Leonardo_Drakon wrote:
Having met Dr. Skinner, I agree that he is a class act and more than welcomes intelligent discussion and critique regarding his work.... I also think that Techniques is a fantastic resource for those hoping to better understand the PGM; however, I do agree with certain points made by Nashimiron.
My biggest critique of Techniques is that Dr. Skinner tends to over-emphasize the Egyptian elements while de-emphasizing the archaic Greek traditions (i.e goetia) that undoubtedly also contributed to the rituals of the papyri. As a counter-balance to Skinner's work, I point people to Jake Stratton-Kent's Geosophia (who takes it in the opposite direction, entirely focusing on the chthonic realm and the archaic Greek goetic tradition). Together these works paint a much more holistic picture of the PGM and the precursor traditions that influenced the scribes.
I too have a bone to pick regarding Skinner's conclusions about the ritual circle...I just don't see any evidence of it in the papyri and I just don't believe it was part of "the usual" preparations made for ritual. The protective elements are almost always clearly defined in the papyri as phylacteries - or lamens - worn by the magician and generally described in great detail...if the scribes go to the extent of describing these protective elements, why would they entirely omit the circle if indeed they were using it?
As a general statement and one based entirely on my practice and experiences, I believe much regarding the practical applications of PGM spells can be grasped when seen in light of spirit-working traditions such as those found in the ATRs/ADRs instead of the overly-ritualized (and overly -intellectualized) forms of ceremonial magic that have become popular in modern western occultism. Many of the spells are focused on creating spirit-vessels or fetishes (whether it is creating stones, rings, wax figurines or 'deifying' animals via the waters of the Nile) as physical vessels to interact with spirit. Again, here we find parallels to modes of working with spirits more akin to the living African and other indigenous traditions than the literary grimoires.
However, we undoubtedly find elements that resonate with the so-called Solomonic and Cyprianic grimoires, in particular I like to point people to PGM IV. 154-285 which is in itself a mini grimoire with language that clearly resonates with the invocations of the Heptameron. But even in this 'most grimoire-like' spell, the protective element is clearly defined as a lamen worn by the practitioner and no mention of a circle is even made...the invocation of the spirit(s) occur initially outdoors atop a roof (with the initiate enacting a ritual 'death' wrapped in burial shrouds) to make initial contact with Helios and Typhon as the authoritative spirit for later operations. The ritual that follows (the lecanomancy rite, which I believe Skinner correctly identifies as a "Evocatory scrying practice" rather than 'bowl divination" as it is often understood) is explicit in the type of water to use, the type of oil to use, the invocation, and the protective lamen (engraved with Typhon's 100-letter name)...but with zero reference to a circle, and indeed when we look at classical Greek art depicting similar practices individuals are shown looking into bowls often seated with no indication of a drawn circle. I find it much more likely that the circles as protective 'spaces' made their way later into the western traditions via Arabic magical traditions, but that is a topic for another day.
Took the words from my mouth mostly, and said it better than i would have lol.
Though I will also say that I dont see a problem mixing some new with the old, and for me circles are a large part of this. My own circle style (the more complicated version anyway) is a five elements set up where the four directions are the elements, and i have a robe that has the fifth on the breast like a lamen.
In general I tend to have a 50/50 agree/disagree relationship with skinner and his work with rankine. They make some points i agree with, but i find both of their styles of writing and some of their approaches rub me the wrong way.
Leonardo_Drakon wrote:
As a general statement and one based entirely on my practice and experiences, I believe much regarding the practical applications of PGM spells can be grasped when seen in light of spirit-working traditions such as those found in the ATRs/ADRs instead of the overly-ritualized (and overly -intellectualized) forms of ceremonial magic that have become popular in modern western occultism. Many of the spells are focused on creating spirit-vessels or fetishes (whether it is creating stones, rings, wax figurines or 'deifying' animals via the waters of the Nile) as physical vessels to interact with spirit. Again, here we find parallels to modes of working with spirits more akin to the living African and other indigenous traditions than the literary grimoires.
This statement in particular is so important, and applies to the grimoires in general as well. Im not sure what the source of the huge pushback to this idea is, but it is surely very much contested for some reason.