Re: A Very British Witchcraft | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

tjj Aug 27, 2013 21:42:09

Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:

Oh come on, he starts off saying “I will say that yet again, the proof or not is down to personal experience” which he knew darn well would cause people to disagree strongly. He then attributes something to Hutton that he realises he can't back up so he flounces off saying “And by the way..Fuck you pal”.

And then he's a poor innocent victim and it's all down to me and my wicked analysis! But like it says at the top of the page, "We all know what is acceptable interaction on this forum and what isn't" So I can't see a lot of excuse for saying Fuck you pal (yet that was missing from your account.). Not that I much mind being unjustly blackwashed these days, honest. My primary interest is in my tomatoes, which are truly epic.

Nigel, I really do want to remain in harmony with you because, as I said before, I do have a fair bit of respect for you. I'm glad your tomatoes are doing well ... really. However, I have to stand my ground and speak up for what I consider to be fair. You have quoted Astral Cat out of context - here is the post in question which contains nothing unreasonable - the final sentence reflects Astral Cat's previous experience on this forum as much as anything else. Yes, he used an expletive finally - at the very end of the interaction - I have been known to use the same one myself when provoked sufficiently.
Quote: AC
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. End Quote:AC

TSC has reminded me, if I needed it, that this is an archaeological forum. I don't consider LS starting a thread about Ronald Hutton's programme as being inappropriate. I personally enjoyed the programme and only mentioned the much older history of witchcraft because it is something I am currently doing some research into.

thesweetcheat Aug 27, 2013 21:50:50

Replying to tjj

tjj wrote:

TSC has reminded me, if I needed it, that this is an archaeological forum. I don't consider LS starting a thread about Ronald Hutton's programme as being inappropriate.

It wasn't meant to be a dig (no pun intended!) - I only really meant that there is a "science-y" aspect to much of the content. I don't really consider TMA to be an archaeological forum, to be honest, just a forum that includes an archaeo aspect. Witchcraft is every bit as valid as discussion topic, in my opinion.

nigelswift Aug 28, 2013 05:56:43

Replying to tjj

And I'll stand my ground too. I certainly didn't quote him out of context, quite the reverse:
"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" was a standalone declaration which he knew was bound to produce opposition as we've had an enormously long thread in which almost everyone disagreed with it. So I disagreed with him, bad me, and he swore and flounced, the twerp. Why are you implying that was OK as he was "provoked"? No he wasn't. Where?

As for witchcraft being an appropriate subject here, I can't think why you even mentioned it because I have said nothing to imply I think otherwise have I?

I really don't care if he's God's gift to etiquette elsewhere, IMO he's clearly demonstrated he needs to grow up a bit, simple as that, and you implying he did nothing wrong won't aid that process.