Search

Early Greek alchemy, Patronage and Innovation in Late Antiquity provides an example of the innovative power of ancient scholarly patronage by looking at a key moment in the creation of the Greek alchemical tradition.New evidence on scholarly patronage under the Roman empire can be garnered by analyzing the descriptions of learned magoi in several texts from the second to the fourth century CE. Since a common use of the term magos connoted flatterer-like figures (kolakes), it is likely that the figures of "learned sorcerers" found in texts such as Lucian's Philopseudes and the apocryphal Acts of Peter captured the notion that some client scholars exerted undue influence over patrons.The first known author of alchemical commentaries, Zosimus of Panopolis (c. 300 CE), presented himself neither as a magos nor as an alchemist. In his treatises, he rather appears as a Christian scholar and the client of a rich woman named Theosebeia. In three polemical letters to his patroness, Zosimus attempted to discredit rival specialists of alchemy by describing them as magoi and demon-worshippers and by equating their techniques with Egyptian temple practice. In a subtler attempt to edge out his competitors, Zosimus pointed to their limited education and suggested that true alchemy could only be acquired by a meticulous interpretation of Greek alchemical texts.Extant evidence thus suggests that alchemical texts were first introduced among other Greek scholarly traditions when Zosimus annexed Egyptian temple rituals into the ambit of paideia thanks to the support and venue provided by his patroness.

Review of Greek Alchemy from Late Antiquity to Early Modernity. Edited by EFTHYMIOS NICOLAIDIS. Pp. 198, illus., index. Brepols: Turnhout. 2018. £72. ISBN: 978-2-503-58191-0.

The article discusses the presence of a generative principle called Mōt in a short cosmogony found in the Phoenician History of Philo of Byblos (c. 100 CE). The Phoenician History's Mōt has been usually understood as the euhemeristic interpretation of a Semitic god of death, which is well documented in late Bronze Age documents from Ugarit. I argue that the name of Mōt was rather inspired by the Egyptian deity Mut as she was conceived from the Ptolemaic period on.

Many scholars of ancient Greek religion would probably agree that the use of curse tablets in the ancient Mediterranean world 'cut across all social categories'. From a comparative perspective, it would be surprising if high levels of Greek literacy had been achieved by all social classes in classical and Hellenistic times. Greek literature, however, always represents these women using non-literary cursing techniques. While the use of figurines and spoken words were common features of ancient Greek cursing, specific mentions of curse writing are absent from classical and Hellenistic sources. According to Jordan, a single person from the mid-third century ce inscribed fifteen curse tablets and deposited them in two wells in the Athenian agora. Unlike many other ancient corpora, the corpus of ancient Greek and Latin curse tablets is in constant evolution. Since new evidence will likely come to light in the future, the study of curse tablets can afford bold hypotheses as well as falsification attempts.

This paper was originally prepared for a meeting of the Methodology Seminar of the Distant Worlds Graduate School (LMU, Munich) and was meant as an introduction to the use of the category of magic in the study of ancient Greek and Roman religions offered to a group of scholars coming from different disciplines. The study of ancient magic is complicated by the fact that most of ancient Greek and Latin terms usually translated by “magic” or “magical” were used in different and contradictory ways. Approaches trying to reconcile rather than expose these different meanings can be divided in two large groups: the so-called essentialist approach, exemplified here by the work of H.S. Versnel and the sociological approach, represented here by the work of P. Bourdieu. Against these two approaches, it has also been argued that the modern term “magic” should be abandoned. Against this last position, I will first repeat – as Versnel and others already did – that we cannot represent alien (i.e. foreign or ancient) categories of thought without using our own categories. Finally, I will present Versnel’s methodology, its problems, and the solution that Bourdieu’s notion of the religious field can provide. While not without problems, it gives an idea of what could be gained by tinkering with common-sense notions rather than assuming that their definitions are self-evident.