Old Undated Masonic Manuscripts.

story was taken out of tho Bible , as the author intimates , even then I could not believe ifc , and I am sure thafc every intelligent boy who attends a Sunday school would laugh at the story , but for all that , tho said story was

repented in a majority of tho MSS . known as " Old Charges " ( but in reality they wero the pre-1717 Masonic rituals ) , from the one written in 1585 , up to those written before 1717 . So much for the Euclid Masonic tradition . And now lot us see how much more reliable the so-called Athelstan

tradition is to the Euclid tradition . Our poet ascribes the beginning or origin of Masonry in England to King Athelstan ; he says : —

" This good Lord loved tho craft well , And proDosed to strengthen ifc every dell [ part ] , For divers faults that in fche Craft he found , lie sent about into the londe [ land ] . After all the Masons of fcho Graft ,

To come fco him full even straight , For to amend those defects all By good Council , if ifc might fall . An assembly then he known let make , Of divers Lords iu their state ,

Dukes , Earls , and Barons also , Knights , Squires , and many more , And the great City burghers of the City , They were there , all in their degree , These were there , each one in every way ,

To ordain for their Masons' estate 5 There they sought , by their wit , How they might govern it ; Fifteen articles there they sought , And fifteen points there they wrought . "

The reader will notice that no year or date is mentioned as to when the said assembly was held , nor where it was held . Athelstan , and Athelstan alone , is said to have

called the said assembly , and all he did was simply to sanction a code of laws , consisting of 15 articles and 15 points , and not a word about a charter or patent is mentioned . And I must here add that all the authority the poet furnishes for tho Athelstan story is as follows : — " This Craft came into England as I—you say , In the time of good , kind Athelstan , his day . " Which means that the story was derived from hearsay , or ,

in other words , thafc it was a tradition , and the said story found its way into a poem about five hundred or more years after Athelstan's death . So much for the poet ' s story ; and now let us see what the author of the Cooke MS .

had to say about it . Now , in tho first place , onr second Masonic author differs from tho first or poot in beginning his history of Masonry from Lamacb , and the history of Masonry in England ho began with Sainfc Alban . After Saint Alban , he comes down at once to Athelstan , and

says : — " After thafc was a worthy King iu England thafc was called Athelstan , and his youngest son lovod well tho science of geometry , and he wist well that handici \ . ft and tho practice of the science of geometry , so well as mason ? . Wherefore ho drew him to council and learned

[ tho ] practice of that science to his speculative , for of speculative he was a master , * and he loved masonry and masons . And be became a mason himself , and he gave \ hera charges and names , as is now used in England and in other countries . And he ordained that thoy should havo reasonable pay , and purchased a freo patent of tho King that th ' oy should make [ an ] assembly . "

There the story of Athelstan ' s son ' s Masonry is inter

rupted with tho story of Euglet , in Egypt , above referred lo , after which he resumes the history of English Masonry , thus : — "After many yoarr , [ after Eaglet ' s story ] , in tho time of King Athelstan , which was some time King of England , by his

councillors and other groat Lords of the land , by common assent , for great fault found among Masons , they ordained a certain rule amongst them : ono time of tho year , or iu 3 years , as need were to the King and groat Lords of the land , and all the commonalty , from province to province , and from country to country , congregations should be made by Masters , " & o .

Afc this assembly , instead of 15 articles aud 15 points , only nine of each were ordained ; and again , we are not informed as to where or when the said assembly was

hold ; the author of tho Cooke MS ., however , puts King Athelstan in the back ground , and he ascribes all the Masonic glory to Athelstan ' s youngest sou ; and , moreover , he informs us that the youngest son of AlthelsWu

Old Undated Masonic Manuscripts.

bought a patent , or charter , for tho Masons , but the name of the youngest sou of Athelstan is not given . Tho third Masonio author , viz ., of the 1585 MS ., says about it : "And ho [ Athelstan ] had a soone , that highfc Edwin . " Tho name of Edwin was unknown then as a

Mason , until 27 th December 1585 . Besides which , the 1585 Masonic historian further informs us that Edwin " held himself an assembly afc York . " We see now that neither Edwin nor York was known to have bad any

connection with Masonry before the end of 1585 . In Anderson ' s Constitutions of 1723 , Prince Edwin Sgnrcs as tho youngest son of Athelstan , and Bro . Anderson further says that the York assembly was held " about 930 . " Anderson , however , afterwards learned

that King Althelstan was childless , but that he had a brother that was named Edwin , and so in the 1738 Constitutions , Anderson quotes , from some unknown authority , as follows : — " That Prince Edwin , the King ' s brother , being taught geometry

and Masonry , for the love he had of the said Craft . . . purchased a freo charter of King Athelstan , hia brother . " But Bro . Anderson made another discovery , viz . : instead of dating tho York assembly to " about 930 , " he made it sharp A . D . 92 G .

One would suppose that so many successive Masonic scholars must have brought tho history of Masonry to perfection with Anderson's investigations and discoveries . But our Masonic antiquity hankorers must needs try to persuade us that Masonry in England is older than Athelstan's day . This Prince Edwin , who was not Masonized before 1585 , was only a Prince , and for the

honour of Masonry ifc should have been a King Edwin , and not a Prince Edwin , that founded Masonry in England . Besides which , tho time of Athelstan is nofc

ancient enough for them . Now , our late lamented

Bro . Woodford , though he was a very good man , was unfortunately afflicted with an inclination of attributing greater antiquity to everything in Masonry than

common sense would allow , hence he said , in Kenning ' s Cyclopaedia : —

" The learned Dr . Drake , in 1726 , afc York , first gave us , as we hold , the true solution of the difficulty , viz ., that the Masonio tradition referred to Edwin or Eadwin of Deira , King of Norfchnm . berland , baptized by Paulinus at York , in 627 , whore he built afterwards a stone church , " & c .

I must here again repeat that neither tho poet nor the author of the Cooke MS . knew either of "York Masonry , " or of Edwin ' s Masonry , but as our later

Masonic antiquity hankerers learned from the MSS ., known as " The Old Charges , " that Edwin summoned a Masonic assembly afc York in the 10 th Century ; Ah ¦! said they , York is right , bufc the Edwin that summoned

the said assembly did not live in the 10 th century , but lived in tho 7 th century , and that his name was nofc Edwin but Eadwin . This is all very nice ; bufc , on the

other hand , as Eadwin was fatherless when he was Masonized , ho could nofc have purchased a Free Charter from his father , hence , after all , the ancient York Masons could never havo had a charter .

And now for the various narratives about the origin of Masonry in England . 1 st . The poet knew thafc Athelstan called the Masons together , and gave them 15 Articles and 15 Points .

2 nd . The author of the Cooke MS . knew thafc tho youngest son of Athelstan called the said assembly , aud he gave the Masons only 9 Articles aud 9 Points .

3 rd . The author ot * the 1585 MS . knew thafc tho youngest son ' s name of Athelstan was Edwin , and that the assembly was hold at York .

dfch . Anderson knew , iu 1723 , that fcho said assembly was held " aboufc 930 . "

5 fch . In 1738 Anderson knew that Edwin was not a sou of Athelstan , bufc his brother , and thafc tho assembly was held iu 92 G .

Gfch . In 172 ( 3 , Dr . Drake knew that fcho traditional Edwin founded Masonry afc York , nofc in 930 or 92 G , but iu G 27 .

And 7 fch . I know that there is no truth whatever 111 the Masonic York legend . I believe no more in tho said legend than 1 believe iu the Messrs . Abraham and Euclid legend . In short , no truth can bo extracted from tbe old

MSS j and no truth can be infused into them . Nay , more , Anderson ' s pre-1717 history of Masonry is as unreliable as the legends iu tho old MSS . Take , for instance , Anderson ' s iiai of the pre-1717 Graud Masters , aud I venture to