The Goetia of Dr Rudd

«This version is mentioned by Joseph Peterson in his excellent The Lesser Key of Solomon, but he understandably dismisses it as being the least reliable version, due to its apparent lateness (1712-13) and to its inclusion of additional material from Peter de Abano's Heptameron.» — Skinner y Rankine abren declarando contra qué juicio trabajan: Joseph Peterson menciona el Harley MS 6483 y lo descarta por tardío —1712-13— y por traer material añadido del Heptameron de Peter de Abano. Las dos razones del descarte son, para ellos, las dos virtudes del testimonio

«However although he reproduces three of the sigils from Rudd's manuscript in Appendix 4 of his work, Joseph Peterson does not discuss the immense practical significance of Harley MS 6483.» — la objeción que Skinner y Rankine oponen a Peterson: reproduce tres de los sellos del manuscrito de Rudd en su Apéndice 4, pero no discute lo que ellos llaman su inmensa importancia práctica

«In Harley MS 6483 the genius of Rudd becomes clear, for the 72 double-seals given by him for working with the 72 Goetic demons also contain the 72 corresponding Shem ha-Mephorash angels, and their associated Biblical verses from Psalms. The Shem ha-Mephorash angels are, as we will show, used to control the Goetic demons, transforming the nature of Goetic magic into a much more accessible and somewhat safer form of practice.» — la tesis que ordena el volumen entero, en boca de los editores: los 72 sellos dobles de Rudd llevan en una cara al demonio goético y en la otra al ángel del Shem ha-Mephorash que le corresponde, con su versículo de los Salmos, y esos ángeles sirven para controlar al demonio. De ahí que digan que la magia goética se vuelve más accesible y algo más segura

«Some of this material comes from Harley MS 6482, but needs to be seen together with Rudd's manuscript Harley MS 6483, to fully contextualise it.» — los editores declaran que su texto no sale de un solo códice: parte del material de los sellos viene del Harley MS 6482 y solo se entiende junto al Harley MS 6483

«That Rudd was heavily influenced by Peter de Abano's Heptameron is evident, but more importantly all the invocations of the Goetia (in every manuscript version) also draw heavily on that important work.» — Skinner y Rankine trazan la dependencia y la amplían más allá de Rudd: no solo él se apoya en el Heptameron de de Abano, sino que todas las invocaciones de la Goetia, en cualquier versión manuscrita, beben de esa obra

«We have only footnoted some of the differences in the names of the spirits between other manuscripts and Rudd's Goetia of Harley MS 6483, rather than repeating the excellent comparative work done by Joseph Peterson in the footnotes of his edition of the The Lesser Key of Solomon.» — los editores declaran el alcance de su propio aparato de variantes: solo anotan algunas diferencias onomásticas entre manuscritos, y remiten para lo demás al cotejo de Joseph Peterson

«We have also included in Appendix 1, material found in Sloane MS 3824, which is a collection of items which make up a sort of proto-Lemegeton, as this manuscript contains many of the items that later made up the Lemegeton, but in many cases in a more complete state.» — Skinner y Rankine llaman al Sloane MS 3824 una especie de proto-Lemegeton: trae muchos de los materiales que después formaron la colección, y en muchos casos en estado más completo

«There are two general invocations of infernal spirits which seem to be missing from the usually accepted texts of the Lemegeton, one of which refers to Lucifer, Beelzebub and Satan.» — hallazgo que los editores adjudican al Sloane MS 3824: dos invocaciones generales de espíritus infernales que faltan en los textos aceptados del Lemegeton, una de ellas dirigida a Lucifer, Belcebú y Satán

«A fascinating inclusion in this material is a Spirit Contract with the spirit Padiel which was meant to be used during the all-important ligatio part of the evocation.» — los editores señalan como pieza rara del Sloane MS 3824 un contrato con el espíritu Padiel, destinado a la ligatio, la parte de la evocación que ellos llaman decisiva

«One of the continuing aims of this Volume in the present series is to show how interconnected the scholarly practice of angel magic was with the magic of the grimoires, and to rescue the grimoires from the stigma of being mere sorcerer's handbooks, as A E Waite suggested, and to show that they are indeed an integral part of the traditions of ceremonial magic, and were often utilised by such acknowledged luminaries as Trithemius, Agrippa, Dee, and de Abano.» — el propósito declarado de la serie, y el pasaje que sostiene la adscripción de la ficha: Skinner y Rankine sostienen que la práctica erudita de la magia angélica y la magia de los grimorios están trabadas entre sí, niegan contra A E Waite que los grimorios sean meros manuales de hechicero y los sitúan dentro de la magia ceremonial que practicaron Tritemio, Agripa, Dee y de Abano

«This Volume contains material from four separate manuscripts. It is consequently difficult to give this Volume a simple title, so we have had to resort to a slightly misleading short» — los editores explican por qué el título del volumen engaña: trae material de cuatro manuscritos distintos y no cabe en un rótulo simple, de modo que eligieron un título corto seguido de otro largo. La frase sigue al otro lado del corte de plana

«Of the manuscripts, Harley MS 6483 which is entitled Liber Malorum Spirituum seu Goetia is transcribed in full, with the exception of its fifth section the Ars Notoria.» — los editores fijan el alcance de la transcripción: el Harley MS 6483, titulado Liber Malorum Spirituum seu Goetia, va entero salvo su quinta sección, la Ars Notoria

«This collection of grimoires comprises five books which are grouped into three categories: Goetia (the first book which deals with 72 evil spirits), Theurgia-Goetia (the second book which deals with spirits of mixed nature), Theurgia (the third, fourth and fifth books which deal with good spirits and angels).» — la partición que el volumen adjudica al Lemegeton: cinco libros en tres categorías, la Goetia con sus 72 espíritus malos, la Theurgia-Goetia con los de naturaleza mixta y la Theurgia con los buenos y los ángeles

«The first question any reader will ask is 'why do we need yet another edition of the Lemegeton, and especially of its first part the Goetia, which has been printed many times since it was first transcribed by S L MacGregor Mathers over 100 years ago?'» — los editores formulan la objeción que se hacen a sí mismos, y la datan: por qué otra edición más de la Goetia, impresa tantas veces desde que MacGregor Mathers la transcribió hace más de cien años

«There are a number of manuscripts of the Lemegeton, each with its own faults and virtues. Peterson used as his prime text Sloane MS 3825 which possibly dates from 1641.» — Skinner y Rankine consignan que cada manuscrito del Lemegeton tiene faltas y virtudes propias, y que el texto base de Peterson, el Sloane MS 3825, puede ser de 1641

«We have selected Harley MS 6483 as our prime text. Although the manuscript is dated 1712-1714 it is a transcription of a much earlier manuscript written or owned by Dr Thomas Rudd (1583-1656).» — la elección de testimonio base y la reserva con que los editores la sostienen: el Harley MS 6483 está fechado en 1712-1714, pero lo tienen por transcripción de un manuscrito muy anterior escrito o poseído por Thomas Rudd

«Given that Rudd died in 1656, and that the manuscript contains some material taken from the 1655 English edition of Peter de Abano's Heptameron we can probably date the original Rudd manuscript fairly accurately as 1655/6. Therefore this version falls 15 years after the probably date of the manuscript used by Joseph Peterson. We will refer to it simply as the original Rudd MS.» — la datación que los editores proponen para el original perdido, con su reserva declarada —probably— y su aritmética: Rudd muere en 1656 y el manuscrito toma material de la edición inglesa de 1655 del Heptameron, de donde 1655/6 y una distancia de quince años respecto del testimonio de Peterson

«This manuscript contains much additional material which no other version does. As Joseph Peterson says, 'Harley MS 6483...contains much additional material, with extracts from de Abano's Heptameron replacing [and sometimes amplifying] much of the instructions included in Book 1 [the Goetia] of the other manuscripts'.» — primera de las cinco razones que los editores dan para su edición, apoyada en la letra del propio Peterson: el Harley MS 6483 trae material adicional que ninguna otra versión tiene, con extractos del Heptameron de de Abano que reemplazan y a veces amplían las instrucciones del libro primero

«The seals in this manuscript are beautiful and more carefully drawn than in any other manuscript. Moreover they are completely unique because they show Hebrew names of the demons (albeit as surmised by Rudd), and each is drawn with its corresponding angelic seal, angel name in Hebrew, and its Latin invocational Psalm text, all of which do not appear in any other manuscript or printed version, in this form.» — tercera razón, y la que sostiene la tesis del volumen: los sellos del Harley MS 6483 son únicos porque llevan el nombre hebreo del demonio —tal como Rudd lo conjetura, aclaran— junto a su sello angélico, el nombre del ángel en hebreo y el salmo latino de invocación

«They do however have copyist errors (which we have noted), and they don't always agree with those of other manuscripts.» — el límite que los editores ponen en la misma plana a su propio elogio de los sellos: traen errores de copista, que ellos anotan, y no siempre concuerdan con los de otros manuscritos

«This version explains the preparation and protection of the magician, specifically what precise angel he should use to compel each individual demon, and the use of the Brass Vessel. These key practical details are not present in any other edition or manuscript of» — cuarta razón: el volumen declara que esta versión explica la preparación y protección del mago, qué ángel exacto ha de usar para compeler a cada demonio, y el uso del Vaso de Bronce. La frase cierra al otro lado del corte de plana, en *the Goetia*

«We wanted to trace where the Lemegeton material comes from and to demonstrate that its roots reach back at least to the thirteenth century, and the connections between angel magicians and those evoking in the grimoire tradition, which in the case of this manuscript proves to be identical.» — quinta razón, y la tesis histórica del volumen: los editores dicen querer rastrear el origen del material del Lemegeton hasta el siglo XIII y mostrar que, en este manuscrito, los magos angélicos y los evocadores de la tradición de los grimorios son los mismos

«We hope this will help heal the divisive dualism which was introduced into magic by the church, and reassert that magic, as a working definition, consists in dealing with 'spiritual creatures' of whatever hue, be they spirits, angels or demons.» — la posición declarada con que Skinner y Rankine cierran sus cinco razones: atribuyen a la iglesia el dualismo que dividió la magia y proponen como definición operativa que la magia consiste en tratar con criaturas espirituales, del color que sean

«In fact the terms 'spirit' and 'demon' have been used almost interchangeably throughout this volume. This may seem theologically sloppy, but many of the magicians and scholars who dealt with them, also used these terms interchangeably.» — los editores declaran su propio uso léxico y lo defienden anticipando la objeción: usan espíritu y demonio casi como sinónimos, conceden que suena teológicamente descuidado, y lo justifican porque así los usaban también los magos y eruditos que trataron con ellos

«We originally thought just to present the new material and explain the techniques presented, but it rapidly became clear that we would be constantly referring the reader back to the text of the Lemegeton, and so it was decided to reproduce in entirety the first four books of the Lemegeton, in fact the whole of Harley MS 6483 (except for the Ars Notoria) so that the reader would have everything needful right in front of him.» — los editores cuentan el cambio de plan del que sale la forma del libro: iban a presentar solo el material nuevo, vieron que tendrían que remitir sin parar al texto del Lemegeton, y decidieron reproducir íntegros los cuatro primeros libros, es decir todo el Harley MS 6483 salvo la Ars Notoria

«Before beginning it is worth clearing up the confusion between necromantia (which is divination by the invocation of the spirit of a dead person) and nigromantia (divination by the invocation of demons) which terms became a little confused after the Middle Ages.» — los editores separan dos términos que dicen confundidos desde el final de la Edad Media: necromantia es adivinación por invocación del espíritu de un muerto, y nigromantia adivinación por invocación de demonios

«Several modern academic works use the term 'necromancy' when in fact they are dealing with nigromancy. Here we deal only with the invocation of spiritual creatures such as spirits, angels, and demons.» — la objeción que los editores dirigen a la academia moderna: emplea necromancia donde trata de nigromancia. Ellos acotan su propio campo a la invocación de criaturas espirituales

«Throughout the course of this work the term 'spiritual creatures' will be used to apply collectively to angels, demons, spirits, elementals, fairies, or other non-human entities. As pointed out elsewhere, if the doctrine of the Fall is accepted then demons are but fallen angels.» — el término colectivo que el volumen instituye para todo el recorrido —ángeles, demonios, espíritus, elementales, hadas u otras entidades no humanas— y la razón doctrinal que le dan: aceptada la doctrina de la Caída, los demonios no son sino ángeles caídos

«We wanted to show how the system of magic in the Lemegeton was developed and actually practiced by working magicians in the seventeenth century. As well as examining the earliest texts available, we deliberately chose the most fully expanded text used by working magicians as our prime text.» — segunda razón que los editores dan para su edición: declaran querer mostrar cómo magos en activo del siglo XVII desarrollaron y practicaron el sistema del Lemegeton, y por eso eligieron a propósito el texto más expandido y no el más temprano

«Although there is a difference between demons and spirits, in the present text the 72 demons of the Goetia will sometimes be referred to as spirits, and so these terms have been used interchangeably.» — los editores repiten para el texto transcrito la licencia léxica que ya se habían dado: conceden que demonio y espíritu difieren, y aun así llaman espíritus a los 72 demonios de la Goetia

«Finally, because there are so many spirit names, which belong to a rather complicated hierarchy, we decided to import the relevant Tables from The Complete Magician's Tables, as a way of providing a tabular reference to the first four books of the Lemegeton.’ These appear in Appendix 2 and 7.» — los editores declaran de dónde sacan sus tablas de referencia: las importaron de The Complete Magician's Tables por lo enredado de la jerarquía de nombres, y van a los apéndices 2 y 7

«The Goetia as a distinct book dates back at least to the fifteenth century, but its techniques and purpose date back at least two and» — Skinner y Rankine fechan el libro y su contenido por separado: la Goetia como libro aparte se remonta al siglo XV, y sus técnicas y su propósito a dos milenios por lo menos. La frase sigue al otro lado del corte de plana, en *maybe three thousand years*

«We wouldn't, as MacGregor Mathers seemed to, assert that the present text was actually written by King Solomon, but we are convinced that the magical technology behind it may date back to the time of that King.» — los editores marcan la distancia con MacGregor Mathers y ponen a la vez su propia reserva: niegan que el texto lo escribiera Salomón, y sostienen que la tecnología mágica que hay detrás puede remontarse a su tiempo

«King Solomon (who reigned 977-927 BCE) had a reputation for being a consummate magician. Many sources, Christian, Jewish and Islamic contain stories of King Solomon's God-given skills in calling and binding demons. These skills included interrogating them, imprisoning them, and finally forcing them to obey him, even to the point of doing heavy physical work like hewing stones and timber for the construction of his famous temple in Jerusalem.» — el retrato que los editores hacen del Salomón de la tradición: fuentes cristianas, judías e islámicas le adjudican la habilidad, dada por Dios, de llamar y atar demonios, interrogarlos, encarcelarlos y forzarlos a trabajo físico para el templo de Jerusalén

«Living as he did well before the advent of Christianity, and without its dualist view of the spiritual worlds, Solomon had no qualms about dealing with both angels and demons; in fact he clearly saw it as part of his duties to curb the power of the latter, thereby reducing the amount of wickedness on the loose in this world.» — la lectura con que los editores explican la falta de escrúpulo de Salomón: vivió antes del cristianismo y de su visión dualista de los mundos espirituales, de modo que trataba con ángeles y demonios por igual y veía en frenar a los segundos parte de su oficio

«Who did Solomon leave his secrets to? The four magicians usually quoted are Fortunatus, Eleazar, Macarus and Toz Grecus, who are sometimes called the quartet annulus. Of these, there are many manuscripts extant on magic reputedly written by Toz Grecus (which some writers suggest may mean 'the Greek Thoth'» — la cadena de transmisión que los editores consignan de la tradición: los cuatro magos que suelen citarse como herederos de Salomón —Fortunatus, Eleazar, Macarus y Toz Grecus, llamados a veces quartet annulus—, y la conjetura, que atribuyen a otros escritores, de que Toz Grecus valga por el Thoth griego

«The Temple of Solomon was destroyed and rebuilt several times, and each time there were manifestations and phenomena which suggest that Solomon had not only used demonic powers effectively to build it, but had bound some of these into the very structure of the Temple» — la tesis de los editores sobre el templo: las manifestaciones que acompañaron cada destrucción y reconstrucción les sugieren que Salomón no solo usó poderes demoníacos para levantarlo, sino que ató algunos a la fábrica misma del edificio

«This procedure was not part of Solomon's later religious defection to the foreign gods of his many wives, but an integral part of his use of magic in building the Temple for the Lord, so that it became truly a magical place.» — los editores separan la magia del templo de la apostasía posterior de Salomón: no es parte de su defección hacia los dioses extranjeros de sus mujeres, sino parte integral del uso de la magia para construir el templo del Señor

«The emphasis is upon unhewn; as such natural rock is still connected directly with the earth, and hence is of greater magical» — la razón que los editores dan al énfasis en la roca sin labrar de la Cúpula de la Roca: la roca natural sigue conectada directamente con la tierra. La frase cierra al otro lado del corte de plana, en *efficacy*

«A third and last attempt at rebuilding the Temple has been given very little attention. It took place under the reign of Julian, the last pagan Roman Emperor (reigned 360-363 CE) who decreed that all pagan temples should be rebuilt, including the great Temple of Solomon.» — el episodio que los editores dicen desatendido: el tercer y último intento de reconstruir el templo, bajo Juliano, el último emperador romano pagano, que decretó rehacer todos los templos paganos

«Illustrations of the Lemegeton seals and sigils (including Figures 6, 7, 8, 9,13, 14, and 15) from Harley MS 6483; of Peter Smart's engraving of Solomon's Brass Vessel (Figure 5) and Rudd's version of the Tabula Sancta (Figure 14) from Harley MS 6482; the Spirit Compass Rose (Figure 10) from Sloane MS 3825; of a magician evoking a spirit from within a Circle from Cotton MS Tiberius A VII, folio 44 (the dust jacket and Figure 2); of the magician 'Canoaster', with grimoire, admonishing two demons from Additional MS 39844, folio 51 (Figure 3); and the variant forms of the Circle from Sloane MS 3824 (Figure 17) have been reproduced with the kind permission of the Trustees of the British Library.» — la página de créditos del volumen, donde se declara de qué manuscrito sale cada ilustración: los sellos del Harley MS 6483, el grabado del Vaso de Peter Smart y la Tabula Sancta de Rudd del Harley MS 6482, la rosa de los vientos del Sloane MS 3825 y dos figuras de manuscritos del British Museum

«The illustrations (including Figures 10, 11 and 17) from Welcome MS 3203 have been reproduced with the kind permission of the Welcome Trust, for which we are also duly grateful.» — segunda parte de esos créditos: las ilustraciones del Welcome MS 3203 se reproducen con permiso del Welcome Trust. El troceo imprime *Welcome* por Wellcome en todo el volumen

«Our thanks to Adam McLean for the illustration of the Seals of the Patriarchs (Figure 4) from his Magical Calendar. We are also grateful for the painstaking work of restoring and cleaning the seals by Dianthus and Valentina Kim and Er Choon Haw. To Peter Forshaw for assistance with Latin and German texts.» — los agradecimientos nominales del volumen: Adam McLean por los Sellos de los Patriarcas de su Magical Calendar, Dianthus, Valentina Kim y Er Choon Haw por restaurar y limpiar los sellos, y Peter Forshaw por el latín y el alemán

«And last but not least to Joseph Peterson for having done the definitive version of the Lemegeton in the first place.» — el último agradecimiento del volumen, y el que fija su deuda con la edición que quiere complementar: a Joseph Peterson por haber hecho la versión definitiva del Lemegeton en primer lugar