Collins: Analyising Efficacious Principals

[us4-he2-gal2]

___________________________________

Analyzing Incantation Lore: How the Magic Works

___________________

Continuing my perusal or T. Collins excellent dissertation (which Shupu has made possible by his wonderful actions), I browse through a fascinating section, Chapter four: The use of Medical incantations as source. (p.48)

In this chapter, which by its title sounds rather bland, the author does in fact make provide very desirable analysis - because he does not only endeavor to discuss Medical incantation as source, but he proceeds to discuss WHAT IS EFFICACY to the Mesopotamians? This sort of discussion is actually somewhat difficult to come across even in the works of ANE incantation scholarship, which as works out is often to minutely focused on a given text or series of texts and attempts to deal with what fundamentally is efficacious in the broad sense. Granted much of Collins interest here is favored to medical incantations, but as he discusses incantations in general as well we may observe from him and attempt to extract from him some principles that are applicable to the incantation genre as a whole.



On the source of efficacy/

Collins begins by expressing his impression that if an origin of the effect of the magic, its legitimating force, were to be ascribed on the basis of textual considerations.. than the magic can be said to be theurgical in nature: that is, reliant on the beneficent attention of the gods for its essential effect. Or as the author says "This chapter argues that a magician believed an incantation would be efficacious not because of what it said, but rather because it came to him from the gods. As a result of this belief the magician composed an incantation without any conscious design; subconsciously, however, he often expressed the problem's remedy by manipulating an analogical or causal relation, or else he secondarily combined parts of existing incantations. When composing an incantation in this manner, the magician often spontaneously provided information on the problem's cause."

Collins takes a strong stance on the issue of efficacy I believe, but rather than understanding 'the words of the incantation could be anything so long as they are divinely ordained' or suggestions to that effect, the composition itself should probably be understood as in some measure important - as tradition seems to have been maintained throughout the span of Mesopotamian incantation literature. At the same time, that the words themselves were infused with the theurgy should not be doubted and that this was what made them effective is also the general conclusion of Cunningham's exhaustive 1997 study, which found Divine legitimation at the core of his studied material: in the form of divine mediators, cosmological narratives and reoccurring closings which state in effect 'this incantation is not mine, it is the incantation of so and so' (of Ningirimma, of Enki or Marduk etc.).

Collins has divided his analysis on the mechanics of an incantation into two discussion. I have begun by summing, mostly in my own words, his section I below - section II will follow. The first deals with two principals contributing to magic effect in incantation - Section two with the origin of effect, with efficacy. I have maintained the authors headings for each subsection.

Section I

I.A Incantations that Manipulate Relations


Sections I.A.1 and I.A.2 deal with how incantation verbally manipulate Analogical or Causal relations in order to effect a certain
outcome. In some cases, the Mesopotamian exorcist or medical practitioner may employ both principals together in order to find that efficacious force that compels resolution and saves the patient. Both of these principals, Analogical relation and Causal relation, are simple enough once discussed:



I.A.1 The Manipulation of Analogical Relations


By manipulation of Analogical relations, Collins refers to those times that an incantation contains part of an old story, an old problem, and at the same time, contains also the resolution to that issue; the incantation would therefore relate the past problem with the current problem and attempt to extend the solution of the former to the latter. An example provided is from a childbirth incantation -the story from some (mythical) past and tells how Sin (the moon god) saw a particular cow having trouble giving birth and is beseeched by servants to help her:


There was a particular cow of Sin, Geme-Sin was her name;
At her shout, at the cry of her labor, Nannaru-Sin heard her cry (and said):

---

"Who is it Narundi? Who is it, Nahundi?: -
"A cow, my lord, she is having difficulty giving birth;
"My lord, throw water from your bucket at her,
So that the cow Egi-Sina may become happy,
"(The calf) may come out like a snake, slither out like a little snake,
"(And) like one who has fallen off a wall, not turn its check to its
rear!"

As we have seen elsewhere at enenuru, simpler analogy is also common in incantation literature, as with this example from an Ur III incantation: ""May the headache-demon `split the river bank' on (the patient's) cranium, may (the demon) break up like a pot.'" At which point ritual analogy may have ensued with the breaking of a pot by the exorcist.




I.A.2 The Manipulation of Causal Relations


Causal relations are more plain still, they are simply those times in an incantation when cause is apparent and, importently, when a suggested counteraction is given. In the below example of a causal relationship, Collins explains that sometimes a general cause was given, such as here we have the exorcist attributing the issue to ghosts (he names numerous possible ghosts since he doesn't know precisely which one is malignant.)

The solution, how the problem will be counteracted, is given in the
last line. It likely reflects a ritual accompaniment.

---

"You, dead person who is always meeting with me,
Whether father, mother, brother, or sister,
whether kith, kin, or relation,
Whether a buried person's ghost or an unburied person's ghost, Whether one who die[d]
by the punishment of a god or by the punishment of a king,
Or a ghost who has no one to libate water for him-
May the Balty thornbush hold you back,
may the ašāgu thornbush hold you back,
may the magic circle of flour hold you back!"

Collins explains that the basic significance of the principle of causal relations that can be observed in the incantation lore, is that the Mesopotamian specialist believed that removing the cause would also remove the medical problem at hand. In the modern context, we can see clearly that removing a knife won't repair a stab wound, but we may be more inclined toward perception of a causal relation when considering the problem of cancer. The ancient preponderance on causal relation is quite understandable in view of the many disease and illnesses that were attributed to demonic or negative affliction of the body of inhibition of the body, or in the case of harmful presence's like the ghosts above.




Excursus: Rituals that Manipulate Relations



As stated earlier both Analogical and Casual relations can be used in the same incantation or ritual - think along the lines of 'so and so is the cause, so and so will be destroyed, will melt away (or will break up) like a something).' Here the cause would be identified (so and so), its solution is also given in by analogy to the "something." Causal and Analogical both.
As is apparent above, incantations will sometimes suggest accompanying ritual proceedings, and at this point Collins provides a beautiful example of this in a carefully selected extract from the Maqlu series. Here we have an example of an incantation text which at this point clearly explains a ritual proceeding; at the same time it, by analogy with the figurines, attacks the causal issue at hand: a host of demons one or more of which are responcible:

---

"I am lifting the torch and setting fire to the figurines,
Which represent the utukku demon, the šēdu demon, the rābiṣu demon, the ghost,
The lamašhtu demon, the labāṣu demon, the aḫḫazu demon,
The lilû demon, the lilītu demon, the ardat lilī demon,
And anything evil that seizes mankind-
Dissolve, low away, drip away drop by drop!
May your smoke go up to heaven!
May the sun extinguish your embers!
May the son of Ea, the āšipu, cut off your "watcher!"

---

Still to come.... Setion II: Means to Efficacy

[us4-he2-gal2]

Section 2

II. The Content of Incantations as a Means to Efficacy



In introducing this topic, Collins has explained there are three main ways by which experts consider the incantation texts, and interpret how the contents might be thought of as effective - the models are:

- psychologically (i.e., by effecting a person's mind)
- theurgically (i.e., by persuading a god to intervene)
- magically (i.e., by directly affecting the external world)



He then proceeds to discuss each in turn.. these are summed below under heads II.A, II.B, and II.C - The author is ultimately doubtful of each of these suggestions, and makes he own suggestion for the interpretation of efficacy in heading III.




II.A Content as a Means to Psychological Efficacy

- Collins considers efficacy as a possibly psychological phenomena: He notes that scholars studying incantations from some cultures have stated that the principles employed compare in some ways to modern psychoanalysis; another observation is the apparent similarity between Old Charms and some modern advertisements which imply "the same principle of suggestion." More directly, the author suggestions that incantations may be efficacious by merit of a "placebo effect", that is, "a patient who believed in an incantation's efficacy may experience a placebo effect whether the incantation's content follows modern psychological principals or is complete gibberish."
It should be added that even if we may understand or suspect a placebo effect, the Mesopotamian incantation specialist would not have understood his actions within a psychological context, would have believed his magical actions to have real world consequences, and in any case most likely was not concerned with clarifying his spoken incantation to his patient in any large measure.



II.B Content as a Means to Theurgical Efficacy

The Theurgical content of incantations is more readily demonstratable and the author begins by alluding to those incantations which make direct appeals to a god, as in a prayer. The below example is to remedy the problem of a ghost, and is directed at Girra:

---

Girra, you are might, you are furious,
[You make] gods and malku demons [go aright], you judge the case of the wronged man and woman-
Stand by me [in my case] and, like the hero Shamash, [jud]ge my case! Make the decision about me!
Remove [the evil ghost] from my body so that I may praise your great divinity!

(Scurlock diss., 256 and 259: 27-30)

Other incantations appeal to a god in passing, such as though which contain one liners such as "Gula, heal (the patient) and take your gift!". Of course the suggestion that incantations were therefore theurgically efficacious is complicated by the fact that some incantations make little or no reference to gods at all. Some scholars have explained these incantation which make to reference to the divine as following a "special rhetoric" which really does invoke the divine just not explicitly - Collins ultimately dismisses these concepts of "special rhetoric" as merely trying to conform all material to the theurgical model. Furthermore, he notes that Babylonian texts often portray gods themselves using incantations and that it is unlikely they could be thought to be using an incantation designed to secure divine intervention - in any case Collins concludes some incantations "were not intended to be theurgically efficacious."



II. C Content as a Means to Magical Efficacy


Magical efficacy is very loosely defined and Collins briefly explores some suggestions such as that the ancients believed merely describing an evil with an incantation would allow control over it. He soon doubts this line of reasoning: "To say that the incantations content alone made it efficacious is implausible, since it implies that he believed that he could change the external world simply by expressing the wish to do so." Collins recalls the use of analogical and casual relations and says basically that incantations are not so simple the stating of a wish and rely on more than just a will.




III. The Content of Incantations as Incidental to Efficacy


Finally we come to what is Collins suggestion about efficacy - that the content is incidental to efficacy. Basically his suggestion is closely related to the Thuergical suggestion, in that again, the power behind an incantation comes from the gods.. but rather than because some incantations appeal to the gods as in the prayer like incantation, this suggestion is based off of knowledge that some, or perhaps all, incantations were seen as words come from the gods, or explicit divine origin. Some examples given are:

---

The incantation is not mine, it is the incantation of Damu and Gula.
Damu [c]ast (it) and I took (it)

(Teeth4:8)

Other incantations attest this principal in a different way:

---

I will cast for you an incantation that drives out every illnes, which Enlilbanda had provided

(CT 42 32:1-2)

In addition to this familiar information, Collins adds something quite interesting: "Magicians also apparently referred to an incantation's divine origin more obliquely, by using the enciltic particle -mi to mark the incantation as a direct quotation. In light of the many explicit statements that incantations come from the gods, the magicians"s use of the -mi particle presumably reflects his belief that the words of the incantations are not his own, but the gods', which in composing the incantation he has repeated verbatim.
A magician's belief that his incantation came from the gods makes it unnecessary to assume that he thought the incantation's content would make it efficacious; he may have thought it would be efficacious solely because the gods had established it in an intrinsically efficacious form."
The author concludes that if indeed the magician believed the incantation was divinely originating, he would endeavor to compose the incantation in not particular creative fashion (perhaps in a traditional format for example) so that the text would most conform to the principal of divine origination, and not seem the work of the writer himself. Yes "the magician sometimes subconciously expressed what he wanted the incantation to achieve-namely, the remedy of the problem. In order to mark the incantation as divine speech, however, he did not express the problem's remedy baldly; rather, he expressed it in poetic language, with more or less elaborate descriptions of the problem and its remedy, and by manipulating a relation involving the problem." The suggestion Collins admits of course, cannot be proven.