The history of words is a rather interesting subject. The term we are looking at is Etymology. When it comes to modern contexts, the concept of the contemplations of words is usually lost. For some reason, and this is my personality bleeding through here, those within modern society seem to absolutely love the idea of not having to think. Modern culture absolutely loves taking things at face value without making an ounce of effort to research the background of something or where it may have come from. This then has slowly produced bastardised and corrupted information and data. It has become the sort of mentality of “Facebook Facts”. And what I mean by that is: Anyone can put something on the internet. And that “something” does not need to have any resources crediting the data they have provided. They often also shirk the paramount disclaimer of something being an opinion, a personal experience, or in the cases of the occult communities (and the most important and valuable prospect here) a UPG. Everything is taken at face value and as gospel.
This is a problem. Well, in the case of subject matter that has texts that predate current data. This is a problem because this can make or break how you may see or view certain subjects. When you study the occult, you have to have a particular set of glasses. These glasses often will be taxing to wear. You must make an effort to think in contexts that may not be your normal comfort zone. This means trying to understand a more historically accurate text with the lenses of those who wrote it. You may not be able to completely empathise with the thought processes of a man from 1610. But you can at least provide a better comprehension as to what was meant by the words that were written if you speak their language.
We often forget that language changes and develops over time to suit the era the word exists in. Some words come out of style and usage and others take a 30 year hiatus or a century hiatus and come back into style within a new era. Some words remain the same but their aesthetical expectations have adjusted. While the word Swagger has almost the exact same meaning as it once did in the 16th century (when applied to a person and their behaviour) - that being of an arrogant and aggressive walk or gait, we have adjusted this a little to mean: “to conduct oneself in an arrogant or superciliously pompous manner especially: to walk with an air of overbearing self-confidence.” However, the modern approach and lens through which we look at this term has gone from a negative connotation to a positive flattering connotation. Mind the quantity of songs associating “swag” as a positive and flattering comment.
This awareness should be applied to contexts that are especially within the focus of your study and practice. This can make or break certain interactions and it can expand your ability to understand and work with particular energies at play. If only you are able to see the words and the texts as they are intended to be seen and comprehended. Authors that spearheaded some works that we are all fond of did not normally write with Twenty-First Century lingo. It just did not happen. This amply makes reading the texts in a modern tongue and context quite null and it is a perfect example as to why we ultimately get varying results and knowledge on particular subjects and focuses.
Mind you, I often do not openly speak about my opinions on this subject which is why I have written a document about it. I find that it may be just ultimately easier for myself to just write a somewhat meretricious document that, quite frankly, just tells people: Do Your Research You Fools. And Stop Taking Everything In Modern Context If It Did Not Come From Modern Works!
Within this document I am going to simply go through a list of words and terms commonly found in some circles of the occult community that need correction or are deserving of correction based upon the definitions that they held when the texts or manuscripts were relevant and written. There is another document that will be provided that does include the adaptations of the Divine through a modern lens. I am not against the concept of modern structure. However, I am an adamant supporter of respectfully acknowledging and working with subjects and focusing in an original context before you begin to adapt and modernise something. The roots of these works existed for a reason. Adaptations should come secondary to the original understanding of the works you are building off of. And this does, unfortunately, mean putting in the work to actually understand and work with the original texts with the original linguistics as much as you can.
The first and foremost entry of etymological scrutiny comes from a Watcher near and dear to me: Azazel.
Now, there is a lot of confusion here when it comes to Azazel’s offices being “Cosmetics and the Knowledge and understanding as to how to craft weapons. Azazel is deemed to be the entity that bestowed the knowledge as to how to turn minerals and materials such as iron and lead into tools and weapons.” And no one questions how Cosmetics comes into play, what that means or questions if the word “Cosmetics” means beautification or if it means something more akin to His original Offices. Modern minds just go: “Yay! Make-up and Swords!” and not: “Discipline, Organisation, Order, Structure, Military Arrangements, Weaponry, Tools, Smithing.” There is nothing quite to do with beautification in 3rd century AD.
And then there is the surprise pikachu face I am sure some of you are making while reading this. I said it. Make-up and beautification concepts with this word don’t come around until much, much later.
We get Cosmetics from, in short, Cosmos. The etymological structure here is as follows: cosmos (n.)
c. 1200, "the universe, the world" (but not popular until 1848, when it was taken as the English equivalent to Humboldt's Kosmos in translations from German), from Latinized form of Greek kosmos "order, good order, orderly arrangement," a word with several main senses rooted in those notions: The verb kosmein meant generally "to dispose, prepare," but especially "to order and arrange (troops for battle), to set (an army) in array;" also "to establish (a government or regime);" "to deck, adorn, equip, dress" (especially of women). Thus kosmos had an important secondary sense of "ornaments of a woman's dress, decoration" (compare kosmokomes "dressing the hair," and cosmetic) as well as "the universe, the world."
Pythagoras is said to have been the first to apply this word to "the universe," perhaps originally meaning "the starry firmament," but it later was extended to the whole physical world, including the earth. For specific reference to "the world of people," the classical phrase was he oikoumene (ge) "the inhabited (earth)." Septuagint uses both kosmos and oikoumene. Kosmos also was used in Christian religious writing with a sense of "worldly life, this world (as opposed to the afterlife)," but the more frequent word for this was aiōn, literally "lifetime, age."
The word cosmos often suggested especially "the universe as an embodiment of order and harmony."
Does the idea of Azazel being associated with Makeup and Swords sound cooler? Oh sure. But is it correct? No. No it is not. The reason why I bring this one in particular to attention is to background check a lot of the content that people provide and how they choose to work with or interact with a particular Divine. This is one of the more extreme differences in word etymology that we see most commonly in the communities. This ultimately shifts a large perspective of what this means when it comes to the offices of Azazel and how you would approach the Watcher. This therein does support some of the workings with associating Azazel with Saturn, as Saturn’s offices as a celestial body portain to discipline and mannerisms, rules, structure, and focus.
The next word I want to focus on is the word “Dignities”. This term gets rather obscured if you are unsure as to what context it is being used it. When it comes to Dignities, we may be referring to a particular entity known as a Dignity - a category of angel or spiritual entity found within the OT. Or we may be referring to a state of worth or honour. To understand how this term is applicable, we look to Agares who has the power to “Destroy Dignities both Spiritual and Temporal”. This application automatically should have the magician looking to the Spiritual Being known as a Dignity (a potential angel of blasphemy) and it should have someone thinking automatically of self worth and value. Dignity. But it goes a bit further than that. The term itself goes back to *Dek - which means to accept or to take. This is an exchange. In Latin this turns into the latin term of “dignus” which means “fitting, worthy, or proper”. By about the 12oo’s we now finally get to “Dignity” which is a state of being worthy.
The entry for “Dignity” is as follows:
dignity (n.)
c. 1200, "state of being worthy," from Old French dignite "dignity, privilege, honour," from Latin dignitatem (nominative dignitas) "worthiness," from dignus "worth (n.), worthy, proper, fitting," from PIE *dek-no-, suffixed form of root *dek- "to take, accept."
From c. 1300 as "an elevated office, civil or ecclesiastical," also "honourable place or elevated rank." From late 14c. as "gravity of countenance."
So when we discuss Agares destroying Dignities, there are a few ways we can approach this. The first is to apply the concept of dignities to the understanding that it is an object that is fitting to something or someone. This may be adornments or objects of honour or appreciation / an offering to someone or something. This would be applicable if you were making an effort to thwart the honouring of an individual or a spirit or competition of yours. If you would like to break it down into the Greek background of “dokein”, we may apply this to breaking down someone’s thoughts or the way they think. This can then put the Magician into a position to adjust or refocus someone to see their perspective or their position in situations or circumstances. When applying the historical context and etymological backgrounds of Dignity, we go from “A position of self worth” and we may backtrack to origins of the word being broken down into meanings that apply to a particular way of thinking or appearing. You may use this prospect of Agares’ Office of destroying Dignities to then apply to change and destruction of old habits and ways of thinking to pave the way for new thoughts and ways of thinking and appearing. Or you may use this Office to apply to breaking down the honour or appreciations of competitions or opposing forces.
As a final nail, I wanted to discuss just one final word to get the wheels turning. When we think of things such as “Virtues”, we may become lost in a few biblical concepts of the word. To start, we observe the angels known as Virtues. This word pops up a lot and we get comfortable with the familiarity of a word simply by seeing it often enough and we settle for what our understanding of it is and not what our understanding of it could be. And given the context of our current subjects, I thought this was a fitting word to get gears turning.
The term Virtues is broken down to mean moral life and conduct. It is an Anglo-French term that stems from the latin word “Vir” which means, simply, “man”. Here lies an almost philosophical concept that is born from the concept that humankind is, of course, of a particular quality. We know not all individuals are virtuous. But beyond that, the term progresses to ensnare a concept of, literally, “manliness” or vigour, strength and virility as we get into 18th century. It was associated with physical ability more than moral decency. It was “excellence” and a concept of power associated with manliness. It is not until the mid 17oo’s that we see a development of the word into an association with decency and morality.
Part of the entry for virtuous reads as follows:
late 14c., "influencing by physical virtues or capabilities, effective with respect to inherent natural qualities," from Medieval Latin virtualis, from Latin virtus "excellence, potency, efficacy," literally "manliness, manhood" (see virtue). The meaning "being something in essence or effect, though not actually or in fact" is from mid-15c., probably via sense of "capable of producing a certain effect" (early 15c.).
With proper context we see the concepts behind the words with which we are interacting in a much more acute light and focus. This focus may be important in your work when discerning a particular spirit. When a spirit says that they bring about good virtues, are they specific and referencing moral decency of people or of other spirits? Or are they referencing virility and manhood? What is the tune and the attitude of the spirit you are working alongside and with what contexts are they expecting you to understand them? As much as the Divine we work alongside may compensate for varying degrees of intellectual ineptitude, it may pay to bridge some of the gaps we experience by broadening our perspectives of the etymological structures of words that are generally considered outdated by modern standards.
I know that this idea may be abhorrent to most people simply due to the prospect of having to do extra reading. And I understand that the general population of youth has an awful clinically acute and fatal allergic response to having to read, less they go into full anaphylaxis. But it cannot hurt to encourage some exposure therapy in hopes that it primes some individuals for future success and future growth.
Thank you for taking the time to read this. I am by no means an expert in all fields of subject matters, but I do take great pride in my ability to make sense of certain qualities when the focus revolves around contexts and modern versus historical drafts and definitions. I hope this piece has properly gotten some of you to rethink how you approach your texts and your work as well as how your approach to your work may be able to grow and adjust to include a broader spectrum of literary content and a far more articulate dictionary.
