Talk:Freemasonry
 | Freemasonry B‑class | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
WikiMasons?
Are there any other Wikipedians who're Masons? --PaxEquilibrium 23:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Lots. Why? Blueboar 23:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Never met another. --PaxEquilibrium 22:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Now you have :>) ... indeed most of the regular editors to this page are Brother Masons (with a few anti-Masons thrown in to keep us on our toes). Blueboar 04:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- You may be interested in this: Category:Wikipedians in the Freemasons :) --Thisisbossi 13:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Although clearly some of the people on that list are not Masons. (And some others including myself just as certainly are) --Bolognaking 20:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well it's based on the userbox usage which claims that the individual is a Freemason. Now I'd agree that some of them might just like the userbox, but surely not that many ;)
- ALR 20:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Pythagorean Brotherhoood
Most definitely a "not proven" fringe theory... the vast bulk of historical evidence does not support this theory... documented evidence says that FM was either a decentant of operative guilds or made up whole cloth around 1600s. perhaps it could be added to History of Freemasonry if properly sourced, but too Fringe for the main article. Blueboar 01:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
US Presidents
Given that this article is very long, and that we are attempting to cut things or move them to sub-articles, I don't think we need a section on the US Presidents that were Masons (as has twice now been added by an anon editor). Other than that, I have no real objection to the material. I simply think it would fit better in one of the sub-articles, such as History of Freemasonry. Blueboar 22:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Given that it's not that many, and it's been less frequent as time goes on, and that they're all listed in the List of Famous Freemasons, I don't think we need it at all in either article. MSJapan 23:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- No problem with that. Blueboar 23:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- I concur with BB - redundancy is the bane of Wiki. :) Bdevoe 20:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- No problem with that. Blueboar 23:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Problems with new template
Toussaint has added a new template to the bottom of almost all of the Freemasonry articles (it was deleted from this article) ... This is an OK concept, but the execution was flawed. I have already caught a few errors - for example, because he used the article entitled List of Grand Lodges recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England as a section header, and placed links to all of the articles about various Grand Lodge under that head, he ended up implying that some GLs and GOs (such as the Grand Orient of Italy) are recognized when actually they are not. I have corrected those errors I could find... but people may want to check the info (at Template:Freemasonry) to see if there are other problems I did not catch.
Given that he added the template to so many articles, it is probably easier to correct the template rather than delete it from each article. Blueboar 20:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd probably delete it anyway for reasons stated on the template talk page, but I hacked it down quite a bit in the meantime. Good idea, bad execution. MSJapan 01:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Idea for new section
Would anyone be interested in writing about the lodges that were established in British colonies in Empire days? I know very little about Freemasonry, but I'm curious about the history of Masonic activity in (for example) Africa, the subcontinent, Malaysia - places in which the lay person might not expect to find a Masonic presence. Readers might find a useful starting point here http://homepage.eircom.net/~lawe/MASONICFOR.htm Regards, Notreallydavid 11:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- While this sounds like an interesting subject, I feel that it would belong naturally in the article History of Freemasonry, and not here. After all, this article is currently at 65kb, which is a wee bit more than the suggested lenght. And btw; why would a layperson not expect to find masons in the places you mention? WegianWarrior 12:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- This should definitely be added to History of Freemasonry... it is a topic that I have been meaning to address in that article for quite a while. I did some preliminary research on the foundation and growth of Masonry in India and Australia, but want to do more. Thanks for the nudge. Blueboar 13:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Blueboar, if you need help with this, please let me know. I live in southeastern Ontario, where the United Empire Loyalists settled after leaving the US in the late-1700's. Some of the lodges in this region (Kingston, Belleville, etc.) are tied to the history of Canada (Sir John A. MacDonald, first Prime Minister of Canada, belonged to a lodge in Kingston - his regalia is on display in the atrium; quite fascinating...but I digress...) I would be interested in assisting with research for a section on this, and perhaps even lead it for Canada. Thoughts? --Absalom (4B54L0M) 19:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds great. The History of Freemasonry article does need work. As for advice... Keep it as general as possible (ie focus on all of Canada, not just one province) and try to keep it short. Thanks. Blueboar 14:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Blueboar, if you need help with this, please let me know. I live in southeastern Ontario, where the United Empire Loyalists settled after leaving the US in the late-1700's. Some of the lodges in this region (Kingston, Belleville, etc.) are tied to the history of Canada (Sir John A. MacDonald, first Prime Minister of Canada, belonged to a lodge in Kingston - his regalia is on display in the atrium; quite fascinating...but I digress...) I would be interested in assisting with research for a section on this, and perhaps even lead it for Canada. Thoughts? --Absalom (4B54L0M) 19:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- This should definitely be added to History of Freemasonry... it is a topic that I have been meaning to address in that article for quite a while. I did some preliminary research on the foundation and growth of Masonry in India and Australia, but want to do more. Thanks for the nudge. Blueboar 13:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Ancients or Antients ?
Refer to the edits by 4B54L0M, where s/he changed from ancient to antient. Which form would be the best to use? Would it make sence to - the first time the term is mentioned - to say something like "ancient (sometimes spelled antient)" or simular? WegianWarrior 06:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- "Ancient (sometimes spelled antient)" is a very good idea. Only those very familiar with Masonic History will understand the "antient" version of the spelling. if we used the latter version, we would constently have well meaning but uninformed editors swinging by to "correct" the article... not to mention the spelling bots. Blueboar 13:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Good point Blueboar - There was some inconsistency in the article regarding the use of ancient and antient. I agree with you - many will try to correct it, albeit in a well-meaning manner. Also, if the article is supposed to be objective, then we should use WegianWarrior's suggestion.
- First time on this page, and have added to my watchlist - hope I can contribute some meaningful items, and help police its disfacement (such as happened yesterday when the history section became an Islamic rant). Should I stumble on that again, how do I restore the original text? BTW - Royal Edward #585 AF&AM GRC Kingston Ontario Canada --Absalom (4B54L0M) 17:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Welcome to the page Absalom. FYI I have added the parenthetical on the spelling (I had to drop a different parenthetical about it being called the "Athol" Grand Lodge, as I could not figure out a way to keep that and the sentence syntax... but as the "Athol" tag is even more obscure than the Antients one, I don't think it hurts the article not to mention it.)
- As for vandalism... unfortunately this happens. Quite a lot actually. You can revert to non-vandalized versions by clicking on the history button, then selecting the last clean version (by clicking on the date/time text, and not by clicking one of the 'see differences' buttons)... this will bring up the old text. Click on "edit this page" and save without making any changes. Remember to add an edit summary with "Rv vandalism" or simply "Rvv". Blueboar 17:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, Blueboar - I appreciate the advice regarding reversing vandalism. That should be posted somewhere (oh, wait, now it is)!
- I'll do my best to check in regularly, and will discuss potential content changes here, or on the various other talk pages before posting - unless I find an item I believe to be 100% factually incorrect, or in need of clarification (in other words, I will use common sense). Cheers. --Absalom (4B54L0M) 05:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
New RFC at Jahbulon
re: unencyclopedic tag. Please add your comments. Blueboar 04:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
ordering of appendix sections
We just had a minor back and forth on the ordering of the appendix sections, and one of the comments said (nope, see Wikipedia:Annotated article and WP:Cite: correct order is 1) see also, 2) notes and references, 3) external links) which, frankly really ticks me off to no end, because neither one of those sections has layout as a policy issue, because it ISN'T, layout is a guideline, as noted at the guide to layout, which says It is okay to change the sequence of these appendices, but the Notes and References sections should be next to each other. For example, you may put "Further reading" above "Notes and references" or vice versa.. So, for Bog's sake, please don't go citing guidelines as if they were policy.--Vidkun 17:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
citations
The lead should not have anywhere near this many citations. Everything that appears in the should be a summary of something that appears in the body and is sourced there. The citations on every phrase are distracting and break up the text, and moving them into the main body will cut down on the density and increase readability. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 01:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm guessing you missed this which suggests that references in the lead section are allowed. Consider, the standard is WP:V, and if something in the lead needs to be verified, assuming the reader will find the reference in the main body is probably not the best idea.--Vidkun 16:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- I will go one step further... the first few paragraphs of this article are not really a standard "lead" (ie a few paragraphs that tells the reader what is in the rest of the article. Rather, it is a basic introduction to the overall topic of 'what is Freemasonry' (one that gives actual information not found in the rest of the article). This is due to a conscious choice NOT to follow the standard format. This article's topic is far too complex to summarize in a standard lead. Blueboar 16:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Whilst I'm not convinced by the argument that the intro has too many citations I would agree that it's quite clunky and doesn't read well. In fact the whole article needs a thorough going over to bring it back into a coherent whole, at the moment the whole does not exceed the sum of the parts. However having thought about it a few times I'm not sure if I could take the inevitable trauma of trying to do it, because I'm conscious that there will be interminable line by line criticism of any effort from some quarters.
- In terms of the intro itself it is a little focussed on the privacy aspect at the expense of what the craft is actually about. Also the And X says.... style isn't a particularly academic tone. We're not using citations consistently, at times they're out in full, at others they're referenced in the footnotes.
- I think we perhaps need to recognise that a somewhat obsessive approach to demanding references from some editors has led to the rather clumsy style.
- I think the content is fair at the moment, we probably need to put a bit of effort into turning it into something more readable and whilst recognising that some people to appear to hobby-horse certain aspects we perhaps need to be more resistant to the clumsiness which results from pandering to that.
- ALR 17:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't agree on the need for nonstandard format. It spends most of the lead expounding on the precise nature of its secrecy and opinions about it, the sort of discussion that belongs in a section on secrecy in the body. You can give a couple of sentence summary in the lead and thus have room for at least a historical and organizational outline as well as a description of their secrecy. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well, then, be bold and write it.--Vidkun 17:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, "Freemasons are proud of their heritage and are happy to share it," sounds peacocky. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Masonic Schooling Link
I've deleted the link just posted (A child's experience at a UK Masonic boarding school in the 1940s). It's obviously a sad story, but I odn't think it is relevant to the contents of this page. Perhaps it would sit more happily on a page about teh specific school (if such a page exists), or on a more general schooling article. Hackloon 23:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a reminder to all...
For those of you who are regular contributors, please check the page history before editing anew. MSJapan 00:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Best wishes for a happy New Year
Fraternally and editorially, Blueboar 01:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Copywrite issues
Please check out "Category:Masonic images"... these seem mostly to be logos of various Masonic organizations and Grand bodies... I have no problems with any of the images except that I am concerned that some of them may be under copywrite (and thus should be deleted). Perhaps we should contact the bodies involved and get permission? Blueboar 02:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Logos of organizations can be used as low resolution images to illustrate the organization in question, according to Wikipedia:Logos. However, there are exceptions, but I don't think these fall into them. Hope that helps :) Chtirrell 04:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Cultural References
This is an interesting discussion at the Village Pump, on having a "Cultural references" section in articles. The basic idea is to get rid of them. The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles and the Essay Wikipedia:Trivia. I really don't have a problem with the Cultural References section in this article, although much of it is clearly trivia. However, we are looking for ways to shorten the article, and cutting the section would be one way to do this. Alternatively, we could keep the section, but trim it ... setting a high standard for what constitutes a "Cultural Reference". Any thoughts? Blueboar 13:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- How about trimming it, setting - as you suggest - a high standard, and spin the rest out in to a seperate article? That way we'll avoid trouble with editors reverting to get 'their' favorite bit of trivia in. The trouble off course would be where to put the line... WegianWarrior 15:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have no problem with trimming if that is the way people want to go... the point being raised by the discussion at the Pump is that 'trivia' should be cut. I can think of several items listed in the section that I think fall into that category. Basically, I would cut anything where Freemasonry was not central to the reference. Under this idea, things like the Magic Flute would stay (as the opera is majorly influenced by Freemasonry), as would reference to Kipling's "the Man Who Would Be King" (Freemasonry being central to the plot)... while things like the fact that "Frank Ross is buried by members of his lodge in Charles Portis's novel True Grit" or that "There are references to Masonic Ladies' Nights in several of John Mortimer's Rumpole of the Bailey stories" are trivial and should be cut.
- Obviously some of the references will have to be discussed on an individual basis. I will do a first round to get rid of the absolute fluff... if people think I am on the right track we can look at the next level... if people disagree, they can revert me. Blueboar 21:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I sort of enjoy the type of trivia which you removed. I posted my viewpoint to the Village Pump discussion, so I'll just go with whatever the consensus is. --Thisisbossi 21:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
OK, on to phase II - Not listing the definite keeps mentioned above, here are the rest... I think they need to be looked at individually:
- Pierre Bezhukov, one of the main characters in Leo Tolstoy's novel War and Peace, becomes a Freemason.
- I am inclined to keep this as I think Masonry is central to the character's actions and thoughts... but we should probably expand if we do keep.
- Agreed with keeping it and also agreed with expanding it with 2 or 3 sentences, at least, though I do not know much of the subject. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I am inclined to keep this as I think Masonry is central to the character's actions and thoughts... but we should probably expand if we do keep.
- Several references to Freemasonry and its rituals are made in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories, notably in "The Red-Headed League" and "The Valley of Fear". Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was raised a Freemason in 1887.
- I would love to keep this, but how extensive are the references? If just passing refs, we should cut.
- As with Poe, I believe they are only passing references, as are the references in various Rumpole stories. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed and Sir Doyle is already mentioned in the List of Famous Freemasons, so I'm fine with that cut, as well. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- As with Poe, I believe they are only passing references, as are the references in various Rumpole stories. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would love to keep this, but how extensive are the references? If just passing refs, we should cut.
- Freemasons feature heavily in Robert Shea's and Robert Anton Wilson's satire, "The Illuminatus! Trilogy".
- Anyone know something about this?
- I do not. If the Freemasons are indeed a key device within the book, then I'd like to see this included with at least 2-3 sentences worth of info explaining their importance to the literature. A topic on "Freemasonry In Literature" may be helpful. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Anyone know something about this?
- John Cleese, and other cast members, satirize Freemasons in the "How to recognise a Freemason" and "Architect's Sketch" sketches of Monty Python's Flying Circus.
- I think this is a definite keep, especially the "how to recognise" sketch, but others may disagree.
- While superficially it might seem to fall into Village Pump's "Family Guy" class, in this case it takes on a central role to the skit rather than a passing reference. I'd support keeping it. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think this is a definite keep, especially the "how to recognise" sketch, but others may disagree.
- The Freemasons are satirized in an episode of The Simpsons, titled "Homer the Great", as The Ancient Society of Stonecutters, a secret organisation that controls everything from the British Crown to the Academy Awards.
- I would actually keep this one as well.
- Agreed for the same reasons as the previous Monty Python sketch. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would actually keep this one as well.
- Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco deals with Masonic themes.
- I'm not really sure about this one. Masonry is not the central theme, but it is mentioned a fair amount.
- If the Freemasons are indeed a key device within the book, then I'd like to see this included with at least 2-3 sentences worth of info explaining their importance to the literature. A topic on "Freemasonry In Literature" may be helpful. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure about this one. Masonry is not the central theme, but it is mentioned a fair amount.
- Dan Brown's novels, Angels and Demons, The Da Vinci Code and The Solomon Key also draw heavily on supposed Masonic and Christian lore and symbolism.
- Angels and Deamons should probably go (very little Freemasonry in it from what I remember). DaVinci Code is iffy (he gets most of it wrong, but does discuss Freemasonry a fair amount), and while I have not read Solomon Key, I gather Freemasonry figures a lot.
- DaVinci the movie mentions the word Masonic all of once in the entire film, so I wonder how plot-central it really is in the book. It may need a qualifiying statement. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The DaVinci code book mentions Freemasonry a little bit more than that (but not much more)... mostly in passing, and in the context of being a front for the Priory of Sion (yeah, I know... but). Has Solomon Key even come out yet? Blueboar 20:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- On Angels & Demons, The DaVinci Code, and Solomon Key... as stated above, Brown's first two books really don't talk all that much about Freemasonry except tangentially... and according to this Solomon Key is not out yet (and is actually a regected working title). Given this, I am going to cut the reference. If his new book does center around Freemasonry we can add that when it comes out. Blueboar 20:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- While I agree that the DaVinci Code is a piece of fiction, the general populace nonetheless associates its themes with that of Freemasonry. Due to the ongoing popularity of the book and movie, I feel that references to Dan Brown's works should be mentioned and expanded upon as to some of the more prominent truths and/or inaccuracies (though I suspect that in doing so, it may be a slippery slope list of anything and everything right or wrong with the book -- quite possibly leading to controversy and edit wars). --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The DaVinci code book mentions Freemasonry a little bit more than that (but not much more)... mostly in passing, and in the context of being a front for the Priory of Sion (yeah, I know... but). Has Solomon Key even come out yet? Blueboar 20:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- DaVinci the movie mentions the word Masonic all of once in the entire film, so I wonder how plot-central it really is in the book. It may need a qualifiying statement. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Angels and Deamons should probably go (very little Freemasonry in it from what I remember). DaVinci Code is iffy (he gets most of it wrong, but does discuss Freemasonry a fair amount), and while I have not read Solomon Key, I gather Freemasonry figures a lot.
- The plot of the 2004 movie National Treasure revolves heavily around the Freemasons and is somewhat unusual in that it depicts them in a benign light.
- Sadly, this is a keep... while absolute garbage as far as fact goes, the plot is all about Freemasons.
- Agreed for much the same reason as DaVinci Code. As compared to Dan Brown's works: what this film lacks in popularity, it makes up for in additional references to Freemasonry (be they accurate or not). --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sadly, this is a keep... while absolute garbage as far as fact goes, the plot is all about Freemasons.
- In The Baron in the Trees Italian writer Italo Calvino includes Masonic Lodges branching out into the lands of Ombrosa with the protagonist of the novel, Cosimo di Rondo, mysteriously and supposedly involved with them.
- Any idea on this? I have never heard of it.
- Neither have I. If the Freemasons are indeed a key device within the book, then I'd like to see this included with at least 2-3 sentences worth of info explaining their importance to the literature. A topic on "Freemasonry In Literature" may be helpful. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Any idea on this? I have never heard of it.
- Katherine Kurtz and Deborah Turner Harris use Freemasonry in their series "The Adept", most notably in "The Adept Book Two: The Lodge of the Lynx", and in Kurtz's American Revolution historical novel "Two Crowns for America", which links Freemasonry and Jacobitism.
- I don't know about the Adept book, but Freemasonry is indeed central to "Two Crowns". Probably a keep
- I am not particularly familiar with any of them. If the Freemasons are indeed a key device within the book, then I'd like to see this included with at least 2-3 sentences worth of info explaining their importance to the literature. A topic on "Freemasonry In Literature" may be helpful. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know about the Adept book, but Freemasonry is indeed central to "Two Crowns". Probably a keep
- Brad Meltzer discusses Freemasonry in his 2006 novel, The Book of Fate.
- Anyone read it? I know he puts the Square and Compasses symbol on the front cover, but is Freemasonry central to the book? Blueboar 14:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've seen it. As Brad Meltzer is a comics writer, I thought this was actually a book about Dr. Fate when I saw the title. Our GL librarian has it on display, but apparently it's got nothing really to do with Masonry at all. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Anyone read it? I know he puts the Square and Compasses symbol on the front cover, but is Freemasonry central to the book? Blueboar 14:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
On a related note, maybe all the trivial stuff deserves a mention someplace. Maybe save it for another article? It serves to illustrate something, obviously, if so many films and books feel a need to incorporate a reference. MSJapan 20:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- If the Freemasons are indeed a key device within the book, then I'd like to see this included with at least 2-3 sentences worth of info explaining their importance to the literature. A topic on "Freemasonry In Literature" may be helpful. I also agree with MSJapan's recommendation to keep all these tidbits within its own ___location, as my posting to the Village Pump discussion indicates. --Thisisbossi 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Society with secrets
Yes, I too have heard this phrase from (former-/) Masons.
- "It is an esoteric society only in that certain aspects are private;[4] Freemasons have stated that Freemasonry has, in the 21st century, become less a secret society and more of a "society with secrets."[5][6][7] "
However, this does set off my BS detector just a little. The Masons have always been a "society with secrets", and this is just a semantic variation on "secret society". They have long publicised their existence, but not their rituals. It was only after the initiation ritual became common knowledge that they have performed it publicly. --MacRusgail 19:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- You yourself point out the reasoning behind this language ... while the fraternity may have once been a "secret society" in a traditional sense, they no longer are. The rituals have became common knowledge, their membership rolls are public, their meeting houses are prominent, etc. ... in short it is no longer "secret". Thus the shift from "secret society" (which in todays world has negative, "conspiracy theory" type conotations) to "society with secrets". Blueboar 19:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Membership and religion section unclear
Specifically:
[2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence] "A wide range of faiths, drawn from the Abrahamic religions, other monotheistic religions, or non-monotheistic religions, (subject to candidates answering Yes to the Supreme Being question), include, for example, Buddhists and Hindus."
What's the point of this sentence? It has an awkward construction and I don't know what it's trying to say. I doubt it's even correct grammatically. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.187.32.169 (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC).
- I have fixed the section. Blueboar 13:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Mozart and Freemasonry
Masonic Funeral Music, by Mozart, K. 477 - Does it have anything to do with Freemasons?