En:The Alchemy of Science and Mysticism

The Alchemy of Science and Mysticism

Alain Bauer y Ariel Godwin: Isaac Newton’s Freemasonry: The Alchemy of Science and Mysticism (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2007), xii+146 pp.,

$14.95, Pbk, ISBN: 1-59477-172-3.

Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica was undoubtedly one of the

most important scientific texts in the age of Enlightenment. Newton’s philosophy

exerted profound influence on the intellectual life of the eighteenth century. As

the official birth of freemasonry was almost coincident with the emergence of

Newtonianism, it is not surprising that efforts were made to establish a connection

between the figure of Newton and freemasonry. Judging by its title alone, Alain

Bauer’s Isaac Newton’s Freemasonry: The Alchemy of Science and Mysticism also tries to

discuss the possibility of such a connection. The back cover depicts freemasonry as an

indispensable element of the Enlightenment project: ‘Freemasonry […] emerged in

the seventeenth century and represented something new—an amalgam of alchemy

and science that allowed the creative genius of Isaac Newton and his contemporaries

to flourish.’ Unfortunately, the title and the cover are somewhat misleading, as the

author does not uncover a direct link between the figure of Newton and Freemasonry,

and does not discuss the indirect connection in detail either.

The actual body of the text is not longer than 86 pages, which does not give much

opportunity to examine an issue of such magnitude in detail, but this is not the intent

here, as the book has the modest objective of drawing attention to the topic.

Bauer’s work begins with a nice summary of the different approaches to masonic

historiography. The author rightfully states that the mythological, romantic view

on freemasonry that mixes legend with factual data is no longer acceptable and

advocates scientific criteria in the writing of masonic history. In the light of this

statement it is somewhat surprising that he should claim that Robert Lomas’ views

on the doubtful connection between freemasonry and the Knight Templars ‘still

merit examination’ (p. 34).

It is evident that the research on the genesis of freemasonry cannot be imagined

without the analysis of its intellectual environment, namely the seventeenth and

eighteenth centuries. In his short book Bauer intends to present ‘the swirl of historical,

sociological and religious influences that sparked the spiritual ferment and

transformation of that time.’ Considering the objective of the book, it is easy to understand

that the description of the social context of the seventeenth and eighteenth

centuries is not really detailed. It cannot be overlooked, however, that Bauer overemphasizes

the role of freemasonry in shaping the contemporary intellectual milieu.

The book, for instance, exaggerates Sir Robert Moray’s and Elias Ashmole’s importance

in the establishment of the Royal Society (p. 41), and suggests that the organization

borrowed rules from masonic lodges (p. 50). When discussing the possible precursors

of the Society, Bauer mentions the Invisible College, the Society of Antiquarians and

the Gresham College but fails to recognize the importance of Samuel Hartlib’s circle.

The author could have used Michael Hunter’s books more extensively as points of

reference instead of citing popular best-sellers.

134 Journal for Research into Freemasonry and Fraternalism

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2010.

Although the book proposes to clarify the connection between Newton and

Freemasonry, it does not present any substantial biographical element of Newton’s

life, which could be associated with freemasonry. Bauer offers little more than a

listing of the most important events of Newton’s life over three pages (pp. 53–56.).

He could have provided a more detailed account of Newton’s possible masonic affiliations

by referring to his friendship with John Desaguliers—a luminary of modern

freemasonry. However, this is discussed only in a few passing sentences. It is also

strange that although listed in the bibliography, Bauer does not cite Margaret Jacob’s

Newtonians and the English Revolution 1689–1720.

The illustration of Newton’s attitude towards Rosicrucianism is also problematic.

Bauer states that the Rosicrucian philosophy had some influence on Newton’s

intellectual pursuits (p. 69). Although Newton’s library contained copies of the

Rosicrucian manifestos, it does not follow from this that he was sympathetic towards

the movement. In his writings Newton devoted only a small passage to the group,

in which he comments on the myth of Christian Rosenkreuz as the ‘history of that

imposture.’

Some of the numerous appendices attached to the text are apparently irrelevant

regarding the purpose of the book. For instance, there is no obvious reason to include

the timeline of the development of French freemasonry. The text also contains some

unfortunate spelling mistakes, for example, the seventeenth-century antiquarian

William Camden, is incorrectly spelled more than once as William Cambden. Closer

editing should have caught such errors.

To sum up, in spite of its exaggerations and hasty conclusions the book more or

less accomplishes its main objective of directing attention to this intriguing topic.

Bauer’s work leaves much room for further research.

FRIGYES HAUSZ

Frigyes Hausz is a graduate student, Department of English Studies, University of Szeged

Szeged, Egyetem u. 2, H-6722, Hungary

E-mail: frigyes.hausz@gmail.com