Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Nuns making out and other things that will not cause deadly rioting (yet more blasphemous imagery)

Digging up another old post that still seems relevant. This one originally appeared on April 3, 2011. And be sure to check out the list of other blasphemous material at the bottom.
--------------------------------

Christian preacher Terry Jones finally made good on his threat to burn the Koran. And, predictably, this has resulted in a wave of deadly violence in the Muslim world.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. The following images say more than any quantity of words ever could about how different Islam is from other religions, including even it's closest rival for most violent and intolerant religion of all time.

It is worth pointing out that many, probably most, of the following examples of blasphemy were in large part motivated by a desire to grab attention, and also were done with the intention of being offensive, or at least in the full knowledge that they would be offensive.

Ticket to hell (from Marshmallow Ladyboy Jesus):


BRB (lol) (from motifake.com):


Jesus Kanye Christ (from Rolling Stone):


Sing-along Blasphemy from Happy Jihad's House of Pancakes:


Blasphemous Dog (from TheYoungTurks.Com):


Milo Manara draws a nun (from hyacint's soup):


Nuns making out:






Nun with whip:


Nun with pierced tongue:


Look on the bright side of life:


Leather Gas Mask Nun:


Artistic Blasphemy from Too Many Questions:


German soft-drink ad:


Love-Making Jesus:


Christopher Hitchens' book Missionary Position:


Jesus Tap Dancing Christ:


Kathy Griffin sez: "Suck it, Jesus!"


Evie Delatosso, from her x-rated film, Lost Salvation:


Last Temptation of Christ:


Priest (a personal favorite, here is a review at Alternate Sexuality):


Hail Mary:


Dogma:


more blasphemy at
e g r e g o r e s:

Saturday, June 28, 2014

Behold: The Future of School Prayer in Post-Potter America?

[Lately my life hasn't left me much time for blogging. So, sometimes now when I go a whole week or more and I haven't had a chance to write anything at all, I just look through some of my more popular old posts and change the date, add a little prologue, and maybe edit it/add to it slightly. This post was originally prompted (well over three years ago) by a graphic that suddenly appeared in several of my Pagan friends' facebook feeds. I was so struck by the subversive brilliance of it, that I tried to find out who was behind it. I only ever got as far as finding the original photographer and model, both of whom are highly talented in their own rights. But to this day I have never discovered who the genius was that added the captioning to the image. If anyone happens to know, please leave a comment! And now without further ado, here is a little something I posted back on November 20, 2010.] 
---------------------------------------

Some pictures really are worth a thousand words, but there are times when just the right caption can add something essential to the end result.

This "Motivational Poster" style commentary on school prayer has been making the rounds on teh interwebs. It started as part of a "Student Witch" series by photographer Marcus J. Ranum. You can see the whole series at Ranum's DeviantArt gallery here.

(Ranum's wikipedia entry tells us that he is a computer security expert of some note and that "his hobbies include photography and firearms.")

I would like to find out whose idea it was to add the eleven words to Ranum's already quite magnificent photo, thus taking it to the next level of brilliance!

The book she is holding is Aleister Crowley's "Magic in Theory and Practice", which you can make out if you look at the full size image of the original. The book on the ground is something by Anton LeVay.

Ranum, who is an atheist and a supporter of Richard Dawkin's "Out Campaign", has this to say about inclusion of the LeVay book as a prop in the original photograph:
Someone mentioned (rightly and courteously) that I might have given offense by mixing the word "witch" with LaVey's goofy satanic bible. It's just a prop. I was tempted to fix the title but then I realized that would be inconsistent. As an equal opportunity disrespector of all religion, it would be unfair of me to show wicca more respect than I show any of the other goofy superstitions of the world. So, with all due respect, if this image bothers you - "get over it."
As long as I'm trying to give credit where credit is due, I'm pretty sure the model is Laura Unbound. She also has her own DeviantArt page here (actually that's a direct link to the photo of her to the right by Scott Church, which is part of Laura's own online portfolio).

[Since first posting this I have received direct confirmation from Laura Unbound that it is her. She also left a comment below.]

Here's my other personal favorite from Ranum's "Student Witch" series (Student Witch - 5), as well as some other works featuring the lovely Laura (by photographer Rodney Mickle), just for the hell of it, and also possibly just to jack up my hit count in one of the most obvious and time tested ways:

.
 .
.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Race, Politics and Paganism: Notes toward a Manifesto of Cosmopolitan Paganism

Recently the Pagan blogosphere has been witness to quite a bit of spleen-venting on the subjects of racism and politics.

Due to circumstances beyond my control, my response to this unedifying cacophony of  ham-fisted, self-righteous sanctimonious posturing must be limited to the following 15 bullet points.


On racism and modern Paganism.
  1. Reject the idea that Paganism is a "European" religion. 
  2. Expose the modern, Christian roots of racist ideology generally, and of antisemitism in particular.
  3. Embrace the cosmopolitan nature of ancient Paganism. 
  4. Declare our solidarity with the indigenous peoples of Africa, Asia and the Americas who continue to defend and preserve their ancient traditions against the spiritual imperialism of Christianity and Islam. 
  5. Emphasize the common spiritual birthright of all human beings as children of the Gods.

On the despicable calumny that Paganism is intrinsically racist.
  1. Reject the calumny that there is any natural affinity between Paganism and racism.
  2. Expose the Christian apologetic agenda of those who promote this calumny.
  3. Embrace the Pagan revivalist movements that arose out of the Romantic period without fear that there is something inherently racist about these movements.
  4. Declare our solidarity with the Jewish people who have been on the receiving end of brutal Christian persecution for as long as Pagans have.
  5. Emphasize the common spiritual roots that unite the various strands of modern Paganism, rather than emphasizing anything and everything that supposedly separates us from each other, especially when these supposed differences are framed in terms of "ethnicity" or "race".

On Paganism and politics.
  1. Reject all modern political ideologies.
  2. Expose the intrinsically tyrannical nature of Christianity and Islam, and the ongoing aggression of both of these ideologies throughout the world.
  3. Embrace the ancient Pagan roots of liberal democratic principles.
  4. Declare our unwavering support for fundamental personal liberties, especially freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
  5. Emphasize the common human yearning for freedom.
.

Thursday, July 4, 2013

Who really wrote "We hold these truths to be self-evident"?

[This is a slightly edited version of a previous post.]

Every American schoolchild learns that it was Thomas Jefferson who penned the mighty words "We hold these truths to be self-evident ...." But recently there has been more than a little confusion on this point.

In part the confusion is an honest and long-standing uncertainty due to the fact that in addition to Jefferson, both John Adams and Benjamin Franklin helped to forge the final version of the Declaration of Independence that was ratified by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. And in addition to Jefferson, Adams and Franklin, there were also two other members of drafting committee: Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston.

But Walter Isaacson has greatly exacerbated this honest uncertainty by stupidly declaring, in his biography of Benjamin Franklin, the following:
Franklin made only a few changes, some of which can be viewed written in his own hand on what Jefferson referred to as the "rough draft" of the Declaration. (This remarkable document is at the Library of Congress and on its Web site.) The most important of his edits was small but resounding. He crossed out, using the heavy backslashed that he often employed, the last three words of Jefferson's phrase 'We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable' and changed them to the words now enshrined in history: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident.'"
[pp. 311-312]
Isaacson, that most esteemed representative of American middle-brow pseudo-intellectualism, makes it clear in the next paragraph that he is motivated by his own idiotic view that Jefferson was some kind of irrational romanticist whose thinking was tainted by religion, whereas Franklin was a true "rationalist" whose mind was unclouded by otherworldly metaphysics.

The idea of “self-evident” truths was one that drew less on John Locke, who was Jefferson’s favored philosopher, than on the scientific determinism espoused by Isaac Newton and on the analytic empiricism of Franklin’s close friend David Hume. In what became known as “Hume’s fork,” the great Scottish philosopher, along with Leibniz and others, had developed a theory that distinguished between synthetic truths that describe matters of fact (such as “London is bigger than Philadelphia”) and analytic truths that are self-evident by virtue of reason and definition (“ The angles of a triangle equal 180 degrees”; “All bachelors are unmarried”). By using the word “sacred,” Jefferson had asserted, intentionally or not, that the principle in question— the equality of men and their endowment by their creator with inalienable rights— was an assertion of religion. Franklin’s edit turned it instead into an assertion of rationality. 
[p. 312]

The problem for Isaacson is that no one agrees with his claim, except for those who foolishly rely on Isaacson as their only only source of information on the question. Everyone who has done independent research on the matter is either meticulously equivocal, or tends toward the accepted attribution of the words to Jefferson.
"Possibly it was Franklin, or Jefferson himself, who made the small but inspired change in the second paragraph. Where, in the initial draft certain 'truths' were described as 'sacred and undeniable,' a simpler, stronger 'self-evident' was substituted."
[David McCullough, John Adams, p. 122. Look here for a much longer excerpt of the relevant passage in McCullough.]

"The phrase 'sacred & undeniable' was changed to 'self-evident' before Adams made his copy. This change has been attributed to Franklin, but the opinion rests on no conclusive evidence, and there seems to be even stronger evidence that the change was made by TJ or at least that it is in his handwriting."
[Boyd, Declaration of Independence, 1945, p. 22-3." (link)]
Pauline Maier, in her "American Scripture: The Making of Declaration of Independence" simply says "the phrase is perhaps Franklin's". [p. 136]

Carl Lotus Becker, in his 1922 classic The Declaration of Independence: A Study on the History of Political Ideas, states that in his opinion the phrase "self-evident" was already in place before Benjamin Franklin had seen the working draft:
"Jefferson first wrote 'we hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable.' In the Rough Draft as it now reads, the words 'sacred & undeniable' are crossed out, and 'self-evident' is written in above the line. Was this correction made by Jefferson in process of composition? Or by the Committee of Five? Or by Congress? There is nothing in the Rough Draft itself to tell us. As it happens, John Adams made a copy of the Declaration which still exists. Comparing this copy with the corrected Rough Draft, we find that it incorporates only a very few of the corrections: one of the two corrections which Adams himself wrote into the Rough Draft; one, or possibly two, of the five corrections which Franklin wrote in; and eight verbal changes apparently in Jefferson’s hand. This indicates that Adams must have made his copy from the Rough Draft when it was first submitted to him; and we may assume that the eight verbal changes, if in Jefferson’s hand, which we find incorporated in Adams’ copy, were there when Jefferson first submitted the Draft to Adams — that is, they were corrections which Jefferson made in process of composing the Rough Draft in the first instance. With Adams’ copy in hand it is therefore possible to reconstruct the Rough Draft as it probably read when first submitted to Franklin."
[Chapter Four: Drafting the Declaration: link]

This is a case where there is room for some small amount of reasonable doubt. But there is in fact very little evidence against the traditional and accepted attribution of the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident" to Thomas Jefferson.

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

"Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils"

This is a very educational documentary. It turns out that if a woman is beaten by her her husband, this might simply be his way of telling her that she needs to improve her cooking skills. And so forth.

Monday, January 7, 2013

Are modern Pagans morally and intellectually superior to adherents of "traditional and indigenous" religions?


There is another problem with the globalization of the term Pagan. It make us (real Pagans) think we are like other traditional religions like the Hindu, Buddhist, or Taoist traditions, or the indigenous cultures like the Shuar, Cherokee, or Yoruba, among so many others. We are not.
Do you think the Earth is the center of the Universe?
Do you think diseases are caused by germs and viruses?
Do you know about more elements than four (or five)?
Has the scientific revolution touched you?
Do you think democracy is a good idea?
In traditional and indigenous society the valences of the above questions are reversed and we are in no position to go back to them. (Everyone in the room who is still alive because of antibiotics, raise your hand). In fact, these ideas are so important that traditional and indigenous societies are adopting them and adjusting themselves accordingly. Good for them, but these ideas are *native* to us. We figured them out, for the most part, and they changed us permanently.
[Sam Webster, "Welcome, Thinking Pagans"]


The above quote is from an online article by Sam Webster smugly entitled "Welcome Thinking Pagans." Webster's casual ethnocentrism is, sadly, all-too common among well-educated modern "liberal" Westerners. Another example of this kind of ethnocentrism, and one which I have previously written about in this blog, is the claim made by David Loy, a prominent American Western Buddhist writer, to the effect that the very concept of social justice is utterly foreign to non-Westerners in general and Asians in particular, and that Asian Buddhists require the guidance of Western Buddhists in order to overcome this deficiency (see  David Loy & the White Buddhist's Burden). The same conceit can also be found in another contemporary Western Buddhist writer, Stephen Batchelor, as I have also discussed elsewhere (see Reason #7 in Top Ten Reasons Why Stephen Batchelor is Full of Shit). And the same kind of ethnocentrism is also implicit (and sometimes explicit) in the writings of the New Atheists (such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris) whenever they deign to discuss religions other than Christianity and Islam (such as Buddhism and Hinduism).

But lets return to Sam Webster, and his claim that "traditional and indigenous" cultures have their "valences" "reversed" when it comes to things like science and democracy. Better yet, let us turn away from Webster and instead look to the writings of a genuine expert on the subject of democracy and social justice: Martin Luther King, Jr.

As always happens with the best and the brightest, Martin Luther King, Jr. searched for a guiding philosophy while he was a college student, a journey that he continued in even more earnest as a young seminarian. What he was looking for, as he later recounted it, was a world-view that applied “the love ethics of Jesus” to the problem of social injustice.

During this “intellectual odyssey”, as King himself called it, he studied the works of Thomas Hobbes, Jeremy Bentham, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Stewart Mill, John Locke, Friedrich Nietzsche, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx, and Vladimir Lenin, as well as Christian authors such as Walter Rauschenbusch and Reinhold Niebuhr, and also ancient authors especially Aristotle and Plato. In particular, King struggled long and hard with the writings of Niebuhr, especially wrestling with Neihbur's rejection of pacifism.

In addition to the above listed writers, King was also was personally influenced, during his studies at the Boston University School of Theology, by Walter Muelder, Allan Knight Chalmers, Edgar S. Brightman, and L. Harold Dewolf. It was under the mentorship of Dr. Brightman that King undertook a close study of Hegel, and King would later say that Brightman had provided him with ‘the metaphysical and philosophical grounding for the idea of a personal God’’ [Papers 4:480].

But none of these Western philosophers, revolutionaries, teachers, and theologians, either living or dead, provided what King was looking for.

In his book Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story, King wrote: “Prior to reading Gandhi, I had about concluded that the ethics of Jesus were only effective in individual relationships …. But after reading Gandhi, I saw how utterly mistaken I was.” Moreover, in King’s estimation, “Gandhi was probably the first person in history to lift the love ethic of Jesus above mere interaction between individuals to a powerful and effective social force on a large scale.” King wrote further that: “The intellectual and moral satisfaction that I failed to gain from [Bentham, Mill, Marx, Lenin, Hobbes, Rousseau, and Nietzsche] I found in the nonviolent resistance philosophy of Gandhi. I came to feel that this was the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom."

Martin Luther King, Jr. is unquestionably one of the most celebrated champions of social justice and the basic principles of democracy in modern history. His search as a young man for a guiding philosophy was based both on moral and intellectual requirements. He was not looking merely for a philosophy that expressed the moral sentiment of social justice, but one that met the intellectual challenge of showing how to apply a philosophy of compassion not just to interpersonal relationships, but to the much broader realm of social change, up to and including social change on global scale.

Those who naively privilege the modern West as the sole font of democracy, equality, and liberty, really need to closely study that figure who, more than anyone else, personifies the modern conception of progressive social change: Martin Luther King. Anyone who makes such a study cannot help but conclude that not only does modern Western culture have no monopoly on "social justice", but that, as a matter of fact, we in the West have much to learn from others.


Also see these related posts from this blog:

Thursday, November 29, 2012

"I follow the Buddha and Goodness": Final messages from Tibetan self-immolators

.
A thousand years from now, scholars will shake their heads knowingly and scoff at the legends of the great Bodhisattva army of Tibetan self-immolators. They will assure their colleagues and students that all such stories are just so much romaniticized nonsense.

Who could believe such things? Who could imagine such things? Who could do such things?





"There is no freedom in Tibet, His Holiness Dalai Lama is forbidden to return home. Panchen Lama [the second highest ranking Lama after the Dalai Lama] is in prison. Numerous Tibetan heroes have made the sacrifice of self-immolation. I don't want to live anymore, there is no meaning in living… We are the son of Snow Lion, the offspring of red face Tibetans. Please remember the dignity of Snow mountain."

"Tibet needs freedom and independence. Release Panchen and let Dalai return home. I self-immolate to protest against the Chinese government! Father, please don't be disheartened because of me. I follow the Buddha and Goodness. My wish is that six million Tibetans will learn their mother tongue, wear Tibetan clothes and be united." 

"Greetings to my dear brothers and sisters, and especially my parents, the kindest of all in this world. I am setting myself on fire for the sake of Tibet. The long life of His Holiness the Dalai Lama must be assured. It is my wish that the sun of happiness may shine on the land of Tibet."

Sources:

Last Words of 19 Tibetans Who Committed Self-Immolation (fromGlobalVoicesOnline.Org).

"May the sun of happiness shine on Tibet," a self-immolator’s last words (from Phayul.Com)


Thursday, September 6, 2012

Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke's 1997 Speech at the New York Open Center

Way back in January, 2010, I linked to and quoted (extensively) from a speech given by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (January 15, 1953- August 29, 2012) to the New York Open Center in 1997 (here is a link to that earlier post).

The complete speech was, at that time, available online at the website for Lapis magazine, which is published by the Open Center. Several months later I noticed that the Lapis magazine website was down, but a cached version of the speech could still be accessed via google, and at that time I downloaded the whole thing in case it disappeared completely, which it now almost has. The speech is still viewable at a "zoominfo" page (http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/person?personId=1343476241&targetid=profile), but otherwise all other traces of it, except for bits and pieces quoted here and there, have vanished. (UPDATE: I checked again on April 12, 2014, and found a link with the entire speech here: http://archive.is/eK3Mw.)

I believe that this speech is significant because in it there are strong, explicitly religious overtones that are only hinted at in Goodrick-Clarke's published works. In particular, one finds that Goodrick-Clarke is committed to a religious analysis of the "roots" of Nazism that exonerates Christianity (except possibly for forms of Christianity viewed as deviant by Goodrick-Clarke) while condemning Paganism (qua Paganism).

According to Goodrick-Clarke, the Holocaust "can only be understood in a theological context." And this context is that the Nazis "wanted to destroy Christian civilization in the name of a new dispensation under pagan influence." This could only happen because the Nazis had abandoned "Christian" ethical principles in favor of Occultism, thus becoming morally debased because of the "narcissism and paranoia that run through these pseudo religions."

In the first two sentences of the Author's Preface to the 2004 Edition of his The Occult Roots of Nazism (originally published in 1985) Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke stated the following:
As we witness the renewed growth of the far right across Europe and America and the former East Bloc, The Occult Roots of Nazism helps illuminate its ideological foundations. By examining the occult ideas that played midwife to the Hitler movement, the most destructive right-wing ideology in history, we can better understand their implications today.
So while it is true that Goodrick-Clarke conceded, for example, in that same book "that Hitler really wasn't an occultist in his own right," he nevertheless literally made a career out of the following false claims concerning Nazism, Christianity, Paganism and the Occult:

1. Nazism has it's "roots" in the Occult.

2. Occultism was the "the midwife" of Nazism.

3. Under the sinister influence of Occult ideas and neopaganistical "pseudo religions", the Nazis abandoned the "Christian" belief in personal responsibility ("mea culpa, my fault"), and therefore succumbed to the "terrible danger" of "narcissism and paranoia."

4. The Nazis "wanted to destroy Christian civilization in the name of a new dispensation under pagan influence."

5. The Occultism of the Nazis also provides the "ideological foundations" of the modern day "far right".

But enough of my analysis and preamble. Here is the late Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his own words:


The Occult Roots of Nazism
by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke
[speech given by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke to the New York Open Center in April 1997, originally published in Lapis Magazine, Feb 18, 2009]

The occult side of Nazism can be easily dismissed as a popular fantasy. But scholarly analysis of the Aryosophist societies in turn of the century Vienna reveals many clear links between racist occult movements, convinced of the unique spiritual origins and destiny of the Aryans, and Hitler's evil clique.

Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke has a wide ranging interest in the history of ideas and the Western esoteric tradition. His book The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence on Nazi Ideology is published by New York University Press. This article is based on a talk he gave at the New York Open Center in April 1997.

"The past is another country, they do things differently there." – L P Hartley, The Go Between

In talking about the rise of the occult movement at the end of the 19th century, I want to recall fin-de-siècle Vienna, not through some album of old sepia photographs but in flesh and blood. Imagine a still very old fashioned sort of place, with state processions of the emperor and his courtiers side-by-side with feudal levels of poverty and prostitutes on the street, but with Mahler directing the Opera, Sigmund Freud developing psychoanalysis, and Modernist culture flourishing. Vienna was an odd mix of old and emergent new.

Austria-Hungry was a relatively late developer in terms of capitalist and industrial economy. Britain, France, and Germany were far more advanced. The empire was still dominated by agriculture, and so the world of factories, steam, and now electricity represented an enormous challenge to the way of life led by people not only in the countryside and in provincial towns like Graz and Linz, but also in Vienna itself. Until the late 1870s, Vienna was still a walled town. It was surrounded by fortifications erected in the 17th century to defend the city against the Turks. During the 1880s and 1890s, the old walls were replaced by the great circular, ring-road development that defines Vienna today. This represented a terrifying threat to people. People were frightened by the pace of change, frightened by modernity, by industry, frightened because such changes challenged the way they were used to living – their religious world, the world of traditional elites, even knowing people down on the corner. Almost everything they had known was being swept away before their eyes. Suddenly there were immigrants, colored people even. Vienna was a melting pot. People were drawn from all over the empire. There were Poles, Ukrainians, Serbs and Croats, Italians, Czechs. The massive change represented by industry, urbanization, slum clearance, and the disappearance of the old city, accompanied by revolutionary developments in music and art, represented a new kind of metropolitan culture, quite divorced from the sort of culture people were used to. The scale of immigration created an altogether new awareness of multiracial society, and it was a shock for an urban society to confront that so early. In the final decades of the 19th century, Vienna was changing from what was predominantly a German city into one of the first multiracial metropolises.

Simultaneously, there were changes of tectonic scale in the world of ideas. Quite aside from the development of psychoanalysis, fundamental challenges were being made to religious orthodoxy. For creationist Christianity the publication of Darwin's Origin of the Species in the 1850s was a shocking alarm signal, striking deep at the root assumptions of established theology. Science was changing the way we saw ourselves in nature. As a direct result, occultism experienced its first great resurgence since the late medieval period. When we talk about the modern occult revival we think of the Golden Dawn in London, and particularly of the theosophical movement, which brought Eastern religion onto the mental horizon of the Western world. But theosophy was not an isolated phenomenon; it was one response among many to the rapid changes – intellectual, artistic, and physical – of the late 19th century.

Theosophy was closely related to a wide range of emergent cults that involved nudism, vegetarianism, natural medicine, and interest in mantic sciences like divination and astrology. Such movements experienced a great surge of interest right up to the outbreak of World War 1. Theosophy itself is in some ways an extension of a very old tradition, because it is so closely related to gnosticism, which started amongst certain heretical sects in the early Christian era, who claimed a superior esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters. These sects shared the conviction that there exists secret knowledge, neither based on reflection, nor achieved by reason. This knowledge of the heart comes through meditative visions in which the truth is revealed. The systems differ considerably, but two common themes can be discerned in traditional gnosticism and are very important for understanding the way in which gnosticism and occult ideas can suddenly take on a political projection. Firstly, there's an Oriental element. In original Persian dualism, the two realms of good and evil, light and darkness, order and chaos are sharply contrasted as independent principles. Most gnostic sects disappeared round about the fourth century, but their ideas lived on. They inspired the Manichaean religion, and today we use the adjective manichaean to mean dualist. During the third to fifth centuries, there developed a gnostic synthesis of Neoplatonic philosophy, pharaonic Judaism, and cabalism. Gnostic and hermetic ideas were revived again in the 15th century and also take a sharply dualistic form. By the end of the 19th century this polar form of gnosticism emerged in theosophy.

In the early years of the 20th century the ideas of the Theosophists were adopted by radical nationalists who wished to stress the importance of ancient Teutonic wisdom. Guido von List (1848-1919), a native of Vienna, identified himself as a guru of ancient Germanic mysteries. It's no accident that this movement started in Vienna, because Vienna was on the fringe of the German-speaking world. Metropolitan Germany lay to the west. To the east lived Hungarians, to the north Czechs and Slovaks, and to the south the various nationalities of the Balkans. And so the Germans of Vienna, with its emerging multiracial society, were a natural audience for doctrines that sought to identify, define, and glorify their own origins.

List's earliest writings were characterized by a spontaneous nature worship. From 1877 to 1887, he published numerous articles, drenched in Germanic references, about the Austrian countryside, in periodicals known for their nationalist sentiment. He celebrated the countryside as the theater of mythological beings. The Alps and the Danube were seen not only as natural objects but as mirrors of the soul of the German past. Streams, fields, and hills were personified as beings in which he tied myth and folklore. At the same time, List was working on his full-length novel, Carnuntum, which described the fateful battle between the Romans and the German tribes at Carnuntum in AD 375. In his opinion, the German victory there unleashed the migrations which led to the sack of the Rome in AD 410 and the ultimate collapse of the Roman Empire. For List, the very word Carnuntum recalled the aura of ancient Teutonic valor and was a motto for the process which eventually restored the ancient Germans to the stage of world history. With his old- style nationalist sentiment expressed in plays, public lectures, and articles, List soon made his mark within the pan-German movements of the late 1890s.

In 1903 the theosophical publication Die Gnosis published an article in which List outlined the stages of a theosophical cosmogony, illustrated with symbols of sun wheels, the triskelion, and three- and four-armed swastikas. He wrote for the first time about the immortality of the soul, reincarnation, and karmic determination – all ideas borrowed from Theosophy. An important part of his gnosis was described as an old Aryan sexual religion, which took the form of a religiously sanctioned eugenic program designed to maintain the purity of the race. Here he was tapping into the ideas on root races that had been propounded by H P Blavatsky, founder of the Theosophical Society, but he was in fact specifying and identifying very much with the German Aryan race. Emphasizing the distinction between this kind of esoteric knowledge and other mundane or profane forms of knowledge, List indicated the political authority of initiates over the profane masses in archaic society. Here we see the growth of something that's altogether more political than mythological.

List's ideas were taken seriously. Around 1905 Friedrich Wannieck, a wealthy Viennese businessman in Prague, together with his son Oskar and some fifty other individuals from the Viennese banking and commercial elite, signed an announcement listing the foundation of the List Society to finance and publish a full program of official research into the ancient Teutonic past. In response, List wrote a series of six weighty tomes on the Aryan Germanic world, though it was a work of his imagination more than of empirical research – he claimed an "ancestral memory" whereby he could read the past through clairvoyance. With his great beard and Wagnerian bonnet, he presented himself as a kind of Aryan patriarch, discerning beneath the rubble of modernity and the debris of the Christian religion an ancient, shimmering German world order which had existed long before the Roman Empire. Using as evidence stone circles, burial mounds, and megaliths in the Austrian countryside, he mapped out an ancient Aryan world that could be lifted from the mists of ancient history and called forth in people's minds. He saw himself as a descendant of ancient priest-kings, high initiates whose knowledge gave them authority over the rest of society. He claimed that he and his sectarian followers – the members were called HAO (High Armanen-Order) – within the List Society, represented the vanguard of a new priestly revival, whose message had to be carried to all Germans in central Europe so that the nation might restore its former glory. This group was predominantly upper middle class, but included artisans and craftsmen, as well as a number of aristocrats, all convinced that they were the legitimate and direct heirs of an old sacred hierarchy. His paramount ideological concern was to restore to certain groups a status rapidly being undermined by modern industrial society.

Another important German nationalist to embrace Theosophy at the time was Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels. He went even further than List. Born in 1874 in Vienna, he founded in 1905 a gnostic order called the Order of the New Templars, whose members were drawn from leading figures in Viennese public life, business, and the armed forces. Lanz's gnosis owes more to Christian religion than to the Hindu doctrines of Theosophy, and as a result his theology is somewhat clearer than List's. However, still the most obvious feature in Lanz's religion was its dualism, which links it to the classical gnostic systems of light and darkness. He was a great fantasist. He claimed he was derived from Sicilian nobility, changed his birth date by about two years, which he later said was to mislead people who wanted to get an astrological fix on him, and during his childhood acquired a romantic interest in the medieval past and its religious and chivalrous orders, which he revered as the spiritual elite of a remote and pious age. It's probable that this complex of sentiments motivated his decision to enter the Cistercian order in 1893. But while he took vows in 1897 and assumed teaching duties in 1898, he was also evolving his own heretical theology, which in due course led to the renunciation of the monk's habit. Unlike List's marriage of nature religion and theosophical notions, Lanz's was in fact quite a dynamic form of heretical Christianity. In 1894 his attention had been drawn to a tombstone – a relief which he found on the underside of some flagstones in the monastery cloister – portraying a nobleman treading upon an unidentified beast. His reflections on its literal implications suggested to him that the root of all evil in the world actually had a subhuman animal nature. He subsequently directed his energies towards the study of contemporary anthropology and zoology. From the scriptures, apocryphal writings, and the findings of modern archeology, he assimilated current German racist ideas into this theology. He identified the stereotypical Aryan race as the divine principle and the various dark races of Negroes, Mongols, and what he called Mediterranialites (Slavs and Italians) as the evil principle. Lanz's distinctive and original contribution to this ideology was the sublimation of prejudice and national glorification into a doctrine which typified the blond and dark races as cosmic principles working for order or chaos, respectively, in the universe. As a result of this doctrine, Lanz was forced to leave the monastery in 1899, justifying his departure with the assertion that he could better inform the church from outside. Like List, Lanz implied that he was rediscovering ancient religion. He wasn't selling this as a new cult; he was saying that he'd found something that Christianity had obscured. Once outside the monastery, Lanz enrolled in several learned societies and began writing for racist periodicals. In 1905 he formulated a full statement of his theology, in Theo-Zoology or the Lore of the Sodom-Apelings and the Electron of the Gods. There he claimed that we are in fact sublime spiritual beings derived from some higher divine species. He claimed that there once existed a race of gods, which represented an earlier and superior form of terrestrial life. He suggested that these divine beings possessed extraordinary sensory organs for the reception and transmission of "electronic signals"-that these "godmen" were telepathic and omniscient. Besides these godmen there existed an entirely distinct race of "beastmen" who represented a fallen, primal man in Lanz's account of the origins of the world. Again, it's very similar to gnosticism, in that there's a primal man – a clay man – that creates the race of the animals and lower beings like Negroes and Mongols and Mediterranialites. At the same time the Aryans come from the stars, from a divine order. The history of all subsequent humanity is a shameful record of increasing racial corruption of the form of the godmen, so that now the pituitary gland and the pineal gland are the sole material remnants of the divine electronic power of the fallen gods.

Today, hard core neo-Nazi literature invokes the themes of ancient civilizations and mysteries to suggest that the Aryans have extraterrestrial origins. The idea of supermen and of gods on Earth has of course been current for some years in the popular books of Erich von Däniken, Robert Charroux, and more latterly in Graham Hancock's Fingerprints of the Gods. In the Nazi variant of this mythology, we read that the Aryans are descended from the angels or other extraterrestrial beings and are just visitors to this benighted planet which they are trying to develop. When Lanz turned to the history of religion, it was likewise interpreted as a front for struggle between task of the Aryan race to rear a new race of godmen and the bestial inferior races who sought to compromise the holy Aryans by dragging them down with their promiscuous embraces. It all sounds extraordinary, but it's a very powerful sexual fantasy as well as a religious myth. The Old Testament recorded the attempts of the chosen people – the Aryans of course – to return to the old gnosis, while the New Testament was interpreted as a revival of the gnosis by Christ, who is considered an exceptional (transracial) Aryan. At the end of this historical scheme was the promise of final salvation, the second coming, and the kingdom of heaven, which Lanz interpreted as the restoration of the race of godmen from Aryan stock on earth. That was the ultimate terrestrial paradise in Lanz's religion. When we look at these ideas today, we think of them as crazy, but I want to show that they produced very concrete links with the early Nazi Party and thus played a critical role in 20th century history.

There was in Germany, around about 1910 or so, already a well-formed anti-Semitic movement. Disgruntled German patriots, nationalists, and simple racists became focused on the power of the Jews. They identified Jews with modernity, with innovations in art and music as well as with capitalism and industrial development. When Germans were concerned, in a reactionary sense, with things moving too fast or of losing their bearings, they looked back to an old-fashioned world. The myth in early 20th century Germany was that Jewry was at the core of a secret worldwide conspiracy to impose a new world order which was displacing ordinary Germans. As a reaction, the Germanenorden was founded in 1912 by right-wing Germans who decided they needed a secret order of their own, with its own conspiracy techniques, secret meetings, passwords, and so on to oppose the Jewish conspiracy. There was a good deal of overlap between the membership of the Germanenorden and the List Society. Lanz Von Liebenfels also had a direct input through some of the closest followers. The growth of the Germanenorden was also very closely connected with something called the Thule Society. In fact, the Thule Society and its founder, Rudolf von Sebottendorff, represented the key link between the Aryan-theosophical movement and the Nazis. Von Sebottendorff was himself an occultist too, born in 1875 in Saxony, the son of a locomotive driver. He left Germany in the late 1890s to work on steamships, was trained as an engineer, and traveled to Australia, Egypt, and America. But later we find him in Turkey, where he spent most of the time until 1913 studying the dervish orders. On his return to Germany, he had developed an extraordinary interest in occultism. Consequently, he joined the Germanenorden, and by January 1918 – when World War 1 was still raging on the western front – he'd managed to build the Bavarian chapter of that order into about fifteen hundred members, which was quite sizable considering that most young men were serving at the front. So membership consisted largely of older men, and they tended to be men of senior authority in commerce and academia. By the end of the war, when Germany was plunged into quasi-revolution, the Germanenorden organized itself into the Thule Society, whose proclaimed object was to foster Germanic mythology and national tradition. The Thule Society fed into the Nazi party much of what List, Lanz, and the Theosophical movement had been promoting.

There were three distinct channels of influence. One was journalistic. Von Sebottendorff picked up a flagging weekly suburban newspaper called the Munich Observer, which in due course became the Nazi party's daily organ. As early as 1920, all the shares in that newspaper were owned by Adolf Hitler. Von Sebottendorff started the paper very much with a view to attracting young people to his own brand of occult and anti-Semitic ideas. This he did by including a lot of sports features. As a result the paper was enormously successful even before the time it passed into Nazi party ownership. The second channel of influence whereby the Thule Society was effective was paramilitary activity. With postwar demobilization groups were recruited by the Thule Society to directly engage in counterrevolutionary activities against the left, which had asserted itself in Munich after the war.

But the Thule's most important channel of influence was political. The Society was regular host to a number of political groups in the prestigious club rooms of the Hotel Vier Jahreseitzen in Munich. We know from the Society's records that regular attendees included such figures as Gottfried Feder, who wrote the economic program for the Nazi party, Alfred Rosenberg, who became the leading ideologue for the Nazi party, Rudolf Hess, and Dietrich Eckart, who was Hitler's mentor in Munich. A famous poet and playwright of the day and an extraordinary character (as well as a drug addict), Eckart introduced the young Hitler to monied and influential circles that were absolutely crucial in building up the Nazi party's respectability at a time when it just as easily could have been perceived as an eccentric working-class movement. Eckart helped Hitler get to the right places and to the right parties. But von Sebottendorff was also mindful of the fact that he had to reach out beyond the educated middle classes; he had to get through to the working class. He had the idea of study circles within workers' movements. He entrusted the formation of a so-called political workers' circle to a Thule member and sports journalist named Karl Harrer. Harrer attracted large numbers of men to Thule groups at industrial plants in Munich. So as early as 1919, they were getting through to the working classes, and planting the seeds of a mass movement. Within less than two years, this seed had developed into the political party known as the German Workers' Party (formed in 1919), which changed its name to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), or "Nazi" party, in 1920.

How much of the original dynamic of Aryan racial cultist ideology was preserved in the Nazi party itself, once it was dominated by politicians, rather than occult cranks, is a matter of debate. It's fair to say that Hitler really wasn't an occultist in his own right, but he was certainly someone who could relate to gnostic dualism in a strong way. While he was raised as a Catholic, there's evidence to suggest that he tended towards that heretical side of Catholicism that sees the world in very sharp black and white terms. Certainly, Hitler's anti-Semitism owed much to the famous anti-Semitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to which he was introduced by his mentors, Dietrich Eckart and Alfred Rosenberg. This notorious Jew-baiting document was first published in German in 1920, but had originated in Russia in the late 1890s. It was highly popular among Czarists during the Russian Revolution as a way of attributing the forces of disorder and radical change to the Jews. There's also very strong evidence to suggest that Hitler actually read Lanz's magazines in Vienna, before World War 1. But after the war there was tremendous acceleration in Hitler's dualistic worldview – most probably due to the Protocols – that the world can be saved only if the Jews are destroyed. Many contemporary observers, people like Albert Speer and others who knew him very well and saw him daily right throughout the Third Reich, noticed that an almost eerie, strange light came into Hitler's eyes whenever Jews were the subject of discussion. He looked kind of haunting; he looked paranoid; he looked strange. He looked as if he was up against something he couldn't beat in the end, because ultimately it was a projection of his own fear. There was the sense that he was a prisoner of dualism.

The person who best exemplified this kind of messianic occultism was undoubtedly Himmler, leader of the SS, Hitler's terrifying police and security force, who was responsible for the administration of the Holocaust. The SS combined the idea of recreating a racial aristocracy on purely eugenic lines with the idea of an ideological elite representing wisdom derived from the Aryosophists. Himmler was totally dominated by these ideas. He maintained within his staff a private magus named Karl Maria Wiligut, who came straight out of the occult tradition. Wiligut was born in 1866, demobilized after a perfectly respectable and successful military career in the Austrian-Hungarian army at the end of World War 1, went into retirement, but was hospitalized because he had a nervous breakdown and exhibited traits of schizophrenia and paranoia. Then in the late 20s, he moved to Germany and became a prominent figure within the Aryosophical underground. By 1933 he'd joined Himmler's staff on the recommendation of an SS officer who happened to be a member of Lanz's order. Wiligut was promoted from the rank of captain to brigadier and joined Himmler's private staff. His job consisted almost exclusively of recording myths and symbols and stories that he intuited from the ancient Teutonic past, because he, like List, considered himself an ancient priest king, a magician who had direct knowledge of Germanic traditions. From Himmler's archives we know that anything that Wiligut produced, Himmler read, marked with his signature HH, and assiduously filed. Wiligut also designed the death's head ring that was worn by all SS men and claimed by Wiligut to be his ancient family's seal. Wiligut also administered to Himmler all kinds of stimulants and special medications that unfortunately had a very damaging effect on his health. Himmler was aware of Wiligut's psychiatric history, and it was widely known that he'd been committed as a patient in Salzburg before 1933 and he was obliged to resign. But he made one final, extraordinary contribution to Himmler's SS mythology and ritual, and that was the design of a great medieval castle celebrating Teutonic glory, intended as a kind of pagan Vatican, a Germanic center in opposition to Rome and Christianity. The Nazis were ultimately determined to replace the Christian heritage of Europe with something that reflected their pagan past.

Such dreams and visions and beliefs were redolent with gnostic and manichaean heresies. But while Nazi racist beliefs have plenty of theological precedence, in terms of dualistic doctrine and a fanatical desire to change the nature of life on earth, such heresies had never ignited historical events of such consequence. I am convinced that the Nazi fantasies of being a missionary-elect, the Nazi pursuit of the millennium in the name of nationalist racist ideology, and the extermination of six million European Jews in death camps are political events which can be understood only in a theological context. It is perfectly consistent with earlier examples of militant heresy in Europe that the Nazis should have wanted to destroy Christian civilization in the name of a new dispensation under pagan influence. When endless columns of Nazi legionaries were marching beneath crooked crosses in the massive marshal displays at Nuremberg, Nazi Germany was effectively saluting its first founder-emperor and Führer of the new one thousand year Reich. But those feelings of exuberance and hope were matched by equally intense feelings of fear and a conviction that destruction of evil was a condition of this new age. Again I'm reminded of the eerie expression that Hitler allegedly wore whenever the word Jew was mentioned in his presence. The proposed shining eternal city of Germania, Hitler's resurrected Berlin, was to be the political center of a vast Germano-Eurasian empire, predicated upon a network of slave and death cities where the antagonists of the millennium would be worked to death or immolated in a holocaust conducted by god's chosen people, the Aryans. The Nazi crusade for a new eon was entirely dualistic in its conception of battling deities for good and evil, order and chaos, and Judeo-Christian in its adoption of cultural symbols involving the destruction of the followers of Satan in a lake of fire and brimstone.

In Auschwitz we see the stain that Nazism cast upon humanity as a whole, an undying testimony to its perverted crusade. The Nazi crusade failed, despite its appeal amongst eccentric apologists for new empires and faiths, because of its hysterical narcissism, its paranoid hatred of things outside itself. You could say that the fundamental pathology of Nazi Germany's hysterical rejection of things that were foreign to itself was a rather brittle talisman. If we think about the lessons of Nazism and the shadow within certain kinds of new age belief, it really comes down to the fact that there is a terrible risk in such projections. When you start to split the world into light and darkness, order and chaos, goodness and evil, it's important that we also bear in mind something that comes very strongly to us through Christian belief: the idea of mea culpa, my fault. List and Lanz, the founders of Aryosophy, cast themselves as shining knights. But their religious dualism was shot through with the idea that they were right and the rest of the world was inferior or wrong. It's this terrible danger of the narcissism and paranoia that run through these pseudo religions and their hysterical assertion of rightness against all that seems disorderly or different that constitutes the ultimate risk – the sense that one can only solve one's problems by destroying the other.

-----------------------------------------------------------


"Nazis & Christians & Pagans" (related posts from this blog):


  1. Nazis and Christians and Pagans, Oh My!
  2. Christian Nazi Quote-fest
  3. Fascism, Islam, and Freedom of Expression
  4. "Hitler was not an occultist": Mitch Horowitz is right but his sourcing is all wrong
  5. Karla Poewe's "New Religions and the Nazis" reviewed by Richard Steigmann-Gall
  6. Rosenberg, Chamberlain, Harnack
  7. Religion, Racism & the Right
  8. Southern Poverty Law Center: There They Go Again
  9. Carl Jung & the Cowardly Blood Sport of Nazi-Baiting
  10. C. G. Jung and the Nazis: notes on two specific allegations
  11. The Not-So-Occult Foundations of Nazism
  12. Traditionalism & Anti-Modernism: A Guide For The Perplexed Pagan
  13. "We need to start dismantling this notion of 'Tradition.'"

Friday, August 31, 2012

The "Religion of Peace" Naked At Last?

Best selling author Tom Holland has written a book about the early history of Islam. Barnaby Rogerson, writing for the Independent, nicely summarizes the gist of what Holland is up to:
This is a history of the history as it were, telling how the warrior-dominated Empires of Antiquity were transformed into the first monotheistic states; how the old inclusive conquest states, with their comparatively simple desire for submission and tribute were replaced by states which imposed systems of total belief and demanded exclusive loyalty.

(link to full review dated March 30)
Rogerson begins his review by saying "This is a book of extraordinary richness. I found myself amused, diverted and enchanted by turn," and ends it with "Even with these slight flaws In the Shadow of the Sword remains a spell-bindingly brilliant multiple portrait of the triumph of monotheism in the ancient world." So it appears that he rather liked it.

Anthony Sattin, writing for the Guardian, was also very positive about Holland's book, which he characterized as "brilliantly provocative".

Here is the concluding paragraph of Sattin's review:
The Qur'an anticipated the day of Holland's coming (or someone very like him). Sura 25 instructs Muslims to counter the claim that "these are fables of the ancients which he has got someone to write down for him" with the insistence that it was "revealed by Him Who knows every secret". For believers, these words are proof enough of the veracity of the Qur'an. Some have gone further and used them as justification for intellectual, legal and physical attacks on people who claim otherwise. The lives of some people who have dared to question the historicity of the prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an have been ruined, even ended. We must hope that Holland is spared their wrath and that his excellent book will be lauded, as it should be, for doing what the best sort of books can do – examining holy cows.

(link to full review, dated April 5)
Ziauddin Sardar, writing for the New Statesman, spews forth a predictable apolgetic hit-job in his "review" of Holland's book. Sardar frames his attack in terms of what Holland is "ostensibly ... concerned with", as opposed to what Holland's "real aim" is. Further, Sardar attacks Holland's sources, Holland's colleages, anyone who agrees with Holland, and the horse he rode in on. In all, it is exactly the kind of obscurantist tripe that one expects from a Left-Islamic cultural warrior like Sardar. Here is a link to Sardar's full review, dated April 25.

Not wanting to be outdone in the political-correctness department by the good Fabians over at the New Statesman, the Guardian decided to publish another review. This time it was the turn of G.W. Bowersock, one of the world's premier historians of late antiquity, who wrote sneeringly that:
Holland came to his work on Islam unencumbered by any prior acquaintance with its fundamental texts or the scholarly literature. He modestly compares himself to Edward Gibbon, whom he can call without the slightest fear of contradiction 'an infinitely greater historian than myself'.

(link to full review dated May 4)
Bowersock ends his review by openly questioning Holland's motives and personal character. This kind of unhinged attack is nothing new for Bowersock, as those familiar with his obsessive hatred for the Emperor Julian are already aware. While generally a staid and reliable scholar, Bowersock reacts to certain subjects the way Rigby Reardon (in Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid) reacts to any mention of "the cleaning woman".

Fortunately, Tom Holland was given the opportunity to respond to Bowersock's screed. This excerpt gives a taste of Holland's highly effective and dignified rejoinder:
If I did not cite a manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale dated by the French scholar François Déroche to the third quarter of the seventh century, it was not – as Bowersock charges – because I had "missed" it, but because the dating of early Qur'an manuscripts is notoriously a work in progress. Déroche himself, for instance, originally placed the origins of the Bibliothèque Nationale manuscript in the early eighth century – and there are other scholars who still do. Nor, unfortunately, does carbon dating offer any greater certainty. At a conference in 2010, the same Christian Robin cited by Bowersock in his review revealed that a preliminary carbon dating of some pages from one of the Sana'a palimpsests had given dates in the late 500s – a most awkward misfire. I hope, then, that it will be understandable why, in a book aimed at a general readership, I opted not to venture into such a quagmire.

(link to full response, dated May 7)

David Frum very much liked Holland's book. Frum is an interesting guy who went from being a celebrated right-wing pundit to, well, the kind of guy who resigns/gets fired from the American Enterprise Institute because he was sick and tired of the Republican obstructionism in Washington, especially with respect to President Obama's Affordable Care Act. This is important to note because it means that Frum is definitely not a knee-jerk reactionary who simply spouts well-rehearsed xenophobic talking points any time the subject of Islam is mentioned.

The beginning of Frum's review (written for the Daily Beast) is worth quoting at length:
"Over the past century, modern scholarship has pretty thoroughly debunked the standard story of the birth of Islam.

The Quran was assembled over a century or more, not revealed in one go.

The religion we call Islam coalesced after the Arab Conquest of what is now Syria and Iraq, not before.

We have no reliable biographical details at all of the life of the prophet now known as Muhammad, but if he existed at all, he was likely a native of someplace in what is now Jordan, not the Hijaz, much less Mecca.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Until now, however, if you wanted more than just an "idea," you faced a challenging time. The revisionist scholars of Islam wrote in a style that was at best highly technical and at worst deliberately obscure. Unlike the gleeful debunkers of the self-told histories of Christianity and Judaism, revisionists such as John Wansborough and Patricia Crone have taken enormous pains to tread delicately.

The scrupulosity of these scholars however has left the largest part of the reading public to popularizers like Karen Armstrong, who continue to spread long-exploded versions of Islamic history as if the explosions had never been detonated. Those unwilling to struggle through academic texts have long needed a guide to the story of Islam as it's understood by those with the fullest access to the latest linguistic and archaeological evidence. Now at last in Tom Holland's In the Shadow of the Sword, they finally have it."

(link to full review, dated June 4)


Other reviews:

Finally, Tom Holland's own website has a collection of blurbs from various reviews, some of which are not included in this post.