The more I study, the less it turns out that Freemasons actually owe to that era, anyway, at least by comparison of the full tradition of Freemasonry. Masons were far more important and influential in their own right in the Middle Ages. That is when they really took off as "masters" with the full privileges, etc., in the eyes of society. It was the medieval Master Mason who was not a mason, an architect, an engineer, a building and bridge inspector, a community leader in HIS OWN RIGHT rather than merely as the flunky of some nobility, etc. Unfortunately, the severe ignorance of the Enlightenment about European history led them to ignore the real contributions of the medieval Master Mason (the first actual free masons in the sense of being their own masters) and leap-frogged past them to more ancient times that had more cheerleaders. This attitude infected Western historical thought for centuries until it started to be questioned was put to bed (unfortunately, only among professional historians and not the wider culture) by the late 20th century.
While the stories of the ancients are always inspiring, we could learn a lot from the reality of the Middle Ages (as opposed to the silly stories we keep telling ourselves of them).