Post by Tamrin on Nov 1, 2009 8:05:08 GMT 10
The Jacobite Conspiracy
[Conclusion - Article by John Hamill, AQC, v.113, pp.97/113]
[Conclusion - Article by John Hamill, AQC, v.113, pp.97/113]
What conclusions can we draw? That there were Jacobites who were also Freemasons is beyond doubt. That those Jacobites had influence on Freemasonry or used Freemasonry for political ends has not been proven. There is nothing in the development of the Grand Lodges in England and Scotland to show even a remote Jacobite influence. Even in the first Grand Lodge in France whose first three Grand Masters — Wharton, MacLean and Derwentwater were active Jacobites — is tghere any evidence of Jacobite influence? To the contrary, Lodges under that Grand Lodge worked in the same manner as those in the British Isles. The question of Freemasonry being used for Jacobite purposes itself raises a question: why would the Jacobites want to use Freemasonry? From the departure of James II in 1688 the Stuart supporters had built up an intelligence network in Europe without any recourse to Freemasonry. Despite Masonic mythology, until the late 1720s there was no Freemasonry in Europe for them to infiltrate for political purposes. I see no reason to argue against Hughan’s comment in relation to the Jacobite Lodge at Rome that Jacobite exiles in Europe were simply practicing a pastime that they had adopted before their exile and which may well have reminded them of happier times.
Not just the conspiracy theorist but otherwise serious Masonic writers have suggested that Jacobite supporters, the French and the Swedes were conspiring together to restore the Stuarts to the throne. In the murky world of early eighteenth century espionage that may well have been the case. But to go from that to say that because some of those involved were Freemasons Freemasonry was the channel through which their plots were hatched is risible. It depends on the belief that there existed in the British Isles, France and Sweden an inchoate Freemasonry from the mid — seventeenth century and ignores the fact that many of the principal Jacobites had no connections with Freemasonry at all.
No one has produced any evidence to show that Charles Edward Stuart was a Freemason. He himself stated categorically to Baron Wachter that he had never been a Freemason. The conspiracy theorists response is that ‘of course he could not admit to being a Freemason. He was dependent on France and the Pope for support, they were against Freemasonry and so the Prince could not be open about his membership’. Von Hund himself added to the conspiracy theory by not only implying that the Prince was a Freemason but that the King of France himself had secretly become a member of an Ecossais lodge! Against such nonsense sensible argument is just so much blowing against the wind.
Unravelling the twisted skeins of the origins of the ‘higher degrees’ is headache making. One thing that I believe has become clearer through the work of Batham and others is that Ramsay’s Oration was the unwitting cause of the proliferation of degrees. It was not Ramsay’s intention in writing his Oration to start any growth of degrees; he was simply, and in the tradition of the Old Charges, giving the Craft an ancient pedigree. To join together the fact that Ramsay’s Oration stimulated the growth of other degrees with the fact that Ramsay had been Charles Edward’s tutor and was a Jacobite supporter and come up with the ‘fact’ that those additional degrees were Jacobite cells to promote the Stuart cause is nonsense. The development of those additional degrees shows no Jacobite influence and continues long after the Stuart cause was lost and its central figure had departed.
Was there a Jacobite Masonic conspiracy and did the Jacobites have an influence on the development of Freemasonry. I think that on the basis of our current knowledge the answers to both of those questions has to be no. Had it not been von Hund introducing the possibility of Charles Edward Stuart as one of the ‘unknown superiors’ of his Strict Observance Rite and fostering the idea that the Kings of Scotland were hereditary Grand Masters of all Masonic systems the whole conspiratorial edifice would have become a minor footnote in the history of our Institution and Charles Edward Stuart would not have figured at all.
Not just the conspiracy theorist but otherwise serious Masonic writers have suggested that Jacobite supporters, the French and the Swedes were conspiring together to restore the Stuarts to the throne. In the murky world of early eighteenth century espionage that may well have been the case. But to go from that to say that because some of those involved were Freemasons Freemasonry was the channel through which their plots were hatched is risible. It depends on the belief that there existed in the British Isles, France and Sweden an inchoate Freemasonry from the mid — seventeenth century and ignores the fact that many of the principal Jacobites had no connections with Freemasonry at all.
No one has produced any evidence to show that Charles Edward Stuart was a Freemason. He himself stated categorically to Baron Wachter that he had never been a Freemason. The conspiracy theorists response is that ‘of course he could not admit to being a Freemason. He was dependent on France and the Pope for support, they were against Freemasonry and so the Prince could not be open about his membership’. Von Hund himself added to the conspiracy theory by not only implying that the Prince was a Freemason but that the King of France himself had secretly become a member of an Ecossais lodge! Against such nonsense sensible argument is just so much blowing against the wind.
Unravelling the twisted skeins of the origins of the ‘higher degrees’ is headache making. One thing that I believe has become clearer through the work of Batham and others is that Ramsay’s Oration was the unwitting cause of the proliferation of degrees. It was not Ramsay’s intention in writing his Oration to start any growth of degrees; he was simply, and in the tradition of the Old Charges, giving the Craft an ancient pedigree. To join together the fact that Ramsay’s Oration stimulated the growth of other degrees with the fact that Ramsay had been Charles Edward’s tutor and was a Jacobite supporter and come up with the ‘fact’ that those additional degrees were Jacobite cells to promote the Stuart cause is nonsense. The development of those additional degrees shows no Jacobite influence and continues long after the Stuart cause was lost and its central figure had departed.
Was there a Jacobite Masonic conspiracy and did the Jacobites have an influence on the development of Freemasonry. I think that on the basis of our current knowledge the answers to both of those questions has to be no. Had it not been von Hund introducing the possibility of Charles Edward Stuart as one of the ‘unknown superiors’ of his Strict Observance Rite and fostering the idea that the Kings of Scotland were hereditary Grand Masters of all Masonic systems the whole conspiratorial edifice would have become a minor footnote in the history of our Institution and Charles Edward Stuart would not have figured at all.
