Overblog Suivre ce blog
Administration Créer mon blog

Texte libre

 

Cécile Révauger,
Professeur des Universités,
UFR d’anglais,
Université Michel de Montaigne

 

Je suis née à Bordeaux en 1955, j’ai fait mes études secondaires au lycée François Magendie de Bordeaux et supérieures à l’Université de Bordeaux III.  Le concours des IPES qui existait alors (pré-recrutement au métier de professeur dans l’enseignement secondaire) m’a permis de vivre dans un relatif confort mes années d’étudiante. J’ai  été reçue aux concours du CAPES et de l’agrégation  en 1977. Enseignante dans un collège d’Argenteuil, puis dans divers collèges et lycées des régions lyonnaise et grenobloise, j’ai  soutenu une thèse de troisième cycle en 1983  sur le conte oriental en Angleterre, ce qui m’a permis d’être recrutée comme professeur agrégé à l’Université Stendhal-Grenoble III en 1985, puis comme maître de conférences dans cette même université en 1987. Mes recherches sur le XVIIIe siècle anglais m’ont incitée à étudier la franc-maçonnerie, née à l’époque des Lumières, de Locke et de Newton. En 1984, il fallait pour cela relever un triple défi : d’une part il s’agissait d’un domaine  largement inexploré par la communauté universitaire et qui semblait donc un peu ésotérique et suspect, d’autre part les archives maçonniques n’étaient pas aussi disponibles qu’elles le sont aujourd’hui, les Grandes Loges anglo-saxonnes faisant à l’époque preuve d’une certaine réserve à l’égard des recherches ayant un caractère public, enfin le chercheur en question était une femme…une bizarrerie pour la plupart des spécialistes britanniques et américains de la franc-maçonnerie … alors qu’aujourd’hui les bibliothèques maçonniques m’ouvrent largement leurs portes et que  les conservateurs font preuve de la plus grande bienveillance à mon égard, comme à l’égard de tous les chercheurs, pourvu que leur travail soit réellement scientifique.

Une bourse Fulbright de la Commission franco-américaine m’a permis d’effectuer des recherches dans les bibliothèques  de Boston et de Washington DC, sans oublier celle de Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Située au cœur du pays du maïs, elle aida sans nul doute son fondateur à tromper l’ennui et rassemble l’une des plus vastes collection d’archives maçonniques . Je pus ainsi rédiger ma thèse d’Etat, « La franc-maçonnerie en Grande –Bretagne et aux Etats-Unis au XVIIIè siècle : 1717-1813 », soutenue à l’Université de Bordeaux III en 1987, sous la direction de Régis Ritz.  Je publiai une version abrégée de cette thèse aux Editions EDIMAF en 1990. Depuis, j’ai publié de nombreux articles consacrés à la franc-maçonnerie, un ouvrage sur les «  Anciens et les Modernes » (, c'est-à-dire  les deux Grandes Loges rivales d’Angleterre, et un livre sur la franc-maçonnerie noire aux Etats-Unis, « Noirs et francs-maçons » (2003). J’ai écrit cet ouvrage grâce à l’obtention d’une seconde bourse de recherche Fulbright qui m’a permis de travailler sur les archives des Grandes Loges noires de Prince Hall à New York et Washington DC. J’ai été nommé professeur des universités en 1990.

J’ai  mené de front recherche et enseignement, comme la plupart des universitaires français. En bonne dix-huitiémiste, je me suis toujours un peu considérée comme citoyenne du monde, et à défaut de pouvoir le sillonner autant que je désirais, j’ai trouvé beaucoup de vertus à la mobilité universitaire…j’ai donc successivement occupé des postes à l’Université de Grenoble (Stendhal-Grenoble III), de Provence (Aix-Marseille I), des Antilles et de la Guyane (en Martinique) avant de rejoindre mon Université-mère, si je puis dire, l’Université de Bordeaux III. Chaque poste m’a apporté un grand nombre de satisfactions et seul l’impérieux besoin de découvrir de nouveaux  horizons a motivé chaque  départ.  A Grenoble, j’ai occupé un poste dit « double-timbre », à l’époque des premiers IUFM, c'est-à-dire que j’enseignais à l’Université tout en exerçant les fonctions de directrice adjointe de cet IUFM pionnier, ouvert à la collaboration avec les universitaires. Ce fut une expérience enrichissante, qui me permit de lancer un certain nombre de programmes de coopération internationale et de côtoyer des milieux  sociaux variés,  des cultures professionnelles  diverses, enseignants du secondaire, anciens directeurs d’écoles normales, corps d’inspection. J’y ai acquis, je pense, quelques qualités de diplomate, à une époque, bien sûr révolue, où pédagogues fondamentalistes et universitaires récalcitrants s’affrontaient allègrement.

 Aujourd’hui je fais partie du CIBEL de Bordeaux, le Centre Interdisciplinaire Bordelais d’Etudes des Lumières, dirigé par Jean Mondot. Mes recherches actuelles, outre la franc-maçonnerie, sont consacrées aux  Lumières et  à l’historiographie des Lumières,  ainsi qu’à l’histoire de la Caraïbe anglophone,  de l’époque des sociétés de plantation à l’abolition de l’esclavage.  J’anime des séminaires de master, dirige des thèses sur le dix-huitième siècle britannique et sur la Caraïbe anglophone des XVIII  et XIXe siècles.

Recherche

Texte libre

Prof. Cécile Révauger

English studies

Michel de Montaigne Bordeaux III University

 

I was born in Bordeaux and was a student at Bordeaux University. I passed the “agregation”  in 1977. I first taught in secondary schools, before registering a thesis on the oriental tale in 18th century . After defending this thesis I started my academic career at Grenoble University. I switched from the oriental tale to Masonic studies as I developed a particular  interest in the 18th century and considered that Masonic lodges could only emerge in the wake of the Enlightenment. At the time studying masonry was a real challenge, first because the academic community was a bit suspicious of the validity of masonry as a scientific field to be explored as it was such an unusual subject, second because Masonic libraries themselves were suspicious and not used to giving public access to their sources, and last but not least because I was a woman, a rarity on Masonic premises  and therefore a strange scholar…Today things have totally changed of course and the curators and staff  of the main Masonic libraries in Britain and the States are extremely helpful. A Fulbright award allowed me to spend a lot of time working on Masonic archives in Boston, Washington DC and Cedar rapids, Iowa: in corn country providing such a huge  collection is  no small feat! The library of the Grand Lodge of Iowa is one of the largest Masonic libraries in the world. I defended my PHd dissertation in 1987, entitled: “ 18th century Freemasonry in and the ”. An abridged version was published  in 1990. I have produced several articles on Freemasonry since. I was appointed “professeur des Universités” in 1990. I obtained a second Fulbright Award in 1999 , which allowed me to work in New York and Washington DC libraries and write a book on black freemasonry in , Noirs et francs-maçons, published in 2003.

As a true 18th century  specialist, I have always considered myself as a “citizen of the world” and although I could not explore the world as much as I wanted to, I did my best and seized all the opportunities to apply for various positions.  This does not mean that I was unhappy with my work but simply wanted to discover a little more each time... This explains why I successively occupied academic positions at Grenoble Unversity, Université de Provence, Université des Antilles et de la Guyane (Martinique) before  coming back to Bordeaux, my home town and university. As most French scholars I have always combined teaching and research activities.

I am now a member of CIBEL (Centre Interdisciplinaire Bordelais d’Etudes des Lumières), the research centre chaired by Jean Mondot at Bordeaux University.  I  teach seminars at master level and I am currently supervising theses on 18th century and in Caribbean studies.

My current research is devoted to freemasonry, the Enlightenment and the historiography of the Enlightenment as well as Caribbean eighteenth and nineteenth century studies.

14 mai 2012 1 14 /05 /mai /2012 21:19

Le second volume consacré aux Femmes et à la franc-maçonnerie vient de paraitre aux éditions de La Pensée et les Hommes.

 

La Pensée et les Hommes

Avenue Victoria 5

B-1000 Bruxelles

Belgique

 

 

Le premier portait sur les XVIIIe et XIXe siècles, celui-ci aborde les XXe et XXIe siècles.

Voir ci-dessous  les tables des matières des deux numéros.

 

Ces deux parutions font suite au colloque que j’avais organisé à Bordeaux en juin 2010.

 

 

Vol. 1 Les femmes dans la franc-maçonnerie 

 

  XVIIIe et XIXe siècles

 

I La maçonnerie d’adoption au XVIIIe siècle 

 

Jacob Women’s Freemasonry in the Age of Enlightenment. Stereotypes on the Right and the Left.

 

Burke Princesses of the Blood and Sisters in Masonry: The Duchesse de Chartres, the Duchesse de Bourbon and the Princesse de Lamballe.

 

Caille La franc-maçonnerie féminine : entre adoption et émancipation.

 

Auffret The Lodges of Adoption at the New Museum of Freemasonry (Paris). + illustrations

 

Onnerfors Performance and Participation in Swedish Female Freemasonry.

 

Witkovski ).  Le rôle de la franc-maçonnerie d’adoption dans le combat politique au début du règne de Stanislas Auguste de Pologne (1764-1776).

 

 

II Origines et rituels

 

Collis The Role of Protectresses in Jacobite Fraternities, 1726-1791.

 

Snoek The Adoption Rite, its Origins, Opening up for Women, and its 'Craft' rituals.

 

Decharneux Quand les femmes deviennent maçonnes : regard critique sur les rituels du Marquis de Gages.

 

Besses Les quatre rites fondateurs de la maçonnerie féminine américaine : Boston 1827.

 

 

III La présence des femmes malgré les exclusions

 

Mirala Women and Irish freemasonry 

 

Peter .  Freemasonry and Women in Eighteenth-Century English Press.

 

Pink Robin Hood and 'her' Merry Women:  a Society of Freemasons in an Early Eighteenth Century London Pleasure Garden.

 

Snell : Enlightenment Females and Freemasonry: Contributions by the Fairer Sex to the Freemasons Magazine with Newly Discovered Links to the Freemasons' Female Charity in England.

 

Prescott & Sommers, Sister Dunckerley

 

Carter  Mormonism, Freemasonry and Women.

 

 

IV La maçonnerie d’adoption au 19e siècle

 

Messeca  La Maçonnerie des Dames dans la France napoléonienne :chant du cygne ou métamorphose ?

 

Benimeli Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie espagnole au 19e siècle.

 

Sommers Hidden in Plain Sight: The Order of the Eastern Star in the Historiography of American Women’s Associations.

 

Vigni La régénération  morale de la femme dans les anciennes loges d’Adoption : le cas italien.

 

Soucy La franc-maçonnerie féminine à Cuba.

 

 

 

 

 

Vol. 2 Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie 

 

XXe – XXI e  siècles.

 

 

 

 

1 Panoramiques

 

Françoise Jupeau-Requillard,  La présence des femmes dans les loges françaises : un enjeu politique.

Marie-Paule Dupin-Benesse, Masculin/Féminin en Franc-Maçonnerie : une histoire de résistances.

Jean-Pierre Bacot, Université de Bourgogne. Le féminisme en franc-maçonnerie, un parcours tortueux.

Jeffrey Tyssens, Le discours masculin sur la franc-maçonnerie féminine en Belgique (1912-1960): la régression des progressistes? 

Anna-Maria Isastia, La franc-maçonnerie féminine italienne des années 1800 à aujourd’hui.

 

 

2 Arrêts sur images

 

Sophie Geoffroy, Annie Besant, Théosophe, Socialiste, Féministe et Franc-Maçonne : une femme à l’origine du Droit Humain.

Patricia Izquierdo, Maria Deraismes, une femme éclairée à la tête du Droit Humain. 

Andrée Prat, Les motivations des postulantes au Droit Humain  à travers l’étude de testaments philosophiques de 1893 à 1903 (d’après les archives russes).

Ann Pilcher-Dayton, Doctor of the  University of Sheffield. Women Freemasons in England 1908-1935.

Diane Clements, “Its members are of all sorts…”, The Male Element of Early Co-Freemasonry in England.

John Slifko, Louis Goaziou, a Member of L’Ordre Maçonnique Mixte International Le Droit Humain, and the Introduction of Freemasonry for Men and Women into the United States in the First Half of the Twentieth Century.

Aimee E. Newell, Scottish Rite Masonic Museum & Library, Lexington, MA, USA. Authority or Auxiliary?  Miss Rose Lipp’s Masonic Business, 1890-1920.

Françoise Moreillon, Les Loges d’Adoption du 20e siècle, creuset  de la Maçonnerie Féminine indépendante.

Olivia Salmon Monviola, Diffusion et circulation des travaux de la franc maçonnerie féminine dans le Madrid des années 30 : l’exemple de la loge Amor.

 

 

3 La mixité en question(s)

 

Françoise Barret-Ducrocq, Une assemblée mixte en maçonnerie est-elle propice à l’émancipation des femmes et des hommes aujourd’hui?

Dominique Paquet, De la mixité en franc maçonnerie : fantasmes et représentations.

 

Célia Poulet, Loges féminines, loges masculines :  distinction institutionnelle, proximité des pratiques.

Ingrid Chapard, L’initiation maçonnique est-elle un opérateur de genre ? 

Claudine Batazzi-Alexis, Représentations sociales de la franc-maçonnerie féminine : des clichés qui ont « la peau dure.

Bérengère Kolly, L’affaire sororité : fraternité, universel et inclusion des femmes dans la franc-maçonnerie.

Olivia Chaumont et Nicolas Froeliger, L’identité de la franc-maçonnerie à travers le transsexualisme.

 

 

Témoignages

 

Denise Oberlin, Le développement de la GLFF à l’international.

Marie-Françoise Blanchet, La Grande Loge Féminine de France, de la difficile liberté au rayonnement : Témoignage d’une Passée Grande Maitresse de la Grande Loge Féminine de France.

Anne-Marie Dickele , Questions de  mixité. 

Marie-Françoise Passini, Comment une femme ayant frappé à la porte de l'obédience mixte du DROIT HUMAIN, il y a plusieurs années,  voit-elle son histoire et celles des femmes et des hommes dans ce cadre ?

 

 

 

Commandes:

 

La Pensée et les Hommes

Avenue Victoria 5

B-1000 Bruxelles

Belgique

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
6 juin 2011 1 06 /06 /juin /2011 21:43

Charles Porset was well known both among 18th century specialists and historians of freemasonry. He was born on April 15, 1944, the son of  refugees from the Spanish civil war. He was brought up in Bordeaux, passed the agrégation de philosophie, the highest competitive examination in the land,  and quite symbolically started teaching philosophy in a secondary school, a lycée, in 1968,  a year when  youth, in France as well as in many other countries, was so hopeful for change, freedom and happiness. He entered CNRS, the major French research institution, very young and spent his life writing books and articles on 18th century philosophy and the history of freemasonry.

 

As a true man of the Enlightenment, he travelled extensively. In 1978 he spent a month studying at Martin Luther Université (Halle, Germany), in 1982 at Saltykov-Schchedrin Library in Leningrad, working on  the Voltaire Fund, in 1984 giving a series of lectures in Martinique on Rousseau and Diderot at Université des Antilles-Guyane, in 1987 and 1988  lecturing in Spain, at Madrid and Sevilla universities, in 1992 in Japan at Gashuin University, (Tokyo)  and at Maison Franco-japonaise. He regularly attended Jose Antonio Ferrer Benimeli’s summer courses on the history of freemasonry in Zaragossa : although  he vastly enjoyed disagreeing with Benimeli on the influence of Jesuits in freemasonry, the two scholars had genuine mutual esteem. Benimeli was very moved when I phoned him to tell him that Charles left us. Charles often gave lectures in Italy and Tunisia. He obtained the Chaire Verhagen at the  Vrije Universiteit of Brussels for the year1998.

 

Charles was a specialist of Madame du Chatelet, Voltaire, Rousseau  and Diderot.

He defended his thesis on Madame du Chatelet. In 1999, he was the deputy general secretary of Société Française d’Etude du Dix-Huitième Siècle, as well as a member of the executive committee of the International Society of Eighteenth Century Studies . He admired Daniel Ligou’s work, although he enjoyed vigorous academic discussions with him. Daniel Ligou was really the first academic historian of freemasonry (after Pierre Chevallier).Charles edited Studia Latomorum & Historica. Mélanges offerts à Daniel Ligou, (Paris, Champion, 1998) and most of all the revised version of Ligou’s huge Dictionary of Freemasonry, in cooperation with Dominique Moreillon.

It is impossible to quote all his books and articles: among his major works : Voltaire franc-maçon, Mirabeau franc-maçon, the commented edition of Louis Amiable’s Loge des Neuf Soeurs, a history of a Bordeaux lodge, Lodge La Concorde Montesquieu. He coedited with me Franc-maçonnerie et religions dans l’Europe des Lumières (Paris, Honoré Champion, 1998

In 1992 he was filmed in La vie et la pensée de Rousseau. (Documentary Film Production. Institute of Japan. Tokyo). One of his most recent contributions  was to a new edition of Rousseau’s works.

 

He was on the editorial board of the Journal and coorganized several conferences with me.

We were currently  jointly editing the Biographical Dictionary of 18th Century Freemasons, which involves over 150 authors. We had reached almost the final stage, with over 2500 pages. I shall consider completing  the task  he valued so much and  releasing it to the publisher as soon as possible as a paramount personal duty, although, as many others,  I feel  I have lost a limb.

 

Charles Porset had been a member of the Grand Orient de France for   years. He was also involved in the Higher degrees of the French Rite, as « Grand Chancellier du Premier Ordre ».

He actively took part in the last conference I organized on women and freemasonry in Bordeaux and there is a beautiful picture of himself, Olivia Chaumont, the first sister of the Grand Orient de France and myself , in Franc-maçonnerie Magazine. Some of you will remember the very good paper given by Olivia to tell her own personal story as a transexual eventually allowed to remain within the Grand Orient. Charles committed himself to the admission of women within the Grand Orient de France and was delighted to have his own daughter initiated in a Bordeaux lodge on November 18, 2010. He was already too ill to attend the initiation, which was the first one for a woman  in Bordeaux at the Grand Orient de France.

He was sincerely committed to the French republican motto Liberté Égalité Fraternité and believed in the fundamental equality of men and women.

He had a real sense of humour, and hated clichés or formal, or politically correct statements. He always told me that he had had a good life and that when it eventually stopped, he would not mind. He was a great one for obituaries, and I feel far behind him for this exercise.

I just want to tell you all that I feel bereaved, that we shall all miss a great historian of freemasonry as well as a real humanist.

 

 

For those of you who speak French, I recommend this 2009  ten minute video on the Enlightenment in today’s world, on the Internet.  This is really Charles at his best, as I like to remember him.

 

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xaruuk_entretien-avec-charles-porset-le-si_news

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
23 mars 2010 2 23 /03 /mars /2010 12:50

Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie, des Lumières à nos jours.

 

Women and freemasonry since the Enlightenment.

 

 

17-18-19 juin 2010, Université de Bordeaux.

MSHA et Musée d’Aquitaine

 

Contact : cecile.revauger@u-bordeaux3.fr

 

Organisé dans le cadre du programme de recherche Le Monde Maçonnique, LNS, Bordeaux 3.

 

Organismes partenaires:

Conseil Régional d’Aquitaine.

CELFF, UMR 8599, Université Paris IV Sorbonne et CNRS,

Laboratoire CIRTAI-IDEES, équipe de l’UMR 6228 (CNRS) Université du Havre 

Sheffield Centre for Research into Freemasonry, Université de Sheffield

Centre de recherche sur la franc-maçonnerie, FREE, Vrije Universiteit, Bruxelles

Center for the Study of Women, UCLA

Dipartimento di Storia Moderna e Contemporanea, Sapienza, Université de Rome 

 

 

Jeudi 17 juin : MSHA, campus universitaire

 

8h30-9h : accueil

9h : ouverture. Patrick Baudry, Vice-Président Université de Bordeaux 3 et Christophe Bouneau, Directeur de la MSHA

9h15 : Cécile Révauger, Bordeaux3.  General Introduction.

 

Chair : Cécile Révauger

9h 40: Margaret Jacob, UCLA.  Women’s Freemasonry in the Age of Enlightenment. Stereotypes on the Right and the Left.

10h20: Janet Burke, Arizona State University.  Princesses of the Blood and Sisters in Masonry: The Duchesse de Chartres, the Duchesse de Bourbon and the Princesse de Lamballe.

11h- 11h30: Debate and pause.

 

Chair: Margaret Jacob

11h30: Andrew Prescott, University of Glasgow & Susan Sommers, St Vincent College Pennsylvania. « Sister » Dunckerley.

11h55: Jan Snoek, Institute for the Sciences of Religions of the University of Heidelberg, Germany: The Adoption Rite, its Origins, Opening up for Women, and its 'Craft' rituals.

12h20: Eloïse Auffret, Assistant Curator of the Musée de la Franc-maçonnerie , Paris. The Lodges of Adoption at the New Museum of Freemasonry (Paris).

12h45-13h00 : Debate.

 

 

Lunch/ Déjeuner

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Chair: Janet Burke

14h30: Andreas Onnerfors, Centre for Research into Freemasonry, University of Sheffield. Performance and Participation in Swedish Female Freemasonry.

14h55: Robert Peter, University of Szeged, British Academy Visiting Fellow at the University of Sheffield in 2009/2010.  Freemasonry and Women in Eighteenth-Century English Press.

15h20: Susan Snell, The Library and Museum of Freemasonry, London   : Enlightenment Females and Freemasonry: Contributions by the Fairer Sex to the Freemasons Magazine with Newly Discovered Links to the Freemasons' Female Charity in England.

15h45-16h15: Debate and pause.

 

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Président : Pierre Morère.

14h30: Marie-Paule Dupin-Benesse, docteur de l’Université de Picardie. Masculin/Féminin en Franc-Maçonnerie : une histoire de résistances.

14h55 : Mireille Palson-Beaunier.  Entre Liberté, Egalité et Fraternité, les différents liens d’incorporation des femmes au sein de la franc-maçonnerie française.

15h20 : Yves Hivert-Messeca , docteur en histoire. La Maçonnerie des Dames dans la France napoléonienne :chant du cygne ou métamorphose ?

15h45-16h15: Débat et  pause.

 

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Chair: Susan Sommers

16h15: Diane Clements, The Library and Museum of Freemasonry, London. “Its members are of all sorts…”, The Male Element of Early Co-Freemasonry in England.

16h40: Ann Pilcher-Dayton, Doctor of the  University of Sheffield. Women Freemasons in England 1908-1935.

17h05: Aimee E. Newell, Scottish Rite Masonic Museum & Library, Lexington, MA, USA. Authority or Auxiliary?  Miss Rose Lipp’s Masonic Business, 1890-1920.

17h30-18h: Debate.

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Présidente: Marie-Lise Paoli

16h15: Przemysław B. Witkowski, doctorant à l’Institut de recherches sur la Renaissance, l’âge Classique et les Lumières (UMR 5186 du CNRS).  Le rôle de la franc-maçonnerie d’adoption dans le combat politique au début du règne de Stanislas Auguste de Pologne (1764-1776). 

16h40 : Patricia Izquierdo, Université  Nancy 1.  Maria Deraismes, une femme éclairée à la tête du Droit Humain. 

17h05 : Pierre Besses, Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.  Les quatre rites fondateurs de la maçonnerie féminine américaine : Boston 1827.

17h30-18h: Débat.

 

 

Vendredi 18 juin : MSHA, campus universitaire

 

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Chair: Christian Lerat

9h: Robert Collis, University of Sheffield. The Role of Protectresses in Jacobite Fraternities, 1726-1791.

9h25:  Andrew Pink, Independent Scholar, London.  Robin Hood and 'her' Merry Women:  a Society of Freemasons in an Early Eighteenth-Century London Pleasure Garden.

10h00-10h45 : Debate and pause.

 

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Présidente: Catherine Lisak

9h : Françoise Moreillon, Paris. Les Loges d’Adoption du 20e siècle, creuset  de la Maçonnerie Féminine indépendante.

9h25 :Andrée Prat, Paris. Les motivations des postulantes au Droit Humain  à travers l’étude de testaments philosophiques de 1893 à 1903 (d’après les archives russes).

9h50 : Célia Poulet, Université de Provence.  Loges féminines, loges masculines :  distinction institutionnelle, proximité des pratiques.

10h15 -10h45: Débat et pause.

 

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Présidente: Anna-Maria Isastia

 

10h45 : Françoise Barret-Ducrocq, Université Paris Diderot-Paris7. Une assemblée mixte en maçonnerie est-elle propice à l’émancipation des femmes et des hommes aujourd’hui?

11h10 : Sophie Geoffroy, Université de la Réunion. Annie Besant, Théosophe, Socialiste, Féministe et Franc-Maçonne : une femme à l’origine du Droit Humain.

11h35: Dominique Soucy, Université de Besançon, La franc-maçonnerie féminine à Cuba.

12h00-12h30:Débat.

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Chair: Jeffrey Tyssens

.

10h45: Hélène Fau, Centre Ecritures, Université Paul Verlaine, Metz. The Female Spiritualist in Affinity by Sarah Waters.

11h10: Carter Charles, Doctorant Université de Bordeaux 3, Mormonism, Freemasonry and Women.

11h35-12h30 : debate

 

Lunch/ Déjeuner

 

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Chair: Andrew Prescott

14h30 : Susan Sommers St Vincent College Pennsylvania. Hidden in Plain Sight: The Order of the Eastern Star in the Historiography of American Women’s Associations.

14h55 : John Slifko, Ph. D. Candidate, UCLA: Louis Goaziou, a Member of L’Ordre Maçonnique Mixte International Le Droit Humain, and the Introduction of Freemasonry for Men and Women into the United States in the First Half of the Twentieth Century.

15h20 : Petri Mirala, Doctor, University of Brussels. Women and Irish freemasonry

15h45-16h15: Debate and pause.

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Chair: Françoise Barret-Ducrocq

14h30: Ingrid Chapard, Doctorante Université Paris 7 Denis Diderot. L’initiation maçonnique est-elle un opérateur de genre ? 

14h55 :Claudine Batazzi-Alexis, Université de Nice Sophia Antipolis.  Représentations sociales de la franc-maçonnerie féminine : des clichés qui ont « la peau dure.

15h20 : Francesca Vigni, Italie. La régénération  morale de la femme dans les anciennes loges d’Adoption : le cas italien.

15h45-16h15: Débat et pause.

 

Workshop 1/ Atelier 1

 

Présidente: Sophie Geoffroy

16h15: Monique Weis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie en Allemagne depuis 1945.

16h40 : Olivia Salmon Monviola, Université Blaise Pascal de Clermont Ferrand.   Diffusion et circulation des travaux de la franc maçonnerie féminine dans le Madrid des années 30 : l’exemple de la loge Amor.

17h05 : Débat.

 

Workshop 2/ Atelier 2

 

Présidence: Bernadette Rigal-Cellard

16h15: Bérengère Kolly, doctorante Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne.  L’affaire sororité : fraternité, universel et inclusion des femmes dans la franc-maçonnerie.

16h40 : Dominique Paquet, Paris VIII.  De la mixité en franc maçonnerie : fantasmes et représentations.

17h05 : Nicolas Froeliger, Université Paris Diderot-Paris7, et Olivia Chaumont, Paris. L’identité de la franc-maçonnerie à travers le transsexualisme.

17h 30-18h : Débat.

 

 

 

 

Samedi 19 juin : Musée d’Aquitaine

 

9H15: Ouverture par François Hubert, directeur du Musée d’Aquitaine.

 

Président: Jean Mondot

 

9h30: José Antonio Ferrer Benimeli, Université de Saragosse. Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie espagnole au 19e siècle.

9h55 : Baudouin Decharneux, Université Libre de Bruxelles.  Quand les femmes deviennent maçonnes : regard critique sur les rituels du Marquis de Gages.

10h20: Jeffrey Tyssens, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.  Le discours masculin sur la franc-maçonnerie féminine en Belgique (1912-1960) : la régression des progressistes? 

 

10h45-11h15: Débat et pause.

 

Président :Éric Saunier

11h15: Anna-Maria Isastia, Sapienza, Université de Rome. La franc-maçonnerie féminine italienne des années 1800 à aujourd’hui.

11h40:Roger Dachez, Paris. Madame Provençal ou les liaisons dangereuses de la franc-maçonnerie lyonnaise

12h05: Jean-Pierre Bacot, Université de Bourgogne. Le féminisme en franc-maçonnerie, un parcours tortueux.

12h30 -13h : Débat.

 

Déjeuner.

 

La franc-maçonnerie féminine aujourd’hui. Témoignages.

 

Modérateurs : Charles Porset et Cécile Révauger

 

14h30 : Laure Caille, Présidente du Grand Chapitre  Général Féminin de France

14h55 : Marie-France Picard, ancienne Grande Maîtresse de la GLFF

15h20 : Marie-Françoise Blanchet, ancienne Grande Maîtresse de la GLFF

15h45-16h15 : Denise Oberlin, Grande Maîtresse de la GLFF

16h15 : Débat

17h : Clôture.

 

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
18 mars 2010 4 18 /03 /mars /2010 15:33
Vient de paraitre le N°13 de la revue Lumières, Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.

Dossier: Lumières radicales et radicalisme des Lumières

Coordonné par Jean Mondot et Cécile Révauger

Vous y trouverez des interviews croisées de Margaret Jacob et Jonathan Israel:  texte traduit  en français et texte en anglais en annexe.

Commandes: PUB Université Michel de Montaigne Bordeaux3, Domaine Universitaire, 33607 Pessac Cedex
Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
2 juin 2009 2 02 /06 /juin /2009 20:31

 

 

 

Women and freemasonry since the Enlightenment.

 

Conference organized at Bordeaux  University and Musée d’Aquitaine,

 

June 17-18- 19,  2010

By

LNS (Lumières Nature Société), Université de Bordeaux 3 sponsored by the Conseil Régional d’Aquitaine

CELFF, CNRS, Université de Paris IV Sorbonne

Laboratoire CIRTAI-IDEES, équipe de l’UMR 6228 (CNRS) Université du Havre 

Sheffield Centre for Research into Freemasonry, Université de Sheffield

Centre de recherche sur la franc-maçonnerie, FREE, Université de Bruxelles

Center for the Study of Women , UCLA

Unviersité Sapienza, Rome 

 

 

Scientific committee:

 

BURKE Janet

ISASTIA Anna Maria

JACOB Margaret

MONDOT Jean 

ONNERFORS, Andreas

PORSET, Charles

PRESCOTT, Andrew

REVAUGER Cécile

SAUNIER, Eric

SLIFKO, John

SNOEK Jan

TYSSENS, Jeffrey

 

 

 

            Today women are still largely absent from Masonic lodges. Yet few rational arguments can be summoned to account for such an  exclusion. The argument of tradition, which is the most frequently put forward, only holds for Anderson’s Constitutions as no such explicit ban against women can be found in the Old Charges. The significance of Elisabeth Aldworth St Leger’s initiation by an Irish Lodge is probably more symbolical than historical as it was a single occurrence never repeated. Yet the event was never denied by the Irish masons at the time, although it probably deterred the “brethren” from renewing the experience and mostly reinforced their convictions on the issue of female initiation. Women however did enter the lodges afterwards, first in the lodges of adoption, and later in co-masonry as well as specific female lodges.

            The lodges of adoption have sometimes been considered as a low key form of masonry, a kind of ersatz masonry meant to humour women. Yet their importance and significance should not be underplayed as Margaret Jacob and Janet Burke in particular have recently shown. The lodges of adoption which emerged in Holland and France during the Enlightenment highlight the main features of women’s commitment in those days, with the same limitations, namely the elitist and aristocratic component. Yet they conveyed some important values, let alone possibly through their rituals, and they allowed women to play an unprecedented part in the public sphere, not unlike the celebrated “French salons”.

We may wonder whether those lodges merely reflected the society of their time or whether they anticipated and even encouraged the emancipation of women. How emblematical are they of Enlightenment sociability? Quite significantly the adoption lodges lost lustre at the same time as the Enlightenment. When they emerged again as the Eastern Star in the United States in the following century they were quite different. The nineteenth century Masonic world was predominantly a male one and it would be interesting to find the reasons why. One has to wait till the end of the nineteenth century to find a female presence again in Masonic lodges with women such as Annie Besant, Madame Blavatsky, Clémence Royer or Louise Michel, sometimes in close connection with the Theosophical Society, as in the case of Annie Besant.

 

            We shall endeavour to identify the main evolutions in women’s commitment, both through co masonry, which appeared at the end of the nineteenth century and through female lodges which date back to the twentieth century only. All those women fought for equality, but some hoped to reach it alongside with men while others opted for autonomy in separate lodges. We shall try to understand those choices both in terms of structures and rituals. We shall focus on the social composition of co masonry and women’s lodges, and try to assess how far they committed themselves to the society of their time or preferred to remain discreet. Women’s’ lodges developed in some countries only, we shall try to suggest possible explanations for such disparity. Lodges and Grand Lodges as well as individual itineraries will be studied.

           

            The different factors of exclusion need to be addressed:

 

- the cultural, social and political factor. Is there a direct link between the development of co masonry and women’s lodges on the one hand and social progress, women’s emancipation and strong feminist movements in the twentieth and twenty first centuries?  Why do Scandinavian countries, which have become respectful of women’s rights, or the United Kingdom, the Suffragettes’ country which enfranchised women long before France, lag behind in terms of female initiation?

- the religious factor. How far does the religious context inform the issue of women’s initiation? Can one identify different attitudes in Catholic, Protestant, Islamic or Orthodox countries?

- the Masonic factor : the rift  between English speaking freemasonry and “liberal” freemasonry dates back to 1877, when the Grand Orient de France decided to grant complete liberty of conscience to its members  instead of imposing a belief in the Supreme being. Curiously enough the issue of women’s admission into freemasonry has also been a dividing one ever since that time. English speaking Grand Lodges and their affiliates exclude women, whereas “liberal” ones accept the idea of initiation, even if the statement needs to be qualified for the latter.

 

            Several levels of exclusion can be identified today : women can either be considered as unfit for initiation, which is still officially the case in the United Kingdom,  the USA and in all the Grand Lodges which pay allegiance to the United Grand Lodge of England and in the Prince Hall Grand Lodges, or their presence can be accepted and encouraged but in separate organizations, not considered as Masonic but meant to enhance the male lodges through their charity work: this is the case of the Eastern Star chapters. As to the Women Freemasons, they are still deprived of official recognition by the United Grand Lodge of England. Finally, the “liberal” Grand Lodges are themselves divided on the issue of women’s admission into the lodges. Some have opted for co masonry; others have put the admission of women on the agenda, while others reject the very notion.

            How far can one speak of Masonic universalism, how far does gender inform the Masonic issue? Our purpose is twofold. We shall address the problem of women’s exclusion under its various guises and try to uncover some of the motivations, and we shall also concentrate on the specificity of female freemasonry both in time and space, from the earliest lodges to the modern ones, in Europe, Asia and the Americas. Conversely we shall wonder how feminist criticism has viewed women’s freemasonry, from the lodges of adoption to contemporary lodges. We welcome different approaches, and would like the historical and geographical scopes to be broad enough to allow for a better understanding of differences, common points and evolutions.

 

 

Call for papers

Abstracts of proposals for papers with a short CV (a total of about 2000
characters) should be sent  to Cécile Révauger before September 15,  2009.
cecile.revauger@u-bordeaux3.fr

                  

                       

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
2 juin 2009 2 02 /06 /juin /2009 20:28

 

 

 

Les femmes et la franc-maçonnerie, des Lumières à nos jours.

 

 17-19 juin 2010, Université de Bordeaux et Musée d’Aquitaine.

 

 

Organismes partenaires:

 

LNS Université de Bordeaux 3 avec le soutien du Conseil Régional d’Aquitaine

CELFF, UMR 8599 , Université Paris IV Sorbonne et CNRS,

Laboratoire CIRTAI-IDEES, équipe de l’UMR 6228 (CNRS) Université du Havre 

Sheffield Centre for Research into Freemasonry, Université de Sheffield

Centre de recherche sur la franc-maçonnerie, FREE, Université de Bruxelles

Center for the Study of Women, UCLA

Université Sapienza, Rome 

 

Contact: Cecile.revauger@u-bordeaux3.fr

 

 

Comité scientifique:

 

BURKE Janet

ISASTIA Anna Maria

JACOB Margaret

MONDOT Jean 

ONNERFORS, Andreas

PORSET, Charles

PRESCOTT, Andrew

REVAUGER Cécile

SAUNIER, Eric

SLIFKO, John

SNOEK, Jan

SOMMERS, Susan

TYSSENS, Jeffrey

 

 

Argumentaire :

 

            Les femmes sont aujourd’hui encore absentes de la plupart des loges maçonniques. Peu d’arguments rationnels peuvent être invoqués pour justifier une telle exclusion. Celui de la tradition, le plus répandu, ne vaut que pour les Constitutions d’Anderson,  aucune exclusive ne figurant explicitement dans les Anciens Devoirs des maçons. L’initiation d’Elisabeth Aldworth St Leger dans une loge irlandaise a sans doute une valeur plus symbolique qu’historique en raison de son caractère insolite. Néanmoins elle n’a jamais été contestée par les maçons irlandais de l’époque, même si elle a certainement encouragé la plupart des  « frères » dans leurs certitudes plutôt que de les inciter à renouveler l’expérience. Depuis, les femmes sont devenues maçonnes, tout d’abord dans des loges d’adoption, puis dans des loges spécifiquement féminines ou mixtes.

            Les loges d’adoption ont parfois été considérées comme une maçonnerie de substitution, sous tutelle, ou comme un lot de consolation. Il serait pourtant erroné de minimiser leur importance et la signification qu’elles ont eu en leur temps, comme l’ont récemment montré en particulier Margaret Jacob et Janet Burke.  Ces loges d’adoption qui ont vu le jour en Hollande puis en France à l’époque des Lumières sont certes caractéristiques des limites de  l’engagement des femmes à cette époque,  en raison de son caractère très élitiste et aristocratique. Elles ont cependant véhiculé un certain nombre de valeurs, ne serait ce que par leurs rituels, et accordé aux femmes une place sans précédent dans la sphère publique, comparable aux salons.  Ces loges se sont-elles contenté de refléter la société de leur temps ou bien ont-elles anticipé certaines évolutions et contribué à l’émancipation des femmes? Dans quelle mesure sont elles emblématiques de la sociabilité des Lumières ? De façon significative ces loges d’adoption se sont éclipsées en même temps que les Lumières, pour renaître sous une forme bien différente  au siècle suivant aux Etats-Unis (Eastern Star). Le monde maçonnique du dix-neuvième siècle fut presque exclusivement masculin. Il serait intéressant de chercher les raisons d’une telle absence féminine. Il faut attendre la fin du dix-neuvième siècle, avec des femmes telles qu’ Annie Besant, Madame Blavatsky, Maria Deraismes, Clémence Royer ou Louise Michel pour retrouver une présence féminine dans les loges, parfois, on le vérifie avec Annie Besant, en liaison étroite avec la Société Théosophique.

            Nous nous attacherons à identifier les évolutions de l’engagement féminin d’une part à travers la maçonnerie mixte, apparue à la fin du XIXe siècle,  et à travers les obédiences spécifiquement féminines, qui ne datent que du XXe. Toutes ces femmes ont combattu pour l’égalité, mais certaines ont espéré y accéder au sein de structures mixtes et d’autres par des voies autonomes. Nous nous intéresserons à ces choix en matière d’organisation et de rituels  ainsi qu’à la composition sociale des loges mixtes et féminines. Nous nous interrogerons  sur leur ouverture sur la société ou au contraire sur leur volonté de discrétion, sur la nature de  leurs travaux. Ces obédiences se sont développées dans certains pays uniquement, nous tenterons d’entrevoir pour quelles raisons. Nous évoquerons à la fois les organisations maçonniques en tant que telles et les trajectoires individuelles.

            Nous tenterons de déterminer le poids des différents facteurs dans  ces exclusions :

-le facteur culturel, social et politique : y a-t-il un lien direct entre le développement des obédiences mixtes et féminines, les avancées sociales en matière d’émancipation de la femme, la force des courants  féministes aux XX et XXIe siècles ? Pourquoi le Royaume Uni, pays des Suffragettes qui a accordé aux femmes le droit de vote bien avant la France, pourquoi les pays scandinaves si soucieux des droits de la femme,  ont-ils un tel retard en matière d’initiation féminine ?

- le facteur religieux : peut on observer des comportements différents en fonction des religions ?  La question de l’initiation féminine s’est t elle posée de façon spécifique dans les pays catholiques,  protestants, islamiques ou orthodoxes?

- le facteur maçonnique : la ligne de fracture entre franc-maçonnerie latine et franc-maçonnerie anglo-saxonne, date de 1877 et de la décision du Grand Orient de France d’accorder une pleine liberté de conscience à ses membres et de ne plus imposer la croyance en Dieu. Or curieusement, elle se traduit également en termes d’exclusion ou de reconnaissance des femmes, même s’il convient immédiatement de nuancer le propos en ce qui concerne les obédiences dites « latines ».

            Il existe aujourd’hui  plusieurs degrés d’exclusion : les femmes peuvent être considérées comme non initiables, c’est encore formellement le cas au Royaume-Uni, aux USA et dans toutes  les obédiences qui font allégeance à la Grande Loge Unie d’Angleterre, ou encore dans les Grandes Loges noires de Prince Hall.  Dans d’autres cas, la présence des femmes est acceptée et même encouragée, mais dans des structures qui ne sont pas reconnues comme maçonniques bien qu’elles soient considérées comme au service des loges masculines grâce à leur actions charitables : c’est le cas des chapitres de l’Eastern Star. Les Women Freemasons  ne sont toujours pas reconnues officiellement par la Grande Loge Unie d’Angleterre. Enfin les obédiences dites latines sont elles mêmes divisées sur la question de l’admission des femmes. Certaines sont mixtes, d’autres se posent la question de la mixité, d’autres encore la refusent par principe.

            Peut on parler d’universalisme maçonnique ou bien la franc-maçonnerie est elle déterminée par le genre ?  Il conviendra de s’interroger à la fois sur les raisons de l’exclusion des femmes, sous toutes ces formes, avec toutes ces nuances, et sur la spécificité de la franc-maçonnerie féminine dans le temps et dans l’espace, des premières loges à celles d’aujourd’hui en Europe, en Asie et dans les Amériques. Nous pourrons également nous interroger sur le regard que les féministes ont porté sur la franc-maçonnerie, à la fois sur les loges d’adoption et sur la franc-maçonnerie contemporaine. Nous encouragerons donc la diversité d’approches, et souhaitons que le champ historique et géographique couvert soit le plus large possible afin de mettre à jour tant les différences que les similitudes et de comprendre les évolutions.

 

Appel à communications :

 

Les résumés accompagnés d’un court CV (2000 caractères en tout) devront parvenir à Cécile Révauger avant le 15 septembre 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
17 février 2009 2 17 /02 /février /2009 19:27

A chronology of abolition and emancipation 


1562 : First English slave trade expedition by Sir John Hawkins.

1619 : first recorded cargo of African slaves landed in Virginia.

1631 : Charles I grants monopoly on Guinea trade to London merchants.

1672 : Britain charters the Royal African Company, in charge of recruiting slaves in Africa and bringing them to America and the West Indies .

1754 : The Society of Friends (Quakers) in Philadelphia condemns the slave trade .

1758 : The Society of Friends of Philadelphia states that slave owners risk damnation. The Society of Friends in London also condemns slavery and the slave trade

1760 : Tacky’s revolt in Jamaica by Coromantee slaves. Death of some 60 whites, leaders of the revolt burnt to death or starved in public.

1761 : The Society of Friends in London also condemns slave owners.

1765 :  Jonathan Strong case . Coromantee uprising in St Mary’s Parish, Jamaica.
Slave revolt in Grenada. Granville Sharp campaigns to abolish slavery in the UK

1769 : Granville Sharp ; A Representation of the Justice and Dangerous Tendency of tolerating Slavery in England.

1770 : Abbé Raynal : Histoire philosophique et politique des établissements et du commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes.

1772 : James Somerset’s case : Mansfield judges that Somerset’s master has no right to compel him to return to the West Indies as he now lives in England. The decision is important because it creates a precedent, although it is restricted to the case of James Somerset and does not mean that all slaves setting foot on the British soil are to become freemen.

1773 : Antony Benezet, author of A Caution and Warning to Great Britain and the Colonies (1767), the Massachusetts abolitionist, visits London and argues against slavery.

1774 : The Philadelphia Society of Friends adopts rules forbidding Quakers to buy and sell slaves and requires its members to prepare for emancipation. The US Continental Congress bans slave importations.

1775 : Appointment of a Commission of the House of Commons to take evidence on the slave trade.
US Congress excludes free blacks from future enlistment and prevents Negroes from being armed.
 
1776 : American declaration of Independence. The Second Continental Congress resolves « that no slaves be imported into any of the Thirteen United Colonies ».
British MP David Hartley moves a resolution in British Parliament against the slave trade.
Adam Smith shows slavery is not rational from an economic point of view.

1777: the Vermont Constitution prohibits slavery.

1778 : Virginia prohibits the importation of slaves.

1779 : probably the last public sale of a black slave in England.

1780 : Wilberforce elected MP for Hull , aged 21 years. The assembly of Pennsylvania adopts a gradual emancipation law.

1783 : Zong case : 133 Africans thrown overboard a slave ship. Granville Sharp publicizes the event. A bill is introduced in the House of Commons forbidding officials of the Royal African Company to sell slaves.

1784 : first petition against the slave trade sent to the House of Commons by a municipality, the town of Bridgwater. Rhode Island and Connecticut pass gradual emancipation laws.

1786 : Thomas Clarkson and Wilberforce  embrace the abolitionist cause.  Clarkson publishes An Essay on the Slavery and Commerce of the Human Species.

1787 : formation of The Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade
( Wilberforce, Clarkson, Sharp and Wedgwood)
Manchester launches the first petition campaign.
Plan to found a new African colony at Sierra Leone to be settled by freed slaves. On 8th April the first black settlers leave on the sloop Nautilus.
The US Constitutional Convention forbids Congress from ending the slave trade until 1808 and enacts the Northwest ordinance, prohibiting slavery in the territories north of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi rivers.

1788 : The  Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade launches a national petition campaign against the slave trade. Pitt asks The Privy Council Committee for Trade and Plantations   to start an enquiry on the British commercial relations with Africa, i.e. investigate the slave trade.
John Wesley delivers a sermon in Bristol on the immorality of slavery.
John Newton, a repented slave ship captain, publishes Thoughts on the African Trade.
Dolben Act: introduced by abolitionist Dolben, it was a slight improvement as it reduced the number of slaves authorized on slave ships.

1789 : Wilberforce’s great speech against slavery launches the abolition process. He introduces 12 resolutions against the slave trade on 12 May.  The House of Commons sets
up its own committee of inquiry.
La Société des Amis des Noirs urges the Estates-General (i.e. in French Les Etats Généraux) to free the slaves in the French colonies but the Assembly sides with the white planters.

1790: The Select Committee in the House of Commons examines witnesses on the slave trade.
The first Maroon War of Dominica ends.
In the US the Quakers and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society petition Congress against slavery and the slave trade. Benjamin Franklin signs this petition as Chairman of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society.

1791 : Wilberforce unsuccessfully tries to introduce a bill on abolition .(the vote loses by 163 to 88 in British Parliament) Parliament grants a charter to the Sierra Leone  Company.
Civil war breaks up in Saint Domingue, the slaves of the North province revolt.  Uprising of the slaves in British Dominica.

1792: Parliament receives 519 petitions against the trade. Wilberforce introduces a bill to abolish the trade. Henry Dundas brings an amendment to the bill seeking the gradual abolition of the trade and determining on 1796 as the date for the end. The Lords fail to assent and ask for a new enquiry.
Popular movement to boycott sugar and other produce of slavery : about 300 000 people boycott sugar;
In France the Legislative Assembly decrees equal rights for all free blacks and mulattoes in the colonies.


1793 : Louis XVI executed, France declares war on Britain. Britain sends troops to capture French colonies.  Sonthonax issues a general emancipation decree in Saint Domingue.

1794: the French national Convention abolishes slavery in all the French colonies. Britain captures Martinique, Guadeloupe and St Lucia , restores slavery, but loses the latter two again. 
 
1795 : Wilberforce again unsuccessfully tries to introduce an abolition bill  to end the trade in 1796. Fedon revolt in Grenada against the British governor : slaves rebel and support  the French Jacobins.

1796 : abolition vote loses by four votes only .

1797 : Wilberforce fails to introduce an abolition bill. The Dolben Act is renewed. Britain captures Trinidad from Spain.

1798: Wilberforce fails to introduce an abolition bill.

1799:  and again Wilberforce fails to introduce an abolition bill. New York passes a gradual emancipation law.

1800: Toussaint L’Ouverture fully controls Saint Domingue.

1801: Toussaint captures Spanish Santo Domingo, unifies the island, becomes governor for life and abolishes slavery.  Napoleon sends troops against him.

1802: Napoleon restores slavery in the French empire. Toussaint is captured and transported to France.

1803: Dessalines defeats the French and proclaims the independent republic of Haiti.

1804: Wilberforce introduces the fourth bill for abolition which passes the Commons but not the Lords. Haiti wins its independence. Dessalines is proclaimed  Emperor.
 
1805: Abolition bill passes Commons but loses in the Lords.
Pitt issues an order-in-council forbidding the import of slaves to the three new West Indian colonies, Essequibo, Demerara and Berbice.

1806 : Pitt’s death. Formation of a pro-abolition “Ministry of All the Talents” by Lord Grenville and Charles James Fox.

1807:  Grenville introduces the bill to abolish the slave trade within the British Colonies; it is passed in the Commons by 283 to 16 votes and in the House of   Lords. The slave trade becomes illegal from 1 May  1807. American Congress passes the United States Slave Trade Act, prohibiting Americans from participating in the African slave trade.

1808: Thomas Clarkson publishes the History of the Rise, Progress and Accomplishment of the African Slave-Trade by the British Parliament.
Mutiny in a regiment in Kingston, Jamaica.

1809: second Maroon war in Dominica.

1811: the British Parliament passes a law making slaving a felony punishable by transportation to Australia.

1812: war between Britain and the US. A British order-in-council requires Trinidad to set up a registry of slaves to help fight illegal importation.

1813: gradual emancipation is adopted in Argentina.

1814: The Treaty of Ghent ends the war between Britain and the United States and makes it explicit that the two countries will join forces to end the slave trade. An article of the first Treaty of Paris restores the French trade for five years. A mass petition of some 755 000 signatures is sent against that article. Thomas Clarkson tries to move French opinion.  Guadeloupe and Martinique are returned to France. Wilberforce tries to introduce the Registry Bill to the Commons, a law requiring the centralized registration of all West Indian slaves.
The Netherlands prohibit slave trading.

1815: At  the Congress  of Vienna, which ends Napoleonic wars in Europe,  British Foreign Secretary Castlereagh obtains only a vague declaration condemning the slave trade. The threat of a possible economic boycott of all the  nations refusing to follow Britain’s example frightens Napoleon, who at the outset of his hundred Days, issues a decree abolishing the French slave trade, probably in order to gain English public support. The Bourbon government after the fall of Napoleon acquiesces to English demands for an abolition law. However the French fail to publish the new law and so French slave trade continues.

1816: Blacks begin to win emancipation in the Latin American wars of independence. Bussa’s slave rebellion in Barbados.

1818 : Castlereagh fails to secure the international right of search of slave ships at the congress of Aix La Chapelle.

1819: the British Parliament passes a compromise measure for the registration of colonial slaves. Britain establishes an anti-slave trade squadron on the Coast of Africa. The USA also authorize  an African naval patrol.

1820: the US Congress defines the slave trade as piracy.

1821: Venezuela, Columbia and Chile abolish slavery.

1822: Britain fails to obtain a maritime police to suppress the slave trade at the international Congress of Verona.

1823 : Anti-Slavery Society formed by Sir Thomas Folwell Buxton : the Society for the Mitigation and Gradual Abolition of Slavery . Demerara slaves’ revolt (in British Guiana). Wilberforce publishes An Appeal to the religion, Justice, and Humanity of the Inhabitants of the British Empire. Clarkson publishes Thoughts on the Necessity of Improving the Condition of the Slaves in the British Colonies.
Slavery is abolished in Chile.

1824 : The British Parliament passes a bill stipulating that any British subject guilty of trading slaves should be convicted of felony and incur death penalty and  approves Canning’s proposals for the amelioration of colonial slavery. The government recommends specific reforms to colonial governors. Bishoprics are established for Jamaica and Barbados.
Slavery is abolished in Central America.

1826: James Stephen publishes England Enslaved by her Own Colonies.

1829: slavery is abolished in Mexico.

1831: The “Christmas Rebellion” or ‘the Baptist War”, the largest slave rebellion in the British West Indies occurs in Jamaica, led by Samuel Sharpe.
Slavery is abolished in Bolivia. The French again abolish their slave trade.

1832: Great Reform Act (great electoral reform extending franchise to the Dissenters and a large portion of the middle classes. End of “rotten boroughs” and representation of the new cities.) The reformed British Parliament appoints a select committee to “consider and report upon the Measures which it may be expedient to adopt for the purpose of Effecting the Extinction of Slavery throughout the British Dominions, at the earliest period compatible with the safety of all classes in the Colonies”. The “Christmas rebellion” is crushed in Jamaica. 

1833 : Abolition of slavery in the British Empire. Yet the Emancipation Act compels former slaves to serve their masters for a period of six years as apprentices. Death of William Wilberforce, buried at Westminster Abbey.

1834: Slave emancipation, qualified by the “apprenticeship” period comes into effect on 1 August in the colonies, when the 1833 Emancipation bill becomes a law. A new French society for the Abolition of Slavery is formed.

1837 : Drag’s mutiny in the First West Indian regiment in Trinidad.

1838 : 700 000 former slaves in the British West Indian Colonies officially achieve their freedom.

1839: the Pope condemns the slave trade.

1840: Thomas Clarkson presides at the international Antislavery Convention in London. The Convention aims at the emancipation of American slaves.

1841: a Treaty is signed in Europe, guaranteeing mutual rights to search vessels for slaves. France refuses to ratify it.

1842: slavery is abolished in Uruguay.

1844: French workers petition the Chamber of Deputies for slave emancipation.

1847: a second petition for slave emancipation is sent to the French Chamber.

1848: slavery is abolished in France and in the Danish colonies.

1851: slavery is abolished in Ecuador. The slave trade to Brazil is ended.

1865 : abolition of slavery throughout  the USA.

1873: abolition of slavery in Puerto Rico.

1886 : abolition of slavery in Cuba.

1888 : abolition of slavery in Brazil.












Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger
commenter cet article
13 novembre 2008 4 13 /11 /novembre /2008 08:42

Cécile Révauger

Bordeaux University

 

"Anderson's freemasonry, the true daughter of the British Enlightenment".

 

 

 

Just as some historians question the specificity, and even sometimes the real existence of a British Enlightenment, scholars of freemasonry sometimes tend to consider freemasonry as a long tradition, immune to changes. Both attitudes reflect the concern for the long term and tend to underplay the importance of evolutions and revolutions. Asserting the perfect continuity between “operative “ and “speculative” masons amounts to forgetting the fact there was a Glorious Revolution which left its imprint on 18th century institutions, political as well as religious culture. Another pitfall awaits scholars of freemasonry: it is at worst a fallacy and at best wishful thinking to   consider freemasonry as a strong component of radical Enlightenment. For the most part, freemasons have condemned social revolutions and rejected atheism. It will be contended therefore that freemasonry should neither be considered as the offshoot of tradition nor as the spur of social and political change, but that it appeared in the wake of the English as well as the Scottish Enlightenment. First, it will be argued that freemasonry is not simply the heir of operative freemasonry , although it would be ridiculous to claim there was no connection at all, especially in Scotland. Conversely freemasonry should not be portrayed as more radical than it was: this will be the second point raised in this paper. Finally it will be contended that freemasonry is first and foremost the daughter of the Enlightenment and more specifically of the British Enlightenment.

 

1- 18th century freemasonry is a new phenomenon which  owes little to  tradition.

 

The terms “operative” and “speculative” have long prevailed among historians of freemasonry. They are not entirely satisfactory, first because only specialists of freemasonry can have some insight into what they might refer to, second because they seem to classify masons into two distinct categories but in fact do not meet any  historical or scientific criteria. Denying the novelty of the Masonic institution which emerged in 1717 in England and in 1736 in Scotland is equally unsatisfactory.

Of course nobody denies the fact that some form of masonry existed previous to 1717. Yet the situation was different in Scotland from what it was in England. One should not forget that 100 lodges were instrumental to the foundation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1736, against only four in London when the Grand Lodge of England was funded.  The Journeymen Lodge of Edinburgh in particular can claim 17th century roots and a continuous membership of masons by trade, throughout the 18th century. Nevertheless, the Grand Lodge of Scotland very soon endorsed the ideas of the Scottish Enlightenment and started  looking forward rather than backward, providing the city with a significant number of Provosts who were eager to  contribute to the embellishment and development of Edinburgh from an architectural as well as from a social point of view.

Discussing English masonry   before 1717 is yet another matter. Numerous guilds and masons’ companies existed. A special issue of Cahiers de l’Herne was devoted to the study of the Old Charges which prevailed among ancient masons. Elias Ashmole has often been given as an example of a member joining a lodge of masons by trade. It seems that a lodge existed in Warrington in 1646 . Yet evidence is scanty. Contrary to Scottish freemasonry, which besides the Schaw Statutes, could claim structural links and a real continuity between the 17th and 18th centuries, with lodges such as the Journeymen Lodge n°8 , evidence concerning the existence of  English freemasonry previous to 1717  rests mostly on the Old Charges. Yet a close analysis of the Old Charges points at major differences with Anderson’s Constitutions as well as the practices developed in 18th century English lodges.

It is argued here that those differences stem from the historical context. The Glorious Revolution informs the Masonic background as well as the Enlightenment. The differences highlighted by the comparison of the Old Charges and Anderson’s Constitutions are threefold, social, political and religious.

Clearly the Masonic lodges which were regulated by the Old Charges were composed of “apprentices” and “fellowcrafts” working for the benefit of an employer or master.  The masons were given rules of conduct, regulating both their private and professional lives, which were closely related: for instance they were taught that they should neither covet their fellow’s wife, nor gamble nor use coarse language. Anderson only stipulated that members of the lodge should be honest men, neither slave nor woman, but no longer regulated professional relations. Members of different walks of life joined the English lodges, from small artisans, craftsmen and merchants  to aristocrats.

Whereas all the Old Charges required masons to be good Christians, to believe in God, the first article of Anderson’s Constitutions, “Concerning God and religion” is written in the latitudianarian spirit of the time: “’tis now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves; that is to be good men and true, or Men of Honour and Honesty, by whatever Denominations or Persuasions they may be distinguished; whereby Masonry becomes the centre of Union, and the Means of conciliating true Friendship among Persons that must have remained at a perpetual distance.”

Whereas allegiance to the King was specifically required from operative masons, Anderson’s Constitutions only made it necessary for masons to respect the laws of their country. More, a lodge could not exclude one of its members simply for rebelling against the State if “convicted of no other crime” and providing the lodge did not “countenance his Rebellion”.  Contrary to the Dumfries MSS which demanded that any mason hearing about a plot should immediately report it  to the King, Anderson’s  Constitutions did not even impose the eviction of a rebellious member…the answer to this quiz is probably to be found in the Whig views of the time which discarded the Tory theories of “passive obedience ” and “non resistance”. On the contrary Locke had shown that the people was entitled to rebel against the King if the latter had misbehaved, i.e. placed himself in a “state of war” against his people and therefore made himself guilty of a breach of contract. Anderson and his companions did not urge “passive obedience” from subjects and clearly endorsed Locke’s views, taking care not to be associated to tory theories.

 

Nevertheless the claim to inherit modern practises from ancient masonry was made by Anderson himself. Nobody today can seriously deny that the pseudo historical account is entirely mythical. The new institution needed legitimacy and in the days of the Battle of the Books, claiming filiations with Solomon and the ancients was more prestigious than quoting “modern” philosophers such as Locke or Newton. The need to refer to tradition, in spite of the novelty of the institution accounts for the moderation of the founders of modern freemasonry. It would be just as inaccurate to pretend that Anderson’s freemasonry  was typical of the radical Enlightement as to assume it was a pure product of tradition and to claim there was a perfect continuity between the XVIIth and XVIIIth centuries .

 

2- English masonry is not indebted to radical Enlightenment either, with a few exceptions.

There is not a single definition of the concept of Enlightenment. For Gertrude Himmelfard, only the English and American peoples were enlightened and the French Jacobins betrayed the good intentions of Montesquieu, thus giving up  the values of the Enlightenment. For Eric Hobsbawm the Enlightenment amounted to a conspiracy led by white aristocrats.

We owe the concept of “radical Enlightenment” essentially to Jonathan Israel and Margaret Jacob although Margaret Jacob quite rightly disagrees with Israel’s focalization on Spinoza: Israel has granted paramount importance to Spinoza’s thought and consequently considered as “radical” all the thinkers  who have been influenced by his ideas. Thus Toland and Collins are considered as true figures of the “radical Englightenment”   while Locke is deemed more banal. Margaret Jacob’s approach is more political as she examines the influence of the Dutch republic and societies which were close to freemasonry such as the Knights of Jubilation. She quite rightly thinks that the Glorious Revolution, the Dutch Republic and the birth of modern freemasonry were related. She is quite right to point at the constitutional habit of freemasons: because they developed an interest in writing rules and regulations, therefore in behaving in a more democratic way than most of their contemporaries, masons influenced political life as they encouraged democratic habits in their own spheres of influence.

This was certainly the case during the American Revolution, when a number of masons took part in the writing of the Articles of Constitution, in the Declaration of Independence and in the writing of the constitutions of each new state.

Yet when it comes to studying English masonry as a whole during the 18th century one has to admit that those who really supported radicalism were a minority, whether one takes the concept of “radical Enlightement” in reference to  religious convictions  as Israel, or in a more political sense as Margaret Jacob. Very few masons condoned Toland’s pantheism or Collins’ freethought. Needless to quote again the famous article written by Anderson and his followers concerning the impossibility for a mason to be an “atheist” or an “irreligious libertine”.  Not all dissenters were welcomed :  Anderson himself wrote a pamphlet condemning Anti-Trinitarians. His religious tolerance did not extend to those who refused to acknowledge the Holy Trinity and were therefore considered with great suspicion by the Church of England and the political authorities.  Few masons at the time acclaimed Newton, even though his most unorthodox writings were not yet known to the public. The Grand Lodges had their own Grand Chaplain, most of the time a member of the Church of England or Scotland. The only writing on freemasonry which can be considered as an offshoot of radical Enlightenment was produced by Thomas Paine, the friend of Nicolas de Bonneville, a French mason who supported the French revolution and condemned the influence of the Jesuits in freemasonry. In his De l’Origine de la franc-maçonnerie, Paine was telling the masons that they were wrong to claim allegiance to the Christian dogma,  that they should look back to the Druids and draw their inspiration from their symbolism rather than advocate the Bible. Yet Paine was probably never a mason…How could he have been one in England or America? Neither were the British masons typical of the radical Enlightenment from a political point of view. There were exceptions such as the Sheffield Masons who supported the Sheffield radicals,  the Journeymen Masons of Edinburgh who lent their premises to the Friends of the People (but were rebuked by the Grand Lodge of Scotland for doing so), some Irish Lodges which seem to have condoned the United Irishmen (but were likewise  severely criticized by the Grand Lodge of Ireland), masons who were friends of John Wilkes and joined the Society for the Bill of Rights.

Generally speaking however the lodges and Grand Lodges were eager to please the authorities. This can be seen both in the Masonic press and in the official declarations of the Grand Lodges; several articles were devoted to the French revolution, all pointing at the horror of Jacobinism. I have already studied at some length the articles published in the Sentimental and Masonic Magazine or in the Freemasons’ Magazine. From 1793 onwards the English, Scottish and Irish Grand Lodges made official declarations to support the government and, more or less implicitly to condemn the French revolution and the spirit of reform. No wonder the British freemasons were the only associations to be allowed to pursue their activities under the seditious Meetings Act. Provided they submitted the lists of members and did not create new lodges, their meetings were tolerated.

In 1800 the Grand Lodge of Moderns officially expressed its concern for the King after the murder attempt. The Grand Secretary apologized for the delay of the letter addressed to the Prince of Wales: the Freemasons, he explained, were discreet people who hated to interfere with politics. However they deemed it necessary to express their support of the monarchy under the circumstances.

It seems therefore difficult to consider British freemasonry as a strong component of radical Enlightenment. However it is perfectly representative of the English Enlightenment such as Roy Porter defined it or of the Scottish Enlightenment and the Moderates of the Church of Scotland.

 

3- Freemasonry is the daughter of the English/Scottish Enlightenment

 

Neither James Boswell, nor Sir William Forbes of Pitsligo, the Grand Master and friend of Johnson’s biographer, nor Dugald Stewart, nor at the end of the century Robert Burns  are considered as radicals. Yet those freemasons are fairly typical of the Scottish Enlightenment. None of them advocated radical political change, none of them was influenced by Spinoza’s pantheism or freethought or even deism. Yet they all advocated religious tolerance, bewaring of the rigidity of religious dogma and strongly believed in man’s potentiality to improve himself and discover the world. Roy Porter pointed at an important difference in the English and French approaches of the Enlightenment. When one speaks of the Enlightenment in France, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Voltaire ,  Diderot and a few big names immediately come to mind. The British summon  Locke and Hume, and sometimes even Hobbes,  but according to Porter  the English Enlightenment does not point at a few philosophers only but encompasses politics, science, and society at large. Rather than speaking of The Enlightenment, he preferred to call his major work “Enlightenment”, pointing at a general spirit rather than specific theories, preferring an empirical approach and studying the impact of Enlightenment in all walks of life.

Coordinating the biographical dictionary of 18th century freemasons has been very fruitful as so many entries point at the involvement of so many men in the major religious, cultural and political evolutions of their time. Several masons have been forgotten today yet they played their part quite convincingly and contributed to the Enlightenment, such as Porter defined it. They were not necessarily great philosophers or politicians but they were representative of the major evolutions of their time in politics, religion, access to education and science. In France, although lodges almost disappeared during the Revolution and masons gave up their Masonic activities, individuals went on playing a major role in the revolutionary institutions. In England freemasons endorsed the prevailing latitudinarian views on religion, supported the new balance of powers  and later condoned  colonial  expansion.  18th century freemasons embraced the values of the Enlightenment: sociability, religious tolerance, and thirst for knowledge.

English people were clubbable and the first lodges were essentially convivial places enabling men to meet and spend a pleasant evening together. Although the social mix was rare, and birds of a feather tended to flock together, the emerging middle-class also found the possibility to encounter aristocrats, at a time when the landed elite was becoming a little more open and to a certain extent encouraging the middle class to mimic the aristocrats. The emergence of the Grand Lodge of Antients in the 1750s allowed a significant number of Irish immigrants like Dermott to join the lodges along with local artisans and men of lower extraction than members of the Moderns.

John Locke vindicated the Glorious Revolution and paved the way for a more secular society, in so far as he made a distinction between the interest of the Church and the interest of the State and considered freedom of worship as a natural right.  After the Glorious Revolution, religious quarrels were avoided as much as possible and theological dispute lost its power of attraction. Most philosophers insisted on the beneficent effect of religion but were indifferent to religious dogma as such. Similarly English freemasons referred to the Creator or to a general guiding principle gradually making way for the term “Grand Architect of the Universe” which was vague enough to unite men of different religious persuasions. Most masons endorsed Shaftesbury’s or Goldsmith’s views, advocating  religious tolerance and being on the whole quite indifferent to theological issues. “Brother” Hogarth perfectly reflected the views of masons when he engraved his famous “Enthusiasm delineated” (1760) and “Credulity, superstition, fanaticism” (1762). There was no need for the British masons to be as anticlerical as their brother Voltaire as the Church of England itself endorsed the values of the Enlightenment; perhaps Hogarth was a little more conservative than the majority of masons as rejecting “enthusiasm” allowed him to make fun of dissenters and the Methodists in particular.

It is a well known fact among scholars of freemasonry that the early Grand Lodge and the Royal Society were closely connected. The friendship between Newton and Desaguliers largely accounts for the links between the two institutions. Newton had invited his friend Desaguliers to join the Royal Society while he was presiding it, in 1714. Desaguliers became Grand Master in 1719. Desaguliers was probably instrumental to the aura of freemasonry among members of the Royal Society. It seems that many members of the Royal Society started joining lodges, while a few masons were also admitted within the Royal Society. From 1719 to 1741 thirteen Grand Masters out of 22   belonged to the Royal Society, an enormous proportion which tends to prove that the Royal Society granted admission to members on honorific as much as scientific criteria at the time…The important fact however is that, even though they were not great scholars themselves, Grand Masters should have felt honoured to belong to the Royal Society and eager to promote scientific discovery : in that respect they contributed to “the marriage of science and Enlightenment”, to the “culture of science” so well described by Roy Porter.

Masons were also eager to take part in cultural life. They contributed to the prologues of many plays. Thus, actor Garrick befriended Boswell, the deputy Grand Master of Scotland, better known as Johnson’s biographer.  A great number of musicians were masons, as Andrew Pink has shown: Bach, Angel, Geminiani… They were all typical of the Enlightenment in so much as they allowed culture to extend to other sectors of the population than the traditional landed elite. Hogarth’s work is significant of a new approach of culture, more popular than aristocratic. He promoted an academy at  St Martin in the Fields’ which was meant to protect and encourage poor artists and to some extent counter the weight of aristocratic patronage.

Freemasons were involved in the press. Thus biographical entries of the dictionary will be devoted to Franklin, but also to John Dunlap, a publisher in Philadelphia and to Osmand, a much less famous publisher in Barbados who thanks to his association  with Dunlap launched a newspaper in Port of Spain. Several masons contributed to the development and freedom of the press.

With hindsight, the Enlightenment has been stigmatized for its contribution to colonization.  Indeed the thirst for knowledge and discovery combined harmoniously with economic and military interests.  It is pointless either to idealize or stigmatize the Enlightenment. It was a period full of contradictions but it represented a significant departure from what has been called the “Ancien regime” in England as well, a static society totally in the hands of the landed elite ruled by Church and King. Quite significantly masons were also eager to discover the world, and like their compatriots took part in colonization. They were extremely present in the American colonies among the first governors.   A great number of officers and governors who conquered the West Indies and India were also masons : to quote but a few among those who will be in the dictionary : general Ralph Abercromby who colonized Trinidad, Commissioner Fullerton, also in Trinidad and an abolitionist as well, General Wolfe, Governor Hastings in India… Military lodges often accompanied those men who seldom joined the local lodges who appeared in the wake of colonial expansion.

 

            Denying the novelty of 18th century freemasonry partakes of the same attitude which consists in denying the existence of a British Enlightenment , whether in the wake of historians such as JCD Clark who consider the long 18th century and prefer to speak in terms of continuity with the Ancien regime or whether in the wake of those who consider 18th century  Britons were aristocrats and racist colonialists  who did not promote any significant social change. Awarding grades to the Enlightenment seems equally ridiculous: thus Gertrude Himmelfarb prefers the English and American Enlightenment because religion was never really challenged and violent revolutions never urged contrary to what the nasty French Jacobins  did.  Although the Enlightenment promoted universal values such as religious tolerance and the end of despotism, yet the cultural specificities of each country remained. In that respect the French Enlightenment differed slightly from the English one or the Scottish one. French freemasonry likewise differed from English and Scottish masonry because the contexts were different.

Claiming that freemasonry was radical enough to bring about significant social and political changes is not valid either. At best it turns the masons into early revolutionaries, ingratiating  the wishful thinking of XIX  century well-meaning historians   such as Louis Amiable in France, at worst it allows the emergence of the ridiculous conspiracy theories put forward by Barruel and Robison.  Masonic lodges disappeared from revolutionary France, with a few exceptions, and masons remained active individually, either supporting the nobility, the clergy or the Third Estate.

In Britain Freemasonry was typical of the English and Scottish Enlightenment, with its strong points and foibles, no more, no less.

 

 

La Franc-maçonnerie: documents fondateurs. Cahier dirigé par Frédérick Tristan (Paris,  Éditions de l’Herne, 1992).

“ The testimony of Ashmole establishes beyond cavil that, in a certain year (1646) at the town of Warrington, there was in existence a lodge of freemasons, presided over by a warden and largely if not entirely composed of speculative or no operative members”, (Robert Freke Gould, History of Freemasonry, revised by Dudley Wright,  London, Caxton&Co, 1884-87, II, 10)

Daniel Ligou, ed., Anderson’s Constitutions (Paris, Lauzeray International, 1978)

Anderson’s Constitutions , Article I, “Concerning God and Religion ».

GertrudeHimmelfarb, The Roads to Modernity. The British, French and American Enlightenment (New York, Alfred A.Knopf, 2004).

Eric Hobsbawm, On History, 1997 quoted by Roy Porter in  Enlightenment ; Britain and the Creation of the Modern World (Londres: Allen Lane, The Penguin Press, 2000)

Margaret Jacob, The Radical Enlightenment : Pantheists, Freemasons and Republicans (London, G.Allen&Unwin, 1985) ; Jonathan Israel, Radical Enlightenment ; Philosophy and the making of Modernity 1650-1750 (NY and Oxford, OUP, 2001) 

 

Ronald Heaton Masonic Membership of the Signers of the Constitution of the United States,Washington DC : The Masonic Service Association, 1972, Masonic Membership of the Signers of the Articles of Association Washington DC, The Masonic Service Association, 1961, Masonic Membership of the Signers of the Articles of Confederation,Washington DC, The Masonic Service Association, 1962. Steven C.Bullock, Revolutionary Brotherhood, Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730-1840,  The University of North Carolina Press, 1996.

 

- Cécile Révauger, « Le deiste Paine et la franc-maçonnerie », postface de De l’Origine de la franc-maçonnerie, ouvrage posthume de Thomas Paine, Editions de l’Orient, Paris, 2007.

Andrew Prescott,  “Freemasonry and radicalism in Yorkshire, 1780-1830”, in  “Franc-maçonnerie et politique au siècle des Lumières : Europe-Amériques”, edited by Cécle Révauger in Lumières n°7 (Bordeaux, PUB, 2006)

Petri Mirala, Freemasonry in Ulster, 1733-1813 (Dublin, Four Courts Press, 2007)

Cécile Révauger, « La franc-maçonnerie en Grande-Bretagne et dans l’Amérique révolutionnaire, 1717-1813. » (Thèse de Doctorat d’Etat soutenue à l’Université de Bordeaux III le 26 juin 1987) and Le Fait Maçonnique au XVIIIe siècle en Grande-Bretagne et aux Etats-Unis (Paris : EDIMAF, 1990)

Letter to the Prince of Wales, signed by William White, Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Moderns, 3 June 1800, in Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England (Moderns) 1770-1813 : “ The Law, by permitting , under certain regulations, the meetings of Freemasons, has defined the existence of the Society; binding, at the same time, the members of it, by a new obligation of gratitude for the confidence extended towards them to labour, as far as their feeble powers may apply, in inculcating loyalty to the King and reverence to the inestimable fabric of the British Constitution… As a veil of secrecy conceals the transactions of our meetings, our Fellow Subjects have no assurance that there may not be an association or tendency injurious to their interests, other than the general tenor of our conduct, and the notoriety that the door of Freemasonry is not closed against any class, profession, or Sect, provided the Individual desiring admission be unstained in moral character. To remove, therefore, as far as possible, any ground for suspicion, it has been from time immemorial, a fundamental rule, most rigidly maintained, that no political topic shall, on any pretence, be mentioned in a Lodge. The singular Juncture to which we have alluded seemed to call for some positive Declaration which might distinctly exhibit our Opinions; we thence ventured to protest to Your Majesty the Loyalty with which the Freemasons of England glowed towards your Royal Person, and their unalterable attachment to the present happy Form of Government in this Country. But, as no foresight could devise a Motive of equal Importance with that which then actuated us, the recent Occurrence being of a Nature too horrid to be in Supposition as a Possibility, it was strongly declared that  no Precedent should be drawn from that step; and that on no future occasion should the Grand Lodge exercise an Advertence to Events which might entail upon Freemasonry the charge of assuming the privilege to deliberate as a Body upon public affairs. Hence, Sire, our present address has not been so early as our individual anxiety would have dictated; for it was requisite that a general concurrence should sanction the Grand Lodge, in a second relaxation of its rules, before we could jointly express that which we severally felt in the most ardent Manner on the solemn Subject.”

Roy Porter,   Enlightenment ; Britain and the Creation of the Modern World (Londres: Allen Lane, The Penguin Press, 2000)

 

Idem.

Cécile Révauger and Charles Porset are currently editing “Le Monde maçonnique au XVIIIe siècle”, a biographical dictionary to be published by Éditions Champion. This involves about a hundred scholars of freemasonry.

Joseph R.Clarke, « The Royal Society and early Grand Lodge Freemasonry », Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 80 (1967) : 110-119.

Roy Porter , Enlightenment, London, Penguin Books, 2000, p.132.

Andrew Pink ‘s entries for the biographical dictionary to be published by editions Champion, directed  by Charles Porset and  Cécile Révauger.

Louis Amiable tried to describe freemasonry as revolutionary ; his work has been reassessed by Charles Porset : Louis Amiable, Une Loge maçonnique d’avant 1789, La Loge des Neuf Soeurs. Augmenté d’un commentaire et de notes critiques de Charles Porset (Paris, EDIMAF, 1989)

Barruel and Robison launched the conspiracy theory. Augustin Barruel, Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire du Jacobinisme ( Hambourg : Fauché, 1797-1798. Rpt edition of 1818,  Vouillé Editions de Chiré, Diffusion de la Pensée Française, 1973) ; John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy, Londres & Edimbourg, 1797.

 

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger - dans revaugercecile
commenter cet article
13 novembre 2008 4 13 /11 /novembre /2008 08:35
Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger - dans revaugercecile
commenter cet article
27 mars 2007 2 27 /03 /mars /2007 11:10

Nouveauté 2007

 

De l’Origine de la Franc-Maçonnerie

Thomas Paine

traduction de Nicolas de Bonneville

Dossier historique de Cécile Révauger :

“ Le déiste Paine et la Franc-Maçonnerie

 

« Les Francs-Maçons ont un secret qu’ils cachent soigneusement ; on a toujours été d’accord là-dessus. » Ainsi débute l’étonnant livre de Thomas Paine, l’un des pères fondateurs des États-Unis d’Amérique, grand révolutionnaire.

 

Dans une langue claire et vigoureuse, il poursuit sa divulgation : ce secret, c’est celui de leur origine, que bien souvent les maçons ignorent eux-mêmes. Et cette origine ne doit pas être recherchée dans la Bible ou dans les Évangiles, mais dans la religion des anciens druides, dans l’ancien culte du Soleil. Ainsi la maçonnerie serait-elle le conservatoire de la religion des druides qui s’y mirent à couvert des persécutions de l’Église chrétienne triomphante…

 

Les éditions A l'Orient publie aujourd'hui le texte original et sa traduction faite par Nicolas de Bonneville, accompagné d'un dossier historique écrit par l'historienne dix-huitièmiste, Cécile Révauger qui permet de replacer l'ouvrage dans son époque.

 

Cet ouvrage est le troisième titre de la nouvelle collection Trait d’Union des éditions A l’Orient. Cette collection publie des textes courts, rares ou inédits et pourtant essentiels. Un soin tout particulier est apporté leur forme en les enrichissant d’illustrations de qualités et/ou de dossiers permettant de replacer les textes dans leur contexte et un format 10x15 en adéquation avec cette famille de pensée qui souvent produit des textes courts.

 

 

L’auteur :

Thomas Paine (1737 - 1809)

Né en Angleterre, il fut l’un des pères fondateurs des Etats-Unis d’Amérique et député de la Convention en France.

Il est l’auteur de Common Sense (1775) et de Rights of Man (1791-92)

 

 

Informations Pratiques :

Collection : Trait d'Union

Série : Archives

ISBN : 978-2-912591-41-8

Format : 100x150 mm

96 pages

Prix : 6 €

 

Diffusion/distribution en librairies :

DG DIFFUSION

Vente en ligne : www.alorient.com

 

 

Contact :

Editions A l’Orient

Valentine Drouet

mail : valentine@gaelyvan.com

tél. +33 (0)2.38.52.02.54

fax : +33 (0)2.38.62.07.69

Repost 0
Published by Cecile Revauger - dans revaugercecile
commenter cet article

Articles Récents

Liens