Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Path of the Witch

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Rudas Starblaze
    ok seriously. when are you gonna put away the wiccan crack pipe?
    If you have no other argument than insulting slander, why should I bother responding to you at all?

    You aren't attempting to engage in reasoned discourse here, but using persuasion on the basis of innuendo, implying that I am some kind of unreasoned adherent to some outdated conception, rather than basing my conclusions on examination of the sources themselves.

    As I indicated, my conclusions are based upon an examination of sources which will appear in my upcoming book. It is not based upon stereotype, but an examination of the word "wicca" as it appears in an Old English (Anglo-Saxon) context.

    So unless you have something more substantial to say than merely trying to manipulate stereotypes based on what's "in", we literally have nothing to say to each other, no offense. I do not base what I say upon what's "in" or what's "popular" to say presently in the Wiccan or Pagan community, but rather upon a studied consideration of the matter at hand.
    I Fight The Backlash and Put It In Its Place!

    *****

    "There was an old ideal, "The truth shall prevail." But the modern ideal seems to be, "See that the truth shall be unknown, so that it may not prevail."" -- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Carla O'Harris
      If you have no other argument than insulting slander, why should I bother responding to you at all?

      You aren't attempting to engage in reasoned discourse here, but using persuasion on the basis of innuendo, implying that I am some kind of unreasoned adherent to some outdated conception, rather than basing my conclusions on examination of the sources themselves.

      As I indicated, my conclusions are based upon an examination of sources which will appear in my upcoming book. It is not based upon stereotype, but an examination of the word "wicca" as it appears in an Old English (Anglo-Saxon) context.

      So unless you have something more substantial to say than merely trying to manipulate stereotypes based on what's "in", we literally have nothing to say to each other, no offense. I do not base what I say upon what's "in" or what's "popular" to say presently in the Wiccan or Pagan community, but rather upon a studied consideration of the matter at hand.

      just what i was waiting for from you. your confusion of the word "witch" with "wicca". you do realize that wicca is a "white lighter" term brought on far later in attempts to make the term witch sound less offensive dont you? no offense, but i as well as several other members have noticed that you are trying to turn the term "witch" into the term "wicca" which if you ever payed close attention to your studies you would notice they are two very, very different concepts.

      im a witch, not a wiccan, and damn proud of it.

      Comment


      • #33
        I do pay attention to my studies. What you might pay attention to is the fact that the word "witch" descends from wicca/wicce, period. Therefore, the connotations of the Anglo-Saxon wicca/wicce are of prime importance.

        You are assuming that I am graphing the "Wica" of Gardner's experience onto all previous practitioners. That is an incorrect assumption. The usage of the word "witch" post-Anglo-Saxon times does take on a far more sinister character, as a result of a mainly positive ambivalence being tilted and twisted into a slanderous representation equivalent to monstrous bloodsuckers by the Church.

        I do not claim that the preChristian wicca/wicce practiced Gardner's cult. I do claim that they were seen as spiritual teachers and held a high status, which is based on examination of the documents independently of Gardner. Once such an independent examination has been done, comparisons between the original situation and Gardner's situation may be conducted to see how much they have in common.
        I Fight The Backlash and Put It In Its Place!

        *****

        "There was an old ideal, "The truth shall prevail." But the modern ideal seems to be, "See that the truth shall be unknown, so that it may not prevail."" -- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

        Comment


        • #34
          Doreen Vialiente wrote an article wrote an article on the 'derivation of the word witch' which i think is interesting, i think she concludes that Wicca never meant 'wise person', i'm not sure if that helps anyone, but she did know Gardner (and therefore she's probably more knowledgable about Wicca and other things than anyone on the internet or off).

          Comment


          • #35
            It's probably cognate with wig, meaning "sacred", and by derivation, an "idol". It is an inflection of "weoh" (Icelandic "ve"), "unspeakably holy or awe-inspiring".
            I Fight The Backlash and Put It In Its Place!

            *****

            "There was an old ideal, "The truth shall prevail." But the modern ideal seems to be, "See that the truth shall be unknown, so that it may not prevail."" -- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Carla O'Harris
              I do pay attention to my studies. What you might pay attention to is the fact that the word "witch" descends from wicca/wicce, period. Therefore, the connotations of the Anglo-Saxon wicca/wicce are of prime importance.

              You are assuming that I am graphing the "Wica" of Gardner's experience onto all previous practitioners. That is an incorrect assumption. The usage of the word "witch" post-Anglo-Saxon times does take on a far more sinister character, as a result of a mainly positive ambivalence being tilted and twisted into a slanderous representation equivalent to monstrous bloodsuckers by the Church.

              I do not claim that the preChristian wicca/wicce practiced Gardner's cult. I do claim that they were seen as spiritual teachers and held a high status, which is based on examination of the documents independently of Gardner. Once such an independent examination has been done, comparisons between the original situation and Gardner's situation may be conducted to see how much they have in common.

              the terms "wicca" and "wicce" are gender definitions (male and female) for witches used slightly before Gerald Gardner (as in possibly 100 to 200 years ago). to prove the terms "wicca/wica" or "wicce/wice" are older then the term "witch", even in the anglo-saxon culture, you will have to have solid, un-disputable references to books that were written pre-Gardarian, as in atleast 100 to 300 years old if not older. the King James version of the bible used the term "witch" several times over and never once mentioned the terms "wicca" or "wicce" and that version was completed and released in 1612. not to mention very few people could even read or write 150 years ago unless their families had money and could afford an education, even father back then that was even worse. quite typically witches were outcasts of society and being away from society greatly limited ones chance of obtaining an education. spells were chanted in ryhmes for a reason, because they were easier to remember for a person who couldnt read or write. so im interested in where exactly you recieved your information and the references to the book you claim to be writting.

              ETA: and not to mention the "keep silent" code of the witches which used to mean "dont tell anyone the secrets of your craft period" in loosly put modern terms. so why would any true witch of old even think about writting something (if they could) that would incriminate themselves if found by witch hunters?
              Last edited by Rudas Starblaze; August 8th, 2006, 12:20 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Dear Sir,

                I really don't mean to embarass you, but you might want to look at what you're saying a little closer. When I say "Anglo-Saxon", I am not using it in the loose way it is sometimes referred to in modern times to mean anything English. I am referring to Anglo-Saxon Germanic tribes who still spoke the language Anglo-Saxon, sometimes referred to as "Old English", which is a Germanic language that has very little in common with our modern English or even the English of the 1400's or 1600's. When I say there are Anglo-Saxon documents, I am discussing documents written in the time period from about 800 to 1100 A.D., far in advance of the witch-hunt days, and far, far in advance of Gardner.

                I am not presently discussing what the words "Wicca/Wicce" meant to Gardner. I am discussing what these words meant to the natives who created/inherited these words. So while it may look like we're having an argument, we're actually discussing two very different and widely separated historical periods. I'm sorry if there was confusion in that regard.
                I Fight The Backlash and Put It In Its Place!

                *****

                "There was an old ideal, "The truth shall prevail." But the modern ideal seems to be, "See that the truth shall be unknown, so that it may not prevail."" -- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Carla O'Harris
                  I am not presently discussing what the words "Wicca/Wicce" meant to Gardner. I am discussing what these words meant to the natives who created/inherited these words. So while it may look like we're having an argument, we're actually discussing two very different and widely separated historical periods. I'm sorry if there was confusion in that regard.
                  I didn't get this either about your first post until your second post, and assumed at first that you were using witch as a blanket statement for all magical practioners before the advent of Christianity, as it is now common to use the term for generic magical practioners.

                  After you clarified, then I understood that we were dealing with a semantic issue as you were referring to it in a specific time and place in it's original context.

                  I think there is some debate about this, yes? I've seen a lot of translations for the word weg or wig, and each one seems to contradict itself?? The most recent that I've read about translates it to be the ancestor of "awaken" or "wake." It's been confusing me lately, so if you could point me in the direction of some alternate resources, I would be appreciative.

                  It makes me wonder why the term was demonized then?? Is it only mistranslation and the subsequent advent of Christianity, or was it something else? Now, I'm just blabbing to myself, so everyone can feel free to ignore me.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    While there is some difference of opinion about the exact root, what is not at issue are the written contexts where we find the word, which are open to analysis and examination to determine their context. In those writings, witches are connected with ritual activity at wells and groves, referred to as teachers, compared to the Magi, and associated with the summoning of spirits.

                    The older opinion was that the root of wicca\wicce was from a form meaning "to bend" --- essentially the root of the word "wicker".

                    The stronger of the newer opinions is that it comes from wig \ weoh --- unspeakably holy --- and cognate with Old Norse ve, which means the same thing but also refers to the holy grounds of the temple district and grove.

                    As it turns out, both may be correct, as wicker may have been used to designate out the holy grounds.

                    The term was demonized because of the connection between pagan-spirituality and witches, making witches effectively the only remaining priestesses of the preChristian religions, and therefore direct competitors.
                    I Fight The Backlash and Put It In Its Place!

                    *****

                    "There was an old ideal, "The truth shall prevail." But the modern ideal seems to be, "See that the truth shall be unknown, so that it may not prevail."" -- Gerald Gardner, The Meaning of Witchcraft

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Carla O'Harris
                      Dear Sir,

                      I really don't mean to embarass you, but you might want to look at what you're saying a little closer. When I say "Anglo-Saxon", I am not using it in the loose way it is sometimes referred to in modern times to mean anything English. I am referring to Anglo-Saxon Germanic tribes who still spoke the language Anglo-Saxon, sometimes referred to as "Old English", which is a Germanic language that has very little in common with our modern English or even the English of the 1400's or 1600's. When I say there are Anglo-Saxon documents, I am discussing documents written in the time period from about 800 to 1100 A.D., far in advance of the witch-hunt days, and far, far in advance of Gardner.

                      I am not presently discussing what the words "Wicca/Wicce" meant to Gardner. I am discussing what these words meant to the natives who created/inherited these words. So while it may look like we're having an argument, we're actually discussing two very different and widely separated historical periods. I'm sorry if there was confusion in that regard.
                      so really your just using the Germanic Anglo-Saxon spelling "wicca/wicce" with out the translation to "witch" (also leaving out accent/dialect differentials). i get ya. but im still interested in where you get your information that witches had a positive connotation. from what i understand, animal and human sacrifices to their deities was a common practice in the Anglo-Saxon witchcraft traditions. which i understand completely was a good thing to them (and me), but to other beliefs and cultures at the time and to todays standards was not a good thing. *shugs* i dunno, unless you post some links to credible resorces from which you get your info........

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X