The essays in this volume were commissioned by the Grand Lodge of Mark Master
Masons to commemorate the 150th anniversary of its first meeting on 23 June 1856. They reflect research in progress on areas relevant to the history of Mark
Masonry and do not purport to provide a comprehensive overview of the fascinating
history of this order. The aim is rather to demonstrate that this is a worthy field for
further investigation and to encourage those interested in the history of Mark Masonry
to relate their study to wider historical themes. As I have pointed out on many occasions
previously, the history of craft Freemasonry has largely been neglected by professional
historians in Britain. What is true of craft Freemasonry i~ even more the case with other
masonic orders such as Mark Masonry, of whose existence non-masonic scholars are
largely ignorant. If this volume helps raise awareness among both scholars and freemasons of the significance and importance of the history and heritage of the
GLMMM, it will have achieved its purpose.
The first essay in the volume is necessarily tentative, sketchy and provisional in its
conclusions. Its intention is to suggest some wider social and historical contexts in
which the history of the GLMMM should be viewed. At this stage of research, its view
of these contexts may be completely wrong, and nothing would please the author more
than to see the appearance of some research, grounded in a detailed analysis of the
membership and other records of GLMMM, which engages with the arguments expressed and perhaps disproves them. However, the fundamental contention of the
essay, that in order to understand the emergence of the GLMMM it is necessary to take
immediate historical and social developments as the starting point, rather than preconceived ideas as to the character and structure of masonic ritual, will, the author
is convinced, always remain valid.
Mark Masonry has no direct connection with the stonemasons' marks found in medieval buildings, but the fact that each mark master mason chooses their own mark
means that the subject of medieval stonemasons' marks has always been of immense
interest to mark masons. At the first meeting of the Mark Provincial Grand Lodge of
West Yorkshire in 1871, a paper on medieval masons' marks was read and over 1,200
pictures of medieval masons' marks were exhibited. The leading modern authority on
stonemasons' marks is Dr Jennifer Alexander, and we are very fortunate that she so
readily agreed at very short notice to allow the reprinting here of her survey of the history
of masons' marks and methods of stone bonding which was originally published in a
volume on The Archaeology of Cathedrals, edited by Tim Tatton-Brown and Julian Munby and published by Oxford University Committee for Archaeology in 1996. Thanks
should also be recorded to the editors of the Oxford volume and to the School of
Archaeology for the University of Oxford for permission to reprint Dr Alexander's article
here, which she has kindly updated for the present volume.
Peter Glyn Williams in his essay 'In the Beginning. ..' provides a lucid summary of
the accepted history of Mark Masonry in Great Britain. Williams's essay is based on a
lecture given to the Grand Stewards' Lodge, as are the essays by James Daniel and Aubrey
Newman. This series of lectures is proving a valuable vehicle for the encouragement of
research into Mark Masonry and it is to be hoped that this lodge will continue to organize
lectures of the high standard already established by previous speakers, and that this series
of lectures will stimulate research into Mark Masonry in the way that the Prestonian and
Batham lectures have done for craft masonry and the Royal Arch respectively.
Despite the important role of Scotland in the events which led to the establishment of
the GLMMM, relations with Scottish masonic bodies were not always very good in the early
days of Mark Masonry, and this is reflected in the historiography of the subject. As recently
as 1969, R. M. Handfield-Jones referred in his history of the GLMMM to the 'cynical
hypocrisy of Scotland' when describing the establishment of a Scottish Mark province in
Lancashire by the Scottish Grand Chapter. Robert Cooper in his essay, 'The Revenge of the
Operatives', provides an authoritative explanation of the background to Scottish involvement
in the development of Mark Masonry in England and Wales. It is to be hoped that Cooper's
essay will enable future writers on Mark Masonry in England and Wales to develop a more
sympathetic and balanced approach in describing the Scottish connection.
Much of the existing literature on the history of Mark Masonry focuses on evidence to show that the Mark degree was worked before the Union of the English
Grand Lodges in 1813. This interest reflects continued anxiety generated by allegations
made at the time of the creation of the Mark Grand Lodge in 1856 that the degree was
a new invention. The discussion has been further complicated by the desire of individual
Mark lodges to prove that they were in existence before the creation of the GLMMM and
are therefore entitled to the prized 'Time Immemorial' status. The result of this is that
the discussion of the nature of the degree before 1813 has often been piecemeal and
tendentious. There is no doubt that the degree exist~d before the Union. What is required
is a systematic review of the surviving evidence, based on a careful examination of
primary sources and materials. A major contribution towards such an endeavour is made
by Elias Kupfermann's essay containing a catalogue of Mark jewels dating from before
the Union. Kupfermann's typology of these jewels will doubtless enable many more such
jewels to be identified and recorded.
A major lacuna in this volume is the lack of any new study of Thomas Dunckerley,
that dominant figure in the development of the Premier Grand Lodge in the late eighteenth century, who was active in promoting the Mark degree. There is clearly a need
for much more research on Dunckerley; it is difficult to believe that Sadler said the last
word. However, the essays by John Mandleberg and Susan Mitchell Sommers evoke vividly the milieu of Dunckerley's circle and of the practice of the Mark degree in the late
eighteenth century by considering two figures closely connected with him, John Knight
and Ebenezer Sibley. Knight and Sibley are both are also of interest in that they also
illustrate different aspects of Freemasonry in provincial England at that time. The extent
to which Freemasonry was a vehicle for the spread of new ideas and values in provincial
towns and cities in the eighteenth century is a major theme for future research, and both
Knight and Sibley are excellent case studies in this respect. Sibley is, of course, best
known for his involvement with the Royal Ark Mariners, a degree which since 1871 has
been under the protection of the GLMMM. Sibley was also a mark mason, and it is appropriate to remember the important connection between Mark Masonry and the
Royal Ark Mariners by including in this volume a major new academic study of Deputy
Grand Noah Sibley.
At the heart of this volume are studies of three men who played a central part in
the early history of the GLMMM: Lord Leigh, the first Grand Master Canon Portal,
Grand Master from 1869 to 1873 and William Kelly, who created the remarkable 'super-province' of Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Derbyshire and Rutland. Lord Leigh took
the lead in creating the new Grand Lodge. Neville Barker Cryer paints an evocative
portrait of Leigh's life and background, but nevertheless he remains at the end of the day
a rather elusive figure. The sense that emerges is that Leigh's involvement in the creation
of GLMMM was prompted to a considerable extent by embarrassment at the allegations
made in the masonic press as to the illegality of the London Bon Accord Mark Lodge.
However, Leigh's concern to maintain good relations with UGLE is striking, and the
whole has to be considered also in the context of the wider disputes which were affecting
UGLE at the time.
In understanding these, a key figure is Portal whose reforming zeal, energy and vigour mean that he still springs from the page as a remarkable man of his time over a
hundred years after his death. Portal introduces us to many others closely connected with
him who were also significant in the early development of the GLMMM, particularly the
'Hampshire mafia' of Lord Carnarvon and the MP William Wither Bramston Beach.
James Daniel's essay at last gives Portal his due, and also points the way to many larger
themes, ranging from the disputes engendered by the Tractarian movement to the relationship between Freemasonry and developments in friendly societies in the late
nineteenth century, which require further consideration. One of the factors which gave rise to the establishment of the GLMMM was the
demand that Freemasonry should pay more attention to the provinces and be less dominated by its London membership. This reflected wider social developments and the
increasing importance of the new industrial towns and cities of the North and Midlands.
Aubrey Newman'~ essay is a case study of William Kelly's manipulation of the opportunities offered by the creation of the GLMMM to enhance his masonic powerbase
in the East Midlands. This provides insights into the way in which GLMMM in its early
days restated the relationship between metropolitan and provincial Freemasonry .The
essays by Cryer, Daniel and Newman illustrate how our understanding of the early
history of the GLMMM can be enhanced by investigating the biography of leading figures in it, and this approach provides a ripe field for further research.
However, analysis of the question of 'Who Were the Mark Masons' cannot be restricted to the powerful men who held high office in Grand Lodge. To understand the
attraction of Mark Masonry in the Victorian period, it is also necessary to examine the
membership of local lodges. Roger Burt, one of the most distinguished British historians
to have written on the history of Freemasonry, has been a pioneer of this kind of research
in his investigations of masonic membership among miners in Cornwall. Burt's researches have hitherto focused on craft freemasonry, but in the essay here he extends
his analysis to consider membership of some Royal Arch chapters and Mark lodges in
West Cornwall. The most urgent and pressing need in the study of Freemasonry in Britain is for the completion of many more local case studies like those undertaken by
Burt. Such research is very time-consuming and requires painstaking identification of
obscure individuals. No great esoteric truths will emerge and sometimes the information
found will not seem to reflect well on Freemasonry. But such research is the only way
that a clear picture of the historical significance of Freemasonry as asocial and cultural
phenomenon will ever emerge. Moreover, this is a type of research which amateur researchers can readily undertake and where they can make ah immense contribution to
the wider field.
The growth of the GLMMM and its emergence as a settled and accepted part of the English masonic landscape is best expressed in the story of its various headquarters
buildings, which is lovingly recounted by Richard Gan. If the success of an organisat.ion
is best expressed by the esteem in which it is held by its employees, evidently the GLMMM
at its 150th anniversary is a very successful organisation indeed -the affection felt for
the GLMMM by its present Deputy Grand Secretary is apparent throughout his essay.
From a nervous and perhaps uncertain connection, GLMMM has developed into an organisation with extensive international links and a truly global profIle. Frederick Smyth
gives us in his essay a whirlwind tour of some of these manifestations of Mark Masonry
abroad, while Dennis Penin describes how Mark Masonry has fared in the Channel
Islands.
Andrew Prescott
Douglas Knoop Center, Sheffield
