Owing to what can probably only be described as intellectual masochism, I recently went back to Thomas Inman's Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names and managed to re-set the rest of the main text of vol. i, and a large part of vol. ii (though the indexes will probably need to be typed out completely). It is thus possible that this project will be completed by the end of this year. Watch this space.
2010-09-29
2010-08-27
O circule stellarum . . .
For C.H.B. -- just uploaded my Latin translation of the Gnostic Mass to Scribd. Earlier versions of this have been webposted on the now-defunct Nu Isis Working Group site (mirrored here), on Hermetic Library's EGC pages, and on the OpenBuddha blog. The posted copy is set out for printing onto A4 for ritual use, and as such has the rubric entirely in the original English and only has the short list of Saints (largely because I never finished Latinising the long list).
In writing it I had in mind the reconstructed classical Latin pronunication that can be found in Latin dictionaries and grammars. The rendition of the Anthem, though, makes no pretence at any Latin verse metre; treat it as if it were English iambic pentameter. I am still far from satisfied by my rendition of the Quia Patris.
In accordance with the short comment on The Book of the Law I am not going to discuss issues of interpretation arising from my translation of quotations from Liber Legis in the Mass. This does not extend to correction of simple grammatical errors.
To my knowledge, this ritual has been performed twice, the first time being by AVoD Oasis OTO in March 2005. There are currently tentative plans for a third performance at the Gnosis IVxviii gathering later this year.
In writing it I had in mind the reconstructed classical Latin pronunication that can be found in Latin dictionaries and grammars. The rendition of the Anthem, though, makes no pretence at any Latin verse metre; treat it as if it were English iambic pentameter. I am still far from satisfied by my rendition of the Quia Patris.
In accordance with the short comment on The Book of the Law I am not going to discuss issues of interpretation arising from my translation of quotations from Liber Legis in the Mass. This does not extend to correction of simple grammatical errors.
To my knowledge, this ritual has been performed twice, the first time being by AVoD Oasis OTO in March 2005. There are currently tentative plans for a third performance at the Gnosis IVxviii gathering later this year.
2010-08-22
This is it, which philosophie dreameth of (2)
Forgot to mention this on the blog at the time, but have uploaded some more materials relating to "Enochian Magic" to scribd.
The Holy Table of John Dee gives a full-colour overview of the Tabula Sancta or Table of Practice based on the final corrected design in the Dee diaries and the description as to colours and dimensions left by Elias Ashmole who had a chance to examine the original table (believed to have been subsequently destroyed in a fire); also includes actual-size images (broken up into parts to fit on A4 pages) of the border, central block and Ensigns of Creation that can be printed then cut out and either stuck together or used as template for painting your own.
The Angelicall Alphabet of Dr. Dee shows the letters of the "Enochian" alphabet based on Dee's copy of the corrected final forms, along with relevant excerpts from the Spirit Diaries concerning the "primitiue diuine or Angelicall speche" and the names of the letters (several of which Regardie and those copying him managed to get wrong).
Bibliographia Enochia is simply a bibliography of primary and secondary sources on the subject, under sporadic review / update. It makes no pretence to completeness, and is limited to works on the subject in English.
The photograph shows a half-size rendition of the Table of Practice plus other accessories made by yours truly (I can occasionally be induced to actually make physically manifested things), the table being backed onto a folding game-board for portability.
The Angelicall Alphabet of Dr. Dee shows the letters of the "Enochian" alphabet based on Dee's copy of the corrected final forms, along with relevant excerpts from the Spirit Diaries concerning the "primitiue diuine or Angelicall speche" and the names of the letters (several of which Regardie and those copying him managed to get wrong).
Bibliographia Enochia is simply a bibliography of primary and secondary sources on the subject, under sporadic review / update. It makes no pretence to completeness, and is limited to works on the subject in English.
The photograph shows a half-size rendition of the Table of Practice plus other accessories made by yours truly (I can occasionally be induced to actually make physically manifested things), the table being backed onto a folding game-board for portability.
2010-08-11
Falsely attributed? (3)
At a bit of a loose end (Guild Wars is offline today for server maintenance) and turned up this blog post on the subject of Dr. Abisha S. Hudson, presumed author of The Masculine Cross and Ancient Sex Worship, mentioned some months back in an overview of Phallicist works on History of Religion issued by CP / UP(L).
While I completely agree with the author's case that the identification of "Sha Rocco" with Hargrave Jennings is utterly implausible, it seems he was still caught up in confusion arising from (a) some deliberately dishonest titling by opportunistic publishers of the late 19th century and (b) Cat Yronwode's comments in 2003 or earlier on a book which she had not actually read at the time.
Ascribing the association between "Sha Rocco" and "Abisha S. Hudson" to an "anonymous librarian" suggests that the only basis for it is a manuscript note on the title page of one library copy—in fact, on the reverse of the title page of the 1874 Masculine Cross it was stated that Hudson had entered the book "in the office of the Librarian of Congress," and the only plausible reason for the name of Dr. Hudson (for whom there is far more biographical data now generally available than Ms. Yronwode was able to find in 2003) being on the copyright notice, other than his being the author, or at the very least personally associated with the author, was that he was an employee of the New York based publisher, which is not credible given what is known about him (e.g., that he was a doctor living variously in Ohio and California).
The connection of The Masculine Cross with the 1889-91 "Nature Worship and Mystical Series," is not as simple as Ms. Yronwode assumed. The tenth and last volume of that series had on its cover the title Masculine Cross. It was not, however, a reprint of the 1874 work; rather an opportunistic re-use of the earlier volume's short title. It seems likely that the 1874 Masculine Cross, while being distributed across the USA, was for some time known more by reputation than actual acquaintence in Britain, and that in 1880 an opportunistic publisher in London stole the name and several passages of the text for a small octavo volume called on its title page, Phallic Worship: A Description of the Mysteries of the Sex Worship of the Ancients with the history of the Masculine Cross, but simply The Masculine Cross on the front board and spine. The binding of this latter volume is similar but not identical to that later adopted for the NW&MS and internal typographical and layout style is completely different.
(Page images of the 1874 and 1891 works (in their 1904 reprints) may be found on the Internet Archive. The 1880 work appears rarer and just has a brief entry on Google Books with a spurious attribution to Jennings.)
My reasons for rejecting the widespread attribution of the "Nature Worship and Mystical Series" itself to Hargrave Jennings have been discussed at length in various places, including the endnotes to the Unspeakable Press (Leng) editions of those volumes and in an earlier post on this blog, and include considerations of style, ideas, and dates.
What I have not examined is the question of, since Abisha S. Hudson was a real person and not a pseudonym of Jennings, and also alive at the time the NW&MS was published, could he have been the author of the series, as the author of the post that prompted these ramblings (on a blog about Emma Hardinge Britten, the Spiritualist) seems to assume? Part of Cat Yronwode's argument for Rocco / Hudson being Jennings was that Ophiolatreia, the second volume of the NW&MS was ascribed to "Abisha S. Hudson" by Gershon Legman, a generally reputable bibliographer; and internal references within the series indicate it as being all by one author.
This I cannot answer definitely at the moment, but it seems unlikely; while judgements on style are of limited value given how much of the NW&MS was verbatim from earlier works, style of those passages which do seem to be due to the actual "author" is unlike that found in the Rocco / Hudson Masculine Cross, and the sources employed and general focus of the studies (specifically the recurring emphasis on India as a supposed centre of "phallic worship" tending to suggest a hidden agenda of justifying British colonial policy there as a so-called civilising force) as well as the simple fact that the whole series was published in London make it more likely that the author was British, and a wide range of sources was used whereas the 1874 Masculine Cross was, saving the last chapter, almost entirely cribbed from Dr. Thomas Inman's Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names.
While I completely agree with the author's case that the identification of "Sha Rocco" with Hargrave Jennings is utterly implausible, it seems he was still caught up in confusion arising from (a) some deliberately dishonest titling by opportunistic publishers of the late 19th century and (b) Cat Yronwode's comments in 2003 or earlier on a book which she had not actually read at the time.
Ascribing the association between "Sha Rocco" and "Abisha S. Hudson" to an "anonymous librarian" suggests that the only basis for it is a manuscript note on the title page of one library copy—in fact, on the reverse of the title page of the 1874 Masculine Cross it was stated that Hudson had entered the book "in the office of the Librarian of Congress," and the only plausible reason for the name of Dr. Hudson (for whom there is far more biographical data now generally available than Ms. Yronwode was able to find in 2003) being on the copyright notice, other than his being the author, or at the very least personally associated with the author, was that he was an employee of the New York based publisher, which is not credible given what is known about him (e.g., that he was a doctor living variously in Ohio and California).
The connection of The Masculine Cross with the 1889-91 "Nature Worship and Mystical Series," is not as simple as Ms. Yronwode assumed. The tenth and last volume of that series had on its cover the title Masculine Cross. It was not, however, a reprint of the 1874 work; rather an opportunistic re-use of the earlier volume's short title. It seems likely that the 1874 Masculine Cross, while being distributed across the USA, was for some time known more by reputation than actual acquaintence in Britain, and that in 1880 an opportunistic publisher in London stole the name and several passages of the text for a small octavo volume called on its title page, Phallic Worship: A Description of the Mysteries of the Sex Worship of the Ancients with the history of the Masculine Cross, but simply The Masculine Cross on the front board and spine. The binding of this latter volume is similar but not identical to that later adopted for the NW&MS and internal typographical and layout style is completely different.
(Page images of the 1874 and 1891 works (in their 1904 reprints) may be found on the Internet Archive. The 1880 work appears rarer and just has a brief entry on Google Books with a spurious attribution to Jennings.)
My reasons for rejecting the widespread attribution of the "Nature Worship and Mystical Series" itself to Hargrave Jennings have been discussed at length in various places, including the endnotes to the Unspeakable Press (Leng) editions of those volumes and in an earlier post on this blog, and include considerations of style, ideas, and dates.
What I have not examined is the question of, since Abisha S. Hudson was a real person and not a pseudonym of Jennings, and also alive at the time the NW&MS was published, could he have been the author of the series, as the author of the post that prompted these ramblings (on a blog about Emma Hardinge Britten, the Spiritualist) seems to assume? Part of Cat Yronwode's argument for Rocco / Hudson being Jennings was that Ophiolatreia, the second volume of the NW&MS was ascribed to "Abisha S. Hudson" by Gershon Legman, a generally reputable bibliographer; and internal references within the series indicate it as being all by one author.
This I cannot answer definitely at the moment, but it seems unlikely; while judgements on style are of limited value given how much of the NW&MS was verbatim from earlier works, style of those passages which do seem to be due to the actual "author" is unlike that found in the Rocco / Hudson Masculine Cross, and the sources employed and general focus of the studies (specifically the recurring emphasis on India as a supposed centre of "phallic worship" tending to suggest a hidden agenda of justifying British colonial policy there as a so-called civilising force) as well as the simple fact that the whole series was published in London make it more likely that the author was British, and a wide range of sources was used whereas the 1874 Masculine Cross was, saving the last chapter, almost entirely cribbed from Dr. Thomas Inman's Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names.
2010-07-16
Falsely attributed? (2)
Further to the last: the GD site mentioned also has a copy of an early CP release of Liber 777, with the front matter excised, and again linked to with the remark "falsely attributed to Aleister Crowley." This is a slightly more ambiguous case. It is worth mentioning, however, that (a) the first edition of 777 was published anonymously, (b) the bulk of the page count of the revised edition, the first to have Crowley's name on the title page, consisted of additional material not in the first edition whose authorship has not been seriously disputed, (c) the title page of 777 Revised described it as "A reprint of 777 with much additional matter by the late Aleister Crowley" which can be parsed as only attributing the "additional matter" to AC, especially since (d) the editor's preface to the revised edition stated: "It is not, however, entirely original. Ninety per cent of the Hebrew, the four colour scales, and the order and attribution of the Tarot trumps are as taught in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, with its inner circle of the Rose of Ruby and the Cross of Gold (R.R. et A.C.)," and in fact this source is indirectly acknowledged in Crowley's original introduction, when he discussed previous attempts to tabulate knowledge.
The specific claim that the tables of 777 were lifted almost in their entirity from a GD MS. titled "General Correspondences" was made by Pat Zalewski in Kabbalah of the Golden Dawn (xiii, 92 n.); Zalewski referred again to "General Correspondences" in later books; however unless and until a copy of this MS. predating the publication of 777 is published or otherwise made available for general examination it will be impossible to tell for certain just how much if anything in the tables of 777 was due to AC.
The specific claim that the tables of 777 were lifted almost in their entirity from a GD MS. titled "General Correspondences" was made by Pat Zalewski in Kabbalah of the Golden Dawn (xiii, 92 n.); Zalewski referred again to "General Correspondences" in later books; however unless and until a copy of this MS. predating the publication of 777 is published or otherwise made available for general examination it will be impossible to tell for certain just how much if anything in the tables of 777 was due to AC.
2010-07-13
Falsely attributed?
Just turned this up: on the website of an organisation calling itself the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn is a copy of the CP edition of the Mathers-Crowley Goëtia, linked with the remark that it was "falsely attributed to Aleister Crowley." While Crowley's claim on the title page to have "edited, verified, introduced and commented" the whole work may be somewhat overblown, his actual contribution to the main text likely limited to providing a few hostile or sarcastic footnotes, the major false attribution in that edition is the "translator" credit to S.L. Mathers; as documented by Joseph Petersen in his edition of the Lemegeton, the BL MSS. on which Mathers drew are all in English. I am also at a complete loss as to by whom Ben Rowe's edition of the Theurgia-Goëtia, also mirrored on that site, was "falsely attributed to Aleister Crowley" -- certainly not by Rowe.
P.S.: To clarify: the full name of the organisation alluded to above is "The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Outer Order of the Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega." It is apparently not the same as The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (R) established by Charles "Chic" Cicero. Neither should be confused with the historical organisation of that name which was established in London in 1887 or 1888 and messily imploded a little over a decade later.
2010-06-07
Scribd issues
As some of you have probably noticed, Scribd recently migrated from the Flash-based iPaper embedded reader to an HTML based system. While an improvement in some respects, it appears to have caused issues with a number of CP titles; a few appear (at least in the browser -- Firefox 3.6.3 -- which I'm using) not to display at all, others have type alignment issues on some pages. All should display as intended if you download the PDFs. Hopefully this is just a teething problem with the new reader software and will be sorted soon.
UPDATE 2010.06.07: If a document is not displaying in the new HTML view, it can still be viewed in iPaper, but this involves selecting the "change your reading preferences" link, and then clearing the tickbox "Display documents in HTML mode (recommended)." Obviously it *also* involves having Flash enabled which the known security issues with current versions of Flash is something you may not want to do.
UPDATE 2010.06.07: If a document is not displaying in the new HTML view, it can still be viewed in iPaper, but this involves selecting the "change your reading preferences" link, and then clearing the tickbox "Display documents in HTML mode (recommended)." Obviously it *also* involves having Flash enabled which the known security issues with current versions of Flash is something you may not want to do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
