As for those creative authors—in my experience, what stifles creativity is not adhering to the Mythos, but rewriting Lovecraft, Derleth, Howard, or Smith without seeking an original voice for oneself.
I’ve also seen condemnation of attempts to explain the behavior of different Mythos beings. After all, shouldn’t they be inexplicable and unfathomable? Perhaps, but we should recall that Lovecraft gives motivations to his Deep Ones, Great Race, Old Ones, etc., that are fairly clear. I am not arguing that we should transform these creatures into humans in funny costumes, filled with the hackneyed romanticism that Lovecraft despised. Those who advocate the other side, however, often confuse “lack of recognizable motive” with “lack of motive”, being content if their monsters simply crush and eat the important characters. Neither of these was Lovecraft’s goal.
People can use the Mythos however they wish, of course. Yet I would stress that continuity is the heart of what makes the Mythos so powerful. The force that propels so many readers through Mythos stories is not their arbitrariness, but the sense that a vast and intricate puzzle lies before them. Some pieces may not seem to fit, but perhaps if enough information is gathered—the “piecing together of dissociated knowledge” which Lovecraft champions in “Cthulhu”—everything will make sense. As long-term Mythos fans know, this is an illusion, but it is nonetheless a comforting one. Readers often seek these stories for it, and deliberately changing the Mythos can drive them away from reading these tales.
I’m not saying that authors shouldn’t be creative, or bend the pantheon if it suits them. If a story cannot proceed without contradiction, however, then why not take it out of the Mythos altogether? To me, one good story of any genre is worth a hundred mediocre stories of any particular classification. Or if the Mythos is to be used, leave an out. Perhaps the book is wrong, or the character is mistaken about the being’s motivation. This doubt need not be stated explicitly, but the possibility can easily be inserted.
ON THIS BOOK
The study of the Cthulhu Mythos is one with many pitfalls, as reading any work attempting to catalogue it (including this one) will show. Such efforts are often biased toward particular stories which the author likes, while elements which others might consider important are omitted. I had not looked at any of these when I began this book in 1990, but in later years I read many such essays and noted their imperfections. I’ve taken care in this book to keep my own prejudices out of the text, presenting a comprehensive and complete view of the Mythos, but in a work like this, absolute objectivity is impossible. If in doubt about the material in this book, consult the original source material.
One of the first problems I confronted in writing this book was deciding whether to use the term “Cthulhu Mythos”. Derleth invented the term after Lovecraft’s death, and there have been numerous attempts to create a new label for the pantheon such as the “Lovecraft Mythos” and “Necronomicon Mythos.” I see no reason for using any of these; why exchange a commonly used term that really offends no one for another which has the exact meaning of the other? To eliminate any confusion prompted by adopting another label, I kept the term “Cthulhu Mythos.”
My next task was finding source material on the Cthulhu Mythos. This was not such a difficult task as it might sound at first, as many people were willing to suggest hundreds of different sources to me. My main problem was deciding what might have useful information and obtaining it. In the end, I was only able to cover approximately half of the material on the Cthulhu Mythos. This would normally be considered a severe liability in such a work, but this half includes over a thousand sources covering many different genres. Much of the remaining material appeared only in small-circulation fanzines that are out of the reach of most researchers. I have tried to choose material which was readily available and which might add something important to this book, and feel that I have been relatively successful in that task.
Next I had to decide which of these stories included elements of the Cthulhu Mythos. This was a considerable undertaking in itself. Even among Mythos fans, there is considerable disagreement about what stories are “Cthulhu Mythos” tales. A degree of subjectivity often enters into these decisions, based on what the individual likes and dislikes. Some people I have met even exclude the creations of August Derleth, Lin Carter, Brian Lumley, or other authors solely because they don’t like their stories. At the same time, most of those I heard from agreed on the works that should be covered—those of Lovecraft, Smith, Howard, Long, and so forth—so I knew it wasn’t a hopeless case. As will be explained later, I tried to keep my analysis to stories mentioning the terms listed in these “core” stories.
For the purposes of this book, I define “Cthulhu Mythos” as a collection of fictional monsters, books, places, people, and other elements which appear in the works of Lovecraft and other authors. It might help to think of Mythos stories as existing in a web strung together with these terms. For instance, Lovecraft’s “The Call of Cthulhu” contains allusions to Cthulhu, the Necronomicon, and Professor George Gammell Angell. All stories which include the same elements connect up with “The Call of Cthulhu”, and are thus part of the Mythos. Then other stories which use the new characters from this group of connected stories attach themselves to these other stories, and so forth. Sometimes an author’s creation is not used in other stories, but when it is, another connection is formed. In this book, I’ve tried to look for the most important connecting elements and to cover them as fully as possible.
My definition of the Cthulhu Mythos both includes and omits a great number of stories and elements which previous commentators have listed. Many would prefer to confine the Mythos solely to the “gods” or extraterrestrials in the stories, but since the characters and locations in the fiction show up so often in connection with them I have added entries for them. Previous authors have tried to define certain of Lovecraft’s tales as belonging to the Cthulhu Mythos or another of his “cycles”, but Lovecraft himself never used such a system, and many of these distinctions seem arbitrary. As such, I have included information on the Dreamlands tales and some of Lovecraft’s work which others might consider “non-Mythos”. On the other hand, I have left out works which others have kept in due to their authorship or their “Lovecraftian” tone (such as Donald Wandrei’s The Web of Easter Island and most of Thomas Ligotti’s stories). I have usually left out real-life people, books, and places, along with gods, places, and beings from traditional mythology, but have written entries for those that have been changed significantly in Mythos fiction. I tried to emphasize Mythos works of Lovecraft and his immediate circle, as well as those elements that have appeared in more than one author’s stories. I hope that my reasons for the inclusion or exclusion of each element are clear, but if not, the reader is invited to contact me.
Finally, I want to say that this book is in no way a substitute for reading the original stories from which this information is derived. I would encourage new readers to try to find these works. I’ll be the first to admit that some Mythos fiction can be pretty bad at times, but reading these stories will be more entertaining than looking over this book, and you may find another favorite author. These sources may be hard to find, but they are definitely worth the search. I hope this book will in some small way encourage further interest in Lovecraft’s pantheon and help to keep it alive in the years to come.
—Daniel Harms
Cortland, NY
January 7, 2007
ON THIS EDITION
The third edition constitutes a revision of the second edition, which was greatly expanded from the first. I had tried to trim the second edition of entries particular to only one source; such material is often fascinating, but it rarely serves much use as a reference. As it turned out, plenty of people wanted those entries from the first edition, and some even made use of them in their own stories.
To prevent future confusion, nothing from the list of entries for the second edition was removed, though individual entries were revise
d and updated. Only two types of entries were added:
Material from the first edition that has proven useful or inspirational to others; and
Material found in two works written by two different authors, or those present in major published novels centering on the Cthulhu Mythos.
The coverage of the Encyclopedia has never covered all the Mythos fiction available. In the case of this edition, I concentrated mainly on published books, under the assumption that these would be more available in the future than fanzines, Web pages, and other sources largely inaccessible to future readers. (My decision about Web material might be controversial, but the average life of a web page is approximately eighteen months.) Thus, it might be that some works eminently worthy of inclusion have been omitted inadvertently. Nonetheless, I have attempted to track down the most influential sources from other media for inclusion.
As with previous editions, a large variety of sources—stories, poems, novels, films, occult works, and others—have been used. At the request of the previous publisher, material for the Call of Cthulhu roleplaying game was not given as high a level of attention as in previous editions. The book was never thought of as a guide to that game’s continuity, and readers of that game should be happy with the coverage nonetheless.
HOW TO USE THIS BOOK
The entries in the book are alphabetized word by word; for example, “De Vermis Mysteriis” comes before “Deep Ones”. Some entries include material in brackets; this may be comments on the historical origins or development for a given allusion. Following each entry is a paragraph of cross-references (“See …) and a list of sources. These are not necessarily all of the sources in which the topic appears, but include the ones used to compile the entry. The original appearance of the topic, as best I can determine it, is listed with (O). This usually refers to first date of publication, save for Lovecraft himself, for whom it signifies the date of composition.
For those entries with multiple definitions, cross-references and/or sources specific to an individual definition are listed in a separate paragraph at the end of the entry.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
Previous editions included a complete guide to further reading. I have not done so here, as the growth of the Internet makes checking particular facts or publication details easy, if not always accurate. Further, many of the books of interest go out of print rapidly and are reissued elsewhere later, making any list of addresses and titles inaccurate.
The only book I will recommend here is Chris Jarocha-Ernst’s out of print A Cthulhu Mythos Bibliography and Concordance (Seattle: Armitage House, 1999). Thousands of entries cover the stories of hundreds of authors who have written for the Mythos. More recent works are not included, and some of the material might require double-checking, but it is a highly useful reference nonetheless.
I should add that one’s local library (or that of the nearest university) can be a wonderful resource that provides much information not available online to the dedicated reader. Also, many libraries can lend to other libraries, meaning your inquiries are not limited to one particular collection.
A
ABBITH. World of seven suns beyond which the binary star of Xoth may be found. (Others say it orbits the star Algol.) The inhabitants of this planet are metal brains that hold many of the universe’s secrets. According to von Junzt, Nyarlathotep lives or is imprisoned on Abbith, though others state that the Crawling Chaos holds court at Sharnoth. The being known as Ossadogwah, or Zvilpogghua, supposedly dwells there.
See Nyarlathotep; Xoth; Ymar; Zaoth. (“The Feaster from the Stars”, Carter; “Out of the Ages”, Carter (O); Visions from Yaddith, Carter; “Zoth-Ommog”, Carter.)
ABDUL ALHAZRED. See Alhazred, Abdul.
ABHOTH. Being connected with filth and disease. Abhoth lives beneath Mount Voormithadreth (or possibly behind the Dreamland’s Grey Barrier Peaks), and takes the form of a huge pool of grey slime. It continually spawns its children, beings of infinite anatomical diversity. Abhoth devours most of these immediately, but the rest may escape from their parent’s cavern home.
In one recorded encounter with this being, Abhoth put out a pseudopod to feel the intruder, communicated with him telepathically, afterward magically compelling him to leave its presence. Others may not be so lucky, as Abhoth finds the existence of humans vexacious.
Few instances of Abhoth’s worship have been reported. The Hyperborean colony of Krannoria revered Abhoth, but in the end their ungrateful deity destroyed them. An “Abhoth the Dark” is also mentioned in many Hittite inscriptions. Abhoth seems not to care that such cults exist, and is unlikely to provide them with any favors. It does require sacrifices from time to time, but may gather them itself by cloaking itself in illusion and calling to unsuspecting victims.
Some have attributed the creation of all evil to Abhoth, but this seems unlikely.
See Haon-Dor; Hyperborea; Outer Gods; Sothoth; Ubbo-Sathla; Voormithadreth. (Return to Dunwich, Herber; A Guide to the Cthulhu Cult, Pelton; “The Seven Geases”, Smith (O); The Complete Dreamlands, Williams and Petersen; The Mind Parasites, Wilson.)
ACHERON. Evil kingdom founded at the Tybor River’s mouth as a Stygian colony in pre-Hyborian times. It soon threw off Stygian control, reaching its height three thousand years before the time of Conan. It was known for its embrace of the darkest sorcery, and its rulers were also mighty magicians. The King of Koth raised a massive alliance, destroying the purple towers of its capital, Python. Its former lands became the kingdoms of Argos, Nemedia, and Aquilonia. Only a few tribes of hill dwellers survived. Acheron’s dark lore nonetheless was passed down to Hyboria and Egypt.
See Koth-Serapis; Kuthchemes; Nephren-Ka; Serpent Ring of Set; Set. (“Black Colossus”, Howard (O); “The Hour of the Dragon”, Howard; “The Hand of Nergal”, Howard and Carter; “Acheron—A Revisionary Theory”, Yaple.)
ADUMBRALI. Entities from another dimension which appear as globules of darkness. The most complete references to the adumbrali can be found in the Song of Yste. These creatures are said to send messengers to other dimensions to attract prey for their own hunting pleasure. These messengers seem to be members of the native species. They have an unnatural grace and are capable of great feats of hypnotism, which they use to ensnare their victims. The minds of these unfortunates are sent to the adumbrali’s homeland, where they are tortured and devoured.
See Song of Yste. (“The Abyss”, Lowndes (O).)
AHTU. See Nyarlathotep (Ahtu).
AHU-Y’HLOA. Deep one city located in the sea off Cornwall. A group of deep ones, with the aid of their brethren from Y’ha-nthlei, are still constructing this metropolis. During World War II, this city formed a loose alliance with the Karotechia before a joint raid of Delta Green and PISCES brought it to an end.
See Deep ones; Y’ha-nthlei. (Delta Green: Countdown, Detwiller et. al.; “The Return of the Deep Ones”, Lumley (O).)
AKELEY, GEORGE GOODENOUGH (1901-1971). Son of Henry Akeley and founder of the Spiritual Light Brotherhood. George Akeley’s mother passed away due to complications resulting from his birth, and his father and a number of caretakers raised the young man.
Following his father’s retirement, George Akeley moved to San Diego, where he married. Of four children, only one (Aimee Doyle Akeley) survived the first few months of life. He continued his father’s studies, and provided Albert Wilmarth with uncanny data when the professor visited him in 1937. Sometime during these years, Akeley met the evangelist Aimee McPherson and was inspired to set up his own church, the Spiritual Light Brotherhood. He served as the “Radiant Father” of the religion his death, whereupon his granddaughter, Elizabeth Akeley, took up the post.
See Akeley, Henry Wentworth. (“The Terror from the Depths”, Leiber; “The Whisperer in Darkness”, Lovecraft (O); “Documents in the Case of Elizabeth Akeley”, Lupoff.)
AKELEY, HENRY WENTWORTH (1871-1928?). Noted folklorist and correspondent of Albert Wilmarth.
Akeley was suppos
edly the son of Abednego Akeley, a minister who served the Townshend, Vermont branch of the Starry Wisdom Church, and Sarah Phillips, a servant in Abednego’s household. Though his mother’s story was dubious, the townsfolk accepted him as Abednego’s heir.
Little has been said of Akeley’s early years, though he had a successful career in academics, most likely as a folklorist. He was married at one time, but his wife died in 1901 shortly after the birth of the pair’s only child, George Goodenough Akeley.
Following his retirement, Akeley moved back into the ancestral mansion near Townshend. Near the end of his life, he wrote frequent letters to the young Professor Wilmarth on the legends of his region. Akeley vanished in September of 1928, following wild stories and bouts of paranoia which led many of his neighbors to believe that the aged scholar had lost his mind. Some say he returned to Earth later in mysterious circumstances.
See Akeley, George Goodenough; Wilmarth, Albert. (“The Whisperer in Darkness”, Lovecraft (O); “Documents in the Case of Elizabeth Akeley”, Lupoff; “Disconnected”, Sammons.)
AKLO. Language of the Valusian serpent-men. It is still used in a modified form by the priests of the Great Old Ones (to whom it was given by their masters), as well as the Little People of Welsh legend. The term “Aklo” may also be used to refer to a series of magical rituals (see below), or a specific time at which an incantation should be performed.
E. A. Hitchcock’s book Remarks upon Alchemy makes reference to “the now unattainable secrets of the AKLO tablets”, a set of writings which has never been discovered. However, Alonzo Typer, an occultist of some note, might have read these “Aklo writings” or others, as he described rituals known as the Aklo formulae in his diary. The third of these formulae is useful in making the unseen visible, but the proper use of the rest remains a mystery.
Cthulhu Mythos Encyclopedia Page 3