malus, kakos (bad, wicked)

The word evil has a long and fascinating etymological history that traces back to Old English and beyond. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Old English: The word “evil” originates from the Old English word yfel, which meant “bad, vicious, ill, wicked.” It was used broadly to describe anything harmful or morally reprehensible.

2. Proto-Germanic: Before Old English, the term comes from the Proto-Germanic root ubilaz, which also carried the meaning of “bad” or “evil.” Variants of this root appear in other Germanic languages:

• Old High German: ubil

• Old Saxon: ubili

• Gothic: ubils

3. Proto-Indo-European: The root of ubilaz is thought to trace back to the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root upelo- or upo-, which conveys ideas of “overturning” or “exceeding limits,” suggesting something disruptive or harmful.

4. Shift in Usage: Over time, “evil” evolved from a general term for “bad” or “harmful” into a more specific term for moral wickedness, particularly in a religious or philosophical context.

5. Comparison with Related Words: In other languages, similar terms for “evil” also reflect notions of harm or moral wrong:

• Latin: malus (bad, evil)

• Greek: kakos (bad, wicked)

Thus, the concept of “evil” has ancient roots tied to notions of harm, wrongdoing, and disruption of order, evolving into its modern sense of profound immorality or wickedness.

Transgress good or healthy

Bad, harmful, deviant?

The English word “evil” has its origins deep in the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family, tracing back at least to the early stages of Old English and beyond. Its earliest known form in English appears as yfel in Old English texts, dating to before the 12th century. This Old English form aligns closely with cognates in other early Germanic languages, such as Old Saxon ubil, Old Frisian ivel, and Old High German ubil. All these variants carry meanings related to morally reprehensible behavior, misfortune, or something harmful or disastrous, though they did not always have the exclusively moral sense that “evil” often carries today.

The Proto-Germanic precursor is commonly reconstructed as *ubilaz (or similar variants), pointing to a shared root in the pre–written history of the Germanic tongues. Although definitive reconstructions at this deep temporal distance are always somewhat tentative, most historical linguists believe that this root signified something “bad,” “harmful,” or “deviant.” It may have been connected to the idea of transgressing established boundaries or failing to meet the standards of what was considered “good” or “healthy.”

Beyond Proto-Germanic, attempts have been made to link the root to Proto-Indo-European (PIE) forms. Some scholars have proposed a tie to a PIE root that would have carried a more general sense of “exceeding limits” or “causing harm,” though the precise PIE form and meaning remain uncertain. Such uncertainty arises because not every Germanic concept can be neatly matched to a PIE antecedent with a direct semantic equivalent. Nonetheless, the general sense of wrongdoing, harm, or moral deficiency seems consistent throughout its deep linguistic ancestry.

In Old English usage, yfel had a relatively broad semantic range, encompassing not only moral depravity but also misfortune, calamity, defect, and anything considered unfavorable or harmful. It was not strictly limited to moral evil as modern English often is. Over time, and through the Middle English period, the forms shifted—ivel, evil, and others—gradually standardizing into the modern spelling “evil.”

By the later medieval period and into Early Modern English, the moral and spiritual connotations of “evil” came to the forefront, particularly influenced by religious texts and philosophical treatises that contemplated the nature of sin, wrongdoing, and moral opposition to the divine. Thus, the modern English sense of “evil” as embodying profound immorality, wickedness, and malevolence reflects a long history of both linguistic evolution and cultural reinterpretation of its meaning.