Author Archives: Br:.

Early high degree systems in Britain

Even though publications with ‘high degrees’ are first known from France, such as Le Parfait Maçon from 1744, it appears that these degrees started to appear first in England shortly after the launch of the third degree by the “Moderns” (ca. 1723). In time, a wild variety of degrees existed, some exclusive to specific lodges, some became more popular and spread. Here and there ‘systems’ of these ‘high degrees’ arose. They were combined, ordered and sometimes even published. Because the early French texts often have seven degrees, for a while, this was the number to aim for.

From what is nowadays the United Kingdom, we know several of such systems/compilations, but I will start with a French one.

Chapter of Clermont (1754):

  • Craft Degrees
  • 4 Maitre Ecossais (Scotch Master);
  • 5 Maitre Eleu (Master Elect or Knight of the Eagle);
  • 6 Maitre Illustre (Illustrious Master or Knight of the Holy Sepulchre);
  • 7 Maitre Sublime (Sublime Master and Knight of God).

The names of the degrees and the translations come from The Rediscovered Rituals of Freemasonry by David Harrison (2020),

I mention this first, because “The Rite of Seven Degrees” of Pierre Lambert de Lintot was heavily influenced by the French text according to Harrison in the same book. That Rite of De Lintot had to squeeze the degrees together a bit in order to come to the number of seven. He grouped his degrees into three “lights”.

  • the ‘first light of the Law of Moses’ (‘degrees’ 1 to 5),
  • the ‘second light upon the Law of Christ’ (the sixth ‘degree’),
  • ‘third light upon Nature’ (the seventh ‘degree’).
  • the sixth ‘degree’ he called ‘the Metropolis of Scotland and Colledge [sic] of Heredom or Royal Order of Heredom’. It consisted of a Heredom degree, a Templar degree and a Rose Croix degree.

The source of the above is again Harrison.

It is interesting to note that De Lintot worked this system under the Grand Lodge of England, South of the River Trent, which was a “daughter Grand Lodge” of the Grand Lodge of All England at York (Snoek, British Freemasonry part 3, p. 373). On page 315 of the same book, Snoek calls York Grand Lodge a “schismatic off-shoot” of the ‘Moderns’.
In the introduction of the same volume it says that: “In this context it is certainly no accident that Lambert de Lintot requested for the high-degrees chapter linked to his ‘Lodge of Perfect Observance’, in 1782, from the Royal Order of Scotland ‘a constitution or diploma, under the name and title of the Perfect Observance of Scotland of Heredom of the seven degrees’.”
So apparently he created a “lodge” (craft degrees) and a “chapter” (‘high degrees’) warranted by two different organisations.

Snoek also presents a list with degree of De Lintot’s system (p. 315/6):

  1. Apprenti;
  2. Compagnon;
  3. Maitre;
  4. Élu;
    Architecte, Prévôts et juge;
    Grand Architecte;
    Compagnon de l’arche royale;
    Grand Élu
    Sublime maître Parfait Écossois;
  5. Chevalier d’orient et d’occident;
  6. Chevalier de l’aigle, pélican, Rose Croix de St. André d’Heredom triple croix, or Chevalier Rose Croix;
  7. K.D.S.H. (= Kadosh).

Snoek compares these degrees to those mentioned in A Word To The Wise (1796) which he calls a “York/Harodim” ritual.

  1. [Entered Apprentice];
  2. [Fellow Craft ];
  3. [Master Mason];
  4. Elect of Nine;
    Elect of Pérignan;
    Elect of Fifteen;
    Noachites;
    Architect or Excellent;
    Grand Architect or Super Excellent;
    [Royal Arch];
    Scots Masters or Super Intendant;
  5. Knights of the Sword or of the East;
  6. The Order of Rosicrucians, or the Neplus Ultra;
  7. Knights Templars.

It would, in fact, most likely be precisely the ‘Modern’ and ‘Antient’ Brethren who plundered the rich sources of the York/Harodim workings and created English ‘higher’ degrees out of them.” (Snoek British Freemasonry part 3 p. 310)

Then there was the “Baldwyn Rite” (1780, Bristol) which Harrison also places in the the “Moderns” camp (Rediscovered Rituals, p. 37)

  1. Three Craft degrees which are classed collectively as one degree;
  2. Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch;
  3. Knights of the Nine Elected Masters;
  4. Ancient Order of Scots Knights Grand Architect;
    Order of Scots Knights Grand Architect;
    Order of Scots Knights of Kilwinning
  5. Knights of the East, the Sword and Eagle;
  6. Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes and Malta;
    Knights of St John of Jerusalem;
    Knights Templar;
  7. Knight of the Rose Croix.

The “Baldwyn Rite” existed within an organisation called: “The Supreme Grand and Royal Encampment of the Order of Knights Templars of St. John of Jerusalem, Knights Hospitaller and Knights of Malta, etc.”, from around 1780 (Belton/Dachez, p. 359). Hence: Southern English Templars and -as mentioned- “Modern”.

In another little book (The Lost Rites and Rituals of Freemasonry 2017), Harrison describes what John Yarker (1833-1913) called “The Lancashire Rituals”, texts of which he found in Manchester and which appear to go back to the “Royal Encampment of Knights Templar” of the same city, founded in 1786. Harrison’s chapter about this rite opens with a quote from a letter of the encampment saying that it accepted both “Antient Mason”s and “Modern” Masons. Yarker copied the texts that he found in Manchester at least twice and his headings give an idea of the degrees that were worked in this system:

  • Craft Lectures;
  • Templar Lectures;
  • K.T. Priest;
  • Rosy Cross;
  • English Templar Kadosh.

So far the lists have little in common with the degrees that are (supposedly) displayed on the Kirkwall Scroll. Things get more interesting with “The Early Sheffield” rituals that also Jan Snoek describes in volume 3 of British Freemasonry and which I have mentioned before. Harrison compares the “Lancashire” Rituals with those of Sheffield.

Harrison refers to Christopher Powell (in AQC 126, 2013) who concluded that the Royal Arch part of the Sheffield rituals can be traced back to the earliest “Moderns” Royal Arch chapter in York.

The Knights Templar ritual has also been determined as being of a “Moderns” origin and even though written 15-20 years later by a different hand, points to a continued use of the book as a source for ritual revision and practice. (Harrison Lost Rites p. 98)

This is a significant remark, since, as we will see, the Sheffield Templar ritual is -as far as I know- the best comparison to the degrees on the Kirkwall Scroll.

The “‘Sheffield’ Knight Templar Ritual (c. 1800)” had the following degrees (list from Snoek):

  • 1st / 2nd / 3rd degree;
  • Mark Degree;
  • Excellent Master / Super Excellent Master;
  • Royal Arch;
  • Knight Templar / Knight Rose Cross.

If the assigned degrees, from bottom to top, on the Kirkwall Scroll are correct, that would come to the following list:

  • Craft degrees (panel 8);
  • Mark and Excellent Master (panel 7);
  • Royal Arch (panel 6);
  • Templar degrees (panel 5);
  • Ark Mariners and Red Cross (panel 3, not too certain);
  • “purely Christian degrees” (panel 2 the panel rather has Royal Arch and Templar symbols).

Most notable are the presence of the Mark degree and the absence of Scots Master. This seems to suggest that the scroll must come from ‘Templar circles’ which I -so far- attributed to the “Antients”, but -as we saw- the Sheffield rituals are probably “Modern”.

This poses a new problem, since the Kirkwall lodge was founded from two ancient lodges, not “Antient”, but certainly not “Modern”. William Graeme was most likely initiated in an “Antient” lodge in London, so where would all the degrees on the Kirkwall Scroll have been picked up? Let’s look at a little map.

I noted a few places of interest.

Graeme travelled from London to Kirkwall. Some 1000 kilometers. Should Graeme travel by land, he would pass Sheffield (and visit a “Moderns” Templar lodge), Manchester (“The Lancashire Rituals” no similarities), York (where the Sheffield rituals may originate and where De Lintot worked his rite of seven degrees). He was pass the birthground of the “Harodim” tradition according to Belton/Dachez (county Durham), but the Kirkwall Scroll does not seem to have Harodim influences. Crossing the border to Scotland, he could pay a visit to the Ancient lodge of Stirling, which appears to have known some high degrees, under which the “Redd Cros” which some say can be found on the Kirkwall Scroll.

Still no real clues for a definite answer. Did Graeme’s “Antient” lodge take him to Dublin where two rival Templar organisations were active in his days? The “High Knights Templar Rituals, Dublin (c.1795)” contain a few degrees that are also on the Kirkwall Scroll, but (notably) no “craft” degrees. Also the “Early Grand Encampment” appears to have worked no “craft” degrees, so the Irish connection is less likely.

I guess the question is now is there were also “Antient” (or independent) Templar lodges that had degrees similar to those in Sheffield. Or did Graeme visit “Modern” lodges in spite of his “Antient” background (in general, this is known to have happened)?

Is my (and Cooper’s) hypothesis that the Kirkwall Scroll comes from English “Antient” circles still tenable now that it seems that the most similar systems appear to be “Modern”? But what about the apparent “Antients” seal?

Perhaps the thought that the scroll comes from Graeme’s (probable) mother lodge may have to be abandoned (as well), since so far I have found no clue of “Antient” Templar Masonry. He might have encountered the degrees (or the scroll!) during his travels.

We really need to learn more about the man William Graeme for new clues about where the origin of the Kirkwall Scroll can be found.

Templar symbols on Panel 2?

Possible Templar symbols can be found on panels 3, 5, but also 2. The most notable candidates are.

“In Hoc Signo” (‘in this sign’) is still motto of Templar Masonry. The cross is either a Templar or a Maltese cross, which would both suggest Templar Masonry.

Then we have perhaps a less obvious one, but I have to point to the fact that both triangles of this hourglass, have 12 candles, just like the popular image in contemporary Templar Masonry. The candles (nowadays) refer to the 12 apostles.

Templar Symbols on Panel 3?

Even though Day sees Templar symbols on panel 5, I see better candidates here.

The three arches can be either Ark Mariner or Red Cross, but Jeremy Cross also has a similar bridge in his The Templar’s Chart of Hieroglyphic Monitor (1821).

More curious I find this symbol (from the same book):

Also the Paschal Lamb is still a symbol in Templar Masonry today. Of course the examples are from much, much later than the creation of the Kirkwall Scroll, but I have to work with what I have.

Lodge Mother Kilwinning

The Kirkwall lodge is called “Kirkwall Kilwinning Lodge”. It was founded in 1736 just before the founding of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. So did the lodge start without a charter, or was it chartered by another organisation?

The website of the lodge simply says: “Our Lodge Charter of 1740”. (1) Craven (see literature) gives a quote saying that: “John Berrihill, free Meason from the antient Ludge of Stirline, and Wm. Meldrum, from the Lodge of Dumfermline” and continues in his own words: “founded [the lodge] on the 1st day of October, 1736.” He says nothing about a possible earlier charter than 1740.

The website of Lodge Mother Kilwinning says (2):

Before the formation of Grand Lodge Mother Kilwinning was a Grand Lodge in her own right, issuing warrants and charters to Lodges wishing to enjoy the privileges of Freemasonry. Many Lodges still carry the name of Kilwinning to this day, but Scotland being a small country it was undesirable to have two Grand Lodges.

Thus suggesting that the Kirkwall lodge was founded from Kilwinning. The quoted text comes right after the paragraph title “Kilwinning Chapter 1771”, which seems to suggest that Kilwinning granted charges until 1771. Belton and Dachez, on the other hand, say (3):

In Scotland Mother Kilwinning left the GL of Scotland in 1744 and did not return until 1807, and in the intervening years warranted lodges across Scotland and probably also for other degrees (although they seem to deny that).

But we are talking 1736. There wasn’t even a Grand Lodge to leave at the time. Lodge Mother Kilwinning says to go back to the 1600’s, so at the moment I can do no better than suggest the strong possibility that the Kirkwall lodge was initially chartered from Kilwinning, hence the name that they still share with 30+ other lodges (of 600+ Grand Lodge of Scotland lodges). Not with the lodges in Stirling and Dunfermline though! There is something interesting about both of them though. According to Wikipedia (4):

The Lodge of Dunfermline, no. 26 on the Roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, and formally Lodge St John claims that it is one of the most ancient masonic lodges in Scotland.

It connects directly with “the Ludge of Masons of Dunfermling” which held St. Clair Charters in 1598 and 1628.

Both are old and both are claimed to be on the St. Clair lists of lodges.

As we have seen, the Stirling lodge has brasses with ‘higher degrees’ on them), some of which can supposedly be found on the Kirkwall Scroll as well. It is too bad that these brasses can’t be dated using carbon dating (because they are made of metal).

There is something interesting regarding these ‘high degrees’. In High Knights Templar Rituals (5) Snoek writes (my emphasis):

The ‘Early Grand Encampment [of Ireland]’ (under its ‘Early Grand Master’) was older than its rival, the ‘Kilwinning High Knights Templar Encampment’ (under its ‘Grand Master’), both in Dublin. Both developed out of the ‘Kilwinning High Knight Templars Lodge’ (IC), warrented 8/10/1779 by ‘Mother Kilwinning’ (SC), and both worked the degrees ‘Excellent, Super-excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar’.

So what if the name of the Kirkwall lodge came along the route of ‘high degrees’? Not directly from the Kilwinning lodge, but from an organisation naming itself after Kilwinning based on an old warrant? Judging the list of degrees of Snoek this is somewhat less likely, as we would miss the “super excellent” master from the degrees that were worked under these organisations and the scroll has a few more.

Interesting is that Belton and Dachez speak of a “Stirling Kilwinning Lodge” (6). They seem to say that this was a Royal Arch lodge/chapter, active since 1743 or 1745. They don’t say until when. Did Stirling have a “craft” and a Royal Arch lodge? Did Kilwinning?

What is certain is that the Kirkwall lodge was founded before the Grand Lodge of Scotland and (if Craven is correct) by members of two very old lodges. The name suggests that Lodge Mother Kilwinning has something to do with it, whether directly or indirectly.

(1) https://lodgekirkwallkilwinning.blogspot.com/p/early-history-of-lodge-kirkwall.html (accessed 7/8/2024)
(2) https://www.mk0.com/history/ (accessed 7/8/2024)
(3) See literature Belton, Dachez, p. 375
(4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry_in_Scotland (accessed 7/8/2024)
(5) High Knights Templar Rituals, Dublin (1795 and 1804) in the third volume of British Freemasonry, 1717-1813 (2016)
(6) See literature Belton, Dachez, p. 318

Scots Master

One Masonic ‘high degree’ is notably absent from the Kirkwall Scroll: the “Scots Master” or “Scottish Master” degree, probably the oldest ‘high degree’.

Jan Snoek has an interesting text on Freimaurer-wiki.de (in German) called: “Frederik: Die Harodim” (1) In Snoek’s reasoning, “Harodim” is a separate Masonic tradition. It is the same text as the one you can find in British Freemasonry (2016), Ars Macionica (2016) and his “Festschrift” (2017). In the text he writes:

In the 18th century, five Masonic traditions existed side by side and apparently independently of each other on the soil of the British Isles:

  • Scotland
  • Ireland
  • England:
    • ‘Premier Grand Lodge’ (First Grand Lodge), later also ‘Moderns’
    • Atholl Grand Lodge (‘Antients’)
    • ‘Harodim’ / York (‘Grand Lodge of All England’)

Snoek is not the first to say that Jacobites (Catholic, house Stuart supporters) found themselves in exile in France in the late 17th century. He says that this is how the Harodim tradition reached France, many of them were Scots. When rituals started to be published in France, these were: “clearly based on the English rituals of the ‘Premier Grand Lodge’, it was decidedly more dramatic.” The older (Jacobite) lodges had simpler rituals and now saw themselves confronted with competition with more appealing rituals.

In response, however, some of the Jacobite Harodim lodges specialised in the Scottish Master Degree, becoming ‘Scottish lodges’, i.e. ‘high degree lodges’.

And so we have the first “Schotten-Loge” in Berlin in 1742, but it was started from London. Elsewhere Snoek says that Scots Master lodges have existed in England since the 1730’ies. Thus: just after the third degree was developed, the “Scots Master” degree emerged. Just as with the Royal Arch, the oldest known ritual texts are from France, but both the Scots Master and Royal Arch degree were most likely developed in England and travelled to France from there.

The ritual of the Berlin lodge is kept in the Kloss collection. It tells the story of “Scottish” Master Masons who were not satisfied with the replacement of the lost word from the third degree, so they traveled to Jerusalem to find the real word. Needless to say that the temple was in ruins, as it had not been rebuilt after the second destruction. Therefor the destroyed temple is an often used image in Scots Master imaginary. Also very notable are the crossed pillars. Apparently the two pillars in front of King Solomon’s temple have broken in two and they were on the ground exactly in the form of a Saint Andrew’s cross. This is convenient, because the Scots Masters took St. Andrew as their patron saint. The Berlin lodge was even inaugurated on his festive day.

The Scots Master degree was known in England and also abroad. It was fairly popular too. France developed its own “Ecossais” (‘Scots’) degree(s), which -to keep them apart- they renamed to “Secret Master”, the name in which it is still part of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. This degree has similar symbols, including the crossed pillars. Belton and Dachez suggest that France and London/Berlin had slightly different evolutions. Perhaps that means that an earlier form of the Scots Master degree travelled to London than the version that we know from Berlin. A difference -for example- is that in France there is no sight of a destroyed temple while we do find it in the Berlin and Kopenhagen texts and thus -probably- in the London version of around 1745.

But if this degree was so popular in England, why isn’t it displayed on the Kirkwall scroll? As we saw in the beginning, Snoek sees five different Masonic traditions in these early days. The Scots Master emerged in “Harodim” circles and was -most likely- mostly popular in these circles, hence not in Irish, Scottish, “moderns” or…. “Antient” circles. Templar Masonry appears to have been more of an ‘Antient thing’, which is yet another clue that the Kirkwall scroll comes from an Antient environment.

Snoek’s conclusions have been checked, revised and updated in the book Exploring the Vault (2024) by Belton and Dachez, but the point that the Kirkwall Scroll must come from another environment than the one in which H.R.D.M. degrees were worked, remains.

Also see the little text about the Harodim.

https://www.freimaurer-wiki.de/index.php/Frederik:_Die_Harodim (accessed 26/7/2024)

Similar items?

Photo of the orignal

The Kirkwall Scroll is a 5,5 meter long scroll that currently hangs against the wall of the Kirkwall lodge. One theory is that the different panels can be used for different degrees, only roling out one particular panel.

Even when the thought makes sense, there is an obvious reason to question this: I know of no comparable item!

The history of the tracing board

A story that can be found at other places. In the early days, Freemasons met in taverns. The “lodge” was drawn on the floor and after the work it was wiped out again. When the lodges grew, dedicated rooms came in use, fixed furniture was introduced (according to some, items that used to be painted were taken into the room itself), which led to “floor cloths” on the one hand and “tracing boards” on the other. Things are not that simple, but this is enough for my current inquiry.

On the left you can see a fairly typical Dutch “tableau” (actually it is a “tapis”, a carpet), a woven carpet. Such a “tableau” lays in the middle of the lodge room on the floor. Around the “tableau” there are three candles (“Lesser Lights”).

On the right is a “tracing board” as in common in England. It is a painted board that stands against the pedestal of the Worshipful master (or Warden). These are the two forms of “tracing boards” that I know, both in the past and in the present. Of course there are variations in design, execution and placement. I know tracing boards that can be rolled up. Often tracing boards combine degrees. On the one on the left you can see symbols for each of the “craft”/ “symbolic” degrees. Often, there is a tracing board for the first and second degree combined and another for the third. In any case, I have never seen anything like the Kirkwall scroll, a massive ‘floor cloth’ which is only partially used for one sitting.

Symbol charts

There is also the Masonic symbol chart:

This is a famous example. It is usually said to be from the 19th century. As you can see, there are many symbols from different degrees, also symbols that are no longer used nowadays. Such a chart was supposedly for educational purposes. These charts come in different shapes and sizes, but never have I seen a 15 foot scroll or an example which is only displayed partially. Also these charts seem to be quite a bit younger than the Kirkwall Scoll. I did run into an interesting item though.

A Masonic handkerchief, supposedly from the “early 1800’s”. The period of creation is not only more interesting, but several of the symbols are too. Look at the two pillars, the rainbow, there is a cock, a lamb, a coffin, a snake on a cross, a 47th problem of Euclid, a triangle with candles, an ark, a hand from a cloud holding a sword, two hands joining, even an odd looking cross. Like the scroll, this is made on cloth.

The Kirkwall Scroll seems to hold the middle between a ‘tracing board’ and a symbol chart, or at least, a fancy object with Masonic symbolism.

William Graeme is mentioned in the lodge minutes that he presented a “floor cloth” which would mean that it was more like the Dutch “tableau” than like the English “tracing board” or the Masonic chart. Does that mean that the “Antient” lodges did not, like contemporary English lodges, use a “tracing board” or was the Kirkwall Scroll never meant to be used as a “tracing board” in the first place? Smith (see “literature“) calls it a “teaching scroll”. Actually, this is a funny aspect of the story.

Some investigators say that the lodge room of lodge Kirkwall Kilwinning is too small for the Kirkwall Scroll to be used. Yet, there are members who remember it being rolled out (even though this isn’t possible). Cooper found out that before the lodge moved to the current building, it met in a spacious hall. Even if it is possible to unroll the entire scroll, would that have any function? Imagine sitting on one end of the 15 foot scroll and there is a text about something on the other end. Or imagine an explanation of the tracing board!

I doubt that the Kirkwall Scroll was used the way we would nowadays use a “tableau” or “tracing board”, even when only partially visible. Perhaps -indeed- more for educational purposes, not during a ritual. Either way, I know of no item more comparable to the scroll than the examples above. Do you?

About the seal

Lewis Masonic, who sell a poster of the scroll, ask themselves:

why does the scroll appear to contain something very similar to the coat of arms of the Grand Lodge of England?

Thinking -of course- of this panel:

And this coat of arms:

What a weird question. This is the coat of arms of the United Grand Lodge of England from 1813. Before the union, the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster (later “Moderns”) had this coat of arms:

So Lewis Masonic on one hand suggests that the Kirkwall Scroll is Medieval and on the other hand that is is younger than 1813? A century ago, it already was suggested that the image on the Kirkwall Scroll was inspired by the coat of arms of the “Antients”:

Which makes a lot more sense. This image appeared in the first version of the Ahiman Rezon from 1764 (above). I haven’t yet found when when the seal (below) came in use.

I wondered if the coat of arms of the Grand Lodge of Ireland could be a/the inspiration for the Kirkwall scroll. Their coat of arms looks like this:

And the Grand Lodge of Ireland was founded in 1725.

It turns out (1) that this seal was designed by a W.S. Mossop and was in use from 1806 until 1846. Therefor this seal cannot be the inspiration for the image on the Kirkwall Scroll. It is more likely that both the scroll and the seal of the Grand Lodge of Ireland go back to the design of Dermott.

Later, many seals have been designed looking quite similar, either of “craft” Grand Lodges or “Royal Arch” or other systems. These can likely be traced back to the seal of the Grand Lodge of Ireland (and/or the “Antient” Grand Lodge).

Because lodges (domestic and abroad) were founded by both the “Moderns” and the “Antients” before their union in 1813, (Grand) lodges that go back on “Antient” lodges may still have similar looking coats of arms.

(1) mediastorehouse.com (accessed 1 March 2024)

Why is the Royal Arch on different panels?

When taking the suggestions for some of the symbols of different authors together, the Royal Arch can be found on several panels. This contradicts the idea that every panel was used for specific degrees. Or does it?

  • The rainbow on panel 2 can be seen as a reference to the Royal Arch for different reasons;
  • Cooper suggests that the “headgear” on panel 2 is a reference to the Royal Arch;
  • Panel 6 also has a (Royal) Arch.

Panel 6 makes more sense with the “Antient” order of degrees in mind. Are the possible references on panel 2 out of place or would that panel have another function?

The degrees and their order

Day (see “literature“) tries to connect every symbol to a certain degree. He sometimes fails to do so and then bluntly talks about “purely Christian degrees” (panel 2) for example. Or he is certain about the Mark degree (panel 7), while the best-known Mark symbol is absent. Day sees “craft” degrees in the panel at the bottom (panel 8 in his counting), suggesting that the scroll is ‘progressive’. Panel 8 is visible when working in a craft degree, panel 7 for the next degrees (“Mark” and “Excellent Master”), panel 6 for the Royal Arch, panel 5 for Templar degrees, panel 3 for “Ark Mariner” and “Red Cross (of Babylon)” degrees and finally, “purely Christian degrees” on panel 2. Panels 1 and 4 are not Masonic in his thinking.

Thus I write myself on “the purpose of this website“. Day has an interesting list:

  • Craft degrees;
  • Mark and Excellent Master;
  • Royal Arch;
  • Templar degrees;
  • Ark Mariners and Red Cross;
  • purely Christian degrees.

To be a bit more detailed, as things are not as certain as it may seem in the list above:

  • Craft degrees on panel 8. This the different authors agree on;
  • Mark and Excellent Master on panel 7. This Day and Cooper agree on;
  • Royal Arch on panel 6. Also here Day and Cooper are in agreement;
  • Templar on panel 5. Jackson and Day see Templar, Cooper sees a third degree;
  • Ark Mariner and Red Cross on panel 3 are actually just mentioned by Day by lack of better suggestions. Jackson speaks of “knighthood” (based on one symbol). Cooper has no suggestions;
  • “purely Christian degrees” on panel 2 in Day’s book, Royal Arch in Cooper’s (because of the rainbow and the headgear). He also refers to an “other branch of Freemasonry” (tools and rope). Also there is a Templar Cross on this panel. When it comes to specific degrees, this panel is not very clear.

Somewhat certain, therefor, are:

  • Craft;
  • Mark and Excellent Master;
  • Royal Arch;
  • Templar.

The monumental five volume work of Snoek and Péter (British Freemasonry, 1717-1813, 2016) volume 3 has a text The ‘Sheffield’ Knight Templar Ritual (c. 1800). In this text they speak of “Harodim traditions”, without saying that this ritual came from that tradition. This Templar Ritual is actually a system of several degrees, an interesting list of degrees!

  • 1st / 2nd / 3rd degree;
  • Mark Degree;
  • Excellent Master / Super Excellent Master;
  • Royal Arch;
  • Knight Templar / Knight Rose Cross.

In the same volume, there is a text about High Knights Templar Rituals, Dublin (c.1795 and 1804).

The ‘Early Grand Encampment [of Ireland]’ (under its ‘Early Grand Master’) was older than its rival, the ‘Kilwinning High Knights Templar Encampment’ (under its ‘Grand Master’), both in Dublin. Both developed out of the ‘Kilwinning High Knight Templars Lodge’ (IC), warrented 8/10/1779 by ‘Mother Kilwinning’ (SC), and both worked the degrees ‘Excellent, Super-excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar’.

So the oldest Templar organisation is the “Killwinning high Knight Templars Lodge” (not necessarily from Kilwinning as you see), which worked in the degrees:

  • Excellent;
  • Super-excellent;
  • Royal Arch;
  • Knight Templar.

Strangely similar lists! Note that the Excellent and Super Excellent Master degrees come before the Royal Arch. With the Dublin Templar lodge we are certainly among the Antients. Sheffield lays in the middle of England, but Snoek calls this a “Moderns” ritual. According to Cooper, it is ‘Antient’ to have this order of degrees (with ‘Sheffield’ in mind, this can’t be entirely true). It is tempting to see Templar (“Killwinning” / “Heredom” ?) list of degrees on the Kirkwall Scroll, but in that case the top three panels are out of place or have a different meaning or use than what we are looking for.

There are a few anomalies. Cooper’s suggests the third degree on panel 5. There are Templar elements on panels 2, 3 and 5, but perhaps the ‘overarching’ Templar system can account for that. Royal Arch is on panels 2 and 6. Panels 1 to 4 do not seem to refer to a specific (set of) degree(s).

Perhaps most interestingly, if the scroll is from 1785/6, would this be the earliest ‘Templar system‘ that we know? Also, if a more definite identification of Ark Mariner degree can be made, there’s also a very early depiction on the Kirkwall Scroll.