[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

were none other than the laws of Geometry  hence the letter G; forgetting, it would
seem, that Geometry had mystical meanings for them long since lost to us. As well
say that the philosophy of Pythagoras was repeating the Multiplication Table! Albert
Pike held that we are "not warranted in assuming that, among Masons generally  in
the body of Masonry  the symbolism of Freemasonry is of earlier date then 1717."**
Surely that is to err. If we had only the Mason's Marks that have come down to us,
nothing else would be needed to prove it an error. Of course, for deeper minds all
emblems have deeper meanings, and there may have been many Masons who did not
fathom the symbolism of the order. No more do we; but the symbolism itself, of hoar
antiquity, was certainly the Common inheritance and treasure of the working Masons
of the Lodges in England and Scotland before, indeed centuries before, the year 1717.
(* When, for example, Albert Pike, in his letter, "Touching Masonic Symholism,"
speaks of the "poor, rude, unlettered, uneultivated working Stone-masons," who
attended the Assemblies, he is obviously confounding Free-masons with the rongh
Stone-masons of the Guilds. Over against these words, read a brilliant article in the
Contemporary Rview, October, 1913, by Phillips, entitled, "The Two Ways of
Building," showing how the Free-masons, instead of working under architects outside
the order, chose the finer minds among them as leaders and created the different styles
of architecture in Europe. Such he adds, "was the high limit of talent and intelligence
which the creative spirit fostered among workmen. . . The entire body being trained
and educated in the same principles and ideas, the most backward and inefficient, as
they worked at the vaults which their own skillful brethren had planned, might feel
the glow of satisfaction arising from the conscious realization of their own
aspirations. Thus the whole body of constructive knowledge maintained its unity. . .
Thus it was by free associations of workmen training their own leaders that the great
Gothic edifices of the medieval ages were constructed. . . A style so imaginative and
so spiritual might almost be the of a poet or the vision of a saint. Really it is the
creation of the sweat and labor of workingmen, and every iota of the holdness,
dexterity and knowledge which it embodies was drawn out of the practical experience
and experiments of manual labor." This describes the Comacine Masters, but not the
poor, rude, unlettered Stone-masons whom Pike had in mind.
(**Letter "Touching Masonic Symbolism.")
II
Therefore it is not strange that men of note and learning, attracted by the wealth of
symbolism in Masonry, as well as by its spirit of fraternity  perhaps, also, by its
secrecy  began at an early date to ask to be accepted as members of the order: hence
Accepted Masons.* How far back the custom of admitting such men to the Lodges
goes is not clear, but hints of it are discernible in the oldest documents of the order;
and this whether or no we accept as historical the membership of Prince Edwin in the
tenth century, of whom the Regius Poem says,
Ot speculatyfe he was a master.
This may only mean that he was amply skilled in the knowledge, as well as the
practice, of the art, although, as Gould points out, the Regius MS contains intimations
of thoughts above the heads of many to whom it was read.** Similar traces of
Accepted Masons are found in the Cooke MS, compiled in 1400 or earlier. Hope
suggests*** that the earliest members of this class were ecclesiastics who wished to
study to be architects and designers, so as to direct the erection of their own churches;
the more so, since the order had "so high and sacred a destination, was so entirely
exempt from all local, civil jurisdiction," and enjoyed the sanction and protection of
the Church. Later, when the order was in disfavor with the Church, men of another
sort  scholars, mystics, and lovers of liberty  sought its degrees.
(* Some Lodges, however, would never admit such. members. As late as April 24,
1786, two brothers were proposed as members of Domatic Lodge, No.177, London,
and were rejected because they were not Operative Masons (History Lion and Lamb
Lodge, 192, London, by Abbott).)
(** "On the Antiquity of Masonic Symbolism," A. Q. C., iii, 7.)
(*** Historical Essay on Architecture, chap. xxi.)
At any rate, the custom began early and continued through the years, until Accepted
Masons were in the majority. Noblemen, gentlemen, and scholars entered the order as
Speculative Masons, and held office as such in the old Lodges, the first name
recorded in actual minutes being John Boswell, who was present as a member of the
Lodge of Edinburgh in 1600. Of the forty-nine names on the roll of the Lodge of
Aberdeen in 1670, thirty-nine were Accepted Masons not in any way connected with
the building trade. In England the earliest reference to the initiation of a Speculative
Mason, in Lodge minutes, is of the year 1641. On the 20th of May that year, Robert
Moray, "General Quartermaster of the Armie off Scottland," as the record runs, was
initiated at Newcastle by members of the "Lodge of Edinburgh," who were with the
Scottish Army. A still more famous example was that of Ashmole, whereof we read in
the Memoirs of the Life of that Learned Antiquary, Elias Ashmote, Drawn up by
Himself by Way of Diary, published in 1717, which contains two entries as follows,
the first dated in 1646:
Octob 16.4 Nor. 30 Minutes post merid. I was made a Freemason at Warrington in
Lancashire, with Colonel Henry Wainwaring of Kartichain in Cheshire; the names of
those that were there at the Lodge, Mr. Richard Panket Warden, Mr. James Collier,
Mr. Richard Sankey, Henry Littler, John Ellam, Richard Ellam and Hugh Brewer.
Such is the record, italics and all; and it has been shown, by hunting up the wills of
the men present, that the members of the Warrington Lodge in 1646 were, nearly all
of them  every one in fact, so far as is known  Accepted Masons. Thirty-five years
pass before we discover the only other Masonic entries in the Diary, dated March,
1682, which read as follows:
About 5 p. m. I received a Summons to appear at a Lodge to be held the next day, at
Masons Hall, London. Accordingly I went, and about Noone were admitted into the
Fellowship of Free Masons, Sir. William Wilson, Knight, Capt Richard Borthwick,
Mr. Will. Woodman, Mr. Wm. Grey, M. Samuell Taylor and Mr. William Wise.
I was the Senior Fellow among them (it being 35 years since I was admitted). There
were present beside myselfe the Fellowes afternamed: [Then follows a list of names
which conveys no information.] Wee all dyned at the halfe moone Taverne in
Cheapside at a Noble Dinner prepared at the charge of the new-accepted Masons.
Space is given to those entries, not because they are very important, but because
Ragon and others have actually held that Ashmole made Masonry  as if any one man
made Masonry! 'Tis surely strange, if this be true, that only two entries in his Diary [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]