# Freemasonry is German?



## hanzosbm (Jul 28, 2016)

Take a look at this article.  It brings up some very interesting points.

http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/freemasons_history_germany.html


----------



## hanzosbm (Jul 28, 2016)

While I think that this is an interesting idea, I'm trying to verify a number of the claims in this article independently and am coming up short.  It seems that there was a grouping of various "lodges" for the building of the Strasbourg Cathedral in 1275(ish) which could be considered a kind of grand lodge, but I can't find much more than that. 

The Brother-Book of 1563 is definitely interesting, and that fact that it discusses secret grips and greetings is, as far as I know, the first of it's kind.  The Strasburg Constitutions of 1459 are also very interesting and has echoes of our current practices (or vice versa).  There is also evidence of non-operative royal supporters/members of lodges, but to claim that this is a speculative beginning is really reaching. 

Overall, I'd say that it is an interesting idea and deserves consideration.  After all, even the early British legends claim that craft came from Charlemagne.  Maybe, figuratively, they were talking about the idea of fraternity coming from Germany.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Jul 29, 2016)

Great article.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Jul 29, 2016)

It is an interesting article but, as many others, forces the connection between Steinmetz and Freemasonry. There are similar articles about the Magistri Comacini or the roman Collegia and others. It looks like the theories that explain the life on our planet as originating from a extraterrestrial source. It is not an explanation: it does not solve the problem, only move it is a region where every claim is possible and none can be demonstrated.

The only reference to the Legend of the Craft is to the Regius manuscript in the part related to the Quatuor Coronatii. Unfortunately the claim "_which are unequivocally linked to the legend of Masons under the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, a Masonic tradition originating in Germany not Britain." _is completely wrong. The first written source of the Four Crowned martyrs legend is the "Passio Sancti Sebastiani" a book dated around V century, that is much before the "Holy Roman Empire (Germanic)". The version told by Regius is the one of Jacobus de Voragine who however has taken his story from the Passio mentionned above. Moreover, according to the Christian tradition the relics of the martyrs were translated to the _Basilica dei Quattro Coronati_ in Rome in the IX century. Unfrotunately, the Holy Roman Empire (Germanic) is dated 962, that is about one century after.

Stone mason guilds were diffused all over Europe and many of them had some similarities with some elements of Freemasonry tradition. However also the Worshipful Company of Mason of London has no direct proof of a connection between them and the Craft.


----------



## hanzosbm (Jul 29, 2016)

I could be wrong ( I don't want to speak for the author) but I believe that the claim regarding the legend coming from the Holy Roman Empire isn't talking about the Four Crowned Martyrs, but rather of Charles the Bald, which goes back to the Cooke Manuscript.

Fast forward a few years and you've got the Grand Lodge Manuscript #1 which names Charlemagne as the first European Mason. 

As for your dating of the Holy Roman Empire, I believe that you're using the dating under Otto I when it was revived.  I suspect the author was referring to its inception under Charlemagne in 800.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Jul 29, 2016)

The complete quote is:

"1. That the Regius Manuscript, the Oldest (reputable) surviving Masonic text in Britain, *makes reference to the four crowned martyrs*, which are unequivocally linked to the legend of Masons under the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, a Masonic tradition originating in Germany not Britain"

I could have perhaps misinterpreted the phrase, but the author makes a connection between a roman time legend and some middle age legends about german masons. Non only  this connection must be demonstrated but surely are the german legends that have been inspired by the one of the four crowned, not the vice versa. In any case the Regius makes a clear reference to the Legenda Sanctorum of Jacobus de Voragine, mispelled as "legent of scanctorum". 

The "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" is only the one of Otto, not the one of Charlemagne. Moreover is a very late definition (a short check has given the date of 1512, diet of Cologne). Ask to a German for reference !


----------



## hanzosbm (Jul 29, 2016)

Ah, I see what you're saying now.  Yes, I agree, that is quite confusing.  I don't understand what the author is claiming regarding the link between the 4 crowned martyrs and the Holy Roman Empire. 

That being said, you're claim that the Holy Roman Empire was not ruled by Charlemagne confuses me.  Is it because the term Holy Roman Empire wasn't adopted until later?  If that's the case, okay, fine, he was the Roman Emperor then according to his exact title, but that's a little misleading.


----------



## dfreybur (Jul 29, 2016)

As all of us fans of Star Trek - The Original Series know - It was inwented in Russia.


----------



## KSigMason (Jul 29, 2016)

JamestheJust said:


> As I recall Prussia was established by the Teutonic Knights - and they seem to have had some association with the Knights Templar - both being in Palestine for the Crusades


I did an article on the Teutonic Knights a couple years ago: http://www.travelingtemplar.com/2014/09/teutonic-knights.html


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Jul 30, 2016)

hanzosbm said:


> That being said, you're claim that the Holy Roman Empire was not ruled by Charlemagne confuses me. Is it because the term Holy Roman Empire wasn't adopted until later? If that's the case, okay, fine, he was the Roman Emperor then according to his exact title, but that's a little misleading.



Not exactly. Both were defined "Holy Roman Empire" but the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" is only the second one. The second connected itself to the first (the Carolingian one) and the Carolingian was considered to be the one which continued the tradition of Western Roman Empire.


----------



## hanzosbm (Aug 2, 2016)

I see, and I understand now.  Thank you for educating me on this.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

hanzosbm said:


> Take a look at this article.  It brings up some very interesting points.
> 
> http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/freemasons_history_germany.html



Absolutely right!
Masonry is German.
King of Prussia Frederick The Great was the -- Most Important Figure in Masonic development.

And George I, Hanoverian King was in power when Premier Grand Lodge of England was established.

Germans have helped Jews pretty much.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Absolutely right!
> Masonry is German.
> King of Prussia Frederick The Great was the -- Most Important Figure in Masonic development.
> 
> ...



Funny enough, jews where actully not allowed to join most lodges in Germany.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> Funny enough, jews where actully not allowed to join most lodges in Germany.



Dude,
Jews are the Creators of Masonry.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Dude,
> Jews are the Creators of Masonry.


No. Check your facts on that one. Jews were not even permitted to join the craft until relatively recently. And Germany was a haven of Judaism until that little incident a few decades ago.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Winter said:


> No. Check your facts on that one. Jews were not even permitted to join the craft until relatively recently. And Germany was a haven of Judaism until that little incident a few decades ago.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



What "incident"?
I just can't understand:
Why to reject obvious things!?
When information is in official sources!
Albert Pike. "Ordo ab chao. The Original Rituals on first Supreme Council".
Last chapter: initiation to 33° degree.
Grand Inspector representing Frederick The Great. And there is -- Tetragrammaton YHWH on his forehead.
How you say: "No"?!


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> What "incident"?
> I just can't understand:
> Why to reject obvious things!?
> When information is in official sources!
> ...


Really? LoL. Pike's writing isn't sacrosanct or an "official" source.  Even a cursory investigation into the founding of Freemasonry will prove that our origin myths are just that. Allegorical stories to help us form a common framework of morality. 

As for the incident in Germany when they weren't very friendly to Jews, I am referring to 1935-1945. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Dude,
> Jews are the Creators of Masonry.



Well then you said masonry is german. 
Im just stating historical facts.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

For those that seem to point that germany and most of nothern Europe as a have for jews are not correct.

Anti-semitism has historicly been high here. Martin Luther even wrote a book called "the Jews and their lies" in the 1500s.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> For those that seem to point that germany and most of nothern Europe as a have for jews are not correct.
> 
> Anti-semitism has historicly been high here. Martin Luther even wrote a book called "the Jews and their lies" in the 1500s.


Maybe haven wasnt the right word. But Germany did have a very large Jewish population compared to a lot of European countries at the time. But antisemitism was and is present throughout Europe.  And is growing today.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> Well then you said masonry is german.
> Im just stating historical facts.



Historically, German Monarchs helped Jews to develop Masonry, but, Hitler somehow went crazy.
Strange.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Historically, German Monarchs helped Jews to develop Masonry, but, Hitler somehow went crazy.
> Strange.



How come they where not allowed in the lodges then?


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> How come they where not allowed in the lodges then?



Your just misinformed.
Hiram, Ahiman Rezon, Dermott, Mackey, Pike, 4Jews were among Creators of Supreme Council (Info from official websites: don't remember exactly, Google gives many).


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Your just misinformed.
> Hiram, Ahiman Rezon, Dermott, Mackey, Pike, 4Jews were among Creators of Supreme Council (Info from official websites: don't remember exactly, Google gives many).



The supreme council didnt exist until 1801. By then freemasonry in continetal Europe was highly developed and had undergone a lot of conflict.

Look up the strict observance and Von Hund.

Sorry but try again.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Your just misinformed.
> Hiram, Ahiman Rezon, Dermott, Mackey, Pike, 4Jews were among Creators of Supreme Council (Info from official websites: don't remember exactly, Google gives many).


Which Supreme Council? NMJ or SMJ? And as has been pointed out multiple times, even if you refuse to acknowledge it, the Supreme Coincil of the Scottish Rite HAS NO GOVERNANCE OVER CRAFT LODGES WHATSOEVER.  IT ONLY GOVERNS SCOTTISH RITE VALLEYS. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> The supreme council didnt exist until 1801. By then freemasonry in continetal Europe was highly developed and had undergone a lot of conflict.
> 
> Look up the strict observance and Von Hund.
> 
> Sorry but try again.



So, you denying that Masonry has Old Testament background?!


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Winter said:


> Which Supreme Council? NMJ or SMJ? And as has been pointed out multiple times, even if you refuse to acknowledge it, the Supreme Coincil of the Scottish Rite HAS NO GOVERNANCE OVER CRAFT LODGES WHATSOEVER.  IT ONLY GOVERNS SCOTTISH RITE VALLEYS.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



You're mistaken, Sir.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> So, you denying that Masonry has Old Testament background?!



No?

A text from the old testament is read in church every sunday.

Your arguments dont make sense.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> You're mistaken, Sir.


If you actually were part of a regular Lodge of Freemasons you would know that you are the one that is incorrect. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> No?
> 
> A text from the old testament is read in church every sunday.
> 
> Your arguments dont make sense.



Masonry has Old Testament background.
Proof: Hiram Abiff was Architect of Solomon's Temple.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Winter said:


> If you actually were part of a regular Lodge of Freemasons you would know that you are the one that is incorrect.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



I'm resting on Official sources.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Masonry has Old Testament background.
> Proof: Hiram Abiff was Architect of Solomon's Temple.



The old testament is in the bible.
That dont meant that christianity is judaism.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> I'm resting on Official sources.



Well your sources is being either wrong or you dont understand them.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> I'm resting on Official sources.


No you are not.  You are quoting one book without an understanding of what you are reading or who it actually applies to. And completely ignoring all attempts to correct your misunderstanding.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> The old testament is in the bible.
> That dont meant that christianity is judaism.



Christianity is -- New Testament.
Judaism is -- Old Testament.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Christianity is -- New Testament.
> Judaism is -- Old Testament.


For the record. We are not fans of the term Old Testamemt. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Elexir (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Christianity is -- New Testament.
> Judaism is -- Old Testament.



No

Judaism = Old Testament.

Christianity = Both new and old testament.

And yes Im aware its not the correct term, however simplification seems prudent here


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> No
> 
> Judaism = Old Testament.
> 
> ...


It is the correct term from the Christian perspective. LoL. I'm just being smarmy. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Winter said:


> No you are not.  You are quoting one book without an understanding of what you are reading or who it actually applies to. And completely ignoring all attempts to correct your misunderstanding.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



1. Ordo ab chao
2. Porch and middle chamber.
3. Morals & Dogma.
4. Anderson Constitution
5. Encyclopedia of A.G. Mackey
& Many other OFFICIAL WEBSITES, sir.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 6, 2019)

Elexir said:


> No
> 
> Judaism = Old Testament.
> 
> ...



Wrong.
Jews don't accept Jesus Christ as Messiah.


----------



## Winter (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> 1. Ordo ab chao
> 2. Porch and middle chamber.
> 3. Morals & Dogma.
> 4. Anderson Constitution
> ...


That proves nothing other than that you lack an understanding of the works as well as Masonic organizations and their relationship to each other.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Brother JC (Mar 6, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> 1. Ordo ab chao
> 2. Porch and middle chamber.
> 3. Morals & Dogma.
> 4. Anderson Constitution
> ...



Nothing you’ve listed is “official.” All of it is subject to scrutiny and marred by perception.
You, sir, are misinformed by your own inability to dig deeper than the surface.
And I’m a member of a group that is based on ancient Persia, but I guarantee it didn’t exist in that time or place. It is just a backdrop. Just like Masonry and it’s use of the LEGEND of Solomon’s Temple.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 7, 2019)

Brother JC said:


> Nothing you’ve listed is “official.” All of it is subject to scrutiny and marred by perception.
> You, sir, are misinformed by your own inability to dig deeper than the surface.
> And I’m a member of a group that is based on ancient Persia, but I guarantee it didn’t exist in that time or place. It is just a backdrop. Just like Masonry and it’s use of the LEGEND of Solomon’s Temple.



Guys, no hurting you, but you really -- "not clever enough" to give answer to simple questions.(masons should be intellectuals, instead you're just insulting like "idiot", "loony", etc.).
Dude, I didn't say "books are official".
I said: Germans helped Jews developing Masonry.


----------



## Brother JC (Mar 7, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Dude, I didn't say "books are official".





Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> & Many other OFFICIAL WEBSITES, sir.



You said several times you were quoting “official” sources. I corrected you.
You are attempting to paint the world with a narrow brush but it doesn’t work. And you really must do better research.


----------



## Ben_Zanaatkar (Mar 7, 2019)

Brother JC said:


> You said several times you were quoting “official” sources. I corrected you.
> You are attempting to paint the world with a narrow brush but it doesn’t work. And you really must do better research.



Dude.
Albert Pike wrote in his book that German King Frederick The Great was "the greatest mason". Pike is liar?


----------



## Roy_ (Mar 8, 2019)

The article that is referred to is a chapter from Klövekorn's book _99 Degrees Of Freemasonry_. This is a book about "modern" Freemasonry (not Memphis-Misraim as the title suggests though). It is an alright book that does not really go in depth. The man has 'an agenda' too. Besides Freemason, he is a 'heathen priest', so this chapter about the German(ic) origins of Freemasonry suit him well.

I'm currently reading R.F. Gould, a Dutch translation of his _Concise History_ in which he gives much much more information about early German Masonry, guilds, Bauhütten, etc. I suppose that Gould will eventually come to the more reasonable conclusion that several rivers mounted in the pool that would become Freemasonry instead of following one such river and claiming to have found the source (whether German, Jewish or otherwise).

Personally I'm mostly interested in Klövekorn's thesis, but his book hardly supports my 'cause'. I *am* glad that a relatively famous author breaks a lance promoting the theory. Soon there will (hopefully) be another one. A Norwegian former Mason wrote a book about the Viking origins of Freemasonry (he was kicked out of his lodge for his book for it being too revealing). The book is written in Norwegian, but work is done on an English version. The book is much more in depth than Klövekorn's with his German theories *and* it goes back further into the past.


----------



## Brother JC (Mar 8, 2019)

Ben_Zanaatkar said:


> Dude.
> Albert Pike wrote in his book that German King Frederick The Great was "the greatest mason". Pike is liar?



That was Pike’s opinion. Opinions are neither lies nor truths, they are personal thoughts and perceptions.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 8, 2019)

Let me quote a little part of my book (sorry for the translation because I've not yet reviewed it):

_An eighteenth-century anti-Masonic text accuses Oliver Cromwell of having created Freemasonry, characterizing it in a Jewish and anti-Catholic sense. In fact, Cromwell was the protagonist of an attempt to bring the Jews back to England from which they had been expelled a few centuries earlier. King Edward I of England (1239-1307), in fact, like other Christian kings of the time, persecuted the Jews forcing them, among other things, to wear a symbol of recognition on their clothes, although it was not the six-pointed star as in Nazi Germany but the two Tables of the Law of Moses. Then, in 1290, they were expelled and remained only the Marranos, that is the Jews who had converted (really or only officially) to Christianity, living in perpetual danger due to various episodes of anti-Semitism.


Cromwell's attempt was unsuccessful and it was only with Charles II Stuart, who lifted the ban in 1655, that the Jews returned to the British islands. This fact, however, reveals that the Jews were not present in Renaissance England and it is therefore unlikely that they could have had any influence on the evolution of Freemasonry before the second half of the seventeenth century. It is therefore unlikely any Jewish influence on Freemasonry at least prior to the birth of modern Freemasonry._

End of quote

I have reported this part to clarify that in middle age freemasonry is very unlikely a "jewish influence". This presumed "jews influence" is due to a mistake that was made along eighteenth and nineteenth century. The reason is tied with the Kabbalah. The original "masonic" Kabbalah (early seventeeth century) was the "Christian Kabbalah" a system, born during Renaissance, to find a way to fuse together the three "a" religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). However along 1700 Christian Kabbalah lost popularity while the Hermetic Kabbalah became the basis of western esoterism.  However the ancient Masonry was not kabbalistic but was transformed in such a way between the end of seventeenth and the beginning of eighteeenth. 

Coming back to the origin, however, in 1726 (three years after the Constitutions) a Mason, Bro. Francis Drake, made one of the first speech that have been conserved and its closing was:

_Since we are so happily met to celebrate this Annual Solemnity: let neither Dane nor Norman, Goth nor Vandal, start up, to disturb the Harmony of it: That the World may hear and admire, that even at this critical Time all Parties are buried in Masonry. But let us so behave our selves here and elsewhere, that the distinguishing Characteristicks of the whole Brotherhood may be to be called Good Christians, Loyal Subjects, True Brittons, as well as Free-Masons_

"_True Brittons"_ is the anwers. How the "true Brittons" are tied with Romans is explained by the Legend of the Craft.

PS 1: the book is "“I LIBERI MURATORI SCHIACCIATI. Origine, dottrina ed avanzamento della setta filosofica ora dominante. Opera composta da Uom pratichissimo delle Loggie, ora tradotta dall᾿edizione di Amsterdam dal sig.abbate Pietro Mogas sacerdote spagnuolo, confermata con Note relative alle presenti rivoluzioni e novita di Europa dal sig.abbate Pietro Saverio Casseda pompejopolitano.” Assisi, per Ottavio Sgariglia, 1793" an italian version of "Les Francs-Maçons écrasés: Suite du livre intitulé: L'ordre des Francs-Maçons trahi" de l'Abbé Larudan

PS 2: The G.A.O.T.U. was initially a christian kabbalistic concept (_The Harmony of the World_, Francesco Zorzi or Giorgi 1466-1540, an Italian friar well known in England because he was the consultant of Henry VIII for a divorce). However also John Calvin (1509 - 1564) used this definitiond. I suspect that this was one of the reason of the friction with the Catholic Church: its sound a "protestant concept"!


----------



## Elexir (Mar 8, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> PS 2: The G.A.O.T.U. was initially a christian kabbalistic concept (_The Harmony of the World_, Francesco Zorzi or Giorgi 1466-1540, an Italian friar well known in England because he was the consultant of Henry VIII for a divorce). However also John Calvin (1509 - 1564) used this definitiond. I suspect that this was one of the reason of the friction with the Catholic Church: its sound a "protestant concept"!



If I dont remember wrong Thomas Aquinas drew paralells to God as an architecht in the 1200.


----------



## Elexir (Mar 8, 2019)

JamestheJust said:


> >_It is therefore unlikely any Jewish influence on Freemasonry at least prior to the birth of modern Freemasonry.
> _
> Unless there was a Jewish component in the Templars.



Some have accused the templars of being moslims but never jewish.

However the RCC has already cleared the templars of the charges over ten years ago.


----------



## Brother JC (Mar 8, 2019)

Templar connection? Fiction alert!


----------



## Winter (Mar 9, 2019)

JamestheJust said:


> >Templar connection? Fiction alert!
> Templars in Scotland.  Earliest (named) Freemasonry in Scotland.



Scotland also had sheep at that time.  Are you suggesting they're connected to Freemasonry?  As much as I enjoy books by by authors like Knight and Lomas, the evidence at this time does not support they claim that there is any connection between the Templars and Freemasonry.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 9, 2019)

Elexir said:


> If I dont remember wrong Thomas Aquinas drew paralells to God as an architecht in the 1200.


Right, but it was a way to indicate the perfection. Giorgi used many time the expression "Great Architect" and his works illustrates and gives specific instructions about the "sacred architecture" with rules about dimensions and proportions that were really used for the building of churches all around Europe. His work was very influential and I recommend a read. From Llull to Pico della Mirandola to Cornelius Agrippa, to Philo of Alexandria the Christian Cabala was a system taken to overlap the previous Masonry "kwnoledge" with another one, similar but at the same time different. The overlapping was so good that basically it is possible to make the inverse operation. In other words we have conserved the ancient kwowledge in most of the part of our rituals and education, simply we have to use a different decoding.


----------



## tldubb (Mar 9, 2019)

Brother JC said:


> That was Pike’s opinion. Opinions are neither lies nor truths, they are personal thoughts and perceptions.



Well said Brother JC!


Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry Mobile


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 25, 2019)

Winter said:


> Even a cursory investigation into the founding of Freemasonry will prove that our origin myths are just that. Allegorical stories to help us form a common framework of morality.


Unfortunately a "cursory investigation" its not enough. I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching. It is not possible to state exactly if this story has really happened or it is a novel fabricated on an historical background, but it is plausible or, at least, its author has done a so good job that it could really have happened.

Aboust the moral content, surely in ancient Masonry existed a specific moral system which has been translated in the modern Freemasonry  in what you rightly define a "a common framework of morality". This system is  illustrated by the "charges" and by some other documents that, currently, would not be classified as "masonic". The modern version is a sort of "translation" of this system but since much water has passed under the bridges we have forgotten the original meanings.


----------



## Glen Cook (Mar 25, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Unfortunately a "cursory investigation" its not enough. I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching. It is not possible to state exactly if this story has really happened or it is a novel fabricated on an historical background, but it is plausible or, at least, its author has done a so good job that it could really have happened.
> 
> Aboust the moral content, surely in ancient Masonry existed a specific moral system which has been translated in the modern Freemasonry  in what you rightly define a "a common framework of morality". This system is  illustrated by the "charges" and by some other documents that, currently, would not be classified as "masonic". The modern version is a sort of "translation" of this system but since much water has passed under the bridges we have forgotten the original meanings.


Hmm. The rituals with which I’m familiar actually  spell out the moral lesson that is being taught. 

That the story is fictional has no bearing on whether it teaches a moral lesson.  I suspect there is no cultural belief system that does not use legends and myths to teach moral lessons.  Even the story of Job falls in this category, does it not?  

In my rituals, the system is not illustrated by charges. 

I would commend to your study the morality plays of the ancient guilds.


----------



## Winter (Mar 25, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Unfortunately a "cursory investigation" its not enough. I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching. It is not possible to state exactly if this story has really happened or it is a novel fabricated on an historical background, but it is plausible or, at least, its author has done a so good job that it could really have happened.
> 
> Aboust the moral content, surely in ancient Masonry existed a specific moral system which has been translated in the modern Freemasonry  in what you rightly define a "a common framework of morality". This system is  illustrated by the "charges" and by some other documents that, currently, would not be classified as "masonic". The modern version is a sort of "translation" of this system but since much water has passed under the bridges we have forgotten the original meanings.



Are you saying there is no morality lesson in the Hiramic legend?


----------



## Elexir (Mar 26, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Unfortunately a "cursory investigation" its not enough. I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching. It is not possible to state exactly if this story has really happened or it is a novel fabricated on an historical background, but it is plausible or, at least, its author has done a so good job that it could really have happened.
> 
> Aboust the moral content, surely in ancient Masonry existed a specific moral system which has been translated in the modern Freemasonry  in what you rightly define a "a common framework of morality". This system is  illustrated by the "charges" and by some other documents that, currently, would not be classified as "masonic". The modern version is a sort of "translation" of this system but since much water has passed under the bridges we have forgotten the original meanings.



In a temprance fraternity I used to be a member there was a strong knights templar influence in the rituals.
Did the templars drink alchol? Most likley yes. So why use templar symbolism in a temprance order? Maybe the value isnt in the historical facts but rather in the myth that is used.

An initatiary fraternity is not focused on historical facts but rather uses histories and myths to convay something more...


----------



## Winter (Mar 26, 2019)

I believe anyone that is looking to Masonic ritual for historical facts or accuracy are fooling themselves as much as anyone who look to religious works for the same.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 26, 2019)

I have little time so I will answer one by one. It could take some days.



Winter said:


> Are you saying there is no morality lesson in the Hiramic legend?



I have not talked about Hiramic legend but about the Legend of the Craft, that is Regius Poem and about one hundred of following manuscripts. But lets talk about the Hiramic legend as it is a 18th century product, that is of the beginning of modern Freemasonry. This is not only my opinion but the one of the most qualified scholars that have studied it. The first trace is in the "Masonry dissected" of 1730. In the Legend of the Craft Hiram architect apparently is not even cited. Hiram the artificer appears only in the manuscripts of Spencer family (together with the name of his father !!!!) which are pretty recent (the oldest is the Inigo Jones manuscript which date is very uncertain as it varies from 1697 to 1725). Therefore it is difficult to affirm that its morality lesson starts from ancient time. On the other side I have seen that Hiram's tragic death tale (what happend after the death has been created by our 18th century Brothers) is an adaptation of a well known European legend about a saint of the catholic church (or a knight, depending from the version as there are many, including one were the poor "Hiram" was both a monk and a knight) who is ... the catholic protector of Stonemasons!
Did ancient Brothers know this legend? Yes, as I have written "apparently is not even cited". Its story is, in reality, hidden in the part where the Legend of the Craft tells about saint Alban and exactly when it is detailled the increase in the salary that Alban obtained for the Masons. Why it is there it is long to explain as it take many pages.


----------



## Glen Cook (Mar 27, 2019)

Well, the Hiramic legend certainly is a legend of the Craft. So you agree it teaches a moral lesson?

Also, we find the legends of the Craft developing in the 1658 indenture of the Lodge at Scoon that the “uniforme communitie and wnione “ of stonemasons   had its origins in King Solomon ‘s Temple.

We also have Noachite Freemasonry referenced by Anderson in 1723. Those familiar with RAM ritual are aware this legend teaches moral lessons as well.

I think perhaps you meant to reflect on legends of the _beginnings_ of the Craft, rather than the Legend of the Craft, such as what has been called the York Legend, the claim That stone masons had been given a charter by Athelstan GL MS 1. Or perhaps the claim in the Regius  MS that stomasonry was invented by Euclid, or the Cooke MS that the Craft was antediluvian. However, the Regius certainly sets out rules for moral behaviour: poaching work, not undertaking work that cannot be finished (a concept unknown to current contractors).

As to date or the Third Degree, the London newspaper, The Flying Post is relevant. The text is known as a ‘Mason’s Examination’. By this time, 1723, the catechism was much longer and the text contained several pieces of rhyme, particularly noting :

_‘An enter’d Mason I have been, Boaz and Jachin I have seen; A Fellow I was sworn most rare, And Know the Astler, Diamond, and Square: I know the Master’s Part full well, As honest Maughbin will you tell.’_

Further, the Cooke MSv references “And the son of the King of Tyre was his master mason.”

Hiram Abiff is also found in Anderson ‘s 1723 Constitutions. The 1738 mentions his death.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 27, 2019)

Glen Cook said:


> Well, the Hiramic legend certainly is a legend of the Craft. So you agree it teaches a moral lesson?


Yes, but it is not ancient, but modern. What I meant was exactly what you say that is


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 27, 2019)

Glen Cook said:


> Well, the Hiramic legend certainly is a legend of the Craft. So you agree it teaches a moral lesson


 Yes but it is not of ancient Freemasonry but from modern one.  The reference in the Cooke, for example 





Glen Cook said:


> “And the son of the King of Tyre was his master mason.”


 is not referred to Hiram the artificier. Hiram the artificier was son of Urias the Israelite (Inigo Jones Ms) who does not appear in the older version of the Legend about the beginnings.

What I meant was exactly what you say, that is I was referring to the 





Glen Cook said:


> legends of the _beginnings_ of the Craft


 which, however is only one. In other words the one that you call York Legend is the same of Regius and of all the other manuscripts and tells one only story which, however, claims that was Nimrod, who was a Mason too, who gave to Masons the first charges. However I would be grateful if you could help me to give a name at this legend as in many place is called "Legend of the Craft", but you could be right and as I'm translating my book I would like to use the term which is the most correct.

I'm not in any rite, therefore I'm not familiare with RAM, but I'm sure, for other reasons, that Noachite Freemasonry is a product of Anderson & Company indipendently from its contents. The reference to the "indenture of the Lodge at Scoon of 1658", which I did not know, is interesting and I would be interested to know why the cited phrase of the Mason’s Examination is so interesting for you. For my reasearches it was interesting particularly the word _maughbin,_ which in other texts is defined as _Matchpin, Mahabyn, Machbenah _and _Magboe_ or simply _M.B._. I do not think that the original word was hebraic however as it is indicated in some researches.


----------



## Glen Cook (Mar 27, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Yes, but it is not ancient, but modern. What I meant was exactly what you say that is


Then your statement, “ I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching.” refers to what you call “ancient masonry.” I don’t know how you define the term “ancient.”  To be clear, though, the discussion is about speculative, not operative masonry.

The Scoon reference was in regard to an earlier reference for the Solomonic legend.


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 29, 2019)

Only to clarify: basically for me "antients" are before English civil war.

About the difference between "operative and speculative", this is pretty complicated. In the Matthew Cooke Ms, for example, is written:

_And after that was a worthy king in England that was called Athelstan, and his youngest son loved well the science of geometry, and he wist well that handcraft had the practice of the science of geometry so well as masons, wherefore he drew him to council and learned [the] practice of that science to his speculative, for of speculative he was a master, and he loved well masonry and masons. And he became a mason himself, and he gave them charges and names as it is now used in England, and in other countries._

If we consider this text, the "speculative" component existed long time before the 1717. But what sound strange to me is the idea that once there were the "operatives" and then the "speculatives": how it is possible to affirm this with certainty without knowing which was the real job of the "operative"? I have an answer about this job that allows me to affirm that, anciently, both the operative part and the speculative one existed together even if with a different purpose. For example the "speculative" mentioned in the Cooke was mainly dedicated to improve the operative part. Anyway this could be an argument for another thread, therefore I will not proceed further on this.


----------



## Glen Cook (Mar 29, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Only to clarify: basically for me "antients" are before English civil war.
> 
> About the difference between "operative and speculative", this is pretty complicated. In the Matthew Cooke Ms, for example, is written:
> 
> ...


Athelstan and  masons is considered a myth. 

Since you define ancient masonry as before the English Civil war, do we not have moral lessons taught at least for some 50 years per  Aichetson’s Haven and the Lodge of Edinburgh?


----------



## Luigi Visentin (Mar 30, 2019)

Glen Cook said:


> Athelstan and masons is considered a myth.


Also the origin in the guilds of real stonemasons is a myth: unfortunately there is no evidence of this. Also the Worshipful Company of Masons of London has no trace of any connection with Freemasonry and also in Scotland there is no evidence that the oldest minutes or the Schaw Statutes were addressed to real stonemasons. As I have written it is not possible to state exactly if the story told is true or is a fictional novel on an historical background. In both case the citation of Athelstan in what you call York Legend, is correct and in the right place, while legend of the meeting in York in 926 (at least as it is reported in many old books) is not correct as York was not among Atelsthan possessions in that year. For all other information about, including the part about the "son" of Athelstan, I suggest you to wait when my book will be ready (the whole part take more than a chapter).



Glen Cook said:


> Since you define ancient masonry as before the English Civil war, do we not have moral lessons taught at least for some 50 years per Aichetson’s Haven and the Lodge of Edinburgh?


This is not what I have written. I have written that the Legend of the Craft tells a story and its moral part is in the Charges. This does not means that in the Lodges were not taught moral lessons but, in case, it is not possible to affirme that they were the same of actual ones. To complete my answer, my hypothesis, supported from the (unfortunately few) documents available is that from end of civil war till around mid of 18th century Freemasonry allowed the entrance in the Freemasonry of persons coming from many different experiences because the ancient Brothers basically decided to cancel the operative part. The "_speculative Fremasonry_" in the modern sense started therefore likely together with the modern Freemasonry that is from end of 17th and beginning of 18th century, not without the opposition of the real "antients". For example the _Briscoe Pamphlet of 1724_ and _The Plain Dealer_, of the same year, accuse Anderson and his collaborators to try to modify deeply Freemasonry in the name of a more "popular" version based on the claim of alleged connection to ancient rites, united with a certain libertine behaviours. Same as above, I have detailled the whole in my book, together with the information that can be extracted by the scottish minutes that you have cited.


----------



## Glen Cook (Mar 30, 2019)

Luigi Visentin said:


> Also the origin in the guilds of real stonemasons is a myth: unfortunately there is no evidence of this. Also the Worshipful Company of Masons of London has no trace of any connection with Freemasonry and also in Scotland there is no evidence that the oldest minutes or the Schaw Statutes were addressed to real stonemasons. As I have written it is not possible to state exactly if the story told is true or is a fictional novel on an historical background. In both case the citation of Athelstan in what you call York Legend, is correct and in the right place, while legend of the meeting in York in 926 (at least as it is reported in many old books) is not correct as York was not among Atelsthan possessions in that year. For all other information about, including the part about the "son" of Athelstan, I suggest you to wait when my book will be ready (the whole part take more than a chapter).
> 
> 
> This is not what I have written. I have written that the Legend of the Craft tells a story and its moral part is in the Charges. This does not means that in the Lodges were not taught moral lessons but, in case, it is not possible to affirme that they were the same of actual ones. To complete my answer, my hypothesis, supported from the (unfortunately few) documents available is that from end of civil war till around mid of 18th century Freemasonry allowed the entrance in the Freemasonry of persons coming from many different experiences because the ancient Brothers basically decided to cancel the operative part. The "_speculative Fremasonry_" in the modern sense started therefore likely together with the modern Freemasonry that is from end of 17th and beginning of 18th century, not without the opposition of the real "antients". For example the _Briscoe Pamphlet of 1724_ and _The Plain Dealer_, of the same year, accuse Anderson and his collaborators to try to modify deeply Freemasonry in the name of a more "popular" version based on the claim of alleged connection to ancient rites, united with a certain libertine behaviours. Same as above, I have detailled the whole in my book, together with the information that can be extracted by the scottish minutes that you have cited.


Visentin: “I have studied a lot the Legend of the Craft and my conclusions are that it tells a story and with no a moral intent or teaching,”


----------

