{"id":21432,"date":"2026-05-03T01:36:37","date_gmt":"2026-05-03T01:36:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/?page_id=21432"},"modified":"2026-05-03T01:36:37","modified_gmt":"2026-05-03T01:36:37","slug":"regan-2026-congress","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/abstracts\/regan-2026-congress\/","title":{"rendered":"Regan (2026 Congress)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Vajra Regan
\n(Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto<\/em>)<\/h2>\n

Abstract of Paper
\npresented at the 61st International Congress on Medieval Studies
\n(Kalamazoo, 2026)<\/h3>\n

2026 International Congress on Medieval Studies: Program<\/a><\/h4>\n

Session on
\n“Grimoires of the Greater West: Conversations on Solomonic Magic<\/a>“
\n<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Sponsored by <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  • Societas Magica<\/strong><\/li>\n
  • Research Group on Manuscript Evidence<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Organized by<\/h4>\n

    Gal Sofer (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev<\/span><\/em>)
    \nMatthew Melvin\u2013Koushki (University of South Carolina\u2013Columbia<\/em>)<\/h4>\n

    Paper Title:<\/h3>\n

    “The Book on the Four Rings of Solomon
    \n(Liber de quattuor anulis Salomonis<\/i>):
    \nOrigins, Sources, and the Problem
    \nof Defining the “Solomonic Corpus”<\/h2>\n

    Abstract:<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
    The Speculum astronomiae<\/em> (ca. 1255), chapter 11, condemns twenty-four books devoted chiefly to image magic. These are divided into two groups, corresponding primarily to the \u201cBooks of Hermes\u201d and the \u201cBooks of Solomon.\u201d The former derive from Arabic sources translated in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Solomonic works are dated to the same period, yet their Arabic origins are more uncertain. Of the four or five texts explicitly attributed to Solomon, only the Almandal is considered a translation from Arabic, and even this has recently been questioned. If the remaining Solomonic texts are not translations, from where do they originate? This question, in turn, prompts a broader inquiry into what we mean by a \u201cSolomonic corpus.\u201d<\/div>\n
    <\/div>\n
    My paper addresses these issues through a close examination of the De quattuor anulis Salomonis<\/em>. Cited in the Speculum<\/em>, the text was already known to William of Auvergne and Michael Scot in the early thirteenth century, making it one of the earliest Solomonic magical works to circulate in the Latin West. Its transmission in five principal manuscripts from the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries, together with excerpts incorporated into the Summa sacre magice<\/em> of the Catalan magician Berengar Ganell, attest to its enduring influence.<\/div>\n
    <\/div>\n
    I begin by outlining the textual tradition of the De quattuor anulis<\/em>, situating it in relation to other early Solomonic writings, particularly the Ydea Salomonis<\/em>. I then turn to select passages, demonstrating that not only the conjurations but also many of the properties assigned to the rings are taken verbatim from Christian benedictions and exorcisms. On this basis, I argue that the De quattuor anulis<\/em> is essentially a Christian composition built around a small nucleus of Arabic material. I conclude by considering the implications of this case study for defining the boundaries and character of the Latin Solomonic corpus.<\/div>\n
    <\/div>\n
    *********<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Vajra Regan (Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto) Abstract of Paper presented at the 61st International Congress on Medieval Studies (Kalamazoo, 2026) 2026 International Congress on Medieval Studies: Program Session on “Grimoires of the Greater West: Conversations on Solomonic Magic“ Sponsored by Societas Magica Research Group on Manuscript Evidence Organized by Gal Sofer (Ben-Gurion […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":1023,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/21432"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21432"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/21432\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21440,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/21432\/revisions\/21440"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1023"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}