06_An_Cranz_586-598_coopia_586-598 10/12/15 10:35 Pagina 589 589 RITUAL ELEMENTS IN ZECHARIAH’S VISION OF THE WOMAN 589 The fashioning of the figurine was usually accompanied by incantations which specified that the artifact became identical to the evil it represented 12. Likewise, the disposal of the figurine was often detailed in incantations that described the ritual journey of the evil which frequently led to the netherworld or to the outskirts of civilization. Incantations of this type date to the second millennium, but are also present in both canonical and non- canonical Lamaštu incantations dating to the first millennium 13. The ma- nipulation of figurines was obviously a versatile custom that cannot be reduced to a single principle. Yet, it is still possible to describe the rationale behind these rituals. As pointed out by Christoph Daxelmüller and Marie- Louise Thomsen, the ritual manipulation of images was always carried out in conjunction with incantations and prayers 14. This pairing of ritual act and incantation indicates that the figurines themselves have no autonomous power, but rather function as representations of the ritual’s anticipated out- come. As such one may understand the figurine as visualization of the sup- plicant’s desires. The link between the ritual and the divine world is also indicated by the series of incantations that accompany the production of clay used for the fashioning of ritual figurines 15. Furthermore, the prayers and in- cantations imply that the ritual itself was of divine origin and represented a form of revealed knowledge 16. Taking into consideration the connection between the ritual figurines and the world of the gods, it can be concluded that the manipulation of images constituted a divinely disclosed instrument which allowed humans to communicate with their deities. Yet, whether and how the gods responded still remained subject to divine deliberation. 12 In BAM 323, for instance, an evil curse is represented by a female fig- urine and addressed as woman, as is explicitly stated in the incantation that accompanies the fashioning of the artifacts: “May he be a man, his statue. (27) May she be a woman, her statue”. For transliteration and translation of BAM 234, see E. RITTER – K. WILSON, “Prescription for an Anxiety State BAM 234”, Anatolian Studies 30 (1980) 23-30. 13 For examples of this custom that stem from the second millennium, see D. SCHWEMER, Akkadische Rituale aus Ḫattuša. Die Sammeltafel KBo xxxvi 29 und verwandte Fragmente (Heidelberg 1998) 69-74. For the Lamaštu in- cantations, see W. FARBER, Lamaštu. An Edition of the Canonical Series of Lamaštu Incantations and Rituals and Related Texts from the Second and First Millennia B.C. (MC 17; Winona Lake, IN 2014) 168-169, 308-309. 14 THOMSEN – DAXELMÜLLER, “Bildzauber”, 56-57. 15 For the custom of conjuring the clay pit before using the clay for ritual purposes, see WIGGERMANN, Mesopotamian Protective Spirits, 12. 16 This is particularly the case for the incantations which contain the Mar- duk-Ea dialogue or refer to the fact that the incantation is not of human origin, but goes back to divine revelation. M.J. GELLER, Ancient Babylonian Medi- cine. Theory and Practice (Chichester 2010) 27-29.