Towards Historicizing 'Magic' in Antiquity

copy Koninklijke Brill NV Leiden 2013 DOI 10116315685276-12341267

Numen 60 (2013) 308ndash347 brillcomnu

Towards Historicizing ldquoMagicrdquo in Antiquity1

Bernd-Christian OttoInstitut fuumlr Religionswissenschaft Universitaumlt Erfurt

Nordhaumluserstr 63 99089 Erfurt Germanyberndottouni-erfurtde

AbstractEven though the concept of ldquomagicrdquo has sufffered severe criticism in academic discourse the category continues to be used in many disciplines During the last two decades clas-sicists in particular have engaged in a lively discussion over ldquomagicrdquo and have produced an impressive amount of written output Given the impossibility of defĳining ldquomagicrdquo in a consistent and widely accepted manner one cannot help but wonder what these scholars are actually talking about Hence this paper purports (a) to critically review the recent debate on ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies (b) to advocate for abandoning an abstract category of ldquomagicrdquo in favour of a proper analysis of ancient sources and (c) to historicize the term ldquomagicrdquo in Antiquity that is to muse on its ancient semantics func-tions and contexts This methodological approach does not only overcome the major problems inherent in modern defĳinitions of ldquomagicrdquo but will also yield new insights into terminologies modes of thought and speech strategies that underlie ancient reli-gious discourses

Keywordsmagic Classical Antiquity Classical Studies Religious Studies conceptual history

Reviewing the Recent Debate in Classical Studies

Over the last two decades an ongoing discourse on ldquomagicrdquo has left an enduring imprint on the Study of Classical Antiquity Classicists have been highly confĳident in organizing international conferences on the

1)enspI would like to thank Richard Gordon Michael Stausberg and Marios Skempis for their helpful comments on diffferent drafts of this paper

B-C Otto Numen 60 (2013) 308ndash347 309

topic2 and have published an impressive number of collections of essays3 articles4 several source books5 and numerous monographs aiming at a systematic overview of the material presented while partly proposing new theoretical terminological and methodological approaches6 To date however cardinal questions that have shaped the academic controversy over ldquomagicrdquo since the late 19th century remain to be answered What is ancient ldquomagicrdquo In what sense is it distinct from ancient ldquoreligionrdquo How should Classicists proceed with ambigu-ous data whose general classifĳication regarding these categories have unleashed an ongoing dispute7 Is the concept of ldquomagicrdquo any good for understanding ancient sources Or should it fĳinally be removed from academic discourse altogether given its judgmental ethnocentric and semantically fuzzy notions

2)enspThe most representative among them are ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo (August 1992 University of Kansas) ldquoMagic and Divination in the Ancient Worldrdquo (February 1994 Berkeley) ldquoEnvisioning Magicrdquo (March 1995 Princeton) ldquoThe World of Ancient Magicrdquo (May 1997 Norwegian Institute Athens) ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo (August 1998 Chapman University California) ldquoPrayers Magic and the Stars in the Ancient and late Antique Worldrdquo (March 2002 Washington) ldquoMagical Practice in the Latin Westrdquo (SeptemberOctober 2005 Zaragoza) ldquoContextualizing Magicrdquo (November 2009 Rome)3)enspCf Faraone amp Obbink 1991 Meyer amp Mirecki 1995 Kippenberg amp Schaumlfer 1997 Jor-dan Montgomery amp Thomassen 1999 Ciraolo amp Seidel 2002 Mirecki amp Meyer 2002 Noegel amp Walker 2003 Bremmer amp Veenstra 2003 Brodersen amp Kropp 2004 Shaked 2005 Gordon amp Marco Simoacuten 2010 Bohak Harari amp Shaked 2011 4)enspApart from the essays in the collections mentioned above the following articles are important Segal 1981 Versnel 1991 Phillips III 1994 Becker 2002 Stratton 2013 5)enspLuck 1985 amp 2006 Ogden 20026)enspCf Foumlgen 1993 Graf 1996 Dickie 2001 Janowitz 2001 Lotz 2005 Carastro 2006 Busch 2006 Stratton 2007 Kropp 2008 7)enspSee eg the discussions about neoplatonic theurgy about the so-called prayers for justice or texts like the Corpus Hermeticum or the Papyri Graecae Magicae For neo-platonic theurgy see among others Copenhaver 1987 in fact the controversy started already in late Antiquity with Iamblichus who opted for a clear distinction (eg de mys-teriis 325160f 331176f) and Augustine who deliberately equated ldquomagicrdquo with ldquotheu-rgyrdquo (eg de ciuitate dei 109) For the discussion about prayers for justice see especially Versnel 2010 For the discussion about the Corpus Hermeticum see eg Copenhaver 1988 Also the Papyri Graecae Magicae have been subject to an ongoing dispute on its ldquomagicalrdquo andor ldquoreligiousrdquo properties mdash see eg Segal 1981 Smith 1995 Remus 1999

310 B-C Otto Numen 60 (2013) 308ndash347

Apparently the vast majority of the works alluded to above do not take up a radical position regarding these questions (that is they do not opt for abandoning the term) but rather continue to perceive ldquomagicrdquo as an adequate albeit disputed category8 Thus to date the term ldquomagicrdquo still serves as a concept widely used to signify and classify specifĳic source material in the Study of Classical Antiquity Substantive applica-tions of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo appear so regularly even in works aiming at a critical discussion or deconstruction of modern defĳinitions9 that an implicit conviction of (at least the majority ofthinsp) Classicists becomes apparent it might be problematic or even impossible to defĳine ldquomagicrdquo in a coherent way but nevertheless ldquomagicalrdquo rites were indeed per-formed in Classical Antiquity Beyond the words and independent of academic controversies ancient ldquomagicrdquo is (and was respectively) real and as such needs to be properly investigated

8)enspSee all with explicit justifĳication Versnel 1991 Thomassen 1999 Hofffman 2002 9)enspSome examples may serve to illustrate this point Fritz Graf (199614ndash23) who con-vincingly deconstructs the classical set of defĳinitions put forward by Frazer Durkheim Malinowski and others begins his monograph with the following words of confĳidence ldquoMagie ist ein fester Bestandteil der antiken Religionen Griechenlands Roms des alten Italienrdquo (Graf 1996 9) as he rejects all substantive defĳinitions throughout his book the introductory sentence (and many others) therefore remains mysterious In a similar vein Matthew Dickie (20011fff) criticizes all established defĳinitions in the introductory chapter of his Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World but frequently surprises with phrases such as ldquoThe overarching category so formed is surely to be identifĳied with a concept that denotes much the same set of activities as does our concept of magicrdquo (p 34) ldquothe concept of mageiacutea was at fĳirst very far from being coextensive with the notion of magic with which we operaterdquo (p 21) or ldquoThe concept of magic present in the Greek world of the fĳifth century BC and particularly in Athens [thinspthinsp] tallies in large measure but not entirely with the concept of magic with which the Western world is familiarrdquo (p 40) Dickie apparently suggests a pragmatic everyday understanding here yet as he rejects all established defĳinitions it remains unclear what he actually means by ldquoour concept of magicrdquo Likewise Peter Busch (200615) dismisses substantive defĳini-tions at the beginning of his Magie in neutestamentlicher Zeit but nevertheless classifĳies ldquomagicrdquo as being part of ldquoreligionrdquo throughout his book Similar patterns of argumenta-tion can be found in many of the aforementioned works Some twenty years ago Henk Versnel (1991181) described this problem with pertinence ldquoPractically no one escapes moments of reduced concentration when they suddenly fall into unsophisticated com-mon sense concepts though they sometimes betray their awareness of the lapse by putting the term magic between inverted commas or adding lsquoso-calledrsquordquo


The ongoing belief of Classicists in the term ldquomagicrdquo as a feasible or unavoidable academic category may partly be explained by the fact that the very same term appears within the ancient sources As is known the former denomination of a Persian priest caste maguš10 entered into the ancient Greek language in the 5th century BCE11 underwent some signifĳicant semantic transformations during its Greek adaptation12 and from then on served as an important concept in Greek Roman Jew-ish and Christian literature throughout all Antiquity Unsurprisingly a number of ancient authors were already discussing the concept and in part proposed theories about the possible mechanisms underlying the beliefs and rituals subsumed under μαγείαmagia13 Since the early Roman Empire people had even been prosecuted under the formal-ized term crimen magiae14 mdash the Apologia sive pro se de magia of the 2nd century philosopher Apuleius Madaurensis is both a dazzling and highly entertaining textual proof15 Finally more than two thousand

10)enspCf de Jong 1997387 ldquoThese words derive from the Old Persian appellative for a priest magu- (nom Maguš) etymologically related to Av mogu- which appears to have meant lsquo(member of a) tribersquordquo For the early etymology see also Nock 1933 Bremmer 1999200211)ensp Cf among other texts Aeschylus Persae 318 Sophocles Oedipus Rex 387f Euripi-des Orestes 1493f Euripides Iphigeneia in Tauris 1327f Gorgias Encomium of Helen 9ndash10 Hippocrates De morbo sacro 11f Plato Alcibiades 1 122a12)enspIn all likelihood the Persian ldquomagiciansrdquo described by Herodotus in his Histories (eg 1101f 330f 719f 37f 113f 191f) and documented in the Persepolis Fortifĳication Tab-lets (see Hallock 1969) did not apply an etymological derivate of their self-appellation to their practices and beliefs indeed they seem to have been responsible for central aspects of Persian temple and deity cults that is for Persian ldquoreligionrdquo In contrast the adaptation of the Greek term implied the conviction that ldquomagicrdquo is not religion but sacrilege and blasphemy (in Greek terms ἀσέβεια) see eg Hippocrates de morbo sacro 11f esp 28f and below13)enspCf among others Plato Laws 932endash933e (Plato uses the Greek synonym φαρμακεία for synonyms see below footnote 62) Pliny the Elder Historia Naturalis esp the begin-ning of book 30 Plotinus Enneads esp 4440ndash44 Augustine eg de doctrina christiana 2XX3074f However a closer look at these sources reveals signifĳicant conceptual dif-ferences between these authors that will be analyzed in more detail in the second part of this paper 14)enspCf in more detail Foumlgen 1993 Lotz 2005 15)enspSee the splendid edition of Hammerstaedt et al 2002 see also Winter 2006 the clas-sic Abt 1908 and the discussion in Graf 199661f Apuleius explicitly refers to the con-cept of crimen magiae (eg Apologia 255) Lamberti (2002 344ndash346) argues that there


ancient curse tablets have been found and described by Classicists to date Given their often harmful aspirations and the fact that their pro-duction is described in the Papyri Graecae Magicae16 a text corpus writ-ten by ritual specialists explicitly claiming the title μάγος17 what term would be more suitable for their analysis than ldquomagicrdquo

Unsurprisingly in recent academic works on ancient ldquomagicrdquo espe-cially in the afore-mentioned monographs there is a strong tendency to leave modern defĳinitions behind and apply an emic approach instead18 Fritz Graf in particular has done considerable groundwork on the ancient conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo in his Gottesnaumlhe und Schadenzauber19 Kimberly Stratton has recently offfered substantial new insights into the ancient discourse on ldquomagicrdquo (or in her own words on ldquomagicrdquo as ancient discourse) in her study Naming the Witch20

must have been a senatusconsultum for establishing the juridical concept of a crimen magiae in the fĳirst century CE based on the Lex Cornelia de sicariis et venefĳicis 16)enspCf eg PGM IV296f 17)ensp See the title in PGM IV243 IV2082 IV2290 LXIII5 18)ensp See for example Segal 1981369ndash70 ldquoThe most interesting question for scholarship as I see it is not whether the charge of magic against Jesus is true or not Since he does not claim the title there can be no possible demonstration or disproof of a charge which is a matter of interpretation in the Hellenistic world The most interesting que-stion for scholarship is to defĳine the social and cultural conditions and presuppositi-ons that allow such charges and counter-charges to be maderdquo Dickie (200119) claims ldquoto understand the Greeks and the Romans in their own termsrdquo Graf 199623 ldquoStatt also eine strenge aber kuumlnstliche Terminologie zu schafffen verfolgt man die antiken Bedeutungen der Terminologie als Teil eines Diskurses uumlber die Beziehungen zwi-schen Menschen und Goumltternrdquo Busch 200617 ldquoDie Fragestellung die wir in dieser Studie an die antiken Texte richten wird eine andere sein Wir fragen nicht ob die Handlungen und Worte Jesu und der fruumlhen Christen lsquomagischrsquo sind Wir fragen inwie-weit und warum diese als lsquomagischrsquo verstanden wurden Hierbei kommen die antiken Texte selbst zu Wortrdquo See also Stratton 2007 who has offfered the most consistent study of the ancient discourse on ldquomagicrdquo so far see eg p 13 ldquoConsequently I emphasize attention to emic terminology in order to illuminate the ideological prejudices behind representations of magic By focusing on ancient terminology one can discern when and how magic was mobilized as a discourse in antiquity This difffers from approaches that impose a universal second-order defĳinition of magic onto other cultures and con-comitantly impose modern distinctions and categories as wellrdquo19)ensp Cf Graf 199624ndash5720)enspSee Stratton 200712f See also Stratton 2013 The approach in this paper difffers slightly from Strattonrsquos work as I do not speak of ldquomagicrdquo as ancient discourse (in the


However important questions remain unanswered what did μαγείαmagia actually mean to Graeco-Roman authors Can the ancient use of the term justify the ongoing application of an abstract category of ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies Even in recent works claiming to focus on ancient terminology no clear or systematic answers to these ques-tions have yet been given21 So far the predominant use of ldquomagicrdquo as a substantive category in the very same studies has tended to downplay attempts to reconstruct the historical semantics of the ancient term in a systematic way and to relate them to possible diffferences regarding the academic concept

However in a number of recent works the shift towards deeper reflec-tion on ancient terminology has led to the thesis of deviance In Antiq-uity some authors claim ldquomagicrdquo functioned only as a polemical term to stigmatize and exclude others (named ldquothe religion of the otherrdquo22 ldquothe dangerous otherrdquo23 the ldquotheological oppositionrdquo)24 or in other words to ldquosquelch avenge or discredit undesirable behaviorrdquo25 Harold Remus who investigated the 2nd and 3rd century controversy between Chris-tian and Graeco-Roman authors on the miraculous abilities of Jesus of Nazareth and among others Apollonius of Tyana describes the con-flict as a ldquocompetition in naming afffĳirming miracle of the extraordinary

end it is a term not a discourse) but rather of μαγείαmagia as terms within ancient discourses21)ensp Stratton (2007 2013) may be regarded as an exception here however her book lacks a fĳinal discussion of the tension between her methodological approach and the exten-sive use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo as a signifĳier of curse tablets or the Papyri Graecae Magicae in Classical Studies Maybe this is due to her own relatively minor attention to these sources in fact her book almost completely lacks a discussion of the ancient use of ldquomagicrdquo as a self-referential term an aspect that is given more attention to in this paper 22)enspCf Zinser 199793f my translation 23)enspCf Kippenberg amp Stuckrad 2003155f my translation 24)enspCf Phillips III 19862711 ldquoA charge of magic represented a persuasive way to deni-grate onersquos theological opposition the opposition would have to lsquoproversquo that its alleged powers derived from the lsquorightrsquo cosmic forcesrdquo Cf also Gager 1994 183 ldquoWhen looked at from the perspective of the centre and its values this negative use of mageiacutea usually amounts to little more than the claim that what we do is religion and what they do is magic And so the term has been used pretty much ever sincerdquo See also Stratton 2007 and 2013 25)enspGarrett 19895


phenomena of onersquos own group and denying the name to those of rival groupsrdquo26 The ancient terminological dualism of μαγείαmagia on the one hand and σημεῖονsignum or θαῦμαmiraculum on the other can functionally be reduced Remus claims to the conceptual creation of discursive boundaries between ldquousrdquo and ldquothemrdquo between ldquoinsiderdquo and ldquooutsiderdquo and between ldquotruerdquo and ldquofalserdquo27 Charles R Phillips III adds that these arbitrary and highly judgmental ancient demarcations of discursive boundaries ushered into academic discourse in the late 19th century and thereby decisively influenced the scholarly contro-versy on ldquomagicrdquo as a whole28

In the ancient sources there is no doubt a plethora of evidence for the thesis of deviance The vast majority of the texts that came down to us and include the term mageiacuteamagia or one of its cognates or syn-onyms refer to persons texts ritual practices or beliefs from an outward perspective and are usually accompanied by semantics of devaluation and stigmatization However the polemical instrumentalization of the ancient term ldquomagicrdquo is only part of the truth in the Papyri Grae-cae Magicae the term appears ten times while clearly referring to the authors themselves and their own ritual practice29 Here μαγεία does

26)enspRemus 1983182 27)enspRemus 198352ndash54 182f 28)enspCf Phillips III 1994 109ndash10 ldquoThese ancient distinctions have entered the schol-arly traditions the more so since empiricist-dominated classical studies were wont to privilege ancient views of their own phenomena AA Barb spoke of the lsquosyncretis-tic rotting refuse-heap of the dead and dying religionrsquo in late antiquity noting of the resultant lsquoempty shellrsquo that lsquothe masses fĳilled it with all the refuse of superstitions questionable white magic and an apparently alarming amount of goecircteiacutea that is to say unequivocal black sorceryrsquo Peter Salway observed that lsquoghosts black magic and curses were taken seriously in the Classical world and are part of that darker side of Classical religionthinspthinspthinsprsquo while HH Scullard on Roman religion of the Republic noted lsquothe dark forest surrounded the minds of their ancestorsrsquo And why did this occur The socio-economic elite of ancient authors speaking directly to the socio-economic elite of modern scholarsrdquo29)enspCf PGM I127 PGM I331 PGM IV211 PGM IV243 PGM IV2082 PGM IV2290 PGM IV2319 PGM IV2450 PGM IV2454 PGM LXIII5 This fĳinding corresponds to the second edition of Preisendanz amp Henrichs (1973ndash74) according to the Thesaurus Lin-guae Graecae There might be further instances in the additional material presented in Betz 1986 and Daniel amp Maltomini 1990ndash92 which have not been checked by the author


not imply a stigmatization but rather a positive evaluation notions of high religious expertise of total efffectiveness and legitimacy of the rituals at issue30 Thus a general postulation of the thesis of deviance seems misleading However it can add to a more complete picture of the ancient use of the term ldquomagicrdquo Μαγείαmagia were employed as polemical concepts to exclude and stigmatize beliefs and ritual behavior deviating from religious norms only in the literature of ancient cultural-religious elites At the same time it was used as a self-referential term by (at least Graeco-Egyptian) ritual specialists which led to an identi-fĳication with the concept and what is more to a positive evaluation of their (inevitably construed) religious identities One would thus be right to speak of a discourse of exclusion and a discourse of inclusion operat-ing simultaneously in Antiquity endowing the concept of ldquomagicrdquo with variegated semantic and evaluative nuances In the second part of this paper I shall deal with these nuances in greater depth

To sum up pervasive modern discussions about the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in the study of classical antiquity as they are they yet failed to establish a thorough theoretical and methodological perspective as far as their central concept is concerned The majority of studies con-tinue to perceive ldquomagicrdquo as an adequate category capable of classifying ancient sources Nowadays defĳinitions are usually rejected terminolog-ical alternatives mdash to counteract the conceptual vacuum mdash have rarely been proposed31 Due to the discomfort produced by modern defĳinitions of ldquomagicrdquo and the frequent occurrence of the very same term in ancient sources recent works tend to vouch for an emic approach However

30)enspCf the evaluation of mageiacutea as being holy in PGM I127 (ὦ μακάριε μύςτα τῆς ἱερᾶς μαγείας) and as being divinegodly in PGM IV2245 (ἐπιδεικνύμενος τὴν δύναμιν τῆς θείας αὑτοῦ μαγείας) Note that the lexeme ἱερ appears (according to the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae) no less than 191 times in the PGM (including all flections) See also formula-tions like PGM I129 (ldquoThe gods will agree in every respect [καὶ ςυνφωνήςουςι πάντα οἱ θεοί]rdquo) or the self-perception of the ritual practitioner as being εὐσεβεῖ καὶ θεοςεβεῖ in PGM IV685ndash6 31)ensp However one fĳinds substitutive expressions like ldquoritual powerrdquo in more recent works see both Meyer amp Smith 1994 and Meyer amp Mirecki 1995 These attempts seem to reflect the desire to reach a higher level of abstraction but need to be thought out in a more consistent manner In fact they often go hand in hand with the substantive use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo and usually take up its notions On this point see also Johnston 2003


the simultaneous use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo as an abstract category seems to have disfavored the systematic reconstruction of its histori-cal semantics32 The increasing focus on ancient terminology led to the thesis of deviance which reveals an important aspect of the conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo but should not be postulated for Antiquity altogether Indeed deviance-theoretical positions appear somewhat isolated in the discourse and are usually entirely neglected in the majority of works dealing with ancient curse tablets33 All in all substantive applications of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo still dominate the Study of Classical Antiquity therefore the cardinal questions posed at the outset of this paper are still in need of satisfying answers

This fĳinding is quite astonishing granted that the discourse on ldquomagicrdquo in Religious Studies has culminated in the words of Hans G Kippenberg in the ldquocollapse of the categoryrdquo34 Due to its pejorative connotations fuzzy semantics and not least the cumulative falsifĳication of all major defĳinitions35 the urgent need for an unconditional abandonment of the term has been registered already in the 1950s and culminated in the 1960s and 1970s by dint of the so-called ldquorationality debaterdquo36 Critics claimed that the academic concept of ldquomagicrdquo does not operate as an impartial semantically sound and thus helpful concept but rather as an ethnocentric semantically distorting and highly polemical template arising from 19th century idealistic yet arbitrary conceptions of (mod-ern) ldquosciencerdquo and (Christian) ldquoreligionrdquo Thus when opposed to ldquosci-encerdquo ldquomagicrdquo has been accused of being a mere ldquoresidual category [thinspthinsp] created by the scientifĳic observer in order to explain incomprehensible

32)enspOne might add here that the reconstruction of historical semantics is only possible by systematically excluding modern semantics of a term under examination In other words conceptual histories especially those aiming at a reconstruction of onomasio-logical shifts can only be accomplished by strictly discarding substantive applications of the analyzed concept 33)enspApart from the splendid work by Gager 1992 see below34)enspKippenberg 199886 my translation 35)enspFor this process see in more detail Kippenberg 1995 See also among many others Lowie 1948136ndash151 Wax amp Wax 1963 Hammond 1970 Hanegraafff 2005 Otto 2011 ch 2ndash5 Otto amp Stausberg 2013 esp 1ndash1236)enspCf among others Radclifffe-Brown 1952138 Pettersson 1957119 Peel 196983ndash4 Pocock 19722 Leach 1982133 etc The ldquorationality debaterdquo can be studied in more detail in Wilson 1970 Horton amp Finnegan 1973 Kippenberg amp Luchesi 1995


actionsrdquo37 when opposed to ldquoreligionrdquo ldquomagicrdquo was merely regarded as ldquoa refuse-heap for the elements which are not sufffĳiciently lsquovaluablersquo to get a place within lsquoreligionrsquordquo38 Unsurprisingly in some recent works on general concepts in the Study of Religion the term ldquomagicrdquo has not been taken into account39 For Randall Styers one of the most radical recent authors academic theorists of ldquomagicrdquo are themselves no more than ldquomagiciansrdquo ldquoculling diverse forms of behavior modes of knowledge social practices and habits from an indiscriminate range of cultural systems and historical epochs and transmogrifying them into a unifĳied phenomenonrdquo40

So far the discourse on ldquomagicrdquo in the Study of Classical Antiquity has tended to reject these rather critical deconstructionist positions brought forth in Religious Studies and adjacent disciplines Jonathan Z Smith put them up for discussion among Classicists by publishing his critical article ldquoTrading Placesrdquo in Meyer amp Mireckirsquos Ancient Magic and Ritual Power41 However his arguments were not well received in the Study of Classical Antiquity but instead heavily criticized by C A Hofffman in his article ldquoFiat Magiardquo42 who claims to represent a ldquoschool of thought that sees in magic a useful categoryrdquo43 In fact one

37)enspKippenberg 199895 my translation 38)enspPettersson 1957119 ldquoSumming up we may say that the scientifĳic debate over the relation between lsquomagicrsquo and lsquoreligionrsquo is a discussion of an artifĳicial problem created by defĳining religion on the ideal pattern of Christianity The elements of manrsquos beliefs and ceremonies concerning the supernatural powers which did not coincide with this ideal type of religion was mdash and is mdash called lsquomagicrsquo There is always a tendency to mock the unfamiliar in other manrsquos faith and worship lsquoMagicrsquo became mdash and still becomes mdash a refuse-heap for the elements which are not sufffĳiciently lsquovaluablersquo to get a place within lsquoreligionrsquo The study of comparative religion would win clearness honesty and strin-gency the aspects of valuation would be avoided etc if the term lsquomagicrsquo were lsquogiven a decent burial mdash to quote Doctor E Smith mdash in the scientifĳic debate of the nature of religionrdquo italics Pettersson 39)enspCf Taylor 1998 Braun amp McCutcheon 200040)enspStyers 2004223 See also Styers 2013 Other recent critics of a substantive category of ldquomagicrdquo are Pasi 2008 Otto 2011 Hanegraafff 2012 esp 164ndash77 Stuckrad forthcoming See for a potential solution of the problem (ldquopatterns of magicityrdquo) Otto amp Stausberg 201310f 41)ensp Cf Smith 1995 42)enspSee Hofffman 2002188f 193f 43)enspHofffman 2002180


gets the impression that the flourishing scholarly discourse on ancient ldquomagicrdquo has up to this point felt rather threatened by critical authors like Smith and Styers as if the latter wanted to take away its main cat-egory without offfering any alternative This tension led to rather crude patterns of argumentation Hofffman in the aforementioned article is so focused on criticizing Smith and other critical authors that he com-pletely omits to explain how the concept of ldquomagicrdquo could actually be used coherently in Classical Studies In this respect his fĳinal phrase ldquolet there be magicrdquo remains mysterious44

Due to these conceptual inconsistencies this paper argues for a methodological turn in the way the concept of ldquomagicrdquo is used in Classi-cal Studies It adds to other works claiming that the arguments against a substantive application of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in academic discourse are if well thought out highly convincing if not compelling (even so these do not need to be recapitulated here)45 Likewise the paper fol-lows the argument of Jonathan Z Smith that abandoning ldquomagicrdquo as an abstract category from scholarly discourse does not lead to a loss of ana-lytic potential but instead to an enhanced understanding of the source material at stake46 However critical authors have so far neglected to clarify the advantages that arise from abandoning a substantive category of ldquomagicrdquo In particular they have failed to offfer insights regarding the immense impact and persistence of the historical concept of ldquomagicrdquo that pervades no less than 2500 years of textual sources In fact criticiz-ing and abandoning modern defĳinitions of ldquomagicrdquo does not necessarily contribute to understanding how ancient (or other premodern) authors employed the term The present paper aims at resolving these issues by developing two strategies fĳirst it tries to offfer conceptual alternatives to the habitual classifĳication of ancient sources like curse tablets or the

44)enspHofffman 2002194 45)enspSee in more detail the works mentioned in footnote 35 For a summary of critical arguments see Otto amp Stausberg 20131ndash10 46)enspSee Smith 199516ndash17 ldquoI see little merit in continuing the use of the substantive term lsquomagicrsquo in second-order theoretical academic discourse We have better and more pre-cise scholarly taxa for each of the phenomena commonly denotated by lsquomagicrsquo which among other benefĳits create more useful categories for comparison For any culture I am familiar with we can trade places between the corpus of materials conventionally labeled lsquomagicalrsquo and corpora designated by other generic terms (eg healing divining execrative) with no cognitive lossrdquo


Papyri Graecae Magicae as ldquomagicrdquo second it opts for a systematic his-toricization of the ancient term mdash that is for a thorough reconstruction of its meanings functions and contexts in ancient textual sources and discourses

A Methodological Turn Historicizing the Concept of ldquoMagicrdquo

At fĳirst sight taking the initial step of abandoning the substantive use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in academic language appears to be a simple task Having discarded the term though how should Classicists deal with source material habitually tagged as ldquomagicrdquo in Classical discourse In this respect the extensive use of an abstract category of ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies may have led to the conviction that it is counterpro-ductive (or even impossible) to abandon such an established concept

In fact it is quite simple to fĳind a convenient if not much more appropriate alternative concept one of the fĳirst academic defĳinitions of ldquoreligionrdquo Edward B Tylorrsquos belief in spiritual beings47 covers most of the material labeled as ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies (not to mention other established defĳinitions of ldquoreligionrdquo)48 The whole corpus of defĳixiones could easily be identifĳied as a specifĳic ritual form of belief in spiritual beings and thus (at least according to Tylor) as a specifĳic form of ancient ldquoreligionrdquo The fact that defĳixiones often imply morally reprehensible rit-ual intentions should not lead to their instinctive classifĳication as being non-ldquoreligiousrdquo or ldquomagicalrdquo malicious ritual goals have always played a signifĳicant role in the established religious traditions of Antiquity and were in fact perceived as being legitimate under certain conditions (that is the intention to harm someone by ritual means cannot operate as a criterion for diffferentiating ldquomagicrdquo from ldquoreligionrdquo)49

47)enspCf Tylor 1994 (1871) eg p 383 48)enspConsider Spirorsquos widely used defĳinition of ldquoreligionrdquo as ldquoan institution consisting of culturally patterned interaction with culturally postulated super-human beingsrdquo cf Spiro 196696 49)enspApart from many Graeco-Roman textual examples (see eg Herodotus Histories 7188f where he describes how the Athenians destroyed part of the Persian fleet by praying to the northern wind ldquoBoreasrdquo) and the overwhelming evidence from old Egyp-tian and Mesopotamian sources even the biblical text gives strong evidence here cf for instance Ex 71f (the ten plagues of Egypt can in fact be interpreted as a ritually


Tylorrsquos defĳinition can also be applied to curse tablets showing patterns of ex opere operato50 even when direct references to spiritual beings are absent it seems fairly reasonable to assume that a belief in spiritual beings always remains the underlying rationale in the ancient idea of cursing (binding in this case)51 John G Gager has written a renowned standard work on ancient curse tablets without using the term ldquomagicrdquo as an analytical category and thereby shown that it actually is possible52 A critical53 interpretation of the concept of ldquoreligionrdquo accompanied by modern interpretations of the concept of ldquoritualrdquo54 and subordinate functional terms (describing ritual goals such as ldquodivinationrdquo ldquohealingrdquo

evoked punishment of the Egyptians to counteract the stubbornness of their pharaoh however moral reflections on killing all fĳirst-borns in Egypt are omitted in the bibli-cal text) 2 Kings 19ndash10 (Elia kills 50 soldiers by verbally evoking fĳire to fall from the sky) 2 Kings 223ndash25 (Elisha kills 42 children by means of a verbal curse) Jer 191ndash15 (schismatic cities are punished by the ritual of the broken pots) Acts 1310ndash11 (Barjesus a ldquopseudo-prophet and magosrdquo is blinded by a verbal curse of the Apostles) Acts 51ndash11 (Hananias and Saphira two peasants are killed by a verbal curse after holding back money from the Apostles) etc50)enspOn this aspect see Kropp 200494ndash7 Kropp 2010 Cf also Faraonersquos notion of the ldquodirect binding formulardquo (199110f) 51)ensp That is instead of assuming ex opera operato mechanisms in curse tablets that omit the transcendent addressee other explanations could be brought forward with equal validity mdash such as writing pragmatics autonomized reception processes ritual dynam-ics etc See also Gager 199213 ldquohere it should be recalled however that gods may have been invoked orally when the tablet was either commissioned or depositedrdquo52)enspCf Gager 199225 ldquoThe sentence lsquoX iswas a magicianrsquo tells us nothing about the beliefs and practices of X the only solid information that can be derived from it con-cerns the speakerrsquos attitude toward X and their relative social relationship mdash that X is viewed by the speaker as powerful peripheral and dangerous [thinspthinsp] Thus our treatment of ancient defĳixiones does not locate them in the category of magic for in our view no such category existsrdquo (italics Gager) Irritatingly Gagerrsquos highly progressive approach seems to have been swept under the table by the majority of scholars dealing with curse tablets in the last two decades 53)enspCritical terms imply mdash according to Mark C Taylor ldquoRather than positing a uni-versal grid or seamless organism critical reflection articulates an incomplete web of open and flexible terms This seamy network of constraint which is riddled with gaps that can be neither bridged nor closed constitutes a constantly shifting cultural a priori that renders critical knowledge possible while circumscribing its unavoidable limitsrdquo Taylor 19981754)enspSee for recent approaches Kreinath Snoek amp Stausberg 2006ndash07


ldquobindingrdquo etc) would potentially sufffĳice to deal with ancient source material habitually tagged as ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies55

Analyzing ancient curse tablets and similar sources (such as curse statuettes or amulets) within the frame of ldquoreligionrdquo has two major ben-efĳits On the one hand the habitual distinction between these sources (ldquomagicrdquo) and established ancient cults (ldquoreligionrdquo) can be questioned From an emic point of view defĳixiones may at least partly not have been perceived as a sectarian curious and potentially blasphemous rit-ual method but rather as a widely known tool to resolve conflicts with the aid of the gods mdash and therefore as a (morally reprehensible) aspect of ancient deity devotion56 Curse tablets found at offfĳicial temple sites or near altars mdash the recent fĳinds in Rome (Fountain of Anna Perenna) and Mainz (sanctum of Isis and Mater Magna) serve as important new evidence here57 mdash even suggest that they may have been used within offfĳicial cults and operated as only one part of a variety of ritual offferings to the gods58 The fact that a signifĳicant amount of curse tablets were in all likelihood produced by unlearned private persons59 or even by

55)enspOf course one could argue that the concept of ldquoreligionrdquo implies problems similar to those of ldquomagicrdquo likewise ldquoreligionrdquo is characterized by fuzzy semantics implicit judgments and a long and diverse history it provoked similarly an ongoing academic dispute offfering no fĳinal answers As a matter of fact no academic term is able to sur-vive the critical analysis of a postmodern deconstructionist monolithic well-defĳined concepts have become (quite rightly) extinct alongside the burial of the phenomeno-logical school and its grand narratives However one has to make choices it seems reasonable to argue that some terms are (in a quite pragmatic sense) better than others ldquoReligionrdquo with a loose working defĳinition of belief in spiritual beings is no doubt appli-cable in Classical Antiquity (and is in fact usually applied in this sense in Classical Studies) Bringing in the concept of ldquomagicrdquo while analyzing ancient sources evokes the well-known arsenal of theoretical problems implied in the terminological dualism of ldquomagicrdquo and ldquoreligionrdquo Thus instead of working with two problematic concepts the distinction of which may forever remain unclear it seems reasonable to stick to the more established (and less disputed) term and discard the other In the end this is a pragmatic decision which cannot be ultimately justifĳied however as this paper will show the methodological approach proposed here can actually help to make better sense of the ancient sources and thus contribute to academic progress 56)enspOn this point see also Gager 199220f 57)enspCf Blaumlnsdorf 2010 Piranomonte 201058)enspCf Graf 1996144f Smith 1983253 n8 59)enspCf Gager 19924f and 123 n11


offfĳicial town writers60 (that is not by ritual specialists who claimed the title μάγοςmagus) adds to this picture Thus from the viewpoint of ancient producers or clients the use of binding formulae on lead tablets might not have been perceived as being ontologically distinct (ldquomagicrdquo) from other aspects of ancient sacrifĳicial cult (ldquoreligionrdquo) even if these meth-ods were considered illegitimate or immoral in elite religious discourses

On the other hand analyzing curse tablets within the conceptual framework of ldquoreligionrdquo can question idealized views of established ancient ldquoreligionsrdquo Do defĳixiones really bear substantial diffferences from other forms of requests for divine aid conducted in Graeco-Roman temples throughout all Antiquity In his Apologia Apuleius of Madaura critically notes that the unconsidered application of the crimen magiae may lead to the accusal of pious deity devotees who merely address a petition (votum) to a statue61 The philosopher points to the problem of classifying ritual offferings here obviously the instrumental aspects of ancient polytheisms (that is foremost the sacrifĳice) operated on the same conceptual grounds as curse tablets (belief in spiritual beings do ut des) and in part aimed at similar ritual goals Who knows how

60)enspCf Jordan 1989 61)ensp Cf Apuleius Apologia 54 5f ldquoIn fact everything that he has ever done will be used as a handle against any man who is charged with sorcery Have you written a petition on the thigh of some statue You are a sorcerer Else why did you write it Have you breathed silent prayers to heaven in some temple You are a sorcerer Else tell us what you asked for Or take the contrary line You uttered no prayer in some temple You are a sorcerer Else why did you not ask the gods for something The same argument will be used if you have made some votive dedication or offfered sacrifĳice or carried sprigs of some sacred plant The day will fail me if I attempt to go through all the diffferent circumstances of which on these lines the false accuser will demand an explanation Above all whatever object he has kept concealed or stored under lock and key at home will be asserted by the same argument to be of a magical nature or will be dragged from its cupboard into the light of the law-court before the seat of judgment [quippe omnibus sic ut forte negotium magiae facessitur quicquid omnino egerint obicietur Uotum in alicuius statuae femore signasti igitur magus es aut cur signasti Tacitas preces in templo deis allegasti igitur magus es aut quid optasti` con-tra nihil in templo precatus es igitur magus es aut cur deos non rogasti Similiter si prosueris donum aliquod si sacrifĳicaueris si uerbenam sumpseris Dies me defĳiciet si omnia uelim persequi quorum rationem similiter calumniator flagitabit Praesertim quod conditum cumque quod absignatum quod inclusum domi adseruatur id omne eodem argumento magicum dicetur aut e cella promptaria in forum atque in iudicium proferetur]rdquo translation Butler 190995 Latin text Hammerstaedt 2002152


many ancient citizens actively cursed or were cursed in Graeco-Roman temples using only prayer or materials such as wax or papyrus that did not last over time unlike lead Thus proposing a general diffference between pleas proposed on lead tablets (ldquomagicrdquo) and pleas proposed alongside more ephemeral ritual offferings in ancient sacrifĳicial cults (ldquoreligionrdquo) is certainly not justifĳied Rather the use of lead laminae might be perceived as mirroring a more private and morally contested aspect of ancient deity devotion (or in more radical terms deity instru-mentalization) and thus of ancient ldquoreligionrdquo

This short discussion of the classifĳication of ancient curse tablets shall sufffĳice to show that the analysis of these sources without employing an abstract concept of ldquomagicrdquo might produce clearer analytical results and evoke research questions more adequate to the religious world in Classical Antiquity In particular the judgmental notions implied in the habitual opposition between ldquomagicrdquo and ldquoreligionrdquo can be set aside thereby heightening the perceived religious ldquovaluerdquo and signifĳicance of defĳixiones and other ancient sources alike Finally ancient polemics sur-rounding these ritual practices (that is their classifĳication as being illicit or irreligious in ancient texts employing among other terms μαγείαmagia) mdash can be analyzed while at the same time excluding them from scholarly terminology

When it comes to taking the second step the historicization of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo things are obviously more complicated As the con-ceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo spans over more than 2500 years and runs through a large amount of textual sources drawn from various epochs cultural-religious settings and languages it would be presumptuous to assume that a few clear and homogenous semantic patterns could be tracked down for its entire history In fact the ancient use of the concept covering Graeco-Hellenistic Roman and Judaeo-Christian sources already implies highly diverse conceptions of ldquomagicrdquo in these corpora Besides one has to read between the lines in order to deduce the ancient semantics of ldquomagicrdquo as classical authors usually lack ldquodefĳi-nitionsrdquo Even those ancient authors who tried to systematize things mdash eg Plato in the 11th book of his Nomoi (using the synonym φαρμακεία)62

62)enspThe historicization of the ancient concept of ldquomagicrdquo proposed here implies of course the simultaneous historicization of synonyms But how can synonyms be identifĳied when the actual meaning of μαγείαmagia remains at least in the begin-


Pliny the elder in the 30th book of his Historia Naturalis Apuleius in his Apologia Plotinus in his 4th Ennead or to name the most impor-tant Christian author Augustine in his De doctrina christiana mdash reveal highly diverse modes of thought and thus general conceptions of the term ldquomagicrdquo

While Plato situates his general concept of ἀσέβεια (usually translated as lsquoimpietyrsquo lsquoblasphemyrsquo for Plato asebeiacutea implies among other things the belief that gods can be influenced by ritual offferings to intervene in some earthly matter)63 within his law against pharmakeiacutea (νόμος περὶ φαρμακείας) Pliny rather opposes magia to (what he perceives as) ldquosecularrdquo medicine or more implicitly and somewhat unjustifĳiably to established Roman cult64 Apuleius is highly ironic in his entire speech and proposes at least three diffferent ldquodefĳinitionsrdquo of the alleged crime of which he is accused65 In his Enneads (4440ndash4) Plotinus tries to fuse

ning unclear The ancient texts themselves can operate as indicators here as some terms are regularly used equivalently for φαρμακεία and μαγεία see eg Philo of Alex-andria De specialibus legibus 3101f Plotinus Enneads 4440 Pseudo-Phocylides 149 Synonymity can also be detected indirectly as μαγεία and γοητεία are often correlated in ancient texts (eg Gorgias Encomium of Helen 9ndash10 Diodorus Bibliotheca historica 555f Philostratus Vita Apollonii Cassius Dio 78184 Diogenes Laertius Vitae philoso-phorum 18 Origen Contra Celsum eg 21 639 Synesius De insomniis 132) and in other texts γοητεία and φαρμακεία (eg Plato Meno 80a-b Plato Laws 909andashc Plato Symposion 203dndashe) Stratton (2007 26ndash37) provides a nice overview of the ancient ter-minology associated with μαγείαmagia 63)enspFor Plato ἀσέβεια implies three false attitudes towards the gods general disbelief (that is atheism) the belief that the gods do not care for human needs the belief that gods can be influenced by eg ritual offferings Cf Plato Laws 885bndash933e64)enspCf Pliny Historia Naturalis 301f See the implicit opposition to Roman religious institutions such as the Quindecimviri Sacris Faciundis in HN 2813 here Pliny claims that ritually spoken words can have an efffect (a fact proven by 830 years of Roman his-tory) while in many other passages he refutes the efffĳicacy of words when spoken by the magi65)enspCf Apuleius Apologia 259fff fĳirst he quotes Platorsquos statement in Alcibiades 1 (122a) that μαγεία refers to the worship of the gods (θεῶν θεραπεία) among the Persians thus Apuleius asks ironically why is it regarded as a crime to know the laws of ceremony the order of sacrifĳice and the norms of religion (leges cerimoniarum fas sacrorum ius religionum) Shortly later (266f) he refers to the ordinary convention (more vulgari) that refers to the magus as someone who has incredible powers through his commun-ion with the gods (communione loquendi cum deis) and especially through powerful invocations (incredibilia quadam ui cantaminum) however he refutes the latter image


the ancient understanding of rituals subsumed under μαγείαγοητεία with his idea of a coherent interrelated divine cosmos operating more or less mechanically through patterns of sympaacutetheia66 Finally Augus-tine classifĳies magia as a pactum daemonum implementing the idea of a single powerful opponent of God reigning over a regiment of daemones (being for Augustine in contrast to Plato or Apuleius intrinsically evil) who try to seduce and enslave humans67

Given this variety of conceptual backgrounds and semantic patterns one obviously has to leave behind the idea of ldquomagicrdquo as a monolithic well-defĳined term and instead focus on the plurality and haziness of historical semantics In fact reconstructing the conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Antiquity means taking a range of approaches and conceptions into account that depend on the author under examina-tion and the respective cultural-religious context Thus there is no room in this paper for a thorough discussion of ancient semantics of ldquomagicrdquo Apart from Strattonrsquos analysis of important functional aspects of the ancient discourse68 a more comprehensive reconstruction of the historical reception of the term and its synonyms has been undertaken in my PhD thesis69 However there are terminological patterns which are easier to grasp and which shall be examined in this paper

These terminological patterns correspond to the distinction proposed above with respect to the functional use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in Antiquity does the term refer to out-group or to in-group persons texts rituals or beliefs Considering the ancient textual sources against the backdrop of this question may lead to the analytical formation of a dis-course of exclusion and a discourse of inclusion70 These two discourses

by proving it to be absurd Finally Apuleius more than once suggests that the whole court case against him is a compensatory farce (this implies Apuleiusrsquo generally critical evaluation of the crimen magiae) driven by nothing more than the envy and greed of his accusers (eg Apologia 286f 545f 671f 99ndash103) Here the philosopher even out-lines the main arguments of the thesis of deviance See in more detail Otto 2011 ch 7 66)enspCf Plotinus Enneads 4440ndash4467)enspCf among many other passages Augustine De civitate Dei 816ndash19 216 Augusti-nus De doctrina christiana 2XX3074f 68)enspSee Stratton 200769)enspSee Otto 2011 70)enspDiscourse is understood here as a sum of statements (ie texts) including the ety-mon or synonyms


can and should be reconstructed diachronically and interculturally Fur-thermore they reach beyond Classical Antiquity because they can also be identifĳied in medieval early modern and modern textual sources71 Crucial to the methodological approach proposed here is the indepen-dent analysis of the discourse of exclusion and inclusion as the perception of ldquomagicrdquo may difffer fundamentally among authors who refer to others or to themselves while using the term In particular to understand what ancient self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo really thought and did it is crucial to set aside the polemics of the discourse of exclusion and take extant texts of the discourse of inclusion exclusively into account

The discourse of exclusion pervades the huge majority of Graeco-Hellenistic Roman and Judaeo-Christian texts While the cultural-religious and thereby the semantic backgrounds of important authors on ldquomagicrdquo change their functional use of the term (that is in most cases a polemical devaluation and social exclusion of the people rituals or beliefs in question) remains the same Thus in spite of their major con-ceptual diffferences when talking about ldquomagicrdquo Plato Pliny Apuleius Plotinus and Augustine (to name only these few) can all be assigned to the discourse of exclusion in Antiquity While the discourse of exclu-sion hence emerges as the dominant terminological pattern throughout Antiquity there is only scarce evidence for the discourse of inclusion mostly limited to the Papyri Graecae Magicae and related Graeco-Egyptian fĳindings This quantitative imbalance of ancient textual sources between the discourse of exclusion and the discourse of inclusion is itself an important fĳirst insight arising from the historicization of the ancient term ldquomagicrdquo proposed here In fact if the Papyri Graecae Magicae had not been recovered in the early 19th century72 there would have been good reason to argue that the polemical instrumentalization of the term ldquomagicrdquo had been the only way of actually using it in Antiquity mdash that is that it had purely served as a polemical tool for social exclusion and not as an identifĳicatory concept for the self-appellation of ancient ritual practitioners73 On the basis of the evidence of the PGM this argument

71)ensp For a wider time frame see Otto 2011 72)enspCf in more detail Brashear 19953401fff See also Betz 1986 especially XLIIndashXLIV73)enspThis argument does not imply that privately operating ritual entrepreneurs (for example producers of curse tablets) did not exist in Classical Antiquity (indeed there certainly were many of them) instead the argument focuses on their names due to


(that is a general postulation of the thesis of deviance for Antiquity alto-gether) can be fĳiled away However the question of the representative-ness of the PGM remains are they only the tip of the iceberg of a much greater textual discourse of self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo throughout the Ancient Mediterranean Or did only Graeco-Egyptian temple priests or scribes in Late Antiquity marginalized through the Roman and since the 3rd and 4th century CE the Christian occupation of their homeland sympathize with this former ldquounderdogrdquo title As no other in-group sources from ancient self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo have been found yet this question remains unanswered up to this moment

However there are other important research questions arising from the analytical separation of an ancient discourse of exclusion and inclu-sion Taking a closer look at the discourse of exclusion it is for example highly illuminating to reconstruct similarities and diffferences regarding the religious patterns that are devaluated and stigmatized by the term ldquomagicrdquo in diffferent cultural-religious settings74 Taking for example Plato for the early Greek Pliny for the Roman and Augustine for the Christian discourse into account it is interesting to note that the demar-cation line between the included and the excluded (that is between the accepted and permitted and the condemned and prohibited) signifĳi-cantly difffers among these three authors Plato not only aims at deval-uating private ritual practitioners working outside the offfĳicial temple cults75 but he also tries to delegitimize the all-too-human attempt to expect favors from the gods by ritual donations That is he implicitly attacks the well-established sacrifĳicial cult in classical Greece thereby proposing the moralistic-philosophical ideal of a helping yet not brib-able god76 Indeed a reading between the lines of his Laws reveals that he actually aims to stigmatize the human individual who tends to

the negative connotations of the title μάγοςmagus (including synonyms like γόης or malefĳicos) in ancient literature and the increasingly harsh prosecution of the crimen magiae especially since the early Roman Empire it is to be doubted that private ritual practitioners used these stigmatized terms in public Indeed they may have used (at least a little) more value-free terms such as μάντις ἀγύρτης haruspex or augur74)enspStratton (2007 2012) has offfered valuable insights into this scholarly desideratum in this paper I will mainly discuss texts that are not or are only marginally dealt with in Strattonrsquos works 75)enspFor this theme see Plato Republic 363endash364c Plato Laws 909andash910d 932endash933e76)enspCf Plato Laws 825bf esp 905ndash907d on this point see also Graf 199632


instrumentalize ldquoreligionrdquo (in this case fĳigures of the Greek pantheon) in order to procure personal benefĳits Platorsquos concept of pharmakeiacutea thus marks the boundary of an egoistic misappropriation of the gods in contrast to his ideal of a more philosophical respectful and unselfĳish belief77

By contrast Pliny the Elder employs magia to summarize and devalue an enormous amount of (primarily) healing practices circu-lating throughout the Roman Empire of the 1st century CE78 While Plato argues on religious grounds Pliny focuses on the ostensible inef-fĳicacy of the described practices thus the term magia in the Historia Naturalis primarily implies notions of inefffectiveness charlatanry and superstitio79 Unsurprisingly a large amount of diverse cultural-religious practices beliefs and persons fĳind their place in Plinyrsquos concept of magia including Homeric fĳigures such as Circe the Sirens and Proteus Greek philosophers such as Pythagoras Empedocles and Democritus and ritual specialists from all ancient civilizations such as the Gallic Druids80 Magia thereby marks the boundary between Plinyrsquos upper-class ldquosecularrdquo Roman worldview and a plethora of ritual practices and beliefs perceived as being ldquofundamentally antithetical and external to Roman Culturerdquo81 Indeed a closer look at his excursus on the power of words in the 28th book reveals that Pliny cannot separate the efffĳicacy of words ritually used in established Roman cult from the ostensibly fraud-ulent formulae of the condemned magi82 His famous ldquohistory of magicrdquo

77)enspSee in more detail Otto 2011169f and Otto amp Stausberg 201319f 78)enspCf especially books 28ndash32 of the Historia Naturalis 79)enspCf Historia Naturalis 301f see also eg 2220 281247198 296781 3234 37155 80)enspCf Historia Naturalis 305ndash13 81)ensp Ogden 200244 ldquoOne of the most important aspects of this discussion is its explicit unifĳication within the same category mdash whatever that category is mdash of fĳigures of very diffferent varieties [thinspthinsp] Compared explicitly or implicitly to the mages (of Persia Medea Babylon Assyria and even Armenia all closely identifĳied [thinspthinsp] are Circe the Sirens Proteus Thessalian witches Carian Telmessus (known for various forms of divi-nation) Orpheus Pythagoras Empedocles and Democritus as well as Jewish Cypriot (Cyprus is identifĳied as a particular home for magic in later sources) Latin and Gallic sorcerers For all that magic spread over the entire world it is presented as fundamen-tally external and antithetical to Roman Culturerdquo82)enspCf Historia Naturalis 289ndash29 the typological similarity of the powerful words used in Roman cults and the rituals of the magi reveals that Plinyrsquos implicit opposition is actually that of traditional established Roman cult vs all kinds of unauthorized and


at the beginning of book 30 is therefore a rather perplexing attempt to historically fortify a concept that actually lacks clear semantic grounds83 Thus the passage should (if this is not too trivial a point to add) not be perceived as a textual window on ancient ldquomagicrdquo by Classicists84

Augustine again relocates the demarcation line between the legiti-mate and the illegitimate in his De civitate Dei and especially his De doctrina christiana Augustine picks up the notions of ἀσέβεια and superstitio from the Greek and Roman use of μαγείαmagia However he adds a complex demonology and theory of lsquosignsrsquo in order to explain the communication between the magos and the daemon85 In this way the whole Graeco-Roman sacrifĳicial cult becomes ldquomagicrdquo as pagan gods are (for Augustine) nothing more than demons86 Accordingly in Augustinersquos writing core aspects of Graeco-Roman ldquoreligionrdquo includ-ing deity devotion divination practice and theatre play are conceptu-ally equated to ldquomagicrdquo now representing nothing more than a cultum

mostly individualistic ritual activity labelled as magia One might therefore also think of ldquoindividual religiosityrdquo as an alternative label here on this perspective see Ruumlpke 2011 83)enspMathew Dickie (1999) rightly claims that Pliny referred to earlier texts (which had been for the most part lost) while compiling his work such as a book attributed to Bolos of Mendes on sympathy and antipathy a book of Zachalias on stones a book of Pseudo-Pythagoras on plants and the cheiromecta of (Pseudo-) Democritus My argument does therefore not imply that the material presented by Pliny is based on pure fantasy or creativity mdash the fact is that he participated in an ongoing textual discourse in Antiq-uity However Dickiersquos construction of a consistent ldquomagical lorerdquo fails at one central point did the authors of these earlier works really subsume under the ancient con-cept of ldquomagicrdquo the idea that stones plants or animals have an efffect on human afffairs Although this question cannot be answered with certainty it seems rather doubtful that μαγείαmagia operated as the general framework for this idea before Pliny From the viewpoint of ancient terminology it is more likely that these books were tagged (by their authors) as being scientifĳic (that is philosophicalperipatetic) or medical In his Historia Naturalis Pliny might have changed this pattern of classifĳication and sub-sumed a vast variety of strange or uncertain beliefs under the umbrella term magia thereby signifĳicantly broadening its semantic range84)enspSee in more detail Otto 2011225f and Otto amp Stausberg 201323f 85)enspCf Augustine De civitate Dei especially books 8 and 9 216 Cf also De divinatione daemonum De trinitate eg 411 De doctrina christiana 2XX3074f 86)enspCf explicitly De civitate dei 923 referring to Psalms 95ndash96 See also De civitate Dei 129 824 1923 etc In a similar vein De doctrina christiana 2XX3074 reveals Augus-tinersquos equation of idolatria (that is Graeco-Roman deity cults) and magia


daemonum Again the semantic range of the term is considerably broad-ened it is Augustine who systematically employs magia to signify and classify everything that is not (Christian) ldquoreligionrdquo thereby not only afffecting the Christian discourse on ldquomagicrdquo as a whole but also (yet more implicitly) the academic discourse on ldquomagicrdquo since the late 19th century87

An important implication set forth while reconstructing the ancient discourse of exclusion is the lack of trustworthiness of its ldquomagicalrdquo claims Authors belonging to the discourse of exclusion tend to classify persons texts or ritual actions (even whole religions) as ldquomagicrdquo although this classifĳication does in most cases not correspond to the respective in-group perspective To be more precise many of those who are referred to as ldquomagiciansrdquo in ancient texts have in all likelihood not called them-selves ldquomagiciansrdquo The 2nd and 3rd century controversy between Chris-tian and Graeco-Roman authors on the miraculous abilities of Jesus of Nazareth and Apollonius of Tyana has already been mentioned as an important example for this discrepancy between the out-group and in-group use of the title ldquomagicianrdquo in ancient sources88 There are many other examples of this phenomenon within the ancient conceptual his-tory of ldquomagicrdquo89 Hence Classical scholars should deal very carefully

87)enspSee in more detail Otto 2011309f and Otto amp Stausberg 201333f88)enspFor Graeco-Roman texts claiming that Jesus was a ldquomagicianrdquo see Celsusrsquo Ἀληθὴς Λόγος (cf Origines Contra Celsum 16 138 168 249 etc) Porphyrius Κατὰ Χριστιανῶν λόγοι (cf frr 4 and 63) or Hierokles Λόγος φιλαλήθης (cf Eusebius Contra Hieroclem esp chapter 2) for Christian counter-texts accusing Apollonius of Tyana and further persons with Graeco-Roman background of being ldquomagiciansrdquo see Origen Contra Celsum or Eusebius Contra Hieroclem In this respect it is important to note that Apol-loniusrsquo biographer Philostratus emphasizes more than once that Apollonius was not a ldquomagicianrdquo but instead a wise and upright philosopher in direct contact with the gods (see eg Philostratus Vita Apollonii 12 512 738ndash39) On the controversy see apart from Remus 1983 also Smith 1978 Gallagher 198289)enspCf the ldquomagiciansrdquo mentioned in Hippocrates De morbo sacro 110f (does Hippoc-rates really refer to self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo wandering around in Greek poleis mdash maybe even Persians mdash or is his use of the title purely polemical This cannot be answered with certainty) Flavius Josephus Antiquitates Judaicae 20142 (did the Cyprian Jew Atomus mentioned by Flavius Josephus really call himself a ldquomagicianrdquo Again there is no clear answer) Tacitus Annales eg 232 (Tacitus reflects the fuzzy application of the title by the Roman legislative which can also be grasped in Apuleiusrsquo Apologia) Cassius Dio 7284 (that Arnuphis a ritual practitioner accompanying the


with the attributive use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in ancient sources in most cases it will not give any substantial information on the subject but merely aim at its religious or moral devaluation

Given this tendency and especially the immense impact of the dis-course of exclusion on the ancient conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo it seems obvious that μαγείαmagia did not operate as sound impartial signifĳi-ers but rather as semantically fuzzy highly polemical ciphers operat-ing within or among ancient religious discourses Thus the fact that the concept already pervades ancient literature cannot serve as a justifĳica-tion of the conceptrsquos extensive application by Classical scholars In fact the problems Classicists are facing when applying ldquomagicrdquo as an abstract category might be comparable to those already inherent in the ancient term mdash except that Classical authors usually did not ponder its seman-tic value from a critical point of view and thereby realize its actual haziness90 There is even reason to argue that the polemical notions of ancient μαγείαmagia had an impact on James G Frazer when he formu-lated his highly influential theory of ldquomagicrdquo in the Golden Bough91 The

legions of Marcus Aurelius called himself a ldquomagicianrdquo is very unlikely) Pliny Naturalis Historia 301f (Pliny uses the title to refer to all kinds of non-Roman fĳigures) Apuleius Apologia 905f (Apuleius gives an enhanced version of Plinyrsquos list) Apuleius himself is classifĳied as a ldquomagicianrdquo by Christian authors such as Augustine (eg De ciuitate Dei 819) other Christian authorities created texts solely devoted to listing ldquomagiciansrdquo such as Tertullian (De anima 57) and Arnobius (Adversus nationes 1521) the Novum Testamentum Graece refers to the Samaritan Simon (Acts 89ndash25) and the Jew Barjesus (Acts 136f) as maacutegoi (again both cases are unlikely from an in-group perspective) the positive use of the μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν in Mt 21 does however deviate from the usually polemical employment of the title ldquomagicianrdquo in Antiquity90)enspHowever apart from Apuleiusrsquo critical reflections in his Apologia Graeco-Roman philosophers polemicizing against Christianity in the 2nd and 3rd centuries also showed an intensifĳied interest in the arbitrary character of the concept Cf for instance Celsus apud Origines Contra Celsum 249 ldquowith his own voice he explicitly confesses as even you have recorded that there will come among you others also who employ similar miracles wicked men and sorcerers [κακοὶ καὶ γόητες] and he names one Satan as devising this so that not even he denies that these wonders have nothing divine about them but are works of wicked men Nevertheless being compelled by the truth he both reveals the deeds of others and proves his own to be wrong Is it not a miserable argument to infer from the same works that he is a god [θεόν] while they are sorcerers [γόητας]rdquo translation Chadwick 1965104 Greek text Marcovich 2001120 91)ensp When Frazer in the second three-volumed edition of the Golden Bough (1900) refers to ldquothe sorcerers of [thinspthinsp] Greece and Romerdquo to justify his theory of ldquomagicrdquo he


ancient tendency to connect μαγείαmagia with devaluation and social exclusion thereby contributed to the academic instrumentalization of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo for the very same purposes in the late 19th cen-tury now aiming at an across-the-board classifĳication and devaluation of so-called ldquoprimitivesrdquo in colonies of the British Empire92

However the question remains what is to be done with the self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo of the Papyri Graecae Magicae Can at least the ancient in-group use of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo justify its academic application Obviously a thorough examination of the PGM can-not be undertaken here Already a quick survey shows however that the PGM subsume an irritatingly wide range of ritual practices under μαγεία among the most common ritual goals are divination93 evok-ing love between two persons94 defence and protection95 controlling or damaging other people96 healing97 or the achievement of wealth luck and fame98 if wealth has been stolen a ritual may be conducted to identify the thief99 if a healing rite has been unsuccessful a ritual for reawakening the corpse may be useful100 other miraculous abilities like

writes in the accompanying footnote ldquoFor the Greek and Roman practice see The-ocritus Id 2 Virgil Ecl 875ndash82 Ovid Heroides 691 sq Amores 3729 sqrdquo (cf Frazer 190010 n 2) The poets quoted by Frazer are an ambivalent selection but can neverthe-less be assigned to the ancient discourse of exclusion (that is they did not call them-selves ldquomagiciansrdquo they probably did not know self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo personally but rather assimilated ancient stereotypes they usually aimed at a devaluation of the described rituals and persons)thinsp 92)enspFor this point see in more detail Styers 200463fff thinsp 93)enspEg PGM II1f III196f III257f III283f III424f III479f IV53f IV88f IV 154f IV223f IV850f IV1275f IV3088f IV3173f IV3210f V1f V55f V370f VI1f VII1f VII222f VII250f VIII930f XIII265f etcthinsp 94)enspEg PGM IV296f IV1265f IV1391f IV1495f IV1872f IV2006f IV2708f IV2891f IV2943f VII191f VII215f XIII237f XIII320f etcthinsp 95)enspEg PGM I195f IV78f IV86f IV468f IV831f IV1168f IV1497f IV3125f IV2241f VII150f XIII249f XIII262f XIII278f etc thinsp 96)enspEg PGM IV2126f IV2623f V305f thinsp 97)enspEg PGM VII193ndash214 VII218f XIII344f XIII253f etcthinsp 98)enspEg PGM IV2145f IV2373f VII187f VII390f VII423f etcthinsp99)enspCf PGM V70 100)enspCf PGM IV1168f XIII278f


interrogating a dead body101 becoming invisible102 controlling onersquos own shadow103 breaking up bonds104 opening closed doors105 or extin-guishing a fĳire (unsurprisingly without water)106 are also described

In order to fĳind a coherent semantic pattern that could cover these diverse ritual goals and thereby clarify the in-group understanding of Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία as a whole it is essential to recall the religious background of the PGM This background is well known virtually all rituals described are addressed to gods or depending on the respec-tive ritual goal other transcendent or intermediary beings belonging to Graeco-Roman Egyptian or Judaeo-Christian ldquotheologiesrdquo thereby reflecting the ldquotruly lsquoecumenicalrsquo religious syncretism of the Hellenistic world culturerdquo107 To quote once again Edward B Tylor a belief in spiri-tual beings is the core concept that unites all ritual and liturgical aspects of the PGM This is not trivial all ritual goals including the aforemen-tioned miraculous abilities imply the belief that it is the gods who are exclusively responsible for evoking them There are no ex opere operato mechanisms underlying Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία (that is the authors were apparently no followers of Plotinus)108 also the Graeco-Egyptian ldquomagiciansrdquo did certainly not believe in possessing supernatural abili-ties as part of their personality lineage or psycho-spiritual training (agrave la Harry Potter) They merely operated as mediators between their clients and the gods while expecting the latter to fulfĳill the requested need Thus for the authors of the PGM it is the gods who induce ldquoloverdquo

101)ensp Cf PGM IV2140f 102)enspCf PGM I222f I246f XIII234f XIII267103)enspCf PGM III613f 104)enspCf PGM XII160f XIII289f105)enspCf PGM XIII127f 106)enspCf PGM XIII298f 107)enspBetz 1986XLVI ldquoFor these magicians there was no longer any cultural diffference between the Egyptian and the Greek gods or between them and the Jewish God and the Jewish angels and even Jesus was occasionally assimilated into this truly lsquoecumenicalrsquo religious syncretism of the Hellenistic world culturerdquo108)enspPlotinus more or less rejects the idea that transcendent beings could be responsi-ble for the efffects of rituals subsumed under μαγείαγοητεία thereby favoring the rather impersonal force of συμπάθεια see explicitly Plotinus Enneades 4443 where he claims that demons are themselves subject to συμπάθεια Further on this see Otto amp Stausberg 201328f


among humans it is the gods who heal protect hurt and send luck it is the gods who are responsible for all aspects of human destiny Accord-ingly in order to deal with critical life situations it is the gods who need to be ritually addressed in order to request their aid

Perceived from this point of view Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία is not a unique curious case in the history of ancient religions Instead it is characterized by a set of common mdash if not classical mdash ideas wide-spread in the religious world of Classical Antiquity that the gods are responsible for human fate and can be ritually addressed in one way or the other to influence the latter In fact the Graeco-Egyptian maacutegoi could fĳind role models for almost everything they did in the majority of religious texts circulating in the Ancient Mediterranean including the Judaeo-Christian tradition109 Hence it is only the highly syncretistic approach of the PGM and especially certain ritual means used to gain the favor of the gods that seem to difffer from the major religious tradi-tions of Antiquity In this regard the use of so-called voces magicae of powerful signs (χαρακτῆρες) and of material artifacts seem to be quite unique aspects of the PGM However as the voces magicae have been identifĳied as being nothing more than alternative efffĳicacious names for

109)enspThis argument is supported by the fact that not only a vast variety of gods but also important Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian fĳigures found their way into the PGM For Jesus see PGM IV3016 XII192 for Moses see PGM V108f VII619f and esp PGM XIII3f the Monad or the Eighth Book of Moses (Βίβλος ἱερὰ ἐπικαλουμένη Μονὰς ἢ Ὀγδόη Μοϋςέως) for Abraham PGM I219 V480 VII315 XIII816 for Salomon PGM IV851f for Pythagoras see PGM VII795 for Democritus see PGM VII168f VII795 for Apol-lonius of Tyana see PGM XIa1 etc In addition the miraculous abilities attested in the PGM may have been influenced by the many wondrous stories of both the Old and the New Testament In fact miraculous abilities served as one of the most common reli-gious ideas in the ancient Mediterranean and were usually attested independently () of the ancient concept of ldquomagicrdquo Apart from the Judaeo-Christian miracle discourse see the respective passages in Philostratus Vita Apollonii Iamblichus Vita Pythago-rae Porphyry Vita Pythagorae Porphyrios Vita Plotini Eunapius Vitae Sophistarum Damascius Vita Isidorii Marinus Vita Procli See also a number of passages in Diogenes Laertius Vitae Philosophorum and the healings of Vespasian in Tacitus Historiae 481 and Suetonius De Vita Caesarum Titus Flavius Vespasianus 7 Against this backdrop it is incomprehensible that scholars tend to instinctively classify miraculous abilities as ldquomagicrdquo they lie at the very heart of Judaeo-Christian narratives and thus represent a classic pattern in the Western history of religions


the invoked gods110 one could again argue that the term μαγεία in the PGM refers to ldquoreligionrdquo in its purest sense This argument can also be applied to charactēres which in many cases accompany voces magi-cae within larger invocation patterns (either spoken or written) and likewise seem to represent alternative god names or formalized prayer patterns (of course they also enabled the ldquomagicianrdquo to impress his cli-ents with mysterious and ostensibly efffĳicacious symbols)111 Finally the use of material offferings described extensively in the PGM may be inter-preted as mirroring one of the most common aspects of ancient deity devotion the sacrifĳice112

In the end only conceptual nuances separate Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία from the instrumental aspects of institutionalized ancient cults (ie ldquoreligionsrdquo) To give a further example the relationship between men and gods demonstrated in the PGM seems to imply the possibility of extraordinary proximity the gods are perceived as being more or less at the disposal of the ldquomagicianrdquo113 (dependent on the proper conduct of his rituals) and could even be ldquoforcedrdquo114 to appear in physical shape115 As a consequence the Graeco-Egyptian ldquomagicianrdquo may have believed that he exerted a strong influence over the gods and thereby over his

110)enspOn this point see already Festugiegravere 1932 esp pp 281f (whose perspective is how-ever rather polemical) see also Betz 1986XLVII who calls the voces magicae simply ldquocode wordsrdquo For clear references to voces magicae as representing names see eg PGM IV278 IV1000f IV1183f XIII149f111)ensp Further on this see Otto 2011403f 112)enspSee on this point also Johnston 2002 113)enspSee the respective formulations in eg PGM I129f I274f III494f IV276f IV776 etc 114)enspNote that the Frazerian notion of coercion cannot be consistently applied to the PGM indeed respectful submissive pleas and more aggressive threats seem to have served as two equally valued forms of communication with gods within Graeco-Egyptian mageiacutea The latter form (ie the threat) may furthermore be traced back to old Egyptian temple rituals and imply ideas of divine hierarchies and ritual identifĳica-tion see in more detail Otto 2011399f 115)enspSee eg PGM I with the strikingly visual even ldquokissablerdquo (PGM I77f) appearance of the parhedros See also PGM XIII and this almost trivial description after a 41 day tour de force of ritual conduct ldquoWhen the god comes in look down and write the things he says and the name which he gives you for himself And do not go out from under your canopy until he tells you accurately too the things that concern yourdquo transl Betz 1986178


and his clientrsquos very destiny It is precisely this notion that is contradic-tory to Platorsquos aforementioned ldquotheologyrdquo and other ancient normative assertions of how gods and men ought to interrelate Compared to the established Graeco-Roman deity cults that may have demanded a cer-tain amount of respect and submissiveness the rituals described in the PGM seem to imply a much more pragmatic interpretation of the ways humans can interrelate with gods From the perspective of the modern Study of Religion however both these ancient ldquotheologiesrdquo do not difffer in their conceptual foundation accordingly they can and should both be classifĳied as ldquoreligionrdquo in academic discourse

To sum up instead of labeling the contents of the Papyri Graecae Magicae (and thereby the ancient in-group understanding of Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία) as ldquomagicrdquo in a modern abstract sense the method-ological approach proposed here also involves a general reorientation regarding the discourse of inclusion On the one hand the PGM are not perceived as a weird or even rubbishy exceptional case in the history of Antiquity but rather as a variation a shift of emphasis or even a mere product of reception processes thereby reflecting an actually common set of religious ideas circulating in the Ancient Mediterranean On the other hand the appearance of μαγεία in the PGM is itself historicized and as such prompts the question what does this term actually mean from an ancient practitionerrsquos perspective Reflection on the aforemen-tioned arguments may lead to the following response the term μαγεία in the PGM refers to formalized ritual actions aiming at instrumentalizing transcendent beings for individual human needs

At this point the reader may be bewildered does this formulation not correspond to certain modern defĳinitions of ldquomagicrdquo From the viewpoint of historical semantics however things are not that sim-ple In short drawing attention to this semantic pattern in the PGM has two important benefĳits First it can be compared to subsequent self-referential uses of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo for example regarding the Early Modern magia naturalis discourse116 or the late 19th century

116)enspHere magia came to signify an impersonal all-embracing pantheistic natural force Cf Marsilio Ficino De vita libri tres esp book 3 and Apologia Giovanni Pico della Mirandola Oratio de hominis dignitate On the Early Modern magia naturalis discourse see also Goldammer 1991 Heinekamp amp Mettler 1978 Otto 2011 ch 10


British occultist discourse of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn117 Through this diachronic intercultural comparison of texts written by self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo an important insight is revealed there are huge conceptual diffferences even within the in-group understanding of ldquomagicrdquo throughout the last 2000 years again suggesting the abandon-ment of the idea of a sound unambiguous academic category of ldquomagicrdquo Second the formulation is not restricted to the ancient discourse of inclu-sion that is ritual instrumentalization of transcendent beings for individ-ual human needs also played a central role in other religious contexts of Antiquity Indeed there is reason to argue that it underlies the very core the Graeco-Roman sacrifĳicial cult (do ut des)118 Thus the most impor-tant semantic aspect of Graeco-Egyptian μαγεία is contemporaneously vivid in established religions of the Ancient Mediterranean here being detached from the concept of ldquomagicrdquo and thereby of devaluation and stigmatization That said the Graeco-Egyptian ldquomagicianrdquo loses his aura of uniqueness in Antiquity even more Rather he appears as being part of a wide spectrum of ancient ritual practitioners sharing mdash at least to some extent mdash similar ideas partly working inside partly outside tem-ples partly having offfĳicial positions in established cults partly regard-ing ritual relations with gods as a mere means of earning a living as a private service provider

The most important question remains to be discussed Why did the authors of the PGM employ the concept of ldquomagicrdquo as a self-referential term Obviously this question cannot be answered with certainty Problems start with identifying these authors were they as speculated above marginalized Egyptian priests or scribes119 In this respect Rob-ert K Ritner David Frankfurter and Johannes Quack have stressed the Egyptian background of the PGM and argued for interpreting these texts in the context of old Egyptian temple rituals120 Given this Egyptian

117)enspHere ldquomagicrdquo came to signify nothing less than apotheosis mdash ldquomake the divine man out of the human manrdquo (Westcott 1892) mdash achieved through a transformative union of the human and the divine ldquowillrdquo Further on this see Otto 2011 ch 114 118)enspSee eg Ruumlpke 2007149f 119)enspJacco Dieleman (2011) convincingly shows that at least the scribes of some of the (Demotic) papyri must have been educated in a traditional Egyptian scriptorium thereby following classical rules of Egyptian ldquoscribal practicesrdquo 120)enspSee Ritner 1995 Frankfurter 1998 esp ch 5 Quack 2011 with further references


context one could even think of μαγεία as a translation of old Egyptian Heka in fact Ritner justifĳies the use of an abstract category of ldquomagicrdquo in Egyptian studies with this argument121 An exclusive translation pro-cess would however not explain the semantic similarities between the concept of μαγεία in the PGM and the stereotypes associated with the term throughout Graeco-Roman Antiquity in the end the Graeco-Egyptian maacutegoi did conduct rituals to among other things induce love they believed in being able to have (or ritually evoke) miraculous abilities and they at least sometimes threatened gods Taking these similarities into account the Papyri Graecae Magicae do not seem to represent a unique Egyptian case Hence it appears more reasonable to assume a larger textual discourse among self-referential ldquomagiciansrdquo in the ancient Mediterranean in which the authors of the Graeco-Egyptian PGM merely participated mdash of course in a somewhat specifĳic Egyptian niche

However as the (Western) conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo began in the late 6th century BCE with Greeks assimilating a Persian term for the ldquoConstruction of the Otherrdquo122 it seems fairly reasonable to argue that the discourse of inclusion emerged after the discourse of exclusion That is ancient ritual practitioners must have picked up the concept of ldquomagicrdquo as a term of self-reference only after it had already circulated as a polemical term in popular discourses These ritual practitioners may have been encouraged by the fact that there were in fact positive remarks on ldquomagicrdquo in a few texts associating the concept with wisdom ritual power and religious authenticity123 It can also be concluded from other historical settings that polemical terms are sometimes picked up deliberately by people who aim at separating themselves from popular

121)ensp See Ritner 199314f for a critical discussion see Otto 2012 122)enspIn more detail see Stratton 2007 ch 2 See also Otto 2011 ch 6 123)enspThis positive tradition may have started with Plato Alciabiades 1 122a who claims that μαγεία refers to the worships of the gods (θεῶν θεραπεία) among the Persians Philo of Alexandria in De specialibus legibus 3100 Dion Chrysostomos in Borysthenes 40f Apuleius in Apologia 259 or (Ps-) Apollonios in his epistula 17 picked up this positive notion A positive use can also be found in Synesios De Insomniis 132ndash133 Thessalos 13 and to a certain degree in the ancient Historia Alexandri Magni 1f Further see Otto 2011 ch 91


culture124 There is no better example for this than the modern Neopa-gan movement which in all its diversity tends to demarcate itself from the Christian tradition and at the same time elevates the concept of ldquopaganismrdquo The fact that Neopagans (and foremost Wiccans) usually have a particularly high opinion of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo indicates that the process suggested here may not be limited to antiquity

Conclusion

This paper proposes a methodological turn in the discourse on ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies It calls on the one hand for the abandonment of an abstract category of ldquomagicrdquo and on the other hand for a system-atic historicization of the ancient term that is for the reconstruction of its ancient semantics functions and contexts The insights yielded by this methodological turn outweigh the ostensible loss of analytic potential that might be perceived by classical scholars who habitually employ the term as a substantive working tool In fact analyzing the ancient use of μαγείαmagia evokes new research questions that yield important insights into socio-religious conflicts into the construction and legitimization of religious identities or into the tension between group and individual religiosity in Antiquity Thus investigating the conceptual history of ldquomagicrdquo has more to offfer than pursuing fruitless discussions about modern defĳinitions of the term Instead of implicitly or explicitly sustaining the idea of an ideal-type transcultural and ahis-torical category classical scholars should begin to perceive ldquomagicrdquo as a historical term that pervades their sources and bears in fact contrary to academic defĳinitions a plethora of meanings functions and valuations worth investigating

The suggested methodological turn can therefore solve a termino-logical issue that has influenced the discussion since the early works of Dieterich Preisendanz and others what is ancient ldquomagicrdquo The clas-sical discourse lacks a satisfying answer to this question despite the impressive literary output covering the topic in the last decades In fact the sheer number of scholarly works on ancient ldquomagicrdquo cannot justify

124)enspSee the splendid discussion of this social phenomenon in Hanegraafff 2012 eg pp 374f


the extensive use of the concept or add to its trustworthiness as an ana-lytical category The present popularity of ldquomagicrdquo as a research topic in Classical Studies rather reveals a scholarly trend possibly inspired by the immense success of the mythologized fĳigure of the ldquomagicianrdquo in modern popular culture or by other dynamics within the academy such as the intention to produce books with a high print run125 This trend however is based on dubious conceptual grounds In particular the aforementioned tendency to work without defĳinitions observable in almost all recent studies results in a methodological aberration Instead of clearly defĳined semantic criteria (being falsifĳiable at the very least) implicit assumptions or inherent understandings of the concept of ldquomagicrdquo now dominate the discourse in Classical Studies It remains mysterious that no one has complained so far about this ongoing pro-cedure Implicit assumptions of ldquomagicrdquo are by no means better than classical defĳinitions but just as fuzzy judgmental and ethnocentric The strategy to work without defĳinitions has in fact made it even more difffĳi-cult to understand what Classicists mean nowadays when talking about ancient ldquomagicrdquo

In contrast the historicization of the term suggested here126 pro-vides a satisfying answer to the aforementioned question ldquomagicrdquo is an emic term employed in ancient textual sources and characterized

125)enspOn this point see the splendid review of Sarah Iles Johnston (200353ndash54) ldquoEven Meyer and his co-convener Paul Mirecki could not resist lauding the contributions that participants had made to defĳining magic when they composed an introduction to their volume of conference papers Moreover although the two had battled with their publisher to keep the word lsquomagicrsquo out of the bookrsquos title and instead use lsquoritual powerrsquo (a phrase that had been suggested debated and provisionally accepted as preferable to lsquomagicrsquo at the conference itselfthinsp) and although they had won that battle at least insofar as the book appeared under the name Ancient Magic and Ritual Power when Mirecki and Meyer published papers from a second conference they called the book Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World (Leiden Brill 2002) A subtle change but worth noting the alternative that had enjoyed such reactionary favour at the fĳirst conference had begun to retreat we were getting back to business as usual which meant tilting once again at the old enemyrdquo126)enspThe sources discussed in the second part of this paper represent only a small part of the ancient reception of the term and were analyzed in such a way as to clarify important aspects and methodological steps implied in the historicization of the con-cept Therefore this paper should not be regarded as a sufffĳicient analysis but rather as a fĳirst step towards a thick description of ancient semantics functions and modes


by a complex semantic fĳield and a diversity of valuations and functions depending in principle on the context of its use It is frequently used within ancient religious discourses and closely related to questions of the marvelous the efffĳicacy of ritual actions the (il)legitimacy of private religiosity and (il)licit ways of interrelating with transcendent beings It could both refer to the ldquodangerous otherrdquo implying notions of irreligios-ity immorality and charlatanry and to the ldquoholy manrdquo (reflecting the in-group perspective of ritual specialists) here implying notions of holi-ness ritual efffĳicacy and religious authenticity Hence the methodologi-cal turn proposed here can not only overcome the wearisome debate on substantial defĳinitions of ldquomagicrdquo in Classical Studies but also contrib-ute to understanding ancient authors (literally) on their own terms

References

Abt Adam 1908 Die Apologie des Apuleius von Madaura und die antike Zauberei Beitraumlge zur Erlaumluterung der Schrift de magia Giessen Toepelmann

Becker Michael 2002 ldquoDie lsquoMagiersquo-Problematik in der Antike mdash genuumlgt eine sozial-wissenschaftliche Erfassungrdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 541 1ndash22

Betz Hans D (ed) 1986 The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation Including the Demotic Spells Chicago University of Chicago Press

Blaumlnsdorf Juumlrgen 2010 ldquoThe defĳixiones from the Sanctuary of Isis and Mater Magna in Mainzrdquo In Richard L Gordon and Francisco Marco Simoacuten (eds) Magical Practice in the Latin West Papers from the International Conference held at the University of Zaragoza 30 Septndash1st Oct 2005 Leiden Brill 141ndash90

Bohak Gideon Yuval Harari and Shaul Shaked (eds) 2011 Continuity and Innovation in the Magical Tradition Leiden Brill

Brashear William M 1995 ldquoThe Greek Magical Papyri an Introduction and Survey Annotated Bibliography (1928ndash1994) [Indices in vol II186]rdquo In Wolfgang Haase et al (eds) ANRW II185 Berlin De Gruyter 3380ndash3684

Braun Willi and Russell T McCutcheon (eds) 2000 Guide to the Study of Religion Lon-don Cassell

Bremmer Jan N 1999 [rev ed 2002] ldquoThe Birth of the Term lsquoMagicrsquordquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 126 1ndash14 re-issued and expanded in Jan N Bremmer and Jan R Veenstra (eds) The Metamorphosis of Magic from Late Antiquity to the Early Modern Period Leiden Brill 1ndash12

of thought underlying the concept of ldquomagicrdquo in Antiquity For a more comprehensive overview see Otto 2011


Bremmer Jan N and Jan R Veenstra (eds) 2003 The Metamorphosis of Magic From late Antiquity to the Early Modern Period Leiden Brill

Brodersen Kai and Amina Kropp (eds) 2004 Fluchtafeln Neue Funde und neue Deu-tungen zum antiken Schadenzauber FrankfurtMain Verlag Antike

Busch Peter 2006 Magie in neutestamentlicher Zeit Goumlttingen Vandenhoeck amp Ruprecht

Butler Harold E 1909 The Apologia and Florida of Apuleius of Madaura Oxford Clarendon Print

Carastro Marcello 2006 La citeacute des mages Penser la magie en Gregravece ancienne Greno-ble Millon

Chadwick Henry (ed) 1965 Origen Contra Celsum Transl H Chadwick 2nd ed Cam-bridge Cambridge University Press

Ciraolo Leda and Jonathan Seidel (eds) 2002 Magic and Divination in the Ancient World Leiden Brill

Copenhaver Brian P 1987 ldquoIamblichus Synesius and the Chaldean Oracles in Marsilio Ficinorsquos De Vita Libri Tres Hermetic Magic or Neoplatonic Magicrdquo In James Han-kins et al (eds) Supplementum Festivum Studies in Honor of Paul Oskar Kristeller Binghamton Medieval amp Renaissance Texts amp Studies 441ndash55

mdashmdashmdash 1988 ldquoHermes Trismegistus Proclus and the Question of a Philosophy of Magic in the Renaissancerdquo In Ingrid Merkel and Allen G Debus (eds) Hermeticism and the Renaissance Intellectual History and the Occult in Early Modern Europe Wash-ington DC Folger Shakespeare Library 79ndash110

Daniel Robert W and Franco Maltomini (eds) 1990ndash1992 Supplementum Magicum 2 volumes Opladen Westdt Verlag

Dickie Matthew W 1999 ldquoThe Learned Magician and the Collection and Transmis-sion of Magical Lorerdquo In David R Jordan Hugo Montgomery and Einar Thomas-sen (eds) The World of Ancient Magic Papers from the First International Samson Eitrem Seminar Norwegian Institute Athens 4ndash8 May 1997 Bergen Norwegian Institute at Athens 163ndash93

mdashmdashmdash 2001 Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World London Routledge Dieleman Jacco 2011 ldquoScribal Practices in the Production of Magic Handbooksrdquo In

Gideon Bohak Yuval Harari and Shaul Shaked (eds) Continuity and Innovation in the Magical Tradition Leiden Brill 85ndash118

Faraone Christopher A 1991 ldquoThe Agonistic Context of Early Greek Binding Spellsrdquo In Christopher A Faraone and Dirk Obbink (eds) Magika Hiera Ancient Greek Magic and Religion Oxford Oxford University Press 3ndash32

Faraone Christopher A and Dirk Obbink (eds) 1991 Magika Hiera Ancient Greek Magic and Religion Oxford Oxford University Press

Festugiegravere Andreacute Jean 1932 Lrsquoideacuteal religieux des grecs et lrsquoeacutevangile 2nd ed Paris Lecofffre

Foumlgen Marie T 1993 Die Enteignung der Wahrsager Studien zum kaiserlichen Wissens-monopol in der Spaumltantike FrankfurtMain Suhrkamp

Frazer James G 1900 The Golden Bough A Study in Magic and Religion Volume I Lon-don Macmillan


Gager John G 1992 Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World New York Oxford University Press

mdashmdashmdash 1994 ldquoMoses The Magician Hero of an Ancient Counter-Culturerdquo Helios 21 179ndash188

Gallagher Eugene V 1982 Divine Man or Magician Celsus and Origen on Jesus Chi-cago Scholars Press

Garrett Susan 1989 The Demise of the Devil Magic and the Demonic in Lukersquos Writings Minneapolis Fortress

Goldammer Kurt 1991 Der goumlttliche Magier und die Magierin Natur Religion Naturma-gie und die Anfaumlnge der Naturwissenschaft vom Spaumltmittelalter bis zur Renaissance Mit Beitraumlgen zum Magie-Verstaumlndnis des Paracelsus Stuttgart Steiner

Gordon Richard L and Francisco Marco Simoacuten (eds) 2010 Magical Practice in the Latin West Papers from the International Conference held at the University of Zara-goza 30 Sept-1st Oct 2005 Leiden Brill

Graf Fritz 1996 Gottesnaumlhe und Schadenzauber Die Magie in der griechisch-roumlmischen Antike Muumlnchen Beck

Hallock Richard T (ed) 1969 Persepolis Fortifĳication Tablets Chicago University of Chicago Press

Hammerstaedt Juumlrgen et al (eds) 2002 Apuleius De Magia Eingeleitet uumlbersetzt und mit interpretierenden Essays versehen von Juumlrgen Hammerstaedt Peter Habermehl Francesca Lamberti Adolf M Ritter und Peter Schenk Darmstadt Wissenschaftli-che Buchgesellschaft

Hammond Dorothy 1970 ldquoMagic A Problem in Semanticsrdquo American Anthropologist 72 1349ndash1356

Hanegraafff Wouter J 2005 ldquoMagic I Introductionrdquo In Wouter J Hanegraafff et al (eds) Dictionary of Gnosis amp Western Esotericism Vol II IndashZ Leiden Brill 716ndash19

mdashmdashmdash 2012 Esotericism and the Academy Rejected Knowledge in Western Culture Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Heinekamp Albert and Dieter Mettler (eds) 1978 Magia naturalis und die Entstehung der modernen Naturwissenschaften Symposion d Leibniz-Ges Hannover 14 u 15 Nov 1975 Wiesbaden Steiner

Hofffman Christopher A 2002 ldquoFiat Magiardquo In Paul Mirecki and Marvin Meyer (eds) Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World Leiden Brill 179ndash94

Horton Robin and Ruth Finnegan (eds) 1973 Modes of Thought Essays on Thinking in Western and Non-Western Societies London Faber amp Faber

Janowitz Naomi 2001 Magic in the Roman World Pagans Jews and Christians London Routledge

Johnston Sarah Iles 2002 ldquoSacrifĳice in the Greek Magical Papyrirdquo In Paul Mirecki and Marvin Meyer (eds) Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World Leiden Brill 344ndash57

mdashmdashmdash 2003 Review Article ldquoDescribing the Undefĳinable New Books on Magic and Old Problems of Defĳinitionrdquo In History of Religions 431 50ndash54

Jong Albert de 1997 Traditions of the Magi Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Litera-ture Leiden Brill


Jordan David R 1989 ldquoNew Evidence for the Activity of Scribes in Roman Athensrdquo In Abstracts of the American Philological Association mdash 120th Annual Meeting (Balti-more) Atlanta American Philological Association 55

Jordan David R Hugo Montgomery and Einar Thomassen (eds) 1999 The World of Ancient Magic Papers from the First International Samson Eitrem Seminar Norwe-gian Institute Athens 4ndash8 May 1997 Bergen Norwegian Institute at Athens

Kippenberg Hans G 1995 ldquoEinleitung Zur Kontroverse uumlber das Verstehen fremden Denkensrdquo In Hans G Kippenberg and Brigitte Luchesi (eds) Magie Die sozialwis-senschaftliche Kontroverse uumlber das Verstehen fremden Denkens 2nd ed FrankfurtMain Suhrkamp 9ndash51

mdashmdashmdash 1998 ldquoMagierdquo In Hubert Cancik Burkhard Gladigow and Karl-H Kohl (eds) Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegrifffe Band IV Kultbild-Rolle Stut-tgart Kohlhammer 85ndash98

Kippenberg Hans G and Brigitte Luchesi (eds) 1995 Magie Die sozialwissenschaftli-che Kontroverse uumlber das Verstehen fremden Denkens 2nd ed FrankfurtMain Suhrkamp

Kippenberg Hans G and Kocku v Stuckrad 2003 Einfuumlhrung in die Religionswissen-schaft Gegenstaumlnde und Begrifffe Muumlnchen Beck

Kippenberg Hans G and Peter Schaumlfer (eds) 1997 Envisioning Magic A Princeton Seminar and Symposium Leiden Brill

Kreinath Jens Jan Snoek and Michael Stausberg (eds) 2006ndash7 Theorizing Rituals Leiden Brill

Kropp Amina 2004 ldquolsquoDefĳigo Eudemum necetis eumrsquo Kommunikationsmuster in den Texten antiker Schadenszauberritualerdquo In Kai Brodersen and Amina Kropp (eds) Fluchtafeln Neue Funde und neue Deutungen zum antiken Schadenzauber Frank-furtMain Verlag Antike 81ndash97

mdashmdashmdash 2008 Magische Sprachverwendung in vulgaumlrlateinischen Fluchtafeln (defĳix-iones) Tuumlbingen Narr

mdashmdashmdash 2010 ldquoHow Does Magical Language Work The Spells and Formulae of the Latin defĳixionum tabellaerdquo In Richard L Gordon and Francisco Marco Simoacuten (eds) Magical Practice in the Latin West Papers from the International Conference held at the University of Zaragoza 30 Septndash1st Oct 2005 Leiden Brill 357ndash80

Lamberti Francesca 2002 ldquoIII De magia als rechtsgeschichtliches Dokumentrdquo In Juumlr-gen Hammerstaedt et al (eds) Apuleius De Magia Eingeleitet uumlbersetzt und mit interpretierenden Essays versehen von Juumlrgen Hammerstaedt Peter Habermehl Francesca Lamberti Adolf M Ritter und Peter Schenk Darmstadt Wissenschaftli-che Buchgesellschaft 331ndash350

Leach Edmund 1982 Social Anthropology Glasgow Fontana Lotz Almuth 2005 Der Magiekonflikt in der Spaumltantike Bon Babelt Lowie Robert H 1948 Primitive Religion New York Liveright Luck Georg (ed) 1985 Arcana Mundi Magic and the Occult in the Greek and Roman

Worlds A Collection of Ancient Texts Transl Annotated and Introd By Georg Luck Baltimore John Hopkins University Press (second enlarged edition Baltimore John Hopkins University Press 2006)


Marcovich Miroslav (ed) 2001 Origines Contra Celsum Libri VIII Leiden Brill Meyer Marvin W and Paul Mirecki (eds) 1995 Ancient Magic and Ritual Power Con-

ference on ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo held in August 1992 at the University of Kan-sas Leiden Brill

Meyer Marvin W and Richard Smith (eds) 1994 Ancient Christian Magic Coptic Texts of Ritual Power San Francisco HarperCollins

Mirecki Paul and Marvin Meyer (eds) 2002 Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World Leiden Brill

Nock Arthur D 1933 ldquoPaul and the Magusrdquo In Frederick J Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake (eds) The Beginnings of Christianity V Additional notes to the Commentary London MacMillan 164ndash88

Noegel Scott et al (eds) 2003 Prayer Magic and the Stars in the Ancient and late Antique World University Park Pennsylvania State University Press

Ogden Daniel (ed) 2002 Magic Witchcraft and Ghosts in the Greek and Roman Worlds A Sourcebook Oxford Oxford University Press

Otto Bernd-Christian 2011 Magie Rezeptions- und diskursgeschichtliche Analysen von der Antike bis zur Neuzeit Berlin De Gruyter

mdashmdashmdash 2012 ldquoZauberhaftes Aumlgypten mdash Aumlgyptischer Zauber Uumlberlegungen zur Ver-wendung des Magiebegrifffs in der Aumlgyptologieldquo In Florian Jeserich (ed) Aumlgypten Kindheit Tod Gedenkschrift fuumlr Edmund Hermsen Wien Boumlhlau 39ndash70

Otto Bernd-Christian and Michael Stausberg (eds) 2013 Defĳining Magic A Reader London Equinox

Pasi Marco 2008 ldquoTheses de magiardquo Societas Magica Newsletter 20 1ndash8Peel John DY 1969 ldquoUnderstanding Alien Belief Systemsrdquo The British Journal of Sociol-

ogy 20 69ndash84Pettersson Olof 1957 ldquoMagic mdash Religion Some Marginal Notes to an Old Problemrdquo

Ethnos 22 109ndash119Piranomonte Marina 2010 ldquoReligion and Magic at Rome The Fountain of Anna

Perennardquo In Richard L Gordon and Francisco Marco Simoacuten (eds) Magical Prac-tice in the Latin West Papers from the International Conference held at the Univer-sity of Zaragoza 30 Septndash1st Oct 2005 Leiden Brill 191ndash214

Phillips III Charles R 1986 ldquoThe Sociology of Religious Knowledge in the Roman Empire to AD 284rdquo In Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase (eds) Aufstieg und Niedergang der roumlmischen Welt II163 Berlin De Gruyter 2677ndash2773

mdashmdashmdash 1994 ldquoSeek and Go Hide Literary Source Problems and Graeco-Roman Magicrdquo Helios 21 107ndash114

Pocock David 1972 ldquoForewordrdquo In Marcel Mauss A General Theory of Magic Trans-lated from the French by Robert Brain London Routledge Kegan Paul 1ndash6

Preisendanz Karl amp Albert Henrichs 1973ndash74 Papyri Graecae Magicae Die Griechis-chen Zauberpapyri (2 vols) Stuttgart Teubner

Quack Joachim Friedrich 2011 ldquoFrom Ritual to Magic Ancient Egyptian Precursors of the Charitesion and their Social Settingrdquo In Gideon Bohak Yuval Harari and Shaul Shaked (eds) Continuity and Innovation in the Magical Tradition Leiden Brill 43ndash84


Radclifffe-Brown Arnold R 1952 Structure and Function in Primitive Society Glencoe Free Press

Remus Harold 1983 Pagan-Christian Conflict over Miracle in the Second Century Cam-bridge Philadelphia Patristic Foundation

mdashmdashmdash 1999 ldquothinsplsquoMagicrsquo Method Madnessrdquo In Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 11 258ndash298

Ritner Robert Kriech 1993 The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice Chi-cago Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago

mdashmdashmdash 1995 ldquoEgyptian Magical Practice under the Roman Empire The Demotic Spells and Their Religious Contextrdquo In Wolfgang Haase et al (eds) Aufstieg und Nieder-gang der roumlmischen Welt II185 Berlin De Gruyter 3333ndash79

Ruumlpke Joumlrg 2007 Religion of the Romans Translated and edited by Richard Gordon Cambridge Polity

mdashmdashmdash 2011 Aberglauben oder Individualitaumlt Religioumlse Abweichung im roumlmischen Reich Tuumlbingen Mohr Siebeck

Segal Alan F 1981 ldquoHellenistic Magic Some Questions of Defĳinitionrdquo In Roelof v d Broek and Maarten J Vermaseren (eds) Studies in Gnosticism and Hellenistic Religions Presented to Gilles Quispel on the occasion of his 65 birthday Leiden Brill 349ndash375

Shaked Shaul (ed) 2005 Offfĳicina Magica Essays on the Practice of Magic in Antiquity Leiden Brill

Smith Jonathan Z 1995 ldquoTrading Placesrdquo In Marvin W Meyer and Paul Mirecki (eds) Ancient Magic and Ritual Power Conference on ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo held in August 1992 at the University of Kansas Leiden Brill 13ndash27

Smith Morton 1978 Jesus The Magician London Gollancz mdashmdashmdash 1983 ldquoOn the Lack of a History of Greco-Roman Magicrdquo In Heinz Heinen (ed)

Althistorische Studien Hermann Bengtson zum 70 Geburtstag dargebracht von Kollegen und Schuumllern Wiesbaden Steiner 251ndash57

Spiro Melford E 1966 ldquoReligion Problems of Defĳinition and Explanationrdquo In Michael P Banton (ed) Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion London Tavis-tock Publ 85ndash126

Stratton Kimberly B 2007 Naming the Witch Magic Ideology amp Stereotype in the Ancient World New York Columbia University Press

mdashmdashmdash 2013 ldquoMagic Discourse in the Ancient Worldrdquo In Bernd-Christian Otto and Michael Stausberg (eds) Defĳining Magic A Reader London Equinox 243ndash54

Stuckrad Kocku von Forthcoming ldquoMagicrdquo In Robert A Segal (ed) The Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion 2nd edn Malden MA Blackwell Publishers

Styers Randall 2004 Making Magic Religion Magic and Science in the Modern World Oxford Oxford University Press

mdashmdashmdash 2013 ldquoMagic and the Play of Powerrdquo In Bernd-Christian Otto and Michael Stausberg (eds) Defĳining Magic A Reader London Equinox 255ndash62

Taylor Mark C (ed) 1998 Critical Terms for Religious Studies Chicago Chicago Uni-versity Press

Thomassen Einar 1999 ldquoIs Magic a Subclass of Ritualrdquo In David R Jordan Hugo Mont-gomery and Einar Thomassen (eds) The World of Ancient Magic Papers from the


First International Samson Eitrem Seminar Norwegian Institute Athens 4ndash8 May 1997 Bergen Norwegian Institute at Athens 55ndash66

Tylor Edward B 1994 (reprint of 1871 ed) Primitive Culture London RoutledgeVersnel Henk S 1991 ldquoSome Reflections on the Relationship Magic mdash Religionrdquo Numen

38 177ndash197mdashmdashmdash 2010 ldquoPrayers for Justice in East and West Recent Finds and Publicationsrdquo In

Richard L Gordon and Francisco Marco Simoacuten (eds) Magical Practice in the Latin West Papers from the International Conference held at the University of Zaragoza 30 Sept-1st Oct 2005 Leiden Brill 275ndash353

Wax Murray amp Rosalie Wax 1963 ldquoThe Notion of Magicrdquo Current Anthropology 4 495ndash518

Westcott William Wynn Ca 1892 Flying Role XV online httpwwwhermeticgoldendawnorghogdframesethtml (19052010) link ldquoLibrary+ Resourcesrdquo link ldquoThe Fly-ing Rollsrdquo link ldquoFlying Role XVrdquo

Wilson Bryan R (ed) 1970 Rationality Oxford Oxford University PressWinter Thomas N 2006 [reprint of orig1969] Apology as Prosecution The Trial of

Apuleius University of Nebrasca-Lincoln (orig Evanston 1969) Available online at httpdigitalcommonsunleducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1003ampcontext=classicsfacpub

Zinser Hartmut 1997 Der Markt der Religionen Muumlnchen Fink

ltlt ASCII85EncodePages false AllowTransparency false AutoPositionEPSFiles true AutoRotatePages None Binding Left CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20) CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-21) CalCMYKProfile (US Web Coated 050SWOP051 v2) sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-21) CannotEmbedFontPolicy Error CompatibilityLevel 13 CompressObjects Off CompressPages true ConvertImagesToIndexed true PassThroughJPEGImages true CreateJDFFile false CreateJobTicket true DefaultRenderingIntent Default DetectBlends false DetectCurves 00000 ColorConversionStrategy LeaveColorUnchanged DoThumbnails false EmbedAllFonts true EmbedOpenType false ParseICCProfilesInComments true EmbedJobOptions true DSCReportingLevel 0 EmitDSCWarnings false EndPage -1 ImageMemory 1048576 LockDistillerParams true MaxSubsetPct 100 Optimize false OPM 1 ParseDSCComments true ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true PreserveCopyPage true PreserveDICMYKValues true PreserveEPSInfo true PreserveFlatness true PreserveHalftoneInfo false PreserveOPIComments false PreserveOverprintSettings true StartPage 1 SubsetFonts false TransferFunctionInfo Apply UCRandBGInfo Remove UsePrologue false ColorSettingsFile (None) AlwaysEmbed [ true ] NeverEmbed [ true ] AntiAliasColorImages false CropColorImages true ColorImageMinResolution 150 ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy Warning DownsampleColorImages true ColorImageDownsampleType Bicubic ColorImageResolution 300 ColorImageDepth -1 ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 150000 EncodeColorImages true ColorImageFilter DCTEncode AutoFilterColorImages true ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy JPEG ColorACSImageDict ltlt QFactor 015 HSamples [1 1 1 1] VSamples [1 1 1 1] gtgt ColorImageDict ltlt QFactor 015 HSamples [1 1 1 1] VSamples [1 1 1 1] gtgt JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict ltlt TileWidth 256 TileHeight 256 Quality 30 gtgt JPEG2000ColorImageDict ltlt TileWidth 256 TileHeight 256 Quality 30 gtgt AntiAliasGrayImages false CropGrayImages true GrayImageMinResolution 150 GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy Warning DownsampleGrayImages true GrayImageDownsampleType Bicubic GrayImageResolution 300 GrayImageDepth -1 GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 150000 EncodeGrayImages true GrayImageFilter DCTEncode AutoFilterGrayImages true GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy JPEG GrayACSImageDict ltlt QFactor 015 HSamples [1 1 1 1] VSamples [1 1 1 1] gtgt GrayImageDict ltlt QFactor 015 HSamples [1 1 1 1] VSamples [1 1 1 1] gtgt JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict ltlt TileWidth 256 TileHeight 256 Quality 30 gtgt JPEG2000GrayImageDict ltlt TileWidth 256 TileHeight 256 Quality 30 gtgt AntiAliasMonoImages false CropMonoImages true MonoImageMinResolution 550 MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy Warning DownsampleMonoImages true MonoImageDownsampleType Bicubic MonoImageResolution 2400 MonoImageDepth -1 MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 150000 EncodeMonoImages true MonoImageFilter CCITTFaxEncode MonoImageDict ltlt K -1 gtgt AllowPSXObjects false CheckCompliance [ PDFX1a2001 ] PDFX1aCheck false PDFX3Check false PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false PDFXNoTrimBoxError false PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 000000 000000 000000 000000 ] PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 000000 000000 000000 000000 ] PDFXOutputIntentProfile (GWG_GenericCMYK) PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () PDFXOutputCondition () PDFXRegistryName () PDFXTrapped False Description ltlt CHS ltFEFF4f7f75288fd94e9b8bbe5b9a521b5efa7684002000410064006f006200650020005000440046002065876863900275284e8e9ad88d2891cf76845370524d53705237300260a853ef4ee54f7f75280020004100630072006f0062006100740020548c002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee553ca66f49ad87248672c676562535f00521b5efa768400200050004400460020658768633002gt CHT ltFEFF4f7f752890194e9b8a2d7f6e5efa7acb7684002000410064006f006200650020005000440046002065874ef69069752865bc9ad854c18cea76845370524d5370523786557406300260a853ef4ee54f7f75280020004100630072006f0062006100740020548c002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee553ca66f49ad87248672c4f86958b555f5df25efa7acb76840020005000440046002065874ef63002gt DAN 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 DEU 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 ESP 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 FRA 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 ITA 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 JPN ltFEFF9ad854c18cea306a30d730ea30d730ec30b951fa529b7528002000410064006f0062006500200050004400460020658766f8306e4f5c6210306b4f7f75283057307e305930023053306e8a2d5b9a30674f5c62103055308c305f0020005000440046002030d530a130a430eb306f3001004100630072006f0062006100740020304a30883073002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e003000204ee5964d3067958b304f30533068304c3067304d307e305930023053306e8a2d5b9a306b306f30d530a930f330c8306e57cb30818fbc307f304c5fc59808306730593002gt KOR ltFEFFc7740020c124c815c7440020c0acc6a9d558c5ec0020ace0d488c9c80020c2dcd5d80020c778c1c4c5d00020ac00c7a50020c801d569d55c002000410064006f0062006500200050004400460020bb38c11cb97c0020c791c131d569b2c8b2e4002e0020c774b807ac8c0020c791c131b41c00200050004400460020bb38c11cb2940020004100630072006f0062006100740020bc0f002000410064006f00620065002000520065006100640065007200200035002e00300020c774c0c1c5d0c11c0020c5f40020c2180020c788c2b5b2c8b2e4002egt NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken die zijn geoptimaliseerd voor prepress-afdrukken van hoge kwaliteit De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 50 en hoger) NOR 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 PTB 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 SUO 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 SVE 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 ENU (Ghent PDF Workgroup - 2005 Specifications version3 (x1a 2001 compliant)) gtgt Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (10) ] OtherNamespaces [ ltlt AsReaderSpreads false CropImagesToFrames true ErrorControl WarnAndContinue FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false IncludeGuidesGrids false IncludeNonPrinting false IncludeSlug false Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (40) ] OmitPlacedBitmaps false OmitPlacedEPS false OmitPlacedPDF false SimulateOverprint Legacy gtgt ltlt AddBleedMarks false AddColorBars false AddCropMarks false AddPageInfo false AddRegMarks false ConvertColors ConvertToCMYK DestinationProfileName () DestinationProfileSelector DocumentCMYK Downsample16BitImages true FlattenerPreset ltlt PresetSelector MediumResolution gtgt FormElements false GenerateStructure false IncludeBookmarks false IncludeHyperlinks false IncludeInteractive false IncludeLayers false IncludeProfiles false MultimediaHandling UseObjectSettings Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (20) ] PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector DocumentCMYK PreserveEditing true UntaggedCMYKHandling LeaveUntagged UntaggedRGBHandling UseDocumentProfile UseDocumentBleed false gtgt ]gtgt setdistillerparamsltlt HWResolution [2400 2400] PageSize [14173229 14173229]gtgt setpagedevice


topic2 and have published an impressive number of collections of essays3 articles4 several source books5 and numerous monographs aiming at a systematic overview of the material presented while partly proposing new theoretical terminological and methodological approaches6 To date however cardinal questions that have shaped the academic controversy over ldquomagicrdquo since the late 19th century remain to be answered What is ancient ldquomagicrdquo In what sense is it distinct from ancient ldquoreligionrdquo How should Classicists proceed with ambigu-ous data whose general classifĳication regarding these categories have unleashed an ongoing dispute7 Is the concept of ldquomagicrdquo any good for understanding ancient sources Or should it fĳinally be removed from academic discourse altogether given its judgmental ethnocentric and semantically fuzzy notions

2)enspThe most representative among them are ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo (August 1992 University of Kansas) ldquoMagic and Divination in the Ancient Worldrdquo (February 1994 Berkeley) ldquoEnvisioning Magicrdquo (March 1995 Princeton) ldquoThe World of Ancient Magicrdquo (May 1997 Norwegian Institute Athens) ldquoMagic in the Ancient Worldrdquo (August 1998 Chapman University California) ldquoPrayers Magic and the Stars in the Ancient and late Antique Worldrdquo (March 2002 Washington) ldquoMagical Practice in the Latin Westrdquo (SeptemberOctober 2005 Zaragoza) ldquoContextualizing Magicrdquo (November 2009 Rome)3)enspCf Faraone amp Obbink 1991 Meyer amp Mirecki 1995 Kippenberg amp Schaumlfer 1997 Jor-dan Montgomery amp Thomassen 1999 Ciraolo amp Seidel 2002 Mirecki amp Meyer 2002 Noegel amp Walker 2003 Bremmer amp Veenstra 2003 Brodersen amp Kropp 2004 Shaked 2005 Gordon amp Marco Simoacuten 2010 Bohak Harari amp Shaked 2011 4)enspApart from the essays in the collections mentioned above the following articles are important Segal 1981 Versnel 1991 Phillips III 1994 Becker 2002 Stratton 2013 5)enspLuck 1985 amp 2006 Ogden 20026)enspCf Foumlgen 1993 Graf 1996 Dickie 2001 Janowitz 2001 Lotz 2005 Carastro 2006 Busch 2006 Stratton 2007 Kropp 2008 7)enspSee eg the discussions about neoplatonic theurgy about the so-called prayers for justice or texts like the Corpus Hermeticum or the Papyri Graecae Magicae For neo-platonic theurgy see among others Copenhaver 1987 in fact the controversy started already in late Antiquity with Iamblichus who opted for a clear distinction (eg de mys-teriis 325160f 331176f) and Augustine who deliberately equated ldquomagicrdquo with ldquotheu-rgyrdquo (eg de ciuitate dei 109) For the discussion about prayers for justice see especially Versnel 2010 For the discussion about the Corpus Hermeticum see eg Copenhaver 1988 Also the Papyri Graecae Magicae have been subject to an ongoing dispute on its ldquomagicalrdquo andor ldquoreligiousrdquo properties mdash see eg Segal 1981 Smith 1995 Remus 1999

























































































































Conclusion










References












































































































































































































































Conclusion










References









































































































































































































































Conclusion










References






































































































































































































































Conclusion










References


































































































































































































































Conclusion










References






























































































































































































































Conclusion










References


























































































































































































































Conclusion










References






















































































































































































































Conclusion










References


















































































































































































































Conclusion










References














































































































































































































Conclusion










References










































































































































































































Conclusion










References




































































































































































































Conclusion










References

































































































































































































Conclusion










References





























































































































































































Conclusion










References

























































































































































































Conclusion










References




















































































































































































Conclusion










References
















































































































































































Conclusion










References











































































































































































Conclusion










References







































































































































































Conclusion










References



































































































































































Conclusion










References































































































































































Conclusion










References



























































































































































Conclusion










References























































































































































Conclusion










References



















































































































































Conclusion










References















































































































































Conclusion










References











































































































































Conclusion










References







































































































































Conclusion










References



































































































































Conclusion










References






























































































































Conclusion










References


























































































































Conclusion










References






















































































































Conclusion










References


























































































































References






















































































































References























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Documents

Towards Historicizing 'Magic' in Antiquity