I’ve been outlining a story about the Dee Society, allegedly founded by the Elizabethian occultist John Dee. Dee’s life is fascinating in its own right, in part because the man appears to have been a true believer, which left him open to the same kind of cons that his whole field of study was based upon.
Dee’s desire to acquire angelic secrets led him to Edward (Kelly) Talbot, one of the most talented medium’s of his day. After years of stringing Dee along, Talbot passed along a bit of angelic wisdom that Dee should share his much younger wife with Talbot. The 60 year-old Dee apparently went along with the medium’s suggestion before returned to England with a pregnant wife in toe.
Dee has also been a regular reference in Lovecraftian fiction. Lovecraft attributed an unpublished translation of Al Azif’s Necronomicon to John Dee. Charles Stross’s Laundry Files novels revealed that the “Laundry” did not evolve out of Q-division in the British Security Operations Executive but had an older charter in the form of the “Hidden College.” While the hidden college is more historically tied to the Royal Society other references link it to the Rosicrucians and to John Dee. Likewise, The Brothers Cabal by Jonathan L. Howard depicts the “Dee Society” as a paramilitary organization operating in the shadows and directed against occult threats.
Yet, in spite of Dee’s strong residual reputation in fiction, his accomplishments seem fairly minimal. Compared with later day alchemists (such as John Winthrop, Issac Newton, or Robert Boyle). Dee left only one lasting mark: the 1564 text, Monas Hieroglyphica, in which he lays out the alchemical logic for a particular symbol.
To be perfectly, honest, most of Monas Hieroglyphica is inscrutable nonsense. One might (as Howard’s Johannes Cabal does) argue that the the very nature of the “occult” is the “hidden” and thus inscrutable nonsense is to be expected. Alternatively, one might read such nonsense as the product of drug induced wishful thinking as is depicted in Umberto Eco’s Baudolino. But I tend to see it as simply nonsense, inscrutability being a necessary side-effect.
Now obviously the whole thing looks a lot like the alchemical sign for mercury (with the humps at the bottom), but it is not! So let’s walk it through a simple deconstruction of the Monas Hierogliphica.
The circle with the dot is an alchemical symbol for the sun (also gold), while the crescent crown is the symbol for the moon (also silver). You can take my word for it or, try to dredge through Dee’s fourth theorem in his Monas Hieroglyphica proof:
Although the semicircle of the Moon is placed above the circle of the Sun and would appear to be superior, nevertheless we know that the Sun is ruler and King. We see that the Moon in her shape and her proximity rivals the Sun with her grandeur, which is apparent to ordinary men, yet the face, or a semi-sphere of the Moon, always reflects the light of the Sun. It desires so much to be impregnated with solar rays and to be transformed into Sun that at times it disappears completely from the skies and some days after reappears, and we have represented her by the figure of the Horns (Cornucopia).
The cross, Dee asserts is meaningful in its own right. He then proceeds to layer additional meaning onto it noting something to do with numerology (1+2+3+4=10!) and then notes that the four parts of the cross represent the four elements. I’m not sure what more there is to say on this, but Dee uses like 4 theorems to make this point.
Finally, the two humps at the bottom, are the alchemical symbol for Aries which is Mars, which is red, which is the color of fire, which reminds us to burn the shit out of those four elements. If you think I’m being glib, please read theorem 10:
The following figure of the zodiacal sign Aries , in use amongst the astronomers, is the same for all the world (a sort of erection both cutting and pointed), and it is understood that it indicates the origin of the fiery triplicity in that part of the sky.
Therefore, we have added the astronomical sign Aries to signify that in the practice of this Monad the use of fire is required.
We finish the brief hieroglyphic consideration of our Monad, which we would sum up in one only hieroglyphic context:
The Sun and the Moon of this Monad desire that the Elements in which the tenth proportion will flower, shall be separated, and this is done by the application of Fire.
Dee offers another 14 theorems based on the manipulation of this combined symbol along with numerical manipulations. In all he is offering the same form of reasoning seen with Josef Wolf – ascribe meaning to symbols, manipulate the symbols, assert that the manipulated symbols have a real world meaning. It is entirely a deductive exercise, which perfectly illustrates what Lovecraft’s Randolph Carter describes in the Silver Key:
It was after this that he cultivated deliberate illusion, and dabbled in the notions of the bizarre and the eccentric as an antidote for the commonplace. Most of these, however, soon shewed their poverty and barrenness; and he saw that the popular doctrines of occultism are as dry and inflexible as those of science, yet without even the slender palliative of truth to redeem them.
Although, it is possible that I’m being unfair to Dee? Did I miss a major early scientific or philosophical accomplishment? Did I understate his role in fiction? Are their other aspects of Dee’s life that are worth noting and remembering?
.