Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:23:22.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

All in the Family: Freemasonry and the British Empire in the Mid–Nineteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2012

Jessica Harland-Jacobs
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , October 2003 , pp. 448 - 482
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Grand Lodge of Quebec, Proceedings (Montreal, 1870), p. 33Google Scholar; Wadia, P. N., The Poetry of Freemasonry (Bombay, 1893), p. 20Google Scholar; District Grand Lodge (hereafter cited as DGL) of Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863; “Annual Report of the Grand Lodge of All Scottish Freemasonry in India” (hereafter cited as GLASFI), 1875, reprinted in the Standard 1, no. 2 (May 1876): 55Google Scholar.

2 Anderson, James, The Charges of a Free-Mason Extracted from the Ancient Records of Lodges beyond the Sea, and of Those in England, Scotland, and Ireland (London, 1723)Google Scholar, reprinted as an appendix to Jacob, Margaret, The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans (London, 1981), pp. 279–85Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Anderson's Constitutions).

3 By the 1880s, there were over seven hundred British lodges active in the colonies. This figure does not include the lodges working under affiliated grand lodges in the Canadian and Australian colonies. Freemasonry also had a very strong presence in the British Army and the Colonial Service, with prominent men in both arenas publicly patronizing the brotherhood. For the proliferation of lodges throughout the empire and Freemasonry's role in buttressing imperialism, see Harland-Jacobs, Jessica, “‘The Essential Link’: Freemasonry and British Imperialism, 1751–1918” (Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 2000)Google Scholar, and Builders of Empire: Freemasons, Identity, and Imperial Power, 1717–1918.

4 There is no full-length study of imperial Freemasonry. Works that touch on Freemasonry in the British imperial context include Hyam, Ronald, Britain's Imperial Century, 1818–1914: A Study of Empire and Expansion (Lanham, Md., 1993)Google Scholar; Francis, Mark, Governors and Settlers: Images of Authority in the British Colonies, 1820–1860 (London, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Rich, Paul J., Elixir of Empire: The English Public Schools, Ritualism, Freemasonry, and Imperialism (London, 1989)Google Scholar.

5 Historians have examined the prevalence of family metaphors in late eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century political rhetoric, but the mid–nineteenth century has not received comparable attention. See Felstiner, Mary Lowenthal, “Family Metaphors: The Language of an Independence Revolution,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 25, no. 1 (January 1983): 154–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hunt, Lynn, The Family Romance of the French Revolution (Berkeley, 1992)Google Scholar. Two works that do consider nineteenth-century appropriations of the family metaphor are Sullivan, Zohreh T., Narratives of Empire: The Fictions of Rudyard Kipling (Cambridge, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and McClintock, Anne, “Family Feuds: Gender, Nationalism, and the Family,” Feminist Review 44 (Summer 1993): 61–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Clawson, Mary Ann, “Early Modern Fraternalism and the Patriarchal Family,” Feminist Studies 6, no. 2 (Summer 1980): 368–91, 368CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bullock, Steven, Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730–1840 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1996), pp. 39, 74Google Scholar.

7 The phrase “rule of colonial difference” is Partha Chatterjee's; by this, he means “the preservation of the alienness of the ruling group.” Chatterjee, Partha, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Post-colonial Histories (Princeton, N.J., 1993), p. 10Google Scholar. Cooper and Stoler employ the term “grammar of difference.” See Cooper, Frederick and Stoler, Ann Laura, eds., Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (Berkeley, 1997), pp. 3–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Cooper and Stoler, eds., Tensions of Empire, p. 4; Burton, Antoinette, “Rules of Thumb: British History and ‘Imperial Culture’ in Nineteenth and Twentieth-Century Britain,” Women's History Review 3, no. 4 (1994): 483–500, 484CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 In addition to the work on race and empire, the most recent and influential interventions into these debates are Metcalf, Thomas's Ideologies of the Raj (Cambridge, 1997)Google Scholar; and Cannadine, David's Ornamentalism: How the British Saw Their Empire (New York, 2001)Google Scholar.

10 For good overviews of, and interventions into, the debates on family history, see Davidoff, Leonore and Hall, Catherine, eds., Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850 (London, 1987)Google Scholar; Hareven, Tamara K., “The History of the Family and the Complexity of Social Change,” American Historical Review 96, no. 1 (February 1991): 95–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar; O'Day, Rosemary, The Family and Family Relationships, 1500–1900: England, France, and the United States of America (New York, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Naomi Tadmor, “The Concept of the Household-Family in Eighteenth-Century England,” Past and Present, no. 151 (May 1996): 111–40; and Davidoff, Leonore, Dolittle, Megan, Fink, Janet, Holden, Katherine, The Family Story: Blood, Contract and Intimacy, 1830–1960 (London, 1999)Google Scholar. On the resemblance of modern to early modern families, see O'Day, The Family and Family Relationships, pp. 197–98; Davidoff et al., The Family Story, pp. 16–50; and Shoemaker, Robert B., Gender in English Society, 1650–1850: The Emergence of Separate Spheres (New York, 1998), p. 90Google Scholar.

11 For discussions of the debates over family size (with particular attention to the findings of the Cambridge Population Group under Peter Laslett), see Hareven, “The History of the Family,” pp. 99–100, 120; and Davidoff, The Family Story, pp. 31–39.

12 Hareven, “The History of the Family,” pp. 119–21; Davidoff and Hall, eds., Family Fortunes, p. 32.

13 The literature on separate spheres ideology is very extensive. Key works include Davidoff and Hall, eds., Family Fortunes; Hall, Catherine, “The Early Formation of Victorian Domestic Ideology,” in her White, Male and Middle Class: Explorations in Feminism and History (London, 1992)Google Scholar; Rose, Sonya, Limited Livelihoods: Gender and Class in Nineteenth-Century England (Berkeley, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vickery, Amanda, “Golden Age to Separate Spheres? A Review of the Categories and Chronology of English Women's History,” Historical Journal 36, no. 2 (June 1993): 383–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Clark, Anna, The Struggle for the Breeches: Gender and the British Working Class (Berkeley, 1995)Google Scholar; and Shoemaker, Gender in English Society, pp. 113–28.

14 “Ireland,” Freemasons' Quarterly Magazine and Review (March 1852): 119. On the tendency of fraternal and other organizations to draw on the family as a metaphor, see Comacchio, Cynthia R., The Infinite Bonds of Family: Domesticity in Canada, 1850–1940 (Toronto, 1999), p. 5Google Scholar; and Clawson, Mary Ann, Constructing Brotherhood: Class, Gender, and Fraternalism (Princeton, N.J., 1989), p. 25Google Scholar.

15 For examples of this discourse, see Provincial Grand Lodge of Canada West, Proceedings, 9 April 1849, United Grand Lodge of England (hereafter cited as UGL) Historic Correspondence (hereafter cited as HC) file 16/A/11; Petition from Ottawa Lodges, 3 July 1855, UGL HC file 16/A/5; circular from St. John's Lodge, Kingston, 27 December 1855, St. John's Lodge File (SN 1292); UGL Proceedings, 4 June 1856; circular of the Provincial Grand Lodge of Canada West, 18 June 1856, UGL HC file 16/A; Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, Report on the Masonic Difficulties in Canada (Boston, 1856), p. 11Google Scholar; Provincial Grand Lodge of Canada West, Proceedings, 10 September 1857, UGL HC file 16/A/7. Unless otherwise indicated, all historic correspondence is housed in the Archives and Museum, Freemasons' Hall, London (hereafter cited as UGL Archives).

16 Collected Verse of Rudyard Kipling (New York, 1907), pp. 318–20Google Scholar; Alexander Keith to W. G. Clarke, 15 August 1867, Robert Burnaby to UGL, 8 February and 31 May 1869, 14 July and 6 November 1871, and John Hervey to Burnaby, 10 May 1869, UGL HC Miscellaneous Correspondence box.

17 Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, pp. 15, 25; Davidoff, et. al., The Family Story, p. 8; J. Howe, , The Freemason's Manual: Or, Illustrations of Masonry (London, 1865), pp. 83, 78Google Scholar.

18 O'Day, Family and Family Relationships, p. 154; Davidoff and Hall, eds., Family Fortunes, p. 32; Davidoff et al., The Family Story, p. 148; Hareven, “The History of the Family,” pp. 108–11; Anderson's Constitutions; Howe, The Freemason's Manual, p. 78.

19 Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, p. 222; O'Day, Family and Family Relationships, p. 75; printed circular from the Goderich-Union Lodge, 13 February 1852, UGL HC file 16/A; DGL of Madras, Proceedings (Madras, 1874), p. 3Google Scholar.

20 Hall, “The Early Formation of Victorian Domestic Ideology,” pp. 82–90; Shoemaker, Gender in English Society, pp. 32, 34, 101–13, 121; Davidoff et al., The Family Story, pp. 39–45; O'Day, The Family and Family Relationships, pp. 163–70; Ozment, Steven, Ancestors: The Loving Family in Old Europe (Cambridge, Mass., 2001)Google Scholar.

21 For examples, see Claude Dénéchau's address to the Provincial Grand Lodge of Lower Canada, 27 December 1822, UGL HC file 16/C/7; and Smart, William, Address Delivered before the Provincial Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Upper Canada (Kingston, 1823), p. 4Google Scholar.

22 Brother Grant's address to Londonderry Freemasons, 24 June 1850, Freemasons' Quarterly Review (September 1850), pp. 415–19; “Freemasonry during the Great Exhibition,” Freemasons' Quarterly Magazine and Review (31 March 1851), pp. 1–2.

23 On patriarchy, see Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, pp. 25–33, and “Early Modern Fraternalism,” pp. 368–91; Shoemaker, Gender in English Society, pp. 91, 101–7; Clark, The Struggle for the Breeches, pp. 248–63; Davidoff et al., The Family Story, pp. 135–57.

24 Grand Lodge of Nova Scotia, Constitution of the Ancient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons with the Charges of a Free Masons (Halifax, 1819), p. 13Google Scholar; Morris, W. J., Pocket Lexicon of Canadian Freemasonry (Perth, 1889), p. 35Google Scholar. See also Howe, Freemason's Manual, pp. 83–84.

25 Anderson's Constitutions.

26 Clawson, “Early Modern Fraternalism,” p. 371.

27 Coppin, John W., A Handbook of Freemasonry: Its History, Traditions, Antiquities, Rites, and Ceremonies (Dublin, 1867), p. xixGoogle Scholar; Anderson's Constitutions. Typically, the office of the Master rotated among the brethren, with a one-year term limit.

28 Shoemaker, Gender in English Society, p. 112; Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, pp. 205–10.

29 For statements by women seeking entrance into Freemasonry, see “To the Editor from a ‘Sister,’” Freemasons' Quarterly Review (June 1844), p. 185; and “Should Females Be Initiated or Not?” Freemasons' Quarterly Review (September 1844), p. 279–81; Rev. C. P. Nash, “Why Women Can Not Be Masons,” Craftsman (15 August 1868), p. 173–74; “The Ladies and Freemasonry,” Craftsman and British American Masonic Record 1, no. 4 (January 1867): 53Google Scholar. For the American context, see Carnes, Mark C., Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America (New Haven, Conn., 1989), pp. 79–90Google Scholar; and Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, pp. 178–210.

30 For European fraternalism, see Hobsbawm, E. J., Primitive Rebels: Studies in Archaic Forms of Social Movement in the 19th and 20th Centuries (New York, 1965)Google Scholar; Gillis, John, Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations, 1770–Present (New York, 1974)Google Scholar; Sewell, William H. Jr., Work and Revolution in France: The Language of Labor from the Old Regime to 1848 (Cambridge, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood.

31 Brethren learned a new ritual, along with its accompanying password and symbols, as they passed each level, or degree, in Freemasonry. The first through third degrees were known as the Craft degrees and consisted of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason. See Carnes, Secret Ritual and Manhood, p. 120.

32 Howe, The Freemason's Manual, pp. 76–85.

33 Bullock, Revolutionary Brotherhood, p. 17; Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, pp. 42–43.

34 Though no academic studies of Freemasonry in nineteenth-century Canada exist, several Masonic historians have tackled the topic. See McLeod, Wallace, ed., Whence Come We? Freemasonry in Ontario, 1764–1980 (Hamilton, Ont., 1980)Google Scholar; Graham, J. H., Outlines of the History of Freemasonry in the Province of Quebec (Montreal, 1892)Google Scholar; and Robertson, John Ross, The History of Freemasonry in Canada, 2 vols. (Toronto, 1900)Google Scholar.

35 John Dean to the Grand Lodge of England, 30 November 1821, UGL HC file 16/D.

36 The events examined here primarily involved Masons in Upper Canada (Ontario); anglophone Masons in the maritimes and Quebec launched independence movements later in the century. In the case of Quebec, French Catholics took an active part in Freemasonry during the eighteenth century, when francophone and anglophone lodges peacefully coexisted. By the mid–nineteenth century the anglophone community dominated Lower Canadian Freemasonry and lodges like la Loge Coeurs-Unis de Montreal, which included members of both communities, were rare. Papal injunctions against Freemasonry resulted in the wide-scale departure of French Catholics from the brotherhood during the mid- and late-nineteenth century. See McLeod, Whence Come We? pp. 3–13, 89–98; Charles E. Holmes, “When the Nobility and Aristocracy of French Canada Favored Free Masonry (1760–1825),” a talk given before the Masonic Study Club of Westmount; Gould, Robert F., The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, vol. 6 (London, 1886)Google Scholar.

37 Alexander Keith to William White, 3 March 1845, UGL HC file 16/I; T. Harington to Clarke, 14 April 1858, reprinted in UGL, Proceedings, 16 June 1858; The Petition of the Provincial Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Canada West, under the jurisdiction of the United Grand Lodge of England to the Right Honourable Thomas Dundas … Earl of Zetland, Provincial Grand Lodge of F and A Masons of Canada West, Proceedings, 20 May 1853 (Toronto, 1854), p. 5.

38 Provincial Grand Lodge of F and A Masons of Canada West, Proceedings, 25 October 1854 (Toronto, 1854). They were concerned about two Irish lodges in particular—King Hiram no. 226 in Ingersoll and St. John's no. 286 in York—which were composed of English Freemasons who had been unable to secure warrants from English authorities.

39 Provincial Grand Lodge of Canada West, Minutes of Special Meeting, 9–10 September 1857, UGL HC file 16/A/7.

40 Grand Lodge of Ireland (hereafter cited as GLI), Minutes, 3 April 1856, and 1 October 1857, GLI Archives, Freemasons' Hall, Dublin; Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, 5 May 1855, in Laurie, William, The History of Free Masonry and the Grand Lodge of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1859), p. 314Google Scholar. Zetland to Harington, 5 December 1857, reprinted in UGL, Proceedings, 3 March 1858.

41 Grand Lodge of Canada, Proceedings (1857), p. 161.

42 Russell, Peter, Nationalism in Canada (Toronto, 1966)Google Scholar; Careless, J. M. S., The Union of the Canadas: The Growth of Canadian Institutions, 1841–1857 (Toronto, 1967), pp. 145–215Google Scholar; Bumsted, J. M., The Peoples of Canada: A Pre-confederation History (Toronto, 1992), pp. 326–27Google Scholar, and A History of the Canadian Peoples (Toronto, 1998), p. 176Google Scholar; Stacey, C. P., Canada and the British Army, 1846–1871 (Toronto, 1963)Google Scholar. For a critique, see Buckner, Phillip, “Whatever Happened to the British Empire?” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 4 (1993): 3–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Penlington, Norman, Canada and Imperialism, 1896–1899 (Toronto, 1965)Google Scholar; Page, Robert, “Canada and the Imperial Idea in the Boer War Years,” Journal of Canadian Studies 5 (1970): 33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Miller, Carmen, Painting the Map Red: Canada and the South African War, 1899–1902 (Montreal, 1993)Google Scholar, and “Loyalty, Patriotism and Resistance: Canada's Response to the Anglo-Boer War, 1899–1902,” South African Historical Journal 41 (2000): 312–23Google Scholar.

44 Two notable exceptions are Rasporich, A. W., “Imperial Sentiment in the Province of Canada during the Crimean War, 1854–1856,” in The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age, ed. Morton, W. L. (Toronto, 1968)Google Scholar; and Zeller, Suzanne, Inventing Canada: Early Victorian Science and the Idea of a Transcontinental Nation (Toronto, 1987)Google Scholar. Carl Berger does see imperialism as one variety of Canadian nationalism, but he looks only at the post-1867 period and sees imperialism as merely a means to an end—the creation of a separate Canadian nation. See Berger, Carl, Imperialism and Nationalism, 1884–1914: A Conflict in Canadian Thought (Toronto, 1969)Google Scholar, and The Sense of Power: Studies in the Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, 1867–1914 (Toronto, 1970)Google Scholar. For arguments about the centrality of British Identity in the previous century, see Errington, Jane, The Lion, the Eagle, and Upper Canada: A Developing Colonial Ideology (Montreal, 1987)Google Scholar; and Mills, David, The Idea of Loyalty in Upper Canada, 1786–1850 (Kingston, 1988)Google Scholar.

45 Memorial of Lodge no. 222 to the GLI, 29 November 1854, Lodge no. 222 File, Deputy Grand Secretary's Correspondence Files, GLI Archives; Edward Brownwell to the GLI, 8 September 1856, Lodge no. 286 Files, Deputy Grand Secretary's Correspondence Files, GLI Archives.

46 Harington to the UGL, 9 November 1857, reprinted in UGL, Proceedings, 3 March 1858; Proceedings at a Special Communication of the Grand Lodge, Masonic Hall, Hamilton, 24 May 1860, to lay the cornerstone of the Hamilton Crystal Palace, Grand Lodge of Canada, Proceedings (1859); Grand Lodge of Quebec, Proceedings (Montreal, 1870), p. 33Google Scholar. For a subsequent Grand Master's expression of Canadian Masons' “perpetual alliance of fraternal amity” with the “British Mother Grand Lodges,” see Grand Lodge of Quebec, Proceedings (Montreal, 1880), p. 26Google Scholar.

47 Mackenzie, John M., “Empire and National Identities: The Case of Scotland,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 8 (1998): 221, 229CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and see also his “Essay and Reflection: On Scotland and the Empire,” International History Review 15 (1993): 661–880Google Scholar; Buckner, “Whatever Happened to the British Empire?” p. 32.

48 “State of Masonry in Ireland,” Freemasons' Quarterly Review (December 1846), p. 411. See also Smart, An Address Delivered before the Provincial Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Upper Canada.

49 John Grant (1840) quoted in “Freemasonry Vindicated: Being the Opinions of Illustrious Men and Eminent Scholars on Its Aims and End—Practice and Principle,” Masonic Herald (January 1871), p. 9; Rev. Woodward, Charles, Oration Delivered on the 10th of May 1849, at the Consecration of a Provincial Grand Lodge (Sydney, 1849), p. 11Google Scholar, UGL Pamphlet Collection, vol. 24.

50 Anderson's Constitutions. The wording is exactly the same in Constitution of the Ancient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons with the Charges of a Free Mason (Halifax, 1819)Google Scholar; Preston's Illustrations (originally published in 1772), quoted in Freemasons Magazine and Masonic Mirror 12, no. 298 (March 1865): 193Google Scholar.

51 Lepper, John Heron and Crossle, Philip, History of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Ireland, 2 vols. (Dublin, 1925), 1:423Google Scholar; Edge, J. H., “A Short Sketch of the Rise and Progress of Irish Freemasonry,” Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 26 (1913): 15Google Scholar; Crawley, Chetwode, “The Old Charges and the Papal Bulls,” Trans. Quatuor Coronati Lodge 24 (1911): 14Google Scholar; Parkinson, R. E., History of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons, 2 vols. (Dublin, 1957), 2:225Google Scholar. Lord Donoughmore, outspoken champion of Catholic rights in Ireland, led the Irish brotherhood from 1789 to 1813; GLI, Minutes, 5 July 1787 and 3 January 1793.

52 White to William Graham, 24 August 1819, Deputy Grand Secretary's Correspondence Files, GLI Archives. In 1836, the Grand Lodge of Ireland followed the lead of the English Grand Lodge and confirmed that Quakers and Jews were eligible for admission. GLI, Minutes, 7 January 1836; Parkinson, History of the Grand Lodge, p. 95.

53 UGL, Proceedings, 3 December 1845 and 3 June 1846. London lodges had admitted Jews during the eighteenth century. Pick, Fred L. and Knight, G. Norman, The Pocket History of Freemasonry (London, 1983), p. 89Google Scholar; Clarke, H. G. M., “Freemasonry and Religion,” in Grand Lodge 1717–1967, ed. Frere, A. S. (Oxford, 1967), p. 211Google Scholar.

54 Premier Grand Lodge of England, Proceedings, 12 November 1777, 2 February 1780, and 21 November 1792, UGL Archives.

55 Robertson, The History of Freemasonry in Canada, 1:688. After the war, Brant settled in the newly established colony of Upper Canada with his fellow loyalists and joined two Masonic lodges, the prominent Barton Lodge no. 10 at Hamilton and Lodge no. 11 in Mohawk Village, where he lived.

56 The main centers of Masonic activity in India during the early nineteenth century were Bengal and Bombay, but Lord Elphinstone's arrival as governor of Madras in 1837 caused an increase in Masonic activity in the south. The governor served as Provincial Grand Master from 1840 until 1852 (though in absentia from 1842). See Gupta, G. S., Freemasonic Movement in India (New Delhi, 1981), p. 10Google Scholar; and Elphinstone to Zetland, 2 July 1851, UGL HC file 19/B/10.

57 See Walker, G. E., “250 Years of Freemasonry in India,” Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 92 (1979): 177Google Scholar; Gupta, Freemasonic Movement in India, p. 7; “India,” Freemasons Quarterly Review (September 1840), p. 537.

58 Washbrook, D. A., “India, 1818–1860: The Two Faces of Colonialism,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 3, The Nineteenth Century, ed. Porter, Andrew (Oxford, 1999), pp. 395–421Google Scholar; Bose, Sugata and Jalal, Ayesha, Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy (London, 1998)Google Scholar; Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj, pp. 28–65.

59 “India,” Freemasons Quarterly Review (September 1840), p. 535. The Grand Lodge of Scotland extended Burnes's jurisdiction to include all of India in 1846. For brief sketches of Burnes, see Gupta, Freemasonic Movement in India, p. 12; and Walker, “250 Years,” p. 177.

60 For Cursetji's story, see Walker, “250 Years,” p. 178; Finan, A., History of the Grand Lodge of All Scottish Freemasonry in India, 1837–1924 (Bombay, 1928), pp. 37–38Google Scholar; Gupta, Freemasonic Movement in India, pp. 12–13; Musa, Fraser B., “The First Indian Freemason Rt. Wor. Bro. Manockjee Cursetjee,” Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, suppl., 81 (1968): 317–21Google Scholar. Cursetji was also the first Indian admitted to the Royal Asiatic Society in England (1835), and he established the Alexandra Girls' English Institution in Bombay in 1863.

61 Cursetji was elected master of the lodge in 1857. On the Parsis, see Luhrmann, T. M., The Good Parsi: The Fate of a Colonial Elite in a Postcolonial Society (Cambridge, 1996): pp. 84–125Google Scholar.

62 Grant to White, 30 November 1840, UGL HC file D/24; Grant to White, 17 April 1841, UGL HC file D/25, UGL Archives. See also Grant's speech at a Masonic banquet in Londonderry, 24 June 1850, in “Londonderry.—Masonic Banquet in the Freemasons' Hall,” Freemasons' Quarterly Magazine and Review (September 1850), pp. 416–17.

63 Edward Augustus to Grant, 2 July 1842, UGL HC file D/28, UGL Archives; Grant quoted in Walker, “250 Years,” p. 179.

64 English Masonry in Bombay also went into decline during the 1840s, and many of its members switched allegiance to Scottish Masonry. A Scottish Mason who wrote to the Freemasons' Quarterly Review in 1844 described the situation using the family metaphor: “Unnatural mothers will ever produce undutiful children; the Grand Lodge of England having proved herself an inattentive and disobliging guardian, a foster-mother has been found who will watch more carefully over her adoptive children.” Quoted in Walker, “250 Years,” p. 182.

65 District Grand Lodge of Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863.

66 Despite the reservations of Masonic leaders, some lodges had begun admitting Hindus. In Madras the Lodge of Perfect Unanimity admitted “a native gentleman,” a Hindu named Runganadum Sastry, in 1857. Other Hindus joined in the late 1850s and 1860s without attracting much notice. Malden, C., History of Freemasonry (under the English Constitution) on the Coast of Coromandel (Madras, 1895), p. 166Google Scholar. Other instances of Hindu admissions (including the Lodge of the Rock's welcoming of seventeen Hindus between 1863 and 1877) are recorded in Walker, “250 Years,” pp. 178, 182; Gupta, Freemasonic Movement in India, pp. 10–11; and Freemason's Magazine and Masonic Mirror (London) no. 62 (8 September 1860) and no. 67 (13 October 1860).

67 Brother Prosonno Coomar Dutt (n.d.), p. 6, UGL Pamphlet Collection, vol. 8, UGL Archives (hereafter cited as Dutt pamphlet); DGL Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863.

68 DGL Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863 and 5 November 1863; UGL, Proceedings, 6 June 1866.

69 DGL Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863 and 24 June 1865.

70 DGL of Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1863.

71 “Report of the President and Vice-President of the Colonial Board on the Eligibility of Parsees and Hindoos to Be Admitted to the Mysteries and Privileges of Freemasonry,” 2 August 1864, in UGL, Proceedings, June 1864 (hereafter cited as Report of the Colonial Board); Duke of Leinster to Dutt, 1 November 1869; Earl of Minto to Dutt, 24 February 1869, in Dutt pamphlet, pp. 10–11.

72 Statistics compiled from lodge reports in the Standard 1, no. 6 (September 1876), and the Standard 2, no. 1 (January 1877), p. 4. Lodge members included judges, lawyers, doctors, engineers, and merchants.

73 To be sure, they posited that members of that family displayed varying levels of civilization and could be placed on a scale that ranged from savagery to barbarism to the pinnacle of human development: European civilization. But, believing in the idea of a universal human family (“monogenesis”), they argued that lower civilizations could, if their unfavorable environments were improved, rise along the “scale of civilization.” See Schlereth, Thomas J., The Cosmopolitan Ideal in Enlightenment Thought: Its Form and Function in the Ideas of Franklin, Hume, and Voltaire, 1694–1790 (Notre Dame, Ind., 1977), pp. 34–36Google Scholar; Marshall, P. J. and Williams, Glyndwr, The Great Map of Mankind: Perceptions of New Worlds in the Age of Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 136, 244–46Google Scholar; Ronald Hyam, Britain's Imperial Century, pp. 74–77; Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj, pp. 5–6, 28–34; and Pagden, Anthony, Peoples and Empires: A Short History of European Migration, Exploration and Conquest from Greece to the Present (New York, 2001), pp. 138–40Google Scholar.

74 On Social Darwinism and racialism, see Bolt, Christine, Victorian Attitudes toward Race (London, 1971)Google Scholar; and Lorimer, Douglas, Colour, Class and the Victorians: English Attitudes to the Negro in the Mid–Nineteenth Century (Leicester, 1978)Google Scholar. For a discussion of the connection between Social Darwinism and the metaphor of the family, see McClintock, “Family Feuds,” p. 63.

75 Metcalf, Thomas, The Aftermath of Revolt: India, 1857–1870 (Princeton, N.J., 1964), pp. 289–93Google Scholar; Bank, Andrew, “Losing Faith in the Civilizing Mission: The Premature Decline of Humanitarian Liberalism at the Cape, 1840–1860,” in Empire and Others: British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600–1850, ed. Daunton, Martin and Halpern, Rick (Philadelphia, 1999), pp. 364–66Google Scholar; Pagden, Peoples and Empires, pp. 140–44; Porter, ed., The Nineteenth Century, 3:22–24.

76 Hall, Catherine, “Imperial Man: Edward Eyre in Australasia and the West Indies, 1833–1866,” in The Expansion of England: Race, Ethnicity and Cultural History, ed. Schwarz, Bill (London, 1996), p. 132Google Scholar.

77 DGL of Bengal, Proceedings, 24 June 1865; Annual Report of the GLASFI, p. 55.

78 Hall, “Imperial Man,” p. 156; Hyam, Britain's Imperial Century, p. 76; Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj, pp. x, 59, 66–112.

79 Rev. D. C. Moore, sermon on brotherly love during the installation ceremony for the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Nova Scotia, 24 June 1869, Grand Lodge of Nova Scotia, Proceedings (Halifax, 1869), p. 80Google Scholar; “What Is the Mission of Masonry?” Masonic Herald 1 (August 1871): 130–32Google Scholar. See also DGL, Eastern Archipelago, Ceremony of Laying the Foundation Stone of the Clyde Terrace Market, at Singapore, the 29th Day of March, 1873 (Singapore, 1873), pp. 18–19Google Scholar.

80 Cannadine, Ornamentalism, p. xix.

81 Ibid., p. 46.

82 “Ceremony of Laying the Foundation-Stone of the Prince's Dock, Bombay, with Masonic Honours, by HRH Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, on Thursday, 11th November, 1875,” in DGL of Bombay, Proceedings, 11 November 1875.

83 DGL of Bengal, Proceedings, 24 June 1875, 27 December 1875 and 21 March 1875 (Calcutta, 1875–76); DGL of Madras, Proceedings, 11 December 1875, and 5 February 1876 (Madras, 1875–76).

84 Report on the Quarterly Communication of the GLASFI, 22 January 1876, in Standard 1 (April 1876): 6–7; “The Grand Master of England in India,” Craftsman and Canadian Masonic Record 10, no. 4 (April 1, 1876): 147–48Google Scholar; Report on the Quarterly Communication of the GLASFI, 24 July 1875, in Masonic Herald 5 (October 1875): 195.

85 DGL of Bengal, Proceedings, 22 September 1866; Report of the Colonial Board.

86 See Bose and Jalal, Modern South Asia, pp. 103–5; Thomas R. Metcalf, The Aftermath of Revolt, pp. 219–48; and Gopal, Sarvepalli, British Policy in India, 1858–1905 (Cambridge, 1965): pp. 8–15, 34–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On imperial collaboration more generally, see Robinson, Ronald, “Non-European Foundations of European Imperialism: Sketch for a Theory of Collaboration,” in Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, ed. Owen, Roger and Sutcliffe, Bob (London, 1972)Google Scholar; and Porter, Bernard, The Lion's Share: A Short History of British Imperialism, 1850–1983 (London, 1984), pp. 27–47Google Scholar. None of these studies mentions the role of cultural institutions like Freemasonry in the process of gaining collaborators.

87 Mehta, Uday Singh, Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought (Chicago, 1999)Google Scholar, introduction and chap. 1. See also McClintock, “Family Feuds,” p. 64.

88 Metcalf, Ideologies of the Raj, p. 66.

89 Cannadine, Ornamentalism, p. 10.

90 Both Kharshedji Rustamji Cama and Jivanji Jamshedji Modi, e.g., published works on the connection between the ancient history of Freemasonry and Zoroastrianism.

91 A perusal of any of the late-nineteenth-century Masonic periodicals being published in Indian cities reveals indigenous members' widespread participation in Masonic banquets and processions.

92 Wadia, The Poetry of Freemasonry, p. 20. Wadia was a former master of Lodge no. 506 and a Past Substitute Grand Master of Scottish Freemasonry in India.

93 Cama, K. R., A Discourse of Freemasonry among the Natives of Bombay (Bombay, 1877), pp. 6–7Google Scholar. Cama was an outspoken Bombay Freemason and officer in the Lodge Rising Star of Western India no. 342.

94 Ghose, P. C., “What Is Freemasonry,” in The K. R. Cama Masonic Jubilee Volume, ed. Modi, J. J. (Bombay, 1907), p. 41Google Scholar. Ghose was a former master of Lodge Caledonia no. 661 in Meerut and an officer in the GLASFI.

95 Chakrabarty, Dipesh, Provincializing Europe (Princeton, N.J., 2000), p. 8Google Scholar.

96 Cama, A Discourse of Freemasonry among the Natives of Bombay, p. 5.