My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Degree timelines

Morris

Premium Member
In another thread I was off on what I was thinking was the correct timeline/order of the degrees.

According to Andrew Hammer, Observing the Craft, below is the timeline (its touched on in the livingstones magazine, Dec edition). Apparently both the second and third were added to the original.

EA degree - sometime prior to 1717
FC degree - between 1717-1719
MM degree - between 1723-1725

I always thought (incorrectly) that our fraternity started with two degrees but apparently it started with just one. Thoughts?
 

MBC

Twice Registered User
Premium Member
I don't think it starts with only one degree. If so, why they need to make the only one degree, a simple "Mason" or "member" should be enough.(I don't know)
In my point of view, it may come out first with no degrees, then add the first two and then the third. This is more reasonable than start with one degree I think.
 

crono782

Premium Member
You can find evidence of apprentice and fellow craft divisions as early as the late 1500s in the shaw statutes so I don't accept the idea that the FC originated later than 1717. Now early 1700s saw a degree higher than FC being practiced. The original FC likely had trace elements of the MM degree, but nowhere it's current form. The original FC degree was probably divided into lower an upper and the legend fleshed out to become the legend we know today.
 

Morris

Premium Member
I ordered the book to see how the author arrived at it. Maybe the timeline is for current forms?

The magazine article read like UGLE opened with only one degree. Maybe I'll copy/paste just that paragraph.

Document is protected so I can't paste that paragraph.
 
Last edited:

crono782

Premium Member
I mean, when I attend a meeting of the Grand Lodge of Texas, it is opened only on the MM degree. It largely depends on context. Also note, there are tons of theories of the origin of Freemasonry and the evolution of the degrees. The problem is that the degrees pre-date any accurate record keeping there isn't a 100% exact answer.
 

Bloke

Premium Member
"I thought it was explained in the apron lecture"
No disrespect intended... but.. bwahahaaahaha ! Ritual is not history, it's often the myth which has grown up.. some myths have foundation in fact, some are fancy.. but I doubt you will find the speculative's apron is ancient..
 

jermy Bell

Registered User
Then how do we know if anything we're doing is even close ? Almost sounds like religion. (Blind faith) until someone finds out the right.
 

Bloke

Premium Member
I hear you... but the ceremonies are designed to teach moral values, not history. It is the moral values to focus on. If you're interested in the ceremonial link to history, you can look forward to a lot of reading and analysis. I used to be interested more in it, but not so much now - but it is a worthy study imho - and many a masonic scholar has made that his focus.
 
Top