History | Page 131

THE STONEMASONS OF GERMANY. page 6, " where he says, It was Abbot William who introduced the Germany," and on the same page he says, "he was formerly {Bauhutte) of St Emmeran at Eegensburg" (Ratisbon). into ni institution of lay brothers at the head of the lodge eleventh century the monks in Germany first copied their liretliren in Gaul by instituting lay brotherhoods attached to the convent, and that the Abbot Marqiiardt of Corvey made use of this institution to procure builders for his new convent. Fallou^ asserts that in the Schauberg, however, refers to Springer (" De Artificibus Monachis," Bonn, 18G1) as proving not lay brothers of the that throughout the Middle Ages the chief artificers were laymen and that even at Corvey the great majority of the artists were laymen.- I can, convent, — — indeed, see no proof that these lay brotherhoods were builders; on the contrary, they probably consisted of nobles, knights, and rich burghers, as is clearly pointed out more by a on the same page, that in the year 1140 the Cistercians of Walkenried (in Brunswick, at the foot of the Hartz Mountains, on the Wieda) instituted such a fraternity, and boasted that they could travel thence to Eome, and dine each day further assertion of Fallou's, This most certainly discloses the with one lay brother, and sup and sleep with another. nature of these fraternities, and it is impossible to connect them in any way with the building craft: they were not lay brothers in the ordinary sense, and evidently did not reside in the convent. On brotherhood to a page 198, however, he still earlier date —say is inclined to attribute a.d. 1080, the institution of a lay when William, Count Palatine of Scheuren, was elected Abbot of Hirschau (on the Nagold, in the Black Forest, Wiirtemberg), and of whom it was reported that he was so famous that crowds fiocked to his convent, praying for admission. These petitioners were all admitted as lay brothers, and speedily taught the so that in 1082 he was enabled to undertake the various manipulations of masonry, etc. ; reconstruction of the monastery. At that time no fewer than three hundred monks and laymen dwelt in the convent under his orders. He instituted a rule for them, partitioned out their hours of labour, rest, worship, and refreshment, inculcated above all things brotherly love, and enjoined strict silence at work, unless desirous of communicating with the master. His school of from art rapidly acquired all parts of Europe such extended fame that he was overwhelmed by entreaties to furnish architects and artists for building operations. Nevertheless, constantly drafted off elsewhere, he was enabled to see his convent completed before his death, a.d. 1091. Thus far Fallou. As he unfortunately omits to quote his authorities, we can only assume in spite of his best that he has man drawn workmen being his facts from some monkish chronicle. That Abbot Wilhelm was a great St Anselm, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, visited day is indisputable. and the ruins of his splendid monastery ai'e still in evidence. But the above 1084;^ account scarcely justifies the deduction that he was the originator of the craft of stonemasons. him in his in It is perfectly evident of skilled artificers ; — That the lapse of time was totally insufiBcient to create a large class no trace here of divisions into grades, such as apprentice, (2.) We have (1.) and As regards the first point. In 1080 he succeedetl to his post, and in 1082 he was enabled to commence reconstruction. It is tlierefore evident that many of the laymen who are reported to have joined him were already skilled masons (two years being wholly fellow, and master. ' Fallou, Mysterien der Freimaurer, p. 157. ' Schauberg, Vergleichendes Handbuch der Syiiibolik der Freimaurerci, Heidelolf, Die Haubutte des Mittelalters, p. 5. ' p. 274.