On the Function of Name in Irish and Slavonic Written Incantation Tradition

Abstract

Each of the words of this topic needs a special commentary. Our study aims to shed some more light on the problem of typology of the magic texts as a special cultural phenomenon that obtains a constant character. NAME. By the ‘name’ in charm tradition we mean two different types of usage of a personal name: (a) ‘background name’ and (b) ‘subject name’. By (a) we mean a traditional use of names of sacred Christian figures as well as of pagan mythological characters that create a specific background of the magic formula. It serves as an indicator of the compiler’s/user’s Christian or pagan character. But, in fact, it is very difficult to draw a strict distinction between the paganism and a so-called ‘naive Christianity’ in the primary sources (esp. in Slavic and, in particular, in Russian). Some further discussion can be provided by a more detailed analysis of a number of ‘background names’ used in charms. At the same time, being unique for the user, the names of celestial bodies, forces of nature, ‘daughters of the sea’ (in Irish lorica) etc. can fulfill the role of the ‘background name’. By (b) the ‘subject name’ we mean a proper name of an individual for (against) whom the magic text is once composed (pronounced, written etc). WRITTEN TRADITION. Two different types of usage of the term are possible. On the one hand, we are dealing with a so called ‘naive recording’ (remembering) of the oral text, probably, for the purpose of its further (oral) reproduction. In this situation, we suppose, the use of the ‘subject name’ is impossible. On the other hand, the written tradition of magic texts presumes (and includes) a manufacturing of specific magical ‘artefacts’ (tablets, amulets, Old Russian ‘nauzes’ etc.). In this case the name fulfills its specific function. It creates a proper magical object (cf. Plotius, Caer, Mikhej of a Novgorod birchbark etc). The idea that the magical texts that use 1 sg. poss. pron. (me) as a subject may be reproduced orally (or in a written form) should be given some consideration. Me-tradition (not widespread in Russia) supposes the poly-functional use of a charm. CHARM. By this term we mean both an incantation (a spell as a text and as a language artifact) and a magical action (a rite, including the manufacturing of an object with specific characters, for example, magical runes of Old Scandinavia). The comparison between Mediaeval Irish and Russian charm traditions is possible due to the typological relation that exists between Irish and Russian cultures in the early period when Christianity coexisted with paganism. The more detailed analysis can be presented as a schema or a table, embracing all situations of the use of ‘charms’ in a traditional culture”.