Aemeth Errors?

General Enochian Discussion.

Topic author
Stalking Hyena
Neophyte
Posts: 16

Aemeth Errors?

Post#1 » Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:53 pm

Hi,
I am in the process of completing my own Sigillum Dei Aemeth, and I ran into some problems of spelling of some of the names.
I am using three references. The first is the Aemeth from Griffin’s Ritual Magic Manual, which I find very beautiful in its applications of Moina’s color scale, though I am going another route. The second is a drawing of the Aemeth closer of the period of origination (I believe the original, though I have no sure reference handy at this time). It is hand scripted and somewhat illegible at points, particularly around outer vertices of the pentagram in the center. The third source is the Aemeth produced in Skinner’s Complete Magician’s Tables, which contradicts Griffin’s design in some places. I could dig for more references, but my hope is to pose a topic of discussion to whoever finds this interesting:)

Here are two examples of discrepancy in my sources.
On the upper right vertice of the pentagram, the spelling in Griffin is:

EDEKIEIL

In Skinner:

EDEKIEL

The difference, obviously, is in the inclusion of an extra ‘I’. Now, in a footnote Skinner explains that this “Probably should be –el– but is actually -ieil- in the manuscript”.

What gives?

In the hexagram I find more discrepancies that are not easily resolved by the older drawing:

Griffin:
HECOA

Skinner:
HEEOA

Skinner does not explain this and it seems it could be either a ‘c’ or an ‘e’ in the original.

Then Skinner contradicts his own version of the drawing. In the lower left 2nd heptagon, his illustration gives:

Ekiei

This matches Griffin, but in the 777 style column of page 73 Skinner gives:

Ekici

Now, I thought it was just a typo, but then I compared it to the older drawing and saw what looks like:

Ekici !

I also noticed there are little ‘dots’ under the 8’s (as in I 21/8. )in the fractions as well as with other numbers. These are reproduced in Griffin, but not Skinner. Can anyone tell me what these signify and maybe why Skinner ommitted them?
(Correction - he produces some, but not all of the 'dots').

I know from experience these things tend to snowball into other tangles which my eye strain is having a hard time with, never mind the numerological factors. At any rate, I thought someone might at least pose some helpful explanations.
Thank you.

This topic has 11 replies

You must be a registered member and logged in to view the replies in this topic.


Register Login
 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests