Letter to Dan Harms Part 9: The Hoax That Was Never Created

Dan Harms and John Gonce III have made quite a name for themselves by stating that the Simon Necronomicon is a hoax. The sad thing about it, is that behind all their writing and references to the copyright office and etc, they have not proved anything. I would like to work with Harms maybe on reconstructing the Sumerian Tradition, but I am not aware of Mister Harms’ position as far as the goal of his work.

I doubt that this post will end the ongoing debate between Harms and I. Yet it is entitled ‘concluding statements’ because I am sure that Mister Harms will need some time to review certain points and absorb the information provided herein.

I find it very fascinating how workers of the Simon Necronomicon will verify the writings of Simon and separate the ‘wheat from the chaff.’ Yet followers of Lovecraft never validate anything that he says. It seems like they are under some sort of blind-faith, like born-again Christians. Lovecraft was a great writer, but he also had his own issues. I could understand Harms and Gonce’s argument, if they were to examine Lovecraft under the same scope as they have Simon. They have never stated their moral ideals as to why they initiated an Inquisition against the Simon Necronomicon. It seems like after reading some of the material that Harms and Gonce have made available across the internet, one could only assume that they have a personal gripe against Simon or some organization that he represents. However, let us look at some of the things that Harms and Gonce overlooked, which made their case of trying to disprove the Simon Necronomicon, an invalid one. Looking  into the Life of Mister Lovecraft we may find some answers as to the Necronomicon’s authenticity.

I find it amazing that it has never occurred to Harms and Gonce why Lovecraft said that the Necronomicon was invented by his imagination. Lovecraft was born on August 20th, 1890 in Providence, Rhode Island.. H.P. Lovecraft was reared in an area that had a history of taking action against individuals who practiced witchcraft. You might enjoy the following link:

http://www.researchlibrary.net/witchcraft.htm

I find it interesting as well that Wikipedia states that Lovecraft’s mother (who had the responsibility of raising him up after his father had died) was able to trace her ancestry back to Massachusetts Bay Colony. This was the same area that the famous Salem Witch trials occurred. I wonder how this fact escaped the notice of Mister Harms.

Another point that should be noted is that because of the persecution against witchcraft, which has occurred over the past four centuries, many occultists would convey certain occult teachings through fiction to avoid persecution. So the statement that the Necronomicon is fiction, may not actually mean that it was not real. An example of this can even be seen in comic book lore.

Some people are aware that comic-book superheroes are stories that eventually are derived from the accounts of the Watchers relationships with humans. These stories also represent the practices of Witches and Warlocks who would often hide their magical identity, and would live their day-to-day life as a materialist. If you have ever notice that most comic-book lure takes place during the full moon. Most of these ‘heroes’ are scientist, which is what in essence witches are. Their alter egos referred to their ability to astral project and effect day-to-day reality. For example, Batman is completely vampiric in nature. If one were to compare the life of Bruce Wayne with Count Dracula, you can find so many similarities. Batman is often referred to as the Dark Knight. Knight means one who serves a lord, or servant. In this case, the ‘dark knight’ would refer to one who is a servant of the ‘dark lord.’ The ‘dark lord’ would refer to the feminine, or yin aspect of divinity, as in the Mother Goddess Tiamat. This would then mean that the dark knight could be identified as the king in the ancient rituals of Mother-Son worship. This is even further affirmed by the fact that Batman is often times accompanied with Robin. A robin is a symbol of new beginnings, and sometimes associated with the Oak Moon, which corresponds to Hecate. Thus, Batman can be perceived as the ‘dark lord’, but the association of Batman with Robin symbolizes the beginning of spring, the arisen Dumuzi. This example shows us just how deep a work of fiction can indeed relate to an occult teaching..

If Mister Dan Harms would have addressed the writings of Lovecraft with the same skepticism, he would not have to face the embarrassment of what I am about to say. Now he has to explain his reasons for believing in Lovecraft without question. Mister Dan Harms has often asserted that the term ‘Necronomicon’ was invented by H. P. Lovecraft. This is far from the truth. Why didn’t Gonce and Harms look into Lovecraft’s works with the same critique that they approached the Simon Necronmicon?!!  If they were to just research the history of Lovecraft they might have discovered that, the word ‘necronomicon’ was a conjoined term.

We have evidence of this as the term ‘nomicon’ appears almost forty years before the birth of Lovecraft in the work entitled, History of the Jewish Nation After the Destruction of Jerusalem Under Titus by Alfred Edersheim, in the year 1856. Eldersheim recounts through his essay many facets of Jewish history. On page 263 it states:

“Simon had made a collection of traditional ordinances, which however has been lost; that composed by Joses was specially reputed  for its scientific arrangement. It bore the Greek title of “Nomicon,” Legal Code, as in general many Latin and Greek terms had crept into the language and writings of the Jews.”

It is interesting that the term ‘nomicon’ was a common term in Jewish culture decades ago, meaning a legal code, or codes for socialization. Since Lovecraft displayed anti-Semitic views openly, as I discussed in some of my previous letters to Dan Harms, it stands to reason that Lovecraft’s use of the term ‘necro’ in front of the term ‘nomicon.’ may have actually been an anti-Semitic joke of describing Jewish ordinances as dead customs. However, we must also keep in mind that there is also ‘The Nomicon of Photius, in Title VIII, says that bishops must not undertake cares and become trustees, even of their own relatives, according to cc. XIII, XIV, XV of Title I of Bk. III of the Basiliar, except only in case that trusteeship is for the purpose of distributing alms or charitable gifts in behalf of their deceased relative, according to Novel 68 of Leo the Wise. Read also the above concordant Canons, prohibiting clergymen from worldly cares. ‘ More information can be found at this link:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:-nr2wZmEraoJ:www.orthodoxcentral.com/documents/Canons%2520of%2520the%2520Apostles.doc+Nomicon+of+Photius&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

What I find even more amazing is Mister Dan Harms’ denial of Crowley’s involvement in the Simon Necronomicon. I mentioned before that Crowley’s name appears 39 times in the Introduction. This is the same amount of times that the Hebrew word for ‘Messiah’ appears in the Old Testament. Another indication of this is the fact that Lovecraft uses so many Greek references to describe a book of Arabic origin. Maybe this is due to his fellowship with persons involved in the occult arts, or the development of the Greek philosophy of Thelema. Why is it that when the doctrine of Thelema is gaining wider acceptance among the occult world, Lovecraft is able to provide a fictional story using Greek terms, which is almost identical to how Crowley received the Book of the Law?  I am sure that Mister Harms, Dan Clore, Gonce, and all the rest of these online writers, who are a part of some Lovecraft Church, fail to recognize Thelema as one of Lovecraft’s influences. If people wonder today what it would have been like if Crowley met Lovecraft, then it must have been some talk of it then. It must have sparked Lovecraft to look into the writings of Crowley and Crowley to look into the stories of Lovecraft. It is no mystery that Lovecraft had friends from various walks of life, occultists being among that crowd. So how is it that Lovecraft is able to receive messages for his ‘fictional’ stories in dreams and have friendship with individuals with occult backgrounds and never explore these lucid dreams or the occult? It is very entertaining how you can read about Lovecraft being a materialist, and not involved in the occult arts. I find this most entertaining because Satanists describe themselves as materialists, and some Satanists never reveal their association with the Church of Satan publicly. When we begin to look at Lovecraft’s beginnings, we can see that his imagination was fueled by occult theories.

Although Mister Dan Harms tries to make it seem, as if Lovecraft invented the word Necronomicon our research tell us differently. Since the word ‘nomicon’ was already in use, Lovecraft just added the Greek prefix ‘necro’ to enhance the meaning of an already existing word. It should also be noted that Lovecraft first mentions the Necronomicon in “The Hound,” which he wrote in mid-October 1921 only three months after having met his would be wife Sonia Greene. Sonia Greene was a Jewish woman. This being the case, it seems very probable that since the ‘nomicon’ was a set of codes establish for Jewish community, Lovecraft did not invent the word, but took a true term from his wife and gave it another definition by adding the prefix ‘necro.’ This establishes that some of Lovecraft’s ideas were indeed borrowed from his wife. Some critics, who do not possess the information on the term ‘nomicon’ have erroneously concluded that since Lovecraft first mentions Abdul Alhazred, the author of the Necronomicon, in “The Nameless City” (which he wrote in January 1921) a full six months before having met Greene, that he already had ideas for the story, but this doesn’t prove that he came up with the term Necronomicon then.

Another error that Harms has made in trying to disprove the Simon Necronomicon, is his critique of Dead Names. Has it ever occurred to Mister Dan Harms that the rare book heists and some of the suicides that are described in Dead Names actually occurred? Now let us think for a second. What type of person would take true life tragedy and incorporate it into a story just to make a point? If Simon’s account was not true in Dead Names, why hasn’t the families of the victims sued Simon of making fiction out of a real tragedy? Also the life Simon leads is one of seclusion, almost like he is a witness-protection program. What individual would want to live a life like that, if the work was not true?

Although the Necronomicon Files provides some useful information, it is also used by Harms and Gonce to attack people and organizations that they have conflict with. On page 118 of the Necronomicon Files, under the subject “BloodSuckers for Cthulhu: The Temple of the Vampire, Harms and Gonce suggest that the Temple’s use of the term ‘Ancient Ones is of Lovecraftian origin. This is complete nonsense since the Temple does not follow Lovecraft.

It seems like Mister Dan Harms has a very strong devotion to Lovecraft, which gives him a warped view of the world. That’s okay. It should be remembered that only one of us can complete their function, and I doubt if Mister Dan Harms will complete his.

Warlock Asylum ( the Dark Knight)

Advertisements

5 replies »

  1. I really don’t feel like plucking my head in a debate which seems to stray off in a dozen different directions with each episode, but I cannot refrain from pointing out a couple of tidbits.

    Your explanation of the title “Necronomicon”, while plausible, has a few problems:

    -This would mean that Simon, Barnes et al blatantly lied about the Simonomicon’s original manuscript being titled Necronomicon, and that they gave it that title after Lovecraft’s creation, which contradicts your previous arguments since presenting a book purporting to be a different book is indeed a hoax. If HPL made up the title, then Simon is a liar, which is what you deny, isn’t it?

    -There is no reason whatsoever why HPL wouldn’t have made an anti-semitic Necronomicon concept authored by a “mad rabbi” or whatever instead of an Arab (especially being a lover of all things arabic).

    -This would mean that Lovecraft blatantly lied when he stated that the title “Necronomicon” came to him in a dream. It would be quite likely that he was aware of this “Nomicon” you mention and it might have inflñuenced his unconscious mind causing that dream, but the Astronomicon usually mentioned as the probable inspiration is far more likely, since we know that HPL knew about it.

    -Dan Harms has never claimed that HPL invented the title. If you guys start refuting things the other never said, this debate is going to Kutu.

    -You say “If they were to just research the history of Lovecraft they might have discovered that, the word ‘necronomicon’ was a conjoined term. We have evidence of this as the term ‘nomicon’ appears almost forty years before the birth of Lovecraft” -well, in The Necronomicon Files page 9, it say that the Astronomicon was older than Lovecraft’s creation. You found a second use of “nomicon” and there are probably others. So what does that have to do with anything?

    Like

  2. it doesn’t mean that Simon lied about the Necronomicon. It means that Lovecraft was indeed writing about something that he knew existed. The point of my argument is to examine whether or not, the Necronomicon was an actual invention of the mind of Lovecraft, and if so, how could he do so with a persona that conflict with how he came up with a story that is so close to magical hisory and principals, has quite a few friends who are in the occult, receives messages in dreams, and never explores the world of the occult for himself. The other possibility is that Lovecraft learned of the Necronomicon in Inner Occult circles and was able to reveal glimpses of it in his fictional work. Yet if one maintains that he just imagined all of this there are some questions that do indeed arise, and I think that I have covered some of them. I enjoy Lovecraft’s work, and my post is not to discredeit him as a writer. Yet I feel that it would be bias not to examine his side of what the necronomicon was under different rules that were placed upon Simon.

    I also feel that both Necronomicon Traditions should be honored with respect. However, Harms seems to have an agenda all on his own. 🙂

    Thanks for your comment

    Like

  3. It would be good if you would demonstrate in your comment what is an “uintruth” and “half truths.” Knowing you everything is funny

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s