Una tablilla de maldición de la necrópolis de Panticapeo (SEG LXIII 616) revisitada; A Сurse Tablet from Panticapaeum Necropolis (SEG LXIII 616) Revisited

It is safe to say that in the past few decades the interest towards ancient magic has not at all dwindled, but in fact increased considerably, as evidenced not only by an increasing number of works on Greek magic papyri, but also by the emergence of many projects dedicated to republishing Greek and Roman spells on lead and ceramics from various regions of the ancient oecumene and providing them with a new detailed commentary1. The epigraphy of the North-

The article is devoted to examining readings and establishing the text of one Bosporan magic tablet from Panticapaeum. The author proposes a new text of the inscription with a critical apparatus and discusses a new interpretation of this monument given recently by Eleni Chronopoulou against the broader background of ancient magical practice.
El artículo está dedicado a verificar la lectura y es tablecer el texto de una tablilla mágica de Panti ca peo. El autor propone un nuevo texto con aparato crítico de la ins crip ción y discute la nueva in ter pretación ofrecida recien te men te por Eleni Chro no poulou desde el contexto más amplio de las prácticas mágicas en la Anti güe dad. ern Black Sea region, not very well known to western researchers for many decades due to the overwhelming number of new monuments' publications and their interpretations being published in Russian, is now gradually coming to international spotlight. It is all the more pleasant to note that the Black Sea epigraphy has finally found a place for itself on the pages of such a respected international journal as Emerita: the recent paper by Eleni Chronopoulou treats the mysterious magical inscription from the necropolis of Panticapaeum, which my late colleague Nikolay Fedoseyev and I published some time ago in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik. The article by Dr. Chronopoulou, where she so carefully re-examined 2 the monument, made me turn my attention again to this interesting document kept in a private collection in Moscow.
The tablet ( Fig. 1) was unearthed in 2011 in Kerch on the top of the Mithridates Mountain, the site of the ancient Panticapaeum's necropolis. The lead plate containing the inscription was found five-times folded (one can see four bends). In our previous publication my co-author and I stated that «there are some traces of damage made by a nail» 3 , (Fig. 2), but in fact it is impossible to assert it with certainty. Since the only hole that can be seen on the right side of the plate passes exactly along the fourth fold and does not affect the rest of the surface, we can assume that this hole was caused by natural causes and may have been formed when the tablet was unfolded by the people who discovered it. We also stated that «the text of the inscription was scratched in straight lines by a relatively accurate handwriting on the surface of the lead plate (16 cm. long and from 2.5 to 6.5 cm. wide). The earliest date that could have been suggested based on the inscription's palaeography is the 3 rd c. BC. This conclusion seems to be supported by the presence of the lunar sigma, appearing in Bosporan inscriptions of this period» 4 . Such a brief lapidary formulation on the letter forms could be misleading for E. Chronopulou, since she writes about this dating as «post quem» 5 . However, we cannot agree with this unequivocally. The shapes of the letters fully correspond to the northern Pontic epigraphic script of the 4 th c. BC, and the appearance of a lunar sigma in the Ionian colonies of the Northern Black Sea region can now, almost without

A С U R S E T A B L E T F R O M P A N T I C A P A E U M N E C R O P O L I S …
131 Emerita LXXXVIII 1, 2020, pp. 129-141 ISSN 0013-6662 https://doi.org/10. 3989/emerita.2020.07.1923 any doubt, be attributed to the same time period 6 , so in fact there is a possibility to date the tablet as early as the 4 th century, and the 3 rd c. date is definitely not post quem.   After careful autopsy of the tablet I can confirm that some of the corrections proposed by Dr. Chronopoulou are correct. It is necessary, however, to note that in the first line of the second column, where I previously suspected the presence of the letter A, it is quite possible to see the letter M. It is also possible to see the letter M in the second line of second column, where Eleni Chronopulou suspects the presence of Δ̣ 7 , since the horizontal hasta of the next letter alpha is barely visible, if it is there at all. One should most likely read the letter nu in the third line of the same column after the letter omicron, where I suspected the presence of rho before. It is impossible to read the letter Π̣ 8 after ἀνώνυμος in the fourth line, contrary to the opinion of Eleni Chronopoulou: it is a cross-shaped sign not connected with the next letter, which is most likely an iota. There is also a clear cross-shaped sign, which can be interpreted, as suggested by Eleni Chronopoulou 9 , as tau or khi in the ninth line after alpha, but I would not be in a hurry to ascribe to it any unequivocally literal value.
In my opinion, the most significant success that Dr. Chronopoulou has achieved is her interpretation of the incomprehensible syllables in the ends of a number of lines: «Es probable que sean abreviaturas o voces mágicas o, mejor, letras mágicas. El paralelo más cercano y seguro que he podido encontrar (porque su lectura no presenta demasiados problemas) es el de DTA 11, que contiene una lista de nombres de víctimas. Al lado de los nombres, en las ll. 2 y 3, aparecen las letras ΔΝ y MM respectivamente. Wünsch los comentó del siguiente modo: "ΔΝ MM litterae additae uidentur, ut magicam augerent speciem". Entre estas letras sin sentido que pueden tener valor mágico encontramos ΜΑΑΡ en una secuencia de uoces magicae en DT 38 y también en PGM XII 168» 10 . She rightly says that «sin embargo, si estas identificaciones son correctas, parece que fuera del contexto egipcio no tienen sentido» 11 . However, there are two circumstances that prohibit us from seeing actual uoces magicae here: 1) the artefact dates to the 4 th or 3 rd century BC, which seems to be too early for such magical devices; 2) strictly speaking, uoces magicae are sequences of vowel sounds, so the incom prehensive syllables could be interpreted here only as nomina barbarica at best. In any case one should be very careful if postulating the actual presence of either device in the text: neither uoces magicae nor nomina barbarica are attested on any curses from the North Black Sea region, they are to be found here only on amulets of the Roman era 12 .
In my opinion, although Eleni Chronopoulou did an excellent work with the text of the inscription and offered an interesting interpretation of incomprehensible places, her opinions on the meaning of this monument and the meaning of the seventeen-fold repetition of the word ἀνώνυμος are left without convincing evidence.
We noted in our editio princeps that «there is a special group of the dead called ἀνώνυμοι 13 , a group that includes the souls of people who died prematurely, usually in a violent manner. These souls, to our opinion, have another 10 Chronopoulou 2019, p. 76 and note 6. 11 Ibidem. 12 See, for example, Yaylenko 2005, pp. 484-496. 13 About anonymity of the gods see also Bader 1989, pp. 306-354. special name -ἄωροι 14 . These ἄωροι, the dead hunting the living in search for revenge, are identified with the Erinyes by Erwin Rohde, and Albert Henrichs supports this conclusion 15 . According to Rohde, ἄωροι are the type of dead souls who are not yet mature, who don't yet possess individuality and self-awareness, that is why they are -ἀνώνυμοι, the "warriors of Hecate", always craving for the blood of the living-. "Not" is the inalienable morphological attribute of their aliases: they are ἀνάριθμοι, ἄψυχοι, ἄωροι, etc. This is exactly the type of creatures (which are also called νεκυδαίμονες), to whom (or, more precisely, to whose graves) those seeking revenge or love should commit their messages, at least according to the creators of the magical papyri (so PGM V.304-369). The papyri mention these ἄωροι about twenty times 16 . In addition, these ἄωροι are also found in defixiones, so on two lead tablets from Apamea we find the following text: μὴ κοιμηθῶσιν ἀλλὰ βλεπέτωσαν [ἀ]π̣ ὸ̣ θυρ̣ ῶν δέμ[ο]νας ἀώρο[υ]ς, δέμονας βιέους Ἡφέστου πῦρ 17 . Addresses to ἀνώνυμοι in particular are not common for epigraphic monuments: in fact, we have only the batch of judicial spells from Κourion on Cyprus 18 . It is also possible to add the defixio from Olbia, first published by V. Shkorpil in 1908 19 ». The aggregate context of the artifact, which is a lead tablet found on the necropolis, indicates that we are, probably, dealing here with the appeal to the spirits of prematurely deceased people, to whom persons (or person) are entrusted, whose names are not mentioned in this spell, but were pronounced, perhaps, in the ritual. The multiple repetition of the word ἀνώνυμος could be due to the fact that the grave into which this spell was put could have been the common burial of many people who were ἄωροι 20 , or we could be dealing with a ritual «magic repetition» of the nameless deities 21 .
Of course, unequivocal identification of ἀνώνυμοι with ἄωροι could seem to be too bold a hypothesis; it is quite possible that there was in fact some kind of a difference between these two groups of chthonic creatures. I think, however, that in this magical context, i.e. the curse being sent to the vengeful dead, both adjectives have the same reference (the untimely departed) and point to different yet connected aspects of the image of the deceased. The word ἄωρος refers to a person who died before reaching their maturity (ὥρα), i.e. physical human perfection. As for the ἀνώνυμος adjective, it describes the loss of personal identity (in form of the personal name -ὄνομα) after death. Personal names were no less important in the Hellenic society than among the ancient Egyptians. In defixiones the name in essence replaces or even materializes its bearer on the lead tablet. Therefore, the practice of cursing the enemies' names does not seem to be accidental to me. 20 It is interesting to note in this connection that, according to Jutta Stroszeckʼs presentation at the workshop on the ancient defixiones organized by Prof. Martin Dreher and his team in Magdeburg (Germany) in 2016, child or family burials containing multiple defixiones were discovered on Athenian Kerameikos. This confirms that 1) there were common burials of persons, 2) whose death was considered by the Athenians as unnatural, and 3) the Athenians knew about such graves and put defixiones in them. The most prominent example of such a grave is the burial of Lissos, see Vierneisel-Schlörb 1966, Beil. 51,1. 21 See BullÉp. 2015: 542: «il a écrit dix-huit fois ἀνώνυμος, étant convaincu que la puissance chthonienne saurait quels étaient les ἀνώνυμοι qu'il fallait punir» (A. Avram).
Eleni Chronopoulou thinks that the word ἀνώνυμος written on the tablet 17 times could mean one of the following: «a) que el defigens no conoce cuántos son sus enemigos y escribe todos los que caben en la tablilla; b) que había un único ἀνώνυμος y el defigens pensaba que con la repetición se reforzaba la maldición; o c) que sabía exactamente cuántos eran pero no conocía sus nombres. En mi opinión, la primera opción es la más probable» 25 . This thesis is justified by the fact that the plate does not contain the actual names of the author's damned opponents, and the word ἀνώνυμος cannot refer to the demon or the spirit of a prematurely deceased person because it is given in the nominative case.
First of all, it should be noted that it was Benedetto Bravo who first suggested that the word ἀνώνυμος on the plate could refer to unknown enemies of the spell's author 26 , and I already had the opportunity to make a brief comment on his assumption 27 . Here I would like to note only that the thesis of B. Bravo repeated by E. Chronopoulou cannot be supported by any parallels in sources presently available. In the context of ancient magic, and I am almost absolutely convinced of this, the word ἀνώνυμος is used exclusively as a reference to the spirit of a prematurely deceased person, and there are simply no other meanings registered by the texts. The absence of personal names of the cursed people on the tablet is indeed puzzling, but as E. Chronopoulou herself notes, «la estructura de nuestra defixio de Panticapeo parece que corresponde a una etapa de magia menos elaborada en lo que se refiere al texto de la tablilla» 28 . The lack of personal names on the tablet can be explained, firstly, by the magical ritual itself, in which the names were obviously spoken orally, but are not recorded in the text of the inscription 29 , and secondly, by the intention of the defigens not to leave any evidence against himself.
Furthermore, I cannot understand why Eleni Chronopoulou is so convinced that «el término ἀνώνυμος aparece en nominativo» 30 : the Greek grammar Emerita LXXXVIII 1, 2020, pp. 129-141 ISSN 0013-6662 https://doi.org/10.3989/emerita.2020.07.1923 teaches us that the vocative case of complex adjectives of 1-2 declensions is identical with the nominative, so ἀνώνυμος can also be a vocative form. Dr. Chronopoulou states that «si se tratase de una invocación, sería de esperar que apareciera en vocativo o, en el caso de que hubiera un verbo de invocación o conjuro en la fórmula oral (que no aparece en la tablilla), el término tendría que ir en acusativo» 31 ; but taking into account the fact that the monument could be attributed to the 4 th century BC, we can assume that the word ΑΝΩΝΥΜΟΣ, in fact, could also be interpreted as an accusative case with the typical Ionic spelling of -ου through Ο 32 , which is very usual in Bosporan inscriptions of the epoch. In other words, it seems impossible to come to an irrefutable conclusion on the grammatical case of ἀνώνυμος.
The joint efforts of Dr. Eleni Chronopoulou and myself seem to have significantly refined the text of the inscription on the mysterious Bosporan lamella. However, I dare to argue that the evidence in favor of the initial interpretation of the inscription as a defixio, in which the defigens calls upon the demonic spirit of prematurely deceased, is much weightier than the arguments of B. Bravo and E. Chronopoulou in favour of the idea that the word ἀνώνυμος on our lead plate refers to some persons unknown to the author of the spell, but still cursed by him. Beyond any doubt, the inscription of the lead tablet frоm Panticapaeum remains an enigmatic document, so any discussion of its contents, meaning and purpose is extremely useful. Within the frames of such a discussion all the arguments should be carefully pondered. As this epigraphic document does not have any direct parallels, it is necessary to start from existing analogues. Unfortunately, E. Chrono poulou did not cite any examples from known texts in support of her point of view and limited her arguments to logic not grounded in source material. The presence of the adversary's names on a defixio is undoubtedly necessary, however, should we then leap to the conclusion that the only word of the text -ἀνώνυμος-is in fact how the author of the document designated his enemies? This conclusion might seem logical, but only at first: the curses always operate with actual names, and it was vitally important for the success of the charm to use the right name, ideally, accompanied by a patronym or a metronym, so to call the adversaries ἀνώνυμοι would mean to condemn the curse to failure from the very begin-ning. If we, however, depart from the examples of the use of this word in magical inscriptions (κάτω κίμενοι ἄωροι κὲ ἀνώνυμοι) and papyri, we shall come to a conclusion that the ἀνώνυμοι of our text might refer to chthonic demons, possibly, the dead, whom the ancients also called ἄωροι. It is true that it is impossible to unambiguously identify this document as a defixio; however, if it is in fact a defixio, one might suggest that the names of the enemies were called out orally in the course of the ritual or, alternatively, that the tablet served as a «cover» for another medium 33 , which did not survive (or is not unearthed yet), where these names were written. Be as it may, I am grateful to Dr. E. Chronopoulou for her excellent paper that made me return to the document I published a while ago and give more thought to its implications.