(Clavicula Salomonis)
edited by S. Liddell MacGregor Mathers
This digital edition by Joph H. Peterson, Copyright © 1999. All rights rerved.
Figure 1. The mystical figure of Solomon, from Lans. 1203.
Introduction by Joph H. Peterson.
The Key of Solomon is the most famous and important of all Grimoires, or handbooks of Magic. As A.E. Waite has stated (BCM, pg. 58) "At the head of all, and, within certain limits, the inspiration and the source of all, stands the Key of Solomon. ... Mr. Mathers' prentation of the Key of Solomon, which is still in print, though the work of an
uncritical hand, must be held to remove the necessity for entering into a detailed account of the contents of that curious work. ... The Key of Solomon can scarcely be judged accurately in the light of its English version, for the translator, preternaturally regarding it as a highly honourable memorial of lawful magic, has excid as much as possible the Goëtic portions, on the ground that they are interpolations, which is of cour arbitrary."
Mr. Waite's harsh criticism is hardly justified. In fact, Mathers excid very little. Actually, three of the four significant excisions are operations dealing with love magic (Colorno, chapters 11-13: The exper
iment of Love, and how it should be performed; The experiment or operation of the Apple; Of the operation of love by her dreams, and how one must practice
it. The fourth excision is chapter 14: Operations and experiments regarding hate and destruction of enemies.)
It is true that the Mathers edition would not be considered critical by modern standards of scholarship (but Waite's editions of various esoteric texts leave far more to be desired than Mathers'). Especially wanting are a proper critical apparatus, an analysis of the relation between manuscripts, and better utilization of the Latin and Italian manuscripts. Nevertheless, this edition has stood the test of time.
Of cour, none of the manuscripts ud by Mathers qualify as "ancient" or even "medieval"; the oldest is probably 16th century. There are however precedents going back further, on which e Richard Greenfield's Traditions of Belief in Late Byzantine Demonology.
Mathers' translation is almost entirely dependant on French Colorno manuscript exemplars dating 18th century. The are reprented by the Kings 288, Harley 3981, and Sloane 3091 manuscripts. Of the Kings 288 is the easiest to read. Abraham Colorno, a Jewish engineer of Mantua (fl. 1578-1
598) translated it from the Italian.
In addition, Mathers made significant u of Lansdowne 1202, even though he pronounces it "more conci in style." Its title page reads: "LES VRAIS CLAVICULES DU ROI SALOMON PAR ARMADEL." The wording in Lans. 1202 often coincides exactly with the Colorno manuscripts, which convinces me that it was bad mainly on a Colorno ancestor. However the frequent deviations and elisions suggest to me that the editor was trying to make a more conci and readable edition, which of cour makes its authority less reliable.
