Notifications
Clear all

Rose Kelly


 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

I'm inclined to believe that Rose Kelly was a descendent of Edward Kelly the scryer of John Dee. But is there any material evidence for this.

AO


Quote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Abraxas_Oscurum" wrote:
I'm inclined to believe that Rose Kelly was a descendent of Edward Kelly the scryer of John Dee. But is there any material evidence for this.

AO

No.


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1126
 

...but don't let that stop you "inclining to believe". 😉


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Does anyone know where Rose is buried? Also there is not much about her after Aleister imprisoned her for alcoholism (dipsomania as it was called then) on her wikipedia record. I know of a lady who was researching a book on her but there are so many gaps to fill in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_kelly

It seems odd to me that Aleister, who after all didn't channel Liber AL as Rose did and plainly didn't even get along with the book for many years, should get all the credit for it. At this years International Thelemic Symposium there was a call to revive Rose's profile along with many of the scarlet women and restore them as thelemic heroines. I am not saying that they should have their stories glossed over, as is often the case with Aleister for example, merely that we actually know what happened to them and give them credit for what they achieved.

Alex

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 486
 
"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
It seems odd to me that Aleister, who after all didn't channel Liber AL as Rose did and plainly didn't even get along with the book for many years, should get all the credit for it.

According to the surviving accounts of what went down at the Cairo Working, Rose was not even in the room when Liber AL was dictated to Crowley, so I am unsure what proof you have of your assertions.

That being said, Rose has been restored to receiving credit in the Centennial edition of the Book of the Law.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

According to Crowley the dictation from 'Aiwas' came over his shoulder. So whoever was channelling was not Crowley himself, presumably it wasn't the hotel staff. When there were corrections to the script it was in Rose's handwriting. For instance, "The Five Pointed Star, with a Circle in the Middle, & the circle is Red." After "The shape of my star is", done by Aleister [Chapter 1 Verse 60 or page 19 in the script].

I think she was added not only to the Centennial Weiser Edition but in the Neptune Press limited edition, as for some time people had questioned exactly how the Cairo Working had been achieved without Rose's help. She was after all the one in communication with Horus and had set the Equinox of the Gods up under Horus's instruction. I think that the referring to Rose not being there, is merely a euphemism for her being in trance. I could be wrong perhaps but I doubt it and even if I were she still played more of a part than all of us Thelemites alive today, put together!

Alex

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 486
 

The Neptune Press was made as far as I know under the authority of the O.T.O. and it's harmony with the Centennial Edition as far as the acknowledgement of reception goes should be thought of in light of that. I was informed by H.B. that the reason for inclusion of Rose was in recognition of her correcting the manuscript of AL as well as her work in the Cairo Working itself, not that he believes Rose was channelling Aiwaz behind Crowley's back.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
I think that the referring to Rose not being there, is merely a euphemism for her being in trance. I could be wrong perhaps but I doubt it and even if I were she still played more of a part than all of us Thelemites alive today, put together!.

The accounts I have read by Crowley put her in another room and Crowley himself seems to dispell any such notion of channelling. In fact he was at pains, after first noting it an interesting example of automatic writing (again not conducive to Rose being the channel), he was at pains at stressing that it was made by direct communication.

Why it is hard to believe that Aiwaz materialized (whether in his mind or person) and dictated the book to Crowley and simultanously believing the rest of the odd events that took place during the Cairo Working is beyond me.

That being said, as the first Scarlet Woman I agree that she did more than any other Thelemite alive today.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

I am glad that you agree with me that Rose was of the highest importance and that it is her handwriting that makes the corrections in the script of Liber AL. The purpose of this post and indeed thread is to broaden the understanding of Rose Kelly as a whole.

I find it odd that the mere suggestion that she had any part to play in the Cairo Working should stir up even slight venom though. I have looked a the diary entries for this period myself and as usual Crowley is deliberately misleading about the whole thing, to keep the mystique, as he does on many other occasions in his career. Don't get me wrong I respect him as a writer, magickian and even prophet. It's the smack addict, wife beater who abandoned all his children I have a small problem with (please don't apologise for him). By comparison Rose's dabble with alcoholism is not worth mentioning, that's all, if that is the cause of your dislike or at least lack of admiration for her.
Crowley himself gives Rose the accolade of a 'natural seer' and credits her with all that lead up to the reception of Liber AL, if not the reception itself. She is as much an author of Liber AL in my humble opinion and Crowley never claimed copyright for it.
Don't worry the Caliphate Ordo Templi Orientis (C.O.T.O.) though. If Rose did turn out to be the author (even channellers have copyright), we know she died in 1932 at the very latest and so the copyright expired last year.

Alex

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5330
 
"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
It seems odd to me that Aleister, who after all didn't channel Liber AL as Rose did

As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, Crowley's account is clear: Rose did not "channel" The Book Of The Law.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
plainly didn't even get along with the book for many years

It was actually a proud boast of his that he didn't "like" or "approve" of the Book but found himself forced to promote it as a result of experience and evidence. In any case, there's no record that I'm aware of that suggests that Rose found it an easier to "get along with it" so I'm unclear as to the point you're trying to make here.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
should get all the credit for it.

She's given "credit" in the Book itself, of course, and her participation in the process is acknowledged in every published account that I've read.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
At this years International Thelemic Symposium there was a call to revive Rose's profile along with many of the scarlet women and restore them as thelemic heroines.

Now, I'm very impressed that Rose tolerated Crowley for as long as she did but exactly what do you think she did that was "heroic"? What we do know of her life suggests that she was at least moderately foolish with her affections, met Crowley and married him on a whim, pointed out a stele in a museum and then drank herself into Colney Hatch. To "restore" her as a "thelemic heroine" would surely require far more information about her role in subsequent years than we actually possess.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
we actually know what happened to them and give them credit for what they achieved.

Agreed absolutely, and Hymenaeus Beta's editions of Crowley's works have tended to provide that information, as have recent biographies of AC, including that by Richard Kaczynski.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
According to Crowley the dictation from 'Aiwas' came over his shoulder. So whoever was channelling was not Crowley himself, presumably it wasn't the hotel staff.

The dictation by Aiwass (or Aiwaz, not "Aiwas") was in a voice described as "a rich tenor or baritone." Why choose to believe some parts of the account and not others? There's no real evidence for any of it, after all.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
I think that the referring to Rose not being there, is merely a euphemism for her being in trance. I could be wrong perhaps but I doubt it

But on what evidence do you base that assumption?

One thing we can say about Rose, who was committed by her family as the result of her alcoholism quite some time after her separation from Crowley, is that she inspired the rather beautiful "Rosa Decidua". For that and her involvement in the Cairo Working she deserves - and receives - due credit amongst Thelemites.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 536
 
"Patriarch156" wrote:
The accounts I have read by Crowley put her in another room and Crowley himself seems to dispel any such notion of channelling. In fact he was at pains, after first noting it an interesting example of automatic writing (again not conducive to Rose being the channel), he was at pains at stressing that it was made by direct communication.

..indeed he was. AC returned to his memories of this Event in a clear & concise account on a few occasions afterwards, once his acknowledgment of the Book's importance became clear. My copy of ' The Equinox of the Gods' is thousands of miles away from me, at the moment, but I recall that the fullest account of it's "Reception", was given here.

AC seems to have made a habit out of conferring the title of 'Scarlet Woman' & then stripping it away, sometimes as suddenly as it was given. It is probably no coincidence that the book itself, seems at first glance, to maybe even encouragethis behaviour. In the case of Leah Hirsig, this was to have a severely damaging effect. Cries of "What a Monster!", have been frequently heard, but I suppose that it could be said in his defence that he was 'working with a magickal formulae', & perhaps often found his own behaviour detestable.

In the case of Rose, it seems certain that his account of those key days would have been altered had her subsequent downfall not coloured his view of Her. In retrospect, he viewed her as a weak, & sometimes pathetic human being. He also, in a backhanded way, blamed her for the death of their first child. (or at least did when writing the 'Hag', with LH as a scribe!)
All of this, obviously, under the weight of a heavy Grief, & perhaps a (gulp) secret Guilt.

Now, I think that there is a wide difference between " Channelling", "Receiving", & being the 'Source', yet all 3 of these seem to have been necessary to allow this Book to manifest. - AC states that Rose was the one who "Channelled" the "Source" at it's inception. If Crowley was not 'in Love' with Rose, this would not have been possible. She was his original 'Scarlet Woman', & the Book itself alludes to this Formula : "Love is the law, love under Will" - It was AC's "Will" to be the Prophet of the New Age, & once the preliminary contact with those Forces, the "Source" of the transmission was established, then Crowley's HGA Aiwass was the Channel & the Voice that was necessary in this case.

AC & Rose ( "Rose of the World!"), worked together to achieve this, though they did not really know what they were doing, at the time!(although they did in the bed, apparently :))
Sure, AC was a brilliant Magickian, but Rose was a natural Medium.

Beautiful!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
At this years International Thelemic Symposium there was a call to revive Rose's profile along with many of the scarlet women and restore them as thelemic heroines.

93 Alex.

All of this other 'stuff' aside, can you remind me again of the true value of having 'Thelemic heroes or heroines' in the first place? How is the practice of assigning 'hero status' to other people in any way Thelemic? It all seems to me just another distraction to busy ourselves with.

Or does this have something to do with your evident preoccupation with eliminating the inaccurately perceived general gender-bias in Thelema?


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 486
 
"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
I am glad that you agree with me that Rose was of the highest importance and that it is her handwriting that makes the corrections in the script of Liber AL. The purpose of this post and indeed thread is to broaden the understanding of Rose Kelly as a whole.

I must admit that I am more than a little bit confused. After 25 years of knowing and speaking with Thelemites, I have yet to come across anyone who have denied the fact that Rose corrected the script of AL and I fail to understand where any such erroneous assumption should have arisen from. She gets proper accolade for this by Crowley, in all the major biographies of his life as well as in the editorial introductions by H.B. as Paul noted above. In fact at every celebration of the Feast for the Supreme Ritual that I have attended, her role in the Cairo Working has been acknowledged and celebrated.

Because of this I really fail to understand why you would be seemingly surprised that I would acknowledge Rose's role in the Cairo Working and consequently why on earht you would write that ""the mere suggestion that she had any part to play in the Cairo Working should stir up even slight venom." While I agree that it would be odd, I also fail to see any such venom anywhere. Instead what you have received have been reasoned arguments to the contrary. I also fail to see what any fears of the O.T.O. and copyrights has to do with this discussion as I am unaware of anyone having argued from that position.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5330
 
"Patriarch156" wrote:
I must admit that I am more than a little bit confused.

We get this on occasion here at LAShTAL.COM, where a member believes he or she has discovered something significant and feels the urge the teach the rest of us. Invariably the "discovery" is nothing of the sort... The best recent example was "Tarotica" and his earth-shattering "discovery" that "Hadit" would ordinarily be written "Behedite". No amount of gentle exposition from other members will persuade him or her that the information isn't new - hence the usual assumption is of a cover-up or a conspiracy.

This thread belittles Rose's real contribution to Thelema by over-stating it, in my opinion.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 536
 

... perhaps someone knows if there have ever been any extant accounts or references about, or to, AC in any letters or diaries of Rose? - Also, could one of the institutions that she was submitted to for her alcoholism still be in existance?

I agree with Lashtal that there is no evidence, at this time, of her fulfilling any other role in Thelema aside from this first ( & very important )one. It was AC's constant preoccupation after they had been seperated for quite some time. It is unclear whether or not she even saw her experiences at that time as being valuable, & AC was certainly not one to tell her so! Sad, really.

On another note, it seems highly plausible that friends & followers of AC were in receipt of information pertaining to, not only intimate details of his & Rose's relationship, but also to the 'Cairo Working', that were unrecorded. Obviously, so much of this is speculation. Knowing more about Rose would help. A biography in the works someone has mentioned?...


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5330
 
"Horemakhet" wrote:
A biography in the works someone has mentioned?...

Detailed biographies of all the Scarlet Women are long overdue, to be honest.

Maybe we could start here: http://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Rose_Edith_Kelly with Rose...

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 536
 
"lashtal" wrote:
"Horemakhet" wrote:
A biography in the works someone has mentioned?...

Detailed biographies of all the Scarlet Women are long overdue, to be honest.

Maybe we could start here: http://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Rose_Edith_Kelly with Rose...

Yes. For instance, there is no mention yet of her & AC meeting, or their subsequent marriage. Alex seems to be very passionate about this subject, so perhaps he could the first one to take the plunge?...


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
 

93!

A few thoughts of mine: I believe Rose is one of the very few people in AC's life he never wanted to hurt. To quote Cammell:

"Aleister Crowley: The Black Magician" wrote:
That Aleister adored Rose is certain and certain it is that the wreck of his marriage poisoned his life and unsettled his reason, which never totally recovered from the anguish, the agony, the torture and martyrdom (he describes his suffering in all these terms) which he endured during the dreary, inexorable march of her declining health. Towards her cure he did much - so he asserted, and so I have been informed - but the malady was not to be exorcised. Separation and then divorce followed; still the once lovers remained friends ...

This is also confirmed in Mary Crowley's genealogy work "The Crowley family" where she writes:

"The Crowley Family, Part 3: Aleister" wrote:
Rose was the daughter of the Rev. Fredrick Festus Kelly. Her first marriage had been dissolved and according to Aleister he saved her from being forced into an unwanted second marriage. They met at Strathpeffer and they were married at Dingwall on August 12th, 1903. They had two children: a boy and a girl. The boy died in infancy and the girl, named Lola Zaza, I have no trace of. [...] Eventually Rose became ill and none of his charms could bring back her health. This led to separation and divorce and finally her death. After the divorce they remained friends and at her death Aleister was completely shattered.

In AC's Augoeides diaries he writes that it was important to him that Rose won't find out about his astral workings with Soror Fidelis (Elaine Simpson), which does not sound like typical Crowley, does it? AC was a romantic fool and although he wanted so much that Mrs. Simpson would become a partner in magick for him or even a new Scarlet Woman, during many of their workings Aiwass (or other entities envoked) tells him to go back to Egypt on a Magical Retirement with his Scarlet Woman Rose. When he comes home to England and learns about the death of their second child he asks her to join him on this retirement but she refuses.

"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
It's the smack addict, wife beater who abandoned all his children I have a small problem with (please don't apologise for him). By comparison Rose's dabble with alcoholism is not worth mentioning, that's all, if that is the cause of your dislike or at least lack of admiration for her.

For many it seems convenient to blame Aleister alone for his relationship problems, but to compare (without any proof) the intensity of Aleister's and Rose's addictions or to call hers just a little "dabble" with alcoholism is of no big help. He obviously cared for her and their child and there is no reason to think that he had her institutionalized to get rid of her, just the contrary would be right I think. But of course she obviously was not able or willing to follow his path.

If I remember correctly it was the member "Mistyrose" who had some knowledge about Lola Zaza, maybe she will one day provide more information again.

I agree, detailed Scarlet Women biographies are needed!

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Excellent review, Lutz!


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 536
 

Just stumbled on this...

"The history of Kelly’s Directories and Handbooks
The roots of Kelly’s Directories and Handbooks can be found in the publication, in 1799, of the first edition of The Post Office London Directory. In 1835, Frederic Festus Kelly was appointed His Majesty’s Inspector of Inland Letter Carriers and took over the production of the London Directory, which took his name. Kelly began producing provincial Directories soon after, ultimately covering every city, town, village and parish.

The company’s name changed accordingly to Kelly & Co Ltd in 1882, later becoming Kelly’s Directories Ltd in 1897.

Kelly was also the curate of St Giles Camberwell from 1880-1915 and was the father of Rose Edith Kelly, who later married the occult writer and poet Aleister Crowley. The Kelly family can be seen living at The Vicarage in Camberwell in the 1891 and the 1901 census. " (from 'findmypast.com')

.. in the 1901 census she is listed as a "Scholar"

Kelly's directories is online at the site listed above, but there is a charge to access any information. Seeing as how it is the daughter of the man compiling the directory, I would not be suprised if there is more information on her.. in particular the date she died, & the place she died..


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 536
 
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
If I remember correctly it was the member "Mistyrose" who had some knowledge about Lola Zaza, maybe she will one day provide more information again.

... I have been reading through that thread again- entitled "Lola Zaza", & as it has some bearing to this discussion, here is the link:

http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=1102&highlight=lola+zaza

...very interesting, but she leaves us hanging. There was also a thread recently (for those of you who don't know) entitled "Crowley's Children", where a great grandson of AC named 'Eric' came forward with some very interesting details about Ninette Shumway. 'Mistyrose' also added some clarification about Lola in this thread.

The fact that two distant relatives have come forward in these forums on friendly & helpful terms, would seem to contradict the assertion of some members of the community here that AC's relations do not want to be bothered. I am sure that there is a 'wall' there with a few of them, but maybe this had to do more with the manner in which they have been approached in the past- & I would bet that, like in the case of 'Mistyrose', some of them cannot understand why anyone would be interested in their family details. Maybe we are crazy 😉

... Though with recent developments, such as the 'Chemical Wedding' movie, & AC being honored as one of the "100 greatest Britons", we could very well see more of them come forward.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Alex_Bennett" wrote:
It's the smack addict, wife beater who abandoned all his children I have a small problem with (please don't apologise for him).

I find it offensive that you use "smack addict" to attack Crowley's character in this way. He was prescribed that heroin for asthma- it was quite legal and obviously encouraged by doctors for certain conditions at that time. Yes, he became addicted to it, but anyone would, and Crowley managed to beat that addiction after a while because of the strength of his character. He was prescribed heroin again for his asthma later in life and so took it again, but by then he was an old man.

Notice I'm not denying that Crowley was addicted to heroin, I just find offensive your use of the term "smack addict" to attack his character.

edit: I'm sorry for bumping this thread, I see now that it's very old. I'm pretty sure it was on the first page of the scarlet women subforum when I looked at it though.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Aleister Crowley had a Harley Street doctor and due to a legal loophole in British medical law, they are allowed to prescribe whatever their patient wants and not get prosecuted for it. Certain very wealthy playboy aristocrats to this day allegedly get their heroine and cocaine legally from Harley Street doctors and are beyond reproach due to this this very old institutions special status.

Crowley took many drugs and heroine on and off for a lot of his adult life. All that is irelivent to my point though. I was saying and still assert than many people make excuses for Crowley whilst condeming his women for lesser selfish or debauched acts than him. Rose Kelly is to my mind an extremely important Thelemite (on a par with him even) and yet she rarely gets any mention other than she was his wife. I don't object to Crowley taking heroine even, rather his signing the form to have his wife locked up in a mental asylum for years for just being an alcoholic (and a woman), that I think was cowardly and hypocritical. That's my point. It was fine for him to be an alcoholic, cheat on her all the time and take tons of drugs but even though The Book Of The Law instructed her to worship Hadit (with wine and drugs I suspect) and cheat on him back, he did all in his power to make sure she didn't and even had her imprissoned in effect. I know he was an Edwardian and it would have showed him up as a man far worse back then but you have to admit at least a bit of double standards. He condemed her for losing their baby in China to colera, when he had abandoned her there to go to California simply to shag someone else, not caring how she got back to Scotland. The poor girl didn't stand much of a chance to start with but he made sure he held the upper hand and then he goes on to say in Magick Without Tears that the battle of the sexes is an illusion, perhaps he only meant as long as he was winning it.

Love is the law, love under will.

Alex


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I don't believe it's hypocrisy. I think you have to look at the ability of Crowley and the ability of Rose to function when on their various substances. In my view, Crowley was able to function within society and be responsible (such as he ever was) on his, whereas Rose could not. I realise that the only information I have is what they and other people wrote about them and it's filtered through them and biased, but that is what I believe.


ReplyQuote
Share: