From our initiation into Freemasonry we are made very aware of the story of the First Temple, the building which is the very basis of the rituals that permeate our entire Craft. In the three degrees of Craft Masonry we learn that it was built on land acquired by King David, by his son, Solomon, aided by his friend King Hiram of Tyre and the Architect, Hiram Abiff.
On reaching the dizzy heights of Master Mason, we are then encouraged to complete our three degrees by joining the Royal Arch which deals with the rebuilding of the Temple that had been destroyed by the Babylonians. Other aspects of the actual building work occur in the Mark degree which some of us also join. As far as I know, there is no reference in our rituals to the rebuilding of the Second Temple by King Herod -the Temple which the Romans destroyed.
Little is known of King Herod despite the fact that he was one of the most glittering figures of one of the spectacular periods of human history. There are few characters of the time of which so much is recorded but who are so little remembered. As the stories of the first and second Temples form the basis of the Craft and the Royal Arch it is perhaps surprising that the story of the “Third Temple” – for, that is what it really was – and its builder, has never been told in Freemasonry.
Certainly neither he nor his works have ever been the subject of an extension to an existing degree or a separate degree in Masonry, but as I hope I will show, Herod was undoubtedly a Master Mason. He not only rebuilt the Temple but he also organised much rebuilding of Jerusalem and in many other parts of the Kingdom of Judaea which he ruled on behalf of the Romans. What is more, whereas there is absolutely no trace of the First Temple and only a little of Second Temple, some of Herod’s building is available for inspection today, 2000 years after his death.
Of course, one of the reasons for Freemasonry ignoring this final aspect of the Temples in its rituals, is the nature of the man himself. For all of us, the name Herod immediately indicates cruelty. He was the man who massacred the Innocents, he was the one before whom Christ appeared for trial, and who procured the death of St. John the Baptist to satisfy the adulteress, Salome.
Not a good example for moral and upright Masons. Can you imagine our enemies’ joy if it were shown that the Heroes in our Masonic Rituals included not only Solomon, Hiram, Zerubbabel, and the rest, but also Herod?
The massacre of the Innocents of which Herod is considered the perpetrator, however, is only mentioned in one of the four Gospels – the one written by Mark – and is almost certainly not true, or perhaps relates to a minor incident. There is no mention of it either in the other Gospels or in the writings of Josephus, who hated Herod, and would certainly have included such a story in his History of the Jews. It is possible that it relates to an incident from one of the succeeding generations because of the custom of sons being named after their fathers, and it is easy to blur all the Herods into one. It is possible that it was an invention of Mark, to make Herod seem even more wicked than he was. The balance of opinion in the researches I have made on this particular subject leaves me thinking that it possibly never happened, and if it did, it was to a very small number (probably not more than ten) of boys in the small town of Bethlehem.
Simón Bolívar fue el héroe de más de 200 batallas que liberaron a América del Sur de España, liberando a Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru y Bolivia. Obtuvo sus 3 primeros grados en la Logia San Alejandro de Escocia en Paris; y fundó y se desempeñó como Maestro de la Logia Protectora de las Vertudes No. 1 en Venezuela; fundó la Logia Orden y la Libertad No.2 en Perú. Recibió sus titulos de Rito escocés en París en 1807 y también se convirtió en Caballero de los Caballeros Templarios en Francia en 1807.
Las mentes de las almas conscientes de libertad de América del Norte y del Sur volteó a la hermosa ciudad pequeña, Bolivar, Missouri, el 5 de iulio, 1948. Allí la imponente figura de bronce de 7 pies de Simón Bolívar , El Libertador de América del Sur y un masón, de pie sobre una base de mármol 11 pies altos, el regalo de Venezuela, se dio a conocer. Ahí la vida, el carácter y logros del George Washington de seis países de America del Sur se conmemoraron adecuadamente en los discursos del presidente Harry S. Truman, el presidente Romulo Gallegos de Venezuela, y el gobernador de Missouri, Philip M. Donnelly, y por la presencia del Sr. Gonzalo Carnevali, Embaiador de Venezuela, otros notables y miles de ciudadanos estadounidenses.
” La vida de Bolívar presenta uno de los personajes más coloridos de la historia lienzos de aventura y tragedia, gloria y derrota ” , dijo Wallace Thompson.
Aquí presentamos un breve esbozo de la imagen de su vida, y expresamos la esperanza de que nuestros lectores no solo busquen aprender 200 batallas que luchó mientras movía a sus tropas sobre un no rastreado desierto bajo un sol ecuatorial, y en el clima severo en la cima los Andes, de las naciones que liberó del yugo del español opresión, pero que estudiarán el trabaio de su vida y su escritos para conocer sus motivos, sus ideales de libertad en todo su fases, sus logros y sus conceptos de arte de gobernar. Para el seis repúblicas: Venezuela, Colombia, Panamá, Ecuadon Perú y Bolivia – y la base establecida para las relaciones panamericanas para el Hemisferio Occidental son monumentos a su habilidad militar y visión de estadista.
Nacido de la nobleza y la riqueza en Caracas, 24 de julio de 1783, Simón Bolívar abandonó la lujosa vida de las cosas materiales y el posición social para la nobleza del espíritu, y murió en la pobreza extrema. El padre del Libertador fue Juan Vicente Bolívar y Ponte, y su madre fue María de la Concepción Palacios y Blanco. Ambos de él los padres eran de familias nobles y ambos murieron antes de los quince años de edad.
Después de adquirir una educación liberal en el hogar, en gran parte de privado tutores, Simón fue enviado a Europa a la edad de diecisiete años bajo el orientación de su tutor favorito, Simón Rodriguez, un conocido filósofo que fue recibido entre los estudiosos de Europa como tal y que era sospechoso de ‘inclinaciones radicales’ ya que simpatizaba con las enseñanzas de los grandes filósofos franceses del siglo XVIII , siglo que se celebraron en aborrecimiento por la gente demasiado agradable de España, Francia, Italia y la clase dominante de su lengua nativa.
Con un ingreso de $ 20,000 al año, un gran ingreso para ese período, y el esposo, a la edad de dieciocho años, de un rico gastado que tenía alcanzado su decimosexto año, las atenciones sociales fueron derramadas en joven Bolívar por las cortes de Europa, el grande y el cercano grande, mucho de lo que él consideró con arrogancia. Su esposa murió de fiebre amarilla en menos de un año después de ella matrimonio, y Bolívar unos años más tarde regresó a Europa para estudiar condiciones allí. Mientras estaba en Madrid, fue presentado a Su Majestad el Rey y Su Majestad la Reina, con una condescendencia que su agudo sentido de tales relaciones percibidas como etiqueta social vacía extendido a una rica y joven Colonia de sangre noble. Como era debido uno de su posición social, Bolívar fue recibido en audiencia por el Papa. Pero una costumbre ancestral en la Santa Sede, siempre expuesta de los visitantes en tales audiencias, es besar el pie del Papa. Este Bolivar se negó a hacerlo, ‘mirando para otro lado’. Preguntado por el Embajador español, que lo había llevado al Vaticano, por qué tenía no se ajustaba a la costumbre, respondió secamerrte que su respeto por el alto cargo del Pontífice no debe medirse por un acto de servilismo.
Al igual que Thomas Iefferson, que había visitado Europa, Bolívar vio mucho y refleja mucho sobre las causas de la desesperación, la miseria y degradación de las masas en Roma y las ciudades más grandes de Francia, Italia y España, donde el romanismo prevaleció en gran medida. Teniendo observó las mismas condiciones en su propio país, él, algunas mañanas después de su audiencia con el Papa, subió a la cima del Monte Aventin con su fiel Rodriguez. Allí , mientras meditaba en medio las ruinas causadas por el desafio del poder de la aristocracia por el personas, Bolívar de repente vio una gran luz y, arrojando sus manos hacia el cielo, se dice que hizo un voto para dedicar su vida a liberando su propia tierra del poder opresivo de España.
Bolívar había pasado mucho tiempo en París y allí se convirtió en un Masón en el rito de York y recibió los títulos de rito escocés en cuanto a la 30 ° Grado. Volviendo a Venezuela por el camino de los Estados Unidos de América, donde visitó a muchas celebridades en las ciudades del este, él regresó a Caracas a fines de 1809, a la edad de veintiséis años. Pronto ofreció sus servicios a la junta de la que era miembro y que, el 19 de abril de 1810, se habia rebelado contra la corona de José Bonaparte, rey de España, a favor de Fernando VII, hijo de Carlos IV, que había sido depuesto por el gobierno francés, y ellos obligó al virrey a abdicar. Por lo tanto, Venezuela fue el primero Colonia de España para declarar su independencia, un evento que tomó coloque el 5 de julio de 1811.
El espíritu de rebelión fue participado temprano por el General Miranda, un Mason, què habia servido bajo George Washington en la Guerra para la Independencia, Bolívar fue enviado por la junta a Inglaterra para llamar él regresó del exilio a los colores de los Revolucionarios. Él regresó y encabezó las fuerzas revolucionarias con Bolívar como uno de sus generales. Derrotado por las fuerzas españolas, Bolívar se convirtió en un refugiado en la isla de Curacao. Pero, en septiembre de 1812, él era en Cartagena, donde obtuvo una victoria contra los españoles en Nueva Granada (ahora Colombia). Luego, a la cabeza de unos 500 hombres, él marchó sobre los Andes a Venezuela y, junto con muchos reclutas en ruta allí, derrotó a una gran fuerza española y, aunque él entró en Caracas triunfalmente el 4 de agosto de 1813, fue derrotado año después. Al regresar a Nueva Granada, ganó una victoria en Bogotá. Pero, fallando en Santa Marta, renunció a su comisión y fue a Jamaica y luego a Haití.
A partir de ahí, con la ayuda del presidente Peton, organizó una pequeña fuerza y navegó hacia Venezuela en Marzo de 1816, donde durante tres años varió su suerte de guerra entre la derrota y la victoria. Ofrenda para renunciar al final de tres años, fue convencido de continuar la guerra. Esto fue en 1819. Habiendo reorganizado el ejército, Bolívar cruzó por tercera vez el Cordilleras de los Andes a Nueva Granada. Allí se unió a las fuerzas del general Santander, un masón y un líder republicano y en Agosto, ganó la batalla fundamental de Boyaca. Cuatro meses después Venezuela se unió con Nueva Granada y formó la nueva República de Colombia y, después de la victoria en Bambona, Ecuador fue incluido como parte de la nueva república.
Con la victoria sobre el los Españoles en Carabobo, el 25 de junio de 1821, España perdieron el control de este zona. El poder español aún no había desaparecido de esa vasta región de Perú superior e inferior (ahora Perú y Bolivia) que se extendió desde el fronteras de Chile y Argentina a Ecuador. General José de San Martin, un masón, y el general Bemardo O`Higgins, también un masón, tenían liberó a Argentina y Chile del poder español, y el primero, ahora “Protector” de Perú, llegó a Guayaquil el 26 de julio de 1822, donde él consultó con Bolívar. Qué procedimientos se decidieron, con respecto a Perú, en esa conferencia entre los dos grandes Los Líberators españoles, que eran masones, probablemente nunca ser conocida. San Martín renunció a su ‘Protectorado” de Perú y regresó a Argentina. En cualquier caso, Bolívar se hizo cargo y, llegando en Callao, el 1 de septiembre de 1823, fue investido con el título de “Libertador” de Perú. Entrenó a unos 4,000 peruanos y, con el ejército que había venido a Perú con él, tenía unos 9,000 hombres. Con estos contrató a un número igual de españoles en Junin en una sangrienta batalla de caballería con sables, donde no se disparó un solo tiro, y ganó un victoria que, con la de Ayacucho el 9 de diciembre dc 1824, bajo El general Antonio José de Sucre, terminó para siempre con el poder colonial de España en el Nuevo Mundo.Habiendo planeado estas batallas con el general Sucre, un masón, Bolívar fue a Lima para organizar un gobiemo cívico y llamar a un Convención Constitucional. Cuando, el 8 de febrero de 1825, tuvo efectuado el nuevo gobierno, renunció al poder supremo en Colombia y Perú. Rechazo de un regalo de 1,000,000 de pesos (aproximadamente $200,000) de Perú y por haber asistido a algunos asuntos cívicos en Perú superior (Bolivia), Bolívar dejó al general Sucre a cargo y se dirigió a Bogotá, Colombia, para calmar los conflictos civiles que habían surgido entre sus antiguos camaradas. Al llegar allí en noviembre de 1826, él pronto pasó a Venezuela, convocando una convención constitucional en ruta para reunirse en Valencia, el 15 de enero de 1827. Aunque él no tuvo sido capaz de ajustar la desafección, ingresó a Caracas en triunfo. Finalmente, después de catorce años en el mando supremo. La renuncia de Bolívar fue aceptada por el Congreso a petición suya, frente a la intriga y el abuso de sus enemigos que fueron hambriento de poder.
Volviendo a Bogotá en septiembre de 1828, llamó una convención general, pero, a pesar de sus apelaciones, la mayoria de sus viejos amigos se retiraron, sin dejar quórum. En septiembre, escapó asesinato en Bogotá. El problema estalló en Perú, que, con el ayuda de Sucre, se aquietó en 1829. Se reanudó el problema en Venezuela y Colombia y, a pesar de que se estaba recuperando de una enfermedad crítica en Guayaquil, regresó a Bogotá. Su convención ha fallado de organización, la desafección entre sus viejos seguidores no habiendo sido asentado, y estando en mal estado de salud, finalmente volvió a diseñó el poder supremo, el 27 de abril de 1830, que había tomado temporalmente, y salió de Bogotá, festejó y honró a medida que avanzaba lugar para colocar en su camino a Cartagena. Allí se enteró de la asesinato de su general Sucre más confiable y eficiente, en junio 4°, cuyo efecto, junto con su estado avanzado de tuberculosis, causó su muerte el 17 de diciembre de 1830, a la edad de cuarenta y siete, en un lugar mral a pocos kilómetros de Santa Marta,Colombia, donde emitió su última proclama.
lntrepido, esperanzado, clarividente, indomable y profundo en su pensando para el bienestar de la humanidad, proclamó Bolívar, para aquellos quien tuvo la visión de ver, los siguientes principios masónicos como su la vida descendió a las costas más allá:
“ Todos ustedes deben trabajar por el bien inestimable de la Unión; personas que obedecen al gobiemo para evitar la anarquía; el ministros rezando al cielo por guía; y el uso militar su espada en defensa de las garantías sociales. . . . Si mi muerte contribuye al final del partidismo y la consolidación de la unión, seré bajado en paz a mi tumba “.
Among the interesting characters that populated Georgian England and spiced it with many anecdotes is the Rev. Dr. William Dodd [1] ; a clergyman with a very unmistakable nickname whose weakness in money matters sent him to the gallows for the crime of forgery on 27th June 1777.
His life history resembles a middle-class melodrama and is a fascinating reading.
———– ~~~~~~~ ———–
William Dodd was born in Bourne, Lincolnshire, in 1729, the son of the local vicar. He attended the University of Cambridge from 1745 to 1750 and achieved academic success by graduating with first class honours. He then moved to London where he impulsively married Mary Perkins, the daughter of a penniless domestic servant, on 15th April 1751. To secure his family a steady income, William took the holy orders in 1771. Two years later he was ordained priest and thereafter his career in the Church took him to serve as a Curate and a preacher of some success.
by John Russell, oil on canvas, 1769
He devoted a lot of his time to charitable work and is accredited to have written over fifty books. However he also mixed with friends of dubious reputation and infamous public fame such as the Freemason John Wilkes, a member of the Parliament who had been arrested for his radical political ideas and for his opposition to George III.
In 1763 Dodd became the vicar of Chalgrave and three years later he gained a doctorate in law from Cambridge University.
The other offices that he filled in life were: Honorary Canon of Brecon, Rector of Hocliffe, King’s Chaplain in Ordinary and tutor to Philip Stanhope who later became the 5th Earl of Chesterfield. All these various church and academic appointments rewarded him with a good income, but Dodd lived well beyond his means and money was always in short supply.
In 1774 Dodd, in an attempt to bolster his earnings, endeavoured to bribe Lady Apsley, the wife of none other than the Lord Chancellor! He had incautiously offered her £ 3,000 if she would secure him the appointment as Rector of St George’s, Hanover Square, London. In those days Vicars could be in control of more than one Church and so tot up their salary.
The dishonourable proposition to Lady Apsley proved fatal for the fortunes of the Reverend Dodd as it led to the dismissal from all his academic and religious positions and compelled him to flee abroad.
His exile lasted two years and was made the more unbearable by the fact that whilst he was spending time in foreign lands – Switzerland and France – he was regularly being made an object of public ridicule in London by the dramatist and actor Samuel Foote who taunted him as the character Dr Simony in a play he staged at the Haymarket Theatre.
WILLIAM DODD THE FREEMASON
It is bizarre to notice that in Georgian England whenever an individual of some reputation became the target of defamation, the recipient of life threats or had his freedom restricted by accusation of unlawful behaviour, Freemasonry would step in to offer protection, support and sometime even rehabilitation.
As a matter of fact, nothing strange was taking place because, as far as the Craft was concerned, it was applying its principle that “he who is on the lowest spoke of fortune’s wheel, is equally entitled to our regard”.
Therefore what William Dodd decided to do at that point of his life and on his return to England in 1755, was no more unusual than what many of his contemporaries in similar situations were doing: he joined Freemasonry.
Dodd was initiated into the St. Albans Lodge No. 29 where, after briefly occupying the office of Junior Deacon, he rose to the rank of Grand Chaplain of the Order and in May 1755, on the occasion of the laying of the cornerstone for the Grand Lodge of England in Queen Street, London, the Rev. Dr. William Dodd even delivered an oration which was widely pubblicised.
The St Alban’s Lodge [2]had been founded in 1728 and was meeting at the Castle and Leg Tavern in Holborn, London. Today it is one of nineteen Lodges that have received the privilege by Grand Lodge of nominating one of its members – every year – to the office of “Grand Steward”. It has therefore become known as a “Red Apron Lodge”.
THE NICKNAME OF THE MACARONE PARSON
Dodd’s constant presence at the race horse tracks had made him a well known public figure and the extravagant style of his clothes, led him to become known as “The Macarone Parson”!
Some sources describe the Macarone as “a fashionable fellow in the mid-18th-century England who dressed and even spoke in an outlandishly affected and epicene manner” and also as a person “who exceeded the ordinary bounds of fashion in terms of clothes, fastidious eating and gambling”.
But the Macarone was also the caricature of an upper-class effeminate practitioner of sodomy, recogneasable by an extravagant hairstyle, effeminate mannerism and the small tricorn hat that he wore on top of a big wig. The early 1770s saw a series of scandals in the fashionable circles of London society that further linked the term of Macarone to a queer inclination and the homosexual man. A certain Captain Robert Jones, a “Macarone” , was convicted in July 1772 at the Old Bailey for sodomizing a thirteen-year-old boy and was sentenced to hang in October. A letter published in The Public Ledger on August 5th 1772, warned those men like the Captain : “(…) therefore, ye Beaux, ye sweet-scented, simpering He-She things, deign to learn wisdom from the death of a Brother”.[3]
But Jones obtained a royal pardon on the condition that he left the country after new evidence suggested that the boy’s testimony may have been unreliable. The pardon was of course greeted with accusations of an establishment cover-up.
Which of the above two mentioned categories of men – the fashionable fellow or the effeminate molly – our Reverend Doctor belonged to, however, can only be speculated on.
THE REVEREND DODD’S CRIME
By 1776 Dodd was living in Argyle Street, London and was regularly in need of money.
Years earlier he had been the tutor of the current 5th Earl of Chesterfield who had just come of legal age ; this gave Dodd the idea of defrauding a large sum of money by borrowing it in the name of his former pupil.
He went to a money broker and told him that the Lord urgently needed funds whilst he was in waiting for his inheritance to come through. However the Lord – explained Dodd – desired to keep the transaction private and had authorised him to conduct the negotiations.
The means of financing the loan was by a Bond issued in the Earl’s name. Being a man of the Church and a former tutor of the aristocrat, Dodd thought nobody would suspect the arrangement to be a fraud. He also no doubt flattered himself to believe in his heart that the Lord, warm of his feeling towards him, would have generously paid the money rather than see Dodd suffer the dreadful consequences of violating the law.
But finding Banks or individuals prepared to lend against a Bond that was not going to bear the actual borrower’s signature and was not going to be witnessed either, was proving difficult.
Even though forgery and fraud carried a sentence of death by hanging in those days, many fortunes were lost and many gained through such games of tricks.
Eventually the Broker Lewis Robertson came forward and persuaded the firm of solicitors Messrs Fletcher & Pitch to advance the sum of money. A bond was drafted in the name of the Earl of Chesterfield and released to Lewis Robertson who passed it on to Dodd.
The Reverend affixed his signature where that of the Lord should have been , the broker endorsed it further by placing his own signature under that of Dodd and the money changed hands.
Except that when the note fell due and was presented to the Lord for redemption, it was disowned. The law representatives immediately called at Dodd’s house to inform him of the accusation of forgery and advise him that if he wanted to save himself from prosecution and incarceration he was to return all of the money forthwith. The Rev. Dodd explained that he had been obliged to commit the fraud by a debt which had fallen due at a time when he was short of money and he could not meet his obligation. In any case, said Dodd he always intended to return the sum he had borrowed. And indeed, true to his word, he immediately handed a great part of the sum in cash to them , signed a few promissory notes and allowed a charge to be raised on his house belongings for the remaining balance.
He then pleaded forgiveness with the Earl of Chesterfield
but to his mortification he found that his noble pupil showed no clemency and later he will even appear in Court to testify against him.
The matter became of public knowledge; the Rev. Dodd was remanded in custody and soon found himself at the centre of a scandal with fatal consequences for him.
THE TRIAL
On February 19th 1777, Dodd appeared at the Old Bailey.
With no lawyer to defend him, he pleaded for mercy with the Court and delivered a speech from which we have extracted the following:
“My Lords and Gentlemen of the Jury, (…) there is no man in the world who has a deeper sense of the heinous nature of the crime for which I stand indicted, than myself.
(…) I humbly apprehend, though (I am) no lawyer, that the (…) malignancy of a crime – always both in the eyes of the Law and of Religion – consists in the intention.
(But) such intention (to defraud), my Lords and Gentlemen of the jury, has not been sufficiently proven on me (…), for ample restitution has been made.
I leave it to you, my Lords and Gentlemen of the Jury, to consider that if an unhappy man ever deviates from the Law and yet in (a) moment of recollection does all that he can to make full and perfect amends, what (…) can God and man desire further ?”
Dodd then went on to cry out that he had been “perused with excessive cruelty” and “persecuted with a scarcely parallel cruelty” even though reassurances had been given to him after he had made restitution. His death, he said, did not matter to him but it was the loss caused to those he would have left behind that concerned him.
“I have, my Lord, ties which render me desirous even to continue this miserable existence.
I have a wife who for 27 years has lived as an unparalleled example of conjugal attachment and fidelity (…) I have creditors, honest men, who will lose much by my death. (And so) I hope for the sake of justice towards them, that some mercy will be shown to me”.
It was a preposterous defence. The jury returned a guilty verdict and the judge pronounced his sentenced in these words:
“Dr William Dodd, you have been convicted of the offence of publishing a forged and counterfeit bond (…) and you have had an impartial and attentive trial. The jury to whose justice you have appealed have found you guilty and (…) the judges have found no grounds to impeach the justice of that verdict.
(…) your application for mercy therefore must be made elsewhere.
(…) I am now obliged to pronounce the sentence of the law, which is that you, Dr William Dodd, be carried from hence to the place from whence you came, that from thence you are to be carried to the place of execution where you are to be hanged by the neck until you are dead”.
DR SAMUEL JOHNSON INTERCEDES
The XVIII century diarist James Boswell wrote in his diary that on Monday September 15th 1777 he went with his lifetime friend Dr Samuel Johnson to visit the garden of the school of Ashbourne; a very pretty place on a bank of the river. It was a hot day and they sat on a bench for a little rest, whereupon Johnson – Boswell reports in his diaries – told him of his “humane interference” on behalf of the Rev. Dr Dodd whom he barely knew. Knowing Johnson’s persuasive power of writing Dodd had asked him, through the interception of the late Countess of Harrington, to employ his pen in his favour by writing a letter of supplication to the King so that “(the King) may spare me the ignominy of public death which the public itself is solicitous to waive, and grant me in some distant part of the globe to pass the remainder of my days in penitence an prayer (…)”.
Dr Johnson, who had only been once in the company of the Rev. Dodd many years earlier and never visited him at Newgate prison, wrote these lines for Dodd to use in his letter to the King:
“May I not offend your Majesty that the most miserable of men applies himself to your clemency (…) a clergyman whom your laws and judges have condemned to the horror and ignominy of public execution.
I confess the crime …but humbly hope that sparing the spectacle of a clergyman dragged through the streets to a death of infamy, justice may be satisfied with irrevocable exile, perpetual disgrace and hopeless penury.
My life, Sir, has not been useless to mankind. I have benefited many. (…)Preserve me, Sir, by your prerogative of mercy (…) permit my to hide my guilt in some obscure corner of a foreign country (…) I am, Sir, your Majesty’s, &c. “
In a post scriptum Johnson recommended Dodd never to disclose who the real author of such words was: “Tell nobody” stressed the Doctor and with it he also advised Dodd not to indulge in hope.
Samuel Johnson also wrote many petitions and letters on the Rev. Dodd’s behalf and was the author of the errant Mason’s sermon called “The Convict’s address to his unhappy Brethren” [4] whose lines Dodd read in the Chapel of Newgate Prison as perhaps a last attempt to sway matters in his favour! The sermon suggested in so many words that if one sincerely repents of a crime he has committed , God (and therefore by association, the King ) should pardon him and set him free to go and repent for the rest of his life, rather than be sent to death.
Although Johnson never admitted that such sermon was the product of his mind, when challenged by a friend he answered: “Depend on it, Sir, that when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, he concentrates his mind wonderfully”.
Having lost any hope of a royal pardon, Dodd wrote a final letter to Johnson to thank him for all that he had done for him: (…) as I shall be admitted to the realm of bliss before you, I shall hail your arrival there with transports, and rejoice to the knowledge that you were my comforter, my advocate and my friend! God be ever with you!”
Dr Johnson was moved by such words and wrote back: “may God (…) accept your repentance” and “in requital of those well-intended offices which you so emphatically acknowledge, let me beg you that you make (in your devotions) one petition for my eternal welfare.”
These lines, so full of irony and wit, bring a smile on my face whenever I read them.
At the time, Dr Johnson’s health was deteriorating and he had become particularly scared at the thought of dying. One night Boswell was struck by the expression of horror on Johnson’s face at the mention of the word “death” and of the Rev. Dodd during conversation. Boswell was expressing his full of admiration for the determination with which Dodd had met his creator a few days earlier. “Dr Dodd seemed to be willing to die and was full of hopes and happiness”, said Boswell. But Johnson retorted that hardly any man dies in public with apparent resolution: “Sir” –said Johnson – “Dr Dodd would have given both his hands and both his legs to have lived because the better a man is, the more afraid is he of death, having a clear view of infinite purity”.
THE EXECUTION
The Rev. Dr. Dodd was allowed to be driven to his place of execution by a private coach and his father is said to have accompanied him on the journey. Every face in the crowd expressed sadness for the fate of that popular preacher who was also a respectful author of books, poems, theological works and newspaper articles and for whom a twenty three pages long petition full of signatures had been presented to the Authorities in the hope that it would spared him from the gallows.
The death-by-hanging technique improved only in the 20th century when mathematical formulas begun to be applied to determine the length of the rope and the height of the drop required to break the person’s neck, quickly. But in the days when such factors – height, weight and neck size of the condemned – where never taken into consideration , the condemned’ s death would have occurred only by a long and inhumane process of strangulation.
Often the family members of the executed person would run under the gibbet and pull his or her legs so as to hasten asphyxiation.
However, it is also the case that the shorter the drop was, the highest the chance of the condemned surviving and being revived if freedom from the noose could be secured within a few minutes.
The latter is just what was attempted on Rev. Dodd’s body as it is recorded that no sooner the cart driver had run forward to cause him to hang, that the same driver returned to steady Dodd’s legs, stop his convulsions and cut the rope.
The Rev. Dodd’s family had pre-arranged and paid for the body of Dodd to be transported from the place of execution in Tyburn to a barber-surgeon’s shop near Oxford Street where an attempt would have been made to resurrect Dodd with hot and cold water baths.
But the mobbing crowd which lined and blocked parts of the journey caused such a delay that the short transit of about eight minutes took over two hours.
By the time the coach reached the barber’s shop, any sign of life in Dodd’s body had of course extinguished.
However the myth of this unfortunate Freemason and man of the Church lived on for many more years because the Northampton Mercury edition for Saturday 18 October 1794 , reported that the Reverend Dodd ‘s body had been successfully revived and that he had escaped to France.
CONCLUSION
All Master Masons are sworn to form, metaphorically speaking, a “column of mutual support and defence” when it is necessary to defend a Brother’s honour. But in the case of this reckless clergyman it is clear that Freemasonry wanted to have no part.
The Reverend Dr. Dodd had insulted the integrity of the wife of the King’s Chancellor, had been keeping a lifestyle little akin to that of a man of the cloth and had been gambling and losing money he did not have. Furthermore as a “Macarone” he might, for all we know, have belonged to that crowd of dandified men who were no strange to the rumours of vice and sodomy which was a serious crime at the time.
The Rev. Dodd had claimed to have been the author of many books – almost 50! – of translations and newspaper articles and yet we know for almost certain that he could not himself write a supplication letter to the King but had to ask Samuel Johnson to do so for him.
He had also fully confessed his crime and naively undertaken to defend himself in a Court of Justice. In short, his weaknesses had disgraced him sufficiently to have pushed the boundary of intervention by his Brethren in his “support and defence” well out of reach. The Right Rev. Thomas Newton, Bishop of Bristol in 1777, on hearing of the execution of the Rev. Dodd for the crime of forgery, was reported to have exclaimed: “He has hanged for the least of his crimes”.
As for Philip Stanhope, the 5th Earl of Chesterfield [5], he was no common Brother but a nobleman who descended from a family of Freemasons and was destined , within a few years, to become an important Peer of the Kingdom.
He recognised that the only right thing for him to do was to uphold the Masonic principle that “murder, treason, felony and all other offence against the laws of God and the ordinances of the realm” – perpetrated by a Freemason and confessed to another – “must at all time be most especially excepted” from being kept a secret. And so the Lord chose neither to excuse nor to pardon the Rev. Dodd but by even testifying in Court for the Prosecution, he sealed Dodd’s fate.
In closing, we must not think that the outcome of this story is indicative of a society and of a Masonic Order which were upholders of rule and justice. They were not, particularly in that epoch.
In society – and by reflection in the Craft – then like now, all are equal but some are and will always be “more equal than others”!
ByW.Bro. Leonardo Monno Anglisani – NHL 6557 ,Middlesex, England
The author forbids any reproduction or publication of this article, in full or in part, without his explicit authorization.
SOURCES
The Masonic Square (UK)
“Dr William Dodd Grand Chaplain” by Bernard Williamson
“Reverend William Dodd” - article published in the Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon’s website
“The sad case of Dr. Dodd” – from “Everybody’s Boswell”
[2] The Lodge was named St Alban’s Lodge in the year 1771
[3] From “Oscar Wilde prefigured: Queer Fashioning and British Caricature, 1750-1900” by Dominic Janes
[4] A twenty four pages long text that is remarkable for the amount of lexicon used. The Rev. Dodd dedicated it to the Reverend Mr Villette, Ordinary of Newgate Prison
[5] Philip Stanhope (10.11.1755-29.08.1815) became the British Ambassador to Spain (1784-1787) and Master of the Mint (1789-1790), Joint Postmaster General (1790-1791) and Master of the Horse (1798-1804).
The life of Thomas Dunckerley was one of a major importance to the Craft. No other 18th century English Freemason occupied so many distinguished offices as he did. His story is an engaging reading that will also fill your mind with questions. Thomas ’s motto was “Fato non Merito” [1] and nothing summarises his life better than those words.
Thomas Dunckerley was born in London on 23 October 1724, the child of Mary Bolness, wife of Adam Dunckerley who became a porter at Somerset House. Although Mary’s husband deserted her when he found out she was carrying an illegitimate child, Mary was able to support – for reasons that will be disclosed to you later – Thomas’s private education at boarding school. That experience, however, proved an unhappy one for the child who, at the age of ten, decided to run away from the institution and never return. His grandmother took him under her mantle and cared for him until, still a child, he joined the Royal Navy’s “Boy Service“ as a “Powder monkey or “Nipper‟.
In the 18th century there were very many adolescent boys serving aboard British ships. Some of them were orphans or foundlings, others were just delinquent and troublesome juveniles. Although the Navy did not provide an apprenticeship leading up to an independent trade, it gave long-term employment to those who were fit and healthy. The Navy recruited from a wide spectrum of the society and even practiced impressment, a custom of forcing any men of age 18 and upwards to serve the Nation for a specific time and in situations of war, even against their will. Many such individuals and children stayed on and progressed through the ranks , reaching captaincy and receiving commissions . A few even ended their service as Admirals.
Geometry was a science that all ship gunners had to learn as it was used to calculate the correct inclination of a cannon in relation to the target and the speed of the ships in combat. By distinguishing himself in that task, Thomas became “Master Gunner” at only 24 years of age. However, he remained in that rank until he retired twenty-six years later. During his time in the Navy Thomas travelled extensively, taught Maths to his ship’s crew, engaged in many sea skirmishes and took part to the siege of Quebec[2] during the Seven Years’ war.
Throughout those years at sea, Thomas received much commendation and tokens of friendship from all the Officers under whom he served. However, merit and seniority were not the only elements required to secure a career; the influence of friends in prominent places was also a crucial factor and sadly Thomas had none.
THE ROYAL SEDUCTION STORY
In 1760, Mary Dunckerley had passed away and Thomas, on his return to London from Quebec, was to discover a story that put him in a new and extraordinary light. On her deathbed, Mary had confided to her neighbour that she became pregnant with Thomas as the result of a brief relationship with the Prince of Wales, the future King George II of England (in the portrait below).
Mary Dunckerley was the daughter of a physician and she lived and worked in the household of the Right Hon. Robert Walpole – a subsequent Prime Minister of England – at Houghton Hall in Norfolk. Mary had gained a solid education, and it is realistic to assume that she was Lady Walpole’s personal assistant rather than one of her servants. The philandering German speaking Prince of Wales, had become fond of the Walpoles [3] and being a recurrent visitor to Houghton Hall, on one such visit he seduced Mary. Lady Walpole did not fail to notice what was taking place under her roof and swiftly moved to bring the embarrassing situation to an end. She schemed an expedient whereby she would find a husband for Mary and then despatched the married couple to live and work hundreds of miles away from Houghton Hall.
Lady Mary Walpole confided in her friend the Duke of Devonshire [4] whom recommended that the future consort of Mary should be an anonymous Adam Dunckerley. He summoned the young man at his Chatsworth House and kept him there until the terms of the arranged marriage were accepted. Clearly either Adam or Mary, if not both, must have had a few reservations. Perhaps their different social status and education played a part in the dithering. After the wedding the couple moved to London where Adam, in exchange for free accommodation, took up the post of porter at Somerset House. The trade of a porter in the early 18th century London entailed carrying wealthy and important individuals in sedan chairs – which provided protection from mud, snow, rain or sun – back and forth through the unpaved streets of London. Porters also loaded and offloaded luggage from horse carriages, cargo from river boats and so on. Theirs was a demanding job, but one that greatly contributed to the growth of the economy in the Capital.
Somerset House (in the picture above) is a beautiful palace just off the Strand, famous worldwide for being immortalised in a painting by Canaletto. The architect Christopher Wren, whom some believe was a Freemason, refurbished it magnificently in 1685. A few decades later , however, the structure fell into disrepair and ceased offering adequate accommodation to foreign Royals, Aristocrats and diplomats. Instead, it provided simple lodgings in exchange for grace and favours.
When in November 1723 Adam Dunckerley left Somerset House to do some errands for the Duke of Derbyshire – he was absent for five months, until May 1724! – he left Mary with much idle time to occupy herself. With Christmas approaching, she set on visiting some of her friends and acquaintances. One of those cronies was Lady Margaret Ranelagh (1672-1728) who lived at 83-84 Pall Mall, London.
On her deathbed Mary confided to Ann Pinkney – the wife of another porter at Somerset House –that one day she went into the parlour of her host’s house and found the Prince of Wales whom she “had too well known” before her unhappy marriage. “At his request and for I could deny him nothing” – said Mary – “I stayed at the house for several more days during which time the Prince made five visits to me” and in one encounter made her pregnant! For the cuckold Adam Dunckerley, this proved too much to bear. He opted out of Mary’s life and disappeared from the records.
The events that followed seem to endorse the argument that Thomas truthfully had a royal “connection”. Proof of it is that the expecting Mary, whom under different circumstances would have been left to her destiny, was instead surrounded and tended for by people of status. The Royal Midwife Mrs Sydney Kennion, for example, assisted the child’s birth with the doctor to the Prince of Wales and to the Walpoles – Dr Richard Meade (1673-1754) [5] – in attendance.
Indeed after Thomas’s birth, the Prince of Wales gifted Mary with fifty pounds; enough money to buy a house in those times. Dunckerley recounts: “This information” – the affair with the Prince of Wales – “gave me great surprise and much uneasiness; and as I was obliged to return immediately to my duty on board the Vanguard, I made it known to no person at that time other than Captain Swanton. We were then bound a second time to Quebec, and Captain Swanton promised that on our return he would try to have me introduced to the King, and that he would give me a character reference; but when we came back to England the King (George II) was dead.”
Thomas’ grandmother had been a nurse to Sir Edward Walpole – son of Sir Robert Walpole, a Freemason – and Dunckerley had been hoping in vain that such a connection would have helped him rise in the Navy‘s ranks. But now – it was the year 1760 – Thomas realised that in the light of his mother’s revelations, he could play the ace card of claiming to be a royal bastard and obtain “employment in any department that is adequate to my (…) abilities and which would not depress me beneath the character of a Gentleman”.
By the end of 1763, the year he had retired from the Navy, Thomas had accumulated debts of £150, a sizeable amount of money that he had no hope on earth of repaying in his life. He was drawing a very good pension from the Navy but he was spending it all on medical bills for his sick daughter and his son [8] who needed to be repeatedly bailed out from his gambling liabilities. With the certainty of ending his days in the debtors’ prison, Thomas made a runner.
In 1764 he signed on as a crew member of the HMS Guadeloupe and sailed away to avoid arrest and imprisonment. On board with him was Lord William Gordon, a fellow Freemason who kept good guard on him. Having become ill with the scurvy, Thomas disembarked at Marseilles and underwent treatment at the home of none other than England’s ambassador in town. When he was restored to a good health, Thomas travelled to Paris to rejoin Lord Gordon who gave him £200.00 and dispatched him back to England to clear all his liabilities.
But money never changes hands without good reason!
Only after the death of Thomas’s alleged royal parent in 1766, Thomas’s claim was brought to the attention of the King. The newly crowned [6] George III (in the portrait above) was said to have been very impressed at the number of intimate information in Mary’s deathbed confession. He made enquires into Thomas Dunckerley’s character and being satisfied, he assigned him an annuity of £100 [7] and gave him the use of private apartments at Hampton Court Palace. He also allowed Dunckerley to bear a Coat of Arms that showed the motto “Fato non Merito” and to sign himself as “FitzGeorge” (son of George).
At the age of forty-six Thomas had at last achieved the prestige and economic security he had longed for.
MASONIC CAREER AND WORK
In contrast to his experience in the Navy, Dunckerley’s Masonic career proved glistening. Thomas was initiated into Freemasonry in 1757 and believed to have gone through the three degrees at the “Lodge of the Three Tuns N.31”, one of the Navy Lodges of Portsmouth which met at the pub with the same name. To substantiate that assumption is the fact that he ended his speech – called “The Light and Truth of Freemasonry Explained “ and delivered before the Lodges of Plymouth in 1757 – with words of apology for having boldly written about the subject whilst still very new to Freemasonry. Two years later he reaped his strong enthusiasm for the Craft by becoming the Grand Master of two Plymouth Lodges.
Thomas Dunckerley
In 1767, Dunckerley received the appointment to Prov. Grand Master of Hampshire and founded several naval Lodges in the County. That first Provincial rank appointment in Freemasonry was a token of true esteem by the Grand Lodge of England – particularly by its Royal Patrons the Prince of Wales (Grand Master of the Order),the Duke of Clarence (Patron of the Holy Royal Arch) and the Prince Edward (Patron of the Masonic Knights Templar Order).
Dunckerley also became the Pro Grand Master for the Masonic Provinces of Bristol, Dorset, Essex, Gloucester, Hereford, Somerset, Southampton & the Isle of Wight. He was also the Grand Superintendent for Kent, Nottingham, Surrey, Suffolk, Sussex and Warwick and the most eminent Grand Master of The Knights of Rose Crucis, Templar, Kadosh and he received the appointment to Past Senior Grand Warden.
However, of far more importance in the Craft was the office that Dunckerley occupied as an instructor of Masonic Lodges and a reformer of Freemasonry. The Grand Lodge of England had in fact authorised him to revise the existing ritual which resulted in Thomas’s removal of part of the third degree ritual and assigning it to the Royal Arch instead. In September 1769, Dunckerley introduced the Mark Mason Degree. Nobody is certain of where he got the idea, but we know that he conferred it for the first time to the Brethren of the Portsmouth Royal Arch Chapter of Friendship No 257. It is also interesting to note that initially there was a “Mark Man” Degree given to Fellow Crafts and a “Mark Master” Degree conferred on Master Masons.
About a hundred years later, the Grand Lodge of England backed off from its initial recognition of Mark Masonry and the Mark could no longer be worked in a Craft Lodge. The Grand Lodge of Mark Master Masons was hence constituted, turning Mark Masonry into a separate and independent Masonic body.
Dunckerley also introduced new Masonic symbols such as the ‘Parallel Lines’ – which represent the two Saint John – and ‘Jacob’s Ladder’. He wrote Masonic songs and hymns, many well-written letters and presented many Lectures.
HIS LATE LIFE
Thomas married young in life and to a much older woman; but the couple lived happily together and even had four children. When Thomas laid the foundation stone of a new Church at Southampton in 1792, he said that “if the structured had been finished by the time he had completed fifty years in wedlock, he should think himself justified in following the practice of some Nations he had travelled in, viz., that of keeping a jubilee year” and being remarried in that Church!
Thomas Dunckerley was a very generous Brother and he continued to give frequent Masonic and social events even when he lived at Hampton Court. He attended public meetings and festivals of the Craft and helped the poor fellows whenever he could. But such benevolence and the regular expenses he incurred for attending all the events of his many Provinces, were costly and caused Dunckerley to effectively lead a poor life.
Dunckerley died in Portsmouth at 71 years of age, in 1795. He had expressed a wish of being buried in the Templars’s Church, London, but was instead laid to rest in St Mary’s Parish Church (shown in the photo above) , Portsea, Portsmouth, in an unmarked grave. An arrangement that speaks volumes!
CONCLUSIONS
Thomas did not show any desire for a classical education and run away from college when he was 10 years old. The excellent proficiency in Maths that he showed later in life, does not compensate for an intellectual education that was never installed onto him. He served in the Navy for twenty-six years – a third of his lifetime! – yet he rose no higher than Master Gunner. He also fell into debt and dishonorably fled the Country. He regained his integrity and avoided imprisonment only thanks to a substantial financial donation – but I suspect we should call it a “lifetime loan” or a bounty – from a Brother Freemason if not from the Grand Lodge of England itself!
How do we otherwise explain that a person with such a background and limited education progressed so significantly in the Craft’s hierarchy, composed Masonic songs, delivered eminent lectures, inspected [9] revised and reformed Freemasonry and even introduced the new Order of Mark Masonry. And he did all that just on his own merit? Why was his body not laid to rest with the reverence and respect that royal blood require?
Susan Sommers is a historian and a recent biographer of Dunckerley, in her article published in the Masonic magazine “The Square” [10] inspirationally states that the 18th century, with its Enlightenment, military wars and civil unrest, was a time of rapid changes which provided the perfect conditions for some men to leave their inglorious, murky or boring past behind and reinvent themselves.
I feel this might be just what Dunckerley did.
Back home and into a civilian life after twenty-six years spent at sea, Thomas stared at financial ruin. What saved him were his human qualities. He was an intelligent, articulate, affable, caring, generous and gregarious individual who got on with everybody. But above all he was a Freemason with a canny physical resemblance to King George II, and with a captivating story that took him out of an anonymous life and gave him the status of a gentleman.
Having escaped incarceration, Thomas very determinedly dedicated the later part of his existence, to the service and glory of Freemasonry. He took on endless work and responsibilities, he entertained, revised, developed and changed all things Masonic.
As the illegitimate child of an English Monarch and a person gifted with noble looks and deportment, Thomas Dunckerley fitted perfectly the profile of a faithful agent for the mysterious and political designs of the 18th century English Freemasonry.And no matter what status he attained later in life, I believe his true worthiness remains shrouded by a thick veil of fabrication.
The author forbids any reproduction or publication of this article, in full or in part, without his explicit authorisation.
[2] It saw the British snatching the Province of Quebec in Canada from the French in 1759
[3] In his role of King , George II relied more and more on the political dexterity of Lord Walpole to govern his realm
[4] William Cavendish, the IV Duke of Devonshire (1720-1764). Duke of Devonshire was just the name of the Title. The Cavendishes were not the Duke of the County of Devon.
[5] Member of the Royal Society of Physician and a Freemason
[8] He was reported to have died in a cellar in St Giles’s prison
[9] In 1760 he received a commission “to inspect the Craft wheresoever he might go”
[10] Thomas Dunckerley – A Masonic hero and/or imposter ? “The Square” – Sept 2013
SOURCES
"History of the Mark Degree" by the E. Lancashire Prov. Grand Lodge
“Thomas Dunckerley and English Freemasonry” by Susan Mitchell Sommers
“The late Brother Thomas Dunckerley” – The Freemasons’ Quarterly Review, March 1842
“Who was Thomas Dunckerley” by WBro. Bro Ken White, Lodge Gosforth, August 1999
“WBro. Dunckerley” – by Edgar W Fentum
All men possess some real worth but Genius is a unique gift of God to man. The word “genius” signifies original, from the Latin of Gignor, to be born; or, older still, from the Greek of Gennao, to generate, to produce.
A man may be a good historian, a good soldier or politician but only a man of genius can be an inventor or a poet and original thinker. Whenever we find men of rare intellect working out their own destiny and showing themselves above their contemporaries, then we are in the presence of such persons. They have lived in all ages and have been found among all races of men. They belong to no particular class or faith and are usually deeply religious in their own way.
Robert Burns, Scotland’s greatest son, was indeed such a man. He taught the world through his poems the difference between religion and faith.
"The rank is but the guinea's stampThe man's the gowd for all that."
THE MAN HE WAS
Possibly no poet ever lived who possessed that original style and uniqueness of composition as Robert Burns. He was the poet of the rights of the common people. His qualities were fire, tenderness, humour, simplicity and all so nicely and rarely blended together.
He touched with delicate and joyful hands the deep and noble feelings of old Scotland and the life, the faith, the genious and hope of his native land.
This is why we love Robert Burns, for it was he who taught us the brotherhood of man, that which lives in his songs and always will live while human nature is the same. He saw the nature with the eyes of a child, saw beauty in the fold of hills, in the trees, in the flowing waters and the sound of the wind filled him with a sad joy.
Such was Robert Burns! a man full of passion and pity.
If he could have its way with us, every injustice, every cruelty, every despotism would fall and every man would have a more fulfilled life and superior soul.
“Then let us pray, that come what may As come it will, for all thatThat man to man, the world over Shall brothers be, for all that”
The discourse the Chevalier Ramsay made in Paris in 1736 could have just been a speech of circumstance which, as it is the fate of many speeches of a circumstantial nature, would have then fallen into oblivion. Instead it has been held in high regard ever since, been translated and successfully published in many foreign languages. But more importantly, it still provides the fundaments on which French Freemasonry rests.
WHO WAS THE CHEVALIER RAMSAY?
Destined to become one of the most romantic figures in the history of Freemasonry, Andrew Michael Ramsay was born in Ayr, Scotland, on June 9th 1686. He entered Edinburgh University at the age of 14 and studied classics, maths, theology and on finishing his studies he took up the position of tutor in the Earl of Wemyss’[1] household. In 1706 Ramsay left England for the Flanders where he joined the army of the Duke of Marlborough who was engaged in the war of the Spanish succession, essentially a war between France and Spain against England and Austria. In 1710 he met the Archbishop of Cambrai, Fenelon, and became his companion until Fenelon’s death in 1715. Born a Calvinist[2] Ramsay converted to the Roman Catholic faith under the teaching of his Church Official friend. Ramsay then moved to Paris where he worked for the Duc de Chateau-Tierry who introduced him to the Regent, Philippe d’Orleans, brother of King Louis XIV. The Prince was also the Grand Master of the Order of Lazarus[3] so that through that acquaintance Ramsay was able to be admitted in his Order which henceforth qualified him to be known as the Chevalier de Ramsay and to receive a pension from the Abbey of Signy.
In 1723 Ramsay became tutor in Rome to the two young sons of the Old Pretender, the catholic James Francis Edward Stuart (James III), who had fled England after losing the crown to the protestant Prince William of Orange. From 1725 to 1728, Ramsay stayed as an invited guest of the Duc de Sully and it was during this period he wrote the famous novel The Travels of Cyrus which was published in 1727. It was a best seller in its day and served to establish the Chevalier’s reputation in England as well as on the Continent.
In 1737[1] at the Grand Lodge of France in Paris its Grand Orator the Chevalier Ramsay , enunciated that the Masonic Order descended from the Knights Templar and was therefore of an exclusively aristocratic nature. Soon after that speech, numerous Masonic High Degrees were founded all over Europe, each one of them claiming to be the rightful guardians of some superior secrets that came in the form of privileged expression of Spiritualism or Esoterism.
The Egyptian Masonic Order was one of those Higher Degrees and it was founded in France by the self-styled Count Alessandro Cagliostro, akas Giuseppe Balsamo[2] from Palermo, who has remained one of the most enigmatic characters in history. Considered to be a great magician, alchemist and healer in some circles or a rogue and a charlatan in others, Cagliostro was accused to be part of the famous plot of “L’affaire du collier de la Reine “(Marie Antoinette)[3] in 1785 at the Court of King Louis XVI. After years of drifting in Europe, the Count ultimately died in 1795 in the gaols of the fortress of San Leo[4] having been sentenced to life imprisonment by the Church Inquisition. Yet with the foundation of the High Degree of The Egyptian Freemasonry, Cagliostro had created something in life that, at least for a while, gave him fame and respect although later it will also cause his downfall and imprisonment.
Cagliostro had joined the London Lodge “Esperance” on 12th April 1777. However the speed with which he reached the highest degree when he was in England suggests that he had already been initiated elsewhere, probably in Malta in 1776. In 1784 he travelled to Lyon and took lodgings at the Hotel de la Reine . There he registered himself under the assumed name of Count Fenice [5] and asked the most illustrious Freemason in town to come and meet him. That individual was Jean-Baptiste Willermoz , who later wrote: “I went to see him two days after his arrival and I went there suspiciously expecting to meet a person called Count Fenice but from his mannerism I soon realised I was in front of Cagliostro. He spontaneously admitted his real identity and told me that he had renounced the practice of medicine – which made enemies for him wherever he went – and now wanted to occupy himself exclusively into instructing selected Freemasons to the truest Freemasonry of all , that of the Egyptian Rite which teaches to work for the glory of God and the happiness of mankind “.
In the minutes of the London Lodge “The Nine Muses” is recorded that on 13th February 1783 the “Marquis Paul de Arconati, Viscount of Milano” was admitted as a member.
Since it was founded on 14thJanuary 1977 at the Thatched House Tavern in James’s Street, “The Nine Muses” Lodge has had a large number of Italians in its lists , so it comes as no surprise that Paul de Arconati fancied it over all the others. The esteemed Chevalier Bartolomeo Ruspini[1] – jointly with few other respectful characters – had established “The Nine Muses” and had been its Grand Master in 1976. His name still appears on a Lodge Certificate dated 1801 as a testimony not only of his longevity but also that he may have been occupying the Chair for period much longer than it is custom nowadays.
But exactly which noble title did Arconati hold, Marquis or Viscount ?
He was a Marquis with the double barrelled family name of Arconati-Visconti/ Perhaps the casual omission of the hyphen in his name might have confounded the Lodge’s secretary and the “Marquis Arconati-Visconti” became the “Marquis Arconati, Viscount of Milano”. It is not uncommon to find in old Masonic lodge minutes, members’ names which have been recorded with an unintelligible handwriting, are mis-spelt or even incomplete, particularly if those names were foreign.
Paolo Arconati-Visconti was born in 1754 and was the third son of Giangaleazzo Arconati-Visconti, third Marquis of Busto Garolfo[2]and most importantly : Chamberlain of the Austrian Empress Marie Therese ! The Arconati-Visconti was a family from Milano that even to these days is highly regarded for having been patrons of the arts in its generations. One of Paolo’s ancestors – Galeazzo Arconati – possessed for a while the collection of Leonardo da Vinci’s sketches known as “The Atlanticus Codex”, which contains some of his futuristic visions on subjects like the flight, new weaponry, mathematics and so forth. In 1747 Giangaleazzo had married the youngest daughter of the last Baron Scockaert [3]Count of Tirimont , one of the richest and most influential Flemish aristocrats of the time. The couple moved to Milano in 1750.
In the circle of aristocracy only the first born male child has the right to inherit the title, but Paolo received that privilege following the unexpected death of both his two older siblings. When the Marquis inherited a large estate in the Flanders he took off there and made the Castle of Gaasbeek his summer residence whilst holding lodgings at the Hotel De Croy in the Place Royale, Bruxelles , for when he travelled there on business. It is claimed that he joined the Lodge “Les Vrais Amis de l’Union” in Bruxelles and that he was involved , whilst there, in many charitable and philanthropic projects.
The Marquis had began his adult life as a captain in the light cavalry regiment of the Hussars, fighting for Austria in the seven years war; a conflict in which all the European nations were involved from 1756 to 1763 and that saw Great Britain and France fighting as usual on opposite sides, each one forging rather fluid alliances with other smaller Countries which often swapped sides during the conflict.
The Marquis travelled far and wide and everywhere he went he studied and immersed himself in the culture of that Country. It was during that time of his life that he visited England and was initiated into Freemasonry. He was a liberal man but his eccentricity was not seen in the right light and people often assumed that he was a revolutionary.
Italian by birth, raised in Austria and French by circumstances, he was only able to occupy official government positions after the French revolution of 1795 , when he was elected to represent the department of Dyle.[4]
Paolo greatly admired Napoleon Bonaparte for having successfully brought order where,after the revolution, there had been chaos. So when Napoleon visited Liege, the Marquis made sure he attended the presentation and gave the First Consul his personal welcome.
Napoleon was swayed by him. Perhaps the fact they shared a common Italian-French heritage played a good part into that. Certainly the First Consul’s opinion of the natives was quite shocking for he is reported as having said : “You Belgian are quite different from the French, Austrian, Dutch or English. You like yourselves too much and your main characteristics are apathy and selfishness”. No wonder even to these days the dislike between the two nations is still latent !
During a visit to Turkey, the Marquis had developed a great taste for the oriental fashion. He loved the satin tunics, the turbans and yellow slippers and on his return home he regularly dressed as an Ottoman nobleman ,with turban and sabre. It is reported that after Napoleon had appointed him Mayor of Bruxelles, the Marquis attended meetings and received the local officials dressed as a Turk ! He also travelled in a carriage pulled by six horses and driven by coachmen with blackened faces. His jaunts were such a great spectacle to watch that the desperate local impresarios had to beg the Marquis to reschedule his pleasure outings so that there would be no clash with the theatre performances, many of which were being cancelled because of him.
Paolo Arconati’s admiration for Napoleon was such that he even attempted to erect a 100 meter tall pyramid on the road to Bruxelles-Mons, with the bust of his hero displayed at the top. The material for the construction would have had to come from the demolition of the Amiens Cathedral. It was a foolish idea and was rejected, of course. In the end, he had to settle for an arch of triumph erected in the middle of the park of his residence in Gaasbeek.
A physical description of the Marquis is provided in a report that an English officer wrote during the battle of Waterloo. The 23rd Battalion of the King’s Light Dragoons had been posted in Gaasbeek and its commander had decided to turn the Marquis’s Castle into the sleeping quarters for the British officers. But when he arrived outside the Castle he was met by a bunch of reservists and farmers whom the Marquis had assembled to protect his property. In perfect English, the Marquis asked the captain why he wished to invade his home. The captain, being aware of the eccentricity of the Marquis’ character, removed his hat in sign of respect and explained that he was simply following the rules of war but that no harm would be brought to anyone there. The gentlemanly manner with which the officer had spoken, greatly impressed the Marquis who then relented.
The British captain ‘s name was Mercer and he described the Marquis as a person with a tanned look and of above average height although , because of his age, his spine was a little curved. He was otherwise quite active and of a very alert mind and dressed like a Turk, with a dirty turban enriched by many precious stones. In his right hand he held a “lance” and in his left a horn. The old man was not only flamboyant but probably a little deaf too !
The Marquis’ other residence in the centre of Bruxelles had been occupied by the Allied Forces Commission whose members committed a considerable amount of damage, estimated in the region of 11,500 francs. The Marquis attempted to recover the sum from the Duke of Wellington but his claim was rejected and he sold off the property in disgust. After the Treaty of Vienna, William I (King of Holland) became the ruler of the Low Countries. Paolo Arconati-Visconti had to lay low for a while as all privileges and noble titles from the old regime were abolished. He became known simply as “citizen Arconati” until in 1816 King William restored the Marquis tile to him. From then on he called himself Paul Marie Remy Arconati-Visconti, Marquis of Busto. It was however dutifully pointed out to him that a carriage pulled by 6 horses was a privilege reserved only to Kings. “No matter” he replied and he then ordered that his coach be pulled by only five horses plus a mule !
The Marquis had a daughter , Sophie, in 1789 but their relationship was rather strange right to the very end. She addressed him as “tutor” or “guardian” but never as her father and he never recognised her as his child. Sophie went on to marry a Frenchman who fought with General Lafayette. The couple did not inherit any part of the Marquis’ fortune which went instead to Paolo’s nephew: Giuseppe Arconati-Visconti.
In his final days, the old eccentric Freemason slept in a coffin lined with wool and red brocade to become accustomed to the place where he would rest when his time came. But when in 1821 he suffered a heart attack, he was unable to reach for the sarcophagus; having climbed onto the nearest table , he laid himself there and died. The Marquis Paul Arconati-Visconti was buried at Gaarsbeek and the epitaph on his tomb reads:
“Man is born to enlighten his soul for only a very short time”.
— *** —
I based most of the material of this paper on an article written by P.J.Dawson, Past Grand Master of the Lodge of the Nine Muses in London. It had been translated into Italian and published in a Masonic magazine that I had seen displayed in a newspaper kiosk in Bologna over fifty years ago. My curiosity drove me to buy it, and I never anticipated I’d become a member of the Craft decades later. I hid it in a safe but forgotten part of my house, and it was only recently found by chance.
[1] Born in Romacoto near Bergamo , Italy, in around 1727 or 1728 , Ruspini came to England in 1750 and died here in December 1813. He was the founder in 1788 of a Charity now known as the Royal Masonic Institution for Girls.
[2] This is a village 30 miles north east of Milano
In the year 1748 the powerful King of Prussia Frederick II sent a letter of commendation[1] to a little known Italian nobleman who had written an essay called “Best practices of military operations for the foot soldiers”. The author was Raimondo di Sangro, Prince of San Severo born on 30th January 1710 in Torre Maggiore near the major town of Foggia, in the southern Italian Region of Apulia.
What Frederick did, however, was both astonishing and baffling. Did he not realise that by writing such letter he was on the one side disquietly exposing the incompetence of his generals and on the other praising the excellence of mind of a mere minor foreign aristocrat ?
Raimondo was admired in life not only for his knowledge of the military arts and for inventing a new type of archibugio[2] ; he was also an accomplished alchemist, a genius of technology, a philanthropist and amongst many other things also a high ranking Freemason. In our times the Prince’s family name is known in Naples for its association with the Chapel of Sansevero, a shrine that had been built by the Prince’s ancestors in 1590 and magnificently refurbished by him between 1749 and 1771.
Museum of the Cappella_Sansevero, Naples
This wide angle picture shows that the inside of the Chapel in question contains several monuments, many of them beautiful and some also famous all over the world, like the “Veiled Christ” by the sculptor Giuseppe Sammartino. According to legend, that masterpiece was created in 1753 by the artist working in a hypnotic state induced by the Prince who, after completion, blinded the Sammartino to prevent him from replicating the secret technique applied to achieve such a stunning result. That exceptional sculpture represents Jesus Christ in death covered by a transparent looking marble shroud.
Some experts assert that the shroud and the subject were carved from one block of stone whilst legend states that Sammartino supplied the Prince with a suitable piece of cloth and the nobleman and alchemist , through a secret chemical process, transmuted it into that marble-like creation that covers the face and torso of the Christ. Displayed in the Chapel is the “Disinganno” – or “Disillusionment” – which is another excellent artwork that Raimondo commissioned to Francesco Queirolo[3].
He dedicated it to his father Antonio di Sangro whom, after years of turmoil following the early death of his wife, returned to Naples in old age and committed the rest of his days to religious life. The human figure is shown in the act of disentangling itself from a net representing the many human sins, whilst the globe symbolises the earthly passions and the little winged Genie embodies the human intellect whose help is offered to assists man in his quest. At the base of the monument there can also be seen an open Bible and a square with compass which, together with the terrestrial globe, are all allegories used in freemasonry.
The other pieces of art put on show in the Chapel are some beautiful sculptured tributes to human virtues like modesty, decorum, truthfulness and sobriety, to mention but a few. To enlarge on what was the inspiration behind them would however be outside the scope of this paper.
Raimondo was the son of Antonio di Sangro, a noble Neapolitan and VII Prince of Sansevero and Cecilia Gaetani dell’Aquila di Aragona Sanseverino who also descended from an old patrician family. Her ancestor Benedetto Gaetani [4] , to mention one, had become Pope Bonifacio VIII in 1294. In fact Raimondo’s whole family genealogy is excellent; it stems from the Duke of Burgundy and has a connection with none other than the great Charlemagne! Such an illustrious ancestry guaranteed the Prince a rightful presence at the Court of the King of Naples with whom he had become a close friend in youth.
At the age of ten Raimondo had been sent to Rome by his father to study mathematics, pyrotechnic, hydrostatics, philosophy, canon and civil laws, at the Jesuit convent “Clementino”. It was in that city that with the official consent of Pope Benedict XIV, Raimondo dedicated his time to the reading of the “forbidden books” kept in the Vatican vaults whence he derived that knowledge that he later applied in his secret experiments.
In 1730 the Prince returned to Naples and made that city his permanent home.
In 1734 Charles Bourbon, Duke of Parma[5] , took Naples and the following year at the age of 18 was crowned its King as Charles VII. His installation on the throne marked the beginning of a long period of revival for the capital of southern Italy and flagged the start of the Prince of San Severo’s scientific activity to which the King was personally interested and had approved of. It is said that Raimondo had gifted Charles with another of his inventions: a rainproof hat.
Prince of San Severo
As the Colonel of his Regiment “Capitanata”, Raimondo di Sangro fought valiantly in 1744 at the battle of Velletri and with the defeat inflicted on the Habsburgs troops he played a big part in saving the Kingdom for Charles VII and the Bourbons. It was during that time of war that Raimondo had written the essay that brought him the recognition from Frederick of Prussia.
The Prince was a modest man who had no vices, did not like excesses and was also of a liberal mind. An affable person, he was nonetheless at times unable to keep his impulsive temperament under control. He spoke several languages, including Arabic and Hebrew and printed books from the basement of his Palace in Naples which he had equipped with his own presses. Amongst those publications was “The Travel of Cyrus” by the famous Freemason Michael Ranmsay [6] which the Prince had translated into Italian. After the war against the Austrians, Raimondo returned to spend his days in his secret laboratory that he kept in the vaults of the Chapel, where he made discoveries which could have made him one of the most famous scientists of his time.
In the crypt of the Sansevero Chapel in Naples are kept the bodies of a man and a woman which the Prince called “anatomical machines”. They are actually skeletons wrapped by the ensemble of veins that are present in a human body. Chronicles report that the person, who injected the mysterious substance which forever preserved the vascular system of those corpses in a metallic-like state, might have been the anatomist Giuseppe Salerno from Palermo. But according to legend it was the Prince himself who experimented on his servants whilst they were still alive; hence the appellation of “sorcerer Prince” and “Devil’s apprentice” that stuck on him.
Although the Prince’s interests were mainly of a scientific and esoteric nature, he also had a good sense of humour and did not shy away from playing a few pranks , one of which is the following. The “Naples Gazette” dated 24 July 1770, reported that Raimondo di Sangro had built a splendid “Carrozza Marittima”, an amphibious carriage pulled by horses and capable of carrying up to twelve people and that such a marvel was seen defying the sea waves in Capo di Posillipo one sunny morning in July 1750. In truth, as the Prince revealed, that splendid machine was nothing more than a raft on which had been attached a painted wooden façade cut out in the shape of a carriage. The horses that appeared to be pulling the carriage were made of cork and the wheels were spun by men hidden behind the disguise. It was a practical joke that not everyone accepted in the right spirit. A year later, dueto the prolonged and regular contact with the intoxicating chemicals that he used in his experiments, the Prince passed away. This practical joke of the amphibious carriage might have been his amusing way of saying adieu to the world and to the people of Naples.
Chronicles report that amongst the many skills that Raimondo possessed, was also the ability of healing the sick with the use of remedies of his own preparation. He successfully applied that dexterity on Luigi Sanseverino, Prince of Bisignano, by saving him from near death after the most talented doctors of Naples had given up any hope. Even Tanucci, the Chief Minister at the Court of Charles VII, notwithstanding his dislike for Raimondo – mostly for being a freemason and therefore an enlightened mind – summoned him when he fell ill.
Count Cagliostro
Twenty or so years later, that famous celebrated charlatan, swindler and Freemason who called himself Count Cagliostro – aka Giuseppe Balsamo from Palermo, Sicily – would have become famous all over Europe for doing exactly as the Prince of San Severo: cure the sick with his own secret magic potions. Except that Cagliostro committed the error of applying his prowess of traumaturgo on the rich as well as the poor people, thus attracting on himself the scorn of the aristocracy who later embroiled him in various plots, the most famous of all being the affair of the missing necklace at the Court of King Louis XVI of France in 1781.
When the Prince became the Grand Master of the Order of the Freemasons for the Kingdom of Naples in 1750 he risked being excommunicated by Pope Benedict XIV. In his defence he asserted that he had only gone into Freemasonry for he believed he was joining an operative order dedicated to the research and practice of Alchemy which was a subject that greatly interested him. The reality was of course quite different because many Masonic lodges of the time also included in their list of members, some progressive, enlightened and revolutionary minds[7]. Instead of making a full mea culpa, Raimondo even dared reprehend the Church in a letter by accusing it of approving idolatry – that pagan tradition of image worshipping – amongst the underprivileged population of the Kingdom and most particularly of the people of Naples.
Perhaps the legacy and influence of the di Sangros inside the Vatican and their noble lineage were stronger than one imagined for on that occasion the Prince, notwithstanding his blunders, was spared imprisonment and damnation.
Nonetheless, accusations of witchcraft and black magic continued to press against him ; the more so after he had claimed to have discovered a flame that could remain alive for an extensive period of time, even months, ”with the minimal lessening of the substance that fed it”.
The Prince wrote to the Florentine scientist Giovanni Giraldi that he had made the discovery by chance during one of his experiments , when a certain substance extracted from “… the bone of the most noble creature on earth; the best one being that from the head…” had caught fire. As the noblest creature on earth was interpreted to be man, we realise why there was never any truce in the war that his enemies engaged again the Prince! The only records that the Prince left us of that imperishable light are some sketches preserved in the Biblioteca Nazionale. The issue has left perplexed scholars in every age .
The Prince’s laboratory was locked up just before his death and never re-open ; the Chapel and his Palace have since remained in the hands of the Sansevero family which has never allowed for any investigations to take place there. According to another legend, when the Raimondo di Sangro felt that his days were coming to an end he gave instructions that after death his body should be cut in seven pieces by his servant and laid into a coffin whence he would resurrect nine months later. However his family , either fearful that the exercise could have come good and thereafter labelled all the Sanseveros as followers of the Devil or simply anxious to check on the progress of things , put an early end to the experiment by opening the tomb before time.
The Prince’s death has remained very much a mystery even to these days. His mortal remains and his actual place of rest – other than the official tomb seen in the Chapel – have not yet been discovered.
The author forbids any reproduction or publication of this article, in full or in part, without his explicit authorisation.
[1] Legler, Rolf (1990). Der Golf von Neapel (in German). Cologne: DuMont Buchverlag. p. 135
[2] Italian word for the predecessor of the musket though it was easier and lighter than that to carry
[3] He was an Italian sculptor born in Genoa in 1704. He was active in Rome and Naples
[4] Born in Anagni in 1235 and died in Rome in 1303
[5] He was the fifth son of Philip V King of Spain but eldest by his second wife Elisabetta Farnese
[6] G.D. Henderson: “Chevalier Ramsay” Thomas Nelson and Sons London, 1952. Michael Ramsay
(9 July 1686 – 6 May 1743) was born in Scotland but spent most of his life in France
[7] To read more about Freemasonry in the Kingdom of Naples in the XVIII century, read my paper entitled “Freemasonry under the shadow of the Vesuvius” of future release.
In the London of the XVIII century, Freemasonry was a predominant and mysterious movement present in society.
Freemasonry was officially born in London in 1717, when the first United Grand Lodge of England was established there.
By the year 1735 there were well over one hundred lodges in the Capital, many of them characterised by a mixed membership of middle-class individuals, clergymen and aristocrats.
Indeed, many Grand Masters came from the nobility and have contributed in no small part to the success of the Order. They played a reassuring role in the mind of the population who assumed that ,with such a distinguished list of names to its record, Freemasonry could not be a subversive and dangerous sect.
Such awareness in turn made people wanting to learn more about that secretive society which , for at least a while longer, remained free from persecution.
Freemasonry’s notoriety reached such a peak as to having its meeting advertised both in the London press and in the pamphlets distributed and read in the London coffee houses.
And with people’s curiosity growing insatiable, Freemasons were happy to be playing into the phenomenon by even appearing in public celebrations.
From 1721 to 1747 a much splendid procession for the Masonic Grand Festival was held yearly in the streets of London. Bands of musicians accompanied the Brethren from the house of the Master Elected to the place (a Hall or most likely a Tavern) where he would be installed in the chair of Solomon. They marched two by two dressed in their aprons and jewels and carrying the emblems and banners of the Craft, followed by the nobility being transported in their rich carriages.
In such a climate it was no surprise that music composers, poets and librettists – many of whom were themselves members of the Craft – choose to incorporate elements from our Society’s symbolism and ideology in their work.
In that respect , much has been written about Mozart’s Opera “The Magic Flute”, but less about the work of another highly successful music composer of the time, the German George Fridiric Handel [1] who was born in the same town and year as another great composer : Johann Sebastian Bach.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
despite the fact that he was one of the most glittering figures of one of the spectacular periods of human history. There are few characters of the time of which so much is recorded but who are so little remembered. As the stories of the first and second Temples form the basis of the Craft and the Royal Arch it is perhaps surprising that the story of the “Third Temple” – for, that is what it really was – and its builder, has never been told in Freemasonry.
Zerubbabel, and the rest, but also Herod?
hijo de Carlos IV, que había sido depuesto por el gobierno francés, y ellos obligó al virrey a abdicar. Por lo tanto, Venezuela fue el primero Colonia de España para declarar su independencia, un evento que tomó coloque el 5 de julio de 1811.
General José de San Martin, un masón, y el general Bemardo O`Higgins, también un masón, tenían liberó a Argentina y Chile del poder español, y el primero, ahora “Protector” de Perú, llegó a Guayaquil el 26 de julio de 1822, donde él consultó con Bolívar. Qué procedimientos se decidieron, con respecto a Perú, en esa conferencia entre los dos grandes Los Líberators españoles, que eran masones, probablemente nunca ser conocida. San Martín renunció a su ‘Protectorado” de Perú y regresó a Argentina. En cualquier caso, Bolívar se hizo cargo y, llegando en Callao, el 1 de septiembre de 1823, fue investido con el título de “Libertador” de Perú. Entrenó a unos 4,000 peruanos y, con el ejército que había venido a Perú con él, tenía unos 9,000 hombres. Con estos contrató a un número igual de españoles en Junin en una sangrienta batalla de caballería con sables, donde no se disparó un solo tiro, y ganó un victoria que, con la de Ayacucho el 9 de diciembre dc 1824, bajo El general Antonio José de Sucre, terminó para siempre con el poder colonial de España en el Nuevo Mundo
.Habiendo planeado estas batallas con el general Sucre, un masón, Bolívar fue a Lima para organizar un gobiemo cívico y llamar a un Convención Constitucional. Cuando, el 8 de febrero de 1825, tuvo efectuado el nuevo gobierno, renunció al poder supremo en Colombia y Perú. Rechazo de un regalo de 1,000,000 de pesos (aproximadamente $200,000) de Perú y por haber asistido a algunos asuntos cívicos en Perú superior (Bolivia), Bolívar dejó al general Sucre a cargo y se dirigió a Bogotá, Colombia, para calmar los conflictos civiles que habían surgido entre sus antiguos camaradas. Al llegar allí en noviembre de 1826, él pronto pasó a Venezuela, convocando una convención constitucional en ruta para reunirse en Valencia, el 15 de enero de 1827. Aunque él no tuvo sido capaz de ajustar la desafección, ingresó a Caracas en triunfo. Finalmente, después de catorce años en el mando supremo. La renuncia de Bolívar fue aceptada por el Congreso a petición suya, frente a la intriga y el abuso de sus enemigos que fueron hambriento de poder.
as “a fashionable fellow in the mid-18th-century England who dressed and even spoke in an outlandishly affected and epicene manner” and also as a person “who exceeded the ordinary bounds of fashion in terms of clothes, fastidious eating and gambling”.
Earl of Chesterfield
With no lawyer to defend him, he pleaded for mercy with the Court and delivered a speech from which we have extracted the following:
to visit the garden of the school of Ashbourne; a very pretty place on a bank of the river. It was a hot day and they sat on a bench for a little rest, whereupon Johnson – Boswell reports in his diaries – told him of his “humane interference” on behalf of the Rev. Dr Dodd whom he barely knew. Knowing Johnson’s persuasive power of writing Dodd had asked him, through the interception of the late Countess of Harrington, to employ his pen in his favour by writing a letter of supplication to the King so that “(the King) may spare me the ignominy of public death which the public itself is solicitous to waive, and grant me in some distant part of the globe to pass the remainder of my days in penitence an prayer (…)”.
Boswell was expressing his full of admiration for the determination with which Dodd had met his creator a few days earlier. “Dr Dodd seemed to be willing to die and was full of hopes and happiness”, said Boswell. But Johnson retorted that hardly any man dies in public with apparent resolution: “Sir” –said Johnson – “Dr Dodd would have given both his hands and both his legs to have lived because the better a man is, the more afraid is he of death, having a clear view of infinite purity”.
The death-by-hanging technique improved only in the 20th century when mathematical formulas begun to be applied to determine the length of the rope and the height of the drop required to break the person’s neck, quickly. But in the days when such factors – height, weight and neck size of the condemned – where never taken into consideration , the condemned’ s death would have occurred only by a long and inhumane process of strangulation.
Although the Navy did not provide an apprenticeship leading up to an independent trade, it gave long-term employment to those who were fit and healthy. The Navy recruited from a wide spectrum of the society and even practiced impressment, a custom of forcing any men of age 18 and upwards to serve the Nation for a specific time and in situations of war, even against their will. Many such individuals and children stayed on and progressed through the ranks , reaching captaincy and receiving commissions . A few even ended their service as Admirals.
Destined to become one of the most romantic figures in the history of Freemasonry, Andrew Michael Ramsay was born in Ayr, Scotland, on June 9th 1686. He entered Edinburgh University at the age of 14 and studied classics, maths, theology and on finishing his studies he took up the position of tutor in the Earl of Wemyss’
England after losing the crown to the protestant Prince William of Orange. From 1725 to 1728, Ramsay stayed as an invited guest of the Duc de Sully and it was during this period he wrote the famous novel The Travels of Cyrus which was published in 1727. It was a best seller in its day and served to establish the Chevalier’s reputation in England as well as on the Continent.
In the crypt of the Sansevero Chapel in 
