Pietre Stones - History of Persecutions of Spanish Freemasonry

8/6/2019 Pietre Stones - History of Persecutions of Spanish Freemasonry

1/37

1

http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/history-spanish-freemasonry.html

*DEATH TO INTELLECTUALSThe history and the persecutions of Spanish Freemasonry.*

by *V.W.Bro. Martin I.McGregor*

Grand Lecturer, Freemasons New ZealandMaster of the Research Lodge of Southland No. 415 (2007-08).PM and Secretary The Southern Cross Lodge No. 9.PM Lodge Te Puke No. 261.Companion St. Andrew's Royal Arch Chapter No. 90.

Member the Waikato Lodge of Research No. 445.Grand Steward, Freemasons New Zealand.

The paper details the history of Spanish Freemasonry from itsfoundation to the present day presents details of the persecutionssuffered by the Spanish brethren virtually throughout their history.The paper describes the socio-political developments in Spain in

which Spanish Freemasonry was intertwined and explains the development of thecontubernio(secret alliance) theory by which anti-Masons sought to justify their actions.Considerable detail about the Spanish Civil War and the Franquismo. Explanation of therelationship between Freemasonry and the Age of Enlightenment and Liberalism and

the reasons for persecution.

On 6 June 1936, Snr. Jose Maria Gil Robles, Leader of the Spanish Catholic Party, theCEDA, rose to address the Spanish Cortez or parliament. He laid bare the parlous stateof Spain when he noted that during the four months the left wing Popular Frontgovernment had been in power 160 churches had been burned to the ground and therehad been 269-mainly political murders and 1287-assaults. No less than 69-politicalcentres had been wrecked and 10-newspaper offices had been sacked. There had been113-general strikes and 228-partial strikes. "Let us not deceive ourselves!" said GilRobles,

"A country can live under a Monarchy or a Republic, with a parliamentary or a

presidential system, under Communism or Fascism! But it cannot live in anarchy.Now, alas, Spain is in anarchy. And we are today present at the funeral service ofdemocracy!"

This stinging criticism of the government was taken up by the Monarchist leader, Snr.Jose Calvo Sotelo, who claimed that the disorder in Spain was due to the flawedConstitution of 1931.

"Against this sterile State," he proclaimed, "I am proposing the integrated State,
http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/history-spanish-freemasonry.htmlhttp://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/history-spanish-freemasonry.htmlhttp://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/history-spanish-freemasonry.html


2/37

2

which will bring economic justice, and which will say with due authority: no morestrikes, no more lock-outs, no more usury, no more capitalist abuses, no morestarvation wages, no more political salaries gained by happy accident, no moreanarchic liberty, no more criminal conspiracies against full production, the nationalproduction will be for the benefit of all classes, all parties, all interests. This State

many may call Fascist; if this indeed be the Fascist State, then I, who believe in it,proudly declare myself a Fascist!"

Reports of this debate reached every corner of Spain but Calvo Sotelo's words werewidely misconstrued, as was his call to the Spanish armed forced to be prepared to riseto the defense of Spain against anarchy. On Monday, 13 July, Jose Calvo Sotelo wasmurdered by members of the Assault Guard, Spain's urban paramilitary police. Theassassins had links with the Young Socialists and the principal assassin, VictorianoCuenca, was known to be a bodyguard of the Socialist leader Indelicio Prieto. The rightwing and its supporters, which had only narrowly lost the election and might haveformed a government had the centre parties lent their support, were outraged and Spain

held its breath.

The response was not long in coming. On the very day of Calvo Sotelo's assassination,General Emilio Mola Vidal, the principal planner of the military rising that had beenplanned to take place in the event of a breakdown of public order, sent a directive bycoded telegram to numerous members of the Spanish Army officer corps that the risingwas to commence in Morocco at 1700 hours on 17 July and on the Spanish mainlandthe following day. But the date and time was betrayed to the commander of the Spanishforces in Melilla in Morocco and the leader of the rebel officers there, Colonel JoseSegui Almuzara, was forced to move fast. Carrying a loaded pistol, Colonel Seguistrode into the office of his commanding officer, General Romerales Quintana(Freemason), and with his pistol aimed at point blank range at the general's head,obtained his resignation. Segui then ordered the troops out on the streets. The SpanishCivil War had started.

It did not take long for Segui's men to take control. All public buildings and left-wingcentres were occupied and all republican and left-wing leaders were arrested and shot.Lists were obtained of members of the left-wing parties, trade unions and Masoniclodges and all persons on the lists were arrested and executed without delay. Thispattern was to be repeated in every city, town and village seized by the rebel militarythroughout the war. In the meantime Colonel Segui had contacted Lt. Colonel JuanYague Blanco and Colonel Eduardo Saenz de Buruaga y Polanco, commanding officersat Ceuta and Tetuan respectively. Lt. Colonel Yague, who was also the commandingofficer of the elite Spanish Foreign Legion, dispatched telegrams to the mainland givingthe password Sin novedad, the sign for the uprising. The commander-in-chief in Africa,General Agustin Gomez Morato (Freemason), was placed under arrest. Colonel Seguialso telegraphed General Francisco Franco, then commanding in the Canary Islands.

At 0610 hours on 18 July, General Franco sent his reply"Glory to the heroic Army of Africa. Spain above everything. Accept the enthusiastic


3/37

3

greetings of those garrisons which join you and all other comrades in the Peninsularin these historic moments. Blind faith in victory. Long live Spain with honour".

This communiqu was sent to every army and navy base. Throughout mainland Spainarmy garrisons rose in rebellion but the element of surprise had been lost and the

uprising was only a partial success. In the north of Spain, in General Mola's sector ofcommand, the rising was successful but even there the Basque Country held out. Theonly other immediate gains were pockets in Andalucia, in particular Seville, whereGeneral Gonzalo Queipo de Llano (Freemason) took control by dint of astonishingaudacity, Cadiz, Toledo, Jerez and La Linia where Carlist troops shot 200-Freemasons.

At 4 in the morning of 19 July the Prime Minister, Snr. Santiago Casares Quiroga, aFreemason, resigned and President Manuel Azana, also a Freemason, invited Snr.Diego Martinez Barrio, a former Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Spain, to form agovernment. Martinez Barrio urgently contacted Freemasons representing all parties butwas unable to come up with a solution. Politically a Liberal, Martinez Barrio was inclined

to moderation and sought ways to achieve reconciliation with the political right. To thisend he telephoned General Mola, a former Freemason, with an overture of peace.General Mola, in his usual lofty manner, rejected Martinez Barrio's peace initiativeemphatically.

"It is not possible, Senor Martinez Barrio," said Mola. "You have your people and Ihave mine. If you and I should reach agreement, both of us will have betrayed ourideals and our followers."

Martinez Barrio's government collapsed within the day and President Azana then invitedSnr. Jose Giral y Periera, another Freemason, to form a government. Giral immediatelyproceeded to distribute arms to the workers militias and, with that, the effective controlof the war effort passed from the hands of the government.

On the 19 July also, General Franco arrived in Morocco to take command of the Armyof Africa. He was faced with the immediate problem of how to transport his army to themainland, for the naval flotilla which been sent for that purpose had been taken over byits crews and the officers killed. Indeed, in one day, the Spanish navy lost 75% of itsofficers, killed by the crews who remained loyal to the Republic. For the moment, theRepublic commanded the sea between Morocco and the mainland. Nothing daunted,Franco requested and obtained nine Italian bombers. He then embarked as manysoldiers as possible in a motley fleet of tramp ships and trawlers which, escorted by twodecrepit old gun boats and under the air cover of the Italian bombers and every airplanethat could be found, headed for the mainland. The German battleships DeutschlandandScheer, both on a courtesy visit to Morocco, screened the armada. The Italian bombersflew straight for the battleship Jaime Primeroand its escorts and forced them to turn tail.Franco's armada reached the mainland without the lost of a single man. Germanbomber-transports arrived within days to transport the bulk of Franco's army in whatwas the first major airlift of troops in history.

Although the Army of Africa's initial numerical strength on the mainland was quite small,


4/37

4

its ruthless efficiency and the superior quality of its troops was to have immediate effect.Having relieved General Queipo del Llano's beleaguered forces at Seville, the Army ofAfrica moved off in three-columns, each comprising a bandera of Legionaires and ataborof Moroccan regulares. Each column had its own artillery and air support and wasfully motorized, the troops riding in commandeered trucks. The objective was to conquer

western Spain and link up with the Army of the North. Under the command of Lt. Col.Yague, this crack-force advanced with lightning speed through western Spain and,having sealed off the border with Portugal and having linked up with forces from thenorth, turned east and drove towards Madrid. The Republican forces, though greatlysuperior in number, were repeatedly outflanked and forced to retreat. But GeneralFranco ordered the Nationalist forces to divert to relieve the garrison of Toledo and thisgave the Republic some breathing space. When the Nationalist forces reached Madrid,this time commanded by General Jose Varela Iglesias, the Republicans had receivedreinforcements of anarchist and communist militias, from international brigadescomprising communists and socialists from all over the world and from the Soviet Union,which sent tanks, planes and military advisors. Under the command of General Jose

Miaja Menant (Freemason), the Republican forces were able stalemate the Nationalistattack on Madrid and General Franco shifted his offensive to northern Spain.

There were then two Spains. Northern and western Spain was firmly held by the forcesof General Franco who by then had been proclaimed Generalisimo or commander-in-chief of the Nationalist forces and Head of the Spanish State. Central and eastern Spainremained nominally in the hands of the Republican government but in reality controlwas in the hands of fractious left-wing political groups and the autonomousgovernments of Catalonia and the Basque Country. A state of terror reigned in thesesharply contrasting zones of control.

In the Republican zone, anarchist, communist, Marxist and socialist militias were a lawunto themselves and took revenge on those whom they saw to be the enemy. TheCatholic Church was a conspicuous target with the murder of 13-bishops, 4,184-priests,2,365-members of religious orders and 283-nuns, some burned to death in theirchurches with reports of crucifixions, rapes, castrations and disembowelment. Scores ofchurch buildings were burned to the ground or wrecked. In addition, thousands ofmiddle-class people and those suspected of being supporters of the Nationalists werekilled and in many cases their property confiscated. Some 2000-prisoners were shot bythe Republicans when General Franco's forces were at the gates of Madrid and in allsome 38,000-people were killed by the Republicans in their zone during the war.

In the Nationalist zone the army imposed strict martial law and carried out a program oforganized terror designed to cow the population into docility and to eliminate allcommunists, anarchists, socialists and Freemasons. In every village, town and city inthe Nationalist zone, lists were made of all such persons and also of peasants who hadillegally occupied land, of those who stood accused of crimes and of people who weresuspected of being supporters of the Republic or who withheld support from theNationalist cause. Prime targets were government officials, union leaders, intellectuals,teachers, doctors and office workers who had worked for them. Forty-members of the


5/37

5

Spanish Cortez were captured and shot. No less than 2000-people in Grenada andanother 2000 in Rioja were executed and in Teruel over 1000 were shot and theirbodies dumped in wells. Eight-thousand persons were killed in Seville, another 2000 inHuelva and the horrendous total of 10,000 on Cordoba, a tenth of the population of thatcity. In Badajoz 1200-people were massacred in the bullring by the soldiers of General

Yague and as many as 12,000 were killed in the surrounding province. These examplesof atrocities occurred at the very start of the Civil War. As General Mola said "You areeither for us or against us". In most cases, those captured were shot, either by theroadside or against the cemetery wall.

Many atrocities were committed against Freemasons in the Nationalist zone. We havealready mentioned the execution of 200-Freemasons at La Linea on the first day of theCivil War. In Huesca 100-people accused of being Freemasons were shot in spite of thefact the local Lodge had less than a dozen members. In Spanish Morocco allFreemasons who were found were shot, likewise in Cordoba and in Cadiz Freemasonswere tortured and killed. In Granada all those whose names were on Masonic records

were forced to dig their own graves and then shot whilst standing in them. In Malaga 80-Freemasons were garroted to death. The same pattern was repeated throughout theNationalist held areas, imprisonment being the least a Freemason could expect ifcaptured. Franco's troops destroyed Masonic lodge rooms and confiscated Masonicproperty, even the private property of Freemasons. Again, most of the excesses werecommitted early in the Civil War and General Franco, once he was in full control did atleast, in 1938, stop most of the bloodshed by making imprisonment rather than deaththe punishment for membership of the Craft in most cases.

The Spanish Civil War was fought with conspicuous, almost reckless bravery on bothsides but with a ferocity, a brutality and a ruthlessness which shocked the world and wemust ask ourselves how and why Spain came to such a parlous state and why theNationalist faction identified the Spanish Freemasons as being every bit as much theenemy as the communists and anarchists and therefore to be eliminated. Why, indeed,the Nationalists believed in the existence of the contubernio, the Judeo-MasonicCommunist conspiracy theory.

*Contubernio* is a Spanish word meaning secret alliance or liaison. A word used todescribe the supposed Judeo-Masonic-Communist anti-clerical conspiracy or plotagainst the Catholic Church and the Spanish monarchy.

The Spanish Civil War is usually described as a struggle between democracy andfascism and as a prelude to the Second World War but, whilst it was certainly perceivedas such at the time by the Republican faction and their supporters, such aninterpretation is not only misleading but also inaccurate. The war was, as we have seen,provoked by officers of the Spanish military and, led by General Franco, the militaryremained in control of what became known as the 'National Movement' throughout theCivil War and indeed until Franco's death in 1975, General Franco was a militarydictator and the National Movement was, at least in theory, the expression of theideology he represented. Indeed, the National Movement was the artificial creation of


6/37

6

Franco himself, a political movement created during the Civil War out of the broadlyright-wing factions that supported the military uprising. These factions stemmed fromdifferent traditions and their ideologies varied markedly, but Franco amalgamated theminto one body by decree and placed himself at the head of the Movement. The factionswithin the National Movement were described as 'families' and Franco played one off

against the others as he deemed from time to time necessary. They were united by abelief in Hispanidad or the Spanish way entailing strong, centralized government,Catholicism and patriotic political and cultural attitude and deemed communism,anarchism, socialism, liberalism and freemasonry as foreign manifestations of anti-Spanish attitudes.

Out the outset of the Civil War the majority of right-wing minded Spaniards weresupporters of CEDA, the Spanish Catholic Party, or else monarchists. The monarchistswere divided into two factions, either they were those who supported the return of theexiled King Alphonso or else they were Carlists, those who supported an alternativeBorbon dynasty. Supporters of the Catholic Party were not necessarily opposed to the

idea of a republic. Then there was the small quasi-fascist party, the Falange Espanol,founded in 1934 by Jose Maria Primo de Rivera which modeled itself on the Italianfascists but with a Spanish flavour. Even within the Falange there were left and rightwing factions. At the time of the outbreak of the Civil War, the Falange had no deputiesin the Cortez and their leader, Primo de Rivera, was in prison, later to be executed bythe Republicans. Franco, however, saw to it that the Falangists gained prominence solong as he needed the help of the Germans and Italians but, as soon as he saw thatGermany and Italy were going to lose the war, he reconstituted the Cortez andprogressively reduced Falangist influence and power.

The rebel military officers were representative of the right-wing factions. Of the seniorofficers, only Lt. Col. Yague and Col. Augustin Munoz Grandez were supporters of theFalange. Colonel Varela and Col. Jose Solchaga Zala were Carlists, General Queipo deLlano and General Miguel Cabanellas Ferrer (Freemason) were republicans, most ofthe rest were either Alphonsine monarchists or simply conservative Catholics. All feltthat the Popular Front government could not maintain peace and good order. As forGeneral Franco, it is true that he adopted the external trappings of fascism so long ashe needed German and Italian assistance, but he kept Spain out of the Second WorldWar and clearly changed tack as soon as he could see that Germany and Italy weregoing to lose the war. It was said of Franco that "not even his collar knows what he itthinking."

Apart from the radical leftist wing of the Falange and the Carlists who drew much oftheir support from the small freehold peasantry, the Nationalist leadership and theirsupporters were from the small but influential Spanish middle-class and the cementwhich bound them together was their adherence to the Catholic Church. These werepeople who had greeted with fear and trepidation the words of the firebrand socialistleader Francisco Largo Caballero when he pronounced -

"When the Popular Front breaks-up, as break-up it will, the triumph of the proletariatwill be certain. We shall implant the dictatorship of the proletariat. That does not


7/37

7

mean the repression of the workers, but of the capitalist and bourgeois classes!"

These were people who feared the growth of the anarchist movement and who couldnot see what possible benefit anarchist ideology could be to Spain. These were peoplewho feared the growth of the communist and Marxist movements would mean a class

war against the Spanish middle-class and the destruction of a whole way of life andgood Catholic values. These were people who were alarmed and frustrated by theincessant strikes, political murders and violent clashes between political factions andthe general breakdown of law and order which the Liberal-led government seemedpowerless to prevent. These were people who were angry and disgusted by the burningof churches and intimidation of clergy by leftist-thugs and the systematic undermining ofthe power and influence of the Church by the government, indeed, the Catholic Churchwas the very embodiment of the attitudes of the Nationalist faction. It is with some

justification that it has been often stated that the Nationalists fought for traditionalCatholic Spain. These were people, moreover, who believed that by virtue of bettereducation they had a superior sense of the history, culture and destiny of Spain and that

all these political movements they feared and despised were imported, foreignideologies and essentially anti-Spanish, bent on tearing the country apart. These werepeople who had no difficulty in believing that the communists took their orders fromMoscow or that the Freemasons took their orders from Paris or Geneva, or that thewhole leftist-movement was part of a Judeo-Masonic plot. What's more, they werepeople who were frustrated by the inertia of the democratic system and had seen howItaly under Mussolini had survived the great economic depression in its stride and howthe Italian fascists had taken a weak and chaotic country and turned it into an efficient,modern, stable and law abiding state which was growing in prosperity and had a strongvoice in world affairs. There was a strong feeling that what Italy could do, Spain coulddo better.

General Jos Millan Astray y Terreros

But the broad range of left-wing political movementswhich made up the Popular Front were also largely ledby middle-class people. These were people whoharboured a strong passion for social justice andchange and who, for the most part, desired a completebreak from the past and especially from the haphazard,fruitless and enervating cycle of revolution andrepression which had marked Spanish politics for nearlytwo-centuries. They believed in a wide range ofideologies, from left-leaning Liberalism, democraticsocialism, radical socialism, communism, anarchism,syndicalism and regional autonomy and all of theseideologies claimed to have to policies to solve to thehuge socio-economic gap which existed between the

rich and the poor in Spain. Moreover, these people regarded the Church as being thechurch of the rich, the opiate of the poor and a major obstacle to social change. These


8/37

8

people believed in a brave new world in which the workers and peasants would rule andin which capitalist greed and bourgeois selfishness would be abolished to make way fora Utopia for the proletariat. For these middle-class intellectuals, the Nationalist GeneralMillan Astray invented the slogan "Death to intelligence".

The Spanish poet Antonio Machado wrote "Little Spaniard who is coming into this world,may God protect you. One of the two Spains will freeze your heart." Two Spains, theSpain of the rich and the Spain of the poor, the Spain of the owners of property and theSpain of those who own little or nothing. As Machado also said, "There is the Spain thatdies and the Spain that yawns". In 1936, these two Spains came head to head, themoderates were brushed-aside and the country was given-over to that extremism whichhas often been cited as a feature of the Spanish character. But, in truth, the concept ofthe two Spains is in itself an oversimplification.

The very geography of Spain has had a divisive effect on the development of Spanishsociety. Separated from the rest of Europe by the massive mountain barrier of the

Pyrenees, Spain itself is dominated by a vast, arid central plateau and is intersected byrugged, inhospitable mountain ranges which form formidable barriers between widelyseparated terrain suitable for productive human habitation. Consequently, althoughSpain is the third-largest country in Europe in geographical area, its population densityis comparatively low. It is therefore a country of widely-separated communities and it isa feature of Spanish society that Spaniards tend to identify themselves, their loyaltiesand interests with village or town first, district or province second and then perhaps withSpain.

The first known inhabitants of Spain were the Basques, a race which spoke a non-Indo-European language, but who otherwise appear to be of prehistoric European stock andwho still inhabit extensive districts of northern Spain and south-western France. TheBasques were joined in prehistoric times by the major migration of a race described asthe Iberians who appear to have originated in the eastern Mediterranean and may berelated to some of the peoples of North Africa. During the first millennium BC thePhoenicians, Carthaginians and Greeks developed trading settlements on the coast ofSpain and established zones of influence but the next major migration into Spain wasthat of the Celts from central Europe arriving in two great waves in the 9 th and 7thcenturies BC. In central Spain the Celts and Iberians mixed freely to form a new race,the Celtiberians. Inevitably the Romans cast eyes on Spain and, starting in 218 BC,fought a series of hard and bitter campaigns which eventually brought the whole ofSpain under Roman control.

The breakdown of the Roman Empire in the 5th Century AD saw the arrival in Spain ofmigratory Germanic peoples, notably the Vandals and Suebi , the latter of which hadno-sooner taken control of most of Spain when the Visigoths arrived in great strengthand it was Visigothic Spain which was overwhelmed by the Muslim hordes. Starting in711 AD, like a tidal wave, the Muslim armies took only eight-years to overrun Spain andadvance into France but almost as soon as the great defeat of the Muslims at Poitiers inAD 732, the small Christian Visigothic and Basque enclaves in northern Spain began to


9/37

9

force the Muslims back. This process was known as the Reconquista, the Christian re-conquest of Spain. From small beginnings, the Christians gradually but inexorablyregained more and more territory from the Muslims. At every stage of the conquest, newcounties were created and in time these counties coalesced into a number of smallkingdoms. These kingdoms in turn coalesced until eventually, under the monarchs

Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille, the last Muslim bastion of Grenada fell andSpain was unified under a single monarchy.

Apart from the political unification and Christianizing of Spain resulting from theReconquista, another lasting effect of this protracted process was the forging of a veryclose community of interest between the monarchy, the nobility and the Church. Aseach province or district was prized-away from the Muslim rulers, so the Spanishmonarchs, nobles and clergy divided-up the spoils, all in accordance with the feudalsystem of governance. This alliance of interest, amounting in the course of time to apower-bloc of conservative reaction against the development of liberal ideology, was tolast into the modern era and found its ultimate expression in the authoritarian Franco

regime. That is why an understanding of the implications of triumphant feudalism inSpain is so important to an understanding of the social polarities which developed overa long period of gestation into the Spanish Civil War, in which Freemasonry found itselflumped with one side and not the other.

Feudalism is in essence a system of governance of a territory and its resources by ahierarchical warrior class or nobility, whereby lords and vassals are bound to each otherby mutual and formal obligations based on revenue-producing land-ownerships knownas fiefs. This warrior class assumed the right to impose this system by virtue of theirown armed-might as a reward, as it were, for their protection of a territory and itspeople, which we may call a commonwealth, against external and internal threats to itspeace and security and for their services in providing the force of law and order. Thesystem is therefore essentially autocratic, a system which is imposed by personspossessing armed-might upon those who do not possess such power. In classicfeudalism the ultimate ownership-of and right to rule all territory and its resources wasvested in a prince, this right deriving from inheritance or conquest. The prince in turnwould grant fiefs of revenue producing land estates to his closest supporters in returnfor their allegiance comprising military support when called-upon. Beneath these baronsor tenants-in-chief of the prince were the knights who received fiefs on a smaller scale,either direct from the prince or from a baron. At the bottom of the feudal pyramid werethe small free farmers and the villagers or villains, both of which were secured in rightsof occupation by providing payment or services or kind to their feudal superior or lord. Atthe very rock bottom of the pile were those who had no rights at all in landed property,the labourers or serfs who worked for subsistence only.

Feudalism was successful enough when applied to rural land but not to the larger townsand the cities. There is a German phrase to the effect that town air makes for freedom,freedom from the bonds of feudalism, and it alludes to the marked degree of self-government most towns and cities were able to achieve. The wealth of the nobility wasderived from the agricultural production, forestry, quarrying and mining associated with


10/37

10

land but the towns and cities contributed nothing significant to that source of wealth.The population of towns consisted principally of merchants, small traders and mastercraftsmen and their employees and families, in fact of a multitude of trades and what wecall today service industries. Many towns contained sizeable populations of Jews andothers who had a tendency to have contacts outside Spain, notably in Europe and

Africa. Such persons were not only involved in the exchange of trade but also in theexchange of knowledge and ideas. Towns also tended to be a haven for any class ofperson, such as gypsies, beggars and vagrants who had managed to escape fromfeudal bondage or who did not easily fit into the feudal system or who were useless to it.In theory these people had no rights to their own destiny and could be sent back to theirnative village or deported entirely but they seldom were.

The government of towns and cities was invariably in the hands of rich merchants andwealthy master craftsmen, legal professionals and the like, usually in some sort ofconjunction with a noble family of the district and/or the local bishop in a power-sharingarrangement which was peculiar to that town and which was frequently confirmed by a

fueroor chartered constitution granted by a prince. These fueroswere fiercely protectedand adhered-to by the recipient communities, the more so because fueros usuallyconfirmed the rights embodied in their ancient laws and the right to make new lawspertaining to their own interests. Thus the governing-class in the towns and cities ofSpain, as elsewhere in Europe, were increasingly the emergent middle-class orbourgeoisie, people who were successful in life due to their education, skills, businessacumen and management ability and it was this class that increasingly sought forthemselves more control over the affairs of city, province and nation. Moreover, it wasthe middle class that participated more than any other social group in the advances inscience, culture and mercantilism permeating from the Renaissance. It was from theSpanish middle class that Freemasonry in Spain emerged.

The third-great beneficiary of the Reconquistawas the Church. The Reconquista was,after all, a crusade or Holy War fought against the infidel. Knights from all countries

joined in it and many of the knights formed themselves into military religious orders,such as the Order of Calatrava. The Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitallers,international crusading orders, were also to feature in the Reconquista. And, as theReconquista progressed, the Church moved-in to the conquered lands to reap theharvest of souls, just as the lords and peasants moved in to reap the harvests from thesoil. The Church however was rewarded with conquered property as well as withspiritual gains so that it became one of the greatest landowners in Spain and a fully-fledged component of the feudal system. Thus, like the knights and nobles, the Churchhad a close community of interest with the monarchy and became the second vitalcomponent in the centralized Church and State concept of Hispanidad. That, in 1936,the Nationalists under Franco fought, in theirminds, a Holy War to restore traditionalCatholic Spain and Hispanidad, is testimony to the enduring quality of the concept.

The reign of the joint monarchs, Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella of Castille, whichlasted from Isabella's accession in 1474 until Ferdinand's death in 1516, not only sawthe completion of the Reconquista with the conquest of Granada in 1492, but also the


11/37

11

consolidation of a politically-united Spanish state. However, the two monarchs were notso unwise as to image that their inheritance was anything more than a group ofculturally dissimilar regions fiercely protective of their own interests, customs andlanguages and which, in the case of Catalonia in particular, were markedly reluctantcomponents in a Spain dominated by Castille. In a process known as The Pacification

of Castile a Holy Brotherhood was set-up, men used as a judicial police force and toreplace the courts, the monarchs created a Royal Council and appointed chiefmagistrates to govern the towns and cities. As the loyalty of these newly-createdofficials to the monarchy was crucial, only those who could show purity of bloodwereappointed. Jews and Muslims were barred from holding public office.

Not content with political unity alone, the so-called Catholic Monarchs instituted theSpanish Inquisition in 1478 in an attempt to flush out 'crypto-Judaism' amongst theconversos or Jews who had supposedly adopted Christianity in order to avoidpersecution. The Spanish Inquisition was a tribunal under direct control of themonarchy. Again, not satisfied with having ordered the segregation of religious

communities, the monarchs - by the Alhambra Decree of 1492, gave the Jews in Spainfour-months to convert completely to Christianity or leave the country. The same policywas later adopted towards the Muslims and Gypsies, but the Gypsies simply refused togo!

The year 1492 also saw the expedition of Christopher Columbus to the Americas andthe start of a great empire for Spain. Under Ferdinand's successor Charles, a Habsburgprince, Spain was to conquer huge territories in the New World and under Charles also,Spain entered the mainstream of European politics. The gold and silver from theAmericas and the Spanish fighting men were to be the lynchpins of Habsburg dynasticambitions in Europe, both under Charles and his successor Phillip II. Moreover, with theonset of the religious reformation, Spain bolted the door shut to Protestantism at thePyrenees and its armies became a bulwark of defense of the Catholic Church. But, suchwas the drain on wealth and manpower caused by its foreign entanglements that by theend of the reign of Phillip II, Spain was all but bankrupt and went into a long and painfulperiod of decline, increasingly insular and out of touch with developments in the rest ofEurope.

One cannot leave the subject of this great period of, from the mid 15 th century to thefirst-two-decades of the 17th century, without mentioning the decline in chivalry, thatbeing the code conduct befitting and indeed expected of a person of knightly or noblerank. Chivalry, with its emphasis on the duty of a knight to his superior lord and to hislady and his companions, was part and parcel of the feudal system but it must bestressed that chivalry was only expected of knights and nobles, in whom it wasinculcated, not of other classes. In a sense, chivalry embodied a code of behavior,acceptable the Christian principles of the Church, applied to a class of person involvedby virtue of their vocation and duty in violent activities and other activities the Churchmight deem sinful. But increasingly, by the end of the Middle Ages and with the rise ofthe powerful monarchical nation states of Spain, Portugal, France and England,knighthood and other titles were increasingly bestowed as a reward for service or


12/37

12

achievement, rather than as a status which entailed a bonded military duty in exchangefor privileges such as fiefs of land. The recipients of knighthood were increasingly fromthe bourgeoisie, people who did not have fighting in their blood and were not inculcatedwith the chivalric code, neither was it expected of them. As a consequence, warfarebecame more total and ruthless, with economic warfare and unbridled terror-tactics

bringing misery and death to untold thousands of innocent civilians. With theconsiderable success of the Protestant reformation in western Europe, with itsemphasis on salvation by faith alone rather than by good works, the moral monopoly ofthe Church of Rome was broken and with it the code of chivalry which it had helped tonurture. Although by virtue of their isolation and resistance to the Reformation, Spainand Portugal managed to preserve the chivalric code to a greater extent than the rest ofEurope, their rough-handling at the hands of such unscrupulous and unchivalrousEnglishmen as Sir Francis Drake caused the much grief.

By the turn of the 18th century, the dust of ages had gathered on the tapestry of eternal,changeless Spain, still languishing in its long sunset of decline, still governed by its

remote, absolutist monarchy through its army of bureaucrats, still answering to the toll ofthe fundamentalist tone of the Catholic church bell and to the chant of the Mass. Thencame something new, but like most things new to Spain it was taken-up with fervour bysome - but stamped-on like some intrusive cockroach by others. That something new,was Freemasonry.

On 15 February 1728, a Lodge named The Lodge of the Lilies was formed in theapartments of the Duke of Wharton in the French Hotel on the Via San Bernardo inMadrid with Charles de Labelye as Master. The Grand Lodge of England was petitionedfor a Warrant on 17 April 1728 and this was granted on 29 March 1729, the Lodge beingplaced on the Roll as No. 50. Phillip, Duke of Wharton, is one whom Freemasonry looksback to with some embarrassment for his personality was the least Masonic imaginable.Wild, tactless, extravagant, and a habitual attention seeker, the Duke of Wharton wasnevertheless a powerful orator and a formidable political opponent of the government ofHorace Walpole. At a highly irregular and chaotic meeting in 1722, he manipulatedseveral London Freemasons into declaring him Grand Master. Thanks to the kindnessof the then regular Grand Master, the Duke of Montagu, Wharton's election was maderegular and he held office until 1723. Soon after becoming bankrupt and to escape anindictment for treason, Wharton escaped to the Continent and was appointed Jacobiteambassador to Austria by the Old Pretender. Having incurred the almost immediatedislike of the Austrians, Wharton arrived in Spain in 1727 and in 1728 became a RomanCatholic. He died in a monastery, penniless in 1731, aged only 33.

In the same year, 1728, the Lodge of St. John of Jerusalem was constituted at Gibraltarand placed on the Roll of the Grand Lodge of England as No. 51 and in 1731, CaptainJames Cummerford, then serving with the British Army in Gibraltar, was appointedProvincial Grand Master for Andalusia, by which was meant Gibraltar and adjacentplaces. Gibraltar had been, since 1713, under British control and although thisProvincial Grand Lodge of Andalusia went on to form lodges in southern Spain againstgreat opposition from the local clergy, this jurisdiction is not within the scope of this


13/37

13

paper.

Freemasonry in Spain first attracted ex-patriots from Britain and France but Spaniardssoon joined and, as elsewhere in Europe, the knowledge of the formation of Lodgesbegan to arouse the suspicions and hostility of the Church and the secular authorities

especially, but not exclusively, in the Catholic countries. The first to prohibitFreemasonry was Grand-duke Gian Gastone of Tuscany just before his sudden deathin 1737. An inquisitor sent by Pope Clement XII made several arrests but the partieswere set at liberty by the new Grand-duke, Francis of Lorraine, who declared himselfpatron of the Order. On 28 April 1738, Pope Clement issued his Bull entitled In eminenticondemning Freemasonry and forbidding Catholics to join or aid Freemasonry underpain of excommunication. This was followed by an edict from the Cardinal Secretary ofState dated 14 January 1739 pronouncing the death penalty on Catholics who weremembers of the Order. In Spain the Bull received the royal exequatur and the Inquisitor-general Orbe y Larreategui published an edict dated 11 October 1738, claimingexclusive jurisdiction on the matter and called for denunciations within six-days under

pain of excommunication and a fine of 200 ducats. The edict was read in churches andaffixed to their portals. This was followed by an edict in 1740 from the Spanish Monarch,Philip V, under which a number of Masons were sent to the galleys. In 1744 the Madridtribunal sentenced Don Francisco Aurion de Roscobel to abjuration and banishment forFreemasonry and in 1756 the same tribunal prescribed reconciliation for Domingo deOtas and, in 1757, a Frenchman named Tournon was sentenced to a year's detentionand deportation.

Further, in 1751, Pope Benedict XIV, published the Bull entitled Providaswhich soughtto justify to a greater extent the Church's opposition to Freemasonry and whichprohibited Catholics from joining any Masonic group. This new denunciation sparked anew round of persecutions and this period is famous for the actions of Father Torrubia,a censor and revisor of the Inquisition, in allegedly attempting to carry out a plan toexterminate all Freemasons in Spain. In order to achieve this, he made use of the vastnetwork of spies available to the Inquisition and - using a false name - joined the Orderhimself and was thus enabled to draw up a list of 97 lodges then in existence. It isalleged that he obtained from the Papal Grand Penitentiary a dispensation to join theOrder under a false name and to break his Masonic oath taken on the Bible. Fr.Torrubia handed over his list to the Inquisition in Madrid and this led to the arrest ofthousands of Freemasons. The King, Ferdinand VI, decreed the prohibition ofFreemasonry throughout the kingdom. Finally, the Cardinal Vicar decreed the deathsentence for all Freemasons.

In spite of virtually continuous persecution, Freemasonry in Spain survived. In 1767, theGran Logia Espanola was formed and Spanish Freemasonry declared itselfindependent from England. The first Grand Master was the Count d'Aranda, PrimeMinister of Charles III. In 1780, the name of this body was changed to the GrandeOriente Espanola and adopted the French system. It is known that many of theministers of Charles III were Freemasons along with an impressive list of prominentSpanish nobles and high officials. That Spanish Freemasonry was able to survive this


14/37

14

sustained period of persecution is testimony not only to the courage and determinationof the brethren but also to the fact that, try as they might, the Spanish Church and civilauthorities could not isolate Spain from the growing momentum of the 'Age ofEnlightenment' and its socio-political articulation in the form of liberalism, of whichFreemasonry was an integral part. Indeed, in no small measure due to the character of

the monarch, the reign of Charles III was notable for its taking-on the spirit of theEnlightenment although little was done to carry-out the necessary land reforms otherthan the confiscation of some Church property. It is the anti-clericalism of the reign ofCharles III, which included the expulsion of the Jesuits, and which was put into effect bya government that included several Freemasons in key positions, that helped cause thepermanent mindset that Freemasonry as an institution was involved in plotting againstthe Church. However, it must be stressed that, although the Spanish governmentsunder Charles III (1759-88) and Charles IV (1788-1808) contained many Masons inprominent roles, the laws against Freemasonry remained in force although evidentlysomewhat abated whilst the influence of the Count of Aranda remained in theascendency.

The 'Age of Enlightenment' can be seen as a continuation or 'second wind' of theRenaissance, which had been slowed-down by the onset of the religious wars in thesecond decade of the 17th century. German scholarship made little contribution to thefund of human knowledge in the thirty-years the war raged over German territory but inEngland, France, Italy and Spain - the development of new ideas in the liberal arts andsciences continued but at a slower pace until the more politically stable era of the late17th century opened up the whole of Europe once more for the exchange of ideas. Thisextraordinarily vital period, spanning from the mid-17th century to the dawn of theIndustrial Revolution at the end of the 18th century, saw discoveries and improvementsin virtually every field of human endeavor, including astronomy, mathematics, chemistry,physics, biology, mechanics, engineering, navigation, metallurgy, medicine, anatomy,agriculture, horticulture, linguistics, antiquities, history, geography, exploration,architecture, marine design, manufacturing, music, the fine arts and philosophy and thiswhole dynamic process was undertaken and driven mainly by members of thebourgeoisie or middle-class although not without the enthusiastic patronage of many ofthe nobility. The Church, however, was often hostile towards scientific or philosophicalpropositions which it deemed contrary to Christian dogma or scripture.

Developing in parallel with the Age of Enlightenment was the rise of Liberalism as asocio-political movement. Liberal thinking was concerned with the rights of individualsand the concept that the state should exist to protect the rights-of and lawful interests ofindividual citizens with especial emphasis on equality of opportunity and equal justice.The principal pillars of Liberalism were freedom of conscience, freedom of thought andspeech, the rule of law and equal treatment of all citizens by the justice system, equalrights, limitations on the powers of government, transparent government, and individualright to private property. The concept that individuals are the basis of law and societyand that society exists to further the ends of individuals without favour to any particularclass or rank was, of course, close to being the opposite to the state of affairs thatexisted in most European states during the 18th century, being that of the absolutist


15/37

15

monarchical system where the individual citizens served and supported a paramountprince and his elite coterie of nobles and grand bourgeoisie. It is therefore not surprisingthat Liberal thought attracted the hostility of the established authorities including theRoman Catholic Church, itself a land-owning power of some importance and aninstitution which had a hand-in-glove relationship with the nobility. Not only that, but the

Church feared that Liberalism would deprive the Church of its monopoly on education,its self-assumed right to impose its moral mores on the private lives of individuals andits claim to ultimate and unchallengeable authority on all matters of conscience andreligious belief - God forbid, indeed, that citizens should make their own laws or eventhink freely! Not only that, but many a Liberal thinker had begun to question theestablished system - especially the cost of maintaining extravagant monarchies andsupporting pointless wars through taxes. Neither did the Church escape the cold eye ofreason when Liberals began to question the cost of maintaining a top-heavy and non-productive religious institution. Clearly, Liberalism was on a collision course with the oldorder.

As with the scientific and cultural enlightenment, Liberalism was born-along on itscourse in the hearts and minds of the middle-class, with some support from the moreenlightened members of the nobility, and it was a middle-class which, in every country,was increasingly in the executive control of commerce, trade, manufacturing, law, themilitary, the civil service and indeed the day to day management of society as a whole.But, with Britain being a notable exception, Liberalism was not spread and organizedthrough political parties during the 18th century simply because few countries had aparliament or popular forum in which political parties could flourish without fear ofpersecution. Instead, Liberal ideas were communicated by way of the customary meansof communication used by the middle-class, namely through personal contacts or, inmodern parlance, through networking. Apart from personal introductions, middle-classpeople increased their circle of friends and useful acquaintances in a number of waysand, during the 17th and 18th centuries, it became the vogue to meet in taverns, coffeehouses and tea houses and all manner of clubs and societies sprang-up in addition tothe social salons of the nobility and gentry where presentable, mannerly and talentedmiddle-class gentlemen were made welcome.

One such society was the Freemasons and from a study of the times in whichFreemasonry initially grew and flourished it is clear that it represented a society of, inthe main, middle-class men thoroughly imbued with the spirit and philosophy ofLiberalism. Not only that, but Freemasonry was the very embodiment of the Liberal spiritand in its organization a model of the Liberal ideal of government. Freemasonry was,and is, in effect a parallel society to that of everyday society. In everyday society aman's standing and his social acceptance, his prospects, his circle of friends and, moreparticularly, his treatment by society were conditional on his station in life, his religion,his politics, his nationality or race, his material worth, his social skills, his occupation, hisachievements or lack of them, even his family - but within Freemasonry he was treatedunconditionally as an equal and his acceptance as a brother depended only on hisadherence to the code of moral and ethical conduct befitting a Freemason.


16/37

16

Moreover, Freemasonry was an autonomous, self-constituted society which neithersought nor obtained permission for its existence from either prince or priest. It made itsown laws and enshrined its code of conduct and rights of members in a constitution andits system of self-government was democratic, based on equal rights and obligations forall members and a spirit of harmonious decision-making, free from confrontational

factionalism which might be caused by differences in the personal beliefs of members.No member was judged or discounted or held to account for his personal beliefs only inso far as he might transgress the code of conduct befitting a Freemason. What is more,Freemasons applied these principles, being no less than the fair and just way to treat afriend and neighbour, to society as a whole - not merely to their brethren inFreemasonry. Clearly, Freemasonry was the antithesis of the autocratic and unjust formof government by a select few over the lives of the vast majority of mankind representedby the monarchical / ecclesiastical alliance prevalent in most of Europe in the 18thcentury.

The last quarter of the 18th century was to see two-revolutions which were to herald

sweeping changes to the political life of Europe, the American Revolution of 1775 andthe French Revolution of 1789. Both revolutions were dominated by Liberal thinking,produced liberal constitutions and both revolutions produced republics although this wasnot the original intention in either case. Significantly, individual Freemasons featuredprominently in both revolutions, once-more fuelling the mindset that Freemasonry wasbent on the destruction of the traditional order of society founded on the alliance ofChurch and monarchy. This mindset, however, fails to recognize that Freemasons werealso prominent in the forces opposing revolution and that all French lodges were forcedto close until 1792.

In Spain the reign of Charles IV saw the rise of the opportunist minister and courtfavourite Manuel de Godoy and the eclipse and eventual banishment of the Count ofAranda. Aranda was replaced as head of the Grande Orienteby the Count of Montijo.Once again, the laws against Freemasonry remained in force but, as in the previousreign, there was little in the way of forceful persecution of Freemasonry. Neverthelessthere is some indication that Freemasons were active in political opposition to thegovernment as evidenced by the republican conspiracy of 3 February 1795 on the Hill ofSan Blas where the Freemason Snr. Juan Mariano Picornell y Gomila was a prominentleader. It is known that arms were collected in the Respectable Lodge of Spain beforethe demonstration which included at least six-members of that Lodge in addition to Snr.Picornell. All of them were arrested and sentenced to death but the sentence was laterreduced to one of life imprisonment at Laguayra in Panama from whence they managedto escape. In 1797 these republicans organized another conspiracy in Caracas inVenezuela. This conspiracy, attributed by Venezuelan historians to the Freemasons,failed and most of the leaders were executed but Snr. Picornell and another of theoriginal San Blas conspirators, Snr. Manuel Cortes, survived to link-up with fellowFreemason, Francisco de Miranda, to raise the flag of rebellion in South America. BothPicornell and Cortes were prolific writers of revolutionary material and were clearlyinfluenced by the Jacobinism of the French Revolution. Picornell was especially notedfor his translation of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.


17/37

17

The year 1808 was a pivotal one for Spanish Freemasonry, starting with the Mutiny ofAranjuez resulting in the capture of the unpopular Prime Minister, Manuel De Godoyand, following Godoy's formal dismissal, the abdication of the King. This extraordinarycourt mutiny was organized by none other than the Grand Master of the Grande

Oriente, the Count of Montijo, and further resulted in the accession of Fernando VII butafter little over a month in power the new king was forced to abdicate in favour ofNapoleon Bonaparte who in turn appointed his own brother Joseph as King of Spain.The French Army was able to initially invade Spain with little difficulty as a considerablenumber of Spain's best troops were actually on loan to France and stationed inDenmark! The French, however, were unable to take Cadiz and it is there that theSpaniards formed a parliament or Cortes to organize resistance against the occupation.Other cities and regions also organized resistance and gradually the remnants of theSpanish army were joined by local militias in a guerilla war which tied-down a Frencharmy of 250,000 and which inflicted enormous casualties upon them.

The reign of Joseph Bonaparte was, however, very beneficial for Spanish Freemasonry.Joseph himself had been Grand Master of the French Grand Orient since 1806 havingbeen made a Freemason at the Tuilleries in 1805. It is alleged that Napoleon Bonapartehimself was made a Mason in the Army Philadelphe Lodge sometime between 1795and 1798. Be that as it may, Joseph Bonaparte was an avid Freemason and quickly set-about supporting the craft in Spain starting with the disbanding of the Inquisition and theannulment of all laws prohibiting Freemasonry. Under his auspices a Grand Orientsubordinate to the French Grand Orient was set up in the very building once occupiedby the Inquisition. Snr. Jose de Azanza was installed as Grand Master of this GrandOrient. New Lodges were chartered in Madrid (7), San Sebastian, Vitoria, Santander,Zaragoza, Salamanca, Santona, Talavere de la Reina, Almagro, Figueres, Gerona,Manzanares, Barcelona and Sevilla. This was followed by a Supreme Council for theScottish Rite. In 1810 a Grand Consistory of the 32nd Degree was constituted at Madridsubordinate to the Supreme Council for France. In 1811, de Grasse-Tilly organized aSupreme Council of the 33rd Degree and this body then constituted a Grand Orient ofSpain and the Indies consisting as its nucleus of the Respectable Lodge of the Star, andthe Lodge of Charity and Santa Julia. Several Freemasons held important posts inJoseph's government, including Snr. Jose de Azanza as Chairman of the NationalGovernment and there can be little doubt that the brethren of the Lodges constitutedunder the Napoleonic regime in the French controlled areas can be counted among theafrancesados, those who favoured the re-constructuring of Spain on the liberal, Frenchmodel. To other Spaniards, however, the afrancesadoswere regarded as collaboratorsand traitors and we can readily perceive another module in the anti-masonic argument,that Spanish Freemasonry was anti-Spanish and controlled by foreign interests. Thiswas one of General Franco's favourite accusations against Freemasonry.

On the other side of the coin Freemasons were active in support of the Assembly orCortes of Cadiz and were especially active in the formulation of the celebrated liberaland democratic Constitution of 1812 which was to be a landmark document in the futureconstitutional history of Spain and of the emerging Hispanic republics of Central and


18/37

18

South America. This constitution is widely regarded as having been largely inspired bythe Masonic deputies to the Cortez, including Snr. Diego Munoz Torrero, Snr. AugustinArguelles, Snr. Jose Maria Calatrava and several others. The presence of severalMasonic deputies and the predominance of liberal deputies did not, however, preventthe Cortes from confirming on 19 January 1812, the old order of 1751 forbidding

Freemasonry in Spain.

The overthrow of French domination in Spain in 1813 saw the restoration of FernandoVII to the throne. Despite the fact that the Cortes of Cadiz was ostensibly a governmentof regency in his name, he was determined to reign as an absolute ruler and dulydissolved the Cortes and refused to accept the Constitution of 1812. In 1814 hereinstituted the Inquisition and permitted the return of the Jesuits. On 4 May 1814 hedeclared the Freemasons guilty of treason and, on 15 August 1814, Pope Pius VIIissued a decree against Freemasonry prescribing both spiritual and corporalpunishments for involvement in Freemasonry. This decree was approved by FernandoVII and was embodied in an edict of the Spanish Inquisition of 2 January 1815 which

offered a Term of Grace of fifteen-days during which penitents would be receivedpending which the full force of the canonical and secular laws would be enforced. Theresponse was inconsiderable and the term was subsequently extended until 14 May1815. King Fernando in the meantime had ordered the secular laws enforced and on 14September 1814 some 25-arrests were made for suspicion of Masonic membership.Amongst those arrested, tortured and imprisoned were the General Alava, who hadbeen aide-de-camp to the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis de Tolosa, Dr. Luque,physician to the king, and the prominent scholar Mariana. Strangely, the parish priest ofSan Jorje in Coruna, was prosecuted by the Inquisition in 1815 for having reported theexistence of a Masonic Lodge to the civil authorities but not to the Church and in severalcases in 1817 the Inquisition super-added a prosecution and punishment of its own ontop of the sentence handed down by the royal courts. One of the most unusual caseswas that of the priest, Vicente Perdiguera, who was actually commissioner of the Toledotribunal of the Inquisition who, when tried by the Madrid tribunal, was found guilty ofinvolvement in Freemasonry of which he made no secret and escaped with the mildpenalty of being deprived of his office and insignia of the Inquisition. But, in spite of thealleged strength of Freemasonry in Spain in those days and the vigour of the Inquisitionthe number of cases that came before the Inquisition can be regarded as surprisinglysmall. Between 1780 and 1815 there were only 19-cases, then a sudden increase to 25in 1816 reducing to 14 in 1817, 9 in 1818 and 7 in 1819. To this may be added cases inthe civil and military courts which did not reach the attention of the Inquisition but overallthe Masonic purge of Fernando VII was far from achieving its objective even though theGrand Master, the Count of Montijo, was held in the secret prison of the Inquisition.

In 1818 the Spanish Freemasons took some steps to rationalize the somewhatconfusing state of the craft in that country when Col. Rafael de Riego and Snr. AugustinArguelles amongst others organized the merging of the two-supreme councils of theScottish Rite with de Riego as Grand Master and it was Riego who led the rebellion oftroops awaiting departure to fight in America which in turn led to the popular uprisingwhich forced Fernando VII to accept the Constitution of 1812, abolish the Inquisition and


19/37

19

expel the Jesuits by which all imprisoned Freemasons were set at liberty. Amongstthose released was the Count of Montijo, Grand Master of the Spanish Gran Oriente.The Count of la Bisbal, who had been sent to crush the rebellion was himself aFreemason and declared for the Constitution and the Freemason, General Ballestaros,was responsible for releasing prisoners held by the Inquisition.

The short-lived freedom of the Spanish Freemasons came to an end in 1823 whenFernando VII solicited the military aid of France to overthrow the liberal government andrestore his absolute powers. Riego was shot and on 1 August 1824 the king issued anew edict by which all Freemasons who failed to renounce the society within thirty-dayswere on discovery to be hanged within 24-hours without trial. The King alleged thatFreemasons had taken part in the revolution of 1820 and he was no-doubt mindful ofthe leading role played by Freemasons such as Francisco de Miranda and SimonBolivar in the liberation of the Spanish colonies in the Americas, a bitter blow for Spain.To the allegations of anticlericalism, revolutionary republicanism and foreign dominancethe Spanish Freemasons were to be accused of complicity in the loss of the Spanish

Empire in the Americas. Indeed, there is some evidence that Freemasons wereproactive in this regard, Francisco de Miranda having formed a lodge in Cadiz at thetime of the Cadiz government called the Lodge of Rational Knights of Lautoro for thespecific purpose of promoting the independence of the American colonies. Since 1821,the newly independent state of Mexico had been ruled by Masonic political partiesrepresenting the York Rite and Scottish Rite respectively.

On 9 September 1825 the new edict was put into effect when a lodge at Grenada wassurprised and seven of its members were executed without delay whist a candidate wassentenced to eight-years hard labour. In the years following several others were victimsof this harsh law. In the Antilles the Marquis de Cavrilano and Ferdinand Alvarez deSoto Mayer were sentenced to death, likewise in Spain one Antonio Caro was hangedand in Barcelona the Master of a Lodge, Lieutenant Colonel Galvez was hanged andtwo members of his lodge condemned to the galleys for life. This period of savagerepression of Freemasonry occurred in spite of the fact that the King Fernando's ownbrother the Infante Francisco de Paula de Bourbon had, since 1823, been Grand Masterof the Grand Orient of Spain.

The death of King Fernando in 1833 ushered in the regencies of Maria Cristina (1833-1840) and Baldomero Espartero (1840-1842) and the reign of Isabella II (1843-1868)and a complicated period in Spanish politics beset by civil wars initiated by the Carlistfaction and a series of military political interventions know as pronunciamentos. TheCarlist factor was caused by Fernando himself when, shortly before his death, he issuedan edict whereby his daughter Isabella would succeed him in contravention to Spanishcustom whereby the eldest male heir such succeed, in this case his younger brotherCarlos. The edict was an immediate cause for civil war upon the King's death and thedeclaration of the regency of Queen Maria Cristina in favour of the infant Isabella,Prince Carlos gaining powerful support from the ultra-Catholic faction with a strongpower-base amongst the peasant smallholders of Navarra.


20/37

20

Throughout the era of the regencies and of the reign of Isabella II Spain there was aconstitutional monarchy which saw the government of Spain in the hands of Liberalscomprised of three-main factions, the Moderates, Progressives and Radicals whichcorresponded respectively to Right, Centre and Left political alignments within the broadLiberal philosophy. The differences between them were more to do with constitutional

theory rather than socio-economic ideology for all of the Liberal factions agreed on theneed for laissez-faire economics, that private business should be as free as possiblefrom government controls and interference. This touches upon what might be called acrisis of identity for Liberalism brought about by the Industrial Revolution and the rise ofCapitalism. The Industrial Revolution can be truly said to have commenced in late 18thcentury Britain with the introduction of steam engine-powered machines which broughtmass production techniques to the manufacturing and textile industries The scientificmind turned to invention, the business mind turned to how to make money from theinventions through manufacturing and marketing and the commercial mind turned tohow to make more money from the money invested in industry.

Capitalism is quite simply the private control of industry and commerce for a profit andobviously, no Liberal worth his salt could be any other than a supporter of Capitalism.The effect of the capitalist-driven Industrial Revolution made a hugely detrimental socio-economic impact on the working class of Britain and Europe. Not only the workers butthe peasants also - as the steam engine was put to work in the fields and as more andmore arable land was converted to sheep and cattle pasture. In Britain there was amassive demographic shift in population from the countryside to the cities and townsand the same but somewhat lesser process was to be felt in most of Western Europe,Spain included. Social and workplace conditions for workers was often dire. Slum areassprang up everywhere, with the workers forced to pay capitalist landlords high rents forsubstandard living quarters. The 19th century was a century of misery for the workingclasses of Europe and with the Liberal and Conservative politicians offering fewbeneficial solutions to the workers because of their reluctance to interfere with privateindustry, the workers turned increasingly to socialism in its various forms. It was nodifferent in Spain, middle-class Liberal society, to which most Spanish Freemasonsbelonged, lost touch with the working class. This was to have dire consequences in thelead-up to the Spanish Civil War. Even so, due to limitations on franchise and factionaldisorganization on the part of the socialist parties, the progressive wing of the Liberalsreceived the support of the majority of the urban masses until well into the 20th century.

A peculiarity of Spanish politics of the 19 th century was the role of the army. Eachpolitical faction had a following in the army, in particular amongst the senior officers whowere referred to as swords and it became a feature of Spanish politics for a seniorofficer to lead his men on to the streets with the aim of toppling the government of theday. A pronuciamento or declaration of principles would be made, the governmentwould hopefully peacefully bow out and a new government installed, following which thearmy would dutifully return to barracks. From time to time the officers themselves wouldplace themselves at the head of government. This almost ritualistic process was uniqueto Spain.


21/37

21

In spite of Liberal dominance in government, the laws against Freemasonry remained inplace and the Craft was forced to conduct its affairs in the strictest secrecy. Even so,the Craft went from strength to strength but with increasing complexity as a number ofnew jurisdictions were formed. The Grand Master of the Gran Oriente, Don Franciscode Bourbon, managed to amalgamate the Ancient and Accepted Rite 1829 so that for

awhile there was a single jurisdiction but an anonymous Grand Orientannounced itselfin 1843 and renamed itself the Grand Orient of Hesperique in 1848. The Grand Lodgeof Ireland formed a lodge at Algeciras in 1843 but the lodge was closed in 1858. Theoriginal Grande Oriente established Orients at Madrid, Burgos, Badajoz, Barcelona,Saragossa, Valencia, Corunna, Santander, Bilbao, Seville, Granada and Malaga.Security was tight with only those personally known to the Grand Master admitted asvisitors. No lodge was permitted to keep written documents and a new password wasissued to all lodges each month.

In 1848 fresh persecutions broke out under the administration of Marshall Narvaez. DonFrancisco de Bourbon was excommunicated by the Pope and fled the country,

delegating authority to Charles Magnan. In 1853 the Lodge of St. John of Spain,chartered under the jurisdiction of the Grand Orient of France, was betrayed by itstreasurer and closed by the Minister of Police. All members were arrested and Master,Aurel Eybert, was sentenced to seven-years imprisonment, twelve others to four-years.All were subsequently pardoned by Queen Isabella. Queen Isabella herself seems tohave turned a blind eye towards Freemasonry for her consort, Don Francisco d'Assissi,was allegedly the Master of lodge in the palace itself. Several members of the royalhousehold were Freemasons, including the queen's preceptors, Snr. Quintana and Snr.Ventura de la Vega, her tutor Arguelles and the palace manager Snr. Martin de losHeros. Certainly, there were many Freemasons in the government and the army duringher reign. During this reign the Lodge of Morality and Philanthropy No. 1024 was formedat Cadiz under the United Grand Lodge of England and there was also a lodge forEnglish-speaking Masons in Madrid. The Grand Orient of France warranted a lodge atMinorca in 1860.

The reign of Queen Isabella came to an end with the Revolution of 1868 the prelude towhich was the uprising in Cadiz carried-out by Generals Pierrad, Moriones andContreras and supported by the political leaders Malcampo, Sagasta, Dulce, Prim, RuizZorilla and Mendez Nunez, all of whom were prominent Freemasons. Isabella wasreplaced as monarch by Amadeus of Savoy, himself a Freemason but he abdicatedafter a reign of only three-years and a republic was proclaimed. An immediate result ofthese political developments was the removal of laws and restrictions on Freemasonrybut this led to even more confusion in the Spanish Masonic jurisdictions. Calatrava'sGrand Orient Hisperique was revived as the National Grand Orient of Spain in 1869.The Grande Oriente Espanolunder Magnan was also given new life. In 1870 however,Magnan left for Santander and his office was transferred to Manuel Ruiz Zorilla. TheGrand Orient Lusitania(Portugal) also started warranting lodges in Spain, more or lesson the excuse that it could not fathom-out which of the Spanish Grand Orients was thelegitimate one. It is claimed that the Grand Orient Lusitania warranted as many as 83-lodges in Spain compared to the 496-lodges of the Grande Oriente Espanol. This


22/37

22

seems to be an extraordinarily large number of lodges and the figure possibly includes'side order' chapters. Also, the membership of lodges seems to have been quite small,often no more than 30-members, which would have made it far easier to hold meetingsundetected by the authorities. Grand Master Zorilla was prime minister during the reignof Amadeus and during that time he managed to conclude a Masonic treaty with the

Grand Lodge of Lusitania granting reciprocity of jurisdictions. On the abdication ofAmadues, Zorilla resigned as prime minister and as Grand Master and Magnanresumed command, immediately to resign in favour of Snr. Carvajal. This caused aschism when several Brethren seceded and elected General La Somera as SovereignGrand Commander who resigned after twelve-months in favour of Praxades Sagasta.This body became known as the Grand Lodge of Spain and absorbed the Iberian GrandOrient with 39-lodges, constituted by the Grand Orient of Portugal, rival to the GrandOrient Lusitania. Add to that the National Grand Orient of Spain under the Marquis deSeone and there were four-grand jurisdictions in Spain at that time. There was anotherschism yet to come when, in 1875, one Juan Antonio Perez created a further bodyknown as the Regular Grand Orient. Also, in 1879, two-lodges withdrew from the Grand

Orient Lusitania and formed a Grand Central Masonic Consistory 32 deg at Malaga. Afurther 13-lodges withdrew from the Grand Orient Lustania and formed themselves intothe Masonic Confederation of the Congress of Seville. The Seville Freemasons then, in1881, divested themselves of all control over Freemasonry and essentially became anallied order and on the same date members of the Craft erected the Grand SpanishIndependent Symbolic Lodge with jurisdiction over the three-Craft degrees only. In 1874the Iberian Grand Orient was revived and in 1876 it reduced the 33 degrees to seven,thus forming the Spanish Reformed Rite.

By 1888 the Spanish Masonic jurisdictions had resolved into the following institutions:

Grand National Orient of Spain (Grande Oriente National de Espana) under GrandMaster Jose Maria Pantoja.

Spanish Grand Orient (Grande Oriente Espanol) under Sovereign Grand CommanderPio Vinader.

Spanish Regular Grand Orient (Grande Oriente Espanol Regulare) under SovereignGrand Commander Juan Antonio Perez.

Symbolic Grand Lodge of Spain (Gran Logia Simbolica Espanola) under Grand MasterJose Lopez Padilla.

Masonic Iberian-American Confederation under Grand Master Jaime Marti.

Sovereign Grand Council of the Rite of Memphis and Misraim under Grand MasterRicardo Lopez Salaverry.

A Catalan-Balearic Symbolic Grand Lodge had also been established in Barcelona in1886 on strongly Catalan political lines but this Lodge adopted a national structure in


23/37

23

1921 and was renamed the Spanish Grand Lodge (Gran Logia Espanol).

In the following year, 1889, the Grand National Orient of Spain merged with the SpanishGrand Orient (Grande Oriente Espanol) under Sovereign Grand Commander ProfessorMiguel Moyrayta and within a few years had gained widespread international

recognition from other jurisdictions, notably the Grand Lodge of Scotland but not theUnited Grand Lodge of England which applied the same criteria for regularity as it didfor the Grand Orient of France, that it did not approve of a Masonic jurisdiction governedby the Antient and Accepted Rite. The first amendments of the Constitution of theGrande Oriente Espanolwas enacted in 1902 to mark the legalization of Freemasonryin Spain and the amendments restructured the obedience on a federal basis accordingto the traditional kingdoms of Spain in order to achieve a spread of regional Masonicorganizations. The federal structure, equivalent to state, provincial or district GrandLodge structures in some other countries was slow to get off the ground in Spain but ina Grand National Assembly on October 1923 a reorganization was agreed-to whichcreated a Grand Lodge in Central Spain based on Madrid, one in the Northwest based

on Gijon, Northeast based on Barcelona, East or Levante in Alicante, South in Seville,Southeast in Cartagena and of Morocco in Tangier. In the same year Snr. Miguel Primode Rivera y Oraneja seized power in a military coup and the persecution of the SpanishFreemasons began anew.

Over the period following the abdication of King Amadeus in February 1873 and theshort-lived First Republic which lasted only until December 1874 and the period of therestoration of the monarchy up until the advent of the Primo di Rivera dictatorship thegovernment of Spain remained dominated by the Liberals, power alternating on analmost yearly basis between the Moderate and Progressive factions, each of themconsisting of an representing the interests of the middle-class elite. Although, asLiberals, these politicians were not insensible to the need for social justice and reform,their desire to maintain the status quo and their reluctance to interfere and to applygovernment control of private interests rendered them inadequate to redress theincreasing socio-economic injustices present in Spanish society which affected theworking class and peasants in particular and to combat the powerful new politicalideologies which claimed to have the answers. Perhaps the black American activistStokely Carmichael summed up Liberalism best when he said "What the Liberal reallywants is to bring about change which will not in any way endanger his position."

The political movements that in the later quarter of the 19 th century sought to galvanizethe Spanish workers and peasants to revolutionary action can all be broadly defined associalist. The social-democratic Spanish Socialist Workers Party (PSOE - PartidoSocialists Obrero Espanol) was formed in 1879 and in 1888 came along the GeneralUnion of Workers (UGT - Union General de Trabajadores) which tended to work inclose cooperation with the PSOE as the industrial arm of the social-democratic politicalmovement. And, in Spain, the anarchist movement attracted a strong following,resolving itself in 1910 into the National Confederation of Workers (CNT - ConfederationNational del Trabajo) and the International Association of Workers (AIT - AssociationInternational de los Trabajadores), with the eventual formation in 1927 of the Iberian


24/37

24

Anarchist Federation (FAI - Federation Anarquista Iberica) Following the RussianRevolution of 1917 the Spanish Communist Party was formed in 1920 (PCE - PartidoComunista de Espanol) and in 1935 the anti-Stalinist Workers Party of MarxistUnification (POUM - Partido Obrero de Unification Marxiste). Common to all socialistmovements was the aim of state control of industry, power to the workers and a more

equitable distribution of wealth. The anarchists had no time for central government andenvisaged all aspects of Spanish society run by local committees. Indeed, the localcommittee concept in all socialist movements was popular with the workers who feltthey could be involved directly in a truly democratic process, but in reality it was notdifficult for party bosses to control committees through their hard-core party members. Itwas such men who increasingly organized the workers to militant action, not only bystrikes in the workplace, but also in acts of street demonstrations and violence. TheChurch, long thought-of by the workers as the "Church of the Rich" was a particulartarget, with church-burnings not uncommon. Likewise, it was not difficult for the socialistparty leaders to drum-up a portrayal of the middle-class as a whole as the oppressors ofthe working classes. The notion of 'class warfare' in which the workers would triumph

and establish the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' became and increasing ideologicalplatform for the socialists.

For the Spanish Freemasons the period was one of mixed fortunes. On the one handnumerous individual Freemasons achieved notability and were active in positions ofpower and influence in central government and throughout Spain and their reputationsreflected lustre upon the institution of Freemasonry at a time when they were no-longerinclined to be secretive about their membership. Such men as Professor Miguel deMorayta, Snr. Bernardo Orcasitas, Mayor of Madrid; and Snr. Praxedes Mateo Sagasta,seven-times Prime Minister of Spain - were amongst the many who attracted admirationboth of themselves and Freemasonry. Spanish Freemasonry went from strength tostrength and was successful in attracting numerous members from the ranks of thearmed forces, the civil service, politics and academia.

On the other side of the coin was the continued opposition to Freemasonry from theCatholic Church and its supporters. Catholic opposition was fueled by the dismissal ofIsabella II and the disastrous outcome of the First Republic in which numerousFreemasons were deeply involved. Later, in 1898, the Freemasons, especially PremierSagasta, were blamed for the loss of Spain's remaining colonies, the Philippines, Cuba,Puerto Rico and Guam as a result of the war against the United States of America. TheUnification of Italy, completed in 1861 and spearheaded by the Freemasons GiuseppeMazzini and Giuseppe Garibaldi, which saw the loss to the Vatican of the Papal Statesincurred the particular animosity of the Catholic Church towards all Freemasons, not

just the Italians. In 1865, Pope Pius IX in his encyclical Multiplices Inter accusedFreemasonry of conspiracy against the Church and with fomenting revolutions anduprisings and, in 1884, Pope Leo XIII released his famous encyclical Humanus Genuswhich remains the strongest condemnation of Freemasonry to date and which was thefirst of several vociferous condemnations from that Pope. It was also Leo XIII who, in hisencyclical Rerum Novarumof 1891, called for political Catholicism to counter what heconsidered to be the anti-clericalism of the Liberal and socialist movements. Of


25/37

25

particular concern to the Church was the increasing secularization in Western Europe ofgovernment, of education and the care of the sick and poor, the beginnings of thewelfare state. The Church accused Freemasonry of trying to take-over the minds of theyoung and of imposing its values on society. In Spain the Carlist movement rallied to theCatholic cause and the new parties Popular Action and Catholic Action were eventually

united in 1933 under the banner of the right wing Spanish Confederation of theAutonomous Right (CEDA - Confederacion Espanola de Derechas Autonomas). Afeature of Catholic thinking came to be a belief in the existence of the Contubernio, thesupposed Judeo-Masonic-Communist-Liberal plot against the Church in order toachieve world domination. This myth was fuelled by two-notorious hoaxes, the Leo Taxilhoax breaking-in the 1890's and the publication of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"in 1903. Both hoaxes were exposed but gained traction nevertheless and are to this daywidely believed amongst anti-Masonry groups. Thus the Spanish Freemasons, asalways predominantly Liberal and middle-class in outlook, found themselves in the lastquarter of the 19th century and the first quarter of the 20th century, wedged between theburgeoning socialism of the working classes which ultimately was unlikely to show any

tolerance of bourgeoisie institutions such as Freemasonry and the Catholictraditionalists who had been opposed to Freemasonry from the outset.

The dictatorship of Miguel Primo de Rivera from 1923 to 1930 held the increasingpolarization of Spanish political trends in a state of suspension. He tried to solve Spain'sproblems with his own brand on non-partizan common-sense and he achieved muchprogress but the effects of the Great Depression of 1929 and popular dissatisfactionwith the Rif War in Morocco which went on until 1926 resulted in a dive in his popularityand military plots against him and he resigned in disillusionment. Spanish Freemasonrysuffered because it became clear to the dictator that the Craft in Spain had becomepoliticized and was opposed to his dictatorship. Consequently, Masonic meetings wererepeatedly banned and, in 1928, some 200-Freemasons were arrested for plottingagainst the State, including the Grand Master of the Grand Orient, Snr. Demofilo deBuen Lozano. In 1927, General Primo de Rivera spoke of "Freemasons, Communistsand professional politicians who are capable of wavering in their love of Spain". Butthere was confusion in the legal rules and inconsistency of application so that whilst, forinstance, a Masonic assembly forbidden in Madrid was allowed to proceed in Barcelonaby the military governor of the city. Freemasonry continued to grow with Grand Orientregister showing 85-lodges for 1927 up to 105 and a membership of 5000 for 1931 andthe Spanish Grand Lodge up from 10 in 1922 to 52 and a membership of 1800 in 1931.

The fall of the dictatorship which led to the stepping-down and self-imposed exile ofAlfonso XIII in 1931 was followed by the declaration of the Second Republic and theelection of a Liberal republican led government under Snr. Manuel Azana Diaz. Azanawas made a Freemason in 1932. Not only that but the Freemasonry accounted for 17-Ministers, 5-Deputy Secretaries, 15-Directors General, 183- out of 470-Deputies toParliament, 5-Ambassadors, 9-Generals of Division and 12-generals of Brigade.Amongst those who were to play leading roles in the future of Spain were Snr. AlejandroLerroux y Gracia, Minister of State; Snr. Diego Martinez Barrio, Minister of War and Snr.Jose Giral, Minister of the Navy. Not to mention Snr. Jose Salmeron, Director General


26/37

26

of Public Works and Mountains. The Mayor of Madrid, Snr. Pedro Rico Lopez was aFreemason, as was Snr. Jaime Ayguade, Mayor of Barcelona. The former GrandMaster, Snr. Demofilo de Buen was Counselor of State. Indeed, a sizeable proportion ofthe membership of Spanish Freemasonry were in a position of power and influenceduring the Second Republic.

The Azana government embarked on a program of reforms which was remarkably likethe declaration of principles recommended for the new republican Constitution by theGrand Lodge of Spain which included freedom of thought and conscience, separation ofChurch and State, universal suffrage, free and compulsory education, free justice andtrial by jury, civil marriage and divorce laws, abolition of the death penalty. The GrandLodge called on those who favour 'the Progress of Humanity' to 'form Masonic nuclei intheir respective places of residence.'

The government accordingly granted the vote to women, disestablished the Church andappropriated property belonging to religious orders amongst other reforms. These

measures offended large sections of the public tending to Catholic traditionalism whilstat the same time the government dealt severely with socialist attempts to disrupt thestate

Documents

Pietre Stones - History of Persecutions of Spanish Freemasonry