Hey, I found it! Actually, I was glancing over my MySpace page where I'd written a Blog about it a few years ago. Sadly, my old PC was so damned slow that I just stopped up-dating my Blog. Anyway, here it is--In his "The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles", Hutton writes:

"None of these images ['Green Man' carvings] could have been a beloved pagan deity, placed in churches by popular demand. The context of this idea was destroyed with the collapse of the Murray thesis, but like that thesis it could hardly have been argued at all by anybody with a real knowledge of the Middle Ages. No churchmen across the entire span of the period described them as such. St. Bernard, in a passage most accessibly printed by Sheridan and Ross, did inveigh against the burgeoning fashion for Romanesque at the beginning of the twelfth century; but his invective does not in fact prove the point suggested by these authors, for he condemned the images as grotesque, silly and expensive, not as pagan. There is abundant evidence, mostly from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, for the sort of people who paid the masons and commissioned the carvings. Occasionally the whole parish did so, but much more often those responsible were churchmen (above all bishops and abbots), landowners and wealthy merchants. The central point in The Witch Cult in Western Europe was that ordinary people remained adherents to the 'Old Religion' while the ruling class was Christian. And it was that class that determined how churches were decorated. The Wild Man, Sheela-na-Gig and Green Man were all products of that tremendous up-swelling of medieval culture which has been called the Twelfth-Century Renaissance. And like the more famous later Renaissance it was a Christian movement, even though it drew upon ancient ideas and images" [pp. 316].

Here, Hutton seems to view the [European/Near Eastern] continental occurrence of this motif, other than the British, as inconsequential evidence, at best; in fact, he never takes it into account. And, you can also clearly observe his use of an intimidation tactic! Alternatively, in Prof. Riches's text (a specialist in Medieval history), we find the following contrary theory of high repute to counter Hutton:

"The haunting image of the 'Green Man'-- the foliate face, redolent of the natural world, which sits so uneasily in Christian churches-- has been identified as a pre-Christian form of St. George. It acts as a reminder of his role as an icon of natural fertility; in fact, 'Green George' is a name sometimes given to this image, which may act as a symbol of the return of spring after the temporary triumph of winter. An interesting echo of this aspect of St, George is found in an Islamic analogue known as 'Al khidr', 'Al Khadir', 'El Khudr', 'Khizr' or 'Jiryis Baqiya'. This figure is particularly associated with the area around Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. He is also recognized by Jews under the name 'Eliyahu ha Navi', who is considered to be a special guardian of Israel, and by local Christians as 'Mar Jiryis'; much of the rebuilt church over the shrine at Lydda was converted to a mosque, and it seems that the tomb was positioned squarely between the two sections of the building, and was thus available to both Christian and Moslem devotees. The various names applied to this holy character equate to terms such as 'Living One', 'the Green One' and 'the Ever Green One'; he is thought to derives from the Greek sea god Glaucos, whose name means 'the Blue One' or 'the Green One', a fisherman who achieved immortality, and hence the status of a god, after eating a seashore herb that he had noticed restored his fish to life. Utnapishtim, a charachter in the Gilgimesh epic, attained immortality in a remarkably similar way, and this parallel may indicate another influence.

"Al Khidr (and his alternative appellations) is reputed to have found the Fountain of Youth, or the Well of Life, which is said to be located near the confluence of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. Drinking from the fountain confers immortality, and it is claimed that Al Khidr has been repeatedly killed and resurrected; one story involves the martyrdom at the behest of a pagan king. Some traditions state that Al Khidr bathed three times in the Well of Life: in consequence, his skin and all his apparel turned entirely green, and he leaves green foot prints wherever he goes. [...]" [pp. 33]

Hmmm...it would appear that, what we may be observing here, is a clear Deity of Indo-European antiquity, perhaps. Even in John Matthews' book, The Quest for The Green Man, he mentions the seemingly pan-European phenominon of the foliate face, even to the extent of the Near East! But, as I recall, he only mentions this in passing-- rather matter-of-factly; and you know how I feel about "matter-of-fact"-- I'd rather have clear evidence for a particular case rather than be in the position of merely taking one at their word. Now, it has been suggested that the so-called "Green Man" figures recorded in Medieval pagents were unrelated to the foliate carvings found in churches [Hutton, 315-16]. However, more recent academic thought expresses the previous assumption concerning the relationship between subsequent Medieval folklore and material culture, as I recall [this was written so long ago, that I cannot recall, now, what scholarship I was actually thinking of at the time]. Continuing from my old Blog entry:

"Further, A Dictionary of English Folklore [Oxford 2000] also contends that the, "continental Romanesque foliat heads [ie, The Green Man], though styalized and distorted, were ultimately derived from dignified leaf-masks of late Roman art, representing gods and supernatural beings (Oceanus, Silenus, Dryads, etc.)" [pp. 127]. While there certainly is a genuinely folkloric component linking St. George-- the famed Dragon-Slayer-- to The Green Man. Thus, at Chester in 1610, at a St. George Day pagent, we fine: "ii men in greene leaves set with work upon their other habet [garnmets] with black heare and black beards very owgly to behold, and garlands upon their heads with great clubs in their hands with fireworks to scatter abroad to maintaine way for the rest of the show." Later, in the same pageant, we find, "two Disguised, called Green-men, their habit Embroydered and stich'd on with Ivie-leaves...[with] huge black shaggie Hayre, Savage-like, with Ivie-garlands upon their heads, bearing Herculean clubs in their hands" fought "an artificiall Dragon, very lively to behold" [Ibid, pp. 154]."

It is also note-worthy, if I may expound, that Hutton frequently goes after the "easy targets", as he views them and frequently delves into sweeping generalization; I also found his lack of cultic information in this particular book to be astounding! For example, no where did he address the consensus amid Celtic specialist scholars that Celtic Iron Age religion was essentially an inter-tribal one devoted to the local tribal land-goddess of sovereignty. I had to learn about this on my own from academic journals by specialists in the field! But, in so doing, he almost imposes an impossible standard of doubt, where most Pagans automatically doubt any evidence by any scholars, unless Hutton has first given it his approval. That, to me, is very troubling... A bit more recently, however, I was conversing with the Ed. of "Shaman's Drum" about Hutton and if he had reviewed his book on the subject, yet; he hadn't. But, when he finally did, he informed me that Hutton was, again, engaging in many of the habitualm tactics I spoke of, earlier, such as Special Pleading...by, apparently ruthlessly, imposing standards onto scholars with who he did not agree, while not following those same standards, himself.