The mysticism of magic has been a topic that has sparked curiosity since the dawn of civilization. However, its peculiar characteristics have not been exempt from intense debate throughout history. In the first point of this study, we will analyze the historiographical debate existing between the concepts of magic and religion in Antiquity. Next, we will observe the similarities and differences that exist between two magical objects such as the ceramic bowls with inscribed charms from Babylon (Bohak, 2019: 70-122) and the binding spells of the Greco-Roman world (Collins, 2008: 104-131), focusing exclusively on those related to communication with entities from the Underworld due to their particularities.
The traditional approach developed during the 20th century, and represented in J.G. Frazer's work The Golden Bough, focused on representing "magic" and "religion" as opposing entities. According to this current, magic was observed as a primitive expression centered on superstition that emerged before religion, which later brought a more mature view of the interaction between man and divine power. This topic has not been exempt from intense historiographical debate in recent times. The main lines of contemporary research point towards two clearly differentiated positions. The first asserts that a large part of the social disapproval regarding magic stems from ruling religious groups labeling these practices as illicit and characteristic of ignorance. On the other hand, the more moderate perspective is based on the idea that magic should be understood as a part of religion or as part of a complex cultural symbolism system in which religion also forms a component. Despite these advances, no clear consensus has been reached on this topic and it continues to be debated persistently.
The world of magic is known for its syncretic nature and for transcending geographical and temporal boundaries. Ortal-Paz Saar defines the term "magical practice" as a ritual activity performed with a clear objective, and detached (partially or completely) from institutional religious rites in a specific time and place. Within these magical activities, binding spells were intended to restrict an individual's physical or psychological will, making them behave according to the beneficiary of the charm and/or triggering a series of events (Saar, 2015: 24-53).
The earliest testimonies on binding spells have been dated to the 5th century BCE, and their use and popularity extended until approximately the 6th century CE. Its utility spread throughout the Greco-Roman world with a wide variety of objectives, from romantic and medical purposes to sports, economic, or judicial ones. The resulting products of these rituals usually took the form of inscribed lead tablets or other materials. The prototypical inscription appealed to supernatural entities and in some cases included the name of the spell's creator. In most instances, the desired outcomes were described as "let all who oppose me lose their voice and words," or "they will not enjoy good health until they return the animal that was stolen from me." Subsequently, the tablet would be deposited in an important location for the charm to take effect, such as a cemetery or temple (Kotansky, 1991:107-137).
On the other hand, most of the known Babylonian magic bowls are defensive (Bohak, 2019: 84-98) and generally differ from characteristic Greco-Roman binding spells. However, some show similarities, particularly in those spells aimed at communicating with the dead and supernatural entities for magical purposes.
As Max Guilmot beautifully and metaphorically points out, "In Egypt (…) a deceased person is never truly dead" (Guilmot, 1966: 1-27). This phrase defines the relationship between the spell beneficiary and the dead. It was most common for objects with binding spells inscribed on them to be deposited in places related to the underworld, especially cemeteries. It was believed that the deceased residing in cemeteries could serve as messengers between the individual and dark powers. The tombs of those who died prematurely or violently were particularly recommended for depositing these tablets because it was believed that these dead individuals envied those who survived them, thus acting against them with greater ferocity.
In the inscribed bowls, we observe how the dead are addressed in the second person to generate analogies about their inert state and their distance from the living:
"As you have eyes but do not see, as you have ears but do not hear, so give me a stone for my silence"
AMB Bowl 6, lines 4–5
In this specific case, various authors have asserted that the individual who performed this spell sought to silence the deceased. This may be due to a legal conflict between the dead and the living, and the latter not wanting any other person or entity to become aware of it.
The wide variety displayed in all aspects of Greco-Roman binding spells is also reflected in their attitude towards the dead, which is far from uniform. Some of these texts toward the dead are even aggressive toward these entities, an element that cannot be observed in the following examples:
"If they accomplish this for me, I will release them."
Gager, 1999: 100
"If you ignore my request and do not comply quickly with what I ask, the sun will not set below the earth."
Gager, 1999: 103-104
However, some spells are less aggressive:
"If you restrain and constrain [the adversaries] for me, I will honor them and prepare a pleasant gift for you."
Gager, 1999: 138
Another fundamental difference between binding spells and inscribed bowls refers to the number of deceased entities they address. In the former, the recipient is usually a single individual. Conversely, in the case of bowls, they generally address the dead as an anonymous group rather than a specific entity.
As we have observed throughout this study, the magical world has not been exempt from controversy and intense debate regarding its social acceptance. Magic must be understood as part of a complex cultural symbolism system in which individuals sought solutions to their problems. Greco-Roman binding spells and Babylonian inscribed bowls are fascinating objects for study. They provide extensive information about the lives of those who used them, especially private and mysterious details that we would never know without these testimonies. They reveal fears of losing a legal case, desires to conquer another person's body and mind, wishes for retribution for slander or theft of property, and countless other cases of envy, jealousy, and revenge that are quite different from the more well-known sources.
Bibliography
Bohak, G. (2019). Babylonian Jewish Magic in Late Antiquity: Beyond the Incantation Bowls. In Y. Friedmann and E. Kohlberg, E. (Eds.), Studies in Honor of Shaul Shaked (pp. 70-122). Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Collins, D. (2008). Magic in Ancient Greek World, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Frazer, J.G. (2005). The Golden Bough: A Study of Magic and Religion, Cosmo Publications (New ed.).
Gager, J. G. (1999). Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World, Oxford University Press.
Guilmot, M. (1966). Les Lettres aux morts dans l’Égypte ancienne, Revue de l’histoire des religions, 170, 1–27.
Kotansky, R. (1991). Incantations and Prayers for Salvation on inscribed Greek amulets. In C. A. Faraone and D. Obbink, (Eds.), Magika Hiera. Ancient Greek Magic and Religion (107-137). Oxford University Press.
Ogden, D. (2004). Greek and Roman Necromancy, Princeton University Press.Saar, O.P. (2015). A Study in Conceptual Parallels: Graeco-Roman Binding Spells and Babylonian Incantation Bowls, Aramaic Studies, 13, 24–34.
Comments