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}


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.


{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/


Academia, David Myatt, And The Order of Nine Angles

David Myatt And Satanism

David Myatt

David Myatt

David Myatt: Satanic Islamist?

Extract from the article:

We analyse here a representative sample of the claims, made some years ago about Myatt by an anonymous accuser in an internet published article, revealing as the analysis does the flaws in the sources used, the factual errors made, and how the accuser employs propagandistic methods in an obvious attempt to try and convince readers that his claims about Myatt are true or at least merit serious consideration […]

As for the Order of Nine Angles, they – being “a dangerous and extreme form of Satanism” – revel in not only such associations with someone whose exeatic life encompasses violence, terrorism, extremism, and crime, but also in the notoriety of “being bad” in the real world as the anonymous accuser certainly believes Myatt to be. In this respect, every accusation made against Myatt by the anonymous accuser, and by others, is kudos for the amoral ONA, enhancing their image, their reputation, as practitioners of evil in the real world.

Thus, the more they revile and seek to demonize Mr Myatt – based on the assumption that he is Anton Long – the more they hype the “dangerous and extreme” Order of Nine Angles as being evil.

Now, were they to accept Myatt as now being some reformed extremist, some modern mystic extolling the virtues of compassion, love, and humility, then the ONA might have something of an image problem given how so many seem to believe that, as Senholt wrote, “the role of David Myatt [is] paramount to the whole creation and existence of the ONA.”

That opponents of the ONA and of Myatt do not seem to understand this is most amusing, for us and our kind.

David Myatt

David Myatt


For the past seven or eight years – including in recent months – there have been attempts made to ‘demonize’ David Myatt all based on the unproven allegation that he is Anton Long of Order of Nine Angles fame.

These attempts have been made both by some individuals associating themselves with the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) and by those who for whatever reason or from whatever motive are opposed to the O9A or to Myatt himself. Such O9A opponents include self-described
modern Satanists as well those who profess to be followers of Jesus and those who take exception to what they believe is the pro-Nazi stance of the O9A. Those who are opposed to Myatt himself include anti-fascists who profess such slogans as “never forgive, never forget” and who thus cannot forgive or forget Myatt’s neo-nazi past, {1} and individuals who for unconscious emotive reasons of their own are in some way either jealous of the real Myatt or hate the ‘sinister Myatt’ conjured up by their imagination, with the ‘real’ Myatt having been described as “having fluency in the classical languages (Greek and Latin), as well as Arabic and possibly Persian, [and] possessed of a gifted intellect and apparently a polymath,” {2} and as “an extremely violent, intelligent, dark, and complex individual,” {3} and with the ‘sinister’ Myatt being accused by demonizers of all manner of crimes even though no evidence is ever provided to substantiate their accusations. {4}

        In the matter of individuals associating themselves with the O9A, their intent seems clear. It is to portray Myatt – aka Anton Long – in the most sinister light possible given that such individuals assert that the O9A is Satanist and indeed the only modern genuinely antinomian and satanist group because it espouses and practices what is evil such as criminality, violence, hatred, human sacrifice, political extremism, drug-trafficking and terrorism. Hence their composition and circulation of texts such as Bealuwes Gast {5} and Diablerie {6} and hence their assertion that Myatt is central to the O9A with his weird life an example of what it means to follow the O9A Seven Fold Way.

In the matter of individuals who are followers of Jesus – or at least sympathetic to the Christian religion – their intent also seems clear. It is to portray Myatt as an example, par excellence, of either a nihilistic modernism or of what a servant of Satan is and does in the real world, with one for instance recently writing that

“it is clear from my reading of O9A material that it is essentially not about the promethean elevation of the human person or individuality at all, which its talk of individuation and so on might seem to imply at first sight, but that the entire ‘philosophical’ system is geared towards the cunning seduction of human individuals in order to have them possessed and effectively taken over by these demonic entities (‘dark gods’), whose agenda is the source of this magical covenant itself, rather than David Myatt as an individualistic ‘philosopher’ with a personal agenda. Much of the teaching as presented exoterically to non-initiates is thus no more than upaya or ‘skilful means’ (if I’m permitted to appropriate the Buddhist term) to get people hooked so that the demons will have their incarnate vehicles to exploit. Some of the O9A fiction outlines very explicitly how it is a matter of a demonic infection being spread through the empowered transmission from a possessed initiate to another human vessel. The terrible truth is that the ‘new, more evolved individual’ is nothing more than a puppet of these satanic beings.”

A Common Theme

All such attempts to demonize Myatt have one thing in common. They all ignore important aspects of Myatt’s life and a swathe of his writings.

The ignored aspects of his life include his public (post 2010) rejection of all extremism (including neo-nazi and fascist ideology) while his ignored writings include his poetry, his published letters, his post 2011 writings about extremism, his writings about his philosophy of pathei-mathos with its principles of empathy, humility, and compassion, his 2013 autobiography Myngath; his post 2012 autobiographical essays included in books such as Sarigthersa and One Vagabond In Exile From The Gods {7} and his essays praising Christianity and in particular Catholicism. {8}

The demonizers of Myatt have ignored such things because those things reveal a very different Myatt. One at odds with the ‘sinister’ image of him they have all in their own way strived to manufacture and have propagated in pursuit of their aims. For the image of Myatt that emerges from his poetry and his post 2011 writings is of a reclusive man who regrets his extremist past, who values virtues such as empathy and compassion, and who believes that

“the most important truth concerning human life […] is that a shared, a loyal, love between two people is the most beautiful, the most numinous, the most valuable thing of all.”

Naturally, one or two demonizers have tried to ‘square the circle’ here by claiming that Myatt’s rejection of extremism is a ruse and that the aforementioned writings of his were either written by someone else or were a clever ‘sinister’ jape by Myatt in order to mislead people.

Such claims are of course both laughable and revealing of the need such demonizers have of their ‘sinister Myatt’. That some of these demonizers have resorted to forgeries which they claim were written by Myatt while others have attached Myatt’s name to old or photocopied O9A typewritten articles, {9} shows the lengths they will go to propagandise their ‘sinister Myatt’ and to support their claim that Myatt is after all Anton Long.

As noted in an essay by Ms J. Wright, Myatt’s later writings

“express is a mysticism, a reverence for and an appreciation of the numinous, so at odds with the ethos and the practice of Satanism – of whatever variety – that it is inconceivable that they were written by a Satanist or even by a practising Occultist.” {10}

Rachael Stirling

{1} According to an academic source Myatt is “arguably England’s principal proponent of contemporary neo-Nazi ideology and theoretician of revolution.” Michael, George. The New Media and the Rise of Exhortatory Terrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly (USAF), Volume 7 Issue 1, Spring 2013.

{2} Connell Monette. Mysticism in the 21st Century, Sirius Academic Press, 2013. pp. 85-122.

{3} Raine, Susan. The Devil’s Party (Book review). Religion, Volume 44, Issue 3, July 2014, pp. 529-533

{4} Some of the silly accusations made against Myatt are included in the 2010 pdf compilation titled Lies of a Moac, currently [March 2017] available at

These silly accusations include (see pp.7ff of the aforementioned document) gangstalking, hacking into various internet forums, stealing people’s ID’s by hacking their computers, attacking disabled people, and that he was a police informer.

{5} Regarding the forgery titled Bealuwes Gast see the article Bealuwes Gast: A Study in Forgery.

{6} Regarding the forgery titled Diablerie see the article A Skeptic Reviews Diablerie.

{7} All these writings, and the poetry, are available from Myatt’s blog Learning From Adversity; A Rejection of Extremism.

{8} For instance see A Catholic Still In Spirit?

{9} Several people have claimed that they have or they have seen old typewritten O9A articles or letters or manuscripts signed with Myatt’s name. Yet as noted in O9A Questions And Answers 2017 (pdf) in response to one such claim that

“a signature on some old ONA typewritten MSS proves nothing. Anyone could have affixed Myatt’s name on them at any time and until the original documents are made available and examined in a forensic way by a professional qualified to do so then it’s just speculation; just another rumor about Myatt. A forensic examination would involve, among other things, finding the age of the paper, the type of ink used in the signature, comparing the signature with a documented signature by Myatt.”

{10} The Strange Life Of David Myatt (pdf).


Lambasting Levey And Aquino


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

Order of Nine Angles

The O9A Septenary

It really has been revealing how so many self-described satanists – and/or self-described adherents of a Western Left Hand Path – over the past ten or so years have moaned, via the medium of the internet, about the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A).

The following recent example is fairly typical, sent forth into cyberspace by someone who, previously claiming adherence to the ONA, was so disgusted by the apparent actions of the ONA that they declared that they had left the ONA:

“I would challenge a person who keeps tabs on the Satanic community to name a black magickal order besides the ONA which regularly expresses scorn for its own adherents… [several people] have been publicly shamed by more respected ONA members…[One person] joined the Order of the Nine Angles at one point prior to his public career. The nexion he joined plotted and attempted his assassination, as is recommended in some rarely perused ONA manuscripts about running a coven or temple.”

Now, let us re-write a part of that moaning to express the reality:

I would challenge a person who keeps tabs on the Satanic community to name a black magickal order besides the ONA which regularly expresses scorn for those who, desiring to remain anonymous, publicly claim adherence to the ONA. Several such individuals have been publicly shamed by more respected ONA members.

Furthermore, and more importantly, given that the ONA has for decades described itself as a Satanist group and has written thousands of texts about its ‘traditional Satanism’ what is so wrong with it being scornful of and shaming some anonymous individuals who have publicly self-declared that they are ONA?

The ONA is and was simply being Satanic in a practical way. For the ONA understands being Satanic as, among other things, being evil. Now, since evil is defined in the complete Oxford English Dictionary as:

(1) To harm or injure; to ill-treat. (2) Bad, wicked. (3) Doing or tending to do harm; hurtful, mischievous, misleading. (4) Offensive, disagreeable; troublesome. (5) Hard, difficult, deadly.

then the ONA is just being evil.

That latter-day self-described Satanists – following the likes of Howard Stanton Levey, the Yahodi – have attempted to redefine evil so that it does not involve any of the above is most amusing and indicative. That many self-described satanists criticize the ONA for actually preaching and doing evil is also most amusing and indicative.

So when the ONA demand anonymous individuals claiming to be ONA prove themselves and provides them with challenges and tests to ascertain their character, their esoteric knowledge, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic. So when the ONA rounds on such individuals to see how they react, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic. So when the ONA sometimes japes them or sometimes hoaxes them, the ONA is practising Satanism, being Satanic.

Also, let’s assume for the moment that the above fantasy about “assassination” is real and that the ONA actually does suggest that members of a nexion can challenge and attempt to assassinate a member or the leader/founder of that nexion. So what? That is being Satanic, being evil; presenting that member/leader/founder with challenges, with a test of his/her character, with a test of his/her fitness to hold such a position.

What, therefore, are modern self-described Satanists complaining about? That the ONA does not abide by the weedy, tame, definition of Satanism of such self-described Satanists?

True, the ONA does not, never has, and never will accept their weedy, tame, interpretation of Satanism.

Thus, despite all the rumours by self-described Satanists, the Order of Nine Angles has not changed at all over the decades. It is still “a dangerous and extreme form of Satanism.” All the ONA has done is made available more and more of its aural, esoteric, traditions (and the experience Anton Long acquired during his sinister and intellectual peregrinations) given how many individuals, over the last decade, have progressed to Internal Adept and given how many, having undertaken the necessary scholarly learning regarding Western esotericism and acquired the necessary sinister-numinous pathei-mathos, are in the process of approaching The Abyss with its melding of the sinister with the numinous and the consequent going-beyond all abstractions, dispensing as they then do with nomen and nomina.

But of course such a scholarly learning and such a willed, practical, sinister-numinous pathei-mathos are foreign to – unexplored worlds for – the latter day self-described (mostly plebeian) Satanist crowd who still, because of their hubris, wallow in such delusions as “Reality is what I make it… I because I am a self-declared Satanist am the highest embodiment of human life.”

December 2016 ev

Article source: http://www.o9a.org/2016/12/yet-more-amusement/

Order of Nine Angles


On Leaving The O9A


From the Introduction:


Given that someone else has – via the internet of course – recently announced that they are “leaving” the Order of Nine Angles (ONA, O9A) because they are upset about what some ONA persons have written and because they do not agree with “this” or with “that”, we reproduce below an apposite article from 2013 about such “leaving”.

Apropos of which, the common themes behind those who publicly announce their “leaving” – and then go to be critical of and/or make accusations about the ONA – are one or more or all of the following:
(i) they have failed to disentangle the exoteric (the outer) from the esoteric (the inner), and thus have become lost in or confused by our Labyrinthos Mythologicus 1 ;
(ii) they have failed to understand just what the ONA is, and thus why there is, esoterically, no “joining” and no “leaving” some “entity” designated by the term “Order of Nine Angles”;
(iii) their lack of scholarly esoteric knowledge evident in their inability to write a scholarly critique of items in a compilation such as The Esoteric Hermeticism Of The Order Of Nine Angles  2 .

Doubtless this recent announcement about “leaving” – and the critical comments and accusations made about the ONA – will be seized upon by latter-day satanists, and unscholarly others, as “proof” that the ONA is “dead” and/or as confirmation of their own shallow, exoteric, personal opinion about the ONA.

But, as the article below states, such a “leaving” – en-wrapped in critical comments – has happened many times over the past two decades. And it has made no difference, and it cannot make any difference, to the esoteric philosophy 3 and the praxises 4 that presence (which are) the Order of Nine Angles. That they – and others – do not seem to understand this is most amusing, and of course indicative.

December 2016

1) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/labyrinthos-mythologicus/
2) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/the-esoteric-hermeticism-of-the-order-of-nine-angles/
3) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/esoteric-philosophy/
4) https://omega9alpha.wordpress.com/complete-o9a-guide/



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

Update, November 2016: The ‘sinister polemics’ blog has been deleted by its authors and is no longer available. A suitable end for such a suspicious venture by anonymous persons pretending to be O9A.

Order of Nine Angles


A recent post on the ‘sinisterpolemics’ blog – about the death of David Myatt, and which report our sources have yet to confirm – raises some interesting issues.

Given the rather anarchic nature of the Order of Nine Angles, and the nature of its Occult philosophy, anyone can associate themselves with the O9A and, claiming to be associated with the O9A, write about it, via the internet or otherwise, and set up an O9A-supporting internet blog or website. They can, anonymously, engage with others on internet forums and post about the O9A on various ‘social media’ platforms.

However, it is quite possible that some individuals doing such things are not really O9A but are intentionally spreading dis-information, providing a false impression of the O9A and its Occult philosophy, or are provoking others into making value judgements about, or inciting them to jump to conclusions about, the O9A and those who are O9A.

What is interesting is that so many modern satanists who are critical of the O9A, for whatever reason, seem to have taken some internet posts, some social media postings, or some blog, by some anonymous persons, seriously: that is, as giving “an O9A view of things” or “as representing the O9A” or, more often, as providing proof of their assumptions about or confirmation of whatever prejudice they harbour regarding the O9A.

How, therefore, can you tell if such blogs, internet posts, websites, comments on social media, and so on, are ‘genuine’ or provide a ‘correct’ view of the O9A? In short, you cannot.

All you can do is be sceptical and take time to consider the content, comparing it, for instance, with the pre-2012 writings of Anton Long and what can be deduced, about O9A Occult philosophy, from those writings. But even then there is no guarantee, given how three of the axioms of the Order of Nine Angles are (i) the authority of individual judgement; (ii) that everything O9A, including its Occult philosophy and its Dark Arts such as the Seven Fold Way, can and should be evolved, and can and should be challenged and changed; and (iii) that what is important is not what Anton Long wrote but pathei-mathos via a personal anados that is both ‘sinister’ and ‘numinous’, both esoteric and exoteric.

Where, then, does that leave such a blog as the ‘sinisterpolemics’ one? With everyone – O9A or O9A critic – rationally assessing it and its contents for themselves, and/or developing such Occult skills as can enable them to intuit the esoteric reality behind outer, exoteric, appearance.

R. Parker
1st October 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


{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

Order of Nine Angles


This was not what he expected. He had spent months, following his reading of The Satanic Bible, posting replies on self-described ‘satanic’ internet forums to such an extent that he – or rather his self-assumed pseudonym – had garnered a certain positive reputation among other self-described ‘satanists’ all of whom seemed to revere and regularly quote that book written as it was by a certain Howard Stanton Levey, who of course used a pseudonym in order to hide his real identity, given the plagiaristic nature of most of the contents of that mass-produced and now rather popular book.

Plying him with praise – massaging his ego – they, using the ‘private message’ facilities on such internet forums, had enticed him here on a warm albeit cloudy day in late August. Enticed, because the messages were supposedly from a young woman who had expressed an interest in him given – or so she said – his knowledge of satanism. And which messages had sometimes included a web-link to suggestive images of a certain young women.

So there he was, a mere nineteen years of age and self-assured as he was, waiting in the fading twilight for the promised tryst with that voluptuous young woman. Waiting, hoping, his head-piece filled with both sexual and egoistic dreams. There: where ancient, twisted, often moss-covered, trees of Oak had settled and grown near a long-abandoned stone quarry in the county borderland that marked the edge of the English Peak District national park.

Waited, until he could but dimly see a figure approach him. Then she and him were both smiling, if for different reasons; and he was so intent on leering at her that he neither saw nor heard the approach of those behind him: those three women who crept upon him to bind his wrists behind his back.

Of course he struggled; or tried to. Kicking out and shouting obscenities as he lay, bound, on his back. For was he not a proud satanist who believed in indulgence, in treating those who annoyed you cruelly and without mercy, in what lex talionis meant and implied? Who was he – with his youthful masculine body honed by regular training in a gym – to be subdued by mere women?

But they were mocking him before, in the twilight dark, placing a hood over his head, gagging him, and carrying him down toward a nearby narrow stream where heavy stones were placed on his legs, arms, abdomen, and chest; almost – but not quite – crushing them.

So it was that he, supine, heard a feminine voice declaim:

Here is he who believed he knew our secret:
But just look at him now and laugh
For we have so easily overcome his much-believed-in outer strength.

Now, wash your throats with sparkling wine
For Sirius returns
And we women are warm and wanton!
Before me, you were sightless:
You looked, but could not see;
Before me, you had no hearing:
You heard sounds, but could not listen.
Before me, you swarmed with men,
But did not enjoy.
But I arrived, opened my body and
Brought you lust, softness, understanding, and love.
My breasts pleased you
And brought forth darkness and much joy.

I, who crushes your enemies and who washes in a basin full of
Their blood.
For you are my daughters and a nexion to our Dark Gods:
Before you my sisters I offer you this body so that his blood
Will feed your virgin flesh.

He heard laughter, the sound of bottles of Champagne being opened, and then – not that long thereafter – felt the dreadful pain as a sharp long-bladed knife slit his throat. So he gasped, gurgled, as his life-blood drained away, some of it collected in a basin to be smeared on breasts and faces.


Sister Morgan
Dark Daughters of Baphomet
127 Year Of Fayen

Source: https://sinistervignettes.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/not-what-he-expected/