I have read a few books that went into detail on the medieval and early modern grimoires like A.E. Waite's 'Book of Ceremonial Magic', which is a fine resource by the by (it's history, not a how-to). I recall him mentioning that many of the grimoires stated that conjuring demons wasn't actually evil if you did it for 'the right reasons'. After all, didn't Jesus himself say that 'In my name you will command demons'? Waite himself was unconvinced as i recall.
St. Augustine observed of *magia* that perhaps it could be a signal to a demon, but the solution for that was to be sure of the purity of your motives before you used anything that worked by means you didn't know.
Yes. But in one of the very few grimoires I've actually read, the Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses, invocations to 'the wrathful angels' were excused on the grounds that, having rebelled against God, they had no rights to complain it mortal sorcerers conjured them up and set them to work.
It also added that God would never allow a righteous and innocent person to suffer at the hands of black magic. Therefor if you flung a curse on someone and it bit, they deserved it. You were merely an agent of divine justice.
Magic is a metaphor for madness. Wizards are nutters, people who've gone too far into the chaos for too long and returned as madmen.
As far as R. E. Howard's Conan stories, in The Hand of Nergal, Conan had the enchanted amulet The Heart of Tamusz (implying a goodly sorcerer made it or it was a gift from the Gods). Also, there was a sorcerer on Conan's side in that story who used a scrying crystal to track events. While the scrying was not directly to Conan's benefit, it was an indirect aid.
"The Hand of Nergal" was only partly by Howard, so perhaps it was Carter's notion. Though it may have been Howard, and it might not have been the reason he dropped it.
I rather like the notion you are born with magic. You have it, or you don't. The few that do are unlikely to ever truly learn their capacity or train it, making real sorcerers rarer than the proverbial hen's teeth.
Personally I have deep philosophical objections to that notion, with only limited exceptions, but that requires a full essay to do it justice. (Actually its first draft exists.)
I have read a few books that went into detail on the medieval and early modern grimoires like A.E. Waite's 'Book of Ceremonial Magic', which is a fine resource by the by (it's history, not a how-to). I recall him mentioning that many of the grimoires stated that conjuring demons wasn't actually evil if you did it for 'the right reasons'. After all, didn't Jesus himself say that 'In my name you will command demons'? Waite himself was unconvinced as i recall.
St. Augustine observed of *magia* that perhaps it could be a signal to a demon, but the solution for that was to be sure of the purity of your motives before you used anything that worked by means you didn't know.
Actually conjuring demons -- you knew.
Yes. But in one of the very few grimoires I've actually read, the Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses, invocations to 'the wrathful angels' were excused on the grounds that, having rebelled against God, they had no rights to complain it mortal sorcerers conjured them up and set them to work.
It also added that God would never allow a righteous and innocent person to suffer at the hands of black magic. Therefor if you flung a curse on someone and it bit, they deserved it. You were merely an agent of divine justice.
So why was black magic unlike any other kind of evil? Hmmmm?
Unless they convinced themselves that was all deserved, too. It's a common fault.
I will say that the argument used seemed rather shaky logic to me.
Magic is a metaphor for madness. Wizards are nutters, people who've gone too far into the chaos for too long and returned as madmen.
As far as R. E. Howard's Conan stories, in The Hand of Nergal, Conan had the enchanted amulet The Heart of Tamusz (implying a goodly sorcerer made it or it was a gift from the Gods). Also, there was a sorcerer on Conan's side in that story who used a scrying crystal to track events. While the scrying was not directly to Conan's benefit, it was an indirect aid.
That's one use for it! There's a lot.
"The Hand of Nergal" was only partly by Howard, so perhaps it was Carter's notion. Though it may have been Howard, and it might not have been the reason he dropped it.
Good point. I wish Howard had lived longer.
I rather like the notion you are born with magic. You have it, or you don't. The few that do are unlikely to ever truly learn their capacity or train it, making real sorcerers rarer than the proverbial hen's teeth.
Personally I have deep philosophical objections to that notion, with only limited exceptions, but that requires a full essay to do it justice. (Actually its first draft exists.)
I look forward to reading it.