To explore the origins of magic, we must first attempt to fully understand and agree upon the definition of the word "magic" itself. Throughout time, the context of "magic" has often changed with the events of the day, in stride of major cultural upheavals, revolutions, influences and developments. Therefore, each context within it's own time-frame, has it's own distinct variation of origin.

        The "origins of magic" that we seek and refer to here, are that of at which time "magic" was first recognized as an art form and amusing entertainment. It is with this understanding and agreement of context, that we proceed to explore.

        Our quest begins with a search for the origin of the actual word "magic". Where did the word "magic" come from? It is believed that "magic" is based on the Greek word "magi", a word used (by the Grecians) to describe the priestly members of the ancient caste of Zoroaster followers, when they migrated from Persia to Greece. Zoroaster was a religious teacher and prophet of ancient Persia (c.628 B.C. - c.551 B.C.), and founder of the early religion Zoroastrianism. Zoroaster is derived from the Greek form of Zarathushtra (or Zarathustra), his Persian name. The Magi (plural for Magus) were revered as wise men, and their reputed power and control over evil demons gave rise to the word "magic". Many believe it wasn't until about the 16th century A.D., that the word "magic" first began to lose it's religious roots, and gain an association to "the conjuror who fools with sleight of hand tricks".

        The origin of the word "magic", doesn't really provide information as to what "magic" is, what "magic" means, or when "magic" began. Now before you reach for a dictionary or encyclopedia, allow me to quote from a recent script. While the show "Magic: Witness The Impossible" was running at the Arena Players Turntable Theatre (at New York's Vanderbilt Mansion - 1997), these words were offered near the beginning of the performance:

        These words imply that we, as humans, have possibly had the natural ability to outwit and outsmart, deceive and lie, ever since our inception or soon thereafter. And we, at sometime, eventually sought to take advantage of that ability. Some argue that honesty, not deception, is our natural virtue. No certain proof exists to support either claim. One look into the history of civilization and I think you'll agree that we, as humans, appear to possess more than the necessary instincts required to deceive. Time has repeatedly shown that when it comes to deception and trickery, we humans do it very well.

        Surely, I don't expect you to believe that the first act of deception or trickery, constitutes the beginning of "magic". What I am trying to convey is this: The basis for "magic" was realized, the very moment when humans discovered and recognized the thought processes needed to accomplish an act of deception or trickery. Exactly when this occurred is unknown.

        If we assume that humans were possibly capable of deception and trickery since our inception (or soon thereafter), then when exactly did the transformation take place, when deception and trickery became interpreted as "magic"? If we could isolate this moment in time, then perhaps we could find one of the first true origins of magic.

        With this in mind, we now proceed to the dictionary. The definition of "magic" by todays standards (according to Webster) is:

        This modern day definition, still provides a hint of the ancient "supernatural" roots of magic. Notice however, that the words "art", "claim" and "seemingly" appear strategically within the sentences. These words are recent additions which help the reader decipher an apparent falseness to magic. Yet nowhere within the definition is the reader blantantly told that "magic is the art of deception and trickery". Still today, it appears that Webster's dictionary opts to supply a faint hope for the reader that real magic may truly exist, through the clever wording of the "magic" definition.

        As recent as the late 1800's, dictionaries supplied meanings for magic that were far more "supernatural" and "mystical" in nature, than the definitions of today. Many didn't include the words "art", "claim" and "seemingly", to allude to any falseness. In fact, the opposite is true. One dictionary (from 1891) explained the definition of "magic" as meaning: "The practice of persons who can change nature using supernatural or mystical powers". These words unquestionably imply to the reader that "magic" is real. Perhaps the then newly discovered and popular fad of spiritualism influenced the timely meaning. This same dictionary also mentions "Sleight of hand" as a possible definition, but this is listed as a second alternative.

        Was there a time when "magic" was real? Is there such a thing as "real magic" today? Allow me to once again quote from my script:

        These words might have served as a warning to the first deceivers and tricksters, who dared to cross the line of morality and honesty with their newfounded skills. With deceptions and trickery, one could possibly gain an advantage over others, if presented in a convincing manner. This being accepted, I think it would be safe to form the reasonably true equation that: deception plus dishonesty can equal power. As soon as one recognized this possible method to attain power, one could use this power to guide the thoughts of others away from the truth, misleading them into falsehoods. Could this be the original "power" that is referred to as the "supernatural power", from which ALL magic stems?

        If we assume that the "supernatural power" of "magic" is the process of misleading the thoughts of others by deceptive means, then perhaps the "real magic" that many dictionaries allude to, is non-existant. "Real magic" may be nothing more than the mis-interpretation of well executed and overly exaggerated deceptions, the secrets of which have never been revealed or uncovered. Perhaps this is why secrecy in magic was, and is, so important.

        If the victims of a deception ever discovered the secret methods used to present such a falsehood, they would no longer accept that falsehood as being true. Thus, they would no longer allow themselves to be mislead. If this occurred, the deceptionist would undoubtedly lose his advantage, and the "power" that advantage provided. Without knowledge or proof of a secret method, the victims naturally believed the deception was real. If we assume that deceptions were used to attain "power" over others, then we must also assume that withholding the secrets to those deceptions was a vital part of maintaining their validity. Of course, no proof has been found to support this theory. If we could ever find evidence that this occurred, we might also find evidence of one of the main origins of secrecy within magic.

        I realize that all these opinionated and bold assumptions are unprovable. Yet I also realize that these assumptions are all very plausible explanations as to the origins of magic. When seeking the origins of anything, one must not only focus on the proof available, but also on the logical possibilities that may also exist without proof. The key word here is "logical". In my mind and to my reasoning, it would be highly unlikely and illogical to assume that the origins of magic occurred in compliance with which the first documented proof alludes. Because we can not find earlier reliable and documented evidence, does not mean the possibility of an earlier existance is unreasonable.

        A final quote before ending this introduction:

        These final words were written to imply that a gateway should remain open for the future of magic, as well as into magic's past. Thousands of years ago, it was deemed impossible to fly, yet many civilizations believed it could happen. Some even believed it did happen. They said it was done by "magic". Could this belief be the reason why the aeroplane was finally invented? In actuality, it was always possible to fly. We had just not discovered all of the many secrets of flight yet. Likewise, we have just not discovered all of the many secrets of "magic" yet.