{"collection":"bos","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/bos/bos620.htm","path":"bos/bos620.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/bos/bos620.htm","text":"Internet Book of Shadows, (Various Authors), [1999]\n The Derivation of the word Witch \n by Doreen Valiente\nStrangely enough, the derivation of the word witch is a subject on which\nscarcely any two authorities can be found to agree. The most frequent\nexplanation is that it is akin to the word wise, and that witchcraft\ntherefore means The Craft of the Wise.\nIt is widely believed that Gerald Gardner originated this derivation.\nHowever, this is incorrect, as it appears in Hugh Ross Williamson's\nbook, The Arrow and the Sword, first published in 1947, before any of\nGerald Gardner's books on witchcraft. But is this the right derivation?\nNot according to Professor Jeffrey Russell, who gives an appendix on\nthis subject in his book A History of Witchcraft (Thames & Hudson,\nLondon, 1980). Professor Russell rejects any connection with the Old\nEnglish word witan, meaning to know, as he also does with the Old\nEnglish wican, to bend. In his opinion, the real origin comes from the\nIndo-European word weik, which has a general connection with religion\nand magic. From this very ancient root-word came in turn, among other\nthings, a word wikk, meaning magic and sorcery, and this eventually\nproduced the Old English wicca, a male witch, wicce, a female witch,\nand the verb wiccian, to bewitch or work witchcraft.\nIt will be seen from the above that \"Wicca\" does not mean \"witchcraft\"\nand never did, in spite of its widespread modern use. So how did this\nusage originate? In his biography, Gerald Gardner: Witch, it describes\nhis initiation in \"Old Dorothy's\" house, and says, 'It was half way\nthrough when the word Wica was first mentioned: \"and I then knew that\nthat which I had thought burnt out hundreds of years ago still sur-\nvived.\"' It will be seen that at this time Gerald didn't even know how\nto spell the word. Its correct spelling is as above. Nor, unfortunately,\ndoes this account state in what context the word was used. It might have\nbeen that Old Dorothy's coven was simply proclaiming Gerald a male\nwitch, in which case this would have been an accurate use of the word.\nSo where did Gerald get the idea that \"Wicca\" meant witchcraft? I would\nlike to advance a theory of my own. I must emphasise that this is just\na theory, and I may be wrong. But I believe that this idea originated\nfrom his reading of a book which I know that he possessed, namely\nAn Encyclopaedia of Occultism by Lewis Spence. This very valuable work\nof reference first appeared in 1920, according to the mention of it\nin the bibliography at the end of Gerald's book, Witchcraft Today.\nIt has recently been re-issued by Bracken Books under the title of\nThe Encyclopaedia of the Occult. The entry referring to witchcraft\nbegins: \"Witchcraft: (from Saxon Wicca, a contraction of witega, a\nprophet or sorcerer).\" This could have been read and misunderstood\nto mean that \"Wicca\" meant witchcraft, and this misconception has\nbeen carried on through the ranks of modern witches ever since.\nIt has to be said, of course, that the word Wicca has its uses to\ndefine the present-day revival, especially in the USA, where a number\nof associations using this word have gained legal recognition as\nreligious bodies. Personally, however, I prefer the term The\nOld Religion, which is the English equivalent of the Italian term\nused by the followers of Aradia, namely La Vecchia Religione.\n(See Charles Godfrey Leland's book, Aradia: or the Gospel of the\nWitches, first published in 1899.)\n2741\n(Incidentally, there is a legend in witchcraft circles to the effect\nthat the reason why the original edition of this book is so rare is\nthat old Gerald bought up all the copies he could find and destroyed\nthem. Whether there is any truth in this or not, I cannot say.)\nIn spite of Professor Russell's opinion, as quoted above, there is an\nolder derivation of the word witch that may perhaps be worthy of\nconsideration. This may be found in A Concise Etymological Dictionary\nof the English Language by the Rev. Walter W Skeat (Clarendon Press,\nOxford, 1901). This book discusses the above-mentioned derivations\nfrom wicca, wicce, etc., and then in turn connects these old words\nwith the Norwegian vikja, which means firstly 'to turn aside' and\nsecondly 'to conjure away'. Thus, speculates the Rev. Skeat, the word\nwitch possibly meant 'averter'.\nHe also mentions that the Anglo-Saxon word witega, a prophet or seer,\ncomes from the Anglo-Saxon witan, to observe, which he says is 'cognate\nwith witan, to know.'. We have seen that Lewis Spence regarded witega as\nthe origin of wicca. So who is right? In spite of all claims, it seems\nto me that it remains a matter of opinion. One thing we do know is that\nthe word came to Britain with the Saxons, who at the time of their\narrival on these shores were pagans. I believe that to them, the word\nwitch (or whichever of its forerunners they used), did not necessarily\nhave any derogatory meaning. A witch was a seer, a knower, an averter of\nevil. The word only took on a negative meaning with the coming of\nChristianity, which taught that all the gods of the heathen were devils.\nSo anyone who clung o the old ways and the Old Religion was a devil\nworshipper. And annually, around Halloween, we still see the same old\ncharges being made in the same old spirit of bigotry. Isn't it sad that\nthese good folk haven't learnt anything since the Dark Ages?\n................................................................................\n2742","title":"Internet Book of Shadows: \"WITCH\" (Doreen Valiente, in WoW)","type":"page"}