From the Bookshelf of Heathens, Pagans and Witches…

The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft

Ronald Hutton

Why we're reading this: The definitive history of the modern pagan witchcraft.
[close] The definitive history of the modern pagan witchcraft.

Find A Copy At

Libraries

Group Discussions About This Book

No group discussions for this book yet.

What Members Thought

Aug 20, 2018 Wade Macmorrighan rated it did not like it

Shelves: wiccan-and-pagan-history

I wouldn't be so quick as to call this book the "true history of Wicca," especially not since Prof. Hutton actually confessed that his "Triumph" was a mere exercise in a Logical Fallacy known as Confirmation Bias! In fact, he also confessed that as he was writing "Triumph" he discovered evidence for ancient paganism that directly mirrored and was traceable to Wicca; but, he intentionally ignored it, because it disproved the theory he was trying to prove! Ultimately, he also admitted that "Triump I wouldn't be so quick as to call this book the "true history of Wicca," especially not since Prof. Hutton actually confessed that his "Triumph" was a mere exercise in a Logical Fallacy known as Confirmation Bias! In fact, he also confessed that as he was writing "Triumph" he discovered evidence for ancient paganism that directly mirrored and was traceable to Wicca; but, he intentionally ignored it, because it disproved the theory he was trying to prove! Ultimately, he also admitted that "Triumph" was merely a personal theory of his that he was unable able to prove. Therefore, it shouldn't be believed.

But, my fingers were burned by Hutton way back when I read his "Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles" when I noticed he omitted whole swaths of academic conclusions, he treated specialist scholarship as if they were wrong (but he's correct?), he would make sweeping generalizations that were always wrong, he would make many unsubstantiated claims, as well as engaging in numerous Logical Fallacies!!! So, ever since, I now ask myself "What else is he intentionally leaving out?" when one of his books comes into my possession.

Yet, when I tell folks of all the academic material and consensus that Hutton was intentionally ignoring, simply because it proved him wrong, the usual line I get fed by one of his sycophants goes something like: "It means that he is a rigorous scholar!" or (and I've actually been told this!) "If there was anything of value to those books/ authors Hutton would have considered them in great detail; but, because he hasn't, I needn't consider them, either!" Even when I show others where Hutton confessed--in his "Witches, Druids and King Arthur"--that "Triumph" was an exercise in Confirmation Bias because Hutton intentionally ignored the unequivocal evidence he discovered during "Triumph" tracing modern Paganism back to ancient paganism! Moreover, Hutton insists he ignored this data because: 1.) few scholars would have believed him, and 2.) his constructed model was still correct without bothering to include it! (Well, that's to be expected when one cherry-picks to construct a one-sided argument!) Heck, Hutton even admitted that "Triumph" was simply his personal theory for which he had no evidence to prove in the end! But, when I mention this to other Pagans, suddenly *I'm* the asshole whom they accuse of lying about Hutton. Despite the fact that Hutton makes his arguments by misrepresenting the views of his sources, putting words in their mouth (he recently claimed he and Carlo Ginzburg are on the same page when they couldn't be farther apart!), and cherry-picking data! ...more

1 like · Like · see review