Speaking of "konx om pax" ...
-
As Jim's book tells us, Αστρον Αργον equals 451 in Greek, and this is possible because of the practice of treating -ST- as the old digraph Stau or Stigma with value 6, instead of the usual Sigma + Tau = 500.
And 451 is nifty because "konx om pax" has that value.
Except ...
It only has that value if the first word is spelled ΚΟΝΞ.
Think about how you would say the word "Thanks" in English. You find that the "N" has the "NG" quality that the end of "Sing" does. Well, the Greeks used a Gamma there instead of a Nu. So before Gamma, Kappa, Chi, or Xi ("velar" consonants, as they're called in phonetics), you have G instead of N. (Another example: "angelos" is ΑΓΓΕΛΟΣ, not ΑΝΓΕΛΟΣ.)
So the phrase is properly spelled ΚΟΓΞ ΟΜ ΠΑΞ, with the value 404 instead (gamma = 3, nu = 50). (And indeed, in the 1514 printing of Hesychius's lexicon, it is a gamma rather than a nu.)
And this is why Gematria is hard ...
-
@sk4p said
"As Jim's book tells us, Αστρον Αργον equals 451 in Greek, and this is possible because of the practice of treating -ST- as the old digraph Stau or Stigma with value 6, instead of the usual Sigma + Tau = 500.[//quotye]
Yes. That ligature should always be treated as a single character equal to 6 in Greek."It only has that value if the first word is spelled ΚΟΝΞ."
That's how it's spelled in the Greek mysteries from which it arises. (Ompax is a single word but, other than that, it's straightforward.)
"So the phrase is properly spelled ΚΟΓΞ ΟΜ ΠΑΞ,"
No, it isn't. The actual Greek spelling is ΚΟNΞ ΟΜΠΑΞ . This isn't a reconstruction, it's from source documents (Eleusinian Mysteries I think, but I'm going from memory on things last read 20 years ago).
"(And indeed, in the 1514 printing of Hesychius's lexicon, it is a gamma rather than a nu.)"
"Puzzling, because that's at odds with other sources.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
Yes. That ligature should always be treated as a single character equal to 6 in Greek.
"You say "that ligature", but is the sequence Sigma-Tau not ever written as two characters rather than the ligature? Or you mean "the sequence".
"Puzzling, because that's at odds with other sources."
Wikipedia article says it's the gamma spelling, and yes, WP needs citations, but in this case it has one:
WP: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konx_om_Pax
Citation from 1514 edition: archive.thulb.uni-jena.de/hisbest/rsc/viewer/HisBest_derivate_00001239/BE_0395_0217.tif
I just report what I see.
-
To add for your convenience in searching: "Konx, ompax" is about halfway down the right-hand column on that page, with "Konx," at the end of a line and "ompax" at the beginning of the next; there are many other "konx" phrases in that column, and at a quick glance I see none which are the Nu spelling; I only see Gamma ones.
-
And another old scanned printing:
Amusingly, I searched for the Nu spelling and google found that, but the phrase clearly uses the Gamma.
I wonder if some confusion arises because both lowercase gamma and lowercase nu have a "v"-sort of shape; it would be a reasonably easy slip for a scribe, less so with the uppercase forms.
-
Another source, for what it's worth, is the version of Crowley's Greek Qabalah floating around on the net keyed in by Bill Heidrick; at the value 404 you can find "kappa-omicron-gamma-xi omicron-mu pi-alpha-xi", but you cannot find the "ΚΟΝΞ" spelling therein, and the only entry at 451 is Αστρον Αργον itself.
Again, Jim, not to say "you're wrong" by any means: you've got decades on me and many others in this business.
But this is the sort of thing that leads to confusion and questions, so IMO it's worth asking and seeing what we can clear up! -
Hi, yes, it's Κὸγξ, ὂμπαξ . With a nu it is a misspelling. I am the one who corrected the wikipedia article on Crowley's Konx Om Pax with the original source in Hesychius. Crowley knew this, of course, and gives it the value of 404 in the Greek Qabalah.
In Greek orthography, a gamma before another gamma or the other velar consonants Κ, ξ, and χ, represents the sound /ng/, a characteristic called “ingma.” This is simply a rule of Greek, both ancient and modern, and there are no orthographic exceptions.
Here are some other well-known words with Latin or English cognates which show it –
Ιυγγες - - “Iunges”as in Star Ruby ritual (nominative plural form of Ιυγξ, “Iunx”, whence English “jinx”); never spelled “ιυνγες” or “Ιυνξ”
Σφιγξ - “Sphinx”; never spelled “σφινξ”
Αγγελος – “Angel”; never spelled “ανγελλος”
Ελεγχος – “Elench”; never spelled “ελενχος”
Κογχη – “Conch”; never spelled “κονχη”
Πλαγκτόν – “Plankton”; never spelled “πλανκτόν”
Etc.