What Happened to the Ritual Books of Bromwell's Rite of Architects?

 

Henry P. H. Bromwell, from the Rocky Mountain News

One of the most frustrating things about trying to decode the ritual of Henry P. H. Bromwell's rite of Free and Accepted Architects is that the only source for the ritual at this time is the Collectanea 4.2, published by the Grand College of Rites in 1959 (their website says it was published in 1948, but the rite had not been retired yet, so could not have been publish prior to February 20, 1959, the date of the last and final meeting of King David's Grand Lodge, in which it was decided to retire the rite and pass the ritual onto the Grand College of Rites for preservation). However, it is out of print, and the Grand College of Rites intends to reprint some of these old out-of-print ritual books, but that appears to be a project on the backburner for them.

Firstly, we know there were ritual books. On January 6, 1874 it was voted in Grand Lodge to have one hundred copies the ritual printed and distributed amongst the lodges and members. This was before the creation of the Royal Architect Degree. One would surmise that when the Royal Architect Degree was created, they printed more books, especially since the Grand College of Rites (GCoR) was able to transcribe all three degrees. The rite had grown considerably in membership by this point, so there were probably more than a hundred ritual books printed with the Royal Architect Degree. With all these ritual books floating around between Illinois, Colorado, and Washington D.C., as well as Oklahoma, California, and New York, what happened to all of them?

Likely a number of them were tossed, misplaced, or lost. A number of them likely are sitting in a Masonic library, having been donated to a lodge or Grand Lodge when the Mason passed away. However, I have had immense difficulty tracking a single one down. But I have a few leads.

Collectanea 4.2 states that the ritual book and all the paraphernalia is still stored in the archive of the Grand Lodge of Colorado. I had asked several other people who I know had previously done research on Bromwell, such as Mike Moore, Grand Master, and Kevin Townley, Grand Lecturer and who republished Bromwell's Restorations of Masonic Geometry in 2010. Neither had actually looked at these old records, but they simply stated that to the best of their knowledge, everything was still in the vault. Mike Moore even told me that the jewels (i.e. officer collars with the signet of their office) of the rite were in the museum. However, on Monday, June 7th, 2021, I went down to the Grand Lodge and with the assistance of Julie Doelligen, the chief archivist, we rummaged through the vault for several hours. The most we found were three large scrapbook folios of newspaper clipping by Bromwell's daughter, Henrietta, and a folder in the George B. Clark files with seven sheets of paper and a copy of the Allied Masonic Degree's Miscellanea 5.3 in it. We rummaged through boxes, shelves, folders, filing cabinets, and found nothing. Julie had previously looked around for some material, but no luck. Nor were the jewels found. Based on the descriptions of the jewels and collars from the records of King David's Grand Lodge, I have reconstructed what they looked like, and we found nothing even remotely close to that anywhere in the building. I may go down to the Grand Lodge again later this year for another look, but my hopes are waning.

One thing that gave me hope was that a few years ago the holographic manuscript (i.e. the original handwritten document) of Restorations was found just sitting on a shelf in the library, and no one knew it was there. It is now fully scanned and in an archival box in the vault. My hope then was that a ritual book was probably just sitting around, perhaps even in the library, but sadly, neither I nor Julie have found one. However, I now suspect that any ritual book, or any of the documents and paraphernalia of the rite were never in Colorado Springs.

In 1970-1971 it was decided to move the Grand Lodge of Colorado from Denver down to its current location in Colorado Springs. This means the ritual book, records, and paraphernalia were all at 1614 Welton Street, Denver when the GCoR published Collectanea 4.2. In talking with Julie Doelligen, she informed me that she had heard from various people that when the move occurred, there were disputes on what goes to Colorado Springs and what stays in Denver. Many people wanted the museum to stay in Denver, some wanted it all to go to Colorado Springs, and it appears that the unofficial decision was to split the museum and archives between the two locales.

On March 3, 1984 a tenant on the ground floor of the Welton Street Masonic Temple in Denver set fire to his shop in an attempt of insurance fraud. There were a few Masons in the building at the time the fire started, and when they smelled smoke, they grabbed somethings of high value and carried them out, namely the massive sterling silver punch bowl, ladle, and cups the Colorado Commandery No. 1 Drill Team won at the 1901 Triannual Conclave of the Grand Encampment in Louisville, Kentucky. This is still proudly on display on the fourth floor. Pretty much everything else was completely lost. There were a lot of priceless things in that building. One is what was believed to be the skull of Felipe Espinosa, famed Colorado serial killer, who was captured and executed by a Mason. According to George B. Clark, the skull Colorado Commandery No. 1 used for the Order of the Temple was this very skull. Of course, that can never be confirmed now, but it illustrates the great loss to Colorado Masonic history this fire caused.

Shortly before the fire, perhaps a few weeks, the Building Association had their insurance renewed, and part of the process was they inventoried everything and took photos of almost everything. This had not been previously done before. As one would expect, there are some conspiracy theories surrounding this fact, but ultimately it is shear fortune this was done just before the fire. I am still waiting on Claud Dutro, Past Grand Master, to confirm if photos were taken of the museum, and if any of those photos may show paraphernalia or jewels from Bromwell's rite. If they do, then it will be another bit of evidence to support my current belief that all the records, ritual books, and paraphernalia were lost in the fire.

Update: I have heard back from Claud Dutro, and photos were only taken of the lodge rooms, furniture in the lodge rooms, and a few other spaces. No photos were taken of the library and museum, and certainly not of the items in the museum. However, Dutro has been a Mason since before the Grand Lodge moved, and he tells me that the entire museum moved to Colorado Springs (correspondence on July 26, 2021). Obviously this is a further frustration, as it goes along with the multitude of differing reports of what happened to everything in the museum.

In discussing these things with Julie (correspondence on June 21, 2021), we agree that the likelihood of a copy of a ritual book being in the Grand Lodge of Colorado's archive is very, very small. If there was a copy, it is highly suspected someone borrowed it and never returned it (a big problem in Masonry), or it was in Denver and was lost in the fire.

Now, the ritual book was transcribed, as were the minutes of King David's Grand Lodge by the Grand College of Rites. This means they had a copy of the ritual. In a personal correspondence with Gerald Klein, Grand Secretary of the GCoR, on June 16, 2021, he informed me that all the early records and materials of the GCoR were given by Harold V. B. Voorhis (a member of Bromwell's rite) to William Peacher, and when Peacher passed away, all his Masonic materials went to an undisclosed Blue Lodge in Southern California, and they have not been able to retrieve them. It appears that Arturo de Hoyos is working to retrieve these, but they do not see those documents being recovered anytime in the near the future. So that lead was a bust, though it could yield something in the distant future.

Next, above I mentioned that we found a copy of Miscellanea 5.3 in the file on the rite in the George B. Clark files. Clark was the Grand Historian of the Grand Lodge of Colorado for many long years, and was the only person to ever hold this title. Clark was a fantastic Masonic historian. He published a number papers, as well as a well-known map of the genealogy of Masonic Grand Lodges from England and throughout the United States. He catalogued and wrote more notes than anything he published, which are kept in a couple of filing cabinets in the Grand Lodge of Colorado archive. Clark was also the last surviving member of King David's Grand Lodge in 1958 when talks began of retiring the rite. The Grand Lodge had been dormant since 1883, and a series of people who held the records of the rite kept dying and passing along the records, until they ended up with Clark. So Clark communicated the secrets of the rite to Harry W. Bundy and charged him to communicate the secrets to a select few others, enough to hold a quorum of the Grand Lodge to retire the rite.

With as much as Clark copied, noted, and catalogued, one would expect the file on Free and Accepted Architects would be larger, especially given he was a member. Sadly, all that is in the folder is a Xerox copy of Bundy's typewritten article on the rite published in Philalethes 12.6 (December 1959), two correspondences between Bundy and William Leon Cummings concerning the meetings to retire the rite, the minutes of the second to last meeting of the rite on December 28, 1958, and the Miscellanea. The Miscellanea (1952) contains a paper written by Cummings, who was selected by Bundy and Clark to be inducted into the rite to organize its retirement. This paper by Cummings is about architect degrees in Masonry, and he discusses briefly Bromwell's rite. He mentions that the Collectanea states the only surviving ritual book is in the Grand Lodge of Colorado vault, but that he himself has a copy, as well as a version that is fully written out (no single letter key, no abbreviations). Cummings was a New York Mason, residing in Albany. He wrote a number a papers and books, including being part of the team of Masons that produced Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia (the best Masonic encyclopedia available, in my opinion). Given his positions and status as a Masonic author, one would expect his library was donated to either his home lodge or the Grand Lodge of New York.

It took some time, but Richard Schulz, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of New York, was able to assist me in figuring out exactly who Cummings was, what lodge he was affiliated with, and where his library went (correspondence on June 16, 2021). He put me in touch with Alexander Vastola, the Director of the Grand Lodge of New York Library (correspondence on June 17, 2021). He was able to find in their catalogue a title called Pentalpha Lodge 5 and King David Grand Lodge Select and Most Excellent Architects: Ancient Free and Accepted Architects (Call #M14.1 B78p). Yay! We found one!

Obviously, I do not intend to bother these gentlemen further, as they were already very helpful and spent a lot of time helping me. I plan to go to New York City at some point in the near future to examine the text (and finally wrap up some research on Douglas Darden). It is likely to be Cummings' copy of the ritual, and likely includes the Royal Architect Degree.

The title says "Select and Most Excellent Architects," but this is due to how dysfunctional the organization was: they were terrible at maintaining records and cleaning up their laws and bylaws. Once the Royal Architect Degree was introduced, the Constitution was never updated, so the Grand Lodge continued to be called "Select and Most Excellent Architects," but unofficially was being called "Free and Accepted Architects" or "Ancient Free and Accepted Architects" (they could not decide on which they wanted). The fact the title contains "Ancient Free and Accepted Architects" indicates this is post-Royal Architect Degree. Whether or not this ritual book is fully written out or is single-letter key/abbreviations is yet to be determined.

Finding a copy of the ritual book is key to my work on decoding the ritual. At this time I am totally reliant on the Collectanea, which I am certain has typographical errors, and is likely why I am having great difficulty in decoding a number of hapax legomena. Some of the supposed typos may be from the original ritual books themselves, or it could be a scribal error in transcribing the books. Either way, being able to view the original ritual book will be most useful in progressing this effort to decode Bromwell's ritual.

Update: the volume in the Grand Lodge of New York's library is not the ritual book. After pestering their director, he clarified the volume is a collection of four manuscripts by Harold V. B. Voorhis, Raphael M. Hosea, George B. Clark, and a chapter from the History of Union American Lodge No. 1. The Grand Lodge of New York does not permit scanning ritual books, but even though this is not a ritual book, it still cannot be scanned (correspondence 12 April 2024). I can only guess that the Grand Lodge has a very broad definition of what counts as a "ritual book." Oh well. One day I will end up back in New York and will hopefully have a chance to view the volume.

Henry P. H. Bromwell's Three Kings and the Three Pillars of Masonry

 

I recently had the privilege of sitting in a presentation given by Fr. Ophiphos of Crux Ansata Oasis O.T.O., in which he discussed Baphomet. I had the option of watching a "Masonic" presentation on "civil discourse" by a Mason who thinks the government is, and I quote, "going to line us up into train cars" — or I could watch this presentation on Baphomet. Of course, I choose Baphomet. And I am glad I did, because it led me in an unlikely direction for something I have been struggling with concerning Henry P. H. Bromwell.

For the last year I have been intensely researching Henry Bromwell and his rite of Free and Accepted Architects. One of the tasks of mine is to fully decode the ritual of his rite. The ritual as transcribed by the Grand College of Rites is based on the old ritual books of the rite, of which I believe the only surviving copy is in the library of the Grand Lodge of New York. Even the copy in the Grand Lodge of Colorado appears to have been lost in the 1984 Welton Street fire. At some point I will travel to New York to see it, but for now I am reliant on Collectanea 4.2. The ritual is partly in single letter key (i.e. the first letter of each word, which is not so much a code as it is a mnemonic guide), partly abbreviations, and partly fully written out. It appears Bromwell was not so much trying to conceal the secrets of Masonry and his rite, which he partly does, but rather it was a shorthand. The first two degrees of the rite were written while Bromwell was residing in Illinois, so it is loosely based on Illinois Blue Lodge and Royal Arch ritual. The third degree, that of the Royal Architect, was written fourteen years later when Bromwell was living in Colorado, but by that point his ritual was not trying to imitate the ritual of other jurisdictions. As a result, there are a lot of single letter and abbreviated portions of his ritual that I am struggling with decoding. Sometimes he will code or abbreviate something and then write it out later, which makes decoding those pieces easier. However, some things are hapax legomena, i.e. they are said once and never occur again, and those have proved the most difficult.

One item in his ritual of the Royal Architect concerns the arrival of three kings, who are represented by the three candidates (this degree is conferred on three candidates at the same time, much like the Royal Arch Degree). They are said to be "Three Kings of the East, Ja n, Bo z, and M. B. H., who are Master Masons and members of this Grand Lodge."

"Ja n" and "Bo z" are clearly the names of the two pillars on the porch of Solomon's Temple, Jachin and Boaz (1 Kings 7:21), which hold particular significance in Masonry. But "M. B. H." has proved difficult for me. I have come across references to the "Three Pillars of Masonry" as well as allusions to the Three Kings in Masonry via three pillars (see for instance Jesse Hathaway's remarks in Episode 1 of the podcast Radio Free Golgotha). The three pillars could be a variety of things, such as the three classical orders of architecture that represent the Master and Wardens: the Ionic, Doric, and Corinthian. There are the three burning tapers about the altar. Et cetera. It is a curious concept relating the Three Kings of the East, i.e. the three Magi that visit the Christ child, to three pillars of Masonry, but these appear to be symbolic speculations that are posited by individual Masonic theorists, as opposed to being anything canonical in Masonry.

Initially, I presumed M. B. H. might be a play on the initials of the traditional names of the Magi: Melchior, Balthazar, and Caspar. My first thought was that Bromwell was playing with the name Caspar, and his poor understanding of Hebrew led him to use H instead of C. My train of thought was, based on other blunders Bromwell makes with Hebrew, that Caspar begins with a C, so he would mistakenly use ח Chet, which can and has been transcribed as an H. At least that is what I originally presumed, until recently.

While listening to Fr. Ophiphos's presentation on Baphomet, he quotes of portion of Aleister Crowley's Liber 333: The Book of Lies, §33, which I will now quote:

ΕΦΑΛΗΛΓ
BAPHOMET

A black two-headed Eagle is GOD; even a Black Triangle is He. In His claws He beareth a sword; yea, a sharp sword is held therein.
This Eagle is burnt up in the Great Fire; yet not a feather is scorched. This Eagle is swallowed up in the Great Sea; yet not a feather is wetted. So flieth He in the air, and lighteth upon the earth at His pleasure.
So spake IACOBUS BURGUNDUS MOLENSIS¹⁷ the Grand Master of the Temple; and of the GOD that is Ass-headed did he dare not speak.

COMMENTARY

33 is the number of the Last Degree of Masonry, which was conferred upon Frater P. in the year 1900 of the vulgar era by Don Jesus de Medina-Sidonia in the City of Mexico.
Baphomet is the mysterious name of the God of the Templars.
The Eagle described in paragraph 1 is that of the Templars.
This Masonic symbol is, however, identified by Frater P. with a bird, which is master of the four elements, and therefore of the name Tetragrammaton.
Jacobus Burgundus Molensis suffered martyrdom in the City of Paris in the year 1314 of the vulgar era.
The secrets of his order were, however, not lost, and are still being communicated to the worthy by his successors, as is intimated by the last paragraph, which implies knowledge of a secret worship, of which the Grand Master did not speak.
The Eagle may be identified, though not too closely, with the Hawk previously spoken of.
It is perhaps the Sun, the exoteric object of worship of all sensible cults; it not to be confused with other objects of the mystic aviary, such as the swan, phoenix, pelican, dove and so on.

NOTE

¹⁷ His initials I.B.M. are the initials of the Three Pillars of the Temple, and add to 52, 13x4, BN, the Son.

First and foremost, I.B.M. has nothing to do with the computer company. Period. In order to not get confused with the computer company, we will henceforth refer to de Molay's intials as J.B.M. Second, in Latin, i and j are the same letter.

A bit of background: this section of The Book of Lies concerns the double-headed eagle of the Scottish Rite. Crowley views the 33rd Degree of the Scottish Rite as the highest and final degree of Masonry. Crowley is claiming in this section that he, Frater P[urdurabo] (one of his pseudonyms), was initiated as a Freemason and received the Scottish Rite Degrees, including the honorary 33rd Degree, while in Mexico City in 1900. Whether or not this is true, or even if the lodge he was initiated into was clandestine or not, is not relevant. It is my conviction that Crowley understood more about Freemasonry than most Freemasons today. However, the 33rd Degree is not the final degree, nor the highest. It is an honorary degree that can only be conferred by invitation. It just so happens to be the highest degree in the Scottish Rite, and is irrelevant of rank outside of the Scottish Rite.

The name Jacobus Burgundus Molensis is simply the Latin name for Jacques de Molay, with Jacob being the Anglicization of the French Jacques. "De Molay" indicates that Jacques was from Molay, a colony in the Haute-Saône region of Burgundy, France. Hence "Burgundus Molensis."

The fact Crowley relates the initials of the Latin name of Jacques de Molay to Jachin, Boaz, and an unnamed third pillar that begins with M, is curious, as it compares to Bromwell's J., B., M.B.H. Thus, for Crowley, Jacques and Jachin are comparable, and Burgundy and Boaz are also comparable.

Of course, we could surmise that a third pillar with the first letter being M could be the Master's Word. And certainly looking at the initials Bromwell gives, it looks like the first letter of each syllable of the Master's Word, just out of order. On the other hand, they are also the initials of where Jacque de Molay is from: M[olay], B[urgundy], H[aute-Saône] (which is also out of order, as it should be M.H.B.).

If this line of thought is correct, that the Three Kings of the East in Bromwell's Royal Architect Degree are named after the three pillars of Masonry, and the initials of those names are derived from the initials of Jacques de Molay's name, then we may conclude Bromwell and Crowley are looking at the same source. It does not matter if it true, and likely is a much later speculation of some Masonic theorist or another; it is doubtful the Knights Templar gave birth to Freemasonry. I myself am a Masonic Knight Templar, as well as a Past Commander of a Commandery, and I do not buy into the speculation that Masonry is connected to the Templars. I have read Born in Blood and I don't buy that theory. There are just too many "what ifs" and "it is possible." I personally think Masons looked at the Templars, the secrecy, the rites of initiation, et cetera and little more than wishful thinking is the connection between the Templars and the Masons. Perhaps it is the thought that the Templars were Gnostics that allures Freemasons to believe they are connected to the Templars.

In particular it was Christoph Friedrich Nicolai in his Trial of Accusations of the Templar Order and Its Secrets (1782) who first posits the theory that the Templars were Gnostics. He partly comes to this conclusion based on his interpretation of Baphomet, the idol that the Templars were accused of worshipping. Nicolai plays with the name Baphomet in Greek, rendering it as βαφη μητος baphe metos, which he translates as "Baptism of Wisdom." For this and other things, he claims the Templars were Gnostics, particular Manichaean. The earliest claims of connecting the Templars to Masonry is in 1737 by Chevalier Ramsay, but the first Grand Conclave of Templars was in 1791.

It really is not out concern here to prove or disprove, or really explore in any meaningful depth the supposed connections between Masonry and the Templars. The point being, Masons have long supposed there is a connection between the Templars and their own fraternity. Crowley certainly thought there was, and given the similarity between Crowley's J.B.M. and Bromwell's J., B., M.B.H., we may presume that Bromwell thought so too.

Bromwell was a Knight Templar, having been knighted at Elmwood Commandery in Springfield, Illinois in 1861. His rite of Architects is largely based on Royal Arch Masonry, and a bit on Cryptic Masonry. I previously assumed he did not bring in Templar Masonry into his rite, but if the above is correct, then this may be one of the only reference to Templary in his rite. Bromwell was not exactly interested in facts or truth in his rite or even in his tome Restorations of Masonic Geometry, but rather he was interested in the history of Masonic ideas, as he clearly states in the first chapter of Restorations (§1.5).

If indeed Bromwell's J., B., M.B.H. is related to Crowley's J.B.M., then they were likely looking at the same source. It is highly doubtful Crowley was looking at Bromwell's work, and was certainly not a member of the rite. Bromwell's rite of Architects was highly dysfunction, and overall an utter failure. (I have written an analysis of the failure of Bromwell's rite, which will be published later this year in Philalethes Vol. 74 No. 4). His book Restorations was not well distributed, and certainly not well read, and mostly sits as a nice looking book in Masonic libraries. Further, I doubt Crowley would have had patience for Bromwell's verbose writings. However, I do believe if the above is indeed related, both Bromwell and Crowley were looking at the same source(s). I have not found what that source could be, but I have a sneaking suspicious that they were both looking at something by Eliphas Levi.

Much of Bromwell's Masonic esoterica is likely derived from Levi, and Crowley pulls extensively from Levi for information and unverified personal gnosis on Baphomet, as well as a great deal of his claims about Freemasonry. I doubt the two men were looking at Levi for the same reason, but given what we know about the men and their ideas, I am willing to bet Levi is responsible in some manner for the disseminating an idea that both Bromwell and Crowley latched onto.

Dionysiac Architects - A Summary

Temple of Dionysus at Teos, 3rd century BCE

It becomes apparent in my previous post on the sources and the chain of corrupting the Dionysiac Artists into the Dionysiac Architects is long, tedious, and repetitive, and likely needs summary. I would recommend anyone doing research into this group to refer to that post for a deeper study, but here I would like to summarize the content of that post, and to contextualize and commentate as needed to understand this group and how their image was drastically modified over the last few centuries.

The earliest sources for the Dionysiac Artists are Strabo and Aulus Gellius. Strabo describes them as something like a traveling band of entertainers, which is not that unusual of a thing, seeing as entertainment companies were known in the ancient world and continued as a tradition even up until this very day to tour and move about. There are only so many skits, poems, and musical pieces a group can perform in a town before everyone has seen it. To keep both the entertainment and the audience fresh, groups of entertainers will move from town to town throughout a region performing their usual set to a new audience every few weeks, and the town gets new entertainment every so often as well with a new group. It is a pragmatic approach to entertainment, and the fact it still works this way today should indicate that this approach is neither novel nor unreasonable. Thus, the Dionysiac Artists are not that unusual, though they may be one of the first or the most notable, though in reality they are probably only notable because anything about them survives today.

Like any band or entertainment corporation today, they are stationed somewhere. The Chautaqua Circuit of the 19th and 20th centuries was founded and stationed in Chautaqua, New York. The USO was founded and still stationed in Arlington, Virginia. The band Metallica was founded in Los Angeles, California and still largely resides there today. These are all itinerant entertainers with a home base. Likewise, the Dionysiac Artists were founded in Teos on Aegean Coast of western Turkey in the region then known as Ionia. As a travelling company of entertainers, they moved about the coast of Ionia providing entertainment in various towns. We know they went as far northwest as the Dardanelles (Hellespont), and probably went as far southeast as Ephesus or a little further. They covered an area about 400 kilometres (approx. 250 miles) based on the known locations they traveled to.

This particular group of entertainers are devotees to Dionysus, because Dionysus was the patron deity of theater and the City of Teos. The town itself was noted in its time for its theater, its wine, and its Temple of Dionysus. This appears to be more in line with the custom of groups with a patron deity, rather than that they were initiates of the cults of Dionysus. For instance, blacksmiths were usually devotees of Hephaestus, and athletes were frequently devotees of Herakles. This does not mean they were only devoted to these deities, but rather due to their vocations were especially devoted to these deities and demigods. Nor does it mean they were members of these deities' cults, though they likely would be. Further, affiliation to a cult was not as formal in antiquity as it is today, so a clear definition of "membership" is loose and vague. The Dionysiac Artists in particular were devoted to Dionysus, however the individuals may also make devotions to other deities, which was customary in Greece. The members of the groups may or may not be initiates of the Mysteries of Dionysus, and it is likely many, if not the vast majority were, but that would be on an individual basis, and likely not the requirements of the company as a whole. We do not know much of anything about their customs and regulations, so pondering these things is venturing into the realm of speculation.

According to Chandler's interpretation of Edmund Chishull's transcriptions and translations of various stone fragments found throughout Ionia (Antiquitates Asiaticae), as well as his own examination of a particular tablet (Travels), these Dionysiac Artists committed an act of sedition and failed, and were forced to relocate. According to Strabo, they relocated their home base several times. They started at Teos, moved to Ephesus after a failed act of sedition, later relocated to Myonneus by King Attalus I, and finally would settle in Lebedos.

Strabo mentions this sedition, but does not state who started it, though he appears to imply it by mentioning it in the first place. The reason for this sedition is not known, but is probably related to two completing factions in Teos at that time. Chishull mentions two organizations in Teos that appear to be at odds with each other: the Commune Attalistarum, who were aligned with King Attalus I of Pergamon, and the Commune Sodalitii ab Echino Dictii, who appear to be an allegiance of Athenians occupying Teos. Chandler in his Travels describes one of the fragments that mentions the Panathenaists and the Dionysiacs. It would appear the Dionysiac Artists were of those loyal to King Attalus I, and this is reasonable given that Attalus favored the Dionysiac Artists, and he would later give them a home at Myonneus. Given the fragments translated by Chishull, we may surmise part of the grievance of the Dionysiac Artists while in Teos is the desire to have the new governance to uphold old laws.

Much of this civic and political conflict appears to arise out of the Macedonian Wars. Philip V of Macedonia had allied with Hannibal of Carthage against the Roman Republic. During this campaign, the Aetolian League of mainland Greece would join forces with the Romans in a naval conflict to prevent the Macedonians from expanding into Anatolia, which started in Ionia. They were successful against Philip V in 215 BCE. Attalus I of Pergamon (an Ionian city) convinced the Roman army to assist in retaliation, and Philip V was ultimately defeated at the Battle of Cynoscephalae in 197 BCE. This guaranteed the Ionian cities to remain autonomous while under Roman rule. The Romans were heavily concerned with securing land and resources, but were not in favor of converting or micromanaging local municipalities. So while they governed a city or region, they allowed them to maintain autonomy in their own religious, political, civic, and economic matters. Since the Aetolians were involved in securing Ionia, as well as the Athenians, there was conflicts between Roman governance, Athenia and Aetolian laws, and Ionia maintaining their old laws and decrees. Let me be clear, I am greatly oversimplifying, and probably improperly overgeneralizing the events of the Macedonian Wars (and I am probably confusing some things or illustrating them improperly, but the Macedonian Wars are not something I am totally familiar with), but it is not entirely necessary to understand these. What we need to understand is that old city-states with their own allegiances and laws suddenly were in conflict with new governors and new residents, and disputes over old laws and customs needed to be addressed and honored.

Of particular importance is an old agreement that Ionia is sacred, and Teos should not be seized nor its citizens violated in any manner. Their right to asylum, sovereignty, and their right to honor Dionysus was been asked to be upheld. The Dionysiac Artists amongst the loyalists of Attalus appear to have felt an old decree was being violated by the occupying Athenians and Aetolians — if Chandler is correct in his assessment — we may surmise they committed an act or conspiracy of sedition. The fact that they had to leave Teos and relocate to Ephesus indicates that they failed in their sedition.

Further, it should not be surprising that a group of entertainers got involved in politics or even political uprisings. Entertainers usually have a public platform by the very nature of their profession, which is useful in political discourse and influence. Further, many entertainers put political and civic dissent and protest into their work. It is certainly prevalent today, and we should not expect it to be any different in antiquity. Euripides's The Bacchae is a rather political charged piece concerning the political struggles against the growing cults of Dionysus. Shakespeare's works are oftentimes very political. Even today, bands like Rage Against the Machine illustrate entertainers using their public platform to exercise political dissension. And even very recently, Jon Schaffer of the heavy metal band Iced Earth was amongst the insurrectionists that stormed the United State's Capital on January 6th, 2021. The fact the Dionysiac Artists got involved in political dissension and sedition is not that surprising when we consider the long history of entertainers' involvement in political dissent.

This illustrates that the Dionysiac Artists are not a group of exactly high morals, or at least is not above illegal schemes. Aulus Gellius illustrates that they were not exactly a positive group that should be admired. His Attic Nights is a fantastic collection of stories and personal anecdotes that is useful to historians endeavoring to understand the social context and the views of the populace of Hellenistic Greece. Aulus Gellius describes the Dionysiac Artists are being potentially corrupting to the youth, as he describes a young man who admires them. This young man is a student of Lucius Calvenus Taurus, a Middle Platonist philosopher, who tries to dissuade him by instructing him to read some of Aristotle (probably De Interpretatione). He tries to show his student that these Dionysiac Artists are intemperate (e.g. drunk, gluttonous, sexually promiscuous) and unenlightened. Their general waywardness and impoverishment is a road to wickedness. Obviously, Aulus Gellius has nothing good to say about the Dionysiac Artists. Mix this with their alleged act of sedition, and one may begin to wonder how this group was turned into a fraternity of high morals.

Two notable people are responsible for equating the Dionysiac Artists with modern day Freemasonry: John Robison and Alexander Lawrie. Robison was a Scottish physicist and lived in Edinburgh. Following the French Revolution, he became disillusioned with the Enlightenment movement, and in particular Enlightenment societies, especially the Freemasons. Thus he penned Proofs of a Conspiracy, and in the first chapter he describes the Dionysiac Artists as being an earlier precursor to Freemasonry. He is the first person to make such a claim, however he does not claim that they became the Freemasons in any sort of genealogical manner, but rather the principle of the Dionysiac Artists as a trade association is a prototype of the trade corporations of the Middle Ages, i.e. the guilds, which in turn led to the Freemasons. He does however apply a number of claims about the Dionysiac Artists that are completely unfounded, such as secret words and signs of recognition. He would then directly influence Alexander Lawrie, a Scottish Freemason also living in Edinburgh. Their close proximity to each other may be ultimately how Lawrie became aware of Robison's work, and may be the sole circumstance responsible for transforming the Dionysiac Artists into the Dionysiac Architects.

Lawrie believed everything Robsion says about the Dionysiac Artists being a precursor to the Freemasons, because Robison was an Anti-Mason, and therefore does not have any reason to lie, because he does not share the Masonic agenda. To quote:

"Dr. Robison, who will not be suspected of partiality to Free Masons, ascribes their origin to the Dionysian artists. It is impossible, indeed, for any candid enquirer to call in question their identity."

However, where Robison is careful not to assert that the Dionysiac Artists became to Freemasons, Lawrie is convinced that they did. Like Robison, Lawrie renders this mysterious organization of entertainers as plastic to make them pliable to the image he wants them to have. Lawrie sees all ancient mystery cults being more or less the same thing, and believed that any thing that was similar in nature and substance is more or less the same thing. Therefore, the Dionysiac Artists being so similar to Freemasonry — because Lawrie makes them seem similar to Freemasonry — they are therefore the same thing. To quote:

"If it be possible to prove the identity of any two societies, from the coincidence of their external forms, we are authorised to conclude, that the Fraternity of the Ionian architects, and the Fraternity of Free Masons, are exactly the same; and as the former practiced the mysteries of Bacchus and Ceres [i.e. Eleusinian Mysteries], several of which we have shown to be similar to the mysteries of Masonry; we may safely affirm, that, in their internal, as well as external procedure, the Society of Free Masons resembles the Dionysiacs of Asia Minor."

Unlike Robison, Lawrie appears to actually be familiar with the works of Richard Chandler, and probably had access to Edmund Chishull's text, though it does not appear that Lawrie knew Doric or Ionian Greek or Latin, as he pulls information from Chishull that is not in Chandler's works, but makes grave blunders that are either deliberate misrepresentations or ignorant misunderstandings; the latter seems most likely. For instance, Chishull mentions two competing factions in Teos, which Lawrie misrepresents as two lodges of the Dionysiac Artists. He takes Chandler's mentioning of a "president" of the annual festivities to mean that these lodges were governed by a master and wardens. Chishull mentions utensils and instruments concerning a damaged stone fragments, which Lawrie misrepresents as Masonic implements still in use by Masons today. One of these stone fragments Chishull translates was relocated from the Aegean Coast to central Turkey and used by the Turks as a gravestone. Lawrie misrepresents this as a monument built by the Dionysiac Architects to honor their deceased masters and wardens. Et cetera. He appears to be attempting to mold this organization into something like the funerary associations of the Roman Empire and the Middle Ages, which modern day Freemasonry still contains a remnant of in tending to their deceased members. Due to this sort of charity, Lawrie further adds that the "more opulent" members helped provide assistance to the "poorer brethren," which is a confabulation of Lawrie's own devising.

Lawrie may have been familiar with Strabo, but he only seems to copy the citations for Strabo given by Chandler. He does appear to be familiar with Aulus Gellius, however, he does ignore certain things Aulus Gellius tells us about the organization, namely that they were intemperate and unenlightened, as well as Chandler's conclusion that they caused the sedition in Teos, for Lawrie wishes to make them seem more like Freemasons, a fraternity of moral teachings. Further, he cites Book 8 of Attic Nights, which is the only book of this work that is lost; only the index survives. Lawrie obviously could only look at the index, as Chapter 11 mentions a Dionysiac festival, so clearly he wished this to be by the Dionysiac Artists. He cites this lost book of Attic Nights in his discussion of the different bogus lodges of the organization, making him seem even less credible.

Several things described about the Dionysiac Artists make it really easy to mold them into the image Freemasons have of their operative progenitors. Freemasons claim they come from the operative stonemason guilds of the Middle Ages and they claim the individual stonemasons were free to move about (hence Free Mason). I address this conception and the problems with it, as well as why it really is not as special as Freemasons think it is in a previous post. The fact that these Dionysiac Artists were said to have moved about, like the stonemasons were supposed to have done, is not that special. Further, their Greek name Διονυσον τεχνιτων (Dionyson techniton) can be misconstrued. The term techneton can refer to a number of things and is usually used to designate an artisan, carpenter, builder, etc, and is the root of the word architect or "chief builder." However, techne is much more multifaceted of a term, as Martin Heidegger illustrates in his essay "The Question Concerning Technology." It concerns things such as craft, art, cunning, creating, etc. Heidegger relates techne to poesis, from which we get words like poetry, and he posits that techne is a process of revealing. In considering this, we can see how Robison misconstrues them as "undoubtedly an association of architects and engineers" and Lawrie follows by claiming they built temples and theaters. Rather than understanding techniton as a creator of entertainment, they misrepresent this multifaceted word to specifically mean an architect and builder. There are many other instances of misunderstanding or misrepresentations by Lawrie concerning Chandler's work, but we need not get into them, as they are small and, frankly difficult to figure out how Lawrie got things so wrong.

Following Lawrie by a few years, we get Hipolito Jose da Costa, who would cement the reputation of the Dionysiac Artists forever in the annals of Masonic legendry. Da Costa was a Brazilian diplomat and journalist, called by some the "Father of Brizilian Journalism" and is best known for getting arrested by the Portuguese Inquisition on the charges of being a Freemason. Where da Costa got the idea to write about the Dionysiac Artists is a bit of mystery. His citations are nearly all ancient sources, which is a bit suspicious. Even modern researchers on antiquity will cite contemporary scholars who provide meaningful insight into the ancient world. Da Costa probably wanted to present himself as an antiquarian, which would add credit to this thesis that the Dionysiac Artists were somehow Masonic in origin. However, many times his citations appear to be copied directly from Lawrie and Chandler, and since Lawrie would copy Chandler's citations, it is entirely possible da Costa came across Lawrie's text and looked no further.

Da Costa's Sketch for the History of the Dionysian Artificers: A Fragment is a disjointed mess. He, like Lawrie, wishes to present all ancient mystery cults as being more or less the same thing. Whereas Lawrie sees all ancient mystery cults as the same thing due to being rites of initiation, which Lawrie then tries to make seem Masonic in essence, da Costa sees all mystery cults of antiquity as being the same due to astrological and star lore similarities. When he gets to actually discussing the Dionysiac Artists thirty pages later, he creates arguments and makes claims none of the previous writers (Lawrie or Robison) makes. He says they were amongst the builders at Byblos and therefore were the Gebalites that Hiram King of Tyre asked to help build Solomon's Temple. Since Hiram Abif is one of the craftsmen sent by Hiram of Tyre, he therefore assumes Hiram Abif is one of the Dionysiac Artists. He claims the Dionysiac Artists introduced their mysteries into Israel. Da Costa then goes onto claim that they survived until the Crusades and then moved into Europe and the British Isles, where they became the modern Freemasons. Where he spent thirty pages trying poorly to explain how the Dionysiac Artists were part of all mystery cults, yet he only spends a page stating this with no argument for it whatsoever.

The whole text is a "scholastic" nightmare. Even Albert Mackey admits "his reasoning may not always carry conviction," albeit Mackey himself applaud's da Costa's essay as it "draws a successful parallel between the initiation into these [mysteries] and the Masonic initiation." His logic is beyond flawed, he presents terrible arguments and justifications for his claims, if he gives an argument at all, and all around it is poorly written. His citations don't actually provide material that supports his claims. It feels like da Costa had an idea that he loosely pieced together from false claims by other Freemasons he heard or read, could not remember properly what they said, and assembled a fragmentary sketch that would have been better gone unpublished and lost in some Masonic archive. But it didn't. Both Albert Mackey and Manly P. Hall would pick up this work, and Hall especially would revere this essay, as he would later republish it with his own introduction.

The next big alteration of this group of traveling, seditious, drunken entertainers is Robert Macoy, who claims they were priests of Dionysus. This contradicts the spirit of everything we know about the cults of Dionysus, namely that their members were largely women, and their hierarchy was governed by women, i.e. priestesses. One fragment discussed by Chandler in Ionian Antiquities mentions a pedestal of one of the Dionysiac priestesses named Claudia Tryphaena. Macoy does not give the sources of his information, but based on the claims he makes in his encyclopedia entry on this group, he is definitely looking at Lawrie and da Costa. Obviously Macoy has no real clue of how the cults of Dionysus worked, and just assumes the Dionysiac Artists were priests of the cults of Dionysus. Macoy is also the first to call them the "Dionysiac Architects." Where Robison, Lawrie, and da Costa claim they were architects and builders, they continued to refer to them at the Dionysiacs or Dionysiac Artificers. Macoy is the one who decides to rebrand them as the Dionysiac Architects.

Albert Mackey largely follows Macoy and Lawrie, especially in calling them the Dionysiac Architects and claiming they were priests of Dionysus. Mackey, for all that his encyclopedic entry is derivative of previous writers. However, Mackey makes an audacious claim when Hiram of Tyre sends these architects to Solomon to help build the Temple, Solomon ordered the Dionysiac Architects to communicate their mysteries to the Israelites, and vice versa. The union of their mysteries would "naturally" evolve into modern day Freemasonry and the legend of Hiram Abif's death and the creation of a monument to him. It is a wild invention of Mackey's, but curiously he then admits it is highly speculative and that if he is wrong about this, then it is "[George] Oliver" and Lawrie's fault:

The latter part of this statement is, it is admitted, a mere speculation, but one that has met the approval of Lawrie, Oliver, and our best writers."

Lawrie likely had been dead for two decades at this point. Oliver had been dead for over a decade when Mackey published his Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry. Macoy was still alive. The point being, Mackey presents his claim as if he had run it past these guys, though they had been dead longer than the date it is presumed he began composing his encyclopedia. So the other way of viewing his statement is that he is relying on the authority of the information they provide in their works to support his claim. Thus, if he is wrong, then it is their fault for making him think this bogus claim could be true. Mackey even appears hesitant to support his own entry on the Dionysiac Architects in his encyclopedia, but he stands by his claims on little more evidence than the theory of their existence and connection to Freemasonry is not so absurd as to not be completely false unto itself:

"Although this connection between the Dionysian Architects and the builders of King Solomon may not be supported by documentary evidence, the traditional theory is at least plausible, and offers nothing which is either absurd or impossible. If accepted, it supplies the necessary link which connects the Pagan and Jewish mysteries."

Mackey certainly had a way with words, and with these words he is trying to alleviate himself of any responsibility of disseminating and proposing bullshit. Spreading bullshit is exactly what he does.

One other thing Mackey does that sets up another line of falsehoods to be propagated by future authors, is where previous writers have stated that the Dionysiac Architects had secret words and signs as modes of recognition amongst its members, much like Freemasons have, Mackey especially states that they had a "universal language." It is an odd turn of phrase, and based on context he certainly means secret words and signs of recognition, but the next author in the chain of corruption, John Weisse, took this "universal language" to a new level. It is my conjecture that Mackey's term "universal language" led Weisse to claim that the Dionysiac Architects had "intercommunications all over the known world."

There are other Masonic writers that mention or discuss the Dionysiac Architects, though they do not appear to have much impact or consequence. Most their material is derivative, and on further inspection are absolutely a third or fourth generation corruption of the original source material in a bad game of scholastic telephone. Henry Bromwell is an interesting one, because as far as I am aware, he is the first to state that Hiram Abif was not only a member of the Dionysiac Architects, but also their Grand Master.

There are some comical moments of corruption, such as Weisse's attempt to transcribe some Greek, namely γυνοικιαι  which he claims means "connected houses." This is a corruption of what Mackey attempts to transcribe, namely συνοικίαι which he claims was the word for "lodge" (the word he is looking for is οίκημα). It looks like Mackey was actually trying to transcribe some Greek provided by Lawrie, but it does not appear that Mackey actually knew Greek, or he knew enough to get himself into trouble, and so provides some bastardized word of no certain meaning. I do not know any forms of ancient Greek, so I myself may not even know what I am talking about.

We can skip over Mackenzie's Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia and Moses Redding's Illustrated History of Freemasonry, as I cannot get access to Mackenzie's work at the moment, and Redding's entry on the Dionysiac Architects is what one would expect from a source that is pulling from three or four generations of the telephone game.

We finally arrive at Manly P. Hall. The first entry in Hall's Secret Teachings of All Ages, he clearly heard about these Dionysiac Architects or read a small entry somewhere in another source. He appears suspicious of any claims about this group, and so what he writes is hesitant and humble. He uses terms like "supposedly" and "probably." Over the course of Hall composing this tome, he appears to have read more on the Dionysiac Artists-Architects. So in his last entry on them, he writes extensively and restates things from earlier with absolute certainty. One must wonder if he even reread or proofed his own book, because one would expect him to have modified his first entry to reflect the certainty he hold much later in the tome.

It is difficult to take Hall seriously, and not just because he makes countless unsubstantiated claims. He is less credible because he speaks at length and with immense certainty on the great secrets of Freemasonry, when he himself would not become a Freemason until twenty-five years after the publication of Secret Teachings. Further, and one particular reason I reserve suspicion for Hall, is that he started his career on Wall Street. He states that the materialism of working on Wall Street, as well as the disastrous outcome of the Great Depression, is why he turned to seeking spiritual things (see the Preface of the Diamond Jubilee Edition of Secret Teachings). The fact that the text sold out before it was ever even off the printing press, and the fact that he had all the funding he needed from investors and people willing to own the book by subscription before printing, tells me that he was a really good salesman with a silver tongue. Subscriptions for the book in 1928 was $15.00 at sign-up, and four payments of $15.00, for a total of $75.00. That is over $1000 in 2021. How does that not sound like a scam? The poor scholarship and the esoteric verbal masturbation that plagues the text tells me this work was more of a marketing scheme. Unlike many esoteric and occult writers throughout history, Hall did very well in making a lot of money off of his publications, and had secured for himself a hell of reputation that would last decades, and probably centuries.

In the latter portion of Secret Teachings in which Hall discusses the Dionysiac Architects is flooded with esoteric mumbo-jumbo, garbled logic, and ahistoical confabulations. It really is not necessary to detail everything he says about them, as all of that can be read in my previous post on the subject. What is essential to realize is that the Dionysiac Artists had taken on a life of their own, and Hall is largely responsible for disseminating the greatest amount of falsehoods about the group. In examining what Hall writes about them and looking back at Strabo, Aulus Gellius, Chishull, and Chandler, it becomes abundantly obvious that by time we get to Hall we are so far removed from any truths about the group. And yet Hall claims he is presenting the great secrets of history. It is a clever sales tactic.

There is a huge gap in history from Strabo and Aulus Gellius to Chishull, over 1600 years. Yet in the two hundred years after Chishull's translations of various stone fragments throughout Greek and Turkey, the Dionysiac Artists had transformed into something else entirely. They were once regarded as an immoral, drunken, traveling band of entertainers that were potentially corrupting to the youth, and were transformed into a fraternity of architects and builders exercising high morals and charity. It is such a bizarre transformation. But at the heart of it, we are looking at something from the ancient world that Freemasons sought to mold into an image that fit their belief that the Masonic Fraternity is far older than it actually is.

Dionysiac Architects - The Chain of Corruption

Theater at Pergamon, circa 3rd century BCE

To fully grasp how the idea of the Dionysiac Artists was corrupted into the Masonic idea of a fraternity of architects, it is incumbent to provide a list of all known sources for the group starting from the earliest known sources up until Manly P. Hall. We will start from the earliest sources and work our way to Hall, but no further, as that is totally unnecessary. I will provide a citation and a link (if available) to the source information, as well as a synopsis of what they have to say on the Dionysiac Artists-Architects, where they got their information from, what new information they are add or what they have corrupted, and a few other various comments.

Strabo, Geography, §14.1.29. Circa 44 BCE - 23 CE.
Strabo was a Greek geographer and philosopher writing during the turn of the Common Era.

Strabo refers to them as Διόνυσον τεχνιτων (Dionyson techniton) or “Dionysiac artists.” He states that they traveled about Ionia (western Turkey) as far as Hellespont — today better known as the Dardanelles, a straight in northwestern Turkey. They had formerly inhabited Teos (western Turkey on the Ionian coast), then relocated to Ephesus after an incident of sedition. King Attalus of Pergamon would later relocated them to Myonnesus, which is between Teos and Lebedos. Later they migrated to Lebedos. All of these cities are within about fifty miles of each other.

(Source: Perseus, Tufts University)

Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights, §8.11 and §20.4. Circa 117 CE.

Aulus Gellius was a Roman author who wrote about everyday things he encountered, many times cataloging more commonplace philosophies that contextualize the socio-civic aspects of religious and philosophical things.

Book 8 is the only portion of this text that is lost, with the exception of the index, which mentions a Dionysiac festival Socrates and his wife plan to attend, with a dispute over the amount of money they plan to spend on their dinner there. The reference to a Dionysiac festival is probably why Alexander Lawrie cites this section of Attic Nights, though the information he provides with that citation cannot be attested with the information provided in the index.

The other section of Attic Nights provides some commentary on the social nature of the Dionysiac Artists. The Dionysiac Artists are described as "freemen," traveling actors and musicians that perform comedy and tragedy alike. They are presented as potentially corrupting to the youth, they are unenlightened (i.e. unfamiliar with philosophy), and spend much of their time impoverished and drunk. The index for this section implies that the love of these Dionysiac Artists is "shameful and disgraceful."

(Source: Perseus, Tufts University)

Chishull, Edmund. Antiquitates Asiaticae: Christianam Aeram Antecedentes. London: Guil Bowyer. 1728. Pg. 105-106, 138-139.
This text is highly useful, as it is translations of various things on Greek stone fragments. The first fragment directly mentions the Dionysiac Artists, while the second appears to have influence Lawrie, though it does not mention them and only tangentially relates to them. However, the translations are in Latin, as is the entire work, and it has never been translated in the English (or any other language). I really am not great at translating Latin. I know enough to work my way through the material I need, so I will brief the material as written by Chishull.

A Teian stone fragment describes a petition to Praetor Alexander of Calidonia (i.e. Scottish), representing the Council of all of Aetolia. It asks that the Romans honor an old law that was agreed to be upheld before the Roman occupation, in which the region is deemed sacred and inviolable, that the Aetolians have a right to asylum (i.e. the Aetolians in Ionian), that Teos not be seized or violated, nor its inhabitants be assaulted, and their right to wine and devotions to Bacchus be upheld. Further, that freedom from being accosted or otherwise seized be extended to the Dionysiac Artists (Διονυσιαχοις τεχνιταις) and their right to consumption of alcohol, per the old law (Pg. 105-106). In his footnote on these artists, he relies on Aulus Gellius's description of them, stating they did both comedy and tragedy, as well as playing the flute. Dionysus was their patron because he invented the theatrical arts. Cities would pay them for their theatrical works, as well as games and competitions. They first inhabited Teos, then moved to Lebedos for security by Aetolian law.

For context, it appears this all is tied up in Philip V of Macedonia's allegiance with Hannibal, who the Aetolian League and the Roman navy defeated in 215 BCE from further expansion in Anatolia. Attalus I of Pergamon, allied with the Rhodians, would convince Rome to wage war against Macedon. 197 BCE Philip was defeated in the Battle Cynoscephalae, securing autonomy for Greeks in Anatolia under Roman rule, with the Aetolian League acquiring spoils from Philip's army. Chishull details various aspects of these allegiances, conflicts, and results in the footnotes.

The next section is from a stone fragment found in a wall, unlike the previous one, which was on the back of a gravestone. The fragment and the decree upon it date to 152 BCE. There are diversity of groups in Teos, and two factions appear to have arisen: Commune Attalistarum (the Common of the Followers of Attalus I of Pergamon) and Commune Sodalitii ab Echino dictii (the Common Fraternity from the Talking Hedgehog/Urchin — echinus is also the name of the deep groves in the neck of the Doric column, thus it may refer to Dorian or even Athenian allegiance). Chishull goes on to quote Strabo's entry on the Dionysiac Artists as length.

In the actual fragment Chishull translates, it largely concerns the Attalians and the laws extended to them. The "council of kings" — particularly King Attalus I himself — describes their favor of this group, the protection of their community, the rights and favors extended to them, and the copious offerings left at the theater, and the "sacred" law that governs these things. Chishull mentions "utensils and equipment of the Attalians" (utensilium et instrument Attalistici), though he intends other information that supports this fragment, which has some imperfect lettering and broken portions of the stone. This will be taken out of context later. The rest of the fragment concerns the breaking of tables, vessels, and other consecrated items.
It should be understood that these are decrees carved in stone, probably for posterity purposes, and really only concerns certain legal rights and privileges extended to the Ionians during Rome's conquest of Greece to ensure these rights were maintained. Not a lot of pertinent information can be gathered from these fragments, though they give a nice bit of coloring to the history of this region. The next source would help contextualize some of the information from these fragments.

(Source: Google Book)

Richard Chandler, Nicholas Revett, and William Pars. Ionian Antiquities, Volume 1. London Society of Dilettanti. 1769. Pg. 3-4.
This work outlines further information on the fragments Chishull was translating, not just their content, but also where those fragments are found. Many have been used in constructing walls, as well as several for gravestones in the burial grounds in Sivrihisar (central Turkey).
The Dionysian "Artificers" are a group of devotees to Dionysus and work in theater. Dionysus is reputed to be the inventor of the theatrical representations. The Dionysiac Artists are said to have been "incorporated" by the kings of Pergamon and "contracted" to work at the theaters in Teos and possibly throughout the region. Dionysus is believed to be the patron deity of Teos, and the theatrical devotees to the god provided entertainment throughout Ionia. After an incident of sedition in Teos, they fled. Many of the stones from this area were later used by the Turks for gravestones. One thing that survived was a pedestal for a statue to Claudia Tryphaena, the High Priestess of the goddess Asia and Priestess of Dionysus.

(Source: Archive.org)

Chandler, Richard. Travels in Asia Minor and Greece, Volume 1, Chap. 28. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1775. Pg. 100-101, 103-104.
This is the notes and journal entries of Richard Chandler in producing Ionian Antiquities.
One fragment Chandler investigates concerns Teos, but the fragment is found fixed in wall of a house in Sivrihisar. This fragment mentions two groups: the "Panathenaists" and the "Dionysiasts." The former is group of Athenians that seized Teos, while the later are the artificers or "contractors for the Asiatic theatres," that were incorporate and situated in Teos per the decree of the kings of Pergamon. These are probably the two factions mentioned by Chishull. Another fragment was found to be have been used as a gravestone in Sivrihisar and was a decree to one of the Dionysiac Artists' magistrates. Chandler also tells us that based on materials he examined, the sedition was specifically caused by the Dionysiac Artists, and for their turbulent behavior were expelled from Teos and moved to Ephesus, and from there relocated to Myonnesus by King Attalus. When the region was under Roman rule, the Teians requested the Romans to not permit the Dionysiac Artists to fortify Myonnesus, which appears to have been granted, as the Dionysiac Artists then relocate to Lebedus.

The Dionysiac Artists are said to have held and annual "General Assembly," in which they made sacrifices to the gods, poured libations to their deceased members and benefactors, and held games in honor of Dionysus. Their meetings were presided over by a president, and their meetings were full of pomp and festivity. It is believed these meetings were held at the Temple of Dionysus at Teos.

(Source: Archive.org)

Robison, John. Proofs of a Conspiracy Against All the Religions and Governments of Europe, Chapter 1. Philadelphia: T. Dobson. 1798. Pg. 20.
This is an Anti-Masonic polemic that endeavors to prove the Freemasons are part of a conspiracy against the world. It is very typical of this genre. However, Robison is the first to introduce the theory that the Dionysiac Artists were earlier precursors to the Freemasons.
In this polemic he posits the criticism that corporations of builders are prone to egotism and believing they are better than all other trade associations. The "Dionysiacs" according to Robison were "undoubtedly" an association of architects and engineers, who had the exclusive privilege of building temples, theaters, and other public works under the tutelage and patronage of Dionysus (Bacchus). They distinguish themselves by keeping their trade secrets in the arts and sciences secret from the uninitiated, and used secret signs and words to recognize each other as being initiates. Robison claims they came to Ionia from Syria, and before that from Persia, and introduced the styles of Greek architecture. They would survive the Medieval dark age as a trade association (i.e. guild) and hold a monopoly on building churches and castles with the patronage of sovereigns and princes, who extended exclusive privileges to the group.

Robison is the first to claim that they came to Ionia from Syria and Iran. This may be an interpretation of material from Chishull who found fragments in "Era-ki," presumably Iraq. As is clear from investigations by Chandler, these fragments appear to have been taken from Ionia to central Turkey and Iraq, not that they were originally from there. It is uncertain what sources Robison is looking at, however, given Chishull and Chandler are the main sources at this time for this material, it is likely these were indeed his sources.

(Source: Project Gutenberg)

Lawrie, Alexander. The History of Free Masonry, Drawn from Authentic Sources of Information. Edinburgh: Alex. Lawrie and Co. 1804. Pg. 25, 28-31.
Lawrie is the first Freemason to write on the subject of the "Dionysian Artificers" and set the stage for later discussions on the matter. He has clearly read Chandler's Travels and Ionian Antiquities, and possibly Attic Nights. He probably had access to Chishull, as he pulls information from him that is not in Chandler's works, but it does not appear he actually knows either Latin or Greek, as he greatly misunderstands things from Chishull; if he does know Latin, he is misrepresenting Chishull. He usually is just copying citations from Chandler. However, he takes his own liberties with the material and clearly is modifying the sources to suit his idea of what he thinks they should be.

Lawrie claims Dionysus was the inventor of theaters and "dramatical representations" (language from Ionian Antiquities). He claims a "particular class of Masons" were employed in building these theaters, and these were the Dionysian Artificers, and were initiates of the Dionysian mysteries as well as those of Eleusis. He claims that this group introduced the Doric and Ionic orders of architecture. They held the distinct privilege of building theaters, temples, and other public works. They worked in Ionia and "surrounding countries, as far as Hellespont," building "theatrical apparatus by contract" (language taken directly from Ionian Antiquities). They built the Temple of Dionysus at Teos. He claims they also existed in Syria, Persia, and India (he is mixing Robison and Ionian Anti. together, and copies the citation from Ionian Anti. which is from Strabo: Και τω Διονυσω την Ασιαν όλην χαζιερωσανζες μεχρι της Ινδιχης.) They were incorporated by the kings of Pergamon and settled in Teos. Their trade secrets distinguished them from the uninitiated at Teos, and they used secret signs and words to recognize each other (from Robison).

Here Lawrie starts trying to mold the Dionysiac Artificers into something like Freemasonry. He claims they were divided into lodges. He cites Chishull, but is taking the information out of context. Lawrie claims two of the lodges were called Commune Attalistarum and the other Commune Sodalitii Echini (Chishull: "Commune Sodalitii ab Echino dicti"). These are clearly factions in Teos, but Lawrie has decided they are actually lodges, leading one to question whether he actually knew either Greek or Latin. Soladitas is kind of synonymous with collegia, and is frequently used a "fraternity," so one can see how Lawrie is either getting confused or misusing information. Further, according to Lawrie, each lodge was under the governance of a master, president, and wardens (the president aspect is taken from Chandler's Travels, but the master and wardens is strictly Lawrie's invention). Lawrie speaks on the annual meetings spoken of in Ionian Antiquities, but that they enjoyed entertainment (not that the entertainment was provided by themselves). Lawrie further adds that they used "utensils" that are still employed by Masons today (clearly misrepresenting Chishull). Then adds that "more opulent" artists provided charity to "their poorer brethren."

Lawrie continues — misrepresenting how the fragments translated by Chishull were relocated and used as gravestones — that the Dionysiac Artists built monuments to "the memory of their masters and wardens" that just so happen to be the very burial grounds the Turks later created at Sivrihisar and "Eraki" (Iraq). "The inscriptions upon them express, in strong terms, the gratitude of the Fraternity, for their disinterested exertions on behalf of the Order; for their generosity and benevolence to its individual members; for their private virtues, as well as for their public conduct." This of course is a total confabulation. He then states that based on the inscriptions that King Attalus was a member of their order; another confabulation.

Finally he concludes that all mystery cults were more or less the same thing, and that because this confabulation of his, he claims the Dioynian Artificers are so similar to Freemasonry (because he made it sound like Masonry), the two are therefore related, if not also the same thing.

An interesting argument Lawrie makes is that because Robison is an Anti-Mason, we can trust what he says on the Dionysiac Artificers because he does not share a Masonic agenda, and therefore by fallacious reasoning believes that Robison's arguments should not be questioned.

(Source: Archive.org)

Da Costa, Hipólito José (Hippolyto Joseph). Sketch for the History of the Dionysian Artificers, a Fragment. 1820.
Da Costa's writing on the Dionysiac Artists may be the more influential, but the essay itself is an esoteric nightmare. He repeatedly confounds different things as being identical (e.g. the Dionysiac and Eleusinian Mysteries were the same thing; the Dionysiac Artists and the Ionians are the same thing; et cetera). He jumps around all over the place, tossing out loose ideas and tries to connect them to other loose ideas with no real effort or argument. He will make assumptions built on speculations founded on misinterpretations. He will even claim that such-and-such an authority/author does not know what they are talking about, and say they did not know the truth behind what they were saying, and then, on no further evidence or proof, da Costa will make his own wild speculations. Further, there is actually very little information in this essay on the Dionysiac Artificers. He repeatedly ties himself into intellectual knots, asserting one thing and then trying to dismiss the negative implications of it later. He also has a surprising amount of citations for a "sketch," but on closer examination, the citations are all ancient sources and no contemporary ones, which is suspicious. Further examination, the citations appear to have been copied from Lawrie and Chandler, as what he claims to be citing is totally misrepresenting what is actually in those sources, or those sources do not actually say what da Costa is citing them for. It truly is painful to read this essay. Da Costa was probably a better diplomat than he was a historian or esoteric writer. There is a reason he has the words "sketch" and "fragment" in the title. No wonder Manly P. Hall was attracted to this work. Hall would later republish this essay in 1938 with his own introduction.

Da Costa starts off by saying that all ancient mystery cults were actually of high morals and enlightened in the sciences, basing their teachings and symbolic ceremonies in astronomy and architecture. Then he goes on to assert that all ancient mystery cults were the same thing under different names, because they all have death and resurrection in their myth cycle, which he thinks is always based on the death of the sun. He spends an unnecessary amount of space trying to argue for something completely unnecessary, and it would appear by page 8 he digresses and says, "Welp! None of that matters anyway, so let's talk about Greece. lol." Then he continues with more random stuff. He confuses isopsephy with gematria, but actually calls it "cabala," because those are all the same thing. He claims the Pythagoreans, Eleusinian mysteries, and the rites of Dionysus all come from Orpheus (this may be attested by Apollodorus, Library and Epitome §1.3.2, though he cites Dionysius Siculus and further states in his commentary information that directly opposes his statement that the Eleusinian and Dionysiac Mysteries were invented by Orpheus). Then he says that the Orphic mysteries come from Egypt, which in turn comes from Persia, which then comes from Scythia (Ukraine and southern Russia between the Black and Caspian Seas). He tries to illustrate what these totally identical mystery rites were like, but he is clearly completely reliant on his experience as a Freemason for his understanding of them. He even cites Apuleius's Golden Ass as a factual source, when the work is actually a fictional novel. Surprisingly he actually gives a fairly accurate interpretation of the Mithraic tauroctony, so I suppose even people who make things up occasionally get something right. He goes on to try and explain away by these mystery cults, especially the Dionysians, were purportedly debauched and wild: because these high moral societies were taken over by perverts (pg. 26) and that their corruption was predicted by [Hermes] Trismegistus himself (pg. 28-29).

There is a lot more he ponders on about, but finally starting at page 30 he starts to get into the Dionysiac Artificers. Da Costa does not appear to have familiarity with the geography of Asia Minor or the Middle East. According to him, the inhabitants of Ionia did not like how populous it was for such a small area and so they immigrated to Asia Minor. That's right. Ionia is in Asia Minor, so they moved from Ionia to Asia Minor. And they took their science and religion of Eleusis with them. For whatever reason he discusses that Apollo was the patron deity of Byblos. Then he says the Ionians invented the Ionic Order, which is one of the few things that is factually correct, so I have to give him that. However, he appears to think the Ionians and the Dionysiac Artificers are the same thing. He claims they were founded in Teos, later moved to Lebedos due to some "civil commotion" (pg. 31), though it appears he never learned that they probably caused the commotion. This group is dedicated to Dionysus because he invented theater buildings, and the Artificers would perform at the Dionysian festivals, so da Costa appears to have accepted they were entertainers from time to time. Then the group expanded into Syria, Persia, and India (da Costa says he gets this directly from Strabo, however he copies the exact same citation given by Lawrie, which is a copy of the citation given in Ionian Ant.). He claims the symbols of Dionysus were astronomical in nature and became incorporated into their buildings, and would extend their moral principles into the art of building. He says Cambyses (probably the Second), King of Persia, approved on the Dionysian Artificers, though it appears historically he just approved the Ionians in general in his conquests.

Da Costa says the Dionysian Artificers had secret words and signs to recognize each other, as well as emblems of their order that were used in buildings (pg. 33). They are amongst the foreign builders sent by Hiram of Tyre to help build King Solomon's Temple, namely the Gebalites (1 King 5:18), who come from Byblos. Perhaps this is why da Costa was talking about Apollo's patronage of Byblos, because to da Costa, all mystery cults and ancient religions are the same thing, as he then claims Apollo's patronage of Byblos is representative of the Eleusinian and Dionysian Mysteries (pg. 34). I don't get it either. Da Costa is the first to claim they built Solomon's Temple, though he does not provide really any proof for this claim, other than that it must be so because Josephus tells us Solomon's Temple was in a Grecian style (Antiquity of the Jews §8.5.2 says the Temple was in the Corinthian Order, probably because the description of the two pillars on the porch are bronze and Corinth was known for their bronze work, and the flowering and plantlike ornamentation is reminiscent of the Corinthian Order). Rather than accept that the Corinthian Order is the closest language Josephus had to describe the Temple's ornamentation, da Costa believes it must have actually been in the Corinthian style, which is odd because according to him, the Dionysian Artificers worked in the Ionic style. He further argues that the Grecian mystery cults like Eleusis and Tammuz (actually a Sumerian cult, but again, they are all the same thing to da Costa) were in Jerusalem because Solomon would later fall to pagan worship and idolatry (1 King 11:6-10). However, da Costa tells us we should not blame the Dionysiac Artificers for this. They would never spread pagan idolatry. No, no, no. This happened because the symbols they used to signify God's goodness are similar to the images of the sun, and the foolish Israelites misunderstood, so it is... the Israelites' fault? Anyway, he also says the Israelites did not have a concept of the immortality of the soul until the Dionysian Artificers introduced it (pg. 35). Some of this comes across as antisemitic.

Da Costa jumps around some more about Eleusis, the path of the sun, and the soul. Then he jumps back into the Temple, which he says is a cosmogonic-soteriological representation. That the laying of the foundation stone was on the 2nd day of the 2nd month (1 Kings 6:1 only specifies the month, Ziv), but da Costa believes this is the 20th of April, or when the sun moves into Aries, representing the sheep skin of the Eleusinian Mysteries (pg. 36 — on pg. 10 he spends some time talking about sheep skin, probably to establish an ancient reason for Masonic lambskin aprons). For da Costa, this establishes a new cosmogonic allegorical system to explain the ancient mysteries in Jerusalem. He then says the the two pillars on the porch represent the Tropics of Capricorn and Cancer. He goes on further about temples as cosmogonic representations in the Platonic "tradition," especially Solomon's Temple because Jehovah is the one true God (pg. 37-38). This must be so because according to da Costa the places where the Dionysian Artificers met were by "tradition" also cosmogonic representations. For whatever reason he starts talking about the ouroboros as a solar image.

Then he moves on to the Essenes, which he believes were the Hasideans mentioned in Maccabees 7:13, who were in charge of repairing the Temple. Da Costa is not the only one to share this opinion, which appears to only be supported by the similarity of the names. Da Costa criticizes Josephus for being unjust about the Essenes because he believes Josephus is ignorant of their great secret, that they are Dionysian Artificers. What evidence does da Costa have for this? That he believes they used secret signs and words, as well as held banquets, even though "it does not appear they followed the profession of builders of architects" (pg. 45). That's sound enough logic. Da Costa starts making great leaps, or even greater leaps, stating the Pythagoreans were builders, the Eleusinian Mysteries survived until the 8th century, et al. He says the Eleusinian Mysteries, along with the Dionysian Artificers and the Essenes "sunk into such oblivion, that no mention is made of them in history" (pg. 47), so one must ask: how does da Costa know so much about them? Finally, he concludes that during the Crusades, these groups adopted rules to be more like today's fraternities, and somehow they got to England and Scotland. It is the remains of the Dionysian Artificers that were discovered in England that his great proof, though I have no idea what proof he actually has.

I would like to toss in a quote that I think sums up da Costa's essay: "I think, that after those circumstances, which afforded so many facilities for the introduction of the system of the Dionysian Artificers in Judea, the continuance of the same, in subsequent periods, cannot be of difficult explanation" (pg. 43). It is clear that he is struggling to express an idea that is more ambitious than practical or even knowable.

If all that was hard to follow, don't worry, because it is. Da Costa's essay is a jumbled mess of conjectures, wild speculations, faulty "scholarship," unsound reasoning, full of contradictions and intellectual knots and acrobatics, and overall very poorly written. It is so badly written, one wonders how this essay even gained a reputation. Da Costa's only other claim to fame is being Brazil's founding journalist and being arrested by the Portuguese Inquisition. Yet, somehow it became one of the most influential pieces on the Dionysian Artists to later Masons, and one favored by Manly P. Hall.

(Source: Archive.org)

Macoy, Robert. General History of Freemasonry (as found in General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry with George Oliver). Ref. "Dionysian Architects." New York: Masonic Publishing Company. 1870.
Macoy refers to the "Dionysian Architects" as "priests" of Bacchus, and is the first to claim they were priests, though this contradicts the evidence that the cults of Dionysus were largely governed by priestesses. He claims that once they had become skilled in architecture they founded the order of "Sidonian Builders" (probably confusing his geography, and being under the impression that Gebalites were from Sidon, though they come from modern day Byblos, or perhaps confused Sidon as another name for Tyre). He claims they existed before the time of King David, and that they later built King Solomon's Temple. It is likely he is getting this from da Costa. Macoy goes on to claim the Dionysian Architects became the Roman Collegia of Architects (there is no known evidence such a college existed), which in turn became the guild corporations of the Middle Ages, which then gave rise to Freemasonry. He then claims the Dionysian Architects are the link between the ancient mystery cults and Freemasonry.

(Source: Archive.org)

Bromwell, Henry P. H. Royal Architect Degree of Free and Accepted Architects. 1875. (Committee on Publication, Grand College of Rites. Collectanea, Vol. 4, No. 2. 1959. Pg. 96).
Bromwell makes a single passing reference to the "Dioynysian Architects," in which he claims Hiram Abif was their Grand Master when they joined the work on King Solomon's Temple. I am uncertain if he discusses them in his Restoration of Masonic Geometry and Symbolry (Bromwell Publishing Co.,1905), as it is a massive and confusing tome that I have yet to finished reading. It is doubtful Bromwell provides much more insight into the Dionysiac Architect in this book that is not derivative of previous writers. Most likely he learned about them from da Costa. It is doubtful Bromwell had any impact on later writers about this group.

(Source: printed material unavailable online and out of print)

Mackenzie, Kenneth R. H. Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia. London: John Hogg. 1877.
Sadly, I cannot find a digital version of this text, nor have I been able to find any hardcopies at this time. I will try to get a copy through interlibrary loan and update this when I do.

Mackey, Albert G. Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry, Vol. 1. Ref. "Dionysian Architects" and "Da Costa, Hippolyto Joseph." Chicago: The Masonic History Company. 1878.
Mackey is pulling from Lawrie, Macoy, and da Costa. He does not mention da Costa in his encyclopedic entry, but he has a separate entry for da Costa. He discusses a bit on the Dionysiac Artificers in his entry on da Costa, so it would appear he wanted to keep da Costa's information separate. This tracks, as the information in his entry on the "Dionysiac Architects" is entirely derived from Lawrie and Macoy. Mackey cites "Oliver" (probably George Oliver) as one of his sources, however, this seems to be an error or confusion, as Oliver never discusses the Dionysiac Artists, but Macoy does. Two works, one by Macoy and the other by Oliver, would be combined into one text, as cited above.

Mackey states they were priests of Dionysus (see Macoy), and thus were initiates of the Dionysian mysteries, and became architects around 1000 BCE. This is the first mentioning of when they were founded, and the date appears to be based on the biblical literal dating of King Solomon's Temple (1018 BCE). They built theaters and other public works. He states the "more opulent" members provided charity to the "poorer brethren" (this exact verbiage comes from Lawrie). He states the the "lodges" were called συνοικίαι oinoikiai, a term that appears to be derivative of some terms used by Lawrie, but looks like a corruption of οίκημα oikema or "lodge." Still pulling from Lawrie, he states the lodges were governed by a master and wardens, they held annual general assemblies, and that they used implements still in use by Freemasons today. They had secret signs or a "universal language" to distinguish each other. They had members across India, Persia, and Syria (Lawrie, da Costa). They were in Tyre by the time of Solomon's reign, and so were employed in the Temple's construction. Then he claims that Hiram Abif was likely a member of the Dionysiac Architects.

Mackey then claims that Solomon implored the Dionysiac Architects to impart their secrets to the Israelites, and then initiated them into the Israelite mysteries, hence "the apocryphal legends of the Dionysians would naturally give way to the true legend of the Freemason." He admits this is a speculation, but claims the statement holds true under the authority of Lawrie and "Oliver" (Macoy) — that is a hell of a way of saying, "I made this up, so if I'm wrong, blame these other guys for making me think this." Nonetheless, he believes this group is the link between the pagan and Israelite mysteries (whatever those were).

According to Mackey, they were incorporated in 300 BCE at Teos by the kings of Pergamon (Lawrie). After a decree by Emperor Theodosius I (392 CE) closed the sanctuary at Eleusis, but Mackey, like da Costa, seems to think all mystery cults were the same thing, so therefore the Dionysians went underground. Here he is clearly following da Costa, as Mackey claims they remained underground until the Crusades and relocated to Europe and became the "traveling Freemasons of the Middle Ages."

In Mackey's entry on da Costa himself, he gives a brief synopsis of the essay, which he applauds, though he does admit "his reasoning may not always carry conviction."

(Source: Phoenix Masonry)

Weisse, John A. The Obelisk and Freemasonry: According to the Discoveries of Belzoni and Commander Gorringe. New York: J. W. Bouton. 1880. Pg. 87-90.
Weisse refers to this group as a "wandering guild of builders," devoted to Dionysus. The source Weisse cites is Mackenzie, though it is doubtful he is only looking at this text. He says the organization appeared "no later" than 1000 BCE (probably from Mackey). Weisse says they enjoyed special privileges and immunities, that they had secret modes of recognition, and bound to each other by "special ties." The richer members provided for the "poorer brethren" (probably getting this verbiage from Mackey, who gets it from Lawrie). Their organization was divided into communities called γυνοικιαι (or corruption of Mackey's term) governed by a master and wardens. Solomon ordered Hiram of Tyre to employ this organization in the building of the Temple and Solomon's palace. For whatever reason, Weisse claims the Dionysiac Architects built the Temple of Diana (Artemis) at Ephesus. Weisse then introduces the wild claim that they has a secret means of intercommunication across the globe. Then following the others, he claims "doubtless" this group became the "traveling masons" of the Middle Ages. All the great monuments of antiquity were built by this organization, and they worked in Ephesus, Rhodes, Athens, Rome, Constantinople, etc. Weisse concludes this section by describing who Solomon, Hiram, Hiram Abif, Adoniram, and the "Sacred Lodge" were. In the section on Hiram Abif, he says Hiram was a member of the Dionysiac Architects, and that they were from and associated at Tyre.

(Source: Archive.org)

Redding, Moses W. The Illustrated History of Freemasonry. New York: Redding & Co. 1903. Pg. 33-34.
Redding outright states that all ancient mystery cults are more or less the same thing. Following Mackey, the Dionysiac Architects are priests of Dionysus founded in 1000 BCE to build temples and public works. They were established in Tyre, as he claims is "well attested by history," and were called to work on King Solomon's Temple. In 300 BCE they settled in Teos and would travel to other countries to offer their services. They were divided into companies and governed by officers similar to Masonic lodges. They practiced charity, had secret words, and used Masonic implements. Redding follows his sources that this group are "at least a part" of what became the traveling Freemasons.

Redding cites Mackenzie's Royal Cyclopedia and Mackey's Encyclopaedia as his sources. It becomes incredibly obvious that with Redding's entry in his tome on the Dionysiac Architects that we are looking at several generations of corruption of some of the earliest source material.

(Source: Phoenix Masonry)

Hall, Manly P. Secret Teachings of All Ages, Chapters 4, 12, 16, and 40. Reader's Edition. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher / Penguin Group. 2003 (originally published 1928). Pg. 78, 188, 234, 245, and 568-574.
Where to start... At this point it should be clear that the source information has become more and more corrupt as writers rely on successive sources for their information on the Dionysiac Artists-Architects. It is like a game of telephone for bad scholars. For Manly P. Hall, he picked some of the worst sources: da Costa's essay, which is an absolute mess of immensely faulty scholarship, and Weisse, who relies on Mackenzie, so about about three or four generations removed from any primary source material. As would be expected, Hall is all over the place; he takes everything previously written as empirical fact and spreads a thick frosting of more confabulations on top of a lopsided cake. So let us briefly go over Hall.

Hall says the "Dionysiac Architects" are much like the Freemasons, an organization of builders bound to each other by "secret knowledge" of the divine sciences in architectonics. In Chapter 4 he starts off humble and hesitant to assert anything as a total fact. For instance he says they "supposedly" helped build Solomon's Temple and "it is believed that CHiram Abif" was a member. He is more assertive that they built other monuments of antiquity and had a secret language (Mackey is the first to say they had a secret language, though this appears be a misunderstanding of secret words and other modes of recognition). Then that they held annual meetings and feasts. This is the section of the book most often cited for information on this mythic organization, though the section with the most substance on them is much later in the book — indicating how few "researchers" bother reading this tome.

Chapter 12 does not specifically mention the Dionysiac Architects, but the index of the Reader's Edition points to this portion as relevant to them. For the most part, Hall is just asserting that all builders, engineers, and architects of the ancient world were initiates of the ancient mysteries, particular the Eleusinian Mysteries. He speaks poetically of nothing important in particular, and then claims these "Guilds of Builders" were progenitors of the Freemasons, and that they concealed their secret doctrines into the designs of their trade.
Chapter 16, Hall gets more assertive and confident in his claims. Now he states that "CHiram Abif" was the Grand Master of the Dionysiac Architects. Later in the chapter, after a great deal of esoteric verbal masturbation, he claims "The Dionysiac Architects were consecrated to the raising of their Master Spirit — Cosmic Beauty — from the sepulcher of material ignorance and selfishness by erecting buildings which were such perfect exemplars of symmetry and majesty that they were actually magical formulae by which was evoked the spirit of the martyred Beautifer entombed within a materialistic world." Whatever that means.

Chapter 40 has the most extensive discussion on the Dionysiac Architects with some of the most audacious claims, and has moved far beyond his humble suggestions in Chapter 4. Hall starts off by saying that they are "the most celebrated of the ancient fraternities of artisans" though apparently no one knew who they were until very recently. They are the "custodians of a secret and sacred knowledge of architectonics" and were "regarded as the master craftsmen of the earth." Hall has some weird ways of explaining things to make them seem more profound than they really are. For instance, he says that because Dionysus was the patron of theaters, these architects "specialized in the construction of buildings adapted for the presentation of dramatic performances." He could have just said "they invented theaters." Whatever. He claims that the semicircular designs were an altar to Aeschylus, the poet.
Hall falls into the category of conspiracy theorist, in that he claims they were so secret that no records exist of their teachings (but of course, Hall spends a few pages explaining their esoteric teachings). For Hall, lack of evidence is proof that something secret was going on. Then he quotes a paragraph of Weisse's Obelisk and Freemasonry.

Next he tells us that these architects spread throughout Asia Minor into Egypt and India (probably getting this from da Costa), and with the "rise of the Roman Empire" they spread in the Europe and England. He claims they built the most stately buildings in Constantinople, Rhodes, Athens, and Rome. Further, out of no where and the first to assert this, he claims Vitruvius was a member. No, no he was not. Anyone who has read Vitruvius's De Architectura will note that he spends way too much page space in the prefaces of each of his books pandering to Caesar Augustus and trying to gain some commissions to have been a member of an elite associations of builders of immense renown and prestige — if he was, why would he be pandering and begging for work? Anyway, Hall quotes a portion of Vitruvius's treatise that really does not have anything to do with anything else he is talking about. I guess Hall was getting paid by the word. He describes Vitruvius's discussion on bronze vessels placed around a theater to help the sounds on stage to amplify and carry across the rest of theater, but Hall says it was to alter the voice of the speaker, then claims this was done in initiation ceremonies and produce a variety of sound effects, though this is unfounded. Further, the buildings the Dionysiac Architects constructed were not just beautiful and follow Vitruvius's principles of architecture, but also, according to Hall, were designed to provoke emotional and spiritual effects. These buildings were not just models of the cosmos, but were supposed to be "in harmony" with the universe, thus making the buildings a "oracle," like the Ark of the Covenant was supposed to be an oracle to talk to God. Hall tries to get into aspects of environmental psychology, but it is a lot of faux criticisms and esoteric mumbo-jumbo.
He brings up da Costa's writing. If da Costa misunderstood and misrepresented much, Hall misunderstands and misrepresents da Costa. He takes da Costa's discussion on astronomical symbolism of the ancient mysteries and runs with it. He loosely speculates on star lore and astronomy in buildings.

Hall continues to claim they had secret forms of communicating. Also that this group was still around in the Middle Ages and while being openly pagan were employed in building Christian structures. He even acknowledges that this is unorthodox. Hall claims secret symbols of this fraternity were carved into the doorways of Notre Dame and destroyed in the French Revolution (how convenient), and were Rosicrucian and Masonic in nature. It is a little odd that an elite fraternity of architects from the ancient world would illicitly construct a Christian structure and then use symbols of two other secret orders from the modern era. Fulcanelli's Mysteries of the Cathedrals was published two years prior to Secret Teachings, so it is likely he is pulling his discussion on the alchemical and occult symbolism of Notre Dame from Fulcanelli. He claims the checkered pavement and trestle board of the Freemasonry were originally from the Dionysiac Architects. He then quotes Charles Heckethorn's Secret Societies in All Ages and Countries, which has long been the source of many Masonic blunders and misrepresentations (Heckethorn is just not a good researcher). Hall goes on to link the Dionysiac Architects with the Roman Collegia, and even claims they influenced Islamic culture, such as the "Mysteries of the dervishes [Sufi Muslims]." 

Hall starts to go rouge and just makes stuff up the further into this section you read. He says they originally called themselves "Sons of Solomon" and that they used the "Seal of Solomon" as a symbol for themselves. However, Hall says the Seal of Solomon is two interlaced triangles (Star of David), and not the traditional pentalpha. The Knights Templar had contact with the Dionysiac Architects, borrowed symbols from them, and spread their symbols into Europe (I thought they did that themselves because they were working in Europe, but now the Templars spread their ideas... okay Hall). He then starts discussing what their spiritual philosophy was — never mind previously he said their ideologies were lost to history — but those philosophies are derivative of Masonic symbolism. He concludes this discussion with some more esoteric verbal masturbation.

The most curious thing about reviewing Hall's discussions on the Dionysiac Architects is how humble and hesitant he was to proclaim with absolute certainty in Chapter 4, and by Chapter 40 he is making wild, baseless claims, taking things from previous writers out of context (and they already were misrepresenting their sources) and just running with it. It is very intriguing to see Hall shift the dynamic of his discourse so dramatically, and really it should not be a surprise.

(Source: Sacred Texts, Chapter 4: Ancient Mysteries and Secret Societies, Part Three)
(Source: Sacred Texts, Chapter 12: Wonders of Antiquity)
(Source: Sacred Texts, Chapter 16: The Hiramic Legend)
(Source: Sacred Texts, Chapter 40: Freemasonic Symbolism)

Other materials...
It is highly likely there is more material between Lawrie and Hall. I have a sneaking suspicion that J. D. Buck (Mystic Masonry, 1911) and C. W. Leadbeater (Glimpses of Masonic History, 1926) both have a tidbit or even a passing reference to the Dionysiac Architects. There is certainly a lot of information that succeeds Hall, such as Graham Hancock, and I am willing to bet Robert Lomas and Christopher Knight probably talk about this mythic group as well. It is not my intention to ever explore anything after Hall, but if I do in future explorations find something previous to Hall that may be of some impact, I will add it. There may be things in Mackenzie that point to other sources, or Bromwell may have something in his Restorations of Masonic Geometry (1905) that points to other sources. For now, this illustrates quite thoroughly the chain of transmission in how a traveling band of drunken entertainers that incited sedition became a fraternity of architects devoted to high morals and constructing sacred buildings. That's a hell of a promotion without a pay increase.