Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

© Stratton, Male Magicians – lectio difficilior 2/2004 – http://www.lectio.unib

© Stratton, Male Magicians – lectio difficilior 2/2004 – http://www.lectio.unibe.ch 1 Kimberly B. Stratton Male Magicians and Female Victims: Understanding a Pattern of Magic Representation in Early Christian Literature Résumé: Les écrits du monde antique tendent à stéréotyper la magie comme une entreprise féminine (par exemple Médée d’Euripide, Erictho de Lucain, Canidie d’Horace, Simaitha de Théocrite, et plusieurs femmes, jamais nommées, qui pratiquent la sorcellerie dans le Talmud Babylonien). Les écrits chrétiens, par contre, s’écartent de ce modèle sexué; les rôles de «magiciens» hérétiques sont presque toujours occupés par des hommes, alors que les femmes sont caractérisées en tant que victimes crédules et hystériques de la manipulation des magiciens. Que suggère ce motif à propos de la fonction des femmes (ou de certaines femmes) dans le discours chrétien sur l’hérésie? Les femmes ne semblent pas avoir été ciblées comme «autres» que les Pères de l’Église cherchaient à marginaliser. Plutôt, les hérésiologues s’en prennent à des hommes lorsqu’ils formulent une attaque contre les menaces à leur autorité. Les femmes sont alors utilisées pour rendre «autre» les concurrents religieux en les identifiant aux superstitions insensées, à l’immoralité sexuelle et l’indécence générale. De plus, les représentations spécifiques des réponses féminines aux attaques magiques reflètent le point de vue idéologique de leur auteur envers l’autorité de l’Église, l’ascétisme et l’autonomie des femmes. It is well known that ancient literature commonly and stereotypically depicted women as practitioners of magic arts. The association of women with magic was so strong in fact that a first century rabbi, Hillel, could blithely state that the more wives one has the more witchcraft one has as well (Mishnah Avot 2:8.).1 The trope of predatory women, using magic to seduce men or seek revenge haunts the pages of Greek and Roman literature from at least as early as the fifth century before the Common Era (BCE), where women’s use of either poison or magic (the word is the same: farmakei/a) figures in Attic tragedy and forensic speeches. Magic was, in many ways, ‘feminized’ by this period - it was associated with gender inversion, effeminate lack of self-control, and barbarism. By the first century BCE, depictions of women’s sorcery was a familiar trope in both Greek and Latin literature. Theocritus’ second Idyll, for example, imagines the intimate gestures and actions of a spurned young woman, conjuring Hecate to win back her errant lover. This poem influenced Virgil’s eighth Epode and subsequent portraits of women’s magic in Roman literature. By the first century CE woman’s magic powers darkened: Canidia of Horace’s literary legacy, for example, prowls cemeteries, looking for human remains to employ in her magic spells.2 She ISSN 1661-3317 © Stratton, Male Magicians – lectio difficilior 2/2004 – http://www.lectio.unibe.ch 2 practices necromancy as well as infanticide - killing a young boy to get the power of his liver after she has starved him to death with a plate of food before his face (Epode 5). It seems that his liver distilled the power of his suffering desire. Similarly, Lucan’s portrait of Erictho in his Pharsalia draws on grotesque imagery almost to the point of being pornographic: she scoops out the eyeballs of corpses and scrapes the flesh of criminals off their crosses (538- 546).3 In the second century, Apuleius employs this trope of predatory women using magic to satisfy their lust as the central element of the plot in his novel, the Metamorphoses. Women’s magic, combined with ill-fated curiosity, lead to the protagonist’s transformation into an ass. Plutarch attributes the use of magic (farmakei/a and gohti/a) to Cleopatra (w(j u(po\ farma/kwn tinw~n h)\ gohtei/aj), explaining her ability to seduce and manipulate Antony (Antony 37.4). Jewish literature from around this period similarly identifies women with sorcery. Second-Temple writings, for example, attribute knowledge of ‘magic’ to the fallen angels of Genesis 6:2, who taught this dangerous art to human women.4 An anonymous Tanna in the Babylonian Talmud states that “most women engage in magic” (Myp#kb twywcm My#n bwr)5 as a way to explain the gendered prohibition of magic (Pw#yk) found in Exodus 22:17.6 Other Tannaim similarly demonstrate a willingness to attribute magic arts to women: Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai and Rabbi Yosi both declare a majority of women to be involved in the practice of magic (Babylonian Talmud Eruvin 64b, Babylonian Talmud Berakhot 53a, Jerusalem Talmud Kidushin 48a). Early Christian Representations of Magic All of these examples serve by way of introduction. They demonstrate the widespread, well- known, and popular trope of women’s magic arts. Interestingly, however, archaeological evidence indicates that men account for the vast majority of extant ‘spells’ recovered from the ancient world (approximately 86% of erotic spells), suggesting that this portrait is not simply mimetic - that is, it is not directly portraying things as they are - but rather is functioning as a trope or a foil to convey some other, ideological, concern.7 Much can be said on this fact, which I will not address now. Rather, I want to establish the ideological nature of these representations as a pretext for exploring the interesting phenomenon of early Christian representations of magic, which oddly do not attribute magic to women but rather to men. Women do figure in magic accusations but they are victims of male predations rather than magical aggressors themselves. Let me turn to some examples: The earliest Christian depictions of magic or ‘magicians’ appear in Luke-Acts. Simon, for example, is said to have amazed the Samaritans with acts of magic (tai=j magei/aij). Later, he levels the accusation of “magic” against male representatives of sanctioned ritual such as Elymas (who is an adviser to the proconsul, 13:7) and the sons of Sceva (who is a Hebrew © Stratton, Male Magicians – lectio difficilior 2/2004 – http://www.lectio.unibe.ch 3 priest, 19:14).8 Women do not figure as magicians in Luke’s history, rather he draws on the centuries old association of ma/goi with charlatanism and barbaric ritual practices to delegitimate male rivals. Justin Martyr, writing around 150 CE, substantially expands and elaborates the account of Simon from Acts. He is the first to mention Simon’s consort, Helena, to whom he attributes theological significance as Simon’s e)/nnoian prw/thn or ‘First Thought.’9 Interestingly, Justin disparages Simon as a ma/goj10 but never draws on the trope of women’s dangerous magic to attack his partner, Helena. Later, Irenaeus articulates more fully Helena’s central place within Simon’s mythic system as well as Simon’s infamous position as the father of all heresies (Adversus haereses 23.2). It is difficult to know what kernel of historical truth his report may contain - if such a person as Helena really existed and what, if any, theological significance she held in Simon’s teachings. In the passages following this one, Irenaeus describes Helena’s ‘fall’ and enslavement in human form along lines that resemble the well-known ‘Sophia myth’ from sources such as the Apocryphon of John. Helena is subject to Simon as his e)/nnoian prw/thn and he is said to be her source and savior. While accorded a prominent place in Simon’s soteriological cosmology, Helena remains utterly passive in relation to him: Irenaeus describes Helena as Simon’s subordinate and side-kick - she rides with him to demonstrate his soteriological power. Simon alone receives the designation Magus. A later portrait of Simon Magus in Hippolytus’ Refutatio omnium haeresium more clearly demonstrates the pattern of representing men as magicians and women as victims; according to this depiction, the relationship between Simon and Helena appears to be objectifying if not a little victimizing: And after having thus redeemed her, he was in the habit of conducting her about with himself, alleging that this (girl) was the lost sheep, and affirming himself to be the Power above all things. But the filthy fellow, becoming enamored of this woman called Helen, purchased her (as his slave).11 (6.14) In this account, Simon purchases Helena to be his sexual servant as well as to demonstrate his soteriological capabilities. Shifting from Simon to his supposed protegee, Marcus, patristic attacks more clearly demonstrate the pattern of magic accusation in which a man is accused of practicing magic and women are portrayed as his victims. In Adversus haereses, for example, Irenaeus lodges an accusation of ‘magic’ against Marcus to explain away his apparently considerable charisma: But there is another among these heretics, Marcus by name, who boasts himself as having improved upon his master [i.e. Simon]. He is a perfect adept in magical imposture (magikh=j u(par/xwn), and by this means drawing away a great number of men, and not a few women, he has induced them to join themselves to him, as to one who is possessed of the greatest knowledge and perfection, and who has received the © Stratton, Male Magicians – lectio difficilior 2/2004 – http://www.lectio.unibe.ch 4 highest power from the invisible and ineffable regions above. Thus it appears as if he really were the precursor of Antichrist. For, joining the buffooneries of Anaxilaus to the roguery of the magi, as they are called, he is regarded by his senseless and cracked-brain followers as working miracles by these means.12 (13.1) To further uploads/Litterature/ startton-male-magicians-and-female-victims.pdf