|
History - 1
Rumah Hantu by Prof Jean De Bernardi |
| ABSTRACT IN THIS PAPER,1 I investigate interactions and tensions between European Freemasons and Chinese sworn brotherhoods in nineteenth century Penang. In Penang, as in India, Parsis and Muslims were the first Asians initiated in Masonic lodges, and the records of Penang's Lodge Neptune show that this lodge included a Muslim member as early as 1827. In light of the wealth of the `respectable Chinese,' there is surprisingly little to suggest that Chinese became members in the Straits Settlements. While monotheistic Muslims, Parsis, and Sikhs (and even Hindus) satisfied Masonic requirements that initiates believe in the Great Architect of the Universe, and take their solemn oath on a sacred text, Buddhists did not meet the Masonic membership requirement that they believe in a Supreme Being. Moreover, most Chinese were polytheists, and their tendency towards 'superstitious" behaviour disqualified them in the eyes of many Masons, who also worshipped at the altar of science, and found meaning in the Enlightenment quest for rational scientific learning. Some, however, sought to overcome the unmoveable boundary between monotheists and polytheists by demonstrating deep, shared roots between the rituals of Freemasonry and the those of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. While the Chinese sworn brotherhoods were illegal in China, they were tolerated in the Straits Settlements, and I speculate that interaction between members of the two groups may have been more extensive than previously recognized. Expanding the Boundaries of Europe and China: European Freemasons and Chinese Sworn Brotherhoods in Penang While doing archival research a few years ago on 19th century Penang Chinese sworn brotherhoods, I became curious about European Masonic groups in the Straits Settlements. Many of the colonial authors who wrote about the sworn brotherhoods (which they called 'secret societies') compared them to Masonic groups, and claimed to find remarkable similarities. In 1826, for example, Straits Settlements missionary sinologist William C. Milne drew attention to six striking parallels that he discerned between the secret sworn brotherhood of the Heaven and Earth Society and the Freemasons: both groups had pretensions to great antiquity; both emphasized philanthropy and "the social virtues" ; their ceremonies of initiation were strikingly similar (including the ceremonial use of the 'bridge of swords'); the Heaven and Earth Society was ruled by three `brethren,' which resembled the "three masonic orders of apprentice, fellowcraft, and mason"; both used signs for identification, in particular "motions with the fingers"; finally, Milne claimed that the ethos of "Liberty and Equality," which some call the "grand secret of freemasonry," was precisely shared by the two groups (Milne 1845 [1826]:68). Many later authors repeated these observations, and some Masons claimed that the similarities proved that the two groups shared origins of great antiquity. What scholars know for certain, however, is that both of these groups were inventions of culture created in the early modern period.. Both groups drew deeply on traditional symbolic forms in order to invent and legitimate cosmopolitan organizations that were the product of the growth of world capitalism. |
| Two questions I decided to seek the answer to two questions. The first was whether the colonial authors who wrote about Chinese sworn brotherhoods were in fact members of the European 'sworn brotherhood' of Freemasonry, and how this might have influenced their perspective on the Chinese groups. My second question, and the more difficult one, was whether the alleged similarities between the two groups were the result of contact and mutual influence between them in the colonial period. I approached the officers of Singapore's Masonic Hall, and found that they were willing to allow me access to their library collection. While I easily documented the fact that many colonial authors who wrote about the Chinese sworn brotherhoods (including Jonas D. Vaughan and William Stirling) were Masons, nonetheless the answer to the second question remains elusive. Nonetheless, I will seek to make the case that contact between the two groups was undoubtedly more extensive than previously recognized. 2 I begin my discussion by asking why so many European authors were so fascinated by the challenge of decoding the secret ritual practices of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. I then examine the development of Freemasonry in Asia (and Penang). Finally, I offer my speculative conclusions about the relationship that existed between European and Chinese 'Masonic' groups in Penang. European Perspectives on the Sworn Brotherhoods During the nineteenth century, the British found the Chinese residents of the Straits Settlements to be exclusive and secretive, using their organizations to resist unwanted regulation. Faced with their lack of prestige in Chinese eyes and problems in enforcing their vision of public order, the British often held the sworn brotherhoods (which they termed 'secret societies') accountable. The British accused the sworn brotherhoods of ignoring British law when they promoted popular (but illegal) activities like gambling, and feared their ability to mobilize support in opposition to government decrees. They also noted that in the course of the elaborate ritual of initiation, the initiates sometimes swore oaths to protect one another from the workings of the colonial courts and government. While their coded ritual symbolism fascinated the British, their exclusiveness (a mirror image of British social exclusivity) provoked them, and they sought to penetrate the group's secrets--both its ritual meanings and social practices. In nineteenth century Penang, Chinese had formed five sworn brotherhoods. Three of these were Heaven and Earth (or Triad) style groups: the Ghee Hin (Yixing, which Chinese probably brought to Penang from Burma or Thailand in 1801), Ho Seng (Hesheng, 1810), and Hai San (Haishan, 1823) Societies. The Hokkien community formed the Chun Sim society in 1826 (Blythe 1969:54), while Straits-born Hokkiens who broke away from the Ghee Hin formed the God of Prosperity (Tua Pek Kong; Dabo Gong) or Kien Tek (Jiande) society in 1844 (Blythe 1969:75). Although the colonial rulers termed the organizations that Chinese called gongsi or hui "secret societies,"theirs was a very public form of secrecy.Their leaders were known to the authorities, and members assembled in huge crowds to perform the rituals of the lunar cycle. Jonas D. Vaughan, for example, described the Penang Ghee Hin's celebration of the Central Festival of the seventh lunar month, claiming that at least 3,000 members came together for a collective feast in their lodge and on the adjacent street (Vaughan 1854:21). Although European observers often noted the extravagant scale of these events, their interest and attention focussed not on the performance of periodic festivals, but rather on the Heaven and Earth Society's secret initiation ritual. |
| Ritual
Practices In the period from Penang's establishment in 1786 to the suppression of the Chinese secret sworn brotherhoods in 1890, we find the growth of an Orientalist scholarship that Bernard Cohn (1996) has described as a 'conquest of knowledge', much of it focussed on decoding the arcane rituals of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. Indeed, the colonial literature on the Chinese in Malaya may be so extensive precisely because "the secret societies puzzled, fascinated, and alarmed British and Malays alike for so long" (McIntyre 1976:269). These societies, formed for charitable purposes and self defence (including protection from a potentially vindictive spirit world) inducted new members with an impressive initiation ritual and a ritual oath. While colonial law enforcers were most concerned about the sworn brotherhoods' involvement with illegal activities like gambling, they also sought information about these secret rituals, both before and after the groups were outlawed in 1890. While their desire for knowledge about these groups no doubt was motivated by their desire to better understand and control the Chinese, their interest far transcended these pragmatic goals. The arcane aspects of societies' ritual practices both fascinated and annoyed colonial officers. Repeatedly they sought to demystify them through the criminal legal process, and through the translation and publication of their sacred texts Repeatedly European Freemasons in the Straits Settlements drew attention to the striking parallels between their own rituals and those of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods, and some argued that the two organizations shared historical roots of great antiquity. In the Straits Settlements, the two also were to be found side-by-side, for while the first Chinese sworn brotherhood was established in Penang in 1801, the Freemasons opened their first lodge there in 1809, only establishing a lodge in Singapore in 1844.3 Thus in Penang, Chinese and European Masonic organizations coexisted for nine decades before the government suppressed the Chinese groups in 1890. Penang's Freemasons came to the settlement steeped in the religion of the Enlightenment, with its emphasis on scientific culture, constitutional monarchy, social mobility under aristocratic patronage, and religious tolerance (Jacob 1981:109). Aware of the sworn brotherhood's opposition to China's last imperial dynasty, Masons who favoured republican forms of governments believed that the sworn brotherhoods shared with them their most deeply held values--liberty, fraternity, and equality. At the same time, Masons who protected the secrecy and exclusivity of their own secret society eagerly published articles and books revealing the secrets of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. While some sought to demonstrate the moral soundness of the teachings of these Chinese groups and to argue for their tolerant treatment, others rejected the similarities as superficial. Especially controversial were the Heaven and Earth Society's anti-dynastic political goals (from which some Masons--fearful of suppression--vigorously sought to distance themselves), and their involvement in criminal activities. Whatever their similarities might have been, a significant asymmetry existed between the two secret societies. While their collective social power and influence protected the European Freemasons and ensured their privacy, the Chinese, by contrast, not infrequently suffered the indignity of the exposure of their ritual secrets in police investigations and interrogations. |
|
Enlightened gentlemen Let me now offer some background on the social practices of Freemasonry. Freemasonry ensured that a new, global capitalist elite had a ritual means to sanctify its power and ensure its social honour, and a social organization by which to recognize the existence of emergent social networks that transcended ethnic, religious, and national boundaries.At the same time, however, in both ideology and practice, Freemasonry linked together morality, education, and social distinction, and drew a crucial social boundary between enlightened gentlemen and the unenlightened folk (Bullock 1996a:59). The European elites of Penang and Singapore embraced Freemasonry, since they found the association useful in extending their social networks and ensuring their respectability and trustworthiness. After its de-Christianization, they also extended the benefits of membership to "respectable" Asians, thereby redrawing the boundaries of consociality. In so doing, they created a cosmopolitan group that (ideally at least) transcended ethnic and religious divisions. The first Masonic lodge in India was formed in Calcutta in 1730, and a Dutch merchant in the East India Company founded the first Masonic lodge in Indonesia (La Choisi) in Batavia in 1762. A number of lodges followed, including a British lodge formed in Bencoolen, Sumatra in 1765, and Penang's Lodge Neptune in 1809 (McDonald 1940; Veur 1976). In Penang, men who had been initiated as Masons met informally for several years before 1809, the year in which Lodge Neptune of Penang finally was consecrated under warrant from the Grand Master of the "Antient" Grand Lodge of England, the Duke of Atholl (Cheesman 1951:12; Frisby 1958:17). Penang was one of a network of trading centers established by the East India Company, and Neptune's 1810 membership list included four merchants, a surveyor, an accountant, a police magistrate, a factor, a warehouse assistant, a marine lieutenant, a ship's surgeon, the boatswain of the H.M.S. Wilhelmina, and a lieutenant of artillery (Frisby 1958:22). Before Freemasonry was deChristianized, Penang's Lodge Neptune celebrated two yearly festivals from sunrise to sundown--St. John the Apostle and Evangelist's Day on December 27th, and St. John the Baptist's Day in midsummer (Dix 1933:155). Masons celebrated the two Saint Johns' Days much as Chinese celebrated their temple fairs, with a ceremonial public procession to Saint George's Anglican Church, the worship of their patron saints, and sumptuous collective feasting. The similarity may be even deeper than this, however, for just as Chinese celebrate two major festivals to the complementary forces of Heaven and Earth at the beginning and midpoint of the year, the festivals of the two Saint Johns have their roots in pre-Christian solar worship. The midwinter festival of Saint John the Apostle on December 27th recalled "the birthday of the god Sol" -- the return of the sun, while the Eve of Saint John the Baptist coincided with midsummer's eve, a solar event still sometimes celebrated with bonfires (Mackey 1927 [1884]:202). By 1819 Lodge Neptune had became dormant (Frisby 1958:36), but in 1821 an artillery officer, Brigadier O'Halloran, applied for a warrant from the Provincial Grand Lodge of Bengal to establish a military lodge in Penang. The new lodge, Humanity with Courage, was formed by artillery who had belonged to Lodge Courage with Humanity at the Indian military depot Dum Dum before their transfer to Penang (McDonald 1940:184). A number of military officers stationed in Penang became members, including officers of the 65th Regiment of Bengal Native Infantry, the 35th Regiment of Madras Native Infantry, and the 12th Regiment of Madras Native Infantry (Dix 1933:167). Lodge Humanity with Courage was so popular in Penang that "almost every civilian of respectability was ranged beneath its banners" (Jennings 1970:5). In 1825, a high-ranking visiting Mason pointed out, however, the irregularity of admitting civilians to a military lodge (a prohibition that Masons in the East had tended to ignore [McDonald 1940:183]). The Penang Masons decided to dissolve Lodge Humanity with Courage, and to revive Lodge Neptune under the Grand Lodge of England (Jennings 1970:6). This lodge survived until 1844, when John Colson Smith left Penang to become Headmaster of the Raffles Institute in Singapore. After Lodge Neptune closed, Penang had no officially sanctioned Masonic lodge until 1875, when Lodge Royal Prince of Wales was founded (Dix 1933:156). |
| Public
honour J. C. Smith's arrival in Singapore, he took steps to promoted the formation of a Masonic lodge, and Singapore soon overtook Penang as the centre for Masonic activity in the Straits Settlements. According to an 1845 article in the Madras Review, the final demise of Lodge Neptune was due to Penang's "diminished commercial importance," and the dwindling number of European residents (Buckley 1984 [1902]:435). While Singapore did not have a Masonic Lodge until 1845, many of its prominent citizens already were members when Lodge Zetland in the East was formed. The list of Singaporeans applying to form a lodge in 1844 included residents who had already been initiated in lodges in Scotland, Gibraltar, London, Bermuda, Calcutta, Allahad, Secunderabad, and Penang ("Freemasonry in the Eastern Archipelago" 1929:18). While few records for this period survive, those remaining testify to the popularity of the Masonic Lodges among the European elite (Beavis 1934). Among the members of the Penang and Singapore lodges were included individuals like Captain George Felix Gottleib, Penang's first harbor master, who was a member of Humanity with Courage; his son, Felix Gottlieb, a lawyer in the government service who was active in Masonic lodges in Singapore and Penang (Jennings 1970:12); John Colson Smith, who had served in the 2nd Battalion Irish Fusiliers in Madras (where military lodges enjoyed great popularity), and came to Penang to become Headmaster at the Penang Free School; Jonas Daniel Vaughan, Superintendent of Police in Penang in the 1850s, who became an active Mason after his transfer to Singapore; Thomas Braddell, a plantation owner who later became the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Jennings 1997:52-53); Samuel Dunlop, Inspector-General of Police and later President of the Singapore Municipality; W. H. Read, a prominent Singaporean businessman who acted as an agent for the Sultan of Johore; and N. B. Dennys, a trained sinologist who had acted as Penang's Protector of Chinese. Some scholars have concluded that Freemasonry was in fact the `religion' of the Enlightenment (albeit a highly exclusive one designed for an all-male elite).According to Masonic ideology, members of this "borderless brotherhood" were to follow three universal principles -- "brotherly love, relief [charity], and truth" as a way of achieving "higher standards in life" ( 150 Years of Freemasonry in the Archipelago 1995:27 ) They taught new members this ideology through allegorical rituals designed to mould the values and moral behaviour of initiates. In consideration of the Masonic emphasis on ritual performance, Steven Bullock has disputed the claim that the fraternity was predominantly secular in its aims: What distinguishes Masonry is not its constitutions but its religious character and its link to public honour.:The fraternity placed its values and its practices in an emotionally charged and heightened ritual setting that claimed a direct link to ultimate values. This partly included religion in the narrower sense. Masons met in lodges of St. John that often celebrated his feast day with religious observances in churches and constitutionally excluded atheists. Their rituals acted out scenes from the building of Solomon's Temple (Bullock 1996b:88). In its emphasis on symbolism, ritual, and the bonds of sworn brotherhood, the European Freemasons greatly resembled the Chinese secret sworn brotherhoods, whose leaders also claimed public honour through a ritual process that taught the group's moral code and sanctified their social bond. Expanding the Boundaries of Brotherhood |
| DeChristianised In the eighteenth century, Freemasons created a socially inclusive organization that joined together Great Britain's three major ethnic groups--English, Irish, and Scots.4 But in the early nineteenth century, Freemasonry became even more socially inclusive when the group and its rituals were "deChristianized" in order to allow members of other religions (including Jews) to become Masons (Cryer 1984:55; Shaftesley 1979). In 1813, two Masonic traditions, the Antients and the Moderns, reunited in a Lodge of Reconciliation to form the United Grand Lodge of England, and Augustin Frederick, the Duke of Sussex (1773-1843) became its Grand Master. The Duke (who had studied Hebrew in order to read the Bible) was a close friend of many Jewish families, and was known as "Jewry's ambassador in non-Jewish circles" (Cryer 1984:56). He concluded that the rituals of Freemasonry should be "deChristianized," and abolished Christian forms of ceremonies while retaining "the ethical and moral basis of strict honour and integrity" in order to allow members of other religious groups to become Masons (Cryer 1984:55). Initiates were required only to demonstrate their belief in the Great Architect of the Universe (GAOTU), and to take their solemn oath on the sacred book of their religious tradition. Consequently, the practice of celebrating the Festivals of St. John by attending a church service in regalia was gradually ended, and the date of the festival was shifted to the Wednesday following the festival of St. George. In their ritual practice, Masons substituted Moses and Solomon for the two Saints John as the "two great parallels of Freemasonry" (Cryer 1984:57). In Asia, practitioners of monotheist religions (including Muslims, Parsis, and Sikhs) were potential members of 'cosmopolitan' Masonic lodges. The exclusive social practices of Masons in Asia changed slowly, however, and membership continued to be largely confined to British civilians and armed personnel (although as early as 1775, a Masonic group in India sought local royal patronage by initiating the first Indian Mason - the Nabob of the Carnatic). Among the earliest Asian initiates were Parsis, who had fled Persia for India when Islamic rulers had pressured them to give up their Zoroastrian religion. The Parsis of Bombay included a number of merchants, bankers, and businessmen who in the nineteenth century took the lead in adopting western dress (Cohn 1996:132; see also Luhrmann 1996). While Parsis were potential members of lodges in India, nonetheless when Manockjee Cursetjee (whose Zoroastrian religion should have posed no obstacle to initiation) was proposed as a Mason in 1841 in Bombay, the lodge rejected his application, even though it had the support of the Provincial Grand Master of Western India, Dr. James Burns. Manockjee Cursetjee travelled to England, where he won the support of the Duke of Sussex, and was initiated in Paris according to the French Scottish Rite. On his return to Bombay, however, the Masonic Lodge once again rejected his application. Finally, 27 Masons petitioned the Grand Master of West India that a lodge be formed for the admission of Indians, and in 1843 he approved the formation of Lodge Rising Star of Western India (Patel 1976:12; 150 Years of Freemasonry in the Archipelago 1995:25). Thus while some Asian Masonic lodges were 'cosmopolitan,' others were exclusively Asian in their membership, and adapted Masonic practices to their own religious traditions. In Penang, Muslim and Parsis were the first Asians initiated, and the records of Penang's Lodge Neptune show that this lodge included a Muslim member--Hassan bin Abrahimûas early as 1823 (Dix 1933:167). In 1830 Lodge Neptune admitted a Parsi merchant, Cowasjee Shapoorjee of Rangoon, who was Master of the brig "Robert Spanker" and after 1833 the names of Indians appeared regularly on the membership lists (Jennings 1997:58; Patel 1976:12; Frisby 1958:39). |
| Hindus
and Chinese The Duke of Sussex also ruled in 1840 since the gods of the Hindu pantheon were personifications of aspects of the Supreme Being, Hindus could appropriately become Masons (150 Years of Freemasonry in the Archipelago 1995; Walker 1979:178-179). Many Europeans still had doubts, however, questioning whether Hindus (with their multiplicity of deities) truly believed in the Great Architect of the Universe, whether the cultural practices of Hinduism really constituted a religion, and what the Hindu equivalent of the Bible or the Koran might be (Walker 1979:179). In light of the wealth of the `respectable Chinese,' there is surprisingly little to suggest that Chinese became members in the Straits Settlements. While monotheistic Muslims, Parsis, and Sikhs (and even Hindus) satisfied Masonic requirements that initiates believe in the Great Architect of the Universe, and take their solemn oath on a sacred text, Buddhists did not meet the Masonic membership requirement that they believe in a Supreme Being (Haffner 1988 [1977]:72). Moreover, most Chinese were polytheists, and their tendency towards "superstitious" behaviour undoubtedly disqualified them in the eyes of many Masons, who also worshiped at the altar of science, and found meaning in the Enlightenment quest for rational scientific learning. Comparison with Hong Kong, which formed its first Masonic lodge in 1844, may illuminate the situation of the Chinese in the Straits Settlements vis-a-vis Freemasonry (Haffner 1988:18). The first known Asian initiate in Hong Kong was a Parsi, who was sworn in on the Zoroastrian sacred book around 1888. A Chinese merchant who applied at the same time, however, withdrew his application (no doubt advised that it would not be successful [Haffner 1988:72]). Not surprisingly, then, the first Chinese member in Hong Kong, who was initiated in 1889, was a lieutenant in the Imperial Chinese Navy who had converted to Christianity (Haffner 1988:72).5 In Indonesia, Dutch Freemasons also were cautious in admitting non-royal Asian members. The first Chinese to apply for admission was The Boen Keh, a Chinese Kapitan and sugar planter in Surabaya, who applied to become a Mason in 1856. Despite his role as leader of the Chinese community, the Freemasons initially rejected his application, for his "indelible" Chinese values were deemed incompatible with those of Freemasonry: . . . numerous objections were raised to "the opinionated and indelible Chinese concepts of virtue and vice, life and death, promises and secrets" which seemed "diametrically opposed to Western tenets and conceptions" (Veur 1976:14). He was, however, admitted in the following year (see also Fripp 1979:211). By contrast, a lodge in Jogjakarta admitted a Chinese in 1871, and promoted him quickly since he "not only mastered the teachings of Confucius but also applied them both in and outside the Masonic Temple" (Veur 1976:15). |
|
Chinese Sworn Brotherhoods Nineteenth century Freemasonry expressed an ethos of cosmopolitanism and increasing inclusiveness, first expanding its boundaries to bring together the diverse peoples of England (including people divided by religious denomination), then promoting an extension of Masonic brotherhood to monotheistic Asians. Nonetheless monotheism defined the absolute boundaries of brotherhood, and this boundary excluded Chinese polytheists and Buddhists (although some Masons extended an unqualified approval to Confucian moralists) Some, however, sought to overcome the unmoveable boundary between monotheists and polytheists by demonstrating deep, shared roots between the rituals of Freemasonry and the those of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. No doubt some of these supposed similarities were the product of a process of translation in which Europeans sought to "locatate the strange in a frame of reference with which they were familiar" (Cohn 1996:53). European authors termed Heaven and Earth society meeting places "lodges" called Chinese sworn brothers "Chinese Freemasons", and found equivalents for Chinese moral virtues in the watchwords of the French and American revolutions, "liberty and equality" They also viewed the Heaven and Earth Society's worship of the Lord of Heaven (a seditious act) as evidence for a fundamental monotheism. Having found an equivalence for the Chinese sworn brotherhoods in European Masonic lodges, authors may have overestimated the resemblance. Moreover, the Masons were eager to prove the antiquity of their own ritual forms, and considered the existence of the Chinese rituals of sworn brotherhood as evidence for that primal antiquity. While we may regard both groups' historical claims with some skepticism, there may be other explanations for the parallels between the two groups. In the early modern period, both Europeans and Chinese drew deeply on traditional symbolic forms in order to invent and legitimate cosmopolitan organizations that were the product of the growth of world capitalism. For the Freemasons, sources included the ancient traditions of the Near East, including some that also influenced the development of Chinese popular religious culture. Consequently, at least some of the parallels are no doubt the result of the Masonic turn towards a widely shared dualistic and triadic symbolism, and their adoption of celestial emblems to represent the divine. We may also speculate, however, whether mutual contact led to influence and borrowing during this period. Daniel Overmyer has noted that the Chinese secret societies of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with their "difficult initiation rituals, explicitly anti-Manchu political ambitions and elaborate secret codes involving both gestures and modified written characters", were not characteristic of the Chinese folk Buddhist tradition, which had far simpler membership rituals and proclaimed their message openly (Overmyer 1976:5; 56). Barend ter Haar also notes that the Triad's ritual enactment of a symbolic death and rebirth, while common in many cultures, was not previously documented for Chinese culture (Haar 1998:12-13), nor does he locate any precedent in Chinese culture for the passage through the gate of swords as part of the blood covenant ritual (although he argues that the Triad could have borrowed this ritual practice from non-Han groups [ter Haar 1998:168]). By contrast, ritual death and rebirth is central to the allegorical rituals of Freemasonry, and the passage through the gate of swords was a publically performed ceremonial practice. Moreover, Masons also made use of non-verbal signs of recognition, and Masonic authors frequently claimed to recognize Triad non-verbal signs of recognition (although they were discrete in explaining the similarities). |
| Heaven and Earth Society While European presence in China was severely limited prior to the mid-nineteenth century, there were many possible points where contact between members of the two 'Masonic' traditions could have taken place in South and Southeast Asia. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, members of the East India Company had established lodges all along the Coromandel Coast of India, in cities and plantations in the Indonesian archipelago, and in the Straits Settlements on the Malay peninsula. By 1790, military lodges also were widely popular anywhere that military units were stationed, including Canada, Gibraltar, Jamaica, America, and India. These lodges held ambulatory warrants that left them "free to meet wherever their members found themselves," whether it was in barns, tents or taverns (McDonald 1940:182). Unfortunately, these highly mobile, unlocalized groups have left but a thin written record of their activities. Masonic groups were a significant social presence throughout the empire built by the East India Company, and cannot fail to have inspired interest and curiosity among the Chinese who came into contact with them. For Chinese involved in commerce in Southeast Asia or India, the advantages of social intercourse with merchants and landowners of the East India Company would have been obvious. As we have seen, however, European Masons were doubtful as to the religious qualifications of Chinese for Masonic membership. A sympathetic Mason might have encouraged a bilingual cultural broker (in Southeast Asia or elsewhere) to join their group, however, and encouraged him to reform his own sworn brotherhood along Masonic lines, taking the oath of membership on Chinese sacred books rather than the Bible (just as Parsis, Muslims, and Hindus did, using their own sacred texts). If this did occur, then the cultural broker would have had to adapt elements of Freemasonry to Chinese cultural and linguistic traditions through a process of translation, selective borrowing, and synthesis. Most importantly, he would have had to establish a monotheistic foundation for the ritual practice, which could only have been found in worship of Heaven, a ritual prerogative monopolized by the Emperor (to the dismay of proselytizing Christians). But according to their historical myth, the Heaven and Earth Society founders appropriated the imperial prerogative when they took their oath of sworn brotherhood - a seditious act that Penang Hokkiens still commemorate when they pray to the Lord of Heaven on the ninth day of the first lunar month (see DeBernardi forthcoming). I find it significant, therefore that in his 1866 study of Heaven and Earth Society ritual, Gustav Schlegel claimed that both Masons and Chinese shared the notion of a "single and undivided god" (Schlegel 1991 [1866]:xiii). Vaughan also noted that Penang Ghee Hin (or Heaven and Earth Society) members used the term Tien Teh (Tiandi) as a name for their main deity (Vaughan1854:16). While Tiandi literally refers to 'Heaven and Earth,' the term also may be have been a punning homophone for "Heavenly Emperor,' which also suggests worship of Heaven (and possibly a claim to worship the Chinese equivalent of the Masonic"Great Architect of the Universe" Although evidence for the scenario that I propose is slim, there is one tantalizing hint that Europeans in the Straits Settlements did seek to introduce Freemasonry to the Chinese elite. In the mid-nineteenth century, a missionary in the Straits Settlements commented that although the Chinese secret societies were anti-Christian, their leaders had responded to overtures from English Masons. He noted that "The English, instead of destroying these secret societies, have tried to introduce among the Chinese freemasonry; and many respectable merchants among them generally frequent the lodge of the place where they are."6 This suggests that in the Straits Settlements the Freemasons allowed members of the Chinese elite (whom they called the 'respectable' Chinese) to visit their lodge, possibly on the basis of their initiation into an informally recognized Chinese 'Masonic' lodge. We find a development similar to the scenario that I am proposing in nineteenth century North America. There, Masonic claims to shared historical origins with the Chinese secret societies opened the door to reciprocal claims of brotherhood. As a consequence of this relationship, some north American Chinese sworn brotherhoods adopted the name `Freemason' and even began to emboss the Masonic emblem (the square and compass) on their meeting houses (Lyman 1964). But if Chinese sworn brotherhoods in places like Penang did transform their ritual and social practices more deeply after contact with European Masons, the hybrid groups that resulted from this contact became unrecognized (or disowned) offspring of the union. Once borrowed, sinicized, and performed in secret, ritual elements like the bridge of swords or the allegorical catechism became inaccessible to the European community, and awaited rediscovery through a long process of decipherment and translation. |
| Conclusion In this paper, I have examined the interactions and tensions between European Freemasonry and the Chinese sworn brotherhoods. Like other well-known social movements of the colonial period -- the Melanesian "cargo cults," for example -- the so-called Chinese 'secret societies' finally came to be defined as "criminal disorder" in the face of the colonial "civilizing" project (Kaplan 1995:202). But unlike the cargo cults -- which European colonials found to be deeply irrational (even perhaps a form of madness) -- the British in Malaya saw in the Chinese 'secret societies' a tantalizing mirror image of their own Masonic organizations. Some Masons investigated parallels between the allegorical, didactic rituals and secret signs of the two traditions of sworn brotherhood, seeking to prove that these groups shared deep historical roots in antiquity.But many Europeans feared that the Chinese sworn brotherhoods had formed an 'empire within the empire,' and that their leaders posed a threat to British authority and control. While recognition of the similarities between the two groups may have led to their tolerance in the Straits Settlements for 90 years, the British drive to establish political hegemony over the Chinese community finally resulted in the suppression of the Chinese sworn brotherhoods in 1890. from a paper presented at The Penang Story Conferrence, Penang by Prof. Jean De Bernardi Department of Anthropology University of Alberta email jean.debernardi@ualberta.ca Endnotes [1] This paper is based upon a section of my forthcoming monograph, Penang Chinese Religion: Memory, Modernity, and the Politics of Unity under Empire and Nation-State (2003). For their assistance I thank E. F. Mullan and Yeo Tiam Siew of the Singapore Freemason's Hall, Philip Hoalim Jr, Miki Hoalim (nee W. A. Goh), and Hardev Singh. For research support I thank the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. Responsibility for the limitations of this study rest entirely with the author. [2] My primary sources for this discussion of Freemasonry in Penang are the Masonic journal The Pentagram occasional publications produced by Lodge Singapore, and research papers presented at Lodge St. Michael. While it would have been useful to consult a wider range of primary documents, many of these were lost in nineteenth century fires, and even more were lost during the Japanese occupation (Frisby 1958:11). Fortunately, Masonic researchers in the prewar period took an interest in nineteenth century history, and made use of these archives to write the history of the early lodges. [3] For overviews of the history of Freemasonry in the Straits Settlements, see Frisby (1958); Jennings (1970; 1997); Lim (1995); Mullan (1995), 150 Years of Freemasonry in the Archipelago (1995); "Our Mother Lodge - The Zetland in the East Lodge No. 508 E.C.: Foundation and Early Years" (1995 [1937]); and Richard (1906). [4] The Grand Lodge of England was established in 1717, the Grand Lodge of Ireland around 1725, and the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1736. [5] While a few more Chinese were initiated, however, in 1898 a District Board ruled that Chinese should not be admitted, since they would make use of their membership as an opportunity to spread revolutionary principles (Fripp 1979:211). Haffner notes that prejudice against admitting Chinese, and resistance to the formation of a `cosmopolitan lodge,' continued for many years in Hong Kong (Haffner 1988:72). [6] Cited by Pickering, and attributed to a "Missionary resident in the Straits" writing twenty years prior to his report. "Annual Report of the Protector of Chinese for the year 1879" Paper no. 7 in CO 275/24 Proceedings of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements (with Appendices) for 1880 :21. |
| BIBLIOGRAPHY Blythe, Wilfred L. 1969. The Impact of Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya: A Historical Study Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. Bullock, Steven C. 1996a. Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840 Published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburgh, Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. -------------------- 1996b. "Review Essay: Initiating the Enlightenment?: Recent Scholarship on European Freemasonry." Eighteenth-Century Life 20 (1):80-92. http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/ecl/20.1er_stevenson.html Cheesman, H. R. 1951. "Freemasonry in the Early Years in Malaya," A Paper Read Before the Lodge St. Michael, 29 January 1951. Reprinted in Papers Presented Before the Lodge St. Michael No. 2933 Lodge of Research Singapore Volume 1, 11-20. Cohen, Abner. The Politics of Elite Culture: Explorations in the Dramaturgy of Power in Modern African Society Berkeley: University of California Press. Cohn, Bernard. 1996. Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India Princeton: Princeton University Press. Cryer, Rev. N. Barker.1984. "The De-Christianizing of the Craft" Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 97:34-88. DeBernardi, Jean. 2003. Penang Chinese Religion: Memory, Modernity, and the Politics of Unity under Empire and Nation-State Stanford: Stanford University Press. Dix, R. A. 1933. "Extracts from Old Minute Books, Penang and Singapore". The Pentagram 23:153-167. Draffen, George. "Prince Hall Freemasonry." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 89:70-91. Fripp, Tom. 1979. "Amoy: The Port and the Lodge by Christopher Haffner." Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2976 Frisby, A. W. 1958. English Freemasonry in Malaya and Borneo 1765-1958. Centenary Edition for the District Grand Lodge of the Eastern Archipelago, 1858-1958. The Pentagram XLIII (December 1958). Singapore: The Library Committee, District Grand Lodge of the Eastern Archipelago. Haar, Barend J. 1998. Ritual and Mythology of the Chinese Triads: Creating an Identity Leiden: Brill. Haffner, Christopher. 1988 [1977]. Hong Kong: District Grand Lodge of Hong Kong and the Far East. Jacob, Margaret C. 1981. The Radical Enlightenment: Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans. London: George Allen & Unwin. ----------------------- Living the Enlightenment: Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Europe New York: Oxford University Press. Jennings. E. L. 1970. "Founding of the District Grand Lodge of the Eastern Archipelago and the part played by J. C. Smith" Paper read before Lodge St. Michael No. 2933 E. C. Singapore, 29 April 1970. Reprinted in Papers Presented Before the Lodge St. Michael No. 2933 Lodge of Research Singapore From 1956 to 1979 Volume 5. ------------------ . 1997 "The First Fifty Years of the Craft in the Eastern Archipelago." The Pentagram: A Masonic Journal 52:47-58. Kaplan, Martha. 1995. Neither Cargo nor Cult: Ritual Politics and the Colonial Imagination in Fiji Durham: Duke University Press. Lim Kuang Hui. 1995. In the Chair of King Solomon Singapore: Lodge Singapore No. 7178 E.C. Luhrmann, Tanya M. 1996. The Good Parsi: The Fate of a Colonial Elite in a Postcolonial World Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Lyman, Stanford M. 1964. "Chinese Secret Societies in the Occident: Notes and Suggestions for Research in the Sociology of Secrecy." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 1(2):79-102. Mackey, Albert. G. 1927 [1884]. An Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences comprising the Whole Range of Arts, Sciences and Literature as Connected with the Institution (Revised Edition). Chicago: The Masonic History Company. McDonald, J. M. 1940. "Military Travelling Lodges" The Pentagram 30:179-188. McIntyre, W. David. 1976. "Malaya from the 1850's to the 1870's, and its Historians, 1950-1970: From Strategy to Sociology." Southeast Asian History and Historiography: Essays Presented to D. G. E. Hall, edited by C. D. Cowan and O. W. Wolters. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Milne, William C. 1845 [1826]. "Some Account of a Secret Society in China Entitled `The Triad Society.' " Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society 1 (1826):240-250, reprinted in The Chinese Repository 14(2) (Feb. 1845):59-69. Mullan, E. F. 1995. "Freemasonry and its Origins in Singapore" In the Chair of King Solomon , edited by Lim Kuang Hui, 12-13. Singapore: Lodge Singapore No. 7178 E. C. Freemasons' Hall. --------------- 150 Years of Freemasonry in the Archipelago Singapore. "Our Mother Lodge - The Zetland in the East Lodge No. 508 E.C.:Foundation and Early Years" (1995 [1937] Overmyer, Daniel 1976. Folk Buddhism Religion: Dissenting Sects in Late Traditional China Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Patel, R. M. 1976. The Persians and the Parsees and their Masonic Traditions. Reprinted in presented before The Lodge of St. Michael No. 2933 Lodge of Research, Volume 2. Singapore: The Lodge St. Michael No. 2933. Pickering, William. 1879. "Annual Report of the Protector of Chinese for the year 1879" Paper no. 7 in CO 275/24 Proceedings of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements (with Appendices) for 1880 :21. Richard, F. A. "Freemasonry in Singapore". Papers presented before the Lodge St. Michael No. 2933 Lodge of Research Singapore , Volume 2. Schlegel, Gustave. 1991 [1866]. Thian Ti Hwui The Hung-League or Heaven-Earth-League: A Secret Society with the Chinese in China and India Scotland: Tynron Press. Shaftesley, John M. 1979. "Jews in English Freemasonry in the 18th and 19th Centuries" Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 92:25-63. Stevenson, David. 1988. The First Freemasons: Scotland's Early Lodges and Their Members Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. --------------------- 1990. The Origins of Freemasonry: Scotland's Century, 1590-1710 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vaughan, Jonas Daniel 1854. " Notes on the Chinese of Pinang" Journal of the Indian Archipelago 8:1-27. Veur, Paul W. van der. 1976. "Freemasonry in Indonesia from Radermacher to Soekanto, 1762-1961."Papers in International Studies, Southeast Asia Series No. 40. " Athens: Ohio University Center for International Studies. G. E." 250 Years of Freemasonry in India" Ars Quatuor Coronatorum: Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 Williams, Loretta J. 1980. Black Freemasonry and Middle-Class Realities Columbia: University of Missouri Press. |
|
Women's Centre for Change
34D Jones Road
Penang
|
| ______ INDEX Point to the article that you want to read, and CLICK |
_____________________ The Penang File Issue 29 |