What role did Freemasons play in the Boston Tea Party?
Executive summary
Freemasons had visible connections to locations, people, and networks tied to the Boston Tea Party — notably St. Andrew’s Lodge’s ownership of the Green Dragon Tavern (a known Sons of Liberty meeting place) and a number of prominent participants who were Freemasons [1] [2]. Sources disagree on how direct or organizational that role was: Masonic histories emphasize meeting-place and membership overlaps [3] [2], while other accounts caution that the Tea Party was not formally a Masonic lodge action and that confirmed participant lists include relatively few lodge members [4] [5].
1. The Green Dragon Tavern: a physical link between Freemasonry and rebellion
The strongest, consistently reported connection is that St. Andrew’s Lodge purchased the Green Dragon Tavern in 1764 and that the tavern served as a meeting place used by the Sons of Liberty — the body that planned colonial resistance including the Tea Party — earning labels like “Headquarters of the Revolution” (Daniel Webster) and “nest of sedition” (Governor Hutchinson) [1] [2]. Masonic coverage highlights the lodge’s ownership and the tavern’s role as a hub where ideas and plans circulated [3] [2].
2. Membership overlap: important individuals who were Freemasons
Multiple sources identify key revolutionary figures connected to the Tea Party who were also Freemasons — names commonly cited include Joseph Warren, Paul Revere, and John Hancock — and modern Masonic commemorations stress those personal ties [6] [3]. Masonic organizations and podcasts argue that Freemasonry’s principles of liberty and civic discussion helped form the environment that produced the Tea Party [7] [3].
3. How many participants were actually Masons? Numbers and qualifications
Claims vary on scale. Some Masonic-authored accounts and commemorations suggest dozens of participants were Freemasons or “believed to have participated,” with specific counts offered in secondary works (for example, a cited book listing 21 Freemasons among participants) [1]. Other historians and post-event membership lists indicate that only a few St. Andrew’s Lodge members are confirmed among those who boarded the ships, and lodge minutes are used to infer involvement rather than definitive roll calls [4] [5]. Available sources do not provide a single, definitive roster proving large-scale lodge membership among the sixty or so men who destroyed the tea.
4. Claims that the Tea Party was “entirely Masonic” — contested and often speculative
A number of Masonic-leaning and informal sources repeat the claim that the Boston Tea Party was “entirely Masonic,” that participants dressed in disguise were Freemasons, or that the Lodge rooms served as dressing rooms for the “Mohawks” [8] [9]. But other sources caution that the Sons of Liberty was not a Masonic organization with exclusive membership, even if many leaders were Masons; the phrase “not a Masonic organization” appears in masonic-oriented histories themselves [5]. Thus, the categorical statement that the Tea Party was an official lodge action is not affirmed across the body of reporting provided [5] [4].
5. Why narratives diverge: agendas, commemoration, and myth-making
Masonic institutions have an interest in highlighting the fraternity’s patriotic role and therefore promote anniversaries, tours, and interpretive materials that emphasize lodge connections and notable Masonic participants [3] [1]. Independent or skeptical sources (including some historians cited in museum and scholarly contexts) stress that membership overlap does not equal formal lodge sponsorship of the action and note limited direct documentary proof that the lodge coordinated the raid itself [4] [2]. Some web and blog sources amplify conspiratorial or romanticized accounts beyond what primary evidence supports [10] [9].
6. Reporting limits and what the sources do not say
Available sources do not present a definitive list tying a majority of Tea Party actors to Freemasonry, nor do they supply contemporaneous minutes explicitly ordering the destruction of the tea [4] [5]. Where sources offer numbers (e.g., “21 Freemasons” or broader claims that “many” leaders were Masons), those figures come from later compilations and commemorative narratives rather than a single contemporaneous ledger of participants [1] [8].
7. Bottom line for readers
Freemasons were materially and socially embedded in the revolutionary milieu — owning meeting space used by the Sons of Liberty and counting among their ranks several prominent Patriots — which makes Freemasonry an important part of the Tea Party’s context [2] [3]. But the assertion that the Boston Tea Party was a formal Masonic operation or “entirely Masonic” is not supported uniformly by the reporting cited; instead, historians rely on overlapping membership, meeting-place ties, and later commemorations to link Freemasonry to the event [5] [4]. Readers should treat claims of direct lodge orchestration skeptically and weigh commemorative sources against archival and scholarly qualifiers [1] [4].