Dee’s Sigillum: The Sloane Drawing and Three Wax Discs

The record is a sequence, not one finished picture

The British Library identifies Sloane MS 3188 as Dee’s record of conferences from 22 December 1581 to 30 May 1583. Within that book, the seal develops in stages. On 10 March a reported speaker describes a square table, a large disc of clean wax, four smaller supports, and an AGLA cross on the reverse. On 19 March forty figures supply the letter-and-number compartments around the circumference. Michael then corrects omissions, number positions, and reading order. On 20 March the record derives seven names from that ring and begins placing additional sevenfold material inside it; a forty-nine-letter table supplies another seven names. The completed drawing at the end of Liber II is therefore a compressed result of several sessions. Reading only the final folio removes the temporal logic: first the object is specified, then its border is populated and corrected, then its interior names are generated and positioned.

Worked comparison: the disputed y/14–y/15 perimeter square from transcript to wax

Near the bottom of the outer ring, the 19 March transcript records three consecutive compartments as the joined letters “og,” then a small y with 15 beneath it, then t with 11 beneath it. The order itself is corrected while the figures appear: t/11 is initially shown too soon, Michael tells Dee to reserve it for the second position, and y/15 is inserted in the former position. That produces og–y/15–t/11 in the written action. Dee’s finished manuscript drawing instead appears to put 14 beneath the y, and the surviving large wax disc follows that y/14 state. The disagreement is only one numeral, but the numbers are not decorative labels. Elsewhere in the same action Michael explains that a number above a letter directs a count to the right and one below directs a count to the left; the destination supplies the next letter in a derived name. A transcriptional redraw that prints y/15 preserves the spoken and written instruction, while a facsimile-style redraw that prints y/14 preserves the completed drawing and wax. The two readings describe different evidence states. Later writers connect their totals with “Aemeth” and “meth”; that arithmetic is a later interpretation, while the primary evidence establishes the narrower fact that transcript, drawing, and object preserve different numerals.

Measurements turn the diagram into furniture

The 10 March record calls for a principal seal nine inches across, roughly 22.9 centimetres, and a little over one inch thick. British Museum 1838,1232.90.a measures 23.2 centimetres across and 3.4 centimetres deep: close enough to make the comparison meaningful, but not a reason to erase the small dimensional difference. The same passage places the large disc at the center of a two-cubit square table beneath the show-stone and puts four smaller seals under the table’s feet. Only two smaller wax discs survive with the large one, so the accession group is not a complete four-leg set. The large disc is thus more than a flat copy of the drawing. Its thickness, engraved reverse, and relationship to the smaller supports embody a spatial arrangement described by the diary. The lost wooden table, later table copies, and printed engravings are separate witnesses to that arrangement.

Close agreement does not close the provenance gap

The museum first traces the discs securely to a visitor’s description of the Cotton Library in 1692, more than eighty years after Dee’s death. It also says that manufacture during Dee’s lifetime cannot be established with complete certainty. Three claims must remain distinct: the large disc closely follows the Sloane design; the group entered a later collection associated with Dee material; and the surviving wax was physically made at a particular date. The first is visible, the second has documentary support, and the third remains limited by the gap. The y/14 square sharpens rather than settles that problem. It suggests that the engraver used a drawn state related to Dee’s final diagram instead of mechanically following the y/15 wording, yet it cannot identify when or by whom the carving was done. The object is strongest evidence for a transmitted design and material arrangement, while the diary remains the stronger evidence for the order in which instructions and corrections were recorded.

Sources and witness notes

1. British Library, Sloane MS 3188 ↗Catalogue of Dee’s 1581–83 conference record; distinguishes it from his later Sloane MS 3191 compilation and notes Ashmole’s copy.
2. Mysteriorum Liber Primus, John Dee Publication Project ↗Diplomatic-style transcript of Sloane MS 3188 used for the 10 March 1582 table and wax-seal specifications. The article paraphrases the passage and keeps the gold lamen separate from the large wax seal.
3. Mysteriorum Liber Secundus, John Dee Publication Project ↗Transcript and reconstructed plate used to check the outer-ring sequence, the y/15 instruction, the numbered-letter extraction rule, and the later completed diagram.
4. British Museum, magical disc 1838,1232.90.a ↗Large engraved wax disc, 23.2 cm diameter. Curator compares the inscription with Dee’s diagram and explicitly cautions that manufacture in Dee’s lifetime is uncertain.
5. British Museum, magical disc 1838,1232.90.c ↗One of two smaller surviving discs; listed as an associated late-sixteenth-century wax object, not a fourth surviving support.
6. Ackermann and Devoy, “The Lord of the smoking mirror” (2012) ↗British Museum object study evaluating the three wax discs and documentary provenance; accessible abstract and catalogue-linked study.
7. Burns and Moore, “John Dee and Edward Kelley’s Great Table, Part II” ↗Later close reading that isolates the y/15 transcript against the y/14 manuscript drawing and wax inscription. Its 440/441 arithmetic is identified as a modern interpretation, not Dee’s stated explanation.
8. Wikimedia Commons, Sloane 3188 Sigillum diagram ↗Dee’s historical drawing is marked public domain and free of known restrictions; source image is a 447 × 507 reproduction.
9. Sloane MS 3188, edited Mysteriorum Libri Quinque contents ↗Modern navigation/transcription identifies March 1582 seal discussions, corrected letters, seven names, and forty-nine-letter tables; editorial text is linked, not republished.