The Antiquity Of Masonic Degrees.

THE ANTIQUITY OF MASONIC DEGREES .

I 5 v BRO . R . F Gon . i .. IN a recent lecture , I alluded to Old Regulation XIII ., and p laced upon it the interpretation , that the degrees of Masonry , as recognised by the Grand Lodge of England in 1723 , were two in number .

The lecture in question was printed in Ar-t Qualnoi Coronatorum , and reviewed in the FREEMASON ' Cintnxrcu by Bro . Jacob Norton—of whom it may be said : —

" He study d well the point and found His foes conclusions were not sonnd , From premises erroneous brought , And therefore the deduction ' s nought . "

According to an authority of great weight and reputation : — " Falsefacta are highly injurious to the progress of science , for they often long endure ; but false vieios , if supported by some

evidence , do little harm , as every one takes a salutary pleasure m proving their falseness ; and when this is done , one path towards error is closed and the road to truth is often at the same time opened . " Darwin— " The Descent of Man " 1871 , Vol . If . p 385 .

The distinction which is thus drawn between " false facts , " and " false views , " might well serve as tho text for a long homily , but my reason for introducing tho quotation may be expressed in a few words . Tho universal belief that three degrees were mentioned in tho

Constitution of . 1723 , seemed to me a false fact , and I attempted to uproot it in tho seventeenth chapter of my History of Freemasonry . Quite recently , however , my own reading of the evidence has been impugned by Bro . Norton , and if

he is xight , the belief I pronounced to be a delusion is a reality , and the only "false fact" in the whole matter is my own unwarrantable assumption , that two degrees and not three , are referred to in 0 . R . XIII .

As this ancient law is worthy of any attention that can be bestowed upon it , I extract the clause which is material to the present inquiry : —

"Apprentices must be admitted Masters and Fellow Craft only here " [ i . e . in the Grand Lodge ] . The meaning or signification of these words , as I have elsewhere { Hist , of Freemasonry , chap , xvii . ) contended is , that two classes of brethren are mentioned , Apprentices , and Masters or Fellow Crafts .

Two additional illustrations , however , occur to me , which I will proceed to set out . The Daily Journal of 15 th August 1730 has the following :-

" N . B . —When yon are first made a Mason , you are only entered Apprentice ; and till you are made a Master , or as they tall it , pass'd the Master's Part , yon are only an entered Apprentice . NOTE . —There is not one man in a hundred that will be at the expence to pass the Master ' s Part , except it be for interest . "

The Catechism from which the foregoing is an extract , has been frequently reprinted , either wholly or in part , as all well informed students are aware . It was reproduced by many London newspapers within a few days . of its first

appearance ; by Benjamin Franklin in the Pennsylvania Gazette of 8 th December 1730 * ; in the Westminster Journal of 8 th May 1742 ; and copies of uncertain date are to be met with in the British Museum and Guildhall Libraries .

Next , let me ask any one who is acquainted with the early ceremonial of Masonry , whether it is even remotely possible that the word " Fellow Craft , " in 0 . R . XIII ., could have been used to describe what is noxo the second degree ?

For the restriction limiting the admission of Masters to the Quarterly Assemblies of Grand Lodge , there is much to be said . Not so , however , with regard to any previous portion of the Masonic ceremonial . " New Men " at their

entrance , were instructed as much through the eye as through the ear . What are now two steps were then only one , and it is equally impossible that either portion of the old "Apprentice Part" was withheld from the candidate for Freemasonry .

Bat I must now come to the object with which this article has been written . It is clear , to demonstration , that two , and not three degrees , are mentioned in the

Constitutions of 1723 . My desire , therefore , is not to labour this point , though I have dwelt upon it somewhat , as in my judgment the popular delusion I have sought to dispel , is the cause of a great deal of the confusion which ,

The Antiquity Of Masonic Degrees.

as instanced by the reasoning of Bro . Norton , still prevail * with regard to the decrees of early Freemasonry . The degrees , as existing in 1723 , were ! on » arbitrarily put

down as being thrrt , and this number being unknown in i » irlier England or Scotland before 1717 , t \ w . supposition that the ceremonial had been added to , between the latter year and 1723 , was by no means an unreasonable one .

In other words , if the premises are conceded , the conelusion follows in due course . But let us view matters as they really were , and not as , until a very recent period , they were universally supposed to have been .

Let us imagine , therefore , that a student of Masonry is desirous of tracing the origin of its symbolism : — Proceeding retrogress ! vely , in duo time ho gets back to 1723 , and finds in the Constitutions of that year a code of laws which , by necessary implication , assure him that the degrees then recognized were two in number .

Going back still further , he finds , in the Manuscri pt Constitutions of the English Masons , that there were two grades before tho era of Grand Lodges , those of Apprentice

and Fellow ( or Master ) . The Statutes and Minutes of the Scottish Masons disclose the same result , but with the slig ht difference that the first grade is Entered Apprentice , and the second Fellow Craft ( or Master ) .

Hence there would be no room for the visionary speculation , that a new degree , or new degrees , had been concocted by the founders of the Grand Lodge of England . The degrees of Ancient Masonry were two only , and those of Modern Masonry were tho same in number—at least until 1723 .

The esoteric evidence , upon which I cannot here enlarge , points in entirely the same direction . Lastly , and this is the conclusion which I shall seek to enforce—if Old Regulation XIII . had been properly

understood by the past generation of Masonic writers , we should have heard nothing whatever of a new ceremonial ( or new degrees ) having been concocted between 1717 and 1723 .

Did Ashmole Ever Own A Masonic Manuscript?

DID ASHMOLE EVER OWN A MASONIC MANUSCRIPT ?

Bv BKO . JACOB NORTON . IN a foot note , page 51 , of Oliver ' s " History of Masonic Persecutions , " he says t" The following account—taken from a MS . in possession of Elias Ashmole—gives a lucid explanation of the revival of Masonry at this

period [ meaning the Atbelstan period ] . It states , ' that though tho ancient records of the brotherhood in England were many of them destroyed , or lost in the wars of the Saxons and Danes , yet King Athelstan , the grandson of Alfred the Great , a mighty architect , the first anointed King of England , and who translated the Holy Bible

into the Saxon tongue , when he had brought the land into rest and peace , bnilt many great works , and encouraged many Masons from France , who were appointed overseers thereof , and brought with them the charges and regulations of the Lodges , preserved since the Roman times , who also prevailed on the King to improve the con «

stitntion of the English Lodges according to the foreign model , and to increase the wages of working Masons . That the said King ' s brother , Prince Edwin , being taoght Masonry , and taking upon him the charges of a Master Mason , for the love ho had to tho said Graft , and the honourable principles whereon it is founded , purchased a free

charter of his father [ Query—Was Athelstan Edwin ' s father , or his brother ?] for the Masons to have a correction among themselves , as it was anciently expressed , or a freedom and power to regulate themselves , to amend what might happen amiss within the Craft , and to hold a yearly communication and general assembly . That

accordingly Prince Edwin summoned all the Masons in the realm to meet him in congregation at York , in June A . D . 926 , who came and composed a general Grand Lodge , of which he was Grand Master , and having brought with them all the old writings and records of

the Craft extant , some in Greek , some in Latin , some in French , and other languages , from the contents thereof that assembly framed the constitution and charges of an English Lodge ; made a law to preserve and observe the same in all time coming , and ordained good pay for the working Masons . ' "

In Bro . Gould ' s " History of Freemasonry , " Vol . II . p 44 , he says , in reference to Preston : — " In his nse , however , of the word ' records , ' the author of the ' Illustrations' sets an example which has been closely followed by

Dr . Oliver , and whenever either of these writers present a statement requiring for its acceptance the exercise of more than ordinary credulity , it will invariably be found to rest upon the authority , i ° the one case of an old record , and in the other of a manuscript of the Society . " Unfortunately , that plan of referring to old records or