General Discussion

Chris Murphy details the Craft’s rich mythology of ancient structure

by: Christopher B. Murphy, FPS, is a Past Grand Historian and Past District Deputy Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Vermont. He edited Exploring Early Grand Lodge Freemasonry: Studies in Honor of the Tricentennial of the Establishment of the Grand Lodge of England.

IF Hist’ry be no ancient Fable,

Free Masons came from Tower of Babel

An Hubradistick Poem, 17221

The legendary origins of the Craft are presented in what is often referred to as the Traditional History. This essential mythopoeia holds Freemasonry as originating from the Great Architect of the Universe, and presents an unbroken lineage of stewards of this hidden knowledge. Mythically speaking, through the millennia, the Ars Masonic have been safeguarded and propagated by luminaries of human history. Biblical patriarchs, mystery figures, historical men of renown, celebrated artists and architects, European monarchs, and the original rulers of the emergent Grand Lodge era are all recognized as being part of this chosen Brotherhood.

While the list of mythic, individual Freemasons is wide and storied, there is one aspect of the Traditional History that stands out as being the work of a group of unnamed individuals. It draws its inspiration from a story found in the Book of Genesis, and yet moves beyond mere Biblical recitation. It is the story of the building of the Tower of Babel, and it offers important teachings regarding Masonic self-concept.

And it came to pass . . .

The totality of the story of Babel comprises just nine verses in Hebrew scripture:

And the whole earth was of one language and one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said to one another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime they had for morter. And they said, Go to, let us build a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from then upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of the earth. (Genesis 11:1–9)

It is through Genesis 10:8–10, that Nimrod “a mighty hunter before the Lord” had “the begin- ning of his kingdom [in] Babel . . . in the land of Shinar.” Thus, Nimrod is understood as the leader of the builders at Babel. The story is commonly interpreted as divine judgement of humanity’s arrogance: the builders’ attempt to impose upon God was punished by a confusion of the tongues, and a dispersal of those who may have otherwise dwelt in unity. Various midrashim, Christian exegeses, and so-called “universal histories” have added to this Biblical story, but the core interpretation is largely the same. Even in the Old Charges of Freemasonry, this is often the case.

A lay reading of the Biblical text, however, does not immediately present that as the teaching. The text records that the goal was for the builders of Babel to remain together, and the tower was merely the vehicle for that. In other words, the completion of such an ambitious feat of architecture would have proven their worth and staying power. Genesis does not say that the builders wished to invade the celestial realm. Nor does it say that the builders wished to claim something divine that was not theirs. The Masonic literature of the early Grand Lodge era seems to recognize this; within that corpus Babel shifted away from being a cautionary tale, and became part of the sacred explanation of Freemasonry’s promulgation.

“Nimrod profest masonry…”

Even a century before the formation of the Premier Grand Lodge, there existed Masonic tradition stating that the first organization of Masons occurred at Babel under the direction of Nimrod. The York MS No. 1 (1600), for instance, records that the erection of the Tower “was the ye first time ever yt any Mason had any charge of his Craft.”2 Such traditions continued unto the threshold of the Grand Lodge era, where they may be found in the extant catechetical lectures and mythopoeia of the first decade of the 1700s.

The Sloane MS 3329, c. 1700, includes the query, “where was the word first given[?]” The answer, simply and without further elaboration, is “at the Tower of Babylon.”3 The Dumfries No. 4 MS, c. 1710, includes a robust history of Masonry, to include the children of Lamech memorializing the arts and sciences on two pillars. After the deluge, these were found by Nimrod, who then “profest masonry” and “taught ym signs & tokens so that they could distingwish on [sic] another from all the rest of mankind on the earth.”4 This matter of signs and tokens will be discussed below. Of note, all of these traditions are found within private Lodge documents.

In 1722, however, the first public connection between Babel and Freemasonry was published, in An Hubradistick Poem. The compilers of the Early Masonic Pamphlets describe the poem as a “vulgar...attack on freemasonry” packed with “obscenities” and crude humor;5 later verses certainly live up to that assessment. The lines related to Babel, however, read no differently than the Freemasons’ own literature ante- or post-dating the poem. Indeed, the poem appears to be written by a person well familiarized with Masonic self-concept. The reader may, then, be advised to consider the poet as someone who speaks with a level of authority on this matter:

And that it shou’d a Secret be

Amongst themselves, they did agree,

Their sev’ral Rules and Orders made,

Relating to the Mason Trade,

Should be observ’d as long as Time,

As Records writ in Prose or Rhyme:

And by a solemn Oath enjoin’d

The only Tye upon the Mind.6

The 1723 Constitutions for the Premier Grand Lodge was the next publication to feature these traditions. The second edition of those Constitutions included an expansion that underscored the notion of the organization of the Craft taking place at Shinar. It explains that after the waters of the deluge had receded, the Craftsmen disembarked and “they found a Plain in the Land of ShInar, together, as NoaChIDÆ, or Sons of Noah.” This statement included an explanatory footnote of the meaning of the term Noachidæ: “The first name of Masons, according to some old Traditions.”7 It continues, stating that Noah ordered his sons and their growing offspring to disperse and populate the world, “but from a Fear of the ill Consequences of Separation, they resolved to keep together.” Nimrod “was at the Head of those that would not disperse” until they could “transmit their Memo- rial illustrious to all future Ages....”8 Although tradition holds that the Ark of Noah was built according to the rules of architecture, this tells us that Babel was the first feat of Masonry. A verse from “The Master’s Song” summarizes this point:

In ShInar’S large & lovely Plain,

To MaSonry gave a second Birth.9

“Displays of this sublime Science”

To further contextualize this myth of Babel, one must first understand that early Masonic self-concept and culture treated the Craft as being of divine origin. Terminology such as “divine Science,”10 “Sacred Order,”11 and “Gift of Heaven,”12 were common. These supported the understanding that “the mysteries of Masonry...are absolutely the most important that can be conceived by the human understanding.”13 Indeed, prayer within Lodges beseeched the Great Architect for “Divine Wisdom, that [Brethren] may, with the Secrets of Masonry, be able to unfold the Mysteries of Godli- ness... .”14 All things related to Craft development and dissemination, therefore, was seen as meeting with the approbation of the Great Architect. This includes the labors at Shinar.

One demonstration of this is found in the Charges traditionally given at Babel. For exam- ple, a 1739 rejoinder states that Nimrod’s Charges included the admonition, “That they should be true to one another, and love truly together. . . .”15 These should clearly resonate with contemporary Craftsmen, particularly within the applied use of the trowel. Similar teachings were captured as part of the catechetical lectures of the early Grand Lodge era. One exchange, initially exposed in 1724, reads:

Q. How many particular Points pertain to a Free-Mason?

A. Three: Fraterntiy, Fidelity, and Tacity.

Q. What do they represent?

A. Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth, among all Right Masons; for which all Masons were ordain’d at the Building of the Tower of Babel...16

Again in 1754, a similar scene is painted:

Q. What were the first Injunctions [Nimrod] laid on the Masons?

A. Silence, Secrecy, and Brotherly Love.

Q. Why so?

A. Silence and Secrecy were enjoined us, that none but the Initiated should ever know our Art, and Mystery, and Brother- ly Love; that, by our unparallel’d Esteem and Regard for each other’s Welfare, and of the Craft in general, our Fame might spread over the Face of the whole Earth and Waters, so that we might be remem- bered among the Sons of Men till Time shall be no more.17

A less-frequently espoused aspect of the Masonic-Babel narrative involves the development of one of the seven liberal arts and sciences, Astronomy. Grand Warden Thomas Edmondes, for example, stated “that vast tower called Babel, [had] upon the summit . . . an astronomical observatory, from whence they made great and skilful advances in that science.”18 Earlier, in 1754, Scott’s Pocket Companion stated, “And hence this Tower was called Babel or Confusion. Upon the Top of this Tower was an Observatory, by the Benefit of which it was that the Babylonians advanced their Skill in Geometry and Astronomy beyond all other Nations.”19 The introduction of this tradition into Masonic mythos appears to come through essayist Joseph Addison. In 1726, Bro. Francis Drake delivered a famous St. John the Evangelist speech before Grand Master Charles Bathurst. In it, he offered a lengthy quote from a 1709 essay by Addison, which included reference to “the Babylonian Observatory” atop the Tower.20 Within these references, notwithstanding the motives or bona fides of the workforce, Babel resulted in a perfection of the Seventh Science.

The most significant departure from a strict Biblical recitation comes with the emergence of the idea that the labors at Shinar, at least in part, did indeed meet with the approbation of the Great Architect. “The Warden’s Song,” first published in the 1723 Constitutions, cited Babel as an example of the Masons’ “Grand Design” passed down through the antediluvian patriarchs. It was only when “it came To be admir’d too much” that the work was halted. Even still, the Craftsmen “brought from ShInar Orders good, To rear the Art they understood.”21 Similarly, consider the words of the first Chaplain to the Grand Lodge, “Orator” Bro. John Henley. In 1737, he avowed “The Builders of Babel were dissipated, not having the Signs of True Masonry, nor the Spirit of its Character.”22 Alone, that reads as a clear condemnation of the workmen. In the same oration, however, Henley lists “the Building of Babylon by Nimrod” as “Displays of this sublime Science,” on par with Seth’s Pillars and King Solomon’s Temple.23 These two examples may be read as a distinction between tower and builder, separating art from artist; however, another reading seems more likely.

Consider, for example, The Perjur’d Free Mason Detected (1730). That author wrote, “Nothing but a complete Master in the Science of Masonry could have conceiv’d so immense an Undertaking” as Babel.24 The same writer recounts that notwithstanding the confusion of tongues:

the mighty Ruins of that Fabrick shews to this Day the Skill of the Master-Mason; the immense Arches, the vast Pilasters, the strong Basis, which are still to be seen, are a lasting Testimony as well as to the Greatness of the Work as to the Genius of the Workman.25

Grand Warden Edmondes, cited above, called the architectural acumen of the workers “the greatest genius.”26 These entries into the Masonic Babel lore dispute the idea that all the builders were bad. They do not make a separation of art from artist, but instead speak directly to the quality of both. How, then, can such a stupendous architectural feat be erected by such talented craftsmen, while still being an arrogant work doomed to failure? Those are irreconcilable perspectives. Therefore, the more likely reading of these concepts would seem to be one of recognition of who comprised the workforce: True Craftsmen engaged in the Ma- sons’ Grand Design, and the cowans who infi ated their ranks when the Tower “came To be admir’d too much.” This interpretation is cemented by the next aspect of the Babel myth to be explored.

The Masons’ Faculty

The most enduring facet of the Masonic-Babel narrative regards the special skill that was gained by the True Craftsmen after the confusion of tongues. In the 1723 Constitutions, Bro. James Anderson stated:

. . . not withstanding the Confusion of Languages or Dialects... [it gave] Rise to the Masons Faculty and ancient universal Practice of conversing without speaking, and of knowing each other at a Distance, yet hinder’d not the Improvement of Masonry27

In other words, despite all being dispersed, there was a distinction between the worthy and unworthy. The worthy Masons were enabled to develop what, in 1737, “the Chevalier” Bro. Michael Ramsey called, “figurative signs . . . composing a language sometimes mute . . . in order to communicate with one another at the greatest distance, or to recognize our Brothers of whatsoever tongue.”28

Within the Babel mythos, this was not solely speaking of the modes of recognition; there was a higher function to this Faculty. Ramsey went on to describe the Mason’s Faculty as being “the remembrance either of some part of our science, or some moral virtue, or of some mystery of our faith.”29 Writing in 1744, Bro. Fifield D’Assigny captured the same essence, noting that when the Great Architect:

caused [the Masons’] lips to loose their usual sounds, and made each language flow in confus’d terms: yet still the faithful preserved their sacred mysteries, and formed a compact amongst themselves to hand down to their successors, which valuable privileges we are possessors of at this time.30

With near universality, when the matter of the confounding of tongues was discussed in Masonic literature, it was presented as the origin of the Mason’s Faculty. The confusion provided the Craftsmen the means by which to take due guard of their secrets against the profane. At least one orator framed this as less a function of creating something new within Masonry, and more a clearing of the dross, when he pronounced in 1734, “at the Building of Babel, the language of Masons Remain’d unaff ted and Intire.”31 In both interpretations, the confusion is God moving in mysterious ways, and what appears to be a punishment is actually the Divine impetus for the Craft to protect itself from cowans in the future.32

Laurence Dermott and the Ahiman Rezon

When reviewing the literature of the early Grand Lodge era, there are several voices that speak out against the Masonic mythos of the Tower of Babel. It is essential, however, to recognize that vast majority of these are found in explicitly anti-Masonic polemics, written by those whose goal was to defame and ridicule the fraternity. As such, their statements are, by definition, adversarial, and cannot be read as reflecting either authentic Masonic self-concept or Lodge culture. There is, however, one prominent Brother who did, indeed, speak out against the Craft’s lore of Babel: Bro. Laurence Dermott, Grand Secretary of the Antient Grand Lodge.

Ahiman Rezon was the title of the Antients’ Constitutions. The fi edition, published in 1754, and written by Dermott, expresses his (and that Grand Lodge’s) Masonic worldview. It fully embraces the mystical, mythic explanation of Freemasonry’s promulgation across the globe. It is, for example, inclusive of the idea that the Craft is “a divine Gift from God,”33 extending to the likes of Adam and Noah. In Ahiman Rezon, Dermott stated, however, “that Nimrod, nor any of his Bricklayers, knew any Thing of the Matter.”34 Further, he stated that Free-masonry is “the most sovereign Medicine to purge out” prejudice, disharmony, and misanthropy, and claims such ills were perpetrated by the “Men at the Confusion of Babel.”35

The songs in Ahiman Rezon also support an anti-Babel perspective. The verse of one, sung to the tune of “The Enter’d ‘Prentice,” asserts:

Then Nimrod the Great,

Did next undertake,

To build him to Heaven a Station;

But Tongues of all Kind,

Prevented his Mind,

For he was no excellent Mason36

Another song embraces the mystical ascent of which Nimrod was interpreted to undertake, while still dismissing the Tower as the device to attain such:

A Tower they wanted to lead them to Bliss,

I hope there’s no Brother but knows what it is;

Three principal Steps in our Ladder there be,

A Mist’ry to all but those that are free.37

Before long, an open and overt antagonism developed between the Premier and Antient Grand Lodges. The conflict would often play out in competing literature written by Masons of both allegiances. An example of this is the 1765 rejoinder, A Defence of Free-Masonry, which was a general argument against the Antients. In counter to Dermott’s specific claims about Nimrod and the builders at Babel, the anonymous Defence summarized many of the points found above:

Though MaSonry may be, and is with great Propriety traced from the Creation, yet the Free-MaSonS Faculty, and ancient universal practice of conversing without speaking, and of knowing each other by Signs and Tokens (which says an old Tradition, they settled upon the Dis- persion, or Migration) certainly took its Rise from the Confusion of Dialects at the Building of Babel; and this Tradition was always firmly believed by MaSonS, the Assertions of this visionary Writer to the contrary notwithstanding: Besides, it is recorded of Nimrod or Belus, that he was the first who reduced Men into Society and Union, which is an Argument in favor of the said Tradition.38

This provides another example that, even though Dermott was firm, the outlook of the Antients vis-à-vis Babel was not the predominantly accepted view of this facet of the Freemasons’ mythopoeia.

“. . . replenished with Masons from the Vale of Shinar...”

The Traditional History is a narrative symbol. As a whole, it represents the concept of the Craft as an unbroken stream of secret, sacred teachings. Its constituent parts support the teachings of the larger myth, while off a depth and complexity of their own. Whereas this mythos was once central to Craft consciousness, and could be found represented in the overwhelming majority of Masonic literature and oratory of the time, it has fallen out of the awareness of much of the Craft today.

Certainly, contemporary Masons can all speak to the importance of King Solomon as a figure within Masonic legend, but far fewer can likely identify that the Solomonic narrative is just one part, a “chapter,” of this larger Traditional History. To these Brethren, the likes of Adam, Hermes Trismegistus, and Zoroaster, or of Pythagoras, Euclid, and Vitruvius, have no bearing on Masonic self-concept or self-perception. The same holds true for the Builders at Babel.

Yet, the above examples begin to illustrate that the Biblical story of the workforce at Shinar was adopted by the Craft and adapted for the purposes of advancing mythic narratives. The fact that it is, indeed, so little known by so many contemporary Masons illustrates how far removed the Craft as a whole has become from the fullness of its foundational, Speculative orientation. From that, Masons of today can perhaps draw another important lesson, unforeseen by our founders. The story of Babel tells of God confounding the Brethren, stifling communication, and leading to the abandonment of their great work. By not engaging with our central myths, and by ignoring the wisdom of our founders, too many Brethren today have confounded themselves; through the voluntary neglect of our core philosophies, myth- ically presented, they have stifl communication from the past, and thus have surrendered their full ability to engage in the great work of Freemasonry.

Notes

1 Anonymous, An Hubradistick Poem, in Douglas Knoop, G.P. Jones, Douglas Hamer (eds.), Early Masonic Pamphlets (London: Q.C. Correspondence Circle Ltd., 1978), 86. Hereafter, “eMP.”

2 York MS No- 1, in William Hughan, The Old Charges of British Freemasons (London: Simpkin, Marshall, and Co., 1872), 37.

3 Sloane MS 3329, in Harry Carr & J.P. Jones, Early Ma- sonic Catechisms (London: Quatuor Coronati, 1975),48. Hereafter, “eMC.”

4 Dumfries No- 4 MS, in eMC, 53. 5 eMP, 83.

6 eMP, 87.

7 James Anderon, The New Book of Constitutions of the Antient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons (London: Richard Chandler, 1738), 4. Hereafter, “Anderson, 1738.”

8 Anderson, Constitutions (1738), 4–5.

9 James Anderson, The Constitutions of the Free-Masons(London: William Hunter, 1723), 75.

10 [Robert Samber], Long Livers: A Curious History of Such Persons of Both Sexes Who Have Liv’d Several Ages, and Grown Young Again (London: J. Holland, 1722), xiii.

11 Edward Oakley, A Speech Deliver’d to the Worshipful Society of Free and Accepted Masons, at a Lodge, held at the Carpenters Arms in Silver-Street, Golden-Square, the 31st of December, 1728, in Benjamin Cole, Antient Constitutions of the Free and Accepted Masons, Neatly Engrav’d on Copper Plates (London: B Creake, 1731), 2.29.

12 Laurence Dermott, Ahiman Rezon: or, A Helptoa Brother (London: James Bedford, 1756), 11.

13 James Hoey, Masonry The Turnpike-Road to Happiness in this Life, and Eternal Happiness Hereafter (Dublin: James Hoey, 1768), 8.

14 From the first recorded Prayer at Making, as found in John Pennell, The Constitutions of the Free Masons (Dublin: J. Watt, 1730), 59.

15 Anon., The Beginning and First Foundation of the Most Worthy Craft of Masonry with the Charges Thereunto Be- longing (London: Mrs. Dodd, 1739), in Cécile Révauger (ed), British Freemasonry, 1717–1813, Volume 1: Institu- tions (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 17.

16 The Grand Mystery of Free-Masons Discovered (1724); see also, Institutions of Free Masons (c. 1725), both in eMC, 79 and 85.

17 Alexander Slade, The Free Mason Examin’d (2nd ed). (London: R. Griffiths, 1754), in J.A.M. Snoek (ed.), British Freemasonry, 1717–1813, Volume 2: Rituals I. (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 25–26. A full examination of this exposure falls beyond the scope of this work, suffice to say that the catechism devotes significant time to fleshing out the Babel mythology.

18 Thomas Edmondes, An Address to the Respective Bodies of Free and Accepted Masons, As Delivered at the Stewards Lodge held at the Horn Tavern, Fleet-street, London, the 16th of November, 1763 (London: S. Hooper, 1766), in Cécile Révauger (ed.), British Freemasonry, 1717–1813, Volume 1: Institutions (London and New York: Rout- ledge, 2016), 94.

19 J. Scott, The Pocket Companion and History of Free-Masons (London: J. Scott, 1754), 10.

20 [Francis Drake], A Speech Deliver’d to the Worshipful and Ancient Society of Free and Accepted MASONS, At a Grand Lodge, held at Merchant’s Hall, in the City of York, on St. John’s Day, December 27, 1726, in Cole, Antient Constitutions, 2.12. For an annotated study of this speech, see Shawn Eyer, “Drake’s Oration of 1726, with Commentary and Notes.” Philalethes: The Journal of Masonic Research & Letters, Vol. 67, No. 1 (2014): 14–25.

21 Anderson, Constitutions (1723), 80.

22 [John Henley], “On Scripture Masonry/ The Divinity and Sublime of Masonry, as Display’d in the Sacred Oracles,” in [John Henley] Select Orations of Various Subjects (London: John Tillotson, 1737), 5.

23 Ibid.

24 Anon., The Perjur’d Free Mason Detected (London: T. Warner, 1730), 3–4.

25 Anon, Perjur’d, 4.

26 Edmondes, “An Address,” in Révauger, British Freemasonry, 94.

27 Anderson, Constitutions (1723), 5.

28 Michael Ramsay, “Oration,” in Robert Gould, Gould’s History of Freemasonry Throughout the World (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1936), 3:12.

29 Ramsey, “Oration,” 12.

30 Fifield D’Assigny, A Serious and Impartial Enquiry into the Cause of the Present Decay of Free-Masonry in the Kingdom of Ireland (Dublin: Edward Bate, 1744), in Louis Williams & Alphonse Cerza, (eds.), D’Assigny. (Bloomington: The Masonic Book Club,1974), 26.

31 C.W. Moore MS, A Dissertation on Masonry, 6–7. Italics added. See Shawn Eyer, “A Dissertation upon Masonry, 1734, with Commentary and Notes.” Philalethes: The Journal of Masonic Research & Letters. Vol 68, No. 2 (2015): 62–75.

32 For more on the Masons’ Faculty, see Christopher Murphy, “The Mason’s Faculty and the Language of Adam” The Plumbline. Vol. 24, No. 4 (2018): 1–7; see also, Shawn Eyer, “’The Essential Secrets of Masonry’: Insight from an American Masonic Oration of 1734”, in Christopher Murphy and Shawn Eyer (eds.), Exploring Early Grand Lodge Freemasonry: Studies in Honor of the Tricentennial of the Establishment of the Grand Lodge of England (Washington, D.C.: Plumbstone Academic, 2017), 178–82; see also, Nathan St. Pierre, Harmony in the Hive: A Vibrant Vision for Freemasonry’s Future (Washington, D.C.: Plumbstone, 2024), 91–95.

33 Dermott, Ahiman Rezon, xiv.

34 Ibid.

35 Dermott, Ahiman Rezon, 23.

36 Dermott, Ahiman Rezon, 154. To this writer’s knowledge, this is the first publication of this song.

37 Dermott, Ahiman Rezon, 123. This song was first published in the songster appended to the 1751 Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. See Edward Spratt, The New Book of Constitutions (Dublin: Edward Bate, 1751), 2.22.

38 [John Revis], A Defence of Free-Masonry, as Practiced in the Regular Lodges, Both Foreign and Domestic, Under the Constitution of the English Grand-Master (London: W. Flexney, 1765), 8–9.