 |
 |
hi Francis i'd say that the Murray comment is a judgment- not that she was s student of mythology, but that MG thinks she was a myth-maker: there is plenty to support this, including a very neat demolition job of her methodology and hugely seelctive quotation of sources that some scholars from the folklore society published a while ago, i think the title was 'Margaret Murray- who beleived her and why?' No idea about the Gardner comment- although GG was a huge self-publicist i'd expect him to veer more towards proclaiming himself current (at the time) custodian of ancient traditions (a la Murray) Conflation- the Hutton and Lurhmann titles both include crossover material, which might be why they are in the mix hope that is at least some help Dave Evans ---------- Original Message ----------- From: Francis <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 10:48:32 +0100 Subject: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Gaskill 2010 : Witchcraft > I'd be very grateful for help in dealing with these queries arisingfrom my study of Gaskill's 2010 book on Witchcraft. > > [1] On page 24, Margaret Murray is referred to as 'the mythologistMargaret Murray'. This is the only time I've come across thisattribution. Does it occur anywhere else? > > [2] The caption to the illustration on page 114 describes GeraldGardner as the 'self-proclaimed father of modern paganism'. I'vefound nothing like this is anything I've read by him or about him.Have I missed something? > > [3] On page 137, in the last section of the Further Reading, RonaldHutton's Triumph of the Moon is listed among the titles 'Foroccultism:'. The following three titles (Luhrmann 1989, Berger 1999,Adler 1986) all relate to Wicca. Is it usual to conflate Wicca andoccultism? > > Help that comes my way will be gratefully received and properlyacknowledged. > > Francis Cameron, Oxford ------- End of Original Message -------