Patrons of the Sacred Art

Can't log in? Contact Us

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Welling's Opus Mago-Cabalisticum et Theologicum

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    97
    Blog Entries
    26

    Welling's Opus Mago-Cabalisticum et Theologicum

    There's an english translation up on Scribd (available as book to be read online, not downloadable "document").

    Translated by Joseph G. McVeigh and edited by Lon Milo DuQuette.

    Opus mago-cabalisticum et theologicum



    (although I've made it into a pdf)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    5,679
    Blog Entries
    1
    The translation on Scribd (by Joseph G. McVeigh) claims to be the very first English one, while the RAMS version appears to be a bit over 200 years old (translated by a Rosicrucian and signed in 1801).

    So which statement is correct?

    And have you had the chance to compare the two translations?

    BTW, the RAMS PDF has 190 pages, the translation on Scribd has almost 997 pages while the hardcover version of the same Scribd translation on Amazon has 576 pages

    Note: Compared to the version on Scribd and Amazon, the RAMS version is missing chapters and entire parts, which is unfortunately not uncommon for many RAMS translations...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    899
    The original indeed is huge.
    Without Welling's permission, there was initially only the "sulfur" part published. But he somehow got the "rights" back and published the "mercury" and "salt" parts among others as well later. Resulting to that huge work.

    Maybe that's the reason and this time it is not the fault of the RAMS guys.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    97
    Blog Entries
    26
    For english, I have Arthur Versluis' partial translation.. I have Barret's manuscript translation (I just realized I have never browsed this.. it actually has a few diagrams). The manuscript is 187 pdf pages, each being 2 pages of notes. I don't see how it could be complete.

    I have the RAMS version but I haven't paid much attention to it because I hate that font, and the OCR'd text is complete garbage. And they butchered the images.

    I've only browsed the one from Scribd so far, but they seem to have done a pretty good job with the images. I've seen chapter titles and scanned some paragraphs and it looks like there's some interesting material in there. And it's much easier to read compared to the RAMS version. I am a little worried about the "editor" though since his credentials seem to be "Golden Dawn".

    The scribd page count really means nothing.. It reflows the pages based on screen size. My PDF came out to 307 double pages.

    As far as the older german ones:

    This one from 1719 is only 116 pages (but has color diagrams):

    http://www.archive.org/details/opusmagocabalist00well

    This one from 1760 is 666 pages:

    http://www.archive.org/details/herrngeorgiivonw00well

    This one is 1735 is 650 pages (Universitats-und Landesbibliothek Dusseldorf has the same):

    http://diglib.hab.de/drucke/nd-776/start.htm

    This is probably the nicest copy of the 1735 edition (683 pages, colored diagrams):

    https://www.e-rara.ch/doi/10.3931/e-rara-8802

    Edit:

    The Francis Barrett manuscript is a translation of Part 1. MS Mellon 140 in Beinecke Digital Collections:

    https://brbl-dl.library.yale.edu/vufind/Record/3445019

    Sample:


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    59
    I have a hard copy of McVeigh and DuQuette's Opus Mago-Cabbalisticum et Theosophicum. I have strong reason to believe Coleridge read the book, which was apparently a favorite of Goethe's. There are a few chapters that remind me of works from John Byrom's special collection

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    59
    If there was an English translation in 1801 then it's very possible it was made possible by Benedict Chastanier, who was a London-based proponent of the work

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    97
    Blog Entries
    26
    The R.A.M.S version has:

    "Translated from teh original German of Baron George Von Welling, and carefully corrected and revised by:

    Francis Barrett F. R. C.
    (With additional notes & observations)
    Professor of Chymistry & Natural Philosophy/

    London June 1801.


    It seems to suggest that Barrett wasn't the original translator (sometime before 1801), but he corrected and revised the translation.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    59
    I thought I had known most of the occult scene of England around the 1790's but Barrett's name escaped me entirely. His name didnt come up as part of the New Jerusalem Church, Swedenborgianism, or anything in the illuminist movements of either Weishaupt or Pernety. Will have to read up on him.

    Wow what a small world - there's a paper on him written by an R. Priddle in Ottawa, where I live (U Ottawa is right down the street from me):

    https://ruor.uottawa.ca/bitstream/10...013_thesis.pdf

    I'd really like to see that older English translation. Most of the practical alchemy is at the back in the appendices

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    59
    Oh - lol - you're also in Ottawa. Now that's definitely a small world

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    59
    OK here is a connection - this author (link below) claims that Barrett was "likely trained under physician and astrologer, Ebenezer Sibly". Sibly was a regular member of the New Jerusalem Church and active when Benedict Chastanier was around.

    https://blogs.adelaide.edu.au/specia...-barrett-1801/

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts