(The following text is a reply to a question I had in the use of the terms covered below. The full answer is provided, as I believe all Enochian Magicians should have access to this helpful information. Only minor editing was done.)
The dilemma here is that in the original
MS. these terms are conflated with the "to be" verb and therefore are parsed as adverbial. But if one is going to use these as titles, as done in the Aurum Solis, and not as descriptions, as they are originally given by Dee, then one has to convert them into adjectives. This quite acceptable, by the way, even in Classical Latin, but Dee's adverbial construction is more standard within a prose context of his supplications,
whereabouts the names would be reconstituted with adjectival modifiers in lists and indicative expressions. Supplications are always in the subjunctive case, a grammatical tense all but lost in modern English.
Here is how I would make the constructions, the adjective traditionally follows the noun in Latin except in the use of the "to be" verb.
Angelus Praeclarus (sing.) / Angeli Praeclari (pl.)
Angelus Illustris (sing.) / Angeli Illustres (pl.)
Angelus Insignis (sing.) / Angeli Insignes (pl.)
Angelus Fulgidus (sing.) / Angeli Fulgidi (pl.)
Angeli Praeclari (2nd decl. adj.) This is constructed with a complex adjective with a number of literal and transferative meanings. Literally "very clear" or "very bright angels" it can also mean "very beautiful angels" either in a visual or moral sense, also "very noble," "splendid," or "distinguished angels."
It can even mean "notorious" in context and for obvious reasons it is the common appellation given to Lucifer. The root clarus is cognate with the English 'clear.'
Angeli Illustres (3rd decl. adj.) This is a medieval adjectival
construction and does not appear in a classical context. It is made by adding the prefix i-, il- (meaning "that are") to lustris which has three separate but related meanings, the first two derived from ancient Etruscan and the last from Greek.
The primary meaning of lustris would make these "the angels that purify by propitiatory offering" (from the Vestal inscriptions as read by Claudius Caesar), but also from Virgil's reading of the Etruscan monuments "the angels that go round" (they did circumnabulations as preparation for ritual, vide supra) or transf. "the angels that traverse," "review,"
"survey," "observe," or "examine." The English cognate here is
'lustration' but as it is a medieval composite it is probable that the intended cognate is 'illustrious.'
The Greek derivation Latin is from Cicero who set the standard for these kinds of constructions and it would mean "the angels that light" or "illuminate." The English cognate is 'luster.'
Angeli Insignes (3rd decl. adj.) Literally "the conspicuous angels," transf. "the distinguished," "marked," or "decorated (in the military sense of given medals etc.) angels." The English cognate is 'insignia.'
Because this is also a construct (albeit a classical one) i-, in- + signum the meaning can also be taken as "the angels with tokens," "signs," "medals," "badges," and even "gems."
Angeli Fulgidi (2nd decl. adj.) Literally "the flashing" or "glittering angels," from the Latin for 'lightening.' Sometimes "shining" and is often used to refer to bright or variable stars. It is related to the English 'fulminate.'
I find this variety of meaning very useful in approaching the complexity of the angels of the subquadrants. They are of great number and the subtlety of meaning can be useful in individuating them from their numerable fellows. Note similarly for the Angels mentioned on pp 211-213 of vol. 3
of the MYSTERIA MAGICA.
When you are wandering through used book stores,
(as all good Enochian magicians should do on a regular basis ;-) keep your eyes open for a LATIN: AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE by F. M. Wheelock and a Smith's (sometimes Smith & Lockwood or even Chambers Murray, they are all the same) LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY. It's extremely hard to do Enochian without at least some basic Latin tools and these are the best.
