In 1698, a London bookseller sold a manuscript now catalogued as Sloane MS 273. It contained columns of spirit names, seals drawn in black ink, and instructions for the circle. The buyer paid in silver. The bookseller did not ask why. The Lesser Key of Solomon, also called the Lemegeton Clavicula Salomonis, is a 17th-century grimoire compiled from older Solomonic texts. Its editions have shaped Western ceremonial magic for over three centuries, but they are not all the same.
A guide to every major edition of the Lesser Key of Solomon, from the 17th-century manuscripts to the modern critical editions, with dates, contents, and practical differences. The Lesser Key of Solomon, also called the Lemegeton Clavicula Salomonis, is a 17th-century grimoire compiled from older Solomonic texts. Its editions have shaped Western ceremonial magic for over three centuries, but they are not all the same.
Where the Manuscripts Came From
The earliest surviving manuscripts of the Lemegeton date to the late 17th century. The British Library holds several: Sloane MS 273 (1698), Sloane MS 3648 (circa 1700), and Sloane MS 3825 (early 18th century). These are not originals. They are copies of copies, each reflecting the scribe’s own choices, errors, and interpolations. The text itself claims to be the work of King Solomon. It is not. The material is a composite of earlier magical traditions: the Ars Goetia draws heavily on Johann Weyer’s Pseudomonarchia Daemonum (1563), which itself compiled spirit lists from medieval conjuration manuals. The Ars Paulina and Ars Almadel adapt late medieval angelic magic. The Ars Nova, the fifth book, appears to be a later addition unique to the Lemegeton tradition. No single author wrote the Lesser Key. It was assembled. The 17th-century manuscripts were not published. They circulated in handwritten copies among a small network of collectors, scholars, and practitioners. To own one was to risk a charge of conjuration under the Witchcraft Act of 1604. That risk explains why the manuscript tradition is so sparse: owners did not advertise their libraries.
What the Five Books Actually Contain
The Lemegeton is divided into five parts, though not every edition includes all of them. The Ars Goetia is the most famous. It lists seventy-two spirits, each with a seal, a rank, and a description of their appearance and function. The spirits are divided into kings, dukes, princes, marquises, counts, presidents, and knights. Bael is the first king, with powers of invisibility. Paimon teaches arts and sciences. Vassago declares past and future. The Goetia is the part most practitioners seek. The Theurgia Goetia describes spirits of the air, thirty-one in number, who are neither wholly good nor wholly evil. They are spirits of the intermediate spaces, bound to the four cardinal directions. The Ars Paulina claims to derive from the Apostle Paul, though the connection is entirely fictional. It divides spirits by the hours of the day and the signs of the zodiac. Each planetary hour has its own angelic and aerial spirits. The Ars Almadel works with four altars, each corresponding to a direction and a season. The magician arranges wax tablets inscribed with divine names and calls upon the spirits of that quarter. The Ars Nova, the fifth book, is a shorter text dealing with the spirits of the constellations and the zodiac. It is sometimes omitted from modern editions because its manuscript basis is thin.
The First Printed Edition: Mathers and Crowley (1904)
The Lemegeton remained a manuscript tradition for over two centuries. The first printed edition appeared in 1904, published by the private press of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. The editor was Samuel Liddell Mathers, with a preface by Aleister Crowley. Mathers worked from a manuscript, likely Sloane MS 3648 or a copy thereof. His edition included the Ars Goetia only, not the other four books. He added the Enochian calls derived from John Dee and Edward Kelley, which have no basis in the original manuscripts. Crowley wrote the preface, which included his own commentary and the famous instruction that the magician should “invoke often.”
This edition shaped the 20th-century understanding of the Goetia more than any other. It was reprinted by Crowley’s own publishing house, the O.T.O., and later by Weiser and other esoteric publishers. It is still widely available. But it is not a faithful representation of the manuscripts. Mathers and Crowley both made editorial decisions that altered the text: the Enochian additions, the rearrangement of some seals, and the commentary that framed the spirits as psychological forces rather than literal entities. Practitioners who work with this edition should understand that they are using a Golden Dawn-era interpretation, not a primary source.
Israel Regardie’s Edition (1937)
Israel Regardie, a former Golden Dawn member and Crowley’s secretary, published his own edition of the Goetia in 1937. Regardie restored some of the material Mathers had omitted and added his own commentary. His edition included the conjurations and prayers in full, along with a detailed description of the ritual tools and their preparation. Regardie’s edition is useful for its practical focus. He was a practitioner, not a scholar, and his edition reflects that. The instructions are clear, the seals are reproduced accurately, and the commentary avoids the psychological reductionism of Crowley’s preface. The weakness is that Regardie did not consult multiple manuscripts. He worked from a single source, and his notes reflect his own Golden Dawn training.
The Modern Critical Editions: Peterson (2001) and Skinner & Rankine (2010)
The 21st century brought a new standard of scholarship. Two editions stand out. Joseph Peterson’s The Lesser Key of Solomon: A Modern Translation (2001, Weiser Books) is the first critical edition of the complete Lemegeton. Peterson collated nine manuscripts, identified the variants, and produced a text that represents the consensus of the manuscript tradition. He included all five books, with the seals redrawn from the manuscripts, and provided extensive footnotes on the sources of each spirit and the historical context of the rituals. Peterson’s edition is the one most scholars recommend. It is accurate, complete, and transparent about its editorial choices. The drawback is that it is a modern translation into contemporary English, not a facsimile of the original. Some practitioners prefer the older language for ritual work. David Rankine and Stephen Skinner’s The Goetia of Dr Rudd (2010, Golden Hoard Press) takes a different approach. They published a transcription of a 17th-century manuscript by Thomas Rudd, a Welsh scholar who compiled his own version of the Lemegeton. Rudd’s manuscript is notable for including the angelic names associated with each spirit, a feature absent from many other versions. Skinner and Rankine provided a parallel text: the original English on one side, a modern version on the other. The Skinner and Rankine edition is valuable for its focus on the angelic connections. It also includes the complete Ars Goetia, the Theurgia Goetia, and parts of the Ars Paulina. It is less comprehensive than Peterson’s edition but more focused on the practical tradition of angelic conjuration.
Which Edition Should You Choose?
The choice of the edition depends on the purpose of the reader. The 21st century brought a new standard of scholarship: two editions stand out — the critical edition of the text with the manuscript variants, for the scholar who wants the historical record, and the practical edition with the clear translation and the commentary, for the practitioner who wants to work with the book. The classic editions — the Mathers and the Crowley — remain the reference of the tradition, and the modern editions build on them. The choice is the choice of the reader: the scholar takes the critical, the practitioner takes the practical, and the serious student takes both.
The answer depends on your purpose. If you are a scholar or a serious practitioner who wants the most accurate text, Peterson’s edition is the standard. It is the edition that most closely represents the manuscript tradition, and its footnotes are invaluable for understanding the sources. If you are interested in the Golden Dawn tradition, the Mathers and Crowley edition is historically important. Use it with the awareness that it is a product of its time, not a faithful copy of the primary sources. If you are drawn to the angelic dimension of the work, the Skinner and Rankine edition offers material that Peterson and Mathers both omit. The Rudd manuscript is a distinct branch of the tradition, and it deserves attention. If you want a practical ritual manual, Regardie’s edition is clear and direct. It is the edition that many working magicians have used for decades. The differences between editions reveal something about the Lemegeton itself. It is not a fixed text. It is a living tradition that changed with each copyist, each editor, each practitioner. The manuscripts disagree on the order of spirits, the design of the seals, and the wording of the conjurations. Some include the Ars Nova, others omit it. Some add the Enochian calls, others do not. This variation is not a flaw. It is the nature of the tradition. The Lemegeton was never a single book written by a single author. It was a collection of practices that practitioners adapted to their own needs. The editions are snapshots of that adaptation. The Lesser Key of Solomon is a single book. It is not. The five books were compiled from different sources at different times, and not all manuscripts include all five. The spirit list is original to Solomon. It is not. The seventy-two spirits of the Goetia are largely derived from Weyer’s Pseudomonarchia Daemonum, which itself drew on medieval demonologies. The seals are the most important part of the book. They are important, but the seal is useless without the correct timing, the proper tools, and the precise wording of the conjuration. The editions that print only the seals miss the point. Crowley’s edition is the standard. It was the standard for most of the 20th century, but it has been superseded by Peterson’s critical edition.
FAQ
Which edition of the Lesser Key of Solomon is most accurate? Joseph Peterson’s 2001 edition is the most accurate, based on a collation of nine manuscripts with full footnotes on variants. Is the Lesser Key of Solomon dangerous to read? No. The text is a historical document and a ritual manual. Reading it does not conjure spirits. The danger, if any, lies in attempting the rituals without preparation or understanding. What is the difference between the Lesser Key and the Greater Key of Solomon? The Greater Key (the Clavicula Salomonis) is a 14th-century grimoire focused on the construction of tools and the preparation of the magician. The Lesser Key is a 17th-century compilation focused on the conjuration of spirits. Does the Lesser Key of Solomon contain the Ars Goetia? Yes. The Ars Goetia is the first and most famous of the five books of the Lemegeton.
The Editions as a Map
The Lesser Key of Solomon is not a single destination. It is a map of a territory that different editors have drawn differently. Mathers and Crowley drew it in Golden Dawn ink. Peterson drew it in archival black. Skinner and Rankine drew it with angels in the margins. The map is not the territory, but without a map, you cannot begin the journey. For a deeper exploration of the spirits themselves, see our guide to the Ars Goetia and the seventy-two spirits. For the symbols that appear in the seals, consult the glossary of Solomonic seals. And for the broader tradition of the grimoires, the demonology and Goetia hub collects the full library.