The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long

Order of Nine Angles



The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long

For almost four decades The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long has interested many of those interested in or curious about the modern Occult group the Order of Nine Angles, since in respect of the Order of Nine Angles whether or not Mr David Myatt is or was “Anton Long” is sui generis.

Sui generis because Anton Long not only devised the Occult philosophy and the praxises (such as the Seven Fold Way with its Insight Roles, Culling, Star Game, Esoteric Chant, Grade Ritual of Internet Adept, and physical challenges) that are – that presence – the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA) but also authored nearly all of its texts from its inception in the early 1970s to his retirement, as the extant Magus of the O9A, in 2011 c.e. As one person associated with the O9A wrote:

“In modern occultism there are four main exponents of, and/or expositions of, what is often referred to as Left Hand Path, and/or Satanic, esotericism. These are Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan; Michael Aquino and the Temple of Set; Aleister Crowley and Thelema; and Anton Long and the Order of Nine Angles.

Whatever one’s opinion of the Church of Satan, the Temple of Set, Thelema, or the Order of Nine Angles, they all to great extent reflect the known and documented life, the personality, and the ideas or beliefs, of the person most associated with them and who first expounded, or who first effectively codified, the ideas/beliefs/praxis – or the esoteric philosophy – evident in them.” {1}

With several academics – from Goodrick-Clarke in 2003, to Senholt in 2012, to Introvigne in 2016 {2} – and others, from journalists to some of those associated with the O9A, writing that Anton Long was a pseudonym of David Myatt, it was natural that many people would believe that “the role of David Myatt was and is essential to the creation and existence of the ONA.” {3}

However, to date no one – including academics – has provided any evidence from primary sources {4} that Myatt is Anton Long or that Myatt wrote any of the thousands of ONA texts that form the ONA corpus.

In the case of Goodrick-Clarke, for example, he based his supposition on a work with the title Diablerie, a copy of which is in the British Library {5} and which consists of comb-bound photocopies of a typewritten text and which purports to be an account of the early life of Anton Long. While the account is superficially similar in some respects to the childhood Myatt recounted in his 1980s memoir Autobiographical Notes: Towards Identity and the Galactic Empire {6} – and subsequently in his 2013 autobiography Myngath {7} – there are discrepancies and errors, such as in details of abode and schooling, as well as many vainglorious boasts such as being a ‘cat-burglar’ and his Occult group holding a person prisoner for days before sacrificing them during a ritual. Which discrepancies and errors, and such vainglorious boasts, have led several of those associated with the O9A to declare it is a forgery {8}, a claim also made by Myatt himself who wrote, in respect of Goodrick-Clarke, that “the often fictitious account he gives of ‘my life’ during that time is almost entirely taken from the fictional Diablerie manuscript.” {9}

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc And Other Fallacies

In a section of A Matter Of Honour sub-titled The Logical Fallacy of Incomplete Evidence – A Case Study, Myatt analyses in some detail the claims made by Senholt in his 2008 Master of Arts thesis, which thesis Senholt later revised for inclusion as a chapter in the book The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity, edited by Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen and published by Oxford University Press in 2013.

Myatt writes:

“A reading of the thesis reveals two interesting things. First, the use of and reliance upon secondary and tertiary sources, many of which are anonymous and many of which are derived from ‘the world wide web’, that most unreliable source of information. For example, he relies on the book Black Sun by Goodrick-Clarke even after admitting it contains errors and that the author offers no proof for the assumptions made in respect of me and the ONA. Second, that Senholt, undoubtedly inadvertently, commits the logical fallacy of incomplete evidence. That is, the multitude of facts and circumstances which do not support his contention about me and the ONA are omitted.”

Myatt details the factual errors made by Senholt, provides logical explanations for the claims made by Senholt – such as the claim that since both Myatt and the ONA use the neo-nazi ‘year of the fuhrer’ calender and terms such as ‘aeonic’, there is a causal link between the two, post hoc ergo propter hoc – with Myatt then listing various facts about his own life which contradict the assumption that he is or was a Satanist, facts (and primary sources) such as his semi-autobiographical poetry, his published correspondence, his marriage in the 1990s in a Christian church, and his ethical philosophy of pathei-mathos, which “reveal the ideas and experiences and (importantly) the failings of someone so different from a satanist that they have to be ignored.”

According to Myatt:

“it is matter of honour. Of personal knowing. As I mentioned […] the traditional gentlemanly and ladylike virtues and their cultivation are no longer the standard which individuals are expected to aspire to and to uphold. Thus I do not expect the plethora of rumours and allegations about me to suddenly cease, although I admit I do and perhaps naively nurture a vague hope that what I have written here may cause a few individuals to reconsider the veracity of such rumours and allegations.”

Yet despite Myatt’s rebuttal and despite the lack of evidence from primary sources, Senholt’s thesis and the chapter based on it in the aforementioned book – together with the claims made about Myatt by Goodrick-Clarke and by others {10} – have been cited by academics and non-academics alike as “proof” that Myatt is Anton Long and founded and was involved with the ONA.

Which use of such sources is a classic example of argumentum ad verecundiam, of the fallacy of appeal to authority. That academics such as Massimo Introvigne – in his Satanism: A Social History published in 2016 by Brill, Leiden, as volume 21 in the series Texts and Studies in Western Esotericism – commit such a fallacy in respect of Myatt seems to confirm Myatt’s conclusion in his A Matter Of Honour essay

“that the research done by some modern authors and even some academics – whose works are published by reputable publishers or quoted by others engaged in academic research – is inadequate and does not meet the taxing criteria of scholarship.” {11}

For Introvigne – professor of Sociology of Religions at the Catholic Pontifical Salesian University, Torino – fallaciously wrote (i) that Goodrick-Clarke in his 2003 book Black Sun confirmed that Myatt was Anton Long, and (ii) that Senholt “offered a number of elements confirming that Long was indeed Myatt.” Fallacious because neither Goodrick-Clarke nor Senholt provided any evidence from primary sources, with their ‘circumstantial evidence’ based on non-evidentiary assumptions (as in Goodrick-Clarke assuming Myatt wrote Diablerie) or derived from fallacious reasoning (as in Senholt unintentionally committing the fallacies of incomplete evidence and post hoc ergo propter hoc).

The Authority Of Individual Judgment And The Fallacy Of Illicit Transference

Those interested in ‘The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long’ sometimes commit another fallacy, that of illicit transference, by arguing from the particular to the general, as Massimo Introvigne does in his book by referencing one item and then stating, on the basis of that one item, that the ONA has “more or less acknowledged that Anton Long was a nom de plume of Myatt.” {12}

The item cited by Introvigne was the e-text A Modern Mage: Anton Long and The Order of Nine Angles, which was later published as a printed book under the title The Radical Philosophy of Anton Long. {13} The work contains an introduction – and several articles – by Mr R. Parker, who wrote in the introduction that

“in order for a person to fully understand and appreciate the Order of Nine Angles – and to thus know what being O9A means in the real world they should know about and understand the sinister-numinous life of Anton Long because the person behind that nom-de-guerre was David Myatt.”

It is fallacious to cite this work, and such a statement – or any such works or any such statements – as an acknowledgement by the ONA that Myatt is Anton Long because the Order of Nine Angles is a leaderless collective – or more correctly, “a movement, a subculture or perhaps metaculture that its adherents choose to embody or identify with” {14} – and thus has no central authority and no one person, or any persons, who can claim to represent or who can claim to speak or write on behalf of the ONA. Even the pseudonymous Anton Long never claimed such an authority, writing in the early 1990s that

“There is no acceptance of someone else’s authority […] I claim no authority, and my creations, profuse as they are, will in the end be accepted or rejected on the basis of whether they work. Satan forbid they should ever become ‘dogma’ or a matter of ‘faith’. I also expect to see them become transformed, by their own metamorphosis and that due to other individuals: changed, extended and probably ultimately transcended, may be even forgotten. They – like the individual I am at the moment – are only a stage, toward something else.” {15}

“You ask who has authority in the Order and what this authority represents. Basically, the only ‘authority’ is that which arises or developes because of experience […] I have no ‘authority’ in the real sense – I simply offer advice and guidance based on my own experience. I am still learning. What I teach is not ‘sacred’ – hopefully, it will be surpassed, refined, changed, when others discover and experience and attain.” {16}

Anton Long is referring to one of the founding principles or traditions of the Order of Nine Angles, ‘the way of practical deeds’, of individuals learning – via such means as the Seven Fold Way – from pathei-mathos, from their own experience, a principle which has become known as The Authority Of Individual Judgment.

In practice this principle means that anyone or any nexion or nexions self-identifying as ONA can only present their own personal views or opinions concerning the ONA, based as those may be on their own experience or learning. Hence when someone such as Mr R. Parker writes that the person behind the nom-de-guerre Anton Long “was David Myatt” they are only presenting – can only ever present – their own personal view or opinion. They are not presenting – can never present – the view or the policy of the Order of Nine Angles.

That some individuals interested in ‘The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long’ do not understand this, and/or commit the fallacy illicit transference, is understandable. That an academic such as Introvigne does not understand this fundamental ONA principle reveals a lack of understanding of the Order of Nine Angles, a lack deriving from an inadequate knowledge of, a lack of scholarly research into, the Order of Nine Angles.

The Legend Of Anton Long

That no one, academics included, has provided any evidence from primary sources that Myatt is Anton Long is not unexpected since in regard to the milieu of modern Occultism attention and interest hitherto has been focused on the likes of Howard Levey, Michael Aquino, and Mr Crowley, and not on the Order of Nine Angles and Anton Long.

That – with perhaps one exception {17} – what little has been written and published by academics about The Peculiar Matter Of Myatt And Long, and about the Order of Nine Angles, contains basic errors {18} {19} and assumptions, with the authors committing various logical fallacies, is also unexpected, given the lack of scholarship – of extensive research using primary sources – in what are relatively new fields of study, that of Western esotericism in general and of modern Satanism in particular.

Consequently, given the importance, the uniqueness, of Anton Long in creating and developing O9A Occult philosophy and praxises he remains – factually – something of a mystery to those associating themselves with the O9A movement and to those academics interested in the O9A, with assumptions and conjectures about his identity, and fallacious reasoning, having served to create and to perpetuate stories about him. Which mystery, which assumptions and conjectures, and which stories, are advantageous to an esoteric movement.

Kerri Scott

{1} R. Parker (2013). Anton Long and The Exeatic Quest for Gnosis. e-text.

Anton Long was the author of foundational O9A documents – primary sources – such as Naos, Hostia, The Deofel Quartet, The Culling Texts, and Enantiodromia: The Sinister Abyssal Nexion.

{2} (a) Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas (2003). Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press. p.216; (b) Senholt, Jacob C. (2013). Secret Identities in the Sinister Tradition: Political Esotericism and the Convergence of Radical Islam, Satanism, and National Socialism in the Order of Nine Angles. “The Devil’s Party: Satanism in Modernity”. Per Faxneld and Jesper Aagaard Petersen (editors). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 250–274; (c) Introvigne, Massimo (2016). Satanism: A Social History. Brill. p.357.

{3} Senholt, Jacob C. (2009). The Sinister Tradition. Conference paper presented at Satanism in the Modern World, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 19-20th of November, 2009. p.16

{4} 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.

In respect of Myatt and his peregrinations, primary sources would include his own writings, including his autobiography Myngath; court transcripts of his criminal trials; interviews with police officers who have arrested and interviewed him under caution; documents concerning his early years in Africa and the Far East; documents relating to his time as a Catholic monk; documents relating to his conversion to Islam (such as his Testimony of Faith in Islam signed as it is by Hafiz Muhammad Tufail – Imam of the Jamia Masjid Ghousia – and by Qadi Abdur Sa’auf and dated 24 Jumada Al-Ula), documents and letters relating to his involvement with Column 88; and so on.

Some material by the anti-fascist group ‘Searchlight’ relating to Myatt can be found in the Searchlight Archive in the University of Northampton archive room (ID: SCH/01/Res). Most of the Myatt items are in Series 12, SCH/01/Res/BRI/12/004, which deals with Combat 18. Some other material, relating to Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement, is in Series 21 SCH/01/Res/BRI/21/002

{5} Long, Anton (c.1991). Diablerie: Revelations of a Satanist. The British Library. General Reference Collection Cup.711/742. BNB GB9219567; System number 012478777.

{6} Quotations from Myatt’s memoir were included in the pamphlet Cosmic Reich: The Life and Thoughts of David Myatt, published by Renaissance Press, New Zealand, in 1995. Some details of Myatt’s early life are described on p.216 of Jeffrey Kaplan’s Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right, published by Rowman & Littlefield, in 2000.

Similar details are given in issue #3, May 1998 edition of Column 88, the magazine published by Myatt’s National-Socialist Movement, with other details included in the 2001 internet article The Life and Times of David Myatt, a copy of which is archived at [Accessed November 2017]

Around 2002, Myatt himself issued a revised and updated version of his memoir – which included his years with Combat 18 in the 1990s – a copy of which is archived at [Accessed November 2017]

{7} Myatt, David. (2013). Myngath. Some Recollections of a Wyrdful and Extremist Life. CreateSpace Publishing. ISBN 9781484110744.

{8} An example is the 2013 article A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie by R. Parker, a copy of which is available at [Accessed November 2017]

Parker writes that the ‘evil deeds’ done by Mr Long which are described in Diablerie “are lame or laughable or sound like the adventures of a frat boy.”

{9} Myatt, David. A Matter Of Honour. e-text, 2012. In the essay Myatt lists seven biographical errors made by Goodrick-Clarke. A pdf version of the essay is available on Myatt’s weblog at [Accessed November 2017]

Myatt also makes mention of another forgery, Bealuwes Gast, writing that it

“seems to have been recently written by someone, possibly for financial gain resulting from selling it at some silly price to collectors of rare Occult memorabilia. The bulk of this new fictional ‘autobiography’ consists of an early (now out of date) edition of Myngath to which various fictional autobiographical stories and ‘sinister’ incidents and diatribes have been added in line with what might be expected from a mythical ‘Anton Long’. Given that the majority of these autobiographical stories in this so-called Bealuwes Gast are quite risible and fanciful (and not fundamentally satanic at all), and given that the ‘sinister diatribes’ seem to have been cut-and-pasted from various internet articles attributed to those who over the years have used the nom-de-plume Anton Long, it seems unlikely that this forgery will ever be taken seriously by anyone. I mean – and to name just one risible example – who can take seriously a ‘clockwork orange cult’ and the wearing of white lab coats to boot.”

In regard to this other ‘autobiography of Anton Long’, qv. the 2014 article by R. Parker, Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery, available at [Accessed November 2017]

{10} One of the fallacious claims often repeated, deriving as it does from Senholt, is that Myatt’s extremist adventures (neo-nazi followed by radical Muslim) were ONA Insight Roles and thus link Myatt to the ONA. It is fallacious since such Insight Roles, by definition, (i) only last between a year and eighteen months while Myatt’s neo-nazi adventures lasted thirty years (1968-1998) with his time as a radical Muslim lasting over ten years (1998-2009), and (ii) they are a task that a fairly new Occult initiate – an External Adept – is expected to undertake before moving on to the next stage of the ONA’s Seven Fold Way.

The task is outlined in such Anton Long authored texts as An Introduction to Insight Rôles, which is included in the 1460 page ONA compilation The Definitive Guide To The Order of Nine Angles: Theory and Praxises, seventh edition, 2015.

{11} In his essay Myatt mentions that the criteria of scholarship “is essentially two-fold: (i) of detailed, meticulous, unbiased research on and concerning a specific topic or topics or subject undertaken over a period of some considerable time, usually a year or more in duration, and of necessity involving primary source material; and (ii) a rational assessment of the knowledge acquired by such research, with such conclusions about the topic, topics, or subject therefore being not only the logical result of the cumulative scholarly learning so acquired but also possessing a certain gravitas.”

{12} Introvigne, op.cit. p. 358.

{13} While the printed book is no longer available, copies of the e-text are, at the time of writing, still available on certain websites.

{14} Monette, Connell (2013). Mysticism in the 21st Century. Sirius Academic Press. p.89.

{15} Letter to Michael Aquino, dated 20th October 1990 ev. The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown. Volume 1. Thormynd Press, 1992.

{16} Letter to Miss Stockton, dated 19th June 1991 eh. The Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown. Volume 1.

{17} The one exception is arguably the chapter on the ONA in Monette’s Mysticism in the 21st Century, op.cit.

{18} Some of the basic errors made by Introvigne include the following: (i) “that Myatt joined Jordan’s British Movement in 1969,” when the correct date is 1968; (ii) that Myatt’s middle name is William, when it is Wulstan; (iii) that the ONA Black Mass “derived from Huysmans and the rituals of the Church of Satan” when there is no such derivation and no documentary evidence to support such a claim; and (iv) 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 […] launched an internal purge, expelling from the Temple of Set those members who also wanted to remain in the ONA,” when – to our knowledge – there was no such purge and no documentary evidence to support such a claim.

{19} The article The Occult And Academia surveys some of the errors about the ONA and Myatt made in the 2016 book Children of Lucifer: The Origins of Modern Religious Satanism, written by Ruben Van Luijk. The article is available at [Accessed November 2017]


Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus

Order of Nine Angles



The life of David Myatt is discussed in relation to the occult group the Order of Nine Angles (O9A/ONA), with particular reference to (i) the O9A’s hermetic ‘seven fold way,’ which is a decades-long personal quest for wisdom, and (ii) the O9A concepts of ‘the sinisterly-numinous’ and ‘aeonics’. It will be argued that Myatt’s strange, varied, and documented life is consistent with someone following that ‘seven fold way’; that Myatt – under the nom-de-plume Anton Long – is one of the most innovative of modern occultists and one of the few to attain the grade of Magus; and that the O9A itself has been consistently mis-understood by outsiders.

Myatt, The Septenary Anados, And The Quest For Lapis Philosophicus

Myatt: A Matter of Honour

On Native Egyptian Influence In The Corpus Hermeticum

For over a hundred years, from Reitzenstein’s Poimandres published in 1904, to Fowden’s The Egyptian Hermes published in 1986, the question of Egyptian influence on the fourteen Greek texts – tractates {1} – collectively known as the Corpus Hermeticum has been much debated. The opinions of scholars, and of translators, have ranged from little influence (Festugiere) to insignificant influence (Myatt), to much influence (Mahé), to the more recent one (Fowden) of hermeticism being syncretic, combining elements of Hellenic culture with elements of Egyptian culture in various and still disputable proportions.

What, however, is often not explicitly defined is what ‘Egyptian’, and Egyptian culture, mean in the context of where and when the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum were written; which was, to give the widest parameters, sometime between the end of the first century CE and the end of the third century CE when Egypt was a province of the Roman Empire and where cities like Alexandria were places where Hellenic culture thrived and where people of Greek and of Roman descent lived in large numbers, some of whom no doubt had an interest in and knowledge of native Egyptian – ‘Pharaonic’ – culture and history. For centuries before that, most of Egypt had – following the conquests of Alexander the Great – been a Greek colony ruled by a succession of people of Greek origin such as the Macedonian Ptolemaios Soter who established what became known as the Ptolemaic dynasty (or Kingdom) whose last ruler was Cleopatra, herself of Greek origin, who desired that the native Egyptians of her time consider her as an embodiment of their native goddess Isis.

Thus for some three centuries before the texts of the Corpus Hermeticum were written Egypt was a thriving outpost of Greek culture; a place where the likes of Aristotle and Archimedes lived and flourished for many years.

It is therefore necessary to make a distinction between the ruling, Greek, elite – and the Greek aristocracy of people such as Aristotle and Archimedes – and native Egyptians; a cultural and an ancestral distinction. A relevant comparison is the British Raj in India who were British by heritage and culture and who, even if they were born and spent most of their life in India, could not – should not – be described as ‘Indian’.

Considered thus the relevant context of the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum was the centuries-long Greek culture of such an aristocracy combined with the relatively recent culture of Rome from the time of Caesar to praefectus Statilius Aemilianus (270 CE). What is not particularly relevant is the culture of the natives, the ancestors of the fellaheen, some or many of whom no doubt continued to revere or at least remember the divinities of ancient Egypt such as the goddess Isis and most of whom would not have been able to read let alone write Greek.

Given the centuries-long Greek and Roman heritage of the ruling elite and the aristocracy – who could speak and read Greek and who were probably acquainted with the writings of Plato and Aristotle – and given why rulers such as Cleopatra desired, for the benefit of her subjects, to be identified with an ancient Egyptian divinity such as Isis, it is most probable that the authors of the Greek texts of the Corpus Hermeticum, resident as they were in the then Roman province of Egypt, sought to give their metaphysical speculations some local, Egyptian, colour by – among other things – naming the son (or the pupil) of the Greek Hermes after the Egyptian god Thoth.

As Myatt noted in the introduction to his translation of tractate IV of the Corpus Hermeticum:

“In respect of Τάτ, while there is no disputing that Thoth is meant, what may or may not be implied by the name Thoth is whether or not there is a primarily Egyptian genesis for the metaphysics and the cosmogony of this particular tractate. For what does ‘Egyptian’ mean in the context of the Corpus Hermeticum, written when Egypt was a post-Ptolemaic Roman province where Hellenism still thrived? That is, is the text propounding a metaphysics and a cosmogony primarily redolent of indigenous, pre-Alexandrian, times, with Hermes Trismegistus simply a Hellenic name for the ancient Dynastic deity Thoth, and thus with the Greek Hermes possibly being a son of that ancient Egyptian deity? Or is the text redolent of a classical metaphysics and a cosmogony; or of a Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony; or of some syncretism of Egyptian (pre-Alexandrian) weltanschauungen with Hellenic mysticism? Or has the author (or authors) of Ἑρμοῦ πρὸς Τάτ ὁ κρατῆρ ἡ μονάς simply used the name of an ancient deity – Thoth – in order to appeal to an audience of Hellenized Egyptians, or Greeks/Romans dwelling in Egypt, or because it seemed to add some esoteric gravitas to the text? Or, as the title might be taken to imply – of Hermes to Thoth – is it a text intended to inform Egyptians (Hellenized or expatriate Greeks/Romans, or otherwise) about Greek/Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony, with Thoth thus regarded, symbolically, esoterically, or otherwise, as the son of the Greek divinity Hermes?

In this matter, I incline toward the view – based on some forty years of study of the Corpus Hermeticum and similar mystical and esoteric texts, classical, Hellenic, medieval, Arabic and otherwise – that what is imparted in this tractate, as with the Poemandres and Ιερός Λόγος, is primarily a mystical, and – for centuries – aural, Greek tradition, albeit one possibly influenced, over time and in some degree, by the metaphysical speculations of later philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle.”

I therefore find myself in agreement with Myatt regarding the question of native Egyptian influence on those texts. That the texts present us with a Greek/Hellenic metaphysics and cosmogony, not with some Greek and Egyptian syncretion, and certainly not with a native Egyptian metaphysics and cosmogony slightly influenced by Hellenism.

For it is essentially a question of terminology: of what ‘Egyptian’ means in cultural and in ancestral terms. Of a perhaps an inhibition on the part of some modern scholars to differentiate between the ancestry and the culture of ‘the natives’ and the ancestry and culture of a ruling elite and aristocracy.

R. Parker

{1} Tractate is derived from the classical Latin tractatus meaning a discussion, ‘concerning’, a treatise; and was used by writers such as Cicero and Pliny. It was later assimilated into ecclesiastical Latin – qv. Augustine – where it denoted a homily or sermon. It is the basis of the modern English word tract.


List of works cited

A-J. Festugiere. La Révélation d’Hermès Trismégiste. 4 volumes. Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1946-1954.

G. Fowden. The Egyptian Hermes. Princeton University Press, 1993

J-P. Mahé. Hermes En Haute Egypte. Tome I, 1978. Tome II, 1982. Presses de l’Université Laval.

D. Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. CreateSpace. 2017.

R. A. Reitzenstein. Poimandres: Studien zur griechisch-ägyptischen und frühchristlichen Literatu. Teubner, Leipzig, 1904

R. A. Reitzenstein & H. H. Schaeder. Studien zum antiken Synkretismus aus Iran und Griechenland. (Studien der Bibliothek Warburg), Teubner, Leipzig, 1926

It Can Sometimes Be Informative To Chastise

Order of Nine Angles


It Can Sometimes Be Informative To Chastise

It can sometimes – in a dialectical sort of way {1} – be informative for our readers, as well as mildly amusing for us, to polemically {2} chastise when someone publicly makes statements about the O9A, and about themselves, which reveal (a) just how silly and ill-informed that ‘someone’ is, and (b) just how they, in their silliness and ignorance, contribute albeit unwittingly to the O9A mythos and thus to its Labyrinthos Mythologicus {3).

Exhibit 1.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “I am proud of my religion, the Left Hand Path celebrates liberty, life and responsibility.”

In that one short sentence, there are two falsities, indicative of ignorance. First falsity is that the Left Hand Path (LHP) – more correctly, the Western, Occult, Left Hand Path – is a religion; second, that it celebrates some causal (some supra-personal, and social and/or political) abstraction denoted by the term ‘liberty’.

Correctly understood, through a scholarly perusal of Western esotericism, the LHP means: (a) antinomianism, that is (i) the rejection of the morality, and the zeitgeist, of contemporaneous society or societies, and (ii) a rejection of the laws established and enforced by others and in particular by supra-personal entities such as governments; and (b) rejection of religion and of the religious attitude, with the essential attributes of both religion and of the religious attitude being “belief in and (often uncritical) obedience to” what someone or some entity has codified, and “acceptance of being part of” some hierarchical group, community, or organization.

This understanding leads and has led to various modern LHP practices, from those redolent of anarchy and nihilism to those ‘extreme practices’ such as exemplified by the Order of Nine Angles who have defined ‘their’ LHP as a personal Occult way where:

“there is nothing that is not permitted; nothing that is forbidden or restricted. That is, the LHP means the individual takes sole responsibility for their actions and their quest. This makes the LHP both difficult and dangerous – its methods can be used as an excuse for anti-social behaviour as they can be used to aid the fetishes and weaknesses of some individuals as well as lead some into forbidden and illegal acts. However, the genuine Initiate of the LHP is undertaking a quest, and as such is seeking something: that is, there is a dynamic, an imperative about their actions as well as the conscious understanding and appreciation that all such actions are only part of that quest; they are not the quest itself. This arises because the LHP Initiate is seeking mastery and self-knowledge – these being implicit in such an Initiation. Accordingly, the LHP Initiate sees methods as merely methods; experience as merely experience. Both are used, and then discarded.

Because of this the LHP is by its nature ruthless – the strong of character win through, the weak go under. There are no ‘safety nets’ of any kind on the LHP […] The LHP breeds self-achievement and self-excellence, or it destroys.” {4}

In other words, the essence of the O9A LHP is practical, esoteric and exoteric, pathei-mathos {5}.

Exhibit 2.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “I earned the hatred of the ONA…my lone LHP voice did significant damage to the ONA.”

In that one short sentence, there are two falsities, indicative – in this case – both of ignorance and self-aggrandizement.

a) First falsity. Since the Order of Nine Angles, correctly understood (by means of detailed study of the entire O9A corpus over many months) is an esoteric philosophy presenced in three Occult praxises – and thus rather akin to “a movement, a subculture or perhaps metaculture that its adherents choose to embody or identify with” {6} – then “it” cannot “hate” anybody, no more than Nietzsche’s philosophy can “hate” a person.

b) Second falsity. Since the Order of Nine Angles is an esoteric philosophy presenced in three Occult praxises, an internet-based “voice” or internet-based “voices” cannot do any damage to such a philosophy, significant or otherwise, especially given that such a “voice” or “voices” is or are unscholarly and has not, or have not, presented any formalized philosophical, and mainstream published, written rebuttal of that philosophy in terms of its ontology, epistemology, and theory of ethics.

It seems to have escaped the notice of this particular silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ – and others of that ilk – that (a) a rant or rants, via the internet, about the ONA, (b) making unsubstantiated allegations about the ONA, and (c) spreading rumours about the ONA, do not amount to a philosophical rebuttal of ONA ontology, epistemology, and ethics; and as such are only and will only ever be taken seriously by such silly and ill-informed persons and others of their (mostly internet-bound) ilk.

Which exposure of such falsities will, in all probability, not prevent this particular silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ – and others of that ilk – from continuing to propagate such falsities about the ONA in the future. For no doubt their, apparently necessary, self-belief that their “voices” can make a difference will motive them to continue making unsubstantiated allegations and continue spreading rumours, strengthened as that self-belief no doubt has been, is and will be by what is, for them, an apparently convincing delusion that they possess a detailed, esoteric, and philosophical, knowledge of the ONA.

Exhibit 3.

In the case under consideration, a silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ wrote: “fanatics such as David Myatt (Order of Nine Angles) promote murder in the name of religion.”

In that one short sentence, there are three falsities, indicative – in this case – of that someone giving voice to the zeitgeist of contemporaneous Western society. Or, in less abstruse terms, parroting Magian propaganda {7} about a particular person in some apparent attempt to discredit and demean him.

a) First falsity. Since Mr Myatt, over seven years ago now, (i) has publicly distanced himself (theoretically and practically) from all types of extremism, (ii) was and is engaged only in academic pursuits, such as translations, (iii) lives and has lived as a recluse, and (iv) has developed a personal philosophy of life based on virtues such as empathy, humility, and compassion, he is most certainly not a ‘fanatic’.

b) Second falsity. Since neither the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ nor anyone else has provided probative evidence that Mr Myatt is or was connected to the Order of Nine Angles, associating him with the ONA amounts to using ‘weasel words’ in order to create a misleading, propagandistic, impression of Mr Myatt.

b) Third falsity. Since the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ used the present tense (promote) and does not provide any details as to where and when this current promotion of murder – in the name of religion or otherwise – occurred, then the accusation is at best a misleading, propagandistic, one, and at worst is a malicious, libellous, allegation.

Given that the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is giving voice to the zeitgeist of contemporaneous Western society by simply parroting Magian propaganda about a particular person – disliked, even hated, as that person is by the savants of the Magian status quo – then the silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is most certainly not, as they believe, “of the Left Hand Path.”


What this particular case illustrates, once again, is how the majority view by individuals – be they self-professed Occultists or ‘satanists’ – of both the Order of Nine Angles and of Mr Myatt is simply a parroting of Magian propaganda about a particular person and about a particular esoteric philosophy.

In the matter of the Order of Nine Angles, it is disliked – even loathed – because of its opposition to the “Ayn Rand with trappings” Magian ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey, its opposition to the foreign influenced (the non-Western) cult of Aquino’s ‘Setianism’, and of course because of the O9A’s antinomian, ‘heretical’, support of National Socialism, holocaust revisionism, and of Muslim Jihad.

In the matter of of Mr Myatt, he is disliked – even hated – by the savants of the Magian status quo (which savants include followers of the ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey as well as anti-fascists) not only because of his alleged links to, and his alleged founding of, the Order of Nine Angles, but also because his experiential life is one of practical opposition to everything Magian, from his thirty years as a neo-nazi activist and as a “principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution,” {8} to his decade as an active supporter of Muslim Jihad {9}{10}, to his Western, ineluctably pagan, philosophy of pathei-mathos {11}, and his recent translations of Western texts about hermeticism {12} which restore them to the Western, pagan, mystical tradition.

Our silly and ill-informed ‘someone’ is therefore simply following what has become something of an established Magian tradition of demeaning and trying to discredit both the O9A and Mr Myatt.

2017 ev


{1} Being pedants by inclination and occupation, we shall explain what we mean by various terms. Dialectical/dialectic:

(i) Having premises which are merely probable as opposed to demonstrably true; based on probable opinions rather than on demonstrable fact. (ii) Characterized by the existence or operation of opposing forces, tendencies, opinions, etcetera; the tension and disputes produced by the clash of such forces, opinions, etcetera; and the revealing of truth (the insight) that can result from such tension, disputes, and clashes. (iii) A disputant who disputes to be transgressive and/or to engender a dialectical response.

(ii) Polemic/polemical:

“Of the nature of, exhibiting, given to, or relating to dispute or controversy; contentious, disputatious, combative. a diatribe. A controversial argument; a strong verbal or written attack on a person, opinion, or doctrine. An aggressive debate or controversy; the practice of engaging in such debate. A person who argues or writes in opposition to another, or who takes up a controversial position; a controversialist.”

{3} The Labyrinthos Mythologicus of the O9A is explained here:

{4} The LHP – An Analysis. 1991. Published in Hostia, volume III.

{5} Refer to Notes On The Esoteric Learning Presenced Through Pathei-Mathos, available at

{6}Monette, Connell. Mysticism in the 21st Century. Sirius Academic Press. 2013. p. 89.

{7} The O9A use the term Magian to refer to the hybrid ethos of Yahoud and of Western hubriati, and to those individuals who are Magian by either breeding or nature. The essence of the paternalistic Magian ethos is inherent in Judaism, in Nasrany, and in Islam.

Two of the most prominent manifestations of the Magian ethos, in the modern world and in Western societies in particular, are (i) the State sponsored religion of holocaustianity (with the attendant demonizing of Hitler, the Third Reich, National Socialism, and the demonizing of ‘White’ – but not of non-White – ethnic awareness) and (ii) causal abstractions deriving from materialism, with the attendant cults of (a) usury and capitalism, and of (b) hubris and egoism such as the “Ayn Rand with trappings” so-called ‘satanism’ of Howard Stanton Levey.

Hubriati: The O9A use the term hubriati to refer to that class of individuals, in the West, who have been and who are subsumed by the Magian ethos and the delusion of (causal) abstractions, and who occupy positions of influence and/or of power. Hubriati include politicians, Media magnates and their savants, military commanders, government officials, industrialists, bankers, many academics and teachers, and so on. The oligarchy (elected and unelected) that forms the controllers of Western governments are almost excursively hubriati.

{8} Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (United States Air Force), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{9} Simon Wiesenthal Center. Response. Summer 2003, Vol 24, #2

{10} Mark Weitzmann, Anti-Semitism and Terrorism, in Dienel, Hans-Liudger (editor), Terrorism and the Internet: Threats, Target Groups, Deradicalisation Strategies. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series, vol. 67. IOS Press, 2010. pp.16-17.

{11}Refer to The Philosophy of Pathei-Mathos .

{12} David Myatt. Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates. Translations and commentaries. 2017. ISBN-13: 978-1976452369


Corpus Hermeticum Book By Myatt

David Myatt


A welcome addition to the published works by Myatt is his Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates which brings together in one volume his eight translations and commentaries of hermetic texts, chapters 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12 and 13 of the Corpus Hermeticum.

The compilation is available as a pdf document {1} and as a 190 page printed book {2} and contains a Preface which outlines his translation methodology, and from which this is an extract:

{Begin quote}

This work collects together my translations of and commentaries on the eight tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum which were published separately between 2013 and 2017. From the fourteen Greek tractates that have been traditionally referred to as the Corpus Hermeticum, I chose the eight (the ogdoad) whose texts I considered were the most metaphysical and mystical and thus which can provide an understanding of what came to be termed hermeticism […]

The methodology of using some transliterations, some relatively obscure English words, and some new term or expression (such as noetic sapientia) results in a certain technical – an ‘esoteric’ – vocabulary which requires or may require contextual, usually metaphysical, interpretation. Often, the interpretation is provided by reference to the matters discussed in the particular tractate; sometimes by reference to other tractates; and sometimes by considering Ancient Greek, and Greco-Roman, philosophy and mysticism. Occasionally, however, the interpretation is to leave some transliteration – such as physis, φύσις – as a basic term of the particular hermetic weltanschauung described in a particular tractate and, as such, as a term which has no satisfactory English equivalent, metaphysical or otherwise, and therefore to assimilate it into the English language. All of which make these translations rather different from other English versions, past and present, with these translations hopefully enabling the reader to approach and to appreciate the hermetic texts sans preconceptions, modern and otherwise, and thus provide an intimation of how such texts might have been understood by those who read them, or heard them read, in the milieu of their composition.

One of the intentions of these translations of mine of various tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum is provide an alternative approach to such ancient texts and hopefully enable the reader without a knowledge of Greek (and of the minutiae of over a century of scholarly analysis of the Greek text) to appreciate the texts anew and understand why they have – in the original Greek – been regarded as important documents in respect of particular, ancient, weltanschauungen that have, over the centuries, proved most influential and which can still be of interest to those interested in certain metaphysical speculations and certain esoteric matters.

{end quote}

The publication of this work also marks a milestone, since Greek translations now account for well over half of Myatt’s published – printed – output. His printed works alone currently amount to almost 1,000 pages, and given that most of these books are large print format (11 inches x 8.5 inches) then were they published in the standard paperback format (6 inches by 9 inches) the total would in the region of 1,200 pages.

The RDM Crew
September 2017 ev

{1} Available here:

The pdf document is published under the Creative Commons (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0) License, which allows for non-commercial copying and redistribution provided no alterations are made to the text and the document is attributed solely to the original author.

{2} David Myatt, Corpus Hermeticum: Eight Tractates, 2017, ISBN 978-1976452369, BISAC: Philosophy / Metaphysics. The 190 page book is priced US$10, and is available direct from a well-known ‘internet publisher’ and from other book outlets such as Barnes & Noble. Like most of Myatt’s printed works it is idiosyncratic given its large size (8.5 x 11 inches). If printed in the standard paperback size (9 x 5 inches) it would amount to around 220 pages but, given the amount of Greek text, would probably be less readable.

Myatt: Tractate 13

David Myatt

David Myatt has now made available (in pdf format) his completed translation of and commentary on tract XIII of the ancient Corpus Hermeticum. A printed version is scheduled for publication in October 2017.

This complements his previously published translations of and commentaries on tracts I, III, IV, VI, VIII, XI, and XII, totalling some 220 pages.


Tractate XIII: Translation and Commentary


Western Paganism: The Avenging Alastoras

O9A. One Image, Ten Thousand Words

O9A Insight Role

The Avenging Alastoras


We read an awful lot, these days, in books, articles, and via the internet, about ‘sorcery’ and invokations, almost all of which books and articles describe or rely on the Magian influenced goetic ‘tradition’ as exemplified by the misnamed Hermetic Order Of The Golden Dawn.

Thus it is refreshing to once again revisit actual Western pagan sources {1} dating from centuries before The Magian Distortion; that is, before the ‘grimoire’ tradition with its summoning forth of Hebrew, and Hebrewesque, ‘demons’ and entities, as beloved by the likes of Creepless Crowley and Howard – the Yahoudi – Levey.

This visit of ours is to Tractate 13 – an evocative name by itself – of the ancient, Greco-Roman, Corpus Hermeticum, as brought to life by the recent translation of Mr David Myatt {2}. The tractate itself deals with palingenesis and Greco-Roman (Western) mysticism – a Western mysticism perhaps relevant to the ‘sinisterly-numinous’ way of the Order of Nine Angles – and our extract below deals with both palingenesis and those avenging deities, the Alastoras, mentioned by Klytemnestra after she, in revenge, had honourably killed her husband and his mistress Cassandra and, covered in blood, stands over the body of her husband:

     Do not add to those words that it was me who was the mistress of Agamemnon
Since the wife of this corpse presents herself here
As that most ancient fierce Avenger.
It is Atreus, he is of that cruel feast,
Who, in payment for that, has added to his young victims
This adult one. {3}

It is probably just coincidence that one of the Alastoras is named by Myatt as Vengerisse, given that in his Mythos Of Vindex he named the female Vindex as Vengerisse.

Alastoras and The Vengeress

An extract from sections 7-11 of tractate 13.

{begin quote}

     Go within: and an arriving. Intend: and an engendering. Let physical perceptibility rest, and divinity will be brought-into-being. Refine yourself, away from the brutish Alastoras of Materies.

Alastoras are within me, then, father?

Not just a few, my son, but many and terrifying.

I do not apprehend them, father.

My son, one Vengeress is Unknowing; the second, Grief. The third, Unrestraint; the fourth, Lascivity. The fifth, Unfairness; the sixth, Coveter. The seventh, Deceit; the eighth, Envy. The ninth, Treachery; the tenth, Wroth. The eleventh, Temerity; the twelfth, Putridity.

In number, these are twelve but below them are numerous others who, my son, compel the inner mortal – bodily incarcerated – to suffer because of perceptibility. But they absent themselves – although not all at once – from those to whom theos is generous, which is what the Way and Logos of Palingenesis consists of […]

To us: arrivance of Knowledge of Theos. On arrival: Unknowing is banished. My son, to us: arrivance of Knowledge of Delightfulness: on arriving, Grief runs away to those who have the room.

The influence invoked following Delightfulness is Self-Restraint: a most pleasant influence. Let us, my son, readily welcome her: arriving, she immediately pushes Unrestraint aside.

The fourth invoked is Perseverance who is influxious against Lascivity. Which Grade, my son, is the foundation of Ancestral Custom: observe how without any deliberation Unfairness was cast out. My son, we are vindicated since Unfairness has departed.

The sixth influence invoked for us – against Coveter – is community. With that departed, the next invokation: Actualis, and thus – with Actualis presenced – does Deceit run away. Observe, my son, how with Actualis presenced and Envy absent, the noble has been returned. For, following Actualis, there is the noble, together with Life and Phaos.

No more does the retribution of Skotos supervene, for, vanquished, they [all] whirlingly rush away […]

With a quietude, father, engendered by theos, the seeing is not of the sight from the eyes but that through the noetic actuosity of the capabilities. I am in the Heavens; on Earth; in Water; in Air. I am in living beings, in plants; in the womb, before the womb, after the womb. Everywhere.

{end quote}

As a certain English poet wrote in 1873 CE, “the separation between the Greeks and us is due principally to the Hebraistic culture we receive in childhood.”

T.W.S., 2017


{1} Our first visit is described here:

{2} An extract from Myatt’s translation is available, together with his comprehensive scholarly commentary, here:

{3} Aeschylus, Agamemnon, as translated by DW Myatt.