![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Private Message to Professor Dolohov
Apr. 21st, 2014 09:45 pmProfessor,
Thank you again for the loan of the books and for the pleasant afternoon's conversation last week. I'm quite enjoying the D'Angier-LeBrun, what; his depictions of the use of battle magic on a mid-19th century campaign are jolly well evocative. And it's been some time since I had a chance to read in French. I've gone through the first three exercises on the Arabic figures, as well. I'm afraid I've not yet started Norton's Impractical Duellist but I expect to get to it by Thursday or Friday.
I hope you spent a pleasant Easter Sunday and Monday. (I had meant to look for a modest service in New London but didn't find one to my liking. I expect it's even more difficult for Eastern Orthodox, what. Perhaps by next year I shall have found a parish. Though I'm aware that's not fashionable in the Protectorate, it somehow feels wrong not to go a few times a year.)
I say, I had a question related to our project for the end of term. I was flipping through ibn Waḥšīya's Commentaries and I know we've not covered Essay #24 yet, but, as you know, our group work figures heavily on Calidus' instruction regarding the use of compulsion magic in combination with elemental intensifiers, so I thought I'd see what ibn Waḥšīya had to say on earth elements. But in the third section--I say, it seems as if it could be a translation irregularity. He's discussing the effect that certain wand woods (oak, thorn and yarrow, specifically) may have when the spell being attempted also includes metalliferous components (iron, for the most part, what, but also in certain cases silver or gold). Footnote number 17 mentions using quartz as a focus to balance the effect, but, I say, from the context, I wonder if it's more accurately translated as any sort of crystal? If it's an accurate translation then could you provide any insight as to why aiming the spell through quartz would produce a more reliable, powerfully-focused spell than, say, diamond or glass? (One can well understand why a coloured stone would taint the result, what, but it would seem that if clarity is desired, any type of clear crystal would do. Quartz is notoriously not perfectly clear, however, which makes one wonder why it would intensify the spell effect or nullify the interaction of iron with a wand of yarrow, for example.)
You see my confusion, what.
Perhaps there's another resource that addresses this same anomaly? If so, I should be very interested in reading it. I'm sure it will be pertinent to at least a portion of our survey.
Looking forward to your answer,
-Finch-Fletchley
Thank you again for the loan of the books and for the pleasant afternoon's conversation last week. I'm quite enjoying the D'Angier-LeBrun, what; his depictions of the use of battle magic on a mid-19th century campaign are jolly well evocative. And it's been some time since I had a chance to read in French. I've gone through the first three exercises on the Arabic figures, as well. I'm afraid I've not yet started Norton's Impractical Duellist but I expect to get to it by Thursday or Friday.
I hope you spent a pleasant Easter Sunday and Monday. (I had meant to look for a modest service in New London but didn't find one to my liking. I expect it's even more difficult for Eastern Orthodox, what. Perhaps by next year I shall have found a parish. Though I'm aware that's not fashionable in the Protectorate, it somehow feels wrong not to go a few times a year.)
I say, I had a question related to our project for the end of term. I was flipping through ibn Waḥšīya's Commentaries and I know we've not covered Essay #24 yet, but, as you know, our group work figures heavily on Calidus' instruction regarding the use of compulsion magic in combination with elemental intensifiers, so I thought I'd see what ibn Waḥšīya had to say on earth elements. But in the third section--I say, it seems as if it could be a translation irregularity. He's discussing the effect that certain wand woods (oak, thorn and yarrow, specifically) may have when the spell being attempted also includes metalliferous components (iron, for the most part, what, but also in certain cases silver or gold). Footnote number 17 mentions using quartz as a focus to balance the effect, but, I say, from the context, I wonder if it's more accurately translated as any sort of crystal? If it's an accurate translation then could you provide any insight as to why aiming the spell through quartz would produce a more reliable, powerfully-focused spell than, say, diamond or glass? (One can well understand why a coloured stone would taint the result, what, but it would seem that if clarity is desired, any type of clear crystal would do. Quartz is notoriously not perfectly clear, however, which makes one wonder why it would intensify the spell effect or nullify the interaction of iron with a wand of yarrow, for example.)
You see my confusion, what.
Perhaps there's another resource that addresses this same anomaly? If so, I should be very interested in reading it. I'm sure it will be pertinent to at least a portion of our survey.
Looking forward to your answer,
-Finch-Fletchley
Tags:
