Gestapo

Gestapo (pronounced guh-stah-poh or guh-shtah-poh (German))

(1) A branch of German police under the Nazi regime (1933-1945) comprising various sections.

(2) A critical descriptor of any organ (usually) of a state which to some degree resembles Nazi Gestapo, especially in the brutal suppression of opposition (often initial lower-case).

(3) By extension, any oppressive force, group or tactic.

1933: An abbreviated form of the German Geheime Staatspolizei (the construct being Ge(heime) Sta(ats)po(lizei)); literally “secret state police”.  Gestapo is a proper noun.

A typically German abbreviation

It’s an urban myth that Hugo Boss designed the uniforms of the Gestapo.  The field officers of force didn't wear uniforms and in that sense operated in the manner of police detectives while some administrative (district) staff wore much the same garb as their SS equivalents.  When operating in occupied territories under wartime conditions, Gestapo wore the same field grey as the SS with a few detail differences in the insignia.  Hugo Boss was one of a number of companies contracted to produce the uniforms of the SS (Schutzstaffel (literally "protection squadron" but translated variously as "protection squad", "security section" etc)).  The SS began (under different names) in 1923 as a party organization with fewer than a dozen members and was the Führer's personal bodyguard.  The SS name was adopted in 1925 and during the Third Reich evolved into a vast economic, industrial and military apparatus more than two million strong to the point where some historians (and contemporaries) regarded it as a kind of "state within a state".  Of the SS, that's a more accurate description than of many of the apparatuses of the party and state but it was a feature of the Nazi period (not well-understood until after the war) that the internal dynamic was one of a permanent state of institutional struggle for dominance, reflecting Hitler's world view.  Post-war analysis by economists revealed the extent to which this system created structural inefficiencies.

The meme-makers found Hugo Boss's corporate history hard to resist.

The investigative & operational arms of Gestapo comprised the Sicherheitspolizei (SiPo; Security Police) and the Kriminalpolizei (Kripo; Criminal Police), the final structural shape achieved in 1936 when Heinrich Himmler (1900–1945; Reichsführer SS 1929-1945) was granted control of all police forces in Germany, this having the general effect of formalizing the all forces branches of the Himmler’ apparatus.  It was a reward for Himmler’s role in the Nacht der langen Messer (Night of the Long Knives), also called Unternehmen Kolbri (Operation Hummingbird), the bloody purge between 30 June-2 July 1934, when the regime carried out a number of extrajudicial executions, ostensibly to crush what was referred to as "the Röhm Putsch".  The administrative change was notable for marking the point at which control and enforcement of internal security passed from the state to the party, something reinforced in 1943 when Himmler was appointed Interior Minister.

The Gestapo was in 1946 declared a “criminal organization” by the international Military Tribunal (IMT) conducting the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) and although the idea of an organization being criminal seemed novel to many, there were precedents.  Under the Raj, the British India Act (1836) provided that if a man was proved to be a member of the Thuggee (the Thugs, a group of professional robbers and murderers who strangled their victims), regardless of whether his conduct disclosed any actual offence, he might receive a life sentence with hard labor and in laws were passed in the US declaring the KKK (Ku Klux Klan) criminal, a model used in 1919 by the state of California to outlaw “criminal syndication”.  Under Soviet law, someone could even be deemed a member of some organization, even if they didn’t actually belong to it, something of a Stalinist companion the crime of “unspecified offences”.  Germany too had “a bit of previous” in the approach, the Weimar Republic (1918-1933) making it a crime to belong to any “anti-government secret organization”, in 1923 gazetting the Communist Party, the National Socialist Party (the Nazis) and the German People’s Freedom Party among the proscribed.

Remarkably (commented upon even at the time), the Orpo (Ordnungspolizei (Order Police, the “policemen” in the usual sense of the word)) and the Kripo weren’t included in the indictment on the basis they remain “civilian organizations”.  In the trial, the defense raised a number of technical points about the state of German law operative at the time the events being judged transpired and the court accepted some of these but anyway on 30 September 1946 ruled the Gestapo a criminal organization, thus implicating all members (excluding only some clerical & ancillary staff and those who had ceased to be employed prior to 1 December 1939.  In legal theory, this meant all operational SiPo staff active after 1 December 1939 could individually have been indicted in accordance with the available evidence and the expectation was that at least those most senior or accused of the more serious crimes would have faced trial.  However, there was no follow-up “Gestapo” trial, “punishment” limited to those Gestapo staff held in Allied internment camps, almost all of who were released after three years.  Although the Allied Control Commission (ACC) which administered occupied Germany allowed local courts to conduct trials, the number of Gestapo officers tried was comparatively low and even when convicted, the period spent in detention prior to trial was deducted from their sentence, a convention not extended to the seven sent to Spandau Prison after the main trial.  Only in first the Russian Zone (and later as the German Democratic Republic (GDR)) were many Gestapo officers charged and sentenced, almost all released after 1957.

For the majority, like many Germans they were subject to the “denazification” process, the prize of which was to gain a “Certificate of Exoneration”, a piece of paper which appealed to the famously sardonic Berlin sense of humor, soon dubbed the Persilschein (Percil Certificate), an allusion to the popular washing detergent which promised to make clothes “whiter than white”.  Most Gestapo staff received a Persilschein and many either resumed their employment in the new German state and ultimately were credited for pension purposes with their service during the Nazi years.

Politicians often reference the Nazis when attaching their opponents and "Gestapo" is a popular slur. 

Even before World War II (1939-1945) began, the word "Gestapo" had entered the English language as a synecdoche for “police state tactics” and it was in this sense Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) on 4 June 1945 used the word in a broadcast for the UK general election, warning a Labour government (“the socialists” as he called them) would inevitably create such an apparatus to enforce the myriad of regulations and controls they were proposing:

“….there can be no doubt that socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the abject worship of the state. …liberty, in all its forms is challenged by the fundamental conceptions of socialism. …there is to be one state to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This state is to be the arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss.

A socialist state once thoroughly completed in all its details and aspects… could not afford opposition.  Socialism is, in its essence, an attack upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe freely without having a harsh, clumsy tyrannical hand clapped across their mouths and nostrils.

But I will go farther.  I declare to you, from the bottom of my heart that no socialist system can be established without a political police.  Many of those who are advocating socialism or voting socialist today will be horrified at this idea. That is because they are short-sighted, that is because they do not see where their theories are leading them.

No socialist government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent.  They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.  And this would nip opinion in the bud; it would stop criticism as it reared its head, and it would gather all the power to the supreme party and the party leaders, rising like stately pinnacles above their vast bureaucracies of civil servants, no longer servants and no longer civil.  And where would the ordinary simple folk — the common people, as they like to call them in America — where would they be, once this mighty organism had got them in its grip?”

Essex man: Clement Attlee at home, mowing the lawn, Stanmore, Essex 19 April 1945.

It was a controversial statement and even many of Churchill’s Conservative Party colleagues distanced themselves from the sentiments.  The man being accused of planning this police state was Clement Attlee (1883–1967; UK prime-minister 1945-1951) who had served as Churchill’s deputy in the National Government (1940-1945) and was one of history’s more improbable figures to be painted an incipient totalitarian.  The electorate wasn’t persuaded and in the 1945 election Labour won a huge majority of seats in what is described as a “landslide” although the numbers are distorted by the UK’s “first-past-the-post” system; Labour gathered well under half the votes cast but that pattern has subsequently been typical of UK elections and in 1951 the Conservatives actually returned to office despite Labour out-polling them.  Attlee had responded to Churchill’s speech the next day:

“The Prime Minister made much play last night with the rights of the individual and the dangers of people being ordered about by officials.  I entirely agree that people should have the greatest freedom compatible with the freedom of others.  There was a time when employers were free to work little children for sixteen hours a day.  I remember when employers were free to employ sweated women workers on finishing trousers at a penny halfpenny a pair.  There was a time when people were free to neglect sanitation so that thousands died of preventable diseases.  For years every attempt to remedy these crying evils was blocked by the same plea of freedom for the individual.  It was in fact freedom for the rich and slavery for the poor.  Make no mistake, it has only been through the power of the state, given to it by Parliament, that the general public has been protected against the greed of ruthless profit-makers and property owners. The Conservative Party remains as always a class party.  In twenty-three years in the House of Commons, I cannot recall more than half a dozen from the ranks of the wage earners.  It represents today, as in the past, the forces of property and privilege.  The Labour Party is, in fact, the one party which most nearly reflects in its representation and composition all the main streams which flow into the great river of our national life.”

Succedaneum

Succedaneum (pronounced suhk-si-dey-nee-uhm)

(1) Something used as a substitute, especially any medical drug or agent that may be taken or prescribed in place of another (obsolete).

(2) One who takes the place of another.

1635–1645: From the New Latin succēdāneum, a noun use of the neuter singular of the Classical Latin succēdāneus (succeeding, following after; acting as substitute), the construct being suc(cēdō) (succeed, follow) +‎ -āneus (the composite adjectival suffix).  The notion of a succedaneum exists in many contexts and there are descriptions which are exactly synonymous and some which are merely similar or functionally overlap to some extent surrogate, backup, understudy, replacement, stand-in, locum, alternate, deputy, expediency, proxy, stopgap, body-double, sub, makeshift, fill-in, delegate, temporary, assistant, nominee, replica, successor and substitute.  Succedaneum is a noun and succedaneous is an adjective, the noun plural is succedanea.

Lindsay Lohan body-doubles: The Parent Trap (1998) (left) and Irish Wish (2023 (right).

The understudy is a term from the performing arts (theatre, ballet, opera et al) and describes someone who rehearses a part and is available to perform if the designated character becomes unavailable (illness, injury, tantrum, death etc).  In some cases an understudy may become a replacement if a temporary substitution becomes permanent.  A backup is essentially the same concept as an understudy but is used more generally.  Locum was a seventeenth century adoption of the Medieval Latin locum tenens (literally “one holding a place”) and has evolved as a class-based description of “a temporary replacement”, being by convention restricted to the professions (doctors, dentists, lawyers, vets etc (and for historic reasons the clergy)) whereas a replacement plumber is simply a replacement.  A body-double is used in film & television production to take the place of an actor for a variety of reasons (dangerous stunt work, scheduling conflicts, nudity scenes etc).  Alternates are usually those appointed to some sort of deliberative body, typically a judge appointed to some sort of enquiry or tribunal expected to last a long time, the idea being that in the case the primary judge becomes unavailable (illness, injury, tantrum, death etc), the matter may proceed without interruption.  In this context a nominee is someone nominated to fulfill some role which is for whatever reason (ex-officio, inheritance etc) in the gift of the nominator.  A proxy is particular example of a nominee who is authorized to exercise some right (usually a vote or votes) on behalf of the nominator.  A stopgap or makeshift is a description of something or someone temporarily substituted until a permanent arrangement is made. A delegate is an appointment made to exercise authority held by another but also carries the special value in that the extent of the delegation can be split.  In granting authority to a delegate, the delegated authority can be restricted to a single instance with all other matters reserved for the delegator.  In many cases a deputy or assistant will be able to exercise all or some of the authority held by the higher office but there are no set rules and things will vary from place to place.  As successor is simply a replacement and such situations the word substitute usually isn’t applied.

The issue of the appropriateness of the notion of succedaneum in legal proceedings was explored in the hearings of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) during the first trial of the leading Nazis at Nuremberg (1945-1946).  The first matter considered was whether others could be substituted if a preferred defendant wasn’t available for trial (ie they were dead or missing).  Because of the teleological nature of the trial insisted on by the Americans (who were providing the bulk of the resources and paying most of the bills) which was best served by a thematic approach to the choice of defendants, at least one representative of each defined area of interest was needed.  In the case of the army and navy that was simple because senior officers were to hand and the matter of the air force was fudged by indicting Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945 and Reichsmarschall 1940-1945) although his role as notional head of the Luftwaffe’s and indeed its role in the war received very little attention during the trial; given the Allies carpet bombing campaign had laid waste to German cities which indisputably were treated as civilian targets, it wasn’t something on which the prosecution wished to dwell although the opening address did include the admission the Germans not alone in reducing European cities to rubble and that “… the ruin that lies from the Rhine to the Danube shows that we have not been dull pupils”.  Despite that prosecutorial gesture however, it was make clear to counsel the defense of tu quoque (best translated as “you did it too” (literally “and you also”)) would not be permitted.

The defendants in the dock listening to Kaltenbrunner’s cross-examination, Nuremberg, 1946.

Dead or missing however were three of the most notorious figures from the security apparatus: Heinrich ("Gestapo") Müller (1900-1945 (presumed); head of the Gestapo 1939-1945), Reinhard Heydrich (1904–1942; head of the Reich Security Main Office 1939-1942) and Heinrich Himmler (1900–1945; Reichsführer SS 1929-1945).  However it was unthinkable a trial of the Nazis could be conducted without the Gestapo and the SS being represented so Ernst Kaltenbrunner (1903–1946; head of the Reich Security Main Office 1943-1945) was substituted and it proved a wise choice because of all the defendants, he was the one with absolutely no defense, his guilt established beyond any doubt by the wealth of documents signed in his own hand (his cross-examination a remarkably brief 2½ days).  He was a trained lawyer and simply denied everything although given the evidence his protests didn’t convince even the others in the dock.  He also wasn’t happy about the use of succedaneum, saying more than once he was not prepared “…to be an ersatz for Himmler” although that did him no good and he was condemned to hang.

Dead too was Dr Joseph Goebbels (1897-1975; Nazi propaganda minister 1933-1945) but the trial was not simply about the armed conflict which was fought between 1939-1945; the Americans in particular wanted the trial to be a platform to explore the role of propaganda in totalitarian societies and the way it was exploited by the Nazis in the 1930s.  Goebbels however had been a dominant figure in propaganda and the only official from the ministry of any status who could be found was Hans Fritzsche (1900–1953) who while not exactly “the newsreader” some claimed, was not someone ever concerned with matters of high-policy and he was available for the trial only because, in the haphazard ways things happened at the end of the war, he’d fallen into the hands of the Russians.  Certainly, his voice was well-known to Germans but nobody on the British or US prosecution teams had heard of him and, perhaps more tellingly, neither had some of his fellow defendants.  Despite this unpromising background however, a case was prepared but compared with the mass-murderers and plunderers which whom he shared the dock, the tribunal wasn’t convinced he could be convicted of war crimes or crimes against humanity and ordered his acquittal.  Unlike the substituted Kaltenbrunner who was guilty as sin of horrific crimes, Fritzsche seemed little more than a clerk, guilty of something but not war crimes.  Arrested shortly afterwards by the German authorities, he was convicted as a “major offender” by a denazification court and sentenced to nine years imprisonment.  In the early Cold War however, attitudes were shifting and like many others, he was soon released.

Courtroom during the Krupp trial, Nuremberg, 1947.

By far the most troubling act of (attempted) succedaneum was that of Alfried Krupp (1907–1967).  Krupp was an industrialist and had been head of the Krupp concern (steel works and related production) which was a major supplier of weapons and other materiel to the Nazi war machine, much of it produced using slave labor under appalling conditions.  It was important to ensure a representative of industry be included in the trial and no operation was more dominant in the Nazi economy than Krupps.  In one of those curious mistakes which just can’t be fixed, although it had been intended to indict Alfried Krupp, at some point in the process, a filing error or something happened and instead his father Gustav Krupp (1870–1950) was listed.  The father had actually been “retired” to the titular position of Chairman because of physical and mental incapacity and the error wasn’t noticed until it was too late and the indictment had been issued.  Were it in any other context, an apology could have been made and the paperwork amended but “substitution” in criminal law is a special case and no civilized legal system permits it.  The court had already been made aware that the elder Krupp was physically and mentally not fit to attend a trial which prompted the suggestion he might be tried in absentia but this the tribunal declined.  The prosecution’s alternative plan was therefore to “add” the name of the son to the indictment but this appalled the tribunal even more because it was so obviously as substitution.  By now it was too late to run the argument that the “addition” was simply to correct the earlier filing error and the trial proceeded without either Krupp.

At things turned out, the mistake merely delayed things.  At the time, it wasn’t certain there would be subsequent trials but the success of the main trial encouraged the prosecutors and twelve hearings (referred to usually as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials") were conducted including three concerned with the crimes committed in the course of industrial production (Krupp, Flick & IG Farben).  After the trial (1947-1948), Alfried Krupp received a twelve year sentence and the forfeiture of property although he served only a few years before the sentence was commuted.

Mason

Mason (pronounced mey-suhn)

(1) A person whose trade is building with units of various natural or artificial mineral products, as stones, bricks, cinder blocks, or tiles, usually with the use of mortar or cement as a bonding agent.

(2) A person who dresses stones or bricks.

(3) A clipping of Freemason (should always use an initial capital but frequently mason and variations in this context (masonry, masonism etc) appear; a member of the fraternity of Freemasons.

(4) To construct of or strengthen with masonry.

1175–1225: From the Middle English masoun & machun (mason), from the Anglo-Norman machun & masson, from the Old French masson & maçon (machun in the Old North French), from the Late Latin maciō (carpenter, bricklayer), from the Frankish makjon & makjō (maker, builder; to make (which may have some link with the Old English macian (to make)) from makōn (to work, build, make), from the primitive Indo-European mag- (to knead, mix, make), conflated with the Proto-West Germanic mattijō (cutter), from the primitive Indo-European metn- or met- (to cut).  Etymologists note there may have been some influence from another Germanic source such as the Old High German steinmezzo (stone mason (the Modern German Steinmetz has a second element related to mahhon (to make)), from the primitive Indo-European root mag-.  There’s also the theory of some link with the seventh century Medieval Latin machio & matio, thought derived from machina, source of the modern English machine and the medieval word might be from the root of Latin maceria (wall).    From the early twelfth century it was used as a surname, one of a number based on occupations (Smith, Wright, Carter etc) and the now-familiar use to denote “a member of the fraternity of freemasons” was first recorded in Anglo-French in the early fifteenth century Mason is a noun & verb, masonry & masonism are nouns, masoning is a verb, masoned is an adjective & verb and masonic is an adjective; the noun plural is masons.

The noun masonry was from the mid-fourteenth century masonrie, (stonework, a construction of dressed or fitted stones) and within decades it was used to describe the “art or occupation of a mason”.  It was from the fourteenth century Old French maçonerie from maçon.  The adjective Masonic was adopted in the 1767 in the sense of “of or pertaining to the fraternity of freemasons” and although it was early in the nineteenth century used to mean “of or pertaining to stone masons”, that remained rare, presumably because of the potential for confusion; not all stonemasons would have wished to have been thought part of the order.  The stonemason seems first to have been used in 1733.  An earlier name for the occupation was the fifteenth century hard-hewer while stone-cutter was from the 1530s (in the Old English there was stanwyrhta (stone-wright).  The US television cartoon series The Simpsons parodied the Freemasons in well-received episode called Homer the Great (1995) in which the plotline revolved around a secret society called the “Stonecutters”.  Dating from 1926, Masonite was a proprietary name of a type of fiberboard made originally by the Mason Fibre Company of Mississippi, named after William H. Mason (1877-1940 and a protégé of Thomas Edison (1847-1931) who patented the production process of making it.  In 1840, the word enjoyed a brief currency in the field of mineralogy to describe a type of chloritoid (a mixed iron, magnesium and manganese silicate mineral of metamorphic origin), the name honoring collector Owen Mason from Rhode Island who first brought the mineral to the attention of geologists.

The Mason jar was patented in 1858 by New York-based tinsmith John Landis Mason (1832–1902); it was a molded glass jar with an airtight screw lid which proved idea for the storage of preserves (usually fruits or vegetables), a popular practice by domestic cooks who, in season, would purchase produce in bulk and preserve it using high temperature water mixed with salt, sugar or vinegar.  The jars were in mass-production by the mid-1860s and later the jars (optimized in size to suit the quantity of preserved food a family would consume in one meal) proved equally suited to the storage and distribution of moonshine (unlawfully distilled spirits).  Much moonshine was distributed in large containers (the wholesale level) but the small mason jars were a popular form because it meant it could be sold in smaller quantities (the retail level) to those with the same thirst but less cash.

A mason jar (left), Mason jar with pouring spout (centre) and mason jar with handle (right).

For neophytes, the classic mason jar can be difficult to handle either to drink from or to pour the contents into a glass.  Modern moonshine distillers have however stuck to the age-old jar because it’s part of the tradition and customers do seem to like purchasing their (now lawful) spirits in one.  South of the Mason-Dixon Line, “passing the jar” is part of the ritual of the shared moonshine experience and, being easily re-sealable, it’s a practical form of packaging.  To make things easier still, lids with pourers are available (which true barbarians put straight to their lips, regarding a glass as effete) and there are also mason jars with handles.

The Mason-Dixon Line and the Missouri Compromise Line.  

The Mason-Dixon Line was named after English astronomers Charles Mason (1728–1786) and Jeremiah Dixon (1733–1779) who between 1763-1767 surveyed the disputed boundary between the colonial holdings of the Penns (Pennsylvania) and the Calverts (Maryland), one of the many boarders (New South Wales & Victoria in Australia, Kashmir in the sub-continent of South Asia et al) in the British Empire which were ambiguously described (or not drawn at all) which would be the source of squabbles, sometimes for a century or more.  The line would probably by history have little been noted had it not in 1804 become the boundary between "free" and "slave" states after 1804, New Jersey (the last slaveholding state north of the line) passed an act of abolition.  In popular use “south of the Mason-Dixon Line” thus became the term used to refer to “the South” where until the US Civil War (1861-1865) slave-holding prevailed although, in a narrow technical sense, the line created by the Missouri Compromise (1820) more accurately reflected the political and social divisions.

A mason’s mark etched into a stone (left) and and image created from one of the registers of mason’s marks (right).

A mason's mark is literally a mark etched into a stone by as mason and historically they existed in three forms (1) an identifying notch which could be used by those assembling a structure as a kind of pattern so they would know where one stone was to be placed in relation to another, (2) as an mark to identify the quarry from which the stone came (which might also indicate the type of rock or the quality but this was rare within the trade where there tended to be experts at every point in the product cycle) and (3) the unique identifying mark of the stonemason responsible for the finishing (rather in the manner of the way the engineer assembling engines in companies like Aston Martin or AMG stamp their names into the block).  With the masons, these were known also bankers’ marks because, when the payment was by means of piece-work (ie the payment was by physical measure of the stone provided rather than the time spent) the tally-master would physically measure the stones and pay according to the cubic volume.  Every mason, upon their admission to the guild would enter into a register their unique mark.

Reinhard Heydrich (second from left, back to camera) conducting a tour of the SS Freemasonry Museum, Berlin, 1935.

Freemasonry has always attracted suspicion and at times the opposition to them has been formalized.  As recently as the papacy of Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958), membership of Freemasonry was proscribed for Roman Catholics, Pius disapproving of the sinister, secretive Masons about as much as he did of communists and homosexuals.  In that he was actually in agreement with the Nazis.  By 1935, the Nazis considered the “Freemason problem” solved and the SS even created a “Freemason Museum” on Berlin’s Prinz-Albrecht-Palais (conveniently close to Gestapo headquarters) to exhibit the relics of the “vanished cult”.  SS-Obergruppenführer (Lieutenant-General) Reinhard Heydrich (1904–1942; head of the Reich Security Main Office 1939-1942) originally included the Freemasons on his list of archenemies of National Socialism which, like Bolshevism, he considered an internationalist, anti-fascist Zweckorganisation (expedient organization) of Jewry.  According to Heydrich, Masonic lodges were under Jewish control and while appearing to organize social life “…in a seemingly harmless way, were actually instrumentalizing people for the purposes of Jewry”.  That wasn’t the position of all the Nazis however.  Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945 and Reichsmarschall 1940-1945) revealed during the Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) that on the day he joined the party, he was actually on his way to join the Freemasons and was distracted from this only by a “toothy blonde” while during the same proceedings, Hjalmar Schacht (1877–1970; President of the German Central Bank (Reichsbank) 1933–1939 and Nazi Minister of Economics 1934–1937) said that even while serving the Third Reich he never deviated from his belief in the principles of “international Freemasonry”.  It’s certainly a trans-national operation and the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or has never denied being a branch of the Freemasons.

In an indication they'll stop at nothing, the Freemasons have even stalked Lindsay Lohan.  In 2011, Ms Lohan was granted a two-year restraining order against alleged stalker David Cocordan, the order issued some days after she filed complaint with police who, after investigation by their Threat Management Department, advised the court Mr Cocordan (who at the time had been using at least five aliases) “suffered from schizophrenia”, was “off his medication” and had a "significant psychiatric history of acting on his delusional beliefs.”  That was worrying enough but Ms Lohan may have revealed her real concerns in an earlier post on twitter in which she included a picture of David Cocordan, claiming he was "the freemason stalker that has been threatening to kill me- while he is TRESPASSING!"  Being stalked by a schizophrenic is bad enough but the thought of being hunted by a schizophrenic Freemason is truly frightening.  Apparently an unexplored matter in the annals of psychiatry, it seems the question of just how schizophrenia might particularly manifest in Freemasons awaits research so there may be a PhD there for someone.

The problem Ms Lohan identified has long been known.  In the US, between 1828-1838 there was an Anti-Mason political party which is remembered now as one of the first of the “third parties” which over the decades have often briefly flourished before either fading away or being absorbed into one side or the other of what has for centuries tended towards two-party stability.  Its initial strength was that it was obsessively a single-issue party which enabled it rapidly to gather support but that proved ultimately it’s weakness because it never adequately developed the broader policy platform which would have attracted a wider membership.  The party was formed in reaction to the disappearance (and presumed murder) of a former Mason who had turned dissident and become a most acerbic critic and the suspicion arose that the Masonic establishment had arranged his killing to silence his voice.  They attracted much support, including from many church leaders who had long been suspicious of Freemasonry and were not convinced the organization was anything but anti-Christian.  Because the Masons were secretive and conducted their meetings in private, their opponents tended to invent stories about the rituals and ceremonies (stuff with goats often mentioned) and the myths grew.  The myths were clearly enough to secure some electoral success and the Anti-Masons even ran William Wirt (1772-1834 and still the nation’s longest-serving attorney-general (1817-1829)) as their candidate in the 1832 presidential election where he won 7.8% of the popular vote and carried Vermont, a reasonable achievement for a third-party candidate.  Ultimately though, that proved the electoral high-water mark and most of its members thereafter were absorbed by the embryonic Whig Party.

Fedora

Fedora (pronounced fi-dawr-uh or fed-dohr-uh)

A soft felt or velvet hat with a curled medium-brim, usually with a band and worn with the crown creased lengthwise.

1887: An invention of American English, from Fédora, an 1882 play by Victorien Sardou (1831-1908), the protagonist of which was the Russian princess Fédora Romanoff, played originally by Sarah Bernhardt.  Bernhardt, a noted cross-dresser, wore a center-creased, soft brimmed hat which was adopted by feminists of the age, then known as women's-rights activists.  The name comes from the Russian Федо́ра (Fedóra), feminine form of Фёдор (Fjódor), from the Ancient Greek Θεόδωρος (Theódōros) (gift of god), derived from θεός (theós) (god) and δῶρον (dôron) (gift).  The ultimate root was the Indo-European dhes- (forming words for religious concepts) + dōron (gift) from do- (to give)).

In the Western world, between the demise of the top hat after the First World War and the abandonment of hats in the 1960s, three variations on a theme, the Fedora, the Trilby and the Homburg vied for choice as men’s headgear, all popular in a way the bowler hat never was.  Fedoras used to be made mostly from wool, cashmere, rabbit or beaver felt, some of the more expensive varieties blended with mink or chinchilla (and rarely mohair, vicuña, guanaco or cervelt).  After enjoying a 1990s revival, they came to be made from any available material, including modern synthetics.

The Trilby (left), Homburg (centre) and the Fedora (right).

The Fedora first became fashionable during the 1920s, displacing the less rakish Homburg (named after Homburg in Imperial-era Germany from where it originated as hunting headgear) although it was the similar, though narrow-brimmed, Trilby (also known in the UK as the “Brown Trilby”) which was said to be more popular with the rich.  The Trilby proved attractive to those often at the track, apparently because, with a narrow brim and one slightly turned up at the back, it made more convenient the carrying of a pair of binoculars.  The name Trilby was derived from a hat worn in the stage adaptation of George du Maurier's (1834-1896) 1894 novel Trilby.  Just another hat in most countries, it suffered by association in Germany because a black Trilby was the choice of most Gestapo officers.

Lindsay Lohan wearing Fedora with coat of unknown provenance, Chiltern Firehouse, London, 2014.

The Homburg did make a mid-century comeback after it became the choice of the UK's pre-war foreign secretary Anthony Eden (1897-1977; UK prime-minister 1955-1957).  The highly strung Eden was the most stylish politician of the age, although his sartorial elegance failed to impress the Duce, Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943) noting he had “…never met a better dressed fool.”  It was his colleague Rab Butler (1902–1982) who, noting the character of Eden's parents, reckoned genetics could explain why Eden was "half mad baronet, half beautiful woman" and he understood that something as distinctive as a hat could convey a political message if the association was widely understood.  At the time when the great dividing line in British politics was the appeasement policy of Neville Chamberlain (1869–1940; UK prime-minister 1937-1940), Eden was replaced as foreign secretary by the pro-appeasement Lord Halifax (1881–1959; UK Foreign Secretary 1938-1940), Butler becoming his under-secretary.  One thing an under-secretary gets allocated is a parliamentary private secretary (PPS), a member of parliament (MP) keen to stake a claim to advancement and on his first day in the Foreign Office (FO), Butler took the PPS to a quiet corner and told him to discard his homburg since it was "too Edenesque" and to "buy a bowler", the hat almost always worn by Halifax.  The PPS had no great regard for Eden and had adopted the homburg merely because he liked the look but anyway took the advice, delighted to be unexpectedly appointed a FO PPS, noting in his diary "...just think, bowlers are back".

Gulag

Gulag (pronounced goo-lahg)

(1) The system of forced-labor camps in the Soviet Union (with initial capital).

(2) Individually, a Soviet forced-labor camp (usually with initial capital).

(3) By association, any prison or detention camp, especially one used for political prisoners (usually not with initial capital).

(4) Figuratively, any place regarded as undesirable or one perceived as being a “punishment-post” (not with initial capital).

(5) Figuratively, any system used to silence dissent (not with initial capital).

1930-1931: From the Russian ГУЛА́Г (GULÁG, GULag or Gulág), the acronym (Гла́вное управле́ние исправи́тельно-трудовы́х лагере́й (Glávnoje upravlénije ispravítelʹno-trudovýx lageréj) translated usually as “Main Directorate of Corrective Labor Camps” but also, inter alia, “Chief Administration of Corrective-Labor Camps”, “Main Directorate for Places of Detention”, “Main Administration of Corrective Labor Camps” etc.).  The noun plural was Gulags.

An example of the way in which a bland acronym (like the 1933 Gestapo (an abbreviated form of the German Geheime Staatspolizei (the construct being Ge(heime) Sta(ats)po(lizei), literally “secret state police”) can become a byword for something awful, although technically, the acronym GULag (Glávnoje upravlénije ispravítelʹno-trudovýx lageréj (Main Directorate of Corrective Labor Camps)) didn’t come into use until 1930, the origin of what quickly would evolve into a vast, nation-wide network of concentration camps lies in the legal device created almost immediately after the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917.  This was the concept of the “class enemy”, a logical crime to gazette under Marxist-Leninist theory and one that could be applied literally to anybody, regardless of their conduct; it was essentially the same idea as the crime of “unspecified offences” which appears in the judicial sentences of some authoritarian states.  Russia, as many of the Bolsheviks knew from personal experience, had a long tradition of “internal exile” and the new regime extended this concept, creating concentration camps for class enemies where convicts were required to perform useful manual labor (forestry, mining, quarrying etc).

The early camps, authorized by decree in April 1919, were the prisoner of war (POW) facilities which had become redundant after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (March 1918) which concluded hostilities between Russia and the Central Powers although the first model camp was in the White Sea region, in what were once the Orthodox Church's monastery buildings on the Solovetsky Islands and the first prisoners were anti-Bolsheviks, mostly left-wing intellectuals and members of the White Army.  The Cheka, the Russian secret police (the first in the alphabet soup of the names adopted (Cheka, GPU, OGPU, NKGB, NKVD, SMERSH, MGB, (most famously) KGB & FSB), was allocated the role of administration.  Reflecting the love secret police everywhere have for mysterious acronyms, the Cheka created SLON (Northern Camps of Special Significance) as an administrative template for the Solovetsky Islands which, briefly, was the only camp complex in the Soviet state.  The number of concentration (usually described as “correctional labor”) camps grew sufficiently during the 1920s to outgrow the bureaucratic structures initially formed by the Cheka and in 1930 the GULag was created as a separate division of the secret police which worked in conjunction with the Soviet Ministry of the Interior overseeing the use of the physical labor of prisoners.  Although the camps were sometimes used for those guilty of “normal” criminal offences, the great majority of inmates were political prisoners who were sometimes genuine political dissidents but could be there for entirely arbitrary reasons or even as victims of personal vendettas.  In these aspects there are parallels with the Nazi's concentration camps which also worked as systems of coercion, punishment & repression although the GULag never had a programme industrially to exterminate an entire race.  There was another striking similarity in the camp architecture of the two dictatorships which were nominally ideological opponents.  The German equivalent of the GULag, the Konzentrationlager is remembered for the words Arbeit macht frei (work makes you free) rendered in wrought iron above the gates of Auschwitz I; the inscription через труд (through labor (ie get back home through working)) was the message at the prisoners' entrance to the Magaden camp in Siberia.      

What is sometime neglected in the history of the GULag (and other systems of concentration camps) is that while it is well-understood as part of a system of repression, there were genuine attempts to locate the camps in places where the labor extracted from the inmates could be applied to the maximum benefit for the state, something of great significance because in 1929 comrade Stalin (1878–1953; Soviet leader 1922–1953) announced a programme of rapid industrialization and the first of a succession of five-year plans. In support of this, the Politburo abolished any distinction between political and other crimes and intruded a unified network of camps to replace the hitherto dual prison system.  From this point, accelerating from the mid-1930s, archipelagos of camps were built (substantially by the prisoners) close to sites of huge economic projects such as a canal from the White Sea to the Baltic Sea, gold mining in Kolyma and lines of communications such as the Baikal-Amur Mainline.

The GULag’s second great growth spurt happened during Stalin’s “Great Terror” in 1936-1938 when the upper echelons of the Communist Party, the armed forces, the civil service and even the GULag management were subject to purges and while there were many executions, most were sent to the camps which, never designed for such numbers, were unable to handle the mass influx and the already high death rate increased sometimes threefold.  During comrade Stalin's great purges, the (whispered) joke was that the Russian population consisted of (1) those in the gulag, (2) those just released and (3) those about to go back.  On a somewhat smaller scale, rapid inflows also happened in the early years of World War II because of the need to imprison those deported from territory just occupied by the Soviet Union (Eastern Poland, the Baltics, Bessarabia) but this pressure on capacity was more than off-set by the sudden release of many prisoners to meet the needs of the Red Army which had suffered massive losses in the Nazi invasion.  Needing troops, all was suddenly forgiven and it wouldn’t be until 1945 that the numbers in the camps began again to trend upwards, reflecting the waves of arrests among the ranks of the Red Army, former German POWs and ethnic minorities, including Soviet Jews.  The Cold War also fed the GULag.  In 1948-1949, Stalin launched the construction of new megalomaniacal projects, including the Volga-Don Canal, new power stations, dams, and communications, among them the Dead Road and a tunnel and railway to Sakhalin Island, both of which, despite a horrific death-toll, proved impossible to build and were cancelled when Stalin died in 1953.

After Stalin’s death, an amnesty was announced for many of those serving sentences for criminal offences and almost all of those deemed to have committed “minor offences” were released although political prisoners remained imprisoned and it wasn’t until “the thaw” under Nikita Khrushchev (1894–1971; Soviet leader 1953-1964) that widespread releases were ordered after almost four million political crime cases were reviewed and in 1957, as one of a number of reforms, the GULag was abolished and most of the camps shut down.  Khrushchev himself announced that the Soviet economy would no longer based on the slave labor of prisoners which, as a piece of economic analysis was true but while the numbers of political prisoners fell, they did not disappear although they tended now to be only imprisoned for genuine opposition to the regime, dispatched most frequently to labor camps in Mordovia or in camps clustered around the Urals. The conditions remained grim but the death rates were tiny compared to those suffered in Stalin’s time but what also disguised the extent of post-Stalinist repression was than many dissidents were technically not imprisoned but instead declared insane and incarcerated in psychiatric hospitals, many of which closely resembled prisons.  There, the “insane” were often subject to cruel & unusual “medical” procedures.

The number of people who passed through the GULag can never exactly be known but, using archival material which became accessible after the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991, historians have estimated between 15-18 million were imprisoned and the death-toll may have been almost 10%, the overwhelming majority of whom were from Russia or the constituent republics of the USSR but others were foreigners, mostly Czechoslovaks, Poles, Hungarians & Frenchmen.  The network of camps dotted around the USSR consisted of almost 500 administrative centres, each running as few as dozens or as many as hundreds of individual camps, historians having documented just under 30,000.  In the West the term GULag became widely known only after the publication in 1973 Russian of novelist Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's (1918–2008) three-volume The Gulag Archipelago, described by the author as "An Experiment in Literary Investigation" which he wrote between 1958-1968, using documentary sources including legal papers, interviews, diaries, statements and his personal experience as a GULag prisoner.

Map of the GULag camp distribution, Plain Talk magazine, 1950.

However, both the system of slavery and the word “GULag” had, during comrade Stalin’s time, been publicized in the West, remarkably accurate maps published in 1950 in the US in Plain Talk (A US anti-communist monthly magazine, 1946–1950) magazine but, despite it being the high Cold War, the revelations didn’t resonate in public consciousness as they would a generation later when Solzhenitsyn released The Gulag Archipelago.

Freemason

Freemason (pronounced free-mey-suh n)

(1) A member of a secret society (Free and Accepted Masons, constituted in London in 1717), present in many countries which operates in a cult-like manner (initial upper case and often used in the clipped form “Mason”).

(2) Historically, one of a class of skilled stoneworkers of the medieval period (lasting into the early modern era), possessing passwords and both public & secret signs, used as devices by which they could identify one another.

(3) A member of a society composed of such workers, which also included honorary members (accepted masons) not connected with stone work.

1350-1400: From the Middle English fremason.  Free was from the Middle English free, fre & freo, from the Old English frēo (free), from the Proto-West Germanic frī, from the Proto-Germanic frijaz (beloved, not in bondage), from the primitive Indo-European priHós (dear, beloved), from preyH- (to love, please); it was related to the English friend.  The verb was from the Middle English freen & freoȝen, from the Old English frēon & frēoġan (to free; make free), from the Proto-West Germanic frijōn, from the Proto-Germanic frijōną, from the primitive Indo-European preyH-.  Mason was from the Middle English masoun & machun, from the Anglo-Norman machun & masson or the Old French maçon, from the Late Latin maciō (carpenter, bricklayer), from the Frankish makjō (maker, builder), a derivative of the Frankish makōn (to work, build, make), from the primitive Indo-European mag- (to knead, mix, make), conflated with the Proto-West Germanic mattjō (cutter), from the primitive Indo-European metn- & met- (to cut).  The “mason” element of the word is uncontested.  A mason was a bricklayer (1) one whose trade was the handling, and formation of structures in stone or brick or (2) one who prepares stone for building purposes.  It later (3) became the standard short-form for a member of the fraternity of Freemasons.  However, the origin of the “free” part is contested.  Some etymologists suggest it was a corruption of the French frère (brother), from frèremaçon (brother mason) while others believe it was a reference to the masons working on “free-standing” (ie large rocks they would cut shape into smaller pieces) stones.  Most however maintain it meant “free” in the sense of them being independent of the control of local guilds or lords.  The noun freemasonry was in use by the mid-fifteenth century.  Freemason, Freemasonism & freemasonry are nouns and freemasonic is an adjective; the noun plural is Freemasons.  Unfortunately, the adjective freemasonistic and the adverb freemasonistically appear not to exist.

The origin of the freemasons was in a travelling guild of masons who wandered England offering their services to those needing stonework.  Operating in opposition to the established guilds, the freemasons (ie free from the dictates of the guilds) had a closed system of passwords, symbols and secret signs (the origin of the famously mysterious Masonic handshake) so safely they could identify each-other and ensure intruders (presumably agents of the guild) couldn’t infiltrate their midst.  In the early seventeenth century, they began accepting as honorary members even those who were not stonemasons and by the early eighteenth century the structure had had developed into the secret fraternity of affiliated lodges known as Free and Accepted Masons (often as F&AM) and as an institution the F&AM were first registered in London in 1717.

Freemason T-shirts should not be confused with other "Free" campaign clothing. 

The “accepted” refers to persons admitted to the society but not belonging to the craft and in time this became the nature of the Freemason, long removed from the actual trade of stone-working.  As an institution, the Freemasons (especially by their enemies and detractors) are often spoken of as if something monolithic but the only truly common thread is the name although most do (at least officially) subscribe to a creed of “brotherly love, faith, and charity”.  Structurally, they’re nothing like the Roman Catholic Church with its headquarters and single figure of ultimate authority and are a looser affiliation even than the “worldwide Anglican community” where the spiritual “authority” of the Archbishop of Canterbury is now wholly symbolic.  The Freemasons are more schismatic still and can’t even be compared to the loosest of confederations because their basic organizational units, the lodges, operate with such autonomy that one might not be on speaking terms with one in the next suburb and each may even deny that the other is legitimately Masonic.

Despite that, the conspiracy theorists have often been interested in the Masons because they can be treated as if they are monolithic and it is true that as recently as the second half of the twentieth century there were many entities (notably police forces) where there was an unusual preponderance of Masons in prominent positions and in one force, for decades, by mutual consent, the position of commissioner alternated between a Roman Catholic and a Freemason.  In Europe, it wasn’t uncommon for the Masons to be grouped with the Jews as the source of all that was corrupt in society and some satirists made a troupe of “the Freemasons and the Jews” being at the bottom of every evil scheme, cooked up either at lodge or synagogue.  One who needed no convincing was Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) who perceived a  Masonic plot be behind the overthrow of Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943) in 1943.

Reinhard Heydrich (second from left, back to camera) conducting a tour of the SS Freemasonry Museum, Berlin, 1935.

The Nazis enjoyed curiously diverse interactions with the Freemasons.  During his trial in Nuremberg in 1945-1946 Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945, Hitler's designated successor & Reichsmarschall 1940-1945) told the International Military Tribunal (IMT) that it was only an accident of history he was in the dock because in 1922 he was on his way “…to join the Freemasons when I was distracted by a toothy blonde.”  Had he joined the brotherhood he claimed, he’d never have been able to join the Nazi Party because it proscribed Freemasonry.  During the same proceedings, Hjalmar Schacht (1877–1970; President of the German Central Bank (Reichsbank) 1933–1939 and Nazi Minister of Economics 1934–1937) said that even while serving the Third Reich he never deviated from his belief in the principles of “international Freemasonry”.  Upon coming to power, the Nazis certainly took that proscription seriously but the suppression of Freemasonry was not unique, the party looking to stamp out all institutions which could be an alternative source of people’s allegiances or sources of ideas.  This included youth organizations, trade unions and other associations, their attitude something like that of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to the Falun Gong and the two authoritarian parties were similarly pragmatic in dealing with the mainstream churches which were regulated and controlled, it being realized their support was such that eradication would have to wait.  By 1935, the Nazis considered the “Freemason problem” solved and the SS even created a “Freemason Museum” on Berlin’s Prinz-Albrecht-Palais (conveniently close to Gestapo headquarters) to exhibit the relics of the “vanished cult”.  SS-Obergruppenführer (Lieutenant-General) Reinhard Heydrich (1904–1942; head of the Reich Security Main Office 1939-1942) originally included the Freemasons on his list of archenemies of National Socialism which, like Bolshevism, he considered an internationalist, anti-fascist Zweckorganisation (expedient organization) of Jewry.  According to Heydrich, Masonic lodges were under Jewish control and while appearing to organize social life “…in a seemingly harmless way, were actually instrumentalizing people for the purposes of Jewry”.

One institution which has for almost three centuries proscribed Freemasonry is the Roman Catholic Church although that official position has run in parallel with a notable Catholic membership in many lodges.  The ban was both explicit and often expressed up until the pontificate of Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958) but after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965), the winds of change seemed to blow in other directions and in recent years from Rome, there’s been barely a mention of Freemasonry, the feeling probably that issues like secularism, abortion, homosexuality, radical Islam and such were thought more immediate threats.  It was thus a surprise to many when on 13 November 2023 the Vatican's Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (the DDF, the latest name for the Inquisition) reaffirmed the Church's teachings that laity or clerics participating in Freemasonry are in "a state of grave sin."  The DDF didn’t repeat the words of Clement XII (1652–1740; pope 1730-1740) who in 1738 called Masonry “depraved and perverted” but did say: “On the doctrinal level, it should be remembered that active membership in Freemasonry by a member of the faithful is forbidden because of the irreconcilability between Catholic doctrine and Freemasonry", citing Declaration on Masonic Associations (1983) by Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) when, as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he was head of the DDF (then called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF)).  Continuing in a way which recalled the ways of the Inquisition, ominously the DDF added: “Therefore, those who are formally and knowingly enrolled in Masonic Lodges and have embraced Masonic principles fall under the provisions in the above-mentioned Declaration. These measures also apply to any clerics enrolled in Freemasonry.”

Apparently, the DDF issued the document in response to concerns raised by a bishop in the Philippines who reported a growing interest in the secret society in his country.  That was interesting in that cultural anthropologists have noted the form of Catholic worship in the Philippines was in some ways a hybrid which merged the Western tradition with the local rituals the Spanish priests who accompanied the colonists found were hard to suppress.  It proved a happy compromise and the faith flourished but one of the Vatican’s objections to Freemasonry has long been that the society swears oaths of secrecy, fellowship and fraternity among members and has accumulated a vast catalogue of rituals, ceremonial attire and secret signals.  It has always made the church uneasy that these aesthetic affectations often use Christian imagery despite being used for non-Christian rituals.  Indeed, it’s not a requirement of membership that one be a Christian or even to affirm a belief in the God of Christianity or Jesus Christ as the savior or mankind and the secret nature of so much Masonic ritualism has given rise to the suspicion of the worship of false idols.  Of relevance too is the existence of the complex hierarchy of titles within Masonism which could be interpreted as a kind or parallel priesthood.

Pope Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013) is fighting a war which he hopes will set the course of the church for the next generation.  Before it could commence in anger he had to wait for the death of Benedict but the battle is now on and it’s against a cabal of recalcitrant cardinals and theologians (“the finest minds of the thirteenth century” he’s rumored to call them) who are appalled at any deviation from established orthodoxy in doctrine, ritual or form, regarding such (at least between themselves), as heresy.  Quite where the DDF’s re-statement of the 300 year old policy of prohibition of Freemasonry fits into that internecine squabble isn’t clear and it may be the interest aroused surprised even the DDF which may simply have been issuing a routine authoritative clarification in response to a bishop’s request.  Certainly nothing appears to have changed in terms of the consequences and the interpretation by some that the revisions to canon law made some years were in some way substantive in this matter appear to have been wrong.

Escutcheons of the Holy See (left) and the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or (right).

Interestingly, the DDF (nor any other iteration of the Inquisition) has never moved to proscribe the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or (The Golden Keys; the international association of hotel concierges.  This is despite the organization being structurally remarkably similar to the Freemasons and the similarities between their escutcheon and that of the Holy See are quite striking.  According to the DDF, the crossed keys are a symbol of the Papacy's authority and power, the keys representing the "keys of heaven" that were in the New Testament passed from Jesus Christ to Saint Peter.  In Roman Catholic tradition, Peter was appointed by Jesus as the first Pope and given the keys to symbolize his authority to forgive sins and to make decisions binding on behalf of the Church (this the theological basis of what in canon law was codified in the nineteenth century as papal infallibility).  The two keys thus symbolize the pope's two powers: (1) spiritual power (represented by the silver key) and (2) temporal power (represented by the gold key).  The latter power manifested in a most temporal manner during the thousand-odd years (between the eighth & nineteenth centuries) when the authority of the papal absolute theocracy extended to rule and govern the Papal States (which were interpolated into the modern state of Italy upon Italian unification (1859-1870).  Claiming (officially) only temporal dominion, the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d'Or logo depicts both their keys in gold, one said to symbolize the concierge's role in unlocking the doors to the world for their guests, the other their ability to unlock the secrets of their destination and provide insider knowledge and recommendations (restaurant bookings, airport transfers, personal service workers of all types etc).  However, neither the Vatican nor the Les Clefs d’Or have ever denied intelligence-sharing, covert operations, common rituals or other links.

In an indication they'll stop at nothing, the Freemasons have even stalked Lindsay Lohan.  In 2011, Ms Lohan was granted a two-year restraining order against alleged stalker David Cocordan, the order issued some days after she filed complaint with police who, after investigation by their Threat Management Department, advised the court Mr Cocordan (who at the time had been using at least five aliases) “suffered from schizophrenia”, was “off his medication” and had a "significant psychiatric history of acting on his delusional beliefs.”  That was worrying enough but Ms Lohan may have revealed her real concerns in an earlier post on twitter in which she included a picture of David Cocordan, claiming he was "the freemason stalker that has been threatening to kill me- while he is TRESPASSING!"  Being stalked by a schizophrenic is bad enough but the thought of being hunted by a schizophrenic Freemason is truly frightening.  Apparently an unexplored matter in the annals of psychiatry, it seems the question of just how schizophrenia might particularly manifest in Freemasons awaits research so there may be a PhD there for someone.

The problem Ms Lohan identified has long been known.  In the US, between 1828-1838 there was an Anti-Mason political party which is remembered now as one of the first of the “third parties” which over the decades have often briefly flourished before either fading away or being absorbed into one side or the other of what has for centuries tended towards two-party stability.  Its initial strength was that it was obsessively a single-issue party which enabled it rapidly to gather support but that proved ultimately it’s weakness because it never adequately developed the broader policy platform which would have attracted a wider membership.  The party was formed in reaction to the disappearance (and presumed murder) of a former Mason who had turned dissident and become a most acerbic critic and the suspicion arose that the Masonic establishment had arranged his killing to silence his voice.  They attracted much support, including from many church leaders who had long been suspicious of Freemasonry and were not convinced the organization was anything but anti-Christian.  Because the Masons were secretive and conducted their meetings in private, their opponents tended to invent stories about the rituals and ceremonies (stuff with goats often mentioned) and the myths grew.  The myths were clearly enough to secure some electoral success and the Anti-Masons even ran William Wirt (1772-1834 and still the nation’s longest-serving attorney-general (1817-1829)) as their candidate in the 1832 presidential election where he won 7.8% of the popular vote and carried Vermont, a reasonable achievement for a third-party candidate.  Ultimately though, that proved the electoral high-water mark and most of its members thereafter were absorbed by the embryonic Whig Party.