False Claims about "Pagans and Witch Hunts"
I am going to just get right to it here. While I am clearly not such a thing as a Christian, it is our responsibility to speak truthfully of what is factual and what has simply been fabricated for any number of claimed, and often unjustifiable reasons.
Like many, I see the same regurgitated nonsense over and over again and have collected an assortment of them to respond to for the sake of simplicity, many things I also assumed at one point, or another, till I actually did more than study (which often terms into self-indoctrination) and did real investigative research (research meaning look again).
Many of you may encounter such things or have been raised with such assumptions, yet most of them are erroneous, false, or simply made up with no factual basis behind such claims. This is where I will get a bid nerdy at times with specific details. Some things will seem repetitious; however, they are simply showing how such things are interconnected and how they related to and challenge various fallacies.
Claim: The Nordic peoples of the pre-Christian period tended to believe that the god(s) that you worship is/was tied in many ways to where you were geographically.
Response: This is a blatant lie. It's simply adding "Nordic" and then distorting the fact it was taken from Pascal’s Wager, by Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) suggests that belief in God can be rationalized based on geographical and cultural contexts, as it posits that individuals engage in a life-defining gamble regarding the existence of God.
This argument implies a connection between belief and geographical location, as it emphasizes the potential benefits of believing in God, regardless of its existence.
Claim: Most of the 'Christian' Holidays essentially renamed Pagan traditions.
Response: This is false. This was a particular claim among Protestant critics of Catholicism and was later popularized in the 19th century. Paul Ernst Jablonski (18th century) is among the earliest named individuals to explicitly link a major Christian holiday (Christmas) to Pagan festivals in a scholarly context, laying groundwork for the broader claim.
However, Alexander Hislop (1853) is more closely associated with the comprehensive assertion that "most" Christian holidays (Christmas, Easter, etc.) are renamed Pagan traditions. So called Neo Pagans as a movement rather than a specific religious identity simply hijacked this to justify their various other actions and claims as a criticism of Christianity and so-called Abrahamic Monotheism in a more generalized sense after the 1950s.
The claim that "most Christian holidays are essentially renamed Pagan traditions" is often criticized for oversimplification and historical inaccuracies. Here are some fallacies and issues associated with this claim:
1. Conflation of Borrowings with Origins
While some Christian holidays may incorporate elements from pre-Christian traditions, this does not mean they are direct acts of renaming or appropriations.
For example, Christmas and Easter have distinct theological origins tied to the birth and resurrection of Jesus Christ, even if certain customs (like Christmas trees or Easter eggs) have older, non-Christian roots.
There is no evidence of the claim that made by a single source (Bede, Anglo Saxon/English Monk) that Easter was actually a holiday to some female deity named Ostara among the Saxons or anyone else, especially from the fact that ostara is a plural derived from such as Danish sostara, singular sostar, and its related terms which is where the words as sister and sisters come from. There are many such claims in his works that have no prior source support or records in literature or archeology. All the rest that has been spun around this fiction largely occurred in the 19th through 20th centuries CE.
2. Overgeneralization
The term "Pagan" encompasses a wide variety of pre-Christian religions and practices, making it overly broad. Claiming that all Christian holidays are derived from "Pagan" traditions ignores the diversity and complexity of both Pagan and Christian practices.
3. Chronological Fallacy
Some claims about Christian holidays being derived from Pagan ones are based on weak or speculative historical evidence. For instance, the association of Christmas with the Roman festival of Saturnalia is debated, as the two celebrations differ significantly in purpose and timing.
4. Intentionality Fallacy
The idea that Christians "stole" Pagan traditions assumes intent to appropriate, which is not always supported by historical evidence. In many cases, the adoption of certain customs was more about cultural adaptation and integration rather than deliberate replacement.
5. Cultural Context
Many Christian holidays were established independently of Pagan traditions, with their own theological and liturgical significance. For example, the date of Christmas (December 25) was chosen based on theological symbolism, such as its proximity to the winter solstice, which was seen as a metaphor for the "light of Christ" entering the world.
These critiques highlight the need for a nuanced understanding of the historical and cultural development of religious holidays.
Claim: Pagan just means Country Dweller or Non-Christian and represents the pastoral pre-Christian religions and cultures later to be displaced by Christianity.
Response: This is misleading and false simultaneously.
The earliest scholarly attempt to link paganus to "country dweller" has been heavily obscured, such as when various sources like the Edict of Thessalonica in 380 CE, which established Christianity as the state religion is mentioned, does not actually the term "pagan/paganus" was not explicitly used.
Instead, a combined set of terms as Pagan Heathens developed later from various Catholic and Christian sources in condemnation of anything "not Christian," further demonstrating the claims are largely false and used out of habit than fact from various academic circles.
The word paganus was first used in classical Latin to mean "villager" as a servant of the Roman empire, derived from pagus, from the root pag- bound/fastened/fixed/established, and the source of the word page, having been written in Medieval Latin as pagius (servant).
Page (as in a servant or attendant) was carried over from Old French page, which referred to a young servant or attendant, evolved through Late Old to early Middle French pagene (bound one) and later Latin pagina which some Elglish sources chose to rewrite as paganus and pagani.
The earliest explicit discussions of this meaning in English likely appear in 17th-century lexicography or works like those of John Toland, but no definitive "first" source is documented. Modern references, such as the Oxford English Dictionary and scholars like Peter Brown, codify this understanding without attributing an originator and tend to overlook key and obvious points as previously made and confuse figurative usage with literal meaning.
Modern "Neo Pagans" began to gain prominence in the mid-20th century, particularly in the 1940s and 1950s, with the rise of modern Pagan movements like Wica (later misspelled as Wicca).
Gerald Gardner, often considered the founder of Wica (through it was actually low ranking English Rosicrucian members that created a "private cult" he was "initiated into and then managed to take over," used the term to describe contemporary spiritual practices inspired by alleged pre-Christian traditions on one hand, but largely derived his foundations from period English occultists and included Thelema as a base, and things like Kabballah and French "spell books" with concepts of nudism mixed in with superficial and external observations of practices like Voodoo, and slapped a superficial, primarily Greek, and English folklore spin for the superficial trappings.
By the 1960s and 1970s, the term "Neo-Pagan" became more widely recognized, especially within the American counterculture movement.
Groups like the Church of All Worlds (founded in 1967) and other organizations began to embrace the term to distinguish their modern interpretations of Paganism from historical practices while others yet still chose heathen to get away from the hippy like and overly feminized fluffy bunny jargon.
Claim: Behind every "god" is "the Goddess."
Responses: The claim that "Behind every 'god' is 'the Goddess'" can be critiqued as a fallacy for several reasons, depending on the context in which it is presented. Here are some potential issues with this assertion pulling from anti-male extremist feminist-based occultism. Let's address the fallacies and then these extremist feminist influences without going too deep into that insane and twisted rabbit hole.
1. Reductionist Fallacy
This claim oversimplifies the diversity of religious and mythological systems by imposing a universal framework where all male deities are subordinate to or derived from a female deity. It disregards the unique characteristics and roles of gods and goddesses in various traditions.
2. Cultural Appropriation
By asserting a universal "Goddess" behind all gods, this perspective risks erasing the cultural and historical contexts of individual deities. It imposes a monolithic interpretation that may not align with the beliefs of the cultures from which these deities originate.
3. False Universality
The idea assumes that all religious systems share a common structure or hierarchy involving a supreme Goddess, which is not supported by evidence. Many traditions, such as monotheistic religions, explicitly reject the concept of a Goddess altogether.
4. Logical Inconsistency
If every god is derived from a Goddess, it raises questions about the origins of the Goddess herself. This can lead to circular reasoning or an infinite regress, where the claim fails to provide a coherent explanation for the ultimate source of divinity.
5. Empirical Challenge
There is no empirical evidence to support the claim that all gods are derived from a single Goddess. This makes it a speculative assertion rather than a demonstrable fact.
6. Theological Exclusivity
This claim may conflict with the beliefs of certain religious traditions that emphasize the independence or supremacy of male deities, or that do not include a Goddess figure at all.
These critiques highlight the complexities and potential pitfalls of making broad, universal claims about the nature of divinity without proper citations, the same as claiming all deities are one deity.
Key Influences:
Spiritualism: In the 19th century, Spiritualism—a belief in communicating with spirits—provided women with a platform for public speaking and leadership. Figures like Victoria Woodhull, a suffragette and Spiritualist, used her beliefs to advocate for women's rights, including suffrage and "free love." She was famously branded "Mrs. Satan" in a political cartoon for her radical views.
Theosophy: Founded by Helena Blavatsky in the late 19th century, Theosophy combined Eastern and Western spiritual traditions. It emphasized universal brotherhood and equality, inspiring feminist ideals of sisterhood exclusivity and empowerment over a fictional globalist patriarchy.
Paganism and Witches Crafts: Modern feminist movements often embrace "Pagan" and so-called "witchcraft" traditions, reclaiming symbols of female power, autonomy and superiority, including imposing false, invented history. The phrase “We are the granddaughters of the witches you couldn’t burn” highlights this connection and assumes only women were victims perpetuating the "more persecuted than thou perpetual victim complex."
Occult Feminism: Some feminist thinkers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries explored occult practices to challenge "patriarchal structures" to the extreme slant of being anti-male. Esoteric rituals and symbols were used to "reclaim female agency and autonomy" as if it didn't already exist, and challenge societal norms (often pushing conversion of girls and women into lesbians in renunciation of men all together and the whole men bad/women good rhetoric).
Claim: All gods and goddesses are expressions of One Source as aspects of itself through the various departments of reality and nature as a whole.
Responses: That only applies if you assume a twofold mix of monotheism with loose concepts of monism and pantheism. To address Pantheism (all one Deity) that all things are one deity as its manifest body and essence, collapses the distinction between human and non-human and essence with a deity indistinctly. Monism (Oneness) breaks down into various kinds of monism:
Priority monism states that all existing things go back to a source that is distinct from them.
In this view only the One is ontologically fundamental or prior to everything else.
Existence monism posits that, strictly speaking, there exists only a single thing, the universe, which can only be artificially and arbitrarily divided into many things.
Substance monism asserts that a variety of existing things can be explained in terms of a single reality or substance.
Substance monism posits that only one kind of substance exists, although many things may be made up of this substance, e.g., matter or mind.
Bipolar (Dual Aspect) monism is the view that the mental and the physical are two aspects of, or perspectives on, the same substance.
Neutral monism believes the fundamental nature of reality to be neither mental nor physical; in other words, it is "neutral".
Fallacies of these concepts:
1. Priority Monism
Fallacy of Overgeneralization: Assuming that all existing things must necessarily depend on a single source oversimplifies the complexity of relationships and interactions in the universe.
Problem of Dependence: Critics argue that the notion of "dependence" is vague and may not adequately explain how distinct entities relate to the "One."
Empirical Challenge: There is little empirical evidence to support the claim that all things trace back to a single, distinct source.
2. Existence Monism
Arbitrariness Fallacy: The claim that divisions within the universe are "artificial" or "arbitrary" can be seen as subjective and dismissive of observable distinctions.
Reductionism Critique: Critics argue that reducing all existence to a single entity (the universe) ignores the diversity and individuality of phenomena.
Practical Irrelevance: This view may lack practical applicability, as it does not account for the functional separations we observe in reality.
3. Substance Monism
Circular Reasoning: The assertion that all things can be explained by a single substance may rely on circular logic, assuming what it seeks to prove.
Lack of Specificity: Critics point out that defining "substance" broadly (e.g., matter or mind) makes the concept too vague to be meaningful.
Incompatibility with Dualism: This view struggles to address phenomena that seem to require dualistic explanations, such as the interaction between mind and body.
4. Bipolar (Dual Aspect) Monism
Category Error: Treating the mental and physical as "aspects" of the same substance may conflate fundamentally different categories of existence.
Explanatory Gap: Critics argue that this view does not adequately explain how mental and physical aspects interact or coexist within the same substance.
Empirical Limitations: There is limited empirical evidence to support the claim that mental and physical phenomena are merely perspectives on the same underlying reality.
5. Neutral Monism
Ambiguity Fallacy: The idea that reality is "neutral" (neither mental nor physical) is often criticized for being too abstract and lacking clear definition.
Problem of Emergence: Critics question how mental and physical phenomena emerge from a neutral foundation without invoking dualistic explanations.
Verification Challenge: This view is difficult to test or verify empirically, making it more of a philosophical hypothesis than a scientifically grounded theory.
Cultural Appropriation
By asserting that all deities are manifestations of one deity, this view risks erasing the cultural and historical contexts of polytheistic traditions. It can be seen as imposing a monotheistic framework onto polytheistic beliefs, which may not align with their original intent.
False Equivalence
The idea assumes that all deities share the same essence or purpose, which may not be true. For example, the gods of Norse mythology, Hinduism, and Greek mythology have distinct characteristics and roles that do not necessarily align with a singular divine entity.
Logical Inconsistency
If all deities are one, it raises questions about the contradictions in their attributes and actions. For instance, how can a deity associate with war and destruction be the same as one associated with peace and creation?
Theological Exclusivity
This concept may conflict with the beliefs of certain religious traditions that explicitly reject the idea of a singular deity or divine unity. For example, many polytheistic religions view their gods as independent and distinct beings.
Empirical Challenge
There is no empirical evidence to support the claim that all deities are manifestations of one deity. This makes it a matter of faith or philosophical speculation rather than a demonstrable fact.
Wicans and Culture Appropriation
Wicans vocally condemn cultural appropriation, decrying the misuse of cultural elements by outsiders, yet they incorporate aspects of various cultural traditions into their rituals, often without deep understanding, historical context, or permission from the originating cultures.
This hypocrisy manifests as a glaring double standard:
Wicans (and those that call themselves Pagans and Heathens) criticize others for borrowing cultural practices while freely blending these diverse traditions into their eclectic spiritual framework, frequently ignoring the cultural significance or sacredness of the elements they adopt.
This contradiction reveals a lack of self-awareness or consistency and reflects a broader issue in modern spirituality, where the allure of eclectic, "universal" practices clash with demands for cultural sensitivity, exposing a tension between personal spiritual exploration and respect for cultural boundaries.
Examples of Appropriated Cultural Elements in Wican Practices:
Native American Spirituality:
Smudging ceremonies, using sage or other herbs, often performed without tribal context or training.
Dreamcatchers, adopted as spiritual tools despite their specific Ojibwe origins and significance.
African Traditions:
Ritual drumming, mimicking African ceremonial rhythms without understanding their cultural or spiritual roles.
Invocation of African deities or spirits, such as those from Yoruba traditions, often divorced from their original religious frameworks.
Eastern Philosophies:
Chakra systems, integrated into Wican energy work without grounding in Hindu or Buddhist cosmology.
Meditation practices, borrowed from traditions like Zen or Tibetan Buddhism, often stripped of their doctrinal roots.
Other Examples of Hypocrisy
Many Wicans and Heathens, as if they have some sort of exclusive right to such titles and words, which they do not, push a narrative of reclamation, seeking to purge the title "Witch" of its negative historical associations—such as accusations of evil, devil-worship, or malice—by framing it as a symbol of empowerment, spiritual wisdom, and connection to nature.
They emphasize the Witch as a positive, often feminine archetype, celebrating its revival in modern paganism.
However, these same groups frequently disregard similar efforts to reclaim or redefine the title "Warlock," which historically carries negative connotations of oath-breaking, sorcery, or betrayal, particularly in European folklore.
This selective reclamation betrays an underlying extremist toxic feminist misandry, as the focus on uplifting "Witch" (often tied to female practitioners) dismisses or vilifies "Warlock" (commonly associated with male practitioners), perpetuating a gendered double standard that marginalizes men in these spiritual communities.
This hypocrisy reinforces a narrative that prioritizes feminist empowerment while ignoring or demonizing masculine spiritual identities, revealing a bias that undermines the inclusive ethos many Wicans and Heathens claim to uphold.
Examples of Selective Reclamation and Misandrist Bias:
Reclamation of "Witch":
Wicans and Heathens promote "Witch" as a term of feminine strength, citing historical witch hunts as patriarchal oppression, and use it in rituals, covens, and public advocacy to signify healing and empowerment.
Workshops, books, and festivals (e.g., "Witchcamp" or "Reclaiming Tradition" events) center on redefining "Witch" as a feminist symbol, often excluding or downplaying male practitioners’ experiences.
Neglect of "Warlock":
"Warlock" is rarely reclaimed or redefined in Wican or Heathen circles, often left to retain its negative folklore associations (e.g., a traitor or malevolent sorcerer) without efforts to explore its potential as a positive masculine archetype.
Male practitioners are frequently encouraged to adopt "Witch" or neutral terms like "pagan" instead of "Warlock," implicitly dismissing a male-specific spiritual identity as less legitimate or inherently suspect.
Toxic Feminist Misandry:
Some Wican and Heathen groups prioritize goddess-centric worship or female-led covens, sidelining male deities or male practitioners, which reinforces a narrative that equates spiritual purity with femininity.
Public rhetoric in these communities often frames historical persecution as exclusively female (e.g., "burning times"), erasing male victims of witch hunts and minimizing men’s contributions to modern paganism, fostering an environment where "Warlock" is stigmatized as a term tied to patriarchal or "dark" energies.
This selective focus on "Witch" while neglecting "Warlock" highlights a broader issue in Wican and Heathen communities: an extremist feminist agenda that elevates female spiritual identities at the expense of male ones, betraying the inclusive and egalitarian principles these groups often claim to champion.
The Warlock Controversy Pushed by Intentional Misinformation
The claim that "Warlock" denotes a Witch who betrays their coven is a modern fabrication, unsupported by historical evidence before the 1951 Wiccan revival. Despite this, many Wicans and Heathens perpetuate this narrative, berating those who identify as Warlocks.
Historical Context:
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) traces "Warlock" to Old English wærloga ("oath-breaker"), however, this claim was added to the OED after the 1950s drawing primarily from the claims of Doreen Valiente, a disgruntled former member of the Gardner cult/coven, who made the association with Scottland but didn't cite her source. It also fails to note sources such as John Dryden (1600s), or either the Heliand (893) or Andreas, c. 9th–10th century, much less its pronunciation being wɛːr-lóʊn.
An alternative etymology, supported by Nordic scholars like Stephen A. Mitchell (2011), links "Warlock" to varðlokkur (spirit-summoning song) from the Saga of Erik the Red (c. 950–1003 CE), aligning with Witches’ historical ties to necromancy.
Modern Misinformation:
Post-1970s Wiccan books falsely claim "Warlock" means a coven traitor, including:
13 Lessons for Pleasing the Divine by Lady Raya: Calls Warlock an "oath-breaker" or traitor to Witches.
The Coven Leader’s Handbook by Sean Belachta: Labels Warlock a traitor to the Old Religion.
How to Become a Witch by Amber K.: Defines Warlock as a coven betrayer.
Wicca for Life by Raymond Buckland: Claims Warlock denoted one who turned in Witches during the "burning times."
These claims lack primary sources and contradict foundational texts like the Gardnerian Book of Shadows, which uses "Warlock" neutrally for a man performing binding rituals.
Hypocrisy in Terminology:
Wicans and Heathens reclaim "Witch" and "pagan" despite their pejorative origins (e.g., "pagan" as Roman "white trash," per Isaac Bonewits), yet refuse to extend this to "Warlock," revealing bias.
Starhawk’s The Spiral Dance urges women to reclaim "Witch" for empowerment and men to find the "divine feminine," ignoring a masculine equivalent being "Warlock," exposing a feminist agenda that dismisses male spiritual identity.
The word "tradition," etymologically tied to "treason" and "betrayal," is used without issue by these communities, yet "Warlock" is vilified for similar associations, highlighting inconsistent standards.
Indeed, if one were to do proper research, the same misrepresentations include defining Witch as referring to a twisted and immoral woman and at times a diseased prostitute.
The refusal to reclaim "Warlock" while championing "Witch" reflects a toxic feminist misandry in Wican and Heathen communities, prioritizing female empowerment over male inclusion.
The false narrative that "Warlock" means a coven betrayer, unsupported by historical evidence, further exposes this bias. By perpetuating these double standards, these groups undermine their claims of inclusivity, revealing a deeper agenda that marginalizes male practitioners and stifles honest discourse about their spiritual heritage which is no heritage at all other than superficial trappings of the same occultist derived fillers rather than cultural retrieval.
For this very reason and doing away with all of the nonsense all around I reclaimed both into Druwayu by digging deeper into the meaning of both titles, their proper pronunciations at the time of the old spellings and learning the proper meaning and context such were being applied and how they were used while breaking down the words themselves to their smallest known parts.
1. Christian Holidays Are Merely Renamed Pagan Festivals
Claim: Many Neo-Pagans and Heathens assert that Christian holidays like Christmas, Easter, and All Souls’ Day are direct appropriations of ancient Pagan festivals, renamed to convert Pagans to Christianity. For example, Christmas is often linked to Yule or Saturnalia, and Easter to spring equinox celebrations like Ostara.
Why It’s False: While some Christian holidays align with pre-Christian festivals in timing or symbolism, the relationship is more complex than a simple renaming. Historical evidence suggests Christianity adapted certain cultural practices to ease conversions, but the theological core of holidays like Christmas (celebrating Jesus’ birth) and Easter (commemorating the resurrection) is distinctly Christian, not derived from Pagan theology. For instance:
Christmas: The date of December 25 was likely chosen to align with Roman festivals like Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, but no direct evidence links it to Germanic Yule practices. The Catholic Encyclopedia (1907) notes this was a strategic choice, not a renaming of a Pagan holiday.
Easter: Its timing near the spring equinox and use of symbols like eggs may echo pre-Christian fertility rites, but the Paschal celebration is rooted in Jewish Passover, not Pagan festivals like Ostara, which lacks clear historical attestation in Germanic traditions.
Reality: Some seasonal alignments exist but claiming “most” Christian holidays are renamed Pagan traditions oversimplifies a process of cultural synthesis. Neo-Pagans often exaggerate these connections to reclaim cultural heritage they never actually had while also ignoring the distinct Christian doctrinal foundations in question.
2. Neo-Pagan Practices Are Direct Continuations of Ancient Traditions
Claim: Some Neo-Pagans and Heathens, particularly in Wicca or Goddess Worship, claim their practices are unbroken traditions from ancient pre-Christian religions, such as a universal “Great Goddess” cult or ancient Druidic rites.
Why It’s False: Most Neo-Pagan practices are modern reconstructions or inventions, not direct continuations. Historical evidence shows:
Wica (later falsely renamed as Wicca and pronounced wrong): Founded by Gerald Gardner in the 1940s, Wicca draws on 19th- and 20th-century occultism, Romanticism, and folklore, with little evidence of a continuous pre-Christian British nature religion. Scholars like Charlotte Allen (The Atlantic, 2001) have debunked claims of an ancient “Great Goddess” religion, showing it was largely constructed by figures like Gardner and Aleister Crowley.
Heathenry: While Heathens use historical sources like the Edda or Beowulf, their practices (e.g., Asatru, Odinism) are 20th-century reconstructions based on fragmented texts and archaeology. Pre-Christian Germanic religions lacked unified dogma, and modern Heathenry often incorporates contemporary values like environmentalism or gender inclusivity, not necessarily reflective of ancient practices.
Druidism: Modern Druidry, revived in the 18th century, has little in common with ancient Celtic Druids, who were suppressed by the Roman Empire by the 2nd century CE. Claims like Druids building Stonehenge are false, as Stonehenge predates Celtic culture by millennia.
Reality: Neo-Paganism and Heathenry are inspired by historical traditions but are modern creations, superficially blending ancient sources with occultism which in turn shaped most of the so-called contemporary alternative spirituality. Claims of unbroken lineage often stem from Romanticism or a desire to legitimize these faiths as “indigenous.”
3. Paganism Was a Unified, Nature-Centered Religion
Claim: Neo-Pagans often describe ancient Paganism as a cohesive, earth-centered, and egalitarian religion, contrasting it with Christianity’s perceived dogmatism or patriarchy.
Why It’s False: Ancient Pagan religions were diverse, regionally specific, and not inherently unified or nature-focused:
Diversity: Pre-Christian religions (e.g., Norse, Celtic, Greek, Egyptian) varied widely in cosmology, deities, and practices. For example, Norse religion emphasized warrior values according to predominately Christian and Catholic authors, and ancestral veneration, while Egyptian religion focused on divine kingship and the afterlife, not necessarily nature worship.
Not Always Egalitarian: Many ancient Pagan societies were hierarchical or patriarchal. For instance, Norse and Celtic women had some roles (e.g., as seers), but male-dominated priesthoods and warrior elites were common. Claims of universal matriarchy lack evidence and is largely fictional.
Nature Worship: While some traditions (e.g., Celtic) venerated natural features, others (e.g., Roman state cults) prioritized civic or imperial duties. Modern Neo-Pagan emphasis on environmentalism reflects 19th-century nature Romanticism more than ancient practices.
Reality: Neo-Pagans project modern values like environmentalism or gender equality onto ancient traditions, creating a romanticized view of Paganism as a monolithic, nature-centric faith. Ancient religions were complex and context-specific, not a single system.
4. Heathenry Is Inherently Tied to Ethnic or Racial Identity
Claim: Some Heathens, particularly in “folkish” or “völkisch” groups, claim Heathenry is an ethnic religion exclusive to those of Northern European descent, tied to biological or ancestral heritage.
Why It’s False: This claim is a modern distortion, not supported by historical evidence:
Historical Inclusivity: Pre-Christian Germanic religions were clan- or community-based, not racially exclusive. Vikings, for example, adopted foreign practices and intermingled with other cultures, as evidenced by archaeological finds like Viking clothing potentially bearing Arabic script.
Modern Universalism: Many Heathen groups, like The Troth or Asatru UK, reject racial exclusivity, emphasizing that Heathenry is open to all who honor its gods and values.
The Heathens Against Hate movement actively counters racist interpretations, noting that Norse mythology includes diverse deities and no racial purity doctrine.
Racist Origins: The “folkish” view stems from 19th-century national Romanticism and 20th-century völkisch movements, not ancient practices.
The Asatru Folk Assembly have been criticized for adopting white supremacist ideologies, which are incompatible with the inclusive nature of historical Germanic religion.
Reality: Heathenry’s historical roots are cultural and spiritual, not racial. Claims of ethnic exclusivity are a modern invention, rejected by many Heathens and scholars as a misappropriation of the tradition. DNA from human remains tied to such cultures further demonstrate the whole racial purity bit is and was false.
5. Neo-Pagan Sacred Texts or Artifacts Are Ancient
Claim: Some Neo-Pagans, particularly in Slavic or other reconstructionist movements, claim their sacred texts or artifacts (e.g., the “Slavic Aryan Vedas” or golden plates) are ancient, preserving pre-Christian wisdom.
Why It’s False: Many such texts or artifacts are modern fabrications:
Slavic Aryan Vedas: In Ynglism, a Slavic Neo-Pagan movement, texts like the “Slavic Aryan Vedas” or “Santees” are claimed to be ancient, written on gold plates. However, their founder, Alexander Hinevich, has provided no verifiable originals, and scholars dismiss them as contemporary creations, likely inspired by Hindu Vedas or occultism.
Lack of Evidence: Pre-Christian Slavic and Germanic religions were largely oral, with few written records before Christianization. Surviving texts (e.g., Prose Edda) were recorded by Christians centuries later, and no archaeological evidence supports claims of hidden ancient texts.
Modern Context: Similar claims, like those in Wicca about ancient grimoires, often trace to 19th- or 20th-century occultists, not historical Pagan traditions.
Reality: Most Neo-Pagan “sacred texts” are modern, created to fill gaps in historical records. While inspired by folklore or archaeology, they lack ancient provenance and reflect contemporary spiritual needs.
Notes and Context
Diversity of Neo-Paganism: Neo-Paganism and Heathenry are not monolithic; beliefs vary widely, from eclectic Wicca to reconstructionist Asatru. Not all practitioners make these claims, and many acknowledge their practices as modern interpretations.
Motivations: False claims often arise from a desire to legitimize Neo-Paganism as an “indigenous” or ancient tradition, countering Christian dominance or cultural marginalization. This can lead to romanticized or invented histories.
Scholarly Critiques: Sources like RationalWiki note that some Neo-Pagan beliefs are based on “false Christian propaganda” about ancient practices, while others, like Wallis’s work on neo-shamanism, highlight the creative but a non-historical nature of these movements.
Cultural Sensitivity: Claims of ancient continuity or racial exclusivity can lead to cultural appropriation (e.g., neo-shamanism borrowing Native American practices) or harm, as seen in far-right "misappropriations" of Heathen symbols.
Common false claims by Neo-Pagans and Heathens include exaggerating the Pagan origins of Christian holidays, asserting unbroken ancient lineages, romanticizing Paganism as a unified nature religion, tying Heathenry to racial identity, and fabricating ancient texts.
These claims often stem from a desire to reclaim spiritual heritage or counter Christian narratives but are unsupported by historical evidence.
False claims of Neo-Paganism and Heathenry are diverse, modern movements that draw inspiration from alleged pre-Christian traditions while incorporating modern/contemporary values like environmentalism or inclusivity as a superficial trapping and cover for the demonstrable nonsense behind most of it.
Many claim to know this and yet continue to repeat it which amounts to being willfully deceitful and with clear intention to continue to mislead present and future generations and trying to turn a fallacy into a fact which is when such things become all the more intolerable.
The "Burning Times" is a term used by some Neo-Pagans and modern Witches (particularly in Wicca and related movements) to describe the early modern European witch hunts (roughly 1450–1750) as a deliberate, large-scale persecution of Pagans, especially women, who allegedly practiced an ancient, pre-Christian religion.
This narrative, along with the claim that women were the primary targets, and that modern Witches are direct spiritual descendants of these victims, is riddled with historical inaccuracies and fallacies.
Below, I address the fallacy of the "Burning Times," the misconception that women were the sole or main targets, and the false claims of modern connections to witch hunt victims, emphasizing that these were largely heresy hunts unrelated to historical or modern Witchcraft.
1. The Fallacy of the "Burning Times"
The "Burning Times" narrative posits that millions of Pagans, particularly women, were executed as Witches during the early modern period, representing a genocidal effort by the Christian Church to eradicate a surviving pre-Christian religion.
Inflated Death Count and Mischaracterization as Pagan Persecution:
This idea is historically inaccurate for several reasons, such as the fact, in Salem MA, within the United States of America all but one victim was recorded as hanged and one specifically "pressed" to death (crushed by the weight of heavy stones):
Claim: Some Neo-Pagans, drawing from early feminist and Wiccan sources like Margaret Murray’s The Witch-Cult in Western Europe (1921) or Gerald Gardner’s Wiccan writings, claim that 9 million or more Witches were killed. Modern iterations may cite figures in the hundreds of thousands.
Reality: Scholarly estimates, based on trial records and demographic studies, suggest 40,000–60,000 executions across Europe over three centuries, with a significant portion occurring in German states.
Fact: Ronald Hutton (The Triumph of the Moon, 1999) and other historians debunk the 9-million figure as an exaggeration rooted in 19th-century polemics and early feminist rhetoric, not evidence. Even accounting for undocumented cases, the toll is far lower than claimed which would far exceed the population of t majority of Europe in the times and locations in question.
Claim: The witch hunts targeted practitioners of a surviving Pagan religion, often framed as a matriarchal, nature-based faith akin to modern Wicca.
Reality: Witch hunts were primarily driven by Christian concerns about heresy and diabolism, not Paganism. The Malleus Maleficarum (1486), a key text for the Witch Hunters (Properly Witch Finders), described Witches as heretics who made pacts with the Devil, not as Pagans preserving ancient traditions.
Fact: Most accused Witches were Christians, often targeted for local disputes, social deviance, or perceived moral failings, not for practicing a pre-Christian religion. Historical evidence, such as trial records from Salem (1692) or the Basque witch hunts (1609–1611), shows no clear link to "Pagan" practices; accusations focused on diabolical conspiracies or maleficium (literality "Malefices" used figuratively as acts of harmful magic).
Claim: Margaret Murray’s “witch-cult hypothesis” argued that Witches were members of an organized, underground Pagan religion that survived Christianization, a view adopted by early Wiccans.
Reality: Murray’s theory has been discredited by historians like Norman Cohn and Keith Thomas. Trial confessions describing covens or rituals were often extracted under torture or shaped by inquisitors’ expectations, not reflective of a real Pagan organization.
Fact: Pre-Christian religions in Europe were largely extinguished by the Middle Ages, and no archaeological or textual evidence supports a continuous Pagan witch-cult. Modern Wica (misnamed on purpose later to the feminine word Wicca/Witch), founded by Gerald Gardner in the 1940s, is a 20th-century creation, blending occultism, folklore, and Romanticism, not a direct continuation of any ancient tradition.
Claim: The Church orchestrated the witch hunts as a deliberate campaign to destroy Paganism or women’s spiritual power.
Reality: Witch hunts were not a centralized Church policy, but a decentralized phenomenon driven by local courts, secular authorities, and community tensions.
Facts: The Catholic Church and Protestant authorities sometimes urged restraint, as seen in the Catholic Inquisition’s skepticism of the "Witch" accusations in Spain. Social, economic, and religious anxieties—such as the Reformation, wars, and plagues—fueled the hunts, not a unified anti-Pagan agenda. The narrative of a patriarchal genocide ignores the complex socio-political factors at play.
2. False Claim: Women Were the Main or Only Targets
The idea that witch hunts primarily targeted women, often framed as a patriarchal attack on female autonomy or spirituality, is a partial truth exaggerated by modern narratives, particularly in feminist and Neo-Pagan circles.
Exaggerated Gender Focus:
Claim: Neo-Pagans and some feminists (e.g., Andrea Dworkin, Mary Daly) assert that the vast majority of witch hunt victims were women, targeted for their gender or supposed Pagan practices.
Reality: While women were disproportionately accused—estimates suggest 75–80% of victims in Europe were female—men were also significant targets.
Facts: In regions like Iceland, Normandy, and parts of Scandinavia, men constituted the majority of victims. For example, in Iceland, 90% of those executed for witchcraft were men, often accused of sorcery tied to runes or economic disputes. Historian Lara Apps (Male Witches "properly called Warlocks" in Early Modern Europe, 2003) notes that gender roles influenced accusations but were not the sole factor; men were often accused as leaders of supposed diabolical conspiracies.
Claim: Women were targeted for their spiritual or healing roles, seen as threats to patriarchal Christianity.
Reality: Accusations often stemmed from social dynamics, not gender alone. Women were vulnerable due to economic marginality (e.g., widows, spinsters), social conflicts (e.g., disputes with neighbors), or stereotypes about female susceptibility to the Devil. However, men were accused for similar reasons, including heresy, maleficium, or political rivalries.
Facts: Midwives and healers (including male ones) were not disproportionately targeted, contrary to popular belief; most victims were ordinary individuals caught in local feuds or moral panics. Trial records, such as those from Würzburg (1626–1631), show accusations crossing gender lines, driven by community dynamics rather than a gendered agenda.
Claim: The witch hunts were a systematic patriarchal attack on women’s power.
Reality: Misogyny played a role, as texts like the Malleus Maleficarum emphasized women supposed moral weakness. However, witch hunts were fueled by broader fears of heresy, social disorder, and the Devil, not just gender. Additionally, most accusations came from women against other women rather than men.
Facts: The focus on women in modern narratives often reflects 20th-century feminist reinterpretations and misrepresentations, not the full historical context. Both men and women were victims of a society grappling with religious and social upheaval, as were, unfortunately, children and animals, especially such as household pets.
3. False Claims of Modern Connections to Witch Hunt Victims
Neo-Pagans and modern Witches often claim a spiritual or cultural connection to witch hunt victims, portraying themselves as descendants of an oppressed Pagan tradition. This is historically inaccurate and misrepresents the nature of the hunts.
False Direct Lineage Claims and false Perpetual Victimhood
Claim: Modern Witches, particularly Wiccans, assert they are spiritual heirs of witch hunt victims, who were secretly practicing a surviving Pagan religion.
Reality: Witch hunt victims were not practitioners of a unified Pagan religion, nor do modern Neo-Pagan movements have a direct historical link to them. Most victims were Christians accused of diabolical heresy or maleficium, not Pagans. Wicca and other Neo-Pagan traditions emerged in the 20th century, drawing on occultism, Romanticism, and reconstructed folklore, not on a continuous tradition.
Facts: Ronald Hutton and Philip Heselton have shown that Wica’s rituals and beliefs lack historical continuity with early modern practices. Claims of lineage are a modern myth, rooted in a desire to claim historical legitimacy and female martyrdom.
Claim: The witch hunts targeted Witches as practitioners of an ancient, non-Christian spirituality.
Reality: Witch hunts were primarily heresy hunts, focused on rooting out perceived threats to Christian orthodoxy committed by other Christian and Catholic vs Protest sects. The concept of “Witchcraft” in the early modern period was tied to Christian demonology—pacts with the Devil, sabbaths, and maleficium—not to Paganism or modern Witchcraft.
Facts: Trial records from England, Scotland, and Germany show accusations centered on harm (e.g., cursing crops) or diabolical conspiracies, not on rituals resembling modern Wicca or Heathenry. Pre-Christian Paganism had largely vanished by the early modern period, and no evidence suggests victims practiced a religion akin to Neo-Paganism.
Claim: Witch hunt victims were “Witches” in the modern Neo-Pagan sense, practicing magic or nature-based spirituality.
Reality: The term “Witch” in the early modern period was a legal and theological construct, not a self-identified spiritual identity. Victims were labeled Witches by accusers, often under coercion or torture, and did not identify as such.
Facts: Modern Witches, who embrace the term as a positive spiritual identity, project their beliefs onto historical victims, ignoring the Christian and demonological context of the accusations and trivializing actual male and female victims. For example, the Salem witch trials (1692) involved accusations of diabolical pacts, not Pagan rituals, and victims like Tituba were not practicing a pre-Christian faith.
Claim: Neo-Pagans claim the witch hunts as a shared history of oppression, akin to a “Pagan holocaust.”
Reality: This narrative appropriates the suffering of diverse victims—mostly Christian, of varied social backgrounds—for modern identity politics. It overlooks the actual causes of the hunts (religious fanaticism, social tensions) and trivializes the experiences of those executed, who were not part of a Pagan movement. Historians like Diane Purkiss (The Witch in History, 1996) argue that such claims romanticize history, creating a false sense of continuity and martyrdom.
Broader Context and Fallacies
Romanticization and Feminist Narratives: The “Burning Times” myth was popularized by feminist writers like Mary Daly and Starhawk in the 1970s, who framed the witch hunts as a patriarchal attack on women’s spiritual power. While appealing to modern feminist and Neo-Pagan audiences, this narrative relies on discredited sources like Murray’s witch-cult hypothesis and ignores male victims and the heresy-driven nature of the hunts.
Confirmation Bias: Neo-Pagans often cherry-pick evidence, such as seasonal festival alignments or folk practices, to support claims of Pagan continuity, ignoring contradictory trial records or the Christian context of accusations.
False Equivalence: Equating modern Witchcraft (a voluntary, spiritual identity) with historical “Witchcraft” (a crime defined by Christian authorities) conflates unrelated phenomena, creating a misleading historical narrative.
Lack of Primary Sources: Claims of a surviving Pagan witch-cult lack support from primary sources like trial records, which focus on Christian demonology, not Pagan rituals. Neo-Pagan reliance on secondary sources like Murray or Gardner reflects a constructed, not historical, tradition.
Evidence from Historical Records
Trial Records: Documents from the Würzburg witch trials (1626–1631), Bamberg trials (1626–1630), and Salem (1692) show accusations centered on diabolical pacts, not Paganism. Victims were often accused of harming neighbors or livestock, not practicing a pre-Christian religion.
Church Writings: Texts like the Malleus Maleficarum and Johannes Nider’s Formicarius (1438) frame Witchcraft as heresy and Devil-worship, not as a surviving Pagan faith.
Archaeological Absence: No artifacts or sites confirm a widespread Pagan witch-cult in early modern Europe, unlike the clear evidence of Christian dominance in material culture.
Scholarly Consensus: Historians like Brian Levack (The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe, 2015) and Norman Cohn (Europe’s Inner Demons, 1975) emphasize the hunts’ roots in Christian theology, social anxieties, and legal systems, not anti-Pagan campaigns.
Modern Implications
Neo-Pagan Identity: The “Burning Times” myth provides a powerful narrative for Neo-Pagans, fostering a sense of historical persecution and solidarity. However, it distorts history and can alienate practitioners from engaging with accurate reconstructions of pre-Christian traditions.
Cultural Sensitivity: Claiming victimhood from the witch hunts risks trivializing the real suffering of those executed, who were not part of a modern spiritual movement. It also ignores the diversity of victims, including men and non-Witches.
Heathenry and Reconstructionism: Heathens, who often focus on Germanic or Norse traditions, generally avoid the “Burning Times” narrative, as their historical context (Viking-era conversion) predates the witch hunts. However, some may still adopt the broader myth of Pagan persecution, which oversimplifies Christianization.
The “Burning Times” is a fallacious narrative that exaggerates the scale, intent, and nature of early modern witch hunts, falsely portraying them as a genocide of Pagans. The claim that women were the sole or main targets oversimplifies the gendered dynamics, ignoring male victims and the broader social context.
Assertions of modern connections to witch hunt victims are baseless, as these were heresy hunts rooted in Christian demonology, not persecutions of a Pagan witch-cult.
Victims were mostly Christians accused of diabolical crimes, not practitioners of a religion resembling modern Wicca or Neo-Paganism.
The myth persists due to romanticized feminist and Neo-Pagan narratives, but it is unsupported by trial records, historical texts, or archaeology. Accurate understanding requires recognizing the hunts as complex, heresy-driven phenomena, distinct from modern spiritual identities and imposed feminist rhetoric and blatant willful distortions.