Saturday, November 30, 2019

Legionary Death Cult

truth62z1-2jfd.jpg

"Another typical aspect of the Legionarism of the 'Iron Guards' is a sort of ascetic commitment on the part of their leaders : they must refrain from going to dance halls, cinemas or theatres, avoid any display of wealth or even of mere affluence. A special storm force of 10,000 men, which was called after Moza and Marin, two leaders of the 'Iron Guards' fallen in Spain, had, for its members, almost as in some ancient orders of chivalry, the clause of celibacy, as long as they belonged to this force : since no mundane or family occupation was to be permitted to diminish their capacity to dedicate themselves at any moment to Death."

Julius Evola - The Tragedy of the Romanian 'Iron Guard': Codreanu

truth62z1-2lbjhjh.jpg

30 NOVEMBER 1939: REMEMBERING THE MARTYRDOM OF OUR CAPTAIN CORNELIU ZELEA CODREANU - NEVER FORGIVE, NEVER FORGET!


'There is no doubt that, in this world, there are all sorts of
people who look nice, but are empty inside, who do not feel either
moral or spiritual aspirations in addition to the physical gifts with
which nature blessed them... But in Corneliu Codreanu, his
magnificient physique corresponds to an exceptional inner wholeness.
Exclamations of admiration from men left him indifferent. Praise
angered him. He had only a fighter's greatness and the ambition of
great reformers... The characteristic of his soul was goodness. If
you want to penetrate the initial motive that prompted Corneliu
Codreanu to throw in a fight so hard and almost desperate, the best
answer is that he did it out of compassion for suffering people.
His heart bled with thousands of injuries to see the misery in
which peasants and workers struggled. His love for the people was
unlimited! He was sensitive to any suffering that the working masses
endured. He had a cult for the humble, and showed an infinite
attention to their aspirations and their hopes. The smallest window,
the most trivial complaint, were examined with the same seriousness
with which he addressed grave political problems.'


-Horia Sima, successor of Codreanu as commander of the Legion in 1940, and co-ruler of Romania. Taken from his his book 'Istoria Miscarii Legionare' (History of the Legionary Movement).

truth62z1-2b.jpg

Read also:

The Murder of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

The Martyrdom of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

 

Thursday, November 28, 2019

If Hitler Won World War II We'd Have A Better, More Just World Today

86bd9eef5e3f331ee389a82c632b04f3

Legendary U.S. General George S. Patton realized late in the war that the United States fought the wrong country. Patton felt the U.S. should have sided with Germany to destroy Jewish Bolshevik/Communist USSR. This information comes from Patton's diary entries, letters he wrote to his wife, and comments he made to military officers and staff.

World War II was incredibly complex. However, in the final analysis, WWII was essentially a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Internationalism/globalism. Adolf Hitler and his allies fought to preserve the concept of Nationalism, not just for Germans but for all peoples the world over. Nationalism really just means the sovereignty of an ethnic people and the right of such ethnic people/nationalists - within their own bordered country - to self-determination.  What is meant by self-determination?  Self-determination just means an ethnic people preserving their unique culture & heritage and pursuing their collective goals as a unique people.  This applies to any ethnic peoples: Nigerians, Germans, Swedes, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Tibetans, etc.

On the other side of WWII was Jewish (Bolshevik) Internationalism (today we simply call this 'globalism'). In the 1920's, 1930's, and of course during WWII, powerful Jewish Internationalists were fervently advancing the Jewish worldview of eventually eliminating all nations... except for a Jewish homeland... (what was later to be - after WWII - the nation of Israel in 1948). Today we see that nothing has changed; Jewish Internationalism/globalism still works toward gradually "merging" all peoples of the world (particularly in the Western World) into one globalist system with a global government, global laws, consistent global culture, global bank, global currency, etc. In short, Jewish globalism (i.e., the weakening and eventual elimination of all nations) is the exact opposite of Nationalism (i.e., a world composed of nations ... specifically, ethnically homogenous and bordered nations). The Allied powers of WWII (led by Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, et al) were tools of International Jewry and thus de facto fighting for the Jewish globalist worldview. After the (Jewish run) Allies won WWII in 1945, International Jewish forces were then free to exercise a Jewish 'Sphere of Influence' over the greater Western World (and as we see today, increasingly over the rest of the world).

Alternatively, if Hitler had won World War II and then exercised a Nationalist 'Sphere of Influence' over the greater Western World, we'd have a more just, fair, and moral Western World today. The rest of the world would have similarly benefited had the Germans been victorious since German influence would have surely spread elsewhere (ideas such as non-usurious banking and strong family oriented culture would likely have spread globally).

20191126_231146.jpg

Had Hitler won World War II, what would be different in the post war world? Here are a few examples:

1 - No USSR (the Soviet government murdered millions of its own people during its 70 year reign - to study this topic read the writings of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn; Hitler would have liberated the USSR, though taking large parts of its Western region for lebensraum, "living space")

2 - No cold war (because there would be no USSR)

3 - No Communist Eastern Europe/Iron Curtain (when WWII ended, Eastern Europe fell to Communism - this was part of Stalin's spoils of war)

4 - No Red China and Mao's subsequent killing of 40 - 60 million Chinese (the USSR created favorable conditions for Mao's Communists which ultimately led to Mao's victory over Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists in 1949, thus if no USSR, no Mao victory)

5 - No Communist North Vietnam (both the Soviet Union and Red China aided Ho Chi Minh)

6 - No Communist Cambodia and Pol Pot's slaughter of 2 million Cambodians (Red China aided Pol Pot)

7 - No dividing Korea into North Korea & South Korea (the Allies split Korea after WWII ended, with North Korea becoming Communist... another of Stalin's spoils of war)

8 - No Communist Cuba (given the previous, what support would Castro have had in the 1950's?)

9 - No Communism anywhere (Hitler was the world's most fervent anti-Communist)

10 - Liberalism & multiculturalism wouldn't dominate Western ethos (both are Jewish creations and both have always been heavily promoted/advanced by Jews; thus if no Jewish influence, then no liberalism and no multiculturalism... at least certainly nowhere near the degree we see today)

11 - No Cultural Marxism and no political correctness (these are social engineering "tools" which came out of the Jewish think tank known as the Frankfurt School)

12 - No third world immigration into Western nations (Jews wouldn't be in power positions to craft and force through liberal immigration laws; Jews are responsible for each and every Western nation's liberal immigration policy/laws, as all were orchestrated by a consortium consisting of the World Jewish Congress, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, and B'nai B'rith)

13 - No depraved filth on TV, in movies, etc. (because Jews wouldn't run Hollywood)

14 - No widespread pornography (Jewish lawyers and Jewish activists were the main challengers of anti-obscenity laws, under the guise of "Freedom of Speech")

15 - There would still be prayer in public schools (Jewish lawyers were instrumental in banning prayer in public schools under the guise of so-called "separation of church and state," something that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution)

16 - No man-hating radical feminist movement (Jews such as Betty Friedan, Sonia Pressman, and Gloria Steinem, among others, were the key drivers of radical feminism)

17 - No Israel and all the problems it has brought the USA and the immeasurable misery it has wrought on the Palestinians

18 - Jews would be living in Madagascar (perhaps) and would be carefully monitored (Madagascar was one place Hitler considered as a Jewish homeland)

Many reading this will ask, "But what about the Holocaust?" The Holocaust has been grossly exaggerated by organized Jewry in order to create sympathy for Jews worldwide and thus help advance the Jewish agenda (i.e., people seen as victims tend to get their way). It is also used as a political weapon to justify Israeli militarism against the Palestinians. Hitler's Final Solution (rebranded in the early 1970's as the "Holocaust") was a plan to remove Jews from Europe, not to kill them. During WWII, just as the U.S. couldn't trust Japanese Americans, thus causing FDR to round many of them up and place them in concentration camps, Hitler couldn't trust Jews since many were partisans sympathetic to the USSR and hence they aided the USSR in various subversive, anti-German activities. Therefore the Nazis rounded up Jews and placed them in concentration camps.

patton11

Somewhere around one million Jews died during WWII (not six million) mostly due to disease and starvation in the final months of the war. Heavy Allied bombing of Germany and parts of German occupied Europe destroyed many roads, rail lines, and bridges making it impossible for Germany to adequately supply the camps with food and medicine. The result is that many Jews died of starvation and disease; and of course many non-Jews also died of starvation and disease (again, due to a massive Allied bombing campaign and its destruction of German transportation infrastructure). Lastly, there were no "gas chambers." Much has been written about this. To study the "gas chamber" subject, read the research papers published by Germar Rudolf & Carlo Mattogno (there are many others as well). To get a broad overview of the Holocaust, read my article, What Was The Holocaust... What Actually Happened?

It should also be noted that Hitler never wanted to "conquer the world." He simply wanted to safeguard Europe and the greater Western World from all manner of nefarious Jewish influence and, more broadly, safeguard the world-at-large specifically from, 1) usurious Jewish banking and, 2) Jewish-driven cultural degradation.

As previously stated, the Allied heads-of-State (Roosevelt, Churchill, et al) were puppets of International Jewry; each sold his soul for power and prestige. Again, as earlier stated, World War II was a war between two competing ideologies: Nationalism -vs- Jewish Bolshevik Internationalism/globalism -- unfortunately International Jewry won.

Was World War II "the good war" as is often claimed? No, it was exactly the opposite. The Allied victory marked the beginning of the end of Western Civilization.

Source

Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Hellenic Ideal

53ef5346907f6855dcfe59d9732dbe68.jpg

"The only way for us to become great, or even inimitable if possible, is to imitate the Greeks."
Johann Joachim Winckelmann

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Re-Establish The Black Rule Of France

[caption id="attachment_9596" align="aligncenter" width="738"]“Napoleon I, crowned by the Allegory of Time, writes the Code Civil” Jean-Baptiste Mauzaisse, 1833. “Napoleon I, crowned by the Allegory of Time, writes the Code Civil” Jean-Baptiste Mauzaisse, 1833[/caption]

“Napoleon was made to overcome the eighteenth century by awakening again the man, the soldier, and the great fight for power in conceiving Europe as a political unit.”

—F. Nietzsche, The Will to Power, §104

Friday, November 22, 2019

Can Britain survive?

muslim-lady-bridge-1.jpg

"Britain's victories are barren; they leave her poor, and they leave her people hungry; they leave her bereft of the markets and the wealth that she possessed six years ago. But above all, they leave her with an immensely greater problem than she had then. We are nearing the end of one phase of Europe's history, but the next will be no happier. It will be grimmer, harder and perhaps bloodier. And now I ask you earnestly, can Britain survive?"

- Broadcast from 30 April 1945; William 'Lord Haw Haw' Joyce's last broadcast

Thursday, November 21, 2019

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

José Antonio Primo de Rivera: Bread and Justice

3055d5a74d53ecce84913bb3d745c509

"Well then: if communism puts an end to many good things, such as family attachments and national sentiment; if it provides neither bread nor freedom and makes us subservient to a foreign country, what is to be done? We are not going to resign ourselves to the continuation to the capitalist regime. One thing today is painfully obvious: the crisis of the capitalist system and its devastating consequences which communism is doing nothing to attenuate. What is to be done, then? Are we in a cul-de-sac? Is there no way of placating the hunger of the masses for bread and justice? Do we have to choose between the desperation of the bourgeois regime and the slavery of Russia?
No. The National Syndicalist Movement is convinced that it has found the right way out: neither capitalist nor communist. Faced by the individualist economy of the bourgeoisie, the socialist one arose, which handed over the fruits of production to the State, enslaving the individual. Neither of them have resolved the tragedy of the producer. To address this issue let us erect the syndicalist economy, which neither absorbs the individual personality into the State, nor turns the worker into a dehumanized cog in the machinery of bourgeois production. The national syndicalist solution is the one which promises to bear the most fruit. It will do away once and for all with political go-betweens and parasites. It will free production from the financial burdens with which finance capital overwhelms it. It will overcome the anarchy it causes by putting order into it. It will prevent speculation with commodities, guaranteeing a profitable price. And, above all, it will pass on the surplus value not to the capitalist, not to the State, but to the producer as a member of his trade union. And this economic system will make a thing of the past the depressing spectacle of unemployment, slum housing, and misery.
Workers! Comrades! Decisive moments are approaching. No one can stand back with his arms folded. The fate of everyone is in the balance. Either the workers, forcefully, implacably, will put an end to the capital and join the National Syndicalist Movement to impose a regime of national solidarity, or internationalism will turn us into stooges of some foreign great power.
The National Syndicalist Movement, conscious that it has strength and reason on its side, will keep up the assault on all its enemies: the right, the left, communism, capitalism. For Fatherland, Bread, and Justice. We are sure to win. It is essential in interest of both the producers and the nation. We will impose a new order of things, without people starving, without professional politicians, without bosses, without usurers, without speculators.
Neither right, nor left! Neither communism nor capitalism! A national regime. The National Syndicalist regime!
Long live Spain!"

383edf99faceec755b5afb1a66653f77.jpg

Monday, November 18, 2019

The Eternal Glory of War

[caption id="attachment_9569" align="aligncenter" width="602"]arditi Arditi advancing in the Isonzo Front[/caption]

“Attack and defence, want and war, victory and defeat, lordship and thraldom, all sealed with the seal of blood: this from henceforth is the History of Man.”

Richard Wagner

Saturday, November 16, 2019

London was a Protean writer who mixed racialism with socialism

e676192eedf57b300280ce3713b84ff1.jpg

https://nationalvanguard.org/author/wpenn/

“THERE NEVER was a good biography of a good novelist,” F. Scott Fitzgerald once observed. “He is too many people, if he’s any good.” This dictum holds particularly true in the case of Jack London (pictured, 1876–1916). For biographers and critics as well, he is the most elusive of subjects. As a person, as a writer, and most of all as a man of ideas, he continually takes on different and sharply contrasting forms.

For nearly half of his short, turbulent and adventurous life he was a member of the Socialist Party. He wrote books and articles championing Socialist principles. He liked to end his letters with “Yours for the revolution.” Twice he ran as a Socialist for mayor of his hometown Oakland (he came nowhere near victory). Once, when serving as president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, he spoke with menacing rhetoric of an imminent violent revolution at Harvard and Yale. Long revered as a patron saint of the Left, he was for years the most widely read American author in the Soviet Union.

His best-known Socialist work is The Iron Heel (1907). Set in a future America, the novel expounds Marxist theory and vividly portrays the bloody suppression of a workers’ revolt by a Bilderbergerish cabal of plutocrats called The Oligarchy. Predictably, liberal-minority critics praise the book as a prophetic vision of the evils of twentieth-century fascism. Just as predictably, they deplore the shadowy presence of London the hereditarian. To him the book’s slum proletarians, “the people of the abyss,” are “the refuse and the scum of life,” a stock irredeemably inferior to the plutocrats and to the Socialist elite who are the heroes and heroines of the novel.

London was usually much more explicit about the genetic coloring of his Socialism. He once horrified some fellow party members by declaring: “What the Devil! I am first of all a White man and only then a Socialist!” And he wrote a friend, “Socialism is not an ideal system devised for the happiness of all men. It is devised so as to give more strength to these certain kindred favored races so that they may survive and inherit the earth to the extinction of the lesser, weaker races.”

7da33fae221357c634b8af852198ad8d.jpg

London became a Socialist because first-hand experience — he once worked 14-hour days in a cannery for ten cents an hour — had made him an enemy of economic injustice. But Socialist theory was just one of the three strong intellectual currents of the time that shaped his world view and found expression in his writing. He was also drawn, by his instinctive belief in the primacy of the self, to the ideas of Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Max Stirner. The third, probably the most profound influence on his thinking, was Darwinism and Herbert Spencer’s application of it to philosophy and ethics. This doctrine was for London an essential key to the pattern of existence.

The contradictions between such divergent sources, writes London’s most recent biographer, Andrew Sinclair (Jack, 1977), “suited his divided nature. . . .  Jack was most a Socialist when he was depressed. . . . When he felt confident, he decided that the survival of the self and the race determined all human behavior.”

We cannot judge to what extent it is fair to describe London’s thinking in terms of manic-depressive psychology. But it is certainly true that throughout his work the writer gravitates from one theoretical matrix to another. For example, in describing his own climb to eminence, either in autobiography or in thinly disguised fiction (notably in the 1909 novel Martin Eden)he casts himself variously as a social underdog victimized by class barriers, as a man of indomitable will, and as a biological specimen superbly fitted for survival.

However he depicted it, his rise was an impressive story. He fought his way up from poverty, educated himself, served a grueling literary apprenticeship, and virtually by main force became a popular, well-paid and influential writer. Glorying in his hard-won status, he established himself in baronial (and un-Socialist) fashion on a sprawling California ranch and labored to maintain his lifestyle by grinding out an average of three books a year.

By instinct and by conviction, London was a literary naturalist — one of a new breed of writers who focused on the harsh, deterministic forces shaping nature and human society. Working at the top of his form, he had an enormous gift for graphically dramatizing primal conflict, and several of his books are classics of their kind. The most famous of these are two novels: The Call of the Wild (1903), in which the canine hero, Buck, learns “the law of the club and fang” in the Yukon; and The Sea-Wolf (1904), a complex and compelling portrait of a sealer captain who is a proto-superman.

Unfortunately, London is not at his best when he makes racial themes central in his fiction. The material, like most of his work, has raw power and vitality. But the modern reader will also find it full of operatic melodrama, stereotyped characters, and Kiplingesque assumptions about the imperial mission of the Anglo-Saxons. (Kipling was a major influence on London’s style and many of his attitudes.)

However, one of London’s themes, racial displacement, is more relevant now than when he wrote. It is the theme of his novel The Valley of the Moon (1913)a sympathetic study of poor, landless Anglo-Saxon Americans in California. They have lost the land to exploiters of their own kind, to more energetic immigrants, and through their own improvidence. They are “the white folks that failed.” Their salvation, London says, lies in returning with new dedication to the land that is their birthright. His prescription, simplistic as it is, merits respect as a pioneering attempt. And we should note that it has been followed in recent years by a small but significant number of Majority members, people who for various reasons have gone back to the land to start over again.

The innate superiority of Anglo-Saxon stock to all others is an article of faith in The Valley of the Moon and in London’s work generally. He was himself of Welsh descent on his mother’s side, English on the side of his presumptive father, a vagabond jack of-all-trades who never married London’s mother and never admitted his paternity.

a061ff0fa00f9121f9fddc511ce40108.jpg

Racial displacement on a larger scale is foreseen in The Mutiny of the Elsinore (1914). The hero-narrator, obviously London’s persona, is a playwright on an ocean voyage whose atavistic instincts help him crush a mutiny of his genetic inferiors. But even as he exults in his victory, he judges it as all for naught in the long historical pull; and throughout the novel he delivers twilight-of-the-gods valedictories to his own kind, the blond, “white-skinned, blue-eyed Aryan.” Born to roam over the world and govern and command it, the paleface Aryan “perishes because of the too-white light he encounters.” The darker races “will inherit the earth, not because of their capacity for mastery and government, but because of their skin-pigmentation which enables their tissues to resist the ravages of the sun.”

This strange hypothesis the writer got from The Effects of Tropical Light on White Men, a book by a Major Woodruff. It was a theory which had been made horribly real for London by the nightmarish skin disease he had contracted on a cruise in the Solomon Islands.

London’s racial pessimism was reinforced by the decline in his fortunes in the last years of his life and by World War I, which he viewed as an orgy of racial fratricide. But the writer who once had a heroine make the sensible observation that “white men shouldn’t go around killing each other” was outvoted by the inveterate Anglo-Saxon, and he became an advocate of American intervention on the side of England against Germany. (One reason he left the Socialist Party in 1916 was to protest its neutralist position. Another was his growing dissatisfaction with its dogma. “Liberty, freedom, and independence,” he wrote in his letter of resignation, “are royal things that cannot be presented to, nor thrust upon, races or classes.”)

Given to treating his increasing numbers of ailments, including alcoholism, with morphine and arsenic compounds, he died in 1916 of a self-administered drug overdose. Whether it was accidental or deliberate has never been determined

It is easy enough in retrospect to point out the flaws in London’s racial thinking. But the point to be stressed is that he knew, through his instinct and reason, how primary a factor race is, and he is one of the very few writers in this century who deals forthrightly with the fundamental role of racial dynamics in human affairs.

Like Proteus, London assumes different forms — the Darwinian, the Socialist, the self-styled Nietzschean “blond beast,” the man of letters, the man of action, the “sailor on horseback” of his projected autobiography, and the major American author. He is also reminiscent of the sea god in that he was something of a prophet. For example, the writer of such works as The Call of the Wild can be considered, to use biographer Sinclair’s words, “the prophet of the correspondences between beasts and men,” and a forerunner of Lorenz and E.O. Wilson.

Sinclair goes on to observe that London’s varied prophetic gifts make him “curiously modern as a thinker, despite the dark corridors of his racial beliefs.” Those of us who have made empirical journeys through our own “dark corridors,” will conclude that in this territory too London is “curiously modern” and prophetic.

* * *

Source: based on an article in Instauration magazine, June 1978

Sunday, November 10, 2019

Divine Punishment

tumblr_p0s72kBXC41wkfutyo1_500

“A man who has taken human life on no responsibility but his own enjoys some of the immunities of a God. The habit of acting first and thinking afterwards is surely divine, or how can we explain the universe?”

— Aleister Crowley, “The Vitriol-Thrower”

Saturday, November 9, 2019

We are as Acquainted with You as we are with Death

tumblr_nxjxgrqlq01s73k0so1_540

“Truly these sixteen who fell have celebrated a resurrection unique in world history. The miracle is that from their sacrifice came Germany’s unity, the victory of a movement, of an idea, and the devotion of the entire people. All that we owe to these first men! If I had found no one then ready to risk his life, it would have been impossible to find them later. All the subsequent blood sacrifices were inspired by the sacrifice of these first men.
Therefore we raise them out of the darkness of forgetfulness and make them the center of attention of the German people forever.
For us they are not dead. This temple is no crypt, but an eternal watch. Here they stand for Germany, on guard for our people. Here they lie as true martyrs of our movement.
We celebrated this day each year in the past — not always in the same form during the years of persecution — and we are determined that it will be for all times a holiday for the German people. We do this not because sixteen men died. Thousands die daily, even more during an hour of war.
We do it because these sixteen men, with believing hearts, died in a way that helped the German people to rise again.”

Adolf Hitler 

3200107077

You dead heroes
Never were you nearer to us —,
Reminder, call, prayer —
As now when the Grim Reaper
Stands before us.
Never were you so necessary to us.
Towers in the storm of care.
Never were you as alive to us.
We are as acquainted with you as we are with death.
We listen for the call. And we hear
In the night, when all is silent
Your voices. They warn, they swear:
Not only victories! The victory!
As our flags sink
God goes as the wind through the field.
All our thanks and thoughts
Become deed.
—Gerhard Schumann


 

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

The Trooping Fairies

fb18d0ddc4be77740c74cacecdf5c4a0

W.B. Yeats

From Fairy and Folk Tales of the Irish Peasantry: Edited and Selected by W.B. Yeats, 1888

The Irish word for fairy is sheehogue  [sidheóg], a diminutive of “shee” in banshee. Fairies are deenee shee [daoine sidhe] (fairy people).

Who are they? “Fallen angels who were not good enough to be saved, nor bad enough to be lost,” say the peasantry. “The gods of the earth,” says the Book of Armagh. “The gods of pagan Ireland,” say the Irish antiquarians, “the Tuatha De Danān, who, when no longer worshipped and fed with offerings, dwindled away in the popular imagination, and now are only a few spans high.”

And they will tell you, in proof, that the names of fairy chiefs are the names of old Danān heroes, and the places where they especially gather together, Danān burying-places, and that the Tuath De Danān used also to be called the slooa-shee [sheagh sidhe] (the fairy host), or Marcra shee (the fairy cavalcade).

[caption id="attachment_9600" align="aligncenter" width="600"]The Fairy Dance - Karl Wilhelm Diefenbach, 1895. The Fairy Dance - Karl Wilhelm Diefenbach, 1895.[/caption]

On the other hand, there is much evidence to prove them fallen angels. Witness the nature of the creatures, their caprice, their way of being good to the good and evil to the evil, having every charm but conscience--consistency. Beings so quickly offended that you must not speak much about them at all, and never call them anything but the “gentry,” or else daoine maithe, which in English means good people, yet so easily pleased, they will do their best to keep misfortune away from you, if you leave a little milk for them on the window-sill over night. On the whole, the popular belief tells us most about them, telling us how they fell, and yet were not lost, because their evil was wholly without malice.

Are they “the gods of the earth”? Perhaps! Many poets, and all mystic and occult writers, in all ages and countries, have declared that behind the visible are chains on chains of conscious beings, who are not of heaven but of the earth, who have no inherent form but change according to their whim, or the mind that sees them. You cannot lift your hand without influencing and being influenced by hoards. The visible world is merely their skin. In dreams we go amongst them, and play with them, and combat with them. They are, perhaps, human souls in the crucible--these creatures of whim.

Do not think the fairies are always little. Everything is capricious about them, even their size. They seem to take what size or shape pleases them. Their chief occupations are feasting, fighting, and making love, and playing the most beautiful music. They have only one industrious person amongst them, the lepra-caun--the shoemaker. Perhaps they wear their shoes out with dancing. Near the village of Ballisodare is a little woman who lived amongst them seven years. When she came home she had no toes--she had danced them off.

[caption id="attachment_9546" align="aligncenter" width="600"]Noel-Patton-The-Fairy-Raid Sir Joseph Noel Paton - The Fairy Raid: Carrying off a Changeling - Midsummer Eve, 1867[/caption]

They have three great festivals in the year--May Eve, Midsummer Eve, November Eve. On May Eve, every seventh year, they fight all round, but mostly on the “Plain-a-Bawn” (wherever that is), for the harvest, for the best ears of grain belong to them. An old man told me he saw them fight once; they tore the thatch off a house in the midst of it all. Had anyone else been near they would merely have seen a great wind whirling everything into the air as it passed. When the wind makes the straws and leaves whirl as it passes, that is the fairies, and the peasantry take off their hats and say, “God bless them.”

On Midsummer Eve, when the bonfires are lighted on every hill in honour of St. John, the fairies are at their gayest, and sometimes steal away beautiful mortals to be their brides.

On November Eve they are at their gloomiest, for according to the old Gaelic reckoning, this is the first night of winter. This night they dance with the ghosts, and the pooka is abroad, and witches make their spells, and girls set a table with food in the name of the devil, that the fetch of their future lover may come through the window and eat of the food. After November Eve the blackberries are no longer wholesome, for the pooka has spoiled them.

When they are angry they paralyse men and cattle with their fairy darts.

When they are gay they sing. Many a poor girl has heard them, and pined away and died, for love of that singing. Plenty of the old beautiful tunes of Ireland are only their music, caught up by eavesdroppers. No wise peasant would hum “The Pretty Girl Milking the Cow”near a fairy rath, for they are jealous, and do not like to hear their songs on clumsy mortal lips. Carolan, the last of the Irish bards, slept on a rath, and ever after the fairy tunes ran in his head, and made him the great man he was.

Do they die? Blake saw a fairy's funeral; but in Ireland we say they are immortal.