John Dee's Actions with Spirits, 22 December 1581 to 23 May 1583

«The manuscript contains 104 folios in Dee’s hand which form his fair copy of notes recording the events taken at the time the Actions were conducted» — Whitby describe el soporte: no son las notas tomadas en la sesión, sino la copia en limpio que Dee hizo de ellas.

«A short preface by Elias Ashmole (1617–1692) and some notes in cipher by William Shippen (1635–1693) are also contained in the present binding» — lo que la encuadernación añade al autógrafo de Dee, según Whitby, con las fechas de vida de los dos añadidores.

«Being unable to understand the contents of these papers, they paid no great attention to them and many were eventually lost through being used by their maid to line pie dishes» — Whitby cuenta así la pérdida de parte de los papeles hallados en el cofre de los Jones: la criada los usó para forrar moldes de pastel.

«Thirteen years before, most of the records of Dee’s magical dealings from 28 May 1583 until his death had been published by Meric Casaubon as a warning how easily man may be deluded into dealing with devils» — Whitby data en 1659 y adjudica a Meric Casaubon la edición de las Acciones posteriores, y le atribuye ese propósito: publicarlas como advertencia.

«Here were the ‘Actions with spirits’ that formed the ground of all those contained in A True and Faithful Relation and without which the latter could not properly be understood» — Whitby fija la relación entre el Sloane 3188 y la edición de Casaubon: lo que aquí se registra es el fundamento de aquélla.

«Consequently on 5 September 1672 Ashmole exchanged a copy of his popular work on the Order of the Garter» — el precio de los manuscritos, según Whitby: un ejemplar del libro de Ashmole sobre la Orden de la Jarretera.

«Even if Dee’s original manuscripts were purchased at Jekyll’s sale along with Ashmole’s transcripts, there is a period of at least forty-six years during which their location is not accounted for» — Whitby acota el hueco de la cadena de custodia entre la subasta de Jekyll de 1739/40 y la aparición de los manuscritos en la colección Sloane.

«Sloane MS 3188 contains 171 leaves in its present folio binding. The first two leaves are unpaginated, and thereafter the leaves are foliated in pencil in the top right hand corner from 1 to 169» — Whitby describe el volumen tal como está encuadernado hoy, con la foliación a lápiz que la biblioteca le puso.

«Thereafter until fol. 108 the manuscript is in Dee’s hand, with the exception of fols 15, 16 and 46 which are in Ashmole’s hand and fol. 99 which is mostly in Edward Kelly’s hand» — el reparto de manos dentro del autógrafo, según Whitby: casi todo Dee, tres folios de Ashmole y uno de Kelly.

«Fol. 87 is either in Dee’s or in Kelly’s hand, but being written in an unprecedented cipher it is not possible to define the authorship any more closely» — Whitby se abstiene ante un folio en cifra sin precedente: la cifra impide adjudicar la mano.

«Dee’s records of his magical dealings are divided into five books and an appendix to the fifth book» — la división interna del manuscrito, según Whitby, con páginas de título en cinco folios.

«Despite the attentions of the Jones’s maid, the five books and appendix of Dee’s magical dealings are nearly complete» — Whitby mide la pérdida: pese a los moldes de pastel de la criada, faltan papeles al principio del segundo libro y del cuarto, y quizá al final del segundo y del tercero.

«Ashmole notes at fol. 15a that concerning Book 2 the ‘beginning thereof is vtterly perished’» — la nota de Elias Ashmole sobre el segundo libro, citada por Whitby, que en su propia transcripción precisa que lo perdido es la primera hoja y la mitad superior de la segunda.

«for in the begining of the Action of 28 of April Michael taxeth and threatneth ∆ [Dee] for his slacknes in not preparing things appointed by him (which ∆ excuseth with inability) but there is no mention of such appointment in the Action of 21 of March» — la conjetura de Ashmole sobre los papeles que faltan entre el segundo y el tercer libro: el ángel Michael reprocha a Dee —a quien Ashmole nombra con la delta de su jeroglífico— un encargo que en lo conservado nadie le hizo.

«Kelly was first introduced to Dee under the name of Edward Talbot and the fourth book is the first time that he is noted under the initials of ‘E.K.’ rather than ‘E.T.’» — Whitby identifica a Talbot con Kelly y explica por ahí el cambio de siglas en el cuarto libro.

«It makes greater sense to see Talbot and Kelly as the same man and this unwillingness shown on 4 May as the rupture that needed reconciliation than to suppose a change of scryer from Talbot to a different individual by the name of Kelly to whose previous employment and desertion there is not a single reference» — Whitby objeta a Ashmole: postular un scryer distinto llamado Kelly obliga a suponer un empleo y una deserción de los que no hay rastro.

«Mr. Talbot cam abowt 3 of the clok afternone, with whom I had some wordes of unkendnes: we parted frendely: he sayd that the Lord Morley had the Lord Mountegle his bokes. He promised me some of Doctor Myniver’s bokes» — la entrada del diario de Dee del 13 de julio de 1582, citada por Whitby: pese a las palabras ásperas, Kelly le sigue haciendo encargos de libros.

«in a mervaylous rage at 8 of the cloke at night, and all that night, and next morning till 8 of the cloke, melancholike and ch <ided me> terrible for……. that come to me only honest and lerned men» — la nota borrada del diario de Dee sobre la cólera de su mujer Jane el 6 de mayo de 1582, con las lecturas restituidas entre corchetes angulares y los puntos de lo ilegible tal cual imprime la edición.

«and her complaint was that Dee was involved with dishonest men, it is probable that the cause of her anger was Kelly» — Whitby razona la causa de la cólera de Jane Dee el 6 de mayo de 1582: se queja de hombres deshonestos y quien la apacigua es Clerkson, el mismo que había metido a Kelly en la casa bajo el nombre de Talbot.

«The six month gap is the longest period in the manuscript during which there are no Actions recorded and if Kelly consistently refused to serve, one would expect Dee to have made some attempt to procure another scryer» — Whitby mide el hueco de mayo a noviembre de 1582 y objeta la explicación fácil: si Kelly se hubiera negado en firme, Dee habría buscado otro vidente.

«The fourth book evidently lacks the first leaf, since Dee numbered the recto of each folio and the first extant leaf begins with the number 2» — el argumento con que Whitby data la pérdida de la primera hoja del cuarto libro: la numeración de Dee empieza en dos.

«On 22 November he went to Blockley at the foot of the Cotswold hills and was supposed to return in ten days» — el invierno de Kelly en Gloucestershire, según el diario de Dee que Whitby cita; los diez días se volvieron cuatro meses.

«When he did return be brought with him certain clues as to the location of some buried treasure, supposedly having been led to these clues by a spiritual creature, and this no doubt assuaged any wrath that Dee may have intended to vent upon him for his prolonged absence» — Whitby lee la vuelta de Kelly con las pistas del tesoro como lo que le evitó la reprimenda por la tardanza; la grafía *be* por *he* es del OCR de esta reimpresión.

«The fifth book and its appendix are complete and there is only a five day period between the last Action of the manuscript and the beginning of TFR, such a gap being not uncommon between consecutive Actions» — Whitby empalma el manuscrito con la edición de Casaubon: entre la última Acción de uno y la primera de la otra median cinco días.

«Evidence for the manuscript being a fair copy may be found in some of the mistakes and corrections Dee made» — la nota al pie con que Whitby funda que el Sloane 3188 es copia en limpio y no el cuaderno de la sesión; remite además a una declaración de Dee en el folio 98b.

«The two principal sources of Dee’s life are of his own composition. They are his diary and the autobiographical exposition that he prepared for the Queen’s commissioners in 1592 in an effort to gain redress for ‘the intollerable extremetie of the injuries and indignities’ which his name had suffered at the hands of the populace» — Whitby declara la base documental de la biografía: el diario de Dee y la exposición que preparó en 1592 para los comisionados de la reina, escrita para reclamar por su fama.

«he devised a mechanical beetle which flew ‘up to Jupiter’s pallace, with a man and his basket of victualls on her back: whereat was great wondring, and many vaine reportes spread abroad of the meanes how that was effected» — el escarabajo mecánico que Dee construyó para una representación estudiantil de Aristófanes, citado por Whitby de la Compendious Rehearsal en palabras del propio Dee.

«Dee’s mechanical wonder excited rumours of supernatural powers being employed, rumours that were to plague his life to the end» — Whitby fecha ahí el origen de la fama de Dee: en una sociedad que miraba con recelo las matemáticas, el ingenio se leyó como poder sobrenatural.

«In May 1547 he made his first journey abroad spending several months in the Low Countries in conference with ‘some learned men, and chiefely mathematicians, as Gemma Frisius, Gerardus Mercator, Caspar à Mirica, Antonius Gogava» — los matemáticos con quienes Dee conferenció en los Países Bajos, nombrados por él mismo en la Compendious Rehearsal; volvió con dos globos de Mercator y un anillo armilar de Frisius.

«a thing never done publiquely in any University of Christendome» — cómo califica el propio Dee sus lecturas públicas sobre los Elementos de Euclides en París en 1550; Whitby añade que el aula no dio abasto y hubo quien escuchó por las ventanas.

«Dee was imprisoned on the plea of a certain George Ferrys who asserted that Dee had struck one of his children blind and killed another by magical means and that Dee was attempting to enchant the Queen with his casting of horoscopes» — la acusación de 1555 según la carta de Thomas Martyn que Whitby cita: magia contra los hijos de Ferrys y encantamiento de la reina por vía de horóscopos.

«No action was taken upon this request and in consequence Dee was to spend a vast amount of time and money on his own library in his house at Mortlake» — Whitby encadena la negativa de la corona a fundar una biblioteca nacional con el gasto privado de Dee en la suya de Mortlake.

«undoubtedly the three most costly items of expenditure were his library, his laboratories and his continental travelling» — los tres renglones que arruinaban a Dee, según Whitby; añade que los viajes se los pagaban a veces mecenas que esperaban ver la piedra filosofal.

«by which time there were nearly four thousand items ‘the fourth part of which were the written bookes’ and he estimated the value at two thousand pounds» — el tamaño de la biblioteca de Mortlake en el inventario que Dee levantó en 1583, con la parte manuscrita y la tasación que él mismo declara.

«The essential importance of Dee’s ‘Preface’ is that it offered not only a mystical appreciation of the science of numbers, which may also be seen in the Actions with spirits, but also practical help to the ‘Common Artificer’» — cómo lee Whitby el Mathematicall Preface a la traducción de Euclides de Billingsley: aprecio místico del número y a la vez manual para el artesano.

«perhaps the true extent to which this work caused a revival of the Vitruvian arts in England will never be known» — Whitby se abstiene sobre el alcance del Preface: reconoce la atención creciente que recibe y a la vez declara que su efecto no se podrá medir.

«And for these, and such like marveilous Actes and Feates, Naturally, Mathematically, and Mechanically, wrought and contrived: ought any honest Student, and Modest Christian Philosopher, be counted, and called a Conjurer» — la defensa que Dee escribe de sí mismo en el Mathematicall Preface, citada por Whitby: pregunta si construir ingenios basta para llamar conjurador a quien los hace.

«While Dee did turn to more occult sciences, it cannot be over-emphasised that he was ever anxious to further the prosperity of the nation in the most practical manner» — Whitby sostiene que el giro de Dee a lo oculto no desplaza su interés práctico por la prosperidad de Inglaterra: las dos cosas corren juntas.

«the second volume, The British Complement of the Perfect Art of Navigation, was never printed and is no longer extant, with the result that nothing is known of Dee’s invention of the ‘paradoxal cumpas’, an exposition of which was contained therein» — la pérdida del segundo volumen de los General and Rare Memorials, y con él lo único que Dee escribió sobre su *paradoxal cumpas*.

«Dee advocates the establishment of ‘a Petty Navy Royall, of Threescore Tall ships’, of 160 to 200 tons burden» — la propuesta naval de Dee según Whitby: sesenta naves grandes, que se tripularían con quienes no pudieran acreditar empleo ni domicilio.

«C.H. Josten writes that ‘it is not known how these Dee manuscripts, and Ashmole’s transcripts of them, have found their way into the Sloane collection of manuscripts at the British Museum» — Whitby trae a C. H. Josten para consignar que la vía por la que los manuscritos llegaron a la colección Sloane se ignora.

«This volume [was purchased at the sale] is in Dr. Dee’s own handwriting, [of Sir Joseph Jekyll’s library in January 1739/40] as far as fol. 108» — la nota de guarda de Sir Frederic Madden, jefe del departamento de manuscritos del British Museum, escrita en enero de 1854 y citada por Whitby con sus tachaduras entre corchetes, que es lo que le permite dudar de la procedencia del original.

«The use of old papers for this purpose was a common culinary practice and a similar misfortune befell many of the manuscripts in the possession of the eighteenth-century scholar William Warburton» — Whitby quita excepcionalidad a la pérdida remitiendo al caso paralelo de la biblioteca de William Warburton, estudiado por W. W. Greg.

«a quantity of folio paper books of his [Dee’s] own writing, consisting of many parts of his Liber mysteriorum, and conferences with angels» — la descripción con que el catálogo Planta de 1802 asentó los manuscritos de Dee en la colección Cotton, traída por Whitby para rastrear su circulación.

«Since Smith’s account only three works have attempted to give any comprehensive and accurate assessment of the whole of Dee’s life: Charlotte Smith’s biography John Dee (London 1909); I.R.F. Calder’s unpublished University of London doctoral dissertation John Dee Studied as an English Neo-Platonist (1952); and more recently John Dee by Peter J. French» — el estado de la cuestión biográfica que Whitby declara en 1988: la biografía de Charlotte Smith de 1909, la tesis inédita de I. R. F. Calder de 1952 y el John Dee de Peter J. French de 1972.

«Since my concern is with Dee in relation to his magical dealings between 1581 and 1583, I propose to do little more than give the straightforward facts of his life and major works here» — Whitby acota lo que su capítulo biográfico se propone: los hechos, no una interpretación de la vida entera.

«Dee often refers to the book as being ‘the Book of Dunstan’ and Fell Smith suggests that it may have been a copy of the manuscript Tractatus…de lapide philosophorum which was formerly believed to be the work of that saint» — la identificación que Charlotte Fell Smith propuso para el libro alquímico que Kelly trajo, traída por Whitby con su reserva.

«Ashmole-interpreted the horoscope as showing ‘him a Man of cleere Understanding, quick Apprehension, an excellent Wit, and a great propensity to Philosophicall Studies» — cómo leyó Elias Ashmole la carta natal de Kelly que Dee había levantado.

«I.R.F. Calder notes that ‘Jupiter is in the Medium Ooelum indicating great worldly honour and position, but it is ill aspected suggesting misfortune and ultimate disaster’ being ‘moreover…conjoined with Mars, which unequivocally in this tenth house denotes a rash and hasty character, boastful, presumptuous, stubbornly weak, one swayed by extravagant passions and generally unbalanced and treacherous» — la lectura contraria que I. R. F. Calder hizo de la misma carta en su tesis de 1952, traída por Whitby junto a la de Ashmole y sin arbitrar entre las dos.

«Anthony à Wood was informed that Kelly had studied for a time at Gloucester Hall, Oxford, but finding no such name in the matriculation register, assumed that he entered under the name of Talbot, three persons of that name being at Gloucester Hall in 1573» — cómo Anthony à Wood salvó la ausencia de Kelly en el registro de matrícula de Oxford suponiendo que se inscribió como Talbot.

«Halliwell’s edition of the diary reads ‘I was sent to E.K.’, which is an incorrect transcription» — Whitby corrige la lectura de James O. Halliwell en su edición del diario de Dee.

«on the point of turning into art, science, practical psychology, or, above all, religion on account of a ‘real overlapping of the fields of all these activities» — la formulación de D. P. Walker que Whitby toma para decir por qué los bordes de la magia renacentista no se dejan trazar.

«Angels and daemons were substituted for the impersonal planetary influences and ‘would be attracted or compelled by the various forces and would then accomplish the effects, acting not only on the body and spirit but also on the higher parts of the soul» — la formulación de D. P. Walker sobre lo que cambia al pasar de la magia natural a la demónica, citada por Whitby.

«There was for everyone, without exception, a good and a bad astrology, just as, for nearly everyone, there was a good and a bad magic. There was general agreement on the criteria for distinguishing the magics: bad magic was to do with the devil and demons; good magic was ‘natural’—though one could of course argue endlessly about the proper application of these criteria» — la distinción entre buena y mala magia según D. P. Walker, con su reserva: el criterio era claro y su aplicación, discutible sin término.

«[The] tradition, as Ficino left it, comprises two kinds of magic, the natural, spiritual magic of [his De vita coelitus comparanda, the third book of de triplica vita (Florence 1489)], and the demonic magic, only hinted at in that work, but quite easily discoverable from his other writings. The tradition, therefore, was likely to grow in two divergent directions; which it did. The demonic magic, combined with mediaeval planetary magic, led to the overtly demonic, recklessly unorthodox magic of Agrippa and Paracelsus. The spiritual magic tended to dissolve into something else: music and poetry, as with La Boderie; orthodox Christianity, as with Giorgi; unorthodox Christianity, as with Pcrsio. At the end of the 16th century the two strands of the tradition come together again in the planetary oratory of Paolini and the magic practised by Campanella» — el esquema de D. P. Walker sobre las dos ramas en que se dividió la tradición de Ficino, que Whitby cita entero para situar a Agrippa.

«I use the word ‘daemon’ rather than ‘demon’ to avoid the presupposed connection with evil» — la decisión terminológica que Whitby declara en nota: escribe *daemon* y no *demon* para no dar por supuesta la conexión con el mal, porque un daemon puede ser bueno, malo o imparcial.

«I am particularly indebted for much of what follows to the study by D. P. Walker» — la deuda que Whitby declara al abrir el capítulo sobre la magia renacentista, junto a Thorndike, Shumaker y Yates.

«They were correctly dated as having been written in the second and third centuries AD by Isaac Casaubon (the father of Meric Casaubon» — la datación del Corpus Hermeticum que Whitby consigna en nota, atribuida a Isaac Casaubon en 1614 —el padre del editor de las Acciones posteriores de Dee.

«It is called catoptromantia when a mirror is placed in a basin full of water and a pure boy or a pregnant woman, who has not yet reached her ninth month, is used to perceive in the mirror things that are requested. In Book I Chapter 12 [of Polycraticus] John of Salisbury gives the name of Specularii to those who give answers through curious consultations in polished and clean bodies, such as bright swords, basins, ladles and various kinds of mirror suitable for augury» — la traducción inglesa que Whitby da de la definición latina de Boulenger, señalando que su segunda mitad es cita directa del Policraticus de Juan de Salisbury.

«Catoptromantia lis the art] which displays visions of things that are asked for in polished mirrors. The art was used by the Emperor D[idiu8] Julianus, who bought the empire and Spartianus writes:“Julianus, furthermore, was mad enough to perform a number of rites with the aid of magicians, such as were calculated either to lessen the hate of the people or to restrain the arms of the soldiers. For the magicians sacrificed certain victims that are foreign to the Roman ritual and chanted unholy songs, while Julianus performed rites, which took place, so we are told, before a mirror, into which boys are said to gaze, after bandages have been bound over their eyes and charms muttered over their head6. And in this performance one lad, it is said, saw the arrival of Severus and the retirement of Julianus» — la traducción de Whitby del pasaje de Del Río, con el testimonio de Espartiano sobre el emperador Didio Juliano y los niños con los ojos vendados; en nota añade que según Dión los ritos incluían sacrificio de niños.

«He had drawn from his purse very gently (as if it had been some precious jewel) a mirror that was scribbled over with a confusion of characters and on which there was magisterially drawn this great word Tetragrammaton. The four corners on the back were painted with several crosses and the signs of the planets» — la traducción de Whitby del arranque del relato de Tahureau: el espejo garabateado de caracteres con el Tetragrámaton y, al dorso, cruces y signos de los planetas.

«Then he asked me whether I did not see anything in the mirror. I replied to him that he was quite correct and that I did not see anything, except the image of our two facets. “That’s strange,” said my philosopher, putting on a melancholy expression. “It must be that there is something wrong with you, for as for myself, I see him as clearly and just as naturally as if I were talking to him. I see him reading a book. Ah,” he said to me then, sighing to the Tuscan, “I believe that you have no» — el desenlace en la traducción de Whitby: el visitante no ve más que los dos rostros, y el mago concluye que le falta fe.

«Not dissimilar from the above is crystallomanteia, except that in this case it is practised with pieces of crystal clasped in rings, in a small vase, or even unadorned and shaped like a cylinder or obelisk. In these a demon claims to live, a certain person of NUrenberg is said to have seen treasures shown by a demon in a crystal in 1550. When he sought them afterwards at a certain spot dug out in front of the city, he and a friend he had summoned to be a witness saw a chest in a cave with a black dog lying down in front of it. The magician entered the cave and was going to drive away the dog and open the chest, but he had not brought a sop for Cerberus. The dog shook the top of the cave and overwhelmed the wretched man in ruin, also filling the cave with earth» — la traducción de Whitby del pasaje de Del Río sobre la cristalomancia y el caso de Núremberg de 1550, con el perro negro sobre el arca y el mago que no llevó la sopa para el Cerbero.

«The accused says that a hundred times, from his first coning to the town of Wombwell, he practised the following ait for the recovery of goods that had been secretly stolen: first he placed a certain youth of less than twelve years of age on a stool in the presence of the said William and placed a crystal stone in the hand of the said boy or youth, making him say the Pater Koster» — el arranque de la traducción que Whitby da de la confesión latina de William Byg: un muchacho de menos de doce años en un banco con la piedra de cristal en la mano.

«He says that twenty times boys like this had seen nothing appear in the stone and that he himself never saw anything at this time» — el final de esa misma traducción, que es lo que Whitby subraya: veinte veces los niños no vieron nada, y el propio Byg no vio nunca nada.

«They told the accused how two goblets had been stolen from the church at Derthington and requested him, in so far as he would, to lend his help in respect of their recovery. The accused agreed to their wishes and they took him to a certain honest nan called Fltzwllllam, a gentleman From there they went to Derthington and in the presence of that sane Fitzwillian, together with a certain Scurdville and others, the foresaid Bishop and Paget produced two boys and seated then on two wicker stools. The accused practised the said art in then and one of the boys saw in the foresaid stone a certain man, whom he did not know, holding the silver cup in his hands» — la traducción de Whitby del segundo caso de la confesión de William Byg: dos cálices robados en Derthington, dos niños sentados en banquetas de mimbre y uno de ellos viendo en la piedra a un hombre con el cáliz de plata.

«The same writer also noted that Meric Casaubon was ‘a very learned and Pious Man but most lamentably troubled with Hypochondriac Melancholy» — cómo juzgaba ese mismo lector contemporáneo al editor Casaubon.

«Modern scholarship takes the view that while a system of cryptography is expounded in the first two of the three books of Steganographia, the work was indeed on daemonic magic and the cryptography provided a veil for the magical content and a means for the author to defend his work as being other than it really was» — el estado de la cuestión sobre la Steganographia que Whitby resume: hay cifra en los dos primeros libros, pero la obra es de magia demónica y la cifra le servía de velo.

«a boke for which many a lerned man hath long sowght and dayly yet doth seeke’ and which was ‘for your honor, or a Prince, so meet, so nedefull and comodious, as in humayne knowledg, none can be meeter, or more behofefull» — cómo describió Dee la Steganographia a Burghley en 1563, tras copiarla entera en diez días.

«My efforts to trace such a manuscript and to get in touch with Mr. Deacon through his publishers have been fruitless, and I am rather sceptical of the reference. Deacon says that the text of the Action was dispatched to London from Dee on the Continent through the agency of Francis Garland and yet does not name the recipient, who ought to he Walsinghan, and I do not see why Dee should retain a copy which would pass to his son Arthur. If the Action was an encoded nessage intended for Walsingham, then I would expect any copy to be kept in as secret a place as the other Actions, The style of the Action is distinctly different from the rest and Deacon’s book is the only work on Deo that Makes Mention of it» — la búsqueda negativa que Whitby declara sobre la fuente de Richard Deacon: no pudo localizar el manuscrito ni contactar al autor, y ningún otro trabajo sobre Dee lo menciona.

«One of the more remarkable facts is that the calls in the angelic language which make up the Claues Angelicae (Sloane MS 3191, fols 1–13) were delivered backwards, often in single letters, intermittently between 13 April and 13 July 1584 (TFR, pp. 78–209), and yet the translation of the words into English is with a few exceptions consistent. It is difficult to believe that Kelly could deliver the calls purely from memory in such a manner and over such a period of time, particularly since the letters were sometimes taken from the letter-filled squares of the Book of Enoch, directions being given which table was to be used and how many squares in each direction were to be counted in order to obtain each letter» — el dato que Whitby opone a la tesis del fraude memorístico: las llamadas se dictaron al revés y letra a letra durante tres meses, y su traducción resulta casi siempre consistente.

«Kelly was a fraud who deluded his pious master» — el veredicto de Frances Yates sobre Kelly, que Whitby cita para objetarle que entonces habría que atribuirle además una memoria extraordinaria.

«the characters have a general appearance rather like Samaritan—though their stylised forms may also suggest Ethiopic. The scripts they do not resemble are proto-Semitic, or Egyptian hieroglyphic, or Sumerian—a resemblance that would seem essential if we were to believe that the script, like the angelic language, dated back to “before the Flood”, and was the most ancient script of mankind» — el cotejo paleográfico de Donald Laycock: los caracteres recuerdan al samaritano y al etiópico, y no se parecen a las escrituras que tendrían que parecerse si fueran anteriores al Diluvio.

«Dr Laycock wonders whether Dee might have been in possession of an Ethiopic version of the Book of Enoch which he could not read, but also points to Dee’s copy of the Voarchadumia of Pantheus (1530) which is now in the British Museum and which contains an alphabet designated as Enochian» — las dos pistas que Laycock deja abiertas: una versión etiópica del Libro de Enoc que Dee no pudiera leer, y su ejemplar de la Voarchadumia de Panteo, que trae un alfabeto llamado enoquiano.

«Meric Casaubon stated that the Characters ‘are no other, for the most part but such as were set out and publised long agoe by one Theseus Ambrosus out of Magical books» — la adjudicación que Meric Casaubon hizo de esos caracteres a los alfabetos mágicos publicados por Teseo Ambrogio Albonesi en 1539.

«that there are occasional resemblances between these various scripts and the Enochian characters, no one script is consistently similar enough to warrant its being regarded as a source and Dr Laycock’s conclusion that ‘the Dee/Kelley alphabet may be fanciful, based perhaps on subconscious recollection of similar scripts in earlier literature’ (p. 29) is as yet the only one that may sensibly be reached» — el balance de Whitby sobre todos esos cotejos y la conclusión de Laycock que asume: el alfabeto puede ser invención, apoyada quizá en recuerdos inconscientes de escrituras vistas.

«I.R.F. Calder suggests that ‘there is a possibility that “Soyga” might have been the famous Voynitch MS. which has defied all decipherers from Kircher onwards» — la identificación que I. R. F. Calder propuso para el Libro de Soyga, traída por Whitby como posibilidad.

«The further practical consequence of such variegated patterns of faith was a widespread de facto toleration: not a merit of the Reformation, but the very atmosphere in which it operated, tantamount to its lack of any clear focus. ‘In affairs of religion everyone does as he pleases, and thus something like peace obtains between the parties,’ observes one censorious Catholic, and the thought is seconded by a Lutheran: ‘In Austria there is almost too much liberty in religion» — la tolerancia de hecho en las tierras de los Habsburgo según R. J. W. Evans, con dos testimonios de época: un católico que la lamenta y un luterano que la encuentra excesiva.

«After the 1520s little religious violence broke cut and serious persecution was very rare throughout the century, Ferdinand’s attack on the Bohemian Brethren for a few years from 1547 being the clearest case. The traditional Catholic edifice still stood, partly because it enjoyed the protection of the dynasty, more importantly because no single Protestan. roup had the strength or organization to replace it» — la explicación que Evans da de esa calma: el edificio católico se sostenía por la protección dinástica y porque ningún grupo protestante podía reemplazarlo; la grafía *cut* por *out* es del OCR.

«The book contained a series of prophecies about events to be expected from 1564 to 1584; Dee evidently bought it at the time, and it is striking how he has underlined especially those passages connected with Habsburg or Bohemian history. Leowitz himself forecast some violent change to coincide with the new trigon which would enter the heavens in 1584, and he was very probably a personal acquaintance of Dee’s» — el indicio que Evans encontró en el ejemplar de Dee del almanaque de Cyprian Leowitz: subrayó los pasajes sobre Bohemia y los Habsburgo, y el autor pronosticaba un cambio violento con el trígono nuevo de 1584.