A useful exercise for anyone approaching this material is to ask, of each detail, which century it comes from.
From Dee and Kelley, 1583 to 1587: the Enochian alphabet and language; the Calls or Keys with their translations; the Great Table and the four Watchtowers; the Tablet of Union names; the thirty Aethyrs and their names; the ninety-one Parts with their regions, their Aethyrs, their twelve Zodiacal Kings, the tribes of Israel those Kings are associated with, and the counts of ministers; the Heptarchic material with its seven kings and princes; the Sigillum Dei Aemeth. This is a large body of primary material and it survives in manuscripts, principally Sloane 3191 and the diaries, in the British Library.
From the Golden Dawn, 1880s onward: the elemental and tarot correspondences; the pyramid and Enochian chess apparatus; the Kerubic and Servient labels; the treatment of the ninety-one names as governing spirits to be invoked individually; the placement of the whole system inside a grade structure; and the working practice that almost every subsequent book assumes.
From Crowley, 1900 onward: the mapping of the Aethyrs onto the sephiroth in triads; the Abyss and Choronzon at ZAX; the reversed working order; and the Thelemic reading of the whole.
From the later twentieth century: the zodiacal signs now attached to the twelve Kings, which are modern reconstructions; a substantial body of independent vision work; and, from the 1980s, a scholarly and practical movement back toward the manuscripts themselves.
None of these layers is illegitimate as practice. The problem is only that they are routinely presented undifferentiated, so that a nineteenth-century attribution and a sixteenth-century record appear in the same sentence with the same authority.