The Dharma Workings of Craft Masonry

Mixed gender Freemasonry only really set off when Annie Besant (1847-1933) got involved. History has it that she told Georges Martin (1844-1916) that she would only help out the newly founded Le Droit Humain if she could replace his atheistic ritual with another one. Things appear to be not that simple.

The eminent Masonic scholar Jan Snoek (1946-) dove into the history of the rituals of the Dutch federation of Le Droit Humain. He published an article in the Bulletin (internal publication of the Dutch federation at the time) and later (2014) in the Handbook of Freemasonry with Henrik Bogdan (1972-) saying that Besant used rituals of the Grand Lodge of Scotland as her source to write her “Dharma Workings of Craft Masonry”.

In the mentioned Bulletin Snoek writes (translated from Dutch):

It is unclear at this time exactly what ritual she used, but it does look like it was not the best-known English ritual, the Emulation Ritual. Rather, the indications point toward a Scottish ritual. For example, the Presiding Master is called “Right Worshipful Master” instead of “Worshipful Master” and the altar with the Bible (and possibly other sacred books) is placed in the center of the lodge instead of directly against the Worshipful Master’s table. A number of smaller details also follow the practice followed in Scotland. Incidentally, Annie Besant did adopt some elements from the French ritual with which she herself had been initiated. For example, there is an “Orator” instead of a “Chaplain” whose judgment is sought in various situations, and a circle of drawn swords is formed around the Candidate during the taking of the pledge which is then repeated as a sign of the protection that Freemasonry will offer the new member in the future. (Personal communication from Kevin Tingay, letter dated 26-8-1996.)

I don’t know if Snoek studied the Dutch translation and/or the original English version of the ritual or secondary sources. Much information in the quote seems to come from Arthur Edward Waite (1857-1942)’s New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry. Waite compares the rituals to his own, coming with another set of differences:

The English Ritual used by Universal Co-Masonry has been printed and had reached a second edition in 1908. It is called The Dharma Working of Craft Masonry, Dharma being the title of the Lodge at Benares.

The Ceremony of the Installation of the Worshipful Master and the Investiture of Officers has also been printed.

In the Ritual of the Three Degrees the variations from our own form are at once numerous and slight, but there are also certain new things introduced.

Some of them may be tabulated as follows:

1. The W. M. is called throughout the Right Worshipful Master, following the Scottish fashion.
2. The rubrics are much fuller.
3. The Entered Apprentice is taken three times round the Lodge and is brought back on each occasion to the centre.
4. The second circumambulation is opposite to the first, or against the sun; the third is the same as the first, or with the sun.
5. In the Second Degree, after the usual circumambulations, the Candidate is placed in the centre and passes through five stages or experiences, corresponding (1) to work on the rough stone; (2) the arts; (3) Sciences; (4) the Humanities, and (5) apparently rest after work, with the idea of work to follow.
6. In the Third Degree the Obligation is shortened and certain significant covenants are not found, presumably because women take it. The wording also differs.
7. The wording differs throughout in many places and some of the prayers are changed.

In 1905 a small booklet appeared in Dutch from the “Theosofische Uitgevers Maatschappij”. This publishing house is one of several names that Duwaer & Van Ginkel used, Duwaer and Van Ginkel, who were both part of the first mixed gender lodge in the Netherlands. The booklet is called Schets van de geschiedenis der Vrijmetselarij en een verslag van de vorming van den Opperraad der Algem. Gemeenschappelijke Vrijmetselarij and subtitled Verhandeling van de Dharma loge te Benares. Voor Nederland bewerkt door H.J. van Ginkel. That’s a mouth full.
A discourse on the history of Freemasonry and a report of the formation of the Supreme Council (of Le Droit Humain), held for the Dharma lodge in Benares, India. It doesn’t say who held the talk, but there is a big chance that it was Annie Besant. In it is mentioned (translated from Dutch):

It is perhaps advisable, to announce here in passing, that the authoritative rites of all the lodges within British and Dutch territory, are those of the Scottish Fraternity, originally belonging to the “Grand Lodge of Scotland.” Although to some extent different from the French Ritual, it nevertheless shows a close resemblance to the rites prescribed by the Grand Lodge of England and these were adopted, with some modifications, as more suitable to the intentions, in order to relate more closely to the order of Freemasonry, with which the Co-Freemasonry on English territory was likely to come into contact

So Besant (but why does she mention the Dutch territory?) confirms that a ritual was taken from the Grand Lodge of Scotland. This doesn’t say which ritual of the GLoS though, as they have several.

When comparing “Dharma” with “The Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry”, there are remarkable similarities, but also noticeable differences. More about that below.

The full title of the “Dharma” ritual is “The Dharma Workings of Craft Masonry” which sounds a lot like “Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry”. There are also pretty similar “Complete Workings of Craft Freemasonry” from England, but Besant opted for “Craft Masonry” rather then “Craft Freemasonry” and -as mentioned- a “Right Worshipful Master”.

Besant was initiated with the rituals that Georges Martin had written and it would be odd if she had not used them for inspiration. We’ll get back to that.

I had to search long and hard to find Besant’s text. This is odd. If Besant used it to found dozens, perhaps even hundreds, of lodges, why is it so hard to find it? In the end, I found it (online!) in the library of the University of Manchester (which has a few more things concerning the British federation).

The library has an entry of a book with the year “19??” and an online version with 1919. The latter can’t be correct. Safe the language, the booklet looks exactly like the Dutch printing. This printing also isn’t dated, but I can make a good guess of the time of printing, see later. The printers of the English and Dutch editions are the same, while the 2nd and 3rd English editions of 1908 and 1913 was printed by two British printers. Just see these examples (English left, Dutch right):

Besant and others initiated the first Dutch co-Masons in 1904. In 1905 the first lodge (called “Cazotte”) was founded. Two of the people that were initiated were also book publishers and translators. One of them (Johannes Duwaer (1869-1944)) published his Masonic memoirs in the third issue of the Dutch Bulletin of 1933. He has the names of those initiated and those present and then he says:

The attributes were purchased and the Ritual used in England was translated; both the English and Dutch Ritual were printed at the Duwaer and Van Ginkel printing office.

The Dutch translation of the first degree finds its way to the second hand market every so often. This findability is lower for the second and third degrees, but I have copies of them as well. The English versions are harder to find. They are not in the archives of the Dutch federation of Le Droit Humain even though they printed the first edition themselves and even the British federation doesn’t seem to have copies.

The Duwaer quote makes it very likely that the ‘University of Manchester edition’, is the one he is talking about, hence, from around 1904.

The Museum of Freemasonry of the United Grand Lodge of England has three different versions of the 1904 English printing and they have a copy of the 1908 second edition. More about that below.

Trying to identify the rituals used

Above I have named a few ‘candidates’ as possible sources for “Dharma”. I have compared the 1904 edition of “Dharma” with George Martin’s 1895 text (which was used for Besant’s initiation), the “Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry”, “The Complete Workings of Craft Freemasonry” and “Emulation”. It turns out that “Dharma” is largely the “Scottish Workings” with quite a few elements of Martin’s ritual and some from Besant’s own imagination. I don’t need the other rituals to explain elements of “Dharma”. Let’s have a look.

The opening of “Dharma” is almost literally the “Scottish Workings”. During the part in which everybody present has to prove being a Mason, Besant added: “The W..s pass between the C..s taking the G. and W. On returning to their seats, the S.W. gives k. and says”.
In the Scottish workings those present are only asked to stand “to order” and neither Warden even has to see if all do that correctly. In Martin, Besant found the passing of the “columns”. For the rest, both the “Scottish Workings” and the “Dharma Workings” have expressions such as “O.G. or T.”, “c..s and eavesdroppers” and the deacons are addressed.
All the way at the end of the opening there are a few differences again, one noticeable. In the “Scottish Workings” the “P.M. opens the “V. of S. L.”, in the “Dharma Workings it is the “I.P.M.” who does so. In the “Scottish Workings” when everybody has taken their seats, minutes and communications are read, while in the “Dharma Workings” dignitaries from other lodges are invited to take their places in the East. This -again- comes from Martin.

There are bigger differences between the “Scottish” and “Dharma Workings” when it comes to the initiation ceremony.
Besant added Martin’s questioning of the candidate and a testament. Martin has many more situations with questions, Besant didn’t adopt most of them, but this one she did.
The candidate enters “noisily”, an element that can be found with Martin (or European continental rituals in general), not in the other rituals.
The same goes for the three “symbolical journeys” and elements thereof.
The creating, conceiving and constituting of the candidate comes from Martin.
Most charges, tests, the oath, the place of the candidate, the charity question, etc. can mostly be found in the “Scottish Workings”, some also in Martin.

Besant also added elements. The Scottish “prayer” became a pretty Theosophical “invocation”.
Besant added texts about mysteries of old and offerings to elementals.
What is also odd, only in “Dharma” does the Senior Warden ask for L. for the candidate. Perhaps a typo, as in all British rituals it is the Junior Warden who does so.

In the closing, Besant added the ‘Martinian’ questions if anybody has anything to say. Both the “Scottish Workings” and the “Complete Workings” don’t have this element. “Emulation” does, but since this can also be found in Martin, we don’t need “Emulation” to explain this element. As a side note, “Emulation” was only first published (officially at least) in 1967, so Besant shouldn’t have been able to use it.
For the rest of the closing, “Dharma” mostly follows the “Scottish Workings” with the difference that in “Dharma” the ‘how should we meet, act and part’ has been swapped with the secrets with FFF.

The conclusion that Besant used the “Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry” together with the ritual that she knew from her own initiation grows stronger.

But why Scottish rituals? Did Besant have people in her surroundings who where members of the Grand Lodge of Scotland? Or did she just go out shopping and happened to be able to lay her hands on the Scottish rituals? In another article I looked into the people involved in the foundation of Human Duty, but I found no candidates to explain the introduction of Scottish rituals. Currently there is just the flimsy suggestion that Besant took the word “Écossaise” (‘Scottish’) in the original name of Le Droit Humain literally.

An alternative theory

A few texts can be found online written (or originally spoken) by Jeanne Edith Margaret Heaslewood. A text you can find on several places is “A brief history of the founding of co Freemasonry” which was supposedly a lecture given by Heaslewood in 1999. In it, she writes:

The Craft Lodges in the British Federation soon adopted Rituals written in English rather than in French and were working Emulation, Verulam and the Dharma ritual (from India) which later became the Lauderdale ritual similar to the Bristol workings (as I understand it).

“Dharma ritual (from India)”. This could refer to the fact that Besant founded a lodge called “Dharma” in Benares, India. Heaslewood has a more interesting article with the title “The Rituals of Freemasonry as performed together by Men and Women”. Here Heaslewood is listed as “Grand Secretary, Grand Lodge of Freemasonry for Men and Women”.

From the article about the rituals I want to draw your attention to the following remark:

Dr. Annie Besant, following her Initiation, Passing and Raising into the Universal Mixte Masonry of France in 1902, decided that Freemasonry had definitely something to offer to men and women working in a lodge together and given the same privileges and pattern of working. Consequently she brought to England in 1902 Universal Freemasonry, the title of which was eventually translated to The International Co-Freemasonry Le Droit Humain. At that stage, the first ritual was a translation of the ritual used in France by the LDH Order. In 1903 Dr. Besant started a Triangle in Benares, India together with her good friends, Francesca and George Arundale (who were responsible for taking her to Paris to join Universal Mixte Masonry in the first place). It was in Benares in 1904 that the Dharma Ritual came to light and together with Dr. C. W. Leadbeater, she wrote into the Dha[r]ma Ritual the special working of the offerings of the elements to be changed into the Elementals.

“At that stage, the first ritual was a translation of the ritual used in France by the LDH Order.” The first lodges that Besant started, didn’t yet use her own ritual, but that of Georges Martin. Only when she founded the Dharma lodge in India, work on a more Theosophical ritual was undertaken. The next paragraph is even more striking.

The Dharma Ritual was originally a masculine ritual, founded in India. There are in existence two different versions dated 1904. Dr. C. W. Leadbeater was also a fellow member of the Theosophical Society of which Dr. Besant was the International Head as well as a recent Freemason; he was also interested in this new exciting society. The Dharma Ritual was the accepted ritual of the group and its connotations very much to their thinking, so that it could be changed to suit the then source of imagination or magic which was considered more suitable to the growth of the mixed (men and women) Freemasonry of the Indian Continent. Therefore Leadbeater, together with Annie Besant, added to the Dharma Ritual the embellishments of the offering of the Elementals and the Mystic Charges. The two following degrees, that of the second and third degree, were also given a more dramatic or magic favour. In fact, the changes can be found more fully written up in Leadbeater’s book, The Hidden Life in Freemasonry. In this book, Leadbeater explains clearly all the magic of the words of the changes made to the Dharma Ritual. One clearly understands the meaning of the changes from this book.

Could this mean that Besant did not base her Dharma ritual on Scottish rituals or “Emulation”, but that she simply translated an Indian ritual that she liked better than that of Georges Martin? Heaslewood also says that “added to the Dharma Ritual” “embellishments” were made. So there had to be a more minimalist first version of Dharma.

Were these two originally male Dharma rituals, rituals of existing Masonic orders in India or was Besant involved in the process of writing them? (But why would she write rituals for men-only lodges?) Only in that case, the whole Snoek/Bogdan theory about Scottish origins make any sense. On the other hand, there is more information in the direction that Dharma has British origins than Indian. Especially when you realise that Leadbeater wasn’t yet involved in these very early days (also see below)! Heaslewood’s information cannot be (entirely) correct.

When we look at the foundation of the first British lodge “Human Duty“, a strong suggestion rises that Besant was initiated in Martin’s ritual, but that she used a Scottish ritual for her own installation and the installation of the first London lodge. Heaslewood says that the first lodges used a translation of the Martin ritual for a while while work was done on the Dharma rituals in India. The latter, then, is a mix between the “Scottish Workings” and the ritual of George Martin. I’m inclined to say that Heaslewood’s information is highly unlikely. Why would Besant use a Scottish ritual for her initiation, ‘revert’ to a translation of Martin’s ritual and soon after use a mix between that Scottish ritual and Martin’s? It is not impossible, yet not too likely. I have found no evidence that backs up Heaslewood’s story.

The differences between the ‘test print’ and the D&vG editions are minor, but when we continue with the initiation ceremony, the differences between “Dharma” and the “Scottish Workings” become more serious.

In the “Scottish Workings”, the initiation starts quite abruptly. The lodge is opened, the Tyler knocks on the door and the Inner Guard says that there is an alarm. In “Dharma” the “D. of C.” (director of ceremonies?) receives the candidate, brings him/her to “the ante-chamber of reflection”, asks him/her to reply to questions which are brought to the Worshipful Master. Then there is a vote and only then the candidate is picked up. This comes from Martin, but not literally. The dialogue about the poor candidate again comes from the “Scottish Workings”.

What follows is a mix between the “Scottish Workings” and Martin with elements from Besant herself. Where Martin has an “interrogatoire”, the other two rituals have an introduction with a question if the candidate is prepared to undergo the initiation.
Then follows an element that comes from Martin: three journeys, also copying the alternating directions.

I have not combed through the entire initiation, but it seems that -in spite of more additions of Besant herself- also this part is a mix between the “Scottish Workings” and Martin, but more of the latter.

Either the use of a (presumably) Scottish ritual or that of a possible variety to the Martin ritual is known as “Besant concord” (or alternatively “Besant accord”).

Editions of Dharma

In March 2023 I visited the library of the Museum of Freemasonry of the United Grand Lodge of England. Their catalogue lists the 1908 second edition which I haven’t found anywhere else. On visiting I got a couple of versions of “Dharma”. I only needed to see the 1908 edition, but I’m glad that I the other versions as well. They have three versions of the 1904 edition! There is a version in which the three degrees are printed separately. In another version the three degrees are combined and then there is a first degree which appears to be a test print.

Here is what I got, combined, to give you an idea of the sizes. Top left is the ‘test print’, top right is the edition with three degrees combined. Bottom left is the 1908 edition and bottom right is the first first degree. In the latter case, the comparison to the Dutch edition is obvious:

As we saw, Duwaer & Van Ginkel printed the first edition of the “Dharma Workings” in (or around) 1904.

Then we have what I suggest was a test print:

As you can see, this version is dated: 1904.

This edition is similar to the Duwaer & Van Ginkel editions, but not identical.

See where I’m going?

The ‘test print’ doesn’t mention a printer. The test print was: “privately printed for the Dharma lodge, Benares City 1904. Copyright all rights reserved”. The Duwaer & Van Ginkel print was: “Privately printed for the Dharma lodge Benares City. All rights reserved”.

There is more, the texts have differences too. The ‘test print’ speaks of “the supreme council of universal joint Freemasonry”. In the D&vG edition, this is “the supreme council of universal co-Masonry”.
There is a difference in the opening, which appears to be tiny, but it is (somewhat) striking. In the ‘test print’ it says: “R.W.M. (to P.M.)”. In the D&vG print this became: “R.W.M. (to I.P.M.)”. In the “Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry” this is: “R.W.M. (to P.M.)”. In the (English) “Complete Workings Of Craft Freemasonry” the question about the placement of the W.M. is directed to the S.W. This is the same in “Emulation”. This is another suggestion that the “Scottish Workings of Craft Masonry” were the starting point. The “P.M.” from the “Scottish Workings” -for some reason- was replaced by an “I.P.M.”
In “Dharma” both the ‘test print’ and the first edition the: “(I.)P.M. opens the V. of S. K.” while in the “Scottish Workings” this is the “V. of S. L.”

In the 1904 print there are: “the ceremonies of calling off and calling on, to call the lodge from refreshment to labour” (or the other way around). This is the same in the Duwaer & Van Ginkel printing. The “Scottish Workings” have “the ceremony of calling off and calling on” in the index, but on the page itself: “Calling-off and Calling-on” as title and “To call the lodge from labour to refreshment” at the start of the text. This is the same in “The Complete Workings”. “Emulation” says nothing about “refreshment to labour”.

There are no other obvious differences between the ‘test print’ and the first official edition.

Then there is another edition of Duwaer & Van Ginkel of the first (official) printing. One with three degrees combined into a cloth bound hardcover with blue printing on dark red linen.

The Dharma Workings of Craft Masonry, second edition (revised and enlarged)

Somewhat smaller in size is the second edition from 1908 with gold print on a blue cloth hardcover. It again has three degrees combined. Perhaps there are again also versions per degree.

The publisher was “Manchester : Marsden and Co., Ltd.” and this edition was “revised & enlarged”. The London Museum of Freemasonry got its copy from: “the Nine Muses Lodge”.

There is a “Note” saying that: “the Ceremonies have been arranged in the order in which they will be required in actual working.” Also a: “number of additions of direction in the working have been made, and a few transpositions.”

The opening remained the same. The “I.P.M.” remained, so the Duwaer & Van Ginkel” printing indeed seems to be an improved version of the edition dated 1904.

The part “ceremony of initiation” begins in 1904 and D&vG with: “The D. of C. receives the Can. at the entrance of the precincts”. In 1908 this part of the initiation was written out more as: “(The Brethern being assembled, the R.W.M. calls his officers…” which is literally the text of the “Scottish Workings” and the “Complete Workings”, but not only textually very different from “Emulation”.

Also the announcement of the candidate is made more specific. Not just “gives the alarm”, but also the way it should be given. This is different from the “Scottish Workings” but even more so from the “Complete Workings”. In the latter there is a “report”, just as in “Emulation”.

“In whom do you put your trust” is in the old editions: “…”, in 1908 there was but one option.

This edition is very similar to the 1904 editions, but as the “note” says, a “number of additions of direction in the working have been made” to remove confusion. A notable change is that the door is no longer opened “noisily” when the candidate enters the room and the three journeys are now all in the same direction.

The Workings of Scottish Rite Freemasonry in the Symbolic or Craft degrees, 1913 Third Edition (Revised and Enlarged) of the “Dharma Workings”

This edition was published by yet another publishing house: William McLellan & company from Glasgow. This booklet says: “Third Edition (Revised and Enlarged) of the “Dharma Workings” 1913″. There is a booklet per degree.
The title page statement is much different from the second edition:

Universal Co-Freemasonry. The Workings of Scottish Rite Freemasonry in the Symbolic or Craft Degrees. Issued under the sanction of the Deputy of the Supreme Council of Universal Co-Freemasonry for Great Britain and its Dependencies

This edition is has the dimensions 14×11 cm, but fewer pages, 92 for the first degree.

This third edition certainly was “revised and enlarged”. In earlier editions the lodge appeared to just be opened. There are no candles lit. The third edition has the (in)famous “ceremony of incensing”, a “ceremony of lighting the candles” and “entering in procession”. Two plans of the lodge have been added, one with an “continental” and one with an “English” setup (both officers in the West versus one in the South and one in the West). Unfortunately there is no foreword or note to explain the big changes. The “I.P.M.” became a “R.W.I.P.M.” The opening of the lodge is roughly the same as before, but this version is much more Theosophical than the previous two.

Again the ritual is worked out in more detail than before. For example, for the first time there are directions for the clothing of the candidate, directions that are familiar today, but which I also didn’t find in the other rituals that I compared “Dharma” to.

Notable, in the 1913 edition, the second journey is again in opposite direction to the first, like Waite described is his Encyclopaedia.

The third edition was a serious revision and enlargement. I am unsure who was responsible for the additions. I always thought Charles Leadbeater and James Wedgwood, but the former was only initiated (by Wedgwood) in 1915! Wedgwood was a member since 1910, so he is the more likely candidate. There are other new ‘non-Theosophical’ elements for which I have yet to find the (possible) source. If you want to learn more about the intense ceremony, read Leadbeater’s The Hidden Life In Freemasonry 1926).

Later editions

In Handbook of Freemasonry the earlier mentioned Jan Snoek writes:

In 1915, Charles Webster Leadbeater -since 1896 the personal theoretician of Annie Besant in the Theosophical Society- was initiated into ldh. The next year Leadbeater and James Ingall Wedgwood-another member of ldh and the Theosophical Society-revised the rituals with which the English speaking part of ldh was working ‘according to the astral instructions of the count of Saint-Germain’. In 1925, these rituals were once more (slightly) revised by Annie Besant and Leadbeater (the ‘1916 Working revised’ or ‘Glasgow Rituals’). This version became the standard for all the English speaking lodges of ldh during the next fifty years.

Ritual of the Three Craft Degrees, 1916, fourth edition

The earlier mentioned library of the Museum of Freemasonry in London proves to have a “4th ed.” According to the catalogue it is: “issued under the sanction of the Deputy of the Supreme Council of Universal Co-Masonry for the British Empire”. It lists as “corporate author”: “International Order of Freemasonry for Men and Women, Le Droit Humain. British Federation”. The text is supposedly printed in Sydney in 1916.

I received a few photos of the booklet. There I can see nothing about this W.C. Penfold, nor even the place where it was printed.

There is also a copy in the Biblioteca Nacional España. They have the same information as London:

So I suppose this is correct.

Could this first edition that no longer used the name “Dharma” be the edition known as “Sydney Workings“? Snoek appears to have another opinion.

Snoek ascribes this edition to Besant (as he does with 1904, 1908 and 1913), but there are better candidates. Charles Leadbeater was touring the globe, giving Theosophical lectures and he stayed in Australia after lecturing there. Wedgwood joined him there in 1915 because he wanted to ask Leadbeater about his revisions to the rituals (earlier printed? As in 1913? Or not yet published?) The two cooperated and only after (!) this working on the rituals, Wedgwood initiated Leadbeater using their text. It would not be all that strange if the result of their work was published in Australia and that Wedgwood took or sent the result to the British federation as the fourth edition which now seems to be the one that is popularly called “Sydney Workings”. Then again, Snoek names the ‘next edition’ “The Sydney Ritual”.

I have up until now not seen a booklet with the name “Sydney Workings” on the title page, but since the 1916 4th edition was printed in Sydney, I think I have identified these “Sydney Workings”. Then again, also the 1921 edition appears to have been printed in Sydney.

1921 “The Sydney Rituals” (?)

Cultureel Maçonniek Centrum (‘cultural Masonic centre’) of the Grand Orient of the Netherlands lists an edition from 1921 (a first and a second degree), printed in …. “Sidney”.

Unfortunately the study centre has been closed for quite some time, so I haven’t seen the copy.

As we saw, the previous edition was also printed in Sydney. There is something remarkable about 1921. It is not ‘numbered’. 1916 Was the fourth edition, 1925 is the fifth. Besides, as we will see, both 1925 and 1928 are “1916 Working revised” and not “1921 Working revised”.

In 1925 there is a “note to the fifth edition”. It is not impossible that this note was already there in 1921, but I currently have no way of checking.

All this raises the suggestion that 1921 was ‘the first branch off the Dharma tree’. Dharma developed with 1913 to 1925 and 1921 was something else. “The Sydney Ritual” in spite of the fact that it was the second ritual to be printed in Sydney?

Ritual of the Three Craft Degrees (1916 Working revised), 1925, fifth edition

On Amazon I ran into the oddly named Kessinger reprint The Secret Rituals Of The Co-Masonic Order For Women. This is, of course, a bit of a contradiction in terms. Because the cover also mentions “Supreme Council of Universal Co-Masonry”, my guess was that this was a publication of the British federation of Le Droit Humain. (I also have a 1925 booklet which is indeed the same as the Kessinger reprint.)

The publication has notes to the third, fourth and fifth edition. The note of the third edition is not 100%, but largely, that of the 1913 edition. In the note to the fourth edition difference is made between “[t]he more elaborate workings” and “smaller and more convenient” workings. “Masonic hymns have been inserted for their use” and “the whole is now arranged in the order in which it is required for use”.

It seems that Wedgwood and Leadbeater continued to work on their Theosophical rituals (Snoek ascribes this edition to Leadbeater, Wedgwood and Besant), but also opened a door for lodges that were less fond of these elements. In the note to the fifth edition we read:

The lodges of the Craft are allowed a choice between the sanctioned Rituals, some preferring the more ornate, the other the plainer Rituals. Music, processions, the use of incense, the ceremonial lighting of the three essential candles, the placing of any picture or pictures on the walls, or of the symbolic chair in the North, and the like, are all non-essentials.

As Masons may belong to any religion it is desirable to have on the A…. a Scripture of each great Faith.

This fifth edition is still a lot like the third. Unfortunately Kessinger left out the first pages.
In the archive of the Dutch federation of Le Droit Humain, there are several booklets which have the “note to the fifth edition”. There is a very small printing from 1925 containing all three degrees and a similar booklet with just the first degree. Judging the lay-out, this edition is the basis for the Kessinger reprint. Like I said, Kessinger didn’t include the first pages, but it proves that this 1925 print is called “Universal Co-Masonry British federation – Ritual of the Three Craft Degrees (1916 Working revised)”.

So the Sydney printing seems to be called “1916 Working” officially and “Sydney Workings” only as popular name. Also note that this 1928 edition says to be a revision of 1916, not of 1921.

There is something interesting about this edition. As we saw both the 1925 and the 1928 editions are “1916 Working revised”. There is a notable difference between the two. According to the preliminary ceremonies, the “The portrait of the H.. of all true F… (if used) is placed in the North”, while in previous editions “The portrait of the H.. of all true F.. is placed above the R.W.M.’s pedestal”. In 1928 it says: “The portrait o the H.. of all true F.. is placed above the R.W.M.’s pedestal (some Lodges have placed it in the North above the empty chair)”.
The latter isn’t strange, as the placement in the North was printed in the 1925 edition. Was 1925 some sort of unofficial edition? Were there objections to certain changes that were repaired in 1928? Remarkably, since 1951, the place of the portrait of the Head of all true Freemasons, is placed in the North, so the 1925 edition was ahead of its time. More about that here.

Ritual of the Three Craft Degrees (1916 Working revised), 1928

Initially this seems that the 1928 edition is just a reprint of the 1925 edition. It does not have a new “note” and there is nothing about it being a sixth edition. The two are not exactly the same though. 1928 Has colour added to the previous edition (spoken text in black, other text in red) and a somewhat different lay-out. The 1928 is larger, a plan of the lodge was added, but most notable, the place of the portrait has been corrected regarding the 1925 edition, see above.

It appears that 1928 was a (slightly) revised edition (or should I say “corrected”?). It doesn’t even say it is a revised edition of 1925, but of 1916, as if the 1925 edition is to be ignored.

Ritual of the Three Craf Degrees (1925 Working revised), 1951

Interestingly, in 1951 there appeared “1925 Working revised” and not “1928 Working revised”.

Even though the name “Dharma” has fallen out of use for a few editions, the 1951 edition seems to have to be placed in the same line.

This edition is not numbered. It has a “Preface (1925 Working revised)”. Previous “notes” are not reprinted.

Ritual of the Three Craft Degrees (1951 Working revised), 1960

Just as the previous edition, this one is not numbered. It has but one “Preface (1951 Working revised)”.

1960 Has longer “obligations”. In 1951 there was only the “obligation on affiliation”. In 1960 these became obligations for “affiliation from another Obedience”, “Joining from another Federation”, “Joining from another Lodge of this British Federation” and “Re-Joining the order”. Apparently new situations had risen that needed structuring.

There are minor editions to the texts that follow.

Summary

When we follow the back references to earlier editions there is a line from “Dharma” 1904, 1908, 1916, 1925 (based on 1916, skipping 1921), 1918 (again based on 1916, skipping both 1921 and 1925), 1951 (based on 1925, not 1928) and finally 1960 (based on 1951). It seems that there have been different factions with different preferences. Perhaps that also explains why from this ‘Dharma tree’ also other branches grew.

Not-Dharma rituals

I have a 2013 edition of “Lauderdale“. It has the four obligations of the 1960 edition and one preface, the “Preface (1951 Working revised). Thus, also that of the 1960 edition. The “Order of Procession” has the addition of the 1960 edition: “On special occasions when a large number of Brn. […].

The “Preliminary Ceremonies” have been rewritten. For example:

There should be a very soft subdued light in the Temple. The portrait o the H… of all true F… (if used) is placed in the North, and if possible,it should be illuminated by a special light so arranged as to shine only upon the picture.

In 1960, became:

There should be a very soft subdued light in the Temple. The Star should be in the east. This will usually be found quite sufficient to give the faint diffused light required, if the six-pointed star in the middle of the roof of the Temple be a transparency, it may also be used, if it does not make the light too strong.

In Lauderdale. The portrait has been removed from the text.

The “Ceremony of Censing” has been been rewritten as well. It seems that (this) “Lauderdale”) is a slightly reworked 1960 edition.

“Verulam” is yet another story. It has been in print since 1922, so it is probably based on 1916/”Sydney”, but -unlike Lauderdale- it is not just an old edition with a new name, it is actually really a “smaller and more convenient” version of the ritual.

“Verulam” has the ‘full title’ “Verulam Workings Of Craft Freemasonry” on the title page. It has been print since 1922, so since before several of the editions mentioned above were published.

It was: “Compiled by a P.M. Assisted by certain Wise and Skilled Brethern”.

It starts with the opening, so no elucidations, no “preliminary ceremonies”, no “procession”, no “introcessional”, prayers or incensing. It simply states:

The Brn. being assembled, the Officers enter in procession. The D.C. incenses the Lodge. The S.D. lights the candles in due form.

“Verulam” is sometimes ascribed to Wedgwood (see here) (the “skilled P.M.”?), while we saw that he most likely also edited the 1913 edition and certainly the fourth edition together with Leadbeater.

There are minor differences. In “Verulam” the lodge is “properly tyled”. In the other named rituals, it is “close tyled”. Mostly, the wordings are the same, so “Verulam” remained close to the rituals mentioned above. This is a bit odd. Why create very similar rituals?

“Verulam” appears to have been in use for over a century with little to no changes, just as “Lauderdale” and similar rituals.

More about all this in my “Rituals in early mixed gender Freemasonry”.