Archeia: Who they really are?

I'm sorry if I post in the wrong place. I hope I do not.

I would like to ask about the beings called "Archeia". Many people believe they are feminine aspects of Archangels and their Twin Flames. Honestly, I don't really know what to think about it. I haven't found anything about Archeia in the Bible and almost every Website says that archeia are feminine counterparts of Archangels. Could anyone tell me something more about them? I will be grateful

This post has been reviewed and I am working on a reply.

~Ari'el

Thank you a lot, Ariel.

I have not forgotten you. I am still working on a reply. It is quite extensive & I have been too busy to complete it but it will be up here soon.

~Ari'el

No problem. I'm patient :)

I am going to segment my response to this, because it is a very interesting topic & there is a lot of information to bring up...

I'll address the subject of the "Archeia" in 3 ways: One, in its modern usage - which is very different &, in many ways, almost wholly divided from its original source. Two, in its "regularities" - that is, the similarities the modern (New Age) concept of "Archiea" shares with the older views. And finally, its foundations in Gnosticism & the archaic proto-Semitic poly-pantheon of female "deities."

The term "Archeia" is a variation of the word "Archon", being a pluralization of the same basic root ("Archaeon"). The word has come to mean many things, because is has a broad reaching basic definition. It means "primary" or "original", & has such come to mean "beginning" or "supreme", "archive" (as in "earlier") & ruler ("lord"). Essentially the word "Archei" simply means a pluralization of the root. It means "what comes first", & can also mean "sources". To the Gnostics, the term "Archaeon" varied between meaning "Ancient one" to "Lord/Ruler." However, It is important to remember that the root "Archo" comes from a primitive verb... it indicates the action "to begin", "to originate", etc. This is important in its application to the beings called "Archeia", because their primary role (at least their recognizable purpose) is to catalyze the work of the Aeons.

The term "Archeia" actually means "the state of being an Arche". It is more properly written as "Archei", which is the basic plural form of the title. I am not criticizing the usage of the first spelling (which is what is highly used today), but will use "Archei" & "Archon" when referring to them.

First, it is important to understand the basic ideas surrounding the confusion between Archangels and Aeons. In short, the Aeons are called Archangels but are not the only Archangels - as they are set apart from other angels. "The Archangels" then means both: a choir, & the 7 highest angels (also called Aeons or Angels of the Presence). I will refer to the "Aeons", "Seven Archangels", & "Angels of the Presence" - but will be referring to the same 7 beings. (For more on this: see here.)

It is true that the beings called Archei are counterparts to the Aeons. It is also more true that they are feminine than not. They were originally known as female reflections of the Aeons, but were dissolved in the growth of Gnostic myth when, for a period of time, Archei and Aeons were considered a mix of the sexes & numbering hundreds. In the New Age movement (starting with the growth of 'modern' mysticism & a revival of the Gnostic/Semitic 'pantheon', they were again called female aspects of the 7 high angels. This reflects the way the Aeons were 'absorbed' into myths where their numbers were large, but maintained an identity as "the Seven" through the title of "Archangel."

I will admit I have not researched heavily on the New Age concept of "Archeia" (not that there is much information to research), but I have a basic understanding. I hope one day to get more in depth with how each of their names (which are in no way related to the originals, with the exception of "Sophia" & "Shekinah") have come about. I understand that many of the properties attributed to them individually are said to have come through "channeling" (that is, direct contact with spirits), & I do not discredit this, but can not wholly support it either.

I will send you a link to a site with information (that I am sure you have already seen), because I will be quoting some information found there.

The Archeia

I have seen several lists which cite 7 - 12 Archeia, usually 11. This makes sense because there are several 'well-known' angels which have been called "Archangels" & there is much confusion between them as to who makes up the 7 (or in some systems 10) primary angels (Aeons). From what I have seen, there are 7. This, I feel, is important because the number 7 is vital to their state of being. The number is universally symbolic in systems of angelology, and means divinity by perfect wholeness. It represents an absolute presence of which they are each a part. This is important because these beings are emanations of different aspects of God, who together reflect his absolute presence.

The most common list of these "Archangels", in association with the Archeia: (their corresponding Archeia in parenthesis)

Michael (Mikaela)
Gabriel (Annunciata)
Raphael (Mareia)
Uriel (Aurora)
Jophiel (Christophina)
Chamuel (Seraphina)
Tzadkiel (Amethystia)

Azrael (Magdalena)
Haniel (Maryllisa)
Metatron (Sophia)
Sandalphon (Shekinah)

The Angels of the Presence (or Aeons) as they are commonly listed are: Michael, Uriel, Ariel, Gabriel, Raphael, Danyael, Beqa/Lucifer/Nathanael. There are variations of this list, of course. These beings, unlike other angels, are not manifestations but emanations - meaning they are personal beings who are not 'created' but 'realized' as attributes of God. They are how an absolute God spreads his nature through creation, and so they are second in authority only to God their source. Each is an emanation of specific attributes or qualities of God, and through manifested creations made in the image of those properties, they are instruments in the creation of the universe. Each is a personification of its properties, but the properties it emanates are very central and principle. The properties of all of creation, its angels, structures & systems are found within these primal but complex attributes.

The Archeia are believed to be feminine counterparts of these 'Archangels', creating a balance by representing the same attributes but through feminine energies. In many forms of mysticism, (& in religious belief), feminine energy & quality is fundamental. 'Male' & 'Female' in this sense does not equate with gender, rather, earthly gender is a reflection of it. It is a generalization, but works in short, to say that 'female' energies and properties act as catalysts while 'male' energies are 'stablizers', or feminine qualities are rooted in potential while males are focused on actualizing. This represents Archeia as having the role of driving one half of their properties into the 'world.'

On the surface, these beings are given short descriptions and unique attributes which make them appear reflective of their male counterparts. Like most angelic property associations, they are listed with attributes such as virtues, chakras & planets. I'll direct you to external sources for some examples:

Archeia Reference

The two sites I have linked to contain the majority of information that can be found on the Archeia in this 'modern scheme.'

The origins of this concept - as well as the formation of the New Age scheme from those origins - is difficult to pin down. This is because Gnosticism is responsible for the written knowledge of these beings, and Gnosticism has possibly the most varying religious history when it comes to basic details in its myth. The Archons, which are the beings that Archeia are derived from, were written about in many different ways. Some believed them to be benign, while in other systems they were the primary evils of the world. One thing that was usually agreed on was that they were the unseen (except on rare occasions) rulers of the physical world. They remained close to Earth but were spiritual beings who governed life.

In Gnosticism, the Archons are being who are either equated with the Aeons or under them in rank. In those schemes which saw them as good, they were more like the Archangels as servants of the perfect God, but who were imperfect themselves as they were not whole. They were either the Aeons moved from the pleroma (God's presence) closer to Earth to observe man's progress or they were less perfect being who were spawned by the Aeons, and acting as servants or on their own will, remained close enough to the Earth and the affairs of living things to be called "authorities" of the physical world.

...more to come...

~Ari'el

Thank you very much, Ariel

I have more on this coming... it has been difficult to focus on it because anything related to Gnosticism usually sends me thinking in multiple directions.

Now, on the foundations of this idea of Archeia, and on the regularities between those fundamental ideas and what is accepted today by the New Age theme...

This whole concept can be almost entirely attributed to Gnosticism, and as I've said before, this is a very tricky belief system to pin down. It is basically a religion of symbolism, where meaning is everything & very little attention is given to the consistency of personality, names or descriptions of the Heavenly beings it describes. The reason for this is that, in the fundamental base of Gnosticism, most of this information is false, inconceivable in its truth as far as a human mind can see it, and unimportant in the grand scheme which places most of its attention on breaking free of the "shackles" of life & the Earth to become a Heavenly being. This means that Aeons, Archons, Demons, etc are secondary characters to what Gnosticism teaches is the 'goal' of life & religion, which is to reunite man's spirit with the absolute impersonal source of God. So these 'characters' that created Earth, manipulate man & do 'God's bidding' are interchangeably named and described, and it is difficult to find or list a consistent description of their character or their names.

I will not list all the variants available on these personalities and names. I am not solely dedicated to the study of Gnosticism (& would have to be to feel confident in my descriptions as it is a belief system with such a vast history). However, I have studied Gnosticism as it pertains to angelology enough to feel comfortable listing the 7 Aeons under their common names as:

Beqa (Kasbel/Lucifer), Michael, Uriel/Ariel, Gabriel, Raphael, Danyael, Nathanael.

And also under their common Gnostic names as:

Horaios (Set/Saklas), Sabaoth, Adonaios/Yaldabaoth, Astaphanos, Elaios, Iao.

Again, there are several variations on these lists, but these are the most commonly sourced. In the different systems these emanations are differently named, classified, and described, but the emanation theory itself is common to all forms of Gnosticism. In Valentinianism they form male/female pairs called "syzygies" (Greek συζυγίαι, from σύζυγοι syzygoi). This can be said to have been influenced by ancient religion of the East which had pantheons of paired male and female Gods. However, in Gnosticism, these "consorts" (Archons) were emanations of the 'dark' or 'unbalanced' side of those emanations of God - the Aeons. They are not companion beings like manifested creatures, but the 'dormant' or 'complimentary' side of an Aeons properties inherent from the Godhead it emanates. Likewise, those Aeons who were the properties they emanated were not all 'male'. Sex is not a direct characteristic of angels or Aeons, but gender is. Gender is an association based on properties being personalized as male and female. In most religions, this does not originate with man's thinking but with God's. God decides which of his properties were 'male' or 'female', & God later distributes properties that are 'feminine' to the sex of woman, and the "male" properties were reflected in male creatures, gender is then recognized from a mixture of those properties being recognized based on the sex they are commonly found in.

This gives a confounding concept which was addressed in Gnosticism. The Aeons are emanations of such large and general properties, that they are BOTH male & female in the properties they represent. This meant that the Aeons & Archons were just reflections of themselves, one male & one female, and that the overall 'sex' of an Aeon was determined by looking at what the majority of their properties were. The resulting reflection or "consort" was usually considered unstable (or at least less stable) & in some systems of Gnosticism, an evil or flawed presence. (This is why some systems consider Archons demonic.)

An example of this:
In addressing properties, Ariel is female, and the only Aeon - aside from Sophia - named as an angel who was given this sex. In ancient times, female properties were more severe yet more 'dormant' or 'potential' by nature. Male deities were the active intelligences who were catalyzed by female energies. As a result of being the 'stable' side of 'her' properties, Ariel's male counterpart was Ialdabaoth, an active & unstable Archon, who is a central figure in Gnosticism - the Demiurge (also called "Aariel"). Again, I will not go much into that here, as my point is just to illustrate the relationship between Aeons & Archons.

So, simplified: Aeons are the emanations of the supreme God, while Archons are emanations of Aeons, specifically of the balancing part of an Aeons properties. This means that they are not - from all 'angles' - their 'own' beings, though they do have intelligence and personality, they are difficult to distinguish from each other, & some Gnostic systems called all of these beings Archons or Aeons... Just as some called all Angels, Archangels or Principalities - Archons, & visa versa.

I will give a brief list of names of angels who have been called Aeons & Archons to illustrate how interwoven the idea of these beings has been through history:

Aeons:
Ialdabaoth (Yaldabaoth / Saklas / Sammael / Aariel)
Pronoia (Forethought) or Sambathas, (fixed time)
Iao (Yahu / Yahweh
Sabaoth (Jupiter Sabbas / Yahweh Sabaoth)
El (Elo / Elohim)
Danyael (Dana Yahweh)
Sophia (Wisdom / Ogdoad / Octonatio)
Astaphanos (Astaphaios / Astaphe)
Dynamis
Adonaios
Malakha
Uriel (Ur)
Ariel (Aariel / Ariouth / Namrus)
Tammuz
Adonis
Barbelo (Ogdoad)
Gabriel (Levannah / Levan / Annah / Annalla)
Shekinah
Raphael (Labbiel)
Elaios (Ailoaios / Ailoein / Eiloaios / Eloein / En lil)
Horaios (Jaroah / Horus)
Nathanael (Nahum)
Shekinah (El Shaddai / Esaldaios / Ruha)
Seth (Set / David)
Paraplex
Hekate
Typhon
Iachtanabas
Abraxas


Archons:
Spugliguel
Amatiel
Caracasa
Seth
Horus
Core
Commissoros
Tubiel
Kakia
Authadia (Authades / Aariel / Ialdabaoth)
Zelos
Phthonos
Errinnys
Epithymia
Gargatel
Gaviel
Tariel
Torquaret
Tarquam
Guabarel
Attarib
Amabael
Cetarari (Ctarari)
Cambiel
Barchiel
Abraxas
Malahidael
Asmodel
Ambriel
Muriel
Verchiel
Hamaliel
Zuriel
Barbiel
Advachiel
Hanael
Michael
Gabriel
Danyael
Anael (Anahel)
Raphael
Sammael
Sandalphon
Sachiel
Zebul
Sabath
Cassiel
Brachiel
Nathaniel
Uriel
Misrael
Donathiel
Brahmi
Uzziel
Xerona
Arithiel
Bitternut
Camael
Jophiel
Abdiel
Metatron
Penemue
Japhkiel
Raziel
Pistis Sophia
Erathaol
Zaphkiel
Domiel
Barachiel
Sealtiel
Zadkiel
Zachriel
Mupiel
Ithuriel
Zephon

This is only a partial list... & you can see that the two are comparable as there are several names which appear as both Aeons & Archons. However, keep in mind that the primary difference between Aeons & Archons is that the Aeons are more primal emanations & limited in number (usually to 7).

A characteristic feature of the Gnostic conception of the universe is the role played in almost all Gnostic systems by the seven world-creating Aeons, known as the Hebdomad (ἑβδομάς). Ancient astronomy taught that above the seven planetary spheres (or Heavens) was an eighth, the sphere of the fixed stars where a "pattern" (understanding) of creation was accessible. In this eighth sphere, dwelt the mother to whom all the Archons owed their origin, called Sophia, Shekinah or Barbelo. In the language of these sects the word Hebdomad not only denotes the seven Aeons, but is also a name of the heavenly regions over which the seven Aeons presided; while Ogdoad denotes the super-celestial regions which lay above their control where the godhead or the spirit (Sophia / Shekinah / Barbelo) dwelled. Of course, in some systems, these being are all referred to as "Archons" as seen listed above.

Now, it should be an obvious statement that with its emphasis on divine origins, the hidden "power" of man & personalization of the forces of nature, that Gnosticism was a major influence in much of the mysticism from late antiquity to modern times. The origins of "New Age" lore came from those mystics who wrote Grimoires & expounded on them, & much of authors such as Aliester Crowley, Carl Jung, and Emanuel Swedenborg, who often illustrated the personal "Archons."

As I have stated before: Gnostic systems vary in their interpretation of the nature or "goodness" of the Archons. As a primary focus of the New Age movement is to see the universe as "progressive", & dogma or religious tradition are not considered important in and of themselves. This means that beings adopted by its practitioners are often "muddled". That is to say, they are 'blended' with the history/qualities of similar beings & identified with them. They are also usually 'tempered' to be subdued in their severity. Demons, for example, are often considered 'dark' natured deities or spirits who are only potentially dangerous based on a lack of understanding by a person experiencing them. This is also very clearly seen in the New Age approach to angels themselves, which paints a picture of them as very "fluffy" in comparison to their origins.

The Archons or "Archeia" are no exception to this. Simply reading the list above (the first list of the "Archangels" & "Archeia") illustrates how the names of these beings as listed in New Age systems are 'borrowed' from several faiths. This does not mean I am directly contesting the validity that the list was indeed 'given' by some higher power. I am simply stating that, consistent with the New Age pattern: there is a clear pattern in the names of the primary female divinity in various faiths. Shekinah - the "Holy Spirit" to the Hebrews, Magdalen - the neo-Gnostic "bride of Christ", Mary - the orthodox Christian "Holy Mother", Sophia - the Gnostic "Mother of All". The other names appear to be attributed to their male counterparts, such as: Michael & Mikaela, Gabriel & Annunciata (Gabriel is the angel of annunciation), or Uriel & Aurora (both names have the root meaning "light.").

As with Gnosticism, however, New Age ideals are symbolic and wrought with meaning. These names are not crucial. What is important to those who believe in the Archeia is their role as catalysts or compliments to the Archangels (Aeons). This is similar to a few systems of Gnosticism, such as the Valentinian, but definitely not to all. (Consider that many systems call Archons "wicked", & some believe Sophia to be the only divine female.)

Also, I feel it is important to stress (even if we do not specify) the idea of a set number of these beings. Most commonly, there are 7 beings in the highest order - call them Aeons, the Hebdomad, Angels of the Face, Angels of the Presence, etc. And there are 3 divided 'seats' of the supreme God, commonly identified as the Trinity in orthodox Christianity but named by other faiths. In Gnosticism, this can be translated to say: "There are 10 Aeons/Archons", but most often there are cited 7 Hebdomad. They are in the form of 7 primal Aeons or 6 Aeons & one female Archon. This makes Ialdabaoth interchangeable between the term "Aeon" or "Archon" which likewise works for Ariel, Sophia, Shekinah, etc. It denotes the term "Archon" ("Archeia") to be associated with feminine primal properties, or more specifically, the properties of the "Spirit" of the Triune God (which is almost universally personalized as feminine).

This concept is not present (from what I have seen) in the New Age considerations. The Archangels are male, the Archeia female - the titles of both indicating their gender as much as defining it. There are also, less often, 7 of these 'sets' of holy beings. As listed above, I have found most often cited together 10 or 11 Archeia & corresponding Archangels.

Each "Archeia" acts as a channel or a 'battery' which charges or catalyzes the workings of the Archangel. Each also has their own various methods of ministering and answering prayers based on the properties they share with their Archangel.

Also, after doing much digging I believe most of what is established in the New Age system about the Archeia was derived from the book "Angels of Love and Light: The Great Archangels & Their Divine Complements, the Archeiai", authored by Lynn Fischer & illustrated by Marius Michael-George. In this work there are initially 7 Archeia listed along with their Archangels. The remaining Archeia & their descriptions appear to have been assembled by the New Age Philosophists Hilary Hargreaves & Mark Brittain [http://www.innerlightworkers.co.uk/] sometime in 2005/2006. All information on these beings online appears to have been quoted or copied from these sources. I have little reason to believe the origin of this information is elsewhere, so it is unnecessary to re-transcribe it here & will instead just direct you there for the New Age "Archeia"...

Angels of Love & Light

Archeia

~Ari'el

Wow... you found a lot of informations! Thanks a lot, Ariel!

I do not really believe in archeia anymore. I think that angels are androgynous and archeia were made by people, because they missed the angels who would be shown as females (many people see angels as males). Archeia are feminine sides of Archangels (not separated beings or their lovers).

Archeia or not, the concept of angels as entirely androgynous is very modern & of questionable accuracy.

Biological sex in angels is not present in the way it is on Earth (male & female) as angels are spiritual beings, but gender (masculine & feminine) in properties & spiritual beings is very prevalent in cultural, religious, and historical accounts of angels. The idea of most basic religions (& through them, even spiritual identities & language) is that spiritual gender is projected throughout creation, so that all properties have gender or specifically a balance of masculine/feminine, none being devoid of either. In other words, what we recognize as gender (& even the sexes 'male' & 'female') is theologically considered a reflection of those extremes in the divine. (This is why language has gender in word forms, objects / locations were traditionally personalized with gender.)

The idea that angels are without these characteristics is of late orthodox Christian tradition, & was clearly established to prevent angelolatry (worship or familiarization with angels) & to discredit those older accounts of angels of gender cohabiting with women or men of Earth. Those views are not even compatible with the belief in fallen angels, & were essentially put forward to imply that angels were perfectly incorruptible & incapable of moral descent.

This seems quite accurate as Archangels (or Aeons) are considered emanations rather than created beings. They, by nature, have many 'sides', the Archeia likely is just one. Though, keeping in mind, all emanations are 'sides' of the creator & can have personality (& even all things can be seen as 'sides' of the creator), this does not mean they do not have personality. I think it is a very complex issue to define what they are.

~Ari'el