neptunesdolphins | Entries tagged with european magic

Since I am a Roman Polytheist, I usually do not use magic in my practice. However, in reading about wands, I realized that I do use a wand. When I do Roman divination, I use a lituus to mark out a templum to take auspices. The lituus is a curved wand with the top shaped as a question mark. Pointing to the sky or an area of land, I set up a square which I quarter, and then quarter again. This is the templum, which could be thought of as sacred space. I ask my question and note the signs occurring within the templum. I interpret the bird signs to discover what the Gods’ answers are to my questions.

In “The Witch’s Wand,” Alferian Gwydion MacLir wrote, “You aren’t begging for divine intervention, you are casting your will upon the cosmos as a person of power and confidence. That is what the wand signifies.” (Note 1.) In using my lituus, I am doing precisely that since I want an answer to my question. I am not foretelling the future but want to find out if I have divine approval for something.

In magic, wizards use wands to cast circles and direct magical energy. Wands are also used for channeling magical energy. With a wand, a wizard can write out their intention in the air. Oberon Zell-Ravenheart in “The Grimoire for the Apprentice Wizard,” sums up what the wand means to a wizard. “In ritual, the wand strives to unite our body, mind, and soul with that of universal consciousness to bring into manifestation our magickal desires.” (Note 2.) I interpret that to mean that the wand unites the wizard with the Cosmos.

I pondered how I could make a wand since I am limited by my brain injury. Christopher Penczak, a noted wizard, inspired me in his observations about wands. He wrote that wands can be disguised as everyday tools. “I’ve known witches who use their wooden kitchen spoon and mechanics who use their screwdrivers.” (Note 3.) The important point is to be united with the tool so that it becomes a part of you.

For a wand, I chose the yellow No.2 pencil. (Note 4.) I use one daily to write in longhand for my exercises to promote brain health. Since for many cultures, words are magic, I regard my pencil to be a magical tool. Dr. Bernard Beitman writes in “Meaningful Coincidences, “words are created to carve out portions of reality that deserve our attention.” (Note 5.) With cursive, I can create and direct my will. (Note 6.) The flow of writing the words out by longhand channels the will of the writer, thereby creating magical intent. Cursive translates my will physically on to the paper much like a wizard writing with a wand in the air.

I have always been particular about my pencils. I routinely dedicate them to the Gods to aid in my writing. After placing them on my lararium (Roman altar), I ask Mercury the God of Communication to bless them and my words. For writing poetry, I ask Apollo, the God of the Bards. I dedicate those pencils to the act of creating beauty and truth.

For me, the pencil would be appropriate for a wand. It is made from wood, which is a traditional material for wands. Moreover, the yellow color represents the mind. The eraser, which is the pommel, balances the yellow and also represents intuition.

Notes:

Note 1. Alferian Gwydion MacLir, “The Witch’s Wand,” P. 170.

Note 2. Oberon Zell-Ravenheart, “Grimoire for the Apprentice Wizard,” P. 104.

Note 3. Penczak quoted by MacLir, P. 26.

Note 4. No. 2 lead is neither too hard nor too soft for regular use.

Note 5. Dr. Bernard Beitman, “Meaningful Coincidences,” P. 10.

Note 6. I write all my essays using cursive in multiple drafts.

Works Used.

Adkins Lesley and Roy Adkins, “Dictionary of Roman Religion.” New York: Oxford University Press. 1996.

Beitman, MD.,Bernard, “Meaningful Coincidences.” Rochester (VT): Park Street Press. 2022.

Greer, John Michael, “The New Encyclopedia of the Occult.” Woodbury (MN): Llewellyn. 2003.

MacLir, Alferian Gwydion, “The Witch’s Wand.” Woodbury (MN): Llewellyn. 2021.

Zell-Ravenheart, Oberon, “Grimoire for the Apprentice Wizard.” Franklin Lakes (NJ): New Page Books. 2004.

Since my first attempt at defining what magic was, my framework had changed. My first definition was that magic can be used to exploit the reality people find themselves in. A magician finds the crack in reality and changes it to their advantage.

Then my working definition of magic became defined by Kurt Seligmann in “The Mirror of Magic.” He wrote, “Magic operation is the application of the practical use of wisdom…acquired in contemplation of the inner self and of nature. Magic endeavors to explain every phenomenon in life, in nature, in the invisible… unity of the universe with its endless entirety.”

Pondering what magic is made me realize that there was a shift in perception after the Enlightenment. Reason and materialism became embedded in every day thought. Later the Protestant Reformation flattened and homogenized life. Richard Kieckhefer in “Magic in the Middle Ages” said that the shift in thinking of magic from being natural or demonic to separate from religion started in the 16th Century.

Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn in her essay, “Pastlessness” observed that the two modern movements that arose from the Industrial Revolution were Marxism and Positivism. Both was based on the theory that history evolves from a theological belief system to scientific empiricism and finally to economic materialism. The basis of belief of these two movements was human mastery and control of the Universe. Because of this, Lasch-Quinn wrote “everything is stripped of soul of inner and mysterious life.”

A product of the Victorian Age, Sir James Frazier defined magic as separate from religion. Since then, this metaphysical outline has bedeviled the study of European magic. Ronald Hutton in his essay, “Framework for the Study of European Magic,” relates the struggles to redefine magic and religion.

For me, I decided to give up the idea of human mastery of the world. Also, I let go of the theory of a rational universe. I am no longer sure if magic endeavors to explain every phenomenon in life as Seligmann says. Science does that, since it assumes the uniformity of the universe. In this, I am reminded of the science fiction writer, Arthur C. Clark’s Three Laws. His Third Law is “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” In modern times, magic and science seems to be equated in some people’s minds. Moreover, secularism has pushed the notion that the mysteries of magic is only a cloak for ignorance.

In order for magic to exist for me, I need the vision of an enchanted world. The Romans and other ancient people lived in a heterogenous Cosmos. Their spiritual ecology consisted of the interaction between Gods, Nature, Ancestors, Others (Lars), Humans, Plants, and Animals. Adopting this framework, I see that the Cosmos is full of mysteries as the various worlds intersect each other.

Magic enchants the Cosmos and gives meaning and purpose to life. I realized this when I was seeking to understand how I saw a “living pterosaur.” For me, this event was magic beyond the rational world. This entity should not exist but it does in all of its glory. For me, magic is more than manipulating reality, it is a metaphysical framework. Magic is the response to the wonder of the world. Magic is the way to change a person’s consciousness according to their will. Through magic, a person can intentionally change their lives.

In my practice of magic, I will consciously work within this spiritual ecology. If I want to change something, it means negotiation with various Divine entities. This could be “a gift for a gift” instead of me willing a change without their consent.

Works Used:

Davis, Owen, ed. “The Oxford Illustrated History of Witchcraft & Magic.” Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2017.

Greer, John Michael, “The Occult Book.” Sterling: NY. 2017.

—, “The New Encyclopedia of the Occult.” Llewellyn: Woodbury (MN). 2003.

Hennessy, Kathryn, ed., “A History of Magic, Witchcraft and the Occult.” Dorling Kindersley: New York. 2020.

Hutton, Ronald, “The Witch.” Yale University Press: New Haven. 2017.

—, “A Framework for the Study of European Magic.” Grey School of Wizardry Class Materials. Dell.Urgano, Ombra, “The Development of European Magic.”

Kieckhefer, Richard, “Magic in the Middle Ages.” Cambridge University Press: Cambridge (UK). 2014.

Lasch-Quinn, Elisabeth, “Pastlessness.” The Hedgehog Review, Vol 24, Number 2, Summer 2022, pages 66-76.

Moro, Pamela, “Witchcraft, Sorcery, and Magic.” International Library of Anthropology. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118924396.wbiea1915.

Seligmann, Kurt, “The Mirror of Magic.” Inner Tradition: Rochester (VT). 1948.

After various Arab texts on magic were translated into Latin, in the 12th Century, European magic became transformed. For the Europeans, these new texts solidified in their minds what magic could be. At their universities and cathedral schools, they combined these exciting ideas with the existing ones about the spiritual and material realms. From this mix, the Europeans developed Western magic into a natural science and a philosophy.

The status of magic rose among European intellectuals from simply being folk magic practiced by peasants to being a noble philosophy. Christopher Warnock, modern astrologer, wrote, “our illustrious predecessors insisted that magic and astrological magic in particular constituted the highest science and deepest practical application of philosophy.” Warnock asserted that magic became a spiritual science with consisting of material, celestial, and divine layers.

Albertus Magnus (Albert the Great of Cologne), leading scholar and Dominican friar, was inspired by the translated texts on metaphysics and natural philosophy. Forming his theories, this noted Doctor of the Catholic Church wrote that the Stars influence the Body, and the Body influences the Soul. Furthermore, Albertus wrote treatises on many topics of natural magic such as the magical properties of minerals and plants. He became an expert on astronomy, astrology, and alchemy. Many of his writings became the basis for modern natural magic.

The best known of the texts was the “Picatrix” (Ghayat al-Hakim). King Alfonso X (Alfonso, the Wise) of Castile had it translated along with many other books on the occult. Compiled by an anonymous magician in the 9th or 10th Centuries, the “Picatrix” was an encyclopedia of magical philosophy and practice. This text claimed to deal with matters which are “hidden from the senses so that most people do not grasp how they happen.” According to the text, the heavenly bodies were sources of magical power. In “Magic in the Middle Ages,” Richard Kieckhefer wrote that “the basic point of the work is to show how spirit itself, dwelling at its purest in the stars can be brought down to earth and work upon matter.”

John Michael Greer, noted writer on the occult and Druidism, said that the most important magical books of the medieval age borrowed from the “Picatrix.” In fact, according to Greer, this encyclopedia became the basis of modern Western magic. Even New Agers, today, consult it for information on astral magic.

In Arabic astral magic, there is an astral plane between the Divine and human planes. The Planets, Stars, and other Heavenly Bodies resided in this plane. Because everything is influenced by astral power, a magician needed to know the Stars. For example, doctors memorized what parts of the body were governed by what Sign of the Zodiac. They consulted horoscopes to find the best days for surgery. In fact, Philip VI of France convened the local doctors of Paris to explain why the Black Death was occurring. They explained that the plague was caused by a Conjunction of three Planets in Aquarius three years before.

Astrology blossomed in Bagdad, which became the astronomical center of the Middle East and Europe. Meanwhile the Sabians of Harran maintained a haven for Pagan astrologers. The astrologers of both places made charts combining astrological timing with the Planets, Fixed Stars, the Twenty-Eight Mansions of the Moon, and the Thirty-Six Decans of the Zodiac. These charts allowed for the mapping of influences at the time of asking a question or for choosing dates for marriages. Moreover, using the charts, magicians could create talismans with the power of the Beings of the Heavenly Bodies. According to Christopher Warnock, a talisman could be made by choosing the right materials with the right symbols at the right time.

Warnock writes that the Arabs preserved the knowledge of the ancient Greeks and others, and then expanded on it with their own discoveries. In turn, this influenced the theories of magic that were being developed by European magicians at the time. The Europeans added to the knowledge obtained from the Arabs. The result was the magical theory that the Cosmos was “one great, interconnected Being, a System based on intricate harmony, sympathy and correspondence, both spiritual and material.”

The 17th Century astrologer, William Lilly built on the efforts of the Arabs and the Europeans. Lilly wrote “God rules all by divine providence, and the stars by his permission are instruments whereby many contingent some small glimpses of the great affairs God intends upon earth.” For him, Astrology revealed God’s Will. With that in mind, Lilly wrote the basic text of Horary Astrology, “Christian Astrology.”

Alchemy came into European knowledge during the 1100s. In 1144, Robert of Chester began translations of various texts of Alchemy into Latin. By 1200, the Archbishop of Toledo had a college devoted only to translating these writings into Latin.

After saving the materials from the Egyptians and Greeks, the Arabs expanded their work in Alchemy. The Arabs first developed the Two Contraries (active and passive). In the 800s, Jabir Ibn Hayyan devised many new processes and theories. From Jabir came the theory of Sulphur and Mercury as the Principles of Alchemy. The Swiss Alchemist, Paracelsus added the Third Principle of Alchemy. after examining how various materials behave in fire. Now according to modern alchemical theory, all things created consist of the Three Essentials – Sulphur, Mercury, and Salt.

Various Europeans built on the transfer of knowledge that came with Arabic magic. Albertus Magnus develop theories of natural magic and developed natural philosophy. The magical properties of crystals are derived from his writings. Meanwhile, Paracelsus became the first among alchemists. Moreover, his ideas became the basis for the revival of Alchemy in the 20th Century. William Lilly wrote “Christian Astrology” in 1647, which became the standard text for modern astrologers.

Works Used:

Bairgent, Michael, “Astrology in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Bear and Co.: Rochester (VT). 1994.

Davis, Owen, ed. “The Oxford Illustrated History of Witchcraft & Magic.” Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2017.

Greer, John Michael, “The Occult Book.” Sterling: NY. 2017.

—, “The New Encyclopedia of the Occult.” Llewellyn: Woodbury (MN). 2003.

Hauck, Dennis, “The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Alchemy.” Penguin: New York. 2008.

Hennessy, Kathryn, ed., “A History of Magic, Witchcraft and the Occult.” Dorling Kindersley: New York. 2020.

Hutton, Ronald, “The Witch.” Yale University Press: New Haven. 2017.

Kieckhefer, Richard, “Magic in the Middle Ages.” Cambridge University Press: Cambridge (UK). 2014.

Seligmann, Kurt, “The Mirror of Magic.” Inner Tradition: Rochester (VT). 1948.

Warnock, Christopher, “Renaissance Astrology,” 2018. Web. https://www.renaissanceastrology.com/

Defining magic can be problematic since it is hard to pin down concretely. In 1911, Sir James Frazer, attempted a modern definition for magic. Frazer said “Magic attempts to compel the powers of the Universe; religion supplicates them.” Bronislaw Malinowski, a noted anthropologist, refined Frazer’s definition in 1930. He wrote “Magic is a practical art consisting of acts, which are only means to a definite end.” Then Malinowski explained, “religion, in contrast, is a body of self-contained acts being themselves the fulfillment of their purpose.” This approach has become the default for many years.

This separation of magic from religion has been long embedded in Western intellectual thought. When monotheistic religions became dominant in the West, the two became separate. Christianity absorbed positive magic as being “official religion.” Rituals such as prayers for healing or Roman Catholic Mass were religious, since their results were miracles of God.

In contrast, magic, which was focused on the individual, was not about pleasing or placating God. Instead, the individual directs the various spirits to do their bidding. Therefore, magic, in having specific aims, was manipulative. In summary, magic was about achieving venial ends like receiving more money whereas religion was about noble ends such as prayers to end a plague.

The problem with the traditional definition is that it cannot be applied to non-Western cultures or to ancient ones. Noted academic of Greco-Roman magic, Richard Gordon declared that this approach was unusable. He said that people in Roman times regarded magic differently than what Frazer had thought. Gordon observed that the people conducted the rituals did so for their own purposes. These could range such as asking the Gods to look favorably on the State or to have their soldiers achieve victories. He proposed a new approach that he called “ritual power.”

There were still problems with Gordon’s approach as it still assumed that magic was done alone and in secret. Therefore, other scholars proposed a different approach. Expanding on Richard Gordon’s ideas, they said that magic was what ancient and medieval cultures regarded it to be. For example, the Greeks determined magic to be more transgressive, usually to harm other people. In contrast, Egyptians thought of magic in two ways- “heka” which ensured the harmony of the cosmos, while “akha” came from the Beings of the Underworld. Meanwhile, the Romans regarded anything done against the communal good to be magic. Again, the split between magic and religion defaulted to Frazer’s original ideas.

The third alternative to the traditional definition was first suggested by (David) Emile Durkheim, the French sociologist. Considered the “Father of Modern Sociology,” Durkheim wrote that religion was “a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things… in one single moral community.” He continued that magic “was not directed towards the gods or sacred things.” Durkheim felt that each society would define what was either magic or religion. Thus, the definition of magic would be made by the culture itself and not by academics.

This approach has problems as well. What each culture decided was transgressive (i.e. magic) differed across time and cultures. What was considered to be magic in Egyptian society of the First Dynasty was changed by the time of Cleopatra. Meanwhile, how could scholars discuss magic across dissimilar cultures? If the definition kept shifting, then the study of magic would be comparing apples with acorns.

Works Used:

Bowie, Fiona, “The Anthropology of Religion: An Introduction.” 2008. PDF. https://www.academia.edu/331603/Anthropology_of_Religion.

Davis, Owen, ed. “The Oxford Illustrated History of Witchcraft & Magic.” Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2017.

Greer, John Michael, “The Occult Book.” Sterling: NY. 2017.

Hutton, Ronald, “The Witch.” Yale University Press: New Haven. 2017.

—, “A Framework for the Study of European Magic.” Grey School of Wizardry Class Materials. Dell.Urgano, Ombra, “The Development of European Magic.”

Moro, Pamela, “Witchcraft, Sorcery, and Magic.” International Library of Anthropology. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118924396.wbiea1915.

Current Mood: sore

In contrast, Evans-Pritchard, in his fieldwork, stressed that the observer of a culture needs to be neutral in their assessments. He wrote of being tolerant of other societies. According to Evans-Pritchard, the ethnographer had to divorce themselves from their own cultural expectations to study other cultures.

The dominant theory that Evans-Pritchard learned was Structural Fundamentalism, which was developed in opposition to Evolutionism. Developed by Bronislaw Malinowski and Alfred Radcliffe-Brown (Note 3.), this theory maintained that each society is a holistic integrated system sustained by individuals. The interlocking series of relationships within each society functioned as a system to keep it from disintegrating. Therefore, each culture has its own internal logic.

Evans-Pritchard first did his fieldwork, in the 1930s in Southern Sudan, among the Azande and Nuer. When he was with both peoples, Evans-Pritchard participated in their daily lives such as oracle taking. Keenly aware that he was an outsider, Evans-Pritchard knew he could not know how these Africans thought. Therefore, he learned the language of the people he was living with. Through their language, Evans-Pritchard could grasp important concepts of the Azande and Nuer.

When Evans-Pritchard started his fieldwork in Africa, the world had changed from Frazer’s time. The First World War destroyed European confidence and shattered empires. The pointless chaos of the First World War exposed the inanity of the Victorian mindset.

During the Second World War, Evans-Pritchard served in the African Resistance against Italy. In North Africa, with the Arab tribes, he engaged in guerilla warfare. From that vantage point, he witnessed the dismantling of the British Empire and the rise of the African nations.

Studying various religions in the 1950s and 1960s, Evans-Pritchard believed that religion was not constructed for either sociological or psychological reasons. He said that those reasons are what non-believers theorized about “alien” religions. Evans-Pritchard thought that people formed religions based on their perception of reality. Religion and magic were rational and logical ways of engaging with the world.

In his writings, Evans-Pritchard separated sorcery from witchcraft. He defined sorcery as magic that caused harm. In contrast, witchcraft was used to air and resolve social tensions. He wrote that “good magic judges and acts only against criminals. Bad magic slays one of the parties without regards to the merit of the case.” Evans-Pritchard defined a “witch” as a person suspected of practicing prohibited forms of magic. In contrast, “sorcerers” actively engaged in using magic for ill. His definitions reflect both British and African sensibilities.

Frazer and Evans-Pritchard agreed that magic was separate from religion. Magic was a result of how people dealt with their environment. Frazer thought that a person misinterpreted the natural world, while Evans-Pritchard that it was a logical response. However, both men believed that science would render magic useless. In that they reflected British sensibilities about the supremacy of technology and progress.

Notes:

Note 3. Evans-Pritchard knew both men.

Works Used:

Bowie, Fiona, “The Anthropology of Religion: An Introduction.” 2008. PDF. https://www.academia.edu/331603/Anthropology_of_Religion.

Davis, Owen, ed. “The Oxford Illustrated History of Witchcraft & Magic.” Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2017.

Evans-Pritchard, Edward Evans, “Social Anthropology and Other Essays.” Free Press: New York. 1966.

Frazer, James, “The Belief in Immortality and the Worship of the Dead.” The Gifford Lectures. https://www.giffordlectures.org/lectures/belief-immortality-and-worship-dead.

— The Worship of Nature.” The Gifford Lectures. https://www.giffordlectures.org/lectures/worship-nature.

Hutton, Ronald, “The Witch.” Yale University Press: New Haven. 2017.

—, “A Framework for the Study of European Magic.” Grey School of Wizardry Class Materials. Dell.Urgano, Ombra, “The Development of European Magic.”

Long, Heather and Kelly Chakov, “Social Evolutionism.” University of Alabama. 2022. https://anthropology.ua.edu/theory/social-evolutionism/.

Moro, Pamela, “Witchcraft, Sorcery, and Magic.” International Library of Anthropology. 2022. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118924396.wbiea1915.

Porth, Eric, Kimberley Neutzling and Jessica Edwards, “Functionalism.” University of Alabama. 2022. https://anthropology.ua.edu/theory/functionalism/.

Two theorists of magic – Sir James Frazer and Edward Evan (E.E.) Evans-Pritchard lived in the United Kingdom during the first half of the Twentieth Century. However, Frazer (1854-1944) was a product of Victorian England. Evans-Pritchard (1902-1973) came of age after the First World War, during a time of great upheaval.

Like his cohorts of Victorian England, Frazer embraced the social theory of Evolutionism. Derived from Charles Darwin’s theories of biological change, Evolutionism was the dominant thought in anthropology until the First World War. According to Evolutionism, all cultures are homogenous, and evolved in three stages – “savagery, barbarism, and civilization.” (Note 1.) This theory was based on the assumption that the “human mind everywhere was similar” – called “psychic unity.” Therefore, all cultures advanced through the three stages, such that the tribal societies of Australia would eventually become like the civilized societies of Europe.

Frazer, a person of his time, did not question the assumptions of Evolutionism. He lived during the era of Western dominance and imperialism. The European empires assumed the responsibility to civilize the backward societies of their colonies, including China and India.

Based on his assumption of the “psychic unity of humans,” Frazer gathered his information from various missionaries in the field. Then, he assembled the data, analyzed and compared cultures. As the first to study religion as an academic field, Frazer regarded it to be a social activity that could be compared across disparate cultures.

Living during the Industrial Revolution, Frazer believed that science was the end-point of civilized societies. Possessing a subtle anti-religiosity, he thought that magic and religion were stepping stones to rational thinking. Frazer claimed that “magic is a false and bastard science.”

According to Frazer, “savages” could not understand the difference between the natural and the supernatural. To explain this thinking, he constructed the “Law of Sympathy.” Frazer broke this law down into two parts – the “Law of Similarity” and the “Law of Contagion.” (Note 2.) The first said that “things that are alike are the same.” The latter said that “a thing once in contact will remain in contact even after the connection is severed.” For Frazer, magic was a ruder phase of the mind – i.e. “primitive.”

According to Frazer, as a culture matured, it would move into more abstract thinking and embrace religion. He said, “magic attempts to compel the power of the universe; religion supplicates them.” Religion is “a slight and partial acknowledgement of powers superior to man.” Therefore, religion was a stepping stone to the “wisdom of science” from “the follies of magic!” (Emphasis is Frazer’s.)

Notes:

Note 1. The terms used by Frazer such as “savages” or “primitives” are from Evolutionism.

Note 2. Frazer’s laws of magic were later codified by practicing wizards.