Napoleon 1
NAPOLEON BONAPARTE was born at Ajaccio, in Corsica, on the 15th of August 1769; the original orthography of his name was Buonaparte, but he suppressed the during his first campaign in Italy. His motives for so doing were merely to render the spelling conformable with the pronunciation, and to abridge his signature. He signed Buonaparte even after the famous 13th Vendemiaire.

It has been affirmed that he was born in 1768, and that he represented himself to be a year younger than he really was. This is untrue. He always told me the 9th of August was his birthday, and, as I was born on the 9th of July 1769, our proximity of age served to strengthen our union and friendship when we were both at the Military College of Brienne.

The false and absurd charge of Bonaparte having misrepresented his age, is decidedly refuted by a note in the register of M. Berton, sub-principal of the College of Brienne, in which it is stated that M. Napoleon de Buonaparte, ecuyer, born in the city of Ajaccio, in Corsica, on the 15th of August 1769, left the Royal Military College of Brienne on the 17th October 1784.

Bonaparte, Napolean - Military Leader, Emperor of France (and his four brothers)
There is serious doubt about Napoleon Bonapart being a Mason among Masonic researchers.

His four brothers memberships are well documented.

French Source ( Internet)

Napoléon Franc-Maçon ?

Reste le cas le plus épineux, celui de Napoléon lui-même. Beaucoup considèrent que Napoléon, bien qu'entouré de nombreux maçons ne fût jamais initié.

Un livre remarquable a pourtant - avec de nombreux détails et de nombreux indices - démontré l'initiation de Napoléon.

L'ouvrage est intitulé " Napoléon Franc-Maçon ? " de François Collaveri (avec une préface de Jean Tulard) réédité en 1983 chez Tallandier à la "Bibliothèque Napoléonienne"

Voici la note concernant cet ouvrage : " Napoléon était-il franc-maçon ? La question semble avoir moins intéressé les contemporains de l’Empereur que la postérité. Pour certains historiens, l’initiation de Napoléon à la loge du Grand Orient ne fait aucun doute. Pour d’autres en revanche, il ne s’agit que d’une hypothèse invérifiée, puisqu’aucun document officiel ne prouve formellement son appartenance à la société secrète. Il est vrai que l’Empereur n’y a jamais fait allusion, même dans sa Correspondance, et a toujours semblé éloigné des questions maçonniques, comme il pouvait l’être avec les questions religieuses... Alors ? Pour trancher cette épineuse question qui divise le monde des napoléoniens, François Collaveri, après sa remarquable étude parue en 1982 et intitulée "La Franc-maçonnerie des Bonaparte", présente et analyse dans "Napoléon franc-maçon ?" un grand nombre de documents inédits, dont certains sont d’une importance capitale. Fruit de dizaines d’années de recherches dans les archives des principales loges françaises et étrangères, cet ouvrage s’affirme aujourd’hui comme la plus sûre contribution qui puisse être fournie pour éclairer ce débat houleux et prouver que l’initiation maçonnique

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                 

C e p h a s M i n i s t r y / L i b r ar y
http //www.cephasministry.com/index2.html

La loge "Bonaparte" est officiellement installée le 1er Mars 1854. Le 6 Avril, le Vénérable-fondateur Eugène MOUTONNET est remplacé jusqu'en 1868 par l'avocat LEZERET de LAMAURINIE, membre du GCDR et futur Conseiller de l'Ordre

This is the only evidence that Napoleon was a Mason. The rest of the writing is not visible on the photo but described as that of Kryptogramms and list the entire familie of Bonaparte and their inner circle called "Hofloge" of the Napoleoniden. The Lithographie. Paris, Archiv des Grand Orient de France Allegorische Darstellung of the Freemason's Doings in France, 1812. Paris, Bibl.nat.

Napoleon was considered the most powerful conquerer in history until Adolf Hitler. He lived from 1769-1821. He promoted liberalism . His second marriage in 1810 was to Marie Louise Habsburg who wore Merovingian Bees all over her robe. She was a descendant of Rudolf I of the Habsburg dynasty who became emperor of the Holy Roman Empire in 1273.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MEMOIRS OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE,

Complete By LOUIS ANTOINE FAUVELET DE BOURRIENNE

His Private Secretary  Edited by R. W. Phipps Colonel, Late Royal Artillery 1891
Free Online 

Source :  http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3567/3567-h/3567-h.htm




 
 
Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
 
 
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
 
 
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
 
     http://www.gutenberg.net
 
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.                                              
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

The Builder Magazine
Napoleon the Mason and the Pope
By BRO ERNEST E. MURRAY, Montana

HISTORIES dealing with Napoleon and his biographers can generally be divided into two classes; on the one hand we have him represented as a military genius, regenerating France, a man of ambition, determination and strength, an example for all to follow in overcoming obstacles, and on the other we have him branded as the greatest adventurer the world has ever known, the scourge of Europe, the ruination of France.

 

The former accentuate and magnify his victories in war and minimize his blunders, playing up small incidents such as relieving a sentry, giving up his horse to a wounded officer, while the latter revile him for forsaking his armies in Egypt and Russia, his treatment of his wife Josephine, his every act attributed to unworthy motives, and so forth, and so forth, the one glorifying him and the other condemning him.

 

That he was a great general in an age when good generals were conspicuous by their absence must be granted, but Wellington was a greater general as he conquered all the French armies opposed to him and commanded by Napoleon's Marshals and finally the army under the direct command of Napoleon himself. Of the rest he was an ordinary man with man's shortcomings and weaknesses.

 

But there is one aspect, although continually referred to in all histories and by his biographers, which I think has not been sufficiently analyzed that of his Destiny. Napoleon continually harped upon his destiny, he is continually referred to as the "Man of Destiny."

 

Just what did he conceive to be his destiny? To conquer and dominate Europe? Undoubtedly but why? Why should he conceive it to be his destiny to do this? Let us consider certain facts.

 

To maintain that Napoleon was without religion is ridiculous; no man who believes that he is destined and used by the Supreme Being to take certain action can be without religion. He certainly was not orthodox, if there were any orthodoxy immediately following the French revolution. Dogma and ceremonial religion did not appeal to him, but he recognized that these were necessary for certain minds. One of the complaints made against him by critics is that in Egypt he posed as a Mahommedan. What is there irreligious about that? The formulae of the Mahommedans is "God is God and Mahommed is His prophet." They recognize Moses and Jesus as His prophets, too, and venerate them. Can any Christian deny that God is God?

 

As soon as he was elected First Consul he realized that to ensure peace of mind to the masses and to stabilize the state a concrete religion was necessary for them, and to that end he concluded a concordat with the Papacy. The terms of this concordat were unique; there never had been one like it and none since.

 

At the revolution the lands and other property of the Roman Church had been confiscated. The people were as incensed against the Church as much as they were against the nobles. The terms of the concordat were, inter alia:

 

It established the Roman Church but only as subordinate to the State.

 

The bishops and archbishops were to be appointed or reappointed by the First Consul.

 

The sequestered estates were not to he restored to the Church.

 

When it is considered that the Roman Church at this time had a strangle hold on most of the states of Europe these conditions are the more remarkable. Spain, Italy, Austria and most of the states of Germany formed part of the Holy Roman Empire, their rulers recognizing the Pope as the Supreme Pontiff and Temporal Ruler.

 

Napoleon was a Freemason; that he was a "Blue" Mason we are sure; very possibly he had taken some of the "Scots" degrees and others that abounded on the continent, wherein liberty of thought, conscience and action were inculcated. The American Colonies had rebelled and formed themselves into a Republic where the State was supreme over all other associations of men. To preach liberty of thought to the French at such a time would very probably have caused thousands to become atheists. As a wise administrator he was awake to the uses of a concrete religion as a preservative of order and so made this concordat with the Church of Rome as a measure of expediency, but he took the precaution to demand that he nominate bishops and archbishops no foreign priesthood for France. It realized a false hope in the Church of Rome as we shall see.

 

As a good Mason he desired education for the people, and proceeded to see that they had it. In the concordat he agreed to let the Church have elementary schools. If the local authorities cared to submit to this or have schools of their own he did not object. But he at once proceeded to establish State controlled secondary or higher grade schools. He established technical schools and in 1806 the educational edifice was crowned by the seventeen academies of the University of France.

 

Having established religion in France as a necessary prerequisite for becoming a great nation, what was his attitude to the Church of Rome? He found cause of quarrel with the Italian States, marched an army there, took possession of the Papal States and forced the Pope to sign a treaty very much contrary to the Pope's liking.

 

Note his action at his coronation. He forced the Pope to attend the ceremony and all went well so long as the religious ceremonies continued. When the Pope proceeded to place the crown on his head, Napoleon bruskly seized the crown from the Pope's hands and crowned himself. Many histories comment on this act and refer to it as his bad manners, impulsive effrontery, and so forth. But was it not a deliberate act to demonstrate to "His Holiness" that the crown of France was no longer in the giving of the Church of Rome ? Was not the Pope deliberately brought there for that purpose to make no mistake about the lesson that the State was superior to the Church?

 

Later when his son was born he compelled the Church to again officiate at his baptism in state, and immediately proclaimed him King of Rome. As a church he recognized the Pope as priest only; by every act he proclaimed that he possessed no temporal power. At one time he had the Pope prisoner in France.

 

Spain, Austria and the states of Germany who acknowledged the Pope as the supreme earthly as well as spiritual ruler were invaded and conquered and members of his family and his Marshalls, owing their appointment to him, were placed upon the thrones of those countries.

 

When he placed his brother Louis on the throne of the Netherlands, the country which had been the worst victims of the Roman Church in the preceding century, he instructed him to be the patron of the Masons.

 

When in 1806 Francis II of Austria regained the throne of that country he dropped the "Holy Roman" title and called himself Emperor of Austria. The Holy Roman Empire had ceased to exist. Had not Napoleon fulfilled his destiny to destroy the power of Rome? What would have been the history of Europe had there been no Napoleon?

 

Having fulfilled his destiny his "star" began to wane first the debacle of Russia his army driven out of Spain by the British the banishment to Elba the 100 days of temporary triumph to be followed by the final and complete disaster of Waterloo.

 

At the time of his election as First Consul the Church of Rome dominated Europe. Who was to dominate the Pope or the people represented by their kings or presidents? Did not Napoleon believe that he was destined to be the means to destroy the Papal domination ? It would appear so.

 

But the Papal domination was not utterly destroyed, it was but subjected. The Papacy has obtained control of other nations, notably in Mexico and South America. Again they have been subjected but not utterly destroyed.

 

With all his many faults Napoleon was a pretty good Mason. He had courage which many of us lack.
…………………………………………………………………………………………..

Another Source link to
http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/aqc/napoleon.html
Grand Lodge of the British Columbia & Yukon
Napoleon appointed his brothers to masonic office: [l to r] Louis (1778/08/02 - 1846/07/25) was named Deputy Grand Master in 1805; Jerome (1784/11/15 - 1860/06/24) was Grand Master of the Grand Orient Westphalia; the eldest, Joseph (1768/01/07- 1844/07/28), was made a freemason at the Tuilleries in April of 1805, and appointed Grand Master of the Grand Orient of France; and Lucien (1775/05/21 - 1840/06/29) was a member of the Grand Orient of France.
Initiated: June 12-19 1798 (1795-98)
Army Philadelphe Lodge, Malta

Napoleon I. and Freemasonry

THE question whether Buonaparte was a Freemason or not has never been decided. Rumour says he was made at Malta. Some writers incline to the belief that he was only "historically instructed." The only matter of certainty is that he countenanced the institution and astutely made it subserve his own purposes.1 .

A recent letter to us from Bro. E. T. Carson, of Cincinnati, throws a little additional light on the question. This distinguished brother, whose Masonic library is as remarkable, or rather more so, for the priceless rarities it contains as for its size, is the fortunate possessor of a fine copy of Thory's History of the Grand Orient of France. A MS. note in it (French) describes it thus:—

"A textual copy of an autograph of Brother Theory, which was found in a copy of his work, "History of the Grand Orient of France," with his portrait. Brought at the sale after his decease."

Bro. Carson remarks: "The copy referred to is undoubtedly the one I have, as it contains the portrait and the following inserted MS. There was no portrait in the edition as published."

The following is Bro. Carson's translation of the French MS. As he says, there is no certainty as to whom Thory's letter was addressed to, "but inasmuch as Morand, the celebrated and well-known Paris Freemason and literateur, certifies to it as corresponding with the original letter in his possession, I am inclined to think the letter was addressed to him. "We also think there can scarcely be a doubt of it, and beyond thanking Bro. Carson for the important information so kindly placed at our disposal, we will only add the one comment, that the letter seems to favour the theory that Napoleon never was a Freemason by initiation, but only "historically instructed." However, let the letter speak for itself. — EDITOR.

 

[Translation from the French certified copy].

Paris, 16th March, 1818.

 

"You ask me Sir, why it was that in my work on Free Masonry I did not say a word as to the secret motives which led Bonaparte to protect this association, when, as you say, his aversion to secret societies was well known to the world, he regarding the members as being opposed to his government.

"This is true Sir, but I did not believe it my duty then to make public the political intrigue which led to this result; if I had done so I would have compromised many persons, and might have endangered myself, but now when all or most of the parties to this affair with Bonaparte, are no more, I can give you the direct information; you may rely on the authenticity of the statement inasmuch as I was a confidential party to the whole affair.

"The Freemasons having been without a Grand Master since the death of the Duke of Orleans,3 . conceived the idea of proposing to the Prince Cambaceres to accept this dignity. He mentioned it to Bonaparte and represented to him that the association of Freemasons properly directed, instead of being prejudicial to his interest, might be made very useful to him politically.

" Before deciding upon the matter, the Emperor required a memoir on the objects and principles of the association, especially as to what is called the Secret of the Freemasons. Cambaceres convoked the chiefs of the order at his hotel, and communicated to them the Emperor's answer. M. Pyron and some others were charged with the duty of preparing the memoir; they presented it a few days afterwards.

"In their report, these gentlemen declared that the Free Masons were the successors of the Templars ; that the ultimate object of the members was the restoration of the Order of the Temple, that all their allegories related to the death of Jacques De Molay, that the vengeance alluded to in the Elu degrees and in Kadosh was that which the Templars formerly swore to execute upon King Philip the Fair, the destroyer of the Order, and upon his successors, but this vengeance was accomplished by the accession of Napoleon to the imperial throne.

"Bonaparte, upon reading this memoir, was enchanted with an explanation so re-assuring. He determined to protect the Freemasons, he gave them his brother, then King of Spain, for Grand Master, and Cambaceres was named Grand Master Adjunct. He directed his generals, the members of his court, and all public functionaries to enter the lodges. It was thus that Cromwell favoured all the cotteries and societies of this kind.

"M. Pyron showed me the memoir before presenting it to the Archchancellor. I endeavoured to dissuade him from presenting it, by demonstrating to him its absurdity, and especially its falsehood and the atrocity of its conclusions; he would hear nothing.

"After these details you can readily see, Sir, why I could not speak in my book of the causes which induced Bonaparte to favour the Association with his protection, besides these matters are not good to be made public in the Lodges, and if some imprudent person should do so, all good Frenchmen would desert them.

"Receive, Sir, the assurance of my distinguished consideration. — THORY."

 

 

I, the undersigned, certify that the foregoing copy is literally comformable to the text of the original which I have in my library. — P. MORAND 33; 8th October, 1843.

 

1. Ars Quatuor Coronatorum vol. viii (1895). ed. G. W. Speth. Margate: Lodge Quatuor Coronati, No. 2078, London. pp. 188-89. ^
2. J.E. S. Tucket, "Napoleon I and Freemasonry," Ars Quatuor Coronatorum vol. xxvii (1914) pp. 96-141.^
3. Mackey notes his election in 1771 and the Grand Orient declaring his office vacant on 13 May 1793, almost six months before his death on the guillotine on 6 November. Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Albert G. Mackey. Revised. vol. ii. Richmond, Virginia : Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, Inc., 1966. p. 745.