Poole’s Prestonian Lecture of 1933, entitled *The Old Charges in Eighteenth-Century Masonry with the Text of the Fortitude MS.*, is both a historiographical synthesis and a critical documentary edition. It offers a thorough re-examination of the place of the Old Charges in eighteenth-century Masonic practice, exploring how documents that originated as operative constitutions continued to function, were adapted, or declined in ritual and institutional use. By situating the Old Charges within the broader narrative of transition from operative to speculative Masonry, and by publishing the text of a newly recovered manuscript (the Fortitude MS.), Poole significantly advances the understanding of how the Old Charges survived and were reinterpreted in a formative century for the Craft.
Thesis and Main Contribution
The thesis is twofold. First, Poole argues that the Old Charges, far from disappearing with the rise of speculative Masonry, continued to shape lodge practice well into the eighteenth century, albeit in evolving forms. Second, he contends that their legacy is most directly preserved in Anderson’s *Constitutions* of 1723, which reframed their charges into the “Ancient Charges” that still form part of Masonic instruction. The principal contributions of the lecture are: (1) a reconstruction of how the Old Charges functioned in eighteenth-century lodges, both ceremonially and as symbolic relics; (2) a critical appraisal of Anderson’s adaptation, demonstrating its fidelity in preserving the operative code of conduct; and (3) the first publication of the Fortitude MS., an eighteenth-century copy belonging to the Lansdowne branch, with unusual interpolations that illuminate the persistence of Old Charges traditions in a speculative context.
Method and Rationale
Poole combines historiographical survey, close textual analysis, and documentary editing. He surveys manuscript evidence from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, compares the Old Charges with contemporary catechisms and rituals, and examines printed versions such as Roberts (1722), Briscoe (1724), Cole (1728), and Dodd (1739). The rationale is to establish continuities and discontinuities: to assess how far the Old Charges remained part of lodge practice, how they were displaced by new rituals, and how Anderson’s *Constitutions* mediated their survival. His method is also archival, making use of lodge minutes, antiquarian references (Stukeley, Richmond, Cowper), and evidence of manuscript transmission and ownership, to demonstrate both practical and antiquarian uses of the Old Charges in the eighteenth century.
In terms of predecessors, Poole situates himself in continuity with Hughan, Gould, and Begemann, whose foundational work collated and classified the Old Charges. He refines their conclusions by focusing on eighteenth-century continuities rather than medieval or early modern origins. He also builds upon Sadler’s and Heiron’s research into lodge practice, while providing fresh evidence from minutes and manuscript discoveries. Unlike Dring and Hamer, who concentrated on philological cruxes such as “Naymus Grecus,” Poole foregrounds institutional and ritual history. His contribution thus complements rather than contradicts earlier textualist work, offering a broader contextual frame.
Main Arguments
- Persistence of the Old Charges in ceremony: Poole shows that into the seventeenth century the Charges were read at admissions, evidenced by Latin rubrics and by the closing formulae binding candidates to their observance. He notes that while catechisms and exposures after 1696 introduced new ritual forms, echoes of the Old Charges survived in oaths and obligations, and that some lodges continued the custom of reading them at initiations well into the eighteenth century.
- Anderson’s adaptation: He demonstrates that Anderson’s 1723 *Constitutions* preserved most of the operative charges almost verbatim, particularly those regulating moral and professional conduct, and that their survival as “Ancient Charges” means the Old Charges continued to shape Masonic identity, even if transformed.
- Printed and antiquarian uses: Poole analyses the Roberts, Briscoe, Cole, and Dodd prints, showing that while some may have served as lodge texts, others were produced for antiquarian or even polemical purposes (e.g. to counter exposures). He also cites evidence of Old Charges being exhibited as curiosities (Stukeley, Richmond) and collected by figures such as Cowper, demonstrating their shifting role from working documents to heritage artefacts.
- Lodge practice and minutes: Poole provides examples from Lincoln, the Old King’s Arms, the Mourning Bush lodges, Old Dundee, and the Golden Lion of Leeds, where the reading of charges or portions of the *Constitutions* is attested. Though sporadic, this evidence suggests continuity of practice, sometimes as part of initiation, sometimes as moral instruction. Preston’s later systematised revival of charge-reading in his *Illustrations* is identified as the conscious codification of a custom already in decline.
- The Fortitude MS.: Poole publishes the newly discovered Fortitude MS., dating from about 1750, belonging to the Lansdowne branch. Its significance lies in three interpolations: (i) a Solomon passage influenced by Cole or Spencer texts; (ii) a modified oath clause requiring allegiance to the “Present King of England and Successively”; and (iii) a unique explanation of a “Mason allowed” as one approved by the “Single Charges.” These additions demonstrate that the Old Charges were still being copied, amended, and adapted to speculative practice in mid-eighteenth-century lodges.
- Preston as transitional figure: Poole shows how Preston, through his *Illustrations* and lodge practices, both preserved and reinterpreted the Old Charges, integrating them into a didactic system that emphasised moral instruction. Though Preston occasionally altered or interpolated texts for his polemical purposes (notably in the York v. London controversy), Poole credits him as the first to use the Old Charges as genuine historical sources, foreshadowing later scholarly approaches.
Strengths of the Approach
- Comprehensiveness: Poole ranges across manuscripts, prints, lodge minutes, exposures, and later systematisations, providing a synthetic view of the Old Charges’ role in eighteenth-century Masonry.
- Documentary contribution: The publication of the Fortitude MS. adds a significant new witness, especially given its interpolations, which shed light on adaptation within speculative practice.
- Integration of institutional and textual perspectives: By linking manuscript evidence to lodge practice and printed constitutions, Poole bridges philology and institutional history.
- Balanced evaluation: He avoids both antiquarian credulity and excessive scepticism, acknowledging legendary elements while demonstrating functional continuities.
Limitations and Potential Biases
- Anglocentric focus: Poole’s analysis centres almost exclusively on English manuscripts and lodges, with little attention to Scottish or continental contexts, where Old Charges traditions may have evolved differently.
- Reliance on limited lodge evidence: The examples from lodge minutes, while valuable, are few, and Poole acknowledges the fragmentary nature of the evidence. This leaves conclusions somewhat tentative.
- Preston’s overemphasis: While crediting Preston as a pioneer, Poole perhaps overstates his historical reliability, underplaying the distortions introduced by Preston’s polemical interpolations.
- Descriptive treatment of the Fortitude MS.: Although Poole carefully describes its interpolations, he does not fully analyse their implications for the interaction between Old Charges traditions and speculative innovations.
Critical Conclusion
Poole’s Prestonian Lecture of 1933 is a landmark in the study of the Old Charges. By shifting the focus to the eighteenth century, he demonstrates that these documents were not relics abandoned with the rise of speculative Masonry, but dynamic texts that continued to be read, adapted, and reinterpreted. His publication of the Fortitude MS. provides crucial new evidence of mid-eighteenth-century adaptation, while his survey of lodge practice and printed versions situates the Old Charges within a continuum that leads directly to Anderson’s *Constitutions* and Preston’s *Illustrations*. The lecture’s comprehensiveness, methodological balance, and documentary contribution make it one of the most significant treatments of the Old Charges in the interwar period. Its limitations lie in its Anglocentric scope and its cautious handling of interpolations, but its lasting value resides in its demonstration that the Old Charges remained central to the evolving identity of Masonry throughout the eighteenth century. It provides both a model of critical historiography and a reminder that even documents often regarded as antiquarian relics continued to shape the lived experience of the Craft in a period of profound transformation.