Magic (supernatural)

Lore & Background

The English words magic, mage and magician come from the Latin term magus, through the Greek μάγος, which is from the Old Persian maguš. The Old Persian magu- is derived from the Proto-Indo-European *magh (be able). The Persian term may have led to the Old Sinitic *Mγag (mage or shaman). During the late-sixth and early-fifth centuries BCE, the term goetia found its way into ancient Greek, used with negative connotations for rites regarded as fraudulent, unconventional, and dangerous, particularly the evocation and invocation of daimons. The Latin language adopted this meaning in the first century BCE, and via Latin the concept became incorporated into Christian theology during the first century CE, with early Christians associating magic with demons.

Reader's Guide

Magic has been a contested category throughout history, with both positive and negative connotations. In Western culture, it has been used to mark cultural difference and primitivism, often attributed to marginalized groups. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Western intellectuals perceived magic as a sign of a fantasy-prone mentality. Since the nineteenth century, academics have defined magic in various ways: some, like Edward Tylor and James G. Frazer, described it as beliefs in hidden sympathies between objects, portrayed as opposite to science; others, like Marcel Mauss and Émile Durkheim, contrasted it with religion as private rites versus communal activity. By the 1990s many scholars rejected the term's utility, arguing it drew arbitrary lines and was ethnocentric. The practice of magic has been associated with women in Western societies, particularly during early modern witch trials, where around three quarters of those executed were female. Magic has also been linked to foreigners and the lower classes, and practitioners have often faced suspicion, though local communities sometimes valued cunning folk and traditional healers.

Did You Know?

• The English word magic derives from the Old Persian maguš, via Greek and Latin.
• During the late-sixth and early-fifth centuries BCE, the term goetia was used in ancient Greek for rites considered fraudulent and dangerous.
• Early Christians associated magic with demons and regarded it as against Christian religion.
• In early modern Europe, Protestants often claimed that Roman Catholicism was magic rather than religion.

A Word's Long Journey: Etymology and Linguistic Migration

The English words magic, mage, and magician trace their lineage back to the Old Persian maguš, a term for a magician. This word descended from the Proto-Indo-European root megʰ-*magh, meaning "be able," suggesting that the very concept of magic was originally tied to the idea of capability or power. From Persian, the term radiated outward: it may have influenced the Old Sinitic word for mage or shaman, and it permeated ancient Semitic languages, appearing in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic as magosh and in Chaldean as maghdim, which carried connotations of wisdom and philosophy. By the first century BCE, Syrian magusai had gained notoriety as magicians and soothsayers. The concept then entered Greek as goetia, a term loaded with negative connotations, applied to rites deemed fraudulent, unconventional, and dangerous—particularly those involving the evocation of daimons, lesser spirits, to acquire power. This Greek framing persisted through the Hellenistic period, when a broad spectrum of practices—enchantment, witchcraft, incantations, divination, necromancy, astrology—were lumped under the single label of magic. Latin absorbed this meaning in the first century BCE, and from there it entered Christian theology in the first century CE, where early Christians linked magic to demons and regarded it as antithetical to their faith.

Magic as a Marker of the Other

Throughout Western history, the concept of magic has functioned as far more than a description of ritual practice; it has served as a powerful marker of cultural difference. Magic has been consistently linked to ideas of the Other, to foreignness, and to what Western thinkers regarded as primitivism, positioning it as a non-modern phenomenon. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Western intellectuals tended to view the practice of magic as evidence of a fantasy-prone mentality, and they commonly attributed such beliefs to marginalized groups of people. This labeling was not confined to a single era or context. When Christian Europeans began colonizing other parts of the world in the sixteenth century, they routinely classified the non-Christian beliefs they encountered as magical, effectively othering entire cultures. Even within Christendom, the term was wielded as a weapon: in early modern Europe, Protestants frequently accused Roman Catholicism of being magic rather than genuine religion. The connotations attached to magic have thus oscillated between positive and negative across different periods, making it a deeply contested and politically charged concept rather than a neutral category.

Sorting the Spectrum: High, Low, and Moral Taxonomies

Scholars and practitioners have long attempted to sort the vast landscape of magical practice into meaningful categories. One prominent distinction separates high magic, also called theurgy or ceremonial magic, from low magic. High magic involves lengthy, detailed rituals and sophisticated, sometimes expensive paraphernalia, and since the Renaissance it has been concerned with drawing down forces and energies from heaven to achieve unity with divinity, typically performed indoors. Low magic, by contrast, is associated with peasants and folklore, featuring simpler rituals such as brief spoken spells, and is closely linked to goetia and witchcraft, often performed outdoors. Another axis of classification divides magic along a moral spectrum. White magic is understood as the use of magical practice for selfless or helpful purposes, while black magic represents its malicious counterpart, directed toward selfish, harmful, or evil ends. Gray magic, or neutral magic, occupies the space between, encompassing practices that are neither specifically benevolent nor completely hostile. Notably, there is no universal consensus on where the boundaries fall; as one observer noted, what is termed black magic depends very much on who is doing the defining.

The Scholarly Quarrel Over Definition

Since the nineteenth century, academics across multiple disciplines have grappled with how to define magic, and they have arrived at strikingly different conclusions. One influential approach, associated with anthropologists Edward Tylor and James G. Frazer, defined magic as belief in hidden sympathies between objects that allow one to influence the other, effectively positioning magic as the opposite of science. A contrasting framework, developed by sociologist Marcel Mauss and his uncle Émile Durkheim, used the term to describe private rites and ceremonies, deliberately contrasting it with religion, which they defined as a communal and organized activity. By the 1990s, however, a growing number of scholars were rejecting the term's utility altogether. They argued that the label drew arbitrary lines between similar beliefs and practices that might alternatively be classified as religious, and that applying the connotations of magic—connotations rooted specifically in Western and Christian history—to other cultures constituted a form of ethnocentrism. This ongoing debate underscores that "magic" is not a fixed, objective category but a concept whose meaning shifts depending on who is defining it and from what cultural vantage point.