I had an interesting discussion with a member of the Pagan federation at the weekend. What struck me most was the degree in which the supposed "information" about Wicca in particular, but other forms of neopaganism as well, is derived from a kind of Chinese whispers in which it is disseminated by books, magazines, the internet, but very little accurate checking of sources takes place.
Some of the stuff is plain nonsense. One article I glanced at berated Christians and Muslims for their Holy Wars, and said that Paganism was not like that, it was a peace loving belief. That may be true of modern neopaganism, but ancient paganism was just as violent and bloody. What tends to happen is that all the records - for instance one of the earliest being the death pits at Ur - are either taken as another form of paganism, but not the one we follow, or any records which describe druids, for example, as involved in human sacrifice, or decapitating enemies, is brushed aside as Roman propaganda, as if the Romans were a gentle peace loving people who wanted to portray their enemies in the worst light. (All the animal sacrifice of the Roman Empire is ignored; all the human sacrifice in the Middle East is glossed over.) Given than Roman paganism was quite happy to indulge in mass crucifixions on enemies, burnings, sending Christians into the area to be devoured by wild beasts, it is unlikely that they would have made that kind of moral argument. If anything, they would have reported it because it was their opponents alternative way of waging war, and therefore instructive to know about.
Druids and mistletoe: it is worth noting that mistletoe was, until fairly recently, rarely found in Scotland and did not grow in Ireland until its introduction in the 18th century. So when we read "The holy magic of the mistletoe was well known to the druids", we have to wonder: if it was so important, why didn't the druids in Ireland introduce it there? In fact, the sole source for this is Pliny the Elder, who was a great collator of miscellaneous information, but whose critical sense was non-existence; he never seems to have worried about checking his tales, which is why he reports that one of the attributes of garlic is that by rubbing it, one can de-magnetise loadstones (magnets)! His works are full of this - a mix of accurate stuff, and bogus stuff, all lumped together. The "Golden Bough" of its day!
Halloween or Samhain: this is the 31st October, when the druids and ancient celtic peoples celebrated the time of the dead, or some such stuff, and has been taken over by the Church. But what on earth were the druids doing adopting a fixed Roman calendar for a date? What did they do before that calendar existed? It is more likely that - if they did celebrate such a day - it would have been the astronomical cross-quarter day, which is not a fixed date. There is no evidence they ever adopted a Roman calendar of fixed dates (and how would it have shifted with the Gregorian reform to the Julian calendar which put the solar year back on track?) As usual, lots of nonsense spouted by people who don't stop to think.
Then there is the old idea that witchcraft was an underground pagan religion, most popularised by Margaret Murray on the basis of very selective evidence from Scottish witchcraft trials. Murray carefully selected all the parts the trial records which would support her thesis, and deliberately fudged numbers so she could have enough for her ideas about a coven. Modern historians, examining all the records, and not just Scottish ones, have come to a more complex conclusion, and one that finds no credence for Murray's views. We actually have some records where notes were smuggled out from those in prison, and they tell a story of being forced to answer questions to matters they didn't believe in as Christians, but because their accusers were simply prepared to torture the truth that they wanted to hear.
What of the hereditary witch, who gained her knowledge from her mother or grandmother?
Jenny Gibbons gives one description of this:
"One woman had her grandmother's diary, which contained a couple herbal remedies. From these two recipes, she deduced that gran must have been a Witch, part of an ancient tradition stretching back to the Stone Age."
This is probably why some people say things like:
"As a Hereditary witch, I think I could also be classed as a Hedgewitch, because although I have the gift from my mother, I express it through herbs and such."
From the studies of Owen Davies, it seems clear that this kind of muddled thinking is typical. What may happen is that some things are passed down - perhaps herbal remedies, charms, incantations - what would be better called folk-custom. The individual invariable comes across modern literature on Wicca etc, and absorbs that and what happens is a kind of cultural contamination, where the new knowledge swamps the old, and changes its significance. What this also has to do with is priority claims - basing authority on something inherited, rather than the Wicca that is known to be largely the creation of Gerald Gardner. It is interesting that one of the earliest breakaway groups was Alexandrian Wicca - the tradition founded by Alex Sanders. For many years Sanders insisted he was a Hereditary Witch, taught by his grandmother, but he eventually confessed to basing his tradition upon Gardnerian teachings.
The Farrars, who have been involved in the Gardnerian form of Wicca, note that:
Over 30 years, we have seen no evidence to suggest modern Wiccan practise goes back beyond the 1950's. In fact, we have plenty of evidence to the opposite. We do not feel that this invalidates modern Witchcraft, quite the reverse: although the practise is young, the underlying philosophies are ancient and still valid, even in today's modern society. For us witchcraft is a dynamic, evolving tradition which will has survived for this reason. We believe that the likes of Gardner, Sanders etc. did what was right for their period of history; we feel it is important that we should do what is right for ours! They did make mistakes, but don't we all - its all part of the learning process.
1947: L'Êpreuve
-
*L'Êpreuve*
*Par J. L. M.*
*CHARACTETHES :*
Jim Déspres (un jeune fermi, nouvieau mathié), fils d'français ... Jack Le
Marquand
Liza Déspres ...
1 day ago
Posts
