If you want to go with the more sycretized version, Liber Chanokh is fine.

Does anybody know of any online or printed graphics that show the correct Tabula Resenca tables with the correct elemental (pyramidal) attributes?

IF working with the Tabula Resenca w/o pyramids, does this mean that a lot of the ceremonial work no longer has a "hook"? I.e. I'm not calling up each individual letter with the pentagrams and hexagrams for the GD attributions, I'm just skrying the letter itself?

Or should I just make both versions?

Confusing stuff!

"Regarding the sephirotic cavalry cross of each lesser angle, why is it that Kether is attributed to Jupiter/Fortune, Chokma/2 to Mercury/The Magus, and so on? This leaves the last few squares without any planet or trump corresponding, and I was wondering if there was any official GD explanation?"

It's complicated - and, again, it's all Mathers. You can read about it fully in Regardie's original G.D.

"In the section of the Golden Dawn that discusses Enochian Magic, Regardie only offers a vague reasoning behind this and only devotes a short paragraph to the subject. Other than that I have found no mention of why."

Yes, only vague reasoning was ever given It's not a well-developed doctrine.

"So if I use the lettering as in Rescensa and the elemental/zodiac patterns as in Chanokh, I should be good? (I mean specifically the elemental/zodiac/planetary attributions of the side of each pyramid - I already made them in this form)."

My memory is that this is correct, yes.

Except, please understand that this isn't Enochian. The pyramid idea is entirely a Golden Dawn (Mathers) invention. This isn't to say anything against it, actually - just to clarify that it is in no way a component of Enochian as received by Dee/Kelly from their transmitting angels.

"And Great Table or individual - depends on what? "

Context, among other things.

So if I use the lettering as in Rescensa and the elemental/zodiac patterns as in Chanokh, I should be good? (I mean specifically the elemental/zodiac/planetary attributions of the side of each pyramid - I already made them in this form).

I notice, for instance, there is a different elemental patterning in the back of Duquette's book than the one in Chanokh.

And Great Table or individual - depends on what?

Thanks for your help!

"Just spent SEVERAL weeks painstakingly constructing Enochian Tablets based on the patterns in Liber Chanokh.

However, now looking around at other sources (Duquette's new book, Ben Rowe's material, Donald Tyson) I see several different patterns for the tables, a discussion of the Tabula Rescensa of Raphael, etc. I am immensely irritated that I may have wasted my time on an incorrect patterning of the Tables.

My question is, which of the Table layouts is considered the most accurate? Is the one in Chanokh viable? "

No. It's just a variant of the Golden Dawn hodge-podge.

"Tabula Rescensa or no?"

This is the version that Temple of Thelema fully endorses. It is the version that came at the end - after all the methods and patterns and forms etc. were dictated and the system was delivered - Raphael showed up and said, more or less, "Here, these are the real tablets."

You can find them online here: aumha.org/arcane/enoch.htm - Don't forget to download and install the Enochian fonts TTF on that page before viewing the tablets.

"Is it advised to use the elemental attributes of the G.D., or a different scheme of elemental attributes?"

You mean for the basic tablets and their quarters? The GD had that right.

I don't recommend, though, that you make them in the Pyramid form - at least initially. That is for very specific work, not the general work. However: As thou wilt.

"Should they be formed into a Great Table, or left split up as in the G.D.?"

Either, depending.