DOI 10.1515/jah-2013-0010 JAH 2013; 1(2): 170–229 Justin J. Meggitt Did Magic Matter? The Saliency of Magic in the Early Roman Empire Abstract: Magic is usually assumed to have been ubiquitous and culturally significant in the early Roman Empire, something exemplified by Pliny the Elder’s claim that “there is no one who does not fear to be spell-bound by curse tablets”.1 A variety of written and material evidence is commonly taken to be indicative of both the regular use of magic and widespread anxiety about its deployment. However, this paper argues that if we attempt, having determined a contextually appropriate definition of magic, to gauge the prevalence and significance of magic in this period, it can be seen to have had little cultural salience. Not only is evidence for its presence more equivocal than usually presumed, but magic is found to be strikingly absent from major popular cultural sources that shed light on the presuppositions and preoccupations of most of the empire’s inhabitants, and to have had little explanatory or symbolic utility. The paper then proceeds to suggest possible reasons for magic’s lack of salience in the early Empire, including the role of various sceptical discourses concerned with the supernatural in general and magic in particular, and the consequence of the largely agonistic context of its use on the limited occasions that it was employed. Keywords: Magic, Popular Culture, Scepticism, Belief, Early Roman Empire. Justin J. Meggitt: Institute of Continuing Education, University of Cambridge, Madingley Hall, Madingley, Cambridge, CB23 8AQ, UK, E-Mail: [email protected] 1 Introduction: The Ubiquity of Magic? It is usually assumed that belief in magic was ubiquitous in the early Roman Empire,2 that, in the words of Pliny the Elder, “there is no one who does not fear to be spell-bound by curse tablets”.3 One needs only read the accounts of the 1 Plin. Nat. 28.4.19. The translation is from Gager (1999), 253. 2 See, for example, Betz (1997), xli. 3 Plin. Nat. 28.4.19. Pliny also claimed that such belief was not new but had “held sway throughout the world for many ages” (30.1). The Saliency of Magic in the Early Roman Empire 171 famous trials for sorcery of Apollonius of Tyana4 and Apuleius of Madaura,5 or the magical explanations given for the untimely demise of Germanicus, Tiberius’ popular heir,6 to see how significant magic appears to have been. Indeed, the only fully extant novel in Latin that we possess,7 the Metamorphoses, is concerned with the consequences8 of meddling in such things.9 Homer’s Odyssey, one of the formative texts for most of the inhabitants of the empire,10 could be thought to be “composed of nothing else”.11 There are also a number of practical magical texts that seem to confirm much the same picture, including not just those that constitute the well-known Papyri Graecae Magicae12 but such works as the amulet grimoire of Cyranides13 or the Testament of Solomon – a handbook for controlling demons potentially responsible for everything from migraine to death.14 Early 4 Philostr. VA 8.1–31. For Apollonius and the accusation of magic, see Abraham (2009); Kosken- niemi (1994); Reimer (2002). 5 Apul. Apol. For studies of the Apologia see Abt (1908); Bradley (1997); Graf (1997a), 65–88; Harrison (2000), 39–86; Hunink (1997); Riemer (2007); Riess (2008); Rives (2003). Apollonius and Apuleius are also both discussed by Augustine (see Graf 2002b). 6 Tac. Ann. 2.69. See also Suet. Cal. 3.3 and Dio 57.18.9. See Lund (2009); Tupet (1980). Germanicus died in Antioch on the Orontes in 19 CE. 7 Petronius’ Satyricon could also be legitimately classified as a novel, despite the extensive use of poetry. However, substantial sections of this work are missing. We only have books fourteen, fifteen, and sixteen out of the twenty-four books that probably constituted the original: see Schmeling (1996), 460–61; (2011).The Satyricon also shows an extensive interest in magic. See, for example, Petr. Sat. 61–63, 131. 8 For studies of the representation of magic in Apul. Met., see Frangoulidis (2008); Graverini (2012); Leinweber (1994); Ruiz-Montero (2007); Winkler (1986). Apuleius’ novel has had a con- siderable effect on the subsequent portrayals of magic and witchcraft in Europe; see Gaisser (2008). A Greek version of the same story, Pseudo-Lucian’s Onos, displays a similar interest in magic. For Pseudo-Lucian’s Onos, see Anderson (1976), 34–67 (though Anderson argues for Lucian’s authorship). Both the Met. and the Onos were based on an earlier, longer, Greek version of the story; see Mason (1994); Thiel (1971–1972). 9 For treatments of magic and magical practitioners in classical literature see, for example, Eitrem (1941); Lowe (1929); Luck (1999); Pollard (2008); Stratton (2007); Tupet (1976). 10 See Herac. All. 1.5–6; cf. 76.3–5; Hor. Ep. 2.2.41–2; Quint. Inst. 1.8.5. For the place of Homer in both Greek and Roman education, see Bonner (1977), 213; Marrou (1965), 246–47; Morgan (1998), 69–71, 105–15. See also Petr. Sat. 48, 59. For a discussion of the significance of Homer in Roman culture more generally, see Farrell (2004). 11 Plin. Nat. 7.5. 12 For the PGM, see Betz (1997); Brashear (1995); Preisendanz, Abt, and Henrichs (1973). 13 See Waegeman (1987). 14 For the Testament of Solomon, see Bohak (2008), 179–82; Busch (2006); Duling (1983, 1988); Johnston (2002); Klutz (2005); Schwarz (2007). Magic can also be found in texts concerned with other things, such as the pharmacopeia of Dioscorides. Dioscorides distinguished the medical usage of plants from their alleged magical properties in his De Materia Medica, placing the latter 172 Justin J. Meggitt Christian literature, such as the canonical Acts of the Apostles15 and the apocry- phal Acts of Peter,16 depict an empire preoccupied by magic, a world in which those spreading the new faith are forced to battle with magicians17 and magical books are burnt in public by those that they convert.18 The material culture of the empire likewise seems to provide copious, tangible evidence of the vitality of belief in magic. Artefacts, such as the myriad of defixiones (binding spells),19 incantation bowls,20 “voodoo” dolls,21 magical lamellae and amulets,22 brought together in the extensive collections by the likes of Bonner, Gager, Kotansky, Michel, Ogden, and Philipp,23 appear compelling evidence of magic’s significant place in the lives of most of the empire’s inhabitants.24 And we could easily go on: from the presence of the paradigmatic witches Circe and Medea on Roman oil lamps, gemstones, murals and sarcopha- at the end of each chapter. He also made it clear to the reader that such traditions consisted of what others had said, rather than what he himself had determined through his own experience, experiment and observation (Praef.2–5). See, for example, Mat. Med. 1.90, 103; 2.104, 125, 126; 3.91, 131; 4.20, 76, 130. See Riddle (1985), 84. For a valuable translation and commentary, see Beck (2005). 15 For treatments of the theme of magic in Acts of the Apostles, see Garrett (1989b); Klauck (2000); Marguerat (2003); Porter (2007); Reimer (2002); Reuter (2009); Shauf (2005). 16 See, for example, the magical battle between Peter and Simon Magus found in Acts of Peter 23–32. See Bremmer (1998, 2002b); Schneemelcher (1992). 17 Notably Bar-Jesus (Acts of the Apostles 13.6–12) and Simon Magus (Acts of Peter 4–32). For studies of the conflict between Bar-Jesus and Paul, see Garrett (1989a), (1989b), 79–87; Nock (1972); Strelan (2004b). Simon is first mentioned in Acts of the Apostles 8.9–24 where he is rebuked for attempting to purchase the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit. He acquired the epithet “Magus” in subsequent literature and became a figure associated with both magic and gnosticism. See Adamik (1998); Derrett (1992); Edwards (1997); Ferreiro (1998, 2005); Lüdemann (1987); Luttikhuizen (1998); Tuzlak (2002). 18 Acts of the Apostles 19.11–20. For studies of this narrative, see Garrett (1989b), 89–99; Klauck (2000), 97–101; Shauf (2005); Strelan (2004a), 107–12. For the symbolism of book burning in the empire, see Sarefield (2006, 2007). 19 See Faraone and Kropp (2010); Gager (1999); Ogden (1999). 20 Bohak (2008), 183–93; Levene (2003). 21 This is a problematic term but remains the best way of referring to such objects in English. It is not meant to imply any association with contemporary religious practices found in Haiti, West Africa or elsewhere: see the remarks in Faraone (1991a), 65, n. 4. The term “poppet”, whilst increasingly common, is inappropriate as it is a term of endearment in a number of dialects of British English. For an example of the use of such dolls, see Hor. Sat. 1.8; Ovid Her. 6.83–94; Ps- Call. Alex. 5; Theoc. Id. 2(Pharm.). 22 See, for example, Bonner (1950); Kotansky (1994). 23 Bonner (1950); Gager (1999); Kotansky (1994); Michel (2004); Michel, Zazoff and Zazoff (2001); Ogden (2009); Philipp (1986). 24 For studies of the use of objects in actual practice, see Bailliot (2010) and Wilburn (2012). The Saliency of Magic in the Early Roman Empire 173 gi,25 to the plethora of apotropaic representations of the evil eye found on everything from mosaics and amulets to ear-rings,26 the salience of magic in the Roman Empire seems to be anything but illusory. Even epitaphs appear to bear witness to its importance. Here, for example, is one from Rome itself which dates from the 20s CE: Iucundus, the slave of Livia the wife of Drusus Caesar, son of Gryphus and Vitalis.