Is the idea of a worldwide pan-polytheism itself “perennialist”?

I suspect even asking this question will not make this a very popular blog post amongst many people, and yet I think the underlying question does need to be asked.

Having established that, I also freely admit that I have avoided writing this post for the past few days, partially because I have been extremely busy (a lot has been going on, which I won’t get into here), but also because I wanted to think about it, make sure that I try to do it as well as possible…and with no small trepidation due to the fear of being completely misunderstood, written off after someone merely reads the subject line and then writes a screed in the comments, or a variety of other possible reactions…including that some people might say that I have “converted” or have “seen the light” or various other things which would indicate that I have either “given up polytheism” (spoiler alert: I haven’t, and won’t!), or that in merely thinking these things or articulating them aloud, that I have somehow “fallen away” from the truth or purity of belief and theology rather than presenting an idea that I think is a fair and legitimate question to ask, and why that is the case.

I will begin by saying that I have had way too many vivid experiences–including visions, theophanies, epiphanies, dream visitations, perceptions of uncanny divine presences, mystical states, meaningful ritual occasions, altered forms of consciousness, profound divination experiences, being “overshadowed” by Deities and other divine beings, moments of inspired poetry or even information-imparting that have proven on research to be accurate to what is known in history and archaeology, and had insights and moments of gnosis (and by that I mean “true gnosis,” not what some call “UPG” and so forth)–which I cannot ignore without cutting off a very large part of the meaningful, powerful, and life-sustaining components of my life story, and the person I have become because of those experiences and the Deities and other divine beings associated with them.

I am also, and equally, a person who is an arch-skeptic, and someone who once strongly identified as a “neo-agnostic.” I do not simply “believe” things just because I feel I should, or that it is good to do so, I only have such beliefs (which I define as “articulations of religious experiences”) because they reflect what I have understood about divine realities, personalities, and processes after particular experiences have happened to me. Skepticism isn’t a general and pervading doubt (though doubt, in itself, is not a bad experience to have, and is not “the opposite of” any form of religious belief), it’s an approach to one’s methodology which asks for evidence, maintains an interest, but also fosters and harbors a healthy understanding of alternative explanations and allows for the potential error of human perceptions, emotional uncertainties, and the possibilities of “wishful thinking,” confirmation bias, and other such fallacies and cognitive dissonances. I can and do regularly succeed in putting such matters in parenthesis during particular experiences, but I cannot banish such thoughts entirely in the aftermath, and continue to entertain the possibility that some of what I have experienced might not be true for anyone but me (always and in every case!), might not be accurate or factual or even applicable, and may be quite far from what I conclude, assume (and it’s best to do that as little as possible, of course!), or decide upon in a given interpretive choice. There are always other ways to choose, to interpret, and to understand nearly everything, and both discernment and divination can and are utilized (and when divination is used, discernment is also and always essential!) to make final determinations…which are rarely final in any absolute sense, and are just “final for the moment” in most cases.

The above two paragraphs may have caused potential readers to either dismiss me as a “true believer” and a total kook, especially in relation to the first of them, or as a hopeless doubter and an overly-cerebral deist or even a complete skeptic. To these I would say: more like something in between, a skeptical believer, a doubting devotee, an agnostic gnostic…something like that. And if your view is something else entirely, I am also happy to hear what you would say about it, if you decide to share such in the comments below!

Like anyone taught by the Jesuits, I regularly have a check-in with myself on whether or not what I’m doing is good for me, is leading to positive outcomes for me, and is as sensible and reasonable as possible. I also have check-ins with the Deities Themselves and make sure I am not neglecting certain things, that particular practices of mine are to Their liking as devotional acts, and that I am using my time, resources, and skills in the best ways possible in service to Them. When something is no longer reasonable, productive, or creates wellbeing, I ask the Deities if it must be continued, and if it is discontinued, I ask what should replace it or how I should modify my practices otherwise. It’s not a perfect process, by any means, but it’s how I have felt best to engage with these realities for the majority of the last 32 years (and particularly the last 23 years).

So, that brings us to the present moment, and the present question.

I was at the International Congress on Medieval Studies over the weekend, and many parts of it were very good (I won’t get into what wasn’t), and though I would have preferred to be there in-person rather than only being able to attend some of the online sessions, and to present on or preside at such sessions, my current financial and health difficulties meant this was the only viable option for me.

In a session that I organized on the future of the study of polytheism in medieval sources, one of the other panelists–Dr. Dan Attrell–raised the very good point that most of the studies regarding particular polytheistic Deities in medieval sources are being conducted in subject-specific contexts, under the headings of particular cultures and languages (e.g. Old Norse Deities, Irish Deities, Slavic Deities, etc.) rather than in some contexts where polytheism-in-itself is considered, and such efforts in regards to the latter have, thus, not been popular and haven’t been engaged with for any number of reasons (beyond the possibility of the general ill-favor toward polytheism of the largely agnostic/atheist or majority hegemonic monotheistic religious population which dominates the academic population). The study of magic continues to thrive, both in focused groups (e.g. the Societas Magica) as well as more widely in specific cultural or linguistic contexts, and “magic” can often be understood as “other people’s religion.” But, as a result of the refutation of the “Murray Hypothesis” (i.e. Margaret Murray’s view that the “witch cult” is a semi-secret revival and continuation of a pre-Christian polytheistic religion into the medieval period) in general academic discourse (even though this is accepted as a dogma amongst some Wiccans, who view their religion as “the oldest religion in the world”…which I’ve also heard from Shinto, Yoruba, and other indigenous religious practitioners!), there is something of an allergy to considering that any truly religious content is present even if Deities of polytheistic religions might be depicted, reinterpreted, or extant in medieval sources. Polytheism, Dr. Attrell said, is a religious viewpoint, and involves devotion and cultus, and thus merely speaking about Deities is not a survival of polytheism-as-such, even where and if details of such practices might either survive or be suggested.

Thus, Dr. Attrell eventually concluded that the idea of “polytheism” as a pan-cultural theological idea that has existed in many times, places, and cultures ends up sounding very much like the perennialist ideas about universal religions and wisdom traditions that have existed in every culture and all “great religions.”

I have a few reactions to this, and I’ll introduce two for the moment: one in favor of polytheism-as-itself, and one against perennialism as comparable to polytheism.

In favor of polytheism-as-itself, I would say that if polytheism is understood simply but broadly as “any theological system within a framework of religious practice which acknowledges the reality of multiple individual Deities and fosters engagement with Them in a manner of religious regard,” which draws upon some language first articulated (and articulated well!) by Theanos Thrax. This fits what Dr. Attrell said of what he thinks is a sine qua non of polytheism quite nicely; and while I would then have to agree that, in stricto sensu, polytheism-as-such is generally not found in medieval sources, but references to polytheistic Deities is certainly found therein. Furthermore, this bare (though somewhat elaborated) definition is something that does apply broadly to a variety of cultures worldwide throughout spans of time and geography. No, they all don’t interpret Deities in the same way, they all don’t share particular theologies (beyond a simply theology that assumes plurality as a norm), and the differences between diverse polytheistic systems are more numerous than their direct similarities in many cases; and yet, this shared theology of plurality can and does exist in those simplest terms across many and varied cultures, I think.

What this approach does not do which perennialism does, however, is assume that there is a “core unity” or a “common core” or a “perennial tradition” (which some older forms of medieval philosophy often associated with Christian Hermeticism and/or Italian Renaissance Humanism) would call the prisca theologia, the “ancient theology” which comes directly from a (singular) Deity and weaves through all of the differing religious traditions of the world. Such a prisca theolgia also presumes that there is a core of “truth” to this notion, which can shine through the various differences and even contradictions between diverse religious systems, and that ultimately all of these “local variations” and “cultural accretions” can be ignored or cleared away in favor of the true and common core within them all. I would argue that even in the bare definition of polytheism above, and in the existence of a theology of plurality, these local differences are not and cannot be ignored, and no one practicing polytheism would wave these away or suggest ignoring them in favor of some “deeper” sense of commonality. (Those who do, in many cases, do so from a viewpoint of “archetypes of the collective unconscious,” and ideas like “the Hero’s Journey” and so forth, and in fact advocates of these views like Joseph Campbell advise ignoring these differences quite directly!) Preserving, observing, and respecting these differences is essential to all of the polytheists I know personally; but any undue interest in such differences is generally considered a waste of time and a major distraction within a perennialist framework.

Thus, I would say that polytheism as a theological category, a theological characteristic, or a trait of a religious system can be acknowledged as existing across a variety of religions that are polytheistic (or even some that aren’t but that trend in that direction with a multiplication of saints, angels, and other often very specialized beings despite having an ostensibly monotheistic framework at their centers), but by no means all religious traditions, especially as they currently exist. Polytheism is not put forward as a universal system or framework, or even trait, but it is a very common one, and probably numerically outnumbers the different religious cultures which have been strictly monotheistic, non-theistic, or atheistic (i.e. there’s probably 20-30 of all of those at most, compared to thousands of indigenous religious cultures that were polytheistic) by a long shot. As I have said about certain other things over the years, it can exist anywhere, but doesn’t exist everywhere, and it can be for anyone, but isn’t for everyone…and thus, cannot be universal, and therefore by definition cannot be considered “perennialist.”

I think there is a worthwhile conversation to be had, as well, about the differences between polytheism as a pursuit, an interest, and a religious practice (all of which can, do, and should co-exist and interact!), and even as a characteristic and a descriptive term, and polytheism as an identity (beyond agency nouns, e.g. a “polytheist” is someone who “does polytheistic religious practices”) or an essence. Perhaps it is because of some of my early exposure to ideas from Buddhism generally and Zen in particular, but I am beginning to think more and more over the years that identity is a kind of trap when understood in an essential manner, and this applies not only to religions, but also to other characteristics like gender identity, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, disability status, and any number of other things which may fall into the categories of intersectional diversity demographics. (No, I’m not against the existence of any of these things, and in fact have invested a lot of time and elaboration on some of these, as many of you know!)

We are currently living in a situation where there is way too much emphasis on identity characteristics of all sorts, and when peoples’ very sense of self and personhood becomes tied up with any of these characteristics, or group identities–of which religious and political ones are often the most fervently held–it leads to situations where differing factions truly hate and never speak with people of alternate group classifications. That situation is sad, and what leads to warfare, dehumanization, and divisions of all sorts; and though I’m not suggesting that we should “ignore our differences” or even de-emphasize them, in favor of some “greater unity” and “what we have in common,” but instead that we can learn to acknowledge and respect our differences, value them, and (above all!) learn not to fear such difference as an existential threat (outside of when someone is so caught up in such understandings of identity that they might seek to do active harm to others…which is actually much rarer than many might assume). We don’t have to agree, and in fact I think it is healthy to disagree on many matters; but, we should at least talk with each other, and be able to recognize that others have made certain choices for reasons that they feel are appropriate to their own cases, and if we can all come to an understanding that not everyone can, has, or needs to make the same choices we have, then there will be no problem. In pluralism (which goes hand-in-hand with polytheism), one needs others to be themselves and to act in the ways that they feel are best, because all of the diverse world needs to do what it does and fulfill its role in the divine panoply that is the plurality of existence at all levels.

I wasn’t expecting to get to quite these conclusions and articulations of ideals in the present inquiry, but there we are! I hope that this is understood in the ways that I have intended it, that no one quits reading and assumes things about me or what I think based on a small part of it taken out of context…but I also understand that this is the internet, that’s what people apparently love to do now, and so it can’t really be helped. Keep in mind, though, if your posted comments are abusive, I will not approve them; and if you have concluded something about me with partial knowledge and/or ignorance of something I spoke about at some other stage of this discussion, I will point out that you need to read what I actually said in full in order for the conversation to continue. (I was a professor at one point, and having to say “read the directions” over and over again to students happened far more frequently as the years went on, alas.)

I look forward to anyone’s civil discussion, and even disagreements that are articulated respectfully, in the days to come1

AMAZING NEWS! New Discovery from Egypt Proves the Antinoan Roots of the Cult of Glykon!

Some of you reading this may recall my article on Antinous and Glykon in Abraxas volume 5 from 2014. Well, like many things I’ve theorized or had insights over in relation to my devotional involvements with Antinous, it looks like I might have had some precognitions on this matter as well!

A few friends and colleagues in academia (because not all of them are as bad as some academics are or have been…!?!) let me know about this matter, and gave me permission to post about it here with a few caveats about journalistic coverage only; the actual publication of the find and the specifics of it for use in future academic discourse will be done by them, and full credit to them for literally digging these things up…all I did was have some interesting insights that turned out to be true!

My friend, Dr. Petra Schlangenstücke (Ph.D., University of Wuppertal, 2019) of the Warburg Institute, in conjunction with a team from the Anglo-Egyptian Exploration Society, the Harry Ransom Center for the Humanities at the University of Texas-Austin, and the Papyrology Collection at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, has been studying some papyrus fragments from an excavation at Tebtynis that took place over the 2022 and 2023 seasons. Six fragments of a single papyrus were found in 2022, and an additional five were found the following year, and these have been reassembled. Of course, due to material lacunae from lost pieces and wearing away of ink on the surviving papyrus fragments themselves, the full text is not available; it is hoped that further fragments might be unearthed in this year’s excavations, but enough of the text has been discerned currently that some incredibly significant conclusions can be drawn.

“What we have here is a strange tale involving the deified Antinous calling for various elements to be assembled for what appears to be a magical spell formula; the Antinous-specific details are limited to the prologue of the spell fragment as we currently have it, while other mythological figures are mentioned in the spell rubrics themselves.”

While this may seem like an interesting but nonetheless not particularly remarkable situation, the Deities mentioned in the spell and some of the ingredients called for are all things fitting what we learn of the cult of Glykon from the account provided in Lukian of Samosata’s Alexandros Pseudomanteis, “Alexander the False Prophet,” a satirical work that has been viewed variously by scholars in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

“In our twentieth-century way, we have too often taken Lukian’s writing on these matters as a kind of investigative journalist’s exposé, as if it reveals the truth about the cult and mysteries of Glykon,” Dr. Schlangenstücke comments. “In reality, we should think of Lukian more as a tabloid story of the late twentieth century in the U.S. than a muckraker in the early twentieth century: there are elements of truth to Lukian’s critique, but overall it is more ‘muck’ than fact, and much of it was done for lurid appeal rather than an interest in exposing fraud. Lukian was a satirist, after all, more of a humorist telling a comedic story rather than someone dedicated to arriving at objective and factual truth in his writings–categories which did not exactly exist at the time, after all.”

The matter of whether it is Lukian who knew of this text or one like it, or if perhaps Alexander of Abunoteichos (or, perhaps even, his collaborator Cocconas, if indeed such an individual existed and is not the invention of Lukian) knew it more directly, is not certain at this stage, but it appears possible that one or both of the prophet and the satirist may have encountered it, or a text like it.

In particular, the relevant parts of the translation roughly reads:

“Miraculous spell for snake divination. This formula was known to the Divine Antinous, when He came from Bithynia to Egypt to hunt the [lion?] and its two companion serpents. The first serpent was trampled by the horse of the Divine Antinous, and receded into the desert; but the second became spattered with the blood of [the lion?–lacunae, about three lines missing] lotus, but the stone serpent fell into the papyrus swamp. It was this stone that allowed the Oracle of the Divine Antinous in His holy city upon the Nile to discern truth from falsehood, to provide dreams to those visiting His temple, to reveal cures for headache, distempers of the bowels, and boils of the skin, and to tell the times of birth of women wishing to conceive children after periods of barrenness. Pachrates of Heliopolis wrote down the spell, and gave the stone to [two lines missing] and the following formula had been spoken by the Divine Antinous, to take [the materials?]…

“[about ten lines missing] when it has come out of the water, and is safe upon the black mud, take the egg of an ostrich and remove the embryo, being careful not to split the shell nor crack it in half. Insert a deified [scarab] beetle into it, along with the ashes of a burnt offering of a waterfowl immolated on acacia wood, along with hyssop, myrrh, and three measures of hair from a four-footed creature still living. Sit on the ground with this egg between one’s folded legs, sealed with black mud from the papyrus swamp, and bring in a large python; if the python is trained or docile, it may be alive, but if ferocious, it is better that [it is dead?]. Wrap the python around the one seated, and let sleep come over him, and say the following: PHORBORBORA MISONKTAIK AAAEEEIIIOOOYYY BAINCHOOCH MENE MENE MENE Holy Selene, keeper of the Gates of Nyx, MARMORMARA AIX ASKI KATASKI etc., I N son of N ask the Divine Asklepios to send His son to aid me in my sleep, that I may know the cures needed on this occasion, AIM AIN AIX AIP AIR AIS AIT, IAO IAO IAOAI. The Goddess Selene will descend in a vision to the one sitting, and will offer to become his lover, and he will dream…

“[five lines missing] adorned with a leopard’s skin, and upon his head a headdress made from the sidelocks of twelve pure children at their coming-of-age, and if possible, let two or more of these be hair of flax or honey in color, as Apollon the father of Asklepios [text breaks off]…”

While the details do not match exactly, and the mantic stone is not attested elsewhere, several elements in the spell do match the cultus of Glykon as reported by Lukian quite closely.

“Perhaps we will see,” Dr. Schlangenstücke hopes, “that some further eyes on the text itself, and our proposed reconstructions and translations, may turn up more ideas and insights into the remainder of the text’s contents, and what else might have been in here. I find the collaboration of scholars in fields different from my own are often the most fruitful in approaching problems from a different angle, and yielding valuable information as a result.”

Dr. Schlangenstücke is also working on a large corpus of Greek and Graeco-Egyptian names which can be contextually classified as cases of nominative determinism. “Pachrates of Heliopolis’ name is relevant in this regard–it’s been sitting there in front of everyone for centuries, and yet no one has asked why a magician attributed with compositions related to Antinous might be named this; the Pancrates comparison, or possibly confusion, is also interesting, but let us prefer to take what is actually written rather than what clever ideas we might prefer that are more our own constructions than what can be verified.”

As more information becomes available, I will certainly let all of you know what I find out! The publication of these results is expected in the latter part of 2024, or perhaps early 2025. Stay tuned!

Irish Medieval Magic from the Manuscripts; Or, “How Do You Spell That?”–Public Lectures on March 17, 2024

I am happy to announce that, for the first time, there will be an online public lecture next week on Sunday, March 17th, 2024–and not surprisingly, given the day it will be held, the subject is Irish-related!

[Detail of Sun Window, at Loafers in Cork, Ireland, by Michael J. “Mick” McCoy (a.k.a. Tighernmas Mac Goibnenn), c. 2003]

The title of the presentation is:

Irish Medieval Magic from the Manuscripts; Or, “How Do You Spell That?”

You can see some details on the event via EventBrite, where tickets are being sold.  The talk will be offered three times that day, so that it is more accessible depending on one’s timezone, starting at 6 AM Pacific time, 12 PM Pacific time, and 6 PM Pacific time.  The cost for the event is $8.  The event will be LIVE all three times it is given, and includes an hour-long presentation plus a live Q&A/discussion at the end, and will also come with a PDF containing a select bibliography and some texts in Irish (usually Old/Middle) as well as English translations.  Please make sure that you choose the right time you’d prefer to participate in the event, as it is not possible to switch one’s ticket from one time to another!

A very limited number of free admissions will be available for each session, provided that one can reciprocate the admission by advertising this event on your own blogs, social media, and by word of mouth (which we’ll assume on the “honor system” you will do to your utmost ability, whether or not anyone successfully purchases tickets as a result of your efforts!).  Also, anyone who is either a patron in my Patreon, or who is currently or has taken an online Academia Antinoi course with me, can also attend a session of your choice for free–if any of these apply to you, please write to me privately and specify which one you’d like to do.

Your presenter: Dr. Phillip A. Bernhardt-House holds a Ph.D. in Celtic Civilizations from the National University of Ireland/University College Cork, an M.A. in Religious Studies from Gonzaga University, and a B.A. in Creative Writing and Medieval Studies from Sarah Lawrence College. Dr. Phil has taught at various colleges, including University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, Columbia College, and Skagit Valley College. See some of Dr. Phil’s publications (on Irish magic, werewolves, and other topics) at Academia.edu.

We hope to see as many of you there as possible; and if this is even moderately successful, we will do future such presentations on a regular basis in the months to come!

Felix Saturnalia! IO IO IO!

I hope all of you that are celebrating Saturnalia and related holy days this year are having an excellent time!

For those of you who wish to have a look, I made a rare public post on my Patreon that is accessible to everyone; and, for the remainder of Saturnalia (from December 17th to December 23rd), all of my posts on there will be public! If it serves as a bit of an “audition” for some of you to see if it would be worth supporting my Patreon, so be it; and for those who don’t wish to do so, but just would like to see what ol’ PSVL is up to, feel free to have a look and enjoy what is there!

For festivals involving particular cities in Egypt, what should one do/Who should one honor?

As many of you who follow the Calendar will know, today is the festival of Hadrian’s first entry (Epibateria) into the Egyptian city of Tebtynis during late 130. There is another such festival on the 29th of November for the city of Oxyrhynchus; and there’s also two festivals involving Naukratis on the calendar, in June and in December.

In the cases in late November and early December, for the longest time my practice was just to honor Hadrian; but as time went on, I began to think it would be appropriate to honor the city as well in terms of giving cultus to some of the city’s major civic Deities (generally determined by what temples have been identified in the city archaeologically).

Having looked up these locations to see what the major Deities of them have been previously, this year (after doing so again…!?!), I realized that I have not been well-prepared in terms of keeping a running record of all of them in one place, or even any place in several instances, for easier reference in the future.  Thus, I think having one here is a good idea, not only for me, but for all of you that might read my blog as well, and who might plan to celebrate these occasions as well.

There’s two festivals in November and December involving the Epibateria into Egyptian cities:  Tebtynis and Oxyrhynchus.  There’s a further one in June for Naukratis (inherited from the Neos Alexandria calendar–Naukratis is not only important historically and culturally for Graeco-Egyptian syncretism, but it’s also the city whose constitution formed the basis for that of Antinoöpolis, but there’s also the festival of Hestia/Vesta in Naukratis in Dece)mber as well, which is why She/They (given here as singular and plural, not as “either feminine or non-gendered pronouns are appropriate”–oddly enough!) are included in both lists.

As a further note:  while we know which temples were in Naukratis, I am also including Egyptian Deities there which are the “general” equivalents of the Greek ones listed, because we know the town was mostly Egyptian (but I will put the Egyptian ones in italics since we don’t know for sure if They actually had temples or not).  

The overall order followed here reflects the order in which They appear in the aretalogies collection I am currently working on (and have been since 2015!), with those Deities syncretized closely with Antinous first, followed by Goddesses, and then (male) Gods, and generally with the order of Egyptian, Greek, and Roman in most cases.

Naukratis:  Horus, Apollon, Hathor, Satis, Anoukis, Hera, Hestia, Aphrodite, Vesta, Sobek, Dioskouroi

Oxyrhynchus:  Osiris, Hermes, Apollon, Dionysos, Isis, Hera, Demeter, Atargatis, Ammon, Serapis, Zeus, Jupiter, Mars

Tebtynis:  Sobek, Geb, Kronos

And, of course, don’t forget Hadrian, and Antinous (if you like)! 😉

Can You Tell Us A Story For Samain?

Of course I can! 😉

[As a major part of how Samain appears to have been practiced in ancient and medieval times involved staying awake all night and telling stories, this is one such story you could tell, which is a story of a Samain night to remember! It is my version of the medieval Irish tale Echtra Nerai, and some might say that in explaining some things or interpolating ideas that may make it more sensible to a modern audience, I have “dumbed it down”…let them say that, if that is the price one must pay to make such things more accessible to the everyday reader or modern polytheist!]

The Adventure of Nera and the Driving of the Cattle of Aingen

At Samain-tide, the king Ailill mac Máta and Queen Medb daughter of Eochaid Feidlech were in Rath Cruachan, each with their retinues, and their entire household during the first day of the First of the Thirds of Samain. They set about cooking food in a vast cauldron to provide for the feast of Samain on the third day of the First of the Thirds of Samain.  At the end of that day, two captives had been hanged by Ailill and Medb.

When the feast of Samain itself arrived with the descent of night, the household and retinues of Ailill and Medb sought entertainments for the night.  

Ailill made a challenge to his household:  “The one who would put a withe around the foot of either one of the two men upon the gallows will have a prize from me for it, of his own choosing.”

The King of the Síd of Cruachan did not like that challenge, for it was custom on Samain to not go out from the assembly once night had fallen, lest madness or death follow for the one who had so broken the steadfastness of the night’s vigil.  At Samain-tide, it was the custom of the people of the síd-mounds to roam about in the darkness and to bring with them much terror and danger to humans.

Many of the household of Ailill and Medb attempted the challenge, but each returned, having taken to fright in the darkness and gloom, and each would be back quickly into the safety of the assembly’s vigil.

At last, the steward of Ailill’s and Medb’s household, Nera mac Núatair maicc Taccáin, not content with the breaking of the vigil, decided to put an end to the night’s games by accepting the challenge himself.  “It is myself who will have the prize from you, O Ailill mac Máta, for it is I who shall go out!”

“Truly, you shall have my fine red-gold-hilted sword for it,” Ailill said.  

The King of the Síd of Cruachan did not like that, for Ailill had given the one who would accomplish the deed their choice of prize, and Nera had not named the sword as his prize.  “If Ailill were not in the sovereignty of Connacht for his marriage to Medb daughter of Eochaid Feidlech, he would forfeit his kingship for this alone!”

“We shall soon see what will become of it,” Bé Aingeni said.

Nera went out to the hanged captives, but put his best armor about him before he went.  He made a withe and put it upon the foot of one of the captives, but it sprang off him. He tried a second time, but it sprang off again.  

“Though you might be at it until the morrow, you will not be able to put the withe about my foot lest you put the proper peg upon it.”

Nera put the proper peg upon the withe, and then placed it around the foot of the hanged man.

“That was heroic, O Nera!” said the captive.

“Heroic indeed!” Nera replied to the hanged man.

“By the truth of your valor, take me upon your neck, that I may get a drink, for I was sore thirsty when I was hanged,” the second of the hanged men said to Nera.

“Come upon my neck, then!”  The second of the hanged men came upon the neck of Nera.  “To where shall I go with the carrying of yourself?”

“To the house which is nearest to us, away from the Rath of Cruachan with its three ramparts.”

Nera carried the hanged man to the house nearest to the Rath, which was surrounded by two ramparts, but they saw something:  a lake of burning fire surrounded its two ramparts.

“I will not have my drink from this house, where the people in the house have raked the coals and banked the fire of the house before sleeping this Samain night, nor any other night!”

“Well I know that it is the house of the retinue of Cét mac Magach, who is as a fire upon the battlefield in the army of Ailill and Medb.”

“However that may be, let us go to another house.”

Nera carried the hanged man to the next house surrounded with two ramparts, but they saw something:  a lake of water surrounded its two ramparts.

“Do not go to that house!” the hanged man said.  “There is never a washing-tub nor a basin for bathing nor even a slop-pail in that house that is left standing with water in it before those inside have been at sleeping in their beds on Samain night, or any other night!”

“Well I know that it is the house of the retinue of Fráech mac Idaith, son of Bé Finn the sister of Bóann, who is as a flood upon the stream and a torrent in a lake in battle in the army of Ailill and Medb.”

“However that may be, let us go to another house.” 

Nera carried the hanged man to the next house, with only one rampart surrounding it.  No lake of fire nor of water stood between them and the rampart around the house, and they passed over the rampart and through into the house, where none barred their entry.

“It is here in this house that I shall have my drink!” the hanged man said.

Nera let the dead man down from his neck upon the ground, and the captive went into the house.  There was a tub for washing and a basin for bathing in it, and a slop-pail, and all had water standing in them as the inhabitants of the house slept, not having risen to welcome the unexpected guest.  The dead man had a draught from each of the vessels of water, and spat it so that every drop of it went from his lips all about on the faces of those who slept, and all of them died thereupon.  He left the house, and the fire that had been left uncovered soon overtook the dwelling, and as it smoldered in the ruin, the gloom from the smoke passed into the mists and the house was lost in the darkness of the night.

“It is not well for the ones who leave the water vessels with impure fluid within them overnight, nor to leave their hearth-fires uncovered nor unbanked when they go to their beds, and the names and deeds of those whose rough and foul house this was will not be known amongst poets, kings, or men, nor will tales be told of them for all time because of their carelessness with fire and water on the night of Samain, and every other night,” Nera the steward of the household of Ailill and Medb said, and Bé Aingeni in the síd of Cruachan agreed.

Nera took the second of the hanged men upon his neck once more, and returned him to his place of torture as undisturbed as possible, and saw that the withe he had left upon its proper peg around the first hanged man’s foot yet remained.  But in the Rath of Cruachan, the dun was burned and razed, and the heads of its household retinues were piled up in a great heap outside of it on account of the warriors of the hosts of the síd from Cruachan.  The host was returning to the cave of Cruachan, and Nera fell in to their company behind them.

“A man on the track here,” the last man in the company said, “and his footfalls heavier than the rest,” he said to the next man in the company, and word traveled from the last man to his marching mate, and on it traveled up the ranks two by two, up to the first man at the head of the company.

They came into the síd, and went before the King of the Síd of Cruachan and displayed the heads of their slain foes from Rath Cruachan.

“And what shall be done with the man that has returned with us?” the first warrior in the company asked the King.

“Let him come here to me, that I may speak with him,” said the King. Nera came forth, and the King asked him, “What brought you with the warriors into the síd?”

“I came in the company of your host, O King,” said Nera.

“Then well met for you it was that you have done so!  Go to the house yonder, where there is a single woman called Bé Aingeni who will make a welcome for you.  Tell her it is from the King that you have been sent to her, and come every day to me in this fort with a burden of firewood upon your back and a bundle of it upon your neck.”

Nera did as he had been told, and came to the house.

“Welcome, indeed, it is if the King is the one who has sent you to me.”

“It is truly the King, indeed, who sent me,” Nera said.

The arrangements were made as the King had said.  Nera came with a bundle of firewood upon his back and a burden of it upon his neck to the fort of the King the next day, and the next day, and the next day.  Each day, he saw a blind man walking with a sighted lame man upon his back coming out of the fort before he arrived, and they would be going to the brink of a well before the fort.

“Is it there?” asked the blind man standing on his own two feet.

“It is, indeed,” said the lame man, his eyes open, being carried by the blind man.  “Let us go away, therefore.”

Nera asked the woman of the síd in the house where he was staying about this.  “Why do the blind man and the lame man go to visit the well each day?”

“They go to visit the crown in the well, a diadem of gold, which is upon the head of the King, which is kept in the well.”

“Why is it they who visit the well?” Nera asked.

“Not difficult to tell:  it is they who are trusted by the King to guard the crown.  The blind man had great strength in his arms, and for fear that he might snatch the crown away, the King had him blinded so he would not be able to see at what he would grasp.  The lame man had great swiftness in his feet, and for fear that he might abscond with the crown, the King had him lamed that he might not flee with that upon which he had been able to lay his hands.  Thus, the one cannot carry the crown but instead must carry he who sees for him, and the other cannot run away on his own and must be carried to see that which he might treasure if he were to make off with it.”

“Come here to me somewhat,” Nera said to the woman, who had become his wife, “that you may tell me of my adventures now.”

“What has appeared to you?” Bé Aingeni asked.

“Not hard to say:  when I had come hither into the síd, I thought the Rath of Cruachan had been destroyed with all of the household and the retinues of Ailill and Medb within it had fallen and been killed, and their heads taken by the hosts into the síd at the cave of Cruachan.”

“That is not true indeed,” said the woman, “for a host of phantoms appeared to you to have come to them.  That it may come to pass in this way cannot be prevented, lest one reveal the phantom vision to his friends in the retinue and in the household of his own people.”

“How shall I reveal this to my people?” Nera asked.

“Not difficult:  rise and go to them, for the charge has not been removed from the fire, and they are still about the same cauldron at the feast,” she said, though it had been three days and nights since the feast of Samain proper, and thus the third of Thirds of Samain had passed in Nera’s reckoning since he had come into the síd.  “Tell them to be on their guard the next Samain-tide coming, unless they come to destroy the fort in the síd.  For I will promise them this:  the fort in the síd to be destroyed by Ailill and Medb, and the crown of Brión be carried off by them, if all comes to pass in the way it is now set to be.”

“How will it be believed of me that I have come into the síd?” asked Nera.

“Not difficult:  take the fruits of summer along with you.”  Nera took wild garlic and primrose and golden fern with him. “And I shall be pregnant by you, and bear you a son.  And send word of a message from you to the síd when your people come to destroy the fort in the síd, that you may take your wife and your son and your cattle from the síd.”

“And what if I do not go and tell them and instead stay here with you to see the birth of my son?” wondered Nera.

“Then the sovereignty of Ailill is forfeit, and the Queenship of Medb is at an end, and the Finnbennach Aí will wander back into the lake at Cruachan and will not be seen again, and you will remain here with the burden of firewood upon your back until the end of the age, when fire and water overtake the world.”

“And what if I go and I am not believed?”

“Then you, too, shall be among the bodies fallen in the dun, and the heads taken from within the Rath, and the spoils presented before the King of the Síd of Cruachan, for the breaking of three of the gessi of the customs of the tide of Samain:  going out from the vigil on the night of Samain itself, and the king not keeping his promise to grant what gift is asked of him and instead naming the gift himself, and of the misuse of fire and water and the impurities upon the house in the territory of the Connachta.  For as sacred assemblies were disrupted, and as sacred gifts were violated, and as the sacredness of water and fire were dishonored and disrespected, so too will assembled hosts rise in vengeance, and promises of sovereigns be transgressed, and the unleashing of destructions by water and fire come upon the Connachta for this, lest they flow out from the síd of the cave of Cruachan and from all of the síd-mounds of the isle of Inis Fáil to overtake the world!”

“Then it is convincing I must be.”

“Convincing in your entreaty, then:  arise and go!”

Thereupon Nera went to his own people at the Rath of Cruachan, and there he found them around the same cauldron as he had left them on the night of the feast of Samain itself.  He related his adventures to them, and when Cét and Fráech had confirmed that the withe was about the foot of one of the hanged men as Nera had said, and they had seen the fruits of summer which Nera had brought from the síd, Ailill turned his red-gold-hilted sword over to Nera.  Nera stayed with his people for the year following.

In that year, Fergus mac Roích and the exiles from the territory of the Ulaid had come to Medb and Ailill at Cruachan in Connacht, after the breaking of the contract with King Conchobor mac Nessa and Naoise over the matter of Derdriu (or, as some say, over the shaming of Macha in her race against the horses of King Conchobor mac Nessa, which lead to the ces noínden upon the men of the Ulaid, excepting the women and the children and Cú Chulainn).

The first of the Thirds of Samain came the following year.  “The appointment of your time has come, O Nera,” said Ailill, “therefore arise and go, and bring your people and your cattle from the síd, that we may lay waste to the fort in the síd and destroy it.”

Then Nera went to his wife in the síd, and she bade him welcome.  “Arise and go now to the fort, and bring a burden of firewood with you,” Bé Aingeni said to Nera.  “For I have gone every day for the past year with a bundle of firewood upon my neck in your stead, and have said you were in your sick-bed.  And there yonder is your son.”

Nera went out to the fort in the síd, carrying a burden of firewood upon his neck with him.

“Welcome alive from the sickness in which you have been!” said the King. “Though I am displeased that the woman has slept with you without asking my permission from me.”

“May it be your will that is done about this, then!” said Nera.

“It will not be difficult for you,” said the King.  Nera returned to the house of the woman.

“Now tend to your kine today!” said Bé Aingeni.  “I gave one cow out of them to your son at once upon his birth.”

Nera went with his cattle to tend them that day.

When he slept that day, The Morrígan came to take the cow of Nera’s son to be bulled by the Donn Cúailnge in the east.  She then went again westward with the driving of the cow, and Cú Chulainn overtook Her on the plain of Muirthemne as She was passing across it. 

For it was one of the gessi of Cú Chulainn that a woman—divine or mortal—should pass out of his territory without his knowledge of it.  It was geis to him that cattle be driven into or out of his territory without his permission.  It was one of his gessi that birds should feed on his land, unless they left something for him.  It was geis to him that fish should be in the bays of his territory, lest they be felled by him.  It was geis to him that warriors of another tribe should be in his land without his challenging of them before morning if they had come at night, or by nightfall if they came during the day. It was one of his gessi that every maid and every single woman amongst the Ulaid was under his ward until they were ordained to be given in marriage to their husbands.  These are some of the gessi of Cú Chulainn.

Cú Chulainn, therefore, overtook The Morrígan with the cow that she was driving from the herds of Nera, the very cow given to his son, who was called Aingen by the woman of the síd, Bé Aingeni.

“This cow must not be taken!”  And Cú Chulainn did as was related in the tale of the Driving of the Cattle of Regamna.

Nera returned to the house of Bé Aingeni.

“One of the cows is missing—that very cow that was given to my son!”

“I did not deserve that you should tend to the kine in that way!” Nera’s wife said to him.  “Now, all is not as I had hoped it would be, and much will be changed from what had gone before!”

At her expression of exasperation, the cow returned to them at her house with the rest of the herd.

“Whence does this cow come?” asked Nera.

“Truly, not difficult:  she comes from the peninsula of Cúailnge, after having been bulled by the Donn Cúailnge, for it was The Morrígan who had taken the cow thither while you slept, despite the burden of the firewood being lifted from you by the King and the duty of the tending of the kine being put upon you by him from my own words.  But rise out now, lest the warriors of your people come!  This host cannot go for a year until the next Samain-tide, and thus let them come on the next Samain-tide, for the síd-mounds of the land of Ériu and Fótla and Banba are always open at every Samain-tide.”

“And what if the hosts of my people come to lay waste to the fort in the síd this very Samain-tide at present?”

“Then the crown of Brión will not be taken, and the casualties of your people will be high in their raid and their ravagings upon the síd, and the Donn Cúailnge will come at the cries of the calf born to the cow of your son, Aingen, who will cry out at the reaving of his mother, and the Finnbennach Aí will follow into the síd after the Donn Cúailnge, and the renown of Ailill will not be known to poets nor kings nor men in times to come, and Medb will again become the wife of Conchobor of the Ulaid, and Fergus will slay Conchobor because of it, and Cú Chulainn will slay Fergus because of that, and in his anger, Cú Chulainn will slay every man in Ireland, and in Alba, and in Letha, and even unto Rome itself, and beyond to Scythia and India and even the lands of Sina at the gates of the sunrise, and the seas will flow in great red waves with the blood of the victims, and not Lug mac Ethlenn nor The Dagda nor even The Morrígan Herself will be able to stop the frenzy of Cú Chulainn!”

“Next Samain-tide, then.”

“Next Samain-tide, indeed!”

Nera went to his people amongst Ailill and Medb.  

“Whence have you come?” asked Ailill.

“And where have you been since you have gone from us?” asked Medb.

“From near and from far I have been:  in fair lands I was, with great jewels and awe-filled hallows and precious things, with plenty of rich clothes and comely garments and sumptuous foods, and of winsome companions and wondrous sights and wonderful treasures. But these same hosts in the fair lands will come to slay you unless it had been revealed to you that this would come to pass by me!  Therefore, do not set out with your hosts and take your army’s divisions against the síd this Samain-tide, for it is death and destruction and the laying waste of the province of Connacht and the end of your sovereignty if it shall come to pass this way!”

“Then, next Samain-tide instead, we shall certainly go against them!” answered Ailill.

So, Nera remained there in the household of Ailill and Medb until the end of the year and the arrival of the next of the first of the Thirds of Samain.

“Now, if there remains anything for you in the síd, O Nera, bring it away at once!” said Ailill.

Nera went into the síd on the first day of the first of the Thirds of Samain and immediately brought out his wife, Bé Aingeni, and his son, Aingen, and his cattle.  As the bull calf from the cow of Aingen that had been bulled by the Donn Cúailnge went out of the síd, the bull calf bellowed out three times.  At that very moment, Ailill and Fergus were playing at fidchell, and they heard the bellowing of the bull calf on the plain.  Said Fergus to Ailill:

“Not pleasing to me is the calf, I like it not,

bellowing on the plain of Cruachu, breaking the lull,

the son of Donn Cúailnge approaches this spot,

from beyond Loch Loíg, the son of the bull.

“There will be calves without cows because of him,

in Bairrche on Cúailnge’s peninsula;

the King will set out upon a great march with vim

because of Aingen’s calf, piercing brooch like fibula.”

(Some say that Aingen was the son of Nera and Bé Aingeni was the name of the woman of the síd who was Aingen’s mother and Nera’s wife; while still others say that Aingen was the name of the man and Bé Aingeni was the name of the woman who appeared to Cú Chulainn in the vision of The Morrígan when She took these shapes upon her in the tale of the Driving of the Cattle of Regamna, and it is said that Nera saw these same shapes upon them.)

Then the bull calf of Aingen, the calf sired by Donn Cúailnge, met the Finnbennach Aí upon the plain of Cruachan.  A night and a day the bull calf and the white-horned bull fought upon the plain, until at last the bull calf was beaten.  The bull calf bellowed out again when it fell.

“What did the bull calf bellow?” Medb asked of her cowherd, whose name was Buaigle.

“I know that!” said Bricriu mac Carbad, “It is the strain which you, O popa Fergus, sang in the morning!”

At that, Fergus glanced aside, and struck at Bricriu’s head with his fist, and the five fidchell-men which were in his hand went into Bricriu’s head, and it was a lasting hurt and a grievous pain and a persistent ill for him for the remainder of his life.

“Tell me, O Buaigle, what the bull calf said,” asked Medb once more.

“Truly, it said that if its father, the Donn Cúailnge, came to fight with it against the Finnbennach Aí, the white-horned would not be seen in the plain of Aí, and the dark brown bull would beat the white-horned bull in the sight of all from end to end of Mag nAí and on every side,” answered Buaigle.

Then Medb said in one breath, swearing in the manner of an oath, “I swear by all the Gods by Whom my people swear, that I shall not lie down, nor sleep on feathers of down nor rest on cushions of flockbed, that neither will I drink buttermilk nor take care of and tend to my nether parts, nor drink red ale nor wine, nor shall I taste nor eat of any food, until I see those two bulls and those two kine fighting before my face and seeing them battle upon the plain before me!”

Thereupon the men of Connacht from Ailill and Medb’s household, and the black exile band of the Ulaid under Fergus, went into the síd, and destroyed the fort in the síd, and took out of the síd what was in it of riches and treasures and fine things. And from the well they then brought away the crown of Brión.  That is one of the Three Wondrous Gifts of the Isle of Ériu and Fótla and Banba: namely the crown of Brión, together with the mantle of Loegaire in Armagh, and the shirt of Dunlaing in Kildare amongst the Laigin.

Nera was left with his people in the síd, his wife and his son and the remainder of his cattle, and he has not come out up until now, nor will he come out until the end of the world’s age, when fire and water overtake the face of the earth.  Though some say that Nera’s four children were the four men—Eirr and Innell, and their two charioteers Foich and Fochlam—who were the bearers and protectors of the treasures of the host of Medb and Ailill; but still others say that these four were the sons of Iriard mac Ainchinne.

And the poets who relate that the Connachta were the men of the hosts of Greece going against the Trojans, and the Trojans were the Ulaid, and that Emain Macha was Troy itself, Conchobor was Priam, Naoise was Paris Alexandros, Conall Cernach was Hector, Fergus was Aeneas, and Cú Chulainn was Troilus, so too might add that Nera mac Núatair maicc Taccáin of the Connachta and of the household retinue of Ailill, like the Greeks, was truly the Peleus amongst them, for it was his lying with the woman of the síd, as Peleus’ marriage to Thetis, that brought about the great cattle-raid of Cúailnge, and as Zeus arranged the marriage of Thetis to Peleus so as not to bring about His own downfall, so too did the King of the Síd of Cruachan set about the coupling of Nera with the woman of the síd to offset the breaking of the customs of Samain-tide by the reckless and irresponsible exercise of sovereignty by Ailill mac Máta. Thus the Adventure of Nera and the Driving of the Cattle of Aingen thus far. 

[I dedicate this tale to the memory of my good friend, Mick McCoy, who enjoyed this version of the tale very much in the year before his death in 2021.]

Does Thetis Appear in The Orphic Hymns?

One of the things which most surprised me when I began more formal and dedicated devotion to Thetis (the story of which is long and complicated!) in preparation for our divine marriage was how very little hymnody survives for her from the ancient world. I readily found the hymn in Philostratus’ Heroikos dedicated to Her–and I would recommend the entire text very highly, as it is sadly neglected amongst modern practitioners and is an important one to know!–I could have sworn back in 2020 that She appeared in The Orphic Hymns as well.

I came to find out, over the intervening years, that I was both correct and incorrect about that particular matter. As with so many issues in modern polytheism, “it’s complicated” is an understatement! 😉

My first stop in figuring out if She did appear in them was the translation of the text that is best relied upon these days, and ever since about 2014 (though it was published the year before): namely, the Athanassakis and Wolkow translation. Her name appears nowhere in this version of the hymns, though she is in the index due to being referred to in the notes on various hymns (including the ones to the Nereides, Hephaistos, Themis, Okeanos, and Proteus). This was confounding to me, and also disappointing, but clearly there was nothing to be done about it.

Then, a few years ago, I heard my friend read the “To Musaeus” at the beginning of The Orphic Hymns on his YouTube channel, The Modern Hermeticist, and Thetis is clearly mentioned in it. This was certainly a bit confusing for me, since a similar line does not appear in Athanassakis and Wolkow. The version of the hymn used is the translation by Thomas Taylor, which is undoubtedly the one most widely available, and in the longest circulation, and thus at this point the best and most commonly known.

Another translation of The Orphic Hymns became available several years back: that by Patrick Dunn and published by Llewellyn. I have enjoyed Dunn’s work very much indeed over the years, and so I was very eager to get my hands on this version, and it’s not only very good, but also to my mind entirely indispensable for modern scholars as well as practitioners, because it also includes Taylor’s translation, and the original Greek, so that all can be compared side-by-side. The original Greek clearly has Tethys, not Thetis; though, of course, these two Goddesses were sometimes confused or conflated at various points in the ancient world.

Based on the brief discussion in the comments on the above video that I had with Dr. Attrell, it appears that Taylor was highly influenced by Marsilio Ficino’s works, and that there is an understanding of Thetis as being connected with divine law at work; but this is clearly a further confusion or conflation, perhaps, not only between Thetis and Tethys, but also between Thetis and either Themis or Thesis (both of which are only one letter different from each other, and from Thetis, in both Ancient Greek and English!). I would think that both Themis and Thesis would suit Ficino’s overall philosophical aims much better than Thetis, and yet perhaps because She had Her own renown, Ficino may have used Her name and incorporated some aspects of Her activities in the Homeric epics into his conception of divine law. Themis and Thetis, after all, come together in the former’s prophecy about the latter regarding potential offspring with either Zeus or Poseidon becoming greater than the fathers.

Flash forward another year–though not for several more after that was I able to get a hold of the text’s second printing–and Sara L. Mastros also produced a version of The Orphic Hymns in her Orphic Hymns Grimoire, originally published in 2019 and then reprinted by Hadean Press in 2022. Though I have not fully worked through this text thus far, there’s much there to be enjoyed (including Brian Charles’ illustrations!), and the version of the line in the Museaus hymn referring to the Goddess-in-question is “Grandmother Sea,” which is footnoted as “Tethys” by the author. There is no index, so I am not sure if Thetis is mentioned in it elsewhere, but looking in “the usual places” has not thus far revealed Her presence therein.

Now, we come to the present day…and a further version of The Orphic Hymns is now available as well! This is the version by Tamra Lucid and Ronnie Pontiac, just published a few months ago by Inner Traditions. This is the most “modern” version, which abandons the verse forms entirely and goes as much for readability and accessibility as possible. Pontiac and Lucid were assistants to Manly P. Hall for several years toward the end of Hall’s life, and thus had access to his extensive resources, which included The Philosophical Research Society’s library, and its new editions of Thomas Taylor’s translation of The Orphic Hymns. I think it is pretty clear that this English version is the one that they worked from for their new version, because the relevant lines in the Musaeus hymn, called in this version “Friend, Use It To Prosper,” reads as follows: “Thetis veiled in the blue deep, / Mother of Achilles / and wife of Okeanos of the seven seas, / father of the Nymphs of the brine” (p. 131). The addition of the phrase about Achilleus was clearly added for context, and it is easy to see that the inclusion of Okeanos as Thetis’ husband is instead a reference to Tethys, as technically Okeanos is Thetis’ grandfather (with Okeanos and Tethys being the parents of Doris, one of the Okeanids Who was Thetis’ mother with Nereus) everywhere that this is ever mentioned in ancient literature.

[Yes: I realize that there are all sorts of local variations, and that such things are not limited to the ancient world, and that new local variants and differing traditions can occur, have already happened, and will continue to appear into the foreseeable future, and this is all FINE! The difference here, and the reason I make note of it, is because this particular doctrine is appearing in the context of a hymn which is understood to be a translation, or at very least a version, of a hymn from the ancient world, which the difference in this doctrine is hitherto unknown in otherwise, at least as far as we know currently. It would be like translating Apollodorus as giving Morpheus as the father of Orpheus with Kalliope, when this particular paternity is something which originates in Neil Gaiman and not the ancient world…and is interesting from a linguistic viewpoint, but is not based on any existing version we know from the ancient world.]

Do not mistake my pointing this out as a critique of the work of Lucid and Pontiac as-a-whole: this version is very fun, readable, and inclusive of some things that many would find extremely useful (e.g. versions of several of the “Orphic” gold leaves and bone tablets; introductory essays/chapters on a number of important contextual matters; and a very good annotated bibliography). And, in many ways, this version is a further heir to Taylor’s tradition, and its widespread knowledge and acceptance as being “the version” according to many people.

This does raise an interesting issue, however: namely, if Taylor’s version, and this latest version, are the most known and most accessible–and it seems likely that the latter will become one to rival those of Athanassakis and Wolkow (because of its academic nature), Dunn (the inclusion of Taylor and the ancient Greek will make this one too daunting to many readers), and Mastros (because no matter how useful it may be, anyone who is not a modern occultist or esoteric practitioner may simply not be aware of this version…and Lucid and Pontiac don’t appear to be, based on their bibliography), if for no other reason than its affordability in comparison to the others–then, does that mean that whether or not this is an accurate portrayal as far as ancient tradition goes, it will be the best known in the modern non-specialist imagination and thus have a “truth” that might be hard to question for some people? It’s an important question, and one that I cannot answer, since we haven’t had long enough to figure it out yet and see what the wider world thinks of such things. (And the answer is: probably very little, since such matters have not been discussed on street corners since the Italian Renaissance, and then probably only on certain streets in Florence when certain groups of people are on them!)

Thus, to try and answer the question of this post’s title in as succinct a way as possible in summary: as far as the original text goes, no; as far as the background of the text and some academic notes on it go, yes; in two popular translations of it, yes. Make of that what you will…but I still think it’s creepy that some might think Thetis is married to Her grandfather…and yet, that would not at all be entirely unusual for mortal nor divine beings in Greek narrative tradition, either.

The bibliographic references for each of the versions I’ve mentioned above is given below, and all of these are easily available from their respective publishers’ websites, as well as The Great And Borg-Like “A” which stole its name from an unsuspecting tribe of famed and fabled female fighters…you know the ones I mean. 😉

*****

Apostolos N. Athanassakis and Benjamin M. Wolkow (trans.), The Orphic Hymns (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013).

Patrick Dunn (trans.), The Orphic Hymns: A New Translation for the Occult Practitioner (Woodbury, MN: Llewellyn Publications, 2018).

Tamra Lucid and Ronnie Pontiac (trans.), The Magic of the Orphic Hymns: A New Translation for the Modern Mystic (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 2023).

Sara L. Mastros (trans.), Orphic Hymns Grimoire, illustrated by Brian Charles (Keighley, U.K.: Hadean Press Ltd., 2022).

A Long Case of Hope; Self-Fulfilling Situations…or, something like that…?!?

While what follows is not as theologically-specific as I have tended to prefer posts on here to be for the length of this blog’s life thus far, nonetheless I feel the need to share this absolute joy I have with a wider audience than the reach of some of my other online and in-person outlets…so, here we are.

We have often been taught to take synchronicities and such as signs that we are on the “path of destiny,” as it were, or that the Deities are watching over us, guiding us, and perhaps sending us various signals to encourage or console us. Certainly, I could use some consolation, as things have not been going well recently…which is another story, but we’ll leave it off for now. But, suffice it to say, when such things do occur, we often can’t help but be rather taken with them, and I am in that position.

I find that the specifics of this case are also contained in the thing itself, in some strange sort of way. As a parallel case, perhaps, though nowhere near as profound a one as this parallel I’m citing, I am reminded of the film The Language You Cry In, which is about a Gullah folk song that was recorded in the 1930s, and which turned out to be a song in the Mende dialect from Sierra Leone, specifically in the context of a song used in funeral ceremonies. All of this was traced from the Southeastern U.S. back to Africa, and the daughter of the woman who sang the song in the ’30s knew the song and still sang it and taught it to her children, and it was found that a woman who knew the song and the ritual in Sierra Leone had been told by her grandmother that she needed to know the song and the ritual because it would be how their relatives would all come together again. The song itself was a kind of gathering song to call the relatives and the Ancestors together for the occasion of marking the passing of a family member. And, the song and investigating it literally did that, allowing a Black family in the U.S. to meet some of their distant relations and members of their ancestral tribe in Africa. If you haven’t seen it, go and watch it, and be prepared to cry yourself! (And if you don’t: please, see Officer Deckard, because you may not be human!)

As stated above, this analogy is a little distorted in its implications: the situation in the film with that song involved hundreds of years of separation, thousands of miles, culture and language changes, religious changes…a lot of things working against the likelihood of those connections ever being established again. What I will outline is nothing like that, and has few wider social or historical implications for anyone other than myself, and perhaps a few people I know, which answers a question I’ve had for almost thirty years. But it has to do with music, and what is a comparative long time (more than two thirds of my life!) and also a bit of distance (3,000-ish miles, essentially).

So: let’s go back to late 1994.

I had gone from my home in Washington state to New York for college, and was away from home for the first time in any extended manner. (I had done a week or so at most away from my family up until that point.) On the high school graduation party I had, a good friend of mine tried to play me a CD that she had been enjoying, and it was not a great environment to listen to new music in and actually be able to take it in. Over the summer, another friend (all three of us–me, the first friend and the second one) would get together and do things like read poetry we’d written, sing songs, and also read tarot cards or other varieties of cartomancy) let me borrow a cassette tape that she recently acquired and had been enjoying, and I realized as I listened to it that it sounded somehow familiar, and figured out it was by the same artist as the CD that the other friend had tried to get me into at my graduation party.

That musician was Loreena McKennitt, and the cassette tape was The Mask and Mirror; the CD that my first friend had played for me was The Visit. Both are among my favorite albums of this artist until the present day…probably in the top three, at least.

One of the things I most looked forward to in going to college was, firstly, being able to be more open about my polytheistic/pagan religious practice and identity, and hopefully being able to meet others who were similarly involved. Yes, both happened, but before the thick of that really occurred (from Samain of that first year–so, 1994), something else happened: I found out Loreena McKennitt was playing in New York at Town Hall during her Mask and Mirror Tour in earlier October…so, I rode the train to the city by myself, found Town Hall, and bought a ticket for the show. My best college friend at the time (whose musical tastes I shared and we bonded over a great deal, amongst other things) came with me on the day itself, was able to get a ticket way in the back (I was in about the fifth row!), and we enjoyed the concert very much indeed! Like many relative newborns of our peculiar religions, I felt like Loreena was singing directly to me, and that the lyrics of some of her songs, like “All Souls Night,” “The Old Ways,” and “The Mystic’s Dream” (amongst others) were pretty much narrating my life in certain ways.

She also played another song I had not heard before, that was absolutely compelling. I eagerly bought all of her albums that I did not already have after the show, hoping it was on one of them.

[More happened after the show, but it’s a side story…!]

Once I listened to all of the albums, it was absolutely certain that none of the other songs on them was the song I heard.

I dutifully bought every further Loreena McKennitt release until the early 2010s, hoping that the next album may be the one that has that song on it…I couldn’t recall the tune, and only had the scraps of a few lyrics. Though I enjoyed The Book of Secrets and An Ancient Muse (and some of her other albums) during that time from 1994 until now, none of them had the song that I really hoped they would.

In the early 2010s, I was on Loreena McKennitt’s website, and saw there was an e-mail address one could write to with questions and such, and so I wrote to it and asked about the song, and said what i knew of it. It had the phrase “climbing cliffs” in the first line, the verse of which was repeated at the end of the song; and in one of the subsequent verses (it felt like it was a few verses later), the word “pagan” was also in it…the word appears in “All Souls Night” as well, but it most certainly wasn’t that.

I received a very courteous e-mail back from whomever answered it, saying that Ms. McKennitt often plays any number of other songs on a given tour’s set list that are not currently recorded, and there was no real way to know what it had been. (Doesn’t someone keep a set list for these things, I would have thought?) I somewhat gave up on ever finding it…

…which is one of many reasons why I missed her next album’s release in 2018, which is called Lost Souls. I still haven’t heard the whole thing…

…However, because I was on a bit of a kick over the last two weeks, for some unknown reason, of revisiting some of her songs (and re-using the tune of one for a devotional commission!), I had a suggestion from the YouTube algorithm for A Moveable Musical Feast, an hour-long documentary on her 2007 tour (which I was able to see a concert for…but that is, alas, another story as well!), but hadn’t watched it for nearly two weeks after its suggestion. I was able to get to it finally last night, and enjoyed revisiting that experience of fifteen years ago, when my life was in a very precarious spot (a bit like now!) and attending that concert was one of the few good things that had happened in a while.

The algorithm worked its magic once again, and suggested another video from Loreena McKennitt, which was a live performance from about five years ago, after the release of Lost Souls. The whole thing is very worth watching, as it is only her (on piano and harp), Brian Hughes (her guitarist and related strings long-time collaborator) and Hugh Marsh (her virtuoso violin/fiddle player), and really gets to the heart of so much of her music.

As I was listening to this, I didn’t know the first two songs–I heard many of the familiar notes and structures, as it were, of other songs in Loreena’s repertoire, and essentially liked these songs immediately even though I didn’t know their contents or titles.

Then the third song came up, and like the previous two, I liked what I heard with the instrumental introductions, but something felt really familiar about it. Then the first line was sung: “Ancient castles and climbing cliffs.” My jaw dropped because I was, perhaps, hearing that song from almost thirty years ago again for the first time since. I listened on, and in the first line of the second verse, she sings:

What pagan smile has touched your lips
What melody so sweet
Soothed your breast, your beating heart
The underworld gone to sleep

THIS WAS THE SONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not only were those particular lyrics, of which I only remembered one word (!?!), rather poignant in themselves and to the situation in which I rediscovered this, but the whole song’s title as well almost predicted how it would entrance me for two-thirds of my life up until now and yet be out-of-reach and inaccessible…until almost 25 years later, had I been paying better attention, but instead it was 30 years later that I learned the song is called: “Ages Past, Ages Hence.”

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I mean: she may as well have sung:

You’ll forget what this song sounds like

Only recall a few words or so

Search in vain for the name of it

Buy all my albums ‘cause you’ll want to know…

So, here I am, it’s just another Thursday afternoon, and little did I know at this time yesterday that later in the evening, I would actually accomplish one of my major “life quests,” as it were, almost entirely by accident!

I would like to thank Loreena McKennitt for making this music, and the quest for it, possible; but also my friends Kathryn Heltsley and Jenn Ryan for introducing me to her music; Jan Bratslavsky for going with me to her concert and hearing this song all that time ago; and Dver for helping give me the final push that ultimately lead me to this rediscovery!

And to all of the Deities responsible for music and inspiration, of course!

Important Survey on Pagan Apocalypticism!

As I have written about this topic relatively recently (only a few posts back, even though it was several months ago…!?!), I thought that some of you regular readers might find this interesting, if you have not seen it elsewhere yet.

Dr. Angela Puca, of the YouTube channel Angela’s Symposium (which you should totally subscribe to if you haven’t already!), is running a survey on Pagan Apocalypticism for a paper she’ll be giving at Cambridge this Fall. I would encourage any of you reading this who identify as pagans or polytheists and who also have eschatological/apocalyptic beliefs, ideas, or such ideas hold an importance in your practices in any fashion (e.g. you do cultus with Deities that are said to be involved in or Who will survive Ragnarok; if you’re a Thelemite who is down with the Aeon of Horus; you’re an Earth Spirituality person who is concerned with the Sixth Great Extinction and the threats of global climate change; or even if you’re a New Age person who likes the ideas of the Age of Aquarius…amongst other possibilities!), to go and fill that out. It won’t take you very long, and gaining an understanding of this is really essential, I think.

So, go forth and fill out surveys, my friends! 🙂

Why aren’t you against organized religion?

It’s been a little while since I made a new post here, and I thought I would tackle a particular issue that might need some disentangling in order to better understand it.

It’s not only common, it’s downright trendy to say that one is against “organized religion.” Statements like this reflect the desire on the part of those who say them to still place some relative value on certain aspects of religion-in-general, while condemning the institutional offenses, excesses, and other corruptions which are perceived in our modern, capitalist, corporatist society to be somewhat inherent to organizations of all sorts. And yet, if we look a bit more closely, and use our discernment (which is not just a cognitive tool that is useful for determining whether a spiritual experience is true, valid, has wider implications and applications than one’s own life, and so forth), we can perhaps see that there are more issues at stake here which need further disentangling.

I would begin by saying that “religion,” understood in the construction I have given many times before (and if you need a refresher on that, please feel free to ask in the comments!), is the systematization of articulations of experiential divine realities, must of necessity be organized. If it is not, it is incoherent, messy, prone to inconsistencies and fallacies and errors of self-contradiction (which cannot be waved away with the quote from Walt Whitman that one “contains multitudes”!). What was mentioned in the previous paragraph, however, is true: that just like any corporate body in our modern capitalist and corporatist society, institutions are prone to corruption of all sorts.

Thus, what is at stake here is really not the organization (nor lack thereof) of a given religion, but instead the institutionalization of it. Anything that has been institutionalized is prone to be of a corporate structure, and such structures are only interested in three things: 1) maintaining themselves and ensuring their continuation at all costs; 2) maintaining as much power as possible both over their own members as well as more widely in terms of their influence; and 3) in combination with these other two maintenance priorities, also to increase in profits and money, generally only to the benefit of those who are the top of the institutional hierarchy. As has often been quipped, “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” and “money is the root of all evil,” and to whatever degree either of these statements are true, they certainly have had an impact when both come together in the context of a religious organization, no matter how small its money and influence reserves might be.

Just as a test case where such matters are concerned: if there is any kind of religious ceremony in a given religion which is solely, primarily, or largely focused on the continuation of the institution or positions within it, and only occasionally acknowledges whatever larger religious reality the group is oriented towards, then this is a diagnostic tool via which one can determine if a religious group is in fact institutionalized, whether or not anyone else has heard of it or if it has a large bank account or any property holdings. In groups I used to be a part of, such things exist, and the groups-in-question are still going; and yet, do you hear much (if anything) about what their practices are, what they have accomplished, or how they have impacted the lives of those involved with them? Have they produced anything? How accessible are they to people outside of their immediate membership? How many people even know they exist? The answer to these questions are all pretty limited in the case of said groups. When the concern is the group itself, the people and the positions they hold, this is the danger, rather than the Deities to Whom such groups are devoted and the practices which enact and increase that devotion.

So, if one were to instead clarify that one is against institutionalized religion, I would certainly agree.

We see in this that, just as the atheist critique of “religion” is really about the excesses of monotheistic religions (whether institutionalized or not), and the spirituality enthusiast’s critique of “religion” is likewise about the excesses of institutionalized monotheism, those who critique the existence of organized religions are actually very often critiquing monotheism and monotheistic religion’s institutionalization of their monotheist principles, rather than organized religion as such, or religion-in-general. In monotheism’s insistence that there is only one Deity, there is often the corollary that there is only one way to be properly devoted to that Deity, and then institutionalization of those principles leads to the excessive competitiveness of these religions, the cutthroat nature of some of their institutional practices (as opposed to their religious practices or spiritual practices…although some of these can also reflect that, e.g. dealing with any spiritual or divine beings outside of their acceptable framework with exorcism and other such adversarial approaches), and the protection of the institution and the leadership and their unassailable reputations at the expense of the safety of its members, the discouragement of questioning of doctrines as equally as the decisions of its hierarchs, and the suppression of all dissent within the ranks on either questions of doctrine or of authority and institutional procedure, and so forth. Most of these excesses are simply an extension of the operating principles of monotheism and its assumptions.

I would grant that in the case of the Roman Imperial Cult, some elements of this were present in certain cases, which we cannot extricate from the fact that the Roman Imperial State was an authoritarian regime with a single head of all affairs in whom was invested near-absolute power. We can also not separate the rise of the Roman Empire outside of a context in which there was political dissension, a recent civil war, and the threat of revolt in many of the recently-conquered provinces. The opposition that Christianity received was more a matter of politics than of religion, because to the Roman mind, it implied rebellion and resistance to the unquestioned rule and sovereignty of the Emperor to acknowledge any other being as one’s Lord, Savior, and King (i.e. Messiah). When the polytheistic religions and the Roman Imperial State were eradicated, however, Christianity was very quick to adopt most of those negative tendencies and make them its own, and then redeploy them against everyone quite immediately.

While much more could be said about all of these things, let’s leave it at this for now: the tendency for corporatist institutional power to be perpetuated in particular ways which promote absolutism, unquestioned loyalty, authoritarian tendencies, and a greater concern over institutional duty rather than upholding the ethics taught by the organization as adjuncts to its religious, spiritual, and/or devotional purposes is more a function of how those institutions are formed and operated rather than a question of the quality of the religions involved; though, certain preferences in monotheism appear to lead in particular directions which are then tied into how organized forms of these faiths become excessive in specific ways they are structured and operated.

Or, at least that’s how I see it at present.