Jake Stratton-Kent wrote:
> Hi Mogg,
>   
Thanks Jake - probable about as far as can go on this -
re colonialism - many modern studies talk about the greek system of 
"aparthied" operated in Egypt -
yes they initially welcomed Alexander the Great - but what was the 
alternative -
can say they had a love / hate relationship with the Greeks who were 
marginally better than the Roman -
the early Christians successfully exploited the Egyptian hatred of the 
Greeks, associating it with the demonised god Seth
(at that stage associated with foreigners) - I think the background to 
this is in David Frankfurter -
if anything the modern obsession would be to assume countries enjoy 
being part of great empires such as
Greece & Rome and its modern avatar the British or French.

AFAIK the collection of texts misleadingly called the Greek Magical 
Papyri are written in one hand -
but they no doubt are some sort of compilation from various sources - 
but a recent study by Jacco Dielemann reveals
that the author / compiler was indeed bilingual if not multilingual 
-that's why he or she is thought to be an Egyptian priest.
But interested to hear other folks views on that?

Re circles - thought your original point was there was any evidence of 
it in Egyptian magick -
and it is in fact a common part of their magical practice from all periods.
The way these techniques spread or got there is another issue -
because magick is quite international in the classical world.

My focus on the decans is that it is in the Testament of Solomon and 
most of the experts agree that that section is
a characteristic Egyptian theory and the enduring Egyptian contribution 
to Greco/Babylonian astrology -
it is also a magical theory that underlies the Corpus Hermeticum & the 
PGM and can be traced in textual sources back to at
least the time of Ramses II (c1350BC).

I think we agree that there are lots of streams that flow into modern 
magick - including all the stuff that surfaced in the renaissance & before 
but also the new material post Napoleonic wars etc, My interest just 
happens to be in the Egyptian current -
which has only really been fully revealed post Golden Dawn and more than 
justifies a modern practitioner's "obsession".

BTW I am aware of the Thracian/Bulgarian connection with Orpheus -
There's an interesting possible counterpoint in PGM magick/CH
between Orphic preference of the sound over the symbol and the Egyptian 
preference for the symbol over the sound.
My friends in A Spell in Time have been doing translations and 
performances of this folklore for a number of years now -
here's a link:

http://www.spellintime.fsnet.co.uk/

bb/93

Mogg



> mean, then by the Kabbalists/Cabalists et al - not to mention Egypt.
>
> So here's my left hook for the neglected barbarians - Thracology is a
> fairly recent science, largely outside English language works. From an
> 'occult' perspective it deserves to be treated at least as seriously
> as Egyptology and Kabbalah, but is unlikely to attract the funding and
> popular interest. This leaves a hugely important area largely
> unacknowledged.
>
> Why is it important? Well major links with Eleusis, Delphi, Orphism
> and other 'Greek' currents for one, but also as the primary base of
> operations of the Bogomil movement/medieval dualism etc.. That is
> millennia of largely unacknowledged influence on Western mystical and
> magical movements..
>
> The argument re Egyptian circles doesn't prove any diffusionist
> theory, as said earlier, Greeks had their own circumambulations to
> mark out sacred space. Either way though this somewhat explodes
> Hutton's thesis that pagans never worshipped in circles!  ;-)
>
> I am very far from denying Egyptian elements in the Hermetica - I'd go
> further and say the so-called Chaldean Oracles show clearer Egyptian
> influence than Babylonian, but also plenty of Greek, just as with the
> Hermetica and the papyri. But then prior to the Romans, Babylon and
> Antioch were part of the Seleucid Empire, so these centres had plenty
> of Greek influences of their own, as well as the Ptolemies for
> neighbours.
>
> Likewise I completely accept an early date for the Testament of Solomon.
>
> I note though that you appear to be relying on the decans to show
> Egyptian influences across a wide spectrum - it seems to me that they
> form part of a cross-cultural interest in astrology and the gods in
> the Hellenistic and Roman era, of which the Babylonians and others
> form at least as major a part. Two schemas I've seen attributing
> divine names to the decans from this period are *very* cross-cultural.
>
> Equally interesting to these folks, and equally enduring, were the
> Zodiac (Chaldeo-Greek) and the Lunar Mansions (jury still out re
> origins). Then we have the Babylonian hours (12 rather than 24?) and
> the related dodekauros (an alternative circle of 12 animals). All can
> be traced in the papyri, showing that folks were fascinated with star
> and time lore in general, rather than a specifically Egyptian
> interest.
>
> When it comes to the grimoires, real 'Egyptian' elements are minimal
> in my opinion. In this the Egyptian legacy is far from being alone.
> The much romanticised  'clerical Underground' which authored and used
> the early grimoires effectively excised most pre-Christian themes that
> had survived in Byzantine and Islamic sources predating them.
>
> The strongest surviving 'antique' influence is a low form of
> Christianised Neoplatonism, largely imitating Agrippa. Until that is
> after Napoleon abolished the Inquisition and folklore elements and
> pagan survivals - and imitations of the same - could re-enter the fold
> via the later printed populist grimoires. See 'The Old Man of the
> Pyramids' aka 'Black Pullet' for a good example. This however is after
> the 'Great Powers' had fought the battle of the Nile, so no continuous
> strand is to be inferred, just an earlier phase of interest in Egypt
> pre Howard Carter <shudder>.
>
> Iamblichus certainly adapted existing magical practices into
> 'Theurgy', and many resemblances to the papyri (and Hermetica) can be
> traced there. At the same time he was the head of the *Syrian*
> Neoplatonist school, and he also claimed to be passing on Assyrian
> knowledge etc. We can't rely on him for a purist Egyptian link in the
> chain from old style magic to the present. Rather he epitomises the
> Hellenistic melting pot model, in which Syria's role has been under
> estimated and Egypt's though present has been exaggerated.
>
> Where I'd strongly concur is that the magical papyri - which I
> consider highly syncretic and not ethnically limited - are the single
> most important resource we have for understanding old style magic and
> its origins. Not to mention taking practical magic out of the context
> of Judaeo-Christian and latterly 'Masonic' redrafts, which played no
> major role in originating magical traditions.  Unfortunately in the
> commercialised world of modern occultism Mathers 'translations' of the
> grimoires still attract much more interest.
>
> ALWays
>
> Jake
>
> On 5 February 2010 15:02, mandrake <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>   
>> Dear Jake Stratton-Kent et al
>>
>> Yes Greeks & Romans projected an image onto the Egyptian priests - which
>> they in turn adopted -> as it enabled them to earn a living as magical practitioners at a time when> normal ways of earning a > livelihood were restricted by their colonial masters -
>> previous scholarship tended to use this to argue there that's all there is -
>> ie the exotic persona but nothing more -> which seems to me reductionist and steadily proved wrong by new research see > for example
>> Jacco Dieleman "Priests, Tongues and Rites" -
>> I think many modern commentators may have subconciously adopted this
>> classical bias . . .
>>
>> For a definitive summary of Egyptian magical techniques see Robert Ritner
>> "Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical practice" which includes
>> the material on encircling and circumambulation in Egyptian magick -
>> a good example of which is the ubiquitous image of the cartouche - in which
>> the name of the king is encircled as a protection etc
>>
>> The CH is indeed a synthesis but there are many strong arguments for heavy
>> Egyptian component -
>> (whereas it used to be argued there was NO Egyptian component whatsoever
>> apart from a bit of local colour)
>> New editions and new discoveries of Hermetic texts have tended to underline
>> the Egyptian context - the material on the decanal spirits being the
>> Egyptian contribution to astrology,
>> the centrality of the sun, the material on activating statues and fetishes,
>> the prophesy and indeed the whole philosophy of language (see again
>> Dielemann, and Garth Fowden, David Frankfurter et al)
>>
>> Yes indeed Testament of Solomon written in Greek and is a synthetic text -
>> the argument is whether it is contemporary
>> with the PGM -
>> rather than some sort of medieval forgery, and whether is has any authentic
>> Egyptian magical components, which is does -
>> the Ring Spell and again the magick of decanal spirits etc
>>
>> The Egyptian component of later grimoires may show imo the continuation of a
>> tradition -
>> given the Egyptian context of the earliest grimoires and indeed Hebrew
>> magick (Cairo Geniza)
>> I've got no problem with QBL having Neo-Platonic elements given that
>> Neo-Platonic writers such as Iamblicus
>> claim to be been taught by Egyptian priests and discuss Egyptian philosophy
>> and magick -
>> ie its the same source.
>>
>> The PGM is indeed a compilation of magical texts from various sources, the
>> magical library of a
>> Egyptian priest from Thebes who was fluent in all the languages used -
>> shows that the reputation for the Egyptian mages was no mere exotic thing
>> but
>> based on their grasp of the subject. (see again Jacco Dielemann)
>>
>> "senebty"
>>
>> Mogg
>>
>> PS:  Hi Jake - any chance of responding in a continuous email -
>> rather than snip up which i find hard work : ) Just a thought
>>
>>     
>
>
>