Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!out.nntp.be!propagator-dallas!news-in-dallas.newsfeeds.com!feed.textport.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: paulhume@lan2wan.com (Paul Hume) Newsgroups: alt.magick Subject: Re: Magick in Theory and Practice Republished! Date: 16 Aug 2001 17:56:37 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 75 Message-ID: References: <3B7AAF25.7F004F75@compuserve.com> <3b7ab8c5.77179987@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <01c125e6$75ae5670$d8865f18@federalist> <01c12683$28c31790$d8865f18@federalist> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.22.20.240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 998009797 453 127.0.0.1 (17 Aug 2001 00:56:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Aug 2001 00:56:37 GMT Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick:257630 > > Ain't it the truth! I remember getting the little black hb of the > > Goetia from Weiser in, 1969 maybe? > > BTD: I think that's what I have. Mine is indicated as the 1916 edition, but > I did get it from Weiser sometime in the 70s for $5.00:) > That would be the one. Small worldsmanship at play. > BTD: This could be, it's not indicated as such but does appear to be a > reprint. I had demand reprints for "Lex Mercatoria" Beawes (London) from a > 1970 reprint, so possibly the Weiser book is a reprint of a 1916 reprint or > actual printing of that time > Pretty sure it was. De Laurence used pirates of the London plates, but did things like change any references to Mathers in the footnotes to himself...I think he did an Abramelin, and I know he did one of the Goetia and the Greater Key. So then Weiser probably reprinted their edition from the De Laurence plates. Their Greater Key at the time (hardback, in sort of woody-looking brown cover, gold stamped title) was identical with the first edition of the Key in the LoC, by Mathers London publishers...Redpath? Red-something?...except for the substitution of "De Laurence" for "DDCF" in footnotes, etc. De Laurence was a US publisher based in Chicago, notorious for doing this kind of thing with British occult works. > the one that left in the bad forsoothly > > blackletter plates for the Enochian version of the conujurations, but > > took out the Enochian itself (g). > > BTD: You mean "After the Hebrew of Dr, Rudd"? The ref to Rudd is somewhere else, I think (never did dig into that since Adam McLean released an edition of Rudd in his brilliant Hermetic series). > There is no > Enochian used in the conjurations provided. My impression from that period > of time was that we're supposed to go through the entire Abra Melin process > and then we'll be instructed on all of this. True. The Enochian was added to the Lemegeton-Goetia by Crowley. Abramelin is, and is unique for being, based on invoking the HGA, and He/She/It will tell you everything else you need. Pivotal impact on the modern approach to theurgy, natch. > Then legends would come out about certain Enochean drawings of Crowley > under "Enochean Chess":) LeVay's Satanic Bible (If I recall correctly) had > some reference to Enochean which made the mystery of the interstice all the > more exciting? Dr. Dee's stuff, via his own docs or Casaubon, or Rudd, has certainly had a huge effect. LaVey got his - including pronunciations - from the GD. Crowley wrote Enochian versions of the Goetia conjurations to add to the Mathers edition (of which AC was publisher). The Zalewski's have the best reference on Enochian Chess these days...though I used to have an Adam McLean book called Enochian Chess, which had tons of original Westcott material in it. I think he and R.A. Gilbert were mining lumber rooms belonging to the present descendants, they find an old cashbox belonging to WWW, pop the latch and there is like his Rose Cross, hand drawn Tsrot trumps, notes on Enochian Chess, etc. Whoo whoo! Paul > BTD: Things are lot better and the world is coming along. I hope it stays > on course. > > > > > > Paul > >