Illustrations Of The History Of The Craft.

the subject IIOAV than to say , that the iCnig hts Templar borrowed , if they did borroAv , their secrets from Freemasonrynot Freemasonry from tho . Knights Temp lar . There is a third vieAv , AA'hicli has of late

been advocated AA'ith more zeal than discretion—namely that AA'hicli AA'Ould limit Speculative Freemasonry to 1717 , and Avould seek to contend that at that epoch the phraseology and Avorking tools of the operative guilds Avere adapted ancl adopted for the purposes of a philanthropic ancl benevolent association ; but that there was no further bond of union or continuity of

purpose . So far back as 1733 , in tho Gentlemen ' s Magazine for February , an anonymous Avriter , untruly calling himself a brother , says Ave may as Avell call ourselves " carpenters or ratcatchers as Freemasons , " and ho further asserts that the present Order is

a " gallimaAA'fry of the restorer of the society . " This is the vievf , practically , which has been pressed upon us in such a variety of ways and under such different forms , Avith more zeal than discretionfor some time

, past—a vieAv , 1 do not hesitate to say , most mistaken , utterly unsupported by the eA'idenco we already possess , and most opposed to the evidence Ave shall gradually obtain . This I hope convincingly to show in the progress of these illustrations .

Having thus pointed out AA'hat I believe is not and cannot be the true history of Freemasonry , I propose in tho next chapter to developo AA'hat I believe that true history is , and Avhere it is to be found .

CHAPTER II . I propose hi this chapter to point out what I believe to be the only true foundation , on AA'hicli the history of our Order can safely rest . In a feAVAVordsI am anxious to advocate

, and uphold what may be called the Guild Theory . In 1863 I made the following statement , m regard to the opinion I then ventured to nitertain in respect of this much " vexata •piostio" and subsequent studand

con-, y sideration have only tended to strengthen the conviction . I then expressed , and which I had arrived at after some years of patient and careful inquiry .

" Freemasonry as we have it to-day , affected , no doubt , to a groat extent by tho preponderance of tho Speculative element , has come doAvn to us , I venture to believe , through a long succession of centuries , ancl may be most safely ancl satisfactorily traced through the operative guilds ancl Masonic

sodalities of the middle and early ages , to Roman Collegia , to Grecian communities , and thence to Jewish and Tyrian Masons . " * Ancl it is this same A'ieAV , substantially , of our Masonic Order , AA'hicli I Avish to bring IIOAV more formally before my brethren

generally , because in it , and in it alone , I feel persuaded the true history of Freemasonry is to be found . The more Ave study the whole questiondifficult as it confessedly is in all its bearings—the more shall AA' 6 be convinced , I

feel confident , ere long , that no other theory can satisfy the exigencies of historical criticism on the one hand ,. or harmonise tho confused traditions of Freemasonry on the other , but that Avhich regards our Speculative Order to-day , as nothing more and nothing less , than the direct continuation and legitimate result of

the olden system of operative sodalities . Lot it be granted that Freemasonry exists under an altered condition of things , and is to bo found perhaps in a wider sphere than of old , AA'hen it AA'as confined to the building societies of an operative brotherhood : yet its normal statefrom

, AA'hicli our present Freemasonry has derived its life and history , Avas that of an operative Masonic guild . NOAV it is a mistake to suppose , as some modern AA'ritors seem to do , that this explanation of our Masonic annals ancl

rjrogress is a novel one , of a comparatively very recent date ancl unknown to our earlier historians . It has been said , for instance , by our latest Masonic annalist , our learned German Bro . Dr . Fhiclel , that the " first Avriter on the subject of

Freemasonry AA'ho ventured to hint at the existence of an historical connection between the Fraternity of Freemasons , ancl that of the stonemasons AA'as tho Abbe Grandidier , a non-Mason , " AVIIO Avrote in 1779 . t But though I am epiite willing to admit , that ho is perhaps tho first non-Masonic Avriter AVIIO openly argued for the distinct