FREEMASONRY IN THE
EASTERN EUROPEAN HISTORY
Its Political and Cultural Influence
BONN 2022
Contents 1 – Introduction – 2
2 – Freemasonry in Poland during the XVIII and Early XIX Centuries – 7
3 – Freemasonry in the Russian Empire until 1822 – 17
4 – The Decembrist Movement and Masonic Influence – 37
5 – Freemasonry in Ukraine before 1905 – 49
6 – Freemasonry in the Russian Empire after 1905 – 59
7 – Political Freemasonry and the Russian Revolutions – 70
8 – Early XX century Autonomists in Ukraine and Freemasonry – 78
9 – Conclusion – 85
10 – Bibliography – 87
Introduction
The history of Freemasonry was always filled with numerous regional differences, aspects of its diversity from within, and particularly this area of the Masonic studies may be specifically interesting. Originally, the whole organization originated in Britain, absorbing its democratic traditions, participating in the process of shaping democracy not merely in the United Kingdom, but elsewhere in the world. Unlike some other similar orders and groups such as Odd Fellows or the Royal Society, it became widespread in other parts of the world, making it the most famous brotherhood with secrets. In certain situations, hostile political environments, the Masonic Lodges were sometimes turning into secret social gatherings, however, they were never meant to be totally hidden, and rather than to be called the secret society, it had always preferred to be the society with secrets.
Its origins are mysterious enough, the roots go back to the guilds of stonemasons [operative masonry] and the British club culture, tea and coffee houses, something that was also becoming popular in the Netherlands, and in its own political way in France, but not in other parts of Europe. Therefore, it may be said that the Protestant world was always way more tolerant to Freemasonry than the Catholic or the Orthodox, making this society prosperous in in founding of the originally mostly Protestant United States. France was Catholic, however, its political and ecclesiastical autonomy from the Vatican made Freemasonry more tolerated there than in Spain or Portugal. The Parliament of Paris, which had a lot of powers not only in the city, but in all of France made it illegal to prosecute Freemasons, thus negating the Papal Bull of 1738 issued by Clement XII.1 The next prohibition of Freemasonry in 1751 by Benedict XIV was also ignored, and could even add to the growth of the society in France. Catholic priests [for example, Father Cordier, a member of the Nine Sisters Lodge] were often participating in the Lodges in France, trying to unite their faith with the Masonic membership without seeing much controversy in such actions.2
While growing in numbers in Britain, its colonies, France, and the Netherlands, this then already famous organization was also turning its attention to other parts of Europe that included Germany, Poland, Austria, and Russia. A lot was written on Freemasonry in England, its origins and the founders, James Anderson, Jean Desaguliers, the infamous Freemasons from the new world, Benjamin Franklin, and George Washington, however, not much is still known about this organization and its history in Central and Eastern Europe. Many interested readers in the English or French speaking world know about the existence of the Ancient and Accepted Rite or the Scottish Rite, but not that much is known there about the Swedish Rite, or the Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia, which played an important role in the removal of the Tsar Nicholas II in 1917. How did this peculiar tradition of speculative masonry become popular and often very influential in Poland and Ukraine? How come the Russian aristocracy could become Freemasons in the Orthodox country, where Freemasonry was often prohibited? These interesting questions are answered in this study, which is fully dedicated to the history of
1 Ian Cumming, Helvetius: His Life and Place in the History of Educational Thought, (Routledge, 2013) at p.
118.
2 Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences, Volume 3, (Jazzybee Verlag, 2016) at p. 147.
Freemasonry in Eastern Europe. The whole concert of Masonic studies, written by many historians and researchers on the subject is added and referred to in this book. Many authors who had already written about Freemasonry in Ukraine and Russia such as Oksana Kryzhanivska, Andrey Serkov, Alexander Zinukhov, Viktor Brachev, Sergey Karpachev, Aron Avrech, Boris Nikolaevsky and Nina Berberova are discussed and included into the study.
Various archival materials from the state archives in Ukraine are implemented and used. The latter gives a lot of information on how political Co-Freemasonry was organized and acted right before and during the 1917 revolutions. These names are mostly not known in the Western Masonic historiography and their effort is standing behind this book.
The Masonic world was always closely related to the democratic process and the growth of political parties, therefore, making an indirect influence on the political process, though the discussion of politics is prohibited during the regular Ritual Labors in any Lodge, which keeps the original tradition grounded in England. A separate Lodge, or the Grand Lodge of its own jurisdiction cannot participate in the political process as an organization. Mostly the lodges were always keeping this tradition, however, some made exclusions and began to introduce changes to the main Masonic document, the Constitution [originally written and composed by James Anderson in 1723, and later in 1738]. In 1877 the Grand Orient of France made it possible for atheists and agnostics to become members of its subsequent Lodges, thus, seceding from the original tradition set up in England at the beginning of the eighteenth century. The Grand Orient and its provincial Lodges made further steps into Russia after 1905, where Freemasonry was prohibited since 1822 and became legal again following the Tsar’s Manifesto of October 17, 1905, and the preceding Act [ukaz] on the religious freedom issued on April 17 that year. Later those lodges that were established by the representative of the Grand Orient of France made it possible to establish another Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia, often considered a Co-Masonry due to its even further negligence of many Masonic traditions written in the Anderson’s Constitution. These developments are discussed in the book, and many activities of the Masonic and Co-Masonic organizations that existed in Eastern Europe during the early XX century are brought into the light. The whole concept of the ‘political Freemasonry’ was quite important in the development of Poland and its independence movement, the 1917 February Revolution in Russia, and the original formation of Ukraine as a state between 1917 and 1922 is very important in the given research. Such figures as Symon Petliura, Pavlo Skoropadsky, Mykola Vasylenko and many others who were participating in the events after 1917 in the former Russian Empire were Freemasons, though their Freemasonry did not belong to the English tradition of regularity. Various splits and divisions between Freemasons and their regular or irregular lodges is discussed too, in order to bring a lot of clarity into the events, which were influenced by them directly or indirectly. What was their role in the establishment of the new political organizations or even governments, and was it exaggerated or diminished?
As noted above, the Polish Freemasonry had a lot of connections to its country’s freedom movement, regular and later irregular Masonic groups were founded there, often to support the process of democracy and Polish republicanism. Duke Antoni Jabłonowski, Count Stanisław Sołtyk, Walerian Łukasiński and many others from their circle were Freemasons and participated in the attempts to give Poland more freedoms from Russia, Prussia and Austria, often establishing various secret societies that were somewhat akin to Freemasonry in its
formation.3 This Masonic tradition was very typical to Eastern and Central Europe where Freemasons were trying to use their experience and organization to establish similar groups based on their experience in Freemasonry. Lacking direct political possibilities, Freemasonry was trying to influence the processes indirectly; many Freemasons were either establishing political societies or as the Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia built their own irregular political Co-Masonic organization. Political figures such as Alexander Kerensky, Alexander Guchkov, Nikolay Chkheidze or Nikolay V. Nekrasov are considered to be members of the Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia, and their role in the February Revolution was very important. Their names were known before, but the actual participation in the GOPR was not, they were not seen as conspirators, the organization itself was not that well known, and generally even if there were some talks, those were considered to be rumors. Eventually, closer to the 1960s more materials began to come out, letters, interviews, some were produced by Boris I. Nikolaevsky, a Menshevik, who was supposedly a Freemason himself and could freely talk to his ‘brethren’. After all, more information became available when Alexander Kerensky himself began to recall the days when he was a Freemason in the GOPR, many activities became clearer after the issue of his memoirs. During the post-Soviet era, many archives, especially in Ukraine, and the Baltic States became available to the public, a lot of information was hidden by the OGPU-NKVD-MGB-KGB; it became known how this Soviet secret political police and counterintelligence was gathering information on Freemasonry and particularly those pre-revolutionary Freemasons in Russia, whom they could prosecute in the 1920s and 30s. Many interesting pages were written on the procured period between 1912- 1917 by Pavel Milyukov, a foreign minister in the Russian Provisional Government, and the constitutional democrat, liberal politician who was advocating business over class war. He was sometimes considered to be a Freemason, too, however, there is no evidence of that and most likely he just knew many of them.4
The Central and Eastern European Freemasonry is especially interesting when dealing with its involvement with politics, political figures who made serious contributions to their countries or were trying to do so, but failed, such as Alexander Kerensky. Famous personalities from Ivan Yelagin to Count Jabłonowski, and from Symon Petliura to Alexander Kerensky are those names among many Freemasons that have shaped history, and became particularly influential, however, they may not be so well known in other parts of Europe, Britain, or the Americas. Except for Prussia, other areas of the discussed region(s) were either Catholic or Orthodox, nevertheless it did not stop Freemasonry from growing there. Polish nobles and intellectuals were following all European [Western] trend of constitutional government, parliamentary representation; their patriotic position was usually closely connected to the general Catholic culture of Poland that was also standing on the patriotic positions. The same may be said about Orthodox Ukraine and Russia. They were often not distinguishing, their Catholic or Orthodox faith and Freemasonry. It was paralleled in their lives because both could find the way to their hearts and minds. Walerian Łukasiński was an officer, military idealist of the Polish cause that he had never abandoned neither during the early years when he believed
3 Vladimir Sablin, Decembrists and Secret Societies in Russia, [Декабристы и тайные общества в России],
(Moscow, V.M. Sablin, 1906) at pp. 126-148.
4 See, Pavel Milyukov, The History of Russian Revolution [История русской революции], in three volumes,
(Sofia, 1921-1932).
in an open rebellion nor in the Russian castle-prison from which he was not allowed to go even after 1861 during the reign of Alexander II. He was behind the establishment of the short lived political Masonic organization called National Freemasonry, and later the Patriotic Society [ [Towarzystvo Patriotyczne].5 It was one of the reasons why the Russian imperial government began to seriously distrust the lodges, their connection to France and the access to partnerships with the influential political figures abroad. There was no solution on how to deal with its own rebellious intelligentsia within the mainframe of the Empire but to limit its presence, hence the prohibition of Freemasonry that followed in 1822. Tsar Alexander I himself was possibly a member of the lodge(s) during his liberal years, when he was keeping good relations with many of the Polish nobles, who were Freemasons, such as Count Adam Jerzy Czartoryski.
It is important to study the Russian Freemasonry not merely to understand its history, but to see the whole picture of the Russian politics in certain situations. European elites were politically interconnected, and Freemasonry is a peculiar tool of history, especially if the country and its top was in one way or another tied to Freemasonry. The book is not aiming to popularize Freemasonry or give political labels to it, it does not judge the organization, however, it tries to add light to its history in connection to the areas that were not that well known during the Cold War and after. Many above mentioned names are difficult to connect to Freemasonry, often they are not associated with other Freemasons, for example in North America, however, they all tried to build something democratic in their countries, less authoritarian and were usually disliked by local conservatives, which have believed in a strong and authoritative monarchy or religious dogma. Some monarchs such as Catherine II in Russia, first welcomed Freemasons, moreover many of them were friendly to her cause and rule, but authoritarianism and incapability to enter the organization made her dislike the organization.
She became afraid of the foreign influences, began to make fun of them in her manuscripts, and thought of them as if they were fools and theatrical nobles. As the result, her wish to close many lodges, persecute some of its members, especially Nikolay N. Novikov, who was connected to the enlightenment and book printing, became very obvious. The absolute monarchy had limits to its enlightenment, especially when it came to various closed societies, and Freemasons were not an exclusion, the same did happen with the Jesuits in Europe. The factor of the Masonic international standing is discussed in the study, its capability to connect with the ‘brothers’ from abroad is important to understand, especially in the context of Russia and Ukraine. Polish history was not absolutist, its Freemasons were not always tolerated, but included many famous names, and was more tolerated than in Russia.
Often the whole Masonic history is so well reflecting political and cultural issues of the given region that by studying it everything becomes clearer and more evident. In many instances, Freemasons and their lodges became barometers of democracy, tolerance and the mutual understanding between the elites and a monarch, especially in the discussed regions.
Along the time Freemasonry did change, Europe in general was open to another Masonic tradition based on the Grand Orient of France, not often familiar with the Protestant conservatism and parliamentarism of Britain and the United States. Some of them became irregular, political, and independent from the international regularization, usually made by the
5 Oksana Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації:
Масонський Рух в Україні], (Nash Chas, 2012) at pp. 91-92.
United Grand Lodge of England. On the other hand, each Grand Lodge, or its predecessors in the form of Provincial lodges [opened by any foreign lodge without having its own independent jurisdiction] were always developing their own local traditions. There was practically no way to unify and make Freemasonry coherent, it was constantly developing new rituals, symbolism, local customs deriving from the culture of each country. Swedish or Zinnendorf Rite, the French Rite, Schroeder Rite, and some others were deviating from England, and subsequently lived their own Masonic lives. Surely, any irregular obedience was based on the fact that it did not follow the Deistic tradition set by the founding fathers of Freemasonry. It became prominent during the days of the Grand Orient of the Peoples of Russia, which was strongly influenced by the left politicians such as Alexander Kerensky; they needed the political base that would unite them with other political parties such as the Kadets [constitutional democrats;
anti-monarchy, pro-republican conservatives] for example, or more radical left and even anarchists. Their Co-Masonic organization even excluded the second Degree because from their opinion it was not important, politics stood on the first place for them, and traditions of the Grand Orient of France which were already friendly to the left political spectrum, had prevailed in Russia after 1905.
This book is not thoroughly discussing the origins of Freemasonry or disproves various theories of its emergence. It simply opens up the traditional, historical, and political gates to the Eastern European Masonic traditions. For example, many researchers do not know that many lodges in Ukraine were founded earlier than most of the lodges in the Eastern coast of the United States, though the latter is considered to be number two after Britain and France in sharing Freemasonry. Such things are not known almost as the first Polish constitution, which was the second after the United States. Many political and historical processes were ignored and seemed as if they never existed; eventually, for many Western European and American scholars and researchers, Berlin and Vienna were the last cities in the East of Europe, and everything beyond was an unexplored territory for them. Even German Masonic tradition was somewhat hidden and not understood, but particularly Freemasons were the group persecuted the most after Jews during the Nazi period. Some Masonic lodges even tried to exist in East Germany for some period of time, but surely could not continue their activities due to the political regime that existed there. In the Soviet Union Freemasonry was totally prohibited, and according to early Bolsheviks this organization was spreading interests of the bourgeois class, and attempted to rival with the communist authority using its international connections. It was paradoxical that the left was often associated with Freemasonry during the period of 1920s and 30s, but its most radical wing, the communists, were extremely anti-Masonic in their approach.
Social democrats were in contact with many Freemasons of the Grand Orient tradition, which accepted atheists starting with 1877 in Paris, however, these lodges were not interested in dealing with radicals. Freemasonry was usually standing on either moderate or apolitical positions in Europe and beyond. Freemasonry in Russia, Poland, and Ukraine gave specific contributions to Masonic history, and it’s for sure worth knowing. This book is explaining these issues and aspects of Freemasonry that were not well known in Western Europe and the Americas, and not to be repetitive, gives a better explanation of how it evolved there, and which factors made it equally prominent to its ‘brethren’ in other parts of the world.
Freemasonry in Poland during the XVIII and Early XIX Centuries
I
Origins
The whole situation of Freemasonry in Poland was based on the traditional aspects of its early popularity everywhere, primarily among the nobles. It was seen as the additional change in their lives, another gathering based on something completely new, possibly bizarre, or non-traditional. It was not made in the Church or home, it could slightly remind the royal court gathering, however, there was no religion nor women, there was no used talk appropriate to other more official meetings, there was the order of men united by some new concept they have barely understood. It was an alternative to other things in life of the people who began to catch the tradition that was already spreading around Germany and France, and by the 1730s began to reach Poland. The nobility of this country was specifically influential, its education and prosperity were well known in Europe, and particularly the level of noble freedoms since the sixteenth century in the Polish-Lithuanian Republic was particularly high in comparison to many other countries. 6 Polish nobility began to encounter Freemasonry without receiving the official recognition while establishing some lodges in Warsaw during the time of King Frederick Augustus II reign; around mid-1730s and later, however, they did not last for too long, hence the Papal Bull, In Eminenti Apostolatus, prohibited Catholic from becoming Freemasons.7 This was a clear message to many in Polish-Lithuanian state because it was and still is known for its strong Catholic affiliation. R.F. Gould had noted in his History of Freemasonry that the brotherhood even without official charters, meaning that they were still not recognized by any English, German or French Grand Lodge, had moved on, and many lodges continued to get installed. In Volhynia, in the town of Vyshnevetz [western Ukraine]
some lodge without the charter was opened in 1742, in Warsaw the Lodge ``Three Brothers”
was installed in 1744, another in Lemberg [Lviv, Eastern Galicia, western Ukraine] in 1747, and the Lodge “Good Shepherd” in Warsaw was opened in 1749 by Master Thoux de Salverte, who was in return allowed to install more lodges in other places.8 The latter information clarifies that France was acting an important role in spreading Freemasonry in Poland. Later connections between Poland and France, before and after the Revolution of 1789, may give some hints; both countries were quite friendly, and possibly Masonic ties were not the last to make them stronger. Generally, the period between the mid-1730s and 1770s became prominent in shaping Masonic lodges elsewhere in Eastern Europe because particularly during that time lodges began to grow in Russia, Hungary and Bohemia. The Higher Degrees [the Chapter of High Degrees] were probably introduced in 1767 by Count Frederick Aloys Brühl, who was experiencing some rivalry with another prominent Freemason and a noble Count
6 Lonnie Johnson, Central Europe: Enemies, Neighbors, Friends, (Oxford University Press, 1996) at p. 104.
7 Robert Freke Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc.
Embracing an Investigation of the Records of the Organizations of the Fraternity in England, Scotland, Ireland, British Colonies, France, Germany and the United States : Derived from Official Sources, Volume 5, (J.
Beacham, 1886) at p. 220.
8 Ibid., p. 220.
Augustus Moszynski, responsible for the Lodge “Three Brothers”.9 Another Masonic historian, Emmanuel Rebold gave some more information on him, and in the work, A General History of Freemasonry, he named him the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Poland, established on June 24, 1769 in Warsaw.10 Recognition by any English lodge is not clear, but the presence of an above mentioned Thoux de Salverte is more or less clear. It must also be noted that the King Stanisław Augustus, who became the monarch of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1764 was protecting Freemasonry, and his position was important to sort of bypass the Papal instructions regarding the order. Various freedoms that were given to Polish nobility were important to protect Masonic organization in the country, plus the favor of nobility was always another traditional issue typical to preservation of Freemasonry. It was always very important to make a monarch, or any other superior power in the state accept Freemasonry and provide it with protection, once this rule was abandoned by the ruler, the organization could immediately plunge into problems. The Catholic Church in Poland was always seriously influential; however, it was also the ideological system, which gave Poland its pro- independence concept, something that was often uniting the Polish nation around itself in times of troubles. Eventually, Freemasonry was getting on its feet and the Catholic Church particularly in that country was answering its national calls, not that the Pope was less important, but the country stood first, somewhat giving its Masonic nobles like Count Moszynski room to manoeuvre. Additionally, Freemasonry in Poland was the original pass that led to its representation in Belarus and Ukraine, the original Masonic lodges in these two countries were established through Poland. Lviv, the cultural center in Eastern Galicia was absorbing various cultures, Ukrainians [Ruthenians], Poles, Jews, Armenians, and Austrian Germans for a long time lived in this city together, this ethnic composition made it a perfect city for Freemasonry to grow and it’s no mistake that on many buildings there that were built during the 1700s-1900s it’s possible to find various Masonic incrustations [symbols of square and compass, and more].
II
Freemasonry at Its Pinnacle in Poland
Certain troubles to the establishment of an operative Masonry in the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth came with its divisions between Austria, Prussia, and Russia. It made certain mutual recognitions and charters go null due to some wishes of the dominating political powers and their representatives to establish their own charters to install new lodges under their authority. The Strict Observance [the system of Degrees under the watchful eye of a Grand Master or Commander of the particular Masonic order] was built into the Polish tradition by the Duke of Brunswick, again the new stronger German influence.11 Then the regular Grand Orient of France had established its provincial [representative] Lodge in Warsaw titled “Perfect
9 Ibid., p. 220.
10 Emmanuel Rebold, A General History of Freemasonry: Based Upon the Ancient Documents Relating To, and
the Monuments Erected by this Fraternity, from Its Foundation, in the Year 715 B.C., to the Present Time, (American Masonic Publishing Associations, 1872) at p. 117.
11 Ibid., p. 117.
Silence”.12 Foreign influence was notable, but it was not strange to the fact that Freemasonry was indeed an international organization with various connections, and its introduction to Poland was going through Germany, particularly Saxony and Prussia, and France. England was the motherland of Freemasonry, and its influence at all levels was as important as it was in Hamburg or the Netherlands, and eventually became quite influential in establishing regular Freemasonry in Poland, too. Another lodge “Perfect Silence” began to become almost equally authoritative as the original Warsaw Lodge “Three Brothers”, and by 14 of May, 1781, had received a patent [charter] from the Grand Orient of France to seek full recognition of its sovereignty, and attach or open other lodges in the region.13 It even claimed to become the Grand Orient [Lodge in French tradition] of Poland, however, this type of effort did not work due to other rivalring Masonic establishments that were looking towards England. It is a good sign of the early splits between the French and English Masonic traditions, not merely in France, but elsewhere in Europe; the future schism of 1877 was grounded in the 1700s. On February 26, 1784 the Grand Orient of Poland was finally installed under the lead of Andrzej Mokronowski.14 This particular direction of Freemasonry in Poland did experience some serious damage during the second partition of Poland, and practically ceased to exist. Possibly due to the liberal nature of the obedience, particularly Russian and Prussian authorities were afraid that it would become directly influenced by France, and the whole notion could become even more dangerous to them after 1789. Many saw Grand Orients installed by the Grand Orient of France as the possible conductor of Voltairianism and later Jacobinism.
In August, 1781 the Grand Lodge of England made its strong step into Polish territory by granting recognition to the Lodge “Catherine of the Northern Star”; first it was led by Count Hülsen, and later by Ignatius Potocki.15 It was done nearly during the same time when the Grand Orient of France was making the same steps, and again, these rivalries were already made before the latter Masonic establishment began to accept atheists after the Convent of 1877 in Paris. After some short-lived rivalry between Count F. Potocki and G. Wilkorski, thirteen Polish and Lithuanian lodges were united into the Grand Lodge [in the building supervised by Francis Woyna in Warsaw] on March 4, 1784.16 Notably, the whole title
“Catherine of the Northern Star '' was obviously alluding to the Empress Catherine II of Russia, which was ruling in the “Northern Palmyra '', St. Petersburg. It was the sign of a growing Russian influence in Poland, and particularly its Masonic organization, regardless of the original recognition. Freemasonry was so intricately interwoven with politics of the day that it may be often difficult to tell whether local Freemasons were following the trend, or the trend of politics was controlling their actions. It becomes more or less clear that similar to the religious affairs, Freemasonry, though it’s not a religion, was acting the role of a mediator between the countries and political representations. The whole complicated picture of the courtiers, various diplomats and intrigues made by them, was presented in the Masonic lodges because many of those diplomats and courtiers were indeed members of the lodges. They all
12 Johann Gottfried Findel, History of Freemasonry from its Origin Down to the Present Day, Second Edition, (London, Asher & Co., 1869) at p. 322.
13 Emmanuel Rebold, A General History of Freemasonry, p. 117.
14 Beginnings of the Grand Orient of Poland, <https://wielkiwschod.pl/historia/>, accessed on October 28, 2021.
15 Findel, History of Freemasonry from its Origin Down to the Present Day, p. 323.
16 Ibid., p. 323.
were representing their countries, or some political interests despite the fact that Freemasonry as an organization is standing aside from politics. Lodges and their statues or charters did not permit political intrigue, neither lodge in Poland-Lithuania, Russia, France, or England was officially representing any government of interest, however, the ‘brethren’ could do so indirectly. Intrigues and interests are part of the human character, it existed in the Catholic Church, Protestant Churches, various organizations working under their protection, for example, Jesuits. The same situation was taking place around Freemasons, too.
A lot of confusion can be seen in many different sources regarding the Masonic establishment in Poland-Lithuania during the period between 1760s and 1790s because some were working under the French Grand Orient jurisdiction or recognition, and some were recognized by England. Both were obviously claiming their originality and authority. As of March 18, 1784 Andrzej Mokronowski seems to be in charge [Grand Master] of the Grand National Orient, and this is according to Robert F. Gould. Additionally, the latter historian made some connections of this Masonic establishment to some lodge in Constantinople, and even the Russian military lodge in Kyiv; both were outside of Poland-Lithuania.17 Surely, many resources, when it comes to historical analysis may be contradictory, not all of them can be trusted, and this is specifically true when discussing Freemasonry and all the issues associated with this fraternity. As it was mentioned before, Freemasons could always represent their own interests, non-Masonic, but those of their countries and particular political figures. The whole concept of regulations, mutual recognition, numerous varieties of the ritual with its distinguished and designated symbolism are complicated enough to understand. Usually this organization looks mysterious, first, then some information comes up and eventually things become more or less clear, of course if that information has nothing to do with the conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, it runs deeper with various aspects, nuances and at some point the whole previous understanding may become null, even to Freemasons themselves. Many of them do not understand anything outside of their own ritual and the lodge. Eastern European Masonic traditions were clearly mixed with each other, some were not so well established in some countries, various traditions were re-invented and modified; particularly, the Zinnendorf Ritual18. The latter came out to reform the Templar Ritual of the Strict Observance, practiced by at least 70% of all Masonic lodges in Germany by the 1770s, and had many followers not merely in Germany, but later in Russia, Poland and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.19 Notably, the Strict Observance created and written in detail by Karl Gotthelf von Hund was meant to reform various issues that dealt with mysticism in the then existing English traditions of the Modern Observance, and called for more German identity of the local Freemasonry.20 All these German traditions in Freemasonry became important to the development of the order in Central and Eastern Europe, hence, German in general, had a lot of influence upon its eastern neighbors. The whole situation with Freemasonry in Poland was also influenced by these
17 Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc, p. 222.
18 Raffaella Faggionato, A Rosicrucian Utopia in Eighteenth-Century Russia: The Masonic Circle of N.I.
Novikov, (Springer Science & Business Media, 2005) at p. 248.
19 Ernest Friedrichs, Freemasonry in Poland and Russia, (International Office for Masonic Intercourse, 1908) at pp. 13-14.
20 The Rite of Strict Observance, <http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/texts/strict_observance.html#1>, accessed on October 29, 2021.
developments in German Masonic traditions, and were directly the factor of influence upon the Polish aristocrats and intellectuals that have decided to join the lodges. Once again, the factor of protection was important, and many local lodges and grand lodges were opening and closing in retrospect to those traditions that were in favor, often it was directly connected to those who were retaining Freemasonry, and the question of royal favoritism during that time was not the last thing to rely on. As a historian of Freemasonry Ernest Friedrichs said, - “But Freemasonry needs for its development and prosperity the support of the powers that be, just as it desires itself to be in its turn a support of those powers”.21
III
Partitions of Poland and Freemasonry
Freemasonry in Poland was shattered by the countries’ partitions, and the process of solid Masonic development, evolution of its rituals and local traditions could not continue as it did in Britain or its colonies, later the United States, or Canada. 1792 was the year when the kingdom of Poland was divided again by Prussia and Russia, leaving no independent Masonic organizations there because by that time both powers understood the influence of Freemasonry, its concept of democracy within itself, and above all, international connections of the organization. Revolutionary France was the source of fears, and Freemasonry was on the edge of these developments. Freemasonry under the Prussian, Russian or Austrian occupation was never truly independent in Poland, for example, even when Napoleon’s forces arrived there, and the French had established the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, still there were foreign influences, from France, obviously, and Prussia; it was clearly visible if looking at the lodges themselves.
On October 4, 1804 [still under the Prussian territorial control] one of the Prussian Grand Lodges, the “Three Globes” had installed a local Provincial Grand Lodge in Plock, later after Napoleon’s arrival, the Grand Orient of France had done the same by establishing the Lodge in Warsaw under its jurisdiction on July 18, 1808.22 It must be also underlined that the German, and particularly the Saxon influence had continued even under Napoleon due to a lot of deep local connections and the First Empire’s allegiances with Saxony; latter’s authority was not questioned that much, even though the Duchy was eventually maintained merely by the French.
At the same time, the Saxon influence was not that strict on the revival of Freemasonry following the Polish terms, and re-establishment of previously prominent Polish lodges such as the “Catharine of the Northern Star” became possible. Ludwik Gutakowski and Count Stanisław Potocki, have completely established the Grand Orient of Poland by 1812 and gave quite the distinguishable identity to Freemasonry in Poland.23 French influence and wide autonomy of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw played not the last role in giving Polish patriots and independently thinking nobility a boost for the future, the country was undergoing the process of a short-lived revitalization. Freemasonry there was protected by Napoleon and directly supervised by the Grand Orient of France. Latter fraternity was directly providing its republican
21 Friedrichs, Freemasonry in Poland and Russia, p. 12.
22 Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc, p. 222.
23 Ibid., p. 223.
traditions and most likely raising many new Polish Freemasons who would later support the same traditions in Poland. Nevertheless, the Grand Orient of Poland was strict and did not allow any other lodges [including the Grand Lodge “Three Globes” of Prussia], but itself [1811].24 It was somewhat reflecting the whole stance of Napoleonic France towards its subject, on one hand it was allowing many things to happen in terms of republican self-rule of the countries and regions, and on the other it was practicing authoritarian rule and censorship of a conqueror.
It was clearly based on Napoleon’s traditions. In 1813 all of these issues were gone as soon as Napoleon was retreating from Eastern and Central Europe, and the Grand Orient of France, which was under his control, would not have any influence there for a long time in the near future. Freemasonry did continue and was actually procuring some level of independence, especially until the death of Prince Poniatowski in March, 1815; even the special Mourning Lodge was established to pay the last duties to him and honor his service to Poland and its Masonic organization.25 Alexander I of Russia was possibly a Freemason himself [not confirmed] and earlier during his reign was open to any dialogue with Polish autonomists, constitutionalists in Russia, liberals of any kind and even planned to introduce a Constitution in his country. However, his mysticism, religious fanaticism, primarily Orthodox, messianism after the defeat of Napoleon, gave Alexander another perspective on everything he was seeing in his monarch’s role or mission. He began to believe that he was appointed by Providence to crush the heresy of republicanism after the French Revolution, defeat Napoleon and establish the conservative order in Europe. Closer to 1820 Freemasonry was seen by him as something heretical, dangerous, and republican in nature. The faith of any closed organization was to follow; it fell under more suspicion of being non-Christian, intriguing, and above all, threatening to the monarchy in Russia. It was reflected in those territories of Poland that were under the imperial control, the established Kingdom of Poland [also known as the Congress Poland, due to its establishment in 1815 at the Congress in Vienna]. All Masonic organizations were prohibited there, and surely the most threatening to the Tsar was the Grand Orient, the system of particularly French Freemasonry that was closely associated with Voltairianism, progressive ideas of democracy, and republicanism. Surely, with the traditional Polish influence in Belarus, Lithuania and western Ukraine, the Grand Orient of Poland was having a lot of influence there, too, practically even contradicting the authority of the Russian Grand Lodges, for example, the Grand Lodge of Astraea [established in 1815 in St. Petersburg]. There were the Grand Provincial Lodges of Lithuania [including Belarus] with seven lodges, Volhynia [Ukraine] with three lodges and Plock with three lodges; all together 30 lodges were forming the Grand Orient of Poland by 1818.26
24 The Freemasons' Monthly Magazine, Volumes 5-6, (Boston, Tuttle and Dennett, 1846) at p. 208.
25 Ibid., p. 208.
26 Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc, p. 223.
IV
Political Involvement
All of them were influencing local Ukrainian and Russian elites in Volhynia and other areas of Ukraine, Belarus, and Lithuania. Young Russian officers stationed in Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine, who were Freemasons in some Russian jurisdictional lodges could communicate with their Polish Masonic ‘brothers’, share ideas, republican sentiments and generally the Polish Freemasonry began to act some independent role in forming or building bridges with the Russian Decembrist movement.27 It was noted before that the Grand Orient of Poland had its influence in Kyiv, and even that “some” lodge was once opened there by Polish
‘brethren’. This discovery was made by Robert F. Gould, the researcher of Freemasonry. It could be the Lodge “Immortality” [1784], consisting of the Russian officers, but regulated by the Grand Orient.28 It is clearly important to note that Alexander I had decided to suppress Freemasonry in the Kingdom of Poland even earlier than in other territories of his empire, particularly the Russian lodges. It happened with his rescript on August 12, 1821 [followed by a promulgation to the Viceroy on November 6], a year prior to the total prohibition of Freemasonry in the Russian empire.29 It was already seen as the revolutionary force in the empire, and could not be tolerated with any dignity, even though nothing was done to establish some form of a controlled, purely ritualistic Masonic Grand Lodge, after the previously established pro-governmental Astrea. It was more or less practiced by Catherine II, however, Alexander, despite his early liberalism, had decided that religion and his absolutism cannot coexist with the Masonic organization. His decisions to close all the lodges, including those operating in St. Petersburg and Moscow and other cities under the Russian Masonic jurisdictions [in different rectified or traditional rituals], without establishing any kind of a controlled Masonic group, was in many ways dictated by the political secret societies, which have incorporated many Freemasons in their ranks. Russian Freemasons during the second decade of the 19th century were not reliable to Alexander as much as their partners in Poland.
He was simply afraid of their network. Polish ‘brethren’ were getting more patriotic and the country that was divided by the absolutist forces, with Russia being the most suppressive, was making Polish Freemasons to seek their network, look for ideas and use it in order to get to the most important point, revival of the Polish independence. Reliable Russian historian of Freemasonry Sergey Efremov had written in his book Freemasonry in Ukraine, that wishes to establish all kinds of secret societies with patriotic undertones and aims were standing in the first place.30 Polish officers were literally boiling with their wish to continue some form of resistance against despotism. The spirit of the May 3 Constitution was living in their minds and hearts, and the whole agenda of their struggle had obtained not merely a wish to revive Poland’s
27 Anita J. Prazmowska, A History of Poland, (Macmillan International Higher Education, 2011) at p. 138.
28 Alexander N. Pypin, Chronological Register of the Russian Lodges from the original introduction until its prohibition, [Хронологический указатель русских лож от первого введения масонства до запрещения его]
1731-1822, (St. Petersburg, 1873) at pp. 22-28.
29 Ibid., 223.
30 Oksana Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації:
Масонський Рух в Україні], (Nash Chas, 2012) at p. 91. Original source: Sergey Efremov, Freemasonry in Ukraine, S. Efremov. Selected works. Articles. Research. Monographies. (Kyiv, 2002) at pp. 689-705.
independence, but also continue with the republican ideals; if the first one was corresponding only to Poland, the second could spread anywhere, including Russia. It was the major point of conflict between absolutism and Freemasonry. The so-called National Freemasonry was organized by the Major of the 18th Infantry regiment Walerian Łukasiński in 1819. He was interested in political Freemasonry only, and understood its ideals only in retrospect of the republican values and resistance to tyranny of any kind. The whole organization was not very well organized, though it included well-disciplined officers and civil servants; reportedly it ceased to exist during the following year [1820].31 The Patriotic Society [Towarzystwo Patriotyczne] which was to follow the National Freemasonry, and both were closely related, was headed by the provisional central committee, W. Łukasiński and S. Sołtyk, but the organization was dismantled in 1822 and its head, the “iron Major”, was arrested.32 Such prominent people associated with Freemasonry as Antoni Barnaba Jabłonowski, judge Grzymala, Secretary Plichta, senator Count Stanisław Sołtyk, and many others were participating in the Society.33 These were prominent people who were planning, and did whatever they could to continue the tradition of Polish resistance. Regular Freemasonry could not act as the political agent, moreover, Freemasons were established as the philosophical or at least esoteric society, they did not plan to use, for example, the Grand Orient as a tool.
However, ideas that drew them there, and continuous attempts to move on with the spirit of republicanism that they have seen in Freemasonry was making them lean towards additional organizations, or Co-Masonry. Similar situation happened almost during the same time in Bavaria, when Adam Weishaupt34 and some other Freemasons decided to follow a more radical approach to social reform, and established the order of Illuminati, which was akin to Freemasonry, but was not part of it. This tradition of learning in Freemasonry and later implementing it elsewhere was limited by the abilities of regular Masonic traditions of political non-involvement, however, any Freemason is always capable of establishing other groups and societies that would actually implement their understanding of the Masonic principles and symbols. This tradition did not become very popular in Britain or its colonies, later USA, Canada and New Zealand, but was quite prosperous in Europe, particularly in Poland and Russia. Patriotic societies, philosophical circles and salons gave an additional detail to a lot of Freemasons, who were seeking to make more changes, and not just concentrate on the ritual part of the speculative Masonic tradition.
Military officers were usually patriotic, well disciplined, and therefore, could organize the lodge, something that is not simple; it may be far more complicated than founding a company. The whole process takes time, friendships, people that can trust and believe in someone, who wants them to become Freemasons. Everything becomes even more complicated if the government is standing on the way, or public opinion believes that Freemasonry is evil.
In 1819 the cavalry Captain of the Prince of Orange regiment, Franzisk Majewski, who was a
31 Ibid., pp. 91-92.
32 Jussi Jalonen, On Behalf of the Emperor, On Behalf of the Fatherland: Finnish Officers and Soldiers of the Russian Imperial Life-Guard on the Battlefields of Poland, 1831, (BRILL, 2015) at p. 81.
33 State Crimes in Russia in the 19th Century, collection composed by B. Basilevsky [or V. Bogucharsky], Volume I 1825-1876, [Государственные преступления в России в XIX веке], (St. Petersburg, 1906) at p 83.
34 See, Adam Weishaupt, Vollständige Geschichte der Verfolgung der Illuminaten in Bayern,
(Grattenauerischen Buchhandlung, 1786).
member of the Masonic Lodge “Templar Knights” in England, had founded the Lodge
“Templars” in Warsaw.35 He was inviting various people, primarily from what now may be called the middle class, mainly former military officers and civil servants, and of course, only those who were patriotic, hence, the main goal of the organization. It cannot be said that these new “Templars” were purely recognized by other Grand Lodges, especially in Russia, and that is not certain what was the status of their ritual, however, they were seeking more democracy and independence. The first Statute [General regulations] of the Grand Lodge that was the Lodge “Templars” itself, similar to the St. Petersburg Lodge “Astrea” founded in 1815, was turned down by F. Majewski because he was seeing it as a threat to his own power.36 It was supposed to be ruled by the Supreme Council, something that was undermining his authority.
Technically, this is the problem in many semi or completely irregular lodges, they are not looking for full recognition from other, authoritative, and established Grand Lodges, therefore, these establishments are prone to some “power struggle”, regardless of the noble ideas set by their founders. Additionally, many members of the aforementioned Patriotic Society were also participating in the Templars, and shared similar attitudes and organization. Nevertheless, they were not always the same, “Templars” were trying to portray themselves as Freemasons, not as the political organization, but with some political principles. For that reason, they have established the fourth symbolic Degree to actually separate themselves from their colleagues, and not to be absorbed by them. Both, Majewevski’s Templars, and the Patriotic Society were not looking for any serious conspiracy, their ideas were quite public, many knew their contacts, so both organizations were put down in the early 1820s by the Russian authorities. As was said before, these organizations and their participants were trying to establish some contacts with the Russian Decembrist movement, those pro-republican nobles, and officers, who believed in either removing the Tsar or limiting his power with the Constitution based law system. Surely, they were suspicious of them, the whole agenda based on liberalism in Russia could always get mixed with the so-called, liberal imperialism; they knew it and did not trust the Decembrists.
However, some did contact them [Decembrists M. Bestuzhev, M. Muravyov] in Kyiv by cornel Kryzanowski [not to be mixed with another cornel with the same name, participant in the American Civil War], despite the warnings given to both, the Patriotic Society and the Templars by the Ukrainian Freemason, Vasyl’ Lukashevych.37 Eventually, such contacts did not lead to any serious cooperation because evidence shows that in 1826 the investigation committee on the Decembrist Uprising did not find any support given by the Polish Patriotic Society, or the Templars of F. Majewski to the organizers of that uprising.38 At the same time, rebels can show examples to each other, and this form of the political Freemasonry was bothering the hearts and minds of the regular Masonic groups. The Northern and Southern Societies [Северное и Южное общества] in Russia were akin to the Polish Patriotic Society, and were if not sharing direct contacts, but could learn from each other. Russian Freemasons,
35 Oksana Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації:
Масонський Рух в Україні] p. 92.
36 Vladimir Sablin, Decembrists and Secret Societies in Russia, [Декабристы и тайные общества в России],
(Moscow, V.M. Sablin, 1906) at pp. 144-145.
37 Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації: Масонський Рух
в Україні] p. 96.
38 Sablin, Decembrists and Secret Societies in Russia, [Декабристы и тайные общества в России] p. 166.
especially members of the Grand Lodge Astrea in St. Petersburg were often Decembrists, too, and were establishing their “side projects” while modeling their Masonic lodges. Also, all these various Polish Masonic and Co-Masonic organizations were influencing Freemasonry and political ideas in Ukraine, which was also not always loyal to the Russian monarchy. However, Ukrainian Freemasons despite their experience with looking at the Patriotic Society of W.
Łukasiński, the Society of True Poles, Young Poland, and the Union of Polish Nation [all active in Ukraine] were not always inspiring, and they did not copy their ways. First, there were ethnic and cultural differences with their separate goals, second, Ukrainian Freemasons were looking for some form of confederation between all Slavic nations [ethnicities] with the center in Ukraine.39 This attitude was disliked by both Polish patriots, who could have territorial claims in Ukraine, and by the Russian Freemasons because of their liberal, but also patriotic and often chauvinistic position. Polish influence was indirect in Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania, it resisted Russian claims to Poland and this aspect could unite Polish Freemasonry and its political variations with some Ukrainian or Lithuanian ‘brothers’. It was all important to understand how interconnected these Masonic issues could be back then, and how complicated the system of Freemasonry always was since its beginnings. Polish influence in the mentioned countries that were in the middle between Poland and Russia was usually spreading among the Polish compatriots [gminy] that were widely presented there. However, they were all, even as Freemasons serving various goals, and could not really unite. After all, if Freemasons forget or stop obeying the old and traditional Regulations, which call for non-political stance, everything including brotherly connections and philosophy of Freemasonry, can collapse and turn the whole organization into a political party. At the same time all these patriotic organizations established by the seekers of Polish independence were often Freemasons, meaning that Freemasonry was clearly calling for freedom and self-understanding, otherwise why would they join this semi mystical and greatly philosophical order? Freemasonry in Poland became one of the largest factors of the Polish independence movement with the intellectual force.
Masonic establishments were given knowledge of the democratic process in the ritual labors, and taught various other experiences, particularly of the Western Europe. French enlightenment, British parliamentary system, and later the Great French Revolution, all were contributing to the Polish Masonic movement. So many prominent names had to produce something valuable. Secretive organization, discipline and networking have turned into instruments of politics, even though politics were not part of the regular and traditional Freemasonry.
39 Alexander Zinukhov, Essays on Freemasonry, [Этюды о Масонстве], (Kharkov, 1994) at p. 151.
Freemasonry in the Russian Empire until 1822
I
Origins
Freemasonry in the Russian Empire became possible due to various changes and reforms that took place there under Peter I [or Great], which introduced a lot of changes to the everyday life of nobility. Practically, the country became part of the European political spectrum, opening up to foreigners. Previously it was more or less closed to visitors unless they were welcomed by the administration as merchants or paid servicemen. The old Moscovy was closed not only to the rest of Europe in terms of politics, but also as the country that did not experience Renaissance; it did not undergo Reformation, except for the Orthodox Schism under Tsar Aleksey Mikhailovich that eventually made civil administration more important than the ecclesiastical power. Westernization of Russia under Peter I was important in introducing many new customs and traditions, including the influence of foreigners on everyday life, they became prominent in the Academy of Sciences [1724], military service and government, especially as advisers to the Tsar, specialists, and experts in various fields. There are continuous disputes, who was the first Freemason in Russia and which lodge became the original one, and some even popular ones do not hold any criticism. The biggest myth is that the first Freemason was Franz Lefort, Peter’s favorite adviser during his early years as the ruler, and that presumably he had introduced the royal art under the Tsar’s protection. This idea was defended by Boris Bashilov, a Russian historian with the anti-Masonic attitude, who saw Freemasonry as a tool of European enlightenment to undermine Russia as an independent country, spiritually and politically.40 This theory is first prejudiced, and second, does not hold any evidence, plus Freemasonry was officially established in 1717 in England, while Lefort died in 1699; most likely he was not even connected to any unofficial lodge prior to its historical establishment.
Historian of Freemasonry Oksana Krzyhanivska had also included a theory that even Jacob W.
Bruce, a Scot whose parents had moved to Moscovy in the 17th century, was a Freemason, and who became prominent under Peter I and influential in implementing of his reforms.41 On the other hand, such researchers as Vik Sparov believe that it lacks all the evidence and cannot be true, especially when it comes to Lefort and Peter I himself, who is also often seen as one of the first Freemasons.42 These theories do not get any support from the actual evidence, and seem to be rumored primarily by the anti-Masonic authors, who wish to criticize Peter I and his reforms, westernization, etc. The first documented Masonic organization led by Captain John Phillips dates back to 1731.43 This information can be confirmed by various sources,
40 Oksana Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації:
Масонський Рух в Україні] p. 51. Original source: Boris Bashilov, History of the Russian Freemasonry, issue 3-4, [История русского масонства, вып. 3-4], (Ruslo, 1992) at pp. 85-88.
41 Ibid., p. 51.
42 See, Vik Sparov, A Complete History of Freemasonry in one Book, [Полная история масонства в одной
книге], (Litres, 2020).
43 Bogdan Kravtsiv, Oleksandr Ogloblin. Freemasonry, Encyclopedia of the Ukrainian Studies, Volume 4
(Lviv, 1994).
including those in England and can be hardly disputed. Phillips was directly connected to England, and shows that typical way of how Freemasonry was spreading around Europe during that particular time. British merchants, nobles and, as here, military Captains, were often Freemasons and their English or generally British identity was marked specifically by this organization in the eyes of other Europeans. It was already known by the 1730s that Freemasonry was well connected to Britain. Russia was not an exclusion, and particularly during the reign of Anna Ioanovna [1730-1740] when many foreigners became closely related to the royal court and the whole period became known as Bironovschina [the time of Biron]
named after her favorite Ernst Johann Biron [Biren], the German-Kurland noble. It should be said that basically these foreigners brought Freemasonry to Russia, and made it popular [E.J.
Biron was not a Freemason]. Original lodges were incorporating merely foreigners without much noble titles, or famous names, they were mostly people as J. Phillips, Captains, foreign officers at the Russian service and merchants. One of the first famous Freemasons in Russia include Kiril Rozumovsky, originally from Ukraine he became very influential with the assistance of his brother, Aleksey Rozumovsky, a favorite of the Empress Elizaveta Petrovna [1741-1761].44
As in any other country during the 18th century, Freemasonry was spreading through British travelers such as Captain John Phillips, and was soon caught up by the local nobility, which saw this new and exotic fraternity as something that was giving them freedom from their traditional religions and the governmental authority. Suddenly, the lodge was making anyone equal [on the level] regardless of his social status; this notion and Masonic tradition was not always true, especially if a lodge was dominated by the aristocracy, but at least various nobles could feel equal to each other. The same process was taking place in Russia, first Freemasons were British or German servicemen at the Russian court, soon they were supported by the local nobles mostly among the young and ambitious military officers. They were also attracted by the exotic nature of Freemasonry, principles of brotherhood, new political ideas that could arrive with the Masonic agenda, and of course, philosophy of the European enlightenment.
Historian Richard Pipes in a foreword to his translation and analysis of the Karamzin’s Memoir on Ancient and Modern Russia had recited Pavel Milyukov, who said that “Freemasonry was the most suitable for that entire generation which hesitated in their choice between the old and the new faiths”.45 This definition is really correct because it shows the whole process of intellectual change that took place among many Europeans during the age of reason. Russian contemporaries were following the trend as much as the North American colonial intellectuals, and began to make their own sense of joining Freemasonry. Nevertheless, it took some time for Freemasonry in Russia to grow and become popular, even though during its first steps the government did not really notice it, and did not impose any restrictions. In 1740 another Captain from Britain, James Keith, received a patent from the Grand Lodge of England to continue working in three symbolic Degrees as the Provincial Grand Master for Russia. It was
44 Karpachev Sergey, The Guide Through Masonic Secrets, [Путеводитель по масонским тайнам], (Center of
the Liberal Arts Education [Центр Гуманитарного Образования], 2002) at p. 27. Also see, Oksana
Kryzhanivska, Secret Organizations: Masonic Movement in Ukraine [Таємні Організації: Масонський Рух в Україні] p. 52.
45 Nikolay Karamzin, Richard Pipes, Karamzin's Memoir on Ancient and Modern Russia: A Translation and
Analysis, (University of Michigan Press, 2005) at p. 26.
the moment when Russian Freemasonry began to become more Russian for that matter, and those aforementioned officers and curious nobles began to enter the newly established lodges.
During the 1740s there were no restrictions and Russia, being the Orthodox country, did not experience Papal prohibitions against Freemasonry. This fraternity was feeling free enough to conceptually move on in learning of the rituals, share Masonic and other literature, and certainly, unite various types of people. It was and remains one of the most important traditions of Freemasonry, gathering different opinions, leveling them under the ritual, adding new perspectives with the Masonic allegories and eventually producing something new in the form of higher tolerance, progressive concepts, and many other ideas of enlightenment.
II
Freemasonry as the Enlightenment
Certainly, a few words should be said about the enlightenment itself, and its progress in Russia after the reforms made by Peter I. Russia or as it was also known, Moscovy after its capital, and before the establishment of St. Petersburg was part of Europe geographically, had a lot of relations with Sweden, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Livonia, but was not really part of Europe. It was isolated from its affairs if they were not at its borders. It was practically seen as an Asiatic country by other Europeans, especially those that did not locate themselves close enough to it, France, England, the Netherlands, etc. Massive and extremely violent reforms made something unique, later seen in Japan under Meiji Restoration.46 Surely Russia was not that far from Europe as the Tokugawa Japan was, but far enough not to accept these changes quickly and peacefully. Russian society remained feudal, strongly aristocratic on top, practically denying any social lift for peasants, or even merchants [kupcy]. Freemasonry in Russia was developing quickly, and all the previous reforms made it possible in the 1730s, however, it was more aristocratic than in other European countries, lower classes did not really have any chance to join it. Nevertheless, Freemasonry did bring something new to the country, and it was definitely non-traditional, certainly exotic, and at the same time somewhat contradictory to the Orthodox concept of Christianity. Historian of philosophy and Russia, V.V. Zenkovsky wrote that, - “...there were people of a different temper of mind, who because of their spiritual needs, were distressed by the emptiness which followed their break with the ecclesiastical consciousness… The Russian freemasons were, of course, ‘Westerners’; they looked to their Western
‘brothers’ for revelations and precepts”.47 Freemasonry provided new perspectives, even if they were just agape [traditional and ritual dinner] or those were sheer ritual labors with later philosophical readings, all of it had contributed to growth and alternatives. It must be said that those who join Freemasonry may be truly religious, but their faith is different from others, they do not share fanaticism with radicals, and usually search for more innovative or moderate types of religious approach. Often they question slavery, serfdom, and social inequality because in Freemasonry itself, everyone should be on the level and should learn how to tolerate different views on life. In Russia there were different kinds of Freemasonry in terms of approaches to it.
46 Arnold J. Toynbee, A Study of History: Volume 1: Abridgement of Volumes I-IV, (OUP USA, 1987) at p.
269.
47 V.V. Zenkovsky, History of Russian Philosophy, Vol 1, (Columbia University Press, 1953) at p. 93.
