On 24/7/09 11:29, "Tom Mc Rae" <thomas.mcrae@bigpond.com> wrote:

> Brethren,
> is there any CONCRETE evidence of Sir Christopher Wren being a
> Freemason ?

Brethren

Records in the Royal Society archives state that Christopher Wren was
adopted into the Fraternity of Accepted Masons on May 18, 1691.

"Records of the Lodge Original, No. 1, now the Lodge of Antiquity No. 2"
mention him as being Master of the lodge.

http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/wren_c/adoption.html

http://www.masonicdictionary.com/wren2.html

By Bros. Bernard Williamson and Michael Baigent

Originally presented Summer 1996.

A search through the archives of the Royal Society has provided us with new
information regarding the claim that Sir Christopher Wren was initiated into
Freemasonry in London on May 18th 1691. This claim was advanced in a
handwritten note added to the manuscript of John Aubrey's Naturall Historie
of Wiltshire, 1685 now in the Bodleian library at Oxford. This manuscript is
in two parts, bound and filed separately as MS AUBREY 1 and MS AUBREY 2. In
the second part a short account of Freemasonry appears:

"Sir William Dugdale told me many years since, that about Henry the third's
time, the Pope gave a bull, or diploma ['patents' added above] to a company
of Italian Architects ['Freemasons' added above] to travel up and down and
over Europe, to build churches. From those derived the Fraternity of Free
Masons [adopted masons added above]. They are known to one and another by
certain signs & ['marks' erased] and watch words: it continues to this day.
They have several Lodges in several Countries for their reception: and when
any of them fall into decay, the brotherhood is to relieve him & c. The
manner of their adoption is very formal, and with an oath of secrecy."

The page to the left of this account was originaly left blank and on this
page, at some later time, were added three additional notes in Aubrey's own
hand. One of these notes concerns Freemasonry. It reads thus:

"MDM, this day ( may 1691 the 18th. Being Monday after Rogation Sunday) is a
great convention at St. Pauls' church of the fraternity of the Accepted[
'free' being struck out] masons where Sir Christopher Wren is to be adopted
a brother: and Sir Henry Goodric of ye tower, & divers ['several' being
struck out] others - and there have been kings, that have been of this
-Sodalitie."

Of those who have studied the text, Clarke in ARS Quatour Coronatorum ,
1965, concluded that Wren was "almost certainly a freemason. John Hamill, in
1986, in his book "THE CRAFT," is more cautious, concluding that however
possible it might be, "it is not proven". As we will show, the text can now
be accorded a greater degree of veracity. To understand this it is necessary
to look at the history of John Aubrey's manuscript.
John Aubrey's Manuscript

John Aubrey, who lived 1626 to 1697 was one of the founding members of the
Royal Society, being recorded in the list of Fellows May 20th 1663. In 1685
he wrote his Naturall Historie of Wiltshire, It was never published but
remained in manuscript form. However, the Royal Society so admired his work,
and felt that it was of such value to Fellows, that an official copy was
ordered and made for the societies archives in order that Fellows would not
have to travel to Oxford to consult it. Dr. Michael Hunter, in his biography
of John Aubrey wrote:

"Above all, the Royal Society did Aubrey the honour of having a transcript
made of his Naturall Historie of Wiltshire in 1690-1, a unique and
extraordinary gesture showing their esteem for it, which cost them the
considerable sum of seven pounds.(�832.64 in 2001)"

The Clerk of the Royal Society, Mr. B. G. Cramer who, in 1690, began the
task and completed it by mid 1691, made this copy, which is still in the
archives of the Royal Society. It is listed as MISC. Ms 92, and it runs to
373 pages.

When Cramer was ordered to produce this copy Aubrey took the opportunity to
make many additions and emendations and he oversaw their inclusion into the
new text. This is indicated by a short note, in Aubrey's own hand, attached
to folio 124a. of part two of the original manuscript: Aubrey writes,
referring to a printed pamphlet on wool which has been appended:

" Mr Cramer! As to this Treatise of wool, transcribe only the presentment of
the grand jury at Brewton in Somersetshire"

When Aubrey had written the original manuscript he had written only on the
first page of each leaf. In consequence, a blank page appears to the left of
each page of text. On this blank page are written the additions and
emendations relating to the text on the right. It can be supposed that all
these changes were made for the purpose of Cramer's new copy, but we cannot
be absolutely certain of this. We can say however, that Cramer included them
in his new copy. In his copy, Cramer included the following in the main body
of text:

"Memorandum. This day ( may the 18th. Being Munday 1691 after Rogation
Sunday0 is a great convention at St. Paul's church of the fraternity of the
Adopted Masons: where Sir Christopher Wren is to be adopted a Brother: and
Sir Henry Goodric of the tower & divers others. There have been Kings, that
have been of this Sodality."

We can, therefore, accept that Aubrey, Wren and the Royal Society agreed
with this addition citing Wren's initiation into Freemasonry. It seems
reasonable to accept it as a truthful statement.

John Aubrey was a close friend of Sir Christopher Wren. Both were in the
Royal Society, Wren had been a founding member of the Society and served as
its president from 1680-2. He was still alive and active in the society in
1691, the date of Cramer's copy. It has been suggested that perhaps Wren
intended to be initiated but on the day he was unable to attend. However, on
the 18th. May 1691, the date of the initiation and the date of the
additional text relating to Freemasonry, Cramer would have still been
working on earlier pages of his copy. Given that the date is written on the
day in question and that Cramer Copied this page at a later date, after the
fact, there was ample time to amend the text to reflect any variation on the
planned event. That this was not done is good evidence that Wren did not
miss his 'adoption'.

In Conclusion, given that none of these men objected to this statement, nor
altered it after the event but prior to the coping, we can accept that it
records a real occurrence. We can be confident that Sir Christopher Wren was
indeed initiated into Freemasonry in 1691. We should like to thank the
librarian and staff of both the Royal Society and the Bodleian Library for
their help in making these manuscripts available to us.

See also :
http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/christopher_wren_freemasonry.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Wren

http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography/wren_c/wren_c.html