Talk:Robert Moray

Moray & Royal Society
"Following the restoration of Charles II, Moray became the first President of the Royal Society at its first formal meeting on 1660-11-28" - Royal Society says, the first President was William Brouncker, not Moray.

Royal Society: "At a second meeting a week later, Sir Robert Moray, an influential Freemason who had helped organize the public emergence of the group, reported that the King approved of the meetings."

Perhaps he was the chaiman of the first meeting? --SGOvD webmaster (talk) 22:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Moray a Rosicrucian?
I note that Sir Robert Moray was "influenced" by Thomas Vaughan, a known Rosicrucian, among others, according to this article. He was also a courtier for Charles II, and a spy and diplomat, among other illustrious things. He was also the first Freemason who's initiation was recorded to have occurred on English soil. How is it that a Scottish lodge (specifically Edinburgh) is seen to be initiating anyone outside their jurisdiction? Supposedly this was a guild of operative masons. Guilds have jurisdictions restricting their activities to a particular municipality or locality by royal charter. How could this initiation be anything but clandestine if it, in fact, occurred as stated? Furthermore, why would a spy, diplomat, and courtier for Charles II be interested in joining the equivalent of a working class trade union, if that's truly what they were? Were they secret because they had trade secrets, or were they secret because they were a spy ring for Charles II masquerading as an innocent guild of masons? (Remember, Charles II was the king overthrown by Oliver Cromwell.) David Stevenson, for one, claims that it was the Rosicrucians that started Freemasonry. He's not the only one, by any means, though most advocates of this contention are Rosicrucians themselves. Specifically, it is a claim made by the German Rosicrucian group known as the Golden and Rosy Cross. Last, but by no means least, Sir Robert Moray was instrumental in getting a royal charter from Charles II for the Royal Society, an acknowledged follow-on group to the Rosicrucians and the Invisible College. How is it that both Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism are quasi-religious organizations and have similar organizational forms (hierarchies based upon levels of initiation) and stated purposes (self improvement through allegorical teachings). These facts are so glaringly obvious, surely some researcher has put the connections together by now. Dlw20070716 (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Rosicrucianism certainly influenced Freemasonry ... but it is a bit of a stretch to say Freemasonry was "started by" the Rosicrucians. Say rather that they existed side by side. We have to understand that Freemasonry has never been a static thing.  Throughout its history Freemasonry has changed and adapted itself to meet to the desires and interests of its members.  Various intellectual and social trends thus get grafted onto Freemasonry. Rosicrucian ideas were all the rage among the intellectuals of the mid 1600's... so, the intellectuals who joined Freemasonry grafted those ideas onto Freemasonry.  The same thing happened in later generations... Freemasons of the 1700s were excited by Enlightenment philosophy, and they grafted elements of Enlightenment philosophy into Freemasonry; While Freemasons of the Victorian era added elements of Victorian moralism to Freemasonry.... etc. Blueboar (talk) 12:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)