NMR ISSUE 49

Astrological Forecast 49
Blessing the Self
Calafia
Chaos: A New Approach to Magick
Common Elements of Ceremonial Initiation
Cults! Confessions of an Outsider
Editorial 49
Esoteric Symbology of the Tarot
Etymological
Fundamental Wiccan Rites
Getting More Magick Out of Your Meditations
Hail to the Hunter
Heathens Idolize School Prayer
Home Protection Amulets
Imbolc Ritual
Legend
On the Path of Destiny
Other Editorial 49
Prairie Dog, Octopus & Praying Mantis
Sarava! Afro-Brazilian Magic Carol l. Dow
Sistrum Sisters
Tarot Looking Glass
The Magick of Franz Bardon
The Sacred Home
The Truth about Sex Magick,
Working with the Sun and its Properties
Working with Your Inner Child
Yule

Articles
Authors
Rituals
Book Reviews
NMR Issues
NMR Covers

Etymological

By Glen A. Harroun

I am by no means an etymologist, but I have a pet theory on the origin of the word warlock, more correctly spelled werlock, in my opinion. Most dictionary definitions of warlock include ME: warloghe, OE: wrloga, to be an oath-breaker. These being wr, pledge or covenant plus loga, liar or betrayer. The history of warlock can be traced to Old English and much earlier.

There is a discontinuity between medieval and modern words in both form and meaning. The Old English meanings of wrloga, the Christian ancestor of warlock, were oath-breaker, wicked person, damned soul, and devil. These meanings persisted until the end of the medieval period. The regularly derived modern form of Old English wrloga would be warlow, which does occur in Middle English. During the Middle English period warlow developed the meaning sorcerer, wizard. It had its greatest currency in northern England and Scotland. Warlock in its current sense, wizard, acquired new life throughout the English-speaking world through the works of Sir Walter Scott and Robert Burns. The precise reason for the alteration of the second syllable is unknown, according to most dictionaries.

In my theory, when the Romans were occupying Britain, within the Roman army were virfloccus, warriors of great moral character and sense of duty. They were for the most part former gladiators, who had earned their freedom. They wore a shorn head except for one ritual lock of hair. This lock was cut off when they were defeated in battle and displayed by the victor; or when these warriors became betrothed, their wives would fashion their hair into a ring which they wore upon their fingers (spellcraft?). The word virfloccus came from vir, man or male, and floccus, lock (of hair or wool); but it soon identified this class of Roman warrior.

Vir in Latin became wer in Old English (as in werwulf) and in Middle English (werwolf). Floccus became lock, as in lock of hair. The Scottish werlock, while originally a description of male hair style, identified the warrior class of certain clans or covens. The warrior class title stuck, the hair style went. Within our circle there are older members who prefer the term werlock. They see themselves as the master-at-arms or protectors of the circle. In the past they did little to participate in the actual performance of magick.

The genesis of words and translations are so steeped in the context of the time that original meanings are hard to find. The infamous Exodus 22:18, Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, has always bothered me. One of our Circle, who has been attempting translation of various Greek literature, translated the line as You will not allow a poisoner to live, confirming what I had read in a recent Pagan publication. Herbalist witches, a few dead patients and the Christian scribes translate poisoner into the wrong noun in ignorance.

Am I just being paranoid? The Christian religion, like any, is a product of the previous belief systems. Like the meanings of words, religions seem to evolve to replace the earlier context out of which they came. So isn't it reasonable to assume that as this new system of belief gained power in four to seven hundred CE, it would attempt to discredit the earlier competing systems of belief out of which it grew? Can Darwin's principles describe the evolution of religion? Are believers in the old religions doomed to extinction? Or, by reviving the old religion, does the neo-Pagan movement threaten Christianity with extinction?

Just a little food for thought.

Benedicere Favere!