Ars Notoria: The Grimoire of Rapid Learning by Magic, with the Golden Flowers of Apollonius of Tyana

The book is wonderful. Exactly as expected and I can’t wait for volume 2 and I will have all I need. I will say that the package was less than desired. Box plenty roomy and only one small section of “air pillow” provided only on top so book slipped and slides around easily. Good thing the dust jacket did come loose or it would have been wrecked. Come on Amazon, if you shake the box and it shifts and rattles then pack it better.

If you're something of a history buff for European trad grimoiric magick,, or are a practitioner / researcher of solomonic magick you have a lot to gain from this edition. Stephen Skinner has out done himself, the Sourceworks of Ceremonial Magic series is just immensely filled with history and I'm astounded by his work. If you know anything about the Ars Notoria you'll realize it's basically a miracle this work exists at all, and isn't lost forever to time or censorship. Just 2 years ago I was lamenting the thought that one could never properly work through the Ars Notoria. now it's a genuine fact that I can.The book arrived 3 days earlier than expected, I ordered from Book Depository US seller

Great read

All I had to do was place this tome under my pillow, Edgar Cayce style, for a specific amount of nights, starting on a specific full moon (p.89), do some lucid dreaming atop it, astral project three times, fast for the equivalent of 14 days on the exoplanet Proxima Centauri b, repeat step two and then meditate on the Sanskrit word for…

This is a much edited and condensed version of a larger review. A proper review might result in something as large as Skinner’s book. I will say this is not a bad start and useful enough. The graphic parts are done well, the bibliography is good but not great, however, I cannot read his comments without cringing on occasion.I have the many problems with Skinner’s editions in general. There is much to take issue with in Skinner’s newest effort as well with his past efforts, but space is limited and time fleeting to offer a point by point account of this book. My short take is the graphic material is the best part and may be worth the purchase price for some.Skinner’s efforts have always been a mixed bag. This is no different. Apart from the graphic material there is little here that could not be gleaned from on-line sources. Skinner’s only substantive contributions are a transcription of Robert Turner’s well-known English translation of “Ars Notoria” done from one of the Beringen editions of Cornelius Agrippa’s Opera. While he includes Turner’s Latin source he did not remain faithful to the text. Skinner states explicitly he did not alter the Latin text however cursory examination suggests otherwise. Skinner includes all the pages of the Mellon manuscript (Yale University Library, Mellon ms 1). All well and good and admittedly the pages are aesthetically pleasing but almost wholly unreadable one would do better down loading the PDF from the Yale library site. Skinner includes notae from other manuscripts which while striking and aesthetically interesting in their own right are entirely devoid of context. To be sure not all of this material is available on line and what there is suffer their own deficiencies.His commentary is informative but should be read critically. He injects a lot of his own opinions and unsubstantiated speculations. Sometimes his discussions lose focus and wander tangentially into trivialities. Per example, after a lengthy meandering account of Hans Sloane’s life and library he mentions Sloane “invented” milk chocolate and once owned a copy of an important “Ars Notoria” manuscript (Sloane 1712) since assumpted to the British Museum/Library. I am not sure skinner’s tables and charts offer anything useful without being able to consult texts he maps. He is not well informed regarding the bibliographical history of the Beringen (i.e. Beringos Fratres) editions of Agrippa. And forgets Turner was working from a summary version of “Ars Notoria” whatever was omitted was omitted in Turner’s source, moreover, Turner was a popularizer not per se expert in “Ars Notoria” or necessarily conversant with magic practices of his day. Turner’s reputation rests with his translations of “Ars Notoria”, some spurious essays attributed to Cornelius Agrippa and Pietro d’Abano including included writings all from a deficient edition of Agrippa’s collected works.Skinner seems completely unaware of Benjamin Rowe’s transcription of Turner’s translation (Ars Notoria: The Notary Art of Solomon Translated by Robert Turner, 1656 Transcribed and converted to Acrobat by Benjamin Rowe, July 1999) This is an excellent transcription of Turner. Rowe’s transcription is easily obtainable from any number of internet sites. In addition, Google books has the British Library’s so-so scan of Turner’s original.Further points of contentionOne, Skinner seems to think that “Ars Notoria” does not belong in the collection of magic texts called “The Little Key of Salomon” that is to say the Lemegeton. I beg to differ. “Ars Notoria” is called for an all six manuscripts of the lemegetonic family. It is missing in only two of the mss the rest include it. For better or worse it is Turner’s translation. One lemegetonic manuscript reorders the text placing “Artem Novam” (aka “Ars Nova”) before the Apollonian “Golden Flowers” and exxplicitly references a print edition (presumably Turner’s).Two, the Beringen “Ars Notoria” explicitly name “Lemegeton” as a Solomonic tract or treatise of spiritual and secret experiments. To be sure, this reference is found in both the A and B versions of Veronese’s critical edition. Skinner, informed by Veronese, noted the name Lemegeton in the Beringen Agrippan version citing the passage with reference to earlier names: Lemogeton, Demegeton, Lemogedan found in medieval versions of “Ars Notoria”. Without suggesting “Lemegeton” is itself a deformation of the name. None of the names have a meaning as such nor are any of them with the exception of “Lemegeton” represented by a treatise or tractate in any historical period. There is an explanation I cover in the larger version of this review.Three, the “Ars Notoria” is not a grimoire it never was. It offered a (not so) quick and (not so) easy way for a medieval student to prep for trivium and quadrivium examinations (the division in medieval times of the seven liberal arts). These examinations were important preliminaries for advanced studies such as medicine and law and very competitive; mnemonics was a very important study aid. “Ars Notoria” was deemed spiritually suspect in the eyes of its detractors and caused John of Morigny a great deal of trouble. Skinner discusses John’s involvement with “Ars Notoria”, though not in detail.Turner’s translation and all the Beringen Agrippas with Ars Notoria are available through Google books as well as posted on and down loadable from several European library web sites. Google scans have their own deficiencies.

I got this after seeing Dr. Skinner on a Glitch Bottle podcast, talking about it. He stated openly that this is not a manual for rapid learning, so I wasn't really expecting one, and I got it mainly out of curiosity. I would say it's heavily encumbered by a scholarly approach that, while praiseworthy for sincerity, also renders the book utterly useless for practical applications by modern-day anybody. It's so cluttered with tables, and cross-tabulations, and duplications that might actually be different things, that it's hard to match anything up. References are often to manuscripts rather than pages in the printed edition. I can't help but wonder if the obfuscation was intentional.It's like Dr. Skinner and Mr. Clark in all sincerity wanted show a scholarly respect for the original content, but in the process, they've dissected the subject matter into a pile of fragmented pieces that don't fit together. It's not holistic. Or maybe it's a cryptographic challenge, and the work you do to figure it it is so difficult that even the niceties of philosophy, theology, arithmetic, rhetoric, etc pale by comparison to the effort necessary to read this tome.Having said that, I'm not afraid to experiment. It's not a short cut to anything; you still have to study the desired subject (for example, grammar) just as hard as before. I'll probably end up creating my own personal manual out of this based on what, if anything, actually works. Possibly Skinner & Clark felt that creating a definitive how-to would be premature, and perhaps irresponsible, or presumptuous, since they themselves haven't gone through the full program.It's also from a different time period. I am not a monk (and not a European male). The medieval educational program, the Trivium and Quadrivium, are still important but must be expanded and adapted to the modern age. The original subjects might have been more timeless, too; geometric proportions are still the same – a square's still a square, and has been since ancient Egypt – but computer languages change ever 5-10 years. The original course of study might have been primarily to improve the student's native cognitive abilities.In terms of modern cognitive science, I would like to know what elements of this Ars Notoria actually make it effective. I have my own nascent theories, but that's about it at this point. To really go through the full 4-month study cycle for one subject is a tremendous effort of personal sacrifice and psychological transformation. Even the preparatory period is quite demanding, perhaps more difficult than the academic portion. One is expected to be pure, chaste, and recite a huge body of special prayers, in total humility, and all of this in addition to studying the academic subject. The role of community, while unspoken, could also be a major factor in success.I'm kind of torn on the rating. The fact that Dr. Skinner and Mr. Clark apparently went through over 100 manuscripts must be respected and gratitude expressed. This was, above all, a labor of love. And the color plates are beautiful and nice to have on paper, even if one could download them from elsewhere.

Not a practical guide. Very interesting for those seeking knowledge but it can turn a little confusing for some.

Edição linda e primorosa de um dos mais esquecidos livros de magia da linhagem salomônica. Stephen Skinner é um dos maiores conhecedores da atualidade em ocultismo. O outro é Joseph Peterson.

Why is it, that every book i by from Dr. Steven Skinner' publishers always turns up damaged. Why also is the binding cheap and made from low quality paper and products used in the binding. He sells some of the most expensive books on the occult and they are aways trash quality.

Book came away from the cover as soon as I unwrapped it. $100 book,really disappointed. Bought another book in the series that's due today, hopefully in better shape. They know I'm not going through the hassle of going to the p.o and sending it back.

Atendeu minhas expectativas!Indico!