Join Freemasonry's Oldest And Most
Respected WebGuild
We're a lot more than just a fancy logo on your homepage
|
EVERY
ancient religion and every ancient society had its heroic
age and its mythology; Freemasonry offers no exception to
the rule. Toward the beginning of the present century and
the end of the cocksure nineteenth, it was a fashion to
look back with disdain upon the childlike fancies of the
storied past. Nowadays we are less certain that all
knowledge can be weighed and measured, or that the
laboratory alone can resolve truth into its component
elements. We are constantly confronted with the necessity
of revising judgments in every department of science,
philosophy and religion. Occasionally it happens that some
tenet, once held and then rejected, must be revived in the
light of more recent information.
In no departments of learning has this necessity become
more apparent or been more frequently displayed than in
those concerned with historical and literary criticism.
Thus it has been found that many a folk tale, trivial in
its content, has enwombed the germ of an important
discovery. The skilled eye must therefore scan closely the
lore of numerous almost forgotten peoples for intimations
of their true greatness. When their mythologies are
compared one with another,, a scroll not infrequent
consequence is the unrolling of a scroll whereon is
written an indispensable chapter in the annals of mankind.
Each taken alone, a Greek legend of Apollo, a Persian
legend of Mithra, an Egyptian legend of Osiris, or a Norse
legend of Balder might be dismissed lightly as a crude
invention of barbaric minds, touched somehow with that
instinctive feeling for beauty which dignifies and
ennobles the human intellect. Taken together, with many
another like them, they afford a clew to man's unceasing
search for the truth about God, a search which at one time
or another invariably leads the seeker's mind to
"soar aloft and read the wisdom, strength and beauty
of the Creator in the heavens." Apollo is the sun,
Mithra is the sun, Osiris is the sun, Balder is the sun,
and although each of these pagan deities had other
attributes, they belong to a universal solar mythology the
existence of which constitutes a set of facts the
historian must ponder well if he is rightly to understand
the unfolding of human faith.
Similarly it comes about that in considering the tales
which have gone into the making of Masonic mythology, the
student ought not to underrate their importance. As
testimony to literal truth many of them are obviously to
be disregarded; but as testimony to what men have believed
to be the truth their value is incalculably great. When
Herodotus doubted the tale of the seafaring Phoenicians he
gave a useful measure of his own knowledge of astronomy.
He doubted that tale because by the science of his day the
southern limit of the earth was placed at about where the
equator is now known to be. It would not be fair to
ridicule his understanding because he knew nothing of the
southern hemisphere; it would be equally unfair to
ridicule the credulity of Masonic writers of the early
eighteenth century because they knew nothing of some
commonplace principles of modern criticism.
The philosophy of the 1700's had not advanced greatly
beyond the limitations imposed by Aristotle; medicine had
made little progress since the days of Hippocrates;
physics and chemistry were but emerging from the penumbra
of hermetic mysticism; men were still gravely debating the
dogma of the divine right of kings; deists were
questioning the literal infallibility of the Bible for
reasons which would seem infantile even to agnostics of
today; the science of comparative religion had not yet
been born. In claiming antediluvian origins for the
Fraternity the wish among eighteenth- century brethren was
father to the thought; but before censuring them for an
easy faith in what they wanted to believe, allowance
should be made for their uncritical times and the nature
and character of the source material with which they had
to work. When modern writers, with far better means of
information, fall into similar and infinitely less
excusable errors, it is scarcely astonishing that Anderson
and Preston and Oliver made no valiant struggle against
the seductions of an attractive romanticism.
Mention has been made heretofore of the Regius Poem, but
it is by no means to be supposed that this was the only
early Masonic scripture of the kind. It remains the oldest
of them, in respect of the time which has elapsed since it
was put upon paper, but it bears every evidence of having
derived from others still older. Another of considerable
antiquity, known as the Dowland Manuscript and dating from
about the year 1500, may be regarded as typical of the
lore from which Anderson and the others drew their
inspiration. Full as it is of anachronisms and historical
absurdities, this document is nevertheless of great
interest and importance.
According to the Dowland legend, Freemasonry existed
before the Flood. It is related that the Israelitish
patriarch, Lamech, had two wives, Adah and Zillah. By Adah
he had two sons, Jabal, the father of tent dwellers and
herdsmen, and Jubal, the ancestor of musicians. By Zillah
he had Tubal-cain and a fourth child, a daughter. The four
are said to have founded all the arts and sciences, but it
is significant that the daughter speedily drops out of the
narrative, although it is recorded of her that she
instituted the art of weaving. Of the triumvirate of sons
- Masonic observers will
quickly catch the significance of the number three in
thisassociation - Jabal is set forth as the founder of
geometry, Jubal as founder of the science of instrumental
music, and Tubal - cain as founder of the science of
smithcraft in gold, silver, copper, iron and steel. Having
a premonition of the impending deluge, the three
brothers, it is related, determined to write their
discoveries on two pillars, one of marble which could not
be destroyed by fire and one of brick which would resist
moisture. The record is somewhat obscure as to the
postdiluvian fate of these records, with their data of
Masonry, but there are auxiliary traditions that in later
centuries one was found by Hermes Trismegistus, the
Egyptian priest and scholar, and that the other was found
by Pythagoras.
The legend next describes how Masonry flourished after the
Flood. Nimrod is listed among its most influential
patrons. Masons are said to have been employed in building
the Tower of Babel; Abraham and Sarah to have taught its
seven sciences to the Egyptians. In Abraham's time it
became necessary to find an instructor for the youth of
the land and the person to whom this task was assigned was
a "worthy Scollar that height Ewclyde." Euclid
is represented as having composed for his pupils a charge
which in phraseology is strikingly like charges given in
medieval operative lodges. Also he is said to have taught
them geometry, which now "is called throughout all
this land Masonrye."
Coming down to the times of Solomon, the legend discusses
the building Of the Temple, the traditional three
personages of that enterprise being King Solomon, Hiram,
King of Tyre and Aynon, described as the son of Hiram of
Tyre. This name is undoubtedly a variant of that of Hiram
Abiff, although the builder of the Scriptural account was
not a son of Hiram, but the son of a widow of the tribe of
Dan; his father had been a certain goldsmith of Tyre.
Engaged in the work was one Maymus Grecus, a Greek, who
afterwards, it is said, introduced Masonry into France in
the time of Charles Martel. The Craft was carried from
France to England, where it received the encouragement of
St. Alban, but died out after his time, being restored in
the reign of Athelstan when Prince Edwin's great assembly
of Masons was convoked at York.
The trifling details of implausibility involved in making
contemporaries of Abraham and Euclid, of Solomon, Charles
Martel and St. Alban, naturally did not trouble the simple
workmen who repeated this and similar tales in their
medieval assemblies. Such a story satisfied the curiosity
of those who believed their fraternal society to be of
impressive and continuous antiquity. It carried
Freemasonry back to the early generations after Adam,
squared it with the major incidents of the Old Testament,
identified it with architecture and geometry and accounted
for its translation from ancient Palestine to England by
way of France. Passed along from mouth to mouth, the
legend underwent modifications. Sometimes variants would
appear and those possessing two or more versions
would attempt to harmonize them; when that task seemed too
great, they got around the difficulty by cheerfully
including them all, as in the case of the Regius Poem. The
hearer could take his choice as to what he would accept,
if he could not accept it all.
After the formation of the first Grand Lodge, and
especially after the Duke of Montagu became Grand Master
in 1721, the Craft became immensely popular. There were
notable accessions of members and the newly made brethren,
being speculatives almost to a man, clamored for a
historical literature reasonably authoritative. Diligent
search was made for old manuscripts and particularly for
constitutions and charges used in operative lodges. The
Reverend James Anderson, a Scot, minister of a
Presbyterian chapel in Piccadilly, was appointed chairman
of a committee authorized by the Grand Master to prepare a
book on the subject. He overshadowed his associates to
such extent that they left the task in his hands and he
prepared the memorable volume published in 1723 with the
high-sounding title, The Constitutions of the Freemasons,
Containing the History, Charges, Regulations, etc.., of
that most Ancient and Right Worshipful Fraternity. It was
described as being "for the use of the lodges"
and as being printed at London "In the Year of
Masonry 5723; Anno Domini 1723.'
The historical portion of Anderson's book begins with a
gay
assumption that Adam must have had the liberal sciences,
particularly geometry, written on his heart; that he no
doubt taught them to his sons, and that they were handed
down until they reached Noah, whose ark, though of wood,
"was certainly fabricated by Geometry and according
to the rules of Masonry." Noah and his three sons,
"all Masons true," brought the Art with them
across the Flood and handed it on so successfully that it
was able to contribute to the building of the Tower of
Babel. After the dispersion from that work, brethren
carried it into all parts of the earth. Among other
celebrities who embraced it was Nimrod. Priests and magi
preserved and propagated it throughout Assyria and the
neighboring lands. It was transported to Egypt by Mizraim,
second son of Ham, and was employed there to control the
annual overflow of the Nile.
Other descendants of Ham, this lively narrative goes on to
say, made use of the art to build strongholds in
Palestine, in South Arabia and in West Africa. Indeed,
fortifications built with its aid by the Canaanites were
so strong that Jehovah was compelled to intervene before
the Israelites were able to overthrow them. Meanwhile the
posterity of Japhet had been taking Masonry into the
"isles of the Gentiles," and descendants of Shem
were transporting it eastward from Assyria into Asia.
Abraham was an adept and took Masonry with him to Egypt.
Moses, following divine instructions in the erection of
the first tabernacle, became "the General Master
Mason, " and was "divinely inspired with more
sublime knowledge in Masonry." Thanks to him, Israel
became "a whole kingdom of Masons, well instructed
under the conduct of their Grand Master,
Moses." Having brought his story down to the
time of Solomon, Dr. Anderson goes into elaborate
description of the building of the Temple under the
supervision of King Solomon, Hiram of Tyre and Hiram Abiff.
When the task was done, the master workmen scattered
into all parts of the world, in every known land teaching
their art to the freeborn sons of eminent persons. In this
way it reached the Greeks, although chief credit for its
propagation among them is given to the researches of
Pythagoras, through whose influence "Geometry became
the darling study of Greece." Afterwards Euclid
gathered up the scattered fragments of geometric science
and "digested them into a method that was never yet
mended." Ptolemeus Philadelphus, King of Egypt,
became a proselyte and ultimately reached the exalted rank
of "General Master Mason."
The Romans borrowed Masonry from their neighbors and in
time, Dr. Anderson hopefully observes, it is to be
"rationally believed that the glorious Augustus
became Grand Master of the Lodge at Rome." He
supposes the ancient Britons got the art from Rome but
lost it in the days of the Anglo-Saxons. It was restored
to England by craftsmen sent over by Charles Martel.
Encouraged by the later Saxon kings, it maintained a
precarious foothold. Athelstan imported many more Masons
from France, who took over "charges and regulations
preserved from the Roman times." Athelstan's son,
Prince Edwin, summoned a council of th Craft at York
and a general lodge was constituted, with Edwin as Grand
Master. Then Dr. Anderson gives what purports to be an
account of the manner in which the institution was
preserved down to the time of the Grand Lodge over which
Montagu was then presiding. It is easily perceived
that Dr. Anderson had merely taken the old legends,
furbished them up, eliminated their more glaring
anachronisms, supplied connecting links wherever these
were wanting and rewritten the whole into an imaginative,
spirited and coherent tale. It probably did riot occur to
him that its basic hypotheses were in doubt; it would not
have occurred to him to question the literal and
historical accuracy of the Pentateuch. He was too
scholarly to confuse the periods of Abraham and Euclid or
those of Solomon and Charles Martel.. He might attribute
those inconsistencies to the garblings of traditions
repeated by generation after generation of unscholarly
men. Assuming the basic facts to be correct, he could look
upon himself as one whose sole function was to reconstruct
the story in the light of ripe scholarship. Surely to the
just of mind it is possible to ascribe at least that much
of sincerity to the worthy dominie and to dissent in his
behalf from Hallam's bitter indictment for
mendacity.
More than half a century later William Preston opened the
third section of Book I of his Illustrations of Masonry -
a work destined to long usefulness - with the words,
"From the commencement of the world, we may trace the
foundations of Masonry." Dr. George Oliver, eager not
to be outdone in conferring antiquity upon a society to
which he made truly magnificent contributions, asserted in
his Antiquities that the Craft "existed before the
creation of this globe, and was diffused midst the
numerous systems with which the grand empyreum of
universal space is furnished." Unfortunately
for the good fame of Masonic scholarship, the credulity of
the eighteenth century did not pass with the eighteenth
century. Tradition then sealed with the official
imprimatur of the Fraternity was destined to survive for
many years, during which to question it was to incur an
imputation of Masonic heresy. It would be rash to say that
it has passed away even yet, although in recent times it
has moved in a new direction through developments in
archeology, criticism and the science of symbolism.
In 1886 American Freemasonry was deeply stirred by the
appearance of a book which even now continues to cause
mild astonishment among informed brethren. The title
itself was sufficient to make the judicious grieve, for in
all its panoplied fulsomeness it read: Sacred Mysteries
Among the Mayas and the Quiches 1500 Years Ago: Their
Relation to the Sacred Mysteries of Egypt, Greece, Chaldea,
and India: Freemasonry at a Time interior to the Temple of
Solomon. This book was written by Augustus le Plongeon,
who undertook to show that Freemasonry was first brought
to America from Egypt or Atlantis or some other ancient
place twelve millenniums ago, at which time it had already
become gray from unimaginable antiquity.
Not to be outdone by the enthusiastic le Plongeon, Dr.
Albert Churchward came next upon the scene with his Origin
and Evolution of Freemasonry, his The Arcana of
Freemasonry and his Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man.
It is somewhat hard for a reader to be sure, from perusal
of so many thousand pages of closely packed theories,
precisely how old Dr. Churchward believes Freemasonry to
be. On page 11 of Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man he
speaks of "20,000 years ago," and goes on to
remark that then, as now, it was scattered over the face
of the globe. Elsewhere in the same book he suggests the
antiquity as "probably 50,000 years." But
in piecing together numerous other references scattered
through his latest volumes there are reasons to think that
in his heart of hearts Dr. Churchward is inclined to
suspect that it must be 600,000 years old - or at any rate
that it began to take form that long ago. He thus imparts
to the Craft an antiquity which ought to satisfy the most
covetous of fancies.
Of all the possible fields of research, symbolism has
yielded most readily to the labors of the
cultivator. The reasons of this are obvious. Since cults
have existed in all lands and ages and since symbolism has
invariably been enlisted to perpetuate their teachings, no
great exercise of ingenuity is required to see that cults
widely scattered in space and time must have hit upon
similar basic doctrines and must have employed similar, if
not identical, signs and symbols with which to record
their teachings. All such cults may be described as a kind
of freemasonry, just as Freemasonry may be described as a
kind of cult. It is safe to predict that if a group of
scholarly innovators attempted tomorrow to elaborate a new
Masonic degree and to fashion for it a new system of signs
and symbols, they could not create a comprehensive ritual
without unconsciously imitating others known somewhere in
the world of long ago. The fallacy of all this sort
of thing is that it reasons by analogy alone whereas
analogy at best supplies but contributory evidence. This
is the kind of thinking which the late Woodrow Wilson
described by his picturesque phrase about a
"one-track mind." If a more prosy word may be
employed, one who thinks in that fashion may be said to
possess a "lineal" mind, a mind under compulsion
to retrace every given thing to some antecedent point in
history.
Working in any historical field, such a mind finds chaos,
which it hates as Nature abhors a vacuum. jungles of fact
lie all about and it is unhappy if it cannot reduce
the confusion to system. It must lay down charts and
diagrams, neatly building roads, boring tunnels, erecting
bridges. It agonizes over breaches and gaps, reasoning
that although such things are they ought not to be. When
urged on by uncontrollable enthusiasm or unchastened by
proper self-criticism, it finds the temptation to
re-interpret all facts in the terms of its own obsession
too great to be resisted. Rarely is it inclined to scan
closely the authenticity of a bit of evidence which
appears to support its theories.
From Anderson to extremists of the modern anthropological
school, minds of that type have been particularly
attracted by the speculative possibilities of Freemasonry.
However they may have differed in other respects they have
always had one delusion in common - they have confidently
held that there was such a thing as the origin of Masonry.
All attempts which have been made to trace Freemasonry in
some unbroken line to Solomon's Temple, to the Egyptian
mysteries, to the Essenes, to the Druses, to the Knights
Templar, to the Gypsies, to the Comacine Masters, to the
Rosicrucians or to any of a thousand other suggested
sources, have been vitiated by the errors characteristic
of the lineally minded historian. He presupposes the
untenable theory that a complex cultural development like
Freemasonry began with one man or a group of men at one
time and in one place and that it remained within the
custody of an uninterrupted succession of legitimate
heirs.
The historical mind which works laterally as well as
lineally is quick to concede that it is beyond the
capacity of human intelligence to reduce the tangle of all
humanity's past to a single simple scheme of rational
progression. It knows well that at best the searcher for
truth must rest content with a handful of facts here and
another handful there, with gaps, guesses and
probabilities in between; that there must be much groping
through the dark by aid of working hypotheses and
tentative theories, which are to be retained as long as
they do work and do explain but must be discarded when new
discoveries make them no longer reasonable.
To such a mind the known facts and plausible guesses about
Freemasonry indicate that it has unfolded and taken form
in pretty much the same general fashion as that which
marked other social developments, examples of which are
the church and the family. Or, to return to a form of
illustration already used in the present work, it finds
Freemasonry to be a social Gulf of Mexico into which many
river systems, with thousands of tributaries, have emptied
themselves.
Therefore this type of mind is not disturbed overmuch if
unable to trace so many streams back to a single
fountainhead. It is wise for the student to be on guard
against the enthusiasms of the single-track mind and
against the ambitions of those who have their own systems
to set up or wish to demolish the systems set up by
others.
Freemasonry is a world within itself, going on all the
while, busy with countless internal activities, and
naturally tending to subdivide into self-determining
groups. Here is one which looks upon the institution as
primarily a religious society serving as a handmaid to the
church. There is one which regards it as a club to further
social pleasures. Yonder is one which sees in it a form of
theosophic occultism, in custody of some Ancient Wisdom
which is to be propagated through the lodges.
Another finds in it a form of mysticism, a secret path
along which the soul may travel the Way of Divine Union.
Still another interprets it as a school for moral and
intellectual culture. The protagonist of each group
observes the whole institution from the viewpoint of his
particular prepossession. He is not to be charged with
dishonesty if in writing of Masonic history he deludes
himself into the belief that all facts fit into the mosaic
of his pet theory, yet it should always be borne in mind
that the function of the advocate, of the special pleader,
is necessarily different from that of the
historian.
The first notably successful attempt to make Masonic
history conform to the canons of scientific criticism was
made by Robert Freke Gould, originally in his History of
Freemasonry, next in his A Concise History of Freemasonry
and then in essays contributed to Ars Quatuor Coronatorum.
This distinguished soldier, lawyer and scholar, born in
Devon, England, in 1836, was made a Mason in Royal Naval
Lodge No. 429, Ramsgate, in 1855. Between 1880 and 1882 he
published the various parts of his History of
Freemasonry.
In 1903 he published the Concise History, which, without
being an abridgment of the earlier work, reviews and
revises some of its important conclusions.
Five years after Gould's death in 1915 the Concise History
was revised by Fred J. W. Crowe. These two works
together have had a wider reading, have been more often
quoted and have plowed more deeply into Masonic thought
than any other contribution to Masonic literature since
Dr. Oliver's appeared. The significance of this lies in
the fact that Gould's fame rests upon his rigid adherence
to the canons of historical writing obeyed by scientific
historians in nonMasonic fields. His work cuts across the
Fraternity's scriptures like a mountain range, dividing
them into two distinct categories of before Gould and
after Gould, making it now impossible for a self-
respecting student to follow the old uncritical habit of
accepting every floating rumor as Masonic
history.
This man's influence was in a sense institutionalized by
the founding in London of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge of
Research No. 2076, which, although it was not Gould's
"lengthened shadow," and is not in any sense his
creation or his creature, nevertheless has during two
score years of uninterrupted industry built solidly and
permanently into Masonic thought the ideals of historical
scholarship to which Gould devoted the latter half of his
career. The petition for the warrant of this lodge was
signed by nine brethren the list of their names reads, to
those who have sat at their feet, like a legend from some
storied scroll: Sir Charles Warren, William Harry Rylands,
Robert Freke Gould, Adolphus Frederick Alexander Woodford,
Walter Besant, John Paul Rylands, Sisson Cooper Pratt,
William James Hughan and George William Speth.
A warrant was granted by the Grand Master, under date of
November 28, 1884, naming Sir Charles Warren as first
Worshipful Master. Owing to the absence of Sir Charles
from the country the lodge was not constituted until
January 12, 1886. Its by-laws contained a provision that
the membership should never exceed forty. Later, at the
suggestion of George William Speth, its first secretary,
the lodge organized its Outer Circle, through which Masons
in all parts of the world have opportunity to procure the
published transactions of its deliberations.
In a brief speech at the time of consecration, Sir Charles
set forth the purpose of Quatuor Coronati Lodge in one
succinct sentence. "This Lodge," he said,
"will be the platform where literary Masons can meet
together to assist each other in developing the history of
the Craft." Seldom has a plan adopted at the
inception of such an enterprise been more faithfully or
more successfully carried out.
From1886 until today Quatuor Coronati Lodge has continued
to publish its yearly volumes under the title Ars Quatuor
Coronatorum, now a household word among studious Masons.
It is no exaggeration to say that these volumes constitute
the most important set of Masonic books in existence and
that they set up a standard in the field of Masonic
history to which scholarship must conform if it is to
maintain its self-respect.
Honest craftsmanship of this kind is slow and laborious,
but it is the only kind truly worth doing. It has meant
painstaking
examination of diffuse and incomplete records. Often it
has
encountered formidable resistance of obstinate secrecy,
resistance firmly rooted in the esoteric character of much
Masonic doctrine.
Men are naturally persuaded more by their emotions than by
reason, and such historical spade-work is in itself
anything but emotional. It has been hard to convince many
skeptics that Freemasonry has everything to gain and
nothing to lose by a scientific appraisal of its records
and traditions; that while a few illusions may be lost in
the process, it will establish realities infinitely more
valuable than the illusions.
Yet that is the truth. Gradually the old mists and fogs
are lifting even from the vales; everywhere the strong
sunlight of reality discloses the handiwork of patient and
sturdy human endeavor.
Freemasonry has always been what it is today, a society or
societies of men, unequipped with supernatural faculties,
unendowed with mysterious gifts of magic, men living out
their lives in the human world as other men do, acting
always upon their environment and in turn being forever
acted upon by it.
The Fraternity as it is came slowly and gradually into
existence, drew freely from innumerable other human
cultures and experiences as all human societies have done.
To penetrate to its inward life, and to trace the
development of that life from century to century and from
place to place, is a discipline in culture that carries
within itself its own reward. The history of Masonry is
one chapter, written at divers times and often in strange
alphabets, of the great history of mankind. It has its
Tintagels and Camelots, shrouded in the golden haze of
myth and legend; it has its own strong and material
edifice, built foursquare to all the winds that blow, the
foundations going down to the bedrock of human nature and
its soaring towers pointing upward to God. |
Join
the ILMASON E-Mail List
The Official Mail list of River Forest-Austin Lodge
ilmason not affiliated
with ilmason.org
This website does not speak for
the Grand Lodge of Illinois or Freemasonry
|
