 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
'Fragrant smoke is sacred unto the gods'
GUESTBOOK
|
THE REGENCY – a snapshot of British Paganism in the 1970s There are always going to be methodological issues involved in researching groups, pagan or otherwise, and the Regency is no exception to this. Any account provided should therefore take into consideration the following factors: - Those few people who’ve written about it have not always had first-hand experience of the rites; those who have may have been there at a different time period to myself so perceptions could vary; some of those who were present for much of the Regency’s life have now passed on; others may just wish to keep quiet and/or memories of those days could be weak. Contextualising myself as regards the Regency, therefore, I had a dual
role – as a participating member and pagan on the one hand and as a
sociological researcher on the other. The Regency itself also needs to be
briefly placed in context. In those days the magical subculture was
smaller and less diverse than it is today but the key categories of
Alexandrian, Gardnerian, traditional and hereditary witchcraft were all
present as were rather fewer Druid orders, Tony Kelly’s Pagan Movement
and the Pagan Front, forerunner of the Pagan Federation. A key element in the genesis of
the Regency, however, is that of its own forerunner usually known nowadays
as the 1734 tradition. Published material is now readily available on this
system (i). The controversial
death of its founder in 1966 brought on its effective demise but out of
its ashes grew the Regency, the main initiators being former members of
the 1734 – George Winter and Ronald White. The neglected thesis by Michael Bampton (ii), ignored by modern commentators on Paganism like Ron Hutton or Tanya Luhrmann, gives a thumbnail sketch of `Chalky’ as he was more commonly known viz. ...`an art teacher at a secondary school, married with one child, sharp, quick-witted, half-educated, in some conflict with his own family’…and so on. By the time I met him several years after Michael’s fieldwork Ron had separated from his wife, was living with what I took to be an ex-student of his, and now head of department at a comprehensive school .I was fortunate enough to be living just around the corner from his ex-wife in North Islington at this time. At a `doorstep interview’ she revealed that Ron, like her, had been a non-conformist Christian, I believe of the Pentecostal kind, but had backslid from the faith. Given what I experienced on occasion as the ecstatic nature of the Regency
rites I cannot help but wonder if he had swapped one form of ecstasy for
another. Certainly Ron saw the Regency, its ideology and its workings, as
a manifestation of the bohemian ideas and ideals of all true artists. He
wrote little about the philosophy behind the Regency. Indeed, by the time
I met him and the group, he had largely distanced himself from the
assorted witches and other pagans he had known in the past.
He seemed by then uninterested in much dialogue with the wider
pagan community and still less with society at large. Indeed, only three what nowadays may be termed `mission statements’ for the group were to hand at the time I was involved - the first being in Gerard Noel’s Pentagram newsletter for 1967, by then reduced to an A5 size publication; the second in the 1970 Samhain issue of Tony Kelly’s house journal for his Pagan Movement, the Waxing Moon; the third appeared in the short lived Spectrum magazine, edited by Mike Howard, in 1974. However, in correspondence with both other people and myself Ron basically reproduced the essentials of his approach to the `pagan way’. The whole statement is too long to be given here but sections of it may be
found in M. Howard (ed) op.cit. On the surface the Regency was presented
as a religious society stressing a dualistic theology based on a Goddess
and twin Gods with the former pre-eminent and expressed through working
rites over the annual seasonal round via festivals. Honour and honesty
were emphasised, the aim of the rites being to achieve `mystic
communion’. Why the name, the Regency? The
overt rationale behind the name was the premise that our present selves
are merely regents waiting to realise the king (or queen) through a
realisation of the higher self as mediated through the Goddess and the
Gods. A more covert reason, however, seemed to be that there would be a
time of waiting before the 1734 tradition was recommenced under the
previous leader’s son once he had come of age. As will be seen below a
still more hidden reason would emerge. As a newcomer to Well, all of this sounded very psychologically healthy to me. Ron pointed out that a lot of people `went to ground’ after the unfortunate death of the 1734 leader and that in the early days of the Regency a number of people who later became very well known in the community (or already were) were associated with it. This tended to change as did working practices these being originally indoors, in varied accommodation, with the rituals being quite tightly scripted and read off boards. I had access to some of this earlier ritual material and compared with most of the rites I experienced at first-hand they appeared both necromantic and rather Christian in tone, indeed I was glad the later ones no longer followed such a format. Instead, a much more spontaneous form of worship seemed to be in place developing around a relatively few set points of ceremony. On each occasion I was present the topography of the wood was used to brilliant effect – a particular oak tree for Midsummer, a particular glade for Halloween (the Halloween dancing ground), a particular stream to symbolise the river Styx, a special holly bush and so on. To me this seemed a beautiful synthesis of earth mysteries, ritual drama and the natural year becoming a vehicle for a true expression of Pagan spirituality. The rituals were thus fluid in their expression and, indeed, fluent. The Regency’s master document in this regard was a piece known as `The Reading of the Festivals of the Year’, again far too long to reproduce here but what amounted essentially to the group’s philosophy, theology and mythology. It provided the rationale behind the rites structure, the god-forms involved plus a potted interpretation of each festival and which of the chapters in the overall story of the Year it narrated. Each festival worked out the pattern set down by the previous ones. The influence of the poet Robert Graves’s conception of a single mythic theme paralleling or being (among many other things) an allegory of the seasons, is apparent – ` the old myth acts at many levels. It can be taken as a `fairy tale’,
or as scaffolding on which you can build upon and indulge in all the
theologisation or theorisation you wish. You find in it what you
want…but as for all the magical tricks one can claim…so what? None of
these matters a tittle if you haven’t a relationship with the Lord and
the Lady’
Ron White Although the main instigator of the Regency remained Ron, together with George who usually acted as `master of ceremonies’, the ritual role structure for the festival cycle was democratically arranged with many of the women present being granted a part as one or the other aspects of the three-fold Goddess. They, in turn, selected aspects of the god/king/lover for the Year via a series of tests typically held at either the Spring Equinox or May Eve. Such tests were not always pleasant – `he
that would hath the Lady in May must pass a test or two and each man has
to pluck a branch of holly, crush it in the hand and present it to the
maiden’.
From the Spring Equinox festival As mentioned above the creative use of many areas of the wood for celebration added greatly to the numinousity of the experience for all those taking part. In addition to role selection and role rotation from one year to the next, different people could take overall responsibility for organising the rite giving everyone a chance to have some say in what happened should they want –
`I would gladly give over
what influence I have with the Regency, and my support to anyone who
showed that She or he was chosen to lead…’ Indeed, this is exactly what Ron did do at Halloween, 1974. At this rite he ritually resigned his `crown’ saying that after seven years the `king’ must bow the knee to one more virile and younger than he. How Frazerian! It may have been this event that caused Ron Hutton to suggest that the Regency disbanded in 1974 (iii). Manifestly this was not the case as I attended at least three further rituals between then and Halloween 1976 and a personal friend of mine had co-ordinated two of these. On the surface therefore we have a pagan group consisting of both a
nucleus and a periphery of refreshingly stable, balanced and healthy
–minded individuals holding down responsible jobs in the wider society
(e.g. market researcher, drama teacher, nurse and so on). Anyone wanting
to gain a rich understanding of natural ritual could have done a lot worse
than attend a complete cycle of 8 meetings (at Christian Advent the The Regency brought a lot of people together especially in the early days of its inception. While numbers present were rarely large (although on one occasion thirty-six individuals took part) guests were always welcome and, indeed, guests of the guests. The group wrote its own rites (at least by the time I knew them), was not dependant on `tradition’ and had the flexibility to alter the form of them every year to a degree. It made no claims for itself, was completely without pretension and anarchistic in principle. The Regency was innovative in holding outdoor rites in public twenty years or more before the Pagan Federation followed suit; it was ritually creative, egalitarian and non-hierarchical given that there was always an inner core to the group. In magical terms it was (or could be, more often than not) at once mystical, inspirational and shamanic. As opposed to ritual magic this was ritual drama at its best. So – did the group have any drawbacks, was there even a dark side lurking? Now a feature of much writing on Paganism in Britain, both academic and otherwise is what appears to be a certain timorousness when it comes to acknowledging, still less analysing, the `warts on the body politic`. Such air-brushing may arise from an actual lack of discernment i.e. the warts just aren’t seen perhaps because of looking at things through rose coloured spectacles – or, they may be seen but out of a fear of creating offence commentators keep relatively quiet. Whatever the reasons this kind
of bias leads to a lack of critical balance and evaluation. It may also
create a degree of `bitchcraft’ behind the scenes. Newcomers to Paganism
may be given a false impression of an all is `sweetness and light’ kind
which can cause disillusionment and often actual withdrawal from the
field. Alternatively, new
traditions or networks may be set up although this is much less common in
conservative In respect to the Regency I want to draw attention to three aspects that I consider problematic in increasing order of seriousness these being respectively:
Obviously, the evaluation is my own. Someone else could evaluate all the above in an opposite direction. What is important is that issues arising in groups (or out of their history) are seen clearly in the first place and an analysis/comment made. Such a responsibility is owed to current seekers, enquirers and readers. 1. I have been fulsome in my
summing up of the Regency’s contribution above. A core member’s praise
sets superlatives higher still. I quote from an addendum to my copy of the
`
`May Eve was a beautiful
experience. Laying there in the grass in the darkness we were Robin
Hood’s band of merry men; each there to celebrate, honour and defend the
woodland couple…. The notes on the Ceremonies tie everything together so
simply. Indeed, simplicity pervades the Regency and is its keynote. They
are the most elementary form of theatre I’ve met, they make the gestures
and masks of eastern theatre appear awkward and complicated…
We are invited to meditate on these one-act plays and thereby led
to discover the wonder of the Mysteries that they present and come to a
real awareness of Life’s deepest secrets and teaching. The Ceremonies
are a rich pausing; they take us in their power and leave us in wonder… and if this were not, in part, the work of R. and the power of C. I should be greatly surprised. G. at his best is the spirit of the Regency, the person who draws us together in laughter, the life of the ceremonies…. Together with the strength and spirit of the rest of Robin’s band that meet in the wood.’ This eulogising should be contrasted with one of many guests I took along over the course of my participation in the group –
`Looking at David
Attenborough’s programme, `The Tribal Eye’, even on film it was
obvious that the tribe had a unity of purpose and experience at their
festivals which only took on a fragmentary character at the Regency. I’m
not sure what their festivals are meant to achieve – are they?
It suffers from over-theatricalness at times. I’m not sure about
C’s motivation, how committed to it all is she I wonder?’ 2. One of my own reservations came from the point of view of being a `mythological purist’. As noted above Robin Hood was one of the Regency’s god-forms. He was presented in juxtaposition with King Arthur, deities of the Waxing and Waning years respectively. If one likes mixed mythologies then this is fine and there were good reasons for choosing Arthur as will be seen. 3. But for me the most serious qualification lay in the political nuances, superficially unapparent, but there in the group’s history and the psyche of its main founder and basically explicit in one section of their `mission statement’ vide:
`The Regency holds that there is a collective psyche….and
regional differences upon that basis. These require differing forms of
expression suited to variations in ……inherited ancestral patterns.
Therefore the Regency, being British, practices… those beliefs and
ceremonies found …..among the people of these islands.
(much) pagan ceremony….still lies (at) the core of a living myth
and theology, fitting to our people, and with its roots firmly anchored in
the National Psyche…..Arthur still sleeps in Avalon.’ Now at a meeting with Ron he admitted to me that at one time the Regency could have turned into almost any sort of group including one with fascist overtones. Many of the members at that time (1966), he explained, had fascist tendencies. Stressing that Paganism was a regional religion he pointed out that non-whites wouldn’t feel at home with it. He felt this viewpoint was realism, not racialism. Differences at the unconscious level among different racial groups would cause problems - `the blacks have their own thing’ was his attitude. The psychology of individuals who run and/or set up groups can sometimes
be revealing and repay careful study. This was certainly the case with
Chalky. It seems he was a fantasist in more ways than one. He frankly
admitted that in the nineteen sixties he believed himself to be the
reincarnation of Richard III (perhaps Richard I would have been more
appropriate given the interest in Robin Hood) and also of Merlin. His real
quest was – or had been – to restore I had it from a reliable source that in the first year of the reformed
Regency i.e. once they started working out of doors, White had a grand
meeting in a forest near Two of the well-known `names’ around at that time both had a black child in their care. It was pointed that Ron himself wouldn’t qualify for his own society on the basis of the aforesaid criteria. When it came to a vote only two people took the oath, the rest gradually ceasing to have so much to do with White or humouring him so far as his literalisation of the Arthurian mythos went. While such undercurrents were at worst dormant and at best defunct by the time I got involved with the group they do point up both the power of fantasy to sometimes overwhelm otherwise reasonable individuals and highlights a contradiction between having a democratic, all-inclusive practice on the one hand and an exclusive, essentially right wing ideology on the other often presented under the guise of the nation state. One has only to think of the place of the occult in Nazi Germany or some of Dion Fortune’s views to make comparisons. In addition, fantasy also expressed itself in some of the male participants tendency to place the women on pedestals as `goddesses’ hence reinforcing sexism on both sides and keeping the sexes in traditional positions. Despite these three reservations, on balance, I regret the passing of the
Regency. Groups have used the same site since, notably the References i. See for example `The Roebuck in
the Thicket` ed. M. Howard.
Capall Bann 2001 ii. M. Bampton - unpublished M.A thesis (education) iii. Hutton – The Triumph of the
Moon. OUP 1999 p.318
Kenneth Rees would welcome any
constructive comments on this article. He can be e-mailed on: (This
article is based on a talk given by Kenneth Rees at Treadwell’s
Bookshop, London,March 2nd 2004) |
