Why is it that most wizards are good and most witches are evil?

Because it is the usual feminist victim complex bait

>Almost all great casters are not male.

It's about an even mix, actually. Even among the gods.

That's what I meant, I knew the sentence was horrible when I hit send.

Vecna and P'tah make your last point moot, however the rest I agree with.

wizards, in general, are lawful. witches, in general, are chaotic.

Common misconception.

Odin - Merlin - King Solomon
vs
Circe - Baba Yaga - Morgan la Fay

Yeah, I'd favor the wizards over the witches too OP

They did represent deviation from society/the norm. That's why they're also called "Wild Women". They may not be trying particularly hard when it comes to doing things society dislikes, but their narrative role places them squarely as chaotic overall.

Wizards - Use their powers to build kingdoms (Merlin, Salomon), establish laws and gain wisdom (Odin)
Witches - Bitches that use their magic to avenge petty slights (Medea, Circe) or because they enjoy suffering (Baba Yaga)

Men create, nurture and substain; women destroy everything in their selfishness and shortsightedness. A classical theme in myths

women are jealous cunts so they specialize on curses

Modern misnomer is that magic-users weren't frowned uppon by in reaches of society through out medieval Europe; they were. Various soothsayers and wise-men may have been called in to advise nobles and rich men from time to time, but these cases were few and far between, and often at the expense of the reputation of the patron in question.

The modern concept of a good wizard stems largely from Merlin, and much later on Gandalf. Arthurian legend, which shaped much of the contemporary concept of a wizard also featured an evil witch named Morgan, and likewise this cemented the already negative perspective of a witch in general society for generations to come.

Now, the reason that a witch is universally looked down upon in all ancient stories is because witches make deals with demons, or the devil him self, depending on who you ask. Their magic is a combination of dark knowledge and vile pacts which the damned. In contrast, the modern perception of a wizard is a wise person who's so mentally in-tune with the arcane forces of the universe they can will mystical happenings into being. Even then, wizards weren't strictly good, they were just wise and powerful, and because they were often sought for council by many protagonists of old, they were also helpful.

The idea of a good witch has only recently become a popular hook on the classic archetype, and is pretty counteractive if you think about it. If they're actually a witch they're making pacts with dark, evil beings from beyond. Typically when you look at fiction with good witches they're not actually witches, they're just magicians or magi of sorts, that are being called witches; typically because the author doesn't know the difference.

As for more men v women, that was just the way of the world back when the trend-setting stories of old were being written.

>it's a shitposter tries to bait people and ends up causing an informative thread episode

well ususally they are a somewhat chaotic force, capricious and as likely to help as to hinder

>Medea
it was also only with Medea's help that jason got as far as he did, so while you arent wrong that she used magic to avenge a slight (although not really petty)- she did also make a king, or near enough

Medea only helped Jason because she was a total whore for him.

>because gods made her do it*

You're excluding the "weird sister," archetype of witch in this analysis. Witches were not universally evil women making deals with devils in the old stories. In some traditions they were more gnostics who's relationship with the unknowable forces of the world which granted them power made them neither good nor evil, but simply instruments of or even outside observers of the whims of destiny which the "heroes," were often unable to break free from. In this way they were similar to how you describe the "in tune with the arcane," style of wizard, but they definitely had a uniquely feminine nature to them that is core to their identity.

Whether a witch is evil or not usually comes down to if the thing to which they are bound is known or not. If it is known, its probably a devil, but if its left unsaid, just some vague otherworldy power, the witch is almost never portrayed as evil.

You also didn't really mention the power-hungry evil warlock version of the Wizard, which is also extremely common in old legends, perhaps much MORE common than the wise and powerful old wanderer of the Merlin/Gandalf/Odin tradition.

IIRC she was such a whore for him she sacrificied their kids to escape the pursuers and be together with him. And Jason cursed her when he found out what she did.

>Wizards get their power from study and hard work

Cite your sources please. Merlin was a powerful wizard because he was fucking born that way. The idea of the wizards requiring arduous study, self-sacrifice and 'hard work,' to obtain their power is an entirely modern construct with no basis in old myths about magic users.

The weird(wyrd) sister(s) archetype isn't really in-line with the classical wizard.
They're powerful because of, well, being odd and being against the code/order.

Wizards are more scholarly and scientific, which gives them a greater air of prestige and power.
Men throughout history have been the morel earned individuals, by light of how patriarchal things were then.

>IIRC

You don't RC. You're sticking two completely unrelated parts of Medea's legend together with crazy glue to try and prove what a "huge bitch," she was. Go read the fucking legend instead of running your mouth.

King Solomon was pretty vigorous in the legends, user. Merlin was half human half demon. Odin sacrificed his eye for knowledge and learning.

Western magic is also highly rigorous in application.

She wasn't a bitch. She was just petty.

>You're sticking two completely unrelated parts of Medea's legend together with crazy glue to try and prove what a "huge bitch," she was
I don't try to prove it, take your pills

>The idea of the wizards requiring arduous study, self-sacrifice and 'hard work,' to obtain their power is an entirely modern construct

Um no. Renaissance and post-Renaissance magic was all about this.

>Odin lost his eye

In some myths he also impaled himself on his spear and hung from the tree for a long time.

Odin is pretty metal

Because generally speaking men have a stronger deaire/aptitude for science, engineering, and mathematics. Generally speaking as well, magic has closely been associated with the for mentioned sciences.

On the other hand whitches have also been associated with alchemy and brewing, ie cooking. They where products of their time.

Also men are just better casters then women it's proven.

Witches don't necessarily make dark pacts. Baba Yaga is the stereotype of a true witch and all her knowledge was self learned. There's two kinds of witches, the devil pact and the shrooms and people brew. One of course takes on a distinctly evil taint while the latter are simply hermits without morals. They don't actively cause harm, but anyone who wanders into their domain will be as likely to be helped by the witch as end up an ingredient. They are knowledge seekers no matter the cost, essentially immortal and extremely powerful due to having mastered and overcome nature, able to shape it to their own will. Usually their magic is in their cauldrons and potions, as well as their magical items they've crafted, rather than being the kind of lightning from their fingertips magic user.

>Western magic is also highly rigorous in application.
Great, so where is the bookish wizards and study of the huge tomes here?

>Wizards are more scholarly and scientific, which gives them a greater air of prestige and power.

This is the case with some wizards of ye olden times, such as King Solomon, but it is nowhere near the norm in old myths and mytho-histories. You're describing a modern construct of the Wizard archetype which is most heavily based on Gandalf, a character invented in the last 100 years. Wise Old Wizards smoking pipes in their mysterious towers while they pore over tomes is not something that exists all that much in actual myth.

Men have a better PR firm on retainer.

It's all there? You're just not noticing it. Have you not seen the amount of occult books published dating back hundreds of years?

A futile endeavor, but a bookish pursuit nonetheless.

>You're describing a modern construct of the Wizard archetype

It's not as modern as you seem to think. Establishments of learning aren't a "modern construct"

Solomon is wise but his magic is a gift from God. I don't know if Odin hanging himself from a tree qualifies as hard work per se.

>It's all there?
Where? What books did Odin and Merlin read?

no, she killer her brother to save his skin

she killed the kids after he went and married someone else (and even then depending on the version- in some her son ends up becoming kind and founds the kingdom of Media)

>petty
it wasnt exactly a minor thing jason did, he left her for dry in a foreign land and after she ended up burning fairly major bridges for his sake

>Wise Old Wizards smoking pipes in their mysterious towers while they pore over tomes is not something that exists all that much in actual myth.
Why does it have to be a tower? You're being too specific and biased at this point to have any conclusive reasoning.

>Solomon is wise but his magic is a gift from God
The magic of our world was always a heavily religious practice. Don't inject D&D nonsense into history. Moses was practically a wizard.

>What books did Odin and Merlin read?

Why do you think I'm referring to these two individuals, exclusively?

its more of a warlock pact than anything- trading self for knowledge

>a wizard.
he was clearly a cleric- he invoked the might of god directly

the mages of the pharaoh were wizards

>Why do you think I'm referring to these two individuals, exclusively?
So what are those other individuals you're referring too and where do they come from?

Because men are better magic and spells obtained from knowlege, while a witch gets her power for demonic deals.

Case in point, male wizards can lock themselves in a tower and continue their work and further their power and knowlege, witches always have to meet up in covers to discuss witch shit that never really solves anything. Seriously they always get together to plot against some random, ever see a wizard do that shit? No we got shit to do. Not talking about how cute that princess is and why we need to curse her. Wizards? Nah we look at her like she is dumb because she is. Wizards are the neets of fantasy, the superior human, fucking none casters get out, reeeeeeee

My theory is that before the printing press books were a commodity.

Wizards would maybe a bookshelf if they were lucky.

Hence wizards did more hands on study.

Yes, but you're conflating "wizard," with "scholar," when in actual mythology they are not even close to one and the same. Show me some examples of mythological wizards from before Gandalf OTHER THAN SOLOMON that fit this theme of a wizened scholar who gains his magical powers through study, because a lot of the ones I can think of are evil warmongers and despots that belong in a Conan story more than anywhere else, and were not being meticulous scholars to gains their eldritch abilities..

>the mages of the pharaoh were wizards

I don't know, magic in Egypt was tied closely to the gods too.

Wrong. The mages of the Pharoah worshipped their own gods.

For further interest, have a look at this Jewish historian.
>ejmmm2007.blogspot.ca/2009/01/moses-magician.html

There was little to no difference between 'clerics' and 'wizards'

Western occultism? It's a very bookish thing. Even Newton was interested in it.

Magic in Europe was seen as a science.

>Have you not seen the amount of occult books published dating back hundreds of years?
We've had a thread on this topic before

Well, the difference would be that the Pharoh's guys were wizards because their gods are pretend and Abrahamic clerics were clerics because their god was real.

At least, that's how THEY would see it. Its how it's portrayed in most versions of the story of Moses if nothing else, what with the whole Cobra Staff incident.

Learned men were often accused of sorcery. Dating back to the days of Alexandria.

They're not mythological figures, but knowledge was often associated with magic.

user, we are talking about casters with extensive lore surrounding them, figures from mythology. Unless you can name specific people and stories of their occult adventures it's pointless to mention them in vague terms.

In classic tales the wise old man is a mentor, he represents the father passing on his knowledge to the son. The witch in classic tales is a figure counter to the benevolent mother nature, the witch does not create but twists and destroys. They are this way because of the narratives they are from, the stories had a purpose to fufill (teaching the young through meatphor) and these were their roles in the story, they were not the main focus. Every other explanation is conjecture and shitpost.

Newton was interested in mysticism because he was a bit of a religious nut, not because he was a scientist.

Calling another priest a 'sorcerer' was a cop-out and insult of falsely placed faith.

Moses was a wizard. The sorcerers worshipping Enki were wizards. They just never called themselves such.

No. He placed absolute faith in Alchemy and the Hermeticum. He was a religious nut, but that wasn't why he pursued such topics.

naturally there are exceptions (scathatch trained Cuchulain)

I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm just saying you can be a scholar without being a wizard and, more relevantly, you can be a wizard WITHOUT BEING A SCHOLAR in a lot of actual myth and legend. It's not a 1-to-1 thing like some people ITT are portraying, and the idea that it IS or SHOULD BE a 1-to-1 thing is very recent in the history of the archetype.

>The witch in classic tales is a figure counter to the benevolent mother nature, the witch does not create but twists and destroys.
Aforementioned Baba Yaga acts as a mentor to heroes she didn't eat

I don't disagree. Magic comes in many flavors.

If we had to do a sliding scale of things.

Merlin was born powerful in magic
Solomon learned his magic from God, demons and angels
Odin was a mix of innate and learned

blood magic

Does Cathbad from the Ulster Cycle count? Or does he not fit due to being a druid?

Scotland and Ireland in general are where you find the most stories that show witches in positive lights. The Sisters in MacBeth are certainly not evil witches out to destroy anything, and Scathatch is another great example.

One wonders why witches are portrayed more positively, or at least less as evil and more as alien, in those cultures compared to many others. Come to think of it, considering how "evil," witches in English mythology are often told to me living in misty moors and swamps and other suggestively Scotch/Irish lands, I'm wondering if there isn't a propaganda element at play here...

It seems their learning was based on personal experience or powerful entities sharing their experience with them

There were hardly many places to learn anything back then. Solomon was pretty lucky as far as wizards go. Merlin was stuck in dirty ol' Britain. Odin had to learn from sacrifice and tutors which he eventually surpassed. Not books, scrolls or tattered parchment, mostly.

Wizards call on devils all the time. He'll Merlin was literally half-demon, that's where his magic came from.

>Cathbad

Hmmm.... tough call actually. The lines between druid, wizard, witch and cleric really blur when you start lining them up next to each other. A thousand years of religious baggage muddling the mix doesn't help either.

Gifts from God to Solomon included texts and items. Binding demons to his service and translating their wisdom.

>what mythological wizards are scholars and scientists

How are you idiots not bringing up Hermes "Thrice-Great" Trismegistus?

>Why is it that most wizards are good and most witches are evil?
>Also why are almost all the great casters male and not female?
Most Disney animators were male, because Walt Disney preferred to hire male animators.

If we're counting Odin, then we're counting god-wizards. Both Hermes and Thoth were gods of magic and writing. What does that say of their followers, hmmm?

Have you read the Corpus Hermeticum? Hermeticism was balls deep in religion, it was maybe giving science a handjob at best.

Hermeticism was one of the many facets that lead to Natural Philosophy, which in-turn lead to modern science.

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Isaac Newton was a fucking hermetic nutjob.

Odin only gets brought into conversations like this because Gandalf was partially based on Odin's habit of disguising himself as an elderly mortal with a walking stick. I'm not really convinced Gods Of Magic have any place in a discussion about magic-using heroic archetypes.

England in general used to be a lot more marshy than it is today.
c.f. 'The Fens'

Magic WAS science in the West. The idea that there were ways of controlling nature was immensely popular among the learned.

P'tah too.

Witch is a female warlock.
Warlocks are subserviant to a more powerful entity.

Ergo, witches get their power from a (usually) evil source, or at least lovecraftian.
Wizards get magic through careful studying and practice.

Ummm, no. Gods and half-gods can be wizards. Magic is a practice and isn't limited to race. Freyja herself was labeled a sorceress.

Many classical sorcerers weren't human to begin with.

You might as well exclude Merlin for being a half demon.

Catholic church villainizing herbalists and healers who usually were older women who had no husbands.Trope caught on and remained there for ages.

So Gandalf isn't a wizard because he's an angelic figure, right?

>Gandalf is angelic
>Merlin is half-human

This is hair-splitting and you know it. Merlin and Gandalf are characters with an investment in the world they live in that we as the audience can identify with, and therefore we can identify with them. That is obviously different than a character who is literally a God like Odin or the Olympians and whom is deliberately portrayed in a way that is different from the protagonist characters whom we're supposed to identify with in those stories.

Witch isn't gender neutral. A male witch is a warlock.
At least that's what I've always been told.

What trash you fill your head with, plenty of adventure with good females.

Your ass is the source of all evil.

I'm dissapoint it took this long for someone to just come out and say it.

Arthur was a rapist and oath-breaker. Merlin was an idiot who let the Christians brainwash Arthur with Guinevere's titties. Morrigan did nothing wrong.

It doesn't really matter, does it? Even gods are magicians.

>King Solomon was pretty vigorous in the legends,
King Solomon had a magic ring that summoned a shitload of demons.

Yes he did. Among plenty of other things.

He only needed one

Gee, I don't know. Why are most witches female to begin with?

Also, watch The Princess And The Frog.

Those are the best.