ISIDORE, ETYMOLOGIAE, VIII, 9, 9

BY HARRY L. LEVY

Magi sunt, qui vulgo malefici ob facinorum magnitudinem nuncupantur. Hi et elementa

concutiunt, turbant mentes homium ....

PROFESSOR THORNDIKE,' in translating Isidore's definition of the word Magi,

renders the foregoing passage as follows: 'They are "those who are popularly
called malefici or sorcerers on account of the magnitude (a characteristic bit of
derivation) of their crimes. They agitate the elements, disturb men's minds
...." ' It seems from his parenthetic remark that Thorndike regards the phrase
'ob facinorum magnitudinem' as an independent etymological comment on
Isidore's part. I believe that I have identified the source which Isidore used in
compiling the quoted passage; if this identification is correct, a revision of
Thorndike's view seems warranted.
Though the Breviarium Alaricianum, the Visigothic compendium of Roman
Law, is considered a probable source of Isidore, Etymologiae, v (De Legibus et
Temporibus),2 no scholar, so far as I know, has brought the Breviary into relation
with our present passage. Yet the following words appear in Breviarium Alari-
cianum, ix, 13, 2 (= Codex Theodosianus, ix, 16, 4):3 ' . . . magi et ceteri, quos
maleficos ob facinorum magnitudinem vulgus appellat... ;' in Breviarium
Alaricianum, ix, 13, 1 (= Codex Theodosianus, IX, 16, 3)4 we find: 'Malefici ...
vel immissores tempestatum vel ii qui ... mentes hominum turbant....'
The correspondence between Isidore's (a) 'Magi ... qui vulgo malefici ob
facinorum magnitudinem nuncupantur .. . ,' (b) '. .. turbant mentes hominum
.,' and the Alarician and Theodosian (A) ... . magi ... quos maleficos ob
facinorum magnitudinem vulgus appellat . . .,' (B) . . . mentes hominum
turbant. . . ' is close in respect both to thought and to expression, while (c)
' .... elementa concutiunt . . . 'parallels (C) ' . . . immissores tempestatum . . . '
in thought.6 In the use of the word 'elementa,' Item (c) corresponds with a
neighboring constitution of the Theodosian Code, which constitution does not,
however, appear in the extant manuscripts of the Breviary: Codex Theodosianus,
ix, 16, 5: 'Multi magicis artibus ausi elementa turbare ... .' One is tempted to

'L. Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science (New York: 1923-41), I, 629.
2 Cf. M. Conrat, Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des Romischen Rechts im Friiheren Mittelal
(Leipzig: 1891), i, 151; E. Brehaut, An Encyclopedist of the Dark Ages (New York: 1912), p. 165.
Cf. also B. iiubler, 'Isidorusstudien,' Hermes, xxv (1890), 519.
3 Cf. M. Conrat, Breviarium Alaricianum. . . in Systematischer Darstellung (Leipzig: 1903), p.
560.
4 Cf. Conrat (1903), p. 558. This quotation is taken from the interpretatio which accompanies the
constitution both in the Breviary and in the Code.
5 The language of Cod. Theod., ix, 16, 4: ' . . . magi et ceteri, quos maleficos ... vulgus appel-
lat . . . ' is paralleled by Lactantius, Divin. Inst., ii, 16, 4: ' . . . magi et ii quos vere maleficos vulgus
appellat . . . ,' and by Augustine, De Civ. Dei, x, 9: ' . . . damnabiles, quos et maleficos vulgus appellat
...... The contexts of the two passages last cited, however, do not contain either of the phrases
which are common to Isidore, the Breviary, and the Code: ' ... ob facinorum magnitudinem. ..,'
and ... mentes hominum turbant ....'

189.248.135.29 on Wed, 21 Sep 2016 05:35:55

 892 Isidore, Etymologiae, VIII, 9, 9

conjecture that an excerpt from the constitution last cited appeared in a copy of
the Breviary now lost, and was there found by Isidore.6
Whatever may be the case as regards Item (c), I suggest that the correspond-
ence between Items (a) and (A) and that between Items (b) and (B) demonstrate
that Isidore, in compiling our present passage, paraphrased the Breviarium
Alaricianum.7 If that is so, the phrase 'ob facinorum magnitudinem,' whether
intended as an etymology or not,8 cannot validly be classified as an example of
Isidore's undoubted fondness for derivation.
A similar remark may be made about the characterization of 'credulous' which
Thorndike9 applies to Isidore's entire definition of magic. A comparison between
that definition and pertinent statutes'0 will show that the credulity should rather
be imputed to the fourth-century legislator," or generally to the Romans of that
century, whose culture-patterns are presumably reflected in their laws. By the
time in which Isidore wrote, the laws in question had been on the statute-books
for centuries. I suggest that the Bishop of Seville should not be taxed with
credulousness in this instance, since he apparently based his definition of magic
largely upon long-accepted formulations of Roman law.

HUNTER COLLEGE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.

6 For an instance in which a Theodosian constitution is excerpted in only one manuscript of the
Breviary, cf. Conrat (1891), i, 151. Cf. also the following footnote.
7 It is not at all likely that Isidore used the Theodosian Code unabridged; cf. Conrat (1891), i,
151; Kubler, loc. cit.; M. L. W. Laistner, 'Dediticii,' Journal of RPman Studies, xi (1921), 267 f.
8 It is probably better to regard the phrase, not as an etymology of the word maleficus, but as a
justification for the application of the opprobrious term to soothsayers and other practitioners of
magic; cf. the word 'vere' in Lactantius, loc. cit. On the infrequency of attempts at etymology in the
writings of Roman jurisprudence, cf. Conrat (1891), i, 151.
9 Loc. cit.
10 Brev. Alaric., ix, 13, 1, 2, and 3 (= Cod. Theod., ix, 16, 3, 4, and 7); cf. Conrat (1903), pp. 558-
560. Cf. also the excerpts from Paulus which appear on the pages last cited.
11 The Theodosian constitutions cited in the preceding footnote are all dated between 317 and 364
A.D. by T. Mommsen, Theodosiani Libri XVI (Berlin: 1905), i, 2, 460-462.

189.248.135.29 on Wed, 21 Sep 2016 05:35:55