Question:

Discussion in 'Prince Hall Freemasonry' started by MasonicAdept, Sep 1, 2016.

  1. MasonicAdept

    MasonicAdept Premium Member

    204
    118
    48
    Great Observations Bro. @dfreybur:

    In the preface of my book I explain that the book doesn't deal with any period in African Lodge's formative years but the years 1778-1784.
    Many of the PHA hardliners want a pristine history clear of any irregularities. Even the sympathizers will attempt to "cover" the irregularities as well. The facts are the facts, and it is better to have the entire history put on the table and addressed, than to have to sit through another century acting as if these findings weren't there and failed to be addressed by past historians.

    Thank you for your honesty.
     
    dfreybur likes this.
  2. chrmc

    chrmc Registered User

    568
    195
    43
    Not to derail the discussion, but have you felt push back from the PHA community about getting the true historical facts out there? As you allude to I could imagine that many people would not be interested in exposing the irregularities further, though they will be inconsequential these days.
    Or has this book and historical reinterpretation largely been accepted positively by the PHA community?
     
  3. Brother JC

    Brother JC Vigilant Staff Member Site Benefactor

    2,698
    1,537
    183
    The further we travel this line called "time" the more difficult it becomes to find history that is "pristine," in any facet of our lives. But it certainly does stay interesting!
     
    tldubb, Bloke and MRichard like this.
  4. Bloke

    Bloke Premium Member

    3,156
    2,118
    133
    It's an intersting discussion! Masonic Adept is passionate enough about it to publish, and i'm just curious. I too love history, and as i said somewhere, it will be intersting how MAdept's book is regarded in the furture, as a bleep, or the moment an axiom was proved false; always interesting in itself. I did that recently with a well known masonic artifact....

    Most students of history will "know" how Prince Hall was initiated into an Irish Lodge with a traveling warrant: that story might become like the Ramsey Address.

    This thread got me reading on Prince Hall contemporary Freemasonry in India in the 1700's.... because i know "regularity" and warrants were not used or considered in the same way in the 1700's as today. (Even in ww2 POW camps they "worked degrees" - although I'm not sure that's means the initiated men.) And i was interested how Indians were treated ( you know the British initiated native american leaders (in Canada?) prior to the war if independance , yes?) at the same time: there would be some similarities between India and Boston at that time, albeit putting the EIC aside...

    India is interesting, because the same GLs were involved and the first Indian initiated was apparently

    "The first Indian Mason was Omdat-ul-Omrah, Nawab Carnatic initiated in 1775" but the doors got slammed until the 1800's.... it's a common theme, Freemasonry is colour blind and accepting of other religions until, from stage right, the freemason pharisees enter

    ( btw http://www.masonindia.in/index.php/faqs-on-indian-freemasonry/ )

    I've tried to find early Australian Aboriginal initiations, tricky because they took or were given basically western names, but i can't find them.... nothing until the 20th century, but I'll keep looking...
     
  5. MasonicAdept

    MasonicAdept Premium Member

    204
    118
    48
    Good Stuff there...
     
  6. Bloke

    Bloke Premium Member

    3,156
    2,118
    133
    Thanks. I answered your questions because I once similarity asked the Dorthy Dixer "what is Freemasonry" to some people who did not know I was a member and got some really interesting results.
     

Share My Freemasonry