Women's Power and Protection: Insights from Babylonian Incantation Bowls and Rabbinic Texts

American Academy of Religion
Exe(o)rcising Power: Women as Sorceresses, Exorcists, and Demonesses in Babylonian Jewish

Society of Late Antiquity
Author(s): Rebecca Lesses
Source: Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 69, No. 2 (Jun., 2001), pp. 343-375
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1465786
Accessed: 28-08-2014 02:02 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press and American Academy of Religion are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of the American Academy of Religion.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 165.196.25.24 on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:02:18 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Power:
Exe(o)rcising Women as
Sorceresses, Exorcists, and

Demonesses in Babylonian
Jewish Society of Late Antiquity
RebeccaLesses
Thisarticleexaminestalmudicdiscussionsandarchaeological findsfrom
Sassanian Babyloniato exploretwodistinctbutrelatedtopics:howsome
actualwomenemployedritualpracticesto gainpower(suchasthe reci-
tationof incantationsandthe useof bowlswithincantations writtenon
them) and how some rabbis thoughtaboutwomen's relationship to ritual
power. Firstexploring rabbinicstatementsand narrativesabout women
the articlethenturnsto the incantationbowls,ordinary
as sorceresses,
earthenware bowlsinscribedwithAramaicincantations, whichwerebur-
ied on the thresholdsor in the courtyardsof dwellings.A comparative
lookatthesetwotypesof sourcesrevealsthatrabbinicaccountsof witches
areactuallymorenuancedthanthe baldtalmudicstatement(b. Sanh.
67a)that"mostwomenaresorceresses" andrevealsthatboththe incan-
tationbowlsandthetalmudicsourcesgiveinformation aboutwomenwho
usedincantationsandamuletsto protectthemselvesandtheirfamilies
fromdemonsandillness.
A STRIKINGstatementin the BabylonianTalmud,in the courseof a legal

discussionabout sorcery,saysthat "mostwomen are sorceresses"(b. Sanh.
67a). Two fourth-centurysages give more nuancedappraisalsof the pos-
siblerelationshipsamongwomen, sorcery,and ritualpractice.Amemartells
how to repel women who do sorcery:"The chief of the women who do
sorcery said to me: 'When one encounters the women who do sorcery
[nasimkalfaniot],he should say thus: hot dung in brokenbasketsin your
RebeccaLessesis Visiting AssistantProfessorof Religion and JewishStudies Distinguished Scholar
in Residence at Bucknell University, LewisburgPA 17837.
Journalof the AmericanAcademyof ReligionJune 2001, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 343-375.
@ 2001 The American Academy of Religion
344 Journalof the AmericanAcademyof Religion
mouths, women who do sorcery [nelei de-harsayya].May your heads

become bald, may the wind carryoff your crumbs, may your spices be
scattered, may the wind blow the new saffron that you were holding,
women who do sorcery"'(b. Pesah. 110a).1This curse wards off both a
verbalincantationand a ritualperformedwith the namedingredients.The
identity of the "chief of the women who do sorcery"is unknown; even
whether she is human is unclear,much less her name or relationshipto
the Jewishcommunityor the rabbinicsages.Shemerelyrevealsto Amemar
how she and her sisterscan be fought by means of a curse to annul their
enchantments.
Many statements attributedto Abaye, on the other hand, quote his
(also unnamed) fostermother (b. Qidd. 31b) givingadviceon how to heal
illness, how to care for newborn infants, and how to use incantations.In
one instance he quotes her about the use of a certainroot to heal illness
and even stop sorcery:"Threestop; five heal;seven are good even against
sorcery [kegafim]"(b. Sabb.66b). Threebunches of the plant stop the ill-
ness, five heal it, and seven are effective even against sorcery.Although
we do not know her name, Abaye'sfoster mother is firmlyplacedwithin
the human community, in Jewishsociety, and among the rabbis(for her
son so frequentlyquotes her). Ratherthan being an externalthreatwho
must be fought,as arethe "womenwho do sorcery,"Abaye'sfostermother
possessesvaluableinformationthat can be used beneficially.She is not a
sorceress,but rathera woman whose advicecould be used to counter the
actions of sorceresses.
Sources other than rabbinic writings also provide a window into
some women's relationshipto ritualpracticein fourth- to eighth-century
Babylonia.Beginningin the nineteenthcenturyand continuingup through
the 1990s,archaeologicalexpeditionshavefound incantationbowlsby the
hundreds in ancient sites in Iraq and Iran. These are ordinaryearthen-
ware bowls, dated to the fifth-eighth centuriesC.E. (i.e., during late Sas-
sanian and earlyIslamicrule), that ritualspecialistsor laypeoplefrom the
Jewish,Mandaean,Manichaean,Christian,and pagan communities in-
scribed with incantations in their own dialects of Aramaic (Gafni 1990:
152-153, 158; Hunter 1995a:319, 1996:220; Montgomery:14, 27, 102-
105;Naveh and Shaked1987: 13). They "aremade of a good clay,and are
wheel-turnedand kiln-dried;they have no surface,slip or glazingof any
I
The terms sorcery,sorcerer,and sorceresstranslatethe Hebrew words ki'uf, kegafim,mekagefim,
mekagef,and mekagefahand the Aramaicterms hargei,hargin,hardayya,and hargata.They are used
in this article to refer to ritual actions that rabbinic texts denounce, or that the incantation bowls
mention as actions performedby the enemies of the beneficiariesof the bowls. My use of these terms
is not intended to oppose "magic"to "religion"but, rather,to referto the ways in which these texts
define certain actions as forbidden. For a fuller discussion, see Lesses:55-61.
Lesses:Exe(o)rcisingPower 345
kind. They were domestic ware, intended for foods" (Montgomery:13).

Hunterwritesthat the bowls "werenot rituallymanufactured,but selected
from the repertoireof common potterywhich was thrown at local work-
shops and then inscribed"(1996: 222). They were "madeby local village
or town craftsmenwho threw the vessels as part of their range of mass-
produced, utilitarianpottery" (Hunter 1995a: 322). Hunter arguesthat
although the script on the bowls varies according to religious commu-
nity, the physicalcharacteristicsof the bowls remainthe same, indicating
"thatcommunities sharedthe same materialculture.The humble house-
hold vessels, which were selected from the stocks of local potters by the
practitionerswho wrote the incantationtexts, are graphicevidenceof the
integrationof the distinctandemergentcommunities:Jewish,pagan,gnostic
and Christian,withinthe largereconomyof SasanidMesopotamia"(1995a:
333-334).
The incantationbowls were found in or nearhouses (in the courtyard
or on the threshold)or in graveyards,usuallyburiedupside down (Mont-
gomery: 41; Naveh and Shaked 1987: 16, 152-153). Montgomery (42),
who published forty bowls from Nippur in southern Iraq, remarksthat
there are often four bowls with identical inscriptions placed in the four
cornersof a room.2The bowls name both women and men as beneficia-
ries of the incantations or as malevolent forces to be protected against,
and it appears,as I discuss further,that both women and men were in-
volved in the production of the texts. Throughthe incantationsinscribed
upon the bowls their makersintended to protect againstdangerousand
evil human and demonic figures,includinggroupsof human women and
2 Hilprecht writes,"Forthe presentit maysufficeto statethatmostof the one hundredbowls

excavatedwhileI wason the scenewerefoundupsidedownin the ground.... It is veryevident
thattheyhadbeenplacedthusintentionally, in orderto preventthe demonsadjuredby the spiral
inscriptionon the innerfaceof mostof thevases,fromdoinganyharmto thepeoplelivingin the
neighborhood.Sometimestwo bowlsfacingone anotherhadbeencementedtogetherwithbitu-
men.In onecaseaninscribedhen'seggwasconcealedunderthebowl"(447-448).M.Geller(1980:
53) pointsout thatone bowlthathe publishedrefersto the practiceof buryingthe bowlupside
downatthethresholdof thehouse:"Iampressingthispressuponthematthistime,andI bury[it]
againstthem.... I am goingandinvertingit in the thresholdof his house."
Thebowlsareheirto a longtraditionof ritualpracticein Mesopotamia involvingthe use of in-
cantationsandthedepositingof bowlsin or neardwellings.Intheirexcavations atNippur,Gibson,
Armstrong, andMcMahonreportfindinguninscribed bowlsburiedin everyperiodfromthe Early
Dynasticthroughthe Achaemenid, invertedovereachother,againstthewallsandneardoorways:
"Weareconvincedthatthesebowlsetsweredepositedeitheras foundationofferingsor to ward
off illnessor othermisfortunes..... andthinkthatthe buryingof bowlsfor apotropaicpurposes
wasa generalpracticethroughoutMesopotamia. Aramaicincantation bowlsof SasanianandEarly
Islamictimesweremerelyan elaborated versionof the practice"(24-26;see alsoGibson1978:7,
56,58, 107,110).Huntersuggestssimilarlythat"incantation bowlscontinuea heritagewhichharks
backto the protectiveritualsof the Neo-Assyrian andBabylonian periodswhenapotropaicfigu-
rineswereburiedat variouspointsin bothprivateandpublicbuildings"(1998:101n.27).
346 Journalof theAmericanAcademyof Religion
men, femaleliliths, male lilin (the male counterpartsof liliths), and other
named classes of dangerous demons who were believed to cause illness
and other misfortunes and who attackedmen and women sexually and
killed children. Bowls written for specificallyfemale biological or social
concerns (pregnancy,childbirth,and erotic desire) are in the minority,
and by and largeboth women and men used them for the same purposes.
In an incantation on one of the Nippur bowls (Montgomery: 190),
KomiS,the daughter of Mahlapta,demands that several liliths go away
"fromher house and from her dwellingand from Kalletaand from ArtaS-
riat her children."Using terms known from the rabbinicdivorce docu-
ment, the get, she ordersthe demons to leave:
This dayfromamongall days,years,and generationsof the world,I,
Komi'batMahlapta,havedivorcedanddismissedandbanishedyou-
Youlilith,lilithof thedesert,ghost,andkidnapper.You,thethreeof you,
the fourof you, the five of you, aresentout naked,andnot clad.Your
hairis disheveled,thrownoveryourbacks.... I havedecreedagainstyou,
withthe cursethatJoshuabenPerohiasentagainstyou. I adjureyouby
the gloryof yourfatherandby the gloryof yourmother.Receiveyour
getsandyourdivorces,getsanddivorcesthatweresentin the cursethat
JoshuabenPerahiasentagainstyou,aboutwhichJoshuabenPerahiasaid
to you, "agethascometo you fromacrossthe sea.In it is foundwritten,
whosemother'snameis Palhanandwhosefather'snameis Pelahdad
Lilith.Hearandgoawayanddonotliewithher,withKomivbatMahllapta,
not in herhouseandnot in herdwelling."
This incantationreflectsthe beliefthatlilithsand lilis(maledemons) could
become attachedto people in a kind of pervertedmarriage,which could
then be dissolved by use of a divorce document. It credits Joshua ben
Perahia,a first-centuryB.C.E. rabbinic leader (m. 'Abot 1:6), with for-
mulating a special form of the get that would apply to the demons. Like
the rabbinicget, it gives the exact specificationfor the lilith whom it dis-
misses, in this case the names of her mother and father(also demons). In
this incantation, Komis appearsunder her own name as the agent who
expels the liliths to prevent them from harming her or members of her
family. Although the incantation uses elements of the rabbinic divorce
document, it is not part of rabbinicliterature;instead,it seems to reflect
knowledge in a wider community of certainaspectsof rabbiniclore that
could be used for protectiveincantations.
From the mid-third to the early seventh centuries C.E., southern
Mesopotamia,calledBabyloniain Jewishsourcesof the time, was ruledby
the SassanianPersiandynasty,whichestablishedZoroastrianismas the state
religion.The Sassaniankings were overthrownby Muslim conquerorsin
the mid-seventh century(Neusner 1972b:118), but this did not have any
immediateeffecton the practiceof bowl magic,which continuedthrough-

out the seventhandeighthcenturies.JewslivedamongZoroastrians,Chris-
tians, Mandaeans,Manichaeans,and followersof the ancient Babylonian
deities.In Sassaniantimes Jewsmadeup betweenone-eighthand one-tenth
of the total populationof six to eight million people, dwellingparticularly
in the heavilysettledareawherethe Euphratesand TigrisRiverscome clos-
est to each other (Neusner 1966:241-250). Jewishcommunities had been
established in Mesopotamia from the sixth century B.C.E., when King
Nebuchadnezzarexiled Jewsfrom Jerusalemand Judeathere (Gafni 1990:
20). Boththe BabylonianTalmudand the incantationbowls provideample
evidencethatJewslivedamongandhadsocialandcommercialcontactswith
their non-Jewishneighbors(Gafni 1990:149-176;Hunter 1995a).To take
just one example,recentexcavationsin Nippurhave found fivebowls bur-
ied in a courtyard,threein Aramaic(two for membersof the same family)
and two in Mandaicfor two brothers.As Hunterremarks,"Theplacement
of the Aramaicand Mandaicincantationbowls stronglysuggeststhat two
families, one possibly Jewishand the other Mandaean,shared adjacent
domestic quarters"(1995a: 333). Therefore,althoughthis articlefocuses
on Jewsandthe Jewishmatrixof certainritualpractices,thesepracticeswere
sharedwith the other peoples among whom Jewslived.
By the thirdcenturyC.E.,the influenceof rabbinicJudaismhad begun
to be felt among the Jewsof Mesopotamia;rabbinicacademies,known as
yeshivot,were established,which centered their study on the Bible, the
Mishnah(the early-third-centuryPalestiniancompendiumof Jewishlaw),
and the midrash(interpretationof narrativeand legalbiblicaltexts) (Neus-
ner 1965: 113-163). Rabbisserved in the administrativeand legal struc-
tures of the Jewishcommunity, headed by the Resh Galuta,or Exilarch,
who governedlimited areasof Jewishlife under the authorityof the Sas-
sanian kings (Neusner 1966:92-125). The BabylonianTalmud, redacted
in the sixth century, is the highly edited record of discussions and deci-
sions of the rabbisof the yeshivotand law courts who sought to influence
other Jewsto live accordingto their biblicalinterpretationsand legal rul-
ings (Gafni 1990: 159;Neusner 1968:95-102). Rabbinicwritingsreflecta
self-consciousnessof the role of the rabbi, the master-disciple relation-
ship, and the processof transmittingtraditions,editingthem, and redact-
ing them. Alongsidethe rabbinicform of Judaismtaughtin the academies,
there persistedmore ancient BabylonianJewishpracticesand beliefs.The
incantationbowls thus preservea glimpse into a particularareaof Jewish
culture not ruled by the rabbis:spells and rituals that ordinary people
employed to rid themselvesof demons and the ills they caused. Rabbinic
writings themselves, as we have alreadyseen, also at times reflect non-
rabbinicforms of Jewishculture and practice.
Scholars of Judaism in Palestine and the Roman diaspora in the

Roman-Byzantineperiod have often employed literaryand archeologi-
cal evidence together, for example, in reconstructingthe history and de-
velopment of the synagogue(e.g., Gutmann;L. Levine 1987, 1992, 2000).
Increasingly,both types of evidence have also been used by scholars in-
terestedin employinggenderas a categoryof analysis,such as Bernadette
Brooten on women in the ancient synagogueand, more recently,Miriam
Peskowitzon gender,work, and rabbinicJudaismand CynthiaBakeron
women and notions of space in Roman Palestine. Scholars have rarely
made use, however,of both types of evidence in the study of Babylonian
Jewry,primarilybecause of the scarcityof archeologicalevidence (Gafni
1990: 159, 1995: 223; see also Boyarin: 11-14). Most scholars of the
BabylonianTalmud (with the exception of JacobNeusner [1970a, 1970b:
217-243], B. Levine,and Gafni [1990:89, 172-176]) have not referredto
the incantation bowls. Scholarsof the incantationbowls do refer to the
BabylonianTalmud and other rabbinictexts in their attemptsto decipher
the bowls and to understandthem linguistically,but they do not usually
try to go beyond the concernsof epigraphyor philology, for most articles
on the incantationbowls are publicationsof the bowls and not synthetic
or comparativestudies.
This articleengagesboth talmudicdiscussionsand archaeologicalfinds
to explore two distinct but related topics: how some actual women in
SassanianBabyloniaemployed ritualpracticesto gain power (such as the
recitationof incantationsand the use of bowls with incantationswritten
on them) and how some rabbis(and perhapssome bowl writers)thought
about women's relationshipto ritualpower. In other words, I am inter-
ested in both actual practiceand ideology about practice.This neat dis-
tinction, however, immediatelyfalls apartbecause the evidence that tells
about women's involvementin ritualpower,whetherrabbinictexts or the
incantationbowls, alreadyincorporatesideasaboutwomen's relationship
to (bad) sorceryor (helpful) incantations(sometimes at the same time).
For example,Abaye'sfoster mother'sstatementthat a certainroot can be
used against kegafim(sorcery)is not neutralbecause kedafimis alreadya
genderednotion ("most women are involved in sorcery").In its present
setting in the BabylonianTalmud it alreadyparticipatesin rabbinicgen-
der ideology. Similarly, some of the bowl texts denounce the "raging
women," or all of the women in one's family, for having used sorcery
against the person named on the bowl. Although these lists sometimes
also include male family members, women predominate. The incanta-
tion bowls do not contain explicit statements about women's relation-
ship to sorcery, unlike rabbinic texts, but they also, in some cases, pro-
vide a gendered view of sorcery. My examination of these two types of
evidence, therefore,carefullyattends to their gender ideologies, both to

revealhow the ideologies work and to see how ideology may play a part
in creatingcertaintypes of ritual practice.
The inquiry that follows will be guided by the following substantive
and methodologicalquestions:How wereJewishwomen beneficiariesand
practitioners of the common late antique use of amulets, recitation of
incantations,and performanceof adjurationalrituals?What does mate-
rial culture,such as the incantationbowls, revealabout women's partici-
pation in such rituals?What does literaryevidence,such as that furnished
by the BabylonianTalmud,tell aboutwomen's participation?How should
rabbinicstatementsbe understood?What problems of interpretationdo
these two types of evidence present, and how can they be employed to-
gether?This article,therefore,attemptsto make use of both talmudicdis-
cussions and archaeologicalfinds to discuss the involvement of women
in malevolentsorceryand protectiveritualin the BabylonianJewishcom-
munity and to contributeto the inquiry into whether and how it is pos-
sible to know about Jewishwomen's religiousexperienceand ritualprac-
tice in late antiquity.
"MOST WOMEN ARE SORCERESSES"

My discussionof rabbinicunderstandingsof the involvementof women
in sorcerybegins with rabbinicexegesisof the crucialbiblicaltext, Exod.
22:17, which reads,"Youshall not permit a sorceressto live."About this
verse both the Babylonianand the PalestinianTalmudssay, "Thelaw re-
fers to both man and woman" (b. Sanh. 67a; y. Sanh. 7.19, 25d). The
BabylonianTalmud then asks, "Ifthat is so, then why does Scripturesay
a sorceress'?Because most women are involved in sorcery."The Pales-
tinian Talmud gives a slightly differentstatement:"Rather,the Torah is
teaching you the ordinary way of the world, because most women are
sorceresses."Are these assertions sociological statements, merely com-
menting on the relativedistributionof men and women in the practiceof
magic?Or, as EmmanuelLevinas(142) suggests,aretheytryingto saythat
there is something particularly"feminine"about magic?Is there some-
thing in women's nature that makes them more susceptible to magical
practices?Or perhaps,as I will suggest, does the social definition of sor-
cery made by the rabbisin ByzantinePalestineand SassanianBabylonia
between the fourth and the seventh centuries inherently include some-
thing "female"or "feminine"in it?
The biblicalversethat servesas the springboardfor this entire discus-
sion refers explicitly to a female transgressor,the mekagefah.Does the
biblical text describea social realityin which those who perform sorcery
(ki'uf) are femaleand not male, or does it constructsorceryitself as femi-

nine? Biblicalscholars (Cassuto:290; Childs:478; Clements: 145; Noth:
185) hold that the feminine term reflectsa preponderanceof femaleprac-
titioners. Sarnaarguesthat "the feminine specificationhere probablyre-
flects a historical reality that the clandestine operators of this officially
outlawedcult were mostly women" (136), but evidencefrom other bibli-
cal texts calls this conclusion into question.3 As evidence for female
specializationin magic,he citesthe incidentof Sauland the femalemedium
of En-Dor (1 Sam. 28:3-25) and Ezekiel'sdenunciationof femalediviners
(Ezek. 13:17-23). Despite these three examples,most legal and narrative
passagesin the Bibledo not assumethat only women performsorcery.Lev.
20:27 specifiesthat both men and women who performrelatedforbidden
actions, such as divining by a ghost ('ob) or by a familiarspirit (yid'oni),
shouldbe put to deathby stoning.Deut. 18:10lists many practicesthat Is-
raelites should not perform, specificallymentioning the male sorcerer
(mekaefJ)among them. The sorcerersof Egyptare male (Exod. 7:11), and
in severalplaces the prophetsdenounce divinersand sorcerersin general
termsthat could referto both women and men (Isa.8:19-20;Jer.27:9;Mal.
3:5;Mic. 5:11).Thus,the biblicalpassagesreferringto forbiddenritualprac-
tices do not assumethat women were the only practitioners.
Earlybiblical interpretersalso treatedthe question of whether Exod.
22:17 refersonly to women or to both women and men. Is only the fe-
male sorceresssubject to execution, or does the verse include the male
sorcerer?Does the verse tell us something special about women as ritual
performers?The earliest translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew to
Greek,the Septuagint(third-centuryB.C.E.Egypt),seems to assumethat
both women and men can be sorcerers,for it states the injunction in the
plural: "You shall not keep sorcerers [pharmakous]safe" (Rahlfs: 124).
The ancient translationsof the Bible into Aramaic,the Targums,differin
their interpretations.Targum Onkelos (Sperber:126) translatesit as re-
ferringonly to women-"You shall not permit the sorceressto live"-an
interpretationthat TargumNeophyti and TargumPseudo-Jonathandis-
pute. TargumNeophyti (Diez Macho 2: 145; McNamara,Hayward,and
Maher 2: 96) interpretsthe verse explicitlyas referringto both men and
women: "My people, children of Israel,you shall not allow a sorcereror
a sorceressto live."
3 The identificationof sorcerywith women in Exod. 22:17 may be a reflectionof a more ancient
Babyloniantendencyto see kigufasa femalepractice.In the BabylonianantiwitchcraftseriesMaql4,the
sorcererand sorceress(ka?adpu/ka??aptu) performdestructivemagic;they are antisocialand motivated
by malice and evil intent:"Althoughlists of witchesincludeboth male and female forms,the witch is
usuallydepictedas a woman. She is normallypresentedas one who uses forms of destructivemagicto
harm other human beings and whose purposeis essentiallymalevolent"(Abusch:31).
Two sourcesfromthe earlieststrataof rabbiniclegalliterature,the

MishnahandMekiltade-RabbiIshmael,alsobroadenthe interpretation
of thebiblicalpassage.TheMishnahusuallyspecifiesthelawwithoutcit-
ing the relevantbiblicaltexts,whereasthe Mekilta,fromthe late third
century,is a legalmidrash,or explication,of Exodusthatcommentson it
line by line. Bothdocumentsstem fromthe rabbinicsagesof Palestine
(Strackand Stemberger: 278-279).The Mishnah(m. Sanh.7:4),relying
on thelistof forbiddenpractitioners of Deut.18:10,liststhosewhoareto
be executedbystoning,includingthe sorcerer(mekasef)andothersguilty
of "magical"actssuch as the soothsayerand the diviner(ba'al 'obwe-
yid'oni).Therefore, it doesnot mentionthesorceress.BecausetheMekilta
(Nezikin17) commentsdirectlyon Exod.22:17,it noticesthe gender
specification of the female"sorceress" andinterpretsit explicitlyto mean
thatbothmen andwomenareliableforpunishment:"'Asorceressshall
not live':the lawrefersto both manandwoman"(HorovitzandRabin:
309).
Theeditorsof boththe Jerusalem andthe Babylonian Talmudsknew
thistraditionfromtheMekilta(orsomethingverymuchlikeit) butseem
disturbedby theTorah'sexplicitreferenceto the "sorceress" andarethus
to
unwilling accept the Mekilta's statement of the law as the onlyimpor-
tantlessonthatthe verseteaches.Instead,theyofferan additionalinter-
pretationof the verse:when it says "sorceress,"it specificallymeans
women,not womenor men.Bothversionsinsistthatthe versetellsus a
generalfactaboutwomen-most of themarenaturally,in the ordinary
wayof the world,sorceresses.
Theseprogrammatic statementsarenot alonein assertingwomen's
peculiar association with magic.Otherrabbinicstatementsaffirmthe
intrinsicconnectionbetweenwomen and sorcery,even (or especially)
amongJewishwomen(m. 'Abot2.7;Soperimch. 15;y. Qidd.4.11,66c).
Twostatementsattributed to Palestiniansagesin the Babylonian Talmud
the
particularlyimplicate "daughters of Israel"in magic. One passage
teachesthatfood left on the roadmustbe pickedup andnot justpassed
by:"RabbiJolhanan said,in the nameof RabbiShimonben Yohai,this
wasnot taughtexceptaboutthe earliergenerations, whenthe daughters
of Israeldid not indulgefreelyin sorcery,but in the lattergenerations,
now thatthe daughtersof Israelindulgefreelyin sorcery,we shouldpass
by"(b. 'Erub.64b) becausetheymighthaveusedthe food for sorcery.4
4 In the other versions of this same passage, there is no reference to the "daughtersof Israel"
performingmagic;see t. Pesah 2.15; Lev. Rab. 37:3;y. Avod. Zar. 1:9, 7b; and y. Dem. 3:3, 13b. The
claim that the "daughtersof Israel"might have engaged in sorcery with food found by the road
seems to have originated in the BabylonianTalmud.
Another statement,this one referringto smellingspices as one walksby a

town, also cites the question of sorcery:"Our rabbis taught: if one was
walkingoutside a city and he smelled an odor [of spices]:If the majority
[of the city's residents]are idol-worshippers,one does not say a blessing;
if the majorityare Jews,one says a blessing. RabbiYosi says, even if the
majority are Jewsone does not say a blessing, because the daughtersof
Israelburn incense for purposesof magic"(b. Ber. 53a). If two women sit
at a crossroads,facing one another, they must be engaged in magic (b.
Pesah. 11la). Statementsby Babyloniansages of the fourth centuryrefer
to specific magicalacts that women perform (b. Git. 54a;b. Pesah. 111a;
b. Sanh. 67b, 100b) and a curse that one can use against sorceresses(b.
110a). EarlyPalestiniansagesestablishedthe idea of women's ubiq-
Pesa.h
uity in magical enterpriseson a firm foundation, and later Babylonian
sages took up this theme and developed it.
Do the passagesascribingmagicalactivityto women bearany relation
to what some women were actuallydoing in Babyloniain the fourth to
seventh centuries C.E.?As several scholars have recently suggested, the
preceding talmudic passages do not necessarilyrepresentsocial reality;
rather,they present an ideologicallymotivatedview that opposes rabbis,
as the holders of legitimate supernaturalpower, to women, illegitimate
claimants to similar power (Bar-Ilan: 18-20; Fishbane: 28, 34; Kern-
Ulmer;Seidel;Veltrie 1997:66-68). Women are portrayedas malevolent
figuresusing illegitimatemeans in contestswith rabbis.Rabbinicwritings
do not call what the rabbis do sorcery or magic (Bar-Ilan:20; Neusner
1969:355-356, 1970b: 180). If they performactions that look like magic,
they only demonstratethe powers they have gained through their purity
and devotion to Torah (Neusner 1968:118-126, 1969:355-362). Women
who are reputed to perform the same acts as the rabbis are condemned
for practicingmagic or sorcerybecause they do not belong to the struc-
ture of rabbinic authority and, in fact, threaten it because of their out-
sider status (Fishbane:28, 34).
Rabbinicdiscussions of kegafim,however, sometimes portrayrabbis
or other men engagingin what they would considermagicalacts if done
by others without receiving the same condemnation. For example, by
means of rituals in the cemetery (referredto by the circumlocution "he
did what he did"), the third-centuryBabyloniansage Rav confirms his
belief that most deathsresultfrom the evil eye (b. B. Mes. 107b). The dis-
cussion of the laws of kesafimin tractate Sanhedrin of the Babylonian
Talmud touches on the question of whether the rabbissaw themselvesas
practicing magic: "Abayesaid, 'The laws of sorcery are like the laws of
Shabbat.Some [acts] are punishableby stoning, some are exempt from
punishment althoughthey are forbiddento perform,and there are [acts]
that are permitted from the beginning ... like Rav and Rav
Oshaya.EveryFridaythey would occupy themselveswith the laws of cre-
.Hanina
ation and a third-growncalf would be createdfor them, and they would
eat it" (b. Sanh. 67b; cf. the parallelin b. Sanh. 65b). Abaye admits that
use of the laws of creationto createa calf is a form of sorcerybut claims
that it is entirelypermitted,unlike the acts of one who actuallydoes sor-
cery or practices illusions. This same discussion also provides another
frameworkthat permitsrabbisto engagein sorcery:for the sake of learn-
ing. Rabbi Eliezer can fill a field with cucumbers merely by uttering "a
word"and subsequentlypluck them up by "aword" (b. Sanh.68a). This,
however,is not sorcerybut, rather,an attemptto gain wisdom; as it says,
"Itis taught,the one who does the deed [of sorcery]is liable,but in order
to learn is different,for the mastersaid, 'do not learn in order to do'; do
not learn in order to do, but to understandand to teach."Comparealso
the tradition (b. Menah. 65a; b. Sanh. 17a) that men skilled in sorcery
should be membersof the Sanhedrin,not in orderto do sorcerybut to be
able to judge cases dealingwith sorcery.
The questionstill stands,however,of whetherwomen, in fact,engaged
in ritualactions that the rabbisconsideredsorcery.SimchaFishbane(35-
37) suggests that there might be some social realitybehind the rabbinic
ascription of magic to women. He relies in part on the account of the
conversationbetween Amemarand the "chiefof the women who do sor-
cery"(b. Pesahl.110a). He interpretsthis referenceand others that men-
tion groups of sorceressesas evidence for the existence of such groups,
condemned by the rabbisfor doing magic but actuallyengagingin their
own kind of ritual or religious practiceto satisfytheir own needs. Fish-
bane'sapproach,however,is as unsophisticatedas that of late-nineteenth-
century Jewish scholar Ludwig Blau, who wrote, "As in all times and
among all peoples, magic was also among Jewspre-eminently the busi-
ness of women" (23). (See also Urbach [100], who promulgatesthe same
uncriticalreadingof the talmudicsources).We cannottakethesetalmudic
statementssimply at facevalue,but neithercan we treatthem as referring
only to a literarytopos or as presentinga single, monolithic viewpoint on
women's involvementin magic and ritualpractices.Instead,we must read
them critically,againstother evidence that is relevantto the discussions
of magicin the Talmud-the archaeologicalevidenceof incantationbowls
from Babylonia.
RABBIS AND INCANTATION BOWLS

An important question to raise before making the comparison is
whetherthesetwo formsof evidencerelateto one another.Werethe incan-
tation bowls and the BabylonianTalmud produced in the same cultural

milieu?Do they evidencesimilarbeliefsaboutdemons,ritualpractices,and
spells?Would they provideevidenceabout the same kind of practitioner?
Thereare,in fact,manybeliefsand imagessharedbetweenthe incantation
bowls and talmudicpassagesabout demons and magic (B. Levine).There
is a particularlystrikingoverlapthattouchesdirectlyon our topic.The curse
that Amemarlearns (b. Pesah. 110a) occurs in fragmentaryform on sev-
eral incantationbowls, most notablyon one publishedby CyrusGordon
(1934c:326-328 [bowl C, 11.3-4]), whereone phraseof the curseappears:
"dungin brokenbasketsin your mouth, women who do sorcery"(Gordon
notes the connection in his commentary).Regardlessof the origin of this
curse (whetheramong the rabbis,lay Jewishsociety,or non-Jews),the fact
that it appearsboth in the Talmudand in the incantationbowl shows that
it was a piece of culturalknowledgesharedby the writerof this particular
bowl and some in the rabbinicclass.
Another important connection between the incantation bowls and
rabbinicliteratureis the fact that severaluse rabbinicdivorceformulasto
exorcisedemons;the divorceformulaseven mention the name of a rabbi,
RabbiJoshuaben Perahia.His name is mentioned on six bowls published
by Montgomery (154 [bowl 8], 161 [bowl 9], 190 [bowl 17], 225 [bowl
32], 230 [bowl 33], 231 [bowl 34]). It is striking,however,that talmudic
literaturedoes not mention the incantationbowls. An extensive discus-
sion of amulets, centeredon the issue of whether they can be carriedon
Shabbat,does not referto the incantationbowls (b. Sabb.60a, 61a-62a).
The text mentions "an amulet in writing or an amulet of roots" (b. Sabb.
61a). Why they were not mentioned is impossible to know: whether ig-
norance, deliberate suppression, lack of interest, or irrelevanceto the
particulardiscussion (for the bowls were buried and not carried).I be-
lieve, nonetheless, that we can consider the bowls and the Babylonian
Talmud as products of the same culturalmilieu.
"MURDERESS DAUGHTER OF MURDERESS":

THE FORCES OF EVIL
Almost one-half of the 154 incantation bowls whose publications I
examinedmentions "lilith"or "liliths"at leastonce; about one-thirdmen-
tions other female evil spirits (often the same bowl mentions "lilith,"so
that just over one-half of the entire group mentions any kind of female
evil spirit);and about 10 percent mention evil human women.5Ten per-
5I examined the publications of incantationbowls in Aramaic,Syriac,and Mandaic, attempting

to be exhaustive in my coverage of the Aramaic bowls and less so in the case of the Syriac and
Lesses: Power
Exe(o)rcising 355
cent make use of the divorce formula to expel the demons. About one-
thirdof the bowls includesmalevolentincantationsdirectedagainstnamed
or unnamed human beings who were believed to have worked sorcery
againstthose named on the bowls. Six are directedagainstspecificnamed
individuals(threefemale,threemale) who cursedthe clientsof the bowls.
In addition to these, the formulas on several bowls specify groups of
women of some sort, particularlyfamily members,as enemies who have
cursedthe clients.One formularecurson severalbowls, in this basicform:
"Upset is the curse of the mother and the daughter,of the daughter-in-
law and the mother-in-law,whether distant or near, whether abiding in
the steppe or abiding in the town or abiding on the shore."Gordon has
published severalbowls that name groups of women as the evil practi-
tioners. One (Gordon 1951:306-309) refersto "womenwho do sorcery,"
using the same phrase as found in the talmudic curse:"Crushedare the
evil sorceriesand mighty spells, crushed are the women who do sorcery
[nelei harshata],they, their sorcery,their spells, their curses, their invo-
cations, from the four borders of his house." Men are also sometimes
named as members of the malevolentfamily group.
Given the formulaicnatureof these phrases,however,it is difficultto
conclude that the client in each case sought protectionfrom all the family
membersnamed. Such phrasingsupposesthat all the women in the fam-
ily, or women in general,aredangerousforcesthatone must guardagainst.
Nonetheless,the incantationbowls do not portraywomen as the supreme
magicalthreat.In the bowl texts groups of women are only one source of
danger,in contrastto the talmudic passagesthat view all women as sor-
ceressesor potential sorceresses.The talmudicpassagesmay reflectmore
widely held views in SassanianBabyloniaabout the threat of groups of
sorceresses,but they focus on and emphasizethis threatin a way that the
incantationbowls do not.
Of the evil femalefigureson the bowls, the most prominent and well-
definedis the lilith,eitheras a singlehatedfigureor as a memberof a group
of liliths or liliths and other evil spirits.The liliths appear,first of all, in
long lists of evil spiritsthat the client wishes to expel or exorcise.In these
lists,they do not possessspecificcharacteristicsthat distinguishthem from
other evil figures, and, in fact, the texts often referto the "maleand fe-
male liliths" (e.g., Montgomery:41 [bowl 6]). In addition to the liliths'
appearancein the demon lists, the bowl texts also accuse the liliths of
Mandaic bowls, for Jewswere not likely to have been responsible for these bowls (although there
are instancesin which these bowls make use of formulasfrom JewishAramaicbowls). On this point,
see Gafni 1990: 174. In quoting the bowls published by Montgomery, I have consulted two articles
by J. N. Epstein for corrections.
haunting people in dreams at night or in visions during the day (e.g.,

Montgomery:117 [bowl 1]), of appearingto men in the likenessof women
and to women in the likeness of men, and of attemptingto have sexual
relationswith them. One text reads, "I adjureyou, all kinds of liliths,...
who appear to human beings, to men in the likeness of women and to
women in the likeness of men, and they lie with human beings at night
and during the day" (Montgomery: 117 [bowl 1, 11.12-13]). Severalof
the bowl texts also command the demons to stayawayfrom the bedrooms
of the individualsor couples (Montgomery:146 [bowl 7, 1.7], 154 [bowl
8, 1. 5], 161 [bowl 9, 1. 8], 195 [bowl 19, 1. 2]). According to the bowls,
therefore, one prominent characteristicof the liliths is that they attack
people in the sexualand reproductiverealmof life. It is no wonder, then,
that some of the writersof the bowl incantationsemployed the language
of divorce to rid themselvesof the liliths.
The demons, including the liliths and the lilin, also attack children.
For example,one bowl text adjuresa whole list of demons, including the
"evil spirits, raging furies, and the male and female liliths," "not to kill
their children"(Montgomery:141 [bowl 6, 11.9-10]). One of the bowls
accuses"Hablasthe lilith, granddaughterof Zarnithe lilith,"of "striking
boys and girls"(Montgomery:168 [bowl 11, 1. 6]). Another text is more
explicit about what this lilith will do to children:she "destroysand kills
and tearsand stranglesand eatsboys and girls"(Montgomery:193 ([bowl
18, 1.6]). A similardescriptionof a femaledemon who kills childrencalls
her "Murderessdaughterof Murderess";she is the "Strangler,who kills
the young in the womb of their mothers; she is called Slayer,and their
father is Destroyer"(Montgomery:238 [bowl 36, 11.4-5]).
The characterizationof the lilith or the lili (in the singularor plural)
as seducersof adults and slayersof childrenhas a long prehistoryin an-
cient Babylonianreligion. Scurlockwrites, "The lilu-demons and their
female counterpartsthe lilitu or ardat lili-demons were hungry for vic-
tims because they had once been human; they were the spirits of young
men and women who had themselves died young" (153). The passage
continues,"Lilh-and lilitu-demonsslippedthroughwindowsinto people's
houses looking for victims to take the place of husbandsand wives whom
they themselves never had" (154-155; see also Hunter 1998: 102). An-
other, related demoness was Lama'tu, who threatened newborn babies
and "hada disagreeabletaste for human flesh and blood" (Scurlock:155).
The figures of the lilith and lili on the incantation bowls appearto be a
combinationof these two ancientevil figures-they both seduce men and
women and attackchildren (van der Toorn, Becking,and van der Horst:
974). The referencesto "maleand female liliths"also seem to reflectthe
ancient conception that these evil demons could appearin either male or
female form to afflict,respectively,women or men.
The lilith is not a particularlyprominent figurein rabbinicliterature,
but the few referencesto her point to a figurevery much like the female
lilith of the incantationbowls. (The identificationof Lilithas the firstwife
of Adam is post-talmudic,appearingfirst in the eighth-centuryAlphabet
of Ben Sira [Stern and Mirsky: 183-184].) Rabbi Hanina refers to the
sexual danger that the lilith offers to men: "It is forbidden to sleep in a
house alone, and whoever sleeps in a house alone, a lilith seizes him"
(b. Sabb. 151b). In b. 'Erub. 18b, Adam is credited with begetting de-
monic children, but his female partner or partners are not mentioned.
R. Jeremiahb. Elazarsays, "Allthe years that Adam was in seclusion, he
wasbegettingspirits[ruhin]and demons [ edin]and lilin,as it says,'Adam
lived one hundred and thirty years and sired in his image, accordingto
his form' (Gen 5:3)-which implies that until that time he did not beget
accordingto his form."Eve, likewise,is creditedwith giving birth to de-
mons from demon fathers (Gen. Rab. 20.11, 24.6).
Two rabbinicreferencesto the lilith point to her physicalappearance:
she has wings and long hair-"Rav Judahsaid in the name of Samuel:An
abortion with the likeness of a lilith, its mother is impure because of the
birth, for it is a child, but it has wings"(b. Nid. 24b). One of the cursesof
Eve is that "she grows hair like a lilith" (b. 'Erub. 100b). Drawingsof the
liliths or demonesseson the incantationbowls bear out these two details
of physical appearance.Montgomery (bowl 14) pictures a demon with
bound winglike arms, breasts,and hair standing straightup on the head
(pl. 15). Bowl 20 featuresa demonic figurewith long curlyhair and wing-
like arms that seem to be bound to its sides (pl. 22). Bowl 30 has a de-
monic figure with outstretchedarms, long hair, and what may be wings
on the sides (pl. 26). (See also Gordon 1951:313;Harperet al.:45; Hunter
1998;Naveh and Shaked1993: 113-114, 118-119, 122-123.) The accusa-
tion that the lilith kills children, even her own, is also mentioned: "Be-
hold, he destroysthem like that lilith, who when she finds nothing, turns
againsther children"(Num. Rab. 16.25).
The long hair of the lilith is an importantfeatureof the exorcisticfor-
mulas on some bowls that use the language of the get. One type of for-
mula describesthe divorcedlilithsas nakedand with disheveledhair:"The
three of you, the four of you, the five of you; you are sent forthnaked and
not clad. Your hair is disheveled,thrown over your backs" (Montgom-
ery: 190 [bowl 17, 11.4-5]). The nakednessof the demoness is also a fea-
ture of some of the drawingson the incantationbowls. For example,one
bowl featuresa naked demoness with long hair, clearlydefined genitals,
and bound hands and feet (Montgomery:pl. 8). This drawingpoints to

the sexual meaning of the demonesses' nakedness.
The demonic image of the lilith's long, flowing, and disheveled hair
may shed some light on the significanceof women's uncovered hair in
rabbinicliterature.Accordingto the Mishnah,a man may divorcehis wife
without the money guaranteedto her upon divorce if she goes out of the
house with her head uncovered:"Theseare the women who are divorced
without their ketubbahmoney:The one who transgressesthe law of Moses
and Jewishlaw [dat yehudit].What is Jewishlaw?The one who goes out
with uncovered head" (m. Ketub. 7:6). Why? One reason is that a mar-
ried woman must cover her hair, in contrastto the unbound hair of the
woman suspected of adultery,the sotah (Num. 5:18). Sipre Num. Naso
11 says, "Thisteachesthe daughtersof Israelthat they should cover their
heads."If a woman coversher hair, it means that she is sexuallyavailable
only to her husbandand not to other men. (For a readingof the sotahas
the woman who similarlyembodies illicit female sexualityand serves as
the Other for rabbis as well as respectablewomen, see Peskowitz: 132-
139.) Only an unmarriedwoman can exhibit her sexuallyarousing hair
(M. Levine:117-118). As R. Sheshetsays(in referenceto the circumstances
under which a man may recite the Shema), "Hairin a woman is sexually
arousing ['ervah],as it is said, '[Ah, you are fair, my darling.] ... Your
hair is like a flock of goats' (Cant. 4:1)" (b. Ber. 24a).
Severaltexts identifythe need for women to cover their hair as a pun-
ishment for Eve'ssin in the Gardenof Eden (M. Levine:96, 106, 120). In
the courseof a discussionnamingthe ten cursesthat Evereceived,R. Dimi
identifiesthe lastthreecursesas follows:"Sheis wrappedup like a mourner,
banishedfrom the companyof all men, and confinedwithin a prison"(b.
'Erub.100b), meaningthat she must coverher hairwhen she goes out and
that a woman maintainsher honor by stayingin the house. The conclusion
that women's head coveringis punishment for Eve'ssin also occurs else-
where.See,for example,Gen. Rab. 17:8:"'Whydoes the man go forthwith
an uncoveredhead and the woman's head is covered?'[R.Yehoshua]told
them:'Asone who committeda sin and is ashamedin public,so the woman
goes forth with a coveredhead."'An anonymous opinion offers an alter-
nativeunderstandingof the lastthreecurses:"Ina baraita[traditionexter-
nal to the Mishnah] it was taught:she growshairlike a lilith, sits and uri-
nates like an animal,and servesas a cushion for her husband"(b. cErub.
100b).Thisstatementconnectswomen'sdemonicandbestialnatureto their
sexualsubordinationto men.
In the drawingson the incantationbowls the lilith's hair is unbound
and uncovered, and in the incantation texts her hair is disheveled and
thrown over her back. The liliths are dangerous,seductivecreatureswho
can beguile men and kill children.Althoughthey have some kind of mar-
riage relationshipwith men, they do not cover their hair as respectable
Jewishmarriedwomen should. Perhapswe can we readthe rabbinicstate-
ment that women grow their hairlike the lilith to mean that if a woman's
hair is visible and disheveled,she is not only an immodest, wild woman
whose husband cannot control her but also outside of the human realm
altogether-she has entered the realm of demons. Long, disheveled,un-
coveredhair is the demonic counterpartto the modest hidden hair of the
marriedwoman-perhaps implyingthat women's hair should be hidden
becauseof its demonic connotations.To be respectablea marriedwoman
must coverthe hairthat makesher like the demonic lilith, seducerof men
and slayerof children (M. Levine:104-105).
DIVORCING THE DEMONS

Becausethe writersof the bowl texts conceived of the human-demon
relationshipas a kind of marriage,it seems only logical that one way of
dissolving this relationshipwas through divorce, in this case using for-
mulasbasedon the Jewishdivorcedocument,the get.Threedifferenttypes
of divorce formulasoccur in the incantationbowls; in this section I sur-
vey them and discusstheir relationto rabbinicdivorceformulas.The first
type of formula,which occurs on five bowls (Geller 1976:425-427 [bowl
2]; Gordon 1937:92-93 [bowl K]; Montgomery:154-155 [bowl 8], 190
[bowl 17]; Naveh and Shaked 1987: 158-163 [bowl 5]), mentions three
elementsthat are importantto comparewith rabbinictexts:the divorced
demons arenaked,with hair flowingover theirbacks;the bowl texts expel
the demons in the name of R. Joshuaben Perahia;and they send a get to
the demons.The incantationstargetmore than one demon and name male
as well as female demons. One example is the incantationby Komiv,the
daughterof Mahlapta,that we have alreadyencountered (Montgomery:
190 [bowl 17]).
The second type of formula,which occurs on threebowls (Montgom-
ery: 161 [bowl 9], 225 [bowl 32], 230 [bowl 33]) exorcisesthe demons by
means of combinationsof the lettersof the divine name.It omits the naked
demonessesbut mentions R. Joshuaben Perahiaand the get (Montgom-
ery: 161). This bowl text also statesthat the get is accordingto the "lawof
the daughtersof Israel":"Andagain,do not appearto them, not in a dream
of the night and not in sleep of the day, for I dismiss and separateyou
with a get of dismissal and a writ of separationand a letter of removal,
accordingto the law of the daughtersof Israel."
The thirdtype of formula,which occurson nine bowls (Gordon 1934a,
1934b,1941:350-352; Hunter 1995b:68-72 [18N18];Layard:510 [text 1];
Lidzbarski:103-105 [textV]; Montgomery:168-170 [bowl 11], 193 [bowl

18], 209 [bowl 26]), retainsthe use of phrasesfrom the get but does not
mention R. Joshuaben Perahia;it does, however,bind "Bagdana,king of
demons and devils,greatrulerof liliths"(on Bagdana,see Shaked).One of
these bowls names a woman, Newanduchbat Kaphni,and her childrenas
the beneficiariesof the incantation;this text alsotellsthe lilithnot to lie with
her:"Ihavewrittenfor you and I haveseparatedyou from Newanduchbat
Kaphni,as demons [sedin]write divorcesto their wives, and they do not
returnto them. Takeyour [f. sing.] get from Newanduchbat Kaphniand
do not appearto her, neither during the day nor at night, and do not lie
with her, do not kill her sons and her daughters"(Montgomery:168).
As Montgomery (159) and B. Levine (348-351) have observed, all
threeformulasuse phrasesfromthe getthat a man givesto a woman whom
he wishes to divorce. The words attributed to KomiS ("This day from
among all days,years,and generationsof the world,I, KomiSbat Mahlapta,
have divorced and dismissed and banished you [f.], you [f.] lilith") are
very reminiscent of phrases from the standardform of the get (Albeck:
267-268): "I have divorced and dismissed and banished you, my wife,"
and "fromthis day and for all time."The second example (Montgomery:
161) includes phrasingthat the talmudictractateon divorce (m. Git. 9:3)
mandatesas the most crucialtext in the wording of the get. "RabbiJudah
says:[he must say] 'and this shallbe to you from me a writ of banishment
and a letter of divorce and a get of dismissal, to go and marryany man
that you please."'The standardformulation (Albeck:268) ends with the
phrase"accordingto the law of Moses and Israel,"whereasthis bowl text
refers instead to the law of the daughtersof Israel.The third type of di-
vorceformulaincludesthe phrase"[Ihavedismissedyou as] demons write
writs of divorce to their wives, and they do not return to them again"
(Montgomery:169). B. Levineremarks,"Thesense is that once banished,
divorced, so to speak,the female demons, principallyLilithherself,were
adjuredneverto returnto the household. This is consonantwith the legal
theory of the get accordingto which the husbanddismisseshis wife (ptr),
and expels her (trk) from his domicile, and leaves her outside of it, for-
bidden to return (gbq)"(349).
There are some crucial differences, however, between the rabbinic
divorce document and the formulasthat the bowl texts use. Accordingto
rabbinic law (based on Deut. 24:1-4), a man gives a get to his wife. A
6Compare,however,y. Ket.5:8,30b,and7:6,31c,whichshowthata womancouldplacea stipu-
lationin hermarriage contractthatwouldpermitherto initiatedivorce.Fordiscussion,see Fried-
man 1:312-346.Peskowitz(127-130)pointsout thata clausecouldsimilarlybe insertedinto the
ketubbah to requirethefatherto supporthis minorchildren,reflectingGreeklegalcustom,in con-
tradictionto earlyrabbiniclawthatexemptedthe fatherfromthe obligationof supportingthem.
womancannotgivea getto a man.6Withone divorcedocument,a man

can divorceonly one woman.The divorceformulasin the incantation
texts,on the otherhand,effecta divorcefrommanydemons,bothmale
and female;both men andwomenareresponsiblefor sendinga get;in
fourinstancesthe bowltextscite onlya woman'sname(Gordon1934b:
141-143;Montgomery: 168-170,190);and,in fact,sometimesthe entire
family responsible sendingtheget.Althoughtheincantations
is for phrase
the divorceformulasin legallanguage,theydo not fit the rabbinicspeci-
ficationsfor a humandivorcedocument.
PRACTITIONERS
Who madethe incantationbowlsandamulets?In whatkindof ritu-
als werethey used, and werewomen involvedin those rituals?Could
womenaswellasmenhavehadthenecessary knowledgeto writethebowls
or dictatethemto scribes?Hunter(1995b:75) commentsthatwomenas
wellasmencouldhavewrittentheincantation texts,eitherasprofessionals
traveling from town to town or as practitionersfor peoplein theirlocal
areas.Thesetextsarecomposedof a seriesof recurring formulasthatwere
transmittedin bothwrittenandoralforms.No rulingauthority,as faras
we know, determinedwhat the formulasshouldbe, and therewas no
processof editingor redactionof the formulasin a finalform,as we can
tellfromcomparingthe sameformulausedon differentbowls.If women
producedthe incantationbowls,theymusthavebelongedto the circles
of thosewho had sufficientknowledgeof a varietyof incantations.It is
difficultto determinehowwidespread knowledgeof the incantationfor-
mulaswas,although from parallelswith earlyJewishmysticalliterature,
it is clearthatsomeformulasweretakenfromesotericsources(Lesses: 351-
362).Otherformulas,of course,dependon the rabbinicdivorceformu-
las,thusindicatingsomekindof contactwithrabbinictraditionsandfor-
mulation of documents.It is not impossiblethat some bowls were
producedbyscribeswithexpertknowledge; yetothersappearto havebeen
writtenby peoplewithlittleknowledgeof scribalarts(Montgomery: 47).
Thepractitioner madeuseof a set of previouslyknownformulasandput
themtogetheraccordingto the needsof the client.Therewas scopefor
the creativityof the practitioner,bothin the formulaschosenandin the
waytheywereput together,but the textswerenot the uniquespontane-
ous creationsof eachpractitioner.
Boththe bowlsthemselvesandthe talmudicevidencehelpto answer
thequestionof whetherwomencouldhavebelongedto thecirclesof those
who knewthe incantationformulas.Oneof thebowlsis particularly sug-
gestiveof a femalepractitioner,especiallywhen comparedwith other
bowls using a similarformula.In this bowl (Montgomery:190 [bowl 17]),

Komi', the daughter of Malhlapta,speaks in the first person to benefit
herselfand her children.Two otherbowls found at Nippuruseverysimilar
formulas,but the client does not speakin the first person (Gordon 1937:
92-93; Montgomery:154-155 [bowl 8]; cf. Geller 1976:425-427; Naveh
and Shaked 1987: 158-163 [bowl 5]). Both bowls are for the benefit of a
couple, but we have no idea who uttered the incantation or wrote the
bowls;it could be one of the clients that the bowl names, or it could be an
unnamed "professional"practitioner.Given that the other instances of
this formula do not name the practitionerin any obvious fashion, it is
particularlystrikingthat Komis speaks in the first person, and it is pos-
sible that she was activelyinvolved in creatingthis bowl, either reciting
the incantationin a ritual,inscribingthe incantationon the bowl herself,
or dictatingit to a scribe.
Although rare, the first-personstyle recursin other incantation for-
mulas. In two bowls published by Gordon (1941: 342-344, 1978: 233-
237), the women named on the bowls utter a formulathat refersto going
up on the roof and speakingwith the demons. Another first-personfor-
mula appearsin two of the Montgomerybowls; on one of them, a man
and a woman utter the incantation in turn: "I, Yezidadbar Izdanduch,
have come in my own might. .... Again, whereveryou sin against him,
againsthis house, I, Mirduch bat Banawill lay a spell againstyou." In a
third bowl that uses this same formula, the beneficiariesof the incanta-
tion do not speakthe exorcism (Gordon 1941:273-276 [bowl 11]). Does
that mean that the people named in the first two bowls participatedin a
ritualusing thesewords,or thatthey (includingMirduch)wrote the bowl?
Montgomery says that the bowl that names two men represents"a mu-
tual charmof two sorcerers,eachinvokinghis powersin turn in the other's
behalf" (122). Becauseseveralversionsof these incantationformulasap-
pear on the bowls, some in which the people named on the bowl speakin
the firstperson and some in which they are spoken of in the thirdperson,
it is possiblethat those named on the first-personbowls wereknowledge-
able practitioners,not merely clients. They could have written the bowls
or dictatedthe formulasto scribes (if they themselvesdid not know how
to write) and performedsome kind of accompanyingritual.If this is true,
some of the ritual practitionerscould have been women.
ABAYE'S FOSTER MOTHER

If the incantationbowls suggestthat women were among those who
produced them or used them in rituals, can rabbinictexts in turn shed
light on the kind of women who might have had the necessaryknowledge
to use these incantations?The BabylonianTalmuddoes, in fact, presenta

picture of a woman who could have had the necessaryritualknowledge:
Abaye's foster mother, whose statement about the use of garlands of a
plant against illness and sorcerywe have alreadyencountered (b. Sabb.
66b). In the same discussion she also gives information about incanta-
tions and how many times they should be recited:"Abayesays:'Mother
said to me: all [incantations]which are [repeated]severaltimes should
be in the name of the mother, and all knots on the left side."'Many in-
cantations and amulets from the ancient world, both Jewish and non-
Jewish,name the client or practitionerby his or her mother'sname rather
than by the father'sname. (Ankarlooand Clarksuggestthat this practice
may serve to associate magic with women "at the ideological level," for
"evidencefor the use of matronymicselsewherein the ancient world in-
dicates that they tend to appearin the context of specificallyfemale dis-
course" [61].) Her next statement is also very interesting:"All incanta-
tions that are specifiedaccordingto the number of repetitions,should be
repeatedthat number of times, but if they are not specified--41 times."
Knowing how many times to say a particularincantation is very impor-
tant because it is one of the crucial factors in its efficacy.In addition to
this information, Abaye'sfoster mother also imparts other ritual-medi-
cal advice,in many caseshavingto do with the careof newbornbabies or
children (Fonrobert:230-243).
Unlike the selectionsfrom rabbinictexts that I firstquoted on women
and magic, these references to Abaye's foster mother generally do not
occur in a polemicalcontext, althoughthat does not mean, of course,that
they were not shapedby the final editors of the Talmud.In at least one of
the quotations attributedto her, Abaye'sfoster mother appearsas one of
the opponents of sorcery (kedafim);what she recommends can be used
againstit. She is not in the same categoryas the "daughtersof Israel"who
burn incense for magical purposes. This may be a way to neutralizeher
comments on how to use incantationsor to show that she is on the side
of the rabbisin their contests with sorceresses.Peskowitz(135-139) sug-
gests that the rabbinicuse of spinners'gossip as evidence againstwomen
suspected of adultery similarly serves to "depict female support for a
masculinist social order," as "enforcersof the rabbinic code." Perhaps
Abaye'sfoster mother is being positioned here as a "respectablewoman"
ratherthan a sorceress(see also Hester,who also points out that "within
patriarchalsocieties, women are often placed in the position of moral
gatekeeperswho socially control other women" [300]).
It is also possible that Abaye'sfoster mother, like some of the women
named on the incantationbowls, used these methods to protect herself,
her family, and others close to her from fever, demonic forces, or the
malevolentspellsand ritualsof others,whethermale or female.When

CharlotteFonrobertdiscussesanotheraspectof the teachingof Abaye's
fostermother-her "manualof infantcare"(b. Sabb.133b-134a)-she
remarksthat she reads"hertextsas a woman'svoice,"and "therefore,
[she]wouldchallengea notion of a monolithicallymale-authoredcul-
tureor eventextin the caseof rabbinicliterature" (241).Whenwe com-
pare the adviceon incantations andknots thatAbaye'sfostermothergives
with the ideologicallymotivatedrabbinicstatementsthat"mostwomen
aresorceresses," it appearsthatin this caseshe furnishesa glimpseinto
anotherreality:a worldin whichsomewomenpossessedthe necessary
knowledgeto fightofffeverandmalevolent ritualattacksbyothers,a world
very much likethat in
revealed theincantation bowlsandamulets,instead
of one thatimagineswomenmonolithically of
as the magicaladversaries
the rabbis.The referencesto Abaye'sfostermothergive us a pictureof
one of the womenwho mighthavebeenwritingincantationsfor those
who hadengagedherservices,eitherforherown familyor forpeoplein
hercommunity,a womanwhoseknowledgewasvaluedenoughbothby
herfosterson andby the editorsof the Talmudto be placedwithinthat
collectionof usuallymalevoices.
CONCLUSIONS
The definitionof sorceryas belongingessentiallyto women'snature
is partof the overallrabbinicprojectthatdefinesgender.Women'ssub-
ordinaterole in the rabbinicreligiouscommunitymakesthemsuspect.
Oneimportantwayin whichrabbinicwritingsdefinekisufisas an activ-
itythatmarginalfiguresin thecommunity(Jewishwomen,gentilewomen
in discussionswithrabbis,heretics)perform.Kiguf,almostby definition,
is not somethingthatrabbisthemselvespractice.Thedynamicof ascrib-
ing kis'ufmageia("magic,"originallythe theologyor practicesof the
"magi,"the Zoroastrian priests),or goeteia("sorcery")to personsmar-
ginal or outside of the community is well known in manysourcesfrom
lateantiquity(MeyerandSmith:2). Kisuf,as a halakhiccategory,defines
ritualactivitiesthatareoutsidetheboundsof theobservance of the misvot
For
("commandments"). example, if one walksby a town and smellsthe
odorof incense,one is supposedto recitetheappropriate blessing(a pre-
scribedhalakhicaction).Ifthetownis mostlygentile,oneshouldnotrecite
the blessingbecausethe incensewas probablyusedfor idolatrouswor-
ship.Evenwhenpassinga townin whichmostof theinhabitantsareJew-
ish, one shouldnot recitethe blessing,for Jewishwomenareknownto
burnincenseforpurposesof sorcery(kedafim). Thus,the rabbinicdefini-
tionsof kisufandthosewhoengagein it serveto distanceboththeactions
and the performersfrom the community that accepts rabbinicauthority

and rabbinicdefinitions of the correct actions (misvot)to perform.
Kivufand its performers are not, however, completely outside the
realmof the permitted.Firstof all, Abaye'sdefinition of kiluf leavesopen
one categorythat is explicitlypermittedfor rabbis:using "lawsof creation"
to createliving beings. Learningabout kivuf(including learningto prac-
tice it) is also permittedfor the sake of acquiringknowledgeand judging
cases of sorcery.Second,certainotherwisequestionablepracticesare per-
mitted for the sakeof health,such as the makingof amulets (b. Sabb.61a-
62a, 67a; Veltrie 1998: 307-313). Third, talmudic stories depict rabbis
performingthe same actions that women perform;the women are con-
demned for engagingin kivuf,while the rabbisare commended for their
clevernessand power (y. Sanh. 7.19, 25d). Finally,rabbis may learn in-
cantations, curses, and other ritual actions from women. Abaye'sfoster
mother gave him informationabout the proper way to use incantations,
while "the chief of the women who do sorcery"told Amemara curse that
he could use against sorceresses.Whereasthe chief of the sorceressesis
outside the community, Abaye'sfoster mother is describedin ways that
make it clear that she was regardedas a valued member of the commu-
nity, both for her knowledgeof health and healingand for her knowledge
of incantations
We see, therefore,that rabbinictexts do not expressonly one "ideol-
ogy of gender."Thereare conflictingstrainsof thought crosscuttingeach
other about women's relationship to illegitimate sorcery (cf. Boyarin;
Peskowitz).On the one hand, we are told that "mostwomen are involved
in sorcery,"while, on the other hand, Abbaye quotes his foster mother
approvinglyabout the use of incantations and knots. (Is he thereby de-
fining them as not sorcery?)One might also say that while the discussion
in Sanhedrintries to gender "sorcery"as female, it undercutsitself at the
same time. Abbayegives the example of an approvedform of "sorcery"
practicedby two rabbisto create a living being, and R. Eliezer'sknowl-
edge about and practiceof "gatheringand uprooting cucumbers"is also
defined as permitted because it is "for the sake of learning."The seem-
ingly conclusivestatementat the beginning of the discussionthat unmis-
takablyidentifieswomen with sorceryhas by the end been deconstructed
and renderedinconclusiveand, not incidentally,has carvedout two areas
of "permitted rabbinic [= male] sorcery"-by means of the "laws of
creation"and for the purpose of gaining knowledge.
Among the other functionsthat they serve,rulesabout sorceryareone
tool the rabbisuse to think about genderdifferences;in fact, they are one
of the ways in which they construct gender differences.The rabbiswere
not the only ones in the ancientworld to use rules about sorceryas a tool
to construct gender differences.Many Greek and Roman writers of an-

tiquityandlateantiquityalsosingledout womenas sorceresses(for ex-
ample,Circein the Odyssey,Medeain Euripedesand Seneca,Dido in
Virgil's Aeneid,Erictho in Lucan'sPharsalia,and severalwitches in the
GoldenAss of Apuleius [Gager:244; Graf:185;Kieckhefer:29-33; Ogden:
61-65]). For ancient Greekculture, Ogden says,
It seemspreferableto concludethatthegeneralassociationof womenin
particularwithwitchcraft in ancientGreecewasprimarilyanideological
act..... Theprejudicethatwitchcraftwasa femalephenomenonin par-
ticularwouldhaveservedthe functionof control:it validatedthe exclu-
sion of womenfromnormalmeansof power.Furthermore, the accusa-
tion of magicalpracticeprovideda stickwith whichwomencouldbe
beaten:such an accusationwas convenientlydifficultto refute,since
magicwasin anycaseinherentlysecretiveanditsmechanisms largelyin-
explicable.(64-65;see also Kieckhefer:
33)
The rabbinicdepictionof women as witchesalso emphasizeswomen's
connectionwith illicit sorcery.As Peskowitzcommentsin regardto
rabbinicnotionsof work,"Whentherabbiswriteaboutworkandwork-
ers'bodiesin waysthatconveynotionsof sex andgender,theyarepart
of a widerRomandiscourse"(67). Giventhe Babylonianprovenance
of the Talmud,it wouldbe importantalsoto investigatethe relationof
rabbinicideasaboutwomenandsorceryto thoseof the officialreligion
of the SassanianEmpire,Zoroastrianism, a projectthat I hope to take
up at a latertime.
Therabbisandthe bowlwriterssharedmanyassumptionsaboutthe
dangersposedby demonsandthe correctmethodsforsavingoneselfand
othersfromthem.Bothbelievedthatdemonsor the evileyecouldcause
diseaseand death,althoughrabbinicwritingsalso understoodtheseaf-
flictionsas punishmentfor one'ssins,amongotherreasons(e.g.,b. Ber.
5a-b).Bothbelievedthatamuletsandincantations couldhelpin thefight
againstdemons,but the rabbisemphasizedthe needto use testedamu-
letsandaccountedothermethodsaseffectiveagainstdemons,disease,and
otherills:prayer,studyof Torah,observance of the misvot,andleadinga
holy life (b. Ber.5a;b. 54a;
'Erub. b. Sabb.61a-62a; see Neusner1968:
102-126).Theysharedthebeliefthatthelilithsweresexuallythreatening
to men,althoughthethreatthatthelilithsofferto womenandchildrenis
muchmoreprominenton the bowls.Thereis alsosome indicationthat
thebowlwriters,liketherabbis,considered groupsofwomen,in particular
womenfromone'sown family,to be a threat,althoughthe formulason
the incantationbowlsconsiderthemto be onlyone threatof many(and
theyoftennamemenamongthethreatening familymembers).Nonethe-
less, it is also clearthat there arecrucialdifferencesbetween rabbinicwrit-

ings and the incantationbowls in both form and content and that these
are importantin the differentimpressionthat each createsof the involve-
ment of women in kivuf.
One important differencebetween the incantation bowls and many
of the rabbinicreferencesto ki uf is the intendedaudience.The bowlswere
made for both women and men, whereasrabbinicliteraturewas produced
by certainmen (the rabbis)primarilyfor each other. Becausesome of the
bowls were made for women, and some were probably produced by
women, we can know in a more directmannerwhat those women's con-
cerns and needs were in particularareas of their lives-health and dis-
ease, pregnancy,childbirth,children'shealth, sexual anxieties,and fears
of malevolent human (male and female) and demonic attack (which is
not to saythat men did not sharethese concerns).This may explainmany
of the differencesbetween them and the rabbinicreferencesto kivuf.
While the image of the lilith is very similar in the incantationbowls
and in the few rabbinicreferences,it is interestingto note that the rab-
binic referencesconcentrateon her sexual dangerto men and her physi-
cal appearance(long hair and wings) but not on the dangershe offers to
children. They also do not discuss the lilin in any detail or mention the
sexual dangerthey representfor women (except for the referenceto Eve
conceiving children by male demons). This difference, it seems to me,
stems from the differentaudiencesfor rabbinictraditionsand for incan-
tation formulas.Whereasthe rabbiswereconcernedaboutthreatsto them
as men, and expressedtheir sexualanxietiesin variousways, the incanta-
tion formulason the bowls reflectthe sexualconcernsof both women and
men. Women as well as men did not want demons to appear in their
dreams and have intercoursewith them. Both fearedthat the liliths and
lilin might kill children,which reflectsthe household and family setting
of the bowls.
The incantation bowls also depict women in a way that they rarely
appearin rabbinic mentions of as antagonists of the demons, the
kiluf,
lilin and the liliths, malevolent people who curse them, and other evil
forces.Women (as well as men) employed incantationsand other rituals
(such as going to the roof to curse the demons) to protect themselves,to
expel the demons, and to effect healing. They are portrayed as active
against kedafimratherthan as practitionersof it. In fact, the depiction of
women as enemies of evil is no differentfrom the depiction of men strug-
gling againstevil forces-both employ the same weapons of incantation
and ritual,both attackdemons and order them to leave their houses and
families,and both call on variouspowers-the God of Israel,angelssuch
as Michaeland Raphael,ancient Babyloniandeities, Bagdana,the king of
the demons and liliths-to help them in their fight. In the light of the
evidence from the incantation bowls, it is easier to see the ideological
tendencies of the rabbinicpassages.While some of the incantation bowl
formulas also position groups of women (usually close relatives of the
client) as malicious enemies, the rabbinic passages are far more single-
minded in their denunciations of sorceresses.
The incantationbowls present practicesthat did not originatein the
rabbinic house of study but found their place, rather, in the ordinary
household life of men and women, not necessarilyunder the control of
the rabbinicclass.I would arguethat the changein social settingfrom the
rabbinichouse of study,where the rabbisdeterminedthe laws of divorce,
to the household, where both men and women employed incantation
bowls to protectthemselves,may have allowedthe bowl writersto change
the divorce formula so that women could use it. Mary Douglas'sdiscus-
sion of the use of ritualpower (1966:94-113) is suggestivehere. Accord-
ing to her analysis,which initially opposes witchcraftto sorcery,women
in rabbinicsociety ought to be accused of witchcraft,an internalpower
that resideswithin the psyche of the agent. Such powers are uncontrolled
and not necessarilytriggeredby the intent of the agent. By contrast,sor-
cery is an externalpower, which the agent must consciouslymake use of,
involvingspells,blessings,curses,charms,formulas,and invocations.The
sorcerer cannot utter a spell by mistake (Douglas 1966: 99). Sorceryis
exertedby those in positions of authorityon behalf of the social system,
while witchcraftis attributedto those with less explicit roles who do not
properlybelong in power, like women in rabbinicculture. However, the
talmudic evidence clearlyshows that women are accused of sorcery,not
witchcraft,by the rabbis-they are accused of doing explicit, conscious
acts to harm others. How does Douglas's scheme account for this situa-
tion? She arguesthat this happens in societies where it is difficultto rec-
ognize explicitauthorityor in which authorityis weakand contested(1966:
105-106). Sorceryis a form of controlled and conscious power that can
be abused by those who are in the intersticesof a society without clearly
establishedauthority(Douglas 1966: 107). The rabbisof the Talmud de-
rive their power from their usefulnessto the Exilarch,who in turn owes
his power to the Sassaniankings. They do not hold unchallengedpower
over Jewishsociety in SassanianBabylonia.Women can challengethem,
or, equallylikely, they fearthat women can challengethem-hence their
statementthat "most women are involved in sorcery."Most women can
be suspectedof posing a threatto their power.
Given the contingent nature of their power, the rabbis were con-
fronted with problems of how to negotiate their power among conflict-
ing forces-including among people within their own community. Joan
Scott has suggested that gender must be understood as working in the

politicalrealmin both a realand a symbolicsense:that genderis a method
of thinking politics (46-50). Thus, to rephrasePeskowitz,rabbinictexts
from SassanianBabylonian"mayhave used the bodies of Jewishwomen
to negotiateand imaginetheir relationto" the Sassanianrulersand to the
Exilarch(17). They may also use women's bodies as a way to imagine re-
lations within the Jewishcommunity and between Jewsand non-Jews.In
other words, as Douglas suggestsgenerally(1966, 1982), a group's stric-
tures on the individual bodies of its members may reflect that group's
problems of self-definition and boundary setting.
As specificallyfemaledemons, the liliths are the antitypeof the proper
woman, both in ancientand rabbinicsourcesand in the incantationbowls.
Insteadof marryingandforminga householdwithherhusband,givingbirth
to children,nourishingand raisingthem, the lilith pursueswhomevershe
wishes,comesbetweenhusbandandwife,andkillschildren(Mtiller-Kessler
1994, 1999;Naveh and Shaked1987: 104-122, 188-193). She is an anar-
chic figurein the realmsof sexualityand reproductionand presentsa night-
mareimageof a woman who is not constrainedby law, convention,or san-
ity. This image of the lilith may also throw light on the identificationof
women with sorceryin rabbinicsources.Women who do magic are also
outsidethe constraintsof the rabbinichalakahand socialconvention.They
engagein ritualpracticesthat the rabbisdo not approveof, they playtricks
on the rabbis,they preventmen from begettingchildren,and they commit
adultery.They are almost alwaysthose who disturbsociety,not those who
defendsocietyfrom dangers,with the importantexceptionof Abaye'sfos-
ter mother (who is insteadcreditedwith the knowledgeto repel kedafim).
The image of the femaleand the possibilitiesof women's actionsare more
variegatedand nuanced in the incantationtexts. Evilwomen and female
demons may endangerhuman beings, but human women, like Abaye's
fostermother,can wield the protectiveweaponsof incantationsand ritual
power againstthem to save themselves,their husbands,and their children
from sexualdangers,disease,and sudden death.
REFERENCES
Abusch,Tzvi "DemonicImageof theWitchin StandardBabylonian

1989 Literature:
TheRe-workingof PopularConceptions
by
LearnedExorcists."In Religion,Science,and Magic:In
ConcertandConflict,22-58. Ed.by JacobNeusner,Ernest
J. Frerichs,and Paul V. M. Flesher.New York:Oxford
UniversityPress.
370 Journalof theAmerican
AcademyofReligion
Bialik.
Albeck,Hanoch TheMishnah:SederNashim.Jerusalem:
1988
andMagicinEurope:
Ankarloo,Bengt,and Witchcraft andRome.
AncientGreece
StuartClark,eds. Philadelphia:
Universityof Pennsylvania
Press.
1999
Baker,Cynthia RebuildingtheHouseoflsrael:GenderedBodiesandDo-
1997 mesticPoliticsin RomanJewishGalileec. 135-300C.E.
Ph.D.dissertation,DukeUniversity.
Bar-Ilan,Meir "Witchesin the Bible and in the Talmud."In Ap-
1993 proachesto AncientJudaismV, 7-32. Ed. by Her-
bert Basserand SimchaFishbane.Atlanta:Scholars
Press.
Blau,Ludwig DasAltjiidische Zauberwesen.
Reprint.Westmead, U.K.:
1970[1898] GreggInternational.
Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Boyarin,Daniel CarnalIsrael.Berkeley:
1993
Brooten,Bernadette WomenLeaders in theAncientSynagogue.
Chico,Calif.:
1982 ScholarsPress.
Cassuto,Umberto A Commentary
on theBookof Exodus.Trans.by Israel
1967 Abrahams.
Jerusalem:
Magnes.
A Critical,
Childs,Brevard TheBookofExodus: Commentary.
Theological
1974 Philadelphia:
Westminster.
Clements,Ronald Exodus.CambridgeBibleCommentary.Cambridge:
1972 Cambridge UniversityPress.
DiezMacho,Alejandro Neophyti1.5 vols.Madrid: deInvesti-
ConsejoSuperior
1970 gacionesCientificas.
Douglas,Mary PurityandDanger.London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul.
1966
1982 NaturalSymbols. NewYork:Pantheon.
Epstein,J.N. "GlosesBabylo-Arameennes." RevuedesEtudesJuives
1921-22 73:27-58;74:40-72.
Fishbane,Simcha "'MostWomenEngagein Sorcery': AnAnalysisof Sor-
1993 ceressesin the BabylonianTalmud."JewishHistory7:
27-42.
Fonrobert,Charlotte Women's Bodies,Women's Blood:ThePoliticsofGender
1995 in RabbinicLiterature.Ph.D. dissertation,Graduate
TheologicalUnion.
Lesses:Exe(o)rcising
Power 371
Friedman,Mordechai Jewish Marriage in Palestine:A Cairo Geniza Study.

Akiva 2 vols. Tel Aviv:Tel Aviv University;New York:Jewish
1980 TheologicalSeminaryof America.
Gafni, Isaiah TheJewsofBabyloniain the TalmudicEra:A Socialand
1990 CulturalHistory.In Hebrew.Jerusalem:ZalmanShazar
Center.
1995 "Synagoguesin Babyloniain the TalmudicPeriod."In
AncientSynagogues: HistoricalAnalysisandArchaeologi-
calData, 221-231. Ed.by Dan Urmanand PaulFlesher.
Leiden:Brill.
Gager,John CurseTabletsandBindingSpellsfrom theAncientWorld.
1992 New York:Oxford UniversityPress.
Geller,Markham "Two IncantationBowls Inscribedin Syriacand Ara-
1976 maic."Bulletinof theSchoolsof OrientalandAfricaStud-
ies 39: 422-427.
1980
"FourAramaicIncantationBowls."In TheBibleWorld:
Essaysin Honorof CyrusH. Gordon,47-60. Ed.by Gary
Rendsburget al. New York:Ktav.
Gibson, McGuire Excavationsat Nippur: TwelfthSeason.Oriental Insti-
1978 tute Communications,23. Chicago:Universityof Chi-
cago Press.
Gibson, McGuire, "TheCityWalls of Nippur and an IslamicSite Beyond:
JamesA. Armstrong, OrientalInstituteExcavations,17thSeason, 1987."Iraq
and AugustaMcMahon 60: 11-44.
1998
Gordon, Cyrus "AnAramaicExorcism."ArchivOrientalni6:466-474.
1934
1934b "AnAramaicIncantationBowl."AASOR14: 141-144.
1934c "AramaicMagicalBowls in the Istanbuland Baghdad
Museums."ArchivOrientalni6: 319-334.
1937 "Aramaicand MandaicMagicBowls."ArchivOrientalni
9: 84-95.
1941 "AramaicIncantationBowls."Orientalia10: 116-141,
272-276, 278-289, 339-360.
1951 "TwoMagicBowlsin Teheran."Orientalia20:306-315.
1978 "TwoAramaicIncantations."In BiblicalandNearEast-
ern Studies:Essaysin Honor of WilliamSanfordLaSor,
231-237. Ed. by Gary A. Tuttle. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdman's.
AcademyofReligion
Graf,Fritz Magic in theAncientWorld.Cambridge,MA:Harvard

1997 UniversityPress.
Gutmann, Joseph AncientSynagogues:TheStateof Research.Chico, Calif.:
1981 ScholarsPress.
Harper,Prudence, "A Seal-Amuletof the Sasanian-Era:Imageryand Ty-
Prods O. Skjgrv6, pology, the Inscription, and Technical Comments."
L. Gorelick,and Bulletinof theAsia Instituten.s. 6: 43-58.
A. J. Gwinnett
1992
Hester, Marianne "PatriarchalReconstruction and Witch Hunting." In
1996 Witchcraftin EarlyModernEurope:Studiesin Culture
and Belief,288-306. Ed. by JonathanBarry,Marianne
Hester, and Gareth Roberts. Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Hilprecht,HermannV. Explorationsin Bible Lands during the 19th Century.
1903 Philadelphia:Holman.
Horovitz, H. S., and Mekhiltade-RabbiIshmael.2nd ed. Jerusalem:Bam-
I. A. Rabin bergerand Wahrman.
1960
Hunter, EricaC. D. "Aramaic-SpeakingCommunities of SassanidMeso-
1995a potamia."Aram 7: 319-335.
1995b "Combatand Conflictin IncantationBowls:Studieson
Two Aramaic Specimens from Nippur." In Studia
Aramaica:New SourcesandNewApproaches, 61-75. Ed.
by Markham J. Geller, Jonas C. Greenfield,and M. P.
Weitzman. Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress.
1996 "IncantationBowls:A MesopotamianPhenomenon?"
Orientalia65: 220-233.
1998 "Who Are the Demons? The Iconographyof Incanta-
tion Bowls." Studi Epigraficie Linguisticisul Vicino
Orienteantico 15: 95-115.
Kern-Ulmer,Brigitte "TheDepiction of Magic in RabbinicTexts:The Rab-
1996 binic and GreekConceptionof Magic."JSJ27:298-301.
Kieckhefer,Richard Magicin theMiddleAges.Cambridge:CambridgeUni-
1989 versityPress.
Layard,Austen H. Discoveriesamong the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon.
1853 New York:John Murray.
Lesses,Rebecca RitualPracticesto GainPower:Angels,Incantations,and
1998 Revelationin EarlyJewishMysticism.Harrisburg,Pa.:
TrinityPress International.
Lesses:Exe(o)rcising
Power 373
Levinas,Emmanuel Nine TalmudicReadings.Trans.by AnnetteAronowicz.

1990 Bloomington: IndianaUniversityPress.
Levine,Baruch "TheLanguageof the MagicalBowls."In A Historyof
1970 the Jews in Babylonia,vol. 5, 243-373. Ed. by Jacob
Neusner. Leiden:Brill.
Levine,Lee, ed. TheSynagoguein LateAntiquity.Philadelphia:Ameri-
1970 can Schools of OrientalResearch.
1992 TheGalileein LateAntiquity.New York:JewishTheo-
logical Seminary.
2000 TheAncientSynagogue:TheFirstThousandYears.New
Haven:Yale UniversityPress.
Levine,Molly "The Gendered Grammarof Ancient Mediterranean
Myerowitz Hair." In Off with Her Head! 76-130. Ed. by Howard
1995 Eilberg-Schwartzand Wendy Doniger. Berkeley:Uni-
versity of CaliforniaPress.
Lidzbarski,Mark "MandiiischeZaubertexte."Ephemerisfiir Semitische
1900 Epigraphie1: 89-105.
McNamara,Martin, TheAramaicBible: TargumNeofiti1 and TargumPseudo-
RobertHayward,and Jonathan.5 vols. Collegeville,Minn.: LiturgicalPress.
Michael Maher
1994
Margaliot,Mordechai MidrashVa-yikraRabbah,vol. 4. Jerusalem:Wahrman.
1972
Meyer,Marvin,and Ancient ChristianMagic:CopticTextsof Ritual Power.
RichardSmith, eds. San Francisco:HarperSanFrancisco.
1994
Montgomery,James AramaicIncantationTextsfrom Nippur. Philadelphia:
1913 Museum of the Universityof Pennsylvania.
Christa "EinearamaischeZauberschaleim Museum ftir Vor-
MUller-Kessler,
zu Berlin."Orientalia63: 5-9.
1994 und Frtiihgeschichte
1999 "PuzzlingWords and Spellingsin BabylonianAramaic
Magic Bowls." Bulletin of the Schoolsof Orientaland
AfricaStudies62: 111-114.
Naveh, Joseph,and Amuletsand MagicBowls:AramaicIncantationsof Late
Shaul Shaked Antiquity.Jerusalem:Magnes.
1987
1993 MagicSpellsandFormulae:AramaicIncantationsofLate
Antiquity.Jerusalem:Magnes.
Academy
of Religion
Neusner,Jacob A Historyof theJewsin Babylonia,

vol.1: TheParthian
1965 Period.Leiden:Brill.
1966 A HistoryoftheJewsinBabylonia,
vol.2: TheEarlySasa-
nianPeriod.Leiden:Brill.
1968 A HistoryoftheJewsinBabylonia,
vol.3:FromShapurI
to ShapurII.Leiden:Brill.
1969 A Historyof theJewsin Babylonia,vol. 4: TheAgeof
ShapurII.Leiden:Brill.
1970a "Archaeology andBabylonian Jewry."In NearEastern
Archaeologyin the Twentieth 331-347.
Century, Ed.by
J.A. Sanders.GardenCity,N.Y.:Doubleday.
1970b A HistoryoftheJewsinBabylonia,
vol.5:LaterSasanian
Times.Leiden:Brill.
Noth,Martin Exodus: A Commentary. London:SCMPress.
1962
Ogden,Daniel "BindingSpells:CurseTabletsandVoodooDollsin the
1999 Greekand RomanWorlds."In Witchcroft andMagic
in Europe:AncientGreeceand Rome,1-90. Ed. by
BengtAnkarlooandStuartClark.
Peskowitz,Miriam Spinning Fantasies:
Rabbis,Gender, andHistory.Berke-
1997 ley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Rahlfs,Alfred Septuaginta.Stuttgart:Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft
1979 Stuttgart.
Sarna,NahumM. TheJPSTorahCommentary: Exodus. Jew-
Philadelphia:
1991 ish PublicationSociety.
Scott,JoanWallach Genderand thePoliticsof History.NewYork:Colum-
1988 biaUniversityPress.
Scurlock,J.A. "Baby-SnatchingDemons,RestlessSouls,andtheDan-
1991 gersof Childbirth:Medico-magical Meansof Dealing
with Some of the Perilsof Motherhoodin Ancient
Mesopotamia." Incognita2: 137-185.
Us andWe WillReleaseYou!'RabbinicEn-
Seidel,Jonathan "'Release
1992 counterswithWitchesandWitchcraft." Journalof the
Association
of Graduatesin NearEastern 3:45-
Studies
61.
Shaked,Shaul "Bagdana,King of the Demons, and OtherIranian
1985 Termsin Babylonian AramaicMagic."ActaIranica25:
511-525.
Lesses: Power
Exe(o)rcising 375
Sperber,Alexander TheBibleinAramaic.Leiden:Brill.
1959
Stern,David,and Rabbinic Fantasies:
ImaginativeNarratives
fromClassi-
MarkMirsky,eds. calHebrewLiterature. JewishPublication
Philadelphia:
1990 Society.
Strack,H. L.,and Introductionto the Talmudand Midrash.Trans.by
G. Stemberger MarkusBockmuehl.Minneapolis: Fortress.
1992
vanderToorn,Karel, Dictionaryof DeitiesandDemonsin theBible.Leiden:
BobBecking,and Brill.
PieterW. vander
Horst,eds.
1995
Urbach,EphraimE. TheSages:TheirConcepts andBeliefs.Trans.by Israel
1987 Abrahams. Mass.:
Cambridge, HarvardUniversity Press.
Veltrie,Giuseppe MagieundHalakha.Tilbingen:Mohr.
1997
1998 "Onthe Influenceof'GreekWisdom':Theoretical
and
EmpiricalSciencesin Rabbinic
Judaism." Stud-
Jewish
ies Quarterly
5/4:300-317.

Women's Power and Protection: Insights from Babylonian Incantation Bowls and Rabbinic Texts

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Women's Power and Protection: Insights from Babylonian Incantation Bowls and Rabbinic Texts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

American Academy of Religion

Exe(o)rcising Power: Women as Sorceresses, Exorcists, and Demonesses in Babylonian Jewish

Sorceresses, Exorcists, and

A STRIKINGstatementin the BabylonianTalmud,in the courseof a legal

mouths, women who do sorcery [nelei de-harsayya].May your heads

kind. They were domestic ware, intended for foods" (Montgomery:13).

2 Hilprecht writes,"Forthe presentit maysufficeto statethatmostof the one hundredbowls

immediateeffecton the practiceof bowl magic,which continuedthrough-

Scholars of Judaism in Palestine and the Roman diaspora in the

evidence, therefore,carefullyattends to their gender ideologies, both to

"MOST WOMEN ARE SORCERESSES"

(ki'uf) are femaleand not male, or does it constructsorceryitself as femi-

Two sourcesfromthe earlieststrataof rabbiniclegalliterature,the

Another statement,this one referringto smellingspices as one walksby a

RABBIS AND INCANTATION BOWLS

tation bowls and the BabylonianTalmud produced in the same cultural

"MURDERESS DAUGHTER OF MURDERESS":

5I examined the publications of incantationbowls in Aramaic,Syriac,and Mandaic, attempting

haunting people in dreams at night or in visions during the day (e.g.,

and bound hands and feet (Montgomery:pl. 8). This drawingpoints to

DIVORCING THE DEMONS

Lidzbarski:103-105 [textV]; Montgomery:168-170 [bowl 11], 193 [bowl

womancannotgivea getto a man.6Withone divorcedocument,a man

bowls using a similarformula.In this bowl (Montgomery:190 [bowl 17]),

ABAYE'S FOSTER MOTHER

to use these incantations?The BabylonianTalmuddoes, in fact, presenta

malevolentspellsand ritualsof others,whethermale or female.When

and the performersfrom the community that accepts rabbinicauthority

to construct gender differences.Many Greek and Roman writers of an-

less, it is also clearthat there arecrucialdifferencesbetween rabbinicwrit-

Scott has suggested that gender must be understood as working in the

Abusch,Tzvi "DemonicImageof theWitchin StandardBabylonian

Friedman,Mordechai Jewish Marriage in Palestine:A Cairo Geniza Study.

Graf,Fritz Magic in theAncientWorld.Cambridge,MA:Harvard

Levinas,Emmanuel Nine TalmudicReadings.Trans.by AnnetteAronowicz.

Neusner,Jacob A Historyof theJewsin Babylonia,

You might also like