THE SHORT TALK BULLETIN |
... The Broken Column ...
The story of the broken column was first illustrated by Amos Doolittle in the
"true Masonic Chart" by Jeremy Cross, published in 1819.
Many of Freemasonry's symbols are of extreme antiquity and deserve the reverence
which we give to that which has had sufficient vitality to live long in the
minds of men. For instance, the square, the point within a circle, the apron,
circumambulation, the Altar have been used not only in Freemasonry but in
systems of ethics, philosophy and religions without number.
Other symbols in the Masonic system are more recent. Perhaps they are not the
less important for that, even without the sanctity of age which surrounds many
others.
Among the newer symbols is that usually referred to as the broken column. A
marble monument is respectedly ancient-the broken column seems a more recent
addition.
There seems to be no doubt that the first pictured broken column appeared in
Jeremy Cross's True Masonic Chart, published in 1819, and that the illustration
was the work of Amos Doolittle, an engraver, of Connecticut.
That Jeremy Cross "invented" or "designed" the emblem is open to argument. But
there is legitimate room for argument over many inventions. Who invented
printing from movable type? We give the credit to Gutenberg, but there are other
claimants, among them the Chinese at an earlier date. Who invented the airplane?
The Wrights first flew a "mechanical bird" but a thousand inventors have added
to, altered, changed their original design, until the very principle which first
enabled the Wrights to fly, the "warping wing", is now discarded and never used.
Therefore, if authorities argue and contend about the marble monument and broken
column it is not to make objection or take credit from Jeremy Cross; the thought
is that almost any invention or discovery is improved, changed, added to and
perfected by many men. Edison is credited with the first incandescent lamp, but
there is small kinship between his carbon filament and a modern tungsten
filament bulb. Roentgen was first to bring the "x-ray" to public notice-the
discoverer would not know what a modern physician's x-ray apparatus was if he
saw it!
In the library of the Grand Lodge of Iowa in Cedar Rapids, is a book published
in 1784; "A BRIEF HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY" by Thomas Johnson, at that time the
Tiler of the Grand Lodge of England (the "Moderns"). In this book the author
states that he was "taken the liberty to introduce a Design for a Monument in
Honor of a Great Artist." He then admits that there is no historical account of
any such memorial but cites many precedents of "sumptuous Piles" which
perpetuate the memories and preserve the merits of the historic dead, although
such may have been buried in lands far from the monument or "perhaps in the
depth of the Sea".
In this somewhat fanciful and poetic description of this monument, the author
mentions an urn, a laurel branch, a sun, a moon, a Bible, square and compasses,
letter G.
The book was first published in 1782, which seems proof that there was at that
time at least the idea of a monument erected to the Master Builder.
There is little historical material upon which to draw to form any accurate
conclusions. Men write of what has happened long after the happenings. Even when
faithful to their memories, these may be, and often are, inaccurate. It is with
this thought in mind that a curious statement in the Masonic ewspaper, published
in New York seventy-five years ago, must be considered. In the issue of May 10,
1879, a Robert B. Folger purports to give Cross' account of his invention, or
discovery, an inclusion, of the broken column into the marble monument emblem.
The account is long, rambling and at times not too clear. Abstracted, the
salient parts are as follows.
Cross found or sensed what he considered a deficiency in the Third Degree which
had to be filled in order to effect his purposes. He consulted a former Mayor of
New Haven, who at the time was one of his most intimate friends. Even after
working together for a week, they did not hit upon any symbol which would be
sufficiently simple and yet answer the purpose. Then a Copper-plate engraver,
also a brother, was called in. The number of hieroglyphics which had be this
time accumulated was immense. Some were too large, some too small, some too
complicated, requiring too much explanation and many were not adapted to the
subject. Finally, the copper-plate engraver said, "Brother Cross, when great men
die, they generally have a monument."
"That's right!" cried Cross; "I never thought of that!"
He visited the burying-ground in New Haven. At last he got an idea and told his
friends that he had the foundation of what he wanted. He said that while in New
York City he had seen a monument in the southwest corner of Trinity Churchyard
erected over Commodore Lawrence, a great man who fell in battle. It was a large
marble pillar, broken off. The broken part had been taken away, but the capital
was lying at the base. He wanted that pillar for the foundation of his new
emblem, but intended to bring in the other part, leaving it resting against the
base. This his friends assented to, but more was wanted. They felt that some
inscription should be on the column. after a length discussion they decided upon
an open book to be placed upon the broken pillar. There should of course be some
reader of the book! Hence the emblem of innocence-a beautiful virgin-who should
weep over the memory of the deceased while she read of his heroic deeds from the
book before her.
The monument erected to the memory of Commodore Lawrence was placed in the
southwest corner of Trinity Churchyard in 1813, after the fight between the
frigates Chesapeake and Shannon, in which battle Lawrence fell. As described, it
was a beautiful marble pillar, broken off, with a part of the capital laid at
its base. lt. remained until 1844-5 at which time Trinity Church was rebuilt.
When finished, the corporation of the Church took away the old and dilapidated
Lawrence monument and erected a new one in a different form, placing it in the
front of the yard on Broadway, at the lower entrance of the Church. When Cross
visited the new monument, he expressed great disappointment at the change,
saying "it was not half as good as the one they took away!"
These claims of Cross-perhaps made for Cross-to having originated the emblem are
disputed. Oliver speaks of a monument but fails to assign an American origin. In
the Barney ritual of 1817, formerly in the possession of Samuel Wilson of
Vermont, there is the marble column, the beautiful virgin weeping, the open
book, the sprig of acacia, the urn, and Time standing behind. What is here
lacking is the broken column. Thus it appears that the present emblem, except
the broken column, was in use prior to the publication of Cross' work (1819).
The emblem in somewhat different form is frequently found in ancient symbolism.
Mackey states that with the Jews a column was often used to symbolize princes,
rulers or nobles. A broken column denoted that a pillar of the state had fallen.
In Egyptian mythology, Isis is sometimes pictured weeping over the broken column
which conceals the body of her husband Osiris, while behind her stands Horus or
Time pouring ambrosia on her hair. In Hasting's ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND
ETHICS, Isis is said sometimes to be represented standing; in her right hand is
a sistrum, in her left hand a small ewer and on her forehead is a lotus, emblem
of resurrection. In the Dionysaic Mysteries, Dionysius is represented as slain;
Rhea goes in search of the body. She finds it and causes it to be buried. She is
sometimes represented as standing by a column holding in her hand a sprig of
wheat, emblem of immortality; since, though it be placed in the ground and die,
it springs up again into newness of life. She was the wife of Kronus or Time,
who may fittingly be represented as standing behind her.
Whoever invented the emblem or symbol of the marble monument, the broken column,
the beautiful virgin, the book, the urn, the acacia, Father Time counting the
ringlets of hair, could not have thought through all the implications of this
attempt-doubtless made in all reverence-to add to the dignity and impressiveness
of the story of the Master Builder.
The urn in which "ashes were safely deposited" is pure invention. Cremation was
not practiced by the Twelve Tribes; it was not the method of disposing of the
dead in the land and at the time of the building of the Temple. rather was the
burning of the dead body reserved as a dreadful fate for the corpses of
criminals and evil doers. That so great a man as "the widow's son, of the tribe
of Naphtali" should have been cremated is unthinkable. The Bible is silent on
the subject; it does not mention Hiram the Builder's death, still less the
disposal of the body, but the whole tone of the Old Testament in description of
funerals and mournings, make it impossible to believe that his body was burned,
or that his ashes might have been preserved.
The Israelites did not embalm their dead; burial was accomplished on the day of
death or, at the longest wait, on the day following. According to the legend,
the Master Builder was disinterred from the first or temporary grave and
reinterred with honor. That is indeed, a supposable happening; that his body was
raised only to be cremated is wholly out of keeping with everything known of
deaths, funeral ceremonies, disposal of the dead of the Israelites.
In the ritual which describes the broken column monument, before the figure of
the virgin is "a book, open before her." Here again invention and knowledge did
not go hand in hand. There were no books at the time of the building of the
Temple, as moderns understand the word. there were rolls of skins, but a bound
book of leaves made of any substance-vellum, papyrus, skins-was an unknown
object. Therefore there could have been no such volume in which the virtues of
the Master Builder were recorded.
No logical reason has been advanced why the woman who mourned and read in the
book was a "beautiful virgin." No scriptural account tells of the Master Builder
having wife or daughter or any female relative except his mother. The Israelites
reverenced womanhood and appreciated virginity, but they were just as reverent
over mother and child. Indeed, the bearing of children, the increase of the
tribe, the desire for sons, was strong in the Twelve Tribes; why, then, the
accent upon the virginity of the woman in the monument?
"Time standing behind her, unfolding and counting the ringlets of her hair" is
dramatic, but also out of character for the times. "Father Time" with his scythe
is probably a descendant of the Greek Chromos, who carried a sickle or reaping
hook, but the Israelites had no contact with Greece. It may have been natural
for whoever invented the marble monument emblem to conclude that Time was both a
world-wide and a time immemorial symbolic figure, but it could not have been so
at the era in which Solomon's Temple was built.
It evidently did not occur to the originators of this emblem that it was
historically impossible. Yet the Israelites did not erect monuments to their
dead. In the singular, the word "monument" does not occur in the Bible; as
"monuments" it is mentioned once, in Isaiah 65-"A people...which remain among
the graves and lodge in the monuments." In the Revised Version this is
translated "who sit in tombs and spend the night in secret places." The emphasis
is apparently upon some form of worship of the dead (necromancy). The Standard
Bible Dictionary says that the word "monument" in the general sense of a simple
memorial does not appear in Biblical usage.
Oliver Day Street in SYMBOLISM OF THE THREE DEGREES" says that the urn was an
ancient sign of mourning, carried in funeral processions to catch the tears of
those who grieved. But the word "urn" does not occur in the Old Testament nor
the New.
Freemasonry is old. It came to us as a slow, gradual evolution of the thoughts,
ideas, beliefs, teachings, idealism of many men through many years. It tells a
simple story-a story profound in its meaning, which therefore must be simple, as
all great truths in the last analysis are simple.
The marble monument and the broken column have many parts. Many of these have
the aroma of age. Their weaving together into one symbol may be-probably is-a
modernism, if that term can cover a period of nearly two hundred years. but the
importance of a great life, his skill and knowledge; his untimely and pitiful
death is not a modernism.
Nothing herein set forth is intended as in any way belittling one of
Freemasonry's teachings by means of ritual and picture. These few pages are but
one of many ways of trying to illuminate the truth behind a symbol, and show
that, regardless of the dates of any parts of the emblem, the whole has a place
in the Masonic story which has at least romance, if not too much fact, behind
it.