The Archaeological Context of Magic in the Early Byzantine Period

25 Pages·2003·5.23 MB·English

by  James Russell

This is an extract from:
Byzantine Magic
edited by Henry Maguire
published by
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection
Washington, D.C.
© 1995 Dumbarton Oaks
Trustees for Harvard University
Washington, D.C.
Printed in the United States of America
www.doaks.org/etexts.html
2
The Archaeological Context of Magic
in the Early Byzantine Period
JAMES RUSSELL
Theobservanttravelerfamiliarwiththebywaysofsouthem Turkeywill occa-
sionallyencountersmalltrees withtheirbranchesfestoonedwithwhitepieces
ofcloth. A typicalexamplemay be seen nearthelip ofthe Corycian Cave, a
siteofprimeval numen, believedin antiquity tobethe homeofTyphon(Fig.
1).’ On therareoccasionsthat Ihaveseenpeopleactuallytyingragstobushes
such asthese, they were usually elderly women either alone or accompanied
by young girls. Since the social constraints of Turkishrural society preclude
me fromserious discussion withthe individuals engagedin the activity, 1 de-
pendforan explanationofthecustomontheremarks ofmalevillagers whose
scornfor thepracticeis barely disguised. Therecan belittle doubt, however,
that thecustomoftyingragstobushesisveryancientandsurvivesfromatime
whenmostpeopleinthisregionofTurkeywerestill nomads oratleastnotyet
fullysedentary.Thepurposeofthosewhoengageinthepracticeisnotinques-
tion. Theyarehopingtherebyto securesome desiredobjective, thecureofan
ailmentortheabilitytoconceiveachildonthepartofarelative.Thereismuch
less certaintyabouttheprecisemagicalpropertiesofthe treeitselfandtherag,
orofthe siteselectedfortheritualandtheprocessesbywhichthedesiredends
willbe achieved. The outsider can onlyacknowledge the truth oftheopinion
withwhich J. P. Roux concludes his discussionof thisparticular custom: “il
a
faut seresigner, dans le monde des nomades anatoliens, ne pas expliquer
d’unemaniare satisfaisante des faits qu’ils ontconserves sans bien connaftre
Strabo, 14.5.5; Pomponius Mela, 1.13. TS.MacKay, “The MajorSanctuaries
1
ofPamphyliaandCilicia ANRW II.18.3(Berlin, 1990), 2103—10.
35
36 JamesRussell
leursignification etque,poursatisfaireleurbesoin decomprendre,ilsjustifient
2
commeilspeuvent.”
This example of magic in practice in the contemporary setting ofrural
Turkey servesto illustrate the difficulties that confrontthe scholarwho seeks
to comprehend magical beliefsamong simplepeople. Even with the obvious
advantageofautopsyandtheopportunityto communicatewiththosefamiliar
withthecustom,muchstill defiesexplanation. Bycontrast,studentsofancient
magicmustrelyexclusivelyon thetextsofspells andcharmsandthe instruc-
tions foreffectingthemcontainedinpapyri andonwhatsurvivesoftheactual
instrumenta employed to exercise magic, such as amulets, engraved gem-
stones, bracelets, andphylacteries. These materials are no substitute for the
livingpractitioners ofmagicasprimaryevidence, andtheirstudybegsabroad
range ofquestions. Since the magical papyri are predominantly from Egypt,
howvalid are theircontents forthe Roman andByzantineworld as a whole?
The material apparatus of magic such as amulets, on the other hand, even
allowingfortheuncertaintyofprovenance,isclearlydrawnfromafarbroader
geographicalrange,andespecially AsiaMinor, Syria, andPalestine. Thissug-
gestsahomogeneity ofpracticeandbeliefin magic, especiallyevidentin the
iconographyofdevicesto wardofftheevil eye. How may we account, there-
fore, for such uniformity, in the absence of any known organizing force or
common statement ofbeliefsuch as theChristian churchemployed inits un-
successfulefforts to maintain unity ofdoctrine? Another vexing question is
whethertheexcessiverelianceofmodernscholarship onthe writtentext gives
adistorted impressionofmagicalpracticeswhich, ifcontemporaryMediterra-
nean societies are any guide, probably required little if any literacy on the
part of those employing them. In short, is there not a risk of missing the
markwhen weallow theancientcommentators on Byzantine magic, whether
sympathetic, as in the case of those who wrote treatises on the subject, or
hostile, as in the case of the church fathers, to stand between us and the
largely poor and illiterate inhabitants of small towns, villages, andcountry-
sidewho actually wore the amulets and uttered the spells and perhaps even
tied white rags onbushes?
Myinterestinthesematters originatedwithagroupofobjectsfounddur-
J.P. Roux,Lestraditions desnomadesdelaTurquiemeridionale, Bibliotheque
2
archeologiqueet historique de 1’Institut Francaisd’Archeologie d’Istanbul 24 (Paris,
1970),208—12.
Archaeological ContextofMagic 37
ing excavations at the small town of Anemurium on the coast of Isauria3
Though unfamiliar at the time of their discovery, it soon became clear that
these objects were devices intendedto protecttheir ownersfrom the evil eye
inthecourseoftheirdailylives.Italsobecame apparentthattheybelongedto
atimeinthecommunity’s lifewhen itscreativeenergies wereconcentratedon
theChristianreligion,afactreflectedinboththeproliferationofchurchbuild-
ings in the city andits surrounding choraand in thewide rangeof personal
4 Inthis respectAnemuriumwas
benefactionsrecordedintheirmosaic floors.
doubtless no different from most other communities throughout the eastem
Mediterranean in the early Byzantineperiod. Underlyingthis devotion to the
newfaith, however, there clearly remaineda deeply engrainedattachment to
practicesinherited fromsometimelesspastinvolving variousformsofmagic.
Ofthesenonecommandedmorewidespreadadherencefromthegeneralpopu-
lationthanthebeliefinthebewitchingglanceofthe evil eye,knownvariously
asphthonos, baskania, baskosyne, baskanosophthalmos, or, inLatin, invidia
or invidiosus oculus. This unseen force could maim livestock, blight crops,
renderwomen barren, strike down children, ordestroythehome, wealth, and
healthofthe unknowingvictim ofits attention.5Examplesofitsinfluence and
the measures taken to counter it were, andindeed remain, at least in rural
society,ubiquitous throughouttheeastern Mediterranean in numerousforms.
In antiquity, householders inscribed apotropaic formulae to accompany the
Forsummariesofthehistoryandantiquitiesofthesiteonthebasisoffieldwork,
3
seeJ.Russell, ‘Anemurium—eineromische KleinstadtinKleinasien,”AntikeWelt7.4
(1976), 2—20; and Anemurium: The Changing Face ofa Roman City,”Archaeology
33.5 (1980), 31—40. Interimreports offieldworkin progress haveappeared regularly
since 1966inTurkArkDerg. in“RecentArchaeologicalResearchinTurkey”inAnatSt,
andinM. J.Mellink,“ArchaeologyinAsiaMinor”inAJA. Alloftheobjectsdiscussed
arehousedinthe AnamurMuseum.
SeeespeciallyJ.Russell, TheMosaicInscriptionsofAnemurium, Erganzungs-
4
bandzudenTituliAsiaeMinoris 13,DenkWien,phil-hist. Kl. 190(Vienna, 1987).
Thebasic study ofthe evil eye inantiquityremains 0. Jahn, UberdenAber-
3
glaubendesbosenBlicksbeidenAlten, BerichteuberdieVerhandl.derK.sachsischen
Gesellsch. derWissensch. zu Leipzig,phil.-hist. Kl. 7 (Leipzig, 1855), 28—110. For
morerecentdiscussions,J.Engemann,“ZurVerbreitungmagischerUbelabwehrinder
nichtchristlichenundchrisflichenSpatantike JbAChr18 (1975),22—48 andK.M. D.
DunbabinandM.WDickie,“Invidarumpanturpectora:TheIconographyofPhthonos-
InvidiaInGraeco-RomanArt JbAChr26(1983), 7—37.
38 JamesRussell
6 uttered special prayers to avert the danger, sometimes
cross on their doors,
evenwith ecclesiasticalauthority,7 and addressedtheirfriends ornamed their
children Abascantos: “Immune fromthe Evil Above all, peoplewore
8
amulets, rings,andotherprotectivedevicesinscribedwithpotentsymbols and
formulaeto avertthe bewitchingglanceoftheenvious.8
As a rule suchbeliefs were frownedon by the authorities,both secular
and religious, as is evident from the writings of the church fathers, which
abound with strictures against the superstitious fear of the evil eye and the
amulets associatedwith it.’8 No amount ofpreaching, however, noreven the
occasional impositionofpenalties ontheiruse by bothcivil andreligious au-
thorities, seems to havehad much effecton the useofamuletsby thepeasant
andthe artisan.11 Justhow widespreadtheirusewas maybededucedfromthe
archaeological context of the objects under consideration, which provides a
moreobjective recordofhow ordinarypeoplecopedwith theevil eyein their
daily livesthan theprejudicedtestimonyofmostliterarytexts.
Thecommonestformulaeemployedarethetrisagion,kuri boethiorsomevan-
6
ant, Eistheos monos XMG (probably Christos, Michael, Gabriel) and IXTHUS; see
W.K.Prentice,“MagicalFormulaeofLintelsoftheChristianPeriodinSyria AJA10
(1901), 137—50.Forformulaeactuallyavertingphthonosbyname,cf.IGLSyr~ no. 1909
and H. Gregoire, Recueil des inscriptions grecques-chretiennes d’Asie Mineure, I
(Paris, 1922),no. 230.
Forexamplesofprayers,seeA.Delatte,AnecdotaAtheniensia, I (Liege,1927),
7
243.11 (prayer ofGregory Theologos). For aprayer with ecclesiasticalauthority, see
MikronEuchologion, ed.M. Saliveros (Athens, n.d.),quoted inFrench translationby
L. Amaud, “Labaskaniaou lemauvaisoeil chezlesgrecs modernes EO 15 (1912),
386—87.
L.Robert,“Hellenica RPh 18(1944),41—42;REG64 (1951), 146,no. 55.
6
On amulets generally, see H. Leclercq, art. “amulettes,” DACL, 1.2 (Paris,
9
1924), cols. 1784—1860;FX. Kraus, art. “amulete,”Realenz.yklopadiederChristl. Al-
terthumer~ 1(Freiburg, 1880),49—51.The mostcomprehensivecollectionofexamples
appearsinC.Bonner, Studies inMagicalAmulets(AnnArbor, 1950),especially95—99
on theevileye.
Representative examples includeJohn Chrysostom, horn. 8 on Col. 3:15, PG
10
62, cols.357—58; hom. 4 on 1 Cor. 1:25, PG 61, col. 38; Augustine, Thact. 7, §6on
John 1:34—51, CChr 36, 70;Basil ofCaesarea on Ps.45 § 29, PG 29, col. 417; and
especially hom. deInvidia, PG31, col. 380;Jerome, Comm. inMatth. 4.23, CChr77,
211—12.
Imposition ofpenaltiesbycivilauthorities:ConstantiusII(Ammian. Marcell.,
1
19.12.13);ValentinianandValens(CTh,9.16.7);byreligiousauthorities: SynodofLao-
dicaea (C.J.Hefele,Histoiredesconciles, I.2 Paris, 1907, Con. 36, 1018—19).
1 Treewithclothrihhonstiedtoit,theCorycian Cave,Mersin.
2 Anemurium, inscrihedglass paste 3 Anemurium, inscrihed glasspaste
amulet, frontfacewithtrisagion. amulet,rearface.
4 Anemurium, inscrihed glasspasteamulet,drawing ofhoth faces.
5 Anemurium,hronze amulet 6 Anemurium, hronzeamulet
withevileyeheingattacked. withfigure ofholyrider(Solomon).
(photo: HectorWilliams) (photo: HectorWilliams)
7 Anemurium, terracottamouldforeulogiaofRaphael.
(photo: HectorWilliams)
8 Anemurium, hronzewith eight-
pointed starengraved on hezel.
(photo: HectorWilliams)
9 Anemurium, hronzetuhular 10 Anemurium, rolled silverphylactery
containerforphylactery. andremains ofhronzecontainer.
(photo: HectorWilliams) (photo: HectorWilliams)
11 Anemurium, smallhell (tintinnabidum).
(photo: Hector Williams)
II
JL
5 0 10
PALAESTRA AREA --
EARLY BYZANTINE HOUSES
12 Anemurium, planofhaths-palaestracomplex(III2B)with secondarydomestic
structures indicated A—D.(drawinghyTom Boyd)