The Precious
Jewels
by
Bros. A. L. Kress and R. J. Meekren
THE BUILDER - October 1926
The Masonic usage of the word jewel has doubtless struck many a brother as
not a little peculiar upon his first introduction to the traditional phraseology
of the Craft. What is possibly its most familiar application, that of
designating the badges of office used in the lodge, is however sufficiently in
accord with the modern meaning of the word to make it appear plausible that it
was through this that it came to be adopted into our terminology. These badges,
worn on the breast and suspended by a ribbon or an ornamental chain, are
frequently superb examples of the jewelers' art. It might thus seem not
unnatural to suppose that plainer specimens were merely substitutes or
imitations of such jewels, and that the other applications of the word in the
rituals are derived from this by association, and as affording a secondary
verbal symbolism indicating the value set by Masons upon certain emblems. There
is no need to say any more of this, as like so many apparently obvious
explanations, further examination shows it to be wide of the mark, for this use
is not the primary one. But though secondary it is doubtless true that its
accordance with the ordinary every-day meaning has had a great deal to do with
the persistence of the word in Masonic forms. Such evidence as we have seems to
indicate that it came into use by Freemasons a very long time ago and that it is
possibly as old as anything in the system. At any rate it is pretty certain that
it originally had nothing to do with ornamental badges of office.
THE MEANING OF THE WORD
A jewel to us signifies something precious; this in ordinary every-day usage
seems to be the root idea, whether the value be intrinsic in the material or due
to its beauty and workmanship. It is therefore with something like surprise that
we learn that the word is really derived from the same root as the French word
jeu, and that it meant originally a plaything, a toy or a trinket. So fully
indeed did the word connote the idea of "play" in medieval times that in
Flanders the dramatic performances presented by the Craft Gilds on the different
festivals were actually called jewels. In Masonic usage, however, the idea of
value seems to have always been the prominent one as far back as we can go.
Whether the other was also present may be an interesting speculation. In most
trades there are traditional jokes which through familiarity have become more
habits of speech than occasions for laughter except when first communicated to
the novice, That our old operative predecessors had a strong sense of humor is
certain, and also that, like unsophisticated folk generally, they did not see
anything inappropriate in mingling it with the sublime, or setting the comic
side by side with the serious and sacred. Men who have the true craftsman's
appreciation of, and interest in their work, are quick also to make fun of it on
occasion, and it would be natural enough for them to speak of their most
necessary implements and tools as "playthings." Such tricks of speech were to be
heard among the elder workmen in different occupations within the memory of
those still living, and may even yet survive if trades unionism, and the idea
that work is essentially an evil to be reduced to an absolute minimum, have not
quite killed them. The case of one old rough mason, still alive some twenty
years ago, might be quoted. It was his invariable habit to speak of any
particularly awkward stone, either from its shape or size, as a "trinket," which
seems a curiously apt parallel. No stress, however, is to be laid on this
suggestion, only it may be as well to bear in mind that at the time the word was
first employed Masonically it had other meanings in common use besides those to
which it is now limited, and that such meanings may have been in the minds of
the men who first spoke of the "jewels" of their Craft.
PRESENT MASONIC USAGE
Though, as we have noted, the first thought suggested to a Mason today by the
word is that of the insignia of the officers of the lodge and the honorary
badges given to past officers, yet he can hardly fail to be aware that it has
other applications. In the Second Degree the candidate is told of the "three
precious jewels of the Fellowcraft." In England the Entered Apprentice learns
that "the perfect Ashlar is for the experienced Craftsman to try and adjust his
jewels on." In America, from the time of Webb at least, the corresponding
passage says that the same ashlar "is a stone made ready by the hands of the
workman, to be adjusted by the working tools of the Fellowcraft." There is no
doubt but that here tools are synonymous with jewels, but these jewels of the
Fellowcraftsman are not the three mentioned above. The candidate is at the same
time told of the furniture and the ornaments of the lodge. The former includes
the Square, which is found in several of the sets of jewels hereafter quoted,
while the latter may be derived from a tradition that had come to be
misunderstood of an earlier set of jewels. That "jewel" and "ornament" have long
been almost synonymous may have had something to do with the change in name.
There will be no need to remind the Mason who is in least familiar with the
formularies of the Craft how confusingly these various groups overlap and
interconnect. There is one external characteristic common to them all, with the
exception of the first, and that is their arrangement in triplets. And even if
the jewels of office are now more than three it must be remembered that
originally the lodge had only this number of officers, the Master and the two
Wardens, so that this set, too, originally agreed with the others in this
regard. Indeed a purist in Masonic nomenclature would have good grounds for
insisting that the insignia of the subordinate officers are not properly called
jewels, and that the custom of doing so is due to ignorance and carelessness.
This may well be, but of course such extensions of meaning by analogy and
association are quite normal in the evolution of language; and something after
all has to be conceded to convenience.
Let us now consider these various groups in more detail. The "furniture"
consists, as is well known, of the Bible, the compasses and the square. It is
probable that the term is derived from another statement, that a lodge must be
furnished, that is provided with, these things as one of the conditions of
regularity. The "ornaments" consist of the Mosaic Pavement, Indented Tessel and
Blazing Star. We have already seen a possible connection between the terms
ornament and jewel and will defer further discussion for the moment. The
"jewels" or "tools" of the Fellowcraft mentioned in the explanation usually
given of the perfect ashlar, are the "square, level and plumb" which are also
said (in America) to be the immovable jewels of the lodge, and are also actually
the insignia of the three principal and original officers of the lodge. The
movable jewels are the two ashlars and the trestleboard. It may be remarked here
that except in the United States these last are called immovable and the others
movable. There is also evidence to show that this is the original usage, and
that the peculiar American description is due to a more or less deliberate
change made by the Baltimore Convention in 184?. Finally we have the "precious
jewels of the Fellowcraft," which phrase seems only to be used as a figurative
mode of describing the traditional manner of conveying Masonic instruction and
preserving Masonic secrets.
Taking for granted the now generally received hypothesis that Freemasonry two
hundred years ago comprised only two grades or degrees, each with its
appropriate ceremonies and ritual secrets, it is feasible to suggest tentatively
that all these groups or sets of three are variants or doublets of some common
original which was given as part of the instruction in the primitive "making" or
initiation of the first grade, excepting those now said to belong especially to
the Fellowcraft. These, as has been seen, stand quite apart from the others, and
we shall therefore dismiss them for the present with the suggestion that they
seem to be connected with the account of the five senses on the one hand, and
the symbolic key of Masonry, which is enlarged upon in the first section of
lecture in the Entered Apprentice Degree as usually worked in England. It would
seem that they may have come to be termed jewels toward the end of the
eighteenth century to signify their importance in the emblematic instructions
regarding the basic duties and obligations incumbent upon each individual Mason.
THE JEWELS OF THE LODGE
In this, as in other special investigations of the kind, we are greatly
handicapped by the lack of definite and trustworthy information; and for the
earliest origins there is practically nothing outside the old Catechisms which
have already been freely made use of in the previous articles in this series. As
has been stated before, they are documents of very doubtful authenticity, but if
we reject them on that account we have simply nothing at all to go upon. We must
therefore use them for whatever they may be worth, always remembering that
conclusions based upon them must always be held with a certain reserve.
Assuming then that these documents represent variant forms of the oral
tradition of pre-Grand Lodge Masonry, or part of it, let us see what they have
to tell us upon the subject. Eight of these catechisms have questions and
answers relating to the jewels of Masonry or of the lodge, and of these four
seem to agree that they were a square ashlar, a diamond and the common square;
by which presumably we are to understand the working tool of that name. It is
true that the Mason's Examination says that there are four, naming them as the
"square, astler, diamond and common square," yet this is probably, indeed almost
certainly, an error arising through the separation, by an inserted comma, of the
adjective "square" from the substantive "astler," thus turning the original
form, represented by the other three versions, into a duplication of the common
square. Unless indeed we suppose that the qualifying word "common" was later
inserted in order to prevent the statement appearing utter nonsense, and to try
and give some meaning to the double mention of the implement. But this appears
the less likely hypothesis.
That the original number of jewels in this tradition was really three and not
four is further supported by the fact that in the Mystery of Free Masons, which
is obviously a slightly variant form of the Examination tradition, this answer
has dropped out together with the following question, while the answer to the
latter has taken its place. This will be made clear by placing them in parallel
columns, as follows:
Examination
Q. How many precious jewels are there in Masonry?
A. Four, Square, Astler, Diamond and Common Square.
Q. How many lights be there in a lodge?
A. Three, the Master, Warden and Fellows.
Mystery
Q. How many precious jewels be there in Masonry?
A. --------
Q. --------
A. Three, the Master, Warden and Fellows.
All the other documents that mention the jewels follow it with a question
about "lights" including Prichard's Dissection. Of the remainder several mention
the lights in approximately the same relative position so that we may perhaps
assume that in the originals of all these variants there were questions and
answers respecting lights and jewels grouped together. From a number of
considerations, such as the general use of the subjunctive mood instead of the
indicative it would seem that the Mystery is probably somewhat the older form of
the two, though both are certainly defective in that each contains matter that
has dropped out of the other. It would be very easy, when two consecutive
questions demand answers beginning with the word "three," and neither of them
very intelligible as we may suppose to the copyists, that such a slip should be
made, and once made, be perpetuated.
This, however, by the way. In three other forms we have agreement on the same
sequence of questions about jewels and lights, though the defining phrases "in
Masonry" and "in the lodge" are absent, probably marking an earlier stage in the
tradition. These three form another well-defined group as they resemble each
other even more closely than the two first quoted do. The answer to the question
about jewels, with some variation in spelling, is in two of them as follows:
Q. How many jewels?
A. Three, a square asher, a diamond and a square.
The third has the obviously corrupt rendering:
A. Three, a square where, a diadem and a square.
Now diadem appears a very possible mistake for diamond, but "a square where"
is most mysterious In type there does not appear any resemblance that might
account for it, but if the word "asher" be written out carelessly and the top of
the "a" left open the two first letters together will bear some resemblance to a
"w" and a copyist ignorant of the real word intendent might well have read it
so. He would thus seem to have before him the word "wher" and would quite
naturally take it for "where" even if it did make no sense. If we could suppose
that he might have had before him a copy that spelled "asher" with a final "e"
it would be all the more natural. But abbreviations and variegated spellings
were so universal at the time we may suppose this copy to have been made that
the supposition is hardly necessary.
The conclusion then that we come to as a result of this discussion is that
five out of the eight documents referring to jewels agreed on there being the
square ashlar, diamond and square." And though, as we have seen, these five fall
into two groups in each of which the exemplars are so closely related that they
should be taken rather as representing two independent witnesses, yet as this
throws back the date of their originals it also tends to augment their weight.
The three remaining references are as follows: In the Sloane M. S.
No. 3329, we have:
How many jewels belong to your lodge?
There are three, the square pavement, the blazing star and the Danty Tassley.
The Chetwode Crawley M. S. has:
Are there any jewells in your lodge?
Three, Perpendester, Square Pavement and an brobed Mall.
While the Mason's Confession has a more extended version:
What's the square pavement for?
For the Master to draw his ground draughts on.
What's the dinted ashlar for?
To adjust the square and make the gages by.
What's the broached dornal for?
For me the younger and last Entered Prentice to learn to broach upon.
Before proceeding to discuss these it may be useful to quote what Prichard in
his Masonry Dissected has to say on the matter. Prichard is the first record we
have of two groups of jewels called movable and immovable. The former according
to him are those which (following the innovation brought in by the Baltimore
Convention) are now called the immovable in America. Those that he thus
distinguishes are the "Trasel board, rough ashlar and broached thurnel."
Following which comes the question:
What are their uses?
Trasel Board for the Master to draw his designs upon, the Rough Ashlar for
the Fellowcrafts to try their jewels upon and the Broached Thurnel for the
Enter'd 'Prentice to learn to work upon.
As the movable jewels spoken of immediately preceding are "the square, level
and plumbrule," we may legitimately suppose that these are also the jewels of
the Fellowcrafts here spoken of as tested on the ashlar. These however we will
pass for the time being, remarking, however, that the passage bears out the
opinion that the older usage is to call these implements "jewels" and not
"tools."
In the four accounts just given of the jewels of the lodge it would seem at
first sight that they disagreed with each other as much as they vary from those
previously discussed. Yet three of them coincide in speaking of a square
pavement, while two agree with the earlier set in mentioning an ashlar. Closer
examination may reveal other identities concealed under the differing
phraseology.
PRICHARD'S VERSION
Though less extended in form, Prichard's version seems to bear considerable
resemblance to that of the Confession. Both agree on that mysterious and much
discussed object the "Broached Thurnel" or "Dornal," for there can be no doubt
that these are but dialectal variants of the same word. Both also mention an
ashlar, though in the one case it is rough and in the other "dinted." Still it
would appear that the same thing was intended in each case. It is true that in
Prichard the "Square Pavement" is replaced by the "Trasel Board", which is
probably the prototype both of the English "tracing board" and the American
"trestle board," yet both are explained as intended for the Master to draw his
plans on. In fact, the explanations of all three are equivalent and couched in
very similar language. The ashlar would appear to have been used as a test block
for trying the accuracy of the working tools while the "dornal" or "thurnel" was
for the Apprentice to learn to work on.
Prichard's work is of very doubtful character, but whatever conclusions we
may come to regarding it, it is impossible to believe that it was pure
invention. However he may have modified and rearranged the material before him
it is practically certain that he copied from earlier documents. As we have them
his three catechisms bear internal evidence of being compilations, and we might
suppose that he had built them up out of similar documents to those we now know
as the Old Catechisms. It would seem that such variant forms as he knew were
combined and sometimes given different applications. If this were not done by
him then it was by others before him, and really this seems the more probable
hypothesis, for his work was but a catch-penny publication and it hardly seems
likely that he would have gone to any unnecessary trouble to edit his material;
unnecessary that is from his point of view, seeing that his object was only to
turn a more or less honest penny.
Immediately preceding the questions relating to the jewels we find in the
"Dissection" the following:
What are they?
Mosaic pavement the ground floor of the Lodge, Blazing Star the Centre and
indented tarsel the border round about it. What is the other furniture of a
Lodge?
Bible, Compass and Square.
Other and later authorities describe the first group not as furniture but as
ornaments, but its resemblance to the set of jewels given in the Sloane M. S. is
so striking that it makes us suspect that jewel, furniture and ornament were
then all very fluid terms, and not used with the technical precision that later
came into vogue. While the "Danty tassley" of the older version might seem an
ignorant corruption of "indented tessel," or of the "indented or tesselated
border," the phrase more familiar to English Masons, yet second thoughts lead us
to suspend judgment. It may really be that both are due to attempts to
rationalize a phrase already corrupt and obscure.
REFERENCES
The same works should be consulted as were given in the February Study Club,
page 59. The paper by Bro. Herbert Poole in the last part issued of A. Q. C.
will be of assistance. A notice of this appeared in the August BUILDER, page
252.
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
In what way can the present use in the ritual of the term "jewel" be best
explained?
What was the original badge or insignia of office of the Master of a lodge?
Could the phrase, "all the implements of Masonry," as used in the American
ritual of the Third Degree have a reference to a time when Master Mason was
equivalent to Master of a Lodge?
back to top |
