Wiccan Roots: Gerald Gardner and the Modern Witchcraft Revival

As a formal research into the foundations of Wicca, as seen through Gerald Gardner's practice and life in the 1930s and 1940s, the bulk of Wiccan Roots is based on speculation and inference, and as such does not deserve the high academic praise it has garnered since its release in 2000. The extensive research of this book proves nothing; lengthy extracts from diaries, social listings in the local newspaper, and theatre programmes only tenuously suggest the connection certain facts might have with Gardner's decision to formally create Wicca. The speculation goes so far as to numerate the members of the New Forest community who may have been Gardner's initiators into the witch cult, with no concrete proof to back up any assertion. Wiccan Roots suggests more of what Gardner might have drawn upon to create the practice, as opposed to what definitely constituted the influences both practice-wise and individual-wise.

What Wiccan Roots does offer, however, is an excellent snapshot of those who were likely to have been Gardner's closest friends and neighbours, an idea of the common elements between various groups, and so forth. The lives of Edith Woodford-Grimes (Dafo) and "Old Dorothy" Clutterbuck are investigated with more depth than any other work, although the conclusions Heselton draws are still speculation. There's plenty of flavour regarding what life was like at the time in the pre-war and wartime years, and what Gardner's mindset might have been in the years leading up to the formal launch of Wicca. Heselton also explores in detail Gardner's other pursuits such as the Crotona Fellowship, community theatre, Rosicrucians, and so forth; but ultimately, all his conclusions regarding the foundations of Wicca are based on inference and coincidence.

Also detracting from the work are the facts that the book is poorly written, and poorly edited. The inconsistent use of italics is particularly annoying. Heselton's habit of not clearly stating his conclusions (or, indeed, the import of the information he presents without context) ruins any case he attempts to make. At the other end of the spectrum lies his tendency to belabour certain points, bludgeoning the reader over the head with tenuous factual support. Much of the book's "proof" is derived from the author's conclusions "proven" in earlier chapters, a poor method of obtaining support for anything.

The last three or so chapters are the best of the book. These examine the other known witch-cult groups in the areas, and the event known as Operation Cone of Power, conceived to counter the German invasion of Britain. In these chapters Heselton pulls certain quotes out of Gardner's books to examine what he had actually been taught, and what he was missing, and this constitutes the best analysis and criticism in the book.

In short, this is a weak addition to the body of material on Gardner's life and works, and unless the reader is obsessively concerned with the New Forest social circles in which Gardner functioned previous to his involvement with Wicca, not worth the money.

(c) 2004 A. Murphy-Hiscock. Acknowledged with thanks is the kindness of Ceri Young in obtaining this book for review.

Further research has turned up this quote from the author, taken from an interview with the Wiccan-Pagan Times:

TWPT: How do you see Witchcraft evolving in the U.K. and around the world since Gerald Gardner brought the practice back into the light of day in the early 1950's? Do you think that Witchcraft would have resurfaced even if there had been no Gerald Gardner to push it along?

PH: Part of the process of writing "Wiccan Roots" was to put myself in Gerald Gardner's place and think how I would have responded to the realisation that witchcraft still survived and that I had been initiated into a surviving coven. In fact, I had been initiated into a surviving tradition some years previously and was taught certain things, so I had my own experience to guide me.

I think Gardner would have wanted to find out as much as possible, through asking questions. They would, perhaps, have been reluctant to answer, for several reasons - some things you have to find out for yourself, and it would defeat the object to tell directly, some things they genuinely didn't know, and some were definitely the wrong questions and wouldn't be answered.

Gardner wasn't satisfied with all this. He started (or continued) to read about witchcraft and allied subjects until he filled in the gaps to his own satisfaction, bringing in things that he found attractive from many different sources.

He certainly wanted to publicise things, and we know that, after considerable discussion, he got permission to publish, first a work of fiction and then a work of non-fiction.

In answer to your question, I think that Gardner was very much the right person at the right time - it could well have been someone else. We certainly now know that the tradition that Gardner came upon at Highcliffe was just one of several which were around. Someone else would have come upon one of the others at some time and had a similar response to that of Gardner - to let people know that witchcraft still survived.

Certainly the repeal of the last of the Witchcraft Acts in 1951 would have provided some impetus in that direction.

This statement suggests the origin of the poor scholarship of Wiccan Roots. Heselton's reasoning process very often comes across as "then I'll bet he did this, and then this," likely derived from the author speculating about Gardner's motives in this manner.