David Myatt

David Myatt

More Academic Inaccuracies

Given the lamentable state of modern academic research into esotericism, as highlighted in several previous articles such as the one titled The Occult And Academia {1}, it was no surprise to read the many mistakes about the Order of Nine Angles and about Mr David Myatt in a recently published book by a major and well-respected academic publisher.

The book in question is Satanism: A Social History written by Massimo Introvigne (professor of Sociology of Religions at Pontifical Salesian University, Torino) and published in 2016 by Brill, Leiden, as volume 21 in the series Texts and Studies in Western Esotericism. The book consists of 651 pages and retails in the UK for around £156.

A section of the book – under the heading Satan The Prophet – is devoted to the Order of Nine Angles (pp. 357-364) with Introvigne writing, among other things,

1. That Myatt was Anton Long was “confirmed” by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his 2003 book Black Sun.
2. That Myatt’s middle name is “William”.
3. That Senholt “offered a number of elements confirming that Long was indeed Myatt”.
4. That the ONA “acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt”.
5. That Myatt joined Jordan’s British Movement in 1969.
6. That the ONA Black Mass “derived from Huysmans and the rituals of the Church of Satan.
7. That the Temple of Set “perceived the competition [the ONA] as dangerous, particularly when in the late 1980s some members of the Temple of Set started considering themselves members of the ONA at the same time. In 1992, Aquino and his British representative David Austen launched an internal purge, expelling from the Temple of Set those members who also wanted to remain in the ONA.”

In respect of his claims:

§ Introvigne not only, due to a lack of detailed research, gets several facts wrong – for instance, Myatt’s middle name is Wulstan, not William; he joined British Movement in 1968 not 1969 – but also does not provide any evidence from primary sources (or indeed from any sources) in support of several of his claims, such as the claim regarding the ONA Black Mass, and the claim regarding the Temple of Set. His claims are just stated as if they were fact. In the matter of the claim about Aquino, for example, it seems that Introvigne did not bother to contact Aquino himself to ask for his side of the story.

§ In addition, Goodrick-Clarke did not confirm anything regarding Myatt being Long, he merely stated that Myatt was Long and accepted without question that the MS titled Diablerie – a notorious forgery {2} – was written by Myatt and that it recounted details of Myatt’s early life. Goodrick-Clarke did not provide any evidence from primary sources that Myatt was Anton Long nor regarding Myatt having written that MS.

§ Likewise in respect of Senholt, for Senholt also provided no evidence from primary sources that Myatt was Anton Long. Instead, he claimed – without providing any evidence from forensic linguistics – that there was a similarity of writing style between works by Myatt and Long, a claim disputed by several other academics (Monette, Sieg, Kaplan), and also claimed that Myatt’s extremist adventures (neo-nazi followed by radical Muslim) were ONA Insight Roles and thus linked Myatt to the ONA even though such Insight Roles only last around a year while Myatt’s neo-nazi adventures lasted thirty years (1968-1998) with his time as a radical Muslim lasting over ten years (1998-2009). Furthermore, Senholt made no mention of the many things about Myatt’s life which contradict his thesis, such as Myatt’s marriage in a Christian church and his writings praising Christianity and especially Catholicism. {3}

§ As a source for his claim that the ONA “acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt” Introvigne cites the text A Modern Mage: Anton Long and the Order of Nine Angles, neglecting to mention four important facts.

(1) “That since Anton Long retired in 2011 no one publicly speaks ‘on behalf of the O9A’. Nor can anyone now or in the future speak ‘on behalf of the O9A’. As befits the O9A principle of ‘the authority of individual judgement’. For even if the person is O9A, as the author of that book is, they are just presenting their own opinion, their own interpretation, just as these answers – and the earlier ones – are someone’s opinion, their interpretation, of matters O9A.” {4}

(2) That the authors of that text are presenting their personal opinions about Myatt and Long and provide no evidence from primary sources in support of such opinions.

(3) That others associated with the ONA have lambasted that text, writing that “the authors seem to have committed the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc; concluding that Anton Long is (or must be) Myatt because his publicly documented life apparently fits the paradigm of what someone ONA should be like and should do in the real world.” {5}

(4) That the nature of the ONA – with its independent nexions and its principle of the authority of individual judgement – means that those associating with the ONA have diverse and often different opinions about various matters, including about whether Myatt=Long and including about the ONA itself. {6}

Conclusion

As noted in a recent ONA polemic,

“Correctly understood, a scholarly approach means undertaking a meticulous, unbiased, research into a specific subject over a period of some years using, wherever possible, primary sources; formulating an opinion based on such learning, such knowledge, as results from such research, and in respect of writing academic papers and books about the subject providing copious, accurate, references to the source material.

Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

Hence, if the author of an academic book or academic paper writes about a person and/or about their works, or about an event, using only secondary sources – sources containing the opinions, the interpretations, or the conclusions of others – then the opinion, the interpretation, the conclusions of that author about such a person and/or about their works, or about an event, are unauthoritative because unscholarly.” {7}

The last paragraph sums up what Introvigne writes about the ONA and about Mr Myatt, for since Introvigne only offers the opinions, the interpretations, or the conclusions of others, providing no evidence from primary sources, his own opinion is unauthoritative because unscholarly. That he also makes some basic factual errors and obviously has not done detailed research into the ONA (as evident in not knowing about the authority of individual judgement and other matters) highlight once again the shoddy nature of quite a lot of academic research into Western esotericism in general and modern Satanism in particular.

K.S.
2017

{1} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/more-unscholarly-research/
{2} https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/about/a-sceptics-review-of-diablerie/
{3} The facts which contradict Senholt’s thesis are enumerated by Myatt is his essay A Matter of Honour available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/myatt-a-matter-of-honour/
{4} Some Questions About The Order of Nine Angles (2016), Part One. Available (April 2017) at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/o9a-q-a/
{5} https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/review-of-the-radical-philosophy-of-anton-long/
{6} A classic example of differing ONA views is given in the text at https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/aristocracy-anarchy-or-nihilism/
{7} https://wyrdsister.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/another-typical-anti-o9a-example/


Related:

Academia, David Myatt, And The Order of Nine Angles
(pdf)

David Myatt And Satanism
(pdf)


odal3

Lambasting Levey And Aquino
(pdf)

 

Contents include:

§ Anton LaVey And Anton Long: A Study In Modern Satanism
§ Knowledge And Culture Verses Plebeian Pretentiousness
§ The Satanic Bible
§ Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again About The Order Of Nine Angles
§ The Sad Sad Story of Michael Aquino


David Myatt

David Myatt

 

For a long time I, personally, have always respected Michael Aquino, founder of the Occult group the Temple of Set. Why such respect? Because, judged by his actions over some forty years and judged by what individuals who have known him have personally said or written about him to me, I judged him to be a person of integrity. Someone, that is, who would not knowingly besmirch a person’s reputation and someone who had and who upheld certain moral standards. Which is most befitting given that he was for years an officer in the United States military.

Thus it is with pleasure that my attention was drawn, by a comrade, to a posting that Aquino (on the 11th of October 2016) made on an internet forum and in which posting he not only reproduced a letter he had received, in the 1990s, from David Myatt but also mentioned that his correspondence with Myatt was “mutually courteous and respectful.”

Since some people who have associated themselves with the Order of Nine Angles seem intent on maligning and mocking Aquino, I reproduce in full here the aforementioned posting in which Aquino quotes from a letter he received from Myatt. The posting is as follows:


[Begin quotation]

My last correspondence with David Myatt [under his own name] occurred in February-March 1998 and was mutually courteous and respectful.

°°°

 David Myatt to M.A. 2/28/98:

Sir: It has come to my attention that you have frequently mentioned my name in connection with a certain “occult” group, alleging among other things that I am some sort of leader or sole member of this group. This is completely untrue. I am not “Anton Long” nor “Stephen Brown”. Neither am I an occultist. As for Mr C Beest, if you know people who had ever met him, you would know he is not yet thirty years old and could not possibly be me, being as I am almost fifty years old.

I am certainly a National-Socialist – that is, a Nazi. I have been a Nationalist-Socialist since I was sixteen years old. For your information I once many years ago infiltrated an occult group in the hope of using that group for NS ends – to propagate National-Socialism. It seemed a good idea at the time.

As far as I am concerned, National-Socialism and the occult are incompatible, and NS and Satanism certainly are. No one can be both a NS and a Satanist – you are either one or the other.

Yours, etc.
D. Myatt

°°°

So let us take Mr. Myatt at his word: that he is not “Long/Brown/Beest”, has no connection with “ONA”, and as he is a professed Nazi considers that it would be impossible for him to simultaneously be a Satanist.

In this case my disapproval of the “ONA” consequent to both the writings under its name and the manners of its professed adherents, are no reflection on Mr. Myatt. I do not know him personally beyond our brief, courteous correspondence almost two decades ago. I have absolutely no reason to wish him ill.

[End quotation]


While a few O9A’ers will doubtless believe that Aquino has fabricated that letter from Myatt, I personally am of the opinion that it is genuine since I accept Aquino’s honesty in this matter and know that Myatt’s letter expresses what Myatt has consistently written and said over many decades. For instance, that Myatt did “infiltrate an occult group in the hope of using that group for NS ends” and that he did believe that “National-Socialism and the occult are incompatible” as evidenced by his 1990s text  Occultism and National-Socialism (pdf).

What I find of particular interest is that the letter from Myatt apparently dates from shortly before – or shortly after – he was arrested for ‘incitement to murder’ following a Dawn Raid on his home by police officers from S012 (Special Branch) stationed at Scotland Yard.

Richard Stirling
2016


Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

The Question of Anton Long And David Myatt

For decades allegations have been made that Anton Long – founder of the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) in the early 1970s {1}{2} and author of most of its Occult texts {3} – was the pseudonym of David Myatt, a former neo-nazi activist regarded as “the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s” {4} and as “England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” {5}

Such allegations – including the one that since Myatt is Long he is also a Satanist – have led to some academics, and many Occultists, to assume – or to accept without question – that Myatt is Long {6}, despite Myatt’s persistent denials and despite no one, in some thirty years, having provided any credible evidence based on research using primary sources {7}. The only detailed examination, so far, of a possible connection has been by Senholt who devoted some 24 pages to the topic {8} although his conclusion that there is a connection is ‘not proven’ because his analysis is based on secondary – not primary – sources and he relies on various assumptions, such as there being some similarity between some events in Myatt’s life (neo-nazi activism and involvement with radical Islam) and some of the Insight Roles suggested by the O9A, and that Myatt’s idea of a ‘Galactic Imperium’ is echoed in some texts written by Anton Long.

As JR Wright mentioned in her essay about Myatt and the ONA {9}, those who accept that Myatt is Anton Long and therefore a Satanist have to explain:

not only the lack of factual evidence proving he is a satanist but also many other things about Myatt’s life, among which are the following:
1) His time as a Christian monk and his many subsequent writings praising Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general.
2) His Occultism and National-Socialism text – written in the 1980’s and republished in the 1990’s and again around 2006 – and in which he denounced occultism.
3) The “small matter” of him being married in Church in accordance with the Christian ceremony of marriage.
4) His semi-autobiographical poetry.
5) His voluminous writings about the hubris of extremism, and about his rejection of and his remorse concerning his extremist past.
6) An extensive seven hour search of his home by six Detectives from Scotland Yard in 1998 failed to find any occult items or literature.
7) A forensic analysis, by the police, of Myatt’s seized computers following his arrest in 1998 failed to find any occult material.


The Early Life Of David Myatt

Several academics have referred to Myatt’s early life {1}{8}{10}(11}(12}, stating that he was born, in 1950, in Tanganyika (now known as Tanzania) when that land was still under British control; that he was educated there; that he later lived in the Far East, and came to live in England in the late 1960s. While these details are sketchy, Myatt himself in his autobiography Myngath provides a few more details {13}. He relates, for example, that he was privately educated in Africa, and that during his teens in the Far East he studied Ancient Greek and learned to read Sanskrit. In several letters and later writings he mentions trips, in the early 1970s, to the Middle East and Iran accompanied on at least one trip by a gay female (possibly Iranian) friend he had met at university. {14} In addition Myatt has mentioned that his father provided him, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, with an allowance sufficient to enable him to travel where he liked and purchase whatever books he happened to be interested in.

This rather eclectic, somewhat itinerant, and possibly privileged early life (in a letter to one correspondent Myatt mentions his family having servants), is certainly interesting and most certainly deserves further research based on primary sources. Which research might provide some clarification in respect of the assumption that Myatt was/is Anton and thus that “the role of David Myatt [is] paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA.” {15}

Hearsay And Rumours

For decades, individuals such as Michael Aquino – famed for his foundation of the Occult group the Temple of Set and for his earlier friendship with Howard Stanton Levey – have, for whatever personal and/or ideological reasons, circulated rumours about Myatt and about the O9A. Thus, in a recent (2016) posting on some internet forum Aquino not only made known his ignorance of O9A esoteric philosophy but also unequivocally stated, yet again, that “he [Myatt] was confirmed to me as Anton Long,” while failing to provide any evidence from primary sources to confirm such hearsay. {16}

Given such hearsay, and the continued allegations that Myatt is Anton Long, it is incumbent on those who repeat such hearsay and such allegations to provide evidence based on primary sources. Until they do – and until academics  also provide credible evidence based on research using primary sources – it will remain a mystery as to whether David Myatt really is (or was) Anton Long.

R. Parker
2016

Notes

{1} Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the Twenty First Century. Sirius Academic Press, 2013. p.86

{2} Senholt, Jacob. Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles, in Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors), The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity. Oxford University Press. 2013. pp. 254–256

{3} Senholt, op.cit. p.256; Monette, op.cit. p.86

{4} Simon Wiesenthal Center: Response, Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2

{5} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (USAF), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{6} For instance, Goodrick-Clarke, in his book Black Sun simply states that Myatt is Long and then proceeds to use their names interchangeably. Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press. 2003, pp.215-216.

{7} Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

{8} Senholt, op.cit. pp.250–274.

{9} JR Wright. David Myatt, Satanism, and the Order of Nine Angles. e-text, 2012 (revised 2016). A pdf version is currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/david-myatt-and-the-o9a/

{10} Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas. 2006. pp. 142-144.

{11}  Kaplan, Jeffrey. Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right. Rowman & Littlefield. 2000. p. 216ff; p.512f

{12} Goodrick-Clarke, op.cit. pp.216ff

{13} Myatt, David. Myngath: Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. 2013. ISBN 9781484110744. It should be noted that, according to academic criteria, an autobiography is a primary source.

{14} Some his letters have been published in a 2009 pdf collection edited by JR Wright and titled Selected Letters of David Myatt, 2002-2008. They are currently (September 2016) available at https://regardingdavidmyatt.wordpress.com/selected-letters/

Some of Myatt’s other correspondence is included in part 2 and 3 of his book Understanding and Rejecting Extremism
A Very Strange Peregrination, [ISBN 9781484854266], while many of his post-2012 essays are autobiographical, such as the two Questions for DWM of 2014 and 2015, and the Development Of The Numinous Way, available (as of September 2016) at https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/

(15} Senholt, Jacob. The Sinister Tradition. Paper presented at the international conference, Satanism in the Modern World, Trondheim, 19-20th November, 2009.

{16} In respect of Aquino’s latest rumour-mongering, qv. his recent diatribes about Myatt on some self-described ‘satanic’ internet forum, some of which are reproduced in the “Michael Aquino Sounds Off Again About The Order Of Nine Angles” and the two-part “The Sad Sad Story of Michael Aquino” sections of the following pdf document: https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lambasting-levey.pdf