LMNO: Why it's not the Aeon of Horus

[Mangrove]

Because Crowley viewed the Aeon Of Horus as being full of 'force & fire'. He considered the New Aeon to be delinquent & adolescent. Bit like the Charioteer in the tarot who has left the home of mom & pop and hit the open road for adventure.

However, I would certainly make a parallel to the so called 'old aeon' formula of IAO - the classic Isis, Apophis, Osiris.

Isis phase = pinealism & board nannies
Apophis = destruction, war, BIP, hardcord n00b flaming
Osiris = rebirth into new form

So if anything, we've had our Horus phase of conflict, outrage etc and have moved on to something more with more equilibrium. Some might say this is correspondent to the Ma'at current.....but I think they're assholes. 

[LMNO]

I get you.

I was making the comparisons of Age 1: Soft, frivolous, carefree; Age 2: Hard, unforgiving, severe; Age 3: A combination of the two.

[Mangrove]

I get you.

I was making the comparisons of Age 1: Soft, frivolous, carefree; Age 2: Hard, unforgiving, severe; Age 3: A combination of the two.

Yeah, that could work too 

There's an ironic twist in the recent 'Initiation In The Aeon Of The Child' book by J Daniel Gunther. This guy makes a very very detailed & interesting study of Thelemic ideas and the purpose of the AA training system etc. Great read if you like occulty Crowley stuff.

The twist is, that in a footnote, he points out that Crowley's proposed chronology for the three Aeons is entirely wrong and should be dropped. Basically he says that if each Aeon is 2000 years and Horus begins in March/April 1904 - then it's totally at odds with all known archaeological & historical records. The cultural paradigms don't match up with the time line as we currently understand it. Oops.

[Having spent much time contemplating on what AC got right, I am currently enjoying it's opposite - contemplating what he got wrong. Part of an ongoing SSOOKN research project.]

[P3nT4gR4m]

I get you.

I was making the comparisons of Age 1: Soft, frivolous, carefree; Age 2: Hard, unforgiving, severe; Age 3: A combination of the two.

Yeah, that could work too 

There's an ironic twist in the recent 'Initiation In The Aeon Of The Child' book by J Daniel Gunther. This guy makes a very very detailed & interesting study of Thelemic ideas and the purpose of the AA training system etc. Great read if you like occulty Crowley stuff.

The twist is, that in a footnote, he points out that Crowley's proposed chronology for the three Aeons is entirely wrong and should be dropped. Basically he says that if each Aeon is 2000 years and Horus begins in March/April 1904 - then it's totally at odds with all known archaeological & historical records. The cultural paradigms don't match up with the time line as we currently understand it. Oops.

[Having spent much time contemplating on what AC got right, I am currently enjoying it's opposite - contemplating what he got wrong. [/i] Part of an ongoing SSOOKN research project.]

Better get a thick pad and a lot of pens. That's a rich seam to tap, right there.

[Mangrove]

Better get a thick pad and a lot of pens. That's a rich seam to tap, right there.

I think it's timely & necessary. Interest in Crowley & his work has been increasing since the late 1960's. There's been a number of fairly even handed biographies which is good, because it helps to give a more balanced account than the tabloid versions of his life.

However, at the same time, while I am all for a fair representation of his life & work, I am not into whitewashing or nominating him for sainthood (largely because he did that part himself.)

I thoroughly enjoy occult history and have spent more than a little time and money in it's study. It's a weird hobby that I acquired back in around 1996 or 1997. I often feel that one day I should put all that to some use and write something. What we don't need in our lives right now is another book telling us how fab & groovy AC was. That is already covered. What I'd like to see is his work entirely reviewed & re-contextualized as part of a broader history.

The idea that's been bugging the crap out of me for months and which I stayed up until 4am, scribbling is this:
     Crowley/Thelema is probably an offshoot of an offshoot of a larger more successful entity.

Of course, this is the sort of thing that would warrant me receiving sack fulls of hate mail should I ever be so bold as to write and publish. The problem is, that in terms of 'occult history' too many people have taken AC's view to be valid, ignoring the fact that he was a big fish in a small pond. Crowley's view of his place in history both occult and overt is really an inside out view, or one looking down the wrong end of a telescope.

If you accept his version of events then it looks like this:

1875 - Year of his birth and foundation of the Theosophical Society by H P Blavatsky & H S Olcutt.
  Crowley viewed this and the writings of Anna Kingsford to be the 'John the Baptist' event to his messiahship.

1898 - Joins the Golden Dawn. Is coached by Alan Bennet & G C Jones. Claims that he 'sped' through the ranks untrue. He moved through them at the speed at which the Order allowed in their bylaws.

1900s - GD falls apart. He claims to have destroyed it, but given the egos involved it would've fallen apart anyway.

1904 - Reception of Liber AL, New Aeon of Horus, the institution of Christianity now put on notice.

1909 - Crowley & Jones form the A:.A:. to 'replace' the Golden Dawn

1909-1947 - Crowley fights with anyone & everyone who doesn't think he's a Prophet.

My alternative angle is:

1875 - Foundation of TS. Eventually turns into a popular, international, still extant organization with not unreasonable claim to influencing society. (Birth of Crowley.)

1888 - Foundation of the Golden Dawn by members of the TS who felt that Blavatsky's interests were too 'Eastern' and lacking in Hermetic & Christian symbolism. Very few people join, lasts only 12 years and evaporates. Basically an quasi-masonic order formed to replace Kingsford's 'Hermetic Society' after she died.

1898 - Crowley joins GD, which goes s'plodey in due course.

1904 - Crowley receives Liber AL

1904 to 1947 - Crowley writes many books. Very view copies are published, even fewer are purchased or read. Barring a few hardcore dedicated friends and followers, pretty much nobody is interested in his work. AC dies.

1930's - Israel Regardie promotes interest in Golden Dawn via his 4 part expose & other works.

1960's - Reactivation of OTO and publication of works long out of print. Wicca exported from UK.

1970's/80's - Resurgence of Golden Dawn & Crowley. Regardie back in print. Americanized Wicca exported back to the UK and beyond.

End result? The success of both the GD and Crowley have been largely posthumous. In their day, very few people were even remotely interested at all. There were far far more people interested in Theosophy, and even more into Spiritualism. And while people were busy arguing over the right way to do a pentagram ritual, there were many thousands of people in other 'occult' or 'mystical' organizations who got on with their lives without knowing about any of it.