in which they were used, the original language of them being sometimes modified, but more frequently lines being interpolated in order to transform them into incantations. They are thus employed like the Lord's Prayer or texts from the Bible in the magical rites of mediæval or modern Europe. The chief difference between the Babylonian and the European usage lies in the fact that what in Babylonia was an authorised and systematic ritual, is in Europe an unauthorised and unsystematic practice against which the Church has set its face.
One of the most curious texts published by Mr. King (No. 53) is an exorcism to dislodge an evil spirit which had taken possession of the patient's body. As it has not been translated by him, I give a rendering of the most important lines:
"O seer of the hosts (of heaven), Merodach, the wise (?), the lord of E-Turra,
O Ea, Samas (the Sun-god) and Merodach, rescue me!
By your grace may I walk uprightly!
O Samas, the spirit that terrifieth, which for many days
Has been bound to my back and is not loosed,
All day long possesses me, all night long terrifies me!
He has exercised his power (?), he makes the hair upon me stand on end,
My side he tortures, my eyes he stiffens,
My back he pains, my flesh he poisons,
All my body he fills with pain.
Whether it is the spirit of one of my family and relations,
Or the spirit of one who has been slain and murdered.
Or an incubus, this it is, this it is!
O Samas, in thy sight I have prayed to him, and clothes for his clothing, sandals for his feet,
A girdle for his loins, a water-skin for his drinking,
(And) provision (?) for the way have I given him.
Towards the setting of the sun may he go.
To Nedu, the great porter of the (under) world, may he journey (?)
May Nedu, the great porter of the under (world), keep guard over him!"
Mr. King's book has been excellently brought out, and the copies of the cuneiform texts are especially good. His translations of them are accompanied by a commentary, and the vocabulary at the end is complete and useful. On the philological side he is well equipped. On the subject-matter of the texts, however, he is more open to criticism. Like too many of the younger Assyriologists he seems to be acquainted only with the most recent Assyriological literature, and consequently to be ignorant of the foundations upon which their work rests. Thus in his preface he states that
