Page:Three Books of Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (1651).djvu/17

 Hence thoe things, which Lucan relates of Theala that Magicianes, and Homer of the omnipotency of Circe, whereof many I confes are as well of a fallacious opinion, as upertitious diligence, & pernicious labor, as when they cannot come under a wicked Art, yet they preume they may be able to cloak themelves under that venerable title of Magick. Since then thee things are o, I wondered much, and was not les angry, that as yet there hath been no man, who did challenge this ublime and acred dicipline with the crime of impiety, or had delivered it purely and incerely to us, ince I have een of our modern writers Roger Bacon, Robert an Englih man, Peter Apponus, Albertus the Teutonich, Arnoldas de villa Nova, Anelme the Parmenian, Picatrix the Spaniard, Cicclus Aculus of Florence, and many others, but writers of an obcure name, when they promied to treat of Magick, to do nothing but irrationall toies, and upertitions unworthy of honet men. Hence my pirit was moved, and by reaon partly of admiration, and partly of indignation, I was willing to play the Philoopher, uppoing that I hould do no dicommendable work, who have been always from my youth a curious, and undaunted earcher for wonderfull effects, and operations full of myteries; if I hould recover that ancient Magick the dicipline of all wie men from the errors of impiety, purifie and adorn it with its proper lutre, and vindicate it from the injuries of calumniators; which thing, though I long deliberated of it in my mind, yet never durt as yet undertake, but after ome conference betwixt us of