Wicca: religion resurrected, or contrived myth?

Skeptic sister

New Member
The more I look into things involving Wicca, the more I have to wonder about it's history. I've read up on many forms of religion, because myth plays such an important role in many of them.

There's nothing concrete to prove that Wicca is based on older ways and beliefs that have been preserved (by what ever means), regardless of the arguments to the contrary.

Some lore, such as Easter Eggs, have been validated and proven part of pagan faith practices. And I don't see that figuring very prominently in Wicca....

Whattaya think... is it made up, or based on something far older.... or maybe it's both?
 

Isis

Member
I think it's both. Wicca and other neopagan religions are based on older traditions, but some were lost and new ones added over time.

In any case, if you go back far enough, all religious practices are "made up".
 

fibi ducks

Active Member
I think a lot of neo pagan stuff is inspired by robert graves', especially his book 'the white goddess'. Maybe wicca too. I've made it a mission to end up understanding what R Graves is going on about, but its a slow business. i think that at the centre of his ideas is the ancient institution of the priest at Nemi, as mentioned in Frazer's Golden Bough. Anyone come across this?
 

RLynn

Active Member
As an organized religion with degrees and all that stuff, Wicca was invented by Gerald Gardner, a Freemason who knew Aleister Crowley. However, there are many practicioners of the Craft who call themselves Wiccans but who are not of the Gardnerian variety. For most people, Wicca is essentially a polite euphemism for Witchcraft, an attempt to avoid any confusion with Satanism.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
There is an exhaustive history on Wicca by the historian Ronald Hutton. It's called Triumph of the Moon.
It was a joy to read. In it, he does say mainly that Martin Gardner had alot to do with it, but in terms of what to call Wicca as a religion, he calls it a revived religion. Although mainly modern, it is a form of Neo-paganism and it is an appeal to the past and what people might have done; even if alot of the rituals have Masonic leanings.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
I think a lot of neo pagan stuff is inspired by robert graves', especially his book 'the white goddess'. Maybe wicca too. I've made it a mission to end up understanding what R Graves is going on about, but its a slow business. i think that at the centre of his ideas is the ancient institution of the priest at Nemi, as mentioned in Frazer's Golden Bough. Anyone come across this?
The Golden Bough was okay, but I just could not understand Graves' White Goddess. I found his ramblings opaque.
It did play a role however in the concept of the triple goddess. His belief had something to do with the notion that all true poetry began with odes to the moon.
Who's he to say what true poetry is.
The Golden Bough had alot to do with the god that dies and rises again, representing the crops and the seasons. Alot of modern scholars now criticize it, but i don't think this model need be totally disregarded; as long as you take it with a grain of salt.
 

fibi ducks

Active Member
The Golden Bough was okay, but I just could not understand Graves' White Goddess. I found his ramblings opaque.
It did play a role however in the concept of the triple goddess. His belief had something to do with the notion that all true poetry began with odes to the moon.
Who's he to say what true poetry is.
The Golden Bough had alot to do with the god that dies and rises again, representing the crops and the seasons. Alot of modern scholars now criticize it, but i don't think this model need be totally disregarded; as long as you take it with a grain of salt.
Oh yes, they are opaque ! For me the thing is - that for a long time i used his reference book on the greek myths to get an introduction. so now a lot of what i see is patly coloured by his views. so i thought i'd better understand where he was coming from.
i like his supreme confidence - so long as we're not expected to take his word for anything.
I once met a guy in hyde park who had a sign saying that he had discovered the secret of immortality. it turned out that it was the nature of the secret that only one person could be immortal at a time, so he couldn't pass it on. the main thing for him was that he was so fed up of no-one believing him. it could be a drag to know somethjing for sure.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
Funny story about Hyde Park.
I recently joined a book club. We are reading his Greek Myths book.
It is not bad, and it is filled with tons of info. But I no longer bother with his interpretations.
Even his retellings get so bogged down with digressions that it loses the narrative thread.
Personally, I would have gone with Bulfinch, Hamilton, Grant or Guerber's compendiums.
 

fibi ducks

Active Member
Ok, I never read any of them. It was just down to which one I happened to come on first. I don't think his greek myths book is a good read. it seems to work for me as a reference book, but although it has some good touches (i like the way he says things like "but other people disagree and say that she was hatched out of an egg..." or whatever - i mean the way he talks as if its all possibly true) the stories don't form narative wholes.
I have got a book that has translations of Apollodorus' the library, and Hyginus' fabulae - so two ancient myth handbooks. the're two of graves' major sources for his grk myths. again, neither ot these are good reads.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
Ok, I never read any of them. It was just down to which one I happened to come on first. I don't think his greek myths book is a good read. it seems to work for me as a reference book, but although it has some good touches (i like the way he says things like "but other people disagree and say that she was hatched out of an egg..." or whatever - i mean the way he talks as if its all possibly true) the stories don't form narative wholes.
I have got a book that has translations of Apollodorus' the library, and Hyginus' fabulae - so two ancient myth handbooks. the're two of graves' major sources for his grk myths. again, neither ot these are good reads.
Hmmm. Sounds like you have not had much luck. Okay, I will point you in the right direction.
Apollodorus is a good reference book, but not fun to read.
A wonderful collection is the Metamorphoses by Ovid. I read the H. Gregory translation from the Latin. Although it is a later work, he tells many of the Greek myths. It is beautiful.
You are also reading a primary source, not a modern retelling.
To cover the stories that are not included in Ovid, I recommend The Age of Fable by Thomas Bulfinch. Actually, you should get the whole book, simply called Mythology. It includes the Age of Fable plus two other books dealing with medieval myths, including Arthurian legends. Worth reading!!!
The only part of Bulfinch I do not like is his renderings of the Iliad and Odyssey. These should be read in its entirety.
If you want a straight forward prose translation of these two epics, you can go with Rouse or Rieu.
If you want a more elaborate verse translation, you can't go wrong with Fitzgerald.
Then of course there is the Aeneid by Virgil. I loved Fitzgerald's version.
I know this is alot, so try Ovid and Bulfinch first.
I promise you will enjoy them. The narratives flow more nicely than Graves.
If you are not satisfied, you can come over and beat me with as many ducks as you like!!
 

RLynn

Active Member
Wicca may be okay, but like any religion it has too many of those insufferable true-believer types.
Ovid's Metamorphoses contains some some beautiful passages, but many people find a lot of it kinda dry. It's all a matter of taste, I suppose.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
Wicca may be okay, but like any religion it has too many of those insufferable true-believer types.
Ovid's Metamorphoses contains some some beautiful passages, but many people find a lot of it kinda dry. It's all a matter of taste, I suppose.
I guess you have that true believer stuff in any religion. I used to be friends with some modern day witches. At first it was fun, but then I grew tired of hearing just about any kind of nonsense believed in without any kind of critical thought. For example, one of them was convinced that her daughter was an incarnation of a Hindu deity. Really???
I found Ovid's book great, but it is the kind of book that is better as a reference, rather than something to be read from cover to cover.
 

RLynn

Active Member
I am in agreement on the use of Ovid as a reference.
Religion seems to attract people who need a system into which to shoehorn themselves. It is rather sad, but maybe the true purpose of religion is to accomodate people who need a certain spiritual regimentation. My personal feeling is that Ultimate Truth (if it exists) is not "out there" somewhere, but rather embedded (or hidden) within the recesses of our psyche. As the Bible (somewhere in the Gospel of Luke) says, "The kingdom of God is within you." The (possibly Gnostic) Gospel of Thomas elaborates this.
 

magickz

Active Member
It is not always needing a system but a way to explain what you believe and why to other people. I still have door to door people visit and want to convert me, I explain my beliefs, they attempt to debate with me and then I politely close the door & wish them well. If I could not explain what I believe and why, then I would be hounded by more door to door people than I already currently am.
 

LegendofJoe

Active Member
It is not always needing a system but a way to explain what you believe and why to other people. I still have door to door people visit and want to convert me, I explain my beliefs, they attempt to debate with me and then I politely close the door & wish them well. If I could not explain what I believe and why, then I would be hounded by more door to door people than I already currently am.
Sounds annoying!!!
Luckily I just get a few Jehovah's Witnesses from time to time.
 

Rhonda Tharp

Active Member
I am in agreement on the use of Ovid as a reference.
Religion seems to attract people who need a system into which to shoehorn themselves. It is rather sad, but maybe the true purpose of religion is to accomodate people who need a certain spiritual regimentation. My personal feeling is that Ultimate Truth (if it exists) is not "out there" somewhere, but rather embedded (or hidden) within the recesses of our psyche. As the Bible (somewhere in the Gospel of Luke) says, "The kingdom of God is within you." The (possibly Gnostic) Gospel of Thomas elaborates this.
Buddhism is very similar to the notion of looking within, Daoism, too, but in dual form.
 

fibi ducks

Active Member
Hmmm. Sounds like you have not had much luck. Okay, I will point you in the right direction.
Apollodorus is a good reference book, but not fun to read.
A wonderful collection is the Metamorphoses by Ovid. I read the H. Gregory translation from the Latin. Although it is a later work, he tells many of the Greek myths. It is beautiful.
You are also reading a primary source, not a modern retelling.
To cover the stories that are not included in Ovid, I recommend The Age of Fable by Thomas Bulfinch. Actually, you should get the whole book, simply called Mythology. It includes the Age of Fable plus two other books dealing with medieval myths, including Arthurian legends. Worth reading!!!
The only part of Bulfinch I do not like is his renderings of the Iliad and Odyssey. These should be read in its entirety.
If you want a straight forward prose translation of these two epics, you can go with Rouse or Rieu.
If you want a more elaborate verse translation, you can't go wrong with Fitzgerald.
Then of course there is the Aeneid by Virgil. I loved Fitzgerald's version.
I know this is alot, so try Ovid and Bulfinch first.
I promise you will enjoy them. The narratives flow more nicely than Graves.
If you are not satisfied, you can come over and beat me with as many ducks as you like!!
Hi Legend of Joe, thanks for this. I don't haveinternet at home or work so it takes a while to reply sometimes.
But - I'm going to stick mostly to greek sources. I'm interested in the small things of how people behave - and i think that as this would most likely be different even in a roman telling; so i should stick to the greek on the whole. But i do have Ovid, and now the Aenead at home - and will try them at some point. If i don't like them I may set the ducks on you. All the best, FD
 
Top