Follow up to: “Trials of the Moon” Book Review

Since Whitmores self published work attacking Proff Ronald Huttons “Triumph of the Moon” work has now done the rounds – there have been a few rebuttals posted specifically in the Pomegranate:

For the correct context – both articles should be read – as Prof Hutton’s material puts things in the right perspective. which I found illuminating and cause for some laughs – it was in my opinion right on the money is Prof Huttons article/rebuttal to Mr Whitmores “Book Review” and puts things in the right context – now the world over.

At this end of the world it should be pointed out that the Pagan community is developmentally about 30-40 years behind the rest of the world. The bun fights, witch wars and stupidity we saw in the 70’s and 80’s in the UK are still being visited here in the colonies.

Racism et al (and tall poppies syndrome) is rife: Ex-pats are treated with derision, isolation and generally hate by the locals.

It’s interesting to note that some years ago Whitmore posted extensively about an ex-pat, his family, his friends and coven – a diatribe that was utter fantasy – to whit he’s had to back down over every single claim he’s made.  He has provided not a single shred of proof let alone any evidence for a single claim he has made and has been forced to apologise to a great many people.

In this review that individual, his family, and clan stand entirely vindicated as yet again Whitmore has targeted someone that actually knew his stuff as a means to big himself up.

For example in Peg Aloi’s article:

“But if Whitmore is to achieve his goal of challenging Hutton’s claims, he would do better to utilize the methods of an historian, including researching primary sources, which he does not do, even once. He does utilize a number of secondary resources, some well-known, some obscure. But, unfortunately, his primary technique is a consistent tone of condescension and sarcasm.”

The review goes on to say:

“Whitmore paints himself as a righteous sleuth bent on exposing Hutton’s laziness and deception; in other words, he saw a need to attack Hutton’s status as a, or even the, preeminent historian on Wicca and contemporary Paganism (what Hutton termed “modern pagan witchcraft”) and to offer himself as a logical successor. The transparency of motive, the petulant language, the megalomaniacal attitude: all of these tonalities undermine the text to an extent that it’s very hard to take it seriously.”

The review from Peg Aloi concludes:

“And there you have it. It is not really so much that Whitmore considers Hutton a poor historian; it is only that he wishes he himself were one of equal standing. And clearly he feels strongly about the subject matter:”

Which speaks volumes. To date there has been found no supporting evidence for a single claim or lineage/membership for any of the supposed orders/covens/traditions that Whitmore states he belongs to. To boot having had proven his own reputed HP’s lineage to be bogus the rest is history. This man is nothing more than someone trying to be something he is not and take umbrage at anyone or anything that has already done the hard yards. End of story. It needs to be pointed out that this sort of thing is culturally typical in New Zealand. IF you present any modicum of success, ability, luck, talent et al – you will be hunted down and shot down by any means necessary – it’s called tall poppies syndrome.

Prof Hutton’s rebuttal is extensive and merciless – as it should be – utterly savage as in the real world which people strongly recommended Whitmore engage with in ’07 when an ex-pat Oxbridge trained historian reviewed the beginnings of his treatise – as a means to engage meaningfully in that community. Put simple – Whitmore unfortunately opted for volume rather than substance – throw enough poo and maybe some of it will stick. Prof Hutton is having none of it and brutally slaughters Whitmore’s work – again – and again – and again.

Statements such as:

“I do feel distressed to have failed Wiccans like Ben Whitmore by not providing the kind of history that they feel that they need.”

In this I feel Prof Hutton has erred – albeit a little – there has at no time been any evidence from Whitmore that he is in fact Wiccan as no-one has been able to present a shred of evidence for it – as such he does not – can not represent the Alexandrian Community let alone the Wiccan community as a whole with any credibility.

Hutton goes on:

“Just for the record, I experienced my first Wiccan rite nine years before Ben Whitmore was born, and he is a proud representative of a Wiccan tradition founded by somebody whom I encountered in his hey-day and from whom I learned some useful things. Whitmore lectures me on not having paid enough attention to Doreen Valiente, but Doreen’s respect for me, based largely on my work, was enough for her to name me as one of the remarkably small number of people whom she wanted to be present at her funeral. He is, however, determined to pose as the defender of Paganism against a hostile outsider.”:

And we all know Prof Hutton was not the first to be targeted by Mr Whitmore’s mistaken belief that he represented anyone, let alone a community.

Funny old world innit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: