The Horned God of the Witches

by Jason Mankey

  There are several different orders within Masonry that contain additional initiation and elevation rituals apart from the regular three degrees. The two most well-known of those inner orders are the Scottish and York Rites. When Albert Pike joined the Masons, there were very few active participants in the Scottish Rite, and most likely less than a thousand in the United States.182 In order to revive the Scottish Rite, Pike began reworking the thirtythree degrees of the Scottish Rite, and in the process infused the rites with an abundance of esoteric knowledge and symbolism.

  In addition to rewriting the rituals of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, Pike also produced a companion volume designed to illuminate some of the mysteries in his rituals. That book, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Order of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (most commonly known as just Morals and Dogma), was first published in 1871 and given to everyone who received the Scottish Rite’s thirty-second degree from the Scottish Rite’s Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction until 1974. 183 Morals and Dogma is an absolutely massive tome, much of it plagiarized from the work of the tremendously influential French occultist Éliphas Lévi (born Alphonse Louis Constant, 1810–1875). Like many occultists of his day, Lévi was comfortable placing Lucifer in the role of “knowledge revealer,” and Pike followed suit. The problem for Pike (and Masonry) was that Pike’s use of Lucifer in Morals and Dogma was considered proof by critics of Masonry that the group was Satanic. (Morals and Dogma is over seven hundred pages and not an easy read. I doubt that most copies of it have been thoroughly read by their owners.)

  Quotations from Pike’s work have been used to paint all Masons as Satanists and Luciferians, and it certainly does seem that way when one reads some of Pike’s quotes from the book:

  LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not.184

  Pike’s writings about Lucifer were not anything revolutionary, and simply depict Lucifer as the idea of light and wisdom. However, the very name alone seems to absolutely terrify some people, and Pike’s inclusion of it in Morals and Dogma didn’t do Masonry many favors. Another passage from Pike includes the god Pan:

  The true name of Satan, the Kabbalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.

  For the initiates, this not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.” 185

  Even where he’s probably unwanted, the Horned God has a history of showing up in initiation rites.

  The fraternal order that might bear the most similarity to many Modern Witchcraft traditions could be the Society of Horsemen, or the Horseman’s Word. Most likely established in Scotland during the eighteenth century, the Horseman’s Word is sometimes thought of as a survival from pagan antiquity, but it most likely was inspired by the Miller’s Word, and before that the original Freemasons.186 Unlike the Masons, who did their best to present a welcoming public face, both the Horseman’s Word and the Miller’s Word embraced more diabolical elements, cultivating an air of mystery and sometimes even fear about the group and their members.

  Initiates into the Horseman’s Word were made to walk a “crooked path” (a term used by many Witches to describe their practice) on their way to initiation ceremonies. Once those ceremonies had begun, potential initiates had to shake hands with individuals portraying figures such as Lucifer and Auld Nick, which is another name for the Devil.187 Society members dressed up as Lucifer often sported an impressive pair of antlers on top of their head, and sometimes reached out to the hands of potential initiates with a hoof (on a stick, of course) instead of a hand.188

  The initiatory rituals of groups like the Horsemen and the Millers were inspired not just by the rites of the Masons but also by folklore and by legends about the witch trials that had occurred just a century or two earlier. It’s often suggested that the rituals of the Horsemen were taken from Witchcraft, an unlikely proposition, as the alleged rites of medieval Witches were generally fiction. However, stories about Witchcraft did influence the rites of the Horsemen, and later the rituals of the Horsemen would inspire today’s Witches.

  Images of the Devil During the Witch Trials

  The leaders of Murray’s theorized Witch-cult were more than just High Priests; they were believed to be the Devil himself. When Murray’s Witches gathered with their Grand Magister (the leader of the Witch covens), they saw him as a god “manifest and incarnate,” and they praised him while on their knees, and even prayed to him.189 The materials she quotes from the witch trials suggest a supernatural entity; one poor victim of the witch trials related meeting the Devil and being told that he “was her God.” 190

  Murray suggests that the Grand Magisters who were supposed to literally be the Devil were instead con men of the highest order. She writes that the “so-called Devil was a human being, generally a man and occasionally a woman.” 191 She later quotes a contemporary who calls the leaders of the Witch-cult “unscrupulous and designing knaves who personated Satan.”192 In other words, Murray’s Witch-cult was perpetuated by shysters who pretended to be the Devil for profit and sex.

  If the Witches of Murray’s alleged Witch-cult truly believed they were honoring the Devil in their circles, it stands to reason that the Grand Magister would look like either Satan or some sort of horned god. But that’s just not the case. Murray’s Grand Magisters always lack horns and any real connection to the Horned God or the Devil in appearance. The closest her Magisters come to looking like the Devil is when on a couple of occasions some were said to have “cloven feete.” 193 Depictions of the Devil in popular art at the time of the witch trials also fail to show much in the way of a horned deity.

  It’s assumed by many Christians and Witches that depictions of the Devil from the time of the witch trials were influenced by the Pagan gods of antiquity, especially Pan. But the idea of Pan (or any other horned god) as a prototype for art featuring the Devil is erroneous.194 If we truly examine depictions of the Devil in art, we get something very different from the god of Arcadia.

  It’s true that most depictions of the Devil from the 1400s onward contain horns, and some even show a figure with cloven feet, but the Devil is linked to all sorts of animals in the art of the period of the Witch Trials. Sometimes his face is like that of a bird or a cat, and in addition to goat legs he also sometimes has chicken feet. But the thing he resembles most often is something reptilian (Figure 14).

  Figure 14: A delightful Devil.

  This Devil looks downright captivating. Look at that smile!

  In most art of the period, the Devil simply looks like a gargoyle inspired by lizards, often complete with wings and claws. When he is shown with hair, that hair generally covers his entire body, which is drastically different from Pan, whose chest was generally bare. Like Pan, the Devil does sometimes wear a beard, but most biblical figures are shown with beards, so that means very little. There are a few isolated incidents where the Devil looks like Pan, but they are just that, isolated, and are the exception rather than the norm.195

  Many classic illustrations featuring the Devil leading a band of Witches depict the figure as completely black. In woodcuts during the period of the Witch Trials, he is the only figure to be fully shaded in. This was probably done to reflect the contrast between the Devil (or a demon) with the angels of the Christian heaven. Since angels were traditionally garbed in white, the denizens of hell had to wear the color that contrasted most with it.196
>
  Murray’s Grand Magisters were most often described in ways that contrasted with their depiction in art during the Witch Trials. Instead of appearing reptilian or animal-like, they were far more likely to be thought of as handsome. They were also dapper dressers, and instead of having horns on their heads, they wore stylish hats.197 Their clothes were most often black, and in keeping with the racist attitudes of the times, they were often said to be a “black man.” 198

  There are accounts of the Devil appearing in animal form during the witch trials, and in France he sometimes appeared as a goat or sheep, but in England he generally took forms unrelated to the Horned God.199 In Britain he was most likely to assume the form of a cat, dog, horse, or bull, all either common pets or farm animals.200 Murray explained the Devil changing his shape by suggesting that her Grand Magisters commonly wore the masks of animals, especially at large rituals.201 I don’t know how anyone could confuse the average cat with a man standing upright dressed in black clothes and wearing a cat mask, but to Murray this idea was plausible.

  Other Devilish Figures: Robin Goodfellow and Baphomet

  One of the most common pictures of the “Devil” seen today in books and online comes from seventeenth-century England and is actually not the Devil at all, but a figure known as Robin Goodfellow or Puck. Like Pan, Robin Goodfellow has horns, the (unhairy) torso of a man, the hind legs and cloven hooves of a goat, and often an erect phallus (or a pretty impressive codpiece). But despite the physical similarities, Robin Goodfellow is not Pan nor the Devil (Figure 15). Goodfellow is often called a hobgoblin, from a term (goblin) used to describe an ugly, prank-playing fairy, but not necessarily an evil one.202

  Figure 15: Robin Goodfellow.

  Images of Robin Goodfellow are often

  mistaken for those of the Christian Devil.

  In literature, Robin Goodfellow is a good-natured house spirit who rewards those who do hard work and punishes the lazy. He’s a prankster, and his tales are always far more whimsical than diabolical. A 1639 edition of a book dedicated to the figure is subtitled His Mad Prankes and Merry Jests, and the title page promises that the work is “Full of honest Mirth, and is a fit Medicine for Melancholy.” 203

  The most famous account of Robin Goodfellow is as Puck in William Shakespeare’s (1564–1616) A Midsummer Night’s Dream, written in 1595/96. As Puck, Robin Goodfellow is a member of the fairy court ruled by King Oberon and Queen Titania. He’s a magickal and mischievous presence, but certainly not evil.

  Pan as a stand-in for the Devil did not become particularly common until the nineteenth century, and that’s likely because of the French occultist Éliphas Lévi. In the second volume of his work Dogma and Ritual of High Magic, Lévi includes an illustration of a figure he calls Baphomet. Lévi’s Baphomet has the head of a goat, a pentagram on his forehead, cloven hooves for feet, and a delightful bosom. Lévi’s illustration of Baphomet is so captivating and unique that it’s been used as a figure of the Devil ever since its initial publication.

  To Lévi, the figure had nothing to do with Satanism or the Devil, and instead represented the entire universe: sex, sin, redemption, revelation, parenthood, intelligence, and the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water.204 Two crescent moons flanking Lévi’s Baphomet, one dark and one illuminated, are also present, representing good and evil. Lévi’s original illustration of Baphomet is not particularly evil-looking, unless one is scared of goats, but it has been reimagined over the last 150 years to appear more sinister.

  The figure of Baphomet does not stem directly from any horned god of pagan antiquity. Instead, the name Baphomet is most likely a corruption of Mahomet (Mohammed), the founder of Islam. During the Middle Ages, a Baphomet was an idol, generally thought to be represented by a skull or a head.205 The legendary Knights Templar were accused of worshipping a Baphomet and put to death for it. Lévi’s version of Baphomet introduced the figure to a completely new audience, and today there are many Witches and occultists who honor Baphomet in their circles as Lévi described him: as a figure representative of the entire universe (Figure 16).

  Figure 16: Baphomet.

  This might be the most misinterpreted image of the last two hundred years.

  Baphomet doesn’t represent evil; he simply represents everything.

  Modern depictions of the Devil looking much like the present-day Horned God are really a product of the nineteenth century, and most likely evolved from the popularity of Pan in the poetry of that era. The figure of the Devil in red with a pitchfork is also rather contemporary, with the Devil’s red skin representing the fires of the Christian hell. The Horned God of the Witches looking like the Christian Satan is something that has come about due to the power and popularity of our Horned One today and over the last hundred years.

  Krampus, the Horned God of Yule and The Christmas Devil

  Currently one of the most popular faces of the Horned God is that of the Krampus, the “Christmas Devil.” The Krampus is a figure from European folklore and can be found throughout Central Europe (including Germany, the Czech Republic, Austria, and Slovakia), in Northern Italy, and as far south as Croatia. In recent years, he’s become a more familiar presence in Canada and the United States. The appearance of the Krampus varies from country to country, but almost always includes goat horns and cloven hooves. He is often depicted with brown and black fur, though that can vary (Figure 17).

  Figure 17: Krampus.

  He’s making a list and checking it twice,

  and then putting you in a basket to take you to hell.

  Traditionally the Krampus is a very threatening figure and is known to spank bad kids with a switch and chain the worst offenders and place them in a basket on his back and whisk them to hell. If all of this sounds a little silly, I have it on good authority that children in many parts of Europe are legitimately terrified of the Krampus. A coven member of mine who grew up in Croatia once expressed to me just how much she feared the Krampus every December.

  Though the Krampus is often perceived as a Yuletide bad guy, he’s really just the opposite. He’s basically the “bad cop” to Santa’s “good cop,” simply trying to coax the best behavior out of young people the best way he knows how, which in this case is with fear. Traditionally the Krampus makes his rounds on Krampusnacht (Krampus Night), celebrated on December 5, directly before the Feast of Saint Nicholas on December 6 (which is a gift-giving day in many places). In smaller towns and villages, he’s known to visit with children as early as November 15, and he’s also been known to make appearances on Christmas Eve.

  I think it’s worth pointing out that the Krampus doesn’t punish the good, but only the wicked. No one has any reason to fear the Krampus as long as they are treating others with kindness and respect. While the Krampus is a part of many nominally “Christian” celebrations, I’ve never read or seen anything depicting him as the avenging arm of Jesus or a demon in the employ of Satan (even if he is called a devil sometimes). The great thing about most Christmastime traditions is that most of them aren’t really linked to anything particularly religious. They are simply another manifestation of the magickal time that is the holiday season.

  The name Krampus most likely derives from the German word krampen, which translates as “claw.” As to the actual origins of the Krampus, no one is completely sure. Recently the idea that he’s the son of the Norse goddess Hel has been making its way around the Witch world, but there’s no real documented evidence of this. (Even reputable websites who sometimes make this claim provide no evidence for it.) The Krampus could also have his origin in ancient pagan “mumming” traditions, which often involved people dressing up as animals. Given the wide geographic range of the Krampus, it’s quite possible that he has a myriad of origin points.

  What we do know is that the Krampus didn’t become a common holiday figure until the sixteenth century, several centuries after the establishment of Christianity in Central Europe. One of the r
easons for the Krampus’s increase in popularity during that period can be linked to his role as an “assistant” to other gift-givers.206 Saint Nicholas has always been the most popular gift-giver at Christmas, but during the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther (1483–1546), in an attempt to remove all traces of Catholicism from the Protestant version of the faith, replaced Saint Nick with the baby Jesus, a figure that became known as the Christkind.207 The baby Jesus as a gift-giver presented several challenges, the most obvious one being “how does a baby carry a sack of toys?” Figures like the Krampus helped fill that void, and when Nicholas returned as gift-giver in many areas, the Krampus stayed right beside him.

  In some areas of Europe, Nicholas was replaced by figures like the German Belsnickel. The Belsnickel gets his name from the German Pelznickel, which translates roughly as “Nicholas in Furs.” Like the Krampus, the Belsnickel is a rather severe figure known for punishing children and carrying a chain.208 This is a much more threatening and wild version of Nicholas, and is another possible origin point for the Krampus.

  Both the Belsnickel and the Krampus could also have their origin in the European “Wild Man” tradition. Wild Men are similar to the North American Bigfoot but are generally depicted as more civilized and less like a giant ape. Wild Men were thought to live on the remote edges of society and were an extremely popular motif in art in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. They also served a role very similar to that of the Krampus: they were often the bogeyman that parents would threaten their children with. Wild Men varied in appearance from place to place, and many of them might have pagan origins too. People dressing up as Wild Men were also a part of many mummers parades.