From tyagi@bjt.net Thu Nov 14 06:05:09 1996 Return-Path: tyagi@bjt.net Received: from kudonet.com (kudonet.com [165.227.52.1]) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA02815 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 06:05:06 -0500 Received: by kudonet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id BAA03020; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:58:54 -0800 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:58:54 -0800 Message-Id: <199611140958.BAA03020@kudonet.com> To: tyagi@hollyfeld.org Subject: The regardie arguement the story so far From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Status: RO >Path: kudonet.com!news.scruz.net!legba.synergy.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mysolution.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!peerfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!edfu.demon.co.uk!edfu >From: Nick Farrell >Newsgroups: alt.magick >Subject: The regardie arguement the story so far >Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 12:44:14 +0000 >Organization: Hermetic Trust >Lines: 59 >Distribution: world >Message-ID: <$plUGHAeEHiyEwUW@edfu.demon.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: edfu.demon.co.uk >X-NNTP-Posting-Host: edfu.demon.co.uk >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.01 This debate has bought to light some interesting things and people. It has also led me to check out a few facts. As a result I can now say that I have changed my mind about Yorke being the source of Regardies 5=6. I am satisfied that he was never a member of the Stella Mat. I have been reviewing these notes with Bob Gilbert including a few letters he has. In my own mind I am content with the Jan 1933 date for Regardies initiation into Bristol. This co-incides with what he said and other papers presented here. Earlier dates suggested by Draconis confuse the relationship with the chiefs with actual membership. The date coincides with letters that Gilbert has between members of the Bristol temple (senior but not chiefs) about Regardies tree of life book which indicates that most of them had never heard of him up to August 1932. (You would expect that they would if he was a follow member). The question of his grade when he entered however is open to dispute. There is no way the Bristol Temple would have allowed an accelerated leap up the ladder to the extent that Regardie would have had to reach 5=6 by December. There was a three month wait between 8=4 and a nine month one between Portal. Bristol were sticklers for it and like many semi-masonic organisations jumping grades was a special thing and would have been noticed. (There would have been some members angry that a wiz kid had been bumped up the grades so fast as there had been some who took years to go up the grades) Gilbert thought it odd that neither Coothelan (who only said Francis was a member) nor Francis Perry who were around at the time had never mentioned such a tradition breaking rise to fame. If a 5=6 certificate exists then this would be easy to check and he has suggested that who ever has it fax him a photocopy. "I know what one looks like from that period and I can check the signitures there have been famous forgeries of certificates in the past." Bob pointed out that the earlier addition of Golden Dawn was full of significant ritual mistakes. He said the 5=6 was particularly notiable for its errors. "They are the sort of errors that were either incompetence or someone copying out something without really knowing what was going on," Bob said. It could be that the 5=6 in Bristol had declined badly. Bob's solution to the issue is that either Regardie didn't get his 5=6 in Bristol or they acknowledged his previous work in another GD order. "Regardie was not a member of Waite's order, we know he didn't got to New Zealand, BOTA and OTO would not have counted, " he said. However there was a London temple of the GD which is a bit of a mystery. "However there is absolutely no documented proof from Regardie or anyone else that he was a member of another GD temple," Bob said. The other alternative is that Regardie was given his 5=6 by someone else later. If there is evidence of Regardies 0=0 certificate being from Bristol then he could not have made 5=6 and got it from elsewhere (which would be interesting to find out). If his 5=6 certificate is shown then we know he must have belonged to another recognisable order before that date (which is also interesting). Both of the above theories allow for Regardies reputation to remain in tact. My own view has always been that Regardie could not have got his 5=6 in Bristol and so far I see no reason to change my mind. I have never said that Regardie was not a 5=6. -- Nick Farrell