I suspect that the magi, should they decide to study the issue in depth, would come to the conclusion the ancient pagan philosophers did:
all perspectives of the Divine are flawed. All Gods are an imperfect reflection of the Divine. Claims to be an exclusive conduit to the divine, or even a superior conduit to the divine are more about secular marketing of your religion than any valid claim of superiority.
Minor point. Islamic Jesus is more than "just another prophet". He is also Messaiah (redeamer), just not the "Son of God" or a divinity in and of himself. He is also the only prophet that still lives. Not ressurrected, but has never died. And it seems to me that Mary is more venerated by Moslems than by Protestant Christians.
I know of this historical Hermeticism you speak of. It is intriguing and worked well for a related game about wizards back in the 90's. But it never really fit for Ars Magica. Ars is anachonistic though.
Provencal still has a (mostly) pagan covenant in ArM5. Aedes Mercurri (aka Doisettep) is strongly affiliated with the Cult of Mercury on many levels.
Magi are scholars and scholars tend to care about quite a lot of things, even things that lie outside their immediate and narrow area of expertise. I have trouble imagining any intelligent person who isn't intimately interested in the deeper nature of reality - not that intelligence is a prerequisite for being a Magus, but it sure does help.
I'm curious to know where in canon it asserts that they wouldn't care - I will fairly state that I may have missed it.
All my recollections of in-universe musings about the Magic realm suggest that many magi believe it emanates from the Divine. That bespeaks interest.
Where also does it state that Hermetic here is meant in the sense of sealed off? That usage itself derives from magical practice, after all - and it wasn't in use until the 17th century.
All extremely interesting and pertinent questions, I like your lines of thought in that last paragraph especially.
A special Mystery Cult that has a version of each integration, meant specifically to sanitize and sanctify each Realm, would be interesting. Canonically there is no good way to deal with the Infernal, but historically this was a major preoccupation with medieval magicians. Just look at Learned Magicians again (which is one of my favorite hedge traditions, if it weren't obvious.)
May bear some exploration into Solomonic magic. I haven't read as extensively into that as I'd like.
Yeah, that's the thrust of my post 
Yeah, but I didn't want to get too into that. The Jews would also have something to say about it. My point was more to say that there's no way a rational person can look at this argument and conclude that one side has it all.
Which is that? I'm genuinely curious.
~
Randomly, would this mean that religious leaders within the order receive Divine Resistance? They probably don't even notice thanks to their Parmas.
I don't think this happens. Not because of religiosity vs magic, but because of the Code of Hermes vs being in a politically major mundane position.
Well, Jewish leaders (in the time period) have little to no political authority. There's also cult leadership positions in the order itself.
Frankly it's mostly irrelevant, given that this is a magi-focused religion, but good to think on.
The Church would surely see it as a threat to authority (I mean, they would anyway. Look what happened to the Cathars.)
I know plenty of people who are highly intelligent and also not especially philosophical or nerdy. Usually that means they have an interest in another direction.
I'm drawing on my own interpretation of canonical sources. In general, it is known that Hermetic magi look down on non-Hermetic sources of power, including holy powers. My leap from that is that, generally, Hermetic magi make the study of Hermetic magic their life's work, and the majority wouldn't delve into deep analysis of the Divine Realm (in part, of course, because they don't have very good tools for such research).
Furthermore, the Order is secular in character. I emphasize "the Order as a whole" in my statement; individual magi have interests that are all over the place, but not all are going to be particularly interested in the Divine. This is particularly true as the Order has grown more conservative and more focused on Hermetic magic, and more hostile to foreign magic (look at how Durenmar treats hedge magic and hedge magicians - and note that Holy Magi are considered hedge wizards because they can't use magic to sin).
I'll note that magi are very interested indeed in the Magic Realm. That doesn't imply an interest in the Divine for its own sake, it implies an interest in something that affects their powers (e.g. the Limit of the Divine).
Actually, I appear to have drawn that from a discussion on this forum: why is hermetic magic not.. well hermetic? - #7 by BlackLiger
The point made is, however, correct. Hermetic magic is drawn from the self and the Gift, not from external powers (that's Theurgy). It's also an expressly secular art (HoH:TL 39).
Again, I'm not saying that individual magi are not interested in the Divine (as you noted, magi are intelligent and inquisitive people and are curious about lots of different things), but that the Order as a whole is not concerned with it. Also (ArM5 188) some magi scorn the Divine simply because it's a huge pain in the tail.
Monistic mysticism (TC 23) has some stuff on integrating the Realm Lores, though it's Warping-focused rather than Mystery-focused. As for the Infernal, look into Chthonic Magic (RoP:I 123); while the effects are somewhat ridiculous, the tamer part of the Virtue makes a lot of sense for a Holy Magus who does a lot of demon-fighting.
I strongly discourage to mix the RPG rules construct of the realms with real medieval philosophy. To be usable in an RPG, the ArM5 realms are necessarily simplistic. Making medieval religious thought 'real' in ArM requires applying the realms appropriately, not finicking around with their rules.
For natural philosophy and metaphysics, A&A assumes the medieval Aristotelian philosophy of the later 13th century to be true. This makes everybody - and in particular older magi - wrong in 1220. But some advanced scholars will be on promising tracks soon, and PC magi can contribute to and benefit of their achievements during standard campaign time.
Neoplatonism (see for a quick overview en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism) already in the 4th century is not a distinct religion. Instead, both Pagans and Christians use it as structural underpinning of their theologies. it is an important foundation of the thought on Christian religion since the early Church Fathers, and throughout all the Middle Ages until full-fledged scholasticism in the later 13th century. You can find historical neoplatonist scholars of the late 9th century in Sub Rosa #16: Johannes Scotus Eriugena on p. 39, and Thabit ibn Qurra on p. 63 and passim.
It is quite logical to have some magi follow neoplatonism as well, and share in the debates of their time, how to apply it to Christendom (and even Islam). Given that all the Pythagorean heritage in the middle ages is conveyed through neoplatonism, The Mystic Fraternity of Samos (TMRE p.126ff) is really a neoplatonic brotherhood with a specific focus.
Cheers
I'd say this couldn't be more wrong, but I'm not actually sure what you're trying to say. I should think that authentic philosophy has a very legitimate place in RPGs, so I must strongly disagree with you on that point, for I am pretty sure it is the point you are trying to make. Why on earth not? If your players are fully capable of handling it, by all means throw them some red meat.
The rest of your stuff is pretty good, though. I will definitely look into those guys.
About Hermeticism it is best to read first en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermetica .
We talk here about esoteric texts conveyed to Mythic Europe either in neoplatonist context, or by the Order of Hermes proper. These might be found in older covenant libraries, or in the studies of philosophically minded magi, e. g. Brethren of Samos.
It is far-fetched to assume a religion based on them in Mythic Europe. But as they played a role in the resuscitation of neoplatonism during the Renaissance, they might lead magi to neoplatonism in Mythic Europe as well.
Cheers
Not to get into the "but magic is more plausible?" bit, that's an argument that goes nowhere fast - however, we are proposing an alternative world in which a society called the "Order of Hermes" is a real thing, incorporating mystical traditions which, too, were only broadly brought back in the fifteenth century. Indeed a great deal of Ars Magica is either projected from the fall of the Roman empire or projected back from the Renaissance.
It seems equally plausible, if not more so, that with magic and evidence of its efficacy that Hermetic religion would not have died out, either.
We must otherwise ask ourselves what exactly the "hermetic" part of "hermetic magic" actually means, and I doubt it's exactly "sealed off."
Keep in mind also the timeline - Bonisagus was working on his theories at the tail end of the era where, in the real world, hermetic thought slowly choked to death. It becomes increasingly plausible that the name is no accident.
1 Like
Let's see.
I agree.
My point being, that one does not write encompassing RPG rules to conform with pretty complex specific late-antique philosophy. Is that what you disagree with?
Cheers
Depends on the level of authenticity desired, but I think we can both agree that a certain level of abstraction is required, yes. My primary concern is when an abstraction deprives a subject of an essential quality.
Yeah, we definitely don't want to do any depriving of essential qualities. That would break the laws of magic.
... Okay, I'll let myself out.
1 Like
When ArM was invented, 'Hermes' might indeed have been chosen because it resounded of 'Hermeticism', and of 'Hermes Trismegistus'. But even if Hermetic Magic was based in part on the hermetica, it never was a religion, nor did it read these texts as religious revelations to follow.
Have a look at The Oracles of Didyma in TtA p.70ff: there you find ArM5 magi continuing a historical pagan cult. But the published Order of Hermes of ArM itself is not built upon a religion: that would be yours to change fyc.
In Mythic Europe Bonisagus developed his theories in the early 8th century, spending formative years in Egypt, Ephesus and Rome, where he might have been exposed to very late instances of Hermeticism. But in the game he was out for magic, not for religion - and the big discovery forming his own approach to magic was a secret cache of the Cult of Mercury's rituals in a well on the Aventine hill (HoH:TL p.5).
And the people he brought together with the help of Trianoma were that heterogeneous (from Birna to Jerbiton, from Merinita to Tytalus), that any idea of a common religion would have smothered the project of the Order of Hermes, before the first Oath of Hermes was taken.
Cheers
I was going to make that joke, but decided it was too corny!
While we're talking about ahistorical dichotomies, let's talk about magic and religion.
The idea that the two are separate and distinct is an exceedingly recent idea, born largely out of a post-secular context. Magic has always been the means by which people mediated with the unseen spiritual forces, and that much hasn't changed in Ars Magica. I think we are making a dire anachronistic mistake when we start conflating modern conceptions of magic in a medieval context.
The nearest thing to truly apersonal, nonspiritual forces is Natural Magic (termed Experimental Philosophy in Art & Academe). While viewed as arising out of a natural order created by divine forces, we might truly deem them as largely scientific. Even the Folk Witches are meant as survivors of pre-Christian practice.
All signs in Hermetic magic point to it having a fundamental basis in religious thought and language - Ilike every other magic tradition in history.
I hearken back to the comments on Holy Magic, a virtue which exists to move Hermetic casting away from pagan ideology to wholly Judeo-Christian thought. Such a concern would not be terribly necessary if it were indeed some pure scientific practice (unless one wants to argue that natural magic is in some way ungodly, which is contra-indicated by Art & Academe.)
1 Like
ArM's Hermetic magic, Order of Hermes and Houses of Hermes are 20th century fantasy concepts, from ArM2 on parachuted into a medieval setting. I believed - apparently by mistake - that this was utterly obvious.
Cheers
That strikes me as a mite cherry-picked, since from Day 1 the game has been about understanding the universe within a medieval context.
You don't get much more vital to a medieval context than understanding the confluence of magic and religious conception. There were very few atheists in this time.
Jachra, you weren't even responding to his point. The Order of Hermes' magic and Magic Theory are not even remotely medieval except where that's been added in later. The Techniques and Forms are 20th-century fantasy, as is the idea of a broad magic that calls solely on a personal magical Gift.
Furthermore, the magic of Bonisagus is absolutely secular and any pagan symbolism it uses has been intentionally stripped of religious association or worship. Magi draw solely on their own personal power (and in ceremony and ritual, magical elements in the natural world), and Bonisagus himself was interested in creating a unified theory of magic, not a unified theory of religion. His concern was with power, not faith, and canonically he got the one without depending on the other, to the extent where a Hermetic magus' power is not affected one bit if he is an atheist.
First, you are somewhat wrong about this being a 20th century fantasy concept only. Yes, it was largely devised now, but the idea of Platonic Forms is as old as Plato. The idea that there was a secret core to magic is also not new - that one is even older than Hermeticism itself, arguably.
Further, the idea of a magical Gift is hardly new. Indeed, the idea that magicians had a special "gift" is a major feature of European folklore.
It's probably worth discussing what actually is "canonical", because I think we're projecting a bit too much.
Something that isn't Canon as far as I can see:
Why it's called the Order of Hermes. That is never explicitly stated as far as I can see. It may be that I've missed it.
Canonical Facts:
In the 700s, Bonisagus developed a theory of magic by listening to people of very different groups. All of these groups came out of religious magical traditions, as far as I can tell - Cult of Mercury and Diedne Druids prominently among them. Also mentioned in his entry are the Cults of Dionysus, Mithras, Osiris, Diana... He found magical texts from Chaldeans, Gnostics, Christians, Jews, and writings of Moses and Solomon, here included as magic users.
House Diedne remained stoutly Pagan. Certain members of House ex Miscellanea maintain the faith traditions of their forebears.
Canonically, then, Bonisagus listened to faith traditions which were involved with drawing down magical forces through their connection with spiritual ones. He managed to strip away most of that to see to an underlying core - if you'll recall, this is essentially similar to the concept of the prisca theologia. Being an atheist myself, it's nice to think of this as a neatly secular, completely nonreligious force, but I beg to differ, and I base it on a few lines of evidence -
Exactly what goes into casting a spell is a little mysterious - ie, we know they generally do a little dance and chant (even if these can be omited with entirely mental effort), but what's going into that, exactly? It's actually never described in the core book, but we can glean it from the sourcebooks. About the closest the corebook ever gets is Ceremonial Magic, which involves calling on occult forces of unspecified nature. This is the single most Hermetic thing about Hermetic magic. Hermetic magic IRL was all about drawing occult correspondences. You wear blue robes and use blue flowers and blue candles with blue powder etc etc.
In Art & Academe's Experimental Philosophy or Natural Magic? it recommends referring to what real 13th century philosophers called "natural magic" as "experimental philosophy", because it did not derive from supernatural realms. Ergo, magic is a process of drawing forces from another realm - this we already know, but it's an important point, and I'll get to that in my next paragraph on RoP: Magic.
Realms of Power: Magic is an excellent source when talking about anything canonical regarding magic, and I think it provides some very key points which I will address in brief:
Platonic forms, things are what they are and that is objective truth. Plato was not a secular man - it is from him we derive the entire notion of Neoplatonicism and the writers even mention him in Divine as having had True Faith, which is very generous, really. One can try to separate the idea of platonic forms from the emanated universe of Plato, but one loses something in the attempt.
While there is no single guiding hand to magic, there are numerous independent spirits and magical beings that act on it - for anyone who understands Roman religious practice this should not surprise. In brief, Roman magic basically worked like this: I give the spirits worship and sacrifice, and then I demand what I want from them. This is not a secular thing, it is magic at its core - the negotiation between seen and unseen forces.
We discover in the Magical Spirits section that every plant and animal has its own associated spirit, the destruction of whom depletes magic. Elements, sensations, emotions, places - and then we get to the Theoi, the Astra Planeta, the Leti, and the lovely Kosmokrators and Protogonoi who run the very foundations of the universe.
The closest we seem to get is the very end fo the Realm of Magic, the Twilight Void. What is the Twilight Void? Who really knows, but it seems to be from whence the Arts that Bonisagus derived flow from. One can interpret this just about any way one likes, but the Platonic Forms of the Arts seems a good place to start - and since the Void corresponds to the 10 Forms rather than the techniques, that seems rather telling.
Characterizing a fully animistic world as "secular" is disingenuous. Animism itself is a religion, and it involves putting context on what is perceived.
We also learn that each spell has a spirit in mystery cults, which is pretty much rock-solid evidence of the classic anthropological concept of magic as intermediation, not simply a hammer.
Perhaps the most damning (ho ho~ ) statements of all are found in Realms of Power - The Divine, in the Holy Magic section (paraphrased for time):
Holy mages are concerned about the "idolatrous influence of pagan religions".
They seek to infuse love and respect for God into their works.
Magic theory is replaced with Holy Magic
All spells must be reinvented as Holy versions.
Hermetic words and gestures are not permitted because they "are believed to lead the magus into ingrained rites of Hermetic idolatry and invoke the symbolism of sacrilegious rituals and worldly enchantment."
Now, while other Hermetic magi consider the assertion that their magic is idolatrous insulting, there's two ways you can look at that:
A) They view it as a holy secular process akin to how a smith turns a blade with a hammer
B) They contextualize their use of pagan symbolism, rites, and deities as existing within a broader framework of magic
A is vividly against the character of magic as it is was understood throughout most of history, especially with regards to things that involve contacting unseen spirits and unseen realms. Those realms are populated and motivated by vast intelligences. Hermetic magic clearly incorporates fully nonsecular and theistic notions of spiritualism and divinity. To classify Hermetic religion as wholly secular is to ignore that it isn't about stripping out religion to find nonreligion, it's about stripping out the aspects of religion that are unnecessary - the act of magic is itself inherently religious if it involves contacting supernatural forces.
Can a magus be an atheist? Sure, nothing prevents that (even if such a person would have to be exceptionally blind to evidence) - but just because he doesn't know he's calling on divine forces doesn't mean that he isn't. Intent and will are the primary components here. I'm not saying that there isn't clearly an effort to demystify it - demystification doesn't mean the total removal of spiritual, religious, and occult beliefs. As an atheist myself I would find it personally appealing that magi buck that tradition, but I am trying to look beyond my personal biases to the best available evidence and the most flavorful interpretation of history.
Such an atheist magician just uses different names for the forces he calls upon. He may choose to believe that they're impersonal, reliable forces, but while magic is objective, the books go out of their way to remind us time after time that they are mysterious and subject to strange, mystical forces. Ignorance of the truth does not change it.
What I am saying is that interpreting this as some sort of 13th century revision of magic into a secular force makes no sense, even in the context of canonical facts. I saw nothing in the text to say canonically that it isn't so.
That magi of various religions were permitted to keep and even expand those religions is not necessarily contradictory to this - indeed, considering the idea behind Hermeticism is that all religions are wrong but also right, it makes perfect sense. There's no need to force someone to convert or make conversion to said religion continent upon conversion. They are already okay as they are.
As a final point, I would like to bring this back to a question of names:
Hermetic Magi
Order of Hermes
What, precisely, does that mean if not to say an order of people dedicated to the Hermetic ideals? One must define Hermeticism to mean something.
I suppose one could try to define it as a fully secular, nonreligious thing. My argument is that it makes no sense in the historical context not to call it what it is, however.
As I stated at the outset - a maga is uniquely positioned to observe every religion in the world if she so chooses. From the devil worshipers to the faerie worshipers to the magic worshipers to the weird guys who get Divine powers sometimes. While it may be possible to stick to one's native faith with the aid of a lot of denial and blinders, magi operate a rational system of magic and must have a rational outlook at least some of the time. For some, or even most, magi, this means clearly perceiving the flaws in the framework. Atheism is obviously absurd in-setting - it becomes clear the universe runs on spiritual forces with even a cursory glance, one must be delusional. All known religions are clearly wrong. What, then, does the average mage, who gleans truth from all religions and none, to make of the universe?
While there are a few people, I'm sure, who completely ignore ultimate questions and blithely go about their business, I'd wager that most magi aren't so blase about the universe they're studying so intimately. It beggars the imagination to imagine them all as philosophical beggars, particularly when they're trained specifically to rip the world apart in search of truth. How is it a stretch to imagine that this act informs their mythology and thus their conception of the world in what we might definitionally call a religion.
Given all these different lines of evidence and the nature of historical views on magic, concluding that there exists a Hermetic religion and it is the primary mythological outlook of the Order seems not only reasonable, but virtually demanded.
So, Ramidel, that is my response.
--
Now, I should update my original post with your Origenists and whatever other useful tidbits were in these replies - as soon as I wake up, because damn that took a long time to type.
2 Likes