Category Archives: Answers

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.

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)

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)

Just an overview of suns and moons on the Kirkwall Scroll.

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.

Snoek writes in his English Freemasonry, 1717-1813:

Knight Templar rituals in English are available only from the end of the eighteenth century onwards. From that period, however, we do have several.

He continues mentioning rituals from 1802 and later.

Later he mentions a 1795 “Early Grand Encampment” in Ireland which: “was older than its rival, the ‘Kilwinning high Knights Templar Encampent’, also in Dublin.

Cooper begins his investigation of the scroll with the remark:

The gap between the official suppression of the KT in 1312 and the first manifestation of a Scottish Masonic Order of the same name in 1787 means that 475 years between one event and the other requires to be bridged […]

If there are indeed Knight Templar references on the Kirkwall Scroll and the scroll is from around 1785, that would be remarkably early.

If 1787 is the ‘start’ of Masonic Templarism, how can it be that the Masonic scholar which whom Snoek wrote a multi volume book writes:

Eckleff played a key role in introducing the high degrees that later would be used by Duke Charles when creating the Swedish Rite. The so-called Acts of Eckleff consisted of S:t Andrew’s or Ecossais degrees which Eckleff allegedly had received from Strasbourg in 1756, and Chapter or Templar degrees received from Geneva in 1759

Western Esotericism in Scandinavia (2016) by Henrik Bogdan (my emphasis).

If he indeed means that as early as 1759 there were Templar degrees in Geneva, this would push back Templar Masonry another few decades. What about this?

It proves that this is a hard path to follow, but if I understand the history correctly, the story -in a nutshell- is as follows.

In 1737 the (in)famous Andrew Michael “Chevalier” Ramsay (1686-1743) had his famous oration in which he traced Freemasonry back to the Knights Templar.

In Gould’s History of Freemasonry (1883-7) we read:

Ladislas de Malczovich, in his Sketch of the Earlier History of Masonry in Austria and Hungary (A.Q.C., vol. v) claims that Ramsay must be regarded as the father of the Higher Degrees, for, in his famous oration, he first connected ‑without historical foundation‑ Masonry with the Crusades and the great historical orders of knighthood. He asserts that Ramsay established three Degrees, viz. Ecossais, Novice and Knight Templar and that out of this system sprang up, with a number of others, the so‑called Rite de Clermont, which was founded at Paris, in 1754, by the Chevalier de Bonneville, although some claim that this was of Jesuit origin and that the Jesuits introduced several new Degrees, founded on Ramsay’s system, which they used for the extension of their order. Ramsay, he says, added four other Degrees, making seven in all, viz. Maitre Ecossais, Maitre Elu or Chevalier de 1’Aigle, Chevalier illustre de Templier, also called Knight of the Most Holy Sepulchre; and Chevalier Sublime or Knight of God.

The De Malczovich text that Gould refers to, was published in 1892 and can be found online.

Somewhat confusingly the “Rite of Clermont” of Gould’s quote is sometimes said to have had seven degrees, sometimes 25. Be that as it may, if Gould is correct, Ramsay himself added a “Knight Templar” degree. Too bad that I haven’t found out if there documents of this degree have survived.

So in 1754 the first Templar degree was introduced by Ramsay, 17 years after his oration, in the vicinity of Paris. If Bogdan is correct, that (or another) Templar degree was worked in Geneva a few years later. Regarding that many Freemasons were avid travellers, this is not impossible. It seems that the 1744 book Le secret des francs-Maçons was printed in Geneva. Also there was a lodge called l’Union des Coeurs, which would initiate the future “Antient” provincial Grand Master in Canada Edward Augustus, Duke of Kent (1767–1820). Geneva seems to have had both ‘high degree’ and “Antient” connections.

Carl Friedrich Eckleff, Swede born in Germany (1723-1786), supposedly received cipher documents from Strasbourg and Geneva around 1750 (Bogdan says 1759) containing ‘high degrees’. These documents would form the basis of the Swedish Rite. Were these the rituals written by Ramsay?

The “Ritualakten” of Eckleff also form the basis some systems in Germany and are kept in Berlin. The Die Freimaurerische Forschungsvereinigung Frederik (‘Masonic Research Association Frederik’) Flensburg published four volumes with Eckleff’s “Ritualakten” (‘Ritual records’). They contain:

Eckleff, C.F.
Ritual-Akten – Band I 2008

Rituale der Johannislogen (1. bis 4. Logenbuch)
Allgemeine Gesetze
Freimaurer Lehrlinge
Freimaurer Mitbrüder
Freimaurer Meister

1. Fragebuch
2. Fragebuch
3. Fragebuch
4. Fragebuch

Band II 2008

Rituale der Andreaslogen (5. bis 6. Logenbuch)

5. Schottische Lehrlinge-Gesellen
6. Schottische Meister
7. Fragebuch
8. Fragebuch

Band III 2008

Rituale der Kapitelgrade (7. bis 10. Logenbuch)

7. Ritter von Osten
8. Ritter von Westen
9. Vertraute Brüder der St. Joh.-Loge
10. Kapitel der Großbeamten
11. Fragebuch
12. Fragebuch
13. Fragebuch

Band IV 2008

Ordensregel (Anhang zum 10. Logenbuch)
Lateinische Ordensregel in Faksimile
deutsche Übersetzung (Th. Merzdorf)

Would here would be a Templar degree? Sure the “Ritter” degrees (7 and 8) are knightly/chivalric, but does that make it a Templar degree? I’m not convinced. Let’s turn back to the Rite of Clermont.

John Yarker (1833-1913) writes in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (#17/1904) that “Chapter of Clermont” existed as early as 1738 (does he even say 1715?). He writes that in 1736 a “Folger” names a “Knight of the Temple” as one of the degrees. By 1815 a degree was called “Illustrious Chevalier, or Chevalier Templar”. Hence there is the suggestion that chivalric (or even Templar) may predate Ramsay, or at least his oration.

Now the interesting question that also Yarker asks is:

If the English Templar, and the Kadosh have, as some suppose, the same origin, they must have diverged very materially

Even if there were Templar degrees in France in the first half of the 18th century, were there also Templar degrees in England at the same time, and if so, the same? I’m afraid that question (currently) can’t be answered. So let’s turn our gaze back to England.

Snoek writes:

Both [the “Early Grand Encampment” and the “Killwinning High Knights Templar Encampment”] developed out of the ‘Kilwinning High Knight Templars Lodge’, warranted 8/10/1779 by ‘Mother Kilwinning’, and both worked the degrees ‘Excellent, Super-Excellent, Royal Arch, and Knight Templar’

So either or not coming from the continent, there was Templar Freemasonry early enough on the British isles to make it possible that they are displayed on the Kirkwall Scroll.

From Snoek’s list of degrees in the last quote, only the Mark degree that is supposedly on the scroll, misses. 1779 Would make fairly good timing. Kilwinning is -of course- in Scotland, but Snoek places the Encampment in Dublin, just as the “rival” Knights Templar organisation. In Snoek’s view “Kilwinning” (or “Heredom”) is a type of Freemasonry.

So, there were Knight Templar degrees at least in the late 1770’ies among Antient lodges and the likely giver of the scroll came from such an Antient lodge, albeit, in England, not in Ireland. Was a Knight Templar degree worked in the London area earlier than the oldest evidence or did Graeme encounter the degree in another Antient lodge?

The Stirling Lodge “brass” has a “night templer” on it. Perhaps that may some day help dating it.

The Grand Lodge of Ireland was founded in 1725, but when did they start using their coat of arms with the two cherubs?

This answer is solved (1806) and dealt with in this little text about the seal.