Simon Says..(the Maqlu texts) [Query]

[us4-he2-gal2]

Simon says, in his preface to the second edition of the Necronomicon (1980)

"Much of what is found here has come from the Maklu text, of which the only extent translation is in the German of Tallqvist ("Die Assyriche Beschworungs-Herausgegeben" Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae, Tomm. XX, No. 6, Helsingforsiae mdcccxcv.)"

Cdli wiki refers to this same work as "Die Assyrische Beschwörungsserie Maqlû, Leipzig 1895", in any case Tallqvist's translations are by now 112 years old. John Gonce wrote an essay available at Gatewaystobabylon.com (under Essays>"The Simon Necronomicon and the Maqlu Text"). Here Gonce skillfully uses T. Abusch's explorations of the Maqlu series to illustrate a pronounced shortcoming in the Necronomicons treatment of these texts. In sum, its apparent Simon intertwined bullshit with 112 year old translations resulting in an entertaining piece of abhorrent pseudo-culture. So where can we get modern up to date English translations of the Maqlu series?
T. Abusch has used the Maqlu incantation and ritual as a key piece in his fascinating exploration of Mesopotamian Witchcraft. Abusch notes about the Maqlu series, that there are in the order of 100 Maqlu incantations contained on 8 tablets, a 9th tablet is the ritual tablet for Maqlu. Despite presenting detailed and extensive analysis on the subject, this authors examinations do not provide for the most part, English translations of the approx. 100 Maqlu incantations. For translations the reader is directed to:

G. Meier "Die assyriche Beschworungssammlung Maqlu, AfO Beiheft 2. Berlin 1937 and
G. Meier "Studien zur Beschworungssammlung Maqlu, AfO 21 (1966) 71-81 *

***Aug 17: Ive realized I have made a mistake here, in that after writing this a few days ago, I have recieved AfO 21 1966. It appears in this article Meier has offered some type of complex concordance between Maqlu text and tablet numbers, the exact function of which I havent determined. These are not translations however.

The query then, is where might complete English translations of this series be obtained (if anywhere)?

[cynsanity]

Ah, I always know that wherever I go, the Simon Necronomicon will pop up only to annoy me.

I've been in email contact with John Gonce about a year ago, before the contact broke down because of my being a lazy student and all that... however, I am at the moment obtaining a hardcover copy of the book (I don't like working with .pdfs) in order to ocmpletely debunk it.

I have a part of the maqlû text in cuneiform and my own translation, and am currently looking for the rest of it in the library (which is, of course, closed down at the moment... *dry smile*).

However, I am definitely getting back on this as soon as I have gathered the material.

[belmurru]

Hi all,

I translated Meier's edition of the text in 1995 with the help of a native German. I thought I had posted them at
www.angelfire.com/tx/tintirbabylon/maqlu.html

but it seems that I had only managed to put up the Meier's transcription - augmented with a few of Abusch's collations from his 1989 essay "The Demonic Image of the Witch in Standard Babylonian Literature: The Reworking of Popular Conceptions by Learned Exorcists" (appeared in Neusner, Frerichs and Flesher, eds., "Religion, Science and Magic: In Concert and Conflict" (Oxford, 1989) pp. 27-58, esp. note 40).

I have the translations printed out, but it will be less trouble if I can find them on my 3.5" floppies. Unfortunately, I still have no scanner, so I can't put them up like that. I also have Tallqvist's edition, which is printed with a beautiful 19th century cuneiform typeface along with his transcription and German translation.

Gerhard Meier should be remembered as an extremely promising German scholar who gave us the equivalent of Erica Reiner's edition of the Surpu ritual. He was drafted as cannon-fodder for Hitler's attempt to conquer Russia. He went missing on the Eastern Front in 1945.

Ross

[madness]

Ross,

That is wonderful! I have been looking for the translation for the Maqlu text for a long time, if you would share it with us it would be of great value, I would be very grateful and I'm sure the rest of us will be too.

And you mentioned Reiner's Shurpu, would you also happen to have a copy of that? I would love to have that as well, if that is not too much to ask.

[belmurru]

madness said:

Ross,

That is wonderful! I have been looking for the translation for the Maqlu text for a long time, if you would share it with us it would be of great value, I would be very grateful and I'm sure the rest of us will be too.

And you mentioned Reiner's Shurpu, would you also happen to have a copy of that? I would love to have that as well, if that is not too much to ask.

Hi madness, sure, please email me your private address and I'll send it as a Word document - text and translation.

That goes for everybody - if you would like it, I'll send it to you.

I'm not trying to be sneaky, but the formatting I did back in '95 was single-columned with tabs, not double columned, so it will definitely not come through in HTML format.

I'll do the same with Reiner's edition of Surpu - which is in English anyway, so no translation necessary.

The translation was done by Marie-Helene Hoffmann, translating the German, while I sat across the table transcribing and helping her with the unusual genre of text and some of its concepts. I "genderized" some of the words (ungendered in English), used some conceits ("magick"), and some archaisms ("ensorcelled"), but it is a sound translation of Meier's German.

Ross

[belmurru]

admin said:

***Aug 17: Ive realized I have made a mistake here, in that after writing this a few days ago, I have recieved AfO 21 1966. It appears in this article Meier has offered some type of complex concordance between Maqlu text and tablet numbers, the exact function of which I havent determined. These are not translations however.

The query then, is where might complete English translations of this series be obtained (if anywhere)?

The 1966 article contains the collations he left behind at his (presumed) death when he was called for military service, intended for an updated edition of the Maqlu series.

Ross

[saharda]

Send it to me. I have an aquaintence who happens to personally know the author of the Simon Necro (His name isn't Simon) and he might be as interested as I am. The Email is [e-mail]

[us4-he2-gal2]

Ross - Thank you!!!! My confidence for the study of later incantation is augmented in this. Astounding ;] I am committed to receive and utilize your offering, and to recognize it as a great labor of love. Because this document is so singular in my experience, I will encourage all around me to do the same!

You present the best of what an enthusiast can do. Thank you.

[belmurru]

saharda said:

Send it to me. I have an aquaintence who happens to personally know the author of the Simon Necro (His name isn't Simon) and he might be as interested as I am. The Email is [e-mail]

Sent - if you don't have it already!

R.

[belmurru]

admin said:

Ross - Thank you!!!! My confidence for the study of later incantation is augmented in this. Astounding ;] I am committed to receive and utilize your offering, and to recognize it as a great labor of love. Because this document is so singular in my experience, I will encourage all around me to do the same!

You present the best of what an enthusiast can do. Thank you.

I'm glad to hear you got it. Thank you for your kind words (blush). It certainly was a great labor of love. Dragging poor Marie-Helene through the whole thing !

I'm sure Abusch's edition, whenever it appears, will be so much superior because of his lifetime of work on newer collations, and because it will be translated directly from the original language, as well as his overall expertise so he can give insightful notes, further references, and background knowledge.

But I am glad to make it available in this provisional form for all of you in the meantime. I hope it is of value. Feel free to make better English out of it of course, for magical purposes.

When I get a scanner, I'll scan Tallqvist's cuneiform text and post it somewhere. I made a collation of Tallqvist's tablets and numbers with Meier's at one time, so it would be easier to find the cuneiform corresponding to a given transcription at an instant.

Ross

[belmurru]

saharda said:

Send it to me. I have an aquaintence who happens to personally know the author of the Simon Necro (His name isn't Simon) and he might be as interested as I am. The Email is [e-mail]

Sylt - I got a failure notice when I tried to send it to that Email. When I tried to send it with all lowercase, I got another failure notice. Do you have another email address? Or maybe Bill can send it along.

Ross

[cynsanity]

Could I have the transliteration and the German as well as the English translation, if it's not too much trouble? I would be very grateful for that. Especially if you could include the tablet numbers. My email is [e-mail]

Thanks =)

[saharda]

Strange about the failure notice. You can generally get any file to me through bill, but it takes me ages before I respond.

[madness]

Tzvi Abusch, in his article "An Early Form of the Witchcraft Ritual Maqlû and the Origin of a Babylonian Magical Ceremony," in Lingering Over Words, discusses the short early version of Maqlû.

This short version, made up of only ten incantations, form part of the Bīt rimki ceremony. It can be reconstructed from the longer version:

Section One: Judgement and Burning
Incantation One: Maqlû I 73-121
Incantation Two: Maqlû I 122-134
Incantation Three: Maqlû I 135-143

Section Two: Release of Witchcraft
Incantation Four: Maqlû IV 96-104
Incantation Five: Maqlû V 89-94
Incantation Six: Maqlû V 95-103

Section Three: Extinguishing
Incantation Seven: Maqlû V 118-138
Incantation Eight: Maqlû V 139-148

Section Four: Disposal
Incantation Nine: Maqlû V 156-165
Incantation Ten: Maqlû V 166-184


Abusch's ritual summary:
One: Statues of the witches are raised up to Šamaš and then placed in a brazier.
Two: Nusku, the lamp, is addressed; a matchstalk is lit in a flame.
Three: The brazier is set ablaze by the application of the matchstalk, and the statues are ignited.
Four: Wool is knotted and unknotted and then cast into the fire (huluppaqqu) (?).
Five: Flour (maşhatu) (and other items) are burned and then thrown into the fire (huluppaqqu) (?).
Six: The brazier is stirred with an ashwood branch.
Seven-Eight: Water is poured on the glowing coals.
Nine: A mountain stone is set atop (the censer which had previously been placed on) the opening of the brazier.
Ten: A magic circle is drawn with flour; the ashes are disposed of.


In the first incantation, the name of Nusku is replaced by Šamaš, as Abusch describes: "Adapted from Maqlû I 73-121. Here I have done no more than substitute the name Šamaš for Nusku on the basis of the incipit of the Bīt rimki short version. For a detailed discussion of this incantation, see below, §IV.3.A, where I demonstrate that the Nusku version, the present text of Maqlû I 73-121, is a reworking of an earlier Šamaš version and involved more than just the substitution of names."

In Meier's edition of the text, all but three of these incantations are complete. Incantations four, five and six are unfortunately fragmented. Abusch states: "The three incantations contained in this section were known to Meier, though only in fragmentary form. They are still not fully restored, but now most of the gaps can be filled and some errors corrected. The present reconstruction of the text is possible largely because of new manuscripts and joins and the use of previously unnoticed parallels."

Abusch also mentions in the article that he has his own unpublished edition of Maqlû. Would be nice if he publishes it one day.


Abusch has this to say about the short version: "I trust that this explication has demonstrated that the short version is an effective and independent ceremony marked by an inner unity and thematic progression and that it possesses a character of its own, a character no less authentic and unique than that of the long version. Indeed, it has a simplicity and organic quality lacking in the eight-tablet canonical series. These characteristics are enough to establish the primacy of the short version, for they are hardly to be expected of an extract; by nature, extracts are less coherent than the texts from which they have been exerpted [sic].
The short version must be regarded as the essential Maqlû in miniature and is the source from which the later and longer work arose. More precisely, it is the kernel from which Tablets I-V, the first division of Maqlû, developed."

[madness]

Abusch's restorations for the incantations in section two.

Incantation Four.
Ša ^dšamši mannu abušu, "Of the Sun, who is his father?" (IV 96-104).

96-101:
ša ^dšamši mannu abušu mannu ummušu
mannu ahāssuma šū dayyā[nu]
ša ^dša[m]aš ^dsin abušu ^dningal ummušu
( ... ) u ši ^dištar ahāssuma šū dayyānu

Of the Sun, who is his father, who is his mother,
Who is his sister? And he is the judge.
Of Šamaš, Sin is his father, Ningal is his mother,
( ... ) And she Ištar is his sister; and he is the judge.

The restoration of IV 96-104 rests largely on BM.34077. This tablet was identified by W. G. Lambert, who kindly drew it to my attention. For the family configuration in this incantation, cf., e.g., the Inanna-Dumuzi Dialogue in S. N. Kramer, "Cuneiform Studies and the History of Literature: The Sumerian Sacred Marriage Texts," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 107/6 (1963), 493-94: 1-22, translated recently by Th. Jacobsen, The Harps That Once ... : Sumerian Poetry in Translation (New Haven/London, 1987), 3-5.


Incantation Five.
Šaruh lānī šaruh zīmī, "Radiant is my countenance, radiant is my appearance" (V 89-94).

šaruh lānī šaruh zīmī
allallû [muʾabbit işşī u abnī]
qāmû [lemnūti zēr kaššāpi u kaššapti]
ēpiš k[āşir barti ... ]
kaššāpu [u kaššaptu lihūlū lizūbū u littattukū]
ana ^dg[irra qāmî qālî kāsî (kāšidu ša kaššāpāti)]

My restoration of the text of this incantation is based upon the parallel lines Maqlû II 141-147 and IV 10-11 // 70-71 (cf. 93-95 // 114-116); see also I 110-111. V 89: My reading replaces Meier's šaruh lānī šaruh lānī. Meier repeated šaruh lānī because he based himself on VAT 4103: ÉN šá-ru-uh la-a-ni KI.MIN (IX 84), and misunderstood KI.MIN as repeating the first part of the incipit. It repeats the preceding ritual. See K.2385 +: [ÉN šaruh lānī š]á-ru-uh zi-mi KI.MIN, and STT, 1, no. 83: [ÉN šaruh lānī šaruh] zi-mi [KI.MIN]. V 90: For the restoration, see II 141. V 91: For Meier's na-mu-ú, read qa-mu-ú (so probably K.2544 +: qa^(?)-mu-ú). For the restoration, see II 142. V 92: K.2544 + preserves a broken sign after e-piš. The restoration is uncertain; perhaps read instead ēpiš b[ar-ti ... ]. See II 145 and compare W. G. Lambert, "Three Literary Prayers of the Babylonians," AfO 19 (1960), 63: 46. V 93: For the restoration, see II 147. V 94: For the restoration, see IV 10-11 // 70-71. Parts of two (?) signs are visible in the middle of the line on K.2544 +.

Abusch does not provide a translation for this incantation. I attempted to create one based on his notes here, but I could not get the grammar right, so I'll leave that up to someone here who has a better clue than I do.


He does not provide any restoration for incantation six, apart from the incipit:
Šerʾānī tukaşşirā ^dea uptaţţir, "Ea has released the muscles that you have bound."

[saharda]

I'm doing some research into Sumerian Magic, and in order to write a detailed explanation of Sumerian magic I need to work on the Necronomicon to show that IT isn't Sumerian magic. This means I need to mention the Maqlu texts. What they are, when they come from, and that they have been stripped down and peppered with Lovecraftian references.

Anyhow, I ran into a problem. I don't remember when the Maqlu texts come from. I remember them being late period Assyrian, but I'd like to confirm that. This is what I was doing this morning, but it occurred to me that we should provide this sort of resource for a lot of magical texts. (If this already exists, I missed it.)

[us4-he2-gal2]

The Below investigation is one I carried out earlier this summer for an occult message board and is something of a departure from my interests at enenuru. Posted here for the benefit of some of our members interesting in the Necronomicon.

---

Peterson`s Claim of An Early Necronomicon

Part 1

Getting back to the question at hand, there is the matter of the Ars Necronomica. This question is not so central as to be likely to shed any direct light on what is in modern times labeled the Necronomicon.. The object here is to consider a claim about Lovecraft's inspirations, however, in so far as they pertain to the nomenclature - did he draw on certain medieval source materials for names such as Necronomicon and Azathoth? While no direct relation should be expected from a medieval work bearing the name Necronomicon to Lovecraft's work, outside of a name perhaps, I'm finding it all the more interesting despite this lack of expectation/ maybe even because of it.


Or is it just a elaborate hoax, the article dealt with below.. Certainly would take some fair bit too know. I am cautiously skeptical at present.



_________________________________________________



The author of the article/


As I mentioned in my intro, I have a general appetite hunger for the occult, and therefore should probably know something (or quite a few somethings) about the author of this article, and his many works for that matter. While it's sometimes too late to approach things with a seasoned insight, its never really a bad time to learn I don't think. Joseph Peterson appears to be quite the name in occult literature, one review of his work [http://www.magusbooks.com/product/Sixth-And-Seventh-Books-Of-Moses/Occult-Sciences] also gives a description of the author/


Joseph Peterson studied religion and various languages at the University of
Minnesota and has translated many esoteric and religious source works. He has
amassed a large collection of photocopies and microfilms of rare occult tracts for
comparative research from the British Museum and other libraries. Peterson lives
in Kasson, MN.



....also Peterson is/


"...an active member of the American Academy of Religion and the Society for Biblical Literature. "




So far as John Dee is concerned, one is inclined to believe Peterson knows his stuff here. In 2003 he edited some of Dee's works and published this book John Dee's Five Books of Mystery: Original Sourcebook of Enochian Magic [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1578631785?ie=UTF8&coliid=I13EQEXDZCIHHR&colid=3JZ48KZW54SF6] . Peterson's role in presenting this material was apparently "translat[ing] Latin terms and add[ing] copious footnotes, putting the instructions and references into context for the modern reader." (As for just how Dee's books were recovered to be presented in 2003 I do not know atm. Though I would insist on some pretty convincing documentation there..)

Peterson also owns and operates the Twilight Grotto, which is an online website which seems to serve as a "source of primary source material in the Western Esoteric Tradition." (Twilight Grotto is contained within Petersons greater web-domain, esotericarchieve.com). He makes freely accessible many original writings by names such as Trithemius, Dee and Agrippa, some texts are in English others in Latin. While the extent of my reading doesn't allow me to qualify these offerings as authoritative or otherwise, the website seems to enjoy at least some form of admiration in the online occult forums.

Twilight Grotto Entrance/ www.esotericarchives.com/twilit.htm


Western Esoterica Section/ www.esotericarchives.com/index.html



________________________________



About the Article/



link to the article/ www.esotericarchives.com/necronom/necronom.htm



We see in the the above url itself, that this article by Peterson is made available from his own webspace as well, and incidentally, many of the footnotes given at right link back to esotericarchives.com . The piece in question is titled "Necronomicon -- shedding some light on Lovecraft's sources" and Peterson's synapses is as follows/


"If we examine H. P. Lovecraft's use of the name "Azathoth", I believe
we can shed some light on his probable source of information on the Necronomicon,
namely John Dee's partial English translation."



As we read through the article, we come to the observation "Many of [Lovecraft's] stories draw on a common 'mythos' which he associated with the prototypical evil book, the Necronomicon. However, it is not entirely clear whether he was drawing on original source material, secondary sources, or his own imagination for this mythos." ...this leads to one of the central statements that Peterson makes/ "I believe one key to understanding Lovecraft's Necronomicon mythos can be found in his 'History of the Necronomicon,' where he states that "a translation made by Dr. Dee was never printed."


I notice this "History of the Necronomicon" seems to be made available at one somewhat doubtable source, however I personally think it is in fact Lovecraft's little explanation. [http://www.geocities.com/soho/cafe/1131/01histen.html] The line Peterson refers to is present and reads "An English translation made by Dr. Dee was never printed, and exists only in fragments recovered from the original manuscript."
Next, the author gives a brief explanation of Dee. Shortly thereafter he abruptly launches into the topic at hand with this sentence/


"Dee apparently regarded the Necronomicon, or Ars Necronomica
('The art of controlling [spirits of] the dead') as an extension of Ars Pyronomica
('the art of controlling the fire').




_________________________________________________



The early 14th or early 15th cen. Necronomicon?/



"Dee apparently regarded the Necronomicon...." Here Peterson interjects a reality he has up to this point done nothing to prepare the reader for - that the existence of a Necronomicon, a book, a manuscript, from the 14th or 15th century of the name, ended up in the hands of Dee. While the article continues on this subject for another few pages, it leaves me asking just how much does it substantiate this reality on close inspection? In particular what is the reality of the manuscript itself?



Peterson proceeds with/
Explanations of how Dee saw the Necronomicon "or" Ars Necronomica as an extension of Ars Pyronomica - however his accompanying citations are from Dee's Monas Hieroglyphica. This actual work is available at the author's homepage here [http://www.esotericarchives.com/dee/monad.htm#theorem13] (including the referred to theorem XII.) However, none of this actually touches for us a 14th cen. Necronomicon (or Ars Necronomica, however that relates to the supposed manuscript.) and only dimly establishs the object of comparison for that matter.

He states/ "It is not know [sic] when or where Dee acquired a copy of the Necronomicon, but it is probably the book he refers to in his Mysteriorum Libri (or magical diaries) as "my Arabik boke." Peterson explains to us that Dee proceeded to make his own copy of this original Latin text, translating it into English as Lovecraft's seems to note in his History of the Necronomicon. Soon Peterson comments "a comparison of the fuller Latin text of the Necronomicon with Dee's manuscript..." Implying that he actually has access to this early Necronomicon. Yet still he provides virtually no identifying information for this manuscript or context for his citing it.

He provides pictures and some translations of the 'late 14th or early 15th century Necronomicon'. No information about where these pictures came from, where the text pictured is stored, or other authenticating effects are attempted. This despite a reasonable number of footnotes earlier in the article (which however usually lead to other areas of his page, or in one case, to amazon's featuring of his latest book.)




And so, Peterson concludes with the remark/ "I believe this is strong evidence that HPL did not have access to the fuller text as preserved in the Latin edition, and most likely had only seen Dee's manuscript." What he treats throughout as a given seems anything but given, despite becoming the essential of the whole discussion. It only leads to the question exactly which 14th Latin manuscript are we supposedly dealing with there?



---------------------

Maybe I should email and ask for sources or something.. Would be a shame if someone with that much occult research generates interest and intrigue by making a bunch of S*** heap up. (Albeit in an elaborate and ingenius way?..)

[us4-he2-gal2]

Peterson`s Claim of An Early Necronomicon

Part 2

(In order to consider the likelihood of Dee possessing a work which deals in some way with Necromancy, as the above would suggest, I've included some additional information below and brief notes about the man.)

___________________________________________________






About John Dee/


As Scientist.



John Dee (1527 - 1608) was a great English thinker and theorist, whose story is as interesting and relevant to historians of science as it is to occult enthusiasts; as is often stated Dee "straddled the worlds of science and magic just as they were becoming distinguishable" and he made significant contributions to both pursuits.
He received his MA at Cambridge in 1548, where Dee exhibited an awesome zeal for learning. He studied with incredible verve according to his own recollection of that time/ ""I was so vehemently bent to studie, that for those years I did inviolably keepe this order; only to sleepe four houres every night; to allow to meate and drink (and some refreshing after) two houres every day; and of the other eighteen houres all (except the time of going to and being at divine service) was spent in my studies and learning." (1)


*sighs*...so envious 0_0


He skills and talents particularly in mathematics, the sciences, and in astrology were quickly recognized although by the late 1540s, Dee would be traveling abroad to meet and confer with men of learning (including the influential cartographer Geradus Mercator.) His reasons for this extended voyage were perhaps twofold..
Firstly: England at the time apparently was lacking in instructors and incentives for the study of mathematics (or in Dee's own words) "our cuntry hath no man (that I ever yet could here of) hable to set furth his fote or shew his hand, as in the Science De Numeris formalibus." (2) Secondly: Dee's associations and discussions with the intellectual elites on the continent resulted in numerous insights particularly in the area of cartography and navigation; these secrets Dee was careful to record and forward back to England. He also brought back with a new selection of navigational instruments previously unknown outside the continent. This action is sometimes characterized as 'among the first recorded acts of English intellectual espionage' and undoubtedly won Dee some esteem in scholarly and royal circles alike.(3)

In 1551 Dee's connections won him a position at the court of Edward VI of England, and he served as adviser to the early English voyage of Richard Chancellor and Hugh Willoughby in 1553 (an attempt to find a Northwest Passage to Cathay (the Indies, China)). In years to follow, Dee knew scandal at the court of Queen Mary due to controversy regarding a royal horoscope he had issued. He was in large extent restored when Queen Elizabeth acceded the throne in 1558, and this monarch had an undeniable appreciation for Dee's talents including his skill as an Astrologer; the two carried on an un-official friendship in the next decades which was to be mutually beneficial. (Estimates to which extent Dee served also as secret spy for Elisabeth during this period are at present inconclusive.)


... A brief list of some of his scientific accomplishment is given here [http://www.johndee.org/DEE.html]




As Occultist.




Dee was at all times in his life a ardent follower of Christian faith. His viewpoint at the same time intermixed with Hermetic philosophy and appreciations of natural magic which is not so atypical of Renaissance thinking. Neither is there is no real inconsistency here, as even through elaborate neo-Platonic or Pythagorean allegories, these endeavors were given a decidedly theistic slant; Dee for example, "believed that number was the basis of all things and the key to knowledge, that God's creation was an act of numbering." (4) And natural magic was at the time considered quite amenable so to speak, it was magic that related to feats performed by human artifice, rather then by spirits or demons and it had many overlaps with the science of time. The occultist here was technically quite in keeping with his faith at all times.

Finally, not even a brief account of Dee's life is complete without some attention to the types of persecution he underwent. His works and pursuits though they won him re-known in higher circles, were hardly accessable (or in anycase comprehendible) to the public at large, and Dee was largely held in suspicion or contempt as a resut. Accusations of "conjuring" or "sorcery" were frequent/ "Throughout his life he was pursued by such rumours; they increased that vein of reserve and secretiveness in him which had helped to give rise to them and continued to encourage them; while at times they led to explicit false charges against him - on occasion, so flagrant and so publicised that they were attended with much personal inconvenience, crippling and distracting some of his activities." (5) For example, in collage time, Dee had been been accused of conjuration after displaying a mechanical toy that he had designed which imitated flight. He also knew brief imprisonment on unfounded charges of conjuring/black magic, that is, up until his association with Elisabeth I. Given his true faith we may take this as substantial reason to expect Dee to want to distance himself from any of the Black arts.. to include necromancy.



____________________________________________________




Edward Kelley/


Later in life, Dee slowly veered away from his traditional pursuits and fostered an increasing interest in occultism. Following a period in which he began record his dreams (and those of his wife) in his diaries, Dee developed further interest in Spiritualism and telepathy, and, perhaps inspired by Renaissance Cabalists, an interest in crystallomancy. (6) (Yes, peering in to crystal balls.) As he readily found himself quite lacking in the 'art of seeing', Dee went through a procession of scryers before making the acquaintance of one Edward Talbott (later known as Edward Kelley.)

Kelley proved an adept scryer, and by merit of his rather exceptional talent, the ability to communicate through his scrying with angels, he obtained Dee's lasting belief and sponsorship.. Perhaps the latter saw this as the special chance at that elusive divine language of creation/ supposedly availble through the medium of the angels. Kelley was of questionable character hwoever, he had started life in search of the formula of the manufacture of gold, but "later [Kelley] turned to crime and black magic, [and] on joining Dee was sternly admonished to concentrate on 'conversations' with the angels and not the devils." (7)
Their activities would span more than a decade, and the angelic conversations together with the complex system of numerology and symbolism Dee built up to encode them, came to form the Enochian magic system.. These activities and the association with Kelley would further damage Dee's esteem among the public.



Necromancy/


The motive of the Necromancer in 16th century England was commonly an attempt at communication with the dead for some particular gain, for example, to ask the whereabouts of a treasure. The expectation that the dead would know this information is based on the belief that the dead were all-knowing and all-seeing. The practice of necromancy held great taboo because it sometimes involved the use pieces of corpse (often illegally dug up), and because of the ecclesiastical condemnation of all communication with dead spirits.. There was also a certain form of necromancy which involved specifically the sacred ground of a churchyard to effect the obedience of the ghost whose body might rest nearby.
Following the Man, Myth and Magic entry on Necromancy, it seems there survives an old print depicting Edward Kelly engaged in just such a churchyard necromantic rite. It is conceivable Kelley may have at one time or another engaged in such practices.. although this print could just as easily have been made by his enemies or those of Dee. Incedently, a similar picture of the print is viewable at the wiki for John Dee [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dee], however while the caption there states Dee is the second man in the picture, the explanation is different in my source and he is likely neither man/


MMM, Necromancy: "[This print depicts] Dr John Dee's assistant, Edward Kelly, standing
in a churchyard, holding a magic wand and reading from a book of spells, while his assistant
illuminates the macabre midnight scene with a flaming torch... In the light can be seen a
newly-resurrected corpse rigid in its shroud. The two sorcerers have taken the precaution
of placing themselves at the center of a magic circle inscribed with the names of certain
protective angels, 'Rapheal, Rael, Miraton, Tarmiel and Rex.'"






__________________________________________________





The Private Library/




Despite his willing assumption of whatever ill repute an association with Kelley would, and did, incur.. It would seem Dee had all the reason in the world to want to avoid associations with Necromancy, and at the same time, his interest in hearing the divine language of creation through conversation with angels (and ensuing methods of encryption), or his interests in natural magic, or Hermetic philosophy seem to run quite adverse to the materialistic demands of the Necromancer. So, why would he be inclined to handle a certain 14th century Latin text titled the Necronomicon? (Which supposedly deals with methods of controlling dead spirits/ necromancy). Why would he be motivated to translate this into English, as Lovecraft's History of the Necronomicon states, and as Peterson states above, when he is perfectly capable of reading Latin (and if this translation were distributed, it would put into the hands of his naive and stupid English speaking persecutors all the more reason to hound him.)


Peterson states in the article discussed above(8) / "Dee assembled one of the most impressive libraries of his time, many of his volumes being rescued from then-recently-defunct Catholic monasteries. Even in his own time Dee had a reputation for being involved with sinister magical practices. Indeed much of his library was kept secret and separate from his public library because it was dangerous to possess such texts. Fortunately, many of the original volumes from Dee's bibliotheca externa, as well as his secret occult library, have been identified through the meticulous research of Julian Roberts and Andrew Watson.[/li][li] This was largely possible because Dee usually left copious notes in the margins of his books, including some very characteristic symbols."

* Peterson's note 4 reads: "Julian Roberts and Andrew Watson, John Dee's Library Catalogue (Oxford, 1992)."


Dee did in fact have a truly impressive personal library at his home at Mortlake. Originally, Dee had proposed the idea of a national library to Queen Mary although this fell through. His own personal library, perhaps an outgrowth of this proposal however, grew to be one of the largest libraries of the period (consisting of thousands of volumes and manuscripts), and was "always at the disposal of Dee's fellow scientists among his friends and pupils. If one believes that the first essential and the true center of any university is its library, Dee's circle might truly be termed the scientific university of England during the period from about 1560 to 1583." (9)
However, in 1583 Dee and Kelley, finding by this time little support for their work in England, accepted an offer of sponsorship by a Polish nobleman and traveled to Poland; they would find little reward in the next years in either this or other European sponsorships as it played out (in Prague they were chased out of the court by accusations of Necromancy!) When Dee returned to England six years later, he found his library burned and in ruins.. An act of one or another mob of "conjuration" theorists.


While not much of Dee's library survives today, thanks in part to the burning, a sense of his collectoins can be obtained evidently by perusing his journal entries and other remaining tomes in which Dee had scribbled notes. Or evidently, from surviving catalogs. I've noted that there is a published catalogue of Dee's which lists his collected manuscripts and this is now available online through the Gutenberg project (see below link.) This work must treat similar material to the 1992 examination of Dee's diary and catalogue, mentioned above in Robertson's note 4.
After numerous page searches I don't see any sign of the manuscript by the name of Necronomicon, although searching "Arabik" will bring up the mentions of "My Arabik Boke" that Robertson refers us to... (Again, no closer to identifying the 14th century Latin manuscipt in question.)


Dee's catalogue of manuscripts/ www.gutenberg.org/files/19553/19553-h/19553-h.htm





(Author's Introduction)



"The present volume contains two curious documents concerning Dr. Dee,
the eminent philosopher of Mortlake, now for the first time published from the original
manuscripts. I. His Private Diary, written in a very small illegible hand on the margins
of old Almanacs, discovered a few years ago by Mr. W. H. Black, in the library of the
Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. II. A Catalogue of his Library of Manuscripts, made by
himself before his house was plundered by the populace, and now preserved in the
library of Trinity College, Cambridge."








_____________________________________________

1/ www.johndee.org/calder/html/Calder3.html , section III.
2/ ibid., section III
3/ Referring here to the Encyclopedia of Man, Myth and Magic. Entry for Dee
4/ Wikipedian summation of the comments of Dr. R. Poole www.history.ac.uk/eseminars/sem2.html
5/ www.johndee.org/calder/html/Calder2.html , section II.
6/ Myth, man and magic. Dee.
7/ ibid.
8/ www.esotericarchives.com/necronom/necronom.htm
9/ www.gfisher.org/chapter_10.htm

[us4-he2-gal2]

Peterson`s Claim of An Early Necronomicon

Part 3

A final post and answer on the !4th cen. Necronomicon





Okay. So before getting to it, it might be worth it to briefly recap the above two posts. As is obvious, Peterson's discussed article struck my interest/ perhaps it was my personal skepticism about the Necronomicon which made the idea of borrowed nomenclature interesting.. or it could have been my latent fascination with Necromancy.

Post 1/ To sum the above two posts, in the first I examined the author of the article, presented some of its essential, and left off with a feeling of suspicion in that the key to the entire examination seemed rather opaque and under-identified. Physically, what 14th cen. Latin manuscript???

Post 2/ In the second post I attempt to outline John Dee as scientist and occultist, some aspects of Necromancy in the period, Edward Kelley, and something of the persecution Dee experienced as a result of public suspicion. My feeling on reading through this information was, why one earth would Dee take up the task of translating a book about Necromancy into English? The interest in Necromancy first of all seems out of character with his general line of mystic inquiry. And as for the translating to English, the language of his persecutors, this would only put him at further risk (if not outright condemnation.)


So I became as interested in disproving the claims of the author as l was in finding more about the alleged manuscript. I decided to email Peterson, and request some further hints though doubted I'd actually get a reply/ I decided to focus on the manuscript question and withhold my doubts about the contextual relevance of Dee (as a matter of tact.) Surprisingly, the below exchange occurred overnight/






______________________________________________________________________-

[To Peterson]


"I am writing to ask if you may be willing to explain some
identifying information for this manuscript? I notice you have
included pictures of this manuscript, brief translations,
and by your comment "a comparison of the fuller Latin text of the
Necronomicon with Dee's manuscript" I understand you have had access
to this manuscript. Is the fuller Latin text available anywhere? Is
there a museum it is now stored at, or an archive? Does this item have
identifying information such as museum number? Has it been written
about anywhere else? Where did these pictures come from?

Thank you very much for considering my inquires and I hope you will
reward my questing spirit with an answer."







"Subject Re: A minor inquiry regarding sources and an article of yours
From Joseph H Peterson <[e-mail]>
Date Tuesday, June 3, 2008 3:58 am
To [censored.]



Sorry for the confusion, but it's just fiction."


____________________________________________________________________





Ahh......... o_0 I don't usually engage in obscenities but I don't know its


Nini! Flustering cod-piece! You fly-bitten nincumpoop! You umm.. You big Bugger! ohhhhhhhh




I'm a little mad about that. I blew the better part of a weekend thinking about this stuff and NO cool 14th cen. text about Necromancy in the end? Why waste peoples semi-precious time with gross mis-representations/ .. (I mean, if not to redirect the "popular" interest in the Necronomion into something a little more Twilight Grotto-esque? Develop a little fixation on John Dee (oh your writing a book on John Dee, Mr.Peterson..very interesting, very very interesting..) Looks like Peterson pulled a Lovecraft of sorts/

Makes for kind of a stunted investigation unfortunately.

[madness]

You'll see on the Twilit Grotto's link page:

necronom/necronom.html - A FICTIONAL note about Lovecraft and the Necronomicon

No misrepresentation there

[us4-he2-gal2]

I don't see where your seeing that - it's possibly he added it after my email this summer. In anycase there is no such thing as a "fictional note" unless your some misrepresentative bastard who is trying to generate interest in the mysteries of John Dee - who you recently wrote a book on like this guy did.

[oipteaapdoce]

This is going way off topic, so just delete if it is irrelevant or if I am just repeating what is above. I have studied John Dee, Edward Kelly and Enochian magic for about 15 years now, which basically means I have read nearly all there is to read on the topic. I also had some very good teachers who fortunately set me straight about the history. I also have all of the Enochian MS (even read a good bit of it), as well as all of the (decent) books on Enochian and Dr. Dee. I'm definitely not used to proper scholarly writing with footnotes and etc. (other then a couple of years of college ages back) so please bear with me. If there is an obvious error (and you had better not be using GD Enochian as a referance) please PM me so I can fix it .

First off, the Niceconmoron, er I mean Necronomicon has absolutely nothing to do with Dee or Enochian magic in the slightest. Sure some author *claimed* that there was an ancient manuscript by Dee (actually I think Lovecraft stated this originally), this bears no truth in the matter. If one looks through any of the MS you will get to know Dee's handwriting pretty quickly and one of the MS in question which contains the Necronomicon has no resemblance whatsoever (I'm hunting up the MS and more information don't worry). As I'm sure most know how it went back then was one would borrow or buy a copy of the Grimoire or book in question and make their own copy of it with notes. Dee did this with several books so he would have his own copy, as did all of the other scholars at the time. There is the possibility that Dee just owned the manuscript but didn't make a copy for himself. However his library was one of the most famous in the world, and definitely in England at the time with even Queen Elizabeth having visited it twice. There is a long list of every single book (the printing press wasn't in wide use yet, so they were handwritten copies.

I have seen an "old" MS being passed around which is supposedly by Dee (which is why I mention the handwriting above), but now I can't find it, or the mention of it. Probably the fun the folks into the more obscure stuff are having. If I find it again I'll add the information.

Other sources (none that I would ever recommend any serious practitioner or scholar of Enochian read) claim that Liber Loagaeth is the Necronomicon. This is Sloane MS 3191 which can be seen on Person's site Well part of it anyways, that is obviously not the entire MS. I have seen some websites which contrast and compare Loagaoth with the Necronomicon, and obviously they were reading an entirely different Loagaoth then I was! More like they made it up. Cthulu isn't mentioned once ever in Dee's diaries (obviously).

Dee was extremely meticulous about things, and wouldn't have just left a few books out of the list. Perhaps he may have acquired it after the fire at Mortlake (set by his neighbors thinking him blasphemous), but that would just mean he may have read it, not written or copied the book.

About Necromancy, there is no proof from Dee's copious diaries that him and/or Kelly did any form of necromany whatsoever. The ONLY "proof" of this is that one nicely romanticized painting of the two of them in a graveyard calling up the shade. It's amazing how theories can be kept alive just by one simple piece of artwork and nothing else to substantiate them.

This is going way off topic, so just delete if it is irrelevant or if I am just repeating what is above. I have studied John Dee, Edward Kelly and Enochian magic for about 15 years now, which basically means I have read nearly all there is to read on the topic. I also had some very good teachers who fortunately set me straight about the history. I also have all of the Enochian MS (even read a good bit of it), as well as all of the (decent) books on Enochian and Dr. Dee.

First off, the Niceconmoron, er I mean Necronomicon has absolutely nothing to do with Dee or Enochian magic in the slightest. Sure some author *claimed* that there was an ancient manuscript by Dee (actually I think Lovecraft stated this originally), this bears no truth in the matter. If one looks through any of the MS you will get to know Dee's handwriting pretty quickly and the MS in question which contains the Necronomicon has no resemblance whatsoever (I'm hunting up the MS and more information don't worry). As I'm sure most know how it went back then was one would borrow or buy a copy of the Grimoire or book in question and make their own copy of it with notes. Dee did this with several books so he would have his own copy, as did all of the other scholars at the time. There is the possibility that Dee just owned the manuscript but didn't make a copy for himself. However his library was one of the most famous in the world, and definitely in England at the time with even Queen Elizabeth having visited it twice. There is a long list of every single book, (the printing press wasn't in wide use yet so most were handwritten copies.

I found where the John Dee being related to the Necronomicon idea originally came from: "H. P. Lovecraft's short story "The Dunwich Horror" (1929) credits Dee with translating the Necronomicon into English" listed under "Dee in Fiction" at Wikipedia. On a side note I find the Wiki article on John Dee to only be partially accurate with quite a few things stated as fact which are purely speculations and wild guesses. Enochian unfortunately has the worst scholarship of all areas in magic unfortunately.

Dee was extremely meticulous about things, and wouldn't have just left a few books out of the list. Perhaps he may have acquired it after the fire at Mortlake (set by his neighbors thinking him blasphemous), but that would just mean he may have read it, not written or copied the book.

About Necromancy, there is no proof from Dee's copious diaries that him and/or Kelly did any form of necromany whatsoever. The ONLY "proof" of this is that one nicely romanticized painting of the two of them in a graveyard calling up the shade. It's amazing how theories can be kept alive just by one simple piece of artwork and nothing else to substantiate them. [/img]

Then there is the fact that the Necronomicon has little if anything to do with actual Necromancy which is the working with and divination by the dead.

It was asked above how Dee's diaries survived and were released all these years later. Well the MS which is supposedly the Necronomicon is of the completely wrong date to be from Dee, so I'll just talk about the ones from the 1500's which Dee actually had in his posession...

John Dee and Edward kelly spent between 8 and 16 hours per day talking with the Enochian entities and scrying. Dee took word for word notes on every single session. You can read the times and dates in the diaries to see they missed very few days. In the end John (Dee) had in his possession of at least 10 different diaries (found in 6 different MS) of at least a few hundred pages each ranging over a period of about 26 years, and with two different scryers. There may have been other diaries which were lost in the fire, and later used to wrap pies and fish, we do not know for sure, but we can assume we have a pretty good record of Dee's practices, books he owned, and even when his wife had her monthly cycle. I seriously doubt he would have left out a mention of the Necronomicon MS or any practices of Necromancy. It is possible that Edward Kelly on the other hand did sneak off to the graveyard from time to time to do workings as is mentioned in one account. However Kelly did not have a book or manuscript collection of his own from what we can tell, and did not leave Dee's sight very often.

So how the diary notes survived.... the EEs (Enochian entities) told Dee to hide the diaries in a hidden compartment in a table. After Dee's death this table was acquired by another family. Well the wife heard rattling one day and decided to investigate. She found a drawer of many pieces of good and strong paper, which was extremely rare and expensive back then. So she did what any housewife of the time would do, she used them to wrap the fish and pies in! Fortunately she didn't make it through the entire pile before they were discovered as something important and given to... (damn memory) a library or scholar of the time I believe.

Well there was a fanatical Christian author who was very much against Dee and wanted to stain his name and reputation so he went and published a large number of the Dee diaries. This is Merric Causaubon, and the book is available on PDF now "A True and Faithful Relation". (from the Cotton Appendix MS) This book is nearly 1000 pages long, and is slightly easier to read then Dee's handwriting. However this only accounts for one of the MS.

The rest Elias Ashmole acquired and copied word for word (even though he does add some of his own notes which sometimes makes it confusing as to which is Dee and which is Ashmole unless you read the originals). This helped to fill in the blanks since many of the Dee diaries are quite damaged from fire and general wear and tear. Ashmole did experiment with the Enochian system for a time as well. He also never mentioned the Necronomicon MS. The Ashmole copies of the MS are both in the Ashmole museum, but many are in the British Library.

The other Dee diaries have made it over to the British library and have been converted over to microfilm (which one can order for about $150 per roll to the US).

Well Joseph Peterson has taken up the long-term project of transcribing (it really is with the old handwriting lol) and translating the various old Grimoire MS. He has published the five books of mystery which had many Latin notes in it, so this is quite helpful to the Enochian researcher. The MS he used were primarily 3188 (and I think
one other), and knowing Joe, I'm sure he compared with the Ashmole copies.

Geoffrey James also provided most of the information from the most important of the Enochian MS (3191, 3189, and compared with the Ashmole as well as tidbits from the others) in his Enochian evocation book (the only other really good and accurate book on Enochian magic).

So it is thanks to Ashmole, Cassabaun (I'll bet he never thought he would be helping), and the British Museum that we have many of the diaries to be able to read today.

If you wish to read the Enochian Diaries in Dee's handwriting you can find quite a few of them here

There is also a free version of the first 3 of the five books of mystery which was published online (by the John Dee society) about 15 years ago.

Referances: Being too much of a slacker to get all my books out and copy the information over with some I have just pasted the notes from pages online where the same book was used ;>. I'm sure I missed a few, or there are some which are newer and redundant, and a couple I wouldn't recommend to anyone even as a doorstop. I have not listed these.

A few other books on the history of Dee, Kelly and Enochian which I don't personally own but just borrowed from various University libraries.

All of the MS from the British library by Dee and by Ashmole, mostly 3191, 3189, 3188 and the Cotton Appendix.

Dee, John: The Hieroglyphic Modad.

Fell Smith, Charlotte (1909). John Dee: 1527–1608. London: Constable and Company.

Fell Smith, Charlotte: John Dee (it's now online!) www.johndee.org/charlotte/

French, Peter, "John Dee, The World of an Elizabethan Magus"

James, Geoffrey: The Enochian evocation of Dr. John Dee

Jim Reeds (1996). "John Dee and the Magic Tables in the Book of Soyga (this one is about Dee's most wanted and prized MS that he obtained which is MS 8 at the British Library)

Jones, David R. (various online articles)

Julian Roberts:"A John Dee Chronology, 1509–1609". RENAISSANCE MAN: The Reconstructed Libraries of European Scholars: 1450–1700 Series One: The Books and Manuscripts of John Dee, 1527–1608. Adam Matthew Publications (2005).

Laycock, Donald: The complete Enochian dictionary (awesome book!)

Meric Casaubon (1659 Republished by Magickal Childe (1992)). A True & Faithful Relation of What passed for many Yeers between Dr. John Dee (A Mathematician of Great Fame in Q. Eliz. and King James their Reignes) and some spirits.

Parker Torrence (various online articles)

Peterson, Joseph: The five books of Mystery

Peterson, Joseph: The five books of mystery

Turner, Robert: Elizabethan Magic: The Art and the Magus (Definitely one of the best books about Enochian magic)

Tyson, Donald: Enochian magick for Beginners (half decent on the history, but take the authors own theories and some of the history with a very large grain of salt)

Zelewski, Pat: Golden Dawn Enochian magick (fortunately mostly not about the GD Enochian, but more about the history and the original Enochian).

Athena

[oipteaapdoce]

Here is the "manuscript" I was thinking of at this website typed out. I'm still trying to hunt up the one I have seen that was handwritten. One can tell very quickly though that it isn't written at all in the writing style of the 15th or 16th century (and definitely not older then that), nor in Dee's writing style.

On a side note I believe the theories about the Voynich manuscript being the Necronomicon are equally humerus.

Athena