The 1844 Ritual of Germania Lodge No. 46 (New Orleans)

Discovery of the 1844 Germania Lodge Ritual and Arturo de Hoyos’ Translation

The Germania Lodge No. 46 of New Orleans was founded in 1844 as a German-speaking Masonic lodge under the Grand Lodge of Louisiana. In February 1993, a remarkable artifact was rediscovered in the lodge’s archives: the original handwritten German-language ritual dating to 1844. This manuscript contained the Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason degree ceremonies (as well as ancillary rites like a Masonic baptism and burial service) used by Germania Lodge from its founding through the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The ritual text had actually been in continuous use (in German) until the 1930s–1940s, when Germania Lodge transitioned to working in English.

Recognizing the importance of the discovery, the lodge sought assistance to translate and study the document. Arturo de Hoyos – a well-known Masonic scholar and linguist – was instrumental in unlocking its contents. A Past Master of the lodge reached out for a brother fluent in German to undertake a translation. Brother Arturo de Hoyos, an honorary member of Germania Lodge, took on the task of translating the 1844 German text into English. De Hoyos provided not only a translation but also an analytical foreword, noting something highly unexpected about the ritual’s nature. His research, along with Michael Poll (Paul) of the New Orleans Scottish Rite College, revealed that the ritual was eclectic – a unique blend of multiple Masonic rite traditions. In essence, whoever compiled or translated the original German ritual in 1844 had drawn upon elements of the York Rite (the standard Anglo-American “Webb” Craft ritual), the Scottish Rite (Craft degrees of the Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite), and the French or “Modern” or “Premiere” Rite as practiced in continental Europe. This finding was groundbreaking because it challenged assumptions that all Louisiana lodges operated under a single uniform rite in that era.

De Hoyos’ English translation (sometimes referred to as The Liturgy of Germania Lodge No. 46) made this long-obscured ritual accessible to researchers. Thanks to his scholarship, many mysteries of Germania’s early work have been clarified. However, the discovery also raised new questions: the lodge’s archives contained no explanation of the ritual’s origin or authorship. It remains unknown who exactly compiled or translated this ritual in 1844, and whether it was done by a special committee or an individual. Likewise, no direct records explain why the founders of Germania chose to create (or adopt) such an unusual “mixed” ritual, or whether they had official permission to do so. Many historical records from mid-19th-century Louisiana Masonry are missing or were deliberately destroyed, making it difficult to fully answer these questions.

Nonetheless, the discovery and translation of Germania No. 46’s ritual is a “game-changing” development in understanding early Louisiana Free-Masonry. It provides a rare primary-source window into the actual ceremonies used by a 1840s New Orleans lodge. The fact that Germania’s ritual was kept in use (in German) up until around World War II underscores the continuity of this practice in that lodge. By the 1940s Germania finally switched over to a standard English-language ritual (more on this below), but the survival of the old German text allowed modern researchers to reconstruct a piece of lost Masonic history.

An Eclectic “Blended” Ritual

Arturo de Hoyos’ analysis revealed that the 1844 Germania ritual was eclectic in composition – essentially a hybrid ritual containing motifs from three different Masonic rites. A detailed comparison shows that much of the ritual’s wording closely follows the standard York Rite Craft degrees as known in early 19th-century America. In fact, large portions of the text match (often verbatim) the expose Illustrations of Masonry by William Morgan. Morgan’s 1826 book infamously revealed the workings of the Preston-Webb ritual (the foundation of mainstream American/“York” Rite Blue Lodge Free-Masonry). The Germania ritual clearly used this American Webb-work as its scaffold – for example, its modes of recognition (grips, passwords, etc.) consistently adhere to the American forms rather than European ones. This suggests the compiler(s) of the German text had received their Masonic degrees in the United States and were thoroughly familiar with New York or U.S. lodge practice.

At the same time, the ritual is not a slavish copy of Webb’s work. The unknown ritualist made deliberate modifications and additions. Some errors present in Morgan’s published ritual were corrected, and certain terms were “Germanized” in spelling – yet notably, the translator did not always use standard German Masonic terminology, betraying that he was not trained in a German lodge tradition. The ritual’s compound nature becomes most evident in sections that go beyond the typical American work. For instance, Germania No. 46’s ritual included a Ceremony of Masonic Baptism – a uniquely European Masonic practice (common in French and German lodges of the 18th/19th centuries) in which a Master Mason’s child is symbolically received into the lodge’s care. Such a baptismal ceremony was never part of Anglo-American (York) Rite craft tradition, and its presence in Germania’s work shows clear influence from the French (Modern) or “Premiere” Rite or broader continental European Free-Masonry. Indeed, the mid-1800s saw some French/German Masonic customs (like “baptisms” and “adoptions”) transplanted briefly to Louisiana lodges.

Meanwhile, Germania’s Funeral/Burial ritual was found to be strikingly similar to the ones described in James Page’s 1856 Freemasons’ Monitor and Albert Mackey’s 1862 Manual of the Lodge, both of which in turn were based on the English/Webb tradition. Thus, in its public ceremonies, the Germania ritual literally combined European Modern Rite elements (e.g. the baptism) with standard American York Rite elements (e.g. the burial service).

The influence of the Scottish Rite is also present. Arturo de Hoyos identified that the Germania ritual reflects aspects of “Scottish Rite Craft Masonry” as practiced in that era. The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite (A∴A∴S∴R∴) is primarily an “higher degree” system, but it has its own versions of the first three degrees (the so-called Scottish Rite Blue Lodge degrees). In 19th-century Louisiana, some lodges worked the Craft degrees according to Scottish Rite patterns. Germania’s ritual seems to have drawn from that lineage as well. Although the exact Scottish Rite contributions are subtle in the ritual text, one indicator is that Germania was chartered as a “Scottish Rite Craft” lodge in later years (and eventually would officially work under a Scottish Rite ritual by the mid-20th century, as discussed later). It’s possible that certain phrases, floorwork, or degree structures in the 1844 ritual were borrowed from an existing Scottish Rite Craft manual available in Louisiana at the time. The ritual’s “hybrid” label in de Hoyos’ research specifically means it combined Preston-Webb (York) work with Scottish Rite Craft elements. We also know the ritual was written in German from some original source – raising the question of whether it could have been a translation of Perseverance Lodge No. 4’s ritual (Perseverance was the French-heritage “mother lodge” of Germania, as we shall see). In other words, was Germania’s ritual literally a “German-language offspring of French parentage”? This notion suggests that the French-speaking lodges (like Perseverance) might have had a similar eclectic ritual in French which Germania simply translated into German. While not definitively proven, this hypothesis aligns with other evidence of ritual sharing among Louisiana lodges (explored below).

In summary, the 1844 Germania Lodge ritual was neither purely York/American, nor purely Scottish, nor purely French – it blended all three. It followed the general framework of the American York Rite degrees (likely to satisfy Grand Lodge requirements) but infused that framework with continental European innovations and possibly Scottish Rite nuances. This made it a truly eclectic or “fusion” ritual, perhaps tailored to the cosmopolitan and multi-ethnic Masonic environment of New Orleans in the 1840s. The lodge founders were German-speakers living in a predominantly French-Creole city under an American grand lodge; creating a blended ritual may have been their way of forging a distinct identity or bridging cultural gaps. Arturo de Hoyos noted that no known history book had ever recorded anything about Germania’s unique work – it was a complete surprise to modern scholars until the manuscript was translated. Initially, researchers speculated that maybe Germania No. 46 alone had struck out on this innovative path as an isolated case. However, as we will see, further investigation has revealed that Germania’s ritual may not have been unique at all, but part of a broader Louisiana pattern.

Germania Lodge No. 46 the Foundation and “York Rite” Classification

Germania Lodge No. 46 was established in New Orleans in 1844 amid a diverse Masonic landscape. At that time, New Orleans had about ten lodges: nine worked in French and one in Spanish. There was great demand among the sizeable German immigrant community for a lodge working in the German language. On March 24, 1844, thirteen German-speaking brethren (many bilingual in French) met at Perseverance Lodge No. 4’s hall to plan the formation of a new lodge. Perseverance No. 4 – a prominent French-heritage lodge – effectively sponsored this effort and is regarded as the “mother lodge” of Germania. By April 1844 the organizers elected officers and petitioned the Grand Lodge of Louisiana for a charter. The Grand Lodge granted a charter dated April 16, 1844, formally constituting Germania Lodge No. 46 as of May 4, 1844. Notably, the charter was issued under the York Rite – i.e. it explicitly authorized Germania to work the Craft degrees in the “York” (American) rite. In the 1840s the Grand Lodge of Louisiana recognized multiple rites, but “York Rite” was the designation favored by the more Anglophone/American faction. So, on paper, Germania was founded as a regular F. & A.M. lodge working in the York Rite. This is reflected in Grand Lodge proceedings: starting with the 1845 session (the first after Germania’s founding), Germania No. 46 is listed among the York Rite lodges in Louisiana. It continued to be listed simply as a “York Rite” lodge in the annual proceedings of 1846, 1847, 1848, and 1849 with no hint that its ritual differed from any other.

Why did Germania identify as York Rite despite using an obviously non-standard ritual? Contemporary records are silent on this point. It may be that Germania’s eclectic ritual was close enough to York workings (due to the Preston-Webb backbone) that the lodge considered itself in compliance. Indeed, parts of the ritual were essentially translated from Webb’s rite into German, so they may have viewed it as the York Rite in German translation. Another theory floated by researchers is that calling themselves “York Rite” publicly was a strategic choice to avoid conflict with the Grand Lodge’s mainstream faction. By outward appearances (in returns and formal classifications) Germania was just another York lodge; the blending of rites was an internal matter not advertised in print. In fact, nowhere in the 1840s Grand Lodge reports is there any mention that Germania’s work was unique. Only later, in 1875, does an interesting admission appear: an official report notes that “Germania Lodge works the first degree in the A. and A. Rite, [and] the second and third degree in the York Rite, or as taught by the Grand Lodge.”. This little-known snippet confirms that at least by the 1870s Germania was openly recognized as using a mixed ritual (1° in the Ancient & Accepted [Scottish] Rite, and 2°–3° in York Rite). It’s possible this arrangement existed earlier as well, but was not explicitly documented during the tense 1840s–1850s. The 1875 note might reflect a leftover practice or a compromise system in place after mid-century changes.

Within Germania Lodge itself, language and ritual practice evolved over time. Minutes in the first year were kept in German and French; in the second year, French and English; and from 1846 onward, record books were maintained solely in German for the next 90 years. This trilingual approach underscores the cultural balancing act Germania performed. It even suggests that Grand Lodge officers (many of whom spoke English or French) needed the minutes in a language they understood – hence the early inclusion of French/English translations. By 1936, Germania finally ceased using German for its records and ceremonies, completing a transition to English work by 1940. At that point, the lodge adopted what was essentially a “standard” Scottish Rite Craft ritual in English, one authored by Bro. Jacques Foulhouze in 1861 (more on Foulhouze later), combined with elements of Louisiana’s York Rite work. In other words, even in the 20th century the lodge’s ritual remained an amalgam—fitting for an organization whose very genesis was eclectic. Today, Germania No. 46 proudly identifies as a “Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite Craft Lodge” (it belongs to the Grand Lodge’s 16th Masonic District, composed of Scottish Rite–working blue lodges). Yet the lodge also acknowledges that its current work is a blend, containing both the Scottish Rite ritual of 1861 and traditional Louisiana York Rite components. This modern hybridity is a legacy of the unique ritual journey Germania has had since 1844.

In summary, Germania Lodge was officially chartered under the York Rite, and for public purposes it aligned itself with that rite in its early decades. Behind closed doors, however, it practiced a ritual that quietly transcended the standard categories. The Grand Lodge seemed content to list Germania among York Rite lodges and did not probe its workings – perhaps out of lack of oversight or to avoid stirring controversy at a time when multiple rites were grudgingly tolerated. We next examine how Germania’s ritual might connect to those of other Louisiana lodges, which will shed light on whether Germania was truly an outlier or part of a wider pattern.

Links to Perfect Union Lodge No. 1 (New Orleans) and La Parfaite Union No. 17 (San Francisco)

One of the most intriguing developments in recent research is the discovery of connections between Germania’s ritual and those of other lodges, especially Perfect Union No. 1 in New Orleans and its offshoot La Parfaite Union No. 17 in California. Perfect Union No. 1 (originally La Parfaite Union, founded 1810) was one of the founding lodges of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana and long regarded as the oldest “York Rite” lodge in Louisiana. Yet evidence now suggests that Perfect Union may have also been working an eclectic or non-orthodox ritual in the mid-19th century, much like Germania.

The link between Germania and Perfect Union came to light through the story of Lucien Louis Hermann (often spelled Herman in English records). Lucien Hermann was a prominent Louisiana Mason in the 1840s. In fact, in 1850, M∴W∴ Lucien Hermann was serving simultaneously as Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana and as Worshipful Master of Perfect Union Lodge No. 1 in New Orleans. This was the tumultuous period of the Gedge affair (discussed later), and Hermann found himself on the losing side of a power struggle in Louisiana Masonry by late 1850. In the aftermath, he left New Orleans and moved to California. By 1850–51, the Gold Rush had spurred the formation of the Grand Lodge of California, and Hermann played a key role in founding La Parfaite Union Lodge No. 17 in San Francisco (chartered 1851).

According to later reports, when Hermann established Perfect Union No. 17 in California, he brought with him a ritual from New Orleans – specifically a French-language ritual, said to be the ritual of Perfect Union No. 1 back home. One Masonic publication even explicitly stated that Perfect Union No. 17 was working in the Scottish Rite Craft ritual, using a French ritual text given to them by Most Wor. Bro. Hermann of New Orleans. This claim raised eyebrows: why would the Master of Louisiana’s premier York Rite lodge hand off a French Scottish Rite ritual to a new California lodge? Was Perfect Union No. 1 itself actually working in French or Scottish Rite ritual at that time? If so, that would overturn the conventional narrative that it was always a strictly York lodge.

For years, this puzzle was speculative. There were two possibilities: (a) Hermann handed over Perfect Union No. 1’s actual ritual, implying Perfect Union in New Orleans had been using a French/Scottish eclectic ritual; or (b) Hermann simply had access to some Scottish Rite (French) ritual from another source (perhaps one of the Scottish Rite lodges in New Orleans) and gave that to the Californians, while Perfect Union No. 1 itself remained York-rite internally. Without surviving ritual texts or minutes from Perfect Union No. 1 (nearly all its pre-1850 records are lost), it was hard to prove either scenario. Hermann himself left no written statement clarifying which ritual he provided or why.

A breakthrough came recently via Perfect Union/La Parfaite Union No. 17 in San Francisco. In 2021–22, researchers Sebastian Tavo and George Vu of that lodge prepared a paper for the Scottish Rite Research Society’s journal Heredom (vol. 30) investigating Perfect Union No. 17’s early history. During discussions for a 2022 symposium, Brother Tavo shared with Michael Poll an important revelation: contrary to the old report labeling it a “Scottish Rite” lodge, Perfect Union No. 17’s ritual was neither purely York nor purely Scottish Rite nor purely French – it was a blend of all three, very much like Germania’s. In fact, Tavo described the lodge’s historic ritual as “a blend or mixing of York, Scottish, and French rites.” This stunned researchers because it suggested that Perfect Union No. 1 in New Orleans might have also been working a similar eclectic ritual in French, which Hermann then transmitted to the California lodge. Essentially, if both Germania No. 46 and Perfect Union No. 1 were using “three-fold” blended rituals in different languages (German vs. French) during the 1840s, then Germania’s case was not an isolated anomaly at all.

Let’s reconstruct this scenario: Perfect Union No. 1 (New Orleans) was founded as “La Parfaite Union” and had a long Francophone heritage. It is plausible that by the 1840s, Perfect Union’s working was a French Modern Rite style ritual that had been modified over time by exposure to York and Scottish Rite influences. This could produce the kind of York–Scottish–French amalgam we see in Germania’s ritual. Now, Germania Lodge was formed by members splitting off from Perseverance Lodge No. 4 (another French-heritage lodge) in 1844. Perseverance No. 4 and Perfect Union No. 1 were peer lodges in New Orleans. If Perfect Union and Perseverance shared similar ritual approaches (as senior lodges), then Germania – being a daughter of Perseverance – might have simply inherited that eclectic ritual tradition. Germania’s founders could have taken the very same mixed ritual that Perseverance (and Perfect Union) were using in French and translated it into German for their new lodge. In other words, the “unique” ritual of Germania might actually have been a localized German translation of the ritual of Perseverance/Perfect Union.

The evidence supporting this includes: (a) Lucien Hermann’s transfer of a French ritual to Perfect Union No. 17 (implying such a French ritual was in use in New Orleans lodges like Perfect Union No. 1); (b) the striking parallel that Perfect Union No. 17’s ritual mix is essentially the same three-rite blend found in Germania’s ritual; and (c) the known historical relationships – Germania 46 was composed of German brethren from Perseverance 4, and Perfect Union 1 had merged in 1812 with another lodge Concord and was very closely involved with all early Grand Lodge happenings.

If both Perfect Union and Perseverance lodges were working a multi-rite ritual (one in French, one perhaps partly English/French), it would explain why the 1830s–40s Grand Lodge was forced to accommodate multiple rites (as we will see in the next section). Michael Poll summarizes the situation after learning of the California evidence: “If Perfect Union Lodge in New Orleans worked in the very same sort of eclectic ritual (except in French), what does this mean? It takes the whole theory that Germania worked a personal rogue ritual just for its identity and throws it out the window. This would not be an isolated ritual used by one lodge. If both Perfect Union and Germania used such an eclectic ritual, we must explore if other lodges did as well.”. Indeed, it suggests a broader ritual tradition was at play in Louisiana prior to 1850, one that was later suppressed or forgotten. Poll goes on to reason that it is much more plausible that Hermann carried Perfect Union No. 1’s own ritual (in French) to California, rather than improbably translating Germania’s German text to French just to create a new lodge. Hermann was of German descent (his father was German) so he could have read Germania’s ritual, but translating it to French for a California lodge makes little sense unless it was already the ritual he was familiar with as Master of Perfect Union. Everything points to Hermann simply exporting the Louisiana eclectic ritual tradition to California. (It’s worth noting that Perfect Union No. 17 in San Francisco did not ultimately continue as a Scottish Rite lodge; over time it assimilated into standard California work. But the seed of Louisiana’s influence was there at its founding.)

In summary, Germania’s ritual appears closely connected to that of Perfect Union No. 1 (La Parfaite Union) and by extension to Perseverance No. 4, and this tradition was carried west by Lucien Hermann to Perfect Union No. 17 in California. This realization dramatically widens the significance of Germania’s ritual: it likely represents a whole vein of “Louisiana working” that existed among several lodges in the early 19th century. We now turn to the historical conflict that led to the downfall of this eclectic rite and the deliberate erasure of its traces – namely, the struggle led by John Gedge and the “York” faction in the mid-1800s.

The Gedge Faction vs. Eclectic Rites

The 1840s were a period of intense political and ideological conflict within Louisiana Free-Masonry. The crux of the conflict was over Masonic ritual and governance, pitting those who supported European/“Modern” and Scottish Rite traditions against those who championed the exclusive use of Ancient York (Anglo-American) Rite Free-Masonry. This culminated in what can be described as a Masonic civil war led by a zealous York-rite Mason, John Gedge.

John C. Gedge was an English-born Mason who became a leader of the conservative York Rite advocates. In the late 1840s, Gedge and his allies grew increasingly frustrated that the Grand Lodge of Louisiana tolerated lodges working anything other than the “Ancient York” ritual. Since its founding in 1812, the Grand Lodge had been multi-cultural: several founding lodges had French or mixed lineage, and as noted, by 1833 the Grand Lodge even explicitly recognized three different rites (York, Scottish, and French Modern) as legitimate for subordinate lodges. This pluralism did not sit well with hardline Yorkists like Gedge. They viewed many Louisiana practices as irregular or “unacceptable” deviations from orthodox (American) Free-Masonry. Among the targets of their ire were the “non-York Rite” craft lodges – i.e. those working in French or Scottish Rite modes. Gedge’s faction believed only the York (Webb) craft ritual should be allowed.

Tensions boiled over in 1848–49. Gedge and others formed a rival Grand Lodge, styling it the “Grand Lodge of Louisiana, Ancient York Masons” (often called the Gedge Grand Lodge by historians). This schismatic body expelled members of the original Grand Lodge and even chartered new lodges of its own. In effect, two competing Grand Lodges operated: the established one (multi-rite tolerant) and Gedge’s breakaway (York-only). The conflict ended in 1850 when Gedge forced a merger on his terms. In January 1850, a union was brokered in which the Ancient York (Gedge) Grand Lodge merged into the main Grand Lodge of Louisiana (F.&A.M.). Remarkably, Gedge himself was then elected Grand Master of the reunified Grand Lodge of Louisiana in 1851. This gave the Yorkists full control over Louisiana Free-Masonry.

Following the 1850 merger, the new leadership initiated a program of “York Rite purification.” They sought to standardize ritual work across the jurisdiction to the American York Rite and eliminate the remnants of French and Scottish Craft workings. It appears that during this period, many records that evidenced the prior eclectic or French practices were deliberately destroyed or omitted. Michael Poll notes the alarming absence of Grand Lodge proceedings and minutes from the mid-1830s through late 1840s – many volumes simply “cannot be located anywhere” and are presumed lost or destroyed. The gaps correspond precisely to the years of greatest controversy. Poll strongly suspects that the post-1850 regime “wanted some aspects forgotten” and may have purged archives of things deemed heretical to York Free-Masonry. For instance, if any official recognition or discussion of lodges working “at the three rites” (more on that phrase shortly) had existed in 1840s records, those might have been expunged. The destruction was “thorough,” leaving modern historians with only fragments and references to piece together what happened. As Poll puts it, “Many of the missing records, minutes, and documents were destroyed by the Grand Lodge York Masons in their belief that this was the best course to advance their vision of Masonry in Louisiana.” This is a bold claim, but it is backed by the pattern of missing documentation during precisely the contentions years. It explains why knowledge of Germania’s eclectic ritual (and similar practices in other lodges) vanished from official histories – the new orthodoxy literally erased the evidence.

The immediate aftermath of Gedge’s takeover was further complicated by external events. In 1853, a devastating yellow fever epidemic swept New Orleans, killing thousands – including many leading Masons on both sides of the conflict. John Gedge himself perished in that epidemic. With the hardliners suddenly removed by fate, the remaining Masons sought compromise and healing. By the mid-1850s, Louisiana Free-Masonry settled into a more “peaceful” period, but under the surface, the damage was done. The York-rite faction had essentially won: after 1850, all lodges were strongly encouraged (or required) to identify as York Rite, and the multi-rite paradigm gradually faded in public view. Even Perseverance No. 4 and others that had once proudly straddled different rites now had to conform or go underground with those practices.

However, not everyone acquiesced quietly. In 1858, a number of New Orleans lodges (led by French/Scottish adherents) rebelled against the Grand Lodge’s new order. Perseverance No. 4, for one, withdrew from the Grand Lodge in 1858 and joined a rival Masonic authority called the Supreme Council of Louisiana. This Supreme Council (established by Jean Jacques Foulhouze and others) was basically a Scottish Rite governing body that also chartered Craft lodges. For two years, Perseverance and some allies operated outside the Grand Lodge’s jurisdiction, effectively creating a schism along rite lines. By 1860 Perseverance returned to the Grand Lodge fold, but it did so with a distinct identity – from then on it “identified itself, even if only by ritual and spirit, as a Scottish Rite lodge.” In other words, Perseverance No. 4, though nominally under the Grand Lodge again, aligned its working with the Scottish Rite Craft tradition and later became part of the same 16th District as Germania (the Scottish Rite district). The 1858–60 episode underscored that the ideological fault lines had not vanished: lodges like Perseverance still valued the older eclectic or Scottish-flavored work and resisted full Yorkization.

Ultimately, the Gedge era left a legacy of both destruction and transformation. On one hand, it “burned out” the overt traces of the eclectic rite from mainstream Louisiana Free-Masonry – for example, Perfect Union No. 1, which appears to have used a blended French ritual before 1850, was merged in 1886 with Marion Lodge No. 68 (a staunch York lodge that descended from Gedge’s faction). At that time Perfect Union switched from French to English and likely adopted pure York work, completing its conversion to a true York lodge. Poll suggests that in that merger, “all non-York Rite elements in Perfect Union were burned out or destroyed” – symbolically purging any last eclectic remnants. On the other hand, some lodges like Germania and Perseverance quietly maintained their distinct rituals (Germania internally, Perseverance via its Scottish Rite allegiance) even as they outwardly complied with Grand Lodge rules until more tolerant times returned. In summary, the mid-19th century conflicts, spearheaded by John Gedge’s Ancient Yorkite insurgency, represent the context in which Germania’s ritual (and those like it) went underground. The Gedge faction’s triumph meant the suppression of multi-rite practices and a rewriting of history to emphasize pure York Rite dominance. Only now, thanks to archival sleuthing and translations, are we uncovering the suppressed evidence of Louisiana’s eclectic Masonic past.

Germania’s Ritual as Part of a Broader Louisiana “Eclectic” Tradition

The emerging hypothesis among researchers is that Germania Lodge No. 46’s ritual was not unique at all, but rather one example of a broader ritual tradition prevalent in Louisiana before 1850. In this view, multiple lodges – especially in New Orleans – shared or developed similar blended rituals that combined York, Scottish, and French elements. The pattern likely originated with the oldest lodges (such as Perseverance and Perfect Union) and was then passed to new lodges (like Germania in 1844) that spun off from them.

Several clues support this broader tradition:

• Perseverance Lodge No. 4: Perseverance (founded 1810) was one of the founding lodges of the Grand Lodge and had French roots (it initially worked under the Grand Orient de France’s rite). By the 1830s it was officially classed as “York Rite” (after joining the Grand Lodge system), but there are signs it maintained other rite practices. In the 1845–1848 Grand Lodge proceedings, Perseverance is oddly listed not just as York, but “at the three rites.” For example, the 1845 GL proceedings show Perseverance No. 4 described as “at the three rites,” without explanation. This phrase (likely translated from French “aux trois rites”) suggests that Perseverance was conducting meetings or degrees in all three recognized rite systems – York, Scottish, and French Modern – or at least was chartered to do so. No other lodge is listed in that fashion except Etoile Polaire (Polar Star) – see below. By 1849, Perseverance’s entry changed to “York Rite accumulating” in the GL returns. The meaning of “accumulating” is unclear, but it might indicate a lodge accumulating (i.e. holding) multiple rites or multiple sets of degrees. Poll admits he has “no idea” what the intended meaning was – it’s a term not seen elsewhere. It could imply that the lodge was accumulating members or degrees from various rites. In any case, Perseverance’s unique listing points to a multi-rite identity. Given that Germania was effectively a daughter lodge of Perseverance (its founding members came largely from No. 4), it is very logical that Germania’s ritual was simply a continuation of Perseverance’s practices, translated for the German-speaking brethren. Poll goes so far as to state: “While I can’t prove it, I believe the most logical answer is that Germania got the eclectic ritual from Perseverance.” Perseverance’s later behavior, such as withdrawing to the Scottish Rite’s jurisdiction in 1858, reinforces that it never was a pure York lodge at heart. It likely possessed that blended ritual tradition from early on.
• Perfect Union Lodge No. 1: As discussed earlier, Perfect Union (“La Parfaite Union”) was always counted as a York lodge in official proceedings, yet the Lucien Hermann episode suggests it had an eclectic French ritual by the 1840s. In 1833’s constitution, Perfect Union was listed under York Rite, but interestingly its very name and origin were French (it was chartered in 1794 by the Grand Orient of France and then re-chartered under the Grand Lodge of Louisiana in 1812). It’s quite conceivable that Perfect Union retained much of the French “Modern Rite” work (perhaps supplemented with American tweaks) throughout the early 1800s. The new Grand Lodge law in 1833 that explicitly permitted three rites was likely in response to discontent from lodges like Perfect Union that didn’t want to abandon their traditional workings. If Perfect Union’s ritual in practice was the same variety of York-Scottish-French blend later found in Germania, it means Germania was not innovating from scratch in 1844 – it was adopting a pre-existing composite ritual that was in the air in New Orleans Free-Masonry. The fact that Hermann could hand that ritual off to a new lodge in California indicates it was portable and established enough to be used as a model for expansion.
• Concord Lodge No. 3: Concord (founded 1811) was another founding lodge of the Grand Lodge. We have scant information on Concord’s ritual, but we know Concord merged into Perfect Union in 1879. Poll speculates that Concord and Perfect Union were “of similar mind” given they eventually joined, though that alone doesn’t prove they shared the eclectic rite. Still, as a founding lodge, Concord had French origins (it was likely Loge La Concorde originally). It’s plausible Concord had a Modern Rite background too, which could have converged with Perfect Union’s practice prior to their merger. However, due to lack of records from Concord, this remains conjecture.
• Charity Lodge No. 2: Charity was another early lodge (founded 1812) but it went dark by 1821. There’s little data on its ritual, but given its era, it likely worked a form of French ritual as well. It’s mentioned here to note that one of the five original lodges fell away early, leaving four main survivors carrying traditions into the 1830s.
• Etoile Polaire (Polar Star) Lodge No. 1/5: Perhaps the most dramatic evidence of multi-rite practice comes from L’Etoile Polaire (The Polar Star Lodge). Polar Star was a French-origin lodge chartered in 1794 (same year as Perfect Union) and a co-founder of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana in 1812. In the Grand Lodge’s new constitution of 1833, Polar Star was uniquely listed in all three categories: York Rite, Scotch (Scottish) Rite, and French (Modern) Rite. It appears that Polar Star literally split itself into three “lodges” on paper, each working a different rite, with separate meeting schedules for each rite’s work. The 1833 proceedings show Polar Star #5 (York) meeting on one Sunday, Polar Star #1 (Scottish) on another, and Polar Star #1 (French/Modern) on yet another – each with its own set of officers. In other words, Polar Star Lodge created three subdivisions to work all approved rites simultaneously! This astonishing arrangement is unlike anything seen elsewhere. No reason is given in the record, and no minutes survive to explain why they did this. By 1842, however, the experiment seems to have ended – the 1842 proceedings list Polar Star only under the Scottish Rite section, implying the York and French “versions” had ceased or consolidated back into the one Scottish Rite lodge. We don’t know what caused this reversion (perhaps lack of manpower, or Grand Lodge pressure to simplify). But the Polar Star case proves that Louisiana lodges were actively experimenting with multi-rite organization. Polar Star’s “threefold identity” in 1833 shows a conscious effort to accommodate multiple traditions within one lodge structure. Polar Star eventually remained a Scottish Rite craft lodge and, like Perseverance and Germania, ended up in the 16th District (Scottish Rite) in modern times.

What all this indicates is a culture of ritual eclecticism in early Louisiana Free-Masonry. Far from the rest of the United States (where Webb’s York Rite had become standard by 1820s), New Orleans’ lodges had strong French Caribbean and European influence. They came from different parent Grand Lodges (France, Pennsylvania, etc.) and brought different ritual styles. Rather than one style extinguishing the others immediately, they coexisted for decades, sometimes within the same lodges. By the 1830s, the Grand Lodge formally acknowledged this by allowing lodges to work “in the rite of their choice” – whether Ancient York, Ancient & Accepted (Scottish), or French Modern. Germania Lodge’s ritual was thus a product of this environment. It was eclectic by design, presumably to make a ritual that all factions might find acceptable (or at least not objectionable). One wonders if perhaps the creators believed a composite ritual “containing elements of the three rituals worked in Louisiana” might unify Masons of various backgrounds. Poll muses whether some thought “a ritual which blended the three rites might be more acceptable to everyone.”. If so, Germania’s ritual could have been an attempt at Masonic compromise or innovation.

By 1850, of course, that spirit of inclusivity was quashed by the Yorkists. After the dust settled, Louisiana’s lodges officially all became “York Rite” in name. But the ghost of the eclectic tradition lingered. Germania continued to work a unique ritual quietly until switching in 1940. Perseverance and others later openly embraced Scottish Rite affiliation once it was safe to do so (in the late 19th century, the Grand Lodge had again become tolerant of Scottish Rite craft lodges, which is why the 16th District exists). In 1877, the Grand Lodge of Louisiana even approved the Cerneau Scottish Rite Craft degrees for use in certain lodges, essentially re-legalizing the Scottish Rite blue lodge practice. So over time a kind of equilibrium returned, but by then the original eclectic rituals had mostly faded or been converted into standardized forms.

In conclusion, mounting evidence supports that Germania Lodge No. 46’s 1844 ritual was part of a broader ritualistic tradition in Louisiana – one that encompassed lodges like Perfect Union, Perseverance, Polar Star and possibly others prior to 1850. This tradition might have originated in the oldest lodges (such as Perseverance or Polar Star) which operated in or “at” multiple rites. Germania inherited and preserved one strain of this tradition (in German translation). The suppression of the 1850s obscured these facts for over a century. Only now, through scholarly detective work, are we piecing together how rich and complex early Louisiana Masonic ritual practice really was.

Primary Sources and Scholarly Research on Germania No. 46 and Related Rituals

Research into Germania Lodge No. 46’s ritual and the associated history has been propelled by a combination of primary sources and modern scholarly efforts. Key sources and studies include:

• Michael R. Poll’s The Scottish Wright Papers (book, 2018): Masonic historian Michael R. Poll (writing in the user’s prompt as “Michael Paul”) compiled a series of research papers on early Louisiana Free-Masonry, including many discoveries related to the 1840s conflicts and rituals. In his book The Scottish Wright Papers, Poll discusses the 1850 Gedge takeover, the missing Grand Lodge records, and the Germania ritual findings. He describes how many revelations (such as the multi-rite accommodations of 1833, and evidence of eclectic rituals) challenge the conventional history. For example, Poll’s work highlights that the 1833 Grand Lodge Constitution explicitly allowed three rites for subordinate lodges, an important context often overlooked in older histories. Poll’s papers also detail the aftermath of the Gedge merger and theorize about the deliberate destruction of records. Essentially, The Scottish Wright Papers serves as a foundational scholarly source that documents Louisiana’s unique Masonic evolution and the re-discovery of lost facets like Germania’s ritual. Poll himself participated in the 1990s translation project with Arturo de Hoyos and has firsthand knowledge of these events. His writings are richly cited with archival snippets (like the proceedings entries for “at the three rites” and “accumulating”). For anyone delving into this subject, Poll’s work is a critical resource that compiles both primary documentation and interpretative analysis.
• Arturo de Hoyos’ Translation and Research Notes (unpublished report, 1995): Arturo de Hoyos not only translated the Germania ritual but also wrote a scholarly introduction analyzing it. His research notes (some of which are summarized on Germania Lodge’s website) explore the provenance questions and compare the ritual text to known exposures and monitors. De Hoyos identified sources for various components (e.g., Morgan’s Illustrations of Masonry for the Webb-work portions, and references for the baptism and burial ceremonies). The Freimaurer-Wiki (a German Masonic wiki) mentions de Hoyos’ work, indicating that his translation was published in some form, possibly as an internal lodge document or through the Grand College of Rites. The title “The Liturgy of Germania Lodge No. 46…translated from the German by Art de Hoyos” suggests it may have been printed for limited circulation. De Hoyos’ findings, particularly that the ritual compiler was likely American-trained (due to use of American modes and lack of European German Masonic terms), are a linchpin in understanding the ritual’s origin. Also, his observation that Germania’s current ritual (post-1940) is itself a hybrid of a Jacques Foulhouze Scottish Rite ritual and standard Louisiana work is a valuable insight into continuity.
• Sebastian Tavo & George Vu, “Perfect Union No. 17” in Heredom Vol. 30 (2022): This recent paper (as mentioned in the user query) specifically investigates La Parfaite Union Lodge No. 17 of San Francisco. Tavo and Vu, members of that lodge, combed through surviving records and oral history of Perfect Union No. 17 to clarify its founding and early ritual. While the full text is not publicly available, it is cited by Poll and was previewed in Masonic symposium discussions. The key takeaway from their research is the confirmation that Perfect Union 17 did not exclusively work a Scottish Rite ritual as once thought, but a mixed ritual containing York, Scottish, and French elements. This directly supports the hypothesis about Perfect Union No. 1’s ritual in New Orleans. Tavo and Vu likely examined documents like the lodge’s original French bylaws or rituals (if any survived or were documented by California’s Grand Lodge). They also possibly used accounts from California Masonic proceedings around 1851–52. The fact that Perfect Union 17 was designated to work in French indicates the Grand Lodge of California gave special dispensation for a non-English ritual due to Hermann’s influence. Their paper would be among the first academic treatments connecting the California lodge back to Louisiana’s rite conflict. For our purposes, we rely on Poll’s summary of their finding: Perfect Union 17’s ritual was “not exactly Scottish Rite, not exactly York or French either – but a blend”. Future researchers will want to consult Heredom vol. 30 for the full evidence and context behind this revelation.
• Grand Lodge of Louisiana Proceedings (1830s–1850s): The official annual Proceedings of the Grand Lodge are primary sources that contain occasional gems of information (despite many gaps). For example, the 1833 proceedings record the classification of lodges by rite in the new Constitution. The 1845–1849 proceedings lists that show Polar Star “at the three rites” and Perseverance “at the three rites” / “accumulating” are critical pieces of evidence, as cited earlier. Also noted in the Germania history is an entry from the 1875 proceedings confirming Germania’s mixed working (1° A.&A., 2–3° York). These proceedings have been preserved sporadically. The Grand Lodge of Louisiana’s library and the Historic New Orleans Collection hold some original copies. In a modern context, some excerpts have been transcribed or referenced by researchers like Poll. As primary documentation, they provide the timeline of charters, mergers, and any constitutional changes (like the 1833 allowance for three rites). They also occasionally include Grand Master addresses or committee reports that hint at ritual issues. For instance, John Gedge’s 1849 Grand Master Address (for the schismatic Grand Lodge of Ancient York Masons) reportedly included calls to eliminate “French influence” in Louisiana Free-Masonry. That address, a rare printed pamphlet, has been reprinted in part and is an important primary source indicating the mindset of the York faction (“Includes: The Elimination of the French Influence in ...” per one catalog). Thus, while many Grand Lodge records vanished, the surviving ones and contemporary printed speeches are invaluable. We have used them to corroborate statements (like the 1833 law and 1840s lodge listings) within this report.
• Germania Lodge’s Archives and Oral History: Besides the ritual manuscript, Germania’s own lodge records (minutes, ledgers, etc.) were preserved to some extent. The lodge’s history notes that intact minutes, Treasurer’s books, membership rosters, and other manuscripts were loaned to the Historic New Orleans Collection for safekeeping and research use. These primary documents likely contain day-to-day details that could shed light on ritual practice (for example, if degrees were referred to by different names or if any correspondence with the Grand Lodge discussed ritual approval). Oral histories from older Germania members also play a role – knowledge that the lodge switched to English ritual in 1940, for instance, would have been transmitted by members who experienced it. Also, the fact that Germania continued to identify with Scottish Rite work in the 20th century (and formed traveling degree teams to exemplify Scottish Rite degrees around the country) is documented in recent lodge narratives. This underscores how the lodge itself views its heritage of a “unique ritual and District”.
• Other Academic and Masonic Publications: The topic of Louisiana’s eclectic rites has begun to surface in Masonic research forums and publications. For example, the Scottish Rite SJ’s magazine or the Louisiana Lodge of Research might have published papers on the 16th District lodges. There was a Short Talk Bulletin (a Masonic Service Association publication) that apparently listed Perfect Union No. 17 among American lodges working Scottish Rite Craft degrees. That bulletin provided a clue which Poll followed up on, demonstrating the value of even newsletter-type publications in pointing to forgotten history. Additionally, Masonic historians like Albert Pike took interest in Louisiana’s situation. Pike was active in New Orleans in the 1850s and delivered an address in Louisiana. An article on referencing Pike’s address notes Germania Lodge’s creation and that “their 1844 ritual shows that they originally worked an eclectic ritual…derived from all three rites worked in Louisiana.”. This indicates that some researchers (possibly Pike himself or modern authors) recognized Germania’s ritual nature, even if only recently. That online source likely builds on de Hoyos’ and Poll’s work, but it shows the information filtering into wider awareness. Online discussions, such as threads on Reddit’s r/freemasonry or other forums, have also begun circulating snippets of this research, spreading knowledge to a broader Masonic audience.
• Rare Books and Archives: Beyond Grand Lodge proceedings, other archives that might contain clues include the Grand Orient of France (which chartered lodges in Louisiana in the 1790s) and the Supreme Council records. The Grand Orient’s correspondence might mention the rites worked in New Orleans. The Supreme Council of Louisiana (est. 1852 by Foulhouze) and the Supreme Council SJ (Mother Council in Charleston) might have had communication about Craft lodges in Louisiana. Rare ritual manuscripts, such as French exposures or Spanish craft rituals, could have parallels with what was used in New Orleans. For example, one might compare Germania’s baptism ceremony text to the French “Tuileur” exposures of the 1830s to see if it was lifted from them. These sorts of cross-archive studies are in very early stages. Michael Poll emphasizes that “far more research needs to be done” and that despite what we think we know, much remains undiscovered. This includes scouring unconventional sources – e.g. personal letters of 19th-century Louisiana Masons, minutes of other organizations like the Grand Consistory of Louisiana (which existed in the 1810s), or even newspaper reports of lodge events that might describe ceremonies. Each could yield a puzzle piece.

Germania 46’s ritual has drawn on a variety of sources: primary documents (ritual manuscripts, proceedings, historical addresses), scholarly compilations (Poll’s book, de Hoyos’ work, Heredom articles), and even lodge oral histories and websites that preserve institutional memory. The research is ongoing – new findings in archives or private collections could further illuminate how these eclectic rituals developed and spread. Researchers are advised to check Masonic libraries (like the Henry C. Clausen Collection at the House of the Temple, where de Hoyos found many materials) and to collaborate across Grand Lodge jurisdictions, since this topic spans Louisiana, California, and beyond.

Clues in Grand Lodge Proceedings, “At the Three Rites” and “Accumulating”

A particularly enigmatic aspect of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana’s records in the 1830s–40s is the terminology used to classify lodge rituals. As noted, the 1833 Grand Lodge Constitution formally allowed lodges under its jurisdiction to work in three different “rites” (styles of Craft Free-Masonry): (1) Ancient York Rite, (2) Ancient & Accepted (Scottish) Rite, or (3) French Modern Rite. Lodges were essentially given a choice, likely to placate those with European lineage. In the printed proceedings, lodges were often listed in sections according to which Rite they practiced.

However, some lodges were listed with curious phrases instead of a single rite. The phrase “at the three rites” (French: “aux trois rites”) appears next to certain lodges in the 1840s. Specifically, as discussed, Perseverance Lodge No. 4 and Etoile Polaire Lodge were described as working “at the three rites” in various years. What does “at the three rites” mean? The proceedings themselves do not explain, and this ambiguity seems intentional or taken for granted at the time. The most straightforward reading is that those lodges practiced all three rites – possibly offering different degree conferrals in different rite formats. For example, Perseverance might have conferred an Entered Apprentice degree in the York style, a Fellow Craft in the Scottish, and a Master Mason in the French, or some rotation thereof. Alternatively, it could mean the lodge had authorization to conduct lodge meetings in any of the three rites as needed (which is essentially what Polar Star actually did by splitting into three). The lack of any footnote or clarification in the proceedings is frustrating for modern researchers. Michael Poll expresses discomfort trying to “prove” anything from such unclear entries, noting “no explanation is given” and that guessing the meaning without further context can mislead. It is precisely the kind of detail one would hope the missing minutes might have clarified.

Another term, “accumulating,” appears in the 1849 proceedings: Perseverance is listed as “York Rite accumulating” and Polar Star as “Scotch Rite accumulating”. This unusual adjective is likewise not explained. It might mean that those lodges were accumulating degrees or rites – perhaps indicating they had multiple rite work ongoing or were stockpiling candidates through various systems. One could speculate “accumulating” means the lodge had accumulated all three sets of rituals by that point (i.e., had competence in all rites). Another theory: it could refer to the accumulation of members from different traditions. Without contemporary explanation, it remains a puzzle. As Poll quips, “I can make a guess, but that guess and $5 will only get me a cup of coffee.” In other words, any interpretation is speculative.

One interesting thought: these terms might have been well-understood slang among Louisiana Masons of the day. Possibly “at the three rites” was locally understood to denote a particular mode of working (like a hybrid ritual) and “accumulating” might have been a transitional status. It’s also plausible that by 1849, after the merger, the Grand Lodge printers deliberately made the language opaque. Poll even wonders if the lack of clear explanation is why those proceedings volumes survived – because they obscured the controversial reality enough to not alarm the Yorkists later. Had the proceedings explicitly detailed that “Perseverance Lodge is working a blended ritual composed of three systems,” it might have been a red flag for suppression. Instead we get euphemisms.

From the vantage of today, we try to reverse-engineer these terms by correlating with known events. By 1849, Gedge’s influence was rising; perhaps “accumulating” was a temporary label for lodges in flux or under scrutiny. Or it might indicate those lodges were still adding new degrees (e.g., adopting higher degrees or side degrees, as some French lodges did). Notably, 1849 is the last pre-merger proceeding; after 1850, such terms vanish because the new regime didn’t allow anything but York Rite publicly.

In conclusion, the phrases “at the three rites” and “accumulating” in the Grand Lodge proceedings are tantalizing hints at eclectic practices. They strongly suggest that certain lodges were multi-rite in character. However, due to the lack of direct definition, we are left to interpret them in light of other evidence. Given what we now know (Germania’s ritual, Polar Star’s triple arrangement, Hermann’s ritual export, etc.), a reasonable inference is: “at the three rites” indicated an eclectic or multi-rite working lodge (likely using a composite ritual or separate meetings for each rite), and “accumulating” might have meant the lodge had aggregated multiple rites under one charter. These terms underscore how unique Louisiana’s Masonic scene was at that time – so unique that even the terminology in records has no parallel elsewhere.

Early Louisiana Lodges and Evidence of Multi-Ritual Practice (1810s–1850)

Looking back to the founding era of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, it becomes clear that multi-ritual practice was baked into its foundations. The Grand Lodge of Louisiana was established in 1812 by the union of several pre-existing lodges in New Orleans, each with different origins:

• La Concorde (Concord) No. 3 – Originally chartered by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania (which itself had many French members) or possibly by a French authority. Likely worked in French initially.
• La Parfaite Union (Perfect Union) No. 1 – Originally chartered by the Grand Orient of France (1794), definitely a French Modern Rite lodge in origin, later re-chartered under Louisiana GL.
• Polar Star (L’Etoile Polaire) No. 5 – Chartered 1794 by the Grand Orient of France as well, a French Modern Rite lodge.
• Perseverance No. 4 – This lodge has a complex origin. It may have begun under the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1807 (as “Persévérance”) with a mixed French/American membership; later it was associated with the Grand Consistory of Louisiana (a Scottish Rite body that briefly functioned as a quasi-Grand Lodge around 1813). Perseverance entered the GL of Louisiana orbit somewhat later but was considered a founding lodge by continuity.
• Charity No. 2 – A short-lived lodge of perhaps French origin (went dark in 1821).
• (There were also a couple of Spanish-speaking lodges in early New Orleans, such as Union (Unión) No. 4 under the Grand Lodge of South Carolina, and others that merged or dissolved, but the main founding lodges are above.)

From the start, these lodges had disparate ritual backgrounds – French Modern Rite vs. English Ancient York, etc. The new Grand Lodge allowed them to keep their workings initially. For example, Perfect Union and Polar Star, coming from G∴O∴d∴F∴ charters, would have practiced the French Rite (which at Craft level has different passwords, floorwork, tracing boards, etc., compared to York Rite). There is evidence that through the 1810s and 1820s, those lodges did continue their continental practices to some degree. One fragmentary source is a report that in 1812, the new Grand Lodge printed its proceedings in both English and French, indicating the bilingual nature of its constituents. Also, a contemporary Mason, Augustus de Grasse (active in New Orleans in the 1810s), wrote about lodges working in various rites.

By 1824, there was a schism where the older French lodges (Perfect Union, Polar Star, etc.) temporarily split to form a rival “Grand Orient of Louisiana,” unhappy with American influence. This was healed in 1827, but it underscores the tension. The result of the 1830s compromise (the 1833 constitution’s three-rite recognition) was essentially to keep everyone under one roof by formally acknowledging the diversity. So in the 1830s and 40s:

• Perfect Union No. 1 – listed under York Rite by 1833, but likely still largely French in ritual; perhaps gradually incorporating English Webb-work to satisfy Americans.
• Concord No. 3 – similarly under York category after 1833, but possibly practicing a hybrid (it merged with Perfect Union later, suggesting they weren’t incompatible).
• Perseverance No. 4 – as noted, “at the three rites” in 1830s. It might have been the lodge that tried to serve as a universal lodge for all traditions (maybe due to its ties with Scottish Rite bodies). It’s recorded that in 1856 Perseverance conducted a Masonic funeral with both Scottish and York factions present, highlighting its bridging role.
• Polar Star No. 5 – the extreme case of triple organization. Polar Star is documented to have been a Scottish Rite lodge by mid-1800s. In fact, it was associated with Jacques Foulhouze’s Supreme Council in the 1850s as well and might have left GL at some point. Polar Star survives today (as Etoile Polaire No. 1 under GL of Louisiana) and works in English, but presumably as part of the Scottish Rite district.
• Germania No. 46 – founded in 1844 from Perseverance, as we’ve detailed, with its eclectic ritual. It was a new lodge but born from that multi-rite milieu, given a York charter but practicing a blend.
• Other Lodges: Between 1830 and 1850, Louisiana chartered many new lodges (numerous English-speaking “American” lodges as well as some French/German ones). For example, Union Lodge No. 6 (English-speaking, Gedge’s lodge), Humility No. 8, etc., which were standard York Rite. But also Jeune Amérique Lodge (French speaking), and later Kosmos No. 171 (German speaking, 1860s) etc. There may have been others working Scottish Rite craft (some sources mention Excelsior Lodge and Emeth Lodge in the 1850s tied to the Supreme Council). Each of these would have their own story, but they fall beyond our core scope.

By focusing on the founding lodges, we see that prior to 1850 at least three of the four main lodges (Perfect Union, Perseverance, Polar Star) had practices beyond pure York Rite. This strongly implies that the Grand Lodge of Louisiana itself, before 1850, was never solely York in character. It was a hybrid Grand Lodge overseeing lodges of multiple traditions. No wonder the conservative Americans like Gedge were disturbed.

One telling piece of evidence comes from the Grand Lodge proceedings of 1875 (referenced earlier): “Germania Lodge works the first degree in the A.&A. Rite, second and third degree in the York Rite…by the Grand Lodge”. The footnote for this in Germania’s history suggests this was noted in the Committee on Work or Grand Master’s report. Interestingly, it implies that even 25 years after the merger, a lodge (Germania) was officially acknowledged as using a mix of rites. This hints that some of the eclectic practice quietly persisted despite the York dominance. Perhaps because Germania was an ethnic lodge, it flew under the radar or was given leeway.

Finally, it’s worth noting the role of Jacques Étienne Foulhouze, as he ties into both the founding lodges and later developments. Foulhouze was a French Mason who moved to Louisiana and became a member of Polar Star Lodge. He was a fervent Scottish Rite proponent and, after the 1850 merger, led the creation of the Supreme Council of Louisiana in 1852. He went on to author an official Scottish Rite Craft ritual in French in 1861. That ritual (sometimes called the Foulhouze ritual) was adopted by lodges like Perseverance and Germania when they were part of the Scottish Rite system. It’s the ritual Germania switched to in 1940 (translated to English by then). Foulhouze’s actions indicate that the French/Scottish tradition was still strong enough to form a parallel Masonic authority when the Grand Lodge tried to snuff it out. The fact that Grand Lodge of Louisiana eventually reconciled with those lodges and even today allows Scottish Rite craft lodges (unique among U.S. Grand Lodges) is a legacy of that early diversity.

In sum, examining the founding and early lodges of Louisiana shows that multi-rite ritual practice was not an anomaly but a foundational characteristic of Free-Masonry in that region. Concord, Perfect Union, Perseverance, Polar Star – all had roots in non-York systems and apparently exercised that heritage until forced not to. Germania came in 1844 as a latecomer that encapsulated all these influences in one ritual, at the cusp of the change. By 1850, the Grand Lodge tried to rewrite itself as purely York, but the truth lived on in lodge memories and hidden documents, now being brought to light.

Legacy, Open Questions, and Continued Research

The case of Germania Lodge No. 46’s 1844 ritual opens a fascinating window into a lost chapter of Masonic history. What began as the discovery of a dusty German manuscript has led to a reevaluation of early Louisiana Free-Masonry’s character. We now understand that New Orleans in the early-to-mid 1800s was a unique “melting pot” of Masonic rites, producing blended rituals like Germania’s that would be unthinkable elsewhere. This eclectic ritual tradition was largely suppressed after 1850 due to ideological conflicts, but enough traces survived in archives and distant lodges (even as far as California) to allow reconstruction of the story.

Germania’s ritual itself stands as a tangible artifact of this blended tradition. Thanks to Arturo de Hoyos’ translation, we know it incorporated York (Preston-Webb) framework, continental French innovations, and likely Scottish Rite flourishes. It served Germania Lodge for nearly a century, helping generations of German-American Masons in New Orleans experience the Craft in their native tongue and in a form that honored multiple heritages. The lodge’s later adoption of a standard Scottish Rite craft ritual in 1940, and continued pride in its 16th District Scottish Rite status, show a continuity of spirit – Germania remained a guardian of distinctive ritual practice even as language and times changed.

There remain many unanswered questions and avenues for further research:

• Who wrote or translated the 1844 ritual? We still don’t know the identity of the compiler. Was it a single brother (perhaps an educated German who had been initiated in New York or Pennsylvania)? Or was it a committee of Germania’s founders? The ritual’s nuances (like awkward German Masonic terms) hint at someone not deeply versed in European Free-Masonry but familiar with American work. Perhaps a clue lies in Perseverance Lodge’s records – if a key member of Perseverance fluent in German assisted. Identifying the author would help explain the intent behind the blend.
• When exactly did the eclectic ritual tradition start in Louisiana? Was it present from 1812 onward (with lodges like Perfect Union practicing mixed forms), or did it develop later as a compromise in the 1820s–30s? If we could find an older ritual text from Perfect Union or Polar Star circa 1820, we might see how similar or different it was. Sebastian Tavo’s research in Heredom might have uncovered descriptions of Perfect Union No. 17’s ritual that match something in Louisiana—pointing to an earlier source.
• Which other lodges used a blended ritual? We suspect Perfect Union No. 1 and Perseverance No. 4 did. Possibly others like Friendship Lodge or Inflammable (La Franchise) Lodge, if any existed, might have done so. The term “at the three rites” could have applied to more lodges that we just don’t have records for. A systematic review of all ante-1850 Louisiana lodge charters and any surviving bylaws might reveal hints (e.g., a French charter might include ritual particulars).
• What exactly did “at the three rites” and “accumulating” mean to those Masons? This is still speculative. If any correspondence or diaries from members like John Gedge’s opponents (say, Louis Peuch or Jean Foulhouze) can be found, they might explicitly discuss these terms or the practices they saw as objectionable.
• Could the Germania ritual (or similar eclectic rituals) have spread beyond Louisiana? We saw one case in California. Are there others? Perhaps lodges in the Caribbean or Latin America that had Louisiana connections? For instance, when French Louisianan Masons went to Havana or Texas, did they bring such workings? Louisiana also had connections to Mississippi and Alabama Free-Masonry in early 1800s – maybe some of those lodges briefly had mixed rites until standardization caught up. This is a broader question of how unique (or not) Louisiana was compared to other regions with mixed populations (e.g., the West Indies or Europe itself during the union of Ancients/Moderns).
• What role did the Grand Orient of France and Scottish Rite bodies play? The GOdF chartered the original lodges, and the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction had a Grand Consistory in New Orleans as early as 1811. Did they issue any ritual instructions or protests when things changed? For example, when Louisiana lodges switched to York Rite, did GOdF record a reaction? Such international correspondence might be archived in Paris or Washington D.C.
• Are there surviving ritual manuscripts? Besides Germania’s, perhaps a French manuscript of Perfect Union’s ritual or a Spanish one from Cervantes Lodge (a Spanish lodge in 1850s) might lurk in an archive. The Grand College of Rites (an organization dedicated to preserving defunct rituals) might have collected something relevant. The Argus archive reference shows Arturo de Hoyos and S. Brent Morris edited a volume on “The Perfect Ceremonies of Craft Masonry and the Holy Royal Arch” – unclear if that touches on Louisiana, but it shows interest in alternative craft rituals.
• Oral history and lodge folklore: Lodges like Polar Star and Perseverance no doubt have stories passed down. Did anyone ever whisper that “we used to do things differently before the war (Civil War)” or some such? In the late 19th century, older members from the 1840s would still have been alive to mentor new ones. Perhaps some hints can be gleaned from old anniversary addresses or speeches. For example, Germania’s 100th anniversary address in 1944 might have mentioned the old ritual (or maybe not, given WWII anti-German sentiment then).

The legacy of this research is multifold. It challenges Free-Masons to appreciate the diversity that once existed in ritual practice – even within a single Grand Lodge. It also highlights how historical narratives can be shaped (or skewed) by those in power, as the Yorkists nearly succeeded in wiping out knowledge of alternative rites in Louisiana. For Louisiana Masons today, this is a rediscovery of their own heritage – something Germania Lodge has embraced by preserving its history and even showcasing its ritual traditions to other lodges (through the traveling degree team). On a broader scale, it adds to the understanding of American Masonic development, reminding us that the “Webb-Standard” was not as monolithic or accepted everywhere as once thought.

In closing, the story of Germania Lodge No. 46’s 1844 ritual exemplifies how deep research – delving into archives, translating old documents, cross-referencing proceedings, and networking scholarly findings – can upend long-held assumptions. It took over 150 years for the pieces of this puzzle to re-emerge. We now have a richer, more nuanced picture of Free-Masonry in antebellum Louisiana: one of three rites in one – truly “eclectic” Free-Masonry – that flourished briefly and left an indelible, if hidden, mark on Masonic history. As more rare documents come to light and historians revisit forgotten archives, we can expect further insights to either confirm or refine the hypotheses presented here. The quest continues, and every new discovery – be it a lost minute book or a scholarly paper – will bring us closer to understanding the full story of Germania Lodge No. 46 and its brethren lodges that once worked “at the three rites.”

Most of this article was made possible because of the immense research work performed by Masonic Scholars especially Michael R. Poll and Art DeHoyos. For more on this topic, I higlhy recommend Michael R. Poll’s video on the matter.

Article By Antony R.B. Augay P∴M∴