× ONLINE SINCE OCTOBER 2007 Ø


INTRODUCTION

When I first started reading Massey's works many years ago (in the mid 80's), I was fascinated by what he was saying, and my attitude at the time was something like 'Where is he getting all this information?' I then started looking deeper into his sources, perhaps thinking he was making it all up. Having a strong interest in the esoteric for some years beforehand, I was more than familiar with some of the obscure works he was referring to, but there were others that I was less familiar with, which intrigued me. I was also somewhat irked by his constant referencing to illustrations in books that were no longer accessible. After all, it was not just a case of walking into my local Waterstones bookshop, taking the book off the shelf to have a good browse. Works like Oedipus Aegyptiacus by Kircher, the volumes on the Roman catacombs by Bosio, Garrucci, De Rossi, et al, the mammoth French work Description de l'Egypte, and many others, were simply not available, not even at my large local library, most of them being scarce, and no doubt hidden away in the vaults of the British Library.

This was, of course, many years before the advent of the internet where everything now is available at your fingertips; any good Google search will bring the desired title to your screen, especially if you know where to look.

For reasons I have explained elsewhere in these pages, I decided it would be a far better idea if Massey's workswhich at the time I believed to have fallen into obscuritycould be made available once again, but with the added bonus of making the titles he refers to available as well. This was the inauguration of my bibliography, something I never anticipated would have taken me so long to compile as it did, as I will hereafter explain. Also, as this was lacking in the printed versions of the corpus, I felt it would make the reader's life easier, and he could check for himself that these books do actually exist, as well as including a full quote to prove that Massey was not making it all up, and that his research could be backed up by well documented data.

That was the main thrust behind the creation of Masseiana, as I have explained in the original introduction to this site (see Part 1), and to substantiate the theories Massey puts forth in his work (see Part 2), with a complete bibliography (see Part 3), a set of indices (Part 4) to help the reader along the way, and also provide some of the source material he used (see Part 5), and where possible a link to all those illustrations which otherwise would have remained hidden and forgotten about in some dusty old tomes.

Now for the reasons why all this has taken so long ...

I have said it before, and I will say it again, Massey is absolutely useless when it comes to referencing. I appreciate that in those days there was a tendency to abbreviate titles, to not provide a full reference, to not state the edition used, etc. However, this is totally unacceptable by today's standards. After all, if you are writing for a modern audience, say a thesis, you have to back up your research and provide full references, as well as a mandatory bibliography to prove that you have done your research, and to demonstrate that the data you are providing is based on solid, academic grounds. It is no good thinking, 'I will just put down the name Fuerst, they will know who I mean.' No we won't! And any such attitude, I'm afraid, smacks of laziness, because believe it or not, somebody like me may come along and tear your thesis apart if any, or none, of your references can be verified. It is for this reason, that what should have been a simple little job of providing the titles of the books Massey has used took me so long, because some of his references did not check out, and some I simply had to guess at what title or which author was intended. Now, I admit speculation is not a good way to go if you are compiling a list of over 2000 titles, but I had to start somewhere, and with the arrival of the internet the probability of completing it became even more likely; many of the titles alluded to could now be accessed online and verified, corroborated, etc. If there were errors, these too could be pointed out and amended. Admittedly, not all of the titles have become available, but where they are, it was at least now possible to substantiate everything Massey was saying, and indeed determine its truth.

My point on this is, if you are going to say something important like Christ never existed, then you have to back up everything you are saying. Do not think for one moment that it is possible to bluff your way through an argument by saying 'such and such says this,' 'such and such says that,' and spout off names no one has ever heard of. I have pointed this out in my essays (see Part 6), and I am not going to reiterate it here again, suffice to say, source material is everything, but use it with impunity.

It would be rather like an acquaintance saying to you, 'Christ didn't exist.' Your response would be, 'How do you know that?' 'Because Mr Jones down the road says so'! Not only would we be less likely to believe him, but we would want proof to back up such a claim, and we would be more than disheartened to learn that Mr Jones is simply a greengrocer who does a bit of reading in his spare time. However, if Mr Jones turned out to be an academic, with twenty or thirty books under his belt, with a wide experience of different cultures, and has letters after his name, we would be more likely to believe him. And that is the whole point, otherwise you leave loopholes in your argument that not only a tadpole could swim through, but a also a 20-tonne shark. I am not saying that Massey does this, for he does state the position of some of his authorities, but only occasionally. And that, unfortunately, is not good enough.

I read recently an attack on Tom Harpur's book, Pagan Christ (an original title!), which was being ripped apart by a Christian who did not like what Mr Harpur was saying, and in the attempt was trying to prove that what Mr Harpur was saying was poppycock as it could not be backed up due to the fact that a few of the quotations he was giving did not exist! The worrying thing about all of this is that some of Mr Harpur's work is based on that of Massey's! So, if you lay yourself open to be attacked, then expect to be attacked, because you will be.

Secondly, if you are going to quote from a work, then quote verbatim. Do not change the words around for your own convenience; do not change the spelling of the words in the quote, or alter the spelling of the names of deities, etc., to suit your own preferences. Too many times have I come across quotes by Massey taken from respected Egyptologists that I could not find easily simply because he had changed the spelling of an Egyptian word or a god's name. For example, Massey prefers to write Taht rather than Thoth, Sut rather then Set, etc. So, if Samuel Birch (the once noted Egyptologist at the British Museum) has written 'The great god Thoth gives light,' do not change it to 'The great god Taht gives light.' That is unforgivable as it will knock out any Google search. If you are so inclined to give a different orthography, then at least use the original spelling with an alternative in square brackets; 'The great god Thoth [Taht] gives light,' would be more preferable. I have had great difficulty in tracking down all of Massey's sources due to his altering of the wording. I do not mean that he has deliberately twisted the quotation to his own purpose, but rather he has not quoted it accurately. Again, if you are going to quote then at least have the decency to quote exactly as it appears on the page.

Thirdly, I have also said this before and I am going to say it again: Massey is a borrower! He borrows left, right and centre. He indiscriminately ransacks books for quotes, without even acknowledging he is doing so. By that I mean, if you are going to quote from an author in another author's book, then at least say 'cited in' or 'quoted by,' otherwise it looks like plagiarism and gives the unfortunate impression that you have read the book you are quoting from, whereas in reality you have relied on another authority to provide it for you. See my essay (1) on this. And one thing I have found over the years whilst researching Massey's source material is the amount of books he has used that he doesn't even mention. These I have classed as 'silent sources,' most of which can be found listed in the Bibliography to that effect, within square parentheses. (I have compiled two tables to demonstrate Massey's use of this method. They can both be viewed here and here.)

The main contender in the latter class is Hislop's The Two Babylons. I have discussed this in another essay (4), so I will refrain from repeating myself here. But if he has used this work and doesn't mention it, then there is a high probability there are others he has used and does not mention either; and indeed that is the case. Not just a couple, or three or four, but many (that I am aware of). Again, consult the Bibliography, and see my table here. We know he has used these books because the quotations in them are identical to the ones he gives, some even appearing on the same page. See, for example, the last section of The Natural Genesis, which is probably the most profound of all the sections of that work. Yet entire quotes have been lifted from Baring-Gould's book, The Lost and Hostile Gospels. The same goes for the section in The Natural Genesis concerning the typology of the cross; most of the sources have been lifted from Zoeckler's The Cross of Christ; also Dunlap's books have been consulted and used for quotes, citations, etc., yet in nowise has he acknowledged the fact. I appreciate that it is a convenient method, but it is inexcusable; poverty may be a drawback, but it is no defence for laziness.

I do not mean to discredit Massey, for he was a profound thinker, with a better understanding of how the symbols, myths and, therefore, religions, had evolved. For a Victorian, writing in Victorian times, he showed a remarkable detachment from his peers, and was not afraid to say what he really wanted to say, sometimes making so-called experts look incompetent by comparison. Massey, for his time, thought out of the box, a rare gift when one considers how thoroughly western minds were indoctrinated with biblical rubbish. To actually stand up against rigidly held belief-systems (which in themselves had very little in the way of solid foundations); when there was an archaeological society set up especially to prove that everything in the bible was true; when it was commonly accepted that the world was only a few thousand years old because some Irish bishop had calculated the date of Creation by tracing back the genealogies of biblical characters, etc., makes Massey something of a radical, and for that we can be thankful that the corpus presented here exists.

As I have said to many of my correspondents, I have been reading his books for nigh on thirty years now and I am still learning. Dipping in here and there, one section at a time; I have always felt that is the best way to approach them. And each time you come away with a little more understanding, a little deeper insight, etc.

(For a fuller study of some aspects of Massey's work, see the essays (Part Six below). A rough outline of the Masseian Corpus has been included here (see Part One) along with details of the minor amendments made to the corpus. Originally it was intended to also include a full biography of the man, but this has proved unnecessary as David Shaw did a worthy job back in 1995 with his slim but profitable biography, Gerald Massey: Chartist, Poet, Radical and Freethinker. It is available as a revised edition in another site dedicated to Massey and his works (mainly poetry, reviews, etc.) and is thoroughly recommended. (See www.gerald-massey.org.uk in general and www.gerald-massey.org.uk/biog_contents for Shaw's biog.) An expanded edition of this work has now been published with additional material and appendices. The book can be ordered directly from the publisher, www.lulu.com, as either a paperback (£14.12) or as a download (£2.90). Other material relevant to Massey's life and his work will be found in Part Seven.)

And now, regrettably, I am calling it a day; I have simply had enough, and I wish to move on to other things. I have taken it as far as I can. There will be no more input from me to this site. I know I have said that before, but I mean it this time; I need to get away from typing, reading, proof-reading, Googling, and computers in general, otherwise I will be liable to a nervous breakdown. I acknowledge that my work here isn't really finished, and that there are still quite a few unresolved references that need to be sorted out. These have proven to be somewhat problematic, for various reasons, and I cannot resolve them without outside help. So I have therefore provided a list here and will be most grateful to anyone who can help me and put me on the right track. That will be the only input from me from now on; to get the last of those annoying references nailed down once and for all. (Incidentally, for those interested in figures, the reference pages on this site contain a total of over 12,000 references. Out of the 12,000 I have posted there are only just over 220 I have not been able to resolve. So please do not be too harsh on me with my admission that I am now giving up. Believe me, I have tried, and yes I have failed on these, but that is an insignificant proportion in comparison with the total amount.)

Lastly, I would like to thank all those people who have been in touch over the years and have added comments, helpful hints, etc. I would especially like to thank the following people; David Shaw, Ian Petticrew, Damian Osbourne, Robert Agasucci, Aaron Crim, Marianne Herdt (for help with some German texts), Jerome Silverman, and many others who have written in and thanked me for my work. Once again, thanks.

Jon Lange,
Editor,
May 2014.

________________

ADDENDUM

MASSEY VINDICATED ONCE AGAIN

Here's proof that the Idiotai still exist:

Out of the blue someone emailed me the other week. The subject heading was PHALLUSINURASS (Phallus-in-your-ass; geddit? Wow, is this person clever or what!) The phallus, as a symbol of the penis, exists only on a mythic level. So surely it would have been more correct to say PENISINURASS, for I would have thought it was easier to stick a penis in my ass rather than a symbol. But then again, I wouldn't know as I have never tried. The sender of this curious email seems to be confused between the symbolic and the actual, therefore straightaway we know we are dealing with an ignoramus.

His message in full is blunt and to the point:

Your comments and reasonings are as much a farce as your master. Pervert the truth of your own darkness and never mislead another man, or your evil be upon your own head a thousand fold. We could care less about your interpretation of ANYTHING .... FOOL.

It was sent by someone calling himself Devon Drake (I assume the sender is male). I have no idea who this person is as I have never heard of him. He has taken it upon himself to email me and insults my intelligence with his ignorance. Why?

For we ask, who does he think he is? On what authority does Mr Drake have to write to me in such a way? Who does he represent? The ignorant majority? Has he not heard of the right of veto? That is, the right to reject something if it does not appeal to your views and accept that which does.

If he is not happy with my opinions or my views then why does he not go elsewhere? I am sure there are other sites better suited to his infantile needs.

My master? What master? I have no masters! He must of course be referring to Massey, a man I admire very much. But I do not slavishly follow everything he says. I am merely a fan of his work, and I took it upon myself many years ago to republish them online in the hope that they would shed a little light in the dark and gloomy world of false belief, and in the hope that interested parties who may be intrigued by what Massey was saying all those years ago could peruse for themselves his own words. I have not given an interpretation of them or skewed them to my own devices; I have laid them bare for all to read. The choice is yours; either take in what he says or reject it; it's that simple.

But Mr Drake feels it is incumbent upon himself to foist on me his own ignorance, in a puerile manner, and without provocation. He feels compelled, as did the Christian ignoramuses, the idiotai, all those years ago, who felt compelled to foist on poor innocent souls their loathsome ideologies, and destroy those who refused to believe or chose to reject their doctrines, and by doing so sealed their own fate.

Mr Drake uses the word 'evil', a very over-used term, and one that conjures up all sorts of delusions and ambiguities. I remember many years ago attending a symposium in Oxford, and the first speaker of the day was the late great writer Gerald Suster who was doing a talk on morality. He started off his speech with his own definition of the word evil by saying, 'It is when someone feels good by making others feel bad.'

That could be equally applicable to Mr Drake; he inflates his ego by trying to make others feel small, hence adding the word 'fool' at the end just to ram home the point. In this case, who is evil? Me doing my True Will? Or Mr Drake, inflicting upon me (and possibly others) his own ignorance? Because quite clearly this person hasn't read anything by Massey, or does not have the capacity to, otherwise he would be attacking me on an intellectual, literary level, or if he had the brains, an academic one. What is his point? What is it that has riled him so? What a shame he hasn't articulated more fully his displeasure with my site, and what it really is that irks him so. Why couldn't he say something meaningful rather than this verbiage? But lacking any intelligence he is incapable of such action and therefore has to revert to the sort of silliness one would associate with schoolboys, not men of intellect. And of course Mr Drake has the temerity to write to me and express his views (fair enough!). Pity then he does not have the temerity to write to me in such a way that he could thereby demonstrate the superiority of his intellect over all and sundry.

One could equally call the Pope an evil person, for, as head of the Church, he is responsible for the torture and slaughter of millions of innocent people. Anybody who did not kowtow to the orthodox doctrine of the Church would be deemed a heretic and thus strongly persecuted, and eventually made to bend to its will. One has only to read the account of Las Casas to see the extent of the depravity the Conquistadors meted out on the natives, forcing them to undergo horrendous acts if they did not concede to the whims of the Church. It was a case of join us or die. Or read any account of the atrocities perpetuated on Hypatia, the lady in charge of the library at Alexandria. The Patriarch Cyril,  being jealous because she was getting all the attention from her fellow pagans, ordered the library to be burnt to the ground and incited a mob to drag her through the streets and have her torn limb from limb. This was an act by a Christian mob: this is what Christians do. Anything that proves a threat to their own existence they have to quash, trample under foot, or destroy.

We wonder if Mr Drake is a Christian. In his brief email (which I did not ask him to send me, I should point out) he seems to bear all the hallmarks of one. And he is the greater fool for being one, for Massey has proved conclusively that Christ never existed, and that the so-called Christ arose out of the misinterpretation of the original mythos upon which the type was based, turning a symbolic event into an actual occurrence. As Christ never came into this world, was never born of a virgin, never died, never resurrected, was never sent down from on high in the name of God, or placed on this earth to redeem mankind, then it would inevitably follow that the Church should really not exist, its foundations being based on a lie.

Yet something has so profoundly affected him that he just had to express his opinion, thinking perhaps it may be of interest to me. How he came to such a conclusion I will never understand. I normally correspond with intellectual people who hold degrees and other qualifications, people of far higher calibre than Mr Drake, people who ask me serious questions, posing tentative arguments, or they ask for further elucidation upon a particular subject. But not our Mr Drake who has quite clearly been agitated by this site, possibly the truth contained therein: it niggled him so, and thus he had to put clammy fingers to keyboard and send me this obnoxious email, the first one of its kind I have ever received since running Masseiana.

What does he mean by perverting the truth of my own darkness? What darkness? The poor boy seems to be confused on many levels. As I have already said, all I am doing is republishing Massey's works, so I have to assume he means a darkness within those pages, whereas intelligent people find light, not darkness. I would hazard a guess the darkness resides within himself. Further, many other visitors to this site have found something here that has helped them to a better understanding and have thanked me for my labours (as demonstrated by the positive feedback page), most of the comments being from enlightened individuals. Who am I misleading? And how? My stance is, and has always been, think for yourself. I don't believe in preaching, I don't go around like a Christian forcing his vile biblical doctrines on another man, nor do I believe it right to force my opinions on others. Again, if he doesn't like what he finds herein, then he can go elsewhere. This site exists purely to enlighten, to help us come to a better appreciation of one of the world's greatest civilisations; and Massey, more than anybody else, had a greater understanding of it because he got to the root of the matter.

Typology is the only way to study something that is so ancient, that is so deep in the human psyche, that it goes beyond words, beyond languages. And it is only through an understanding of the types do we get to the root of all myths, all symbols, all religions, and understand how they evolved. It is like the old adage of the acorn and the oak tree. The oak tree is the manifest, overt expression of an inner, deeper cause, the acorn. As the oak sprung out of the acorn, so did the religions and myths arise out of the earlier, deeper types. Massey was the first to use this system of types in order to fathom the deepest, most ancient mysteries. Remember, we have to go back, way back, in time to understand how a travesty like Christianity could have come about. We have to understand the original types that led to the gross superstition that today we call the Church. We have to know what Aleister Crowley meant when he said 'the wrong of the beginning.' For, to continue the analogy, we would be very surprised to find that out of an acorn a birch tree grew, but this is exactly how Christianity, and other religions, I might add, evolved. Through ignorance the root gave birth to an abortion, an aberration that has blinded us, misled us, enfeebled our minds, for so may centuries that we can no longer see the wood for the trees. Massey knew this, and it was through his perspicacity, his continuous toil, his determined struggle to put us all on the right path that led to the creation of the corpus that now lies here for all to read, so at least we have the option of taking it or leaving it. He did not extol, preach, evangelise or rub our faces in it. He merely said, 'Look there is something wrong here, and I believe I know what it is, and here are the facts to prove it.' For doing that we could say he was a genius, whereas quite obviously Mr Drake is not.

Could care less? I think he means 'couldn't care less.' It would make more sense, and be more grammatically correct, if this sentence was in the negative, surely, as in 'I could not care less about what you or Massey are saying,' to make his point. See, the boy can't even get a simple sentence like that right! Thank God Massey could write, and did so brilliantly, especially against his detractors, as his Lectures reveal. He had to deal with ignoramuses who simply did not understand what he was saying, even if it meant going up against recognised authorities in their field. But Mr Drake believes he is better than Massey. And I can't believe there are still Neanderthals like Mr Drake walking around on the face of our beautiful planet. His sort should have died out aeons ago. All this email proves is that Mr Devon Drake is a complete, utter dunderhead, and hopefully, along with the rest of his kind, soon to be an extinct species.

The Editor

DEVON
DRAKE
R.I.P.


 

 

____________

This site contains Egyptian hieroglyphics and Coptic characters. Download and install the following fonts:

Gardiner
Coptic

________________

It also contains his major expository workstotalling over 3400 pages. And the following:


Part One
Notes on The Masseian Corpus

  1. A Brief Introduction
  2. Reasons for Amendments and Revisions
  3. Changes to the Texts
  4. Table of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses
  5. A Short Guide to the Masseian Corpus

Part Two
The Masseian Corpus

A Book of the Beginnings (revised)

The Natural Genesis (revised)

Ancient Egypt, The Light of the World (revised)

Massey's published Lectures (revised)


Part Three
A Bibliography to the Masseian Corpus

Bibliography


Part Four
Indices to the Masseian Corpus


Part Five
A Selection of Massey's Primary Source Material
Relevant to the Masseian Corpus

Other Minor Works Referenced in the Corpus


Part Six
Essays by the Editor

  1. 'Borrowing or Plagiarism?' (Updated Feb. 2012)
    Being an account of Massey's misuse of his source material.
  2. 'Massey and Africa.'
    An analysis of Massey's view of the African origins of the human race and the reception of his work by modern Afrocentrists.
  3. 'Massey and his Critics.'
    Being a brief overview of Massey's work by his contemporaries and modern critics.
  4. 'Who came first? Massey or Hislop?'
    An examination of Massey's indebtedness to Hislop's book The Two Babylons (cached here), demonstrating how Massey borrowed from a book he never even mentions.
  5. 'Massey's Followers.'
    An overview of how certain authors have attempted to carry the Masseian method of typological interpretation to further conclusions.
  6. 'Reliability of Sources.'
    An examination of some of Massey's sources and whether they were reliable or not.

NOTE: Apart from the first one, the other essays are in obvious need of updating; they have been included here as it was thought it would be pertinent as part of a brief examination of some aspects of the Masseian corpus.


Part Seven
Other Pertinent Material


'For myself, it is enough to know that in despite of many hindrances from straitened circumstances, chronic ailments, and the deepening shadows of encroaching age, my book is printed, and the subject-matter that I cared for most is now entrusted safely to the keeping of John Gutenberg, on this my nine-and-seventieth birthday.'

Gerald Massey,
(Introduction to AE)
South Norwood Hill,
29th May, 1907.

× Positive feedback to www.masseiana.org can be read here. Please feel free to add yours via the email address below. Ø

BACK

HOME CONTACT

NEXT

This page last updated: 11/05/2014