One spirit, three sources: a comparison practice

In this lesson you will compare one spirit in Weyer 1577, Scot 1584 and the 1904 Goetia, step by step, and see how texts change as they are copied.

In lesson 4 you met the three books behind the modern Goetia. Now you put them side by side. This is the core skill of anyone who studies grimoires seriously: comparing texts and noticing what changes as a list is copied, translated and printed. It is calm, careful work, and it is entirely reading and writing.

Three texts, one list

Historical Johann Weyer, a physician who argued against the witch trials, printed a list of 69 spirits called the Pseudomonarchia daemonum as an appendix to the 1577 edition of his book De praestigiis daemonum. He printed it to show how foolish it was, and he says he left parts out so that nobody could use it.

Reginald Scot translated the list into English in The Discoverie of Witchcraft in 1584, in book 15. In the seventeenth century an anonymous compiler gathered a related list of 72 spirits into the manuscripts now called the Lemegeton. S. L. MacGregor Mathers translated its first part, and Aleister Crowley published it in 1904 as The Book of the Goetia of Solomon the King.

Later tradition In 1916 L. W. de Laurence printed an unauthorised copy of the 1904 book and changed some numbers without saying so. Belial has 80 legions in 1904 and 50 in de Laurence. Many websites copy the later numbers, so always check a scan of the 1904 edition.

Bael in three texts

Historical It helps to see the texts side by side. In Reginald Scot’s English of 1584, translating Weyer, the first spirit reads: “Their first and principall king (which is of the power of the east) is called Baell; who when he is conjured up, appeareth with three heads; the first, like a tode; the second, like a man; the third, like a cat.” Scot goes on to say that he speaks with a hoarse voice, makes a man go invisible and rules sixty-six legions.

Historical The 1904 edition gives the same spirit as: “The First Principal Spirit is a King ruling in the East, called Bael. He maketh thee to go Invisible. He ruleth over 66 Legions of Infernal Spirits. He appeareth in divers shapes, sometimes like a Cat, sometimes like a Toad, and sometimes like a Man, and sometimes all these at once.

He speaketh hoarsely.” Read them together and you see the same core: king of the east, invisibility, sixty-six legions, a hoarse voice and the toad, man and cat. But the order has changed, and the three heads at once have become “divers shapes”, only sometimes together. Small changes like this are exactly what happens when texts are copied and reworked by hand.

Four spirits in, one spirit out

Historical Weyer’s list has 69 spirits, and the Goetia has 72. The Goetia includes four spirits that Weyer does not have, namely Vassago, Seere, Dantalion and Andromalius, and it leaves out one of Weyer’s spirits, Pruflas. Four in and one out turns 69 into 72. The number 72 had a special meaning in Jewish and Christian tradition, linked for example to the 72 names of God drawn from Exodus 14:19 to 21 in Kabbalah, and some scholars think the compiler wanted to reach it, though we cannot be sure.

Where the names come from

Historical Some names in the list echo older gods and figures, and this is a good place for careful wording. Bael probably echoes Baal, the Canaanite storm god condemned in the Hebrew Bible, and Astaroth echoes the goddess Astarte. Asmoday echoes the Asmodeus of Tobit. But many names have no clear origin, and online claims that each spirit “was originally” a particular ancient god are usually guesses. When you meet such a claim, ask for the source.

What differences teach you

Historical Differences between the texts are clues. Focalor commands thirty legions in Weyer’s Latin, three in Scot’s English of 1584 and 30 again in the 1904 Goetia. Scot seems to have misread Weyer’s triginta, “thirty”, and some Goetia manuscripts copied his three.

A slip passed down a chain of copies is classic evidence of who copied whom. A different word for a spirit’s shape may be a translation choice. A sentence that appears only in the later text may be an addition. None of this needs you to believe or disbelieve anything. It is how historians read every old text.

Your comparison practice, step by step

What you need: a notebook, a ruler, about an hour, and free online editions of Weyer, Scot and a scan of the 1904 Goetia. Joseph Peterson’s free Esoteric Archives site and Project Gutenberg have them.

1. Choose one spirit that appears in all three texts: Bael, Agares or Focalor are good choices.
2. Draw a table with four rows, for rank, legions, appearance and offices, and three columns, one for each text.
3. Fill in each cell in your own words, with a short quotation where it helps.
4. Highlight every difference.
5. Next to each difference write “copying”, “translation” or “addition”, with a question mark if you are unsure.
6. Check the same spirit on a popular website and note which text it copies.
7. Write three sentences on what you learned about how texts travel.

Journal prompts: Which difference surprised you most? Did the popular website follow the 1904 text, a later copy or neither? How does seeing the list as a copied document change the way it feels to read it?

A second comparison, step by step in prose

Try Agares, the second spirit, the same way. Find him in Scot’s book 15 and in the 1904 edition. Read the two entries aloud, slowly, and note what stays the same: his rank, his ride on a crocodile with a hawk on his fist, his languages and his power to make those who run away come back. Then note what changes, such as word order, spelling of the name and the number of legions, if any.

After that, look him up on one popular website and see which source it follows, or whether it adds things that neither text says, such as a planet, a zodiac sign, a colour or a favourite offering. Write each addition down with a question mark. You will usually find that the oldest texts are plainer than the internet.

Modern A common beginner question is whether one version is more correct. For a historian, each version is correct as evidence of what its copyist wrote. Another question is why the differences matter at all. They matter because they show that the list is a human document that changed over time, which is the single most useful thing to understand about any grimoire. A last myth to drop is that the 1904 edition is the oldest version; it is one of the latest.

Focalor, read side by side

Historical Focalor is the best spirit for seeing a copying chain at work. In Scot’s English of 1584 he is “a great duke comming foorth as a man, with wings like a griphen, he killeth men, and drowneth them in the waters, and overturneth ships of warre, commanding and ruling both winds and seas.” Scot goes on: “he hopeth after 1000. yeares to returne to the seventh throne, but he is deceived, he hath three legions.”

The 1904 Goetia keeps nearly everything: the man with a griffin’s wings, the drowning, the ships of war, the power over winds and seas, the promise not to hurt anyone if commanded and the hope of returning to the Seventh Throne after a thousand years. Two things change. The number of legions goes back to Weyer’s thirty, and the sharp little comment “but he is deceived” disappears. Weyer, a physician writing against the witch trials, liked to mock the spirits’ boasts. The later compiler, who took the list seriously, quietly dropped the mockery.

That one missing phrase teaches you something about each writer. A sceptic printed the list to expose it; a believer copied it to use it. The same words carried very different intentions.

Reading the gaps

Differences are not only words that change. Sometimes the most telling evidence is what a copyist leaves out or adds as a habit. As you fill your table, add a fifth row headed “tone” and note whether each text sounds neutral, mocking or reverent. You will find that tone shifts more than facts do, and that the shift follows the purpose of each book.

A beginner’s worry: “What if I misread the old spelling and get the comparison wrong?” Then you correct it later, as every historian does. Write a question mark beside anything uncertain, and check it against a modern edition such as Peterson’s when you can.

A worked example

A learner chooses Bael. All three texts call him a king with power in the East, with 66 legions, and describe three heads, of a toad, a man and a cat. The offices agree on making a person invisible. Her table shows small differences of wording only. She then checks Focalor and finds the 30 and 3. She writes: “Bael was copied carefully, Focalor was not. The list I see online is not one unchanging book but a chain of copies.” A website she checks gives Belial 50 legions, so she marks it “copies de Laurence”.

Try this

Choose Bael, Agares or Focalor. In a table, write the rank, number of legions, appearance and offices given by Weyer, Scot and the 1904 Goetia, then mark every difference and guess whether it is a copying error, a translation choice or an addition.

Recap

Weyer printed 69 spirits in 1577 to mock the list, Scot translated it in 1584, and the 72-spirit Goetia comes from seventeenth-century manuscripts printed in 1904. Comparing them line by line shows copying slips, translation choices and additions. Always check numbers against the 1904 scan, not the 1916 copy.

What next

Press “Mark as done” and continue with Pictures, seals and claims. My Weyer and Scot page has more on both men.

Further reading: Joseph H. Peterson’s parallel edition of the Pseudomonarchia daemonum on his Esoteric Archives site, which sets the Latin and English side by side.

Sources

• Johann Weyer, Pseudomonarchia daemonum, appendix to De praestigiis daemonum (Basel, 1577); Latin text and English translation in Joseph H. Peterson’s Esoteric Archives.
• Reginald Scot, The Discoverie of Witchcraft (London, 1584), book 15, chapter 2.
• S. L. MacGregor Mathers (trans.) and Aleister Crowley (ed.), The Book of the Goetia of Solomon the King (Boleskine, 1904).

Go deeper: the Goetia pages on this site

Mark as done