ANCIENT YORK MASONS
The abbreviation, A.Y.M. is frequently met in Masonic history and
nomenclature. It points to a legend, a persistent tradition: and it raises an
almost unanswerable question.
Did or did not a form of Freemasonry exist in the City of York, England, in
the year A.D. 926?
The answers to that question have created one of the most interesting
problems for Masonic research. Eminent Masonic students scholars and
investigators have for a great many years discussed, analyzed, examined, taken
apart and put together all the direct evidence all the indirect evidence and
evidence which is not even remotely indirect. concerning Ancient York Masonry.
The better to visualize the difficulties consider that the "direct evidence"
is contained in a manuscript the probable date of which is A.D. 1390 which is
464 years after the events chronicled in this manuscript are supposed to have
occurred. We, now, examine this manuscript 1030 years after the event described
and try to reach a conclusion.
It is just 467 years since Columbus voyaged to the New World. Suppose that
some present day story teller should write an account of the voyages of
Christopher Columbus, saying that he came to this continent, liked the Indians,
admired their tepees, called them into a meeting and gave them a charter to
build more and better tepees?
What would the historians and the researchers a thousand years from now make
of this? About all they can do is to consider the probability of the unknown
writer of 1959 having and writing accurate information.
The story in the Regius Manuscript is repeated in other and later manuscripts
constitutions. The first question which the researcher has to answer is "Were
all these manuscript constitutions copies made, one from the other, and added to
and changed by each copyist's whim, imagination, or ignorance? Were they all
copies of an unknown and now lost document which was the source of all the
manuscripts we have?"
The same sort of problem is the Synoptic Problem of the first three Gospels
of the New Testament Here the writers lived (probably) within a hundred years of
the events which they chronicled, but the thousands of theologians, ministers,
scholars, and historians who have for hundreds of years considered this problem
are not yet agreed that one copied from another, or that all three had access to
"Q" ( from Quelle, German for spring, or source) an unknown, long-lost original,
telling the story of the Carpenter of Nazareth
Not the thousandth part of the effort put on the Synoptic Problem has been
devoted to "the York Problem"; after all, ancient York Masonry is of interest
chiefly to Freemasons and, really, to only a small per cent of them Yet to those
to whom it does matter, it is really important
The evidence is not great in amount, nor difficult (except in the old
spellings and ancient words) to interpret.
The Regius Poem, Freemasonry's oldest document, tells the story. Here is the
pertinent paragraph, with modern spelling and words to make it easier to read
"This craft came into England, as I tell you, in the time of good King
Athelstan's reign; he made them both hall, and also bower and lofty temples of
great honor, to take his recreation in both day and night, and to worship his
God with all his might This good lord loved this craft full well, and purposed
to strengthen it in every way on account of various defects that he discovered
in the craft. He sent about into all the land, after all the masons of the
craft, to come straight to him- to amend all these defects by good counsel, if
it might so happen. He then permitted an assembly to be made of divers Lords in
their rank, dukes, earls, and barons, also knights, squires, and many more and
the great burgesses of that city, they were all there in their degree; these
were there, Each one in every way make laws for the estate of these masons There
they sought by their wisdom how they might govern it; there they found out
fifteen articles, and there they made fifteen points.
Our next oldest document in which this legend is recited is the Cooke
Manuscript whose date is probably in the first half of the 1400's. The details
are here much more copious than those contained in the regius Manuscript. The
passage referring to the legend is as follows:
"and after that was a worthy kynge in England, That was called Athelstone,
and his youngest sone lovyd well the sciens of Gemetry, and he wyst well that
hand craft had the practyke of the sciens of Gemetry so well as masons;
Wherefore he drewe him to consell and lernyd (the) practyke of that sciens to
spectulatyf. For of the speculatyfe he was a master, and he lovyd welle masonry
and masons. And he bicome a mason hymselfe. and he yaf hem (gave them) charges
and names as (h)it is now usyd in Englond and in other countries. And he
ordeyned that theyt schulde have resonabulle pay. and purchesed (obtained) a fre
patent of the kyung that they schulde make a sembly when thei sawe resonably
tyme a (to) cum togedir to here (their) counselle of the whiche charges, amnors
& semble as is write and taught in the boke of oure charges wherefor I leve hit
at this tyme.
In later lines. which appear to have been taken from what is called the BOKE
OF CHARGES, the legend is repeated in these words:
"In this manner was the forsayde art begunne in the lond of Egypt bi the
forsayd maister Euglat (Euclid), & so, it went fro lond to londe and fro
kyngdome to kyndgome. After that, many yeris, in the tyme of Kyng Adelstone,
wiche was sum tyme kyngze of Englonde, bi his counsell and other gret lordys of
the lond bi comin (common) assent for grete defaut y-fennde amongys hem (them).
On (one) tyme of the yere or in iii yere, as nede were to the kynge and gret
lordys of the provynce and fro countre to countre congregacions they that be
made masters schold be examined of the articuls after written, & be ransacked (
thoroughly examined ) whether thei be abull and kunnyng (able and skillful) to
the profyte of the lordys hem to serve (to serve them ), and to the honor of the
forsayd art."
More than a hundred years later, about 1560, the Lansdowne Manuscript was
inscribed; and in it we find the legend still further developed, and Prince
Edwin for the first time introduced by name. That manuscript read thus:
"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
(disturbed) and put down vntill the tyme of King 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 father 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 loue he had to Masons
and to the Craft, he was made Mason at Windsor, and he gott of the King, his
father, a Charter and Comission once every yeare to have Assembley within the
Realme where they would within England, and to correct within themselves ffaults
& Trespasses that weere done as touching the Craft, and he held them an
Assembley at Yorke and there he made Masons and gave them Charges, and taught
them the Manners and Comands the same to be kept ever afterwards. And tooke them
the Charter and Comission to keep their Assembley, and Ordained that it should
be renewed from King to King, and when the Assembley were gathered togeather he
made a Cry, that all old Masons or young, that had any Writeings or
Vnderstanding of the Charges and manners that weere made before their Lands,
wheresoever they were made Masons, that they should shew them forth, there were
found some in ffrench, some in Greek, some in Hebrew, and some in English, and
some in other languages, and when they were read and over seen well the intent
of them was vnderstood to be all one. And then he caused a Booke be made thereof
how this worthy Craft of Masonrie was first founded, and he himselfe comanded,
and also then caused, that it should be read at any tyme when it should happen
any Mason or Masons to be made to give him or them their Charges, and from that
time vntill this Day Manners of Masons have been kept in this Manner and forme,
as well as Men might Governe it, and furthermore at diverse Assemblyes have been
put and Ordained diverse Charges by the best advice of Masters and fellows."
Subsequent manuscripts contain the legend substantially as it is above. Most
of them appear to be mere copies of it, or most probably of some original
manuscript from which both they and it are copies,--a Masonic "Q".
Revert for a moment to the Synoptic Problem; it has resolved itself into
three theories, each of which is more or less credible. although all three
together cannot be truth.
The first may be called the successive dependence theory; it presupposes that
one of the three Gospels is the original and the other two were either copied
from it, or one was copied from it, and the third is a copy of this copy.
The second theory is that which may be called the documentary or "Q"
theory,--that there was a long lost original Gospel from which Matthew, Mark,
and Luke copied, or one copied it and the third copied from this copy.
The third theory may be called the oral tradition theory; that all three
writers took word of mouth, spoken tradition, the myth and legend of the day,
and from them wrote their gospels.
It is certainly possible that three similar theories may contain the truth of
the York legend; an original (Masonic "Q") from which the writer of the Regius
copied; that the Regius is the original from which Cooke and Lansdowne and other
old, manuscript Constitutions were copied; that there was an oral tradition in
England at a time when there were no books and when only few men could either
read or write manuscripts, and that the Regius and its successors were but
versions of this oral tradition.
The indirect evidence may be likened to the legend of the cherry tree, I
cannot tell a lie. Parson Weems' story of George Washington. No historian today
gives any credence to the old popular school-boy tale. Yet there is nothing in
the character, parentage or surroundings of Washington to indicate that it could
not he true. All our accounts of the great Father of His Country show a man of
character, breeding, morality, and honesty. He came of gentle people. He lived
in an environment where noblesse oblige was important. He was an educated lad.
His childhood surroundings were such as to indicate a decent, God-fearing,
truthful lad. There is nothing impossible, or even improbable in his confession
of guilt and in his statement, "Father, I cannot tell a lie; I did it with my
little hatchet. "
There is merely no evidence--except Parson Weems--that it ever happened! It
must be remembered that the mere repetition of any document, no matter how many
times, does not add to the authenticity of the original. If the three writers of
the first three Gospels merely copied from one another, or from a lost "Q", the
fact that there are three documents in place of one does not make any of the
three more authentic than the first one. If the three followed, independently,
oral tradition, their writings are much more evidential, taken in support each
of the other.
If the Cooke and the Lansdowne and other manuscripts are either copies of the
Regius, or all, including the Regius, are copies of a lost Masonic "Q", the
number of such manuscripts adds no whit to the authenticity of any. If they are
different redactions of an oral tradition, only the 464 years of such tradition
is against their reinforcing each other with credibility.
The character of Washington is not incongruous with the cherry tree story.
The character of Athelstane is not incongruous with the York story. He was a
liberal; he was a good ruler; he was God-fearing; he is said to have built many
churches and monasteries and to have reverenced the Scriptures.
There were stone churches in Athelstane's time; the Venerable Bede (most
learned English historian of his time, 673-735 writes of churches built of stone
in his life time.
The city of York has always been mason conscious, stone work conscious, and
church and cathedral conscious. There were beginnings of a York Cathedral as far
back as 627. lt has been built, added to, destroyed, burned, wrecked, rebuilt,
enlarged. All in all, York Cathedral and its forerunners and beginnings cover a
period of nearly if not quite nine hundred years.
Oral tradition would be especially strong in a city in which a great
ecclesiastical building was in construction.
Lionel Vibert, Masonic authority of England, concluded that in the character
of Athelstane, in the traditions of the City, backed by the old Manuscript
Constitutions, there was no positive evidence for the old York legend. hut
certainly no real evidence against it. He stated that, "if the phrase York
Masonry be understood to imply not that the users of it belonged to York. but
merely that in common with the brethren of that city they adhered to the ancient
customs of the order and valued the old traditions in the craft, the legend can
imply a high standard, a reverence for time immemorial customs, and the
preservation of all that is the best in Freemasonry today.
Albert Gallatin Mackey wrote that he believed the manuscript evidence and
that about the year 926 a General Assembly of Freemasons was held at York under
the patronage of Edwin, brother of Athelstane, at which Assembly a code of laws
was adopted, which became the basis by which all subsequent Masonic
Constitutions were framed.
The pages make no pronouncement. They do earnestly commend this thought to
all interested Masons: the York tradition is as much a part of our Freemasonry
as is Santa Claus of childhood. Balaam's Ass speaking to his Master is a story
which has helped many and hurt none. No learned astronomer has been injured in
his science or his beliefs by the Star of Bethlehem which went before the Wise
Men "till it came and stood over where the young child was."
The York story has been good for Freemasonry. That it is still a "York
problem" is also good for Freemasonry.
But, true or fanciful, it has a sweet singing sound in the ears of brethren
to whom the Freemasonry of long ago is at once an inspiration and a benediction.
back to top |
