Betz, H. - The Delphic Maxim PDF

The Delphic Maxim "Know Yourself" in the Greek Magical Papyri
Author(s): Hans Dieter Betz

Source: History of Religions, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Nov., 1981), pp. 156-171
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1062222
Accessed: 14-05-2020 19:09 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1062222?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to History of Religions
This content downloaded from 150.200.1.16 on Thu, 14 May 2020 19:09:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Hans Dieter Betz THE DELPHIC
MAXIM "KNOW
YOURSELF"
IN THE GREEK
MAGICAL PAPYRI
Habent sua fata sententiae. This modifica

proverb provides an apt characterization
history of the Delphic maxim "Know you
pretations. In his recent monumental wo
has gathered and ordered the sources docu
from Socrates to Saint Bernard of Clai
account many subsidiary rivers of the great
Courcelle also mentions two passages fro
Magicae2 in a footnote.3 There are, howev
be named, and on the whole the influe
maxim in the PGM are more complex tha
1 Pierre Courcelle, Connais-toi toi-meme; de Socrat
(Paris: Etudes Augustiniennes, 1974-75). See also my
"The Delphic Maxim rNQOI 2ATTON in Hermetic Interpretation," Harvard
Theological Review 63 (1970): 465-84; idem, Plutarch's Theological Writings and
Early Christian Literature (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), pp. 85 ff.; idem, Plutarch's
Ethical Writings and Early Christian Literature (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978), pp.
55, 221, 375, 379 ff.
2 The edition quoted in this article is by Karl Preisendanz, Papyri Graecae
Magicae. Die griechischen Zauberpapyri, 2d ed., 2 vols., ed. Albert Henrichs
(Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1973-74). The papyri are hereafter cited as PGM with
references to numbers and lines.
3 Courcelle, 1:76, n. 39, referring to PGM VII.335 and VIT.505.
? 1981 by The University of Chicago. 0018-2710/82/2102-0003$01.00
History of Religions 157
would lead one to believe. These influences do not offer them-

selves at first sight but become apparent only after the texts
have been brought into contact with philosophical and religious
thought outside the PGM.
THE PROBLEM
Why the PGM should have become interested in

maxim is far from self-evident. The maxim is n
verbatim, but interpretations of the maxim in th
tradition seem to have attracted the attention of
It is at the point of these interpretations that inf
maxim in the PGM can be identified.
THE PRESUPPOSITIONS
As Courcelle has so clearly demonstrated, the his

interpretation of the Delphic precept can be t
primarily to Socrates and Plato. Most influential
discussion of the meaning of the maxim in Plato'
Maior.4
When in the final section Plato has Socrates give his inter-
pretation of the precept (128E-135E),5 he raises the question
of what the self is that we are advised to know. Since that self
must be what the human person (avOpwwros) as a whole is in
essence, it must be different from the body: "So the human
being is an entity different from his own body."6 The question
is, of course, "Then what is the human being?"7 Socrates
answers: "The soul is the human being."8 Consequently, knowl-
edge of the self is knowledge of the soul: "Then the god who
instructs us to know ourselves orders us to know the soul."9
This definition will furthermore affect the concept of self-
control (aow>poavvr1): self-control that comes from the knowledge
of the soul will cause a person to devote his attention to the
"care for one's soul" (eirLtAXELa rTjS Ovxjs)'0 instead of to external
matters. Based upon these presuppositions, Socrates goes on
4Courcelle, 1:20 ff., 30 ff.
6 According to the edition by J. Burnet, Platonis Opera, vol. 2 (1901; reprint ed.,
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964). Translations are mine.
6 Alc. 1.129e: "Erepop &pa &vOpwrbs kanr TOV occb/LaTOr Ts ro avrov.
7 Ibid.: Tt ror' o'v 6 &vOpepwros.
8 Ibid. 130c:... e ^,vxl kFaTrV &avpwTros.
9 Ibid. 130e: *vxjv apa JI,a KeXEbEL yvowpiaa 6 krLvrarrwv -yvvaL iavr6v.
10 Ibid. 132b-c.
158 "Know Yourself" in Greek Papyri
to raise the question of how we can obtain that kind of knowl-

edge of ourselves. In order to explain the way to it, he turns to
the example of the vision of the eyes (132D). Certainly with
definite purposes in mind he modifies the maxim and has this
instruction given to the eye: "See yourself." How can this
happen? Is there a possible way for the eye to see itself?
Socrates refers to the observable fact that "the face of the
person who looks into someone else's eye is shown by vision of
the opposite person, as in a mirror. We of course call it the pupil,
a kind of image [ea'woXov] of the person looking."1' Hence we
can say that "an eye beholding another eye and, looking into
what is its most precious part and that by which [the other]
sees, may in this way see itself."'2
Socrates then applies this insight to the problem of the
knowledge of the soul: ".. . if a soul is to know itself it must
look into a soul, and especially into that area of it in which
occurs the virtue of the soul, wisdom...."'1 This part which
houses "insight and thought" is its most divine. Since it
resembles the deity, "anyone looking into this part and know-
ing all that is divine, the deity as well as thinking, thus may
also, in the best possible way, know himself."'4 Once the
equation of the self with the soul and the deity was made,
another equation offered itself almost necessarily. The older
concept of the soul as daimon (balwuov or baLuo6Lov)"5 had become
highly important in the Socratic and Platonic traditions of
thought, especially because of its connection with the so-called
daimonion of Socrates.'6 This concept of the "personal daimon"
which the deity has imparted to every human being is men-
tioned also in Plato's myths, but it is certainly older than
11 Ibid. 132e-133a: 'EvvevorKas oiv orT roV eiu3Xf\O7rovros eLs rbov b6OaX,v rT 7rpoawirov
e.qaivETraLit v r TO 0 Karavr'tKpv o&ELt cwiarp ev KarTo6rrTp, 6 6 KaL KOprlv KaXOlAeV, 1Ef&WXOv
6v rL TOV fjSXeTovros; . ..
12 Ibid. 133a: '069a4Xj6s apa 6f0aXos6v Oe&jAevos, Ka ef3XC\rwv els ro7ro 6jrep fEXrTLrovT
avrov Kalt p4, pW oSrws av avrov Zbot.
13 Ibid. 133b: . Ka. . ,vl X El AeXXEL yvAvurEaea avr,v, Eis 1vX)v akroj 3pXetrrPov, Kal
AaXta-r' Els roTrov avrrjs rov TOroV iv 4 E-yyLyveratL 1 VXJjS aperT7, aoofas. For the inter-
pretation of this statement in the philosophical tradition, see Courcelle, 1:30 ff.
14 Ibid. 133c: Tcp Oec apa roUr' EOLKev avrns, Kai r TI S es TOo fXieCv Kia Trav rO
Oetov 'yvobs, fOev rT Katl fp6Ofatv, oi'ru Kal cavrov av yvol'7v jaXLcTra.
16 For a general discussion, see C. Colpe et al., "Geister (Diimonen)," Reallexi-
kon far Antike und Christentum, vol. 10 (1978) (hereafter cited as RAC), cols.
546-797, esp. 598 ff., 615 ff.
16 Ibid. cols. 613-14. See also A. Corlu, Plutarque, Le d6mon de Socrate (Paris:
Klincksieck, 1970), pp. 47 if.; K. Doring, Exemplum Socratis (Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner Verlag, 1979), pp. 11-12.
Plato.'7 In the myth of Er we ar

state every soul elects its own d
life and the hereafter.'8 As one
the development of Platonic ph
question was extensively discuss
sonal daimon" was simply to be
the soul. As Courcelle'9 has show
his De legibus, especially in the
the Tusculanae Disputationes tha
divine part of the soul with the
As a result of this identity it
step to approach that daimon
oracle for consultation. Self-kno
being the outcome of philosoph
terpreted in analogy to the orac
cisely when this change occurred
the oracular interpretation was
without his having necessarily d
Arrian has preserved an interest
from Epictetus, all variations on
BoiXvaal t?rLtu/eXao-rpov,
yvwOi aavr6v,
aVaKpLvov TO 16LSao VLOP,
6iXa Oeov fAi eirtXLpi7als.
Take council very carefully,

know yourself,
consult your personal daimon,
without God undertake nothin
17 See Plato Leg. 5.732C, 877A; 'i. 90A.
ter Vrugt-Lentz, RAC 10, cols. 605-6.
18 See Plato Resp. 10.617C, 620D-E; for
Phd. 107D, 108B, 113D.
19 Courcelle, pp. 29 ff.; see also Betz, pp. 4
20 See esp. the summary exhortation in
and be sure that it is not you that is mor
whom your outward form reveals is not y
that physical figure which can be pointe
you are a god, if a god is that which live
which rules, governs, and moves the body
God above us rules this universe" (tran
Library [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni
a discussion, see P. Boyance, Etudes sur le
Feret & Fils, 1936), pp. 121-37, and K. B
Gestalt, Sinn (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner V
21 Courcelle, pp. 32-33.
22 See, on this problem, A. Bonhoffer, Ep
Enke Verlag, 1890), pp. 81-86; C. Zintzen,
23 The text is quoted from the edition b
ab Arriano digestae (Stuttgart: B. G. Teu
mine.
The set is composed with considerable care. While the first line
corresponds to the fourth, and the second to the third (a-b-b-a),
the content of the first is more general and propaedeutic in
kind, while the fourth line is its fulfillment. These two lines
also provide the frame for the second and third lines, with the
second containing the root maxim, the Delphic precept, and
the third explaining the way for obtaining self-knowledge. The
sequence as a whole should be understood as functioning
climactically: line 1 begins with the propaedeutic, line 2 intro-
duces the authoritative precept, line 3 is its implementation,
and line 4 reveals the ultimate goal of the process. The matter
of interest to us is the mantic language of line 3: avaKptivw is
used here in the sense of a mantic technical term,24 explaining
that self-knowledge can be obtained by some kind of consulta-
tion of the "personal daimon."
Epictetus, of course, takes this language in the metaphorical
sense, since for him such consultation can only mean the careful
examination of his "conscience."25
THE INTERPRETATION BY THE MAGICIANS
In a different frame of reference, however, the magi

interpret mantic language on their own terms. Fo
therefore, "consult your personal daimon" implies
Delphic maxim orders them to conjure up their
daimon and get control of it by magical procedures; w
daimon appears, the magician can then submit quest
receive answers. This type of interpretation and pro
what we find in the PGM.26
In PGM VII.505-28 a spell is transmitted which bears the
title "Meeting with your personal daimon" (aoara7aa liov
batlovos). At first sight this section title seems misplaced,27 or
the spell seems incomplete,28 because the matter of meeting
24 Cf. also the use of the term in Diss. 1.1.20, 2.20.27; a&vaKp,rs in PGM IV.
1992, 2008, 2140.
25 See Diss. 1.14.12-14; Enchiridion 32.
26 For these demonological doctrines, see esp. Theodor Hopfner, Griechisch-
dgyptischer Offenbarungszauber I (Leipzig: H. Haessel, 1921), pp. 27-30, secs.
117-34; Colpe et al., cols. 615 ff.
27 The title is correct textually, as E. R. Dodds points out in The Greeks and
the Irrational (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1957),
p. 304, n. 56.
28 See Dodds, p. 289.
with one's "personal daimon" is never mentioned again. The

first part (lines 505-21) contains greetings of Tyche and other
deities (505-7), followed by the greeting of Helios-Aion (50-7
8) and his invocation (508-21); the second part (lines 521-28)
consists of a brief ritual of purification.
Despite the seeming discrepancy between the title and the
content, the spell may nevertheless be correctly entitled. We
know especially from Plato's myth of Er29 that the "personal
daimon" had from the beginning a close relationship to "the
spindle of Necessity" and to the Moirai, Necessity's three
daughters Lachesis, Clotho, and Atropos:
"But when, to conclude, all the souls had chosen their lives in the order of
their lots, they were marshalled and went before Lachesis. And she sent with
each, as the guardian of his life and the fulfiller of his choice, the genius that
he had chosen, and this divinity led the soul first to Clotho, under her hand
and her turning of the spindle to ratify the destiny of his lot and choice; and
after contact with her the genius led the soul to the spinning of Atropos to
make the web of its destiny irreversible, and then without a backward look
it passed beneath the throne of Necessity."30
It is not difficult to understand, therefore, why the magician

saw an advantage in greeting Tyche first. While the rule of
Tyche was an important part of hellenistic beliefs in gen-
eral, the concept of the "personal daimon" as "fulfiller"
(daro7rXpwrT7s) of a person's destiny was very much in discussion
by the Neoplatonists, as we know from Plotinus, Porphyry,
Jamblichus, and Proclus.31 In addition, there are at least two
other points where contacts between the spell of VII.505-28
and the conjuration of the "personal daimon" are suggested.
While in line 506 "the daimon of this place" is greeted, a
typical magical reference to locality occurs in the legend re-
ported by Porphyry in his Vita Plotini 10. As he tells it, a
certain Egyptian magician who had come to Rome and had
made the acquaintance of Plotinus offered, as a way to demon-
strate his magical skills and powers, to conjure up Plotinus'
29 Plato, Resp. 10.616c-617c.
30 Ibid., 620d-e, according to the translation by Paul Shorey in the Loeb
Classical Library edition of Plato (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1970), 6:517. The critical words read in the Greek: eKeivtVv 5' iKaar0, 6v
e'Xaro balcova, rovroTv op bXcaa tv/i7rlAreLtv Trou [Lov KaL &7ro7rXripcWrJv -rw apOLPTWP.
31 Plotinus Enn. 3.4; Jamblichus, De mysteriis 10; Proclus, In Ale. 77-78; see
also Epictetus 1.1.14, 4.1.109. For a survey of the problem, see C. Zintzen, RAC,
vol. 10, cols. 644-68. For the association of Tyche and Moirai, see also PGM
XII.254-55, XIII.781-82, and XXI.16, but Tyche and Moirai are usually not
identical.
"personal daimon" (oLKECOs 8aliuw).32 In this seance t

is said to have been of special importance: "... the
took place in the temple of Isis: the Egyptian said it
only pure spot [roros KaOapos] he could find in Rom
other point of contact occurs in the same legend in P
When Plotinus' "personal daimon" to everyone e
his own surprise turned out to be not a lower daimo
god (8oes),34 the demonstration was unfortunately in
before any questions could be addressed to it: "It was not
however possible to ask any questions of the god or even to see
him present for longer, as the friend who was taking part in
the manifestation strangled the birds which he was holding
as a protection, either out of jealousy or because he was afraid
of something."35 In PGM VII.521-28 we also have a ritual
involving not two birds36 but two eggs with which the magician
is advised to purify himself, no doubt for the reason of pro-
tection.
An earlier section of the same papyrus contains an invocation
of the god Eros, which, although of Greek provenance, now
stands in the middle of Graeco-Egyptian materials (VII.478-
90). The section has no title, but the content is clearly an
incubation ritual and request for a dream revelation.37 There
32 The story which has been frequently discussed in recent literature is part of
a string of legendary anecdotes popularizing Plotinus's philosophy. See esp. S.
Eitrem, "La Theurgie chez les Neo-platoniciens et dans les papyrus magiques,"
Symbolae Osloenses 22 (1942): 49-79, esp, 62 ff.; Dodds, pp. 289-91. The rather
apologetic section in Dodds led to the controversy between P. Merlan and A. H.
Armstrong on the question of whether Plotinus was a practicing magician or
not: see P. Merlan, "Plotinus and Magic," Isis 44 (1953): 341-48; "Plotinus and
Magic," in Kleine philosophische Schriften (Hildesheim and New York: Olms
Presse, 1976), pp. 388-95; A. H. Armstrong, "Was Plotinus a Magician?" Phro-
nesis 1 (1955): 73-79; and J. M. Rist, "Plotinus and the Daimonion of Socrates,"
Phoenix 17 (1963): 13-24.
33 Porphyry, Plot. 10, according to the translation by A. H. Armstrong in the
Loeb Classical Library edition of Plotinus (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1966), 1:33-35.
34 This surprising event is not, however, inconsistent with Plotinus's own much
more subtle views stated in Enneads 3.4. See also J. Haussleiter, "Deus in-
ternus," RAC, vol. 3 (1955), cols. 794-842, esp. 808 ff.; W. Himmerich, Eudai-
monia. Die Lehre des Plotin von der Selbstverwirklichung des Menschen (Wiirzburg:
Konrad Triltsch, 1959); H. J. Blumenthal, Plotinus' Psychology: His Doctrines
of the Embodied Soul (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1971); C. de Vogel, "Ploti-
nus' Image of Man: Its Relationship to Plato as Well as to Later Neoplatonism,"
in Images of Man in Ancient and Medieval Thought. Studia G. Verbeke . . . dicata
(Louvain: Catholic University Press, 1976), pp. 147-68.
35 Plotinus 1:35 (see above, n. 33).
36 How these birds could have acted as protection is far from clear, as was
pointed out by Eitrem (see n. 32 above), pp. 62 ff.; and Dodds, pp. 290-91.
37 At the beginning, after the address to the god, the papyrus has an unidentifi-
able word which could be, as Preisendanz suggests, an abbreviation of a section
title ovetpalrirrov ("request for a dream revelation").
are four sections: the invocation of Eros (lines 478-83), fol-

lowed by instructions for a burnt-offering (484-86), a phylac-
tery (486-88), and the incubation (488-91).
The request to Eros is "to send me my personal daimon
tonight, to give me information about whatever the concern
is" (line 478). The word "daimon" is missing in the papyrus,
but must be restored if the spell is to make any sense.38 Two
hints in the spell suggest that it has to do with the consultation
of the "personal daimon." The burnt offering has among the
ingredients to be burnt "dirt from your sandal"-an instance
of magical substance (ovala) representing the person's self.39 In
addition, the instruction for the incubation says somewhat
ambiguously (line 489): E'aeXOE rapa aeavrw, which can be
rendered in the ordinary sense as "go to [a room] by yourself,"40
or, with a deeper sense implied, as "turn in with yourself."
The ordinary sense is indicated by the following instruction
to "put out the lamp and sleep on a rush mat on a new bed-
stead." However, a magician acquainted with the Hermetic
or Neoplatonic interpretation of the Delphic precept as "mi-
gration" or "return into your self" might have seen a reference
to this in the magical text. In sleep the body and its sense
perceptions would be understood as put at rest, so that the
soul can separate from the body and return to its eternal and
divine state of being.41
The question of how the "personal daimon" can be recog-
nized once it appears is answered by two other PGM sections,
both of which reflect older Egyptian and Greek ideas.
A badly damaged spell for gaining control of one's own
shadow, PGM III.612-32, is Egyptian in provenance. The
magician is assured that as a result of a prescribed ritual "you
will gain control of your own shadow, so that it will serve
you."42 The shadow of a human person had been identified
38 The restoration of ballzova is more likely than &yyeXov as Preisendanz has it,
since the technical term iLos Salfjwv occurs in the same papyrus (PGM VII.505).
39 See PGM VII.484. For this magical use of dirt, see Hopfner, pp. 171-72
(secs. 669-77). The concept reflects popular religion, as some New Testament
passages show (Mark 6:11; Matt. 10:14; Luke 9:5, 10:11; Acts 13:51, 18:6).
For the significance of the sandal in magic, see the material referred to in Hans
Dieter Betz, "Fragments from a Catabasis Ritual in a Greek Magical Papyrus,"
History of Religions 19 (1980):287-95.
40 Preisendanz II, p. 22 translates: "geh heim."
41 See Betz, "The Delphic Maxim," pp. 468-69, 478 ff.; Courcelle, p. 75, n. 32;
p. 110, n. 52; also W. Theiler, "Antike und christliche Riickkehr zu Gott," in his
Forschungen zum Neuplatonismus (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1966),
pp. 313-25.
42 PGM III.614-15; see also 623-24, 629-30. I am indebted to John Dillon for
the translation.
with his soul in popular religion43 since the archai

Egyptian44 as well as Greek religion,45 and in part
role in magic is well attested in the sources.46 There is,
only this one passage in the PGM.
When the shadow appears, the magician is told,
come to you standing opposite you, and then say to
me everywhere'..." (lines 630-32). In other words
of the self has been achieved when the magician's s
become his "assistant daimon" (7rapE5pos baLtipwv).47
The other spell important for the concept of the
daimon" is PGM VIII.1-52, entitled "Love spell of As
kos" (OLXrpoKara6&eao-os 'AaTpa/ovKov).48 The spell itse
ever, not concerned with gaining the love of a woman o
as one would expect, but with obtaining in a mo
sense "favor, sustenance, victory, prosperity, elegan
of face, strength among all men and women" (lines
character of the spell is Graeco-Egyptian with p
fluences from Neoplatonic concepts.49 The greater p
rather involved text consists of a lengthy invocation of
who is said to be manifest not only in four mystica
the four quarters of heaven but also in the four sacr
of ibis, dog-faced baboon, serpent, and wolf, repres
deities Thoth, Anubis, Uto, and another form of An
43 See F. Pradel, "Der Schatten im Volksglauben," Mitteilungen der
Gesellschaft fur Volkskunde 12 (1904): 1-36; J. von Negelein, "Bild
Schatten im Volksglauben," Archiv fur Religionswissenschaft 5
(hereafter cited as ARW); M. Bieler, "Schatten," Handworterbuch d
Aberglaubens 9 (1940): 126-42.
44 See B. George, Zu den altdgyptischen Vorstellungen vom Scha
(Bonn: Rudolf Habelt Verlag, 1970).
46 See E. Rohde, Psyche, 2 vols. (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
schaft, 1961), 1:3 ff.; H. D. Betz, Lukian von Samosata und das Neu
(Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1961), pp. 85, 93, 151; P. W. van der
Schatten im hellenistischen Volksglauben," in Studies in Hellenis
ed. M. J. Vermaseren (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979), pp. 27-36.
46 See esp. Plutarch De Is. et Os. 47, 370C; Quaest. Graec. 39, 300C
564C-D; and Pliny HN 28.69. For a discussion, see Hopfner, pp. 53,
222, 333, 347); J. G. Griffiths, Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride (Cambridg
of Wales Press, 1970), pp. 481-82.
47 This type of daimon occurs often in the PGM (e.g., 1.42-54, 1.9
92; IV.1840-70; XII.14-16). See K. Preisendanz, "Paredros, 2" Real
klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. 18 (1949) (hereafter cited
1428-53; RAC 10, cols. 621-22.
48 Apparently meant to refer to the legendary Persian magician As
See E. Riess, "Astrampsychos," PW, vol. 2 (1896), cols. 1796-97.
49 The terms aXKj ("strength"), in lines 6 and 31, avvoxb ("distress"
EdwoXov ("image") in line 38, and avvpprw ("incline together" [?]) in
interest to Neoplatonism. See O. Geudtner, Die Seelenlehre der C
Orakel (Meisenheim: Anton Hain Verlag, 1971), pp. 48, 50 ff.; H. Lew
Oracles and Theurgy, new ed., by M. Tardieu (Paris: Etudes Augustin
6-11).50 Moreover, Hermes is identified by his plant and his

tree (lines 12-13) and his city of Hermopolis (14). These and
other identifications made in the spell justify addressing Hermes
as the "many-named" (roXvWvv,os) (line 14).
What then is the relationship between the god Hermes and
the "personal daimon"? Clearly, Hermes is invoked as the
highest god and is requested: "Hear me and make me agreeable
to all the species throughout the inhabited world. Open up for
me hands of everyone who dispenses gifts and compel them to
give me what they have in their hands" (lines 16-20).51 While
this language sounds fairly traditional, the magician goes on
to state the special powers that he claims to have over the
god because of his mystical union with him. Expressing these
claims, the magician draws on a number of mystical formulae.
To begin with, he recites a threefold petition for mystical union
with the god: "Come to me, lord Hermes, as fetuses do to
wombs of women. Come to me, lord Hermes, who collect the
assemblies of gods and men. Come to me NN, lord Hermes,
and give me..." (lines 2-4). To judge from the following
sections, however, it seems that the mystical union with the
god has already taken place (perhaps in the initiation of the
magician in which the secret names of the god used in the
spell were first revealed to him). As a result of this union the
magician may have thought to have the god under control, or
to be controlled by the god and therefore express his will with
his power. Three formulae express this union, the first two of
which are in lines 36-37:
aTV yap ieyc KaZi iy ab,
TO OV oVO iOLa /AOV KKai TO r MV 0abv.
For you are I, and I am you;

your name is mine, and mine is yours.
While the first formula is attested also elsewhere in the PGM52

and, in fact, is known from gnostic and mystic texts outside
this literature as well,53 and the second is characteristic of
60 For this information I am indebted to Jan Bergman.

61 The translation quoted here is by Edward N. O'Neil.
52 E.g., in line 50; see PGM XIII.795 and its context.
63 See 0. Weinreich, "Religiose Stimmen der Volker," ARW 19 (1916-19): 165-
68; F. Heiler, Das Gebet, 4th ed. (Munich: Ernst Reinhardt Verlag, 1922), pp.
306-7; R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres (Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1904), pp. 20-21,
242 ff.; A. Dieterich, Eine Mithrasliturgie, 3d ed. (Leipzig and Berlin: B. G.
Teubner, 1923), pp. 97-98, 240; G. Widengren, Religionsphdnomenologie (Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1969), pp. 516-45.
magic, a third formula is unique in the PGM54 (lines 37-38):

iyb yap ei,u r6 Ecok060 aov.
For I am your image.
This statement is certainly more than an incidental confession;

it is a self-definition of the status of the magician in the hier-
archy of beings and, moreover, a definition of the human self.
The statement has been interpreted in various ways. R.
Reitzenstein assumed Egyptian ideas to lie behind the notion
of eidolon and identified it with the ka.55 F. Preisigke thought
of it in terms of a divine fluidum: "Like the fluidum of a god
flows into his statue, in order to take its effect there as the
living divine I, so it also flows into the body of the initiate."56
But the notion of eidolon seems to be Greek in origin.
The concept of "image" (e'o}wXov) as referring to the soul is old
in Greek religion. It describes the soul as a visible entity which
can even be depicted in vase paintings.57 Philosophical specu-
lation also adopted the term and interpreted it in a variety of
ways. Such speculations determined that the substance of such
"images" must be a kind of "spirit" (rrvev,a).58 The philoso-
phers also used the concept in explaining the relationship
between the soul and the deity.59 According to traditions
handed down in the Academy60 and elaborated further in
54 Cf., however, XII.235-36, LXI.53-55; and the Book of Jeu, chaps. 39, 41,
etc. (see V. MacDermott, The Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce
Codex [Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978], p. 329, s.v. eLKwv).
65 R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres, p. 21, n. 11.
66 F. Preisigke, Vom gottlichen Fluidum nach dgyptischer Anschauung (Berlin
and Leipzig: Vereinigung wissenschaftlicher Verleger, 1920), pp. 18-19. My own
translation.
57 See O. Waser, "Uber die aussere Erscheinung der Seele in den Vorstellungen
der Volker, zumal der alten Griechen," ARW 16 (1913): 336-88, esp. 360 ff.
58 See F. Riische, Das Seelenpneuma, seine Entwicklung von der Hauchseele zur
Geistseele, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der antiken Pneumalehre (1933; reprint ed.,
New York: Johnson Publishing Co., 1968); H. Kleinknecht, "r'vev,a," Theological
Dictionary of the New Testament (1959; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1968),
6:332-59.
59 See also W. Burkert, "Air-Imprints or Eidola: Democritus' Aetiolog
Vision," Illinois Classical Studies 2 (1977): 97-109.
60 This doctrine of the el&oXov (Latin: simulacrum) appears to be m
Platonic. See Plutarch De E apud Delphos 21.393E, reflecting source mat
see H. D. Betz, "Observations on Some Gnosticizing Passages in Plutarch
Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Gnosticism, Kungl. Vitter
Historie och Antikvitets Akademiens Handlingar, Filologisk-filosofiska serien,
(Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1977), pp. 169-78, esp. 175-77; I. Heinem
Poseidonios' metaphysische Schriften, 2 vols. (Breslau: Marcus, 1921, 1
1:55 ff.; 2:312 ff.
hermetic6' and Neoplatonic62 specu

ence between the soul and the deit
of the mirror picture: the soul as
being reflects, as a mirror reflect
looks into the human soul by intr
This concept stands also behind
PGM VIII.37-38. When one sees
look into it as into a mirror and co
that what one sees in the mirror i
PGM VIII.37-38, this means that
is, his self) is the mirror-picture
interpretation is correct, the anal
Christ in the Acts of Thomas come
of himself:64
EaoTrTpov Ei/uSl ?OL Tc VoouVTi ,Je.
A mirror I am to you who know
Furthermore, the statement calls to mind New Testament

passages, like the Fourth Gospel defining the relationship
between the Father and the Son in this way: "He who has seen
me has seen the Father."65 To be sure, this concept did not
originate in the New Testament but seems to be older.66 At
any rate, in Hermetic and Neoplatonic thought it became the
central concept for determining the relationship between the
61Corpus Hermeticum VI.4; Fragments VIII.3; XI.2 (47); XV.4. For the
interpretation of the concept in gnosticism, see G. Quispel, "Das ewige Ebenbild
des Menschen. Zur Begegnung mit dem Selbst in der Gnosis," in his Gnostic
Studies (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut in het Nabije
Oosten, 1974), 1:140-57.
62 See Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles, index s.v. elbwXov; J. H. Sleeman and G. Pollet,
Lexicon Plotinianum (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1980), cols. 299-30 s.v. ae&wAov.
63 See H. Leisegang, "La Connaissance de Dieu au miroir de l'ame et de la
nature," Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses 17 (1937): 145-71; J.
Geffcken, "Der Bilderstreit des heidnischen Altertums," ARW 19 (1916-19): 286-
315, esp. 304 ff.; G. B. Ladner, "Eikon," RAC, vol. 4 (1959), cols. 771-86.
64 Acta Joannis 95 (25), ed. R. A. Lipsius and M. Bonnet, Acta Apostolorum
Apocrypha (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1959), 2, pt. 1:198.
Cf. differently Odes of Solomon 13:1 (J. J. Charlesworth, ed., The Odes of Solomon
[Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973]): "Behold, the Lord is our mirroir. Open (your)
eyes and see them in Him." See also Pseudo-Clementine Homilies 13.16.2.
66 John 14:9 and the context 14:7-11 (see R. Bultmann, The Gospel of John
[Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971], p. 605, n. 6, referring to the "personal daimon"
in Jamblichus De mysteriis 9:6; 5:19, 6:46, 10:30, 17:1 ff.). See also M. Smith,
Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1973), pp. 226-27.
66 The corresponding concept in the New Testament is EKWv, while erwXov is
reserved for "idol."
self and the deity. If, therefore, the magician in PGM VIII.37-
38 defines himself in his relationship to the deity by the
formula "I am your image," we can conclude that he was
influenced by the philosophical tradition, which had taken up
and interpreted the ancient and widespread religious notion of
the relation of man to God as his "image," found already in
Gen. 1:26ff.
In addition to accepting Hermetic or Neoplatonic language,
however, the magician also provides his own interpretation.
While the first formula ("you are I and I am you") comes from
a mystical and even erotic background, and the last ("I am
your image") from Hellenistic philosophical thought, the mid-
dle one gives the magical rationale: "your name is mine and
mine is yours." Characteristic for the magical literature, it is
the knowledge of the secret name that establishes the ground
for the mystical union.
In PGM VIII.40-49 the magician reminds Hermes that he
knows his "true name" from the holy stele in the innermost
sanctuary of the temple in Hermopolis, where Hermes was
born. That name is then stated and the inherent powers are
released. On this basis the magician can claim (lines 49-50):
ot6a ce, 'EpP/i, Ka a u o i'
'yb EL/JAL> a KaL arv iY&.
I know you, Hermes, and you me;

I am you, and you are I.
Hence knowledge of the god through knowledge of the names

is the same as knowledge of the magician's self-this is the
magician's answer to the Delphic maxim. Possessing this knowl-
edge, the magician can then also use his powers to influence his
destiny. Whatever that destiny may have been before, now it
is identical with the god's own destiny (lines 38-40): "If some-
thing should happen to me during this year or this month or
this day or this hour, it will happen to the great god .. ." But
Hermes is a good god, the great benefactor of gods and men,
as the magician frequently reminds him. United with this god,
the magician's own destiny can therefore be nothing but good,
too. When he finally presents his request to the god, therefore,
he does so by supplementing the traditional request formula
with his own interpretation. Traditional is the opening line,
interpretative the second, traditional again the conclusion
(lines 50-52):
Kaw Tpabv .ot A &rdvTra

Kal arvvper(o>)s arv 'A,yaOj TbXP Kai 'AyaOey AaipovL,
3rtl, 6581, raXb, raXb.
And so, do everything for me,
and may you turn to me with Good Fortune and Good Daimon,
quickly, quickly, immediately, immediately.
Having a beneficent god like Hermes as his "personal daimon"

can only mean that the god will "incline together"67 with
Good Daimon and, as the "fulfiller of destiny," with Good
Fortune, both prominent deities in the PGM and, for that
matter, in Graeco-Roman religions in general.68
Once these self-identifications have been recognized in their
nature and purpose, other such statements in the PGM fall
into place. All of them document the identity of the knowledge
of the divine and the knowledge of the self as understood by
the magicians.
In PGM III.599-600, in the context of a long Hermetic
prayer of thanksgiving, the magician states the indebtedness
of his community for the knowledge of god:
Xaipou[e]v, ort aeaTvrv i)/uYv eLOtas,
XaFpolev, 6TL Iv 'rKXltaap.rv rtjas vTras &'rOe0iwaas Tp aeavroO 'yvpwat.
We rejoice that you have shown yourself to us;
we rejoice that while being in bodies you have
deified us by the knowledge of yourself.69
Another such self-presentation is found in a long invocation

of Apollo in PGM II.126-28:
eywc e51 6 8etva, 6anTLS OL &67rrTrr)Tla,
Kat 6ip6v ! oL iwcopoffw rvP TOV eyierTov a OV 6vb6YaTos YvoxLv, . . .
I am NN, who have come into your presence

and you have given me as a gift the knowledge of
your most great name ...70
This knowledge of the deity has its counterpart in statements

of self-knowledge. A short statement of this kind occurs in an
invocation to the god Aion in PGM IV.1177-80:
y,c e/iAL &pofforos, Oeo TOV ev obpavQ rXk&aata KAXXiarov,
'yev6fJevov P K 7rvevvacros Kal 5p6ov Kat 'yjs.
I am a human being, the heavenly deity's most

beautiful creation,
made out of spirit and dew and earth.7
67 The translation of vwvpe7rw in line 51 is uncertain; see n. 49 above.

68 See also PGM IV.2999-3000. On Agathos Daimon, see Colpe, RAC, vol. 8
(1972), cols. 182-97.
69 Translation by W. C. Grese. See also lines 570 ff., 578, 605, 607-8.
70 Translation by J. Dillon.
71 My own translation.
The extraordinary similarity of this statement and those found

on the so-called Orphic Tablets72 is obvious and suggests that
the papyrus quotes older material; in fact, a "gold tablet" is
even mentioned in line 1219.
A much more elaborate self-presentation occurs in the great
invocation of Helios in the so-called "Mithras Liturgy," PGM
IV.644-49:
avOpworos ~eyw 6 eplva rTs Sclva,
'yevo6Ievos eK Ovr7rrjs bwrpas T7ri belva Kaal LXiopos orepjuaTrKou,
Kat oar,cpoV 7oVrorv VrO wrov aoe( ra} )yevvre7veos,
EK ToroaoW VPL AvpLa&wv &Tra0avaarfLeOfs
epv TaVTfr Tr l'pq Kar7a 6ork)Lav 0eov vrep3a\XX6vTws ayaOov,73 . . .
A human being am I, NN, son of her, NN,

born from the mortal womb of NN and from the seminal fluid,
and today, when this man has been rebegotten by you;
having become immortal, out of so many thousands
in this hour according to the will of a god abundantly good, . ..74
Comparison of this self-presentation with the shorter one

PGM IV.1177-80 shows that a simpler statement of two line
has been expanded to include the person's regeneration, whic
is the result of having been initiated into the mystery of th
"Mithras Liturgy."75
CONCLUSION
The PGM demonstrate that such self-presentatio

part of rituals of deification, such as is the "Mithra
72 See Orphicorum Fragmenta, ed. O. Kern (Berlin: Weidmann, 1
(pp. 104-9), and the edition with commentary by G. Zuntz, Perseph
Clarendon Press, 1971), pp. 275 ff. Type B contains a line (line 6) w
cited as a "password": rivs rals efiul Kal Obpavou AarcTpoEerros ("A child
I am and of starry Heaven"). See Zuntz's commentary, pp. 364
statement is found in the new gold tablet from Hipponion, line 11:
Ovpavou &orep6evTos ("A son of Heavy [sc. Earth] I am and of star
For commentaries on the Hipponion tablet, see R. Merkelbach,
Goldtafelchen aus Hipponion," Zeitschrift far Papyrologie und E
(1975): 8-9; M. L. West, "Zum neuen Goldblittchen aus Hippon
schrift far Papyrologie und Epigraphik 18 (1975): 226-36; M. Ma
Gold Leaf from Hipponion," Zeitschrift far Papyrologie und Epigraph
221-24; G. Zuntz, "Die Goldlamelle von Hipponion," Wiener Stu
(1976): 129-51. There is a similar line in the tablet in the J. P. Gett
Malibu, California, which reads (lines 4-5): ras vbos EL/,L Kat Obpavov
("A son of Earth I am and of starry Heaven"). See the edition b
A Greek Prayer (Pasadena, Calif.: Ambassador College, n.d.).
73 My punctuation differs somewhat from that of Preisendanz. For
see also lines 516-37.
74 My own translation.
76 See PGM, lines 718-27; also 476-77, 501, 516-37; and for the interpretation
see Dieterich, Mithrasliturgie, pp. 134 ff. See also the important passage in
Pseudo-Plato Axiochus 372a.
76 See also PGM III.145-46, XIII.637.
In this frame of reference which extends to all of the magical

texts, self-knowledge and self-control are no longer regarded as
a matter of philosophical self-examination or moral exercise
but as the outcome of magical initiation. This is the magicians'
answer to the Delphic maxim "Know yourself," an answer not
as commonly known as the interpretations of the philosophical
tradition. But it may have been just as influential in the history
of religion and literature, being transmitted, as befits magic,
through literary underground channels.
To cite one of the most impressive examples, in the opening
monologue of Goethe's Faust, Faust is shown reflecting on the
implications of the Socratic dictum that all we know is that we
know nothing, itself part of the tradition of the Delphic maxim
(line 364). Because of these miserable results from scholarship
Faust has turned to magic (line 377). Guided by a book of the
great Nostradamus, Faust approaches the great Spirit and is
just about to experience an ecstatic ascent into the higher
world when Wagner, his famulus, "der trockne Schleicher"
(line 520), interrupts the experience. When Wagner has left
the room, Faust continues the monologue and presents himself
with these words (lines 614-22) :77
"Ich, Ebenbild der Gottheit, das sich schon
Ganz nah gediinkt dem Spiegel ew'ger Wahrheit,
Sein selbst genol in Himmelsglanz und Klarheit,
Und abgestreift den Erdensohn;
Ich, mehr als Cherub, dessen freie Kraft
Schon durch die Adern der Natur zu flielen
Und, schaffend, G6tterleben zu geniefen
Sich ahnungsvoll vermaB, wie muB ich's biiBen!
Ein Donnerwort hat mich hinweggerafft."
University of Chicago
77 Goethe's Werke, herausgegeben im Auftrage der Grofherzogin Sophie von

Sachsen (Weimar: Bohlau-Verlag, 1887), 14, pt. 1: 37. For an English version
of the quotation see Goethe's Faust, Parts I and II, in the Sir Theodore Martin
translation, introduced, revised, and annotated by W. HI. Bruford (London: Dent;
New York: Dutton, 1954), pp. 21-22:
"I, God's own image, I who deem'd I stood
With truth eternal full within my gaze,
And of this earthly husk divested, view'd
In deep contentment heaven's effulgent blaze;
I, more than cherub, whose free powers, methought,
Did all the veins of nature permeate,
I who-so potently my fancy wrought-
Conceived that, like a god, I could create,
And in creating taste a bliss supreme,
How must I expiate my frenzied dream?
One word, that smote like thunder on my brain,
Swept me away to nothingness again."

Betz, H. - The Delphic Maxim PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Betz, H. - The Delphic Maxim PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Betz, H. - The Delphic Maxim PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Delphic Maxim "Know Yourself" in the Greek Magical Papyri

Author(s): Hans Dieter Betz

Habent sua fata sententiae. This modifica

would lead one to believe. These influences do not offer them-

Why the PGM should have become interested in

As Courcelle has so clearly demonstrated, the his

to raise the question of how we can obtain that kind of knowl-

Plato.'7 In the myth of Er we ar

Take council very carefully,

THE INTERPRETATION BY THE MAGICIANS

In a different frame of reference, however, the magi

with one's "personal daimon" is never mentioned again. The

It is not difficult to understand, therefore, why the magician

"personal daimon" (oLKECOs 8aliuw).32 In this seance t

are four sections: the invocation of Eros (lines 478-83), fol-

with his soul in popular religion43 since the archai

6-11).50 Moreover, Hermes is identified by his plant and his

For you are I, and I am you;

While the first formula is attested also elsewhere in the PGM52

60 For this information I am indebted to Jan Bergman.

magic, a third formula is unique in the PGM54 (lines 37-38):

For I am your image.

This statement is certainly more than an incidental confession;

hermetic6' and Neoplatonic62 specu

EaoTrTpov Ei/uSl ?OL Tc VoouVTi ,Je.

A mirror I am to you who know

Furthermore, the statement calls to mind New Testament

I know you, Hermes, and you me;

Hence knowledge of the god through knowledge of the names

Kaw Tpabv .ot A &rdvTra

Having a beneficent god like Hermes as his "personal daimon"

Another such self-presentation is found in a long invocation

I am NN, who have come into your presence

This knowledge of the deity has its counterpart in statements

I am a human being, the heavenly deity's most

67 The translation of vwvpe7rw in line 51 is uncertain; see n. 49 above.

The extraordinary similarity of this statement and those found

A human being am I, NN, son of her, NN,

Comparison of this self-presentation with the shorter one

The PGM demonstrate that such self-presentatio

In this frame of reference which extends to all of the magical

77 Goethe's Werke, herausgegeben im Auftrage der Grofherzogin Sophie von

You might also like