“Magic” is a hot topic in current research, and antiquity is no exception. Even if J.E. Sanzo affirms that “this book is not about magic” (p. 2), he still must deal with the questions of demarcation and definition. For it is precisely these methodological and theoretical approaches to the source material that we today understand as “magical” in the broadest sense that have been sharpened in recent years—and J.E. Sanzo has made a significant contribution to this in numerous publications.
His latest book “Ritual Boundaries” continues this work. In a somewhat lengthy introduction, he does not avoid setting out his understanding of rituals and magic, and he goes much further, asking how magical objects of (late) antiquity conceptualized boundaries between Christians and non-Christians, or insiders and outsiders, and more generally how these objects contribute to the understanding of ancient “lived religion”. Therefore, this book is not a book about magic, but about religious assimilation and differentiation, based on the analysis of “magical” texts and objects.
In the introduction, Sanzo states the now obvious fact that for most Christians of antiquity the use of amulets was not in contradiction with their Christian identity—arguably, numerous church fathers lectured against it and normative texts forbade the use of magic and amulets.[1] Such regulating canons as that of the Council of Laodicea (cited in Sanzo p. 10) or the “Apostolic Constitutions” (VIII.32)[2] show, according to Sanzo, that Christians in the 4th and 5th centuries already “conceptualize(d) illicit ritual activities and their practitioners as a distinctive threat.” (p. 10). This was less about content than about religious and ritual boundaries, ultimately a question of identity. Certain ritual practices were defined as non-Christian, even if they did not differ too much from Christian rituals in terms of content.
Chapter 1 illustrates this point using a Coptic book of spells from Leiden (Ms. AMS 9) and the Prayer of St. Gregory therein.[3] This text designates itself as “prayer”, “phylactery”, and “exorcism” and therefore promises help against all forms of magic and demonic influence. These positive self-designators stand in contrast to an equally clearly defined opposition: evil people, sorceries, and enchantments are mentioned as terms that are furthermore associated with ethnic groups: male and female Persians, Chaldeans, Hebrews, and Egyptians commit these evil deeds against the Christians who are to be protected with the help of God.
For Sanzo, AMS 9 is a perfect example of how ancient magical objects defy modern classification. For many church fathers, it would have been indisputable that the prayer of St. Gregory was a ritual permeated by magic and superstition. However, the author himself takes an equally clear stance and fights against other forms of unauthorized magic, while presenting himself in a positive light. According to Sanzo, it would therefore be wrong to speak of blurred or fluid boundaries: the text itself draws clear boundaries, but they are not congruent with other (ancient and modern) views. “Evidence of this kind reveals the coexistence of different configurations of the boundaries between proper and improper ritual” (p. 40). Legitimization is therefore nothing more than a question of perspective.
In chapter 2, Sanzo examines the language of the amulets regarding the demarcation between Jews and Christians. Again, Sanzo fights against modern terminology that likes to resort to categories such as “syncretism” or “blurred boundaries”. What do we make of Christian amulets with supposedly non-Christian elements (e.g. the terms Iao Sabaoth, Adonai, Horus etc.)? Have the manufacturers of such objects not taken care of denominational issues, or have they adopted foreign terms in order to increase ritual efficacy through foreign-sounding names?
For Sanzo, these explanations fall short. His solution is “appropriation”: over time a “non-Christian” element could become a fully “Christian” element. The meaning of names and symbols was subject to change, and so was the amuletic language. A Christian ritual expert understood culturally shared elements as a natural part of his Christian identity. “It is important to note that this latter scenario involves neither ‘boundary crossing’ nor ‘boundary blurring’ from the perspectives of the practitioners.” (p. 51).
While this proposed solution rightly takes into account the changing meanings of symbols and does not hastily fall back on prefabricated categories, it all too quickly dismisses the theory of multiple identities in early Christianity.[4] In my opinion, not every text or every object can be classified as clearly Christian or clearly pagan or clearly Jewish, all the more so as Sanzo himself alludes to interreligious and intercultural contact in the conclusion of the chapter (p. 61 and 71). Sanzo also writes that this contact did not always have to lead to conflict, but he misses an opportunity here to elaborate on this. The explanation that each object and each text should be examined individually, and that each author draws his own clear-cut boundaries, also harbors the danger that categories such as Christian or non-Christian become completely obsolete, as they can no longer be delineated in a generally valid way. But this problem can hardly be solved if one wants to avoid the concept of syncretism, which can serve as a stopgap solution for precisely those cases.
In the third chapter, Sanzo examines “the ways in which practitioners crossed, merged, and reconfigured the boundaries between and within verbal, visual, material, and performative domains.” (p. 66). Amulets are therefore far more than just a text that one carries with them for protective purposes. Sanzo explains the various aspects that can be taken into account when interpreting such an object: obviously the drawings (more on this in chapter 4); symbols, which can also be instructions for the ritual performance (e.g. the sign of the cross); but the way in which the amulet was folded and worn also deserves attention. Sanzo adduces the case of P.Oxy. 8.1077, which was folded into fifteen octagons, fourteen of which are inscribed with a Gospel text organized into cross-shaped patterns; on the fifteenth piece, a drawing represents the client, who was wrapped in the Bible through the performative folding. According to Sanzo, the materiality as a whole deserves more attention. Not only the size, but also the weight of an object worn on the body and the material, which creates a different sensation depending on the temperature. Sanzo also considers the process of reading (or reciting), which becomes a different ritual performance through the object: for example, the armband written all around, which must be turned while reading. All these considerations lead directly to the subject area of “lived religion” and the “performance” of ritual texts, which still holds a great deal of potential and which Sanzo has addressed in an admirable way.
In chapter 4, Sanzo discusses the various possible interpretations of Christ’s crucifixion, as he finds them on amulets and gems from Late antiquity. Two opposing approaches are possible: firstly, the crucifixion can be understood as a triumphant mythic event in which Jesus Christ defeated death and the evil powers. Similarly, a phylactery depicting the crucifixion can help the wearer to overcome these evil satanic powers. Secondly, and more obviously, the crucifixion is interpreted negatively. The nakedness on the cross, which implies humiliation and sexual shame, reinforces the powerless position, the iconography of which Sanzo analyzes masterfully. However, the question arises as to what implications the respective interpretations of the crucifixion had for the magical ritual, or for what purpose was the crucifixion used iconographically? Here Sanzo ventures a bold thesis by including the crucified Jesus among the “restless dead” (e.g. biaiothanatoi, violently killed), who were often invoked in ancient magical rituals as a source of support. The depiction of Jesus on the cross testifies to the belief in the power of ousia related to crucified individuals (just as, for example, the nails of the cross in the legend of St. Helena became special relics). For Sanzo, the depiction of the crucifixion of Jesus can thus be both “a triumphal precedent for demonic struggle in the here and now” and “a mechanism for manipulating an entity who was subjected to a painful, humiliating, and untimely death.” (p. 108). Both versions testify to a fundamentally different reception of the Bible in the lived religion of late antiquity.
Unfortunately, Sanzo’s book comes to an end after these four case studies. The reviewer would have liked more, especially as Sanzo has paved the way for this with an extremely detailed introduction and methodology. Notes, bibliography, and a short index round off the book.
Sanzo is to be commended for critically questioning common explanatory patterns such as “syncretism” or the two-tiered model of “elite” and “non-elite” religion. His studies show that identities such as “Christian”, “Jewish”, or “pagan” were a constant process of negotiation that was also reflected in ritual objects, and not only in the speeches and tracts of the “elites”. However, Sanzo’s arguments here are food for thought for further research, and we will undoubtedly read numerous critical responses in the coming years. The reviewer admires Sanzo’s approach to the objects of ancient “lived religion” in particular. Sanzo’s book provides valuable impulses in this direction and is essential reading for researchers of ancient religion in general, and especially for those who engage in the study of magical objects.
Notes
[1] J.E. Sanzo, Early Christianity, in: D. Frankfurter (Hg.), Guide to the Study of Ancient Magic, Leiden 2019, 198/239 provides a detailed overview.
[2] CA VIII.32 (ed. M. Metzger, Les constitutions apostoliques, 3 Bde., Paris 1985-1987 [SC 320, 329, 336]).
[3] The text of the prayer has also been handed down in Greek, see Strittmatter, A. 1930/1932. Ein griechisches Exorzismusbüchlein: Ms. Car. c 143b der Zentralbibliothek in Zürich. Orientalia Christiana 20: 169-178; 26: 127-144. However, the Coptic spell book is older than the Greek manuscript.
[4] Éric Rebillard is a pioneer in this field. Christians and their many Identities in Late Antiquity, North Africa, 200-450 CE. Ithaca 2012; see also É. Rebillard / J. Rüpke (Hg.), „Group identity and religious individuality in late Antiquity“, Washington 2015.