Note:  This material was scanned into text files for the sole purpose of convenient electronic research. This material is NOT intended as a reproduction of the original volumes. However close the material is to becoming a reproduced work, it should ONLY be regarded as a textual reference.  Scanned at Phoenixmasonry by Ralph W. Omholt, PM in May 2007.

 

GOULD’S HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY

THROUGHOUT THE WORLD

 

VOLUME 1

 

 

CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS                                          NEW YORK

 

REVISED BY DUDLEY WRIGHT

 

EDITOR OF THE MASONIC NEWS

 

THIS EDITION IN SIX VOLUMES EMBRACES NOT ONLY AN INVESTIGATION OF RECORDS OF THE ORGANIZATIONS OF THE FRATERNITY IN ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, IRELAND, THE BRITISH COLONIES, EUROPE, ASIA, AFRICA AND SOUTH AMERICA, BUT INCLUDES ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ESPECIALLY PREPARED ON EUROPE, ASIA, AND AFRICA, ALSO CONTRIBUTIONS BY DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF THE FRATERNITY COVERING EACH OF THE FORTY‑EIGHT STATES, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND THE POSSESSIONS OF THE

 

UNITED STATES

 

THE PROVINCES OF CANADA AND THE

 

COUNTRIES OF LATIN AMERICA

 

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

 

MELVIN M. JOHNSON

 

Past Grand Muter of Masons in Massachusetts, and M \ P\ Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, 33° for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the United States

 

AND

 

J. EDWARD ALLEN

 

Foreign Correspondent and Reviewer Grand Lodge, Grand Chapter, Grand Council, Grand Commandery of North Carolina and the Grand Encampment K. T. of the United States

 

ILLUSTRATED

 

FOREWORD

 

GOULD was the Thucydides of Masonic history. The Masonic histories before his day belong on the shelves with books of mythology and fairy tales. Gould also inspired real historical research and study. Vast stores of information have been uncovered since his time which correct some errors made by Gould, and add tremendously to the real story of the past of Freemasonry. Moreover, much has transpired since then. All this requires the present revision.

 

Outside of its own membership, Freemasonry is to‑day little understood and much misunderstood. At the outset, let us get a clear idea of what Freemasonry is, of its purposes, and a few of its major accomplishments.

 

Freemasonry is a charitable, benevolent, educational, and religious secret society, adhering to its own peculiar Ancient Landmarks. Its methods of recognition and of symbolic instruction are secret and thereby a test of membership is provided, though a Brother be travelling in foreign countries and among those who would otherwise be strangers.

 

It is religious in that it teaches monotheism, the Volume of the Sacred Law is open upon its Altars whenever a Lodge is in Session, worship of God is ever a part of its ceremonial, and to its neophytes and Brethren alike are constantly addressed lessons of morality; yet it is not theological nor does it attempt to displace or rival the church. Masonry is not a religion; it is the handmaid of religion.

 

It is educational in that it teaches a perfect system of morality, based upon the Sacred Law, by a prescribed ceremonial; and it also provides libraries and opportunities for study therein.

 

It is benevolent in that it teaches relief of the poor and distressed as a duty and exemplifies that duty by relief of sick and distressed Brethren, by caring for the widows and orphans of the Brethren, by maintaining homes for aged and distressed Brethren and their dependents, and by many other altruistic endeavours.

 

It is charitable in that none of its income inures to the benefit of any individual, but all is devoted to the improvement and promotion of the happiness of mankind.

 

It is a social organisation only so far as it furnishes additional inducement that men may forgather in numbers, thereby providing more material for its primary work of training, of worship, and of charity.

 

The sole dogma (i.e., arbitrary dictum) of Freemasonry is the Landmark of Belief in God. No neophyte ever has been or ever will be permitted participation in the mysteries of legitimate and recognized Freemasonry until he has vii viii FOREWORD solemnly asserted his trust in God. Beyond that, we inquire and require nothing of sectarianism or religious belief.

 

Freemasonry's idea of God is universal. Each may interpret that idea in the terms of his own creed. The requirement is solely a belief in one Supreme Being whom we sometimes call the Great Architect of the Universe. Upon this, the enlightened religious of all ages have been able to agree. It is proclaimed not only in the New Testament of the Christian, but in the Pentateuch of the Hebrew, in the Koran of the Islamite, in the Avesta of the Magians of Persia, in the Book of Kings of the Chinese, in the Sutras of the Buddhist, and even in the Vedas of the Hindu.

 

 "Father of all! in every age, In every clime adored, By Saint, by Savage, and by Sage, Jehovah, Jove, or Lord!" Freemasonry has probably been the greatest single influence toward establishing the doctrine of liberty of conscience. In the midst of sectarian antagonism, our Fraternity's first Grand Lodge was organised in 1717, by four Lodges then existing within the "Bills of Mortality" of London, England. It almost immediately reached out, planting new Lodges and successfully establishing systematised Grand Lodge control over all Lodges, including those which had theretofore met "according to the old customs"; that is to say, without Charter or Warrant but by the authority inherent in members of the Craft who, finding themselves together in a locality, met and Worked.

 

In 1723, the Constitutions of this Mother Grand Lodge of the World were published. These declared "Concerning God and religion.. Though in ancient Times Masons were charg'd in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet 'tis now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that Religion in which all Men agree, leaving their particular Opinions to themselves." These Constitutions further declared "No private Piques or Quarrels must be brought within the Door of the Lodge, far less any Quarrels about Religion, or Nations, or State Policy, we being only, as Masons, of the Catholick Religion above‑mention'd; we are also of all Nations, Tongues, Kindreds, and Languages, and are resolv'd against all Politicks, as what never yet conduc'd to the Welfare of the Lodge, nor ever will." Proselyting has its place in the world, but not in the halls of Masonry. Sectarian missionary spirit and its exercise have been of incalculable value to the human race. However much we should give it our support as individuals or as members of other societies, it has no place within this Fraternity. In our Lodge Rooms, upon the single bond of belief in Deity, we may thus "conciliate true friendship" among men of every country, sect and opinion.

 

No authoritative spokesman of legitimate and recognised Freemasonry has FOREWORD ix ever engaged in a campaign against or antagonised any religion. (Distinguish, here, between religion and a church in politics.) Freemasonry never has been, is not now, and never will be a party to the reviling of any faith, creed, theology, or method of worship.

 

The Bull of Pope Clement XII in 1738, and other later Papal Bulls and Edicts, one as recent as 1884, have scathingly denounced Freemasons and Freemasonry. Of the reasons assigned, two are based on fact; one, that Freemasonry is tolerant of all religious creeds; the other, that oaths of secrecy are demanded. All other reasons given are incorrect; so wrong, indeed, that we of the Craft wonder how it was possible that any one could have been persuaded to proclaim or even believe them.

 

Many members of the Roman Catholic Church have held Masonic membership and office. Until they were ordered out of our Fraternity, one‑half of the Masons in Ireland were of that faith. A Papal Nuncio, as a Freemason, laid the corner‑stone of the great altar of the Parisian Church of St. Sulpice (1733). Some eminent Catholics have held the highest possible office in the gift of the Craft, that of Most Worshipful Grand Master (e.g. the Duke of Norfolk, 1730 31; Anthony Brown, Viscount Montacute, 1732‑33; Benedict Barnewall, Viscount Kingsland, Ireland 1733‑34; Robert Edward, Lord Petre, 1772‑77). If that Church sees fit to bar its members from belonging to our Fraternity, it has a perfect right to do so. It is the sole judge of the qualifications of its own members. Freemasonry, however, does not bar an applicant for its Degrees because he is a member of that or of any other church. Whether or not he can be true both to his Church and to the Fraternity is a question the applicant's conscience must determine. Belief in his sincerity and fitness will be determined by the ballot box.

 

No discussion of the creed of any Church is permitted within the tiled Lodge Room, and the attitude of Freemasonry toward any and all sects and denominations, toward any form of the honest worship of God, is not one of antagonism but of respect.

 

If within the power of Freemasons to prevent it, no sect, atheistic, agnostic or supremely religious, will be permitted to dominate, dictate or control civil government. Freemasonry has never attempted to do this, and would not if it had the power.

 

Our Fraternity asks no man to carry Freemasonry as an institution into his civic life, to vote as a Mason either in the ballot box or in legislative halls, to perform executive duties as a Mason, or to adjudicate as a Mason. Freemasonry has no fear of the practises, policies or acts of any man whose character is sound. Its ambition is to aid in implanting and nurturing ideals of equality, charity, justice, morality, liberty, and fraternity in the hearts and minds of men. It concerns itself with principles and not with policies. It builds character, not faction. Freemasonry will join hands not only with its friends but with its enemies‑though no God‑fearing, liberty‑loving man should be its enemy‑to establish and perpetuate in all nations where it has a foothold l FOREWORD the spirit of this ringing message of our Bro. George Washington, " I have often expressed my sentiments, that every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience. " When no Roman Catholic in England was allowed civil or military rights, or even to worship according to the ceremonies of his own religion, Freemasonry joined hands with the Catholic Committee in persuading England to grant them the rights of citizenship and to worship God according to the dictates of their consciences. One of the greatest leaders in this movement was the Seventh Lord Petre, Grand Master of Masons in England and the leading member of the Catholic Committee.

 

In Colonial America, Freemasonry was the most important inter‑colonial network‑indeed, almost the only thing which the Colonies had in common, save hatred, not of the British people but of the British Crown of that day. Freemasonry exercised a greater influence upon the establishment and development of the fundamental principles of this land of ours than any other single institution.

 

Neither general historians nor the members of our Fraternity have realised how much that civilisation of which we are a part owes to Freemasonry. Its intangible accomplishments can never be measured. The dollars which it has spent in charity are tangible, as is its numerical strength; but numbers and dollars are not the criteria by which to estimate the value or accomplishments of Freemasonry.

 

It is the inculcation in the hearts and minds of men of those basic and immutable principles of human conduct, upon which all social compacts rest and a departure from which inevitably brings chaos, that organised Masonry seeks accomplishment. Worship of God cannot be measured in volts, morality in gallons, friendship in pounds, love in dollars, or altruism in inches; yet these are vastly more essential to the peace and happiness of man than material things which have three dimensions, or than energy and motion capable of statistical tabulation. Indeed, the preservation of civilisation depends upon a true reflection of these qualities of mind and soul. No statistician can possibly measure the results of such endeavour. It is through these good works that Freemasonry desires to be known rather than by compilations and formulas.

 

Down through the years, not only here but in many other lands, Freemasonry has been instilling and cultivating ideals‑ideals of worship of God, of liberty of conscience, of truth, equality, charity, liberty, justice, morality, and fraternity, in the hearts and minds of men.

 

Based always upon the sure foundation of the worship of God, the greatest of these in its effects upon human contacts is fraternity ‑ call it brotherly love, the second great commandment or the Golden Rule, if you will.

 

Our charitable, benevolent, educational, and religious Fraternity has for its main purpose to‑day the propagation of this one and only cement or bond FOREWORD xi of human society which is local, national and international. Without it, the centrifugal forces of disorder, destruction, iconoclasm, hate, jealousy, and envy, ever active, would send our whirling civilisation flying into atoms.

 

Love, as the basis of national and international relations, has never yet been tried. Power, might, and authority, physical and financial and even ecclesiastical, have been tried and have failed. Here, then, is the great secret of Freemasonry‑a secret only because the world will not heed it. Striving onward, day by day, in the midst of what sometimes seems to threaten a return to chaos, our Fraternity persists in cultivating and disseminating these ideals, these landmarks of civilisation, and in reaching forward to that millennial day when love shall rule the world.

 

Then shall there be no more need of Declarations of Independence. Rather, shall there be Declarations of Dependence of man upon his fellowmen, of city upon its contacting communities, of State upon its neighbour States, of nation upon its sister nations. To preserve and broaden such ideals, Freemasonry at the end of centuries, confidently looks forward into the centuries which are to come. Our backs are to the past; our faces to the future. Ahead lies our duty ‑our opportunity.

 

These are the ideals and an indication of the accomplishments of the greatest Fraternity the world has ever known. Such a Fraternity should have its history recorded in order that its own members, as well as the profane, may know the part which it has played, is playing, and should play in a world which more than ever needs its wholesome influence. This is my purpose in sharing in the compilation of this history.

 

MELVIN M. JOHNSON.

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

VOLUME I

 

CHAPTER ONE

 

INTRODUCTION ‑ THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES ‑ THE ESSENES ‑ THE ROMAN

 COLLEGIA ‑ THE CULDEES

 

CHAPTER TWO

 

THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS

 

CHAPTER THREE

 

THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 64

 

CHAPTER FOUR

 

THE CRAFT GUILDS CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE

 

CHAPTER FIVE

THE COMPANIONAGE, OR LES COMPAGNONS DU TOUR DE FRANCE

 

CHAPTER SIX

 

MEDIEVAL OPERATIVE MASONRY 120

 

CHAPTER SEVEN

 

MASONS' MARKS 142

 

CHAPTER EIGHT

 

THE STATUTES RELATING TO THE FREEMASONS

 

CHAPTER NINE

 

APOCRYPHAL MANUSCRIPTS 202

 

CHAPTER TEN

 

THE QUATUOR CORONATI 221 xlll 24 86 99 154 xiv

 

CONTENTS

 

CHAPTER ELEVEN

 

THE MASONS' COMPANY, LONDON

 

CHAPTER TWELVE

 

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY ‑ ENGLAND, I PAGE 24I 159

 

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

 

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY ‑ ENGLAND, II 307

 

 

ILLUSTRATIONS

VOLUME I

 

George Washington as Master of Alexandria Lodge, No. 22 ‑ (Colour) Frontispiece PACING PAGE Seals and Tokens of Continental Guilds, I 68 Seals and Tokens of Continental Guilds, II 78 Arms of Masons, Carpenters, etc., I 86 (Compagnons.) A Procession of the Fellow Craft ioo A Series of Fifteen English and French Freemasonry Prints of 1745‑1757 1809‑1812‑ inserted between pages‑ 12‑o and 12.1 Masons' Marks, I 146 Masons' Marks, II 148 Masons' Marks, III 150 Arms of Masons, Carpenters, etc., II 2‑44 Frontispiece to Anderson's Book of Constitutions, 1723 2.62 A Masonic Sesqui‑centenary Celebrated by Loyal Lodge at Barnstaple, North Devon, September 24, 1933 310 An Interior View of the Guildhall, During the Masonic Sesqui‑centenary Celebration at Barnstaple, North Devon, September 24, 1933 32.0 Presidents of the United States, Members of the Masonic Fraternity George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William H. Taft, Warren G. Harding, and Franklin D. Roosevelt At end of volume The Iron Worker and King Solomon 8 I 1 GOULD'S HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD VOLUME I i A HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD VOL. I

 

 

CHAPTER I

 

INTRODUCTION‑THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES‑THE ESSENES‑THE ROMAN COLLEGIA‑THE CULDEES

 

UP to a comparatively recent period, the History and Antiquities of Freemasonry were involved in a cloud of darkness and uncertainty. Treated as a rule with a thinly veiled contempt by men of letters, the subject was, in a great measure, abandoned to writers with whom enthusiasm supplied the place of learning, whose principal qualification for their task was membership of the Fraternity. On the other hand, however, it must fairly be stated that the few literati who wrote upon this uncongenial theme evinced an amount of credulity which, to say the least, was commensurate with their learning and, by laying their imaginations under contribution for the facts which were essential to the theories they advanced, confirmed the pre‑existing belief that all Masonic history is untrue. Thus Hallam, in his Middle Ages (18 5 6, vol. iii, p. 3 5 9), wrote: "The curious subject of Freemasonry has been treated of only by panegyrists or calumniators, both equally mendacious." The vagaries of this latter class have been pleasantly characterized as "the sprightly and vivacious accounts of the modern Masonic annalists, who display in their histories a haughty independence of facts, and make up for the scarcity of evidence by a surprising fecundity of invention. `Speculative Masonry,' as they call it, seems to have favoured them with a large portion of her airy materials and with ladders, scaffolding and bricks of air, they have run up their historical structures with wonderful ease." Thus wrote Dr. (afterwards Bishop) Armstrong, of Grahamstown, in The Christian Kemembrancer, July 1 847. The critical reader is indeed apt to lament that leaders of the creationist school have not followed the example of Aristotle, whose " wisdom and integrity " Lord Bacon in The Advancement of Learning commends, in having " cast all prodigious narrations which he thought worthy the recording into one book, that such whereupon observation and rule was to be built, should not be mingled or weakened with matter of doubtful credit." In this connexion may be cited Pitt Taylor's original edition of Professor Greenleaf's Law of Evidence. The various American Law Reports quoted therein are lettered A, B, C, D, in accordance with the relative estimation in which they were held by the profession. Some classification of this kind would be of great assistance to the student of Masonic antiquities.

 

I z

THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY

 

A new and more critical school has, however, at length arisen, which, while doing much to place the subject on a sound historical basis, has yet left something to be desired.

 

The publication of a General History of Freemasonry, by J. G. Findel (of Leipsic) in 1861 (Geschichte der Freimaurerei), marks a distinct era in the progress of Masonic literature. No universal history of the Masonic Craft (at all worthy of the name) had previously been compiled and the dictum of the Chevalier de Bonneville was generally acquiesced in, " That the span of ten men's lives was too short a period for the execution of so formidable an undertaking." The second (and revised) English edition of this work was published by Kenning in 1869.

 

Findel's work is a highly meritorious compilation and reflects great credit upon his industry. The writings of all previous Masonic authors appear to have been consulted, but the value of his history would have been much enhanced by a more frequent reference to authorities. He seems, indeed, to labour under a complete incapacity to distinguish between the relative degrees of value of the authorities he is attempting to analyse; but, putting all demerits on one side, his History of Freemasonry forms a very solid contribution to our stock of Masonic facts and, from his faculty of lucid condensation, has brought, for the first time within popular comprehension, the entire subject to the elucidation of which its scope is directed. Prehistoric Masonry is dealt with very briefly, but this branch of archaeological research has been taken up by G. F. Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, 1876), who, in an interesting volume of 481 pages, devoted entirely to the "Antiquities" of the Society, discusses very ably and clearly the legendary or traditionary history of the Fraternity.

 

The design of the present work is to embody in a single publication the legendary and the authentic histories of the Craft. The introductory portion will cover the ground already occupied by Fort and then will be traversed the field of research over which Findel has travelled. The differences from these writers will be material, both as regards the facts they accept and the inferences they have drawn and the record of occurrences will necessarily vary somewhat from theirs, whilst the general conclusions will be as novel as it is hoped they may prove to be well founded.

 

At the outset it may be remarked that the actual History of Freemasonry can only, in strictness, be deemed to commence from the period when the chaos of mythical traditions is succeeded by the era of Lodge records. This epoch cannot be very readily determined. The circumstances of the Lodges, even in North and South Britain, were dissimilar. In Scotland the veritable proceedings of Lodges for the year 15 99, as entered at the time in their minute‑books, are still extant. In England there are no Lodge minutes ranging back even into the seventeenth century and the records of but a single Lodge (Alnwick) between 1700 and the date of formation of the first Grand Lodge (1717). For the sake of convenience, therefore, the mythico‑historical period of Freemasonry will be held to have extended to 1717 and the special circumstances which distinguish the early Masonry of Scotland THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 3 from that of its sister kingdom will, to the extent that may be requisite, be further considered when the histories of the British Grand Lodges are separately treated.

 

The period, therefore, antedating the era of Grand Lodges (1717), will be examined in the introductory part of this work.

 

In dealing with what Fort has happily styled the "Antiquities of Freemasonry," whilst discussing, at some point or other, all or nearly all the subjects this writer has so dexterously handled, the method of treatment adopted will, nevertheless, vary very much from the system he has followed.

 

In the progress of the inquiry it will be necessary to examine the leading theories with regard to the origin of Freemasonry that have seemed tenable to the learned. These will be subdivided into two classes, the one being properly introductory to the general bulk of evidence that will be adduced in the chapters which next follow ; and the other, claiming attention at a later stage, just before we part company with the " Antiquities " and emerge from the cloud‑land of legend and tradition into the domain of authentic history.

 

The sources to which the mysteries of Freemasonry have been ascribed by individual theorists are too numerous to be particularized, although some of the more curious will be briefly reviewed.

 

Two theories or hypotheses stand out in bold relief‑the conjectural origin of Freemasonry as disclosed in the pages of the Parentalia (or Memoirs of the Family of the Wrens, 1750, p. 306) and its more recent derivation from the customs of the German Steinmetzen (Fallon, Winzer, Findel, Steinbrenner and Fort). Each of these speculations has had its day. From 1750 until the publication of Findel's History (1861), the theory of "travelling Masons " ‑ ascribed to Wren‑held possession of our encyclopxdias. The German supposition has since prevailed, but an attempt will be made to show that it rests upon no more solid foundation of fact than the hypothesis it displaced.

 

In successive chapters will be discussed the various matters or subjects germane to the general inquiry whilst, in a final examination, the relation of one topic to another, with the conclusions that may rightly be drawn from the scope and tenor of the entire evidence, will be duly presented.

 

It has been well said, "that we must despair of ever being able to reach the fountain‑head of streams which have been running and increasing from the beginning of time. All that we can aspire to do is only to trace their course backward, as far as possible, on these charts that now remain of the distant countries whence they were first perceived to flow" (Brand's Popular Antiquities, 1849, vol. i, p. ix). It has also to be borne in mind that as all trustworthy history must necessarily be a work of compilation, the imagination of the writer must be held in subjection. He can but use and shape his materials and these unavoidably will take a somewhat fragmentary form.

 

Past events leave relics behind them more certainly than future events cast shadows before them. From the records that have come down to us, an endeavour will be made to present, as far as possible, the leading features of the real Antiquities 4 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY of Freemasonry, that every reader may test the soundness of the general conclusions by an examination of the evidence upon which they are based. It must ever be recollected that " a large proportion of the general opinions of mankind are derived merely from authority and are entertained without any distinct understanding of the evidence on which they rest, or the argumentative grounds by which they are supported" (Sir G. C. Lewis : On the Influence of Authority in Matters of Opinion, p. 7). Lord Arundell of Wardour says (Tradition, principally with reference to Mythology and the Lazy of Nations, 1872, p. 13 9) : " Knowledge in many departments is becoming more and more the traditions of experts and must be taken by the outside world on faith." From this reproach, it will not be contended that the Freemasons of our own day merit an exemption, but the stigma, if such it be, under which they rest must assuredly be deemed to attach with even greater force to the inaccurate historians by whom they have been misled. It is true, no doubt, that the historian has no rules as to exclusion of evidence or incompetency of witnesses. In his court every document may be read, every statement may be heard. But, in proportion as he admits all evidence indiscriminately, he must exercise discrimination in judging of its effect. (See Lewis : Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics, vol. i, p. 196.) There is, indeed, no doubt that long habit, combined with a happy talent, may enable a person to discern the truth where it is invisible to ordinary minds possessing no special advantages. In order, however, that the truth so perceived should recommend itself to the convictions of others, it is a necessary condition that it should admit of proof which they can understand. (See Lewis: An Inquiry into the Credibility of the Early Roman History, vol. i, p. 14.) Much of the early history of Freemasonry is so interspersed with fable and romance that, however anxious we may be to deal tenderly with long‑cherished legends and traditions, some, at least, of these familiar superstitions‑unless we choose to violate every canon of historical criticism‑must be allowed to pass quietly into oblivion. The following mode of determining the authenticity of the Legends of the Saints, without dishonouring the authority of the Church or disturbng the faith of her children, suggests indeed one way out of the difficulty : " Les legendes sont dans 1'ordre historique ce que les reliques des saints sont dans le culte. 11 y a des reliques authentiques et des legendes certaines, des reliques evidemment fausses et des legendes evidemment fabuleuses, enfin des reliques douteuses et des legendes seulement probables et vraisemblables. Pour les legendes comme pour les reliques l'Eglise consacre ce qui est certain, proscrit le fableux et permet le douteux sans le consacrer " (Cours. d'Hist. Eccl., par l'Abbe Blanc, P. 5 52). In dealing with this subject, it is difficult‑indeed, almost impossible‑to lay down any fixed rules for our guidance. All the authorities seem hopelessly at variance. Gibbon states, " the Germans, in the days of Tacitus, were unacquainted with the use of letters. . . . Without that artificial help, the human memory ever dissipates or corrupts the ideas entrusted to her charge." " To this," says Lord Arundell (op. cit., pp. 120, 12 i), " I reply, that, although records are valuable for the attesta‑ THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 5 tion, they are not guarantees for the fidelity of tradition. When mankind trusts mainly to tradition, the faculties by which it is sustained will be more strongly developed and the adaptation of societyfor its transmission more exactly conformed." Yet, if we turn to one of the greatest masters of historical criticism, the comforting assurance of Lord Arundell is seriously assailed. " A tradition," says Sir George Lewis, " should be proved by authentic evidence to be not of subsequent growth, but to be founded on a contemporary recollection of the fact recorded. A historical event may be handed down by oral tradition, as well as by a contemporary written record ; but, in that case, satisfactory proof must be given that the tradition is derived from contemporary witnesses " (On the Influence of Authority, etc., p. go).

 

The principle just enunciated is, however, demurred to by another high authority, whose words have a special bearing upon the point under consideration. The learned author of The Language and Literature of Ancient Greece observes : " We have without hesitation repudiated the hypercritical doctrine of a modern school of classical antiquaries that, in no case whatever, is the reality of any event or person to be admitted unless it can be authenticated by contemporaneous written evidence. If this dogmatical rule be valid at all, it must be valid to the extent of a condemnation of nearly the whole primitive annals of Greece down to the first rise of authentic history about the epoch of the Persian War. The more rational principle of research is, that the historical critic is entitled to test the truth or falsehood of national tradition by the standard of speculative historical probability. The general grounds of such speculative argument in favour of an element of truth in oral tradition admit of being ranged under the following heads First, The comparative recency of the age in which the event transmitted is supposed to have taken place and the proportionally limited number of stages through which the tradition has passed. Secondly, The inherent probability of the event and, more especially, the existence of any such close connexion in the ratio of cause and effect between it and some other more recent and better attested event, as might warrant the inference, even apart from the tradition on the subject, that the one was the consequence of the other. Thirdly, The presumption that, although the event itself may not have enjoyed the benefit of written transmission, the art of writing was, at the period from which the tradition dates, sufficiently prevalent to check, in regard to the more prominent vicissitudes of national history, the licence in which the popular organs of tradition in a totally illiterate age are apt to indulge " (W. Mute, A Critical History of the Language and Literature of Ancient Greece, 1853, vol. iv, pp. 317, 318).

 

The principle to be observed in inquiries of this character appears, indeed, up to a certain point, to have been best laid down by Dr. Isaac Taylor, who says " A notion may weigh against a notion, or one hypothesis may be left to contend with another ; but an hypothesis can never be permitted, even in the slightest degree, to counterbalance either actual facts, or direct inferences from such facts. This preference of facts and of direct inductions to hypotheses, however ingenious or specious they may be, is the great law of modern science, which none but dreamers attempt to violate. Now, the rules of criticism and the laws of historical evidence 6 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY are as much matters of science as any other rules or laws derived by careful induction from a mass of facts " (The Process of Historical Proof, 18z8, p.3). In another part of this work (p. z62) the author says : " Our part is to scrutinize as carefully as we can the validity of the proofs ; not to weigh the probability of the factsa task to which we can scarcely ever be competent." The last branch of this definition carries us a little farther than we can safely go.

 

In the main, however, whilst carefully discarding the plainly fabulous narrations with which the Masonic system is encumbered, the view to which Schlegel has given expression is, perhaps, the one it would be well to adopt. He says : " I have laid it down as an invariable maxim to follow historical tradition and to hold fast by that clue, even when many things in the testimony and declarations of tradition appear strange and almost inexplicable, or at least enigmatical ; for as soon as, in the investigations of ancient history, we let slip that thread of Ariadne, we can find no outlet from the labyrinth of fanciful theories and the chaos of clashing opinions " (Philosophy of History, 183 S, vol. i, p. 29).

 

"The origin and source whence first sprang the institution of Freemasonry," says Dr. Mackey, " has given rise to more difference of opinion and discussion among Masonic scholars than any other topic in the literature of the institution." Indeed, were the books collected in which separate theories have been advanced, the dimensions of an ordinary library would be insufficient for their reception. For the most part, it may be stated that each commentator (as observed by Horace Walpole in the case of Stonehenge) has attributed to his theme that kind of antiquity of which he himself was most fond. Of Stonehenge it has been asserted " that nearly every prominent historical personage from the Devil to the Druids have at one time or another been credited with its erection‑the latter, however, enjoying the suffrages of the archeologists." Both the Devil and the Druids have had a large share ascribed to them in the institution of Freemasonry. In India, even at the present day, the Masonic Hall, or other place of meeting for the Lodges, is familiarly known as the "Shaitan" Bungalow, or Devil's house, whilst the Druidical theory of Masonic ancestry, although long since abandoned as untenable, was devoutly believed in by a large number of Masonic writers, whose works are even yet in demand.

 

The most fanciful representative of this school appears to have been Cleland, though Godfrey Higgins treads closely at his heels. The former, writing in 1766, presents a singular argument, which slightly abridged is as follows : "Considering that the May (May‑pole) was eminently the great sign of Druidism, as the Cross was of Christianity, is there anything forced or far‑fetched in the conjecture that the adherents to Druidism should take the name of Men of the May or Mays‑sons ? " This is by no means an unfair specimen of the conjectural etymology which has been lavishly resorted to in searching for the derivation of the word Mason. Dr. Mackey, after citing many derivations of this word, proceeds : " But all of these fanciful etymologies, which would have terrified Bopp, Grimm, Muller, or any other student of linguistic relations, forcibly remind us of the French epigrammist, THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 7 who admitted that alphina came from equus, but that in so coming it had very considerably changed its route " (Encyclopadia of Freemasonry, p. 489). All known languages appear to have been consulted, with the natural result of enveloping the whole matter in confusion, the speculations of the learned (amongst whom figures Lessing, one of the first literary characters of his age) being honourably distinguished by their greater freedom of exposition. It is generally assumed that, in the ancient oriental tongues, the few primitive words must needs bear many different significations and the numerous derivatives be infinitely equivocal. Hence anything may be made of names, by turning them to oriental sounds, so as to suit every system past, present, and to come. "And when anyone is at a loss," says Warburton, " in this game of crambo, which can never happen but by being duller than ordinary, the kindred dialects of the Chaldee and Arabic lie always ready to make up their deficiencies " (Divine Legation, vol. ii, p. zzo, where he also says: "I have heard of an old humorist and a great dealer in etymologies, who boasted that he not only knew whence words came, but whither they were going ").

 

The connexion of the Druids with the Freemasons has, like many other learned hypotheses, both history and antiquity obstinately bent against it; but not more so, however, than its supporters are against history and antiquity, as from the researches of recent writers may be readily demonstrated. The whole question has been thoroughly discussed in Dudley Wright's Druidism, The Ancient Faith of Britain, where a full bibliography will also be found. Clinch, with a great parade of learning, has endeavoured to identify Freemasonry with the system of Pythagoras and, for the purpose of comparison, cites no fewer than fifteen particular features or points of resemblance which are to be found, he says, in the ancient and in the modern institutions. "Let the Freemasons," he continues, " if they please, call Hiram, King of Tyre, an architect, and tell each other, in bad rhymes, that they are the descendants of those who constructed the temple of Solomon. To me, however, the opinion which seems decisive is, that the sect has penetrated into Europe by means of the gypsies." See "Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry " in Anthologia Hibernica, vol. iii, pp. 34,178, 279, and 421. W. Simson, in his History of the Gypsies, 1865, pp. 456,457, says : "Not only have they had a language peculiar to themselves, but signs as exclusively theirs as are those of the Freemasons. The distinction consists in this people having blood, language, a cast of mind and signs, peculiar to itself." The learned author of Ernst and Falk and Nathan der W>eise, Gottfried Ephraim Lessing, was of opinion that the Masonic institution had its origin in a secret association of Templars, long existent in London, which was shaped into its present form by Sir Christopher Wren. That the society is, in some way or other, a continuation of that of the Templars has been widely credited. The Abbe Barruel supported this theory in Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism, translated by the Hon. Robert Clifford (2d edit., 1798). Edmund Burke wrote to Barruel, May 1, 1797, on the publication of his first volume, expressing an admiration of the work which posterity has failed to ratify. He says: "The whole of the wonderful 8 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY narrative is supported by documents and proofs (?) with the most juridical regularity and exactness." This theory has endured to the present day (see Frost's Secret Societies of the European Revolution, 1876, vol. i, p. 22) and, more recently, found an eloquent exponent in E. T. Carson, of Cincinnati, U.S.A. Notwithstanding the entire absence of historical corroboration, it has been adopted by many writers of ability and has exercised no inconsiderable influence in the fabrication of what are termed "High Degrees" and in the invention of Continental Rites. The subject will be discussed more fully in a later chapter of the present work.

 

Nicholai, a learned bookseller of Berlin, advanced, in 1782, a singular hypothesis in I>ersuch fiber die Beschuldigungen. French and English translations respectively of the appendix to this work (which contains Nicholai's Essay on the Origin of Freemasonry) will be found in Thory's Acta Latomorum and in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1853, p. 649. His belief was that Lord Bacon, influenced by the writings of Andrea, the alleged founder of the Rosicrucians and of his English disciple, Robert Fludd, gave to the world his New Atlantis, a beautiful apologue in which are to be found many ideas of a Masonic character. John Valentine Andrea was born in 1586 and died in 16 S4. The most important of his works (or of those ascribed to his pen) are the Fama Fraternitatis and the Chemical Marriage (Chemische Hockeit), published circa 1614 and 1616 respectively. It has been stated " that Fludd must be considered as the immediate father of Freemasonry, as Andrea was its remote father ! " (Freemasons' Magazine, April 18 5 8).

 

A ship which had been detained at Peru for one whole year, sails for China and Japan by the South Sea. In stress of weather the weary mariners gladly make the haven of a port of a fair city, which they find inhabited by Christians. They are brought to the strangers' house, the revenue of which is abundant; thirty‑seven years having elapsed since the arrival of similar visitors. The governor informs them "of the erection and institution, 1900 years ago, of an order or society by King Solamena, the noblest foundation that ever was upon the earth and the lanthorn of the kingdom." It was dedicated to the study of the works and creatures of God and appears to have been indifferently described as "Solomon's House," or "The College of the Six Days' Works." During the stay of the visitors at this city (in the Island of Bensalem), one of the fathers of "Solomon's House " came there and the historiographer of the party had the honour of an interview, to whom the patriarch, in the Spanish tongue, gave a full relation of the state of the " College." " Firstly," he said, " I will set forth unto you the end of our foundation ; secondly, the preparation or instruments we have for our works ; thirdly, the several employments and functions whereto our fellows are assigned ; and fourthly, the ordinances and rites which we observe." The society was formed of fellows or brethren ; and novices or apprentices. All took an oath of secrecy, " for the concealing of those things which we think fit to keep secret ; though some of those we do reveal sometimes to the State and some not." The narrative breaks off abruptly with the words, " The rest was not perfected." THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY 9 According to the latest of Baconian commentators, Spedding, " the story of Solomon's House is nothing more than a vision of the practical results which Lord Bacon anticipated from the study of natural history, diligently and systematically carried on through successive generations." See "The New Atlantis" in Spedding's Bacon, vol. iii, p. 129. The work seems to have been written in 1624 and was first published in 1627.

 

It will be seen from the foregoing abstract, in which every detail that can possibly interest the Masonic reader has been included, that the theory advanced by Nicholai rests upon a very slender, not to say forced, analogy. A better argument, if, indeed, one inconclusive chain of reasoning can be termed better or worse than another, whose links are alike defective, might be fashioned on the same lines, in favour of a Templar origin of Freemasonry.

 

The view about to be presented seems to have escaped the research of Dr. Mackey, whose admirable Encyclopa,dia seems to contain the substance of nearly everything of a Masonic character that has yet been printed. For this reason and, also, because it has been favourably regarded by Dr. Armstrong, who, otherwise, has a very poor opinion of all possible claims that can be urged in support of Masonic antiquity, the hypothesis will fit in very well with the observations that have preceded it and it will terminate the " short studies " on the origin of our society.

 

Dr. Armstrong says : " The order of the Temple was called `the knighthood of the Temple of Solomon,' not in allusion to the first temple built by Solomon, but to their hospital or residence at Jerusalem, which was so called to distinguish it from the temple erected on the site of that destroyed by Titus. Now, when we find a body said to be derived from the Templars, leaving, amongst the plumage with which the modern society has clumsily adorned itself, so much mention of the Temple of Solomon, there seems some sort of a ground for believing in the supposed connexion ! The Hospitallers of St. John, once the rivals, became the successors of the Templars and absorbed a large portion of their revenues at the time of their suppression. This would account for the connexion between the Freemasons and the order of St. John." See The Christian Remembrancer, July .1847, pp. I5‑.17. The authorities mainly relied upon by Dr. Armstrong are William of Tyre and James of Vitry (Bishop of Acre) : " Est prxterea," says the latter, " Hierosolymis Templum aliud immensx quantitatis et amplitudinis, a quo fratres militia, Templi, Templarii nominantur, quod Templum Salomonis nuncupatur, forsitan ad distinctionem alterius quod specialiter Templum Domini appellatur " (cited in Addison's History of the Knights Templar, 1842, p. 1o).

 

Passing from the fanciful speculations which, at different times, have exercised the minds of individual theorists, or have long since been given up as untenable, we may examine those derivations which have been accepted by our more trustworthy Masonic teachers and, by their long‑sustained vitality, claim at least our respectful consideration. By this, however, is not implied that those beliefs which have retained the greatest number of adherents are necessarily the most worthy of acceptance. In historical inquiry finality can have no place, and there is no greater i 10 THE ANTIQUITIES OF FREEMASONRY error than to conclude " that of former opinions, after variety and examination, the best hath still prevailed and suppressed the rest." " As if the multitude," says Lord Bacon, " or the wisest for the multitude's sake, were not ready to give passage rather to that which is popular and superficial than to that which is substantial and profound ; for the truth is, that time seemeth to be of the nature of a river or stream, which carrieth down to us that which is light and blown up and sinketh and drowneth that which is weighty and solid" (Advancement of Learning). This idea seems to have been happily paraphrased by Elias Ashmole in his Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum (1652, Proleg.).

 

Before, however, commencing an analysis a few general observations will not be out of place. Krause, in Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, writes When we find in any nation or age social efforts resembling in aim and organiza tion those of the Freemasons, we are by no means justified in tracing any closer connexion between them than such as human nature everywhere and in all ages, is known to have in common, unless it can be historically proved that an actual relationship exists.

 

Likewise, Von Humboldt, in his Researches (1844, vol. i, p. ii), says A small number of nations far distant from each other, the Etruscans, the Egyptians, the people of Thibet and the Aztecs, exhibit striking analogies in their buildings, their religious institutions, their division of time, their cycles of regenera tion and their mystic notions. It is the duty of the historian to point out these analogies, which are as difficult to explain as the relations that exist between the Sanscrit, the Persian, the Greek and the languages of German origin ; but, in attempting to generalize ideas, we should learn to stop at the point where precise data are wanting.

 

The explanation, however, which Von Humboldt withheld, had long previously been suggested by Warburton (Divine Legation, 1837, vol. ii, pp. 203, 221), who dwells with characteristic force upon " the old inveterate error that a similitude of customs and manners amongst the various tribes of mankind most remote from one another, must needs arise from some communication, whereas human nature, without any other help, will, in the same circumstances, always exhibit the same appearance " ; and, in another passage of his famous work, he speaks " of the general conformity which is commonly ascribed to imitation, when, in truth, its source is in our own common nature and the similar circumstances in which the partakers of it are generally found." Even in cases where an historical connexion is capable of demonstration, we must bear in mind that it may assume a Protean form. It is one thing when an institution flourishes through being constantly renewed by the addition of new members, its sphere of action and regulations undergoing, at the same time, repeated changes ; and another thing when, from a pre‑existing institution, an entirely new one takes its rise. It is also different when a newly formed institution takes for its model the views, sphere of action and the social forms of one which has long since come to an end.

 

 I2 THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES having been the model of all later imitations. If, then, Freemasonry in its existing form is regarded as a mere assimilation of the Mysteries, attention should be directed chiefly to the bewitching dreams of the Grecian mythologists which, enhanced by the attractions of poetry and romance, would, naturally, influence the minds of those " men of letters " who, it is asserted, " in the year 1646 " rearranged the forms for the reception of Masonic candidates,‑in preference to the degenerate or corrupted mysteries of a subsequent era. This is a deduction arising from the admission into a Warrington Lodge in 1645 of Elias Ashmole and Colonel Mainwaring, of which Lodge wealthy landowners in the neighbourhood were also members. See England's Masonic Pioneers, by Dudley Wright, pp. 12‑47; and Sandy's Short View of the History of Freemasonry (1829), p. 5 2.

 

On the other hand, if Freemasonry is regarded as the direct descendant, or as a survival of the Mysteries, the peculiarities of the Mithraic worship‑the latest form of paganism which lingered amidst the disjecta membra of the old Roman Empire‑will mainly claim notice. It is almost certain, therefore, that if a set of philosophers in the seventeenth century ransacked antiquity in order to discover a model for their newly‑born Freemasonry, the " Mysteries properly so called" furnished them with the object of their search. Also, that if, without break of continuity, the forms of the Mysteries are now possessed by Freemasons, their origin must be looked for in the rites of Mithraism.

 

The first and original Mysteries appear to have been those of Isis and Osiris in Egypt and it has been conjectured that they were established in Greece somewhere about 1400 B.c., during the sovereignty of Erectheus. The allegorical history of Osiris the Egyptians deemed the most solemn mystery of their religion. Herodotus always mentions it with great caution. It was the record of the misfortunes which had happened to one whose name he never ventures to utter ; and his cautious behaviour with regard to everything connected with Osiris shows that he had been initiated into the mysteries and was fearful of divulging any of the secrets he had solemnly bound himself to keep. Of the ceremonies performed at the initiation into the Egyptian mysteries, we must ever remain ignorant, and Sir Gardner Wilkinson expressly states " that our only means of forming any opinions respecting them are to be derived from our imperfect acquaintance with those of Greece, which were doubtless imitative of the rites practised in Egypt." See Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, 1878, vol. iii, pp. 3 8o, 3 87 ; Herodotus, vol. ii, p. 171.

 

The most celebrated of the Ancient Mysteries were the Orphic, the Bacchic, or Dionysiac, the Eleusinian, the Samothracian, the Cabiric and the Mithraic. The Mysteries were known in Greece as mysteria, teletai and orgia. The last term originally signified sacrifices only, accompanied, of course, by certain ceremonies, but it was afterwards applied especially to the ceremonies observed in the worship of Dionysius and, at a still later period, to Mysteries in general.

 

The Eleusinian were probably a part of the old Pelasgian religion, also those of the Cabiri, celebrated more especially in Thrace. All nations of antiquity THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES 13 appear to have been desirous of concealing some parts of their religious worship from the multitude, in order to render them the more venerated and, in the present case, an additional motive was to veil its celebration from the gaze of their Hellenic conquerors, as the Walpurgis Nights were adopted by the Saxons in Germany, in order to hide their pagan ceremonies from their Christian masters.

 

This practice of concealing rites and ceremonies from the uninitiated was a feature of the worship of the Early Church and it has persisted, to the present day, in some Oriental forms of Christian worship.

 

The Eleusinian were the holiest in Greece and, throughout every particular of those forms in which its Mysteries were concealed, may be discerned the evidences that they were the emblems or, rather, the machinery, of a great system‑a system at once mystical, philosophical and ethical. They were supposed to have been founded by Demeter, Eumolpus, Musxus, or Erectheus, the last named of whom is said to have brought them from Egypt. The story of Demeter is related by Diodorus Siculus and is also referred to by Isocrates. This version of their foundation was the one generally accepted by the ancients. All accounts, however, concur in stating that they originated when Athens was beginning to make progress in agriculture. When Eleusis was conquered by Athens, the inhabitants of the former district surrendered everything but the privilege of conducting the Mysteries. Ample details of the ceremonies observed at Eleusis will be found in The Eleusinian Mysteries and Rites by Dudley Wright.

 

The Mysteries, by the name of whatever god they might be called, were invariably of a mixed nature, beginning in sorrow and ending in joy. They sometimes described the allegorical death and subsequent revivification of the Deity, in whose honour they were celebrated ; whilst, at others, they represented the wanderings of a person in great distress on account of the loss, either of a husband, a lover, a son, or a daughter. It admits of very little doubt that the Mysteries, by whatever name they were called, were all in substance the same.

 

We are informed by Julius Firmicus that, in the nocturnal celebration of the Bacchic rites, a statue was laid out upon a couch as if dead and bewailed with the bitterest lamentations. When a sufficient space of time had been consumed in all the mock solemnity of woe, lights were introduced and the hierophant, having anointed the aspirants, slowly chanted the following distich Courage, ye Mystx, lo, our God is safe, And all our troubles speedily shall end.

 

And the epoptce now passed from the darkness of Tartarus to the divine splendour of Elysium.

 

Lucius, describing his initiation into the Mysteries of Isis, says : " Perhaps, inquisitive reader, you will very anxiously ask me what was then said and done ? I would tell you if it could be lawfully told. I approached to the confines of death and, having trod on the threshold of Proserpine, at midnight I saw the sun shining with a splendid light." He then goes on to say, " that his head was decorously 14 THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES encircled with a crown, the shining leaves of the palm tree projecting from it like rays of light, and that he celebrated the most joyful day of his initiation by delightful, pleasant and facetious banquets." In all the Mysteries there were Degrees or grades. Similar gradations occurred among the Pythagoreans. It was an old maxim of this sect, that everything was not to be told to everybody. It is said that they had common meals, resembling the Spartan syssitia, at which they met in companies of ten and, by some authorities, they were divided into three classes, Acustici, Mathematici, and Physici. It also appears that they had some secret conventional symbols, by which members of the Fraternity could recognize each other, even if they had never met before. See under " Pythagoras " in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography.

 

That, in all the Mysteries, the initiated possessed secret signs of recognition, is free from doubt. In the Golden Ass of Apuleius, Lucius, the hero of the story, after many vicissitudes, regains his human shape and is initiated into the Mysteries of Isis ; he finds, however, that it is expected of him to be also instructed in those " of the great God and supreme father of the gods, the invincible Osiris." In a dream he perceives one of the officiating priests, of whom he thus speaks : " He also walked gently with a limping step, the ankle bone of his left foot being a little bent, in order that he might afford me some sign by which I might know him " (Taylor's ed., bk. xi, p. 287). In another work (Apologia) the author of the Metamorphosis says : " If any one happens to be present who has been initiated into the same rites as myself, if he will give me the sign, he shall then be at liberty to hear what it is that I keep with so much care." Plautus, too, alludes to this custom in one of his plays (Miles Gloriosus, iv. z), when he says Cedo Signum, harunc si es Baccharum.

 

It has been alleged, but on very insufficient authority, that the Dionysian architects, also said to have been a fraternity of priest and lay architects of Dionysus or Bacchus, present in their internal as well as external procedure the most perfect resemblance to the Society of Freemasons (see Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, 1804, p. 31 ; and Robison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, 1797, p. zo). They seem, says Woodford (in Kenning's Cyclopaedia, p. 163), to have granted honorary membership and admitted speculative members, as we term them ; and it has been asserted that they had grades and secret signs of recognition. The chief interest in their history, however, arises from the claim that has been advanced for their having employed in their ceremonial observances many of the implements which are now used by Freemasons for a similar purpose. In the oldest of the Chinese classics, which embraces a period reaching from the twenty‑fourth to the seventh century before Christ, we meet with distinct allusions to the symbolism of the mason's art. But " even if we begin," says H. A. Giles (Freemasonry in China, p. 4), " where the `Book of History' ends, we find curious Masonic expressions to have been in use ‑at any rate in the written language‑more than seven hundred years before the Christian era ; that is to say, only about a couple of hundred years after the death THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES 15 of King Solomon himself. But, inasmuch as there are no grounds whatever for impugning the authentic character of that work, as connected with periods much more remote, this would give to speculative Masonry a far higher antiquity than has ever yet been claimed." In a famous canonical work, called The Great Learning, which Dr. Legge (The Chinese Classics, vol. i, Proleg., p. 27) says may safely be referred to the fifth century before our era, we read that a man should abstain from doing unto others what he would not they should do unto him ; " and this," adds the writer, " is called the principle of acting on the square." Giles also quotes from Confucius, 481 B.c. and from his great follower, Mencius, who flourished nearly two hundred years later. In the writings of the last‑named philosopher, it is taught that men should apply the square and compasses figuratively to their lives and the level and the marking‑line besides, if they would walk in the straight and even paths of wisdom and keep themselves within the bounds of honour and virtue. In Book VI of his philosophy we find these words A master mason, in teaching his apprentices, makes use of the compasses and the square. Ye who are engaged in the pursuit of wisdom must also make use of the compasses and the square.

 

The origin, rites and meaning of the worship of Mithras are extremely obscure. The authorities differ as to the exact period of its introduction into Rome ; Von Hammer (Mithraica, 1833, p. 21), placing it at 68 B.c., whilst, by other historians, a later date has been assigned. It speedily, however, became so popular as, with the earlier‑imported Serapis worship, to have entirely usurped the place of the ancient Hellenic and Italian deities. In fact, during the second and third centuries of the Empire, Serapis and Mithras may be said to have become the sole objects of worship, even in the remotest corners of the Roman world. " There is very good reason to believe," says King (The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 47), " that, as in the East, the worship of Serapis was, at first, combined with Christianity and gradually merged into it with an entire change of name, not substance, carrying with it many of its ancient notions and rites ; so, in the West, a similar influence was exerted by the Mithraic religion. There is no record of their final overthrow and many have supposed that the faith in " Median Mithras " survived into comparatively modern times in heretical and semi‑pagan forms of Gnosticism ; although, as Elton points out (Origins of English History, p. 3 S 1), we must assume that its authority was destroyed or confined to the country districts when the pagan worships were finally forbidden by law.

 

By authors who attempt to prove that all secret fraternities form but the successive links of one unbroken chain, it is alleged that the esoteric doctrines which in Egypt, in Persia, and in Greece preserved the speculations of the wise from the ears and tongues of illiterate multitude, passed, with slight modifications, into the possession of the early Christian heretics ; from the Gnostic schools of Syria and Egypt to their successors the Manichxans ; and that from these through 16 THE ESSENES the Paulicians, Albigenses and Templars, they have been bequeathed to the modern Freemasons.

 

According to Mackey, an instance of the transmutation of Gnostic talismans into Masonic symbols, by a gradual transmission through alchemy, Rosicrucianism and medixval architecture, is afforded by a plate in the A.Zoth Philosophorum of Basil Valentine, the Hermetic philosopher, who flourished in the seventeenth century. This plate, which is hermetic in its design, but is full of Masonic symbolism, represents a winged globe inscribed with a triangle within a square and on it reposes a dragon. On the latter stands a human figure of two hands and two heads, surrounded by the sun, the moon and five stars, representing the seven planets. One of the heads is that of a male, the other of a female. The hand attached to the male part of the figure holds the compasses, that to the female a square. The square and compasses thus distributed appear to have convinced Dr. Mackey (see his Encyclopaedia, under article " Talisman ") that originally a phallic meaning was attached to these symbols, as there was to the point within the circle, which in this plate also appears in the centre of the globe. " The compasses held by the male figure would represent the male generative principle and the square held by the female, the female productive principle. The subsequent interpretation given to the combined square and compasses was the transmutation from the hermetic talisman to the Masonic symbol." II. THE ESSENES " The problem of the Essenes," says De Quincey (Essay on Secret Societies), " is the most important and, from its mysteriousness, the most interesting, but the most difficult of all known historic problems." The current information upon this remarkable sect, to be found in ecclesiastical histories and encyclopxdias, is derived from the short notices of Philo, Pliny, Josephus, Solinus, Porphyry, Eusebius and Epiphanius. Of these seven witnesses, the first and third were Jewish philosophers ; the second, fourth, and fifth, heathen writers ; and the last two, Christian church historians. The Masonic student is referred to C. D. Ginsburg's The Essenes : their History and Doctrines, 18 64, also to the series of articles which appeared in vols. lxi and lxii of The Freemason, i9zi and 1922.

 

According to Creuzer (Symbolik, vol. iv, p. 433), the Colleges of Essenes and Megabyzx at Ephesus, the Orphics of Thrace and the Curetes of Crete are all branches of one antique and common religion ; and that originally Asiatic. King (The Gnostics and their Remains, pp. i‑3, 17 z) says, " the priests of the Ephesian Diana were called Essenes, or Hessenes‑from the Arabic Hassan, pure‑in virtue of the strict chastity they were sworn to observe during the twelvemonth they held that office. Such ascetism is entirely an Indian institution, was developed fully in the sect flourishing under the same name around the Dead Sea and springing from the same root as the mysterious religion at Ephesus." Krause (Dei drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden, bk. i, pt. i, p. i 17) finds in the THE ESSENES 17 earliest Masonic ritual, which he dates at A.D. 926 (from being mentioned in the York Constitutions of that year), evidence of customs " obviously taken from the usages of the Roman Colleges and other sources, that individually agree with the customs and doctrines of the Essenes, Stoics and the Soofees of Persia." This writer draws especial attention to the " agreement of the brotherhood of the Essenes with the chief doctrines which the Culdees associated with the three great lights of the Lodge (ibid., p. I I7). He then observes " that though coincidences, without any actual connexion, are of little value, yet, if it can be historically proved that the one society knew of the other, the case is altered." Having, then, clearly established (at least to his own satisfaction) that the Culdees were the authors of the 926 Constitutions, he next argues that they knew of and copied in many respects the Essenes and Therapeutx ; after which he cites Philo in order to establish that the three fundamental doctrines of the Essenes were Love of God, Love of Virtue and Love of Mankind.

 

These he compares with the phases of moral conduct, symbolized in Masonic Lodges by the Bible, square and compasses ; and, as he assumes that the " Three Great Lights " have always been the same and argues all through his book that Freemasonry has inherited its tenets or philosophy from the Culdees, the doctrinal parallel which he has drawn of the two religious systems becomes, from his point of view, of the highest interest. Connecting in turn the Essenes with the Soofees of Persia, Krause still further lengthens the Masonic pedigree.

 

Although the Soofee tenets are involved in mystery, they had secrets and mysteries for every gradation, which were never revealed to the profane. (See Malcolm's History of Persia, 1829, vol. ii, p. 281.) But there seems reason to believe that their doctrine " involved the grand idea of one universal creed, which could be secretly held under any profession of an outward faith ; and, in fact, took virtually the same view of religious systems as that in which the ancient philosophers had regarded such matters " (King, The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 185).

 

" Traces of the Soofee doctrine," says Sir John Malcolm, " exist, in some shape or other, in every region of the world. It is to be found in the most splendid theories of the ancient schools of Greece and of the modern philosophers of Europe. It is the dream of the most ignorant and of the most learned " (op. Cit., vol. ii, p. 267) It remains to be noticed that, by one writer, the introduction of Essenism into Britain has been actually described and the argumentative grounds on which this speculation is based afford, perhaps, not an unfair specimen of the ordinary reasoning which has linked the principles of this ancient sect with those of more modern institutions. Algernon Herbert (Britannia after the Romans, 1836, vol. i, pp. 120‑5 ; vol. ii, pp. 75‑92) contends that St. Germanus, on his visits to England, for the purpose of extirpating the Pelagian heresy, found that the doctrines which Pelagius had imbibed from the Origenists were, as far as they went, agreeable to those Britons among whom the notions of Druidism still lingered, or were beginning to revive ; but they had been framed by him in the form and character of a Christian sect and did not include the heathenish portion of Origenism, though I 18 THE ROMAN COLLEGIA the latter was so far identical with Druidism, that both were modifications of Pythagorism.

 

The description of the Essenes given in Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1804 (PP‑ 33‑9) has been followed for the most part in later Masonic works. It was based mainly on Basnage's History of the Jews, bk. ii. Of this last writer Dr. Ginsburg says, he mistook the character of the Essenes and confounds the brotherhood with the Therapeut e, hence asserting that " they borrowed several superstitions from the Egyptians, among whom they retired " (p. 66).

 

III. THE ROMAN COLLEGIA The leading authorities for this section are Heineccius, De Collegiis et Corporibvs Opificvm, Opera omnia, Geneva, 1766, vol. ii, pp. 368‑418 ; J. F. Massman, Libellus Aurarius, Leipsic, 1840, pp. 74‑85 ; Smith, Diet. of Antiquities, titles, " Collegium," " Societas," " Universitas " ; H. C. Coote, The Romans of Britain, 1878, pp. 383‑413. The precision observed by Massman is very remarkable‑no fewer than forty‑five footnotes appearing on a single page (78).

 

The Roman " colleges " were designated by the name either of collegium or corpus, between which there was no legal distinction and corporations were as frequently described by one title as by the other. A classification of these bodies will the better enable us in any subsequent investigation to consider the features which they possessed in common. They may be grouped in four leading divisions (a) Religious bodies, such as the College of Priests and the Vestal Virgins.

 

(b) Associations of official persons, such as those who were employed in administration, e.g. the body of Scribce, who were employed in all branches of administration.

 

(c) Corporations for trade and commerce, as Fabri (workmen in iron or other hard materials), Pistores (bakers), Navicularii, etc., the members of which had a common profession, trade, or craft upon which their union was based, although every man worked on his own account.

 

(d) Associations, called Sodalitates, Sodalitia, Collegia Sodalitia, which resembled modern clubs. In their origin they were friendly leagues or unions for feasting together, but, in course of time, many of them became political associations ; but from this it must not be concluded that their true nature really varied. They were associations not included in any other class that has been enumerated ; and they differed in their character according to the times. In periods of commotion they became the central points of political factions. Sometimes the public places were crowded by the Sodalitia and Decuriati and the Senate was at last compelled to propose a lex which should subject to the penalties of Vis (see Smith's Dictionary, p. 1 zoo, tit. " Vis ") those who would not disperse. This was followed by a general dissolution of collegia, according to some writers, but the dissolution only extended to mischievous associations.

 

 THE ROMAN COLLEGIA z9 There were also in the Imperial period the Collegia tenuiorum, or associations of poor people, but they were allowed to meet only once a month and they paid monthly contributions. A man could only belong to one of them. Slaves could belong to such a collegium, with the permission of their masters.

 

The following were their general characteristics i. The collegium (or societas), which corresponded with the hetaria of the Greeks, was composed of collega or sodales (companions). The term originally expressed the notion of several persons being voluntarily bound together for some common office or purpose, but ultimately came to signify a body of persons and the tie uniting them.

 

z. A lawfully constituted " college" was legitimum‑an unlawful one, illicitum. The distinction is not clearly laid down. Some of these institutions were established by especial laws and others, no doubt, were formed by the voluntary association of individuals under the provisions of some general legal authority.

 

3. No college could consist of fewer than three members. So indispensable was this rule that the expression tres faciunt collegium‑" three make a college"became a maxim of the civil law.

 

4. In its constitution the college was divided into decurice and centuricz‑bodies of ten and a hundred men ; and it was presided over by a magister and by decuriones ‑a master and wardens.

 

S . Amongst other officers there were a treasurer, sub‑treasurer, secretary and archivist.

 

6. In their corporate capacity the sodales could hold property. They had a common chest, a common cult, a meeting‑house and a common table.

 

7. To each candidate, on his admission, was administered an oath peculiar to the college. Palgrave, in Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, says that peculiar religious rites were also practised, perhaps with a veil of secrecy ; and those forms of worship constituted an additional bond of union. When a new member was received, he was said‑co‑optari and the old members were said, with respect to him, recipere in collegium.

 

8. Dues and subscriptions were imposed to meet the expenses of the college.

 

9. The sodales supported their poor and buried their deceased brethren. The latter were publicly interred in a common sepulchre or columbarium, all the survivors being present. Members were not liable for the debts of their college, but the property of the college itself could be seized. They could sue or be sued by their syndicus or actor.

 

io. Each college celebrated its natal day‑a day called cares, cognationis‑and two other days, called, severally, dies violarum and dies rose (see Coote, The Romans in Britain, p. 388).

 

i i. The sodales called and regarded themselves as fratres. "For amongst them," says Coote, " existed the dear bond of relationship which, though artificial, was that close alliance which a common sentiment can make. This it was which, in defiance of blood, they called cara cognatio." This bond of connexion the civil 20 THE CULDEES law ratified and extended ; for, allowing the assumption of kinship, it imposed on the sodales another duty in addition to those already taken, by compelling any one of them to accept the guardianship of the child of a deceased colleague. The fratres arvales formed a college of twelve persons, deriving their name from offering sacrifices for the fertility of the fields, the victim (hostia ambarvalis) that was slain on the occasion being led three times round the cornfield before the sickle was put to the corn. This ceremony was also called a lustratio or purification. Krause says, " that although the college did not especially call one another ` brother,' yet the appellation does occur and that the college was formed on the model of a family " (Die drei Kunsturkunden der Freimaurerbruderschaft, vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 166).

 

Although no rules are extant of any of the trade colleges of the Romans, some of those in use among the colleges Cultorum Dei have descended to us. Of one of these last‑mentioned corporations the rules or by‑laws are given by Coote, who next cites corresponding regulations of three guilds (or, as he prefers to style them, Colleges) established in London, Cambridge and Exeter respectively, composed of gentlemen or persons unconnected with trade ; and, having carefully compared the rules of the British guilds with those of the college of cultores dei already quoted, their resemblances are placed in formal juxtaposition and he adds, " These coincidences, which cannot be attributed to imitation or mere copying, demonstrate the absolute identity of the gild of England with the collegium of Rome and of Roman Britain " (The Romans in Britain, pp. 390‑413).

 

Stieglitz, in his History of Architecture, divides the influence of the early colleges or corporations upon British and Continental Masonry respectively. In England, he thinks it possible that the colleges may have influenced the Brotherhood in their external development, but he records a tradition that at the time the Lombards were in possession of Northern Italy, from the sixth to the seventh century, the Byzantine builders formed themselves into guilds and associations and that, on account of having received from the Popes the privilege of living according to their own laws and ordinances, they were called Freemasons. If, indeed, any direct continuation of the Collegia can be shown, it must be through the guilds or fraternities of Britain or of Southern France. The Roman Law remained in force in Southern France throughout all vicissitudes of government and, at the Revolution, it consolidated its authority by superseding the Feudal law of the North, in Pays Costumier.

 

IV. THE CULDEES Dr. J. Lanigaw, in his Ecclesiastical History of Ireland (1822, vol. iv, p. 295), has declared that " if ever subjects plain and easy in themselves have been distorted, misrepresented and corrupted through ignorance and religious prejudice, the [Culdeel question merits a distinguished place among them." Yet, although the simplicity of the inquiry in its original bearings, when unweighted with " the obstruction of ingenious theory, professional prejudice and ecclesiastical pre‑ THE CULDEES 21 dilections," has also been deposed to by the highest living authority among Irish antiquaries (Dr. W. Reeves of Armagh, author of The Culdees of the British Islands as they appear in History, 1864), the labours of over fifty writers who have taken up the subject, including those of Dr. Reeves himself, attest by their many points of divergence the substantial difficulties of the investigation.

 

Great stress has been laid by Dr. Reeves on the " national error " of supposing the Culdees to have been a peculiar order, who derived their origin from St. Columba ; or, in other words, that they were " Columbites," in the same sense that we speak of " Benedictines " and he contends that, though after the lapse of centuries Culdees were found in churches which St. Columba or his disciples founded, still their name was in no way distinctive, being, in the first instance, an epithet of asceticism and afterwards that of irregularity.

 

Many learned men have believed that there was some connexion between the Culdees and the Roman collegia, or the esoteric teaching of Phcenician or Eastern confraternities. This belief, indeed, has mainly arisen from the profound speculations of Krause, whose conclusions have been too hastily adopted by many German writers of distinction, whence they have in turn penetrated to this country (see Kunsturkunden, bk. i, pt. ii, p. 3 5 8 ; bk. ii, pt. i, p. 468).

 

In his laboured Inquiry into the Origin of all Languages, Nations and Religions, Higgins, the industrious author of the Anacalypsis, finds room for many allusions to Freemasonry. According to his view, the Essenes, the Druids and the Culdees were all Freemasons in progressive stages of development. Higgins says : " I request my reader to think upon the Culidei or Culdees in the crypt of the Cathedral of York, at Ripon and in Scotland and Ireland‑that these Culdees or Chaldeans were masons, mathematici, builders of the Temple of Solomon ; and that the country where Ellis found access to the temple in South India (referring to the statement that this member of the Madras Civil Service, in the capacity of a Free mason, had actually passed himself into the sacred part, or adytum, of one of the Indian temples, Anacalypsis, 1836, vol. i, p. 767) was called Colida and Uria; that the religion of Abraham's descendants was that of Ras ; that Masonry in that country is called Raj or Mystery ; that we have also found the Colida and most other of these matters on the Jumna, a thousand miles distant in North India and, when he has considered all these matters, as it is clear that one must have bor rowed from the other, let him determine the question‑Did York and Scotland borrow from the Jumna and Carnatic, or the Jumna and Carnatic from them ? " In another work Higgins says : " The Culdees were the last remains of the Druids, who had been converted to Christianity before the Roman Church got any footing in Britain. They were Pythagoreans, Druidical monks, probably Essenes and this accounts for their easily embracing Christianity ; for the Essenes were as nearly Christians as possible " (The Celtic Druids, the Priests of the Nations who Emigrated from India, 1829, p. zos). Higgins is in error in his statement that the Druids were converted to Christianity before the Roman Church got any footing in Britain. There is abundant historical, even epistolary, evidence to the contrary.

 

 22 THE CULDEES The most remarkable, however, of all theories connecting the Culdees with the Freemasons was advanced by the Hon. Algernon Herbert in 1844 and has been characterized by Dr. Reeves " as a strange combination of originality and learning, joined to wild theory and sweeping assertion " (see British Magazine, vol. xxvi, pp. 1‑13). According to this writer, under the shell of orthodoxy, Culdeism con tained a heterodox kernel, which consisted of secret rites and the practice of human sacrifice.

 

" Taking the question," he says, " as against the Culdees to be whether or not they had secret mysteries inconsistent with the orthodoxy of their outward profession, we may approach it in two ways‑the external, or testimony directly bearing on the fact of their having such secrets ; and the internal, or indications of specific evils appearing in the course of their history. The first mode resolves itself into this question : Are they charged with having secrets ? They are, both by ancients and moderns, although the fact of their being so is neither notorious nor prominent." We are next informed that " they made their appearance in the Continent under Colman or Columban in A.D. 589. Whilst in Burgundy, the courtiers of the king inflamed him against the man of God and urged him to go and examine into his religion. The king accordingly went to the monastery of Luxeuil and demanded of the holy abbot why he departed from the manners of the rest of the province and 2vhy access within the more secret enclosure was not permitted to all Christians 1 He also went on to say that if Columban wished the royal support, all persons must be admitted into all places. The man of God replied, If you come hither for the purpose of destroying the ccenobia of the servants of God and casting a stain on the regular discipline, know that your kingdom will entirely fall and perish." " From this statement it appears that the early Culdees excluded strangers from their septa secretioria in such a manner as was unknown in Burgundy and dissonant from the mores comprovinciales, sufficing to raise up doubts of their religion, and ` cast a stain upon their rule' ; and that Columban neither denied, nor explained, nor in any way modified the circumstances complained of. He might have denied the peculiarity of his system and shown that the Gallican or comprovincial usages permitted it ; or he might have maintained its general expediency, whilst inviting the most searching investigation of his secret places, things and practices, by a commission of holy bishops, or other suitable persons : he might, in some way, have sought his own compurgation and exposed his calumniators, but he did not. All this amounts to the substance of the proposition sought for‑viz. that their system was actually censured of old, not for this or that evil, but for the secrecy which may (if abused) cloak any evil whatsoever." In the view of the same writer, " the most remarkable incident to Culdeism is the idea of human sacrifice " ; and the legend of St. Oran is subjected to minute criticism. " Poor Oran," he says, " was overwhelmed, and an end for ever put to his prating." In Donald Mackintosh's Collection of Gaelic Proverbs occurs one which reads : " Earth ! Earth 1 on the mouth of Oran, that he may not blab more." Hence we learn that the mysteries of early Culdeism, as known to those who had THE CULDEES 23 penetrated into the septa secretioria, contained an acknowledgment of the falsehood of the Christian religion as outwardly taught by the Culdees. The founder suppressed those dangerous avowals. But on what grounds ? Solely because the blabbing of secrets, so manifestly true as Oran's resurrection might seem to make them, was impolitic. Double doctrine, maintained by organic secrecy (and that secrecy vindicated by murder), is as clearly set forth in the traditions of Columba as any sovereign Prince of Heredom could ever have desired it to be in the mysteries framed " first at Icolmkill." Herbert here quotes from a French Masonic work, in which, what is spoken of as the eighteenth Degree is declared to have been established " first at Icolmkill " and afterwards at Kilwinning (see British Magazine, vol. xxvi, p. 12).

 

Herbert further contends that the stories and proverbs he has adduced show that some such ideas were once connected with Culdeism. But if, subsequently to Adamnan and Bede, no such opinions prevailed either in books or in vulgar estimation, these legends must date from anterior times and from the very beginning. " When general charges exist against a body and are believed by many, any given tale to their prejudice may be false and of recent invention. But, if no such general opinion prevails, or hath prevailed at any known time, specific tales or proverbs involving that opinion must flow from the fountain head. This latter proposition is the more certain when the things said of the parties are not said against them. But the legend of St. Oran was evidently not commemorated to their prejudice. No inferences were drawn from it, the consequences which it involves were not evolved and the reputation which it tends to fix upon them did not adhere to them." CHAPTER II THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS THE ancient documents handed down from the operative masons in Great Britain and Germany respectively‑all generically described under the misleading title of " Constitutions "‑require to be examined carefully and described separately. The so‑called " Constitutions," peculiar to England and Scotland, contain legends or traditional history, which are not to be found in the regulations or working statutes of the latter country, nor do they appear in the Ordinances of the Craft either in France or Germany. The only point of identity between the English and German Constitutions in the shape of legend or tradition is the reference to the " Four Holy Crowned Martyrs," but as they are only mentioned in one of the English versions and then merely in that portion of the MS. devoted to religious duties, the thread that connects them is a very slender one indeed. It will be found that, as a general rule, early documents of the guilds or crafts commence with .an invocation of saintly patronage and the " Holy Martyrs " were not monopolized in this respect by the masons of Germany, as they were the assumed patrons of numerous other fraternities. Nor can it be maintained, with any show of reason, that the slender thread of union already cited at all warrants the conclusion that the English Masons derived the legend of the " Quatuor Coronati " from their German Brethren. The British Constitutions, or " Old Charges," have indeed neither predecessors nor rivals and their peculiar characteristics will be found, in truth, amply to warrant the detailed examination which follows.

 

By no other craft in Great Britain has documentary evidence been furnished of its having claimed at any time a legendary or traditional history. Oral testimony of any real antiquity is also wanting when it is sought to maintain that the British Freemasons are not singular in the preservation of their old legends. The amusing pretensions of certain benefit societies do not affect the claim, for no " traditions " of these associations can be traced historically to a period sufficiently remote to prove their independent origin ; the probability being that they are all modern adaptations of Masonic traditions and customs.

 

In saying " no other craft," the French Compagnons are excluded from consideration. They were afterwards members of all crafts, though, in the first instance, the association was confined to the masons and carpenters. Not that the " Compagnons " were without legendary histories, but they now possess no early writings with which we can compare the " Old Charges of British Freemasons," as the " Constitutions " under examination have been aptly termed by W. J. Hughan, the Masonic author whose labours have been the longest sustained in this branch of archaeological research.

 

24 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 25 The legends peculiar to the Compagnonage have been lightly passed over by Masonic and other historians. This is in a great measure to be accounted for, no doubt, by the absence of any literature bearing on the subject until a comparatively recent date. Authors of repute have merely alluded to this obscure subject in the most casual way and, virtually, the customs and legends of this association were quite unknown to the outer world, until the appearance of a small work in 1841, by Agricol Perdiguier, entitled Le Livre du Compagnonage. The leading features of the Compagnonage are given by Dr. Mackey in his Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, pp. I79‑8I (Philadelphia, 1874). The subject is also discussed, though at less length, by Woodford and Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, in the excellent Cyclopeedias for which they are responsible.

 

Perdiguier, who was a Compagnon, writes of the organization as a Freemason would of Freemasonry, i.e. without disclosing aught of an esoteric character ; but the legends and customs are carefully described. The analogies between distinctive portions of the English and French legends occur too frequently and are too strongly marked to be accidental. If, then, we may assume that certain legends were afloat in early days of the Compagnonage, anterior to the date of our earliest British Constitution‑the " Halliwell," circa 139o‑the following is the result In the fourteenth century there is, on the one hand, an organization (the Compagnons) in full activity, though without manuscript Constitutions, or legends, which has endured to this day. On the other hand, there is documentary evidence satisfactorily proving that the legendary history of the English Masons was not only enshrined in tradition, but was embalmed in their records. Yet we have little or no evidence of the activity of English Masons in their Lodges at so early a period, beyond what is inferentially supplied by the testimony of these Old Charges or Constitutions, which form the subject of the present investigation.

 

On the‑whole, it may reasonably be concluded that the Compagnons of the Middle Ages preserved legends of their own which were not derived from the Freemasons (or Masons) ; and the latter, doubtless, assembled in Lodges, although Acts of Parliament and other historical records are provokingly silent upon the point.

 

But if the legends of the Compagnonage were not derivative, can the same be said of those which have been preserved by the Masons ? The points of similarity are so varied and distinct, that if it be conceded that the present legends of the two bodies have been faithfully transmitted from their ancestors of the Middle Ages, the inference is irresistible, either that the Masons borrowed from the Compagnons, or that the traditions of both associations are inherited from a common original.

 

At no previous period have equal facilities been afforded for a study of these " Old Charges of British Freemasons," either as respects their particular character, or their relations to the Compagnonage and other organizations, Masonic or otherwise. Until the middle of the nineteenth century barely ten copies were known to be in existence, but since i 86o (chiefly through the zeal of W. J. Hughan, who published the result of his labours in 1872 and the patient and discriminative 26 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS research of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford) more than double that number have been brought to light. Many extracts from manuscripts, which were missing, have now been noted and all references to such documents, for the last two hundred years, have been duly arranged and their precise nature estimated.

 

Without an exception, all these " Old Charges " have been carefully collated and their points of agreement and divergence as far as possible extracted, in order that their value as ancient Masonic chronicles may accurately be gauged. One at least of these MSS., possibly two, date before the introduction of the printing press. Of the remainder, some twenty were in circulation amongst the Masonic Lodges prior to the last century, the majority being over two hundred years old and all being copies of still older documents.

 

No two of the MSS. are exactly alike, though there is a substantial agreement between them all and evidently they had a common origin, just as they were designed to serve a common purpose. As it is probable that each Lodge, prior to the last century, had one of these " Old Charges " amongst its effects, which was read to an apprentice on his introduction to the Craft, it is almost certain that additional scrolls still await discovery, the only wonder being, that considering how numerous the Lodges must have been, so few have yet been traced. Possibly, however, the " several very valuable manuscripts concerning the Fraternity (particularly one written by Nicholas Stone, the warden of Inigo Jones), too hastily burned by some scrupulous brothers " (this statement of Dr. Anderson must be accepted with reserve), mainly consisted of forms of the " Old Charges." When and how the first of these documents was compiled, or by whom, it is impossible now to decide, for we possess no autographic versions of the Masonic Constitutions.

 

It will be desirable to furnish something like a detailed account of the copies extant and, in order to do so, Hughan's Old Charges (which, singular to state, contains the only collection ever published of these ancient Constitutions) has been consulted ; also the remarkable preface to that work, by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford. Since the issue of this volume in 1872, additional MSS. have been discovered ; so, for the sake of perspicuity and general convenience, they will all be considered seriatim, according to their actual or supposed age, each being indicated by a number for facility of reference, which number has been prefixed to their popular titles. An alphabetical classification was adopted by Hughan, but these transcripts are now so numerous, that no single alphabet would suffice for the purpose.

 

As many of these old MSS. are undated, their age is partly a matter of conjecture ; but it may be assumed that the periods of origin herein assigned approximate closely to the actual dates. Preference has been given to the testimony of such independent paleographical authorities as Edward A. Bond (late principal librarian of the British Museum) and other non‑Masonic " experts," to the possibly interested opinions of those connected with the Fraternity and the antiquity of these or any other documents relating to Freemasonry has not been overstated. Whilst anxious, however, to disconnect such ancient writings from modern adaptations and erroneous interpretations, there is no minimizing of appreciation of their importance and value, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 27 as the repertories of time‑honoured traditions and regulations. Even regarded in this light alone, these old legends and traditions, these bygone usages and regulations of the operative guilds, thus happily preserved, have and always must have for all thoughtful Freemasons, the deepest value and the most lasting interest.

 

The classification adopted consists of three divisions, which will include all the versions, viz. (A) originals ; (B) late transcripts ; (C) printed copies, extracts, or references. An asterisk denotes that the date is an approximation.

 

(A) MS. VERSIONS OF THE "OLD CHARGES" 1. " HALLIWELL." *14th Century. British Museum (Bib. Reg., 17A I).

 

Early History of Freemasonry in England, by J. O. Halliwell, Esq., F.R.S., London, 1840 and 1844 ; Dr. C. W. Asher, Hamburg, 1842, and other reprints. Masonic Magazine, London, 1874, etc. (modernized). A small MS. on vellum, about 5 inches by 4 inches, bound in russia, having thereon G. R. II, 1757 and the royal arms. It formerly belonged to Charles Theyer, a noted collector of the seventeenth century and is No. 146 in his catalogue, as described in Bernard's Manuscribtorum Anglite (p. 200, col. 2). Soon afterwards it was placed in the Old Royal Library, founded by King Henry VII, for the princes of the blood royal, comprising nearly 12,000 volumes, the munificent gift of His Majesty George II to the nation, A.D. 1757. In A Catalogue of the Manuscripts of the King's Library (London, 1734), by David Casley (deputy‑librarian of the Cottonian Library), the MS. is erroneously entitled A Poem of Moral Duties and it was not until April 18, 1839, that its chief contents were made known in a very suggestive paper by Halliwell (Phillips), " On the Introduction of Freemasonry into England," read before the Society of Antiquaries, which will be found in the Proceedings of that body, session 1838‑9. See Archceologia, vol. xxviii, p. 444. Casley, who was considered an accurate judge of the age of MSS., ascribed it to the fourteenth century and the learned editor of the poem considers it was written not later than the latter part of that century. E. A. Bond places it at the middle of the fifteenth century ; Dr. Kloss between 1427 and 1445. Halliwell believes he is right in stating " that this is the earliest document yet brought to light connected with the progress of Freemasonry in Great Britain " and, apart from " Fabric Rolls " and similar records, he is doubtless justified in making the claim. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford says : " The poem is of high antiquity. . . . If ever Pars Oculi turns up, an old poem, now missing, from which John Myre borrowed his poem, a portion of which is found in the Masonic poem (and Myre wrote in 1420), we shall probably find that it is Norman‑French, or Latin originally " (The Freemason, November 18 79).

 

2. " COOKE." *15th Century. British Museum (Addl. MSS. 23,198).

 

Published by R. Spencer, London, 1861 and edited by Matthew Cooke, hence its title. It was purchased from a Mrs. Caroline Baker, October 14, 1859, for the National Collection and its original cover of wood remains, with the rough twine connecting the vellum sheets, apparently as sewn some four hundred years ago. In size it resembles its senior (MS. 1) ; the reproduction by Spencer, excepting the facsimile at the beginning, being an amplification of the original.

 

Bond's estimate is, " Early 15th Century " and there seems to be no reason z8 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS to differ from him, although some authorities have sought to refer it to the latter part of that century, because there are several references in the MS. to the Policronicon. It has been too hastily assumed that Caxton's celebrated work of A.D. 1482 is the one thus alluded to (Findel makes this erroneous statement and others have copied from him), the fact being lost sight of, that, whilst the first typographical edition was not issued until that year, the compilation itself, from certain old Latin chronicles, is supposed to have been arranged by Roger, a Benedictine monk of St. Werburgh's Abbey, in Chester, early in the previous century. It was soon afterwards enlarged by Ranulph Higden of the same monastery, styled a Polycronicon, or Universal History and was brought down to his own time. He died about A.D. 13 6o. The earliest edition is believed to have been issued in 1342 and numerous Latin transcripts were in circulation, as well as a translation in English prose, by John de Trevisa (chaplain to the Earl of Berkeley) during the same century. There will be occasion to refer to these later on, but there is no evidence whatever of any printed work being alluded to in this quaint chronicle (MS. z). Findel terms it the " Cooke‑Baker document," simply on the ground that Dr. Rawlinson, about 1730, spoke of a MS. being in the possession of a Mr. Baker, but the latter was in the form of a Roll, whereas the Cooke MS. never was ; hence such a title is both misleading and improper.

 

 3. " LANSDOWNE." *16th Century. British Museum (No. 98, Art. 48).

 

Published in Freemasons' Magazine (February z4, 18 5 8) and Hughan's Old Charges (p. 31), but not in the Freemasons' Magazine, 1794, as stated by M. Cooke and other writers, neither is it dated 156o as Fort asserts. Bond sets it down at about 16oo and by all authorities it is considered to be of a very early date, probably of the middle or latter half of the sixteenth century, as these " Free Masons Orders and Constitutions " are believed to have been part of the collectioh made by Lord Burghley (Secretary of State, temp. Edward VI and Lord High Treasurer, temp.

 

Elizabeth), who died A.D. 15 98.

 

The MS. is contained on the inner sides of three sheets and a half of stout paper, 11 inches by 15, making in all seven folios, many of the principal words being in large letters of an ornamental character (see Hughan's Masonic Sketches, part z, p. z1). Sims (MS. Department of the British Museum) does not consider these " Orders " ever formed a Roll, though there are indications of the sheets having been stitched together at the top and paper or vellum was used for additional protection. It has evidently " seen service" and is entitled to the third place in order of actual transcription. The catalogue of the Lansdowne MSS., A.D. 1812, fol. 19o, has the following note on the contents of this document‑" No. 48. A very foolish legendary account of the original of the order of Freemasonry," in the handwriting, it is said, of Sir Henry Ellis. The Lansdowne MSS. are so called in honour of the Marquess of Lansdowne. On his death the MSS., consisting of 1,245 vols., were purchased in 1807 by a Parliamentary grant of 04,925.

 

 4. " GRAND LODGE." A.D. 15 83. Grand Lodge of England.

 

First published by Hughan in his Old Charges. This roll of parchment (9 feet in length and 5 inches in breadth) was purchased by the Board of General Purposes, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 29 for the Library and Museum, in 1839, for the sum of Cz5, from Miss Siddall, the granddaughter of Thomas Dunckerley's second wife. At the time of purchase it was declared to be " dated 25th December 1183, in the twenty‑ninth year of Henry II ; and that this date is nearly correct may be inferred from the writing, which is the court hand of that time." After describing its character, the same writer asserts that it contains " the ancient Charges as agreed on at the Grand Lodge, held at York A.D. (about) 926." This appears to have been too much even for the Rev. Dr. Oliver to accept for, on the Roll being shown to him, he placed it as late as the time of Elizabeth, in this respect differing from the writer of the article (see Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1842, p. 149). A careful examination of the manuscript itself, however, reveals the fact that the date is " Scriptum anno domini 1583, Die Decembris 250." In early days, figures were not always traced with mathematical precision and the mistake in reading five for one may be accounted for in many ways. On the reverse of the scroll occurs the first verse of the 1st chapter of John (" Whose sacred and universal law I will endeavour to observe, so help me God "), in Dunckerley's handwriting (it is said), so that it may be easily surmised what use he made of the Roll as an ardent Royal Arch Mason.

 

 5. "York, No. i." *17th Century. The York Lodge, No. 236, York.

 

Published in Hughan's Old Charges and Masonic Magazine (August 1873). In an inventory of the effects of the Grand Lodge of All England (extinct), held at York, six copies of the Old Charges were catalogued, five of which are now carefully treasured by the York Lodge. They were numbered one to six without respect to their relative antiquity for, though the first is certainly the oldest, the second is the junior of the series. The senior is thus described in the Inventory of A.D. 1779 ‑" No. i. A parchment roll in three slips, containing the Constitutions of Masonry and, by an endorsement, appears to have been found in Pontefract Castle at the demolition and given to the Grand Lodge by Brother Drake " (1736). It was used as a roll, measuring about 7 feet in length and 5 inches in width. Francis Drake, F.R.S., was a native of Pontefract, of which place both his father and grandfather had been in turn the vicar. His great‑grandfather, prior to his ordination, was a Royalist officer and his diary of the siege was published some years ago by the Surtees Society. The history of this MS. and that of the last on the inventory, after the Grand Lodge at York died out, has been a singular one. They had been lost sight of by the York Brethren for several years. Hughan, whose sight was preternaturally keen when Masonic MSS. were being searched for, at last identified the " wanderers " at Freemasons' Hall, London, through their description in the inventory and,.having announced his discovery to the members of the York Lodge, who had become possessed of the bulk of the archives formerly appertaining to the Grand Lodge of that city, they made application to the then Grand Master, the Earl of Zetland, for the two Rolls. He willingly acceded to the petition and they were restored to the custody of their rightful owners in 1877. During its absence from York this MS. was transcribed (circa 1830) and a second copy afterwards made by Robert Lemon, Deputy‑Keeper of State Papers (in consequence of some imperfection in the first one), which was presented to H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex, the then Grand Master. When the rolls were examined by Hughan the two transcripts were tied up with them, also a letter from Lemon, dated September 9, 1830, suggesting a 30 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS collation of the original Roll with the one owned by the Lodge of Antiquity. The date of the MS. is partly determined from internal evidence, partly from a consideration of the date when Pontefract Castle surrendered to the Parliamentary Forces (March 25, 1649). The demolition began during the following month. The Roll seems to have formed the text for at least three of the other York MSS. It is mentioned in Hargrove's History of York as being in the possession of the Lodge, to which it was given by Francis Drake.

 

6&7‑ "WILSON, Nos. i & z." *17th Century. Thirlestane House, Cheltenham.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine, 1876 and in Kenning's Archa'ological Library, 1879. The earliest known reference to this MS. occurs in the " Manifesto of the Right Worshipful Lodge of Antiquity, 1778," as follows : " O. MS. [meaning Original MS.] in the hands of Mr. Wilson, of Broomhead, near Sheffield, Yorkshire, written in the reign of K. Henry VIII." This Manifesto is published in extenso in Hughan's Masonic Sketches, pp. 1oz‑8. Until, however, fifty years ago, all attempts to trace the actual MS. resulted in failure. A clue being at length obtained, the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford (and others assisting) ultimately succeeded in obtaining an exact transcript. The search elicited the fact that there existed " a duplicate copy. Both seem about the same age and are verbatim et literatim " (see The Freemason, July z6, 1879). They were sold to Sir Thomas Phillips (a great collector of MSS.) by Wilson and were afterwards in the possession of his son‑in‑law, the Rev. J. E. A. Fenwick, of Cheltenham, who kindly permitted a transcript to be made. The MSS. are written on vellum and certain words are rubricated. By some authorities, their origin is placed early in the seventeenth century, although Woodford, whose opinion is entitled to great weight, considers that the sixteenth century would be a more correct estimate.

 

8. " INIGO JONES." A.D. 1607. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.

 

Published only in the Masonic Magazine, July 1881. Its right to the above title is based upon the claim made in the document itself, which was sold November 12, 1879, by Puttick & Simpson. The cataloguer described it as " The ancient Constitutions of the Free and Accepted Masons. A very curious folio manuscript, ornamented title and drawing by Inigo Jones, old red morocco, gilt leaves, dated 1607." Woodford subsequently became its fortunate possessor and, as usual with him, lost no time in making the Craft acquainted with its contents. He mentions that " it is a curious and valuable MS. per se, not only on account of its special verbiage, but because it possesses a frontispiece of masons at work, with the words ` Inigo Jones delin' (not fecit as incorrectly printed in the Masonic Magazine, July 1881) at the bottom. It is also highly ornamented throughout, both in the capital letters and with ` finials.' It may be regarded as almost certain that it did belong to Inigo Jones. It is of date 1607." Woodford also states that he considers " it a peculiarly interesting MS. in that it differs from all known transcripts in many points and agrees with no one copy extant." The validity of these claims is open to remark, but the subject will again be referred to later on. Its importance has been rather under than over stated ; for this, one of the latest " discoveries," is certainly to be classed amongst the most valuable of existing versions of the manuscript Constitutions.

 

 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 31 9. "WOOD." A.D. 16io. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.

 

Published only in the Masonic Magazine, June 1881. For the acquisition of this scroll in 1879, the Craft has again to thank the fortunate owner and discoverer of the " Inigo Jones " MS. Wood, from whom it was obtained, is unable to furnish particulars of its history, beyond that the MS. had been in his possession for about twenty years. " It belonged to a family who died out many years ago and is of great age " (see The Freemason, February z, 1880). In editing the manuscript, Woodford informs us that it is " written on parchment (or vellum), with partially illuminated letters here and there.. The ` Finis de Tabula,' at the end of the Index (for it has also an index), is, according to some authorities, most archaic and may refer to an original two hundred years older. It therefore deserves careful noting and perusal." It is entitled The Constitution of Masonrye. Wherein is briefly declared the first foundation of divers Sciences and principally the Science of Masonrye. With divers good Rules, Orders and Precepts, necessary to be observed of all Masons." Then follow the first verse of Psalm cxxvii and the declaration " Newlye Translated by J. Whitestones for John Sargensonne, 16io." If, as Woodford suggests, No. 9 was copied from another MS. of the fifteenth century, which is not at all unlikely, the term " Translated " may be simply an equivalent for modernized.

 

10. " YORK, No. 3." A.D. 163o. At York A.D. 1779.

 

The MS. third in order on the " Inventory " at York of A.D. 1779 (already alluded to) has not been traced of late years. We know that it was a version of the Constitutions by the description " No. 3. A parchment Roll of Charges on Masonry, 1630 " ; and it is just possible that No. 41 may have been this document. At all events, it is not No. 15, though some plausible reasons have been advanced in favour of this view, because that Roll bears no date and, apparently, was not transcribed until fifty years later than No. 1o.

 

I I. " HARLEIAN, 1942." *17th Century. British Museum.

 

An incomplete copy was published in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review of 1836 (p. z88), by Henry Phillips (of the Moira Lodge, now No. 92). Another transcript was printed in Hughan's Old Charges. Bond (Freemasons' Magazine, July 10, 1869), in reply to W. P. Buchan (of Glasgow), respecting the ages of the Masonic MSS. in the British Museum, stated that " he could speak without any hesitation as to the general period of their date " and he ascribed the present MS. to the " beginning of the seventeenth century " ; the document next following in this series being, he considered, half a century later in point of time. There cannot, however, be much difference between them as to the dates of transcription, but it is probable that No. 12 was copied from a much older text.

 

There are only two versions of the Old Charges in the vast collection made towards the end of the seventeenth century by Robert Harley (afterwards Earl of Oxford and Mortimer), viz. in vols. 1942 and 20S4. The collection consisted of some 1o,ooo vols. of MSS. and more than 16,ooo original rolls, charters, etc. In the Catalogue Bibliothecee Harleiana, of A.D. 18o8, the number 1942 is thus described : " A very thin book in 4to, wherein I find‑1. The harangue to be made 1 32 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS at the admittance of a new member into the Society or Fellowship of the Freemasons ; 2. The articles to be observed by the several members of that Society ; 3. The new articles and form of the oath to be taken at admission. Whether this be a copie of that old book mentioned by Dr. Plot in his Staffordshire I cannot say." No. i i contains The New Articles (z6 to 31), which are not in any other known MS., also the " Apprentice Charge," peculiar to a few versions only (the latter being entirely omitted by Phillips in his transcript of the MS.). These two specialities and, particularly, the clauses 26 to 31, constitute a text of great importance and will again be referred to.

 

12. " HARLEIAN, 2054." *17th Century. British Museum.

 

Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches and Masonic Magarine, 1873. The official catalogue describes vol. 2054 as " A Book in folio consisting of many Tracts and loose papers by the second Randle Holme and others . . . and the third Randle Holme's account of the Principal Matters contained in this Book." In it are " Charters of the joyners, carvers and turners ; weavers, bakers, wrights, carpenters, slaters and sawyers ; beer brewers, mercers and ironmongers ; saddlers, drapers," being various guilds or companies of Chester. There is no original record of these in the British Museum, but the MSS. were transcribed by the second and third Randle Holme, sometimes dated and at other times not, from records, for the most part written, it is supposed, before 16oo.

 

The Holmes of Chester were evidently enthusiastic students of heraldry, and three generations were represented in the persons of the grandfather, father and son‑all bearing the Christian name of Randle‑at the Herald's Office, as deputy to the College of Arms for Cheshire and other counties. The first Randle Holme died 1654‑5, the second in 1649 and the third in 1699‑1700 (born 1627). The second Holme is stated to have died A.D. 1659, but, according to W. H. Rylands (Masonic Magazine, January 1882), his death occurred in 1649 (1 Charles II, i.e. computing the reign from the death of Charles I). Now, if No. 12 is in the hand‑writing of the third Randle Holme, Clearly A.D. 1650 is quite early enough for the transcription, as it is believed to have been copied by that diligent antiquary. The original, however, from which it was taken was evidently much older ; but, having classified the MSS. according to the periods of their transcription, rather than the presumed age of their original texts, in strictness this document should be numbered after No. 13, though, for the sake of convenience, the " Harleian " (11 and 12) have been coupled with the " Sloane " MSS. (13 and 14).

 

No. 12 is written on four leaves of paper, containing six and a half pages of close writing in a very cramped hand. The water‑mark is indistinct and undated. After the recital of the Old Charges, entitled the Freemasons' Orders and Constitutions, is a copy of a remarkable obligation to " keep secret " certain " words and signes of a free mason," etc. and likewise a register of the fees paid (varying from five shillings to twenty) " for to be a free mason," by twenty‑seven persons whose names appear. We have here the earliest known mention of words and signer (see Masonic Sketches, pt. 2, p. 46 and Masonic Magazine, January and February 1882). As Hughan states, they are apparently not connected with the Old Charges, as forming an integral part of this version, though they were most probably used by one and the same body.

 

 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 33 13. " SLOANE, 3848." A.D. 1646. British Museum.

 

Published in the Old Charges (also Masonic Magazine, 1873) and named by Hughan as the probable text for 1 z and 14. This may have been the case as regards the latter, but not, possibly, as to the former. There is an undated water‑mark in the paper, which is of no importance, the conclusion of the MS. being " Finis p. me Edwardu Sankey, decimo sexto die Octobris Anno Domini, 1646." Fort draws attention to the fact that it was written on the same day and year that Elias Ashmole, the celebrated antiquary, was initiated as a Freemason at Warrington. Rylands has proved (Masonic Magazine, December 1881 ; see also Wright's England's Masonic Pioneers, p. 31) that Richard Sankey and his family for generations before him, were landowners in Warrington and that, in the Warrington registers, is the entry, " Edward, son to Richard Sankey, Gent., Bapt. 3rd February 1621‑2," so it is quite within the limits of probability that the same Edward Sankey transcribed No 13 for use at the initiation of Ashmole and Colonel Mainwaring on October 16, 1646.

 

14. " SLOANE, 3323." A.D. 1659. British Museum.

 

Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches. It is signed and dated " H ec scripta fuerunt p. me Thomam Martin, 1659." The entire collection of 50,000 vols., printed books and MSS., conditionally bequeathed by Sir Hans Sloane was secured by Act of Parliament in 175 3 for the use of the nation, to all posterity, at the nominal cost of ú20,000. Sir Hans Sloane has labelled this volume " Loose papers of mine concerning curiosities." The part endorsed " Freemasons " is written on six leaves of paper (5 inches by 4) and is briefer than usual in the historical narrative. The writing is small and neat. Its text presents a variation from the ordinary form, which will be noticed hereafter.

 

15. " BUCHANAN." *17th Century. Freemasons' Hall, London.

 

Published for the first time in this work and adopted as a type of the ordinary MSS. This parchment roll was presented to the Grand Lodge of England by George Buchanan, Whitby, March 3, 188o; and, in proposing a vote of thanks to the donor, the Earl of Carnarvon, Pro Grand Master, stated that " he had no doubt it would be very much to the satisfaction of Grand Lodge, if other members were found as generous as Brother Buchanan." As respects its age, Buchanan's opinion that it is of the latter part of the seventeenth century‑say from 166o to 168o‑appears, after a careful examination of the MS., to be well founded. Its history may thus briefly be summarized. The scroll was found with the papers of the late Henry Belcher, an antiquary, who was a partner with the father of Buchanan (solicitor). Belcher was a friend of Blanchard, who, according to Hargrove, was the last Grand Secretary under the Northern organization and from whom he obtained some of the effects of the then extinct Grand Lodge of All England (York). For this reason it has been sought to identify No. 15 with the missing MS. of the York Inventory, but Hughan has clearly set aside the claim, having cited the fact that "York MS. No. 3 " was dated A.D. 1630 (see Nos. 1o and 41).

 

 34 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 16. " KILWINNING." *17th Century. Mother Kilwinning Lodge, Scotland.

 

Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches (Part 2) and Lyon's History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, 1873, pp. 108‑11. In glancing at the minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh for the years 1675 to 1678, D. Murray Lyon, the Scottish Masonic historiographer, was struck with the similarity which the handwriting bore to that in which the Kilwinning copy of the " Narration of the Founding of the Craft of Masonry is written " ; and, upon closer examination, he felt convinced that in both cases " the caligraphy was the same," the writer having been the clerk of the former Lodge (see Lyon, op. cit., p. 107): Lyon, however, is not justified in stating that this document is entitled to prominence because of its being the only one in which the term Free Mason occurs in a MS. of the seventeenth century or earlier ; as Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, and others, contain precisely the same expression, whilst in some, " True Mason " and " Free Mason " are both used. As will be noticed more fully hereafter, all the Scottish versions are evidently of English origin. Lyon, in his History of Lodge No. 1, Scotland, states that " in the early part of the last century it was a custom of the Lodge of Kilwinning to sell to Lodges receiving its charters, written copies of this document (MS. 16), which was termed the old buik " (p. .107). The " Kilwinning " version is very similar to No. 4, but differs considerably from the " Melrose " text.

 

17. " ATCHESON HAVEN." A.D. 1666. Grand Lodge of Scotland.

 

The " Musselburgh " or " Atcheson Haven " MS. was published in the History of Freemasonry and the Grand Lodge of Scotland (zd edit., 1859), by W. A. Lawrie ; but, having been slightly altered and modernized, a correct transcript of the original in Freemasons' Hall, Edinburgh, was printed by Lyon in his History of No. 1, Scotland. " Ane Narratione of the finding out of the craft of Masonrie and by whom it heth been cherished," is engrossed in the earliest known minutebook of this old Lodge and bears date A.D. 1666.

 

18. " ABERDEEN." A.D. 1670. Ancient Lodge at Aberdeen.

 

Published in Voice of Masonry, Chicago, U.S.A. (December 1874). After the " Laws and Statutes " of the old Lodge at Aberdeen, A.D. 1670 (the earliest preserved), comes the " Measson Charter," as it is called and then the general laws, list of members, etc., etc., all beginning in 1670, when the " mark book " was commenced.

 

As the records of this remarkable Lodge will again be considered, they need scarcely be particularized further in this place. It may be stated, in brief, that its ancient members " ordained likeways that the Measson Charter be read at the entering of every Entered Apprentice and the whole Laws of this Book. Ye shall find the charter in the hinder end of this Book‑Farewell." This transcript does not seem to have been made from any complete standard text, as it breaks off abruptly at clause 9 of the " General Charges" (vide MS. 15). It is curious, on perusing the copy, to find that, whilst the clerk was content to acknowledge the English origin of the text, by inserting the clause True leidgeman to the King of England, he gratified his national proclivities by making the " First Charge " to read " true man to God and to the holy kirk." THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 35 19. "MELROSE, No. 2." A.D. 1674. Old Lodge at Melrose, Scotland.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine (January i88o). For the discovery of this important MS. in 1879, the Craft is indebted to W. Fred. Vernon, of Kelso. Notwithstanding the number of Masonic pilgrimages to Melrose and the diligent searches instituted from time to time, this copy of the "Old Charges" eluded detection until the date mentioned. Apparently, there was no allusion to this version until 1879, though its existence had been suspected by Hughan, who made frequent inquiries on the subject and induced friends to search for a copy, but without success, until Vernon's visit, when the latter kindly furnished him with an exact transcript, afterwards published as before stated. It has been contended that this MS. is similar to the other Scottish versions, and that it is most probably a copy of No. 16 (see The Freemason, October 18, 1879). The facts, however, are, that, in many portions, it varies considerably from the other Scottish MSS. and the document is of far greater value than the other three (Nos. 16, 17, and 18) already described. One can almost positively declare it to be a transcript of an extinct MS. Of A.D. 15 81 (Melrose No. 1), or even earlier, as the conclusion is a certificate from a " master freemason," in favour, apparently, of the lawful service by his apprentice. The copyist has likewise certified the days and date of his transcription, viz. " Extracted by me, A. M., upon the 1, 2, 3, and 4 dayes of December, anno MDCL.

 

IIII." Vernon, in his sketch of the old Melrose Lodge, suggests the clue to the name of the transcriber, viz. Andro Mein, who wrote also a copy of the " Mutuall Agreemint Betwixt the Maisonis of the Lodge of Melros," of the year 1675, which still exists. The family of the Meins supported the Craft for many generations and, in 1695, out of twelve signatures attached to a resolution of the Lodge, no fewer than eight were those of members distinguished by that patronymic.

 

20. "HOPE." *17th Century. Lodge of Hope, Bradford, Yorkshire.

 

Published in Hughan's Old Charges, pp. 5 8‑63. The transcript thus printed was a copy kindly supplied by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford and compared with the original parchment scroll by William W. Barlow, who, as the then Master of the Lodge, consented to its publication. It is slightly imperfect in the Apprentice Charge and, in its present state, is about six feet in length, the deficiencies being easily supplied by comparison with MS. 25, which it resembles. Its title is, " The Constitutions, articles which are to be observed and fulfilled by all those who are made free by the Rt. Wor'. M‑. Fellowes and Brethren of Free Masons at any Lodge or assemblie." 21. "YORK, No. 5." *17th Century. York Lodge at York.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine, August 1881, from a transcript made by William Cowling and Ralph Davison. It bears neither date nor signature, but seems to have been written about A.D. 1670. The roll of paper is 71‑ feet by 8 inches and must have been still longer originally, as the first portion of the introduction is wanting at the present time. Its text is that of MS. 5 and was described in 1779 as " Part of another Paper Roll of Charges on Masonry." 36 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 22. "YORK, No. 6." *17th Century. The York Lodge.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine, March i88o. It is described in the York Inventory as " a parchment Roll of Charges, whereof the bottom part is awanting," which description occasioned its identification by Hughan as being in the custody of the Grand Lodge of England, to which reference has already been made. It is strange that the part missing was found with the Roll and appears to have been cut off designedly from the original. The severed portion, when applied to the remainder of the scroll, clearly establishes, if further proof was necessary (see Old Charges, p. 13), that it is the roll so long missing from York ; but it is now scarcely probable that its history in the interim will be cleared up. In the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England, March 4, 1840, there is an intimation that " Bro. White, the Grand Secretary, had presented to the library a valuable and interesting collection of Masonic works, consisting of 63 printed volumes, also an ancient manuscript." If the latter was a copy of the Old Charges, it must have been this particular MS. or No. S, as the origin of No. 4 has been clearly established. There were but three MSS. in Grand Lodge until the advent of No. 15 and at present Nos. 4 and 15 are the only representatives of their class at Freemasons' Hall. It is considered to be of a little later date than No. 21 and is a very indifferent copy of one of the earlier York Rolls, its imperfection being increased by the careless tracing of an indistinct text by a transcriber. According to Hughan, the conclusion is unique, viz., " Doe all as you would bee done unto and I beseech you att every meeting and Assembly you pray heartily for all Christians‑Farewell." 23. "ANTIQUITY." A.D. 1686. Lodge of Antiquity, London.

 

Published in Hughan's Old Charges from a transcript of the original, certified by E. Jackson Barron, who also furnished an interesting account of the scroll, which is of parchment (9 feet by I I inches) and headed by an engraving of the Royal Arms after the fashion usual in deeds of the period. The date of the engraving is fixed by the initials at the top " I z R " (James II, King) and under are emblazoned in separate shields the arms of the City of London and the Masons' Company. Then follows the injunction, " Fear God and keep his Commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." The invocation beginning, " In the name of the Great and Holy God," is in that respect different from the majority of the MSS. which commence, " The might of the Father of Heaven." The word " Cratches " (cratch = " a rack for hay or straw "‑Bailey. In the Breeches Bible, published a century before this MS., cratch is printed instead of " manger " in Luke ii, 16) occurs before the recital of the General Charges, which Preston quotes as `t Crafties," but there is no doubt of the word being as stated, whatever meaning was intended to be conveyed by the term. Preston also makes an unwarrantable addition to the conclusion of the fifteen articles, by inserting, " At the installment of master " (see Illustrations of Masonry, 1788, pp. 100‑3), not to be found in the original. The final sentences are very suggestive, viz. " William Bray, Free‑man of London and Free‑mason. Written by Robert Padgett, clearke to the Worshipful Society of the Free Masons of the City of London, in the second yeare of the Raigne of our most Gracious Soveraign Lord, King James the Second of England, etc., Annoq. Domini, 1686." According to Kenning's Masonic Cyclopiedia, Robert Padgett did not belong to, nor is his name to be found on the books of the Masons' Company THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 37 24. " SUPREME COUNCIL, No. 1." A.D. 1686. Duke Street, St. James's, London.

 

Not yet published. The Roll was met with in Wales and acquired by Colonel Shadwell H. Clerke, who, in 1879, placed it in Hughan's hands for transcription (The Freemason, October 11, 1879) and afterwards presented it to the Supreme Council, 3 30, London, for their extensive Masonic Library. The Old Charges are written on two parchment skins, sewn together and headed with an ornate illumination, the arms of London and the Masons' Company (in two ovals) and the inscription " J. 2d R. 1686," the date being the same as that of its partner and predecessor, No. 23. The text seems to be that of the Dowland version (MS. 39), slightly modernised.

 

 25. "YORK, No. 4." A.D. 1693. The York Lodge.

 

Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches. It is written on a large roll of paper, slightly mutilated and endorsed, " Brother Geo. Walker of Wetherby, to the Grand Lodge of York, 1777, No. 4, 1693 " ; the date is further certified by, " These be the Constitucions of the noble and famous History, called Masonry, made and now in practice by the best Masters and Fellowes for directing and guideing all that use the said Craft, scripted p. me vicesimo tertio die Octobris, anno Regni regis et Regina Gulielmy et Marie quinto annoque Domini 1693‑Mark Kypling." The following singular record is at the foot of the Roll " The names of the Lodg.

 

William Simpson Cristopher Thompson Anthony Horsman Cristopher Gill Mr. Isaac Brent, Lodg Ward," making, with the copyist five members and the Warden of the Lodge‑six names in all.

 

The text of No. 25 is not only valuable, from its containing the Apprentice Charge, which is absent from the other York MSS., but especially so, from the anomalous instructions which are preliminary to the " Charges," viz. " The one of the elders takeing the Booke and that bee or shee that is to bee made mason, shall lay their hands thereon and the charge shall be given." The possibility of females having been admitted as Freemasons and duly obligated, as in ordinary instances has been a fruitful topic of inquiry and discussion since the publication of this Roll in 1871 ; and, so far as a settlement of the point is concerned, we are no nearer to it now than we were then, because we cannot be certain that the insertion of " shee," instead of they, was not a clerical error (which is the opinion of Hughan, Lyon and Dr. Mackey). More, however, on this topic hereafter. Findel is unfortunate in his suggestion that " the contents are almost exactly like those of the so‑called York Constitution," the fact being that they are quite dissimilar. (See Findel's History of Freemasonry, p. 34. He also cites Krause in confirmation.) 26. " ALNWICK." A.D. 1701. Alnwick.

 

Published in American edition of Hughan's Masonic Sketches, etc., 1871 and in his Old Charges, 1872 ; also Masonic Magazine, February 1874. "The Masons' Constitutions " (as they are termed) are written on the first twelve pages preceding 3 8 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS the records of the " Company and Fellowship of Freemasons of a Lodge held at Alnwicke," the first Minute of which begins 29th September 1701, " being the Generall head meeting Day," when several " orders to be observed " were agreed to. Evidently a recital of the " Old Charges " was considered as a necessary prerequisite to the rules and so they were entered accordingly. The folio volume belonged to Edwin Thew Turnbull of Alnwick, who lent the whole of the records, including the MS., to Hughan for perusal and for publication, if considered desirable. A sketch of the old Lodge by Hughan was given in The Freemason, January 21, 1871 and reprinted in the Masonic Magazine, February 1874, also in other publications. The Latin sentences at the end of No. 26 have been discovered by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford in a little work of 1618, but they are not of any Masonic importance.

 

27. "YORK, No. 2." A.D. 1704. The York Lodge.

 

Published in Hughan's Masonic Sketches, pp. 79‑88. It is the junior of the York Rolls, written on parchment (6o by 71 inches) and is entitled " The Constitutions of Masonrie, 1704," the certificate being " Script nono Die Septembris Anno Regni Dome Nre Anne Regina nunc Angl., etc., Tertio. Annoq. Dom. 1704 " ; but there is no signature. The heading, however, may indicate the name of the scribe, " An Annagrame on the name of Masonrie. Robert Preston to his friend Daniel Moult, upon the Art of Masonrie, as followeth." It is singular that No. 5 has a similar " Anagraime," only given by William Kay " to his friend Robt. Preston." Findel, on his visit to York, failed to decipher this anagram, which is now reproduced Much might be said of the noble art, A Craft that is worth esteeming in each part ; S undry nations, nobles and their kings also, 0 h how they sought its worth to know, N imrod and Solomon the wisest of all men, Reason saw to love this science, then I 'll say no more, lest by my shallow verses I E ndeavouring to praise, should blemish Masonrie.

 

This poem on the Craft, forming the prologue to two copies of the Old Charges, is certainly old as a composition, whatever may be said of its merits, for it probably dates from the sixteenth century. As seen, by reference to the above, it was made to do duty in 1704, just as it was used in its prototype (No. i of the York series), about a century earlier, with a few trifling alterations in the orthography.

 

28. " SCARBOROUGH." A.D. 1705. Grand Lodge of Canada.

 

Published in Mirror and Keystone, Philadelphia, 186o ; The Craftsman, Hamilton, Ontario, February 1874; and Masonic Magazine, September 1879. It was published in 186o by Leon Hyneman, as editor of the Mirror and Keystone, August 22, 186o, but had been quite lost sight of until Jacob Norton of Boston, U.S.A., made inquiries respecting the original, which was owned by the Rev. J. Wilton Kerr of Clinton, Canada. Unfortunately it had been lent and mislaid ; but, after a search, it was traced and generously placed in the hands of T. B. Harris, Grand Secretary THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 39 of Canada, for that Grand Lodge. A verbatim transcript was published shortly afterwards, by the editor of The Craftsman, whose appeal for its recovery (in connexion with the earnest endeavours of Jacob Norton) was so successful. Hughan has forcibly observed, " Such a result illustrates what may yet be done in the tracing of further MSS. if other Brethren displayed equal earnestness and persistence " (Masonic Magazine, 1879, p. 104). The value of this version is really greater on account of the endorsement, than for the text of the MS. itself, the former being of special importance (as also the concluding record of No. z5). Moreover, the date of the Minute partly determines the age of the document, the antiquity claimed by the Rev. J. Wilton Kerr being the first decade of the sixteenth century. The record reads thus :‑" We .ò.ò. That att a private lodge held att Scarbrough in the County of York, the tenth day of July 1705, before William Thompson, Esq., P'sident of the said Lodge and severall others Brethren Free Masons, the severall p'sons whose names are herevnto subscribed were then admitted into the said Fraternity. Ed. Thompson, Jo. Tempest, Robt. Johnson, Tho. Lister, Samuel W. Buck, Richard Hudson." The editor of The Craftsman, who has carefully scrutinized the MS., says, "unhesitatingly the year is 1705 " and so did Leon Hyneman ; but Kerr maintains that it is 1505. On internal evidence the editor of The Craftsman says " that there is reason to believe that the figure has been altered, a microscopic examination showing a difference in the colour of the ink between that part of the figure which makes a good seven and that part which has been added, if the seven has been transformed into a five. It is a very awkward and unsymmetrical five as it stands ; remove the part supposed to be added and a very good seven remains." Hughan accepts the year as 1705 and considers that the copy of the Old Charges was probably made for that meeting and subsequent ones intended to be held, the admissions being recorded on the blank side with the signatures of the initiates. The newly initiated members signed the record of their admission in the early proceedings of the old Lodge at York (see Masonic Sketches, part 1, p. 40). There are several Thompsons entered as members in those records, but not a " William " Thompson, the President in 1705 being Sir George Tempest.

 

29. " PAPWORTH." *A.D. 1714. Wyatt Papworth, London.

 

Published in Hughan's Old Charges, pp. 75‑9. The document was originally in the form of a Roll, written on pages of foolscap size, which were joined continuously. Afterwards, probably for convenience, the pages were again separated and made into a book of twenty‑four folios. The water‑mark consists of a crown and the letters " G.R." above, so that it could not have been written before 1714. It was purchased by Wyatt Papworth from a London bookseller ; and, as it lacked the conclusion of the ordinary MSS. (Rules 16 to 18 inclusive as in No. 15), that gentleman has supplied the omission from No. 39, which it closely resembles. The motto at the beginning of the Roll is, " In God is all our Trust," the previous MS. (No. z8) having a similar one on its seal (" In the Lord is all our Trust ").

 

30. "GATESHEAD." *A.D. 173o. Lodge of Industry, Gateshead.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine, September 1875, with an article (continued from the August number) by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, explanatory of the early history of the Lodge of Industry, Gateshead. We here find a very late instance of 40 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS a Lodge utilizing the Old Charges, presumably for reading to the initiates. Their occurrence at so advanced a period of the eighteenth century, as a portion of the laws of the Craft, is doubtless owing to the Lodge having been mainly an operative one and independent of the Grand Lodge until 173 5. The general and special clauses, which closely resemble those of No. 15, are entitled " Orders of Antiquity " and consist of some twenty‑one rules, being numbered accordingly. They were written about A.D. 1730, the oldest Minutes being bound up with a copy of the Constitutions of A.D. 1723. The Apprentice Orders were entered a little later and, as Woodford says, " in their present form are unique." They begin by reminding the apprentices about to be " charged," that, " as you are Contracted and Bound to one of our Brethren, we are here assembled together with one accord to declare unto you the Laudable Dutys appertaining unto those yt are apprentices ; " and then recite an epitomized history of the Craft from the Tower of Babylon to the royal Solomon, the remainder corresponding with similar clauses in Nos. 11, zo, 25 and 37, though exceeding them in length ; then comes the parting counsel to the neophytes, that they should " behave one to another gentlely, Friendily, Lovingly and Brotherly ; not churlishly, presumptuously and forwardly ; but so that all your works (words ?) and actions may redound to the Glory of God, the good report of the Fellowship and Company. So help you God. Amen." In all probability, these " Orders of Antiquity" reproduce a much older version, now missing.

 

 31. " RAWLINSON." *A.D. 1730. Bodleian Library, Oxford.

 

Published in Freemasons' Magazine, March and April 18 5 5 and Masonic Magazine, September 1876. The original has not been traced, the note in the Scrap Book being to the effect, " Copied from an old MS. in the possession of Dr. Rawlinson," by which we know that Richard Rawlinson, LL.D., F.R.S., who was an enthusiastic Masonic collector, possessed an ancient version, from which this transcript was made about 1730. The termination is unusual, for, instead of " the contents of this Booke," or some such form, the words substituted are the holy contents of this Roll.

 

(B) LATE TRANSCRIPTS OF THE " OLD CHARGES " 32. (MS. 8) " SPENCER." A.D. 1726. Grand Lodge of Massachusetts.

 

Published in the Old Constitutions, by R. Spencer, 1871. This seems to be in the main a copy of No. 8, or, at all events, of one very like it. Five years before the discovery of No. 8, the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford suggested that this document was a copy of an older MS. and not a transcript of No. 47. It would seem, therefore, that the surmise of 1872 was realized in 1879, as many points of resemblance plainly indicate No. 8 as the original of Nos. 3 2 and 47. It is the only version that resembles No. 8, though there are printed copies that generally agree, which, as they are evidently taken from Nos. 8 or 32, need not be quoted as extra versions. The MS. was purchased in July 1875, at the sale of Richard Spencer's valuable Masonic library, for Enoch Terry Carson, of Cincinnati, the well‑known Masonic bibliographer. It is beautifully written, in imitation of the copper‑plate style, in a small book, the size of the early issues of Cole's Constitutions and was probably the text from which those editions were engraved. It may have been actually a THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 41 copy of No. 8, not necessarily exact ; and if so, the Inigo Jones MS. is the only document of its kind now known. Some authorities set up No. 37. as an independent version. Colour is lent to the supposition by the style in which the MS. is written, which is highly suggestive of its being intended as a model for the art of the engraver.

 

33. (MS. z) " WOODFORD." A.D. 1728. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London. 34. (MS. 2) " SUPREME COUNCIL, No. 2." A.D. 1728. Duke Street, London.

 

These MSS. are certainly copies of No. 2 and are little gems of caligraphy. The first was purchased some years ago by the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford from Kerslake, bookseller, Bristol and contains the arms plate of " William Cowper, Esq., Clerk to the Parliaments " [Grand Secretary, 1723] and the inscription, " This is a very ancient record of Masonry, w`h was copy'd for me by Wm Reid, Secretary to the Grand Lodge, 17z8‑Ld Coleraine, Grd. Master, Al. Choke Depy ; Nat. Blackesby and Jo. Higmore, Gd Wardens." The second is in the library of the Supreme Council, 3 3', London and, in a pencil note, is termed, Lord Coleraine MS. In date, size and style it resembles the former and was probably a transcript made for Lord Coleraine, Grand Master, 1727‑8. Bound in morocco gilt, or otherwise attractively habilitated, Nos. 32, 33 and 34 form a handsome trio.

 

35. (MS. 18) " MELROSE No. 3." A.D. 1762. Old Lodge at Melrose.

 

This is simply a transcript of No. 18 and is thus referred to in the Records " Given out this day, the old Rights of the Lodge contained in a long Roll to be extracted by Nichol Bowr and Thomas Marr and they are to be allowed for their trouble " (see Masonic Magazine, May 188o). The copy is still preserved by the Lodge and was probably in common use, the older Roll being reserved for important occasions. A similar practice now obtains in the York Lodge, where to ordinary visitors are exhibited copies of the ancient documents‑a precautionary measure which cannot be too highly commended‑and, doubtless, affords ample satisfaction to all who have not made the subject a special study.

 

36. (MS. 13) " TUNNAH." *A.D. 1828. W. J. Hughan, Truro.

 

The transcript, which resembles No. 13, was once the property of John Tunnah, of Bolton, for many years Provincial Grand Secretary of East Lancashire ; and, on his decease, was presented by his partner, James Newton, to a fellow Masonic student, W. J. Hughan. The water‑mark in the paper is of the year 1828. There are a variety of notes on the manuscript, one being, " This may be a copy of the old MS. said to have been in the possession of Nics Stone, a sculptor under Inigo Jones, which was destroyed with many others, 1720 (vide Preston, p. 217) " ; and another, " The Parchment MS. may be the original Charter of Constitution and Obligation sent from the Grand Lodge (or Lodge of Antiquity), when the Lodge at Bolton was constituted, A.D.‑,varied according to circumstances of the time " ‑to all of which the answer must be‑Yes 1 it may be ! 37. "WREN." A.D. 185 z. The Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, London.

 

Published in Masonic Magazine, December 1879. It is endorsed " Copy from an ancient parchment Roll, written in old Norman English about the date of 16oo and said to be a true copy of the original found amongst the papers of Sir Christopher 42 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS Wren, who built St. Paul's Cathedral, London. This parchment roll belonged to the late Rev. Mr. Crane, a very learned divine and zealous Mason, for many years Provincial Grand Secretary, when Sir Robert S. Cotton [father of the late Lord Combermere, afterwards Provincial Grand Master] was the Provincial Grand Master for Cheshire." Signed " Bro. S. Browne, Secretary and Treasurer of the ` Cestrian,' 615, Chester A. L., 4852, December 4th." It was purchased, with other papers from the latter, by W. R. Bainbridge, of Liverpool, prior to S. Browne leaving for North Wales, where he died ; and its name has also been known as the " Browne " or "Crane" MS.; but, as the endorsement is particular in mentioning its origin, the title selected is the preferable one, especially as every item is useful as a means of possible identification. The MS. begins with the concluding part of the Euclid Charges and apparently did so from the first, the folios being numbered consecutively as if complete (see The Freemason, March 6, 1880). The conclusion is in Latin, signed Vera copia, &c., J. L. Higsom. Possibly the Latin sentences were inserted in the original of this MS., as in No. 26, to exhibit the linguistic abilities of the scribe‑certainly not for the information of the Craftsmen, to whom all such recitals must have been even less edifying than they would be to operative masons of the present day.

 

 (C) PRINTED COPIES, EXTRACTS, OR REFERENCES 38. "DERMOTT." *16th Century. G. L. Minutes (Ancients). 42. " MORGAN." *17th Century. G. L. Minutes (Ancients).

 

The only allusion to versions of the Constitutions in the records of the Ancients occurs in a minute of December 6, 175 2, viz.: " The Grand Secretary desired to know whether there was any other books or manuscripts more than had been delivered to him upon the 2d of Feb. 175 2. To which several of the Brethren answered that they did not know of any. Others said, they knew Mr. Morgan had a roll of parchment of prodigious length which contained some historical matters relative to the ancient Craft, which parchment they did suppose he had taken abroad with him. It was further said, that many manuscripts were lost amongst the Lodges lately modernized, where a vestige of the Ancient Craft was not suffered to be revived or practized ; and that it was for this reason so many of them withdrew from Lodges (under the modern sanction) to support the true ancient system. .ò.‑. The Grand Secretary produced a very old manuscript, written or copied by one Bramhall, of Canterbury, in the reign of King Henry the Seventh, which was presented to Br. Dermott (in 1748) by one of the descendants of the Writer. On perusal, it proved to contain the whole matter in the fore‑mentioned parchment, as well as other matters not in that parchment." It may fairly be assumed that these two Rolls are rightly placed in the present series, being in all probability copies of the Old Charges. Laurence Dermott was the Grand Secretary alluded to, his predecessor being John Morgan. The documents still await discovery.

 

 3 9 " DOwL.AND." *17th Century.

 

Published in Gentleman's Magazine, March 31, 1815 and Hughan's Old Charges. The original of this copy is also missing; and though, in 1872, Hughan expressed the hope "that after careful comparison, it will be traced to one of the MSS. extant," THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 43 the expectation has not yet been realized. James Dowland, who forwarded it to the editor of the Gentleman's Magazine for publication in 1815, thus described the document, " For the gratification of your readers, I send you a curious address respecting Freemasonry, which not long since came into my possession. It is written on a long roll of parchment, in a very clear hand, apparently early in the seventeenth century and, very probably, is copied from a MS. of earlier date." Woodford styles it " that most ancient form of the Constitution " and places it at " about 15 00," or, rather, as representing a MS. of that period (see Preface to Old Charges, p. xi). Of course Dowland's estimate may have been an erroneous one, as nothing is really known as to his paleographical qualifications ; still, in present circumstances, one can but accept the period assigned by him, because of whatever date the original or autographic version may have been, the Dowland Scroll and the other Old Charges (properly so termed) that have come down to us, are but later copies of types differing more or less from those circulated in the first instance. The estimate furnished by Findel is of a very unsatisfactory character, viz.: " With this document most of the manuscripts known to us agree, excepting only in a few unessential and unimportant particulars, as, for example, a scroll of the Lodge of Hope, at Bradford ; also one in York, of the year 1704 ; the Lansdowne Manuscript ; one of Lawrie's," etc. (History of Freemasonry, pp. 32, 33). As Dowland's text is of the ordinary kind, it will readily be seen that the differences are neither few nor unimportant.

 

 40. " DR. PLOT." *17th Century.

 

Published in Natural History of Staffordshire (c. viii, pp. 316‑18) 1686. Dr. Robert Plot, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, in a rather sarcastic manner, examines the claims of the " Society of Freemasons " to antiquity in his noted Natural History of A.D. 1686 and alludes particularly to the " large parchment volum they have amongst them, containing the History and Rules of the craft of masonry. Which is there deduced, not only from sacred writ, but profane story, particularly that it was brought into England by St Amphibal and first communicated to St Alban, who set down the Charges of masonry and was made paymaster and Governor of the King's works and gave them charges and manners as St Amphibal had taught him. Which were after confirmed by King Athelstan, whose youngest son Edwyn loved well masonry, took upon him the charges and learned the manners and obtained for them of his father, a free‑Charter. Whereupon he caused them to assemble at York and to bring all the old Books of their craft and out of them ordained such charges and manners, as they then thought fit ; which charges on the said Schrole or Parchment volum, are in part declared ; and thus was the craft of masonry grounded and confirmed in England. It is also there declared that these charges and manners were after perused and approved by King Hen. 6. and his council, both as to Masters and Fellows of this right Worshipfull craft." It is impossible to decide as to the date of the " Schrole of parchment," so the latest estimate that can be fixed has been inserted : no existing MS. agrees exactly with these references or extracts from the " parchment volum." 41. " HARGROVE." *17th Century.

 

The extract from a MS. not now known, which was said to be at York A.D. 1818, in Hargrove's History of that city (vol. ii, pp. 475‑8o), does not agree 1 44 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS with any existing MS., either at York or elsewhere, for which reason Hughan, in his Old Charg es, gives a portion of the quotation, the remainder being, " And when this Assembly was gathered together, they made a cry, that all masons, both old and young, that had any writeinge or understanding of the charges that were before in the land, or in any other land, that they should bring them forth ; and when they were secured and examined, there was found some in French, some in Greek, some in English and some in other languages ; and he commanded a booke thereof to be made and that it should be read and told when any Mason should be made and to give his charge ; and, from that time to this, Masons have kept and observed this form." The only living member of the extinct Grand Lodge, when this work was written, was Blanchard, proprietor of the York Chronicle. The author (Hargrove) states :‑" About the year 1787, the meetings of this (Grand) Lodge were discontinued, and the only member now remaining is Mr. Blanchard, to whom the writer is indebted for information on the subject. He was a member many years and being Grand Secretary, all the books and papers which belonged to the Lodge are still in his possession " (ibid., p. 476. See also No. 15). In the extract the " Royal Edwin " is spoken of as " a Great Protector " for the Craft and it is also recorded that " When the ancient Mysterie of Masonrie had been depressed in England by reason of great warrs, through diverse nations, then Athelston, our worthye king, did bring the land to rest and peace." In some respects the language of the extract agrees more nearly with the quotation from an old MS. noted in Dr. Anderson's Constitutions, than with any of the existing texts.

 

 42. See Ante. No. 38.

 

 43. " MASONS' Co." *17th Century.

 

In the Edinburgh Review," April 1839, p. 103, is an interesting article by Sir Francis Palgrave, wherein mention is made of an inventory of the contents of the chest of the London (Masons') Company, " which not very long since contained (i.e. shortly before 1839), a Book wrote on parchment and bound or sticht in parchment, containing an 113 annals of the antiquity, rise and progress of the art and mystery of Masonry." Sir F. Palgrave adds : " But this document is now not to be found." 44. (MS. I I) "ROBERTS." *17th Century.

 

The library of the late Richard Spencer contained several rare Masonic works, some being unique copies. No. 24o at the " Spencer‑Sale " was published in 1722 at the moderate price of sixpence. The only copy known was purchased at this sale on behalf of R. F. Bower, of Keokuk, Iowa, who had one of the finest Masonic libraries in the world, consisting of some thousands of volumes of books, pamphlets, MSS. and medals. The price paid for it was L8 ios. The valuable works and MSS. at the sale were mainly divided by competition between him and his friend Carson, the eminent Masonic bibliographer. How many the edition consisted of (hundreds or thousands) it is not possible to say, but in the catalogue it is described as " unique, the public museums have been searched in vain." It was republished in Spencer's edition of the Old Constitutions, 1871, also separately by that indefatigable Masonic collector and student. Its title (" Printed and sold by J. Roberts in Warwick‑Lane, MDCC.

 

II.") is " THE THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 45 OLD CONSTITUTIONS Belonging to the ANCIENT and HONOURABLE SOCIETY of Free and accepted MASONS Taken from a Manuscript wrote above Five Hundred Years Since." The claim for its great antiquity was scarcely commensurate with the modest price asked for a copy of the publication in 1722 and was not justified.

 

As the first printed pamphlet for general sale on Freemasonry and, typographically, one of the best issued, it has a special value quite apart from its alleged age and, particularly, as it preceded the first Book of Constitutions of the premier Grand Lodge by one year. The preface is chiefly an apology for the existence of the Society of Freemasons, in which it is stated that " none of the Persons of Honour who have lately grac'd the Society with their Presence, have yet seen any Reason to be asham'd of them, or to withdraw their Protection from them," therefore, it seems probable that the tract was edited by some one who was at least well acquainted with, if not a member of, the Fraternity. The conclusion also suggests the aim of the publisher, viz. " It has yet seen the World but in Fragments, but is now put together as a Thing of too much Significancy to pass our Observation and which will effectually vindicate the Ancient Society of Freemasons from all that has or can be said against them." The writer does not inform us of what the " fragments " consisted, unless, indeed, he refers to a portion of the legendary history not peculiar to the society.

 

The " Roberts " version is undoubtedly a reproduction, or a counterpart, of No. 11, not only because there is not another MS. which so resembles it, but also because the differences are so trivial in the text and the additions so evidently of an editorial character, that the proofs of such an origin are irrefragable. Woodford and Hughan both concur in this view. The 13th rule of No. 11 is omitted (apparently a clerical error), but is supplied in No. 44 (it is, however, common to most MSS. and will be generally recognizable in No. 15, Clause 2, of the Special Charges). The 21st rule of the one is divided into two in the other and, after the 26th, (the whole of the rules being numbered consecutively from the first), the obligation is inserted in No. 44, as well as at the end, the latter only being in No. ii. Then, again, the ten separate rules entitled " This Charge belongeth to Apprentices," which immediately follow in the former, come after " The New Articles " in the latter, but it only denotes a variation in the order and does not effect the contents. The " New Articles," which are undated and undescribed in No. 11, are in No. 44 entitled " Additional Orders and Constitutions made and agreed upon at a General Assembly held at . . . , on the Eighth Day of December 1663." Had he been placed in a " witness box," the editor of the " Roberts MS." might have found a difficulty in producing authority for his statement, that the original document was written " more than five hundred years since " ; indeed, he himself dates a portion of it in the seventeenth century. Clause VI, " That no person shall be accepted a Freemason, unless he be one and twenty years old, or more," is manifestly a modern innovation. The Constitutions of 1722 are said to have contained allusions to several " High Degrees of Freemasonry," but the statement is wholly incorrect, as Hughan had a letter from the owner of this pamphlet and publisher of the first reproduction (Richard Spencer of London), explicitly denying the assertion.

 

45. (MS. 12) "BRISCOE." *17th Century.

 

" Sam. Briscoe, at the Bell Savage on Ludgate Hill," was the publisher of another version, the editor of which was less pretentious in his claim than his 46 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS immediate predecessor ; for in 1724 he only assumed the original to be " of near 300 years Translation into the English." R. F. Bower of Keokuk, U.S.A., had one of the pamphlets and other copies have been mentioned. The first and second editions (1724‑5) are represented in the British Museum. " A Masonic Student " (The Freemason, March 29, 1873) says he " does not attach much value to such works as Briscoe's pamphlet . . . many of the observances are purely imaginary, meant, in fact, as a ` skit' upon the order, resembling Dean Swift's more humorous, but equally idle, attack on Freemasonry." These well‑deserved strictures are fulminated against the compilation under review, wherein is narrated in a somewhat facetious manner, " An Accidental Discovery of the Ceremonies made use of in the several Lodges, upon the admittance of a Brother as a Free and Accepted Mason." The printed copy of the " Old Charges " is substantially founded on No. 12 ; the reasons for which view have been partially given by Hughan in The Freemason, April 5, 1873. It does not appear to have been again reprinted in full until October 1873, in the Masonic Magazine and in the Freemason's Chronicle, 1876.

 

46. "BAKER." *17th Century.

 

As it is well to register all references to the Old Charges, this is inserted in the enumeration. It occurs in a foot‑note by Dr. Rawlinson, in the copy of his MS. in explanation of the legend of King Athelstan having caused " a Roll or Book to be made, which declared how this Science was first invented ; . . . which Roll or Book he Commanded to be read and plainly recited when a man was to be made a Free Mason, that he might fully understand what Articles, Rules and Orders he laid himself under, well and truly keep and observe to the utmost of his power " (see Masonic Magazine, 1876, p. 1oz), as follows : " One of these Rolls I have seen in the possession of Mr. Baker, a carpenter in Moorfields." 47. (MSS. 8 & 32) " COLE." *17th Century.

 

As it is probable that No. 32, the original of Benjamin Cole's engraved editions of 172.8‑9 and 1731, was derived from No. 8, it is but fair to class the present number as a representative at least of a seventeenth‑century version ; and, of all reproductions, it was the finest issued in the 18th century. The whole of the interesting little book was printed from engraved plates, dedicated in 1728‑9 to the Right Hon. the Lord Kingston, Grand Master and, though not dated, the dedication is sufficient to fix the period of its advent. The second edition was dedicated in 1731 to Lord Lovel, Grand Master. Ordinary editions were published in 1751, etc. ; but it was not until 1869 that a facsimile of the engraved series was issued, when Hughan made it an attractive feature of his first literary venture‑the Constitutions of the Freemasons. Dr. Kloss is incorrect in classing this version with No. 45, in his Bibliographic der Freimaurer, p. 125 48. (MSS. 8 & 32) " DODD." *17th Century.

 

Spencer thinks that from one or two differences " and minor alterations in portions of the text, the printer, or editor, had never seen Cole's book " ; but Hughan is of opinion that the one is a reproduction of the other, with simply a few fanciful changes, for which an example had been set by Masonic historians of the period. Carson, for whom it was purchased at the Spencer‑Sale, concurs in THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 47 this view and adds‑" therefore it appears to me that Cole's Editions, 1728‑31‑5 I, etc. and the Spencer manuscript now in my collection, with the present reprint, are substantially, though not identically, one and the same Constitutions" (see Introduction to the third reprint by the Masonic Archxological Society of Cincinnati, 1876). Two copies are known to be in the United States, viz., the one herein described and another owned by R. F. Bower. Spencer knew of three in all. It has been faithfully reproduced by E. T. Carson (1876) for the first time, the original being a small quarto of twenty pages. The title is " The Beginning and first Foundation of the most worthy Craft of Masonry, with the Charges thereunto belonging " and it is said to be " By a Deceas'd Brother, for the Benefit of his Widow " ! It was " Printed for Mrs. Dodd, at the Peacock without Temple Bar, MDCC.

 

XIX (Price Six‑pence)." No statement is made as to its origin or age, but there is no doubt of its being a copy of Nos. 8 or 32, or a reprint of No.'47, engraved edition, the original of the two last being a seventeenth‑century version.

 

49. HARRIS. The Bedford Lodge, London.

 

From the minutes of the Bedford Lodge, No. 157, we learn that in January 18o9, its then secretary, " Bro. Harris," was thanked " for his present of ancient manuscripts, in parchment, containing the original Charges and part of the lectures on Craft Masonry." 5 0. " BATTY LANGLEY." 18th Century.

 

Published in the Builder's Compleat Assistant, 3 d edition, 1738. Batty Langley, a prolific writer, published his Practical Geometry in 1726, which he dedicated to Lord Paisley, as " the Head of a most Ancient and Honourable Society " and subscribed himself " your most devoted servant." In 1736 appeared his Ancient Masonry, Both in the Theory and Practice, dedicated to Francis, Duke of Lorraine and forty British noblemen ; also " to all others the Right Hon. and Right Worshipful Masters of Masonry, by their humble servant and affectionate brother, B. Langley." These words seem to establish the fact that the Builder's Compleat Assistant, of which only the third edition is available in the library of the British Museum, must have originally appeared after 1726, when Langley was not a Freemason and to found an inference that it was published some few years at least before the second edition of the Book of Constitutions. The Masonic legend, which is given with some fullness, is called " The Introduction of Geometry" and, amongst famous " Geometers," are named " Nimrod, Abraham, Euclid, Hiram, Grecus," etc. The sources of information open to Langley at the time of writing were MSS. 44, 45, and 47 in this series and Anderson's Constitutions of A.D. 1723. As Edwin is styled the son of Athelstan, No. 47, which calls him brother, could not have been referred to. No. 44 recites the Edwin legend, but leaves out his name ; whilst No. 45 uses the word son, but spells the name in such a manner as to defy identification. On the whole, it is fairly clear that Langley must have followed Dr. Anderson (1723), who plainly designates Edwin as the son of Athelstan. It may be added, that the two legends are in general agreement. Without being of any special value, per se, the fact of the legendary history of the Craft being given at such length by a practical architect and builder, taken into consideration with the dedication of his work on Ancient Masonry to a number of " Freemasons " of exalted rank, afford additional I 48 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS evidence, if such be required, of the close and intimate connexion which continued to exist between operative and speculative Masonry for many years after the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England.

 

s i. "KRAUSE." *18th Century.

 

The so‑called " York MS. Of A.D. 9z6 " has been invested with much more importance and antiquity than it deserves, for it is quite possible that even the eighteenth century is too early a date to assign for its compilation. It was first announced in 18o8, through a German version having been issued by Herr Schneider, of Altenburg, from a Latin translation said to be certified by " Stonehouse, York, January 4, 18o6 " (of whom no trace can be found) ; and, in 181o, this German re‑translation was printed by Dr. Krause in Die drei Aeltesten Kunsturkunden der Freimaurer Briiderschaft. An English version was presented to Hughan by Woodford for insertion in the Old Charges of British Freemasons ; but neither of these experts believes it to be of any real antiquity. Dr. George Kloss denied its genuineness, " and contended that the Latin translation, which was certified by Stonehouse, had been prepared before i 8o6 and that, in preparing it, an ancient manuscript had been remodelled on the same basis as the 173 8 edition of Anderson's Constitutions, because the term ` Noachida' is employed in both, but is found nowhere else." Findel visited England, by desire of the German Union of Freemasons, thoroughly to investigate the matter ; the historian, however, failed to find aught to confirm its claims to antiquity and returned to Germany with a stronger belief than ever as to its being neither a York Charter, nor of the year 9z6 ; and, in fact, he " brings it down to a much more modern date " (see his History of Freemasonry, p. 89). The character and history of this MS. will be considered in a separate chapter.

 

Mere partial reprints of any one of the MSS. have been omitted from the foregoing list. There are many of these, acknowledged or otherwise, each of which takes its text from one or more of the versions described. There are also numerous regulations of the Craft, from an early date, which, in many respects, contain points of agreement with the MS. Constitutions, particularly those of Scottish origin. These will be duly considered in their regular order.

 

If the Old Charges are grouped according to their texts‑their several dates of compilation having already been considered‑it will be found that only five divisions will be requisite.

 

(D) " HALLIWELL " MS. (NO. i) On November 1, 13 8 8, Richard II made an order for returns from the guilds and the crafts (i.e. " Mysteries ") and, in all probability, the material thus brought to light, as the result of a thorough examination of the effects of the various guilds, crafts and brotherhoods, was utilized by the priest‑poet in this manner and, in the exercise of his spiritual functions, he added sundry instructions for the guidance of the Fraternity in their religious observances and general behaviour. It must be remembered that the first laws of all nations were composed in verse and sung (see Goguet, Origin des Lois, vol. i, p. 29). Palgrave, in his History of the Anglo‑Saxons (1867,.P‑ 128) tells us that Aldheim, Bishop of Sherborne, could find no mode of THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 49 commanding the attention of his townsmen so efficacious as that of standing on the bridge and singing a ballad which he had composed. " The harp was handed round at their festivals ; and he who could not join in the glee was considered as unfit for respectable company." As to the exact age of this MS. the point is immaterial, as ten, twenty, or a few more years after 1389 will accord with the judgments passed upon its caligraphy ; whilst, even if the estimate of Dr. Kloss (1427‑3S) is accepted, it will still remain the oldest representative of the " Charges " peculiar to the Freemasons.

 

The following epitome of the various articles and points will serve to illustrate the stamp of laws in operation during the fourteenth century. Their general similarity to those of later periods cannot fail to strike the most casual reader.

 

FIFTEEN POINTS FOR THE CRAFTSMEN I. " Most love wel God, and holy churche, and his mayster and felows." 2. Work truly for " huyres apon werk and halydays." 3. Apprentices to keep " their mayster cownsel " in chamber and " yn logge." 4. " No mon to hys craft be false," and apprentices to " have the same lawe. " 5 . Masons to accept their pay meekly from the master, and not to strive, 6. But to seek in all ways " that they stonde wel yn Goddes lawe." 7. Respect the chastity of his master's wife, and " his felows concubyne." 8. Be a true mediator " To his mayster and felows fre," and act fairly to all. 9. As steward to pay well, and truly " To mon or to wommon, whether be be." io. Disobedient Masons dealt with by the Assembly, the Law, and forswear the craft.

 

II. Masons to help one another by instructing those deficient in knowledge and skill.

 

I z. The decisions of the Assembly to be respected, or imprisonment may follow. 13. " He schal swere never to be no thef," and never to succour any of " fals craft." 14. Be true " to hys lyge Lord the Kynge," and be sworn to keep all these points. 15. And obey the Assembly on pain of having to forsake the craft, and be imprisoned.

 

I. 2.

 

34.

 

6. 7.

 

 9.

 

I0. II. 12.

 

131415 FIFTEEN ARTICLES FOR THE " MAYSTER MASON " He must be " stedefast, trusty, and trve," and upright as a judge.

 

" Most ben at the generale congregacyon," to know where it " schal be holde." Take apprentices for seven years " Hys craft to lurne, that ys profytable." ò No bondemon prentys make . . . Chef yn the logge he were y‑take." ò The prentes be of lawful blod," and " have hys lymes hole." " To take of the Lord for hyse prentyse, also muche as hys felows." ò Schal no thef " accept, " lest hyt wolde turne the craft to schame." " Any mon of crafte, be not also perfyt, he may hym change." " No werke he undurtake, but he conne bothe hyt ende and make." ò Ther schal no mayster supplante other, but be as systur and brother." He ought to be " bothe fayr and fre," and " techyt by hys mychth." " Schal not hys felows werk deprave," but " hyt amende." His apprentice " he hym teche," in all the requisite particulars. So " that he, withynne hys terme, of hym dyvers poyntes may lurne." Finally, do nothing that " wolde turne the craft to schame." 1 50 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS (E) " COOKE " MS. (NO. 2) The expression of thankfulness to " God our Glorious Fader " (not to the Trinity, as in the ordinary forms), which introduces the historical narration in No. 2, differs somewhat from the extract which is given by Halliwell, as Norton has pointed out, so much so, indeed, as to lead some readers to suppose that the excerpt was taken from an entirely distinct MS. As the phraseology of No. 2, however, more closely resembles it than that of any other existing version and, as it is scarcely possible that any MS. Constitution has " disappeared " since the publication of the first edition of Halliwell's work in 1840, it may fairly be assumed that the quotation is given by that well‑known antiquary without the exercise of his usual care and exactitude. No. 2 is much more like the ordinary MSS. than its senior and hence will be found to contain nearly all the legend of the usual " Charges," as in No. 15, though not always in quite such an orderly fashion, for, at line 644, the historical introduction is begun anew respecting Euclid and other celebrities.

 

(F) MSS. 11, 19, 20, 25, 30, & 37 The " Harleian 1942 " (11 in this series) might well claim a separate examination, containing, as it does, the " New Articles," in the possession of which it stands alone ; but, in order to avoid a numerous classification, six MSS. are now selected for criticism, which present, as a common feature, what is known as the " Apprentice Charges," or additional rules for the apprentices, not in the ordinary clauses, as set out in No. 15.

 

The " New Articles " are undated and run as follows " HARLEIAN MS.," No. 1942 (11) 26. " Noe person (of what degree soever) bee accepted a free mason, unless hee shall have a lodge of five free masons ; at least, whereof one to bee a master, or warden, of that limitt, or devision wherein such Lodge shalbee kept, and another of the trade of Free Masonry." 27. " That no p'son shal bee accepted a Free Mason, but such as are of able body, honest parentage, good reputacon, and observes of the Laws of the Land." z8. " That noe p'son hereafter bee accepted free mason, nor shalbee admitted into any Lodge or assembly untill hee hath brought a certificate of the time of adoption from the Lodge yt accepted him, unto the Master of that Limit, and devision, where such Lodge was kept, which sayd Master shall enrole the same in parchm't in a role to bee kept for that purpose, to give an acct of all such acceptions at every General Assembly." z9. " That every person whoe now is Free Mason, shall bring to the Master a note of the time of his acception to the end the same may bee enroll'd in such priority of place of the p'son shall deserve, and to ye end the whole company and fellows may the better know each other." 30. " That for the future the sayd Society, Company, and fraternity of Free Masons, shalbee regulated and governed by one Master, and Assembly, and Wardens, as ye said Company shall think fit to chose, at every yearely generall assembly." 31. " That noe~~'son shalbee accepted a Free Mason, or know the secrets of the said Society, until hee hath first taken the oath of secrecy hereafter following THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 51 'I, A. B., Doe in the presence of Almighty God, and my Fellowes, and Brethren here present, promise and declare, that I will not at any time hereafter, by any Act or circumstance whatsoever, Directly or Indirectly, publish, discover, reveale, or make knowne any of the secrets, priviledges, or Counsells, of the Fraternity or Fellowship of Free Masonry, which at this time, or anytime hereafter, shalbee made knowne unto mee soe helpe mee God, and the holy contents of this booke.' " The additional regulations already noted are variously entitled the Apprentices' Orders (3o), the Future Charges (37), and the Apprentice Charge (zo and 25), but are not distinguished by any title in No. II, simply succeeding the New Articles, and are numbered I to io, the fifth rule being absent. The text of the " York No. 4 " (z5) has been selected to contribute this section of the laws.

 

" THE APPRENTICE CHARGE" (25) I. " That he shall be true to God and the holy Church, the prince his Mr and dame whome he shall serve." 2. " And that he shall not steale nor peke away his Mr or dames goods, nor absent himselfe from their service, nor goe from them about his own pleasure by day or by night without their Licence." 3. " And that he do not commit adultry or fornication in his Master's house with his wife, daughter, or servant, or any other." 4. " And that he shall keepe councell in all things spoken in Lodg or Chamber by any Masons, fellows, or fremasons." 5. " And that he shall not hold any disobedient argument against any fremason, nor disclose any secret whereby any difference may arise amongst any Masons, or fellowes, or apprentices, but Reverently to behave himselfe to all fremasons being sworne brethren to his Mr.,, 6. "And not to use any carding, diceing, or any other unlawfull games." 7. " Nor haunt Taverns or alehouses there to waste any mans goods, without Licence of his said Mr or some other fremason." 8. " And that he shall not commit adultry in any mans house where he shall worke or be tabled." 9. " And that he shall not purloyn nor steale the goods of any p'son, nor willingly suffer harme or shame or consent thereto, during his said apprentisshyp either to his Mr or dame, or any other fremason. But to withstand the same to the utmost of his power, and thereof to informe his said Mr or some other fremason, with all convenient speed that may bee." The extra rules of the following MS. differ so materially from those we ordinarily find in documents of a like class, that a brief summary of these regulations becomes essential.

 

" MELROSE MS." (I9) I. A " Frie Masone " not to take more than three apprentices in his lifetime. z. To obtain consent of " ye set Lodge," of " all his masters and Fellows." 3. Apprentices (" lawfully taken "), after serving their time, " ought not to be named losses," but " to be named frie men, if they have their Mrs Discharge." 4. " All others not lawfully taken are to be namit loses." I 52 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5. Apprentices to furnish essays to prove their skill, before being made " frie masons." 6. Masters and Fellows only to engage " Losses " when regular Masons cannot be had.

 

7. Not to let " Losses " know " ye priviledge of y░ compass, square, levell, and ye plumb rule." 8. " Plumming " to be set " Losses," and " let them work between ym wt a Tyne." 9. " Frie Masons " on coming to labour ought to displace such " Losses " (or cowans).

 

io. If lawful members cannot be given work, they must be furnished with money.

 

i i. If apprentices " doe run away and are found," their lawful Mr must be informed.

 

i z. " We do swear, so God us helpe, and holy dome, and by the contents of this book," etc.

 

This MS. (iv) is the oldest, virtually, of the four Scottish versions (i6 to i9 inclusive), of which all but the Atcheson Haven (i7) contain the important clause " treu to ye King of England," as in the second of the General Charges of our English copies. This is the more noticeable, if we bear in mind that the Melrose version is clearly a transcript of one of A.D. 15 8 t, or earlier ; also that No. 17, whilst it omits " England," has still the clause " true to the king," the addendum either being purposely omitted, or simply left out through non‑existence in the text copied from, some even of the English versions not containing the complete sentence. It would not, perhaps, be possible to have more convincing proof of the English origin of these Scottish versions of the Old Charges. The historian of the Lodge of Edinburgh, D. Murray Lyon, commenting upon the " Kilwinning " MS. (16), says emphatically, " that it was a production of the sister kingdom is evident from its containing a charge in which `every man that is a mason,' is taken bound to be ` liedgeman to the king of England' and also from that part of the legend which refers to the introduction and spread of masonry in Britain being confined to the rehearsal of the patronage extended to the craft by English kings." It may, indeed, positively be affirmed that every form or version of the Masonic documents, which it is the design of this chapter to classify and describe, had its origin in South Britain.

 

Another peculiarity of the Melrose text is its addition to the third of the special charges, viz. " Also that no Mr nor fellow supplant on other of his mark," which clause is not to be found elsewhere (though quite in accordance with the Schaw Statutes, of A.D. 1598) and, as already intimated, it varies so much from the other Scottish forms, that, as a version, it should not be classed with them, save as respects locality and common features of agreement. In Scotland it is as notably sui generic as No. 8 (including 32 and copies) is in England, both being curious examples of departure from what might fairly be termed the accepted text.

 

The oldest of the York MSS. (No. 5 of this series) reads teneat Librum ut ille vell illi, etc., but in No. z 5 a translation is given of the customary Latin instructions, in which ille veil illi appears as hee or shee ; illi (they), having through error or design been set aside for illa (she). Taking the testimony of all the other MSS., the translation should read he or they, but, as a matter of fact, in No. 25 it reads he THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5 3 or she. Mackey, Hughan and Lyon believe the latter is a faulty translation and nothing more ; but there are others (including the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford) who accept this document as evidence of the admission of females into Masonic fellowship, especially as so many of the old guilds were composed of women as well as men (see Introduction to Smith's Guilds, p. xxx). Not one out of a hundred but recruited their ranks from both sexes ; and even in guilds under the management of priests, such as the Brotherhood of Corpus Christi of York, begun 1408, lay members were allowed (of some honest craft), without regard to sex, if " of good fame and conversation," the payments and privileges being the same for the " brethren and sisteren." Women " were sworne upon a book " in the same manner as the men. In 1348 the general assembly of the Grocers' Company, held at Ringed Hall, Thames Street, agreed to certain " new points," one being in favour of the admission of female members (see Herbert's Companies of London, vol. i, pp. 306, 423 ; vol. ii, pp. 44, 68z).

 

It may, indeed, be suggested that women were admitted into craft guilds in cases where such membership was not obviously unfit or unsuitable ; but the mason's handicraft being so ill‑adapted for female exercise, the balance of probability leans strongly against their ever having been admitted to full membership in the Masonic body. To this it may be replied, that the trade of a carpenter was not more favourable to the employment of women than that of a mason. Yet in the carpenters' guild of Norwich, founded A.D. 137 S, " In the name of ye fader and sone and holi gost and of oure ladi seinte marie, cristes moder and al yo holi cumpayne of heuene " the ordinances were agreed to for " ye bretherin and sistrin " (see Smith's Guilds, p. 37). The charter of the Carpenters' Company of London describes the company to consist of " the brethren and sisters of freemen of the said mystery " and the records of this Fraternity attest that " on August 5, 1679, Rebecca Gyles, spinster, sometime servant to Rebecca Cooper, a free servant of the company, was admitted to the freedome, haveing served her said Mistres faithfully a terme of seaven years " (E. B. Jupp, History of the Carpenters' Company, 1848, p. 161). The " Gild of the Peltyers " (Furriers), of A.D. 1376, also made provision for female membership and the records of craft guilds in numerous cities might be cited in corroboration of this usage. Still, there is no direct testimony as to the admission of females into Masonic Lodges or assemblies at any time, though they were sometimes allowed partially to reap the benefit, as widows, of a deceased husband's business, if they had a Freemason to help them. The records of Mary's Chapel Lodge, under date of AJ?ril 17, 1683, furnish an instance of the legality of a female occupying the position of " dame," or " mistress," in a Masonic sense, but from the minute of the Lodge it will be observed that it was only to a very limited extent that the widows of master masons could benefit by the privilege (see Lyon's History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 1z2). On this point Lyon observes : " In the case of female members of Scottish Incorporations, `the freedom of craft' carried with it no right to a voice in the administration of affairs. The city of Lichfield was anciently governed by a Guild and Guild‑Master. King Henry II and Anne his Queen ; Henry VII and his Queen ; and many other illustrious names, were enrolled as members, the Guild comprising brothers and sisters, but the rules provided for the Brothers only, choosing the Master and Wardens annually (Rev. T. Harwood, F.S.A., History of Lichfield, 18o6, p. 319). Neither was their presence required at enrolment, although their entry‑money was double that of members' sons." 54 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS Lyon thinks that the reference in certain clauses of the MS. of 1693 (25) " to an entered apprentice's obligation to protect the interests of his ` master or dame,' i.e. mistress, clearly indicates that at that time it was lawful for females, in the capacity of employers, to execute mason‑work." On the whole, we must accept the clause in question, either as an error or fancy of the translator or copyist ; but it is certainly very singular that there is no record of females having belonged to Masonic guilds or companies, though they were connected with those of other crafts, such as the saddlers and spurriers, carpenters, peltyers (furriers), calendrers and tailors.

 

 (G) " INIGO JONES" & "SPENCER" (8 & 3 z. Also Reproductions) This text obviously formed the basis, in part, of Dr. Anderson's Constitutions. Its chief importance is derived from the additional clauses in the legendary history, rather than from any changes in the language of that part which is to be found in the ordinary versions. Mere arbitrary alterations of the copyist only demand notice as possible means of identification in tracing families of MSS. Of these many examples are found in copies not otherwise of any importance whatever, whilst some are so plainly errors of transcription that any arguments based upon them are of little, if indeed of any value, e.g. in No. 8, the conclusion runs, " So Help you God, and the Itallidom," for " your holy‑dome " (halidom‑Saxon, " holy judgment "‑whence the ancient oath, " By my halidom "). Fort has some interesting observations upon the usual finale of the " Old Charges " and thinks that the word " holy‑dome " is evidently derived from the old form of administering an oath upon the shrine in which the sacred relics of some martyred saint were enclosed, the receptacle of the bones being ordinarily constructed in the form of a house (domus), so that the elision was easy from holi‑domus to holi‑dome (see his Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 171, 292, 404). Without impugning the correct ness of this view in reference to a very early period of guild life, its applicability to the Old Charges from the fifteenth century must be contested strongly, for the form in which the concluding charge is generally given suggests only the solemnity of the obligation about to be taken, " So healpe you God and your halydome and by this booke in yor hands unto yr. power." On the admission of the Masonic apprentices, according to the direct or indirect testimony of the several versions and of the prevailing custom in later times, they were " sworn " on the Bible, not " on the holidom," as were those of the Tailors' Guild of Norwich (fourteenth century) and there is nothing resembling the ordinance of the " Smiths " of Chesterfield (of the same era) in the Masonic Constitutions, the former requiring all the brethren to be bound " by touch of relics " as a pledge of their fidelity (see Smith's Guilds, p. 170).

 

That a change was effected in the manner of administering the obligation, may be inferred from a reference to " The Oaths to be Taken," by the " Fraternyte of Synt John the Babtyste of Taylors " (Exeter), for the words holy dome, and by this boke, have been crossed out by a later hand, and the holy contentes of this boke substituted, which corresponds with MS. I I and others. It is in the text of No. 8, the prototype of No. 32 and its reproductions, that Prince Edwin is spoken of as " Brother to King Athelstane," all the other forms either describing him as a son, or maintaining a discreet silence as to the relationship. The historical narrative is also chronologically arranged and the years of many of the events are inserted, THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 5 5 which is unusual in these documents. The omission of the name of Charles Martel is noteworthy, also that of Naymus Grecus, but otherwise the text, as stated, is more remarkable for the additions to, rather than the deviations from, the ordinary versions.

 

(H) ORDINARY VERSIONS Under this description may be ranged all the MSS. not included in the four divisions preceding (D to G), excepting only such as are merely reproductions which naturally belong to the same class as their originals, whether or not the connexion has been noted. This division includes a majority of the transcripts, which are thus grouped together, because whilst each MS. contains some peculiarity of its own, there is a substantial agreement between them all. The recital of the legend is, generally speaking, similar ; also the various Charges, whilst the differences being nominal are virtually referable to the transforming influences of time and circumstances. In all, the Apprentice Charge and the New Articles are wanting, whilst they contain none of those clauses which, in the previous division (G), confer a special value on the text for purposes of comparison with the early editions of the Grand Lodge Constitutions. Attention having been already directed to the special differences in the MSS. of other types (D to G), the reproduction of an ordinary version will give the general reader a fair conception of the prevailing characteristics of the different Old Charges. For this purpose the text of the following Roll has been selected.

 

The prose Constitution, which will now be given in its entirety, is a fair specimen of the others ; all these scrolls being much alike and, indeed, differing only in minor details. In making a selection for purposes of illustration and reference, a document of the seventeenth century, which combines the chief points of agreement between the Old Charges and has not hitherto been printed, has been selected. It was transcribed by W. J. Hughan from Buchanan's copy and collated with the original in the library of Grand Lodge.

 

 THE " BUCHANAN MS." (15) I.‑O Lord God Father of Heaven with the wisdom of the glorious Sonn through the grace and goodness of the Holy Ghost three persons in one Godhead Bee with us att our begining And give us grace soe to governe us in our Lives here that wee may come to his heavenly bliss that never shall have ending Amen.

 

II. Good Brethren and Fellowes our purppose is to tell you how and in what manner this worthy craft of Masonry was begun And afterwards how it was upholden maynetained by many worthy Kings and Princes and other worthy men And also to them that bee here we shall declare the charges that belongeth to every Free Mason to Keppe for it is a science that is worthy to be kept for a worthy craft and vertuous science for it is one of the seven Liberall Sciences : And these be the names of them. The First is Grammar : that teacheth a man to speake truly and to write truly : The Second is Rhethorick and that teacheth a man to speake faire and in subtill termes The third is Dialectica that teacheth a man to decerne and know truth from falsehood : The fourth is Arrithmetike And it teacheth a man to reckon and count all numbers : The fifth is Geometrye and it teacheth a man to mete and measure the Earth and all other things of which is masonry The sixth is musicke and it teacheth the Crafte of Songe and voice of tongue orggann harpe and Trumpett. The Seventh is Astronomye and teacheth a man to know the course of the Sunne Moone and Stars : These be the seven sciences which are all found by one science which is Geometrye.

 

1 56 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS III. Thus may you prove that all the sciences of the world were found by this science of geometrye and grounded thereon for it teacheth mete and measure ponderation and weight of all manner of kind of the earth for there is noe man that worketh in any craft but hee worketh by some mete or measure nor any man that buyeth or selleth but he may use mete measure or weight and belongeth to Geometrye and these Marchants and Craft of Geometrye doe find all other of the six sciences Especially the plowemen and tiller of the ground for all manner of corne and grayne vynes plants and setters of other fruits For Grammar nor Musicke neither Astronomye nor any of the other six sciences can find mete measure or weight without Geometrye wherefore that science may well be called the most worthyest of all sciences which findeth mete and measure to all the Rest IV. If you aske how this Science began I shall you tell : before the flood of Noah there was a man called Lamech : as you may find in the fourth Chapter of Genisis, whoe had two wives, the name of the one was Adah : and the name of the other was Zillah : by his first wife Adah hee had two sonnes the name of the Elder was Jaball : and the other was called Juball : and by his other wife Zillah hee had a sonne called Tuball and a daughter called Naamah : These foure children found the begining of all the Crafts in the world : And the Eldest sonne Jaball found the Craft of Geometrye and hee parted flocks of sheepe and lands in the field and first built a house of stoone and timber as is noted in the Chapter aforesaid : and his brother Juball found the Craft of Musicke songe of tongue harpe organn and Trumpett : And the third brother Tuball found the Smith's Craft to worke in Gold Silver Brasse Copper Iron and Steele and the Daughter Naamah found the Craft of Weaveing : and these children knew that God would take vengeance for sinns either by fire, water, wherefore they did write the sciences they had found in two pillars of stone that they might be found after God had taken vengeance for sine the one was Marble and would not burne with fire : the other was Laterus and it would not droune in water.

 

V. There resteth more to tell you how the stones were found that the Sciences were written in after the said flood the great Hermarynes that was Tusses his Sonne the which was the sonne of Sem the sonne of Noah the same Hermarynes was afterwards called Hermes the father of wise men : he found one of the two pillars of stone and hee found the sciences written therin and he taught them to other men.

 

VI. And at the makeing of the Tower of Babilon there masonrye was much made of: the Kinge of Babilon that height Nemorth and Nemorth himself was a Mason : and loved well the Craft as is said with Masters of Histories and when the Citie of Neneve and other Cities of the East Asia should bee made this Nemorth Kinge of Babilon sent thither 6o masons art the desire of the Kinge of Neneve his cousin and when they went forth hee gave them a charge in this manner that they should be true each of them to other and that they should love truly together soe that hee might have worshipp for his sending of them to his cousin the Kinge of Neneve And further hee gave them two charges as concerning their science And they were the first charge that ever any Mason had of his worke or Crafte.

 

VII. Moreover when Abraham and Sarah his wife went into Egypt hee taught the seven sciences to the Egyptians And hee had a worthy scholler whose name was Euclid which learned very well and became Master of all the seven sciences And in his Dais it befell that Lords and Great men of those quarters and Dominions had soe many sonnes some by their wives and some by other women for those Countries bee hott of Generation and they had not competent goods and hands to maintayne their children which made much care And the Kinge of that Land considering theire poverty called his counsell together and caused a Parliment to be houlden the greatest of his intent was to know how they should maintayne their children and they could not find any way unlesse it were by cunning and good science whereupon he let a proclamation bee made through his Realme if there were any that could teach an informe them in any good Cuning art or science hee should come unto them and bee very well contented for his paynes and travell : after this proclamation made came this worthy Clarke Eclid and said unto the Kinge and his Nobles if you will betake THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS S7 your children unto my government I will teach them the seven Liberall Sciences whereby they may live honestly and like gentlemen upon this condition that you will grant mee a Comisson to have rule and power over them according as science ought to be ruled and upon this Covenant I shall take care and charge of them : the Kinge and his counsel granted the same and sealled the Comisson and then this worthy Docter tooke to him those Lordes sonnes and taught them the science of Geometric in practise for to worke all manner of worthy workes that should bellong to building of Temples Churches Castles mannors Towers houses and all manner of buildings And he gave them a charge.

 

VIII. The First was that they should bee true to the Kinge and Lords they served.

 

IX. And that they should love well together And be true each one to other.

 

X. And to call each other his fellowe or else his brother And not servant nor knave nor any other foule name.

 

XI. And that they should deserve theire pay of the Lord or Master they should serve XII. And that they should ordaine the wisest of them to bee the Master of their Lords worke And that neither Lord nor man of Great Linage or Riches or for favour should make and ordaine such a one to beare Rule and be governour of theire worke that hath but small knowledge or understanding in the science whereby the owner of the worke should bee evil served and you ashamed of your worke‑manshipp.

 

XIII. And alsoe that they should call the governour of the worke master whilest they wrought with him.

 

XIV. And many other charges that are to long to tell : and to all the charges hee made them to sweare the . . . great oath which men used in that time XV. And hee ordered for them reasonable wages that they might live with honesty.

 

XVI. And alsoe that they should come and assemble themselves together once every yeare That they might take advice and councell together how they might worke best to serve theire Lord and Master for his proffitt an theire owne creditt and honestie And to Correct amongst themselves him or them that erred and trespassed And thus was the Craft or science of Geometric grounded there XVII. And this worthy Master gave it the name of Geometric And now it is called Masonrie.

 

XVIII. Sith the time when the children of Israell were come into the land of behest that is now called amongst us the land of Cannaan the countrie of Jerusalem, Kinge David began the Temple which is called Templum Dominum and is now called with us the Temple of Jerusalem and the same Kinge David loved Masons well and cherished them and gave good paiement unto them and gave them charges in manner as hee had in Egipt by Euclid and other charges more as you shall heare afterwards And after the Decease of Kinge David Solomon sonne unto the said King finnished the Temple that his father had begunn and hee sent after masons of divers towns and countries and gathered them together soe that he had 24,000 Masons and iooo of them were ordayned Masters and governours of his worke.

 

XIX. And there was another Kinge of another Land which was called Huram and hee loved Kinge Solomon well and hee gave him timber for his worke and hee had a sonn named Aymon and hee was master of Geometric and the chiefest master of all his masons and Governour of all his graven and carved worke and of all manner of other masonrie that belonge unto the Temple and all this witnesseth the Fourth booke of the Kings in the Bible .

 

. And this same Kinge Solomon confirmed both charges and manners that his father had given to masons and soe was this worthy craft or science of Masonrie confirmed in the Countrie of Jerusalem and in many other Countries and Kingdoms glorious Craftsmen about full wide into divers countries some because of learning more knowledge and skill in the Craft and some to teach others and soe it befell that there was a curious mason whose name was Mamon [Naymus] Grecus that had been att the building of Solomon's Temple And hee came into France and there he taught the Craft of Masonrie to men in France.

 

I 5 8 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS .

 

I. And there was a man in France named Carolus Martill came to this Mamon Grecus aforesaid and learned of him the craft of Masonrie well hee tooke upon the charges And afterwards by the grace of God hee was elected Kinge of France and where hee was in his estate hee tooke many Masons and helpe to make men masons that were none before and sett them on worke and gave them good wages and confirmed to them a Charter to hould theire Assemblie from yeare to yeare where the would and cherished the much and thus came the Craft of Masonrie into France.

 

.

 

II. England stood att that time void from any charge of Masonrie untill the time of Saint Albons and in his time the Kinge of England being a pajan walled the Towne about that is now called Saint Albons and Saint Albons was a worthy Knight and chiefe steward with the King and the governance of the Realme and alsoe of the making of the Towne walls and hee loved masons well and cherrished them right much and hee made theire pay right good standing as the Realme did then for he gave them two shillings and sixpence a weeke and three‑pence for thiere nonesynches and before that time throughout this Land A Mason took but a pennie a day and his meate until Saint Albons did amend it and hee gave to them a charter which hee obtained of the Kinge and his Councill for to hold a general councell and hee gave it the name of an Assemblie And hee being a Mason himself thereat hee was hee helped to make Masons and gave to them the charges as you shall heare Afterwards.

 

.

 

III. Right soone after the decease of Saint Albons there came men of divers nations to wart against the Realme of England soe that the Rule of good Masonrie was destroyed untill the Time of King Athelston in his dayes hee was a worthy Kinge in England and brought this Land to rest and peace and builded many great buildings of Abbey's and castles and divers other great buildings And hee loved masons well.

 

.

 

IV. And hee had a sonn named Edwin and hee loved masons much more then his father did and hee was a great practizer in Geometric and came himselfe to comune and talke much with masons and to learn of them the Craft and afterwards for the love hee had to Masons and to the craft hee was made a mason himselfe.

 

.

 

V. And hee obtained of his father the Kinge a Charter and a Comission to hould every year once an Assembly where they would within the Realme of England that they might correct faults errors and trespasses if that any there were comitted and done concerning the craft of Masonrie.

 

.

 

VI. And hee with other Masons held an Assemblie at Yorke and there hee made Masons and gave them a Charge and comanded that rule to be houlden and kept ever after and hee made an ordinance that it should be renewed from Kinge to Kinge.

 

.

 

VII. And when the assemblie were gathered together hee caused a crie to be made after this manner that all old Masons and younge that had any writeings or understandings of the charges and manners that were made before in this Land or in any other that they should show them forth and there were found some in Greeke some in Latine and some in French and some in English and some in other Languages and the meaning of them were all one.

 

.

 

VIII. And hee caused a booke to be made thereof : And how the Craft was found and hee comanded that it should be read or told when any free mason should bee made for to give him his charge. And from that day untill this time Masonrie hath bene much made on and kept and that from time to time as well as men might governe it.

 

.

 

IX. And furthermore att divers Assemblies there hath bene put and ordained certaine charges by the best advised Masters and Fellowes.

 

.

 

X. The manner of taking an oath att the making of free Masons Tunc unus ex Seniorebus teneat librum ut illi vel ille ponant vel ponat manus supra librum tunc precepta debeant legi.

 

.

 

XI. Every man that is a Mason take heed right wisely to these charges if you find yourselves guiltie of any of these that you may amend of your errors against god and principally they that be charged for it is a great perrill to forswears themselves upon a booke.

 

 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 59 (General Charges) .

 

XII. (r.) The charges are that you shall bee true men to God and his holy church : that you use noe heresie nor errors in your understanding to distract mens teacheings.

 

(z.) And Alsoe that you bee true men to the Kinge without any treason or falshood and that you shall know noe treason or falshood but you shall amend it or else give notice thereof to the Kinge and Councell or other officers thereof.

 

(3.) And alsoe you shall be true each one to other that is to say to every Master and Fellow of the Craft of Masonrie that be free masons allowed and doe you to them as you would that they should doe to you.

 

(4.) And Alsoe that every free Mason Keepe councill truly of the secret and of the Craft and all other Councell that ought to bee Kept by way of Masonrie.

 

(5.) And Alsoe that noe Mason shall be a Theife or accesary to a theife as farr forth as you shall know.

 

(6.) And Alsoe you shall be true men to the Lord and Master you serve and truly see to his profitt and advantage.

 

(7.) And Alsoe you shall call Masons your fellowes or brethren and noe other foule name nor take your fellowes wife violently nor desire his daughter ungodly nor his servant in villanie.

 

(8.) And Alsoe that you truly pay for your table and for your meate and drinke where you goe to table.

 

(9.) And Alsoe you shall doe noe villanie in the house in which you table whereby you may be ashamed.

 

These are the Charges in generall that belong to all free masons to keepe both Masters and Fellows.

 

.

 

XIII. These bee the Charges singular for every Master and Fellowe as followeth (Special Charges) (z.) First that noe Mason take upon him noe Lord's worke nor other mens worke unlesse hee know himselfe able and skilfull to performe it soe as the Craft have noe slander nor disworshipp but that the Lord and owner of the worke may bee well and truly served.

 

(z.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow take noe worke but that hee take it reasonably soe that the Lord may bee truly served with his owne goods and the Master may live honestly and pay his fellowes truly as manners aske of the Craft.

 

(3.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow shall suplant any other man of his worke that is to say if hee have taken of a Lord or Master that you put him not out unlesse hee bee unable n knowledge to finish that worke.

 

(4.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow take any Apprentice to bee allowed to bee his Apprentice any longer then seven years and the apprentice to bee able of birth and limbs as hee ought to bee (5.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow shall take any allowance to bee allowed to make any Free Mason without the consent of Sixe or Five att the least of his Fellowes and that they bee free borne and of Good Kindred and not a bondman and that hee have his right limbs as a man ought to have.

 

(6.) And Alsoe that noe Master nor Fellow put any Lordes woke to taske that is wont to goc journey.

 

(7.) And Alsoe that noe Master shall give noe pay to his Fellowes but as hee may deserve soe as they may not bee Deceived by false workmen.

 

(8.) And Alsoe that noe Fellow slander another behind his backe whereby hee may loose his good name and his worldly goods.

 

(9.) And Alsoe that noe fellow within the Lodge or without the Lodge missweare one another ungodly without any just cause.

 

 6o THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS (io.) And Alsoe that every one reverence his fellow elder and put him to worshipp.

 

(i i.) And Alsoe that noe Mason play att Cards or Dice or any other game whereby they should be slandered.

 

(12.) And Alsoe noe Mason shall bee a Comon Ribald in Lechary to make the Craft slandered.

 

(i3.) And Alsoe that noe fellow shall goe into the towne in the night thereas is a Lodge of Fellowes without some Fellowes that may beare him witnesse that hee was in a honest place.

 

(i4.) And Alsoe that every Master and Fellow shall come to the Assembly if it be within seven miles about him if hee have warning or else to stand to the award of Master and Fellowes.

 

(15.) And Alsoe every Master and Fellow if hee have trespassed shall stand att the award of the Masters and Fellowes to make the accord if hee may, and if hee may not accord then to goe to the Common Law.

 

(i6.) And Alsoe that noe mason make mould nor square nor noe Rule to any lyer within the Lodge nor without the Lodge how to mould stones without noe mould of his own making.

 

(17.) And Alsoe that every Mason shall receive and cherrish every strange Mason when they come to theire Country and set them to worke as the manner is that is to say if hee have mould stones in the place hee shall sett them or him a fornight at least on worke and give him his pay and if hee have noe stones for him bee shall refresh him with money to the next Lodge.

 

(18.) And Alsoe you shall every mason serve truly the Lord for his pay and truly finish his worke bee it Taske or journey if you may have your pay as you ought to have.

 

.

 

XIV. These charges that you have received you shall well and truly keepe not discloseing the secresy of our Lodge to man woman nor child : Sticke nor stone : thing moveable nor immoveable soe God you helpe and his holy Doome, Amen. . . . Finis.

 

 The Introductory Prayer or Invocation of the Buchanan MS. differs from the generality of these supplications, but is after the manner of No. 17, although, in other respects, the MSS. are not identical. It is curious, however, that as regards the radius within which attendance at the assembly was obligatory, this is the only version which specifies seven miles, three others having five (1z, zo, and z9), two having ten (ii and 31), one alone forty (19) and the remainder fifty miles. The distinctive feature of No. 15 is its obligation, which, if a fair representation of the pledge given by the newly admitted Brethren, is certainly destructive of any theories in favour of female membership, which are based upon No. 25. There are many copies of the oaths imposed by craft guilds, but few of those in use among the masons are of an entirely trustworthy character. Assuming those appended to the Old Charges to be fairly correct, there would seem to have been no particular set form for the purpose, the three samples extant not agreeing with one another as to the verbiage, albeit the intention is clear enough throughout the whole. The titles of the MSS. vary, some being very suggestive, e.g. " The Freemasons Orders and Constitutions " (1 z) ; " Here Begineth the True Order of Masonrie " (3) ; " A discourse : hade : before : A : meeting : of Meassones " (18) ; " The Booke of Constitutions " (6),‑besides others already recorded. The earliest known extracts or references to the Old Charges are to be found in Dr. Plot's History of Staffordshire, A.D. 1686 (40) and The Constitutions of the Freemasons, by the Rev. James Anderson, M.A. (afterwards D.D.), of A.D. 1723. The first complete typographical reproduction of a copy of these Old Charges was " Printed and sold by J. Roberts in Warwick Lane, MDCC.

 

II " (44). This handsome little tract was THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 61 evidently edited by one who was either a Freemason or favourably disposed towards the Society, as the preface is laudatory of the aims of the Fraternity and is the first distinctly Masonic work known that was issued for general sale. The pamphlet (which was never authorized) appeared one year earlier than the premier Book of Constitutions. The resolution to empower " Bro. James Anderson, A.M., to digest the old Gothic Constitutions, in a new and better method " was agreed to by the Grand Lodge, held September 29, 1721 and, on December 27 following, " 14 learned Brothers " were appointed to examine the manuscript, who reported favourably on March z5, 1722, when the Grand Master was desired " to order it to be printed." The New Book of Constitutions was submitted in print to the members, January I7, 1723 (3) and again approved, with the addition of " the ancient manner of Constituting a Lodge," from which it may be inferred that the work could not have appeared before 1723 (the year stated on the title page), as the additional matter is to be found in the copies extant, paged consecutively with the former portion and followed by some twenty more pages. The General Regulations inserted in this work were first compiled by George Payne in 1720 and approved in 1721. They were subjected to revision by Dr. Anderson.

 

The Roberts version (44) appears to have been based upon the text of No. II, so that if the latter was not known to Dr. Anderson, early last century, he was doubtless familiar with the former, but whether before or after the preparation of his work cannot now be determined. The first extract is said to be made from " a certain Record of Freemasons written in the Reign of King Edward IV " (about A.D. 1475) and is in exact conformity with no MS. extant, though in some respects it resembles the quotation of Hargrove (41) and others, as it alludes to King Athelstan and his youngest son, Prince Edwin ; so far, many MSS. confirm this excerpt. None, however, sanction the statement that the Prince summoned the masons at York in " a General Lodge of which he was Grand Master " (p. 33), neither do they recite aught about the " Laws of the Freemasons having been seen and perused by our late sovereign King Henry VI." Possibly the latter information was obtained from Dr. Plot, but the former is well known to have been an unwarrantable and pernicious interpolation. The second extract is almost word for word with the concluding sentences of No. z, except that the verbiage is modernized and, as it is known that such a version was exhibited to the Grand Lodge in 1721, by Grand Master Payne, there need be no hesitation in accepting the Cooke MS. as the document from which Dr. Anderson quoted. It is not so easy to decide as to the first excerpt, especially so far as it seems to be actually taken from some old MS., for such particulars are to be found in the majority of the scrolls. The subject was new to Dr. Anderson in ‑1721‑3, but in 1738 there were many sources available from which a rational history and resume of the ancient Regulations might have been compiled and he had special facilities for acquiring the facts upon which such a history ought to have been founded. The result of Dr. Anderson's researches, as seen in the ‑1738 edition, is very far from satisfactory and tests the credulity of his readers even more than the previous one of 1723. Since the publication of 62 THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS the latter, various reproductions of MS. Constitutions had appeared and, including the one before alluded to (which may not have been known to Dr. Anderson before 1723), there were in circulation the following : Roberts (44), Briscoe (45), and Cole (47), virtually representing the text of Nos. ii, 12 and 8 in this series respectively. It is quite clear that Dr. Anderson had more MSS. before him in the preparation of the 1738 than he had for that of the 1723 edition and there is so much to confirm this view that it only requires examination to be adopted. The historical introduction is much fuller in the former and varies considerably from the earlier issue ; e.g. the Edwin legend is altered and reads that he was the King's brother (not son), a variation only to be found in the Inigo Jones text (8) and which was engraved in the Cole MS. (47). His imagination developing (1738), the word general was altered before Lodge for Grand by the editor and the year added, which has led the so‑called York Constitution to be dated A.D. 926. The concluding paragraph of the 1723 edition is separated from the Edwin legend in the 1738 issue and, after a few minor changes, is added to the second extract already noticed, which was from quite a distinct MS., as Dr. Anderson himself declares, accompanied at page 71 by the declaration‑" The Constitutions were now meliorated, for an old record imports, ` that in the glorious reign of King Edward III,' " etc., about which the first publication is silent. Moreover, the reproduction of this second extract is but partial, as a portion is omitted and other sentences are so altered as to make them read like modern Constitutions, the title Grand Master being interpolated and the qualification, " if a brother," inserted respecting the attendance " of the Sheriff, or the Mayor, or the Alderman " ; also the word Congregation is turned into Chapter I Two extracts are printed, which are not in the earlier publication ; the one preceding, the other following, those before mentioned. The first agrees with the Cole MS. and recites the St. Alban legend, both terming that Saint " the Proto‑Martyr," only the value of the quotation is seriously diminished by Dr. Anderson again adding the modern title of Grand Master. The last citation from the old MSS. is to be found at p. 101 and is based upon No. ii, or its typographical representative, the Roberts MS. (44). The Additional Orders are those selected for insertion in the second edition of the Grand Lodge Constitutions (173 8), which are undated in the original text (11) ; but are said in No. 44 to have been agreed to " at a General Assembly, held at . . . on the Eighth Day of December 1663." Dr. Anderson was evidently not so careful in his statements as Roberts, for he supplies the names of the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, present on the occasion (of frees, by the way, then unknown) and alters the day to the Feast of St. John the Evangelist 1663, doubtless to bring it into conformity with modern usage. The text of No. 11 should be consulted at p. 5 6 and compared with that supplied by Dr. Anderson, when it will readily be seen that the learned Divine has changed the 5th Rule (No. 30 in MS. 11) so as to read " one Grand Master," in lieu of " one Master " and has appropriated the 6th Rule of the Roberts MS. (not in No. 11), though he has discreetly omitted the 7th, and the Obligation. Preston follows in THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS 63 Anderson's footsteps and is, therefore, entitled to no greater credence than the authority upon whom he relies.

 

A modern arrangement entitled " The CHARGES of a FREEMASON, extracted from the ancient RECORDS of LODGES beyond sea and of those in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for the use of the Lodges in London : To be read at the making of NEW BRETHREN, or when the MASTER shall order it," prefaces " The General Regulations," printed A.D. 1723. Although Dr. Anderson presented an " improved " (?) version in 1738, it was not liked and, in subsequent editions, that of 1723 was reverted to and, indeed, is substantially the same as those Charges which have been circulated with the " Regulations for the Government of the Craft " of the United Grand Lodge of England, from 1815 to the present date.

 

Additional confirmation of the Inigo Jones text having been adopted in part by Dr. Anderson, or at least that of the Cole MS. (which is virtually the same), will be found by comparing the 1738 Constitutions with either of those MSS. so far as respects " The History of Masonry from the Creation throughout the Known Earth." Of what has been termed in late years " learned credulity," the labours of Dr. Anderson afford an excellent illustration. Of the creationist school of Masonic historians, he is the facile princeps and, if imitation may be regarded as the sincerest form of flattery, the late Dr. George Oliver has been, beyond all comparison, his most appreciative disciple.

 

Over eighty different copies of these Old Charges or Constitutions of the Fraternity are now known to have been or to be still in existence ; these, for the most part being preserved with great care in Public or Masonic Libraries. They are generally written on parchment or paper rolls, which vary from about five to nine feet in length and from five to eleven inches in breadth. There are seven of these Old Charges in the British Museum, others in the archives of the United Grand Lodge of England, at York, Edinburgh and other places ; York being very fortunate in having the richest collection.

 

The Masonic Year‑book for the Province of Shropshire for 1912 contained particulars of a copy of the Old Charges which the Rev. C. H. Drinkwater of Shrewsbury discovered in a MS. book in the custody of the Rector of Warburton. This copy appears to have been made in 1748 from an older copy contained in another book written in 1694.

 

In 1908 W. J. Hughan announced the discovery of the Tho. Carmick MS. of A.D. 1727, so named after the owner and, probably, the transcriber of the document, from one belonging to St. John's Lodge of Philadelphia, U.S.A. The text is, in chief respects, similar to the well‑known Alnwick MS. of 1701, but has features peculiar to itself, more especially in relation to its Christian character and sundry additions and omissions ; besides which the anonymity of the MS. generally is varied in this instance by the Apprentice charge being declared to be " Invented by Mr. William harige, Sury and Meason, of his Majesty's town of harwich." CHAPTER III THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY THE ceaseless progress of the building art, throughout the strife and turmoil of the Middle Ages, is a remarkable phenomenon which at once arrests our attention and challenges our research. A bare list of the monuments of architecture erected from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries would cover many pages ; in no country is this movement more emphatically marked than throughout the length and breadth of Germany. Devout men from the British Isles, chiefly from Ireland, crossed over to the mainland and, penetrating into the depths of the German forests, carried the pure doctrines of primitive Christianity to the German tribes. Wherever they came, they raised churches and dwellings for their priests, cleared the forests, tilled the virgin soil and instructed the heathen in the first principles of civilization.

 

And who were these builders ? What manner of men were they ? Whence came they? They were the Steinmetzen. They were a class of simple workmen, bound together by strong ties of brotherhood, but containing in their midst master builders whose minds were stored with all the mathematical knowledge of those days, who contentedly worked for a lifetime at an edifice, satisfied to know that, although they might never see its completion, their successors would carry on the work to a glorious conclusion and raise one more temple to the worship of the Most High.

 

Fallou (Mysterien der Frei>naurer, p. 157) asserts that, in the eleventh century, the monks in Germany first copied their brethren in Gaul by instituting lay brotherhoods attached to the convent and that the Abbot Marquardt of Corvey made use of this institution to procure builders for his new convent. Schauberg, however, refers to Springer (De Artificibur Monachis, Bonn, 186 1) as proving that, throughout the Middle Ages, the chief artificers were laymen‑not lay brothers of the convent ‑and that even at Corvey the great majority of the artists were laymen. There is no proof that these lay brotherhoods were builders ; more probably they consisted of nobles, knights and rich burghers, as is clearly pointed out by a further assertion of Fallou's, on the same page, that, in the year 1140, the Cistercians of Walkenried (in Brunswick, at the foot of the Hartz Mountains, on the Wieda) instituted such a fraternity and boasted that they could travel thence to Rome, dine each day with one lay brother, sup and sleep with another. This most certainly discloses the nature of these fraternities and it is impossible to connect them in any way with the building craft : they were not lay brothers in the ordinary sense and evidently did not reside in the convent. On p. 198,,however, he is inclined to attribute the institution of a lay brotherhood to a still earlier date‑say A.D. io8o, when 64 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 65 William, Count Palatine of Scheuren, was elected Abbot of Hirschau (on the Nagold, in the Black Forest, Wurtemberg), of whom it was reported that he was so famous that crowds flocked to his convent, praying for admission. These petitioners were all admitted as lay brothers and speedily taught the various manipulations of masonry, etc. ; so that, in io8z, he was enabled to undertake the reconstruction of the monastery. At that time no fewer than three hundred monks and laymen dwelt in the convent under his orders. He instituted a rule for them, partitioned out their hours of labour, rest, worship and refreshment, inculcated above all things brotherly love and enjoined strict silence at work, unless desirous of communicating with the master. His school of art rapidly acquired such extended fame that he was overwhelmed by entreaties from all parts of Europe to furnish architects and artists for building operations. Nevertheless, in spite of his best workmen being constantly drafted off elsewhere, he was enabled to see his convent completed before his death, A.D. 1091.

 

Thus far Fallou. As he unfortunately omits to quote his authorities, it can only be assumed that he drew his facts from some monkish chronicle. That Abbot Wilhelm was a great man in his day is indisputable. St. Anselm, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, visited him in 1084 ; and the ruins of his splendid monastery are still in evidence. But the above account scarcely justifies the deduction that he was the originator of the craft of stonemasons. It is perfectly evident ‑(1) That the lapse of time was totally insufficient to create a large class of skilled artificers ; and (z) We have no trace here of divisions into grades, such as apprentice, fellow and master. As regards the first point. In io8o he succeeded to his post and, in 1o82, he was enabled to commence reconstruction. It is, therefore, evident that many of the laymen who are reported to have joined him were already skilled masons (two years being wholly insufficient for the instruction of such a large body of men) ; nor would the ensuing nine years have sufficed to raise such a superstructure by means of only half‑trained workmen. In fact, a passage further on in Fallou (op. cit., p. zoi) distinctly states that, according to the chronicle of Walkenried, Abbot Henry III admitted into his convent " z 1 skilled laymen, chiefly stonemasons," as lay brothers. It is important to distinguish between a layman and a lay brotherthat is, between a citizen of the world and a semi‑member of the Church. Fallou would seem almost purposely to have confounded them. As to any organization of the workmen, the idea is untenable. If any such existed, it was doubtless amongst the free artisans of the town, who may have entered into the pay of the monks ; but the lay brothers in all cases became the servants of the convent, dependent on them for food, lodging and raiment ; and the necessity for a term of apprenticeship is entirely absent. The title of magister, or master, was doubtless in use and may have denoted the monk directing the operations. The distinctive feature of apprenticeship is the obligation to serve a certain master for a fixed time at a reduced rate of payment, or even gratis, as the case may be. But a lay brother of a monastery would be under the same rule as the monk himself‑allowed to possess no private property‑hence could receive no pay beyond his sustenance ; so that if grades 66 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY of workmen existed at the building of these monasteries, they were either craft masons in the pay of the abbot, or something totally dissimilar to any association subsequently known to us. Speaking of Fallou's assertions as above, Winzer (Die Deutschen Bruderschaften, p. 47) says : " But these fraternities cannot interest us, being organizations of serfs " ; and probably he is right the workmen, or labourers, with the exception of a certain proportion of craft masons, being most likely the serfs, vassals and villeins of the convent. Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 73), however, distinctly maintains that the Freemasons at a very early age appropriated the several degrees then existing in the monasteries. On p. 46 he gives his reasons for this statement, which are wholly unsatisfactory " Lacroix asserts, in a chronicle of the time of Dagobert (A.D. 6z8‑‑9), that Saint Eloi organized the jewellers, whom he selected from different monasteries, into a society comprising three degrees of labourers‑masters, fellows and apprentices." There is no proof that these monks were clerics ; in the early ages monks could enter or leave a monastery as they chose ; vows of chastity, etc., were unknown ; in fact the life of a monk was a purely voluntary one ; and in the quotation we are told that they left their different monasteries and were organized into a society. Lacroix (Les Arts au Moyen age, p. 16o) himself says : " Already was the jeweller's trade organized into a corps d'etat "‑i.e. a trade association‑which is far from proving Fort's assertion ; indeed, more naturally suggests the usual features of an ordinary craft guild.

 

It should be added that Fallou had previously maintained the same theory and even went further, in endeavouring to show that the ceremonies of the Steinmetzen were an adaptation of those used at the reception of a Benedictine novice, thereby implying that Freemasonry, as (according to this author) we now have it, was directly due to the inspiration or influence of the Abbot Wilhelm. Unfortunately for this theory, the Benedictine ceremonies, relied upon by Fallou, appear to have had no existence outside the pages of his work, indeed his statements on this head are positively contradicted by more than one writer of authority (Gurlitt, Geschichte des Benedictiner Ordens and Aubrey, History of England, vol, i, p. 98).

 

We thus see that from the sixth (perhaps fifth) century onwards up to the twelfth, when most of the monasteries were completed, they afforded the means of acquiring skill in the manipulation of building materials and may thus be looked upon in Germany as the earliest school of masonry and the cradle of architecture, furnishing large numbers of cunning artificers and experienced master builders, but not contributing in any way towards the organization of the stonemasons. For the origin of this sodality we must look to the trade guilds ; which, beginning in the towns as early as the tenth century, or even earlier, had meanwhile been acquiring increasing importance and extent ; until, in the twelfth, we find them fully developed throughout Germany. When the German tribes first appeared on the pages of history, they consisted of perfectly free and independent members only ; subject in matters of external policy and war to a chief of their own election, who THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 67 is described generally as their king, but whose office was not hereditary‑those cases in which the dignity descended from father to son arising solely from the superiority of the son to the other members of the tribe. Even the great Attila's kingdom fell to pieces on his death. The great bond of society was the patriarchal ; every member of a family owed allegiance and support to its head and assistance to every other member of the family. In course of time as the families grew larger and extended over a wider territory, their bond of union was loosened and voluntary associations of neighbours, having a community of interests, took its place. When Charlemagne established his supremacy in the ninth century, he introduced the feudal system and, from this time, we find German society divided into feudal lords‑feudal retainers‑smaller freeholders and serfs. About this time, also, cities first began to arise, probably from various causes. In some cases fortified places were necessary for protection against the still savage and predatory tribes of the North, or of Hungary. Charlemagne was himself the founder of a city, by establishing a court there, as at Aix‑la‑Chapelle. In others, the increasing population round a bishop's seat frequently developed into a town.

 

In the German towns of the Middle Ages we find two distinct classes. First, the original freeholders, in whom resided the whole government of the town, represented by the burghers' guild. This guild underwent various denominations in the different cities : it was called the old guild, the high guild, the guild, the patrician guild, etc. In some cases, where it monopolized the chief trade (not craft), it was otherwise styled‑for instance, the weavers' guild. But under whatever denomination, it had grown exclusive ; it no longer admitted all free burghers, not even if they possessed the territorial qualification ; demanding, in all cases, that the claimant to the honour should have forsworn his craft for a year and a day ; that none " with dirty hands," or " with blue nails," or who " hawked his wares in the street," should be admitted (Brentano, On the History and Development of Guilds, p. 43). Thus a distinct class had been formed‑the patrician class, the rights and emoluments of which were hereditary and acquired with great difficulty by strangers ; whose members reserved to those among themselves who were not thoroughly independent of all labour the most lucrative and considerable trades, such as the goldsmiths, the bankers, the general merchants, etc. They had also grown proud, domineering and aggressive ; so that no sooner did the second class, the craft guilds, feel themselves strong on their legs, than in one city after another bloody feuds ensued ; the final result of which was the dethronement of the patricians from their supremacy and, in some cases, the breaking‑up of the high guild.

 

Generally, however, the conquerors, with rare magnanimity, still allowed the patrician guild to contribute its delegates to the municipal council and, in some cases, even granted them a casting vote in consideration of their past services (ibid., p. 47). Brentano fixes the time of the final victory of the craft guilds as towards the end of the fourteenth century, although in some cities the consummation had been arrived at much earlier.

 

 68 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY The craft guilds having thus acquired a high position, we now find another movement initiated by the masters‑who in their turn became proud‑viz. that of gradually excluding the workmen from their meetings. This took place in all guilds, the stonemasons only excepted, as will presently appear ; and even with it, the same evolution must have occurred, only much later‑probably not till the end of the seventeenth century. The workmen (journeymen) therefore formed guilds or fraternities of their own ; in some cases electing officers of their own body ; in others, from amongst the masters. The literature treating of these societies is extensive and, in many cases, their customs and usages may enable us to form some idea of the customs of the stonemasons, who were a craft guild resembling in many things the other craft guilds and, in some matters, wherever the exigencies of their trade required it, differing from all. This fraternity of builders, whose first authentic charter is the one already quoted of the thirteenth century, had doubtless been in existence much earlier, as a contract has been preserved to us made in 1133 between the Bishop of Wurzburg, Embricho and the lay master mason Enzelin (see Dr. Ang. Reichensperger, Die Bauhiitte des Mittelalrers, p. 12, Cologne, 1879) ; to them we must look for the organization of the society, which was not to be found amongst the convent builders. It is probable that in the twelfth century, or thereabouts, the skilled masons of the convent builders left the employ of their masters, the monks, now grown opulent, fat, lazy, and vicious and unable to provide them with further work, amalgamated with the craft builders in the town and that the two together formed the society afterwards known throughout Germany as the Steinmetzen.

 

In the codes of laws and ordinances we find one new feature that doubtless dates from 1459‑that of the bond embracing all Germany and Switzerland‑that is, the inner fraternity and the supreme authority. There can be no doubt that previous and constant intercommunication had reduced the various guilds of stonemasons scattered throughout Germany to one general uniformity, except in some small matters (the length of apprenticeship, for instance) and that, like all other trades, a journeyman free to work in one place was acceptable in another. Yet differences, tending to positive strife, were by no means impossible under such circumstances ; but, in 145 9, this was rendered excessively difficult by the institution of a universal guild or fraternity and four chief lodges, to which all disputes must be referred. Of the latter, in spite of some obscurity in the wording, the lodge at Strasburg was the supreme head. It is even more than likely that this assembly in 1459 and the rules then laid down were the direct result of some quarrel which had threatened to become prejudicial to the trade ; or they may have taken their rise from a feeling in the craft that the days of their highest prosperity and power were slipping away from them and that some mighty effort was necessary to consolidate their associations and combine their interests ; or they may, on the other hand, have been simply the outcome of a desire to obtain royal authority for their future proceedings, as immediately afterwards these statutes were laid before the Emperor for confirmation.

 

 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 69 These Ordinances apparently remained in full force till 1563, with possibly some slight alterations of individual sections ; a proceeding perfectly allowable according to the laws themselves. Heldmann, indeed, supposes that such did take place, at the assemblies held (as he avers) in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries at Strasburg, Cologne, Bale and other places, although he does not cite his authority for this statement (see Die drei Aeltesten Geschichtlichen Denkmale, p. 5 2). It is, however, quite obvious that the Ordinances of 1459 are given in a very confused manner, without any attempt at natural sequence or order ; and for this, as well possibly as for other reasons, it became highly desirable that they should undergo a general revision, which accordingly took place in 1563, at two meetings, held respectively on the festivals of St. Bartholomew and St. Michael. These revised laws were printed in folio and a copy distributed to every lodge of importance the master of which was willing to join the fraternity ; and the following are excerpts from what is described as The Brother Book of 1563, containing " The Ordinances and Articles of the Fraternity of Stonemasons renewed at the Chief Lodge at Strasburg on St. Michael's Day MDLXIII." No English translation of these Ordinances has hitherto appeared. They were first published as the Secret Book (Geheimbuch) of the Stonemasons, in folio, with the imprint 1563 and the imperial eagle on the title page and, from this copy, were republished by Heldmann, Krause, and Heideloff.

 

The preamble reads as follows His Imperial Roman Majesty, our most gracious Lord, having in this one thousand five hundred and sixty‑third year most graciously renewed, confirmed and approved to the general fellowship and brotherhood of the Stonemasons in German Lands their regulations and duties ; and, whereas for some time past, many irregularities and bad habits have arisen and obtained in the craft of masonry, therefore have many masters and fellows of aforesaid craft and fraternity, as they are named hereafter, met together in the aforesaid sixty‑third year at Bale on St. Bartholomew's and at Strasburg on St. Michael's Day, in order to elucidate and better aforesaid Ordinances and Articles of the Craft and Brotherhood and the aforesaid have elucidated and bettered said Ordinances and settled that they shall be held as hereafter follows ; and no one who is of this guild shall do or act contrary thereto.

 

It is unnecessary to reproduce the Ordinances in full, but the following are of interest to modern Freemasons Of the Duties of those who are of this Guild.

 

II. Whoso comes into this guild of his own good will, as hereafter stands written in this book, he shall promise to keep every point and article if he be of our craft of Masonry. Those shall be masters who can erect costly edifices and such like work, for the which they are authorized and serve no other craft unless they choose so to do. And be it masters or fellows they shall and must conduct themselves honourably and none shall be wronged by them ; therefore have we taken power in these Ordinances to punish them on the occasion of every such act.

 

4 70 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY Who may be taught to execute Work from the Ground Plan or other Carved Work.

 

XIII. And no craftsman, warden, or fellow shall teach any one, whoever he be, that is not of our craft, to make extracts from the ground plan or other usages of masonry, who has not practised masonry in his day, or not served long enough with a stonemason according to our craft, customs and ordinances.

 

No Master shall teach a Fellow anything for Money.

 

XIV. And no craftsman or master shall take money from a fellow for showing or teaching him anything touching masonry. In like manner no warden or fellow shall show or instruct any one for money in carving as aforesaid. Should, however, one wish to instruct or teach another, he may well do it, one piece for the other, or for fellowship sake, or to serve their master thereby.

 

How many Apprentices a Master may have.

 

XV. A master who has only one building or work may have three apprentices, two rough and one art apprentice, that he may also employ fellows in the same lodge, that is, if his superiors permit. If he have more than one building he shall not have more than two apprentices on the first works and buildings, so that he have not more than five apprentices on all his buildings. Nevertheless, so that each may serve his five years on that building and work on which he serves.

 

Who openly lives in Concubinage.

 

XVI. No craftsman or master of masonry shall live openly in adultery. If, however, such a one will not desist therefrom, no travelling fellow nor stonemason shall stand in his employ, or have communion with him.

 

 Who lives not as a Christian, and goes not yearly to the Holy Sacrament.

 

XVII. No craftsman or master shall be received into the guild who goes not yearly to Holy Sacrament, or keeps not Christian discipline and squanders his substance in play. But should any one be inadvertently accepted into the guild who does these things as aforesaid, no master shall keep company with him, nor shall any fellow stand by him until he shall have ceased so to do and been punished by those of this guild.

 

How Complaints are to be heard, judged, and conducted.

 

XIX. And if a master have a complaint against another master for having violated the regulations of the craftsmen, or in the same way a master against a fellow, or a fellow against another fellow, whatever master or fellow is concerned therein shall give notice thereof to the masters who hold these books of the regulations. And the masters who are informed thereof shall hear both parties and set a day when they will hear the cause. And meanwhile, before the fixed or appointed day no fellow shall avoid the master, nor master the fellow, but render services mutually until the hour when the matter is to be heard and settled. And this shall all be done according to the judgment of the craftsmen and what is adjudged shall be observed accordingly. And, moreover, where the case arose there shall it be tried, by the nearest masters who hold the book of these regulations, and in whose district it occurred.

 

Where a Book is, there shall be the Collection for the Poor and Sick Brothers.

 

.

 

IV. And all those to whom books of the ordinances are given, shall faithfully collect the weekly penny from the fellows ; and if a fellow becomes sick, shall assist him. Likewise, where such a superior has a master under him, having employment and fellows, he shall order him to collect the weekly pennies in a box and give him a box for that purpose, which box shall THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 71 be emptied by and accounted for to each superior of a district every year and be employed for the assistance of the poor and sick of our craft who are under him.

 

And every master who has a box and has received account every year of his neighbours of their boxes, shall send a bohemian [a coin of trifling value] every year at Michaelmas to the chief lodge at Strasburg, with a ticket whence it comes, as a sign of obedience and brotherly love ; that it may be known that all things as aforesaid have been carried out.

 

 How the Masters of this Guild shall preserve the Book.

 

.

 

VIII. The master who has charge of the book shall, on his oath to the guild, have a care that the same be not copied either by himself or by any other person, or lent ; so that the books remain in full force, as resolved by the craftsmen. But should any one be in need of one or two articles more or less, that may any master give him in writing. And every master shall cause these Ordinances to be read every year to the fellows in the lodge.

 

 No Fellow to be employed who lives in adultery.

 

XLVI. No master or craftsman shall employ any fellow who consorts with a woman in adultery, or who openly lives a dishonourable life with women, or who goes not to the holy communion according to Christian discipline, or one who is so foolish as to game away his clothing.

 

Not to leave the Lodge without permission.

 

LI. No fellow shall go out from the lodge without leave, or if he go to his broth or any other meal, remain out without leave ; nor shall any make Holy Monday. If any one do so, he shall stand to punishment by the master and fellows and the master shall have power to discharge him in the week when he will.

 

What an Apprentice shall vow to the Craft when he has served his time and is declared free.

 

LIV. In the first place, every apprentice when he has served his time and is declared free, shall promise the craft, on his truth and honour, in lieu of oath, under pain of losing his right to practise masonry, that he will disclose or communicate the mason's greeting and grip to no one, except to him to whom he may justly communicate it ; and also that he will write nothing thereof.

 

Secondly, He shall promise as aforesaid, to be obedient to the craft of masonry in all things concerning the craft and if he be sentenced by the craft he shall conform wholly to such sentence and yield obedience thereto.

 

Thirdly, He shall promise not to weaken but to strengthen the craft, so far as his means may extend.

 

Fourthly, No one shall stand by another to hew stones who is not honestly of the craft ; and no master shall employ any one to hew stones who is not a true stonemason, unless it be previously permitted to him of a whole craft.

 

LV. And no one shall alter of his own will and power his mark which has been granted and lent him by a craft ; but if he ever desire to alter it he shall only do it with the knowledge, will and approval of a whole craft.

 

LVI. And every master, having aforesaid apprentices, shall earnestly enjoin and invite each one when he has thus completed the above‑written five years to become a brother, by the oath which each one has taken to the craft and is offered to each.

 

 No Apprentice to be made a Warden.

 

LVII. No craftsman or master shall appoint as warden any one of his apprentices whom he has taken from his rough state, who is still in his years of apprenticeship.

 

LVIII. And no craftsman or master shall appoint as warden any apprentice whom he has 72 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY taken from his rough state to apprentice, even if he have served his years of apprenticeship, unless he have also travelled for one year.

 

Ordinances of the Apprentices.

 

LX. And no craftsman shall knowingly accept an apprentice of illegitimate birth, but shall have made earnest inquiries before accepting him and shall ask the apprentice on his truth whether his father and mother have lived together in wedlock.

 

LXI. And it is also decreed that no craftsman shall accept an apprentice in the rough otherwise than for five years and henceforth none shall pay any money for the time which he has not served, but shall completely serve his five years. Nevertheless, what has heretofore been done, that shall so remain, but in future it shall only be done as aforesaid.

 

LXII. And a father, being himself a mason, shall have power to bind one or more of his sons for five years and to complete their instruction, but only in the presence of other stonemasons ; and such an apprentice shall not be under fourteen years of age.

 

A few paragraphs of the 1459 Ordinances are totally omitted in 1563. These principally provide for divine worship, the singing of masses for the departed and the return of the book and box to Strasburg, should a master's building be completed and he have no further employment for his fellows. One of the omitted Ordinances is, however, curious ; and to render the review complete it is now inserted Item. Whoever desires to enter this fraternity shall promise ever to keep steadfastly all these articles hereinbefore and hereafter written in this book ; except our gracious lord the Emperor or the king, princes, lords, or any other nobles, by force or right should be opposed to his belonging to the fraternity ; that shall be a sufficient excuse ; so that there be no harm therein. But for what he is indebted to the fraternity, he shall come to an agreement thereon with the craftsmen who are in the fraternity.

 

The Ordinances of 1459 and 1563 provide that an apprentice shall not be appointed warden ; whereas those of 1462 permit the master to appoint an apprentice to the office of warden, " if he be able to maintain it " ; that is, if he be sufficiently instructed and capable, in order that no harm may thereby ensue. In all other points, the Torgau Ordinances are merely complemental to those of 1459ò The stonemasons were divided, like all other crafts whatsoever, into three classes‑masters, fellows and apprentices. The apprentices, however, though of the craft, were not admitted to the brotherhood ; in this respect an analogy existing with the other craft guilds. But with the stonemasons, as their laws reveal, the master remained a member of the brotherhood and owed his position in the fraternity as presiding judge, solely to his qualification of workmaster ; whereas, in other crafts, the masters had formed fraternities of their own and the journeymen also ; and the journeymen fraternities were presided over in some instances by one of the masters of the locality and, in others, by one or more of the journeymen themselves, who then took the title of " Old‑fellow " (Alt ge rell). In both cases, however, the officer was elected by the votes of the members ; and in the former the master was admitted more as a representative of the masters than THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 73 as a president, the proceedings being always conducted by the " Old‑fellow," the master sitting as a sort of coadjutor (see Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe, vol. i).

 

On the completion of his apprenticeship a new life awaited the young workman. He was declared free of the craft and obtained rank as a fellow craft (Gesell) ; but did not necessarily thereby enter the fraternity. This act was solemnly performed before the assembled Lodge and was doubtless accompanied by some formalities, of which the leading features are pointed out. We know that he had to take a solemn obligation " on his truth and honour in lieu of oath," under the penalty of being expelled the craft, that he would be a true, loyal, and obedient mason, that he would maintain the craft as far as in him lay, that he would not of his own initiative alter or change his distinctive mark and that he would not disclose the greeting (Gruss) or grip (Schenck) to any non‑mason ; even that he would not commit any part thereof to writing. These methods of recognition were then imparted to him and the ceremony concluded with a jovial feast, which was partly at the master's expense, partly at his own. To this feast sundry guests were invited, probably the clergy attached to the building then in course of erection ; even the bill of fare was provided for. The master was strictly enjoined not to delay this action for a longer period than fourteen days, except on good and valid grounds ; and it was expressly stipulated that henceforth nothing shall be unjustly withheld, in order that no excuse may be pleaded in after‑times ; hence it may be assumed that amongst other matters the Ordinances were read to him. This was called pledging his mark, toasting it, or drinking good luck to it ; and, so important was the occasion considered, that the stipulated rules of frugality were suspended and the warden was empowered to cease work one hour sooner. This mark henceforth became his distinctive property and was used by him as a species of signature ; he was required to engrave it on all his work upon completion and severely punished if he did so before the work had been proved and passed. What the grip was we are not told ; but at the beginning of last century, Herr Osterrieth, an architect, who had been professionally educated at Strasburg, where he joined a survival of the stonemasons, on being admitted to Freemasonry by Heldmann at Aarau (in the province of Aargau, Switzerland), expressed his astonishment at recognizing in the entered apprentice grip the token of the Strasburg stonemasons (see Heldmann, Die drei Aeltesten Geschichtlichen Denkmale, p. zSo). Unless we think fit to doubt this assertion, the Masonic reader will know what the stonemason's grip was ; if we believe it, the curious question remains, is the resemblance a mere coincidence, or a proof of a connecting link between the German and English stonemasons of the Middle Ages ? On Osterrieth's own showing, he must have violated his promise of secrecy to his Strasburg Brethren and, therefore, cannot be regarded as a witness of scrupulous veracity. He places himself in the awkward dilemma, either of having deceived the Freemasons of Aarau by a falsehood, or of having perjured himself, so that we shall be justified in receiving his disclosure with caution. It is also to be noted, that, although all writers claim a grip for the stonemasons, the only evidence by which this claim can be supported, is one word quoted, viz. Schenck. This 74 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY word is derived from schencken, to give ; hence handschencken, to give or shake hands ; and in this case we must suppose that the word Hand is omitted and understood, as Schenck alone would not import the fuller meaning. The word Schenck occurs very frequently in the Ordinances and, in other clauses, always refers to the pledge feast ; ausschencken or verschencken is to pour out, a libation, a toast, pledge, etc. and as these toasts were always drunk in other handicrafts, with a prescribed movement of hand and cup, accompanied by a fixed form of words, it may be assumed that the stonemasons also had their pledge‑ritual. It is therefore just possible that here the word alludes to the pledge and that the article forbids the fellow craft to divulge to the non‑mason this peculiar ceremonial. Inasmuch, however, as all German writers agree in attributing the possession of a certain grip to the present descendants of the stonemasons and, taking into consideration that the word is used conjointly with " greeting " (Grass), it may reasonably be concluded that the existence of a grip has fairly been demonstrated.

 

Heldmann also states (p. z50) that the Steinmetzen had a series of prescribed steps, identical with those of the Freemasons, but he cites no authority, not even his friend Osterrieth ; so that it remains more than questionable whether the former has not given a very loose rein to his imagination. Fallou more than once describes these steps, asserting, but always without authority, that they were usual on various specified occasions ; and Winzer (p. 67) copies him. According to Heinsch, they reappear amongst the Stone‑heivers and are described as three equal steps forward and backward, in which, however, there is nothing suggestive of Masonic identity.

 

But the new craftsman was also charged not to reveal the greeting. Findel, Fort, Steinbrenner and others, translate this word by " salute," a term conveying a sense which appears to be unauthorized. A salute combines the idea of a greeting by word of mouth and a greeting by action ; in fact, a sign and a speech. There is no mention in an authentic document of a sign. Fallou writes throughout in such a manner as to leave the impression that the salute was accompanied by a sign ; and Fort (p. 215) expressly declares that a wandering journeyman on entering a Lodge " advanced by three upright measured steps and gave the salute, Gruss, or hailing sign." It is impossible to restrain a feeling of impatience when writers, whose works would otherwise be valuable, destroy the confidence of a critical reader by such baseless assertions. In no trade of the Middle Ages, not even amongst the Steinmetzen, is it possible to find the slightest trace of a sign or of anything approaching thereto. It would not, however, be fair to leave unnoticed the remark that sculptured images may still be seen in existing medixval churches whose attitudes bear a close resemblance to certain of our Masonic positions. Indeed, Fort (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 89) positively asserts " that in one of the churches at Florence there are life‑size figures in Masonic attitudes." The idea thus suggested is further supported by a pictorial representation of the entrance to the cathedral in the same city, which he gives as a frontispiece to his well‑known work. In this sketch there are portrayed (exclusive of minor figures) the forms of five ecclesiastics in reverential attitudes. The postures they assume THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 75 will remind those conversant with the services of the Roman Church of the attitude of the officiating priest and, beyond the strong family likeness which must always exist between supplicatory and reverential positions of all kinds and in all countries, assumed in invocation of Divine aid, there does not seem anything to merit attention in the similitude upon which Fort has laid so much stress. It may be added, that to what has been happily termed by Hyde Clarke " the doctrine of chance coincidences " are due all the " traveller's tales " of later years, wherein, as a common feature, appear either the manifestation or the recognition of Masonic signs, by Arabs of the desert, native Australians, Bushmen, Afghans, etc. Upon the whole, we may safely infer that whatever resemblances may appear to exist between the Masonic ceremonial and the attitudes to which Fort has alluded are as much the product of chance as the " supposititious masonry " of our own times, which has evoked the excellent definition of Hyde Clarke (see Freemason's Magazine, November 26, :1864).

 

As for the greeting itself we are distinctly told what it was, also the words in which a fellow was to claim assistance and how he was to return thanks for the help tendered. It may seem strange that what was considered a secret should have been committed to writing ; and, in fact, Fallou (Mysterien der Freimaurer, p. 3 5 3) asserts that it was never in use and that the Torgau Ordinances were of no authority, being merely a private sketch of a proposed new ordinance and rule ; and he elsewhere states that they never received confirmation. The latter statement is correct and, moreover, they were never meant to be confirmed, being entirely subsidiary to and elucidatory of, the 1459 Ordinances ; but, as to the former, it is so palpably erroneous, as shown in another place and by the preamble itself, that no words about it need be wasted here. Fallou prefers to this documentary evidence the statements of a Steinmetz of the present day ; the greeting, however, as told by him is so similar, that it may well have arisen from the old original‑all except the three upright steps. When we take into account, however, the fact that the Torgau Ordinances were never printed, or intended to be and were probably only entrusted to well‑known masters, as may be presumed from the fact that up to the present time only one copy has come to light ; when we consider how important it was that this greeting should be given with great exactitude, in order to distinguish a bona fide craftsman, we can no longer wonder at the Saxon masters ensuring its accurate preservation. But if so, why was not the grip similarly preserved? Because it was so simple in its very nature, that once learned, it could not be forgotten or perverted.

 

A careful glance at the Ordinances will convince us that no single clue of the remotest kind is afforded as to the nature of the affiliation ceremony ; we are not even told that a ceremony existed, nor is it probable that it did in 145 9, although one may have become usual in after‑years. We are not informed that there were any secrets to be communicated, or mysteries to be concealed, or any further instruction to be acquired ; nay, we are directly assured that there were none ; because the perfect apprentice was no longer to have aught concealed from him ; that is to say, that 7 76 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY everything necessary to the due prosecution of his profession became his by right, whether or not he joined the fraternity. Fort, in his description (which is chiefly copied from Fallou), evidently confuses the distinct occasions of passing to the journeyman's degree and of entering the fraternity, which mistake, however, Fallou has avoided. Findel also, following the same lead, has not only fallen into a similar error, but contrives to entangle with both these incidents some of the preliminaries of indenture. Steinbrenner has gone even farther astray, placing the conferring of the mark last of all. Their great authority Fallou presents a graphic description of this ceremony, but it will be sufficient in this place to glance at its leading features. He avers that the candidate was blindfolded, half unclothed, slipshod, deprived of weapons and metals (a cord about his neck), led three times round the Lodge ; that he then advanced by three upright steps to the master, undertook an obligation on the Scriptures, square and compasses, was restored to sight, shown the three great lights, invested with a white apron and gloves, etc., etc. Now, it may positively be affirmed that if Fallou could have fortified these assertions by the merest colour of authority, he would have done so ; also that if subsequent writers had been able to discover any confirmatory evidence, they would have given it. Endeavours to trace any foundation of authority have proved lamentable failures and, combining this experience with the above considerations, it does not seem difficult to pronounce that the entire ceremony has been invented by Fallou. The account is in itself improbable. Why should the fellow craft be blindfolded ? There was no concealed light to be revealed to him as far as operative masonry was concerned and of a speculative science there is no trace in the annals of the Steinmetzen. It should be recollected, moreover, that Fallou places before us the details of an affiliation, not of an initiation. Beyond a doubt the novice would be "deprived of weapons"; these were never at anytime allowed in Lodge ; and possibly he may have been partially unclothed in token of humility and to remind him of his distressed brethren. But wherefore the cord " about his neck " and the rest of the ceremony ? The whole account is palpably absurd. It may at once frankly be avowed that no record exists of the ceremony of affiliation amongst the stonemasons and, even according to Fallou, their present descendants have preserved none of any kind. It is, therefore, in the highest degree improbable that we shall ever know whether one existed ; but we have means at hand, if we concede its possible existence, of forming an imperfect idea of its nature, in the recorded ceremonies of other journeyman fraternities. Some of these usages certainly survived until the early part of this century and may perhaps even now be more or less practised.

 

We find, then, that the first thing necessary to render a meeting of the fraternities legal was the opened chest of the society. This contained their documents, minute‑books, registers and treasury ; and was usually secured by three locks and keys, which keys were in possession of three different officials ; hence their joint presence must also have been necessary. The presiding officer then knocked with some symbol of authority (usually a staff or hammer), to procure silence. The THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 77 periodical contributions of the members were then collected. Complaints were next heard and strife adjusted. The locksmiths (see Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe, vol. vii, pp. 173‑6) (and possibly other crafts) closed their meetings by three formal inquiries, whether anything for the good of the craft or of the fraternity offered itself. All ceremonial operations were conducted in the form of a dialogue between the officials. Now note the ceremony of affiliating a journeyman joiner (Stock, Grunddiige der TVerfassung, p. 24). He was ushered into the assembly and placed before the president in an upright position, his heels joined, his feet at right angles, which was ensured by the square being placed between them. His posture was proved by the level, he was required to stand erect, elbows on his hips and hands spread out sideways so as to represent an equilateral triangle, of which his head was the apex. He was denominated throughout " rough wood." He was then directed to listen to a lecture. The first part of this lecture treats of the origin of the joiner's art and includes remarks on architecture in general, couched in rude verse, the phraseology of which (according to Stock) denotes an early eighteenth‑century origin ; much of it is based upon Vitruvius. In the generality of crafts he underwent a rude symbolical ceremony called Hdnseln (see Berlepsch, op. cit., vol. iv, p. 66 ; vol. vi, p. i i 8)‑that is, handling or manipulation. In the case of the joiners this consisted of being stretched on a bench, rather roughly planed and shaped with various tools, in fact treated as rough wood under the joiner's hands. The locksmiths turned a key round three times in the mouth of the candidate (Stock, op. cit., p. 29). After this ceremony the joiner was called in future " smooth wood " and, the proceedings being ended, was once more placed under the level. We then are treated to a reminiscence of knightly installations ; for the master having asked his name and received for an answer, say, " Martin," exhorts him thus‑" Until now you were Martin under the bench, now you are Martin above the bench " ; he then slaps his face and continues, " Suffer this, this once from me, henceforth from no man " (ibid., p. 28). The joiners' ceremony has been selected for quotation, being the most symbolic and, therefore, the least inimical to the theory of there being at this period any species of speculative Masonry ; and because, as might be expected from their intimacy with the masons, it shows traces of a connexion with architecture. The lecture contains excellent rules for conduct and some lessons in morality. Although couched in rude language, it is brimming over with the rather ponderous German wit.

 

The office of warden does not appear to have existed in guilds other than those of the stonemasons, but there full information as to his duties is found. In his installation we find traces of another solemn ceremony. He was to be appointed personally, not by a message or a third party, master and warden being both present and no doubt the whole Lodge ; the master then addressed him on the importance of his office and its duties (" he shall impress him with the wardenship ") and the warden made oath to the saints (the four crowned martyrs), on the square and gauge, to perform his duties to the best of his ability. The fellows then hailed him as warden and swore obedience to him as the master's representative, the whole of course, 78 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY concluding with a feast at the warden's expense. As to his duties, they were manifold. The 1563 Ordinances merely state generally, that he is to be true, trusty and obedient, but those of Torgau are much more minute. We are told that his signal was two knocks, but whenever an announcement was made, such as to begin or to cease work, command attention, etc., one knock only. He was to preserve the order, the privileges, the tools and appliances of the Lodge and to see that all instruments of precision, square, gauge, etc., were maintained in full accuracy. He was to act as general instructor to the fellows and apprentices and prepare, prove and pass their work for them, to reject spoilt work and to levy all fines for negligence or otherwise. He was to call the brethren to labour at the proper time, without fear or favour and to fine those who did not make their appearance ; in this latter respect, his attention being forcibly directed to the influence of a good example. Whilst true and faithful to his master, ever on the alert to safeguard his interests, he was to be conciliatory and kind to the fellows, ever ready to help them, of a peaceable disposition, to avoid giving cause of strife and, on no account, to act with greater severity than the usages of the craft permitted. He was to preside at their ordinary vesper meal and to enforce a becoming frugality ; he had power to assist a traveller and to engage and dismiss workmen and, in the master's absence, succeeded to all his authority, even to the extent of reducing the hours of labour. His name is differently given. The Strasburg Ordinances always call him parlierer. According to Fallou and others this word would signify " the speaker," from the French parler, to speak ; and, in fact, he was, undoubtedly, to a certain extent, the mouthpiece of the master. But a glance at the original language of the Statutes will show that no other word there used indicates a French origin and the custom, since so prevalent with a certain class of German writers and speakers, of Teutonizing French words, to the great detriment of their fine old mother tongue, had not yet arisen. Fort gives a far more probable derivation (Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 267). The Torgau Ordinances spell the word pallirer ; and he states that, in former times amongst the Germans, all places of worship, justice, etc., were fenced around with a row of stakes, in modern German pfahl, formerly pal ; the guardian or warden of the enclosure would thence take his name, pfablirer or pallirer and, when the real meaning of the word was forgotten and the present office of the holder only remembered, it might easily have become corrupted into parlierer.

 

Individual Lodges were subordinate to a district Lodge ; several district Lodges owed obedience to a provincial Lodge and all culminated in the chief Lodge of Strasburg, all being united by the tie of brotherhood.

 

Masonic writers all combine in placing vividly before us the importance and the dignity of the chief master at Strasburg ; and scarcely one of them omits to mention that he was invested with a sword and sat enthroned under a canopy or baldachin. If, however, this assertion is carefully traced from one authority to another up to the fountain‑head, we find that it originates in the work of a nonmason, viz. Stock (p. 85), who says he has been informed " that such was the case." THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 79 Fallou (p. 72) ascribes the origin of this statement to Grandidier, but questions his accuracy. It therefore rests simply on hearsay. Without being a matter of importance either way, it affords, nevertheless, a good example of the manner in which Masonic history has been written. But, without importing into the case any extravagant conclusions, no doubt need be entertained that the overjudge at Strasburg wielded an immense influence ; although, looking at the whole spirit of the Ordinances before us, it is hardly conceivable that his judicial decisions were promulgated on his own sole and undivided authority. Like the district masters, he had probably to avail himself of the assistance of neighbouring or, perhaps, provincial masters and of the fellows of the craft in general. In 1461 the Town Council of Strasburg formally made over to him the adjudication of all disputes amongst the citizens relating to their buildings and he was provided with an assistant versed in the law. But, as he misused this power, it was withdrawn in 16zo. See Alsatia Illustrata, by Schopflin, quoted by Krause, znd edit., vol. ii, pt. iv, P. 245.

 

In the Cathedral of Wurzburg two pillars stand within the building, which at some period formed a part of the original porch. They are of peculiar construction. Their names, Jachin and Boaz, suggest a derivation from the celebrated pillars at the entrance of King Solomon's Temple, with which, however, their architectural form in no way corresponds. Jachin is composed of two series of eight columns ; the eight springing from the capital extend to the centre and are there curved and joined two and two, so as to form in reality only four U‑shaped columns ; the same applies to the four whose eight open ends rest on the base. At the bends of the opposing U's, the pillar is completed by an interlaced fillet or band. Boaz consists of two U's at the top and two at the base, these are joined by two O's of equal length, so that this pillar consists of apparently three series of four columns each. The names are engraved on the capitals. A sketch of these will be found in Steinbrenner, p. 76. A counterpart of Jachin is to be found in Bamberg Cathedral and one of Boaz in the New Market Church of Merseburg ; various ornamental forms in other buildings resemble these columns in one or more respects (see Steinbrenner, Origin and Early History of Freemasonry, p. 79). It is obvious that these curious monuments are suggestive of many mystical interpretations ; they may be intended to represent man (body and soul), the Trinity (three in one), or, in fact, almost anything‑a little ingenuity will discover numberless hidden meanings ‑or they may simply be the result of the inventive fancy of some skilful workman. Their names merely prove that the masons were acquainted with that part of the Old Testament most interesting to them as architects, which in itself may have suggested the idea of constructing something unusual. Of Church symbolism, Stieglitz (Geschichte der Baukunst, p. 448) observes, " and because the Apostles were considered the pillars of the Church, the columns at the side of the porch were referred to them ; although the pillars in front of King Solomon's Temple were thereby more especially brought to mind." But, admitting that the ancient builders attached a hidden symbolical meaning to these pillars, the fact is sufficient to sustain 8o THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY the theory that a speculative system of philosophy or of theology was nurtured in the masons' lodges.

 

One point, however, demands attention before we pass from this subject. According to Schauberg (Vergleichendes Handbuch der Symbolik der Freimaurerei, vol. ii, p. S33) on each side of the Meistertafel (master's tablet) at Bale is a sculptured representation of one of the four martyrs, with the addition of a couplet in rude rhyme. Identical verses, in slightly modernized phraseology, are also engraved on the treasury chest of the Hamburg Lodge of Masons, which reverted to Vienna together with the Brother‑book, after the death of the last Steinmetz, Wittgreff. These verses run as follows I The square possesses science enough, But use it always with propriety.

 

II The level teaches the true faith ; Therefore is it to be treasured.

 

III Justice and the compass' scienceIt boots naught to establish them.

 

IV The gauge is fine and scientific, And is used by great and small.

 

 The versifiers, in the second and third rhymes more especially, clearly show that they grasped the idea of an ethical symbolization of the implements of their handicraft ; yet the question arises, whether this ought not rather to be taken as a proof of philosophical reflection on the part of some individual members, than as indicative of a system of speculative philosophy having been co‑existent with medixval stonemasonry? It has been already shown that the masons enjoyed no monopoly of the symbolism of their trade. H. A. Giles (Freemasonry in China, p. 3) observes : "From time immemorial we find the square and compasses used by Chinese writers, to symbolize exactly the same phases of moral conduct as in our own system of Freemasonry." If such a system existed, why has it not survived ? why are there no traces of it in the still existing lodges of the stonemasons ? Why, when Freemasonry was introduced from England, did no recognition take place of its previous existence in Germany ? The reason is obvious. Stonemasonry, purely operative, had existed in Germany ; Freemasonry, that is, a speculative science‑never ! The Steinmetzen may have claimed a few thoughtful, speculative members and so, for that matter, might a society of coalheavers ; but it never concealed within the bosom of its operative fraternity any society which consciously and systematically practised a speculative science.

 

 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 81 In view of the assertions so often made, that the stonemasons were in the habit of admitting into their fraternity the most learned men of the age, it is somewhat surprising to find no provision for this contingency in the Ordinances. Albertus Argentinus and Albertus Magnus are both claimed as masons. To the former is attributed the design for the towers of Strasburg Cathedral and, to the latter, the plan of Cologne Cathedral, although some writers are inclined to consider them as one and the same person. This is the opinion of, amongst others, Heideloff, who says (Die Bauhiitte des Mittelalters, p. 15), " the masons' traditions connect Albertus Argentinus with the Cathedral of Strasburg, but he is probably Albertus Magnus, born 1193 or 1206, living in 1230 as a Benedictine monk in Strasburg, teacher of theology, philosophy, physics and metaphysics." If he really designed the plan of Cologne Cathedral, we can scarcely wonder at the masons desiring to claim him as a brother, but proof is, in such a case, of course, hardly to be expected. The Emperor, Frederick III (1440‑1492), is said to have been admitted to the fraternity, as shown in his Veiskunig. All this is not impossible, but there is nowhere any proof of, nor provision made for it. Nevertheless, we know that other crafts admitted honorary members ; indeed, when the town government was divided amongst the craft guilds, it became necessary that every citizen should belong pro forma to one of them and provision is very early made for this. In the charter granted in i z6o by the Bishop of Bale to the tailors, we find this clause : " The same conditions shall be submitted to by those who are not of this craft and wish to join the society or brotherhood." See Berlepsch, Chronik der Gewerbe (vol. ii, pp. 18, 19).

 

It is a remarkable fact that, throughout this roll of documents, no mention is made of the four martyrs, but that the guild of stonemasons and carpenters, who were always cited together, is repeatedly called the Fraternity of St. John the Baptist. This arose from their having originally held their headquarters at the Chapel of St. John in the cathedral square ; but it also points to the possibility of their having formed only one fraternity.

 

In 15 61 (two years before the Strasburg Ordinances of 15 63), the burgomaster and council of Cologne issued a charter of constitution to the stonemasons and carpenters, containing eighteen clauses, some of which were in direct conflict with the 1459 and 1563 Ordinances. Even if we admit that the craft first drew up the Ordinances and the council then confirmed them, as was probably the case, the importance of these contradictions is none the less. Either way, it implies that the municipality was able to impose terms on the masons within its walls, subversive of the formally recognized Ordinances of the craft, which ordinances had even been approved and confirmed by the Emperor.

 

One or two traditions of the craft remain to be noticed. At p. 146 of Steinbrenner's work (also Findel, p. 66o), we find an examination of a travelling salutemason. Fallou seems to have been the first to attach any great importance to this catechism, which he declared to be in use on the seaboard of North Germany ; and he professed to find in it a great resemblance to the examination of an entered 82 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY apprentice freemason and a clear proof of the early existence in Germany of Speculative Masonry. Steinbrenner goes even further and claims that it was used by the stonemasons of the Middle Ages. Here he is clearly in error, as no other writer, not even Fallou, claims for it any great antiquity, but all cite the catechism as tending to prove the former existence of something more to the purpose. Fallou no doubt got it from Krause or Stock ; but it seems to have been first published in i 803 by Schneider in his Book of Constitutions for the Lodge at Altenburg, from which Stock owns to having copied it ; so that its very existence is not above suspicion, at least in this exact form, as Schneider says, " he has discovered the secrets of these masons with great difficulty " and he may not have obtained a veritable transcript of their " examination." The following are a few extracts " What was the name of the first mason ? " Anton Hieronymus [Adon‑Hiram ?] and the working tool was invented by Walkan " [Tubal Cain?].

 

In regard to these expressions, the two pillars previously referred to sufficiently attest that the masons were conversant with the architectural details of the Holy Writings ; and there is nothing to excite surprise in their claiming Adon‑Hiram as a brother, or in their affirming that the first artificer in metals designed the implements of their handicraft. Fallou lays great stress on the following Q. What dost thou carry under thy hat ? A. A laudable wisdom.

 

Q. What dost thou carry under thy tongue ? A. A praiseworthy truth.

 

Q. What is the strength of the craft ? A. That which fire and water cannot destroy.

 

And he explains the substitution of truth for beauty, by the fact [sic] that beauty is no longer a part of a mason's art (see Mysteries der Freimaurer, p. 366).

 

But even if this is conceded, we only arrive at the simple conclusion already forced upon us‑that the stonemasons, like all other guild‑members, were fond of symbolism and allegory. The most interesting part of this catechism is the tradition contained in the following dialogue " Where was the worshipful craft of masons first instituted in Germany? " "At the Cathedral of Magdeburg, under the Emperor Charles II, in the year 876." From this it may reasonably be concluded that the tradition amongst the stonemasons ran to the effect that their craft guild took its rise at the building of Magdeburg Cathedral. The inner fraternity, as we know, only originated in 1459. But the earlier date (876) is undoubtedly an anachronism. The first cathedral was built in the tenth century, its successor in the twelfth, whilst Charles (the second of Germany, the third of France, surnamed Le Gros) was deposed in the year 887! Putting the Emperor's name on one side, the date first in order of time (876) will coincide fairly well with the incipience of the German craft guilds and the second with that of the culminating point in their history. The whole matter is, of course, merely legendary and of no great importance in an historical study.

 

 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 83 Another tradition, which is constantly cited, appears to have been first published in 1617 by Schadeus in his description of Strasburg Cathedral. It runs to the effect that the cathedral, being completed in 1275, the tower was begun in 1277 by the famous architect, Erwin of Steinbach and that his daughter Sabina, being a skilful mason, carved the porch. Why Fort (p. 81) speaks of the " undoubted authenticity " of this tale it is difficult to conjecture. Assertion does not merge into demonstration by the mere fact of constant repetition. Stieglitz's argument (Geschichte der Baukunst, p. 573) that women were admitted to membership in the majority of the mediaeval guilds is valueless. Membership of a guild did not carry with it the right of being apprenticed, although it implied that a female member might share in all its benefits, pious and pecuniary and, in the event of her husband's death (he being a master), might carry on his trade. But this was easily done with the help of a managing journeyman and provision was made for his promptly acquiring the master's rights by marrying such a widow. From the records that are accessible, there is no evidence that the stonemasons ever contemplated the contingency of female membership. Apprenticeship and travel were essentials and, of these ordeals, though the fortitude of a determined woman might have sustained her throughout the labours of the former, it is scarcely to be conceived that a member of the gentler sex could have endured the perils and privations of the latter. It should be stated, however, that in London a woman was admitted to the " freedome " of the Carpenters' Company in 1679, " haveing served her Mistres a terme of seaven years." A remarkable tradition appears to have been prevalent from the earliest times viz. that the stonemasons had obtained extensive privileges from the Popes. Heideloff gives, among the confirmations of the Emperors already cited, two papal bulls, viz. from Pope Alexander VI, Rome, 16th September 15 oz. Pope Leo X, pridie calendarium Januarii 1517.

 

He also says that they received an indulgence from Pope Nicholas III, which was renewed by all his successors up to Benedict XII, covering the period from 1277 to 1334. He, confesses, however, that he could never obtain one of these documents for perusal. The Strasburg Lodge, in its quarrel with the Annaberg Lodge (1518‑1521), besides relying upon the confirmations of the Emperors, also alludes to the authority granted it by the papal bulls, so that this tradition (if such it be) is found in force very early. Kloss and Krause have both made strenuous efforts to discover these bulls. It is well known that Governor Pownall, in 1773, was allowed to make a careful search in the archives of the Vatican, which was fruitless in its result, although he was rendered every possible assistance by the Pope himself (see Archceologia, vol. ix, p. 1 z6). Krause searched the Bullarium Magnum Rome in vain ; and Kloss, the Bullarium Magnum Luxemburgi (Kloss, p. 236), with a similar want of success. But whether or not the tradition rests on any solid 84 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY foundation, it is certain that the Church, by holding out from time to time special inducements, sought to attract both funds and labour for the erection of its splendid cathedrals ; and some of these tempting offers were not quite consistent with strict morality. For instance, there is a document which Lacomblet states was signed on April i, 1 279, by Archbishop Sifrid of Cologne, promising full absolution to all who shall, for the furthering of the cathedral building operations, present to him any wrongfully acquired goods (see Lacomblet, Urkundenbuch fur Geschichte des Nieder Rheins, vol. ii, p. 429). Pope Innocent IV, on May zi, 1248, issued a bull promising indulgence to all " who shall contribute to the restoration of the Cathedral at Cologne, recently destroyed by fire " (ibid., vol. ii, p. 173). This does not quite amount to granting privileges to the stonemasons, but comes somewhat near it. It is, however, only fair to add, that of this latter document no original appears to be extant, the only copy of it being in Gelen's manuscript, de admir. magnit. Coloniae, p. 231 (ibid., vol. ii, p. xviii).

 

The general conclusions to which we are led by the foregoing inquiry may be thus briefly summarized i. The cradle of German architectural skill is to be found in the convents, not the organization of the Steinmetz guild.

 

z. This organization had its origin in the craft guilds of the cities.

 

3. About the twelfth century the convent and the craft builders imperceptibly amalgamated and formed the guilds of the Steinmetzen.

 

4. These guilds differed only from other guilds in never having split into separate fraternities for masters and journeymen.

 

5. In 1459 they constituted themselves into one all‑embracing fraternity, with its perpetual head at Strasburg.

 

6. The Steinmetzen were not singular in possessing a general bond of union, although their system of centralization has received greater notice than that of other fraternities.

 

7. As in all other guilds, there was in use a secret method of communication, consisting of a form of greeting.

 

8. It is possible that there was a grip, in the possession of which the Steinmetzen may have differed slightly from the other crafts.

 

9. There is not the slightest proof or indication of a word and the existence of a sign is very doubtful.

 

10. There was no initiation ceremony.

 

11. There was possibly, but not probably, a ceremony at affiliation.

 

i z. The symbolism did not go further than that of other craft guilds. 13. There is not the least trace of a speculative science. 14. The admission of honorary members is very doubtful.

 

15. The independence of State control was attempted but never established. 16. The Ordinances of the Steinmetzen and their institution of a fraternity, were designed to prolong their corporate existence by bringing into play a machinery analogous to that of a modern trades union.

 

 THE STONEMASONS (STEINMETZEN) OF GERMANY 8 5 17. The confirmations of the Emperors were fraudulently obtained.

 

18. Whether privileges were granted by the Popes remains undecided.

 

i 9. Although the Steinmetzen preserved a continuous existence until within living memory, Freemasonry, on its introduction into Germany from England in the last century, was not recognized as having any connexion with them, although in outward forms there were many points of resemblance between the usages of the German Stonemasons and of the English Freemasons. The Abbe Grandidier (a non‑Mason) in 1778, or the following year, first broached the theory of there being an historical connexion between the Freemasons and the Steinmetzen, although Freemasonry in its present form had penetrated into Germany from England nearly half a century previously.

 

 CHAPTER IV THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE J T is somewhat remarkable that French Masonic writers have not been tempted to seek the origin of the institution in their own past history and in the traditions and usages of their own land. German authors, from Fallou onwards, have seized upon every trifling circumstance, every chance coincidence, tending to show a German origin of Freemasonry and, when a link was wanting in the chain of evidence, have not scrupled either to forge one, even to the extent of inventing ceremonies, or placidly to accept, without inquiry, the audacious inventions of their predecessors. And yet, by a judicious combination of the history of the French trade guilds with that of the Companionage, a much better case might be made out than the Steinmetz theory, requiring for its complete establishment no deliberate falsification of history, as in the former instance, but only a slight amount of faith in some very plausible conclusions and natural deductions from undoubted facts. A glimmering of this possibility does occasionally manifest itself. An anonymous pamphlet of ‑1848 (Les Compagnons du Devoir) casually remarks, " Let us point out the community of origin which unites the societies of the Companionage with that of the Freemasons." Another writer (C. G. Simon, Etude historique et Morale sur la Compagnonage) says, " The moment we begin to reflect, we are quickly led in studying the facts to the conclusion that the Companionage and Freemasonry have one common origin." Many other French writers and one English one, (Heckethorn), make similar allusions, but without attaching any importance to the subject, or proceeding any further with it ; treating, in fact, the journeymen societies of France as a species of poor relations of the Freemasons‑as somewhat disreputable hangers‑on to the skirts of Freemasonry. Two French authors are more explicit. Thory (Acta Latomorum, p. 301), writing many years before those quoted above, gives a very slight sketch of the Companionage and remarks, " Some authors have maintained that the coteries of working masons gave rise to the order of Freemasons." Unfortunately, he affords no clue to the identity of these authors and it has not been possible to trace them. Besuchet (Precis historique de l'Ordre de la Franc‑maconnerie, p. S) observes that in 1729 the prevailing opinion in France was that " England only restored to her what she had already borrowed, inasmuch as it is probable, according to a mass of authorities and traditions, that Freemasonry, in its three first or symbolic Degrees, is of French origin." Besuchet then also lets the matter drop ; and there is no serious attempt to examine the craft guilds of France from a Masonic point of view. Although French historians could undoubtedly have made out a good and plausible case if they had wished to do so, it is not by any means probable that their theory would have been unassailable.

 

86 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 87 In Paris the rise of the municipality is characterized by a singular feature‑the government of the city being vested not in the delegates of all the guilds, but in the officers of one huge guild only, that of the Parisian Hanse. It is, however, well to bear in mind that the Hanse was not only the chief source of the opulence and prosperity of the capital, but also, in course of time, came to include all the well‑to‑do citizens.

 

At the period when history first affords us any definite picture of this association, we meet with it under the name of the Marchands de 1'eau de Paris and, later, simply as Marchands de l'eau and it possessed a monopoly of the commerce of the Seine within certain limits above and below the city. No ship could enter this territory without taking into partnership and sailing under the protection of one of the members of the company ; otherwise all its cargo was confiscated. In return for lending his name, the Paris merchant had the option either of taking over half the freight at cost price, or of selling such goods as were intended for Paris under his own auspices and halving the net profits. Furthermore, no goods were allowed to proceed beyond Paris, if the Paris merchants thought them suitable and required in that city. They were enabled to secure all the profits of extensive trading without the risk attending it, their own capital not being called into requisition. The head of this association was called the provost of the merchants and he very early assumed all the functions of a mayor of the city, even collecting the taxes until the reign of Louis IX (1226‑1270). For this guild the French writers claim a Roman origin and all agree in considering it the direct successor of the Nautm Parisiaci. The fact is that a corporation of Nautx did exist under the Romans, also that in the reign of Tiberius Cxsar they erected an altar to Jupiter, which was found, in the eighteenth century, on the spot now occupied by the Hotel de Ville (see Levasseur, Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres en France, vol. i, p. 22). It bears the following inscription TIB . C.+ESARE . AVG . IOVI OPTVM MAXSVMO . . . . M NAVT.E PARISIACI PVBLICE . POSIERV . TN The earliest document in which this company is legally recognized bears date A.D. 1121, wherein Louis VI grants certain privileges which had previously vested in him and in which it is treated as an already ancient institution (ibid., p.193). These privileges were confirmed in 1170 by Louis VII and once more in 1192 by Philippe Auguste. This society appears shortly afterwards under another name, whilst still retaining its ancient fluvial jurisdiction‑viz. that of the Marchands, or Six Corps de Paris. These six bodies were the cloth‑workers (drapiers), grocers (Ipiciers), mercers (merciers), hatters (bonnetiers), furriers (pelletiers) and goldsmiths (orfivres). These constituted the municipality ; each corps elected biennially its master and 88 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE wardens (garden) ; each of these masters became successively juge, consul and, finally, Echevin de la ville de Paris. They were regarded as the most distinguished citizens, and became ipso facto ennobled, taking the title of esquire (ecuyer) ; their provost assuming that of chevalier (see Lavergne, Introduction to Delacroix, Memoire a Consulter sur l'Existence den Six Corps, p. 7). Levasseur (p. 482) is of opinion that these guilds were not descended from the Hanse, but he gives no reasons and is directly opposed by all other writers.

 

All the remaining trades and crafts of Paris seem to have arisen much in the same manner as those of the other cities of the kingdom and some very ancient records are still in existence. The jewellers were organized as early as the time of Dagobert (6z8, 629) by St. Eloi, recognized by a royal charter (traditional) in 768 and their privileges confirmed in a capitulary of Charles the Bald (846). The Dictionnarius of Jean de Garlande‑in the second half of the eleventh centuryenumerates four classes of workers in gold (aurifabrorum industria)‑viz. the coiners (nummularii), enamellers (firmacularii), gobletmakers (cipharii) and the goldsmiths properly so called (aurifabri). In io6i Philippe I granted privileges to the candlemakers and, in 116o, Louis VII conceded no fewer than five trades in fief to the wife of Yves Laccohre. The ancient customs of the butchers are mentioned in 1162 and confirmed by Philippe Auguste in 1182. In 1183 the furriers and clothworkers were also the objects of his benevolence. Of the butchers Levasseur says that, already at the beginning of the twelfth century, the date of their origin was unknown and a charter of 1134 speaks of their old‑established stalls. In course of time these stalls were limited to a fixed number and became hereditary (like the Roman corporation of butchers), forming a very thorough monopoly. So strong was the guild of butchers, that, on several occasions, when neighbouring landowners wished to erect markets on their own property, the king was induced by the monopolists to forbid their erection, or to confine the number of new stalls within a very small limit.

 

But this excessive power of the trades guilds naturally gave rise to various abuses and it seems that after the reign of Philippe Auguste even the provost became venal and, in consequence, the collection of the taxes was taken out of his hands by Louis IX, who, in 125 8, appointed Etienne Boileau provost of Paris. Under this new arrangement the various craft guilds and general administration of the city came under the supervision of the provost of Paris ; but the governance of the six corps and the fluvial jurisdiction still remained with the provost of the merchants. In spite of this, in 1305, the six corps were so strong, that under their provost, Marcel, they were enabled to dictate to the young regent of France the impeachment of his ministers, the liberation of the King of Navarre and the appointment of a council of four bishops, twelve knights and twelve bourgeois to assist the Dauphin. This victory must have rankled in the minds of the sovereigns of France ; for, in 13 83, Charles VI, believing himself to be irresistible after his defeat of the Flemish at Roosebeck, abolished the municipality altogether ; suppressed the prevoti of the merchants, transferring the remnant of its jurisdiction to the prevot de Paris; inter‑ THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 89 dicted all trade fraternities and forbade the craftsmen in general to have any other chiefs than those appointed by himself. He had, however, over‑estimated his power : the guilds did not disband ; the butchers were the first to be legally reinstated in 1387; the others followed suit ; and, in 1411, the municipality itself was restored (see Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 409‑II). Ultimately the provost of Paris was suppressed and the provost of the merchants recovered the whole of his former authority, which, in spite of many temporary reverses, continued in full force until the great revolution at the end of the eighteenth century (Depping, Livre des Mitiers d'Etienne Boileau, Introduction, p. 86).

 

Under what title the earliest trade guilds exercised their authority it is now impossible accurately to determine. It may have been the inherent right in any body of men to settle their own line of conduct, provided such conduct obtained the general approbation of their fellow citizens. Subsequently, in the feudal ages, the consent of the lord paramount was absolutely essential to the validity of their statutes (see Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations d'Arts et Mitiers, p. 5) ; whilst, in the fourteenth century, the trade guilds could not legally exist without the king's express approval of their rules and regulations.

 

There are occasional traces of curious ceremonies in connexion with the reception of new masters. Whether they were usual in all trades it is difficultto decide, as upon this point historical records leave us very much in the dark. With the bakers of Paris the modus operandi is thus described : " On the day agreed upon the candidate leaves his house followed by all the bakers of the city and, coming to the master of the bakers, presents to him a new jar full of nuts, saying, `Master, I have done and accomplished my four years ; behold my pot full of nuts.' Then the master of the bakers turning to the secretary (clerc lcrivain) of the craft, demands to know if that is truly so. Upon receiving a reply in the affirmative, the master of the bakers returns the jar to the candidate, who smashes it against the wall, and ‑behold him master 1 " (see Monteil, Histoire des Francais des Divers .tats, 4th edit., 1853, vol. i, p. 294).

 

Another ceremony of greater interest (as taking place at the reception of the millstone‑makers, who were classed in the same category as the stonemasons) is the following : " A banqueting hall was prepared and above that a loft, whither, whilst the masters were partaking of good cheer below, the youngest accepted master, with a broomstick stuck into his belt in lieu of a sword, conducted the candidate. Shortly after, there issued therefrom cries which never ceased, as though he were being cudgelled to death " (see Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, 1850, p. 243) In 1467 Louis XI organized the crafts into a species of militia or garde national. The various trades were ranged under sixty‑one banners. The king granted them a distinguishing banner bearing a white cross in chief and below, the private blazon of the craft. These banners were only produced on special occasions and in the king's service, not on the ordinary festivals of the crafts. They were confided to the chiefs of each trade and kept in a chest under triple lock, one key of which go THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE was retained by the king or his officers (see Migne, Nouvelle Encyclopedie theologique, Dict. des Confreries et Corporations, p. 75).

 

The first occasion on which these corps assembled they numbered 8o,ooo men and were reviewed by Louis XI, Cardinal de la Ballue and others. The leading banners were those of the six corps of merchants ; the thirty‑second being that of St. Blaise, comprising the masons, quarrymen, stonemasons, etc. (see Migne, op. cit., p. 78). This organization was afterwards extended throughout the kingdom. The trade guilds not only possessed their distinguishing banners, but also assumed coats of arms and mottoes. That of the six corps in Paris was, Vincit concordia fratrum ; of the apothecaries, Avec noun securite et coniance ; and of the locksmiths, Fidelite et secret.

 

An institution closely allied with the craft guilds was that of the fraternity (confrairie, conphrairie, frairie, confrerie le cierge, la caritat, etc.). Every craft guild belonged, as a body, to some fraternity, maintained an altar in some neighbouring church and decorated it with candles, to supply which it levied on its members fines and fees to be paid in wax. From this wax candle the fraternity was sometimes spoken of simply as le cierge, " the candle." La caritat is the Provencal form of la charite, " the charity." The other synonyms given above are archaic forms of confrerie, " confraternity." The society was composed of the same members as the craft and is, in many cases, difficult to distinguish from it on that account ; nevertheless, it was always a distinct entity and was often legislated for separately. It provided for the assembly of the brethren at stated periods, for religious exercises and social pleasures ; those of the table occupying a large share. The newlyreceived master was expected to provide the members of the fraternity with a banquet and it was the excess to which the feasting was carried which eventually formed one of the great hindrances to becoming a master. Their most useful sphere of action was the sustenance and relief of aged and poor masters, their widows and children, the assistance rendered to members in cases of illness and to companions on their travels. The members appear to have belonged solely to the body of masters, although apprentices entering on their indentures and companions working in the city, were required to contribute to the funds. In return they were assisted from the treasury and shared the benefit of the religious services. Louandre says (Introduction to Monteil, Histoire de l'Industrie francaise, 1872, p. S 4), " Entirely distinct from the corporation, although composed of the same elements, the fraternity was placed under the invocation of some saint reputed to have exercised the profession of the members. The symbol of the craft was a banner, that of the fraternity a wax taper." The craft guilds were dedicated to particular saints ; e.g. the cordwainers of all kinds to St. Crispin, the carpenters to St. Joseph, the goldsmiths to St. Eloi and so on ; but the fraternities appear to have been generally dedicated to the patron saints of the churches or chapels in which their altars were raised. At Rouen in x61o the masons had a fraternity under the patronage of Saints Simon and Jude; (Ouin‑Lacroix, Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, p. 238), who were never even traditionally connected with the building trades. That the THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 91 fellow‑crafts were not admitted seems very probable from the fact that, as early as November 1394, the fellow‑craft furriers (garcons pelletiers) were permitted by royal ordinance to form their own fraternity (Levasseur, Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres en France, p. 497). But, although the craft and the fraternity may usually be described as two names for one body, this was not always the case. There were sometimes several fraternities in one craft ; at other times several crafts united to form one fraternity (ibid., p. 470). In Montpellier the glassmakers united with the mercers, because in the first‑mentioned craft there was only one resident master, who did not suffice to form a fraternity. We hear of an early fraternity of stonemasons in 1365, the statutes of which have been preserved (Confrerie de pejriers de Montpelier). One of the earliest decrees against the fraternities, whether of citizens (and at that time we may take it that citizens were always tradesmen), or of nobles or others, has more than antiquity to recommend it, inasmuch as it was promulgated by the father of one who played a great part in the history of our own country, viz. Simon, Count de Montfort, whose son was the celebrated Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester. It is dated A.D. 1212, and runs as follows : " No baron, bourgeois, or peasant shall dare in any way to pledge obedience by way of oath or good faith in any conjuration whatsoever, even under pretext of fraternity or other good thing, the which is often mendacious (mensonger), unless it be with the consent and pleasure of the said lord (seigneur) ; and, if any are convicted of having so taken oath against him, they shall be held, body and chattels, at his pleasure. But if it be not against the said lord, then the members of the fraternity (conjurateurs) shall only pay, if barons, 1o livres, if knights, loo sols, if citizens, 6o sols, and if peasants, zo sols " (Ouin‑Lacroix, Q. cit., p. 423).

 

In 1308 the number of these fraternities was so great as to provoke the fear of Philippe le Bel, who interdicted them ; and this was more especially the case in the south of France, under the name of La Caritat (Levasseur, op. cit., vol. i, p. 468). Of these bodies‑so numerous as to be considered dangerous by the State‑but few records have come down, so that the absence of any statutes of a prior date to A.D. 1170 by no means implies that such fraternities had not previously existed.

 

The following code is preserved in the archives of the city of Amiens. It is dated June 15, 1407 and styled the " Statutes regulating the Fraternity (cierge, candle) of the masons' trade (du mestier de Machonnerie) of Amiens " (A. Thierry, Recueil des Monuments inidits de l'Histoire du Tiers Etat, vol. ii, p. z6).

 

Know all men who may see or read these presents, that it has been and is ordained by the Mayor and 1~chevins of the city of Amiens, for the common wellbeing and profit, at the request of the men of the craft of masonry in the said city and with their consent, or that of the major and more sane part of them, assembled before the said mayor and 1chevins or their commissioners, as follows : Firstly. It is ordained that the masters of the said craft are and be required to attend at the honours funereal and nuptials of those who are of this craft, if they be in the city of Amiens and have no sufficient excuse, which excuse they are required to make known to the sergeant or clerk of the " candle " of the said craft and if any one fail to do so he shall be liable each time to a fine of xii pence, to be applied to the profit of said candle.

 

 92 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE z. Item. It is ordained that all such sums as shall be presented for libations to those of the craft on their return from the funeral honours of any of this craft, the one half of the said donation, whether large or small, shall be placed and converted to the profit of said " candle " and the other half to be expended in drink amongst them, as may seem good to them.

 

3. Item. When any apprentice shall be first received into the said craft he shall be required to give one pound of wax as soon as he commences to earn money in the said craft, to be applied to the profit of the said " candle." 4. Item. If any of the said craft work for the first time in said city of Amiens, as soon as he shall have worked xv days, he shall be required to pay to the profit of the said " candle " one pound of wax and as long as he remain there be quit of paying it any more, excepting the first time only.

 

5. Item. It is ordained that all those of the said craft who do earn money here, living in the city of Amiens, shall be required to belong to the said " candle," to enter into it and shall be constrained to pay, observe and accomplish the matters above said and each single clause hereof the which constraint shall be exercised by the sergeant or clerk of the said " candle," who shall also constrain each one of the said craft, who in this place earns money, to pay his part and portion of the said " candle : " and for so doing he shall have for wages every year xii sols of Paris, a hood of the livery of those of the said craft and ii sols for each funeral or wedding which he shall summon, such ii sols to be levied on him, or them who gave the order.

 

The above ordinances were made, ordained and established in the echevinaae of Amiens, with the assent of the said mayor and ichevins, by Sire Fremin Piedeleu, Mayor of Amiens, Jacque Clabaut, Jehan Plantehaie, Jacque de Gard, Pierre Waignet, Jehan Liesse, Thumas de Henault, Jehan Lecomcte, Jacque de,Cocquerel et Thumas de Courchelles, ichevins the xv day of June in the year one thousand four hundred and seven.

 

The above statutes may advantageously be supplemented by two articles from those of the masons of Rheims ; one of which exhibits a curious regulation touching their religious services, whilst the other indicates that the constant endeavours of the authorities to put down the abuse of the banquets had not been entirely fruitless, inasmuch as the statutes outwardly conform to the royal commands. It must not be forgotten, however, that the statutes of this date, though drawn up in all cases for the perusal of the king or his ministers, the royal approval being necessary to render them valid, it by no means follows that they were not systematically evaded by a private understanding amongst the masters. The statutes referred to are dated July z6, 1625 and the clauses are as follows (see Collection de Documents inidits sur l'Histoire de France, Section Pierre Varin, Archives Legislatives de la Ville de Reims, pt. ii, vol. ii, p. 483).

 

 XVI. The masters of the said craft shall be required every year, at the procession of the Holy Sacrament of the altar, according to their invariable custom, to carry four torches of the weight of ten pounds each one, which torches shall be borne by the four junior masters of the craft.

 

.

 

I. And we forbid the said wardens (iureZ) to accept any banquet from those who shall achieve their masterpiece, under penalty of arbitrary fine ; and the said companions to offer any such under penalty of being deprived of the masterpiece [i.e. not allowed to benefit by its successful completion] and without the faculty of being admitted under three years ensuing.

 

Of all the French handicrafts, the building trade of the Middle Ages naturally possesses the greatest interest. Without pausing to touch on the disputed point THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 93 as to the country in which the Gothic style of architecture originated, it may safely be asserted that, as regards boldness of conception and dexterity of execution, the French artists were not behind their contemporaries in other parts of Europe. The churches, cathedrals, town‑halls and other monuments scattered throughout France, testify to their skill. It should be noticed that the familiar tradition of bands of builders wandering from one country to another has also obtained credence in France and even misled so careful a writer as Ouin‑Lacroix. He says (Histoire des Anciennes Corporations, p. zz7) : " The corporation of masons offers a proof of its early regular organization as far back as the twelfth century, in the grand manifestation of zeal which it displayed about i 145 in proceeding to Chartres to take part in the construction of the cathedral there, which has since become so famous. There were to be seen, as wrote Archbishop Hugues of Rouen to Theodoric of Amiens, immense Norman companies, organized in vast corporations under the conduct of a chief named Prince, emigrating in a crowd to the Chartres country. On their return, according to Haimon, Abbot of St. Pierre‑sur‑Dive, these same companies built and repaired a great number of churches in Rouen and that province." Levasseur has not allowed himself to be led astray, but gives the true interpretation of these letters (op. cit., vol. i, p. 3z6), portions of which he appends in a footnote. The " immense companies " consisted of amateurs‑lords and ladies, knights, priests and peasants‑who harnessed themselves to the cars and helped to drag along their destined route the huge stones of which the cathedral is built. Miracles are even reported of the rising tide being stayed in order to suit the convenience of some parties of these devotees, who might otherwise have been placed in a very awkward fix. The members of these associations performed the useful functions of common labourers and beasts of burden, but nothing tends to show that they were in any sense masons. It was a grand and remarkable demonstration of the allconsuming religious zeal of the Middle Ages‑a manifestation of the same spirit which underlay the pilgrimages and the Crusades.

 

Very early notices of the building trades are to be found ; but the oldest code which has been preserved is probably that of Boileau (about iz6o). In it we find them already subdivided into many branches, which of itself presupposes a much earlier existence, as the division of labour always marks a considerable development of a trade. This code unites under the banner of St. Blaise, the masons, stonemasons, plasterers (both makers and users) and the mortarers (both makers and users of mortar). From other sources we know that the quarry‑workers and the tylers (but not tyle‑makers) owed allegiance to the same banner, also the millstonemakers.

 

In this code the stonemasons are not particularly mentioned, although towards the end a decided distinction is drawn between the members of this craft and the masons. It is probable that they are classed throughout with the ordinary masons and that only in the special instance alluded to did any difference exist. The code contains twenty‑four articles, but, as some of these relate solely to the plasterers and mortarers, those only are given which are of interest in the present inquiry.

 

 94 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE OF THE MASONS, THE STONEMASONS, THE PLASTERERS, AND THE MORTARERS I. He may be mason in Paris who wishes, provided always that he knows the handicraft and that he works after the usages and customs of the craft ; and they are these II. None may have in his employ but j apprentice ; and if he have an apprentice, he may not accept him for less than vj years' service, but for longer service may he well accept him, and also for pay if he be able to obtain it. And if he accept him for less than vj years, then is he cast in a fine of xx sols, to be paid to the Chapel of St Blaise, unless they be his own sons born only in honourable wedlock.

 

III. And the mason may take to himself one other apprentice so soon as the first shall have served v years, for whatsoever time he may have taken the first.

 

IV. And the king who is at this time and to whom God grant long life, has granted the mastership of the masons to Master William of Saint Patu, for so long as it shall please him. Which Master William took oath in Paris, within the precincts of the palace aforesaid, that he would the aforesaid craft well and loyally keep to the best of his power, as well for poor as rich, for weak as strong, for so long as it shall please the king that he keep the said craft ; and afterwards the said Master William did take, the form of oath aforesaid before the Provost of Paris at the Chastelet.

 

VII. The masons, the mortarers and the plasterers may have as many assistants and workmen in their service as they please, provided always that they instruct them not in any point of their handicraft.

 

VIII. And every mason and every mortarer and every plasterer, shall swear by the saints that he will keep the craft aforesaid well and truly, each one in his place : and if they know that any one do ill in anything and act not according to the usages and customs of the craft aforesaid, that they will lay the same before the master whensoever they shall know thereof, and on their oath.

 

IX. The master whose apprentice shall have served and completed his time shall appear before the master of the craft and bear witness that his apprentice has served his time well and truly : and then the master who keeps the craft shall cause the apprentice to swear by the saints that he will conform to the usages and customs of the craft well and truly.

 

X. And no one shall work at his craft aforesaid after the stroke of none (3 p.m.) of Notre Dame during flesh time ; and of a Saturday in Lent, after vespers shall have been chanted at Notre Dame ; unless it be to close an arch or a stairway, or to close a door frame placed on the street. And if any one work beyond the hours aforesaid, unless it be of necessity in the works aforesaid, he shall pay iiij pence as fine to the master who keeps the craft and the master may seize the tools of him who shall be recast in the fine.

 

XVII. The master of the craft has cognisance of the petty justice and fines of the masons, the plasterers and the mortarers and of their workmen and apprentices, as long as it shall please the king, as also of deprivation of their craft and of bloodless beatings and of clameur de proprete.

 

XVIII. And if any of the aforesaid craftsmen be summoned before the master who keeps the craft, if he absent himself he shall pay a fine of iiij pence to the master and, if he appear' at the time and acknowledge [his fault] he shall forfeit and if he pay not before night he shall be fined iiij pence to the master and if he deny and be found to have done wrong he shall pay iiij pence to the master.

 

XIX. The master who rules the craft can not levy but one fine for each offence ; and if he who has been fined is so stiffnecked and so false that he will not obey the master or pay his fine, the master may forbid him his craft.

 

.

 

. If any one of the aforementioned crafts whose craft shall have been forbidden him by the master shall nevertheless use his craft, the master may seize his tools and keep them until he have paid the fine ; and if he forcibly resist, the master shall make it known to the Provost of Paris, and the Provost of Paris shall compel him.

 

 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 95 .

 

I. The masons and the plasterers owe the watch duty and the tax and the other dues which the other citizens of Paris owe the king.

 

.

 

II. The mortarers are free of watch duty and all stonemasons since the time of Charles Martel, as the wardens (preudomes) have heard tell from father to son.

 

.

 

III. The master who keeps the craft in the name of the king is free of the watch duty for the service he renders in keeping the craft.

 

.

 

IV. He who is over lx years of age and he whose wife is in childbed, so long as she lies abed, are free of watch duty ; but he shall make it known to him who keeps the watch by order of the king.

 

These statutes were published in the original French as an appendix by G. F. Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry. A translation, with notes, appeared in Moore's Freemasons' Monthly Magazine, Boston, U.S.A., May 1863, vol. xxii, p. 201.

 

On Art. IV Fort has built up two erroneous conclusions which need correction. The less important one is making a nobleman out of plain Master William de Saint Patu. This has probably arisen from the prefix de, though the plebeian title of mestre should have warned him that it only signified that St. Patu was some district or hamlet where Master William was born. At a time when the commonalty were only just beginning to assume surnames, this was the usual mode of distinguishing one William from another.

 

The other mistake into which Fort has stumbled is of more consequence, as he manages to open a " lodge " within the palace. This would imply that the Paris masons called their workshops " lodges "‑a form of expression they never used, with which French artisans have not even yet become familiarized ; and as a lodge in the palace could merely exist for the purposes of government, it would very closely resemble our present Freemasons' Lodges. The word loge, which he has thus contrived to mistranslate, signifies an enclosure or space partitioned off and survives in the loge du theatre, or box at a theatre. Es loges du pales, or, in more modern form, En les loges du palais, simply means, in the enclosures of the palace, i.e. within its precincts.

 

Additional proof of the corporate existence at an early age of the building trades may present some interest. At Amiens the masons (machons) appear to have taken part in the municipal elections, for the first time, in 1348 (see A. Thierry, Recueil des Monuments inidits de l'Histoire du Tiers Etat, p. 540). In 1387 the municipality had a city architect (maitre des ouvrages, master of the works).

 

The archives of Montpellier supply the following references (Renouvier et Ricard, Des Maitres de Pierre, pp. 23, z6, zo and So).

 

1201. Bertrandus : Jai la peira (does stone work).

 

1244. Paul Olivier : maistre de peira (master‑mason).

 

1334. Peri Daspanhayc : maistre que hobra al pout de Castlenou (master who works at the bridge of Castlenau).

 

The statutes of the probes hommes of Avignon regulate, in 1243, the pay of the stonemasons.

 

 i 96 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE In 1493, Peyre Borgonhon, master‑mason, reports to the consuls of Montpellier that he could no longer find masons to work at the fortifications under 4 sons per diem ; and these, " after taking information respecting the prices elsewhere and considering also that the days in the month of April were amongst the longest in the year, resigned themselves to pay the price asked." This is one of the earliest strikes in the building trade.

 

In 1zo8, Ingelram was architect of Rouen Cathedral ; in 128o, Jehan Davi constructed the south porch (Ouin‑Lacroix, op. cit., p. 229).

 

In 1389, Jehan de Boyeaux was appointed master‑mason of the city of Rouen. His title was " master of the works of masonry," his salary 1o livres a year : he had a seat at the municipal board, and wore a distinctive dress almost like that of the echevins of the city. The salary, however, rapidly increased. In 1562, Pierre de Marromme received 75 livres and, in 1692, Nicolas de Carpentier 1500 livres, besides other emoluments (Ouin‑Lacroix, op. cit., p. 236). This title and office of master of the works still existed in 1777, Fontaine being then the architect.

 

Guillaume de Saint Leonard, mayor, revised the statutes of the plasterers of Rouen in 1289. They must, therefore, have been previously drawn up.

 

The statutes of the tylers of Rouen, in 1399, prove that already their slates were in use.

 

In 15 07, Jehan Gougeon is styled tailleur de Pierre et Masson, affording another proof that the masons and stonemasons were virtually one craft, although, as seen already, in certain cases distinctions were made.

 

In 1498, the Parliament prohibited all banquets and confriries and, at the same time, enacted laws to regulate the guilds ; which measures proving inoperative, led to further legislation in 1500. In 15o,, however, the Parliament had to content itself with forbidding the formation of new associations. In 15 3 5, the prohibition was renewed ; but, meanwhile in 152.9 and 1534, fresh laws regulating the guilds were passed. This constant see‑saw brings us to the statute of Francis I of August 1, 1539. French Masonic writers have signally failed to understand this enactment, from which they have drawn the most absurd conclusions ; but non‑Masonic authors have escaped these errors, Levasseur, Louandre, Heckethorn and others, all seeing it in its true light. Thory broadly states that it abolished all trade guilds. Rebold says, " The Masonic corporations were in a large measure dispersed and dissolved in France at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when their scattered fragments were absorbed by the city guilds." (Here he evidently alludes to the bodies of travelling masons, with special papal privileges, whose very existence in this sense is problematical.) "At length, in 1539, Francis I abolished all guilds of workmen and, in France, thus perished Freemasonry, according to the old signification of the word " (see E. Rebold, Histoire generale de la Franc‑maconnerie, 1851, p. 76). The inaccuracy of this historian is evident still more glaringly in a later work‑" The number of these fraternities diminished by degrees in almost all countries and, in France, they were dissolved in 1539, by edict of Francis I, for having persisted in the revindication of their ancient privileges, but particularly r THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE 97 for having given umbrage to the clergy by the purity of their religious ideas and secret reunions." The gravamen of the charges against the fraternities was the bad not the good use they made of their secret meetings, in conspiring against the supremacy in trade matters of the State and in buttressing the pernicious monopolies of the masters ; and when, a hundred and twenty years later, some of these came into collision with the clergy, it was not on account of the purity of their religious ideas, but was due entirely to the travesties of religion exhibited in their rites and ceremonies. These writers, instead of following blind guides, would have done infinitely better had they turned to the French statutes and drawn from the fountain‑head. The truth of the matter simply is, that Francis I attempted (though unsuccessfully) to suppress the fraternities, but he never sought to abolish the guilds ; on the contrary, the same law acknowledged their legality by regulating them. Both the guilds and the fraternities survived him for two centuries and more.

 

A translation of a few of the most important paragraphs of the ordinance will show its real character.

 

 (185) All fraternities (confrairies) of craftsmen and artisans shall be abolished, interdicted and forbidden throughout our kingdom, according to the ancient ordinances and edicts of our sovereign courts.

 

(186) We ordain that all matters formerly tried before the fraternities shall in future be carried before the ordinary justices of those places.

 

(188) And, in order to pass the mastership of said crafts (mestiers), there shall be no dinners, banquets, nor convivialities (disnies, banquets, ni convis), nor any other expenses whatsoever, even should it be done voluntarily, under penalty of a fine of loo sols of Paris, to be levied on each one who shall have assisted at said banquet.

 

(189) The wardens (gardes) shall pass the masters as soon as they shall truly have achieved their masterpiece.

 

(191) We forbid all the said masters, together with their journeymen and apprentices (compagnons et serviteurs) in all trades, to make any congregations or assemblies (congregations ou assemblies) be they large or small and for whatever cause or occasion whatsoever ; nor to erect any mono polies, nor to have or take any council together concerning their craft, under penalty of confiscation of body and goods.

 

 The effect of this sweeping enactment was simply nil. The societies were for a time carried on in secret, then one was excepted as a particular favour, then another and so on, till none remained to claim exemption. As late as 1673 new crafts were incorporated into guilds, but there is no occasion to pursue the inquiry. Laws more or less severe were enacted one year, to be modified or reversed the next and this vacillating policy continued, until, in 1776, a vigorous attempt was made to reconstruct the whole system and to establish absolute free trade. In the reign of Louis XVI and under the ministry of Turgot, it was perceived that the guilds exercised an evil influence on the industry of the country by limiting competition, checking progress and invention and confining the stalwart limbs of the eighteenth‑century giant in the swaddling clothes so appropriate and serviceable to the fifth‑century babe. That astute minister threw open the crafts and trades to all comers, suppressed and I 98 THE CRAFT GUILDS (CORPS D'ETAT) OF FRANCE abolished all guilds and fraternities, excepting only the goldsmiths, chemists (pharmaciens), publishers and printers and the maitres barbierr perruqu