Preface

Julius Evola and the UR Group ^*1

Renato Del Ponte

The collaboration that Julius Evola sought out at the end of the 1920s with the most interesting figures of Italian esotericism to form the famous UR Group, aside from the example it has provided and continues to provide to anyone seriously engaged in the esoteric sciences, is also extremely important in the overall context of Evola’s work. For it was precisely during this period that he came to expand his own interests in the real, time-honored realms of Tradition, and at least two of his principal works, Revolt Against the Modern World and The Hermetic Tradition, are contained in seed-form in some of the monographs published by UR. The attendant experiences with the UR Group should therefore not be neglected, for in order to clarify essential points necessary to a comprehension of the spirit of Evola’s lifework, indeed it is necessary to investigate the precedents, limits, and outcomes of their endeavors.

The Preliminaries

The journals Atanòr (1924) and Ignis (1925), both edited by Arturo Reghini, can be considered direct antecedents of Ur.¹ During the two brief years of their existence (Ignis enjoyed a fleeting revival in January 1929), these two journals of “initiatic studies” confronted esoteric themes and disciplines with a scientific rigor and seriousness uncommon to the heterogeneous spiritualistic environment of the era. The themes, which were always of exceptional interest, ranged from Pythagoreanism and Tantrism to the Kabbalah and the secret documents of Cagliostro’s trial. It was here, in Italy, that the writings of René Guénon were first published, including his principal versions of L’ésotérisme de Dante (The Esotericism of Dante) and Le roi du monde (The King of the World, translated by Reghini), which only later came out in France in 1925 and 1927, respectively. Among Reghini’s contributors we find names that will crop up again in the UR Group: Aniceto Del Massa, “Luce” (“Light,” pseudonym of Giulio Parise), and, aside from Reghini himself, Julius Evola.

Apart from some critical reviews, Evola, who was then twenty-six years old, contributed a long essay to Atanòr in installments on La potenza come valore metafisico (Power as a Metaphysical Value), which was later incorporated into L’uomo come potenza (Man as Power) in 1926.² In Ignis he published essays on Steiner, on “the feminine,” and a lecture, “Dionysius,” which was included in 1926 in the small volume L’individuo e il divenire del mondo (The Individual and the Becoming of the World).³

Apart from his work in the artistic field of the avant-garde, which does not concern us here, by this time Evola had to his credit the powerful Saggi sull’idealismo magico (Essays on Magic Idealism, 1925) and countless contributions to spiritualist and philosophical journals of the era, such as Ultra, a publication of the Independent Theosophical League of Rome, edited by Decio Calvari; Bilychnis⁴; and Idealismo Realistico (Realistic Idealism). In a letter of his dated 1925 and written on stationery bearing the name of this last journal, he makes it clear that he had already completed Teoria dell’Individuo Assoluto (Theory of the Absolute Individual) some time before (probably in 1924), which would later be published in two volumes at two different times (1927 and 1930) by Bocca as Teoria and as Fenomenologia dell’individuo assoluto (Theory and Phenomenology of the Absolute Individual).⁵ Among the contributors to Ultra we find other members of the future UR Group: the poet Arturo Onofri and the Anthroposophist Giovanni Colazza.⁶

In a famous novel by Sibilla Aleramo (1876–1960), Amo, dunque sono (I Love, Therefore I Am), published by Mondadori in Milan in 1927, we can retrace these circles in some detail.⁷ Evola, with whom the author had had a brief and stormy love affair around 1925, appears in her novel as Bruno Tellegra and is depicted, in the wake of their relationship, as a sinister, almost Luciferian figure: “Bruno Tellegra was made more to succumb to the charms of a devil rather than an angel,” she writes on p. 152. “He is inhuman, an icy architect of acrobatic theories, vain, vicious, perverse . . .” is her description of him on p. 148. But the true protagonist of the novel is unquestionably “Luciano,” that is, Giulio Parise, who would be known as “Luce” in the future UR Group; he is the hero-lover of the book, which takes place in 1926. He is also possessed by desire, striving and straining to “become a magus.” On p. 21 we find: “It required all your infinite seduction for me not to flee when I found out that you, too, belonged to the sect of the magi.” And on p. 50: “Luciano, Luciano, and you want to become a magus! You’ve told me you’ve already worked fantastic things, things not only fantastic to speak of, but carried out in truth.”

From this novel, in fact, we find out that “Luciano” spent that summer in the company of a magus in a “tower in the midst of the sea. A tumbledown lookout on a deserted rock” (p. 15). The magus was Arturo Reghini, of whom “Luciano” was a fervent friend and disciple; the tower was the tower of Scalea, in the northern Tyrrhenian, and belonged to the mysterious Master who initiated Reghini into Pythagoreanism and who was at the source of Reghini’s mission in the inner circle of Italian Freemasonry.⁸

It is evident that the material contained in journals such as Ignis had more than a purely speculative value, as is shown especially by the writings of “Luce” on the “Opus magicum: ‘Gli specchi’—‘Le erbe’ ” (The Magical Work: “The Mirrors”—“The Herbs”) in the issues of August/September and November/December 1925, but the foundations were not yet laid for a genuine collective endeavor.

The UR Group and Its Journals

Conditions propitious to such collaborative effort came about when Evola—probably encouraged by Reghini—formed the UR Group around himself with the intention of gathering up the preceding tendencies and exigencies with particular emphasis on their practical and experimental aspects.⁹

Their seat was in Rome, where the group began its activities toward the beginning of 1927. It was led under the alternating direction (at least until September 1928) of the most magically gifted members, foremost among whom were Arturo Reghini and Julius Evola. One result was that dependent offshoots, or “research groups,” formed in other cities, as is attested by the written piece “Instructions for Magical Chains,”¹⁰ dealing with “the period of training that individual groups will carry out separately and with the aim of a primary organization and a fluid construction.” It is certain that from the end of 1927 to 1929, one of these groups existed in Genoa, consisting of five people whose names have since been lost.¹¹

Thus were “magic chains” created and, while on the one hand studies were carried out and corrected interpretations of ancient texts were acquired for practical use, on the other hand they proceeded toward the “creation” and retrieval of forces and subtle influences that would serve to support the collective activity of the group.

From this common travail a new journal was born: Ur, a monthly publication of monographs written by certain members of the group based on their own experiences and studies. At the end of each year the monographs were to be collected and bound into volumes.¹² The first isssue of Ur was printed at the end of January 1927; in the course of that year, ten issues were published in all, two of which were double issues (July/August and November/December). In a loose editorial insert to Number 11/12, the last issue of 1927, entitled “Ur nel 1928. Ai lettori” (Ur in 1928—To Its Readers), it was stated that the publication had been “followed with sympathetic attention in the most varied circles: from isolated and unknown rural workers to famous politicians¹³ and university professors. We are certain that this attention will be sustained throughout the new cycle. For our part, we will give all we can give . . .”

In 1927 Ur described itself as a “journal with indications for a science of the Self, issued under the direction of J. Evola.” But in the first issue of 1928, January/February, it defines itself instead as a “journal of esoteric sciences under the direction of J. Evola, P. Negri, G. Parise,” an initial sign that those members connected to the Pythagorean-Masonic trend—Reghini (pseudonym “P. Negri”) and Parise—initiated an attempt to grab hold of the reins of the group and its journal, which was, however, always under the leadership and responsibility of Julius Evola.

Eight issues emerged during the course of 1928, four of which were double issues (January/February, March/April, July/August, and November/December). Starting with the June issue, certain “elements of sharp and serious critique toward all that has a relationship with esotericism in today’s culture” were included. That is to say, they printed a list of the publications they received, accompanied by concise comments that were often very effective in their caustic immediacy, especially when dealing with Catholic circles.¹⁴ For this reason, but also because of a series of polemical articles on the relationship between Fascism and Catholicism that Evola had published in Bottai’s Critica Fascista and Arpinati’s Vita Nova in the second half of 1927,¹⁵ and above all due to the appearance in the spring of 1928 of his book Imperialismo pagano (Pagan Imperialism),¹⁶Ur was subjected to heavy clerical attacks during that period. Among these it is curious and interesting to note the charges of the future Pope Paul VI, Giovanni Battista Montini, who, in the pages of Studium, accused the “magi” united around Evola of “abuse of thought and word . . . rhetorical aberrations, fanatical reevocations and superstitious works of magic.”¹⁷

In was amid this climate, in October 1928, that certain members of the inner circle of the UR Group—i.e., Reghini and Parise—who maintained a close relationship with Freemasonry (officially dissolved by the Fascist regime in November of 1925), attempted to evict Evola from the leadership of the group and the journal.¹⁸ This attempt failed, but it signaled the end of the “operative” period of the Roman magical coterie. On the inside front cover of the October 1928 issue, there appeared a precise statement of contrary stance (especially with regard to Parise) that reaffirmed “an absolute unity of direction” in the name of the sole director responsible for the journal, Julius Evola.

A sharp journalistic controversy ensued (accompanied, however, by reciprocal libel actions for defamation and plagiarism, which eventually petered out) between Evola on one side¹⁹ and Reghini on the other. In fact Reghini revived his old publication Ignis for the occasion, though only one issue came out, in January of 1929.²⁰ For these reasons, in the third and last year of its existence, the UR Group journal changed its name to Krur. ²¹ “For various reasons the editorial group comprised of J. Evola, P. Negri, and G. Parise is hereby dissolved. However, J. Evola, together with all the other contributors, who are directly responsible to him and who answer to the pseudonyms of Ea, Abraxa, Iagla, Leo, Tikaipôs, Oso, Krur, will continue to publish regularly in 1929, joined by new members, but with directives that will remain absolutely the same. The only change will be that instead of ‘Ur,’ the issues will now bear the legal title of the new journal ‘Krur,’ the exclusive property of our director.”²²

From Esotericism to Traditional Action

Advance notice was given of some new changes in projects and action: “Krur intends to link itself more explicitly to a vaster movement, which is affirmed on the one hand by the philosophical work of J. Evola (a work that will serve as a defensive wall around our Sciences in regard to contemporary philosophical and critical thought); and that on the other hand acts in diverse instances to integrate into the preceding impulse of national renewal the values of a spiritual, Ghibelline, heroic, anti-European imperialism.”²³

Eight issues of Krur were published, of which two were double issues (March/April and June/July) and one a triple issue (September–November). In the last issue of the journal (December 1929), the cessation of the group’s activities was announced in the editorial insert “Our Activity in 1930—To the Readers”: “Krur is transforming. Having fulfilled the tasks relative to the technical mastery of esotericism we proposed for ourselves three years ago, we have accepted the invitation to transfer our action to a vaster, more visible, more immediate field: the very plane of Western ‘culture’ and the problems that, in this moment of crisis, afflict both individual and mass consciousness. In 1930 Krur will therefore reemerge in another form: no longer as a monthly journal, but as a bimonthly review of combat, criticism, affirmation and negation. The heroic-magical point of view that we have always held will not be abandoned; in reality it alone will constitute the point of reference and justification for the task of critique and examination of what of an essential nature is published both inside and outside Italy. It is our intention to erect an unbreachable bulwark against the general decline of every value in life; our claim to know and point out vaster horizons, beyond the usual ones of humanity’s small constructions; our proposal to stand firm on the ramparts, ready for both defense and offense, isolated and closed to any escape. For all these reasons the title Krur will be changed to the title La Torre [The Tower], ‘a work of diverse expressions and one Tradition.’”²⁴

In this way, what had been acquired on the esoteric plane of operative magic came to be integrated—almost by necessity, according to Evola’s particular vision—into an existential-political picture, heralding many interesting developments in the sphere of Evola’s upcoming activities.

Meanwhile, the journal’s issues that had been completed over a period of three years were gradually integrated under general and more specific indices, collectively titled Introduzione alla Magia quale scienza dell’Io (Introduction to Magic as the Science of the Self), and were compiled into volumes by the subscribers, thus constituting the first edition of the work.²⁵ After the war, in the months of August and September 1955, the Roman publishing house Bocca reprinted the first two volumes and finally, in May of 1956, the third volume, each of which was revised, corrected, and expanded by Evola himself. These were soon bought up, thus becoming rarities that those interested in the esoteric sciences had to seek out from antiquarian book dealers.²⁶

More recently, in 1971, Edizioni Mediterranee of Rome reissued the work—again with detailed revisions by Evola—in a boxed set, at the same time publishing a deluxe edition of 210 copies bound in half-leather and gold-stamped, under the simplified title Introduzione alla Magia (Introduction to Magic). In 1985 a German translation of the first volume was based on that edition: Magie als Wissenschaft vom Ich. Praktische Grundlegung der Initiation, published by Ansata-Verlag, Interlaken, Switzerland; and in 1997 the second volume appeared as Schritte zur Initiation, both translated by Dr. H. T. Hansen.

In the first edition of 1927–1929, serializations appeared of some of Evola’s writings that would constitute the initial nucleus of later, very important works. The essay “La tradizione ermetica” (The Hermetic Tradition), which Evola had been working on since the year prior,²⁷ was serialized in issues 5–12 of Krur, and later appeared as a book published by Laterza in Bari in 1931 and again in 1948. It was later republished by Edizioni Mediterranee in 1971. In issues 3 and 4 of Krur, the essay “L’Aurora dell’Occidente” (The Dawn of the West; inspired in part by the ideas of H. Wirth, see note 21) appeared, which became the nucleus of an essential section of Rivolta contra il mondo moderno (Revolt Against the Modern World; first edition 1934, English edition Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions, 1995). Other critical essays concerning modern spiritualism were in all likelihood reworked by Evola for the subsequent publication of Maschera e volto dello spiritualismo contemporaneo (Mask and Face of Contemporary Spiritualism), published in 1932 and reissued in new editions in 1949 and 1971. All of these sections—along with others that Evola judged insignificant or no longer relevant—were deleted in the edition of 1955–1956, their place taken by new contributions such as Evola’s “L’esoterismo, l’inconscio e la psicanalisi” (Esotericism, the Unconscious, and Psychoanalysis) and “Sulle prospettiva magiche secondo Aleister Crowley”—(On Magical Perspectives According to Aleister Crowley—the latter an author completely unknown during the time of Ur, as can be seen from their document “Publications Received” of 1928); another, surely written by Evola but signed “Arvo,” entitled “Vivificazione dei ‘segni’ e delle ‘prese’ ” (Revival of “Signs” and “Stances”) dedicated to a singular work by Rudolf von Sebottendorff²⁸; as well as an essay by René Guénon, writing under the pseudonym “Agnostus,” “Su due simboli iperborei” (On Two Hyperborean Symbols)²⁹; and finally, the article by “Massimo” (Massimo Scaligero) titled “Sul distacco” (On Detachment),³⁰ and the important article “Esperienze fra gli Arabi” (Experiences Among the Arabs) by “Gallus.”³¹ Most of these contributions can be found in the third volume. In its last edition in 1971, there is only one new article of interest, attributable to Evola: “Sulle droghe” (On Drugs) about their particular use in magic.³²

The Personalities and “Schools” of the UR Group

In conformity with the traditional custom of every esoteric organization, whether Eastern or Western, from the Pythagoreans to the medieval guilds and to the Rosicrucians, the authors of the monographs in Ur remained anonymous, since, as they declared, “their individual selves count for nothing, because everything valid they can offer now is not of their own creation or devising, but instead reflects a collective and objective teaching.”³³ For this reason all the contributing writers used symbolic names, such as “Luce,” “Abraxas,” “Havismat,” “Oso,” “Arvo,” “Taurulus,” and so on. Today, after the passage of so many years and the death of almost all of the protagonists of that era, it is both permissible and possible—through research that was by no means easy—to shed a little light on the circles and schools that gave life to the group and on the actual names of most of its members.

It seems that Evola, to whom all the unsigned passages are attributed (and therefore the numerous notes and annotations, prefaces, introductions, and definitive, “formal” revisions of works not his own), as well as the pieces signed “Ea,” which he acknowledged explicitly as his,³⁴ wrote the articles signed “Agarda” and probably also the numerous interesting contributions of “Iagla.” It is probable that at least some of the pieces signed “Arvo” are his as well, and we will have more to say on this later.

Among those who became the closest of Evola’s friends and collaborators, from that period to the postwar years and beyond, was “Havismat,” the Islamicized Catholic Guido De Giorgio (1890–1957). De Giorgio was regarded highly by Guénon as well, as can be seen in a recent publication of their correspondence.³⁵ Evola himself acknowledged that he was greatly influenced by “Havismat,” due to his exceptionally energetic and dramatic conceptions of Tradition.³⁶

Aside from De Giorgio, there was also the Catholic writer and philosopher Nicola Moscardelli, author of a contribution in volume I signed “Sirius” and one in volume II signed “Sirio.”

As we have already said, as far as the Pythagorean sphere and Masonic inspiration are concerned, there was Arturo Reghini (“Pietro Negri”) and Giulio Parise (“Luce”). Along with them we should include Aniceto Del Massa (1898–1976), an art critic and prolific writer as well as a true scholar of traditional sciences, who contributed to Krur under the name “Sagittario,” contemporaneously writing for Reghini’s Ignis in its sole issue of 1929.³⁷

But the “school” that contributed the most collaborators and influences to the course taken by the UR Group was without a doubt the school of thought of Rudolf Steiner, generally known as Anthroposophy. Surely this direction was encouraged by the encounters and discussions that took place in the salon of Baroness Emmelina De Renzis, the custodian of Steiner’s original Hungarian writings. In fact, she was the first person to introduce Steiner to Italy, by writing the first Italian translation of his work for her friends and those who frequented her salon in Rome.³⁸ Among these associates were two poets, the more famous one being Arturo Onofri,³⁹ who gave his signature as “Oso” in his monographs for Ur. The other, Girolamo Comi,⁴⁰ who later became progressively more Catholic in stance, signed himself as “Gic.” The most important among the Anthroposophic collaborators of Ur was, however, Giovanni Colazza (“Leo”), who undoubtedly played an essential role in Italian occultism in the first half of the twentieth century.⁴¹ Another Anthroposophist was a famous political exponent, leftist but not Marxist, who it appears wrote articles for Ur under the name of “Arvo” (although others identify this pseudonym instead with Evola): Duke Giovanni Antonio Colonna di Cesarò (1878–1940), in whose journal, Lo Stato Democratico (The Democratic State), the first of Evola’s political monographs appeared in 1925⁴²; Baroness Emmelina De Renzis, whose salon was mentioned earlier, was Duke Giovanni Antonio’s cultured and extremely active mother.⁴³ Also related to the statesman Sidney Sonnino, Giovanni Antonio Colonna di Cesarò was a fairly famous political figure on the Italian scene, sprung up from the ranks of the radical anti-Giolittian democrats and founder of the political party Social Democracy, which in February of 1922 boasted forty-one members of Parliament; he was Postal Minister under Mussolini’s first government and later the brilliant driving force behind one of the last anti-Fascist movements in Italy, above all speaking out from the pages of the bimonthly journal Lo Stato Democratico.⁴⁴

Moreover, many years later, in 1938, only two years before his death, an interesting and very important work by Duke Colonna di Cesarò was published by La Prora in Milan: Il “Mistero” delle origini di Roma: Miti e Tradizioni (The “Mystery” of the Origins of Rome: Myths and Traditions). Apart from the obvious influence of Steiner, this work bears significant traces and favorable acknowledgment of the thoughts of Julius Evola, as well as remembrances of the works accomplished by the UR Group. For his part, Evola honored the publication of this book in a long and significant essay that appeared in the February 1939 issue of La Vita Italiana (Italian Life),⁴⁵ in which the book did not go unappreciated, especially for its methodological principles, but also for the fact that it distanced itself with regard to the basic theories that belonged to the [Rudolf] Steiner school.⁴⁶

Everything would lead us to believe that other followers of Steiner also contributed to Ur, such as the writer who signed himself “Alba” (Dawn); but in his case, no definite identification has been possible.

A quantitatively inconsistent but highly qualified component of the journals was the “Kremmerzian” element, inspired by the Myriam school of esoteric initiation founded by Giuliano Kremmerz (1861–1930); an active sect existed in Rome since 1926 called the Accademia Virgiliana (Virgilian Academy). Kremmerzian influence in Ur was expressed mainly through the contributions of Ercole Quadrelli,⁴⁷ who furnished material to Evola that the latter then reworked, and which appeared in Ur and Krur signed by “Abraxas.”⁴⁸ Direct and wholly unrevised pieces by Quadrelli also appeared; these writings (notable among which is his comment on the Versi Aurei [Golden Verses] by Pythagoras) were signed “Tikaipôs.”⁴⁹

Regarding the field of Hermetics, it should be remembered that Evola was in direct, personal contact with the Hindu alchemist C. S. Narayânaswami Aiyar Shiyali, author of a monograph now included in the third volume: “Trasmutazione dell’uomo e dei metalli” (The Transmutation of Man and Metals).⁵⁰

None of the people who participated in the UR Group’s practical activities during its first two years is still living; nor, it seems, are any of the writers who limited themselves to contributing their work to the journal Ur.

Domenico Rudatis (1898–1994), who signed himself “Rud,” wrote of an Alpine experience, “Prima ascesa” (First Ascent), very much in the spirit of Evola’s sensibilities,⁵¹ whom he had already mentioned in the Rivista del C.A.I. (Journal of the Italian Alpine Club). Writing about mountains with a spiritual orientation very close to Theosophy, Rudatis collaborated in later publishing activities promoted by Evola⁵² and more recently gave ample testimony to the friendly relationship he maintained with him.⁵³

Corallo Reginelli, born in 1905 or 1906 and deceased sometime after 1996, lived in Merano for about twenty years; he signed himself “Taurulus” in the Experiences recounted in the third volume.⁵⁴ He wrote very little, but engaged in an intense exchange of letters right up to his death.

Emilio Servadio (1904–1995) has little need of introduction, as he is certainly the person most well known to the Italian public, being the founder of the Italian Psychoanalytical Society (1932), a writer, poet, and the forerunner of parapsychological research. His participation in the UR Group is a subject of controversy, since at first he denied any involvement with it,⁵⁵ while very recently he quite emphatically affirmed it.⁵⁶

Contents and Topics

The first task the UR Group set for itself was to invest the word magic with a particular, active, and functional connotation (as opposed to the connotation of knowledge or wisdom attributed to it in antiquity) that was close to the concept delineated by Roger Bacon: practical metaphysics. Far removed from the abhorred “spiritualistic” practices that were so fashionable at the time, from vulgar spiritism, pseudo-humanitarian Theosophy, and any of the confused and inferior forms of occultism, the UR Group, apart from particular teachings that one or the other of the collaborators may have been most familiar with, intended to reconnect with the very sources of Traditional esoteric teaching, according to that principle of Kremmerz, for whom magic “in all its complexity is simply a series of demonstrable theorems and experiences with concrete effects; the magical truths, as abstract as they may be, owe their evident demonstration in concrete ‘fulfillment,’ just as abstract mathematical truths have mechanical applications.”⁵⁷ According to Kremmerz, magic, “or Arcane Knowledge, is divided into two parts, the Natural and the Divine. The former studies all the phenomena due to the occult qualities of the human organism and the way to access and reproduce them within the limits of the organism engaged as a means. The latter is dedicated to preparing the spiritual ascension of the initiate, in such a way as to render possible a relationship between man and the superior natures invisible to the vulgar eye.”⁵⁸ One must bear in mind, furthermore, that “the point at which the former ends and the latter begins is very difficult to determine . . . and it therefore very often happens that both magical directions [the Natural and the Divine] move forward in tandem.”⁵⁹

Let us examine more closely the processes engaged in by the UR Group, who, explicitly via both natural and divine magic, or “High Magic,” hoped that they would be the Introduction leading to its seductive and arduous threshold.

The point of departure for modern man was the necessity to dissipate the fog of everyday reality, so as to open a way for himself to a new existential dimension. The new man must aspire toward a direct vision of reality, “as in a complete reawakening.”⁶⁰

From this aspiration, by means of an internal magical process, one must arrive at a “change of state,” whose final point of arrival coincides with the alchemical opus transformationis: “self-transformation is the necessary preliminary to higher consciousness, which does not know ‘problems’ but only ‘tasks’ and ‘accomplishments.’ ”⁶¹

The contents of the three volumes of Introduction to Magic can be subdivided into four well-defined categories: 1) “Esoteric doctrine and culture,” consisting of the exposition of methods, disciplines, and techniques of actualization, with a particular deepening of symbology; 2) “Practice”—i.e, accounts of experiences actually lived through in person; 3) “Publication or translation of classic or rare esoteric texts” with appropriate comments and explanations; and 4) “Recognized doctrines placed in appropriate context,” often incorporating critical or polemical footnotes.

Especially important in the first volume [the one translated here], regarding “Practice,” are the contributions by “Luce” on the “Opus Magicum” (The Magical Work: Concentration, Silence, Fire, Perfumes) and by “Alba” on the magical sense of nature (De Naturae Sensu); regarding “Doctrine,” the monograph written by “Abraxas” on “Knowledge of the Waters,” a brilliant and evocative interpretation of a very famous esoteric symbol, and one by “Ea,” “On the Magical Vision of Life,” useful in that it synthesizes the significance of magical action for those who propose to become “alchemical heroes”: “A great freedom, with action as the sole law.”

Among the “Documents” published in this volume, notable for their importance are the translation from the Greek of the “Mithraic Ritual of the Great Magical Papyrus of Paris”—the only ritual of the Ancient Mysteries to have survived intact—with an excellent introduction and extremely accurate commentary⁶²; an original treatise from alchemical Hermeticism, De Pharmaco Catholico, in a synthesis by the same anonymous author, translated and annotated by “Tikaipôs”; and extracts from De Mysteriis, attributed to the Neoplatonic Iamblichus, the Buddhist Majjhima-nikâjo, and the Tibetan Bde-MiChog-Tantra.

In the second volume, regarding “Doctrine” we must note above all the two important studies by “Pietro Negri,” on “The Western Tradition” (unfortunately never completed)⁶³ and on the “Secret Language of the ‘Fedeli d’amore,’ ” reported on and discussed by the same Luigi Valli⁶⁴; and the notable contributions by Evola on “Esotericism and Ethics,” “Initiatic Consciousness Beyond the Grave,” “On the Metaphysics of Pain and Illness”; as well as the monograph by “Arvo” on “The Hyperborean Tradition,” subject to many interesting developments.⁶⁵ Among the anonymous writings regarding “Practice,” the most compelling are “Teachings of the Chain,” “The ‘Double’ and Solar Consciousness,” and “Dissociation of the Mixtures.”

Among the “Documents and Texts” in the second volume, we find the annotated translation of the Turba Philosophorum (The Crowd of the Philosopher), one of the most ancient and widely quoted Hermetic-alchemical texts; an important and annotated version from Kremmerzian contributor “Tikaipôs” of the Golden Verses, attributed to Pythagoras⁶⁶; as well as three songs by the Tibetan ascetic Milarepa.⁶⁷

In the third volume, which appears richer in source material than in practical doctrines, most notable are Evola’s own writings on “Aristocracy and the Initiatic Ideal”⁶⁸ and “On the Symbolism of the Year,” as well as those by “Arvo” on “ ‘Oracular’ Arithmetic and the Background of Consciousness.” Regarding “Practice,” we find the “Experiences” of “Taurulus,” the “Magic of Victory” by “Abraxas,” and the important account of the Hindu alchemist Narayânaswami, of whom we have already spoken.⁶⁹

Notable among “Documents and Texts” are passages from the Clavis Philosophicae Chemisticae (The Key to Chemical Philosophy) by Gherard Dorn and from the Enneads of Plotinus, astutely annotated by Evola, as well as selected passages from the works of Kremmerz and Crowley.

Interestingly, it was in Ur and Krur that a constructive critique was initiated of the specific works by René Guénon most open to analysis and discussion. One of these was La crise du monde moderne (The Crisis of the Modern World),⁷⁰ which Evola would later publish in an Italian edition in 1937 (second edition, 1953; third edition published by Edizioni Mediterranee in Rome, 1972); another was Autorité spirituelle et pouvoir temporel (Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power).⁷¹ In the later editions of Introduction to Magic, Guénon’s Aperçus sur l’initiation (Considerations on the Initiatic Way) was included.⁷²

Despite their differences of position, Guénon definitely appreciated Evola’s honesty and intellectual rigor; the two men engaged in an intense mutual correspondence beginning in 1927 and ending only with their deaths. Together they collaborated on the material for “Diorama Filosofico” (Philosophical Diorama), a special page carried by the daily Il Regime Fascista (The Fascist Regime, edited by Farinacci), contributing at least twenty-six collaborative articles between 1934 and 1940.⁷³

More in-depth research would be well advised in order to shed a brighter light on the attempts by the inner circle of the UR Group to revitalize the esoteric roots and initiatic processes of the Roman Tradition.⁷⁴ Aside from the contributions by Reghini, by some of Steiner’s followers, and by Evola himself (most notably his piece “Sul ‘sacro’ nella tradizione romana” [On the “Sacred” in the Roman Tradition], published in the third volume), there is an interesting and enigmatic account in the last chapter of the third volume entitled “La ‘Grande Orma’: la scena e le quinte” (The “Great Trail”: The Stage and the Wings), signed by a mysterious “Ekatlos.”⁷⁵ In it the author strives to point out the traces of a long-perpetuated, ancient initiatic chain in the very bosom of the land around Rome, and its attempt, however futile, to exert a rectifying influence within the sphere of the Fascist movement during the first years in which it took power.⁷⁶

In regard to this, Evola himself wrote that the aim of the “chain” of the UR Group, aside from “awakening a higher force that might serve to help the singular work of every individual,” was also to act “on the type of psychic body that begged for creation, and by evocation to connect it with a genuine influence from above,” so that “one may perhaps have the possibility of working behind the scenes in order to ultimately exert an effect on the prevailing forces in the general environment.”⁷⁷

Although this attempt did not meet with its hoped-for success, the monographs in the Introduction to Magic provide invaluable material for those individuals who, even today, might combine intention and capability in order to repeat the experiences of UR and, if possible, surpass its results on a practical and actualized level.⁷⁸ However, there is always the great hidden danger in groups or cliques of this kind that uncontrolled or uncontrollable forces may gain the upper hand, when the corresponding ability is weak or is lacking to contain and transform the inherent subtle forces in all of us into positive power. If this was not the case in the UR Group—which, however, was able only to partially achieve what it had hoped to accomplish—it is all the less likely in contemporary times, when we have witnessed the eager tendency to improvise and re-create groups or communities whose intention, at least, was to further the mission of UR, and yet which gave rise to negative outcomes and uncontrolled negative forces, as has happened at least twice in Italy in the past thirty years.⁷⁹

In conclusion, we would emphasize that the treatises found in Introduction to Magic are definitely not designed for the general public, but for a few qualified people who already grasp a precise sense of the notions put forth by the UR Group. Certainly these few, to conclude with the words of Kremmerz, “will find new and fertile nourishment for the spirit wearied by empty philosophies and even emptier conventionalities . . . just as they will find that serene and loyal clarity, the unquestionable sign of all true knowledge, which will give them a firm and stable orientation.”