|
History and Origin:
Though it would not be exactly correct to say that the
history of Freemasonry was lost in the mists of antiquity,
it is competent to remark
that although to a certain degree traceable, its records
are of a scanty nature, and so crossed by the trails of
other mystical brotherhoods, that disentanglement is an
extremely difficult process. The ancient legend of its
foundation at the time of the building of the Temple at
Jerusalem is manifestly traditional. If one might hazard
an opinion, it would seem that at a very early epoch in
the history of civilization, a caste of builders in stone
arose, who jealously guarded the secret of their craft. In
all probability this caste was prehistoric. It is not
unreasonable to assume this when we possess plenty of
proof that an ancient caste of bronze-workers flourished
in every country in Europe and Asia; and if this be
admitted, and it cannot well be refuted in the light of
recent researches,—(see Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society
for 1913)—there is nothing absurd or impossible in the
contention that a similar school of workers in stone
should have arisen at a like early period. We know that it
is probable that the old caste of bronze-workers had an
esoteric language of their own, which has come down to us
as the Shelta Thari (q.v.) spoken generally by the tinkler
people of Great Britain and Ireland. If such a caste can
elaborate a secret language and cling jealously to the "
mysteries " of metal-working, there is no reason to doubt
the existence of a similar caste of masons. We tender this
theory for what it is worth, as it is unsupported by any
great authority on the subject. Where such a caste 'of
operative masons arose is altogether a separate question,
and cannot be dealt with here ; but it must obviously have
been in a country where working in stone was one of the
principal arts. It is also almost certain that this early
brotherhood must have been hierophantic. Its principal
work to begin with would undoubtedly consist in the
raising of temples and similar structures, and as such it
would come into very close contact with the priesthood, if
indeed it was not wholly directed by it. In early
civilization but two classes of dwelling receive the
attention of the architect,—the temple and the palace. For
example, among the ruins of Egypt and Babylon, remains of
the private house are rare, but the temple and the royal
residence are everywhere conspicuous, and we know that
among the ruins of Central America' temples and palaces
alone remain—the huts of the surrounding dwellers having
long ago disappeared. The temple is the nucleus of the
early city. Around the worship of the gods crystallises
commerce, agriculture, and all the affairs of life. All
roads lead to the temple. Striding for a moment over the
gap of years between early'Babylon and Egypt and mediaeval
Britain, we find the priesthood in close touch with the
masons. A mediaeval cathedral took more than one
generation to erect, and in that time many masons came and
went around the fane. The lodge was invariably founded
hard by the rising cathedral or abbey, and apprentices and
others were entered as opportunity offered : indeed a man
might serve his apprenticeship and labour all through his
life upon the one building, without ever seeing any work
elsewhere. The evidence as to whether the master-masons
were also architects is very conflicting, and it has been
held that the priests were the architects of the British
cathedrals,—the master-masons and operatives merely
carrying out their designs. There is good evidence however
that this is not wholly true. Authorities are at one in
declaring that of all arts architecture is by far the most
intricate. It is undoubtedly the one which requires a long
and specific training. Questions of stress and strain of
the most difficult description arise, and it seems
incredible that anyone with the most superficial knowledge
of the subject should believe that ecclesiastics, who had
not undergone any special training should be qualified to
compose plans of the most perfect and intricate
description for the most noble and remarkable edifices
ever raised in this country.
\Ve know that professional
architects existed at a very early period; and why the
priesthood should be credited with their work, it is
difficult to understand ; but instances are on record
where the priests of a certain locality have taken to
themselves the credit of planning the cathedral of the
diocese. Be this as it ma)', the " mystery " of building
was sufficiently deep to require extensive knowledge and
experience and to a great extent this justifies the
jealousy with which the early masons regarded its secrets.
Again, this jealousy with which it was kept from the
vulgar gaze may have been racial in its origin, and may
have arisen from such considerations as the following: '•
Let no stranger understand this craft of ours. Why should
we make it free to the heathen and the foreigner ? " This
also smacks of priestcraft, but if masonry originated
hiero-phantically, it certainly did not continue a
preserve of any religion, and is nowadays probably the
chiefest abomination of the Roman Catholic hierarchy,
which has not hesitated to publish and disseminate the
grossest libels regarding it. It is to Britain that we
must look for evidence as to the evolutionary line of
masonry. Before the founding of the Grand Lodge, we find
that York and the North of England in general was regarded
as the most ancient seat of the fraternity in this island.
Indeed without stretching probabilities too far, the line
ot evolution so far as York is concerned is quite
remarkable. We know for example that in the early days of
that city a temple of Serapis existed there, which was
afterwards a monastery of the Begging Friars, and the
mysteries of this god existed beside the Roman Collegia or
Craftsmen's Society. It is also considered that the crypt
of York Minster affords evidence of the progress of
masonry from Roman to Saxon times. It is stated that
it'has a mosaic pavement of blue and white tiles laid in
the form employed in the first degree of masonry, and is
said to show the sites of three seats used by the master
and his wardens during the construction of the building.
It is also an undoubted fact that the craft occasionally
met in this crypt during last century. There is thus
reason to believe even though the evidence be of a scanty
nature (but the foregoing does not embrace all of it) that
the early masons of Britain were probably influenced by
Romano-Egyptian mystical societies, and that their own
craft societies drew some of their practices and
constitutions from these alien schools. Masonic tradition
goes to show that even in the beginning of the fourteenth
century masonry in Britain was then regarded as a. thing
of great antiquity. Lodge record's for the most part only
date back to the sixteenth century in the oldest
instances, but ancient manuscripts are extant which
undoubtedly relate to masonry. Thus the old charges
embodied in the Regius MS. which was unearthed in 1839 by
Mr, Halliwell Phillips are dated at 1390, and contain a
curious legend of the craft, which tells how the necessity
of finding work of some description drove men to consult
Euclid, who recommended masonry as a craft to them. It
goes on to tell how masonry was founded in Egypt, and how
it entered England in the time of Athelstan. The necessity
for keeping close counsel as regards the secrets of the
craft is insisted upon in rude verse. The Cooke MS. dates
from the first part of the fifteenth century, and likewise
contains versions of the old charges. Egypt is also
regarded here as the mother-land of masonry, and Athelstan
is the medium for the introduction of the craft into the
island of Britain. But that this manuscript was used among
masons at a later date was proved by the discovery of a
more modern version dated about 1687, in 1890, and known
as the William Watson MS. In all about seventy of these
old charges and pseudo-histories have been discovered
since 1860. They have all much in common and are of
English origin. A great deal has been written to attempt
to prove that
British freemasonry borrowed extensively from continental
secret societies, such as the Steinmetzin of Germany, the
Rosicrucians (q.v.) and similar fellowships. The truth
probably lies however in the circumstance that the coming
and going of students of occultism throughout Europe was
so constant, and so frequent were their communications
that practically all those societies were in touch with
one another. Again many persons belonged to several of
them at once, and imported the rules and constitution of
one body into another. No student of occultism can fail to
be struck with the close resemblance of the constitutions
of nearly all the mystical- fellowships of the middle
ages, and the resemblance of the verbiage employed by
their founders and protagonists. It must also be insisted
that the speculative or mystic part of masonry was in the
middle ages merely a tradition with the brotherhood,
whatever it may have been in earlier times, and whatever
close connection the craft may have had with hierophantic
or mystic philosophy. The speculative element, we repeat,
was merely traditional and symbolical as at present, and
not practical; but this tradition was to serve to keep
alight the flame of speculative mysticism which was to be
aroused again at the end of the medieval period. When
political freedom awoke in Europe, the necessity for the
existence of secret societies vanished, but the persons
who delighted in their formation and management still
remained. The raison d'etre of these fellowships had
disappeared, but the love of mysticism, not to say the
mysterious, was perhaps stronger than ever. What then
occurred ? Simply this: that all those persons who found
the occupation of floating and managing real secret
societies gone, cast about for anything in the shape of a
mystical fellowship that they could find. They soon
discovered the craft of masonry which although operative
possessed mystical traditions. The attraction was mutual,
and astrologers, alchemists and others soon crowded the
lodges, to such purpose that at the lodge held in 1646 in
London, there was not an operative mason present, and at
that held in 1682, the speculative branch was overwhelming
in its numbers. Harkingf back a little, it is noteworthy
that the freemasons in media: val times formed a
fellowship or guild closely resembling in its constitution
that of similar trade guilds both in Britain and the
continent; such as the Weavers, Tailors, Fishmongers, and
so forth. But although these guilds preserved their ';
mysteries," where they possessed them, with considerable
jealousy, they do not appear to have embedded in their
constitutions the same ancient practices and ritual which
go to. show so strongly that masonry is undoubtedly an
institution of great antiquity.
It has also been suggested that freemasonry was introduced
into Europe by the Knights Templar. It would be difficult
to discover a similar institution which in the opinion of
some authorities had not been founded by that order ; and
it is difficult to believe that the haughty chivalry of
Noiman times would have claimed any connection whatsoever
with an operative craft. There are, however, many
connections between alchemy and masonry. For example in
the Ordiv.all of Alchymy compiled by Thomas Norton,
(q.v.), the freemasons are alluded to as workers in it. In
1630, we find Fludd (q.v.) using language which smacks
strongly of freemasonry. His society was divided into
degrees, and the Masons' Company of London had a copy of
the masonic charges presented by him. Vaughan also appears
to have been a freemason, and many masons of the middle of
the seventeenth century, such as Robert Moray and Elias
Ashmole, were diligent students of occult science, and Sir
Christopher Wren was a student of hermetic art.
It has often been put forward that Scotland was the
original home of freemasonry in these islands, but
although the craft was undoubtedly "ancient in that
country, there does not appear to be any adequate proof
that it was older than in England. Some of the Scottish
lodges, such as No. i Edinburgh, Kilwinning, and Aberdeen,
possess very ancient records, and it is probable that this
has led to the assumption that the brotherhood was of
greater antiquity in North Britain than in England. But
the circumstance that the craft was probably introduced
into England in Roman times, where it has in all
likelihood flourished ever since, tends to dispose of such
a theory. The history of modern freemasonry begins with
the formation of the Grand Lodge of England, which was
inaugurated on St. John the Baptist' s Day 1717 by several
old lodges. This represented the first central governing
body of the fraternity, and before this time each lodge
had been self-governing. Many lodges speedily came under
its aegis, and Ireland formed a Grand lodge of her own in
1725 but Scotland did not follow till 1736, and even then
many lodges held aloof from the central body, only 33 out
of 100 falling into line. From one or other of these three
governing bodies all the regular lodges throughout the
world have arisen, so that modern masonry may truthfully
be said to be of entirely British origin. This is not the
place to enter into an elaborate discussion of the history
and affairs of modern masonry, and we are chiefly
exercised regarding its mystical position and tendencies.
Regarding these we must be brief. As regards the lower
ranks of the craft, it consists almost entirely in these
islands at least of persons who have in great measure
treated it as a mere friendly society, and it is only in
the higher ranks that any real idea of the true
significance of the mystical tenets preserved and taught
is retained. The ordinary mason, who preserves a cryptic
and mysterious silence when the affairs of his craft are
alluded to, merely serves as a laughing-stock to the
modern well-equipped mystic. Certain signs and handgrips
are in use amongst masons, and the possession of these,
and of a ritual the significance of which he rarely
comprehends, the average brother fondly imagines, renders
him somewhat superior to the layman. It is extremely
doubtful if among even the higher ranks of masonry, the
deepest significance of the tradition of the craft is
thoroughly realised, and if the absurd works which every
now and then emanate from eminent masons regarding the
history of their craft be accepted as criteria of their
higher knowledge, it must indeed be of slight proportions.
Regarding the grand secret, or secrets, of masonry, the
layman may rest comfortably assured that if he has failed
to join the brotherhood, he has missed no fact of supreme
importance by so doing. There is no " secret" at all. The
original secrets in connection with the craft were those
of operative masons, who were jealous of their position as
workmen, and who rightly enough did not believe in giving
away business secrets to all and sundry; but the so-called
•' secrets " of modern speculative masonry are merely such
as have brought alchemy, astrology, and the kindred
sciences into unthinking disrepute among those who do not
recognise their significance in the history of human
thought. This is not to say that masonry as a whole
consists of mere claptrap. The trend of its entire
constitution is nowadays frankly mystical, but it is a
mysticism which is only half understood by the lower ranks
of the craft, and which is imperfectly recognised by its
higher officers. Its tenets are unquestionably mystic and
lofty, but masonic transcendentalism has scarcely kept in
line with the more modern forms of mysticism. From time to
time new degrees have been formed which have in some
measure rectified this, but the number of masons qualified
to understand the nature of the vast and mighty truths
conveyed in these, is naturally extremely small, and it is
as a friendly society that the brotherhood effects its
greatest good. As has been said, continental masonry is
undoubtedly
the offspring of British systems. This is not to say that
in France and Germany there were no masonic lodges in
existence before the formation of the English Grand Lodge;
but all modern lodges in these countries undoubtedly date
from the inception of the English central body. French
masonry possessed and possesses many rites which differ
entirely from those accepted by the British craft. We find
the beginnings of modern French masonry in the labours of
Martinez Pasqually (q.v.), St. Martin (q.v.), and perhaps
to a great extent in those of Cagliostro (q.v.) who toiled
greatly to found his Egyptian rite in France. It is
noticeable, however, that he had become a member of a
London lodge before attempting this. In France, masonry
has always had more or less a political complexion, and
nowadays the extreme enmity existing between it and the
Roman Catholic church in that country favours the
inclusion in its ranks of persons possessing ideals by no
means in consonance with the very upright standard of
British masonry. In Germany, it has been said that the
Stein-rnetzin approximated very strongly in mediseval
times to the British masons, if they were not originally
one and the same; but the later lodges in Germany all date
from that founded in 1733.
The entrance of masons into the various degrees involves
an elaborate system of symbolic ritual, of which the
essence is uniform throughout all lodges. The members are
classified in numerous degrees, of which the first three
are entered apprentice, fellow-craft, and master-mason.
Each lodge possesses its own byelaws, subject to the Book
of Constitution of the Grand Lodge.
Wild stories have been circulated, chiefly by the Roman
Catholic enemies of masonry, regarding the practice of
diabolic occultism in the higher ranks of the craft. To
begin with, it is extremely unlikely that more than three
or four persons connected with it possess the requisite
knowledge to thus offend against the Christian
proprieties, and the childish asseverations of French
writers on the subject may be dismissed with a smile. The
" occultism " and " transcendentalism " of the majority of
zealous brethren are usually of the mildest character
possible, and are in some measure related to the
mysterious attitude of the average mason, when dark hints
as to lodge doings are whispered of among his admiring
relatives
with several other young
men, the Hessian was allowed to witness numerous
experiments, and while he watched them, it seemed to him
that the great secret lay open before him ; but
afterwards, when he made attempts on his own account, he
found that Lascaris had duped him shamefully, and had even
taken advantage of his ignorance. Thereupon, in
contradistinction to the majority of thwarted alchemists,
he renounced the futile search altogether, vowed fealty to
his original calling, and devoted the rest of his life
thereto.
Home | Alternative
Medicine | Astrology | Channeling
|
Divination |
Esoteric & Occult |
Food
|
Life
After Death | Michael
Teachings
| Mind
& Body | Paranormal
| Philosophy
& Religion |
Relationships
| Spiritual
Growth
| World
Issues
|
read more...