I’ve just completed another 50 pages of the unpublished English translation of the 13th century Arabic writer Ibn Abi Usaibia’s dictionary of medical writers. Thankfully he has now reached Galen. It was the material on Galen that led me to look at this work. It’s much more interesting than the material which has preceded it.
The sun is still shining, but I keep wanting to go to sleep. The winter sun doesn’t give as much light, it seems.
The change of season is at long last perceptible, and for the last two or three days it has actually felt like autumn for the first time. The bright warm weather has concealed the fact that the nights are drawing in, but now, suddenly, it is evident. Waking early one morning by chance, at 6:30, I find that it is only just light, after many months of bright sunshine at that hour. This morning for the first time I put the heating on.
It is also suddenly colder outside, some 10 degrees colder than it was last weekend. This morning I looked out to condensation on the car and on the grass and on the inside of the window. The hour change is only two weeks away.
The change in the light level has left everyone in my office yawning this week, as our bodies attempt to adjust to the new conditions. In truth I find that the next 8-9 weeks always leave me feeling somewhat jet-lagged, as the days get shorter quickly.
But it also means that winter pursuits are becoming practicable. It no longer seems like a waste of a nice day to get up this morning and spend an hour on the computer, OCRing Ibn Abi Usaibia, and correcting the results in Finereader 10. Indeed I have done just that, with great satisfaction.
The sun is low this Saturday morning, but the sky is now blue and the sun bright on the house opposite. So I think that I had better get ready to go out!
A very useful post at the British Library manuscripts blog today gives an image of the medieval catalogue of the books owned by the Abbey of St. Andrew at Rochester. The page is from Ms. Royal 5 B XII, and is doubtless one that was stolen by the crown when the abbeys were closed down at the Reformation.
These catalogues of medieval libraries are often very imperfectly published, and there is nothing like seeing the actual page! The Rochester page (f.2r) in fact lists the books owned by the abbey, starting with works by Augustine; then by Gregory the Great; then by Ambrose of Milan; then Jerome / Hieronymus; then the Venerable Bede; and then miscellaneous other books, including a lectionary, a passionary, a homiliary, some saints’ Lives, decretals, and others which I can’t make out.
But what we all want to see, of course, are the complete mss. online.
Quite by accident today I stumbled over a rather interesting overview of Coptic Patristic literature in a Google books preview of a volume of the Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XIII, The Late Empire, A.D. 337-425, ed. Averil Cameron &c, (1998) p.725 f. here. It is quite difficult for the non-professional to get an orientation in this sort of field, and these couple of pages fill the bill admirably.
It comes from section 7, pp.720-735, by Mark Smith of Oxford University. Dr. Smith divides his topic into six sections:
Magical texts
The bible and apocrypha
Patristic and homiletic works
Monastic texts and martyrologies
The Nag Hammadi library and related tractates
Manichaean writings.
All are extremely interesting and well-referenced: here is the section on patristics.
Patristic literature in Coptic, at least for the period A.D. 337—425, consisted chiefly if not entirely of works translated from Greek. There is no evidence that any of the Fathers of the church, even those such as Athanasius or Cyril of Alexandria, who lived in Egypt and had extensive dealings with Egyptian monks, ever wrote in the language of that country.[42] According to a tradition preserved by Epiphanius,[43] a certain Hieracas (c. 270-3 60) was the first to write commentaries and other treatises in Coptic. No trace of his work has survived, unless it be an Akhmimic MS. of fourth-century date containing psalms or hymns which some have attributed to him.[44] This being the case, it is difficult to evaluate the tradition critically. For the purposes of the present discussion, Coptic patristic literature may be divided into two categories: works preserved in manuscripts of the fourth and fifth centuries, and those preserved in manuscripts of later date. Only a few texts fall into the first category. The treatise on the Pascha by Melito of Sardis is attested by three early manuscripts, one Akhmimic and two Sa’idic, as well as a few fragments.[45] One of the Sa`idic MSS., which also contains Jonah, 1 Peter, an extract from 2 Maccabees, and an Easter homily, was written at the end of the third or the beginning of the fourth century. The other Sa`idic MS. and its Akhmimic counterpart are certainly of fourth-century date. The translation of this work into Coptic has been seen as further evidence for a connection between Asiatic Christianity and certain Christian circles within Egypt.[46] Among other texts, the Shepherd of Hermas is preserved in an Akhmimic manuscript of the fourth century[47] and a Sa`idic one of the fifth century.48 Coeval with the latter is a Middle Egyptian version of the Didache.[49] The First Epistle of Clement is attested by two Akhmimic codices, one dating to the fourth century,[50] the other to the fifth.[51] The latter contains the Gospel of John and the Episde of James as well. There are, in addition, miscellaneous letters and sermons preserved in MSS. of fourth- or fifth-century date. These are mainly fragments and their authors have yet to be identified.[52]
Thus far, matters are relatively straightforward. For various reasons, however, the second category of texts is more problematic. A number of genuine patristic writings are preserved in Coptic MSS. which postdate the fifth century. Full lists of these have been compiled by Krause[53] and Orlandi.[54] Among the authors attested are Athanasius, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, and the Cappadocians, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa. Unfortunately, with rare exceptions, there is no way of knowing when the works of these writers were first translated and, consequently, it is impossible to say whether Coptic versions of them were in circulation during the fourth and fifth centuries. The point is well illustrated by the four discourses of Gregory of Nazianzus preserved in Sa`idic and Bohairic MSS. of the eighth—eleventh centuries.[55] These may have been translated as early as the fifth century, as the editor of two of them has suggested,[56] but firm evidence that they were is lacking.
The picture is further complicated by a number of late MSS. containing works that are falsely attributed to one or another of the church Fathers. Some are genuine patristic writings that have been credited to the wrong authors. Others are totally spurious, having been composed in Coptic long after the end of the period under discussion. Examples in the first category include a homily of John Chrysostom on the Canaanite woman, wrongly attributed to Eusebius of Caesarea,[57] and an exegesis of a passage from Paul’s Letter to the Romans, written by Basil but credited to Athanasius.[58] Both are preserved in a Sa`idic codex of seventh-century date. A good exemplar of the second category is the cycle of homilies ascribed to Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria from 385 to 412.[59] Works of this type will not be taken into consideration here.
In general, it can be said that the translators of patristic literature into Coptic were not interested in theological questions as such. Rather, they were influenced by practical concerns. Texts were selected for translation either because they were valuable for liturgical purposes, or capable of providing moral instruction or spiritual edification.[60]
42 Arguments to the contrary are unconvincing, e.g. Lefort (1953a); cf. Draguet (1980) 111*—12*.
43 Haer. LXVII. 1.2—3.
44 Lefort (1939) 1-6; Peterson (1947).
45 See Goehring (1984); Crum and Bell (1922) 47-9 .
46 Orlandi (1986) 59.
47 Lefort (1952) ii-iv and 1-18.
48 Ibid. viii-ix and 25-6.
49 Ibid. ix-xv and 32-4.
50 Schmidt (1908).
51 Rosch (1910) 1-88.
52 E.g. Crum (1905) nos . 269, 279 , 285, 521, 1220; Till (1931).
53 Krause (1980) columns 707, 710-11.
54 Orlandi (1970) 69-88, 115-24. Cf. idem (1973), (1984).
55 For bibliography on the editions of the MSS. in question, see Lafontaine (1981) 38-40.
56 Ibid. 43. The same writer expresses a more cautious view at Lafontaine (1980b) 39 and (1980a) 201.
57 Mercati (1907).
58 Orlandi (1975) 52—3.
59 Orlandi (1985) 103-4; cf. idem (1973).
60 Orlandi (1986) 71-2.
The abbreviated references point to the back of the book, where they are given in full: a system full of peril to the reader, if the editor fails to ensure that every volume does actually get included in the bibliography.
Footnotes 53 and 54, containing lists of Patristic works in Coptic, are worth expanding here. What a pity neither is in English or French!
Krause, M. (1980) ‘Koptische Literatur’, in W. Helck and W Westendorf (eds.), Lexicon der Agyptologie Vol. 3 (Wiesbaden) columns 694-728
Orlandi, T. (1970) Elementi di lingua e letteratura copta. Milan
Orlandi, T. (1973) ‘Patristica copta e patristica greca’, Vetera Christianorum 10: 327-41
The same volume also contains a useful article on Syriac. It is a reminder not to neglect this series, which is a useful entry point to the literature.
In my teens I used to buy volumes of the CAH, saving up money from birthdays to do so. Unfortunately I started at the beginning, rather than in the historical section, and ended up with 4 volumes of mainly dry archaeology reports. Naturally my interest waned, and I stopped buying them. In retrospect, if I had had a friend who could advise me, he would probably have told me to start in the Principate, with the early Caesars, and I might well have read through the series. The auto-didact faces many problems, of course. Those who receive reading lists at university are rarely grateful enough for them!
The next chunk of the first ever English translation of the calendrical book by the 6th century antiquarian, John the Lydian, has arrived! And very seasonal it is too!
The chapter is a short one, which means that it can appear here. Please note the excellent note 7 by the translator. A number of the references are drawn from astrological writers, such as Euctemon, who usually marked the date on which various constellations rose or set.
[161] OCTOBER
135. For the Macedonians, October[1] is the first month, but for the Romans, it is the eighth from the spring, and hence they call it October, meaning “eighth.” This month was formerly named Sementilius, from “seed”—for that [i.e., semen] is what Romans call “seed.”
On the [162] Kalends of October,[2] the priests would speak oracularly to the people, that they ought not to pay attention to their dreams, because of the images that were due to the moist swelling connected to the autumn fruit. But from the “Waxing of the Light,”[3] that is, from January, one ought especially to pay attention [i.e., to dreams], in accordance with the opinion of Herophilus, who accepted that dreams were actually god-sent, whereas Democritus [classifies them] among manifestations of images.
On the Kalends of October, Varro says that the Pleiades rise in the East.
The Romans thought it good to eat leeks all through the month, on the basis of some ancient tradition, to ward off the condition of gout.
136. On the sixth day before the Nones of October,[4] Eudoxus supposes that there will be rain in the evening.
137. In the case of the seeds that are cast into the earth, there was a certain power, which the sun draws along as it goes around the lower hemisphere at the time of the winter solstice: Corê [i.e., Persephone] is the seed-holding power, while Pluto is the sun under the earth, who is said to have seized Corê, whom Demeter sought while she was hidden under the earth. And the myths tell that the seizure [took place] at Aetna in Sicily [163]; for it is said that grain was sown there first.
138. On the fifth of October, the Regionarchai and Sebastophoroi would dance in the Gusteion, as it were, the “Fish-shop,”[5] in honor of Tiberius. And now the common people call this sort of place Augusteion. In the uncovered [area] of the Daphne,[6] in the small courtyard, Constantine the Great set up a statue [stêlê]of his own mother, after whom he named the place Augusteion.[7]
139. On the day before the Nones of October,[8] Democritus asserts that the Kids [i.e., the constellation Haedi] rise and that the North wind blows, while Eudoxus says that the middle of Aries sets.
On the Nones of October,[9] Varro predicts that the Pleiades rise in the evening, and the West wind [zephyros] blows, and then also the South-West wind [lips].
140. Concerning the wooden horse, Euphorion says that it was a boat called “Horse” by the Greeks. But others say that it was a gate with this name in Troy, through which the Greeks entered.
141. On the day before the Ides of October,[10] Euctemon considers it to be the absolute middle of autumn.
On the 15th day before the Kalends of November,[11] the sun enters Scorpio, as Callipus says.
On the 14th day before the Kalends of November,[12] Metrodorus says that the Hyades rise in the evening, and [there is] a violent wind.
142. There are said to have been three Asclepii: First, the [son] of Apollo the [son] of Hephaestus; he invented the surgical probe. Second, the [son] of Ischys the [son] of Elatus and Coronis; <he> was buried on the borders of Cynosuris. Third, the [son] of Arsippus and Arsinoe the daughter of Leucippus; this one invented surgery and the forceps for extracting teeth, and he has a grave in Arcadia.[13] The astronomers say that he is Ophiuchus, who stands over Scorpio.
143. On the day before the Kalends of November,[14] Varro says that Lyra rises together with the sun.
[1] I.e., the Macedonian month Dios. [2] 1 Oct. [3] Gk. ta Auxiphôtia. Cf. 4.121, 158. [4] 2 Oct. [5] So LSJ. Alternatively, “Cook-shop” (Sophocles’ Lexicon). Gk. opsopôleion. [6] Part of the imperial palace at Constantinople. [7] This place (Augusteum / Augustaeum / Augustaion / Augusteion—to be distinguished from the Augusteus, which was part of the palace) was an open courtyard in front of the imperial palace (ultimately between it and the Hagia Sophia), the earliest development of which is obscure: It certainly existed in the 5th century, and was later remodelled by Justinian. For John Lydus’ account, cf. Hesychius’ Patria Constantinopoleos 40 (Preger, Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum 1:17): “And he [i.e., Constantine] erected a statue of his own mother Helena upon a column and named the place Augustaion“; Procopius (Buildings 1.2.1 and 1.10.5) refers to it as an agora (market-place) “which the Byzantines call the Augustaion.” For the idea that it was originally a “fish-shop,” cf. Suda s.v. Augustus (with the account of the statue of Helena) [based on John Lydus, it seems] and s.v. Justinian; andthe late Byzantine Ps.-Codinus, Patria Constantinopoleos, 2.15 [based on John Lydus, it appears, but substituting “the current ruler” for “Tiberius”] and 2.17: “Justinian, after building the Hagia Sophia, purified the courtyard and coated it with marble stucco—it had previously been a gusteion, or ‘fish-shop.'” Cyril Mango, The Brazen House (1959), p. 46, notes that the Chronicon Paschale (p. 593 Dindorf) reports that in A.D. 459 the city prefect Theodosius “built the Augustaion alongside the Great Church”—and that this source nevertheless also (pp. 528-29 Dindorf) gives the account that Constantine erected a statue of Helena and called the place “Augustaion.” Cameron and Herrin (eds.), Constantinople in the Early Eighth Century: The Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai (1984),p. 262, citing Mango and the Chron. Pasch., consider the association with Constantine the Great legendary. Finally, Mango (p. 46 n. 50) notes John Lydus’ placement of the statue of Helena in the open area of the Daphne as a piece of information that conflicts with the location of the Augustaion; yet John clearly does not see a conflict—it may be that he is using the term Daphne loosely to refer to the palace in general, or that the story about the statue of Helena originally did not refer to the familiar Augusteion, but has been garbled at some stage in the transmission. [8] 4 Oct. [9] 5 Oct. [10] 14 Oct. [11] 18 Oct. [12] 19 Oct. [13] For these Asclepii, cf. Cicero, De Natura Deorum 3.22(57)—Cicero also says (55) that the “first” Hephaestus (Vulcan), the son of Caelus, was the father of one particular Apollo. [14] 31 Oct.
I learn today that an edition of the Coptic text of the life of Samuel of Kalamoun does exist, with English translation. It was edited by Anthony Alcock, and published in 1983 in Warminster by Aris & Phillips, ISBN 0856682195. It is useful to know it exists. According to COPAC, it is based on his 1972 D.Phil. thesis at Oxford, which was a critical text of the manuscript, Pierpont Morgan ms. Coptic 578.
Dr Alcock also worked on the 4th century Coptic texts from the Kellis excavations, of which volume 1 was published in 2001 and volume 2 is yet (sigh) to appear, as well as a range of other interesting coptica.
I need to think some more about Coptic material. I’d still like to get more work done on the De Lagarde catena, and there must be other Coptic texts which could usefully go online.
Now the resolution is a little low but … what is the script on the lower tauroctony? The upper inscription is Greek, plainly enough, although I can’t quite read it. But the lower script looks very unfamiliar.
Anyone know?
UPDATE: I find that I have some pages on disk taken from the 1936 publication of the Mithraeum.[1] On p.83 I find the following:
The smaller cult bas-relief (PI. XXIX, I) has a double inscription: one (of three lines) in Palmyrene is inscribed on the base of the bas-relief inside a tabella ansata, the other on the face of the left side of the molding. Letters are cut and painted red. On the text of these inscriptions Professor Torrey submits the following note:
“Below the smaller Mithras relief is a Palmyrene inscription in three lines. This is accompanied by a vertical line of Greek (0.24 m. long) at the left of the relief (no. 145), repeating the name and title of the author. The first letters of the latter inscription are so worn away as to be barely legible; it reads (height of letters 0.01.5-0.021 m.) :
The Palmyrene inscription reads as follows (0.41 m.,,0.06 m., letters 0.015 m.):
The Palmyrene inscription in the Dura Europos Mithraeum
“A good memorial; made by Ethpeni the strategos, son of Zabde`a, who is in command of the archers who are in Dura. In the month Adar of the year 480 (168 A. D.).
“The name Ethpeni is otherwise known as Palmyrene, and the pronunciation of the final syllable is now made certain by the Greek transcription. This is a simple verbal form, the ethpe`el perfect: …”
The following philological notes make plain that Palmyrene is a dialect of Aramaic, as mention of the ethpeel form makes plain to anyone with a smattering of Syriac. The tabella ansata is the rectangular box with triangles at the end.
On p.84 Torrey’s note is continued:
The second and larger bas-relief of the cult niche (Pls. XXIX, 2-XXX) bear an inscription in Greek (no. 846) in two lines (0.93 m. x 0.07 m., height of letters, 0.025 m.). It occupies the front of the base of the bas·relief. It is not enclosed in a tabella ansata. Letters are cut and painted red.
There follow some indistinct scratched lines, probably a filler like the usual ivy leaves.
On the next page the text of a Latin inscription elsewhere in the building is given, which indicates the restoration templum dei solis invicti Mithrae — the Mithraeum — under the three emperors Septimius Severus, Caracalla, and Geta, who ruled together in 209-212 A.D. This inscription was added by a Roman legionary vexillation, and marks a subsequent layer of occupation.
An idle search in Google images for “Mithra Zoroastrianism” brought up precisely NO images of the Zoroastrian god. It’s quite interesting, really, not least because I have no idea how he was depicted — if he was depicted — in reliefs.
It also brought up a number of unfamiliar tauroctonies of Mithras. The need for a large collection of images of Mithraic sculptures etc was never more apparent to me than today. We can clearly learn a great deal, simply by comparison, without undue theorising. I was almost tempted to start locating images and getting my camera out!
Mind you, an online list of places to visit and photograph would itself be a useful thing. We don’t even have that! If we could put such a thing online, one might get enthusiasts to contribute by visiting museums. It’s a wiki-project if ever there was one.
How I curse the wretched troll, who cold-bloodly plotted to wreck the Wikipedia Mithras article, and drive off all the honest contributors, for destroying the best means of collaborative work in this area!
I wonder how else it might be done. How does one contact Mithras enthusiasts? A few people doing day-trips to museums might contribute much!
Tonight I completed scanning another 50 pages of the English translation of Ibn Abi Usaibia. That makes a total of 100 so far. 900 to go! It’s slow, because my current job leaves me very tired every evening; but we’ll get there. I started at the beginning of chapter 1, but there is some prefatory matter, mostly rather blurry, which I left to one side, in order to get a bit of velocity with stuff that wasn’t so difficult. But I’ve started in on that this evening.
There is sad news from Egypt, where the overthrow of Mubarak has led Islamic groups to feel that they can now attack the Coptic Christians with impunity. Several churches have been burned. Last night the Copts demonstrated against these attacks, and were themselves attacked by the security forces. The political instability of Egypt is evident, even now.
I fear that the Egyptians will come to look back on the days of Mubarak as days of peace and plenty, compared to what may happen. Little worse is alleged against him than that he grew rich from being president, and a coterie of hangers-on exploited their position. Corruption is always damnable, and it is the curse of the region. But Mubarak at least kept Egypt from becoming involved in the pointless wars of the Arab world, and allowed a generation to grow up in peace. In the end it was the rise in food prices that brought him down, I suspect. But just changing leader won’t fix that problem, and unless it is dealt with, I don’t see how any regime can be stable. Nothing will stop his replacements from being equally corrupt, and probably far more quarrelsome. Let us hope that it all turns out OK.
Further to my post last week, I thought that people might like to see the texts. I think that they were published long ago in Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, but this is not before me. Instead let’s quote from a very useful modern collection of the magical texts. The bits in bold and italics are rubrics in the manuscript. I don’t guarantee that I have transcribed the strings of nonsense words exactly, however.
Excellent rite for driving out daimons: Formula to be spoken over his head: Place olive branches before him, and stand behind him and say: “Hail, God of Abraham; hail, God of Isaac; hail, God of Jacob; Jesus Chrestos, the Holy Spirit, the Son of the Father, who is above the Seven, who is within the Seven. Bring Iao Sabaoth; may your power issue forth from him, NN, until you drive away this unclean daimon Satan, who is in him. I conjure you, daimon, whoever you are, by this god, SABARBARBATHIOTH SABARBARBATHIOUTH SABARBARBATHIONETH SABARBARBAPHAI. Come out, daimon, whoever you are, and stay away from him, NN, now, now; immediately, immediately. Come out, daimon, since I bind you with unbreakable adamantine fetters, and I deliver you into the black chaos in perdition.”
Preparation: take 7 olive branches; for six of them tie together the two ends of each one, but for the remaining one use it like a whip as you utter the conjuration. Keep it secret; it is proven.
After driving out the daimon, hang around him, NN, a phylactery, which the patient puts on after the expulsion of the daimon –a phylactery with these things [written] on a tin metal leaf: ” BOR PHOR PHORBA PHOR PHORBA BES CHARIN BAUBO TE PHOR BORPHORBA PHORBABOR BAPHORBA PHABRAIE PHARBA PHARBA PHORPHOR PHORBA BOPHOR PHORBA PHORPHOR PHORBA BOBORBORBA PAMPHORBA PHORPHOR PHORBA, protect him, NN.” But another version has a phylactery on which this sign occurs: @
*Tr: M. W. Meyer. This Greek and Coptic exorcistic spell is discussed by Tamboruino, RGVVVII 3, 9; 10. For additional literature, see Preisendanz, PGM vol. I, 114 and idem, APF 8 (1927) : 115.
Is it me, or is there something of an attempt by the translator and the editor to disassociate this from Jesus Christ? It seems clear enough that the latter is meant here, however. Later in the same volume is another spell which mentions Jesus.
A tested charm of Pibechis for those possessed by daimons: Take oil of unripe olives with the herb mastigia and the fruit pulp of the lotus, and boil them with colorless marjoram while saying, “IOEL SARTHIOMI EMORI THEOCHIPSOITH SITHEMEOCH SOTHE IOE MIMIPSOTHIOOPH PHERSOTHI AEEIOYO IOE EO CHARI PHTHA, come out from NN” (add the usual). The phylactery:On a tin lamella write “IAEO ABRAOTH IOCH PHTHA MESENPSIN IAO PHEOCH IAEO CHARSOK,” and hang it on the patient. It is terrifying to every daimon, a thing he fears. After placing [the patient] opposite [to you], conjure. This is the conjuration: “I conjure you by the god of the Hebrews, Jesus, IABA IAE ABRAOTH AIA THOTH ELE ELO AEO IIIBAECH ABARMAS IABARAOU ABELBEL LONA ABRA MAROIA BRAKION, who appears in fire, who is in the midst of land, snow, and fog, TANNETIS; let your angel, the implacable, descend and let him assign the daimon flying around this form, which god formed in his holy paradise, because I pray to the holy god, [calling] upon AMMON IPSENTANCHO (formula). I conjure you, LABRIA IAKOUTH ABLANATHANALBA AKRAMM (formula) AOTH IATHABATHRA CHACHTHABRATHA CHAMYN CHEL ABROOTH OUABRASILOTH HALLELOU IELOSAI IAEL . I conjure you by the one who appeared to Osrael in a shining pillar and a cloud by day, who saved his people from the Pharaoh and brought upon Pharaoh the ten plagues because of his disobedience. I conjure you, every daimonic spirit, to tell whatever sort you may be, because I conjure you by the seal which Solomon placed on the tongue of Jeremiah, and he told. You also tell whatever sort you may be, heavenly or aerial, whether terrestrial or subterranean, or netherworldly or Ebousacus or Cherseus or Pharisaeus, tell whatever sort you may be, because I conjure you by god, light-bearing, unconquerable, who knows what is in the heart of every living being, the one who formed of dust the race of humans, the one who, after bringing them out from obscurity, packs together the clouds, waters the earth with rain and blesses its fruit, [the one] whom every heavenly power of angels and of archangels praises. I conjure you by the great god SABAOTH, through whom the Jordan River drew back and the Red Sea, which Israel crossed, became impassable, because I conjure you by the one who introduced the one hundred forty languages and distributed them by his own command. I conjure you by the one who burned up the stubborn giants with lightning, whom the heaven of heavens praises, whom the wings of the cherubim praise. I conjure you by the one who put the mountains around the sea [or] a wall of sand and commanded the sea not to overflow. The abyss obeyed; and you obey, every daimonic spirit, because I conjure you by the one who causes the four winds to move together from the holy aions, [the] skylike, sealike, cloudlike, light-bringing, unconquerable [one]. I conjure [you] by the one in holy Jerusalem, before whom the unquenchable fire bums for all time, with his holy name, IAEOBAPHRENEMOUN (formula), the one before whom the fiery Gehenna trembles, flames surround, iron bursts asunder and every mountain is afraid from its foundation. I conjure you, every daimonic spirit, by the one who oversees the earth and makes its foundations tremble, [the one] who made all things which are not into that which is.”
And I adjure you, the one who receives this conjuration, not to eat pork, and every spirit and daimon, whatever sort it may be, will be subject to you. And while conjuring, blow once, blowing air from the tips of the feet up to the face, and it will be assigned. Keep yourself pure, for this charm is Hebraic and is preserved among pure men.
*Tr.: W. C. Grese.
The biblical connections are given squarely here, although “daimon” grates — the spell-writer surely means “demon”, just as the New Testament does.
The editor adds:
On the peculiar epithet “Jesus the god of the Hebrews,” see Reitzenstein, Poimandres14, nn. 1-2; Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East 260, n. 4; Knox, “Jewish Liturgical Exorcism,” 193-94; H. Chadwick, Origen, Contra Celsum(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2 1965) 210 (on c. Cels. 4. 34); Smith, Jesus the Magician113; A. A. Rarb, ‘Three Elusive Amulets,” JWCI 27 (1964) : 7-9. Cf. PGM XXIIb. 18.
A few things to look at in that, but perhaps another time. Note that PGM XXIIb, line 18 merely is another Jewish charm, this time invoking “O Lord God of the Hebrews”. It is curious to see “God of the Hebrews” capitalized, but not “Jesus the god of the Hebrews”. But since Dr Betz was a “Professor of New Testament” and the translators both held the title of “Professor of Religion”, perhaps it merely indicates the emotional climate in US universities at the time.
These catalogues of medieval libraries are often very imperfectly published, and there is nothing like seeing the actual page! The Rochester page (f.2r) in fact lists the books owned by the abbey, starting with works by Augustine; then by Gregory the Great; then by Ambrose of Milan; then Jerome / Hieronymus; then the Venerable Bede; and then miscellaneous other books, including a lectionary, a passionary, a homiliary, some saints’ Lives, decretals, and others which I can’t make out.
But what we all want to see, of course, are the complete mss. online.