Commentary on the Charge of the Goddess 3: Sources of the Charge

The sources of the Charge
Sources for the texts used in the Charge are identified in the commentary to follow, building on the sources identified by Serith (Ceisiwr Serith: The Sources of the Charge of the Goddess. <http://www.ceisiwrserith.com/wicca/charge.htm.> Updated 2003, Accessed 18.6.08.), Dearnaley (Roger Dearnaley: The Influence of Aleister Crowley upon “Ye Bok of ye Art Magical”. <http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/module-subjects-viewpage-pageid-91.phtml> Updated 2005, Accessed 9.3.10.), Kelly (Aidan Kelly: Inventing Witchcraft. Thoth Publications, Loughborough, 2007.),  and d’Este and Rankine (Sorita d’Este and David Rankine: Wicca: Magical Beginnings. Avalonia, London, 2008.). I have decided to treat the text slightly differently from any single one of these, however. The Charge as we now encounter it is a literary composition by Gardner and Valiente, with both quotations from other writings, and passages influenced by quotations from other writings used in the first version, but changed as the Charge as been edited. I have therefore decided to treat the Charge as one single text drawing on a number of influences, rather than as a collection of quotations drawn from other works.
My approach is not based primarily on the approach of any one of the four sources above, although I have been heavily influenced by all of them and taken pointers from them. In identifying sources and influences I have had to make some decisions on what I consider to be the weight of the evidence. I have given the reasons for these decisions, but none of them can be considered final conclusions on sources. Even in direct quotation there are sometimes several sources the same quotation could have comes from, and in other places sources show their influence in more subtle ways: I would identify four levels of influence on the Charge by other texts. The present version of the charge is a recension of the version of the Charge in Ye Bok of ye Art Magical, so I treat that as the direct source for the last version of the Charge. This is the first level of influence. The second level of influence on the Charge is direct quotation from other works (usually present in the first version of the Charge). The meaning of some of the direct quotations in the first version survives into the final version, but are no longer direct quotations, which is the third level of influence. Finally a fourth level of influence can be seen: passages influenced by the ideas contained in other writings, without actually quoting them directly. These of course are well-nigh impossible to detect, but I think one instance of this level of influence becomes apparent.
Serith argues for the non-inclusion of Isis’s speech in Apuleius’s Metamorphoses in the Charge, but I would argue that the Charge is influenced at this level by Isis’s speech. As a literary composition (the speech of a Goddess), the Charge belongs to the same genre; it is known that Gardner was aware of the existence of this passage of Apuleius – in The Meaning of Witchcraft he gives an account of the story, which he describes as ‘a romance of witchcraft’ (Gerald Gardner: The Meaning of Witchcraft. Weiser Books, York Beach, 2004, p. 71.),  with reference to the Goddess and the witches of Thessaly; many of the same ideas of divinity are contained in both texts (such as a number of phrases beginning ‘I am’, even to the extent of some being preceded by ‘Behold’); it is a rare account from the late Classical world of a syncretised Goddess such as is described in the Charge; and, as I shall show below, the High Priest’s introduction to the Charge both most clearly shows the influence of Apuleius, and has no other apparent source. Sources and influences can be shown for the rest of the text, and so it would be unusual if one section were the composition of Gardner alone.
At the end of the commentary  the reliance of the Charge on other sources will be analysed in terms of the number of words, and the relative proportions of material which cannot be attributed to other sources.
I give the sources from Crowley as they appear in The ‘Blue’ Equinox (Aleister Crowley: The Equinox Vol. 3, No. 1, March 1919 (The Blue Equinox). Weiser Books, San Francisco, 2007.),  since all these sources appear in that work. The primary source for quotation of Crowley should be The Book of the Law, but the Charge’s quotations from that text appear as they do in Crowley’s own quotations. It also appears naturally more likely that the single available source (both in the 1940s and now) for  all of those quotations would be the actual source used, rather than a number of editions. Further, many of the quotations used appear close together (on only one page in the edition I consulted), and in the same order as they appear there. After the commentary The Law of Liberty will be compared to the Charge to show the closeness of the quotations used.
It should be noted that only five things can be said with certainty on the origin of the Crowley quotations in the Charge: that the Charge appears in the form of a single text in BAM, rather than in the form of notes from different sources; that a number of passages in the BAM version of the Charge quote directly from the published works of Aleister Crowley; that Gardner told Valiente he used these to flesh out fragmentary inherited rituals; that the one single Crowley source which contains all the quotations is the Blue Equinox; and that we can only know that Gardner had access to any volumes of the Equinox after May 1947, when Crowley wrote to Gerald Yorke and told him to send ‘The Equinox of the Gods’, which Gardner had bought (Crowley, letter to Gerald Yorke, May 9th, 1947 (Warburg Institute Library, Gerald Yorke Collection, OSD5, 33) cited in Morgan Davis: From Man to Witch: Gerald Gardner 1946-1949. <http://www.geraldgardner.com/Gardner46-49.PDF> Version 1.1, accessed 5.4.10.).
Rumours such as that Crowley was paid to produce the Book of Shadows rituals, or that Crowley was a member of the witch-cult, are supported by no evidence at all. Dearnley theorises that Gardner had access to a copy of the Blue Equinox at some time in the early 1940s and used it in his work on the Charge.
Heselton , conversely, theorises that Gardner inherited rituals compiled by someone else, in part using material from Crowley, which Heselton does not believe need have come from the single source of the Blue Equinox, material which Gardner recognised, despite being relatively unfamiliar with Crowley’s writings, although Heselton believes he must have had access to a copy of the Blue Equinox after receiving the rituals in BAM (Philip Heselton: Gerald Gardner and the Cauldron of Inspiration. Capall Bann, Milverton, 2003.).
I believe that both of these explanations involve unnecessarily complicated explanations of the available evidence, and that the evidence referred to above best supports this explanation: the Charge was compiled by somebody, who was not an OTO initiate, using the Blue Equinox as the source, at some time in the years before the late 1940s, when Gardner’s possession of the text in BAM is believed to date. Since Gardner acknowledged to Valiente that he used Crowley to flesh out the rites, in the absence of other evidence I would attribute editorship to him.
In the commentary below I will give likely sources for the last version of the text, giving them in descending order of influence:
First, the version of the Charge in Ye Bok of ye Art Magical, as being the source text for the final version of the Charge and  which was being rewritten.
Secondly, apparent direct quotations from other literary sources.
Thirdly, sources directly quoted in the Ye Bok of ye Art Magical version of the Charge, edited for use in this version.
Last, sources which are likely to have been drawn on for ideas in this text, but which are not directly or indirectly quoted.