to the books and records of the Masons' Company for purposes of historical research, the design of this work will be better fulfilled by a concise summary of the results of my examination, together with such collateral information as I have been able to acquire, than by attempting to fully describe the superstructure of error which has been erected on so treacherous a foundation.

This I shall proceed to do, after which it will be the more easy to rationally scrutinise the later entries in the "Diary."

THE MASONS' COMPANY, LONDON.

The original grant of arms to the "Hole Crafte and felawship of Masons," dated the twelfth year of Edward IV. [1472-1473], from William Hawkeslowe, Clarenceux King of Arms, is now in the British Museum.1 No crest is mentioned in the grant, although one is figured on the margin, with the arms, as follows:-Sable on a chevron engrailed between three square castles triple-towered argent, masoned of the first, a pair of compasses extended silver. Crest, on a wreath of the colours a castle as in the arms, but as was often the case slightly more ornamental in form.

This grant was confirmed by Thomas Benolt, Clarenceux, twelfth Henry VIII. or 1520-21, and entered in the visitation of London made by Henry St George, Richmond Herald in 1634. At some later time the engrailed chevron was changed for a plain one, and the old ornamental towered castles became single towers, both in the arms and crest. The arms thus changed are given by Stow in his "Survey of London," 1633, and have been repeated by other writers since his time. A change in the form of the towers is noticed by Randle Holme in his "Academie of Armory," 1688.3 "Of olde," he says, "the towers were triple towered;" and to him we are indebted for the knowledge that the arms had columns for supporters. These arms he attributes to the "Right Honored and Right Worshipfull company of ffreeMasons."

Seymour in his "Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster," 1735,4 gives the date of the incorporation of the company "about 1410, having been called Free-Masons, a Fraternity of great Account, who having been honour'd by several Kings, and very many of the Nobility and Gentry being of their Society," etc. He describes the colour of the field of the arms, azure or blue.

Maitland in his "History and Survey of London," 1756,5 describes the arms properly, and adds that the motto is "In the Lord is all our Trust." Although of considerable antiquity, he says that the Company was "only incorporated by Letters Patent on the 29th of Charles II., 17th September, anno 1677, by the name of the Master, Wardens, Assistants, and Commonalty of the Company of Masons of the City of London," etc."

Berry in his "Encyclopædia Heraldica" states that it was incorporated 2d of Henry II., 1411, which may be a misprint for 12th of Henry IV., 1410-11, following Stow (1633), or

1 Addl. MS. 19, 135.

2 A facsimile in colours will be found in the Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., p. 87, and the text of the document is there given at length.

3 Page 204, verso; and Mas. Mag., Jan. 1882.

Rec. Roll, Pat. 29, Car. ii., p. 10, n. 3.

4 Vol. ii., book iv., p. 381.

7 Vol. i., Masons (London).

5 P. 1248.

for the date at which the arms were granted-12th Edw. IV. He adds that the Company was re-incorporated September 17, 12th Charles II., 1677. Here is again an error. By no calculation could the 12th Charles II. be the year 1677; it was the 29th regnal year of that king as stated by Maitland from the Patent Roll.

On the annexed plate will be found the arms of the companies as given by Stow in 1633; and with them a number of arms of the French and German companies of Masons, Carpenters, and Joiners taken from the magnificent work of Lacroix and Seré, "Le Moyen Age et la Renaissance." 1 The latter show the use of various building implements, the square, compasses, rule, trowel, in the armorial bearings of the Masons, etc. of other countries. To these are added in the plate, for comparison, the arms as painted upon two rolls of the "Old Charges," both dated in the same year, viz., 1686,—one belonging to the Lodge of Antiquity, No. 2; and the other preserved in the museum at 33 Golden Square. Only the former of these bears any names, which will be considered in another place when dealing with the early English records of Freemasonry. It is, however, interesting to note that the arms are precisely similar to those figured by Stow in 1633, and that in each case they are associated with the arms of the City of London, proving beyond doubt that both these rolls, which are handsomely illuminated at the top, were originally prepared for London Lodges of Masons or Freemasons.

In a future plate I shall give a coloured representation of the arms, showing the original coat as granted in the reign of Edward IV. and other forms subsequently borne.

As it is with the later, rather than the earlier history of the Masons' Company, that we are concerned, I shall dwell very briefly on the latter period. One important misstatement, however, which has acquired general currency, through its original appearance in a work of deservedly high reputation,2 stands in need of correction. Mr Reginald R. Sharpe,3 who in 1879 was kind enough to search the archives of the City of London, for early references to the terms Mason and Freemason, obliged me with the following memorandum :—

"Herbert in his book on the 'Companies of London,' refers to 'lib. lx., fo. 46' among the Corporation Records for a list of the Companies who sent representatives to the Court of Common Council for the year 50 Edw. III. [1376-1377]. He probably means Letter Book H., fo. 46 b., where a list of that kind and of that date is to be found. In it are mentioned the 'Fre masons' and 'Masons,' but the representatives of the former are struck out and added to those of the latter.

"The term 'Fre[e]masons' never varies; 'Masons' becomes 'Masouns' in Norman French; and Cementarii' in Latin."

The preceding remarks are of value, as they dispel the idea that in early civic days the Masons and Freemasons were separate companies. The former body, indeed, appears to have absorbed the Marblers, of whom Seymour (following Stow) says "The Company called by

1 1848-51.

5

2 Herbert, Companies of London, vol. i., p. 34.

3 I take the opportunity of stating, that for the information thus obtained, as well as for permission to examine the Records of the Masons' and Carpenters' Companies, I am primarily indebted to Sir John Monckton, Town-Clerk of London, and President of the Board of General Purposes (Grand Lodge of England), who, in these and numerous other instances, favoured me with letters of introduction to the custodians of ancient documents.

4 See ante, Chap. VI., p. 304.

5 "Merblers-Workers in Marble. In his will, made in 1494, Sir Brian Rochiffe says, 'volo quod Jacopus Remus, marbeler, in Poules Churcheyerde in London, faciat meum epitaphium in Templo'" (The Fabric Rolls of York Minster, Surtees Soc., vol. xxxv., Glossary, p. 347).

the Name of Marblers, for their excellent knowledge and skill in the art of insculping Figures on Gravestones, Monuments, and the like, were an antient Fellowship, but no incorporated Company of themselves, tho' now joined with the Company of Masons.

"Arms-Sable, a chevron between two Chissels in Chief, and a Mallet in Base, Argent."1 Down to the period of the Great Fire of London, the Company of Carpenters would appear to have stood at least on a footing of equality with that of the Masons. If, on the one hand, we find in the early records, mention of the King's Freemason,2 on the other hand there is as frequent allusion to the King's Carpenter,3 and promotion to the superior office of Surveyor of the King's Works was as probable in the one case as in the other. The city records show that at least as early as the beginning of the reign of Edward I. (1272), two master Carpenters, and the same number of master Masons, were sworn as officers to perform certain duties with reference to buildings, and walls, and the boundaries of land in the city, evidently of much the same nature as those confided to a similar number of members of these two companies, under the title of City Viewers, until within little more than a century ago.5 In the matter of precedency the Carpenters stood the 25th and the Masons the 31st on the list of companies." Nor was the freedom of their craft alone asserted by members of the junior body. If the Masons styled themselves Free Masons, so likewise did the Carpenters assume the appellation of Free Carpenters, though I must admit that no instance of the latter adopting the common prefix, otherwise than in a collective capacity, has come under my notice.

According to a schedule of wages for all classes of artificers, determined by the justices of

1 Robert Seymour, A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster, 1735, bk. iv., p. 392. Randle Holme describes the Marblers as ston-cutters (Harl. MS. 2035, fol. 207, verso).

2 This title is applied by Anderson, apparently following Stow, in the Constitutions of 1723 and 1738, to Henry Yevele, of whom Mr Papworth says, "he was director of the king's works at the palace of Westminster, and Master Mason at Westminster Abbey, 1388-95." See Chap. VII., p. 342.

3 Cf. E. B. Jupp, Historical Account of the Company of Carpenters, 1848, p. 165. During the erection of Christ Church College, Oxford, 1512-17, John Adams was the Freemason, and Thomas Watlington the Warden of the Carpenters (Transactions, Royal Institute of British Architects, 1861-62, pp. 37-60).

In the reign of Henry VIII. the office of Surveyor of the King's Works was successively held by two members of the Carpenters' Company (Jupp, op. cit., p. 174).

5

Ibid., pp. 8, 188, 193. The form of oath taken by the Viewers on their appointment is preserved in the City Records, and commences

"The Othe of the Viewers,

Maister Wardens of Masons
and Carpenters."

6 According to a list made in the 8th year of Henry VIII. (1516-17), the only one which had for its precise object the settling of the precedency of the companies. In 1501-2 the Carpenters stood the 20th, and the Masons the 40th, on the general list, the members of the former company being thirty in number, whilst those of the latter only mounted up to eleven (Jupp, Historical Account of the Company of Carpenters, Appendix A.).

7 An address of the Carpenters' Company to the Lord Mayor on Nov. 5, 1666, complains of the "ill conveniences to the said Citty and freemen thereof, especially to the Free Carpenters vpon the entertainemt of forriners for the rebuilding of London" (Jupp, Historical Account of the Company of Carpenters, p. 278).

8 It is probable, however, that if the ordinances of more craft guilds had come down to us, the prefix "free," as applied to the trade or calling of individuals, would be found to have been a common practice. Thus the rules of the Tailors' Guild, Exeter, enact, "that euery seruant that ys of the forsayd crafte, that takyt wagys to the waylor (value) of xxs. and a-boffe [above], schall pay xxd. to be a ffre Sawere (Stitcher) to us and profyth [of the] aforsayd fraternyte" (Smith, English Gilds, p. 314).