-
Articles/Ads
Article THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.* Page 1 of 2 Article THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY.* Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The History Of Freemasonry.*
THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY . *
IN this volume , Bro . Gould is occupied with the most difficult portion of his task , and we are not employing exaggerated terras of praise when we say that he appears to have exhibited the same thoroughness in his investigations which has characterised his work in the preceding
volumes . Ho will probably , nay even certainly , not meet with the same sympathy from his readers with the conclusions he has drawn—at least in respect of his first chapter , but this must not be allowed to detract from his general merits as a most conscientious writer , whose
principal object is to determine the truth . We have again and again pointed out the fault which has been committed by the majority of Masonic historians , to wit , their determination to clothe every tradition that has been handed down to us with as much circumstantiality as possible . On
the other hand , as we have ajso again and again pointed out , the latest school of Masonic investigators seems anxious to go to the very opposite extreme of rejecting everything which cannot be reasonably well authenticated . This class of student must have chapter and verse for
every proposition it lays down , and there is too much reason to fear that many cherished traditions , which may be accepted as reasonable , will be rejected quite as peremptorily as even the most monstrous assumptions of writers of the Oliver School . We must take the liberty of
pointing ont that this chariness of accepting only what is capable of demonstration by the means ordinarily employed in determining historic truths is likely to prove almost as unsatisfactory in its results as an extreme readiness to accept anything and everything , no matter how casual or slight may be its bearing on the subject .
The few remarks contained in the opening paragraph of his new volume sufficiently indicate the plan on which Bro . Gould has conducted his latest inquiries , while his
treatment of the Wren tradition as clearly indicates the extreme severity with which he is resolved on carrying out his plan . It is no doubt true enough that as yet we have failed to obtain such evidence as will serve to establish as an
absolute fact that Wren was a member of our Fraternity , but though there may be no such evidence forthcoming to the effect that he was a Freemason , there is , on the other hand , nothing which justifies the assumption that he was not . Vet , after what we readily concede is a most careful study
of the circumstances , extending over nearly the whole of Chapter XII ., Bro . Gould is enabled to see no other way out of his difficulty than by dismissing the acceptance of " the great architect—at any period of his life—into the Masonic fraternity " as " a mere figment of the
imagination . We must protest against this stern denunciation of a cherished belief , merely because it is incapable of being demonstrated as a fact ; in this case , at all events , the
probabilities are in favour of the belief . But let us follow the author throngh the successive stages of his arguments , so that the reader may have an opportunity of judging for himself if Bro . Gould ' s conclusion is justified by his
premises . Speaking generally , we see nothing exceptionable in the statement that the historian " is concerned with facts and not with possibilities ; " but this represents only a part of the historian ' s duty . He must be careful not to substitute
or mistake possibilities for facts , but he is not called upon to discard wholly the possibilities which more or less remotely affect a disputed point . It is in the nature of things that what is impossible can never acquire the status of a fact ; but setting impossibilit y aside , as being , so
to speak , the zero of possibility , we must not forget that there are degrees of possibility which no historian can afford to leave unconsidered in his treatment of a question . For instance , in this case of Wren ' s alleged membership of our Society , the historian has no option but to
discard it as a fact , but he will not be thoroughly alive to his duty if he discards it as a possibility , so reasonable as to approximate very closely to a fact . On the other hand , the proposition that Adam or Moses was a Freemason is a possibility so far removed from the status of a fact that it
The History Of Freemasonry.*
may at once be described as an impossibility . In other words , while the historian must never be allowed to confound facts and possibilities together , he should not do otherwise than endeavour to determine the value of his possibilities b y their several degrees of probability or
improbability . If we apply this " test of credibility " to the case of Wren , we shall find that his alleged membership merits a better fate than to be pooh-poohed as a " mere figment of the imagination . " Again , nothing has given us so much pleasure in
studying this work of Bro . Gould as the severity with which he denounces the ridiculous nonsense which has been palmed off upon Craftsmen as Masonio history , but this pleasure will not induce us to go so far as to discard all Masonio traditions alike , and this of Wren ' s is far too reasonable
to be treated thus unceremoniously . We do not need to be reminded that " in traditional truths each remove weakens the force of the proof ; and the more hands the traditions has successively passed through , the less strength and evidence does it receive from them . " We also bear in mind the
quotation from Locke , being well aware of the fact that " propositions , evidently false or doubtful enough in their first beginning , come by an inverted rule of probability to pass for authentic truths ; and those which found or deserved little credit from the mouths of their first authors are
thought to grow venerable by age , and are urged as undeniable . " These as general propositions are unobjectionable , but we have in our mind strong doubts , amounting almost to certainty , as to their particular applicability to the Wren tradition . We do not regard the statement of his having
been Grand Master with inordinate affection , but we see no reason , either a , priori or a posteriori , against his having been a Freemason . The allegation as to his having been such may be nothing else than a " traditional trnth , " but , in the circumstances , it must not be ranked among those
"traditional truths" which acquire "less strength and evidence , '' the " more hands " it successively passes through . It is not one of those propositions which are " evidently false or doubtful enough in their first beginning , " or , be it said rather , though it must be set down as " doubtful , " to
the same extent that everything is "doubtful" which cannot be distinctly proved , it is not " evidently false , " seeing there are few propositions which have attached to them so strong a probability of their being true . Then there is the passage which the author has quoted from
Dalcho , and which we take the liberty of transcribing . " The road to truth , particularly to subjects connected with antiquity , is generally choked with fable and error , which we must remove , by application and perseverance , before we can promise to ourselves any satisfaction in our
prgress . Because a story has been related one way for an hundred years past is not alone sufficient to stamp it with truth ; it must carry , on the face of it , the appearance of probability , and if it is a subject which can be tried by the evidence of authentic history , and by just reasoning from
established data , it will never be received by an enlightened mind on the ipse dixit of any one . " It must be understood that we raise no objection to the opinions expressed in this or other passages quoted by Bro . Gould , or to those which he himself has formulated , so far as they may be applied
generally . What we maintain is , that whether we apply them , so far as they are applicable , severally or collectively , they will be found , in either case , to have the effect of strengthening instead of weakening our grounds of faith in the Wren tradition . The passage in Aubrey ' s " Natural
History of Wiltshire , " from which "historically , the general impression derives what weight it may possess , " may be an " obscure " one—we shall not trouble to inquire why Bro . Gould thus designates the passage—and , " traditionally ( or Masonically ) the acceptance of the ' legend / and its devolution from an article of faith into a matter of a conviction "
may be dependent upon our yielding full credence to statements in Dr . Anderson ' s Constitutions of A . D . 1738 , which "—hat this of course is only a matter of opinion" are quite irreconcilable , with those in his earlier publication of 1723 . " Nevertheless , there is the passage , and even
according to Bro . Gould ' s own showing , the statement as to some great Masonic event having occurred in 1691 , the year it mentions , is corroborated by Prichard , while Anderson in 1738 , as in 1723 , had by him the same learned
brethren and Past Grand Masters , Payne and Desaguliers , as critics at all events , if not as coadjutors . It must also be borne in mind , as regards these two sources of authority , namely , the " obscure passage " in Aubrey , and the " statements in Dr . Anderson ' s Constitutions of A , D . 1738 , " that ,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The History Of Freemasonry.*
THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY . *
IN this volume , Bro . Gould is occupied with the most difficult portion of his task , and we are not employing exaggerated terras of praise when we say that he appears to have exhibited the same thoroughness in his investigations which has characterised his work in the preceding
volumes . Ho will probably , nay even certainly , not meet with the same sympathy from his readers with the conclusions he has drawn—at least in respect of his first chapter , but this must not be allowed to detract from his general merits as a most conscientious writer , whose
principal object is to determine the truth . We have again and again pointed out the fault which has been committed by the majority of Masonic historians , to wit , their determination to clothe every tradition that has been handed down to us with as much circumstantiality as possible . On
the other hand , as we have ajso again and again pointed out , the latest school of Masonic investigators seems anxious to go to the very opposite extreme of rejecting everything which cannot be reasonably well authenticated . This class of student must have chapter and verse for
every proposition it lays down , and there is too much reason to fear that many cherished traditions , which may be accepted as reasonable , will be rejected quite as peremptorily as even the most monstrous assumptions of writers of the Oliver School . We must take the liberty of
pointing ont that this chariness of accepting only what is capable of demonstration by the means ordinarily employed in determining historic truths is likely to prove almost as unsatisfactory in its results as an extreme readiness to accept anything and everything , no matter how casual or slight may be its bearing on the subject .
The few remarks contained in the opening paragraph of his new volume sufficiently indicate the plan on which Bro . Gould has conducted his latest inquiries , while his
treatment of the Wren tradition as clearly indicates the extreme severity with which he is resolved on carrying out his plan . It is no doubt true enough that as yet we have failed to obtain such evidence as will serve to establish as an
absolute fact that Wren was a member of our Fraternity , but though there may be no such evidence forthcoming to the effect that he was a Freemason , there is , on the other hand , nothing which justifies the assumption that he was not . Vet , after what we readily concede is a most careful study
of the circumstances , extending over nearly the whole of Chapter XII ., Bro . Gould is enabled to see no other way out of his difficulty than by dismissing the acceptance of " the great architect—at any period of his life—into the Masonic fraternity " as " a mere figment of the
imagination . We must protest against this stern denunciation of a cherished belief , merely because it is incapable of being demonstrated as a fact ; in this case , at all events , the
probabilities are in favour of the belief . But let us follow the author throngh the successive stages of his arguments , so that the reader may have an opportunity of judging for himself if Bro . Gould ' s conclusion is justified by his
premises . Speaking generally , we see nothing exceptionable in the statement that the historian " is concerned with facts and not with possibilities ; " but this represents only a part of the historian ' s duty . He must be careful not to substitute
or mistake possibilities for facts , but he is not called upon to discard wholly the possibilities which more or less remotely affect a disputed point . It is in the nature of things that what is impossible can never acquire the status of a fact ; but setting impossibilit y aside , as being , so
to speak , the zero of possibility , we must not forget that there are degrees of possibility which no historian can afford to leave unconsidered in his treatment of a question . For instance , in this case of Wren ' s alleged membership of our Society , the historian has no option but to
discard it as a fact , but he will not be thoroughly alive to his duty if he discards it as a possibility , so reasonable as to approximate very closely to a fact . On the other hand , the proposition that Adam or Moses was a Freemason is a possibility so far removed from the status of a fact that it
The History Of Freemasonry.*
may at once be described as an impossibility . In other words , while the historian must never be allowed to confound facts and possibilities together , he should not do otherwise than endeavour to determine the value of his possibilities b y their several degrees of probability or
improbability . If we apply this " test of credibility " to the case of Wren , we shall find that his alleged membership merits a better fate than to be pooh-poohed as a " mere figment of the imagination . " Again , nothing has given us so much pleasure in
studying this work of Bro . Gould as the severity with which he denounces the ridiculous nonsense which has been palmed off upon Craftsmen as Masonio history , but this pleasure will not induce us to go so far as to discard all Masonio traditions alike , and this of Wren ' s is far too reasonable
to be treated thus unceremoniously . We do not need to be reminded that " in traditional truths each remove weakens the force of the proof ; and the more hands the traditions has successively passed through , the less strength and evidence does it receive from them . " We also bear in mind the
quotation from Locke , being well aware of the fact that " propositions , evidently false or doubtful enough in their first beginning , come by an inverted rule of probability to pass for authentic truths ; and those which found or deserved little credit from the mouths of their first authors are
thought to grow venerable by age , and are urged as undeniable . " These as general propositions are unobjectionable , but we have in our mind strong doubts , amounting almost to certainty , as to their particular applicability to the Wren tradition . We do not regard the statement of his having
been Grand Master with inordinate affection , but we see no reason , either a , priori or a posteriori , against his having been a Freemason . The allegation as to his having been such may be nothing else than a " traditional trnth , " but , in the circumstances , it must not be ranked among those
"traditional truths" which acquire "less strength and evidence , '' the " more hands " it successively passes through . It is not one of those propositions which are " evidently false or doubtful enough in their first beginning , " or , be it said rather , though it must be set down as " doubtful , " to
the same extent that everything is "doubtful" which cannot be distinctly proved , it is not " evidently false , " seeing there are few propositions which have attached to them so strong a probability of their being true . Then there is the passage which the author has quoted from
Dalcho , and which we take the liberty of transcribing . " The road to truth , particularly to subjects connected with antiquity , is generally choked with fable and error , which we must remove , by application and perseverance , before we can promise to ourselves any satisfaction in our
prgress . Because a story has been related one way for an hundred years past is not alone sufficient to stamp it with truth ; it must carry , on the face of it , the appearance of probability , and if it is a subject which can be tried by the evidence of authentic history , and by just reasoning from
established data , it will never be received by an enlightened mind on the ipse dixit of any one . " It must be understood that we raise no objection to the opinions expressed in this or other passages quoted by Bro . Gould , or to those which he himself has formulated , so far as they may be applied
generally . What we maintain is , that whether we apply them , so far as they are applicable , severally or collectively , they will be found , in either case , to have the effect of strengthening instead of weakening our grounds of faith in the Wren tradition . The passage in Aubrey ' s " Natural
History of Wiltshire , " from which "historically , the general impression derives what weight it may possess , " may be an " obscure " one—we shall not trouble to inquire why Bro . Gould thus designates the passage—and , " traditionally ( or Masonically ) the acceptance of the ' legend / and its devolution from an article of faith into a matter of a conviction "
may be dependent upon our yielding full credence to statements in Dr . Anderson ' s Constitutions of A . D . 1738 , which "—hat this of course is only a matter of opinion" are quite irreconcilable , with those in his earlier publication of 1723 . " Nevertheless , there is the passage , and even
according to Bro . Gould ' s own showing , the statement as to some great Masonic event having occurred in 1691 , the year it mentions , is corroborated by Prichard , while Anderson in 1738 , as in 1723 , had by him the same learned
brethren and Past Grand Masters , Payne and Desaguliers , as critics at all events , if not as coadjutors . It must also be borne in mind , as regards these two sources of authority , namely , the " obscure passage " in Aubrey , and the " statements in Dr . Anderson ' s Constitutions of A , D . 1738 , " that ,