# Koren #1 @7314 Thu Apr 19 122855 1990 Obviously, a modern numerologist wouldn't get very f

```

Koren #1 @7314
Thu Apr 19 12:28:55 1990

Obviously, a modern numerologist wouldn't get very far with this table.
In order to compensate for the missing letters in the Hebrew system, most
modern textbooks on numerology 'fill in' the missing letters by 'borrowing'
numerical values from the Greek alphabet, thus mixing cultural symbols in an
eclectic approach that is not entirely convincing.
Another problem is the exclusion of the number 9 from the table -- which
modern textbooks often 'explain' by saying that the Hebrews did not use the
number 9, since it was a 'sacred' and 'mystical' number.  The real truth,
however, is far less esoteric.  The fact is, the Hebrew alphabet DID have
letters with the numerical value of 9 -- the letters Teth and Sade.  But,
since Teth and Sade do not have equivalents in our modern English alphabet,
the 9 value must be left out.
And finally, it is once again difficult to see any INTRINSIC
relationship between a Hebrew letter and the number it represents.  Why
should one symbol stand for 1, or another for 2, or yet another for 3, and
so on?  The whole superstructure seems somewhat shakey.      But let us now
turn our attention to a Celtic alphabetic system called the 'Ogham'.  This
alphabet is written by making a number of short strokes (from 1 to 5) below,
above, or through a 'base line' (which in practice tended to be the edge of
a standing stone).  Thus, A, O, U, E, and I would be written, respectively:

---/----//----///----////----/////---

Of course, in this system it is easy to see how a letter becomes associated
with a number, since the numerical value of each letter is implicit.  Thus,
A=1, O=2, U=3, E=4, and I=5.  (It is true there is much disagreement and
confusion among modern scholars as to how the Ogham alphabet should be
rendered.  Further, a number of different Oghams seem to have been employed
at various times by different Celtic cultures.  But this confusion usually
centers on whether the strokes should be above, below, or through the base
line -- NOT on the number of strokes used.  On that point, there is general
agreement.  And though orientation to the base line is important, it is not
essential to our discussion of numerology, since we need only concern
ourselves with the NUMBER of strokes used.)
Thus, based on the work of such scholars as P.C. Power, S. Ferguson, D.
Diringer, I. Williams, L. Spence, and D. Conway, I have synthesized the
following table of Celtic numerology:

1       2       3       4       5
---------------------------------
A       D       T       C       I
B       G       U       E       N
H       L       V       F       P
M       O       W       J       Q
X               K       R
S       Y
Z

Using this table, the student of Celtic numerology would then proceed to
analyze any word in the generally accepted manner.  One should not be
concerned that the numbers 6, 7, 8, and 9 do not appear in this system, as
the Ogham alphabet had NO letters with these values (as opposed to the Hebrew
alphabet which DID have letters with the missing 9 value, as mentioned
earlier).  Another consideration is that the Ogham alphabet is just that --
an alphabet.  It never represented any particular language, and historically
it has been employed by many different languages.  Again by contrast, the
Hebrew alphabet was structured for a particular language -- Hebrew -- and
many problems arise when we attempt to adapt it to a language for which it
is not suited.
Although the Ogham alphabet only has letter values from 1 through 5, all
of the numbers from 1 through 9 (plus any master numbers of 11, 22, etc.)
will be used in the final analysis (just as in the Hebrew system).  To
understand how this works, let us try an example.  We will use the name of
the Welsh goddess Rhiannon:

R + H + I + A + N + N + O + N
5 + 1 + 5 + 1 + 5 + 5 + 2 + 5 = 29
2 + 9 = 11
Most numerologists will agree that 11 is a 'master number' or 'power
number' and therefore it is not further reduced by adding the two digits
(although, if one does this, 1 + 1 = 2, and 2 is considered the first even
and feminine number in the numerical sequence, certainly appropriate for a
Welsh Mother Goddess).  Viewed as an 11, the analysis is usually that of
someone who is on a 'higher plane of existence' (certainly appropriate for
a goddess), someone who brings 'mystical revelation'.  Often this is someone
who feels slightly distant from the people surrounding him or her, and who
has trouble feeling any real empathy for them (which seems to fit a faery
queen who has come to live in the land of mortals).  Also, this is sometimes
the number of the martyr, or of someone unjustly accused (which is certainly
true of Rhiannon's story as told in the 'Mabinogi', in which she is falsely
accused of destroying her own son).      By way of contrast, the 'modern'
system would have Rhiannon be a 3, a somewhat inappropriate masculine number
(not that all feminine names should always yield a feminine number -- but
one would at least expect it to do so in the case of an archetypal mother
goddess).  The Hebrew system would yield an even more inappropriate 4, that
being the number of the material world and all things physical (and since

```

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank