The Symbolism within Rosslyn Chapel

The heyday of Christian symbolism in the western Christian faith was during the medieval period and was most frequently given expression in the numerous European medieval churches and Cathedrals.

Unfortunately, few of us today can readily interpret that symbolism the meaning of which would have been easily understood by a large number of people. At the time of the Reformation (c.1559) much church ornamentation was condemned as idolatrous and destroyed or removed. Symbolism was not condemned per se but the teaching of their meaning declined to the extent that 440 years later few now understand that Christian symbolism, its’ meaning, or how to interpret it. The recent century has seen an accelerated secularisation of western society and this has contributed greatly to the inability to appreciate a true understanding of such symbolism.

Human kind is nothing if not inquisitive and recently people have begun to ask what their ancestors understood such symbolism to be, what individual symbols stood for, and how they were used and appreciated. This recent re-examination of symbolism has emphasised the position of Rosslyn Chapel and introduced numerous hypotheses which attempt to link modern Scottish Freemasonry with the Chapel and the medieval Knights Templar. These recent hypotheses are just that, thoughts, ideas etc., for no proof has yet been produced in support of any of them.* The reader may be interested to learn of the recently published book: An Illustrated Guide to Rosslyn Chapel etc., which discusses these very points. To read a review of that book click here.

The purpose of Rosslyn chapel lies firmly in the Christian tradition of the late Middle Ages. It was founded, 1446, as a Collegiate Church dedicated to St Matthew. For that reason alone Rosslyn Chapel is unremarkable for numerous Collegiate Churches were founded at about the same time. Collegiate Churches could either be additions to existing churches and were established to ensure the salvation of the founder and family by providing for prayers to be said, in perpetuity, by a succession of priests. The church would typically have a 'staff' of a prebendary priest, clerks, choristers, sacrist, chaplains and occasionally canons.

(* It is important to appreciate the substantial differences that exist between Freemasonry as practiced in Scotland and that which exists elsewhere.)

One essential question must be asked: Is Rosslyn Chapel, its history, its symbolism and its function and purpose to be considered in isolation or in relation to the history of Scotland and other Scottish Collegiate Churches? The Rosslyn Templars almost immediately concluded that the latter must be the correct approach. In the first instance a comparison will be made with other collegiate churches in Scotland and a list of these is to be found below. Once these churches have been pictured and described then a comparative and analytical comparision can be made. Thereafter, Rosslyn Chapel and its place in the history of Scotland can be considered.

Rosslyn chapel is not, and was not, an isolated collegiate church and indeed some were very nearby, e.g. Crichton and Dalkeith which are also in Midlothian. A few miles further afield and we find that there are twelve collegiate churches in the Lothians and Edinburgh. Many of these churches are in ruins, e.g. Seton church but which can be visited. Others remain in use, e.g. St Giles, Edinburgh. A few have almost completely disappeared.

The Rosslyn Templars hope to be able to bring details of these other important Christian sites in due course. Access to pages with such information will be provided by hyperlinks in the above table. At the moment there is only one page of this sort - that relating to Seaton Collegiate Church. To access the page dealing with that site click here. 

The collegiate church of Trinity College, Edinburgh, was founded 1466 under the patron age of James III. Despite that royal patronage it, like Rosslyn, was destined never to be completed. Rosslyn was to be in the form of a cruciform collegiate church but was never completed as attested by the existence of the foundations for the uncompleted parts. To see a plan of the ground plan showing the foundations click here. The chapel consists only of a choir, parts of the east transept walls and a sacristy. As a piece of Gothic architecture the chapel is unremarkable in its construction, having in much in common with many other churches of the same period. What does make the chapel stand out in comparison to other similar structures of its time is the profusion of the internal carving which, although of comparatively poor quality, dominates the senses on first visit. Perhaps this is exactly the effect the builder intended for such a small church. Perhaps he knew he could not compete in terms of the sheer scale of other Collegiate churches being built in the area. 

Why Rosslyn Chapel exists is because it was due to one man’s desire to be remembered or even to be immortalised. A collegiate church was specifically designed to do just that by having prayers said for the founder, in perpetuity, in order to save the founder's soul. William St Clair has achieved that aim although it is unlikely that he anticipated that this would be by way of having created a major tourist attraction. That is not a criticism. For individuals have long sought to be remembered to their descendants - be it by family photographs, a family bible, an imposing graveyard monument or a legacy to a charity. Follies, in which this country is rich, have not been interpreted as anything other than a rich man’s desire to be remembered. This is because their use, purpose and meaning is clear and has not been re-interpreted by any others. Rosslyn chapel does not conform to the pattern of one man’s desire to be remembered down the ages because recent writers have chosen to re-interpret a previously accepted version of the meaning inculcated within the chapel. Whether such writers are correct is a matter to be determined on the basis of the evidence and information available from a variety of sources such as this website. (For information as to original sources about Sinclair's building of the chapel you may wish to read about the new book - Genealogie of the Saintclaires of Rosslyn. If so click here).

Symbols have, for most modern authors, been interpreted as nothing other than simple signs - signs with only a single, simple and literal explanation or message. Their interpretation of the symbolic in this way has ensured that it is rejected as having any validity whatsoever. For example: the image of an old white bearded man, dressed in long white flowing robes, sitting on a floating cloud, dispensing his anger at the transgressors of mankind by the use of thunder-bolts, is rejected out of hand by the modern mind as being impossible, literally, and therefore misleading and inaccurate. In essence this is what Karl Marx described as being ‘the opium of the masses’ and whilst he was referring to organised religion he was arguing that what could not be directly experienced by the five human senses, in this case ‘religion’ (of all forms, of all variants, with all its symbolism etc.) was nothing more than a confidence trick, a ‘flim-flam’. It is a conundrum that this materialistic, physical, view of the world has dramatically increased in popularity despite the system born of that irreligious, atheistic, analysis having collapsed. We live in an increasingly secular, material, world but that does not mean that we should fail to explore the possibility of, ‘understanding ourselves, our humanity, why we are here, and where we are going’, etc. 

This modern perception of symbolism is one reason why many Freemasons fine ritual and symbolism meaningless – they have lost the ability to understand that, like the bearded old man, the symbol of, say, the compasses is much more than the image of a measuring instrument. The reasons why we today fail to understand symbolism, be it Masonic or that within Rosslyn chapel, must in part be due to the increasing secular and materialistic world in which we live. Today rational and logical thinking means a refusal to accept that anything is real unless it can be examined using any (or all) of the five senses. If a price tag can be added the so much the better! This way of looking at symbols means that there is only one way of looking at each and only one possible explanation.. This ensures that the complexity of the symbol is reduced to the status of a road sign.

Modern writers who dismiss the image of G-d as an ‘old grey man’ do not understand the symbolism in the first instance and, even worse, go on to suggest what that symbolism ‘really’ means. Their personal interpretations are offered as the ‘real’, ‘true’ or ‘original’ explanations of what we ‘see’ with our eyes rather than with knowledge of the past be it from a variety of traditions.

The reason why such individuals can present such opinions, and have them even considered, is because the number of people in possession of the knowledge necessary for the interpretation of symbolism has dramatically reduced. Years ago such authors would have been the subject of ridicule rather than being fêted. Successive generations have been offered less and less in the way of explanation of the spiritual and more and more of the physical tangible ‘things’. Truly does society suffer from materialism and commercialism that affects every aspect of our lives. Is there not a duty to explain this and, at least, to allow our members to make an informed choice?

The lack of explanation of symbolism since the Reformation, generation after generation, has ensured that the general population no longer understand the symbols that once were understood by all. The ‘fracture’ of the Reformation meant that past symbolism was dislocated from post-Reformation symbolism (of which there was, comparatively, little). 

That ‘fracture’ also exists within Freemasonry. In 1813 the new United Grand Lodge of England decided to de-Christianise (some would argue de-Spiritualise) Masonic ritual. From then on the meaning of Masonic symbolism, with its Old Testament roots, ceased to be explained, in detail, to a candidate. The ancient penalties of the obligation are no longer given and therefore there is no explanation of the sign. The word has been changed due to outside pressure. The time is nigh when Freemasonry shall cease to exist in its present form. There are some of us who hope to be alive and prepare for its renaissance.

Signs Vs Symbols

A sign is something that is intended to convey information, unambiguously, i.e. Low Bridge Ahead. What you read is what is real - that what is ahead is a structure of a certain height. The sign allows for no other interpretation or explanation. 

A symbol on the other hand exists to convey an intangible, a concept, an idea, a belief, something spiritual etc. Unlike a sign it is intended to work on several levels. Thus a sign can never become a symbol but we are constantly reducing symbols to the status of signs and loosing more and more of our spirituality in the process.

Symbols are things that are loaded with symbolic meaning. Thus it can be a variety of things – visual images and written words. Occasionally we find these in combination. 

So how do symbols ‘work’? The best way I can think of to explain this is by analogy. Imagine that you are in a room that has a window to the landscape beyond. The window is the symbol is the window and it can assist you in seeing the landscape outside the room. At a literal level the window is made of wood and glass and if you focus, closely, on the window the landscape beyond almost completely disappears and cannot be seen let alone understood. However, as you use the symbol, the window, and re-focus on the view beyond it becomes clear. The symbol has helped you see from your world, the room, into another world beyond – the landscape. The symbol is an aid, in this instance a visual aid, but in order to be able to use it you must understand that it is more that just wood and glass. Unfortunately the modern mind can only perceive the symbol in as wood and glass and usually the curtains are closed!

From this analogy we can see that the symbol works on more than one level if we allow it to. Symbols generally work on at least four different levels:-

1 The obvious or literal level (general – obvious to all)

2 The allegorical level. That is, not only is the symbol a 'window' but that can also be considered to be one that can be seen through - a window on the world etc. (general – can be understood in this way by most people)

3 The personal level. This is specific to an individual who in addition to the above understands that the window provides an opportunity to glimpse and interpret another world. (specific)

4 The mystical level. The symbol, now fully operational, allows the individual to experience the numinous. (specific)

Although divided into four levels it must be made clear that these are artificial divisions only to assist with the explanation. It is quite possible to appreciate some, or all, of these levels at the same time.

Another way to explain how symbols work is to describe it as a junction between two realities, the conscious and unconscious, the meeting point between the microcosm and the macrocosm etc.

In describing symbols and their interpretation in this abstract manner the reader will note that there is also a ‘symbolism of numbers’ inherent in the discussion which is dominated by the number 2. For example: inner world, the outer world; the room and the landscape; sign and symbol; conscious and unconscious etc. This is no coincidence as the symbol is positioned between two ‘things’.

The large majority of people only understand the interpretation of symbols at the first level (see above) having lost the ability to read them at any higher level. Fewer people still can 'read' the symbols at the second, allegorical, level. Very, very, few ever reach levels three or four. This inability to read symbols at this levels lead many to seek understanding at a literal level and without the knowledge of Christian symbolism come to incorrect conclusions. Suggesting a Masonic interpretation for the symbolism within Rosslyn Chapel in an example of this erroneous process.

It is interesting, therefore, that Freemasonry utilising, as it does, Christian material (albeit Old Testament, and therefore also Muslim, Jewish, Zoroastrian etc.), soon began to adopt some Christian symbolism and iconography. Freemasonry cannot be used to interpret Christian symbolism – it must be the other way about as Christianity pre-dates Freemasonry by many centuries. However, it would be a further error to believe that Christian symbols as appropriated and used by Freemasonry can be given a Christian interpretation (although some people mistakenly attempt to do so). This latter point is very important but virtually ignored by the majority of writers. Freemasons copied Christian, and other religions, symbolism but applied a different interpretation, Thus a symbol within a Jewish Synagogue, a Muslim Temple or a Christian Church cannot be said to be Masonic although such symbols might be identical.

G-d is occasionally depicted in Christian images as the Great Architect of the Universe (G.A.O.T.U.) as shown below.

THE GREAT ARCHITECT OF THE UNIVERSE (T.G.A.O.T.U.)

Bible Moralisée. c.1250. © Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek

From as early as the middle of the thirteenth century G-d is depicted as a the Great Architect of the Universe. Above he is shown to be measuring, or circumscribing the universe, which he has just created. Another interpretation is that G-d is depicted as calculating his plans for the creation of the Universe. One other, quiet reasonable interpretation, is that G-d having measured and calculated the elements required is about to create the 'Big Bang' which brought our present existence into physical being.

© The William Blake Archive

Brother William Blake (1757 - 1827) shows G-d in the process of creation. The dark ‘matter’ between the two points of the compasses represent all matter which shall be moulded into all creation, G-d’s creation, and all creation is united at the point of conjunction of the two ‘legs ‘ of the compasses in the Great Architect’s hand.

How does one ‘get into’ the head of someone who died 400, 4000, or 50 years ago? How can people today understand the past? Is is possible through their ‘remnants’ to obtain an understanding. It is impossible to experience or relive their lives yet symbolism is an attempt to do just that albeit on a different level. Blake, as an example, left for posterity a large number of images which he intended would provoke the viewer to further explore and therefore try to understand his view of the world, his opinions and attitudes. He did not, as far as the writer is aware, specifically challenge Freemasons to contemplate some of his work from a Masonic point of view. Perhaps he did so subtly? Has anyone, Freemason or not, attempted a Masonic interpretation of his work, or parts thereof, at least?

Specific Symbolism

The stone masons of the middle ages were nothing is not inventive and whilst we shall generally refer to those who built and adorned Rosslyn Chapel it should always be bourn in mind that those stone masons were of a variety of skills. The lowest degree of stone mason were those hacked stone at the quarry. Those of the highest degree were those sculptors who carved the finest statues etc. The remains of both exist today. The fine carver of statutes has suffered more than the hewer of stone. Why? Well the rough hewer made stones which remain with us today in Holyrood Palace, Edinburgh Castle etc. The skill of the stone carver as demonstrated in religious statues remind us of their skill. What must be bourn in mind is that the individuals concerned were not undertaking the work for the sake of promoting themselves but in order only to glorify G-d. This is why the names of the individual masons who built Rosslyn Chapel are unknown. They did not assign their name, or mark, to their work except to identify them for payment. Their marks on stone, essential for payment for their work, were exclusive to each man. The use of another mason’s mark was the equivalent of stealing a fellow masons wages as payment was based on the mark on each carved stone.

Interestingly we find that numerous custodians of buildings make a great play on the existence of marks, on stone, within 'their' churches etc. Rosslyn Chapel is a very good example of this. Unfortunately, many are unaware of the actual use and purpose of masons’ marks. The origin and purpose of these marks is confidential to practitioners of the original art but, fortunately, two Rosslyn Templars have been initiated into this arcane branch of masonry (not Freemasonry) and thus the lore of the Rosslyn marks will be preserved and perpetuated.

To be continued...

To read a discussion of Masonic Symbolism click here.

[ Home ] [ Up ]

Send mail to Robert@RosslynTemplars.org.uk with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2002 - 2008 The Rosslyn Templars
Last modified: Saturday, 19 January 2008 17:05:03