“The Spear of Destiny”: Hitler, the Hapsburgs and the Holy Grail

The cover of Trevor Ravenscroft’s The Spear of Destiny</em?
The cover of Trevor Ravenscroft’s The Spear of Destiny

Although ‘serious historians’ don’t like to discuss it, ‘alternative historians’ have presented evidence that the Nazis had more than a passing interest in the occult and pseudosciences that overlap with it. Beginning with Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier’s Le Matin des Magiciens, a number of writers have explored these themes in some detail, although they often lay stress on different aspects of mystical claims. In many cases, the writer’s own specific religious, mystical or occult beliefs colour their accounts.

One classic of the genre is Trevor Ravenscroft’s (1921-1989) The Spear of Destiny: the occult power behind the spear which pierced the side of Christ (Neville Spearman, 1972). This focuses on the alleged occult power of a spear, known as the Holy Lance of Vienna (or the Hofburg Spear), which forms part of the regalia of the Hapsburg monarchs and with which, according to Ravenscroft, Hitler was obsessed. The basic details have been repeated by other writers within the ‘occult history’ genre, for whom Ravenscroft appears to be regarded as a reliable authority.

Outline of Ravenscroft’s account

Trevor Ravenscroft begins his book by introducing us to Dr Walter Johannes Stein (1891-1957), whom he portrays as his spiritual mentor. He tells how Stein had intended to begin work on a book on the theme of The Spear of Destiny in 1957, but collapsed only three days after making the decision to do so and died in hospital soon after. Ravenscroft is claiming to act almost as a posthumous amanuensis for the book. As we will see, this is highly significant.

Water colour view of Vienna Opera House by Adolf Hitler, painted during his desitute years in Vienna
Water colour view of Vienna Opera House by Adolf Hitler, painted during his desitute years in Vienna

The early part of the book is effectively a biography of the years Adolf Hitler spent in Vienna as a down-and-out, an understandably poorly documented period of the future Führer’s life. Ravenscroft’s religious beliefs shine through the writing, which is peppered with exclamation marks, and it soon becomes clear that he wishes to explain Hitler’s peculiar evil as a result of Satanic possession or, at least, influence. There is remarkably little discussion of the Spear, given that it is supposed to be the focus of the book. We are given a brief account of Hitler’s first view of the Spear and that is about it for Part One.

Nevertheless, in this section of the book, Ravenscroft has much to say about Hitler’s alleged interest in the Grail, although it is a very different sort of Grail from that of the Arthurian legends: this one is more related to medieval alchemy. It was this interest that is said to have brought Hitler into contact with Walter Stein in 1911, when Ravenscroft claims that Stein purchased a copy of a nineteenth-century edition of Wolfram von Eschenbach’s (c 1170 – c 1220) Parzival, with learned but troubling annotations in Hitler’s handwriting, from a dingy second-hand bookshop.

Part Two of the book introduces us to Dietrich Eckart (1868-1923), Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927), Helmuth Johann Ludwig von Moltke (1848-1916) and the Thule-Gesellschaft, among numerous other characters and organisations. Once again, the Spear is almost absent and Ravenscroft concentrates on the influence of the various éminences grises whom he portrays as nurturing the evil spirit in possession of Adolf Hitler, who is little more than an empty vessel for a demonically orchestrated plan. It is remarkably dull stuff, but I don’t understand why people are obsessed with the Nazis to the point that the “History” sections of many bookshops are filled mostly with books about them.

Walter Stein (1891-1957) Source
Walter Stein (1891-1957) Source

The third and final part of the book returns to Walter Stein and his alleged interest in the Spear. We are told that Stein was a reincarnation of Hugo of Tours, an obscure contemporary of Charlemagne, who, according to Stein, had been instrumental in bringing various relics (including the Pręputium Domini, allegedly the foreskin of Jesus) to France. Then we return to Nazi history and racial theories, which Ravenscroft traces back to Madame Blavatsky (1831-1891) and her magnum opus, The Secret Doctrine. There is no critical evaluation of Blavatsky or her ideas of human development that run completely counter to anything understood by twentieth-century anthropologists. We are told about Hilter’s special hatred for Rudolf Steiner and of Steiner’s own interest in the Spear before returning to Nazi history and the rise of Heinrich Himmler (1900-1945). Himmler’s antiquarian obsessions are well known and included an interest in the Hapsburg regalia, of which the Spear is a part. Finally, on page 316, we are told how Hitler took the Spear from its case in the Schatzkammer (Treasury) of the Hofburg Museum on the day of his entry to Vienna following the Anschluss that incorporated Austria into Greater Germany. Then we lose sight of it again until the end of the Second World War, when it was allegedly discovered by Lieutenant Walter William Horn (1908-1995) at the very moment of Hitler’s suicide on 30 April 1945.

Problems with Ravenscroft’s account

Trevor Ravenscroft (1921-1989)
Trevor Ravenscroft (1921-1989) Source

It is evident from an early stage in the book that Trevor Ravenscroft was a follower of Anthroposophy, an offshoot of Theosophy that combines many of Helena Blavatsky’s eccentric ideas about the development of humanity with a more radically Christian viewpoint. This by itself ought not to disqualify the book as a work of serious history: instead, we should be alerted to the special colouring it lends to some of his analyses. Nevertheless, this is not the only problem with the book.

A greater problem with The Spear of Destiny is that Ravenscroft writes in a style that is decidedly novelistic, reporting not only direct speech in whole conversations, but also thoughts and motivations. This is a phenomenon I have noted before, where a detailed and circumstantial account turns out to have been written originally as fiction but repeated, misunderstood (perhaps wilfully), by an ‘alternative’ writer. This is clearly not the case here, as Ravenscroft is the primary authority and he is not repeating or rewriting someone else’s text. This technique is perhaps closer to that used by Gérard de Sède in Le Trésor Maudit de Rennes-le-Château, in his reproduction of whole conversations whose content he cannot possibly have known.

The problems grow when we discover that, despite his lengthy description of his first meeting with Walter Stein and their developing relationship, Trevor Ravenscroft and Stein never actually met. Ravenscroft does seem to have had access to Stein’s papers, through his widow, but he admitted in 1982 that his contact with the man himself was conducted entirely through a medium: in other words, he was in contact with Walter Stein’s spirit. This is thus a form of historical research conducted by séance!

There are also gross historical errors that ought never to have made it into the book. The most significant of these is the date at which Walter Horn discovered the Hapsburg imperial regalia, including the Spear: it was not, as Ravenscroft states, at the exact moment of Hitler’s suicide but in 1946. This easily verifiable fact has been altered to suit the narrative of the book, according to which the Spear has an occult power that gives great power to whoever possesses it.

The Spear of Destiny (the Vienna Lance)
The Spear of Destiny (the Vienna Lance) Source

The Spear itself

Even if we allow that Ravenscroft embellished his story, at the very least, is there any evidence that the Vienna Lance is what Ravenscroft claimed it to be, the spear (λόγχῃ) that, according to the Gospel According to Saint John (XIX.34), pierced the side of the dead Jesus, as he hung on the cross? Is there any evidence to connect it with a Roman soldier (often given the rank of centurion) named Longinus in christian mythology (Gospel of Nicodemus A Text XVI.9, B text XI.1)? We are entering a murky world of objects that were venerated in the medieval church as relics, tangible links with the stories of the Bible.

The first issue to address is that, as with so many religious relics, the Vienna Lance is not the only one. There are at least three others, including one in St Peter’s (Vatican City) and another in Vagharshapat (Վաղարշապատ, Armenia). The question of identity does not seem to have occurred to Trevor Ravenscroft, yet, if the idea that the very spear that pierced the side of Jesus has an occult power, the identity of the specific object is crucial to its possession of any such power (assuming, against all probability, that this sort of occult power has any reality). So, what is the claim of the Vienna Lance to be that very spear?

The Vienna Lance is first attested in the reign of Otto I (912-973, “The Great”) as Holy Roman Emperor (961-973). It became part of the Reichskleinodien (official regalia) of the Empire in 1424, when Sigismund of Luxembourg (1368-1437, Emperor 1433-1437) assembled a group of artefacts to be kept in Nürnberg (Nuremberg, Germany) as the official coronation and ceremonial accoutrements of the Emperor. During the Revolutionary Wars of 1796, when the French army was close to Nürnberg, the Reichkleinodien were given to Aloys Freiherr von Hügel (1754-1825) for transport to Vienna, where they remained until 1938. In that year, the Nazi hierarchy took the collection to Nürnberg, where they were hidden on the Allies’ advance toward the city in 1945. They were recovered thanks to the efforts of Walter Horn, a medievalist working in the US Army, whose knowledge of both the history of the Holy Roman Empire and the German language, was able to ascertain their hiding place in 1946. They were returned to Vienna and remain in the Schatzenkammer in the Hofburg Museum.

That much is the recent history of the Vienna Lance. However, if it is the spear that was thrust into the dying body of Jesus on the cross, its history must be traced back farther than Otto I in the later tenth century CE. According to Trevor Ravenscroft, Walter Stein believed it to be among the relics brought to France by the shadowy Hugo of Tours. This much is possible; the Hofburg Museum has long believed it to be of Carolingian date (eighth or ninth century). However, it was examined by Robert Feather in 2003 as part of a television documentary and shown to be of a seventh-century type. It has been plausibly identified as a lance used in Lombard king-making, although it has been modified to take a nail of Roman type (said to be one of the nails from the True Cross), effectively christianising an originally pagan object. Charlemagne was crowned King of the Lombards in 774, which provides a context for its incorporation into the imperial regalia.

The other lances have equally complex histories, none of which take us back any farther than the Early Middle Ages. They are not relevant to the story of the “Spear of Destiny”, as no claims have been made for their occult power. What this means, though, is that Ravenscroft’s claims are, essentially, rubbish. The spear he alleges so obsessed Hitler is an early medieval artefact, of probably Lombard origin; its connection with christian myth is a later accretion.

Some have suggested that Ravenscroft was writing fiction. There is even a suggestion that Ravenscroft’s publisher persuaded him to market what was written as a novel as non-fiction, but this does not seem to be borne out by the evidence. Instead, it seems to be the work of a fantasist, making claims to possess knowledge hidden from others. The case is closed.


I have been working on this post for almost a month. I have found it hard going and it has turned more into a duty than a pleasure. This seems to be more than my utter lack of interest in the Nazis (other than distaste for their twisted ideology and willing adoption of any old bit of pseudoscience and Bad Archaeology that would prop up their pernicious and wrong claims for German racial superiority), but I can’t work out what has held me back. Perhaps I needed time to think about how best to write this in a way that was not plain sneering, something I always try to avoid, no matter how ludicrous the claim I am examining.


  1. I think some of the appeal for general readers is the complete wierdness of the Nazi worldview. It’s not just some expantionist political movement but a more complex and confusing jumble of ideas and it is the more obscure or fanciful parts that attract morbid curiosity. Of course, there is plenty of myth tied up in all this as well and considering the reality, it’s easy to believe just about anything if you involve Nazis.

    Incidently, there is a readable book on the actual occult work of some obscure Nazi offices: Heather Anne Pringle, The master plan, (Hyperion: New York, 2006). If you can stand any more of it.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. The fascination with the Nazi’s is fairly easy to explain: It’s a real wonder how an otherwise civilized and cultured people could fall under the spell of the likes of Hitler and his gang of thugs and criminals. The ‘behind the scenes’ of any court/power circle holds its own fascination, from the political science aspect to just simple celebrity watching. Hitler’s court, which went from being on top of world to just a dank bunker in Berlin that was literally surrounded by the enemy, is especially dramatic.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You’re right. Someone, I can’t remember who, said that the horror of the Nazis was how the people who gave us Goethe and Beethoven could fall for a wicked charlatan like Hitler. But I suspect that’s part of the story: there was no German nation when Goethe and Beethoven produced their art, but Hitler and the Nazis elevated Germanness to a level that the German people in general could never have foreseen and in a way that really spoke to their sense of identity. The thing that I find constantly surprising is how we tend to think of Nazism as ideologically driven when it was just a mess of inconsistent and incoherent concepts twisted into a fanatical hatred of “the other”. We should never forget that the Nazis were not only anti-semitic: they hounded communists, homosexuals, the mentally ill, the disabled, political dissidents… anyone who didn’t share their world view.

      I suppose that a large part of my distaste is the same as my dislike of the modern worship of celebrity (but with the added horror of knowing how they were able to put their hatred into concrete form: celebrity watching hasn’t yet gone that far).


      1. I was lent this book to read in 1980. My principal thought was that if the Spear was so powerful, why was Austria taken over by Germany? Why did the Nazis lose the war?


    2. Agree. Yet Ravenscroft was no doubt much of a speculative fantasist driven by unrealistic mystical beliefs. However, I have read in various places that Ravenscroft was consulted by Churchill because he knew much about Hitler’s beliefs, especially astrology. That TR met Churchill may be a lie for publicity, but Churchill did activate people to influence the astrological predictions published in British papers so as to try to influence him. It would be quite interesting if any reliable documentation could solve this question.


      1. My Question is more about Walter J Stein and his meeting(s) with Churchill (and in turn Ravenscroft), one of which is documented (but as yet unchecked by me) in ‘Churchill and Secret Service’ by David Stafford p.166 in connection with the King of Belgium. Churchill’s insight into the real nature of the nazis shows through in his speeches (‘The War on Russia’ June 22nd 1941 is for me a clear example). Obviously his own (spiritual) background is key, but was Walter J. Stein a secret adviser to Churchill as Ravenscroft claims? Does anyone have documentary evidence? Thanking you in advance!


    3. …which begs the question: How could we in America have fallen under the spell of the thugs and criminals we have? Our popular sovereignty has been eroding away for decades until we have arrived at the present day, when the most corrupt person to ever seek the office of President of the United States is actually ahead in the poles. History repeating itself?


  3. The Pringle Book is OK, though just a little weighted towards the (no doubt comforting) view that the SS Ahnenerbe (which is what it’s mostly about) was all about inventing archaeological evidence to sustain the wilder fantasies about prehistory imagined by various fringe writers whom Himmler had picked up on (Himmler, incidentally, was the one who took these fantasies about Aryan/Germanic origins seriously; Hitler was a great deal less persuaded and apt to mock Himmler’s obsessions). The reality seems to be a bit more complex and uncomfortable- most Ahnenerbe archaeologists were “properly” trained and certificated and most Ahnenerbe digs were done according to the professional conventions of the day. On occasions this professionalism saw them at odds with party activist amateurs over particular sites (the so-called Irminsul site in central Germany being a good example). The issues came after the sites had been dug ,over how the finds were interpreted (and sometimes over dating questions). All of which helps to explain why many German archaeologists with Ahnenerbe jobs on their CV still managed to get jobs in post-1945 german academia (where of course it was very much in their interest to stress the role of the lunatic fringe).


  4. One of the best introductions to the subject. No-one can cover all aspects, but from my perspective there are omissions about the examination of the Spear I was privileged to perform in 2003 in Vienna and the subsequent documentaries by National Geographic in 2003 and 2010 – all mentioned in my website. robert-feather.com

    I have also published a factional thriller ‘A Clash of Steel’ (available on Kindle) which includes a lot of details about the metallurgical tests I was able to perform at a nearby arts institute, incidentally the place that Hitler was rejected by when he applied to study painting there.


  5. I read that book years ago, it gave me a good chuckle.
    Jesus never existed. So no spear. Simple answer.
    The world loves to read about “the wicked Nazi’s” because thats what the propaganda masters have decreed will make them money.


    1. You may be correct about the Spear, as portrayed in the NT but there are just too many external references to Jesus for him to be a figment of someone’s imagination. Read my book the Secret initiation of Jesus at Qumran, where the evidence is laid out. You might also find my ‘A Clash of Steet’ of interest, especially as what I predicted is actually starting to happen.
      Robert Feather


  6. Excellent examination of all this, but I find myself wondering what exactly Ravenscroft claims his “Spear of Destiny” DOES. Is the nature of its powers just not relevant to its veracity, or is the book really that incredibly vague?


    1. That’s one of the frustrating things about the book that put me off trying to deal with it: it’s like trying to handle jelly. It works by giving the reader impressions rather than data. Yes, Ravenscroft claims the spear had “power”, and it’s a “power” that gives its owner immense “power”, too. But that “power” is never defined. In that sense, it reminds me of New Agers’ “subtle energies” that are so elusive that no measuring instrument can detect them.


      1. No-one can answer for Trevor Ravenscroft, but a character in my book, ‘A Clash of Steel’ by the name of ‘Ivor Cravenstorf’, has a fair stab at defining some of the reasons the Spear took on some ‘supernatural’ powers. Part of the mystique is the reality of its possessors apparently being aided in their military conquests, and partly by the strange coincidences of their failures and deaths when they lost ownership. Hitler saw more into the powers that it conveyed, partly because of his obsession with Wagner’s vision of the Spear in his opera ‘Parsifal’, and Patton suffered a similar fate very shortly after the Spear was taken from him.
        Robert Feather


        1. Funny how many artifacts find their way into the hands of conquering military powers, and then get lost at about the time the resident power starts to decline.


  7. I did a bing image search for “The Spear of Destiny”, after seeing a commercial on MILITARY channel 5 am NY. I must say this is the best debate I have ever read online. I am also happy to find so much information. I plan on reading all of these books.


  8. I first read “The Spear…” about 30 years ago and was fascinated, but even a cursory review of the source material showed serious, even fatal, flaws in Ravencroft’s research. These flaws have been expertly exposed by Mr. Fitzpatrick-Matthews in this excellent essay. I set it aside, but a doubt lingered.
    After a recent viewing of Mr. Feather’s documentary I was inspired to revisit the book and was again struck by its glaring inaccuracies but decided to read in comparison Heiden’s “Der Fuehrer” a work frequently cited in “The Spear..” . Heiden is no supranaturalist and is a primary source for many serious historians including Allan Bullock and yet his account is replete w/references to the demoic and he even calls forth the Antichrist when discussing Hitler. Further, he builds his history of Hitler’s rise around the infamous “Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion” which figures prominently in “The Spear” as well. Nervertheless, there is nothing in Heiden to support Ravenscroft’s claims.
    So once again I set this fantasy aside and yet, a doubt lingers. Afterall, the swastika is an occult symbol.


  9. Call me overly skeptical but I question the historical truth behind the spear before 1424. Its not as if holy relics were something new either then or in the time of Otto the Great (who, as I recall, did not conquer the world either) nor was the business of manufacturing them & their histories.

    Apologies for opening old threads but I just found this site last week.


    1. It’s the style of the spearhead that suggests an earlier date. Its earlier history may be open to question, but I think that the idea of it being an early medieval type has merit. What we lack is a chain of attestation from the time of Otto I to 1424, some five hundred years.


  10. I have posted previously about the book ‘A Clash of Steel’ Jan 2013 a source for more deta and sound evidence that a Spear, the one with most lineage was known long before Otto.


    1. I plan to order your book. Could you please provide a link to what a Roman spear would have looked like in first century Jerusalem? Also, what tests did you perform on the spear in question? I have a rudimentary knowledge of the subject, but you are a foremost expert Doctor. I will be ordering “A Clash of Steel”, which I understand is a tremendous read.


      1. Dear Jim, The best source for the answers to you questions are in the book and a TV documentary on the Spear of Christ. I could send you copies of both and will quote a price if you let me know where live and whether you want either or both sent Airmail or surface. Kind regards Robert Feather

        Sent from my iPad



      2. Dear Jim,
        The best source for the answers to you questions are in the book and a TV documentary on the Spear of Christ. I could send you copies of both and will quote a price if you let me know where live and whether you want either or both sent Airmail or surface.

        Sent from my iPad

        On 25 Sep 2016, at 17:05, badarchaeology.wordpress.com wrote:

        Respond to this comment by replying above this line
        New comment on badarchaeology.wordpress.com

        Jim Miller commented on “The Spear of Destiny”: Hitler, the Hapsburgs and the Holy Grail.

        in response to Robert Feather:

        I have posted previously about the book ‘A Clash of Steel’ Jan 2013 a source for more deta and sound evidence that a Spear, the one with most lineage was known long before Otto.

        I plan to order your book. Could you please provide a link to what a Roman spear would have looked like in first century Jerusalem? Also, what tests did you perform on the spear in question? I have a rudimentary knowledge of the subject, but you are a foremost expert Doctor. I will be ordering “A Clash of Steel”, which I understand is a tremendous read.

        Reply Comments
        Want less email? Unsubscribe from all follow-up comments or modify your Subscription Options.

        Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


  11. Trevor Ravenscroft was my father in law, before that a friend and co-writer. I knew his shortcomings and flaws up close. He lived with me in a flat on Colehorn Road in London in 1971-1972. His book was to come out during that process. I, too, have a set of Dr Stein’s papers entitled “History In the Light of the 8th and 9th Centuries. I wrote a play at 26 titled ” Hugo the Duke of Tours.” My recollection, without digging out the papers in some gray tote in the shed was Hugo sailed to Corsica to pick up relics, including the foreskin of Lazarus. If in fact that was in Trevor’s book, it was wrong. These relics were significant, a gift from the Caliph of Bagdad, Haroun al Raschid. At a time in Europe, when priests were illiterate, Haroun held court with Aristotelian science, the Arts, etc.

    Trevor’s obsession with Hitler is certainly born of being a POW for 3 years. There are some who say we became infected with fascism from WW2 and brought it home. Bear in mind, his generation had no way short of “shell shocked” for PTSD. Men did not talk about their inner world, it took my generation to open a dialogue for men, create a lexicon.

    It might help the blogger to understand a few things. I think his pursuit of facts is fair. I don’t want to enter some verbose debate. I’m a writer, most of my life writing poems. At 67 I am beginning to address my prose work. This includes a small book of fiction titled “Bird of Destiny.” It was begun because I argued to Trevor that the Grail teachings would be best served as fiction. He in no way was able to write fiction. His pedigree was as a journalist. My feeling, at 26, was to get off the granola shelves at Barnes and Noble, simply take the knowledge and wisdom of the Grail teachings to spin a story, like the Minnesingers did with Wolfram’s “Parsifal.” If it is a good story then it will mainstream and become exoteric.

    It might be fair to call Trevor delusional, or exaggerated, but that is just too simple. Hopefully, in spite of his paradigms, he was trying to create a picture of the Grail teachings, and perhaps melodramatically. I went to Vienna at 26 and saw the “Spear.” It did not vibrate for me. Mozart’s piano did, however. Trevor’s task was to cross the Ocean with the very same insights Wagner, Wolfram, and Rembrandt shared. An oral legend really that stumbles in print.

    I always thought Trevor was a shitty writer but one hell of an interesting soul who made a great character in one of my novels. Certainly he was influenced greatly by Stein and in turn, Steiner, after his War experience he was a shattered man and needed a world picture. But that becomes obvious early in his work. The idea that both Creation Myth and Evolution are interdependent upon each other is a greater truth. To go all intellectual or scholarly-like is not the point. Each writer lives with his or her shortcomings, both as person and as writer. Trevor had many. But he also possess a wonderful fecund mind and was generous to the bone with whatever he had. So, it becomes a “don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater” kinda deal. If you work with a writer’s pictures as metaphor, the essence can survive it’s vehicle’s shortcomings. I suppose I am having a hard time figuring out your motive in writing your review, so many years after the mindset of the book. I know when I review I never give a calorie to a writer or poet whom I do not like. I refuse to give them the exposure. So, I ask you, what is your motive, aside from 35-40 years later, debunking?


    1. Thanks for that thoughtful response: a lot better than many I get. I had intended to write an anlalysis of The Spear of Destiny when I started my (then) Cult Archaeology website back in 1997 as it was a book I had first read as a teenager. I knew little about the Nazis (and still don’t, for that matter) but what I did know was heavily influenced by Pauwels and Bergier’s Le Matin des Magiciens.

      This set me up for a thoroughly mysticised view of their ideology and when The World at War was first broadcast around the same time, I thought that the programme makers had overlooked all this stuff. At the time I had no idea how to engage in proper historical research. Over the years, I would think about Ravenscroft’s book but kept putting it aside through my revulsion with Nazism.

      WhenI came to write the blog post, my intention was to deal solely with the spear as an archaeological artefact. I know enough about Roman military metalwork to recognise that the Hapsburg spear isn’t from the first century AD and assumed it was a typical medieval fake relic. It was only as I began to research it that I came to realise that there was a lot more to the story than I had appreciated. I took Ravenscroft’s story at face value, reserving my scepticism only for the psychic aspects (when I first read the book and for some years afterwards, I was intrigued by Theosophy and was prepared to give the idea of channelling some limited credence). However, once I began to research the history of the Nazis, I realised that there were all sorts of problems with The Spear of Destiny‘s account that needee looking into.

      The more I looked, the worse it got. I didn’t set out to do a hatchet job on the book and I hope that I wasn’t unfair to your father-in-law: I try always to go for the message, not the messenger!


      1. My comment on 13th January 2013 stated that information on the metallurgical work I did on the Spear at the Art Institute, near the Hapsburg Museum in Vienna, was available on Kindle. This has now been withdrawn, due to difficulties with the previous publisher CreateSpace. The reason was partly due to the number of spelling mistakes in the 1st edition. They were also instructed not to sell the book version ‘A Clash of Steel’.
        One of the findings of my work was that the composition of the central pin, wired into the blade of the Spear, was different from that that of the three roundels hammered into the pin itself and marked with brass crosses. Later examination of the microscope images I took at various magnifications from x16 to x48 showed a tiny inscription of a ‘fish’ and several Latin letters.
        A main conclusion was, as Keith believes, that the Spear was not dated to the 1st century AD. However I had no doubt that the complexity of the structure and corrosion characteristics of the materials ruled out any possibility of it being a modern fake.
        A second edition of ‘A Clash of Steel’, with more information and most of the mistakes rectified, is now available from Amazon sites (ISBN 9 780955295317). It seems to be difficult to buy from Amazon but can be obtained direct from mail@copper-scroll.com


      2. Perhaps an interesting answer to the question of Trevor Ravenscroft’s authenticity, notwithstanding his shortcomings, may soon be available. Trevor predicted a date, assessed by his research and his mystical and psychic insights, that related to a tremendous event taking place at Rosslyn Chapel. The result of this event would help humanity as a whole to free itself of misconceptions and blinkeredness that pose as rationality and common sense, when in fact, according to him, they are simply the result of being entrenched and cemented into materiality and a ‘sleeping’ 3D view of reality. The date is 28th of July, 2019, so we don’t have long to wait to see if he could be right!


  12. Thank Keith. Didn’t know about the other Spears or that he never met Stein. I read the book 30 yrs ago … very impressive . . . may I reblog ?


  13. I appreciate the additional detail in this article regarding Walter Stein and the work done on dating the spear. Also, thank you, Mr. Kidd for leaving your reply.

    I agree that many of the assertions in the book were extremely vague. Much of it left the topics of Nazis and the spear itself entirely. For example, the chapter, ‘The Secret Doctrine: The Origin of the Aryan Race in Atlantis’, is only tangentially related to the story. Including that is strange when elsewhere in the book, Ravenscroft lets us know that he’s only able to reveal a small amount about some group or ritual without explaining why. But here, a chapter is devoted to material that not only should be covered in an entirely separate pice but actually is covered by Blavatsky. In this chapter, Ravenscroft does not credit The Secret Doctrine itself, not is The Secret Doctrine mentioned in the bibliography.

    ‘The Secret Doctrine:’ chapter and The Man Who was Smooth between the Legs contain really enticing references to relationships between occult lodges, specific rituals (not actually described), Tibetan cave oracles, Wolfram vonSievers and the last rights of those condemned at Nuremberg, John Buchanan… a lot of material that could be treated separately – maybe as fiction. The Spear of Destiny does get frustrating in how much it tries to address in a very short space (Wagner, Klingsor, Landulf II, the role of the grail in Charlemagne’s court – there’ so much!) while still managing to be kind of a slog to get through.

    Also, why were two chapters near the end, before we get to Himmler’s possession by the world’s doppelgänger, dedicated to what a great guy Rudolph Stein was? I don’t doubt his greatness but he doesn’t seem to be much of a player in the narrative.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.