Marinus of Samaria, The Life of Proclus 18-19
Proclus made use of the noble purificatory practices which woo us from evil, that is lustrations and all of the other processes of purification whether Orphic or Chaldean, such as dipping himself into the sea without hesitation every month, and sometimes even twice or thrice a month. He practiced this discipline, rude as it was, not only in his prime, but even also when he approached his life’s decline; and so he observed, without ever failing, these austere habits of which he had, so to speak, made himself a law … As to the necessary pleasures of food and drink, he made use of them with sobriety, for to him they were no more than a solace from his fatigues. He especially preached abstinence from animal food, but if a special ceremony compelled him to make use of it, he only tasted it, out of consideration and respect. Every month he sanctified himself according to the rites devoted to the Mother of the Gods by the Romans, and before them by the Phrygians; he observed the holy days observed among the Egyptians even more strictly than did they themselves; and especially he fasted on certain days, quite openly. During the first day of the lunar month he remained without food, without even having eaten the night before; and he likewise celebrated the New Moon in great solemnity, and with much sanctity. He regularly observed the great festivals of all peoples, so to speak, and the religious ceremonies peculiar to each people or country. Nor did he, like so many others, make this the pretext of a distraction, or of a debauch of food, but on the contrary they were occasions of prayer meetings that lasted all night, without sleep, with songs, hymns and similar devotions. Of this we see the proof in the composition of his hymns, which contain homage and praises not only of the Gods adored among the Greeks, but where you also see worship of the God Marnas of Gaza, Asklepios Leontukhos of Askalon, Thyandrites who is much worshipped among the Arabs, the Isis who has a temple at Philae, and indeed all other divinities. It was a phrase he much used, and that was very familiar to him, that a philosopher should watch over the salvation of not only a city, nor over the national customs of a few people, but that he should be the hierophant of the whole world in common. Such were the holy and purificatory exercises he practiced, in his austere manner of life.

Suidas s.v. Hêraïskos
Hence his life also reached such a point that his soul always resided in hidden sanctuaries as he practiced not only his native rites in Egypt but also those of other nations, wherever there was something left of these. Heraiskos became a Bakchos, as a dream designated him and he traveled widely, receiving many initiations. Heraiskos actually had a natural talent for distinguishing between religious statues that were animated and those that were not. For as soon as he looked at one his heart was struck by a sensation of the divine and he gave a start in his body and his soul, as though seized by the God. If he was not moved in such a fashion then the statue was soulless and had no share of divine inspiration. In this way he distinguished the secret statue of Aion which the Alexandrians worshiped as being possessed by the God, who was both Osiris and Adonis at the same time according to some mystical union. There was also something in Heraiskos’ nature that rejected defilements of nature. For instance, if he heard any unclean woman speaking, no matter where or how, he immediately got a headache, and this was taken as a sign that she was menstruating.

Suidas s.v. Sarapio
For Isidore said that never in fact could he persuade him to meet another man, especially because when he grew old he no longer came out frequently from his own house; he lived alone in a truly small dwelling, having embraced the solitary life, employing some of the neighbors only for the most necessary things. He said that Sarapio was exceptionally prayerful, and visited the holy places in the dress of an ordinary man, where the rule of the feast led him. For the most part he lived all day in his house, not the life of a man, but to speak simply, the life of a God, continually uttering prayers and miracle-stories to himself or to the divinity, or rather meditating on them in silence. Being a seeker of truth and by nature contemplative, he did not deign to spend time on the more technical aspects of philosophy, but absorbed himself in the more profound and inspired thoughts. For this reason Orpheus was almost the only book he possessed and read, in each of the questions which came to him always asking Isidore, who had achieved the summit of understanding in theology. He recognized Isidore alone as an intimate friend and received him in his house. And Isidore seemed to observe in him the Kronian life of mythology. For that man continued doing and saying nothing else but recollecting himself and raising himself, as far as he could, towards the inward and indivisible life. He despised money so much that he possessed nothing whatever but only two or three books (among these was the poetry of Orpheus); and he despised the pleasures of the body so much that straightway from the beginning he offered to the body only what is necessary and alone brings benefit, but of sexual activity he was pure throughout his life. And he was so little concerned about honor from men that not even his name was known in the city. He would not have been known subsequently, if some one of the Gods had not wished to make him an example for mankind of the Kronian life. He used Isidore as an heir, having no heir from his family, nor supposing that anyone else was worthy of his property, I mean the two or three books.

Aidonian has been making a series of informative posts on the Dodekatheon and their kin, and in his entry on Dionysos wrote the following: 

A fellow polytheist states that according to him there isn’t 1 Dionysos but many. His various names and epithets. Considering that he is a Dionysian, I don’t agree with him but do find that take interesting. For me, they are aspects of the God, not different Gods altogether. I wonder how he came to that conclusion?

Since I’m not aware of other contemporary Dionysians who engage in this kind of theological exploration I’m going to assume that Aidonian was referring to me, and specifically this post in which I speculate that there could be an entire pantheon of Dionysoi, and so feel that I should respond. 

Of course, as I wrote there I’m in full agreement with the author of the Gurôb Papyrus — “εις Διόνυσος!” (Either “there is one Dionysos” or “Dionysos is One” depending on your translation and philosophical disposition.) In fact I take the most expansive view possible, tracing him back like a proper Bacchic Orphic to the Primordial Egg and the four-headed, winged, androgynous entity it once contained (and will again) named Erikipaios, Eros, Metis or simply Phanês the God of manifestation who in time and through a series of incarnations would come to be known as Dionysos. I not only accept the vast plurality of epithets (I’ve cataloged around 300 and am certain that’s nowhere near complete) as referring to different aspects of a single God, but also accept all of his syncretic associations (around 150 by last count; most of these I take to be Dionysos temporarily adopting the forms and attributes of these divinities rather than him being identified with them, except in the cases where that is what’s going on) as well as his numerous births (he’s got around 20 different mothers that we know of, including at least one male mother) not to mention the times he’s incarnated as a human being (an avatār in Hindu terms, though I prefer the Greek Νέος Διόνυσος, meaning a “New” or “Young” Dionysos) which is distinct from full and even long-term possession, something else that we frequently find in his cult. 

Since I was a teenager I’ve dedicated myself to hunting down everything that can be known about this God so that I can experience and understand him better through these things — which has had a profound impact on my religious practice and identity. I’ve followed Dionysos down some mighty strange culverts — going from a Wiccanate Neopaganism to a general (heavily Attic-tinged) Hellenismȏs, to Greco-Egyptian polytheism, to local-focus Pacific Northwest polytheism, to Orphism and Magna Graecian polytheism with some folk Catholic elements, to founding my own initiatory mystery cult — the Starry Bull tradition — which is a synthesis of all these strains, and now I’m following him into Heathenry and the lands and traditions of the Starry Bear. 

And yet the position of the Gurôb Papyrus author is not the only possible one. 

We are dealing with a God, and as Aidonian reminds us, a God who is unique among the other Gods. But what sets him apart from his fellow Theoi is not just his mortal origin, his humanity (though that certainly and significantly does!) it’s the fact that Dionysos is fucking insane. And not just the kind of quirky crazy you see so fondly and frequently depicted on your streaming service of choice — every madness imaginable (and plenty that are beyond human ken) is contained in the mind of Dionysos. What happens when a GOD is mentally ill? Suppose he creates a persona, a mask, another self to converse with in the immense loneliness of his dwelling at the heart of the labyrinth? Does it just cease to exist when he’s done? Might it not share in its creator’s power and consciousness, and perhaps come to think of itself as an entity in its own right? Might its independent experiences not change its thinking, thus making it a truly different person than its starting point? What then do we call and consider this replica of Dionysos to be — Dionysos? Something different? And if so, what is it and how exactly does it differ? 

I don’t know. Fuck, I don’t even know who I am half the time. How am I supposed to comprehend a God — and a God like Dionysos μαινόμενος, the mad and maddening one?

So, yeah. I was just speculating, spitballing, throwing a bunch of shit at the walls and seeing what sticks and what slides down. However, flattered as I am Aidonian, I did not come up with this idea all on my own; indeed, as I was saying before I so rudely interrupted myself the position of the Gurôb Papyrus author is far from the only one that proliferated in antiquity. 

Nonnos of Panopolis, the final flowering of Greek epic who produced a work as large as the Ἰλιάς and Ὀδύσσεια combined on the mythical exploits of Dionysos despite being a Christian whose other masterwork is a paraphrase of the Gospel of John in dactylic hexameters, closed his Dionysiaka by having Iakchos formally admitted into the civic pantheon of Athens — thus producing a Bacchic Trinity of Iakchos the Son (of Aura and Dionysos), Dionysos the Father (born of Zeus and Semele, and destined to be the next King of the Gods) plus Zagreus the Holy Ghost (product of Zeus and Persephone who was murdered by the Titans.)     

Then the Archeress stilled her anger. She went about the forest seeking for traces of Lyaios in his beloved mountains, while she held Aura’s newborn babe, carrying in her arms another’s burden, until finally she delivered his boy to Dionysos her brother … The Athenians honoured him as a God next after the son of Persephoneia, and after Semele’s son; they established sacrifices for Dionysos lateborn and Dionysos firstborn, and third they chanted a new hymn for Iakchos. In these three celebrations Athens held high revel; in the dance lately made, the Athenians beat the step in honour of Zagreus and Bromios and Iakchos all together.

Diodoros Sikeliotes, on the other hand, relates a tradition wherein we find two Dionysoses, an Elder and Younger, in Bibliotheca historica 4.4.1-5. At other places he relates traditions about Cretan, Indian, Egyptian and Libyan Dionysoi, all of whom he treats as distinct — except when he combines them. 

Some writers of myths, however, relate that there was a second Dionysos who was much earlier in time than the one we have just mentioned. For according to them there was born of Zeus and Persephonê a Dionysos who is called by some Sabazios and whose birth and sacrifices and honours are celebrated at night and in secret, because of the disgrace resulting from the intercourse of the sexes. They state also that he excelled in sagacity and was the first to attempt the yoking of oxen and by their aid to effect the sowing of the seed, this being the reason why they also represent him as wearing a horn.

But the Dionysos who was born of Semelê in more recent times, they say, was a man who was effeminate in body and altogether delicate; in beauty, however, he far excelled all other men and was addicted to indulgence in the delights of love, and on his campaigns he led about with himself a multitude of women who were armed with lances which were shaped like thyrsi.​ They say also that when he went abroad he was accompanied by the Muses, who were maidens that had received an unusually excellent education, and that by their songs and dancing and other talents in which they had been instructed these maidens delighted the heart of the God. They also add that he was accompanied on his campaigns by a personal attendant and caretaker, Seilenos, who was his adviser and instructor in the most excellent pursuits and contributed greatly to the high achievements and fame of Dionysos. And in the battles which took place during his wars he arrayed himself in arms suitable for war and in the skins of panthers, but in assemblages and at festive gatherings in time of peace he wore garments which were bright-coloured and luxurious in their effeminacy.

He was also called Dimetor,​ they relate, because the two Dionysi were born of one father, but of two mothers. The younger one also inherited the deeds of the older, and so the men of later times, being unaware of the truth and being deceived because of the identity of their names thought there had been but one Dionysos.

While Cicero, who after being humiliated by Mark Antony and forced to retire from public affairs devoted himself to religious, antiquarian and philosophical studies in his ample spare time (at least until the chickens of vengeance came home to roost and Antony was able to pressure Octavian into having him executed) maintained that there were actually five Dionysoi, whom he carefully delineated in De Natura Deorum 3.21-23: 

We have a number of Dionysi. The first is the son of Jupiter and Proserpine; the second of Nile — he is the fabled slayer of Nysa. The father of the third is Cabirus; it is stated that he was king over Asia, and the Sabazia were instituted in his honour. The fourth is the son of Jupiter and Luna; the Orphic rites are believed to be celebrated in his honour. The fifth is the son of Nisus and Thyone, and is believed to have established the Trieterid festival.

Indeed these are not just empty hypostases but in cult we find one form of Dionysos invoked to counteract the influence of another Dionysos, both in Corinth:

The things worthy of mention in the city of Corinth include the extant remains of antiquity, but the greater number of them belong to the period of its second ascendancy. On the market-place, where most of the sanctuaries are, stand Artemis surnamed Ephesian and wooden images of Dionysos, which are covered with gold with the exception of their faces; these are ornamented with red paint. They are called Lysios and Bakcheios, and I too give the story told about them. They say that Pentheus treated Dionysos spitefully, his crowning outrage being that he went to Kithairon, to spy upon the women, and climbing up a tree beheld what was done. When the women detected Pentheus, they immediately dragged him down, and joined in tearing him, living as he was, limb from limb. Afterwards, as the Corinthians say, the Pythian priestess commanded them by an oracle to discover that tree and to worship it equally with the God. For this reason they have made these images from the tree. (Pausanias, Description of Greece 2.2.6-7)

And Naxos:

… whence Hipponax said (F 48 West), ‘the dark fig-tree, sister of the vine’; and they say that the fig is a discovery of Dionysos; wherefore Dionysos is Sykites among the Lakedaimonians. And in Naxos the mask of Dionysos Bakcheos was of vine-wood, but that of Meilichios of fig, and they called figs meilicha, and they say that figs are the most useful of all tree fruits to men. (Eustathios, Commentarii ad Homeri Odysseam on 24.341)

So while I have my own beliefs on the matter I endeavor to step out of that framework from time to time and try to see things from other people’s perspective, as Aidonian himself counsels, particularly when those others were devotees and initiates or contemporaries of such people at a time when the cult of this God was active and flourishing and part of an intact tradition within a healthy, creative and deeply pious society. Now I’m not saying that that automatically makes them right, but it is a mindset worth contemplating, especially since it may contain insights into the nature and activities of Dionysos which may elude even sincere devotees in this modern, progressive, secular abomination manufactured and marketed by corporations and governments (sorry, I repeat myself) alike, which we all pretend (or can’t tell the difference since we’re raised in and surrounded by it our entire lives) is a civilization though any sane person would recognize that most people are just mindlessly wandering around rifling through the garbage dump of history. But hey, different strokes for different folks, right? Dionysos is big enough to encompass every conception we have of him, and things we never dreamed existed too. He is the great Sol Niger, the coincidentia oppositorum who both unites and transcends all binaries, polarities, contradictions, paradoxes, and every other configuration we can come up with. 

Or as the Orphics of Olbia put it:

SEG 28.659:
βίος. θάνατος. βίος. ἀλήθεια. Ζαγρεύς. Διόνυσος
Life. Death. Life. Truth. Zagreus. Dionysos.

SEG 28.660:
εἰρήνη. πόλεμος. ἀλήθεια. ψεῦδος. Διόνυσος
Peace. War. Truth. Lie. Dionysos

SEG 28.661:
Διόνυσος. ἀλήθεια. σῶμα. ψυχή
Dionysos. Truth. Body. Soul.

Any time that the Ukraine is mentioned I think of Olbia and the bone tablets found there. Specifically SEG 28.659:

βίος. θάνατος. βίος. ἀλήθεια. Ζαγρεύς. Διόνυσος
Life. Death. Life. Truth. Zagreus. Dionysos.

This cryptic sequence is capped off by a fragment often omitted from translations, though it has been the subject of a great deal of scholarly debate: Ὀρφίκ-. Some believe that the final word is missing an α (which would make it Orphika, a reference to a class of literature and ceremonies which circulated under the name of the famous Thrakian musician) or if it’s supposed to end in -οι (giving us Orphikoi, a community organized around such material.) These days the existence of Orphic thiasoi is hotly contested though previous generations spoke of a kind of proto-Protestant Orphic “church.” I suspect, as with most things, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. There was no universal Orphic ekklesia, but there were itinerant religious specialists and the communities they served who drew inspiration from “Orphic” ideas and practices — and if the -οι party is correct, the bone tablets would be among the earliest evidence of their existence.

I sometimes wonder if the Ὀρφίκ- was a modifier however, as in “Orphic Dionysos” (though I’ve no idea if that’s plausible considering the spacing of the letters on the tablet, etc.) Was the author then commenting on the identity of Zagreus as the Dionysos associated with Orphika? While it’s unlikely that Zagreus as the child who suffers σπαραγμός and ὠμοφαγία at the hands of the Titans is intended since the name means “Great Hunter” and the earliest myths associated with it all suggest a potent, savage adult (or at least ἔφηβος) and only late authors such as Nonnos and Olympiodoros project it back (and Olympiodoros alone provides the anthropogony where man has a dualistic nature since we are sprung from an admixture of the blood of Dionysos and the ashy remnants of the Titans who were obliterated by Zeus’ lightning, which should be evident since his preserved heart is fed to Semele who was not among the first generation of humans and Dionysos when grown to manhood travels the inhabited world introducing wine and viticulture and his other mysteries and blessings to careworn mortalkind who have developed into separate races and civilizations, with numerous thriving cities.) But a different sort of Zagreus as the Orphic Dionysos … that has potential. 

And, although there are few traces of him left in the literary record (let alone the archaeological) I’ve long suspected that one is hiding in plain sight in Euripides’ Bakchai. At 1191 Agave hails Dionysos as κυναγέτας σοφός (“knowledgeable hunter”) to which the chorus of Mainades replies ὁ γὰρ ἄναξ ἀγρευς (“Our Lord is a hunter!”) Run those last two words together and you get ἄναξἀγρευς or ἄν- Ξἀγρευς which might sound to certain ears so inclined to hear it like Ζαγρεύς (especially since there was often dialectical confusion between Xi, Zeta and Sigma in the Archaic and Classical periods.) I’m not saying that was his intention, though Euripides did write the play during his residence at the Makedonian court, which we know from Plutarch was a hotbed of Bacchic Orphism, at least during the reign of Queen Olympias:

All the women of Makedonia were addicted to the Orphic rites and the orgies of Dionysos from very ancient times (being called Klodones and Mimallones), and imitated in many ways the practices of the Edonian women and the Thracian women about Mount Haemus, from whom, as it would seem, the word threskeuein came to be applied to the celebration of extravagant and superstitious ceremonies. Now Olympias, who affected these divine possessions more zealously than other women, and carried out these divine inspirations in wilder fashion, used to provide the revelling companies with great tame serpents, which would often lift their heads from out the ivy and the mystic winnowing baskets, or coil themselves about the wands and garlands of the women, thus terrifying the men. (Life of Alexander 2.5-6)

And both before and after her plenty of the Argeádai or Temenid dynasty were devotees of Dionysos, whom they counted amongst their ancestral Gods and further considered the progenitor of their line (except when they wanted to be Heraklids.)

Speaking of strange lights in the sky, one was recently seen over the capital of Ukraine.

The catastrophes at Byzantium

So, I’m reading Karen Høilund Nielsen’s most excellent study Endzeiterwartung – expecting the End of the World from Neue Studien zur Sachsenforschung 5, 2015 when I’m struck by how shitty things were after the Romans turned their backs on their ancestral Gods and Spirits. 

Lactantius (c. 240 – 320) collected all the apocalyptic omens of the end of the world from sacred and profane literature (KÖTTING 1958, 134) in order to prove the fast approaching end. Wars, kin fighting kin, the decline of morals, famine, plague, cosmic episodes and natural catastrophes could be such omens (BRANDES 1990; 1997, 40–42;KÖTTING 1958, 135). During the decades around the turn of the century at AD 400 many saw these prophecies coming true. They saw various incidents of war and natural catastrophes as signs of the coming of the end of the world (BLECKMANN 2008,13). These catastrophes are listed in contemporary chronicles such as Marcellinus Comes’s Chronicon (quoted and translated from KÖTTING 1958, 137):

389: Two days of hail; comet visible to the North
390: Column of fire in the sky for thirty days
393: Darkness of the sun
394: From September to November earthquakes
396: Frequent earthquakes and fire symbol in the sky
402: Earthquake in Constantinople
404: Enormous fire in Constantinople
407: Enormous damages due to bad weather
408: Seven days of loud rumbling (mugitus terrae) in the Forum Pacis in Rome. Severe weather
409: Famine and revolt in Constantinople
417: Earthquake and darkness
419: Christ appeared on the Mount of Olives. He showed himself in a cloud. Many neighbouring tribes, who witnessed the incident, converted in fear and were baptised; with divine assent all the baptised wore the cross of the Redeemer on their clothes

On top of that came Alarich’s conquest of Rome in AD 410, which spread anxiety among Christians as well as pagans. And at least a further nine earthquakes were recorded for Constantinople and its surroundings by the end of the fifth century (DOWNEY 1955, 596–597)

In the previous post I mentioned that there would likely have been a bunch of professing Christians in the crowd celebrating the Bacchic orgia at Antioch. Although this city is where members of the nascent Jesus-movement were first given the name Χριστιανοι (Acts 11:26) and it remained one of the strongest and most intellectually vibrant centers of Christendom in the East, the Antiochenes always had a very heterodox character and were frequently lambasted for their love of pleasure and sensuality on the one hand and their attachment to old Pagan customs, especially the Maiuma, on the other. The Maiuma was a joyous celebration of Spring and the union of Dionysos and Aphrodite, during which people would throw lavish banquets, go down to the beach, spend time at the public baths and the theater, and festoon themselves with flowers. And of course have lots and lots of sex.

Here are some quotes I’ve collected on the festival.

Codex Theodosianus 15.6.1-2
It has pleased Our Clemency to restore to the provincials the enjoyment of the Maiuma, provided, however, that decency and modesty and chaste manners shall be preserved (25 April 396).

We permit the theatrical arts to be practiced, lest, by excessive restriction thereof, sadness may be produced. But we forbid that foul and indecent spectacle which under the name Maiuma a shameless license claims for its own (2 October 399).

Diodoros Sikeleiotes, Library of History 4.6.1
Now the ancients record in their myths that Priapos was the son of Dionysos and Aphrodite and they present a plausible argument for this lineage; for men when under the influence of wine find the members of their bodies tense and inclined to the pleasures of love.

Homeric Hymn 6 to Aphrodite
To Sea-set Kypros the moist breath of Zephyros the western wind wafted her over the waves of the loud-moaning sea in soft foam, and there the gold-filleted Horai welcomed her joyously. They clothed her with heavenly garments: on her head they put a fine, well-wrought crown of gold, and in her pierced ears they hung ornaments of orichalc and precious gold, and adorned her with golden necklaces over her soft neck and snow-white breasts, jewels which the gold-filleted Horai wear themselves whenever they go to their father’s house to join the lovely dances of the gods. And when they had fully decked her, they brought her to the gods, who welcomed her when they saw her, giving her their hands. Each one of them prayed that he might lead her home to be his wedded wife, so greatly were they amazed at the beauty of violet-crowned Kythereia.

John Chrysostom, In Matthaeum Homiliae 7
For tell me, if anyone offered to introduce you into a palace, and show you the king sitting (there), would you indeed choose to see the theatre instead of these things? And you leave this and run to the theatre to see women swimming, and nature put to open dishonour, leaving Christ sitting by the well? But you, leaving the fountain of blood, the awful cup, go your way to the fountain of the devil, to see a harlot swim, and to endure shipwreck of the soul. For that water is a sea of lasciviousness, not drowning bodies, but working shipwreck of souls. And while she swims naked, you, as you behold, are plunged into the depths of lasciviousness. For in the first place, through a whole night the devil takes over their souls with the expectation of it; then having shown them the expected object, he has at once bound them and made them captives. If now you are ashamed, and blush at the comparison, rise up to your nobility and flee the sea of hell and the river of fire, I mean the pool in the theatre. And you, when there is a question of precedence, claim to have priority over the whole world, since our city first crowned itself with the name of Christian; but in the competition of chastity, are you not ashamed to be behind the ruder cities?

John the Lydian, De Mensibus 4.76-80
Those theologians who inquire into the nature of things wish May to be water. That is what it is called in the Syrian language and even today they call aqueducts meiouri. Also, they call feasting ‘to do the Maiuma’, from which we get the term Maiuma. The festival was held in Rome in the month of May. The leading men of the city went down to the shore and the city of Ostia to enjoy themselves by throwing one another into the waters of the sea. And so all festivals of this sort are traditionally called Maiuma.

Emperor Julian, Misopogon 362D
Yet all of you Antiochenes delights to spend money privately on dinners and feasts; and I know very well that many of you squandered very large sums of money on dinners during the Maiuma.

Ioannes Malalas, Chronicle 284-5
Likewise Commodus set aside a specific quantity of gold for torches, lights, and other expenses for the celebration of the nocturnal dramatic festival, held every three years and known as Orgies or the Mysteries of Dionysos and Aphrodite, which some call Maioumas because it is celebrated in the month of May or Artemisios.

Plutarch, Life of Antony 24
At any rate, when Antony made his entry into Ephesos, women arrayed like Bacchanals and men and boys like Satyrs and Pans, led the way before him, and the city was full of ivy and thyrsos-wands and harps and pipes and flutes, the people hailing him as Dionysos Carnivorous and Savage.

Severus of Antioch, Homily 95
But those who have gone up to Daphne in pagan fashion have had no regard for the truth, which is so terrible and on account of which everything moves and trembles. But in the dark moments of the night they even lit lamps of wax in the stadium and added incense, stealthily bringing about their own destruction; and it was certain strangers, take good note, who informed me of this while trembling and crying. Do you not see the nets of the Calumnator, and his hidden traps, which on the one hand have as a pretext the joy and pleasure at first sight and lead on the other hand to idolatry and the celebration of festivals in some ways criminal and harmful? And are you not ashamed, when we call ourselves Christians, we who were born on high for the purification which comes from the water and the Spirit and call ourselves children of God, to run equally to the solemnities of Satan, which we have renounced by divine baptism? For whenever you change your clothing and afterwards go up to the spactacle, dressed in a tiny linen tunic, which hides the arms but not the hands, waving about a wooden stick and with all skin shaved with a razor, so to speak – look, is it not quite clear that you have made the procession and participated in the celebration?

 Sokrates the Rhodian, History of the Civil War Book 3 [Quoted in Athenaios, 4.29]
But Cleopatra having met Antony in Cilicia, prepared a royal entertainment, in which every dish was golden and inlaid with precious stones, wonderfully chased and embossed. And the walls were hung with cloths embroidered in gold and purple. And she had twelve triclinia laid; and invited Antony to a banquet, and desired him to bring with him whatever companions he pleased. And he being astonished at the magnificence of the sight, expressed his surprise; and she, smiling, said that she made him a present of everything which he saw, and invited him to sup with her again the next day, and to bring his friends and captains with him. And then she prepared a banquet by far more splendid than the former one, so as to make that first one appear contemptible; and again she presented to him everything that there was on the table; and she desired each of his captains to take for his own the couch on which he lay, and the goblets which were set before each couch. And when they were departing she gave to all those of the highest rank palanquins, with the slaves for palanquin bearers; and to the rest she gave horses, adorned with golden furniture: and to every one she gave Ethiopian boys, to bear torches before them. And on the fourth day she paid more than a talent for roses; and the floor of the chamber for the men was strewed a cubit deep, nets being spread over the blooms.

I’ve been thinking about the final line of Theodoret’s anecdote about the reign of Emperor Valens:

and votaries initiated in the orgies of Dionysos ran about in goatskins, mangling dogs in Bacchic frenzy. (Ecclesiastical History 5.20)

Let us assume that this is not a slur invented by our good Christian historian whole-cloth — and there are solid reasons for doing so since we find isolated pockets of Bacchic worship surviving into the 7th century, and then a couple hundred years after that spontaneous revivals start breaking out all over the place, culminating in the Renaissance whose guiding lights were obsessed with all things Dionysian (especially the more Neoplatonic take on them) and Regency England which coined the term “Bacchomania” to describe the prevalence of Dionysian motifs in the arts, architecture and popular culture of the period; this is also when you start seeing secret societies devoted to Dionysos (and usually Aphrodite or Pan) such as the Hellfire Club, which no less than Benjamin Franklin was a member of. 

What can we infer about this group of Dionysos-worshipers during the twilight of Classical Paganism? If they were a survival it is likely because they were a θίασος (“private association”) unattached to a particular temple or locale such as a sacred mountain, cave, grove or even artificial grotto which would allow them to survive independent of the fluctuating degree of state support which the civic cults were dependent on. They either met in the homes of the cult-leaders, had a private club-house, or met in different locales depending on the occasion.

They may have possessed a lineage stretching back before the family of Constantine rose to power (and established Christianity as Rome’s state religion) or they could have started up during the brief interlude of Julian’s reign when many cults or traditions underwent a process of revival and reconstruction; since Theodoret mentions initiations we are probably looking at an intergenerational and closed group rather than an expression of civic religion, though it’s also possible that there’s an inner court of initiates, and a wider community (which may even have included professing Christians) who took part in the drunken revels. It’s possible that we’re dealing with some degree of survival of Antioch’s civic cultus since Dionysos was immensely popular there well up through late antiquity, but in all probability the core was a closed group of initiates.

What’s particularly interesting is that they have revived the sacrament of σπαραγμός (“rending, tearing to pieces”) and most likely ὠμοφαγία (“the eating of raw flesh”) too, which had largely been phased out during the Hellenistic period. Different, however, is their choice of victim — during the Archaic and Classical periods, and even with the tamer versions of the Hellenistic the animal is most often αγριος (“wild”) i.e. deer, hare, foxes, wolves, etc. as opposed to domestic. The two most notable exceptions to this are goats and cattle, though other domesticated animals such as sheep, swine, fish and fowl were not generally sparagmósed even when they are sacrificial animals offered to Dionysos as part of civic cultus. And we see that here with this group which rent goats and dogs as part of their rites.

Two things can be inferred from this: the group probably conducted its rites within the confines of Antioch rather than venturing out into the χώρα (“surrounding land”) as most (though certainly not all) previous Dionysian thiasoi had done, and they were also unconventional in their choice of dogs. While the dog is certainly a Dionysian animal, it is almost never a sacrificial animal. Indeed, only very non-mainstream deities like Hekate and Ares (both originating on the Hellenic periphery) or mainstream Gods during unusual occasions (such as Pan at the Lupercalia; but also note that he’s Arcadian) ever received dog-sacrifices in Greek and Roman religion. Very interesting indeed.   

The mention of the νεβρίς in the last post reminded me of Semachos and his daughters, eponyms of the Attic deme Σημαχίδαι who were the first to receive the prize of the hunt from the God. I wish we had more of the story, especially since it forms a triptych with the other great Attic receiver-heroes Ikarios, who was given a vine-branch and taught wine-making by Dionysos (and also had a myth involving a goatskin) and Amphiktyon the son of Deukalion, who was taught by Dionysos the proper proportion for mixing water and wine when the God came to visit the kingdom under his reign (Eustathius, On Homer, p. 1815.) Not to mention that the Attic deme Ἀλωπεκή takes its name from a foxskin, making me wonder if there’s a lost legend lurking there involving a visitation by Dionysos Βασσαρεύς. 

I’m high, and listening to some good tunes, and thinking about how life is full of all kinds of ups and downs and how that is superbly exemplified in the life of Flavius Valentinianus who, despite the humiliation of being discharged from the army for incompetence by Emperor Julian, upon rising to the purple restored Christianity’s status as state religion of the Roman Empire, and finally shat himself to death while screaming at a barbarian envoy.

Panta chorei, as Herakleitos said. (“Everything dances.”)

Despite the whole making Christianity the state religion again thing you don’t hear a lot about Emperor Valentinian these days, which is too bad as he was a pretty interesting guy. He was frequently at odds with the clergy, denouncing their venality and political aspirations while they decried his generally tolerant, hands off approach to religion and in particular his refusal to allow them to use the apparatus of the imperium to persecute Pagans, Jews and Christian heretics. The bastard! This laissez-faire attitude was shared by his brother and Co-Emperor in the East Valens, who provoked the ire of the Christian historian Theodoret:

At Antioch Valens spent considerable time, and gave complete license to all who under cover of the Christian name, Pagans, Jews, and the rest preached doctrines contrary to those of the Gospel. The slaves of this error even went so far as to perform Pagan rites, and thus the deceitful fire which after Julian had been quenched by Jovian, was now rekindled by permission of Valens. The rites of the Jews, of Dionysos and Demeter were no longer performed in a corner as they would have been in a pious reign, but by revellers running wild in the forum. Valens was a foe to none but to them that held the apostolic doctrine. Against the champions of the apostolic decrees alone he persisted in waging war. Accordingly, during the whole period of his reign the altar fire was lit, libations and sacrifices were offered to idols, public feasts were celebrated in the forum, and votaries initiated in the orgies of Dionysos ran about in goatskins, mangling dogs in Bacchic frenzy. (Ecclesiastical History 4.21; 5.20)

There was also a lot of “up and down” in Valentinian’s life because of the changes he introduced into the Roman legal code regarding marriages:

Justina became known to Marina Severa, wife of the emperor Valentinian, and had frequent dialogue with the empress, until their intimacy at length grew to such an extent that they were accustomed to bathe together. When Severa saw Justina in the bath she was greatly struck with the beauty of the virgin, and spoke of her to the emperor; saying that the daughter of Justus was so lovely a creature, and possessed of such symmetry of form, that she herself, though a woman, was altogether charmed with her. The emperor, treasuring this description by his wife in his own mind, considered with himself how he could espouse Justina, without repudiating Severa, as she had borne him Gratian, whom he had created Augustus a little while before. He accordingly framed a law, and caused it to be published throughout all the cities, by which any man was permitted to have two lawful wives. The law was promulgated and he married Justina, by whom he had Valentinian the younger. (Socrates Scholasticus, Historia Ecclesiastica IV.31)

Unless Socrates is slandering the Emperor — there’s certainly no trace of this in Roman jurisprudence or the other biographical sources on Valentinian, plus Justina was a fervent Arian, so she might have been the target of the Constantinopolitan’s inky barbs. But I want to believe that it’s true.

Image by schmoo15, which Petros found on Deviant Art and sent to me. It reminds me of one of my favorite lines from Euripides’ Bakchai (which is saying something as there’s a lot of great lines in that play) where Dionysos is described as θεὸς δεινότατος, ἀνθρώποισι δ’ ἠπιώτατος (861) [to mortals the most terrifying and most benign God.]

Coincidentally it is also the second day (out of seven) of the Hudson Valley Bakcheion’s observance of the Dionysia, and the start of the Gold Season (April through June) during which the face that the God shows to us is that of the Sacred King, and we honor him alongside the Fairies & Goblins of his Retinue. Check that first link for movie recommendations and other tips on how to celebrate the Dionysia, our festival of the ars dramatica. In addition to the Dionysian Artists and legendary figures of the stage, this is also a good time to pay your respects to the Heroes and Heroines of the Bakcheion by reflecting on their stories, and works, and the virtues (and vices) that they embodied as well as making offerings (particularly libations) to them. You can either venerate them collectively or pick a different recipient for each day of the festival. In particular reflect on their association with Dionysos and how they, consciously or subconsciously, acted out his myths, drives and (often contradictory) traits through their lives in both positive and negative ways. Remember, an hero isn’t necessarily a salutary model to emulate but rather is honored for being exceptional. And the exceptional is often dangerous and destructive, especially when Dionysos is involved. Finally, you can organize your movie-watching thematically, devoting one day to tragedies, one day to comedies and since Satyr-plays are not generally produced anymore (especially not in Hollywood) you can swap them out with another appropriate Dionysian genre such as horror, dark fantasy or rom-coms. If you have any questions about any of this please do not hesitate to ask your humble ἱεροποιός. 

We just got back from the first public meet-up hosted by the Kindred of the Well and Tree. Although a couple people who RSVPed didn’t show turnout was surprisingly decent, and we had a wonderful time talking about Loki and his family (since today is his feast day in several Heathen denominations) as well as numerous community and other pagany and magical topics. We ended up chatting for close to three hours, and might have gone longer if management hadn’t started giving us the stink-eye. We left a considerable tip because we’re Heathen and not Neopagans, and so understand the virtue of hospitality. And being on time. (Well, most of us.) Having helped organize these events a number of times before in various places (Washington, Nevada, Oregon and here in New York several years back) I can honestly say I’m impressed with how well things went, and am very much looking forward to future meet-ups, and through them, Gods willing, finding the sort of people we want to do ritual with and invite to join our small but growing Kindred. Trust me, considering some of the folks I’ve had show up to past events — you want to perform as much vetting as possible if you’re doing anything even remotely involving the public and the sacred.

One of the most important lessons I’ve learned as a mantis or diviner is a bit of wisdom that was inscribed at the temple of Apollon at Delphi, one of the holiest and most important oracular sites in the ancient world. Thales is generally credited with first giving this sage advice, though it was also attributed to Chilon, Bias, Cleoboulos, Periander, Pittacus and a variety of other ancient wise men. (And at least one wise woman as well, the poet Phemonoe!) All of these men had a strong connection to the God Apollon, so you wouldn’t be far off the mark if you were to claim divine inspiration for the words. They are, after all, essential for anyone who seeks to live a wise, pious and successful life. I mean, of course, the famous admonition γνῶθι σεαυτόν (gnōthi seauton) which can be rendered into English as “Know Thyself.”

Historically there have been two primary ways to interpret the injunction, both of which are relevant to those seeking to take up this divine craft. (There are, as I’m sure you’re aware, many other equally valid ways to interpret the phrase, but one would need to devote a whole essay – at the least! – to exploring all of them. There’s a reason why Apollon was granted the epiklesis Loxias.) The most familiar of the two, thanks to the Socratics, is as an encouragement towards introspection and authentic self-discovery and expression. The founder of that school so aptly observed that the unexamined life was not worth living and through the process of dialectic he challenged people to critically examine their basic assumptions about who they were, how the world worked and what concepts such as love, truth, wisdom, piety, beauty, courage, etc. actually meant to them as opposed to the definition insisted upon by unthinking society or convention.

The second interpretation – which is probably more in line with the original intent of its author, even if it isn’t as well known – is that we should know ourselves in the sense of knowing our proper place in the world, observing respectable boundaries of thought and deed, avoiding overreaching pride, arrogance and impious aspiration. Similar Delphic maxims include “nothing too much,” “observe the limit,” “think mortal thoughts,” and so forth.

Both ways of reading this admonition have relevance for those who would pass on the sage counsel of the Gods to their communities, regardless of the tradition within which they work.

To begin with the mantis must have a proper understanding of exactly what it is they are doing. They must know where the information is coming from, be able to carefully distinguish the messages of the Gods from their own thoughts and emotional responses to the issue and must accurately report everything that comes through and limit what they say only to what was communicated without subtraction, embellishment or unasked for interpretation and commentary. After the message has been given, the querent may ask the mantis for their opinion or further clarification on an obscure point of the message, but in doing so the mantis should make it perfectly transparent what came from the Gods and what is their own private interpretation. They should be especially careful not to force their opinion on the querent since it is often part of the process for the person to figure out what the oracle means to them personally and one should also avoid idle conjecture or in other words, if you have no idea what an oracle means don’t guess or you’re liable to be wrong and unhelpful.

Now to offer further clarification on some of these points.

I am a trained mantis with over two decades worth of experience under my belt. That does not, however, mean that I am a therapist or possess the necessary knowledge, training or certification to diagnose mental problems or offer practical, emotional or spiritual counseling. Anyone who comes to me seeking that sort of thing gets redirected to qualified personnel – in fact I’m reluctant even to offer friendly advice because, to put it mildly, I’m shitty at handling my own problems and I’d undoubtedly be much worse at sifting through other people’s crap.

Unfortunately a lot of folks in this line of work don’t share my misgivings and I’ve seen them royally fuck people over as a result. They didn’t mean to, of course – they went about their advice-giving with the best of intentions. But when it came down to it they just didn’t know enough about the situation or the workings of the human psyche to be truly helpful. Even if their advice was excellent and exactly what the person needed to hear at that precise moment, it can be extremely difficult to remove one’s ego from the equation. A lot of people just aren’t prepared to be ignored or misunderstood, which happens the majority of the time that advice is given. You may see with perfect clarity that your friend is in a dysfunctional and abusive relationship and needs to drop that bitch and start his life fresh as far away from there as possible – but your friend may not be ready to do that just yet, even if he’d agree 100% with you. He may be worried about the economic consequences of leaving his wife, he may still be making all sorts of excuses about why it happens (she didn’t really mean it, she only does it when she’s had too much to drink, I brought it on myself by provoking her) or he may be in denial or ashamed to admit that things have actually gotten that bad and so on and so forth. The only thing you can be certain of in a situation like that is that the person won’t leave or seek the necessary help until they are good and ready to – and even then it may require several frustrating abortive attempts before it finally sticks.

It can be maddening to watch the cycle of abuse play itself out over and over again, but you can’t force a person to change against their will. Often their anger and impotence will become directed at you if you try and push them since you are a safe target for their venting or else they might perceive you as a threat to the status quo. Your actions may inadvertently heighten their sense of shame and isolation, which only serves to ensconce them deeper in the dysfunctional situation. You, yourself, may become frustrated that they aren’t listening to your wise advice or are hellbent on a path of despair and self-destruction. You may, in turn, lose all respect for them or no longer wish to associate with them lest you become culpable in their abuse by knowing about it and not being able to stop it.

This is, of course, a fairly radical situation but I’ve seen plenty of friendships destroyed over things of far less consequence as a result of indiscriminate advice-giving. I feel it best to avoid this altogether – or least not to proffer until asked for – but if you feel that you absolutely must give your opinion, make sure that you do so devoid of any expectation. Once your words have been spoken, leave it at that, granting them the freedom to act on it or not as they see fit. You should be willing to stand by your friend regardless of how they choose to put your advice into action, and if you cannot withhold judgment either keep your feelings to yourself or end the friendship without making a huge deal of it. You do not want to get embroiled in unnecessary drama and transform the person you once considered a bosom companion into a mortal enemy.

There are many ways, in fact, that we need to keep ego in check when it comes to serving as a mantis. Related to the above principle it is incumbent upon you to remove any personal investment or consideration from your oracles. Your job is to transmit a message from the Gods to the querent. Once you have successfully done that your obligation ceases. How the person accepts it and what they do with that information is entirely up to them. It should be no concern of yours whether they misinterpret the message, incompletely or incorrectly implement what was asked of them or ignore it outright. Honestly this can be one of the hardest parts of the job, especially when the oracle comes through unambiguously or you see the person still struggling or complaining about a situation months or years later, all of which could have been swiftly and satisfactorily resolved had they only done what they were told. It’s even more frustrating when the person comes back to you later on with the same question, seemingly hoping for a different answer. You come to feel annoyed, ignored, disrespected – and this can have unpleasant consequences for your friendship if you’re not careful.

The best thing that you can do is to know your place. Your place is to give the oracle not to lead the person’s life for them. That is their responsibility and they – and only they! – will suffer the consequences of their insolence, indolence and ignorance. You also need to understand that everyone responds to situations differently. Maybe it’s going to take this person longer to overcome an obstacle than it would have for you. Maybe they have important lessons to be learned which can only come about through repeated failures. Maybe the God never intended for them to do what the oracle said but rather was subtly urging them on to a different path which they could only discover through attempting something and then realizing that it wasn’t right for them. And maybe what you see so clearly in the oracle isn’t what the God wished to communicate to them, so even though they may be interpreting it “wrong” from your perspective, they are actually doing what is pleasing in the eyes of the God. Regardless, even if you are right and they aren’t it’s their oracle to do with as they please.

Another reason not to take it personally is because if you’re doing your job as a mantis properly then the message was never yours to begin with. It originates from the God and you are nothing more than a messenger passing it on to its intended recipient. And at that point the matter rests entirely between them and their God. Or to think of it in another way: you are just a vessel into which the Gods pour their blessings. A cup has no feelings and no purpose other than to be a receptacle for fluids. It has no say and indeed it hardly matters whether wine or water or milk or anything else is dumped into it. It doesn’t matter whether the person drains the cup in a single draught, takes only a tiny sip and then walks away never to taste it again or even if they dump it out or just let it sit there growing mold. The cup’s sole purpose is to hold what’s poured into it without leaking, to serve the needs of the one pouring something into it and the one that is going to drink out of it. Thus, like the cup the sole desire of the mantis ought to be for utility without any concern for how they are being used and what follows after. In keeping with this I feel that is the supreme obligation of the mantis to get themselves out of the way as much as possible. You are facilitating communication between the Gods and their people and your job is to transmit those messages as clearly and carefully as you possibly can. Always remember your place and stay mindful of its humble position in the grand scheme of things.

The people are not coming to you to hear your wisdom or gain your valuable opinion on important matters. If you want to send your own message out into the world then take up the noble craft of the writer or become an orator, a therapist, a teacher, a philosopher, some crazy drunken dude on the street corner or something else along those lines. But when you take up the calling of the mantis then you must always be conscious that you are a servant of the Gods and faithfully report exactly what they tell or show you. Nothing more and nothing less than that should ever pass your lips or fingertips when you are engaged in this sacred vocation.

Long before the aspirant mantis begins offering their services to the public they must cultivate the spiritual faculty of discernment, the ability to listen for the voice of the Gods (however that is expressed to them, and this can indeed come through in many different ways depending on the Gods and the person involved) the ability to identify who and where it’s coming from (since there are so many Gods, spirits and assorted divine beings out there) as well as being able to recognize how this differs from one’s own thoughts, feelings, personal convictions and the detritus floating about in one’s brain. This can be incredibly challenging especially when one is first starting off on the path or when the issue is one that directly involves the mantis or those close to them.

It’s even trickier when you do the sort of direct trance-possession oracles that I’ve been specializing in with Dionysos for a number of years now. After all, if you’re employing some form of external, mechanical divination such as Tarot, Runes, I Ching, augury or the like there’s a measure of control and corroboration that you can rely on. This is what the tools turned up, this is the traditional meaning and here’s how I interpret the symbolism. Even if that is just the starting point and you rely on inspiration and free association there’s still a degree of concreteness to the process that’s generally lacking when you are shown visions, hear the words of a God or some other form of intimate, often internal communication takes place. You have to be constantly on guard that the message is coming through clearly, that it isn’t getting distorted by errant thoughts and astral junk, or that you accidentally and perhaps even without being aware of it are twisting things to conform to your own biased expectations. This is not a perfect science no matter how diligent and disciplined we are or what added precautions we take. Furthermore we are faulty human beings. The Gods exist on a level far beyond us with an understanding of the world and the things in it which is radically different from and dwarfs our own. The act of transmitting this through an imperfect human vessel, translating transcendent understanding into finite human speech and thought is a process fraught with peril. It’s like representing a multi-dimensional construct using only length and width. Much, inevitably, is going to be lost in the process. But it’s your job to ensure that things run as smoothly as possible, that the wires don’t get crossed, the information corrupted and contaminated as little as possible and that you don’t interject your own take on things.

One of the most important elements of this is communicating the message as it was given, regardless of what you personally feel about the issue. Many times over the years I’ve received messages that didn’t make much sense to me or quite frankly were a complete one-eighty from what I would have told the person had they come to me seeking advice. Sometimes the message is uncomfortably direct and harsh. In those instances you’ve really got to struggle against the tendency to impose order on it, make it more sensible and directly relevant, or to sugar-coat it. You have to trust that the Gods are far wiser than you, that they are seeing a fuller picture or referencing something that will be intelligible to the person receiving it even if it’s incomprehensible to you, that if it means nothing to the person now it may in time when more of the puzzle pieces have fallen into place and that the Gods have a reason for saying what they do and in the manner that they have chosen regardless of how you feel about all of it. Even if they aren’t as polite as you would like, you have to consider that that brusqueness may be there because that is exactly what the person needs to hear in order for the message to get through their defenses. And if they take it out on you, suggest the message came from you and accuse you of being too harsh and judgmental, well, that’s the risk you’ve got to take if you want to be a messenger of the Gods. You’re not in this to win friends and accolades, and it’s not your business to adulterate the words of the Gods or soften the blow. Conversely there have been times when I was expecting a forceful reply and the oracle came across gentle and somewhat coddling to my complete surprise. Clearly that’s what the person needed to hear in that instance and the Gods recognized that bashing them over the head with it wouldn’t have done any good. The more you encounter oracles like these the more you come to realize how little a role you play in all of it and how clearly they originate from somewhere outside of yourself.

For these and many other reasons I try to go into an oracular session knowing as little about the circumstances of the question as humanly possible. I do not ask for background details or clarification unless it’s absolutely necessary, I only skim the requests when I receive them to determine if there are other matters that need to be addressed, I keep the requests in a folder and transcribe them early in the evening hours before I start my preparation, I try to avoid thinking about the question or discussing it with the person beforehand and I go through an elaborate series of preliminary ritual actions which are not only highly devotional in nature but also help to clear my mind and focus my attention on the sacred work before me so that I won’t have any room for mundane concerns or dwelling on the details of the request. And on the rare occasions when none of that works because I’m too involved or close to the situation and person I’ve straight-up told them that I couldn’t do it and they should seek assistance from a different source. I’ve only had to do this a handful of times over the years but I feel that it is a necessary step to take to preserve the integrity of my calling and ensure that I am providing the best possible oracular service that I can.

Likewise when an oracle that I receive is too jumbled and incomprehensible and all further attempts to gain clarity prove fruitless, or I just can’t get into the proper oracular state I admit as much to the person and either offer to try a different divination method or advise them to seek an answer elsewhere or accept that this is not something that they are going to gain insight on at this time. Some may find it uncomfortable to admit fallibility but I’d rather the person think me a failure than to know myself to be a fraud, manufacturing messages when none are forthcoming or twisting the details so that they appear more sensible. To distort things in that way is a violation of the sacred trust that both the Gods and my community have placed in me. This work is difficult and demanding and it requires integrity, courage, dedication, discipline and all of the other virtues upon which character is based. If I compromise even a little, give less than my absolute best – even if no one else is aware or likely to ever find out about it – it is going to undermine my confidence in myself and cause me to doubt my ability to hear what the Gods are saying and communicate that to others. So even setting aside the considerable moral obligation I have to those that approach me with their questions, it is in my own best interest if I intend to continue in this vocation to be as honest and uncompromising as possible. I’ve got to live with myself and look myself in the mirror – how could I possibly do that knowing that I had deceived and cheated someone?

As an extension of that I feel that a mantis should always be conscious of what their office means to those who seek their assistance, the importance and dignity and sacredness of it. We help bridge the gap between the mortal and divine realms. People come to us to learn about the Gods and to hear their messages. While I agree with the general principle that no one needs an intermediary between themselves and the Gods, that the Gods can hear our prayers, accept our offerings and make their will known to us in a multitude of ways – practically speaking there are often circumstances that make things much more complicated than that. Perhaps the person is full of doubt or too close to the situation to gain any kind of useful clarity. Perhaps they are in a state of impurity, do not know the proper methods of communicating with the divine or how to recognize such communication in the first place. Perhaps they are new to all of this, lack proficiency in divination, are spiritually blocked or deaf and blind to the invisible world. Maybe they’re in over their heads, facing a situation they could never have conceived of before or are just looking for an outside perspective or confirmation of things they have already intuited. There are a thousand and more reasons why a person might consult a mantis and it is our job to be there to lend our assistance where and in whatever way we can.

This is both an immense honor and an incredible responsibility because when we take up this office we become the representative of our Gods. Everything that we say and do – whether in our capacity as a mantis or outside of it – reflects back on the Gods. We must be diligent in our execution of our religious duties, must conduct ourselves with integrity, character and proper decorum and never do anything that would cast aspersions on our holy office or cause others to doubt the existence, wisdom and benevolence of the Gods. And note that morality is relative and in this context largely determined by the Gods you are working for. The qualities favored by a God like Dionysos or Hermes are very different from the standards insisted upon by Apollon or Athene, to the point where I’m strongly hesitant to have anything to do with the latter pair.

When people see someone who claims to be a mouthpiece for the Gods acting in a haughty, shameful, cruel or unnecessarily contentious fashion it is natural for them to wonder how such a person could have an intimate communion with the Gods or if it’s all just empty hokum and vain posturing. Doubt that begins in the person spreads to the Gods: how wise and moral could they possibly be if they would entrust their message to such an undeserving person?

We may feel that this is unfair since we are all fallible human beings and virtue is not an easy path as evidenced by how few truly good men there are in the world. Further, spiritual aptitude is not always dependent on or even consistent with conventional morality as evidenced by the deplorable lives led by many visionaries, religious figures and artists down through the centuries. Regardless this is still the common perception and fair or not we are held to this standard with grave consequences for those who fail to measure up. The thought that one’s careless actions might drive people away from the Gods ought to fill any mantis worthy of the title with abject horror.

And finally, I’d like to include a word on asking and receiving. Remember, always, that a God is talking to you. It’s not the same as checking your horoscope in the paper or seeing what weird shapes your coffee grounds have formed. (Though these, too, can convey the will of the Gods to those who are properly paying attention.) Ask questions that suit the dignity of the occasion, not something you can figure out on your own with a little critical thinking. Don’t do it as a lark, because you’re bored or to try and test the Gods. And above all else, show respect by taking the answer you get seriously. That means spend some time really thinking about it and how it applies to your life. Don’t jump to the most obvious conclusion, especially when the oracle has been phrased enigmatically. History is littered with those who failed to see clearly what the Gods had indicated and brought untold suffering on themselves and their communities as a result. The Gods gave us rational faculties with the intent that we’d use them. That may require you to do a bit of digging and meditation before the ultimate meaning reveals itself to you, but as with all things in life you get out of stuff what you put into it. Likewise, when an answer is clearly and unequivocally presented to you you should strongly consider doing what it says. Why ask the advice of the Gods in the first place if you’re just going to ignore what they’ve got to say? Now, obviously, choice comes into play here. You’re not a robot and you can very well disagree with what a God is telling you to do. Maybe the sort of life you want for yourself isn’t what they’ve got in mind for you, or maybe the risks and consequences just don’t add up. I tend to think the Gods are wiser than us, more aware of the things that lurk beneath the surface or the chains of reaction that simple acts can set into motion – but hey, it’s your life, so do as you please. But on the other hand, don’t keep asking the same question over and over again hoping for a different result and don’t expect your situation to change if you’re not willing to act in a manner which they indicated will have a favorable outcome. Sometimes, a lot of the time actually, you’ve got to put in the work first before things will make sense to you. This is where trust comes into play. Don’t demand understanding and desirable results before you’ve done your part. If you’ve done everything asked of you and there’s still been no change, then perhaps you’re justified in getting upset and demanding an answer. But be careful about deluding yourself. Often we may think we’ve done everything in our power when we’ve really just skimmed the surface.

In one of the more curious anecdotes from Eunapius’ Lives of the Philosophers and Sophists, a group of gullible students were attending a theurgic seance wherein an Egyptian priest conjured a visible apparition of what purported to be the God Apollon, but when the Neoplatonic holyman Iamblichos inspected it he laughed and (I’m paraphrasing here) proclaimed, “Why are you falling to your knees filled with reverent terror – this is just the ghost of a humble gladiator!” 

Man may well be the measure of all things, as Protagoras averred, but we’re not very high up on the food chain when one considers the profuse array of divine and spiritual entities who inhabit this world alongside us. Not only do they vastly outstrip us in knowledge, power and access to other planes of existence but they are not constrained by any kind of universal moral code. There are dangerous and deceptive forces out there who want nothing more than to see the human race wiped from this planet – and they aren’t even necessarily what one would consider “evil” beings. Those exist too, in their plenitude, as well as things that are hurt, confused, scared, lonely or trapped.

So how can you tell that the entity you are encountering is who they claim to be?

You can’t. Not with 100% accuracy, 100% of the time. But there are questions you can ask, and things you can do that can certainly help.

Such as, how do we know any of the things that we think we know?

Inference.
Other people’s testimony.
The direct experience of our senses.

If you have prior experience with the entity use that, along with the known lore concerning them and the accounts of contemporaneous devotees as your basis for evaluation. 

Is the entity behaving in a manner that is consistent with the above? Do they “feel” like they normally do? Are they employing recognizable speech patterns? Are the appropriate signs and symptoms present? 

By signs and symptoms I mean the type of phenomena described in Proklos, On the Signs of Divine Possession as quoted in Psellus’ Accusation against Michael Cerularius before the Synod:

He speaks first about the differences which separate the so-called Divine Powers, how some are more material and others more immaterial, some joyous (hilarai) and others solemn (embritheis), some arrive along with daemons and others arrive pure. Straight afterwards he goes on to the proper conditions for invocation: the places in which it occurs, about those men and women who see the Divine Light, and about the divine gestures (schêmatôn) and signs (sunthêmatôn) they display. In this way he gets around to the Theagogies of divine inspiration (tas entheastikas theagôgias)[a theagôgia is a drawing in or drawing down of the divine]. “Of which, ” he says “some act on inanimate objects and others on animate beings: some on those which are rational, others on the irrational ones. Inanimate objects, ” he continues “are often filled with Divine Light, like the statues which give oracles under the inspiration (epipnoias) of one of the Gods or Good Daemons. So too, there are men who are possessed and who receive a Divine Spirit (pneuma theion). Some receive it spontaneously, like those who are said to be ‘seized by God’ (theolêptoi), either at particular times, or intermittently and on occasion. There are others who work themselves up into a state of inspiration (entheasmôn) by deliberate actions, like the prophetess at Delphi when she sits over the chasm, and others who drink from divinatory water”. Next, after having said what they have to do [i. e. to gain divine inspiration], he continues “When these things occur, then in order for a Theagogy and an inspiration (epipnoian) to take effect, they must be accompanied by a change in consciousness (parallaxia tês dianoias). When divine inspiration (entheasmôn) comes there are some cases where the possessed (tôn katochôn) become completely besides themselves and unconscious of themselves (existamenôn…kai oudamôs heautois parakolouthountôn). But there are others where, in some remarkable manner, they maintain consciousness. In these cases it is possible for the subject to work the Theagogy on himself, and when he receives the inspiration (epipnoian), is aware of what it [i.e. the Divine Power] does and what it says, and what he has to do release the mechanism [of possession](pothen dei apoluein to kinoun). However, when the loss of consciousness (ekstaseôs) is total, it is essential that someone in full command of his faculties assists the possessed”. Then, after many details about the different kinds of Theagogy, he finally concludes: “It is necessary to begin by removing all the obstacles blocking the arrival of the Gods and to impose an absolute calm around ourselves in order that the manifestation of the Spirits (pneumata) we invoke takes place without tumult and in peace (atarachos kai meta galênês)”. He adds further “The manifestations of the Gods are often accompanied by material Spirits which arrive and move with a certain degree of violence, and which the weaker mediums cannot withstand.”

If all that does not jive, what is different and how might this be accounted for? 

After all, Gods and Spirits often have a plurality of forms and the situation might require them to be more or less formal than they ordinarily would be. 

But sometimes you can tell that something is off and what you’re encountering is just a bad drag routine. 

At which point, ask for confirmation. I have set up codewords with all of the core Gods and Spirits that I work with, and if the being cannot provide them it’s a dead giveaway that they are not who they seem to be. (This is also an excellent means of verification when a third party comes forward claiming to have messages for you. If the God or Spirit doesn’t provide authentication it either means the message is not of utmost urgency or the person is not as perceptive as they are presenting themselves to be.)  

Another method is to make reference to past encounters with the entity but include false information; if you are not corrected, that can be a red flag. 

Thirdly, you may intone their epithets and project a sigil or charged mental representation of the God or  Spirit which will either empower or pass straight through them if they are that being (or very closely aligned to them) but will cause distortion and disruption if it is something merely pretending. 

There are, of course, many other methods for discerning the identity of a spiritual entity but it is not my intent to cover all of them; rather I am trying to get the conversation started. 

And so we’re going to move on to how to evaluate messages communicated by spiritual entities. 

Begin by asking yourself the following questions. 

What has been communicated to you? At this stage, keep it just to the facts. Don’t fill in the gaps, make inferences, analyze what the message personally means to you or any of the other interpretive methods we regularly employ. You want the message as clear and concise as possible. 

How has this been communicated to you? Did the encounter happen face to face or through indirect means such as divination? Was it the result of a dream, vision, or out of body experience? Was it something you observed, something you heard, something you intuited or arrived at through other means? Did it involve external perception or was the communication internalized? 

How reliable is your perception at the moment? What is your current mental, emotional and physical status and how might this be influencing what you receive? Is there a lot of internal chatter or stress that could be compromising your signal clarity? Are you suffering a depressive, hypermanic or delusional episode? How is your sleep routine and nutrition? Are you on any medications or drugs? Note that none of these are sufficient to rule out a message received, but all of them can and will influence your perception. 

How do you feel about the message being communicated? Is it challenging or upsetting, completely novel or exactly what you expect, what sorts of emotional responses does it stir in you and so forth. None of these speak to the accuracy of the message, but it’s definitely something you’ll want to be aware of lest you fall into a series of errors one need only survey the majority of polytheist and neopagan communities to find amply on display. 

We’ve all encountered people in the community who get divination results or channeled oracles that perfectly line up with the views they normally express on social media via memes; here are some possible explanations for why that might happen.

The closer we get to a divinity the more our values and choices come to reflect theirs, often on an unconscious level. Thus, without even necessarily thinking about it we may find ourselves parroting our Gods and Spirits.

Like calls to like. Thus devotees are naturally drawn to divinities who possess similar character traits and values as their own.

The divinity may be communicating with their devotee outside divinatory or oracular channels and so the person already knows what the divinity wants before the question is formally posed.

Divinities may communicate different things to different devotees, either because their agendas are large and complicated enough to encompass both positions, because they have specific tasks for each party, because they feel that devotee A is not emotionally capable of handling what is communicated to devotee B, because the divinity is playing both sides against each other, and so forth.

People see only what they want to. Meaning, that message may be there but is just an isolated scene in a larger tapestry and they’re not able or willing to take in the whole or they may extrapolate beyond what was said. For instance a divinity might advise one simply to “care for the suffering” which is then interpreted as promoting a specific political ideology or movement.

Either the devotee is willfully twisting the message to suit their ideology and agenda or else the fault lies with the oracle or diviner, who may be confused, biased or deceitful. Not all who present themselves as mouthpieces of the Gods are as competent or ethical as they should be.

Sort of an extension of the above, but the person may be in contact with something that isn’t what it’s presenting itself as – either a mental sock puppet, or a deceitful and possibly malign Spirit or God that’s masquerading as someone else. Spiritual discernment is decidedly rare in our communities.

People lie. To themselves and to others. It happens all the time, and religious communities are certainly not immune to this, especially not those on the pagan/polytheist spectrum.

Mental illness is also prevalent in our communities. While madness has many blessings it can also make “reality” a little fuzzy.

A few years ago I was looking for λεγόμενα (“things said”) which I could incorporate into the ritual and meditation practices of the Starry Bull tradition, and this led to one of the most potent tools for cleansing in our arsenal — the Oration of Aristides.

The Aristides in question is Aelius Aristides, a second century Roman lawyer, hypochondriac and initiate of Asklepios, Serapis and Dionysos. He kept exhaustive records of his illnesses, dreams, spiritual encounters and visits to various healing and oracular shrines, and the unconventional cures he was prescribed – by doctors, priests and his various Gods and Spirits. This work – the Hieroi Logoi or “Sacred Tales” – give a fascinating glimpse into the interior life of what we’d consider today a slightly neurotic spirit-worker. Some of his dream encounters come off really shamanic. Like at one point he gets cut into pieces by a flaming sword and in another Asklepios reaches into his chest and scoops out the pollution/illness. There were a bunch more but it’s been ages since I’ve read him.

The Orations are less autobiographical; they’re rhetorical exercises praising cities and institutions, and salutary hymns in honor of various divinities. The passage we use in the Starry Bull tradition – II.331k – comes from an Oration to Dionysos written on the occasion of Aristides’ initiation, if memory serves.

οὐδὲν ἄρα οὕτως βεβαίως δεδήσεται, οὐ νόσῳ, οὐκ ὀργῇ, οὐ τύχῃ οὐδεμιᾷ, ὃ μὴ οἷόν τ᾽ ἔσται λῦσαι τῷ Διονύσῳ.

Oudèn árâ hoútos bebaíos dedésetai ou nóso ouk orgê ou týkhe oudemía, ho mé hoîon t’estai lýsai tô Dionýso.

Nothing can be so firmly bound – by illness, wrath or fortune – that cannot be released by [the Lord] Dionysos.

Even more than Herakleitos or Empedokles I believe that the Olbian bone tablets:

SEG 28.659:
Life. Death. Life. Truth. Zagreus. Dionysos. Orphikoi.

SEG 28.660:
Peace. War. Truth. Lie. Dionysos

SEG 28.661:
Dionysos. Truth. Body. Soul

Can best be compared with the Pythagorean Table of Opposites, which circulated in a variety of forms though it was first recorded by Aristotle thusly:

Finite – Infinite
Odd – Even
One – Many
Right – Left
Male – Female
Rest – Motion
Straight – Curved
Light – Darkness
Good – Evil
Square – Oblong

Taken from here, with useful commentary and links. If you’re interested in taking a deep dive into the subject I recommend starting with Owen Goldin’s The Pythagorean Table of Opposites, Symbolic Classification, and Aristotle. This is where Pythagorean Orphism and Bacchic Orphism depart though they share common roots and practices. In Pythagoreanism these polarities take on a dualistic antipathy, while among the Bakchoi it’s more about alternating cycles and coincidentia oppositorum.

The alphas that creep up throughout the famous bone tablets – often via very inventive ways such as hiding in the sail of a ship, which I’ve always taken to be a representation of the Black Ship of Dionysos, or as part of a sketch of a horse – make me curious.

I’ve considered the possibility that it’s an abbreviation for Apollon, who is featured on a bone tablet of his own excavated at nearby Berezan Island which is located at the intersection of the Black Sea and the river Borysthenes or the modern Dneiper (there’s also the thiasitai Boreikoi inscription from Olbia itself mentioning Apollon) – however the Olbian bone tablets are solidly within a Bacchic Orphic milieu, and this one obviously is not. (Though it’s possible its creator was an Orpheotelest, just working in a different strain of the tradition.) 

So I wondered if it was an allusion to a Dionysian allonym (other name) or epiklesis (descriptive title) such as Agrios (Wild), Antheus (Flowering), or Anthesterios (of the Festival of Flowers), which were all popular in the (mostly) Ionian apoikia (colonies) scattered throughout present-day Turkey, Ukraine and southern Muscovy.

I’ve pondered the possibility that the Α stood for Ἀριάδνη or even Αστεριος, which would have fascinating implications but isn’t terribly likely. Keeping with the bull-theme of the latter I also entertained the improbable but not impossible notion that it represented the Phoenician letter ʾālep (𐤀 meaning “ox”) which Dionysos’ grandfather Kadmos brought to Greece whilst searching for his sister Europa.

I also thought it might be something along the lines of the Ἄλφα καὶ Ωμέγα of Christian mysticism, particularly with the Pythagorean Orphic interest in isopsephy and other codes, riddles and puzzles, as well as the general orientation of Orphism towards the τέλος, which requires a beginning.

But I suspect that all of these speculations missed the mark. (Arrowheads, perhaps?) Clearly all the scholars are wrong too and they’re actually upside-down uppercase lambdes for Λυσιος, the Loosener or Releaser. 

Or something.

Truthfully, I haven’t a clue. But I find them enchanting nonetheless. (Aha! Definitely charaktêres then!)

According to the Starry Bull Alphabet Oracle alpha signifies:

Aeiro (άείρω) to lift, raise up, rise above.
Aigle (αἵγλη) radiance, glory, splendor.
Aparchê (άπαρχή) dues, first-fruits, preliminary offerings.
Aphiemi (άφίημι) discharge, loose, set free.
Aoton (ἅωτον) the flower of its kind, prime, fairest.

And comes with the following prescription:

Get up (άνεγείρω) at dawn, go to the highest place (άνίημι) you can and hang (άρταω) a star. Then count the number (άριθμός) of times you see stars throughout the day; if it is odd, your luck will shine (αἵγλη) through the [next] Kalends. If even, then make a batch of goat-shaped (αἴξ) cookies and offer them to the Winds (Ἄνεμοι) that they may snatch away (άρπάζω) your misfortune.

One point on which I disagree with Nicola Mureddu is his comparison of the paradoxical pairings on the Olbian bone tablets with some of the more enigmatic phrases found in the fragments of the Ephesian philosopher Herakleitos, whom he feels has little to do with Dionysos. I feel that this is mistaken for two reasons; first, Herakleitos’ logoi are incredibly Dionysian and not just when he’s commenting on Bacchic cult practice, using mystery terminology, a couple of his fragments circulated under the name of Orpheus, etc. and secondly I think a more fruitful comparison can be made with Empedokles of Akragas who (like the probable author of the bone tablets, Pharnabazos) was an itinerant religious specialist (an agyrtes or Orpheotelest in the words of Plato) who practiced divination and the healing arts. His central conception was that there were four “roots” (ῥιζώματα) or generative substances (i.e. Air, Earth, Fire and Water) out of which all things arise and have their being through an admixture and subtraction of these primal elemental powers (identified with Hera, Haides, Zeus and Nestis, a local form of the Goddess Persephone) which are acted upon by Love (φιλότης, the force of attraction) and Strife (νεῖκος, the cause of separation.) Empedokles goes on to elaborate a complex cosmology seemingly full of drug-fueled hallucinations including cyclical births and deaths of the world, creatures that are half-human and half-beast as well as others that are hermaphrodites, and daimones from an alien realm trapped in mortal flesh like some kind of Philip K. Dick novel. It’s cool shit, and I sense a similar mind at work behind the bone tablets; though I also detect the coincidentia oppositorum of Herakleitos and the Sol Niger, so who knows? It’s certainly interesting to think about. 

Speaking of the Bacchic Orphic bone tablets from Olbia, Nicola Mureddu sums up the different scholarly interpretations of the zigzag and other symbols found interspersed among the enigmatic phrases inscribed on them in his Truth carved on Bones – Studying the mythological and cultic meaning of the Orphic Bone Plaques of the Black Sea: 

The zigzag has however been interpreted in many different ways: Rusyaeva had initially thought to see a letter sigma in it, standing for Zagreus, another incarnation of the Orphic Dionysus. But she soon realized that at the time of its carving that letter was identical with the Phoenician zayin shaped as an I. West interprets it as both a snake, a well known symbol of rebirth, and a lightning bolt, the divine power which both generated Dionysus and killed Orpheus. Bilde offers a more imaginative solution: according to her the zigzag may be the symbol of a key, a divine key that only a god possesses, as indicated by Pausanias’ description: “What is called Hades has been locked up by Plouton.” So if the zigzag is Plouton’s key, it symbolizes the mastering of life and death. The A can be the initial of another name, but West’s vision of a stylized boukranion symbolizing then a horned figure is remarkable. The second plaque shows a symbol similar to a ship, a ship of which the sail resembles, as noticed by Rusyaeva, a disguised A. The third has again a drawing, this time of a horse; again Rusyaeva sees hidden in its mane a letter A, this time no names are written beside the figure. The fourth plaque carries again Greek words, once more expressed by opposites: Eirene, Polemos and Aletheia, Pseudos, again signed Dion accompanied by the usual A. This plaque has an inscribed verso; it shows the zigzag figure in a more detailed manner, another similar figure and a rectangular field divided into seven compartments in which oval figures are placed at different heights. The zigzag here is read as a combination of I, A and X, an abbreviation for Iakchos. In the seven compartments Rusyaeva recognizes the seven parts into which Dionysus was dismembered according to one of the myths. West on the other hand comments that such a schematic design had way too many possible interpretations among which he envisages a cultic offer of eggs or a musical instrument.