Love spell magical, formulary)

Egyptian (Coptic)

Coptic

Parallel text: P. Mich. inv. 597 ro l. 7 – vo l. 2 (KYP M15, T834)

28. ⲛⲧⲟⲕ̅ ⲡⲉⲓⲟⲩ̅ⲗ “You are the deer” This reference to a deer is puzzling. Considering that the deer was one of the main animals associated with the Greek goddess Artemis, its presence here could be explained by the identification of Isis with Artemis within the process of interpretatio graeca that occurred in the Greco-Roman period (cf. Witt 1971: pp. 141-151; Malaise 2000). In another Coptic magical text, a doe appears in a narrative charm for childbirth (BKU I 1 = KYP M76, T143), where it receives help from Christ; cf. Dosoo 2022, p. 525. In the Life of Eustathius and Theopistae (cc0273), Christ appears to General Placidus as a stag. However, from the context, there is no reason to see a reference to Christ here. Other options would be to read ⲉⲓⲁⲗ for “mirror”, or perhaps a form of the related ⲓⲉⲗⲗⲉ “light”. If we parse ⲛⲧⲟⲕ̅ ⲡⲉ ⲓⲟⲩ̅ⲗ, ⲓⲟⲩ̅ⲗ could be the name of the being invoked (“You are Ioul”), although this specific name is not otherwise attested in Coptic magical texts.
29ff. “I will send you to stone, you will break it …” The powers to break stone and dissolve iron are attributed to various beings in Coptic magical texts, including the Virgin Mary in the Prayer of Mary ‘ad Bartos’ (BL.Or. 6796.1-3 (KYP M118, T337); Coptic Museum inv. 4958 (KYP M130, T642); PCM I 25 (KYP M186, T238); Collège de France 2 (KYP M573, T744); BL.Or. 4714 (KYP M117, T99)), the archangel Michael (BKU I 7 (KYP M88, T33)), Afboure (PCM I 9 (KYP M122, T179)), the angel of divine punishment Tartaruchus (BKU I 3 (KYP M77, T58)) and Miak (Hay 1 (KYP M302, T1441)). Quite often, this expression follows the structure “if I sent you to do X, you would do it. But I do not send you to do X; instead, I send you to do Y”; for discussions of this structure, cf. Zellmann-Rohrer 2022, p. 98; PCM I p. 61; Bélanger Sarrazin 2025: pp. 198-202.
29. ⲁⲧⲟⲟϥ ⲧⲁϭⲓϫ Here we understand Sahidic ⲉ-ⲧⲟⲟⲧ⸗ϥ̅ ⲛ̅-ⲧⲁ-ϭⲓϫ, but there is a problem of gender agreement – ϭⲓϫ is feminine and so we would expect ⲉ-ⲧⲟⲟⲧ⸗ⲥ̅. Since there does not seem to be any other candidate for the possessor of ⲧⲟⲟⲧ⸗, we understand this as a simple error, but it may be that this reflects a deeper problem in the transmission of this text – a passage with another possessor who has dropped out, or d The genders here do not agree (masculine ⸗ϥ and feminine ⲧ-ϭⲓϫ)
30. ⲑ̅ⲁ̅ⲗⲁⲥ̅ⲁ̅ ⲛ̅ⲅ̅ⲡⲁϩ̅ⲥ̅ Splitting the sea is another feat of biblical proportion attributed to the being invoked here; cf. Exodus 14.21, ⲁϥⲡⲱϩ ⲛϭⲓ ⲡⲙⲟⲟⲩ (“the water was divided”), describing the parting of the waters of the Red Sea.
30-31 ⲛϣ̅ⲱ̅ ⲧ̅ⲏ̅ⲣⲟ̅ⲩ̅ ⲙ̅ⲡⲕⲁ̅ϩ̅ ⲡⲟ̅ⲣⲕⲟ̅ⲩ̅ ⲧⲏⲣⲟ̅ⲩ̅ ⲙⲛ̅ ⲧⲉⲩⲛ̅ⲟⲩⲛ̅ⲉ “all the sands of the earth, uproot them all, and their root!” ϣⲱ means “sand”, but this makes little sense with the following action. We would rather expect a word denoting some kind of plant, such as ⲉϣⲟ “bran”, or ϫⲟ “seed” (cf. Bélanger Sarrazin 2025: p. 267), but neither is attested with the spelling ϣⲱ. It could be for ϣⲱⲛ (Crum CD 568b), with the final ⲛ dropped, which is perhaps a variant of ϣⲏⲛ “tree”; cf 2 Kings 16.4: ϩⲁⲣⲟϥ ⲛϣⲱⲛ ⲛⲓⲙ ⲉϥⲟ ⲛϩⲁⲓⲃⲉⲥ “under every shady tree”. Alternatively, ϣⲱ could have originally belonged with the previous statement about the sea (perhaps ⲑⲁⲗⲁⲥⲥⲁ ⲛⲅⲡⲁϩⲟⲩ ⲛⲛⲉⲥϣⲱ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ “the sea, you will divide (or disperse?) all its sands), so that there would be a missing word for what should be uprooted in the following statement. Compare BM EA 75406 (KYP M555) ll. 6-7: ϯⲁⲃⲟⲗ ⲃⲟⲗ ⲡϣⲱ ⲛⲑⲁⲗⲁⲥⲁ ϯⲛⲁϣⲧⲏⲃ̣ ⲉϩⲣⲁ (“I will scatter the sand of the sea, I will lay it low”). In Hay 1 ro l. 23 (KYP M302, T1441), it is the roots of the Amente that are uprooted (ⲛⲛⲟⲩⲛⲉ ⲛⲁ[ⲙⲛⲧⲉ] ϯ̣ⲛ̣[ⲁ]ⲡⲟⲣⲕⲟⲩ).
32. ⲇⲇ The lack of a preposition before ⲇⲇ makes the meaning unclear. It could be “of NN” or “for NN”, depending on whether the first NN is the recipient or the victim and if the cup belongs to them or is intended for them.

KD, MPS, RBS, SVS (23/7/2026)