ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FREEMASONRY AND ITS KINDRED SCIENCES
by ALBERT C. MACKEY M. D. grand lodge

N

The Hebrew letter is the fourteenth letter in the English and Hebrew alphabets; its numerical value is 50, and its definition, fish. As a final, Nun is written 1, and then is of the value of 700. The Hebrew Divine appellation is Formidabilis.

NAAMAH.

The daughter of Lamech and sister of Tubal-cain (see Genesis iv, 18-24, and 99, which have been read as meaning two different persons but now usually understood as of the same list). To her the Legend of the Craft attributes the invention of the art of weaving, and she is united with her three brothers, by the same legend, in the task of inscribing the several sciences on two pillars, that the knowledge of them might be preserved after the Flood.

NABAIM

See Schools of the Prophets

NAHARDA,BROTHERHOOD OF

After the destruction of the Solomonial Temple, the captives formed an association while slaves at Naharda, on the Euphrates, and are there said to have preserved the secret mysteries.

NAKED

In Scriptural symbology, nakedness denoted sin, and dothing, protection. But the symbolism of Freemasonry on this subject is different. There, to be “neither naked nor clothed” is to make no claim through worldly wealth or honors to preferment in Freemasonry, where nothing but internal merit, which is unaffected by the outward appearance of the body, is a recommendation for admission.

NAME OF GOD

A reverential allusion to the name of God, in some especial and peculiar form, is to be found in the doctrines and ceremonies of almost all nations. This ineffable or unutterable name was respected by the Jews under the sacred form of the word Jehovah. Among the Druids, the three letters I. O. W. constituted the name of Deity. They were never pronounced, says Giraldus Cambrensis, but another and less sacred name was substituted for them. Each letter was a name in itself. The first is the Word, at the utterance of which in the beginning the world burst into existence; the second is the Word, whose sound still continues, and by which all things remain in existence; the third is the Word, by the utterance of which all things will be consummated in happiness, forever approaching to the immediate presence of the Deity. The analogy between this and the past, press ent and future significations contained in the Jewish Tetragrammaton will be evident

Among the Mohammedans there is a science called Ism Allah, or the science of the name of God. “They pretend,” says Niebuhr, “that God is the loclc of this science, and Mohammed the key; that, consequently, none but Mohammedans can attain it; that it discovers what passes in different countries; that it familiarizes the possessors with the genii, who are at the command of the initiated, and who instruct them; that it places the winds and the seasons at their disposal, and heals the bites of serpents, the lame, the maimed, and the blind.”

In the chapter of the Koran en titled Araaf, it is written: “God has many excellent names. Invoke him by these names, and separate your selves from them who give him false names.” The Mohammedans believe that God has ninety-nine names, which, with that of Allah, makes one hundred; and, therefore, their chaplets or rosaries are composed of one hundred beads, at each of which they invoke one of these names; and there is a tradition, that whoever frequently makes this invocation will find the gates of Paradise open to him. With them Allah is the Ism al adhem, the Great Name, and they bestow upon it all the miraculous virtues which the Jews give to the Tetragrammaton.

This, they say, is the name that was engraven on the stone which Japheth gave to his children to bring down rain from heaven; and it was by virtue of this name that Noah made the ark float on the waters, and governed it at will, without the aid of oars or rudder. Among the Hindus there was the same veneration of the name of God, as is evinced in their treatment of the mystical name Aum. The “Institutes of Menu” continually refer to the peculiar efficacy of this word, of which it is said, “All rites ordained in the Veda oblations to fire, and solemn sacrifices pass away; but that which passes not away is the syllable Aum, thence called aishara, since it is a symbol of God, the Lord of created beings.”

There was in every ancient nation a sacred name given to the highest god of its religious faith, besides the epithets of the other and subordinate deities.

The old Aryans, the founders of our race, called their chief god Dyaus, and in the Vedas we have the invocation to Dyaus Pitar, which is the same as the Greek Zev cramp, and the Latin, Jupiter, all meaning the Heaven-Father, and at once reminding us of the Christian invocation to “Our Father which art in heaven.”

There is one incident in the Hindu mythology which shows how much the old Indian heart yearned after this expression of the nature of Deity bv a name.

There was a nameless god, to whom, as the “source of golden light,” there was a worship. This is expressed in one of the Veda hymns, where the invocation in every stanza closes with the exclamation, “Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?”

Nor, says Bunsen (God in History i, 302), “the Brahmanic expositors must needs find in every hvmn the name of a god who is invoked in it, and so, in this case. their have actually invented a grammatical divinity the god Who.” What more pregnant testimony could we have of the tendency of man to seek a knowledge of the Divine nature in the expression of a name?

The Assyrians worshiped Assur, or Asarac, as their chief god. On an obelisk, taken from the palace of Nimrod, we find the inscription, “to Asarac, the Great Lord, the King of all the great gods.”

Of the veneration of the Egyptians for the name of their supreme god, we have a striking evidence in the writings of Herodotus, the Father of History, as he has been called, who, during a visit to Egypt. was initiated into the Osirian mysteries. Speaking of these initiations he says (book u, chapter 171), “the Egyptians represent by night his sufferings, whose name I refrain from mentioning.” It was no more lawful among the Egyptians than it was among the Jews, to give utterance aloud to that Holy Name.

At Byblos the Phenicians worshiped Eliun, the Most High God. From him was descended El, whom Philo identifies with Saturn, and to whom he traces the Hebrew Elohim. Of this El, Max Muller says that there was undeniably a primitive religion of the whole Semitic race, and that the Strong One in Heaven was invoked under this name by the ancestors of the Semitic races, before there were Babylonians in Babylonia, Phenicians in Sidon and Tyre, or Jews in Mesopotamia and Jerusalem. If so, then the Mosaic adoption of Jehovah, with its more precise teaching of the Divine essence, was a step in the progress to the knowledge of the Divine Truth. In China there is an infinite variety of names of elemental powers, and even of ancestral spirits, who b are worshiped as subordinate deities; but the ineffable name is Tien, compounded of the two signs for great and one, and which, the Imperial Dictionary tells us, signifies “The Great One—He that dwells on high, and regulates all below.”

Drummond (Origines) claimed that Abaur was the name of the Supreme Deity among the ancient Chaldeans. It is evidently the Hebrew signifies “The Father of Light.” The Scandinavians had twelve subordinate gods, but their chief or supreme deity was Al-Fathr, or the All Father.

Even among the Red Men of America we find the idea of an invisible deity, whose name was to be venerated. Garcilasso de la Vega tells us that while the Peruvians paid public worship to the sun, it was but as a symbol of the Supreme Being, whom they called, Pachacamac, a word meaning the soul of the world, and which was so sacred that it was spoken only with extreme dread.

The Jews had, besides the Tetragrammaton or fourlettered name, two others: one consisting of twelve and the other of forty-two letters. But Maimonides, in his More Nevochim (part i, elxii), remarks that it is impossible to suppose that either of these constituted a single name, but that each must have been composed of several words, which must, however, have heen significant in making man approximate to a knowledge of the true essence of God. The Cabalistical book called the Sohar confirms this when it tells us that there are ten names of God mentioned in the Bible, and that when these ten names are combined into one word, the number of the letters amounts to forty-two.

But the Talmudists, although they did not throw around the forty-two-lettered name the sanctity of the Tetragrammaton, prescribed that it should be communicated only to men of middle age and of virtuous habits, and that its knowledge would confirm the n as heirs of the future as well as the present life. The twelve-lettered name, although once common, became afterward occult; and when, on the death of Simon I, the priests ceased to use the Tetragrammaton, they were accustomed to bless the people with the name of twelve letters. Maimonides very wisely rejects the idea that any power was derived from these letters or their pronunciation, and claims that the only virtue of the names consisted in the holy ideas expressed by the words of which they were composed.

The following are the ten Cabalistic names of God, corresponding to the ten Sephiroth:

1. Eheyeh

2. Jah

3. Jehovah

4. E1

5. Eloah

6. Elohim

7. Jehovah Sabaoth

8. Elohim Sabaoth

9. Elhi

10. Adonai

Lanzi extends his list of names to twenty-six, which, with their signification, are as follows:

At. Aleph and Tau, that is, Alpha and Omega. .A name figurative of the Tetragrammaton.

Ihoh. Eternal, absolute principle of creation.

Hoh. Destruction. the male and female principle, the author and regulator of time and motion.

Jah. Lord and remunerator.

Oh. Severer and punisher.

Jao. Author of life.

Azazel. Author of death.

Jao-Sabaoth. God of the co-ordinations of loves and hatreds. Lord of the solstices and the equinoxes.

Ehie. The Being, the Ens.

El. The First Cause. The principle or beginning of all things.

Elo-hi. The Good Principle.

Elo-ho. The Evil Principle.

El-raccum. The Succoring Principle.

El-cannum. The Abhoring Principle.

Ell. The Most Luminous.

II . The Omnipotent.

Ellohim. The Omnipotent and Beneficent.

Elohim. The Most Beneficent.

Elo. The Sovereign, the Excelsus.

Adon. The Lord, the Dominator.

Etoi. The Illuminator, the Most Effulgent.

Adonai. The Most Firm, the Strongest.

Elion. The Most Sigh.

Shaddai. The Most Victorious.

Yeshurun. The Most Generous.

Noil. The Most Sublime.

Like the Mohammedan Ism Allah, Freemasonry presents us as its most important feature with this science of the names of God. But here it elevates itself above Talmudical and Rabbinical reveries, and becomes a symbol of Divine Truth. The names of God were undoubtedly intended originally to be a means of communicating the knowledge of God himself. The name was, from its construction and its literal powers, used to give some idea, however scanty, in early times, of the true nature and essence of the Deity. The Ineffable Name was the symbol of the unutterable sublimity and perfection of truth which emanate from the Supreme God, while the subordinate names were symbols of the subordinate manifestations of truth. Freemasonry has availed itself of this system, and, in its reverence for the Divine Name, indicates its desire to attain to that truth as the ultimate object of all its labor. The significant words of the Masonic system, which describe the names of God wherever they are found, are not intended merely as words of recognition, but as indices, pointing—like the Symbolic Ladder of Jacob of the First Degree, or the Winding Stairs of the Second, or the Three Gates of the Third—the way of progress from darkness to light, from ignorance to knowledge, from the lowest to the highest conceptions of Divine Truth. And this is, after all, the real object of all Masonic science.

NAMES OF LODGES

The precedency of Lodges does not depend on their names, but on their numbers The rule declaring that “the precedency of Lodges is grounded on the seniority of their Constitution” was adopted on the 27th of December, 1727 (Constitutions, 1738, page 154). The number of the Lodge, therefore, by which its precedency is established, is always to be given by the Grand Lodge. In England, Lodges do not appear to have received distinctive names before the latter part of the eighteenth century. Up to that period the Lodges were distinguished simply by their numbers. Thus, in the first edition of the Book of Constitutions, published in 1723, we find a list of twenty Lodges, registered by their numbers, from No. 1 to No. 20, inclusive. Subsequently, they were further designated by the name of the tavern at which they held their meetings. Thus, in the second edition of the same work, published in 1738, we meet with a list of one hundred and six Lodges, designated sometimes, singularly enough, as Lodge No. 6, at the Rummer Tavern, in Queen Street; No. 84, at the Black Dog, in Castle Street; or No. 98. at the Bacchus Tavern, in Little Bush Lane. With such names and localities, we are not to wonder that the “three small glasses of punch,” of which Doctor Oliver so feelingly speaks in his Book of the Lodge, were duly appreciated; nor, as he admits, that “there were some Brethren who displayed an anxiety to have the allowance increased.” In 1766 we read of four Lodges that were erased from the Register, under the similar designations of the Globe, Fleet Street; the Red Cross Inn, Southwark; No. 85, at the George, Ironmongers’ Lane and the Mercers Arms, Mercers Street. To only one of these, it will be perceived, was a number annexed. The name and locality of the tavern was presumed to be a sufficient distinction. It was not until about the close of the eighteenth century, as has been already observed, that we find distinctive names beginning to be given to the Lodges; for in 1793 we hear of the Shakespear Lodge, at Stratford-on-Avon; the Royal Brunswick, at Sheffield; and the Lodge of Apollo, at Alcester. From that time it became a usage among our English Brethren, from which they have never since departed.

But a better taste began to prevail at a much earlier period in Scotland, as well as in Continental and Colonial Lodges. In Scotland, especially, distinctive names appear to have been used from a very early period, for in the very old Charter granting the office of Hereditary Grand disasters to the Barons of Rosslyn of which the date cannot be more recent than 1600, we find among the signatures the names of the officers of the Lodge of Dunfermline and the Lodge of Saint Andrew’s. Among the names in the list of the Scotch Lodges, in 1736 are those of Saint Mary’s Chapel, Kilwinning, Aberdeen, etc. These names were undoubtedly borrowed from localities; but in 1763, while the English Lodges were still content with their numerical arrangement only we find in Edinburgh such designations as Saint Luke’s, Saint Giles’s, and Saint David’s Lodges.

The Lodges on the Continent, it is true, at first adopted the English method of borrowing a tavern sign for their appellation; whence we find the Lodge at the Golden Lion, in Holland, in 1734, and before that the Lodge at Nure’s Tavern, in Paris, in 1725. But they soon abandoned this inefficient and inelegant mode of nomenclature; and accordingly, in 1739, a Lodge was organized in Switzerland under the appropriate name of Stranger’s Perfect Union. Tasteful names, more or less significant, began thenceforth to be adopted by the Continental Lodges. Among them we may meet with the Lodge of the Three Globes, at Berlin, in 1740; the Minava Lodge, at Leipsic, in 1741; Absalom Lodge, at Hamburg, in 1742; Saint George’s Lodge, at the same place, in 1743; the Lodge of the Crowned Column, at Brunswick, in 1745; and an abundance of others, all with distinctive names, selected sometimes with much and sometimes with but little taste. But the worst of them was undoubtedly better than the Lodge at the Goose and Gridiron, which met in London in 1717.

In the Colonies of America, from the very first introduction of Freemasonry into the western world, significant names were selected for the Lodges; and hence we have, in 1734, Saint John’s Lodge, at Boston; a Solomon’s Lodge, in 1735, at both Charleston and Savannah; and a Union Kilwinning, in 1754, at the former place.

This brief historical digression will serve as an examination of the rules which should govern all founders in the choice of Lodge names. The first and most important rule is that the name of a Lodge should be technically significant; that is, it must allude to some Masonic fact or characteristic; in other words, there must be something Masonic about it. Under this rule, all names derived from obscure or un-masonic localities should be reflected as unmeaning and inappropriate. Doctor Oliver, it is true, thinks otherwise, and says that “the name of a hundred, or wahpentake, in which the Lodge is situated, or of a navigable river, which confers wealth and dignity on the town, are proper titles for a Lodge.” But a name should always convey an idea, and there can be conceived no idea worth treasuring in a Freemason’s mind to be deduced from bestowing such names as New York, Philadelphia, or Baltimore, on a Lodge. The selection of such a name shows but little originality in the chooser; and, besides, if there be two Lodges in a town, each is equally entitled to the appellation; and if there be but one, the appropriation of it would seem to indicate an intention to have no competition in the future.

Yet, barren of Masonic meaning as are such geographical names, the adoption of them is one of the most common faults in American Masonic nomenclature. The examination of a very few old Registers, taken at random, will readily evince this fact. Thus, eighty-eight, out of one hundred and sixty Lodges in Wisconsin, were named after towns or counties; of four hundred and thirty-seven Lodges in Indiana, two hundred and fifty-one have names derived from the same source; geographical names were found in one hundred and eighty-one out of four hundred and three Lodges in Ohio, and in twenty out of thirty-eight in Oregon. But, to compensate for this, we had seventy-one Lodges in View Hampshire, and only two local geographical appellations in the list. There are, however, some geographical names which are admissible, and, indeed, are highly appropriate These are the names of places celebrated as Masonic history. Such titles for Lodges as Jerusalem, Tyre, Lebanon and Joppa are unexceptionable. Patmos. which is the name of a Lodge in Maryland, seems. as the long residence of one of the Patrons of the Order. to be unobjectionable.

So, too, Bethel, because it signifies the House of God; Mount Moriah, the site of the ancient Temple; Calvary, the small hill on which the sprig of acacia was found; Mount Ararat, where the ark of our father Noah rested; Ophir, whence Solomon brought the gold and precious stones with which he adorned the Temple; Tadmor, because it was a city built by King Solomon; and Salem and Jebus, because they are synonyms of Jerusalem, and because the latter is especially concerned with Ornan the Jebusite, on whose threshing-floor the Temple was subsequently built—are all excellent and appropriate names for Lodges. But all Scriptural names are not equally admissible- Cabul, for instance, must be rejected, because it was the subject of contention between Solomon and Hiram of Tyre; and Babylon, because it was the place where “language was confounded and Freemasonry lost,” and the scene of the subsequent captivity of our ancient Brethren; Jericho, because it was under a curse; and Misgab and Tophet, because they were places of idol worship. In short, it may be adopted as a rule, that no name should be adopted whose antecedents are in opposition to the principles of Freemasonry.

The ancient patrons and worthies of Freemasonry furnish a very fertile source of Masonic nomenclature, and have been very liberally used in the selection of names of Lodges. Among the most important may be mentioned Saint John, Salomon, Hiram, King David, Adoniram, Enoch, Archimedes, and Pythagoras. The Widow’s Son Lodge, of which there are several instances in the United States, is an affecting and significant title, which can hardly be too often used. Recourse is also to be had to the names of moderate distinguished men who have honored the Institution by their adherence to it, or who, by their learning in Freemasonry, and by their services to the Order, have merited some marks of approbation. And hence we meet, in England, as the names of Lodges, with Susser, Moira, Frederick, Zetland, and Robert Burns; and in the United States with Washington, Lafayette, Clinton, Franklin, and Clay. Care must, however, be taken that no name be selected except of one who was both a Freemason and had distinguished himself, either by services to his country, to the world, or to the Order. Brother Oliver says that “the most appropriate titles are those which are assumed from the name of some ancient benefactor or meritorious individual who was a native of the place where the Lodge is held; as, in a city, the builder of the cathedral church.”

In the United States we are, it is true, precluded from a selection from such a source; but there are to be found some of those old benefactors of Freemasonry, who, like Shakespeare and Milton, or Homer and Virgil, have ceased to belong to any particular country and have now become the common property of the world-wide Craft. There are, for instance Carausius, the first Royal Patron of Freemasonry in England; and Saint Alban, the first Grand Master; and Athelstan and Prince Edwin, both active encouragers of the art in the same kingdom. There are Wykeham, Gundulph, Giffard, Langham, Yevele (called, in the old records the King’s Freemason), and Chicheley, Jermyn, and Wren, all long celebrated as illustrious Grand Masters of England, each of whom would be well entitled to the honor of giving name to a Lodge, and any one of whom would be better, more euphonious, and more spirit-stirring than the unmeaning, and oftentimes crabbed, name of some obscure village or post-office, from which too many of our Lodges derive their titles.

And, then, again, among the great benefactors to Masonic literature and laborers in Masonic science there are such names as Anderson, Dunckerley, Preston, Hutchinson, Town, Webb, and a host of others, who, though dead, still live by their writings in our memories. The virtues and tenets—the inculcation and practice of which constitute an important part of the Masonic system—form very excellent and appropriate names for Lodges, and have always been popular among correct Masonic nomenclatures. Thus we everywhere find such names as Charity, Concord, Equality, Faith, Fellowship, Harmony, Hope, Humility, Mystic Tie, Relief, Truth, Union, and Virtue. Frequently, by a transposition of the word Lodge and the distinctive appellation, with the interposition of the preposition of, a more sonorous and emphatic name is given by our English and European Brethren, although the custom is but rarely followed in the United States. Thus we have by this method the Lodge of Regularity, the Lodge of Fidelity, the Lodge of Industry, and the Lodge of Prudent Brethren, in England; and in France, the Lodge of Benevolent Friends, the Lodge of Perfect Union, the Lodge of the Friends of Peace, and the celebrated Lodge of the Nine Sisters.

As the names of illustrious men will sometimes stimulate the members of the Lodges which bear them to an emulation of their characters, so the names of the Masonic virtues may serve to incite the Brethren to their practice, lest the inconsistency of their names and their conduct should excite the ridicule of the world.

Another fertile and appropriate source of names for Lodges is to be found in the symbols and implements of the Order. Hence, we frequently meet with such titles as Level, Trowel, Rising Star, Rising Sun, Olive Branch, Evergreen, Doric, Corinthian, Delta, and Corner-Stone Lodges. Acacia is one of the most common, and at the same time one of the most beautiful, of these symbolic names; but unfortunately, through gross ignorance, it is often corrupted into Cassia—an insignificant plant, which has no Masonic or symbolic meaning.

An important rule in the nomenclature of Lodges, and one which must at once recommend itself to every person of taste, is that the name should be euphonious, agreeable sounding. This principle of euphony has been too little attended to in the selection of even geographical names in the United States, where names with impracticable sounds, or with ludicrous associations, are often affixed to our towns and rivers. Speaking of a certain island, with the unpronounceable name of Srh, Lieber says, “If Homer himself were born on such an island, it could not become immortal,-for the best-disposed scholar would be unable to remember the name”; and he thinks that it was no trifling obstacle to the fame of many Polish heroes in the Revolution of that country, that they had names which left upon the mind of foreigners no effect but that of utter confusion. An error like this must be avoided in bestowing a name upon a Lodge. The word selected should be soft, vocal—not too long nor too short—and, above all, be accompanied in its sound or meaning by no low, indecorous, or ludicrous association. For this reason such names of Lodges should be rejected as Sheboygan and Oconomowoc from the Registry of Wisconsin, because of the uncouthness of the sound; and Rough and Ready and Indian Diggings from that of California, on account of the ludicrous associations which these names convey. Again, Pythagoras Lodge is preferable to Pythagorean, and Archimedes is better than Archimedean, because the noun is more euphonious and more easily pronounced than the adjective. But this rule is difficult to illustrate or enforce; for, after all, this thing of euphony is a mere matter of taste, and we all know the adage, “De gustibus non est disputandum,” there is no disputing about tastes.

A few negative rules, which are, however, easily deduced from the affirmative ones already given, will complete the topic. No name of a Lodge should be adopted which is not, in some reputable way, connected with Freemasonry Everybody will acknowledge that Morgan Lodge would be an anomaly, and that Cowan Lodge, would, if possible, be worse. But there are some names which, although not quite as bad as these, are on principle equally as objectionable. Why should any of our Lodges, for instance, assume, as many of them have, the names of Madison, Jefferson, or Taylor, since none of these distinguished men were Freemasons or Patrons of the Craft. The indiscriminate use of the names of saints unconnected with Freemasonry is for a similar reason objectionable. Beside our Patrons, Saint John the Baptist and Saint John the Evangelist, but three other saints can lay any claims to Masonic honors, and these are Saint Alban, who introduced, or is said to have introduced, the Order into England, and has been liberally complimented in the nomenclature of Lodges; and Saint Swithin, who was at the head of the Craft in the reign of Ethelwolf; and Saint Benedict, who was the founder of the Masonic Fraternity of Bridge Builders. But Saint Mark, Saint Luke, Saint Andrew all of whom have given names to numerous Lodges, can have no pretensions to assist as sponsors in these Masonic baptisms, since they were not at all connected with the Craft.

To the Indian names of Lodges there is a radical objection. It is true that their names are often very euphonious and always significant, for the Red Men of the American Continent are tasteful and ingenious in their selection of names—much more so, indeed, than the whites, who borrow from them; but their significance has nothing to do with Freemasonry.

What has been said of Lodges may with equal propriety be said, mutatis mutandis, the necessary changes having been made, of Chapters, Councils, and Commanderies.

We may supplement what Doctor Mackey says here with a few allusions to peculiar names of Lodges Gaelic Lodge of Glasgow, Scotland, has the peculiarity that once a year the Brethren confer a Degree in that quaint old Celtic language of the Scotch. America Lodge of London, England comprises exclusively only those who were born in the United States. There is a Lodge of lawyers at Belfast. Ireland which bears the significant name of the Lodge of Good Counsel. A Lodge at London comprises a membership keenly interested in the improvement of the condition of the blind, and the name of their Lodge, Lux in Tenebris, or Light Among Shadows has a meaning that touches the heart.

Titles of many foreign Lodges have a peculiar significance as they exhibit a tendency to group Brethren of certain professions and pursuits. The London Hospital Lodge, the Middlesex Hospital Lodge and the City of London Red Cross Lodge are particularly significant names and several of the leading clubs, permanent schools, societies of musicians, of architects, of chartered accountants, the London School Board as well as engineers and various other professional organizations have Lodges bearing the names of these institutions. The Telephone Lodge has an expressive title, and one might suspect that the Sanitarian and Hygeia Lodges have to do with public health, and that is correct. Aquarius Lodge recruits its members from Brethren connected with the London Water Works, Aguartus being indeed the “water bearer.” The Brethren of Evening Star Lodge are concerned with the lighting of London. We Visited a Lodge at London whose members were all lawyers and all engineers; they were certified members of the Institution of Patent Agents and the name of their Lodge was Invention. Hortus Lodge comprises Brethren who are merchants or growers of flowers, hortus being the Latin word for garden.

NAMUR

A city of Belgium, where the Primitive Scottish Rite was first established; hence sometimes called the Rite of Namur.

NAOS

The ark of the Egyptian gods. A chest or structure with more height than depth, and thereby unlike the Israelites Ark of the Covenant. The winged figures embraced the lower part of the Naos, while the cherubim of the Ark of Yahveh were placed above its lid. Yahveh took up His abode above the propitiatory or covering between the wings of the cherubim, exteriorly, while the gods of Egypt were reputed as hidden in the interior of the Naos of the sacred barks, behind hermetically closed doors (see Cherubim).

NAPHTALI

The territory of the tribe of Naphtali adjoined, on its western border, to Phenicia, and there must, therefore, have been frequent and easy communication between the Phenicians and the Naphtalites, resulting sometimes in intermarriage. This will explain the fact that Hiram the Builder was the son of a widow of Naphtali and a man of Tyre.

NAPLES

Freemasonry must have been practiced in Naples before 1751, for in that year Ring Charles issued an Edict forbidding it in his dominions. The author of Anti-Saint Nicaise says that there was a Grand Lodge at Naples, in 1756, which was in correspondence with the Lodges of Germany. But its meetings were suspended by a royal Edict in September, 1775. In 1777 this Edict was repealed at the instigation of the Queen, and Freemasonry was again tolerated. This toleration lasted, however, only for a brief period. In 1781 Ferdinand IV renewed the Edict of Suppression, and from that time until the end of the century Freemasonry was subjected in Italy to the combined persecutions of the Church and State, and the Freemasons of Naples met only in secret. In 1793, after the French Revolution, many Lodges were openly organized.

A Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite was established on the 11th of June 1809 of which King Joachim elected Grand Master, and the Grand Orient of Naples on the 24th of the same month. The fact that the Grand Orient worked according to the French Rite, and the Supreme Council according to the Scottish, caused dissensions between the two Bodies, which, however, were finally healed. And on the 23d of May, 1811, a Concordat was established between the Supreme Council and the Grand Orient, by which the latter took the supervision of the Degrees up to the Eighteenth, and the former of those from the Eighteenth to the Thirty-third. In October, 1812, Wing Joachim accepted the presidency of the Supreme Council as its Grand Commander. Both Bodies became extinct in 1815, on the accession of the Bourbons.

NAPOLEON I

It has been claimed, and with much just reason, as shown in his course of life, that Napoleon the Great was a member of the Brotherhood. Brother J. E. S. Tuckett, Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge (volume xxvii, pages 96 to 141, 1914), arrives at the following conclusions: The evidence in favor of a Masonic initiation previous to Napoleon’s assumption of the imperial title is overwhelming:

The initiation took place in the body of an Army Philadelphe Lodge of the—Ecossais—Primitive Rite of Narbonne, the third initiation of the ” Note Communique” being an advancement in that Rite; These initiations took place between 1795 and 1798.

Brother David E. W. Williamson sends us a reference of value here: In his Notes pour servir a Histoire de la Franc-Maçonnerie a Nancy jusqu’en 1805, M. Charles Bernardin, P. M. of the Lodge at Nancy, writing about 1910, says “3e Décembre (1797) on place la visite du general Bonaparte a la loge de Nancy.” If this visit by hirn as a Freemason is a fact we can limit to a narrow range the probable time when Bonaparte was initiated and thus support the claim of Brother Tuckett.

Brother Tuckett’s evidence is summed up thus: In 1801, that is, fully two years before Napoleon became Emperor, a prominent Ecossais, Brother Abraham, writes of the Masonic order “as proud now to number the immemorial Brothers Bonaparte and Moreau among its members.” The Official report of a Masonic Festival at Dijon in November of the same year described Masonic honors paid to Napoleon and refers to ” Les DD.. et RR.. FF.. Buonaparte et Moreau.” Another official report of a similar Festival at Montauban eleven days later describes Masonic honors paid to Napoleon and Moreau, and in the Toast List their names occur with essentially Masonic embellishments. Moreau became head of the Army Philadelphes in 1801. The Strassburg Lodge is said to have toasted Napoleon as a Freemason. The wording of the toast shows that this was before Napoleon became Emperor. At the same period a Philadelphe Lodge, probably of the Army Branch, did exist at Strassburg. In 1805, or early 1806, an eminent Brother Pyron, then, or a few months later, a Philadelphe, writing to another eminent Brother Eques, chief of the Philadelphes, claims Napoleon as brother of our Rite.” Rite referred to possibly Philadelphe, certainly an Ecossais Rite.

In March, 1807, at Milan, in a Lodge named in honor of the Empress, the mother of the Viceroy, Grand Master at Milan, Napoleon is toasted as “Brother, Emperor and King, Protector.” In 1816 appears a book of Confesses de Napoleon with an engraving representing the reception of Bonaparte by the llluminsti. In 1820, and again in 1827, an unknown writer says, “It is certain that Napoleon underwent three initiations.” The first, 1795, the reception by the Francs- Juges-query, Illuminati ? The second, from description evidently an Ecossais initiation, is placed between March, 1796, and June, 1798. The third, a Philadelphe, more probably of the Army Branch initiation at Cairo. In the same volume Napoleon is made to say that he had been initiated into a “Secte des Egyptien.s.” In 1829 the Abeille Masonnique, and in 1830 Clavel, state that Napoleon visited Lodges in Paris incognito, unknown. From 1829 onwards a number of writers repeat that Napoleon was initiated at Malta in 1798. In 1859 a correspondent of the Freemasons Magazine claims to have known a French Brother who professed to have met Napoleon as a Freemason in open Lodge.

Frost in his Secret Societies of the European Resolutions London, 1876 (volume i, page 146), quoted Nodier’s authority for the statement that “the Emblem ” of the Army Philadelphes was identical with that adopted for the Legion of Honor. The Insignia chosen for the Legion consisted of a white enameled five-rayed star bearing the portrait of Napoleon and a wreath of oak and laurel. Legend—Napoleon Empereur des Français. On the reverse—The Frence Eagle grasping 3 thunderbolt. egend—Honneur et Patrie. The Ribbon was of scarlet watered silk. Presumably Frost and Nodier allude to the five-rayed star, derived from the Pentalpha an emblem found in all Masonic and related systems. The Emperor’s brothers, the Imperial Princes Joseph, Lucian, Louis and Jerome, were all Freemasons as was also his step-son Eugene Beauharnais—at first regarded as the Imperia; Heir-Apparent, his brother-in-law Murat, and his nephew Jerome. Joseph, 1768-1844. King of Naples, 1806-8. King of Spain, 1808-13. Nominated by the Emperor himself as Grand Master of the Grand Orient of France, 1804. Louis, 1778 to 1846. King of Holland, 1806-10. Grand Master Adjoined of the Grand Orient of France, 1804. Jerome, 1784 to 1860. King of Westphalia, 1807-13. Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Westphalia. His son Jerome was also a Freemason. Lucien, 1775 to 1840.

A member of the Grand Orient of France. Eugene Beauharnais, 1781 to 1S24. Viceroy of Italy 1805-14. Grand Master of Italy and Grand Master of the Grand Orient of the Division Militaire at Milan, 1805. Joachim Murat,1771 to 1815. King of Naples,1808. Senior Grand Warden of the Grand Orient of France, 1803. Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Naples 1808. Grand Master of the Order of Saint Joachim 1806. The Empress Josephine is known to have been friendly to Freemasonry. She was initiated into the Maconnerie d’Adoption in the Lodge Les Francs Chevaliers in 1804 at Paris, together with several of the ladies of her court, and became an active member as well as patroness of that Rite. Those who were chosen by Napoleon for high honor and office in the State were nearly all of them members of the Craft and higher Degrees. Of the sis who, with the Emperor himself formed the Grand Council of the Empire, five were certainly Freemasons, at their head being the Arch-Chancellor, Prince Jean Jacques Regis Cambaceres, the Emperor’s right-hand man, and in his time the most active, enthusiastic and indefatigable Freemason in France.

The sixth, the Arch-Treasurer Le Brun, formerly Third Consul, is also believed to have been of the Craft, but it is not certain. Of the nine lesser Imperial officers of State, six at least were active Masons. Of Marshals of France who served under Napoleon, at least twenty-two out of the first thirty were Freemasons, many of them Grand Officers of the Grand Orient. The union of all the separate and often mutually hostile Rites in one governing body was from the first the project of Napoleon. Mereadier relates that during the Consulate Napoleon threatened to abolish Freemasonry altogether unless this was accomplished. Late in 1804, at the request of Cambaceres he interested himself in the reorganization of the Grand Orient with the result that in 1805 the Grand Orient assumed control over the whole body of Freemasonry in the Empire, with the Emperor’s brother, Joseph, as Grand Master, with Cambaceres and Murat as his Grand Master Adjoints. Through Cambaceres the Emperor assured the Brothers of his imperial protection, stating that he had instituted inquiry into the subject of Freemasonry, and that he perceived that their highly moral aim and purpose were worthy of his favor.

Louis Napoleon III was a member of the Supreme, of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of France.

NAPOLEONIC FREEMASONRY

An Order under this name, called also the French Order of Noachites, was established at Paris, in 1816, by some of the adherents of the Emperor Napoleon. It was divided into three Degrees: 1. Knight

2. Commander

3. Grand Elect

The last Degree was subdivided into three points

i. Secret Judge

ii. Perfect Initiate

iii. Knight of the Crown of Oak

The mystical ladder in this Rite consisted of eight steps or stages, whose names were Adam, Eve, Noah, Lamech, Naamah, Peleg, Oubal, and Orient. The initials of these words, properly transposed, compose the word Napoleon, and this is enough to show the character of the system. General Bertrand was elected Grand Master, but, as he was then in the Island of Saint Helena, the Order was directed by a Supreme Commander and two Lieutenants. It was Masonic in form only, and lasted but for a few years.

NARBONNE, RITE OF

See Primitive Rite

NATIONAL GRAND LODGE

The Royal Mother Lodge of the Three Globes, which had been established at Berlin in 1740, and recognized as a Grand Lodge by Frederick the Great in 1744, renounced the Rite of Strict Observance in 1771, and, declaring itself free and independent, assumed the title of the Grand National Mother Lodge of the Three Globes, by which appellation it is still known. The Grand Orient of France, among its first acts, established, as an integral part of itself, a National Grand Lodge of France, which was to take the place of the old Grand Lodge, which, it declared, had ceased to exist. But the year after, in 1773, the National Grand Lodge was suppressed by the power which had given it birth; and no such power was recognized in French Freemasonry (see Grand Lodge and General Grand Lodge).

NATIONAL GRAND LODGE

See General Grand Lodge

NATIONAL LEAGUED OF MASONIC CLUBS

See Masonic Clubs, National Imbue of

NATIONAL MASONIC RESEARCH SOCIETY

Organized in Iowa, 1914, the Society commenced the publication of the Builder, January, 1915, with Reverend Joseph Fort Newton as Editor-in-Chief. A managing Board of Stewards, all of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, were George E. Frazier, President; Newton R. Parvin, Vice-President; George L. Sehoonover, Secretary, with Louis Block, C. C. Hunt, John W. Barry. Ernest A. Reed of New Jersey became President in 1922, with R. I. Clegg, Ohio, VicePresident; C. C. Hunt, Iowa, Secretary, and F. H. Littlefield, Missouri, Executive Secretary and Treasurer. Later, Brothers R. I. Clegg, H. L. Haywood, Robert Tipton, Dudley Wright, Louis Block, A. B. Skinner, J. H. Tatsch, became associate editors, Brother Haywood becomung editor in 1921, and R. J. Meekren in 1926.

In 1913 Bro. George L. Schoonover of Anamosa, Ia., who was to become Grand Master, Grand Lodge of Iowa, some five years later, became deeply impressed by the fact that among the three million Masons in America were a rapidly-increasing number of Masonic students; and that newly-made Masons, imbued with the spirit of the time, were more and more demanding to know “what it is all about.” He was familiar with the world-wide influence of the Iowa Grand Lodge Library, and with the work of Research Lodges in England, but believed that the American Craft needed a facility of a different kind, not localized but national, and one not an official arm of any Grand Lodge yet one that could be approved by each Grand Lodge and could cooperate with them. He worked out a plan for a national society, to be devoted to Masonic studies and to be a way-shower in Masonic education, and to be composed not of Lodges or of Grand Lodges but of individual Masons who would join it voluntarily, each paying a small annual sum for dues; he also believed that such a society would require a monthly journal; not a Masonic newspaper but a competently edited, well-printed, illustrated magazine, carrying no advertisements, which could compare favorably with the best non-Masonic journals. He believed also that while the society ought to stand on its own feet and pay its own way it should be examined, approved, and officiallY endorsed by a Grand Lodge beforehand.

In 1914 he laid his plan before the Grand Lodge of Iowa, and received whole-hearted endorsement. Though not a man of great wealth Bro.Schoonover was a man of means, and at his own expense he erected a three-story, beautifully designed headquarters building in his home town of Anamosa, Ia., some twenty-three miles outside of Cedar Rapids. The newly-formed organization chose the name “National Masonic Research Society”; secured Joseph Fort Newton as Editor-in-Chief; employed Wildey E. Atchison of Colorado to be Assistant Secretary in charge of staff and on January lst, 1915, issued the first number of The Builder, its official monthly journal, sent to members only.

Each member paid an annual membership fee ($2.50 at first, and then $3.00); for this he received The Builder, special brochures and booklets as they were published, could have answers to any question, could secure expert advice on Lodge educational methods, assistance in private Masonic researches, etc. The membership increased slowly, but in due time passed 20,000, among which were hundreds in foreign countries—at one time more than 40 countries, with 200 to 300 in England alone. The only new activity added after the Society’s formation was a department for the sale of Masonic books as a convenience to its members, and not for profit. Bro. F. H. Littlefield became Executive Secretary in 1921 and removed headquarters to St. Louis, Mo.

When in 1916 Bro. J. F. Newton was called to London to become pastor of the City Temple his place was filled for a time by a group of associates, among the latter being Bro. H. L. Haywood, who wrote three books for the Society. He served as Editor without pay for about two years, and then in 1921 became Editor-in-Chief; Bro. Jacob Hugo Tatch was his Assistant Editor for about one year then transferred to the Masonic Service Association (it had no connection with the N. M. R. S.); he was succeeded by Bro. R. J. Meekren, who in turn became Editorin-Chief in 1925, after Bro. Haywood had left for New York to become architect and director of the Board of General Activities of the Grand Lodge of New York, including editorship of The New York Masonic Outlook.

Midway in the year 1931 the Society was so depleted in membership by the depression when some thirteen million men were out of employment that it was forced to discontinue. During the sixteen years the Society had published The Builder in the form of a bound volume with index each year. In a certain sense that set of books continues the work of the society, because it is in almost every Masonic library in America, in many public libraries, and in thousands of homes. It is a work of great reference value, because in it are carefully wrought, factual articles on the history, symbolism ritual, and jurisprudence of the Fraternity, the larger number (unlike Ars Quatuor Corona natoram, a reference work for another purpose) being on Freemasonry in America.

NATIONAL MASONIC TUBERCULOSIS SANATORIA ASSOCIATION

The National Tuberculosis Association estimates that some fifty thousand living cases exist at all times among Freemasons in the United States and that five thousand of the Brethren die from tuberculosis every year. A Tuberculosis Sanatoria Commission was appointed by the Grand Lodges of Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico.

An investigation was made by this Commission in 1922 of the situation in the Southwestern United States where thousands of consumptives resort. Many of these are Freemasons. Information collected by the Commission indicated distressing conditions and an urgent need for larger fraternal co-operative service. During the fortyffeventh Annual Communication on February 18, 1925, Grand Lodge of New Mexico, a Committee was empowered and subsequently, at Las Cruces in that State, the Committee met and provided for the incorporation of a National Masonic Tuberculosis Sanatoria Association with an office at Albuquerque, New Mexico, under the supervision of Brother Alpheus A. Keen Grand Secretary. The purpose of the institution is to act as trustee or agency for receiving and administering funds for the relief of Freemasons and members of their familes or others suffering from tuberculosis or in distress from other causes; to provide hospitalization for sick and employment for the well; to establish institutions for the care of those suffering from tuberculosis and other diseases; and to acquire and conduct property in lands and buildings for such training schools, hotels, and so forth, as required for the objects named, and to circulate scientific and useful information for the prevention, relief and cure of tuberculosis, etc.

The Association is to do whatever may be deemed essential to accomplish these objects, to encourage and promote works of humanity and charity, to relieve poverty sickness, distress, suffering, to prevent danger, and to educate, to conquer tuberculosis. The management is under a Board of Governors, one member from each United States Grand Lodge Jurisdiction, the General Grand Chapter, General Grand Council, Grand Encampment, the two Supreme Councils, the Shrine, and the Eastern Star. The first President, Jaffa Miller, was succeeded by Herbert B. Holt, both Past Grand Masters of New Mexico; the first Secretary was Alpheus A. Seen, Grand Secretary of Freemasons, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and the Executive Secretary was Francis E. Lester, Past Grand Master, Mesilla Park, New Mexico. The Builder, National Masonic Researeh Soeiety, St. Louis, Missouri, had a monthly department, “The North-East Corner,” conducted vigorously and ably as a Bulletin of the Association by Robert J. Newton, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

NATIONAL SOJOURNERS

An association of Freemasons who hold or have held commissions in the defense forees of the United States Government. Detroit Chapter No. 1 was organized in 1919.

NAVAL LODGES

Because of crowded space in ships and because of frequent changes of personnel early attempts to constitute Lodges on board war vessels did not meet with large success, even at the period when Thomas Dunckerley, master organizer, and himself member of a Naval Lodge on H. M. S. Vanguard, put his enthusiasm behind them. In his Lodge Lists, Lane names only four British Naval Lodges. Between 1760 and 1768 the Modern Grand Lodge chartered only three. In 1810, after a conference called by the Grand Lodge of Scotland, the British Grand Lodges agreed not to authorize Naval warrants. Men in the Navy, marines on sea duty, and seamen in general found their Masonic homes in Lodges working in the ports, many of which were Naval or Mariners’ Lodges in effect. Masonic students have to be on guard against confusing a Masonic meeting on board a ship, called by Masons in its crew or passenger list or by a Military Lodge on board a transport, with chartered Naval Lodges. (There are a number of instances where Masonic burial services have been solemnized on board a ship; in one instance where a retiring missionary died on board ship a group of Masons wirelessed to Washington for permission to bring the body home for burial, and three of them accompanied the body and the widow to her home in the Midwest.)

NAYMUS GRECUS

The Grand Lodge Manu, script, No. 1, contains the following passage: “Yt befell that their was on curious Masson that height [was called] Naymus Grecus that had byn at the making of Sallomon’s Temple, and he came into ffraunce, and there he taught the science of Massonrey to men of ffraunce.” Who was this Naymus Grecus? The writers of these old records of Freemasonry are notorious for the way in which they mangle all names and words that are in a foreign tongue. Hence it is impossible to say who or what is meant by this word. It is differently spelled in the various manuscripts.

Namas Grecious in the Lansdowne, .Nayrnus Graecus in the Sloane, Grecus alone in the Edinburgh-Kilwinning, and Maymus Grecus in the Dowland. For a table of various spellings, there are about twenty-five, see Transactions, Quatuor Coronati Lodge (volume iii,page 163). Doctor Anderson, in the second edition of his Constitutions (1738, page 16), calls him Ninus. Now, it would not be an altogether wild conjecture to suppose that some confused idea of Magna Graecia was floating in the minds of these unlettered Freemasons especially since the Leland Manuscript records that in Magna Graecia Pythagoras established his school, and then sent Freemasons into France.

Between Magna Graecia and Maynus Grecuns the bridge is a short one, not greater than between Tubal-cain and Wackan, which we find in a German Middle Age document. The one being the name of a place and the other of a person would be no obstacle to these accommodating record writers; nor must we flinch at the anachronism of placing one of the disciples of Pythagoras at the building of the Solomonic Temple, when we remember that the same writers make Euclid and Abraham contemporaries. Just so do we find w this “Curious Masson” flourishing at the widely different periods of King Solomon and Charles Martel, a claim not easily explained on historical grounds.

NAYMUS GRECUS

The curiously puzzling problem of Naymus Grecus which is discussed on page 700 is in a sense a Rosetta Stone for the archeology of early Masonic Manuscripts, therefore the large amount of time devoted to it by Masonic scholars has not been out of proportion. Robert I. Clegg’s penetrating suggestion in that article that Naymus Wrecks was Magna Graecza is respected as one of the reasonable solutions. On page 94 of his History of Freemasonry Mackey refused to commit himself except to reject Krause’s theory that Naymus had been Nannon, a Greek scholar of the period of Charles the Bold. Edmund H. Dring contributed to Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. XVIII., page 178, a treatise in which he brought his great erudition to bear to prove that Naym?~s Grecus was a corruption of the name Alcuin. R. F. Gould had proposed the theory that Naymus meant “some one with a Greek name.” Wm. E. Upton believed that Grecus was a genuine surname. Wyatt Papworth enumerated eight possible derivations. Howard advocated the theory that a Greek colony in France named Nemausus or Nismes was referred to; and with this W. J. Hughan agreed. Sidney Klein took Naymus Grecus to be an anagram of Simon Grynaeus, a 15th century editor of Euclid. Russell Forbes took Naymus to have been an architect who worked under Charlemagne. Speth and Yarker identified him with Marcus Graecus. (The data immediately above are collected from the discussions appended to Dring’s treatise.)

To these may be added yet another suggestion. Jewish scholars who divide the history, religion, and literature of the Jews into the three periods of Eebraic, Israelitish, and Judaic, begin the third period at the time when the Jews enlarged their own culture to include, first, Hellenic culture, with its Greek language and dialects, and (at a somewhat later period) Arabic culture. Mohammed received most of what little education he possessed from Jewish teachers in his home community, and it is certain that his Allah was his own theological presentation of Moses Jehovah, a pure monotheism; when Mohammedanism swept through the Near East and into North Africa and Spain it carried with it a saturation of Old Testament and Talmudic lore.

During the long period when the regnant culture in North Africa, Egypt, Arabia, the Near East, and some of Greece was an amalgam of Jewish, Hellenic, and Mohammedan elements the word naymus was everywhere in use by it. In Greece a naysus was a law-giver, or teacher, or great scholar. In the Talmud he was a prophet, the term being taken to denote an orator, leader, scholarly reformer, etc. Among Arabs a naymus was a “cryer out,” or prophet or teacher; Mohammed himself was called a naytnus. Perhaps in that whole culture (of which 80 much infiltrated into Europe from Greece, Sicily, Spain, and from the Crusades) the most famous Greek naymus was Pythagoras; and since he is in the Old Manuseripts connected with Euclid, Naymus Grecus could easily have referred to Pythagoras as the Greel; “Naymus.” This is not to suggest that the author of the Old Charges intended Naymus Grecus to be Pythagoras; rather it is to suggest that originally Naymus Grecus had been a title, but that the author of the 0ld Charges took this title to be a name; and it may be that it originally had been a title used of Pythagoras.

NAZARETH

A City of Galilee, in which Jesus spent his childhood and much of his life, and whence he is often called, in the New Testament, the Nazarene, or Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus Nazarenus was a portion of the inscription on the cross (see I. N. R. I). In the Rose Croix, Nazareth is a significant word, and Jesus is designated as “our Master of Nazareth,” to indicate the origin and nature of the new dogmas on which the Order of the Rosy Cross was instituted.

NEBRASKA

In March, 1854, the region between the Missouri River and the Rocky Mountains was divided by Congress into the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska. The Grand Master of Illinois issued a Dispensation for a Lodge at Bellevue to petitioners who were vouched for by a member of Garden City Lodge, No. 18, and by Lafayette Lodge, No. 18, both of Chicago. The Lodge was chartered as Nebraska Lodge, No. 184, on October 3, 1855. On January 24, 1888, the Lodge moved to Omaha. Three Lodges, namely, Nebraska, No. 184; Giddings, No. 156, and Capital, No. 101, sent representatives to a Convention held on September 23, 1857, at Omaha to organize a Grand Lodge. David Lindley presided and George Armstrong was chosen Secretary. Grand Officers were elected: Brother Robert C. Jordan, Grand Master and Brother George Armstrong, Grand Secretary. The name of Giddings Lodge was changed to Western Star and that of Capital to Capitol. The Lodges were then renumbered as Nebraska, No. 1, at Bellevue; Western Star, No. 2, at Nebraska City, and Capitol, No. 3, at Omaha.

On November 21, 1859, Omaha Chapter, No. 1, was granted a Dispensation by the General Grand King, and on September 8, 1865, when this was reported to the General Grand Chapter, a Charter was i88ued. At a Convention held March 19, 1867, at Plattsmouth, by permission of the Deputy General Grand High Priest, the Grand Chapter of Nebraska was regularly organized. Officers were elected and installed as follows: Companions Harry P. Deuel and James W. Moore, Grand High Priest and Deputy Grand High Priest; Companion David H. Wheeler, Grand King; Companion Edwin A. Allen, Grand Scribe, and Companions Orsamus H. Irish and Elbert T. Duke, Grand Treasurer and Grand Secretary. All who helped in the organization of this Grand Chapter were later made Life Members. Nebraska is one of the States which make the Order of High Priesthood an essential qualification to the installation of the High Priest elect.

The Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, granted a Charter for the organization of Omaha Council, No. 1, on July 8, 1867. Delegates from Omaha, No. 1; Alpha, No. 2, and Furnas, No. 3, formed the Grand Council of Nebraska on November 20, 1872. From 1875 to 1886 the Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons controlled the Council Degrees in Nebraska, but they again came under the Grand Council on March 9, 1886, and in 1889 the latter became a member of the General Grand Council.

Mount Calvary Commandery, No. 1, was formed at Omaha by Dispensation dated June 16, 1865, and issued by Grand Master Benjamin B. French. It was organized July 24 and chartered September 6. Representatives of the four Commanderies of the State, Mount Calvary, No. 1; Mount Olivet, No. 2; Mount Carmel, No. 3, and Mount Moriah, No. 4, met in Omaha on December 28, 1871, and established the Grand Commandery of Nebraska.

In 1881 came the beginning of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, Southern Jurisdiction, in Nebraska. Mount Moriah Lodge of Perfection, No. 1, was chartered January 1; Semper Fidelis Chapter of Rose Croix, No. 1, on January 17; Nebraska Consistory, No. 1, was granted a Charter April 12, 1885, and Saint Andrew’s Council of Kadosh, No. 1, on October 22, 1890.

NEBUCHADNEZZAR

About 630 years before Christ, the Empire and City of Babylon were conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, the King of the Chaldeans, a nomadic race, who, descending from their homes in the Caucasian Mountains, had overwhelmed the countries of Southern Asia. Nebuchadnezzar was engaged during his whole reign in wars of conquest. Among other nations which fell beneath his victorious arms was Judea, whose King, Jehoiakim, was slain by Nebuchadnezzar, and his son, Jehoichin, ascended the Jewish throne. After a reign of three years, he was deposed by Nebuchadnezzar, and his kingdom given to his uncle, Zedekiah, a monarch distinguished for his vices. Having repeatedly rebelled against the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar repaired to Jerusalem, and, after a siege of eighteen months, reduced it. The city was leveled with the ground, the Temple pillaged and burned, and the inhabitants carried captive to Babylon. These events are commemorated in the first section of the English and American Royal Arch system.

NEBUZARADAN

A Captain, or, as we would now call him, a general of Nebuchadnezzar, who commanded the Chaldean army at the siege of Jerusalem, and who executed there orders of his sovereign by the destruction of the city and Temple, and by carrying the Inhabitants, except a few husbandmen, as captives to Babylon.

NEGRE

The dark skin of Gabriel Mathieu Marconis the elder, a founder of the Rite of Memphis, made him known as the Negre, or Negro.

NEGRI, BENED

Composer of the song, the Aged Brothers, the words written by Brother J. J. Smith, and sung at Freemasons Hall, London, June 24, 1846, in aid of the Aged Freemasons Home.

NEHEMIAH

Son of Haehaliah. During the Babylonish captivity, given permission to rebuild the Temple and restore the city, becoming Tirshatha or Governor of Judea and Jerusalem, for twelve years. Literally translated, the Hebrew, Nehemiah, is Consolation af God.

NEIGHBOR

All the Old Constitutions have the charge that “every Mason shall keep true counsel of Lodge and Chamber” (see Sloane Manuscript, No. 3848). This is enlarged in the Andersonian Charges, of 1722 thus: “You are not to let your family, friends and neighbors know the concerns of the Lodge” (Constitutions, 1723, page 55). However loquacious a Freemason may be in the natural confidence of neighborhood intercourse, he must be reserved in all that relates to the esoteric concerns of Freemasonry.

NEGRO LODGES

The subject of Lodges of colored persons. commonly called Negro Lodges, has long been a source of contention in the United States. Dot on account of the color of the members of these Lodges, but because of the supposed illegality of their origin and operation.

Prince Hall and thirteen other negroes were made Freemasons in a Military Lodge in the British Army then at Boston on March 6, 1775. When the Army was withdrawn these negroes applied to the Grand Lodge of England for a Charter and on the 20th of September, 1784 a Charter for a Masters Lodge was granted (although not received until 1787), to Prince Hall and others. all colored men, under the authority of the Grand Lodge of England. The Lodge bore the name of African Lodge No. 459 (later changed to loo. 370). and mas situated in the City of Boston. This Lodge, li