Necronomicon Files Correction on the “Sumerian Tradition”

In The Necronomicon Files, John and I attempted to discover the origin of this Aleister Crowley quote that shows up in the Simon book:

Our work is therefore historically authentic; the rediscovery of the Sumerian tradition.

We never did figure it out, and we assumed that it came from Crowley’s unpublished writings.

Yesterday Donovan sent me a link to this post by Khem Caigan in which he locates the quote in the introduction to Part IV of Crowley’s Liber ABA/Book 4. I’ve ordered the book through ILL to verify the quote.

(It should be added that it does nothing to dispute our overall point that Crowley really wasn’t that interested in Sumer, but it’s good to clear up one mystery nonetheless.

Published in: on July 3, 2008 at 12:09 pm  Comments (7)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. The quote can be found in “Introduction to Book 220”
    By Aleister Crowley, n.d., unpublished. This document © O.T.O. This document is a part of the Warburg Collection, and was written as an introduction to his Commentary on Liber Legis.
    The Sumerian perspective also connects to a book called “The Two Babylons” or so, that Crwoley used as an argument for a interpretation of Catholicism als Solar-Phallicism. (vide Liber XV)

  2. The actual page is visible via Google Books at

    H.B. attributes the passage to an unpublished portion of the introduction to the New Commentary on Liber Legis.

  3. Thanks to both Axel and Daniel for locating the exact quote!

  4. Hello Dan,

    To add some more information. Since the intro from Book IV (in which Hymaneus Beta presents this quote from Crowley) comes from 1998 (if I remember correctly) when the complete edition was published, Simon would probably have to of culled this quote from Kenneth Grant’s “The Magical Revival” published in the early 70’s (page 52). This just happens to have been conveniently available from the Warlock Shop for a mere $7.95 according to the advertisement you posted a short time back. Actually Grant’s book would probably most explain Simon’s insistence on Crowley, as after this quote from Crowley Grant goes on to say that Crowley’s system is “incomprehensible …. and unfathomable without the key supplied by the Sumerian tradition.” “

  5. Dave,

    I didn’t post that here, but I put it in the paper. It’s amazing just how revealing that price list has been in figuring out what was going on with the Necronomicon.

  6. The passage in question comes not from the New Comment, but from a commentary on “The Book of the Law” which Crowley appears to have started either during or shortly after the Amalantrah Working. Though unpublished, it was typed up by Gerald Yorke (most probably in the 1950s) from a notebook of Crowley’s. This commentary never went beyond the first chapter, but much of it was incorporated into the New Commentary. For instance, this from the New Comment to the first verse of chapter one:

    “Further information concerning Nuit and Hadit is given in the course of this Book, but I must here mention that the Brother mentioned in connection with the Wizard Amalantrah (Shmuel bar Aiwaz) identifies them with ANU and ADAD the supreme Mother and Father deities of the Sumerians. Taken in connection with the AIWAZ connection, this is very striking indeed.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s