THE STONEMASONS OF GERMANY.
151
in course of time liis affiliation took place with a ceremony of some kind.
And this brings
us to the most difficult point of our research and the one upon which the most loose and untliat
;
To begin
with, Winzer^ states justly enough, that before
he was only a free stonemason (free of his craft), and that after joining he became a
joining
brother also.
But he is quite unjustified in deducing the conclusion that he was thenceforth
^ "free and
accepted mason" {freier und angenommener Maurer), as such a term as "accepted
brother" (angenommener Bruder) occurs nowhere in German documents prior to 1717, and even
founded assertions have been made.
"
"
never applied to the completed apprentice, who was always called losgesagt
"
or losgcschlagen, i.e., declared or "knocked
It is evident that Winzer, in his zeal to prove
loose.
that our present masonic system is of German origin, has adopted a now current phrase,
free
{frei) is
although he ascribes
in this respect
is
its
derivation to a
Fallou.
clue of the remotest
A
kind
are not even told that a
German
source.
But the
greatest perverter of history
careful glance at the Ordinances will convince us that
afforded
is
ceremony
as
the
to
existed, nor is
it
probable that
no single
ceremony; we
did in 1459, although one
nature of the
affiliation
it
may have become usual in after-years. We are not informed that there were any secrets to be
communicated, or mysteries to be concealed, or any further instruction to be acquired nay,
;
we
are directly assured that there were none
;
because, as already pointed out, the perfect
apprentice was no longer to have aught concealed from him (Art. LXVIII.) that is to say,
that everything necessary to the due prosecution of his profession became his by right, whether
;
he joined the fraternity.
or not
Fort,^ in his
is
description (which
from
chiefly copied
Fallou), evidently confuses the distinct occasions of passing to the journeyman's degree and of
^
entering the fraternity, which mistake, however, FaUou has avoided. Findel also, following
the same lead, has not only fallen into a similar error, but contrives to entangle with both
these incidents some of the preliminaries of indenture.
Steinbrenner
*
has gone even farther
Their great authority Fallou ^ presents
astray, placing the conferring of the mark last of all.
a graphic description of this ceremony, but it will be sufficient in this place to glance at its
He avers, that the candidate was blindfolded, half unclothed, slipshod,
leading features.
cord about his neck), led three times round the lodge that
three upright steps to the master, undertook an obligation on the
deprived of weapons and metals
(a
;
he then advanced by
Scriptures, square, and compasses, was restored to sight, shown the three great lights, invested
with a white apron and gloves, etc., etc. Now, I think it may be positively affirmed, that if
Fallou could have fortified F