It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Scottish Rite as original freemasonry

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 07:27 AM

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I am sure that it is not a premeditated plan to distance the two groups, but I have found that whenever I have listed the many commonalities Masons and Templars share, the reaction is most often a defensive posturing. It may not be that at all, but it appears that way. The other factor that I try to keep in mind is that even if the Lodges know full well that they are directly traceable straight back to Jacques DeMolay and Roger BelleChance, they may desire to keep that heritage on the down low. The reason they would does not matter to me, as I am certain it is not sinister, and is more likely modesty.

Some Masons in the past have been overzealous in trying to establish a Templar/Masonic link. The problem with this is that it makes Freemasonry lose credibility in the eyes of serious researchers and historians. If it could be demonstrated that Masonry was a result of Templary, I doubt many Masons would mind.

But, in fact, the Masonic Fraternity probably predates Templary. The Regius Manuscript is dated circa 1390, but tells of a convention of Masons held in York, England in the 10th century.

There was no mention of a Masonic / Templar connection until Brother Michael Andrew Ramsay gave a speech on the subject to a French Lodge in the early 18th century. Ramsay did not mention the Templars by name, but instead alluded to Masonry having originated with orders of chivalry during the Crusades.

The Regius Mss. can be read here.

Ramsay's speech, which is the origin of the Masonic Templar legend, can be read here.

posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 03:48 PM

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Perhaps european stonemasons went with their lords to police the holy land, and picked it up there and transfered it back, but not the knights.
Once they got to the Holy Land they had to lay siege to stone fortresses, which entailed digging tunnels under the corners to weaken the walls, then when the wall collapsed they would storm the breach. The job of the tunnellers was not envied. Then, when they had captured the castle, they had to make it back into a fortress, rebuilding the walls, turrets, etc.
So the returning Crusaders would have contained many adept stoneworkers among them.

They would have been mostly joiners I think - but good observation. The accounts given about Richard the Lionheart's butchery in the seige of Acre include the fact that he and his men built vast seige towers.

An old thread, and I have only got half-way through it, so sorry if this is covered later - just had to commit the thought before it got away. I had never made this connection before and I think it is very significant. Thank you for planting the seed.

The development of scissor braced roofs in 13th century Gothic architecture demonstrates a merger between the two trades and an equality in skill. Carving and ornamentation similarly began to achieve new standards. The Templars would have had the skills required, both as engineers of war machines and as boat builders to create these roofs. The Nave of a church was shaped like an upturned boat, hence the name and its derivative Navy. The skills were therefore transferrable. It would also have involved a need to work closely together and share knowledge.

I have been considering the connection between the Freemasons and the Templars for just a short time but I definately think that there is some common ascentry. It certainly seems to be the case in York.

St Marys Abbey was completed in 1257, though a ruin now, it was at the time one of the finest examples of gothic architecture in the country.
There is some indication that the same Stone Masons then went to work on the Chapter House at York Minster. The work here had some wealthy benefactors and the Chapter House is considered to be the best work in the entire Minster. It is incredible and an incredible space to be in. I have arranged events in the minster and always sneak away to have the place to myself. You could spend hours in there and still not take in the beauty of the place.

The Chapter House is joined to the Minster by a vestibule accessed from the north of the Minster. This vestibule travels 3 bays north before turning right to travel 2 bays east. Above this vestibule is the mason's lodge.

Though this is interesting for a number of reasons, in light of the realisation that the Templars would have been skilled joiners, it is the roof that is most interesting. According to blueprints the lodge was a much later addition to the original design and was added in the early 1300s. The scissor brace roof is of very high standard, as is the roof in the Chapter House.

I think that the Templars could have commissioned the building of the Chapter House to hold their meetings. When the order was issued to round up the templars may be they or their supporters added the lodge to enable them to hide out. As the York Templars suffered no dire consequences as a result of the persecutions driven by Philip of France it may not have been needed for this purpose. They would however have needed somewhere to meet if they were to continue the observance of their traditions....

Lots of gaps there but I just thought I would share my thoughts on the topic. It is an old thread but if anyone is still interested.....

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:14 AM
Hey i was reading your guys post's and i found them interesting yet each was filled with different information. I did my research and i found a useful website that is pretty interesting and explains the money pit, nova scotia in depth.

Post your comments about it im interested in hearing others opinions.
Thanks for your time.

posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 05:33 PM
I think some of the answers to the questions in this thread can be found in Robert Folger's The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, In Thirty-Three Degrees.

The introduction states:

It would be proper here to state, that the degrees, to which this history relates, have no connection whatever with what is known as " Ancient Craft Masonry,'' whether derived from York, in England, or Kilwinning, in Scotland.

Folger claims that this statement in Acta Latomorum, ou Chronologie de l'histoire de la Franche-Maçonnerie Française et étrangère is wrong, even though most Freemasons accept the book as gospel truth:

"This ancient Council had its chamber in the old Grand Lodge of France, and both the Grand Lodge and the Council were under the direction of the same Grand Master, Count de Clermont, Prince of the Royal Blood, and also of the same representative or Substitute of the Grand Master, Challon de Joinville. This Council of the Emperors of the East and West was formed in 1754, by the Chevalier de Bonnville, from the ruins of the 'Chapter of Clermont.'"

Personally, I doubt that the book was even written by Claude-Antoine Thory.

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
You do realize Mr. Pike was a notorious practical joker, especially among the Freemasons (he was a member of the Scottish Rite an appendant body).
Winston Smith.

The same could apply to Stephen Morin about whom Jean Marie Ragon had this to say in Orthodox Maçonnique:

The Council of the Emperors never imagined for a moment that such an audacious Jew and Juggler as he was, would take possession of the rite, to make a profit out of it, they never dreamed that he would make it an article of traffic, and not only so, but that he would re-model the degrees, make new ones, &c."

As for the founding of the Supreme Council 33° of the Scottish Rite, Folger claims that 13 of the original 16 Deputy Inspectors General were Jews, although it's hard to tell exactly who the 13 were. This is my best guess:

1. Henry A. Francken (Frankin?)
2. Moses M. Hays
3. Isaac da Costa
4. Joseph Myers
5. Solomon Bush
6. Barend M. Spitzer
7. Moses Cohen
8. Hyman Isaac Long
7. "Brother A. Forst"
8. Israel Delieben
9. Emanuel de la Motta
10. Abraham Alexander
11. Isaac Auld

Folger states confidently that only 3 of them were known not to be Jews:

1. Colonel John Mitchell
2. Colonel Augusuts Provost
3. Dr. Frederick Dalcho

He also states that their story of having been chartered by the King of Prussia on May 1, 1786 was completely made up. In addition, he states that "Masons in a day" skip most of the degrees because they make references to Jesus Christ, which may be offensive to Jewish initiates. Mind you, Folger was a 33° Mason and a past master before writing this book.

edit on 29-1-2011 by vcwxvwligen because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Masonic Light
The degrees of the Scottish Rite consist of the 25 degrees of the French Rite of Perfection, along with 8 additional degrees taken from the French Philosophical Rite and Rite of the East and West. The Scottish Rite is purely speculative in nature, and derives from the York Rite, which had an operative ancestry.

I think Black Guard's confusion is a common one, though, stemming from the use of the word "Scottish". The Scottish Rite actually has nothing to do with Scotland; it was named "Scottish Rite" because the title of the 29° was "Grand Scottish Knight of St. Andrew", not because it originated in Scotland.

Those upper 8 degrees were originally 6 degrees, called the "Irish degrees," in honor of Irish Freemasonry. Their name changed to "Scottish degrees" in honor of the Kilwinning Lodge.

It's possible that the word "Scottish" means "slave," because the Scottish were known for being kidnapped and sold into slavery.

edit on 29-1-2011 by vcwxvwligen because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:03 PM
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

Actually, I'm of the opinion that "Scottish" is used because of mispronunciation. The Rite of Perfection, which originated in France, was called by them the Order of Acacia. The French pronounce "Acacia" and "Eccosaias" in an almost identical manner, "Eccosais" being the French for "Scottish".

posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 02:35 AM
reply to post by Masonic Light

You can't confuse "Eccosais" and "acacia," it just doesn't happen ...

posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 10:24 AM
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

How do you know that? Were you there? To someone who isn't fluent in French may have.

posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by Masonic Light

Quote: ... Nevertheless, the Scottish Rite is American in origin and actually did not make it to Scotland until nearly the beginning the 20th century.

I do hardly understand what you mean. Somewhre in the SR the following name is mentioned. How could I expalin this conicidence ?

As far as I know a degree is added to the rite by Friedrich II.

Frederick II (German: Friedrich II.; 24 January 1712 – 17 August 1786) was a King in Prussia (1740–1772) and a King of Prussia (1772–1786) from the Hohenzollern dynasty.[1] In his role as a prince-elector of the Holy Roman Empire, he was Frederick IV (Friedrich IV.) of Brandenburg. He was in personal union the sovereign prince of the Principality of Neuchâtel. He became known as Frederick the Great (Friedrich der Große) and was nicknamed der alte Fritz ("Old Fritz").

edit on 13-2-2011 by isoger1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 13 2011 @ 01:32 PM
reply to post by Masonic Light

Quote: A. E. Waite once pointed out that early Masonic Templary was founded and constituted by the Jacobites, leading him to conclude that the Masonic - Templar connection was a myth generated by the followers of the Stuarts in order to gather support for their cause. Most other Masonic researchers have reached the same conclusion, including Voorhis, Pike, Coil, Gould, and those of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge.

The founders of modern freem... are

1- Operative masons like Como Masters.
They did certainly have no knowledge of initiation. Regius reflects this fact pretty good.

2- English Nobles.
So did they.

3- The jews.
Verry unlikely.

4- There remains only one group that had connections with the Orient. I would rather say you name it.

Without the templars there could hardly be the transfer of the knowledge of initiation and ...

very truly
edit on 13-2-2011 by isoger1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-2-2011 by isoger1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 09:09 AM
God I would have loved to have seen Edward The 2nd's face when he was informed of the catastrophe that was Bannockburn. It resulted in the founding of the great Stuart dynasty, and gave Scotland 300 or so years of proud independance.

The whole thing occured not long after Grand Brother Jaques was burned at the stake. There seems to have been a massive conspiracy against the Templars, quite possibly one of the biggest of all time. The English very obviously coveted not only Scottish gold butt also Scottish esotoric knowledge.

Scottish Rite freemasonry is a Franco-german invention, popular in America and quite different to old school Scottish Masonry.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in