The Symbolism and Design of the Masonic Apron

[Tamrin]

THE SYMBOLISM AND DESIGN OF THE MASONIC APRON
by WBro. C. J. E. Hudspeth, with compliments of the Victorian Lodge of Research No 218, UGLV

(Excerpt)

The Apron is not a modern invention, in fact it is the most ancient of all garments. In the 3rd Chapter of Genesis these words are written: "and the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons."

We are not so much interested in Adam and Eve's apron as we are in the Masonic apron. Boutelle, in his story of the building of King Solomon's Temple, says: "When the construction of King Solomon's Temple was commenced, workmen were selected to carry out the different trades. Hiram, the widow's son, proclaimed that before entering upon the undertaking the aid of God should first be invoked, and as the Temple was to be God's Holy House and erected to Him, each workman having a part in its construction should offer a sacrifice to God on the Altar of Burnt Offering. The Lamb had in all ages been deemed an Emblem of Innocence and was offered as a sacrifice. With the exception of the skin, the whole of the lamb was consumed. The skins were properly prepared and Hiram caused aprons to be made of them. One apron from the skin of each lamb sacrificed, one apron for each mason under him."

When the aprons had been presented to the workmen, Hiram is reported to have said: "Masonic authority makes this, the snow-white lambskin apron, its first tangible gift to you and ordains that all Masons in all ages, wherever they may be throughout the world, shall ever receive it and always wear it." The apron is an emblem of innocence. Innocent life has gone out of the world: for every man an apron - for every apron a life.

[keith]

The only verifiable references to the building of King Solomon's Temple are contained in the Old Testament, notably I Kings and II Chronicles. Anything else is mere supposition, embellishment and invention. I wish people would stick to the facts and not express imagination as established history.

[jmd]

The context of the publication of this paper has the following pre-amble:

"PLEASE NOTE:

The following is the text of a lecture delivered in the Lodge
by WBro. C. J. E. Hudspeth, PM, AMIE Australia on June 24, 1949
and published in the Transactions of that year.

Even though parts of this paper may now be of historical interest only,
it was decided the paper still contains valuable material worthy of publication."

This does not of course excuse statements made that go beyond what is warranted, but the whole paper needs to be read in conjunction of various degree rituals in which various statements that are historically inaccurate stand.

[keith]

As long as the difference between Fact and Fancy is acknowledged, tha't's fine. Too many people take statements made during the Ritual as historical fact, not allegory intended to illustrate a concept