This article is from the September 2023 issue of Fraternal Review titled The Rise of Rhetoric.
Rhetoric is more than using the right words and phrases to convince people of your argument. Within the field of rhetoric, or—to use a more modern term—persuasion, there are specific techniques. Here, we will explore texts from over the last millennia that are directly relevant to Freemasonry today or to the history of Freemasonry. As we do so, we will look at three techniques: (1) agnomination, (2) appeal to authority, and (3) euphemism. As you will see, while all of the main texts are centuries old (and in one case, almost a thousand years old), modern day examples, almost identical in structure, can still be found. Let us begin with the earliest.
AGNOMINATION:
Somewhere between 1150 and 1175 C.E., the master stonemason Richard of Durham, England, carved a baptismal font with scenes of foliage, people, and animals. On one panel of the font, he also depicts a stonemason with a hammer and chisel. And, above it, he carved the following declaration: Ricard he me iwrokte ⁊ to þis merð ʒer ** me brokte.
Giving his statement rhetorical power, Richard has used agnominatio. This technique rhymes two different words in the same sentence; in this case iwrokte (wrought, made) with brokte (brought). As a whole, the statement can be translated “Richard, he wrought me and to this mirth brought me.” We can have no doubt that the plain, undecorated stone font would be one without joy or mirth (merð).
Perhaps the most similar, and well-known, statement of this kind in modern history is that of defense lawyer Johnny Cochran’s closing remarks during the O. J. Simpson trial: “If the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” The genius of this statement is that, by rhyming two words (“fit” and “acquit”), it is easy to remember and simple to repeat. As such, the statement feels authoritative. The glove didn’t “fit” so there is no other option but to “acquit.” (Notice that no other option is even presented. We do not hear, for example, if the glove doesn’t fit, you must either acquit or evaluate the rest of the evidence and come to a conclusion based on that.)
Although Cochran presented only one possible course of action, rhyming words are sometimes cleverly used to create the impression of a choice between A and B, with only one option being desirable, thus pressuring the listener to do what the speaker wants: “It’s my way or the highway” or—to quote Malcolm X—it’s either “the ballot” or “the bullet.”
Carved almost a millennium earlier, Richard’s statement (rhyming iwrokte and brokte) would, no doubt, have convinced the people of the 12th century that he was truly a master stonemason worthy of renown. He understood more than stonemasonry.
He understood the power of rhetoric. Let’s move forward a few centuries.
APPEAL TO AUTHORITY:
One of the oldest of the Old Charges of the stonemasons of Great Britain is the Cooke Ms, written during the late 14th to early 15th century:
but I |s|chall |s|chew you |s|ome
that is to |s|ey ho and in what
wyse the |s|ciens of Gemetry
fir|s|te be ganne and who |wer|
the founders therof and of
othur craftis mo as hit is no
tid in |the| bybill and in othur|s|tories.
but I shall shew you some,
that is to say how, and in what
wise, the science of Geometry
first began, and who were
the founders thereof, and of
other crafts more, as it is noted
in the Bible and in other stories.1
The author says that “I |s|chall |s|chew you” (i.e., that he will show the reader; or listener if the work is read aloud). “Show” (schew) implies “prove” or “demonstrate.” It positions the author’s claims as authoritative. But that authority is ultimately derived from scripture: “as hit is no tid in |the| bybill” (“as it is noted in the Bible”). The claims of the Bible are beyond dispute (at least they were in 14th and 15th century England). If it is the Bible (bybil) that tells us of the origin of geometry, then the stonemason’s and architect’s work must be directly related to the Biblical. It is not mere work; it is Godly work, elevated above many other professions and ordinary chores. If this is the case, any stonemason should do his utmost best.
We might consider this kind of argument to be an argumentum ab auctoritate or an “appeal to authority.” Such arguments cite a supposed authority rather than proving through argument or logic. Here, the argument is based on the Bible rather than archeology or other non-Biblical evidence.
Often, when we hear such appeals, the authority in question is either not really an authority on the matter being debated or presents no evidence for their beliefs. Sometimes the word “even” is used to make it sound as if everyone agrees with the claimant, and that the example used is actually from someone who doesn’t normally agree with everyone else. Hence, we might hear that “even Bill Gates says we all need to get vaccinated.” The claimant probably knows that Gates has no credentials in medicine. and that he is also not an outlier on the subject (as is implied by “even”).
Such appeals to authority are common: “my professor says,” “the president says,” “this author says.” Okay. But what does the evidence say?
EUPHEMISM:
In act III of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, we find a phrase that appears in the Masonic Ritual: to that “undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveler returns.” Hamlet’s full statement is,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Here, Shakespeare’s protagonist contrasts life (which is characterized by weariness, toil, and suffering) with what lies beyond death, the exact nature of which is unknown to the living. The English playwright uses a euphemism for death or afterdeath (“the undiscovered country”) that does not allow us to think of the horrors of sickness, or of the corpse, etc.
We do not die; rather, we “travel” to the “undiscovered country.” The phrase suggests that the afterlife is much like our own, populated not only by other people (whom we may be related to) though, in some way, better as well as mysterious.
Euphemisms remain an important part of rhetoric. Not exactly Shakespearean, we say someone “passed away” rather than “died.” The killing of civilians in a military operation is “collateral damage” (a phrase that suggests only economic loss). And, of course, corporations never lose money; they merely experience periods of “negative growth.”
Rhetoric is as important today as it was in Richard of Durham’s time—perhaps, even more so. Understanding its techniques enables us to appreciate the beauty of language. It helps us to understand when someone is attempting to motivate us for our own good. And it should alert us to the manipulations of spin doctors, who do not have our interests at heart. As stonemasons and Freemasons have been encouraged for centuries, learn and use rhetoric.
– Written by Angel Millar
BIO: Angel Millar is the Editor-in-Chief of the Fraternal Review, a Fellow of the Philalethes Society, and the author of The Path of the Warrior-Mystic and The Three Stages of Initiatic Spirituality among other books.
..
1. The Matthew Cooke Manuscript with translation, https://freemasonry.bcy.ca/texts/cooke.html