Re: CHALDAEANS, J. Fabre d'Envieu, 'Le Livre du Prophète Daniel' [1890]

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: CHALDAEANS, J. Fabre d'Envieu, 'Le Livre du Prophète Daniel' [1890]

Post by billd89 »

Image

'aššafım = אשפים, Assaphim, Asaphim, Aschaphim, Aschaphim, Ashshafim, Ashshaphim; Aššɔpīm.
mekaššfım/mecaššfım = מכשפים, Mecasphim, Mekasphim, Machspim, Mechaschephim.

J. Fabre d'Envieu, Le Livre du Prophète Daniel traduit d'après le texte hébreu, araméen et grec, Vol. 2 [1890], pp.109-121

Various Classes of the Babylon Sages.

All critics (and Cäsar von Lengerke himself) admit there were divisions and classes among the Wise-Men of Chaldea. It is known there were sections among Egyptian ‘priests’ (Exodus 7: 11; Herodotus 2:36, 2:58), and it is not surprising when we consider the diversity of functions these scholars had to fulfill. In Babylon there were even special colleges.

Daniel mentions four classes (2:2, 4:4,5:11), three classes (5:7), and one single ruling class (2:4,10). Here, it should suffice to give a short explanation of the titles for such ‘Wise-Men,’ scholars, priests, astrologers, etc., of Babylonia.

The class of hartummim (XX) occupies primary rank. The Septuagint aptly translates this term as ἱερογραμματεῖς (sacred scribes). Lengerke {in Das Buch Daniel [1835]} adopted this sentiment and translated 'hartummim' as die Bilderschriftkenner {Hieroglyphic Expert}. In fact, these people were scholars, scribes, royal notaries. This term derives from XXX (stamp, chisel, stylus, writing instrument). A hartom was the scholar who knew how to read and write characters of the classical and sacred language, the one who applied himself to books, tablets, and special cuneiform writing reserved for the learned classes. He was the interpreter of sovereign orders and secret laws of the empire. Many scribes were employed to copy old texts and to prepare new ones. Thus, strictly speaking, hartummim were ‘men of the stamp’, people of letters, literates. They formed {p.110} a literary society. Also, we see that the god Nabu or Nebo is represented with the writing-punch or stylus (Assyrian: hatļu, punch to engrave, to write; reed, scepter), because he was regarded as the Inventor of Writing. From this meaning of the name offered by Daniel, we see that it has been mis-translated as ‘diviners, horoscope-readers, fortune-tellers, magicians or astrologers’ (Vulgate harioli; Theodotion, ἐπαοιδοὺς = enchanters; LXX, σοφιστὰς). It is true many hierogrammatists (or ‘scholars educated in literature and the science of books’) must have been involved in magic. The name hartummim could thus also be taken in an unfavorable direction (like that of ‘philosopher’, which often indicates only dangerous sophists); simply, it indicated magicians, sorcerers, enchanters, and individuals who meddled with matters in the field of magic.

Hartummim, properly called, undoubtedly carried in their hands a symbol of their profession, an instrument similar to the one they used for writing. This instrument would later become a hallmark which distinguished all those concerned with true (or false) sciences: with astrology and astronomy, with occult sciences, etc. Thus, the Roman augur held a short stick in his right hand, curved at one end called lituus. We also find this usage in Egypt. Among Greeks, the religious poets of the First Age, the Rhapsodes who sang of the deeds of gods and heroes, who composed religious hymns, and mythological stories, they carried in hand a tree-branch (laurel or myrtle). The name of these scholars, which is given the meaning of ‘singers of stitched lays’ (ῥαπτῶν ἐπέων), seems rather to come from ῥάβδος (rod) which was the sign of their profession. This etymology, confirmed by Callimachus (Fragm.138) and by Apuleius (Florid.122), was adopted by Boileau who, in his Réflexions critiques sur Longin, calls the Rhapsodes ‘singers of the branch.’ Pindar and Plato make Homer a rhapsode, and it is in allusion to this name that this poet is represented on a medal of Smyrna as carrying a laurel branch in his hand. For the same reason, several gods regarded as protectors of letters and sciences were also represented carrying a stick.

Quite recently, an etymology has been proposed which would link the term ḥartom to the Assyrian word harutu (scepter), found in inscriptions designating the scepter {p.111} carried by kings. Yet the scepter could very well have received this name because it resembled the stylus and designated the king as Chief-Scholar of his kingdom: as legislator, possessor of the magical sciences, and uerrier (Cfr. stylus and stylet). This wand, which became a divining or magic-wand, indicated his kingship over inhabitants of the Earth and Spirit-World.

Later, we shall see Daniel had the title and dignity of rab-hartummim (4:6) or ‘Chief-of-Letters’. When speaking of the Hebrew Prophet, it is needless to say this term must be taken in its special, original and etymological sense, not in that general and quite secondary sense of ‘Diviner’ or ‘Enchanter’.

The 'aššafım (1:20; 2:27; 4:4) were presumed to be astrologers, enchanters, magicians, etc. Aben-Esra translates this term as refa'im (doctors) and Theodotion as magoi. Saadia and Kimchi explain it as 'astronomers, observers of the stars' (probably attaching this term to zafah: he observed, spied); the LXX (Venetian Greek) translate by astronomos; the Vatican edition by magous, and the Chigi manuscript by pharmakous. For Lengerke, the 'aššafım are conjurors (die Beschwörer). But the Greek of Alexandria seems to have captured the true etymological meaning of the name by rendering it as philosophous. Indeed, the aš-šaf was the Babylonian sophos, who studied the superior, admirable, difficult and demonic things, as Aristotle says: τά καὶ περιττὰ μὲν καὶ θαυμαστὰ καὶ χαλεπὰ καὶ δαιμόνια (Ethic., 6,7).

Much too influenced by rationalists of his day, Calmet incorrectly expressed himself about this term: "The root of Asaphim is not found in Chaldean. Some clever people (Grotius) pretend this term comes from the Greek Sophos. The Septuagint and the Vulgate have very well rendered it by Magi: they were the philosophers of that country. So this name was very honorable" (Hoc loco). However, this commentator could easily have found an etymology for this word in the Semitic languages. Moreover, he notes the author of Ecclesiastes 6:23, seems to derive Sophia from the Hebrew XXX ‘hide’). Without stopping at this etymology, we shall observe that Greek critics have supported the thesis of the scholars whose prejudices made D. Calmet tremble. Dr. Williams (Introduction to P.S. Deprez, Daniel; or, The Apocalypse of the Old Testament [1865], p.xxiiii) believes that the term 'aššafım (the Wise-Men, diviners) could only be the Greek word sophos. He might have known, however, that the Greeks took philosophy from the ‘barbarians’ {p.112} that is, from the Babylonians, so it is natural to think the word traveled as such. But we cannot dwell on this point here. It is sufficient to recall that Pusey has proven the word 'aššuf has a certain Aramaic origin. Indeed, this root initially had the meaning of ‘to speak in a low voice, mysteriously.’ This meaning is preserved in the Syriac 'ašef; and it is found in Hebrew words našaf, našam, saaf, and in the Arabic nasafa (to speak low, secretly), the meaning of which reappears in the Arabic nasifo, clandestine preservation, secret, hidden thing). This root then meant ‘to fascinate, to enchant,’ to whisper certain formulas that were supposed to have a mysterious influence and extraordinary power. Thus the Hebrew word lahas first had the meaning of ‘to speak low’ and then that of enchanting, conjuring. The noun 'aššaf very well designated the man who possessed a secret, mysterious science transmitted in a manner which Pythagoras had borrowed from his teachers. Indeed, it is known that Pythagoreans communicated their teaching by secret signs. Basically and originally, 'aššafım were scholars in abstruse, philosophical and theological sciences: the 'aššafım were above all theosophists.

Moreover, it should not be ignore that the aššaf (like later Neo-Pythagoreans and Neo-Platonists) fell into superstitious practices also, and that this name designated one who worked enchantments: particularly, one who charmed snakes. The Assyrian word a-si-pu was discovered which translates as ‘conjurer’. This name became synonymous with ‘enchanter’: it designated men in charge of repelling evil spirits, using incantations, prayers or imprecations. From these explanations, it still follows that the word 'ašaf (alef is a simple aspiration which could have passed for the Greek article ó) is probably identical to the word Sophos, and that it is completely wrong that Daniel borrowed it from the Greeks. On the contrary, the Greek word can be assumed a simple transcription of the Hebrew word.

The mekaššfım (XXX) were probably a particular type of enchanter. St. Jerome translates this term as malefici; he believes they used sacrificial victims' blood in their magical operations and that they used corpses to ascertain the future. Menochius, Tirin, Grotius imagine those evoking souls of the dead by their enchantments were necromancers. According to Lengerke, this term means ‘magician’ {p.113} (Zauberer). In Syriac the root kašaf means ‘to whisper, to speak in a low voice’. Therefore, the original meaning of mekaššfım would indicate 'men who spoke low while reciting mysterious words'. In Arabic, kašaf means detexit, denudavit future {=disclosed, uncovered the future}; and in this case, mekaššfım would designate ‘revelators of future things’.

The Casdim or Chaldeans (Assyrian frequently changes a sibilant before a dental into an l; cf. Jules Oppert, Éléments de la Grammaire Assyrienne [1868] p.5) were once a tribe distinguished by religious and superstitious knowledge. Later on, in addition to its ethnic meaning, this name, took on a restricted meaning and designated more particularly a caste particularly devoted to magical practices. This is the sense Daniel takes for the term, here: Casdim were the official interpreters of dreams and omens. In later Antiquity, among the Greeks and Romans, fortune-tellers and magicians were called 'Chaldeans'. The name Casdim was perhaps not so debased in Daniel's time. It referred to a priestly and learned caste which had become preponderant in Babylon after the Twentieth Century’s reformation {i.e. c.1850 BC}. This priestly caste came from the conquering race of Casdim or Chaldeans; however, they did not concentrate all sciences under their control. The Casdim seem to have formed a priestly caste of its own. But next to it, besides this priestly college, there were scientific colleges whose attributions were all different. We will not pause to search for an etymology of the name of the Casdim.

The one imagined by Saadia (as demons כְשֵׁדִים) is no better than Scheuchzer's. A. Scheuchzer {in M. Heidenheim's Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift für englisch-theologische Forschung und Kritik, Vol. 4., No. 4 (1868)} merely changes Khasd into Khsad1 - which becomes Zend Khsaeta {=fiery red} identical to the Sanskrit Kshatriya {=authority; Red} - and the name 'Casdim' would mean 'the dominators' or 'warriors'. It costs nothing more to identify the Sanskrit stem with the Aramaic schalat (to dominate), which has exactly the same meaning, and to recall the Casdim name with that of the Scythians. We cannot take these linkages seriously. In our opinion, the word 'Casdim' derives from the Assyrian Kasid (acquirer, conqueror). It was the name of a Semitic tribe which conquered the southern part of the Euphrates-Tigris basin and adopted the writing and part of the language and religion of the conquered people, just as Tatar, Mongol or Turkish conquerors were yoked to the writing, language and beliefs of China or Islam. {p.114} The terms Casd-im and Chald-æi are two collateral forms, whose origin we have explained.

Further on, Daniel (5:7; 2), speaks of a class he designates by the term gazrin (See at the place indicated). Nor does the Prophet mention here the hakkim or Wise-Men (Aramaic: hakkim, wise; Hebrew: hakam, wise, prudent, skilful, experienced), of whom he speaks elsewhere (2:12,21; 4:3; 5:7,8). Translators who have rendered this term (and various words mentioned above) as ‘magi’ demonstrate they were more interested in Persians than Chaldeans. It is also worth noting the term ‘Wise-Man’ included all classes of scholars and literates of Babylonia.

Moreover, we must repeat here what we have mentioned about the names of magistrates: the etymology of the Wise-Men’s names does not always indicate the special meaning of each of these names. Translators have interpreted them according to Greek customs which copied Asia and Egypt on so many points.

Objections.
It would have been surprising if critics had not raised objections to these classes of Babylonian sages. It is therefore claimed Daniel did not know the organization of ‘the priestly and learned caste of Babylon.’ But it will be easy to see the rationalists' objections on this subject are groundless: they are based only on ignorance of these critics.

{p.115} Objection to the limited meaning of the term ‘Casdim’.
Some rationalist critics have objected to the limited usage or restricted meaning of the term ‘Casdim’ as designating a single section of the ‘Magi.’ Wilhelm Gesenius (Der Prophet Jesaia, Vol.2 [1821] p.355) questions the limited meaning of this term. However, it is used by Daniel (2:2,10; 5:17; 2) to designate a class of Wise-Men of Babylon; and in Ctesias the word ‘Chaldean’ means the highest class of magi. It is true, as Gesenius and Hitzig say, the term Chaldean is used in a general sense (Ch.2:4; 4). But Lengerke rightly replies that this is a shorthand way of speaking and that a dominant class is named to avoid recapitulating or detailing various groups again (p.50).

Objection to the number of classes specified in this verse.
Bleek (in Schleiermacher’s Zeitschr. Heft 111. § 25 c.1860) doubts there were different classes. But even if one were to claim the Casdim were a large priestly and learned class, one would still have to admit their various groups. Indeed, apart from astrology practiced by the Casdim, it is known there were diviners versed in the art of predicting the future by bird-flight, explaining dreams and prodigies, and inspecting the entrails of victims, as neatly explained by Diodorus of Sicily (11.29). Now, these various subjects could very well indicate different classes, such as we have recognized among Greeks. Also Lenormant says with reason: "The Greek writer thus points out to us among the Chaldeans the existence, in the state of a study pushed very forward and regular in its procedures, {p.116} of the four principal divisions which one recognized to the divinatory art in the classical world, {1} the science of auguries and auspices sought in the observation of birds, {2} the haruspicy according to the entrails of sacrificial victims, {3} the study and explanation of prodigies or signs of any nature, τέρατα {=monstrosities}, which strictly speaking constituted the mantic practice {i.e. prophecy/divination}, and finally {4} the interpretation of dreams. His statement is confirmed by the testimony of fragments we receive from augural literature, in cuneiform script, because there we find examples of all these kinds of divination sufficient to give us a certain idea of the manner in which one practiced them." (La Divination et la Science des Présages chez les Chaldéens: les Sciences Occultes en Asie [1875], p.51ff). The same Assyriologist also tells us: “It is important to note that the division we find in the astrological and divinatory books of the Chaldeans corresponds, in the data of the biblical Book of Daniel, to two special classes of the Chaldean caste, the chasdim and the gazrim, the astrologers and the soothsayers, just as we have already noted, in a previous work La Magie chez les Chaldéens et les Origines Accadiennes, p.13), that three other classes corresponded to the three divisions of the magic books" (16. p.49).

It is moreover evident that not all Chaldean scholars simultaneously cultivated all the various branches of true or superstitious knowledge of their time. Moreover, one cannot help recognizing that - besides astrologers, diviners, magicians and sorcerers - there were men who possessed positive notions of astronomy, meteorology, physics, chemistry, and medicine; we also know there were engineers, architects, and scribes. Furthermore, we see Lengerke granting his pseudo-Daniel a certain knowledge of the priestly classes of Babylonia; which, he says, is not surprising, for the Babylonian ‘magi’ persisted long after Christ, and there were relations between Palestine and Babylonia. Nevertheless, the rationalist critic claims to have discovered here the error of a writer not quite familiar with Chaldean matters (p.49). He therefore points out historical contradictions about the ‘Magi,’ and finds the author has in this connection mixed the true with the false. The alleged historical errors concerning the Magi concern: firstly, the number of the five classes, and secondly, the introduction of Daniel and his friends into a closed pagan-caste given to superstitious practices (pp.47,51). We shall answer this last objection a little further on (see vs. 48).

{p.117} Lengerke thus accuses Daniel of being mistaken in listing five sections or classes of magi. "The rest of antiquity protests against this assertion (dagegen spricht das übrige Alterthum), for all the ancient writers have known only three orders of priests or magi." To prove this, the critic has recourse to Indians, Medes, Persians and Bactrians, and he could just as easily have had recourse to the Catholic clergy (bishops, priests and deacons). Hence the argument of the rationalist critic: the Persian magi had only three orders; therefore there were only three orders or classes of Wise-Men among Babylonians. Nor does it merit anything better to confuse the Median magi of Daniel's day with Mazdean or Zoroastrian magi of a more recent period (see Introd., pp.586-608).

The authorities for "the uniform report of all antiquity" on which Lengerke relies are St. Jerome (contra Jov., I, p. 55), and Porphyry of Abstin., IV, 16). But in reality, neither gives his own testimony; they quote Eubulus. A rhetorician of this name is known to have lived about 370 BC; another Eubulus lived about 200 years before this same Christian era. It is undoubtedly the latter who said, in his Mithra history: "the magi were divided into three classes." But at what time was that division made? In the time of Eubulus, or in some earlier period? Among Babylonians in Nebuchadnezzar's day, or among Persians at the time of Darius, son of Hystaspe? Obviously, Eubulus has Persians in mind, since his book is about Mithras. But we may ask: what does Persian usage of the 3rd or 2nd C. BC prove against Babylonian practice in the 7th C. BC? It is a division completely alien to the Chaldean sages. The Zend-Avesta speaks of two classes - it is not known at what time - the herbeds (candidates for the priesthood) and the mobeds (priests). But this Persian hierarchy was established and clearly defined only in a later period, and it has no connection with the organization of Aramaic sages of Babylonia. Daniel speaks of the latter, and therefore the Persian usage {p.118} is of little importance. He speaks of the Chaldeans. It is impermissible to reason this way: the Persian magi formed three groups, therefore the Chaldean sages did not comprise five classes. So Lengerke is not entitled to conclude the Book of Daniel's author is a writer of a recent age, and of a remote country where tradition had preserved no more than a vague, uncertain testimony of the past. This critic has succumbed to the mania of 'Parsism', which is seeing Zoroastrianism everywhere. Since the middle of the 18th C. AD, anti-Christians have thought the best way to see clearly into something is to muddle it; by following this method they have confused a relatively modern religion (which only became a completed religion in the time of the Sassanids) with the Babylonians' religion under Nebuchadnezzar. Thus Lengerke has come to confuse classes of Babylonian sages (Casdim, etc.) with the magi who formed a Mede caste, whose worship and beliefs were reformed in name under Zoroastrianism, at the time of the Achaemenids, around the 5th C. BC. This observation is sufficient to show that texts relating to these magi prove nothing against texts of Daniel relating to Babylonian sages. Moreover, the Assyriological discoveries would not contradict testimony of the Prophet, since according to Fr. Lenormant, the "five classes of doctors (in the Book of Daniel) correspond exactly to the five great divisions which we have observed in the surviving fragments of sacred, astrological, divinatory and magical books" (La Divination, etc., p.189).

It unnecessary to think that magical practice absorbed all the activity of Chaldean sages, however. Among them were scholars, writers in the archaic style (Assyro-Accadian), engineers, architects, mechanics, physicists, men versed in political, administrative, military knowledge; simply, besides those who led the religious cult and devoted themselves to superstitious magic, there were scholars who were depositories of all the knowledge of their day. There were schools or academies in Babylon (in Borsippa, in Sippara, etc). It is known that Chaldean astronomers possessed very advanced knowledge: they knew the true dimension of the earth, its movement around the sun, the precession of the equinoxes, and they calculated eclipses. It was only natural that such varied scholars should form different groups and be designated by special names.
{p.119}
Therefore, Reuss was wrong for repudiating Lengerke's connection by pretending not to take seriously these named classes of Babylonian sages mentioned by Daniel. "For the author, all these terms could have been synonymous or approximate, and we can safely ignore the three classes of priests mentioned by Classical writers" (La Bible, etc., Vol.7, p.233). Nothing proves the names used by Daniel are synonymous, but it is quite true the three orders of Zoroastrianism are irrelevant here. In 7th C BC Mesopotamia, Casdim were the dominant race, and some of them had formed one of the classes (probably the priestly class); but it was all of these classes together which constituted that entirety designated by the name ‘sages’ (hakkimey: - II, 12, 48) of Babylon.

Nor will it be pointless to note here an unforgivable confusion which fanciful critics have made of Nebuchadnezzar's ‘Wise-Men’ of Babylon with Medo-Persian ‘magi’ subsequent to Cyrus. It is true Greeks and the Latins have misunderstood the former as ‘magi,’ attributing, in a retroactively, the name for Persianized Medo-European diviners and enchanters to classes of Chaldean-Babylonian scholars and magicians. (One might have said the same of Greek, Egyptian, Carthaginian, or Roman magicians.) This name took on a vague meaning found in the word ‘magician’. Yet it seems that no Chaldean class of ‘Wise-Men’ were called ‘magicians’. It is true Jeremiah (39:13) does mention a personage who bore the title of rb mg (XXX), who the Massoretes made rab mag. This last word has been identified as the name for ‘magus’. But it has now been discovered one of the chief dignitaries of the Babylonian government was named rubu emga. He is considered a chief of the priestly caste, one of the principal agents of the Babylonian cult. However, we do not know which modern Orientalist assures us this character was the Chief of the Fleet. In any case, this hybrid qualification includes the Assyrian word rubu (= Hebrew rab, great) and the Accadian em-ga (glorious, august). Jeremiah simply wrote the consonants of this compound word, conforming to the Jewish way of writing. The name ‘magus’, in fact, belongs to a {p.120} tribe and caste of Medes which appeared in Babylonia only after the Persian conquest. Herodotus mentions this tribe, but it is not known whether they were Turanian or Aryan. There was certainly a Turanian ethnic layer in Media, but it is no less true that there was also an Aryan tribe in this region which eventually became dominant. In the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, a pseudo-Daniel would not have failed to call the Wise-Men of Babylon ‘magi’. But the real Daniel was careful not to confuse the Median magi with the Babylon ‘Wise –Men’ at the time of the Captivity.

Objection to the convocation of these classes.
Bleek finds it odd that Nebuchadnezzar should have summoned all the classes of 'magi' to explain a dream, when it would have sufficed to call together that class especially concerned with this subject, namely the oneiroscopes. It was replied that the King (having forgotten particulars of the dream and understanding the difficulty of the problem whose solution he wished to obtain) had decided to summon all the wise-men for this reason: that what one class could not do, the other could. Lengerke rejected the allegation of his Rationalist colleague and does not find it surprising that, the King was not satisfied to summon those who rightly concerned with this branch of divinatory practice, in order to obtain the revelation or indication of this dream. It is understandable that when one type of divination failed to produce results, another method had to be used. It might also be necessary to have recourse to astrology, the evocation of spirits and other practices of the mantic art.

{p.121}
Also, Hartummim or sacred scribes were particularly needed to interpret the written signs, sounds, voices, oracles of the gods which might be part of a dream, offering mysterious things necessary to fathom. Thus, it is understood a hurtom had to be summoned on occasion. Indeed, one of those dreams which Greeks called ‘compound’ (σύνθετος = synthetic) often presented itself, which contained several distinct omens, and whose various parts had to be interpreted in isolation (Cf. Artemidorus, Oneirocritica 4.35).

Daniel accused of plagiarism and forgery.
Gesenius has claimed that probably the author of the Book of Daniel simply assembled various designations of classes of people he enumerates, as they are mentioned in other places in the Bible; and Lengerke says this is ‘what he undoubtedly did’ (p.47). But on what basis do these critics make this accusation? On none. They say that pseudo-Daniel only imitated chapters in which Moses describes ‘magicians’ of Egypt (Genesis 41:24; Exodus 8:11). It is true that among the Egyptians there were functions analogous to those of the ‘Wise-Men of Chaldea’, and it is not surprising Moses designated the ‘Wise-Men’ on the banks of the Nile by names taken from the language of his people. Abraham first spoke the Aramaic language in use during his time in Mesopotamia, so his descendants called the scholars of Egypt by names of parallel classes in Chaldea. Thus, among the Magicians who fought against Moses we find mention of hartummim (Genesis 41:8,24; Exodus 7:10,12; 8:3,14,15; 9:11). This term is not found in other books of the Old Testament. Moses also mentions mecaššfım (Exodus 7:11). It is not surprising Daniel found such scholars in Babylon, and that he referred to them by names they had already held before the Terahites’ emigration. But Moses enumerates eight different classes of magicians (Deuteronomy 18:9, 10,11), which Daniel does not mention. On the other hand, the latter speaks of the Casdim, the 'aššafım and the gazrin, who are not mentioned in the Pentateuch. Besides, what would the mention of these same terms in other passages of the Bible prove against the Book of Daniel? In no way would it follow that these classes did not exist in Babylon at the time of the Exile.

1. See Edouard Secrétan, Les Assyriens. Nouvelles recherches dans le champ de l'histoire assyrienne [1871], p.36:
The Assyrians are a conquering people. Babylon, according to Ctesias, was his first conquest, but not his place of origin; their appearance in history is contemporary with and identical to that of the Khasdim. M. Scheuchzer's thesis is essentially based on philology. Without wanting to follow him to the end on this ground, we will nevertheless try to give an idea of his argument. Khasd makes Semitic plural Khasdim; now Khasd is Khsad, whence the Sanskrit makes Kshaita and the Zend Khsaeta and which, in the cuneiform inscriptions of the first kind, is transformed into Khsavathia. The Persian Khasayathias are therefore the equivalent of the Kshatriyas of India, a word which in Sanskrit designates the class of warriors. The real meaning of this word is 'ruler', and Kshatra means 'power, government'.

User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Asaphim: References

Post by billd89 »

Keyword Variants:
Chartumim = הרטמים, Chareṭummı̂ym, Harṭummim, Khartumim
Mecasphim = מכשפים, Machspim, Mekasphim
Kasdim = Casdim

Most scholars accept the Book of Daniel dates to c.165 BC. Yet Philo Judaeus himself does not quote it, for reasons unknown. Perhaps he consciously avoided recent parts of the Torah? In Daniel, the incidence of Egyptian concepts and terms clearly names four classes of mantic workers (i.e."magicians") known to Alexandrian Jews of the 2nd C. BC, approximately four generations before Philo's Therapeutae.

If Philo had studied (c.15 BC) under a Therapeut master of 70 years old (himself educated c.70 BC), said teacher might have studied in a school of the Bible's authors and at a time when Asaphim still openly practiced their arts. In key particulars, Philo's Therapeutae resemble the (Jewish) Biblical Asaphim, who are likewise conflated as scribes and healers (i.e.'magicians') in later definitions. These 'dream interpreters' (i.e. early psychologists) would have been identifiable, if problematic, to a strictly observant Jewish audience in Ptolemaic Egypt. Yet Philo didn't touch this material; that's telling. Philo Judaeus harshly condemns 'radical exegetes' of his day, scholars who pervert Holy Scripture, although it is unclear who those enemies were exactly. We may presume this kind of Jewish 'dream interpretation' ("magic") had been condemned by Philo's day, even if the pseudo-Hadrianic Epistle in the Historia Augusta suggests a popularity otherwise.

Daniel 1:17: "Daniel had insight into all kinds of visions and dreams."
The Book of Daniel was a Jewish book for Jews and those who they would influence; Daniel is classed among exegetes, expounders or interpreters of dreams (LXX. ἐξηγηταί). As Daniel tells us, and other parts of the OT make clear, Jewish seers were competitive in the marketplace. In Philo's coded discourse, these theosophically-oriented spiritualists were euphemistically labelled "philosophers" with disdain. The legitimate question arises, then, of why he even wrote about the Therapeutae at all. (Possible solution: in his early life, Philo had once defended the colony in a political trial, c.17 AD.) Although there is much that could be examined in Daniel and elsewhere on this topic generally, we want to focus on these Jewish theosophers specifically.

Daniel 1:20: "And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the Chartumim and Asaphim that were in all his realm."

The four Jewish boys (incl. Daniel) were wiser than all scribal forecasters and theosophers in Nebuchadnezzar's realm. Asaphim appears only twice in the OT, at this late date (165 BC) and in this one book; the odd term always appears beside an Egyptian word. Asaphim may have an obscure Chaldean etymology (c.450 BC?), yet it appears to be a Judeo-Egyptian word; it is translated into English several different ways.

From the ancient Hebrew, Daniel 2:2: "So the king commanded to summon the Chartumim (scribal forecasters), Asaphim (theosophers), Mecasphim (sorcerers), and Kasdim (folk-magicians) to explain his dreams."

Thanks to this passage, the order makes sense: here are levels, classes and grades of spiritualists recognized by Jews. There are different types: from the most sophisticated to the primitive, including scribes and song-smiths, both black- and white-magicians. The Greek translation has made significant changes, however, and the conflation of both 'Scribes' and 'Song-Enchanters' in the Asaphim class (c.165 BC) seems most significant to our inquiry. How did Alexandrian Jews recognize these mantic specialists, c.175 BC - 25 AD?

In Daniel 1:20, ἐπαοιδοὺς = Asaphim. So to Daniel 2:2: καὶ ἐπέταξεν ὁ βασιλεὺς εἰσενεχθῆναι τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς (enchanters) καὶ τοὺς μάγους (magi: wise-men) καὶ τοὺς φαρμακοὺς (witch-doctors; druggists) τῶν Χαλδαίων (astrologers? folk-magicians).

To better grasp questions of terminology here, some detailed definitions are necessary:
1.Chartumim: (הרטמים) chareṭummı̂ym, The word is defined by Gesenius to mean, "Sacred scribes, skilled in the sacred writings or hieroglyphics - ἱερογραμματεῖς hierogrammateis - a class of Egyptian priests." It is, according to him (Lex.), of Hebrew origin, and is derived from חרט chereṭ, "stylus" - an instrument of writing, and the formative מ (m). It is not improbable, he suggests, that the Hebrews with these letters imitated a similar Egyptian word. Prof. Stuart (in loc.) says that the word would be correctly translated "pen-men," and supposes that it originally referred to those who were "busied with books and writing, and skilled in them." It is evident that the word is not of Persian origin, since it was used in Egypt long before it occurs in Daniel.

In the OT, the word Chartumim refers to Egyptian scribal magicians and horoscopists, notably except at Daniel 2:2. The word, therefore, is presumably Judeo-Egyptian; by definition, some connection to the priests of Thoth is suspected.
Daniel 2:10: חַרְטֹּ֖ם charṭôm, khar-tome'; from the same as kheret; a horoscopist (as drawing magical lines or circles):—magician. *the fact that the word is always applied to Egyptian magicians, except Daniel 2:2 (late), suggests Egyptian origin, but no agreement among Egyptologists: HarkavyJas., 1870, Mars-Avril, 169 proposes χαρ, speak + tum, hidden =teller of hidden things; WiedSamml 44 thinks Hebrew word perhaps imitating an Egyptian cher-ṭem-t, he who holds the book; FCCook'Speaker's' Comm. i. 279 proposes cher-tum =bearer of sacred words.

2.If Asaphim (pl.) properly translates as ἐπαοιδοὺς, 'enchanters' or vocalizing magicians who charm by incantation or song, then such Egyptian divines practiced their art of healing through 'toning' or therapeutic sound. These harmonizing healers are likewise following a known Pythagorean practice, i.e. 'music of the spheres'. We see further Egyptian evidence of this in the Greek Magical Papyri. (Note: the Pythagorean Therapeutae at Alexandria also wrote and sang hymns; this movement had endured for many generations, Philo says.) So the Asaphim appear to be direct predecessors or identical spiritualists to Philo's Therapeutae (Philo, DVC 1.2).
"The Hebrew word { אַשָּׁף ʼashshâph, ash-shawf'; the etymology is uncertain} according to Gesenius, means "enchanters, magicians." It is derived, probably, from the obsolete root אשׁף 'âshap, "to cover," "to conceal," and refers to those who were devoted to the practice of occult arts, and to the cultivation of recondite and cabalistic sciences. It is supposed by some philologists to have given rise, by dropping the initial א to the Greek σοφος sophos, "wise, wise man," and the Persian sophi, an epithet of equivalent import"

The inclusion of 'Hellenized Persian' (if that were possible) or Hellenized Hebrew either suggests Asaphim was a fairly recent word for a kind of revelation marginal to both cultures c.200 BC.
Greek, τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς tous epaoidous. The Greek word means, "those singing to;" then those who propose to heal the sick by singing; then those who practice magical arts or incantations - particularly with the idea of charming with songs; and then those who accomplish anything surpassing human power by mysterious and supernatural means. - Passow.

Another possible connection of the Asaphim to snake-cults, or perhaps devotees of the Great Serpent Cult known from Alexandria (c.335 BC) is indicated by one etymological interpretation:
enchanters, Heb. ’ashshâph, Aram. ’âshaph, found only in the Book of Daniel (Daniel 2:2; Daniel 2:10; Daniel 2:27, Daniel 4:4, Daniel 5:7; Daniel 5:11; Daniel 5:15), the Assyrian ashipu (Schrader, KAT[187][188] ad loc), which passed also into Syriac, where it is used specially of the charmers of serpents.

[187] AT. Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T. 1885, 1888).

To explain an enchanter's work, see M. Dickie, Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World [2003], p.14ff:
To call a man an epodos, which means literally ‘one who sings over’ or ‘one who directs song at something’, does not mean that the man in question engaged in a specialized form of magic-working in which incantations were more than usually important. It is a fair guess, nonetheless, that the epodos was not originally a magician, but a man who specialized primarily in singing over persons afflicted with various physical ills to cure them of the ill or at any rate to alleviate their suffering. Despite their name, pharmakeis and pharmakides did not confine their activities to the use of drugs or poisons (pharmaka), although they too will have had their origins in persons expert in pharmaka and in the allied calling of the cutting of roots (rhizotomia).

3.kâshaph: וְלַֽמְכַשְּׁפִים֙. Sorcery and witchcraft, the Greek equivalent given is Pharmakos, a potion-maker (druggist) handling venom/poison, "one who uses drugs either for sorcery or magic practices." Sorcerers or witch-doctors are associated with black magic, but 'venom' suggests poisonous snakes (where participation in snake-cults remains a question). This role strongly implies the formulary functions of the Folk-Alchemist or Folk-Doctor, another Hermetic specialty consolidating and advancing c.200 BC - 200 AD.

4. Chaldeans וְלַכַּשְׂדִּ֔ים Kasdim in Egypt are presumably 'Old Semites' (Chaldean Jews) practicing white- or folk-magic. With a different meaning, they may otherwise be identified as Astrologers, as in Artapanus (c.150 BC) and Philo Judaeus (c.30 AD). Philo wrote (Abraham18.82) that the Patriarch Abraham went to Chaldea to study astronomy and "be versed in the doctrines of the Chaldaeans" then used his reasoning on these subjects to understand God. Afterwards, A. migrated to Egypt, where he presumably taught Chaldean arts. This is a favorable view towards 'Chaldeans' and their crafts, in Egypt c.25 AD (see also Abr.15.69; Migr. 32.178; Somniis 1.10.53). Philo also says Moses was by race a Chaldean {Vita Mosis 1.5 Μωυσῆς γένος μέν ἐστι Χαλδαῖος}; we know Moses ('The Egyptian') is the Father of Israel. Given the association of both Abraham and Moses with Egypt and its Chaldeans, the philosophy of the Patriarchs in Egypt re-directs our attention from all these (Jewish) "magicians" meantioned in the OT c.165 BC to Philo's ancient Judaic "philosophers" and healers of the same period, the Therapeutae.

A side note worth investigating further, Philo's word(s) for 'philosophers' may be analyzed: does he mean something closer to θεοσόφους, theosophers?

Two other sources credit Abraham for teaching the Greeks and Egyptians astrology, so the idea was very well-known. See a 2010 M.Phil., p.32:
If Eusebius and Josephus are right, then the earliest reference {to Abraham} dates after 290 BC. The Babyloniaca of Berossus, a book on Chaldean history in three volumes, is said to have introduced astrology to the Greek world, so the close association between Abraham and astrology might originate from that.

From Philo, Josephus, Elephantine papyri, etc. we know that "Chaldeans" are Judaic or Proto-Jewish Semites, so anything about this Judeo-Egyptian 'philosopher class' is fundamentally important. Unfortunately, most 19th C. scholars have garbled the terminolgy. See, for example:
It is curious to notice that the three parts composing thus the great work on magic, of which Sir Henry Rawlinson has found the remains, correspond exactly to the three classes of Chaldean doctors, which Daniel (2:2; 5:11) enumerates, together with the astrologers and divines (Kasdim and Gazrim), that is, the Chartumim or conjurors, the Chakamim or physicians, and the Asaphim or theosophists.

(François Lenormant, Chaldean Magic, “The Magic and Sorcery of the Chaldeans,” Chapter I, 1878, pp. 13-4. Originally published as La Magie Chez Les Chaldeens, 1847)

Earlier scholars grappled w/ this question less successfully, and Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary reveals how muddled this becomes with generic, imprecise terminology.
Link:
זלמכשפים זלכשדים לחרטמים . He names four sorts: Chartumim, Asaphim, Mecasphim, and Kasdim at Daniel 2:2.

The first, Chartumim, according to Theodotion, signifies "enchanters;" according to the LXX, "sophists;" according to Jerome, hariolas, "diviners, fortune tellers, casters of nativities."

The second word, Asaphim, has a great resemblance to the Greek word σοφος , "wise man;" whether the Greeks took this word from the Babylonians, or vice versa. Theodotion and Jerome have rendered it "magicians;" the LXX, "philosophers."

The third word, Mecasphim, by Jerome and the Greeks, is translated malefici, "enchanters;" such as used noxious herbs and drugs, the blood of victims, and the bones of the dead, for their superstitious operations.

The fourth word, Kasdim, or Chaldeans, has two significations: first, the Chaldean people, over whom Nebuchadnezzar was monarch; the second, a sort of philosophers, who dwelt in a separate part of the city, who were exempt from all public offices and employments. Their studies were physic, astrology, divination, foretelling of future events by the stars, interpretation of dreams, augury, worship of the gods, &c. All these inquisitive and superstitious arts were prohibited among the Israelites, as founded on imposture or devilism, and as inconsistent with faith in God's providence, and trust in his supremacy.

Church Fathers (364 AD) distinguished between 'Enchanters' and 'Astrologers' just as Daniel 2:2 separated the 'Enchanters' from the 'Magicians' and the 'Chaldeans'. Again, these appear to be quite distinct classes of spiritual practitioners.
Laodicea 364 Can. 36: Ὅτι οὐ δεῖ ἱερατικοὺς ἢ κληρικοὺς μάγους ἐπαοιδοὺς εἶναι, ἢ μαθηματικούς, ἢ ἀστρολόγους ...
Laodicea 364 Can. 36: Ὅτι οὐ δεῖ ἱερατικοὺς ἢ κληρικοὺς (magicians) ἢ (enchanters) εἶναι, ἢ (mathematicians), ἢ (astrologers) ...

"They, who are of the priesthood or clergy shall not be magicians, enchanters, mathematicians, or astrologers; nor shall they make what are called amulets, which are chains for their own souls. And those who wear such, we command to be cast out of the Church."

Daniel's classes of sorcerer/magicians may be summarized, cautiously:
1. Chartumim = Scribes, 'Mathematicians', Hierogrammateis.
2. Asaphim = Enchanters/Song-Healers; Theosophers, Wise-Men.
3. Mecasphim = Witch-Doctors, Malefici, Pharmakoi.
4. Kasdim = Chaldeans, 'Old Semites', folklorist Astrologers.

Athanasius Kirchner, Obeliscus Pamphilius [1650],p.109:
Asaphim, who from an ancient Latin translator are called 'philosophers', and the translators of the Septuagint are 'wise-men'. They philosophized about all things divine, as well as the causes of human things; some think that Baal was prepared by Hermes (a contemporary author), and I find that Origen wrote this in his book Against Celsus - even after many centuries, admonished by the writing of this prophecy: “the magi from the East set out into Judea to adore Christ.” But we prove that this came from Zoroaster (which we have also shown elsewhere) and whose claims will be examined elsewhere in greater detail.

Furthermore, the Chartumim (who in the Septuagint are called ἐπαοιδοι or 'enchanters', and by St. Jerome 'soothsayers') possessed by demonic curses, trace their origin (by witnesses Justin and Augustine) to 'Hermes the Egyptian Zoroaster', true inventor of magic, which was subsequently corrupted by another magus of this name, and said magic was reduced to the ravings of enchantments.

Without all the distracting clausal asides, reducing what A.Kirchner has written to its simplest form is quite radical in its implications:
Porrò incantatores (=Asaphim) originem duxerunt ab Hermete Zoroastro Ægyptio...= "Furthermore, the Chartumim-Asaphim originated from Hermes 'the Egyptian Zoroaster'..."

This means - in no uncertain terms - that A.Kirchner believed the 'Egyptian' Asaphim were fundamentally Hermetic. The implications are again quite clear. If the Therapeutae (c.15 AD) are descended from or relic of the (Semitic) Chartumim-Asaphim, that ancestry is explicitly Thothic.

Origen (Against Celsus, Ch.LXVIII) has Celsus conflating Jesus with the 'Sons of God' and Magicians:
Following these [events], Celsus -- proceeding from works demonstrated by Jesus which occurred in great number, about which we mentioned but a few of many -- affects to grant that those written statements may be true (about healings, resurrections, or the feeding of a multitude with a few leftover loaves) or whatever other stories he thinks the Disciples (said to have performed wonders) might have narrated. And he adds here: "Bring forward [proof], that we may believe that these were actually wrought by you." And then he immediately compares them to the works of the magicians {}, as if they promised more wonderful things, and to feats performed by the Egyptians, paid a few obols for solemn teachings in the middle of the market-place, and expelling demons from men, and dispelling diseases, and invoking the souls of heroes, and for conjuring about sumptuous banquets, tables, dishes, and appearances of things unreal, and for moving objects which are not truly living creatures but appear as such to the point of illusion, and he asks: "Since they do these things, shall we not conclude they are ‘Sons of God’? Or must we consider them to be works of evil, of wicked men and demons?" Do you see then how, through these {examples}, he seems to accept it is magic? I do not know if he, writing about magic, had more books [about it], except that these {examples} are useful to him now, to narrate the works of Jesus. And it would be fitting, if he had hastened to demonstrate them as well to those who practice magic; but now none of the magicians call those who have seen [them] to correct their customs, nor does he lead those who have been amazed at the sights by fear of God, nor does he attempt to persuade those who have seen them to live according to the will of God, and those who have not been taught more by His Word (or by the teaching and traditions), how they should wholly live to please the Highest God. …

That Therapeuts would continue to 'Jewishly' write Hermetic tractates (c.75 BC - 10 AD) is therefore no surprise at all; this was their own lineage and culture. Likewise, as the 'Judaic' scribes of the Septuagint (c.272 BC) came from the cult of Thoth/Hermes (supporting Daniel Völter’s thesis re: Moses), so the Jewish Author of Daniel (c.165 BC) described 'ancient Chaldeans' with Egyptian terms, describing recent and local mantic specialists. The Jewish Hermetica is perfectly understood as a product of this occult, syncretistic and heterodox culture.

Athanasius Kirchner, Obeliscus Pamphilius [1650], p.109:
The Mecasphim (who as indicated in the Septuagint are called ‘Pharmakoi’) Jerome calls ‘sorcerers’ and thinks that they use blood and make animal sacrifices and often touch dead bodies, and derive from them; concerning their rites and ceremonies more detail in what follows. The (or as the Septuagint translate them as Gazareni) Jerome calls Haruspices, or those who divine by inspecting the entrails of their victims. And these were the elements of Chaldean Wisdom (which lasted from the times of Cham until Nebuchadnezzar) with which we read Daniel was also imbued with in "Daniel 7", the branch of the fifth part of Egyptian Wisdom which (as I have said) they called ‘Magician’: the propagator. And hence the book of Cham, containing the elements and practice of the Necromantic art, a book by the impious magis, a supposition of a certain birth under the name of Cham, of which Francesco degli Stabili (aka Cichus Asculanus) also mentions in his commentary on the De sphaera mundi[1230 AD]. On which he was discussing for more detail, compare Maimonides in the great work Mishneh Torah, and in Moreh Nevuchim. c.29.

Philo Judaeus has 'the enchanters' as opponents of Moses, but distinguishes between the druggists. He portrays both, however, as schemers against the Logos.
Philo, De migratione Abrahami:
[83] ἢ οὐχ ὁρᾷς τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς καὶ φαρμακευτὰς ἀντισοφιστεύοντας τῷ θείῳ λόγῳ καὶ τοῖς παραπλησίοις τολμῶντας ἐγχειρεῖν, οὐχ οὕτως ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἰδίαν ἐπιστήμην ἀποφήναι περιβόητον, ὡς ἐπὶ τῷ διασῦραι καὶ χλευάσαι τὰ γινόμενα; καὶ γὰρ τὰς βακτηρίας εἰς δρακόντων μεταστοιχειοῦσι φύσεις, καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ εἰς αἵματος χρόαν μετατρέπουσι, καὶ τῶν βατράχων τὸ ὑπολειφθὲν ἐπῳδαῖς ἀνέλκουσιν ἐπὶ γῆν (Exod. 7, 12. 22. 8, 7), καὶ πάντα οἱ κακοδαίμονες τὰ πρὸς τὸν οἰκεῖον ὄλεθρον συναύξοντες ἀπατᾶν [84] δοκοῦντες ἀπατῶνται.

De Migratione Abrahami 15.83) Do you not see that enchanters {ἐπαοιδοὺς} and potion-makers {φαρμακευτὰς}, use tricks to contest the divine Logos with their sophistries, and who - daring try other things of a similar kind - labor not so much to make their own knowledge famous but rather to tear down and ridicule what has been made? {Exodus 7:11.} For they even transform their rods into the nature of dragons, and change water blood-colored, and - by their incantations - attract the remaining frogs to land, and, by multiplying everything for their own downfall like the wretches, while thinking to deceive others they are deceived themselves.

Annon vides incantatores et veneficos arte cum Dei verbo pugnare, et conari efficere fimilia, tam vt suam scientiam reddant celebrem , quam vt obtrectent et calumnientur quae facta funt. Nam virgas in dracones transformant, aquas in cruentum colorem vertunt, ranarum reliquias fursum trahunt in terram incantationibus: quae omnia iniseri cumulant in fuam perniciem, et decipiuntur duin se putant decipere.

Do you not see enchanters and sorcerers fighting with the art of the Word of God, and endeavoring to achieve similar things by this art, so that they render their knowledge famous, as to decry and slander those deeds? For they transform their rods into dragons, turn the waters bloody, steal the remnants frogs and drag them to the land with incantations; all these things pile up in their ruin and they are deceived that they think to have deceived others.

Exodus 7:11 has classed 'the enchanters' with the potion-makers. Either some Egyptian enchanters were druggists (folk-alchemists, witch-doctors) or their charming spells or music seemed to have a 'narcotic' effect.
Exodus 7:11. συνεκάλεσεν δὲ Φαραω τοὺς [1]σοφιστὰς Αἰγύπτου καὶ τοὺς [2]φαρμακούς καὶ [3]ἐποίησαν καὶ οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων ταῗς φαρμακείαις αὐτῶν ὡσαύτως.
Exodus 7:11. But Pharaoh called 1) the wise-men {sophistas} of Egypt and 2) the drug-potioners {pharmakous; Kashaphim=Enchanters} and also those who made the same drug-like miracles, 3) the enchanters of Egypt.

The Hebrew is different from the Septaguint, more precise:
1) לחכמים = wise-men
2) ולמכשפים = enchanters, spell-casters
3) חַרְטֻמֵּ֥י = horoscopists
4) בלהטיהם = necromancers

Philo describes the crafty orators (metaphorically: spell-binders) of Egypt in a slightly different way, see De Somniis 1.220:
...ἐξ ὧν Αἰγύπτου πάντες ἀνέβλαστον [1] σοφισταί, [2] οἰωνομάντεις, [3] ἐγγαστρίμυθοι, [4] τερατοσκόποι, [5] δεινοὶ παλεῦσαι καὶ κατεπᾷσαι καὶ γοητεῦσαι, ὧν τὰς ἐπιβούλους τέχνας μέγα ἔργον διεκδῦναι.

...from which spring forth all the sophists, bird-diviners {i.e. avian augurs}, daemon-possessed {i.e. mantic ventriloquists}, diviners of omens, and rhetoricians who decoy, lull and bewitch, of Egypt: men whose unfolding craft is hard to escape.

De Specialibus Legibus, 1.60:
ἐπιστάμενος γοῦν τῷ πλάνῳ τῶν πολλῶν βίῳ συμπράττουσαν οὐ μετρίως εἰς ἀνοδίαν μαντικήν, οὐδενὶ τῶν εἰδῶν αὐτῆς ἐᾷ χρῆσθαι, πάντας δὲ τοὺς κολακεύοντας αὐτὴν ἐλαύνει τῆς ἰδίου πολιτείας, θύτας, καθαρτάς, οἰωνοσκόπους, τερατοσκόπους, ἐπᾴδοντας, κληδόσιν ἐπανέχοντας.

For as he has seen the life of the multitude greatly collaborating in mantic folly, so he forbids them any such form and expels all its flatterers from his own commonwealth: animal sacrificers, ritual purificators, ornithomancers, interpreters of omens, incantators, prophetic hearers.

1. θύτας =sacrificers, augurs?
2. καθαρτάς = ritual purifiers, lustrators.
3. οἰωνοσκόπους = ornithomancers: bird divines; sky-watchers.
4. τερατοσκόπους = observers of portents/interpreters of omens/ herald of auspices; divine disciples.
5. ἐπᾴδοντας = incantators, enchanters.
6. κληδόσιν ἐπανέχοντας = 'listeners for portents'/prophetic hearers; sound interpreters.

ἐπᾴδοντας, κληδόσιν ἐπανέχοντας = incantatores, αuium cantui intentos = enchanters, birds(?) vocalizing intently.

Regarding forms of divination forbidden by the Law (e.g. μάντις, μαντεία, μαντεύομαι, ἐγγαστρίμυθος, τερατοσκόπος, κληδών, ἐπαοιδός) see Lev 19:31; 20:6, 27; Num 23:23; Deut 18:10-14).

On Jewish enchanter-healers in the synagogues, see M. Dickie, Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World [2003], p.279:
If Chrysostom (c.375 AD, Antioch) is to be trusted, the Jewish healers boasted of demons who could cure sickness, a boast which Chrysostom says makes no sense, since demons as the servants of the Devil, who is the slayer of mankind, could hardly be expected to heal. What Chrysostom must mean is that Jewish experts in incantations said that they knew how to invoke demons who cured sickness. Who these Jewish performers of incantations and adepts with amulets were we are not told. They were certainly men, they worked in groups and they were to be found in or through the synagogue. They were not then magicians who happened to be Jews and who traded on their Jewishness to impress their clientele, but men who had some recognized rôle in the synagogue or connection with it.

Unfortunately, Antioch 375 AD is too far removed from Alexandria 25 AD to provide a clear connection or direct relevance. If this information is true, however, it establishes that some Jewish mantic healers did work in or through synagogues in the Diaspora. That suggests the Therapeutae had descendants, abroad; they sound like Hermeticists.

St. Jerome's Commentaries on Daniel 1.3 "Philo thinks that the Hebrew language itself is Chaldean, because Abraham was of the Chaldeans."

Latin text, Hie Str. Co In Da 25 Hieronymus Stridonensis 340-420 Parisiis J. P. Migne 1845

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrrhus, Interpretatio in Danielem 1.20:
ηὗρεν αὐ τοὺς δεκαπλασίονας ὑπὲρ πάντας τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς καὶ μάγους, τοὺς ὄντας ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ αὐτοῦ.
"And he was found by him ten-fold better than all the enchanters and magicians in his kingdom."

Daniel 5:7 τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς καὶ φαρµάκους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ γαζαρηνοὺς … “the enchanters and sorcerers and Chaldeans and Gazarenes”

St. Jerome (c.415 AD) offers a muddled interpretation of Daniel 2:2:
3 Praecepit ergo rex, ut convocarentur harioli, et magi, et malefici, et Chaldaei, ut indicarent regi somnia sua. Qui cum venissent, steterunt coram rege. Quos nos hariolos, caeteri ἐπαοιδοὺς interpretati sunt, id est, incantatores. Ergo videntur mihi incantatores esse, qui verbis rem peragunt.
4 Magi, qui de singulis philosophantur: Malefici, qui sanguine utuntur et victimis, et saepe contingunt corpora mortuorum. Porro in Chaldaeis γενεθλιαλόγους |gr significari puto quos vulgus mathematicos vocat.
5 Consuetudo autem et sermo communis magos pro maleficis accipit: qui aliter habentur apud gentem suam, eo quod sint philosophi Chaldaeorum, et ad artis huius scientiam reges quoque et principes eiusdem gentis omnia faciunt. Unde et in nativitate Domini Salvatoris ipsi primum ortum eius intellexerunt, et venientes in sanctam Bethleem, adoraverunt puerum, stella desuper ostendente.


3. "Wherefore the King commanded that the harioli {=enchanters}, the magi {=wise-men, the malefici {=black magicians}, and the Chaldeans explain to the King his dreams. And when they came, they stood before the King." Those whom we have translated as hariolos others have rendered as epaoidoi, that is, 'enchanters.' Well then, it seems to me that enchanters are people who perform something by words {i.e. sing, chant}.
4. Magi {wise-men} who philosophize on specific lines; malefici {=black magicians, sorcerers}, who use blood and sacrifices, and often handle corpses. Furthermore, I think that among the Chaldeans γενεθλιαλόγους {=genethlialogoi or nativity-casters, horoscopists} is signified by what the common people call 'Mathematicians'.
5. But common usage and language understands the term 'magi' as sorcerers. Yet among their own people they are considered differently, because they are the Chaldeans' philosophers, and even the kings and princes of this same nation do all they can to acquire a knowledge of this science.

Jerome doesn't reference Hebrew or Aramaic sources here (ignorance), and he re-names or re-orders categories while noting difficulties other translators faced. His confusion seems odd, given his proximity to Alexandria and contemporary differences, whereas Chrysostom demonstrated a superior understanding just a few decades earlier.

If we may identify the Therapeutae (with their poetic hymns and Mosaic performance) as "enchanters... who perform something by words" {incantatores... qui verbis rem peragunt}, then the Therapeuts' festal play is a very intriguing template. Where the Recovery Program is an occult elaboration of the Mosaic Exodus, our Anonymous Authors also recall the Therapeutic prototype in the trope of 'the Actor in a play' and Hellenistic performance arts generally. Perhaps (c.150 BC) the more sophisticated urban Asaphim/ἐπαοιδοὶ had already been transformed into troops of Pythagorean Thespians, as their brethren in the Fayum became 'doctors of poetic healing' (i.e. itinerant cantors) in far-flung antinomian synagogues?

On the Egyptian magicians (Balaam, etc.) and Moses, see Koji Osawa "Jannes and Jambres: The Role and Meaning of Their Traditions in Judaism" in Sonderdruck Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 37 (2011/12). Albert Pietersma, The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres the Magicians[1994].


The Asaphim (i.e. Therapeutae) were enchanters/incanters and healing magicians. The more advanced or better educated magi composed song and prayer. Likewise, a practicing Therapeut (i.e. Jewish magos) in rural Egypt chanted healing prayers for Jews and other clients, as indicated in PGM XXIIb. The characteristic 'Jewish prominence' of Egyptian names for YHWH more probably indicates a dominant clientele, though nothing here assumes Therapeutae - as itinerant mantic specialists - could only serve Jews. On the contrary, their expertise (as we are told, in the tales of Moses, Daniel, etc.) was considered superior by other peoples; this inferred fact explains the popularity of the Jewish god also. See Pieter W. van der Horst, Judith. H. Newman, Early Jewish Prayers in Greek[2008], p.221:
Like other collections of magical recipes, PGM XXIIb was likely originally the property of a professional ritual expert, perhaps a priest associated with a temple or an itinerant 'magician,' who would have chosen from his collection to suit the needs and desires of his various clients.12 There is no agreement on the exact purveyor of this particular spellbook, but while the magos who may have owned and wielded the collection of spells and incantations may have been a socially marginal figure, he or she nonetheless represented an elite expertise not available to the illiterate or minimally literate clients who purchased the service. Thus the professional oral mediation of the spells should be borne in mind as well as the popular use of the prayer. The ritual context for offering this prayer is elusive ... That noted, the exact means of delivery no doubt was different for different circumstances and varied clients. Was the prayer offered on behalf of a client in the same way in which other spells and adjurations and so on were performed by a specialist? If so, was the person Jewish, or of some other ethnicity, or should we understand the prayer to have been in the collection for use on behalf of Jewish clients? The prayer itself indicates that the person offering the prayer should be 'from the nation of Israel' (....) which would argue in favor of its use for Jewish clients. As Betz suggests, the magicians using the spells may have been associated with temples of Egyptian and Greek deities, but he is rightly cautious about making definitive claims in this regard. Although Betz is guilty of overstatement when he describes the syncretism of the PGM as in effect amounting to a new religion, “displaying unified religious attitudes and beliefs,” his observation about the character of religion in antiquity is helpful: “Whether the gods are old or new, whether they come from Egyptian, Greek, Jewish, or Christian traditions, religion is regarded as nothing but the awareness of a reaction against our dependency on the unfathomable scramble of energies coming out of the universe.”13 The Prayer of Jacob also represents such a syncretism both in terms of formal elements and ideas it contains from the broader religious context of Egypt, Greece, and Babylon.
[...]
Another factor mitigating the likelihood that the magos in possession of the collection was Jewish is the fact that the Jewish God was thought to be a very powerful one by non-Jews, judging from the appearance of his name in a large number of Greek magical papyri. His name outnumbers that of any other god in the papyri by a hefty margin.14 While the Greek magical papyri in general reflect a syncretism, they were strongly influenced by Jewish religion.

See Erich Gruen, The Construct of Identity in Hellenistic Judaism[2016],p.181:
A more obscure allusion in Artapanus has Moses receive the designation of Hermes by the Egyptian priests who honored him as the interpreter of hieroglyphics.50 The Hellenic aspect is not in the forefront here. Artapanus makes reference to the Egyptian version of Hermes, an equivalent to Thoth, the mythical progenitor of much of Egyptian culture.51 But his creative reconstruction clearly amalgamates the cultural strands. Artapanus writes ostensibly about Pharaonic Egypt but looks, in fact, to contemporary Ptolemaic Egypt. His Moses absorbs both Musaeus and Hermes and becomes the fount of Greek culture in the Hellenistic era.

50. Artapanus apud Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.27.6: ὑπὸ τῶν ἱερέων… προσαγορευθῆναι Ἑρμῆν, διὰ τὴν τῶν ἱερῶν γραμμάτων ἑρμενείαν. “By the priests ... Moses was addressed as Hermes because of his interpretation of the sacred writings."

51. On Artapanus’ manipulation of the Hermes/Thot characteristics, see Gutman, "The Beginnings", pp.120–22 (Hebrew); G. Mussies, “The Interpretatio Judaica of Thoth-Hermes,” in Studies in Egyptian Religion (ed. M. Voss; Leiden: Brill, 1982) 97–108.

Typical of most 21st C. scholars, Gruen (2016) is apparently unaware of Völter's careful explication of Moses as a representation of Thoth. Gruen's misunderstanding is complete: Moses is not 'obscurely' assimilated to Thoth but rather an exquisite expression of Thoth. This isn't a 'creative reconstruction' by Artapanus - it is a revelation that Moses IS Thoth. The literary creation of Biblical Moses predates Artapanus only by few generations (perhaps decades), and it seems likely A. knew a different version. But what's interesting here, Artapanus has explicitly qualified Moses as Hierogrammateis: a scribe after Hermes. Therefore, Moses was recognized 'by the priests' as a member of the Hermetic brotherhood, for Chartumim (pre-existing Moses, Exodus 7:1) were Hermetic interpreters, and logically a higher (the highest? ) grade of priest.

Moses was a 'Hermes' - perhaps even a Hermes Trismegestus? (Manetho identified that third stage of this deity had already developed by 250 BC; we cannot date Moses with any certainty before c.375 BC.) Such a 'Hermes', a divinized teacher, had made himself like unto Thoth and founded a school carrying on his allegorical method of interpreting Scripture - exactly as Philo Judaeus has described in DVC 29. And Hermes' students (Theosophers, and Wise-Men themselves), particularly those who composed and sang songs in the itinerant lifestyle of a heterodox preacher-healer, would be designated Asaphim. We have good reason to suppose 'Moses-the-Egyptian', - perhaps, a tribal lineage of Chaldean Semites - established a Jewish cult in the Eastern Delta near Sinai which had flourished before the Ptolemaic Greeks arrived in Egypt. There is no reason, however, to assume this was the only form of primitive Judaism in Egypt 300 BC - 100 AD.

Mostly Wiki
The name of Jannes not as that of a magical opponent of Moses but as the originator with Moses and one Lotapea[6] (or Lotapes[7]) of a sect of magicians occurs in Pliny the Elder's Natural History (XXX, II, 11);[8] Pliny's citation is also referred to in Apuleius. Numenius of Apamea, a Neopythagorean philosopher, called them sacred Egyptian scribes. The Gospel of Nicodemus also refers to the magicians by the name of Jannes and Jambres.

Two "wise men" are referred to by the names "Johana and Mamre" in the Babylonian Talmud in Menachoth 85a.[9] "Jannis and Jambres" are mentioned by name in the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan in sections Exodus 1:15,[10] Exodus 7:10-12,[11] and Numbers 22:2.[12][13] Jewish traditions in the Targums preserve other legendary lore about the pair. They are called the sons of Balaam, the unwitting non-Jewish prophet of Peor.[14] It was also claimed that they converted to Judaism, and that they left Egypt at the Exodus to accompany Moses and the Israelites

Exodus 7:1
1. חכמים = σοφιστὰς (σοφιστής): Wise-men.
2. מכשׁפים = φαρμακούς (φάρμακος): Sorcerers, Witch-doctors; Druggists.
3. חרטמים = Chartumim: Scribes, 'Mathematicians', Hierogrammateis.

21st C. interpretations, following the confusion of Jerome in late Antiquity, also muddle the meaning or Biblical distinction(s) between Chartumim/Asaphim. It appears even Greek translators conflated these two mantic castes; in practice, however, some lector-priests may have fulfilled both functional-roles. See Julianne C. Burnett, A Socio-historical Exploration of Moses's Wonder-working in the Narratives of the Pentateuch within the Context of Ancient Egyptian and Israelite Magic (PhD diss., 2019), p.157
There are several aspects of the Egyptian religious milieu that are of interest in exploring the presentation of Moses in the Pentateuchal narratives. As mentioned earlier, there is arguably a relation between the Hry-hb.(t) (lector-priests) and חרטמים {Chartumim}. But more than a possible linguistic connection, there is evidence of numerous similarities in the portrayed function and actions of these specialists.

pp.179-82
4.2.3 Specialists in Exodus 7 and Lector Priests
Of the three specialists listed, חרטמים are repeatedly mentioned in Exodus (7:11,22; 8:3,14,15; 9:11). Donald Redford is among numerous scholars who argue the Hebrew חרטם is likely related to the Egyptian title ḫry-ḥb, ḫry-tp).110 If the חרטם are related to the ḫry-ḥb, the chief-of-priests or the lector-priests, then a few comments about the lectors should be made here.

These specialists were part of the official priestly caste and were not considered illicit or on the fringe of society. In a recent study Roger Forshaw has proposed that lectors might not have served in the same way as other priests in ancient Egypt. Rather, they were official ritual specialists who functioned in a wider range of contexts than most priests, including inside and outside the temple, and were considered to fulfil legitimate roles.111 Some of the main roles of the lector included involvement in medical healing,112 temple festivals and rituals, performing “transfiguration rites” in funeral ceremonies,113 magic practices,114 royal involvement (included purification rituals),115 and in a legal capacity.116 They were also known for being “keepers of the books” and were esteemed for the ability to read and write, which in itself was considered related to magic.117 Thus, if we associate the lectors with חרטמים, then Römer correctly concludes that they, “have a double identity: they are both priests and ‘magicians’” in Exodus 7-11.118 ...The depiction of the lector’s use of the staff (especially in connection with magico-religious rituals) and the performances attested in the Westcar Papyrus also seem to complement rather than refute the biblical writers’ portrayal of the Egyptian specialists.120

However, there are notable points of divergence and features we might expect in the text if the lector was being represented.121 To begin with, any description of the חרטם with scrolls or the ability to read and write is completely absent from the Exodus narrative. There is no explicit recitation of spells or verbal exchange, although some commentators translate להט in 7:11 as “magic spells.”122 It could be argued that the LXX provides evidence for perceiving a connection between חרטם and sung incantations.123 Hamilton suggests חכמים might have been scribes “who had nothing to do with magic” however, we know there is ample evidence to demonstrate that writing and reading were associated with magical activity in ancient Egypt.124

There are a number of points for consideration here. First, if the Chartumim/Asaphim are two distinct sets of duties (I suppose they were, in most cases) and what happened to such Thothic priests when their temples downsized or closed after the Ptolemaic system collapsed (after c.50 BC), as the Romans scaled back major financial support. At a Temple, the chief-of-priests probably kept his post. It was the subordinate priests who handled lesser tasks of medical healing, funeral ceremonies, and clerical duties most at risk and losing employment. Thereafter itinerant lector-priests might travel, teach and join other cults - by necessity, they became religious innovators and syncretists, adapting to whichever communities they visited. Most intriguing, the lector-priests performed 'transfiguration rites' (which may have been adapted to conversion sacraments, i.e. Hermetic palingenesia) and had extraordinary literacy - such specialists could transfer their skills to other cults/religions.

'Moses-the-Egyptian, who became Jewish' makes a lot more sense, within this context. Several generations later, the Therapeuts still welcomed proselytes into their Mosaic, Pythagorean (and perhaps Hermetic) cult.

c.200 AD:
Lactantius (c.310 AD) claimed magicians in polytheistic communities knew and could therefore call upon the true, heavenly names of different gods represented by the old images and statues in the failing pagan temples of the 3rd C. AD (Institutiones Divinae 2.17). By such lucrative expertise in the provision of divine access (by operating as a daemonic mediator for the masses of illiterate, superstitious gentiles in crisis), a Jewish magician could both protect his own insular community and gain vital information about others outside. Where antinomian Judaic cults sought proselytes two centuries earlier, a Jewish Therapeut operated more freely in the larger world, socially positioned to readily identify desirable converts. (Later, the Roman Church priests adopted similar roles and powers in converted temples, now churches.)

On the Chaldaean lector-priests generally, see G.R.S. Mead [1906]:
Compare the Arabic translation of a "Book of Ostanes" (Marcellin Berthelot, Histoire des sciences: La chimie au moyen âge [1893], Vol.3, p.121), in which an old inscription on an Egyptian stele is quoted: "Have you not heard the story that a certain philosopher [i.e. Egyptian priest] wrote to the Magi in Persia, saying: ‘I have found a copy of a book of the ancient sages; but as the book is written in Persian {i.e. Chaldean?}, I cannot read it. Therefore, send me one of your wise-men who can read for me the book I have found’” R.363

Berthelot, Histoire des sciences: La chimie au moyen âge [1893], Vol.3, p.121:
“The land of Misr (Egypt) is superior to all other cities and towns, because of the wisdom and knowledge of all things which God has bestowed upon its inhabitants. However the people of Misr (Egypt), as well as the rest of the earth, need the inhabitants of Persia and they cannot succeed in any of their works, without help which they draw from this latter country. Don't you see that all philosophers who have devoted themselves to science have addressed themselves to Persian people whom they have adopted as brothers? They asked to send them what was in Persia which they could not find in their home-country. Have you not heard that a certain philosopher wrote to the Magi, inhabitants of Persia, saying to them: “I have discovered a copy of a book of the ancient sages; but this book being written in Persian, I cannot read it. Send to me then one of your sages, who can read me the work which I have found. If you do what I ask of you, I will think highly of you, and thank you for as long as I live. Hasten to do what I ask of you, before I die; because once dead, I will no longer need any science." Here is the answer addressed to him by the sages of Persia

It is unclear if this 'Book of Ostanes' is the Octateuchos mentioned by Eusebius, Preparatorio Evangelica 1.10.52. There is no way of determining the validity of this Arabic claim; if correct, this would appear to reference a Chaldaean work, perhaps from c.650 BC. There were many Chaldeans in Egypt c.400 BC. Hypothetically, this suggests a memory of the period of the Neo-Assyrian kings in Egypt, c.670 BC: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/19837/2/19837.pdf

Charles Guignebert, The Jewish World in the Time of Jesus [1935;1939], p.240:
a number of magical texts have come down to us which show us the syncretistic process at work in a limited but none the less genuine form, and their mere existence proves, in my opinion, that there must also have been other more elaborate and complicated forms. The names lao, Sabaoth, Michael, Raphael and other Jewish angels are there to be found side by side with those of Egyptian or Greek divinities. Moreover, the Jews were renowned throughout the Roman world for their skill in magic arts, and here again we may recognize the influence of syncretism, for this knowledge must have come to them principally through contact with the Chaldaeans. "After the Jews,” says Cumont, "had been initiated into the secret doctrines and practices of Persians and Chaldaeans, they served as the indirect means by which knowledge of certain formulae spread throughout the area of the Diaspora.”

Franz Cumont [1906], p.281 cites Jewish Magic: Lajos Blau, Das Altjüdische Zauberwesen [1898] p.39?; cf. Hubert & Mauss, "Esquisse d'une théorie générale de la magie" L'Année sociologique, Vol. 5 [1902-3] or Henri Hubert's «Magia» in Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines ?? p.1505.
Post Reply