|
THE
ARCANE
ARCHIVE |
a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.
|
TOP | OCCULTISM | MAGIC | CEREMONIAL | GOLDEN DAWNGD Cipher Forgery Shoddy?
To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
From: nigris333
Subject: GD Cipher Forgery Shoddy? (was Fraudulent Hermetic Orders)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 20:29:43 GMT
50020719 VII om
issue: is the forgery of the docs initiating the Hermetic
Order of the Golden Dawn and its rites "shoddy"?
Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume):
>On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:11:44 -0400, Greg Cameron
> wrote:
>>Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume) wrote:
>>> Now if you say that *The Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript* is a
>>>cheap, shoddy hoax, forgery and fraud,
>>"If" indeed.
>>>what does that make *The Zohar*? ******
>>
>>A book? ;-)
>>
>>I wouldn't be surprised if you and Tom agree that a work can be of
>>great value regardless of its actual history.
the central point after the matter of history is considered.
too often it gets in the way of the historical consideration,
however, and spats crop up due to the umbrage taken by
those whose association with the material is overly-emotional.
>>It would be nice if you would both acknowledge that rather than snipe
>>at eachother over petty differences.
>
>*******Greg:
>I agree with you in principle but not in degree.
good to hear. I suspect there are fewer disagreements than
agreements here.
>Calling the Cypher Manuscript of the G.D. a "forgery," and a
>shoddy one at that, is not a "petty" cavil.
Richard Cavendish calls the documents upon which the GD rested
"forged" ("A History of Magic", p. 142., 1987 (90 edition Arkana).
The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was founded
in London in 1888. It was ostensibly a branch of a
Rosicrucian order in Germany, though the German
order did not really exist and the documents on
which the connection rested were forged.
it's easy to misunderstand this to be saying that the cipher ms.
was a 'forgery' (though I'm not sure what this would mean and am
curious as I read these things and consider the content of your
text). in his previous (1967) "Black Arts" (pp 40-2) he seems
to accept the story:
The Golden Dawn's most precious possession was a
mysterious manuscript written in code, which had
been discovered in on a London bookstall in 1884
by a clergyman, Dr. Woodman, a doctor who was an
authority on the Cabala and the Tarot.
so perhaps he was just talking above about the lineage papers
and Soror Sprengel.
Colin Wilson (The Occult) doesn't mention the cipher ms. being
"forged", but describes the GD as a Rosicrucian offshoot.
traditional alt.magick references have more (from the alt.magick
GD FAQ at http://www.luckymojo.com/altmagickfaq/gdref copyright
1995 Steven Cranmer):
The next key development was in 1887 with the "discovery"
of the famous Cypher Manuscripts. Whether found in a
Masonic library, bought from a used bookshop, or fabricated
whole-cloth by Westcott, these documents contained summaries
of the first five G.D. initiation rituals (0=0 to 4=7).
They were written in a simple, well-known alphabetic code
based on the _Polygraphiae_ of Johann Trithemius, and
partial transcriptions have been published in Zalewski's
_Secret_Inner_Order_Rituals_of_the_G.D._. Mathers took to
them with a passion, and fleshed them out into full-blown
rituals of ceremonial magic. Written on the manuscripts was
the address of a certain Fraulein Anna Sprengel ("Sapiens
Dominabitur Astris," or "The wise one will be ruled by the
stars") in Germany, but many believe that Fraulein Sprengel
was invented by Westcott to provide a sense of continental
authority and legitimacy to this material.
Even if not directly German in origin, many of the magical
concepts inherent in the Golden Dawn system were strongly
influenced by continental European sources. Without a
doubt, the works of the esteemed French occultist Eliphas
Levi (1810-1875) were known to the originators of the
Golden Dawn system.
so it seems that there are some who believe that Westcott
fabricated the entirety, manuscript, Soror Sprengel, et al, (all
supposed authoritative connections to Germany and the Continent of
Europe aside from the British Isles). but we have to examine more
particularly the essentials of the claims surrounding the cipher
manuscript in order to determine whether it is itself a "forgery",
and how good it is (shoddy?). what does the manuscript say about
itself? what did its 'finders'/'receivers' say about it? a Hermetic
odyssey to be sure, and one I'm glad you're continuing discussion
of in this forum, Poke. :>
Mary K. Greer writes:
In 1887 William Wynn Westcott, thirty-nine, was employed as a
deputy coroner in London. He was also the secretary-general
of a Rosicrucian Freemasonry group called the *Societas
Rosicruciana in Anglia* (*S.R.I.A.*), whose interest lay in
spiritual alchemy and ceremony. In that year Westcott acquired
a manuscript written in cipher. Although it was purportedly
from Germany and of ancient origin, the cipher transcribed
into English. Occult scholar R.A. Gilbert offers convincing
evidence that it was actually compiled by Kenneth Mackenzie,
editor of the *Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia* (1877), who had met
the magician Eliphas Levi in Paris, had studied his writings,
and was well read in Continental works of alchemy and magic.
Mackenzie died in July 1886, and Westcott obtained many
ritual documents from his wife.
[AUTHOR'S NOTE: See R.A. Gilbert, *Provenance
Unknown: A Tentative Solution to the Riddle
of the Cipher Manuscript of the Golden Dawn,*
in *Wege und Abwege: Beitrage zur europaischen
Geistesgeschichte der Neuzeit*, edited by
Albrecht Gotz von Olenhusen.]
The cipher manuscript,
written in a code divulged in the *Polygraphiae* of
Abbot Trithemius (fifteenth century), with which both
Mackenzie and Westcott were familiar, described a series
of quasi-Masonic rituals that could be practiced by both
men and women.
[AUTHOR'S NOTE: There are other possible sources
for either the manuscript or the ideas upon
which it is based. One is an eighteenth-century
organization called *Chabrah Zereh aur bokher*
("Society of the Shining Light of Dawn"),
headed from 1810 by the Kabbalist Johann Friedrich
Falk, also known as Rabbi de Falk. Another is a
Jewish Masonic lodge in Frankfort called the
*Zur aufgehenden Morgenrote* ("Toward the Rising
Dawn") -- related to a French lodge called
*Aurore naissante* ("Rising Dawn") that may be
that into which the novelest Lord Bulwer-Lytton
was initiated in the mid-1800s. One theory holds
that Bulwer-Lytton's papers were passed to a
Frederick Hockley, who, with his interest in the
Enochian language of John Dee, could have added
the Enochian calls and encoded the entirety.
Hockley's papers were inherited by a Reverend
Woodford who then gave them to Westcott. Another
story has the manuscript being found by Reverend
Woodford in a bookstall. These possibilities and
others are discussed in detail in R.A. Gilbert,
*The Golden Dawn:Twilight of the Magicians*,
R.A. Gilbert, *The Golden Dawn Companion"; Gilbert,
"Provenance Unknown"; Ellic Howe; and Ron Heisler,
"Precursors of the Golden Dawn," *Cauda Pavonis:
Studies in Hermeticism* 8, no. 1 (1989):1-4. My
thanks also to James Gerald Koch for personal
correspondence. A transcript of the cipher manuscript
is reproduced in Patrick J. Zalewski, *Secret Inner
Order Rituals of the Golden Dawn*.]
The manuscript was supposedly accompanied
by the name and address of a Fraulein Sprengel in Stuttgart,
Germany.
Westcott stated that he wrote to Anna Sprengel, also known
by her Latin motto of *Sapiens Dominabitur Astris* (*S.D.A.*)
of Die Goldene Dammerung (the Golden Twilight), about his
interest in working the rituals. Dammerung was an official
letter received November 26, 1887, giving Westcott the high
rank or "grade" of Adeptus Exemptus (7'=4`) within the Order
and authorizing him to found a temple in England along with
two co-chiefs, Dr. W.R. Woodman and S.L. Mathers.
[AUTHOR'S NOTE: Frauline Sprengel claimed that
the cipher manuscript had originally belonged
to the French mage Eliphas Levi (who died in
1875), althought Levi did not speak the English
into which it translated; also that there were
now three "Golden Dawn" temples: Temple No. 1
was her own *Licht Liebe Leben* Temple ("Light,
Love, Life" Temple) in Germany; No. 2 was the
Hermanubis Temple from which the cipher
manuscript had come; No. 3 was to be the new
Isis-Urania Temple.]
Yet *six weeks before receiving the letter*, on
October 4, 1887, Westcott wrote Mathers, asking if he
would become co-chief with one other and himself, with
the aim of promulgating a "complete scheme of initiation."
Westcott proposed to roughly translate the cipher and then
Mathers could write it up as a complete set of working
rituals, for which work Mathers would be paid. ...
...
Westcott and Mathers created not only an Order that would
practice magic but an entire lineage to validate it in
the eyes of prospective members. The real issue here, since
we cannot know what actually happened is: What was their
intent? There were long-standing traditions of a hidden
Roscicrucian order with mysterious powers. Lacking any
knowledge of how to contact such an order (for members
were not really members if they ever acknowledged their
membership), the three men created their own order. Books
and manuscripts aplenty existed giving specific details
of magical ritual and practice, foremost among them the
works of Eliphas Levi. Both Westcott and Mathers were
longtime students of occult literature, proficient in
astrology, experienced in Masonic ceremony,. and well read
in Hermeticism and Kabbalah. Perhaps they reasoned that
in starting an order (which they would subtly mention in
the occult journals) they would bring themselves to the
attention of the true Adepts who would investigate and
find them worthy of contact.
---------------------------------------------------------
"Women of the Golden Dawn: Rebels and Priestesses",
Mary K. Greer, Park Street Press, 1995; pp. 47, 419-20.
=========================================================
well! Mary K. Greer appears to think the motivation at best was to
impersonate a presumed authority in the hopes that the actuality
would pay attention and establish contact.
Occam's Razor gets me thinking that attention-getting was surely
the motive, initiating a current of occult co-freemasonry, but
whose attention they'd intended to draw seems a matter of minor
dispute.
the fact that discussion about the contents of the letter to the
mysterious Frauline Sprengel occurred SIX WEEKS BEFORE RECEIVING
SAID LETTER rather nails the coffin on both Sprengel and Germanic
origins. if he's lying about the letter of authority, why shouldn't
he lie about the origin and authority of the cipher manuscript?
>It strikes at the heart of the modern Hermetic magical
>tradition which owes its very existence to the Hermetic Order of the
>Golden Dawn (this includes the A.A., the O.T.O., the Arum Solis, the
>B.O.T.A. with its magical off-shoots, and the O.T.A.).
it only strikes to the heart of said existence if one takes the
fabricated details and papers as important to the establishment
of the original Golden Dawn's methods and society. if the papers
are inconsequential to what were created from them, then the
latter work stands on its own and the forgery is irrelevant
except as it reflects upon the time period and the people who
engaged this deception.
that these were the founders of the Golden Dawn may call into
question the effectiveness of the rites they used (liars creating
co-masonic rites of supposed mystical import, traced to popular
authors of their time -- Levi), but on its own this says nothing
about the results of applying the ceremonial magic created
'post-discovery'.
your book includes a brief analysis by Zalewski:
The origin of the Cyphers will always be a mystery but
my own feeling parallels with Runyon's that they
originally came from an older English Rosicrucian
member that was at least known to Westcott personally.
A number of years ago some friends of mine were just
starting a circle for mediumistic work and asked me
to contribute some questions. One of the questions
I put to them was who was the originator of the
Golden Dawn Cyphers. Considering that none of these
elderly matrons had even heard of the Golden Dawn
the reply of one word startled me -- it was
"Hockley".
[ZALEWSKI'S NOTE: Hockley, who died in 1885,
claimed a German Rosicrucian Initiation.
Westcott must have received the Cyphers
in 1885/6 and Mathers worked them up to
full blown rituals over a two year
period until the start of the Golden Dawn
in 1888 (according to the temple Warrant).
I would also point out though that some
of the Admission Badges of the S.R.I.A.
rituals (as shown in the Cypher) were tied
in the Golden Dawn rituals. -- P.Z.]
------------------------------------------------------
"Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript",
deciphered/annotated by Carroll "Poke" Runyon,
C.H.S. Inc., 2000; from the foreword by Pat
Zalewski, pp.iv - v.
======================================================
and this seems to be a perfect introduction to a consideration
of your wonderful book, Poke. I look forward to peering over
your contentions in comparison with the above and other sources
and think the issue of the origins and character of the cipher
itself to be quite interesting.
>Mackenzies' Cypher Manuscript was a work of genius and all
>the more potent for its concise brevity. Our modern Tarot
>is derived from it.
so you're saying that the copy of the cipher manuscript which
was given to Waite he translated and used as the basis in the
construction of his tarot?
>...the Cypher Manuscript is 68 pages----but in
>those 68 pages we find the most effective, practical condensation,
>distillation and rectification of the essential Western Hermetic
>Tradition since Agrippa's three volumes of Occult Philosophy published
>three hundred years earlier.
so your contention is that because it was so utilizable its
character should not be considered "shoddy forgery"?
the veil does appear rather thin as regards its provenance,
however well-crafted its content. why would Levi have had it?
from where would he have obtained it? was it maintained that
Sprengel claimed Levi had created the thing?
>Also it is pertinent to note that those
>who try to discredit the Cypher Manuscript are those who have not
>studied it.
my impression is that the discreditation was about its origins
and the fabrications of its character. you admit it didn't
come from Eliphas Levi, so this is an admission that the ms
is a forgery. the rest of the argument pertains to whether it
is a "shoddy forgery". given that it translates using Abbot
Johannes Trithemius's "Polygraphaeia" (1561) into ENGLISH and
purports to be from Levi, who knew no English, this could
reasonably be said conform to the character of "shoddy forgery",
however valuable the ritual form and however influential it may
have become.
if you disagree with the logic of my consideration in the
above (I'm only really beginning to gaze at and consider the
content of your book in this matter, Poke, and am grateful
for the chance to fall into it after re-organizing the temple
library), please point out why or direct me to the section in
your text which details this. thanks.
>Unfortunately this included the late Ellic Howe, who
>didn't even know what was on the first page! And if you find that
>hard to believe, then go to www.amazon.com look up *Secrets of the
>Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript* and become enlightened. *****
that fits with descriptions above, but doesn't add any defense to
why the cipher ms of the Golden Dawn should not be categorized as
an influential, shoddy forgery, utilized to found an influential
Rosicrucian order of co-masonry whose offshoots survive to the
present day.
please elaborate as to the origins of these manuscripts and how
what is said about their association with Levi is accurate in any
way, should you care, and I'll gander through the great
introduction to the subject you've placed in your book which
contains photocopies of it. it looks like a thorough analysis
comparable to Zalewski's or Gilbert's.
nigris 333
============
ps
you coming to the alt.magick hijinks 8/24:Forestville??
it'd be great to have you visit! :>
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
Subject: Re: GD Cipher Forgery Shoddy? (was Fraudulent Hermetic Orders)
References: <60ddjuc0ib211cqak5b8u35h0ablves166@4ax.com> <3d36ef6c.1912519@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3d388235.17802699@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
From: nigris333
Reply-To: spam@yronwode.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 699
Message-ID:
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 05:13:19 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1027141999 208.201.242.18 (Fri, 19 Jul 2002 22:13:19 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 22:13:19 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:33641 alt.magick:310327 talk.religion.misc:383575 alt.pagan:301875 alt.magick.order:6612
50020719 VII om
Poke Runyon/Sardonicus@roastcom.net (Sardonicus):
>>>Calling the Cypher Manuscript of the G.D. a "forgery," and a
>>>shoddy one at that, is not a "petty" cavil.
nagasiva/nigris333:
>>Richard Cavendish calls the documents upon which the GD rested
>>"forged" ("A History of Magic", p. 142., 1987 (90 edition Arkana).
>>
>> The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was founded
>> in London in 1888. It was ostensibly a branch of a
>> Rosicrucian order in Germany, though the German
>> order did not really exist and the documents on
>> which the connection rested were forged.
>>
>>it's easy to misunderstand this to be saying that the cipher ms.
>>was a 'forgery' (though I'm not sure what this would mean and am
>>curious as I read these things and consider the content of your
>>text). in his previous (1967) "Black Arts" (pp 40-2) he seems
>>to accept the story:
>>
>> The Golden Dawn's most precious possession was a
>> mysterious manuscript written in code, which had
>> been discovered in on a London bookstall in 1884
>> by a clergyman, Dr. Woodman, a doctor who was an
>> authority on the Cabala and the Tarot.
>>
>>so perhaps he was just talking above about the lineage papers
>>and Soror Sprengel.
Poke Runyon/GnomedPlume:
>This story was one of the least credible. Cavendish--as good as
>he is in other areas---is out-dated in repeating this--but it was
>current at the time (1967)
I've found him unreliable on details in many areas. that's why I
started with him. :>
>>traditional alt.magick references have more (from the alt.magick
>>GD FAQ at http://www.luckymojo.com/altmagickfaq/gdref copyright
>>1995 Steven Cranmer):
>>
>> The next key development was in 1887 with the "discovery"
>> of the famous Cypher Manuscripts. Whether found in a
>> Masonic library, bought from a used bookshop, or fabricated
>> whole-cloth by Westcott, these documents contained summaries
>> of the first five G.D. initiation rituals (0=0 to 4=7).
>> They were written in a simple, well-known alphabetic code
>> based on the _Polygraphiae_ of Johann Trithemius, and
>> partial transcriptions have been published in Zalewski's
>> _Secret_Inner_Order_Rituals_of_the_G.D._. Mathers took to
>> them with a passion, and fleshed them out into full-blown
>> rituals of ceremonial magic. Written on the manuscripts was
>> the address of a certain Fraulein Anna Sprengel ("Sapiens
>> Dominabitur Astris," or "The wise one will be ruled by the
>> stars") in Germany, but many believe that Fraulein Sprengel
>> was invented by Westcott to provide a sense of continental
>> authority and legitimacy to this material.
>
>Incorrect. Westcott claimed that her name and address was
>included with the document, but not a part of it.
I see your point. you include a copy of the CIPHERED NOTE
from the supposed Soror Sprengel that accompanied the
cipher ms., where it is decoded as:
[unidentified mark] Sapiens dom ast is a chief
among the members of the
goldene dammerung she is
a famous soror her name
is Fraulein Sprengel -- letters
reach her at herr j enger
hotel marquart [unintelligible handwriting "...her after"?]
stuttgart
she is [degree = degree, unintelligible] or a chief adept
------------------------------------------------------------
"Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript",
deciphered/annotated by Carroll "Poke" Runyon,
C.H.S. Inc., 2000; page 179.
======================================================
any idea who "J. Enger" might be, or who would have collected the
mail for such a person at Hotel Marquart, Stuttgart at that time?
you say that the address was "inserted into" the ms., and yet it is
also in THE SAME CIPHER CODE AS THE MANUSCRIPT ITSELF!!!, which
makes it far more difficult to distinguish it as something separate
and merely 'accompanying' it. it sets the stage for all the stories
associating the "authority" of the GD, as described by SCranmer and
many others.
>> Even if not directly German in origin, many of the magical
>> concepts inherent in the Golden Dawn system were strongly
>> influenced by continental European sources. Without a
>> doubt, the works of the esteemed French occultist Eliphas
>> Levi (1810-1875) were known to the originators of the
>> Golden Dawn system.
>>
>>so it seems that there are some who believe that Westcott
>>fabricated the entirety, manuscript, Soror Sprengel, et al, (all
>>supposed authoritative connections to Germany and the Continent of
>>Europe aside from the British Isles). but we have to examine more
>>particularly the essentials of the claims surrounding the cipher
>>manuscript in order to determine whether it is itself a "forgery",
>>and how good it is (shoddy?). what does the manuscript say about
>>itself? what did its 'finders'/'receivers' say about it? a Hermetic
>>odyssey to be sure, and one I'm glad you're continuing discussion
>>of in this forum, Poke. :>
>
>The word "forgery" could only apply to Wescott's Sprengle ruse
or to the 'found in a Masonic library' ruse, or to the 'bought
from a used bookshop' ruse. this is a classical grimoire motif,
which I recognized immediately when reading of it amongst Golden
Dawn initiates as a modus reproductio of that told of/by Nicolas
Flamel, the celebrated alchemist (similarly fabricated I'll wager).
Flamel took little notice of the dream [of a fabulous
alchemical manuscript] and would probably have forgotten
it altogether but for a remarkable event that occurred
some time later. On a certain day in 1357 he bought
from an unknown vendor an old book which he at once
recognized as being the very book he had seen in his
dream:
There fell into my hands for the sum of two
florins, a gilded book, very old and large;
it was not of paper or parchment, as other
books are, but made only of thin bark (as it
seemed to me) of tender shrubs. Its cover was
of copper, very delicate, and engraved all
over with strange letters or figures. I could
not read them but I thought that it might be
Greek or some other ancient language. The leaves
of bark inside were coverd with beautiful
and very clear Latin letters, which had been
inscribed with a steel point and coloured. The
book contained three times seven leaves, for so
they were numbered at the top of the leaves, the
seventh leaf always without writing on it, but
instead, on the first seventh leaf, had been
painted a rod, with two serpents swallowing
another; on the second seventh, a serpent on
which a serpent was crucified; and on the last
seventh were painted deserts, in the midst of
which ran beautiful fountains, from which there
issued many serpents which ran hither and thither.
Upon the first of the leaves there was written in
larger capital letters of gold: ABRAHAM THE JEW,
PRINCE, PRIEST, LEVITE, ASTROLOGER, AND PHILOSOPHER,
TO THE NATION OF THE JEWS, BY THE WRATH OF GOD
DISPERSED AMONG THE GAULS, SENDETH SALUTATION.
After this it was filled with great execrations
and curses (with this word MARANATHA, which was often
repeated there) against every person that should
cast his eyes upon it, unless he were a Sacrificer
or Scribe.
---------------------------------------------------------
"Alchemy", E.J. Holmyard, Pelican Books, 1967; pp. 240-1.
=========================================================
so it isn't as if the origin of this manuscript is completely
revealed by Westcott or his cronies in the establishment of
the Golden Dawn with a single flop of the mysterious Sprengel.
there were several fabulous origins for the cipher manuscript.
not only that, there was an attempt to make the thing LOOK
older, and was cyphered in a 16th-century code of a well-known
occultist and magician (Trithemius, author of "Steganographia",
which contains systems of angelic magic and cryptography).
you write:
Marshalling formidable occult experience, Mackenzie
(possibly with Hockley's help) would have drafted the
original Cypher Manuscript in clear English sometime
between 1860 and 1875. Westcott may also have suspected,
from some of the naive mistakes in the encipherment,
that a scribe of lesser occult attainment had been
employed to put the Manuscript into cypher. It was
certainly not Hockley's calligraphy as he was noted for
his meticulolus penmanship. According to Gilbert the
sketches are in a style recalling drawings by Mackenzie.
This observation by Gilbert may have led Joscelyn Godwin
to assume tha the cypher writing itself was in Mackenzie's
hand. Unfortunately the Cypher Manuscript will not yield
to handwriting analysis because it is all in block cypher
characters.
No doubt Westcott chuckled to himself when he noted the
aged paper and brown ink used for the purpose of getting
"one-up" on Wentworth Little who, as mentioned above,
had claimed to have a similar manuscript when he had
founded the Soc. Ros. years before. This insider's
knowledge of the Manuscript's modern origins gave
Westcott the license to add several pages to the MS.
himself -- including a corrected "older version" of an
existing page.
---------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., pp. 15-7.
==========================
to the extent that an attempt was made to convince Little and
others of some ancient lineage behind the manuscript, it was
indeed fraudulent, arguably attempting to compete in authority
with the ms. copy of the German "Geheime Figuren*, or *Secret
Symbols of the Rosicrucians* published in Altona in 1785,
which Wentworth Little claimed to hold (an "ancient" document)
when FOUNDING the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia (of which
most of these guys were members; your note 4 to the first
third of your Commentary, found on page 35, indicates that
you believe Westcott knew of this and was trying to so compete).
also, if indeed "a scribe of lesser occult attainment had been
employed to put the Manuscript into cypher" as you (and probably
R.A. Gilbert) maintain, then there is clear deception from the
start, very obvious attempts to deceive as to the origins of the
manuscript, not just 'handed over from Mackenzie's wife'.
>(a "sprenglem" means a Masonic falsehood in German BTW, so he wasn't
>entirley secretive in his attempt.
not entirely! thanks for the info!
>And Alexandrina Mackenzie (Soror Cryptonomia) did give him the MS.
I've never heard her called that before. ;>
>>Mary K. Greer writes:
>>
>> In 1887 William Wynn Westcott, thirty-nine, was employed as a
>> deputy coroner in London. He was also the secretary-general
>> of a Rosicrucian Freemasonry group called the *Societas
>> Rosicruciana in Anglia* (*S.R.I.A.*), whose interest lay in
>> spiritual alchemy and ceremony. In that year Westcott acquired
>> a manuscript written in cipher. Although it was purportedly
>> from Germany and of ancient origin, the cipher transcribed
>> into English. Occult scholar R.A. Gilbert offers convincing
>> evidence that it was actually compiled by Kenneth Mackenzie,
>> editor of the *Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia* (1877), who had met
>> the magician Eliphas Levi in Paris, had studied his writings,
>> and was well read in Continental works of alchemy and magic.
>> Mackenzie died in July 1886, and Westcott obtained many
>> ritual documents from his wife.
>>
>> [AUTHOR'S NOTE: See R.A. Gilbert, *Provenance
>> Unknown: A Tentative Solution to the Riddle
>> of the Cipher Manuscript of the Golden Dawn,*
>> in *Wege und Abwege: Beitrage zur europaischen
>> Geistesgeschichte der Neuzeit*, edited by
>> Albrecht Gotz von Olenhusen.]
>>
>> The cipher manuscript,
>> written in a code divulged in the *Polygraphiae* of
>> Abbot Trithemius (fifteenth century), with which both
>> Mackenzie and Westcott were familiar, described a series
>> of quasi-Masonic rituals that could be practiced by both
>> men and women.
>>
>> [AUTHOR'S NOTE: There are other possible sources
>> for either the manuscript or the ideas upon
>> which it is based. One is an eighteenth-century
>> organization called *Chabrah Zereh aur bokher*
>> ("Society of the Shining Light of Dawn"),
>> headed from 1810 by the Kabbalist Johann Friedrich
>> Falk, also known as Rabbi de Falk. Another is a
>> Jewish Masonic lodge in Frankfort called the
>> *Zur aufgehenden Morgenrote* ("Toward the Rising
>> Dawn") -- related to a French lodge called
>> *Aurore naissante* ("Rising Dawn") that may be
>> that into which the novelest Lord Bulwer-Lytton
>> was initiated in the mid-1800s. One theory holds
>> that Bulwer-Lytton's papers were passed to a
>> Frederick Hockley, who, with his interest in the
>> Enochian language of John Dee, could have added
>> the Enochian calls and encoded the entirety.
>> Hockley's papers were inherited by a Reverend
>> Woodford who then gave them to Westcott. Another
>> story has the manuscript being found by Reverend
>> Woodford in a bookstall. These possibilities and
>> others are discussed in detail in R.A. Gilbert,
>> *The Golden Dawn:Twilight of the Magicians*,
>> R.A. Gilbert, *The Golden Dawn Companion"; Gilbert,
>> "Provenance Unknown"; Ellic Howe; and Ron Heisler,
>> "Precursors of the Golden Dawn," *Cauda Pavonis:
>> Studies in Hermeticism* 8, no. 1 (1989):1-4. My
>> thanks also to James Gerald Koch for personal
>> correspondence. A transcript of the cipher manuscript
>> is reproduced in Patrick J. Zalewski, *Secret Inner
>> Order Rituals of the Golden Dawn*.]
>>
>> The manuscript was supposedly accompanied
>> by the name and address of a Fraulein Sprengel in Stuttgart,
>> Germany.
>>
>> Westcott stated that he wrote to Anna Sprengel, also known
>> by her Latin motto of *Sapiens Dominabitur Astris* (*S.D.A.*)
>> of Die Goldene Dammerung (the Golden Twilight), about his
>> interest in working the rituals. Dammerung was an official
>> letter received November 26, 1887, giving Westcott the high
>> rank or "grade" of Adeptus Exemptus (7'=4`) within the Order
>> and authorizing him to found a temple in England along with
>> two co-chiefs, Dr. W.R. Woodman and S.L. Mathers.
> She was never "Anna." That was a later gloss.
apparently quite a bit had to be glossed if all that was included
in Westcott's ruse was "sapiens dom ast" and "fraulein sprengel"
as well as claims of her adeptship in the "goldene dammerung".
somehow this note had had arrived in the manuscript and why
it was encyphered in the same figures must also be explained. it
was probably this that led to the 'found in the bookstall' or
'masonic library' fictions.
>> [AUTHOR'S NOTE: Frauline Sprengel claimed that
>> the cipher manuscript had originally belonged
>> to the French mage Eliphas Levi (who died in
>> 1875), althought Levi did not speak the English
>> into which it translated; also that there were
>> now three "Golden Dawn" temples: Temple No. 1
>> was her own *Licht Liebe Leben* Temple ("Light,
>> Love, Life" Temple) in Germany; No. 2 was the
>> Hermanubis Temple from which the cipher
>> manuscript had come; No. 3 was to be the new
>> Isis-Urania Temple.]
>
>This is not accurate either. There was never any direct claim that
>Levi wrote the Cypher MS, not by Sprengle or Westcott.
if Sprengel was fictional, then this much is obvious, yes.
whether Westcott claims Levi did more than pass it on seems
an interesting point. where did MKGreer get this information?
it's one thing to expose a fiction or rumour as such, it is
quite another to track down the stories and see where they
arise in the 'romanticization' of occult literature.
>It was said that it passed through his hands.
who said it and how? you attend to this somewhat in your book.
>Levi has been mentioned tentatively as a possible author
>of one page.
mentioned by whom? if part of the Sprengel thing then it
was probably Westcott and he should be given 'credit'.
>> Yet *six weeks before receiving the letter*, on
>> October 4, 1887, Westcott wrote Mathers, asking if he
>> would become co-chief with one other and himself, with
>> the aim of promulgating a "complete scheme of initiation."
>> Westcott proposed to roughly translate the cipher and then
>> Mathers could write it up as a complete set of working
>> rituals, for which work Mathers would be paid. ...
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Westcott and Mathers created not only an Order that would
>> practice magic but an entire lineage to validate it in
>> the eyes of prospective members. The real issue here, since
>> we cannot know what actually happened is: What was their
>> intent? There were long-standing traditions of a hidden
>> Roscicrucian order with mysterious powers. Lacking any
>> knowledge of how to contact such an order (for members
>> were not really members if they ever acknowledged their
>> membership), the three men created their own order. Books
>> and manuscripts aplenty existed giving specific details
>> of magical ritual and practice, foremost among them the
>> works of Eliphas Levi. Both Westcott and Mathers were
>> longtime students of occult literature, proficient in
>> astrology, experienced in Masonic ceremony,. and well read
>> in Hermeticism and Kabbalah. Perhaps they reasoned that
>> in starting an order (which they would subtly mention in
>> the occult journals) they would bring themselves to the
>> attention of the true Adepts who would investigate and
>> find them worthy of contact.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> "Women of the Golden Dawn: Rebels and Priestesses",
>> Mary K. Greer, Park Street Press, 1995; pp. 47, 419-20.
>> =========================================================
>>
>>well! Mary K. Greer appears to think the motivation at best was to
>>impersonate a presumed authority in the hopes that the actuality
>>would pay attention and establish contact.
>
>If so then Mary is wrong. If that had been the case Westcott
>would have attributed the MS. to the Comte St. Germaine or some other
>legendary continental adept such as Cagliostro or even an English
>adept such as Thomas Vaughan. Sprengle was a bare minimum ruse to
>escape discreditation by the Theosophical Society and the jealous
>put-downs of rivals on the occult scene. Blavatsky had made "Secret
>Masters" an essential prerequisite to the acceptance of any occult
>order.
yes, this seems the prime contention in your book also, which I
can somewhat understand. still, deception is deception and forgery
or fraudulence doesn't change just because of an environment wherein
one must engage such deceptions to gain attention, students,
converts, whatever. you make your point most cogently on page 33
(how proper! :>) when you write:
In his privately printed *History of the Societas
Rosicrucia in Anglia*, Westcott emphasizes the
secret manuscripts in the archives of the Soc.
Ros. This paper reveals how essential such 'ancient
documents' were to the establishment of
Rosicrucian bodies.
----------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 33.
==========================
and the emphasis of many students in challenging these texts
is perfectly in line with the single quotes of 'ancient
documents'. rather than defend the mechanism of deception in
order to get attention to one's work, I think it is important
to admit that such mechanisms have been important in uglier
times amongst competing magicians and admit of the fraud,
moving on quickly to the actual contents of the documents.
>>Occam's Razor gets me thinking that attention-getting was surely
>>the motive, initiating a current of occult co-freemasonry, but
>>whose attention they'd intended to draw seems a matter of minor
>>dispute.
>>
>>the fact that discussion about the contents of the letter to the
>>mysterious Frauline Sprengel occurred SIX WEEKS BEFORE RECEIVING
>>SAID LETTER rather nails the coffin on both Sprengel and Germanic
>>origins. if he's lying about the letter of authority, why shouldn't
>>he lie about the origin and authority of the cipher manuscript?
>
>That makes no sense. Sprengle was a hoax.
I follow you that far. this much seems agreed by many.
>The Cypher MS. was a reality.
its reality has NEVER been disputed. its ORIGINS are what is being
considered, in comparison to what has been claimed about its
origins either within it ('Sprengel'-writ + Westcott's/Mathers'
handwritten additions and *corrections*) or outside it (in the
utterances of Westcott or others of the Golden Dawn who sought to
bring attention to their ceremonial society and its writings.
>Mackenzine was dead. Don't confuse the two.
this is the confusing part. my guess is that you're saying that
the fact that Mackenzie was dead and his wife was passing on
the document to Westcott doesn't contradict the possible origin
of the contents of the document as having arrived from Germany
via Mackenzie due to Westcott's 1910 History of the SRIA (which
we already know contained untruths) characterizing Mackenzie
as having:
during his stay in Germany in earlier life, been
in communication with German Adepts who claimed a
descent from previous generations of Rosicrucians.
German adepts had admitted him to some grades of their
system, and had permitted him to attempt the formation
of a group of Masonic students in England, who under
Rosicrucian name might form a partly esoteric society.
-------------------------------------------------------
Runyon quoting Westcott, Ibid., pp. 13-4.
===========================================
you mention Hockley and Mackenzie as having been "the most
formidable English occultists of their time." (p. 14). but
is there any evidence of his contact with these adepts?
if he liked Levi so much (who is widely-known for his
invention and fabrication in his writings; dunno if he had
that reputation amongst the Rosicrucian occults), then is
it possible that he would use some of Levi's methods of
fabrication?
>>>It strikes at the heart of the modern Hermetic magical
>>>tradition which owes its very existence to the Hermetic Order of the
>>>Golden Dawn (this includes the A.A., the O.T.O., the Arum Solis, the
>>>B.O.T.A. with its magical off-shoots, and the O.T.A.).
>>
>>it only strikes to the heart of said existence if one takes the
>>fabricated details and papers as important to the establishment
>>of the original Golden Dawn's methods and society. if the papers
>>are inconsequential to what were created from them, then the
>>latter work stands on its own and the forgery is irrelevant
>>except as it reflects upon the time period and the people who
>>engaged this deception. ]
the heart of the modern Hermetic magical tradition which draws on
the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn is not its fabrication,
but instead its actual creation. separating these out in this
day and age is something you have helped to do. others are trying
in their own way to do likewise and put the manuscripts in their
PROPER HISTORY AND PLACE.
>>that these were the founders of the Golden Dawn may call into
>>question the effectiveness of the rites they used (liars creating
>>co-masonic rites of supposed mystical import, traced to popular
>>authors of their time -- Levi), but on its own this says nothing
>>about the results of applying the ceremonial magic created
>>'post-discovery'.
>>
>>your book includes a brief analysis by Zalewski:
>>
>> The origin of the Cyphers will always be a mystery but
>> my own feeling parallels with Runyon's that they
>> originally came from an older English Rosicrucian
>> member that was at least known to Westcott personally.
>> A number of years ago some friends of mine were just
>> starting a circle for mediumistic work and asked me
>> to contribute some questions. One of the questions
>> I put to them was who was the originator of the
>> Golden Dawn Cyphers. Considering that none of these
>> elderly matrons had even heard of the Golden Dawn
>> the reply of one word startled me -- it was
>> "Hockley".
>>
>> [ZALEWSKI'S NOTE: Hockley, who died in 1885,
>> claimed a German Rosicrucian Initiation.
>> Westcott must have received the Cyphers
>> in 1885/6 and Mathers worked them up to
>> full blown rituals over a two year
>> period until the start of the Golden Dawn
>> in 1888 (according to the temple Warrant).
>> I would also point out though that some
>> of the Admission Badges of the S.R.I.A.
>> rituals (as shown in the Cypher) were tied
>> in the Golden Dawn rituals. -- P.Z.]
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> "Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript",
>> deciphered/annotated by Carroll "Poke" Runyon,
>> C.H.S. Inc., 2000; from the foreword by Pat
>> Zalewski, pp.iv - v.
>> ======================================================
>>
>>and this seems to be a perfect introduction to a consideration
>>of your wonderful book, Poke. I look forward to peering over
>>your contentions in comparison with the above and other sources
>>and think the issue of the origins and character of the cipher
>>itself to be quite interesting.
>>
>>>Mackenzies' Cypher Manuscript was a work of genius and all
>>>the more potent for its concise brevity. Our modern Tarot
>>>is derived from it.
>>
>>so you're saying that the copy of the cipher manuscript which
>>was given to Waite he translated and used as the basis in the
>>construction of his tarot?
>
>No. You are saying that. Read my book.
well gee, Poke, reading your book brings more questions. for
example, the Tarot Lecture (3=8), starting on page 52 (the
reason you mentioned the above, likely) contains the following:
Mathers states that:
Eliphas Levi ... had in his possession
those cypher MSS. of The Order... But he
probably felt he was not at liberty to
divulge to the outer and uninitiated
world the secret and true attribution
of the Tarot which was given in the (G.D.)
Cypher MS. The attribution he gave in
*The Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie*
[nowadays "Transcendental Magic" -- 333]
... is very different than that treasured
in The Order.
Actually MacGregor was fibbing. It's not "very
different", it's almost identical! (For the Major
Trumps, that is.)
------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., pp. 54-5.
===========================
and you proceed to lay out how the cipher ms. author (whom
you suggest was probably Mackenzie RATHER than Mathers)
changed Levi's tarotic attribution scheme presented in
his works cited above, placing the Fool (0) prior to the
rest on the First Path rather than the bottom of the
Sefirotic Tree with which they were working, and moving
Justice and Strength to more natural zodiacal locales,
switching them.
as you say this is the rough draft of the GD arrangement,
and improves upon Levi. the quote of Mathers above also
makes plain where some of the provenance of the manuscript
is coming from (Mathers contends it passed through the
hands of Levi and suggests Levi knew completely of its
"secret and true" content, but does he ever explain the
English/French cipher problem?? if Mathers can fib in one
instance (there are others pertaining to his translations),
why should we take him seriously about history otherwise?).
>>>...the Cypher Manuscript is 68 pages----but in
>>>those 68 pages we find the most effective, practical condensation,
>>>distillation and rectification of the essential Western Hermetic
>>>Tradition since Agrippa's three volumes of Occult Philosophy published
>>>three hundred years earlier.
>>
>>so your contention is that because it was so utilizable its
>>character should not be considered "shoddy forgery"?
>>the veil does appear rather thin as regards its provenance,
>>however well-crafted its content. why would Levi have had it?
>>from where would he have obtained it? was it maintained that
>>Sprengel claimed Levi had created the thing?
>
>It was said that Levi "had it", not that he wrote it--
thanks for clarifying this. is there any evidence to support
this claim as far as you know? it seems like more deception
and an attempt to profit from Levi's stature as an author.
>nor was this essential to it's validity
the issue of "validity" is too twisted an issue to resolve
here, as it enters into philosophic and relative qualities
which we have not begun to unravel. suffice it to say that
your attempts to defend its "validity" are unconvincing in
part because we aren't really attempting to determine it.
those who would dismiss the content of a deception-shrouded
document without a clear consideration of its practical
application and the evidence supporting contentions about
to what the proffered techniques lead (a subject most mages
have yet to touch on account of proximity to the subject)
are truly unworthy of your attention and futile defense.
>--but Levi's Tarot system is very close to that in the MS.
>It obviously influenced Mackenzie.
yes, I'd put it the other way 'round, though, wouldn't you
(that Mackenzie's was influenced by Levi)?
>...the writings of those who have not studied it---this includes
>everyone you have quoted above.
Cavendish? Mary K. Greer? guess so. I'm not familiar enough with
the subject to know, but I'm making my best stab at it. :>
>>my impression is that the discreditation was about its origins
>>and the fabrications of its character. you admit it didn't
>>come from Eliphas Levi, so this is an admission that the ms
>>is a forgery.
>...If the Cypher MS. had had Francis Barrett's name on it,
>it would have been a forgery. It had no one's name on it.
>It was anonymous---get it?******
lessee, it is was supposed to have had Fraulein Sprengel's
name and address in cipher inside of it with clear claims
as to her Germanic "chief adeptship". there are clear claims
by Mathers and others that the document has passed through
the hands of Eliphas Levi and that he understood its
"secret and true" contents. it was ciphered in a code
created by a 16th century magician and Westcott and others
claimed it was "ancient". it sports "pseudo-Biblical prose"
which you maintain Mathers would have done better if he'd
created the Tarot Lecture (3=8). any ammo for fraudulence?
the substance of the dispute is really not contested.
your best case is stated here:
I will suggest that Alexandrina Mackenzie, the woman
who may have passed the Cypher Manuscript on to
Westcott, was probably the kernel of reality
lurking behind the imaginary Fraulein Sprengel.
Dr. Wynn Westcott, and those whom he took into his
confidence, were constrained by actual circunmstances
to come as close as possible to the truth in their
fabrication. Far from being a self-serving hoaxer in
the Sprengel affair, Westcott conceived, coordinated,
and carried out an ingenious *ruse de guerre* that
provided him and his associates with the obligatory
*charter myth* necessary to establish the *Golden
Dawn* in an occult environment dominated by the very
powerful *Theosophical Society* of Madame Helena
Blavatsky.
------------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 10.
=======================
>>why the cipher ms of the Golden Dawn should not be categorized as
>>an influential, shoddy forgery, utilized to found an influential
>>Rosicrucian order of co-masonry whose offshoots survive to the
>>present day.
you stated why above.
>Zohar* was just as much or more of a hoax....
other bluster removed. sorry, Poke, but maintaining that similar
fraudulent origins of religious or mystical documents exist is
not in any way convincing to me. I would regard the origins of any
other magico-religious document (e.g. *Lemegeton*!) with similar
scrutiny, though I appreciate your well-worded defense above and
agree with you that a consideration of its origin is different
than considering its content.
nigris333
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
Subject: Re: GD Cipher Forgery Shoddy? (was Fraudulent Hermetic Orders)
References: <60ddjuc0ib211cqak5b8u35h0ablves166@4ax.com> <3d36ef6c.1912519@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
From: nigris333
Reply-To: spam@yronwode.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 266
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:11:29 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1027289489 208.201.242.18 (Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:11:29 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:11:29 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:33650 alt.magick:310475 talk.religion.misc:383694 alt.pagan:301962 alt.magick.order:6685
50020721 VII om
issue: is the forgery of the docs initiating the Hermetic
Order of the Golden Dawn and its rites "shoddy"?
nigris333:
>it's easy to misunderstand [an RCavendish quote] to be saying
>that the cipher ms. was a 'forgery' (though I'm not sure what
>this would mean ...)....
>
> ...
>
>...we have to examine more
>particularly the essentials of the claims surrounding the cipher
>manuscript in order to determine whether it is itself a "forgery",
I wish to return to the main issues here.
the manuscript is, as sri catyananda has already pointed out,
not a copy of some extant document, so it does not qualify as
'counterfeit', or 'forgery' in this sense, but the contentions
surrounding its origins appear to be less than clear.
who started the stories about its origins would seem
important to ascertain. important also is an analysis of its
content, especially its initial pages and how they may present
the material or orient the reader to what follows. I have not
the accounts of the origins of the stories, so I pass to the
examination of the facsimile presented by Poke and others in
order to ascertain the character of the document itself and
what it contains.
immediate issues encountered, therefore, include the fact that
only sections are numbered. the integrity or structure of the
manuscript may therefore have easily be changed by the
interested prior to its presentation (or indeed its deciphering),
and in decipherment Poke notes that different authors present
the manuscript in different configurations, radically changing
the sequence of sections, though I'm sure each has their reasons
for doing this (coming to understand them and how this may compare
with in what structure the ms. is supposed to have been received
will also add dimension to the examination).
from Poke's book I derive general initial content of the ms./notes:
# SECTION CONTENT # PGS
#
# 1. "Where members ought to sit in the Temple" 1
# (ms. marginal notes; ms. begins w/o intro.)
# ["Temple set-up and administration page" -- CRunyon]
#
# 2. NEOPHYTE OPENING #1 (ms. marginal notes) 1
# "NOUGHT = NOUGHT" (top of ms. page)
#
# NEOPHYTE OPENING #2 (ms marginal notes) 1
# "NOUGHT = NOUGHT" (top of ms. page)
#
# 0=0 (ms. marginal notes; NEOPHYTE CLOSING) 1
# "CLOSE" (top of ms. page)
#
# 0=0 (ms. marginal notes NEOPHYTE ADMISSION) 3 (+ old pg)
# "NOUGHT=NOGHT (sic *ms.*) GRADE
# ADMISSION" (ms. p1 top)
# "0" (ms. p2 top)
# "[Hebr. Teth]"; old p, "[Teth] (9)" Poke;
# ms. p3old top)
# "[H. Teth]; new p, "[Teth] (9) [He] (5)"! Poke;
# ms. p3new top)
#
# 3. "[H. Aleph] = [Yod]" [ZEALATOR]
# ADMISSION" (ms. p1 top)
-----------------------------------------------------------
333's inference in examination of:
"Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript",
deciphered/annotated by Carroll "Poke" Runyon,
C.H.S. Inc., 2000; pp. 40, 65-81.
===========================================================
etc. (I hope somebody's done the rest of this, else I'll have
to return to it when I have more time and complete it. -- 333)
it appears that the ms. itself has been subjected to some
shuffling, probably for practical or presentation purposes.
Poke indicates that Westcott began his decipherment with
page 2 (the Neophyte Section), rather than with page 1, the
'Temple set-up and administrative page' (Poke's descriptor).
what was the motivation for this odd decipher method? this
seems to indicate he already knew what it contained or what
its content was based on its structure. was Westcott given
a description of its content before it was de-coded, or was
he given some kind of Table of Contents? elsewise, why did
he start his deciphering at page 2 of the ms.?
page 1 (if this is indeed the first page; to which I'll
quite possibly return in a later post) as presented by
Poke contains no general descriptor or introduction in
the original ms. it has placements and instructions for
the conduct to "HOLD A TEMPLE", including the following
two rules:
* CHANGE OFFICERS EVERY [H. Vav] {(6) -- Poke}
MONTHS
and * AVOID ROMAN CATHOLICS
BUT WITH PITY
the ms. margin notes comment on this latter with:
Avoid Roman Catholics \ What a strange
but with pity. / statement!
indeed, it is, isn't it? what would the motivation be to
add such a rule? I'm insufficiently informed to hazard a
reliable guess. Poke guesses though, and appears to think
it is an attempt to CONVINCE THE READER OF THE MS. THAT
IT DERIVES FROM THE 17TH CENTURY:
[ed. note 4 p. 65 attached to the roman catholic
line in the ms.:
17th Century Rosicrucianism was a
Protestant movement and Roman Catholics
had little use for Freemasons. Why is
this statement "strange" (?)[sic] -- CRR.]
-------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 65.
============================
if my reading of this is accurate (please correct me if I
err here), then we have clear evidence that this document
is intented to represent something much older than it is,
especially combined with its being written on old paper in
brown ink and including a note in code providing faulty
German provenance (whatever actual provenance it may have).
so the fact that it is a forgery seems to be proven. the
assertion of its shoddiness seems to turn on how CONVINCING
it is, but this is why Greer and Runyon thereafter turn to
the motivation and targets of the deception in response.
they would like to soften the criticism, buffer it by virtue
of its special sociocultural conditions, ones which seem to
pervade religious cultures of numerous types and time periods.
btw, Poke, I noticed that your decipherment omitted a line
of demarcation between lines (7) and (8):
(7) WITH THE HIEROPHANT
______________________________________ should be line here
(8) INC{E}NSE SHOULD BE BURNING
(9) IN THE TEMPLE AT ALL CEREMONIES
______________________________________
I corrected my copy and think it of only minor importance.
>well! Mary K. Greer appears to think the motivation at best was to
>impersonate a presumed authority in the hopes that the actuality
>would pay attention and establish contact.
this is questionable and I think Poke's description far more
likely.
>the fact that discussion about the contents of the letter to the
>mysterious Frauline Sprengel occurred SIX WEEKS BEFORE RECEIVING
>SAID LETTER rather nails the coffin on both Sprengel and Germanic
>origins.
this seems premature in the wake of possible influences on the
Wockley/Mackenzie origins and claims pertaining to Mackenzie's
possible (if not merely 'romanticized') exposure and initiation
into Germatic esoteric co-masonry. I'm unsure whether there is
evidence in support of these stories about Mackenzie but would
be interested to learn of it.
>if he's lying about the letter of authority, why shouldn't
>he lie about the origin and authority of the cipher manuscript?
that he was is now established, the motivation and quality of
the lie appear to be the remaining outstanding issues. just to
fend off Hermetic umbrage here, I would like to re-iterate that
I am not attempting to assess the *quality of the system for
which this document serves as a skeletal ancestor*, merely the
historicity of its origins and character of is manifestation.
>so your contention is that because it was so utilizable its
>character should not be considered "shoddy forgery"?
if so, this is illogical and an emotional appeal to overlook
the fabricated nature of this book and books like it.
>why would Levi have had it?
apparently Mackenzie met Levi. perhaps he provided him with a
glimpse of it or told him about it? what seems credible here?
>from where would he have obtained it?
not sure this is relevant if we can't trust he ever had it.
>was it maintained that Sprengel claimed Levi had created the thing?
it sure isn't part of the inserted Sprengel authority-claim,
which Poke calls a "letter" and says "is not a part of the
Cypher Manuscript" (Ibid., p. 179 whereat the facsimile of
the note is included, thanks!). was the note from the fabled
Sprengel on any special kind of paper? in brown ink? we may
presume not, but it isn't stated anywhere that I can see in
Runyon's text. the code being the same as he ms. merely
indicates that whoever wrote the note was familiar with the
code and probably its content. I wonder if one might do some
kind of 'symbol-writing analysis' comparing the Sprengel note
with the ms. Trithemian code symbols.
>... you [Poke] admit it didn't
>come from Eliphas Levi, so this is an admission that the ms
>is a forgery.
this appears to have been mistaken. you seem to admit that
it didn't come from the 17th century, however.
>the rest of the argument pertains to whether it
>is a "shoddy forgery". given that it translates using Abbot
>Johannes Trithemius's "Polygraphaeia" (1561) into ENGLISH
this it does, but does it try to translate into some kind
of old English? it uses "Thy" poorly (compared to Mathers)
as you point out, and the reference to Roman Catholics and
use of old paper could give the impression that this is the
intent of the appearance. as such a valuable way to analyze
whether the forgery is "shoddy" would be to see whether it
approximates Old English or something to which it aspires.
is the use of NOUGHT contiguous with older English (compared
with NAUGHT)? any other terms or comments indicating same?
as Poke has already said, whether the forgery is convincing
is probably not that important to its presentation as a
foundation document for an esoteric order. thus 'shoddy' is
probably overly harsh unless it can be established that
there was a significant difference of calibre between it
and COMPARABLE DOCUMENTS.
we must thereafter select what we think comparable. it helps
if what we pick has similarly-traceable original manuscripts
and sociological character. one might suggest "Liber CCXX"
(Liber Al vel Legis, penned by Crowley and at one point in
time a foundation document for The Order of Thelema if memory
serves, possibly also fundamental to other orders) if one
found this of interest or the "Fama Fraternitas" or other
foundation documents from Rosicrucian and similar esoteric
orders.
>...doesn't add any defense to
>why the cipher ms of the Golden Dawn should not be categorized as
>an influential, shoddy forgery, utilized to found an influential
>Rosicrucian order of co-masonry whose offshoots survive to the
>present day.
the answer to this appears to be that the sociological context
excuses the poor quality of the presentation and therefore should
be assessed with a wider perspective on the entire subject. I look
forward to some attempt to dismantle or qualify this answer.
nigris333
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
Subject: Re: GD Cipher Forgery Shoddy? (was Fraudulent Hermetic Orders)
References: <60ddjuc0ib211cqak5b8u35h0ablves166@4ax.com> <3d36ef6c.1912519@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3d388235.17802699@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3D3A4921.966B8847@pacbell.net>
From: nigris333
Reply-To: spam@yronwode.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 42
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 02:22:40 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1027390960 208.201.242.18 (Mon, 22 Jul 2002 19:22:40 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 19:22:40 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:33673 alt.magick:310619 talk.religion.misc:383769 alt.pagan:302051 alt.magick.order:6727
50020722 VII om
Joseph Count de Money :
>...Isn't the point of the
>cypher manuscripts and the Zohar and the Torah et al to put one
>intouch with the "secret chiefs" or "god" in a very old fashioned,
>superstitious, survival circuit sense which the 20th century has
>succeeded in demystifying & re-identifying with the self.
sounds like too big a bite for me to agree about. ;> for all those
who agree concerning the transphysical Masters of the Universe, it
probably does hold, but when you start to extend beyond that view of
the cosmos to 'God' or some other spiritual authority, I'm not sure
at all that they can be mapped together.
>the ultimate aspect of self that is one with the universe,
>secret chiefs and/or god?
again, this differs substantially from cult to cult.
>This being the only reason these types of things might work is because
>the link is allready there and needs only to be discovered consciously
>within onself?
theory varies.
>ergo it dosent matter if god really wrote the torah or if the cypher
>manuscripts are really a message from or directions to the secret
>chiefs so long as they produce the desired affect.
completely understandable, and a wonderful theory. I'm sure there'd
be a good bit of disagreement about it from those who regard these
documents in their varying ways. part of the difficulty you've
encountered here in your assertions is that the age of the Zohar
and Torah make them subject to a great diversification of meaning
and social context.
certainly for those who share this perspective of yours, the real
history of the documents is of no consequence as long as conform
in appearance and application to that for which they were designed.
nigris333
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
Subject: GD Cipher Origins
References: <60ddjuc0ib211cqak5b8u35h0ablves166@4ax.com> <3d36ef6c.1912519@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3d3b50aa.24975066@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
From: nigris333
Reply-To: spam@yronwode.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 627
Message-ID: <%K__8.1934$U3.21257@typhoon.sonic.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 21:25:15 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1027373115 208.201.242.18 (Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:25:15 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:25:15 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:33671 alt.magick:310593 talk.religion.misc:383754 alt.pagan:302042 alt.magick.order:6725
50020722 VIIom Hail Satan!
issue: the character and presentation of the Golden Dawn Cypher
manuscripts; conditions and claims surrounding their origin
333:
>>the manuscript is, as sri catyananda has already pointed out,
>>not a copy of some extant document, so it does not qualify as
>>'counterfeit', or 'forgery' in this sense, but the contentions
>>surrounding its origins appear to be less than clear.
Poke Runyon/Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume):
>Which should not be an issue in judging the spiritual and
>magical importance and validity of the document
you're still on about the validity? I told you that's not my
present interest in the discussion and I don't think that it
can be analyzed easily. my focus here is as is your book --
attempting to discern the origins of the GD proto-rites and
knowledge lectures (esp. the Tarot materials!).
>>examination of the facsimile presented by Poke and others in
>>order to ascertain the character of the document itself and
>>what it contains.
>>
>>immediate issues encountered, therefore, include the fact that
>>only sections are numbered. the integrity or structure of the
>>manuscript may therefore have easily be changed by the
>>interested prior to its presentation (or indeed its deciphering),
>>and in decipherment Poke notes that different authors present
>>the manuscript in different configurations, radically changing
>>the sequence of sections....
it seems that my suspicions were accurate and there have been
many disruptions from the original sequence.
>>from Poke's book I derive general initial content of the ms./notes:
>>
>># SECTION CONTENT # PGS
>>#
>># 1. "Where members ought to sit in the Temple" 1
>># (ms. marginal notes; ms. begins w/o intro.)
>># ["Temple set-up and administration page" -- CRunyon]
>>#
>># 2. NEOPHYTE OPENING #1 (ms. marginal notes) 1
>># "NOUGHT = NOUGHT" (top of ms. page)
>>#
>># NEOPHYTE OPENING #2 (ms marginal notes) 1
>># "NOUGHT = NOUGHT" (top of ms. page)
>>#
>># 0=0 (ms. marginal notes; NEOPHYTE CLOSING) 1
>># "CLOSE" (top of ms. page)
>>#
>># 0=0 (ms. marginal notes NEOPHYTE ADMISSION) 3 (+ old pg)
>># "NOUGHT=NOGHT (sic *ms.*) GRADE
>># ADMISSION" (ms. p1 top)
>># "0" (ms. p2 top)
>># "[Hebr. Teth]"; old p, "[Teth] (9)" Poke;
>># ms. p3old top)
>># "[H. Teth]; new p, "[Teth] (9) [He] (5)"! Poke;
>># ms. p3new top)
>>#
>># 3. "[H. Aleph] = [Yod]" [ZEALATOR]
>># ADMISSION" (ms. p1 top)
>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>> 333's inference in examination of:
>> "Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript",
>> deciphered/annotated by Carroll "Poke" Runyon,
>> C.H.S. Inc., 2000; pp. 40, 65-81.
>>===========================================================
>>
>>etc. (I hope somebody's done the rest of this, else I'll have
>>to return to it when I have more time and complete it. -- 333)
gee Poke, this was quite a lot of work I went to here in the
examination of the ms. structure you've laid out in your book.
I don't see that you have done it yourself in the text, and
hope you'll deem it of some value. do you know if anyone has
detailed the ms. in this way before? if not, perhaps I'll take
the time and complete it, especially if I can determine what
the original sequence of the sections might have been (the
easiest modules to shift about -- we might as well figure that
insertions and changes to it otherwise will be evident, many
of which you identified and catalogued in your book).
>>it appears that the ms. itself has been subjected to some
>>shuffling, probably for practical or presentation purposes.
note the best face put on this enterprise by yours truly.
>>Poke indicates that Westcott began his decipherment with
>>page 2 (the Neophyte Section), rather than with page 1, the
>>'Temple set-up and administrative page' (Poke's descriptor).
>>what was the motivation for this odd decipher method?
you seem to be saying that you have followed the tradition of
re-structuring the original manuscript to suit your presentation.
the question then becomes is there a way to determine how the
manuscript arrived in the hands of Westcott? what did he do to
it other than write a few comments and translate the Trithemian
code?
it would seem valuable to construct a timeline with significant
developments of the manuscript's content, who added what,
and how they passed it on to others in an examination of its
composite content and form in history.
>>this seems to indicate [Westcott] already knew what it contained
>>or what its content was based on its structure. was Westcott given
>>a description of its content before it was de-coded, or was
>>he given some kind of Table of Contents? elsewise, why did
>>he start his deciphering at page 2 of the ms.?
> ...Darcy Kuntz and I placed page one in the first position
>because it belongs there.
arguable. you indicate yourself that Kuntz placed it second
after the "Grade Notes folio", which you suspect a later
insertion by a third hand. your contention is that it makes
sense to place it there due to Masonic considerations, and
this seems reasonable. where did this page originally fall?
>It was obviously not in that position when Westcott
>recieved the MS. --which was in loose folios.
'obviously'? how so? you mention that you suspect that the
manuscript arrived from Mackenzie's widow when described
by Westcott to Yarker as "some loose papers". I see no
analysis by you of how this ms. first came to him. maybe
I'm just missing it. please offer elaboration on this
apparent obviousness that I'm missing, thanks.
>>page 1 (if this is indeed the first page; to which I'll
>>quite possibly return in a later post)
yeah, I had a good idea that it wasn't, and you confirmed
this. ok, so do you maintain that the NEOPHYTE OPENING
was the first page in the ms. when Westcott received it?
or is there any real way to tell what was received, only
what was passed on to others?
>>as presented by Poke contains no general descriptor or
>>introduction in the original ms.
page 2 (Neophyte Opening rite) also contains no general
descriptor or introduction. I don't see this at all in
the facsimile of the ms. but may be missing it.
>It *is* the introduction....
that is, page 1 is the intro. I see the strength of
your argument based on Masonic considerations. you appear
to be maintaining that
These initial requirements [Temple set-up folio]
are essential and typical for any organization
on a Masonic model.
------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 40.
=========================
so structurally it may well be the "introduction", but it
sounds like you're saying that it didn't originally come
first in the folio sequence. else you would not have had
to "place [it] as number one in overall pagination" because,
as your notes to that page indicate, "this sort of material
usually comes in front of actual rituals in a masonic degree
script". I'm trying to look to the beginnings, not discern
its overall structure, but your point is a good one and it
affords us another standard in examining the ms. (one I'm
not able to assess due to my ignorance, but sri catyananda,
you, and others may be able to more clearly and fruitfully
explain).
quoting this Temple set-up page:
>> AVOID ROMAN CATHOLICS
>> BUT WITH PITY
let's get this more clear. the ALL-CAPS appeared in the
original ms. in Trithemian cypher, this is translation.
>>the ms. margin notes comment on this latter with:
>> Avoid Roman Catholics \ What a strange
>> but with pity. / statement!
it was not clear who wrote these notes, but apparently it
was by Ellic Howe, by your assessment (see below).
>>indeed, it is, isn't it? what would the motivation be to
>>add such a rule? I'm insufficiently informed to hazard a
>>reliable guess....
your more educated guess is that it conforms to Masonic
perspective on Roman Catholicism. this was one of my early
suspicions until I misunderstood your assertion about 17th
century Rosicrucianism. sri catyananda explained what you
meant to me, so I drop that line of consideration. :>
>...What I wrote was:
> "This is either a reference to contemporary Catholic vs. Masonic
> squabbling or a harkening back to original Rosecrucianism as an
> expression of Protestant activism......"
not sure from where this derives, but it looks familiar. yeah,
I found that text later after sri catyananda had already given
me the Masonic perspective. the text I quoted WAS your note,
it just was brief in reflection of what you'd already said.
>> [ed. note 4 p. 65 attached to the roman catholic
>> line in the ms.:
>>
>> 17th Century Rosicrucianism was a
>> Protestant movement and Roman Catholics
>> had little use for Freemasons. Why is
>> this statement "strange" (?)[sic] -- CRR.]
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Runyon, Ibid., p. 65.
>> ============================
>
>And the above refers to the contemporary post 1960 marginal
>note (probably by Ellic Howe).
indeed, you say as much in note *3* on that page, something
I didn't notice as emphasized for all the notes on that
page outside note 3 (which pertained to holding temple).
>> ...we have clear evidence that this document
>>is intented to represent something much older than it is,
>>especially combined with its being written on old paper in
>>brown ink and including a note in code providing faulty
>>German provenance (whatever actual provenance it may have).
>...It could very well refer to events then current such as
>the anti-Masonic Catholic-supported "Palladian Scandal" hoax.
good explanation! then the rest above is left as a support
for what you're calling their "Charter Myth". only the note
from Sprengel and the aged paper and brown ink seem to be
clear indicators other than Westcott's attempt to obscure
the origins himself and Mathers' claims otherwise (something
taken up by Gilbert in "From Cypher to Enigma", which you
have graciously included as an afterword to your book and
which I quote below).
these bear directly on what was done to effect and create
the Charter Myth. my intent is to some degree to look more
closely at what was and was not true about the manuscript
and identify its Charter Myth qualities. this can go some
distance to allowing us to examine with rigour the Charter
Myths of many others, distinguishing this from true history.
it bears less upon the validity (which you want to defend)
and more on the creativity of the originators and what they
felt it necessary (along the lines of your conjecture) to
do to establish a new esoteric order, what standards they
may have succeeded or failed to uphold.
>>so the fact that it is a forgery seems to be proven....
the problem with the term 'forgery' is its relative demeanor,
as you have been pointing out. that deception and fraud was a
part of esoteric societal establishment has to be considered
in context so as not to take the deceptive activities out of
context. as such, this is convincing enough to me that I'm of
a mind to drop the language and seek the reality of the situation.
part of why I found it interesting was how much time and
energy you, Poke, have devoted to "debunking" Simon's
"Necronomicon". I felt that a comparable amount of energy need
be brought to the skeptical evaluation of this manuscript. as
it derives from a different sociocultural context I concede
their difference while yet suspecting it to be rivalry amongst
magicians creating grimoires.
perhaps the GD cypher should be considered a good example of a
social Charter Myth while the Necronomicon should be considered
a mass-distributed grimoire without societal support (e.g. I
know of no esoteric orders established with the Necronomicon
as their basis, but there MAY be one or two small ones in the
Chaos Magick community ;>).
>> [the] assertion of its shoddiness seems to turn on how
>> CONVINCING it is,
you touch on this yourself in consideration of other books:
In the creation of a new "Ancient Rite" there are
certain customs to be observed. A charter myth is
created that may or may not be believed, but should
be able to stand on its own as good story. For
example: my old friend and colleague: Louis Culling,
claimed to have been *the last of the Palladians*
and it was such a good story that nobody cared
whether it was true or not!
[AUTHOR'S NOTE: And, true or not, I give
notice at this point _that I am now the
last of the Palladians_ (*Ordo Palladium
Reformado*) and we also have *an ancient
cypher manuscript!* -- CRR]
----------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., pp. 21, 36n10.
================================
apparently re the "CONVINCING" above:
>...negatively loaded buzz-words--
ok, you'd prefer ENTERTAINED? :>
>>but this is why Greer and Runyon thereafter turn to
>>the motivation and targets of the deception in response.
>>they would like to soften the criticism, buffer it by virtue
>>of its special sociocultural conditions, ones which seem to
>>pervade religious cultures of numerous types and time periods.
this seems to stand as supported by both you and Greer,
despite the recent consideration of its content. perhaps
the 'deception' part ought be replaced with 'ruse'.
>>btw, Poke, I noticed that your decipherment omitted a line
>>of demarcation between lines (7) and (8):
>>
>> (7) WITH THE HIEROPHANT
>>
>> ______________________________________ should be line here
>>
>> (8) INC{E}NSE SHOULD BE BURNING
>> (9) IN THE TEMPLE AT ALL CEREMONIES
>> ______________________________________
>>
>>I corrected my copy and think it of only minor importance.
>Then why mention it ?
cuz I'm a nice guy? because immediately prior to the facsimiles
you have:
I would not be surprised if errors have slipped by
and I welcome any sincere effort by knwoledgeable
readers to suggest corrections, additions or other
interpretations.
--------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 64.
=======================
so I figured you'd like to know. the error seemed easy enough
to spot that I didn't worry about assertion from confusion,
and gave you the benefit of another reviewer's comments. if
I'd wanted to be truly picayune, I'd have pointed out errors
like typos, but these seem inconsequential to your product,
whereas that demarcation line might have meant something very
important to the originator of the document (such as that it
separates distinct instructions -- one regarding where adepts
and the rest sit, one regarding the burning of incense).
>>>the fact that discussion about the contents of the letter to the
>>>mysterious Frauline Sprengel occurred SIX WEEKS BEFORE RECEIVING
>>>SAID LETTER rather nails the coffin on both Sprengel and Germanic
>>>origins.
>Not at all. The Sprengle letters were known to be a cover device
>agreed upon by the founders from the outset. No one has seriously
>claimed otherwise since 1970 --- and very few claimed otherwise since
>the early1900s....
perhaps you've got your head in a Hermetic Hole, Poke. consider
the possibility that it has either been dismissed as an attempt
to deceive through fraud and forgery or accepted as a legendary
origin to a well-known esoteric order. I have seen numerous
exceptions to your claim immediately above. here's one:
_Sprengel, Anna_ (ca. 1888)
The mythical Rosicrucian adept and member of the German
occult society Die Golden Dammerung who is supposed to
have given permission to Rosicrucian _William Westcott_
to found the Hermetic Order of the _Golden Dawn_.
Westcott claimed to have found Sprengel's name and
address on a sheet of paper inserted in the pages of
a mysterious cipher manuscript bought from a bookstall
on Farringdon Road, London, in 1887.
Correspondence exists between Westcott and Sprengel
relating to the Golden Dawn, but its authenticity
has been questioned, and the cipher manuscript is
believed to be a forgery that nevertheless launched
a [sic] occult society.
_Sources:_
Howe, Ellic. *The Magicians of the Golden Dawn*.
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972.
King, Francis. *The Rites of Modern Occult Magic*.
New York: Macmillan, 1970.
---------------------------------------------------
"Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology",
ed. J. Gordon Melton, Gale Research, 1996;
p. 1241 -- Volume 2: M-Z and Indexes.
================================================
and I've seen many more. Steven Cranmer said something
similar in the alt.magick GD REF, and both of these
sources were from the 90's, no doubt drawing on 70's
references.
in any case, the withdrawal of a ruse does not wipe it out
of existence. what is the current story by Goldawnians?
>>this seems premature in the wake of possible influences on the
>>Hockley/Mackenzie origins and claims pertaining to Mackenzie's
>>possible (if not merely 'romanticized') exposure and initiation
>>into Germatic esoteric co-masonry. I'm unsure whether there is
>>evidence in support of these stories about Mackenzie but would
>>be interested to learn of it.
do you know of any, Poke?
>>>if he's lying about the letter of authority, why shouldn't
>>>he lie about the origin and authority of the cipher manuscript?
continuing re Westcott:
>...He didn't lie about the origin of the MS., only the
>so-called chartering authority. He actually gave Mackenzie,
>Hockley and Levi credit for it in the History of the Order.
do you mean his veiled references? if what you say is true,
then why does R.A. Gilbert write:
Without exception, every seeker after the ultimate
source of the Golden Dawn and its rituals comes to
grief over the problem of one man: Dr. William Wynn
Westcott. For more than a hundred years Westcott
has blocked every attempt to uncover the truth
about the source, authorship and purpose of the
Cipher manuscripts, leaving us with only one certain
fact about them: that it was he who, in 1886, came
upon them and out of them fashioned what was to
become the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn.
--------------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., "From Cipher to Enigma", R.A. Gilbert,
forming an Afterword to Poke's text; p. 204.
=======================================================
look at your own book. you mention the problem of a challenge
by someone (can't find them elsewhere, got an index to your book?)
named "Holland" were Westcott to clearly identify the connection
to Mackenzie (p. 23). it's obvious deception is a very important
part of this Charter Myth process, and you admit it. it's not just
good stories (though this is a valuable defense), but also oaths
of restriction, apparently, which they must abide.
>>that he was is now established, the motivation and quality of
>>the lie appear to be the remaining outstanding issues.
this appears to stand. I see no objections from you or others
which contradict it.
>>I am not attempting to assess the *quality of the system for
>>which this document serves as a skeletal ancestor*, merely the
>>historicity of its origins and character of is manifestation.
> ...you are incapable of such an analysis....
quite possible, but I'll muddle through as best I'm able. maybe
if people like you and sri catyananda help me I'll do a better
and more thorough job for the forum to which this is sent.
if you want to post your whole book or a summary which covers
these details then you can save me some time. ;>
>incapable of discrediting the origins of the document because
>you are not a scholar in this field or any other.
I'm not sure such qualifications are necessary, but it is an
interesting comment on your part.
>All secret societies and mystical sects have such mysteries
>and charter myths....
quite possible, and a consideration of discernment between
which part is "myth" and which part is "historically true"
would seem quite valuable to anyone studying them. :> if we
are not scholars, perhaps we can bring some scholarly
sources to the table to assist us.
>>>so your contention is that because it was so utilizable its
>>>character should not be considered "shoddy forgery"?
>It never was a "forgery." The dictionary defines forgery as:
>"The act of forging, esp. the illegal production of something
>counterfeit." There was nothing "illegal" or even "counterfeit"
>in the strict sense of the term about the Cyphers.
agreed that this is not the case. we already discussed that part.
>They were made to look older than they were
along with the Sprengel ruse, the other evidence of deception.
>but the content was very genuine.
what makes a manuscript's contents "genuine"? are you talking
about Masonically-geniuine? I could understand that. or even
Rosicrucianally-genuine. too vague otherwise and it borders
on the 'validity argument' I refuse to have with you.
>That is artistic license providing you do not sell the item
>as an antique---and don't tell me they used them to "sell"
>Golden Dawn >memberships because they did not. It was a
>Charter Myth device.
right, and I'm trying to get a better idea of what such a
device is, how good this one is for its class, and whether
such things might be utilized and how in today's world. if
one doesn't accept masonry as legitimate or meaningful,
then one might quibble with you about its 'genuineness'.
I don't think that line of argument is valuable.
>>if so, this is illogical and an emotional appeal to overlook
>>the fabricated nature of this book and books like it.
>>>why would Levi have had it?
>****Why not? ******
cuz he didn't read/write English. who might have given it to
him, prior to its arrival with Westcott? is there any evidence
one way or another about it (e.g. at Mackenzie's visit)? if
not or you don't know of any, that's fine.
>>apparently Mackenzie met Levi. perhaps he provided him with a
>>glimpse of it or told him about it? what seems credible here?
>>
>>>from where would he have obtained it?
I hope you address this question, but won't expect it.
>>not sure this is relevant if we can't trust he ever had it.
>>
>>>was it maintained that Sprengel claimed Levi had created the thing?
>Of course not---and you know that.
nope, I haven't seen the Sprengel letters yet. I didn't see them
anywhere in your book.
>>code and probably its content. I wonder if one might do some
>>kind of 'symbol-writing analysis' comparing the Sprengel note
>>with the ms. Trithemian code symbols.
>.... The Sprengle insertion was obviously Westcott's. End of story.
obviously? ok. I'll accept that you think it so. I still don't
know why it is obvious, but perhaps you will say.
>>>the rest of the argument pertains to whether it
>>>is a "shoddy forgery". given that it translates using Abbot
>>>Johannes Trithemius's "Polygraphaeia" (1561) into ENGLISH
>>
>>this it does, but does it try to translate into some kind
>>of old English? it uses "Thy" poorly (compared to Mathers)
>>as you point out, and the reference to Roman Catholics and
>>use of old paper could give the impression that this is the
>>intent of the appearance. as such a valuable way to analyze
>>whether the forgery is "shoddy" would be to see whether it
>>approximates Old English or something to which it aspires.
>>is the use of NOUGHT contiguous with older English (compared
>>with NAUGHT)? any other terms or comments indicating same?
>...The MS. is
>obviously drafted in semi-archaic style--which is normal for documents
>of this type. Take another look at *Dark Mirror of Magick.* I even
>talk that way in Temple. In fact the most ancient example of a "secret
>ritual" that we have, the so-called "Aramaic-Demotic Papyrus" from the
>4th century B.C. is written in Aramaic ciphered into the Demotic
>alphabet and phrased in a style archaic even for that period!
a good response to the query about the form of the ms.'s content.
thanks.
>>...'shoddy' is
>>probably overly harsh unless it can be established that
>>there was a significant difference of calibre between it
>>and COMPARABLE DOCUMENTS.
>A generally true statement....
thanks!
>>we must thereafter select what we think comparable. it helps
>>if what we pick has similarly-traceable original manuscripts
>>and sociological character. one might suggest "Liber CCXX"
>>(Liber Al vel Legis, penned by Crowley and at one point in
>>time a foundation document for The Order of Thelema if memory
>>serves, possibly also fundamental to other orders) if one
>>found this of interest or the "Fama Fraternitas" or other
>>foundation documents from Rosicrucian and similar esoteric
>>orders.
>The Rosicrucian founding documents are as cloudy in
>origin as the Cypher Manuscript....
you're saying there are no comparable documents with as clear
a trail?
>>>...doesn't add any defense to
>>>why the cipher ms of the Golden Dawn should not be categorized as
>>>an influential, shoddy forgery, utilized to found an influential
>>>Rosicrucian order of co-masonry whose offshoots survive to the
>>>present day.
>>
>>the answer to this appears to be that the sociological context
>>excuses the poor quality of the presentation
no you seem to be saying that the presentation was completely
fine given the context and intent behind it. I can buy that,
but I'd still like to hear what you think are comparable docs
and what might be 'reasonable deception' given the times.
>...The encipherment is sometimes careless. It even seems (to
>me) that Mackenzie farmed it out to a student to encipher....
could be to present the illusion of an illiterate mage
originating it in the "ancient" past, romanticizing it a bit.
thanks for the real discussion on the subject, Poke!
nigris333
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.thelema,alt.magick.order
Subject: GD Cipher Origins
References: <60ddjuc0ib211cqak5b8u35h0ablves166@4ax.com> <3d36ef6c.1912519@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3d3b50aa.24975066@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3D3B9208.2526@luckymojo.com>
From: nigris333
Reply-To: spam@yronwode.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 394
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 05:39:50 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1027402790 208.201.242.18 (Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:39:50 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:39:50 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:33676 alt.magick:310631 talk.religion.misc:383783 alt.pagan:302059 alt.magick.order:6730
50020722 VII om
333:
>>>who started the stories about its origins would seem
>>>important to ascertain. important also is an analysis of its
>>>content, especially its initial pages and how they may present
>>>the material or orient the reader to what follows. I have not
>>>the accounts of the origins of the stories, so I pass to the
>>>examination of the facsimile presented by Poke and others in
>>>order to ascertain the character of the document itself and
>>>what it contains.
sri catyananda :
>When you say you don't know "who started the stories about its
>origins" becuase "have not the accounts of the origins of the
>stories," do you mean you have never read a historical book
>about the GD?
I've read a few, or at least referenced them. I've also read a
few overviews of occultism generally. all of them had stories
about these incidents. few of the authors took the time to
actually track down the stories to their source, however, they
just repeated what they'd understood from written sources --
the weakness where deceptions in religiomagical traditions is
concerned. ;> wait long enough and it gets treated as history.
>An account of "who started the stories about its origins" is
>generally given in such books. These stories are generally
>told in the occult community as well.
sure are. I've read and heard many. few substantiate their
claims, however, or have proximity to people and place involved.
you mentioned Mary K. Greer, and yet apparently she is repeating
without basis falsities at this late a date. Frater Heidrick
warned me aeons ago that there were no good histories of the
subject of magic. I am inclined to agree, though there are some
good ones on Renaissance and Middle Ages in Europe.
>Poke, could you point [333] to a good, unbiased account of
>"who started the stories about its origins" and what
>eventually hapened as a result?
I'd love to be directed to such a thing.
>>>it appears that the ms. itself has been subjected to some
>>>shuffling, probably for practical or presentation purposes.
>>>Poke indicates that Westcott began his decipherment with
>>>page 2 (the Neophyte Section), rather than with page 1, the
>>>'Temple set-up and administrative page' (Poke's descriptor).
>>>what was the motivation for this odd decipher method? this
>>>seems to indicate he already knew what it contained or what
>>>its content was based on its structure. was Westcott given
>>>a description of its content before it was de-coded, or was
>>>he given some kind of Table of Contents? elsewise, why did
>>>he start his deciphering at page 2 of the ms.?
Poke Runyon/Gnome d Plume:
>> ...Darcy Kuntz and I placed page one in the first position
>> because it belongs there. It was obviously not in that
>> position when Westcott recieved the MS. --which was in
>> loose folios.
>...I understand YOUR reason for putting the set-up of the temple at
>the front, but do your claim to know which page was at the top when
>the stack was handed to Wescott -- and if so, how? Simply becuase he
>started deciphering with page 2, or said he did, we cannot be sure
>that his reason for this was because it was the top page.
yup, that's what I was asking also -- what is known about the ms.
as it passes from Mackenzie (and/or Hockley) to Westcott and beyond?
>>>page 1 (if this is indeed the first page; to which I'll
>>>quite possibly return in a later post) as presented by
>>>Poke contains no general descriptor or introduction in
>>>the original ms.
>> It *is* the introduction....
>[333] very clearly states that the page in question does not contain a
>descriptor or introduction. It does not. That is, there is nothing that
>says, "Introduction" or "This is the Beginning." [333] was only noting
>that in due form.
>That the first page is the first page of the TEXT is obvious
no it isn't, except to someone who re-organizes its structure
based on some formatting (e.g. Masonic). others who've studied
this manuscript have placed other things as the first page,
even Darcy Kuntz, to whom Poke refers. 'obvious to whom' seems
to be the qualifier here.
>-- but it is not an introduction ....
it can be considered one de facto if these are masonic or
intended to be quasi-masonic rites.
>Again, all he said was that the page taken to be the first
>page does not self-descriptively place itself as an introduction.
yes.
re the Roman Catholic note on "page 1":
>> It could very well refer to events then current such as
>> the anti-Masonic Catholic-supported "Palladian Scandal" hoax.
>
>I.e. the Taxil hoax. Indeed.
thanks for the correction!
>>>so the fact that it is a forgery seems to be proven.
>No, [333], it does not.... his word or the word of any commentator
>would not make the document a "forgery." It is a document with a
>spurious history, but it is not a forgery.
my terminological usage has a wide base of support which I do not
see either you or Poke rising to dispute. it is established that
fraudulence regarding the documents is in evidence. rather than
getting all hung up on semantics, let's focus on the actual
origin of the documents and the intent behind the deception.
>>>but this is why Greer and Runyon thereafter turn to
>>>the motivation and targets of the deception in response.
>>>they would like to soften the criticism, buffer it by virtue
>>>of its special sociocultural conditions, ones which seem to
>>>pervade religious cultures of numerous types and time periods.
this stands as demonstrated by each of their text. I look forward
to exceptions or qualifications from any who are interested. see
my paragraph immediately above this for my own thoughts on it.
again, re Westcott:
>>>> if he's lying about the letter of authority, why shouldn't
>>>> he lie about the origin and authority of the cipher manuscript?
>Why *shouldn't* he? Well, ask yourself why *should* he?
motivations have been described that a Charter Myth had to be
created. how far could the deception and lies go before it
fell flat in the esoteric-org-construction-community? this
seems a very important question, though I'm unsure how it
might be established.
>>He didn't lie about the origin of the MS., only the
>>so-called chartering authority. He actually gave
>>Mackenzie, Hockley and Levi credit for it in the History
>>of the Order.
>
>Could you cite that, please? That would be of interest to me.
he's blowing out of proportion what was an implication in his
history lecture:
... the decease during the second half of the century
of several eminent adepts and chiefs of the Order,
having caused a temporary dormant condition. Prominent
among these adepts were *Eliphaz Levi*, the greatest
of modern French Magi, Ragon, the author of several
classical books on occult subjects. *Kenneth
Mackenzie*, author of the Masonic Encyclopedia, and
*Frederick Hockley*, famous for his crystal seeing
and for his MSS. These and other contemporary adepts
received their knowledge and power from predecessors
of equal and of greater eminence but of even more
concealed existence....
------------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., quoting Westcott (V.H.Frater Sapere
Aude, Praemonstrator of Isis-Urania Temple), from
"Historical Lecture", on Poke's page 24.
====================================================
I didn't see any direct attributions or mentions, just the
gratitude to Hockley for "his MSS". possibly implying the
cypher ms.
>>> that he was is now established, the motivation and quality of
>>> the lie appear to be the remaining outstanding issues.
>We can never determine his motication without resorting to
>speculation.
no problems there. all of those examining this issue go into some
depth attempting to analyze the motivations for the deception --
because the deception proper is presumed. the only reason such a
limit would be applicable is if there were no remains of Westcott
in paper or anecdotes of those with whom he spent his days. this
is unlikely.
>...This was the point where you might have discussed the value of
>the material in the Cypher manuscript and compared its worth to
>the student of the occult against, for instance, what is contained
>in the Black Pullet, the 6th and 7th Books of Moses, the 8th, 9th,
>and 10th Books of Moses, or the Keys of Solomon, lesser and greater.
good idea. unsure if they are compable (intents or purposes seem
slightly different in some of these), but comparing them would be
great fun.
>>>a pparently Mackenzie met Levi. perhaps he provided him with a
>>> glimpse of it or told him about it? what seems credible here?
>>>
>>>> from where would he have obtained it?
>...[333] is trying to determine the value and reason for the
>statement that Levi had it. If it was credible, it might have been a
>mere statement of fact. If it was not credible, it might have been a
>pointer (made by Mathers???) that he wished to reveal that MacKenzie
>was cribbing from Levi.
or that Levi was so popular that they wished to associate it with
him for their Charter Mythos.
>>> not sure this is relevant if we can't trust he ever had it.
>>>
>>>> was it maintained that Sprengel claimed Levi had created the
>>>> thing?
>...No one, from Mathers down to Poke, has suggested that
>Sprengle ever "maintained" anything, beyond a purported
>residence in Stuttgart.
incorrect, which is why I brought it up. consult Mary K. Greer,
who claimed directly that:
Frauline Sprengel claimed that the cipher manuscript
had originally belonged to the French mage Eliphas
Levi (who died in 1875), althought Levi did not speak
the English into which it translated....
---------------------------------------------------------
"Women of the Golden Dawn: Rebels and Priestesses",
Mary K. Greer, Park Street Press, 1995; pp. 419-20.
=========================================================
and Poke suggested that there was rumoured to be a page of
the ms. which was attributed (however unbelievably) to Levi.
you're too quick to dispute this, though I admit of its
unlikelihood. we haven't even begun to EXAMINE the letters
supposedly from Sprengel.
>>> it sure isn't part of the inserted Sprengel authority-claim,
>>> which Poke calls a "letter" and says "is not a part of the
>>> Cypher Manuscript" (Ibid., p. 179 whereat the facsimile of
>>> the note is included, thanks!).
>>> was the note from the fabled
>>> Sprengel on any special kind of paper? in brown ink? we may
>>> presume not, but it isn't stated anywhere that I can see in
>>> Runyon's text. the code being the same as he ms. merely
>>> indicates that whoever wrote the note was familiar with the
>>> code and probably its content. I wonder if one might do some
>>> kind of 'symbol-writing analysis' comparing the Sprengel note
>>> with the ms. Trithemian code symbols.
>[333] is simply asking how that is known. It's a legitimate
>question. As a scholar you might answer it, and his other
>questions -- "was the note from the fabled Sprengel on any
>special kind of paper? in brown ink?"
or go further.
the Sprengel hoax was certainly convincing to the
rank-and-file G.D. members (as were Blavatsky's
Mahatmas to most Theosophists). It should be to
Westcott's credit that his fabrication was as
discreet and innocuous as possible. He voluntarily
shared authority with his co-founders and then
killed off the fictious Sprengel as soon as she
had served her purpose.
--------------------------------------------------
Runyon, Ibid., p. 22.
=======================
this simultaneously seems to admit that the hoax was
intended to convert "rank-and-file G.D. members" (or
else, what was the purpose that Sprengel served here?),
and attempts to play down the fact of the deception as
regards 'what Westcott had to do in order to establish
a new esoteric order'. there are problems, however,
with associating Westcott's Sprengel hoax with HPB's
Mahatmas: Blavatsky's level of deception was arguably
criminal. it extended far beyond the level of charters.
>>>>... you [Poke] admit it didn't come from Eliphas Levi,
>>>> so this is an admission that the ms is a forgery.
>[333], Poke is not "admitting" (as if under grilling)
>that it didn't "come from Levi" because it was only ever
>stated that Levi had "had" it, not that it had "come from" him.
sure, but if one doesn't say where it was before someone
"had" it, then this could imply it originated with him.
it is as clear an implication as Westcott's 'credit' to
Hockley in his "Historical Lecture".
>And even if this claim that "Levi had it" was a staterment
>made by one of the GD founders or early members -- and was
>known to be a false statement -- that is still NOT "an
>admission that the ms is a "forgery" (or, more properly a
>hoax). It is only a spurious staement of PROVENANCE.
>
>Provenance is the chain of possession of an object. Provenance
>is at best a MODIFIER of theories of an object's origin.
>Unless the provenance is unbroken from the author/artist to
>the current owner, it does not in and of iteself prove or
>disprove the nature of the object's origin.
all agreed.
>...the document is not, technically speaking, a "forgery."
>It is a document with a spurious origin story.
what is usually spoken of as a forgery are the Sprengel
letters, perhaps following on the claim by Mathers as Poke
has outlined, at the disintegration of the G.D.
>> The MS. is
>> obviously drafted in semi-archaic style--which is normal for documents
>> of this type. Take another look at *Dark Mirror of Magick.* I even
>> talk that way in Temple. In fact the most ancient example of a "secret
>> ritual" that we have, the so-called "Aramaic-Demotic Papyrus" from the
>> 4th century B.C. is written in Aramaic ciphered into the Demotic
>> alphabet and phrased in a style archaic even for that period!
>
>Good point, Poke.
hey, something we all agree on! :>
>...compare the GD Cypher manuscript against other
>comparable documents. But why bother?
to see how it stacks up, whether it was similar, whether
it warrants greater attention than other comparable docs,
etc., etc.
> ...not of as much interest as discussing the nature of the
>Cypher manuscript iteself.
I'm game, what would you like to discuss?
>> The Rosicrucian founding documents are as cloudy in origin as the
>> Cypher Manuscript. Didn't you read my book?
>
>Ditto all the other examples i gave. See previous posts.
>>>> ...doesn't add any defense to why the cipher ms of the
>>>> Golden Dawn should not be categorized an influential,
>>>> shoddy forgery....
>...Why take these words -- "shoddy" and "forgery" as a serious
>benchmark against whom one must measure the GD Cypher?
as a lightning avenue of approach to a study of the document's
origins. I'm interested in the origins of the document, as are
many others. those who criticize the document itself and its
character in whatever manner offer an assertion which may be
supported or denied based on evidence.
>>>>> utilized to found an influential Rosicrucian order of
>>>>> co-masonry whose offshoots survive to the present day.
>>>
>>> the answer to this appears to be that the sociological context
>>> excuses the poor quality of the presentation
>> ...The encipherment is sometimes careless. It even seems (to
>> me) that Mackenzie farmed it out to a student to encipher....
>"Sloppy" is a far more supportable term than Schuler's "shoddy."
the qualitative assessment possibly focusses on the following:
* the presentation as a Charter Myth (paper, Sprengel, etc.)
-- whether it is convincing
-- whether it goes too far in its deception
* the manuscript's content and cipherment proper
-- that it is skeletal and had to be fleshed out
-- that it contains many errors
I'm unsure that "shoddy" (meanings possibly applicable here
include (from Am Her Dic) "inferior or imitation goods",
"of poor quality or workmanship", "dishonest", and
"transparently and cheaply imitative".
considering all of the above, some of them apply. denying them
tends to stultify the conversation. Poke seems to be defending
the material which was encyphered, rather than the practices
of dishonesty or the poor encypherment. if anyone is criticizing
the content itself as 'shoddy', I'm not paying attention to them.
I like the content very much. it helps me to consider the reason
for dishonesty and why the encypherment might be delegated to an
dyslexic in an examination of the manuscript's origins.
nigris333
|
|
Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small
donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site.
|
|
|
The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories,
each dealing with a different branch of
religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge.
Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit:
|
interdisciplinary:
geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism:
enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness
occultism:
divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells
religion:
buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo
societies and fraternal orders:
freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc.
|
SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):
|
OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST
Southern
Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo,
including slave narratives & interviews
Hoodoo
in Theory and Practice by cat yronwode: an
introduction to African-American rootwork
Lucky W
Amulet Archive by cat yronwode: an online museum of
worldwide talismans and charms
Sacred
Sex: essays and articles on tantra yoga, neo-tantra,
karezza, sex magic, and sex worship
Sacred
Landscape: essays and articles on archaeoastronomy,
sacred architecture, and sacred geometry
Lucky Mojo Forum:
practitioners answer queries on conjure; sponsored by the
Lucky Mojo Curio Co.
Herb Magic:
illustrated descriptions of magic herbs with free spells,
recipes, and an ordering option
Association of
Independent Readers and Rootworkers: ethical
diviners and hoodoo spell-casters
Freemasonry
for Women by cat yronwode: a history of mixed-gender
Freemasonic lodges
Missionary
Independent Spiritual Church: spirit-led, inter-faith,
the Smallest Church in the World
Satan Service
Org: an archive presenting the theory, practice, and
history of Satanism and Satanists
Gospel of
Satan: the story of Jesus and the angels, from the
perspective of the God of this World
Lucky
Mojo Usenet FAQ Archive: FAQs and REFs for occult and
magical usenet newsgroups
Candles and Curios:
essays and articles on traditional African American
conjure and folk magic
Aleister
Crowley Text Archive: a multitude of texts by an
early 20th century ceremonial occultist
Spiritual
Spells: lessons in folk magic and spell casting from
an eclectic Wiccan perspective
The Mystic
Tea Room: divination by reading tea-leaves, with
a museum of antique fortune telling cups
Yronwode
Institution for the Preservation and Popularization of Indigenous
Ethnomagicology
Yronwode Home:
personal pages of catherine yronwode and nagasiva
yronwode, magical archivists
Lucky Mojo
Magic Spells Archives: love spells, money spells,
luck spells, protection spells, etc.
Free Love
Spell Archive: love spells, attraction spells, sex
magick, romance spells, and lust spells
Free
Money Spell Archive: money spells, prosperity
spells, and wealth spells for job and business
Free
Protection Spell Archive: protection spells
against witchcraft, jinxes, hexes, and the evil eye
Free
Gambling Luck Spell Archive: lucky gambling spells
for the lottery, casinos, and races
|
