The origins of Gardnerian Wicca - or at least, the story Gardner told of them - are well known. He was supposed to have made contact with a coven of genuine witches in the New Forest, and was initiated by them into the Wicca 'cult', as he referred to it. Among these were the old witch Dorothy Clutterbuck, and the young Dafo, who was Gardner's own High Priestess. It was Dafo who wrote to Gardner late in his life to rebuke him for seeking publicity - a statement taken by many to mean Gardner's decision to open the Craft up to a wider audience.
Since then, many people have endeavored to find out the truth behind Gardner's account, most recently Philip Heselton in his book 'Wiccan Roots'. Heselton seems to take the view that Gardner was telling the absolute truth, and that he really was initiated into a surviving coven; Wiccan Roots is a brave attempt to find facts to fit the theory, and certainly goes much further than any other attempt, though it is somewhat disappointing to find that the diaries of Dorothy Clutterbuck reveal her to have been a perfectly ordinary if nature-loving Christian. The trouble with Gardner's core story, though, is that it he can be shown to be lying about some of the key elements. With that in mind, I intend to demonstrate once and for all that not only is Wicca a completely modern construct, but to indicate for the first time in print why Gardner invented Wicca in the first place.
http://whitedragon.org.uk/articles/hoax.htmThe Great Wicca Hoax II: Attack of the Crones
By Adrian Bott
Originally published at Lughnasa 2002
I was not in the least surprised to see the wave of controversy which 'The Great Wicca Hoax' provoked. As our esteemed editrix has pointed out, part of our intention was to give the wasp's nest a good hard whack and see what came out. However, this was not done with the sole intention to stir up discord (well, not by me, anyway - I cannot speak for her what runs the show!) but was also intended to tackle issues at the very root of the Wicca/Trad debate.
It seems there are two kinds of negative reaction to an article like mine. One is the kind that would question one's very right to query the origins of Wicca. The other is that which at least tries to challenge one's findings by presenting contradictory evidence.
Concerning the first kind, I have no sympathy at all with those who think Gardner's lies should go unexposed just because he founded a religion to which many thousands of people now belong. Do such people think that the life of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, should likewise be free from inquiry? How about the corrupt televangelists in America or the paedophile priests who are causing such uproar in the Catholic church? Should we turn a blind eye to these just because some people need to believe in them? Perhaps the Turin Shroud should never have been subjected to scientific tests, just in case people were upset when they discovered it did not date from the time of Jesus after all?
http://whitedragon.org.uk/articles/wicchoax.htm