William Schaw “Father of Freemasonry” *** FULL BOOK ***
No one man built Freemasonry, but there is an individual that stands out as its principal architect, the ‘Master of Works’ to King James VI of Scotland.
What started out as some personal research and interest in the history of Freemasonry turned in to a full blown “lockdown project” in 2020/2021.
WARNING: This is a long post, you are going to need a cup of coffee ☕ and something to put your feet up on.
Introduction
Every Freemason who spends time reading about the history of the craft will eventually ask himself the same questions. When and where did Freemasonry start?
The origins of Freemasonry belong to a time when record-keeping and academic discipline were ‘questionable’ at best. A time when the vast majority of people could neither read nor write, and as a result, the history of the Craft has been open to imaginative interpretation and wild theory through the centuries.
Despite this, there is one individual that stands out as its principal architect, the ‘Master of Works’ to King James VI of Scotland. The Father of Modern Freemasonry, William Schaw.
Today most Freemasons are familiar with the date 1717, being the year that the Grand Lodge of England was formed. The first of its kind in the world, however, often misquoted by masonic historians as being the birth of modern speculative Freemasonry. As a date however, it has only minor importance in the overall development of Freemasonry which existed long before these four lodges met within the ‘Goose and Gridiron Tavern’ in St Paul’s Churchyard.
In fact, the hundred or so years prior to this were very aptly named ‘Scotland’s Century’ in David Stevenson’s work ‘The Origins of Freemasonry’.
In Scotland, we find the most extensive collection of Masonic records to be found anywhere. The earliest attempts at organising lodges at a national level, the earliest use of the word ‘lodge’ in the modern masonic sense and the earliest evidence that these were permanent institutions along with the oldest surviving minute books and other records of these lodges - something we can attribute directly to William Schaw. More on that later.
Scottish history also provides us with the earliest references to the term “Mason’s Word”, the earliest examples of ‘non-operatives’ (ie. men that were not working stonemasons) joining lodges, earliest connections of lodge masonry with specific ethical ideas explained through the use of symbolism, as well as the earliest evidence of the ‘entered apprentice’ and ‘fellow craft’ degrees as well as the later the emergence of the third degree.
Finally, the titles of lodge officers are unquestionably derived from the operative masons of Scotland.
Freemasonry is as Scottish as Tartan, Whisky and Irn Bru.
But what makes Scottish Freemasonry different from that found around the world is its distinctive history, and that historically Scottish Stonemasons and Scottish Freemasons are one and the same.
Freemasonry in Scotland was not an artificial creation, it grew from the beliefs and institutions of working stonemasons and later individuals, like ourselves, who were allowed the privilege and honour of joining Stonemasons in their Lodges as they slowly began to admit men from other crafts and men of higher social status. This process however, was undoubtedly accelerated after the foundation of the Grand Lodge in London in 1717 when freemasonry became ‘fashionable’.
We must be thankful to our Scottish ancestors and their sons for the records they kept, and to William Schaw for his part in commanding them to do so. Providing us incontestable facts and details on the character of operative Lodges, how they were organised, what they did and how they developed step by step into the craft we know today.
Early Stonemasons In Scotland
The earliest records relating to Stonemasons in an official capacity in Scotland date back to 1475 when the Masons and Wrights (woodworkers) of Edinburgh were recognised as being an official civic body, securing a ‘Seal of Cause’ or Charter from the City of Edinburgh.
Prior to this they are mentioned along with other trades in 1425 with regards to the Edinburgh city council fixing wages.
For our purpose, however, the latter of the two in 1475 marks an important moment, as this document creates an ‘Incorporation’ somewhat similar to or the equivalent of an English Trade Guild. Stonemasons were thereby incorporated into the local political system of Edinburgh.
A similar ‘Seal of Cause’ was granted to Masons, Wrights and Coopers (barrel makers) in Aberdeen and Glasgow in 1527 and 1551 respectively.
These seals do not, however, mark the beginnings of the organisations concerned. Rather that they had existed and evolved for generations, with the branding of the seal representing the culmination of the process, even though it is often the first point at which an organisation becomes visible to the historian.
In 1534, Henry VIII of England instituted a religious reformation in England, making himself the head of the church in place of the Pope in Rome. His motivation was his desire to annul the marriage to the first of his wives, Catherine of Aragon and the Pope’s refusal to do so. Henry capitalised on this opportunity and confiscated most of the church’s money and property. Organisations which supported and encouraged pre-reformation religious practices, such as English guilds, were disbanded, their money and property confiscated also.
At this time, however, Scotland and England were separate Kingdoms so this did not apply North of the border. In fact, the situation in Scotland was very different.
The Protestant Reformation took place in Scotland several decades later in 1559 and unlike that of Henry VIII, was of a religious nature. The Catholic Church and many of its practices were replaced by an entirely new religious system based on Calvinism. Unlike England however, Scottish guilds (incorporations) were not abolished, rather they simply ceased their religious support for the pre-Reformation Church when the new Protestant faith was established.
In fact, even following the ‘Union of the Crowns’ when James VI of Scotland (who we will hear more about later) became James I of England uniting both Kingdoms with a single monarch in 1603, Scotland still retained its own parliament, monetary system, laws, religion and Freemasonry.
So Scottish Incorporations, unlike their English counterparts, functioned in Scotland before and after the reformation. Their purpose was to advance the interests of their members and had certain rights and responsibilities with regards the governance of the Craft, resolving trade differences, negotiating wages, supervising ‘quality control’, apprenticeship terms, burying deceased members, looking after their widows and orphans and even improving the morals of members. Although almost certainly not well organised - the Stonemasons were powerful enough at this stage to be recognised as having some sort of economic and political clout, having at least at a local level, a voice within the city council.
Unlike other incorporated trades such as Websters (weavers), Cordiners (shoemakers), Fleshers (butchers), Baxters (bakers), and Hammermen (metal workers), the essential difference between the craft of stonemasonry and these others was an additional level of organisation - the Lodge.
The reason for this was two-fold. Whereas the way of life of most craftsmen was a settled one, producing goods for sale locally or in distant markets via merchants; the stonemason’s trade was one that frequently moved around from job to job, a life of movement and unpredictability. This meant that the needs of a mason in terms of organisation and relations with his fellow craftsmen were rather different from those of most other locally based trades.
In addition to this, the Incorporation of Masons also included other trades such as Wrights (carpenters) and Coopers (barrel makers) and therefore did not facilitate the communicating of stonemasons’ secrets specific to their craft.
The lodge was a strictly independent body, out with the control of the local burgh, and indeed there are instances where lodges would meet outside of the town specifically for this reason. Douglas Knoop in his book ‘The Early Masonic Catechisms’ refers to the literary exaggeration that a true lodge meets 'a day's journey from a burgh town without barking of a dog or crow of cock’ and metaphorically, of course, this is the same today.
The Lodge, therefore, was a place where secrets were transmitted from Stonemason to Stonemason. Incorporations being an acknowledged and accepted part of Scottish society, the public face of the craft, Lodges were the more private and secretive face of the Stonemasons.
Originally the lodge would have been a simple, sheltered working place, a temporary construction, perhaps a separate shed or sort of lean-to against the wall of an existing building that was under construction. Masons would use this to shape and carve stone out of the elements. Through time however, this developed beyond this and masons can be found eating and resting in lodges, even using them as temporary accommodation whilst away from home.
In 1491, just 16 years after they were incorporated, the Edinburgh authorities granted the stonemasons the right ‘to gett a recreation in the common luge’.
We can not realistically link this to Freemasonry as we know it today, however it does demonstrate that stonemasons used the Lodge for something much more than simply working stone or storing their working tools, and although in this instance granted by the Edinburgh authorities, these lodges were autonomous bodies, not answerable to the burgh and outside the restrictions of the trade incorporations.
Going back to what makes Scotland different to the origins of the craft across the world, this organisation and arrangement is very much restricted to Scotland and the Stonemasons alone.
William Schaw (c.1550-1602)
William Schaw was born circa 1550 in Cranock in Fife. He was the second son of John Schaw of Broich and grandson of Sir James Schaw of Sauchie whose lands lay near Stirling in the tiny shire of Clackmannan. Broich, known today as Arngomery, was a fortified house near Kippen.
The Schaw family had long standing links to the Royal Court, principally as the keepers of the King's wine cellar, and it’s reasonable to assume that his family connection brought about William Schaw’s first employment within the Royal Court.
Sauchie Tower, which still exists today, was the seat of the Schaw family, and whilst there is no known evidence to support Schaw lived here it’s likely he frequented it given the family connection.
A young William Schaw is mentioned in the accounts of the treasurer as a Page to Mary of Guise, Queen Dowager and Regent of Scotland, for whom black velvet was bought to make a cloak of mourning on 1st June 1560 in anticipation of her fate dying just ten days later. Although it’s uncertain that it’s the same William Schaw.
Schaw does however appear in the records in his own right for the first time in 1580 when he is listed by an English informant at the royal court as the "clock-keeper”, and then again a year later on 11 April 1581, when he is granted a valuable gift of rights over the lands in Kippen belonging to the Grahams of Fintry.
A Catholic living in a protestant country at this time would have most certainly been difficult, and considering Schaw’s position within the Royal Court it suggests a degree of flexibility around his religious practices. Avoiding actions that might provoke persecution, it’s clear he didn’t wear his Roman Catholic beliefs on his sleeve so to speak.
It’s no surprise then, that one of his closest friends and colleagues, Alexander Seton - the youngest son of Lord Seton, is well recorded as performing a similar religious balancing act for many years while holding high office. As we will see later, Seton was one of the individuals who commissioned Schaw’s tomb upon his death.
In 1581, when the reformed church in Scotland feared that the young James VI was falling under Catholic influence, both the King and his courtiers were forced to sign what became known as the ‘Negative Confession’, a systematic denunciation of Catholicism. Despite being of the Catholic faith, amongst the signatures is that of William Schaw.
The theme continued with fears of Catholic intrigues at the court being renewed by the Church in 1588. William Schaw amongst those ordered to appear before the presbytery of Edinburgh.
In 1593 an English agent drew up a list of those in the Royal Court who supported and those hostile to English interests, listing Schaw in the latter and described as being ‘a suspected Jesuit’ - a scholarly religious congregation of the Catholic Church which originated in the sixteenth-century in Spain, and an organisation regularly charged throughout the much later 18th Century as having intimate connections with Freemasonry.
Again in 1596, an English paper listed reasons to suspect James VI of being himself a Roman Catholic, including the appointment of known Catholics to the Royal Court, noting Schaw as ‘Praefectum Architecturae’; Alexander Seton as President of Council, and Lord Hume as the King’s bodyguard.
In May 1583, William Schaw was in Paris at the death of the exiled Esmé Stewart, the Catholic Duke of Lennox, who was a close friend of James and it was said that he took Esmé's heart back to Scotland returning it to the King.
The King’s ‘Maister O’Wark’
Later that year on 21 December 1583, James VI of Scotland (who would become King James I of England following the death of Queen Elizabeth, and described by James Anderson in his work within The Constitutions of The Freemasons in 1723 as ‘being a Mason King’) appointed William Schaw of Sauchie, at approximately 33 years of age, the Maister o' Wark (Master of Works) to the Crown of Scotland for life. Schaw was one of the four men to hold the office during the Scottish rule of King James VI; Sir William McDowell, Sir Robert Drummond of Carnock, William Schaw of Sauchie, and David Cuningham of Robertland.
Responsible for overseeing the repair, maintenance and new building work of all palaces, castles, hunting lodges and other buildings that might be used by the royal family. The successor to Sir Robert Drummond of Carnock and Arnmore - Arnmore being a location near Kippen that neighbours Brioch, the home of William Schaw.
Although this was his official appointment, he was however paid the first instalment of his salary - £166-13-4 as ‘grete Mr of wark in place of Sr Rbt Drummond’ in November.
By the terms of his appointment, Schaw for the rest of his life was to be:
'Grit maister o wark of all and sindrie his hienes palaceis, biggingis and reparationis, – and greit oversear, directour and commander of quhatsumevir police devysit or to be devysit for our soverane lordis behuif and plessur.' or, in current words; 'Great master of work of all and sundry his highness' palaces, building works and repairs, – and great overseer, director and commander of whatsoever policy devised or to be devised for our sovereign lord's behalf and pleasure.'
In the days following, a new manuscript now with the Grand Lodge of Scotland, was written up containing copies of the legends first recorded in the Regius and Cooke manuscripts. We don’t know if these were specifically copied for Schaw or not, however it is likely as a result of his appointment, and from this point copies of these texts known more commonly as the Old Charges are seen to circulate amongst Scottish masons.
Schaw was amongst the courtiers who accompanied King James VI to marry Anne of Denmark in 1589 where he stayed with James for the Winter, entertained by the Danish court. He returned to Scotland early in 1590 ahead of the rest of the royal party to prepare for the return in May 1590 of the King and his bride. His purpose was to begin the preparations of St. Gillies for the Queen’s coronation as well as arrange the extravagant welcoming ceremony in Leith, and on to Edinburgh where a celebratory feast, organised by Schaw, was to be held in the Royal Mint in the Cowgate.
Work also started repairing the Queen’s assigned residence Dunfermline Palace for which he received £400 ‘by his Majesty's precept, for reparation of the house at Dunfermling befoir the Queenis Majesties passing thereto’ and also Holyrood House Palace prior to the Royal couple taking up residence there, for which taxes of £1,000 Scots were gathered in Edinburgh for the ‘bigging and repairing’ of the Palace and Church.
That same year, 1590, we see the first evidence of direct sovereign control over the Masonic craft in Scotland and the first attempts at regionalising the trade, perhaps even early plans for the formation of a Grand Lodge of Scotland. Perhaps as a direct result of the planned renovations.
Patrick Copland of Udaught was elected to the office of “Wardane and Justice” over the Masons of Aberdeen, Banff and Kincardine. The Royal missive stated that Copland’s predecessors had been “ancient possessors of the office”, however his appointment by the King was as a result of the choice of the Master Masons of the district of which he was to oversee all matters affecting the art and craft of Masonry.
Knowing that Schaw was held in such high esteem by both the King and Queen, it’s unlikely that Copland’s appointment would have been made without Schaw’s knowledge and agreement as Master of Works.
Unfortunately there is no evidence that Copland did much with his new position, and probably led to Schaw’s increased involvement in updating the attitudes within Lodges and restoring the Masonic profession to its former glory.
It’s worth noting however that although the King appointed Schaw as the Master of Works, giving him authority over the masons and the work they completed, any authority over their actual trade practices and in Lodge activities, which we will see more of in the coming pages, could only have been with their cooperation and consent.
As well as Master of Works, Schaw was also appointed as the President of the Sacred Ceremonies (Director of Ceremonies to you and I) and that he held this position by 1591, thanks to the English ambassadors report that the office, vacant through the death of the previous holder was to be given to Schaw. He was then later appointed Lord Chamberlain responsible for the Royal household in Dunfermline which at the time was an office of the household of Queen Anne where he worked closely with Alexander Seton and William Fowler. Both names are worth noting going forward.
It’s clear he was highly regarded in the royal circles and with the King and Queen.
The Schaw Statutes
Schaw’s position and inherent duties meant that he was in regular contact with stonemasons, who were in turn responsible for carrying out his commands on behalf of the Crown. In fact records still exist of the transitions and contracts he made with masons and other tradesmen who carried out work.
The most famous of these records are what we now refer to as the First and Second Schaw Statutes both issued on 28th December 1598 and 1599 respectively and laid the foundations for organised lodges. These documents sent to every known stonemasons’ lodge in Scotland detailed the rules and regulations that Schaw expected them to follow from that date and one of the first examples of the esoteric and speculative aspects of the craft.
What is not clear however is why Schaw, who would have been involved with many different types of tradesman in his work, took such an interest in the masons of Scotland and why he felt the knowledge known to stonemasons was so important to preserve.
Therefore here’s the million pound question... how did William Schaw know this knowledge was worth preserving without himself knowing it? Was he himself a member of a lodge? Perhaps, however, that is just speculation as there are no written records to claim or prove that he was.
Masons of Scotland always met on 27th December, the Feast Day of St. John the Evangelist, and conducted the business of the craft - essentially their AGM, at which decisions were made, monies collected, bills paid and initiations recorded. The Schaw Statutes, therefore, were both issued on the day following this meeting and it would be inconceivable that a civil servant of Schaw’s status would write the statutes the day following in the certain knowledge that they would not be discussed for another 364 days.
I think we can conclude therefore that Schaw was involved in the lodge meeting the day before, 27th December and that the statutes were therefore drafted and sent to all concerned following that meeting.
The Statutes set down a lot of practical guidance, with much on working conditions, relationships between stonemasons, taking on and training of apprentices.
The First Schaw Statutes (1598)
William Schaw, as master of works ‘and generall Wardens of the said craft’ issued ‘The statutis and ordinanceis to be obseruit be all the maister maissounis within this realme’, on 28th December 1598. At the time of writing, over 420 years ago.
As the King’s master of works, Schaw was the man that organised work on behalf of the King and therefore, without doubt, was the single most important employer of masons in the country. That in itself gave him a considerable authority over masons.
Schaw begins the first of his statutes by instructing master masons to observe all the good ordinances previously made by their predecessors. It is believed that Schaw is referring here to the ‘Old Charges’ which many of the subsequent clauses are based upon. This is evidence that the Old Charges were known in Scotland long before the date of the earliest surviving copies in Scotland - but more importantly it shows the craft had an established history, even in the late 16th Century.
What is particularly interesting about the first item is the instruction that they be true to one another and live charitably together as sworn brethren and companions of the craft. Could we ask for a better description of the ideals of Freemasonry in the present day?
It is also evidence that being a member of the Lodge at this time involved an oath or obligation and as such had sworn responsibilities to one another. Arguably being the first item shows the importance placed on these ideals by Schaw and therefore by the Lodges themselves.
This first clause also tells us one of the most important aspects of the entire Statutes: Schaw did not ‘invent’ Lodges, nor the obligation taken by Masons to look after and care for one another. It seems that in becoming Master of Works, his intention was to formalise an existing but loose and informal association of Scottish stonemasons and their Lodges.
We don’t really know why, perhaps he was himself part of the Lodge as a non-operative member; but at the very least the likelihood is that by formalising and helping organise the Lodges better would have made them more efficient and therefore in theory able to produce a better quality of work for the King.
The Statutes go on to state that obedience was to be given to the wardens, masters and deacons of a Lodge and that masons undertaking work they were not competent to perform should be fined and made to compensate their employer, the amount of which being assessed by the general warden or, in his absence, by the wardens, deacons and masters of the ‘shrefdome’ or county.
Clause 7 ordered that a warden was to be elected yearly by the master masons to have charge of ‘everie lodge as they ar devidit particularlie’. This was to be done with the consent of the general warden if he was present, and he was to be informed of the results of all elections so that he could send directions to the Lodge wardens.
This once again raises the question, if Schaw wasn’t a member of the Lodge why would he as the General Warden be expecting to be present at the yearly election of office bearers?
Clauses 8 through 12 deal with the taking on of apprentices, stating that no master was to take on more than three apprentices in his lifetime without the special consent of the wardens, deacons and masters of the county, yet another example of the regionalisation of Lodges. They continue that apprentices are bound to their masters for a period of at least seven years, and not to be made a ‘brother and fellow in craft’ until they have worked for a further seven years. Masters must notify their Lodge upon taking on an apprentice so that they could be ‘orderlie buikit’, and apprentices were to be subsequently ‘entered’ in the same order in which they had been booked. It’s from here that the term Entered Apprentice comes, when the apprentice is literally entered into the Lodge records.
In Clause 13 no master or fellow of the craft could be admitted to a lodge unless at least six masters (one of which was to be the warden of the Lodge) and two entered apprentices were present, and that no man was to be admitted without being duly tested. The attendance of all fellowcraft was to be recorded along with his mark as well as the names of all those in present at the meeting.
Various regulations were then laid down concerning working practices. No master should work with, or let his servants work with, ‘cowans’, the first historical reference to the ban of cowans. It means someone who works as a Mason without serving a regular apprenticeship. Entered apprentices were only to undertake work with permission of the warden and masters of the lodge, and were only to undertake small jobs.
At this time, the fellowcraft elected to the Chair of the Operative Lodge was referred to as the Warden or Deacon, and the modern day office of Master of the Lodge was unknown to the Operative Craft, likewise the degree of Master Mason did not exist until the seventeenth century - it seems odd therefore that the word ‘master’ is repeated so often in Schaw’s Statutes. It seems, the title of master referred only to the fellowcraft acknowledged to be masters of their trade who had been enrolled as employers of labour. The word ‘master’ therefore referred to the individual’s activity rather than any sort of office, rank or position within the Lodge.
Disputes between masons were to be referred to their lodges, any member refusing to accept the proposals of the Lodge for settling such quarrels ‘salbe deprivit of the privilege of thair ludge’ and not be permitted to work until resolved.
Finally, the statutes ordered that masons who did not attend meetings of which they had been informed were to be fined, and masters attending assemblies or meetings were to tell of any wrongs they know of committed by other masons against their fellows or their employers. All fines imposed by the Lodge for breaches of these regulations were to be devoted to pious (charitable) causes.
All the sums of money mentioned in the statutes refer to payments in £Scots as opposed to £Sterling. The Scots pound was worth about 8p in today’s currency, so a fine of £40 amounted to £3.20 of today’s money. Only the most highly skilled workmen earned anywhere near £40 Scots, which suggests that such fines were steep.
The statutes were agreed unanimously by the master masons present and signed by William Schaw, with a copy sent to every Lodge in the realm.
The first of the Schaw Statutes provides a wealth of evidence about masonic organisation in Scotland, but it doesn’t distinguish innovation from confirmation of existing practice.
The biggest taking from the Statutes however is the Lodges. The name isn’t new, however the medieval lodges of the past, from before the time of William Schaw, had been temporary or semi-permanent buildings, attached to ecclesiastical buildings, used by the masons working on that building for working, eating, sleeping while on the building site. There is no evidence that such lodges had any sort of jurisdiction over the trade or over who could enter the trade; something that has obviously evolved through the years leading up to Schaw’s Statutes.
The Second Schaw Statutes (1599)
The Second Schaw Statutes were issued 12 months later on 28th December 1599, signed at Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh.
Whereas the first statutes dealt more with the running of a Lodge and general regulation of the craft, the second statutes were more focused on the precedence of lodges in Scotland.
Following the circulation of the first statutes a year earlier there had been some unrest and discontent over them. In particular Lodge Kilwinning, located in the West of Scotland in the county of Ayrshire who sent a representative by the name of Archibald Barclay to Edinburgh to meet with William Schaw.
One of the key differences of the second statutes is that they are addressed directly to Lodge Kilwinning, and would therefore suggest it has been a direct result of discussions with or complaints presented by Archibald Barclay.
Schaw appoints Kilwinning as the ‘the heid and second ludge of Scotland’ with Edinburgh being ‘the first and principall ludge of Scotland’.
The first statutes were written in Edinburgh, the capital of Scotland, the home of the Royal Court, it most likely did not occur to Schaw, that another Lodge elsewhere in Scotland could be older than the one in Edinburgh and having already acknowledged Edinburgh as the primary lodge in Scotland, he was caught between a rock and a hard place, with the risk of upsetting one of them regardless of any decision he made.
Unfortunately his solution to appoint Kilwinning as the second Lodge in Scotland with regional control of the West of Scotland was not to appease the disgruntled members in Kilwinning who played no further part in Schaw’s plans and the consequences of which are still evident in Scottish Freemasonry today.
Despite this, the Second Statutes, like the first provide us with yet more insight and similarities between the Lodges of 1599 and Freemasonry Lodge of today.
The very first item of the Second Schaw Statutes deals with the election of the Warden of the Lodge (as mentioned previous, the equivalent of the Master of the Lodge today), stating that following the election which will be annually in the Kirk of Kilwinning on 20th December, the Lodge must inform the Generall Warden (ie. William Schaw) immediately after election.
The Lodge is instructed to test every member on remembering ‘something’, that there is to be no exceptions, and that the penalty for failure is 20 shillings for a fellow of the craft and 10 shillings for an apprentice. This annual test tells us that there was some sort of common shared knowledge, known by every member of the Lodge.
Why a memory test? Because at this time stonemasons would have been for the most part illiterate and there being a need to test it annually with a hefty price for failure, suggests the knowledge being tested was not merely a word or a handshake but instead something more substantial such as a form of ritual or stonemasons’ ceremony.
Schaw’s choice of words also tells us a bit about speculative masonry at this time. In 1599 the term ‘the art of memory’ was in more common use than it is today. It refers to a specific set of memory disciplines and techniques that have evolved from Ancient Rome and Classical Greece. Specifically the concept of a “memory palace”.
A memory palace, also known as the “method of loci” (Loci being latin for places), is an imaginative reconstruction of a building or location in which items or symbols are placed within rooms and at key locations as prompts to something the practitioner wants to recall. An architectural mnemonic. Seems appropriate.
By the 16th century the “art of memory” already had strong traditions in Scotland and throughout the British Isles as a part of medieval culture, however, it was seeing a resurgence in popularity during the Renaissance and the term itself featured in hundreds of books published during this time.
The art of memory was something that flourished in the court of King James VI. With several of the court being known to be experts in the field and close associates of William Schaw.
One of those associates was Alexander Dickson, a personal student of Giodarno Bruno, one of the most adventurous thinkers of the Renaissance who would later be burnt at the stake for being a heretic in the Papal Inquisition. Dickson was featured in one of Bruno’s works on the art of memory and wrote one himself outlining his own memory system based on Bruno’s teachings.
Another known memory master was someone I mentioned earlier, William Fowler. Fowler was the personal secretary to Queen Anne, while Schaw was her Chamberlain. He graduated the year after Alexander Dickson from the same St. Leonard’s College and wrote a treatise on the art of memory whilst teaching the techniques to King James VI himself.
From the earliest exposures published on Freemasonry we understand that prior to permanent lodge buildings, ceremonies and ritual were based around the imaginary recreation of King Solomon’s Temple, with symbolic images drawn on the floor or the tavern or hall to aid in the imagination, and specific office bearers placed around the Lodge. A form of Memory Palace.
It’s likely that by using the term “art of memory” Schaw is referring to some form of early Masonic ritual, the memorising of which is still an important aspect of Scottish Freemasonry today.
This is partly what makes the history of Freemasonry in Scotland so different from elsewhere in the world. Scottish Stonemasons by day would cut, carve and dress stones, building spectacular structures. By night however, when they met in the lodge they did not build, or dress stones - not in a physical sense at least. This time was dedicated to ceremonial aspects and the passing on of esoteric knowledge. Therefore as mentioned previously Scottish stonemasons were both Stonemasons and Freemasons at the same time.
It’s clear Schaw has detailed information about the knowledge held by stonemasons and the value in preserving it. This, along with his presence at the two meetings at which the Schaw Statutes were written and his permitted presence at the annual election of the Lodge Wardens, is the only evidence we have that suggests that William Schaw was indeed himself a member of a Lodge. Sadly beyond the Second Statutes and this assumption there is no record of this from any Lodge. Perhaps one of the quirks of history, as lodges don’t begin to keep records until Schaw instructs them to do so.
If this is true, then William Schaw is the first known Freemason.
The Second Statutes go on to discuss that the Warden of Kilwinning shall be present at the election of Wardens within the wards of Cliddisdale (Clydesdale), Glasgow, Ayr and the district of Carrick. With the authority to convene the wardens of these areas when necessary. Essentially the makings of a Grand Lodge, although something that didn’t transpire in Scotland until 1736.
Schaw reminds Wardens that all members of the craft are subject to the laws of the land, and proceeds to lay out the procedures for dealing with brethren of commit a crime, are disobedient to the church, craft or council, or through ‘slothfulness’ fail the memory test mentioned previously. Granting Wardens the ability to exclude members from Lodges for any of the above.
Finally further insight is given to the process of an apprentice being entered into the craft and later becoming a fellow of the craft.
Every fellowcraft, before admission into the Lodge, was to be tested by the warden, deacon or any district masters in the Lodge on his knowledge and skill, and complete an assigned task to demonstrate his mastery of the art. Upon entry, he was to pay the Lodge ten pounds for the banquet, and ten shillings for gloves. Every 'prentice’, before he was admitted, paid six pounds towards the common banquet.’
The requirement of gloves means they must have had some sort of ceremonial significance within the Lodge.
The St. Clair Charter (1601)
In addition to the Schaw Statutes, William Schaw in his position as the Master of Works, appears as the primary signatory along with representatives of five Scottish Lodges on a letter dated 1601 sent to William Sinclair of Rosslyn. The lodges represented include Edinburgh, St. Andrew’s, Haddington, Aitcheson’s Haven, and Dunfermline.
Although often quoted as a ‘charter’ the document is more of a begging letter from the masons of Scotland, with the consent of the Schaw, stating that they have long acknowledged the St. Clairs of Rosslyn to be their ‘Patrons and Protectors’, despite their own negligence in allowing the association to lapse.
This was written the year before Schaw’s death in 1602, with the primary purpose of convincing William Sinclair of Rosslyn to become an arbiter or judge to the Stonemasons for all internal disputes and was followed up in 1628 by a second, almost identical letter to the son of William Sinclair.
It implies that there was some sort of hereditary ‘line’ between Stonemasons in Scotland and the St. Clairs of Rossyln, or at least a belief of such, and that it has been broken through time. Schaw’s signature shows this was not just the belief of the stonemasons themselves but maintained and supported by King’s Master of Works and most likely the King himself.
Despite being penned on behalf of the stonemasons who by their own admission could neither read nor write, it’s quite clear that it is from them. It starts ‘We Deacons, Masters, and Freemen of the Masons within the realm of Scotland’ and concludes with ‘We, for ourselves and in the name of our dear brethren and craftsmen’ - yet William Schaw is the primary signatory on the document. Not exactly proof that Schaw was a Freemason but certainly adds to the suggestion when considered with other evidence.
Both the first letter of 1601 signed by William Schaw and that of 1628 were later used during the formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, in 1736, to enhance the antiquity of the Scottish Craft and therefore of the Grand Lodge’s pedigree, a lineage stretching back almost 140 years earlier.
William Schaw’s Legacy
Schaw died on 18th April 1602 in Dunfermline after a short illness, and was interred in the Northern aisle of the nave in Dunfermline Abbey which he had previously helped to restore. Succeeded as the King's Master of Works by David Cunninghame of Robertland and a year before his King, James VI, ascended the throne of Great Britain at the age of approximately 52.
Upon his death, the lands within the Barony of Sauchie were left to his nephew, Sir John Schaw of Broich and Arnecrumbie (Arngomery). This along with no evidence that he ever married and the suspicion of being a Jesuit, strongly suggests he was a bachelor.
However, an unusual, unique and, to date, unexplained entry in the Annals of Dunfermline states...
1630.—William Schaw and the Mason Craft.—William (son of William Schaw, Master of Works to James VI.), and himself Master of Works to Charles I., granted a charter to the general lodge, recognising Sir William Sinclair of Roslin as patron and protector from age to age of their craft. This charter is attested by names of deacons and masters of the lodges of several of the Royal burghs in 1630. Among the signatures appears that of Robert Alisone, one of the Masters of the Lodge of Dunfermline. {Chal. Hist. Dtmf vol. ii. p. 156.)
A Classical wall monument in Dunfermline Abbey, now located under the north-west tower having been moved in 1794 from a position further east in the nave, was constructed in his memory at the expense of his friend Alexander Seton and Queen Anne of Denmark. It survives today with a Latin inscription recording Schaw's intellectual skills and achievements, and remains the most valuable source of biographic information relating to William Schaw.
Composed by Alexander Seton, translated it reads:
‘To his most upright Friend, WILLIAM SCHAW, Live with the Gods, and live for ever, most excellent man; This life to thee was labour, death was deep repose. ALEXANDER SETON, Erected DEO OPTIMO MAXIMO (To God the Best and Greatest.)
This humble structure of stones covers a man of excellent skill, notable probity, singular integrity of life, adorned with the greatest of virtues – William Schaw, Master of the King's Works, President of the Sacred Ceremonies, and the Queen's Chamberlain. He died 18th April 1602.
Among the living he dwelt fifty-two years; he had travelled in France and other kingdoms for the improvement of his mind; he wanted no liberal training; skilful in architecture; was early recommended to great persons for the singularity of his mind; and was not only unwearied and indefatigable in labours and but constantly active and vigorous, and was most dear to every good man who knew him. He was born to do good offices and thereby to gain the hearts of men; now he lives eternally with God. Queen Anne ordered this monument to be erected to the memory of this most excellent and most upright man, lest his virtues, worthy of eternal commendation, should pass away with the death of his body.’
Included on the monument is a marble monogram that features the letters of Schaw’s name set over a Square and Compass, as well as a masons’ mark repeatedly and prominently displayed throughout. This is not the mark of Schaw, but rather that of the mason who created it, believed to be that of David Scougal of Crail in Fife, examples of which can also be seen on the signed and dated tomb of James, 7th Earl of Glencairn and his wife Glencairn aisle of St Maurs in Kilmaurs. Likely, also, to be the same “David Skowgall” mentioned as a member of the Lodge of St. Andrews in the St. Clair Charter of 1601.
Schaw’s death was recorded in the Annals of Dunfermline (A.D. 1601 - 1701 - Part 1)
DEATH OF WILLIAM SCHAW, “Master of the Works.”—William Schaw, architect to King James VI., died on the 18th of April, this year. He was an accomplished man, and “held in the highest esteem by his Sovereign, and by all who was honoured with his friendship.”
About the year 1594, the restoration of the Abbey, &c., was committed to his charge.
He built the steeple and the north porch, some of the buttresses, the roofs of the north and south aisles, and that part of the west gable immediately above the great western door. He also planned and built the “Queen’s House,” the Bailie and Constabulary Houses, &c.
He died at Dunfermline, on the 18th April, 1602, after a short illness, and was interred in the north aisle of the nave which he had restored. His monument, a very massive one, was reared about his grave, “behind the pulpit-pillar”
The monumental tomb was removed from its original position in 1794 and placed within ‘the bell-ringer’s place at the bottom of the steeple’. The reason given for this in the Annals in 1794 was that ‘the upper part of it interfered with the light of one of the windows, and thereby prevented much of the light falling on the pulpit-bible.’
Sadly a lack of letters and other personal or family papers inevitably leaves much of William Schaw’s life and work obscure and it’s unlikely that we will ever know why Schaw undertook to reform Scottish Lodges in this way.
What we do know however, is that Schaw formalised the arrangements of Scottish lodges. So much is made of the year 1717 and the creation of the first Grand Lodge in England, however Schaw laid the foundations for such an organisation. He standardised many ancient practices and he saw himself at the head of the new structure, placing himself as Warden of all masons.
Even today, in 2020, it’s difficult to read the 22 clauses of the 1598 Schaw Statutes and find a way to improve them. Schaw’s instructions are as applicable to every stonemason and Lodge in the 16th Century as they are today, impressing upon the craftsmen the qualities of loyalty, secrecy and obedience.
Within a year of Schaw’s death, the Union between Scotland and England led to a massive emigration of Scotsmen accompanying James VI to take up the throne in London as James I. The undoubted influence of The Schaw Statutes on English Masons thereafter is something that remains an area to be studied, however the development of lodges in Scotland, their growing importance in the decades that followed Schaw’s death and their handling of both operative as well as esoteric ritual with non-masons joining the craft is undisputed.
The contribution of Schaw for which those interested in the history of Freemasonry are most grateful however, was to order that lodges keep written minutes. As a result, lodges suddenly emerge from obscurity and left lasting monuments more impressive than buildings, though Schaw could never possibly have known what the effects his actions would have on the Masonic Craft in Scotland and throughout the world.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Original Manuscript of The First Schaw Statutes
At Edinburgh the XXVIII day of December, The zeir of God I' V' four scoir awchtene zeiris.
The statutis ordinance is to be obseruit be all the maister maissounis within this realme, Sett doun be Williame Schaw, Maister of Wark, to his maiestie And generall Wardene of the said craft, with the consent of the maisteris efter specifeit.
Item, first that they obserue and keip all the gude ordinanceis sett doun ofbefoir concemyng the priviligeis of thair Craft be thair predicesso' of gude memorie, And specialie That thay be trew ane to ane vther and leve cheritablie togidder as becumis sworne brether and companzeounis of craft.
Item, that thay be obedient to thair wardenis, dekynis, andmaisteris in alithingis concernyng thair craft.
Item, that thay be honest, faithfull, and diligent in thair calling, and deill uprichtlie w'the maisteris or awnaris of the warkis that they sall tak vpoun hand, be it in task, meit, & fie, or owlkiie wage.
Item, that name tak vpoun hand ony wark gritt or small quhilk he is no'abill to performe qualifeitlie vnder the pane of fourtie pundis money or ellis the fourt pairt of the worth and valo'of the said wark, and that by and atto' ane condigne amendis and satisfactioun to be maid to the awnaris of the wark at the sycht and discretioun of the generall Wardene, or in his absence at the sycht of the wardeneis, dekynis, and maisteris of the shrefdome quhair the said wark is interprisit and wrocht.
Item, that na maister sali tak anevther maisteris wark over his heid, efter that the first maister hes aggreit w'the awnar of the wark ather be contract, arlis, or verball conditioun, vnder the paine of fourtie punds.
Item, that na maister sall tak the wirking of ony wark that vther maisteris hes wrocht at of befoir, vnto the tyme that the first wirkaris be satisfeit for the wark quhilk thay haif wrocht, vnder the pane foirsaid.
Item, that thair be ane wardene chosin and electit Ilk zeir to haif the charge over everie ludge, as thay are devidit particularlie, and that be the voitis of the maisteris of the saids ludgeis, and consent of thair Wardene generall gif he happynis to be pn', And vtherwyis that he be aduerteist that sic ane wardene is chosin for sic ane zeir, to the effect that the Wardene generall may send sic directionis to that wardene electit, as effeiris.
Item, that na maister sall tak ony ma prenteissis nor thre during his lyfetyme w'out ane speciall consent of the haill wardeneis, dekynis, and maisteris of the schirefdome quhair the said prenteiss that is to be ressauit dwellis and remanis.
Item, that na maister ressaue ony prenteiss bund for fewar zeiris nor sevin at the leist, and siclyke it sall no'be lesum to mak the said prenteiss brother and fallow in craft vnto the tyme thathe haif seruit the space of vther sevin zeiris efter the ische of his said prenteischip w'out ane speciall licenc granttit be the wardeneis, dekynis, and maisteris assemblit for the caus, and that sufficient tryall be tane of thair worthynes, qualificatioun, and skill of the persone that desyirs to be maid fallow in craft, and that vnder the pane of fourtie punds to be upliftit as ane pecuniall penaltie fra the persone that is maid fallow in craft aganis this ord', besyde the penalteis to be set doun aganis his persone, accordyng to the ord'of the lodge quhair he remanis.
Item, it sall no' be lesum to na maister to sell his prenteiss to ony vther maister nor zit to dispens w'the zeiris of his prenteischip be selling y'of to the prenteisses self, vnder the pane of fourtie punds.
Item, that na maister ressaue ony prenteiss w'out he signifie the samyn to the wardene of the ludge quhair he dwellis, to the effect that the said prenteissis name and the day of his ressauyng may be ord'lie buikit.
Item, that na prenteiss be enterit bot be the samyn ord', that the day of thair enteres may be buikit.
Item, that na maister or fallow of craft be ressauit nor admittit w'out the numer of sex maisteris and twa enterit prenteissis, the wardene of that ludge being ane of the said sex, and that the day of the ressauyng of the said fallow of craft or maister be ord'lie buikit and his name and mark insert in the said buik w' the names of his sex admitteris and enterit prenteissis, and the names of the intendaris that salbe chosin to everie persone to be alsua insert in thair buik. Providing alwayis that na man be admittit w'out ane assay and sufficient tryall of his skill and worthynes in his vocatioun and craft.
Item, that na maister wirk ony maissoun wark vnder charge or command of ony vther craftisman that takis vpoun hand or vpoun him the wirking of ony maissoun wark.
Item, that na maister or farow of craft ressaue ony cowanis to wirk in his societie or cumpanye, nor send nane of his servands to wirk w'cowanis, under the pane of twentie punds sa oft as ony persone offendis heirintill.
Item, it sall no'be lesum to na enterit prenteiss to tak ony gritter task or wark vpon hand fra a awnar nor will extend to the soume of ten punds vnder the pane foirsaid, to wit xx libs, and that task being done they sall Interpryiss na mair w'out licence of the maisteris or warden q'thay dwell.
Item, gif ony questioun, stryfe, or varianc sall fall out amang ony of the maisteris, servands, or entert prenteissis, that the parteis that fallis in questioun or debait, sall signifie the causis of thair querrell to he perticular wardeneis or dekynis of thair ludge w'in the space of xxiiij ho" vnder the pane of ten pnds, to the effect that thay may be reconcilit and aggreit and their variance removit be thair said wardeneis, dekynis, and maisteris; and gif ony of the saids parteis salhappin to remane wilfull or obstinat that they salbe deprivit of the privilege of thair ludge and no'permittit to wirk y'at vnto the tyme that thay submit thame selffis to ressoun at the sycht ofthair wardenis, dekynis, and maisteris, as said is.
Item, that all maisteris, Inte priseris of warkis, be verray cairfull to sie thair skaffellis and futegangis surelie sett and placeit, to the effect that throw thair negligence and siewth na hurt or skaith cum vnto ony personis that wirkis at the said wark, vnder pain of dischargeing of thaim y efter to wirk as maisteris havand charge of ane wark, bot sall ever be subiect all the rest of thair dayis to wirk vnder or w ane other principall maister havand charge of the wark.
Item, that na maister ressaue or ressett ane vther maisteris prenteiss or servand that salhappin to ryn away fra his maisteris seruice, nor interteine him in his cumpanye efter that he hes gottin knawledge y'of, vnder the paine of fourtie punds.
Item, that all personis of the maissoun craft conuene in tyme and place being lawchfullie warnit, vnder the pane of ten punds.
Item, that all the maisteris that salhappin to be send for to ony assemblie or meitting sall be sworne be thair grit aith that thay sall hyde nor coneill na fawltis nor wrangis done be ane to ane vther, nor zit the faultis or wrangis that ony man hes done to the awnaris of the warkis that they haif had in hand sa fer as they knaw, and that vnder the pane of ten punds to be takin vp frae the conceillairs of the saidis faultis.
Item, it is ordanit that all thir foirsaids penalteis salbe liftit and tane vp fra the offendaris and brekaris of thir ordinances be the wardeneis, dekynis, and maisteris of the ludgeis quhair the offendaris dwellis, and to be distributit ad pios vsus according to gud conscience be the advyis of the foirsaidis.
And for fulfilling and observing of thir ordinances, sett doun as said is, The haill maisteris conuenit the foirsaid day binds and oblisses thaim heirto faithfullie. And thairfore hes requeistit thair said Wardene generall to subscriue thir presentis wt his awn hand, to the effect that ane autentik copy heirof may be send to euerie particular ludge w'in this realme.
WILLIAM SCHAW,
Maistir of Wark.
Appendix 2: Original Manuscript of Second Schaw Statutes
XXVIII Decembris, 1599.
First It is ordanit that the warden witin the bounds of Kilwynning and other placeis subject to thair ludge salbe chosin and electit zeirlie be monyest of the Mrs voitis of the said ludge vpoun the twentie day of December and that wn the kirk of Kilwynning as the heid and secund ludge of Scotland and yrefter that the generall warden be advertysit zeirlie quha is chosin warden of the ludge, immediatlie efter his electioun.
Item it is thocht neidfull & expedient be my lord warden generall that everie ludge wtin Scotland sall have in tyme cuming ye awld and antient liberties yrof vse and wont of befoir & in speciall, yt ye ludge ol Kilwynning secund ludge of Scotland sail haif thair warden pnt at the election of ye wardenis wtin ye bounds of ye Nether Waird of Cliddsdail, Glasgow Air & bounds of Carrik; wt powar to ye said wairden & dekyn of Kilwynning to convene ye remanent wardenis and dekynis wtin ye bounds foirsaid quhan thay haif ony neid of importance ado, and yai to bejudgit be ye warden and dekyn of Kilwynning quhen it sall pleis thame to qvene for ye tyme ather in Kilwynning or wtin ony vther pt of the west of Scotland and bounds foirsaid.
Item it is thocht neidfull & expedient be my lord warden generall, that Edr salbe in all tyme cuming as of befoir the first and principall ludge in Scotland, and yt Kilwynning be the secund ludge as of befoir is notourlie manifest in our awld antient writts and that Stirueling salbe the third ludge, conforme to the auld privileges thairof.
Item it is thocht expedient yt ye wardenis of everie ilk ludge salbe answerabel to ye presbyteryes wtin thair schirefdomes for the maissonis subiect to ye ludgeis anent all offensis ony of thame sall committ, and the thrid pt of ye vnlawis salbe employit to ye godlie vsis of ye ludge quhair ony offens salhappin to be committit.
Item yt yr be tryall takin zeirlie be ye wardenis & maist antient maisteris of everie ludge extending to sex personis quha sall tak tryall of ye offenss, yt punishment may be execut conforme to equitie & iustice & guid conscience & ye antient ordor.
Item it is ordanit be my lord warden generall that the warden of Kilwynning as secund in Scotland, elect and chuis sex of the maist perfyt and worthiest of memorie within (thair boundis,) to tak tryall of the qualificatioun of the haill masonis within the boundis foirsaid of thair airt, craft, scyance and antient memorie; To the effect the warden deakin may be answerable heiraftir for sic p(er)sonis as Js qmittit to him & wthin his bounds and jurisdictioun.
Item conunissioun in gewin to ye warden and deakon of Kilwynning as secund luge, to secluid and away put ftirthe of yr societe and cumpanie all psonis disobedient to fulfil & obey ye haill acts and antient statutts sett doun of befoir of guid memorie, and all psonis disobedient eyr to kirk craft counsall and uyris statutts and acts to be mayd heireftir for ane guid ordour.
Item it is ordainit be my lord warden generall that the warden and deakyn to be pnt of his quarter maisteris elect cheis and constitut ane famous notar as ordinar clark and scryb, and yat ye said notar to be chosinge sall occupye the office, and that all indentouris discharges and vtheris wrytis quhatsumevir, perteining to ye craft salbe onlie wrytin be ye clark and that na maner of wryt neyther tityll nor other evident to be admit be ye said warden and deakin befoir yame, except it be maid be ye said clark and subscryuit wt his hand.
Item It is ordanit be my lord generall that ye hale auld antient actis and statutis maid of befoir be ye predicessrs of ye masonis ofkilwynning be observit faithftillie and kepit be ye craftis in all tymes cuminge, and that na prenteis nor craftis man, in ony tymes heireftir be admittit nor enterit Bot onlie wthin the kirk of Kilwynning as his paroche and secund ludge, and that all bankatts for entrie of prenteis or fallow of crafts to be maid wthin ye said lug of Kilwynning.
Item lt is ordanit that all fallows of craft at his entrie pay to ye commoun bokis of ye luge the soume of ten punds monie, wt x s. worthe of gluiffis or euire he be admitit and that for the bankatt, And that he be not adrrtitit wthout ane sufficient essay and pruife of memorie and art of craft be the warden deacon and quarter mrs of ye lug, conforme to ye foirmer and qrthrow yai may be ye mair answerable to ye generall warden.
Item that all prentessis to be admitit be not admittit qll first pay to ye commoun bankat foiresaid the sowme of sex punds monie, utherwyes to pay the bankat for ye haill members of craft wthin the said ludge and prentessis yrof.
Item It is ordanit that the warden and deakis of ye secund luge of Scotland pnt of Kilwynning, sall tak the aythe, fidelitie and trewthe of all mrs and fallowis of craft wthin ye haill bounds commitit to yr charge, zeirlie that thai sall not accumpanie wth cowans nor work with diame, nor any ofyr servands or prenteisses wndir ye paine of ye penaltie contenit in ye foirmer actis and peying yrof.
Item It is ordanit be ye generall warden, That ye warden of ye lug of Kilwynning, being the secund lug in Scotland, tak tryall of ye airt of memorie and science yrof, of everie fellowe of craft and everie prenteiss according to ayr of yr vocations; and in cais yat yai haue lost ony point yrof dvied to thame To pay the penaltie as followis for yr slewthfulness, viz., Ilk fallow of craft, xx s., Ilk prentess, x s., and that to be payit to ye box for ane commoun weill zeirlie & yat conforme to the commoun vs and pratik of the commoun lugs of this realm.
And for the fulfilling, observiiige and keping of thir statutis and all oyr actis and statuttis maid of befoir and to be maid be ye warden deaconis and quarter mrs of ye lugis foirsads for guid ordor keping confonn to equitie justice & antient ordor to ye makinge and setting doun qrof ye generall warden hes gevin his power and conunissionto the said warden and yrs abouevrtn to sett doun & mak actis conforme as accords to ye office law. And in signe and taking yrof I the generall warden of Scotland hes sett doun and causit pen yir actis & statutis And hes sybscryuit ye smyis wt my hand eftr ye testimoniale on this syd and on the uther syd.
Be it Kend to the warden dekyn and to the mrs of the ludge of Kilwynning That Archibald Barklay being directit commissioner fra the said ludge comperit in Edr the twentie sevin & twentie awcht of December Instant quhair the said
Archibald in pns of the warden generall & the mrs of the ludge of Edr, producit his commissioun, and behaifit himself verie honestlie and cairfullie for the discharge of sik thingis as was committit into him; bot be ressone of the absence of his Maitie out of the toun and yt thair was na mrs bot the tudge of Edr convenit at this tyme, We culd not get ane satlat order (as the privileges ofthe craft requyris) tane at this tyme, bot heirefter quhan occasioun sal be offerit we sall get his Maities warrand baith for the authorizing of the ludgeis privilegeis, and ane penaltie set down for the dissobedient personis and perturberis of all guid ordor. Thus far I thocht guid to sgnifievn to the haill brether of the ludge, vnto the neist commoditie In witnes heirof, I haif subscriuit this pnt wt my hand at Halyrudhous the twentie awcht day of December The zeir of God ImV' fourscoir nynetene zeirs.
WILLIAM SCHAW,
Maistir of Wark, Wairden of ye Maisons.
Appendix 3: Original Manuscript of The St. Clair Charter 1601
Be it kend till all men be thir present letters ws Deacons Maistres and freemen of the Masons within the realme of Scotland with express consent and assent of Wm Schaw Maister of Wark to our Souane Lord ffor sa meikle as from aige to aige it has been observit amangis that the Lairds of Rosling has ever been Patrons and Protectors of us and our priviledges likeas our predecessors has obey’d and acknowledged them as Patrones and tectoris while that within thir few years throwch negligence and sleuthfulness the samyn has past furth of vse whereby not only has the Laird of Rosling lyne out of his just rycht but also our hail craft has been destitute of ane patron and protector and overseer qlk has genderit manyfauld corruptions and imperfections, baith amangis ourselves and in our craft and has given occasion to mony persones to conseve evill opinioun of ws and our craftand to leive off great enterprises of policie be reason of our great misbehaviour wtout correction whereby not only the committers of the faults but also the honest men are disapoyntit of their craft and ffeit. As lyikwayes when divers and sundrie contraversies falls out amangis ourselfs thair follows great and many fald inconvenientis through want of ane (Patron and Protector) we not being able to await upon the ordinar judges and judgement of this realme through the occasioun of our powertie and langsumness of process for remeid qrof and for keeping of guid ordour amangis us in all tymes cumyng, and for advancement of our craft and vocatioun within this realme and furthering of policie within the samyn We for ourselves and in name of our haill bretherene and craftismen with consent foresaid agrees and consents that Wm Sinclar now of Rosling for himself & his airispurchase and obtene at ye hands of our Souane Lord libertie fredome and jurisdictioun vpone us and our successors in all tymes cummyng as patrons and judges to us and the haill fessoris of our craft wtin this realme quhom off we have power and commission sua that hereafter we may acknawlege him and his airis as our patrone and judge under our Souerane Lord without ony kind of appellation or declynyng from his judgement with power to the said Williame and his airis to depute judges ane or mae under him and to use sick ampill and large jurisdictione upon us and our successors als weill as burghe as land asit shall pleise our Souerane Lord to grant to him & his airis.
William Schaw, Maistir of Wark.
Edinburgh - Andro Symsone Jhone Robesoune
St Androse - * * * * * * *
Hadingtoun - P. Capbell takand ye burdyng for Jon. Saw, J. Vallance William Aittoun
Achiesone Heavin - Georg Aittoun Jo. Fwsetter Thomas Petticrif
Dunfermling - Robert Pest
Thomas Weir mason in Edr. Thomas Robertsoun wardane of the Ludge of Dunfermling and Sanct Androis and takand the burding upon him for the brethren of the Mason Craft within they Lwdges and for the Commissioners efter mentionat viz. David Skowgall Alexander Gilbert and David Spens for the Lwdge of Sanct Androis Andrew Alisone and Archibald Angous Commissionaris for the Lwdge of Dwmfermling and Robert Baize of Haddington with our handis led on the pen be the notaris underwritten at our commandis because we can nocht write.
Ita est Laurentius Robertsoun notarius publicus ad praemissa requisitus de specialibus mandatis dict. personarum scribere nescien. ut aseruerunt testan. manu mea propria.(Ita est) Henricus Banna(Tyne) connotarius ad premissa (de mandatis) antedictarum personarum (scribere nescientium ut aseruerunt teste) manu mea propria.
Thank you for this most interesting account of William Schaw. I am currently RWM of Lodge St Maurs, Kilmaurs No 1398 in Ayrshire and PMs of our Lodge were involved in the identification of the Mason’s Marks which appear on Schaw’s Monument. They were able to identify them as belonging to David Scougal who in 1600 created the ornately carved mural monument to James Cunningham 7th Earl of Glencairn contained within the Glencairn Aisle which adjoins the parish church of St Maurs Glencairn in Kilmaurs.
A really interesting read Scott. Fiona and I live about 100ft away from Lodge 321, and I couldn’t have told you anything about the history of The Masons.....