CANNABIS CULTURE – Jerry and Julie Brown have said of their own work, “we believe that The Psychedelic Gospels should be studied with the same rigor applied to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Gnostic Gospels”, which is considerable self praise. Having read their book, I think Psychedelic Trope would have been a more fitting title.
side bar – Fungi-Pareidola: The tendency to see mushrooms in various objects, from parasols, folds in cloth, painted trees to domed buildings, and then interpret this as a ‘secret message’ regarding the ‘secret use’ of psychoactive mushrooms, with no other evidence to back it up. This condition is widespread in entheogenic culture, particularly among the ‘discipuli Allegrae’ a term coined by Tom Hatsis, for the various researchers duped by the questionable etymological interpretations of John Allegro.
Jerry Brown is an an anthropologist and ethnomycologist and served as founding professor of anthropology at Florida International University (FIU) in Miami, his co-auhtor and wife, Julie Brown is described on their site as “an integrative psychotherapist, who conducts research on the role of sacred plants in religion.” One would hope with such credential that The Psychedelic Gospels would be a much needed, well referenced and researched contribution to the emerging field of entheogenic history, but sadly those hopes would soon be seen as amiss. Rather than the sort of deep dive into history one might have hoped for from a professor of anthropology, this book is more of a sensationalist travelogue adventure story, that one might expect from Dan Brown, only more cheesy and contrived.
This was a criticism that I tossed recently at The Immortality Key, and after Graham Hancock asked if he could run my review of that book on his site (he wrote the forward for it) he later told me he would be running another critical review of it from Professor Brown as well. The author of The Immortality Key was given more than a month to respond to our reviews, but in the end, declined.
Although I had some casual connection with Jerry on social media, prior to this, I had never read his book. I had however, read a fair bit on the subject of mushrooms and Christianity, and I was already well familiar with the works of his predecessors in this realm, such as Clark Heinrich, Jan (pronounced ‘yawn’ with good reason) Irvin, John Allegro, John Rush and others, and quite frankly I am more than skeptical of their work.
The Christian Mushroom theory has long been a thorn in my side. In fact, a major point of disagreement and contention with the great Jack Herer, was over his own lack of interest in the Hebrew ‘kaneh bosm’ references that have been identified as cannabis, and his focus on Allegro’s book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross, that claimed Jesus was a mushroom. There is actually an unpublished manuscript that Jack worked on with various authors, like the late James Arthur, Yawn Irvin and others about mushrooms and Christianity. Jack and I feuded endlessly over this topic. A few years ago, I was approached with a request to look at the manuscript and perhaps finish it, but I declined with the comment that I thought the best thing for Jack’s legacy was that it never see the light of day as a published book.
Considering this situation, I will be addressing my criticisms slightly wider than the Brown’s book from time to time, and will slightly digress into discussions of the work of authors that the Browns build upon, such as Allegro, and other related topics, occasionally.
Although this is my first article on claims about mushrooms in Christian art, its not my first critical review of some of the claims made by those suffering from Fungi-Pareidola. I have given detailed criticism of R Gordon Wasson’s theory that the Vedic Soma was the fly agaric mushroom, as well as the preposterous claims of Mike Crowley about magic mushrooms in Buddhism, which, based on art and iconography interpretations in Buddhist art, are in many ways similar to those of the Brown’s book with its images in Christian art interpreted likewise as magic mushrooms.
However, regardless of these intellectual criticisms, I want to be clear, I have had many powerful personal experiences on magic mushrooms, and I think there is legitimate historical evidence of their use in South America, North America, Russia, and elsewhere. It is the simplistic nature of the research in these particular studies I am critical of, not the power of the mushroom.
After Graham Hancock published mine and Jerry Brown’s reviews of The Immortality Key, and the author Brian Muraresku failed to respond to our criticisms, Jerry, whose review although not detailed, was very clear on what he saw as a lack of academic rigour in regards to the book, was keen to get into a broadcasted debate against Muraresku, with me as his partner. As this was the case, inevitably I had to explain to Jerry that I was not a believer in the Sacred Mushrooms in Christian Art theory, that has become increasingly popular with the rise of interest in psychedelics in general.
As Prof. Brown describes himself “I am an anthropologist who studies religion”
Jerry suggested that we read each others books, feeling certain that his book would offer some convincing new information in this realm. As he had a career as a professor of anthropology, I happily obliged. However as soon as I started reading, I could see that so much of Professor Brown’s own criticism of The Immortality Key, would be better directed at his own book, which was a much, much, more poorly written mystery adventure travelogue. I want to be clear here, as much as I criticized The Immortality Key in my review, its a much better and more serious book than the Browns’ Psychedelic trope.
In regards to a serious study of entheogens in religion, I would estimate that if you took out all the tourist destinations, fine dining discussions and debates, from The Psychedelic Gospels, and whittled it down to the actual study of the historical role of entheogens, you would be left with about 20% of the book. I think this is a fair estimation, as the Brown’s 22 page article ‘Entheogens in Christian art: Wasson, Allegro, and the Psychedelic Gospels’ printed in a 2019 edition of the Journal of Psychedelic Studies, does just that, and boils it down to the main hypothesis presented in The Psychedelic Gospels, without the cheesy Dan Brown style narrative.
On the Cheese
Before delving into the historical suggestions and artistic interpretations of The Psychedelic Gospels, I think its worth looking at some of the cheesy and contrived conversations that make up the travelogue that dominates the narrative of the book, a sort of wine and dine Champignon Tour de France at times:
As I’ve learned only too well after years of marriage, a hungry Julie is a cranky Julie. Rather than waiting hours until dinner, we decided to stop for lunch and had a delicious smoked duck salad at a restaurant across the street from the central train station in Toulouse.
When Paul checked us in, he announced that dinner would be ready in an hour. The garden behind our private cottage bordered on a rushing river and looked up at a majestic mountain. “See, I told you it would be beautiful,” Julie reminded me as we drank in the scenery.
An English cook in France—this could be bad, I thought. Little did I know we had just arrived in gourmand heaven. As Julie and I entered the dining room, Paul introduced us to a Belgian couple who had been hiking the Pyrenees for a month, mainly camping but sometimes check- ing in to B&Bs, and an ex-pat Danish couple who had come by for din- ner. On our first night at Aux Quatre Saison, we enjoyed a banquet that reminded me of the film Babette’s Feast. I am not a drinker, but on this magical night of gastronomic delight, I tried everything on the menu, including a sip (or two) of each wine. The highlights were blinis with smoked salmon and prawns, beef bourguignon with scalloped potatoes, and chocolate soufflé with crème.
Chef Paul Bridgestock proudly announced each course as he carried it out of the hot kitchen into the candlelit dining room—all the while regaling us with staccato bursts of ribald humor. Paul is tall, slender, and suave in a Hugh Grant sort of way. He sat at the head of the long wooden table, eating nothing, drinking constantly, talking up a storm. His wife, Val, sat at the other end, eating everything, saying nothing, with a serene smile on her lovely face.
‘Would you pass the Grey Poupon?’
Curiously, in my own four books on the role of entheogens in magick and religion, I have never found the occasion to discuss what I ate for dinner. So much of The Psychedelic Gospels is based on contrived dinner conversations, with fellow diners, waitresses, or tour guides, who conveniently fill the reader in on important historical points. I not only doubt these were recorded verbatim (with the Brown’s pulled out recording equipment and asking if the participants would mind) but I also doubt the validity of their claimed content or if they even happened.
Indeed, it is hard not to see the pages of dialogue from a waitress serving them lunch, only known as Simone, that fill in so much of the historical narration, as anything but contrived dialogue to tell a story.
“Why were the parchments so important to you?” Julie asked, more curious than ever.
“As a student of art history,” Simone answered, “I became very intrigued by their reference to Poussin and his painting Les Bergers de Arcadie, or, as you say, The Shepherds of Arcadia. This painting, which hangs in the Louvre, depicts a group of shepherds exploring a tomb that, according to the inscription, was possibly the burial place of Jesus. They say that Poussin painted this from an actual landscape nearby, that it is a depiction of a real tomb in the nearby village of Arques accurate down to the rendering of the mountains and skyline. Unfortunately, I could not visit the tomb because it was mysteriously demolished sometime during the 1980s, after the BBC documentaries on Rennes attracted hordes of curious visitors. So I turned my attention to other paintings by Poussin, including his interpretation of Autumn, which portrays two peasants carrying a bunch of giant blue grapes and huge golden apples. I thought per- haps that there could be some link to the ‘blue apples’ of the parchment.”
Hard to follow up on a character only known as Simone, for verification, but when other figures, whose full names and positions are given in life, there does seem to be some issues between what was said and what was written. Take the conflicting case of Professor Insley as described in The Psychedelic Gospels, in comparison to my correspondence:
Great Canterbury Psalter replica at Christ Church University in Canterbury. When I informed Insley about the presence of entheogenic mushrooms in the psalter, he was not at all surprised and acknowledged that such practices could, indeed, have been perpetuated by the clergy. However, he quickly added that, since the Catholic Church was far from omnipotent during the Middle Ages, it frequently had to accommodate the customs and beliefs of the “pagan royalty.”
“Professor Insley,” I asked pointedly, “what do you think about the silence of the art historians and theologians on these sacred psychoative images in the Great Canterbury Psalter? Or in Christian art in gen- eral, for that matter?”
“Well, in my view,” he replied, carefully choosing his words, “it’s not that they are purposely ignoring them, as some might think. Rather I believe that most art historians and theologians are simply not aware of them.”
“Really?” I said, feigning surprise, because I was curious what he would say next in support of this view.
“There’s no doubt in my mind,” Insley affirmed. “In fact, if you want definitive confirmation, I suggest you call Professor Nigel Morgan at Cambridge. He coauthored the commentary that Moleiro published with the psalter.”
“I called his office the other day, but he wasn’t in,” I replied.
“Well, I suggest you keep trying,” Insley said, underscoring the importance of Morgan’s opinion on the matter.
A few days later, I was finally able to reach Professor Morgan by phone. After introducing myself as an anthropologist and inquiring about the history of the Great Canterbury Psalter, I asked Morgan if he’d ever noticed the colorful mushroom shapes in the scenes from Genesis. A few moments of silence followed, which ended when Morgan asked if I would mind waiting while he consulted his copy of the psal- ter. When Morgan spoke again, his tone had changed from collegial to cold, as if the topic made him uncomfortable.
“Professor Brown,” Morgan said in a crisp British accent, “I haven’t the faintest idea what you are talking about. As a matter of fact, I wouldn’t know a mushroom if I saw one.” With that, he excused him- self and ended the conversation.
As I was having my doubts about the veracity of some of these correspondences, I contacted professor Insley directly to see what he recalled of this encounter:
Dear Chris,
Thanks for this. If memory serves (this was a conversation that happened in maybe 2007 or 2008?), I did say that there was plausible evidence for the effects of entheogenic mushrooms in some of our sources descriptions of events (I’m thinking primarily of ergot here). I’m not sure where the reference to ‘pagan royalty’ came from, and I wasn’t the keeper of the psalter replica at CCCU. When asked about mushrooms in the psalter, I deferred to Nigel Morgan on the issue, since he had been the scholar we invited to CCCU when we ‘inaugurated’ our replica and is an undoubted authority on medieval illuminated manuscripts, which I’m not, alas. The rest of the conversation does not particularly match my memory of the event – which was basically to advise Brown to talk to Nigel directly.
Does that help?
Best
Charles
—————————— Prof. Insley, Thanks for getting back to me and it does help. In regards to your comment ” I did say that there was plausible evidence for the effects of entheogenic mushrooms in some of our sources descriptions of events (I’m thinking primarily of ergot here)” Are your referring to events surrounding the creation of the psalter or in that time period, or biblical accounts? All the best Chris. ——————–Hi Chris,
More generally in the early middle ages, and not specifically in connection wuth the psalter. Best CharlesWhat is interesting here is, not only the different views of the exchange, but that Insley did not refer to the classic toad stool sort of mushroom of the Brown’s hypothesis, but instead was hypothesizing some sort of ergot preparation as suggested in The Immortality Key, which Jerry was so dismissive of. (I’m dismissive of both ideas, but i would like to see what has garnered professor Insley’s interest in that area).
A Shaky Foundation: Wasson and Allegro
As with a lot of current books that suggest a role for psychedelic mushrooms in history, the Brown’s build on the shaky ground of Wasson and Allegro.
The Brown’s account of Soma, is superficial at best.
[Wasson]…insisted that any solution must address all of the Rigveda’s enigmas, which Soma [his book]did eloquently. In fact, Wasson’s psychoactive mushroom theory solved the most bizarre puzzle of all. According to Hindu scripture, in addition to consuming Soma directly by either eating the mushroom or drinking its juice, a devotee could ingest Soma indirectly by drinking the urine of a person who had already consumed Soma. In the Rigveda, both Indra, the supreme deity, and the priests are described as drinking Soma in and then pissing it out. One verse addresses Indra with these words: “Like a thirsty stag, come here to drink. Drink Soma, as much as you want. Pissing it out day by day, O generous one, You have assumed your most mighty force.”
By proposing Amanita muscaria, Wasson provided a compel- ling solution to the urine enigma as well. In time, pharmacological analysis revealed that muscimole and ibotenic acid (which converts to muscimole)—the psychoactive agents in the fly agaric—rapidly pass out through the urine, largely unmetabolized and still potent after ingestion.
There are no references to the drinking of urine in the Vedas, and Wasson was unable to produce one. Instead Wasson had to jump more than a thousand years forward in time. Wasson explained that a Hindu reference to urine drinking occurred in the much later text, written about a millennia or more after the Vedas, the Mahabharata, when the god Indra, disguised as an outcaste, gives the hero Uttanka, amrta (ambrosia), to drink in the form of urine, which is duly rejected.
In the… Mahabharata… there occurs one episode – an isolated episode of unknown lineage – that bears with startling clarity on our Second Form [i.e. Fly agaric enriched urine]. It was introduced into the text perhaps a thousand years after the fly-agaric had ceased to be used in the Soma sacrifice, and perhaps the editor did not know its meaning… (Wasson, 1970)
Take note here how Wasson rejected the whole 10th Mandala, which clearly describes soma as being both green and purple and having branches, and much of the Avesta, with the claim that by the time these had been composed the ‘real’ soma had been lost. Now here, to make a case for the ritual consumption of urine, he jumps forward centuries after those texts were written! The Browns, with nothing but enthusiasm, accept this unquestioningly and pass it on with a clear lack of understanding. For my thorough review of Wasson’s theory on the long lost Vedic sacrament, see my article The Mushroom Soma Theory: A Critical Analysis.
The Browns describe the controversial scholar John Allegro, best known for his 1970 book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross, as “a well known as an eminent philologist and the most controversial member of the scholarly team studying the Dead Sea Scrolls, most of which were written in Hebrew and Aramaic”.
There is no doubt that Allegro was at one time a respected scholar and philologist, but that all went out the window when he wrote The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross. Let me give you an example of some of Allegro’s philological work, in regards to a word that I have spent considerable time studying the origins of, ‘Cannabis’.
Allegro made etymological arguments suggesting that the Greek term ‘Kannabis’ somehow referred to a mushroom top, and ‘red hashish’ belladonna or nightshade! This caused him to miss the actual indications of cannabis use in the Old Testament narrative, now confirmed by archeological evidence. Here is a quote from Allegro on cannabis: The herb which gave them their name, khaslzish, “Hashish”, means in Arabic no more than “dried herbage”. If used of a particular drug it properly requires some qualification, like “Red Hashish”,. meaning Belladonna, Deadly Nightshade. The word Hashish alone has become attached to one particular form, Cannabis sativa, or Hemp, and the enervating drug made from its resin. But it is difficult to believe that the “pot”-smokers of today, the weary dotards who wander listlessly round our cities and universities, are the spiritual successors of those drug-crazed enthusiasts who, regardless of their safety, stormed castles and stole as assassins into the strongholds of their enemies. If their “Hashish” correctly interprets Cannabis then the latter must represent some more potent drug. The Greek word Kannabis may now be traced to the Sumerian element GAN, “mushroom top”, followed by the word which we saw earlier was part of the name of the New Testament Barnabas, and meant “red, speckled with white”, denoting, in other words, the colour of the Amanita muscaria. As well as the transfer of its name to the less powerful “Hashish”, it underwent a jumbling of its form to produce the Greek Panakës, a mysterious plant also called Asciepion (elsewhere used of the mushroom), which required atonement to the earth of various cereals when pulled up. It seems, therefore probable that the original Cannabis was the sacred fungus, and that the drug which stimulated the medieval Assassins to self—immolation was the same that brought the Zealots to their awful end on Masada a millenium earlier. Indeed, we may now seriously consider the possibility that the Assassin movement was but a resurgence of a cultic practice that was part of Islam from the beginning, and had its real origin thousands of years before that. It seems to be a pattern of religious movements based on the sacred fungus that long periods of relative calm and stagnation are interspersed with flashes of violent extremism which die away again after persecution, only to re—emerge in much later generations. In this, history is reflecting the action of the drug itself on its partakers. After hectic bouts of uncontrolled activity, the fungus-eater will collapse in a stupor from which only a resurgence of the stimulatory poison in his brain will arouse him’ (Allegro, 1970) Allegro never smoked marijuana, but his own observations of what he referred to as “the ‘pot’-smokers of today, the weary dotards who wander listlessly round our cities and universities”, caused him to discount any possible use of cannabis as a means of achieving spiritual ecstasy. In THE SACRED MUSHROOM AND THE CROSS, Allegro translated the Kaneh-Bosm reference in Exodus as aromatic cane when mentioning the holy unction of the Old Testament, even commenting how the anointing oil would have added to a “kind of intoxicating belief in self-omniscience”, but failed to make the rightful connection with cannabis. His legacy is a mistaken hypothesis about mushrooms as the sacrament of a desert people, and missing the etymological clues for cannabis, the use of which has now been confirmed by archeological evidence out of Arad Jerusalem, documenting its use in a Jewsih temple site from 800 BCE. Moreover, the general consensus is that the root word for ‘Cannabis’ originated in a Proto-Indo-European word “kanap” and from there spread through various later Indo-European family languages. No serious etymologist or linguist is currently suggesting anything close to Allegro’s interpretation. Even bigger issues arise when you look at Allegro’s linguistic case for Jesus being a mushroom, which, thankfully, the Brown’s did not endorse. To the Brown’s credit, they do not count on Allegro for his philological expertise, and they actually reject “Allegro’s radical interpretation of the Old and New Testaments, which concludes that the Jesus of the Gospels did not exist but was rather a metaphor, a code name, for the Amanita muscaria mushroom”. We admire Allegro for being one of the first academics to call attention to the fundamental role of entheogens in religion. Nevertheless, our theory differs from Allegro’s in three ways. First, while Allegro denies the existence of Jesus, we concur with those scholars of religious studies who believe that Jesus was a historical figure. Second, while Allegro bases his theory on the speculative interpretation of ancient languages, we base our theory on the plausible identification of entheogenic images. Third, while Allegro hopes that his writings will liberate people from the thrall of a false Christian orthodoxy, we hope that our discoveries will educate people about the history of psychoactive sacraments in Christianity. I am not clear here how they can both reject and embrace Allegro in this context, denying his theory that Jesus was a mushroom, but then embracing him as “one of the first academics to call attention to the fundamental role of entheogens in religion” when that theory was the basis for that identification; or how their “plausible identification of entheogenic images” are any better than Allegro’s “speculative interpretation of ancient languages”? Regardless of this paradox, the Brown’s can not be deemed ‘discipuli Allegrae‘. However, when it comes to Allegro’s interpretation of the Plaincourault fresco’s forbidden tree, the shared Fungi-Pareidola is fully embraced, and as Wasson rejected this interpretation, his credibility is called into question, due to connections with the Vatican! Trope, borrowed from that notorious ‘Alex Jones’ of the Psychedelic scene, Jan Irvin. In regards to Allegro, Irvin can take a lot of credit, in keeping his insane theory, that Jesus was a mushroom, alive and considerably popular. Irvin’s 2009 re-issue of The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross, sells remarkably well, and the misinformation about mushrooms in ancient Christianity is thriving as a result.
Plaincourault fresco, Garden of Eden
Although they rejected Allegro’s view that Jesus was a mushroom, along with the twisted philological and etymological work he insanely wove together explaining this, they embraced Allegro’s contribution to visual interpretations of a 12th century painting interpreted as a mushroom as seen in the Plaincourt Fresco, which I do think is likely the omega point of the psychedelic Fungi-Pareidola interpretations of Christian art.
The Plaincourault Fresco’s mushroom tree, as depicted on Allegro’s ‘The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross’.
Wasson vs Allegro over Palincourault So after citing and praising Wasson’s research into soma being a mushroom, and dismissing Allegro’s philological work that identified Jesus as a mushroom, but embracing Allegro’s interpretation of the Plaincourault ‘mushroom-tree’ the Brown’s refer to Wasson dismissal of this view as that of an “amateur mushroom seeker”. Wasson’s view was that “the mycologists would have done well to consult art historians.” In one of the better researched areas of The Psychedelic Gospels, the Brown’s refer to a 1952 letter Wasson had received from the eminent art historian Ervin Panofsky, who explained:The plant in this fresco has nothing whatever to do with mushrooms . . . and the similarity with Amanita muscaria is purely fortuitous. The Plaincourault fresco is only one example—and, since the style is provincial, a particularly deceptive one—of a conventionalized tree type, prevalent in Romanesque and early Gothic art, which art historians actually refer to as a “mushroom-tree” or in German, Pilzbaum
Thus the view is, like a lot of the presentations brought attention to in the Brown’s book, that the image in the Fresco is a poorly drawn tree. Unlike a mushroom, it has branches, even three going up to the top portion of the tree, and the serpent holding the traditional apple is woven between then, which would rule out the single stem of a mushroom.
Although there are dots on the image, as with the white dots of the amanita muscaria, unlike the mushroom, where the white dots appear sporadically, on the tree these are structured neatly in rows, and there are lines indicating overlaying layers of growth.
What this image is, is in fact evidence of how much things had fallen in the centuries known in the Dark Ages, and the skills of pre Christian art were largely lost, as were many other aspects of civilization and culture…. Child like art.
In the Brown’s interpretation, Adam and Eve are covering themselves with dinner plate sized mushroom caps, and Eve’s ribs are indication of a shamanic death and rebirth.
Wasson’s dismissal of Allegro’s interpretation of the Plaincourault ‘mushroom-tree’, is seen as a potential cover up, from Wasson due to Catholic ties, as they ponder:
Was Wasson afraid of betraying the church? As the son of a clergy- man, did Wasson feel a filial allegiance to his father and a loyalty to Catholicism?
Was he afraid of the power of the Vatican? Did Wasson draw back because he was concerned that his hard-won reputation might be destroyed?
The questions on this do not stop there. Wasson was by profession and international banker, and according to the Browns, he had the Vatican for a client, and was thus theoretically bound to cover up theorized secret mushroom cult. In their book the Browns explain:
The unmasking of the Wasson-Vatican connection calls into question everything Wasson ever wrote to justify his position on the absence of entheogens in the Judeo-Christian tradition after 1000 BCE, including his ardent refusal to publicly acknowledge that the “mushroom-tree” in the Eden fresco at Plaincourault is indeed an Amanita muscaria. It was this refusal that provided the motivation for Wasson’s insidious personal attacks on Allegro, the scholar of the Dead Sea Scrolls who expanded the theory on the role of entheogens in religion to encompass the origins of Christianity.
Now note here, that the Brown’s reject Allegro’s cockameenie philological claims about Jesus being a mushroom, and other fungal interpretations, but again praise this same work as expanding “the theory on the role of entheogens in religion to encompass the origins of Christianity”. When really, their only apparent shared point of agreement is in regards to the mushroom tree of the Plaincourault fresco. However, everything Wasson has written on the matter, is called into question due to an alleged banking connection to the Vatican.
As noted in the Psychedelic Times interview with the Browns ‘Gordon Wasson’s Hidden Ties to the Vatican‘, the Brown’s are here referring to the research of Thomas Riedlinger, in his excellent The Sacred Mushroom Seeker. As the Brown’s explain:
Riedlinger found it really curious that such a conservative firm as J.P. Morgan would allow one of its presidents to explore magic mushrooms in Mexico, and he interviewed and quoted several retired vice presidents from J.P. Morgan. They revealed that ‘Oh, by the way, Wasson was our emissary. We managed the Vatican’s accounts and Wasson was our emissary to them.’ So that starts to fill in the puzzle. After discovering this, we felt that Wasson was disingenuous because we have been to the Wasson archives in Harvard; we have read everything we can get our hands on, everything he has ever written (which is voluminous) and he never mentions his relationship with the Vatican. It’s as if a major climate denier who is well known in the press and the media is hiding the fact that he is on the Exxon-Mobil payroll. So this opened up a lot, and helped us understand how there were financial interests affecting why Wasson would not go [public]in that particular direction.
Circumstantial evidence at best. Although I disagree with Wasson’s view on soma, I think claiming a Vatican level cover up because he did some banking for them, while working with one of the largest international banks, is a conspiracy theory, not a smoking gun. Wasson was also in touch with many Government agencies as well, as Yawn Irvin is quick to point out, but here it is important to remember, Wasson was a straight, non counter-culture, member of society, he was very patriotic. He was all too happy to help his country. Psychedelics became the sacrament of the hippy counter culture, years after Wasson first partook of the “little ones” with Maria Sabina.
In the end, for the Brown’s the Wasson and Allegro debate over the Plaincourault Fresco, is settled in the minds of the Browns through the words of a Plaincouralt tour guide known only as ‘Alain’.
When Alain finished describing the presence of good and evil in the Temptation scene, I asked him why they had painted a hallucinogenic mushroom in the middle of the Garden of Eden. Without hesitation Alain replied, “Because it permits the elevation of the spirit to communicate with God. It is a representation of the Tree, but deliberately showing it as a mushroom to teach people that they need to elevate themselves spiritually.”
As Alain turned his attention to an elderly woman with a cane who had just entered the chapel, Julie beckoned me to join her in front of the Temptation fresco. “So, Allegro was right,” she whispered. “Anyone can see this is obviously a mushroom and not by any stretch of the imagination a pine tree.”
Well, not anyone…. only those who suffer from the curious mental condition known as Fungi-Pareidola, and have a lack of critical thinking.
The Door of Salvation
The Garden of Eden’s forbidden trees come up again, when the Brown’s look at a relic commissioned by the 10th century Catholic Bishop Bernward, known as ‘The Door of Salvation’. The Brown’s claim, this and other pieces created at the behest of Bernward that sit in St. Michael’s Church in Hildesheim, Germany, represent “an entheogenic legacy that was deliberately created by a saint of the Catholic Church.” However, as we will see, the Brown’s interpretation of the Eden mythos as depicted on ‘The Door of Salvation’, is something of a misrepresentation that leaves out part of the sequence, perhaps even intellectually dishonest in this respect, however they are not the only ones to have done this in regards to this specific relic.
The Brown’s bring our attention to the mushroom like branches of the tree in this specific panel and explain
A scene from Eden that the Brown’s claim depict psilocybin mushroom harvesting and ingestion.
Bernward left no doubt that one of the three mushrooms had already been eaten by Adam and Eve, as indicated by the broken branch spring- ing from the lower part of the mushroom-tree.
In casting the door, Bernward took special care to precisely identify the species of psychoactive mushroom in his bronze bas-relief.5 As ethno- botanist Giorgio Samorini observes, “The mushroom-tree is realistically rendered with a precision not far short of anatomical accuracy and can be identified as one of the most common Germanic and European psilocybian mushroom, P. semilanceata.” Botanically speaking, the mushroom-tree between Adam and Eve sprouts two bell-shaped mushrooms with pointed, nipple-like tops (papillae) and furrowed (striated) caps.
The mushroom tree, interpreted as the European psilocybian mushroom, P. semilanceata by the Browns and other researchers.
Eve beside a broken branch and covering herself with a fig leaf.
An interesting interpretation if that is all there was to it, however, the Browns, and others who have written about this panel on ‘The Door of Salvation’ with similar claims, leave out the proceeding panel, which is clearly depicting the ingestion of the temptation of the forbidden fruit, and instead use the panel that follows that one, which shows the covering themselves in fig leaves, which is what the panel being used for the suggestion of mushroom imagery, actually represents. In the depiction Eve is using the same material that is on the tips of the branches which are being interpreted as ‘mushrooms’ to cover herself.
In the proceeding panel, we can see Eve being tempted by the serpent who holds the classic apple in his mouth, and her offering it to Adam from a tree that has no indication of mushrooms.
.
Clearly the proceeding panel, with the classic forbidden apples is depicting the ingestion of the forbidden fruit. The panel being used by the Brown’s for the mushroom like imagery of the trees, is in no way connected to the forbidden tree of knowledge, but is instead a tree from which fig leaves were broken off and Adam and Eve covered themselves. “and they knew that they were naked; so they sewed together fig leaves and made coverings for themselves”.
As the Browns took the trouble to visit St. Michaels in person, I think it remains without question, that they left out this panel which shows the forbidden tree as a the classic apple tree, and the actual ingestion of the forbidden fruit by Adam and Eve. There is no indication the mushroom like trees are connected besides serving as a source of ‘fig leaves’ for their covering.
The Great Discoveries
Early on in their mystery adventure tale, the Brown’s make some ‘discoveries’ while on a visit to Rosslyn Chapel, a trip that “was initially inspired by Dan Brown’s bestseller, The Da Vinci Code”. While sleuthing at the famous tourist destination, the Brown’s took photos which included a well known and reproduced image of the Green Man, a symbol common in European art for the medieval and renaissance period.
As Jerry Brown describes it, some time later on ” a most fateful day” in an Italian restaurant in Saint Andrews, he happened to rotate a image of the Rosslyn Green Man, when he “suddenly noticed what appeared to be a mushroom—embedded upside down in his forehead.”
As I considered the implications of this discovery, I asked myself a question: Was the Green Man of Rosslyn Chapel providing a clue to the presence of sacred mushrooms in Christian rituals? -Jerry Brown
Thus begins the Fungi-Pareidola of The Psychedelic Gospels. Now in regards to the Green man image in question, I think it makes a pretty weak case for indications of a secret mushroom cult. Particularly when you consider that there are about one hundred other variations of the Green Man in Rosslyn Chapel, and Brown did not notice any other secretly encoded mushrooms. This sort of one off example and disregarding other evidence, is not alone in the Browns’ book….
This is the Green Man image that the Brown’s singled out from Rosslyn Chapel, thought to be from the 15th century
In the Brown’s interpretation the image in the centre of the forehead when flipped upside down, becomes a mushroom.
I think a better case would be the top of a poorly drawn Oak leaf:
Personally I see something closer to a leaf than a mushroom. But even if we were to see a mushroom, what relevance would it be really? Nothing to distinguish it as a psychedelic mushroom, and as there is so much flora and fauna associated with the Green Man image, why would a mushroom signify anything more than the other flora and fauna? And to go from the singled out image, without further evidence from the hundred or so Green Man images at Rosslyn Chapel, to evidence of a secret mushroom Christian Eucharist, is quite a leap of logic….
However, in the Brown’s minds, this was a ground breaking discovery worthy of a career in archeology!
“Julie,” I said, “do you realize that some archaeologists search their entire lives without finding a single artifact! We’ll never be able to prove that Sinclair wanted people to read Esdras 2. But during the past two weeks, we’ve uncovered confirmation of an entheogen in the Green Man icon of Rosslyn and enticing evidence in the Esdras text of the Old Testament!”
The Brown’s refer to the apocryphal account of Esdras, where he drinks from a fiery cup to induce a vision. As Esdras 2 records:
Then opened I my mouth, and behold, he reached me a full cup, which was full as it were with water, but the colour of it was like fire. And I took it, and drank: and when I had drunk of it, my heart uttered understanding, and wisdom grew in my breast, for my spirit strengthened my memory: And my mouth was opened, and shut no more.
In the Brown’s view this fire aspect is symbolic of the amanita muscaria:
“Listen to these descriptions: water the color of fire, spring of under- standing, fountain of wisdom, stream of knowledge,” Julie observed. “These could easily be poetic analogies for the juice of the Amanita mushroom.”
Beyond that they never really develop a connection. Now never mind that neither of these things would qualify as archeological discoveries, one a very loose interpretation of a mushroom on a single pagan Green-Man, indicating a secret code for Christian use of mushrooms; and the other an infusion that is red indicating the red and white spotted fly agaric msuhroom. The other, an account from Esdras that has long been discussed as a potential reference to an entheogenic infusions by others, long before the Browns stumbled upon it.
Instead of clapping themselves on the back over coming across the references to Esdras drinking a entheogenic potion, and focussing on dining and travelling details, the Brown’s should have dug around a little on what those before them wrote about Esdras and the ‘cup of fire’ and written about that. I explored these references at length in my 2010 book, Cannabis and the Soma Solution (which is admitedlly short on dining and travel details) and others before me going back more than a century, such as George W. Brown (1890) and later Vicente Dobroruka have covered the account in Esdras as evidence of an entheogenic potion. Thus rather than a career making ‘archeological find’ as the Brown’s frame it, this is not even a novel discovery, and all these other writers offer deeper explanations of the texts and the possible infusion used, than the Brown’s do with their nonsense claim that a red infusion indicates the red amanita muscaria mushroom.
This sort of reluctance to do actual research into biblical passages and other texts they occassionally refer to, and instead focus on their personal adventure, the friends they meet, where they had dinner or lunch (I counted 17 pages where this came up) , is my most severe criticism of The Psychedelic Gospels, and this sort of neglect to do the actual research and instead focus on the story telling, and personal aggrandizement, is present from cover to cover.
In fact, I get the impression that the Brown’s have only the most superficial understanding of the Bible and Gnostic texts, as well as the history of the Church. Take the example of when they discuss their evidence of the ‘blue mushroom’ and miss the fact that a quote they translated from French, is one of the most famous quotes in Catholic history.
“Look!” Julie said, pointing directly above the holy water. “That looks like a blue mushroom, sitting on top of a pine cone. It’s flanked by two dragons, under a red circle inside a gold border with the initials ‘B. S.’ in the middle. And there’s an inscription in French that reads: PAR CE SIGNE TU LE VAINCRAS”…
“The initials have to stand for the priest, Béranger Saunière,” I noted, “who obviously was not a modest man. But what does the inscription say?” I asked Julie, who had lived in Paris many years ago.
Julie reflected and then turned to me and said, “It means ‘By this sign, you shall conquer.’”* We fell silent, taking in this new information…
Before looking that the alleged ‘blue mushroom’, I want to discuss this French phrase “Par ce signe, tu vaincras” which I am sure any educated French Catholic would be familiar with, as its actually translated from a Latin quote “In hoc signo vinces” that in many ways signalled the formation and foundation of the Roma Catholic Church, and one of the faiths most famous non biblical phrases. “In hoc signo vinces” was said to have been the slogan written on a banner, placed around the cross that the Roman Emperor Constantine allegedly saw in a vision before his embracement of Christianity, leading to the Roman branch of the faith to becoming a State Religion and the canonization of the New Testament texts. That this context goes without mention by the Browns, to me indicates a lack of awareness about the phrase and its origins. I guess it was not in their dinner menus…..
Constantine’s Vision of the Cross and its famous slogan.
Now about that Blue Mushroom…… The Brown’s ‘identify’ to a ‘blue mushroom’ in this iconography with the devil:
First, the same sort of blue vegetative imagery is repeated on the other side of the same statue, without the mushroom like centre. Second, it sort of looks like a mushroom, but that is about it. Its a swirling vegetative pattern, and to suggest this somehow, not only secretly indicates a mushroom, but a psychoactive mushroom, is a leap even the Brown’s had difficulty making: “we have no context here in which to place this little blue mushroom—if it really is a mushroom—that is suspended over the holy water. There’s no biblical story or imagery to relate it to and nothing about the life of Christ.” So why spend the time analyzing and discussing it? Filler in a short 257 page book? I thought the dinner and travel details were for that.
Mushrooms in folds of Cloth
So much of the Brown’s case is based on similar Fungi-Pareidola. Folds in cloth gowns in paintings, for instance, are to the Jones, not only mushrooms, but hallucinogenic mushrooms used in lost secret rituals that no one ever directly referred to or wrote about, even their detractors. According to the Browns, this 12th century painting of the last supper, found in the Church of Saint Martin de Vicq, France, holds a secret under the table…. mushrooms encoded into the gowns of the apostles!
“I thought back on discovering the mushroom embedded in the forehead of the Green Man of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. But this find in the Church of Saint Martin in France was more significant. It was a revelation.” – Jerry Brown
Another depiction from which the Brown’s interpret mushrooms from folds in cloth:
Even if one were to interpret these as mushroom, its a pretty non descript mushroom shape, not any specific identification, even different colours, and nothing indicating their use on the top side of table in a Eucharistic sense. However according to the Brown’s take There is “a mushroom in the hem of the disciple directly to the right of Jesus as well as two more at the tip of Judas’ robe. The claim is artist painted the mushrooms into the folds, as if trying to disguise them to all but the initaited. These mushroom hems are neatly aligned because the artist is telling us how important they are–a way of informing initiates that entheogens were present at the Last Supper.”
If this is the way this secret information was encoded and transmitted to future initiates, there is little wonder that the Christian mushroom cult disappeared! Never is there any real attempt to corroborate this with written histories or other evidence form the era, its all this sort of loose interpretation of mushroom like shapes in art.
In some case, the mushroom like shapes in the paintings are indeed, very mushroom like. In a depiction from the same Church with the last supper, another painting, which depicts a scene from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem,are used.
Now these do look like giant mushrooms, but again, no specific variety, unless thee is a vine like giant species of shrooms I am missing? However, if you understand the Biblical context of the scene, you realize that what is being depicted, is poorly drawn palm trees. In fact the event depicted in these paintings is still widely celebrated, and is called “Palm Sunday”. which commemorates Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem. As he rode into the city on a donkey, his followers cut and spread palm branches at his feet and called him “Hosanna” or “savior.” Palm branches were considered symbols of victory and triumph at the time. “The Crowd from Jerusalem went out to meet Jesus with palm branches: “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the king of Israel!” (John 12:12-13). These are poorly depicted palm trees from a 12th century European artist who likely never saw a palm tree. Palm Sunday is never mentioned by the Browns. Poorly depicted trees and vegetation interpreted as mushrooms, make up the bulk of the Brown’s ‘evidence’.
The left side of the ‘Entry into Jerusalem’ painting in the Church of Saint Martin de Vicq, France, depicts a figure, the Brown’s identify with Isaiah, as there is a line from Isaiah incorporated into the painting. As noted in their essay Entheogens in Christian Art:
Here Isaiah is kneeling before an angel, whose partially visible body is bathed in concentric circles of light and who is entering the scene from above. The angel’s hand is coming out of the circles of light. Between his thumb and index finger is a tan, roundish object that is being offered to Isaiah who reaches up to receive it.
The relevant Old Testament passage states, “Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged” (Isaiah, 6:6–7). However, in this medieval fresco of the Isaiah story, the object that the seraphim is holding out is round and tan, not the fiery red color nor even the glowing black one would expect of a burning coal. Furthermore, the angel is not holding this offering with tongs, but between his fingers.
Isaiah is seen as an an important figure in predicting the coming ‘messiah’ and this painting is actually a play on the Purification Isaiah received from the coal from the altar, with the Purifying effects of the Host, in the form of bread. Moreover, we now know that cannabis was burnt on an altar in a 8th century BCE Jewish temple, and that the ‘ Kaneh’ references in Isaiah, which have long been tied with cannabis, give a clearer indication as to what was used. That is a piece of Eucharistic bread, not a mushroom cap as the Brown’s loosely interpret it:
“If the radiance of the coal symbolizes the mystery of the Incarnation, it’s perfectly round shape may further suggest the form in which this mystery is materially embodied on earth. The particular gesture with which the angel displays the coal appears visually to identify the small disk with the Eucharistic host….”
….We reflected on our interpretation of what these frescoes were saying: that the angel was purifying Isaiah’s lips with a holy mushroom, which inspired his prophetic visions and which was also the key to Christ’s elevated state of consciousness; that the inscription “The Prophet Goes Forth” refers to the flight of Isaiah’s soul after ingesting entheogens; that the Last Supper and the First Eucharist that Jesus was sharing with his disciples was actually a meal of sacred mushrooms as indicated… by the expression on Jesus’s face.
Hey Jesus, you tripping bro?
So here in relation to Isaiah, their interpretation of a painting with a line from him from the 12th century, trumps the actual written account from about 2,700 BCE which clearly refer to an altar of incense, coal and tongs….. We now know in this time period, cannabis had actually been used as an incense on a Jewish altar, and we also know there is no evidence for the Fly Agaric’s presence in the Holy Land, and the Brown’s do not even try to make a case for that….
The Mosaics of the Basilica of Aquileia
In the case of more ancient evidence the Brown’s point to the Mosaics of the Basilica of Aquileia in Italy, built around 330 AD. In this case, we are clearly looking at a bowl of mushrooms, no argument there…. however are they hallucinogenic, or delecacies?
The mushrooms are part of a large mosaic, that also includes other fruits, vegetables, sheep, goats, fish and other flora and fauna, included is this image of snails, which like mushrooms, were a delicacy in the ancient world.
The Browns make a lot of these images. In regards to the image of mushrooms, they note:
As the presence of psychoactive mushroom images in Aquileia indicates, we know that early Christians consumed hallucinogens. This is confirmed by historical documents as well. Roman authorities frequently accused Christians of practicing sorcery through the use of hallucinogens [no footnote or reference]. In addition, Irenaeus (130–200), the bishop of Lyon, argued that only the heretical churches, including the Gnostic churches, made use of hallucinogens in their secret rites. [Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, I, 13–15; I, 24–25]. (Brown & Brown, 2016).
Up to this point, the Browns have been claiming evidence of mushrooms in medieval Catholic Churches and holding the view these were Catholic secrets, however here they refer to the Gnostic sects the Catholics were suppressing. As they note of the various paintings on which their theory is based:
Given that these entheogenic images were created by a Christian saint and his monastic descendants, their presence in Saint Michael’s Church dispels the claim, popular in some circles, that the Catholic Church in Europe was actively suppressing “Christian mushroom cults” during the High Middle Ages. The presence of psychedelic images in the high holy places of England, France, and Germany suggests that the use of entheogens was widespread among the Catholic religious elite. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
As with Allegro and Wasson, the Brown’s are ready to flip flop whenever it suits their presentation.
As well, the Browns refer specifically to frequent Roman accusations that Christians were practicing sorcery with the use of hallucinogens, and after this rather bold statement, offer not a single example or reference to back it up. So much time describing scenery and restaraunt dinners in the book, would have been better spent, laying out the actual history. The reference to Irenaeus, being a rather important piece of evidence in regard to Gnostic use of entheogens, is also, barely discussed.
In regards to the imagery of snails, the Browns make a totally unsubstantiated claim:
“Snails were a common food, and the Romans were sophisticated when it came to breeding snails, but since the consumption of Amanita muscaria can cause nausea, instead of eating the mushrooms directly, the Romans and early Christians first fed the mushrooms to the snails and then ate the snails,” I said. “In this way, they would avoid the unpleasant side effects. We’ve seen this before among Siberian reindeer herders who have visions after consuming the meat of reindeer that have gorged on psychoactive mushrooms.” (Brown & Brown, 2016).
How about you test that theory before making the claim? This reminds me of the recent hypothesis of another academic writing about entheogens, Wouter Hanegraaff a Professor of History of Hermetic Philosophy and related currents at the University of Amsterdam, who put forth the suggestion of psilocybin rich scarab beetles by the ancient Egyptians without even establishing the use of magic mushrooms in ancient Egypt.
My view on these images are that snails and mushrooms were delicacies then as they are now. Escargot stuffed mushrooms could likely be found on some of the menus the Browns looked at on their Dan Brown style mushroom tourism through Europe.
In regards to the specific mushroom featured in the Mosaics of the Basilica of Aquileia the prominent white dotes of the Amanita muscaria are not visible, and what we are looking at is most likely Amanita caesarea a well known edible mushroom.
Amanita caesarea, commonly known as Caesar’s mushroom, is a highly regarded edible mushroom in the genus Amanita, native to southern Europe and North Africa. While it was first described by Giovanni Antonio Scopoli in 1772, this mushroom was a known favorite of early rulers of the Roman Empire.
God Creates Plants
Another popular image with the Fungi-Pareidola crowd, is titled ‘God Creates Plants’ and comes from the English 12th century work the Great Canterbury Psalter Folio 1. The Brown’s were so impressed with the evidence for their theory in this particular image, it appears on the cover of their book.
God Creates Plants. Great Canterbury Psalter Folio 1, England, ca. 1200
These are odd shaped somethings, I think we can all agree on that. In the Brown’s view, specifics are much more clear however:
Numerous red, blue, orange, and tan stylized mushrooms are found in the first 100 pages, including this picture (Figure 14) showing God as the Creator of Plants, or more specifically as Creator of Sacred Plants. The red mushroom on the far right with white speckles is A. muscaria. The second one on the right is blue, manifesting the classic bluing reaction of psilocybin-containing mushrooms. While everal authors have identified the third plant as a Syrian Rue (Peganum harmala) pod, careful inspection reveals that it bears no resemblance. Rather the color, shape, and fringes of the eight tiny mushroom images embedded in the cap suggest Panaeolus, a psilocybin-containing mushroom found in England and Northern Europe. While other authors have described the fourth plant on the far left as “an Opium Poppy in the shape of a mushroom,” again, there is little resemblance either to the flower or the pod of the opium plant. Instead, this more likely represents another mushroom of the genus Psilocybe. (Brown & Brown, 2019).I think this interpretation is a bit of a stretch, and that these images actually represent oddly drawn vegetation, and I say this due to the identical style of imagery, from the same era and area, and if not the same artist, the same school of artistry. Tom Hatsis expressed to me he brought these same images to the Jerry’s Brown’s attention, with little reaction or interest. I refer here to a manuscript known as the Rochester Bestiary(London, British Library, Royal MS 12 F.xiii) which is a richly illuminated manuscript copy of a medieval bestiary, a book describing the appearance and habits of a large number of familiar and exotic animals, both real and legendary.
In my view the image is what it says it is “God creates plants”, albeit, poorly drawn ones with which it would be difficult to say what they represent, likely drawn from the artists own imagination with nothing specific in mind. The Brown’s specifics in regards to interpretation are loose and careless scholarship, with no basis what so ever.
Many European medieval artists never actually saw the plants or animals from other lands they depicted from written descriptions or other illustrations, and as we all know from the child hood game of passing a whisper from one ear to another down a line, what you start with and what you end up with can really change as it goes down the line, into something very different than the original. I think this is the case many times in regards to things like Palm Tree, as depicted in medieval European art as well.
Oddly drawn palm trees, have not only been interpreted as mushrooms. A variation of Fungi-Pareidola, known as Cannabi-Pareidola has resulted in claims of similar cannabis evidence in medieval paintings, such as these from Sicily’s Cathedral of Monreale (1182) . I sent these to Jerry Brown asking what he thought of these images, no response.
Now never mind the obvious similarity to a cannabis leaf in these images, despite the clear archeological evidence in the Holy Land for cannabis as a ritual incense in a 8th century BCE Jewish temple, or its 4th century CE use both topically and as an incense for medical purposes from Bet Shemesh Israel, I could never see myself making the sort of claims about these images, that the Brown’s do about mushrooms, solely on interpretations of medieval art, with no evidence that humanity in Europe were even aware of many of the mushroom species suggested, let alone their ingestion. I prefer things, like actual textual references, etymological research and most of all archeological evidence. However, there are some clear cases of Cannabi-Pareidola out there, notably the QAnon activist couple Alan Gordon and Anne Armstrong, who share a love for cannabis and clear as day messianic complexes, and who point to imagery of cannabis in all sorts of Catholic context, that in many ways makes even the claims of the Browns seem more reasonable.
Alan Gordon and Anne Armstrong are notable victims of Cannabis-Pareidola
Well maybe not that reasonable
The Blue Amanita Muscaria
The Browns refer to a painting from the Tomb of Amenemheb that shows a man confronting a large hyena, with a background that includes a “rare images of blue Amanita muscaria mushrooms” as seen in the depiction above. This creates a problem, as there is no known “blue” amanita muscaria mushroom, a dilemma the Brown’s explain away with the comment:
Nevertheless, there may have been blue Amanita muscaria species in the mountainous regions of the Mediterranean three thousand to five thousand years ago. In addition, in ancient Egypt the color blue was symbolic of the sky, the heavens, and the primal floods, giving it the meaning of life, death, and rebirth, which may have inspired the artist to paint these mushrooms blue. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
The reality here is that there are all sorts of amanita mushrooms, and only a couple are seen as psychoactive, and neither are blue…….. Baseless speculation here witht eh blue amanita muscaria at best. There may have been a fur covered amanita muscaria as well, speculation is easy, proof is another story
Shit on a stick….
I’m going to discuss one last mushroom picture from the Brown’s collection. This is in regards to the detail of the sponge in an image of the Crucifixion, from the Dark Church, Open Air Museum, Göreme, Turkey, dated to 1050 AD.
What we are looking at here is the Roman toiletry device known by the name xylospongium or tersorium. This device was also known as sponge on a stick, and served as a hygienic utensil used by ancient Romans to wipe their anus after defecating, consisting of a wooden stick (Greek: ξύλον, xylon) with a sea sponge (Greek: σπόγγος, spongos) fixed at one end.
Xylospongium
Roman toilets, note the lower hole so one could reach in with the sponge stick to wipe their bung hole.
Esopus, the old man, is not holding the “sponge” up to Jesus’s mouth or to his lips as reported in John (19:29) but to his side. Jesus’s left side is skeletonized, similar to that of Eve’s body in the Plaincourault Temptation fresco… This painting implies that Jesus is in an entheogenic state of consciousness. If this Amanita muscaria find in the Dark Church were confirmed, it would be a significant new discovery. It would increase the possibility that entheogenic images were as prevalent in Byzantium (Eastern Catholic Church) as they were in Europe (Western Catholic Church) after the fall of the Roman Empire. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
The Brown’s begin by making a bold and baseless connection between the Plaincourault Fresco in France with this artwork from Turkey, based solely on the ribs in both paintings…. Then attempt to continue with the idea that this 11th century image of an amanita muscaria being fed to the crucified Jesus is more reliable than the Biblical accounts which directly refer to a sponge. And to be clear here, this was an insult to Jesus, the point of the story was that he was offered a drink from a poop sponge.
The Brown’s also suggest that the “painting implies that Jesus is in an entheogenic state of consciousness”. Referring to the controversial work of Prof. Hugh Schonfield, The Passover Plot, a book that was also made into a motion picture, the Brown’s explain:
Hugh Schonfeld argues that Jesus plotted his own arrest, crucifixion, and resurrection and therefore was drugged, perhaps by the “sponge,” to survive the cross. Baigent further suggests that the sponge could have been soaked with a mixture of opium, belladonna, and hashish, which would have served as “a good anesthetic.” Amanita muscaria can also serve as a powerful anesthetic. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
I have written at length about Schonefield’s theory on the crucifixion in books and an article excerpted from those books. Schonefield is clearly referring to a sponge soaked int these other substances, and these other compounds are well know and established anesthetics with a clear history of their use for these purposes going back to ancient times. Brown does not even establish amanita’s availability in the area in the time period, let alone any sort of potent anesthetic effects from a single mushroom cap. And he flips back to a sponge from a mushroom cap in his explanation here.
What is most preposterous here is the view that somehow this 11th century image over rides all the earliest accounts of the event, and that the sponge was an actual amanita. The Brown’s treatment of the historical Jesus is some of the worst trope I have seen on the topic.
As with unbacked up claims that the amanita muscaria could have helped Jesus feign death, they also claim without evidence that his healing of lepers came via sacred mushrooms, without ever trying to offer any scientific evidence that they would be effective in this case.
…[W]e see Jesus laying hands on a leper and performing a healing ceremony . The scroll in the leper’s left hand translates as “Master, if you want, you may cleanse me.” Curiously, the scroll is not directed toward Jesus but points to and merges with the stem of the tan mushroom at the base of the panel. In turn, Jesus is holding a scroll in his left hand that extends to the back of the leper, saying “I want to: Be cleansed.” Here, the artist is making a direct link between Jesus’s healing ministry and the curing power of sacred mushrooms. (Brown & Brown, 2016).
As the Brown’s explain of their topical mushroom lotion “if the juice is concentrated and mixed with olive oil into an anointing ointment, it can be applied and absorbed through the skin…and… applied as anointing oil (chrism)” (Brown & Brown, 2016). As Jerry has read my work and mentions me in his book as an example of an “entheogenic scholar” we can be sure he is familiar with my own work indicating a role for cannabis in Jesus’ healing ointment, based on the recipe given in Exodus 30:23 for the Holy oil, and archeological material from a 4th century AD tomb in Bet Shemesh Israel, that testifies to its medical use in the region, topically and as an incense. Jerry however, bases his claims on a 12th century painting and nothing else but sensationalism…..
The Brown’s jesus travels to India to learn the secrets of soma (the identity of which by that time, had already been lost) and Egypt for the entheogenic knowledge there as well, but never is any real researched discussion of these hypothetical events given. Instead the Brown’s spend endless time describing restaurant chit chats, or how they helped save an islamic gay man they met on their travels from suicide.
False Gnosis
The Browns discussion of Gnostic texts are fleeting and short, and from my personal correspondences with Jerry, I get the clear impression he only has the most superficial understanding of the texts involved. Their arguments in general seem to flip flop, they agree with Allegro on Plancourault, but disagree with his etymological interpretations in The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross; The embrace Wasson on Soma and his pioneering mycological research, then claim he is an agent of suppression working for the Vatican, out to hide evidence of Christian use of entheogens. They claim that medieval Catholic Churches were the venues of pyschedelic mushrooms, but then also claim the catholic church was responsible for their prohibition.
Given that these entheogenic images were created by a Christian saint and his monastic descendants, their presence in Saint Michael’s Church dispels the claim, popular in some circles, that the Catholic Church in Europe was actively suppressing “Christian mushroom cults” during the High Middle Ages. The presence of psychedelic images in the high holy places of England, France, and Germany suggests that the use of entheogens was widespread among the Catholic religious elite. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
verses
…The complete absence of sacred plants in the Vatican Museum was the culmination of a centuries-long effort by the Roman Catholic Church to consolidate its political power by marginalizing all alternative interpretations of Christianity along with individual pathways to the divine. This historical march of the Orthodox Church was officially affirmed by the Council of Nicea in the fourth century and the adoption of the four canonical Gospels. In the West, the Church Triumphant ultimately consolidated its political and military power by means of the Papal Inquisition of the thirteenth century, which over time branded all those who deviated from the True Faith (Catholic Cathars, Knights Templar, witches, and others) as heretics subject to torture and death at the stake. It was in 1231 that Pope Gregory IX began the Medieval Inquisition….
….Under the increased scrutiny of the Inquisition, over time Roman Church authorities became aware of the entheogenic images displayed at Saint Michael’s Church and in other churches as well throughout Europe. While the Inquisition could not remove what was already enshrined in many religious works, it certainly sent a chilling message that future “demonic” and “heretical” works of art would not be tolerated. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
Beyond these glaring contradictions, they filled pages with their travel adventures and personal interactions that would have been better spent on actual research, such as going over the Gnostic texts and the accusations of the Catholic Church Fathers against their secretive practices – that is the sort of scholarship one would expect from a career anthropologist.
As Tom Hatsis who has debated Jerry Brown has also accurately noted “if something looks like a mushroom, it is a mushroom—a weak methodology that… has many problems, the first of which lets a self-fulfilling prophet see whatever he wishes” (Hatsis, 2017). The Browns clearly see mushrooms and in so doing, seem to also percieve themselves as prophets, stating of their own work that “The Psychedelic Gospels should be studied with the same rigor applied to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Gnostic Gospels”.
I could understand this level of sensationalism, by a first time writer. But Jerry Brown worked as a professor of Anthropology, and the lack of real research in this book is no testament to the shining career of an academic, just the exact opposite in my opinion. For those who think my criticism of the Brown’s unfair or unjustified, they should read Jerry Brown’s review of The Immortality Key,
All too often throughout TIK, in order to defend his thesis, Muraresku overreaches and presents speculation as fact, a conceptual leap only achieved by distorting history and disregarding contrary viewpoints in the literature…
Undoubtedly, TIK’s most extreme example of overreach is its postulation of a chain of linear historical diffusion from Stone Age mortuary rituals to early Greek and Christian Mysteries, and to medieval witchcraft. Here in order to defend his central thesis, Muraresku executes a series of intellectual somersaults that are best tenuous and at worst unsubstantiated. (Brown, 2021).
Such criticisms could more justifiably be directed at The Psychedelic Gospels, and I have read both books. In regards to my critique of the Brown’s work, they certainly invited criticisms and challenges to their work. With confidence they wrote:
Given the controversial nature of our theory, we call for the establishment of an interdisciplinary committee on the Psychedelic Gospels. This committee would be comprised of scholars from relevant fields, including anthropology, art history, ethnobotany, and theology, to name a few. The committee would evaluate potential entheogenic images in Christian art from around the world. In addition to this committee, we advocate the discussion of these ideas in a wide variety of social media forums. (Brown & Brown, 2016)
I have laid out my issues with the Browns’ work here in detail. I would be interested in debating the matter with them, either in a live debate or better, in an exchange of articles, where we can more succinctly address direct points. I open the floor to a written response from the Browns. Jerry was very keen to have me join him in a debate against Muraresku over The Immortality Key, but does he have the confidence to debate me over the validity of his own contributions to the field?
Original Article
