Did The Ancient Chaldean Priests Use Methods of Ceremonial Magick Similar To The Simon Necronomicon?
Practitioners of the Simon Necronomicon often get ridiculed for invoking ancient Chaldean deities in a ceremonial manner. It is due to such criticism that the question now arises as to what place did ceremonial magic have in the operations of ancient Babylonian wizardry? In order to answer this question, let us look into the words of Lewis Spence as found in the classic work entitled, Myths and Legends of Babylonia and Assyria, where it states:
That Chaldean magic was the precursor of European mediaeval magic as apart from popular sorcery and witchcraft is instanced not only by the similarity between the systems but by the introduction into mediaeval magic of the names of Babylonian and Assyrian gods and magicians. Again and again is Babylon appealed to even more frequently than Egypt, and we meet constantly with the names of Beelzebub, Ishtar (as Astarte), Baal, and Moloch, whilst the names of demons, obviously of Babylonian origin, are encountered in almost every work on the subject. Frequent allusions are also made to the ‘wise men’ and necromancers of Babylon, and to the ‘ star-gazers ’ of Chaldea. The conclusion is irresistible that ceremonial magic, as practiced in the Middle Ages, owed much to that of Babylon.
Our information regarding Chaldean magic is much more complete than that which we possess concerning the magic of ancient Egypt. Hundreds of spells, incantations, and omen-inscriptions have been recovered, and these not only enlighten us regarding the class of priests who practised magic, but they tell us of the several varieties of demons, ghosts, and evil spirits ; they minutely describe the Babylonian witch and wizard, and they picture for us many magical ceremonies, besides informing us of the names of scores of plants and flowers possessing magical properties, of magical substances, jewels, amulets, and the like. Also, they speak of sortilege or the divination of the future, of the drawing of magical circles, of the exorcism of evil spirits, and the casting out of demons.”
The ancient Mesopotamians did indeed use ceremonial magic as a means of making contact with the spirit world and for purposes of cultivation. The Simon Necronomicon is open and honest in its approach and the historical legacy of grimoires and the proper use of magic of this nature. Under the subheading The Mythos and the Magic, we read:
“These were the sorcerer’s handbooks, and generally not meant as textbooks or encyclopedias of ceremonial magick. In other words, the sorcerer or magician is supposed to be in possession of the requisite knowledge and training with which to carry out a complex magickal ritual, just as a cook is expected to be able to master the scrambling of eggs before he conjures an “eggs Benedict”; the grimoires, or Black Books, were simply variations on a theme, like cookbooks, different records of what previous magicians had done, the spirits they had contacted, and the successes they had. The magicians who now read these works are expected to be able to select the wheat from the chaff, in much the same fashion as an alchemist discerning the deliberate errors in a treatise on his subject.
Therefore it was (and is) insanity for the tyro to pick up a work on ceremonial Magick like the Lesser Key of Solomon to practise conjurations. It would also be folly to pick up Crowley’s Magick in Theory and Practise with the same intention. Both books are definitely not for beginners, a point which cannot be made too often. Unfortunately, perhaps, the dread NECRONOMICON falls into this category.”
The Necronomicon Saga continues…..