Post by Vampirologist on Jul 21, 2006 5:47:46 GMT -5
RAISNG THE DEVIL: Satanism, New Religions and the Media
Author: Bill Ellis Published in 2000
Critique by the Right Rev'd Seán Manchester
Chief among those who disseminated misinformation in the new century are Bill Ellis of the International Society for Contemporary Legend Research and Jacqueline Simpson of the Folklore Society. Ellis met Farrant. Simpson did not, but relied on Ellis as her source. Neither Ellis nor Simpson met me, but we did exchange correspondence. I offered recorded interviews from the 1970s which include Farrant discussing his early claims on television and in private. Ellis showed no interest in this material, but I did forward the interviews on CD to Simpson who acknowledged their receipt.
Chapter eight of Raising the Devil is titled “The Highgate Cemetery Vampire Hunt” and is based on what Ellis gleaned from Farrant when he met him in July 1992, interpolated by Ellis’ own scepticism. The chapter began its life as an article published in 1993 by the Folklore Society based at University College London in the UK. My response was offered to University College London in the form of an academic paper. The Folkore Society was uninterested in the rebuttal, some of which would later be absorbed within the pages of The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook.
Ellis describes himself as “a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America” and, moreover, someone “who has taken leadership positions and on occasion taught adult Sunday school and led services.”[1] Notwithstanding this claim, when I contacted the ELCA they informed me that they had no knowledge of Bill Ellis and “cannot confirm whether he is a member of the ELCA or one of the other Lutheran bodies.” The “Evangelical Lutheran” Ellis defines exorcism as “a means of temporarily inducing an alternative personality … beneficial to some persons for whom conventional psychological or psychiatric therapy fails.”[2] For me, at whom he is more than willing to cast an aspersion, exorcism is the act of casting out demons (Mark 16: 17). It is not alternative therapy for failed psychology. Ellis is nonetheless an associate professor of Anglo-American Studies at Pennsylvania State University, USA. He received his PhD in English from Ohio State University in 1978. In that long-lost era, Ellis says students were told not to worry about the job market; so nor did he. He wrote his dissertation on the image of the mother in country music, drawing on Northrop Frye's theory of archetypes. It would take him six years to find a tenure-track job. Meanwhile, he taught English as an adjunct. He found work preparing the annotations to editions of Nathaniel Hawthorne's letters and notebooks, which gave him some credentials as a specialist in American literature. In 1984 he moved to Pennsylvania State's small branch campus in Hazleton, where, at the age of thirty-four, Ellis finally made the transition to a regular appointment. It was not a position designed for a scholar. Most of the 1,200 students are freshmen and sophomores.
Ellis usually teaches two or three composition courses each semester. That means grading roughly one thousand pages of student writing per course. It is rare that he gets to offer an upper-division class, and rarer still that the topic is folklore, his primary field of scholarly interest. As for conducting a graduate seminar, the possibility never comes up because the campus has no graduate programmes. “Bill has never been part of the mainstream of folklore scholarship,” says Gary Alan Fine, a professor of sociology at Northwestern University; adding: “His work has always been quirky.”
Quirky or not, Ellis felt his folkloric background qualified him to comment at length on the Highgate Vampire case. His 1993 Folklore article prompted my following observation: “Reading like popular journalism of the most squalid kind, it loses no time in becoming a polemic wherein the personal prejudices and opinions held by Ellis dominate. A dry, impartial ‘academic report’ it is not. His cynicism underscores every line as he tries to debunk anything and everything to do with demonic molestation and satanic ritual abuse. … Ellis strives to correlate the vampire panics associated with the Highgate Vampire case with satanic child abuse panics in Britain and America, particularly ‘the appalling cases at Rochdale and the Orkney Islands.’ One might be forgiven for thinking that he is somewhat out on a limb. … Ellis is willing to employ a discredited publicity-seeker in his mission. … His only other resource was an array of press cuttings [selected and provided by Farrant], many of them flawed and some followed by retractions and amendments that he failed to take into account. Again, the source of much of the contentious reporting in the popular press at the time was Farrant himself. To this person Ellis gives ‘more emphasis than the others as his actions were demonstrably more central to events’.”[3] Having neither met nor consulted me prior to his article’s publication, Ellis conceded in correspondence on 22 February 1996: “Since my piece appeared in Folklore I have received several packets of material correcting my account.” Amazingly, he did not enlist my help at this point.
One of many misleading statements in the Folklore article (subsequently reproduced by Jacqueline Simpson in a book of her own) is that Farrant and I were once “rival members” of the British Occult Society. This false allegation was expurgated by Ellis from Raising the Devil. Likewise, Simpson was obliged to remove it when she came to publish the paperback edition of The Lore of the Land.
When I first encountered him in early 1970, Farrant was residing in a coal cellar. This was the setting where I interviewed him following his letter published in a local newspaper on 6 February 1970. The letter (reproduced in its entirety by Ellis on page 219) is revealing. Farrant claims that he had thrice witnessed “a ghost-like figure inside the gates” at Highgate Cemetery in the preceding weeks, ending with the admission that he had “no knowledge in this field” - the field in question being psychic investigation. Yet, incredibly, on page 217, Ellis introduces Farrant, circa 1970, as a “psychic investigator.”
In June 1974, Farrant was convicted of stealing from a hospital, illegal possession of a handgun and ammunition, malicious vandalism to tombs, breaking and entry into a mausoleum, offering (by means of black magic) indignities to remains of the dead, and threatening police witnesses with voodoo dolls transfixed with pins and accompanying menacing poems. Except for the verdicts on Farrant’s tomb vandalism and his sending of voodoo dolls, Ellis describes the remainder of the aforementioned convictions as “minor offences.”[4] What outrage needs to be committed by Farrant to qualify as a serious offence? Judge Michael Argyle commented at the conclusion to Farrant’s trials: “Any interference with a corpse during black magic rituals could properly be regarded as a great scandal and a disgrace to religion, decency and morality.” Ellis relegates such interference to the “minor” category. He presents Farrant as a “psychic investigator” who “continues to receive and investigate accounts of supernatural phenomena” and then bleats on about Farrant’s rights being “infringed because he had not been able to practice Wicca in jail”[5] Farrant’s “right” to summon a satanic force during a depraved ritual in Highgate Cemetery, as described by the man himself in New Witchcraft, finds Ellis looking askance. Instead we read: “While the media were increasingly billing him as a black magician, Farrant was not deterred from continuing his occult investigations. By December he had agreed to help John Pope.”[6] Conveniently omitted is the fact that John Pope was at that time the head of the United Temples of Satan and in 1973 (when he formed an alliance with Farrant) was also under suspicion for occasioning ritual abuse. He was later convicted of indecent assault on the boy in question. We must not forget, of course, what Ellis wrote in his own book’s Acknowledgements: “Some of my close professional friends are in fact participants in the Neo-Pagan movement, and I respect both their beliefs and the actions they have taken based on them.”[7] Not much respect was shown, however, toward a fellow Christian.
Ellis goes along with pretty much everything he was told by Farrant. Consequently readers are given the impression that Farrant “returned to Highgate Cemetery in 1969” to continue his supposed investigations when he “decided to spend a night in Highgate [Cemetery], choosing December 21, 1969, the winter solstice … and he saw ‘two eyes meeting my gaze at the top of the shape … [which] were not human,’.”[8] Ellis’ source is Farrant’s latter-day 1991 pamphlet - Beyond the Highgate Vampire.
On the next page of Raising the Devil, he reproduces Farrant’s first published letter to the Hampstead & Highgate Express, 6 February 1970, where we discover that Farrant states he saw the “ghost-like figure” inside the cemetery gates for the very first time on 24 December 1969. Ellis ignores this anomaly. Moreover, Farrant’s letter makes it clear that, far from deciding to spend the night in the graveyard, all three occurrences, including his first alleged sighting, took place on nights when he “walk[ed] home past the gates of Highgate Cemetery.” Many had seen the phenomenon, of course, and this is how Farrant himself learned about it, as confirmed by what he told the police. In an official and signed statement, Farrant told police that he heard the vampire rises out of its grave and wanders about the cemetery on the look-out for human beings on whose blood it thrives. This was reported by the Evening Standard, 18 August 1970.
Having mentioned correspondence in the Hampstead & Highgate Express for 27 February 1970, he refers to the “next weekly issue [that] featured Manchester’s warnings under the wry headline ‘Does a wampyr walk in Highgate?’.”[9] The famous headline was published on 27 February 1970; the same day, not the following week.
Ellis then attributes the infamous “King Vampire from Wallachia” remark to me and muddles this with a “castle,” despite having been informed by my 1996 report, 1997 book, and correspondence that this was a journalistic embellishment which did not originate with me. I had already addressed his article: “The source this time is a press cutting where a statement was slightly misquoted, plus a travesty of what is written in The Highgate Vampire. For ‘fine house in London’s West End’ read Ashurst House which once stood at the western end of the site now occupied by Highgate Cemetery. I did not suggest that Ashurst House became, or previously had been, a castle. The castle Ellis is referring to existed many centuries earlier and had nothing to do with the contagion. ... What I actually state, and have always stated, is that Ashurst House was sold and leased to a succession of tenants of whom one was a mysterious gentleman from the Continent who arrived in the wake of the vampire epidemic that had its origins in south-east Europe. This does not have quite the same sensationalist impact as ‘King Vampire from Wallachia,’ which is the Draculesque adornment preferred both by Ellis and the journalist responsible for the front page press report.”[10]
“To be sure,” Ellis reports using old newspapers as his source, “his theory was at first not taken seriously. … Even [the Reverend Neil-Smith] called Manchester’s vampire theory ‘a novelistic embellishment’.”[11] Three years earlier I had published: “Then we come to the Reverend Christopher Neil-Smith, the late vicar of St Saviour’s Church, Hampstead. … In fact, Neil-Smith was originally quoted as saying: ‘I believe the whole idea of vampires is probably a novelistic embellishment.’ However, within a very short space of time the same priest claimed to have confronted and exorcised several vampires. Interviewed by Daniel Farsons, Reverend Neil-Smith accepted ‘that there is such a thing as vampirism,’ as recorded in the book Mysterious Monsters (1978) and elsewhere. Ellis makes no mention of these quotes which far outnumber the single occasion when the priest appeared to entertain some doubt on the issue; assuming, that is, he was not misquoted by the newspaper reporter in 1970.”[12] This is the same priest who sought to exorcise people of Farrant’s evil.
The claim on page 222 that the early weeks in 1970 “were dominated by an escalating rivalry between Farrant and Manchester” is also untrue. I barely knew Farrant at the time and he played no part in the investigation at Highgate. On the same page the following error is found: “The programme also aired a series of ghost stories from a group of young neighbourhood children, one of whom asserted, ‘I actually saw its face and it looked like it had been dead for a long time’.” This is not the case. The Today programme on Thames Television, 13 March 1970, reveals it to be Farrant, not any of the children, who uttered the words “I actually saw its face and it looked like it had been dead for a long time.”
When Ellis refers to me it is someone “who claimed to have been present … etc.”[13] Farrant, however, is taken at his word by Ellis who invariably presents the charlatan absent of the aspersion that he was “claiming” to be somewhere, or “claiming” to be how he might describe himself. I suffer the misfortune of “claiming ordination”[14] while Farrant is “the head of the reorganized British Psychic and Occult Society.”[15] Ellis claims an awful lot. If he were writing for a sensationalist tabloid newspaper it would be regrettable, but when publishing what he terms a “scholarly book” it is untenable. He states what he does without any balancing comment whatsoever. Ellis, who was not present, presumes that “many of the vampire-hunters in Highgate took the event as a lark.”[16] In fact, the mass vampire hunt on the night of 13 March 1970, involving more than a hundred people, manifested precisely because so many people had heard about the reports and taken them extremely seriously indeed. Ellis presumes that Farrant’s version of events is somehow reliable. Thus virtually everything we learn about Highgate and Farrant is from Farrant himself.
When Farrant was arrested in August 1970 by police searching for diabolists and was made to appear at a magistrate’s court, Ellis claims he was “exonerated” when he got off on a technicality. Charged with being in an enclosed area for an unlawful purpose, his defence solicitor successfully argued that, in the strict sense of the wording, Highgate Cemetery is not an enclosed area. What Ellis does not tell his readers is that Farrant, when first charged by the police, pleaded guilty before later changing his plea to one of not guilty. It was after his release that Farrant admitted he had been in contact with Satanists. He soon afterwards started to evince a form of theatrical Satanism himself as we find in the article in New Witchcraft and also confirmed by Dr J Gordon Melton in his coverage of the Highgate Vampire. Farrant in recorded interviews admits to worshipping Lucifer, engaging in animal sacrifices, raising demons and putting curses on people. None of this will be discovered within the pages of Raising the Devil.
Ellis speaks of Farrant’s “supporters,” but Farrant had no support. He was a lone publicity-seeker who duped gullible individuals into posing for photographs that invariably ended up in the Sunday tabloids or magazines such as New Witchcraft. This much can be deduced from the press coverage at the time. Ellis is biased towards Farrant’s whitewash without any critical regard for the facts. Consequently, when Ellis refers to Farrant’s collaboration with “an Evening News reporter … in October 1970”[17] it bears no similarity to the actual report, much less does it mention that this ludicrous outing was headlined as a “midnight date with Highgate’s Vampire.” Barrie Simmons was the journalist in question and his five column feature, complete with a half-page of photographs, was nothing more than a publicity-seeking, albeit amateur, vampire hunting enterprise. “Clutched under his arm, in a Sainsbury’s carrier bag,” wrote Simmons, “[Farrant] held the tools of his trade. There was the cross made out of two bits of wood tied together with a shoelace and a stake to plunge through the heart of the beast.”[18] No mention of this is made by Ellis, needless to say. For him Farrant’s revisionism takes precedence. Thus we read that “they surveyed the damage done: graves opened, skulls stolen, vaults defaced with strange scrawls.”[19] What was actually important to Simmons was Farrant’s theatrical stalking of the vampire. Not so in Ellis’ version. There are no stakes, no cross made out of two bits of wood and a shoelace. Indeed, no vampire hunting! In his previous paragraph, dealing with the August arrest and court appearance, Ellis reproduces Farrant’s latter-day falsehood that he never went vampire hunting with a cross and a stake. This had all “been fabricated by the police” we are required to believe, and he then reproduces Farrant’s disingenuous claim that he was “using the ‘stake’ with string attached to cast a magic circle for the ritual.”[20] Despite the BBC, 15 October 1970, television transmission clearly showing Farrant in Highgate Cemetery with a sharpened stake in his hand, wearing a large cross around his neck, and stalking the Highgate Vampire; despite having seen photographs of Farrant wielding a wooden stake and crucifix, Ellis avoids any mention of Barrie Simmons’ midnight stalking of the vampire with Farrant which is what the article is really about. Instead readers of Raising the Devil are given a misleading impression in which Farrant and the Evening News reporter are merely “surveying” damage in Highgate Cemetery.
It would be almost amusing, were it not so serious, to see how easily someone as uneducated as Farrant can pull the wool over a professor’s eyes, over and over again. Ellis describes the “evidence that black witches had broken into a mausoleum”[21] as being the result of Farrant’s “investigating.” Yet this same evidence was used at the Old Bailey to convict Farrant of tomb vandalism. Detail of this kind Ellis overlooks. He quotes Farrant’s unsubstantiated claim: “I know who was responsible for the desecration.”[22] If Farrant knows who is responsible for the tomb vandalism for which he was found guilty, why on earth has he not identified them? The answer is obvious, but readers of Ellis’ book will not find this question so much as raised. Only Farrant’s counterfeit version is told, not the court reports that led to guilty verdicts. Ellis is selective. He hears only what he wants to hear; only what fits his biased agenda.
“After [June 1974], the Highgate affair disappeared from public comment for some time,”[23] Ellis erroneously claims. He seems to believe that the “Highgate affair” revolved around Farrant's shenanigans and proceeds to proffer Farrant’s perverse version of what was described in the sensational press as a “magical duel” in 1973. Ellis writes: “Shortly before the event, a tabloid press article muddied the water by claiming that both Manchester and Farrant intended to slaughter a cat in front of an assembly of naked witches.”[24] Ellis does not identify the newspaper in his text, but this is what the Sunday Mirror, 8 April 1973, reported alongside a photograph of Farrant and a nude girl: “The bizarre ceremony will involve naked witches, demon-raisings and the slaughter of a cat.” I am quoted, saying: “My opponent intends to raise a demon to destroy me by killing a cat - I will be relying solely on divine power.” Farrant insisted: “Blood must be spilled, but the cat will be anaesthetised.” The Sun newspaper, 23 November 1972, had earlier quoted me stating that Farrant’s boasts ought to be put to the test: “The quickest way to destroy the credibility of a witch trying to earn a reputation for himself is to challenge his magical ability before objective observers.” Yet unlike the print media, who did invite versions from both sides, no balancing comment was sought from me by Ellis. I told what actually happened in a work he refers to in his text - a book he also chose to completely ignore. The notorious posters advertising the “duel” were traced at the time to Farrant who had engaged a small printing company used by him on earlier occasions. Ellis repeats Farrant’s falsehood to imply that I was responsible for these posters. Yet even Brian Netscher, editor of New Witchcraft, revealed in his magazine’s first issue: “As to the ‘test of powers’ challenge, it is a matter of public record that Mr Farrant not only accepted it but publicised it widely in the national press and by means of a rather crudely-made poster.” I wrote in From Satan To Christ (1988): “There was no sign of Farrant. He had been fearlessly called to account and, like so many others who use witchcraft to instil dread, could not fulfill the least of his claims when the day of reckoning arrived. … Farrant’s excuse was that he would have been lynched by the crowd of onlookers whose arrival was entirely due to the publicity he had created in the preceding weeks.”
________________________
[1] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, pxii).
[2] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p282).
[3] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p68).
[4] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p235).
[5] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p237).
[6] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p233).
[7] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, pxii).
[8] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p218).
[9] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p221).
[10] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p103).
[11] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p222).
[12] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p72).
[13] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p223).
[14] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p238).
[15] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p237).
[16] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p223).
[17] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[18] “Midnight Date With Highgate’s Vampire” by Barrie Simmons (Evening News, 16 October 1970).
[19] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[20] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[21] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p227).
[22] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p227).
[23] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p228).
[24] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p231).
Author: Bill Ellis Published in 2000
Critique by the Right Rev'd Seán Manchester
Chief among those who disseminated misinformation in the new century are Bill Ellis of the International Society for Contemporary Legend Research and Jacqueline Simpson of the Folklore Society. Ellis met Farrant. Simpson did not, but relied on Ellis as her source. Neither Ellis nor Simpson met me, but we did exchange correspondence. I offered recorded interviews from the 1970s which include Farrant discussing his early claims on television and in private. Ellis showed no interest in this material, but I did forward the interviews on CD to Simpson who acknowledged their receipt.
Chapter eight of Raising the Devil is titled “The Highgate Cemetery Vampire Hunt” and is based on what Ellis gleaned from Farrant when he met him in July 1992, interpolated by Ellis’ own scepticism. The chapter began its life as an article published in 1993 by the Folklore Society based at University College London in the UK. My response was offered to University College London in the form of an academic paper. The Folkore Society was uninterested in the rebuttal, some of which would later be absorbed within the pages of The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook.
Ellis describes himself as “a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America” and, moreover, someone “who has taken leadership positions and on occasion taught adult Sunday school and led services.”[1] Notwithstanding this claim, when I contacted the ELCA they informed me that they had no knowledge of Bill Ellis and “cannot confirm whether he is a member of the ELCA or one of the other Lutheran bodies.” The “Evangelical Lutheran” Ellis defines exorcism as “a means of temporarily inducing an alternative personality … beneficial to some persons for whom conventional psychological or psychiatric therapy fails.”[2] For me, at whom he is more than willing to cast an aspersion, exorcism is the act of casting out demons (Mark 16: 17). It is not alternative therapy for failed psychology. Ellis is nonetheless an associate professor of Anglo-American Studies at Pennsylvania State University, USA. He received his PhD in English from Ohio State University in 1978. In that long-lost era, Ellis says students were told not to worry about the job market; so nor did he. He wrote his dissertation on the image of the mother in country music, drawing on Northrop Frye's theory of archetypes. It would take him six years to find a tenure-track job. Meanwhile, he taught English as an adjunct. He found work preparing the annotations to editions of Nathaniel Hawthorne's letters and notebooks, which gave him some credentials as a specialist in American literature. In 1984 he moved to Pennsylvania State's small branch campus in Hazleton, where, at the age of thirty-four, Ellis finally made the transition to a regular appointment. It was not a position designed for a scholar. Most of the 1,200 students are freshmen and sophomores.
Ellis usually teaches two or three composition courses each semester. That means grading roughly one thousand pages of student writing per course. It is rare that he gets to offer an upper-division class, and rarer still that the topic is folklore, his primary field of scholarly interest. As for conducting a graduate seminar, the possibility never comes up because the campus has no graduate programmes. “Bill has never been part of the mainstream of folklore scholarship,” says Gary Alan Fine, a professor of sociology at Northwestern University; adding: “His work has always been quirky.”
Quirky or not, Ellis felt his folkloric background qualified him to comment at length on the Highgate Vampire case. His 1993 Folklore article prompted my following observation: “Reading like popular journalism of the most squalid kind, it loses no time in becoming a polemic wherein the personal prejudices and opinions held by Ellis dominate. A dry, impartial ‘academic report’ it is not. His cynicism underscores every line as he tries to debunk anything and everything to do with demonic molestation and satanic ritual abuse. … Ellis strives to correlate the vampire panics associated with the Highgate Vampire case with satanic child abuse panics in Britain and America, particularly ‘the appalling cases at Rochdale and the Orkney Islands.’ One might be forgiven for thinking that he is somewhat out on a limb. … Ellis is willing to employ a discredited publicity-seeker in his mission. … His only other resource was an array of press cuttings [selected and provided by Farrant], many of them flawed and some followed by retractions and amendments that he failed to take into account. Again, the source of much of the contentious reporting in the popular press at the time was Farrant himself. To this person Ellis gives ‘more emphasis than the others as his actions were demonstrably more central to events’.”[3] Having neither met nor consulted me prior to his article’s publication, Ellis conceded in correspondence on 22 February 1996: “Since my piece appeared in Folklore I have received several packets of material correcting my account.” Amazingly, he did not enlist my help at this point.
One of many misleading statements in the Folklore article (subsequently reproduced by Jacqueline Simpson in a book of her own) is that Farrant and I were once “rival members” of the British Occult Society. This false allegation was expurgated by Ellis from Raising the Devil. Likewise, Simpson was obliged to remove it when she came to publish the paperback edition of The Lore of the Land.
When I first encountered him in early 1970, Farrant was residing in a coal cellar. This was the setting where I interviewed him following his letter published in a local newspaper on 6 February 1970. The letter (reproduced in its entirety by Ellis on page 219) is revealing. Farrant claims that he had thrice witnessed “a ghost-like figure inside the gates” at Highgate Cemetery in the preceding weeks, ending with the admission that he had “no knowledge in this field” - the field in question being psychic investigation. Yet, incredibly, on page 217, Ellis introduces Farrant, circa 1970, as a “psychic investigator.”
In June 1974, Farrant was convicted of stealing from a hospital, illegal possession of a handgun and ammunition, malicious vandalism to tombs, breaking and entry into a mausoleum, offering (by means of black magic) indignities to remains of the dead, and threatening police witnesses with voodoo dolls transfixed with pins and accompanying menacing poems. Except for the verdicts on Farrant’s tomb vandalism and his sending of voodoo dolls, Ellis describes the remainder of the aforementioned convictions as “minor offences.”[4] What outrage needs to be committed by Farrant to qualify as a serious offence? Judge Michael Argyle commented at the conclusion to Farrant’s trials: “Any interference with a corpse during black magic rituals could properly be regarded as a great scandal and a disgrace to religion, decency and morality.” Ellis relegates such interference to the “minor” category. He presents Farrant as a “psychic investigator” who “continues to receive and investigate accounts of supernatural phenomena” and then bleats on about Farrant’s rights being “infringed because he had not been able to practice Wicca in jail”[5] Farrant’s “right” to summon a satanic force during a depraved ritual in Highgate Cemetery, as described by the man himself in New Witchcraft, finds Ellis looking askance. Instead we read: “While the media were increasingly billing him as a black magician, Farrant was not deterred from continuing his occult investigations. By December he had agreed to help John Pope.”[6] Conveniently omitted is the fact that John Pope was at that time the head of the United Temples of Satan and in 1973 (when he formed an alliance with Farrant) was also under suspicion for occasioning ritual abuse. He was later convicted of indecent assault on the boy in question. We must not forget, of course, what Ellis wrote in his own book’s Acknowledgements: “Some of my close professional friends are in fact participants in the Neo-Pagan movement, and I respect both their beliefs and the actions they have taken based on them.”[7] Not much respect was shown, however, toward a fellow Christian.
Ellis goes along with pretty much everything he was told by Farrant. Consequently readers are given the impression that Farrant “returned to Highgate Cemetery in 1969” to continue his supposed investigations when he “decided to spend a night in Highgate [Cemetery], choosing December 21, 1969, the winter solstice … and he saw ‘two eyes meeting my gaze at the top of the shape … [which] were not human,’.”[8] Ellis’ source is Farrant’s latter-day 1991 pamphlet - Beyond the Highgate Vampire.
On the next page of Raising the Devil, he reproduces Farrant’s first published letter to the Hampstead & Highgate Express, 6 February 1970, where we discover that Farrant states he saw the “ghost-like figure” inside the cemetery gates for the very first time on 24 December 1969. Ellis ignores this anomaly. Moreover, Farrant’s letter makes it clear that, far from deciding to spend the night in the graveyard, all three occurrences, including his first alleged sighting, took place on nights when he “walk[ed] home past the gates of Highgate Cemetery.” Many had seen the phenomenon, of course, and this is how Farrant himself learned about it, as confirmed by what he told the police. In an official and signed statement, Farrant told police that he heard the vampire rises out of its grave and wanders about the cemetery on the look-out for human beings on whose blood it thrives. This was reported by the Evening Standard, 18 August 1970.
Having mentioned correspondence in the Hampstead & Highgate Express for 27 February 1970, he refers to the “next weekly issue [that] featured Manchester’s warnings under the wry headline ‘Does a wampyr walk in Highgate?’.”[9] The famous headline was published on 27 February 1970; the same day, not the following week.
Ellis then attributes the infamous “King Vampire from Wallachia” remark to me and muddles this with a “castle,” despite having been informed by my 1996 report, 1997 book, and correspondence that this was a journalistic embellishment which did not originate with me. I had already addressed his article: “The source this time is a press cutting where a statement was slightly misquoted, plus a travesty of what is written in The Highgate Vampire. For ‘fine house in London’s West End’ read Ashurst House which once stood at the western end of the site now occupied by Highgate Cemetery. I did not suggest that Ashurst House became, or previously had been, a castle. The castle Ellis is referring to existed many centuries earlier and had nothing to do with the contagion. ... What I actually state, and have always stated, is that Ashurst House was sold and leased to a succession of tenants of whom one was a mysterious gentleman from the Continent who arrived in the wake of the vampire epidemic that had its origins in south-east Europe. This does not have quite the same sensationalist impact as ‘King Vampire from Wallachia,’ which is the Draculesque adornment preferred both by Ellis and the journalist responsible for the front page press report.”[10]
“To be sure,” Ellis reports using old newspapers as his source, “his theory was at first not taken seriously. … Even [the Reverend Neil-Smith] called Manchester’s vampire theory ‘a novelistic embellishment’.”[11] Three years earlier I had published: “Then we come to the Reverend Christopher Neil-Smith, the late vicar of St Saviour’s Church, Hampstead. … In fact, Neil-Smith was originally quoted as saying: ‘I believe the whole idea of vampires is probably a novelistic embellishment.’ However, within a very short space of time the same priest claimed to have confronted and exorcised several vampires. Interviewed by Daniel Farsons, Reverend Neil-Smith accepted ‘that there is such a thing as vampirism,’ as recorded in the book Mysterious Monsters (1978) and elsewhere. Ellis makes no mention of these quotes which far outnumber the single occasion when the priest appeared to entertain some doubt on the issue; assuming, that is, he was not misquoted by the newspaper reporter in 1970.”[12] This is the same priest who sought to exorcise people of Farrant’s evil.
The claim on page 222 that the early weeks in 1970 “were dominated by an escalating rivalry between Farrant and Manchester” is also untrue. I barely knew Farrant at the time and he played no part in the investigation at Highgate. On the same page the following error is found: “The programme also aired a series of ghost stories from a group of young neighbourhood children, one of whom asserted, ‘I actually saw its face and it looked like it had been dead for a long time’.” This is not the case. The Today programme on Thames Television, 13 March 1970, reveals it to be Farrant, not any of the children, who uttered the words “I actually saw its face and it looked like it had been dead for a long time.”
When Ellis refers to me it is someone “who claimed to have been present … etc.”[13] Farrant, however, is taken at his word by Ellis who invariably presents the charlatan absent of the aspersion that he was “claiming” to be somewhere, or “claiming” to be how he might describe himself. I suffer the misfortune of “claiming ordination”[14] while Farrant is “the head of the reorganized British Psychic and Occult Society.”[15] Ellis claims an awful lot. If he were writing for a sensationalist tabloid newspaper it would be regrettable, but when publishing what he terms a “scholarly book” it is untenable. He states what he does without any balancing comment whatsoever. Ellis, who was not present, presumes that “many of the vampire-hunters in Highgate took the event as a lark.”[16] In fact, the mass vampire hunt on the night of 13 March 1970, involving more than a hundred people, manifested precisely because so many people had heard about the reports and taken them extremely seriously indeed. Ellis presumes that Farrant’s version of events is somehow reliable. Thus virtually everything we learn about Highgate and Farrant is from Farrant himself.
When Farrant was arrested in August 1970 by police searching for diabolists and was made to appear at a magistrate’s court, Ellis claims he was “exonerated” when he got off on a technicality. Charged with being in an enclosed area for an unlawful purpose, his defence solicitor successfully argued that, in the strict sense of the wording, Highgate Cemetery is not an enclosed area. What Ellis does not tell his readers is that Farrant, when first charged by the police, pleaded guilty before later changing his plea to one of not guilty. It was after his release that Farrant admitted he had been in contact with Satanists. He soon afterwards started to evince a form of theatrical Satanism himself as we find in the article in New Witchcraft and also confirmed by Dr J Gordon Melton in his coverage of the Highgate Vampire. Farrant in recorded interviews admits to worshipping Lucifer, engaging in animal sacrifices, raising demons and putting curses on people. None of this will be discovered within the pages of Raising the Devil.
Ellis speaks of Farrant’s “supporters,” but Farrant had no support. He was a lone publicity-seeker who duped gullible individuals into posing for photographs that invariably ended up in the Sunday tabloids or magazines such as New Witchcraft. This much can be deduced from the press coverage at the time. Ellis is biased towards Farrant’s whitewash without any critical regard for the facts. Consequently, when Ellis refers to Farrant’s collaboration with “an Evening News reporter … in October 1970”[17] it bears no similarity to the actual report, much less does it mention that this ludicrous outing was headlined as a “midnight date with Highgate’s Vampire.” Barrie Simmons was the journalist in question and his five column feature, complete with a half-page of photographs, was nothing more than a publicity-seeking, albeit amateur, vampire hunting enterprise. “Clutched under his arm, in a Sainsbury’s carrier bag,” wrote Simmons, “[Farrant] held the tools of his trade. There was the cross made out of two bits of wood tied together with a shoelace and a stake to plunge through the heart of the beast.”[18] No mention of this is made by Ellis, needless to say. For him Farrant’s revisionism takes precedence. Thus we read that “they surveyed the damage done: graves opened, skulls stolen, vaults defaced with strange scrawls.”[19] What was actually important to Simmons was Farrant’s theatrical stalking of the vampire. Not so in Ellis’ version. There are no stakes, no cross made out of two bits of wood and a shoelace. Indeed, no vampire hunting! In his previous paragraph, dealing with the August arrest and court appearance, Ellis reproduces Farrant’s latter-day falsehood that he never went vampire hunting with a cross and a stake. This had all “been fabricated by the police” we are required to believe, and he then reproduces Farrant’s disingenuous claim that he was “using the ‘stake’ with string attached to cast a magic circle for the ritual.”[20] Despite the BBC, 15 October 1970, television transmission clearly showing Farrant in Highgate Cemetery with a sharpened stake in his hand, wearing a large cross around his neck, and stalking the Highgate Vampire; despite having seen photographs of Farrant wielding a wooden stake and crucifix, Ellis avoids any mention of Barrie Simmons’ midnight stalking of the vampire with Farrant which is what the article is really about. Instead readers of Raising the Devil are given a misleading impression in which Farrant and the Evening News reporter are merely “surveying” damage in Highgate Cemetery.
It would be almost amusing, were it not so serious, to see how easily someone as uneducated as Farrant can pull the wool over a professor’s eyes, over and over again. Ellis describes the “evidence that black witches had broken into a mausoleum”[21] as being the result of Farrant’s “investigating.” Yet this same evidence was used at the Old Bailey to convict Farrant of tomb vandalism. Detail of this kind Ellis overlooks. He quotes Farrant’s unsubstantiated claim: “I know who was responsible for the desecration.”[22] If Farrant knows who is responsible for the tomb vandalism for which he was found guilty, why on earth has he not identified them? The answer is obvious, but readers of Ellis’ book will not find this question so much as raised. Only Farrant’s counterfeit version is told, not the court reports that led to guilty verdicts. Ellis is selective. He hears only what he wants to hear; only what fits his biased agenda.
“After [June 1974], the Highgate affair disappeared from public comment for some time,”[23] Ellis erroneously claims. He seems to believe that the “Highgate affair” revolved around Farrant's shenanigans and proceeds to proffer Farrant’s perverse version of what was described in the sensational press as a “magical duel” in 1973. Ellis writes: “Shortly before the event, a tabloid press article muddied the water by claiming that both Manchester and Farrant intended to slaughter a cat in front of an assembly of naked witches.”[24] Ellis does not identify the newspaper in his text, but this is what the Sunday Mirror, 8 April 1973, reported alongside a photograph of Farrant and a nude girl: “The bizarre ceremony will involve naked witches, demon-raisings and the slaughter of a cat.” I am quoted, saying: “My opponent intends to raise a demon to destroy me by killing a cat - I will be relying solely on divine power.” Farrant insisted: “Blood must be spilled, but the cat will be anaesthetised.” The Sun newspaper, 23 November 1972, had earlier quoted me stating that Farrant’s boasts ought to be put to the test: “The quickest way to destroy the credibility of a witch trying to earn a reputation for himself is to challenge his magical ability before objective observers.” Yet unlike the print media, who did invite versions from both sides, no balancing comment was sought from me by Ellis. I told what actually happened in a work he refers to in his text - a book he also chose to completely ignore. The notorious posters advertising the “duel” were traced at the time to Farrant who had engaged a small printing company used by him on earlier occasions. Ellis repeats Farrant’s falsehood to imply that I was responsible for these posters. Yet even Brian Netscher, editor of New Witchcraft, revealed in his magazine’s first issue: “As to the ‘test of powers’ challenge, it is a matter of public record that Mr Farrant not only accepted it but publicised it widely in the national press and by means of a rather crudely-made poster.” I wrote in From Satan To Christ (1988): “There was no sign of Farrant. He had been fearlessly called to account and, like so many others who use witchcraft to instil dread, could not fulfill the least of his claims when the day of reckoning arrived. … Farrant’s excuse was that he would have been lynched by the crowd of onlookers whose arrival was entirely due to the publicity he had created in the preceding weeks.”
________________________
[1] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, pxii).
[2] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p282).
[3] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p68).
[4] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p235).
[5] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p237).
[6] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p233).
[7] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, pxii).
[8] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p218).
[9] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p221).
[10] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p103).
[11] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p222).
[12] The Vampire Hunter’s Handbook (Gothic Press, 1997, p72).
[13] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p223).
[14] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p238).
[15] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p237).
[16] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p223).
[17] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[18] “Midnight Date With Highgate’s Vampire” by Barrie Simmons (Evening News, 16 October 1970).
[19] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[20] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p224).
[21] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p227).
[22] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p227).
[23] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p228).
[24] Raising the Devil by Bill Ellis (University Press of Kentucky, 2000, p231).