“The Law, as quoted, lays down a fair conduct of life, and one not easy to follow. I have been fellow to a beggar again and again under circumstances which prevented either of us finding out whether the other was worthy. I have still to be brother to a Prince, though I once came near to kinship with what might have been a veritable King, and was promised the reversion of a Kingdom--army, law-courts, revenue, and policy all complete. But, today, I greatly fear that my King is dead, and if I want a crown I must go hunt it for myself.”
Thus begins Brother Rudyard Kipling’s great novel The Man Who Would Be King.
It’s the epic saga of two memorable rowdies, who had to be two of the most incredible scoundrels ever to get through the west gate. Peachey Carnehan and Danny Dravot were loyal only to each other and the craft. Theirs is a story about two ambitious ex-soldiers stationed in India who set out to become the rulers of an entire country. After finishing their tour of duty in India, Danny and Peachyhave decided that India is "too small for the likes of them," so they decide to bribe a local ruler and extort money from him, in order to buy twenty Martini rifles, which they will use to take over villages in Kafristan. Together they would take over a country and become not just Kings but one would be worshipped as a God. But like Iccarus before them, they flew too close to the sun and paid a horrible price for their impertinence.
I have always wondered why Brother Kipling chose to write about these lovable scoundrels and why he decided to make them Freemasons. After I read some of his poems and short stories I decided to see if my conclusions agreed with those of other researchers. Here are a few comments I received.
Ed King, FPS “Most biographers, because of their unfamiliarity with how the Masonic fraternity can 'get into the skin' of us Masons, never seem to quite give what I feel is the appropriate credit to the impact Freemasonry had upon Kipling's life. . . Like any author who writes on Masonic topics, there's also the MUCH greater warmth extended by the Fraternity. . . While not quite as plainly drawn in metaphorical terms as was Conrad's 'Heart of Darkness' perhaps, I think that Kipling was trying to do something similar. Using Freemasonry also creates a whole image backdrop without wasting words, similar to a writer today throwing in a character with a background in the CIA or something. It 'sets the scene'.... a real moral tale that probably speaks to Freemasons at a far deeper visceral level than those outside the Craft could ever imagine.”
Eric Carter PVST #29 “I would speculate that Kipling was commenting that the spirit of GAOTU is in all of us whether scoundrel or saint. Peachey and Danny may have not held true to the laws of the land but they certainly held true to their obligations. No man is perfect or can say that they have never fallen to the hand of temptation.”
Milo Dailey Belle Fourche, SD“On the frontier, regardless where it may be, the roughness of one's ashlar is well exposed where in more populated "city" areas its rough edges are not so easily noticed as it is seen among thousands of others in various states of smoothing. . . A number of frontier era Masons I've studied fit this description only too well, both military and civilian. But reading about them today gives little real insight into how their Brothers felt when meeting on the five points literally or allegorically.”
Kurt Kurosawa Hampton, Virginia “Our Masonic rowdies are a great treasure. There is no replacing a guileless Brother to whom loyalty to another Brother is totally non-negotiable, to whom nothing exists but the task at hand, and who acts out of his heart, giving always 100% because he allows no weakening of his efforts due to constraints of prioritization or apportionment.”
As for my conclusions I think Brother Kipling actually knew men like Peachy and Danny adventurous men who after spending decades on the frontier could not imagine returning to the dull existence that awaited them back home. Similar to Mother Lodge this story shows how deep an impact the craft can have on the roughest of men. In every war since the 1700’s Masons have put aside their own safety to render aid to a Brother, regardless of his condition or the color of his uniform. Common soldiers were not the most gentlemanly of English society. In fact, they were perhaps among the roughest. Yet, as rough and tumble as they were, they took the obligations they swore at the altar of Freemasonry very seriously indeed. There is no doubt in my mind that these two rebellious criminals where also worthy Brother Masons.
Indeed, Brother Kipling answers the question better than any of us. When he is asked by the prosecutor why a man like Kipling would associate with such scoundrels as Peachey and Danny he responds simply but firmly "Once a Mason, always a Mason".