Negative Positive
Title: wishful thinking and misinformed
Review: Murray, like Gardner and Crowley, was one of those early eclectics about her study of the Old Religion. There is too much supposition and not enough factual basis for her conclusions on the development of the "Witch God." The first chapter, however, is a great read following the earliset depictions of the horned god. But the jump to stating that these depictions from all over Europe at varying times are linked to a single cohesive religion is tenuous. This is yet another case in which the author has made the facts fit her conception rather than objectively trying to make connections between the facts. This is the case, unfortunately, for almost all early expositors of witchcraft and the Old Religion. Read the more scholarly "Triumph of the Moon" by Ronald Hutton if you're looking for objectivity rather than charlatanism.
Is the review positive or negative? 