In the rest of this book I shall be dealing with several kinds of magic and magical theory, and with various arguments for and against them. I shall be trying to trace the history of a tradition of Neoplatonic magic, exemplified by Ficino, of its
connections with other kinds of magic and with other related activities, and of the reactions against it. I shall discuss only a very few works from the vast literature on the subject of magic; but they will, I hope, be enough to show the main outlines of this history.

This tradition, as Ficino left it, comprised two kinds of magic, the natural, spiritual magic of the De V.C.C. [Walker here refers to the De Vita coelitus comparanda of Ficino], and the demonic magic, only hinted at in that work, but quite easily discoverable from his other writings. The tradition, therefore, was likely to grow in two divergent directions; which it did. The demonic magic, combined with mediaeval planetary magic, led to the overtly demonic, recklessly unorthodox magic of Agrippa and Paracelsus. The spiritual magic tended to disolve into something else: music and poetry, as with La Boderie; orthodox Christianity, as with Giorgi; unorthodox Christianity, as with Persio. At the end of the 16th century the two strands of the tradition come together again in the planetary oratory of Paolini and the magic practised by Campanella.

Since the logical structure of theories of magic, as presented in 16th century writings, is both loose and obscure, I want here to suggest a scheme that will fit the theories we shall be dealing with; it will, I hope, help to clarify the relationship between the various topics that occur in most writings on magic.

The activities designated by the term natural magic all had a strong tendency to become indistinguishable from some other activity more properly called by another name; magic was always on the point of turning into art, science, practical psychology, or, above all, religion. I am not talking here merely about a vagueness or breadth in the use of the term - magia naturalis was indeed sometimes the exact equivalent of philosophia naturalis, as, for example in most of Porta's magic - but about a real overlapping of the fields of all these activities, an overlapping which made the position of the concept of natural magic very insecure and resulted in its eventual disappearance. I shall try to explain the way in which magic overlaps with these other activities by means of this diagram, which is meant to indicate the relationship between the main themes of the theory of natural magic.

The planetary influence may act directly on the imagination of the operator, or indirectly through any or all of the forces. Effects can be produced by any one of the forces or their sub-divisions, or by any combination of them; but the vis imaginativa is nearly always present, for it is the fundamental, central force, and the others are usually used only as aids to heightening it or ways of communicating it. The most usual medium of trans-mission in the whole process is the spirit, cosmic and human The effects may be either on an animate being, or on an inanimate one (or directly on the body); the planets, considered sometimes as the former and sometimes as the latter (i.e. only their bodies), can produce a ricochetting effect back on to the operator's spirit and imagination. If the effect is on an animate being, it may be either subjective, remaining within the operator(s), or transitive, directed at some other person(s); in both cases it may be either purely psychological, remaining within the imagination or soul, or psychosomatic, affecting the body through the imagination.

This scheme is for a natural, non-demonic magic; but it could be altered to fit demonic magic by substituting angels or demons for the impersonal, "spiritual", planetary influences. The demons would be attracted or compelled by the various forces and would then accomplish the effects, acting not only on the body and spirit but also on the higher parts of the soul. In the present scheme, that is, of natural magic, the planets and the operator are not supposed to act directly on anything higher than the spirit, which is the vehicle of the imagination. (1) The effects produced on inanimate things or directly on bodies (unless by the vis rerum) are more difficult to explain without assuming a supernatural agent (angelic, demonic or divine) than the purely psychological ones; the same is true of the more odd or abnormal psychosomatic ones, for example, stigmatization or nervous diseases, as opposed to blushing or sleep. There is therefore a strong tendency for the effects of natural magic to be confined to the purely psychological, and the more ordinary psychosomatic ones. The more miraculous effects could be explained as natural, but only by assuming a power in the human spirit which was not generally admitted.

[Walker provides a diagram to show the relationship between different kinds of force.]

The A and B divisions of the vires imaginum, verborum, musices, rerum, do not all represent the same distinction, but they have this in common: the A forces of all these things are the ordinary, universally accepted ones, and, though they can be used for magical purposes, they can also and normally do produce effects which no one considered magical; whereas the B forces, though not all necessarily magical, are not universally admitted as real or legitimate, and their use is at least suspect of being magical. Any transitive effect produced by the vis imaginativa alone (e.g. telepathy) is obviously magical. The A and B kinds of the same or different forces may be combined in the same operation. The A kinds of the vires imaginum, musices, verborum, can produce aesthetic, affective or intellectual effects by the ordinary means of, respectively, painting (or any other visual art), music or song, oratory or poetry; the A kind of the vis rerum can produce ordinary effects on bodies through the elemental qualities of the things applied, as in any ordinary craft (e.g. cooking, or non-astrological medicine). Uses of these A forces are liable to be considered magical only if planetary influences are combined with them, that is, if they are astrological painting, music, etc. Painting, music and oratory can be given astrological force by making them expressive of the character, the ethos [Greek characters in text], of a particular planet; it can be given to an elemental process by using the traditional correspondences between the planets and elemental qualities. (2)
 
The B kinds of forces are more diverse and must be examined separately.

The B division of the vis rerum produces effects through the occult qualities of things, that is, their forces or virtues other than elemental ones; these qualities are usually thought to be caused by the planets, to correspond to a certain planet's character, and they are used to induce or reinforce the required planetary influence. The simple use of them, without the imagination of operator or patient being involved, is not necessarily magical, as, for example, the use of astrologically prepared medicines having their effects only on the body, or the use of a magnet to extract metal from a wound. But the classification of these cases is very doubtful, since it is seldom, if ever, that the imagination can be certainly excluded. In medicine the credulity or faith of the patient in the remedy is always of crucial importance. Even the magnet may be considered, as it was by Gilbert, (3) to act like a soul, or, more precisely, as a fragment of the Soul of the Earth. (4) Plainly magical uses of the B kind of vis rerum occur when it is directed, usually in combination with other forces, at the operator's or patient's imagination, as when, for example, in Ficinian magic, groups of solarian, jovial or venereal plants, foods, animals, odours, are used in conjunction with planetary music and talis-mans. The main magical importance of occult qualities is in the resultant planetary grouping of objects, which can then be used by the other forces; one can, for example, make a picture, song or oration solarian by representing solarian objects (heliotrope, honey, cocks, etc.), or one could just sit and imagine them - in both cases one's imagination would become more solarian. These groups of objects may also comprise human beings, who can be used in the same way.

The B division of the vis imaginum produces effects by means of such things as talismans, celestially activated statues, the ars notoria. The distinction between the A and B kinds of this force is, like all the others I am making, far from being hard and clear; but there is this difference between the two. The A force of an image is in proportion to its successful, beautiful representation or expression of its subject, even if this is astrological and meant to serve a magical purpose. The force of a B image lies solely in its astrological affinities; its shapes are often not representative at all (e.g. ars notoria signs, Paracelsan amulets), and, even if they are, the adequacy or beauty of the representation does not contribute to its efficacy. (5) The other forces, of the imagination, words, music, things, are often applied during its manufacture or use to reinforce the image's astrological power. (6)

Since talismans usually bore words, letters or characters, as well as figures, they connect with the vis verborum and share with it the liability to accusations of demonic magic. The words or letters, not being representative, that is, having no one-to-one correspondence with a planet or planetary object, can only be effective through the medium of an intelligent being who understands their significance, namely, a human being, a planetary angel or a deceiving demon. One way out of this accusation is to confine the effects to the operator or to human patients who also see the talisman, whose signs can then be understood by them and become effective through their intelligences; this excludes effects on inanimate things, on the body, or at a distance. The other way out is by means of the B division of the vis verborum. This kind of verbal force rests on a theory of language according to which there is a real, not conventional, connection between words and what they denote; moreover the word is not merely like a quality of the thing it designates, such as its colour or weight; it is, or exactly represents, its essence or substance. (7) A formula of words, therefore, may not only be an adequate substitute for the things denoted, but may even be more powerful. Instead of collecting together groups of planetary objects, we can, by naming them correctly by their real, ancient names, obtain an even greater celestial force. Here again, though this use of words obviously lends itself to
 magic, it is not necessarily magical; and, though it is distinct from ordinary operative uses of language, such as affective oratory or poetry, it may be combined with them in a magical operations poem, for example, might be both an expressive work of art and also an incantation, as, say, a hymn which both expressed the character of a god or planet and contained his true, ancient names.
 
The B division of the vis musices remained, as far as I know, purely theoretical. It is a theory that proposes the production of effects by means of the mathematical or numerical correspondence between the movements, distances or positions of the heavenly bodies and the proportions of consonant intervals in music. That this correspondence could be physically operative was explained by the analogy of the sympathetic vibration of strings. This theory is part of a wider cosmological theory, which supposes that the whole universe is constructed on these musical proportions, and which provides the most usual theoretical basis for sympathetic magic. One reason why this theory did not lead to practical music is that the musical representation of any given state of the heavens would provide only one chord and would suggest no particular melody or mode. Magical practices involving music, such as Ficino's, had therefore recourse to the A vis musices, which, through the text of the song or hymn, was combined with the A and B vis verborum.

We have now dealt with the means of producing effects. Ficinian magic, in terms of this scheme, uses the vis imaginativa combined with the vires imaginum B, verborum A & B, musices A, and rerum B. The effects it aims at are psychological and subjective. This description applies both to the spiritual magic of the De V.C.C., and to his demonic magic. In the latter case the demons would be attracted by the several vires.

"Subjective", it will be remembered, means such effects as remain within the operator or those taking part in the operation, that is, either individually or collectively subjective, as opposed to transitive operations by which the operator imposes an effect on someone else without undergoing it himself. This distinction between subjective and transitive effects is important in two ways. First, if the effects are subjective, there is much less danger of the magic being demonic, since there is no transmission involved other than normal sense-perception of the images, words, music or things used in the operation; whereas for many transitive effects the operation is not perceivable by the patient or the effect is on an inanimate object. It is still possible to claim that a subjective effect is accomplished by demons, but it is at least easily explicable without them. Secondly, it is only transitive operations that can be socially important; subjective magic may be good or bad from the point of view of morals or religion, but, since it does not affect other people, it is not an instrument of power for social, political or proselytizing religious ends, such as were aimed at, for example, by Bruno or Campanella. Subjective magic, therefore, is much less likely than transitive to arouse fear and persecution. The use of transitive magic directed at animate beings constitutes an overlap with practical psychology; such magic is meant to control and direct other people's emotions by altering their imagination in a specific and permanent way. There is a marked tendency for such magical techniques to be centred on sexual feelings, both because they were probably recognized to be especially powerful and fundamental, and because they are in fact more closely linked with the imagination than other natural appetites. Treatises on witchcraft came near to being a pornographic genre; and Bruno made a remarkable attempt to outline a technique for controlling all emotions which is explicitly based on sexual attraction. (8) Subjective magic too can overlap with psychology, the only difference being that the techniques are applied to oneself, as in Ficinian magic; the sexual bias is not here apparent. These overlaps with psychology do not lead to the absorption of magic into another activity, since applied psychology did not exist in the 16th century as a separate discipline; in so far as it was consciously systematized, it was a part of religion, and this is one of the ways, perhaps the most important, in which magic overlaps with religion.
 .
The production of effects by applied psychology or magic differs from many religious practices only in that no divine cause is assumed. (9) Natural, non-demonic magic is therefore an obvious threat to religion, since it claims to produce the same effects without any supernatural agent; its logical consequence is atheism or deism. Demonic or angelic magic avoids this danger, but is more evidently unacceptable to a Christian because it is a rival religion; the Christian revelation is unique and exclusive, and there is no room for any other religion. Prudent and wary Christians, therefore, prefer to consider all magic as demonic and to condemn it absolutely. Imprudent but well-meaning magicians attempt to achieve a non-demonic magic, in order to escape both the Devil and the obvious unorthodoxy of practising a rival religion. But their natural, subjective, purely psychological magic could explain all the effects of a subjective, psychological religion without assuming God. Ordinary Catholicism had some defence against this destructive explanation because many of its practices were of a miraculous kind which could not easily be so explained; they produced effects on inanimate things (bells, bread, crops), psychosomatic effects of a surprising kind (stigmata, cures of diseases), and employed techniques closely associated with magic, the vis imaginum and the vis verborum. But there still remained for Catholics the impossible task of demonstrating that these practices differed essentially from magical operations producing similar quasi-miraculous effects by similar means. Some evangelical Catholics and some Protestants attempted to remove or explain away such practices, and to condemn any but purely psychological religious effects as demonic magic. But since they had to accept the miracles in the New Testament, their position was not logically tenable, and, without the miracles, they were in danger of reducing their religion to a godless psychological technique, identical with natural psychological magic. The overlap of magic and religion produced then this dilemma: either a miraculous but plainly magical religion, or a purely psychological religion without a god. This dilemma was not of course explicitly stated, but it is clear that several anti-magical writers were aware of it and unable to find a way out. A very few pro-magicians, such as Pomponazzi, explained all religious effects, including miraculous ones, by natural (psychological and astrological) causes; and some very liberal Catholic magicians had no objection to identifying religious and magical practices. The historical importance of these connexions between magic and religion is, I think, that they led people to ask questions about religious practices and experiences which would not otherwise have occurred to them; and, by approaching religious problems through magic, which was at least partially identical with, or exactly analogous to religion, but which could be treated without reverence or devotion, they were able sometimes to suggest answers which, whether true or not, were new and fruitful.

1: Natural magicians are neither consistent nor disingenuous on this point; they use the A kinds of the vires imaginum & verborum, which plainly have intellectual effects.

2: Cf. e.g., Frances Yates, "The Art of  Ramon Lull", Warburg Journal, 1954.

3: Gilbert, De Magnete, Londini, 1600, II, iv, V, xii, V, i, pp. 68, 208 seq., 211 seq.

4: Gilbert (ibid., pp. 208-9) explicitly connects this with the Platonic anima mundi.

5: Cf. Trithemius' directions for making a talisman, infra p. 87 [i.e. later in Walker's book], and cf. pp. 179-181.

6: Cf. passage quoted from the Asclepius, supra p.40 [i.e. earlier in Walker].

7: Cf. Walker, "Prisca Theologia in France", Warburg Journal,1954, pp. 230 seq.; E.H. Gombrich, "Icones Symbolicae, The Visual Image in Neoplatonic Thought", Warburg Journal, XI, 1948, pp. 163 seq.

8: Bruno, Opera Latine Conscripta, Florentiae, 1891, III, 637 seq. (De Vinculis in Genere)

9: Cf. William James, Varieties of Religious Experience, London, 1902, pp. 508 seq.