Was Moses Perceived As a Magician?

Home , Christian Jacq, Djadjaemankh, Edwin Smith Papyrus, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, Staff of Moses, Two Ladies

WAS MOSES PERCEIVED AS A MAGICIAN? A SOCIO-HISTORICAL EXPLORATION OF MOSES’ WONDER- WORKING IN THE NARRATIVES OF THE PENTATEUCH WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF ANCIENT EGYPTIAN AND ISRAELITE MAGIC

A Thesis Submitted to The University of Manchester for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the Faculty of Humanities

2019

Julianne C. Burnett

School of Arts, Languages and Culture Research carried out at Nazarene Theological College, Manchester, UK

TABLES OF CONTENTS

List of Illustrations…………………………………………………………………....8

List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………….9

Abstract………………………………………………………………………………10

Declaration and Copyright Statement………………………………………………..11

Dedication……………………………………………………………………………12

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………..13

Chapter One: Religion, Magic, and the Divine in the Ancient Near East: An Introduction………………………………………………………………………15

1.1. Methodology……………………………………………………………..…17

1.2. The Relation between Magic and Religion…………………………………20

1.2.1. The Challenge of Defining Magic………………………………...22

1.2.2. Magic in Scholarship……………………………………………...24

1.2.2.1. Overview of Early Social Science and Theories of Religion and Magic……………………………………………….25

1.2.2.1.1. Edward Burnett Tylor………………………….26

1.2.2.1.2. James George Frazer…………………………...27

1.2.2.1.3. Émile Durkheim………………………………..30

1.2.2.1.4. R. R. Marett……………………………………32

1.2.2.1.5. Bronislaw Malinowski…………………………33

1.2.2.1.6. Conclusion of Early Social Scientific Theories..35

1.2.2.2. Contemporary Scholarship on Ancient Religion and Magic…36

1.2.3. Divination and Magic……………………………………………..42

1.3. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………45

Chapter Two: Interaction with the Divine in the Ancient Near East………………...47

2.1. The Egyptians and the Divine………………………………………………51

2.1.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic: Heka………………………...52

2.1.2. Specialists…………………………………………………………55

2.1.3. Divination…………………………………………………………57

2.1.4. Conclusion on the Egyptians……………………………………...60

2.2. The Mesopotamians and the Divine………………………………………..60

2.2.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic………………………………..62

2.2.2. Specialists…………………………………………………………66

2.2.3. Divination…………………………………………………………69

2.2.4. Conclusion on the Mesopotamians………………………………..75

2.3. The Hittites and the Divine…………………………………………………76

2.3.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic………………………………..78

2.3.2. Divination…………………………………………………………81

2.3.3. Conclusion on the Hittites………………………………………...85

2.4. The Persians………………………………………………………………...86

2.4.1. Religion and Potential Persian Influence …………………………86

2.4.2. Magi……………………………………………………………….90

2.4.3. Conclusion on the Persians………………………………………..91

2.5. Evidence from Ugarit……………………………………………………….92

2.5.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic………………………………..92

2.5.2. Divination…………………………………………………………94

2.6. Magic and Divination in the Hebrew Bible………………………………...96

2.6.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic………………………………..97

2.6.2. Specialists………………………………………………………..102

2.6.3. Divination………………………………………………………..105

2.6.4. Teraphim…………………………………………………………108

2.6.5. Necromancy…………………………………………………….109

2.6.6. Dream Divination……………………………………………….111

2.6.7. Prophecy and Divination………………………………………..112

2.7. Conclusion on Interactions with the Divine in the Ancient Near East…...113

Chapter Three: Magico-Religion in Ancient Egypt………………………………..116

3.1. Royal Contexts and Magic…………………………………………….….117

3.1.1. Maat………………………………………………………….….123

3.1.2. Personnel…………………………………………………….…..125

3.2. Temple Contexts and the Divine……………………………………….…128

3.2.1. Temple Personnel: Priests…………………………………….…134

3.2.2. Lector Priests………………………………………………….....136

3.3. Healing Contexts………………………………………………………..…139

3.3.1. Healing Specialists………………………………………………142

3.4. Legal Contexts…………………………………………………………….145

3.5. Funerary Contexts…………………………………………………………147

3.6. Literary Context: Tales and Stories……………………………………….150

3.6.1 Private and Official Examples of Magic………………………...154

3.7. Implications and Conclusions………………………………………….….156

Chapter Four: Reflections of Magic in the Moses Narratives: Selected Passages.…159

4.1. Summary of Source Critical Problems in the Moses Narratives……….…159

4.2. Signs and Themes Preceding the Plagues: Exodus 4:1-9 and 7:1-7……....163

4.2.1. The Hardness of Pharaoh’s Heart………………………………..172

4.2.2. Exodus 7:8-13……………………………………………………177

4.2.3. Specialists in Exodus 7 and Lector Priests……………………....180

4.3. Ritual Action and Performance: The Plagues and Beyond…………….…184

4.3.1 The Use of the Staff……………………………………………...184

4.3.1.1. Exodus 7:14-25……………………………………………..184

4.3.1.2. Exodus 8:12-15 (MT) / 8:16-19 (EVV)…………………….188

4.3.1.3. Exodus 10:1-20……………………………………………..189

4.3.1.4. Exodus 14:15-31……………………………………………190

4.3.1.5. Exodus 17:1-7……………………………………………....191

4.3.1.6. Numbers 17:16-28 (MT) / 17:1-13 (EVV)…………………192

4.3.1.7. Numbers 20:1-13…………………………………………….192

4.3.1.8. Numbers 21:4-9…………………………………………….192

4.3.2. Gesture (with and without staff)…………………………………194

4.3.2.1. Exodus 7:26-8:11 (MT) / 8:1-15 (EVV)……………………194

4.3.2.2. Exodus 9:13-25……………………………………………..195

4.3.2.3. Exodus 10:21-29……………………………………………196

4.3.2.4. Exodus 11:1-10……………………………………………..198

4.3.2.5. Exodus 17:8-16……………………………………………..199

4.3.3. Contact/Manipulation……………………………………………200

4.3.3.1. Exodus 9:8-12……………………………………………....200

4.3.3.2. Exodus 12:1-28……………………………………………..201

4.3.3.3. Exodus 12:29-36…………………………………………….202

4.3.3.4. Exodus 15:22-27……………………………………………203

4.3.4. Miscellaneous……………………………………………………203

4.3.4.1. Exodus 8:16-28 (MT) / 8:20-32 (EVV)…………………….203

4.3.4.2. Exodus 9:1-7………………………………………………..204

4.3.4.3. Exodus 31:18 and 32:15-20…………………………………204

4.4. Deuteronomy and Magic…………………………………………………208

4.4.1. Deuteronomy 13:2-6 (MT) / 13:1-5 (EVV)……………………..211

4.4.2. Deuteronomy 18:9-22…………………………………………...211

4.4.3. Deuteronomy 34:10-12………………………………………….216

4.4.4. Deuteronomy Summary and Conclusion..………………………217

4.5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………...218

Chapter Five: Connections between Moses and Egyptian Magic…………………221

5.1. Magic in the Divine Realm and Cosmos………………………………….221

5.1.1. Moses as Disrupter of maat……………………………………...222

5.1.2. Moses and the Written Word…………………………………….224

5.1.3. Moses and Serpents……………………………………………...226

5.1.4. Heka……………………………………………………………..228

5.2. Magic in Royal Contexts: Implications from Exodus…………………….229

5.2.1. Moses and “Children of the Kap”……………………………….230

5.2.2. Royal Sceptre……………………………………………………231

5.2.3. Egyptian Uraeus and Serpent Staves……………………………232

5.2.4. Delegation………………………………………………………..234

5.2.5 Summary…………………………………………………………234

5.3. Magic in Priestly and Ritual Contexts…………………………………….235

5.3.1. Healing Contexts………………………………………………...235

5.3.2. “Swallowing” in Magic Contexts………………………………..239

Exodus 7:8-13………………………….240 :תנין Swallowing of .5.3.2.1

5.3.2.2. Exodus 14:26-31/15:12……………………………………..241

5.3.2.3. Exodus 32:19-20…………………………………………….242

5.3.3. Summary…………………………………………………………243

5.4. Crucial Differences………………………………………………………..245

5.4.1. Appearance………………………………………………………245

5.4.2. Absence of Incantations…………………………………………246

5.4.3. Absence of (Regular) Rituals……………………………………246

5.5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………...247

Chapter Six: Conclusion……………………………………………………………249

6.1. Summary…………………………………………………………………..249

6.2. Suggested Contributions and Implications ……………………………….252

6.3 Potential for Further Research …………………………………………….255

Appendix 1………………………………………………………………………….258

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………..260

Word Count: 78,322

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 2.1 Babylonian amuletic necklace ……………………………………...…66

Fig. 3.1 Egyptian wooden figurine (A) …………………………………….…138

Fig. 3.2 Egyptian magical stela (Cippus of Horus) ………………………...... 141

Fig. 5.1 Egyptian copper alloy cobra wand …………………………………..227

Fig. 5.2 Egyptian wooden figurine (B) ……………………………………….233

Fig. 5.3 Egyptian ivory magic wand ………………………………………….237

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary

AEL Ancient Egyptian Literature

AMT Assyrian Medical Texts from the Originals in the British Museum

ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament

BAM Die Babylonisch-Assyrische Medizin in Texten und Untersuchungen

BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly

COS Context of Scripture

DDD Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible

EVV English Versions (of biblical text)

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JBQ Jewish Bible Quarterly

JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series

LXX Septuagint

MT Masoretic Text

NRSVA New Revised Standard Version Anglicized Edition

TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament

TDP Traité Akkadien de Diagnostics et Pronostics Médicaux

TWOT Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament

VT Vetus Testamentum

ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

ABSTRACT

This thesis examines the portrayal of Moses as a wonder-worker and possible magician in the narratives of the Pentateuch and in light of ancient Near Eastern evidence of magico-religious practices. A socio-historical methodology is used to explore the context of magic in the Hebrew Bible and ancient Near East, with particular interest in ancient Egypt as it is the literary backdrop to the Moses narratives. The historical veracity of the events depicted in these narratives are not of interest to this study, but rather how the ancient Near Eastern milieu sheds lights on the narratives that depict Moses performing wonders.

The first chapter introduces the challenges and debates in defining “magic.” Paradigms stemming from 19th and early 20th century social scientists often place “religion” and “magic” in opposition with each other. In such models, “magic” is portrayed as an inferior and illicit practice. However, this dichotomy between religion and magic does not reflect the context of the ancient Near East and is challenged in this study. Chapter Two surveys this theme through exploring interaction with the divine in the ancient Near East. It is through this broader framework of divine interactions that magic is understood. As a result of the evidence explored in the survey, the focus narrows to magic in ancient Egypt (Chapter Three). Evidence of magico-religious practices in Egypt are examined in depth and specific concepts, such as heka and maat, are highlighted for their significance in Egypt and with potential consequences for the Moses narratives.

The biblical texts are examined in Chapter Four and include portions of Exodus 4, 7- 12, 14-15, 17, 32; Numbers 17, 20-21, and Deuteronomy 13, 18, 34. The selected passages from Exodus and Numbers are used in this research to demonstrate occasions where Moses engaged in performing wonders. These are accomplished by means of the staff, gesture, contact, and words, which are also attested in ancient Near Eastern magico-religious contexts. The passages of Deuteronomy are included as they list prohibitions against “magic” and warnings against false prophets. These bans of magic are read against the narratives in Exodus-Numbers. Chapter Five places the Egyptian evidence from Chapter Three in a direct comparison with the Moses narratives, so as to make final assessments of this evidence and draw implications for the way Moses is portrayed as a wonder-worker.

DECLARATION

No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or institute of learning.

I. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the ‘Copyright’) and he has given The University of Manchester and Nazarene Theological College certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes.

II. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made.

III. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trademarks and other intellectual property (the ‘Intellectual Property’) and any reproductions of copyright works in this thesis, for example graphs and tables (‘Reproductions’), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions.

IV. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and commercialisation of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place in the University IP policy (see http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=24420), in any relevant Thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/about/regulations) and in The University’s policy on Presentation of Theses.

DEDICATION

To my husband, Juan Con todo mi amor para siempre

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am indebted to many who have helped me throughout this academic journey. To my primarily supervisor, Dr. Dwight Swanson, I am thankful for your guidance and insights which equipped me to complete this project. Thank you for all the time spent reading (and re-reading) drafts and offering suggestions. To my secondary supervisor, Dr. Kent Brower, I am thankful for your encouragement and wisdom throughout this process. My examiners, Dr. Ann Jeffer and Dr. Svetlana Khobnya provided me with very helpful observations, critiques, and kind suggestions which have further strengthened my research. Thank you for your time and dedication to engaging so thoroughly with my thesis and for such an enjoyable discussion. I am grateful to those who have read portions of my thesis or taken the time to discuss my project at length. A special thank you goes to Dr. Diana Edelman for offering valuable observations on an earlier draft. We have shared a number of fruitful conversations over the past few years and I am grateful for your time and insights. Thank you to Dr. David Calabro for our discussions, for reading portions of Chapter Three, and providing comments regarding my treatment of Egyptian texts. Dr. Campbell Price kindly met with me on multiple occasions to discuss artefacts in the Manchester Museum and answer my many questions. I am also thankful for Prof. Rosalie David who generously met with me on multiple occasions to discuss all things related to Egyptian magic. Dr. Scott Noegel offered feedback on a conference paper I presented and through our e-mail dialogue has helped me sharpen specific points in my research. Thanks to Sara Bannerman for proof-reading portions of this thesis. In addition, there are a number of people who have offered various forms of academic guidance, insights, and encouragement at different stages of my research: Dr. Peter Rae, Dr. Svetlana Khobnya, Dr. Sarah Whittle, Dr. David Rainey, Dr. Tom Noble, Dr. David Bundy, Dr. Steve Wright, Prof. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, Dr. David Schreiner, Dr. Gary Cockerill, Dr. Sandy Richter, and Dr. Steve Blakemore. Thank you to the librarians who have assisted me with many inter-library loans: Helen Stocker, Michelle Hudson, Nathan Howe, Grace Andrews, and Frances Almengual. To the fellow NTC students who have been or are currently on this academic journey, I thank you for the questions and critiques you offered as I developed my research, in addition to our friendship: Andrew & Gina Pottenger, James Romano, Dan Arnold, Rob Fringer, Robert Pelfry, Mi-Ja Wi, Jim Moretz, Richard Liantonio, Gift Mtukwa, Jacob Lett, Samantha Chambo, Kelly Yates, Tammie Grimm, Quinn Gervel, and Michaila Roberts. A special thank you to Lindy Williams for being my ‘sounding board’ as I processed my research over these past few years and who has become a very close friend. My family has provided constant encouragement and help in practical ways. My husband continuously cheered me on and sacrificed his own time in order to help me accomplish this goal. Very special thanks should be given to my mum and dad, who have invested in my education throughout my life and always expressed their tremendous love for me. My sister, Jif, and her family are also to thank as they shown their confidence in me. Rupert and Chloe have provided companionship through the many hours of research and writing. I would also like to thank my grandparents, Richard and Eula May Carr (who continue to model what it means to be life-long learners) and Don and Ruby Burnett (even though they are no longer with us). Along

with my entire family, they have taken an interest in my education and have rejoiced with me through every accomplishment.

CHAPTER ONE

RELIGION, MAGIC, AND THE DIVINE IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST: AN INTRODUCTION

The Moses narratives in the Hebrew Bible contain fascinating stories of divine encounters, wonders, and magic. Moses is presented in the Hebrew Bible as a

a 1,(איש האלהים) ”profoundly authoritative figure. He is described as a “man of God

the deliverer of the Hebrew people, the giver of the Torah, and in 2,(נביא) ”prophet“ many ways “Israel’s archetypal ‘king.’”3 Moses is also portrayed as one who is repeatedly able to perform wonders and (arguably) engage in magic.4 Whilst interest in the Moses narratives and the book of Exodus has already generated a vast amount of research in scholarship, one area which merits further study is magic. The way

Moses uses the staff in performing wonders, the appearance of serpents, and the plagues cycle are all reminiscent of ancient Near Eastern (especially Egyptian) magic.

Yet, these acts are often seen as “miracles” whereas the acts of Pharaoh’s specialists are “magic.” This dichotomy is in part because of the prohibitions listed in

1 Deuteronomy 33:1. 2 For example, Deuteronomy 34:10, “Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face.” Unless otherwise stated, Hebrew Bible quotations will be from the NRSVA. 3 Danny Matthews, Royal Motifs in the Pentateuchal Portrayal of Moses (New York: Bloomsbury, 2012), 1. 4 Deuteronomy 34:10-12. 15

Deuteronomy 18:9-14 (and elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible).5 It is also a reflection of the theological position of commentators. However, upon closer examination it becomes more apparent that Moses’ wonder-working and engagement with magic is an important aspect of his character in the text and ultimately his authoritative status.

This is indicated in Deuteronomy 34:11-12, “He was unequalled for all the signs and wonders that the LORD sent him to perform in the land of Egypt, against Pharaoh and all his servants and his entire land, and for all the mighty deeds and all the terrifying displays of power that Moses performed in the sight of all Israel.”

The importance of the role of wonder-workings along with the complex portrayal of magic in the Pentateuch merits further study into these nuances. For this reason, the main aim of this thesis is to ask whether Moses would have been perceived as a magician by the ancient Egyptian culture or audience(s) of the

Pentateuch due to his wonder-working as recorded in the Moses narratives. The

Exodus Moses narratives are the basis for the study, with significant attention on 4, 7-

14. The purpose is to compare and contrast the way wonders or magic are presented through the actions of Moses in the relevant narratives and the evidence of magic from ancient Egyptian culture. This literary inquiry aims to situate the wonder- workings of Moses within the socio-historical context of the ancient Near East

(primarily ancient Egypt) in order to recognise the significance of the biblical account of Moses. However, the focus here is not in issues related to historicity of the biblical narratives.

This project presents a cumulative case to highlight the nuances of the portrayal of Moses as one who engages in magic, especially when compared with

Egyptian evidence and motifs. Chapter One introduces the subject of magic in

5 A concise and very helpful overview of approaches to magic in scholarship may be found in Rüdiger Schmitt, “The Problem of Magic and Monotheism in the Book of Leviticus,” The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 8, article 11 (2008).

relation to religion and how this has been approached by social scientists and biblical scholars. Chapter Two surveys the theme of interacting with the divine in the ancient

Near East and situates magic in this context. As a result of this overview, Egyptian magic becomes an important part of the backdrop for Moses’ activity. Chapter Three focuses on the role of magic in ancient Egypt and examines the significant role of the

Pharaoh and religious specialists in this area. Then an exegesis of the selected passages from the Moses narratives is presented in Chapter Four. A synthesis of the evidence compared directly with the biblical material is included in Chapter Five followed by a conclusion.

1.1. Methodology

A note on methodology is helpful at this point. This inquiry seeks to understand the role of Moses as wonder-worker or magician as portrayed in the Moses narratives in the Hebrew Bible. Two key questions which undergird this research include: how would the narratives of Moses’ wonder-working likely been perceived by an ancient

Near Eastern audience? How do the wonders, magic, and rituals performed by Moses

(as presented in the Hebrew Bible) fit with the context of magicians in the ancient

Near East? In order to address these questions a socio-historical methodology will be used.

A socio-historical approach will naturally contain elements of both sociology and anthropology; however, this study will not be focused extensively on sociological theories or modern case studies of cultures beyond the ancient Near Eastern world.6

This method will use a cross-cultural comparison between the ancient Near East and the biblical text. This will situate the biblical portrayal of magic and wonder-working

6 For example, I will not be using E. E. Evans-Pritchard’s analysis of the Azande as a main point of comparison with the ancient Egyptian’s usage of magic.

in the wider scope of the social and historical context of the ancient Near East. From this context, similarities and differences can be analysed and new light potentially shed on the Moses narratives. The contributions made from a socio-historical methodology are suggested in Lester L. Grabbe’s work.

1. They show new possibilities and approaches to the familiar texts … 2. They allow us to interrogate the texts and attempt to derive answers from them about questions which were not the primary concerns of the authors and editors … 3. They provide models which can be tested against the biblical data … 4. They may provide cross-cultural comparisons which help to fill gaps in the biblical data.7

A study of ancient Near Eastern magic will provide the framework to better understand the many nuances of Moses’ activity within the Pentateuchal narratives.

Even so, there are limitations with any methodological approach. This research will proceed with a degree of caution in the use of sociology, so not to misuse an approach within a discipline beyond the primary area of this research, biblical studies.8 There is also a risk of misusing or over interpreting evidence. However, despite these potential challenges, observing ancient Near Eastern societies and comparing their use of magico-religious rituals is of considerable value in this inquiry.

The historical element of this methodology is also important to outline. While this is a literary inquiry, interest lies in the historical context of particular narratives and stories, such as Moses confronting the Pharaoh, or the Egyptian magician who transformed a wax crocodile to life.9 The accounts of wonder-working explored in this research are not necessarily regarded as historically accurate (and perhaps not

7 Lester L. Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1995), 15. 8 Cryer expresses his concern with sociology being “over-used, and by persons not properly qualified to use it at all,” particularly in the discipline of biblical studies and even more specifically pertaining to magic. Frederick H. Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel and Its Near Eastern Environment: A Socio-Historical Investigation (JSOT 142; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1994), 14. This research agrees with this caution. 9 See Exodus 7-11 and the Westcar Papyrus in Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, (3 vols.; Los Angeles: The University of California Press, 1975), 1: 215-6.

intended to be), but they spring forth from historical people in real space and time and continued to be retold and transmitted through generations. This research is interested in the socio-historical context in which these stories were told, heard, and passed on.

An exhaustive historical reconstruction of Israel is not possible, but conclusions may be drawn regarding the socio-historical probabilities of the perception of the character Moses as presented in the Hebrew Bible. Jonathan Stökl affirms the option of presenting historical “probabilities and possibilities, rather than certainties”10 which is useful for this study. Primary sources will be used respectfully with the assumption that ancient authors and editors had information and messages they intended to convey (even if this does not reflect historical reality), but with the recognition that these sources require interpretation.11 It should also be noted that as a whole, the specific texts in the Hebrew Bible used here will usually be interacted with in their final form.12

As is the case in any study of ancient history, texts and artefacts are crucial pieces of information. Some sources are more historically reliable than others. Texts and inscriptions which are deemed exaggerated, biased, grossly ethnocentric, or even entirely fictitious are still of value as they provide glimpses into culture (perhaps for no other reason other than to shed light on the bias of a culture).13 Extant texts and artefacts still require interpretation and a level of evaluation.

10 Jonathan Stökl, Prophecy in the Ancient Near East: A Philological and Sociological Comparison (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 2-3. 11 It is acknowledged that ancient myths and stories may come out of an oral tradition that dates earlier than the extant texts. 12 We are in agreement with Lester Grabbe’s point, “What does the text as it now stands tell us about the king or priest or diviner?” or in the case of this project, I would add “the magician.” Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages, 17. This research recognises that the Pentateuch has multiple authors and editors. Whilst acknowledging this, the text will be used in its final form here. In the final form, Moses is a prominent figure and reportedly known for his role as a priest, prophet, lawgiver, and wonder-worker. 13 Grabbe makes a similar suggestion that, “Even when distorted and unbalanced, they may convey certain truths about society in general,” Priest, Prophet, Diviner, Sage, 9.

Within this socio-historical approach, cross-cultural comparison will be made between selected texts of the ancient Near East as well as the social world. This assumes an aspect of commonality between the Egyptians, Israelites, Hittites, and

Mesopotamians but should not be overemphasised at the expense of losing the distinctiveness of culture. There is uniqueness to each culture with its own history, social identity, texts, traditions, and rituals. Therefore, the magico-religious practices of these various ancient Near Eastern cultures will be compared and contrasted. The goal is that these findings will shed light on the presentation of Moses in the Hebrew

Bible, specifically his role as a wonder-worker by situating his portrayal in the context of ancient magic and divination. By understanding the social, cultural, and magico- religious nuances it is possible to establish a more accurate understanding of what the narrative conveyed to its ancient audience, both about Moses and the Egyptian magicians (Exodus 4-14). With this in mind, the complex relation between religion and magic will now be explored.

1.2. The Relation between Magic and Religion

Any research endeavour that involves the study of ancient magic must acknowledge the problematic nature of the term “magic.” Magic is very difficult to pinpoint and define, and a consensus of this subject has not been achieved. Some social scientists have labelled magic as an early, undeveloped form of religion (e.g., Frazer14) whilst others have considered it a pseudo-science (e.g., Tylor15 and Frazer16), or primarily

14 James George Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion, Vol. 1 The Magic Art and the Evolution of the Kings (12 vols.; New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1911-1936), 226. In footnote 2 Frazer makes his conclusion explicit that magic preceded religion and there was an “earlier stage in which magic existed alone.” 15 Edward Burnett Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture (1873; repr. Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith, 1970), 12-13. “So well, indeed, does primitive animism account for the facts of nature, that it has held its place into higher levels of education,” 13.

identify it as anti-social, illicit behaviour (e.g., Durkheim).17 The paradigms of religion, magic, science, and rationality are prevalent in 19th to early 20th century scholarship, particularly in social sciences. For this reason, some may object to use of the vague terms “magic” and “religion” in this research, wondering if these terms have more in common with paradigms of social science modernism than ancient Near

Eastern practices.18

These modern paradigms are acknowledged (although not necessarily embraced) and this inquiry recognises the need for using such terminology as a starting point in this discussion. H.S. Versnel argues, “One problem is that you cannot talk about magic without using the term magic. Using a term entails having a concept, even if to reject its applicability.”19 The terms “religion,” “magic,” “magico- religion,” “wonders,” and “ritual power” will be used throughout the thesis to help articulate the beliefs and practises of the ancient Near East. Despite the inadequacy and potential problems in using such terms, this thesis agrees with Versnel that in order to discuss magic, one must use some kind of general terms (such as “magic”) as a starting point. In the words of Daniel Lawrence O’Keefe, magic “is not a pretty subject, and not an easy one if one cannot tolerate ambiguity.”20 This inquiry draws upon ancient Near Eastern sources in order to gain clarity on such an ambiguous topic. Before examining ancient sources, a brief outline of the difficulties in defining

16 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 53, 222. Frazer identifies magic as a “false science” (53) and “bastard sister of science” (222). Frazer credits Tylor for influencing his perspective of magic “based on a mistaken association of ideas,” on page 53, footnote 1. 17 Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (trans. Joseph Ward Swain; New York: The Free Press, 1965), 58-60. 18 Hans H. Penner chooses not to use the term “magic.” See Penner, “Rationality, Ritual, and Science.” Pages 11-24 in Religion, Science, and Magic: In Concert and in Conflict (ed. Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frerichs, and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 3. 19 H. S. Versnel, “Some Reflections on the Relationship of Magic-Religion,” Numen 38 (1991): 181. 20 Daniel Lawrence O’Keefe, Stolen Lightning (New York: Vintage Books, 1983), xvii.

magic, an overview of general contributions from early social scientists, and highlights of contemporary research on the subject of magic will be explored.

1.2.1. The Challenge of Defining Magic

Scholars differ in their understanding and definition of the term “magic.” According to Frederick H. Cryer, “Although magic is notoriously difficult to define, and although we do make mistakes in the matter, we usually know magic when we see it.”21 The difficulty is that scholars have come to very different, and perhaps incompatible, understandings of magic. To demonstrate, the following is a brief sampling of the range of definitions and perspectives.

Shawna Dolansky identifies magic in relation to the boundaries of religion.

Her primary point is that, “What distinguishes magic from religion … is that magic is practised outside of considerations of moral boundaries.”22 Stephen Ricks views magic as, “quintessentially the activity of the ‘outsider’ in the Bible.”23 Both of these perspectives situate magic in light of religion and minimise the possibility that they overlap. A more nuanced approach proposed by Solomon Nigosian is that in the

Hebrew Bible, (especially pre-exilic times) many divinatory or magic rituals were accepted if performed in the name of YHWH. However, “Activities done in the name

21 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 42. 22 Shawna Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t: Biblical Perspectives on the Relationship Between Magic and Religion (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 6. 23 Stephen D. Ricks, “The Magician as Outsider in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament,” in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power (ed. Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki; Boston: Brill Publishers, 2001), 132. Sarah Iles Johnston also argues that magic, “almost always referred to someone else’s religious practice.” Sarah Iles Johnston, “Magic” in Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals Across the Mediterranean World (ed. Sarah Iles Johnston; Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2007), 140.

of other deities were roundly condemned.”24 The crucial point is by whose name these practices were performed.

Robert K. Ritner defines ancient Near Eastern magic rather broadly as, “any activity which seeks to obtain its goals by methods outside the simple laws of cause and effect.”25 Cryer explains magic in terms of, “magical actions of which divination is a subspecies, are performative ‘utterances’, which I take to mean both verbal and non-verbal situational contexts which define particular conventional social acts.”26

These definitions are much less focused on identifying a dichotomy between religion and magic than Dolansky and Ricks and are more interested in the ritual actions and general activity which appears to be based the invocation of the divine or supernatural forces.

The following two definitions will be most beneficial to this study. J. A.

Scurlock takes an approach which defines magic as communication to or with the supernatural world, “by means of ritual actions (especially ones which involve the symbolic imitation of what the practitioner wants to happen), and/or by means of formulaic recitations which describe the desired outcome and/or invoke gods, demons, or the spirits believed to be resident in natural substances.”27 Kimberly B.

Stratton understands magic as a “form of discourse (i.e., - a constellation of ideas, practices, and institutions) that functions differently depending on the social context.”28 Stratton’s research points to the need to adapt definitions of magic according to different cultures and through different periods of time.

24 Solomon Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament (Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2008), vii. 25 Robert K. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993), 69. 26 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 117. For example, “Magical performatives include such phenomena as conjuring, healing, divining, cursing, and so forth.” 27 J. A. Scurlock, “Magic,” ABD 4:464. 28 Kimberly B. Stratton, Naming the Witch: Magic, Ideology, & Stereotype in the Ancient World (New York: Columbia University Press, 2007), x.

A combination of Scurlock’s definition and Stratton’s nuances of the varying perception of magic will be used as the basis for our understanding of magic in the ancient Near East. Magic can thus be generally understood as contact with the divine

(deities, demons, spirits, divine or celestial forces) through ritual or symbolic acts by means of words, actions, or use of objects, for the purpose of achieving or altering an intended outcome.

This list of definitions provides a brief overview of the range of definitions and approaches in recent scholarship toward magic and identifying its relationship with religion. It may be helpful to explore some of the key contributions made on this subject, particularly among early anthropologists and social scientists followed by more recent research.

1.2.2. Magic in Scholarship

Perspectives on magic are varied and have been subject to change through different periods in time. The past 100-150 years have seen change in scholarship on how magic is perceived, researched, and defined. The study of magic is no longer confined to the realms of theology and philosophy but is also be found in other disciplines such as anthropology, psychology, sociology, and comparative religion.

As Graham Cunningham has pointed out, these “modern disciplines” bring their own contribution to the discussion of magic.29 The expansion of disciplines involved in the discourse of magic and religion makes a change in how the subject is approached and consequently the conclusions drawn. For this reason, it is important to examine several influential modern scholars.

29 Graham Cunningham, Religion and Magic: Approaches and Theories (Washington Square: New York University Press, 1999), vii.

Hegel played a significant part in the initial shift in scholarly approaches of magic. He connected magic with religion and paved the way for other scholars (such as Tylor and Frazer) to develop the possibility that magic played a crucial role in the development of religion.30 Hegel proposed, “The earliest form of religion – although one may well refuse to call it religion –is that for which we have the name ‘magic.’”31

Hegel defined religion as “consciousness of God”32 and placed emphasis on the object of religion as well as the function of human beings as the subjects.33 Hegel contributed in opening the possibility for magic having more common ground with religion than was usually assumed. This opened a pathway for other scholars to develop paradigms of religion and magic in society. Tylor, Frazer, and Durkheim are among the main social scientists who took a lead in explicitly addressing the issue of religion and magic, as will be seen below.34

1.2.2.1. Overview of Early Social Science and Theories of Religion and Magic

Versnel argues, “Scholars in earlier decades of this century were luckier: they knew both what magic was and how to find it. They simply opposed its characteristics to those of either science or religion, which they knew as well.”35 Versnel attributes this approach to Frazer’s “tripartite distinction between science, religion and magic.”36

30 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture. Frazer, The Golden Bough. 31 G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion: One-Volume Edition, The Lectures of 1827 (ed. P. C. Hodgson; trans. R. F. Brown, P.C. Hodgson, and J.M. Steward; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006), 226. 32 Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion, 186. 33 Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion, 186 “... we immediately encounter these moments (a) the object [that is] in religion, and (b) consciousness, i.e., the subject, the human being that comports itself toward that object, religious sensibility, intuitions, etc.” Graham Cunningham acknowledges the magnitude of Hegel’s contribution in leading scholars in a new direction with regards to the study of magic. See Religion and Magic, vii-ix. 34 Tylor’s focus is primarily on animism and the evolution of religious thought, but he is included here as was a significant influence on Frazer and also on the disciple of social science on this topic in general. 35 Versnel, “Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic-Religion,” 177. 36 Versnel, “Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic-Religion,” 178.

Subversive and anti-social connotations were imposed on any mention of magic “thus leading to the Durkheimian dichotomy: magic is immoral, anti-social, deviant, whereas religion has positive social function, is cohesive and solidarizing.”37 These approaches impacted the study of magic and set the course for how scholars would treat the connection between religion and magic, as will be discussed below.38 This will not be an exhaustive list, but an overview of some the most influential social scientists.

1.2.2.1.1. Edward Burnett Tylor

A significant figure who impacted the study of magic in the realm of social science was anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor. Tylor defined religion generally as “the belief in Spiritual Beings.”39 He proposed a theory of “natural evolution of religious ideas”40 with animism as the initial stage of religious thought.41 The term “animism,” was not original to Tylor but the later widespread use of this term can be attributed to him. 42 His theory proposed that out of animism developed concepts of polytheism43 and from there, monotheism.44 In many ways magic could be classified as a pseudo-

37 Versnel, “Some Reflections on the Relationship Magic-Religion,” 179. 38 John Middleton, “Theories of Magic,” in The Encyclopedia of Religion (vol. 9; New York: MacMillan, 1987), 82-89, 83. Middleton claims that the theories of Tylor and Frazer still “retain currency” and should be acknowledged for steering the course of scholarship in this subject. 39 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 8. 40 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 9. 41 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 5. Stratton draws attention to Tylor as the precursor to Frazer with his evolutionary approach to magic, religion, and science. 42 See Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 9. “Animism is not a new technical term, though now seldom used.” However, Evans-Prichard is clear that it was Tylor who truly coined this term and communicated his theory of the evolution of religious thought through this term. See E. E. Evans- Pritchard, Theories of Primitive Religion, (1965 repr.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), 24. References to animism appear in the works of Earnest Crawley, The Tree of Life: A Study of Religion (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1905), 184-185. See R. R. Marett, The Threshold of Religion (2nd ed. rev. and enl.; London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1914), ix-2. See Marcel Mauss, A General Theory of Magic (trans. Robert Brian with a foreword by D. F. Pocock; New York: Routledge, 2001), 14-15. 43 See Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 340. 44 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 417.

science, according to Tylor’s works.45 He argued that “savage religion” could be used to explain developed, “civilized” religions but the reverse is scarcely true, concluding that an evolution of religious beliefs can be observed.46 He deduced that “what is intelligible religion in the lower culture is often meaningless superstition in the higher.”47

A positive aspect of Tylor’s work was his attempt to explain the broader origins of religion and the correlation with general social development. His research influenced other social scientists interested in explaining the origins of religion as will be seen below.

1.2.2.1.2. James George Frazer

Following the work of Tyler, James George Frazer proposed an evolutionary progression from magic to religion. Accordingly, in the evolution of thought the first phase is the existence of magic alone.48 “Religion,” as understood by Frazer (see definition below) had not yet developed. The second stage includes the emergence of religion comingled and confused with magic. The third stage is the recognition of the distinctiveness between magic and religion. Magic and religion are eventually understood to be separate systems and “their relation was that of open hostility.”49

Frazer defined religion as “a propitiation or conciliation of powers superior to man which are believed to direct and control the course of nature and human life.”50

Religion is comprised of theoretical and practical elements, and both must be present

45 Edward Burnett Tylor, Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom (vol. 1; 6th ed.; London: John Murray, 1920), 121-22. 46 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 443. 47 Tylor, Religion in Primitive Culture, 443. 48 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 226, 233. 49 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 226. 50 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 222.

in order for a phenomenon to be considered “religion.”51 Magic, on the other hand, is referred to as “the bastard sister of science,”52 “a spurious system of natural law as well as a fallacious guide of conduct,”53 “a false science”54 and “one great disastrous fallacy.”55 To be sure, while a priest can be observed for his humbleness, the magician is marked for his arrogance.56

Frazer proposed two principles of magic which fall under the umbrella term

“sympathetic magic”: homeopathic and contagious magic.57 Homeopathic magic abides by the law of similarity and is based on the concept that like produces like.58

The law of contact is evident in contagious magic and is the idea that an object or being which has been in contact with another can continue to be connected and affect each other after they are physically separated.59 Contagious magic assumes that an object can be manipulated and in doing so it can cause an equal effect upon the intended individual.

Essentially, these are laws of nature which are embedded in the cosmos and can be exploited for personal advantage if one (usually a magician) knows how to achieve this. The magician would be sought for this area of expertise. These laws and principles when “legitimately applied they yield science; illegitimately they yield magic, the bastard sister of science.”60 Correct laws which govern the universe are science, fallacious laws are magic61 and therefore magic relies on erroneous ideas of the laws of nature, while science correctly understands these laws. By understanding

51 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 222-223. 52 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 222. 53 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 53. 54 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 53 55 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 54. 56 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 226. 57 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 52. 58 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 52. 59 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 174. 60 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 222. 61 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 222.

the laws of nature and the way the world works, the magician mistakenly believes he can achieve a desired outcome. Frazer draws the conclusion that magic is flawed as it rests upon inaccurate assumptions. He elaborates, “Homoeopathic magic commits the mistake of assuming that things which resemble each other are the same: contagious magic commits the mistake of assuming that things which have once been in contact with each other are always in contact.”62

Frazer’s evolutionary theory of magic, religion, and science is problematic, particularly for studying the context of the ancient Near East. It is based on the false assumption that magic, religion, and science do not simultaneously exist within the same community (other than during “second stage” in the evolutionary process).

Frazer’s approach also fails to recognise the overlap between these areas. For example, is a healing ritual an example of “magic” or pseudo-science if it includes it is performed by a priest and also includes an effective remedy? What if that same healing ritual is performed in the home and without the presence of a priest or religious specialist?

Magic is only viewed as a “false science” and “disastrous fallacy” in Frazer’s paradigm. But this does not take into consideration how certain practices and rituals were viewed by the practitioners. It also creates an inherent hierarchy where empirical modern science is at the top, followed by structured religion, and then magic is placed at the bottom. This reflects Frazer’s Western modern perspective more than the context of the practices studied. Yet, this had an impact on the way subsequent scholars would approach the study of religion and magic. Aspects of

Frazer’s “principles of magic” (homeopathic and contagious magic) can be useful in

62 Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1: 53.

discussing certain practices in the ancient Near East, but his evolutionary paradigm as a whole does not accurately reflect this context.

1.2.2.1.3. Émile Durkheim

Émile Durkheim63 (1858-1917) is among the most significant early sociologists who made an impact on the academic discourse of religion and magic. Others include

Marcel Mauss64 (1872-1950), Lucien Lévy-Bruhl65 (1857-1939) and Max Weber66

(1864-1920).67 A detailed examination of each of these sociologists is beyond the scope of this study, but a brief survey of Durkheim’s theory of religion will included here.

Durkheim defined religion as the following: “A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practise relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden – beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them.”68 He recognised the value in Tylor’s attempt to be more comprehensive in his approach of religion. Yet, Durkheim’s analysis led him to the conclusion that Tylor’s reference to “spiritual beings” was problematic. Spiritual beings in Tylor’s theory are “conscious beings” (rather than forces) and are treated in same way one would with other conscious beings.69 The implication is that spiritual beings (conscious beings) need to be persuaded and appeased “either with the aid of words (invocations, prayers), or by offerings and

63 Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (trans. by Joseph Ward Swain; New York: The Free Press, 1965). 64 Marcel Mauss, A General Theory of Magic (trans. Robert Brian with a foreword by D. F. Pocock; New York: Routledge, 2001), see pages 14-18 for treatment of Tylor and Frazer. 65 Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Primitive Mentality (trans. Lilian A. Clare; London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1923). 66 Max Weber, Economy and Society (ed. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), see pages 399-441 for magic and religion. 67 Middleton outlines several of these early sociologists in “Theories in Magic,” 84. 68 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 62-63. 69 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 44.

sacrifices.”70 As a result, “there can be no religion except where there are prayers, sacrifices, propitiatory rites, etc.”71

Durkheim’s main critique is that there are religions which do not acknowledge the existence of a deity, such as some forms of Buddhism or Jainism. He recognised that Tylor and Frazer’s definitions of religion fall short of encompassing certain religious beliefs and established religions.72 Rather than the mark of religion being a belief in “spiritual beings,” Durkheim proposed a theory of the distinction between the sacred and the profane.73 The separation of these two domains “is the distinctive trait of religious thought ….”74 The designation of “sacred” is not so narrow that it only refers to gods, spirits, or spiritual beings. Anything can be classified as sacred such as inanimate objects, rites, traditions, myths, etc.75 The sacred and the profane

“cannot even approach each other and keep their own nature at the same time,” thus communities and individuals go to great lengths to keep these separated.76

Ultimately, “there is no religion, however unified it may be, which does not recognize a plurality of sacred things.”

Magic can be differentiated from religion on two main points. Firstly, every religion is a complex system which is comprised of various parts and “a whole cannot be defined except in relation to its parts.”77 With a religion a community determines what is sacred and what is profane. Religion is marked by its participants seeking the

70 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 44. 71 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 44. 72 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 48. Durkheim acknowledged, “there are great religions from which the idea of gods and spirits is absent, or at least, where it plays only a secondary and minor role. This is the case with Buddhism.” 73 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 52. 74 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 52. 75 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 52. 76 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 55. 77 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 51.

sacred. In contrast magic appears to take a “professional pleasure in profaning holy things; in its rites, it performs the contrary of the religious ceremony.”78

Secondly, Durkheim proposes that the line of demarcation between magic and religion lies within the idea of community and a cohesion, what Durkheim refers to as

“a Church.” He states, “A society whose members are united by the fact that they think in the same way in regard to the sacred world and its relations with the profane world, and by the fact that they translate these common ideas into common practices, is what is called a Church.”79 Magic, however, does not have the same binding, unifying quality. Thus, “There is no Church of magic.”80 There is no remaining bond or tie between magician and individuals, or between the individuals who practice magic. Durkheim asserts that magicians have clientele rather than parishioners or worshippers.

1.2.2.1.4. R. R. Marett

Others who followed the lead of Tylor and Frazer include R. R. Marett (1866-1943),

Andrew Lang (1844-1912), and A. E. Crawley (1869-1924).81 Significantly, Marett introduced the phrase “magico-religious” which remains an acceptable term, if not preferable by some, to express the phenomena.82 One benefit of using this term is that it does not strictly differentiate between religion and magic. These distinct paradigms can be misleading, particularly in a study of the ancient Near East. For this reason this study finds considerable benefit in using the term “magico-religious.” However, it must be acknowledged that the introduction of the term “magico-religious” has also

78 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 58. 79 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 59. 80 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 60. 81 Due to limitations of space, Lang and Crawley will not be discussed. For an overview of these and other early anthropologists see Middleton, “Theories of Magic,” 84. 82 R. R. Marett, The Threshold of Religion (2nd ed.; New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1914), xxix.

led to ambiguity and confusion. John Middleton claims this has “muddled the issue of the natures of magic and religion for over half a century” which remains evident in current academic discourse.83

Whilst Marett was influenced by Tylor and Frazer, he objected to Tylor’s definition of early religion (“belief in spiritual things”) as too minimal.84 Frazer perceived magic and religion as, “occupying mutually exclusive spheres,” where

Marett claimed they overlap.85 He maintained a broader concept of religion than

Frazer and proposed that much of what had been previously labelled as “magic” was probably part of early religion. Marett explained, “I have used ‘mysterious,’ ‘mystic,’

‘occult,’ ‘supernatural,’ ‘sacred’ and so forth to characterize the sphere of the magico- religious ….” thus seeing the value in using a term (“magico-religious”) to express the overlap of these spheres.86 This cohesive perspective of magic and religion will be seen in contemporary scholarship.

1.2.2.1.5. Bronislaw Malinowski

Bronislaw Malinowski87 (1884-1942) is often regarded as one of the most important social anthropologists as he was the first to create a theory of magic based on field research.88 His research with the Trobriand Islanders suggested a definite difference between magic and religion. Religion focused on issues pertaining to human existence whilst magic was more oriented on creating a remedy for a problem.

83 Middleton, “Theories of Magic,” 84. 84 Marett, The Threshold of Religion, vii. 85 Marett, The Threshold of Religion, 27-28. 86 Marett, The Threshold of Religion, xxix-xxx. 87 Bronislaw Malinowski, Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays (Garden City: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1955). 88 One of E. E. Evans-Pritchard’s primary critiques of anthropologists and sociologists (such as Tylor and Frazer) is that they created a theory of magic and early stages of religion without any field work. See Theories of Primitive Religion, 6.

Malinowski also asserted that magic has a manipulative element not present in religion. Accordingly, participants of magic appear to have more control over the intended outcome than they would with a religious posture. Malinowski claims magic, “is always the affirmation of man’s power to cause certain definite effects by a definite spell and rite.”89 But Malinowski’s theory does not easily apply to practices in the ancient Near East.90

Another important concept for Malinowski was the distinction between the sacred and the profane. This distinction has been seen in the works of Durkheim, and also is present in the research of Mircea Eliade and Mary Douglas.91 Malinowski states, “In every primitive community studied by trustworthy and competent observers, there have been found two clearly distinguishable domains, the Sacred and the Profane; in other words, the domain of Magic and Religion and that of Science.”92

At this point Malinowski identifies a dichotomy between issues pertaining to the supernatural and that of rationality and scientific inquiry. It is difficult to make a case for this clean division in the ancient Near East, as will be seen particularly on the issue of healing and magic.

Malinowski’s research was ground breaking as he created theories of magic and religion based on field research, yet it is not without its flaws. One problem with

Malinowski’s approach is that he takes the observations from one particular culture

89 Malinowski, Magic, Science, and Religion, 88. 90 For example, Egyptologist Robert K. Ritner contends that the theories of early anthropologists (specifically Frazer and Malinowski) are inadequate for ancient Egypt. Ritner, “Magic in Daily Life” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (vol. 2 of 3 vols.; ed. Donald B. Redford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 321. 91 Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 236 “The sacred world sustains an antagonistic relationship to the profane world. They correspond to two forms of life that are mutually exclusive, or at least that cannot be lived at the same moment with the same intensity.” Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (trans. Willard R. Trask; New York: Harcourt, Brace & World Inc., 1959). Also see Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1984). Mary Douglas, In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 21-26 especially. 92 Malinowski, Magic, Science, and Religion, 17.

and context and applies it to very different contexts, cultures, and times as a general theory. Scholars such as Middleton have voiced similar concerns that Malinowski

“projected is findings among the Trobriand Islanders onto all mankind, making their particular cultural beliefs, thoughts, motives, and actions into universals.”93 Such approach runs the risk of imposing ideas onto a culture which may or may not be present. This approach also fails to account for variations between cultures and what changes may occur over time. As Jan Bremmer argues, “magic was not a static concept” and consequently one must be cautious in over-generalising a specific example of magic.94

1.2.2.1.6. Conclusion of Early Social Scientific Theories

It is evident that a distinction between religion and magic was widely accepted in 19th to early 20th century social science. Most of the early theories proposed were dominated by variations of evolutionary theories which were intended to explain the origin of religion. These theories are now largely considered as flawed and inadequate currently. Yet, these theories steered a new course in scholarship where interdisciplinary methods would become more prominent and the study of magic would gain deeper interest. The relation between religion and magic continues to be a point of debate and often disagreement. Kimberly B. Stratton observes, “This distinction between magic and religion has become axiomatic in the fields of religious studies and anthropology. It continues to figure in debates over definitions and terminology – cropping up tacitly even in studies that try to avoid using the term magic altogether.”95

93 Middleton, “Theories in Magic,” 86. 94 Jan N. Bremmer, “The Birth of the Term Magic,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 126 (1999), 10. 95 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 5.

This summary outlines some key points where influential anthropologists and social scientists have contributed to the study of magic. Recently there is a fresh interest in magic in the disciplines of biblical studies and ancient Near Eastern studies.

Eliade appropriately concludes, “The era of Tylor, Frazer, and Marett seems to be ended; anthropology is no longer considered the key to such ‘great and final problems’ as the origin and growth of religion.”96 It is fitting now to highlight more recent contributions on this topic, particularly related to the ancient Near East.

1.2.2.2. Contemporary Scholarship on Ancient Religion and Magic

As has been seen, defining magic is difficult as well as identifying the connection between religion and magic. This research agrees with Alan F. Segal that despite the significant contributions from anthropologists and sociologists of the past 100 years, there is no consensus of the connection between religion and magic, nor definitions which have been agreed upon.97 Thomas C. Römer acknowledges the complex nature of defining magic as it is, “always in relation to ‘religion’ that historians of religion attempt to locate ‘magic.’”98 Current scholarship continues to wrestle with these terms and the most accurate way of articulating the practises and rituals of the ancient

Near East.

One of the shifts that can be seen in scholarship is the recognition that ancient magic often does not fall neatly into a single, clear theory or paradigm.99 For example, Segal recognises that anthropologists have been quick to make a sharp

96 Eliade, The Quest: History and Meaning in Religion, 27. 97 Alan F. Segal, “Hellenistic Magic: Some Questions of Definition” in Studies in Gnosticism and Hellenistic Religion: Presented to Giles Quispel on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday (ed. R. Van den Broek and M. J. Vermaseren: Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981), 349. Segal writes, “Magic’s relation both to religion and science has never been clearly delineated,” 349. 98 Thomas C. Römer, “Competing Magicians in Exodus 7-9: Interpreting Magic in the Priestly Theology” in Magic in the Biblical World (ed. Todd Klutz, London: T&T Clark, 2003), 12. 99 Ann Jeffers, “Interpreting Magic and Divination in the Ancient Near East,” Religion Compass 6 (2007): 684-694.

distinction between religion and magic.100 Not all scholars who focus on the Hebrew

Bible agree on this. For example, Johnston, Neusner and Stark adhere to a division between religion and magic in the ancient Near East (as will be explored below) whilst others remain reluctant to accept this dichotomy (Cryer, Jeffers, Kapelrud,

Pinch, Ritner, and Scurlock).

In the 1980’s Daniel Lawrence O’Keefe observed, “Nowadays we are not supposed to write about global subjects like magic,” due to nominalists and academics concerned about applying general concepts (such as magic) globally. O’Keefe continues, “We cannot talk about caste systems, totemisms, magic, anxiety and so forth, and so we are helpless when we bump into these harsh realities.”101

Magic is frequently characterised as social action by scholars. Cryer understands divination and magic to be “performative utterances” which help define social acts102 whilst O’Keefe sees magic as “collective social action”103 even when one practises it privately or individually.104 For example, he argues that even individual acts such as yoga or meditation mean that the individual withdraws for a period of time, but then re-enters the community,105 concluding that magic is social action, not private, deviant activity.

Evolutionary approaches to religion and magic (such as seen in Tylor and

Frazer) result in an incompatibility between magic, religion, and science, with magic becoming obsolete. This approach is often rejected in contemporary research. As

100 Segal, “Hellenistic Magic,” 350. Malinowski is an example of such anthropologist who makes a sharp distinction. 101 Daniel Lawrence O’Keefe, Stolen Lightning (New York: Vintage Books, 1983), xvii. 102 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 117. 103 O’Keefe, Stolen Lightning, 26. 104 Also see Cryer who understands divination and magic to be “performative utterances” which help define social acts, Divination in Ancient Israel, 117. O’Keefe sees magic as “collective social action,” Stolen Lightning. 105 O’Keefe refers to this as “social actions” where this individual acts (perhaps performed privately) still impacts the community, as the individual experiences some kind of change through the process of “withdrawal and return” as noted on page 26.

Rodney Stark highlights, “If magic is failed science, then it is doomed to be replaced by the rise of real science.”106 An exploration of the place of science in relation to magico-religious beliefs will not be addressed in this research, but Stark’s argument is mentioned for the purpose of acknowledging how that this features in contemporary scholarship. Observing this trajectory which sees magic as superseded by science,

Stark rejects the notion that religion evolved out of magic. He argues that even the general ordering of “magic, religion, and science” is unsatisfactory and misleading.107

The main difference between religion and magic is identified by Stark in these terms, “magic assumes the supernatural realm, it locates its rewards here and now, while religion locates its most valuable rewards (and often its most extreme costs) in another realm.”108 Essentially the implication is magic is concerned with the near present, whilst religion is mostly concerned with the afterlife. The problem with

Stark’s idea is that this does not entirely apply to the ancient Near East, where funerary magic was prevalent (particularly in ancient Egypt) and one’s existence in the afterlife was often contingent upon continued magic.109

Sarah Iles Johnston argues that a dichotomy between magic and religion is not a product of modernism, but dates much earlier. She finds that in antiquity in the

Mediterranean, magic was distinguished from religion and, “almost always referred to someone else’s religious practice; it was a term that distanced those practices from the norm – that is, from one’s own practices, which constituted religion.”110 However,

Johnston acknowledges that in reality this division is not clear, especially in the

106 Rodney Stark, “Reconceptualizing Religion, Magic, and Science,” Review of Religious Research, 43 (2001): 103. 107 See Stark, 107, “This order was established in the nineteenth century by the leading social evolutionists who did think religion originated in magic – an assumption that goes back at least to Hegel, and was embraced by Tyler, Spencer, and Frazer.” 108 Stark, “Reconceptualizing Religion, Magic, and Science,” 112. 109 See David: 2002 and Pinch: 1994. 110 Sarah Iles Johnston, Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals across the Mediterranean World (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007), 140.

ancient world.111 Johnston argues, “Most scholars of religion now concede that a reliable means of dividing magic and religion will never be found.”112

As discussed earlier, Stephen Ricks argues that the magician is always portrayed as the outsider in the Hebrew Bible. He suggests, “magic in antiquity was not regarded as a separate institution with a structure distinct from that of religion, but was rather a set of beliefs and practice that deviated sharply from the norms of the dominant social group, and was thus considered antisocial, illegal, or unacceptable.”113 Regarding ancient Near Eastern society, Karel van der Toorn states,

“Ancient religions especially have too often been reduced to a hotchpotch of myth and ritual bearing little relationship to the forms of religious life as they actually existed.”114 The same could be said of ancient magico-religious practices.

Naomi Janowitz argues that when approaching this subject, “We bring many of our own modern expectations to a study of ‘magic.’”115 As modern expectations of magic differ from ancient magic, this may skew the research of this topic in an ancient

Near Eastern context. Janowitz argues that part of the inadequacy of early twentieth century approaches to the study of magic is due to the theory that religion evolved from magic. Rituals and religious practices were examined out of context and often,

“contrasted to other more familiar religious practices of Protestant Christians.”116

Similarly Stratton identifies, “In modern parlance magic is most often associated with fatuous sleight-of-hand tricks or with esoteric rituals to harness occult power.”117

111 See Johnston, Ancient Religions, 141. 112 Johnston, Ancient Religions, 142. 113 Ricks, “The Magician as Outsider,” 131. 114 Karel van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria, and Israel (New York: E. J. Brill, 1996), 1. 115 Naomi Janowitz, Magic in the Roman World: Pagans, Jews and Christians (London: Routledge, 2001), 2. 116 Janowitz, Magic in the Roman World, 4. 117 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 2.

This is not an accurate representation of magic in the ancient Near East, and therefore one must be cautious with such portrayal.

An important conclusion Stratton derives is that magic may appear in different forms among different cultures and therefore may require more nuanced, variations of a definition. Accordingly, “Magic is conceived differently in different ancient

Mediterranean cultures: despite certain common features and shared mythologies, the details of the representations vary considerably from place to place and over time.”118

Solomon Nigosian echoes a similar idea by affirming, “The practice of magic is so ancient, widespread, and in various forms that no single definition will ever be uncontested.”119 There may be some common features of experiencing the divine in ancient Near Eastern cultures but there are also differences and unique features from different cultures, as will be explored later. To some extent, magic needs to be understood in the socio-historical context in which it occurs.

Stratton argues there are a number of important questions one should ask in the study of magic, namely, “who defined magic, which practices were labelled magic, and how was power negotiated through the application of this label?”120 Since

Stratton proposes the definition and understanding of magic varies between cultures and time, these questions are necessary for identifying the usage of magic in each cultural context. As a result magic need not be understood exclusively in negative terms but could be positive in certain contexts. Stratton acknowledges, “Magic, however, was not universally regarded as negative and could sometimes operate in positive ways to signify divine power and special knowledge or ritual technology.”121

Stratton’s approach is helpful for examining how magic and divination were

118 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 16. 119 Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament, 17. 120 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 17. 121 Stratton, Naming the Witch, 143.

perceived in the ancient Near East. As will be seen in Chapter Two, there are examples of both negative and positive displays of magic. The evidence largely points to a neutral or positive portrayal of magic and was deeply embedded in the cosmologies of the ancient Near East.122 This raises the question of whether magic is nuanced and perhaps even positive in certain places in the Hebrew Bible.

Similarly to Frazer, Jacob Neusner presents a distinction between religion, science, and magic as social conventions and plays on the theme of the insider and outsider in society. He is clear that there is a definitive difference between religion and magic, specifically “in any given system, persons know the difference between acts of religion (that is, miracles), and those of superstition (namely, magic) by reference to the source and standing of the one who does a deed deemed out of the ordinary.”123 Societies create a difference between religion and magic, a distinction between acceptable and unacceptable religious practice. Neusner argues this is evident in the Hebrew Bible (also affirmed by Ricks) and points to Elijah and the prophets of Baal as an example. He elaborates, “It connotes the simple judgment that what my side does is a miracle; and by the way, it works; what your side does is magic, whether or not it works.”124

Neusner concludes, “The distinction between learning (inclusive of rationality or science) and magic emerges in the sources we have surveyed as essentially a convention of the system of the Judaism of the dual Torah.”125 An interesting point of

Neusner’s presentation of magic is that the question is not whether magic “works” but who is the performer of the specific ritual action. To an extent this approach could be

122 Ann Jeffers, Magic and Divination in Ancient Palestine and Syria (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996), 1-4. 123 Jacob Neusner, “Science and Magic, Miracle and Magic in Formative Judaism: The System and the Difference,” in Religion, Science, and Magic: In Concert and in Conflict (ed. Ernest S. Frerichs and Paul Virgil McCracken: Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 61. 124 Neusner, “Science and Magic, Miracle and Magic,” 61. 125 Neusner, “Science and Magic, Miracle and Magic,” 78.

applied to Moses in the Hebrew Bible. In Exodus 7:10-12, the Egyptian magicians are able to reproduce the same wonder as Moses and Aaron. The action of the

Egyptians here is effective in producing the same result, but the narrative portrays

Moses and Aaron as superior because of their association with YHWH.

1.2.3. Divination and Magic

Before examining the context of the ancient Near East, a few general observations about divination should be briefly mentioned. There should be caution in hastily separating divination from magic in the ancient Near East. At the very least, divination should be considered in a discussion on magic. Nigosian explains, “This strict distinction between magical manipulative processes or ‘control’ versus divinatory finding techniques or ‘discovery’ should not be overestimated. In actual practice the boundary line between the two is much less marked than in theory.”126

We are in agreement with Cryer and Jeffers that divination and magic overlap and in many ways are connected through the rituals performed, specialists called upon, and means of resolving circumstances.127 For this reason, divination in the ancient Near East will be incorporated in discussions pertaining to magic in this thesis. Accordingly, “magic and divination are interrelated and necessarily overlap.

Both are used, so it seems, in times of crisis.”128 Divination is often used to obtain divine direction or insight into a situation or problem. This requires magic to assist in achieving the desired result once this insight has been gained.129

Cryer argues that discussing divination in the context of magic requires little justifying, as these are interwoven practises. Cryer explains, “After all, the

126 Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament, 18. 127 Also see Anne Marie Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” CBQ 65 (2003): 22-43. 128 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 20. 129 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 20.

phenomenon was assigned to the realm of magic already in antiquity (cf. the ‘Magi’ of Matt 2.1,17, etc., who are clearly presented as astrologers), and has since then consistently been discussed under the headings as ‘magic,’ ‘Mantik,’ and the like.”130

To demonstrate, in the Hebrew Bible there is mention of lots, urim and thummim, the ephod, and dreams being used in an apparent divinatory way.131

Cryer also observes that 19th century social science influenced scholarship in which a way that, “scholars automatically ceased to focus on divination, as they were concerned to focus on the evolutionary stage at which, ‘as everyone knew’, had replaced it, namely prophecy.”132 As will be explored later, divination was more complex and nuanced than once assumed and merits further examination in this research.

Prophecy too, may be considered as intersecting with divination at certain points.133 There are differences between these practices, yet they seem to share more common ground than has previously been acknowledged. Similarly, Martti Nissinen observes a, “growing tendency in the present-day study of biblical and ancient Near

Eastern prophecy to consider prophecy an integral part of divination, rather than being in conflict with it in general terms.”134 The role of the prophet as the mouthpiece of a deity is not far removed from the diviner who receives messages and interprets divine signs.

130 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 42. 131 For example see Numbers 26:52-56; Joshua 18:6 (lots), 1Samuel 14:41 (urim and thummim), Exodus 28:30-31 (urim, thummim, and ephod). 132 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 242. 133 According to Nissinen, “Among the forms of divination, prophecy clearly belongs to the noninductive kind.” Martti Nissinen, Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East (Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 1. 134 Martti Nissinen, “What is Prophecy?” in Inspired Speech: Prophecy in the Ancient Near East (ed. John Kaltner and Louis Stulman: London: T&T Clark International, 2004), 21. This is evident in Kitz: 2003; Cryer: 1994; Grabbe: 1995; Stökl: 2012.

Anne Marie Kitz highlights three main components necessary for “successful divination.”135 These must include “material manipulation by the deity,” a sign produced, and an interpretation of the sign.136 Initially it may seem that material manipulation and a divine sign are the same. But a closer look at divination reveals a difference. In the case of bird omens, their movement and flight conveys the divine message. As Kitz explains, “The birds themselves are not the sign, but it is their divinely prompted calls and/or movements from right to left or left to right, and so on.

Therefore, a human being is not necessarily the sign, but it is the heavenly generated dream, vision, word, or divinely orchestrated deed that actually constitutes a sign.”137

The person may receive or experience a sign by passive or active means. For example, Joseph was the recipient of an unsolicited dream, a heavenly sign, which had an interpretation (Genesis 37:5-11). Moses was instructed by YHWH to divide the land actively by lot (Numbers 25:52-56). It is not difficult to see then, how the prophet may be used not only as a mouthpiece of God but as one who identifies divine signs.138

Prophecy can be understood as a branch of non-inductive divination, but the prophet would typically not undergo the technical training of inductive divination, such as reading omens in livers.139 Furthermore, as Nissinen has pointed out, one could be a dreamer and not identified as a prophet. Equally, one could be a prophet without necessarily receiving divine dreams.140 Moses is not recorded as having divine dreams, yet functions in a prophetic role. Jacob, among many others in the

135 Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” 27. 136 Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” 27-33. 137 Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” 33. 138 Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” 33. Also see Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, “The one feature common to all the prophets is speaking in the same of a god … and claiming to pass on a revelation from that god,” 83. 139 Nissinen, “What is Prophecy?” 22. 140 Nissinen, “What is Prophecy?” 22.

Hebrew Bible, is said to have received a dream from God in Genesis 28:10-17 but is not identified as a prophet (or a diviner for that matter). Dream divination is complicated by the fact that one cannot prevent a dream from occurring nor control its content.141 This problem will be addressed further in Chapter Two.

Much remains to be said on magic, divination, and prophecy. What can be determined at this point is the close connection between magic and divination. This inquiry will proceed by understanding these are overlapping spheres and will therefore give attention to divinatory techniques in the context of magic. A link between prophecy and divination is also acknowledged. This is of particular interest since Moses is portrayed as a prophet as well as wonder-wonder in Deuteronomy

34:10-12. Even though Deuteronomy outlines a list of prohibitions related to forms of magic and divinatory practices (18:9-12), Moses is highly esteemed by the

Deuteronomist for performing “signs and wonders” before Pharaoh (34:10-12).

Moses is also presented as an authoritative figure and extraordinary prophet largely because of his wonder-working in his confrontation with the Pharaoh. His unique position is exemplified in Deuteronomy 34:10, “Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses.” For this reason, further study on the role of wonder- workings in the portrayal of Moses is merited.

1.3. Conclusion

The subject of magic is complex and takes on different characteristics and meaning in various contexts and especially from different periods of history. As has been seen, many early social scientists classified magic as a subclass or a deviation of religion.

In some instances it was viewed as a pseudo-science. In either case magic was treated

141 Kevin M. O’Brien, “To Seek the Counsel of the Lord: Dream-Divination in the Hebrew Bible Deuteronomistic History” (Ph.D. thesis, The University of Manchester), “All people dream nightly; and the dream was believed to derive from divine realms,” 15.

as an inferior practice. Upon first glance, some readers might be inclined to view magic in the Hebrew Bible in a similar manner. However, it is proposed here that the issue of magic in the ancient Near East and Hebrew Bible is far more complex and in many cases intertwined with the official religious and cultic practices.

Before examining the specific examples of Moses engaging in wonders or magic in the Pentateuch, a general overview of magic in the ancient Near East and

Hebrew Bible will be presented. It is through an exploration of interacting with the divine in the ancient Near East that magic can be situated. Due to the ambiguous and even flexible nature of how magic is portrayed in the ancient world, a rather broad definition and understanding is used in this thesis. “Magic” will be used to generally refer to contact with the divine (deities, demons, spirits, divine or celestial forces) through ritual or symbolic acts by means of words, actions, or use of objects, for the purpose of achieving or altering an intended outcome. We will now look to examples from the ancient Near East in order to understand the concept(s) of magic and the relation between it and official religion.

CHAPTER TWO

INTERACTION WITH THE DIVINE IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST

This chapter is an overview of the theme of interaction with the divine in the ancient

Near East, under which the approach to magic in this study is analysed. This broad survey sets out to describe these interactions in order to situate magic in the Moses narratives of the Hebrew Bible (which will appear in Chapter Four). In doing so, a framework is provided to narrow the scope of the magico-religious sources as well encompass a survey of secondary literature. This will be covered through examining the theme in the context of the: (i) Egyptians, (ii) Mesopotamians, (iii) Hittites, (iv)

Persians, (v) Ugarit, and (vi) Hebrew Bible. This will then provide the framework in which the Moses narratives may be examined (see Chapter Four).

This chapter examines selected examples (both textual and non-textual) that provide insight into concepts or the activities of interaction with deities or the divine realm. It is within this context that magic practices occur. Divinatory and ritual actions are of particular interest within this general framework of activities involved in interacting with the divine realm. As this is an overview of the themes of magico- religious practices in the ancient Near East, only a limited number of examples will be involved. These have been included as examples of perceived contact with the divine or an attempt to alter an outcome by means of some type of divine power (whether manipulation of deities, insight into the future, curses, healing rituals, etc.).

The sources chosen are a result of an initial broad survey of textual and non- textual evidence including royal archives, temple records, monument inscriptions, divinatory manuals, instructions for healing rituals, mortuary texts, and administrative documents. The time span of these texts and artefacts examined was intentionally wide ranging so not to overlook any relevant material by focusing only on a specific period. For example, texts from ancient Egypt range from the Old Kingdom (ca. 2686

BCE) to around the beginning of the Greco-Roman period (ca. 300 BCE).1 By covering a large period of history, the continuity, changes, or developments in the way magico-religious practices are presented in ancient Near Eastern texts can be traced. This chapter shows a sampling of evidence from different regions and periods of history so that a general understanding of interactions with the divine in the ancient

Near East can be reached. The Hebrew Bible is included in this examination of texts so that it can be compared and contrasted along with the other sources. Themes of magic (malevolent and benevolent), illness/healing, and divination will be explored.

This provides a context in which the Moses narratives can later be analysed.

From ancient Egypt, the main texts examined are from the Pyramid Texts,

Coffin Texts, Book of the Dead, Westcar Papyrus, Chester Beatty III Papyrus, Setne

Khaemwaset, and London-Leiden Papyrus, Book of Thoth. Additional artefacts, administrative, and legal texts are included as well. These texts range from the Old

Kingdom (Pyramid Texts) to the Late period (Book of Thoth/London-Leiden

Papyrus). The Pyramid Texts, Coffin Texts (First Intermediate period–Middle

Kingdom), and Book of the Dead (New Kingdom) are all royal, mortuary texts from different periods of time. The Westcar Papyrus and Tale of Setne Khaemwaset are important texts from the genre of literary tales and are from two different historical

1 The approximate dates for these time periods are based on Rosalie David’s chronology for ancient Egyptian history. Rosalie David, Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt (London: Penguin Books, 2002), xvi-xvii.

eras (Middle Kingdom and Late period, respectively). While the Pyramid Texts were not widely accessible to most people in society, the literary tales were composed and recited for the masses. This provides insight into how magic was portrayed to the population in general.

Handbooks for priestly-ritual specialists pertaining to healing, divination, and dreams (and are overlapping in these manuals) demonstrate how specialists interacted with their patients, the types of remedies provided, and how magic was interwoven in the diagnostic and treatment methods. From ancient Egypt, the extant healing and dream manuals include the Ebers Papyrus, Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, Chester

Beatty III Papyrus, London-Leiden Magical Papyrus.

From Mesopotamia, there are Babylonian clay liver models which were used as divinatory manuals. In addition, the Maqlû series (compiled and translated by Tzvi

Abusch) is a collection of “anti-witchcraft” texts found on eight tablets.2 This is part of the larger genre of therapeutic texts, which range from ca. 2600-100 BCE.3 These texts provide another perspective on how magic was viewed (both with harmful and protective qualities). JoAnn Scurlock compiled and translated medical and divinatory texts which are used here. The collection represents “the full range of developed Mesopotamian medicine both in time (from Middle Babylonian and

Middle Assyrian to Seleucid periods), in space (texts from Assur, Nineveh,

Sultantepe, Nippur, Sippar, Babylon, and Uruk), and by type (diagnositic therapeutic, and pharmacological).”4 These are particularly useful for understanding the way divination, magic, and healing were seen from the perspective of the specialist practitioner.

2 Tzvi Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû (Atlanta: SBL, 2015), 4. 3 Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 1. 4 JoAnn Scurlock, Sourcebook for Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine (Atlanta: SBL, 2014), 1.

Comparatively, there are significantly less magic and ritual related texts from

Hittite Anatolia than what has been found in Mesopotamia or Egypt. While there are a number of incantation collections from Ugarit, these are also fewer than what is available from Mesopotamia or Egypt. This is reflected in the variety and number of texts examined here. Notable translations of collections of ritual and divinatory texts from Ugarit include Nick Wyatt, Dennis Pardee, and Gregorio del Olmo Lete.5 In order to show a good representation of texts from all regions of the ancient Near East

(particularly where there are fewer texts available), the Context of Scripture volumes have been relied upon.

Sources from the Persian era are very limited in providing insight into magico- religious practices. For example, Egypt under Persian rule largely continued its existing ritual and cultic practices. This was similar elsewhere in the Persian Empire.

The sources on Persian “religion” are mostly from the Greco-Roman era and reflect such a perspective (for example, Herodotus).

Through examining sources from the ancient world, it clear that the perceived earthly and divine worlds interacted and intersected regularly. The gods of the ancient Near East were active on the earth. Jean Bottéro writes, “The gods …

‘resided’ in Heaven, on Earth, under Earth, in their temples, and in their statues but never in the heart or spirit of a person, which was, moreover, logical, since too entirely anthropomorphic – the gods were not and could never truly be ‘immaterial.’”6

This understanding of the divine interacting with creation shall play a role in understanding magic in the ancient Near East.

5 N. Wyatt, Religious Texts from Ugarit (2nd ed.; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002); Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (Atlanta: SBL, 2002); Gregorio del Olmo Lete, Incantations and Anti-Witchcraft Texts from Ugarit (Boston/Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014). 6 Jean Bottéro, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia (trans. Teresa Lavender Fagan; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 40-41.

One of the reasons why magic was perceived as effective was due to the way the gods were portrayed as engaging in the world and interact with human beings. The ancient Near Eastern world viewed life events (weather, illness, famine, prosperity, military victory/defeat, etc.) through the lens of divine activity. Humans needed to serve7 and appease deities and spirits in order for life to be peaceful.8 Negative events indicated the anger of a god or work of a harmful deity, spirit, or malicious ritual specialist. Tammi J. Schneider argues, “Since humans existed to serve the gods, the responsibility of the diviner was to learn what the gods wanted. The ancient

Mesopotamians believed the gods disclosed their intentions by signs in natural phenomena and world events that needed to be interpreted through prolonged observation and study.”9 Thus it was widespread, if not considered widely desired, for the ancients to attempt to recognise and interpret any contact from the gods or spirits. An aspect of this research is to explore what was considered legitimate or illegitimate means of interaction with the divine. It is within this framework that ancient Near Eastern “magic” can be understood.

2.1. The Egyptians and the Divine

There is widespread evidence of interactions between humanity and the divine throughout pharaonic Egypt. Much of this overlapped with evidence of the beliefs and activities related to “magic.”10 Since magic was such a significant part of life in ancient Egypt, further study into this context of these practices, beliefs, and pieces of evidence is merited. J. F. Borghouts defines magic within this context as an action,

7 For example, “Atra-ḫasis,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.130:450-52). 8 Tammi J. Schneider, An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 115-116. 9 Schneider, An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion, 83. 10 See Rosalie David, Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt (London: Penguin Books Ltd., 2002), 284.

“aimed to achieve a desired effect by symbolic means, usually in the form of a verbal utterance (such as a spell) that could be accompanied by a ritualized action involving an object or certain combination of ingredients.”11 One of the most important words and concepts related to this is “heka” which shall be discussed next.

2.1.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic: Heka

The term heka refers to the cosmic force as well as to the deity, Heka. Any activities directly involving heka are also included here (such as temple rituals, execration rituals, and healing contexts), and this term will be used interchangeably with the word “magic” in discussions pertaining to Egyptian practices. Jan Assmann draws to our attention that the ancient Egyptians had no single word for religion, but through studying the worldview and practises of the Egyptians it is evident that “the Egyptians felt especially close to their deities.”12 In terms of exploring magic in Egypt Assmann writes, “There is thus no lack of texts and rituals that we are clearly obliged to classify as magical.”13 While one may struggle to define “magic” adequately according to ancient Egyptians, what can be determined is that magic was, “widely used at all periods and at all levels of society.”14

The concept of heka was morally neutral “considered neither supernatural nor unholy, representing instead the divinely sanctioned force that initiated, permeated, and sustained nature itself.”15 One could use magic (heka) with the intent to harm,

11 J. F. Borghouts, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Egypt,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000), 1775-1785: 1775. 12 Jan Assmann, The Search for God in Ancient Egypt (trans. David Lorton; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001), 16. 13 Assmann, The Search for God, 154. 14 David, Religion and Magic, 286. 15 Ritner, Robert K. “Magic in Daily Life,” Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, vol. 2 (ed. Donald B. Redford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 322.

and thus the intended victim would consider that individual act as malevolent.16 But the existence and use of heka in itself was not inherently negative or subversive.17

Many Egyptologists including Robert K. Ritner conclude that categories of “black” and “white” magic do not exist in ancient Egypt and that “[a]ttempts to isolate such distinctions have proved unsuccessful.”18 Unlike the Hittites or Mesopotamians, ancient Egyptians did not make a sharp distinction between malevolent or benevolent magic, as all of this somehow came through heka.

This cosmic force existed from the beginning of creation and originated with the divine. An excerpt from Spell 261 of the Coffin Texts states, “for to me belonged all before you had come into being, you gods; go down and come up the hinder parts, for

I am a magician.”19 Deities, kings, the dead and, under certain circumstances, the living could obtain or access heka.20 Geraldine Pinch claims, “All deities and lesser supernatural beings, including the forces of chaos had their own heka.”21 The

Pyramid Texts indicate that the Pharaoh “feeds on gods … eats their magic, swallows their spirits … Great-Power rank was given him.”22 The concept of heka was not portrayed as being in opposition with state religion, for the gods themselves possessed such force. It was a component of everyday life, temple contexts, and royal settings.

The pervasive and largely neutral nature of magic in ancient Egypt has led some

16 One such example is the Harem Conspiracy, which will be addressed further in Chapter Three. Joachim F. Quack, “Kontinuität und Wandel in der spätägyptischen Magie” Studi Epigraphici e Linguistici 15 (1998): 77-84. Quack argues that practicing magic was largely unproblematic in ancient Egypt, but there was an effort to restrict or control some practices for temple rituals. 17 Ritner, “Magic in Daily Life,” 322. 18 Ritner, “Magic in Daily Life,” 322. Christoffer Theis, Magie und Raum: Der Magische Schutz ausgewählter Räume im alten Ägypten nebst einem Vergleich zu angrenzenden Kulturbereichen (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 11-12. 19 R. O. Faulkner, The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts, Volume I: Spells 1-354 (Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1973), 199-200. Adriaan de Buck and Alan H. Gardiner (eds.), The Egyptian Coffin Texts, Volume III: Texts of Spells 164-267 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1947), 382-389. 20 Geraldine Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt (Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1994), 12. 21 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 11-12. 22 Utterances 273 of the antechamber, east wall of the Unas Pyramid Texts trans. Miriam Lichtheim, AEL 2:37.

Egyptologists, including Ritner, to define it rather broadly as, “any activity which seeks to obtain its goals by methods outside the simple laws of cause and effect.”23

As previously mentioned, Heka was also one of the gods of Egypt. Generally depicted as a male god, Heka does not appear to have had any major temples dedicated to him. Heka did not play as prominent a role as some of the other gods, but was considered to be the power or force that was present and enabled the creation of the world.24 Spell 261 in the Coffin Texts provides such example.

I am the one whom the Sole Lord made before two things had evolved in this world, when he was one, when something came from his mouth, when his million of ka was in protection of his associates, when he spoke with the one who evolved with him, than whom he is mightier.

All was mine before you evolved, gods. Go down, you who came at the end! I am Magic (Heka).25

Another important Egyptian term is akhu, which can be rendered as “magic” or “enchantment.”26 Whilst similar to heka, it is not synonymous.27 There is no personification or deity with the name akhu. But it is a type of force used by deities

(for example, Isis), deceased humans, and even some stars.28 One of the differences between heka and akh/akhu is that heka is used and obtained by the living as well as the dead but akhu seems to be mentioned only with the deceased and deities.

Utterance 214 of the Pyramid Texts states:

(All) mankind shall acclaim you, For the stars which know not destruction have exalted you.

23 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 69. 24 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 10. 25 “Coffin Texts Spell 261,” trans. James P. Allen (COS 1.11:17-18). 26 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 12. 27 Jan Assmann, “Magie und Ritual im Alten Ägypten,” in Magie und Religion, ed. Jan Assmann and Harald Strohm (München: Wilhelm Fink, 2010), 23-24. 28 Mircea Eliade, History of Religious Ideas, Volume 1: From Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries (trans. Willard R. Trask; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 408. Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 12.

Get yourself up to the place where your father abides, To the place where Geb abides, And he will give you the uraeus which is on the brow of Horus. Through it you will become an akh, Through it you will become mighty, Through it you will be preeminent among the Westerners.29

2.1.2. Specialists

The religious and ritual specialists of Egypt had different roles but overlapping functions, particularly in the engagement with magic. Borghouts demonstrates how in many regards a line between priest and professional magician cannot be drawn. The overlap in the function and activity of priest and magician (and perhaps physician) does not correspond well with contemporary categories. Borghouts explains, “Titles indicating the exercise of a magical profession, such as ḥk’w (‘magician’), s’w

(‘protector’), or w’b sḫmt (‘priest of Sekhmet’), could be combined with that of

‘doctor’ (swnw, ‘healer’), so as to make it impossible to differentiate strictly between the two callings.”30

The London-Leiden Papyrus is an example of a divinatory, magical, and healing textual corpus used by priests. Portions of this text were written in demotic

(Egyptian) and other portions in Greek. Demotic was used during the periods when

Egypt was occupied by the Persians, Greeks, and Romans. Although it is difficult to pinpoint the date of this papyrus, it is approximately from the Roman era (100-300

CE).31 The following excerpts illustrate the divinatory-magical aspect of this text.

Col. I. 9-12:

29 Lines 139-146 of Utterance 214 “A Spell for Ascension,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt (3rd ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003) 249. 30 Borghouts, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Egypt,” 1783. 31 Jacco Dieleman, Priests, Tongues, and Rites: The London-Leiden Magical Manuscripts and Translation in Egyptian Ritual (100-300 CE) (Leiden: Brill, 2005). F. L. Griffith and Herbert Thompson (eds.), The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden (London: H. Grevel & Co., 1904).

(9) for this vessel-divination is the vessel-divination of Isis, when she sought (10) … come in to me, O my compeller (?), for everything (11) … and cause the eyes of this child to be opened to them all, (12)… for I am the Pharaoh Lion-ram; Ram-lion-lotus is my name.32

Col. III. 31-33:

(31) If you wish to make the gods come in to you and that the vessel work its magic quickly, you take a scarab and drown it in the milk of a black cow (32) and put it on the brazier; then it works magic in the moment named and the light comes. (33) An amulet to be bound to the body of him who has the vessel, to cause it to work quickly. You take a band of linen of sixteen threads, four of white, four of [green].33

One well known example may serve to demonstrate the overlap between priest and magician in the demotic tales of Setne Khaemwaset. These fictional tales were composed from the Late Period to the period of Roman Egypt but based on the historical Prince Khaemwaset.34 He was the fourth son of Ramses II and was known for being a priest and a magician.35 Khaemwaset was a sem priest in Memphis who eventually became the high priest (for the temple of Ptah).36 He was known as

“Setne” in these stories and was thought to possess a large library, magical amulets, and even attempted to steal a book of spells composed by the god Thoth. It is known that magic was part of Egyptian culture and way of living as early as the fourth millennium BCE.37 This story about Prince Khaemwaset does reflect the interest and acceptance of magic in Egypt even around the Late Period.

32 Griffith and Thompson (eds.), The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden, 23. 33 Griffith and Thompson (eds.), The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden, 39. 34 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 50. 35 See Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 49. Pinch dates Ramses II around 1279-1213 BCE. 36 See Emily Teeter, Religion and Ritual in Ancient Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), see pages 16-38 for an overview of the function of different types of priests. 37 Pinch, “amulets found in graves in the fourth millennium BC … Little is known about the people who may have practised magic at this period,” Magic in Ancient Egypt, 50.

The lector priests (xry-Hb) had roles within the priesthood, magic, and healing.

Among several things they were known as performers of “wonders” (biAyt),38 keepers of books, incantations and certain rituals. The role of these specialists will be explored in detail in Chapter Three.

There are two stories of lector priests that illustrate their capabilities and perhaps portray particular wonders, which at the very least resemble similarities on a superficial level with Moses’ wonders. In the Westcar Papyrus39 one chief lector priest is said to have dropped a pendant in a lake. In order to retrieve it, he parted the waters (using magic). An act of parting waters is recorded in Exodus 14 (although

Moses is portrayed as carrying out the command of YHWH, rather than initiating the wonder on his own). Another story found in Westcar Papyrus mentions a lector priest who was able to transform a wax crocodile into a living one. These texts will be explored more in Chapter Three and with specific comparison to the biblical portrayal of Moses in Chapter Five.

2.1.3. Divination

Oracles were the main means of provoked divination in ancient Egypt. One example of Egyptian divination was through a procession involving the image of a god outside of the temple.40 The image within a shrine was carried in a boat on the shoulders of the priests. The general public could pose questions to the god and receive a simple

38 For example, “The Tale of King Cheops’ Court” in the Westcar Papyrus. Translation from R. B. Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems 1940-1640 BC (Oxford: OUP, 1997), 212. 39 These stories are from the Westcar Papyrus which consists of several tales involving priests and magicians. Lichtheim argues that the stories are set in the Old Kingdom (4th dynasty) but that the papyrus is from around the Hyksos period (before dynasty 18) and is written in “classical Middle Egyptian.” Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1:215-6. R.B. Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems 1940-1640 BC (Oxford, OUP, 1997). 40 Aylward M. Blackman, “Oracles in Ancient Egypt,” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 11 (1925): 249-255.

“yes” or “no” response according to the movement (nodding) of the image.41 Oracles were also used in a legal context in “oracular trials” to determine the guilt of the accused.42 Papyrus BM 10335 is an example of an oracle which references the

“nodding” of a god.

Second regnal year, third month of Akhet, first day. The servant Amunemunia appealed to Amun of Pe-Khenty at his goodly festival, the Festival of the Harim, saying: ‘Help [me], Amun of Pe-Khenty, my good and beloved lord! The overseer of the cattle of the altar made me abide here in Pe-Khenty of the citizens (?), guarding his store-house and drawing his dues; and men came unto me at noon and stole five tunics of coloured cloth from me. My good and beloved lord, wilt thou give me back their theft?’ And the god nodded very greatly.43

Dreams were also a means of hearing from the divine and at times discerning future events. This is what Rita Lucarelli calls “divinatory magic.” 44 There is not much textual record of dreams in the ancient Near East, particularly among the Egyptians

(and Hittites).45 A. Leo Oppenheim makes an interesting observation that a record of dream content is more common in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament than most ancient Near Eastern texts. Dreams which are interpreted as “message dreams” are generally characterised as a theophany, in which the divine chooses to communicate with a human whether this was solicited (through incubation) or unsolicited.46

Evidence of this is found in the Chester Beatty III Papyrus (ca. 1220) which is a manual for interpreting dreams.47 The following is an excerpt from plate 7 (8, 24-27):

41 Frederick H. Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel and Its Near Eastern Environment: A Socio-Historical Investigation (JSOT 142; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1994), 218. 42 Sandra Lippert, “Law Courts,” UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 1 (2012): 9. 43 Translation from Blackman, “Oracles in Ancient Egypt,” 250. 44 Rita Lucerelli, “Oracles and Magic in Ancient Egypt: The Case of the ‘Oracular Amuletic Decrees,’” (paper presented at the annual meeting SBL, Denver, Colorado, 18 November 2018), 2. 45 A. Leo Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East with a Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, v.46, Part 3, 1956), 186. 46 Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams, 191. 47 Papyrus Chester Beatty III, www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=111808& partId=1.

building his house, BAD; the fomenting of words with him. carrying off property belonging to a temple, BAD; the removal of his possession in his (own presence).

putting incense [upon] the fire to a god, BAD; the might of a god against him. throwing wood into the water, BAD; the bringing of a pain into his house.48

On this plate there are lists of different images or scenarios arranged topically.49 Each contains a verdict on how to interpret the dream omen as seen in the example above.

The prognosis is either “GOOD” or “BAD.” In contrast, dream records in the Hebrew

Bible contain details about the content of the dream rather than listing themes with verdicts (for example, the Joseph narrative).50

Incantations and other magic related rituals could be used to counter a negative omen from a dream. If divination is a means of divine communication, receiving a piece of knowledge, or perhaps catching a glimpse into the future, then one perspective on magic is that it can be seen as a possible solution, remedy, or a course of action in light of what insight is gained from the divination. This is evident in the Hebrew Bible, to an extent. God communicates specific messages to individuals through dreams and visions (for example, Abraham, Jacob, Joseph,

Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, etc.).

2.1.4. Conclusion on the Egyptians

Magic was prevalent and even normative in ancient Egypt. Far from being subversive, magic was strongly connected with the divine (specifically the god, Heka) and was used in the temples as well as in ordinary spheres of daily life. The

48 Translation of Papyrus Chester Beatty III from Alan H. Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum, Volume 1: Text (London: British Museum, 1934), 17-18. 49 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 221. 50 Genesis 37, 40-41.

Egyptians did not have a specific word for malevolent magic, for “magic was magic.”51 But rather, it could be used for benefit or for harm depending on the intended outcome.52 Most evidence only reports of positive examples. In contrast, the Mesopotamians and Hittites did differentiate between harmful and protective magic both in language and in different types of specialists (as will be seen below).53

The magico-religious specialists (various priests, healers, and magicians) reflect this legitimate place of magic in ancient Egyptian society. There are not

“sorcerers” (as a subversive role) but instead legitimate priestly castes. The role of

Egyptian religious and ritual specialists will be examined in greater detail in Chapter

Three. At this point, it is evident that magic was a means of communicating with the gods and, consequently, was integral to life in ancient Egypt.

2.2. The Mesopotamians and the Divine

The vast number of deities in Mesopotamian religions is indicative of their significant role in everyday life and society at large.54 Stephen Bertman argues that for the

Mesopotamians the cosmology and continued existence of the world was believed to be “alive with diverse spirits.”55 The divine was perceived as working behind the seemingly ordinary aspects of daily life such as the ability to start a fire, build bricks, implement justice, and harvest crops, to name just a few examples.56 This illustrates how pertinent the idea of activity of the gods and spirits was to everyday life and to

51 JoAnn Scurlock, “Sorcery in the Stars: STT 300, BRM 4.19-20 and the Mandaic Book of the Zodiac,” Archiv für Orientforschung 51 (2006): 125-146. Theis notes that magic was not restricted to a particular use or context. Theis, Magie und Raum, 12-13. 52 See the Execration Texts for an example of magic used with the purpose of provoking harm. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 136-147. Anne Marie Kitz, Cursed Are You! The Phenomenology of Cursing in Cuneiform and Hebrew Texts (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2014). Also see Egyptian execration rituals in COS 1.32:50-52. 53 Scurlock, “Sorcery in the Stars,” 126. 54 See Bottéro, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, 45 and Stephen Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia: Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia (New York: Facts on File Inc., 2003), 114. 55 Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia, 114. 56 Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia, 114.

aspects of life (such as making bricks) which do not appear to be mysterious or extraordinary.

Daniel C. Snell states that a god was, “someone with extraordinary power and success and someone who might exert that power over distance and perhaps over time.”57 Snell points out a few specific features of deities of the ancient Near East.

For example, the gods were not necessarily immortal.58 There was a time when they did not exist and they were capable of dying (Inanna and Dumuzi, for example).59

They were limited in power and knowledge.60 In the Sumerian myth of the death of

Gilgamesh, those in the netherworld are described as “ghosts.” The Death of

Gilgamesh: c.1.8.1.3:

(Another god speaks:) "Let Gilgameš as a ghost, below among the dead, be the governor of the nether world. Let him be pre-eminent among the ghosts, so that he will pass judgments and render verdicts, and what he says will be as weighty as the words of Ninĝišzida and Dumuzid."61

In addition to interactions with the divine, the dead were also consulted by the living.

JoAnn Scurlock explains, “there was in ancient Mesopotamia also a strong tradition of consultations of the dead for the purpose of divining the future.”62 There was the possibility for communication and activity between the dead and the living. Scurlock also argues that in Mesopotamia, the dead could be used as a means for ridding

57 Daniel C. Snell, Religions of the Ancient Near East (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 19. 58 Snell, Religions, 17. 59 Helmer Ringgren, Religions of the Ancient Near East (trans. John Sturdy; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1973), 12-13. Also see Pritchard, ANET, 50-57 concerning the death of Gilgamesh and also the Inanna’s descent to the underworld. Stephanie Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others (Oxford: OUP, 2008). 60 “The Exaltation of Inanna,” trans. William W. Hallo (COS 1.160: 518-522). Snell, Religions, 17. 61 Translation from the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL), 3 April 2018, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/. 62 J. A. Scurlock, “Magical Uses of Ancient Mesopotamian Festivals of the Dead,” in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power (ed. Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki; Boston: Brill Academic Publishers Inc., 2001), 106.

oneself of illness or particular malevolence.63 The deceased might also be seen as the cause of a symptom. In a medical text, a physician-healer notes that the cause of a patient’s fever is related to an affliction by a ghost. DPS XXVI:38:

If (his affliction always afflicts him in the evening and) when it afflicts him, fever keeps him awake from the evening watch until the middle watch night, affliction by a ghost.64

The examples above serve to better understand the context and worldview of perceived interactions between the divine and spirits/ghosts with the ancient

Mesopotamian.

2.2.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic

Outside of public festivals, one of the main ways most people interacted with the deities was through attempts of reading and interpreting divine signs; in other words, through divination and magic.65 While there is some fluidity to the concept of magic, the vocabulary and designation of rituals and specialists indicates that there was a clear distinction between benevolent and malevolent engagement in magic in

Mesopotamia.

Scholars have described and interpreted such practices from a variety of perspectives. For example, Sarah Iles Johnston argues that negative connotations were not necessarily affiliated with magic.66 Tammi J. Schneider suggests, “Ancient

Mesopotamia had no category considered ‘magic’ that was clearly distinguished from anything that could be viewed as religious. Magic was simply regarded as a normal

63 Scurlock, “Magical Uses,” 106. 64 Translation from JoAnn Scurlock and Burton R. Andersen (ed.), Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2005), 28-29. 65 Stephen Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia: Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia (New York: Facts on File Inc., 2003), 132. 66 For example, Sarah Iles Johnston, “Magic” in Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals Across the Mediterranean World (ed. Sarah Iles Johnston; Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007), 139-152.

aspect of life and was not disapproved.”67 While this is largely true, Schneider, Black and Green all make a distinction between what they refer to as “black” and “white” magic. According to such claims, magic could be used for protection and personal well-being, or with the purpose of harming others (such as using curses).68 Rather than using loaded terminology of “black and white magic” from specific paradigms, we will refer to malevolent and benevolent intentions of magic instead.

Positive or neutral examples of magic might include festivals, healing contexts, apotropaic rituals, and divination. One important textual example is the

“Maqlû” series. This is one of the largest and most significant corpora of magical therapeutic texts from Mesopotamia.69 The text of Maqlû (literally “burning”) contains the description of rituals and almost one hundred incantations against

“witchcraft.” This was identified as a “single complex ceremony” by Tzvi Abusch rather than a collection of random incantations.70 The extant tablets date to the early first millennium BCE, but it is possible that there are earlier forms of this ceremony.

The ritual tablet and incantations are to counter witchcraft, protect the patient, and invoke a punishment on the witch through death by fire.71 The ceremony/text is an example of a protective act of magic used to counter a malevolent one. This is demonstrated in the following excerpts.

Maqlû I 113-117:

I call upon you in the stead of Šamaš, the judge. Judge my case, render my verdict. Burn my warlock and my witch, Devour my enemies, consume the ones who would do evil to me! Let your raging (fire-)storm vanquish them.72

67 Schneider, An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion, 113. 68 Kitz, Cursed Are You. 69 Tzvi Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû (Atlanta: SBL, 2015), 1-5. 70 Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 4. 71 Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 4-5. 72 The translation from Maqlû is taken from Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 51.

Maqlû I 135-136 and 139-140:

I am raising the torch and burning their statues, (Those) of the utukku-demon, the šēdu-spirit, the lurker-demon, the ghost… And any evil that seizes mankind, Melt, dissolve, drip ever away!73

The Maqlû series indicates the existence of both a deviant, malevolent form of magic and an acceptable, benevolent form. The methods and actions used are the same in both cases. It was the intended result which determined whether it was a negative or positive form of magic. In the same vein Walter Farber says, “sorcerers used exactly the same techniques and spells for their illegitimate purposes that the victims might use to defend themselves legitimately.”74

To suspect the work of a deity, demon, ghost, or sorcerer as being responsible for calamity, crises, or illness was a common perception.75 Counter-spells existed to combat misfortune and perceived attacks as “evil demons and human sorcerers could always strike the individual with premeditated mischief.”76 One example of this is a spell against evil spirits related to the results of improper burial of the dead.

“Evil Spirits” 1.168:

Oh evil spirit, ghost appearing in the desert. Oh Namtar, when you touch something evil, Oh tongue, which in its malice binds a man to you, May you be broken like a pitcher, may you be split like a measuring vessel! May you not cross through the door-frame or over the door-sill!

73 Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 53. 74 Walter Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000), 1898. Also see Erica Reiner, Astral Magic in Babylonia (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 84: American Philosophical Society, 1995), 101. 75 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1896. Regarding ghosts Farber states, “Ghosts of the dead could also haunt the living,” 1897. 76 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1896.

May you not cross over the threshold(?)!77

Amulets were used to avert evil or bring about a positive outcome and were connected with the principles of sympathetic magic.78 By placing an amulet in a specific location, the protective qualities were conferred to that place or person connected to its placement. Bertman attests to the use of amuletic plaques which were, “hung in the home from walls or by doors to keep out evil spirits who might attempt entry,”79 which is reminiscent of Exodus 12:13. Amulets were used in some form from civilians to royalty. For example Neo-Assyrian kings were known to wear amulets as necklaces.80 Also, Babylonian amuletic necklaces dating as early as around 18th

81 century BCE have been found and likely functioned in the same way.

Fig. 2.1 Babylonian amuletic necklace, ca. 18th-17th century BCE

77 “From ‘Evil Spirits,’” trans. W. W. Hallo (COS 1.168: 539-40). 78 Black and Green, Gods, Demons and Symbols, 30. 79 Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia, 133. 80 Black and Green, Gods, Demons and Symbols, 30. Francesca Rochberg, “Heaven and Earth: Divine-Human Relations in Mesopotamian Celestial Divination,” in Prayer, Magic, and the Stars in the Ancient and Late Antique World, (ed. Scott Noegel, Joel Walker, and Brannon Wheeler; University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003), 175. 81 Item 47.1a-h at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. This gold necklace is from Dilbat (Mesopotamia) and dates ca. 18-17th century BCE.

(Metropolitan Museum of Art, accession number 47.1a-h)

2.2.2. Specialists

Illness, disease, and physical symptoms were usually understood within the framework of “messages from the gods (omens)” and thus were not strictly a physical issue alone.82 In ancient Mesopotamia this could be understood to be the work of a deity, demon,83 ghost, or even a punishment for certain actions.84 Magic and rituals were often needed as part of the remedy against such maladies. The role of priest, exorcist, and physician/healer were somewhat related and certainly overlapped.85 The line between medical and magical treatment was not altogether clear, nor was it necessary for these to be separated. The pharmacological text KADP 1 (4.88A) provides specialists with an extensive list of plants and their medicinal purposes. For example, (v.4-5):

Fresh [maštakal] is a plant for a dog bite. It is to be ground (and) [daubed] on the bite. Maštakal is a plant for ‘hand’ of god. Its leaf is to be wrapped in a tuft of wool (and) [put] on [the person’s neck].86

Another example from a healing context is diagnosis and treatment for a patient with a fever thought to be caused by the demoness Lamaštu (text BM 35512,

82 András Bácskay, “Magical Element of Mesopotamian Medical Texts,” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 49 (2010), 12. 83 Wolfram von Soden points out that there is not strictly a collective word for “demon” in the ancient Near East. He does claim, “The Sumerians, Babylonians, and Assyrians used some words for demons individually, or in some cases for good genies who held stations comparable to an angel,” The Ancient Orient: An Introduction to the Study of the Ancient Near East (trans. Donald G. Schley; Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1994), 198. Scurlock, “Magical Uses of Ancient Mesopotamia Festivals; and Scurlock, Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illnesses in Ancient Mesopotamia. 84 Jeremy Black and Anthony Green claim that causes of disease were, “often ascribed to the work of gods or of demons acting as the agents of gods for the punishment of sin.” Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary (Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1992), 67. 85 Black and Green, Gods, Demons and Symbols, 67. 86 “Beginnings of Pharmacology (KADP 1),” trans. JoAnn Scurlock (COS 4.88A: 277-80).

4.881). This text begins with instructions on creating a treatment mixture followed by these next steps: “You let (the mixture) cool. You recite the recitation ‘The hatred(?) of his god has been loosened’ three times over and, if you rub him gently with it, he

87 should recover.”

JoAnn Scurlock draws attention to two important kinds of professional healers in ancient Mesopotamia, namely the asû and the āšipu. The asû has traditionally been understood to be equivalent to a physician, while the āšipu is often translated as

“conjurer” or “magician.”88 The āšipu usually treated patients by means of rituals, prayers and incantations, whereas the asû used different techniques. While some scholars have interpreted the asû as engaging in more “rational” treatments to ailments, Scurlock challenges such position and argues that such clear distinctions cannot be easily made in Mesopotamia. For example, texts such as BAM 33 and BAM

78: 18-19 contain, “exclusively what we would consider ‘rational’ treatments, and hence, would be otherwise inclined to attribute to the asû,” and yet “probably belonged to the libraries of, or were ‘excerpted for specific performance’ by known

āšipus.”89 Bertman claims that it was the āšipu priests who were called on to determine “what god they may have offended so he or she could be appeased, or by finding what hostile spirit was possessing them so that it might be expelled by rites of exorcism.”90 Scurlock explains, “not only do the therapeutic texts contain any number of prescriptions which we would consider ‘magical,’ sometimes directly intermixed with ‘medical’ ones, but also, included among the rare places in the AMT

87 “‘Supernatural’ Causes: The Demoness Lamaštu: Fever (BM 35512),” trans. JoAnn Scurlock (COS 4.881: 295-97). 88 JoAnn Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician: A Tale of Two Healing Professional,” in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretive Perspectives (ed. Tzvi Abusch and Karel van der Toorn: Groningen: Styx Publications, 1999), 69. 89 Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician,” 69. BAM 33 and BAM 77 in JoAnn Scurlock, Sourcebook for Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine (Atlanta: SBL, 2014), 429-430; 531-536. 90 Bertman, Ancient Mesopotamia, 133.

and BAM texts where the prognosis is quoted in full, is one of the most obvious bits of

āšipūtu in TDP.”91 It is possible that the type or cause of a malady was unclear, in which case both specialists (asû and āšipu) may be called upon.92

In very general terms, Scurlock concludes that the āšipu were usually involved in the diagnosis of an ailment.93 The asû does not fit easily into a contemporary medical professional role, but may be closest to a pharmacist, as Scurlock sees the asû’s main role as being “at the treatment end of the medicine business.” 94 Ultimately these are complementary rather than competing roles.95

The bārû should also be mentioned. This specialist is usually understood to be a “diviner” or more literally a “seer.”96 The bārû observed omens and interpreted divine signs (especially on the entrails of animals). Scurlock argues this role of this specialist also included the prognosis of a patient in the context of medicine. Scurlock suggests that once the āšipu provides a diagnosis to the patient, if called upon, the bārû was to determine the patient’s recovery time.97 The significance of this not only demonstrates that magic played an important role in healing and medicine, but also that a sharp distinction between modern scientific views of medicine and ancient magic cannot easily be made.

2.1.3. Divination

Divination was practised throughout the ancient Near East and likely practised in some form at most levels of society. Harry A. Hoffner argues that while most of the

91 Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician,” 75. 92 Black and Greek, Gods, Demons and Symbols, 67. 93 Scurlock points to CAD A/2 432a. s. v. on page 77. 94 Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician,” 78. 95 Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician,” 78. 96 Krzysztof Ulanowski (ed.), The Religious Aspects of War in the Ancient Near East, Greece, and Rome (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 69. 97 Scurlock, “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician,” 77.

divinatory documents are from royal collections, one should not be misled to conclude that divination was restricted to royalty.98

The Mesopotamians understood a deep connection between writing and producing, which was often recognised as having magical elements.99 Therefore, if a divine message is written in the sky, or through oil patterns on water, or on the liver of a sheep, then this was understood as communication from the gods, particularly when this is embedded in the mythology of the divine. This is not to suggest that the method of soliciting divine communication was perceived to be the invention of humans. Rather, even the methods of deductive divination were understood as given from the gods for this very purpose. This is what Ulla Jeyes identifies as “a reliable communication link with the divine” which results in chaos if broken.100

The reading of animal entrails (often the liver) was a widespread means of receiving a divine message, and usually a response to a question. This was especially popular among the Mesopotamians and Hittites. A message was ‘written’ on the organs and a specialist (usually a bārû) was used for the interpretation of the message.101 Mesopotamian texts indicate that the diviner might request the presence of a deity to be in the stomach, intestines, or liver of the animal being examined in the hopes that a divine message will be relayed. One extispicy report reads:

I ask you, Šamaš, great lord: Be present in this ram, place (in it) a firm positive answer, favourable designs, favourable propitious omens by the oracular command of your great divinity, and may I see (them).102

98 Harry A. Hoffner Jr., “Ancient Views of Prophecy and Fulfillment: Mesopotamia and Asia Minor,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30 (1987), 258. Hoffner states, “Indeed, divination was widely practiced in Mesopotamia and Hatti.” 99 Botteró, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, 178. 100 Ulla Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum, (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te İstanbul, 1989), 19. 101 See Botteró, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, 179. 102 I. Starr, Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria, (SAA 04; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990) Cited 15 May 2014. Online http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/knpp/saa_04, see no. 190, lines 7-8. Botteró, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, 178 uses this text as an example to demonstrate the invitation of the deity during the divinatory process.

Clay models of sheep livers have been found which give evidence to this divinatory practice and also explain how the specialist obtained the skill of deciphering the divine message.103 These clay models may have been used to interpret any unusual marking or abnormality of the liver.104 Omen reports indicate that the final verdict was simply “favourable” or “unfavourable.” For example, in a military extispicy report:

2[The out]side [rides] upon the ‘c[ap’]. 3[The breast]-bone [is split] in the center. 4[There are...] unfavourable omens. 5 Unfavorable.105

Erica Reiner explains that divination by means of lecanomany (oil poured on water) and libanomancy (observation of pattern of smoke from incense) were popular during the Old Babylonian period, but are not seen much after the mid second millennium

BCE.106 In the fragments of a royal inscription, there is a reference to the practice of lecanomancy being passed down from Šamaš and Adad to king Enmeduranki. A diviner is referred to as an “expert in oil” also referring to this practice of reading and interpreting divine signs.

Šamaš and Adad [brought him in] to their assembly, Šamaš and Adad [honoured him], Šamaš and Adad [set him] on a large throne of gold, they showed him how to observe oil on water, a mystery of Anu, [Enlil and Ea], they gave him the tablet of the gods, the liver, a secret of heaven and [underworld], they put in his hand the cedar-(rod), beloved of the great gods. Then he, in accordance with their [word (?)] brought the men of Nippur, Sippar and Babylon into his presence

103 Jeyes, Old Babylonian Extispicy. 104 Walter Farber “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. 3, (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 2000), 1994 105Starr, Queries to the Sungod, Cited 15 May 2014. Online: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/knpp/saa_04, lines 2-5. 106 Reiner, Astral Magic in Babylonia, 62. Also see Winitzer, “The Divine Presence,” in Divination and the Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World, ed. A. Annus (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago: 2010):177-97, see 185 in particular.

and he honoured them.

When a diviner, an expert in oil, of abiding descent, offering of Enmeduranki, king of Sippar, who set up the pure bowl and held the cedar-(rod).107

Omens were the main way the gods communicated or gave a warning about the future and, “Only rarely do we encounter other means of such communication, such as oracles, prophecy, necromancy, or incubations.”108 The omens could be solicited or non-solicited, and an example of solicited would be extispicy or lots. Jack

Sasson argues that the role extispicy played was similar to astrology in that diviners could read the signs of the gods through these means (by the organs of an animal or the stars in the sky).109 Extispicy became favoured in Mesopotamia as it “could be staged whenever information was needed” in contrast with particular astrological events.110 Augury was not generally practised among the Mesopotamians, but was used more by the Hittites.111

Non-solicited omens would be a natural disaster, a meteorological rarity, an unusual occurrence, an abnormal birth (i.e. a malformed animal or baby), to list a few examples.112 A Mesopotamian omen text of anomalous births (šumma izbu) provides us examples of how such events might be interpreted.

If an anomaly has no left ear – the god has heard the prayer of the king, the king will take the land of his enemy, the palace of the enemy will be scattered, the enemy will have no advisors, you will decrease the herd of the enemy, he will make a promise.

If an anomaly’s right ear is cleft – that ox-fold will be scattered.

107 Lines 4-12 and 22-24 from K 2486 + 3646 +4364; K 3357 + 9941; K 13307 translated by W. G. Lambert, “Enmeduranki and Related Matters,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21 (1967), 132. Also see Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 145-47. 108 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1899. 109 Jack M. Sasson, “About Mari and the Bible,” RA 92 (1998), 116. 110 Sasson, “About Mari and the Bible,” 116. 111 Hoffner, “Ancient Views of Prophecy and Fulfillment,” 260. 112 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1899.

If anomaly’s left ear is split – that ox-fold will expand; the ox-fold of the enemy will be scattered.113

The omen text recording an eclipse of the moon in the morning provides an example of how such event was interpreted as a divine message, providing insight into the future.

[If] there is an eclipse in Sivan (III) on the 14th day, and the (moon) god in his eclipse becomes dark on the east side above, and clears on the west side below, the north wind rises during the evening(!) watch and touches the middle watch: you observe his eclipse and keep the north wind in mind; thereby a decision is given for Ur and the king of Ur: the king of Ur will experience famine; deaths will become many; as for the king of Ur, his son will wrong him, but Šamaš will catch the son who wronged his father, and he will die in the mourning-place of his father; a son of the king who had not been named for kingship will seize the throne.114

What is interesting about this type of omen was that it was not restricted to specialists, but rather could be “observed by anyone who had eyes.”115 In the same way, the unsolicited omen may affect anyone and is not restricted to a specific person.

Anyone who happened to observe it or was nearby during the occurrence could be impacted by this. Farber claims that, “it would have been no use to sit back and wait for a better omen, as was possible with the solicited kind of message.”116 If the omen was interpreted as negatively affecting a whole community, city, or the king then special ceremonies would take place in an attempt to ward off evil.117 While the predicted event or disaster might not be preventable, one could prepare and specifically look for ways (through ritual and religious/magical practices) to protect oneself, family, city, etc. Farber claims that “Offerings and purification rites were

113 “Mesopotamian Omens,” trans. Ann K. Guinan (COS 1.120: 423-26). 114 SAA 08 004, lines 1-7 (RMA 271). http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/corpus 115 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1899. 116 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1899. 117 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1899.

included to secure benevolence of, and protection by, the god thought to have sent the ominous warning.”118

Dreams held an important role in divination and receiving divine signs in

Mesopotamia. Evidence of dreams appear as early as ca. 2454–2454 BCE in the

Sumerian monument of a military success of King Eanatum I.119 The “Stele of

Vultures” recounts a dream where deity Ningirsu appears to Eanatum and assures him of military success. An excerpt from sections V and VI of the Stele of Vultures reports:120

Ningirsu with his open hand received him; 5 cubits as its length – he laid upon him – 5 cubits and a span. Ningirsu with great joy the king …‘Eannatum, the mighty, over the lands in brightness is exalted’ … On the bed, on the bed, his head he lay – Eannatum on his bed the king whom he loved (?).

Varying forms of dream omens are evident for approximately 1500 years in

Mesopotamia. 121 The library of Assurbanipal contained a collection of dream clay tablets (collectively called a ‘series’ iškaru).122 These dreams covered a wide variety of content to be used as a dream manual. This “Dream Book” indicates an attempt to

“standardize and control dreams” according to Scott Noegel.123 Additionally, Noegel comments that this book provides us with insights into the desires and fears of the average Mesopotamian, in contrast with dream reports from royalty.124 The following provides an example of the way content was categorised for the purpose of providing

118 Farber, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1900. 119 Scott B. Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters in Mesopotamia and in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament),” in Dreams and Dreaming: A Reader in Religion, Anthropology, History, and Psychology (ed. Kelly Bulkeley; Hampshire: Palgrave-St. Martin’s Press, 2001): 45-71. 120 Translation of the Stele of Vultures in George A. Barton, The Royal Inscriptions of Sumer and Akkad (New Haven: The American Oriental Society and Yale University Press, 1928), 25. 121 A. Leo Oppenheim, “The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East: with a Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 46:3 (1956), 256. Hoffner, “Ancient Views of Prophecy and Fulfillment,” 261. 122 Oppenheim, “The Interpretation of Dreams,” 261. 123 Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters,” 51. 124 Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters,” 51.

an interpretation or prognosis of the dream. Tablet IX, Col. I from the series Ziqīqu thematically grouped together dreams that involve travel or changing locations.

If a man in his dream enters the gate of his city: Wherever he turns, [he will (not?) attain his desire]. If he goes out of the gate in the city: wherever he turns, [he will (not?) attain] his desire]. If he ascends to heaven: his days will be sh[ort]. If he descends to the netherworld: his days will be long. If [he ] to the ‘Country-of-no-return’: [his days] will be long.125

We have an example of dream incubation and the royal use of oneiromancy to receive divine insight and guidance. In a dream report, Assurbanipal is described as seeking the help of Ishtar for guidance before battle. He informs a priest about his prayers to Ishtar and need of assistance in battle. The priest goes to sleep and has a dream where Ishtar is seen holding a bow and sword and securing victory for

Assurbanipal. Lines 50-59 depict this:

During the night in which I appeared before her, a šabrû-priest lay down and had a dream. He awoke with a start and then Ishtar caused him to see a nocturnal vision. He reported to me as follows: “The goddess Ishtar who dwells in Arbela came in. Right and left quivers were suspended from her. She was holding a bow in her hand, and a sharp sword was drawn to do battle. You were standing in front of her and she spoke to you like a real mother. Ishtar called to you, she who is most exalted among the gods, giving you the following instructions: “Wait with the attack; (for) wherever you intend to go, 126 I will go with you, O goddess of goddesses!”

It is evident that there was a political component to royal dream reports, but these still provide insight on how kings sought divine counsel. Many examples from dream manuals involve a formula which resembles legal codes: “if x, then y.”127 This along with the perceived power of certain words which appear in dream omens

125 Translation of K.6267+ by Oppenheim, “The Interpretation of Dreams,” 267. 126 ANET.606, 171. Oppenheim, “The Interpretation of Dreams,” 249. Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters,” 47. 127 Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters,” 52.

indicates divine communication through divination (including dreams) as a means of

“acts of divine judgements.”128

2.2.4. Conclusion on the Mesopotamians

The divine and earthly realms often communicated, interacted, and had the potential to affect each other from the perspective of the ancient Mesopotamians. Magic had a prominent place in the royal spheres as well as the everyday life. Magic, and magic- ritual specialists, could be malevolent or benevolent. Unlike the Egyptians who made no distinction in language or ritual action between “good” and “bad” magic, the evidence from Mesopotamia clearly attests to a differentiation. The effects of harmful magic are combatted by benevolent magic.

The Maqlû ceremony and texts are part of the wider corpus of therapeutic or protective texts. While we do not have collections of texts for “witches,” the existence of the Maqlû series suggests the existence of harmful practitioners of magic.129 In addition, amulets and amuletic plaques played an important role in apotropaic and healing contexts. Protection against illness, foreboding circumstances, malevolent magic, spirits or deities was sought through magico-religious means. The general principles of apotropaic magic are similar between ancient Egypt and

Mesopotamia (and the ancient Near East at large).

Divination was deeply interwoven with the activity of the divine. Whether one received an unexpected omen, the answer to a question, or insight into the future, these signs were believed to be communication from the divine. Extispicy was a significant aspect of Mesoptomian divination. The presence of clay omen liver models attests to this practice and the importance of having a “qualified” specialist to

128 Noegel, “Dreams and Dream Interpreters,” 52. 129 Including kišpū and lemnūtu. Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlû, 1, 4. 75

perform and interpret the divine message. Magic could then be used in an attempt to resolve the situation or ailment and ultimately to change an outcome.

2.3. The Hittites and the Divine

In light of what has been explored concerning ancient Near Eastern magico-religion so far, it is not surprising the one finds Hittite religion and magic co-existing without competing. Arvid S. Kapelrud comments, “They are completely intermingled and it is sometimes difficult to say what is religion and what is magic, it may depend upon one’s definition of the two.”130 For example just as Egypt had a deity of magic

(Heka), so the Hittites had a deity associated with magico-religious rituals and healing. The goddess Kamrusepas was the goddess of “healing and magic.”131 To demonstrate this, one Hittite text known as the “Kamrusepa Myths” says:

Thus says Kamrusepa: ‘… take red, black, and green wool. Take the stalk (?) of the reed/arrow. Enchant it/them and wind [this one] on his neck, but that one on his feet. And let the illness of his head become a mist, let it ascend to heaven. Let the Dark Earth lift his illness with the hand.’132

This text is an example of what Gabriella Frantz-Szabó identifies as the blurred line between magic and religion, “a fact that was not recognized by earlier scholarship.”133

Magic is what connected humans with the divine realm and enabled communication to be possible. Yet scholars are divided on the issue of magic in Hittitology. Unlike

Frantz-Szabó, Kapelrud perceives Hittite magic and religion to be intermingled, but over time they were intentionally harmonized in texts and given legal boundaries on

130 Arvid S. Kapelrud, “The Interrelationship Between Religion and Magic in Hittite Religion,” Numen 6 (1959): 32-50; 33. 131 Kapelrud, “The Interrelationship Between Religion and Magic,” 41. 132 Harry A. Hoffner Jr., Hittite Myths (2nd ed.; Atlanta: SBL, 1998), 33. This text is part of the “Kamrusepa Myths,” lines 3-8. 133 Gabriella Frantz-Szabó. “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000): 2007-2019: 2007.

the appropriate use.134 Thus, “there is little doubt that the harmony between religion and magic in the Hittite texts is artificially created.”135 Kapelrud quickly points out that the extant Hittite texts pertaining to religion and magic come from the royal archive and clearly “represent the strictly official view,” not necessarily the view held by all people in society.136 Regardless of royal or popular rituals, the general assumptions undergirding Hittite magic and religion are the same and lead one to the conclusion that, “magic can hardly exist without a religious stamp, nor religion without magic.”137

The gods of the Hittites were often depicted in anthropomorphic ways and needed to be appeased, appealed to, and worshipped. Gregory McMahon emphasises that while a Hittite creation account of humanity has not been found, “[t]he basic conceptualization of human-divine relations utilized the analogy of the master and slave.”138 With this understanding of the relations between humans and gods, it is not surprising that the Hittites sought not only to understand the desires of their deities, but also to fulfil them in some way.

McMahon reminds us that the “official attitude towards the gods” is of importance but only represents the perspective of royalty and priests.139 He claims,

“Private practitioners of magic, attested in their individually composed magical rituals, relied upon the gods to support or supplement their attempts to magically manipulate the universe.”140 Unfortunately many aspects of the lives of ordinary

134 See Kapelrud, “The Interrelationship Between Religion and Magic,” 44. 135 Kapelrud, “The Interrelationship Between Religion and Magic,” 44. 136 Kapelrud, “The Interrelationship Between Religion and Magic,” 43. 137 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2007. 138 Gregory McMahon, “Theology, Priests, and Worship in Hittite Anatolia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000), 1988. “This may be seen in the Plague Prayers of Murshili II and very explicitly in the Instructions for Temple Personnel.” 139 McMahon, “Theology Priests, and Worship,” 1991. 140 McMahon, “Theology Priests, and Worship,” 1991.

people were not recorded, (such as their experience of dreams) and so we do not have many of these first-hand accounts from households.141

2.3.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic

There are certain practises which convey ritual power, personal communication with the divine, and an attempt of altering something within the natural world which will be dealt with here.142 Whilst it has been stated that individuals, other than priests, attempted to access the divine, we do know that specialists (perhaps ‘magicians’) were used.

There is evidence that within magico-religious practice, the Hittites drew a distinction between whether it was benevolent or malevolent.143 The particular methods used did not differ, but the intention of the practitioner largely determined whether magic was being used for good or for harm. Frantz-Szabó argues, “Two opposing forms of magic and witchcraft arose: ‘black magic’ (or harmful witchcraft) and ‘white magic’ (or defensive witchcraft).”144 Even though there is not an abundance of Hittite texts regarding malevolent magic (or ‘witchcraft’), there are some instances of legal bans on certain kinds of magic. For example, King Telipinu

(about 1500 BCE) made an edict which banned sorcery.145

Regarding cases of sorcery in Ḫattuša: keep cleaning up (i.e., investigating and punishing) instances. Whoever in the royal family practises sorcery, seize him

141 See Beckman, “On Hittite Dreams,” 26. In the case of dreams, Beckman proposes that most likely the occurrences and interpretation of dreams would not differ drastically between ordinary Hittites and royalty. Gary Beckman, “On Hittite Dreams,” in Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday (ed. Itamar Singer; Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications, 2010). 142 Frantz-Szabó states, “Magic confronts a natural world that is permeated with supernatural forces for good or evil” in “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2007. Magic is not being used here with negative connotations, but simply as a means of interaction with the divine or supernatural. 143 See Scurlock, “Magic” in ABD 4: 465. Here Scurlock argues that benevolent magic was viewed as a divine gift and could legitimately be used to appease the gods. 144Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2008. 145 Examples of these laws are outlined in Telipinu Proclamation section 50 and Hittite Laws 44b. See Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2008 and Scurlock, “Magic,” ABD 4: 465.

and deliver him to the king’s court. But it will go badly for that man (C adds: 146 and for his household) who does not deliver him.

Also see the fragment of a text which appears to be a ritual to counteract malevolent sorcery. Lines 29-30 include:

Whatever words the sorcerer spoke, whatever he wove, whatever he made in whatever place, (30) those (things) he did not (properly) know … I have pushed over these words of sorcery like a pillar, I have untwined them like a string.147

Another aspect of the Hittite magical ritual was the appeasement of angry gods. Once it was made known that the gods had been angered, the next course of action needed to be appeasement, which often appears as magic ritual. The myth of the disappearance of the Sun-god mentioned earlier ends in a ritual to appease the gods and ultimately restore cosmic order.148 The final words of this text are:

The Storm God’s anger and wrath, [sin and sullenness] burn up in the same way. And just as this fire [is extinguished, so may] his anger, wrath, and sullenness [be extinguished in the same way].149

It could be argued that for the Hittites, “Magic follows the principles of analogy and contiguity, that is, direct contact.”150 Analogic magic depends on the idea that an object can be used to represent a specific person or object that is not present. Through oral recitation of incantations and an action being done to the object

(for example melting, burning, or cutting), the magical ritual has effect on the intended person or object. One crucial point is, “Analogic magic always includes an oral component, an incantation that establishes the magical connections between the

146 Translation of Telipinu’s Edict from Martha T. Roth (ed.), Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 237-38. 147 Text KUB, xvn, 27 “Ritual to Counteract Sorcery” trans. Pritchard (ANET: 347). 148 Billie Jean Collins, “Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities,” in Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy in the World of Antiquity (ed. Reinhard G. Kratz and Hermann Spieckermann; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 69. Also see Hoffner, Hittite Myths, 22. 149 Hoffner, Hittite Myths, 22. 150 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2011.

evil and its model.”151 Direct contact magic does not seem to require the incantations like analogic magic does. Objects may be manipulated in both forms of magic (for example, ribbon or cord may be pulled or twisted).152 In a ritual for purifying a house, the following instructions are given for the actions to be taken.

In the morning the exorcist opens the house [and] he goes [in]. He holds a hoe, a spade and a shovel (?). He digs the ground (with) the hoe, (and) he [clear(?)] the (resulting) pit with the spade.

He digs in this same way at the four corner (of the house) and he digs in this very same way [to the side of(?) the hea]rth. The (resulting) pit [he clears(?) with] the shovel(?).

He says as follows: “O Sun Goddess of the Earth, we are taking this m[atter …]. Why is this house gasping? Why does it look upward to heaven?

Either a human has perjured (himself), or he has [shed] blood …

or someone has practiced (witchcraft(?)) and [has] en[tered], or bloodshed has occurred in the house. May this now release the evil, impurity, perjury, bloodshed, curse, threat, tears (and) sin of the house. May the floor (lit., earth), the floodboard, the bedroom, the hearth, the four corners, (and) the gates of the courtyard release (them).”153

It is through this performance of the ritual and act of digging, manipulating the ground, and the recitation by the exorcist that this purification is effectual. This text also gives us a glimpse into the perceived consequences of “witchcraft” and the contrast of this with the legitimate exorcist.

A more mundane example of the use of magic in order to alter a situation is the “Ritual Against Domestic Quarrel.” Instructions are written for a specialist to use various materials (including wool, water, dough, oil, and clay pots).154 Through the manipulation of these materials, words recited, and smashing of the pots, this magic ritual is expected to alter the present situation of quarrelling.

151 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2012. 152 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2012. 153 “Purifying a House: A Ritual for the Infernal Deities,” translated by Billie Jean Collin (COS 1.68:168). 154 Pritchard, ANET: 350-351.

2.3.2. Divination

Gary Beckman explains the Hittite concept of the universe as a continuum with “no strict disjunction between the sphere of humans and that of the gods. Rather, the two groups of beings, although vastly different in power, were interdependent.”155 This connection makes contacting the divine through divinatory means more understandable. Frantz-Szabó argues that magic attempts to deflect evil and to access beneficial divine forces in order to help humans live well. Divination and dreams can be used for predicting the future. She writes, “The mantic arts, on the other hand, investigate the intentions of supernatural powers and thereby obtain information about the future.”156

Oracles were practised by means of presenting a question to the gods and using

“lot oracles, extispicy, or augury” to receive any answer (whether positive or negative).157 The Hittite texts that mention lot oracles imply a system of symbols and representations, of which we are very limited in our understanding and interpretation.

Themes such as “life”, “the king”, “battle” were among those included in the representation of the lot oracles and arranged on something that resembled a game board, according to Frantz-Szabó.158 Using lot oracles guaranteed a response from the god(s) being appealed to and could be initiated by humans (unlike dreams and omens).

155 Gary Beckman, “How Religion was Done,” in A Companion to the Ancient Near East (ed. Daniel C. Snell, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005), 345. 156 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2013. 157 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2015. Richard H. Beal, “Hittite Oracles,” in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World (ed. Leda Jean Ciraolo and Jonathan Lee Seidel; Leiden: Brill, 2002): 57-81. 158 See Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2016.

Hittite omens, extispicy and oracular practices were borrowed from Mesopotamia and functioned in a similar way.159 Augury, however, likely originated from the

Hittites and was a popular means of divination in the Anatolia region but not in

Mesopotamia.160 Snake oracles are indigenous to the Hittites too, but these are rare

(with only seven fragments published).161 One Hittite omen text indicates that the diviner recites the nature of a situation, states the desired outcome, and then says, “(if) the matter … will be resolved for us by these actions … (then) let the ‘lot’- (oracle) be favourable.”162 In this same series the text mentions the use of augury, “Exactly the same question (is put) by the augur. Let the bird determine (positively).”163 This example also demonstrates how multiple methods of divination may be used in order to discern the divine response.164

In an excerpt from an oracle report we see how a king’s illness is attributed to divine wrath. In response, divination is used to determine whether the gods are angry and to provide a list of compensatory gifts to the deities. This oracle repeatedly mentions extispicy, seeking either a “favourable” or “unfavourable” divine response.

In regard to the fact that His Majesty (Tudḫaliya IV?) became ill, […] have not you, [O deity] of (the town of) Arušna, somehow been provoked [in connection with the illness of His Majesty? If you, O deity, are angry about this, let the first extispicy be favourable and the latter] unfavourable. First 165 extispicy: favourable … unfavourable. Latter [extispicy: ….] Unfavorable.

159 Gregory McMahon “Theology, Priests and Worship in Hittite Anatolia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. 3, (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 2000), 1982. 160 Beal, “Hittite Oracles,” 65. 161 Beal, “Hittite Oracles,” 65. 162 George C. Moore, “GI STUKUL as ‘Oracle Procedure’ in Hittite Oracle Texts,” JNES 40 (1981): 51. 163 Moore, “GI STUKUL as ‘Oracle Procedure,’” 51. 164 Beckman asserts that in the Hittite understanding was that the gods would communicate their wishes through oracles and omens, See “How Religion was Done,” 352. 165 “Excerpt from an Oracle Report,” trans. by Gary Beckman (COS 1.78: 204-06).

Dreams and unsolicited omens were beyond the control of humans and as they could be desired or even encouraged, they could not be coerced.166 There were two general categories in which a dream would come under, “message-dreams and ‘bad dreams.’”167 This vague reference to an evil or bad dream may be a prediction of a negative event, a threat to the dreamer, or the presence of an evil spirit.168 The dreamer would likely seek protective magic to prevent any harm. Extant texts describing the content of dreams are rare, as with Egypt.169

Dreams could be used by the gods to communicate with humans concerning the outcome of a situation, about an offense one has committed against the gods, as a warning, or simply insight into the future.170 In the “Plague Prayers of Mursili II,” through a series of prayers the king seeks divine insight into the cause and remedy of a plague epidemic. He mentioned dream incubation as a possible means of communicating.

[Or] if people have been dying because of some other matter, let me either see it in a dream, or [let] it [be discovered] by means of an oracle, or let a prophet speak of it. Or the priests will sleep long and purely (in an incubation rite) in regard to that which I convey to all of them. […] Save me, O Storm-god of Ḫatti, my lord! Let the gods, my lords, reveal to me their providence. Let someone then see it in a dream.171

A. Leo Oppenheim and Andrew Miles Byrd both place dreams in the ancient Near

East into three categories.172 Dreams were either (i) a message dream from a deity,

166 See “The Hunter Kessi and His Beautiful Wife” Hittite tale recording a series of dream omens in Hoffner, Hittite Myths, 87-88. 167 Alice Mouton, “Dreams, Pharaonic Egypt and Ancient Near East,” in The Encyclopedia of Ancient History (ed. Roger S. Bagnall et al.: Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2013), 2226. 168 Oppenheim, Dreams in the Ancient Near East, 185. Oppenheim explains that the designation of an evil dream is rather vague. 169 Oppenheim, Dreams, 186. 170 See Beckman, “Hittite Dreams,” 26-31; Bryce, Life and Society in the Hittite World, 150; and Oppenheim, Dreams in the Ancient Near East. 171 “Plague Prayers of Mursili II,” trans. Gary Beckman (COS 1.60: 156-60). 172 Oppenheim, Dreams, 184. Also see Andrew Miles Byrd, “Deriving Dreams from the Divine: Hittite tesḫa-/zasḫ(a)i-” Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics 124 (2011): 102.

(ii) a dream which simply reflected the state of mind of the dreamer, or (iii) a mantic dream which indicated a foretelling of the future.173 Even with these nuanced ways of interpreting the type of dreams in the ancient Near East, both Oppenheim and Byrd are in agreement that message dreams were “best documented in the Hittite texts and

... often described as the preferred medium of the gods.”174 In an autobiographical record of Ḫattušili III, a series of dreams from the goddess Ištar are reported.

Then the goddess, My Lady, appeared to me in a dream (saying): “Become my servant [with] (you) household!” so the goddess’ [ser]vant with my household I became. In the house which we made ourselves, the goddess was there with us and our house thrived: that was the recognition of Ištar, My 175 Lady.

The above example is “the most ample use of dream-stories ever to occur in a document in the ancient Near East.”176 Collectively, these dreams are used to justify

Ḫattušili’s decisions and actions by portraying them as divinely sanctioned by Ištar.

In this text, not only does Ištar communicate to Ḫattušili through dreams but also appears to his wife. This seems to further reiterate the veracity of the divine message.

2.3.3. Conclusion on the Hittites

The origins of Hittite magic are unknown although we do know that these practices were influenced by border regions (especially Mesopotamia).177 Even though there is a limited amount of evidence of these practices, it is unsurprising that there are many similarities with magical practices and ritual power in the ancient Near East. Like the

Mesopotamians the Hittites did make a distinction between “sorcery” (forbidden, harmful magic) and the neutral or positive practices of magic. The divinatory-magic

173 Byrd, “Deriving Dreams from the Divine,” 102. 174 Byrd, “Deriving Dreams from the Divine,” 102. This is evident in the “Apology of Hattušili III,” trans. Th. P. J. van den Hout (COS 1.77:199-204). 175 “Apology of Ḫattušili III,” trans. Th. P. J. van den Hout (COS 1.77: 199-204). 176 Oppenheim, Dreams, 197. 177 Frantz-Szabó, “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination,” 2018.

practices had significantly more in common with Mesopotamia than Egypt. One of the more unique practices among the Hittites included augury. Divine communication through oracles was portrayed as one of the most important methods of obtaining information from deities.178

Hittite beliefs and practices related to interactions with the divine do not appear to provide significant insight into magic practices in Hebrew Bible. Divine communication through dreams is one area that may have some similarities (albeit limited) with dream events in the Hebrew Bible. But even this might be

Mesopotamian influence. Thus, there is insufficient evidence that Hittite magico- religious practices will help shed light on magic in the Moses narratives.

2.4. The Persians

The primary reason why this portion of history is being explored is because a significant portion of the Hebrew Bible was written, compiled, and redacted during the Persian period.179 For this reason, attention should be given to the magico- religious practices and how they might compare or contrast with what is presented in the Moses narratives.

As with studying any aspect of ancient history, there are difficulties and challenges to gaining socio-historical insights. Amélie Kuhrt has highlighted this stating, “The sources for studying the Persian empire present particular difficulties, not so much because they are sparse but because they are extremely disparate and exist in a number of different languages and forms.”180 As is explained by Kuhrt, classical writers (such as Herodotus) have recorded accounts of the history of Persia

178 Beckman, “How Religion was Done,” 352. 179 Diana Edelman, The Origins of the ‘Second’ Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem (London: Equinox, 2005), 11-12. 180 Amélie Kuhrt, The Ancient Near East c. 3000-330 BC, vol. II (London: Routledge, 1995), 647.

and Greece, primarily from the perspective of Greek victories from 490-478.181

Establishing a history of Persia is complex, as well as understanding religion. Peter

R. Ackroyd asserts, “The unravelling of the religious situation in the Persian period is as difficult as the recovery of history sequences.”182 With this caveat, a few points shall be examined.

2.4.1. Religion and Potential Persian Influence

It is difficult to speak of ‘Persian religion’ as a single, static concept.183 Religious beliefs and practices are developed over time and this impacts our understanding of

Persian religion. Zoroastrianism is associated with being one of the predominant religions (although it is debated). Grabbe asserts “Zoroastrianism, which became the official religion of the Persian rulers, may have helped in the spread of monotheism, though there is no evidence that the Persians imposed particular religious practices on anyone as some have alleged.”184 Jason M. Silverman concludes, “From a sociological-historical point of view it is unlikely that the Judaeans could have lived under Persian rule for roughly two centuries without having been influenced at all.”185

James Barr challenged the theory that Persian influence has significantly impacted the Hebrew Bible as a whole. Barr affirms on the one hand, “a religion as great and noble as Zoroastrianism simply must have had an effect on Judaism and

181 Kuhrt, The Ancient Near East, 647. 182 Peter R. Ackroyd, “Archaeology, Politics and Religion: The Persian Period,” The Iliff Review 39 (1982): 18. 183 As Erhard S. Gerstenberger writes, “. . . the spiritual history of a nation or a cultural religion never stands still,” Israel in the Persian Period: The Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C.E. (trans. by Siegfried S. Schatzmann; Atlanta: SBL, 2011), 68. Matt Waters, Ancient Persia: A Concise History of the Achaemenid Empire, 550-330 BCE (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014). James Barr, “The Question of Religious Influence: The Case of Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 53 (1985): 221. 184 Lester Grabbe, Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice from the Exile to Yavneh (London: Routledge, 2000), 34. 185 Jason M. Silverman, “Persian Influence on Jewish Apocalyptic,” PIBA 32 (2009): 52.

Christianity.”186 Scholars such as Mary Boyce, argue that Persian influence is evident in Genesis 1 and Jewish creation myths. However, this theory is challenged by Barr who asserts, “we have to consider the striking indifference of other parts of the Old

Testament to the religion of Iran.”187 It is important to note that, “The rise of the

Persian empire brought into the Middle East a religion that in structure and type was entirely different from the religion, of basically Semitic peoples, with which the

Hebrews were reasonably familiar. But it is very difficult to find in the Bible any recognition of the fact.” This does not eliminate the possibility of Persian impact, but it presents it with certain limitations.

Grabbe also expresses the difficulty not only in identifying religion during the

Persian period, but also the extent of influence the Persians may have had upon

Judaism.188 Even where there may be places of theological similarity, it becomes complicated to identify the origins of such concepts. For example, scholars have observed parallels between Zoroastrianism and later Jewish beliefs about resurrection, angelology, and eschatology, but Grabbe explains that, “each also has roots in earlier native traditions” and therefore cannot confidently be attributed solely to

Zoroastrianism.189

One obstacle in reconstructing the history and religious practices is the dating of Persian religious sources. Zoroastrianism became the predominant religion but much of what has been preserved in Zoroastrian documents are from post-Islamic era and do not necessarily shed light on practises during the Persian empire.190 The

186 Barr, “The Question of Religious Influence,” 203. Also see Mary Boyce: 1979. 187 Barr, “The Question of Religious Influence,” 209. 188 Lester L. Grabbe, Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period, 36. 189 Grabbe, Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period, 36. Charles David Isbell presents a case that these parallels have been exaggerated in recent scholarship and that there are very few similarities between Persian religion/Zoroastrianism with concepts presented in the Bible. See “Zoroastrianism and Biblical Religion,” JBQ 34:6 (2006): 152. 190 Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian Vol. One: The Persians and Greek Periods (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), 101. Gerstenberger compares the quest of dating and

majority of the Avesta and other religious writings are considered to be deeply embedded in oral tradition, also making the beliefs and concepts held complicated to date. In addition, there is little textual records describing the details of divination, prophecy, and magico-religious practices. Much of the information on this has come from Greek and Roman sources, with particular interest in the magi.191

Another difficulty in attempting to measure the Persian influence on Judaism is that their rule did not necessarily impose their religious practices on others. This is not to imply there was no influence on other religions, such as Judaism, but it is important to note that Persian religious practices were not always enforced upon others. J. M. Cook goes as far as to say, “there was no attempt to force Persian religious beliefs and practices on subject peoples who had deities of their own. The

King did destroy some sanctuaries of alien gods, but this was by way of retaliation or punishment not with intent to suppress other religions.”192 It was also in the king’s interest to be known for charitable as well as powerful rule.

Equally interesting is the claim that the Persians were adaptable and willing to incorporate aspects of other religious beliefs and practices also. One such example would be the dedications to Egyptian deities. Cook highlights, “Dedications to

Egyptian deities by Persian officials in Egypt from the reign of Xerxes on are probably as much a matter of the inculcation to confirm as of syncretism.”193 Grabbe presents similar evidence and concludes, “It was clearly Persian policy to allow and sometimes even to encourage the activities of local cults” as seen in the inscription of

reconstructing the development of Zoroastrianism and the Avesta with the attempt of dating the Bible. See Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Israel in the Persian Period: The Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C.E. (Trans. by Siegfried S. Schatzmann; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 69. 191 Sarah Iles Johnston (ed.), Religions of the Ancient World: A Guide (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2004), 382. 192 J. M. Cook, The Persian Empire (New York: Schocken Books, 1983), 147. 193 Cook, The Persian Empire, 148.

Udjahorresnet.194 These factors considered altogether clearly suggest there are layers of complexity for exploring Persian influence on Jewish religious beliefs and practices.

An important magico-religious development during the Persian period is horoscopes. These are believed to have grown out of Babylonian astronomy but are not established until Persian times. Kuhrt explains, “What has not been noticed generally is the fact that the earlier extant horoscope dates to the late fifth century …

This means that one of the most famous and influential of Babylonian inventions was achieved in the period of Achaemenid domination.”195 This is the earliest known time that horoscopes were explicitly formed and used. At this same time astronomy was advancing and horoscopes are the result of this advancement.196 It is important to observe that horoscopes do not appear in any of the Moses narratives.197 This is one aspect of magico-religious practice which does not appear to factor into the focus of this research.

2.4.2. Magi

The magi are often associated with the Persian period, Zoroastrianism, and magic, yet their role is not entirely clear. They were associated with magic later on, but originally appear to have been known as priests who had a wide range of responsibilities. As has been seen in the case of lector-priests in ancient Egypt, a distinct line between priest and magician often does not exist, so being part of a priesthood does not necessarily exclude one from also practising what might be called

“magic.” Regarding the role of the magi Cook explains that they, “led march-outs and processions. They sacrificed, poured, libations, chanted their theogonies and

194 Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian Vol. One, 97. 195 Kuhrt, Survey of Written Sources, 150. 196 Kurht, Survey of Written Sources, 155. 197 Although there is a horoscope text found at Qumran (4Q Cryptic). Yamauchi, Persia and the Bible, 478-9.

lisped incantations. They might be called upon to interpret dreams or portents.”198

The Magi were not perceived as deviant but, “Whenever it was during the

Achaemenid period that Zoroastrianism became the predominant religion of the empire, the magi took over the ecclesiastical leadership and preserved the so-called

Good Religion after the Macedonian conquest through the Arsacid and Sasanid periods.”199 One text records Cyrus instituting the magi. Xenophon, Cyropaedia

VIII, 1.23:

He (sc. Cyrus) recognised this and so, first, he showed himself more perfect in attention to the gods, as he was now more fortunate. And then, for the first time, the magi were established … and always sang hymns at daybreak to the gods and to sacrifices each day to whichever gods the magi told him so to do.200

The magi are not mentioned in the Avesta, which has led to uncertainty concerning their possible connection with Zoroaster. The magi are often associated with Zoroastrianism. Yamauchi, however, proposes that the magi were potentially in conflict, if not competition, with Zoroastrians and thus were not as closely associated together as often thought.201 By the Roman times, the magi were associated with sorcery more than the priesthood.202 They were also considered to be astrologers by around the fourth century BCE.203 In the records of Herodotus, one of the activities of the magi included interpreting a solar eclipse as a divine message. Herodotus VII,

37.2-3:

As they set off, the sun left its place in the sky and was invisible; although there were no clouds and it was exceptionally clear, day turned to night. When Xerxes saw this and noted it, he became anxious and asked the magi what such a sign presaged. They replied that the god was foretelling the

198 Cook, The Persian Empire, 155, 199 Johnston, Religions of the Ancient World, 301. 200 Xenophon, Cyropaedia VIII, 1.23 translated by Amélie Kurht in The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period, (London: Routledge, 2007), 560. 201 Edwin Yamauchi, Persian and the Bible, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), 468. 202 See Yamauchi, Persian and the Bible, 471. 203 Yamauchi, Persian and the Bible, 472.

eclipse of their cities to the Greeks, because, they said, the sun was the prophet of the Greeks, while theirs was the moon.204

It is difficult to understand what the Jewish interaction with magic may have been at this point in time as sources appear rather late. There is no allusion to the magi in the book of Exodus and does not appear to have any connection with the

Moses narratives.

2.4.3. Conclusion on the Persians

The brief evidence examined above does not appear to present a clear connection between the magi, astrology, or Zoroastrianism with any of the magico-religious occurrences in the Moses narratives. If these narratives were compiled or redacted during the Persian period, the background of the narrative of Moses still appears to favour the incorporation of Egyptian magic and ritual rather than Persian. In light of this, Persian magico-religious practices will not be of significant focus in this study.

2.5. Evidence from Ugarit

2.5.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic

The Ugaritic texts indicate similarities with Babylonian and Mesopotamian incantations and magic. Yet, there remain some unique aspects to these texts found in

Ugarit. As Gregorio del Olmo Lete has demonstrates, “The Ugaritic religious system proves to be independent and unique … Magic was certainly a variable matter in the religious ideas and praxis of Ugarit.”205 Mesopotamia and Egypt have significantly

204 Herodotus VII, 37.2-23 trans. Amélie Kurht in The Persian Empire, 559. 205 Gregorio del Olmo Lete, Incantations and Anti-Witchcraft Texts from Ugarit (Boston/Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014), 33.

more texts containing incantations and elements of magic in comparison with

Ugarit.206 There does not appear to be a primary deity associated with Ugaritic magic, although ’Ilu, Šapšu, and Ḥôrānu do occur in these texts (although not necessarily together).207 The types of Ugaritic incantation texts include protection against snakebites, against sorcery/witchcraft, healing, and some fragments which are considered unclassified.208 The following are a selection of spells and incantations which demonstrate aspects of the magico-religious practices in the West Semitic region.

KTU 1.82 is a “Miscellaneous Incantation Text against Snakebite.”209 The following excerpt is from lines 32-38.

[---?] venom(?) at the cry of the Rapauma [------] [------] the night (ghosts). I shall remove the sobbing from your mouth [------] [------] a kettle (?) and may you live (in) good (health) [------]. [---against] the male serpents and you shall repeat/sit, against the female serpents, you shall [wash yourself] (?) [--- in] her dwelling (?) the sister of Papasarru namely Papasarratu [-----]. [---?] of two wild goats (?) and I’ll return to your path with a branch of [----]. [If] you tread on a creeping (creature) on the ground, run away from it (and) let Ba’lu fire at it, indeed!210

There are examples of benevolent and apotropaic magic used against harmful magicians or malevolent practices of magic. In text RIH 78/20, there is an incantation against the “sorcerers” which illustrates this. RIH 78/20 lines 1-2 and 7-8:

This recitation casts out the tormenters of a young man: The pain of your rod it has banished, The producers of the pain of your rod.

On the heights, in the well-watered valleys, In the shadows, even at the sanctuary.

Then, as for the sorcerers, the tormenters, Ḥôrānu will drive them out.211

206 Olmo Lete, Incantations, 1. 207 Olmo Lete, Incantations, 33. 208 Olmo Lete, Incantations, 29. 209 Olmo Lete, Incantations, 109-113. 210 Olme Lete, Incantations, 112. 211 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 160.

A further example includes a text which was discovered in 1992. Text 1.110

“Ugaritic Incantation Against Serpents and Sorcerers” explicitly counters of malevolent magical actions of sorcerers. Lines 8-13:

In like manner , may the tormenters, the sorcerers not give ear, To the word of the evil man, To the word of any man: When it sounds forth in their mouth, on their lips, May the sorcerers, the tormenters, then pour it to the earth.212

KTU 1.96/ RS 22.225 is labelled as an “Attack of the Evil Eye and Counterattack.”

This incantation indicates a victim suffering from an attack of the “evil eye” and then a counter spell to turn the suffering back to the “wicked man” or “wicked woman.”

The Evil Eye roves about, And disfigures the beauty of its brother and the grace of its brother, even though (the other eye be) in perfect health.

It eats (the other’s) flesh without a knife, it drinks (the other’s) blood without a cup.

May the eye of the wicked man return to the wicked man; may the eye of [the wicked woman] re[turn] to the wicked woman”213

2.5.2. Divination

There are divinatory texts found at Ugarit. Dennis Pardee explains that “Two types of divinatory texts are attested at Ugarit: those that reflect daily practice and those that consist of collections of various types of phenomena interpreted as ominous.”214

Pardee observes that these divinatory texts found at Ugarit are rarer than “in other

212 “A Ugaritic Incantation Against Serpents and Sorcerers,” trans. Dennis Pardee (COS 1.100: 327-328). 213 N. Wyatt, Religious Texts from Ugarit (2nd ed.; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 375-77. Olmo Lete, Incantations, 128. 214 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 127.

Near Eastern archives and are for that reason particularly precious.”215 Our information is therefore limited.

Divination by means of reading animal entrails is well attested in ancient

Mesopotamia and there is evidence of such practice in Ugarit. The discovery of clay liver models as instruction manual for extispicy indicates not only the presence of this practice but also that a trained specialist was used for the interpretation of the entrails.216 The diviner would convey the sign or message to the client based on the appearance of the organ. These models appear to have been used as reference guides for the diviner to accurately interpret the markings on the animal organs. Pardee asserts, “In the ‘manuals’ translated below, the ‘science’ lay in the collection of phenomena laying out the details of the tradition of interpretation. The models bear incisions representing schematically the features that were present on the animal liver that the model represents.”217 RS 24.326 is one example of a clay liver model. The text on this clay model states:

(This is) the liver (pertaining to the consultation on behalf) of YPT, son of YKN, When this month was about to begin.218

In addition to clay liver models, models of the lung of an animal have also been found in connection with divination, particularly for receiving guidance on knowing a future event (see RS 24.277).219 RS 24.277 lines 1-3 and 23:

Sacrifices of the entire month. An object vowed, a sacrifice.

If the city is about to be seized, if someone (lit., ‘a man’) attacks,

215 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 127. 216 Dennis Pardee, “Divinatory and Sacrificial Rites,” Near Eastern Archaeology 63 (2000), 233. 217 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 127. 218 “Ugaritic Extispicy,” trans. Dennis Pardee (COS 1.92:291-93). 219 Pardee, “Divinatory and Sacrificial Rites,” 233.

the (male) personnel (of the city).220

Evidence from astrological texts in Ugarit and a few references in the Hebrew Bible demonstrate an interest with celestial bodies. John Gray asserts that for the

Canaanites the stars were perceived as having “an influence on human affairs, against which, however precaution might be taken.”221 One example of an Ugaritic text which may be connected with an astrological report is RS 12.061.222

During the six days of the new-moon festival of The month of Ḫiyyāru the sun (Šapšu) set, her gatekeeper being Rašap. The men (?) shall seek out the governor. 223

The astrological sighting would have been performed by a specialist. It seems likely that this text had a ritual component to it and after the sighting, a specialists in sacrificial divination would have also been involved.224 Jeffrey L. Cooley argues that astral religion was part of ancient Israel, but “celestial divination was not a common part of Israelite religion to any large decree before the exile.”225 Cooley proposes that astral religious practices should not be isolated from Ugaritic religion in general, but that the authors of the Hebrew Bible who have created this division as evident by

Deuteronomy prohibitions (for example Deuteronomy 4:15a).226 He claims “For the

Deuteronomist, such activity was to be expected from non-Israelites, since Yahweh had appointed the celestial luminaries for this purpose. However, celestial worship was not to be practiced by members of Yahweh’s covenant.”227

220 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 130-31. 221 John Gray, The Canaanites (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1964), 126. 222 Pardee, Ritual and Cult in Ugarit, 131-132. 223 Pardee, Ritual and Cult in Ugarit, 131-132. 224 Pardee, Ritual and Cult in Ugarit, 132. 225 Jeffrey L. Cooley, “Astral Religion in Ugarit and Ancient Israel,” Journal of New Eastern Studies 70 (2011): 281-287. 226 Cooley, “Astral Religion,” 283. 227 Cooley, “Astral Religion,” 284.

The evidence from Ugarit and examples provided in this section should be analysed alongside the portrayal of interaction with the divine in the Hebrew Bible.

Together these provide insights into magico-religious practices of the West Semitic region.

2.6. Magic and Divination in the Hebrew Bible

A general overview of the magico-religious practices of the Egyptians,

Mesopotamians, Hittites, and Persians have been examined. A survey of occurrences of such practices in the Hebrew Bible will now be addressed. There are a number of religious practices and rituals depicted in the Hebrew Bible and this portrayal is not necessarily reflective of historical realities, but is of particular interest because of how they might interact with the literary account of Moses.

The extent to which magic and divination are evident in the Hebrew Bible is still debated in biblical studies. Moreover, the way it is presented by the biblical writers has been interpreted differently by various contemporary scholars. Shawna

Dolansky goes as far as to claim “almost every major biblical hero makes use of magic or divination.”228 An overview of certain divinatory or magico-religion practices or rituals described in the Hebrew Bible will now be explored.

2.6.1. Malevolent and Benevolent Magic

Blessings and curses are found in the Hebrew Bible as well as other ancient Near

Eastern texts. This is explicitly mentioned in Deuteronomy 28 where obedience to

YHWH leads to blessings, while disobedience results in curses. The concept of blessings and curses was not uncommon in ancient Near Eastern magico-religious

228 Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 39.

practices. In the Hebrew Bible blessings are portrayed as being connected with

YHWH, yet there are instances where particular individuals are able of actively blessings without any explicit mention of YHWH. Genesis 27 presents one example where Isaac blesses Jacob. This can serve as an example of the irrevocable nature of blessings.229

The idea of irrevocable blessings or curses is not unknown to the ancient Near

Eastern milieu, as has been seen in Chapter One. Dolanksy observes, “Isaac is unable either to revoke his blessing of Jacob or to give the same (or even an equivalent) blessing to Esau, who is now doomed to serve his younger brother (v40). Within the context of the story, the efficacy of this blessing will play itself out over the subsequent histories of the twin nations of Israel and Edom.”230

Numbers 22-24 presents an interesting example of how blessings and curses may have been perceived. The text narrates how Balak, the king of Moab sent messengers to approach Balaam, requesting his ability to perform curses on behalf of the Moabites (see Numbers 22:4-8). The text conveys the belief that both blessings and curses are effective and are not easily removed. This was a service performed by

for such service would be expected (קסמים) a type of professional, where a fee

(Number 22:7). If Balaam performed the curse, the expectation was that Israel would become weakened so that they could be defeated. God forbids Balaam from

.(Numbers 22:12) ברןך ’performing the curse for Israel is ‘blessed

Rituals associated with the use of a scapegoat were not uncommon in the ancient Near East and indications of this are also found in the Hebrew Bible. An example of this is found in Leviticus 16. Both Hittite and Mesopotamian texts attest to use of a scapegoat in order to avert divine wrath, evil, or expel impurity. One

229 See Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 90-91. 230 Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 92.

important point to note is that in the Hebrew Bible, the scapegoat is used to eliminate impurity of an entire community, whereas the Hittite and Babylonian rituals are for an individual. Milgrom and Dolansky both see this as a crucial difference between the practice in the Hebrew Bible and that according to Hittite and Mesopotamian texts.231

Dolansky argues that whether the scapegoat is to be used on behalf of an individual or a whole community, this ritual will only appear in places and during times when the worldview is favourable toward the notion that sin or impurity can be removed by the transference of it onto an object or other creature.

For the Hebrew Bible and other scapegoat ritual texts Dolansky asserts, “The belief in the power of this ritual is thus a belief in the power of magic” and is not in opposition of monotheism.232 The scapegoat ritual is one of many indications that the ancient Near Eastern world was saturated with a belief system that impurity leads to calamity and must be (and can be) expelled through the correct ritual.

Another area where scholars are divided is over incantations and the Hebrew

Bible. Incantations are attested at Ugarit (for example, RS 92.2014 ‘An Incantation against Snakes and Scorpions’)233 but are they found in the Hebrew Bible? Psalm 91 has been equated with an incantation and certainly with apotropaic purposes. Ronnie

Goldstein contends that there are too many differences between Psalm 91 and

Akkadian incantations to designate it primarily as an incantation. Unlike the

Akkadian incantation, in Psalm 91 there is no ritual for expelling evil (which one would expect to be here) and “In spite of this difference, the terminology in the psalm shows that the author was aware of magic literature and incantations.”234

231 See Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 88. See Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 (Yale University Press, 1998). 232 Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 88. 233 Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit, 158. 234 Ronnie Goldstein, “Notes on the Presence of Magic Within the Hebrew Bible in Light of Akkadian Literature,” in Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World (Edited by Helen R.

A related area includes what Marian Broida has called “apotropaic intercession.” Broida distinguishes between two main types of speech evident in ancient narratives: ordinary and causative, whilst a “hybrid” form is sometimes used.235 Causative speech was believed to have a type of magical effect, impacting the gods in some way and effectively altering a situation. Broida highlights that in the

Hebrew Bible, apotropaic intercession is only presented in ordinary speech, unlike most ancient Near Eastern examples, and is likely interwoven with “an expression of the different cultures’ underlying theology. Biblical writers generally treat causative speech as YHWH’s prerogative alone and depict Israelites as using only ordinary speech.”236 Apotropaic intercession is used when it is believed that divine punishment, catastrophe, or harmful situation is likely to occur, as an attempt to change the gods’ mind, to ask for divine intervention, or to magically altar what would others come to pass. This is well attested in Neo-Assyria with the namburbu ritual.

In the Hebrew Bible, Exodus 32:11-13 serves as an example of an appeal for

YHWH to change His stated course of action. Broida explains, “Each apotropaic intercessory text portrays a drama involving three roles: intercessor, beneficiary, and divine authority,”237 which is evident in characters like Moses who function as intercessor. The Hebrew Bible certainly contains instances of an intercessor seeking a different outcome than is predicted or declared, yet the intercessor’s speech remains ordinary rather than causative. Broida concludes that “these texts lack explicit ritual elements or gestures other than prostration, and thus better fit Moshe Greenberg’s

Jacobus; Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme; Philippe Guillaume; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 16. 235 Marian Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession in the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East,” in Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World (ed. Helen R. Jacobus; Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme; Philippe Guillaume; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 20 236 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 21. 237 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 21.

category of ‘prose prayer.’”238 Exodus 32:11-13 is used as an example, containing only ordinary speech from Moses. Causative speech does occur elsewhere, however, including Numbers 23:7-10 when Balaam blesses the Israelites.239

It should be observed that while most ancient Near Eastern occurrences of causative speech and apotropaic intercession involved a set speech and ritual, the

Hebrew Bible keeps such instances unstructured, typically not prescribed, and more spontaneous.240 Broida explains, “Moses and Aaron use actions only in producing the plagues, and the one time that Moses combines words and actions in producing a miracle (Num. 20:9-11) YHWH penalizes him severely (Milgrom 1983).”241 Broida concludes that the biblical writers portray the intercessor changing the will of YHWH through persuasion rather than causative speech or ritual.242

Incantations and prayers are closely related, but in the Hebrew Bible it is evident that prayer is favoured (and expected) above incantations or apotropaic intercession. This is a distinctive difference between the other ancient Near Eastern texts where incantations and particular divinatory rituals were openly employed. This appears to be theologically motivated by the biblical writers, with a clear message that

YHWH cannot be coerced or tricked through the right ritual, but can only be persuaded.

Amulets or charms do not frequently feature in the Hebrew Bible, but there are a few instances which are worth mentioning. The teraphim, urim and thummim, ephod, and the ark have all been speculated as equivalent to charms. There is archaeological evidence of an amulet inscribed with Numbers 6:24-27. William G.

Dever records that this amulet was discovered in a tomb, “of the late 7th century,

238 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 34. 239 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 35. 240 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 36. 241 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 36. 242 Broida, “Apotropaic Intercession,” 36-37.

100

found near St. Andrew’s Scots Church … Its date 600 makes it by far our oldest surviving fragment of the biblical text - at least four centuries older, for instance, than any manuscripts from the Dead Sea caves.”243 It is argued by Dever that this amulet was being used as a magical charm, not for the understanding of Scripture and thus provides evidence that magic was being engaged in. Consequently he proposes that such archaeological findings prove the existence of a ‘folk religion’ in conflict with the type of religion presented by the biblical writers.244 Whether or not the presence of amulets supports Dever’s theory of Israelite folk religion, it is evident that they were used in homes and tombs and indicate that amulets were widespread in the ancient

Near East in general.

2.6.2. Specialists

Priests and prophets are some of the main legitimate specialists in the Hebrew Bible.

Some of the priestly apparatus described in the text seems to be a component to ritual efficacy. In some instances certain priestly objects appear to take on a seemingly divinatory or magical function. Several examples will now be examined.

The Hebrew Bible portrays the use of priestly oracles as a legitimate means of divination. Regarding the priests Roland de Vaux explains, “The only name by which the Old Testament ever refers to priests of YHWH is kohen; the same word is used for priests of foreign gods …”245 It was through the legitimate office of the priest that

243 William G. Dever, What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 180. 244 Dever, What Did the Biblical Writers Know? 180. Dever contends, “there are many more archaeological examples of such magical or superstitious rituals, from Israelite and Judean contexts, some of them invoking foreign deities like the Egyptian gods Bes and Osiris.” 245 Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (trans. John McHugh; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 345. De Vaux substantiates this by providing examples in the Hebrew Bible of references to foreign priests such as, “Egyptian (Gn 41:45; 47:22), Phoenician (2 K 10:19; 11:18), Philistine (1 S 5:5; 6:2), Moabite (Jr 48:7) or Ammonite (Jr 49:3),” 345.

101

Israel could appeal to oracles. De Vaux claims, “In ancient Israel men went to a sanctuary ‘to consult Yahweh’ and the priest gave oracles.”

Cryer acknowledges that divinatory rituals and practices took place in ancient

Israel and are found in the Hebrew Bible but questions the term “priestly oracle” in the sense that it may not be “priestly.”246 Rather, he is suspicious of Old Testament scholarship which draws distinctive lines between the priest and prophet, as this was unlikely a historical reality and at times is absent in the Hebrew Bible. Moses and

Joshua can serve as examples of figures that perform “priestly” activities without the title of being “priests” at the time of engaging in such activities.247 Cryer states, “In connexion with divination, the most clear association of this kind is provided by the numerous passages in which various prophets assign time-limits to their prognostics, for this … was one of the principle functions of the Mesopotamian diviner.”248 The evidence in the Hebrew Bible indicates that there were oracular inquires, but these were portrayed in such a way that the diviner could not be a manipulator of

YHWH.249

Another means of consulting YHWH was through the ephod. There are a number of different descriptions of the ephod at different places in the Hebrew Bible.

In one instance, it appears to be linen and worn as part of the priestly garment as is the case with Samuel (1 Samuel 2:18).250 The ephod is referred to as something worn by the high priest (for example Exodus 29:5). Cryer points out that elsewhere in the

Hebrew Bible, the ephod is used in different contexts other than priestly (see Judges

246 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 293. 247 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 293. 248 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 293. 249 For example, Judges 6:36-40 and 1 Samuel 23:1-5. See Jack M. Sasson, “Oracle Inquires in Judges,” in Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, ed. Chaim Cohen et al. (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2008): 149-168. 250 De Vaux highlights several of the Biblical references to the ephod, 349-352.

102

17:5; 18:14-20; 1 Samuel 14:3ff; 23:9; 30:7).251 Jeffers argues that they are two separate objects (or at least two groups) both referred to as the ephod. Concurring with scholars mentioned above, it is possible to understand the ephod as a garment (or part of a garment) and separately as a small object, similar to a small idol or god.252 It is reasonable to at least consider the possibility of a connection between both, which may not seem obvious to readers today.253

De Vaux mentions that the breastplate (ḥoshen) was not the same as the ephod but would be worn with it. It was likely made from the same material as the ephod and contained the urim and thummim.254 He explains that in “Ex 28:15, 30 it is called

ḥoshen hammishpat, ‘the breast-plate of the (oracular) decision.’”255 Clearly in this textual reference the ephod assists in making decisions and yet elsewhere in the

Hebrew Bible the ephod seems similar to an “object of cultic worship.”256 What can be established about the ephod is its usage was concerned with determining “the will of the divinity according to a set of pattern of invocation/demand/answer,” which could bring immediate guidance during a crisis.257

Another means of oracles was through the place of the sacred tent, (ʼōhel môʼēd). This was established by Moses and was the place where YHWH revealed himself to his people.258 This place may have had oracular connotations as it was perceived as a place of contact between the Israelites and their god. Thus, “The purpose of this meeting may be further defined as communication, and so ‘tent of

251 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 229. 252 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 202-203. 253 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 203. 254 De Vaux, Ancient Israel, 350. 255 De Vaux, Ancient Israel, 350. 256 De Vaux, Ancient Israel, 350. De Vaux refers to “Jg 17:5; 18:14, 17, 20; Jg 8:27.” 257 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 208. 258 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 215. “It is recorded that it was located at different times in several places in Canaan after Israel’s settlement in that land and it was finally replaced by Solomon’s temple.”

103

meeting’ really means ‘tent of revelation’, ‘tent of the oracle,’ ‘tent of testimony.’”259

In Exodus 33:7-23, it is evident that this is where Moses and the Israelites sought

YHWH, “in other words it was used for divination.”260 Subsequently this makes

Moses the oracular priest.261

The ark is presented in Deuteronomy as primarily having the function of carrying the tablets, as instructed by YHWH (see Deuteronomy 10:1-5). From archaeological research, it is evident that there is connection between the oaths in the general ancient Near Eastern milieu and the literary portrayal of the ark in the Hebrew

Bible. M. Haran argues, “It appears that the practice of burying various books, documents, written oaths, and covenant in a special case under the image of gods in temples was common in Egypt and the Hittite kingdom” for the purpose that both parties involved in the oath would abide by them.262

The ark also has strong connotations with the divine presence in the Hebrew

Bible.263 1 Samuel 4:1-11 (particularly verse 3) makes it clear that the ark was associated with the divine presence. Yet, at different points in the Hebrew Bible the ark appears to play a role in what would generally be classified as sympathetic magic.

One example can be found in 1 Samuel 5-6 when the Philistines capture the ark and are inflicted as a result of possession of the ark. Dolansky explains, “The priests and qōsĕmîm recommend an act of sympathetic magic: models of the mice and the haemorrhoids that plague the Philistine people should be made of gold and sent back

259 Jeffers, Magic and Divination 216. Jeffers argues that the tent was the meeting place of the people with the divine in Ugaritic texts also, 217. 260 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 219. 261 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 219. 262 M. Haran, “The Ark and the Cherubim: Their Symbolic Significance in Biblical Ritual,” Israel Exploration Journal 9 (1959): 89-94. 263 See Ian Wilson, “Merely a Container? The Ark in Deuteronomy,” in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel (Ed. by John Day; London: T&T Clark, 2007): 212-249.

104

to Israel along with the ark. The Philistines do this and are relieved of both plagues.

Thus the divinatory act provides correct and the magic successful.”264

Van der Toorn and Houtman agree that in addition to the divine presence, the ark may have had a divinatory use.265 They state, “Since the ark materializes God’s presence, so to speak, it might be expected that it was used for divinatory purposes as well,” and point to Judges 20:27-28 as supporting evidence from the Hebrew Bible.266

2.6.3. Divination

One may conclude from reading the Hebrew Bible that lot casting was an acceptable means of divination as it is occurs numerous times and is portrayed as a neutral and normative practice. There are scholars such as Jean-Michel de Tarragon, who suggest that it was later as monotheism became more prominent that, “the biblical editions authorized only divination by lots, which were carried by the High Priest.”267

Solomon Nigosian argues that casting lots was a sanctioned “procedure for the allotment of ‘inherited land’ (Num. 26:52-56; 33:54; 34:13; 36:2-3)” that was condoned by YHWH.268 This can also be seen in the prophets, “who regarded

YHWH as casting lots to determine the fate of Israel (cf. Isa 34:17; Jer. 13:25; see also Ps. 16:5).”269 Walton builds a case asserting that it is possible that lots may have

264 Dolansky, Now You See It, Now You Don’t, 48. 265 Karel Van der Toorn and Cees Houtman, “David and the Ark,” Journal of Biblical Literature 113 (1994): 216-217. 266 Van der Toorn and Houtman, “David and the Ark,” 216-217. They comment that the gloss “For the ark of God was with the Israelites on that day” was added to 1 Samuel 14:18 because elsewhere oracular inquiry took place without any indication of the presence of the ark (Judges 20:26 for example) and the editor(s) wanted to make clear that this particular instance would be associated with the ark. 267 Jean-Michel de Tarragon, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Canaan and Ancient Israel,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000), 2071-2081: 2072. 268 Solomon Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament (Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2008), 50. Nigosian argues this practice was sanctioned by YHWH since the days of the wilderness and remained a popular method of divination. 269 Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament, 49.

105

been understood as being divine-initiated because they were marked with a binary response. The lots were shaken in a container and when a lot fell from the container, it was believed that the deity drew the lot-response (not the human).270 Accordingly, the deity is not manipulated into providing a response, but rather the human engages in the way the divine has chosen to communicate.

Closely associated with lots are the urim and thummim. They are generally mentioned together in the Hebrew Bible, although Jeffers points out two occurrences where the urim occurs on its own (Numbers 27:21 and 1 Samuel 28:6).271 Not much is known regarding the origin of the urim and the thummim. Jeffers explains that one may speculate they originated “in a non-Semitic area, or in Assyria or Babylonia, or perhaps in Egypt, but these are speculations for which we have no supporting evidence.”272

In terms of how or why the urim and the thummim were used, De Tarragon claims, “Just to speak of the ephod, therefore, was equivalent to referring to the Urim and the Thummim, which were carried there.”273 He draws upon 1 Samuel 14 (verses

41-42 in particular) as part of his argument. However, Cornelis van Dam argues that while 1 Samuel 14:41 is used by many scholars to prove that the urim and thummim were equated with oracular lot, we should not be quick to come to this conclusion.

Alternatively he suggests, “Indeed, when all relevant evidence is considered, making the UT [urim and thummim] equivalent to a lot oracle is not a defensible conclusion.”274

270 John Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 256; 259. 271 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 209. “Probably both objects are being referred to here; the joint expression refers to one method of divination.” 272 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 210. 273 Tarragon, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Canaan and Ancient Israel,” 2072. 274 Cornelis van Dam, The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 4.

106

Based on Exodus and Leviticus scholars such as Jeffers argue that we can establish that the urim and thummim were probably small, as they are described as being kept in a pocket-like holding (the ‘breast plate’). Jeffers explains, “This pocket, bearing twelve precious stones, was about twelve inches square, and was fastened permanently to the high priest’s breast, with an opening to allow the high priest to take out the urim and thummim.”275 This suggests the possibility the urim and thummim were stones rather than dice, although their material is still debated. In its literary occurrence in Deuteronomy 33:8, it is claimed they belonged to the tribe of

Levi “and it traces back to Moses the existence of these oracular objects. It confirms that oracular function of the priests and levites.”276 This is one further example of an overlap between divinatory and priestly activity.

2.6.4. Teraphim

The teraphim only appears fifteen times in the Hebrew Bible and is portrayed as an idol or as an “instrument of divination,” and “the two categories need not necessarily exclude one another.”277 Not only is this term used in different ways, but there also are conflicting views within the Hebrew Bible pertaining to whether it is acceptable within YHWH worship. Jeffers points out, “The teraphim are at times foreign devices

(Gen 35:2,4), and at other times Israelite sacred objects (Judges 17; Hos 3:4).”278

This may indicate a change over time in how it was used and how compatible it was within Yahwism.

Whilst the origin of the teraphim has not been clearly established, Jeffers argues that some consideration should be given to the Hittites. One of the main

275 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 211. Jeffers draws attention to Exodus 28:2ff and Leviticus 8.8 in footnotes 404 and 405. 276 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 213. 277 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 272. 278 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 222.

107

reasons is because the Hittite ‘tarpiš’ (similar to the ‘t-r-p’ root of teraphim) has “the double meaning of ‘protective deity’ or of ‘evil spirit’, ‘demon’).”279 However,

Jeffers argues that additional evidence of the Hittite influence upon Palestinian teraphim is sparse, so such theory must be weighed in light of this.280

Cox and Ackerman propose that the teraphim are associated with ancestral figurines, particular in Judges 17-18.281 They acknowledge that there is a polemic in the text, but it is still of value in attempting to determine Israelite cultic practices and

“present a picture that was generally believable to their ancient Israelite audience.”282

2.6.5. Necromancy

In the Hebrew Bible necromancy is not explained in detail, nor is it frequently mentioned, perhaps giving the reader the initial impression that this practice did not occur frequently. However, the fact that this practice is condemned in the Hebrew

Bible clearly indicates that it was likely taking place. Ann Jeffers observes, “In the

Old Testament such a practice seems relatively infrequent though it must have been popular enough to justify Deuteronomic, Levitical, and prophetic condemnation.”283

Prohibitions in the Pentateuch include Deuteronomy 18:11 and Leviticus 19:31; 20:6, as well as in Isaiah 8:19-20 as a few examples.

The most detailed account of necromancy in the Hebrew Bible is 1 Samuel 28 with Saul and the “witch” of Endor. Saul sought divine communication through legitimate means but YHWH did not respond through dreams, urim, or the prophet (1

Samuel 28:7). As a result, Saul pursued supranatural knowledge by means of a

279 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 225. 280 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 225. 281 B. D. Cox and S. Ackerman, “Micah’s Teraphim,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 12 (2012): 1-37, see 8. 282 Cox and Ackerman “Micah’s Teraphim,” 7. 283 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 167.

108

woman who was capable of conjuring the dead. The text does not deny the efficacy of necromancy but the result is disastrous for Saul, leaving a clear message that this is not the way YHWH communicates and those who choose illegitimate means will have grave consequences.

Bill T. Arnold argues, “the Deuteronomistic historian used the account of

Saul’s necromantic inquiry at Endor rhetorically as a means of characterizing the ill- fated king (1 Sam 28:3-19) and had elsewhere used Israel’s legitimate means of divination – that is, divination by means of casting lots, or cleromancy – as a contrastive literary device to prepare for this characterization of Saul.”284 We see this narrative as contrasting legitimate and illegitimate means of communicating with

YHWH and also seeking supranatural knowledge or direction.

As Jeffers points out, it is striking that we do not find a prohibition in Exodus

20:22-23:33, which we may expect in light of necromancy being portrayed negatively in general in the Hebrew Bible. It has been suggested by Jeffers that we may deduce the absence of necromancy in Exodus is because, “it was so commonly practised, or at least that it was connected so closely with the cult of the dead, there was no reason for prohibiting it.”285 Necromancy may have been condemned later as a result of it threatening the exclusive worship of one god, which may be why there are places

(such as 1 Samuel 28) where necromancy is presented in a negative way. 286

Jeffers draws attention to places in Ugaritic literature where necromancy is mentioned, such as KTU 1.22, II, 1.4; KTU 1.161.287 There is evidence in Ugaritic literature that the methods of necromancy are consistent with what is presented in the

284 Bill T. Arnold, “Necromancy and Cleromancy in 1 and 2 Samuel,” CBQ 66 (2004): 199- 213. 285 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 168. 286 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 168. 287 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 168.

109

Hebrew Bible.288 All of this indicates that necromancy is “well attested in the

Northwest Semitic world as both Ugaritic literature and a study of the Old Testament demonstrate.”289 There are enough references to conclude that necromancy was engaged in throughout the history of Israel. The Hebrew Bible still leaves many gaps in our understanding of the ritual involved in necromancy.

2.6.6. Dream Divination

There are forms of divination which are explicitly condemned in the Hebrew Bible and others deemed accepted, such as dreams. Dreams fall into an unusual category of divination as they cannot be controlled or avoided. One cannot coerce a dream nor can they truly be forbidden. This has been addressed in detail by Kevin O’Brien.

O’Brien claims that Deuteronomy places restrictions on divination but does not condemn all forms. These restrictions mean that the only acceptable divine communication “be limited to words that Yahweh will put into a prophet’s mouth

(18:18).”290 Deuteronomy also restricted divination, “by re-designating all acceptable manner of human-divine communications as ‘prophecy and dreaming or dreams.’”291

Deuteronomy 13:1-5 warns about prophets and “dreamers of dreams” who profess anything which may challenge the exclusive worship of YHWH. Those found guilty of such offense are to be put to death (Deut 13:5). Clearly, dreams were taken very seriously both in their content and interpretation. Dreams are reported to either

288 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 173. 289 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 181. 290 O’Brien, To Seek the Counsel of the LORD, 8. 291 O’Brien, To Seek the Counsel of the LORD, 9.

110

be passively received or at times sought after through incubation in the hope that a dream will be given from the deity.

The understanding and use of dreams differs within the Hebrew Bible. In the narratives, “dreams serve either to legitimate important cultic (e.g., the sanctuary at

Bethel) or theological (the covenant with Abraham) themes, or else they are simply narrative instruments which illustrate Yahweh’s protection (e.g., from Abimelech of

Gerar, Gen 20; Laban, Gen 31) and care for his chosen people (Jacob and Joseph).”292

2.6.7. Prophecy and Divination

Prophecy is also a complex issue and has been understood as a form of divination by scholars such as Anne Marie Kitz.293 Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible is presented as being channelled through the prophets, who are the mouthpieces of YHWH. The prophetic office is one of the legitimate means of divine communication. Kitz makes a case that the Hebrew Bible does not deny the effectiveness of divination but “any attempt, unaided by Yahweh alone, to interpret the implications of divine activity.”294

This can be contrasted with Mesopotamian omens which are generally understood to be divine communication but with an acknowledgment that human skill is what drives the correct interpretation.

O’Brien observes that, “Deuteronomy makes a sharp distinction between the

Mosaic prophet who stands in direct contact with the voice of Yahweh on one hand

292 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 265 293 Anne Marie Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” CBQ 65 (2003), 22-42. 294 Anne Marie Kitz, “Prophecy as Divination,” 23.

111

and the other diviners of 18:10-14 on the other. But not all of the Hebrew Bible makes such a distinction.”295

O’Brien correctly points out that, “Distinguishing between prophecy and divination, as if these are two separate institutions, results in a false dichotomy that misrepresents the text.”296 This thesis agrees that such dichotomy is not evident in the ancient Near East, nor is helpful to bring into this investigation. At the same time, because we are examining different aspects of magic, divination, and religious ritual, it is important to give attention to prophecy. The intention is not to isolate it from divination, but to acknowledge the complexity of this topic and to explore what implications may be drawn. Yet in Deuteronomy 13, readers (hearers) are cautioned about “dreamer of dreams” even if such dreams come true.

Deuteronomy 13:2-6 and 18:20-22 are of particular interest to this research.

Heiko Wenzel argues that these two passages are often used when discussing true versus false prophecy in the Hebrew Bible (particularly in the Pentateuch). Yet he argues one should approach these passages with the question of legitimacy rather than authority.297 It is evident in the Hebrew Bible that a sign or wonder does not exclusively point to YHWH. Wenzel states, “The loss of legitimacy leads to a call to eliminate the disqualified persons despite their authority (Deut. 13:6, 9-10, 16).”298

Wenzel argues, “The chiastic structure in Deut. 18:14-15 explicates the unique relationship with Yahweh and focuses on the people’s responsibility. Rather than listening to these experts the people should follow the prophet. So the prophets shall

295 O’Brien, To Seek the Counsel of the LORD, 14. 296 O’Brien, To Seek the Counsel of the LORD, 63. 297 Heiko Wenzel, “Drawing a Line between Prophecy, Magic, and Divination,” in Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World (Edited by Helen R. Jacobus, Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme & Philippe Guillaume; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 79-80. 298 Wenzel, “Drawing a Line,” 81.

112

replace these experts.”299 Ultimately, the prophet partially functions as the only legitimate role as diviner in the Hebrew Bible. Wenzel concludes, “The prophets’ area of responsibility thus overlaps the diviners’ area of expertise (Deut. 18:14-

15).”300 For this reason, this research does not intend on sharply distinguishing between prophecy and divination, recognising that these are overlapping spheres.

2.7. Conclusion on Interactions with the Divine in the Ancient Near East

In light of the content covered in this chapter, it is evident that magic and divination were an integral part of interacting with the divine in the ancient Near East. These interactions were vital to daily life and permeated virtually all spheres of society. The magico-religious continuum overlaps with the themes of worldview, cosmology, and myth in the ancient Near East.301 The textual examples surveyed in this provided insights into the magico-religious continuum of the ancient Near East and also showed a shared general worldview. Within this shared perspective was the perception that the divine and earthly realms were overlapping and intertwined, as were mythology and cosmology.

A closer look at how these were practised among different cultures within the ancient Near East reveals notable differences. The Mesopotamian, Hittite, and

Ugaritic textual evidence indicates a clear distinction in language and concepts between malevolent and benevolent magic. Magic as a whole was not perceived as illicit, but there was specific terminology for describing a harmful practitioner of magic (often translated as “sorcerer” or “witch) as well as different titles for practitioners of apotropaic magic. In contrast, evidence from Egypt does not provide

299 Wenzel, “Drawing a Line,” 86. 300 Wenzel, “Drawing a Line,” 87. 301 This has been clearly established by Ann Jeffers in Magic and Divination.

113

a clear distinction between these two aspects of magic. Rather, heka simply exists and it could be used in a positive way or a malicious way. Overwhelmingly most of the evidence indicates positive examples of magic.

There have been many studies on magico-religious and ritual power of the

Mesopotamians.302 Mesopotamian and Ugaritic influence on the Hebrew Bible has been a significant part of the field of biblical studies. One aspect to the study of magic in the Moses narratives of the Pentateuch which comparatively has received less attention is Egyptian source material. This thesis does not suggest direct borrowing of specific Egyptian sources in the Pentateuch or that this is the only perspective evident in examples of magic in the Hebrew Bible. But overall, the

Egyptian evidence of magic fits with the portrayal of Moses as a magician/wonder- worker. There are numerous significant reasons to look to Egyptian evidence of magic and ritual power to enhance our reading of the Moses narratives.

A key reason for looking to ancient Egypt is that it serves as the backdrop for the literary narrative in Exodus. This does not necessarily indicate historical accuracy and neither will that be argued in this thesis. But a comparison between ancient

Egyptian magic and the presentation of Moses remains an interesting endeavour regardless of historical accuracy. Any points of similarity might indicate additional nuances in the Moses narratives. Specific points which contrast Egyptian magic might indicate other areas of influence or even an intentional subversion to “foreign” magic. In the next chapter, further examples of magic in ancient Egypt will be explored in depth with particular attention to evidence (both textual and non-textual)

302 Some recent notable works include: Tzvi Abusch, The Magical Ceremony of Maqlu: A Critical Edition (2015), Tzvi Abusch, The Witchcraft Series Maqlu (2015), Tzvi Abusch and Daniel Schwemer, Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals (2010), Tzvi Abusch and Karel van der Toorn (eds.), Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical and Interpretative Perspectives (Brill: 2000), JoAnn Scurlock, Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illness in Ancient Mesopotamia (2006), JoAnn Scurlock, Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses (2010).

114

which might intersect with the themes and portrayals of magic in the Moses narratives.

115

CHAPTER THREE

MAGICO-RELIGION IN ANCIENT EGYPT

The ancient Egyptians understood the cosmos to be an interwoven system of the physical and divine realms. Interaction with deities was possible if one knew the effective means of communication. There was no single term for “religion,” but there was an abundance of evidence for beliefs and practices of experiencing the divine.1

Two terms associated with “magic,” heka and akhu, were introduced in chapter one.2

These concepts are present in the various spheres in society where the divine is encountered. Also, it should be noted that while the words “religion” and “magic” appear in this chapter, these are very much overlapping, interwoven categories.

Magic is scattered throughout ancient Egyptian history and texts. A number of texts have been selected from different periods of pharaonic Egypt to illustrate how integral magic was to Egyptian life over a large span of time. Considerably more examples could be included, but this is a mere sampling from larger textual corpora in order to highlight some occurrences of magic. This will be approached by spheres of life and contexts where magic is evident. These spheres overlap significantly, as will

1 John Baines, “Society, Morality, and Religious Practice,” in Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths and Personal Practice (ed. Byron E. Shafter; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 123. 2“Im Ägyptischen gibt es kein Wort, das sich mit ‘Religion’ übersetzen ließe, ebenso wenig übrigens wie in den meisten sonstigen Sprachen. Dafür gibt es aber zwei Wörter, die unserem Begriff ‘Magie’ entsprechen, nämlich Heka und Achu,” Jan Assmann, “Magie und Ritual im Alten Ägypten.” 23-43 in Magie und Religion; eds. J. Assmann and Harald Strohm (Munich: Fink, 2010), 23.

116

become apparent below. These include: royal, temple, healing, legal, funerary, and literary (tales and stories) contexts.

3.1. Royal Contexts and Magic

The institution of kingship remained relatively stable for almost 3000 years in ancient

Egypt. This longevity provided a sense of continuity to Egypt’s identity and general religious beliefs. The establishment of the king’s office was linked to the divine and royal myth. He was considered the manifestation of Horus and the son of Re.3 By the

Middle Kingdom, the Pharaoh was also described as “the son of Amun.”4 This provided an explanation of the origins of this role and also a perpetual legitimation of the office and specially the decisions of the reigning Pharaoh.5 The connection to the royal god, Horus provided the king with a divine authority to rule over the nation and to leave little room for the people to question the instructions of the king.6 Moreover, the legitimacy of the institution of divine kingship is further strengthened because of

“its inherent link with the distant past.7”

The Pyramid Texts will be examined with funerary texts, but there is one reference which should be mentioned here. Utterance 273 indicates that the Pharaoh

“feeds on gods … eats their magic, swallows their spirits … Great-Power rank was

3 The development of the kingship began to take on structure by the Archaic Period with Memphis as the place of residence. Rosalie David, Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt (Manchester: University of Manchester, 2003), 138. One example of how the king was identified with Horus can be seen in an inscription of The Great Sphinx Stela of Amenhotep II at Giza. The king is referred to as “the living Horus” and ruler over the two lands. See Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature: Volume II, The New Kingdom (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976, 2006), 39. Josef W. Wegner, “Royal Cults” in The Ancient Gods Speak (ed. Donald B. Redford; Oxford: OUP, 2002), 71. 4 Wegner, “Royal Cults,” 71. 5 Aidan Dodson, “The Monarchy” in The Egyptian World (ed. Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010), 75. 6 One example of how the king was identified with Horus can be seen in an inscription of The Great Sphinx Stela of Amenhotep II at Giza. The king is referred to as “the living Horus” and ruler over the two lands. See Lichtheim, AEL 2:39. 7 Claus Jurman, “Legitimisation through Innovative Tradition,” in Royal versus Divine Authority: Acquisition, Legitimisation, and Renewal of Power (ed. Filip Coppens et al.; Wiesbaden: Verlag, 2015), 177.

117

given him.”8 The same spell also makes reference the royal ureaus: “His gods on his head, his serpents on his brow.”9

A monumental inscription of Rameses II at the battle of Kadesh describes the greatness of the Pharaoh and his qualities which ensured victory. It gives us insight into how kings sought to be remembered, regardless of the veracity of such claims.

One particular statement supports an understanding of the magical function of the uraeus. It conveys the Pharaoh’s authority and power, but the uraeus cobra was thought to assist in battle by magically spitting fire into the eyes of the enemy. This is evident in the following excerpt:

The serpent on my brow felled by foes, Cast her fiery breath in my enemies’ faces, I was like Re when he rises at dawn. My rays, they burned the rebels’ bodies, They called out to one another: ‘Beware, take care, don’t approach him, Sakhmet the Great is she who is with him’… My majesty overpowered them.10

Ancient Egyptian kingship cannot be separated from its connection with the divine.

This is one of the most complex elements of the Pharaoh’s office. The king was regarded as semi-divine during his reign and fully divine upon death. He served as an intermediary figure between the gods and humanity. From at least the Old Kingdom, the Pharaoh was already regarded as “god on earth” and had a divinely established role in ruling Egypt.11 Kingship, along with cosmic order, was established by the divine. Consequently, Broadie and Macdonald conclude, “Egyptian kingship, justice, law, and many other aspects of the life of the incarnate god-king belonged ultimately and ideally to the realm of the divine.”12

8 Utterance 273 of the antechamber, east wall of the Unas Pyramid Texts trans. Miriam Lichtheim (AEL1:37). 9 Texts trans. Miriam Lichtheim (AEL 1:36). 10 Texts trans. Miriam Lichtheim (AEL 2:70). 11 David, Religion and Magic, 68. 12 A. Broadie and J. Macdonald, “The Concept of Cosmic Order in Ancient Egypt in Dynastic and Roman Times,” L’Antiquité Classique 47 (1978): 106-128, see 125.

118

Deities of ancient Egypt were believed to manifest in two mains ways: “inhabitation and incarnation” and these were achieved through the Pharaoh and divine images.13

Thus, the Pharaoh was generally understood as the earthly embodiment of the divine and the preserver of maat.

The Teaching for King Merikare14 provides an example of magic depicted as divinely initiated and given to humanity for their use. This text could be classified as a form of wisdom literature15 or instructional teaching.16 At the same time, it likely served as political propaganda in the Twelfth Dynasty which strengthened the importance of the office of kingship.17 This text contains the words, “He made for them magic as a weapon, To ward off the blow of events, Guarding them by day and by night.”18 Humanity shares in the “substance of the creator” as David Lorton observed, and magic is presented as an instrument which can also be used by the kings.19

The coronation ritual is what conferred the divine status to the Pharaoh through the royal kA but it was primarily through ongoing festivals of kingship that divine power was emphasised and confirmed.20 This is further clarified in Redford’s summary, “Since his status as nTr depended on his union with the royal ka, there were rituals intended to reinforce this relationship during the king’s reign.”21 Pyramid Text

783 depicts part of the insignia ritual where the uraeus is received:

13 Jan Assmann, The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs (trans. by Andrew Jenkins; New York: Metropolitan Books, 1996), 407. 14 Lichtheim, AEL 1:97. 15 David, Religion and Magic, 138. 16 Christopher Eyre, The Use of Documents in Pharaonic Egypt (Oxford: OUP, 2013), 57. 17 R. B. Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems 1940-1640 BC (Oxford, OUP, 1997), 212. 18 Lichtheim, AEL 1:106. Papyrus Leningrad 1116a is from second half of eighteenth dynasty (around 1400-1320 B.C.E). Also see Ritner: 1993, 20. 19 David Lorton, “God’s Beneficent Creation: Coffin Texts Spell 1130, the Instructions for Merikare, and the Great Hymn to the Aton,” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kulture 20 (1993): 125-155. 20 Stephen Quirke, Ancient Egyptian Religion (London: British Museum Press, 1992), 90. 21 Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 68.

119

It endures for you with you. Neith wear it and it will give life to your forehead. Ho, Neith [Provide] yourself with [it, and it will make you a god]. Uraeus; cobra.22

The official five titles of the kings became highly important in ancient Egypt. This included “Horus, He of the Two Ladies, Horus of Gold, He of the Sedge and Bee, and

Son of Ra.”23 Royal titles date back at least to the fourth dynasty (and possibly earlier), but it was by the Middle Kingdom the order of names in the title became established.24 Quirke explains, “The five titled names belong to an intricate language designed both to express the solar character of the reigning king and to reinforce at every moment that king’s claim to legitimacy as son of the gods and king of the dual land of Egypt.”25 This royal title is a constant reminder of the lineage (both human and divine) of the king and his justified place for fulfilling the office. Ronald J.

Leprohon demonstrated that during the twelfth dynasty the royal title also reflected the king’s “given policy” or anticipated contribution during his reign.26 This

“programmatic use of the royal titulary” is evident as each king had a different title, presumably reflecting his policies.27

The office of the Pharaoh was considered a permanent place in the cosmos, where the individuals who would fill the office would naturally change. The Pharaoh portrayed himself with extraordinary skills, strength, and superhuman abilities, which is consistent with his presentation as an embodiment of a god. These special abilities were to equip him in his divinely ordained position to mediate between the earthly

22 James P. Allen, The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts (2nd edition; Atlanta: SBL, 2015), 307. 23 Quirke, Who Were the Pharaohs? 10. 24 David P. Silverman, Ancient Egypt (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 113. 25 Quirke, Who Were the Pharaohs? 13. 26 Ronald J. Leprohon, “The Programmatic Use of the Royal Titulary in the Twelfth Dynasty,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt (1996), 165-171. Dr. David Calabro kindly brought this article and the nuances of the royal title to my attention through e-mail correspondence. 27 Leprohon, “The Programmatic Use,” 165.

120

and divine realms. In theory, everything belonged to him, including the land, the temples, the people, and any of their possessions.28 However, since the Pharaoh was also subject to maat, he needed to ensure that his actions were consistent with divine order and justice. Clearly this could be manipulated to suit his own agenda, but generally he consulted his advisors and state administrators with many decisions.29

This importance of upholding maat is evident in Chapter 125 of the Book of the Dead.

This text describes the Pharaoh’s confession to the gods upon his death that he lived a life in accordance with maat.

I have come here to bear witness to maat, To set the balance in right position among the dead … For I have done maat for the Lord of maat! I am pure.30

The Pharaoh’s duties included temple, political, economic, military, and legal responsibility also, but these were often delegated to state officials.31 He was renowned for strength, military success, and construction of monuments and temples.

He continuously reminds the people of his accomplishments through inscriptions and depictions on temple walls. Failures were not recorded and any statues or inscriptions of one who later fell from favour with the current Pharaoh would be destroyed and memory of such person or event was to be forgotten. It is also expected that any of the Pharaoh’s staff (especially priests and scribes) would also record the accomplishments of the king. One example is in tomb inscription of a high priest, proclaiming the Pharaoh’s achievements:

While you are on earth, on the Horus throne, having appeared as ruler of the living. You marshal the troops of Egypt, yet you kill as a lord,

28 Aidan Dodson, “The Monarchy” in The Egyptian World (ed. Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010), 75. David, Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, 136. 29 David, Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, 138. 30 Lines 15-20 of Spell 125 from the Book of the Dead trans. Miriam Lichtheim (AEL 2:128- 9). 31 David, Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, 140. Dodson, “The Monarchy,” 77.

121

one enduring of kingship upon earth.32

There was an interesting connection between the success and accomplishments of previous Pharaohs with the current one. For example, if a Pharaoh knows of a particular political or national success of a previous Pharaoh, he might announce that it is his success and take credit. For example, there are several accounts of a Pharaoh conquering the Libyans with specific details about the sacrifice of a Libyan prince.

These accounts are hundreds of years apart, from different locations in Egypt, and each taking credit for this achievement. At some point, this probably reflected an historical event. In some sense, the current Pharaoh was able to connect himself with the previous one and join in the achievement of the kingship. John Wilson explains,

“Every Pharaoh conquered the Libyans in the same way that the first of this series conquered them – down to the last corroborating detail of the names in the Libyan royal family.”33

A further example is how Rameses III uses the battle victory of Rameses II in the Medinet Habu reliefs, connecting such accomplishment with himself.34 This sense of the perpetual role of the Pharaoh reinforces the legitimacy and continuity of the kingly institution. There remains a magical aspect to this that each individual fulfilling the role of Pharaoh in some way joins the community of the living manifestations of the god Horus and to some extent can share in the achievements of one another.

32 The Theban Tomb of Nebwenenef translated by Elizabeth Frood, The Biographical Texts from Ramessid Egypt (Atlanta: SBL, 2007), 38. 33 John A. Wilson, “The Royal Myth in Ancient Egypt,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 100 (1956): 439-442. 34 Anthony J. Spalinger, “A Canaanite Ritual Found in Egyptian Reliefs,” Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (1977), 58, note 25. This occurrence of borrowing or “plagiarism” is discussed by Rudolf Anthes, “Die Vorführung der gefangenen Feinde vor den König,” Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 65 (1930): 26-35. It is widely accepted that Ramesses II’s celebrated victory was significantly exaggerated and was a “at best a stalemate,” Mark D. Janzen, “The Iconographic of Humiliation: The Depiction and Treatment of Bound Foreigners in New Kingdom Egypt” (PhD diss., The University of Memphis, 2013), 186.

122

One initiative from the royal office was to further promote Egypt and the

Egyptian way of life to surrounding nations. This was done through a royal programme which allowed children from royal or elite households of other countries to be raised and educated in the Egyptian palace. These children were referred to as

“children of the kap.”35 This will be further discussed in relation to Moses in Chapter

Five.

3.1.1. Maat

One of the most important concepts of ancient Egypt is maat. This term can be understood as the correct balance and order of the universe, as well as justice or truth.36 Cosmic order undergirds the ancient Egyptian worldview and is interwoven in the mythology of deities. This can be seen in the Maxims of Ptahhotep.

Great is Ma’at, and its foundation is firmly established; It has not been shaken since the time of Osiris (6,5).37

This text also encourages the reader to live in accordance with maat and the positive life which following maat endues. In order for one’s life to go well and in order for

Egypt to prosper, maat needs to be maintained. Maat is also personified as a deity involved in the weighing of the heart upon one’s death. In the Pyramid Texts a spell for the deceased speaks of the giving of offerings and presence of maat.

Now that I have come unto you, I eat of your ka’s nourishment, I feed on Sustenance, and receive contentment from the god’s hand.

35 Erika Feucht, “The ẖrdw n kap Reconsidered,” in Pharaonic Egypt, the Bible and Christianity, ed. Sarah Israelit-Groll, (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985): 38-47. Mark Depauw, “A Ghost-Name of a hrd n kap” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 83 (1997): 217-218. 36 Daphna Ben-Tor, The Scarab: A Reflection of Ancient Egypt (trans. by Inna Pommerantz; Jerusalem: The Israel Museum, 1989), 11. Emily Teeter, The Presentation of Maat Ritual and Legitimacy in Ancient Egypt (Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1997). Jan Assmann, Maat: Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten (Munich: Verlag, 2006). 37 “The Maxims of Ptahhotep” trans. William Kelly Simpson (The Literature of Ancient Egypt), 132.

123

I am the one who made bread-loaves: sustenance is given to me on the day of the Making-Sound offering. Collect to yourself the one who pertains to Maat, because of the Maat I have said.38

One of the primary responsibilities of the Pharaoh was to maintain maat. Divine kingship and maat were intrinsically linked, as the king is the only person depicted in temples as offering maat.39 This reiterates the legitimacy of the Pharaoh’s unique role in Egypt. Moreover, this connection results in a dependency of the people on the

Pharaoh for keeping maat and staying in a favourable position with the gods. As

Shafer explains, “What the world needed was not ‘salvation’ but the preservation of order through governance; and governance provided jointly by god and king.”40

This balance and order was necessary to ensure good crop harvest, livestock, weather patterns, and general well-being. When there were economic struggles or political unrest, this was perceived as the absence of maat and it was the Pharaoh’s role to restore balance. Ben-Tor elaborates, “The Egyptians thus regarded the universe as essentially static and unchanging, and viewed historical events as unimportant when measured against the continuity represented by the role of the living Horus, who inherited the kingship from the dead Osiris and maintained the established order.”41

One of the crucial indications of the presence of maat was the wellbeing and regular inundation of the Nile River. The Nile was Egypt’s greatest natural resource and sustained life. A key motivating factor for maintaining cosmic order was for the sake of the Nile. Droughts occurred and the level of flooding could not be predicted.

38 The Pyramid Texts of Queen Neith, trans. Allen (The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts, 294). 39 Emily Teeter, The Presentation of Maat Ritual and Legitimacy in Ancient Egypt (Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1997), 82. “The presentation of Maat also functions as a potent expression of the legitimacy of the king….” 40 Shafer, “Temples, Priests, and Rituals,” 3. 41 Ben-Tor, The Scarab, 11.

124

Interruption of the natural cycle of drought to inundation of the Nile was interpreted as the absence of maat. There are hymns to the Nile which speak of its provision and plenty.42 In the Hymn to the Nile Inundation (also called “the Hymn to Hapy”), the river is praised for its role “To nourish all who thirst … Food provider, bounty maker.”43 In exchange for the proper flow and flooding of the Nile, the petitioner promises to make sacrifices to the gods.

When you overflow, O Hapy, Sacrifice is made for you … One offers to all the gods, Of that which Hapy has provided.44

Consequently, the activity of the Nile was connected to the forces of order (maat) or chaos and the actions of deities. Egypt’s prosperity was understood as dependent on the Pharaoh’s fulfilment of maintaining maat. Other palace and temple personnel were delegated responsibilities which supported the king’s efforts. These provide further examples of magic in ancient Egyptian society.

3.1.2. Personnel

Naturally, the Pharaoh was the head of the administration of Egypt. Below the king was the vizier (tjay) who was the overseer of all branches of the government (temple, royal building projects, military, land, and was the producer of the royal tomb).45 An inscription from the tomb of Rekhmire describes the installation of a new vizier and includes some of the duties and expectations given by the Pharaoh:

42 See The Chester Beatty Papyrus V, “The Hymn to the Nile’” in Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum: Chester Beatty Gift (ed. by Alan H. Gardiner; London: British Museum, 1934). 43 “The Hymn to Hapy” trans. Lichtheim (AEL 1: 204-210). 44 Lichtheim, (AEL 1: 208-9). 45 Barbara S. Lesko, “Rank, Roles, and Rites,” in Pharaoh’s Workers: The Villagers of Deir El Medina (ed. Leonard H. Lesko; Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1994), 18. Karen Exell and Christopher Naunton, “The Administration,” in The Egyptian World (ed. Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010), 92. Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 50.

125

(1)Thus said His Majesty to him: [Look] to the office of the vizier, (2) be vigilant concerning [all that] is done in it, for it is the mainstay of the entire land […] 46 (5) therefore you should see that everything is done in accordance with what is in the law and that everything is done exactly right when [placing a man on] his vindication.47

The vizier acted on behalf of the Pharaoh as needed in overseeing the progress of the royal tomb and supervising the tomb workers including paying wages.48 One of the many types of personnel under the authority of the vizier was that of scribe.

The role of the scribe was vital to ancient Egypt and is attested from the beginning of the Old Kingdom. Scribes were involved in administrative records, building project records, and royal and mortuary inscriptions. The ability to read, write, and preserve the written word was highly esteemed. One example which illustrates this is from The Teaching of King Merikare:

(35) And [attain] success through knowledge Behold, their words endure in writing; Open and read (them), So that you may emulate their knowledge. One who is proficient will become knowledgeable.49

The practice of magic was frequently connected with written words. While many could practise magic, few could read or write. Literacy was limited to about one percentage of the population of Egypt, making the ability to read almost an act of magic in itself.50 There are a few references to kings being literate, including the example above. In an additional example, the “Prophecy of Neferti” describes a

Pharaoh writing down the words of a lector priest.

46 R. O. Faulkner, “The Installation of the Vizier,” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 41 (1955): 18-29. This tomb was at Thebes, mentioned on page 18. 47 Faulkner, “The Installation of the Vizier,” 22. 48 Lesko, “Rank, Roles, and Rites,” 18. 49 “The Teaching for King Merikare,” trans. William Kelly Simpson (The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 155). 50 Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 323.

126

He stretched out his hand to the box of writing equipment, took scroll and palette and began to put into writing the words of the lector-priest Neferti, the wiseman of the East, servant of Bastet in her East, and native of the nome of On.51

Then Order will return to its seat, While Chaos is driving away. Rejoice he who may behind, he who may attend the king! And he who is wise will libate for me, When he sees fulfilled what I have spoken!52

The Chester Beatty Papyrus VIII contains spells against an illness. The text specifies that the spell to be recited by a lector priest and includes instructions for a medicinal drink of honey, oil, and wine.53 This papyrus connects the origin of such a spell with the temple. The text states,

This writing was found in the library, (in a) room of the temple.54

And make this writing upon a new papyrus, to be put upon the neck of a live cat with the beautifying.

[…] make a prescription for searching out a god’s poison in the body of a man or woman, and for(?) searching out the god in the body, so as to [destroy?] every dead man and woman, and every disease.55

It was crucial that such spells were preserved and properly recited by the qualified personnel. Words were connected with magic and the right words (spells) became part of a means of achieving a desired result. To be sure, Geraldine Pinch argues, “Although so much emphasis is placed on the spoken word, written magic had powers and virtues of its own.”56 Consequently, the scribe had an important part in magic as well as what might be considered administrative duties.

51 Lines 16-17 from “The Prophecies of Neferti,” trans. Lichtheim (AEL 1:140). Ronald J. Williams, “Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt,” JAOS 92 (1972), 215. J. A. Wilson, ANET, 444-446. 52 Lines 67-68 from “The Prophecies of Neferti,” trans. Lichtheim (AEL1:140). 53 Chester Beatty Papyrus VIII in Alan H. Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum: Chester Beatty Gift, vol 1. (London: British Museum), 68. 54 Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri, 68. 55 Chester Beatty Papyrus VIII in Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri, 68. 56 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 69.

127

In an additional textual example, the power of the written word is connected to immortality. This also In Chester Beatty Papyrus IV, “The Immortality of Writers” describes the everlasting nature of writers and their writing.

(2,5) If you do this, you are versed in writings. As to those learned scribes, Of the time that came after the gods, They who foretold the future, Their names have become everlasting, While they departed, having finished their lives, And all their kin are forgotten.

They hid their magic (3,10) from the masses, It is read in their Instructions. Death made their names forgotten But books made them remembered!57

This text also explicitly connects magic to the power of the written word and the scribe. In this instance, books are the keepers of this magic which is not accessible to

“the masses” but is kept for the scribes. Those who could write were more than highly trained specialists, as they were also ones who engaged in magic.

3.2. Temple Contexts and the Divine

The gods possess magic, as is widely attested throughout pharaonic Egypt. The Book of the Heavenly Cow is a mythological text which explains humanity’s rebellion against the sun god. It is also a royal funerary text which provides further legitimacy to the king.58 In this text, a person identifies with the divine in order to participate in the renewal of the sun god, Re. This is achieved through magic and was particularly important after death. The following are two passages taken from this text.

The ba of Apophis is in the Eastern Mountain, whereas the ba of Re is in magic throughout the whole world. A man should say that he may make his protection through magic, ‘I am this pure Magic that is in the mouth and belly

57 P. Chester Beatty IV = P. British Museum 10684 trans. Lichtheim (AEL 2: 175-77). 58 Nadine Guilhou, “Myth of the Heavenly Cow,” in Jacco Dieleman and Willeke Wendrich (eds.), UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology (Los Angeles: UCLA, 2010), 1.

128

of Re. O gods, spirits, and the dead, keep away from me! I am the radiant one.59

Moreover, guard against those magicians /who know their spells, since (the god) Magic is himself therein. Now as for the one who ingests him, there I am. The guarding of me originated not through greatness; it originated even before me. I commanded them to your son Osiris. Keep watch over the youngest of them and cause their hearts of the oldest of them there to forget their magical power, they who act as they please against the whole world, using their magic which is in their bodies.60

In a hymn to Thoth, he is esteemed as one “Who makes way for the gods! Who knows the secrets, Who records their expression … whose words ensure forever.”61

C. J. Bleeker describes this aspect of Thoth’s role as “secretary for Re and the gods as a whole.”62 Thoth was known as “the inventor of writing” and “lord of magic” and so a clear link between magic and writing.63 The Late Period text “The Book of Thoth” supports this portrayal. For example, “Come that I instruct you concerning … the writing which Thoth gave into the hand of his disciple.”64

This text also depicts hunting imagery to convey the act of writing: “He will go to the House of Life. He will hunt in the … magicians.”65 The connection between writing and magic is made in multiple occasions. One final excerpt will be used to illustrate this. Later on in the Book of Thoth there is a description of the opening of papyri and knowledge of deities conveyed through these writings.

Total, one by one, all their good things (= rituals or results thereof) Which came from the Four Corners of Nun. She tarried, while I say upon the storeroom (= House of Life) with them, while their magic enchants my heart.

59 Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 296. 60Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 294-295. 61 “The Hymn to Thoth” trans. Lichtheim (AEL 2: 102-103). 62 C. J. Bleeker, Hathor and Thoth: Two Key Figures of the Ancient Egyptian Religion (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973), 141. 63 Richard Jasnow and Karl-Theodor Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life: A New Translation of the Ancient Egyptian Book of Thoth (Wiesbaden: Verlag, 2014), 36. 64 Text 379 in Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 115. 65 Text 454 in Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 132-33.

129

The (visible) evidence of the deeds of magic, which are behind him (=Thoth) as sole guard.66

The temple had a very significant role in ancient Egypt as the home and dwelling place for the gods. It was the place where humanity (through the Pharaoh and priesthood) had contact with the divine. 67 This is where hymns and prayers were offered, food offerings presented, festivals and ceremonies took place, where the gods would inhabit, and consequently, magic took place.68 Through these activities, the deities received these offerings and maintained order.69 Cosmic order (maat) was kept in balance and chaos (isfet) kept at bay through temple cult rituals.

Temples were also designed to reflect the structure of the cosmos. This was the

“gods’ prerogatives” and through the precise help of the king, was co-created with some of the deities.70 The roof was intended to represent the sky while the floor was designed as the marsh, and both were decorated accordingly.71 The walls outside of the temple usually contain a very large statue of the Pharaoh, representing the power and authority given by the gods.72 This massive image of the Pharaoh served to ward off chaos and evil spirits from entering the temple, the dwelling place of the gods.

However, once inside the temple the Pharaoh was represented on a much smaller scale. The concept of maat can be seen in the temple structure. Richard Wilkinson writes, “The elevated position of the temple’s innermost area also symbolized the relation of the structure to maat – the underlying ‘order’ upon which the world

66 575-576, 578 in Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 161. 67 Michael B. Hundley, Gods in Dwellings: Temples and Divine Presence in the Ancient Near East (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), 41. 68 K. A. Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant: The Life and Times of Ramesses II (Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1982), 154. 69 Teeter, Religion and Ritual in Ancient Egypt, 41. 70 Dimitri Meeks and Christine Favard-Meeks, Daily Life of the Egyptian Gods (London: Pimlico, 1999), 124. 71 Richard H. Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic in Egyptian Art (London: Thames and Hudson, 1994), 36. 72 Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 36.

130

rested.”73 The corridors were the passageways in the divine processions. Restricted areas including open courts open to the public on certain occasions.74

As part of the king’s duty to preserve maat, it was necessary that he perform temple rituals. He stood as the intermediary figure between the divine and earthly realms. In practice the king requested the high priest and temple personnel to serve as his substitute and fulfil these duties on his behalf.75 But in order to fulfil its purpose as a sacred space, the gods needed to inhabit the temple site. This occurred through the divine presence (ka) and power (ba) of a deity manifesting in designated cult statues.76 Deities could be manifest in multiple places and in multiple forms simultaneously.77 Their presence was not restricted by the multiplicity of cult statues, but still required ongoing care. Erik Hornung describes how these statues become

“‘bodies’ of the gods, which they ‘enter.’”78

The Opening of the Mouth is among several of the necessary rituals that made cultic objects and space in the temple “cultically operational.”79 This ritual

“awakened” the deity’s presence in the statue. 80 Like humans, they needed to eat, drink, and be clothed so continual care was necessary. Once the ritual had been performed, the statue could be placed in the temple as the permanent place of residence. Through ritual actions and events, participants were “transposed to the

73 Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 28. 74 Emily Teeter, “Temple Cults,” in The Egyptian World (ed. Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010), 311, 323. 75 Douglas K. Brewer and Emily Teeter, Egypt and the Egyptians (2nd ed.; Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007), 101. 76 Teeter, “Temple Cults,” 311. 77 Hundley, Gods in Dwelling, 155. 78 Erik Hornung, Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971), 135. 79 David, Religion and Magic, 192. 80 Redford, When Ancient Gods Speak, 293-297. Claude Traunecker, The Gods of Egypt (ed. David Lorton; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001), 4.

131

world of the gods” and engage in interaction with the gods.81 An excerpt from the

Book of the Dead, Chapter 23 describes the Opening of the Mouth:

My mouth is given to me, My mouth is opened by Ptah With the chisel of metal With which he opened the mouth of the gods…

As for any spells, any spells spoken against me, The gods shall rise up against them, The entire Ennead, the entire Ennead!82

The daily care of the deities manifested in temple statues included the Daily Temple

Ritual. As depicted in Chester Beatty Papyrus IX, it involved “a spell for bringing the god to his meal.”83 Bread and beer are included in this food offering to Amun-Re, as was standard in most offerings. The spell explicitly conveys that the deity will consume the meal by means of magic.

Bring thou thy soul, thy magic, and thy honour to this thy bread that is warm, (to) this thy beer that is warm, (to) this thy roast that is warm.84

The following spell in this papyrus begins with instructions “to be recited by the lector-priest,” and the invitation that “Amun … may rest in [his] palace.”85 Through the deity’s magic, the ritual will be efficacious and will result in a successful interaction between the priests and gods.

One occasion when the general public was involved with the temple activities was during special festivals. It was during these times that the image of a god was carried outside of the temple so that the people could see the god, offer prayers, pour

81 Desiree Heiden, “New Aspects of the Treatment of the Cult Statue in the Daily Temple Ritual,” in Hawass, Z. (ed.), Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century, vol. 2 (Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 2003): 308-315. 82 Trans. Lichtheim (AEL 2:120). This applied to mummies as well as statues. 83 Roger Forshaw, The Role of the Lector in Ancient Egyptian Society (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2014), 54. 84 Plate 51 trans. Gardiner (Hieratic Papyri 1:85). 85 Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri, 85.

132

water libations, and have an opportunity for oracular inquiries. Through ritual and ceremony the image was changed from a representation to a manifestation of a deity.86

In a similar procession the priests would carry the sacred boat shrine out of the temple on their shoulders.87 They would walk beyond the outer courts of the temple, carrying the sacred boat to where the people had gathered. As is explained by Abdel

Abubakr, “It was the custom on religious festival days to carry the sacred images of the gods in procession around the temples and through the town. On these occasions the statue, which was quite small, was placed in a shrine standing in a richly decorated boat.”88 Using long poles, the boat was rested on the priests’ shoulders.

Once at the assigned location, the public were permitted to make their requests to the gods or present a binary question. The movement of the boat (or object on top of the boat) as it was being carried or held by the priests was then interpreted as a positive or negative response to the petitioner’s request.89 Objects thought to have been touched, worn, or used by the gods were believed to retain some degree of divine power or influence which would benefit the petitioner. 90

The size of cultic objects usually indicated its level of importance or function.91 Especially in the early dynastic period, the size of artefacts, statues, and pieces of art was indication of the scale of importance. Naturally deities and kings were depicted very large (such as when placed outside, guarding the temple), whereas other people or animals would be represented much smaller. The main exception to

86 Shafer, “Temples, Priests, and Rituals,” 6. 87 The deities were believed to be transported in sacred boats, so these objects became a vital part of temple rituals and the burial of kings. See Silverman, Ancient Egypt, 158-159. 88 Abdel Moneim Abubakr, “Divine Boats of Ancient Egypt,” Archaeology 8 (1995), 98. 89 Lanny Bell, “The New Kingdom Divine Temple: The Example of Luxor,” in Temples of Ancient Egypt (ed. Byron Schafer; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997): 127-84. 90 Bell, “The New Kingdom Divine Temple,” 136. 91 Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 38.

133

this includes amulets and figurines of deities.92 Figurines which were buried with the dead represented the full scale objects or people and the size was for convenience rather than indicatory of importance or power.93 Also, as charms and amulets became more prevalent (especially in the New Kingdom), the size was for convenience and mass distribution. They were still considered to be effective, even though they were portable.

3.2.1. Temple Personnel: Priests

The priesthood was a significant component of the economy, the bridge between the king and the people, and performing magico-religious practices in ancient Egyptian society. This was a delegation of royal power from the Pharaoh and the priests functioned as his substitutes in performing temple rituals in order to keep cosmic balance (maat) and any other duties to ensure the wellbeing of the Egyptian people.94

There were important rituals which needed to be performed on a daily basis, such as the ‘Daily Temple Ritual.’95 It was imperative to have priests at every temple site, ensuring that this ritual (as well as many others) was performed on behalf of the

Pharaoh.

During the Old and Middle Kingdoms, most priests served on a part-time basis, had other occupations, their own families, and continued to live in their regular homes when not on duty. They served on a rotation with other men in the community. Shafer asserts that during this time, “almost all men of prominence acted as priests several months a year and served elsewhere in the power structure the rest

92 Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 42. 93 See Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 42. Donald B. Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 101. Stephen Quirke and Jeffrey Spencer, The British Museum Book of Ancient Egypt (London: Thames and Hudson, 1992), 86. 94 Serge Sauneron, Priests of Ancient Egypt (New York: Grove Press Inc., 1960), 35. 95 Rosalie David, “The Temple Priesthood,” in The Egyptian World (ed. Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010): 105-117, see page 111.

134

of the time.”96 There were noticeable changes in the priesthood during the New

Kingdom. Some priests continued to serve on a part-time rotation, but full-time professional positions were established.97 This created an increased distinction between laity and priests, more than previous times in Egypt’s history.

The priestly selection was often handed down from father to son.98 There is evidence of some instances where the king personally chose someone to become a priest, as in the case of Nebwenenef by Ramesses II.99 Rosalie David identified a few cases where the priestly position was purchased.100 But there is little evidence which would inform us on the training process of priests. The details of the priestly ritual of installation are also unclear.101

As an extension of the Pharaoh’s power, priests were “ritual experts who conducted their rituals in the innermost chambers of the temple to ensure the preservation of cosmic order,” including ritual purity, sacrifices, offerings, and festivals.102 But their involvement went beyond the temple walls. Many priests also acted as physicians, educators, and engaged in magic.103

The Egyptian generic term for priest is wʽb, which can be translated as the

“pure one.”104 These were a generic class of entry-level priests who assisted in maintaining the temple and rituals which did not require a more specialised priest.105

Other types of priests include, but are not limited to, sem, lector, hem-ka (‘servant of

96 Byron E. Shafer, “Temples, Priests, and Rituals: An Overview,” in Temples of Ancient Egypt (ed. Byron E. Shafer; Ithaca: Cornell, 1997): 1-30, see page 9. 97 Teeter, Religion and Ritual, 35. 98 Sauneron, Priests, 44-45. David, Religion and Magic, 199. 99 Teeter, Religion and Ritual, 28. Frood, Biographical Texts from Ramessid Egypt, 35-39. 100 David, “The Temple Priesthood,” 108. 101 Sauneron, Priests of Ancient Egypt, 47. 102 Jacco Dieleman, Priests, Tongues, and Rites: The London-Leiden Magical Manuscripts and Translation in Egyptian Ritual (100-300 CE) (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill: 2005), 211. 103 David, “The Temple Priesthood,” 114-16. 104 Dieleman, The London-Leiden Magical Manuscripts, 212. 105 David, Religion and Magic, 202.

135

ka’), Iwnmutef, Sekhmet, and hem neter.106 The lector priests are of particular interest to this thesis due to their special role as magicians, so further attention will be given to them in the followings section.

3.2.2. Lector Priests

One branch of the Egyptian priesthood included Hry-hb.(t), lector priest, or Hry-tp, chief lector priest. Special focus is given to this particular caste of priests in this chapter for the following reasons: (i) There is evidence to suggest the Hebrew term

Exodus 7:11) is linguistically related, and the overall portrayal is compatible) חרטמים with the Egyptian lector priests;107 (ii) Lectors were connected with the ability to engage in magic (with examples in the Westcar Papyrus); (iii) Their use of a staff or wand in magico-ritual contexts.

Lector priests were official ritual specialists who functioned in a wider range of contexts than most priests, including service inside and outside the temple.108 The lector’s duties included involvement in temple festivals and rituals, royal involvement

(including purification rituals),109 medical healing,110 and magic practices.111 They used a variety of pieces of apparatus including staves, apotropaic wands, figurines, beads, and amulets.112 Lectors were also known for being “keeper of the books” and

106 Teeter, Religion and Ritual in Ancient Egypt, 19-27. 107 Donald B. Redford, A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph (Genesis 37-50) (VTSup, 20; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970), 203-4. Robert K. Ritner, “‘And Each Staff Transformed Into a Snake:’ The Serpent Wand in Ancient Egypt,” in Through A Glass Darkly: Magic, Dreams and Prophecy in Ancient Egypt, ed. Kasia Szpakowska (Oakville: Classical Press of Wales, 2006), 222. This position is also held by Jan Quaegebeur, John Baines, Thomas Römer, and John Currid. 108 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 2-5. 109 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 51-52. 110 John F. Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine (London: British Museum Press, 1996). 111 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice; Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt; Forshaw, The Role of the Lector. 112 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 34-43. This also includes ivory clappers, beads, amulets, figurines and papyri.

136

were esteemed for the ability to read and write.113 These were not freelance magicians, neither did a separate category of “magician” exist outside of the priesthood.114 Lectors were part of the staff of the temple and during the Old

Kingdom many were even part of the royal family.115

The House of Life (pr-‘nḫ) was a library kept by the lectors. Ritner explains,

“The foregoing analysis of the pH-nTr reveals the intersection of religion and magic not merely in practice, but in practitioner, for as the priest was the author and compiler of magical spells and rites, so he was also the performer and ‘magician.’”116

The House of Life contained religious rituals, spells, and administrative documents, and functioned as the temple archive.117 These scribal priests composed, edited, and preserved written and oral incantations and rituals which would be used in the temple as well as for private practice in the household.118

A Middle Kingdom tomb at Thebes included a box which contained healing incantations written on papyri, as well as a number of items such as, wands, figurines, and a coiled bronze serpent-staff.119 The combination of the papyri with the apparatus has led scholars to conclude that this belonged to an official magician- priest, and possibly a lector priest.120 One of the figurines found in this box is a wooden figure with the face or mask of a lion and body of a woman (who is clutching two serpents (one in each hand).121 Egyptologists disagree on whether this figurine

113 This was connected to the performance of magic. Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 61-64. 114 Some scholars, including Ritner, conclude that itinerant magicians were not part of ancient Egypt’s societies. Specialists were connected with the temple in some capacity or the House of Life, (The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magic, 222). David Frankfurter echoes this in Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation and Resistance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 211. 115 Teeter, Religion and Ritual, 22. 116 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 220. 117 David, Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, 123. 118 Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 323. 119 Werner Foreman and Stephen Quirke, Hieroglyphs and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt (London: British Museum Press, 1996), 106. 120 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector Priest. Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed,” 206. 121 Foreman and Quirke, Hieroglyphs and the Afterlife, 106.

137

represents a goddess or a female magician acting on behalf of the divine.122 In either case, this figurine was used in some form of magical context and likely related to healing.123

Fig. 3.1 Wooden Figurine, ca. 1773 – 1650 BCE (Manchester Museum, University of Manchester accession number 1790, Quibell 12)

Along with this was a separate coiled bronze serpent-staff and several animal and plant figurines. These items appear to have been used in an apotropaic context to provide protection, “of birth, of new life and of birth into new life after death.”124

This coiled serpent-staff resembles the image of the cobra with a raised head, as if ready to strike. The staff is broken, but the middle portion is flattened, possibly where it would be held by a human practitioner.125 This “magician’s box” is significant as it

122 Forshaw summarises this debate in The Role of the Lector Priest, 35. 123 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 34-35. 124 Foreman and Quirke, Hieroglyphs and the Afterlife, 107. 125 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 36.

138

connects serpent-staff iconography with actual wands, the serpent-staff with a human practitioner of magic, and the incantations (or spells) with apparatus which includes the serpent-staff.126

3.3. Healing Contexts

Healing contexts were another example of magic at work in life in ancient Egypt. The treatment for illnesses and injuries included a combination of magico-medical remedies. Rosalie David has persuasively demonstrated that, “Egyptian medicine itself combined both ‘rational’ and ‘irrational’ procedures, and extant ancient sources indicate that ‘rationality’ was not a new concept.”127 There are numerous examples where medical remedies are paired with incantations or magic components. Those who functioned as healers were often both priests (sometimes magicians) and physicians.128 The overlap of medicine and magic are evident in the texts below.

(i) The Ebers Papyrus is the largest extant collection of healing treatments from ancient Egypt. The texts date to about 1500 BCE, but it is likely that the remedies themselves date much older.129 It contains a remedy for a headache, which illustrates the interconnected nature of the divine with medicinal remedies.

Another remedy which the goddess Isis prepared for the god Ra to drive out the pains that are in his head: Berry-of-the-Coriander, Berry-of-the-Poppy-plant Wormwood Berry-of-the-sames-plant Berry-of-the-Juniper-plant Honey

126 Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed,” 206. 127 Rosalie David, “Rationality versus Irrationality in Egyptian Medicine in the Pharaonic and Graeco-Roman Periods,” in Magic and Rationality in the Ancient Near East and Graeco-Roman Medicine (ed. H. F. J. Horstmanshoff and M. Stol; Leiden: Brill, 2004): 133-151. David also contends that magic and religion are “indistinguishable” in ancient Egypt. 128 David, “Rationality versus Irrationality,” 135. These are most frequently identified as the swnw, wa’abu, and sau. 129 Cyril Bryan, The Papyrus Ebers: Translated from the German Version (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1930), xiii.

139

Make into one, mix with honey, and smear … and all sufferings and evils of any sort, he will instantly become well.”130

(ii) The collection of spells in the London-Leiden Papyrus served as an example of this from the Late Period. A spell to treat a dog bite calls upon Anubis,

“O this dog, who is among the ten dogs which belong to Anubis, the son of his body, extract thy venom.”131 The spells ends with medicinal instructions to “pound garlic

… and you put it on the wound of the bite of the dog … daily until it is well.”132

(iii) Another example of interest is the Horus cippi133 which portrays a young

Horus holding snakes and scorpions by their tails whilst trampling on crocodiles.134

Nunn notes that the cippi, “provided a range of texts and incantations which could be recited both for prevention of attack and for relief in the event of a sting or bite.”135

The Coffin Texts spell 885 may shed light on this imagery stating, “The snake is in my hand and cannot bite me.”136 Horus had been protected from dangerous animals and so this representation of him conveyed protection and healing to others through the spells inscribed on this stela.137 Water was poured over it and through this action the spells were activated and absorbed. The water was collected at the base and then used for medicinal purposes to bring healing.138 This is likely related to the amulet

130 Bryan, Papyrus Ebers, 40. 131 Col. XIX, lines 3-5 in F. L. Griffith and Herbert Thompson (eds.), The Leyden Papyrus: An Egyptian Magical Book (New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1974), 123. 132 Col. XIX, lines 8-9 in Griffith and Thompson, The Leyden Papyrus, 125. 133 British Museum EA 36250 (ca. 6th-3rd centuries BCE). 134 Rendsburg, “Moses Equal to Pharaoh,” in Text, Artifact, and Image: Revealing Ancient Israelite Religion (eds. Gary M. Beckman and Theodore J. Lewis; Providence: Brown Judaic Studies, 2006): 201-219. 135 Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 108. 136 Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed Into a Snake,” 213. 137 Kamyar Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus in the Iran National Museum, Tehran,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 61 (2002): 203-210, see page 207. 138 Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus,” 209.

140

variants of the Late Period, which depict a figure trampling a serpent.139 The Horus cippi was used to prevent and treat various animal bites and stings.

Fig. 3.2 Magical Stela (Cippus of Horus), 360-343 BCE (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, accession number 50.85)

Healing statues are attested from the 26th Dynasty to the early Ptolemaic

Period. Due to the importance of reciting the inscriptions on the statues, it seems likely that these were primarily for a small, elite literate group affiliated with the temple. The written words were considered powerful and magical and were efficacious because they were written. The names of gods were inscribed on statues and monuments to invoke the presence of that deity.140

139 British Museum EA 11821. Carol Andrews identifies the figure on this amulet as Bes and argues this amulet served apotropaic purposes in warding off the bite or sting of animals depicted on the amulet (serpent, crocodile, scorpion, lion, jackal, hippopotamus) in Amulets of Ancient Egypt (London: British Museum Press, 1994), 38. 140 Campbell Price, “On the Function of ‘Healing’ Statues,” in Mummies, Magic, and Medicine in Ancient Egypt: Multidisciplinary Essays for Rosalie David (eds. Campbell Price, Roger Forshaw, Andrew Chamberlain, and Paul T. Nicholson; Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016): 169-182.

141

3.3.1. Healing Specialists

The title swnw is generally rendered as “physician.”141 The swnw were members of the priesthood. They were not the only priests who might be involved in healing, but they are the specialist most frequently mentioned in collections of healing texts, such as the Ebers Papyrus.142 Textual evidence indicates that in the context of healing, magic and what might be thought of as “traditional” or “rational” medicine were complementary. They were both incorporated, preventatively and for treatment of symptoms, as can be seen in the Ebers Papyrus. Redford states, “Health maintenance certainly entailed the most common applications of magic in daily life. From the simple wearing of amulets to complex rituals, medicine employed a wide variety of magical treatments.”143 Often it was a priest of Sekhmet who functioned in a role we may consider as a physician.144

Some of the methods healers used for patients include utterances, rituals of transference, medicine (a particular mixture of ingredients to be ingested or used topically), or even surgical procedures in some cases.145 A deity is frequently invoked by the healer to grant healing, to make the ritual efficacious, or to remove the punishment (if divine anger or punishment has been detected).146 Prescriptions and medical remedies were often attributed to the divine (either in their origin or for their effectiveness). The Ebers Papyrus has an example of words to be recited as a medicinal mixture is being prepared.

141 Paul Ghalioungui, Magic and Medical Science in Ancient Egypt (London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., 1963), 33. 142 For example see Ebers Papyrus 188. Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 115-16. 143 Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 332. 144 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 138. 145 See The Edwin Smith Surgical Procedures Papyrus, vols. 1-2 (trans. by James Henry Breasted; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1930). 146 See Ghalioungui, Magic and Medical Science, 37-38.

142

As it is to be, a thousand times. This is the book for the healing of all diseases. May Isis heal me even as she healed Horus of all the pains which his brother Set had inflicted on him when he killed his brother Osiris!147

It has been explained by scholars such as Ghalioungui, “The words could be uttered during the preparation of the remedy, like the following formula (Eb. 360), which was spoken over turtle’s bile while mixing it with honey to prepare a cure for leucomata…”148 Spells could also be spoken over the measuring units or instruments.

Textual evidence for manuals on treatment and healing demonstrate how instructions to prepare certain medicinal remedies were often given to the patient in conjunction with spells pronounced over the instruments or ingredients used. For example, the

Hearst Medical Papyrus contains examples of written prescriptions as well as instructions for reciting incantations over the medicine as it is being prepared. One incantation includes identifying with Horus and relying upon the magic of Isis to make the remedy effective, stating, “The magic of my mother is the protection of my members.”149

Magic was also incorporated into daily life for preventative measures against illness. In the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, there is an incantation which is to be spoken by the petitioner whilst holding a piece of wood and walking around his house.150 This was to ward off anticipated diseases of the season.

Let a man say this incantation before a nefret-flower, bound to a piece of des- wood, and tied with a strip of linen. Let them be passed over the things; the pest will be exorcised, (and) the passage of the disease-demons by everything that is eaten, likewise by the beds, will be prevented.151

147 Translation from Bryan, The Papyrus Ebers, 42. 148 Ghalioungui, Magic and Medical Science, 40. 149 See H XI 3-7 in The Hearst Medical Papyrus (with introduction by George A. Reisner, 1905), 6. 150 Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 205. 151 “Directions for Pronouncing the Seventh Incantation XX 5-8,” trans. James Breasted, The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, 504.

143

Sometimes healing instructions were accompanied by incantations and sometimes there were only treatments listed.152 This was not considered more effective than those which included incantations or more obvious forms of magic ritual. Health manuals such as the Gynaecological Papyrus and the Edwin Smith

Surgical Papyrus are organised collections of medical cases.153 The Ebers Papyrus also demonstrates how the ancient Egyptians used certain mixes of ingredients as remedies (including plants, minerals, part of an animal and even bodily fluid such as human urine or semen).154

Another remedy for the body. Leaves-of-the-Castor-oil-plant Dates-of-the-Male-Palm Cyperus-grass Stalk-of-the-Poppy-plant Coriander Cold Beer Keep moist, strain, and take for four days.155

The Horus cippi were used to prevent and treat a range of afflictions including snake bites and scorpion stings.156 The myth that Horus had been cured from a scorpion sting gave hope that a cure could be found on this inscription.157 These stelae were believed to have healing and protective properties because of the carved depiction of Horus and magic spells. Water was poured over the cippi and collected at the bottom of it. Once the water passed over the inscription, it was believed that

152 The Papyrus Ebers contained prescriptions both with and without any incantations. Redford, The Ancient Gods Speak, 196. 153 F. L. Griffith (ed.), Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob (London: Quaritch, 1898). Dieleman, “Scribal Practices in the Production of Magic Handbooks,” 89. 154 Bryan, The Papyrus Ebers. 155 Bryan, The Papyrus Ebers, 45. 156 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 143-5. 157 Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus,” 209.

144

the water then contained the power of the spell. This was gathered and drunk to cure illness.158

In a text from Deir el-Medina, a type of specialist called rekhet is attested.

This group is known as “the wise women” (or “knowing ones”) and not much is known about who these women were or how this group operated.159 There is not extensive information about them, but it does appear that they were used for dispelling venom from snakes through spoken words, eliminating ghost related afflictions, and possibly even functioning as a medium.160

3.4. Legal Contexts

The importance of upholding maat has been introduced already. It applies to legal contexts, as it is the overarching order of the universe. It is so significant that after death everyone is judged according to how they maintained maat in their life. It is also mentioned in private legal agreements and texts. For example, the Gebelein

Papyri include the record of a house purchase. It includes a statement from a witness to the purchase:

As the king lives, Netjersen ensures that Maat should be enacted, and I am satisfied concerning it.161

The ḳnbt or qnbt councils162 were a type of local court and were associated with some temples. There is evidence from Deir el-Medina that elders of the village were the

158 Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus,” 209. 159 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 140. Leonard H. Lesko (ed.), Pharaoh’s Workers: The Villagers of Deir El Medina (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994), 130. 160 See Brewer and Teeter, Egypt and the Egyptians, 107. Lesko, Pharaoh’s Workers, 130. Deborah Sweeney, “Women Growing Older in Deir El-Medina” in Living and Writing in Deir el- Medina (ed. by Andreas Dorn and Tobias Hofmann; Basel: Schwabe Verlag, 2006), 140. Frankfurter, Religion in Roman Egypt, 211. 161 Nigel C. Strudwick, Texts from the Pyramid Age (Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 185. 162 S. Allam, “Egyptian Law Courts in Pharaonic and Hellenistic Times,” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 77 (1992): 109-127. See page 116 (footnote 37), “The word qnbt became a

145

members of this council.163 Temple staff were involved in some instances and there is evidence that lector priests were among the members.164 Papyrus Berlin 3047 contains a list of personnel involved with this legal settlement (dating to around the time of Rameses II). This list includes: “Web-priest and lector of Amun ҆Imn-ḥtp,

Web-priest and lector of Amun Anjj, Web-priest of the temple of Amun Ḥa-ja.”165 The high priest was involved in the court and resolving the issue of the fields.166

In another example, “A Lawsuit Arising from the Purchase of Two Slaves,” the ḳnbt are involved in giving the oath and legal resolution to this case.

Said by Court of judges [ḳnbt] to the citoyenne Erēnofre: ‘Take an oath by the Sovereign ….’

Oath by the Sovereign spoken by the citoyenne Erēnofre. ‘As Amūn endures, and as the Prince endures, if witnesses establish against me that there was any property belonging to the citoyenne Bekmūt (comprised) in this silver which I gave for this servant, and I have concealed it, I will be liable to 100 strokes, 167 after being deprived of her.’

The Harim Conspiracy provides an interesting setting for magic mentioned in a legal context. This account is a narrative summary of the alleged crimes, the trial and verdict surrounding the plot to kill Rameses III.168 Robert K. Ritner observes that this

standard term to signify the sort of document that can be laid before law courts and acknowledged by them.” 163 S. P. Vleeming, “The Days on which the ḳnbt used to Gather,” 183 in Gleanings from Deir El-Medina (ed. R. J. Demaree and Jac. J. Janssen; Leiden: Nederlands Institutuut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1982): 183-192. 164 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 130. 165 Wolfgang Helck, “Der Papyrus Berlin P 3047,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 2 (1963): 65-73, see page 66. 166 “Gegenüber dem Tempel, dessen Hohenpriester noch dazu im Gerichtshof saß, konnte Ni- ’a nicht wagen, die Felder weiter illegal zurückzuhalten und gab seine Zumstimmung.” Helck, “Der Papyrus Berlin,” 70. 167 Papyrus Cairo 65739, trans. Alan H. Gardiner, “A Lawsuit Arising from the Purchase of Two Slaves,” JEA 21 (1935), 140-146. John A. Wilson, “The Oath in Ancient Egypt,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 7 (1948): 129-156, see page 139. 168 Portions of this are recorded in various documents including the Judicial Papyrus of Turin, Papyrus Rollin, and Papyrus Lee.

146

is the only known “evidence of a trial or accusation for sorcery known from ancient

Egypt.”169

Papyrus Rollin describes the conspirator’s actions: “He began to make writings of magic (HkAw) for exorcising (and) for disturbing, (and he began) to make some gods of wax (and) some portions (pXr .wt) for laming the limbs of people …

Now when he realized the great crimes worthy of death which he had done, he killed himself.”170

The crime was not the participation in magic, but the use of magic in plotting to kill the king. Magic could be used as a weapon (as noted in the Instruction for King

Merikare). As is stressed in Ritner’s work magic is, “Comparable to a sword…The records of the Harim Conspiracy thus reveal a condemnation of sorcery against the king, not a condemnation of sorcery itself.”171

3.5. Funerary Contexts

Death and the afterlife is another important sphere of one’s existence. Funerary texts were an important part of ancient Egypt. The Pyramid Texts are “the oldest, smallest, and best preserved of the Old Kingdom sources.”172 These were created for royalty and were inscribed in the tombs of kings.173 Magic is evident throughout funerary texts, providing protection and sustenance to the deceased in the afterlife. Steven

Snape has made an interesting observation that the treatment of the dead parallels the

Egyptian treatment of deities.174 The image (statue) of the deity needed to be washed,

169 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 192. 170 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 193-94. 171 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 199. 172 James P. Allen, The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts (2nd ed.; Atlanta, SBL, 2015), 1. 173 Although Rosalie David, has pointed out a few cases of non-royal funerary texts during the Old Kingdom in Religion and Magic, 92. 174 Steven Snape, Ancient Egyptian Tombs: The Culture of Life and Death (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2011), 41-42.

147

dressed, fed, and would receive offerings. This was similar to caring for the deceased to ensure a continued existence in the afterlife.175 In the Old Kingdom, this particular care was mostly for deceased royalty and a few royal officials. By the New Kingdom, this was applicable to significantly more people, including non-royals.

Food was an important part of maintaining the dead. It should be brought to the tomb and the inscribed funerary texts read aloud. A stela from the chapel of

Khentyka at Balat provides an example of what occurs if one did not bring food. The food offering should be pronounced and is made effective through magic.

O you who live upon earth and who shall pass by this tomb of mine: they who shall love the king, especially any scribe, and those who read out the writing on this stela, are who shall give me bread and beer from that which you possess. If you possess nothing, then you shall make this pronouncement: ‘a thousand of bread and a thousand of beer for the boat captain, the ruler of the oasis Khentika.’176

This written and verbal magical pronouncement brings the food offering into existence and made accessible to the deceased. Should this inscription be eroded or chiselled out, the food offering would no longer exist and consequently would be highly problematic for the deceased persons.

In order to ward off serpents in the journey through the underworld, certain spells were inscribed in the pyramids for the protection of the deceased. These are sometimes referred to as the “serpent spells” in the Pyramid Texts and includes utterance 226-243.177 These spells illustrate the threat that serpents (including mythological ones) and other creatures posed, even in death. Utterance 227 says,

175 Snape, Ancient Egyptian Tombs, 41. 176 Strudwick, Texts from the Pyramid Age, 374-75. 177 “Spells for Protection of the Mummy” in Allen, Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts, 19-20.

148

“Hpnw-snake, I say this about you! God-spelling scorpion, I say this about you!

Overturn yourself, drive into the earth, you about whom I have said this!”178

Further examples of magic can be found in the Coffin Texts (funerary texts from the First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom).179 There is direct borrowing from the Pyramid Texts as well as new material developed in the Coffin

Texts. In contrast with the Pyramid Texts, this group of funerary texts were for both royalty and non-royal persons. These texts describe the Duat (underworld) as “ruled by the god Osiris” and the deceased is identified with Osiris.180

Coffin Text 1130 describes the threat of the serpents (representing danger), “I repeat to you the good deeds which my own heart did for me from within the serpent- coil, in order to silence strife … I am he who is in the shrine, master of action who destroys the storm; who drives off the serpents of many names when he goes from his shrine.”181

The Book of the Dead or the Book of Coming Forth by Day is a compilation of funerary texts from the New Kingdom. It uses material from both the Pyramid and

Coffin Texts and also adds new content and varying inclusion of spells. These magical spells were written on papyri and by the New Kingdom increasingly became more “widely available” so that they could be included in one’s burial and provide safety in the journey to the next world.182 These texts address various stages and challenges in one’s existence after death. Bob Brier identifies these as “(1) Protection

178 Allen, Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts, 19. 179 First Intermediate Period (ca. 2216-2137 BCE) and Middle Kingdom (ca. 2137-1781 BCE). 180 Michael E. Habicht, “Coffin Texts,” in Mummies Around the World: An Encyclopedia of Mummies in History, Religion, and Popular Culture (ed. Matt Cardin; Oxford: ABC-CLIO, 2015), 71- 73. 181 Lichtheim, AEL 1:131-32. 182 David, Magic and Religion, 92.

149

of the body in the tomb; (2) Journey to the netherworld; (3) Judgment by the gods; and (4) Existence in the next world.”183

As the Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts have spells against serpents, so does the Book of the Dead. Chapter 35, “Depart, leave me, pass me by, you snake.”184

Chapter 39 identifies Apophis as the serpent enemy: “Fall! Crawl away, Apophis, you enemy of Re!”185

Additional spells throughout this text make explicit reference to magic (heka).

One example is found in Chapter 64, “Come following me, for my Heka-magic is firm and my Akhu-magic is my protection which I inherited.”186 Chapter 99 contains the recurring phrase “Who are you who comes? I am a magician.”187 The deceased is identified with the magician as part of this spell to bring the ferryboat “in the God’s

Domain.”188

3.6. Literary Context: Tales and Stories

Stories and tales were told as part of everyday life of ancient Egypt. With very low literacy rates, public story-telling was a means of communicating information as well as entertainment. These tales often had implicit morals or messages which would be related to a current context and were a means of royal propaganda, as observed by

Rosalie David. These tales and other forms of stories were “disseminated throughout the country, and handed down by generations of public story-tellers.”189 Magic plays

183 Bob Brier, “The Book of the Dead,” in Mummies Around the World: An Encyclopedia of Mummies in History, Religion, and Popular Culture, (ed. Matt Cardin; Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 2015), 36-39 184 Raymond Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth by Day (introduction by Ogden Goelet; San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1994, 1998), 104. 185 Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 104. 186 Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 107. 187 Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 110-111. 188 Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 110. 189 David, Religion and Magic, 111.

150

a key role in several tales from different periods of time, which reiterates how widespread and normal magic was in everyday life.

The Westcar Papyrus contains a cycle of five tales (which Spalinger identifies as “wonder tales”),190 although part of the text appears to be missing. It was composed in the Middle Kingdom but the stories are set in the Fourth Dynasty and feature King Cheops/Khufu. The story tells of the king’s boredom and summons his sons to entertain him with stories of former kings. The tales describe a number of wonders and magic performed by magicians (most identified as lector priests).

(i) The Tale of King Cheops’ Court begins with Prince Chephren/Khaefre reciting a story of a “wonder” (biAyt) during the time of Nebka. The lector priest

Ubainer/Webaoner and King Nebka went to make an offering at the temple.

Ubainer/Webaoner’s wife loved one of the townsmen and she spent the day drinking with him. This was reported back to Ubainer/Webaoner. He requested ebony and electrum and formed a crocodile out of wax. The text explains:

[Then] he [modell]ed a [wax] crocodile, seven [fingers long]. [And he] read out [a spell] reading [it thus], ‘[As for the man] who will come to wash in my pool, [you shall seize] that commoner [in your mouth]!’ Then he gave it to the [stew]ard, and said to him, ‘Now [wh]en the commoner has gone down to my pool, as is his daily custom, you shall throw [this] crocodile [into the water] after him!’ The [steward] then went, and took the wax crocodile with him.191

The lector priest sent the steward to the pool where the commoner visited each day. He instructed him to throw the wax crocodile into the water once the commoner was there. When this took place, the wax crocodile was transformed into a living one and captured the commoner in its mouth. Ubainer was with the king at this time and remained with him for seven days. After this, Ubainer went to the crocodile and invited the king to see what wonder had occurred.

190 Anthony Spalinger, “Osiris, Re and Cheops,” ZÄS 134 (2007): 173-194. 191 Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe, 107.

151

Then Ubainer [summoned the] crocodile, saying, ‘Bring [the] commoner [immediately]!’ [The] crocodile [came] out, [with the commoner in its mouth]. Then the high lector priest Ubainer said, ‘[That commoner – release] him!’ Then it [spat] him [out]. Then it put [him down without having harmed] him. And the Majesty of the Dual King Nebka, the justified, said, ‘This is surely a fierce crocodile!’ Ubainer then bent down. Then he took hold of it. And in his hand it was a wax crocodile.192

The tale concludes with the king instructing the crocodile to “Take what is yours,” which resulted in the crocodile disappearing into the water.193 He sent Ubainer’s adulterous wife away to be burnt. He praised the lector priest for the “wonder which happened” and esteemed him for his wisdom.

(ii) Another tale in this cycle begins with Prince Bauefre telling a “wonder”

(biAyt) to entertain the king. In the story, King Sneferu was bored so he summoned the lector priest, Djadjaemankh, who suggest the king take his boat to the lake. The king requested twenty beautiful women who would row the boat for him. Whilst rowing, one woman’s pendant fell into the lake. The king then calls upon the lector priest Djadjaemankh to assist in the retrieval of the pendant.

Then the high lector priest Djadjaemankh said his words of magic. Then he put one side of the lake’s water on top of the other, and he found the fish-pendant lying on a sherd. Then he brought it back, and it was given to its owner. Now the water was twelve cubits in the middle, and it ended up as twenty-four cubits, once it was folded. Then he said his words of magic. Then he brought these waters of the lake back to their usual position, and his Majesty spent all the day making holiday, with the entire Royal Household (l.p.h.!). And so he rewarded the high lector priest Djadjaemankh with every good thing.194

(iii) An additional relevant text is from the Late Period. These are two stories which describe Setne Khamwas, the fourth son of Ramesses II. Historically, he was responsible for many building projects, the restoration of sacred monuments, and was

192 Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe, 108. 193 Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe, 109. 194 Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe, 111.

152

the high priests at Memphis. After his death, he was esteemed for being a magician, scribe, and with close ties to Thoth, the god of writing.195 Setne I cycle is missing the first part of the story. This has been reconstructed by Miriam Lichtheim as follows:

Prince Khamwas, son of Rameses II and high priest of Ptah at Memphis, was a very learned scribe and magician who spent his time in the study of ancient monuments and books. One day he was told of the existence of a book of magic written by the god Thoth himself and kept in the tomb of a prince named Naneferkaptah (Na-nefer-ka-ptah), who had lived in the distant past and was buried somewhere in the vast necropolis of Memphis, After a long search, Prince Khamwas, accompanied by his foster brother Inaros, found the tomb of Nanefertaptah and entered it. He saw the magic book, which radiated a strong light, and tried to seize it. But the spirits of Naneferkaptah and his wife Ahwere rose up to defend their cherished possession.196

The story explains that Naneferkaptah was a deceased prince and magician who had stolen a magic book written by Thoth. Khaemwas (also called Setne) enters the tomb and as he attempts to recover the book, he is confronted by the ghost of

Ihweret (Neneferkaptah’s sister/wife), which explains that the family has been separated in burial. Setne eventually retrieves the book by means of magic. This triggers an encounter with Tabubue and Setne negotiates favour in exchange for the murder of his children. Eventually the book of returned, Ihweret and Meribptah are reburied so to join Naneferkaptah, Setne’s children are unharmed, and all is well again.197

In Setne II, the story includes the miraculous birth of his son, Si-Osiris and his magic dual with a Nubian whilst visiting the Underworld with Setne Khaemwas.198

Horus-the-son-of-the-Wolf made a spell of magical writing, while yet in the shape of Si-Osire, against the shaman of Cush. He caused fired to surround him … Pharaoh was earth shaken in wonder together with his great men at the things that they had seen in the court, as they said, ‘There is no good scribe or wise

195 Lichtheim, AEL 3:125. 196 Lichtheim, AEL 3: 127. 197 Steve Vinson, “The Names ‘Naneferkaptah,’ ‘Ihweret,’ and ‘Tabubue’ in the ‘First Tale of Setne Khaemwas,’” JNES 68 (2009): 283-304, see page 286. 198 Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 470.

153

man like Horus-the-son-of-the-Wolf! No other will come into existence after him ever again!199

3.7 Private and Official Examples of Magic

One recurring question is whether the official (state) magico-religious beliefs and practices of Egypt were held by the majority of the people. The average person in ancient Egypt did not have a fraction of the resources, wealth, and personnel of the palace or temple, so as a result religious practice in households and communities likely looked different to royal cultic practice.

Barry Kemp observes three main aspects to ancient religion. These components include beliefs, works, and “profile of faith in a population.”200 Textual sources are used to examine belief while archaeological artefacts, temples, and buildings shed light on religious works. The profile of faith in a population in ancient

Egypt cannot be measured but Kemp argues it is fruitful to attempt to look at the values and reasons behind behaviour.201 Even with evidence of religious practices, there is still quite a lot of interpretive work to be done. Understanding the reasons behind beliefs and actions is difficult to pinpoint, but provides great insight into the religious milieu of ancient Egypt. This does not address the question of the differences between temple and household religion, but it remains a helpful approach.

One of the difficulties in drawing conclusions on this issue is that rituals in the households are not generally recorded and do not leave much archaeological evidence of their occurrence. The Edwin Smith Papyrus (medical) would be one example of textual evidence of rituals, procedures, and remedies which may take place in the home, but directed under the guidance of a physician. But most records of magic

199 Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 489. 200 Barry Kemp, “How Religious were the Ancient Egyptians?” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5 (1995): 25-54. 201 Kemp, “How Religious were the Ancient Egyptians?” 26.

154

ritual have royal or temple connections and do not necessarily provide much information on what was practised in most households.

With such a sparse portion of the population literate, spells and rituals were not accessible the average person without the involvement of a specialist (a priest).202

Instances of magic rituals performed outside of the temple are not presented as deviant.203 An example of apotropaic ritual used domestically is O. Gardiner 363 “A

Spell Against Night Terrors.”204 This spell (along with other similar spells) sheds light on pottery with painted images of cobras found in houses. As line 10 of this

New Kingdom text indicates, the spell is to be recited over the clay pot and “one is placed in [each] corner [or every room/of any bedroom].”205 By doing this, the images on the pots would successfully ward off ghosts or night terrors in a bedroom.

Obtaining this spell and instructions for it would have been through a specialist at some point. However, such apotropaic ritual was in no way considered incompatible with public rituals. The private and public instances of magic coexisted simultaneously without competing with one another.

The “Harem Conspiracy” (ca. 1182-1151 BCE) is an unusual representation of private magic being portrayed as conflicting with official, royal magic.206 Magic here is presented as a weapon, and a malevolent magical attack was equated with a physical attack. This account initially appears to condemn certain types of magic but

202 Gertie Englund, “Gods as a Frame of Reference: On Thinking and Concepts of Thought in Ancient Egypt,” in The Religion of the Ancient Egyptians: Cognitive Structures and Popular Expressions, ed. Gertie Englund (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1987): 7-28, see page 9. 203 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 189. 204 Robert K. Ritner, “O. Gardiner 363: A Spell Against Night Terrors,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 27 (1990): 25-41. Also see Kemp, “How Religious were the Ancient Egyptians?” 31-32. 205 Ritner, “O. Gardiner 363,” 26. 206 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 192.

155

upon closer examination, it is condemning magic against the king.207 Magic, like any other action, is not permitted when it is used for the purpose of harming of the king.

The issues of restriction and control apply to both private and public rituals and certainly magic was somewhat restrained. The fact that literacy rates were low for much of pharaonic Egypt limits who could access written spells. Magic was practised by the Pharaoh, priests, and specialists as well as used by the average civilian by means of a specialist. Due to resources, specialised knowledge, and the scarcity of written material, magic practiced in the temple was quite different to magic in communities. Due to the widespread acceptance and use of magic, Baines concludes that magic was not considered restricted knowledge, but the most skilled examples of magic would be limited to the experts.208

3.8 Implications and Conclusion

The ancient Near East shares some perspectives and practices on religion and magic, as seen in chapter one. But there are notable differences. This chapter has highlighted some of the unique aspects of Egypt’s portrayal of experiencing the divine and engaging in magic (heka). The concept of maat was crucial to all spheres of life in ancient Egypt. The interwoven nature of religion and magic is present in virtually all aspects of society.

Heka and maat were important aspects to the concept of Egypt’s divine kingship. The Pharaoh was granted a semi-divine status and served as a representative of the gods on earth. He was imbued with heka and was even referred

207 See Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 199. 208 John Baines, “Restricted Knowledge, Hierarchy, and Decorum: Modern Perceptions and Ancient Institutions,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 27 (1990): 1-23, see page 15.

156

to as “the great Magician” in the coronation hymn in the Pyramid Text.209 It was the

Pharaoh’s responsibility to maintain maat and promote justice and peace in Egypt through upholding the divine cosmic order. One way this was fulfilled was through the worship and care of the gods during temple activities. Magic was an important aspect of temple rituals (such as the Daily Temple Ritual). Some priests were involved in healing and apotropaic rituals and patient treatment, which relied upon magic for an effective result.

An important conclusion to draw from the Egyptian evidence in this chapter is that there is no dichotomy between “religion” and “magic” (as is presented in some modern era studies). Heka and anku are morally neutral concepts, and not illicit in themselves. Unlike Mesopotamia, Egypt does not have a term for malicious or forbidden magic. The only instances of the condemnation of magic are directly related to the intended result. If the intention of magic is to break the law, then it was condemned on the grounds of lawbreaking rather than on engagement in magic (for example, “The Harim Conspiracy”). In most cases, magic is used as a means of a solution or remedy to life issues.

There are several aspects of the Egyptian religious milieu that are of interest in exploring the presentation of Moses in the Pentateuchal narratives. As mentioned

.חרטמים earlier, there is arguably a relation between the Hry-hb.(t) (lector priests) and

But more than a possible linguistic connection, there is evidence of numerous similarities in the portrayed function and actions of these specialists. This will be mentioned in chapter four as the Moses narratives are examined and will be further

209 Spells 220-22, Pyramid Texts. Also see Henri Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1978), 107.

157

analysed in Chapter Five where the biblical texts are compared with the Egyptian evidence.

158

CHAPTER FOUR

REFLECTIONS OF MAGIC IN THE MOSES NARRATIVES: SELECTED PASSAGES

This chapter will examine portions of the Moses narratives in the Pentateuch which present Moses engaging in wonder-working. The purpose is to explore the biblical text before returning to evidence from ancient Egypt (in Chapter Five). Attention is given to the Moses narratives in order to assess the treatment of wonders or magic so that we move closer to determining if Moses was portrayed as a “magician” in the texts.

4.1. Summary of Source Critical Problems in the Moses Narratives

The Moses narratives are being addressed altogether here, but it should first be acknowledged that this is not a unified piece of writing and reflects multiple authors and editors. The Documentary Hypothesis has long been the prevailing theory in

Pentateuchal studies and even recent interpretations and approaches often respond to or reject this framework. For this reason, source criticism is acknowledged in this chapter when relevant to the discussion on a particular text but will not be a key focus.

159

The classic Documentary Hypothesis (J, E, P, D) has been the predominant position in biblical criticism for much of the 19th and 20th centuries.1 Variations of this continue to be put forth, as well as completely new theories and approaches.2

Source criticism and redaction criticism continue to be important approaches to studies of the Hebrew Bible. In order to illustrate the division in scholarship, a few works will be mentioned here.3

In 1993 Rolf Rendtorff provocatively declared, “the traditional Documentary

Hypothesis has come to an end.”4 However, recently there has been a resurgence of the four source documentary theory (with some adaptation made) by scholars such as

Joel Baden, Jeffrey Stackert, and Richard Elliott Friedman.5 Baden argues that a straightforward reading of Exodus “presents contradictory viewpoints, indeed contradictory plot points” which is to be expected once we accept multiple authors, and more precisely, three distinct “literary manifestations.”6 Brevard Childs7 found adequate evidence of the presence of J, E, and P sources in narratives in Exodus and

1 Julius Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (Cleveland, OH: The World Publishing Company, 1957). 2 Mark S. Smith summarises this by saying, “Assaults on this paradigm have taken three general forms: modifications of source theories, redactionally oriented theories, and synchronic approaches,” in “The Literary Arrangement of the Priestly Redaction of Exodus: A Preliminary Investigation,” CBQ 58 (1996): 25-50, see page 27. 3 An overview of source critical approaches to Pentateuchal studies can be found in Gale A. Yee, Hugh R. Page Jr., Matthew J. M. Coomber (eds.), The Pentateuch: Fortress Commentary on the Bible Study Edition (Minneapolis: Ausburg Fortress Press, 2016), 70-73 and Thomas Römer, “Pentateuchforschung,” Lexikon Bibelwissenschaft, December 2015, www.bibelwissenschaft.de/stichhwort/30711/. A detailed look at the development and impact of the Documentary Hypothesis is found in Ernest Nicholson, The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1998). Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Schmid, Baruch J. Schwartz (eds.), The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011). 4 Rolf Rendtorff, “The Paradigm is Changing: Hopes – and Fears,” Biblical Interpretation 1 (1993): 34-53, quotation from page 44. 5 Joel S. Baden, The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012). Jeffrey Stackert, A Prophet Like Moses: Prophecy Law, and Israelite Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014). Richard Elliott Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible? (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1987). 6 Joel S. Baden, The Book of Exodus: A Biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019), 18 7 Brevard Childs, The Book of Exodus (Louisville, KY: The Westminster Press, 1974), 131.

160

others who take this approach include: John I. Durham,8 William H. C. Propp,9 J. P.

Hyatt,10 and Joseph Blenkinsopp.11

Noth rejected the three source theory in Exodus and argued that J and P are present.12 Thomas B. Dozeman does not consider E to be an independent source and chooses to designate sources as non-P and P.13 John Van Seters proposes that J and P are the main sources for the plague narratives.14 Bernard F. Batto15 argues E is too complex to disentangle from J, so refers to J/E source and P source, as does Moshe

Greenberg.16

Frank Moore Cross concluded that “P is not a narrative source.”17 However,

Gary A. Rendsburg takes a different approach in that he does not detect a division of sources in Exodus 1-15.18 He believes that the Documentary Hypothesis is beneficial

8 John I. Durham, Exodus (Waco: Word Books Publisher, 1987), 94-96. 9 William H. C. Propp, Exodus 1-18 (New York: The Anchor Bible, 1999). 10 J. P. Hyatt, Exodus: The New Century Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), see page 97 for an outline of J, E, P in 7-11. 11 Joseph Blenkinsopp, The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1992). 12 M. Noth, Exodus: A Commentary (trans. J.S. Bowden; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1962), 69-71. George Coats finds Noth’s theory the most persuasive, accepting two sources in the plague narratives “with E a dependent collection of glosses.” Coats, Moses: Heroic Man, Man of God (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1988), 107. 13 Thomas B. Dozeman, Exodus (Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2009), 36-38. An example from a redactional approach is Rainer Albertz, Exodus, Band I: Exodus 1-18 (Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2012), 19-26. Konrad Schmid also traces to continuity and discontinuity of sources in the Patriarchs and Exodus. He notes places in Exodus that are P or non-P in Erzväter und Exodus: Untersuchungen zur doppelten Begründung der Ursprünge Israels innerhalb der Geschichtbücher des Alten Testaments (Düsseldorf: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999), 8, 241. 14 John Van Seters, The Life of Moses: The Yahwist as Historian in Exodus-Number (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1994), 77-78, 100-112. 15 Bernard F. Batto, “Mythic Dimensions of the Exodus Tradition,” in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, ed. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp (New York: Springer, 2015): 187-195, see page 189. 16 Moshe Greenberg, “The Redaction of the Plague Narrative in Exodus,” in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed. Hans Goedicke (Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press, 1971): 243-252, see page 245. 17 Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997), 303. Cross proposes that the Priestly strata did not exist independently as a narrative document, but was a school using various written documents and oral sources. “The Priestly work, JEP, was especially the Tetrateuch in its penultimate form,” 325. 18 Gary A. Rendsburg, “The Literary Unity of the Exodus Narrative,” in “Did I Not Bring You Out of Egypt?” Biblical, Archaeological and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, ed.

161

when examining the legal-cultic material, (as Exodus 25–Numbers 10 is quite distinct from Deuteronomy), but not with the other portions of Exodus. Thus Rendsburg maintains, “the literary reading of this material yields a narrative unity for this section of the Torah.”19 Umberto Cassuto favours reading the plagues narrative as a unified,

“organically homogenous composition” rather than a result of combined sources and fragments.20

Carol Meyers acknowledges the presence of multiple sources in the plagues narrative (possibly P, J and/or E). She suggests, “Whether or not it originated as composite sources, its present canonical form is a sophisticated literary structure that has been recognized as such since early postbibilical times.”21 Similarly Fretheim recognises the existence of J, E, and P sources but chooses to “focus on this last major redactional stage” of the Tetrateuch.

This summary highlights various perspectives on the sources of the Pentateuch

(or in some cases, Tetrateuch) which shows the lack of consensus regarding the designation of sources in the Moses narratives. One question which arises from this study is whether source criticism can shed light on the portrayal of magic in the

Pentateuchal narratives. Does one source present magic more favourably than the others? Does one indicate more hostility? Is an attempt to trace different sources in these narratives fruitful in answering the question if Moses is portrayed as a magician?

James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016): 113-132. 19 Rendsburg, “The Literary Unity,” 114. 20 U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1983), 93. 21 Carol Meyers, Exodus (The New Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 78. George V. Pixley acknowledges the Documentary Hypothesis, but prefers to address the final form of the text as it’s arrangement and preservation appears to have intentionality behind it. On Exodus: A Liberation Perspective (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987), xvi-xvii

162

In order to begin addressing these questions, a chart is provided in Appendix

1. This outlines what the majority of commentators consider to be the source(s) attributed to each passage from Exodus and Numbers used in this chapter. In most of these portions of the texts, commentators find it very difficult to discern J from E

(with many doubtful that it is even possible). For this reason, we have chosen to limit the delineation of sources to non-P and P, as Thomas Dozeman has done.22 The chart limits the footnote citations to only a few commentaries which focus on the source critical issues. However, all commentaries cited in this chapter were used in gathering a general “consensus” for the information. This is not to suggest that a true consensus has been reached among scholars. The purpose of tracking this general information in a chart is to determine whether source criticism sheds any light on the issue of magic. With this in mind, we will proceed to examine portions of the narratives in their final form from Exodus and Numbers whilst acknowledging the immense complexity behind the text.

4.2. Signs and Themes Preceding the Plagues: Exodus 4:1-9 and 7:1-7

Exodus 4 follows the narrative of the burning bush (3:1-12), the revelation of the divine name (3:13-15), and the call of Moses to lead the Hebrew people out of Egypt

(3:16-22). Moses responds with several objections to fulfilling this role. As a

as a means of authenticating and (אֹות) response, YHWH provides three signs persuading Moses. The focus here will be on the “signs” (the transformation of a staff into a serpent, the diseased hand, and water turning to blood when poured out), rather than on the objections raised by Moses in the narrative.23

22 Dozeman, Exodus, 31-46. 23 William Johnstone proposes these three ‘signs’ be understood in light “the wider context of the D-version,” specifically Deuteronomy 13:2-6 and 18:15-22 as a means of authentication in Exodus

163

These three wonders have usually been understood as the authentication of

Moses before the Hebrew people.24 At the same time, these signs also seem to anticipate the plagues and wonders that will be performed later in the narrative.25

They involve performance by means of the staff, gesture, and contact/manipulation, all of which are evident is subsequent wonders. William H. C. Propp refers to these signs as “three magic tricks,” heightening the intrigue about how these occurrences should be interpreted.26 Similarly, Thomas B. Dozeman calls these “three magical powers” given by God.27 But not all commentators find “magic tricks” to be a suitable designation.28

The three signs can also be classified as “life-death contrast” (as has been done by Cornelius Houtman).29 He argued that the serpent, the diseased hand, and the blood are all potentially related to death. Each of these signs demonstrates YHWH’s power and authority over life and death.30 The skin affliction/disease and blood have an obvious connection to death. The reversing of these signs is the restoration of health and life. The association of serpent imagery in the context of death, healing, or magic is widely attested in the ancient Near East. Leslie S. Wilson identified three main “serpent traditions” and noted the combining of these separate traditions. He

1-19 (Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2014), 109. In other words, these signs in Exodus 4:1-9 authenticate Moses as an agent and true prophet of YHWH. 24 This is where Moses is initiated into the role not just as leader but also wonder-wonder. “Er stattete Mose mit drei Beglaubigungswundern (Ex 4,2- 4.6-8.9) aus, durch die Mose über den Kreis der Propheten hinaus in den Stand der Wundertäter erhoben wurde.” Albertz, Exodus, 19. 25 Johnstone connects these signs with Exodus 7:15, 17; Numbers 12:10-15, and 21:5-9, (Exodus 1-19, 108-109). Jan Christian Gertz, Tradition und Redaktion in der Exoduserzählung: Untersuchungen zur Endredaktion des Pentateuch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 310. “. . . dass Jahwes Zusage und Auftrag auf das weitere Geschehen, die Zeichen vor dem Pharao zu beziehen sind.” 26 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 226. 27 Dozeman, Exodus, 140. 28 For example, Helmut Utzschneider and Wolfgang Oswald, Exodus 1-15 (trans. Philip Sumpter; Stuttgart: Vergal W. Kohlhammer, 2015), 126-7. They use the phrase “miracles of transformation.” Durham specifies these as “signs of Moses’ authority,” Exodus, 41. Moshe Greenberg only uses the word “signs” to refer to these acts, Understanding Exodus: A Holistic Commentary on Exodus 1-11 (Eugene: Cascade Books, 2013), 71. 29 Cornelis Houtman, Exodus, vol. 1 (Kampen: Kok Publishing House, 1993), 387. 30 Childs, The Book of Exodus, 78.

164

concludes that the evidence indicates the serpent traditions “become substantially commingled in the Israel of the 7th century BCE” and provides examples across the ancient Near East where serpents are associated with death.31

The signs arguably provide a foretaste of the wonders which will occur in 7-

11. Propp makes the assertion that, “[t]hese tricks are not particularly impressive.

They stand in relation to the Plagues of Egypt as the Burning Bush does to Mount

Sinai aflame.”32 When understood in the broader context of the “plagues narrative,”33 it is evident that events in Exodus 7-14 are significantly more dramatic and the impact is far reaching. Contrary to Propp, Nahum B. Sarna understands these signs to be extraordinary and impressive (even alongside the plagues) precisely because Moses is untrained and unskilled in what could be viewed as Egyptian magic.34 At the same time, Sarna is careful to clarify that while these wonders appeared to be acts of magic, they were wonders produced by YHWH through Moses.35 This position derives from a theological reading more than differences in performance of magic in the ancient world. For example, Sarna writes, “In Egypt the magician manipulates the divine; in

Israel it is the one God who manipulates man and nature.”36 This is the “insider versus outsider” paradigm that Stephen D. Ricks describes in his essay, “The

Magician as Outsider in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.”37 It is problematic because these appear to be more in alignment with modern Western paradigms of “religion versus magic” than reflecting an ancient Near Eastern context.

Carol Meyers also claims that “modern theological considerations” are far removed

31 Leslie S. Wilson, “Nachash and Asherah: Serpent Symbolism and Death, Life, and Healing in the Ancient Near East,” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1999), 19, 20-39. 32 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 227. 33 Exodus 7-11. 34 Nahum M. Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York: Schocken Books, 1996), 59. 35 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 59. 36 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 59. 37 Stephen D. Ricks, “The Magician as Outsider in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament,” in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power (ed. Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki; Boston: Brill, 2001).

165

from the context of the Hebrew Bible and ancient world.38 Sarna does make a valid point that spells, incantations, and magical formulae are not used by Moses at any point in the Exodus narrative, (which we might expect from one engaged in magic performance).39 Instead, Moses is depicted as the mouthpiece of YHWH and conveys

YHWH’s words to the people.

The first sign occurs in 4:2-4 where YHWH instructs Moses to take his staff

and throw it to the ground. The result of this action is the transformation of the (מטה)

The staff is portrayed in the narrative as a regular .(נחשׁ) staff into a serpent shepherd’s staff, without any inherent powers. But through following YHWH’s directives, Moses takes part in performing these wonders. The word rendered as

is the same word which occurs in Genesis 3 and Exodus 7:15. This is (נחשׁ) ”serpent“

is used instead.40 תנין different from Genesis 1:21 and Exodus 7:9, 10, or 12 where

Source criticism points to different authors of 4:2-4 (non-P source), 7:10-12 (P) and

7:15 (a composite text consisting of both non-P and P), but does not sufficiently address how the occurrences of these two terms shape parts of the narrative.

has a mythological aspect to its meaning, it seems that this was תנין Since

regardless of the source. While Karen Joines נחשׁ deliberately chosen instead of

,have synonymous meanings תנין and נחשׁ ,concludes that in the context of Exodus

Gary Rendsburg argues that the change in terminology indicates a deliberate

in 4:2-4 to a much larger creature (whether נחשׁ upgrade” from a regular serpent“

38 Meyers, Exodus, 61 39 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 59. 40 Victor P. Hamilton observes that the same Hebrew word is being used in Exodus 4:2-9 as in Genesis 3, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapid: Baker Academic, 2011). 71. Also see Childs, Exodus, 128.

166

is used instead.41 Even with תנין crocodile or mythological creature) in 7:8-12 when both of these terms appearing, it does not disrupt the continuity of the narrative as there is a general connection found in their range of meaning (serpent, snake, crocodile, dragon, etc.).

What makes this first sign particularly interesting is the ability to transform an inanimate object into a living creature and to reverse this. Stephen Bertman presents a case that the reversibility of signs is attested in the ancient Near East with examples including Moses, Gideon, and Marduk.42 He demonstrates that the ability to produce a reversible sign occurs in some ancient Near Eastern texts when a leader needed acceptance from the group he was trying to lead. For example, in Enuma Elish

Marduk is instructed to produce a reversible wonder which functions as his legitimation as king.

He spoke, and at his word the constellation vanished. He spoke to it again and the constellation was recreated. When the gods his fathers saw how effective his utterance was, They rejoiced, they proclaimed, “Marduk is King!” They invested him with sceptre, throne, and staff-of-office They gave him an unfaceable weapon to crush the foe.43

In light of this, the reversibility of Moses’ first two signs in 4:2-6 is justifiable given his concerns that the Hebrew people will not believe him. One point of interest is the symbolic significance of a leader with a staff. Royalty are frequently depicted with a sceptre or royal staff in the ancient Near East. This imagery connotes authority,

41 Karen Randolph Joines, Serpent Symbolism in the Old Testament (Haddonfield, New Jersey: Haddonfield House, 1974), 2. Rendsburg, “The Literary Unity of the Exodus Narrative,” 128- in Exodus 7 has mythological overtones and should not be interpreted תנין P. Guillaume argues that .29 as an ordinary serpent or crocodile (in “Metamorphosis of a Ferocious Pharaoh,” Biblica 85 (2004): 232-236. Mary Wakeman, God’s Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery (Leiden: Brill, 1973), 72-73, 84-96. This was also discussed in private dialogue with Diana Edelman at the University of Oslo in June 2018 and by e-mail in September 2018. 42 Stephen Bertman, “A Note on the Reversible Miracle,” History of Religions 3 (1964): 323- 327. 43 Enuma Elish Tablet IV translation from Stephanie Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others (Oxford: OUP, 2000), 250.

167

power, and royalty in biblical depictions as well.44 Danny Matthews has drawn parallels between Moses with Joseph and David. All three began as shepherds and

Matthews argues we should view “the activity of shepherding as a royal vocation.”45

This connection is seen elsewhere, especially in Mesopotamia. For example, in an inscription of Nebuchadnezzar II’s restoration of the Ebabbar Temple, he is described as shepherding the land and people.

king of Babylon I, when Marduk, the great lord, the wisest among the gods, the proud one, gave me the shepherdship of the country and the people.46

Other examples of royal-shepherd portrayals include Hammurabi, Nebuchadnezzar I, and Cyrus.47 What this indicates is that the presentation of Moses as first a shepherd and later a royal wonder-worker is connected. In Exodus 4, what is presented as an ordinary shepherd’s staff is transformed into a symbolic sign of power and an instrument of ritual performance (magic).48 Pharaoh and his serpent sceptre

(presumably) are confronted by Moses and his staff (which can become a serpent) and this becomes a theological polemic presenting Moses in a quasi-royal manner.49

The second sign involves Moses’ hand taking on the appearance of disease

and then being restored to health. This skin disease is frequently translated as (צרעת)

44 Psalm 110:2; Isaiah 10:5, 24; Ezekiel 19:11-14. See Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 60. 45 Danny Matthews, Royal Motifs in the Pentateuchal Portrayal of Moses (New York: Bloomsbury, 2012), 53. 46 “Nebuchadnezzar II’s Restoration of the Ebabbar Temple in Larsa,” trans. Paul-Alain Beaulieu (COS 2.122:308-9). Matthews, Royal Motifs, 54. 47 “The Laws of Hammurabi,” trans. Martha Roth (COS 2.131: 351), “The great gods have chosen me, I am indeed the shepherd who brings peace, whose sceptre is just.” “Cyrus Cylinder,” trans. Mordechai Cogan (COS 2.124:315), “And he (Cyrus) shepherded with justice and righteousness all the black-headed people, over whom he (Marduk) had given him victory.” “Nebuchadnezzar and Marduk,” trans. Benjamin R. Foster, From Distant Days: Myths, Tales, and Poetry of Ancient Mesopotamia (Bethesda: CDL Press, 1995), 198. Matthews, Royal Motifs, 54. 48 Sarna affirms the connection between Pharaoh, sceptre and snakes, asserting, “Sometimes the pharaohs hold a serpent staff in their hand,” 60. 49 Matthews, Royal Motifs, 1-3.

168

“leprous”50 although many commentators have noted that the rendering should refer to a type of skin disease or affliction rather than what has become understood as

Hansen’s disease.51

Cassuto asserts that leprosy was prevalent in ancient Egypt and so this sign was in keeping with the Egyptian environment and Exodus 4:6-7 should be interpreted as leprosy.52 This claim has largely been refuted in more recent scholarship. For example, Carol Meyers claims that Hansen’s disease is not clearly

-as “a snow צרעת attested until the third century BCE.53 Houtman prefers to translate like rash” since this term was used to denote a variety of skin diseases, rather than

Hansen’s disease.54 The precise meaning and etymology remains disputed, but the

are often connected to divine punishment.55 This does not seem צרעת occurrences of to be the case in the context of Exodus 4, making this somewhat unusual. Since it is

refers to Hansen’s disease, we will interpret it broadly as some צרעת unlikely that type of skin disease or affliction.

50 It appears to be the most common way of translating this into English versions of the Bible. This is the case with the following English Bible translations: ASV, ESV, KJV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, and RSV. 51 Meyers, Exodus, 61. 52 Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, 47. 53Meyers, Exodus, 61. Gwen Robbins et al. claim that the earliest Egyptian textual reference to leprosy is in the Ebers Papyrus (ca. 1500 BCE), but this has not been verified with scientific evidence. Consequently, this textual evidence alone is controversial for establishing when leprosy (Hansen’s disease) existed in Egypt. They propose that evidence from around the sixth century BCE is far more widely accepted as one of the earliest attestations to Hansen’s disease (recorded in South Asian texts Sushruta Samhita and Arthashastra as well as Greek accounts from the fourth century BCE). See Gwen Robbins, V. Mushrif Tripathy, V.N. Misra, et al. “Ancient Skeletal Evidence for Leprosy in India (2000 BC)” Public Library of Science One 5 (2009), 1. Joseph Zias suggests that anthropological evidence can verify Hansen’s disease in the ancient Near East by the fifth century CE but that textual accounts indicate its presence among the armies of Alexander the Great in 327-326 BCE. Zias, “Lust and Leprosy: Confusion or Correlation?” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 275 (1989): 27-31. 54 Houtman, Exodus, vol. 1, 394-395. 55 Michael L. Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 94. Examples .as a divine punishment includes: Numbers 12:10-15; Deuteronomy 24:8-9; 2 Kings 5:27, 15:5 צרעת of Leviticus 13-14 includes instructions for ritual cleansing and purity for those who were unclean .but does not connect this with punishment here ,צרעת because of

169

The implications of this sign are puzzling. The only other instance of this term in the Moses narratives is when Miriam is described as “leprous, like snow”56 in

Numbers 12:10. The other two signs in Exodus 4 (the staff becomes a snake and the water becomes blood) seem to make an additional (and intensified) appearance in the plagues cycle (Exodus 7-11). Perhaps this could be very loosely connected with the

“boils” (skin affliction) in Exodus 9:8-12 as another instance of a type of skin affliction. But the term used in Exodus 9 and the description of the affliction is very different than in 4:4-6, so this seems unconvincing. YHWH is the source of healing

demonstrated in 4:4-6 and stated in 15:26).57 However, this sign is not) צרעת of the repeated in Exodus 7 as the other two signs in this episode are and so this sign is an anomaly.

As the third sign Moses is to take water from the Nile and when it is poured on

While it is the last sign in Exodus 4:1-9, it will .(דם) the ground it becomes blood become the first plague, affecting all of the water in Exodus 7:19-20. Unlike the first two signs this one is not reversible and so it diverges slightly from the pattern of those signs. The transforming of water to blood concludes the episode of signs in Exodus 4 but is what will begin the plagues in 7:14 when the Nile is turned to blood. Both water and blood are necessary for life and are symbolic of vitality and life and so there is implication that YHWH is the one who controls life (and life-giving elements).58

Exodus 7:1 continues the theme of authenticating Moses as a divinely chosen leader. This verse is crucial to understanding the subsequent portrayal of Moses in

56 Richard Elliott Friedman, Commentary on the Torah (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2003), 468. So there is not necessarily a direct correlation between .צרעת is used, not מחלה In Exodus 15:26 57 4:4-6 and 15:26, but the general theme of YHWH as healer is evident in both places of the narrative. 58 B. Becking, “Blood,” DDD, 175. Also discussed via e-mail with Diana Edelman (September 2018).

170

to Pharaoh and Aaron will be אלהים the narrative.59 YHWH tells Moses that he is like

Moses will act as an agent of God and subsequent actions will be on .(7:1) נביא his

YHWH’s behalf. Aaron will speak and act for Moses, when prompted.

This verse has generated a variety of interpretations, with a few examples mentioned below. Durham renders this as, “I will make you a god so far as Pharaoh is concerned”60 and emphasises the power of YHWH displayed through using Moses and Aaron in such visible and crucial ways against the Pharaoh. Propp, on the other hand, views this to be an example of P’s, “ambivalence toward Moses and toward

less problematic אלהים prophets in general,”61 and finds the reference to Moses as

”as “spokesman נביא as “God” and אלהים than Durham. Childs prefers to translate and draws a connection to Exodus 4:15 where the prophet is connected with spokesperson and mouthpiece.62 He maintains that this should be interpreted as

Moses receiving divine authority from YHWH that will be displayed before

Pharaoh.63 Sarna argues that 7:1 should not be understood only as a repetition of

4:16, but as a theological challenge to Pharaoh’s presumed divine status in the eyes of the Egyptians.64 He argues that Moses takes on the role of God in a confrontation with the Pharaoh and as an agent of YHWH.

59 Exodus 6:2-7:7 has been largely accepted as a literary unit of P with redactional supplementation and the decision to begin with 7:1 (rather than 6:2) is not a challenge to that consensus, but simply reflects the thematic relevance for this thesis chapter. See Thomas B. Dozeman, God at War: Power in the Exodus Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 111. Dozeman, Exodus, 161; Propp, Exodus 1-18, 266; Childs, Exodus, 111, 138; Coats, Exodus 1-18, 17; Noth, Exodus, 61-62. Durham, however, claims that 6:28-7:7 are part of a larger priestly composite which includes 6:2-7:13 (see Exodus, 85). 60 Durham, Exodus, 84-87. 61 Propp, Exodus1-18, 82. 62 Childs, Exodus, 111. 63 Childs, Exodus, 118. 64 Nahum M. Sarna, Exodus: The JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1991), “Moses’ divinely endowed power and authority will expose the hollowness of that [Pharaoh’s] claim,” 36.

171

is אלהים Regardless of the precise rendering of this verse, it is noteworthy that rarely ascribed to human beings in the Hebrew Bible and neither is extensive wonder- working as we see in Moses.65 This further heightens the unique status and role of

Moses in the narrative.66 It also continues the polemic against Pharaoh and Egypt.

Moses will become God to Pharaoh, who is considered (for ancient Egypt) to be the embodiment of the divine on earth. The seemingly ordinary shepherd becomes a wonder-worker par excellence and will defeat and humiliate the Pharaoh. This overall message permeates the plagues cycle

4.2.1. The Hardness of Pharaoh’s Heart

The hardening of heart motif occurs twenty times and nearly exclusively in Exodus

Exodus 7:3 68.קשׁה ,חזק ,כבד :Three different terms are used to describe this 4-14.67 links the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart with the signs and wonders displayed in 7:8-

11:10. It is through this recurring motif that YHWH’s superiority over Egypt is demonstrated.

65 K. van der Toorn, “God (I),” DDD, 353. Hamilton, Exodus, points to Exodus 4:16, where is first introduced, but still refers to Moses. While this role is extraordinary, Hamilton comments אלהים that Pharaoh appears to be uninformed of this in the text and unimpressed by Moses, page 113. 66 Moses is clearly a more prominent figure than Aaron, but James D. Finday argues that Aaron’s role also should be seen as unique and vital narrative. James. D. Findlay, From Prophet to Priest: The Characterization of Aaron in the Pentateuch (Leuven: Peeters, 2017), 58-60. 67 Robert R. Wilson, “Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” CBQ 41 (1979): 18-36. Wilson points out that 1 Samuel 6:6 is the only other time the Pharaoh’s hardened heart is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, pages 19-20. Sarna observes that out of the twenty references to the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, ten are depicted as Pharaoh’s wilful hardening and ten as YHWH’s hardening of his heart, Exploring Exodus, 64. is usually translated as “to be heavy.” HALOT follows this rendering, pointing out that כבד 68 this should be understood as “to make dull, make unresponsive,” as is (לב in hiphil (and occurring with can be understood as “to חזק .(the case in Exodus 8:11, 28; 9:34; 10:1 (HALOT Study Edition, 1:456 be strong or hard.” TDOT vol. 4, 302-308 suggests in the general sense, this can be translated as “to be it is more accurately “to be or become hard.” The range of ,לב or become strong” but when used with include: to be strong, difficult, or hard. Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the קשׁה renderings of Pentateuch (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 161 suggests, “English equivalent ‘bullheaded.’” This occurs as “heavy or hard” in HALOT 2: 1152 and as “hard, harsh, cruel” in TDOT vol. 13, 189.

172

Meyers observes that the Hebrew terms used to describe Pharaoh’s heart have a range of meaning which are not necessarily evident in the English translation

.as a pun in the narrative as a whole כבד harden.”69 For example, she sees the use of“

but so is the mouth and tongue of Moses (כבד) ”Not only is Pharaoh’s heart “heavy

(4:10), several of the wonders (8:24; 9:3; 9:18 24; 10:14), and the workload of the

should be understood as חזק Israelites (5:9).70 Propp proposes that the occurrence of

“strengthen” rather than “harden” and that idiom conveys stubbornness, not cruelty.71

Sarna interprets the imagery and idiom of “hardness of heart” to convey

“numbing of the soul, a condition of moral atrophy” with layers in the theological message of the narrative.72 This includes Pharaoh’s hardened heart as implying his lack of control, not only over the outcome of the situation but even over his own will, and “his so-called divinity is mocked.”73

Robert Wilson suggests that this motif was not part of the original plagues cycle and was added later.74 But within the exodus narratives, this seems to be an important aspect of the story given the frequency with which it is mentioned. Wilson sees J, E, and P each using the hardening in a different way, including the choice of

75.קשׁה and חזק while P uses both ,חזק E uses ,כבד terms. J uses

69 Meyers, Exodus, 70. 70 Meyers, Exodus, 70, interprets this as an intentional literary device within the narrative. 71 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 122, 217, “The traditional translation ‘harden’ is misleading, since we use ‘hard-hearted’ to connote cruelty.” Blenkinsopp, The Pentateuch, 141 also renders this as “strength.” 72 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 64. 73 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 65. 74 Wilson, “Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 20. 75 Wilson, “Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 22.

173

Georg Fohrer understands the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart as an important link between the individual plagues.76 This is rejected by Childs who instead suggests, “Rather, the motif sought to explain a tradition which contained a series of divine signs but which continued to fail in their purpose.”77 He contends that this motif “has been consistently over-interpreted” by connecting it with theological positions of free will or predestination.78 Thus, the motif should be understood primarily as a function of the signs in the narrative. David M. Gunn takes Child’s point even further. The hardening of heart motif is also “expressive of mastery.”79

The Pharaoh’s power, control, and magic are reduced to futility. Gunn writes,

“Yahweh can not only out-magic the mighty wizards of Egypt, he can control the response of Pharaoh to these marvels. He can turn the wisdom of a king to folly…

Yahweh is truly master.”80

This motif in Exodus has posed a theological quandary for some interpreters.

Why would YHWH harden the Pharaoh’s heart? Donald E. Gowen believes this question has been largely overlooked by most commentators who just accept its presence in the narrative. He asks, “If God could harden Pharaoh’s heart, why did he not instead soften his heart, and thus avoid all that suffering and death?”81 Gowen

,חזק and ,קשׁה ,כבד does not believe that a source-critical analysis of the use of resolves the complexity (perhaps tension) of the theological meaning of the hardening

76 Georg Fohrer, Überlieferung und Geschichte des Exodus: Eine Analyse von Ex 1-15 (Berling: Verlag Alfred Töpelmann, 1964) and Wilson, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 20. 77 Childs, Exodus, 174. 78 Childs, Exodus, 174. 79 David M. Gunn, “The ‘Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart’: Plot, Character and Theology in Exodus 1-14,” in Art and Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical Literature (eds. Alan J. Hauser, David J. A. Clines, David M. Gunn; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982): 79-90. 80 Gunn, “The ‘Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,’”80. 81 Donald E. Gowen, Theology in Exodus: Biblical Theology in the Form of a Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994), 128

174

of heart.82 He arrives at the conclusion that this is not the way God generally deals with people, but with the case of a person in a position in such power, “God will accept no negotiated settlement. Nothing less than the pharaoh humbling himself before YHWH will do (10:3).”83

Cox interprets this motif as God giving Pharaoh, “the strength of will necessarily to go on opposing Him, in accord with Pharaoh’s most fundamental desires …”84 The theological implication is that God may provide strength but

Pharaoh is the one who chooses to harden his own heart and oppose the Hebrew people. This appears to be a contemporary theological explanation for what might be viewed as negative (and therefore problematic) actions of YHWH in the narrative.

Durham concludes that by the time readers come to Exodus 9.7 it becomes evident that, “YHWH has made obstinate the mind of Pharaoh.”85 This position is rejected by many commentators, including John Van Seters who examines hardness

in Jeremiah 5:3, Ezekiel 2:4, and 3:7-9 in order to better understand its function (חזק) in Exodus.86 He writes, “Nowhere is it suggested that the deity was ever the agent of this stubbornness. However, alongside of this theme of obduracy is the suggestion that YHWH intervenes on Israel’s behalf to harden the heart of its foes so that they come to destruction.87 Diana Edelman notes how YHWH is presented as “hero-savior

82 Gowen, Theology in Exodus, 138. 83 Gowen, Theology in Exodus, 138. 84 Dorian G. Coover Cox, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in its Literary and Cultural Contexts,” Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): 292-311. 85 Durham, Exodus, 122. 86 Van Seters, The Life of Moses, 89. 87 Van Seters, The Life of Moses, 89-90, points to victory over kings of Canaan (Joshua 11:20 in Joshua 11:20 similar to חזק in particular) as further examples. G. K. Beale also finds the usage of when it applies to Pharaoh in Exodus, “An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9,” Trinity Journal 5 (1984): 129-154, see page 131.

175

who defeated the conspiratorial enemy, pharaoh,” especially as the pesach-massot ritual developed.88

From a contrasting position, Nili Shupak suggests this conveys a positive image of the Pharaoh. Her argument is that, “The Egyptian expressions equivalent to

‘heavy,’ ‘strong,’ and ‘hard hearted’ in the Bible, when used with a positive connotation, represent exemplary, praiseworthy behaviour,” and were commonly used in Egyptian sources, especially related to the royal court or autobiographies.89

Shupak’s proposal is intriguing, as nuances in the narrative would take on a different meaning to an Egyptian audience. But this is not entirely convincing. An Egyptian context also raises some additional options for interpreting the hardness of heart motif.

Another possible angle to understanding this motif is within an Egyptian context. John Currid proposes that understanding ancient Egyptian religion and ideology is essential to grasping the nuances within this motif.90 He points to the

“weighing of the heart” judgement, which is depicted in the Book of the Dead (the

Papyrus of Ani). One’s heart (through actions and morality) is weighed against the feather of truth and will be judged against how it balances. Eternal life is granted to those have lived a virtuous life, but if the heart weighs too heavily no such reward will be given.91 Cox also finds values in placing this motif within the context of

of Moses’ mouth and difficulty with (כבד) ”Egyptian culture.92 The “heaviness

88 Diana Edelman, “Exodus and Pesach/Massot as Evolving Social Memory,” in Remembering and Forgetting in Judah’s Early Second Temple Period (eds. C. Levin and E. Ben Zvi; Forschungen zum Alten Testaments, 85; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012): 161-193. 89 Nili Shupak, “Hzq, Kbd, Qsh Leb, The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4-15:21: Seen Negatively in the Bible but Favourably in Egyptian Sources,” Penn State University (2001), 3. 90 John D. Currid, Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), 96-103. 91 Currid, Ancient Egypt, 97-98. 92 Cox, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 304.

176

Cox argues that .(כבד) speech is now contrasted with Pharaoh’s “hardness” of heart

as conveying difficulty or “something that does not function כבד we can understand properly” in the exodus narratives.93 In the case of Pharaoh’s heart, Cox also looks to the Egyptian concept of the weighing of the heart for understanding this recurring motif in the exodus narratives.94 Cox argues, “the king of Egypt’s heart was held to be the locus for control of cosmic order.”95 In other words, the hardening of

Pharaoh’s heart indicates the disruption of maat and the loss of control. YHWH is the one who controls on a cosmic level, not pharaoh or the Egyptian gods.96 These explanations from the context of an Egyptian background provide interesting possibilities for understanding the “heaviness” of Pharaoh’s heart in Exodus.

4.2.2. Exodus 7:8-13

The “signs” were introduced in 4:1-8 and are mentioned here in 7:3 as “signs and

and these will be further displayed throughout 7:8-11:10.97 )אות dna מופת) ”wonders

It is here that we begin to see the wonders performed by Moses, Aaron, and the

“magicians.” Dozeman summarises, “Exodus 7:8-15:21 narrates the direct conflict between YHWH and Pharaoh over the fate of the Israelites as a war between kings.”98

The plagues begin in 7:14, but the “magic contest” between Moses and Aaron and the

Egyptian specialists starts here and continues through the plagues narrative. YHWH

This is a .(מופת) ”tells Moses and Aaron in 7:9 that Pharaoh will request a “wonder

93 Cox, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 304. This view is shared by Wilson, “Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 26. 94 Cox, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 305. 95 Cox, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” 307. 96 Edelman, “Exodus and Pesach/Massot,” 167-73. occurs in Exodus (אות dna מופת) ”In the Moses narratives the phrase “signs and wonders 97 7:3, Deuteronomy 4:34, 13:3 MT, 28:46, 34:11. 98 Dozeman, Exodus, 176.

177

sign) occurred.99 Exodus 7:9 and 11:9 are the) אות different term than in 4:8-9 where

Signs and wonders” seems“ .אות occurs without מופת only places in this book where to be what YHWH or his agents produce, whereas Pharaoh only requests a

“wonder.”100

,in 7:8 begins the magic contest between Moses מופת The request to perform a

Aaron and Pharaoh and the magicians. Propp notes the particular wording in 7:9,

“Give yourselves a wonder. We might rather have expected ‘give me a wonder’…

Pharaoh, who first suggests a wonder, will get many more than he bargained for.”101

Because Pharaoh is depicted as the one first requesting a wonder, consequently he is the initiator of this battle. Moses and Aaron do as YHWH instructed them and

This is what Moses was able .(7:10) תנין ,Aaron’s staff is transformed into a serpent to perform in 4:3, but this time it is Aaron who throws down the staff, acting on behalf of Moses as was introduced in 7:1. Pharaoh summons his specialists who are

102,(חכמים) ”presented to us in the text using three different words: “wise men

of Egypt. They are to replicate 104(חרטמים) ”and “magicians 103,(מכשׁפים) ”sorcerers“ this same wonder and by implication, engage in this magic contest. The excitement in

,(swallows the others (7:12 (תנין ,the story builds as Aaron’s staff (snake demonstrating the supremacy of Aaron, Moses, and YHWH over the Egyptians.

99 The LXX includes “sign and/or wonder” (σημειον ἢ τέρας). is used. This observation was prompted מופת The exception being Exodus 11:9 where only 100 through a discussion with Diana Edelman (September 2018). 101 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 322. .(This term appears in the LXX as σοφιστὰς (σοφιστής .חכם From of 102 .(The LXX translates this as φαρμακούς (φάρμακος .כשׁף From 103 The LXX translates this as οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων. Further details on the .חרטם From 104 ”.will appear under the sub-heading “Specialists in Exodus 7 and Lector Priests חרטם

178

While Exodus 4:2-4 appears to anticipate this event in 7:8-13, it can be argued that the

swallowing the others, anticipates the Egyptians being swallowed (תנין ,staff (serpent in the sea in 14:26-31.105 This motif of “swallowing” is used in the narrative as a means of looking backward (to the events in 4:1-18) as well as forward to greater wonders which would occur (14:26-31).106

In ancient Egypt it was not unusual for scribes, priests, and lectors to be called upon by the Pharaoh for ritual related performances and temple duties. It is interesting that three types of Egyptian specialists are mentioned in the biblical text here. This seems to play into the rhetoric of the biblical writers, conveying the futility of Pharaoh (who has every resource, including religious specialists, at his disposal) against the power and will of YHWH in Exodus. It also fulfils the anticipation of

Exodus 7:1 that Moses would be “elohim” to Pharaoh and Aaron as his prophet.

There are a number of striking features about the beginning of the competition between Aaron and the Egyptian magicians/lectors. It is intriguing that in the text the

Egyptians are able to reproduce any of the wonders at all. The biblical writers do not seem to question the existence of magic and wonders outside of YHWH, nor are threatened by this. But the narrative leaves no room for the reader to consider the

Egyptian specialists as equal to Moses and Aaron since this first confrontation ends with Aaron’s staff swallowing the others.

The implications of this episode are multifaceted. Firstly, the “wonders” performed by Moses, Aaron, and the Egyptians are not presented as trickery but as something they are all about to produce.107 Secondly, it has a theological function of

105 Currid, Ancient Egypt, 85. 106 This was discussed in an e-mail from Diana Edelman in September 2018. Edelman particularly drew attention to the way Exodus 4, 7, and 14 are simultaneously looking backward and forward in anticipation of future actions. 107 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 323.

179

attesting to the superiority of YHWH over the Egyptians gods (and Pharaoh), which will be demonstrated further in subsequent plagues. Thirdly, the “swallowing” of the serpent (Exodus 7:12) correlates with the “swallowing” of the Egyptians in the Red

Sea (Exodus 14). Fourthly, the act of swallowing is used in Egyptian magic ritual and is echoed here.108 This ritual act of swallowing is first singular (one serpent) and with mythological tones, and then crescendos into the swallowing of many (Pharaoh’s army) and on a cosmic level as YHWH defeats Pharaoh and implicitly the Egyptian gods. One aspect of the signs which is inconsistent with the events of Exodus 7-11 is the “diseased hand.” This sign does not appear in the plagues cycle, although it might generally anticipate the boils and diseases afflicting humans and livestock. The more

is with Miriam in Numbers 12, which has צרעת relevant subsequent occurrence of little connection to Exodus 4 or 7-11.109

4.2.3 Specialists in Exodus 7 and Lector Priests

;are repeatedly mentioned in Exodus (7:11, 22 חרטמים ,Of the three specialists listed

8:3, 14, 15; 9:11). Donald Redford is among numerous scholars who argue the

are חרטם is likely related to the Egyptian title ḫry-ḥb, ḫry-tp).110 If the חרטם Hebrew

108 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 102-110. 109 Exodus 4:6-7 is generally considered as non-P authorship but Numbers 12:10 is P. 110 Donald B. Redford, A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph (Genesis 37-50) (VTSup, 20; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970), 203-4. Thomas Römer, “Competing Magicians in Exodus 7-9: Interpreting Magic in Priestly Theology,” in Magic in the Biblical World: From the Rod of Aaron to the Ring of Solomon (ed. Todd E. Klutz; JSNTSup 245; London: T&T Clark, 2003), 20. Gary Rendsburg, “Moses the Magician,” in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, eds. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp, (Heidelberg: Springer, 2015): 243-258. Diana V. Edelman, “Of Priests and Prophets and Interpreting the Past: The Egyptian ḥm-nṯr and ẖry-ḥbt and the Judahite nāḇî,” in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe (ed. Philip R. Davies and Diana V. Edelman; London: T&T Clark, 2010): 103-112. Jan Quaegebeur, “On the Egyptian Equivalent of Biblical Hartummim,” in Pharaonic Egypt (ed. S. Israelit- Groll; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985): 145-55. Noegel, “Moses and Magic,” 45. Rüdiger Schmitt, Mantik im Alten Testament (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), 2.

180

related to the ḫry-ḥb, the chief of priests or the lector priests, then a few comments about the lectors should be made here.

These specialists were part of the official priestly caste and were not considered illicit or on the fringe of society. In a recent study Roger Forshaw has proposed that lectors might not have served in the same way as other priests in ancient

Egypt. Rather, they were official ritual specialists who functioned in a wider range of contexts than most priests, including inside and outside the temple, and were considered to fulfil legitimate roles.111 Some of the main roles of the lector included involvement in medical healing,112 temple festivals and rituals, performing

“transfiguration rites” in funeral ceremonies,113 magic practices,114 royal involvement

(included purification rituals),115 and in a legal capacity.116 They were also known for being “keepers of the books” and were esteemed for the ability to read and write, which in itself was considered related to magic.117 Thus, if we associate the lectors

then Römer correctly concludes that they, “have a double identity: they ,חרטמים with are both priests and ‘magicians’” in Exodus 7-11.118

The Westcar Papyrus provides several stories of lector priests during the

Middle Kingdom who are able to perform wonders (which will be examined in the following chapter).119 Lectors are depicted on temple reliefs before the Pharaoh

111 Roger Forshaw, The Role of the Lector in Ancient Egyptian Society (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2014), 2-5. 112 John F. Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine (London: British Museum Press, 1996). 113 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 3. 114 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice; Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt; Forshaw, The Role of the Lector. 115 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 51-52. 116Forshaw demonstrates there is textual evidence to suggest the lector had a role in the legal system, (The Role of the Lector, 129-134). 117 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 61-64. 118 Römer, “Competing Magicians in Exodus 7-9,” 20. 119 A. M. Blackman and W. V. Davies, The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians: Transcribed from Papyrus Westcar (Berlin Papyrus 3033) (Reading: J. V. Books, 1988). Interestingly, there is a Sumerian epic which depicts a contest between a sorcerer and an old woman which involves magic. See Frederick H. Cryer and Marie-Louise Thomsen (eds.), Witchcraft and Magic in Europe: Biblical

181

(usually assisting in a festival or ritual) and sometimes were portrayed with a staff.

They are often seen holding a scroll as well as one of their main duties was maintaining written documents. There are aspects of the overall presentation of lectors which may be echoed in the Exodus narrative, even though this does not mean there was direct borrowing from the Westcar Papyrus in the biblical texts. The evidence that the lectors were present in the royal palace for service is consistent with the specialists described in Exodus 7:10-11. The depiction of the lector’s use of the staff (especially in connection with magico-religious rituals) and the performances attested in the Westcar Papyrus also seem to complement rather than refute the biblical writers’ portrayal of the Egyptian specialists.120

However, there are notable points of divergence and features we might expect in the text if the lector was being represented.121 To begin with, any description of the

with scrolls or the ability to read and write is completely absent from the חרטם

Exodus narrative. There is no explicit recitation of spells or verbal exchange,

in 7:11 as “magic spells.”122 It could be להט although some commentators translate

חרטם argued that the LXX provides evidence for perceiving a connection between

might have been scribes “who had חכמים and sung incantations.123 Hamilton suggests nothing to do with magic” however, we know there is ample evidence to demonstrate

and Pagan Societies, vol. 1 (London: The Athlone Press, 2001), 23-24. Also Jeremy Black, Graham Cunningham, Eleanor Robson, and Gábor Zólyomi (eds.), The Literature of Ancient Sumer (Oxford: OUP, 2004), 3-11. 120 Smith, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 13-24. 121 This is particularly true when evidence of the lector priests beyond the Westcar Papyrus is taken into account. 122 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 322-323. Propp argues that there is a possibility this even refers to a magic scroll. 123 Dozeman, Exodus, 210. The LXX translates ḥarṭummîm as οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ “suggesting incantation through song, most likely for the purpose of healing,” 210. If this rendering is accurate, it does appear to be congruous with Egyptian lectors and priests.

182

that writing and reading were associated with magical activity in ancient Egypt.124

Also lacking from the text is any type of execration ritual (such as the breaking of the red pots) or ritual performance for attacking one’s enemy (such as the “bound prisoner figurine” or wax figure of the enemy).125 These were employed as an attack against enemies, but there is no hint of such action in Exodus.

The goal of the narrative of Exodus does not appear concerned with portraying the Egyptian specialists in a clear or detailed way, but is simply mentioning their presence and participation in the battle between Moses and Pharaoh. The lack of

.is perhaps a statement in itself חרטם details about the knowledge and activities of the

It suggests the biblical writers only have indirect experience with Egyptian specialists, but still have enough knowledge of Egyptian magic and magicians to craft a nuanced polemic. The theological message in the text seems to be that even with the best and highest ranking priests and specialists, the Pharaoh could not stop Moses (and implicitly YHWH) from proceeding with wonders, plagues, and leaving Egypt.

Moreover, the elaborate description of Moses performing wonders throughout

Exodus-Numbers is implicitly contrasted here with the Egyptian specialists who cannot produce many marvels (and certainly not on par with Moses and Aaron). The biblical writers seem more concerned with conveying this, than presenting details of lectors or any other type of Egyptian specialists. This is likely a reflection of their general rather than specific knowledge of lector priests and other specialists.

,with the lector חרטם However there remains sufficient evidence to compare the

124 Hamilton, Exodus, 119. He also points out that this is the same term used in Genesis 41:8 for the general category of “professional men of learning.” For evidence connecting magic to writing, in addition to Ritner: 1993; Pinch: 2006; Forshaw: 2014, David: 2002; Traunecker, 2001. Richard Parkinson and Stephen Quirke, Papyrus (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1995), 49. 125 See examples in Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 136-141, 159-162 and Pinch Magic in Ancient Egypt, 90-97.

183

provided one also takes into consideration what is absent from the portrayed scenes in

Exodus 7-11.

4.3. Ritual Action and Performance: The Plagues and Beyond

There are multiple ways of grouping the plagues and wonders performed by Moses and Aaron. For the purpose of this inquiry the focus, and consequently limitation, will be on the ritual actions performed by Moses (and at time Aaron) in Exodus, with only brief mention of Numbers. These will be examined through wonders performed by means of: (i) the staff, (ii) gesture (with and without the staff), (iii) contact or manipulation of objects (without the staff), and (iv) miscellaneous.

4.3.1. The Use of the Staff

4.3.1.1. Exodus 7:14-25

The use of the staff for magic or ritual purposes was introduced in Exodus 4. It continues to have a significant role in Moses’ ability to perform wonders throughout

Exodus and Numbers. The occurrence of the staff does convey royal imagery, but in the case of Moses this appears to go beyond that and also be associated with his role as a wonder-worker/magician.126

Multiple signs and wonders have already occurred in 4:1-9 and 7:8-13, but this is where most scholars consider the first plague to occur.127 Exodus 7:15 describes

Pharaoh as going out to the water in the morning. This is consistent with the biblical description of Egyptian royalty depicted as going out to the river (e.g., Genesis 41:17;

126 Matthews finds the presentation of Moses largely consistent with royalty, but does not explore the magician/wonder-worker aspect to Moses’ role. Matthews, Royal Motifs, 98-99. 127 Albertz identifies this as a “turning point” in narrative with the confrontation of the Pharaoh. “Die Beauftragung des Mose in der ersten Plage-Erzählung bildet einen wichtigen Wendepunkt in der Auseinandersetzung mit dem Pharaho,” Albertz, Exodus, 142.

184

Exodus 2:5; 7:15; 8:16; Ezekiel 29:3-5; 32:2-6).128 It also seems to be part of a larger literary pattern which arranges the plagues in triads, each beginning with meeting

Pharaoh early in the morning (with the climax of the death of the firstborn standing alone).129

In Exodus 7:15 YHWH instructs Moses to take his staff, which was previously

This is a clearly an allusion to the event in 4:3 and the .(נחשׁ) changed into a serpent same word for “serpent” is used.130 This is different from 7:9-10, 12 where Aaron

The occurrence of two different terms here .תנין and the magicians’ staves become has been used as indication of different sources in the text, as has been noted in the discussion of the first sign in Exodus 4:1-5.131 Despite different sources, it can still be fruitful to trace the plot and motifs in this narrative as a whole.132

Moses speaks to Pharaoh on behalf of YHWH in 7:16-18. Pharaoh does not listen (as was stated in verse 13)133 and therefore Moses and Aaron are to proceed

the Nile by means of (נכה) with the plague/judgement (7:4). YHWH will strike

Aaron’s gesture (striking of the staff) so that the waters will be transformed to blood

(7:17-19). As has been mentioned earlier, it is possible the transformation of water into blood in 4:9 anticipated this first plague.134 Exodus 7:20-25 describes the

128 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 323-4. Hamilton also raises this point as one possible explanation for why the detail of Pharaoh going to the water is in the text. He presents additional explanations such as: bathing, checking the water level of the river, ritual act, or just taking a walk (see Exodus, 123). 129 Cassuto, Exodus, 93; Meyers, Exodus, 78; Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 76; Utzschneider and Oswald, Exodus 1-15, 183-185. 130 Exodus 4:3 is generally considered to be from a non-P source (J/E) and 7:8-12 from P. However, 7:15 appears to be a composite text. 131 Non-P source in 4:3; 7:14-15a, 16-17 and P in 7:9-10, 12. Childs, Exodus, 131. 132 Rendsburg, “The Literary Unity,” 113-114. ,Exodus) ,(שׁלח) ”and “let go (שׁלחני) ”Cassuto detects a word-play between “has sent me 133 97). 134 Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1991), 114. Hyatt disagrees and considers this a “superficial resemblance,” Exodus, 105.

185

did the (חרטמים) completion of the wonder, as performed by Aaron.135 The magicians

and are contrasted with Moses and Aaron who 136 (בלטיהם) ”same by “their mysteries

as בלטיהם did as YHWH commanded” (7:20). Richard Friedman renders the phrase“

“with their charms,” and Sarna chooses the translation “with their spells.”137 Whether we understand this to refer to incantations or charms, the theological distinction between the Egyptian specialists and Moses and Aaron is YHWH is behind the activities. Houtman writes, “The author points out that although there may be no difference on the surface between Aaron’ miracle and the miracle of the magicians, there is nevertheless an essential difference with respect to the origin of the miracle.”138

An additional point to consider is to what extent this plague was a specific attack on the Nile River, which sustained life and also was one of the indications that cosmic order (maat) was being upheld in ancient Egypt. The Pharaoh’s duties included maintaining maat, so a disruption such as this reflected poorly on him.139

Charles Aling argues this first plague is “quite obviously an attack against the Nile god, Hapi … Hapi was rendered powerless.”140 This position is also held by John

Currid who concurs with Aling but also points to the Egyptian “Hymn to the Nile” as an illustration of the intricate connection between fertility, life, and the Nile.141 This is somewhat problematic as Hapi is associated with the annual inundation of the Nile,

135 Exodus 7:20 could also be read as “YHWH raised the staff and struck the water of the Nile” rather than Aaron. 136 This phrase occurs in Exodus 7:11, 8:14 (MT) as well. 137 Friedman, Commentary on the Torah, 94. Sarna, Exodus: The JPS Torah Commentary, 40. Cassuto, Exodus, 99 138 Houtman, Exodus, vol. 1, 535. 139 Emily Teeter, The Presentation of Maat: Ritual and Legitimacy in Ancient Egypt (Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1997). Toby Wilkinson (ed.), The Egyptian World (New York: Routledge, 2010). 140 Charles F. Aling, Egypt and the Bible History: From the Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 106. 141 Currid, Ancient Egypt, 109-110.

186

but is not specifically a god of the Nile.142 However, the disruption in the expected patterns of the Nile and weather in general was a sign that cosmic order had been disturbed. Richard Wilkinson comments, “it was Hapy who held the key to this proper balance of flooding and fertility.”143

Greta Hort’s ground breaking research on the plagues provided natural, ecological explanations of these occurrences.144 Her inquiry concludes that the order of the plagues (7:14-12:33) can also be understood as reflecting a series of natural phenomenon which ensue.145 Hort does not regard this as conflicting with the theological message in the text which emphasises the power of YHWH, but that the perplexing claims in the plagues narratives should be investigated to determine if they could be “rooted in fact.”146 Hort’s research asks different questions and goes beyond the scope of this thesis so while these issues are intriguing, the focus here will be on theological message and polemic of the biblical writer(s).147

One more interpretive approach to the plagues cycle is as a de-creation story, which can be seen in the works of Fretheim148 and Zevit.149 This is an intriguing way of reading the plagues narrative, but it is not without flaws. The specific mention of frogs, gnats, locusts) in the plague narratives do not seem to have a strong

142 Richard Wilkinson, The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, (Cairo: The American University Press, 2003), 106. James K. Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticating of the Exodus Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 149. 143 Wilkinson, The Complete Gods and Goddesses, 106. Also, the annual flooding was connected to the resurrection of Osiris, as has been pointed out by Hoffmeier in Israel in Egypt, 150. Dozeman acknowledges the possible polemic against Hapi and Osiris but then concludes this plague in general terms “an attack on the Egyptian gods” and does not develop these possibilities further. See Exodus, 216. 144 Greta Hort, “The Plagues of Egypt,” ZAW 69 (1957): 84-103; 70 (1958): 48-59. 145 Hort, “The Plagues of Egypt,” ZAW 69 (1957): 84-85. 146 Hort, “Plagues of Egypt,” 86. 147 A shortcoming of Hort’s hypothesis is that it does not interact with the plagues in Psalm 78:42-51 or 105:27-36, which have only seven plagues and arrange them in different orders from each other and from the Exodus account. 148 Fretheim, Exodus, 106. He does not use the term “de-creation” but points to “a theology of creation” where the created order is unravelled with each plague. 149 Ziony Zevit, “The Priestly Redaction and Interpretation of the Plague Narrative in Exodus,” JQR 66 (1976): 193-211.

187

correspondence with details in the Genesis 1 or 2 creation myths. Moreover, an abundance of creatures (frogs, gnats, locusts), in the plagues is quite different from total destruction of those creatures. Propp persuasively suggests, “indeed, frogs and insects really involve Creation, not Uncreation.”150 This thesis finds the theory of de- creation lacking enough evidence to correlate it with the creation myths in Genesis.151

The polemic against the concept of maat seems to be more suited in the plagues cycle than the undoing of the creation myth in Genesis 1.

4.3.1.2. Exodus 8:12-15 (MT) / 8:16-19 (EVV)

There is no forewarning for this plague, unlike the previous two. Again, Aaron is instructed to stretch out his staff and strike the dust (ground) in order to bring about

152.(כנם) the plague, which this time is the infestation of gnats

This time the magicians were unsuccessful in replicating the wonder. They

MT). This 8:15) (אצבע אלהים הוא) ”report to Pharaoh that “this is the finger of God has been interpreted as “this is an act of God,”153 “the finger of God/a diving being it is!”154 and as a variant form of the “mighty hand” and “outstretched arm.”155

Regardless of the translation, the context indicates that this is a divine action.

Utzschneider and Oswald note that “The finger of God also plays a role in the writing of the tablets of the Ten Commandments (Exod 31:18).”156 This connects the acts of

YHWH through Moses beyond the plagues cycle (7-11). The writing of the tablets will be explored in greater depth further below.

150 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 346. 151 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 345. Also see Coats, Exodus 1-18, 6-9. 152 Durham provides a discussion on various ways this term has been translated. Exodus, 107. 153 Durham, Exodus, 109. 154 Hamilton, Exodus, 134 155 Meyers, Exodus, 82. 156 Utzschneider and Oswald, Exodus 1-15, 205.

188

4.3.1.3. Exodus 10:1-20

The text repeats the fact that Pharaoh and his servants’ hearts were hardened.157 It is striking that this plague begins with the hardening of the heart motif as well as ends with it. This is the only plague episode where it begins with a comment that YHWH hardened Pharaoh’s heart.158 Pharaoh is warned that if he does not release the

Hebrew people that an enormous multitude of locusts will descend upon Egypt and will devour any remaining plants (10:5, 12, 14-15). Pharaoh’s servants appeal to him, requesting that he let the people go (10:7). Meyers makes an important observation that, “The signs-and-wonders are not simply for the sake of demonstrating divine might to the Egyptians; they are part of the collective experience of the Israelites and, as such, will be extended to future generations.”159 This becomes part of the cultural memory and identity.

Through the act of stretching the staff over the land, the plague of locusts begins (10:12-13). Exodus 10:19 describes how YHWH drives out the locusts through the Sea of Reeds, which might be in anticipation of the plight of the Israelites through the sea. YHWH tells Moses to stretch out his hand but he actually stretches out his staff, which does not appear to be problematic for the biblical writers or redactors. The narrative seems to treat the staff and hand/finger of God synonymously at times and therefore this association strengthens our understanding of the staff as a divine instrument for YHWH’s actions.

157 Hiphil first person perfect; YHWH is the one who hardened the hearts of Pharaoh and the servants. 158 Hamilton, Exodus, 157. 159 Meyers, Exodus, 86.

189

4.3.1.4. Exodus 14:15-31

Chapter 14 appears to be another composite section of the text, although there is little agreement among scholars on how many sources are evident here.160 Durham maintains, “As always, the composite as a whole must be considered of greater importance for an understanding of the meaning of the text than the separate strata that make it up …” and this position is reflected here.161

as YHWH 162,(ים) Moses lifts up the staff and holds his hand over the sea instructs and the waters are parted, forming a wall (14:21). As the Pharaoh and his chariots followed the Israelites through the divided sea, Moses once again gestures with his hand and is able to restore the waters (14:26-28).163 The account tells of how the Israelites were able to safely cross the parted waters while the waters engulfed and drowned the Egyptians (14:30). As was described in Chapter Three, a story in the

Westcar Papyrus (“The Boating Party Tale”) describes a lector priest parting the water of a lake, which provides an important comparison with the narrative in Exodus. In the Egyptian tale, the parting of water was a positive action and resulted in the retrieval of a post pendant. However, this motif in Exodus 14 is used in order to

160 Durham assigns Exodus 14 mostly to J and P (as does Wellhausen: 1957, 352) although he acknowledges there are scholars who include E (namely, Noth and Childs), 195. Dozeman identifies P and non-P sources in this chapter also, 312-313. Propp argues that there are five sources: J, E, P, R, and the Song of the Sea for 13:17-15:21, 476. Utzschneider and Oswald have summarised the lack of consensus on the sources and division of this text, 287. 161 Durham, Exodus, 195. 162 The “sea” or waters is not identified in the text. In Exodus 13:18; 15:4, 22 it is referred to and is often rendered “sea of reeds.” Hoffmeier believes this refers to “one of the lakes ים־סוף as between the Mediterranean and the Gulf of Suez,” Israel in Egypt, 200. 163 Cross interprets this Exodus 14:21-29 in light of 15:7 and postulates that it is a severe sea storm that comes over the Egyptians: “Rather, the divine act is described in more naturalistic language; an east wind blows, driving the waters of the shallow sea back, laying bare dry ground,” Canaanite Myth, 134. Other studies which explore possible natural explanations include: Mark J. Harris, “How did Moses part the Red Sea? Science as Salvation in the Exodus Tradition,” in Moses in the Biblical and Extra Biblical Traditions, ed. Axel Graupner et al. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007), 5-31. Cassuto believes this event in the narrative is intended to be perceived as “a miraculous event” but he does provide information on the natural phenomenon of what happens during high and low tide in the region of the Suez. See Exodus, 167-8. He suggests the possibility that YHWH made use of a natural phenomenon and increased the scale, 168.

190

defeat and humiliate the Egyptians. It is a positive result for the Israelites but disastrous for the Egyptians in the narrative, portrayed almost as a parody. As

Rendsburg comments, “It is if the biblical writer wishes to state the following … if you Egyptians believe that magician-priests are capable of such praxes, we will use those very same actions to bring about your ruin and defeat.”164 The same theme of shaming the Egyptians using Egyptian-styled magic recurs many times throughout the

Moses narratives.

4.3.1.5. Exodus 17:1-7

The Israelites complain to Moses that they do not have water to drink (17:1-3) so

Moses cried out to YHWH (17:4). YHWH provides instructions for provision through the use of the staff again. The text identifies this is the staff which Moses used to strike the Nile (17:5). This time the action of the striking of the staff will result in water for the people to drink, unlike when it was used to strike the Nile, which resulted in it becoming undrinkable (17:5-6).

4.3.1.6. Numbers 17:16-28 (MT) / 17:1-13 (EVV)

This episode is an anomaly compared with most of the other examples examined here.

The context is entirely different to those connected to the plagues cycle or most of the

“wilderness tradition” narratives. The staves of Aaron and Levi are used in a divinatory-like action, as prompted by YHWH’s instructions for determining his choice. Moses is the one to carry out these instructions from YHWH, but is not

164 Rendsburg, “Moses the Magician,” 252.

191

credited for the “sprouting” of Aaron’s staff, as the narrative clearly ascribes this to

YHWH’s actions.165

4.3.1.7. Numbers 20:1-13

Similar to Exodus 17:1-17, the narrative in Numbers depicts Moses striking the rock with the staff (as instructed by YHWH) and producing water. The P writer appears to be familiar with Exodus 17:1-17 (non-P) and uses this as a means of explaining why

Moses is excluded from the land.166 Both accounts use the staff in order to achieve this wonder. But this example shows that the key issue here is not the physical action of using the staff to strike a rock, as this was permitted in Exodus 17. The narrative depicts the main problem in Numbers 20:1-13 as Moses ignoring YHWH’s instructions to speak to the rock rather than strike it.

4.3.1.8. Numbers 21:4-9

167,(הנחשים השרפים) ”After Moses prays to YHWH to take away the “fiery serpents

Moses .(נס) YHWH instructs him to make a “fiery serpent” and place it on a pole

and while it is not used with a staff, it is placed on (נחש נחשת) crafts a bronze serpent a pole which functions in a similar manner. George W. Coats identifies a connection between, “this Nehushtan and the rod of God in Moses’ hand that turns into a serpent

(nāḥāš) before the Israelites and the Egyptians … the bronze serpent becomes a

165 Philip J. Budd, Numbers (Waco: Word Books, 1984), 197. Budd comments that this episode from P confirms the overall message that Aaron and his sons are the only true priests. 166 Budd, Numbers, 217. 167 This could also be translated as “venomous serpents.” For a discussion on the nature of these creatures and the type of affliction they caused, see R. K. Harrison, Numbers: The Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1990), 276-7.

192

symbol of Moses’ position as a leader of the people (cf. 2 Kgs 18.4).”168 This form of sympathetic magic is widespread in ancient Egypt.169 Even with the narrative depicting YHWH as the source of healing (and Moses as his agent), the use of a bronze serpent to ward off real serpents engages in some of the key principles of sympathetic magic.170

Hershel Shanks has drawn attention to a solid gold cobra (ca. 630-603 BCE) found in a palace of Philistine Ekron and a copper serpent (ca. 13th-12th century

BCE) found in a palace in Timna (southern Israel).171 He points out the similarities in their form and what is described in Numbers 21 suggesting, “The Israelite Nechushtan functioned much like the Egyptian Uraeus.”172

The extent of the similarities between the nechushatan and ureaus would be their protective, therapeutic qualities and the imagery of some type of snake as part of the efficacy. The bronze serpent in Numbers 21 is a staff-like object that is used by

Moses in the performance of wonders (in this case healing and protection). Whilst being a very different type of “staff” than the one Moses appears to have throughout much of Exodus-Numbers, it can still be considered in this category of wonders.

Numbers 21:4-9 will be examined further in Chapter Five.

168 George W. Coats, The Moses Tradition (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 139. 169 Karen Randolph Joines, Serpent Symbolism in the Old Testament (Haddonfield: Haddonfield House, 1974), 86-89. 170 Diana Edelman, “Taking the Torah out of Moses? Moses’ Claim to Fame before He Become the Quintessential Law-Giver,” in La Construction de la Figure de Möise (ed. Thomas Römer; Paris: Gabalda, 2007): 13-42. 171 Hershel Shanks, “The Mystery of the Nechushtan,” Biblical Archaeology Review 33 (2007): 58-63. 172 Shanks, “The Mystery of the Nechushtan,” 63.

193

4.3.2. Gesture

The significance of gesture as a means of nonverbal communication and performative action has been addressed by Victor H. Matthews,173 David M. Calabro,174 and Einar

Thomassen.175 The following section includes passages which involve gestures (both with and without the use of the staff) as a means of producing a desired result.

4.3.2.1. Exodus 7:26-8:11 (MT) / 8:1-15 (EVV)

There is no known .(צפרדע) This plague is the overwhelming multitude of frogs

Egyptian text which uses frogs as a means of judgement or attack, although some scholars have attempted to connect this plague with the goddess Heqet.176 Rather than being a dangerous assault at Pharaoh, Propp considers this “more of a prank than an attack,” and may even play with the reference to Hebrew people being prolific

(1:7).177

Again we find YHWH telling Moses to instruct Aaron on a particular action (to stretch out his hand) in order to cause this second plague to occur. Here the Egyptian magicians/lectors are able to replicate this wonder “by their mysteries” (8:1-3 MT;

8:5-6 EVV). Reproducing the same wonder (rather than destroying the frogs) seems curious since the abundance of frogs was a tremendous nuisance. This continues to demonstrate that Pharaoh’s specialists were effective in their roles (up to a certain

173 Victor H. Matthews, “Making Your Point: The Use of Gestures in Ancient Israel,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 42 (2012): 18-29. 174 David M. Calabro, “Gestures of Praise: Lifting and Spreading the Hands in Biblical Prayer,” in Ascending the Mountain of the Lord: Temple, Praise, and Worship in the Old Testament (ed. Jeffrey R. Chadwick, Matthew J. Grey, and David Rolph Seely; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013): 105-21. Calabro, “Ten Ways to Interpret Ritual Hand Gestures,” Studia Antiqua 12 (2013): 65- 82. 175 Einar Thomassen, “Is Magic a Subclass of Ritual?” in The World of Ancient Magic: Papers from the First International Samson Eitrem Seminar at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, 4-8 May 1997 (ed. David R. Jordan, Hugo Montgomery and Einar Thomassen; Bergen: Norwegian Institute at Athens, 1999): 55-66. 176 Currid, Ancient Egypt, 110 and Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 79. 177 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 349. Durham also observes the “quasi-comical picture of frogs,” in Exodus, 105.

194

point). Pharaoh pleads with Moses and Aaron to consult YHWH and remove the frogs (8:4 MT; 8:8 EVV). This request was fulfilled but the narrative continues to mention Pharaoh’s “hardened heart” (8:11 MT; 8:15 EVV).178

4.3.2.2. Exodus 9:13-25

The plague of hail begins with a familiar pattern. For the third time Moses is instructed to go before Pharaoh in the morning and give an announcement about the

is perplexing (את־כל־םגפתי) ”next plague (9:13-19). The reference to “all my plagues since there are more plagues to follow (9:14).179 Noegel makes an interesting case that this seventh plague (as well as the tenth) is intended to dramatically stand out from the other eight plagues.180 The number seven and number ten serve a symbolic function throughout the Hebrew Bible, and it is possible that this is the case in the plagues pericope also.

It has been argued by a number of scholars that this particular plague presents

YHWH as a storm god, which is well attested in Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine.181

This is one example of influences (other than Egyptian) which may have shaped this narrative, but overall Egyptian motifs are most prevalent in the plagues cycle.

In Exodus 9:23 Moses stretches his staff toward heaven, resulting in thunder, hail, and fire (in an example of gesture plus the use of the staff). This causes widespread damage to humans, animals, plants, and the land, with the exception of

Goshen where the Israelites did not experience hail (9:26). Pharaoh becomes

178 Cassuto, Exodus, 104. 179 Dozemen prefers the translation “all of my blows,” Exodus, 233-4. Durham interprets this phrase as, “a whole arsenal of blows,” Exodus, 123. A summary of various interpretive options can be found in Utzschneider and Oswald, Exodus 1-15, 216. Also see Houtman, Exodus, vol. 2, 85-86. 180 Scott B. Noegel, “The Significance of the Seventh Plague,” Biblica 76 (1995): 532-539. Greenberg makes a similar point but does not provide much explanation on this as Noegel does. 181 Dozeman connects this portion of the text with the Canaanite god, Baal and does not find any strong Egyptian equivalent, 235. Similarly, Propp associates the imagery of hail with Canaan more than with Egypt, 351.

195

momentarily remorseful and pleads with Moses and Aaron to appeal to YHWH to end the plague (9:27). By means of gesture, Moses is able to cease the thunder, hail, and rain (9:33). Pharaoh is momentarily remorseful (9:27) but after the thunder, hail, and rain end, he hardens his heart once again (9:34).182 The servants of Pharaoh are also included in the hardening of heart.

4.3.2.3. Exodus 10:21-29

We find another example of the use of gesture (by Moses) used to initiate another plague (10:21-22). This time the plague is not removed, but transitions to the climax of the death of the firstborn.183

There are several different interpretations of the plague of darkness. The

which comes over Egypt (10:22) has been connected to (חשׁך אפלה) heavy darkness the final plague (11:4; 12:12, 29-31, 42) and divine judgement.184 The darkness foreshadows the death of the firstborn in the darkness of night (12:29).185

Zevit186 and Fretheim187 suggest that the darkness also refers to the chaos darkness at the beginning of creation.188 This connection is germane if one adheres to the plagues narrative as a de-creation motif. But it this is not the most suitable explanation if one rejects that motif (which is the case here, as previously mentioned).

.כבד Hiphil of 182 183 Dozeman argues Exodus 10:21-14:31 can be separated into three connecting episodes: the plague of darkness, the death of the firstborn, and the destructions of the Egyptian army in the Sea of Reeds in Exodus, 243. 184 Terence E. Fretheim, “The Plague as Ecological Signs of Historical Disaster,” Journal of Biblical Literature 110 (1991): 385-396, see page 391. 185 Meyers, “As the last calamity, darkness serves as a motif that links the nine signs-and- wonders with the subsequent firstborn plague and then the deliverance at the sea,” Exodus, 87. 186 Zevit, “The Priestly Redaction and Interpretation of the Plague Narrative in Exodus,” 209. 187 Fretheim, “Plague as Ecological Disaster.” 188 Meyers mentions this as one interpretive option, but does not elaborate on it. She includes other possibilities, such as a polemic against the Egyptian sun god, in Exodus, 87-88.

196

Alternatively, Cassuto,189 Sarna,190 Rendsburg,191 Propp,192 and Dozeman193 argue this plague was intended to be an attack on the Egyptian sun god. Other scholars mention it as a possibility, but do not appear to give more credence to this theory than others.194 This is an appealing connection, but it does not explain why the sun god would be targeted in the ninth plague, rather than the first. If it is a climatic affect, then why introduce it in the ninth plague rather than save it for the tenth plague alone?

Two additional and less discussed approaches will be briefly mentioned.

Moss and Stackert make a case that the darkness in 10:23, “connote an imposition of blindness and lameness upon the Egyptians.”195 A less persuasive approach is that this account may refer to a sandstorm which is so severe that visibility is poor, argued by Pixley.196 Noth mentions a similar theory that the hot south-east wind brings such a heavy amount of dust that the atmosphere is dark, although he admits “this connection is not very probable.”197 This range of interpretations illustrates some of the difficulty in determining the significance of this plague in its literary and historical context.198

in 10:10 to the Egyptian god Ra, and believes this was רעה 189Cassuto also connects the word a deliberate play on words to create this polemic with the plague of darkness. See Exodus, 129. 190 Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 79. 191 Gary A. Rendsburg, “The Egyptian Sun-God Ra in the Pentateuch,” Henoch 10 (1988): 3- 15. 192 Propp specifically mentions the “Prophecy of Neferti” as Egyptian evidence of this. See Exodus 1-18, 351. 193 Dozeman, Exodus, 247. 194 Meyers, Exodus, 87-88; Utzschneider and Oswald, Exodus1-15, 223. 195 Candida R. Moss and Jeffrey Stackert, “The Devastation of Darkness: Disability in Exodus 10:21-23, 27, and Intensification in the Plagues,” The Journal of Religion 92 (2012): 363-372. 196 Pixley, On Exodus, 58. 197 Noth, Exodus, 83. 198 Stackert argues that this episode in the Moses narratives is less puzzling when ascribed to P and read in the context of other P texts. Jeffrey Stackert, “Why Does the Plague of Darkness Last for Three Days? Source Ascription and Literary Motif in Exodus 10:21-23, 27,” VT 61 (2011): 657-676.

197

4.3.2.4. Exodus 11:1-10

The darkness continues as the climactic final plague is announced. The firstborn of the Egyptian people and animals will die at midnight (11:4-5).199 The speech in 11:4-

8 contains a number of literary problems in the progression of the story. Childs points out that the content of the speech is not unexpected, but it is unclear in the text what time of the day it is and to whom Moses delivers the speech.200 According to his assessment of the text, he believes Exodus 11 has been constructed in a topical order rather than chronological.201 Regardless, this appears as the climax of the plagues.

YHWH makes a distinction between the Israelites (His people) and the

Egyptians (foreigners) 11:7. But what is the rationale for targeting the firstborn? The significance could be that the firstborn were associated with Pharaoh’s successor, as the firstborn child would be next to rule Egypt.202 This is an interesting possibility, but not entirely satisfactory as it does not explain why the rest of the firstborn of

Egypt and livestock would also be struck.

The separation between the announcement and fulfilment of this (12:29-36), according to Hamilton, “indicates that this final plague is a bridge, climaxing what has gone before and introducing what is to follow.”203 Exodus 11:9-10 uses some of the language of 7, which appears to be an intentional framing for the plagues narrative.204 This has led Cassuto to argue for a single author. In contrast, Propp finds the cohesion to be a result of the intentional weaving of various sources by a redactor.205 A similar position is held by Durham who claims “Separate traditions

199 Literally “the divide of the night,” (see Dozeman, Exodus, 257), or “about the middle of the night,” John J. Davies, Moses and the Gods of Egypt (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1971), 133. 200 Childs, Exodus, 161. 201 Childs, Exodus, 161. 202 Davies, Moses and the Gods of Egypt, 141. 203 Hamilton, Exodus, 167. 204 Childs, Exodus, 161 and Propp, Exodus 1-18, 320. 205 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 321.

198

regarding the mighty acts are clearly present, as is an overarching pattern of arrangement. Neither must be pressed, however, either to the exclusion of the other or to the degree that superimposes upon the text something clearly not in it.”206

4.3.2.5. Exodus 17:8-16

One final time in the Exodus narratives, Moses is able to provoke a desired outcome

(מטה האלהים) as a result of the ritual act of gesture. Importantly, the staff of elohim is presented as a necessary component in order to produce this wonder (17:9, 11).207

When Moses’ arms are raised, the Israelites were succeeding in battle. But this gesture is not presented as merely symbolic of victory, for when he rests his arms the

Amalekites began winning (17:11). The text suggests this became apparent, since when Moses’ arms grew tired, he was seated but his arms remained propped up with the help of Aaron and Hur (17:12).

The undergirding element of magic has not gone unnoticed by some commentators. Hyatt affirms, “Moses is here the wonder-working magician … Thus this act has some intrinsic efficacy as a channel of the power of YHWH, working on behalf of Israel.”208 Yet this is not maintained by all interpreters. Childs points out,

“Both Jewish and Christian commentators have been quick to assume that Moses’s stance was that of prayer. What else would he be doing? However, there is no indication whatever in the text which would confirm this.”209 This would appear to have more to do with the commentator’s theological conviction than explicit evidence

206 Durham, Exodus, 96. 207 Durham points out that this is the primary reason why this section could arguably belong to E (Exodus, 234). 208 Hyatt, Exodus, 184. 209 Childs, Exodus, 314.

199

within the text. However, it should be mentioned that the text does not state that

Moses performs a magic ritual action either.

4.3.3. Contact/Manipulation

4.3.3.1. Exodus 9:8-12

There is no forewarning to Pharaoh for the sixth plague (as is the case with the third).

YHWH instructs Moses and Aaron to take a handful of ash and scatter it heavenward before Pharaoh’s eyes (9:8, 10). As a result, a rash of blisters or boils appeared on the people and animals, including Pharaoh’s magicians (9:10-11). The magicians exit the scene as the skin affliction was upon them also and too great to endure. Skin afflictions are sometimes connected to judgement in the Hebrew Bible such as,

Deuteronomy 28:27, 25 and possibly Numbers 20:10-11.210 There does not appear to be a strong link with Exodus 4:6-8.

Pharaoh’s heart is hardened again, but this time it is YHWH who causes this.

Meyers finds this significant as, “the indirect language of previous calamities, in which Pharaoh’s heart is simply hardened or he is said to harden it himself, now gives way to unmediated divine causality.”211 This is somewhat awkward in the narrative, as there is not an obvious reason as to why YHWH would suddenly be the one to harden Pharaoh’s heart. This is not a particularly climactic plague, nor is there an indication within the narrative as to change from Pharaoh hardening his own heart.

210 Hamilton points out multiple instances where innocent people also experience a skin disease: Leviticus 13:18; 2 Kings 20:7; Job 2:7 (see Exodus, 145). 211 Meyer, Exodus, 84.

200

4.3.3.2. Exodus 12:1-28

YHWH gives instructions to Moses and Aaron so that they can tell the Israelites what is required of them. YHWH will pass through the land of Egypt and will strike all of the firstborn of Egypt (12:12). YHWH will bring judgement against gods of Egypt.

Blood on the doorposts serves as a sign and an apotropaic means of protecting the firstborn of the Israelites (12:13, 22, 23). It is perplexing as to why blood is necessary in order to distinguish the Israelites from the Egyptians, since up to this point YHWH has been able do. Propp postulates, “the paschal blood may not avert the Destroyer by its own virtue. Rather, it may create a zone of purity attractive to YHWH’s presence … Thus the doorway functions as an altar.”212 Apotropaic rituals and remedies are widely attested in the ancient Near East, and that is what appears to be taking place here. But this one is particularly significant for the Israelites as it becomes a ritual of the Passover.

Exodus 12:23 explains that YHWH will strike the Egyptians, but when He

to enter or (משׁחית) ”sees the blood on the doorposts, he will not allow the “destroyer cause harm. Is the reader to assume the “destroyer” is YHWH? Or perhaps a

“destroying angel/being”?213 Meyers identifies an interesting juxtaposition that, “in verse 13, God will ‘protect’ (NRSV ‘pass over’), in contrast to what God will do in the second part of the verse: ‘destroy.’”214 There may be an Egyptian context to this apotropaic ritual depicted in the biblical narrative, as Thomas Schneider suggests.215

A spell for “Purifying Anything during the Plague” in the Edwin Smith Papyrus

212 Propp, Exodus 1-18, 437. 213 Cassuto, Exodus, 143. 214 Meyers, Exodus, 97. 215 Thomas Schneider, “Modern Scholarship Verses the Demon of Passover: An Outlook on Exodus Research and Egyptology through the Lens of Exodus 12,” in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, ed. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp (New York: Springer, 2015): 537-553.

201

describes warding off the plague or illness through recitation of a spell and use of amulet.

May your emissaries be burned, Sakhmet! Let your slaughters retreat, Bastet. No year (-demon) passes along to rage against my face! Your breeze will not reach me!

I am the King inside his shrine! A man will save this spell over … [amulet] A means to scare away the plague, to ward off the passing of slaughters along anything edible, as well as along a bedroom.216

This Egyptian text might not be directly connected to the description of the

“destroyer” and death of the first born in Exodus 12. It may provide a context in which this biblical text (and subsequent ritual) can be better understood.

4.3.3.3. Exodus 12:29-36

The death of the Egyptian firstborn is the most drastic and devastating of all the plagues. It is evident from the list in 12:29 that from the lowest ranking in society

(prisoners) to the very highest (royalty), every firstborn Egyptian (and animal) were killed. Dozeman highlights an element of irony that it is no longer the Israelites who cry (as mentioned in 2:23; 3:7, 9; 5:8, 15) but now it is the Egyptians.217 As a result of this plague, Pharaoh tells Moses and Aaron to take the Hebrew people and leave

Egypt (12:31).

216 “A Spell for Purifying Anything During the Plague,” from the Edwin Smith Papyrus, trans. J. F. Borghouts, Ancient Egyptian Magical Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1978), 17. Schneider, “Demon of Passover,” 545. 217 Dozeman, Exodus, 280.

202

4.3.3.4. Exodus 15:22-27

The bitter water at Marah is transformed into clean drinking water by means of casting a piece of wood into the water (as instructed by YHWH). YHWH claims to

in 15:26. This is the only instance in the Moses (רפאך) be the one who heals narratives where an explicit connection between wonders performed and YHWH as healer.218

4.3.4. Miscellaneous

4.3.4.1. Exodus 8:16-28 MT / 8:20-32 EVV

As is the case with the first plague, Moses is to meet Pharaoh early in the morning by

will ensue if (ערב) the water. A warning is given that a plague of flying insects/flies

Pharaoh does not release the Hebrew people. Other than the verbal declaration Moses gives to Pharaoh, he does not have an explicit role in this wonder.

This is the first time in the plagues narrative where a clear distinction is made between “YHWH’s people” and “Pharaoh’s people” (8:19 MT / 8:23 EVV). On this point Dozemen suspects, “The redemption of the Israelites, not the plague of flies is a

‘sign’ (ʼōt).”219 The intensity of the plagues narrative continues to build as YHWH is the one who is depicted as directly performing this without the help of Moses or

Aaron (8:20 MT / 8:24 EVV). Moses’ involvement is more prominent after the flies are present and are only removed once Moses prays to YHWH (8:26-27 MT / 8:30-31

EVV).

218 Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer, 78, proposes this is a monotheistic claim that YHWH alone is the only one who can heal his people, and thus this statement is a polemic against polytheism. 219 Dozeman, Exodus, 227.

203

4.3.4.2. Exodus 9:1-7

This plague brings about the death of livestock of the Egyptians, but not the Israelites

(9:3-4). Pharaoh is warned that the “hand of YHWH” (rather than finger)220 will cause a type of severe epidemic among the various livestock which will result in their death (9:3). The way this plague came about is not described, nor the means. It appears that Moses and Aaron had no part to play on this occasion.

4.3.4.3. Exodus 31:18 and 32:15-20

Exodus 31:18 describes Moses receiving the tablets. This event is recounted in several places in the Hebrew Bible, but here and Deuteronomy 9:10 are the only

בְּאֶ צְּבע ) ”places where the tablets are described as written “by the finger of elohim

The phrase “the finger of God” only occurs a total of three times in the 221 .(אֱ ֹלה ִֽ ים

Hebrew Bible (Exodus 8:15 MT, 31:18, and Deuteronomy 9:10).222 Exodus 32:16 describes the tablets as “the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God.”223

B. Couroyer argues the scarcity of this phrase in the Hebrew Bible is because it is an

Egyptian phrase, not Hebrew.224 Other aspects of writing in ancient Egypt will be briefly explored.

The connection between the act of writing, the written word itself, magic, and divine activity is well attested in ancient Egypt. The Egyptian term for hieroglyphs is

220 The hand and the finger of YHWH both convey divine power. 221 Pentateuchal references to the tablets of stone include: Exodus 24:12; 31:18; 32:15-16; 34:1-29; Deuteronomy 4:12-13; 5:22; 9:10-11, 16-18 (MT); 10:1-5. 222 See Gerald A. Klingbeil, “The Finger of God in the Old Testament,” ZAW 112 (2000): 409- 415. B. Couroyer, “Quelques Egyptianisme dans L’Exode,” Revue Biblique 63 (1956): 209-219. וְּהַ֨לֻּחֹ֔תמעֲש ה אֱ ֹלה ִ֖ ים הֵ֑מָּ הוְּה מ כְּתָָּּ֗ ב מ כְּת ב אֱ ֹלה ים֙הֹ֔ ּוא חָּרִ֖ ּות ע ל־ה לֻּח ִֽ ת 223 224 “On peut légitimement supposer qu'en mentionnant ce doigt de Dieu, qui par ailleurs ne se retrouve pas dans l'Ancien Testament avec ce sens de puissance divine, les magiciens emploient une expression courante dans leur,” Couroyer, “Quelques Egyptianisme dans L’Exode,” 211.

204

literally “words of god” or “divine words” (mdw-nTr).225 Both the spoken and written word were considered powerful and associated with magic and writing attributed to divine authorship naturally conveyed immense authority.226 Moreover, the ability to read and write was deeply connected to magic and ritual power and as Rosalie David proposes, “Knowledge of the sacred writing gave the priests similar powers.”227 This was particularly true of the lector priests as “keepers of the books” and priestly magicians.

The deity, Thoth, was known as the “lord of magic” and “inventor of writing” and was often depicted in iconography as holding a reed pen.228 Since Thoth was associated with magic, this reinforced the idea of the act of writing and the written word (signs) had an effectual, magical component. The Book of Thoth (Late Period

Egyptian texts) provides numerous examples of this. This text outlines a conversation between Thoth and a disciple (scribe). Instructions for the “disciple” in the text state:

and he elucidates the hieroglyphic signs, and he becomes an apprentice of the Majesty of Thoth.229

Be good with your hand! Write with your fingers!230

The king also sought power, knowledge, and the preservation of existence in the afterlife through writing.231 “The Teaching for King Merikare” illustrates the perceived power behind words and great importance of the written word:

225 Richard Jasnow and Karl Theodor-Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life: A New Translation of the Ancient Egyptian Book of Thoth (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2014), 36. Scott B. Noegel, “Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign: Script, Power, and Interpretation in the Ancient Near East,” in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World (ed. Amar Annus; Chicago: University of Chicago, 2010), 145. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 35. H. te Velde, “Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs, Symbols, and Gods,” Visible Religion 4-5 (1986): 63-72. 226 Siegfried Morenz, Egyptian Religion (trans. Ann E. Keep; Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1973), 220. 227 David, “The Temple Priesthood,” 110. 228 Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 36. 229 Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 99. 230 Jasnow and Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 111.

205

(31) Words are mightier than any struggle, And no one can outsmart him who is skilled of heart… (35) And [attain] success through knowledge Behold, their words endure in writing; Open and read (them), So that you may emulate their knowledge. One who is proficient will become knowledgeable.232

Returning to the biblical text, the Egyptian context may shed lights on the nuances of this phrase “the finger of God” and the nature of the written word. Gerald

Klingbeil argues, “Therefore, as in Exodus 31:18 and Deuteronomy 9:10, the finger of

God indicates the presence of God, his creative power and authority, and his involvement in human affairs.”233 But if we consider the possibility that the phrase and imagery of the tablets being written “by the finger of God” might hold a deeper significance, then we might also consider that so does their destruction.

Exodus 32:19-20 describes Moses’ reaction to seeing the golden calf. His

,and he threw the tablets at the foot of the mountain (וי ִֽחר־א ף ַ֣ מ שֶָּׁ֗ ה) anger was kindled breaking them. This is the same wording for YHWH’s anger in 32:10, which might be used to bring continuity from YHWH’s response to Moses’ actions.234 The intensity of Moses destroying the tablets (32:19) is conveyed as the hiphil is used for

Exodus 32:20 describes the destruction of the calf as it was .שָּׁ בר and the piel for לשָּׁ ְך

scattered on ,(וי טְּח ןִ֖ ע ַ֣ד אֲשֶׁ ֵ֑ ר־דָּ ק) pulverised to powder ,(וי רשְּ ַ֣ ףבָּא ֹ֔ שׁ) burnt with fire

and given to the “children of Israel” to drink. The act of ,(וי ַ֨זֶר֙ ע ל־פְּנַ֣י ה מ ֹ֔ ים) water

231 Mark R. Sneed, The Social World of the Sages: An Introduction to Israelite and Jewish Wisdom Literature (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2015), 94-5. Morenz, Egyptian Religion, 230. 232 “The Teaching for King Merikare,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 155. 233 Klingbeil, “The Finger of God in the Old Testament,” 45. 234 Sarna, Exodus, 207.

206

breaking or destroying is a component known to magic and ritual power in ancient

Egypt. The Pyramid Texts spell 476 says, “Scribe, scribe, smash your palette, break your pens, tear up your rolls! Oh Re, expel him from his place and set me in this place.”235 In another text, Coffin Texts Spell 425 depicts, “I have come to you that I may break your water-pots and smash your inkwells, for a path is prepared for me to the place where the great god is.”236 Ritner proposes that these two texts together provide a connection between the ritual action of smashing, writing, and the repelling of an enemy.

The act of incineration is another occurrence in Egyptian magic rituals as is ingesting, which becomes of interest when exploring the destruction of the golden calf in Exodus 32:19-20. As part of the ritual action for destroying one’s enemy the priest-magician could demolish the figurine(s) which represented the enemy. The name(s) of the enemy was written and the figurine spat upon, ground, and burnt to ensure success of the ritual.237 The gemstone carnelian was considered as a harmful material in some contexts and was “often associated with the very fire by which the foes of the gods are annihilated.”238

Michael Donahue has proposed that Exodus 32:19 depicts Moses performing an execration ritual in order to curse the people who are worshiping the golden calf.239

If we consider the execration-like actions in Exodus 32 alongside Moses’ intersession

235 Ronald J. Williams, “Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 92 (1972): 214-221. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 149. 236 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 149. R. O. Faulkner, The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts: vol. 1 (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1973). 237 Christian Jacq, Egyptian Magic (trans. Janet M. Davis; Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1985), 98. “To be sure of being totally effective, one writes the names of one’s enemies, with those of their fathers, mothers and children, in green on a leaf of papyrus and carves these wax figurines. One spits on them, grinds them beneath one’s feet, pierces them through, burns them in the grate at precise times of the day or night … [and] conquers those who disturb the cosmic order,” 98. 238 Robert Steven Bianchi, “Raneferef’s Carnelian,” in Essays on Ancient Egypt in Honour of Herman te Velde (ed. Jacobus van Dijk; Groningen: STYX Publications, 1997): 29-32. 239 Michael S. Donahue, A Comparison of the Egyptian Execration Ritual to Exodus 32:19 and Jeremiah 19 (Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2010).

207

for the people in 33, a nuanced example of permissible “magic” plays a part in the larger theological message. Due to the act of idolatry depicted in 32, a punishment through execration styled cursing is given. YHWH sends a plague (32:33) and pronounces that he will “blot out” the names of the people. Moses intercedes for the people and is able to divert this pronouncement of punishment.

The smashing of the tablets and destruction of the calf do not mirror the execration ritual precisely. However, there are notable similarities and certainly enough in the ritual action to consider the possibility of aspects of Egyptian magic here. We suggest that if we understand cursing and the ritual action associated with it under the broader umbrella of “magico-religious practice,” then it remains a relevant aspect of this re-examination of the narrative in Exodus 32.

4.4. Deuteronomy and Magic

An inquiry in magic in the Pentateuchal narratives must also explore how the issue is addressed in Deuteronomy. The acts of magic and ritual performance in Exodus and

Numbers seem starkly contrasted with the prohibitions in Deuteronomy 18. The text also identifies Moses as a prophet and holds him in high esteem for his wonder- working, confrontation with the Pharaoh, and the only person to know YHWH “face

240.(פָּנ ִ֖ים אֶ ל־פָּנ ִֽים) ”to face

Additionally, Moses became known as the giver of the Torah and so Mosaic authority and Torah authority become intertwined.241 Moses is presented as

240 Deuteronomy 5:4 also describes the relationship between Moses and YHWH using this Judges ;אלהים phrase. The phrase occurs elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (Genesis 32:31 in reference to 6:5; and Ezekiel 20:35), but not in the context of knowing YHWH in this way. 241 “Unlike prophetic riddles, the revelation that Moses receives requires no explanation,” Alan Lenzi, Secrecy and the Gods: Secret Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia and Biblical Israel (State Archives of Assyria Studies; the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project; Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2008), 367.

208

simultaneously the exemplar or paradigmatic prophet and also the exception to any other prophet or ritual specialist (Deuteronomy 18:15, 34:10-12). Alan Lenzi writes,

“Although he may be associated with or even identified as a prophet in some texts, he is at the same time presented as a unique mediator, unparalleled by others.”242 For these reasons, several portions of Deuteronomy will be examined.

Initially there is an apparent tension within the Pentateuch concerning divination and magic if we acknowledge that Moses and Aaron are portrayed in the texts as engaging in ritual action/magic. Moses functions as a magician (and perhaps with royal overtones) in many of the textual examples mentioned in this chapter. Yet,

Deuteronomy presents the performance of certain magic related practices as prohibited. In many ways, the Deuteronomist attempts to resolve this “tension” by framing this in relation to legitimate versus illegitimate prophets of YHWH. The issue is not whether certain divinatory techniques are effective, but rather whether they are considered legitimate and consistent with Yahwistic worship. In addition, the concern is not strictly prophecy versus divination, since false prophets who perform signs and wonders are also attested in the text (e.g., Deuteronomy 13:2-3). O’Brien concludes that in Deuteronomy, the issues concerning divination are inextricably linked to legitimacy and promoting Torah.243 He writes, “… it inspires devotion to

YHWH in that divination must only inquire of YHWH and not another deity or any

Torah supersedes all .אחד other so-called manifestation of YHWH, since YHWH is other divine communications.”244

.נביא Legitimate divine communication becomes restricted to the

Deuteronomy enforces this restriction whilst also acknowledging and even elevating

242 Lenzi, Secrecy and the Gods, 368. 243 O’Brien, “To Seek the Counsel,” 17. 244 O’Brien, “To Seek the Counsel,” 17.

209

the status of Moses as nāḇî, wonder-worker, and mediator who knew YHWH “face to face” (Deuteronomy 34:10-12).245 Diana Edelman suggests the “deuteronomistic solution” was to restrict the means of determining the divine will and also recast formerly accepted practices (namely, magic and divination) in a negative light.

Edelman proposes,

The Hebrew Bible provides ample evidence that the deuteronomistic solution to overturning the former means of determining the divine will was two- pronged. It included the banning of such personnel and practices as part of official tôrāh (Deut 18:9-18), on the one hand, but also the relabelling of past cultic personnel to conform to what came to be considered the sole legitimate means of knowing the divine will in the past monarchic era: the ecstatic prophet (nāḇî).246

with regards to the use of כהן and) נביא In restricting divinatory activities to the role of the ephod and urim and thummim), all legitimate Yahwistic practices must come under these regulations in Deuteronomy.247 What is conveyed here is that YHWH does not speak through other channels of communication, but only through the

248.נביא

245 Jeffers argues that at some point the activities of the nāḇî “could be classified as divinatory and/or magical,” Magic and Divination, 84. Edelman draws parallels in the multi-faceted role of the Hry-hb.(t) of ancient Egypt and nāḇî in the Hebrew Bible, in “Of Priests and Prophets,” 110. 246 Diana Edelman, “From Prophets to Prophetic Books: The Fixing of the Divine Word,” in The Production of Prophecy: Constructing Prophecy and Prophets in Yehud (ed. Diana V. Edelman and Ehud Ben Zvi; London: Routledge, 2014): 29-72, see page 30. 247 This is perhaps an example of the Deuteronomistic “streamlining” prophecy and the role of Jeffers rightly asks, “Is Deut 18.9-14 a blueprint from which to understand and assess all things .נביא magical? Or is it an ideological rethinking of a situation, a mastery attempt to control religious intermediations by reducing them to a rather narrow understanding of prophecy?” Ann Jeffers,“Magic from before the Dawn of Time: Understanding Magic in the Old Testament: A Shift in Paradigm (Deuteronomy 18.9-13 and Beyond),” in A Kind of Magic: Understanding Magic in the New Testament and Its Religious Environment, ed. Peerbolte Lietaert and Michael Labahn (London: T&T, 2007): 123- 132. Lester L. Grabbe, “Prophets, Priests, Diviners, and Sages in Ancient Israel,” in Of Prophets’ Visions and the Wisdom of Sages: Essays in Honour of R. Norman Whybray on his Seventieth Birthday (ed. Heather A. McKay and David J. A. Clines; Sheffield: JSOT, 1993): 43-62. 248 “The people are to listen to this Mosaic prophet rather than to other types of intermediaries (Deut 18:14-15).” Robert R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 156.

210

4.4.1. Deuteronomy 13:2-6 (MT) / 13:1-5 (EVV)

and dreamers, literally “dreamer of (נביא) The Deuteronomist warns against prophets

contrary to (מופת) and wonders (אות) who foretell of signs (חל ַ֣םחֲ לֵ֑ ֹום) ”,dreams

YHWH. The ability to perform wonders is not necessarily an indication of a legitimate prophet of YHWH. The key issue is exclusive devotion to YHWH. The

and ,(מופת) wonders ,(אות) text connects the “prophet” with the performance of signs dreams. Jeffrey Tigay relates this to the actions of Moses in Exodus; “God armed

Moses with such marvels to convince the Israelites and Pharaoh that He had really spoken him.”249

A dreamer or prophet who suggests the worship of any god other than YHWH is to be considered a false prophet and is condemned to death (13:6). Gordon

McConville interprets 13:2-6 in the context of Deut 12 and 13, as “an important element in the elaboration of Israel’s covenantal commitment to YHWH …. The need for such loyalty is now the theme of ch. 13.”250 The core issue is not whether a wonder is produced (for even “false prophets” can provide these, according to Deut

13:1-2) but whether the prophet points to any deity other than YHWH alone.251

4.4.2. Deuteronomy 18:9-22

This section falls in between instructions for Levitical priests (18:1-8) and the succession of new prophets “like Moses” (18:15-22). Christensen notes the setuma at

249 Jeffrey H. Tigay, Deuteronomy (The JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1996), 127. 250 J. G. McConville, Deuteronomy (Apollos Old Commentary; Leicester: Apollos, 2002), 234. 251 Brian B. Schmidt, “Canaanite Magic vs. Israelite Religion: Deuteronomy 18 and the Taxonomy of Taboo,” in Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World (eds. Paul Mirecki and Marvin Meyer; Boston: Brill, 2002): 242-259. Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages, 114.

211

the end of verses 13 and 22, thus dividing 18:9-22 into two parts.252 Here the prohibited “abhorrent practices” of illegitimate ritual specialists and false prophets are contrasted with the true prophet “who stands in the tradition of Moses.”253 This is further emphasised by O’Brien who states, “Deuteronomy 18:9-22 knows of only one legitimate type of intermediary: the Mosaic ‘prophet’; yet authentic prophecy is admittedly difficult to discern (18:21).”254

Deuteronomy 18 introduces a framework of classifying many practitioners of magic and divination as “other.”255 Such practices are presented as foreign and/or forbidden. In contrast, “the ephod, the Urim and Thummim, and lots are acceptable because they are Israelite, while the others are rejected because they are not” as presented in the Hebrew Bible.256 Schmitt outlines an important aspect of how these prohibitions function; “Dtn 18,9-22 fungiert nicht nur als Klarstellung der Kriterien für falsche und wahre Prophetie im Rahmen der Ämtergesetze, sondern formuliert im

Anschluss an Ex 22,17 gleichzeitig ein Stigma im Rahmen der Abgrenzung Israels vom ‘Anderen,’ mit religiosen ‘Greueln’ behaftetem.”257 Related to this, the issue of idolatry is of key concern for the Deuteronomist. As Hans Barstad has pointed out, the prohibited forms of divination described in Deuteronomy 18:-9-14 can be seen “as a type of idolatry” which is one reason why they are so problematic.258

252 Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-21:9 (2nd ed.; Word Biblical Commentary; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 404. 253 Christensen, Deuteronomy 1-21:9, 404. 254 O’Brien, “To Seek the Counsel,” 59. 255 Ricks, “The Magician as Outsider,” 134-35. 256 Ricks, “The Magician as Outsider,” 139. 257“Deut 18:9-22 functions not only as a clarification of the criteria for false and true prophets in the context of the laws concerning officials but at the same time formulated a stigma in the context of the demarcation of Israel from the ‘other’ with religious ‘atrocities/abominations’ following Exodus 22:17.” Rüdiger Schmitt, Magie im Alten Testament (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2004), 344. 258 Hans M. Barstad, “The Understanding of the Prophets in Deuteronomy,” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 8 (1994): 236-251, see page 244. Schmidt, “Canaanite Magic vs. Israelite Religion,” 259. David Villar Vegas, “Análisis de las Prácticas Condenadas en Deuteronomio 18:9-14,” Antesteria 7 (2018): 35-50.

212

Deuteronomy 18:9 clearly frames the various mantic and magic practices

and other nations (כְּ בתֹועֲ ִ֖ ת) ”mentioned in verses 10-14 with “detestable practices

”Verse 10 references one who makes a son or daughter “pass through fire .(ה ּגֹוים)

”The LXX renders this as “purify completely” or “purges .(מעֲב יר בְּ נִֽ ֹו־ּוב תֹוִ֖ בָּא ֵ֑ שׁ)

(περικαθαίρων).259 McConville notes the possibility that this is a reference to the cult of Molek, although this is debated.260 But there is insufficient information on how the rituals of the cult of Molech related to divinatory techniques to comment further.261

In this list of forbidden practices and practitioners, most are some type of diviner apart from this reference to passing children through fire.262

Jeffers .(קס ַ֣םקְּסָּמ ֹ֔ ים) ”The next is “one who divines divinations” or “diviner writes, “it is a method of drawing lots, perhaps originally with arrows, but more probably by drawing lots by manipulation of wood … It has both derogatory meaning

(e.g. Deut 18:10 …) and an innocent one (e.g. Prov 16:10).”263 In general, any non-

Yahwistic form of divination is condemned, even though we do not have the details of the activities of many of the specialists listed here in Deuteronomy 18.264

Also listed in verse 10 is “one who practises soothsaying” or “diviner (who

McConville points out that 266.(מְּ עֹונ ֵ֥ן) interprets cloud [and smoke?] patterns?)”265

259 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 124. 260 McConville, Deuteronomy, 300. This is also considered by Gerhard von Rad, Deuteronomy: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966), 123; Daniel I. Block, Deuteronomy: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 435; Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 124. 261 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 124; Schmidt, “Canaanite Magic vs. Israelite Religion,” 248-250. 262 Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages, 122. 263 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 96-97. 264 Jeffrey Stackert refers to the “even grimmer view of non-prophetic forms of divination” in this portion of Deuteronomy in “The Syntax of Deuteronomy 13:2-3 and the Conventions of Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy,” JANER 10 (2010): 159-175, see page 164. 265 Edelman, “From Prophet to Prophetic Books,” 35.

213

while it is forbidden here and in Leviticus 19:26, Joseph “used his cup for the purpose, perhaps by ‘watching the light’ on the liquid’” and so engaged in a form of divination.267 This is followed by listing “one who practises divination” or “one who

The LXX associates this with one interpreting omens from 268.( נּומְּ ח ִ֖ שׁ) ”reads omens the flight of birds (οἰωνιζόμενος). Divination through following the flight of birds was attested in Hittite Anatolia and so continues Deuteronomy’s message against “foreign gods.”

269.(ּומְּכ ש ִֽ ף) ”The last term used in verse 10 describes a “sorcerer” or “magician

This also appears in the Pentateuch in Exodus 7:11 and 22:17 MT (22:18 EV) although it appears in the feminine form in the latter example.270 It is rendered as

(φαρμακός) in the LXX. Jeffers concludes “we gain very little information from the

Old Testament except that měkaššěpîm were connected with pagan practices either

Canaanite (Deut 18:10-11) or foreign (Mesopotamian or Egyptian); but we note their presence in royal courts which shows that they must have had a specific role among the other skilled professionals.”271 Tigay argues that since this is a “capital crime” in

22:17 MT, that in Deuteronomy it refers to “a practitioner of black magic.”272

is a loanword that also has negative connotations in כשׁף Rüdiger Schmitt argues that

Mesopotamian and Ugaritic contexts.273 It also appears in Exodus 7:11, reinforcing

.ענן This is a piel participle of 266 267 McConville, Deuteronomy, 301. ”.Some, such as Lundbom, prefer to translate this as “auger .נחש This is a piel participle of 268 Jack R. Lundbom, Deuteronomy: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013), 551. 269 Also a piel participle. Jeffers suggests that if we look to the possible Arabic etymology of this term, then “herbalist” is a consideration in understanding this type of specialist, (in Magic and Divination, 65-70). This is also proposed by Nigosian, Magic and Divination in the Old Testament, 76. 270 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 68. This is the only occurrence of the feminine form in the Hebrew Bible. 271 Jeffers, Magic and Divination, 69. 272 Tigay, Deuteronomy, 173. 273 Schmitt, Magie im Alten Testament, 107. TWOT, 458

214

the illegitimacy of Pharaoh’s specialists. Verse 11 continues the list, naming an

Lundbom argues that with the .(וְּח ב ִ֖ר חָּ ֵ֑בֶ ר) ”enchanter” or “one who casts spells“ possible root connection with the Akkadian ḫbr may further strengthen the understanding of this phrase as one who recites spells or “mutters sounds.”274

.( שׁוְּ א ל אֹוב֙ ) ”Next is a “one who inquires of spirts/ghosts” or a “necromancer

This is the type of specialist Saul consults in 1 Samuel 28:3, 9 and within the

דרשׁ and שׁאל Pentateuch is also forbidden in Leviticus 19:31; 20:6, 27. The verbs occur together in relation to consulting gods (YHWH or other gods).275 Cryer states,

“If the dead were regarded in ancient Israel as divine, then the use of these two verbs in this sense would be completely intelligible.”276 So the practitioner included in this

with an apparent similar ,(וְּ דרִ֖ שׁ אֶ ל־ה מ ת ִֽ ים) ”verse is “one who inquires of the dead

is “often mentioned in connection with the (י דְּ ע ני) ”The “wizard .שׁאל אוב meaning to necromancer, but whose activity remains unclear.”277 This term is related to knowledge, but beyond that not much is obvious for what this role entailed. Of the eleven times this word occurs in the Hebrew Bible, it is always used in conjunction

Cryer concludes, “‘wizard’ is as good a guess as any.”279 The text further 278.אוב with reiterates that these are detestable practices and associated them with non-Israelite nations (vv. 12-14).

In contrast to these forbidden practices, vv. 15-22 affirms the prophetic office as the primary means of seeking knowledge and communicating with YHWH. The

274 Lundbom, Deuteronomy, 552. 275 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 259. He points to 2 Kings 1:2 as another example. 276 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 259. 277 Lundbom, Deuteronomy, 552. 278 J. Tropper, “Wizard” in DDD, 907. 279 Cryer, Divination in Ancient Israel, 261.

215

truth prophet is in the likeness of Moses and as Schmitt states, “Der wahre Prophet steht in einer unmittelbaren Beziehung zu Jahwe.”280 Moses is presented as the true prophet par excellence and is the exemplar for the kind of prophets YHWH will raise up (v. 15). Christophe Nihan argues, “the relationship between Moses and prophecy accompanies not only the forming of the Pentateuch but also its gradual establishment as ‘Torah.’”281 Furthermore, Deuteronomy identifies Moses as a prophet and at the same time is validated because its laws are passed from the prophet of YHWH to the people. This is what Barstad describes as “no difference in theory between the revelation provided by YHWH, and which is passed on to the Israelite people, and the message of the prophets.”282

4.4.3. Deuteronomy 34:10-12

Deuteronomy 34:10-12 further solidifies the portrayal of Moses as an extraordinary wonder-worker, identified as nāḇî in 18:15 and 34:10, and was to be remembered as one who knew God “face to face.” The writer is clear in connecting the ability to perform wonders in the quest of liberating the Hebrew people from the Egyptians with Moses’ special status. In doing so, Moses’ engagement with magic is presented as legitimate acts which bolster his credibility as an authoritative figure. The writer of

34:10 also makes clear that Moses is a special case and “Never since has arisen a prophet in Israel as Moses.” Moses is esteemed for his performance of wonders whilst at the same time almost all other types of divinatory specialists are condemned

(18:9-13). By emphasising the unique character and role of Moses, the writer(s) attempt to minimise future cases of engagement in magic.

280 “The true prophet stands in direct relationship with YHWH.” Schmitt, Magie, 342. 281 Christophe Nihan, “‘Moses and the Prophets’: Deuteronomy 18 and the Emergence of the Pentateuch as Torah,” Svensk Exegetisk Arsbok 75 (2010): 21-55, see page 53. 282 Barstad, “The Understanding of the Prophets in Deuteronomy,” 244.

216

Richard Nelson, “The repetition of ‘all’ in vv. 11-12 highlights the signs and wonders of Moses as confirming evidence of his prophetic office (in some tension with the outlook of 13:3 [ET 2]).”283 Tigay points out that this is the only place in the

Pentateuch where Moses is explicitly referred to as a prophet and “the term is invoked here for the purpose of declaring that he is superior to all other prophets.”284 The writer attributes the signs and wonders of Moses to his special status since “[n]o prophet thoroughly proved his authenticity as Moses did.”285

McConville concludes, “The book closes with an affirmation of Moses’ incomparability as a prophet. ‘Prophet’ thus becomes the most characteristic description of him.”286 Yet, it seems that Moses is presented as much more than

“prophet” in the Pentateuch. He functions also as a king, priest, lawgiver, and

“magician.” By attributing the title of nāḇî to him, the writers have affirmed the prophetic office and at the same time legitimised the actions and attributes of Moses’ wonder-working under the umbrella of “true prophecy.”

4.4.4. Deuteronomy Summary and Conclusion

In sum, Deuteronomy provides a different perspective on magic than the Moses narratives of Exodus-Numbers. Deuteronomy 18:9-13 includes the most extensive list of ritual specialists connected to magic and divinatory practices in the Hebrew

Bible. These are presented as “detestable practices” with a strong tone against foreign nations, and more specifically, the worship of foreign gods. This list of magic prohibitions are presented as the contrast to a true prophet of YHWH (Deuteronomy

18:14-22). Moreover, Moses is portrayed as the exemplar for the role of the prophet.

283 Richard Nelson, Deuteronomy (The Old Testament Library; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 397. 284 Tigay, Deuteronomy, 339. 285 Tigay, Deuteronomy, 340. 286 McConville, Deuteronomy, 477.

217

Since Moses is depicted as having a unique relationship with YHWH, his wonder- working described in Exodus-Numbers are legitimate.

The way magico-religious and divinatory practices are portrayed are clearly different in Deuteronomy as opposed to the narratives in Exodus and Numbers.

Wonders or magic are presented in a much more fluid way in Exodus-Numbers. With the exception of the law in Exodus 22:18, these narratives do not provide explicit condemnation of magic. The recurring issue is that no other deity is as powerful as

YHWH and no other shall be worshipped alongside or in place of him. Deuteronomy, however, lists practitioners and practices which are prohibited by YHWH for his people. Moreover, Deuteronomy “stream-lines” divine contact so that this primarily should occur through the nāḇî of YHWH. Even within among the nāḇî, there are restrictions on what they can do and how they do it (Deuteronomy 13 and 18).

This raises the question as to why the issue of magico-religious practices is presented differently between Exodus-Numbers and Deuteronomy. It is certainly feasible that Deuteronomy more specifically reflects and addresses a context and period of time when Israelite identity and religious practices were under threat and when Yahwism needed to be reinforced. A Persian time period could be the context of this, although others could possibly be as well. But regardless of which time period Deuteronomy may be primarily addressing, the intent to regulate and restrict magico-religious practices within the broader issue of divine communication is evident.

4.5. Conclusion

This chapter has explored examples of Moses performing wonders and magic in the

Pentateuchal narratives. There are numerous instances within the plagues cycles

218

which depict Aaron as the performer of such acts. But this occurs within the

נביא and Aaron as his אלהים overarching framework of Moses as the key figure, as

(Exodus 7:1). Therefore, overall Moses is still considered the primary wonder-worker in the narratives.

After surveying the general source critical theory on the selected passages from the Moses narratives, it is apparent that the chosen examples derive from both non-P and P (see the chart in Appendix 1). These are fairly equally distributed between non-P and P and does not point to one source more favourable than another in the examples explored in this chapter. The most notable difference is that Aaron had a more prominent role in performing wonders in P texts of the plagues cycle, but not exclusively. Deuteronomy is where a different perspective on magic is evident.

Signs and wonders are not forbidden but any practitioners of divination other than a

“true prophet” are condemned. False prophets (Deuteronomy 13:5; 18:14-22) and banned ritual specialists (18:9-13) are presented as following deities other than

YHWH. This is contrasted with a true prophet of YHWH, with Moses being the ideal.

We contend that magic (from an ancient Near Eastern perspective) was so pervasive that it is unsurprising to find evidence of this from the biblical writers.

From the passages of Exodus and Numbers explored here, a large portion of the chosen narratives occur within the plagues cycle. Exodus 4, 7-12 in particular contains many examples of magic which also correspond to an Egyptian milieu.

As a result of examining multiple portions from Exodus and Numbers, it is clear that Moses engaged in the performance of wonders which is reminiscent of magic (and “Egyptian flavoured magic” specifically). It is made explicit in

Deuteronomy that on the one hand, Moses is the exemplar for prophets (Deuteronomy

219

18:15), and on the other that Moses is the exception and is held in special esteem

(Deuteronomy 34:10-12). As Schmidt says, “Moses contrasts several ritual professions with the roles of the king, Levitical priest, and true prophet.”287 In many ways Moses is presented as one who functioned in each of those roles and his ability to perform wonders is part of the evidence of his authentication. The use of the staff, gesture, contact or manipulation of objects, and sometimes words are all important components to the ritual action and efficacy of the wonders performed.

Multiple aspects of the wonders and ritual performances have similarities with

Egyptian ritual and magic. Even the Pentateuchal portrayal of Moses contains hints of parallels with Egyptian ritual specialists, predominantly the lector priest. A comparison of these texts will be fruitful in order to assess the extent that Egyptian practices might shed light on the wonders performed in the Moses narratives.

287 Schmidt, “Canaanite Magic vs. Israelite Religion,” 242.

220

CHAPTER FIVE

CONNECTIONS BETWEEN MOSES AND EGYPTIAN MAGIC

The theme of magic and wonder-working is crucial to understanding the connection between ancient Egyptian motifs and the portrayal of Moses in the Pentateuchal narratives. In Chapter Three, magic was examined in the context of various spheres of Egyptian life in which it occurs. Many of these spheres are also evident in the way

Moses is depicted in Exodus and Numbers. He is portrayed in both royal and priestly roles. Magic is a key in both of those roles. This will now be addressed in light of the

Egyptian evidence.

5.1. Magic in the Divine Realm and Cosmos

Magic is presented in Egyptian texts as originating in the divine realm and as a gift from the gods (examined in Chapter Three).1 Heka is interwoven in the fabric of the cosmos and used by deities and some humans. For example, “the ba of Re is in magic throughout the whole world.”2 Egyptian concepts related to divine magic intersect with some aspects of the presentation of Moses in the Pentateuch. This can be seen in the concepts of maat, the power of words, and heka.

1 E.g., “The Book of the Heavenly Cow,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 294-295. 2 “The Book of the Heavenly Cow,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 296.

221

5.1.1. Moses as Disrupter of maat

One of the key aspects of ancient Egyptian kingship is maintaining maat (see Chapter

Three). The Pharaoh is responsible for maintaining maat and order in Egypt primarily through appeasing deities and living in accordance with justice and truth.3

Consequently, the absence of order was also a reflection on the Pharaoh’s actions (or lack of appropriate behaviour or actions). The narrative in Exodus depicts the confrontation between Moses and Pharaoh through the plagues, the un-doing of creation, and unravelling of maat. In the “Maxims of Ptahhotep,” we have an example from Egyptian wisdom teaching of the place of maat in the cosmos and the important connection with Osiris.

Great is Ma’at, and its foundation is firmly established; It has not been shaken since the time of Osiris (6,5).4

The disruption of maat is indicative of a failure to live in balance with cosmic justice and the gods. An attack on maat is an attack on ancient Egypt’s deities, king, and worldview.

In the Exodus narrative as Pharaoh denies the request to “let my people go,” so Moses undermines the authority of Pharaoh through disrupting maat in Egypt.

According to Teeter, “Scenes of the presentation of Maat serve as proclamations of the king’s legitimacy… The ritual expresses the association of the king and Maat, hence the king’s cognizance of correct governance.”5 This portrayal in the Exodus narrative weakens the role of Pharaoh (and consequently Egypt) whilst simultaneously strengthening the authority and power of Moses (and by extension,

3 Michael V. Fox, “World Order and Ma‘at: A Crooked Parallel,” JANES 23 (1995): 37-48, see page 38. 4 “The Maxims of Ptahhotep,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 132. 5 The ritual of the royal name is described in Teeter, The Presentation of Maat, 89-90.

222

YHWH). Moses is presented in a royal manner, but also as one who subverts the

Egyptian concept of kingship by acting as a disrupter rather than maintainer of maat.

Exodus 7:3-5 establishes this theological framework before the plagues cycle begins.

But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in Egypt, he will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt I will bring out my (בשְּׁ פָּטִ֖ ים דּגְּ ל ִֽ ים) and with mighty acts of judgment divisions, my people the Israelites. And the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it.

In this passage YHWH declares the upheaval of Egypt through “great judgements”

(בשְּׁ פָּטִ֖ ים דּגְּ ל ִֽ ים) and the stretching of his hand against them. YHWH’s judgement would undo the cosmic order and balance in Egypt and Moses would be the primary

Through the plagues and their 6.(אלהים agent to carry out these acts (appearing like intensification, judgement is released on Egypt. This is where the “hardness of heart” motif is integrated into the overall battle of Moses (and YHWH) versus Pharaoh.

From an ancient Egyptian perspective, the “weighing of the heart” is a final judgement over the life and actions of a deceased Pharaoh. The “heaviness” indicates that maat has not been upheld and that life accomplishments (and “good works”) have fallen short. Thus, the narrative masterfully depicts this double judgement upon

Pharaoh, from YHWH and from the Egyptian perspective of the cosmic realm.

As YHWH’s chosen wonder-worker, Moses disrupts the justice and order of

Egypt (maat) and as a result directly challenges the authority of Pharaoh. The chaos unleashed on the Egyptians is the beginning of rescue and order for the Hebrew people. This is also another means of reiterating the superiority of YHWH and his people over Egypt. Through the “signs and wonders” YHWH’s control over an

6 Exodus 7:1

223

Egyptian concept of maat is displayed. At the same time, Moses is used in re- establishing YHWH’s cosmic order, which includes freeing the Hebrew people.

5.1.2. Moses and the Written Word

The importance of words, both spoken and written, was significant in ritual, priestly, and magical contexts in the ancient Near East. The few who had the ability and training in reading and writing were largely part of the royal and priestly castes, who were the ritual specialists. The ancient Egyptian term for hieroglyphs was mdw-nTr,

“words of god” denoting their inherent power behind these divinely-originated written words.7

There are not many examples of Moses connected to words in a context of ritual power or magic in the Pentateuch, but the primary instance is significant. The writing on the tablets is mentioned in Exodus 31:18, 32:15-16, 34:4-5, and

Deuteronomy 9:10, 10:1-5. Exodus 31:18 specifically describes these as being written “by the finger of God.” In Exodus 32:16 the tablets are described as being the

“work of God” and the writing was “the writing of God.” These depictions present

Moses as the intermediary and scribe of YHWH.

This also echoes royal motifs where a Pharaoh is portrayed as the scribe for a deity. One iconographic example of this from Egypt is on the wall of the temple of

Ramesses II (Abydos). Ramesses is depicted as holding a water pot and writing kit for Thoth as Thoth writes (hieroglyphs), keeping record of the reigns of the Egypt’s

Pharaohs.8 Since Thoth was associated with magic, this reinforced the idea of the act of writing and the written word (signs) having an effectual, magical component.

7 Jasnow and Theodor-Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life, 36. Noegel, “Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign,” 145. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 35. H. te Velde, “Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs, Symbols, and Gods,” Visible Religion 4-5 (1986): 63-72. 8 Image of this wall relief in Wilkinson, The Complete Gods, 215.

224

Written words were known to have magical properties and the inscriptions in temples, monuments, or tombs would continue to be efficacious as long as the inscription remained.

Another example of interest here is the Horus cippi where water is poured over an inscribed spell, transferring power from the words to the water.9 The Horus cippi portrays a young Horus holding snakes and scorpions by their tails whilst trampling on crocodiles.10 The Coffin Texts Spell 885 may shed light on this imagery, “The snake is in my hand and cannot bite me.”11 Horus had been protected from dangerous animals and so this representation of him conveyed protection and healing to others through the spells inscribed on this stela.12 Water was poured over it and through this action the spells were activated and absorbed. The water was collected at the base and then used for medicinal purposes to bring healing.13 This is likely related to the amulet variants of the Late Period, which depict a figure trampling a serpent.14 This is an example of the overlapping themes of cosmic power, healing, ritual, and magic.

Before examining serpents in the Moses narratives below, one additional connection between writing and magic can be made. The Egyptian word for

“statement” or “saying” (sometimes used synonymously with “spell” in magic contexts) is ḏd.15 The hieroglyphic sign for this word is a serpent ( ). The example of the Horus cippi and other spells against snakes make a connection between the power of words, magic, and serpents. The hieroglyphic sign for ḏd further

9 British Museum EA 36250 (ca. 6th-3rd centuries BCE). 10 Rendsburg, “Moses Equal to Pharaoh,” 213-15. 11 Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed,” 213. 12 Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus,” 207. 13 Abdi, “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus,” 209. 14 British Museum EA 11821. Andrews, Amulets of Ancient Egypt, 38. 15 This connection is made by Noegel, “Moses and Magic,” 50. Lexical entry for ḏd in Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar, 603 and 623.

225

strengthens this connection. Noegel proposes that with this Egyptian magical context for both serpents and writing, that Exodus 7:8-13 and the plagues which follow have subtle undercurrent of “eating one’s (magical) words.”16 After the serpent of Moses and Aaron ate that of the Egyptians, the Egyptian magicians were unable to immediately replicate the next wonder (the plague of blood, Exodus 7:14-24). In this example of Moses and Aaron’s serpent consuming the serpent/“word,” Moses defeated the Egyptians in this magic contest and also rendered them temporarily ineffective in their magic.

There are limited examples in the Pentateuch of Moses explicitly using words in the context of displays of ritual power. But when this is seen in light of the larger portrayal of Moses in the role of a magician, it remains an important example.

5.1.3. Moses and Serpents

The Horus cippi along with the Coffin Texts and serpent-staves from ancient Egypt provide a new angle in which serpents in the Moses narratives can be seen. Serpents of varying forms appear in Exodus 4:4, 7:8-13, and Numbers 21:6-8.

by the tail, per (נחשׁ) Exodus 4:4 describes Moses grabbing the serpent

YHWH’s instructions. This is not just a test of faith for Moses, but is the initial display of an “Egyptian flavoured” magic, demonstrating mastery over the threat of a literal serpent as well as primordial forces.17 Reading the Coffin Texts Spell 885,

“The snake is in my hand and cannot bite me,” alongside this episode in the Moses narratives helps make this nuance more evident.18 This spell and the Horus cippi also provide a helpful backdrop for understanding Numbers 21:4-8. The bronze serpent on

16 Noegel, “Moses and Magic,” 50 17 Noegel, “Moses and Magic,” 47-48. 18 Ritner, “’And Each Staff Transformed into a Snake,” 213.

226

a pole becomes the means to bring healing to the Israelites. This is reminiscent of the principles of sympathetic magic (in this case “like repels like”). More specifically, this is similar to ancient Egyptian imagery and spells against snakebites, as seen in the

Horus cippi and Coffin Texts. Moses is presented an intercessor and YHWH’s ritual specialist who is able to effectively perform wonders in Numbers 21:4-8 which are deeply connected to Egyptian magic. In the image below, we have an example of a bronze cobra wand from Middle Kingdom Egypt.

Fig. 5.1 Copper Alloy Cobra Wand, ca. 2055 BCE – 1650 BCE (The Fitzwilliam Museum, University of Cambridge, accession number E.63.1896)

This bronze cobra from Egypt is a tangible example of the type of imagery found in Exodus 7:8-13. The intricate connection between serpent, wand or staff, and performance of magic is well attested in ancient Egypt.19 We see very similar themes in Exodus 7:8-13 and Numbers 21:4-8 where some type of serpent-staff is YHWH’s chosen ritual object for Moses to use. The serpent-staff or pole (as in the case in

Numbers) is not an insignificant detail in the narrative, but becomes an important instrument in the effective performance of wonders/magic. It functions throughout the Moses narratives at times as an extension of Moses’ hand (and therefore also

19 Tomb 5 “the magician’s tomb” in the Manchester Museum, University of Manchester.

227

YHWH’s). Beyond the plagues, the staff is used by Moses in the producing water from a rock (Exodus 17:1-7) and in gaining victory over the Amalekites (17:8-15). In

Exodus 17:9 Moses is instructed to take the “staff of God” and in 17:11-12 only

Moses’ hands are mentioned, and so this is one example where the staff and “hands” are used almost interchangeably in the context of wonders. There is an implicit theological message with this close connection between the staff and hand or arm of

God in the narratives. The staff used by Moses and Aaron is in some way an extension of YHWH’s hand. When Moses performs signs and wonders, he is acting

before the Pharaoh. Moses is not equal to אלהים on behalf of YHWH and appears as

Pharaoh, but portrayed as greater than him.

5.1.4. Heka

There is no cognate or loan word for heka in the Hebrew Bible, yet the concept may be seen to appear in the backdrop of the Moses narratives. The theme of magic is prominent particularly in Exodus 7-11, even though the word “magic” does not occur.

by their“) בלטיהם The description of the performance of wonders by the Egyptians is secret arts” or “with their mysteries”). This occurs in Exodus 7:11, 7:22, 8:3 MT,

8:14 MT. In contrast, this phrase is not used when Moses or Aaron are performing wonders. YHWH imbues Moses with the ability to perform specific wonders and in turn, Moses acts on behalf of YHWH (e.g., producing the plague of boils by throwing soot in the air, which leaves the Egyptian magicians unable to stand before Moses in

Exodus 9:8-12, and victory in battle against the Amalekites through Moses keeping his hands raised in Exodus 17:8-13). Duane Garrett contrasts the work of magic with the work of Moses here. Regarding Exodus 9:8-9 he writes, “[these] are divine actions that Moses has the power to invoke. To the Egyptians, this would have been a

228

work of magic. It is not magic, however, since magic is supposed to always be successful after one has used the appropriate words, actions, and manipulation of objects. That is, this ritual is for his one episode.”20 But instead of seeing this as a message against the practice of magic, in the plagues narratives it is more of a critique of foreign gods and specifically any deity other than YHWH (not just Egyptian deities).

In addition to deities and kings using heka and performing wonders, lector priests were known for their performance of magic. While heka was pervasive across all spheres of life in ancient Egypt, it was mostly used by priestly or royal specialists.

Consequently, those who were experts in performing magic were also in authoritative roles. Moses is elevated in the Pentateuchal narratives in having a prominent position of authority as the mouthpiece and wonder-worker for YHWH. Moses appears in the narratives as using a resemblance of Egyptian heka in order to bring chaos and defeat to the Pharaoh. But the theological message is clear; YHWH is greater than the perceived power of heka and can channel it for his purposes.

5.2. Magic in Royal Contexts: Implications from Exodus

In the Exodus narrative, the Pharaoh is presented as the main opponent to Moses and consequently, also to YHWH. The text does not elaborate on details about the

Pharaoh. The recurring comments about him include coming out of the Nile in the morning (Exodus 7:15; 8:20 (EVV); 9:13) and the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart. There is no description of his appearance, royal clothing, performance of daily rituals, or

20 Duane A. Garrett, A Commentary on Exodus: Kregel Exegetical Library (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publication, 2014) 316. Victor Hamilton similarly argues that the biblical writers are making a point about magic. “Pagan magic can introduce evil, but once having introduced it, cannot get rid of it,” Exodus, 131.

229

even a name. Instead the focus is primarily on Moses and secondarily on Aaron throughout the Exodus-Numbers narratives.21

5.2.1. Moses and “Children of the Kap”

The description of Moses being raised in the Egyptian royal household (Exod 2:5-10) provides the beginning of his royal portrayal. The scenario depicted in the Exodus narrative of Egyptian royalty raising a non-Egyptian child in the royal household is similar to real practices in ancient Egypt. The royal Egyptian initiative to invite children from other countries to be raised and educated in the palace was known as

“children of the kap.”22 The intention behind this programme was to advance favourable foreign relations between Egypt and neighbouring countries (as discussed in Chapter Three). Children from other royal and high-ranking status would come to

Egypt to be educated, learn to read, and become familiar with the Egyptian way of life. As future leaders of their home countries, they would return home with a favourable perspective on Egypt and with a somewhat similar ideology.

The birth narrative in Exodus 2 has an echo of the “children of the kap” with clear differences as well. Moses did not originate from a family of status or wealth.

He was not sent to Egypt for education and diplomatic relations. Instead his upbringing was a result of Egyptian oppression of the Hebrew people. Rather than being presented as a guest in the palace, Moses was grafted into the royal household in being adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter (Exodus 2:10). This background in the narrative provides reasons as to why Moses might be presented in a royal manner in later in Exodus, especially 7-11 with the confrontation with the Pharaoh.

21 See Matthews, Royal Motifs and Rendsburg, “Moses as Equal to Pharaoh.” 22 Feucht, “The ẖrdw n kap Reconsidered,” 38-47. Depauw, “A Ghost-Name of a hrd n kap,” 217-218.

230

5.2.2. Royal Sceptre

In Egyptian iconography the staff served as a symbol of authority and sovereignty, so when held by a deity, it conveyed divine power.23 This divine power is conferred to the Pharaoh as the gods’ representative on earth and is particularly heightened during certain ceremonies (such as coronation) and festivals.24 Pyramid Texts 196-203 depict the king’s coronation: “Give the Crook into his hand, So that the head of Lower and Upper Egypt shall be bowed.”25 As part of this semi-divine status, the Pharaoh was also the possessor of magic26 and at times, the staff was used as a divine weapon.27

The use of the staff in the Exodus narrative has symbolic significance in light of the Egyptian context.28 What is an ordinary shepherd’s staff is transformed into a symbolic message of authority and an instrument of ritual power (magic). The narrative(s) in Exodus and Numbers portray Moses as one who uses a staff in order to perform magical acts and defeat the Pharaoh. There are numerous implications for

Exodus 4 and 7 in light of this Egyptian evidence. Moses is presented as a quasi- royal figure, in addition to magician, with the ability to perform wonders and summons his specialist in a similar way to the Pharaoh. His authority in the

Pentateuch/Torah is validated through his call from YHWH (Exodus 4:1-18), performance of wonders (Deuteronomy 34:10-12), defeating the Pharaoh (Exodus 7-

23 Henry G. Fischer, “Notes on Sticks and Staves in Ancient Egypt,” Metropolitan Museum Journal 13 (1978): 5-32, see page 14. 24 A. H. Gordon and C. W. Schwabe, “The Egyptian was-Scepter and Its Modern Analogues: Uses as Symbols of Divine Power or Authority,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 32 (1995): 1985-196. 25 Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, 109. 26 Pinch, Magic in Ancient Egypt, 50. 27 Charlie Trimm, “YHWH Fights for Them!” Warrior in the Exodus Narratives (Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2014), 102. 28 Additional biblical examples of the staff and authority include Psalm 110:2; Isaiah 10:5, 24; Ezekiel 19:11-14. Also see Sarna, Exploring Exodus, 60.

231

14, Deuteronomy 34:10-12) and freeing the Hebrew people. Moses is given the ability to perform magic wonders through YHWH’s directives and power.

5.2.3. Egyptian Uraeus and Serpent Staves

One of the greatest serpent images in Egypt is the cobra represented on the royal uraeus. Neither the Pharaoh nor Moses are depicted with a royal uraeus in the

Exodus narratives, but the connection between serpents and magic is important (both in ancient Egypt and the Moses narratives). Hendel affirms that the uraeus serpent,

“protects kings and gods; the king has the snake as part of his being, and so is immune to snake bites and can heal others.”29 It represented power and was a symbol of divine protection. Pyramid Text Utterance 298 says, “The Sun appears, with his effective uraeus atop him, against this snake that comes from under my fingers.”30

One further example is an inscription on the stela of Amenhotep III, which states,

“Their uraeus-serpents, coiled about their sides, provide their protection.”31 This is why Shanks argues that the Israelite nehushtan functioned in a similar way to the uraeus. 32

Staves and wands made in a serpentine form are particularly pertinent to this study, given the reoccurrence of both staff and serpent imagery in Exodus and

Numbers. Robert Ritner surveyed the archaeological evidence of serpent-staves in ancient Egypt and has identified nine with certainty. These eight staves vary in size, material and date (ranging from Middle Kingdom to Late Period).33 But Ritner clarifies, “If extant serpent wands are themselves rare, corresponding depictions of clutched serpents are common and perhaps served as artistic prototype for the actual

29 Hendel, “Serpents,” in DDD, 745. 30 Pyramid Text Utterance 298, trans. James P. Allen, The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Text, 58. 31 Lichtheim, AEL 2:45. 32 Shanks, “The Mystery of the Nechushtan,” 63. 33 Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed into a Snake,” 212.

232

ritual implement.”34 The illustration below appeared in Chapter Three also and is a clear example of a clutched “serpent-staff” associated with magical practice.

Fig. 5.2 Wooden Figurine, ca. 1773 – 1650 BCE (Manchester Museum, University of Manchester accession number 1790, Quibell 12)

The serpent imagery plays an interesting role in the Moses narratives (Exodus 4, 7,

likely refers to תנין ,and Numbers 21 in particular). As was argued in Chapter Four some type of reptile and is likely used in the narrative as an “upgrade” to the sign in

Exodus 4:2-4 and perhaps carries mythological overtones here.35 The language and depiction of “casting down” the staff is similar to that of the Egyptian ritual of casting down Apophis, “the primordial serpent of chaos.”36 This sign in Exodus 4 provides authentication for Moses before the Hebrew people. But in Exodus 7, the

’and consequent swallowing of the Egyptians תנין transformation of the staff into

34 Ritner, “And Each Staff Transformed,” 212. 35 Rendsburg, “The Literary Unity of the Exodus Narrative,” 113-132. 36 Scott Noegel, “The Egyptian ‘Magicians,’” https://thetorah.com/the-egyptian-magicians/ Retrieved on 1/5/2018 and Noegel, “Moses and Magic,” 47-48. Wakeman, God’s Battle with the Monster, 15-16.

233

staff/serpent conveys a deeper theological message. It anticipates the impending defeat of the Egyptians being swallowed in the Sea of Reeds. Moreover, through the displays of wonders in 7-14 and victory over the Pharaoh display the superiority of

YHWH over Egypt, and implicitly, all foreign nations.

5.2.4. Delegation

Another aspect of the royal portrayal of Moses is the way he delegates to Aaron, particularly in the plagues-cycle. Exodus 4 indicates to the reader that Moses will be the one performing the wonders when confronting the Pharaoh. But in Exodus 7:1

Moses is described as “elohim” and Aaron as his prophet. Exodus 7:8-10 depicts

Aaron as the one being summoned to perform the wonder before Pharaoh and his specialists. In this instance and elsewhere (including the plague of gnats in 8:12-15

MT), Aaron’s actions become an extension of Moses’ actions. Similarly, Moses’ actions are an extension of YHWH’s actions. This is reminiscent of the way the

Egyptian Pharaoh summons and delegates his priestly specialists for the performance of rituals, healing, and wonders. That which is performed on behalf of the Pharaoh is treated as if the Pharaoh personally performed the action.

5.2.5. Summary

The royal aspects to the portrayal of Moses in the Pentateuch are one facet of his role as wonder-worker of YHWH. The literary depiction of Moses’ early life in the

Egyptian palace (Exodus 2) is relatively consistent with the Egyptian practice of raising and educating children from other countries in the Egyptian palace. The royal theme continues in Moses’ life as he appears before Pharaoh as one who is not just equal but superior. In the initial confrontation in Exodus 7:8-13, Pharaoh has several

234

specialists on hand in order to perform a wonder on his behalf. Pharaoh has three different magic specialists, but Moses is able to defeat them with his “specialist,”

Aaron. The relation between Moses and Aaron in the Exodus narratives is similar to the Pharaoh and his magicians, in the delegation of performing wonders in the context of this battle. In the magic contest between Moses and Pharaoh, the magical, royal connotation of the serpent-staff is important and intricate in the presentation. Imagery of Egyptian magic is used by Moses in the narrative in order to show the supremacy of YHWH.

5.3. Magic in Priestly and Ritual Contexts

5.3.1. Healing Contexts

The spheres of healing contexts and magic ritual were often overlapping in ancient

Egypt. There are only a few occurrences in Exodus and Numbers where Moses is presented in such context.37 One example includes the healing of Miriam from a skin

in Numbers 12:10-15. Miriam was afflicted with this after YHWH’s (צרעת) disease wrath was against her and Aaron (12:9). Moses asks YHWH to heal her (12:13).

There is no mention of rituals, the manipulation of objects, or gesturing in contrast with the wonders performed in the plagues-cycle. The only role Moses appears to have is to petition YHWH on Miriam’s behalf. His request is granted and after seven days Miriam is permitted back inside the camp. Moses plays a minimal role in this occasion of healing, but still depicted as the primary intermediary between YHWH and the people.

37 One anomaly to the examples explored in this section is the changing of bitter water into sweet water (Exodus 15:22-25). Although this does not describe the healing of a living being, it contains the general motif of healing the water so that it would not be harmful to the people. Moses is the agent in this transforming act by throwing a piece of wood into the water (15:25). 235

Secondly, Numbers 21:4-9 presents Moses as an intermediary and also a

(נחשׁ) healer. After the people spoke against YHWH and Moses, venomous snakes were sent to afflict them (21:5-6). The people asked Moses to consult YHWH and request that the snakes be removed. This time YHWH instructs Moses to create a

It is through YHWH’s initiative of 38.(נס) and position it on a pole (שרף) serpent sympathetic magic that anyone who gazes upon this bronze serpent would be healed

(21:9). Moses acts as the agent of YHWH and wonder-worker for the Hebrew people.

This remedy for the bite of venomous snakes is somewhat unusual within the Hebrew

Bible, but is fitting in the context of ancient Egypt.

A common Egyptian motif for repelling snakes was by means of using snake imagery in apotropaic contexts. The healing Horus cippi was already mentioned and is relevant here also. The idea behind the efficacy is that like repels like. In the case

was used to repel venomous snakes and (שרף) ”of Numbers, a created “fiery serpent heal those who had been bitten. The coiled bronze serpent-staff from Theban tomb is reminiscent of the serpent-pole in Numbers 21:7-8.39

The serpent is a widespread image with both malevolent and benevolent connotations in ancient Egypt. This complex perception of serpent imagery is found among deities (Apophis and Mehen being two examples),40 in apotropaic and healing spells, fertility,41 and in death. Ronald Hendel summarises, “The snake can appear in

38 Here we have a different Hebrew term related to “serpent” than what appears in Exodus, reflecting a different author and/or tradition. 39The British Museum EA 52831. Roger Forshaw, “Before Hippocrates: Healing Practices in Ancient Egypt,” in Medicine, Healing and Performance, ed. Effie Gemi-Iordanou, Stephen Gordon, Robert Matthew, Ellen McInnes, Rhiannon Pettitt (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2014): 25-41, see page 35. 40 Hornung, Conceptions of God, 159. The Egyptian deity Apophis (of serpent appearance) was considered to be an enemy to the gods and is associated with the “power of chaos.” He can never be completely destroyed and so needs to be constantly repelled by means of magic. Wilkinson, The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, 220-228. Examples include Apophis, Denwen, Kebehwet, Mehen, Meretseger, Nehebu-Kau, Renenutet, Wadjet, Wepset, Weret-Hekau, and Yam. 41 Joines, Serpent Symbolism in the Old Testament, 73.

236

many roles: as an adversary or a protector, a deity or a demon, and can signify life and regeneration or death and nonexistence.”42 The presence and practice of magic is evident in nearly every sphere of life in ancient Egypt, so perhaps it is not surprising that occurrences of the serpent are often related to magic. In the image below, a serpent can be seen on an Egyptian “magic wand” (also known as a “birth tusk”) along with other figures. This was also found in the Ramesseum Tomb along with the wooden figurine (fig. 5.1). It was likely used for apotropaic and healing contexts with expectant mothers.

Fig. 5.3 Ivory Magic Wand, ca. 1773 – 1650 BCE (Manchester Museum, University of Manchester accession number 1801)

The tension between positive and negative serpent imagery is evident in incantations, rituals, and royal activity, which all have magic undergirding their effectiveness.43 These demonstrate how snakes were feared and at the same time revered. There are many magic spells against snake bites; both for prevention and

42 Hendel, “Serpent,” in DDD, 744-45. 43 Wilkinson, The Complete Gods and Goddess of Ancient Egypt, 220.

237

treatment.44 Serpents did not only pose a threat to the living, but also were feared in the journey through the netherworld in death. The Book of the Dead contains incantations to ward off various dangerous creatures, including serpents.45 Spell 35, for example says, “Depart, leave me, pass me by, you snake.”46

Karen Joines observes how this is reminiscent of sympathetic magic. She explains,

“Serpents could be repelled by serpent emblem, and healing brought to serpent bites by representation of the serpent or by contact with a magical medium.”47

In addition, the use of gold was chosen for symbolic reasons among others. It was regarded as a divine material and reflected eternal life, the sun, and at times was connected to the god Re. Richard Wilkinson claims, “Because the flesh of all the gods described from Re was also said to be of gold, the use of this metal for statues and other representations of deities was certainly symbolic.”48 Objects with a gold or bronze look had this added significance. This strengthens the connection to Egyptian magic with the bronze serpent in Numbers 21:4-9.

Lastly, the use of water was related to magic in Egypt.49 It was used in medicine and healing contexts, magic rituals, and royal and priestly festivals.

Forshaw provides the example: “The use of water as a healing medium is attested on the 19th Dynasty (1295-1069 BCE) stela of Qenherkhepeshef (BM EA 278) where

44 The Brooklyn Museum Papyri 47.218.48 and 47.218.85 contains a set of instructions for a specialist in treating snake bites and scorpion stings. The Pyramid Texts also contain numerous spells against snake bites, which were adapted for funerary contexts too. Donald Redford includes additional examples in The Ancient Gods Speak, 1999. 45 Spells 33-39, trans. Raymond Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth By Day (San Francisco: Chronicle Books), 1998. 46 Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 104. 47Joines, Serpent Symbolism, 89. 48 Wilkinson, Symbol and Magic, 83. 49 Souto Castro, J. Turner, and M. Ferro Garrido, “Evidence of Healing and Purifying Water Properties in Ancient Egypt during the New Kingdom and the Ramesside Period,”in Libro de Actas del II Symposium Internacional de “Termalismo y Calidad de Vida,”(transcribed proceedings, Ourense, Spain, 2017), 6.

238

there is a reference to sleeping in the temple court and drinking sacred water ….”50

The Horus cippi, as noted earlier, are also examples of the role water played in magic and healing contexts.51 This adds further to depth to the wonders performed by

Moses that involve water (e.g., water transforming to blood in Exodus 4:8-9 and 7:20-

21, the parting of the waters of the Sea of Reeds in 14:21-28, producing water from a rock in 17:5-7 and Numbers 21:9-12). In some instances, water is part of the geographical description in the narrative (e.g., the parting of the sea) but there is also an aspect of that this medium which occurs in many Egyptian rituals is used here for

YHWH’s “signs and wonders.”

5.3.2. “Swallowing” in Magic Contexts

The act of swallowing is attested in various magic ritual contexts in ancient Egypt and appears in several instances in the Pentateuch. Before examining these occurrences in the biblical texts, there will be a brief introduction to this aspect of ancient Egyptian magic. The method of magic being conferred through swallowing is attested as early as the Pyramid Texts. In that context, the Pharaoh “feeds on gods … eats their magic, swallows their spirits … Great-Power rank was given him.”52 The practice of swallowing, consuming, or licking is not exclusive to ancient Egypt, as Ritner notes.

The Pyramid and Coffin Texts, “describe the licking of written spells and drawn images in order to ingest their efficacy.”53

There are three examples in the Pentateuch of Moses being associated with the performance of a wondrous act that involved swallowing. These include 7:8-13,

50 Forshaw, “Before Hippocrates,” 34. 51 Robert K. Ritner, “Horus on the Crocodiles,” in Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt, ed. James P. Allen, Jan Assmann, Alan B. Lloyd, Robert K. Ritner, David P. Silverman (New Haven: Yale University, 1989): 103-116. 52 Utterances 273 of the antechamber, east wall of the Unas Pyramid Texts, trans. Miriam Lichtheim, AEL 1:37. 53 Forshaw, The Role of the Lector, 26.

239

14:26-31/15:12, and 32:19-20. Numbers 5:11-31 describes instructions for a curse against an adulteress wife. If the accused woman is found guilty, the punishment is

on a scroll, washes them (מארה) delivered by the priest. The priest is to write curses into “bitter water” and gives this to the woman to drink. The dissolving of words and ingestion of the bitter water becomes the means of activating this curse. This does resemble the example mentioned in the Tale of Setne as well as the principle behind the efficacy of the Horus cippi. Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme observes that “the details of the ritual’s ‘magicality’ are rarely addressed” even though many scholars who acknowledge this is an example of magic.54 This example fits within the scope of examining magic in the Hebrew Bible but since Moses is not depicted as a performer of such ritual, it will not be addressed further here.

Exodus 7:8-13 :תנין Swallowing of .5.3.2.1

In this example Moses instructs Aaron to take the staff and throw it down. It is transformed into a living serpent and swallows the serpent (staff) of the Egyptian specialists (7:12). This is an example of a “magical transformation contest.”55 These are not specific to ancient Egypt, but attests to the wider context of the ancient Near

East. The older Sumerian tale “Enmerkar and En-suhgir-ana” also features a magic transformation contest between a “wise woman” and sorcerer.56

As has been seen in Chapter Three, there is an example from ancient Egypt which resembles Exodus 7:8-13. In the Westcar Papyrus, the lector priest

54 Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme, “A Kind of Magic? The Law of Jealousy in Numbers 5:11-31 as Magical Ritual and as Ritual Text,” in Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World (ed. Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme and Helen Jacobus; Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013): 149-168. 55 Ioannis M. Konstantakos, “The Magical Transformation Contest in the Ancient Storytelling Tradition,” Cuadernos de Filología Clásica, Estudios Griegos e Indoeuropeos 26 (2016): 207-234. 56 Black, The Literature of Ancient Sumer, 3-11.

240

Ubainer/Webaoner is able to transform a wax crocodile into a living one and then reverse it back into wax.57 In this tale, the crocodile is instructed to find and eat a specific townsman. With the close connection between magician (lector), a possible

and the “swallowing” (through consumption), this ,(חרטם) loan word in Exodus 7:11 is an important example.

5.3.2.2. Exodus 14:26-31/15:12

As mentioned in Chapter Four, the theme of ritual swallowing is present in both 7:12 and 14:26-31. It was argued that Exodus 4:2-4 appears to anticipate the event in 7:8-

13. Similarly, it can be argued that the staff (serpent) swallowing the others (7:12)

that בלע anticipates the Egyptians being swallowed in the sea in 14:26-31.58 The verb is used in 7:12 is also used in 15:12 to recount the Israelites’ crossing the Sea of

Reeds. This is a literary function in the text which has been skilfully interwoven to further connect the signs and wonders to the actions of Moses and YHWH’s victory over the Egyptians. This is an example of magic used in the context of battle, which was a familiar motif in the ancient Near East.59 Moses assumes the role as both priestly-magician and king as he acts as YHWH’s agent in dividing the waters. He is the deliverer for the Hebrew people, but the opponent to the Egyptians as he closes the waters on them (14:26-27).

Also in the Westcar Papyrus is a tale of the lector priest, Djadjaemankh, who is able to part the waters of a lake in order to retrieve a pendant (see Chapter Three).

Then he was able to return the waters. The lectors were frequently described as being performers of “wonders” (biAyt) in this cycle of tales. This is significant as the

57 Parkinson, The Tale of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems, 107. 58 Currid, Ancient Egypt, 85. 59Trimm, “YHWH Fight for Them!”

241

Westcar Papyrus contain tales of lector priests performing wonders which are noticeably similar to what Moses does. In the way that lectors were well-known for producing “wonders,” so Deuteronomy seems to attribute this to Moses (Deut 34:10-

12).

5.3.2.3. Exodus 32:19-20

In this third example of swallowing there are several differences from the examples above. Exodus 32:19-20 describes how Moses smashes the tablets, pulverises the golden calf, and scatters it on water. He then makes the Hebrew people drink this mixture. This episode is without any serpent imagery and is not connected to the themes in the other instances of swallowing (Exodus 7 and 14). Another difference is that here in Exodus 32, humans are doing the swallowing, rather than people or a ritual object being swallowed up. The Egyptian Tale of Setne, sheds light on this example of someone swallowing something which leads to a particular consequence.

In this tale the dissolving and consumption of the written words on papyrus conveyed the transfer of knowledge: “He wrote it down every word that was on the papyrus completely. He burned it with fire; he dissolved it with water. He recognised that it had dissolved; he drank it and knew that which was in it.”60 Thus, swallowing and

“knowing” became associated together.61

In the “Tale of the Two Brothers,” Bata is described as dying but being revived after his heart swallows water.

[12,5] They cut off the blossom upon which Bata’s heart was, and he fell dead that very instant.

60 Setna I, col. 4.1-1-4. Lichtheim 1980: 131; Ritner 1993: 108; Forshaw 2014, 137. 61 Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 108

242

[14] After night had fallen, / his heart absorbed the water, and Bata shuddered over all his body and began looking at his elder brother while his heart was (still) in the bowl. Anubis, his elder brother, took the bowl of cool water in which his younger brother’s heart was and him drink it. His heart assumed its (proper) position, and he became as he used to be.62

In both of these examples, there is a positive result of the magical act of swallowing. However, in Exodus 32 the swallowing of the pulverized calf is conveyed with negative connotations. Rather than gaining knowledge through consuming this mixture, the end result in the narrative is that YHWH inflicts the people with a plague (32:35) as a punishment for the worship of the calf. This is reminiscent of an execration context and Moses serves as the priestly-magician of

YHWH in performing the ritual action.

5.3.3. Summary

The aspects of Egyptian motifs which are most prominent in the Moses narratives are related to magic, cosmic order, serpents, ritual use of the staff, kingship and power.

Against a backdrop of the Egyptian concept of maat, we can see how the plagues

(Exodus 7-11) are not so much an undoing of creation but a subversion of maat.

Moses is the primary agent of YHWH who becomes the disrupter of maat and provokes chaos on a cosmic level for the Egyptians. In doing so, there is an implicit theological message that chaos and defeat for the Egyptians is order and victory for the Hebrew (“Israelite”) people. YHWH is not just the deity of the Hebrew people but presented in the biblical narrative as one who can control things on a cosmic level

(including maat and heka), above any other deity.

62 “The Tale of the Two Brothers,” trans. William Kelly Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt, 87. Ritner, The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice, 105.

243

Heka was a crucial part of priestly activities and rituals in ancient Egypt, including healing and significant aspects of this are seen in the Moses narratives too.

Moses takes on the role of healer as one aspect of his wonder-working. The imagery of Egyptian magic is especially prominent in the episode of the bronze serpent in

Numbers 21:4-8. The basic principles of sympathetic magic are recognisable as a bronze serpent-staff (pole) is used to deflect and protect against living snakes. In the biblical narrative, this act is framed around an understanding that the efficacy of this stems from YHWH and his directives to Moses.

The ritual act of swallowing and magical component to writing both fall under the principles of maat and heka. The only significant point between the act of writing and any Egyptian examples is found in Exodus 31:18 and 32:15-20. This is intertwined with the context of execration rituals and consequences for breaking the covenant with YHWH. The theme of “swallowing” appears in several places in the

Moses narratives, all with the theme of magic running through them. In each instance in Exodus 7:8-13, 14:26-31/15:12, and 32:19-20, Moses is behind the ritual action

(through Aaron in 7:8-13). By considering the Egyptian significance to swallowing in magic contexts, this brings greater significance to these wonders in Exodus 7, 15, and

32. The act of swallowing is not a small detail in episodes but indicates a magic-ritual context for the wonders performed.

Lastly, the use of the staff appears in many royal, priestly, and magic contexts in ancient Egypt, as does various forms serpentine imagery. As has been seen in

Chapter Four and here in Chapter Five, the staff plays a significant part in the wonders performed by Moses. At times it is mentioned interchangeably with the hand or arm of YHWH, and so there is a degree of fluidity between the staff of Moses

(sometimes called the “staff of God”) and the hand or arm of YHWH. The staff as a

244

symbol of royal authority is integrated in the presentation of Moses throughout the narratives in Exodus and Numbers.

5.4. Crucial Differences

So far this chapter has highlighted similarities between the presentation of ancient

Egyptian magic and the portrayal of Moses in the Pentateuchal narratives. But there are also notable differences and points where the presentation of Moses clearly varies from an Egyptian representation.

5.4.1. Appearance

Royal and priestly personnel were often depicted iconographically or described textually with particular regalia or aspects to his or her general appearance. Moses is certainly not presented as having an appearance consistent with a king or priestly wonder-worker. The most noteworthy description of Moses’ appearance is related to the use of the staff and also the occurrence of his face shining after his time on Mount

Sinai. The portrayal of a prominent figure with a staff or sceptre is not exclusively unique to magic ritual or an Egyptian context. Within the biblical text, there is a general lack of interest in the appearance of the Egyptians as well as Moses. The biblical portrayal of Moses seems to be focused on the actions he performs (wonders) rather than on his stature or appearance. By leaving the Pharaoh and his specialists unnamed and with no description of regalia in the narratives, the attention is focused on the important figures; Moses and YHWH.

There is significant attention given to priestly garments in Exodus 28, including the ephod, breastplate, urim and thummim. The instructions for such garments are addressed to Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. The focus

245

here is more on establishing priestly protocol, rather than on Moses. While there are a number of similarities between the portrayal of Moses as a wonder-worker and the

Egyptian lector priests, there is no point of similarity in the description of appearance other than the association with a staff.

5.4.2. Absence of Incantations

Incantations are a very common and frequent part of magico-religious practices and ritual power in the ancient Near East. There is a remarkable absence of these in the

Moses narratives. The Deuteronomist provides a list of prohibited ritual specialists, including those who cast spells or incantations (18:11), and the casts these as “foreign practices.” Moreover, the biblical writers appear to contrast Moses and Aaron from the Egyptian specialists.

In each wonder performed by Moses, there is either the use of the staff, a gesture, or contact (or manipulation) with an object. But these are unaccompanied by recitations or even further explanation of the technique in the narratives. In some places, YHWH gives instructions to Moses on what to do. Yet in other instances the narrative describes the particular action without any further explanation (e.g., during the battle with the Amalekites in Exodus 17:8-15). Moses is described as praying, but not reciting incantations at any point in the narratives.

5.4.3. Absence of (Regular) Rituals

The main responsibilities of priests included the performance of specific rituals, maintenance of temple activity, and consequently, care of the gods. Egyptian priests act on behalf of the Pharaoh. When the Pharaoh delegated the priests to perform daily rituals on his behalf, he took credit for them as he performed by himself.

246

Many of the rituals and festivals were performed by the lector priests. These included purification rituals, the daily temple ritual, the consecration of the temple, various festivals (including the sed-festival), funerary rituals, and the opening of the mouth ceremony (to name a few general categories of such rituals). As Serge

Sauneron has noted, “Egyptian priests have a very precise role to play, as substitutes for the king, officiating in title only: to maintain the integrity on earth of the divine presence …”63

In the context of wonder-working, there are no established priestly rituals that

Moses is required to follow. There is some repetition (the use of gesture, contact, and the staff), but not a set performance. This is not particularly surprising in the context of the plague narratives (Exodus 7-11). Specific rituals do appear in the context of purity, sacrifices, consecration, and priestly duties in the Pentateuch. But these mostly fall outside of the context of wonder-working.

5.5. Conclusion

In light of this, an important theological polemic becomes apparent in the biblical narrative. Glimpses of Egyptian magic function in the text to add another layer to the wider polemic, which demonstrates the superiority of YHWH (and consequently

Israel) over the Egyptian deities, Pharaoh, and Egypt. Moses and Aaron assume roles which involve their engagement in Egyptian magic and result in their victory against the Pharaoh. This evidence demonstrates that magic could have a neutral or even positive place in Exodus, when initiated by YHWH.64 As has been discussed in

Chapters One-Three, magic was a normative part of “religious practice” in the ancient

63 Sauneron, The Priests of Ancient Egypt, 34. 64 Dolansky, Now You See It, 53.

247

Near East and that is still somewhat recognisable in the Hebrew Bible. The biblical writers have framed YHWH’s “magic” largely as “signs and wonders” in the

Pentateuchal narratives.

Some of the most prominent aspects of “Egyptian-styled” magic in the Moses narratives appear in Exodus 4, 7-12, and 14 and with Moses as the performer of these acts. As has been seen in this chapter, the overarching themes of maat and heka are interwoven in the portrayal of the confrontation between Moses and the Pharaoh. As

Moses gains victory over Pharaoh and the Egyptians, Pharaoh and his specialists are ultimately depicted as powerless. Moses is the one who appears to be the expert of

Egyptian-styled magic in the narratives, further showing him to be not equal but greater than Pharaoh and the lector priests of Egypt.

The unique role given to Moses in the Pentateuch is in part the reason he can legitimately engage in the performance of magic/wonders. Deuteronomy 18:9-13 places strict bans on divinatory, magical, and ultimately foreign practices in Israel.

This is contrasted with the Exodus-Numbers narratives which seem to “borrow”

Egyptian practices and motifs in order to show YHWH’s superiority over them.

Deuteronomy 34:11-12 indicates that it is because Moses holds such a unique and authoritative position that he is permitted to perform magic on behalf of YHWH, even though this is not typical of most prophets in the Hebrew Bible.65 Magic functions in the Exodus narrative as a means of authenticating Moses and demonstrating the supremacy of YHWH over foreign practices and powers.

65 A few notable exceptions could include Elijah, Elisha, and Daniel. But overall wonder- working does not become part of the model for future prophets (Deuteronomy 13 and 18).

248

CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION

The central question this thesis sought to address is whether Moses is portrayed as a magician in the Pentateuch. To answer this question evidence from the ancient Near

East (primarily ancient Egypt) and Hebrew Bible has been examined. It is through situating the themes of magic and wonder-working in the Moses narratives within the context of ancient Egyptian magic that the presentation of Moses as a divinely- enabled magician emerges.

6.1. Summary

Chapter One introduced the challenges to defining magic and surveys scholarly literature on the subject. The broad sketch of significant studies on magic from early social scientists demonstrates how a particular paradigm of magic developed. This paradigm largely interpreted magic as an early form of or a subversion to religion and/or science. Since this is not an accurate representation of magic in the ancient

Near East, it is highly problematic when applied to that context. Rather than reflecting the accuracy of the ancient Near Eastern evidence, it reflects more on the context and debates of early 20th century Western social scientists.

The general framework of this paradigm of magic seeped into biblical scholarship. Consequently, most 19th-mid 20th century discussions about magic in

249

the Bible were influenced by a paradigm which portrayed magic as an illegitimate form of religious practice. Over the past 20 years there has been a renewed interest in magic in the Hebrew Bible and ancient Near East. A survey of recent literature in this area indicates a shift in the discussion on magic. Chapter One highlighted this survey and acknowledged the complexity of examining ancient Near Eastern magic.

This thesis sought to take an emic approach to ancient Near Eastern magic and not impose a contemporary interpretation onto an ancient context. For this reason

Chapter Two surveyed the theme of interacting with the divine in the ancient Near

East in order to discern what the evidence indicates about magic. An aspect of the magico-religious continuum seemed to be present in every sphere of life, although with differences between cultures within the ancient Near East. But it was not a precursor to organised religion nor was it a “primitive” form of science (as Frazer suggested).

Magic was a complex and intricate component of interacting with the divine

(whether deities, demons, ghosts, cosmic forces, etc.). It cannot be separated from

“religion” in the ancient Near East. The Mesopotamians and Hittites had specific vocabulary to label illicit practices or practitioners of harmful or even illegal magic.

But this was not a portrayal of all instances of magic, but rather forbidden forms of it.

The Egyptians did not have a term for harmful magic. Magic was heka and an important component in the divine and earthly realms.

Through a survey of evidence of magic and interacting with the divine in the ancient Near East, my research was drawn to focus on ancient Egypt in order to address my central questions. Chapter Three explored the magico-religious practices in various contexts of society in ancient Egypt from the Old Kingdom to the Late

Period. The decision not to focus on one specific time period was so that potentially

250

relevant material would not be overlooked. This broad scope also made it possible to observe whether there were notable changes in the portrayal of magic over several thousand years in Egypt. The evidence surveyed indicates a remarkable amount of consistency in representations of heka, maat, the role of the Pharaoh, and the overall cosmology. The significance of this is that evidence of magic from Egypt which appears to be relevant in the Moses narratives are not from one specific period. The evidence explored in Chapter Three highlighted specific examples of texts and artefacts which might shed light on nuances of magic in Exodus and Numbers. The areas of similarities between the Egyptian evidence and the Moses narratives include: magic in the divine realm, royal, and temple contexts, and from a variety of genres or sources (inscriptions, priestly writings, mortuary spells, and literary tales).

In Chapter Four, selected passages from Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy were examined in order to analyse the way Moses is portrayed and how the issue of magic is treated by the biblical writers. Source criticism does not adequately address the question of whether Moses is portrayed as a magician in the text. The passages which include Moses performing wonders are not dominated by any particular source.

They were fairly evenly divided between J/E and P and one source did not appear to present magic more positively or negatively than another (from the selected passages).

There is a clear polemic against Egypt, or any rival to YHWH, but this becomes far richer and more nuanced once evidence from the context of ancient Egypt is drawn upon.

Chapter Five re-examines episodes from the Moses narratives in light of specific examples from ancient Egyptian evidence. From the theme of magic in the divine realm and cosmos, Moses is seen as the instrument of YHWH in subverting the

Egyptian order and maat in the Exodus narratives. Using an Egyptian-styled magic,

251

Moses defeats the Pharaoh and makes a mockery of him, the power of heka, and the

Egyptian deities. The prominence of magic in royal and priestly contexts of ancient

Egypt and is mirrored in Exodus. The Egyptians are briefly depicted as having some level of skill in magic or “secret arts” (Exodus 7:11, 22), but this is overshadowed by

YHWH’s numerous “signs and wonders” performed through Moses. Transcending one specific paradigm Moses, is portrayed in royal, priestly, prophetic, and wonder- working ways, with a unique relation to YHWH, knowing him “face to face” (Exodus

33:11 and Deuteronomy 34:10).

6.2. Suggested Contributions and Implications

This thesis contributes to studies in magic in the Hebrew Bible and the portrayal of

Moses in the Pentateuch. The use of a socio-historical methodology with significant attention to evidence from ancient Egypt alongside the Pentateuchal narratives provides a unique way of understanding the presentation of Moses. The performance of wonders is not peripheral to the Moses narratives, but is a significant part of his status and portrayal.

In light of the evidence examined, this research is led to the conclusion that

Egyptian motifs, depictions, and ideology are imbedded in the Moses narratives to convey a theological message. In the narrative, YHWH uses Moses to defeat Egypt by means of a magical contest (Exodus 7-11) that resembles an Egyptian style of magic. YHWH elevates Moses to a unique role and empowers him to perform wonders, beyond the escape from Egypt. Magic functions in the text as a means of authenticating Moses as a mouthpiece for YHWH and leader of the Hebrew people.

It is also a way of emphasising the superiority of YHWH over Egypt (or any foreign nation or deity). In the narrative the Egyptians are defeated in their own land, by

252

means of a foreigner (Moses) using “Egyptian magic” against them. The wonders

Moses performs either involve the use of the staff, gesture, contact or manipulation.

The specific concepts of heka and maat are woven into these narratives, all with a theological or polemical message. By incorporating these concepts, the Exodus narratives “borrow” and reimagine an Egyptian framework for magic and cosmic myth and place it under the Israelite one. YHWH is presented as having superiority over the perceived authority of the pharaoh, but also all cosmic power and mythologies. “Egyptian magic” is subordinated by YHWH but is also reconceptualised so that Moses and Aaron are able to effectively engage in this form of magic in order to defeat the Egyptians.

Returning to the thesis title and central question: was Moses perceived as a magician? If we accept an understanding of magic from the milieu of the ancient Near

East, then there is not a clear division between “magic” and “religion.” Magic and divination both fall under the category of interactions with the divine. In the Moses narratives the issue of legitimacy is determined by whether YHWH is ultimately behind the action, not whether the action comes under “magic” or “religion.” We have examples in the narratives of both Moses and Aaron crossing the boundary between legitimate and illegitimate acts. Aaron crafts the golden calf (Exodus 32) even though YHWH commanded that no graven images be made (Exodus 20:3-5).

This action is strongly condemned, but his role in transforming a staff into a serpent

(Exodus 7:8-12) is commended. Moses performs many wondrous acts throughout the narratives, including producing water by means of striking a rock (Exodus 17:1-7).

Yet, this same action (and for the same purpose) is no longer legitimate in the instance in Numbers 21:1-13. Moses defies YHWH’s instructions and strikes the rock twice rather than speaking to it, according to the narrative. The wonder was still produced,

253

but now this was an illegitimate action rather than what had previously been a legitimate one. Magic is not what is condemned, but rather following any deity apart from YHWH and any actions which go against his instructions.

This research began with a very broad definition of magic (certainly a magico- religious continuum) based on the evidence and context of the ancient Near East surveyed in Chapter Two. An accurate, universal definition of magic for all time, cultures, and contexts is not possible. However, a more focused definition in light of this study on Moses may be offered for the Pentateuch (and most specifically the

Moses narratives in Exodus-Numbers).

In the Moses narratives, magic can be understood as a performance of an action through use of gesture, an instrument (most prominently a staff/rod), contact or manipulation of an objective for the specific purpose of producing or altering desired results by means of a cosmic or divine force. Such actions are presented as permissible when initiated or prompted by YHWH but are portrayed as illegitimate when done by any other deity or power. Deuteronomy 18:9-18 further narrows the legitimate actions and subjects them to Torah judgement, deeming certain practices and practitioners as illegitimate.

From the context of the ancient Near East, Moses would have been perceived as some type of magician or wonder-worker who was a ritual specialist with a special connection to a deity. From an Egyptian perspective this narrative would portray

Moses as a magician with similar actions and abilities as a pharaoh and also lector- priest. But would Moses still be perceived as a magician from an “Israelite” perspective? This project has not approached the issue of historicity of the Exodus narratives or the intended audience of the narrative. The evidence examined has not

254

pointed to one specific time period in which the narrative may have been composed, but indicates that it is connected to a long-standing view of magic in ancient Egypt.

What we can address is the biblical portrayal of the “Israelites” within the

Pentateuch and whether Moses could be perceived as a magician from within this

Pentateuchal perspective. Moses is presented a magician and wonder-worker who did not possess secret knowledge or powers of his own, but only what YHWH enabled him to perform. Deuteronomy 18 places strict bans against non-Yahwistic divinatory and magic practices (predominantly associated with foreign practices). Moses is remembered and esteemed for his unique relation with YHWH and performance of

“signs and wonders” that YHWH sent him to do (Deuteronomy 34:10-12). The acts of magic performed by Moses are permissible since they ultimately originated from

YHWH. Thus, even within the Pentateuch Moses can be seen as a legitimate magician and wonder-worker who follows the directives of YHWH.

If these portions of the Moses narratives and Egyptian evidence are seen in conjunction with one another, then it is evident that there are multiple examples of

Moses depicted as the wonder-worker and magician par excellence and engaging in what appears to be “Egyptian-flavoured magic.” This functions as a way to reinforce the legitimacy, conveyed power, and authority of Moses and ultimately, YHWH.

6.3 Potential for Further Research

The evidence of practices within the magico-religious continuum discussed here raises the possibility for additional research. It is important to further situate Moses as a magician into a larger discussion of wonder-working in the Hebrew Bible as a whole. In particular other figures including Joseph, Elijah, Elisha, and Daniel should be examined closely. Each of these figures engages in some sort of divinatory and

255

magico-religious practice (with Joseph and Daniel interacting with other foreign ritual specialists). In the Hebrew Bible, the word “ḥarṭummîm” only occurs in the narratives of Moses, Joseph, and Daniel and so this connection is naturally of interest.

As Egypt is the literary setting for much of the Joseph narratives, a comparison of the way magic and divination are presented along with the Moses narratives and ancient Egyptian evidence would be fruitful. Some of the specific terms for foreign ritual specialists that occur in the Moses narratives also appear in the stories of Joseph as well as elsewhere (namely, ḥarṭummîm and ḥâkāmîm). While dream interpretation is absent from Moses’ wonder-workings, it plays an important role with Joseph and would provide another perspective on magic and divination in the Hebrew Bible.

The Elijah-Elisha cycle in 1 Kings 17-19 and 2 Kings 1-7 contain a series of stories which describe the performance of wonders by these two prophets. We do not have the mention of magico-religious specialists (other than the prophets of Baal in 1

Kings 18:16-46) as occur in the Joseph, Moses, and Daniel narratives. But Elijah and

Elisha are given the title of “man of God” numerous times throughout the cycle, as well as are nāḇî of YHWH. They are effective in producing wonders by means of contact (e.g., 2 Kings 2:8 when Elijah rolls his cloak and uses it to strike the water, or

2 Kings 6:1-7 when Elisha causes an axe-head to float after throwing a stick in the water), the use of the staff followed by contact (e.g., 2 King 4:29-35), the use of words, the multiplication of provisions (e.g. oil and flour), healings, and other types of wonders (some overlapping with theophanies, including the appearance of fire). An examination of the techniques by which Elijah and Elisha are depicted as performing wonders would be useful, particularly in order to compare and contrast these with what has been seen in the Moses narratives.

256

The Daniel narrative is set in an exilic, Babylonian context but is still of interest for developing this research further. The ḥarṭummîm are mentioned here, both in Hebrew and Aramaic, and the měkaššěpîm (with both terms occurring in

Exodus 7:11 also). Like Joseph, Daniel also has the ability to interpret dreams when other non-Yahwistic specialists cannot. Moses, Joseph, and Daniel all have close interactions with royalty (particularly non-Israelite) and all engage in some form of divinatory or magico-religious practices.

257

APPENDIX 1

Source Analysis of the Moses Narratives used in Chapter Four1005

Text Non-P (J/E) P Composite text (containing both non-P and P) Exodus 4:1-91006 x 7:1-71007 x 7:8-131008 x 7:14-251009 x 7:26-8:11 (MT)1010 x 8:12-15 (MT)1011 x 8:16-28 (MT)1012 x 9:1-71013 x 9:8-121014 x 9:13-251015 x 10:1-201016 x 10:21-291017 x 11:1-101018 x (vv.1-8) x (vv.8-10) 12:1-201019 x 12:21-281020 x 12:29-361021 x

1005 This chart provides an outline of the general consensus among commentators on the source critical analysis of these passages used in chapter four. The citations list the following commentators as examples of those who adhere to such source critical perspective. Philip J. Budd, Numbers (Waco: Word Books Publisher, 1984); Thomas B. Dozeman, Exodus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2009); John I. Durham, Exodus (Waco: Word Books Publisher, 1987); Baruch A. Levine, Numbers 1-20 (New York: The Anchor Bible, 1993); Levine, Numbers 21-36 (2000); William H. C. Propp, Exodus 1-18 (New York: The Anchor Bible, 1999); Propp, Exodus 19-40 (New York: The Anchor Bible, 2006). 1006 Dozeman, 107; Durham, 43; Propp, 191. 1007 Dozeman, 103; Durham, 85; Propp, 266. 1008 Dozeman, 190; Durham, 90. Propp, 311. 1009 Ibid. 1010 Dozeman, 190, 202; Durham, 102; Propp, 312-13. 1011 Dozeman, 190, 211; Durham, 107, 112-13; Propp, 311-12. 1012 Ibid. 1013 Dozeman, 190; Durham, 117; Propp, 312-13. 1014 Dozeman, 190, 211; Durham, 120; Propp, 313, 317. 1015 Ibid. 1016 Dozeman, 240; Durham, 134; Propp, 314. 1017 Dozeman, 245; Durham, 140; Propp, 314, 320. 1018 Dozeman, 250-51; Durham, 131; Propp, 314-15, 320. 1019 Dozeman, 262, 272; Durham, 152, 156, 161; Propp, 373. 1020 Ibid. 1021 Ibid.

258

14:15-311022 x 17:1-71023 x 17:8-161024 x 31:18-32:15-201025 x

Numbers 17:16-28 (MT)1026 x 20:1-131027 x 21:4-91028 x

1022 Dozeman, 190, 317; Durham, 189-90, 195; Propp, 476. 1023 Dozeman, 388; Durham, 229; Propp, 603-4. 1024 Dozeman, 392; Durham, 234; Propp, 615. 1025 Dozeman, 577; Durham, 417, 427; Propp (vol. 2), 148-53, 366. 1026 Budd, 193-94; Levine (vol. 1), 431. 1027 Budd, 216; Dozeman, 388; Levine (vol. 1), 487. 1028 Budd, 232-33; Levine (vol. 2), 40.

259

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Abusch, Tzvi. The Witchcraft Series Maqlû. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2015.

______. The Magical Ceremony of Maqlu: A Critical Edition. Leiden: Brill, 2015.

______. Babylonian Witchcraft Literature: Case Studies. Brown Judaic Studies 132. Atlanta: Scholar Press, 1987.

______. and Daniel Schwemer, Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

Allen, James P. The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. Writings from the Ancient World, 23. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.

______. The Egyptian Coffin Texts: Vol. 8 Middle Kingdom Copies of Pyramid Texts. Chicago: Oriental Institute Publications, 2006.

Barton, George A. The Royal Inscriptions of Sumer and Akkad. New Haven: The American Oriental Society and Yale University Press, 1928.

De Moor, Johannes C. An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit. New York: E. J. Brill, 1987.

Del Olmo Lete, G. Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit. Bethesda: CDL Press, 1999.

______. Incantations and Anti-Witchcraft Texts from Ugarit. Boston/Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014.

Betz, Hans Dieter. The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, Including Demotic Spells. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992.

Breasted, James Henry. The Edwin Smith Surgical Procedures Papyrus, vols. I and II. Translated by James Henry Breasted, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1930.

Black, Jeremy, Graham Cunningham, Eleanor Robson, and Gábor Zólyomi, eds. The Literature of Ancient Sumer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

260

Blackman, A. M. and W. V. Davies. The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians: Transcribed from Papyrus Westcar (Berlin Papyrus 3033). Reading: J. V. Books, 1988.

Bryan, Cyril. The Papyrus Ebers: Translated from the German Version. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1930.

Buck, Adriaan de and Alan H. Gardiner, eds. The Egyptian Coffin Texts, Volume III: Texts of Spells 164-267. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1947.

Budge, E. A. Wallis. The Egyptian Book of the Dead. New York: Dover Publication, 1967.

Clay, Albert T. Babylonian Epics, Hymns, Omens, and Other Texts. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2005.

Dalley, Stephanie. Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Faulkner, Raymond O. The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth by Day. Introduction by Ogden Goelet. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1994, 1998.

______. The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts, Volume I: Spells 1-354. Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1973.

Foster, Benjamin R. From Distant Days: Myths, Tales, and Poetry in Ancient Mesopotamia. Bethesda: CDL Press, 1995.

Gardiner, Alan H., ed. Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum: Third Series Chester Beatty Gift. Vol. 1. London: British Museum, 1935.

Griffith, F. L., Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob, Principally of the Middle Kingdom (The Petrie Papyri). London: Quaritch, 1898.

______. and Herbert Thompson, eds. The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden. London: H. Grevel & Co., 1904.

______. The Leyden Papyrus: An Egyptian Magical Book. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1974.

Hallo, William W. and K. Lawson Younger, Jr., eds. The Context of Scripture. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997-2016.

Hoffner Jr., Harry A. Hittite Myths. 2nd ed. Edited by Gary M. Beckman. Society of Biblical Literature. Writings from the Ancient World 2. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998.

261

Jasnow, Richard and Karl-Theodor Zauzich, Conversations in the House of Life: A New Translation of the Ancient Egyptian Book of Thoth. Wiesbaden: Verlag, 2014.

Kuhrt, Amélie. The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period. Abingdon: Routledge, 2007.

Lichtheim, Miriam. Ancient Egyptian Literature. 3 vols.; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.

Pardee, Dennis. Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002.

Parker, Simon B., ed. Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Translated by Mark S. Smith et al. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1997.

Parkinson, R. B. The Tale of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems 1940-1640 BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part II. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns: 2007.

Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Reisner. George A. The Hearst Medical Papyrus: Hieratic Text in 17 Facsimile Plates in Collotype. Berkeley: University of California, 1905.

Roth, Martha T., ed., Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997.

Scurlock, JoAnn. Sourcebook for Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine. Writings from the Ancient World, 36. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014.

Scurlock, Jo Ann and Burton R. Andersen, eds., Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2005.

Simpson, William Kelly. The Literature of Ancient Egypt: An Anthology of Stories, Instructions, Stelae, Autobiographies, and Poetry. 3rd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.

Strudwick, Nigel C. Texts from the Pyramid Age. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005.

“The Death of Gilgamesh: c.1.8.1.3.” Translation from Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL). 3 April 2018. http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/.

Wyatt, N. Religious Texts from Ugarit. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.

262

Secondary Sources

Abdi, Kamyar. “An Egyptian Cippus of Horus in the Iran National Museum. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 61 (2002): 203-210.

Abubakr, Abdel Moneim. “Divine Boats of Ancient Egypt.” Archaeology 8 (1955): 96-101.

Abusch, I. Tzvi. “The Form and Meaning of a Babylonian Prayer to Marduk.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983): 3-15.

______. “The Development and Meaning of the Epic of Gilgamesh: An Interpretive Essay.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 121 (2001): 614-622.

______. and Karel van der Toorn, eds. Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretive Perspectives. Groningen: STYX Publications, 1999.

Ackroyd, Peter R. “Archaeology, Politics and Religion: The Persian Period.” The Iliff Review 39 (1982): 5-24.

Albertz, Rainer. Exodus, Band I: Exodus 1-18. Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2012.

Aldred, Cyril. “The ‘New Year’ Gifts to the Pharaoh.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 55 (1969): 73-81.

Alexander, T. Desmond and David W. Baker, eds. Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch. Downers Grove: IVP, 2002.

Aling, Charles F. Egypt and the Bible History: From the Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992.

Allam, S. “Egyptian Law Courts in Pharaonic and Hellenistic Times.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 77 (1992): 109-127.

Andrews, Carol. Amulets of Ancient Egypt. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1994.

Anisfeld, Moshe. “Why was Moses Barred from Leading the People into the Promised Land?” Jewish Bible Quarterly 39 (2011): 211-220.

Anthes, Rudolph. “Die Vorführung der gefangenen Feinde vor den König,” Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 65 (1930): 26-35.

Armstrong, Karen. A Short History of Myth. Edinburgh: Canongate Books Ltd., 2005.

Arnold, Bill T., “Necromancy and Cleromancy in 1 and 2 Samuel.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 66 (2004): 199-213.

263

Assmann, Jan. Moses the Magician: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997.

______. The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs. Translated by Andrew Jenkins. New York: Metropolitan Books, 1996.

______. The Search for God in Ancient Egypt. Translated by David Lorton. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.

______. Maat: Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten. Munich: Verlag, 2006.

______. “Magie und Ritual im Alten Ägypten.” Pages 23-43 in Magie und Religion. Edited by Jan Assmann and Harald Strohm. München: Wilhelm Fink, 2010.

Bács, Tamás. “Two Calendar of Lucky and Unlucky Days.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 17 (1990): 41-64.

Bácskay, András. “Magical Element of Mesopotamian Medical Texts.” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 49 (2010): 10-23.

Baden, Joel S. The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012.

______. The Book of Exodus: A Biography. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.

Baines, John. “A Bronze Statuette of Atum.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 56 (1970): 135-140.

______. “Temple Symbolism.” Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 15 (1976): 10-15.

______. “ʻAnkh-Sign Belt and Penis Sheath.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 3 (1975): 1-24.

______. “Literacy and Ancient Egyptian Society.” Man 18 (1983): 572-599.

______. “Practical Religion and Piety.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 73 (1987): 79-98.

______. “Restricted Knowledge, Hierarchy, and Decorum: Modern Perceptions and Ancient Institutions.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 27 (1990): 1-23.

______. “Society, Morality, and Religious Practice,” in Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths and Personal Practice. Edited by Byron E. Shafter. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991.

264

Bar-Ilan, Meir. “Between Magic and Religion: Sympathetic Magic in the World of the Sages of the Mishnah and Talmud.” Review of Rabbinic Judaism 5 (2002): 383-398.

Barkay. Gabriel. “A Late Bronze Age Egyptian Temple in Jerusalem?” Israel Exploration Journal 46 (1996): 23-43.

Barr, James. “The Question of Religious Influence: The Case of Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 53 (1985): 201-235.

Barstad, Hans M. “The Understanding of the Prophets in Deuteronomy.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 8 (1994): 236-251.

Bárta, Miroslav. “Egyptian Kingship during the Old Kingdom.” Pages 257-283 in Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Edited by Jane A. Hill, Philip Jones, and Antonio J. Morales. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013.

Batto, Bernard F. “Mythic Dimensions of the Exodus Tradition.” Pages 187-195 in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience. Edited by Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp. New York: Springer, 2015.

Beal, Richard H. “Hittite Oracles.” Pages 57-81 in Magic and Divination in the Ancient World. Edited by Leda Jean Ciraolo and Jonathan Lee Seidel; Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Beale, G. K. “An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9.” Trinity Journal 5 (1984): 129-54.

Beckman, Gary. “The Religion of the Hittites.” The Biblical Archaeologist 52 (1989): 98-108.

______. “How Religion was Done.” Pages 343-353 in A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Edited by Daniel C. Snell. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005.

______. “On Hittite Dreams.” Pages 26-31 in Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday. Edited by Itamar Singer. Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications, 2010.

Bell, Lanny. “Luxor Temple and the Cult of the Royal Ka.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 44 (1985): 251-294.

______. “The New Kingdom Divine Temple: The Example of Luxor.” Pages 127-184 in Temples of Ancient Egypt. Edited by Byron Schafer; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997.

265

Ben-Tor, Daphna. The Scarab: A Reflection of Ancient Egypt. Translated by Inna Pommerantz. Jerusalem: The Israel Museum, 1989.

Berlyn, Patricia. “The Pharaohs Who Knew Moses.” Jewish Bible Quarterly 39 (2011): 3-14.

Berman, Joshua. “CTH 133 and the Hittite Provenance of Deuteronomy 13.” Journal of Biblical Literature 130 (2011): 25-44.

Bertman, Stephen. “A Note on the Reversible Miracle.” History of Religions 3 (1964): 323- 327.

______. Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. New York: Facts on File Inc., 2003.

Bianchi, Robert Steven. “Raneferef’s Carnelian,” in Essays on Ancient Egypt in Honour of Herman te Velde. Edited by Jacobus van Dijk. Groningen: STYX Publications, 1997: 29-32.

Billing, Nils. “Writing an Image – The Formulation of the Tree Goddess Motif in the Book of the Dead, Ch. 59.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 32 (2004): 35- 50.

Bjerke, Svein. “Remarks on the Egyptian Ritual of ‘Opening the Mouth’ and its Interpretation.” Numen 12 (1965): 201-16.

Black, Jeremy and Anthony Green. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary. Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1992.

Blackman, Aylward M. “Oracles in Ancient Egypt.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 11 (1925): 249-255.

Bleeker, C. J. “Guilt and Purification in Ancient Egypt.” Numen 13 (1966): 81-87.

______. Hathor and Thoth: Two Key Figures of the Ancient Egyptian Religion. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973.

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “Yahweh and Other Deities: Conflict and Accommodation in the Religion of Israel.” Interpretation 40 (1986): 354-366.

______. “Temple and Society in Achaemenid Judah.” Pages 22-53 in Second Temple Studies 1. Persian Period. Edited by Philip R. Davies; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.

______. The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

______. Sage, Priest, Prophet: Religious and Intellectual Leadership in Ancient Israel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995.

266

Block, Daniel I. Deuteronomy: The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.

Bochi, Patricia. A. “Images of Time in Ancient Egyptian Art.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 31 (1994): 55-62.

Bodel, John and Saul M. Olyan, eds. Household and Family Religion in Antiquity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008.

Bogdan, Henrik. “Introduction: Modern Western Magic.” Aries 12 (2012): 1-16.

Bohak, Gideon, Ancient Jewish Magic: A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Bonewits, Isaac. Real Magic: An Introductory Treatise on the Basic Principles of Yellow Magic. York Beach: Samuel Weiser Inc., 1989.

Bonner, Campbell. “Magical Amulets.” Harvard Theological Review 39 (1946): 25- 54.

J. F. Borghouts, “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Egypt,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000: 1775-1785.

Bottéro, Jean. Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia. Translated by Teresa Lavender Fagan; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011.

Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, eds.Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Translated by John T. Willis et al. 15 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974–2006.

Boyce, Mary. “Zoroaster the Priest.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 33 (1970): 22-38.

______. “On the Orthodoxy of Sasanian Zoroastrianism.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 59 (1996): 11-28.

Braber, Marieke van and Jan-Wim Wesselius. “The Unity of Joshua 1-8, its Relation to the Story of King Keret, and the Literary Background to the Exodus and Conquest Stories.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 22 (2008): 253-274.

Breasted, James Henry. A History of Egypt. New York: Bantam Books, 1964.

Bremmer, Jan N. “The Birth of the Term Magic.” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 126 (1999): 1-12.

Brewer, Douglas and Emily Teeter. Egypt and the Egyptians. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

267

Brier, Bob. “The Book of the Dead.” Pages 36-39 in Mummies Around the World: An Encyclopedia of Mummies in History, Religion, and Popular Culture. Edited by Matt Cardin; Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 2015.

Britt, Brian. Rewriting Moses: The Narrative Eclipse of the Text. London: T&T Clark, 2004.

Broadie, A. and J. Macdonald. “The Concept of Cosmic Order in Ancient Egypt in Dynastic and Roman Times.” L’Antiquité Classique 47 (1978): 106-128.

Brooke, George J., Adrian H.W. Curtis and John F. Healey, eds. Ugarit and the Bible: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Ugarit and the Bible, Manchester, September 1992. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1994.

Brown, Michael L. Israel’s Divine Healer. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Bryce, Trevor. Life and Society in the Hittite World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Budd, Philip J. Numbers. Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 5. Waco: Word Books, 1984.

Budge, E. A. Wallis. Egyptian Magic. Mineola: Dover Publication, 1971.

Byrd, Andrew Miles. “Deriving Dreams from the Divine: Hittite tesḫa / zasḫ(a)i.” Historische Sprachforschung 124 (2011): 96-105.

Calabro, David M. “Gestures of Praise: Lifting and Spreading the Hands in Biblical Prayer.” Pages 105-21 in Ascending the Mountain of the Lord: Temple, Praise, and Worship in the Old Testament. Edited by Jeffrey R. Chadwick, Matthew J. Grey, and David Rolph Seely. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013.

______. “Ten Ways to Interpret Ritual Hand Gestures.” Studia Antiqua 12 (2013): 65-82.

Carroll, Robert P. “Textual Strategies and Ideology in the Second Temple Period.” Pages 108-124 in Second Temple Studies 1. Persian Period. Edited by Philip R. Davies. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.

Cassuto, U. Exodus. Jerusalem: Magnes Press Hebrew University, 1967.

Chajes, J. H. “Too Holy to Print: Taboo Anxiety and Publishing of Practical Hebrew Esoterica.” Jewish History 26 (2012): 247-262.

Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus. Louisville: Westminster Press, 1974.

Christensen, Duane L. Deuteronomy 1-21:9. 2nd ed. Word Biblical Commentary; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.

268

Coats, George. Moses: Heroic Man, Man of God. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1988.

______. The Moses Tradition. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

Cockburn, T. Aidan. “Death and Disease in Ancient Egypt.” Science, New Series 181 (1973): 470-471.

Collins, Billie Jean. “Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy of the Hittite and Hurrian Deities.” Divine Wrath and Divine Mercy in the World of Antiquity. Edited by Reinhard G. Kratz and Hermann Spieckermann. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.

Conman, Joanne. “It’s About Time: Ancient Egyptian Cosmology.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 31 (2003): 33-71.

Coogan, Michael. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Cook, J. M. The Persian Empire. New York: Schocken Books, 1983.

Cooke, J. Hunt. “The Westcar Papyrus.” The Biblical World 4 (1894): 49-53.

Cooley, Jeffrey. “Astral Religion in Ugarit and Ancient Israel.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 70 (2011): 281-287.

Cooney, Kathlyn M. and J. Brett McClain. “The Daily Offering Meal in the Ritual of Amenhotep I: An Instance of the Local Adaptation of Cult Liturgy.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 5 (2005): 41-78.

Costa, Salvador. “On the Scenes of the King Receiving the Sed-Fests in the Theban Temples of the Ramesside Period.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 35 (2006): 61-74.

Couroyer, B. “Quelques Egyptianisme dans L’Exode.” Revue Biblique 63 (1956): 209-219.

Cox, Benjamin and Susan Ackerman. “Micah’s Teraphim.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 12 (2012): 1-37.

Cox, Dorian G. Coover. “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in its Literary and Cultural Context.” Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): 292-311.

Crawley, Earnest. The Tree of Life: A Study of Religion. London: Hutchinson & Co., 1905.

Cribiore, Raffaella. “A Hymn to the Nile.” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 106 (1995): 97-106.

269

Cross, Frank Moore. “Yahweh and the God of the Patriarchs.” The Harvard Theological Review 55 (1962): 225-259.

______. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

______. and Richard J. Saley. “Phoenician Incantations on a Plaque of the Seventh Century B.C. from Arslan Tash in Upper Syria.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 197 (1970): 42-49.

Crowley, Aleister. Magick in Theory and Practice. New York: Dover Publications, 1976.

Cryer, Frederick H. Divination in Ancient Israel and Its Near Eastern Environment. JSOT 142. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

______. and Marie-Louise Thomsen, eds. Witchcraft and Magic in Europe: Biblical and Pagan Societies, vol. 1. London: The Athlone Press, 2001.

Cunningham, Graham. Religion and Magic: Approaches and Theories. Washington Square: New York University Press, 1999.

Currid, John D. Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997.

Dam, Cornelis van. The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1997.

David, Rosalie. Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 2002.

______. Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt. Rev. ed. New York: Facts on File Inc., 2003.

______. “Rationality versus Irrationality in Egyptian Medicine in the Pharaonic and Graeco-Roman Periods.” Pages 133-151 in Magic and Rationality in the Ancient Near East and Graeco-Roman Medicine. Edited by H. F. J. Horstmanshoff and M. Stol. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

______. “The Temple Priesthood.” Pages 105-117 in The Egyptian World. Edited by Toby Wilkinson. London: Routledge, 2010.

Davies, John J. Moses and the Gods of Egypt. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1971.

Davies, Philip R. Second Temple Studies 1. Persian Period. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.

Dawson, Warren R. “The Magicians of Pharaoh: The Frazer Lecture.” Folklore 47 (1936): 234-262.

270

______. “Pygmies and Dwarfs in Ancient Egypt.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 24 (1938): 185-189.

Depauw, Mark. “A Ghost-Name of a hrd n ka.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 83 (1997): 217-218.

Dieleman, Jacco. Priests, Tongues, and Rites: The London-Leiden Manuscripts and Translation in Egyptian Ritual (100-300 CE). Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2005.

Dolansky, Shawna. Now You See It, Now You Don’t: Biblical Perspectives on the Relationship between Magic and Religion. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2008.

Dodson, Aidan. “The Monarchy” Pages 75-90 in The Egyptian World. Edited by Toby Wilkinson; London: Routledge, 2010.

Donahue, Michael S. A Comparison of the Egyptian Execration Ritual to Exodus 32:19 and Jeremiah 19. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2010.

Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1984.

______. In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Dozeman, Thomas B. God at War: Power in the Exodus Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

______. Exodus. Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2009.

______. Konrad Schmid, Baruch J. Schwartz, eds. The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.

Drews, Robert. “Canaanites and Philistines.” Journal for the Study of Old Testament 81 (1998): 39-61.

Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

Durkheim, Émile. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Translated by Joseph Ward Swain. New York: The Free Press, 1965.

Eakin, Frank E. “The Reed Sea and Baalism.” Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967): 378-384.

Edelman, Diana. The Origins of the ‘Second’ Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem. London: Equinox, 2005.

271

______. “Taking the Torah out of Moses? Moses’ Claim to Fame before He Become the Quintessential Law-Giver.” Pages 13-42 in La Construction de la Figure de Möise. Edited by Thomas Römer; Paris: Gabalda, 2007.

______. “Of Priests and Prophets and Interpreting the Past: The Egyptian ḥm-nṯr and ẖry-ḥbt and the Judahite nāḇî.” Pages 103-112 in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe. Edited by Philip R. Davies and Diana V. Edelman. London: T&T Clark, 2010.

______. “Exodus and Pesach/Massot as Evolving Social Memory.” Pages 161-193 in Remembering and Forgetting in Judah’s Early Second Temple Period. Edited by C. Levin and E. Ben Zvi; Forschungen zum Alten. Testaments, 85. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012.

______. “From Prophets to Prophetic Books: The Fixing of the Divine Word.” The Production of Prophecy: Constructing Prophecy and Prophets in Yehud. Edited by Diana V. Edelman and Ehud Ben Zvi. London: Routledge, 2014: 29-72.

Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion. Translated by Willard R. Trask. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World Inc., 1959.

______. The Quest: History and Meaning in Religion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969.

Engelhard, David Herman. “Hittite Magical Practices: An Analysis.” PhD diss., Brandeis University 1970.

Englund, Gertie. “Gods as a Frame of Reference: On Thinking and Concepts of Thought in Ancient Egypt.” Pages 7-28 in The Religion of the Ancient Egyptians: Cognitive Structures and Popular Expressions. Edited by Gertie Englund. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1987.

Erman, Adolf. Life in Ancient Egypt. Translated by H. M. Tirard. New York: Dover Publications, 1970.

______. Ancient Egyptian Poetry and Prose. Translated by Aylward M. Blackman. New York: Dover Publications, 1995.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E. Theories of Primitive Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965, Repr. 1990.

Eyre, Christopher. The Use of Documents in Pharaonic Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Farber, Walter. “Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000.

272

Faraone, Christopher. “Curses and Blessings in Ancient Greek Oaths.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 64 (2005): 161-186.

______. “Molten Wax, Spilt Wine and Mutilated Animals: Sympathetic Magic in near Eastern and Early Greek Oath Ceremonies.” The Journal of Hellenic Studies 113 (1993): 60-80.

Faulkner, Raymond O. “The Installation of the Vizier.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 41 (1955): 18-29.

Feder, Yitzhao. “The Mechanics of Retribution in Hittite, Mesopotamian and Ancient Israelite Sources.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 10 (2010): 119- 157.

Feucht, Erika. “The ẖrdw n kap Reconsidered.” in Pharaonic Egypt, the Bible and Christianity. Edited by Sarah Israelit-Groll. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985: 38-47.

Finday, James D. From Prophet to Priest: The Characterization of Aaron in the Pentateuch. Leuven: Peeters, 2017.

Finkel, Irving L. “Necromancy in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Archiv fur Orientforschung 29 (1983): 1-17.

Fischer, Henry G. “Notes on Sticks and Staves in Ancient Egypt.” Metropolitan Museum Journal 13 (1978): 5-32.

Fleming, Stuart. “Science Scope: Life in Ancient Egypt: Harsh Realities.” Archaeology 35 (1982).

Flynn, Shawn W. “The Teraphim in Light of Mesopotamian and Egyptian Evidence.” Catholic Quarterly Review 74 (2012): 694-711.

Fohrer, Georg. Überlieferung und Geschichte des Exodus: Eine Analyse von Ex 1-15. Berlin: Verlag Alfred Töpelmann, 1964.

______. “Prophetie und Magie.” ZAW 78 (1966): 25-47.

Foote, Theodore C. “The Ephod.” The Journal of Biblical Literature 21 (1902): 1-47.

Foreman, Werner and Stephen Quirke. Hieroglyphs and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt. London: British Museum Press, 1996.

Forshaw, Roger. The Role of the Lector in Ancient Egyptian Society. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2014.

______. “Before Hippocrates: Healing Practices in Ancient Egypt.” Pages 25-41 in Medicine, Healing and Performance. Edited by Effie Gemi-Iordanou, Stephen Gordon, Robert Matthew, Ellen McInnes, Rhiannon Pettitt. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2014.

273

Forsyth, Neil. The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987.

Fox, Michael V. “World Order and Ma‘at: A Crooked Parallel.” Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 23 (1995): 37-48.

Frandsen, Paul John. “Aspects of Kingship in Ancient Egypt.” Pages 47-73 in Religion and Power. Edited by Nicole Brisch. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2008.

Frankfort, Henri. Kingship and the Gods. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.

Frankfurter, David. “The Perils of Love: Magic and Countermagic in Coptic Egypt.” Journal of the History of Sexuality 10 (2001): 480-500

______. Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation and Resistance. Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1998.

Frantz-Szabó, Gabriella. “Hittite Witchcraft, Magic, and Divination.” Pages 2007- 2019 in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000.

Frazer, James G. The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion. 12 vols. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1911-1936.

Freedman, David Noel and David Frank Graf., eds. Palestine in Transition: The Emergence of Ancient Israel. Sheffield: The Almond Press, 1983.

Frerichs, Ernest S. and Lesko, Leonard H, eds. Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns 1997.

Friedman, Richard Elliott. Who Wrote the Bible? New York: Harper San Francisco, 1987.

______. Commentary on the Torah. New York: Harper San Francisco, 2003.

Fretheim, Terence E. Exodus, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1991.

_____. “The Plague as Ecological Signs of Historical Disaster.” Journal of Biblical Literature 110 (1991): 385-396

Frood, Elizabeth. The Biographical Texts from Ramessid Egypt. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.

Gachet, Jacqueline. “The Divinatory Livers.” Near Eastern Archaeology 63 (2000): 235.

274

Gardiner, Alan H., “A Lawsuit Arising from the Purchase of Two Slaves.” JEA 21 (1935): 140-146.

______. “The Baptism of Pharaoh.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 36 (1950): 3-12.

Garr, W. Randall. Dialect Geography of Syria-Palestine, 1000-586 B.C.E. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985.

Garrett, Duane A. A Commentary on Exodus: Kregel Exegetical Library. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publication, 2014.

Gee, John. “Prophets, Initiation and the Egyptian Temple.” Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 31 (2004): 97-107.

Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Israel in the Persian Period: The Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C.E. Translated by Siegfried S. Schatzmann; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011.

Gertz, Jan Christian. Tradition und Redaktion in der Exoduserzählung: Untersuchungen zur Endredaktion des Pentateuch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000.

Ghalioungui, Paul. Magic and Medical Science in Ancient Egypt. London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., 1963.

Gibson, J. C. L. Canaanite Myths and Legends. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd. 1977.

Gitay, Yehoshua, ed. Prophecy and Prophets: The Diversity of Contemporary Issues in Scholarship. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1997.

Gordon, A. H. and C. W. Schwabe, “The Egyptian was-Scepter and Its Modern Analogues: Uses as Symbols of Divine Power or Authority.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 32 (1995): 1985-196.

Goedegebuure, Petra M. “KBo 17.17+: Remarks on an Old Hittite Royal Substitution Ritual.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 2 (2002): 61-73.

Goedicke, Hans. “A Deification of a Private Person in the Old Kingdom.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 41 (1955): 31-33.

______. “Early References to Fatalistic Concepts in Egypt.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 22 (1963): 187-190.

______. “Was Magic Used in the Harem Conspiracy against Ramesses III? (P. Rollin and P. Lee).” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 49 (1963): 71-92.

______. “Zu Zwei Stellen im Papyrus Westcar.” Wiener Zeitschrift fürdie Kunde des Morgenlandes 63/64 (1972): 1-5.

275

Goelet, Ogden. “Nudity in Ancient Egypt.” Notes in the History of Art 12 (1993): 20- 31.

Goetze, Albrecht. “An Incantation against Diseases.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 9 (1955): 8-18.

Gowen, Donald E. Theology in Exodus: Biblical Theology in the Form of a Commentary. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.

Grabbe, Lester L. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, vol. 1: The Persian and Greek Periods. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.

______. Priests, Prophets, Diviners, and Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel. Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1995.

______. “If the Exodus and Conquest had Really Happened.” Biblical Interpretation 8 (2000): 23-32.

______. Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice from the Exile to Yavneh. London: Routledge, 2000.

Grabbe, “Prophets, Priests, Diviners, and Sages in Ancient Israel.” Pages 43-62 in Of Prophets’ Visions and the Wisdom of Sages: Essays in Honour of R. Norman Whybray on his Seventieth Birthday. Edited by Heather A. McKay and David J. A. Clines. Sheffield: JSOT, 1993.

Grant, Michael. The History of Ancient Israel. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1984.

Gray, John. The Canaanites (Ancient Peoples and Places). New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1964.

______. The Legacy of Canaan: The Ras Shamra Texts and Their Relevance to the Old Testament. 2nd ed. Rev. ed. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1965.

______. Near Eastern Mythology. London: Hamlyn Publishing Group, 1969.

Grayson, A. Kirk. “Literary Letters from Deities and Diviners, More Fragments.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983): 143-148.

Greenberg, Moshe. “The Redaction of the Plague Narrative in Exodus.” Pages 243- 252 in Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Edited by Hans Goedicke. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1971.

______. Understanding Exodus: A Holistic Commentary on Exodus 1-11. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2013.

276

Greifenhagen, F. V. Egypt on the Pentateuch’s Ideological Map: Constructing Biblical Israel’s Identity. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.

Gudme, Anne Katrine de Hemmer, “A Kind of Magic? The Law of Jealousy in Numbers 5:11-31 as Magical Ritual and as Ritual Text.” Pages 149-168 Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World. Edited by Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme and Helen Jacobus. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2013.

Guilhou, Nadine. “Myth of the Heavenly Cow,” in Jacco Dieleman and Willeke Wendrich. eds. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology. Los Angeles: UCLA, 2010.

Guillaume, P. H. “Metamorphosis of a Ferocious Pharaoh.” Biblica 85 (2004): 232- 236.

Gunn, David M. “The ‘Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart’: Plot, Character and Theology in Exodus 1-14.” Pages 79-90 in Art and Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical Literature. Edited by Alan J. Hauser, David J. A. Clines, and David M. Gunn. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1982.

Gurney, O. R. The Hittites. London: Book Club Association, 1975.

Michael E. Habicht, “Coffin Texts.” Pages 71-73 in Mummies Around the World: An Encyclopedia of Mummies in History, Religion, and Popular Culture. Edited by Matt Cardin. Oxford: ABC-CLIO, 2015.

Hagedorn, Anselm C. “Looking at Foreigners in Biblical and Greek Prophecy.” Vetus Testamentum 57 (2007): 432-448.

Hallo, William W., and K. Lawson Younger Jr., eds. The Context of Scripture. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997–2016.

Hallo, William W. “The First Purim.” The Biblical Archaeologist 46 (1983): 19-29.

______. “Before Tea Leaves: Divination in Ancient Babylonia.” Biblical Archaeology Review 31 (2005).

Hamilton, Victor P. Handbook on the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.

______. Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapid: Baker Academic, 2011.

Hamori, Esther J. “The Prophet and the Necromancer: Women’s Divination for Kings.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132 (2013): 827-843.

Haran, M. “The Ark and the Cherubim: Their Symbolic Significance in Biblical Ritual.” Israel Exploration Journal 9 (1959): 89-94.

277

Harris, Mark. J. “How did Moses part the Red Sea? Science as Salvation in the Exodus Tradition.” Pages 5-31 in Moses in the Biblical and Extra Biblical Traditions. Edited by Axel Graupner et al. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007.

Harris, R. Laird, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Chicago: Moody Press, 1980.

Harrison, R. K. Numbers: The Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Chicago: Moody Press, 1990.

Haupt, Paul. “Crystal-Gazing in the Old Testament.” Journal of Biblical Literature 36 (1917): 84-92.

Hegel, G. W. F. Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion: One-Volume Edition, The Lectures of 1827. Edited by P. C. Hodgson. Translated by R. F. Brown, P.C. Hodgson, and J.M. Steward. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006.

Heiden, Desiree. “New Aspects of the Treatment of the Cult Statue in the Daily Temple Ritual.” Pages 308-315 in Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century, vol. 2. Edited by Z. Hawass. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 2003.

Helck, Wolfgang, “Der Papyrus Berlin P 3047.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 2 (1963): 65-73.

Hendel, Ronald. “The Exodus in Biblical Memory.” Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001): 601-622.

Hill, Jane A., Philip Jones and Antonio J. Morales, eds. Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2013.

Higginbotham, Carolyn. “Traveling the Ways of Horus: Studying the Links between Egypt and the Levant.” Near Eastern Archaeology 65 (2002): 30-34.

Hoffmeier, James K. “The Arm of God versus the Arm of Pharaoh in the Exodus Narrative.” Biblica 67 (1986): 378-387.

______. Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Hoffner Jr., Harry A. “Symbols for Masculinity and Femininity: Their Use in Ancient Near Eastern Sympathetic Magic Rituals.” Journal of Biblical Literature 85 (1966): 326-334.

______. “Ancient Views of Prophecy and Fulfilment: Mesopotamia and Asia Minor.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30 (1987): 257-265.

278

Hornung, Erik. Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971.

______. Akhenaten and the Religion of Light. Translated by David Lorton. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999.

Hort, Greta. “The Plagues of Egypt.” Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 69 (1957): 84-104.

Houtman, Cornelis. Exodus, vol. 1 Kampen: Kok Publishing House, 1993.

Hundley, Michael B. Gods in Dwellings: Temples and Divine Presence in the Ancient Near East. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013.

Hyatt, J. P. Exodus: The New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Isbell, Charles David. “Zoroastrianism and Biblical Religion.” Jewish Bible Quarterly 34 (2006): 143-54.

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

Janzen, Mark D. “The Iconographic of Humiliation: The Depiction and Treatment of Bound Foreigners in New Kingdom Egypt.” PhD diss., The University of Memphis, 2013.

Jacq, Christian. Egyptian Magic. Translated by Janet M. Davis. Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1985.

Jeffers, Ann. Magic and Divination in Ancient Palestine and Syria. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996.

______. “Interpreting Magic and Divination in the Ancient Near East.” Religion Compass 6 (2007): 684-694.

______. “Magic from before the Dawn of Time: Understanding Magic in the Old Testament: A Shift in Paradigm (Deuteronomy 18.9-13 and Beyond).” Pages 123-132 in A Kind of Magic: Understanding Magic in the New Testament and Its Religious Environment. Edited by Peerbolte Lietaert and Michael Labahn. London: T&T, 2007.

Jeyes, Ulla. “The ‘Palace Gate’ of the Liver: A Study of Terminology and Methods in Babylonian Extispicy.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 30 (1978): 209-233.

______. Old Babylonian Extispicy: Omen Texts in the British Museum. Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te İstanbul, 1989.

Johnston, Sarah Iles., ed. Religions of the World: A Guide. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2004.

279

______. “Magic” in Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals Across the Mediterranean World. Edited by Sarah Iles Johnston; Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2007.

______. Ancient Religions: Beliefs and Rituals Across the Mediterranean World. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007.

Johnstone, William. Exodus 1-19. Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2014.

Joines, Karen Randolph. “The Bronze Serpent in the Israelite Cult.” Journal of Biblical Literature 87 (1968): 245-256.

______. Serpent Symbolism in the Old Testament. Haddonfield: Haddonfield House, 1974.

Jurman, Claus. “Legitimisation through Innovative Tradition.” Pages 177-214 in Royal versus Divine Authority: Acquisition, Legitimisation, and Renewal of Power. Edited by Filip Coppens et al.; Wiesbaden: Verlag, 2015.

Kapelrud, Arvid S. “The Interrelationship between Religion and Magic in Hittite Religion.” Numen 6 (1959): 32-50.

Kaufmann, Yehezkel. The Religion of Israel: From Its Beginnings to the Babylonian Exile. Translated and abridged by Moshe Greenberg. Jerusalem: Sefer Ve Sefel Publishing, 2003.

Kemp, Barry. “How Religious were the Ancient Egyptians?” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5 (1995): 25-54.

King, Philip J. and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in Biblical Israel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Kitchen, K. A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1966.

______. “From the Brickfields of Egypt.” Tyndale Bulletin 27 (1976): 137-147.

______. Pharaoh Triumphant: The Life and Times of Ramesses II. Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1982.

Kitz, Anne Marie. “The Hebrew Terminology of Lot Casting and Its Ancient Near Eastern Context.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 62 (2000): 207-214.

______. “Prophecy as Divination.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 65 (2003): 22-42.

______. Cursed Are You! The Phenomenology of Cursing in Cuneiform and Hebrew Texts. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2014.

280

Klingbeil, Gerald A. “The Finger of God in the Old Testament.” ZAW 112 (2000): 409-15.

Klimkeit, Hans-J. “Spatial Orientation in Mythical Thinking as Exemplified in Ancient Egypt: Considerations toward a Geography of Religions.” History of Religions 14 (1975): 266-281.

Klotz, David. “Between Heaven and Earth in Deir el-Medina: Stela MMA 21.2.6.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 34 (2006): 269-283.

Klutz, Todd., ed. Magic in the Biblical World. New York: T&T Clark, 2003.

Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Babylonian Liver Omens. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2000.

Konstantakos, Ioannis M “The Magical Transformation Contest in the Ancient Storytelling Tradition.” Cuadernos de Filología Clásica, Estudios Griegos e Indoeuropeos 26 (2016): 207-234.

Kuhrt, Amélie. “Survey of Written Sources Available for the History of Babylonia Under the Later Achaemenids.” Pages 147-157 Achaemenid History I Sources, Structure and Synthesis. Edited by Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg. Leiden: Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten, 1987.

______. The Ancient Near East c. 3000-330 BC, vol. 2. London: Routledge, 1995.

Kwiecinski, Jakub. “The Dawn of Medicine: Ancient Egypt and Athothis, the King- Physician.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 56 (2013): 99-104.

Lambdin, Thomas O. “Egyptian Loan Words in the Old Testament.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 73 (1953): 145-155.

Lambert, W. G. “Enmeduranki and Related Matters.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21 (1967): 126-138.

Lange, Armin. “Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets.” Vetus Testamentum 57 (2007): 461-482.

Lauer, Quentin. Hegel’s Idea of Philosophy: With a New Translation of Hegel’s Introduction to the History of Philosophy. New York: Fordham University Press, 1983.

Leahy, Anthony. “Death by Fire in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. 27 (1984): 199-206.

Lenzi, Alan. Secrecy and the Gods: Secret Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia and Biblical Israel. State Archives of Assyria Studies; the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2008.

281

Leprohon, Ronald J. “The Programmatic Use of the Royal Titulary in the Twelfth Dynasty,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt (1996): 165-171.

Lesko, Barbara S. “Women’s Monumental Mark on Ancient Egypt.” The Biblical Archaeologist 54 (1991): 4-15.

Lesko, Leonard H, ed. Pharaoh’s Workers: The Villagers of Deir El Medina. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Lesses, Rebecca. “Exe(o)rcising Power: Women as Sorceresses, Exorcists, and Demonesses in Babylonian Jewish Society of Late Antiquity.” Journal of the American Academic of Religion 69 (2001): 343-375.

Levine, Baruch A. Numbers 1-20: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible, vol. 4; New York: Doubleday, 1990.

Levinson, Joshua. “Enchanting Rabbis: Context Narratives between Rabbis and Magicians in the Late Antiquity.” Jewish Quarterly Review 100 (2010): 54-94.

Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien. Primitive Mentality. Translated by Lilian A. Clare; London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1923.

Lichtheim, Miriam. “Ancient Egypt: A Survey of Current Historiography.” The American Historical Review 69 (1963): 30-46.

Lincoln, Bruce. “The Role of Religion in Achaemenian Imperialism.” Pages 221-242 in Religion and Power: Divine Kingship in the Ancient World and Beyond. Edited by Nicole Brisch; Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2008.

Lindblom, Joh. “Lot-Casting in the Old Testament.” Vetus Testamentum 12 (1962): 164-178.

Lippert, Sandra. “Law Courts,” UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology. Edited by Elizabeth Frood and Willeke Wendrich. 2012. http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/ viewItem.do?ark=21198/zz002djg218016.

Lloyd, Alan B. “Heka, Dreams, and Prophecy in Ancient Egyptian Stories.” Pages 71- 94 in Through a Glass Darkly: Magic, Dreams, and Prophecy in Ancient Egypt. Edited by Kasia Maria Szpakowska. Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 2006.

Long, Burke O. “The Effect of Divination upon Israelite Literature.” Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1973): 489-497.

Lorton, David. “God’s Beneficent Creation: Coffin Texts Spell 1130, the Instructions for Merikare, and the Great Hymn to the Aton.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 20 (1993): 125-155.

Lucas, A. “Cosmetics, Perfumes and Incense in Ancient Egypt.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 16 (1930): 41-53.

282

______. “Poisons in Ancient Egypt.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 24 (1938): 198-199.

Lucerelli, Rita. “Oracles and Magic in Ancient Egypt: The Case of the ‘Oracular Amuletic Decrees.’” Paper presented at the annual meeting Society of Biblical Literature, Denver, Colorado, 18 November 2018.

Lundbom, Jack R. Deuteronomy: A Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013.

Magdolen, Dušan. “The Solar Origin of the ‘Sacred Triangle’ in Ancient Egypt?” Studien zur Altägyptischen 28 (2000): 207-217.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1955.

Marett, R. R. The Threshold of Religion. 2nd ed. revised and enlarged; New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1914.

Matthews, Danny. Royal Motifs in the Pentateuchal Portrayal of Moses. New York: T&T Clark, 2012.

Matthews, Victor H. “Making Your Point: The Use of Gestures in Ancient Israel.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 42 (2012): 18-29.

Matthews, Victor H. and James C. Moyer. The Old Testament Text and Context. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012.

Mauss, Marcel. A General Theory of Magic. Translated by Robert Brian with a foreword by D. F. Pocock. New York: Routledge, 2001.

McCarthy, Heather Lee. “The Osiris Nefertari: A Case Study of Decorum, Gender, and Regeneration.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 39 (2002): 173-195.

McConville, J. G. Deuteronomy. Apollos Old Commentary; Leicester: Apollos, 2002.

McDonald, Diana Krumholz. “The Serpent as Healer: Theriac and Ancient Near Eastern Pottery.” Notes in the History of Art 13 (1994): 21-27.

McGovern, Patrick E. Late Bronze Palestinian Pendants: Innovation in a Cosmopolitan Age. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985.

McKeown, Elizabeth. “Insight Out and In Between: Comparing and Comparativists.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 20 (2008): 259-269.

McMahon, Gregory. “Theology, Priests, and Worship in Hittite Anatolia.” Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. III. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2000.

283

Meeks, Dimitri and Christine Favard-Meeks, Daily Life of the Egyptian Gods. London: Pimlico, 1999.

Meyer, Marvin W., ed. The Ancient Mysteries A Sourcebook: Sacred Texts of the Mystery Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean World. New York: Harper San Francisco, 1987.

Meyer, Marvin and Paul Mirecki, eds. Ancient Magic and Ritual Power. Leiden: Brill 2001.

Meyer, Marvin and Richard Smith. The Ancient Christian Magic: Coptic Texts of Ritual Power. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1994.

Meyers, Carol. Exodus. The New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Middleton, John. “Theories of Magic.” Pages 82-89 in vol. 9 of The Encyclopedia of Religion. Edited by Mircea Eliade. 16 vols. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1987.

Miglio, Adam E. “A Study of the Serpent Incantation KTU 1.82: 1-7 and its Contributions to Ugaritic Mythology and Religion.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013): 30-48.

Mills, Mary E. Human Agents of Cosmic Power in Hellenistic Judaism and the Synoptic Tradition. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990.

Moore, George C. “GI STUKUL as ‘Oracle Procedure’ in Hittite Oracle Texts.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 40 (1981): 49-52.

Morenz, Siegfried. Egyptian Religion. Translated by Ann E. Keep; Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1973.

Moss, Candida R. and Jeffrey Stackert, “The Devastation of Darkness: Disability in Exodus 10:21-23, 27, and Intensification in the Plagues.” The Journal of Religion 92 (2012): 362-372.

Mouton, Alice. “Dreams, Pharaonic Egypt and Ancient Near East.” Page 2226 in The Encyclopedia of Ancient History. Edited by Roger S. Bagnall et al. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2013a.

______. “Portent Dreams in Hittite Anatolia.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Baltimore, 23 Nov. 2013b.

Nakamura, Carolyn. “Dedicating Magic: Neo-Assyrian Apotropaic Figurines and the Protection of Assur.” World Archaeology 36 (2004): 11-25.

Nelson, Richard. Deuteronomy. The Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002.

284

Neusner, Jacob. “How Much Iranian in Jewish Babylonia?” Journal of the American Oriental Society 95 (1975): 184-190.

______. “Science and Magic, Miracle and Magic in Formative Judaism: The System and the Difference.” Pages 61-81 in Religion, Science, and Magic: In Concert and in Conflict. Edited by Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frerichs, and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Nicholson, Ernest. The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1998.

Niditch, Susan. Folklore and the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Nigosian, Solomon. Magic and Divination in the Old Testament. Portland: Sussex Academic Press, 2008.

Nihan, Christophe. “‘Moses and the Prophets’: Deuteronomy 18 and the Emergence of the Pentateuch as Torah.” Svensk Exegetisk Arsbok 75 (2010): 21-55.

Nissinen, Martti. Prophets and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Peter Machinist. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.

______. “What is Prophecy?” Pages 17-37 in Inspired Speech: Prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Edited by John Kaltner and Louis Stulman. London: T&T Clark International, 2004.

Noegel, Scott B. “The Significance of the Seventh Plague.” Biblica 76 (1995): 532- 539.

______. “Moses and Magic: Notes on the Book of Exodus.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies 24 (1996): 45-59.

______. “Dreams and Dream Interpreters in Mesopotamia and in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).” Pages 45-71 in Dreams and Dreaming: A Reader in Religion, Anthropology, History, and Psychology. Edited by Kelly Bulkeley. Hampshire: Palgrave-St. Martin’s Press, 2001.

______. and Joel Walker, and Brannon Wheeler., eds. Prayer, Magic, and the Stars in the Ancient and Late Antique World. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003.

______. and Kasia Szpakowska. “‘Word Play’ in the Ramesside Dream Manual.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 35 (2006): 193-212.

______. “Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign: Script, Power, and Interpretation in the Ancient Near East.” Pages 143-162 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by Amar Annus. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2010.

______. “The Egyptian ‘Magicians.’” https://thetorah.com/the-egyptian-magicians.

285

Noll, K.L. “Was there Doctrinal Dissemination in Early Yahweh Religion?” Biblical Interpretation 16 (2008): 395-427.

Noth, M. Exodus: A Commentary. Translated by J. S. Bowden. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1962.

Nunn, John F. Ancient Egyptian Medicine. London: British Museum Press, 1996.

Obermann, Julian. “Two Magic Bowls: New Incantation Texts from Mesopotamia.” The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 57 (1940): 1-31.

Oblath, Michael D. The Exodus Itinerary Sites: Their Locations from the Perspective of Biblical Sources. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc., 2004.

O’Brien, Kevin M. “To Seek the Counsel of the Lord: Dream-Divination in the Hebrew Bible Deuteronomistic History.” Ph.D. thesis, The University of Manchester, 2010.

O’Connor, David and David P. Silverman, eds. Ancient Egyptian Kingship. Leiden: Brill, 1995.

O’Keefe, Daniel Lawrence. Stolen Lightning. New York: Vintage Books, 1983.

Oldenburg, Ulf. The Conflict Between El and Baʽal in Canaanite Religion. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969.

Oppenheim, A. Leo. “The Mesopotamian Temple.” The Biblical Archaeologist 7 (1944): 54-63.

______. The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East with a Translation of an Assyrian Dream-Book. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 46, part 3, 1956.

______. Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization. Revised and completed by Erica Reiner. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977.

Olyan, Saul M., ed. Social Theory and the Study of Israelite Religion. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012.

Overholt, Thomas W. “Seeing is Believing: The Social Setting of Prophetic Acts of Power.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 23 (1982): 3-31.

Palmer, Craig T., Lyle B. Steadman, Chris Cassidy, and Kathryn Coe. “The Importance of Magic to Social Relationships.” Zygon 45 (2010): 317-337.

Pardee, Dennis. “Divinatory and Sacrificial Rites.” Near Eastern Archaeology 63 (2000): 232-234.

286

Parker. Richard. A. “The Beginning of the Lunar Month in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 29 (1970): 217-220.

______. “Ancient Egyptian Astronomy.” Philosophical Translations of the Royal Society of London. Serious A., Mathematical and Physical Sciences 276 (1974): 51-65.

Parkinson, Richard and Stephen Quirke. Papyrus. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1995.

Pemberton, Delia. Treasures of the Pharaoh. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2004.

Penner, Hans H. “Rationality, Ritual, and Science.” Pages 11-24 in Religion, Science, and Magic: In Concert and in Conflict. Edited by Jacob Neusner, Ernest S. Frerichs, and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Peterson, Jeremiah. “An Old Babylonian Incantation Collective with Incantations Involving a Counter-Measure Against Oath-Breaking and the Alteration of a Dream of the King.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 9 (2009): 125- 141.

Pinch, Geraldine. Magic in Ancient Egypt. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1994.

______. The Handbook of Egyptian Mythology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Pixley, George V. On Exodus: A Liberation Perspective. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987.

Phillips, Anthony. “David’s Linen Ephod.” Vetus Testamentum 19 (1969): 485-487.

Pope, Marvin H. El in the Ugaritic Texts. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1955.

Price, Campbell. “On the Function of ‘Healing’ Statues.” Pages 169-182 in Mummies, Magic, and Medicine in Ancient Egypt: Multidisciplinary Essays for Rosalie David. Edited by Campbell Price, Roger Forshaw, Andrew Chamberlain, and Paul T. Nicholson. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016.

Propp, William H. “The Rod of Aaron and the Sin of Moses.” Journal of Biblical Literature 107 (1988): 19-26.

______. Exodus 1-18. The Anchor Bible Commentary, New York: Doubleday, 1999.

Quack, Joachim Friedrich. “Methoden und Möglichkeiten der Erforschung der Medizin im Alten Ägypten.” Medizinhistorisches Journal 38 (2003): 3-15.

______. “Kontinuität und Wandel in der spätägyptischen Magie.” Studi Epigraphici e Linguistici 15 (1998).

287

Quaegebeur, Jan. “On the Egyptian Equivalent of Biblical Hartummim.” Pages 145- 155 in Pharaonic Egypt. Edited by S. Israelit-Groll; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985.

Quirke, Stephen. Who Were the Pharaohs? A History of Their Names with a List of Cartouches. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1990.

______. Ancient Egyptian Religion. London: British Museum Press, 1992.

Quirke, Stephen and Jeffrey Spencer, The British Museum Book of Ancient Egypt. London: Thames and Hudson, 1992.

Rainey, Anson F. Egypt, Israel, Sinai: Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the Biblical Period. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1987.

Redford, Donald B. “Literary Motif of the Exposed Child.” Numen 14 (1967): 209- 228.

______. A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph (Genesis 37-50). VTSup, 20. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970.

______. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1992.

______. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Redford, Donald B, ed., The Ancient Gods Speak. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Regulski, Ilona. “The Beginning of Hieratic Writing in Egypt.” Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 38 (2009): 259-274.

Reiner, Erica. “The Uses of Astrology.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 105:4 (1985): 589-595.

______. Astral Magic in Babylonia. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, 85 (1995): 1-150.

Rendsburg, Gary. “Moses as Equal to Pharaoh.” Pages 201-219 in Text, Artifact, and Image: Revealing Ancient Israelite Religion. Edited by Gary M. Beckman and Theodore J. Lewis. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.

______. “The Literary Unity of the Exodus Narrative.” Pages 113-132 in “Did I Not Bring You Out of Egypt?” Biblical, Archaeological and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives. Edited by James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2016.

288

______. “Moses the Magician.” Pages 243-258 in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience. Edited by Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp. Heidelberg: Springer, 2015.

______. “The Egyptian Sun-God Ra in the Pentateuch.” Henoch 10 (1988): 3-15.

Rendtorff, Rolf. “The Paradigm is Changing: Hopes – and Fears.” Biblical Interpretation 1 (1993): 34-53.

Ricks, Stephen D. “The Magician as Outsider in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.” Pages 131-143 in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power. Edited by Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki. Boston: Brill, 2001.

Ringgren, Helmer. Religions of the Ancient Near East. Translated by John Sturdy; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1973.

Ritner, Robert K. “O. Gardiner 363: A Spell Against Night Terrors.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 27 (1990): 25-41.

______. The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 1993.

______. “Magic in Daily Life.” Pages 329-333 in vol. 2 of The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Edited by Donald B. Redford. 3 vols. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

______. “‘And Each Staff Transformed into a Snake’: The Serpent Wand in Ancient Egypt.” Pages 205-225 in Through a Glass Darkly: Magic, Dreams and Prophecy in Ancient Egypt. Edited by K. Szpakowska. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales, 2006.

______. “Horus on the Crocodiles.” Pages 103-116 in Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt. Edited by James P. Allen, Jan Assmann, Alan B. Lloyd, Robert K. Ritner, David P. Silverman. New Haven: Yale University, 1989.

Robbins, Ellen. “Time-Telling in Ritual and Myth.” Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997): 71-88.

Robbins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

Robbins, Gwen, et al. “Ancient Skeletal Evidence for Leprosy in India (2000 BC)” Public Library of Science One 5 (2009). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005669

Robinson, Bernard P. “Moses as the Burning Bush.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 75 (1997): 107-122.

Rochberg, Francesca. “Empiricism in Babylonian Omen Texts and the Classification of Mesopotamian Divination as Science.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 119 (1999): 559-569.

289

______. “Heaven and Earth: Divine-Human Relations in Mesopotamian Celestial Divination.” Pages 169-195 in Prayer, Magic, and the Stars in the Ancient and Late Antique World. Edited by Scott Noegel, Joel Walker, and Brannon Wheeler. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003.

______. The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Römer, Thomas C. “Competing Magicians in Exodus 7-9: Interpreting Magic in the Priestly Theology.” Pages 12-22 in Magic in the Biblical World. Edited by Todd Klutz. London: T&T Clark, 2003.

______. “Pentateuchforschung,” Lexikon Bibelwissenschaft, December 2015, www.bibelwissenschaft.de/stichhwort/30711/.

Roth, Ann Macy. “The psš-kf and the ‘Opening of the Mouth’ Ceremony: A Ritual of Birth and Rebirth.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 78 (1992): 113-147.

Rutz, Matthew T. “Mesopotamian Scholarship in Hattusa and the Sammeltafel KUB 4.53.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 132 (2012): 77-94.

Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus: The JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

______. Exploring Exodus. New York: Schocken Books, 1996.

Sasson, Jack M. “Mari Dreams.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983): 283-293.

______. “About Mari and the Bible.” Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale 92 (1998): 97-123.

______. “Oracle Inquiries in Judges.” Pages149-168 in Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Edited by Chaim Cohen et al. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2008.

Sasson, Jack., ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 4 vols. Peabody: Hendrickson Publisher, 2000.

Saurenon, Serge. The Priests of Ancient Egypt. Translated by Ann Morrissett. London: Evergreen Books Ltd., 1960.

Schmid, Konrad. Erzväter und Exodus: Untersuchungen zur doppelten Begründung der Ursprünge Israels innerhalb der Geschichtbücher des Alten Testaments. Düsseldorf: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999.

290

Schmidt, Brian B. “Canaanite Magic vs. Israelite Religion: Deuteronomy 18 and the Taxonomy of Taboo.” Pages 242-259 in Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World. Edited by Paul Mirecki and Marvin Meyer. Boston: Brill, 2002.

______. The Materiality of Power: Explorations in the Social History of Early Israelite Magic. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016.

Schmitt, Rüdiger. Magie im Alten Testament. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2004.

______. “The Problem of Magic and Monotheism in the Book of Leviticus.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 8 (2008): 1-12.

______. Mantik im Alten Testament. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014. Schneider, Tammi J. An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion. Grand Rapid: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2011.

Schneider, Thomas. “Modern Scholarship Verses the Demon of Passover: An Outlook on Exodus Research and Egyptology through the Lens of Exodus 12.” Pages 537-553 in Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience. Edited by Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, and William H. C. Propp. New York: Springer, 2015.

Schuman, Verne B. “A Second-Century Treatise on Egyptian Priests and Temples.” Harvard Theological Review 53 (1960): 159-170.

Shupak, Nili. “Hzq, Kbd, Qsh Leb, The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4- 15:21: Seen Negatively in the Bible but Favourably in Egyptian Sources.” Penn State University (2001).

Schwemer, David. “Evil Witches, Apotropaic Plants and the New Moon: Two Anti- Witchcraft Incantation from Babylon (BM 35672 and BM 36584).” Die Welt des Orients 41 (2001): 177-190.

Scott, Nora. “The Daily Life of the Ancient Egyptians.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 31 (1973): 123-170.

Scurlock, J. A. “Magic.” Pages 464-468 in vol. 4 of The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

______. “Physician, Exorcist, Conjurer, Magician: A Tale of Two Healing Professional.” Pages 69-80 in Mesopotamian Magic: Textual, Historical, and Interpretive Perspectives. Edited by Tzvi Abusch and Karel van der Toorn. Groningen: Styx Publications, 1999.

______. “Magical Uses of Ancient Mesopotamian Festivals of the Dead.” Pages 93- 107 in Ancient Magic and Ritual Power. Edited by Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers Inc., 2001a.

______. Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illness in Ancient Mesopotamia. Leiden: Brill, 2001b.

291

______. “Sorcery in the Stars: STT 300, BRM 4.19-20 and the Mandaic Book of the Zodiac.” Archiv für Orientforschung 51 (2006): 125-146.

______. Sourcebook for Ancient Mesopotamian Medicine. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014.

Segal, Alan F. “Hellenistic Magic: Some Questions of Definition.” Pages 349-375 in Studies in Gnosticism and Hellenistic Religions, Presented to Giles Quispel on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Edited by R. Van den Broek and M. J. Vermaseren. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981.

Segal, Robert. “Myth and Ritual Theory: An Overview.” Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997): 1-18.

Shafer, Byron E., ed. Temples of Ancient Egypt. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997.

Shanks, Hershel. “The Mystery of the Nechushtan.” Biblical Archaeology Review 33 (2007): 58-63.

Shubert, Serpo. “Pharaoh’s Three Offers, Moses’ Rejection, and the Issues They Foreshadowed.” Jewish Biblical Quarterly 38 (2010): 93-96.

Silverman, David P., ed. Ancient Egypt. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Silverman, Jason M. “Persian Influence on Jewish Apocalyptic.” PIBA 32 (2009).

______. “Iranian-Judean Interaction in the Achaemenid Period.” Pages 133-168 in Text, Theology, and Trowel: New Investigations in the Biblical World. Edited by Lidia D. Matassa and Jason M. Silverman; Pickwick Publications, 2011.

______. Persepolis and Jerusalem: Iranian Influence on the Apocalyptic Hermeneutic. New York: T&T Clark, 2012.

Smith, Duane E. “‘Pisser Against a Wall’: An Echo of Divination in the Biblical Hebrew.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 72 (2010): 699-717.

______. “Portentous Birds Flying West: On the Mesopotamian Origin of Homeric Bird-Divination.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 13 (2013): 49- 85.

Smith, Jonathan Z. “Religion and Bible.” Journal of Biblical Literature 128 (2009): 5-27.

Smith, Mark. S. “The Literary Arrangement of the Priestly Redaction of Exodus: A Preliminary Investigation.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 58 (1996): 25-50.

______. “Remembering God: Collective Memory in Israelite Religion.” Catholic Quarterly Review 64 (2002a): 631-651.

292

______. “Ugaritic Studies and Israelite Religion: A Retrospective View.” Near Eastern Archaeology 65 (2002b): 17-29.

______. God in Translation: Deities in Cross-Cultural Discourse in the Biblical World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008.

Smither, Paul. “A Ramesside Love Charm.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 27 (1941): 131-132.

Smoak, Jeremy D. “May YHWH Bless You and Keep You from Evil: The Rhetorical Argument of Ketef Hinnom Amulet I and the Form of the Prayers for Deliverance in the Psalms.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 12 (2012): 202-136

Snape, Steven. Ancient Egyptian Tombs: The Culture of Life and Death. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2011.

Sneed, Mark R. The Social World of the Sages: An Introduction to Israelite and Jewish Wisdom Literature. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2015.

Snell, Daniel C. Life in the Ancient Near East: 3100-332 B.C.E. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.

______. Religions of the Ancient Near East. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Soden, Wolfram von. The Ancient Orient: An Introduction to the Study of the Ancient Near East. Translated by Donald G. Schley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Souto Castro, J. Turner, and M. Ferro Garrido, “Evidence of Healing and Purifying Water Properties in Ancient Egypt during the New Kingdom and the Ramesside Period,” in Libro de Actas del II Symposium Internacional de “Termalismo y Calidad de Vida.” Transcribed proceedings, Ourense, Spain, 2017.

Spalinger, Anthony. “The Limitations of Formal Ancient Egyptian Religion.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 57 (1998): 241-260.

______. “Osiris, Re and Cheops,” ZÄS 134 (2007): 173-194.

Spanier, Ktziah. “Rachel’s Theft of the Teraphim: Her struggle for Family Primacy.” Vetus Testamentum 42 (1992): 404-412.

Stackert, Jeffrey. “The Syntax of Deuteronomy 13:2-3 and the Conventions of Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy.” Journal of Near Eastern Religion 10 (2010): 159-175.

293

______. “Why Does the Plague of Darkness Last for Three Days? Source Ascription and Literary Motif in Exodus 10:21-23, 27.” Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011): 657-676.

______. A Prophet Like Moses: Prophecy Law, and Israelite Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Stark, Rodney. “Reconceptualizing Religion, Magic & Science.” Review of Religious Research 43 (2001): 101-120.

Starr, Ivan. “Notes on Some Technical Terms in Extispicy.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 27 (1975): 241-247.

______. Queries to the Sungod: Divination and Politics in Sargonid Assyria, SAA 04. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990. 15 May 2014. http://oracc.museum. upenn.edu/saao/knpp/saa_04.

Stavrakopoulou, Francesca and John Barton., eds. Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. London: T&T Clark International, 2010.

Stein, Michael Alan. “The Religion of the Israelites in Egypt.” Jewish Bible Quarterly 392011: 196-199.

Steindorff, George. “The Magical Knives of Ancient Egypt.” The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 9 (1946): 41-51, 106-107.

Steindorff, George and Keith C. Seele. When Egypt Ruled the East. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1947.

Steiner, Richard C. “Northwest Semitic Incantations in an Egyptian Medical Papyrus of the Fourteenth Century B.C.E.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 51 (1992): 191-200.

Stratton, Kimberly B. Naming the Witch: Magic, Ideology, and Stereotype in the Ancient World. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

Stökl, Jonathan. Prophecy in the Ancient Near East: A Philological and Sociological Comparison. Leiden: Brill, 2012.

Sweeney, Deborah. “Women Growing Older in Deir el-Medina.” Pages 135-160 in Living and Writing in Deir el-Medina. Edited by A. Dorn and I. Hofmann; Schwabe Verlag. Basel, 2006.

Szpakowska, Kasia Maria., ed. Through a Glass Darkly: Magic, Dreams, and Prophecy in Ancient Egypt. Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 2006.

______. “Demons in the Dark: Nightmares and other Nocturnal Enemies of Ancient Egypt.” Pages 63-76 in Ancient Egyptian Theology and Demonology: Studies on the Boundaries Between the Divine and Demonic in Egyptian Magic. Edited by Panagiotis Kousoulis; Leuven: Peeters, 2011.

294

Tambiah, Stanley J. Magic, Science, Religion, and the Scope of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Te Velde, H. “A Few Remarks upon the Religious Significance of Animals in Ancient Egypt.” Numen 27 (1980): 76-82.

______. “Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs, Symbols, and Gods.” Visible Religion 4-5 (1986): 63-72.

Teeter, Emily. The Presentation of Maat: Ritual and Legitimacy in Ancient Egypt. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1997.

______. Religion and Ritual in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Theis. Christoffer. Magie und Raum: Der Magische Schutz ausgewählter Räume im alten Ägypten nebst einem Vergleich zu angrenzenden Kulturbereichen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014.

Thomassen, Einar. “Is Magic a Subclass of Ritual?” Pages 55-66 in The World of Ancient Magic: Papers from the First International Samson Eitrem Seminar at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, 4-8 May 1997. Edited by David R. Jordan, Hugo Montgomery and Einar Thomassen. Bergen: Norwegian Institute at Athens, 1999.

Tigay, Jeffrey, H. Deuteronomy. The JPS Torah Commentary: Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1996.

Tignor, Robert L. Egypt: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011.

Tobin, Vincent Arieh. “Mytho-Theology in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 25 (1988): 169-183.

______. “Divine Conflict in the Pyramid Texts.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 30 (1993): 93-110.

Torri, Giulia. “A Hittite Magical Ritual to be Performed in an Emergency.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 4 (2004): 129-141.

Trachtenberg, Joshua. Jewish Magic and Superstition: A Study in Folk Religion. New York: The World Publishing Company, 1961.

Traunecker, Claude. The Gods of Egypt. Translated by David Lorton. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001.

Trimm, Charlie. “YHWH Fights for Them!” Warrior in the Exodus Narratives. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2014.

295

Troy, Lana. Patterns of Queenship in Ancient Egyptian Myth and History. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 1986.

Tugendhaft, Aaron. “Politics and Time in the Baal Cycle.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 12 (2012): 145-157.

Tylor, Edward Burnett. Religion in Primitive Culture.1873; repr. Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith, 1970.

______. Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom. Vol. 1; 6th ed.; London: John Murray, 1920.

Ulanowski, Krzysztof, ed. The Religious Aspects of War in the Ancient Near East, Greece, and Rome. Leiden: Brill, 2016.

Utzschneider, Helmut and Wolfgang Oswald, Exodus 1-15. Translated by Philip Sumpter; Stuttgart: Vergal W. Kohlhammer, 2015.

Van Der Toorn, Karel. Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria, and Israel: Continuity and Change in the Forms of Religious Life. New York: E. J. Brill, 1996.

_____. Bob Becking, and Pieter Willem van der Horst., eds. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Cambridge: Eerdmans, 1999.

______. and Cees Houtman, “David and the Ark,” Journal of Biblical Literature 113 (1994): 209-231.

Van Seters, John. The Life of Moses: The Yahwist as Historian in Exodus-Number. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1994.

Von Rad, Gerhard. Deuteronomy: A Commentary. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966.

Vaux, Roland de. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Translated by John McHugh. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Versnel, H. S. “Some Reflections on the Relationship of Magic-Religion.” Numen 38 (1991): 177-197.

Vidal, Jordi. “The Sacred Landscape of the Kingdom.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 4 (2004): 143-153.

Villar Vegas, David. “Análisis de las Prácticas Condenadas en Deuteronomio 18:9- 14.” Antesteria 7 (2018): 35-50.

Vinson, Steve. “The Names ‘Naneferkaptah,’ ‘Ihweret,’ and ‘Tabubue’ in the ‘First Tale of Setne Khaemwas.’” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 68 (2009): 283- 304.

296

Wakeman, Mary K. God’s Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery. Leiden: Brill, 1973.

Walker, Coyd. “Magic Thinking.” Journal of Religion and Psychical Research 22 (1999): 83-92.

Walters, Stanley D. “Prophecy in Mari and Israel.” Journal of Biblical Literature 89 (1970): 78-81.

Walton, John H. Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.

Waters, Matt. Ancient Persia: A Concise History of the Achaemenid Empire, 550-330 BCE. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Wazana, Nili. “A Case of the Evil Eye: Qohelet 4:4-8.” Journal of Biblical Literature 4 (2007): 685-702.

Weber, Max. Economy and Society. Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.

Weinfeld, Moshe. “Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature.” Vetus Testamentum 27 (1977): 178-195.

Weiss, Lara. “Personal Religious Practice: House Altars at Deir El-Medina.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 95 (2009): 193-208.

Wellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1957.

Wenzel, Heiko. “Drawing a Line between Prophecy, Magic, and Divination.” Pages 79-80 in Studies on Magic and Divination in the Biblical World. Edited by Helen R. Jacobus, Anne Katrine de Hemmer Gudme & Philippe Guillaume. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2013.

White, J. E. Manchip. Ancient Egypt: Its Culture and History. New York: Dover Publications, 1970.

Wilson, John A. “The Oath in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 7 (1948): 129-156.

Wildish, Bruce Martin. “Parting Seas, Magic Stars, and Miracle.” Skeptic 9 (2002): 80-89.

Wilkinson, Alix. “Symbolism and Design in Ancient Egyptian Gardens.” Garden History 22 (1994): 1-17.

297

Wilkinson, Richard H. “New Kingdom Astronomical Paintings and Methods of Finding and Extending Direction.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 28 (1991): 149-154.

______. Symbol and Magic in Egyptian Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 1994.

______. The Complete God and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt. Cairo: The American University Press, 2003.

Wilkinson, Toby, ed. The Egyptian World. New York: Routledge, 2010.

______. The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt. London: Bloomsbury, 2010.

Williams, Ronald J. “Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 92 (1972): 214-221.

Willis, John T. Yahweh and Moses in Conflict: The Role of Exodus 4:24-26 in the Book of Exodus. New York: Peter Lang, 2010.

Wilson, Ian. “Merely a Container? The Ark in Deuteronomy,” in Temple and Worship in Biblical Israel. Edited by John Day. London: T&T Clark, 2007.

Wilson, John A. “The Oath in Ancient Egypt.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 7 (1948): 129-156.

______. “The Royal Myth in Ancient Egypt.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 100 (1956): 439-442.

Wilson, Leslie S. “Nachash and Asherah: Serpent Symbolism and Death, Life, and Healing in the Ancient Near East.” Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1999.

Wilson, Robert R. “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41 (1979): 18-36.

______. Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Winitzer, Abraham. “The Divine Presence and Its Interpretation in Early Mesopotamian Divination.” Pages 177-198 in Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World. Edited by Amar Annus. Oriental Institute Seminars 6. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2010.

______. “Writing and Mesopotamian Divination: The Case of Alternative Interpretation.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 63 (2011): 77-94.

Winlock, H. E. “The Costume of an Ancient Egyptian Priest.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 27 (1932): 186-187.

Wyatt, N. “What Has Ugarit to do with Jerusalem?” Studies in World Christianity 8 (2002): 138-160.

298

Yamauchi, Edwin M. “Magic in the Biblical World.” Tyndale Bulletin 34 (1983): 169-200.

______. Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996.

Yee, Gale, A. Hugh R. Page Jr., Matthew J. M. Coomber. eds. The Pentateuch: Fortress Commentary on the Bible Study Edition. Minneapolis: Ausburg Fortress Press, 2016.

Zias, Joseph. “Lust and Leprosy: Confusion or Correlation?” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 275 (1989): 27-31.

Zevit, Ziony. “The Priestly Redaction and Interpretation of the Plague Narrative in Exodus,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 66 (1976): 193-211.

______. The Religions of Ancient Israel: A Synthesis of Parallactic Approaches. London: Continuum, 2001.

299