Talk:Lodowicke Muggleton

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Apocalypse Now and again

I'm trying to improve the page by adding new sections (which in the short term makes the whole article very imbalanced), writing a new introduction for visitors who just want a quick summary, tipping in an illustration by way of an engraved portrait of Lodo, and entering the story of his life after the death of his fellow-witness John Reeve which is not really covered at all as things stand. This'll take months and months during which time things will look pretty peculiar. So I thought I'd better explain myself. I'm really not trying to get this article down-rated from stub-class to wreckage-class despite appearance to the contrary! If you have different views about how things should be done, please find a corner to start in and have a go.Coxparra (talk) 11:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prophets without honour

I have no quarrel whatsoever with calling Mr Muggleton a sectarian because he was. Personally, I would prefer the term prophet because that is how he would have described himself and I can't see it's an inadmissible point of view if its the point of view of the subject of the article we are writing about. If I had to sum up Muggleton in one word it would be prophet. Anyone have views about this? Coxparra (talk) 20:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to kick up a massive fuss if we call him a prophet on the first line. However, there is a difference between defining him as a prophet, and saying that he called himself a prophet. "Muggleton was a man who called himself a prophet" would be rather prolix for the first line, in any case.

Presumably Muggleton would have thought that other people who called themselves prophets were not the genuine article, like him. For example: Gerrard Winstanley, fifth monarchists, ranters... Muggleton had a lot of competition. The prescriptions of these groups were mutually exclusive. If one of them was a prophet, then the rest of them were false prophets. It is better to avoid the issue entirely. BillMasen (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with your last sentence! Actually, I've just taken the trouble to look up the sectarian page and it is extremely hostile in its definition. It doesn't seem one can be an honest sectarian! Coxparra (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muggshot

People have been pointing out that there are quite a number of other portraits of Lodowicke Muggleton beyond those mentioned in the 'portraits' section here. Pictures of Muggleton would seem to have been a significant, if surprising, backwater in the art world down the centuries. However, to identify them properly in terms of their sources would require someone with far greater technical knowledge than I possess. There do seem to be two ur-sources. One is G V Casseel's engraving from the deathmask. The others stem from William Wood of Braintree. Which of these are originals, which are variations by Wood and which are copies of Wood by other artists is beyond me to tell. And who commissioned any of these works and why? There's a Ph. D. in every packet. I get the impression people have been approaching the task with a view to pointing out my inadequacies. Naturally, I see things a shade differently. I'd like to think it is exactly the point of wikipedia to bring out submerged community knowledge in this way whilst keeping it in the community. Coxparra (talk) 20:15, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lodowicke Muggleton: the musical

If incorporating Muggletonian portraits and fine art into this page presents a problem, Muggletonian music is even trickier. Perhaps for the first time in a century, something within an ace of Muggletonian music will occur in London on April 18th 2009 with a performance by Dieter Mueh at St Giles in the Fields church, St Giles High Street. This is profoundly Enochian, although Muggletonians would not feel that Enoch invited others to try to emulate him. The style is ambient/industrial. It is the real McSplivvins, not just kids mucking about with the occult and may appeal to some.Coxparra (talk) 19:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lodowicke Muggleton & "the vision thing"

There's a fascinating alternative explanation of (and dating for) the Book of Revelation available at Apocalypse of John - dated astronomically. However, anyone accepting the dating suggested has some explaining to do because John's book is explicitly referred to in Dialogue with Trypho the Jew by Justin Martyr and written about 135CE.Coxparra (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Record of 1677 trial on the Old Bailey's website

I'm not familiar enough with the subject of this article to say exactly where this link and the information therein should go, but you might want to be aware of this record I found while doing an unrelated search of trial records on the Old Bailey: http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?foo=bar&path=sessionsPapers/16770117.xml&div=t16770117-1 I see the trial mentioned in the article, but the link provided doesn't seem to function. A shame, as the language in the record is priceless. LDhummingbird (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]