John Dee owned a manuscript filled with 46,656 letters arranged in squares. Unable to understand its tables, he is said to have asked the angel Uriel to reveal their meaning. Even now, the Book of Soyga poses the question Dee could not answer: do its 36 tables hold a message, a magical structure, or just an ingenious combinatorial trick?
A modern mathematician has since recovered the method that produced the tables. However, their function stayed hidden. I reject the neat cliche that someone has decoded the Book of Soyga at last. We now hold the method of generation, while the meaning and use remain unknown, which makes a stranger and better ending.
The Book of Soyga and Its 46,656 Letters
The Book of Soyga, also called Aldaraia sive Soyga vocor, is a 16th-century Latin treatise mixing astrology, magic, angelology, demonology and lunar mansions. That list matters, because the manuscript behaves like a cabinet of systems. Planetary logic, letter games and ritual imagination press against one another on its pages.
Scholars identified two copies in the 1990s: Sloane MS 8 at the British Library and Bodley MS 908 at Oxford. So the book has a material history alongside its legend, and paper, copying habits and scribal errors all count as evidence.
Finally, at the end sit 36 tables of 36 by 36 squares, making 46,656 letters. Generating words and astrological configurations govern these grids. For anyone who studies occult computation, that is the shock: the Book of Soyga reads like a machine built out of an alphabet.
On a grainy scan, I once tried to read the top row of a table aloud. It sounded like a language from a dream, almost words. I spent an hour hunting for a hidden message before admitting I was doing exactly what the book seems built to make people do.
Why John Dee Turned to an Angel
John Dee was an Elizabethan scholar, mathematician, astrologer and collector, and you can trace the Elizabethan scholar’s life in some detail. His world drew a softer line between calculation and revelation than ours does.
An old mention links a copy of the Book of Soyga to Dee. According to that tradition, he asked Uriel about the tables because he could not make sense of them. The detail is powerful, because it shows a trained mind reaching the edge of its technique and asking for another kind of key.
Precision matters here, though. That Dee’s copy is Sloane MS 8 is a scholarly reconstruction, short of certainty. The link is plausible enough to fascinate and fragile enough to keep the imagination honest.
Angels draw strong interest today. People still look up how people go looking for an angel’s name, and zodiac lore often includes the archangel tied to each zodiac sign. In this case, though, there is no evidence of contact with angels or of any supernatural effect. What remains recognizable is the human move: when a pattern grows too vast, the mind gives it a messenger.
How a Mathematician Found the Key
The mathematician Jim Reeds showed that the tables come from a deterministic procedure applied to keywords. Deterministic means the same starting point always produces the same result. In other words, a fixed rule built the squares, one letter after another.
Reeds also noticed copying errors shared by both manuscripts, which point to a common ancestor. I’ve always loved that move. Instead of asking the grid to confess, he asked the mistakes where they came from.
Finding the rule is a real victory. The best question survives it.
In Reeds’ reading, tables 1 to 12 carry the zodiac signs, Aries to Pisces, each grown from a six-letter seed word. The detail I can’t shake is the seed word NISRAM behind the Aries table. It is small, hard and generative, like a stone dropped into a deep well.
Hold the distinction tight. We know how someone built the tables of the Book of Soyga. Their purpose is unknown. That line protects the story from lazy triumph on one side and from mystical inflation on the other.
What Nobody Has Solved
Thirty-six squares. No message yet.
Once Reeds stripped away the false mystery, the real questions got sharper. Each one is still open.
Who invented the procedure? The maker remains unnamed, and authorship would change how we read motive and authority.
Did their maker mean the tables to be read, or only contemplated and used in ritual? The book sits among magical and astrological material, yet its use is unproven.
Do the letters hide any message at all? The grids invite that hunger, and an invitation proves nothing.
Why are some tables tied to planets and celestial configurations? The framework looks deliberate, and its exact function is unsettled.
What did the numbers linked to the seed words once do? They may have had a role we no longer understand.
Maybe nobody meant these squares to be read. I hope someone did. I’ve learned to keep that hope on a short leash in research like this, because the evidence still decides what we can claim about the Book of Soyga.
Five Ways to Read the Book of Soyga
The Book of Soyga allows five serious readings, each useful and each incomplete. First comes the combinatorial one: the tables are a mathematical procedure made visible, with a controlled rule generating huge complexity.
A second reading is astrological. Because the zodiac tables, Aries through Pisces, tie the grids to celestial order, they may have served as symbolic pictures of astral influences.
Third, a magical and kabbalistic reading sees the letters as a ritual object meant to link language, numbers and the cosmos. For context, compare the old idea that numbers structure the cosmos. Resemblance alone proves no function, though.
Next comes an initiatory reading: perhaps a reader needed an oral explanation, now lost. It is tempting, and also risky, because a lost key can excuse almost any claim.
Last, a prosaic reading says opacity gave the book, and whoever owned it, authority. A manuscript that looks technical, ancient and almost readable can push a reader straight into reverence.
My own working view sits where astrology, Christian kabbalah, cryptography and an old dream of a universe built like a language all meet. The Book of Soyga looks to me like a forerunner of generative algorithms, where a simple rule yields an unfathomable architecture. Knowing the algorithm clears part of the mystery. It still tells us nothing about the intention of the person who designed it, and I’m content to leave that question standing.
The post John Dee Asked the Angels to Decipher This Book. A Mathematician Found Its Key appeared first on askAstrology.
