Dedicating Magic: Neo-Assyrian Apotropaic Figurines and the Protection of Assur Author(s): Carolyn Nakamura Reviewed work(s): Source:

World Archaeology, Vol. 36, No. 1, The Object of Dedication (Mar., 2004), pp. 11-25 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4128300 . Accessed: 25/02/2012 15:41
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

Dedicating apotropaic
of
Assur

Neo-Assyrian magic: and the protection figurines

Carolyn Nakamura

Abstract to conventionalstudiesthat evaluateancientsystemsof magicagainstthe logic of As counterpoint rationalthought,this papersituatesmagicalpracticeas a mode of knowingand producing anterior to such logic, engaged in the reproduction of society.The discussionconvergeson Neo-Assyrian apotropaicfigurinedeposits,which providedmagicalprotectionof a priest-houseat Assur. It is arguedhere that apotropaic magicengagesin a mode of secrecythat underwrites protectivepower in the social field. These material assemblages, as mimetic expressionsof myth and dedication, configureprotection in a play on the public secret, the pathos of the real as really made up. Protectivepower,therefore,emergesin this processthat compelsthe perceptionand experienceof and protectedreality. a transformed

Keywords materialpractice;producAssur;magic;apotropaicfigurines; mimesis;dedication; Mesopotamia; tion of space.

Technologies of (re)production Magic is a mode of relating to things in the world; and this mode, which engages materiality to negotiate the human experience of transcendent powers and supernatural beings, delineates a process of bringing forth that which is invisible, imagined and powerful into the hard-core realm of human perception and understanding. Heidegger's analysis of the Greek concept of techne finds particular relevance here; techne serves 'to make something appear, within what is present, as this or that, in this way or that way', it denotes a 'producing in terms of letting appear' (Heidegger 1977a:361, emphasis added). But techne also expresses a mode of knowing, the essence of which consists in the revealing of beings: 'to know means to have seen, in the widest sense of seeing, which means to apprehend what is present, as such' (Heidegger 1977b: 184). Viewed as a technique or technology,

Routledge Francis
Taylor&

Group

& Francis LtdISSN0043-8243 online print/1470-1375 ? 2004Taylor

WorldArchaeology Vol. 36(1): 11-25

The Objectof Dedication

DOI: 10.1080/0043824042000192687

12 CarolynNakamura The magic belongs to both a knowing and a producingthat foregroundsmateriality. is that apprehended and magical object (or substance) presents an imagined reality experienced as real. Here, magic takes advantageof the recursive exchange between concept and experience, imagination and physical reality; its power resides in this the bringingforthof the inherentinstabilityof sociallife,unleashedin the 'lettingappear', invisibleinto the materialrealm.Magic,with this capacityto transformreality,serves as an 'affective technology' (Meskell 2004) and engages in the reproductionof society. Viewed in these terms,the material practice of magic constitutes nothing less than a technology. reproductive Dedicatorypracticejoins and often convergeswith magicunderthis concept of techne; like magic, dedication forges and transformsnetworks of social relations, mediating between worlds and beings, effectively reproducing society. The current discussion explores certainmodalitiesof technein a ritualof Mesopotamianapotropaicmagic:the strategicburialof protectivefigurinedeposits underhouse and temple floors duringthe Neo-Assyrianperiod of ancient Iraq (c. 934-610 Bc). This practice engages magic and And it is the materialproductionof socially dedicationto createor bringforthprotection. this goal. I consider the apotropaic that achieves and object-beings powerful space and mimesis,which trace back to the of dedication of how in terms conceptions process mythic origin of humans,configuremagicalprotection.I would suggest that the deposition of these assemblagesas dedicatorycaches mimics the creation of world order and What I traces out paths of magicalagencysuch that social realitybecomes transformed. of a maneuver on of that the idea here is the find compelling production society hinges metaphysicalproportions- the simultaneous duplication and obliteration of human selves at their origins- and how this 'secret'convergeswith materialpracticeto form a socially powerful reproductivetechnology.As such, magic orbits around something anteriorto reason,a way of knowingcontingentupon a secretthat configuresthe production of humansand theirsociety. The secrecyof objects somethingwhichlies Somethingwhichis involvedin the very natureof social relations, of of the is which these of at the heart relations, groundwork society,and which part necessarilyand continuouslyentails negative consequencesfor part of society,cannot individualsand groupsproduceof their society. appearas suchin the representations (Godelier 1999:173) This 'something'that Godelier alludes to as a primaryconditionfor the productionand namesas the 'publicsecret':thatwhichis generally of societyis whatTaussig reproduction knownbut cannotbe articulated (1999:5). And this 'knowingwhatnot to know' provides a social skill essentialto being a person,a social being,and is no less essential to society itself (ibid.:195).The secret,more than just a thing,is a process (Canetti 1984:290; also see Taussig1999:144), a process which permeates and configuresvarious reproductive technologies.In greaterMesopotamia,the public secret enshroudsthe myth of human the fact thathumanscreatethe gods or beingswho 'create'humanlife and society. origins:

Dedicating magic

13

This imagined reality underscores a culturally mediated worldview - a secret or truth within - that inhabits and is sustained by social practice. Materiality is key in this dialectic: certain devoted objects confront a kind of 'hard-core' understanding of the world with the process of public secrecy, amounting to a participation between matter and spirit, appearance and essence, and ideal and real (Taussig 1999: 192). Such objects locate and present the synthesis of that which can and cannot be expressed or represented to society (after Godelier 1999:137); namely, the true nature of the relationship between humans and their imaginary doubles. Anterior to the division of mind and body, there is mimesis: the age-old and rather profound faculty that stands somewhere at the beginning of language, the beginning of memory and the mediation of experience in-the-world. In Mesopotamia, this mimetic faculty merges with the public secret to reproduce and create social life; the original substitution of gods for humans - that simultaneous duplication and effacement of human selves at their origin - constitutes the secret whose possibility assures the possibility of society 'because this obliterating of real humans and replacing them with imaginary beings, this repressing beyond consciousness of the active role of man in the origins of society ... is necessary in order to produce and reproduce society' (Godelier 1999: 137). This social reality locates power in an ur-presence created by the miming of humans into original being (the divine). This is Taussig's 'miming the real into being' (1993: 105-6), as it were, writ large at the origins of human society. And this original mimesis of the self is notable on two accounts: first, this self-miming is tantamount to self-obliteration at its origins; second, the copy not only assumes the power of the original, but magnifies the power of the original. Original mimesis, therefore, accomplishes the creation of a powerful, divine super-presence through self-obliteration. By and large, humans truly believe in and experience this divine presence and being. This fact gets at the most provocative aspect of the public secret: that the original creation of absence - the absence of physical being (both human and divine) - ensures, no less than produces, the presence of a powerful spiritual being that is experienced and perceived as real. This reality of undeniable presence through absence configures the public secret as social power; and this power emerges through a cunning reversal: the secret as made by persons in turn becomes the secret making persons (Taussig 1999: 121). 'It is in this surrender to the thing made, to the creation taking over the creators, that we find the pathos of the real as really made up' (ibid.). The inviolability of this surrender to imagined, invisible divine beings configures sacred power, since the gods give back; they give back to humans their rules and customs as idealized and sacred realities. In turn, humans constantly reproduce and reform these ideals through social and material practice. It is this convergence of myth, power and materiality in public secrecy that I take as a departure point for understanding an ancient Mesopotamian reality in which clay figurines became magically powerful and powerfully real.

The apotropaic In Mesopotamia, the Neo-Assyrians (c. 934-610 BC) devoted a significant amount of thought and endeavor to their relationships with the 'first beings': the divine owners of the

14 CarolynNakamura this primordialdebt to universe who gave them life and civilization.Not surprisingly, in humans made sense of their world. invisible how beingsfiguredprofoundly imaginary, A relationshipprefigured by the obligationof service and devotion to the gods probably andkingly an principlefor myth,magic,religion,state administration provided organizing this material we can practice. interrogate phenomenonthrough power.Archaeologically, The early excavations of ancient Mesopotamian cities unearthed provocative Neo-Assyriandepositsburiedbeneathroomfloors (Plate 1):brickboxes often containing clay figurinesportraying mythicalbeings- gods,animalsand varioushybridtypes- found in or singly, pairs groups of seven. Notably,ancient humansplaced these boxes under particularareas:flankingdoorways,along walls,in corners,thresholdsand the middle of rooms. These assemblages,found at Assur, Nimrud,Nineveh, Kish, Ur and Babylon, conformedclosely to a practicerecordedin variousritualtexts (Gurney1935;Smith1926; Wiggermann1992). These texts suggest that the ritual served to purify and protect individualsand buildingsfrom disease and evil forces,and entailed a protractedseries of elaborateceremoniesand acts performedby a trainedpractitioner. Previousstudies of these materialsprovide detailedfigurinecatalogs(Klengel-Brandt 1968;Rittig 1977;Van Buren 1931),iconographicanalyses(Ellis 1967, 1995;Green 1983, 1986,1993-7;Wiggermann 1993-7) and mythologicaland textual analyses(Wiggermann 1992). Such studies, although rigorous and thorough,fall short of doing justice to the the scholarshipconspicuouslyomits sophisticationof this ancient practice.Particularly, in terms of social account of these data any practice.These apotropaicassemblagesare

Plate 1

Brick capsules in room 3 of the Haus des Beschworungspriesters (after Preusser 1954:table

28a).

Dedicating magic

15

evocative preciselybecause they present a materialimprintof humanpracticein space and time;moreover,ritualtexts and a substantialcorpus of researchon Mesopotamian culturalhistorycan add considerabledepth and detail to the interpretation of this practice. Modernscholarship, needs to theorize and contextualize various therefore, gestures of apotropaicpractice,drawingfrom multiple classes of data.With this goal in mind, I revisit a case study from Assur (Andrae 1938;Klengel-Brandt 1968;Preusser1954) and considerhow apotropaicdeposits might be seen in terms of a reproductivetechnology, negotiatinghuman-divinerelationstowardsthe localizationand productionof protected space.

the gift that takes Of humanorigins: The conception of world origins was debated over nearly four millennia in various mythologies of diverse Mesopotamiancultures,peoples and polities.Although various mythologies constantlyre-negotiatedconceptions of world order and creation,certain ideas of humanoriginsand theirplace in the worldenduredthroughoutthe region. One of the most prevalent ideas maintainedthroughoutthe mythic traditionis the divine creationof humansas servantsof the gods. In most cases,the great god Ea/Enki conceives humankindas a substituteto free the gods from havingto labor the earth for their sustenance. TheAtrahasisepic recountsthe creationof humankind from a mixture of clay of the apsu andthe blood of a slainrebel god (TabletI, 210-13). Othermythsrelate divine human creation using only this clay (Enki and Ninmah,24-6) or blood (Enuma elish,TabletVI, 33). These materialsof human creation are relevant to the mimesis of I am concernedwith how protectivebeings and will be discussedlater on. But currently, this mythologicaltheme delineatesthe creationof humankind in termsof eternalhuman servitudeto the gods.Humansare born servants. This fact prefiguresthe cunninghuman abilityto make demandsthroughthe dedicatorygift,the givingthat takes.The Mesopotamiangods are the true ownersof all thingsand possessionsin the world,includingthose procuredfromthe earth.The divinegift of life establishesa primordial debt,whichplaces humansin eternal obligationto labor and provide for the gods, but, in performingthis service,humanssimplyreturnwhat rightfullybelongs to the gods.Humanshave nothing to give but themselves; fromthis position,they can only demand(Derrida1992:142). And what they demand is that the gods give what they have to humans - give them the resourcesto live, produceand thrive- but also give by takingthem,'by takingwhat they are and by takingthem such as they are' (ibid.:144). In other words,humansas servants (what they are) who have nothing (such as they are) demandto be taken underthe care of the gods;this is the demandfor protection.
Episodes from the Atrahasis and Gilgamesh epics depict how humans are able to negotiate protection of their precarious existence (as both useful servants and annoying over-breeders) through unanticipated gifts of devotion. In these stories, people narrowly survive scourges sent by the gods - first plague and then flood - with help from Ea and by presenting offerings to win back the gods' favor. After the flood, Utanapishtim (also known as Atrahasis), the father of the only surviving human family, presents an offering to the mass of remorseful, heartbroken and hungry gods:

16 CarolynNakamura Then I set out everythingin all directionsand sacrificed[a sheep]. I offered incensein front of the mountainziggurat. Seven and seven cult vessels I put in place, and [intothe fire]underneath[or:into their bowls]I pouredreeds,cedarand myrtle. The gods smelledthe savor, The gods smelledthe sweet savor, And collectedlike flies over a (sheep) sacrifice. (Kovacs1992:102, lines 155-61) Thissuppliant, more thanobligatory, act of offeringprovesto be a highlyeffectivemethod of persuasion.Humans redeem their existence by fulfillingtheir original purpose:to providegifts,dedicationand devotionto the gods.And, with these acts,humansfind they can demandprotectionof theirexistencefrom the gods. God-givenprotectionensuresthe reproductionof society,since the gods,those substitute beings who replacehumansat their origins,'give [humans]back their own laws and into the commongood, into a sacred customs,but in a sacredform,idealized,transmuted which brooks no no principle argument, opposition, which can only be the object of unanimousconsent' (Godelier 1999:174).The process of reversalin the dedicatorygift recalls the uncanny exchange in the secret of origins:'the creation taking over the creators'. This process,in whichthe categoriesof having,being,giving and taking merge, becomes a preconditionof social being (followingDerrida1992:144).The role of dedication in the public secret, therefore,produces and configuresthe nature of protection. Techneinhabits dedication as the two-sided coin of creation/protection.Dedication creates in the sense that it reproducesnecessary conditions of social life: the life and essence of the divine;and it preserves (protects) in that it makes this creation actual. Herein lies the publicsecretin the formof the gift that takes back,and whatit takes back is power.

Dedicated mimesis Say you the stone or wood, or silver is not yet a god? When then does he come to the birth? See him cast, molded sculptured - not yet is he a god; see him soldered,

assembled,and set up - still not a god;see him bedizened,consecrated, worshiped; hey, presto!He is a god - by a man'swill and the act of dedication. (MinuciusFelix,translatedin Walkerand Dick 1999:117) In the contextof Neo-Assyrianapotropaic magic,dedicationengendersa protectedreality the of by creating presence powerfulbeings in the materialworld;these are protective
deities and spirits that come to inhabit the world as a presence that is apprehended as real. Neo-Assyrian magical figurines perform the fulfillment of the wish for protection. More precisely, they manifest this wish. Dedicatory gestures, which animate this magical practice, are not merely the obligatory acts of servants, but specific requests; they constitute the apotropaic, 'the defense that goes on the offensive' (Derrida 1992:142). In short, dedication takes a creative role in this context; it grounds the process that transforms matter into being. Also essential to this transformation is the mimesis of divine creation.

Dedicatingmagic 17 The ritual text, sep lemuttiina bit ameli parasu,'to block the entry of the enemy in someone's house',demonstratesthe dedicatorymode that inhabitsthe entire creationof the protective figurine,from the consecrationof the clay, dedication to the gods and declarationof being: Incantation: Claypit, clay pit, you are the clay pit of Anu and Enlil, of the clay pit Ea, lord of the deep,the clay pit of the greatgods; you have made the lord for lordship, you have made the king for kingship, for have made the future you prince days; your pieces of silverare given to you, you have receivedthem; your gift you have received,and so, in the morningbefore Samas,I pinchoff the clay NN son of NN; may it be profitable, may what I do prosper. [As soon as] you have recitedthis,you shall speakbefore Samasas follows: [statues]of Ea and Marduk, repellingthe evil ones, be in the house of NN son of NN [to] expel the foot of evil, [to] placed I [pinchoff] their clay before you <in> the claypit. 1992:13, lines 151-61) (Wiggermann These instructions recallthe gift that takes:'yourpieces of silverare given to you ... your have This consecrationof ritual materials reduplicatesthe human received'. gift you obligationof givingback that which alreadybelongs to the gods;this in turn sets up the for power:'may it be profitable, request/demand may what I do prosper'.These instructions call for the re-enactmentof creation itself - from the utterance of words to the pinchingoff of clay - all dedicatedto Samas,the sun god (see Black and Green 1992:54). In this dedicated mimesis, human creation assumes the power of original creation that transforms amountingto a demonstration reality (afterTaussig1993:106).The clay becomes the clay of the deep the originalmatterfrom which the world was createdfashioned into a powerful being with divine or supernatural powers and qualities.The thick lime plaster which coats many of the figurines,often obscuringtheir distinctive features,may be associatedwith divinityand protection(see Mallowan1954:87). Speculating further,it seems possible that this plasterrepresentsmelam,the luminous,visible markof the supernatural. Provocativelyhere, the spiritof supernatural being comes to inhabita physicalreality that presents a blatant sham for a double:miniatureclay figurinesdipped in thick lime plaster.But, with mimesis,the copy need not be a 'good' or accuratecopy (Taussig1993: 13). I would suggestthat this intentionalcreationof a humblecopy constitutesa cunning dissimulationakin to what Taussigcalls defacement,an act which produces 'violated' such that they are no longer merely symbols,but come to life (1999:30). representations The 'poor' counterfeit,like a built-inform of defacement,bringsinsides out, revealinga powerfulpresence throughthe labor of the negative.The power of the spiritspills forth into a controllablepresence through this very negation of the secret; the secret (the human creationof the divine) becomes articulated, performed,exposed, as if to propel the figurebeyondthe mere statusof 'powerfulobject'and mergeinto powerfulbeing,but this revelationbecomes concealed immediatelyin the dedicatorygesture amountingto the very creationof beingin thing.And the 'thingness'of being is essentialhere.Humans

18

Carolyn Nakamura

mediate their relationships between worlds and beings materially, such that this communication locates and structuresa perceptiblereality. Apotropaicfigurinespresent a palpablepresence-in-the-world, as object-beings with the life of protectivespiritsand as of a protectedreality. into the realm a collectivedemonstration By bringingthe imaginary of directperception,apotropaicassemblagesmime a protectedrealityinto being.

Imagesof the underworld of protectioninvolves furthermimeticacts at the level of producing The demonstration protected space. By the Neo-Assyrian period, Mesopotamiansconceived of an underworld,populatedby variousbeings,both benevolent and malevolent:deities, dead gods, slain heroes and monsters,spiritsof dead humansand demons.Numeroussources locate beneath the surface of the earth (Black and Green 1992: the underworldunderground, 180;Bottero 1992:273-5). Thisidea follows from a traditionalMesopotamianconception of a verticaland bipolaruniversewhere the earth,inhabitedby living humans,separated the Heavens from the Netherworld(Bottero 1992:273). Certainritualpracticesreinforce the most obvious being the burialof located underground, this notion of an underworld the dead in the ground,thereby effecting their passage to their proper residence in the netherworld. The burial of apotropaicfigurinesmay also reinforce a related conception of space. Most of the mythologicalcreaturesand gods depicted in apotropaicfiguresdwell in the freshwaterocean.The placementof these powerfulcopies underapsu,the underground groundmay act to channelor enervatetheir power,as they are broughtforth to being in their 'proper' realm. Notably, dedicatorypractices often involve burial underground. Evidence of dedicatorycaches and foundation offerings throughoutvarious Mesopotamianculturalperiods (Ellis 1968;Van Buren 1931) suggests that the gesture of burial has certainand,perhaps, multiplemeaningsin ritualcontexts. The placement of apotropaic figurines undergroundis also interesting from the perspectiveof liminalspace.The surfaceof the earth acts as a boundarythat delineates and the 'living'worldof humankind. the borderbetween the underworld Manyof the evil forces targeted in apotropaicpractices- spirits,ghosts, gods and demons - find their But suchunsettledor summonedbeings are able properdwellingplace in the underworld. This in the earth and cause harmto humans. holes and cracks to leave this realmthrough recallsLefebvre'snotion of visibleboundarieswhich'give rise to an appearpermeability ance of separationbetween spaces where in fact what exists is an ambiguouscontinuity' (1991:87). And this continuitylocates potential;the surface of the earth, permeable to both benevolent and malevolent beings from the underworld,presents potential for
threat and danger, but also for aid and protection. At the household scale, other liminal boundaries include corners, walls, thresholds, doors and windows. Indeed, one ritual text specifically designates corners, doorways, windows, roofs and attics as areas in need of protection and purification (Wiggermann 1992: 17, lines 245-9). The door is both an entrance and exit; it keeps in, protects, secures, but also lets pass, invites and tempts (Bachelard 1994: 222). Similarly, corners are part walls, part door and designate spaces of hiding, protection and immobility (ibid.: 136). Such liminal areas designate areas that are

Dedicatingmagic 19 'in-between' or in transition at margins.As such, these areas could be regarded as powerfulsince they locate potential.

Producingprotection The apotropaic assemblages from Assur offer roughly 117 clay figurines,thirty-four deposits and eight general figure types, two of which have subtypes (Figure 2; for detailed catalog, see Klengel-Brandt 1968). The Haus des Beschworungspriesters (Andrae 1938;Klengel-Brandt1968;Preusser1954),the best-knownexample at Assur, provides an ideal case for theorizing the deposition patterns of Neo-Assyrian apotropaic figurine assemblages.This Neo-Assyrian house belonged to a priest family and probablyaccommodateda temple school duringSargonidtimes (Weidner1937-9).The context is particularly remarkablegiven that it not only provides materialevidence of the apotropaicritual,but textual evidence as well. KAR 298 (Gurney 1935;Smith 1926; Wiggermann1992), the inventory of figures which describes the production,use and placement of apotropaicfigurines,originates from this house along with many other literaryand magicaltexts.A contextualanalysisof this practice,drawingupon material, textual and mythologicaldata,will help illuminatecertainNeo-Assyrianconceptionsof protection. Threedifferentfigurinetypes in sixteenknowndepositsare locatedin the priesthouse: the six-curledlahmuwith spade (TypeVIIa, Plate 2, thirteenfigurines), the bird-apkallu with cone andbucket(TypeIa,Plate3, fifteenfigurines) andthe fish-apkallu (TypeII,Plate The figuresstand in brickboxes made from three or four bricks 4, twenty-onefigurines). about 35cm underfloorlevel (Plate5). Eleven of sixteenexcavatedfigurine placedupright in occur room and have notabledepositionpatterns(Fig.1). Withinthis room, 3, deposits capsules1 and 4-8 containpairs of Type Ia and VIIa;these deposits occur flankingthe north-east in frontof the NW doorthreshold, in the middleof the room andin all doorway, cornersexceptfor the west corner, whichPreussersuggestsmighthave been robbed(1954: these 58). Capsules10 and 11 containTypeII in groupsof seven and fourteen,respectively; two deposits occur in the middle of room 3, oriented perpendicularto each other.

!
-,-. .. . ;'. ..

10..../

,<

13

To b
1;1/;

12

Oil

14

Figure1 Positionsof brickcapsules1-16 in the Haus des Beschwbirungspriesters (afterMiglusand

Heidemann 1996: Plan132c).

20

Carolyn Nakamura Alternatively, capsule 10 could be viewed as positioned in front of south-east doorway, which would conform to the KAR 298 placement of the seven fish-apkallu guarding the entrance to the ritual chamber or bedroom (15-16). Interestingly, capsules 6, 10 and 11 do not cluster in the direct center of the room but within the path between the north-east and south-east doorways. Wiggermann's reading of ritual texts suggests that, within this apotropaic ritual, the apkallu figurines act as 'purifiers and exorcists whose presence continuously protects the inhabitants against evil influences' (1992: 96). As such, he predicts that the apkallu figurines would be placed in the private, more internal rooms of the house. Furthermore, figurines of gods and monsters (Fig. 2), whose task is to defend against demonic intruders, would

Plate 2 Six-curledlahmu,VA 4895,Ht 12.6 cm (afterPreusser 1954: table29c).

Plate 3 Bird-apkallu, VA 4890, Ht 11.9 cm (after Preusser1954:table 29c).

be stationed in the outer entrance and at strategic points within the house (ibid.: 97). However, the practice at Assur does not conform to this appealing analysis. Although, based on Preusser's assumption that the door into courtyard 7 provides the entrance to the house (1954: 58), room 3 appears to be a well-enclosed interior room, the locations and types of deposits do not follow textual prescription. The fish-apkallu deposits do occur Plate 4 Fish-apkallu, VA 5484, exclusively in room 3 of the house, but the lahmul Ht 11.7 cm )after Preusser1954; bird-apkallu deposits occur in interior rooms 2 and 3 table 29a).

Dedicating magic 21

Plate5 Brickcapsule11 with fish-apkallu figurines(afterPreusser1954:table 28b). (capsules 1-11), near the house entrance (capsule 12) and in other areas (capsules 13, 14). Moreover, the lahmu/bird-apkallu pairing never occurs in the texts, and the identification of lahmu as an apkallu figure is insecure, if not contentious (Ellis 1995;Wiggermann 1992: 147-52). This divergence supports Richard Ellis's suggestion that the relation between apotropaic theory and practice at this time engendered a creative intellectual endeavor, one that could compensate for the uncertainty, vagueness and disagreement that characterized the process (1995: 164-5). The histories and identities of apotropaic figures animate this practice with various mythical and supernatural associations and therefore might contribute a certain dimension to the meaning of protection in this context. In the Neo-Assyrian period, these often-divergent profiles come under the rule of Marduk (Green 1993-7: 248). The text sep lemutti ina bit ameli parasu locates the apkallu and lahmu as creatures of the apsu: 'the statues repelling the evil ones, of Ea and Marduk' (Wiggermann 1992: 87, line 159). Various apkallu figures come to represent the Babylonian Seven Sages, mythological antediluvian beings who first brought the arts of civilization to humankind (Black and Green 1992: 163-4; Wiggermann 1992: 75-6). Monsters, who previously engendered various forces of life, death, peace and destruction that intervene in human affairs, become known as Tiamat's creatures, the servants and defeated enemies of Marduk (Wiggermann 1992: 147-52, 1993-7: 229). As such, these supernatural beings provide complexly appropriate figures of protection. Like humans, monsters are servants. Unlike humans, monsters are not born servants; rather, they are born rebel warriors who become servants in their defeat. Their essential being as rebels completely overthrown, disarmed

22

Carolyn Nakamura
PKALLU SAGES LOWER GODS
Fish-apkallu
&

IANIMAL
Smiting-god? Latarak
flail flail

Type
Attributes cone & bucket

Bird-apkallu
staff

Ninsubur
gold gold foil foil staff staff

Dogs

bucket bird-human (plaque)

brcket bucket

Form

bird-human (plaque)

bird-human (plaque)

fish-human (figurine)

god (figurine)

god (figurine)

god in lion pelt (figurine)

quarduped (figurine)

Representation

Type Number

Ia

Ib

Ic

II

III

IV

VI

Type Attributes

I[TIAMAT'S
spade human (plaque)

CREATURES: MONSTERS & DEMONS

staff human (plaque) spear human (figurine) Basmu in copper mouthe snake (figurine) Mushussu Ugallu Kusarikku Kulullu

Six-curled lahmu 2

snake-dragon (figurine)

lion-demon (figurine)

bull-human (plaque)

fish-man (figurine)

Representation Type Number VIIa VIIb VIIc VIII IX X XI XII

in Blackand Green Figure2 Apotropaicfigurinetypes found at Assur.1. DrawingafterRichards of the lahmufigureis controversial; it namesboth a cosmogonicdeity (1992).2. The identification and one of Tiamat's 1992:155-6), and also may representan apkallusage creatures(Wiggermann 1995: Russell 1991: fn. 165; 184, 27). (Ellis and acquired by the gods, monsters are reduced to mere pawns and extensions of divine will and rule. As defeated enemies, monsters only serve; and, as apotropaic figures, they serve protection: the embodiment of appropriated aggressive being and force controlled and redirected into defensive power. From this vantage, monsters seem well suited for the apotropaic: 'the defense that goes on the offensive'. There is undoubtedly something of the public secret at work here, not only in the flip-flop of offense and defense, but in the dialectics of what is hidden and manifest in the hybrid physiognomies (Bachelard 1994: 111). Although the issue cannot be further explored here, this point of hybrid physiognomy articulates well with the notion of liminality discussed earlier. Suitably then, the apotropaic figures found in the priest house embody those beings with powers suitable for protection. The bird and fish-apkallu carry various instruments that purify, effect release and remove sin: the mullilu (cleaner), banduddai (bucket) and libbi gisimmari (offshoot of the date palm), respectively (Wiggermann 1992: 66-9). Lahmu - the monster embodiment of the preservation of life (ibid: 152) - becomes specifically associated with Marduk when carrying a marru (spade), the symbol of the god. The apkallu and lahmu, therefore, engender powers of purification and divine protection, respectively. In the context of the priest school, the pairing of purification (bird-apkallu) with the protection of Marduk (lahmu) might find particular salience in terms of legitimizing the priestly power under the authority of Marduk; at the very least, this apotropaic team might provide a non-specific idiom of the apotropaic appropriate for general placement within the house.

Dedicatingmagic 23 Consideredcollectively, the assemblageof Neo-Assyrianapotropaicfigurinesin room 3 suggests linked conceptionsof protection and dedication.The installationof various to guarddangerousliminalareas such as corners,doors,floors and beings underground thresholdsdelineatesa protectedspace:a space of localizedpower and of a mythological locality.Notably,these assemblagesalso localize dedication in objects and space. The creationof powerfulbeingsin apotropaic depositsengagesthe processof the publicsecret tantamount to the reproduction of certainsocialrelationsand realities:the priestlypower of purification, Marduk'sprotectionof humankindand a particular conceptionof being and worldorder.The dedicatorymode anchorsprotectivepower,permeating the mimetic praxis which creates the apotropaic:the miming of creation, being, world order and As such,apotropaicdepositsengagethe processof the publicsecretas dedicaprotection. that demandprotectionand localizethis powerin designatedspaces. tory gifts remarks Concluding I have suggested that the efficacy of apotropaicmagic emerges in the dedication of mimesis:a constellationof mimeticgestureswhichcreate power in the process of public secrecy.Fromthis perspective,the magicalcapacityitself,as a certainqualityof 'mimetic excess' tantamountto transformation, becomes operativein ancientsocial practice. And, if we follow the redoubled movements between dedication,protection and magic, we indeed findthat 'secrecylies at the very core of power' (Canetti1984:270). While we can never know exactlyhow Mesopotamians conceivedof apotropaicpower in their rituals, it is clearthat theirmagicconstitutesand engagesin a particular mode of one that does not fit a Western the knowledge, easily paradigm.Consequently, modern task of transposing the views of studyof ancientlife necessarilyconcernsthe problematic one culture to another.Such interpretationtreads even more delicate terrainwhen it involves the articulationof ancient practicewith contemporarytheory and philosophy such a projectremainsa (see Asher-GreveandAsher 1998:35). Despite these difficulties, worthy pursuitsince it attempts to situate ancient life in terms that engage a modern audienceand have social resonanceacrossa wider register.From this vantage,Mesopotamian magical practice emerges from the shadow of knowledge defined by modern reason and becomes salient as a sociallyreproductive technology.

Acknowledgements I am gratefulto Lynn Meskell for her supportand encouragementof this project.I am also grateful to Tom Aldrich, Robin Osborne and an anonymous reviewer whose thoughtfulcommentson earlierdraftshelpedclarifythe ideas presentedhere.Needless to remainmy own. Research for this project was say, all mistakes and misrepresentations fundedby a generousgrantfrom the Wenner-Gren Foundation.
Columbia University

24 CarolynNakamura References
Andrae, W. 1938. Das wiedererstandeneAssur. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. Asher-Greve, J. M. and Asher, A. L. 1998. From Thales to Foucault. In Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East: Papers Presented at the 43rd rencontre assyriologique internationale Prague, July 1-5, 1996 (ed. J. Prosecky). Prague: Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Oriental Institute, pp. 29-40. Bachelard, G. 1994. The Poetics of Space. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Black, J. and Green, A. 1992. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. London: British Museum Press. Bottero, J. 1992. Mesopotamia: Writing,Reasoning and the Gods. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Canetti, E. 1984. Crowds and Power. New York: Farrar,Straus & Giroux. Derrida, J. 1992. Given Time: I. Counterfeit Money. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Ellis, R. 1967. 'Papsukkal' figures beneath the daisies of Mesopotamian temples. Revue d'Assyriologie et d'Archeologie Orientale, 61: 51-61. Ellis, R. 1968. Foundation Deposits in Ancient Mesopotamia. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press. Ellis, R. 1995. The trouble with 'Hairies'. Iraq, 57: 159-65. Godelier, M. 1999. The Enigma of the Gift. Cambridge: Polity Press. Green, A. 1983. Neo-Assyrian apotropaic figures: figurines, rituals, and monumental art, with special reference to the figures from the excavations of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq at Nimrud. Iraq, 45: 87-96. Green, A. 1986. The lion-demon in the art of Mesopotamia and neighboring regions: materials towards the encyclopedia of Mesopotamian religious iconography, I/1. Baghdader Mitteilungen, 17: 144-254. Green, A. 1993-97. Mischwesen B. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und VorderasiatischenArchaologie (eds E. Embling and B. Meissner). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, pp. 246-64. Gurney, O. R. 1935. Babylonian prophylactic figurines and their rituals.Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, 22:31-96. Heidegger, M. 1977a. Building dwelling thinking. In Martin Heidegger: Basic Writings (ed. D. E Krell). San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, pp. 343-64. Heidegger, M. 1977b. The origin of the work of art. In Martin Heidegger: Basic Writings (ed. D. E Krell). San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, pp. 139-212. Klengel-Brandt, E. 1968. Apotropiische Tonfiguren aus Assur. Forschungen und Berichte, 10: 19-37. Kovacs, M. 1992. The Epics of Gilgamesh & mythmaking and literature of ancient Mesopotamia. Asian Art, 5(1): 53-69. Lebefvre, H. 1991. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell. Mallowan, M. E. L. 1954. The excavations at Nimrud (Kahlu), 1953. Iraq, 16: 59-114, 115-63. Meskell, L. 2004. Material Biographies: Object Lessons from Ancient Egypt and Beyond. Oxford: Berg. Miglus, P. and Heidemann, S. 1996. Das Wohngebiet von Assur: Stratigraphie und Architektur. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.

Dedicating magic

25

Preusser, C. 1954. Die Wohnhiuser in Assur. Wissenschaftliche Veriffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, 64: 1-66. Rittig, D. 1977. Assyrisch-babylonische Kleinplastik magischer Bedeutung. Munchen: Verlag

Uni-Druck.
Russell, J. 1991. Sennacherib's Palace without Rival at Nineveh. Chicago and London: University of

ChicagoPress. Journalof theRoyalAsiaticSociety, 1926:695ff. Smith,S. 1926.Babylonianprophylactic figures.

Taussig, M. 1993. Mimesis and Alterity:A Particular History of the Senses. London: Routledge. Taussig, M. 1999. Defacement: Public Secrecy and the Labor of the Negative. Stanford, CA: Stanford

UniversityPress.
Van Buren, E. D. 1931. Foundation Figurines and Offerings. Berlin: Hans Schoetz.

The Walker,C. and Dick, M. B. 1999.The inductionof the cult image in ancient Mesopotamia:
Mesopotamian mis pi ritual. In Born in Heaven Made on Earth:The Making of the Cult Image in the

AncientNearEast (ed, M. B. Dick).WinonaLake,IN:Eisenbrauns, pp. 55-122.

Orientforschung, 12: 147. Wiggermann, E A. M. 1992. Mesopotamian Protective Spirits:The Ritual Texts.Groningen: Styx.

Archivfiir des BerischtestiberSargonsachtenFeldzug. E. E 1937-9.Neue Bruchstticke Weidner,

Wiggermann, E A. M. 1993-7. Mischwesen A. In Reallexicon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatichen

Archaologie(eds E. Eblingand B. Meissner).Berlinand New York:de Gruyter, pp. 222-45.

Carolyn Nakamura is a PhD candidate in the Anthropology Department at Columbia University. Her main interests include social theory, magical systems and visual culture.