tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post1830976993019439744..comments2024-02-20T09:54:37.105-06:00Comments on Talking About Ritual Magick: Ronald Hutton - Shibboleths and Moonshine?Frater.Barrabbashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11689013897789072360noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-78490976684983186342011-02-13T19:42:54.397-06:002011-02-13T19:42:54.397-06:00I can't believe that I misspelled Carlo Ginzbu...I can't believe that I misspelled Carlo Ginzburg's surname TWICE in my above post. Must've been in a typing frenzy that day.Caroline Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295336008587199702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-30067719889274719392011-01-14T16:38:47.607-06:002011-01-14T16:38:47.607-06:00I am stunned that scholars have spent over 50 year...I am stunned that scholars have spent over 50 years trying to dismantle modern Witchcraft. Ultimately that is what this discussion is about if we look to the root issue.<br /><br />When will we admit that we know next to nothing of our pagan past and that is all there is to it! All the "progress" we have made in the Pagan History field has been nothing more than educated guesses, and blind opinions.<br /><br />As an old, tiring, Wiccan, I wish we could just say that Gardner took the fragmentary remnants of a surviving witchcraft tradition, spruced it up, modernised it, and gave it to the world,and Margaret Murry was off on her theories, yet there was still a core of truth in them. <br /><br />I am tired, I think everyone else is too, of scholars trying to find proof and answers of Pagan survival that simply do not exist! It's time to admit that we simply need to except that it is time to direct our attention to the future, not the past.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-3744920055073835502010-11-19T22:21:51.954-06:002010-11-19T22:21:51.954-06:00I just want to point out that if you are not keepi...I just want to point out that if you are not keeping up with all of the relevant literature, you are likely to miss a lot. For example, Ronald Hutton did not single-handedly or lightly dismiss Murray: there was a protracted and detailed dismantling of her work on Witchcraft in the professional literature. If you skipped from Murray to Gardner to Hutton (to exaggerate a bit) you would think that Hutton had expected Murray to go away at the wave of a pen, which was anything but true.<br /><br />The discussion needs to go on, but without the posturing and cockfighting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-33479368919588327232010-11-18T14:09:09.307-06:002010-11-18T14:09:09.307-06:00Will wonders ever cease! Based on Ben Whitmore'...Will wonders ever cease! Based on Ben Whitmore's work, even Peregrin now appears willing to reevaluate the case for the survival of elements of Pagan antiquity, rather than merely parroting Dr. Hutton's arguments as though they were dogma sealed in stone as he did at the outset of this debate.<br /><br />Truly, Ben Whitmore has done a great service to the entire Pagan community. "Trials of the Moon" is bound to have a far reaching impact. At a very minimum, it has people thinking for themselves again, even in unexpected quarters.<br /><br />- David GriffinDavid Griffinhttp://hermetic-golden-dawn.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-12037429957319106212010-11-18T07:24:32.312-06:002010-11-18T07:24:32.312-06:00Seeing as Ben Whitmore's new book discusses th...Seeing as Ben Whitmore's new book discusses the relationship of Hutton's work to Ginsburg's among other things, interested readers might consider getting a hold of the new article on 'Witchcraft and Deep Time – a debate at Harvard' in the journal 'Antiquity' (Volume: 84 Number: 325 Page: 864–879) in which Ronald Hutton comes together with Carlo Ginsburg and others - marking the twentieth anniversary of Carlo Ginzburg's influential book on the connections between witches and shamanism - to discuss fascinating subjects close to all our hearts!<br /><br />http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/Ant/084/ant0840864.htmCaroline Tullyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295336008587199702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-35117634563193731822010-11-17T21:29:49.580-06:002010-11-17T21:29:49.580-06:00Good article. Thank you.Good article. Thank you.Hearth Moonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-89785493980864970562010-11-17T08:06:28.024-06:002010-11-17T08:06:28.024-06:00@Peregrin - Thanks for your posting. The book is i...@Peregrin - Thanks for your posting. The book is in print at www.createspace.com book number 3473805. I already ordered my copy and got it three days ago.Frater.Barrabbashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11689013897789072360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-63152186330861104772010-11-16T22:04:25.561-06:002010-11-16T22:04:25.561-06:00While I do not wish to continue this debate incess...While I do not wish to continue this debate incessantly and simply let readers study the evidence and make their own minds up, I do wish to correct a few points directed at me personally.<br /><br />@David - I have never seen any evidence of Christians or anyone else "seeking to destroy the [Pagan] faith from within!". And of course I have never tried to destroy any faith, pagan or otherwise. How does one go about doing this, anyway? I have no idea.<br /><br />I never pretended to be Pagan. I never called myself a Pagan on your blog or elsewhere in relation to this issue. I can't recall when I last called myself a Pagan.<br /><br />I said I no longer CALL myself a pagan or magician because of the dysfunction I see in these communities. I also do not CALL myself a Christian for the same reason, and because I do not have a deep enough relationship with Christ. <br /><br />What I PRACTICE is personal and esoteric based. I suspect nearly all Christians would call it Pagan, as do the many pagans I know.<br /><br />I have immense respect for the Neo-Pagan traditions as religion. I just feel the western esoteric traditions are of more depth for magical /theurgic work. <br /><br />I said only (with a smile) that my ego would like to be called a "Christian apologetic" - historically the Christian apologetics were brilliant thinkers in an environment where they were persecuted and likely to lose their lives for what they wrote.<br /><br />I hope this clarifies the issue, which any reader can clearly see by looking at what I actually wrote. <br /><br />As for the topic...I am enjoying the extract from Ben Whitmore's book and slowly cross checking his work as much as I can without references which I will have once it is published. I really hope to have my opinions challenged and changed - as a teenager once I had realised Wicca was based on western magical works I spent many years trying to connect and find older Craft/Pagan religious traditions. It would be nice to think there are some. I concluded back then and again when Hutton and others published, there were no historical traditions. I am ready to change my mind if I see the evidence :) ThanksPeregrinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508191641503321789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-59927874855636167182010-11-15T09:13:06.736-06:002010-11-15T09:13:06.736-06:00@Ben Whitmore - Thank you so much for your posting...@Ben Whitmore - Thank you so much for your posting. I heartily agree with you, but I do look forward to the time and the day when Hutton does some revision and formally accepts some other points of view. <br /><br />Christian compassion and the high value placed on individual life are important contributions to the world. However, we in the U.S. are experiencing a fair amount of cultural war with a minority of politically conservative Christians, which has unfortunately muddied the waters. Passions are high on both sides, but you are correct, more unites us than divides us. <br /><br />I would very much like to correspond with you offline, please send me an email to my blog mailbox (tiresius@gnosticstar.org) so I might be able to have an email to respond back to. <br /><br />Bright blessings - <br /><br />Frater BarrabbasFrater.Barrabbashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11689013897789072360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-16961941420106214652010-11-15T01:10:29.032-06:002010-11-15T01:10:29.032-06:00I'm sorry, I've already waffled for long e...I'm sorry, I've already waffled for long enough, but I'd like to clarify something: I said "I've been a little concerned to see some other responses (both positive and negative) failing to grasp the subtleties of my arguments." I was referring to entirely unrelated discussions on other pagan sites, rather than anyone here...Ben Whitmorehttp://www.goodgame.org.nznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-74858648530595062312010-11-14T18:17:25.195-06:002010-11-14T18:17:25.195-06:00(Continued from previous comment)
Regarding your ...(Continued from previous comment)<br /><br />Regarding your comments about survivals and reconstructions, they remind me of a conversation I had with my High Priest in Wales about trying to distinguish what was pagan from what was Christian. His view (and I hope I can get this roughly right) was quite refreshing, for he considers Christianity itself to be largely pagan, not just in terms of specific images and elements it has preserved from ancient religions, but in terms of its ability to speak to certain primal needs and impulses in people. This is so often buried under oppression, restriction and fear- and hate-mongering, which are inimical to any true spirituality. But as Peregrin correctly points out, in many other cases it is a valuable, valid and powerful path to enlightenment, compassion and rich participation in life. Perhaps, for my HP, 'paganism' is whatever speaks to true spirituality, and is thus in some way universal to humanity. My discussion of the theories of Jose Pina-Cabral would tend to support this view.<br />This leads me to give a caution, which is perhaps not directed at any of the contributors so far, but at others who might read this discussion:<br />In reconstructing a 'true' paganism, I would be cautious of throwing out the baby with the bath-water (as I feel some 'traditional witchcraft' revivalist traditions have done) by abandoning the more positive ethical values that some associate with 'Christian' morality. This I believe has come from seeing paganism and Christianity as fundamentally opposed forces. As a regime, Christianity has indeed been opposed to paganism at various points in history, but as a spirituality, Christianity has seemingly co-existed with paganism for centuries and found much in common. I believe that many so-called 'Christian' values gained acceptance among pagans for the simple reason that they were essentially already present in paganism. Or so my research has led me to believe. If our reconstructions of paganism are built around a forceful rejection of what we see as 'Christianity', we risk defining ourselves in terms of that Christianity as its opponent, and becoming a spiritually impoverished tradition.<br /><br />That single concern now spoken to, I can join you, Frater Barrabbas, in your excitement at the prospect of a renewed and re-empowered modern Pagan tradition, and I hope to see more voices of this calibre join the debate.<br /><br />To the glory of the Gods,<br />Ben WhitmoreBen Whitmorehttp://www.goodgame.org.nznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-16179867305695165122010-11-14T18:14:54.344-06:002010-11-14T18:14:54.344-06:00As the author of the above-mentioned book, I can’t...As the author of the above-mentioned book, I can’t resist responding.<br /><br />Firstly, thank-you, Fr. Barrabbas, for your very kind words. It is immensely gratifying to hear the excitement of someone fresh to my material, mirroring the excitement I felt during the research and writing. It’s especially nice to see you so accurately mirror the case I lay out in the book, representing my arguments fairly and without overstepping my own conclusions. I've been a little concerned to see some other responses (both positive and negative) failing to grasp the subtleties of my arguments. Does my book convey what I actually mean it to? Your eloquent summary goes a long way to offsetting that concern.<br />I particularly like your point about our definition of 'religion' perhaps being deficient. This is exactly the kind of subtlety of debate (with potentially far-reaching consequences) I was hoping to provoke.<br /><br />I now find myself in the unlikely position of defending Ronald Hutton. You and David Griffin suggest that he may, behind his sympathetic exterior, be inimical to Paganism. I admit, this is something I wondered when I was starting this project, but I no longer think this is likely. In the course of my own research and writing it has become clear how much care is needed to avoid slipping into a selection bias and finding just those works (or passages within works) that tend to support my views. Without pretending any knowledge of Hutton's methods and motives (I have never met him nor had any exchange with him), I can imagine him truly believing what he wrote. What I suspect is that he painted himself into a corner with his earlier book, Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles, and has only gradually been able to start working his way out of it. That book, he has admitted, was written in anger at what he saw were neopagans promoting a false history. And he is correct, there was a lot of false history being thrown around at the time, which was an embarrassment to more informed witches and pagans. The quality of research and referencing in Pagan Religions is pretty poor, and his conclusions correspondingly inaccurate. It reads as a polemic. However, since then his books have shown an increasing sympathy towards Paganism, and he has gradually eroded his own hard line against the possibility of pagan survivals -- not far enough, I would contend, but to me this demonstrates his genuine regard for the Pagan faiths and the Pagan community.<br />I know he has responded bitterly to some critiques, but he has also written glowing recommendations for other books which, while not openly criticising his work, clearly undermine it. Heselton's books are a case in point. I have also heard numerous people speak of his generosity in giving time and energy to Pagan researchers. This to me demonstrates that while he may still be somewhat wrapped up in his own views, he would like to participate in a developing and changing field of research, and even re-evaluate his conclusions -- and ultimately that he enjoys the company of Pagans and very much values their acceptance of him within the community. I can understand that some of my readers may feel antagonistic to Hutton: as David Griffin observes, the forceful rejection of a prevailing dogma can for some be necessary when re-establishing their own religious views. But I take no pleasure that I may turn people against Hutton as a person. For me, this is an intellectual debate, and in a way, my quarrel is more with those who have turned Hutton's opinions into an unquestionable dogma than with Hutton himself.<br /><br />(To be continued... I'm running out of characters for this post!)Ben Whitmorehttp://www.goodgame.org.nznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-71851920225389485152010-11-13T23:51:22.686-06:002010-11-13T23:51:22.686-06:00Thanks all, for your comments. Yes, I felt it nece...Thanks all, for your comments. Yes, I felt it necessary to "takedown" Ronald Hutton. Now on to the pleasant work of reclaiming and inventing.Frater.Barrabbashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11689013897789072360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-51140964724878140862010-11-13T21:17:21.874-06:002010-11-13T21:17:21.874-06:00Well, if Hutton's argument was able to convinc...Well, if Hutton's argument was able to convince anyone that no modern pagans engage in any practices that were also used in antiquity, he must be a master of smoke and mirrors indeed.<br /><br />And I suppose if one is going to contend that the Golden Dawn invented theurgy one would have to demonstrate that the invocation of the Holy Guardian Angel from Abramelin was in no way theurgic. Clearly, as a Thelemite, it seems obvious to me that this is not the case.<br /><br />It sounds to me like Barrabbas' takedown of this guy was long due.Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-44015122779927251932010-11-13T06:51:28.254-06:002010-11-13T06:51:28.254-06:00Ananael,
I know that this sounds outrageous from ...Ananael,<br /><br />I know that this sounds outrageous from the outside, but Hutton is a master of smoke and mirrors. He built a great case for the modernity of Wicca, then piggybacked a case onto it that no elements of Pagan religion had survived from antiquity, but instead had been completely wiped out by Christianity. Hutton never denies Pagan religion in antiquity. Instead, he simply declares that it all went away, and that everything today is but modern revival.<br /><br />At first glance, Hutton's arguments appear ait tight, unless you happen to be an expert in a given subject area or are willing to do a lot of research for yourself.<br /><br />For example, to build his case that the magick of Witchcraft is purely a modern invention, Hutton actually makes the quite audacious claim that it was the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn that invented Theurgy, and that all pre-Golden Dawn magick was but the magick of coercion to make things happen rather than for the spiritual development of the individual.<br /><br />This is quite ludicrous, of course, but when presented by such an "imminent" authority on Pagan history, it nonethelous takes on an air of believability to the average lay person.David Griffinhttp://www.golden-dawn.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-45011193700666708322010-11-13T06:48:46.925-06:002010-11-13T06:48:46.925-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Imperator David Griffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569334890339311989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-43841237852590557792010-11-13T06:46:01.734-06:002010-11-13T06:46:01.734-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Imperator David Griffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05569334890339311989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-91269102172056144732010-11-13T00:59:01.451-06:002010-11-13T00:59:01.451-06:00The whole problem was created by Ronald Hutton'...<i>The whole problem was created by Ronald Hutton's contention that not only Wicca is modern, but Paganism as a religion as a whole as well</i>.<br /><br />Well, I can't say I'm familiar with Hutton's work but if this is indeed the case he must be pretty stupid. The Babylonians and Sumerians weren't pagan? How about the Egyptians? The Greeks? The Romans prior to Christianity? The religions of all of those cultures fall under the general umbrella of paganism - polytheistic religions rooted in reverence for the cycles of nature. It should be obvious that pagan religions of one form or another have been practiced for thousands of years to anyone who knows anything about history.<br /><br /><i>However, the ancient magic should not be thrown out with the academic bathwater so easily either</i>!<br /><br />I just think that both ancient and modern methods should be tested for effectiveness like any other pieces of technology. Then we should keep working with the methods that work best, regardless of their history.Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-20090369815648394542010-11-12T20:16:15.919-06:002010-11-12T20:16:15.919-06:00Another problem facing the modern Pagan movement (...Another problem facing the modern Pagan movement (also thanks to Hutton!) just became apparent on my blog as well. My debate opponent (spouting Hutton as gospel) was pretending to be Pagan. It was only after a heated emotional exchange that a provocative witch outed him as a both Christian apologetic and a Pagan detractor, which he proudly admitted once outed. <br /><br />One can only wonder how many of these sort of clandestine attacks have occurred over the past decade from individuals pretending to be Pagan while spouting Hutton and seeking to destroy the faith from within!<br /><br />- DavidDavid Griffinhttp://www.golden-dawn.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-23794477815604707402010-11-12T19:34:28.794-06:002010-11-12T19:34:28.794-06:00@Ananael Qaa
The whole problem was created by Ron...@Ananael Qaa<br /><br />The whole problem was created by Ronald Hutton's contention that not only Wicca is modern, but Paganism as a religion as a whole as well. There are sweeping generalisations that became all but enshrined as dogma in the modern Pagan movement, which largely allowed Hutton to redefine it as "Neo"-Pagan.<br /><br />The question of efficacy of magical system and of the value of antiquity of a religion are two separate issues and not to be confused.<br /><br />I am astonished by the willingness of so many modern Pagans to have allowed themselves to have been all but cut off from the roots of their faith in antiquity, by leaving Hutton's sweeping pronouncements unchallenged for so long.<br /><br />Yes - modern systems of magic are certainly authentic and efficacious.<br /><br />However, the ancient magic should not be thrown out with the academic bathwater so easily either!<br /><br />- David GriffinDavid Griffinhttp://www.golden-dawn.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6817682567561164198.post-48278258242451462842010-11-12T16:20:09.904-06:002010-11-12T16:20:09.904-06:00It seems to me that this whole argument is one of ...It seems to me that this whole argument is one of definitions. It is pretty clearly demonstrable that Wicca as it is practiced today is a fundamentally new religion, but it is just as clearly demonstrable that some forms of paganism can be traced back to ancient times. When we conflate family traditions that combine magical practices and pagan beliefs with Wicca by calling both of them "witchcraft" the whole thing becomes something of a mess. Paganism is ancient, while Wicca is modern.<br /><br />Above and beyond this I'm always amazed at how much importance is accorded to whether or not various traditions are old or new. The important factor should be whether or not the practices those traditions teach work, not how far back they go. There is no reason to think that an ancient magical system should be superior to one that was invented within the last decade. In fact, I would think that since recent systems can be built around current scientific understanding of both physics and psychology a good argument could be made that the modern system should work better.Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.com