Edward Kelley, Historical Figures
Standing
Concerns Reliability of the Testimony
Currently States Whether Kelley reported what he saw in the showstone or invented it is not established. The Enochian material survives only through Dee's record of Kelley's reports, and Dee's diaries are strong evidence of what Dee believed and weak evidence of what took place. Frances Yates called Kelley a fraud outright; others read him as a genuine visionary or as self-deceived.
Deborah E. Harkness's John Dee's Conversations with Angels: Cabala, Alchemy, and the End of Nature (Cambridge University Press, 1999) reads John Dee's own diaries, the primary surviving record of Edward Kelley's angelic scrying sessions, and finds three genuinely competing scholarly readings built from that same source: Frances Yates called Kelley a fraud outright, other historians of the period read him as a sincere visionary, and others again as self-deceived rather than dishonest. Harkness's method is close textual analysis of the diary record itself, and she finds all three positions argued from the same body of evidence, which is what makes this a live scholarly disagreement rather than a gap; what no side has produced is independent evidence, such as a record of Kelley preparing material in advance or a linguistic analysis of the Enochian corpus bearing on whether it was composed rather than received, that could decide between the three readings.
Source John Dee's Conversations with Angels: Cabala, Alchemy, and the End of Nature, Deborah E. Harkness