№ 68. The Freemason 32 and 33 degrees: A lesson in misdirection I shall never forget

PAGE STATUS: This page is unfinished but the essential information is here, by which I mean the actual or true meaning of these two numbers. However, there is much to learn about not accepting complex answers when studying the progeny of Jove by deconstructing such explanations. I intend to eventually finish this page as a series of arguments against all other possible interpretations of these two numbers, but doing so is a very low priority.
LAST UPDATE: April 12, 2021

The House of the Temple has 33 columns which are 33 feet tall. If for no other reason, this makes understanding the Freemason number 33 a weighty matter. For me, the search for the true meaning of the numbers 32 and 33 was as difficult as was the search for the true meaning of the number 13. In both cases, one can easily get lost in a bewildering number of possibilities. The Freemasons buried the real meaning of these two numbers in centuries of misdirection so thick it appears to easily confuse some of their own members. The one guiding principle is always simplicity. In the end, this was a lesson about the level of respect and reverence the Rosicrucians and Freemasons feel for Sir Francis Bacon. Just look at that building! It is commemorating one man.

I shall never forget reading The Origin of Freemasonry. More precisely, it was while reading the following two sentences that I fully understood for the first time that Freemasons are deadly serious about their secrecy:

On his banishment, he was kindly received by Minos, king of Crete, and adorned that country with many incomparable edifices and monuments of his skill. This ancient tale has been explained by the greatest of modern philosophers, Lord Bacon, as chiefly denoting the envy which strangely prevails amongst excellent artificers; for no kind of people are observed to be more implacable and destructively envious to one another than these.

Lodge of Instruction, The Victoria Lodge, No. IV.,
Dublin, The Origin of Freemasonry by Robert Longfield, February 14, 1857.

This is the only mention of Crete and Lord Byron in the entire 14-page document, but it was the timing that mattered. It was clear to me that even when addressing his peers to say more was not permitted. Consequently, it is only by noticing the subtle timing of these two sentences that the reader learns about the true origin of Freemasonry.

The true meaning of 32 and 33

SPECIAL NOTE: This should be the last section you read on this page until I can return to explore the history of these two numbers using the material that comes after this section. 

The meaning of the Freemason 33 is well known to the initiated. It is a “Simple Cipher” reference to Bacon, as in Sir Francis Bacon. The Simple Cipher (A=1, B=2, C=3, etc.) is not so simple until you learn there are only 24 letters in the Elizabethan England alphabet.

But don’t expect a Freemason to ever tell you that. They spend a considerable amount of their time coming up with other explanations for the meaning of the Freemason 33 either because they are clueless and do not know or because they do know. But it means Francis and is a reference to Sir Francis Bacon.

Hitherto, I have described the Freemason 32 as a reference to the 32 years that separated the supernovae SN 1572 in the Cassiopeia constellation and SN 1604 in Ophiuchus. But after discovering that Sir Francis Bacon and his entourage were engrossed in the work of Paracelsus shortly before founding the Rosicrucians, I must now consider that the Freemason 32 may be derived from the 32 Prognostications in this book with their “magic figures.” That it is one of these two or perhaps both is beyond question for me because I know how the Bard and his men think.

The Number 33 in The Secret Teachings of All Ages by Manly P. Hall

The full title of this book is An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy: Being an Interpretation of the Secret Teachings concealed within the Rituals, Allegories and Mysteries of all Ages.

There were five printings in 1928 of Manly P. Hall’s Secret Teachings of all Ages. Here’s a snippet from the introduction.

The pre-publication sale of this book has been without known precedent in book history. The subscription list for the first edition of 550 copies was entirely closed a year before the manuscript was placed in the printer’s hands. The second, or King Solomon, edition, consisting of 550 copies, and the third, or Theosophical, edition, consisting of 200 copies, were sold before the finished volume was received from the printer. For so ambitious a production, this constitutes a unique achievement. The credit for this extraordinary sales program belongs to Mrs. Maud F. Galigher, who had as her ideal not to sell the book in the commercial sense of the word but to place it in the hands of those particularly interested in the subject matter it contains. Valuable assistance in this respect was also rendered by numerous friends who had attended my lectures and who without compensation undertook and successfully accomplished the distribution of the book.’
Two later editions “The Rosicrucian Edition” (100 copies) and the “Fifth Edition” (800 copies) were published in 1928. This gives us a total of

First (Subscriber’s) Edition: 550
King Solomon Edition: 550
Theosophical Edition: 200

1300 copies in three special editions

Rosicrucian Edition: 100
Fifth Edition: 800

Total: 2200 Copies

The following entry is from the Table of Contents.

The Rosicrucian mask–Life of William Shakspere–Sir Francis Bacon–The acrostic signatures–The significant number thirty-three–The philosophic death.

And here are the remaining references to the number 33 from throughout the book. [replace these images…]

p. 165

Bacon, Shakspere, and the Rosicrucians

THE present consideration of the Bacon–Shakspere–Rosicrucian controversy is undertaken not for the vain purpose of digging up dead men’s bones but rather in the hope that a critical analysis will aid in the rediscovery of that knowledge lost to the world since the oracles were silenced. It was W. F. C. Wigston who called the Bard of Avon “phantom Captain Shakespeare, the Rosicrucian mask.” This constitutes one of the most significant statements relating to the Bacon-Shakspere controversy.

It is quite evident that William Shakspere could not, unaided, have produced the immortal writings bearing his name. He did not possess the necessary literary culture, for the town of Stratford where he was reared contained no school capable of imparting the higher forms of learning reflected in the writings ascribed to him. His parents were illiterate, and in his early life he evinced a total disregard for study. There are in existence but six known examples of Shakspere’s handwriting. All are signatures, and three of them are in his will. The scrawling, uncertain method of their execution stamps Shakspere as unfamiliar with the use of a pen, and it is obvious either that he copied a signature prepared for him or that his hand was guided while he wrote. No autograph manuscripts of the “Shakespearian” plays or sonnets have been discovered, nor is there even a tradition concerning them other than the fantastic and impossible statement appearing in the foreword of the Great Folio.

A well-stocked library would be an essential part of the equipment of an author whose literary productions demonstrate him to be familiar with the literature of all ages, yet there is no record that Shakspere ever possessed a library, nor does he make any mention of books in his will. Commenting on the known illiteracy of Shakspere’s daughter Judith, who at twenty-seven could only make her mark, Ignatius Donnelly declares it to be unbelievable that William Shakspere if he wrote the plays bearing his name would have permitted his own daughter to reach womanhood and marry without being able to read one line of the writings that made her father wealthy and locally famous.

The query also has been raised, “Where did William Shakspere secure his knowledge of modern French, Italian, Spanish, and Danish, to say nothing of classical Latin and Greek?” For, in spite of the rare discrimination with which Latin is used by the author of the Shakespearian plays, Ben Jonson, who knew Shakspere intimately, declared that the Stratford actor understood “small Latin and less Greek”! Is it not also more than strange that no record exists of William Shakspere’s having ever played a leading rôle in the famous dramas he is supposed to have written or in others produced by the company of which he was a member? True, he may have owned a small interest in the Globe Theatre or Blackfriars, but apparently the height of his thespian achievements was the Ghost in Hamlet!

In spite of his admitted avarice, Shakspere seemingly made no effort during his lifetime to control or secure remuneration from the plays bearing his name, many of which were first published anonymously. As far as can be ascertained, none of his heirs were involved in any manner whatsoever in the printing of the First Folio after his death, nor did they benefit financially therefrom. Had he been their author, Shakspere’s manuscripts and unpublished plays would certainly have constituted his most valued possessions, yet his will–while making special disposition of his second-best bed and his “broad silver gilt bowl” neither mentions nor intimates that he possessed any literary productions whatsoever.

While the Folios and Quartos usually are signed “William Shakespeare,” all the known autographs of the Stratford actor read “William Shakspere.” Does this change in spelling contain any significance heretofore generally overlooked? Furthermore, if the publishers of the First Shakespearian Folio revered their fellow actor as much as their claims in that volume would indicate, why did they, as if in ironical allusion to a hoax which they were perpetrating, place an evident caricature of him on the title page?

Certain absurdities also in Shakspere’s private life are irreconcilable. While supposedly at the zenith of his literary career, he was actually engaged in buying malt, presumably for a brewing business! Also picture the immortal Shakspere–the reputed author of The Merchant of Venice–as a moneylender! Yet among those against whom Shakspere brought action to collect petty sums was a fellow townsman–one Philip Rogers–whom he sued for an unpaid loan of two shillings, or about forty-eight cents! In short, there is nothing known in the life of Shakspere that would justify the literary excellence imputed to him.

The philosophic ideals promulgated throughout the Shakespearian plays distinctly demonstrate their author to have been thoroughly familiar with certain doctrines and tenets peculiar to Rosicrucianism; in fact the profundity of the Shakespearian productions stamps their creator as one of the illuminati of the ages. Most of those seeking a solution for the Bacon-Shakspere controversy have been intellectualists. Notwithstanding their scholarly attainments, they have overlooked the important part played by transcendentalism in the philosophic achievements of the ages. The mysteries of superphysics are inexplicable to the materialist, whose training does not equip him to estimate the extent of their ramifications and complexities. Yet who but a Platonist, a Qabbalist, or a Pythagorean could have written The Tempest, Macbeth, Hamlet, or The Tragedy of Cymbeline? Who but one deeply versed in Paracelsian lore could have conceived, A Midsummer Night’s Dream?

Father of modern science, remodeler

Click to enlarge


From Shakespeare’s King Richard The Second, Quarto of 1597.

The ornamental headpiece shown above has long been considered a Baconian or Rosicrucian signature. The light and the dark A‘s appear in several volumes published by emissaries of the Rosicrucians. If the above figure be compared with that from the Alciati Emblemata on the following pages, the cryptic use of the two A’s will be further demonstrated.

Click to enlarge


From Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy.

Baconian experts declare Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy to be in reality Francis Bacon’s scrapbook in which he gathered strange and rare bits of knowledge during the many years of eventful life. This title page has long been supposed to contain a cryptic message. The key to this cipher is the pointing figure of the maniac in the lower right-hand corner of the design. According to Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Gallup, the celestial globe at which the maniac is pointing is a cryptic symbol of Sir Francis Bacon. The planetary signs which appear in the clouds opposite the marginal figures 4, 5;, 6, and 7 signify the planetary configurations, which produce the forms of mania depicted. The seated man, with his head resting upon his hand. is declared by Baconian enthusiasts to represent Sir Francis Bacon.

p. 166

of modern law, editor of the modem Bible, patron of modem democracy, and one of the founders of modern Freemasonry, Sir Francis Bacon was a man of many aims and purposes. He was a Rosicrucian, some have intimated the Rosicrucian. If not actually the Illustrious Father C.R.C. referred to in the Rosicrucian manifestoes, he was certainly a high initiate of the Rosicrucian Order, and it is his activities in connection with this secret body that are of prime importance to students of symbolism, philosophy, and literature.

Scores of volumes have been written to establish Sir Francis Bacon as the real author of the plays and sonnets popularly ascribed to William Shakspere. An impartial consideration of these documents cannot but convince the open-minded of the verisimilitude of the Baconian theory. In fact those enthusiasts who for years have struggled to identify Sir Francis Bacon as the true “Bard of Avon” might long since have won their case had they emphasized its most important angle, namely, that Sir Francis Bacon, the Rosicrucian initiate, wrote into the Shakespearian plays the secret teachings of the Fraternity of R.C. and the true rituals of the Freemasonic Order, of which order it may yet be discovered that he was the actual founder. A sentimental world, however, dislikes to give up a traditional hero, either to solve a controversy or to right a wrong. Nevertheless, if it can be proved that by raveling out the riddle there can be discovered information of practical value to mankind, then the best minds of the world will cooperate in the enterprise. The Bacon-Shakspere controversy, as its most able advocates realize, involves the most profound aspects of science, religion, and ethics; he who solves its mystery may yet find therein the key to the supposedly lost wisdom of antiquity.

It was in recognition of Bacon’s intellectual accomplishments that King James turned over to him the translators’ manuscripts of what is now known as the King James Bible for the presumable purpose of checking, editing, and revising them. The documents remained in his hands for nearly a year, but no information is to be had concerning what occurred in that time. Regarding this work, William T. Smedley writes: ” It will eventually be proved that the whole scheme of the Authorised Version of the Bible was Francis Bacon’s.” (See The Mystery of Francis Bacon.) The first edition of the King James Bible contains a cryptic Baconian headpiece. Did Bacon cryptographically conceal in the Authorized Bible that which he dared not literally reveal in the text–the secret Rosicrucian key to mystic and Masonic Christianity?

Sir Francis Bacon unquestionably possessed the range of general and philosophical knowledge necessary to write the Shakespearian plays and sonnets, for it is usually conceded that he was a composer, lawyer, and linguist. His chaplain, Doctor William Rawley, and Ben Jonson both attest his philosophic and poetic accomplishments. The former pays Bacon this remarkable tribute: “I have been enduced to think that if there were a beame of knowledge derived from God upon any man in these modern times, it was upon him. For though he was a great reader of books; yet he had not his knowledge from books but from some grounds and notions from within himself. ” (See Introduction to the Resuscitado.)

Sir Francis Bacon, being not only an able barrister but also a polished courtier, also possessed that intimate knowledge of parliamentary law and the etiquette of the royal court revealed in the Shakespearian plays which could scarcely have been acquired by a man in the humble station of the Stratford actor. Lord Verulam furthermore visited many of the foreign countries forming the background for the plays and was therefore in a position to create the authentic local atmosphere contained therein, but there is no record of William Shakspere’s ever having traveled outside of England.

The magnificent library amassed by Sir Francis Bacon contained the very volumes necessary to supply the quotations and anecdotes incorporated into the Shakespearian plays. Many of the plays, in fact, were taken from plots in earlier writings of which there was no English translation at that time. Because of his scholastic acquirements, Lord Verulam could have read the original books; it is most unlikely that William Shakspere could have done so.

Abundant cryptographic proof exists that Bacon was concerned in the production of the Shakespearian plays. Sir Francis Bacon’s cipher number was 33. In the First Part of King Henry the Fourth, the word “Francis” appears 33 times upon one page. To attain this end, obviously awkward sentences were required, as: “Anon Francis? No Francis, but tomorrow Francis: or Francis, on Thursday: or indeed Francis when thou wilt. But Francis.”

Throughout the Shakespearian Folios and Quartos occur scores of acrostic signatures. The simplest form of the acrostic is that whereby a name–in these instances Bacon’s–was hidden in the first few letters of lines. In The Tempest, Act I, Scene 2, appears a striking example of the Baconian acrostic:

“Begun to tell me what I am, but stopt
And left me to a bootelesse Inquisition,
Concluding, stay: not yet.

The first letters of the first and second lines together with the first three letters of the third line form the word BACon. Similar acrostics appear frequently in Bacon’s acknowledged writings.

The tenor of the Shakespearian dramas politically is in harmony with the recognized viewpoints of Sir Francis Bacon, whose enemies are frequently caricatured in the plays. Likewise their religious, philosophic, and educational undercurrents all reflect his personal opinions. Not only do these marked similarities of style and terminology exist in Bacon’s writings and the Shakespearian plays, but there are also certain historical and philosophical inaccuracies common to both, such as identical misquotations from Aristotle.

“Evidently realizing that futurity would unveil his full genius, Lord Verulam in his will bequeathed his soul to God above by the oblations of his Savior, his body to be buried obscurely, his name and memory to men’s charitable speeches, to foreign nations, to succeeding ages, and to his own countrymen after some time had elapsed. That portion appearing in italics Bacon deleted from his will, apparently fearing that he had said too much.

That Sir Francis Bacon’s subterfuge was known to a limited few during his lifetime is quite evident. Accordingly, stray hints regarding the true author of the Shakespearian plays may be found in many seventeenth century volumes. On page 33 (Bacon’s cipher number) of the 1609 edition of Robert Cawdry’s Treasurie or Storehouse

Click to enlarge


From Alciati Emblemata.

The curious volume from which this figure is taken was published in Paris in r618. The attention of the Baconian student is immediately attracted by the form of the hog in the foreground. Bacon often used this animal as a play upon his own name, especially because the name Bacon was derived from he word beech and the nut of this tree was used to fatten hogs. The two pillars in the background have considerable Masonic interest. The two A’s nearly in the center of the picture–one light and one shaded–are alone almost conclusive proof of Baconian influence. The most convincing evidence, however, is the fact that 17 is the numerical equivalent of the letters of the Latin farm of Bacon’s name (F. Baco) and there are 17 letters in the three words appearing in the illustration.

Click to enlarge


From Bacon’s Advancement of Learning.

Lord Bacon was born in 1561 and history records his death in 1626. There are records in existence, however, which would indicate the probability that his funeral was a mock funeral and that, leaving England, he lived for many years under another name in Germany, there faithfully serving the secret society to the promulgation of whose doctrines he had consecrate his life. Little doubt seems to exist in the minds of impartial investigators that Lord Bacon was the legitimate son of Queen Elizabeth and the Earl of Leicester.

p. 167

of Similes appears the following significant allusion: “Like as men would laugh at a poore man, if having precious garments lent him to act and play the part of some honourable personage upon a stage, when the play were at an ende he should keepe them as his owne, and bragge up and downe in them.”

Repeated references to the word hog and the presence of cryptographic statements on page 33 of various contemporary writings demonstrate that the keys to Bacon’s ciphers were his own name, words playing upon it, or its numerical equivalent. Notable examples are the famous statement of Mistress Quickly in The Merry Wives of Windsor: “Hang-hog is latten for Bacon, I warrant you”; the title pages of The Countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia and Edmund Spenser’s Faerie Queene; and the emblems appearing in the works of Alciatus and Wither. Furthermore, the word honorificabilitudinitatibus appearing in the fifth act of Love’s Labour’s Lost is a Rosicrucian signature, as its numerical equivalent (287) indicates.

Again, on the title page of the first edition of Sir Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis, Father Time is depicted bringing a female figure out of the darkness of a cave. Around the device is a Latin inscription: “In time the secret truth shall be revealed.” The catchwords and printer’s devices appearing in volumes published especially during the first half of the seventeenth century were designed, arranged, and in some cases mutilated according to a definite plan.

It is evident also that the mispaginations in the Shakespearian Folios and other volumes are keys to Baconian ciphers, for re-editions–often from new type and by different printers–contain the same mistakes. For example, the First and Second Folios of Shakespeare are printed from entirely different type and by different printers nine years apart, but in both editions page 153 of the Comedies is numbered 151, and pages 249 and 250 are numbered 250 and 251 respectively. Also in the 1640 edition of Bacon’s The Advancement and Proficience of Learning, pages 353 and 354 are numbered 351 and 352 respectively, and in the 1641 edition of Du Bartas’ Divine Weeks pages 346 to 350 inclusive are entirely missing, while page 450 is numbered 442. The frequency with which pages ending in numbers 50, 51, 52,53, and 54 are involved will he noted.

The requirements of Lord Verulam’s biliteral cipher are fully met in scores of volumes printed between 1590 and 1650 and in some printed at other times. An examination of the verses by L. Digges, dedicated to the memory of the deceased “Authour Maister W. Shakespeare,” reveals the use of two fonts of type for both capital and small letters, the differences being most marked in the capital T‘s, N‘s, and A‘s, (Seethe First Folio.) The cipher has been deleted from subsequent editions.

The presence of hidden material in the text is often indicated by needless involvement of words. On the sixteenth unnumbered page of the 1641 edition of Du Bartas’ Divine Weeks is a boar surmounting a pyramidal text. The text is meaningless jargon, evidently inserted for cryptographic reasons and marked with Bacon’s signature–the hog. The year following publication of the First Folio of Shakespeare’s plays in 1623, there was printed in “Lunæburg” a remarkable volume on cryptography, avowedly by Gustavus Selenus. It is considered extremely probable that this volume constitutes the cryptographic key to the Great Shakespearian Folio.

Peculiar symbolical head- and tail-pieces also mark the presence of cryptograms. While such ornaments are found in many early printed books, certain emblems are peculiar to volumes containing Baconian Rosicrucian ciphers. The light and dark shaded A is an interesting example. Bearing in mind the frequent recurrence in Baconian symbolism of the light and dark shaded A and the hog, the following statement by Bacon in his Interpretation of Nature is highly significant: “If the sow with her snout should happen to imprint the letter A upon the ground, wouldst thou therefore imagine that she could write out a whole tragedy as one letter?”

The Rosicrucians and other secret societies of the seventeenth century used watermarks as mediums for the conveyance of cryptographic references, and books presumably containing Baconian ciphers are usually printed upon paper bearing Rosicrucian or Masonic watermarks; often there are several symbols in one book, such as the Rose Cross, urns, bunches of grapes, and others.

At hand is a document which may prove a remarkable key to a cipher beginning in The Tragedy of Cymbeline. So far as known it has never been published and is applicable only to the 1623 Folio of the Shakespearian plays. The cipher is a line-and-word count involving punctuation, especially the long and short exclamation points and the straight and slanting interrogation points. This code was discovered by Henry William Bearse in 1900, and after it has been thoroughly checked its exact nature will be made public.

No reasonable doubt remains that the Masonic Order is the direct outgrowth of the secret societies of the Middle Ages, nor can it be denied that Freemasonry is permeated by the symbolism and mysticism of the ancient and mediæval worlds. Sir Francis Bacon knew the true secret of Masonic origin and there is reason to suspect that he concealed this knowledge in cipher and cryptogram. Bacon is not to be regarded solely as a man but rather as the focal point between an invisible institution and a world which was never able to distinguish between the messenger and the message which he promulgated. This secret society, having rediscovered the lost wisdom of the ages and fearing that the knowledge might be lost again, perpetuated it in two ways: (1) by an organization (Freemasonry)

Click to enlarge


From Ralegh’s History of the World.

Many documents influenced by Baconian philosophy–or intended m conceal Baconian or Rosicrucian cryptograms–use certain conventional designs at the beginning and end of chapters, which reveal to the initiated the presence of concealed information. The above ornamental has long been accepted as of the presence of Baconian influence and is to be found only in a certain number of rare volumes, all of which contain Baconian cryptograms. These cipher messages were placed in the books either by Bacon himself or by contemporaneous and subsequent authors belonging to the same secret society which Bacon served with his remarkable knowledge of ciphers and enigmas. Variants of this headpiece adorn the Great Shakespearian Folio (1623); Bacon’s Novum Organum (1620); the St. James Bible (1611); Spencer’s Faerie Queene (1611); and Sir Walter Ralegh’s History of the World (1614) (See American Baconiana.)

Click to enlarge


From Shakespeare’s Great Folio of 1623.

There are no authentic portraits of Shakspere in existence. The dissimilarities the Droeshout, Chandos, Janssen, Hunt, Ashbourne, Soest, and Dunford portraits prove conclusively that the artists were unaware of Shakspere’s actual features. An examination of the Droeshout portrait discloses several peculiarities. Baconian enthusiasts are convinced that the face is only a caricature, possibly the death mask of Francis Bacon. A comparison of the Droeshout Shakspere with portraits and engravings of Francis Bacon demonstrates the identity of the structure of the two faces, the difference in expression being caused by lines of shading. Not also the peculiar line running from the ear down to the chin. Does this line subtly signify that the face itself a mask, ending at the ear? Notice also that the head is not connected with the body, but is resting on the collar. Most strange of all is the coat: one-half is on backwards. In drawing the jacket, the artist has made the left arm correctly, but the right arm has the back of the shoulder to the front. Frank Woodward has noted that there are 157 letters on the title page. This is a Rosicrucian signature of first importance. The date, 1623, Plus the two letters “ON” from the word “LONDON,” gives the cryptic signature of Francis Bacon, by a simple numerical cipher. By merely exchanging the 26 letters of the alphabet for numbers, 1 became A, 6 becomes F, 2 becomes B, and 3 becomes C, giving AFBC. To this is added the ON from LONDON, resulting in AFBCON, which rearranged forms F. BACON.

p. 168

to the initiates of which it revealed its wisdom in the form of symbols; (2) by embodying its arcana in the literature of the day by means of cunningly contrived ciphers and enigmas.

Evidence points to the existence of a group of wise and illustrious Fratres who assumed the responsibility of publishing and preserving for future generations the choicest of the secret books of the ancients, together with certain other documents which they themselves had prepared. That future members of their fraternity might not only identify these volumes bur also immediately note the significant passages, words, chapters, or sections therein, they created a symbolic alphabet of hieroglyphic designs. By means of a certain key and order, the discerning few were thus enabled to find that wisdom by which a man is “raised” to an illumined life.

The tremendous import of the Baconian mystery is daily becoming more apparent. Sir Francis Bacon was a link in that great chain of minds which has perpetuated the secret doctrine of antiquity from its beginning. This secret doctrine is concealed in his cryptic writings. The search for this divine wisdom is the only legitimate motive for the effort to decode his cryptograms.

Masonic research might discover much of value if it would turn its attention to certain volumes published during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which bear the stamp and signet of that secret society whose members first established modern Freemasonry but themselves remained as an intangible group controlling and directing the activities of the outer body. The unknown history and lost rituals of Freemasonry may be rediscovered in the symbolism and cryptograms of the Middle Ages. Freemasonry is the bright and glorious son of a mysterious and hidden father. It cannot trace its parentage because that origin is obscured by the veil of the superphysical and the mystical. The Great Folio of 1623 is a veritable treasure house of Masonic lore and symbolism, and the time is at hand when that Great Work should be accorded the consideration which is its due.

Though Christianity shattered the material organization of the pagan Mysteries, it could not destroy the knowledge of supernatural power which the pagans possessed. Therefore it is known that the Mysteries of Greece and Egypt were secretly perpetuated through the early centuries of the church, and later, by being clothed in the symbolism of Christianity, were accepted as elements of that faith. Sir Francis Bacon was one of those who had been entrusted with the perpetuation and dissemination of s the arcana of the superphysical originally in the possession of the pagan hierophants, and to attain that end either formulated the Fraternity of R.C. or was admitted into an organization already existing under that name and became one of its principal representatives.

For some reason not apparent to the uninitiated there has been a continued and consistent effort to prevent the unraveling of the Baconian skein. Whatever the power may be which continually blocks the efforts of investigators, it is as unremitting now as it was immediately following Bacon’s death, and those attempting to solve the enigma still feel the weight of its resentment.

A misunderstanding world has ever persecuted those who understood the secret workings of Nature, seeking in every conceivable manner to exterminate the custodians of this divine wisdom. Sir Francis Bacon’s political prestige was finally undermined and Sir Walter Ralegh met a shameful fate because their transcendental knowledge was considered dangerous.

The forging of Shakspere’s handwriting; the foisting of fraudulent portraits and death masks upon a gullible public; the fabrication of spurious biographies; the mutilation of books and documents; the destruction or rendering illegible of tablets and inscriptions containing cryptographic messages, have all compounded the difficulties attendant upon the solution of the Bacon-Shakspere-Rosicrucian riddle. The Ireland forgeries deceived experts for years.

According to material available, the supreme council of the Fraternity of R.C. was composed of a certain number of individuals who had died what is known as the “philosophic death.” When the time came for an initiate to enter upon his labors for the Order, he conveniently “died” under somewhat mysterious circumstances. In reality he changed his name and place of residence, and a box of rocks or a body secured for the purpose was buried in his stead. It is believed that this happened in the case of Sir Francis Bacon who, like all servants of the Mysteries, renounced all personal credit and permitted others to be considered as the authors of the documents which he wrote or inspired.

The cryptic writings of Francis Bacon constitute one of the most powerful tangible elements in the mysteries of transcendentalism and symbolic philosophy. Apparently many years must yet pass before an uncomprehending world will appreciate the transcending genius of that mysterious man who wrote the Novum Organum, who sailed his little ship far out into the unexplored sea of learning through the Pillars of Hercules, and whose ideals for a new civilization are magnificently expressed in the Utopian dream of The New Atlantis. Was Sir Francis Bacon a second Prometheus? Did his great love for the people of the world and his pity for their ignorance cause him to bring the divine fire from heaven concealed within the contents of a printed page?

In all probability, the keys to the Baconian riddle will be found in classical mythology. He who understands the secret of the Seven-Rayed God will comprehend the method employed by Bacon to accomplish his monumental labor. Aliases were assumed by him in accordance with the attributes and order of the members of the planetary system. One of the least known–but most important–keys to the Baconian enigma is the Third, or 1637, Edition, published in Paris, of Les Images ou Tableaux de platte peinture des deux Philostrates sophistes grecs et les statues de Callistrate, by Blaise de Vigenere. The title page of this volume–which, as the name of the author when properly deciphered indicates, was written by or under the direction of Bacon or his secret society–is one mass of important Masonic or Rosicrucian symbols. On page 486 appears a plate entitled “Hercules Furieux,” showing a gigantic figure shaking a spear, the ground before him strewn with curious emblems. In his curious work, Das Bild des Speershüttlers die Lösung des Shakespeare-Rätsels, Alfred Freund attempts to explain the Baconian symbolism in the Philostrates. Bacon he reveals as the philosophical Hercules, whom time will establish as the true “Spear-Shaker” (Shakespeare).

Click to enlarge


From Ralegh’s History of the World.

What was the mysterious knowledge which Sir Walter Ralegh possessed and which was declared to be detrimental to the British government? Why was he executed when the charges against him could not be proved? Was he a member of me of those feared and hated secret societies which nearly overthrew political and religious Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries? Was Sir Walter Ralegh an important factor in the Bacon-Shakspere-Rosicrucian-Masonic enigma? By those seeking the keys to this great controversy, he seems to have been almost entirely overlooked. His contemporaries are unanimous in their praise of his remarkable intellect, and he has long been considered me of Britain’s most brilliant sons.

Sir Walter Ralegh–soldier, courtier, statesman, writer, poet, philosopher, and explorer–was a scintillating figure at the court of Queen Elizabeth. Upon this same man, King James–after the death of Elizabeth–heaped every indignity within his power. The cowardly James, who shuddered at the mention of weapons and cried like a child when he was crossed, was insanely jealous of the brilliant courtier. Ralegh’s enemies, Playing upon the king’s weakness, did not cease their relentless persecution until Ralegh had been hanged and his decapitated, quartered, and disemboweled body lay at their feet.

The title page reproduced above was used by Ralegh’s political foes as a powerful weapon against him. They convinced James I that the face of the central figure upholding the globe was a caricature of his own, and the enraged king ordered every copy of the engraving destroyed. But a few copies escaped the royal wrath; consequently the plate is extremely rare. The engraving is a mass Rosicrucian and Masonic symbols, and the figures on the columns in all probability conceal a cryptogram. More significant still is the fact that the page facing this plate is a headpiece identical with that used in the 1623 Folio of “Shakespeare” and also in Bacon’s Novum Organum.

The Dioscuri or Aśvins: Freemason 32 and 33

I will show you the videos of two researchers whose work I greatly admire and respect. They could not fathom the meaning of the Freemason 32 and 33. Countless individuals have tried and failed. Nor could I for many years. There are few subjects I can think back on over the past eight years that have required as much thought as this did.

First let’s take a look at the following trademarked images. What they all have in common is the double headed eagle. The Northern Jurisdiction trademark is the simplest. Both Southern Jurisdiction trademarks include a Latin phrase. According to the trademark applications, the English translation of the wording “SPES MEA IN DEO EST” in the mark is “MY HOPE IS IN GOD” (32 SPES MEA IN DEO EST – Trademark Details) and the English translation of the Latin wording “DEUS MEUMQUE JUS” in the mark is “GOD AND MY RIGHT” (33 DEUS MEUMQUE JUS. – Trademark Details). Both Southern Jurisdiction trademarks state, “Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.” The 32nd Degree Southern Jurisdiction trademark is from Dallas, Texas. The unusually colorful 33rd Degree Southern Jurisdiction trademark is surprisingly from SUPREME COUNCIL OF THE 33° AND LAST DEGREE OF THE ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED SCOTTISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY FOR THE STATE OF ISRAEL.

The Northern Jurisdiction trademark is the simplest and is somewhat generically rendered. However, the Dallas, Texas 32nd Degree Southern Jurisdiction trademark is faithfully rendered.

The mark consists of a double headed eagle perched on a sword with its wings outspread. A triangle is placed on the chest of the eagle and displays the number “32”. A belt is draped on the sword and carries the Latin phrase “Spes Mea In Deo Est”, with a star appearing before the word “Spes” and after the word “Est”.

Trademarks.justia.com, Northern Jurisdiction trademark

Please note that the Israeli Southern Jurisdiction trademark is not faithfully rendered because it lacks “a plurality of stars…situated underneath the eagle’s wings and above the sword.” However, these clusters of stars under the wings seem to have fallen out of favor and their omission is not unusual. Here is the detailed “description of the mark” from the trademark application:

The mark consists of a double headed eagle perched on a sword with its wings outspread and wearing a crown. A triangle is placed on top of the crown and displays the number “33”, with rays of light emanating from the triangle. A belt is draped on the sword and carries the Latin phrase “Deus Meumque Jus”. A plurality of stars is situated underneath the eagle’s wings and above the sword.

Trademarks.justia.com, 33 DEUS MEUMQUE JUS. – Trademark Details

3 videos here of superhuman efforts

address (1) math could not be hidden this long and (2) The Number 33 in The Secret Teachings of All Ages by Manly P. Hall doesn’t get it and (3) NOTHING IS LEFT. They key is in the groupings and the need to be higher than 25. The rest is meaningless

The following subsections will make this clear. There are many “rites” in masonry. The Scottish Rite is just one of them. Every rite has a different number of degrees.

Rites and degrees

The following definitions are from An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry by Albert C. Mackey, M. D., 1884, a copy of which has been added to the Apocalyptic Synthesis Library (ASL).

Please note that the text in the following list was block copied directly from this book. I am leaving the older spelling as is without marking them [sic]. I am also not citing pages because this is an alphabetical glossary of terms. See also List of Masonic rites (Wikipedia).

Rite. The Latin word ritus, whence we get the English rife, signifies an approved usage or custom, or an external observance. Vossius derives it by metathesis from the Greek rpi&eiv, whence literally it signifies a trodden path, and, metaphorically, a long- followed custom. As a Masonic term its application is therefore apparent. It signifies a method of conferring Masonic light by a collection and distribution of degrees. It is, in other words, the method and order observed in the government of a Masonic system. The original system of Speculative Masonry consisted of only the three symbolic degrees, called, therefore, Ancient Craft Masonry. Such was the condition of Free- masonry at the time of what is called the revival in 1717. Hence, this was the original Rite or approved usage, and so it continued in England until the year 1813, when at the union of the two Grand Lodges the “Holy Royal Arch” was declared to be a part of the system; and thus the English, or, as it is more commonly called, the York Rite was made legitimately to consist of four degrees. But on the continent of Europe, the organization of new systems began at a much earlier period, and by the invention of what are known as the high degrees a multitude of Eites was established. All of these agreed in one important essential. They were built upon the three symbolic degrees, which, in every instance, constituted the fundamental basis upon which they were erected. They were intended as an expansion and development of the Masonic ideas contained in these degrees. The Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master’s degrees were the porch through which every initiate was required to pass before he could gain entrance into the inner temple which had been erected by the founders of the Rite. They were the text, and the high degrees the commentary. Hence arises the law, that whatever may be the constitution and teachings of any Rite as to the higher degrees peculiar to it, the three symbolic degrees being common to all the Rites, a Master Mason, in any one of the Rites, may visit and labor in a Master’s Lodge of every other Rite. It is only after that degree is passed that the exclusiveness of each Rite begins to operate. I have said that there has been a multitude of these Rites. Some of them have lived only with their authors, and died when their parental energy in fostering them ceased to exert itself. Others have had a more permanent existence, and still continue to divide the Masonic family, furnishing, however, only diverse methods of attaining to the same great end, the acquisition of Divine Truth by Masonic light. Eagon, in his Tuilier General, supplies us with the names of a hundred and eight, under the different titles of Rites, Orders, and Academies. But many of these are unmasonic, being merely of a political, social, or literary character. The following catalogue embraces the most important of those which have hitherto or still continue to arrest the attention of the Masonic student.

1. York Rite.
2. Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite.
3. French or Modern Rite.
4. American Rite.
5. Philosophic Scottish Rite.
6. Primitive Scottish Rite.
7. Reformed Rite.
8. Reformed Helvetic Rite.
9. Fessler’s Rite.
10. Schroder’s Rite.
11. Rite of the Grand Lodge of the Three Globes.
12. Rite of the Elect of Truth.
13. Rite ofthe Vielle Bru.
14. Rite of the Chapter of Clermont.
15. Pernetty’s Rite.
16. Rite of the Blazing Star.
17. Chastanier’s Rite.
18. Eite of the Philalethes.
19. Primitive Rite of the Philadelphians.
20. Rite of Martinism.
21. Rite of Brother Henoch.
22. Rite of Mizraim.
23. Rite of Memphis.
24. Rite of Strict Observance.
25. Rite of Lax Observance.
26. Rite of African Architects.
27. Rite of Brothers of Asia.
28. Rite of Perfection.
29. Rite of Elected Cohens.
30. Rite of the Emperors of the East and “West.
31. Primitive Eite of Narbonne.
32. Rite of the Order of the Temple.
33. Swedish Rite.
34. Rite of Swedenborg.
35. Rite of Zinnendorf.
36. Egyptian Rite of Cagliostro.
37. Rite of the Beneficent Knights of the Holy City.

These Rites are not here given in either the order of date or of importance. The distinct history of each will be found under its appropriate title.

pp. 649-650

Degrees. The word degree, in its primitive meaning, signifies a step. The degrees of Freemasonry are then the steps by which the candidate ascends from a lower to a higher condition of knowledge. It is now the opinion of the best scholars, that the division of the Masonic system into degrees was the work of the revivalists of the beginning of the eighteenth century; that before that period there was but one degree, or rather one common platform of ritualism; and that the division into Masters, Fellows, and Apprentices was simply a division of ranks, there being but one initiation for all. In 1717 the whole body of the Fraternity consisted only of Entered Apprentices, who were recognized by the thirty-nine Regulations, compiled in 1720, as among the law-givers of the Craft, no change in those Regulations being allowed unless first submitted ” even to the youngest Apprentice.” In the old Charges, collected by Anderson and approved in 1722, the degree of Fellow Craft is introduced as being a necessary qualification for Grand Master, although the word degree is not used. “No brother can be a … . Grand Master unless he has been a Fellow Craft before his election.” And in the “Manner of constituting a New Lodge ” of the same date, the Master and Wardens are taken from ” among the Fellow Crafts,” which Dermott explains by saying that “they were called Fellow Crafts because the Masons of old times never gave any man the title of Master Mason until he had first passed the chair.” In the thirteenth of the Regulations of 1720, approved in 1721, the orders or degrees of Master and Fellow Craft are recognized in the following words: ” Apprentices must be admitted Masters and Fellow Crafts only in the Grand Lodge.” Between that period and 1738, the system of degrees had been perfected; for Anderson, who, in that year, published the second edition of the Book of Constitutions, changed the phraseology of the old Charge to suit the altered condition of things, and said, “a Prentice, when of age and expert, may become an Enter’d Prentice or a Free-Mason of the lowest degree, and upon his due improvement a Fellow-Craft and a Master-Mason.” No such words are found in the Charges as printed in 1723; and if at that time the distinction of the three degrees had been as well defined as in 1738, Anderson would not have failed to insert the same language in his first edition. That he did not, leads to the fair presumption that the ranks of Fellow Craft and Master were not then absolutely recognized as distinctive degrees. The earliest ritual extant, which is contained in the Grand Mystery, published in 1725, makes no reference to any degrees, but gives only what I suppose was the common initiation in use about that time. The division of the Masonic system into three degrees must have grown up between 1717 and 1730, but in so gradual and imperceptible a manner that we are unable to fix the precise date of the introduction of each degree. In 1717 there was evidently but one degree, or rather one form of initiation, and one catechism. Perhaps about 1721 the three degrees were introduced, but the second and third were not perfected for many years. Even as late as 1735 the Entered Apprentice’s degree contained the most prominent form of initiation, and he who was an Apprentice was, for all practical purposes, a Freemason. It was not until repeated improvements, by the adoption of new ceremonies and new regulations, that the degree of Master Mason took the place which it now occupies; having been confined at first to those who had passed the chair.

Hautes Grades. French. High Degrees, which see.

High Degrees. Not long after the introduction of Freemasonry on the Continent, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Chevalier Ramsay invented three new degrees, which he called Ecossais. Novice, and Knight Templar. These gave the impulse to the invention of many other degrees, all above the Master’s degree. To these the name of hautes grades or high degrees was given. Their number is very great. Many of them now remain only in the catalogues of Masonic collectors, or are known merely by their titles; while others still exist, and constitute the body of the different Rites. The word is not properly applicable to the Royal Arch or degrees of the English and American systems, which are intimately connected with the Master’s degree, but is confined to the additions made to Ancient Craft Masonry by continental ritualists. These degrees have, from time to time, met with great opposition as innovations on Ancient Masonry, and some of the Grand Lodges have not only rejected them, but forbidden their cultivation by those who are under their obedience. But on the other hand, they have been strenuously supported by many who have believed the Ancient Craft degrees do not afford a sufficient field for the expansion of Masonic thought. A writer in the London Freemason’s Magazine (1858, i. 1167,) has, I think, expressed the true theory on this subject in the following language:

“It is the necessary consequence of an exclusive addiction to Craft Masonry that the intellectual and artistic development of the minds of the members must suffer, the ritual sink to formalism, and the administration fall into the hands of the lower members of the Order, by a diminution in the initiations of men of high intellectual calibre, and by the inactivity, or practical secession, of those within the Order. The suppression of the higher degrees, that is, of the higher Masonry, may be agreeable to those who are content to possess the administrative functions of the Order without genuine qualifications for their exercise, but it is a policy most fatal to the true progress of the Order. When Masonry has so fallen, to restore the higher degrees to their full activity is the measure essential for restoring the efficacy of Masonry within and without. Thus, in the last century, when Craft Masonry had spread rapidly over the whole of Europe, a reaction set in, till the heads of the Order brought the high degrees into vigor, and they continued to exercise the most powerful influence.”

A complete list of Scottish Rite degrees

carefully compare this list because the one in Word is from the Canadian Jurisdiction and specifically says there are variations in the titles

A Complete List of Freemasonry Degrees

The status of any Freemason can be identified by his degree, which represents the steps he has taken from the lower ranks up to the highest degree of Freemason knowledge.

Nowadays, there are many different kinds of degree systems all around the world, including symbolic degrees, chapter degrees, historic degrees, and more.

The standard, widely accepted Masonic rite has three degrees. They are Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft, and the highest rank that anyone can earn, Master Mason.

A common alternative, the Scottish Rite, has 33 degrees, including these three standard rankings and 30 other supplementary degrees, which we’ll list below.

The Standard Freemasonry Degrees

The standard three Masonic degrees come from the Blue Lodges of Freemasonry. These degrees are called the Entered Apprentice, the Fellowcraft, and the Master Mason. True to Freemason origins, the concept and names of each degree were adapted from middle age craft guilds.

Entered Apprentice
The Entered Apprentice degree poses an introduction to the Masonic order in which candidates learn about the rituals, symbolism, and beliefs in Masonry.

Among other things, members learn the language of Freemasonry, which topics are not to be discussed in the lodge, and the actual responsibilities of the lodge. This first degree represents youthfulness and a time of learning.

An Entered Apprentice is entrusted with certain Masonic secrets around morality and ethics, which he can communicate only in accordance with Masonic law. Once he’s proven himself as an Entered Apprentice, he is considered ready to pass onto the second degree – the Fellowcraft.

The Fellowcraft
Members of the Fellowcraft degree pursue a more advanced search for understanding in philosophy, intellectual enlightenment, and wisdom. This degree represents the member reaching manhood.

Once again, the member is ready to advance to the degree of Master Mason when he’s learned his lessons in the Fellowcraft degree.

Master Mason
The third degree represents maturity, with advanced wisdom and knowledge. Master Masons are taught about virtue and morality, along with the duties and tools of a Master Mason.

Once a Mason has completed his third degree – which usually takes some years – he receives all the rights and privileges available to him and will become known as a Master Mason.

Scottish Rite Degrees

Compared to the three degrees in standard freemasonry, the Scottish Rite, an offshoot of Freemasonry, has 33 degrees.

Thirty of these degrees are “appendant degrees”, in that they are not higher in ranking but lateral. This means that a member with a 21st degree in the Scottish Rite has the same ranking as someone with the 3rd degree of masonry.

You could think of these additional degrees as honorary, given to those Masons who have maintained consistent, significant participation with the order. These degrees are given based on merit and ability, although Master Masons cannot progress through these degrees without time and examination.

To attain the 32nd degree, for example, a Freemason must have been a Master Mason for at least 14 years, have been elected Master of the Lodge, and have satisfactorily served the Supreme Council.

There are more than an estimated 160,000 members of the Scottish Rite in the world, with just some 4,000 holding the 33rd degree.

Aside from the Scottish Rite, there are several other orders with more than 3 degrees, including the New York Rite (with nine degrees) and the Swedish Rite (with ten degrees).

The 33 degrees of the Scottish Rite
The first three degrees are the same as those for Blue Lodge Freemasonry. The others can be split into categories, called the Lodge of Perfection (degrees 4-14), the Council of Princes of Jerusalem (degrees 15 and 16), the Chapter of Rose Croix (degrees 17 and 18), and the Consistory (degrees 19 to 32).

The Lodge of Perfection
Master Traveller
Perfect Master
Master of the Brazen Serpent
Provost and Judge
Indentant of the Building
Master of the Temple
Master Elect
Sublime Master Elected
Master of Mercy
Master of the Ninth Arch
Grand Elect Mason

Council of Princes of Jerusalem
The 15th and 16th degrees (Knight of the East and Prince of Jerusalem respectively) are historical degrees, teaching biblical events that relate lessons about dedication to conviction, duty, and truth.

Chapter of Rose Croix
The 17th degree, Knight of the East and West, teaches about the importance of seeking truth in our life path and avoid repeating past errors.

Meanwhile, the 18th degree, Knight of the Rose Croix of H.R.D.M, teaches laws of universality and tolerance.

Brothers of the Trail
Master Ad Vitam
Patriarch Noachite
Prince of Libanus
Knight of Valor
Brother of the Forest
Master of Achievement
Friend and Brother Eternal
Knight of Jerusalem
Knight of the Sun
Knight of St Andrew
Grand Inspector
My Brother’s Keeper
Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret

The 33rd Degree
The 33rd degree is a supreme honour bestowed only on those who have demonstrated outstanding service to the Brotherhood, as well as professional and personal accomplishments.

Learn More About The Freemasons
Want to know more about the Freemasons? Find out the stories behind the symbolism or learn about some of history’s most famous Freemasons.

Or if you’re new to the order, shop our range of Masonic craft regalia online at George H. Lilley today.

Scottish RiteLodge of Perfection

Secret Master

Perfect Master

Confidential [Intimate] Secretary

Provost and Judge

Intendent of the Building

Elu, or Elected Knight, of the Nine

Illustrious Elect or Elu of the Fifteen

Sublime Knight Elect, or Elu, of the Twelve

[Grand] Master Architect

Knight of the Ninth Arch, or Royal Arch of Solomon

Grand Elect, Perfect and Sublime Mason, or Perfect Elu
Chapter of Rose Croix

Knight of the Sword [of the East]

Prince of Jerusalem

Knight of the East and West

Knight [Prince] Rose Croix
Council of Kadosh

[Grand] Pontiff

[Grand] Master of Symbolic Lodges

Noachite or Prussian Knight

Knight of the Royal Axe

Chief of the Tabernacle

Prince of the Tabernacle

Knight of the Brazen Serpent

Prince of Mercy

Knight Commander of the Temple

Knight of the Sun, or Prince Adept

Grand Scottish Knight of St. Andrew

Knight Kadosh
Consistory of Sublime Princes

Inspector Inquisitor Commander

Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret
Supreme Council

Sovereign Grand Inspector General

A distinction with a difference: “Appendant degrees” versus Rank

Freemasons are want to explain that the highest “rank” in Masonry is Master Mason, which is only the third “degree.” I always find this pedantic.

If you put medals on a guy like this one, address him with titles such as “Worshipful Master,” and regard him with more respect than his fellows, I would earnestly suggest that “appendant degrees” versus rank is a distinction without a difference and is at odds with common usage.

By common usage, I mean everything from the use of the term “advanced degrees” on Freemason websites (eg. What Is The Scottish Rite?) to the definitions found in the An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry. Here is a typical example of this pedantic nonsense. I fixed “The question is no,” but did not change anything else. It’s possible the writer is writing in a second language.


There are many Masonic rites, and every one of them has its own specific number of degrees. The standard, widely accepted Masonic rite has three degrees. They are Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft, and the highest rank that anyone can earn, Master Mason. The confusion starts when you think that the Scottish Rite has 33 degrees. So, the question many have is whether someone that has earned say, 9th degree in the Scottish Rite is actually higher in the hierarchy than someone that has only the 3rd degree of Masonry? The is no. To clarify, we will explain the Masonic Rites. For starters, the Scottish is not the only one that has more than 3 degrees. For example, the New York Rite, has nine degrees. The Swedish Rite has 10, and the old Rite of Memphis had 97 degrees back in the day.

Let’s start with the fact that the attainment of the 3rd degree is the highest rank of degree in Masonry.   –is this even part of the quote???

The DocumentaryTube.com, MASONIC RITES AND DEGREES EXPLAINED – WHY THE SCOTTISH HAS 33 AND THE NORMAL ONLY 3 DEGREES? by Aleksandar Mishkov (accessed October 15, 2020)

I chose this example because the “higher ranks” highlighted in yellow is contradicting the very point he is trying to make. This is a classic distinction without a difference. Here is another, more official example:

One important point which must be recognized by all Masons is the fact that the Scottish Rite shares the belief of all Masonic organizations that there is no higher degree than that of Master Mason. The Supreme Council and its subordinate bodies acknowledge the Masonic supremacy of the Symbolic Grand Lodges, and the Grand Master of Masons is recognized as the ranking Masonic officer present when in attendance at any Scottish Rite meeting.

Our Scottish Rite degrees are in addition to, and are in no way “higher” than, Blue Lodge degrees. Scottish Rite work amplifies and elaborates on the lessons of the Craft. It should never be forgotten that termination of a member’s Symbolic Lodge standing automatically terminates his Scottish Rite membership, whether his rank be 4° or 33°.

The Valley of Rochester Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, What Is The Scottish Rite? (accessed October 15, 2020)

Tell that to Brother Pike. Again, this contradicts common usage even within freemasonry.

…the degrees are ancient, authentic and recognized everywhere. Progressively taken, they shed light upon the prior degrees and orders and only when you have all of them is the Masonic fabric of the Ancient York Rite complete.

Masonic Grand Lodge of Rhode Island, A brief history and explanation of York Rite

Freemasonry in France: The 25 “haute” degrees

The logic here is simple. If there were 25 “haute” degrees in France, there is nothing ancient or particularly meaningful about 33. They just needed more numbers and picked 33 for reasons which I will make clear momentarily. You can see all of this in the following excerpt from a Freemason website.

…the first reference to the Rite appears in old French records where the word “Ecossais,” meaning Scottish, is found. During the latter part of the 17th Century, when the British Isles were torn by strife, many Scots fled to France and resumed their Masonic interests in that country. It is believed that this influence contributed to the use of the word “Scottish.”

In 1732, the first “Ecossais” or Scottish Lodge, was organized in Bordeaux, one of the oldest and most influential Masonic centers in France. The membership included Scottish and English Masons. The years 1738-40 saw the formation of the first “Hauts Grades” or advanced degrees. In 1761, certain Masonic authorities in France granted a patent to Stephen Morin of Bordeaux to carry the advanced degrees across the sea to America. In 1763, Morin established these degrees in the French possessions in the West Indies. What he established consisted of a system of 25 so-called higher degrees which flourished in France, and which were known as the “Rite of Perfection.”

Within a few years after 1763, other degrees were added, until the Rite had a ritual structure of 33 degrees — the first three being exemplified in a Symbolic Lodge if a Grand Lodge with subordinate Lodges existed in the area.

In 1767, Henry Francken, who had been deputized by Morin, organized a Lodge of Perfection in Albany, New York. This was the forerunner of what was to become the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite in the United States.

The Valley of Rochester Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, What Is The Scottish Rite? (access October 15, 2020)

grades” at one point in France, then 33 is completely meaningless. They were just looking for a higher number that could incorporate additional degrees than those _____ brought over from France.

“The French nobility had a fascination for

prestigious and grandiloquent titles

Incidentally, +33 is the code for international direct-dial phone calls to France.

Do not be mistaken. The Freemasons may be reluctant to admit it (though some do and are quoted below), nevertheless, the origin and meaning of eighteen-century “haute” degrees in the Scottish Rite is indistinguishable from the haute couture of today.

Why the name “Scottish Rite?”

A vague reference to the name can be found in a manuscript dating back to 1733: a Lodge #115 meeting at the Devil Tavern near Temple Bar in London was described as a Scotts Masons Lodge. The exact origin of the name, however, remains a mystery to this day.

A plausible explanation might be found in late 17th-century European history. When the British Isles were torn by political and religious conflicts, many Scots from the nobility, particularly from the Stuart dynasty, fled to France to seek King Louis XIV’s protection. A few of them were already Freemasons. They resumed their Masonic activities in St. Germain-en-Laye, near Paris, and at Versailles, the seat of the French royal court. There, the exiled Scots created more Masonic degrees to expand upon the original three. The French nobility had a fascination for prestigious and grandiloquent titles, so to gain acceptance and attract French members to the Craft, the Scots glamorized their new rituals with impressive names such as Prince of Jerusalem, Prince of the Royal Axe, and Knight of the White and Black Eagle, to name a few. Their influence may have contributed to the use of their name for the degrees that eventually became known as the Scottish Rite or “higher” degrees of Freemasonry.

Sources from the 18th century also attest to the existence of a Scottish Rite being practiced in the port of Bordeaux, France, as early as 1743. In 1761 the French Masonic authorities in Paris granted Brother Stephen Morin – a wine merchant from that region – a patent naming him Grand Inspector and “authorizing and empowering him to establish perfect and sublime Masonry in all parts of the world.” Morin traveled to America, taking the advanced degrees with him, first to the West Indies, one of the most important French colonies at the time, where he disseminated their lessons. Shortly thereafter, Morin made Henry Francken — a French-speaking Dutch Mason— a Deputy Inspector, which authorized him to spread the Rite into continental America. In 1767, he created a Lodge of Perfection in Albany, New York, which most historians agree was the seed that became the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of the United States of America in 1801. The Scottish Rite is now well established throughout much of the world.

HigherMasonry.org, The origins of an ancient order (accessed October 15, 2020)

From France to the Lodge of Perfection and finally thirty-three gods

Morin traveled to America, taking the advanced degrees with him, first to the West Indies, one of the most important French colonies at the time, where he disseminated their lessons. Shortly thereafter, Morin made Henry Francken — a French-speaking Dutch Mason— a Deputy Inspector, which authorized him to spread the Rite into continental America. In 1767, he created a Lodge of Perfection in Albany, New York, which most historians agree was the seed that became the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of the United States of America in 1801. The Scottish Rite is now well established throughout much of the world.

Thirty-three gods (Wikipedia)

The Scottish Rite copied the idea of 33 from Vedic

how does the capital Atlanta (think Sir Frances Bacon’s New Atlantis) end up on the 33rd parallel north….

Quote from Scottish Rite Degrees (MIT.edu) for the Scottish Rite degree groupings
There are four coordinate bodies within the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction:

31 deities consisting of 12 Ādityas, 11 Rudras, and 8 Vasus, while the identity of the other two deities that fill out the 33 varies.


From article above: ” In 1767, he created a Lodge of Perfection in Albany, New York, which most historians agree was the seed that became the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of the United States of America in 1801. The Scottish Rite is now well established throughout much of the world. “

Lodge of Perfection, 4°-14° (presiding officer – Venerable Master)

Chapter of Rose Croix, 15°-18° (presiding officer – Wise Master)

Council of Kadosh, 19°- 30° (presiding officer – Commander)
Consistory, 31°- 32° (presiding officer – Master of Kadosh)
xxxxxx grouping according to another website x xxxxxxx

The first set of degrees, from 4th to 14 are part of the “Lodge of Perfection” aspect. The names like Master Traveler, Perfect Master, Master of the Brazen Serpent, Master elect of the temple, Grand Master Architect suggest that the degrees represent knowledge in certain areas.

For example, the 4th degree, called Master Traveler emphasizes duty and the necessity for secrecy in all confidential relationships. The sixth degree, called Master of the Brazen Serpent teaches “that devotion to one’s friends and zealousness in performing one’s duties are rewarding virtues”.

Degrees 15 and 16 are part of the “Council of Princes of Jerusalem” set, with names as Knight of the East or Sword, and Prince of Jerusalem. Further down the road, degrees 17 and 18 are part of the “Chapter of Rose Croix” set, with names as Knight of the East and West and Knight of the Rose Croix.


Oldest lunar calendar identified

“a set of 31 deities consisting of 12 Ādityas, 11 Rudras, and 8 Vasus, while the identity of the other two deities that fill out the 33 varies.”

Vertebral column. 33 Vertebrae. Inter-vertebral disc. Form 1/4 of its length.



It was the night of September 23, 2020 that I began to make headway figuring out what the Freemason 32 and 33 meant. I had lost almost two days work pursuing one possible explanation before I hit a dead end. At first I became discouraged and walked away from the subject as I have so many times in the past. But then I decided to rededicate myself to the study. Previous versions of this section focused on the angles in a right triangle using the Fibonacci sequence 2-3 and 5-8

and went over all my notes, everything I had. Still nothing. Then it hit me. Somethings wrong. It’s been over 200 hundred years. If the Freemason 32 and 33 were rooted in mathematics, someone would have figured it out by now. There can be no doubt about that. mathematics can be positively eliminated. Progress! What else is there?

To answer this question, I first want to look at video clips from researchers who I greatly admire and respect. In other words, let start looking at how others have approached this problem.



The following article was copied from The Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Supreme Council, 33° Southern Jurisdiction, USA website (scottishrite.org) for two reasons. The first is that it is authoritative. This is coming straight from the horse’s mouth. The second reason is that I want to add bold-red highlighting.

This article is adapted from Arturo de Hoyos, “A Brief History of Freemasonry and the Origins of the Scottish Rite,” Scottish Rite Ritual Monitor and Guide (2010), 77–111.

High Degrees before 1801
Speculative Masonry and the birth of the “high degrees”

On June 24, 1717, four London lodges assembled at the Goose and Gridiron Ale House and institutionalized non-operative Freemasonry when they established the Grand Lodge of England and elected its first Grand Master. The original record, if there was one, cannot be found, but was reconstructed and published by Rev.James Anderson in his New Book of Constitutions (1738):

Accordingly on St John Baptist’s Day, in the 3rd year of King George I. A.D. 1717, the ASSEMBLY and Feast of the Free and accepted Masons was held at the foresaid Goose and Gridiron Alehouse.

Before Dinner, the oldest Master Mason (now the Master of a Lodge) in the Chair, proposed a List of proper Candidates; and the Brethren by a majority of Hands elected Mr. Anthony Sayer, Gentleman, Grand Master of Masons. . . .

It should be recalled that when the premiere grand lodge was formed, there were still only two degrees: Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft. In the Edinburgh Register House Ms (1696) the “points of fellowship” were a reference to the Fellow Craft, who received two words taken from 1 Kings 7:21 and 2 Chronicles 3:17. Yet other early documents include hints of a separate higher honor bestowed even before the creation of the grand lodge. It included a unique word that was given to the Masters (senior Fellow Crafts) and was associated with the ritual embrace.The Sloane Ms 3329 also describes the “Master’s grip” given with the embrace:

Their Masters gripe is grasping their right hands in each other placing their four finger’s nails hard upon the Carpus or end of others wrists and the thumb nailes thrust hard directly between the second Joynt of the thumb and the third Joynt of the first ffinger but some say the masters grip is the same I last described only each of their middle ffingers must reach an inch or three barly corns Length higher to touch upon a vein yt comes from the heart.

A remarkable transformation occurred a few years later when a separation of the ritual esotery of the senior Fellow Craft’s honor was used to help create the first “high degree”—the Master Mason’s Degree. “By November, 1725, there was in existence a new degree, a degree intermediate between the Acceptance and the Master’s Part, and it was known as the Fellow-Craft.” Thus, we also read of the earliest known conferral of this new high degree, just eight years after the formation of the premiere grand lodge when, on May 12, 1725, Bro. Charles Cotton received the Master Mason’s Degree. The identity of the authors of the new ritual is not known, nor precisely how the transformation occurred. However, we may compare the creation of the Master Mason’s Degree with that of the “virtual” Past Master’s Degree (now part of American York Rite Masonry), which developed from the private installation of a Master of a Craft Lodge. Also called the “Installed Master” Degree (or ceremonial), it is still performed in many jurisdictions. As a part of the ceremony the (Past) Master is “regularly seated” (installed) in a particular manner and given certain “secrets of the chair.” Obviously, since relatively few Masons have the honor of presiding over a lodge, these secrets are withheld from many. However, the honor became a prerequisite to receiving the Royal Arch Degree. To accommodate this requirement, the installation ceremony and its secrets were transformed into a “virtual” Past Master’s Degree. Similarly, the secrets associated with the honor of being a “Master Mason” (senior Fellow Craft) may have been converted and transformed into the Master Mason’s Degree.

The High Degrees and “Scotch Masons’ Lodges”

When we consider the creation of the Master Mason’s Degree—the first “high degree” added to Craft Masonry—it is a remarkable fact that high degree Masonry is virtually as old as Speculative Freemasonry itself. Other high degrees also followed quickly on the footsteps of the Master Mason’s Degree. As early as 1733 a reference to a “Scotch Masons’ Lodge” appeared in a manuscript list of lodges by Dr. Richard Rawlinson, and the following year, it was again mentioned in a printed list of Masonic Bodies. The early designations “Scotts,” “Scotch,” and “Scottish” refer to a type of Masonry practiced, rather than referring to native Scotsmen. Thus, we read that from 1733–40 the “Scotch Master Masons” Degree was being conferred on “normal” Master Masons. For instance, on July 18, 1740, at the Lodge at the Rummer, Bristol, it was “Order’d & agreed That Bro. Tomson & Bro. Watts & any other member of this Lodge. that are already Master Masons may be made Scotch Master. . . .” By 1734–35 additional degrees were invented, two of which were the “Excellent Mason” and “Grand Mason.” These early “Scotts” (or Scottish) Degrees are ancestors of the Scottish Rite in both name and tradition, and represent a type of Masonry almost as old as the Master Mason’s Degree. The tradition of “Scotts” (or Scottish) Masonry is the second oldest type of high degree Masonry known, even surpassing the antiquity of the Royal Arch Degree.

French haut grades Masonry: Stephen Morin and the Order of the Royal Secret

If the high degrees originated in Britain, they flourished in France. In 1732, an English Lodge, appropriately named Loge L’Anglaise, was founded in Bordeaux, France. This lodge was later chartered by the English Modern Grand Lodge and still exists today. An early offshoot of Loge L’Anglaise was the Loge la Française which, as the name implies, was French. The latter lodge had a penchant for the so-called hauts grades (high degrees), then coming into vogue, and it founded Loge Parfaite Harmonie in 1743. Étienne (Stephen) Morin, who would become important in the history of high degree Masonry, was among the founders of Loge Parfaite Harmonie. The book Le Parfait Maçon, published in 1744, has particular relevance to the development of high degree Freemasonry. In a section on the “Secret of the Scottish Masons” (Secret des maçons écossaise), it introduces another direct ancestor of the high degrees, whose theme remains the basis for the Scottish Rite’s 15°, Knight of the East, and 16°, Prince of Jerusalem:

It is said among the Masons, that there are still several degrees above that of the masters, of which I have just spoken; some say there are six in all, & others go up to seven. Those called Escossais [Scottish] Masons claim that they form the fourth grade. As this Masonry, different from the others in many ways, is beginning to become known in France, the Public will not be annoyed if I relate what I have read about it . . . which seems to give the Escossais a degree of superiority above the Apprentices, Fellows, & ordinary Masters.

Instead of weeping over the ruin of the temple of Solomon, as their brethren do, the Escossais are concerned with rebuilding it. Everyone knows that after seventy years of captivity in Babylon, the Great Cyrus permitted the Israelites to rebuild the temple & the City of Jerusalem; that Zerubabel, of the House of David, was appointed by him [Cyrus] the Chief & leader of that people for their return to the Holy City; that the first stone of the temple was laid during the reign of Cyrus, but that it was not completed until the sixth year of that of Darius, King of the Persians.

It is from this great event that the Escossais derive the epoch of their institution, & although they are later than the other Masons by several centuries, they consider themselves of a superior grade.

At this early period, the French Masonic strongholds were in Bordeaux and Paris. On August 27, 1761, the French Grand Lodge at Paris (the Grand and Sovereign Lodge of St. John of Jerusalem), acting with a body of the superior degrees (the Council of the Emperors of the East and West, Sovereign Écossais Mother Lodge), issued a patent to Morin as a Grand Inspector, “authorizing and empowering him to establish perfect and sublime Masonry in all parts of the world.” Around 1763, Morin created and promulgated a Masonic rite of 25 degrees which he called the “Order of the Royal Secret” or “Order of Prince of the Royal Secret” (sometimes mistakenly called the “Rite of Perfection”). This order included many of the most popular degrees worked at the time. Although it was once commonly believed that the Council of the Emperors of the East and West created the Order of the Royal Secret, recent research suggests that Morin was personally responsible for its organization. There also is compelling evidence that, to bolster his authority, he created and backdated documents known as the Constitutions and Regulations of 1762—an act that was not discovered for more than 220 years. About 1763, Morin introduced the Order of the Royal Secret to Kingston, Jamaica, and by 1764, high degrees were brought to North American soil, when they were established in New Orleans, Louisiana. About this time, Morin empowered an enthusiastic Dutch Mason, Henry Andrew Francken, to establish Masonic Bodies throughout the New World, including the United States. Francken soon sailed to New York, and in 1767, he began to confer the high degrees in Albany. Fortunately, he also transcribed several manuscript copies of the rituals of the Order of the Royal Secret, some of which survive today. These copies are known as the Francken Manuscripts. On December 6, 1768, Francken appointed Moses Michael Hays (or Hayes), of Dutch parentage, a Deputy Inspector General of the Rite, for the West Indies and North America. The Hays patent granted authority to confer all the Degrees of Morin’s Order of the Royal Secret.</> The following year, Francken returned to Jamaica, and by 1780, Hays immigrated to Newport, Rhode Island. In 1781, Hays traveled to Philadelphia, where he met with eight Brethren whom he appointed Deputy Inspectors General over given American States, with the exception of Samuel Myers, who presided over the Leeward Islands in the West Indies in the Caribbean. Barend Moses Spitzer, one of the Deputy Inspectors General, lived in Charleston, S.C., from 1770 to 1781 and moved to Philadelphia where he was appointed Deputy for Georgia and, after traveling briefly abroad, returned to Charleston by 1788. On April 2, 1795, Spitzer appointed the Irish-born John Mitchell, then living in Charleston, a Deputy Inspector General of the Order of the Royal Secret. Colonel Mitchell had served as Deputy Quartermaster General of the Continental Army, and was an acquaintance of George Washington.

High Degrees after 1801
Birth of the Scottish Rite: Charleston, May 31, 1801

On May 24, 1801, John Mitchell made the Reverend Frederick Dalcho (a Prussian, born in London) a Deputy Inspector General of the Order of the Royal Secret, and one week later, on May 31, “the Supreme Council of the 33d Degree for the United States of America, was opened . . . agreeably to the Grand Constitutions” in Charleston, South Carolina, with Col. Mitchell and Rev. Dalcho presiding. The Supreme Council was a superior system to Morin’s Order of the Royal Secret; it administered 33 degrees, including all 25 of Morin’s rite. The traditional authority of the Supreme Council stems from the “Grand Constitution of the 33d degree” (also Grand Constitutions of 1786), ostensibly ratified by Frederick II (“the Great”), King of Prussia. The earliest known copy dates from about 1801–02, and is written in Rev. Dalcho’s hand. Its 18 articles are preceded by the title “Constitution, Statutes, Regulations &c. for the Government of the Supreme Council of Inspectors General of the 33rd and for the Government of all Councils under their Jurisdiction.” The Circular throughout two Hemispheres, or “1802 Manifesto” (the first printed document issued by the Supreme Council), also asserted that Frederick the Great instigated its creation:

On the 1st of May, 5786 [1786], the Grand Constitution of the 33d degree, called the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, was finally ratified by his Majesty the King of Prussia, who as Grand Commander of the order of Prince of the Royal Secret, possessed the Sovereign Masonic power over all the Craft. In the new Constitution this high Power was conferred on a Supreme Council of nine Brethren in each Nation, who possess all the Masonic prerogatives in their own district, that this majesty individually possessed; and are Sovereigns of Masonry.

The involvement of Frederick II, King of Prussia, was repeated in the “History” which was delivered in the original 33° ritual:

The Most Puissant Grand Sovereign—Grand Master Commander in Chief—Sovereign of Sovereigns of the degree of Prince of the Royal Secret, was our Illustrious brother, Frederick the 2:nd King of Prussia. He established this degree, in concert with our brother, his Serene Highness, Louis of Bourbon, Prince of the Blood Royal of France, and other Illustrious characters, who had received the degrees of K.H. and prince of the Royal Secret. . . . This new Degree he called “Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, or Supreme Council of the 33:rd”

Like Morin’s Constitutions and Regulations of 1762, many modern Masonic historians view the Grand Constitutions of 1786 as “traditional” rather than historical documents. After a detailed investigation into its possible origins, Albert Pike accepted the tradition regarding the king’s involvement, and his reputed role in the creation of the Supreme Council, even though there was no direct evidence that he did so. Pike did argue correctly, however, that whatever the origin, the formal adoption of any law forms a legal basis for government. Modern opinion agrees with the latter and maintains that, at a minimum, the stories regarding the origins of the Constitutions of 1762 and 1786 are akin to the legends preserved in the Old Charges, providing a traditional environment for the degrees, just as the Biblical account of King Solomon’s Temple forms the symbolic setting for Craft Freemasonry’s origins.

Scope and authority of the early Supreme Council

The “Supreme Council at Charleston,” as it was sometimes called, was the first Supreme Council of the 33° in the world. It continues to exist today as the Supreme Council, 33°, Southern Jurisdiction, and its see remains in Charleston, although its residence was moved to Washington, D.C., about 1870, and it now sits at the House of the Temple. As the premiere Supreme Council, it naturally exercised authority over the entire country, and Col. Mitchell was referred to as “Grand Commander in the U[nited] States of America,” as well as “President of the Supreme Council of Masons of the United States.” In its early days, the Supreme Council issued “warrants of Constitution” to create Sublime Grand Lodges of Perfection (which administered the 4°–14°), and Grand Councils of Princes of Jerusalem (administering the 15°–16°), but it did not involve itself directly in their government or administration. The Supreme Council only exercised direct control above the 16°, Prince of Jerusalem. This was explained in the Circular throughout two Hemispheres as well as Dalcho’s manuscript copy of the Grand Constitutions of 1786:

[Article] 6th The power of the Supreme Council does not interfere with any degree below the 17th or Knights of the East and West. But every Council and Lodge of Perfect Masons are hereby required to acknowledge them in quality of inspectors General, and to receive them with the high honors to which they are entitled.

This limitation was repeated in the original manuscript ritual of the 33°:

The King on the first of May 5786, formed and established the 33:rd Degree to give some elucidations of the K.H.—The King was conscious, that agreably [sic] to the common course of human nature, he could not live many years; & he conceived and executed the glorious design of investing the Sovereign Masonic power which he held, as Sovereign Grand Commander of the order of Prince of the Royal Secret —in a Council of Grand Inspectors General—

that they might, after his decease, regulate, agreably [sic] to the Constitution and Statutes which he then formed, the government of the Craft in every degree, from the 17:th or Knights of the East & West inclusive, leaving the control over the symbolic Lodge—the Grand, Ineffable and Sublime Lodge of Perfect Masons, and the Knights of the East or sword— to the Grand Council of Princes of Jerusalem, whom he conceived to be justly entitled to that Honor and power.

According to the Circular throughout two Hemispheres, at the time of the Supreme Council’s creation, the 30°, 31°, and 32° collectively constituted the Degree of “Prince of the Royal Secret, Prince of Masons.” This means that only 15 degrees were under direct control of the Supreme Council. The government of the entire system, from the 4°, Secret Master, to the 32°, Royal Secret, inclusive, was not assumed until after the revival of American Freemasonry in the 1840s, following the “Morgan Affair.” Although not previously exercised, the authority to govern the entire system resided with the officers of the Supreme Council, who were “Sovereigns of Masonry,” and “possessed the Sovereign Masonic power over all the Craft.” The high degrees often were referred to as the Ineffable and Sublime (or Superior) Degrees. In the earliest days of the Scottish Rite, the high degrees were conferred only on Past Masters, or virtual Past Masters, of Blue Lodges. Frederick Dalcho’s 4°, Secret Master, ritual (dated 1801), noted, “The Blue Past Master or Candidate, must be examined in the Antechamber (by the Master of Ceremonies) in his three first degrees, and in the secrets of the Chair”; and the Circular throughout two Hemispheres explained that Sublime Masons “communicate the secrets of the Chair to such applicants who have not already received it, previous to their initiation into the Sublime Lodge, but they are at the same time informed that it does not give them rank as Past Masters in the Grand Lodge.” A similar requirement exists in the American York Rite, where candidates become virtual Past Masters prior to receiving the degree of Royal Arch Mason. In 1804, Alexandre-Auguste de Grasse-Tilly, a member of the Supreme Council at Charleston, organized a Supreme Council for France. In an agreement made that year between this newly-created Supreme Council and the Grand Orient of France (which operated as a Grand Lodge), the title “Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite” (Rite Écossais Ancien et Accepté) was used for the first time. Beginning with the administration of Grand Commander Albert Pike in 1859, the name came into general use in the Southern Jurisdiction.

The Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, The Supreme Council, 33°, A. & A.S.R. of Freemasonry, S.J., USA, History of the Rite, accessed October 13, 2020

Albert Pike, the great Masonic symbolist, admitted that there were many points concerning which he could secure no reliable information. In his Symbolism, for the 32° and 33°, he wrote: “I do not understand why the 7 should be called Minerva, or the cube, Neptune.” Further on he added: “Undoubtedly the names given by the Pythagoreans to the different numbers were themselves enigmatical and symbolic-and there is little doubt that in the time of Plutarch the meanings these names concealed were lost. Pythagoras had succeeded too well in concealing his symbols with a veil that was from the first impenetrable, without his oral explanation * * *.”


On May 1, 1813, an officer from the Supreme Council at Charleston initiated several New York Masons into the Thirty-third Degree and organized a Supreme Council for the “Northern Masonic District and Jurisdiction”.

I think what is happening here is that 32 represents the highest possible attainment on a mathematical path and then 33 has an entirely different meaning that harks back to ancient Egypt and the symbolic meaning of

The lunar-solar cycle takes 33 years. The lunar year is approximately 354 days, the solar year has 365 days, this means that it takes 33 years for the cycle to return to the original position.

The modern Russian alphabet consists of 33 letters.

The 33rd Parallel, and the number 33, in short

Mysteries of Parallel 33

33 (number) (Wikipedia)


There are 33 occurrences of the word “evil” in the Book of Enoch

Newton’s temperature scale is from 0° to 33°…

TITLE08 The Great Pyramid – Secrets in Plain Sight
CHANNELSecrets In Plain Sight

(Unclear as to why the above video is here.)

Great collection of 33 stuff…

This YouTube is no longer available. I have a copy. It is only worthwhile for identifying more misinterpretations of 33. 

Research notes

MUST conclude list of others trying to find the meaning with what Peter Dawkins says in https://www.fbrt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Baconian-Rosicrucian_Ciphers.pdf

Maximize use of this reference : https://web.mit.edu/dryfoo/Masons/Misc/SRdegrees.html


see http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/bernheim17.html

History of Freemasonry in France (Wikipedia)