CHAPTER XV.

EAELY BEITISH FEEEMASONEY.

E N G L A N D.— I V.

THE "OLD CHAEGES"— THE LEGEND OF THE CEAFT— LIGHT AND
DAEKNESS— GOTHIC TRADITIONS.

^ITHOUT a classification of authorities, any ancient text preserved in a plurality of
documents, will present the appearance of a single labyrinth, through which
there is no definite guiding clue. The groups, however, into which the " Old
, -vi-^ i] Charges "have been arranged, wiU sufficiently enable us to grasp their true

t meaning in a collective character, and this point attained, I shaU pass on to another
branch of our inquiry.

Before proceeding with the evidence, it may be convenient to explain, that whilst the
singularities of individual manuscripts wiU, in some cases, be closely examined, this, in each
instance, wiU be subsidiary to the main design, which is, to ascertain the character of the Free-
masonry into which Ashmole was received, and to trace, as far as the evidence wiU permit, its
antiquity as a speculative science.

These " Old Charges," the title-deeds and evidences of an inherited Freemasonry, would
indeed amply reward the closest and most minute examination, but their leading characteristics
have been sufficiently disclosed, and in my further observations on their mutual relations, I
shall leave the ground clear for a future collation of these valuable documents by some com-
petent hand.

Whether " theories raised on facsimiles or printed copies are utterly valueless for any
correct archaeological or historical treatment of such evidences," ^ it is not my province to
determine, but it may at least be affirmed, that " the extemporaneous surmises of an ordinary
untrained reader will differ widely from the range of possibilities present to the mind of a
scholar, prepared both by general training in the analysis of texts, and by special study of the
facts bearing on the particular case." ^

A method of textual criticism, begun by Dr John Mill in 1707, and completed by Drs
Westcott and Hort in 1881, seems to me, however, to promise such excellent results, if applied
to the old records of tlie Craft, that I shall present its leading features, in the hope that their

1 Woodford, The Age of Ancient Masonic Manuscripts, Masonic Magazine, Oct. 1874, \<. 98.
' Dr Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, Introduction, 1881, p. 21.

204 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

appearance in this work, whilst throwing some additional light upon a portion of our subject
which has hitherto lain much in the dark, may indicate what a promising field of inquiry still
awaits the zealous student of our antiquities.

The system or method referred to, has been evolved in successive editions of the Greek
Testament, commencing with that of Mill in 1707, and ending with the elaborate work of
Doctors Westcott and Hort.

Mill was followed by Bentley, but the system received a great development at the hands
of Bengel in 1734, whose maxim.^ " Prodivi scriptioni prccstat ardua," has been generally
adopted. By him, in the first instance, existing documents were classified into families.

The same principles were further developed by Griesbach "on a double foundation of
enriched resources and deeper study," and witli important help from suggestions of Semler
and Hug.

Lachmann inaugurated a new period in 1831, when, for the first time, a systematic
attempt was made to substitute scientific method for arbitrary choice in the discrimination of
various readings.

Passing over Professor Tiscliendorf (1841), and, for the time being, also Dr Tregelles (1854),
we next come to Doctors Westcott and Hort (1881).^

The main points of interest and originality in the closely reasoned " introduction " of Dr
Hort are the weight given to the genealogy of documents, and his searching analysis of the
effects of mixture, upon the different ancient texts.

Two leading maxims are laid down, of which tlie first is, "That knowledge of documents

SHOULD PRECEDE FINAL JUDGMENTS UPON READINGS." ^

This is to be attained, in the first place, from " The Internal Evidence of Eeadings," of
which there are two kinds, " Intrinsic Probability," having reference to the author, and
'• Transcriptional Probability," having reference to the copyists. In appealing to the first, we
ask what an author is likely to have written ; * in appealing to the second, we ask what
copyists are likely to have made him seem to write.^

1 This great principle of distinction between various readings was then little understood, and has been practically
opposed by many who have discussed such subjects in later times. On the other hand, Dr Tregelles observes, "surely in cases
of equal evidence, the more difficult reading — the reading which a copyist would not be likely to introduce — stands on a
higher ground, as to evidence, than one which presents something altogether easy " (The printed text of the Greek
New Testament, 1854, p. 70). Also, according to Dr Hort, " it is chiefly to the earnest, if somewhat crude advocacy of
Bengel, that Transcriptional Probabilities, under the name of the harder reading, owe their subsequent full recognition "
(The New Testament in the Original Greek, Introduction by Dr Hort, p. 181).

- The New Testament in the Original Greek, 1881.

3 This differs slightly, if at all, from the legal axiom — " Contemporanea expositio est optima ct fortissima in lege—
The best and surest mode of expounding an instrument is by referring to the time when, and circumstances under
which, it was made" (2 Inst. 11 ; Broom, Legal Maxims, edit. 1864, p. 654).

* "There is much literature, ancient no less than modern, in which it is needful to remember that authors are not
always grammatical, or clear, or consistent, or felicitous ; so that not seldom an ordinary reader finds it easy to replace
a feeble or half-appropriate word or phrase by an effective substitute ; and thus the best words to express an author's
meaning need not in all cases be those which he actually employed" (Hort, Introduction to New Test., p. 21).

' "It can hardly be too habitually remembered, in critici.sm, that copyists were always more accustomed to add
than to omit. Of course careless transcribers may omit ; but, in general, texts, like snowballs, grow in course of trans-
mission " (Tregelles, The Greek New Testament, 1854, p. 88). Torson says: "Perhaps you think it an affected and
absurd idea that a marginal note can ever creep into the text ; yet I hope you are not so ignorant as not to know that
this has actually happened, not merely in hundreds or thousands, but in millions of cases. From this known pro-

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 205

Tlie limitation to Internal Evidence of Readings follows naturally from the impulse to deal
conclusively at once with every variation as it comes in turn before a reader, a commentator,
or an editor ; but a consideration of the process of transmission shows how precarious it is to
attempt to judge which of two or more readings is the most likely to be right, without
examining which of the attesting documents, or combination of documents, is the most likely
to convey an unadulterated transcript of the original text ; or in other words, in dealing with
matter purely traditional, to ignore the relative antecedent credibility of witnesses, and trust
exclusively to our own inward power of singling out the true readings from among their
counterfeits, wherever we see them.

Secondly, then, there here comes in the " Internal Evidence of Documents," that is, the
general characteristics of the texts contained in them as learned directly from themselves by
continuous study of the whole or of considerable parts.

This paves the way for the maxim to which I have already referred — that " Knowledge
of Documents should precede final Judgment upon Eeadings." Wherever the better documents
are ranged on different sides, the decision becomes virtually dependent on the uncertainties
of isolated personal judgments ; there is evidently no way through the chaos of complex
attestation which thus confronts us, except by going back to its causes, that is, by inquiring
what antecedent circumstances of transmission will account for such combinations of agree-
ments and differences between the several documents as we find actually existing. In other
words, we are led to the necessity of investigating not only individual documents and their
characteristics, but yet more the mutual relations of several documents.

The next great step consists in ceasing to treat documents independently of each other,
and examining them connectedly, as parts of a single whole, in virtue of their historical
relationships. In their prima facie character, documents present themselves as so many
independent and rival texts of greater or less purity. But as a matter of fact, they are not
independent ; by the nature of the case, they are all fragments — usually casual and scattered
fragments — of a genealogical tree of transmission, sometimes of vast extent and intricacy.
The more exactly we are able to trace the chief ramifications of the tree, and to deter-
mine the places of the several records among the branches, the more secure will be the
foundations laid for a criticism capable of distinguishing the original text from its successive
corruptions.

At this point comes in the second maxim or principle, that All trustworthy Eestoration
OF corrupted texts is fouxded oy THE STUDY OF THEiK HISTORY — that is, of the relations of
descent or affinity which connect the several documents.

The introduction of the factor of genealogy at once lessens the power of mere numbers. If
there is sufficient evidence, external or internal, for believing that of ten MSS. the first nine
were all copied, directly or indirectly, from the tenth, it will be known that all the variations
from the tenth can be only corruptions, and that for documentary evidence we have only to
follow the tenth.i

pensity of transcribers to turn everything into text wliieli they found written on the margin of their MSS. , or between
the lines, so many interpolations have proceeded, that at present the surest canon of criticism is, Preferatur lectio
brevior" (Letters to Archdeacon Travis, 1790, pp. 149, 150).

' "Any number of documents ascertained to be all exclusively descended from another extant document, maybe
put safely out of sight, and with them, of course, all readings which have uo other authority " (Hort, Introduction to
KewTest., p. 53).

2o6 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

If, however, the result of the inquiry is to find that all the uiiie MSS. were derived, not
from the tenth, but from another lost MS., the ten documents resolve themselves virtually into
two witnesses : the tenth MS., which can be known directly and completely, and the lost MS.,
which must be restored through the readings of its nine descendants, exactly and by simple
transcription where they agree, approximately and by critical processes where they disagree.

The evidence on which the genealogy of documents turns is sometimes, though rarely,
external, and is chiefly gained by a study of their texts in comparison with each other. The
process depends on the principle that identity of reading implies identity of origin. Full
allowance being made for accidental coincidences, the great bulk of texts common to two or
more MSS. may be taken as certain evidence of a common origin. This community of origin
may be either complete, that is, due entirely to a common ancestry, or partial, that is, due to
mixture, which is virtually the engrafting of occasional or partial community of ancestry upon
predominantly independent descent.

The clearest evidence for tracing the antecedent factors of " mixture " in texts, is afforded
by readings which are themselves " mixed," or, as they are sometimes called, confute, that is,
not simple substitutions of the reading of one document for that of another, but combinations
of the readings of both documents into a composite whole, sometimes by mere addition with
or without a conjunction, sometimes with more or less of fusion.

Another critical resource, which is in some sense intermediate between internal evidence
of documents and genealogical evidence, in order of utility follows the latter, and may be
termed its sustaining complement. This supplementary resource is internal evidence of
groups, and by its very nature it enables us to deal separately with the different elements of a
document of mixed ancestry. Where there has been no mixture, the transmission of a text is
divergent, that is, in the course of centuries the copies have a tendency to get further and
further away from the original and from each otlier. The result of " mixture " is to invert
this process. Hence a wide distribution of readings among existing groups of documents need
not point back to very ancient divergencies. They are just as likely to be the result of a
late wide extension given by favourable circumstances to readings formerly very restricted

in area.

In the preceding summary an outline has been given of those principles of textual
criticism, which are found by experience to be of value in inquiries such as we are now
pursuing.

My own method, of classifying the "Old Charges" accordiug to their historical value,
may not meet all cases, nor satisfy all readers. It possesses, however, the merit of
simplicity, which is no slight one. The characteristics of each MS. are revealed at a
glance, whilst in " the descriptive list," which follows a few pages later, will be found the
skeleton history of every document, together with a reference to the page in Chapter II.,
where it is described at length.

In classifying the MSS. with a due regard to their separate weight as evidence, I hope
in some degree to remove the confusion which has arisen from the application of the con-
venient term " authorities " to these documents.

The " Old Charges " may, indeed, be regarded as competent witnesses, but every care
must be taken to understand their testimony, and to weigh it in all its particulars.

The various readings in our manuscript "Constitutions," it is not my purpose to

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 207

scrutinise very closely. In aU. cases ^ we rely upon transcripts very far removed from the
originals. Yet, if three are put on one side— the Harleian 1942 (11), the Eoberts (44),
and the Krause (51) — we find substantial identity between the legend of the craft, as
presented in the oldest and the youngest of these documents respectively. It is true that
the number of transcriptions, and consequent opportunities of corruption, cannot be
accurately measured by difference of date, for at any date a transcript might be made either
from a contemporary manuscript, or from one written any number of centuries before. And,
as certain MSS. are found, by a process of inductive proof, to contain an ancient text, their
character as witnesses must be considered to be so established, that in other places their
testimony deserves peculiar weight.^ Still, taking the actual age of each MS. from that of
No. 4 (Grand Lodge) — 1583 — and earlier, down to those of documents which overlap the year
1717, e.g., the Gateshead (30), which will give us the relative antiquity of the vjritings, though
not, of course, of the readings — the traditions of the craft — of which we possess any docu-
mentary evidence — are found not to have undergone any material variation ^ during the
century and more which immediately preceded the era of Grand Lodges.

The " Old Charges " were tendered as evidence of the Masonic pedigree in Chapter II.
Indeed, a friendly critic complains of the insertion of their general description " in the first
volume as being out of sequence in the history," * though, as he bases this judgment upon my
having — after leaving the Culdees — " made a skip of some centuries, and landed my readers
in the fifteenth century," I may be permitted to reply, that the Colidei or Cele-de continued
to exist as a distinct class at Devenish, an island on Loch Erne, until the year 1630; also that
the history of the Culdees, and the written traditions of the Freemasons, possess a common
feature in the grant of a charter from King Athelstan, the interest of which is enhanced by
the privileges, in each case, derived under the instrument, being exercised at York.^

Assuming, then, that in Chapter II. the " Old Charges " were taken as read, I shall proceed
a step further, and prove then- legal admissibility as evidence.

For this purpose, and following the line of argument used at an earlier page,^ I shall bring
forward the gi'oup of documents to which I have assigned the highest place ^ under my own
system of classification. Several of these, at least — and even one would suffice to establish my
point — come from the pro2)er custody ; and of acts done with reference to them, there is ample
proof, direct in some instances, and indirect in others.

Next, and longo intervallo, come the remaining documents, all of which fail in attaining
the highest weight of authority.

1 I.e., excluding from consideration the Halliwcll (1) and Cooke (2) MSS., which may be termed evidences of pre-
existing, or, in other words, fourteenth century Constitutions. The mixed or confiate readings in both documents, to be
presently noticed, point to the use in each case of different exemplars, one of which, at least, indicated in the Halliwell
poem by the Ars quatuor coroxatorum, is to be found in no other line of transmission.

2 Thus, in the opinion of experts, the Dowland MS. (39) of the seventeenth century was transcribed from a much
older document. The reading it contains has been assigned by Woodford the approximate date of 1500. Cf. Hughan,
Old Charges, preface, p. xi. ; and Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., pp. 81, 99.

'Respecting the general authenticity of manuscript copies of a single text, Sir G. Lewis observes: "Their
authority is increased by their substantial agreement, eombined with disagreevieni in subordiiiatc points, inasmuch as it
shows that they are not all derived from some common original of recent date" (On the Methods of Observation and
Reasoning in Politics, vol. i., p. 209).

* Mr Wyatt Papworth, iu the Builder, March 3, 1883. " Chap. II., pp. 50, 52.

" Ante, pp. 195, 196. ' Class I., ante, \>. 192.

2o8 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Tlius the relative inferiority of the manuscripts forming the second class to these com-
prising the first, is not continued in the same ratio. Descending a step, the deteriora-
tion of proof, though distinguishable, is not so marked. Manuscripts in roll or book
form suggest wider inferences than are justified by others merely written on vellum or parch-
ment. A clear line separates the components of the last from those of the last class but one ;
but in the larger number of cases the importance and value of all the documents hdow the
Lodfjc Records will be found to depend upon extraneous considerations, which will be differently
regarded by different persons, and cannot therefore be of service in the classification.

To use the words of Dr ]\Iaitland,^ " every copy of an old writing was unique — every one
stood upon its own individual character ; and the correctness of a particular manuscript was
no pledge for even those which were copied immediately from it." It is evident, therefore,
that if undue weight is attached to the existence of mere verbal discrepancies, each version of
the " Old Charges " might in turn become the subject of separate treatment. Subject to the
qualification, that I do not concede the "correctness" of Harleian MS. 1942 (11), that is, in
the sense of the " New Articles " which form its distinctive feature, being an authorised and
accredited reading whicli has come down to us through a legitimate channel — the manuscript
in question, when examined in connection with No. 44 (Roberts), fully sustains the argument
of Dr Maitland.2

The documents last cited, if we dismiss the Krause MS. (51)3 ^s being unworthy of
further examination, constitute the two exceptions to the general rule, that the " legend of the
craft," or, in other words, the written traditions of the Freemasons, as given in the several
versions of the " Old Charges," from the sixteenth down to the eighteenth century, are in
substance identical.

The characteristic features of the Harleian (11) and Eoberts (44) MSS. have been given
with sufficient particularity in Chapter II.,* where I also express my beUef that the latter is
a reproduction or counterpart of the former. I am of opinion that the Roberts text is
the product of a revision, which was in fact a recension, and may, with fair probability, be
assigned to the period when Dr Anderson, by order of the Grand Lodge, was " digesting the
old Gothic Constitutions," ^ which would exactly accord with the date of publication of the
MS. Of the Roberts text, as may be said in the analogous case of the Locke manuscript, — it
stands upon the faith of the compiler — and is only worthy of notice in an historical inquiry,
from the fact that it was adopted, and still further revised by Dr Anderson," whose " New
Book of Constitutions " (1738), " collected and digested, by order of the Grand Lodge, from
their old records, faithful traditions, and lodge-books," ' informs us, on the authority of " a
copy of the old Constitutions" that after the [restoration of Charles II., the Earl of St Albans,
having become Grand Master, and appointed Sir John Denham his deputy, and Sir Christopher

' The Dark Ages, p. G9. ' Chap. II., pp. 64, 75, 83. ^ ;jj^., p. 77 ; and Chap. XL, p. 494.

* Pp. 64, 75, 103, 104, 105. The date of publication of No. 44, given at p. 75, line 3, to read mdccx.xii.

» Chaps. II., p. 103 ; VII., p. 352, 353.

" Chap. II., pp. 104, 105. Sir G. Lewis observes : "The value of written historical evidence is further subject to
be diminished by intentioiial falsification. Sometimes this is effected by altering the tests of extant authors, or by
interpolating passages into them " (On the Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics, vol. i., p. 209).

'The New Book of Constitutions, 1738, title page, "We, the Grand Master, Deputy, and Wardens, do hereby
recommend this our new printed Book as the only Book of Constitutions, and we warn all the Brethren against using
any other Book in any Lodge as a Lodge-Book" {Ibid., The Sanction, preceding the title page).

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 209

Wi-en and Mr John Web his wardens, " held a General Assembly and Feast on St John's day
27 Dec. 16G3," ^ when the six regulations were made, of which the first five are only given in
the MS. of origin (11), though all are duly shown in No. 44.^

These regulations, which Dr Anderson gives at length, are so plainly derived from the
Eoberts MS., that it would be a waste of time to proceed with their examination, the more
especially as the corruptions of the Harleian text (11) which are found in the recensions of
1722 and 1738, have been already pointed out in the course of these observations.^

The two readings, we have last considered, may safely therefore, in accordance with the
genealogical evidence,* be allowed to " drop out," and we are brought face to face with the
original text — Harleian MS. 1942.

Having now attained a secure footing from an application of the principle laid down by Dr
Hort in his second maxim, the canon of criticism previously insisted upon by the same
authority may be usefully followed. Our "knowledge," however, of this document is of a
very limited character ; and even its date, which is the most prominent fact known about a
manuscript, can neither be determined with any precision by palaeographical or other indirect
indications, nor from external facts or records. This is the more to be regretted, since, if we
obey the paradoxical precept, " to choose the harder reading," which is the essence of textual
criticism,^ the "New Articles" given in MS. 11, open up a vista of Transcriptional and other
Probabilities which we shall not find equalled by the variations of all the remaining texts or
readings put together.

These constitute the crux of the historian. It has been well gaid, that "if the knot
cannot be opened, let us not cut it, nor fret our tempers, nor wound our fingers by trying
to undo it, but be quite content to leave it untied, and say so."^ The "New Articles"
I cannot explain, nor in my judgment is an explanation material. We are concerned with
the admissibility of evidence and the validity of proofs, and to go further would be to
embark upon the wide ocean of antiquarian research. The manuscript under examination,
in common with the rest, is admissible, and its weight, as an historical record, has to be
determined, but if by a careful review of facts, we find that a material portion of the
text differs from that of any other independent version of the " Old Charges," whilst, as an
authoritative document, it ranks far below a great number of them — unless we deliberately
violate every canon of criticism — the stronger will prevail over the weaker evidence, and so
much of the latter as may actually conflict with the former, must be totally disregarded.'^

This will not extend, of course, to the rejection of the inferior text, where its sole defect
is the absence of corroboration, as the necessity for excluding evidence will only arise, when the
circumstances are such, as to compel us to choose between two discrepant and wholly incon-
sistent readings.^

' Cf. ante, p. 11 ; and Chap. II., p. 105. ' Chap. II., pp. 75, 88.

' If the so-called Roberts MS. had any better attestation, it might be worth while inquiring, why the blank

between the words, "a General Assembly held at [in all, thirteen ticks or marks], on the

Eighth Day of December 1663" — was not filled up? The question of dates would also become material, since, if Jlr
Boml's estimate is followed, we find M.S. 11 — ilating from the hcginnhig of the century — containing six out of ncvcn
regulations which were only made in 1663 ! Cf. Chap. II., pp. 75, 88.

■• I.e., that identity of reading implies identity of origin. ' Ante, p. 204, note 1.

' Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, p. 121. ' Sec ante, p. 196.

' "Authorities cannot be followed mechanically, and thus, where there is a diifcrence of reading, , • . all that we
VOL. II. "2d

210 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Altliougli, in the opinion of Mr Halliwell, "the age of a middle-age manuscript can in
most cases be ascertained much more accurately than the best conjecture could determine that
of a human being," ^ the experience in courts of justice hardly justifies so complete a reliance
upon experts in writing ; and the date which he has himself assigned to the earliest record of
the Craft (MS. 1) differs from the estimate of Mr Bond, by more years than we can conceive
possible, in the parallel case of the age of a man or woman being guessed by two impartial
and competent observers.

It is to be supposed that the remark of the antiquary, to whom we are indebted for
bringing to light the Masonic poem, would extend beyond the manuscript literature of the
IMiddle Ages, and though the maxim, " cvilihet in sua arte pcrito est credcndum" "^ must not be
construed so liberally as to wholly exclude the right of private judgment, there is no other
standard than the judgment of experts, by which we can estimate the age of an ancient writing,
with the impartiality, so indispensably requisite, if it is desired tliat our conclusions should be
adopted in good faith by readers who cannot see the proofs.

The document under examination (11), as regards form, material, and custody, comes before
us under circumstances from which its use for antiquarian purposes, rather than for the require-
ments of a lodge, may be inferred. Externally therefore, it is destitute of Masonic value by
comparison with the four sets of documents which precede it in my classification. Its
internal character we must now deal with, and the first thing to do is to ascertain the date of
transcription. Mr Bond's estimate is "the beginning of the seventeenth century," and by
Woodford and Hughan the date has been fixed at about 1670. In my own judgment, and
with great deference to Mr Bond, the evidence afforded by the manuscript itself is not con-
clusive as to the impossibility of its having been transcribed nearer the end of the century.
This I take the opportunity of expressing, not with a view of setting up my personal opinion
in a matter of ancient handwriting against that of the principal librarian of the British
Museum, but because the farther the transcription of the MS. can be carried doivn, the less
will be the probability of ray mode of dealing with its value as an historical document being
generally accepted.

I do not think, however, that by the greatest latitude of construction, the age of the ]\IS.
can be fixed any later than 1670, or say, sixteen years before the date of the Antiquity MS.
(23), with which I shall chiefly compare it.

Leaving for the time, No. 11 (Harleian), let me ask my readers to consider the remaining
MSS., except Nos. 44 (Roberts) and 51 (Krause), as formally tendered in evidence.

These will form the subject of our next inquiry, and I may observe, that although the
copies which I place iu the highest clas.s, differ in slight and unimportant details, this con-
sideration does not detract from their value as critical authorities, since they are certainly
monuments of what was read and iised in the time when they were written.

To the Antiquity MS. (23) 1 attach the highest value of all. It comes down to us with

know of the nature and origin of various reaJings . • . must be employed. But discrimiuation of this kind is only
required when the witnesses differ ; for otherwise, we sliould fall into the error of determining hy conjecture what the
text ought to be, instead of accepting it as it is" (Tregelles, The Greek New Testament, p. 186).

' A few Hints to Novices in Manuscript Literature, 1839, p. 11.

' Co. Litt. 125 a ; Broom, Legal Maxims, 1861, p. 896. — "Credence should be given to one skilled in his peculiar
profession."

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 211

every concomitant of authority that can add weight to the evidence of an ancient writing.
Other versions of the " Old Charges," of greater age, still remain in the actual custody of
Scottish lodges. These assist in carrying back the ancestry of the Society, but the Antiquity
MS. is by far the most important connecting link between the present and the past, between
Freemasonry as we now have it, and its counterpart in the seventeenth century. The lodge
from whose custody it is produced — the oldest on the English roll — was one of the four who
formed and established the Grand Lodge of England, the mother of grand lodges, under whose
fostering care, Freemasonry, shaking off its operative trammels, became wholly speculative,
and ceasing to be insular, became universal, diffusing over the entire globe the moral brother-
hood of the Craft.

This remarkable muniment is attested "by Eobert Padgett,^ Clearke to the Worshipfull
Society of the Free Masons of the City of London. Anno 1686."

It has been sufficiently shown that in 1682 the Masons and the Freemasons were distinct
and separate sodalities, and that some of the former were received into the fellowship of the
latter at the lodge held at Masons' Hall, in that year;- also, that the clerk of the Company
was not " Padgett " but " Stampe." ^

Thus in London the Society must have been something very diflerent from the Comimny,
though in other parts of Britain, there was virtually no distinction between the two titles.
Eandle Holme, it is true, appears to draw a distinction between the "Felloship" of the
Masons and the "Society called Free-Masons," though, as he "Honor's" the former "because
of its Antiquity, and the more being a Member " of the latter, it is probable that the expres-
sions he uses — which derive their chief importance from the evidence they afford of the
operative ancestry oi a, " 'Society " ox "Lodge" of Freemasons, a.d. 1688 — merely denote that
there were Lodges and Lodges, or in other words, that there were then subsisting unions of
practical Masons in which there was no admixture of the speculative element.

The significance of this allusion is indeed somewhat qualified by the author of the
" Academie of Armory," * grouping together at an earlier page, as words of indifferent
application, " Fraternity, Society, Brotherhood, or Company " — all of which, with the
exception of " Brotherhood," we meet with in the fifth of the " New Articles," ^ where they
are also given as synonymous terms.

In the minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, the
word " Society " is occasionally substituted for Lodge, and fifty years earlier the Musselburgh
Lodge called itself the " Covipany of Atcheson's Haven Lodge." ® In neither case, however,
according to Lyon, was the new appellation intended to convey any idea of a change of
constitution.

The Company, Fellowship, and Lodge of the Alnwick "Free Masons" has been already
referred to.^ But whatever may have been the usage in the provinces, it must be taken, I
think, that in the metropolis, Society was used to denote the brethren of the Lodge, and Com-
pany, the brethren of the Guild. Indeed, on this ground only, and waiving the question of
its authority, I should reject the Harleian MS. (11) as a document containing laws or con-

1 Chaps. II., p. 68'; XIV., p. 149. ^ Ante, p. 143, note 2. ' Ibid., p. 149.

* Book III., Chaps, iii., p. 61 ; ix., p. 393. Cf. ante, p. 180.

» Harleian MS. 1942 (11), § 30 ; ante, Chap. II., pp. 75, 88.

« Lyon, History of the LoJge of Edinburgh, ]>. 147. ' Ante, \\ 156 ; and Chap. 11., p. 69.

212 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY—ENGLAND.

stitutions "made and agreed upon at a General Assembly," or elsewhere, by the London
Freemasons.i Iq the view, however, that the " New Articles " or " Additional Constitutions "
may have been made in London, let us see how this supposition will accord with the facts
which are in evidence.

We find in this code that the conditions on which a " person " can " be accepted a Free
Mason" are defined with the utmost stringency. The production of a certificate is required
of a joining member or visitor, and we learn, that for the future, " the sayd Society, Company,
& fraternity of Free Masons, shall bee governed by one ' Master, & Assembly, & Wardens. ' " ^

Now, if there was only one "Society" or "Company" of Freemasons -the confusion
hitherto existing with regard to the "Company of Masons" having been dispelled S— we
might expect to find in the " received text " of the History and Eegulations of the Craft, a.d.
1686, these very important laws, given with some fulness of detail. The absence, therefore,
of any allusion to them is very remarkable, and a collation of the Harleian (11) and Antiquity
(23) MSS., reveals further discrepancies which are not restricted to the mere regulations or
orders. The former, strangely enough, does not mention Prince Edwin,* whilst the latter,
as before observed, presents a reading, which differs from that of all the other texts, except
the Lansdowne (3), in giving Windsor as the place in which "he was made a Mason."

The two documents clearly did not come from the same manufactory, and the weight of
authority they respectively possess, may be determined with precision by the application of
those principles of textual criticism, of which a summary has been given. To repeat some-
what, we find that the " History ^ and Charges of Masonry " are related in very much the
same manner by all the prose forms of our old manuscript Constitutions, with the single
exception of the Harleian (11), of which the Eoberts (44) was a recension. The Krause MS.
(51), it may be observed, we must consider relieved from any further criticism.

The readings that have come down to us, omitting, perhaps, those given in the Dowlaud
(39) and York No. 4 (2.5) MSS.— which are in the same line of transmission with the majority,
though their lost originals may be of higher antiquity— may, for the purposes of these
remarks, be traced to two leading exemplars, the Lansdowne (3) and the Grand Lodge (4)
versions of the " Old Charges." Thus, on the one hand, we have the Lansdowne and the
Antiquity (23) readings, or rather reading, and on the other the versions, or version, contained
in the remaining MSS., of which the earliest in point of date, if we base our conclusions on
documentary evidence, is No. 4 (Grand Lodge). These two families or groups differ only in
slight and unimportant particulars, as I shall proceed to show.

The Lansdowne, and I may here explain, that although the text of this MS. derives its
weight, in the first instance, from the attestation of a Lodge Eecord (23), its age, and in a
corresponding degree its authority,—!?, carried back to the earliest msc of the same traditional
history, of which there is documentary evidence. The historical relationship between Nos. 3
and 23' is happily free from doubt, and except that the older document has the words "trew

' Ante, p. 209, note 3. "^ Chap. II., p, 88. " * Ante, pp. 149, 150.

«The Harleian MS., after mentioning the buildings constructed by King "Athelstane," proceeds— "hee loved
Masons more than his Father," etc. This clearly refers to Edwin, and the words omitted by the scribe will be found
in the parallel passages from Nos. 3 and 4, given at a later page. See also the " Buchanan" text, §§ XXII. -XXVI.
(Chap. II., p. 97).

IS I.e., the wrilUn traditions of the Craft, within which I assume the "New Articles" to fall.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 213

Mason," ^ and '•' the charges of a Mason or Masons," whilst its desceudant has " Free Mason,"
and the " Charges of a Free Mason or Free Masons " — variations not without their significance,
but possessing no importance in the genealogical inquiry — the readings are identical.

In dealing with what has been described as " the Internal Evidence of Groups," it will
only be necessary in the present case to compare the leading features of their oldest repre-
sentatives, the Lansdowne (3) and the Grand Lodge (-4) MSS.

These documents, and the family each represents, really differ very slightly, indeed so
little, that in my judgment they might all be comprised in a single group, whilst I fail to
discern any points of divergence between the several readings or versions, which cannot be
explained by the doctrine of Transcriptional Probability.

The division of our old Masonic records into " families," has been advocated by the leading
authorities, whose names are associated with this department of study,- and I have before me
an analysis of the " Old Charges," ^ wherein the differences between the families or types, of
which the Lansdowne and the Grand Lodge MSS. are the exemplars, are relied upon as
supporting the Masonic tradition, that, prior to 1567, the whole of England was ruled by a
single Grand Master. This conclusion is based upon a statement, that with two exceptions —
Nos. 3 and 23— the Grand Lodge MS. (4) " or a previous draft originated all constitutions,
whether in Yorkshire, Lancashire, Scotland, or South Britain." In the sense that the read-
ings or versions thus referred to have a common origin, the position claimed may be conceded,
though without our going to the extent of admitting that the theory, which is the most
comprehensive, has the greatest appearance of probability.

Let us now consider the points on which the readings of the Lansdowne and the Grand
Lodge MSS. conflict.

The invocation is practically identical in both documents, and the narrative, also, down to
the end of the legendary matter, which, in the Buchanan (15) copy, concludes the sixth
paragraph.* In the next of the sections or paragraphs (VII.), into which for facility of
reference I have divided No. 15, the Lansdowne and Grand Lodge readings vary. In the
former, Euclid comes on the scene in direct succession to Nemroth (Nimrod), King of Babylon,
whilst in the latter Abraham and Sarah separate these personages. According to the former,
certain charges were delivered to the Masons by Nemroth, which, amplified, are in the
latter ascribed to Euclid, as stated in paragraphs VIII.-XVI. of No. 15.

The omission of what are termed the " EucUd Charges " in the Lansdowne document, has
been laid stress on, but not to say that these are virtually included, though in an abridged form,
in the charges of " Nemroth " — the discrepancy between the two texts, were we discussing an
actual instead of a fabulous history, might be cited as illustrating the dictum of Paley, that
human testimony is characterised by substantial truth under circumstantial variety.^

The allusions in both manuscripts to David, Solomon, Naymus Grecus, St Alban, King
Athelstane, and Prince Edwin, are so nearly alike, as to be almost indistinguishable, though,

' This term occurs in the Atcheson Haven (17) ami Melrose No. 2 (19) MSS. Also in the two English forms to
which Woodford assigns the highest antiquity, viz., the York No. 4 (25) and the Dowland (39). The Grand Lodge
(4) and Kilwinning (L6) versions have " free masson."

' Hughan, Old Charges, pp. 16, 18 ; and preface (Woodford), p. xi.

' In a letter from Mr John Yarker. ■" Sec Chap. 11 , pp. 94, 95.

" Evidences of Christianity, I'.irt III., chap, i.

214

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

iu one particular, by tlie omission or the interpolation of two words, accordingly as we award
the higher authority to the one document or the other, some confusion has resulted, which, by
placing the passages iu juxtaposition,^ I hope to dispel.

" Lansdoavne " MS. (.3).
" Soone after the Decease of St Albones
there came Diverse Warrs into England out of
Diverse Nations, so that the good rule of
Masons was dishired and put downe vntill
the tyme of KixG Adilston, in his tyme there
was a worthy King in England that brought
this Land into good rest, and he builded many
great workes and buildings, therefore he loved
well Masons, for he had a Sonne called Edwin,
the which Loved Masons much more then his
ffather did, and he was soe practized in
Geometry that he delighted much to come and
talke with Masons, and to Learne of them the
Craft, And after, for the love he had to
IMasons and to the Craft, he was made JIason
[at Windsor], and he gott of the King his
ilather a Charter and Comission once every
yeare to have Assembley within the Eealme
where they would within England, and to
correct within themselves ffaults & Tres-
passes that weere done as Touching the Craft,
and he held them an Assembley at Yokke,
and there he made Masons and gave them
Charges," etc.

" Grand Lodge " MS. (4).
" righte sone After the decease of Saynte ^
there came diu''s war''es into England
of dyu"'s nacoiis so that the good rule of
massory was destroyed vntill the tyme of
Knigte Athelston that was a woorthy King
of England & brought all this land into
rest and peace and buylded many greate
workes of Abyes and Toweres and many other
buyldinges And loved well massons and
had a soonne that height Edwin and he loved
massons muche more then his ffather did and
he was a greate practyzer of Geometrey and
he drewe him muche to taulke & coiiien w"'
massons to learne of them the Craft and after-
wards for love that he had to Massons and to
the Crafte he was made a masson [ ]

and he gat of the Kyng his ffather a Charter
and a Comission to houlde euy yere a sembly
once a yeere where they woulde w*hin thee
realme of England and to Correct w'hin them-
self faults and Trespasses that weare done
w'hin the Crafte And he held himselfe an
assembly at Yorlce & there he made massons
and gaue them chargs " etc.

The crotchets or square brackets shown above do not represent lacimm in the readings, but
have been inserted by me to mark in the one case certain words contained in the text, which
may be omitted, and in the other case, words not contained in the text, which may be added,
without in either instance the context suffering by the alteration. The passages are so
evidently taken from a common original, and the conjectural emendation under each
hypothesis is of so simple a character, that in my judgment we shall do well to definitively
accept or reject the words " at Windsor," in hoth cases, as forming an integral part of the text,
and thus remove, as I venture to think will be the result, the only source of difficulty whicli
we meet with in a collation of these representative MSS.

It may be observed that I am here only considering the written traditions of the craft, by
which I mean the items of Masonic history, legendary or otherwise, given in the "Old
diaries." Among the.se, the "Xew Articles," peculiar to No. 11 must be included, and we

1 Transcribed from the originals. Cf. tlie Buclianan MS. (15), §§ XXII.-XXVI. (Cliap. II., p.
' Tlie cvideut omission of a word here [AlhorC] weakens ;)ro tanto the authority of tliis readinj;.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 215

have next to determine whether this document possesses a weiglit of authority superior to that
of all the others put together, as, unless we are prepared to go to this length, its further
examination need not be proceeded with. I shall, therefore, content myself with saying that
there are no circumstances in the case which tend to lift the Harleian MS. above the level of
its surroundings in the fifth class of historical documents ; ^ on the contrary, indeed, whatever
judgment we are enabled to form of its authority as a record of the craft, bears in quite
another direction, and induces the conviction that both parent and progeny stand on the same
footing of unreality. The "Xew Articles" are entitled to no more weight than the "Additional
Orders " of No. 44, or the recension of Dr Anderson. All three are unattested and
unauthentic, and the value of their united testimony, which we have now traced to the
fountain head, must be pronounced absolutely nil.

From the point of view I am regarding the " Old Charges," it is immaterial which of
the 2!fos., 3 or 4, is the older document, nor must the superiority of tlie latter be assumed from
the power of mere numbers. It is improbable that any care was taken to select for transcrip-
tion, the exemplars having the highest claims to be regarded as authentic, whilst it is con-
sonant with reason to suppose, that in the ordinary course of things, the most recent manuscripts
would at aU times be the most numerous, and therefore the most generally accessible.^

I have sought to show, however, that in substance the written traditions of the Freemasons
from the sixteenth down to the eighteenth century were the same ; and our next inquiry will
be, to what extent is evidence forthcoming of the existence of these or similar traditions at
an earlier period than the date of transcription of the oldest version of our manuscript
Constitutions ?

This brings in evidence the HaRiwell and Cooke MSS., which are not " Constitutions " in
the strict sense of the term, although they are generally described by that title. The
testimony of the other Masonic records, which more correctly faU within the definition of
" Old Charges," carries back the written traditions of the craft to a period somewhere
intermediate between 1600 and 1550, or, in other words, to the last half of the sixteenth
centuiy. The two manuscripts we are about to examine now take up the chain, but the
extent to wliich they lengthen the Masonic pedigree cannot be determined with precision.
HalliweU and Cooke dated their discoveries, late fourteenth and late fifteenth century
respectively,^ but a recent estimate of Mr Bond, by pushing the former down and the latter ^lp,
has placed them virtually on an equality in the matter of antiquity.* This conclusion must,
however, be demurred to, not, indeed, in the case of the Cooke MS. (2), respecting which the

' The "Legend of the craft," which forms the introduction to the Masonic poem (1), was taken by Mr HalliweU
from Harl. MS. 1942 (11), which he quotes at second hand from the Freemasons' Qiuirterly Review, vol. iii., pp 288 et
seq. This, if further proof was necessary, would amply attest the necessity of classifying the "Masonic Constitutions,"
with a due regard to their relative authority.

' "Even if multiplication of transcripts were not always advancing, there would be a slow but continual substitu-
tion of new cojiies for old, ]iartly to fill up gaps made by waste and casualties, partly by a natural impulse which could
be reversed only by veneration or an archaic taste, or a critical purpose" (Ilort, Introduction to the New Test., p. 10).

' The Early History of Freemasonry in England, 1844, p. 41 ; The History and Articles of Masonry, 1861, preface,
p. V. It should be recollected, however, that by David Casley, the Masonic poem was i^ateii fourteenth ccn/wry without
any limitation to theiatter part of it (ante, Chap. II., p. 60).

* " As you seem to desire that I should look at the MSS. again, I have done so, and my judgment upon them is that
they arc both of the first half of the fifteenth century " (Mr E. A. Bond to the Kev. A. F. A. Woodford, July
29, 1874 ; Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., y\\ 77, 78).

2i6 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

oijinion of Mr Bond is not at variance with that of any other expert in handwriting, but as
regards the Masonic poem (1), the date of which, as approximately given by Mr Halliwell,
himself no mean authority, has been endorsed by the late Mr Wallbran ^ and Mr Eichard
Sims.^ The MSS. may safely therefore, in my judgment, be assigned — No. 1 to the close of
fourteenth,^ and No. 2 to the early part of the fifteenth, century.

The next step will be, to consider what these documents prove, though it should be
premised, that even prior to their disinterment from the last resting-place of so much
manuscript literature — the library of the British Museum — the texts or readings then knovm
were pronounced by a competent judge to be "at least as old as the early part of the
fifteenth century." ^

The period named synchronises with that in which the Cooke MS., according to the best
authorities, was compiled, and our next task will be, to examine how far the readiwjs of the
" Constitutions," strictly so called, are coniirmed by writings dating from the same era as that
assigned to the lost exemplars of the former.

The Halliwell and Cooke MSS. possess many common features, though one is in metrical,
and the other in prose, form. In both, the history of Masonry or Geometry is interspersed
with a number of quotations "and allusions to other subjects, whilst each affords a few
illustrations of the phenomenon of " conflation " in its simple form, as exhibited by single
documents.

The Cooke MS. (2), which I shall first deal with, recounts the Legend of the Craft, very
much in the same fashion as it is presented in the documents of later date.* Coming down to
Nimrod — Abraham, Sarah, and Euclid are next severally introduced, the Children of Israel duly
proceed to the " land of Bihest," ^ and Solomon succeeds David as protector of the Masons.
Naymus Grecus, indeed, is not mentioned, but we meet with Charles the Second — meaning, it
is to be supposed, Charles Martel — Saints Adhabell and Alban, King Athelstan and his son,
who, by the way, is not named, though it is stated that he became a Mason, " purchased a free
patent of the King," and gave charges after the manner of the later Edwin. At line 642,
however, there is a sudden break in the narrative, and in an abridged form we are given the
story of Euclid over again, whose identity the scribe veils under the name of Engld, though,
as he is described as the "most subtle and wise founder," who "ordained an art, and called it
Masonry," besides being referred to as " having taught the children of great lords " to get an
" honest living," there is no room for doubt as to the world-famous geometer ^ being the hero
of the incident, the more so, since it is expressly stated that the " aforesaid art " was " begun
in the land of Egypt ; " whence " it went from land to land, and from kingdom to kingdom,"
and ultimately passed into England " in the time of King Athelstan." Englet [Euclid] and
Athelstan are the only personages named in the shorter legend, in which, however, room

' Masonic Magazine, Sept. 1874, p. 77 ; Hughan, Old Cliarges, preface (Woodford), p. vii.

2 " The te-at is in a hand of about the latter portion of the fourteenth century, or quite early fifteenth century "
(Masonic Magazine, March 1875, p. 258).

' Not being an expert in manuscript literature, my personal contribution to the determination of this date consists
of the remarks in Chapter VII. (The Statutes relating to the Freemasons, pp. 357-361), where I deal with the grounds on
whicli Dr Kloss assigns a fifteenth century origin to the Halliwell poem.

* Sir Francis Palgi-ave in the Edinburgh Review, April 1839 ; ante. Chap. II., p. 87.

5 The leading features of this MS. and its descendants are given with some fulness in Chap. II., i)p. 83-85.

» Cf. Chap. II., p. 96, § XVIII. ' Ibid., p. 95, § VII.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 217

is found for the tradition of Masonry having derived its name from Euclid, a fragment of
Masonic history missing from the fuller narrative. These two versions of the Craft Legend
were evidently transcribed from different exemplars.

The Halliwell poem has been described as " a metrical version of the rules of an ordinary
mediteval Guild, or perhaps a very superior and exemplary sort of trades union, together with
a number of pieces of advice for behaviour at church and at table, or in the presence of
superiors, tacked on to the end." ^

The latter I shall consider in the first instance. The Halliwell MS. (1), from line 621 to
line 658, except —

" Amen ! Amen ! so mot hyt be,
Now, swete lady, pray for me," -

is almost word for word the same as a portion of John ^Myrc's " Instructions for Parish
Priests," ^ commencing at line 268. With slight variation the two then correspond up to
line 680 of the ilasonic poem. jMjtc was a canon regular of the Augustinian Order ; and it
has been conjectured that his poem, avowedly translated from a Latin work, called in the
colophon " Pars Oculi," was an adaptation from a similar book by John Mirseus, prior of the
same monastery, entitled, " Manuale Sacerdotis." * The corresponding passages in the Halli-
well and IMyi'c ^ISS. were printed by Woodford in 1874.^

The last hundred lines of the Masonic poem * are taken from " Urbanitatis," ' a poem which
consists of minute directions for behaviour — in the presence of a lord, at table, and among
ladies. Of these Mr Sims justly observes, " Some are curious, but some also there are which
may not well be written down here ; ^ and strange indeed it is to think that it should have
been found necessary to give tliera at all, for they show a state of manners more notable,
perhaps, than praiseworthy." " Perhaps, however," he continues, " the intention of the author
is to leave no point unprovided for."

The Masonic portion of the Halliwell poem, which consists of the first 576 lines, appears,
like the parts we have already examined, to have been derived from varied sources. This did
not escape the observation of Woodford, who, in his scholarly preface to Hughan's " Old
Charges," says : " The poem has been put mainly in its present shape by one who had seen other
histories and legends of the Craft,

' By olde tyme wryten.'

And it seems to be, in truth, two legends, and not only one — the first legend appears to end

' Richard Sims, Comparison of MSS., Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., March 1875, p. 258. Cf. ante, Chap. II., pp. 79.82.
- Lines 655, 656. This would seem to be the extension of a quotation in Slyrc, which stops short just before these
lines. They also resemble the two concluding lines of the Masonic poem, which are based on the following, from
" Urbanitatis : "

" Amen, Amen, so moot hit be.
So saye we alle for Charyte ! "

' Cotton MS., Claudins, A. II. ; Early English Text Society, vol. xxxi., 1868, edited by Mr E. Peacock, who con-
siders that the MS. was not written out later than 1450, and perhaps rather earlier.

* Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., p. 260. Cf. Myrc, Duties of a Parish Priest (Early English Text Society, vol. xxxi.).

' Masonic Magazine, vol. ii., p. 130. • Line 693 to line 794.

' Cotton MS., Caligida, A. II., circa A.D. 1460. The text of " Urbanitatis " has been printed by the Early English
Text Society, 1868, as part of a volume on Manners and Meals in Olden Times, pp. 13-15, edited by Mr F. J. Fumivall.

' I.e., in the descriptive account of this poem, given in the Masonic Mugazine, voL ii., p. 259.
VOL. II. 2 E

2i8 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

lit line 470, and then apparently with line 471 begins a new rythm of abbreviated use of the
Masonic history. 'Alia onUnacio artis gemetrice.' There is not, indeed, in the MS. any change
in the handwriting, but the rythm seems somewhat lengthened, and you have a sort of reple-
tion of the history, though very much condensed."

The " Ars Quatuor Coronatordm " occurs in what is thus termed by Woodford " the second
legend," 1 and, apart altogether from its surroundings, which stand on an entirely different footing,
and must be separately regarded, points to the existence, at the time the poem was written, of
traditions which have not come down to us in any other line of transmission.^

The Halliwell and Cooke MSS. have been collated with some minuteness by Fort,
who accepts, in each case, the date with which it was labelled by the person who made
known its existence. Thus the transcription of the former is separated from that of the
latter by a period of about a century, an estimate I cannot concur in, and which, as we
have seen, is diametrically opposed to that of Mr Bond. This gap in the early manuscript
literature of the craft, would obviously justify wider inferences being drawn from the
discrepancies between the Halliwell and Cooke documents, than if their ages are brought
more closely together. Thus it is observed by the talented writer to whom I have just
referred : " Tlie operative Mason of the Middle Ages in France and Germany knew nothing
of a Jewish origin of his craft. In case the traditions current in the thirteenth century,
or later, had pointed back to the time of Solomon, in preparing the regulations for
corporate government, and in order to obtain valuable exemptions, the prestige of the
Israelitish king would have by far transcended that of the holy martyrs, or Charles the
Hammer-Bearer." * Fort then goes on to say : " It stands forth as highly significant, that
HaUiweU's Codex makes no mention of Masons during the time of Solomon, nor does that
ancient document pretend to trace Masonic history prior to the time of Athelstan and
Frince Edwin." * At a later page he adds : " HalliweU's manuscript narrates that Masonic
Craft came into Europe in the time of King Athelstan, whose reign began about the year
924, and continued several years. No other ancient document agrees with this assertion.^
The majority of Masonic chronicles refer the period of the appearance of Masonry into
Britain to the age of Saint Alban, one of the early evangelist martyrs, many centuries
prior to the time of Athelstan ; hut they all agree that the craft came from abroad, and
specify Athelstan's reign as an interesting period of Masonic history. From the preceding
statement it will be observed that the older craft chronicles are lacking in harmony upon
vital points of tradition, and in some respects, tested by their own records, are totally
antagonistic." *

In the opinion of the same writer, " at the close of the fourteenth century, the guild
of builders in England, depending on oral transmission, suggested the origin of their Craft
in Athelstan's day. Later records, or perhaps chronicles copied in remote parts of the
realm, expanded the traditions of the Fraternity, and added a more distant commencement
in the age of Saint Alban, introducing, moreover, the name of Prince Edwin, together with the

I Hughaii, Old Cliarges, preface, p. vii. ' See ante, p. 207, note 1 ; and Chap. X., jyassim.

^ Fort, The Early History and Antiiiuities of Freemasonry, p. 181. ^ Ibid.

" The italics are mine. It is evident that the statement in the Halliwell poem will lose its importance if the dates
of the two oldest M.SS. are brought into proximity.

' Fort, The Early History and Antiijnities of Freemasonry, pp. 443, 444.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAAW. 219

fabulous Assembly at York." " It is, perhaps, impossible," he continues, " to fix a date for
the legends of Edwin and Athelstan," but strong belief is expressed that the story of Athel-
stane " is no earlier than the fourteenth century," also that " the tradition of Edwin is clearly
an enlargement of craft chronicles of the fifteenth." ^

The precise measure of antiquity our Masonic traditions are entitled to, over and above
that which is attested by documentary evidence, is so obviously a matter of conjecture, that
it would be a mere waste of time to attempt its definition. From the point reached, however,
that is to say, from the elevated plane afforded by the Masonic writings (MSS. 1 and 2), which,
speaking roundly, carry the Craft Legend a century and a half higher than the Lansdowne (3)
and later documents, it will be possible, if we confine our speculations within reasonable limits,
to establish some well-grounded conclusions. These, if they do not lead us far, will at least
warrant the conviction, that though when the Halliwell poem has been produced in evidence,
the genealogical proofs are exhausted, the Masonic traditions may, with fair probability, be
held to antedate the period represented by the age of the MS. (1) in which we first find them,
by as many years as separate the latter from the Lansdowne (3) and Grand Lodge (4)
documents.

Tlie Legend of the Craft will, in this case, be carried back to " the time of Henry IIL,"
beyond which, in our present state of knowledge, it is impossible to penetrate, though it must
not be understood that 1 believe the ancestry of the Society to be coeval with that reign. The
tradition of the " Bulls," in my judgment, favours the supposition of its going back at least as
far as the period of English history referred to, but the silence of the " Old Charges " with
regard to " Papal Writings " of any kind having been received by the Masons, not to speak of
this theory of Masonic origin directly conflicting with the introduction of Masonry into
England in St Alban's time, appears to me to deprive the oral fable or tradition of any further
historical weight.

In the first place, the legendary histories or traditions, given in the two oldest MSS. of
the Craft, must have existed in some form prior to their finding places in these writings.

Fort is of opinion, that the HalliweU MS. has been copied from an older and more ancient
parchment, or transcribed from fragmentary traditions, and he bases this judgment upon the
internal evidence which certain portions of the manuscript present, having an evident refer-
ence to a remote antiquity. In illustration of this view he quotes from the " ancient charges,"
" that no master or fellow shall set any layer, within or without the lodge, to hew or mould
stone," ^ and cites the eleventh point {Fundus undecimus) in the Masonic poem,^ as showing
one of the reciprocal duties prescribed to a Mason is —

" If he this craft well know
That sees his fellow hew on a stone,
And is in point to spoil that stone.

' Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 445, 446.

' The Halliwell MS. is cited as the authority for this regulation, which is incorrect. See Chap. II., p. 100, Special
Charges, No. 16. Laijcr in Nos. 12 (Harl. 2054), 20 (Hope), and others, gives place to rough layer, whilst No. 3
(Lansdowne), followed by No. 23 (Antiquity), has, " Also that a Master or Ifullow make not a Moulde Stone Square nor
rule to no Lowcn nor Sett no Luwcn worke within the Lodge nor without to no Mould Stone."

^ The extract which follows in the text I take from Woodford's modernised version of tlie pwm.

220 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Amend it soon, if tliat tliou can,
And teach him then it to amend,
That the whole work be not y-schende." *

He next observes, on the authority of the Arcliccologia,^ that until the close of the twelfth
century stones were hewn out with an adze. About this time the chisel was introduced, and
superseded the hewing of stone. " Thus," continues Fort, " we see that the words ' hew a
stone,' had descended from the twelfth century at least, to the period when the manuscript
first quoted (1) was copied, and, being found in the roll before the copyist, were also
transcribed." ^

In the judgment of the same historian, tlie compiler of the Cooke MS. (2) had also before
him an older parchment, from which was derived the following remarkable phraseology :

" And it is said, in old hooks of masonry,'^ that Solomon confirmed the charges that David,
his father, had given to masons."

In the conclusion, that the anonymous writers to whom we are indebted for the manu-
scripts under exanunation, largely copied from originals which are now lost to us, I am in full
agreement with Fort, thougli in both cases, instead of in one only, I should be inclined to
rest this deduction on the simple fact, that in either document the references to older Masonic
writings are so plain and distinct, as to be incapable of any other interpretation. Thus, under
the heading of " Hie incipiunt constituciones artis gcmetrice secundum Euclydem," we read in the
opening lines of the Halliwell poem :

" Whose wol hothe wel rede and loke,
He may fynde wryte yn olde hohe
Of grete lordys, and eke ladyysse,
That hade mony chyldrjTi y-fere, y-wisse ; ^
And hade no rentys to fynde " hem ' wyth,
Nowther yn towne, ny felde, ny fryth : " ^

The " book " referred to was doubtless a prose copy of the " Old Charges," whence the
anonymous author of the Masonic poem obtained the information, which greatly elaborated
and embellished, it may well have been, by his own poetic taste and imagination,^ he has
passed on to later ages.

The same inconvenience from the existence of a superabundant population is related
in the poem, as in the manuscripts of later date,^'' whilst in each case Euclid is applied
to, and with the happiest result. The children of the " Great Lords " are taught the " craft
of geometry," which receives the name of Masonry :

1 Y-6chende — ruined, destroyed. ' Vol. ix., pp. 112, 113.

' Fort, The Early History aud Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 117, 113.

* " Olde bokys of Masonry," in original. The quotation above is from the modernised version by tlie late Matthew
Cooke (The History and Articles of Masonry, 1861, p. 83).

° Y-fere, together; y-wisse, certainly.

' " Fynde, to provide with food, clothing, etc. We still use tlie word— a man is to have so much a week, &\\iXfind
himself" (Halliwell, The Early History of Freemasonry, 1844, p. 50).

' Thc7n. 8 <■ Frytlij an enclosed wood " ( Halliwell, The Early History of Freemasonry).

'See Woodford's Inlroiliiction to Huglian's "Old Charges," p. vi.

'"Chap. II., p. 95, § VII.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 221

" On thys maner, thro good wytte of gemetry,
Bygan furst the craft of masonry :
The clerk Euclyde on thys wyse hyt fonde,
Thys craft of gemetry yn Egypte londe.^
Yn Egypte he tawghte hyt ful \vyde,
Yn dyvers londe ' on every syde :
Mony erys ^ afterwarde, y understonde
[Ere 3] that the craft com ynto thys londe.
Thys craft com ynto Englond, as y [yow ^] say,
Yn tynie of good kynge Adelstonus day." *

Leaving this early portion of tlie poem, I shall next invite attention to a passage
commencing at line 471, where, with " a new rythm of abbreviated use," and under the
title, Alia ordinacio artis gemetricv, begins, what has been styled by Woodford, " the second
legend," contained in this MS. :

" They ordent ther a semble to be y-holde
Every [year], whersever they wolde,
To amende the defautes, [if] any where fonde
Amonge the craft withynne the londe ;
Uche [year] or thrydde [year] hyt scliuld be holdc,
Yn every place whersever they wolde ;
Tyme and place most be ordeynt also,
Yn what place they schul semble to.
AUe the men of craft ther they most ben,
And other grete lordes, as [ye] mowe sen,
Ther they schullen ben alle y-swore,
That longuth to thys craftes lore,
To kepe these statutes everychon.
That ben y-ordeynt by kynge Aldelstou."'

Let US now compare the foregoing passages with the following extract from the second or
shorter legend in the Cooke MS. (2), to which I have previously alluded : "

" In this manner was the aforesaid art begun in the land of Egypt, by the aforesaid master
Englat, and so it went from land to land, and from kingdom to kingdom. After that, many
years, in the time of King Athelstan [Adhdstone], which was some time King of England,
by his councillors, and other greater lords of the land, by common assent, for great default
found among masons, they ordained a certain rule amongst them : one time of the year,
or in 3 years as need were to the King and gi-eat lords of the land, and all the comonalty,
from province to province, and from country to country, congregations should be made, by
masters, of all masters, masons, and fellows, in the aforesaid art." '

' Land. ' Years.

' In the original, obsolete words, having for their initial letter the Saxon j— written somewhat like the ;: of modern
English manuscription — formerly used in many words which now begin with y.

* Halliwell MS., lines 53-62.

''Ibid., lines 471-480, 483-486: ordent, ordeyut, y-ordeynt, ordained; y-holde, Iwldcn ; defautes, defects; uche,
each; thrydde, third; mowe, may ; y-swore, sworn; longuth, bclowjcth ; everychon, everyone; Aldelston, Atliclstan.
Tlie words within crotchets are placed there for the same reason as those in the preceding e.\tract, to wliich attention
has already been directed.

« Ante, p. 216.

' Cooke, The History and Articles of Masonry, pp. 101, 103. Cf. Addl. MS., 23,198, British Museum, lines 687-711,
where a closer resemblance to the metrical reading will appear than can be shown by our modern printing Ij'pes.

222 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

Having regard to tlie fact, that the authors or compilers of what are knowu as the Halliwell
and Cooke MSS. availed themselves, in a somewhat indiscriminate manner, of the manuscript
literature of their respective eras, without fettering their imaginations by adhering to the strict
■wording of the authorities they consulted, the similarity between the excerpta from the two
writings which I have held up for comparison must be pronounced a remarkable one. The
points on which they agree are very numerous, and scarcely require to be stated, though the
omission of any mention whatever, in the selected passages from either work, of the long array
of celebrities who, according to the later MSS., intervene between Euclid and Athelstan, as
well as their concurrent testimony in dating the introduction of Masonry into England during
the reign of the latter, must be briefly noticed, as tending to prove an " identity of reading,"
which, as we have seen, " implies identity of origin." ^

It will be seen that Fort has expressed too comprehensive an opinion, in withholding from
the Halliwell MS. the corroboration of any other ancient document, with respect to the state-
ment concerning Athelstan. Upon the passage in the Masonic poem where this occurs,^ the
learned editor has elsewhere observed : " This notice of the introduction of Euclid's ' Elements '
into England, if correct, invalidates the claim of Adelard of Bath,^ who has always been con-
sidered the first that brought them from abroad into this country, and who flourished full two
centuries after the ' good Kyng Adlestone.' Adelard translated the ' Elements ' from the
Arabic into Latin ; and early MSS. of the translation occur in so many libraries, that we may
fairly conclude that it was in general circulation among mathematicians for a considerable time
after it was written." *

It does not seem possible that the " Boke of Chargys," cited at lines 534 and 641 of the
Cooke MS., and which I assume to have been identical with the " olde boke " named in the
poem,° can have been the " Elements of Geometry." The junior document (2) has : " Elders
that were before us, of Masons, had these Charges written to them, as we have now in our
Charges of the story of Euclid, [and] as we have seen them written in Latin and in French
both." " This points with clearness, as it seems to me, to an uninterrupted line of tradition,
carrying back at least the familiar Legend of the Craft to a more remote period than is now
attested by extant documents. It has been forcibly observed that, " in all the legends of
Freemasonry, the line of ascent leads with unerring accuracy through Grecian corporations back
to the Orient," which, though correct, if we confine our view to the legendary history given in
the manuscript Constitutions, is not so if we enlarge our horizon, and look beyond the " records
of the Craft " to the further documentary evidence, which adds to their authority by extending
the antiquity of their text.

The Halliwell and Cooke MSS. contain no mention of " Naymus Grecus," though they both
take us back to an earlier stage of the Craft Legend, and concur in placing the inception of

1 Ante, p. 206. " Halliwell MS., lines 61, 62 ; ante, p. 221.

' " Euclid of Alexandria lived, according to Proelus, in the time of the first Ptolemy, b.o. 323-283, and seems to
have been the founder of the Alexandrian school of mathematics. His best known work is his Elements, which was
translated from the Arabic by Adelard of Bath about 1130 " (Globe Encyclopaedia, s.v. Euclid).

* J. 0. Halliwell, Kara Mathematica, 2d edition, ISil, pp. 56, 57.

' Line 2. It should bo borne in mind that the expressions, boke of charyys and oldc hokx, occur in the first legend
only of either MS.

•^ Cooke, History and Articles of Mnsonry, jip. 01, 63.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 223

Masonry, as an art, in Egypt. On this point the testimony of all the early Masonic documents
may be said to be in accord.

Now, without professing an extravagant love of traditions, " these unwritten voices of old
time, which hang like mists in the air," I do not feel at liberty to summarily dismiss this
idea as a mere visionary supposition, a thing of air and fancy.

Later, we shall approach the subject of " degrees in Masonry," when the possible influence
of the ancient civilisation of Egypt, upon the ceremonial observances of all secret societies
commemorated in history, cannot but suggest itself as a factor not wholly to be excluded,
when consideriiig so important a question.

It may therefore be convenient, if I here temporarily abandon my main thesis, and taking
the land of Masonic origin, according to the Halliwell and other MSS., as the text upon which
to construct a brief dissertation, pursue the inquiry it invites, to such a point, as may render
imnecessary any further reference to the " great clerk Euclid," and at the same time be of
service in our subsequent investigation, with regard to the origin and descent of the degi'ees
known in Masonry.

" The irradiations of the mysteries of Egypt shine through and animate the secret doctrines
of Phcenicia, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy." ^

In the opinion of Mr Heckethorn, " the mysteries as they have come down to us, and are
stUl perpetuated, in a corrupted and aimless manner, in Freemasonry, have chiefly an
astronomical bearing." - The same writer, whose freedom from any bias in favour of our
Society is attested by the last sentence, goes on to say — and his remarks are of value, as well from
being those of a careful and learned writer, as by showing to us the historical relationship
between Freemasonry and the Secret Societies of antiquity, which is deemed to exist by a
dispassionate and acute critic, who is not of ourselves.

" In all the mysteries," he observes, " we encounter a God, a superior being, or an
extraordinary man suffering death, to recommence a more glorious existence; everywhere the
remembrance of a grand and mournful event plunges the nations into grief and mourning,
immediately followed by the most lively joy. Osiris is slain by Typlion, Uranus by Saturn,
Adonis by a wild boar, Ormuzd is conquered by Ahrimanes ; Atys and Mithras and
Hercules kill themselves ; Abel is slain by Cain, Balder by Loke,^ Bacchus by the giants ; the
Assyrians mourn the death of Thammuz, the Scythians and Phoenicians that of Acmon, all
nature that of the great Pan, the Freemasons that of Hiram, and so on." *

As it is, however, with the mysteries of Egypt that we are chiefly concerned, I shall limit
my observations on the mythological systems, to that of the country which according to the
traditions of the Craft was the birth-place of Masonry.

The legendary life of Isis and Osiris, as detailed by Plutarch, tells us that Osiris had two
natures, being partly god and partly man. Having been entrapped by the wicked Typhon^
into a chest, he was thrown into the Nile. His body being with difficulty recovered by Isis,

' Heckethorn, Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, 1875, vol. i., p. 78. - Ibid., p. 22.

2 Cf. Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, pp. 408, 410.

* Heckethorn, Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, vol. i., pp. 23, 24.

' Heckethorn observes — " Osiris symbolises the sun. He is killed by Typhon, a serpent engendered by the miul
of the Nile. But Typhon is a transposition of Python, derived from the Greek word iruOu, 'to putrefy,' and means
nothing else but the noxious vapours arising from steaming mud, and thus concealing the suu " (Secret Societies of all
Ages and Countries, vol, i. , pii. 67, 68).

224 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

and hidfleu, it was again found by Typlion, and the limbs scattered to the four winds. These
his wife and sister Isis collected and put together, and Osiris returned to life, but not on
earth. He became judge of the dead.^

Osiris, who is said to have been a king of Egypt, " applied himself towards civilising his
countrymen, by turning them from their former indigent and barbarous course of life ; he
moreover taught them how to cultivate and improve the fruits of the earth ; he gave them a
body of laws to regulate their conduct by, and instructed them in that reverence and worship,
which they were to pay to the Gods ; with the same good disposition he afterwards travelled
over the rest of the world, inducing the people everywhere to submit to his discipline, not
indeed compelling them by force of arms, but persuading them to yield to the strength of his
reasons, which were conveyed to them, in the most agreeable manner, in hymns and songs
accompanied with instruments of music." ^

Such a god was certain to play an important part in tlie funereal customs of the Egyptians ;
and we learn from Herodotus,^ when writing of embalming, that " certain persons are appointed
by law to exercise this art as their peculiar business ; and when a dead body is brought them
they produce patterns of mummies in wood, imitated in painting, the most elaborate of which
are said to be of him, whose name I do not think it right to mention on this occasion."

Sir Gardner Wilkinson * has an interesting remark on the above passage " with regard to
what Herodotus says of the wooden figures kept as patterns for mummies, the most elaborate
of which represented Osiris. All the Egyptians who from their virtues were admitted to the
mansions of the blessed were permitted to assume the form and name of this deity.^ It was
not confined to the rich alone, who paid for the superior kind of embalming, or to those
mummies which were sufiiciently well made to assume the form of Osiris ; and Herodotus
should therefore have confined his remark to those which were of so inferior a kind as not to
imitate the figure of a man. For we know that the second class of mummies were put up in
the same form of Osiris."

The discloser of truth and goodness on earth was Osiris, and what better form could be
taken after death than such a benefactor ? It is not very clear at what period the deceased
took upon himself this particular form, though it seems possible that it was immediately after
death ; but it may be noticed that the term Osiris or Osirian " is not applied in papyri or
inscriiJtions to the deceased before the time of the XlXth dynasty, or about 1460 years B.C.
With the dead was buried a papyrus or manuscript— a copy of the Eitual, or Book of the
Dead, as it is called. This work, although varying in completeness at different periods and
instances, was, " according to Egyptian notions, essentially an inspired work ; and the term
Hermetic, so often applied by profane writers to these books, in reality means inspired. It is
Thoth himself who speaks and reveals the will of the gods, and the mysterious nature of
divine things in man. This Hermetic character is claimed for the books in several places,
where ' the hieroglyphs ' or theological writings, and ' the sacred books of Tlioth,' the divine

' Plutarchi de Iside et Osiride Liber, Samuel Squire, Cambridge, 1744, p. 15 d scq.

' /ii«., pp. 16, 17. 3 Herod., ii. 86.

< Sir J. G. Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, edit. 1878 (Dr Birch), vol. iii,, p. 473.

'"The Mysteries of Osiris," says Heckethorn, "formed the third degree, or summit of Egyptian initiation.' In
these the legend of the murder of Osiris by his brother Typhon was represented, and the god was personated by the
candidate" (Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, vol. i., p. 75).

^ Birch, Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch., vol. viii., p. 141.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY—ENGLAND. 225

scribe, are personified. Portions of them are expressly stated to have been written by the
very finger of Thoth himself, and to have been the composition of a great God."'

Dr Birch ^ continues in the valuable introduction to his translation of this sacred book :
" They were, in fact, in the highest degree mystical, and profound secrets to the uninitiated in
tlie sacred theology, as stated in the rubrics attached to certain chapters, while their real
pui-port was widely different." " Some of the rubrical directions apply equally to the humaa
condition before as after death ; the great facts connected with it are its trials and justification.
The deceased, like Osiris, is the victim of diabolical influences, but the good soul ultimately
triumphs over all its enemies by its gnosis or knowledge of celestial and infernal mysteries." ^
In fact, it may be said that all these dangers and trials, culminating in the Hall of the two
Truths, where the deceased is brought face to face with his judge Osiris — wliose representative
he has been, so to speak, in his passage through the hidden world, — only " represented the idea
common to the Egyptians and other philosophers, that to die was only to assume a new form ;
that nothing was annihilated ; and that dissolution was merely the forerunner of reproduction."*

Space would not allow, nor is it necessary here, to enter into a discussion of the various
beliefs as to night and darkness being intimately connected with the creation and re-creation
of e.xistences. The Egyptians, we learn from Damascius, asserted nothing of the first principle
of things, but celebrated it as a thrice unknown darkness transcending all intellectual percep-
tion. Drawing a distinction between night and the primeval darkness or night, from which
all created nature had its commencement, they gave to each its special deity.

Death was also represented in the Pantheon, but was distinct from Nephthys, called the
sister goddess in reference to her relationship to Osiris and Isis. As Isis was the beginning,
so Nephthys was the end, and thus forms one of the triad of the lower regions. All persons
who died, therefore, were thought to pass through her influence into a future state, and being
born again, and assuming the title of Osiris, each individual had become the son of Nut, even
as the great ruler of the lower world, Osiris, to whose name he was entitled when admitted to
the mansions of the blessed. The worship of Death and Darkness, as intermediate to
another form, seems to have been universal. Erebos, although personified, which in itself
signifies darkness, was therefore applied to the dark and gloomy space under the earth,
through which the shades were supposed to pass into Hades ; indeed, all such ideas must have
played an important part in the symbolical representations of the ancient mysteries.^ Among
the Jews darkness was applied to night, the grave, and oblivion alike, and we find the use of
the well-known expression, — darkness and the shadow of death.^

The idea of death as a means of reproduction is beautifully expressed in the text :'' " Except
a grain of wheat fall into the earth and die, it abideth by itself alone ; but if it die it beareth

' Huiisen, Egypt's Place iti Universal History, vol. v., 1867 (Birch), \<. 134. » Ibid.

* fbid., p. 136. •* Wilkinson, op. cil., vol. iii., p. 468.

° " In the mysteries all was astronomical, but a deeper meaning lay hid under the astrononiieal symbols. While
bewailing the loss of the sun, the epopts were in reality mourning the loss of that light wliose influence is life. . ■ .
The passing of the sun through the signs of the Zodiac gave rise to the myths of the incantations of Vishnu, the labours
of Hercules, etc., his apparent loss of power during the winter season, and the icstoration thereof at tlie winter solstice,
to the story of the death, descent into hell, and resurrection of Osiris and of Mithras" (lleckethorn. Secret Societies of
all Ages and Countries, vol. i., pp. 19, 20).

« Job X. 21 ; xxviii. 3, etc. ' St John xii. 24.

VUL. II. 2 F

226 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

niucli fruit." Baptism and reception into the Cliuroh by washing away, and entire cliange of
condition, is, in fact, a form of death and new birth.

As bearing on this point, a carefully written article^ by the late liev. Wharton B. Marriott
will well repay perusal. When explaining one of the terms used to designate baptism, he
observes : Terms of Initiation or Illumination. " The idea of baptism being an initiation (iivrym
fiva-rayioyCa TeXerJ)) into Christian mysteries, an enlightenment ((^(OTicr/^os, illuviinatio, illustratio)
of the darkened understanding, belonged naturally to the primitive ages of the Church, when
Christian doctrine was still taught under great reserve to all but the baptized, and when adult
baptism, requiring previous instruction, was still of prevailing usage. Most of the Fathers
interpreted the (jxnTLo-GevTei, ' once enlightened,' of Heb. vi. 4, as referring to baptism. In the
middle of the second century (Justin M., Apol. II.) we find proof that ' illumination '
was already a received designation of baptism. And at a later time (S. Cyril Hieros, Catech.
passim) ol (fxnTi^o/jLevoi (illuminandi) occurs as a technical term for those under preparation for
baptism, ol (^wTto-Sevres of those already baptized. So ol d/ii'i/roi and ol fiefxvi]ix,evoi, the uninitiated
and the initiated, are contrasted by Sozomen, R. E., lib. i., c. 3."

Much curious information will be found in the quotations from the Catecheses of St Cyril
of Jerusalem,^ with reference to the ritual of that city, a.d. 347. Those to be baptized
assembled on Easter eve ^ in the outer chamber of the baptistry, and, facing towards the west,
as being the place of darkness, and of the powers thereof, with outstretched hand, made open
renunciation of Satan ; then turning themselves about, and with face towards the east, " the
place of Light," they declared their belief in the Trinity, baptism, and repentance. Tliis said
they went forward into the inner chamber of the baptistry.

The figurative language of St Cyril, we are told, makes evident allusions to the accompany-
ing ceremonial of the Easter rite. This was celebrated, as is well known, on the eve and
during the night preceding Easter Day. " The use of artificial light, thus rendered necessary,
was singularly in harmony with the occasion, and with some of the thoughts most prominently
associated with it."

This being a most important Catholic ceremony, it will not be uninteresting to give a short
account of it from another source.

Dr England, in his description of the ceremonies of the Holy Week, in the chapels of the
Vatican, observes : " On these days [Thursday, Friday, and Saturday of the holy week] the
church rejects from her office all that has been introduced to express joy. The first invoca-
tions are omitted, no invitatory is made, no hymn is sung, the nocturn commences by the
antiphon of the first psalm ; the versicle and responsory end the choral chaunt, for no absolution
is said ; the lessons are also said without blessing asked or received ; no chapter at Lauds, but
the Miserere follows the canticle, and precedes the prayer, which is said without any salutation
of the people by the Dominv,s vobiscum, even without the usual notice of Oremus. The celebrant
also lowers his voice towards the termination of the petition itself; thus the Amen is not said
by the people, as on other occasions, nor is the doxology found in any part of the service.

" This office is called the tenebrac or darkness. Authors are not agreed as to the reason.
Some inform us that the appellation was given, because formerly it was celebrated in the

' Smith, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. Baptism, p. 155. '•' Ibid., p 157.

' Easter Evo was the chief time for the baptism of catechumens.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 227

darkness of midnight ; others say that the name is derived from the obscurity in which the
church is left at the conclusion of the office, when the lights are extinguished. The only
doubt which suggests itself regarding the correctness of this latter derivation, arises from the
fact, that Theodore, the Archdeacon of the holy Eoman church informed Amalarius, who
wrote about the year 840, that the lights were not extinguished in his time in the church of
St John of Lateran on holy Thursday ; but the context does not make it so clear that the
answer regarded this office of mattins and lauds, or if it did, the church of St John then
followed a different practice from that used by most others, and by Eome itself for many
ages since."

"The office of Wednesday evening, then, is the mattins and lauds of thursday morning
in their most simple and ancient style, stripped of every circumstance which could excite
to joy, or draw the mind from contemplating the grief of the man of sorrows. At the
epistle side of the sanctuary, liowever, an unusual object presents itself to our view : it is
a large candlestick, upon whose summit a triangle is placed ; on the sides ascending to
the apex of this figure, are fourteen yellow candles, and one on the point itself. Before giving
the explanation generally received respecting the object of it's present introduction, we shaU
mention what has been said by some others. These lights, and those upon the altar, are
extinguished during the office. All are agreed that one great object of this extinction is to
testify grief and mourning. Some writers, who seem desirous of making all our ceremonial
find its origin in mere natural causes, tell us that it is but the preservation of the old-fasliioned
li"ht which was used in former times when this office was celebrated at night, and that the
present gradual extinction of its candles, one after the other, is also derived from the original
habit of putting out the lights successively, as the morning began to grow more clear, until
the brightness of full day enabled the readers to dispense altogether with any artificial aid.
These gentlemen, however, have been rather unfortunate in generally causing all this to occur
in the catacombs, into which the rays of the eastern sun could not easily find their way, at
least with such power as to supersede the use of lights. They give us no explanation of
the difference of colour in the candles which existed, and still exists in many places, the
upper one being white and the others yellow, nor of the form of this triangle. Besides,
in some churches all the candles were extinguished at once, in several by a hand made
of wax, to represent that of Judas ; in others, they were aU quenched by a moist sponge
passed over them, to shew the death of Christ, and on the next day fire was struck from
a flint, by which they were again kindled to shew his resurrection. . . .

" The number of lights was by no means, everywhere the same ; . . . and in some
churches they were extinguished at once, in others at two, three, or more intervals. . . .
In the SLxtine chapel there are also six upon the balustrade, which, however, are ex-
tinguished by a beadle, at the same time that those upon the altar are put out by tlie
master of ceremonies ; nor is the caudle upon the point of the triangle, in this chapel, of a
different colour from the others."

The explanation adopted by Dr England is that which informs us tliat the candles
arranged along the sides of the triangle represent the patriarchs and prophets. Jolin tlio
Baptist being the' last of the prophetic band, but his light was more resplendent than that of the
others. The ceremony is based on the Kedemption, and, preparatory to tlie closing scene, the
last " remaining candle is concealed under the altar, the prayer is in silence, and a sudden

228 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

noise ^ reminds us of the convulsions of nature at tlie Saviour's death. But the light has not
been extinguished, it has been only covered for a time ; it will be produced still burning, and
shedding its light around." ^

As mentioned above, the ceremony of baptism was preceded by a formula of renunciation,
pronounced by the catechumen. He was at that time divested of his upper garment, standing
barefoot and in his chiton (shirt) only, being required to make three separate renunciations in
answer to questions put to him whilst facing the west, and before he was turned towards the
east.^ The renunciation of something gone before was followed by a formal ceremony of
admission ; and this appears to have been the universal rule, as such admission necessarily
indicated a change. Persons applying for admission to the Order were to stay at the gate
many days, be taught prayers and psalms, and were then put to the trial of fitness in renuncia-
tion of the world, and other ascetical pre-requi sites.*

Although monasticism, or the renunciation of the world, was widely established in Southern
and Western Europe, it was the Eiile founded by Saint Benedict, born a.d. 480, who died
probably about 542, that gave stahility to what had hitherto been fluctuating and incoherent.
According to his system, the vow of self-addiction to the monastery became more stringent,
and its obligation more lasting. The vow was to be made with all possible solemnity, in the
chapel, before the relics in the shrine, with the abbot and all the brethren standing by ; and
once made, it was to be irrevocable — " Vestigia nulla retrorsum." *

" But the great distinction of Benedict's Eule was the substitution of study for the com-
parative uselessness of mere manual labour. Not that his monks were to be less laborious ;
rather they were to spend more time in work; but their work was to be less servile, of the
head as well as of the hand, beneficial to future ages, not merely furnishing sustenance for the
bodily wants of the community or for almsgiving." ^

The Eule of St Benedict for some time reigned alone in Europe, and very many were the
magnificent buildings raised by the care and energy of the members of the Order ; it would
be endless to enumerate the celebrated men the Order has produced.

As the first, and perhaps the greatest of all the rehgious Orders, and the one which, as
before mentioned, fixed in a definite manner the rcgiihc or rules of such brotherhoods, it will
not be out of place to give a short account of the formal ceremony of reception into the
Order ; the more particularly as it bears on the subject upon which I have lightly touched in
the last few pages, viz., Darkness, as connected with death and initiation. I am indebted to
Mr William Simpson, who himself witnessed the ceremony, for the following account : —

" St Paul's without the walls [of Eome] is a basilica church, and in the apse behind the
high altar an altar had been fitted up. The head of the Benedictines is a mitred abbot. On
this morning, the 1st Jan. 1870, the abbot was sitting as I entered the church, with mitre on
head and crosier in hand. Soon after our entrance a young man was led up to the abbot,
who placed a black cowl on his head. The young man then descended the steps, went on his
knees, put his hands as in the act of prayer, when each of the monks present came up, and,

' Made by striking books together.

' Dr J. England, Bishop of Charleston, Explanation of the Ceremonies of the Holy Week in the Chapels of the
Vatican, etc., Kome, 1833, p. ii et seq.

' Smith, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, p. 160. ■■ Fosbroke, British Monachism, 1S43, p. 14.

• Smith, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, art. Benedictine Rule, p. 187. * Ibid., p. 189.

EARLY BRITISH FREEH ASONRY— ENGLAND. 229

also on their knees, kissed him iu turn. When they had finished, a velvet cloth, black, with
gold or silver embroidery on it, was spread in front of the altar ; on this the young man lay
down, and a black silk pall was laid over him. Thus, under semblance of a state of death, he
lay wliile mass was celebrated by the abbot. When this was finished, one of the deacons of
the mass approached where the young man lay, and muttered a few words from a book he
held in his hand. I understood that the words used were from the Psalms, and were to this
effect — ' Oh thou that sleepest, arise to everlasting life.' The man then rose, was led to the
altar, where, I think, he received the sacrament, and then took his place among the Brotherhood.
That was the end of the ceremony. The young man was an American ; I could not learn his
name, but after he became a monk it was to be Jacobus." ^

Before passing away from the mysterious learning of the East, a few remarks con-
cerning two of the most powerful of the secret societies of the jNIiddle Ages will not be out of
place. The symbols, metaphors, aud emblems of the Freemasons, have been divided by Dr
Armstrong into three different species. First, such as are derived from the various forms of
heathenism — the sun, the serpent, light, and darkness ; Secondly, such as are derived from the
Mason's craft, as the square and compasses; and Thirdly, those which are derived from the
Holy Land, the Temple of Solomon, the East, the Ladder of Jacob, etc.

The first two species of symbols— those derived from heathen worship and from the
Mason's craft — he finds in the Vehmic Institution, and the third, being " of a crusading
character," he considers favours the assumption of a connection between the Freemasons and
the Templars. It is further observed by the same writer, that the secret societies borrowed
their rites of initiation, their whole apparatus of mystery, from heathen systems ; and we
are asked to remember that the Holy Velime was in the height of its power during the
fourteenth century, and that it was in that century that the sun of the Templars set so
stormily.^

The liistory of the Knights Templars has been sufficiently alluded to iu earlier chapters,'
but the procedure of the Holy Vehme, though lightly touched upon at a previous page,^ may
again be briefly referred to. This is, indeed, in a measure essential, if all the evidence which
may assist in guiding us to a rational conclusion, with respect to many obscure points con-
nected with our Masonic ceremonial, is to be spread out before my readers.

It has been well observed, that " in all lodge constituent elements and appointments, the
track is broad and dii-ect to a Gothic origin." ^ Now, leaving undecided the question whether
this is the result of assimilation or descent,^ if we follow Sir F. Palgrave, the Vehmic Tribunals
can only be considered as the original jurisdictions of the " Old Saxons " which survived the
subjugation of their country. " Tlie singular and mystic forms of initiation, the system of

' In a letter dated Jan. 3, 1884, Mr Simpson informs me : " This is the account from my diary [1870] written on
the day of the ceremony." The annexed Plate is from a drawing by Mr Simpson, which appeared iu the llhtstrcUcd
London News, Feb. 26, 1870.

^ The Christian Remembrancer, vol. xiv,, 1847, pp. 13-15.

8 Chaps. I., pp. 8, 10 ; V., p. 245 ; and XI., pp. 498-504. * Chap. V., p. 250.

^ Fort, The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, p. 183. " Points of identity between lodge operations
and medieval courts are of too freijuent occurrence to be merely accidental " {Ibid., p. 272).

' It may be usefully borne in mind, that the regulations by which the Craft was governed jirior to 1723, were
termed by the Masons of that era, the " Old Gothic Constitutions." Cf. Chaps. II., p. 103 ; VII., p. 351 ; and XV.
p, 208.

230 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

enigmatical phrases, the use of signs and symbols of recognition, may probably be ascribed to
the period when the whole system was united to the worship of the Deities of Vengeance, and
when the sentence was pronounced by the Doomsmen, assembled, like the Asi of old, before
the altars of Thor or Woden. Of this connection with ancient pagan policy, so clearly to be
traced in the Icelandic courts, the English territorial jurisdictions offer some very faint
vestiges ; ^ but the mystery had long been dispersed, and the whole system passed into the
ordinary maclunery of the law." ^

Charlemagne, according to the traditions of Westphalia, was the founder of the Vehmic
Tribunal ; and it was supposed that he instituted the court for the purpose of coercing the
Saxons, ever ready to relapse into the idolatry from which they had been reclaimed, not by
persuasion, but by the sword.^ This opinion, however, in the judgment of Sir F. Palcrrave, i.s
not confirmed either by documentary evidence or by contemporary historians, and he adds, " if
we examine the proceedings of the Vehmic Tribunal, we shall see that, in principle, it differs
in no essential character from the summary jurisdiction exercised in the townships and
hundreds of Anglo-Saxon England." *

The supreme government of the Vehmic Tribunals was vested in the great or general
Chapter, before which all the members were liable to account for their acts.^ No rank of life
excluded a person from the right of being initiated, and in a Velunic code discovered at Dort-
mund, the perusal of which was forbidden to the profane under pain of death, three detTces
are mentioned.® The procedure at the secret meetings is somewhat obscure. A Friewraff
presided, while the court itself was composed of Freischoffen, also termed Scabini or
Echevins. The members were of two classes, the uninitiated and initiated ( Wissetuhn or wise
men), the latter only, who were admitted under a strict and singular bond of secrec}', beinf
privileged to attend the " HeimUche Aclit," or secret tribunal.^

At initiation the candidate took a solemn oath to support with his whole powers the Holy
Vehme, to conceal its proceedings " from wife and child, father and mother, sister and brother,
fire and wind, from all that the sun shines on and the rain wets, and from every being
between heaven and earth," and to bring before the tribunal everything within his know-
ledge that fell under its jurisdiction. He was then initiated into the signs by which the
members recognised each other, and was presented with a rope and a knife, upon which
were engi-aved the mystic letters s. s. G. G.,^ whose signification is stUl involved in doubt,
but which are supposed to mean stride, stein, gras, grcin.^

The ceremonies of the court were of a symbolic character ; before the Friegi-aff stood a

1 E.g., the strange ceremony of the " Gathering of the Ward Staff" in Ongar Hundred, possesses a similarity to tlie
style of the Free Field Court of Corbey. See Palgrave, op. cit., pp. cxlir., clviii.

" Palgrave, The Eise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, 1832, Part II., p. clvi.

^ Hid., p. civ. ■* Palgrave, loc. cit. Ibitl., p. cli.

« Heckcthorn, Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, vol. i. , p. 200.

' Palgrave, 02>. cil., pp. cxlix., cli.

* Heckethorn states that tlie initials s. s. s. G. G. have been found in Vehmic writings preserved in the archives of
Hertfort, in Westphalia, and by some are explained as meaning stock, stein, sti-ick, gras, gnin, stick, stone, cord, grass,
woe (Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, voh i., p. 201).

' Encyclopa;dia Britaunica, 9th edit. For the preliminary procedure at the reception of a candidate, see
Chap, v., p. 250.

EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND. 231

table, on which were placed a naked sword and a cord of withe [or willow tings\} There was
no mystery in the assembly of the Heimliche Acht. Under the oak or under the lime-tree
the judges assembled, in broad daylight and before the eye of heaven.-

" In England," observes Sir F. Palgrave, " the ancient mode of assembling the suitors of
the Hundred 'beneath the sky,' continued to be retained with very remarkable steadiness.
Within memory, at least within the memory of those who flourished when English topo-
graphy began to be studied, the primeval custom still flourished throughout the realm."
" It is remarkable," he continues, " that on the Continent there appears to be very few
subsisting traces of popular courts held in the open air, except in Scandinavia and its
dependencies, where the authority of Charlemagne did not extend; in Westphalia, where
the Vehmic Tribunals retained, as I have supposed, their pristine Saxon law; and in
' Free Freisland,' the last stronghold of Teutonic liberty." ^

During the proceedings of the Heimliche Acht all had their heads and hands uncovered,
and wore neither arms nor weapons, that no one might feel fear, and to indicate that they were
under the peace of the empire.* At meals the members are said to have recognised each other
by turning the points of their knives towards the edge, and the points of their forks towards
the centre of the table.^

Although the Vehmgerichte or secret criminal courts of Westphalia existed, at least in
name, until as late as the middle of the eighteenth century," the history of the Association or
Society is stiU enveloped in the utmost obscurity. Like many other subjects, however, upon
which the light of modern research has but faintly beamed, its consideration was essential
in this history, though for any success which may attend the method of treatment which has
been adopted, I am chiefly indebted to a long-forgotten article on " Ancient and Modern
Freemasonry," from the pen of the late Dr Armstrong, Bishop of Grahamstown— an extract
from which will conclude this dissertation.

According to the Bishop all the views formed of the Masonic body, stand, like Chinese
women, on small feet, on the slender foundation of a few facts. The views, however, of the
principal writers on the subject, he considers may be ranged into two classes, — the one main-
taining that the fraternity was originally a corporation of Architects and Masons, employed
solely on ecclesiastical works, composed of persons of all ranks and countries, and moving from
place to place during the great church-building periods; the other asserting that it was a

' Mackey, Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry, p. 878.

' Palgrave, op. cit. , p. cliv. The form of opening the court was probably by a dialogue between the Freigraff and
an Echevin, as in the analogous procedure of the Free Field Court of Corbey (Ibid., p. cxlv.). Cf. Fort, The Early
History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, chap. x.xt., passim.

' Palgrave, The Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, Part II., p. clviii. C/. ante, p. 229.

* Mackey, loc. cit.

' Heckethorn, Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, vol. i., p. 201. Sir Walter Scott, in his novel "Anne of
Geierstein," in which he unfolds to us somewhat of the mysterious history of the Holy Vehme, makes use of a judicial
dialogue, the rhymes of which, by a perhaps excusable poetic licence, he has transferred from the Free Field Court of
Corbey to the Free Vehmic Tribunal.

« Palgrave, Rise.and Progress of the English Commonwealth, Part II., p. civii. According to Heckethorn it was not
till French legislation, in 1811, abolished the last free court in the county of Munster, that they may be said to have
ceased to exist ; and not very many years ago, certain citizens in that locality assembled secretly every year, boasting of
their descent from the ancient free judges (Secret Societies of all Ages and Countries, vol. i., p. 205).

232 EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY— ENGLAND.

secret society connected with the Templars, and merely using the terms and implements of
the Mason's craft as a medium of secret symbolical communication.

Dr Armstrong endeavours to soothe these opposing writers by the assurance that there may
be truth in both opinions ; on which assumption, and having in a manner associated the Vehmic
Tribunals and the Knights Templars, as we have already seen, by means of his classification of
the metaphors and symbols used by the Freemasons, and by an allusion to the date of extinction
of the latter as an Order, coinciding with that in which the fortunes of the former reached their
culminating point, ^ observes : " We have now done our best for the two theories which we find
floating about the world. Supposing that there is truth in both, it does not seem improbable
to suppose that, at the time of the suppression of the Templars, a new secret society was then
formed, which adopted the title of ' The Freemasons,' to escape suspicion ; or that the Free-
masons—which, as a working practical body, was on the point of dying away— was changed
into a secret society ; or perhaps the higher degrees, the inner circle, the inipcrium in imperio,
merged themselves into a secret society." ^

It has been already shown, that under the cloak of symbols, borrowed from the Egyptians,
pagan philosophy crept into the Jewish schools, where it afterwards served as the foundation
upon which the Cabbalists formed their mystical system.^ The influence of the Cabbala upon
successive schools of human thought, with direct reference to the possibility of the old world
doctrines, having been passed on whole and entire to the Freemasons, has also been examined.*
Still, it is necessary, or at least desirable, to add some final remarks to those which appear in