This article is taken from the October 2024 issue of Fraternal Review titled, “Freemasonry and The Pagan Revival.”
The earliest evidence of a mythology of stonemasonry—and thus the earliest suggestion of some overlap of what we might call “the Mysteries” and stonemasonry—is usually regarded as the Regius MS, written circa 1390-1450 C.E. Yet, we find significant hints of such a union of the trade and the Mysteries several centuries earlier, rooted in the “runes” or “runic letters.”
Used by the pagan Germanic tribes, the earliest “runic alphabet” was the 24-rune “Elder Futhark,” or, more accurately, “Elder Fuþark” (as named by modern scholars, after its first six letters, F, U, Þ, A, R, K). Around the 9th century, in Scandinavia, the Fuþark was reduced from 24 to 16 runes. At the same time, in England and Frisia, the old runic alphabet was expanded up to 33 runic letters (runstafas), with some being altered or moved. Today, this alphabet is known as the “Anglo-Frisian Fuþorc,” after its first six letters: F, U, Þ, O, R, C.
There has always been some association between the runes and northern European pagan Mysteries and magic. The word “rune” descends from the Old Norse run, meaning “secret,” and from Old High German runa, meaning “secret” or “to whisper,” and the god Odin was believed to have discovered the runes in a vision. Moreover, like Hebrew and Greek letters, runes have specific meanings, described in various poems, including the Old English Rune Poem (O.E.R.P., 9th century). Hence, for example, the name of the Old English ‘F’ rune (Fee or Feoh) translates as “money” or “wealth.”
Carvings in runes can be found on many significant artifacts, especially of the Christian era, though, pagan and Christian elements are often mixed together. Hence, on the 8th century Franks Casket (now in the British Museum, London), we see scenes of the Temple of Solomon, Weyland the smith, Christ, Romulus and Remus (the founders of ancient Rome), and the three Norns.
Runes were occasionally used by the monastic scribes of medieval Britain, usually to record the answers to riddles written in the Latin script; and stonemasons also sometimes carved them into stone, again often alongside inscriptions in Latin, such as can be seen in the 8th century Ruthwell Cross.
For Masons, the most important runic inscription was carved into a baptismal font in the town of Bridekirk, in the north of England, by a stonemason living during the middle of the 12th century. Written in Old English, in runes and a few bookhand characters,[1] the inscription reads “Ricarþ he me iwrokte ⁊ to þ is merð ʒer ** me brokte” (“Richard wrought me and to this mirth brought me”).
Beneath the inscription above, we see the figure of a stonemason. With an oversized hammer and chisel (each longer than the torso and head of the mason), he is carving a scrolling grapevine. It is possible that the stonemason, Richard, meant only to make a statement about the importance or power of the craft or guild of stonemasonry. But, it is also possible that the scene represents something more religious. Wine, grapes, and grapevines, were associated with Jesus (e.g., John 15, “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman”) and, as such, it is quite possible that the vines refer to the Christian Mystery.
The exaggerated scale of the stonemason figure’s tools might also suggest that this figure represents the Creator in the act of creating the material world. (If so, here we would have probably the oldest representation of a “Great Architect” (i.e., master mason) in Great Britain.) Or, perhaps, Richard meant to suggest that stonemasons continue the work of the Great Architect, perfecting nature (especially stone) and bringing it to a state of splendor.
Around that same time, across the British Isles, stonemasons began adopting runes as their individual marks, and would sign their work with them. Several runes can still be found in King’s College Chapel in Cambridge—while the Ing rune (usually regarded as the name of a hero) can be found in Beverley Minster and the Ear rune (the final rune of the O.E.R.P., meaning “earth,” “mud,” or, by extension, “grave”), can be seen in Ely Cathedral—all are carved as masons’ marks. [2]
But, did the medieval British stonemasons absorb any secret knowledge, or “Mysteries,” associated with the runes? The O.E.R.P. describes only 29 runes. Among those that are not described, there are two that may be of relevance here: Calc (or Cealc) and Stan. The latter means “stone.” It is not difficult to see the possible connection to stonemasonry (O.E. stangeweorc and stangetimbre) here. Calc (or Cealc) most probably meant “chalk,” “plaster,” or “lime.” Notably, cealcstan (an Old English compound word composed of Cealc and Stan) meant “limestone.” This was the primary ingredient in mortar (O.E. stanlim), used in building; though it was also used in the preparation of parchment for manuscripts.
Partially Christianized, a careful examination of the O.E.R.P. suggests that it has a complex structure, with one stanza relating to another symmetrically rather than linearly;[3] and that, as such, it has a hidden philosophical— or “esoteric”—dimension. It is likely that this poem, and the runes in England during the last few centuries of their use, acted as a repository for ideas that existed prior to, or outside of, the official Christian canon promulgated from Rome.
It is highly likely that, just as the Church absorbed pagan elements and societies’ beliefs were often a mixture of pagan and Christian (hence the Franks Casket), so stonemasons absorbed elements of both into their worldview, including—or, perhaps, especially—those Mysteries formerly associated with the runes. Moreover, the creation of Calc and Stan suggests that stonemasonry—or, perhaps, Mysteries associated with stonemasonry—did influence the runes in England.
Notes:
1. John M. Kemble, Anglo-Saxon Runes. (Pinner, Middlesex: Anglo-Saxon Books, 2009).
2. Nigel Pennick, Magical Alphabets. (York Beach: Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1992), p. 184.
3. Angel Millar, “The Old English Rune Poem—Semantics, Structure, and Symmetry,” The Journal of Indo- European Studies, 34, 3-4 (2006), pp. 419-36.
Written by Angel Millar