The Western Gate

Tubelo’s Forge
Shani Oates
Anathema Publishing

‘Tis a fine looking book, like Fagin cowering over and coveting that box of jewels, here I am clawing at the cover and greedily eyeing every inch, “beautiful…. beautiful”
I have of course in the past cast my miserable wretched eye over the works of Shani Oates, bleating and moaning about the word salad and the verbose nature of her previous works and indeed authors, particularly from the network of individuals known as the Clan of Tubal Cain. Perhaps it’s me. I did ask an author friend what she though of the verbose nature of someone who writes in a Grandiloquent manner, Circumlocutory (oh fuck off with your parodying) bilge. She told me she quite liked the scholarly style, even the bombastic. What’s the alternative she reminded me, to read books as someone speaks? Like those of the like of Irvine Welsh, or maybe in a similar vain Robbie Burns, or even the slang in style of Anthony Burgess? ;- Ah, horrorshow books like that make my yarbles ache! All them fancy slovos and oozhny rambles—what a wastesk of time, my droog. I’d rather have a bit of the old ultraviolence than slog through such gloopy, gazhny mess. Keep it sharp and skorry, or off to the grazzy pole with it!”

So, and apologies, what’s on offer here.
A smattering of gods from the Norse to Greek, and even beloved Maat is mentioned in passing at the outset of the wayfarers journey. There’ll be kabbalah and the old wheel of the year etc. But, it’s much more than that, of course it is.
I almost forgot a few chapters in that this was written by Shani Oates, not only is it accessible, it is engaging, interesting, it’s a magnet for the occultist brain.
I often mix up The clan of Tubal Cain, and Chumbley’s Cultus Sabbati, often speaking of one and the other in the same sentence. I’m sure perhaps I’ve made this mistake in a review in the past and certainly in chats, I don’t care, they’re, to me, very similar. They present a version of witchcraft that cannot be researched wholly in history, the grimoires and diagrams wont be found ad hoc in some MS in the British Library, but they both use and shoehorn bits here and there, embellish it with their own artistic licence ! and that is tradition. Even if it is not strictly hereditary. But, yes, I apologize to anyone from The Clan or Cultus if I’ve mixed you up, it’s like comparing the Peoples Front of Judea with the Judean Peoples Popular Front. (I’m not actually endearing myself with regards to my apology here am I.)
So it is, Shani Oates presents us with Robert Cochrane’s (founder of the Clan of Tubal Cain) vision. Cochrane emphasised the importance of self-gnosis, personal ritual, evolution, I wholeheartedly agree. Each person must tread their own path !
Of course we then read of rituals and the working tools that The Clan of Tubal Cain adopt/ed, but that’s not a bad thing, it’s not hypocrisy and irony. It can be judged such… that if a person were new to the craft, if they were a seeker and this book were the first that they got their eager grubby hands on, would it suffice? It certainly would. It isn’t so advanced that a thorough working knowledge of Kabbalah, though it is referenced, is required. One needn’t know every classical God and Goddesses history, nor do you need to be well versed in the background knowledge of Magical papyri and grimoire. It stands attested to itself. A testament indeed.
It may well be that the reader decides the Clan of Tubal Cain is not for them, but undoubtedly they will gain knowledge and thirst for the quest by foraging through this book. At times the venture appears to be in an animist but grounded world and off-footed we stray to the land of Fae and back again. Imagery and ‘feel’ plays a huge part in this praxis. I wonder if Gardnerian/Alexandrians will feel they are in completely uncharted territory, will they escry at the knowledge and shout , “pretenders to our throne, Cowans !!” , and the hereditarians will likewise probe the unfamiliar disguise as plagiarism, behind which their rooted knowledge lies, dangerously close to the methods. I found myself immersed in the liminal world of the craft as I poured over these pages, as if something old and ancient was nodding approvingly at the paragraphs I was reading. I could give examples, I could list all the ways and wends that Shani Oates presents, but it is a book that demands you read it unhindered from prejudice, it’s concise and is not a rehash of some pulp working title which then duplicates and rewrites that very same public domain knowledge, it’s not another (yawn) book about some supposed coven/clan/group/cult and here’s their rituals. It feels different, it has that aura of uncovering lost and arcane treasure, even if much of the original content was wrote half a century ago. It will regardless illuminate the curious and the proficient.
As for being a concise and the go to book regarding the ‘path’ of Robert Cochrane ? It’s the definitive. Surely.
As a prelude to this book I read ‘the craft of Tubal Cain’ by Kenneth Johnson, I somewhat mocked the nature of the clan, bits of this and that, conceding eventually that we all have a scrap book of gnosis and isn’t that wonderful.
I didn’t want to like this book, and yet I love it.
… oh come on… get the stick out, poke that wasp nest…..
“The great work requires Will, Discipline, Law, Desire, Guidance and Gnosis”.
Well o.k. herein this renegade wanders off. I understand that tenet, for a mendicant begging for wisdom. It would however drive me straight into a hostelry of Bacchus- for drunken and wanton orgies. Some of us, really, don’t want to smell of the purest perfume, some of us can never accept a diet of only wholesome food and regimentation. We don’t want perfection. Yah, we are the fools. What is the ultimate goal, what is the path’s conclusion? Are we ashamed to have some fun?
However ! This is a great book, well researched, well written ! and edited, that will sit easily alongside the classics both modern and old. Whether you agree with the content or not.

Header illustration:- The Witches in Macbeth” by Alexandre-Gabriel Decamps (c. 1841-1842).