Hi Nagasiva,
let me say first that 'Early Modern' Western magic isn't 'a thing in
itself', it has roots, and is much less interesting - to me at least -
when considered without them. Tracing the sources of this or that
recent figure, and otherwise making much the same omissions, seems to
me a very sterile approach.
On 28 June 2010 22:31, nagasiva yronwode, YIPPIE Director
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> g'day, Jake!
>
> as had ever been my expectation given that the number of
> spirits in this grimoire/directory is sesigesimal (72).
aye, but that involves tweaking to fit, Weyer doesn't give 72, nor
does Scot, but both precede the GoS. The GoS 'astronomy' is duff
anyway, only one of the Evu-ul Spirits is Saturnine, which isn't
terribly convincing. Gimme the 'aerial Hades' of Plato, Plutarch and
Iamblichus, much closer to the roots; curiously enough their picture
is far more compatible with Living Traditions today, permitting
cultural interchange of a more significant and deeper nature.
Oddly enough, if we are to harmonise Western Magic with the magical
traditions of the New World (rooted in African Christianity), we first
need to examine the pre-Christian roots of the Western Tradition.
Pretending Western magic is no older than 1495 when the Christian
Cabala came in is not going to take us anywhere. The whole picture of
our 'spirits' is hideously distorted from then on, with the dead
virtually omitted from Western magic rendering it artificial and
remote from every other culture.
Allow me to reiterate, goetia didn't start with an early modern
English grimoire, but approximately 2000 years earlier, with the rise
of the polis in Greece, the reformation of Hero cults and the rise of
Orphism. Tweaking late conjure books isn't getting any closer to the
essence of the original, which was not dependent on Judaeo-Christian
theology and its aversions.
Jake
http://www.underworld-apothecary.com/
|