hanzosbm
Premium Member
There's something that has been rubbing me wrong for a long time, and I kept planning to do more research on it independently, but it gets put off, so I figured I'd open it up to the Brethren.
Supposedly, Hermeticism in the form of the Corpus Hermeticum came to Europe for the first time in 1471 via Marsilio Ficino. However, the Matthew Cooke Manuscript (dated 1450) talks about Hermes the philosopher finding one of the antediluvian pillars in its discussions on the history of Freemasonry.
Now, whether or not Freemasonry can be traced directly back to Hermes is irrelevant for this conversation. What is important, is how a group of supposedly purely operative Masons knew about Hermes 21 years before the rest of Europe, and to such a degree that they included him in their writings in a very matter of fact way.
There are 3 possibilities I've come up with:
1) The Cooke Manuscript is dated incorrectly
2) The details of Hermeticism were not known prior to 1471, but the knowledge of a philosopher named Hermes was common throughout Europe (I recently purchased a book that argues that Hermeticism was more widely known in Europe during the middle ages, but I haven't yet had time to read it)
3) Somehow, this group of men held deep philosophic knowledge that ran counter to established church doctrine that was unknown to the rest of Europe
Either way, the argument that Freemasonry as a philosophy only came about in the 17th century with the introduction of speculative Masons seems to pretty much go out the window. Operative Masons had knowledge of and held some level of respect for an esoteric and heretical philosopher.
Thoughts?
Supposedly, Hermeticism in the form of the Corpus Hermeticum came to Europe for the first time in 1471 via Marsilio Ficino. However, the Matthew Cooke Manuscript (dated 1450) talks about Hermes the philosopher finding one of the antediluvian pillars in its discussions on the history of Freemasonry.
Now, whether or not Freemasonry can be traced directly back to Hermes is irrelevant for this conversation. What is important, is how a group of supposedly purely operative Masons knew about Hermes 21 years before the rest of Europe, and to such a degree that they included him in their writings in a very matter of fact way.
There are 3 possibilities I've come up with:
1) The Cooke Manuscript is dated incorrectly
2) The details of Hermeticism were not known prior to 1471, but the knowledge of a philosopher named Hermes was common throughout Europe (I recently purchased a book that argues that Hermeticism was more widely known in Europe during the middle ages, but I haven't yet had time to read it)
3) Somehow, this group of men held deep philosophic knowledge that ran counter to established church doctrine that was unknown to the rest of Europe
Either way, the argument that Freemasonry as a philosophy only came about in the 17th century with the introduction of speculative Masons seems to pretty much go out the window. Operative Masons had knowledge of and held some level of respect for an esoteric and heretical philosopher.
Thoughts?