Necronomicon: 31st Anniversary Edition

In 1927, Lovecraft wrote the "History of the Necronomicon" as a tongue-in-cheek history of his mythical book. He said he did it to give "a sort of air of verisimilitude." Doubtless also to be sure that all the other writers who were making reference to the Necronomicon would be consistent.

According to Lovecraft's "History," the Necronomicon was written in the 8th Century AD by the "mad Arab" Alhazred, and was translated into Greek under the title Necronomicon by Theodorus Philetas in AD 950, then into Latin by Olias Wormius in 1228. (The real Wormius--a Danish doctor--lived from 1588 to 1654.) An "imperfect" English translation was supposedly made by Dr. John Dee (1527-1608), an English mathematician and astrologer. And so on. Lovecraft thus created a detailed background for his imaginary book.

When fans wrote Lovecraft in the 1930s to ask if these books were real, he replied truthfully (as quoted above.) In a 1936 letter, for instance, he says, "I am forced to say that most of them are purely imaginary. There never was any Abdul Alhazred or Necronomicon, for I invented these names myself."

Could he have been lying? Doubtful. Joshi says that he seems to have been a very truthful person. It would have a been a long-standing and consistent lie. But more telling is that there is simply no other historical reference to a "Necronomicon" or to "Alhazred" until Lovecraft started writing about them. Nor to the various Old Ones (like Cthulhu and Yog-Sothoth)--no mention anywhere before Lovecraft's.

Long after Lovecraft's death, several books appeared, sold privately or in bookstores, purporting to be new translations (or rediscovered copies) of the Necronomicon. Most of these are clearly spoofs or in-jokes. There are just under a dozen versions floating about, including one by Lin Carter and one by L. Sprague DeCamp, famous science fiction writers in their own right. All of them have an initial appearance that post-dates Lovecraft, usually by over 35 years.

There is the "Necronomicon of George Hay" (first published in 1978), claiming to be the English translation by John Dee, taken from a copy in the British Museum. Joshi calls it "one of the most exquisite hoaxes of modern times." Critic Colin Wilson (who wrote the intro to the Hay Necronomicon) admitted in a 1984 fanzine that it was a joke, concocted by him and a few friends.

The most commonly found version nowadays, and the only one that is not openly admitted by the author to be a joke or spoof, is the "Simon Necronomicon," published in 1977. The introduction claims it to be a translation of a Sumerian original, but it mentions gods and stories that are much later. There are other internal inconsistencies as well. Dan Clore says, "These hoax Necronomicons frequently display an utter lack of verisimilitude [in their content and in their introductions] where a little research would have provided a much more convincing story."
<<<<<<<
If that is not enough for the idiots attaching it to Wormius, (impossible, since Wormius lived two centuries different, unless you think he extended his life, but kept his name, which doesn't appear anywhere before the time he lived). Why are people so interested things that didn't really exist, when there are more fantastic real characters out there? John Dee, Faustus, and Aggrippa come to mind (though Crowley doesn't, being an idiot and all that).
The Necronomicon (the title being an easy give away, ripped straight from the 'Satyricon') doesn't live up to Lovecraft's fantastic style, however, and it certainly would be an embarrassment to him to be associated with it. A true Lovecraft fan, I bought it young, and discarded it as useless after reading and checking the (bad) information out (check your information)! If your reading for entertainment value, you should pick up your local phone book. If your looking to create magical spells ala Harry Potter, you'd have better luck chanting your local phone book. This book is ludicrous in the extreme, and certainly not worth anyone's time or money. Check it out from the library if you're really curious. For some more serious books, however, check out the 'Leyden Papyrus' or 'Hermes Emerald Tablet', which are indeed, ancient magical scrolls. If magic exists, you're not likely to find it in a popular trade paperback format, and without question, not in this one.


Absolute Garbage   October 22, 2000
Azriel (USA)
27 out of 34 found this review helpful

I hardly even know where to begin bashing this "book." First of all, whoever wrote this piece of trash didn't even have the guts to put his name on it. Instead, we're given this mysterious character named Simon, who could have stepped right out of some cheesy spy movie. This Simon supposedly approached the editors with a mysterious "manuscript." Excuse me while I laugh myself silly. Second, the author(s) then attempt to prove that there really is a Necronomicon by pointing out similarities between creature's from H.P. Lovecraft's stories and gods from Sumerian mythology. In doing so, they ignore the simple fact that Lovecraft easily could have borrowed a few names and ideas from the Sumerians. Thirdly, they completely ignore most of what Lovecraft actually said about the Necronomicon in his stories. If one takes the time to look at all of the references, you'd realize that the real Necronomicon would have to be at least a thousand pages long. This copy is considerably lighter, weighing in at around 250 pages. The author(s) of this farce don't even include many of the famous quotes attributed to the book. Fourth, all the spells are so complicated, no one will actually take the time to carry them out, assuring that they will never be discredited. Honestly, who is going to have extra silver plates just lying around, plus tools for carving them? Finally, just what makes ancient Sumerian mythology any more believable than say, Greek mythology? So there are similarities between their myths and some Christian beliefs. BIG FREAKIN' DEAL. If you look, you'll find that almost all religions have at least a few similar beliefs or practices. This book is no better than any of the other new-age crap out there, and is an insult to the literary legacy of H.P. Lovecraft. Sadly, the lowest rating I could give this garbage was 1 star. If I could have given it less, I would have. Don't waste your money on this junk.


SERIOUS OCCULTISTS...PLEASE see this for what it is!   February 8, 2000
H. Powell (Reynoldsburg, Ohio USA)
24 out of 30 found this review helpful

By his own admission, we know Lovecraft invented the legendary Necronomicon; it was a pure fabrication, a fictional tome serving as one of the many devices he utilized to tie the works of his "Cthulhu Mythos" together. Lovecraft's Necronomicon was not inspired by any "real" medieval magical grimoire (Abdul Al Hazred is a fictional character), rather HPL took his inspiration for the literary Necronomicon from "The King In Yellow", a series of stories by Robert W. Chambers in which Hastur, The Yellow Sign, Carcossa, Hali and the evil tome The King In Yellow itself first appear in American horror literature. Never-the-less, many fans of Lovecraft refused to believe that the Necronomicon was a fabrication.... And writers like this mysterious "Simon" are reaping the benefits of this naive misconception. What the "editor" has done here is present a primer on traditional ceremonial magic (in the tradition of MacGregor Mather's Golden Dawn and Crowley's A.A.), spruced it up with some (possibly authentic) Sumero-Babylonian mysticism, and then shamelessly worked in modified names of Lovecraftian beasties (Xastur=Hastur, Azag-Thoth=Azathoth, Ishniggarub=Shubniggurath)and then marketed this hodge podge under the name "Necronomicon" hoping that Lovecraft fans would buy it thinking it was real. He apparently was not disappointed... The only reason I gave this dishonest work two stars is because the intro information on Crowley is informative and the rituals themselves (if you can excuse the occasional use of Lovecraft's creatures' names) are apparently based on actual Golden Dawn magic ceremonies and authentic Sumerian traditions. So, the book is not totally useless, I just wish the original content (sans Lovecraft) would have been presented under a different name (and the fact that it wasn't is inexcusable and dishonors HPL, Crowley, and any serious practitioner of ceremonial magic). Do the rituals work? I don't know...I don't have the guts to try them out!