Monday, 17 September 2012

Seals of the Archangels in the Veritable Clavicle

(edited)

The Key of Solomon in its classical shape, tributary to the Greek Hygromanteia, does not contain any of the seals of the seven archangels as we know them, only modern manuscripts French and English add them from the basic need of completeness, often accompanied by a plethora of other seals and diagrams from various sources, more or less classical.

This manuscript I am now analisyzing, titled Les Clavicules de R. Salomon,  was penned in 1796 by one aristocrat scribe from a family with a distinct tradition in copying grimoires and making the most beautyful manuscripts of the French school, F.F.Fyot.

It is without doubt that the source of the seals in this case is the Heptameron. Not only are the seals neatly copied, but there are also complex composite diagrams in the form of magical circles generated according to the instructions of the Heptameron. As these diagrams contain seals as well, I have done my best to isolate them and enhance the quality and will reproduce the accordingly. Note that the convex shape of the seals is due to the need of the scribe to fit them in the space between the circles.





I saw no use in reproducing the plates, which can be consulted in Skinner's edition, so I will only add the seals themselves. There is more than one seal of the archangel for each planet: the first occurrence is usually in the circular diagram, among other planetary pentacles and the second is singular and clear, in the rubric dealing with characters and seals. There are other occurrences as well, in similar diagrams towards the end of the manuscript, but the forms are identical. Exceptions have been noted.   I had no access to the original manuscript, Wellcome 4670, so the quality plates of its current English translation have been used:
 The Veritable Key of Solomon (Sourceworks of Ceremonial Magic Series, vol.IV) Skinner, Stephen (Ed.), Rankine, David (Ed.), Golden Hoarde Press, Singapore, 2008.


The seal of Michael

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2

Notes: Number 2 is more like the Heptameron figures than1. In figure 1, the downward slope is styled into a curve and there are two dots above the first cross.



 The seal of Gabriel

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2 
Notes: the fact that all seals, including those I omitted, have the break in the leg of the A figure, indicating Hept.1 as a source.


 The seal of Samael

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2 
 
Clav.A.3
Notes: All figures present a break in the curve, consistent with Hept.1 and 3. Figure 2, presented in the diagram, is original, I do not know if it is means as a series of characters of Mars or an alternate version for the seal of Samael, from another tradition. The first mark is a standard cross, the second one  is unknown to me but the left half seems consistent with other martial glyphs (where a kind of 3 figure is affixed, rather than an arrow), the third mark may be the sign of Scorpio and the fifth mark is clearly the glyph of Mars.



The seal of Raphael

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2
Notes: all features indicate Hept.1 as a source. Very peculiar, the second circle is missed by the copyist in figure 1. 


 The seal of Sachiel

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2 

Notes: Unusual elongation of the first mark. Mark 2 matches Hept.1 the most, down to the lower hook in the third mark. Figure 2 seems stylized, with the curve of the second mark curling into a circle and the lower left hook in the third mark being placed opposite to the one in 2.  




 The seal of Anael

 
Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2 
 Notes: Figure 1 resembles Hept.1 the most (tail attached in the lower part) and figure 2 resembles Hept.2 and 3 most (tail attached in the middle), with the specification that the triangle is only tangent to the circle.
 The seal of Cassiel

Clav.A. 1


Clav.A. 2 

Notes: Both seals are identical, but they differ from the Heptameron slightly: the curved ending in the second line is left open, not closed in a circle and the half and lower arms of the third mark tend to come together in the same spot without touching. 





1 comment:

  1. where you mention the second circle unnoticed i agree it should be so and if i may i would like to explain my reasoning behind this.
    if the second circle is placed it removes the cross, the cross being the third smaller on the right. the second if you like, imagine as a lens and light passing through is then changed. so it does this and changes the action upon the direction and thus then no cross so the final K in the image would not exist but then the third circle could remain and does so in stead of becoming the cross.

    ReplyDelete