close
more_vert

tjj wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Wiggy wrote:
I was very intrigued by the tantalising suggestion that there was indeed some form of indigineous British witchcraft being practised prior to and during the period that he was developing "Wicca". Hutton seemed to brush over this, maybe due to lack of written, verifiable source, which is a shame but understandable I suppose.
It has been suggested , and makes sense , that the New Forest coven may well have been based on the discredited writings of Margaret Murray .
I was little perplexed by the programme in some ways - the suggestion that Wicca was 'invented' by Gerald Gardner in the early part of the 20th century seems to airbrush 'witchcraft' out of history. Whether witchcraft it actually existed or was just the general scapegoating of women who were a bit alternative (shall we say) - the history of witch trials in England and Scotland is well documented. I would have liked Ronald Hutton had made some reference to this in the programme but he didn't.
I think it was more of an editing/time limit problem. In his seminal work 'Triumph Of The Moon' he does make the distinctions between modern Wicca and traditional witchcraft etc. Wicca has its roots in traditional witchcraft, as well as other systems. Gardner would have no doubt studied Israel Regardie's writings re. the Golden Dawn rituals. I don't think it really matters really. Buddhism was a construct borne out of Vedanta. I think Gardner's intentions were entirely genuine, and as for the efficacy of magic ? Ronald Hutton himself is respectful and sympathetic these days as a result of his studies. I'm not getting into another game of semantic one upmanship, but I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience.

Astralcat wrote:
tjj wrote:
I was little perplexed by the programme in some ways - the suggestion that Wicca was 'invented' by Gerald Gardner in the early part of the 20th century seems to airbrush 'witchcraft' out of history. Whether witchcraft it actually existed or was just the general scapegoating of women who were a bit alternative (shall we say) - the history of witch trials in England and Scotland is well documented. I would have liked Ronald Hutton had made some reference to this in the programme but he didn't.
I think it was more of an editing/time limit problem. In his seminal work 'Triumph Of The Moon' he does make the distinctions between modern Wicca and traditional witchcraft etc. Wicca has its roots in traditional witchcraft, as well as other systems. Gardner would have no doubt studied Israel Regardie's writings re. the Golden Dawn rituals. I don't think it really matters really. Buddhism was a construct borne out of Vedanta. I think Gardner's intentions were entirely genuine, and as for the efficacy of magic ? Ronald Hutton himself is respectful and sympathetic these days as a result of his studies. I'm not getting into another game of semantic one upmanship, but I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience.
Thanks Astralcat, I don't doubt Ronald Hutton is extremely knowledgeable on his subject and I sure you are right in that he was probably working within time constraints in that particular programme. The persecution of women for the alleged practice of witchcraft is a deep and complex history - in the context of his programme it would be hard to refer briefly to it I imagine.

Astralcat wrote:
I'm not getting into another game of semantic one upmanship, but I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience.
.... or belief ;)

Astralcat wrote:
I'm not getting into another game of semantic one upmanship, but I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience.
If you don't want to play semantic one upmanship why toss out a statement you must know most people don't accept? ;)

Oh, and while I'm at it, you shouldn't kid yourself or anyone else that Hutton is sympathetic to the view that there's any efficacy in magic -

Astralcat wrote:
as for the efficacy of magic ? Ronald Hutton himself is respectful and sympathetic these days as a result of his studies.
He might be sympathetic to Wiccans but he actually describes Wicca as formed by modern people to express modern myth, which is the exact opposite of believing in magic.

Astralcat wrote:
I think it was more of an editing/time limit problem. In his seminal work 'Triumph Of The Moon' he does make the distinctions between modern Wicca and traditional witchcraft etc. Wicca has its roots in traditional witchcraft, as well as other systems. Gardner would have no doubt studied Israel Regardie's writings re. the Golden Dawn rituals. I don't think it really matters really. Buddhism was a construct borne out of Vedanta. I think Gardner's intentions were entirely genuine, and as for the efficacy of magic ? Ronald Hutton himself is respectful and sympathetic these days as a result of his studies. I'm not getting into another game of semantic one upmanship, but I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience.
Nicely put Mr A.

There seems to be a bit of confusion about what the programme was about, however. Though the title includes the word Witchcraft, the ‘Very British’ bit really does indicate that the prog was about Wicca and its creator Gerald Gardner, not about the history of witchcraft. If that wasn’t clear enough the abstract reads, “The extraordinary story of Britain's fastest-growing religious group - the modern pagan witchcraft of Wicca - and of its creator, an eccentric Englishman called Gerald Gardner.”

I don’t think the wider discussion of witchcraft was an editing/time limit problem actually – the focus really was on the Wicca movement started by Gardner. Prof Hutton is well equipped to present a separate prog on witchcraft (British or otherwise) and here’s hoping he will. I know I’ve said it before but I had the pleasure of meeting him at a crop circle conference a few years back (his presence there being yet another illustration of his open-mindedness). I walked into a pub during the lunch break and there he was sitting in the corner on his own. He waved me over and we spent a great hour or so chewing the fat. Fantastic guy – gentle, incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable but, maybe most of all, always open to other people’s perceptions of the world.