Russian Love Charms in a Comparative Light // Charms,Charmers and Charming: International Research on VerbalMagic / Ed. by Jonathan Roper. Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. P.119-144.

Russian Love Charms in a Comparative LightAndrei Toporkov (Moscow)

Problems of the comparative study of Russian charmsThe comparative study of Russian charms [zagovory] has

its own traditions, reaching back to the works of scholarsfrom the 19th and early 20th centuries: F. I. Buslaev, A.N. Afanas’ev, A. N. Veselovskii, M. I. Sokolov, F. Iu.Zelinskii. V. F. Miller, A. I. Almazov, V. Mansikka, A. I.Iatsimirskii, N. F. Poznanskii. In recent years Russiancharms have been examined primarily in comparison with thecharms of other Slavic peoples (Agapkina, Toporkov 1990;Kharitonova 1991; Kliaus 2000; Agapkina 2002; Levkievskaia2002; Toporkov 2002; Worobec 1995). There have also beenattempts to compare Russian magical texts with German andancient Indian texts (Toporov 1969; Toporova 1996: 108-123).

Nonetheless, the possibilities of comparative(comparative-typological and comparative-historical) studyof Russian charms have been far from exhaustively explored.Comparison of Russian charms with the charms of otherSlavic and non-Slavic peoples has traditionally come downto the simple establishment of resemblances betweenseparate texts, themes and motifs. Such lists ofsimilarities are useful in themselves, but as a rule theyhave a selective character and present a somewhataccidental choice of materials. Besides this, the causesfor these similarities remain unclear: are they due to agenetic relationship, a typological resemblance, or amutual influence of various ethnic traditions? If we wishto explain its nature and ancestry, rather than simplynoting the resemblance, we must consider the geography oftextual dissemination, the presence or absence of texts inthe manuscript tradition (where early evidence isparticularly important), and their quantitative parameters

1

(how many charms of a given type are known in this or thattradition).

If Russian scholars do not take the magical traditionsof other European peoples into account sufficiently, it isalso true that western scholars know little about Russiancharms. General works on the history of European sorceryand magical rituals have presented Russian materialunsystematically and in clearly insufficient quantity; as arule, any Russian material is drawn from English-languageworks by Western philologists.

The comparative study of Russian charms may have twointerconnected but nonetheless distinct goals: first, toreveal the resemblance between Russian charms and those ofother traditions, and, second, to reveal the specificcharacter of Russian charms in comparison withcorresponding texts in other languages (formulae, themes,motifs). I would particularly like to underline the secondaspect, since it often causes misunderstandings for westernresearchers. For Russian folklorists it is important inprinciple that a comparison should not only establishsimilarities, but also discover distinctions andparticularities. Even if a text was borrowed from oneethnic group by another, complete study requiresinvestigating the history of the text’s adoption in its newcultural sphere. We observe that a text borrowed fromelsewhere does not remain unchanged. Rather, it undergoespressure from other texts and generic schemata; it “growsinto” the tradition, takes on new forms, changes itsemphases of meaning, etc.

In Russian scholarship the task of comparative study ofcharms in recent decades has been connected primarily withreconstructing the old Slavic and even the Indo-Europeantext (Toporov 1969; Agapkina, Toporkov 1990). The essentialproblem, however, is that we find one and the same textsand formulae in ethic traditions that have no connectionwith one another from the point of view of languageclassification. Given their small format, the presence of adefined poetic structure, their fixation in writing, andtheir inclusion in sacred texts, it is easy for charms andcharm-incantational formulae to migrate over time and

2

space. They can pass from one ethno-linguistic traditioninto another by way of oral contacts or translations ofwritten texts (e.g., books of home cures and herbals). Thetask of re-establishing the history of magic texts inEurope from antiquity to the present and from the Atlanticto the Urals is, in any case, just as attractive as thereconstruction of ancient ancestral texts.

The comparison should be carried out on several parallellevels:

1. The contrast of various ethno-linguistic traditionsof verbal magic from the point of view of their structureand patterns of function: the correspondence of variousgeneric varieties (charms [zagovory], incantations[zaklinaniia], non-canonical prayers, etc.), oral and writtenforms of textual function, and the presence or absence ofcertain functional or thematic groups of charms (medicinal,love, protective, and others).

2. Comparison of concrete charms from various traditionswith the same purpose and similar themes, motifs andformulae.

3. The contrast of separate formulae that resemble oneanother in structure and lexical composition and appear incharms that have the same purpose.

Some particularities of the Russian charm traditionBefore turning to our main topic, let us make a few

general observations about the particular nature of theRussian charm tradition.

1. First of all, it is extremely large and various,including many thousands of texts and dozens of themes. Inrecent decades, charms have been discovered in theNovgorodian birch-bark documents of the thirteenth tofifteenth centuries (Zalizniak 1993; Zalizniak 1995: 293(No. 734), 428-429 (No. 715), 540 (No. 521); Zalizniak2004: 694 (No, 930); Gippius 2005). The two earliestmanuscript collections of charms, the so-called Olonetskyand Velikoustiuzhsky collections, date from the secondquarter of the 17th century. Archival research by N. N.Pokrovsky, E. B. Smilianskaia, A. S. Lavrov, A. V. Pigin,A. A. Turilov, A. V. Chernetsov, and other scholars, has

3

made available a whole series of formerly unknowncollections of charms from the seventeenth and eighteenthcenturies, and scholars have described the forms of socialfunction of verbal magic (Lavrov 2000; Toporkov, Turilov,2002; Smilianskaia 2003). As a result, it is now possibleto survey the Russian charm tradition in the seventeenthand eighteenth centuries amid its historical dynamics andgeographical and social stratification.

Charms circulated actively through geographical andsocial space (Bobrov, Finchenko 1986: 154-55; Lavrov 2000:99-115). This resulted in the wide dissemination of textsand their variants and versions over the territory ofRussia, not only in villages but also in urban centers.Charms were found in peasant and trading environments,though they were also known among church functionaries andnobles. They were written down on separate sheets of paperor in special notebooks, which were kept at home or carriedabout as amulets; they were included in medical manuals, inmixed-content collections; they were confessed atinterrogations, sometimes under torture.

2. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there wasno strict boundary between the oral and written functioningof charms: the oral text could easily be fixed in writtenform, and the manuscript version was accompanied byinstructions in how to pronounce it, and which ritualactions should accompany it. There was also a tradition ofusing manuscripts as amulets. For example, illiteratepeople would take a little booklet with a military charminto battle, and it was supposed to protect them, eventhough they could not read it themselves (Sazonova,Toporkov 2002).

This half-oral and half-written kind of textualfunctioning led to a variety of consequences. On one hand,texts whose evolution was linked with local folkloretraditions, once fixed on paper, became detached fromritual practice, moved into new social and geographicalsettings, and took on a more bookish and religiously-colored character. On the other hand, canonical and non-canonical prayers began to function alongside folk charms,undergoing abbreviation and various kinds of revision. One

4

and the same apocryphal prayers, translated from Greek,were found among all the Orthodox peoples, and to someextent in the Catholic countries as well. In the Russiantradition these prayers were not only recopied, but alsore-written, brought closer to the oral charms. Ourtextological tradition has stressed the fact that duringits existence and use a prototypical text is not so muchdistorted as subjected to a purposeful and sensiblecorrection with a creative character. In this sense,following the gradual evolution of the text during itsrecopying, inclusion in manuscripts of various contents,and replacement of the oral form of function by the writtenand vice versa – all this is a task no less important thanthe determination of its genesis.

Manuscript collections were often composed and preservedby people knowledgeable about liturgical literature but atthe same time close to folk culture (in part, village andurban priests; Lavrov 2000:123-27; Mikhailova 2000;Smilianskaia 2003:119-41; Ryan 1999: 166-67).1 In manycollections and "libraries," confiscated by the authoritiesover the course of the seventeenth and eighteenthcenturies, we encounter a combination of charms andapocryphal prayers (such as "The Dream of the Virgin," "ThePrayer of the Archangel Michael," "The Prayer of Cyprian,""The Prayer of the Apostle Paul against Snakes,""Sissinius's Prayer against Fever," etc.). Charms andapocryphal (non-canonical) prayers were not clearlydemarcated (Eleonskaia 1994; Levin 1997). In manuscriptscharms were often called "prayers," and it is more thanlikely that they were perceived in that way by theircopiers.

Charms reside at the intersection of the Christianchurch and folkloric knowledge. The whole body of magicalcharm texts may be imagined as a kind of continuum.Canonical and non-canonical prayers are at one of itspoles, with pagan folkloric and "black" charms andincantational formulae at the other. Texts located at theextremes of this continuum are fundamentally distinct from1 On analogous phenomena in England in the 16th and 17th centuries,and in continental Europe, see Thomas 1991: 55-56, 78-80, 326-327;Arnautova 2004: 274-279.

5

each other in structure, lexicon, religious and moralgoals, and so on. Nonetheless, the space between theextremes is continual in character, representing a seriesof gradual transitions between canonical prayers, on onehand, and folkloric-magical texts, correlated with notionsof natural spirits and ways of interacting with them, onthe other.

3. No later than the second quarter of the seventeenthcentury, a distinctive type of charm developed, mostcharacteristic of the Russian North and practically absentin Ukraine, Belarus, and the south of Russia. This kind ofcharm may begin with the formula "I arise blessing myself,I go out crossing myself…" ['Vstanu blagoslovias', vyiduperekrestias'']. Further, these charms describe how theprotagonist goes to the sea or into an open field, meetssome mythical personage there and addresses a request to it(for example, to protect him or her against enemies or toinflict love on a person of the opposite sex). These charmsare characterized by the presence of a subject, the motifof a "mythological center," images of the protagonist, amediating personage and an addressee, and a description ofthe location in space (Toporkov 1999; Agapkina 2005).

The appearance of such a structure had severalconsequences for the charm tradition. Texts of a singletype were easy to memorize and pass on, and new texts werecomposed according to the set pattern. Typically, weencounter the same formulae in Russian charms as inanalogous charms from other Slavic magical traditions, butat the same time the formulae are organized in a new way,included in configurations of subject and motif that arespecific to the Russian tradition.

Problems of the study of love charms A sizable literature has been devoted to love magic in

Russia and the other Slavic and non-Slavic countries ofEurasia. Love charms are mentioned in studies of the magicand writing of Ancient India, the ancient Near East,antique Greece and Rome, Europe in the medieval,Renaissance, and early Modern eras, and Russia in thenineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The studies of

6

magic and rituals, family and marriage relationships,erotic folklore and erotic literature, and ethnobotany(plant aphrodisiacs) have developed their own traditions.

Interest in this topic has grown significantly in recentdecades through a series of factors: removal of the tabooon formerly forbidden or dangerous themes, the growth ofgender and historical-anthropological scholarship, thespread of contemporary neo-pagan movements, and thepublication of numerous handbooks on contemporary magic andoccult sciences. Aspects of the contents and functionalexistence of love charms have attracted the attention ofcollectors, publishers and scholars of Russian folklore(Toporov 1969; Kharitonova 1991; Kliaus 1994; Minyonok1994; Kis' 1994; Toporkov 1999; Pushkareva 1999; Kiseleva2001; Ryan 1999: 179-83).

Russian ethnographers and folklorists have studied youngwomen’s love and marriage charms, noted the many parallelsbetween the formulae of love charms and ritual weddingsongs, and analyzed the folkloric magical repertoire of thesorcerer and the druzhok at weddings. These works rely onmaterial from local traditions, such as Zaonezh’e and thePerm’ region (Zyrianov 1975; Lipatov 1982; Loginov 1988;Kuznetsova 1992; Kuznetsova 2000; Kalashnikova 2000). Lovecharms have also been studied from the structural point ofview (Klagstad 1958; Chernov 1965; Peskov 1977; Carus 1977;Conrad 1989; Kiseleva 1992; Kiseleva 1998; Toporkov 1999).

E. B. Smilianskaia and A. S. Lavrov have cast light onthe social functioning of love charms using materials fromeighteenth-century trials involving sorcery (Smilianskaia1996: 15-19; Smilianskaia 2001; Lavrov 2000: 89-132). Iwould note in particular Smilianskaia’s article “‘Liubov’tvoia rany mne velikie delaet’ (Chuvstva i strasti posledstvennym materialam XVIII v.)” (‘“Your love causes megreat wounds” [Sentiments and passions according tojudicial materials from the XVIIIth century],’ 2001) andthe chapter “Magic and Love” in her book Volshebniki.Bogokhul’niki. Eretiki. Narodnaia religioznost’ i ‘dukhovnye prestupleniia’ vRossii XVIII v. (‘Enchanters. Blasphemers. Heretics. Folkreligion and ‘spiritual crimes’ in XVIIth-century Russia,’Smilianskaia 2003: 172-86). O. D. Zhuravel’ has studied the

7

plot of the pact of a man with the devil in Old Russianliterature, and besides literary texts she has brought injudicial and trial materials from the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries about pacts with the devil. She drawsreaders’ attention to the parallels between love charms andliterary texts, in particular “Povest’ o Savve Grudtsyne”(‘The Tale of Savva Grudtsyn’), and has also analyzed themotif “Plata d’iavolu: posobnichestvo v liubovnykh delakh”(‘Paying the devil: Complicity in love affairs,’ Zhuravel’1996: 121-24). Valerie Kivelson has examined the genderaspects of the functioning of charms in Russia in theseventeenth century in a series of articles (Kivelson 1991;Kivelson 1995).

From the literature published in other Slavic countries,I would mention first and foremost the collection ofSerbian love charms of M. Mijuskovic (1985), with asubstantial introduction by L. Radenkovic.

Fundamental edition of Romanian charms was prepared bySanda Golopentia (Golopentia 1998; see also: Golopentia1996; Golopentia 2004).

In recent decades, scholars from Western Europe and theUnited States have often turned to the love magic ofmedieval and Renaissance European traditions (Kieckhefer1976: 56-61; Flint 1991: 231-53; Wilson 2000: 142-47).Richard Kieckhefer’s splendid article “Erotic Magic inMedieval Europe” (Kieckhefer 1991) provides a generalintroduction to the topic. Another series of worksinvestigates the love magic of a particular country (forexample, Italy, Spain, and the Spanish colonies of the NewWorld) or even city (for example, Renaissance Florence andVenice, Modena at the end of the 16th century; Brucker1963; Brucker 1971: 266-68; Couliano 1987; Martin 1989;O’Niel 1987; Ortega 1991; Ruggiero 1993: 88-129; Scully1995; Stephens 2002). These works offer rich collections ofmaterials as well as valuable observations about the socialand gender aspects of the function of love magic.

The study of the links of verbal magic with theliterature of ancient Greece and Rome has a venerabletradition. Among the most important works we may note thechapter “The literary representation of magic” in F. Graf’s

8

book Magic in the Ancient World (Graf 1997: 175-94) and thechapter “Aphrodite and aphrodisiacs” in H. Parry’s bookThelxis: Magic and Imagination in Greek Myth and Poetry (Parry 1992:263-83). Valuable observations have been made on the manyparallels between charms and ancient Greek lyrics,including the poetry of Sappho and the second idyll ofTheocrites (Segal 1974; Petropoulos 1993; Faraone 1995, andothers).

John Winkler’s book The Anthropology of Sex and Gender in AncientGreece includes a chapter on love charms (Winkler 1990: 71-98). Christopher Faraone has also devoted many articles toancient Greek love charms (Faraone 1991; Faraone 1993a;Faraone 1993b), as well as his more general book AncientGreek Love Magic (1999). Many of Faraone’s observations applywith certain reservations to Russian love charms, too,although the Russian charms are completely unfamiliar tohim and he does not take them into account. There arespecial studies of specific formulae from antique lovespells, in particular the formula of sending fire (Kuhnert1894; Tavenner 1942) and the formula “let the maiden/womanbe unable either to drink or eat (until she comes to me)”(Martinez 1995).

In this way, Russian and worldwide scholarship hasaccumulated broad experience in the study of love charmsfrom various ethno-linguistic traditions. This createspreconditions for a study of Russian love charms thatexamines them in comparison with analogous love spells ofother peoples of Eurasia.

Evolution of the Formula "Let her neither eat nor drink"The present article will examine in detail one formula

from love charms – "Let the maiden/woman not eat and notdrink (until she has come to me)."2 This formula is thetopic of a special article by D. Martinez, from which wewill take comparative material (Martinez 1995); Faraone'sbook also offers some valuable observations (Faraone 1999:53-54).

2 A comparative analysis of other formulae of Russian love charms ismade in our book Русские заговоры в рукописной традиции XVII-XVIII вв . (‘Russian charms in the manuscript tradition of the 17th and 18thcenturies’), forthcoming.

9

Martinez examines two basic modifications of theformula: one found in oaths and vows, the other from lovecharms. Among the earliest fixed forms of the formula, henotes the oath of Achilles not to eat or drink until he haskilled Hector (Iliad 19. 204-10), the vow of Saul not to eatuntil he has taken revenge on the Philistines (1 Kings14.34), and the promise of some of the Judeans "not to eatand not to drink until they have killed Paul" (Acts 23.12).In pre-Islamic Arabia, "a man who had decided to takerevenge for the death of a member of his family would vowthat he would not drink wine, eat meat, rub himself withfragrant unguents, approach a woman, or wash the dirt fromhis hair until he had carried out his intention" (Rezvan1988: 41). Among the early fixed forms of the formula inlove spells is the Greek text on a lead tablet from the 4thcentury A.D. from Egypt, in which a certain Ailurion asksthe spirits of the underworld to cause his beloved Kopriato be unable to eat or to drink until she has come to himand fulfilled all his wishes (Martinez 1995: 335).

According to Martinez's observations, when a person madea vow he took upon himself the obligation to refrain fromeating and drinking until he had done what was promised. InGreek erotic magic of the Roman and Byzantine eras, a manwas trying to force restraint not on himself, but onanother, the woman he hoped to win, and moreover was tryingto force her to adopt this behavior against her will(Martinez 1995: 352).

The magical texts containing the formula of interest tous date primarily from the third and fourth centuries A.D.However, it is also found in two early magical papyri (onefrom the era of Augustus, the other from the first centuryA.D.). The second of these reads, "If she is sleeping, lether not sleep; if she is eating, let her not eat; if she isdrinking, let her not drink until she has come to me"(Martinez 1995: 353). The given sources testify that theformula was already known at the beginning of the firstmillennium of our era.3

The wish for a woman to be unable to drink and eat may

3 For a bibliography of magical texts, including the formula “let hernot eat and not drink, until…” see Martinez 1995: 353, note 61.

10

arise independently, and it may be combined with the wishthat she be unable to sleep, that she break off relationswith her parents and other relatives, that she behave as ifpossessed or mad. The basis of these motifs is a conceptionof lovesickness characteristic of the ancient Greeks,reflected not only in magic,4 but also in love lyrics (e.g., Sappho), and later adopted by medical literature(Galen) and the love novel (Daphnis and Chloл). Love charmshappened to follow many of the same rules as charmsemployed to send spoiling [porcha] and sickness.

Refusing food and drink and inability to sleep arecharacteristic symptoms of lovesickness. For example, Galenwrites about those "who have grown thin, or grown pale, orlost their sleep, or even fallen ill of fever because oflove" (Martinez 1995: 354). One of the love charms of theParis papyrus from the fourth century A.D. described thedesired result of the magical action this way: "she isdistressed and wants to talk with you… she is distressed oreven dying" (PGM IV: 132-37).5 In another charm the stateso-and-so wishes to call up in his beloved recalls aclinical description of illness and greatly resemblesGalen's description (PGM XXXVI: 356-60; Betz 1996: 278).

In Longinos's novel Daphnis and Chloл the trials of theheroes are at times described in complete correspondencewith love charms and medical literature. For example, "Thedear girl did not know what had happened to her, for shehad grown up in a village and had never even heard anyonesay the word 'love.' Her [Chloл's] soul pined, her eyeswandered distractedly, and she could speak of nothing butDaphnis. She ceased to eat, she did not sleep at night, she did notcare for her flock, first she would smile and then sob,then suddenly fall asleep and jump up again; her face wouldturn pale and then blaze with fire" (Daphnis and Chloл, bookI, ch. 13 [Long 1969: 175]; italics ALT).6 In the samenovel, the old man Philet tells of his youthful love forAmarillis: "…Then I forgot about food, and I took no drink, and I did not

4 Many texts include madness in one list with other symptoms ofillness, while in others it is the central idea (Martinez 1995: 354,note 64).5 English translation: Betz 1996: 40.6 Russian translation by S. Kondrat'ev [Long 1969: 175].

11

know sleep. I suffered in my soul; my heart fluttered, mybody grew cold; first I would moan as if I had been beaten,then I would be silent as a dead man, then, as if I hadbeen burnt by fire, I would cast myself into the rivers.[…] There is no medicine against Eros either in drink, or in food,or in magical charms, except for one thing – kisses,embraces, and also naked bodies that lie pressed oneagainst the other" (Daphnis and Chloл, book II, ch. 7 [Long1969: 188]).7

The formula in European charms (from the Renaissanceuntil the Modern era)

As Faraone rightly observes, love charms with theformula "let her not eat, or drink, or sleep" remainedpopular in Europe for centuries (Faraone 1999: 54, note63). Similar wishes occur in magical manuscripts compiledin Holland and Germany in the fifteenth century (Kieckhefer1991: 40-41), and in Italian and Spanish love charms fromthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, preserved in thearchives of the Inquisition (Ruggiero 1993: 45, 88-89, 167-68; Ortega 1991: 71-74).

In an Italian charm from Modena in 1597 a woman,addressing St. Martha, expressed the wish "that he shouldfall in love with me, take drink, food, sleep, strength awayfrom him, that he should be unable to leave or to remain inone place, nor ride a horse, nor gallop, nor stroll, norhave relations with other women, until he comes to me, tofulfill all my wishes and do all that I ask him" (O'Neil1987: 102; italics ALT).8 One of the earliest recordedSpanish charms, preserved in the archives of theInquisition, dates from 1499. A woman addresses nine starsand asks them to ensure "…that he be unable to eat or drink,/Until he has come to love me well/ And receive pleasurewith me" ("…que no pueda comer nн beber / hasta que a mivenga a bien querer/ e a aver plaзer» (Ortega 1991: 74;italics ALT).

In another love charm from Spain, a woman asks Satan and

7 Russian translation by S. Kondrat’ev. On similar formulae in theantique love novel see Licht 1995: 194.8 In O’Neil’s article the text is published in English translation(ALT).

12

all the devils: "...And do not permit him / to rest or eator sleep, / He may not rest in his bed, / without thinkingof me" ("…Y no le dejarйis / reposar, ni comer, ni dormir /ni en la cama reposar /sino conmigo pensar» (Ortega 1991:71; italics ALT). Love charms in the form of prayers to St.Onofrius and St. Martha also included the formula "let himnot eat and not drink" ("que no pueda comer, ni beber")(Ortega 1991: 78). Also close to our formula, although notcoinciding in every detail, is one of the wish-cursesaddressed to Gerd, daughter of the giant Gьmir, from theso-called "Potion of Skirnir" (included in the song "TheJourney of Skirnir" [strophe 27] from the Elder Edda):"Food will be more repellent to you/ Than to any man/ A gleamingsnake amid the living!" (Korablyov 2003: 101; italicsALT).9

To supplement materials collected by scholars ofEuropean sorcery, we may add a series of examples referringto Southeastern and Eastern Europe (Poland, Bohemia,Serbia, Romania, Ukraine and Russia). Records of a judicialproceeding from 1544 have preserved a Polish love charmwhich begins with an address to the dawn: "Witajże zorze,idź-żesz mi do tego Filipa, roztargniej-że mu jego serce,iżby nie mógl ni pić ni jeźdź bez niej, iżby nie miał wolini do dziwki ni do wdowy, ni do żadnego stworzenia, jednodo samej Łucyi…» ('Welcome, morning star. Go to Philip andbreak his heart, so that he be unable either to eat or todrink, be sexually attracted to neither maiden nor widow,nor to any other creature, except Lucia…') (Kolberg 1962:241).10

E. V. Vel'mezova, compiler of the most completecollection of Czech charms, notes that there are not manylove charms in Czech culture (Vel'mezova 2004: 22). Shecites a single text of the kind, recorded at the end of thenineteenth century in eastern Moravia (Valasko). The charmis pronounced as follows. Thrice a day (in the morning atsunrise, at noon, and in the evening at dusk) the wisewoman goes out with a maiden to an open space; the womanpronounces the charm, and the maiden repeats it after her.

9 Russian translation by Korablyov.10 For the English translation see Brzozowska-Krajka 1994: 79.

13

The text includes the following fragment, addressed to thesun:

"You, clear sun, you shine for us, you see him [theintended – ALT], so inflame him and warm his heart, hislungs, his three hundred parts and joints, so that thisintended one of mine, intended for me by God, so that he canneither eat, nor drink, nor smoke tabacco, nor sleep, nor be cheerful, butonly think about me, the maiden christened (so-and-so), runto me, so that an hour will not be an hour for him, nor hisfamily a family, his sister a sister, his brother abrother, his mother a mother, his father a father, so thatnone of that will be dear to him, only I, his intended,with God's help would stand before his eyes, so that itdrips onto the crown of his head, onto his shoulder, ontohis heart, into his lungs, into his three hundred parts andjoints, so that he can neither eat…, but only run to the onechristened (so-and-so), until he runs to her and says aword to her, and enters into marriage with her…"(Vel'mezova 2004: 84; italics ALT).

In a collection of Serbian love charms compiled by M.Mijuskovic, the formula that interests us occurs only once:"Dobro jutro bel pelenche! Ja te zovem omajnice,raspornice, razbolnice, da mi omajesh dragog, da garasporish i ubodesh u srce, u dzigericu, za mene, u oci, uusta, ruke, noge, za mene; s dushom se rastavio, sa mnom sesastavio. […] Pa da se ukhvatish za zemlju pa da kazhesh:Ne vadzam se za zemlju, no za Dzavola da dovede dragog kodmene, da nema mira ni da ide, ni da jede, ni da spava…" ('Good morning,white wormwood! I call you, exhauster, tearer, infecter, tosweep over my darling, to rip him open and pierce him inthe heart, in the kidneys, for me, in the eyes, lips, arms,legs for me; so he will part with his soul and cometogether with me. […] Then you touch the ground and say: Ihold not to the earth, but to the devil, so he will bringmy darling to me, so he will have no peace to walk, nor to eat, nor tosleep.' Mijuskovic 1985: 53, No. 77).

In Romanian charms, a girl expresses the wish for ayoung man to be unable to eat or drink without her: "Faramine n-au putinta, nici a bea, nici a manca, pana nu m-orsaruta, nici sa beie nici sa mance, pan ce-n brata nu m-or

14

strange" ('Without me they can neither drink nor eat untilthey kiss me, nor drink nor eat until they take me in theirarms') (Golopentia 1998: 67-68. No. 6; see also: 217, No.72.) A girl sends the devil to a young man and conjureshim: "Si de l-ei gasi mancand nu-l da a manca, iar da l-eigasi band nu-l da a be" ('And if you find him eating don'tlet him eat, and if you find him drinking don't let himdrink') (Golopentia 1998: 242-43, No. 86). In other texts,the girl wants her beloved to eat and drink together withher: "Asa sa nu oiata pana cu mine nu s-o ogoi, si nu s-oodihni, pana cu mine in pat nu s-o culca si dintr-o bucatan-o manca! Sa ma visez cu dansul la masa sezand, dintr-obucata de pane muscand si din pahar plin band" ('So may henot find solace till he takes comfort in me, till he rests,till he goes to bed with me and eats of the same food as I.Let me dream of myself with him sitting at the table,eating from the same piece of bread and drinking from afull glass.' Golopentia 1998: 223, No. 76; see also 248,No. 87).

In Ukrainian charms recorded in the second half of thenineteenth century and the early twentieth century, ourformula occurs more than once, with two basicmodifications. In the first variety a girl addresses threestar-sisters, the wind, or the moon with the request thatthey let the young man neither eat nor drink; for example:"Vy zori-zirnytsi, vas na nebi tri sestrytsi: odna nudna,druga pryvitna, a tretia pechal'na. Berit' holky ishpyl'ky, hordove kaminnja; bijte joho i pechit', palit' inudit'; ne dajte jomu ni spat', ni lezhat', ni jisti, nipyt' – drugykh ljubyt'" ('You dawn-stars, you three sistersin the sky: one dull, the second welcoming, and the thirdsorrowful. Take needles and pins, stones, beat and bake,burn and urge him; do not let him either sleep, or liedown, or eat, or drink – or love others.' Vasilenko,Shevchuk 1991: 218; see also SMU 1998: 76 [No. 221]; 80[No. 229]; 84 [No. 246]; Bondarenko 1992: 23).

In the second modification, a girl asks for her youngman to be unable to eat or drink his fill (that is, beunable to forget her while eating or drinking), forexample: "Polety zh ty, ognennyj bugalo, do kozaka u dvir

15

[…] uchepysja ty jomu za sertse, zatomy ty joho, zanudy,zapaly ty joho, shchob vin trjassja i trepetavsja dushoju itilom za mnoju narozhdenoju, khreshchenoju, molytv'janojudivchynoju […], shchob vin mene ne zapyv, ne zaiv i zinshymy ne zahuljav, use mene ne pomyslakh mav" ('Fly, youfiery bugalo, to the Cossack's door […] seize him by theheart, and then force him, inflame him, so that he shakesand trembles in his soul and body for me, his intended,christened, prayerful girl […], that he be unable to drinkme away or eat me away and to stroll me away with others,always having me in his thoughts.' Vasilenko, Shevchuk1991: 218-219); "Shchob ty i izheju ne zaпv, i vodoju nezapyv, i snom ne zasnuv, ta vse dumav pro mene…" ('That yoube unable to eat me away with food, and to drink away withwater, and to fall asleep, but always think about me…'Vasilenko, Shevchuk 1991: 234; see also SMU 1991: 78 [No.226]).

Parallels between Greek and Russian charmsIn Russian charms the formula appears dozens of times in

three basic modifications, and each of these modificationshas a corresponding number in the Greek charms from theEgyptian papyri. For clarity, we cite in parallel thefragments of the Greek with the Russian texts; naturally,there could be many more examples:

1. 'So-and-so asks for the person of the opposite sex tobe unable to drink or eat.'

PGM IV, 353-355, 373-376; IV cent. A.D.Let so-and-so be unable either to drink, or to eat, or to love, let

her have no strength, be unhealthy, be unable to sleepwithout me. …attract so-and-so to me, give her no drink, norfood eating and drinking, cut short any attempts of so-and-so tomake love with any other man, even with her own husband,only with me, so-and-so…11

PGM IV: 1510-1521; IV cent. A.D.11 Here and elsewhere the Greek texts are translated from the Russiantranslation of Jan. P. Talbatsky. For an alternate Englishtranslation, see Betz 1996: 45 (S. Forrester).

16

If she is sitting, let her not sit, if she is chattingwith someone, let her not chat, if she is looking atsomeone, let her not look, if she comes to visit someone,let her not come, if she is going for a stroll, let her notgo for a stroll, if she is drinking, let her not drink, if she is eating, lether not eat, if she is caressing someone, let her not caress,if she is enjoying some pleasure, let her not enjoy it, ifshe is sleeping, let her not sleep, but let her think onlyabout me, let her passionately desire only me, let her loveonly me, let her fulfill all my wishes.12

Pokrovskii 1987: 261; dated 1734.…pokamest menia, raba imiarek, ne uvidit i ne osmotrit i

ne obozrit i so mnoiu vmeste ne prebudet, po ta mes"[ta] byei ne vmestimo bylo ni jasti, ni piti, ni s mater'iu, ni s gosti,ni s ynymi ljud'mi ni s kakimi.

('So long as she does not see and observe me, [God's]slave so-and-so, and is not together with me, then may shebe unable to eat, or to drink, neither with her mother, or withguests, or with any other kinds of people.']

Vinogradov 1908/I: 30, No. 37. Ser. 19th cent.…chtoby ne mog onyi rab Bozhij (imiarek) bez raby

Bozhiei (imiarek) ne zhit', ne byt', ne s"is', ne ispit', ni chasuschasovat', ni veku svekovat', ni maloi minuty minovat'.

('…so that this (male) slave of God (so-and-so) beunable to live, or to be, or to eat up, or to drink up, or to spendan hour, or to spend a whole life, nor to spend a littleminute without God's (female) slave (so-and-so).')

2. 'So-and-so asks that a person of opposite sex thinkof him or her while eating.'

PGM XVIIa, 7-15; IV cent. C. E.Subdue her pridefulness and release her from pettiness

and from her shamefulness, and attract her to me, to myfeet, melting with passionate desire at every hour of theday and night, always remembering me, when she is eating food, whenshe is quenching her thirst, when she is working, when she is

12 See Betz 1996: 67.

17

occupied with conversation, when she is resting, when sheis dreaming…13

Lipatov 1983: 104; XIX cent.Gde by on ne khodil, gde by ne gulial, khot' by on v

torgu torgoval ili v piru piroval, ili v besede besedoval, vseby on menia, rabu Bozhiiu, na ume na razume derzhal pridne, pri krasnom solntse, pri temnoi noche, pri svetlommesiatse.

['Wherever he may go, wherever he may stroll, even if hebe trading at trade or feasting at a feast, may he always haveme, God's servant, in mind and in thought by day, by thered sun, by dark night, by the bright moon.']

3. 'So-and-so asks that a person of the opposite sexfeel hunger and thirst (be unable to eat or drink hisfill).'

PGM XXXVI: 110-113; IV cent. A. D.Enchant to me so-and-so, so that passion burns her up,

so that torments dry her up, so that she goes hungry, sothat she feels thirst, so that she flies in the sky, sothat she does not sleep, let her fall in love with me, so-and-so, who was borne by such-and-such a woman, until shecomes to me, until her female nature adheres to my maleone. Now, now, quickly, quickly.14

OR NBU, f. 301, unit 455, sheet 5 verso; end of 17th orbeg. of 18th cent.

…ne mogla b ona toi toski po mne, [rbi] krov'iu,lezhankoi (?) ne otlezhatts, snom ne otospatts, khozhankoine otkhoditts, besedoi ne otsidetts, bogomoleniem neotmolitts, krestom ne otkrestitts, dut'eiu ne otduttse,pit'em ne otpitts, estvami ne otistittse, ni travami ni koren'iami neotgrysts…

['…let her not be able [to bear] that longing for me,[so-and-so] with blood, not lie her fill of lying down (?),in sleep not sleep her fill, in walking not walk her fill,

13 See Betz 1996: 45.14 See Betz 1996: 271.

18

not sit her fill in conversation, not pray in prayer toGod, not cross herself in crossing, not breathe her fill ofbreathing, not drink her fill of drink, not eat her fill of eating, not biteher fill of the herbs or roots…']

Vinogradov 1908/I: 47-48, No. 60; undated ms.S toi by ei toski i velikiia pechali – edoi by ei ne est' i

pit'em by ne zapit', gul'boi by ne otguliat', v plat'e by ei neotnosit'; gde by ne zaslyshala zychnyi golos, tak by onabezhala i v sakharnyia usta tselovala.

['From that longing and great sorrow let her be unable to eatof food, and drink her fill of drink, not stroll her fill ofstrolling, let her be unable to wear her dress; wherevershe may hear a loud voice, then let her run and kiss mysweet lips.']

Various modifications of the formula differ from oneanother somewhat in meaning. In one case it is a matter ofdepriving a person of the opposite sex entirely of food anddrink (either taking them away, or else bringing her tosuch a state that she herself is unable to eat anything["kusok v gorlo ne polezet," 'the piece sticks in thethroat']). In the second case, the person may take part ina meal, but in so doing must think about the performer ofthe charm. The third case stresses that the woman should betormented by hunger and thirst and be unable to eat ordrink her fill. In Russian versions of the thirdmodification of the formula one may see an echo of the OldTestament curse on dishonorable ones: "They shall eat – andwill not be sated, they shall sin carnally – and notmultiply…" (Hosea 4: 10).

The semantics of the formula "let her not eat or drink"Regardless of its apparent simplicity, the formula

allows differing interpretations. It contains them incompact form, and they can be actualized depending on thecontext.

1. Deprivation of food, drink and sleep: this is inessence torture, supposed to force a person to do somethingthat he himself is not inclined to do, to move him to agree

19

to everything in order to end the suffering.2. Each of the actions declared taboo for a maiden or a

woman, when they are addressees of the charm (eating a mealwith others, sleeping at night, etc.), is meant not onlyfor satisfaction of physiological needs, but also forsocial communication. A person who does not eat in thefamily circle and does not sleep at night not only has amore difficult life, but also falls out of the conditionsof normal interactions, winds up in an isolated condition.

3. Food, drink and sleep are basic physiological needs,essential for life. Considering the "death-bearing" contextof the love charms and how close they are to curses, onemay see a concealed threat: the woman may expect to die ofhunger and thirst if she does not give herself to the man.

4. Insofar as hunger and restraint in general (amongother things, during a religious fast) are a means ofpurifying and preparing oneself to encounter the sacralworld, we might see the wish that someone not eat or drinkas a way of bringing that person into a special elevatedcondition, close to ecstasy, in order to intensify hisfeelings and open him to new emotional experiences.

5. The charms say that a maiden should be hungry andtormented with thirst and insomnia until she gives in tothe man; however, it nowhere says that after she gives inshe will get something to eat and drink and be put to bed.This may be understood as follows: love itself will easeher hunger and thirst and allow her to relax and forgetherself in sleep – or else in the sense that after her"fall" she will be doing all this along with her newmaster.

The multitude of meanings of the formulae and thepossibility of variant interpretations are characteristicof the whole poetics of charms.

Interpreting similarityIt is no accident that the formula "let her not eat nor

drink" in Greek charms from the Egyptian papyri of thefirst through fourth centuries and in Russian manuscriptcollections from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuriesappears so similar. It should be understood as part of a

20

more general system of relationships and connections amonglove charms across Eurasia.

In principle, the resemblance may be explained eithertypologically or else as a result of historical andcultural connections. In the first case, we see the generalmechanisms of the origin and functioning of magical texts,and in the second that the Greek texts could haveinfluenced the Slavs in one way or another (in translationsdirectly from Greek, or else through some intermediatelinks). At the same time, the typological resemblance doesnot argue against genetic links: they may mutuallyreinforce and support each other. The inheritance of theantique world led in certain circumstances to new sproutson different ethnic soil. We may also not exclude a priorithe possibility that both Greek and Russian charmsdescended from some common, third sources (for example, thetraditions of the ancient Middle East).

The magical texts preserved in Greek papyri of the firstthrough fourth centuries and in Russian manuscripts, havecommon typological characteristics. To a large extent, theymay be considered as written traditions, "men's" and"educated" in distinction to the oral, "women's" and"simple people's" traditions. For all the differencesbetween Egyptian Mages and Russian sorcerers (kolduny),priests or other copiers of the charm letters in theseventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it seems probablethat both groups did not merely record the texts ofeveryday magic, but approached the act in a creative way.They carried out a selection of texts, they reworked themin part, completed their composition, brought in charmsfrom various regional and even ethnolinguistic traditions,etc.

Let us note that in Ukrainian, Serbian and Bulgarianlove magic we also see individual formulae known in theRussian and Greek charms, although on the whole the lovecharms of these peoples have a completely differentcharacter. In these traditions only oral magical texts areknown, not written ones; they were pronounced mainly bygirls or women, not by men; the performers of the charmshad the goal of marriage or strengthening the family, not

21

sexual subordination of a person of the opposite sex.From the point of view of gender, both the Greek and the

Russian love charms we have been discussing are mostlymen's texts, directed towards taking mastery of a maiden ora woman (though there are exceptions). Along with the men'smagic, both Greeks and Russians also had maidens' andwomen's magic, which was distinct from the men's. As amongother peoples, this aimed at marriage or retaining ahusband, inspiring him to behave better towards his wife orincrease his sexual activity. This women's tradition leftconsiderably less trace in manuscripts than the men'stradition.

Greek and Russian love charms share the concept of thefiery nature of love (a flame seizes the heart, the liver,and other internal organs of the victim), of lovesickness,its causes and symptoms (refusing food and drink, insomnia,heat and fever, social isolation, breaking with parents andother relations, madness or possession by evil spirits,being struck in the heart with an arrow or some other sharpweapon), the association of the emotion of love withmelancholy (in part, leading to suicide), and also thatlove may be imposed on a person from outside, and that godsand demons (for the Greeks) or natural elements and demons(for the Slavs) may be helpers in this matter.

These typological resemblances suggest a few ideas ofcultural-historical and social-psychological character. Inmany cultures, love and magic are tightly interconnected.Attempts to act on a person of the opposite sex by magicalmeans, and likewise to explain suddenly enflamed feelingsas a result of sorcery, were known among the earliestpeoples. Love charms serve in identical everyday situationsand are called upon to resolve social-psychologicalcollisions that arise completely independently andspontaneously in various societies (the impossibility forwhatever reason of union with the beloved, sexual betrayal,love triangles, and so on). To these cultural universaliawe may add the link of sexual relations to the problems ofpower and violence. Both Greek and Russian charms speak notonly of taking mastery over some person, but also ofsubordinating her to oneself, depriving her of her own

22

will, forcing her to act as the performer of the charmdesires. This is linked to the aggressiveness of lovecharms and the traits of cruelty and even sadism we find inthem.

Furthermore, the incantational formulae of love charmsnot only accompany magical actions, based on the universalprinciples of magic; they also describe these actions.Therefore, one and the same formula, or in any caseextremely similar formulae, may arise completelyindependently in different cultures, where the magicalactions arose just as independently. For example, theformula of sending fire, of the type "As fire burns in astove, so let the heart of N. burn," could arise in anyplace where myrrh or wood were ritually burned in order toinflame the heart and other internal organs of a man orwoman.

Finally, to a significant extent the picturesque qualityof the charms grows out of linguistic metaphors. Themetaphorization of love as fire is known in many languages,including, e.g., ancient Greek, Russian and English(Kцvecses 1988; Kцvecses 1991). If some language describeslove as a fire (the flame of love, the heart burns, to set a man on fire,fiery feelings, fiery glances, etc.), then naturally in magicalrituals and charms a person will attempt to ignite theflame of love in his victim by the means available. Giventhat similar linguistic metaphors are widespread in variouslanguages, it is not surprising that charm formulae too mayarise completely independently in a variety of traditions,suggested by the language.

Some further hypothesesIn this way, the correspondences we have shown between

ancient Greek and Russian charms may be explained by thefact that they serve in identical, or at least verysimilar, everyday situations, and by their link with magicand the language of metaphor. Yet, nonetheless, the numberand variety of the coincidences and their systematic,motivated and multi-leveled character suggest that Greekand Russian charms are most probably linked not only bytypology, but also by borrowing.

23

The very fact of the closeness of Greek and Slaviccharms is neither strange nor surprising. As we know, theChurch Slavic language arose in the process of translationfrom Greek, and old Slavic literacy initially formed as aresult of intentional transplantation of the Byzantinetradition into Slavic soil. A large number of prayers closeto charms were included in liturgical books translated intothe Church Slavic language. We also cannot dismiss thepossibility of direct inheritance between the Greek andSlavic traditions of verbal magic in the Balkans.

We cannot establish direct links between Greek andRussian love charms at this time, although we can indicateone probable direction for further research. It is possiblethat Greek love charms reached Slavic soil among the eroticcharms ascribed to the holy martyr Cyprian of Antioch. Letus recall that Cyprian (III cent.) was, according totradition, a considerable philosopher and sorcerer. His vitais preserved in various versions in Greek and Latin.According to one version, Justina (in the Russian texts,Ustin'ia) was the daughter of a pagan priest in Antioch;she converted to Christianity along with her parents andmade a vow of virginity. The upper-class youth Aglaid fellin love with Justina and appealed for help to the paganMage Cyprian. Cyprian sent demons to tempt Justina, buteach time Justina drove away her tempters. In the end,Cyrprian became convinced of the uselessness of hissorcery, began to believe in Christ, was christened, andburned his magical books (Loparev 1993).

"In another ancient version of the vita, the biographyof Cyprian is told in the form of a confession in which wesee the historical traits of that syncretism of religiouscults and magical practices, ancient and Eastern, withwhich the antique world attempted to oppose the growinginfluence of Christianity. From an early age Cyprian hadstudied magic, he was a priest in the Temple of PallasAthena in Athens, he made sacrifices to Apollo, Demeter andHera, took part in their rites and ceremonies, wasinitiated into the mysteries of Mithra (the Zoroastriancult), studied wisdom with the Egyptian priests at Memphisand knowledge of the heavenly spheres with the Chaldeans.

24

He became 'a famous Mage and philosopher,' summoned thedevil, received his blessing and help, fought withChristianity and committed a number of godless crimes withhis enchantments. In this version, Cyprian is not thehelper of Aglaid but his rival: having seen Justina, hehimself began to burn with passion for her and wanted towin her love with the help of the devil. In some latertreatments of the tale Cyprian crowds Aglaid out entirelyand becomes the sole hero of the novel" (Zhirmunskii 1978:263). Some versions of the confession of Cyprian include awide-ranging erotic charm, which Cyprian employed as hetried to make Justina pine for love. One extant eleventh-century Coptic text of the "Confession" includes theformula, "let her not eat and not drink," and all the basicformulae of Greek love charms in general (Meyer, Smith1999: 153-58, No. 73).

There is an extensive literature devoted to the legendsof Cyprian, but their history in Russia has not yet beenstudied (Beletskii 1911: 62-63; Bezobrazov 1917: 223-26;Zhirmunskii 1978: 263; Bagno 1985: 369; Zahn 1982;Radermacher 1927: 5-41; Bilabel, Grohmann 1935: 304-25;Jackson 1988: 33-41). In the Great Reading Menaion ofMetropolitan Makarii, the entry for October 2 includesseveral versions of the legend of Cyprian and Ustin'ia:"Cyprian's Repentance," "The Life of the Holy MaidenUstina," "The Torments of Saint Cyprian and the MaidenUstina" (Velikiia Minei-Chet'i ['The Great Menaion for Reading']1870: 45-80). These works do not include any retelling ofthe love charms.

While further research is needed to confirm or refuteour hypothesis, the question of the intermediate linksbetween the Greek and Slavic traditions of verbal magic, inany case, requires the special investigation of specialistsin Byzantinology.15

BIBLIOGRAPHYAgapkina 2002 — Agapkina Tat’iana A. “Siuzhetika

vostochnoslavianskikh zagovorov v sopostavitel’nom aspekte.”

15 For some information on love charms in Byzantium see: Greenfield1988: 246-248.

25

Literatura, kul’tura i fol’klor slavianskikh narodov (Moscow, 2002): 237-49.Agapkina 2005 – Agapkina Tat’iana A. “Siuzhetnyi sostav

vostochnoslavianskikh zagovorov (Motiv mifologicheskogotsentra).” Zagovornyi tekst: Genezis i struktura (Moscow, 2005): 247-91.

Agapkina, Toporkov 1990 — Agapkina Tat’iana A., ToporkovAndrei L. “K rekonstruktsii praslavianskikh zagovorov.” Fol’klor iиtnografiia: Problemy rekonstruktsii faktov traditsionnoi kul’tury (Leningrad,1990): 68-75.

Arnautova 2004 — Arnautova Iu. E. Kolduny i sviatye: Antropologiiabolezni v srednie veka (St. Petersburg, 2004).

Bagno 1985 — Bagno V. E. “Dogovor cheloveka s d’iavolom v‘Povesti o Savve Grudtsyne’ i v evropeiskoi literaturnoitraditsii.” Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury, vol. XL (Leningrad,1985): 364-72.

Betz 1996 — The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation. Ed. H. D. Betz.2d ed. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1996.

Bezobrazov 1917 — Bezobrazov P. Vizantiiskie skazaniia. Part I.Rasskazy o muchenikakh. Iur’ev, 1917.

Beletskii 1911-1912 — Beletskii A. I. “Legenda o Fauste v sviazis istoriei demonologii,” Zapiski Neofilologicheskogoobshchestva pri S.-Peterburgskom universitete, vyp. 5 (1911):59-193; vyp. 6 (1912): 67-84.

Bondarenko 1992 — Taiemnaia sila slova (Zahovory, zamovliania, zaklinaniia).Ed. G. B. Bondarenko. Kyпv, 1992.

Brucker 1963 — Brucker, G.A. “Sorcery in early RenaissanceFlorence.” Studies in the Renaissance. Vol. 10, 1963.

Brucker 1971 — Brucker, G.A. The Society of Renaissance Florence. NewYork, 1971.

Carus 1977 — Carus, A.B. ‘The Affective ‘Grammar’ andStructure of Great Russian Charms.” Forum at Iowa on RussianLiterature, vol. 2 (1977): 3-19.

Chernov 1965 — Chernov I. “O strukture russkogo liubovnogozagovora.” Trudy po znakovym sistemam, vyp. 2 (Tartu, 1965): 159-72.

Conrad 1989 — Conrad, J. L. “Russian Ritual Incantations:Tradition, Diversity, and Continuity.” Slavic and East EuropeanJournal, vol. 33, no. 3 (1989): 422-44.

Couliano 1987 — Couliano, I. P. Eros and Magic in the Renaissance.Trans. M. Cook. Chicago, 1987.

26

Eleonskaia 1994 — Eleonskaia E. N. “K izucheniiu zagovora ikoldovstva v Rossii.” Eleonskaia E. N. Skazka, zagovor i koldovstvo vRossii (Moscow, 1994): 99-143.

Faraone 1991 — Faraone, C. A. “The Agonistic Context ofEarly Greek Binding Spells.” Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic andReligion, Ed. C. A. Faraone, D. Obbink. New York, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1991: 3-32.

Faraone 1993a — Faraone, C. A. “The Wheel, the Whip and OtherImplements of Torture: Erotic Magic in Pindar Pythian 4:213-19.”Classical Journal, vol. 89 (1993): 1-19.

Faraone 1993b — Faraone, C. A. “Molten Wax, Spilt Wine andMutilated Animals: Sympathetic Magic in Early Greek and NearEastern Oath Ceremonies.” Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. 113 (1993):60-80.

Faraone 1995 — Faraone, C. “The ‘Performative’ in ThreeHellenistic Incantations and Theocritus’ Second Idyll.” ClassicalPhilology, vol. 90 (1995): 1-15.

Faraone1999 — Faraone, C. A. Ancient Greek Love Magic. Cambridge,MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1999.

Flint 1991 — Flint, Valerie I. J. The Rise of Magic in Early MedievalEurope. Princeton, NJ: 1991.

Gippius 2005 — Gippius A. A. “‘Sisinieva legenda’ vnovgorodskoi berestianoi gramote.” Zagovornyi tekst: Genezis i struktura(Moscow, 2005): 136-42.

Golopentia 1996 — Golopentia S. “Love Charms in Cornova,Bassarabia.” Studies in Moldovan: the History, Culture, Language andContemporary Politics of the People of Moldova / Ed. by L. D. Donald. NewYork, 1996: 145–205.

Golopentia 1998 — Golopentia S. Desire Machines: a Romanian LoveCharms Database. Bucharest, 1998.

Golopentia 2004 — Golopentia S. “Towards a Typology ofRomanian Love Charms.” Charms and Charming in Europe. Ed. by J.Roper. New York, 2004: 145-187.

Graf 1997 — Graf F. Magic in the Ancient World. Translated by F.Philip. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.

Greenfield 1988 — Greenfield, R. Traditions of Belief in Late ByzantineDemonology. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1988.

Kalashnikova 2000 — Kalashnikova R. B. “Svadebnoesoderzhanie i ‘prisushivatel’naia’ simvolika zaonezhskikhbesiodnykh pesen vtoroi poloviny XIX veka.” Kizhskii vestnik, no. 5

27

(Petrozavodsk, 2000): 72-94.Kharitonova 1991 — Kharitonova V. I. “Liubovna mahiia

slov’ian (serbs’ko-rosiis’ki paraleli).” Problemy slov’ianoznavstva(L’viv, 1991): 59-66.

Kieckhefer 1976 — Kieckhefer, Richard. European Witch Trials: TheirFoundations in Popular and Learned Culture, 1300-1500. Berkeley and LosAngeles: University of California Press, 1976.

Kieckhefer 1991 — Kieckhefer, Richard. “Erotic Magic inMedieval Europe.” Sex in the Middle Ages. Ed. J.E. Salisbury (NewYork, 1991): 30-55.

Kieckhefer 1991 — Kieckhefer, Richard. Forbidden Rites: ANecromancer’s Manual of the Fifteenth Century. University Park, PA: ThePennsylvania State University Press, 1997.

Kiseleva 1992 — Kiseleva Iu. M. “Smyslovye komponentyzagovora kak deistvuiushchego slova.” Konferentsiia “Slovo kakdeistvie.” Tez. dokl. (Moscow, 1998): 32-37.

Kiseleva 2001 — Kiseleva Iu. M. Smyslovaia organizatsiia russkikhlechebnykh i liubovnykh zagovorov. AKD. Moscow, 2001.

Kis' 1994 — Kis' R. “Eros i vodna styhiia (Pervisnasemiotichnist’ shljubnoi mahii).” Suchastnist’ (Kyiv, 1994), No.1: 83-98.

Kivelson 1991 — Kivelson Valerie A. “Through the Prism ofWitchcraft: Gender and Social Change in Seventeenth-CenturyMuscovy.” Russia's Women: Accommodation, Resistance, Transformation. Ed.Barbara E. Clements, Barbara A. Engel, Christine D. Worobec.Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1991: 74-94.

Kivelson 1995 — Kivelson Valerie A. “Patrolling theBoundaries: Witchcraft Accusations and Household Strife inSeventeenth-Century Muscovy.” Harvard Ukrainian Studies, vol. 19(1995): 302-23.

Klagstad 1958 — Klagstad H. L. “Great Russian CharmStructure.” Indiana Slavic Studies, vol. 2 (1958): 135-44.

Kliaus 1994 — Kliaus V. L. “Vzaimootnosheniia polov vslavianskikh zagovorakh (na materiale iuzhnykh i vostochnykhslavian).” Zhenshchina i svoboda: Puti vybora v mire traditsii i peremen(Moscow, 1994): 369-73.

Kliaus 1995 — “Zagovory i magicheskie sredstva” (st. i pub.V. L. Kliausa). Russkii eroticheskii fol’klor: Pesni. Obriady i obriadovyi fol’klor.Narodnyi teatr. Zagovory. Zagadki. Chastushki (Moscow, 1995): 344-61.

Kliaus 2000 — Kliaus V. L. Siuzhetika zagovornykh tekstov slavian v

28

sravnitel’nom izuchenii. Moscow, 2000.Kolberg 1962 — Kolberg O. Dzieła wszystkie, vol. 15. Wielke

Księstwo Poznańskie. Cz. 7. Wrocław; Poznań, 1962.Korablev 2003 — Korablev L. Runicheskie zagovory i apokrificheskie

molitvy islandtsev. Moscow, 2000.Kovecses 1988 — Kovecses, Z. The Language of Love: The Semantics of

Passion in Conversational English. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell UniversityPress; London and Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1988.

Kovecses 1991 — Kovecses, Z. “A linguist’s quest for love.”Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, vol. 8 (1991): 77-97.

Kuhnert 1894 — Kuhnert, E. “Feuerzauber.” Rheinisches Museum,vol. 49 (1894): 37-54.

Kuznetsova 1992 — Kuznetsova V. P. “O funktsiiakh kolduna vrusskom svadebnom obriade Zaonezh’ia.” Zaonezh’e (Petrozavodsk,1992): 117-31.

Kuznetsova 2000 — Kuznetsova V. P. “Druzhka i ego rol’ vrusskoi svad’be Zaonezh’ia.” Kizhskii vestnik, no. 5 (2000): 95-104.

Lavrov 2000 — Lavrov A. S. Koldovstvo i religiia v Rossii: 1700-1740 gg.Moscow, 2000.

Levin 1997 — Levin Eve. “Supplicatory Prayers as a Source forPopular Religious Culture in Muscovite Russia.” Religion and Culturein Early Modern Russia and Ukraine (De Kalb: Northern Illinois Univ.Press, 1997): 96-114 (In Russian: Levin Iv. Dvoeverie i narodnaiareligiia v istorii Rossii, trans. A. L. Toporkov and Z. N. Isidorova(Moscow, 2004): 84-109).

Levkievskaia 2002 — Levkievskaia E. E. Slavianskii obereg:Semantika i struktura. Moscow, 2002.

Lipatov 1981 — Lipatov V. A. “K probleme regional’noispetsifiki fol’klora: O variativnosti zagovorov.” P. I. Chaikovskii iUral (Izhevsk, 1983): 99-108.

Likht 1995 — Likht G. Seksual’naia zhizn’ v Drevnei Gretsii. Trans.from English by V. V. Fedorin. Moscow, 1995.

Loginov 1988 — Loginov K. K. “Devich’ia obriadnost’ russkikhZaonezh’ia.” Obriady i verovaniia narodov Karelii (Petrozavodsk, 1988):64-76.

Long 1969 — Longinus. Dafnis i Khloia. Akhill Tamii. Levkippa iKlitofont. Long. Dafnis i Khloia. Petronii. Satirikon. Apulei.Metamorfozy, ili Zolotoi osel. Trans. from ancient Greek and Latin.Moscow, 1969: 167-34.

Loparev 1993 — Loparev Kh. M. “Kiprian.” Khristianstvo.

29

Entsiklopedicheskii slovar’, vol. 1 (Moscow, 1993): 736-37.Martin 1989 — Martin, R. Witchcraft and the Inquisition in Venice, 1550-

1650. Oxford: Blackwell, 1989.Martinez 1995 — Martinez, D.G. “‘May She Neither Eat nor

Drink…’: Love Magic and Vows of Abstinence.” Ritual Power in theAncient World. Ed. M. Meyer, P. Mirecki (Leiden, 1995): 335-360.

Meyer, Smith 1999 — Ancient Christian Magic: Coptic Texts of Ritual Power.Ed. M. Meyer and R. Smith. Princeton, NJ, 1994.

Mijuskovic 1981 — Mijuskovic M. Ljubavne cini. Belgrade, 1985.Mikhailova 2000 — Mikhailova T. V. “Predstaviteli dukhovkogo

sosloviia v koldovskikh protsessakh vtoroi poloviny XVIII v.”Vestnik molodykh uchenykh. Istoricheskie nauki (St. Petersburg, 2000): 31-40.

Minczev 2003 — Minczev G. Święta księga — ikona — obrzed:Teksty kanoniczne i pseudokanoniczne a ich funkcjonowanie wsztuce sakralnej i folklorze prawosławnych Słowian naBałkanach. Łódz, 2003.

Minenok 1994 — Minenok E. V. “Rol’ zhenshchin v zagovornoitraditsii.” Zhenshchina i svoboda: Puti vybora v mire traditsii i peremen(Moscow, 1994): 362-368.

O’Neil 1987 — O’Neil, Mary. “Magical Healing, Love Magic andthe Inquisition in Late Sixteenth-Century Modena.” Inquisition andSociety in Early Modern Europe. Ed. and trans. S. Halizer (London,1987): 88-114.

Ortega 1991 — Ortega, M.H.S. “Sorcery and Eroticism in LoveMagic.” Cultural Encounters: The Impact of the Inquisition in Spain and the NewWorld. Ed. by M.E. Perry, A.J. Cruz (Berkeley, 1991): 58-92.

PGM — Papyri Graecae Magicae. Die Griechischen Zauberpapyri. Herausg.von K. Preisendanz et al. 2. Aufl., vol. 2. Stuttgart: Teubner,1973-1974.

Parry 1992 — Parry, H. Thelxis: Magic and Imagination in Greek Myth andPoetry. Lanham, New York, London, 1992.

Peskov 1977 — Peskov A. M. “Ob ustoichivykh poeticheskikhelementakh russkogo zagovora.” Filologiia, vyp. 5 (Moscow, 1977):26-39.

Petropoulos 1993 — Petropoulos, J.C. “Sappho Sorceress:Another Look at Frag. 1 (L-P).” Zeitschrift fьr Papyrologie undEpigraphik, vol. 97 (1993): 43-56.

Pokrovskii 1987 — Pokrovskii N. N. “Tetrad’ zagovorov 1734goda.” Nauchnyi ateizm, religiia i sovremennost’. Novosibirsk, 1987: 239-

30

66.Pushkareva 1999 — Pushkareva N. L. “‘Kako sia razgore

serdtse moe i telo moe do tebe…’: Liubov' v chastnoi zhiznicheloveka srednevekovoi Rusi po nenormativnym istochnikam.” “Ase grekhi zlye, smertnye…” Liubov’, erotika i seksual’naia иtika v doindustrial’noi Rossii(X-pervaia polovina XIX v.). Ed. N. L. Pushkareva (Moscow, 1999): 507-15.

Rezvan 1988—Rezvan E. A. Eticheskie predstavleniia vKorane.” Иtiket u narodov Perednei azii (Moscow, 1988): 38-59.

Ruggiero 1993 — Ruggiero, C. Binding Passions: Tales of Magic, Marriageand Power at the End of the Renaissance. New York, Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1993.

Ryan 1999 — Ryan William F. The Bathhouse at Midnight. An HistoricalSurvey of Magic and Divination in Russia. University Park, PA: ThePennsylvania State University Press, 1999.

Sazonova, Toporkov 2002 — “Zagovory ot vrazheskogo oruzhiiav sbornike XVIII v.” Otrechennoe chtenie v Rossii XVII-XVIII vekov. Ed. A.L. Toporkov, A. A. Turilov. (Moscow, 2002): 267-89.

Scully 1995 — Scully, S. “Marriage or a Career? Witchcraftas an Alternative in Seventeenth-Century Venice.” Journal of SocialHistory, vol. 28 (1995): 857-76.

Segal 1974 — Segal, C. “Eros and Incantation: Sappho andOral Poetry.” Arethusa, vol. 7 (1974): 139-60.

Shniter 2001 — Shniter M. Molitva i magiia. Sofia, 2001.Smilianskaia 1996 — Smilianskaia Elena B. “Sledstvennye dela

‘o sueveriiakh’ v Rossii pervoi poloviny XVIII v. v sveteproblem istorii obshchestvennogo soznaniia.” Rossica, no. 1(1996): 3-20.

Smilianskaia 2001 — Smilianskaia Elena B. “‘Liubov' tvoiarany mne velikie daet…’ (Chuvstva i strasti po sledstvennymdelam XVII v.).” Mifologiia i povsednevnost’: Gendernyi podkhod vantropologicheskikh distsiplinakh (Saint Petersburg, 2001): 26-40.

Smilianskaia 2003 — Smilianskaia Elena B. Volshebniki.Bogokhul’niki. Eretiki. Narodnaia religioznost' i “dukhovnye prestupleniia” v RossiiXVIII v. Moscow, 2003.

SMU 1998 — Slovesna mahiia ukraпntsiv. Kyпv, 1998.Stephens 2002 — Stephens, W. Demon Lovers: Witchcraft, Sex, and the

Crisis of Belief. Chicago and London: The University of ChicagoPress, 2002.

Tavenner 1942 — Tavenner, E. “The Use of Fire in Greek and

31

Roman Love Magic.” Studies in Honor of F.W. Shipley (St. Louis, 1942):17-37.

Toporkov 1999 — Toporkov Andrei L. “Russkie liubovnyezagovory XIX veka.” Eros i pornografiia v russkoi kul’ture. Ed. MarcusLevitt and Andrei L. Toporkov. Moscow, 1999: 54-71.

Toporkov 2002 — Toporkov Andrei L. “Zagovorno-zaklinatel’naia poeziia v rukopisnykh traditsiiakh vostochnykhi iuzhnykh slavian.” Literatura, Kul’tura i fol’klor slavianskikh narodov: XIIIMezhdunarodnyi s"ezd slavistov (Liubliana, avgust 2003). Doklady rossiiskoi delegatsii(Moscow, 2002): 351-61.

Toporkov, Turilov 2002 — Otrechennoe chtenie v Rossii XVII-XVIII vekov.Ed. Andrei L. Toporkov, A. A. Turilov. Moscow: Indrik, 2002.

Toporov 1969 — Toporov V. N. “K rekonstruktsiiindoevropeiskogo rituala i ritual’no-poeticheskikh formul (namateriale zagovorov).” Trudy po znakovym sistemam, vyp. 4 (Tartu,1969): 9-43. (Uchen. zap. Tart. god. uni-ta; vyp. 236.)

Toporova 1996 — Toporova T. V. Iazyk i stil' drevnegermanskikhzagovorov. Moscow, 1996.

Vasilenko, Shevchuk 1991 — Vy, zori-zorytsi… Ukraпnska narodnamagichna poeziia (Zamovliannia). Ed. M. G. Vasilenko, T. M. Shevchuk.Kyпv, 1991.

Velikiia Minei-Chetii 1870 — Velikiia Minei-Chetii, sobrannyiaVserossiiskim mitropolitom Makariem. October, days 1-3. St.Petersburg, 1870.

Vel’mezova 2004 — Vel’mezova E. V. Cheshskie zagovory: Issledovaniiai teksty. Moscow, 2004.

Vinogradov 1908/I-II — Vinogradov N. Zagovory, oberegi, spasitel’nyemolitvy i proch. (Po starinnym rukopisiam i sovremennym zapisiam). St.Petersburg, 1908, vyp. 1; 1909, vyp. 2.

Wilson 2000 — Wilson, St. Magical Universe: Everyday Ritual and Magic inPre-Modern Europe. London and New York, 2000.

Winkler 1990 — Winkler J. J. The Constraints of Desire: TheAnthropology of Sex and Gender in Ancient Greece. New York, 1990.

Zalizniak 1993 — Zalizniak Andrei A. “Drevneishiivostochnoslavianskii zagovornyi tekst.” Issledovaniia v oblasti balto-slavianskoi dukhovnoi kul’tury: Zagovor (Moscow, 1993): 104-07.

Zalizniak 1995 — Zalizniak Andrei A. Drevnenovgorodskii dialect.Moscow, 1995.

Zalizniak 2004 — Zalizniak Andrei A. Drevnenovgorodskii dialect.2nd ed. Moscow, 2004.

32

Zhirmunskii 1978 — Zhirmunskii V. M. “Istoriia legendy oFauste.” Legenda o doktore Fauste. Ed. V. M. Zhirmunskii. 2nd ed.,corrected (Moscow, 1978): 257-362.

Zhuravel’ 1996 — Zhuravel’ O. D. Siuzhet o dogovore cheloveka s d’iavolomv drevnerusskoi literature. Novosibirsk, 1996.

Zyrianov 1975 — Zyrianov I. V. “Zagovor i svadebnaiapoeziia.” Fol’klor i literature Urala, vyp. 2 (Perm’, 1975): 49-81.

OR NBU – Otdel rukopisei Nacional'noi biblioteki Ukrainy im.V. I. Vernadskogo (The Manuscript division of the V. I.Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine) (Kiev)

33