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 2008Rituale der Johannislogen (1. bis 4. Logenbuch)
Allgemeine Gesetze
Freimaurer Lehrlinge
Freimaurer Mitbrüder
Freimaurer Meister
- Fragebuch
- Fragebuch
- Fragebuch
- Fragebuch
Band II 2008
Rituale der Andreaslogen (5. bis 6. Logenbuch)
- Schottische Lehrlinge-Gesellen
- Schottische Meister
- Fragebuch
- Fragebuch
Band III 2008
Rituale der Kapitelgrade (7. bis 10. Logenbuch)
- Ritter von Osten
- Ritter von Westen
- Vertraute Brüder der St. Joh.-Loge
- Kapitel der Großbeamten
- Fragebuch
- Fragebuch
- 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.