Editing Freemasonry (section)

===Conservative landmarks and their evolution===
Conservative Freemasonry, exemplified by the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE), bases its concept of regularity on adherence to "landmarks"—fundamental principles considered essential to Masonic identity. While often presented as immutable, these landmarks have undergone significant reinterpretation over time.<ref>http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/freemasonry-supreme-being.html {{Bare URL inline|date=May 2025}}</ref>

The religious requirement, initially revolutionary in the early 1700s for being strictly for Christians but welcoming all denominations during an era of sectarian strife, has gradually expanded. It evolved first to include all religions with a revealed scripture and the resurrection of the body after life, then to accept belief in any supreme being, and increasingly allows more personalised interpretations of spirituality whilst maintaining the requirement for some form of metaphysical belief.<ref>{{cite book|title=Freemasonry and Religion|author=James W. Daniel|publisher=Lewis Masonic|year=2007}}</ref><ref>https://www.masonrytoday.com/index.php?new_month=2&new_day=15&new_year=2024 {{Bare URL inline|date=May 2025}}</ref>

Similarly, the principle of exclusive territorial jurisdiction has evolved in the United States, where many states now share jurisdiction between Prince Hall and mainstream Grand Lodges—a significant departure from historical practice.<ref name="phylaxis"/>

Perhaps most telling is the evolution regarding women in Freemasonry. The UGLE, whilst maintaining gender separation within its own Lodges, formally acknowledged in 1999 that "'''Freemasonry is not confined to men'''" and recognised the legitimacy of women's Masonic orders, though without permitting intervisitation.<ref>https://www.ugle.org.uk/become-freemason/women-freemasons {{Bare URL inline|date=May 2025}}</ref> The UGLE now engages in collaborative charitable projects with women's Masonic organisations, representing a significant evolution from earlier positions that denied women could be legitimate Freemasons at all.

It's important to understand that no universal landmarks exist within Freemasonry. Each Grand Lodge or Grand Orient maintains its own set of Landmarks, with some conservative bodies not codifying any specific landmarks whatsoever.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.themasonictrowel.com/Articles/Manuscripts/meaning/landmarks.htm|title=The Meaning of Landmarks in Freemasonry|publisher=The Masonic Trowel|access-date=2025-03-27}}</ref> The practical reality of Masonic recognition hinges not on universal agreement about landmarks, but rather on ensuring that no recognised body violates the landmark principles held dear by the recognising jurisdiction.
Within Conservative Freemasonry, the shared rules for Recognition vary considerably, shaped by the particular Masonic tradition each Grand Lodge embraces. Three landmark systems have gained particular prominence within Masonic jurisprudence: the 1929 United Grand Lodge of England landmarks, which focus on governance and practical recognition requirements;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/landmarks-freemasonry.html|title=Landmarks of Freemasonry|publisher=Freemasons-Freemasonry.com|access-date=2025-03-27}}</ref> Albert Mackey's extensive 1858 catalogue of twenty-five landmarks, which comprehensively delineates administrative structures and principles;<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thesquaremagazine.com/mag/article/202209mackeys-25-masonic-landmarks/|title=Mackey's 25 Masonic Landmarks|publisher=The Square Magazine|access-date=2025-03-27}}</ref> and Roscoe Pound's streamlined 1911 approach, which distils Masonic landmarks to seven essential philosophical elements.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.booksamillion.com/p/Masonic-Landmarks/Roscoe-Pound/9781162858562|title=Masonic Landmarks|author=Roscoe Pound|publisher=Kessinger Publishing|year=2010|access-date=2025-03-27}}</ref>

{| class="wikitable"
|+ '''Comparison of Major Masonic Landmark Systems'''
! Aspect !! UGLE (1929) !! Albert Mackey (1858) !! Roscoe Pound (1911)
|-
| '''Number of Landmarks''' || 8 || 25 || 7
|-
| '''Religious Requirements''' || Belief in a supreme being is required; scripture required on altar || Belief in a supreme being and the resurrection required; book of law required on altar || Belief in God; belief in persistence of personality; book of law required on altar
|-
| '''Gender Policy''' || Exclusively male; no relationship with mixed Lodges || Exclusively male; "free born and of mature age" || Must be a man, free born, and of age
|-
| '''Governance Structure''' || Grand Lodge has sovereign jurisdiction over Craft degrees || Government by Grand Master; specific rights and prerogatives of Grand Master; Lodge governance by Master and Wardens || Not specified as landmarks (considered customary law)
|-
| '''Core Principles''' || No discussion of politics or religion; adherence to ancient landmarks, customs and usages || Modes of recognition; secrecy; three degrees; Hiramic legend; equality of Masons; foundation in operative art || Legend of third degree; secrecy; symbolism of operative art
|}

As can be seen from this comparison, while there are common elements across all three landmark systems (belief in Deity, male-only membership, symbolic/speculative nature), there are significant differences in scope, detail, and emphasis. The UGLE system focuses primarily on governance and recognition requirements, Mackey's extensive list includes detailed administrative prerogatives, while Pound's streamlined approach emphasizes the philosophical essentials.