Dear all
I could add that although to self identify as a 'witch' or 'pagan'
seems to be mainly a characteristic of the moderns -
there were supposedly 'intellectual pagans' a long time ago in the classical
world. Ie well educated young men and women who engaged in a personal form
of pagan religion in which they often had a personal calling or revelation
of a god or goddess. Their personal version of the god's myth (for example
Mandulis) often doesn't fit with the known mythology of that god - its very
personal to them.
In a way it would be strange if someone wanted to self identify as a witch
before modernism - who would willingly take on the role of victim? But for
us moderns 'reclaiming' negative terms such as 'queer' etc has become a bit
of a habit.
On the bias towards textual evidence - I know one contemporary cunning man
who feels that it is used too selectively - ie an absence in the textual
record is supposed to mean the phenemenon didn't exists before that time eg:
the padstow hobby oss - supposedly doesn't exist before the written attempts
to have it banned! But when dealing with more recent events - absence of
written evidence seems to cause fewer problems.
'love and do what you will'
mogg
: ) .....................................: )
Mandrake.uk.net
Publishers
PO Box 250, Oxford, OX1 1AP
+44 1865 243671
homepage: <http://www.mandrake.uk.net>
Blogs =
http://mogg-morgan.blogspot.com
http://mandox.blogspot.com
secure page for credit card <http://www.mandrake.uk.net/books.htm>
|