Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:03:37.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In Defence of Ambiguity: Is There A Hidden Demon In Mark 1.29–31?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

John Granger Cook
John Granger Cook
Affiliation:
(LaGrange College, 601 Broad St, LaGrange, GA 30240, USA)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

‘Now Simon's mother-in-law was in bed with a fever, and they told him about her at once. He came and took her by the hand and lifted her up. Then the fever left her, and she began to serve them.’1 Does the author of the Gospel of Mark believe that the fever in Mark 1.30 is demonic? Or does he trace it to the power of God? It is also possible that he looks at the fever as a result of medical causes. It could be the case he author has no clear perception of the cause of the fever. In the Greco-Roman culture of Mark's audience, the fever could be seen as the result of medical, astrological, divine, or demonic causes. This set of facts will be established below. The text in Mark can then be read in four different ways depending on the understanding of fever that the scholar chooses to adopt. Given the cultural possibilities for understanding fever, Mark's text takes on a certain ambiguity. The ambiguity should be carefully upheld in light of recent attempts to precisely identify the Markan etiology of the fever.

Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , April 1997 , pp. 184 - 208
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 NRSV translation of Mark 1.30–1.1 thank Prof. Hans Dieter Betz for critical comments on this essay.

2 On the presuppositions that an author and audience share see: Plett, H., Textwissenschaft und Textanalyse. Semiotik, Linguistik, Rhetorik (Uni Taschenbücher, 328; 2nd ed.; Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1979) 86–91Google Scholar; Stalnaker, R., ‘Pragmatics’, in: Petöfi, J./Franck, D. (eds.), Präsuppositionen in Philosophie und Linguistik, Presuppositions in Philosophy and Linguistics (Linguistische Forschungen 7; Frankfurt: Athenaeum, 1973) 395–7, 399Google Scholar; Schmidt, S. J., Texttheorie (Uni Taschenbücher 202; München: Fink, 1973) 101–5Google Scholar; van Dijk, T., Text and Context, Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse (Longman Linguistics Library, 21; London/New York: Longman, 1977) 207, 228, 229Google Scholar; Hellholm, D., Das Visionenbuch des Hermas als Apokalypse, Formgeschichtliche und textheoretische Studien zu einer literarischen Gattung, I (ConBNT 13.1; Lund: Gleerup, 1980) 41, 47, 48.Google Scholar

3 See BAGD's article on πυρετός. J. Louw and E. Nida do not countenance a component such as ‘caused by a demon’ for πυρετός in their Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains 2 (2nd ed.; New York: United Bible Societies, 1988/1989) 23.159 (p. 271)Google Scholar. On the componential analysis of the meanings of words see Baldinger, K., Semantic Theory. Towards a Modern Semantics (trans. Brown, W. C.; ed. Wright, R.; New York: St. Martin's, 1980) 62–80Google Scholar and Heger, K., Monem, Wort, Satz, und Text (2nd ed.; Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1976) 41–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 The Problem of History in Mark and Other Marcan Studies (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982) 88, 89.Google Scholar

5 B. Ber. 34b; extensive bibliography on this text can be found in Kahl, W., ‘New Testament Miracle Stories in their Religious-Historical Setting: A Religionsgeschichtliche Comparison from a Structural Perspective’ (Ph.D. Diss.; Emory University, 1992) 228 n. 26Google Scholar. SHA Vita Hadriani 25.3, 4 and 24.9.Google Scholar

6 J. Z. Smith discusses the difficulty of constructing taxonomies that are based on a given set of characteristics shared by the members of the given taxon. A ‘monothetic’ classification defines the members of a taxon (or class) to share certain common features. The members of the given taxon differ from members of closely adjacent taxa in one single feature. In a ‘polythetic’ classification the members of a given taxon share a set of properties. Each member of the class shares a large number of the properties, but no single property is shared by every member. Each property is characteristic of a large number of the members of the class. The polythetic system is a statistical system of classification. The biological sciences have developed the polythetic approach (‘Fences and Neighbors: Some Contours of Early Judaism’, Imagining Religion. From Babylon to Jonestown [Chicago/London: University of Chicago, 1982] 1–8).Google Scholar

7 R. Bultmann believes that Luke's πετίμησεν τ π υρετ is only a ‘clarifying’ comment (Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition [FRLANT N.F. 12; 4th ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958] 226)Google Scholar. E. Klostermann does not see a demon behind the fever (Das Markusevangelium [HNT 3; 5th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1971] 18)Google Scholar. Mark's story shows Jesus' power as effective not only against demons (1.23–7) but also against sickness according to Lührmann, D. (Das Markusevangelium [HNT 3; Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1987] 52)Google Scholar. V. Taylor is only willing to say that ‘Luke almost personifies the fever’ (The Gospel According to St Mark … [2nd ed. London: Macmillan, 1966] 179, 180).Google Scholar

8 ‘Markus’, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments … Erster Band …. (ed. J. Weiβ; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1907) 83.Google Scholar

9 Das Evangelium des Markus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967) 40.Google Scholar

10 Medicine, Miracle, and Magic in New Testament Times (SNTSMS 55; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1986)Google Scholar. Kee surveys the traditions of Hellenistic medicine (Medicine, 27–64).

11 Albrecht Oepke gives references to the view of doctors in Greece, and Israel, (‘ἰάομαικτλ’, TDNT 3.195, 196, 201, 202.Google Scholar

12 Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield: Merriam-Webster, 1990) 1051.Google Scholar

13 Thorndike, L., A History of Magic and Experimental Science. During the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era (2 vols.; New York: Macmillan, 1923) 1.165–81Google Scholar. S. Benko summarizes Thorndike's discussion of Galen: ‘Galen was accused of practicing magic, and, although he sharply rejected philters and love charms, his works do contain magical devices’ (Pagan Rome and Early Christians [Bloomington: Indiana, 1986] 132 n. 12)Google Scholar. The discussion of the use of the peony as a περιάπτον is in Galen, , De simplicium medicamentorum …. 6.10 (ed. Kühn 11.859)Google Scholar, discussed by Thorndike, , History of Magic, 173Google Scholar. On the experientially verified efficacy of amulets see Galen, , De compositione medicamentorum …. (ed. Kühn 12.573)Google Scholar. Thorndike, (History of Magic, 173)Google Scholar also refers to De compositione medicamentorum …. 9.2 (Kühn 13.256)Google Scholar for another discussion of the efficacy of amulets.

14 Ulpian, dig. 50.13.1.3 (text and trans. in Mommsen, T. and Krueger, P., The Digest of Justinian [4 vols.; trans. Watson, A.; Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania, 1985] 4.929)Google Scholar. The text is discussed by Theiβen, G., Urchristliche Wundergeschichten (Studien zum Neuen Testament 8; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1974) 99 n. 26.Google Scholar

15 In Epist. ad Coloss. Cap. Ill Homil. VIII 5 (PG 62.358).Google Scholar

16 Horn's excellent survey of the Hellenistic approach to fever begins with a discussion of the physicians’ treatment of the disease (‘Fieber’, RAC 7.878, 879)Google Scholar. K. Weiss refers to a number of Hellenistic treatises that distinguish large and small fevers including Galen's, critique in De differentiis febrium (ed. Kühn 7.273–7Google Scholar; ‘πυρέσσω, πυρετός’, TDNT 6.957 n. 6)Google Scholar. W. Hobart gives many references to discussion of fever by the Greek physicians (The Medical Language of St Luke … [Dublin/London: Hodges/Longman 1882] 52, 53)Google Scholar. M. Neuburger (and J. Pagel) summarizes various Hellenistic approaches to fever including Plato's attribution of the disease (in its various forms) to earth, air, fire and water in Tim. 86a (Handbuch der Geschichte der Medizin [vol. 1; Jena: Gustav Fisher, 1902] 250–2)Google Scholar. As Weiss (TDNT 6.957) notes, the rabbis were aware of ‘natural’ causes and treatments of fever with reference to Str-B 1.479 and Preuss, J., Biblisch-talmudische Medizin …. (Berlin: Karger, 1911) 182–7Google Scholar. The rabbis could dabble in ‘magical’ cures. R. Abaye's mother, for example, taught him to treat fever with a mixture that included lentils and old wine and a period of sleep in an old cloak. If the patient does not remove the cloak when he awakes the illness will return (b. Git. 70a). Abaye's mother also taught him that in the case of daily fever, the patient should sit at a crossroad and take a large ant carrying something, throw it into a brass tube, seal it and then say, ‘Your burden be on me and my burden be on you’ (b. Shabb. 66b).

17 Deipnosophistae 3.18 ed. Kaibel (= 3.79 ed. LCL).Google Scholar

18 Compare similar discussion in Problemata 861b and 963b (the lung as the origin of fevers). Ps.-Aristotle defines fever as excessive heat in the entire body (862a). Many of the texts in the essay are taken from the Thesaurus of the Greek Language (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae CD ROM #C [U. Cal. Irvine, 1987]Google Scholar – henceforth ‘TLG’). The works on this disk are listed in: Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Canon of Greek Authors and Works (3rd ed.; ed. L. Berkowitz and K. A. Squitier; New York and Oxford: Oxford University, 1990)Google Scholar. Theophrastus discusses winds and dampness in relation to fever (De causis plantarum 1.13.6 ed. LCL)Google Scholar. In a fragment he describes winds that produce fever (οἱνότοι 5.57; ed. Wimmer, F., Theophrasti Eresii opera …. [Paris: Didot, 1866]).Google Scholar

19 Chrysippus frag. 349 (ed. J. von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta); 8.9.30 in Stählin's GCS ed. of Clement. ET in ANF 2.566.

20 Posidonius, frag. 413 (ed. W. Theiler).

21 Plutarch, De tuenda sanitate praecepta 123aGoogle Scholar. Compare his discussion of several possibilities of things that can cause fever including bad combinations of heat and too much dampness: ποίωνταταπυρετνἔργα,ποίωνἠπιάλων τίνεω;ςνστάσεις ἢαρεμπτώσειςἢ δυσκρασίαθερμνἣὑπέρΧυσιςύγρν(Animine an corporis affectiones sint peiores 502a).

22 See note 41 on fever and mortality.

23 Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos (LCL; ed. Robbins, F. F.; London: Heinemann, 1980) xiiGoogle Scholar. Robbins notes further that Galileo, Kepler, and Leibnitz countenanced astrology. A. Bouché-Leclercq describes the legal attempt to repress astrology in the ancient world along with the occasional philosophical critique of astrology (L'astrologie Grecque Brussels: Culture et Civilisation; reprint of the Paris 1899 ed.) 565–70, 570–5.Google Scholar

24 Ptolemy Tetrabiblos 1.2.6; 1.3.11. Lucian has a text in which the goddesses of fate send death by fever and various other means (Moῖραιέκάστῳπικλώθουσι, τνμνκεραυνῷ, τνδξίφει, τνδπυρετῷᾒ φθόηποθανεῖν Iupp. Trag. 25).

25 Ptolemy Tetrabiblos 1.2.9.

26 Ptolemy Tetrabiblos 1.2.7.

27 Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos 3.12.Google Scholar

28 ET from Murray, A. C., Homer, The Iliad with an English Translation (LCL; London: Heinemann; 1925) 22.30–1.Google Scholar

29 Valens, VettiusAnthologiae (ed. Pingree, D.; Leipzig: Teubner, 1986) 1.1; page 3, line 4Google Scholar. Compare Anth. 2.41; page 122, line 7. Many other references (with varying astrological causes of fevers) can be found in Pingree's index.

30 See Dionysiaca 5.276 where Zeus restrains Sirius (Σείριοναἰθαλόεντοςναστέλλωνπυρετοῖο); and compare 13.282.

31 The text from Cod. Paris. Gr. 1603 is in Delatte, A., Anecdota Atheniensia…. (Paris: Champion, 1927) 554Google Scholar. Delatte prints the word as ‘Oριου. On astrological boundaries or ‘terms’ see Ptolemy's discussion of ὅρια in Tetrabiblos 1.17.37, 1.20.43, and 1.21 (LCL). They are, on one understanding, thirty degree segments of the celestial sphere.

32 The Magi in Matt 2.2 are an exception.

33 Ioannis Calvini Opera (CR 73; 1st ed. 1555; rep. 1964; Braunschweig: Schwetschke, 1891) 155Google Scholar. K. Weiss notes that the fever in Acts 28.8 may be a divine punishment (TDNT 6.957, 958).Google Scholar

34 ‘Tradizione e Redazione in Mc. 1,29–31 (e paralleli). La Guarigione della Suocera di Simon Pietro’, Rivβ 17 (1969) 159.Google Scholar

35 Weiss (TDNT 6.957) notes that these are the only occurrences of fever in the LXX with the addition of ῥῖγος in Dt 28.22. He also discusses ‘fever as punishment’ in Judaism.

36 Philo could also identify medical causes of fever as in De Opificio 125 in a context in which he mentions Hippocrates.

37 H.N. 2.3.14–16. Horn mentions three cult statues of fever (Val. Max. 2.5.6) and some late inscriptions to fever deities from northern England (dea Tertiana; CIL 7.999), Nimes (dea Quartana; CIL 12.3129), and an unpublished inscription from Samos (Tεταρταῖος ‘Fieber’,890).

38 Epictetus mentions an altar of fever in Rome (Arrian Epict. Diss. 1.19.6). He also asks why there are statues of evil demons like the statue of the god of fever: τίοὖνγάλματα, ὡςκακοῖςδαίμοσιν, ὡςπυρετῷΔιί (Epict. Diss. 1.22.16).

39 The text in Oribasius Collectiones Medicae 45.30.10–14 can be found in Edelstein, E. J. and Edelstein, L., Asclepius. A Collection and Interpretation of the Testimonies (2 vols.; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1945) 1.238, 239Google Scholar with commentary in 2.168. See also Horn, , ‘Fieber’, 885.Google Scholar

40 P. Oxy. 1381.95–6: the fever. 1381.113–21: the shining and huge figure with a book in his left hand. 1381.160–2: the neglect of the divine book. Compare Horn, , ‘Fieber’, 885Google Scholar, who calls the fever a ‘punishment’.

41 Lucian, Philops. 25Google Scholar. H. D. Betz treats the angelic appearance in Lukian von Samosata und das Neue Testament …. (TU 76; Berlin: Akademie, 1961) 56–7Google Scholar. In Arrian Epict. Diss.3.22.58 there is a text in which a hypothetical individual blames God for sending him a fever. Hellenistic literature includes many occasions in which fever brings death: Aesopus Fab. 279, version 1 (ed. Teubner); Anthologiae Graecae, Epigrammata sepulcralia (ed. H. Beckby; 4 vols.; Munich: Heimeran, 1965–1968) Epigram 588Google Scholar; Appian Bellum 1.12.105; Arrian Epict. Diss. 3.26.2; Lucian, de morte Peregrini 44Google Scholar; Pausanias 8.11.11; Plutarch Marius 17.11; Plutarch Fragment 176 (ed. Teubner); Posidonius Fragment 200 (ed. W. Theiler); Procopius de bellis 7.19.33; Suda Lexicon ‘Aννίβας?, entry 2452 (ed. Teubner).

42 Dittenberger, Syll3 1239 (ca II CE). In Dittenberger, Syll3 1240 there is a list of ills including fever that is repeated from Deut 28.22, but the divinities mentioned are God, the furies, Grace, and Hygeia.

43 Audollent, A., Defixionum Tabellae …. (Paris: Fontemoing, 1904) 74–5Google Scholar. See also Horn, , ‘Fieber’, 884 on this type of malicious magic.Google Scholar

44 Kropp, A. M., Ausgewählte Koptische Zaubertexte (3 vols.; Brussels: La Fondation Égyptologique, 1930–1931) 2.69 (229–30)Google Scholar. The text is also found in Meyer, Marvin, Ancient Christian Magic: Coptic Texts of Ritual Power (San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1994) #89.Google Scholar

45 Kropp 2.71 (234); Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #91.Google Scholar

46 Opera (CR 73.155). The word used for ‘curses’ in the Vulgate of Deut 28.15 is maledictiones.

47 E. Bickermann claimed (in reference to Mark 1.31) that ‘Fieber ist auch eine Besessenheit, wie nicht nur aus Luc. Philops. 9, Confess. Cypr. 7, einem Text bei R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres, 18, Anm. 8, sondern auch aus der Parallelstelle Lc 4:39 folgt’ (‘Das Messiasgeheimnis und die Komposition des Markusevangeliums’, ZNW 22 [1923] 132 n. 3).Google Scholar

48 Léon-Dufour, X., ‘La Guérison de la Belle-Mère de Simon-Pierre’, EstBib 24 (1965) 207.Google Scholar

49 Pesch, Rudolf, Neuere Exegese – Verlust oder Gewinn? (Freiburg/Base/Wien: 1968) 172, 174Google Scholar. Pesch claims, with no references to primary literature, that the fever in Mark, is ‘conceived demonically’ (Das Markusevangelium I. Teil [HTKNT; Freiburg/etc: Herder, 1976] 130).Google Scholar

50 Das Neue Testament und die dämonischen Mächte (SBS 58; Stuttgart KBW, 1972) 19–20Google Scholar. The Pliny references in the Teubner ed. are H.N. 8.32(50).112–19; 22.14(16).37–8; 28.16(66).228–9. Dämonenfurcht und Dämonenabwehr. Ein Beitrag zur Vorgeschichte der christlichen Taufe (BWANT Series 5, Volume 10; Stuttgart et al.: Kohlhammer, 1970) 153Google Scholar. See note 54 for the Reitzenstein reference. Yamauchi, E. objects to Böcher's, ‘pan-demonological’ view of sickness (‘Magic or Miracle? Diseases, Demons and Exorcisms’, Gospel Perspectives. The Miracles of Jesus [vol. 6; ed. Wenham, David and Blomberg, Craig; Sheffield: JSOT, 1986] 142).Google Scholar

51 A. Fuchs observes that the use of the verb πιτιμν in Luke 4.35 and 4.39 shows that the fever-is understood to be a demonic power (‘Entwicklungsgeschichtliche Studie zu Mark 1,29–31 par Mt 8,14–15 par Lk 4,38–39’, Studien zum neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt Series A, 6/7 [1981/1982] 56–7)Google Scholar. Luke (4.39) forms the healing in an exorcistic manner because Jesus rebukes the fever like a demon, according to Gnilka, J. (Das Evangelium nach Markus [EKK 2.1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978] 84)Google Scholar. H.-J. Horn believes that the Lukan version of the story has a demonic conception of the fever (as people still allegedly do in Palestine), and Jesus rebukes the fever of the fever demon (‘Fieber’, RAC 7.892). The Lukan scene is a kind of exorcism in Loisy's, A. view (Les Évangiles Synoptiques [Ceffonds: Privately published, 1907] 455)Google Scholar. K. Weiss writes that the ‘demonic explanation of fever holds the field’ with reference to Audollent Def. Tab. 74.6, Pliny Hist. Nat. 2.16 (ideoque etiam publice Febris fanum in Palatio dicatum est), and Philostratus Vit. Ap. 4.10 where a ‘fever’ demon is stoned (fever is not actually mentioned in this text). The causes of the fevers in the NT healing stories are demonic or divine (as a punishment for sin). Luke's story is an exorcism (TDNT 6.957, 958).Google Scholar

52 Jesu exorzistisches Wirken aus der Sicht des Lukas. Ein Beitrag zur lukanischen Redaktion (Klosterneuburg: Österreichisches Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1981) 62, 63, 67, 68.Google Scholar

53 ‘Fieberheilung in Apg 28 und Lk 4’, Les Actes des Apôtres: Traditions, rédaction, théologie (ed. J. Kremer; Leuven: Leuven University, 1974) 517–18.Google Scholar

54 Betz, , Lukian, 147Google Scholar n. 2 does not hypothesize a demonic cause for the fever mentioned in Lucian's text. Reitzenstein, R., Poimandres. Studien zur Griechisch-Ägyptischen und Frühchristlichen Literatur (Leipzig: Teubner, 1904) 18, 19Google Scholar. Cyprian, , Sancti Caecilii Cypriani Carthaginensis et martyris opera…. Stephani Baluzii…. (Paris: Typographia Regia, 1726Google Scholar [Containing Ps. Cypr., Confess.]). Pradel, F., Griechische und süditalienische Gebete, Beschwörungen und Rezepte des Mittelalters (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 3.3; Giessen: Töpelmann, 1907) 20.20 (p. 272)Google Scholar. In Delatte, , Anecdota, 113Google Scholar an amulet mentions different kinds of fever and then has: καπσανδιαβολικνφαντασίαν Clearly fever is diabolical in the author's mind. Another amulet mentions the object of the magical text as all the work of the devil (φυλακτήριονθεοζντος καξορκισμς Σολομντοςπσαντο διαβόλου συνεργίαν). Fever is one of the devilish evils that Solomon is able to strike down (Delatte, , Anecdota, 126–7)Google Scholar. In a text of exorcism a demon is mentioned who brings fever (ρκίζωσε, δαιμόνιονπονηρνκαλούμενονΛεσωήλ, τψχος καῥῖγοςκαστομάχουπόνονπάγωντοῖςνθρώποις… Delatte, , Anecdota, 237Google Scholar; see also 243). Delatte also published a text in which there is an angel of fever named Salael, (Anecdota, 10).Google Scholar

55 Kropp 2.73 (241); Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #93Google Scholar. Compare Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #96 and # 106Google Scholar. Kropp 3.208 discusses the Coptic church's position on such magical activity.

56 Naveh, Joseph and Shaked, Shaul, Amulets and Magic Bowls: Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity (Jerusalem: Magnes, Hebrew University, 1987) 2.8–9 (44–5).Google Scholar

57 Edited by Fitzmeyer, Joseph and Harrington, Daniel J., A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts (BibOr 34; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1978).Google Scholar

58 Naveh, and Shaked, , Amulets, 9.1–2 (82–3)Google Scholar. There is also an amulet in which angels are appointed over fever (Naveh, and Shaked, , Amulets, 3.21–2 [50–1]Google Scholar) and other Aramaic amulets against fever (4.29 [56–7], 14.2 [102–3], and Geniza 5.1 [224–5]).

59 On this point see D. E. Aune and the bibliography there, ‘Magic in Early Christianity’, ANRW II.23.2, 1514, 1515, 1521Google Scholar. Occasionally the upper classes dabbled in magic. Certain senators (nonnulli ex ordine senatorio) were adepts according to the Codex Theodosianus 9.16.10Google Scholar (ed. Haenel, G., Codex Theodosianus [Bonn: Marcus, 1837]Google Scholar; ET in Pharr, Clyde, The Theodosian Code …. [Princeton: Princeton University, 1952] 238)Google Scholar. According to a law in Justinian's, Codex 9.18.7Google Scholar even people of high rank including those in Constantius’ and Julian's retinue (comitatu meo vel Caesaris) were not exempt from torture for the crime of magic (Corpus luris Civilis (vol. 2; ed. P. Krueger, Berlin: Weidmann, 1895)Google Scholar; ET in Scott, S. P., The Civil Law…. [17 vols.; Cincinatti: Central Trust Co.] 15.33)Google Scholar. This is also reflected in the earlier work by Paulus in which possession of magical texts is illegal. Those of high (honestiores) rank are exiled and low rank (humiliores) are executed (Sententiae 5.23.18Google Scholar; ET in Scott, , Civil Law 1.327Google Scholar; original text in Riccobono, S., Fontes luris Romani Antejustiniani [3 vols.; Florence: Barbera, 1968] 2.410)Google Scholar. Persons of high or low rank who administer potions for abortion or love philtres (abortionis aut amatorium poculum) are also punished (Sententia 5.23.14).Google Scholar

60 Vernon Robbins has made use of the sociological categories ‘dominant’ and ‘counter-cultura’ to understand the cultural background of Mark and 1 Cor in ‘Rhetoric and Culture: Exploring Types of Cultural Rhetoric in a Text’, forthcoming Sheffield Academic Press. Keith A. Roberts describes a counter-culture as a social unit in an uncompromising conflict with the dominant society (‘Towards a Generic Concept of Counter-Culture’, Sociological Focus 11 [1978] 121)Google Scholar. Bryan R. Wilson defines a thaumaturgical movement as one in which ‘The individual's concern is relief from present and specific ills by special dispensations. The demand for supernatural help is personal and local: its operation is magical. Salvation is immediate but has no general application beyond the given case and others like it’ (Magic and the Millenium …. [London: Heinemann, 1973] 24–5).Google Scholar

61 Aune, , ‘Magic’, 1522Google Scholar. Aune convincingly objects to the distinction of magic and religion based on psychological attitude (magic manipulates and coerces while religion supplicates and venerates). Magic is a phenomenon that exists within the matrix of a particular religious tradition and is a species of the genus ‘religion’ (‘Magic’, 1512–13, 1516).

62 Sharyn Dowd has shown that in the ancient popular imagination, magicians could compel the gods to do their bidding. She refers to texts such as Claudian's description of magic as ‘the art whereby the Chaldeans impose their will upon the subject gods’ (qua gens Chaldea vocatis imperet arte deis; In Rufin. 1.145–9). Dowd, Sharyn, Prayer, Power and the Problem of Suffering: Mark 11:22–25 in the Context of Markan Theology (SBLDS 105; Atlanta: Scholars, 1988) 138–42.Google Scholar

63 Sin uero more uulgari eum isti proprie magum existimant, qui communione loquendi cum deis immortalibus ad omnia quae uelit incredibili quadam ui cantaminum polleat…: Apuleius Apologia 26 (Vallette, Paul, Apulée: Apologie Florides [Paris: Société d'Édition ‘Les Belles Lettres’, 1971])Google Scholar. Vallette argues that Apuleius was actually more guilty of ‘magic’ in the popular sense than he is willing to admit (Apulée, xxii n. 2).

64 In epist. ad Col. Cap. III. Hom 8.5 PG 62.358. Chrysostom calls the magicians ‘those who make profit from the amulets and philosophize ten thousand things about them’ –Tγρπερίαπτα, κἂνφιλοσοφσιν οίκτούτωνχρηματιζόμενοι. The texts from Apuleius and Chrysostom are discussed in Dowd, , Prayer, 145, n. 49Google Scholar. Gospels (or excerpts) were used as amulets (ντφυλακςμεγάλης) by women and little children according to Chrysostom Ad populum Antiochenum 19.4Google Scholar (PG 49.196)Google Scholar. Negative patristic responses to amulets are discussed in Eckstein, F. and Waszink, J. H., ‘Amulett’, RAC 1.407, 408.Google Scholar

65 See Aune above in note 61. Compare Apuleius’ understanding of the art of the magi as ‘philosophy’ in Apol. 25, 27, 103.Google Scholar

66 Aune, , ‘Magic’, 1518Google Scholar. Benko, (Pagan Rome, 129)Google Scholar refers to the Sentences of Paulus 5.23.15–18Google Scholar which prohibit magical activities that ‘enchant, bewitch, or bind anyone’ (ca 210; ET in Scott, , Civil Law 1.326–7)Google Scholar. The penalty is crucifixion or wild beasts. Books of magic are to be burned and owners are to be exiled or put to death, depending on their social rank. Compare the Twelve Tables 8.1 and 8.8 for laws concerning possibly magical carmina and magical activity against another's crops (see the text in Riccobono, , Fontes 1.52, 55)Google Scholar, Digest 48.8Google Scholar, Justinian's, Codex 9.18Google Scholar and Codex Theodosianus 9.16Google Scholar. Bouché-Leclerq refers to various laws and imperial activities against magicians and astrologers including a text for Dion Cassius (76.13 LCL) in which S. Severus had gathered all the magical texts he could find in Egypt and put them in the tomb of Alexander, (L'astrologie Grecque, 566, n. 3)Google Scholar. R. MacMullen gives many references to legal texts that condemned magical activities (Enemies of the Roman Order [Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1966] 124–6).Google Scholar

67 The text is a law promulgated under Constantine, May 23, 321–1; Cod. Theod. 9.16.3 (ed. Haenel)Google Scholar. ET in Pharr, , The Theodosian Code, 237.Google Scholar

68 Aune, , ‘Magic’, 1523.Google Scholar

69 See Galen's use of a peony root as an amulet in the section above on the medical understanding of fever.

70 Preisendanz, Karl (Papyri Graecae Magicae, Die Griechische Zauberpapyri [2 vols.; ed. Heitsch, E./Henrichs, A., Stuttgart: Teubner, 1973/1974])Google ScholarPGM 18b. ET in Betz, H. D., The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, including the Demotic Spells (Chicago/London: University of Chicago, 1986) PGM 18b.Google Scholar

71 Brashear, William, ‘Vier Berliner Zaubertexte’, Zeitschrift fülr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 19 (1975) 28Google Scholar (ET in Betz, , PGM 106)Google Scholar. Amulets and recipes that are not obviously Christian include the following: Betz, , PGM 7.211–14, 18b, 33, 43, 47, 83, 87, 88, 90, 91, 104, 106, 115, 130.Google Scholar

72 Preisendanz, , PGM P5a (2.212)Google Scholar; ET in Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #15.Google Scholar

73 Preisendanz, , PGM P13 (2.220–2)Google Scholar; ET in Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #10Google Scholar. See Meyer for translations of other Greek and Coptic amulets and spells against fever (Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #11, 12, 15, 16, 20, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 64, 67, 133)Google Scholar. For another Christian fever amulet and bibliography see Maltomini, F., ‘Due Papiri Magici Inediti’, in: Studi Classiciet Orientali 31 (1981) lllffGoogle Scholar. (in Betz it is PGM 128). An unedited Christian prayer against fever appears in Wobbermin, G., Altchristliche Liturgische Stücke aus der Kirche Aegyptens…. (TU N.F. II, 3b; Leipzig: Heinrichs, 1898) 7, 8Google Scholar. Still useful on amulets in general (pagan and Christian) is Wilcken, U., ‘Heidnisches und Christliches aus Àgypten’, Archiv für Papyrus forschung 1 (1901) 420–9Google Scholar. P. J. Sijpesteijn lists pagan and Christian amulets against fever and gives reference to scholarship done on the Christian use of amulets (‘Ein Christliches Amulett aus der Amsterdamer Papyrussammlung’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 5 [1970] 57 n. 1; 58 n. 2).Google Scholar

74 Preisendanz, , PGM P18 (2.227)Google Scholar; ET in Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #13.Google Scholar

75 Papyri Greek and Egyptian. Edited by Various Hands in Honour of Eric Garner Turner on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday (Greco-Roman Memoirs, 68; London: British Academy, 1981) #49 (193)Google Scholar = Meyer, , Ancient Christian Magic #14.Google Scholar

76 Vassiliev, A., Anecdota Graeco-Byzantina (Vol. 1; Moscow: University of Moscow, 1893) 323.Google Scholar

77 Crum, W. E., ‘La Magie Copte. Nouveaux Textes’, Receuil d'Études Égyptologiques (Bibliotheque de l'École des Hautes Études … Sciences Historiques et Philologiques, 234; Paris: Champion, 1922) 543Google Scholar (= Kropp 2.16 [62, 63]). Crum's references to other amulets with the story of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law are Turaiev, , Christ. Vostok, 1, p. 203Google Scholar (unavailable to me) and Worrell, W., ‘Studien zum abessinischen Zauberwesen’, ZA 24 (1910) 79Google Scholar. Worrell edited a text from a 19th-century Ethiopic MS that mentions the Gospel of Mark in an amulet for one possessed by a demon. The text freely quotes Mark 1.29ff. Horn refers to the text in Kropp in a discussion of Christian amulets against fever (‘Fieber’, 906).

78 Betz, , ‘Introduction to the Greek Magical Papyri’, Greek Magical Papyri, xlviii.Google Scholar

79 Kee shows that ancient Judaism (II BCE to I CE) was interested in Hellenistic medicine and also believed that illness could be due to demonic influence Medicine, 21–6.

80 Clement Strom. 8.9 (see the section on the medical causes of fever).

81 ET from Armstrong, A. H., Plotinus… Enneads II. 1–9 (LCL; Cambridge/London: Harvard/Heinemann, 1979) 2.9.14 (277–81).Google Scholar

82 Staehelin, Ernst, Johann Caspar Lavaters ausgewählte Werke (vol. 2; Zürich: Zwingli, 1943) 96, 97, 102, 107, 108,109.Google Scholar

83 Athanasius, Orationes tres contra Arianos PG 26.392 (TLG).Google Scholar

84 Nyssenus, GregoriusDe opificio hominis PG 44.217 (TLG).Google Scholar

85 Damascenus, JohannesSacra parallela PG 96.145 (TLG)Google Scholar. One could multiply such references. Other examples include: Chrysostomus, Ps.Contra Judaeos, gentiles et haereticos PG 48.1076 (TLG)Google Scholar; Basilius, Ps., Consolatoria ad aegrotum PG 31.1721 (TLG)Google Scholar; Epiphanius, Panarion vol. 2.268Google Scholar (GCS 31 in TLG); Origines, Comm. in evangelium Joannis Bk 13 chap. 63, sec. 445 (SC 222 in TLG). One of the Syrian fathers, Dionysius Bar Salibi, when commenting on Matt 8.15, simply notes that health followed when the disease left, tand that doctors could not affect the healing. He calls the disease a אגךךוכ (illness) and not a demon. He contrasts it with the health (אנמלות) that follows (Latin, trans, in Commentarii in Evangelia 189 (CSCO vol. 85, part 40)Google Scholar and Syriac text in Commentarii in Evangelia 253 (CSCO vol. 77, part 33).Google Scholar

86 Cramer, J. A., Catenae Graecorum Patrum in Novum Testamentum (vols. 1, 2; Oxford: Oxford University, 1844) 1.277.Google Scholar

87 Cramer, , Catenae 2.40.Google Scholar

88 Hieronymus, Tract, in Marci Euangelium 1.13–31Google Scholar (CChrSL 88.468). These examples could also be multiplied at will. Compare other writers who identify fever with the passions: Beda, In Marcum 1 (CChrSL 120.448)Google Scholar and In Lucam 4.32–9 (CChrSL 120.111)Google Scholar; Theophylact, , Enarratio in Evangelium Marci 1 (PG 123.505)Google Scholar; Zigabenus, Euthymius, Comment, in Marcum 2 (PG 129.780)Google Scholar. Horn discusses the use of the concept of the ‘passions’ to understand fever in ancient interpretation (‘Fieberü 902–4).

89 Mülhaupt, Erwin, D Martin Luthers Evangelien-Auslegung (vol. 2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973) 293.Google Scholar