• Forums Software Updates

    The forums will be undergoing updates on Sunday 10th November 2024.
    Little to no downtime is expected.
  • We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Witches (General; Compendium)

OOOOH! For instance this! The Torryburn Witch! Torryburn in in Fife. The grave of Lilias Adie, died in prison 1704, and it actually, really, truly, definitely on purpose IS between high tide and low tide!

Mortuary behaviour in action :)
 
People don't recognise witches any more that's the problem.

Mary Poppins - Witch
Sally Morgan - Witch
Derren Brown - Witch (or Warlock!)
John Edward - Witch (or Warlock)
David Blaine - Witch (or Warlock)
Stormy Daniels - Witch

You get the picture. At one time they'd have been seen as witches wouldn't they? When did we become so liberal?!
 
Martin Littlewood said:
People don't recognise witches any more that's the problem.

Mary Poppins - Witch
Sally Morgan - Witch
Derren Brown - Witch (or Warlock!)
John Edward - Witch (or Warlock)
David Blaine - Witch (or Warlock)
Stormy Daniels - Witch

You get the picture. At one time they'd have been seen as witches wouldn't they? When did we become so liberal?!
Click to expand...
Stormy Daniels?
 
I've always seen it as the name of the species :) If you want to put a marker down for Time Lady, Time Lordette or Lady Time Lord please do! lololol
 
[Mod Edit: This post has been left as a Warning to the Curious, Frideswide]

Martin Littlewood said:
People don't recognise witches any more that's the problem.

Mary Poppins - Witch
Sally Morgan - Witch
Derren Brown - Witch (or Warlock!)
John Edward - Witch (or Warlock)
David Blaine - Witch (or Warlock)
Stormy Daniels - Witch

You get the picture. At one time they'd have been seen as witches wouldn't they? When did we become so liberal?!
Click to expand...

FFS! You MUST be trolling!

Mary Poppins is s frikkin' fictional character so grow a frikkin' brain Martin! Sally Morgan and John Edward are using the stage magic art called cold reading' they aren't mediums, they're charlatans. Derren Brown and David Blaine are both self declared stage magicians who makes no claims of supernatural powers whatsoever. As to Stormy Daniels, she's a prostitute who our Beloved Orange President had sex with and paid off with a large sum of money, and despite apparently staring in the pornographic movie "The Witches of Breastwick", she isn't actually a witch.

Furthermore, in Britain the laws against Witchcraft were repealed in 1951, and in the USA the right to practice witchcraft is legal under the First Amendment of the US Constitution which guarantees its citizens Freedom of Religion. Are you seriously saying you want to return to the stupid days of the Salem Witch Trials Martin? You do realize that back then ANYONE who decided they didn't like you could simply accuse you of being a witch and their ignorant and superstitious society would band together to wreck your life and then hang you and burn your body on heresay evidence. So if someone decided they had a grudge against you specifically Martin, they could slander you and have you killed, and probably be rewarded with your worldly possessions for doing so and "protecting the community" thereby. Does that sound like a good idea?

My advice to you Martin, is wipe the dung off your face, use your torch to burn your pitchfork, and enter the 21st century you retarded dark ages peasant. You are using a computer. Once upon a time that computer would be considered an unthinkably evil tool of black magic, yet here you are blithely ignoring your heinous sins to tap away drivel. Say, while we're on the subject, have you noticed that science works, but religion is just a pile of ignorance and failure that perpetuates itself via the gullible?

I don't want to think the worst of you Martin. Admit you were trolling and we can move on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think, being charitable, Martin is pointing out that those people on the list (Mary Poppins excluded as she is fictional) might well have had trouble explaining how they do what they do in the past. Nowadays we KNOW that it's just cold reading, trickery or, in the case of Stormy, possibly extreme hypnosis (how else could she bear it? But money is a powerful magic on its own...). But a few hundred years ago these people would probably have had the label 'witch' attached to them.

Although I did read that most cases brought against so-called 'witches' were thrown out of court, or received a not guilty verdict, so I don't think the 'hang the witch!' was quite as prevalent as people seem to think.
 
catseye said:
Although I did read that most cases brought against so-called 'witches' were thrown out of court, or received a not guilty verdict, so I don't think the 'hang the witch!' was quite as prevalent as people seem to think.
Click to expand...
Total deaths from the Spanish Inquisition were about 150,000. Total deaths from witch trials in Protestant countries in Europe during the Wars of Religion were another 50,000 according to present estimates. Some have put the total deaths from witch trials closer to 3 million as an aggregate figure over the full A.D. period. In fact, compared to all the other ways religion set about killing people, witch trials weren't really much of a blip statistically speaking.
 
AlchoPwn said:
FFS! You MUST be trolling!
Click to expand...

Or posting something and you didn't get it?

In the long tradition of giving a poster the benefit of the doubt, ascribing a sense of humour to them, considering sarcasm/irony and all the rest of what makes us forteans and not foaming at the mouth intolerants:

I'm sure your post is meant in a humorous and witty way. Otherwise I'd be rolling out much-loved Mod expressions instructions such "this is a discussion not an argument" and "don't take up threadspace with snarkery".

I will use "Comments or questions on this? PM or General Queries please"

Frides
 
And now we get to the meat of it.

@AlchoPwn - you don't use "retarded" as an insult. Or for anything except scholarly historical commentary and talking about timing mechanisms. This also goes for any coinings from it.

Using the medium of PM, this is a good time to explain to me why you have broken the "no ad hominem attacks" rule.

Frides
 
[Mod Edit: This post has been left as a Warning to the Curious, Frideswide]

Frideswide said:
And now we get to the meat of it.

@AlchoPwn - you don't use "retarded" as an insult. Or for anything except scholarly historical commentary and talking about timing mechanisms. This also goes for any coinings from it.

Using the medium of PM, this is a good time to explain to me why you have broken the "no ad hominem attacks" rule.

Frides
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's fair. Calling someone a retarded dark ages peasant with dung on their face is ad hominem. I apologise and promise not to call Martin a retarded dark ages peasant with dung on his face again. I will in future refer to him as "medievally challenged".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blimey wasn't expecting that sort of (over) reaction. No I wasn't trolling, just making an observation on how times have changed. People think all the witchcraft stuff died out centuries ago, but my point was that it hasn't. If the likes of the people I mentioned went about their business openly back in the 1600s (purporting to communicate with the dead, utilising hidden arts, acting like a succubus in a brazen manner with no shame) it would have been assumed they were in league with the Devil and they would have probably been put on trial. I know full well that they are NOT actually witches - just as those persecuted for witchcraft were not actual witches either (or where they?! - only joking). As for Mary Poppins, my goodness if the puritans were able to glimpse the future (which surely would have made them witches?! OK Logic breakdown), it would be interesting to see what they made of people willingly portraying a 'witch' as a family friendly children's hero!
 
Martin Littlewood said:
Blimey wasn't expecting that sort of (over) reaction. No I wasn't trolling, just making an observation on how times have changed. People think all the witchcraft stuff died out centuries ago, but my point was that it hasn't. If the likes of the people I mentioned went about their business openly back in the 1600s (purporting to communicate with the dead, utilising hidden arts, acting like a succubus in a brazen manner with no shame) it would have been assumed they were in league with the Devil and they would have probably been put on trial. I know full well that they are NOT actually witches - just as those persecuted for witchcraft were not actual witches either (or where they?! - only joking). As for Mary Poppins, my goodness if the puritans were able to glimpse the future (which surely would have made them witches?! OK Logic breakdown), it would be interesting to see what they made of people willingly portraying a 'witch' as a family friendly children's hero!
Click to expand...

I am sure there were 'family friendly' witches in the 1600's. Well, 'witches' in as inverted commas as you wish them to be.

After all, a quiet old lady who treated your corns, helped midwife your children into being and knew the right herbs to ease that horrible pain you sometimes got in your side - well, if she doesn't upset anyone, no-one will accuse her of being a witch.

The women accused of witchcraft were often the women that someone decided they didn't like. Maybe they looked at them funny one day. Or shouted at them in the street to keep their dog under control and stop it chasing their cat. Or the cow died and someone must be to blame, mustn't they?
 
From what I understand, "witch' was one of the terms that were given to a wisewoman as described by Catseye. Someone who was familiar with using herbs for tinctures, poultices etc.

Not sure why the term was not applied to men, though perhaps it had to do with gender roles and culture. Women would have looked after aiding births and other female troubles.

Other cultures refer to people knowledgeable in herbs and healing as shamans.
 
brownmane said:
From what I understand, "witch' was one of the terms that were given to a wisewoman as described by Catseye. Someone who was familiar with using herbs for tinctures, poultices etc.

Not sure why the term was not applied to men, though perhaps it had to do with gender roles and culture. Women would have looked after aiding births and other female troubles.

Other cultures refer to people knowledgeable in herbs and healing as shamans.
Click to expand...

Women were witches. Men were surgeons/doctors etc. Training was denied to women, so they passed cures from generation to generation by word of mouth. There must have been men who picked up the same information - even if only by listening in as their sisters were taught - but if that kind of healing was generally accepted as being done by the women, maybe they never had to use their learning. Or maybe there were those hushed kinds of arguments in the kitchen 'I told you tansy wouldn't work...' 'Well, if you're so clever, you go and find some marigolds!'
 
AlchoPwn said:
[Mod Edit: This post has been left as a Warning to the Curious, Frideswide]



FFS! You MUST be trolling!

Mary Poppins is s frikkin' fictional character so grow a frikkin' brain Martin! Sally Morgan and John Edward are using the stage magic art called cold reading' they aren't mediums, they're charlatans. Derren Brown and David Blaine are both self declared stage magicians who makes no claims of supernatural powers whatsoever. As to Stormy Daniels, she's a prostitute who our Beloved Orange President had sex with and paid off with a large sum of money, and despite apparently staring in the pornographic movie "The Witches of Breastwick", she isn't actually a witch.

Furthermore, in Britain the laws against Witchcraft were repealed in 1951, and in the USA the right to practice witchcraft is legal under the First Amendment of the US Constitution which guarantees its citizens Freedom of Religion. Are you seriously saying you want to return to the stupid days of the Salem Witch Trials Martin? You do realize that back then ANYONE who decided they didn't like you could simply accuse you of being a witch and their ignorant and superstitious society would band together to wreck your life and then hang you and burn your body on heresay evidence. So if someone decided they had a grudge against you specifically Martin, they could slander you and have you killed, and probably be rewarded with your worldly possessions for doing so and "protecting the community" thereby. Does that sound like a good idea?

My advice to you Martin, is wipe the dung off your face, use your torch to burn your pitchfork, and enter the 21st century you retarded dark ages peasant. You are using a computer. Once upon a time that computer would be considered an unthinkably evil tool of black magic, yet here you are blithely ignoring your heinous sins to tap away drivel. Say, while we're on the subject, have you noticed that science works, but religion is just a pile of ignorance and failure that perpetuates itself via the gullible?

I don't want to think the worst of you Martin. Admit you were trolling and we can move on.
Click to expand...
Martin's post was what is known as "a joke". Though making an interesting point.
 
Frideswide said:
disproportionately old, poor and alone if I'm remembering it right :(

why is so little made of the men who were "witches" (adopting your use of the inverted commas @catseye )
Click to expand...

Well, as far as I remember, one of the most famous "witch" is Isobel Goudie, that was reasonably young. The women that died in Salem were not that old, neither.

There is a difference between women that were tried and executed under the accusation of "witchcraft" and the older women, seen as wise and versed in the effects of plants, for exemple (anyway, they would be always under the risk of being pointed as "witches", at one moment or another, depending on a unsatisfied customer or a jealous priest).

Just as a remark, I've been reading Nigel Jackson's "Masks of Misrule", where he offers some interesting ethimologies to the word "witch". I couldn't check on this sources, but I am appeciating the way he presents his conclusions. A very interesting read.

He starts with a supposed indo-european root "Weik", arrives to the Saxon "Wicce", the Middle English "Wicche" and stretches to arrive to the German "Witte", as from "Witte-Wivven", the Wise Wives, that correspond to the ladies that cared for the community with plants and (not necessarily chrisitian) prayers. Of course, I let the Horned God out of the discussion, but let's focus on the "witch" word... :)
 
catseye said:
Women were witches. Men were surgeons/doctors etc.!'
Click to expand...
So I may be wrong as I have not looked into "witches" per se, but I was referring to earlier(?) times when there were no trained doctors or surgeons. I do know that once men came into the medical profession, "witch" was used to belittle women who had knowledge, just not what the male medical profession deemed important, to deter people from looking to the women for aide.
 
Are we saying these "wise women" had the word witch written on their business cards?
 
Xanatic* said:
Are we saying these "wise women" had the word witch written on their business cards?
Click to expand...
In a certain manner, yes, it could be implicit but not necessarily negative. Take the case of the Benandanti : they were negative only in the christian context, but inside their own communities, they were necessary, even heroic characters. Isobel Goudie wasn't seen as a menace, except for the perverted witch hunters. Witches were not intrinsically evil, but as an authority inside their communities they were a counterpoint to the authority of the priest, so, a menace.
 
chicorea said:
Take the case of the Benandanti : they were negative only in the christian context, but inside their own communities, they were necessary, even heroic characters.
Click to expand...

Interesting - new to me, thank you. Reminds of some of what was recorded in the cathar regions of Languedoc. Montaillou has lots of material.
 
LymeswoldSnork said:
Martin's post was what is known as "a joke". Though making an interesting point.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got a bit triggered by that comment. On the other hand the "point" is actually also completely factually incorrect. It is hardly "liberal" to be accepting of what is a very ancient religious tradition, just because it is a little nonconformist. For me that is merely symptomatic of the militant intolerance of middle eastern monotheisms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top