"These are the myths that Basileides tells from his schooling in Egyptian wisdom, and having learnt

such wisdom from them he bears this sort of fruit." Hippolytus, Refutatio 7.27 My thesis on the Egyptian Gnostics is posted here in its entirety. I felt it important to make it availa le efore I find an eventual pu lisher for those interested in a perspective upon the origins of Gnostic thought, one only marginally inde ted to the current !hristian "rigins appropriation of the field. #his thesis firmly grounds the rise of Gnosis in ancient emanationist theologies, preeminently Egyptian and, furthermore, presents a socio$historic perspective for the rise of Gnostic thought in %le&andria. 'resented here, as (ell, are a num er of original Gnostic tractates, translated y the author.

ii
THE EGY T!"# $%&#'"T!%#( %$ Thesis "bstract* ! use "foundations" advisedly in the title of this thesis, foundations being usually hidden below ground, or concealed beneath the stratifications of the edifice they support. Hiddenness in this study is a hermeneutic issue, one that re+uires an interdisciplinary orchestration of philosophy, comparative religious studies, and social, historical research in order to unearth the ancient and tenacious precepts of Egyptian emanationist thought, and to reveal them as a pre,eminent contributor to Graeco, -oman Gnosis. Behind the surfeit of aeonial detail is to be found the hidden gestalt, the synergy of the theogonic, the emanationist substructure. !t is the method of this study to step bac. from these particulars in order to chart the overall pattern, and to define it as substantively Egyptian, both in te/tual content and historical process. 0ithout wishing to idealise "le/andria it is difficult to overstate the centrality of this city in these times, both for its centuries,long tradition of te/tual appropriation by the time the Gnostics appeared, as well as its stubborn independence in the face of -oman ideologies, both pagan and )hristian. ! shall demonstrate that the antinomianism, the pronounced individualism, the rise of female spiritual leaders, the artistic traditions, the "libertinism", and the elitist predilections associated with the very broad and diverse Gnostic movement, find their philosophical, political, and geographical centre in the anarchic ferment of first and second centuries ).E. "le/andria. "le/andria, in turn, had e/tended its roots ever deeper into the Egyptian religious substrata through its close political and spiritual lin.s with 1emphis. " fusion occurred between an Egypto,Gree. literati and the long,standing, and at this point long,suffering Egyptian priesthood, now disposed to deal with the acute problem of evil in the world. The Gnostic movement was indeed more than "le/andria and 1emphis in the distinct local species of thought it produced, but the root of the eclectic "le/andrian21emphite genius clearly pervades the genus of Gnostic e/pression. E+ually, the Egyptian emanationist view, one handed down from the first instances of human time as a recorded phenomenon, became the great inescapable architectonic of Gnostic thought. G#%(T!) TH%&GHT

iii

Gnostic Tractates in Translation

Introduction
#he #hunder) 'erfect Mind is a difficult (ork to place historically. %mong the collection of Gnostic tractates found at *ag Hammadi, Egypt, in +,-., this (ork is uni/ue in a num er of regards. 0hile the (ork is certainly Gnostic in many (ays, its distinct allusiveness does not allo( it to e linked (ith any particular Gnostic system1 rather it seems to em ody a (ider appeal (hich stems from its asis in the Isis23ophia traditions prevalent in Egypt from 455 6.!.E. to 455 !.E. #he use of a female first$person narrative is rare enough in ancient te&ts1 the fact that there e&isted this tradition in 'tolemaic %le&andria three$hundred years prior to the rise of the Gnostic sects there, presents us (ith a strong case for historical connectedness. !ontrast, then, the follo(ing passage from another Gnostic (ork entitled #he Gospel of Eve, preserved in an anti$gnostic polemic y Epiphanius of 3alamis)
It is I (ho am yourself) and it is you (ho are me. %nd (herever you are, I am there. %nd I am so(n in all) and you gather me from (herever you desire. 6ut (hen you gather me, it is yourself you collect.

(ith a passage from the Isis tradition)

I am (ife and sister of 7ing "siris I am she that is called goddess y (omen I assigned to Greeks and ar arians their languages

iv
I made the eautiful and the shameful to e distinguished y nature I overcome 8ate Hail, " Egypt, that nourished me9 !yme, trans. 8rederick !. Grant

#he potency of the Isis tradition can e demonstrated y the fact that it penetrated as far north into the Roman empire as Germania and Hadrian:s (all. #he link et(een the influence of Isis and the Hellenistic emancipation of (omen is an o vious connection to make here, and the development of Gnostic systems sa( an even greater influence of (omen in religious matters in their roles as leaders and teachers. #his in fact (as one highly o ;ectiona le facet of the Gnostic movement to the orthodo& patriarchs of Rome. #he #hunder) 'erfect Mind a ove all alludes to the Gnostic 3ophia myth, and appears to dra( out the parado&ical unity of 3ophia, manifested in her t(o aspects after her descent into the lo(er material realm. #he higher 3ophia em odies the return to the 'leroma <lit. =fullness=>, (hile the lo(er 3ophia represents the carnal passage in life to(ards the reascent in Gnostic terms. #his (ork clearly demonstrates its concern (ith parado& and language. It is also evident that the (ork self$consciously strives to transcend all dichotomy, and this is accomplished not y looking at dichotomy as an e&ternal reality, ut in vie(ing it as e&isting (ithin the duplicities of language, and therefore (ithin the speaker herself (ho presents herself, in effect, as Rhetoric incarnate. #he relentless insertion of parado&ical statements is o viously designed to make something =une&pected= happen in the reader. #his something might e said to e the elicitation of an uncanny identification (ith the speaker (ho is =the (ord of many aspects=. 6ehind the ironic a(areness of her o(n persuasiveness, ehind the landishments of rhetorical seduction (ith its (ilfully alem icated (elter of parado&ical terms, lies the enigma of a rhetorical personality $ this alone vaults Intelligi ility onto the meta$rhetorical level1 as such, the purpose underlying the antimonies of these ver al posturings uses the archetype of pure persuasion as a means, not as an end or o session in itself $ an ethical tautness in this confession saves it from such a fall. In effect the paradigm of good and evil e&isting in 3ophia, very po(erfully conveyed y the use of o&ymorons <the master$trope of mysticism> and parallelisms, is held up as an e&istential mirror for the human condition) =I am merciful, and I am cruel.=

The Thunder* erfect 1ind

v
I (as sent forth through the po(er and I have come to those (ho contemplate me) I (as found y those (ho sought after me. ?ook upon me, you (ho contemplate me and you listeners, listen to me. #hose of you (ho pay heed to me, take me to yourselves. %nd do not anish me from your sight, and do not cause your voice to imprecate me, or your hearing. @o not e ignorant of me <in> any place or <in> any time. 7eep (atch9 @o not e ignorant of me. 8or I am the first and the last) I am the one (ho is honoured and the one (ho is scorned. I am the (hore and the holy one. I am the (ife and the virgin. I am the mother and the daughter. I am the mem ers of my mother. I am the arren (oman (hose sons are many. I am she of many (eddings and I did not take a hus and. I am the mid(ife and she (ho does not ear. I am the solace of my la our pains. I am the ride and the ridegroom and my man is the one (ho egot me. I am the mother of my father, and the sister of my man and he is my offspring. I am the servant of he (ho prepared me. I am the mistress of my offspring) ut he is the one (ho egot me, prematurely, on a day of irth. %nd in time he is my offspring and my po(er is from him. I am the staff of his po(er throughout his youth, and he is the staff of my old age. %nd that (hich he (ishes efalls me. I am the silence that cannot e apprehended and the idea that is often remem ered. I am the sound of the manifold voice, and the (ord of many aspects. I am the story) <I am> my name. #hose (ho hate me$$(hy do you love me and <yet> hate those (ho love meA #hose (ho deny me, confess me, and those (ho confess me deny me. #hose (ho speak truth of me, lie a out me,

vi
and those (ho lied a out me, tell the truth a out me. #hose (ho understand me, e ignorant of me. %nd those (ho do not kno( me, let them kno( me. 8or I am the Gnosis and the ignorance. I am reticence and lo/uaciousness. I am (ithout shame, I am modest. I am assurance and I am fear. I am (ar and peace. " serve me) I am the one (ho is condemned and the <one (ho is> great. " serve my poverty and my (ealth. @o not e arrogant (ith me (hen I am cast out upon the earth, and you shall find me among those (ho are coming, and do not vie( me on the dung$heap$$ do not go, do not leave me then, a andoned, and you shall find me in the dominions. *or vie( me a andoned among those (ho are condemned and in the inferior places. @o not mock me nor cast me do(n among those rutally slain. 6ut I, I am merciful and I am cruel. 6e vigilant9 @o not loath my o edience and my self$control do not love. In my (eakness do not forsake me, and do not e afraid of my po(er. 8or (hy are you contemptuous of my fear and curse my prideA 6ut I am she (ho e&ists in all fears, and the security in insecurity. I am she (ho is (eak and am made (hole in a voluptuous place. I am foolish and I am (ise. 0hy have you hated me in your counsels$$ that I shall e silent among those (ho are silentA I shall appear and speak. 0hy then have you Greeks hated meA 6ecause I am a ar arian among ar ariansA 8or I am the 3ophia of the Greeks and the Gnosis of ar arians. I am the ;udgement of the Greeks and of the ar arians. I am the one (hose image is great in Egypt and the one (ho has no image among the ar arians. I am the one (ho has een hated and loved in every place. I am the one called ?ife (hom you called @eath. I am the one called ?a( (hom you called %narchy. I am the one (hom you have pursued and I am the one (hom you have grasped. I am the one (hom you have scattered and you have collected together. I am the one efore (hom you have een ashamed,

vii
and you have een shameless to me. I am she (ho does not keep festival, and I am she (hose festivals are many. I, I am godless, and I am the one (hose God is many. I am the one (hom you have reflected upon, and you have scorned me. I am unlearned, yet they learn from me. I am the one (hom you have despised and you reflect upon me. I am the one (hom you have hidden from, and you appear to me. 6ut (henever you hide yourselves, I myself shall appear. 8or (henever you BappearC, I myself Bshall e hiddenC to you. #hose (ho have B...C y means of it B...C in senselessness B...C #ake me B...C understanding through suffering, and ear me to yourselves through understanding and suffering. %nd ear me to yourselves from ugly places (hich are in ruin and seiDe from those even in disgrace. "ut of shame accept me unto yourselves shamelessly1 and out of shamelessness and shame, indict the parts of my eing in yourselves, and come into myself, those (ho <thus> kno( me, and those (ho kno( the parts of my eing, and esta lish the great (ith the small first creatures. !ome to childhood and do not a hor it ecause it is small and it is little. %nd do not turn a(ay greatnesses in some portions from the smallnesses, for the smallnesses are kno(n from the greatnesses. 0hy do you curse me and esteem meA Eou have (ounded and you have had pity. @o not separate me from the first ones you have kno(n and do not cast anyone out, nor re;ect anyone B...C BnorC return (ithout kno(ing it. B...C that (hich is mine. It is I (ho kno(s the first ones and their descendants kno( me. 6ut I am the *ous of the B...C and the repose of B...C I am the Gnosis of my /uest, and the discovery of those (ho seek after me, and the command of those (ho ask of me and the po(er of the po(ers in my Gnosis (ith the angels, they (ho have een sent y my (ord

viii
and the gods in their aeons y my design, and the spirit of each man e&isting (ith me, and of (omen e&isting (ithin me. I am the one (ho is honoured and (ho is praised, and (ho is despised scornfully. I am peace and (ar comes to e ecause of me. %nd I am a foreigner and a citiDen. I am the su stance and the one (ho has no su stance. #hose (ho e&ist together in my eing are ignorant of me1 and those (ho e&ist in my su stance are the ones (ho kno( me. #hose (ho have dra(n near to me ecame ignorant of me, and those far eyond me are the ones (ho have kno(n me. "n the day I dra( near to Byou <pl>C1 ByouC are far eyond Bme, andC on the day (hen I Bam far eyondC you BI dra( nearC to you. BI amC B...C (ithin. BI amC B...C the in orn /ualities. BI amC the foundation of the spirits. BI amC that (hich is asked for y the souls. I am restraint and unrestraint. I am in harmony (ith the dissolution. I am the a iding and I am the dissolution. I am the one elo(, and they come up to me. I am the ;udgement and the forgiveness. I, I am sinless and the root of sin comes from (ithin me. I am lust in <out(ard> appearance and a stinence e&ists (ithin me. I am the utterance attaina le to everyone and the speech (hich cannot e grasped. I am a mute (ho does not speak, and great is my multitude of (ords. Hear me in (eakness, and e instructed y me in strength. I am she (ho cries out and I am cast forth upon the face of the earth. It is I (ho prepares the read and my mind inside. I am the Gnosis of my name. I am the one (ho cries out, and it is I (ho listens. I appear and (alk in a B...C seal of my B...CB...CB...C I am B...C the defense. I am the one (ho is called =the #ruth,= and =Ini/uity= B...C Eou esteem me and you (hisper against me. #hose (ho are victorious, ;udge them efore they pass ;udgement upon you, for discernment and partiality e&ists in you. If you are condemned in this (ay, (ho shall forgive youA "r, if you are forgiven through this, (ho shall e a le to control youA 8or (hat is (ithin you is that (hich is outside you, and the one (ho fashioned you on the outside

i&
<also> shaped the inside of you, and that (hich you see on the e&terior you see on the interior) it is revealed and is your garment. Hear me you auditors, and learn from my (ords those (ho kno( me. I am the hearing that is attaina le to everything, I am the speech (hich cannot e grasped. I am the name of the sound and the sound of the name. I am the sign of the letter and the manifestation of the division. %nd I <lines +$4 missing> B...C the light B...C and B...C auditors B...C to you B...C B...C the great po(er and the B...C shall not move the name B...C to the one (ho created me. I, ho(ever, shall speak his name. ?ook then at his (ords and all the (ritings (hich have een completed. Give heed then you auditors and for your part, the angels, and those (ho have een sent, and the spirits (ho have arisen from the dead... that I am the one (ho e&ists alone, and I do not have anyone to ;udge me. 8or many are the delightful forms (hich e&ist in numerous sins, and li ertinisms, and condemned passions, and transitory pleasures (hich are grasped until they ecome so er, and they ascend to their resting$place and they shall find me in that place, and they shall live, and they shall not die again. FFFFFFFFF

&

Introduction

#he #rimorphic 'rotennoia <*H! GIII,+> (as discovered in the He el al #arif in Ipper Egypt in +,-., along (ith the other fifty$t(o tractates of the *ag Hammadi ?i rary. #he !optic te&t is the only e&tant version of this tractate, and it (as pro a ly (ritten originally in the Egyptian language, although Greek versions likely e&isted as (ell. !optic$the last (ritten form of spoken Egyptian rendered (ith the Greek alpha et$evolved (ithin the 'tolemaic state, representing a linguistic fusion et(een Greek and Egyptian, ecoming a primary medium for Gnostic e&pression. #he entire Gnostic corpus <(ith the inclusion of a fe( non$Gnostic heterodo& e&pressions> (as likely uried to preserve it from persecution in the early fourth century, in the period leading up to the urning of the li raries of %le&andria y !hristians. #he su title of this piece, (hich (as /uite possi ly intended as the main title, is perhaps ironic in the sense that the !hristian connotation of =epiphany= is not at all intended in this piece1 rather the Greek term designates a coming to light, or manifestation, even the modern sense of =a moment resonant (ith higher human meaning.= #he epiphany concerns the dynamics of a female divinity (ho is the speaker of the te&t and so the second irony in the title is that a =8ather= or ='arent= in the strictly masculine sense is not at all intended as the (riter or speaker of the tractate, ut rather as a distant mentor or ackdrop for the activities of the female agent. #his, in con;unction (ith specific !hristianising glosses (hich intrude upon the te&t, indicates that the Greek title itself may have een a later addition. #he vie( on male and female in the te&t is a su tle one (hich devolves upon the notion of the syDygy$$a =heavenly con;unction= of se&ual opposites. #he resulting fusion, in the form of the divine speaker, is androgynous as she proclaims herself to e. Ho(ever, her overarching female identity is every(here maintained unto the higest levels of eing) as is typical in all emanationist systems, the 'rimal source, the

&i
"ne, or Monad, is often identified as the 8ather. #his masculine entity can e traced ack to the Egyptian %tum, the primeval creator and, as is like(ise common in these systems, he is seen to effect his emanations from out of a =feminine= (atery !haos$$*un in the Egyptian Heliopolitan system, and 3ilence in this system (hich appears to have close affinities (ith the Jalentinian in this regard. #his then is the only =father= possi ly eing credited (ith authorship of the te&t1 even so, this presence is removed and is effected in intimate fusion (ith the female speaker) perhaps =ghost (riter= and chief protagonist, as opposed to an amaneunsis, (ould e an apt description of her role in the theogony. #here are, then, also strong indications of the ancient Egyptian =Memphite theology= in this tractate. In contradistinction to the Heliopolitan emphasis upon se&ual pairing for an emanation$theogony, the Memphite focuses upon =thought= and the =(ord= in their seminal creative functions (ithin the mind of divinity itself. #he focus upon utterance and the voice in the te&t is /uite pronounced and it thus displays close affinities (ith the #hunder 'erfect Mind <JI,2> and #he %pocryphon of Hohn <II,+>, t(o other Gnostic tractates that e&hi it this unusual feature <for the ancient (orld> of a first$person female speaker. #he speaker, as in the #hunder 'erfect Mind, clearly identifies herself as a 3ophia$figure, presenting salvation as eing attained through gnosis$$through a fusion of language and se&uality. 6oth te&ts react to patriarchalism in various (ays and this evidence for =se&ualised gnosis= is confirmed y patristic censure on the su ;ect, the o vious hyper ole and distortion in their testimonies not(ithstanding. #he =!hristian= influence upon the te&t, glosses aside, is marginal, and there is more evidence to sho( a stronger influence from He(ish 0isdom traditions. Ho(ever, this too cannot e called a ma;or trend in the te&t, (hich demonstrates far more profound affinities (ith the !haldean and Middle 'latonic systems. It remains a good e&ample of an Egyptian mitigated dualism (ith a central focus upon a feminine soteriological principle. 'atristic evidence <Irenaeus, #ertullian, and Epiphanius> also affirms that (omen (ere active as leaders and teachers in the Gnostic movement, Manichaeism in Egypt included, and there is no reason not to e&pect their authorship of a (ide variety of tractates. #hat eing the case this tractate demonstrates many indications of female authorship, in spite of a num er of e&traneous glosses that have een added here and there <common to many of the tractates in the *ag Hammadi li rary>. #he reference to the %rchons <evil po(ers> and =their !hrist= is clearly an indictment of orthodo& !hristianity as a repressive and malign force (hich (ould likely indicate a time of composition follo(ing the persecutions. @iocletian:s edict against the Manichaeans (as issued in 2,7 !E and the edict y !onstantine against the Jalentinian Gnostics (as decreed in 42K. % critical feature of the te&t is the e&tensive use of Greek loan$(ords. #he glossary included (ith this translation lists all instances of key terms, only omitting the appearance of Greek particles, con;unctives and the like <(hich are sparse in any case>. !ulling those terms that are not prosaic or used as o vious synonyms for Egyptian (ords, (e are left (ith a very sophisticated philosophical voca ulary indeed. It is clear that this array of terms does not appear in the te&t as a sort of

&ii
haphaDard free$associativity on the part of the most recent scri e or redactor, rather it is to e supposed that their employment (as an integral part of the original composition. #his is a fascinating proposition, for it demonstrates that the (riter (as cogniDant in particular of Middle 'latonic and !haldean terminologies, and (as comforta le enough (ith them to use these sophisticated terms in the development of a kindred though completely independent system. It is of course very difficult to ascri e authorship to a te&t such as this1 ho(ever, a reasona le hypothesis is that it (as (ritten y a Gnostic teacher, /uite pro a ly female, (ho had received a ilingual education in Egypt in the late$third or fourth centuries. 3he (rote, in !optic, for a ilingual milieu, one (ell$versed in Greek philosophy as the li eral use of Greek loan$(ords in the te&t indicates. %s an heir to such %le&andrian teachers as 6asileides, !arpocrates, and Jalentinus, she may herself have een associated (ith %le&andria or some other large ilingual city in the north.

FFFFFFFFF

#RIM"R'HI! 'R"#E**"I%
<#HE ?"G"3 "8 #HE E'I'H%*E> 3acred 3criptures (ritten y the 'arent (ith complete Gnosis I am the 'rotennoia, the #hought (hich e&ists in the ?ight. I am the stirring (hich e&ists in the %ll, she in (hom the %ll is at (ork to its foundations, the first$ egotten among those (ho came to e, (ho e&ists efore the %ll, she (ho is called y three names, (ho e&ists y herself, eing fulfilled. I am invisi le (ithin the #hought of the Invisi le "ne and I am revealed in that (hich is immeasura le and ineffa le. I am incomprehensi le, e&isting (ithin the incomprehensi le. I move in each creation. I am the life of my Epinoia, that (hich e&ists in every 'o(er and in every eternal stirring, and (ithin invisi le ?ights and (ithin the %rchons and %ngels and the @emons and every soul e&isting in #artaros and every hylic soul.

&iii
I e&ist in those (ho came to e. I move in everyone and I reach into them all. I go forth(ith and those (ho sleep I rouse, and I am the vision of those (ho dream in sleep I am the invisi le "ne (ithin the %ll. I am the one (ho advises those (ho are hidden as I kno( the %ll (hich e&ists in hiddenness. I am num erless eyond everyone. I am immeasura le and unuttera le, yet if I desire I shall manifest myself, solely, for I am the 6rilliance of the %ll. I e&ist efore the %ll and I am the %ll as I e&ist in everyone. I am a voice speaking softly. I e&ist from the eginning in 3ilence. I am that (hich is in every voice and the Joice (hich is hidden in myself, in the incomprehensi le limitless #hought (ithin the limitless 3ilence. I came do(n into the midst of the under(orld and I shone forth upon the @arkness. I am the one (ho poured the (ater. I am the one (ho is hidden in the luminous (aters. I am the one (ho gradually illuminated the %ll y my #hought. I am coupled (ith the Joice and it is through myself that Gnosis comes forth. I e&ist in the ineffa le and incomprehensi le ones. I am the determination and the 7no(ledge, uttering a Joice y means of #hought. am the e&isting Joice and I speak forth in everyone and they recogniDe it since a 3eed e&ists in them. I am the #hought of the 'arent and it (as first through myself that the Joice came, that is, the 7no(ledge of things (hich do not have an end1 and I e&ist as #hought for the %ll, in harmony (ith the #hought that is unkno(a le,and unattaina le. I manifested myself$$I$$among all those (ho kno( me, for I am the one ;oined (ith everyone in the #hought (hich is hidden and the Joice (hich is e&alted, and such a Joice is y means of the invisi le #hought, and as immeasura le it e&ists in the Immeasura le. It is a mystery, and it is unhindered ecause of its incomprehensi ility eing invisi le to all those (ho are manifest in the %ll. It is light (hich e&ists in ?ight. 0e alone are separate from the manifest (orld since (e are saved y the hidden humanness of our hearts

&iv
y means of the ineffa le and immeasura le #hought. %nd the one (ho is hidden (ithin us pays the tri ute of his fruit to the (aters of ?ife. #hen the 3on (ho is complete in all respects, that is the 0ord (hich originated through this Joice (hich preceeded it in the heights, and (ho possesses (ithin himself the name (hich is a ?ight, he revealed the imperisha le things and all of the unkno(n things (ere made kno(n and these things that are difficult to interpret and (hich are hidden, he revealed1 and as for those (ho e&ist in 3ilence (ith the first #hought, he proclaimed to them, and those (ho e&ist in the @arkness he revealed himself to, and those (ho e&ist in the @epths, he informed them, and those (ho e&ist in the hidden Horus, he taught them the ineffa le mysteries and he enlightened them, all the children of the ?ight, a out the unrepeata le instructions. Ho(ever, the Joice (hich e&ists in my #hought e&ists as three states) the 8ather, the Mother, the 3on, as a sound e&isting in perception. It possesses a 0ord (ithin it$$this 0ord (hich possesses every glory. %nd it possesses three malenesses, three po(ers and three names, e&isting in the manner of three (hich are four$cornered, hidden in the 3ilence of the Ineffa le. #his one alone, (ho e&ists, that is, the ?ogos, I annointed (ith the glory of the invisi le 3pirit of goodness. #he third then, I alone caused in an eternal po(er over the living %eons of the ?ight, that is, the God a ove the %ll (ho shone forth from the eginning in the ?ight of these e&alted %eons, and in this glorious ?ight he remains resolute. %nd he takes his stand in his o(n ?ight (hich surrounds him, that is the Eye of ?ight (hich gloriously illumines myself. I gave the %eon of the 'arent to all the %eons, (hich I am, the #hought of the 'arent, the 'rotennoia, that is, 6ar elo,the complete, invisi le, hidden, and immeasura le "ne. I am the Image of the invisi le 3pirit and the Image of the %ll is completed through myself, and this ?ight, (hich the Mother appointed and (hich came to e named Jirgin, the one) Meirothea, the incomprehensi le 0om , the Joice that is uncontrolla le and immeasura le. #hen the fulfilled 3on revealed himself to his %eons, these (ho came to e through him, he manifested them, glorifying them, and he gave them thrones, and he stood in the glory (ith (hich he glorified himself L#hey praised the perfect son, the !hrist, the god (ho egot himself,

&v
and they glorified him saying, He is9 He is9 the son of God, the son of God, he is the one (ho e&ists9M and> the %eon of %eons looked upon the %eons he gave irth to. 8or you egot (ith your o(n desire ecause of this (e give glory to you) M% M" """ EI% EI "* EI, the %eon of %eons, the esteemed %eon9 #hen the god (ho (as egotten gave them a 'o(er Bthat anyone can ecome strongC and he esta lished them in their place) the first %eon he esta lished Bover the firstC) <H>armedon *ousanios HarmoDel1 the second he esta lished Bover the second %eonC) the third over the third %eon) Mellephaneus ?oios @aueithai1 the fourth a ove the fourth) Mousanios %methes Eleleth. *o( the %eons (ere egotten y the god, Lhe (ho (as <himself> egotten, the !hrist.M #hese <%eons> (ere given glory and the %eons <too> gave glory. #hey (ere first manifested, e&alted in their thought and each of the %eons gave myriads of glory in great untracea le ?ights, and they each together lessed the fulfilled son, the god (ho (as egotten. #hen a 0ord came forth from the great ?ight Eleleth and it said) =I am 7ing$$(ho is it elongs to !haosA and (ho is it elongs to the Inder(orldA %nd immediately thence his ?ight appeared radiant, itself possessing the Epinoia. #he 'o(ers of the 'o(ers did not entreat him and, on the contrary, there immediately appeared the Great @emon (ho rules over the ottom part of the Inder(orld and !haos. He has neither 8orm nor completion ut <instead> possesses the 8orm of the glory of those egotten in @arkness. *o( this one is called =3aklas=, that is, =3amael,= =Ealta aoth=, the one (ho had taken po(er, (hich he seiDed from the Innocent "ne) he (ho had first een victorious over her, that is the Epinoia of ?ight (ho had come to the @epths, the "ne from (hom he <himself> came in the eginning. 0hen the Epinoia of ?ight understood <this> she entreated the other !reation in humiliation. 3he said, B=Give unto me another e&istenceC so that I (ill come to the given 'o(er, lest I e&ist in an BevilC "rder.= B%nd theC entire Bassem ledC House of Glory agreed (ith her (ord. #hey rought a lessing upon her and the e&alted "rder e&pelled it <the lo(er "rder> from her. %nd the great @emon egan to produce %eons in the likeness of the %eons (hich e&ist

&vi
ho(ever he produced them out of his o(n 'o(er alone. #hen I too revealed my Joice in that (hich is hidden, saying, =!ease, stop you, those (ho (ander in the Hyle1 for ehold, I am descending unto the (orld of the mortal for the sake of my part (hich is in that place from the time of the victory <over> the innocent 3ophia, this "ne<f>, the one (ho descended so that I (ould dissolve their ends$$ as He commanded, the "ne (ho reveals himself through her.= %nd they (ere distur ed, all those (ho e&ist in the House of Ignorant ?ight, and the @epth shook, and the %rchigenetor of Ignorance (ho ruled over !haos and the Inder(orld produced a person in my 8orm. 6ut he did not kno( that this one (ould ecome a sentence of dissolution for him, nor did he understand the 'o(er (hich is in it. 6ut no( I have descended and have reached do(n into !haos, and I (as BnearC those of mine (ho are in that place. I am hidden among them, I give them 'o(er, I give them 8orm, and from the eginning until the BlastC day BI grant oldnessCto those (ho are Bmine, and I shall ;oinC (ith these ones so that they Bunderstand these (ordsC, that is, the !hildren of the ?ight (hose parent I am. %nd I shall tell you a Mystery) 0ith my 'ronnoia I have loosed all five fetters from you, and the chains of the @emons of the Inder(orld I urst$$ those (hich ound my mem ers, opposing them. %nd the high (alls of @arkness I thre( do(n, and the locked gate of the pitiless ones I reached, and their ars I roke. %nd the evil Energy and the "ne (ho strikes you and the one (ho impedes you and the #yrant, the %dversary, the one (ho is 7ing, and the Enemy (ho e&ists$$ all of these things I taught to those (ho are mine, those (ho are the !hildren of the ?ight so that they shall dissolve them all and e released from all of these fetters to ascend to their place of origin. I am the first to descend for the sake of a mem er of mine (ho remains, that is the 3pirit (ho e&ists in the 3oul (hich resides in the 0ater of ?ife and through the cleansing of the Mysteries. I spoke$$ I$$(ith the %rchons and %uthorities, for I (ent eneath their language and told the Mysteries to my o(n, a Hidden Mystery <through (hich> the fetters and sleep of Eternity (ere dissolved. %nd I rought forth 8ruit in them)

&vii
that is the #hought of the Inchanging %eon and my House, and their 'arent. %nd I descended Bfor those (ho (ere mineC from the eginning and Besta lished for themC the first strands (hich they produced. #hen they all shone (ithin me, and I prepared a pattern out of those ineffa le ?ights (ithin me. %men.

#he ?ogos of the 'rotennoia B+C

I am the Joice (hich revealed itself through my #hought, for I am the "ne (ho is 3yDygaic. I am called =#he #hought of the Invisi le,= <and>=the 3ound (hich gives irth to !hange=) I am called, therefore, =3he (ho is 3yDygaic.= I am a single "ne <f>, undefiled. I am the Mother of the Joice, speaking in many (ays, completing the %ll, the 7no(ledge e&isting in myself, the Gnosis of infinite matters. I am the "ne (ho speaks in every creature, and I (as kno(n through the %ll1 I am the "ne (ho gives the 3peech of the Joice unto the ears of those(ho have kno(n me, that is the !hildren of the ?ight. Ho(ever, I came for the second time in the form of a (oman and I spoke (ith them. %nd I shall tell them of the coming end of the %eon, and I shall edify them <concerning> the eginning of the %eon to come, the one (hich does not possess change < ut> (hich (ill alter our countenance through itself, that (e ecome pure. 0ithin these %eons, from (hich I revealed myself in the #hought of the resem lance of my<f> maleness, I preserve those (ho are (orthy (ithin the #hought of my unchanging %eon. 8or I shall tell you a Mystery of this %eon in particular, and I shall inform you of the Energies (ithin it. #he 6irth calls Bto the 6irth)C hour egets hour, Bday createsC day, month creates month, #ime turns, follo(ing #ime. #his particular %eon (as accomplished in this manner, and it (as num ered,< eing found> small,

&viii
for it (as a finger that omitted a finger, and a <chain> link (hich is added to y means of a link. 0hen the Great 'o(ers understood that the time of fulfillment (as manifest as in the la our pains of the pregnant (oman <(hich> rought <her to> the entrance of the door, in this (ay the @estruction approached. %ll together the Elements trem led and the foundations of the Inder(orld and the ceilings of !haos shook and a great fire glo(ed in their midst and the rocks and the earth shook like reeds lo(n in the (ind. %nd the lots of the Heimarmene and those (ho measure the d(ellings (ere greatly distur ed y a tremendous thundering. %nd the thrones of the 'o(ers (ere distur ed as they had een overturned, and their 7ing (as afraid. %nd those (ho follo( the Heimarmene gave their account of visits to the road and said to the 'o(ers) =0hat is this distur ance and this shaking that has come do(n upon us through a hidden voice <and> an e&alted speechA %nd all our houses are shaken, and all the ounds of our up(ard course have met (ith destruction, and the path upon (hich (e ourselves (alk, the one (hich takes us up to the %rchgenitor of our irth, it has ceased to e&ist for us.= #hen the 'o(ers ans(ered, saying, =0e ourselves are at a loss concerning it as (e did not understand that (hich pertains to everyone. 6ut arise, let us ascend to the %rchgenitor and ask him.= %nd all the 'o(ers assem led and they (ent to the %rchgenitor saying to him, =0here is your oast in (hich you take prideA @id (e not hear you say, NI am God, and I am your 8ather, and I am the one (ho egot you and there is no other eyond me.:A 6ehold, no( an utterance is manifest hidden in the invisi ly given Joice of this B%eonC (hich (e do not kno(, and (e ourselves did not kno( (ho it elonged to, for that Joice (hich (e heard is alien to us and (e do not kno( it <or> understand (hat it is a out. It came and loosed terror in our midst and paralyDing the muscles of our arms. 3o no( let us (eep and mourn in great sorro(. Henceforth, let us make our complete escape efore (e are forci ly imprisoned and taken do(n to the osom of the Inder(orld, 8or already the loosening of our chains is nigh and the #imes are cut short, and the days are short,

&i&
and our #ime is completed, and the (eeping of our perdition is upon us so that (e (ill e taken to the place that (e recognise. 8or as for our tree from (hich (e gre(, a fruit of Ignorance is (hat it possesses, and death also e&ists in its leaves, and @arkness e&ists eneath the shade of its oughs, <from> (hich (e plucked (ith guile and lust, this <tree> of the !haos of Ignorance (hich ecame for us a d(elling$place. 8or ehold, he himself, the %rchgenitor of our irth in (hom (e took pride, even he is ignorant a out this Itterance.= 3o no(, hear me !hildren of the #hought, <hear> the Itterance of the Mother of your mercy, for you have ecome (orthy of the Mystery hidden since the %eons <appeared> so that you shall receive it. %nd the end of this BparticularC %eon BandC this life conducive to violence Bhas approached and there da(nsC the eginning Bof the %eon of ?ightC, that (hich is Bforever (ithout changeC. I am androgynous. I Bam MotherC, I am 8ather since I Bcoha itC (ith myself alone, and I BcopulateC (ith myself alone BandC <(ith those> (ho BaloneC desire me, <and> the %ll Bstands firmC through myself alone. I am the 0om Bthat formsC the %ll y giving irth to the ?ight that shinesC in splendour. I am the %eon to come. BI amC the fulfillment of the %ll, that is Meirothea, the glory of the Mother) I pro;ect an Itterance Bof theC Joice into the ears of those (ho kno( me, and I call you into the ?ight (hich is e&alted <and> fulfilled. Moreover, (hen you enter this <?ight> you shall receive glory from those (ho give glory, and those (ho enthrone shall enthrone you. Eou shall receive ro es from those (ho give ro es, and the 6aptists (ill aptise you, you shall ecome ever more glorious$$ you (ere this (ay in the eginning (hen you ecame ?ight. %nd I concealed myself in everyone and manifested myself in them, and every mind seeking after me longed for me, for I am the one (ho gave representation to the %ll (hen it (as (ithout form.

&&
%nd I transformed their forms into other forms until the #ime (hen they shall give form to the %ll. #hrough myself the Joice came to e, and I myself make the reath (ithin those (ho are mine, and the 3pirit (hich is eternally pure I introduced in them, and I ascended and entered my ?ight. I fle( up upon my ranch and sat Bin the midst ofC the !hildren of the pure ?ight and I (ithdre( to their d(elling place (hich B...................................C B.........................................C ecome pure B.................C %men.

B"n theC Heimarmene B2C I am the ?ogos (hich e&ists Bin the ?ightC that is ineffa le. I e&ist in the B3ilenceC that is undefiled, and a #hought (as BrevealedC in perception y means of Bthe greatC Itterance of the Mother (hich (as a egotten male <(ho> took care to set me up, and it e&isted from the eginning in the esta lishments of the %ll. Ho(ever, there is a ?ight that e&ists hidden in 3ilence, it eing the first to come forth1 yet as she alone e&ists as 3ilence, I alone am the ineffa le ?ogos) undefiled, immeasura le, <and> inconceiva le. It <the ?ogos> is a hidden ?ight (hich gives a fruit of ?ife, pouring a living (ater from an invisi le spring, undefiled <and> immeasura le (hich is the glorious Joice of the uninterpreta le Mother, the glory <that is> the offspring god, a male virgin y virtue of a hidden *ous, that is the 3ilence (hich is hidden from the %ll, eing an uninterpreta le, immeasura le ?ight, the spring of the %ll, the Root of the entire %eon. It is the 8oundation that undergirds every movement of the %eons (hich elong to the intrepid Glory. It is the 8oundation of every foundation. It is the reath of the 'o(ers. It is the eye of the threefold Repose (hich e&ists as Joice y virtue of #hought, and It is ?ogos y virtue of the Itterance) it (as separated to illumine those (ho e&ist in @arkness.

&&i
*o(, ehold, BI shall revealC to you Bthe MysteriesC since you are my companion$B rothers and you shallC kno( them all B.............................C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B..........C I told Ball of themCBthe MysteriesC that e&ist in Bthe incomprehensi leC, ineffa le B%eonsC. I taught Bthem the MysteriesC through the Joice B(hich e&istsC (ithin a complete *ous Band IC ecame the 8oundation of the %ll, and BI gave 'o(erC to them. #he second time I came in the BItteranceC of my Joice I gave <an> image to those (ho took <the> image until their end. #he third time I revealed myself to them in their tents, e&isting as the ?ogos. %nd I revealed myself in the likeness of their image, and I (ore common garments and I hid myself do(n among them, and they did not kno( the one (ho gives po(er to me, for I e&ist (ithin all 8irst 'rinciples and the 'o(ers and (ithin the %ngels and in every 3tirring (hich e&ists (ithin all Matter. %nd I hid myself (ithin them until I revealed myself to my rethren and none of them kne( me although I am the one (ho is Energy (ithin them. 6ut BtheyCthought that the %ll (as created y them) eing ignorant they did not kno( BtheirC Root, the place in (hich they gre(. I am the ?ight (hich gives ?ight to the %ll. I am the ?ight (hich re;oices Bin myC rethren for I came do(n to the (orld Bof theC dead on ehalf of the 3pirit (hich remains ehind BinCthat (hich BdescendedC, issuing forth BfromC the innocent 3ophia. BI cameC and Bset forthC my living B........C and I stripped a(ay B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B.....C through the Bpropriety of the #houghtC (hich he possessed from Bthe eginningC Bsince I gave himC the (ater Bof ?ife and heCstripped a(ay the !haos, that (hich Be&istsCBinC the uttermost B@arknessC in the lo(est part of all B@arknessC1 that is <I gave to him> the #hought of the 'neumatic and 'sychic B'o(erC.

&&ii
%ll of these I put on. Ho(ever, I stripped him of it <the 'o(er> and I gave him a radiant ?ight, that is, the 7no(ledge of the #hought of the 'arenthood. %nd I delivered him to those (ho give ro es) Iammon, Elasso, %menai, and they covered him (ith a ro e from among ro es of ?ight and I delivered him to the aptists and they aptised him$$ Micheus, Michar, Mnesinous$$ they immersed him, ho(ever, in the spring of the 0ater of ?ife1 and I delivered him to those (ho enthrone$$ 6ariel, *outhan, 3a enai$$ and they enthroned him upon the #hrone of Glory. %nd I delivered him to those (ho glorify$$ %riom, Elien, 'hariel$$ and they glorified him (ith the glory of 'arenthood and BstillC those (ho master, carried off$$ 7amaliel, B...Canen, 3am los, the servants of the great and holy Illuminator$$ they took him to the place of ?ight of his 'arenthood, and Bhe receivedC the 8ive 3eals from Bthe ?ightC of the Mother, the 'rotennoia, and it (as granted him that he take in Bthe MysteryC of the 7no(ledge and Bhe ecame ?ightC in ?ight. *o(, then B.............C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B......................................C B.....I (asC e&isting in them) BI clad myself in the likeness of eachC one. #he %rchons thought Bthat IC (as their !hrist$$ truly, I Be&istCBinC every BoneC, indeed in those in (hom BI residedC<as> B'o(erC <and> ?ight (ithin them, <I> BhumiliatedCthe %rchons. I am their eloved for in that place I clothed myself in the BmannerC of the 3on of the %rchgenitor and I resem led him until the end of his ;udgement, that is, the Ignorance of !haos. %nd among the %ngels I appeared in their likeness, and among the 'o(ers as if I (ere one of them$$ among the sons of Man ho(ever, as if I (ere a son of Man although I e&ist as 'arent of everyone.

&&iii
I concealed myself in all of these until I manifested myself in my mem ers, (ho are mine, and I taught them <a out> the ineffa le 6oundaries and the rethren. 6ut they are ine&pressi le to every 8irst 'rinciple and every archontic 'o(er e&cept the !hildren of the ?ight alone, that is, the 6oundaries of the 'arent. #hese are Glories higher than every Glory, that is, the five 3eals fulfilled through *ous. #he one (ho possesses the five 3eals of these names in particular has stripped off the ro es of Ignorance, and put on a radiant ?ight. %nd none shall reveal themselves, remaining hidden to the 'o(ers of the %rchons. 0ithin those of this kind the @arkness (ill e dissolved and Ignorance (ill die. %nd the thought of the creature (hich (as dispersed (ill present a single 8orm and Bthe dark !haosC (ill dissolve and B......................................C B......................................C B...............C and the B............C B.............C incomprehensi le B.....C B.......C until I reveal myself Bin the 'o(erCBof my GloryC and until I gather BtogetherC all of my fello( B rethrenC (ithin my Beternal reignC. %nd I proclaimed to them the BfiveC ineffa le BsealsC so that BI mightC e&ist in them and they too might e&ist in me. I$$I put on Hesus. I rought him forth from the cursed cross and I esta lished him in the d(elling places of his 'arent. %nd those (ho guard their d(elling places do not kno( me, for I am uncontrolla le, along (ith my 3eed, and my 3eed, (hich is mine, I shall put it into the pure ?ight (ithin the incomprehensi le 3ilence. %men. #he ?ogos of the Epiphany <three> #rimorphic 'rotennoia <three> 3acred 3criptures (ritten y the 'arent (ith complete Gnosis

&&iv

Introduction
""n e/tremely obscure wor.... ! had always thought that the henomenology of (pirit by Hegel was the most difficult piece of writing, but this last document from the 3ung )ode/ is even more pu44ling...." $$Gilles Ouispel

#he #e&t #he Tripartite Tractate is the fifth tractate in the first code& <the so$called Hung !ode&> of the *ag Hammadi li rary, discovered y local %ra s in Ipper Egypt near the to(n of *ag Hammadi in +,-.. In total, some .2 tractates in +2 ooks (ere uried there, the ma;ority eing Gnostic in varying degrees, ut also including a fe( Hermetic discourses, and a fragment of 'lato:s Repu lic. #he Tripartite Tractate is one of a num er of !optic te&ts in the collection (hich can e identified as Jalentinian in large measure <Jalentinus (as a prominent %le&andrian Gnostic teacher, active later in his career in Rome ca.+-5 !.E.>, although the scholarly need to define Jalentinianism and delimit a via le tra;ectory for this movement is fraught (ith difficulties <the paucity of sociological evidence, the slanted reports of heresiologists, and the interpretational difficulties (ith the limited num er of direct te&ts availa le, to name a fe(>. #he (ork is actually untitled, although the division y artistic orders into three sections resulted in the first editor titling it the #ractatus #ripartitus. #he tractate is the longest in the *ag Hammadi li rary <PP pages>, is very (ell preserved, and (as entirely unkno(n efore it came to light in this century. It is (ritten in the 3u achmimic dialect of !optic <!optic eing essentially the Egyptian language (ritten in Greek characters> (ith some 3ahidic influences. Its creation can tentatively e set near the end of the third century up to the mid$fourth century !.E. (hen most of the *ag Hammadi li rary itself (as put

&&v
together and su se/uently uried. Hudged stylistically, the (ork is almost certainly the (ork of one author. #he numerous parallels (ith the system of 6asileides, and to a lesser e&tent (ith other Egyptian Gnostic sects and Hermetic thought, indicates that this (ork (as part of the %le&andrian milieu of Greek$educated poets, mystics, and theosophers, many of (hom, like Jalentinus, (ere native Egyptians. #he analogy of a poetic genre <perhaps less of an analogy than (e are inclined to think> might e&plain the marked lack of cohesion e&hi ited y the *ag Hammadi corpus as a (hole. %ccording to (hat (e kno( a out various Gnostic sects, none of the (orks contained therein can e considered e&emplars for any particular school, although (e can ascertain strong tendencies in some. #his certainly holds true to some e&tent for the Tripartite Tractate, easily among the most dense, difficult, often florid, and eguiling poetic2philosophical metaphysic in the entire collection, yet it po(erfully displays key features of the Jalentinian myth. #he (ork is not easily approached analytically and is compara le in style and theme (ith the later mystical (ritings of Hako 6Qhme, or Meister Eckhardt. It is an =inspirational= (ork, yet it can e approached philosophically to some e&tent1 this I have attempted y (ay of specific footnotes included (ith this translation. "verall the (ork descri es the entire theogonic devolution of the Godhead into its o(n depths, the creation of evil, the mission of the 3on2?ogos, and an e&tended elucidation upon determinism and free$(ill as e&emplified y the aeons, most particularly in the last aeon to e egotten$$3ophia. 'art I deals (ith the determinism of the 8ather and the free$(ill of the hypostatiDed aeons1 'art II descri es the creation of humanity, evil, and the fall of %nthropos1 'art III deals (ith the variety of theologies, the tripartition of humanity, the actions of the 3aviour and ascent of the saved into Inity. %s (ith all Jalentinian Gnostic systems that have come do(n to us, the concern is (ith theodicy$$the ;ustification of God in the face of de facto radical evil. More essentially the reciprocity et(een !reator and created finds its flash point in Gnosis <i.e. =7no(ledge=>. 0hether the created are hypostatic aeons or human eings, the entire ontological e/uation of eing is affected y the movement of each independent entity to(ards salvation or perdition. #hroughout all of this the 3on$3ophia acts as the divine emissary and catalyst in his$her descent into the lo(er realms. In order to more fully appreciate this te&t a rief e&cursus into the historical ackdrop is necessary. 8ollo(ing the death of !hrist, !hristian teachings radiated out to various =mystery cult= centres < esides %le&andria, %ntioch and Edessa figure prominently>, this development occurring from ca. 45$+45 !.E. 6y the time this +55$ year period had passed some of these schools$$(hether originally pagan Gnostic or not$$had made the =!hrist myth= a part of their teachings. #he great Gnostic teachers of %le&andria, Jalentinus and 6asileides, oth claimed direct apostolic links (ith 'aul via his o(n disciples in this regard1 that said ho(ever, as my thesis set out to prove <The Egyptian $oundations of Gnostic Thought, Iniversity of #oronto, +,,->, %le&andrine Gnosis (as pre$eminently concerned (ith maintaining and revivifying the ancient Egyptian cosmological architectonics of anti/uity. %s such, those Gnostic speculations (hich included Hesus in their mise en scRne accorded him

&&vi
a role usually en par, often upstaged, y 3ophia. #he Tripartite Tractate is no e&ception in this regard, (herein (e have the interesting and uni/ue spectacle of the t(o personages fused into one, (ith 3ophia some(hat masked in the presentation as the te&t presuma ly (as intended for dissemination amongst those (ith more orthodo& !hristian sensi ilities. 3o, too, the entire Gnostic aeonial gestalt (ithin this te&t is some(hat masked in order to present Gnostic %eons rather as /ualities of the Godhead in addition to their o vious theogonic functions. In the teachings of most Gnostic schools <and in the Gospel of Hohn (ith (hich this te&t displays some interesting similarities> the emphasis is not upon the historic Hesus ut rather the figure of the transmundane 3on or ?ogos as the critical personage in the cosmic drama of good and evil$$this =se/uence of inner$divine events= as Hans Honas put it. #he emphasis upon kno(ing (here the 3on is from, his mission on earth, and (here he ascended to follo(ing his incarnation or appearance mirrors all individual e&istential concerns for the Gnostics) !hrist ecomes the archetype for the redemption of %nthropos as activated in each personal e&perience of gnosis. 0ell and good so far for a !hristian reading of the te&t) this translation, ho(ever, dilates this surface reading and details the underlying truth <(hich (ould have een o vious to any Jalentinian at the time> that !hrist is in actual fact 3ophia in disguise, possi ly her consort, and that her salvific mission amongst the aeons is a stage directly inherited from ancient Egyptian Memphite and Hermopolitan mythology, for such is the essence of Jalentinian thought, itself /uintessentially %le&andrian. 6y =%le&andrian= I mean to infer a road range of influences used (ith poetic license <I use this e&pression to avoid the negative connotations of =syncretism=> y the (riters of a milieu orn of seething centuries$long philosophical and theosophical ferment, centred a out the li raries in %le&andria (ithin the ilingual social strata of the Graeco Egyptian. !ertainly pre$3ocratic, 'latonic, neo$'latonic, He(ish <including Essene>, Hermetic <and there y Egyptian>, and possi ly Soroastrian concepts appear in the Tripartite Tractate <along (ith possi le 6a ylonian and "rphic influences> through the mesh of Greek literary and philosophical conventions. Irrespective of these influences, ho(ever, the am ience of %le&andrian Gnosis <and I am including the Hermetica here> remains essentially Egyptian. % recently pu lished translation of the Tripartite Tractate y Harold 0. %ttridge and Elaine 'agels makes the case for a genuine accommodation (ith orthodo&y on the part of this author (ho is further situated in the (estern Jalentinian 3chool. I (ould go further and say that the te&t (as /uite possi ly (ritten in the original y Jalentinus himself, and that (e are dealing (ith a relatively faithful redaction of the original (ork. % asic premise here is that the conceptions in the te&t are %le&andrian$Gnostic in nature although pro a ly directed to(ards an audience including !hristians. If the (ork (as originally y Jalentinus, then a Greek translation of it (as likely carried y him to Rome. It is e&actly the sort of (ork one (ould e&pect a reno(ned Gnostic teacher from %le&andria to present to the patriarchs in Rome, y (ay of seeking possi le rapprochement, or an end$run around their o(n positions. If this is the case the Tripartite Tractate (as ultimately a failure as it =accommodates= orthodo&y rather poorly and is loaded (ith allusions

&&vii
(hich (ould have guaranteed its destruction y the end of the fourth century in any case. #he mission of Jalentinus in Rome <ca. +-5> (as likely an =%le&andrian initiative,= his attempt to ecome ishop of Rome <he nearly did according to #ertullian> an effort to head off and alter (hat (as vie(ed y Gnostics as a false church <a =(aterless canal=> fomenting a regressive theology that posed a direct threat to the middle group of Mankind$$those (hom the Jalentinians called the psychics. In terms of rhetorical intent given the political realities of the time, (herein Rome and %le&andria (ere s/uaring off across a divide that separates orthodo&y from heterodo&y, the (ork might e seen to e operating as a sort of te&tual #ro;an horse. 3trong similarities e&ist et(een The Gospel of Truth <another Jalentinian document dated earlier> and the Tripartite Tractate) oth are rhetorically crafted so as not to offend orthodo& sensi ilities on ma;or points, (hile su tly proselytiDing the Gnostic path to salvation, containing (ithin themselves all of the Gnostic (orld$vie( <and eyond> for those =(ho have ears to hear.= #he =Gnostic= and =orthodo&= e&perience of the !hristian message (as radically different even during the time of Jalentinus, oth in its formulations, and more essentially in its social applications. !ertainly the Jalentinians, from southern Gaul to the Euphrates, had some sort of egalitarian church, select num er of rituals < aptisms primarily>, and loose$knit community centred a out various gifted leaders. 6y the time this tractate (as redacted ho(ever, they (ere undou tedly feeling the effects of a life and death (ar eing (aged upon them y the !hurch of Rome. #he sociological and theological differences (ere in fact profound in many critical regards, and the opening roadside y Irenaeus of ?yon upon the Jalentinians <ca. +P5$+,2> dre( its aim upon precisely these differences, setting the pattern for the anti$Gnostic polemics (hich follo(ed. #he early days of !hristian pluralistic tolerance <some Jalentinians, after all, (ere self$proclaimed !hristians> (ere over y the third and fourth centuries. #he (holesale censoring of =heretical= ooks <their mere possession made a criminal offence> (as ;ust around the corner (hen this tractate (as pro a ly uried, /uite possi ly even current, and this had no dou t een anticipated y those in Egypt (ith li raries <and it is therefore almost a certainty that there are other uried (orks out there a(aiting the light as it (ere>. #he =Gnostic temperament=, (ith its anti$ecclesial, anti$sacramental, cosmic$critical focus upon the e&perience of Gnosis (ithout let or hindrance from any e&ternal earthly authority (as surely not impressed (ith a religion intent upon e&ercising temporal po(er < y the third and fourth centuries>, nor y its su se/uent efforts to totally eradicate the autochthonous faiths of Egypt. It simply does not follo( to suggest that the freethinking =li eralism= of Gnostic %le&andria (ould naturally fall s(ay to the e&clusionary canon and fundamentally proscriptive dogmas of orthodo& elements then on the ascendant in the Roman (orld. Much has een made of the orthodo& antipathy for the Gnostics$$there (as surely a surfeit in return (ith respect to the Gnostic assessment of the "rthodo& !hurch. #he kernel and pith of the Gnostic phenomenon came out of Egypt, manifesting at their core the emanationist theologies of anti/uity. 'lotinus, himself from Egypt, (restled (ith the same conundrums in his philosophical (orks as did

&&viii
Jalentinus and 6asileides. #he social milieu (e speak of here is the ilingual Egypto$Greek literati, and it must e remem ered that teachers like Jalentinus and 6asileides appeared against a ackdrop of revolt and insurrection against Roman rule, seen to e the demonic e&ecutor of the @emiurge in (orldly affairs. It is therefore not possi le to conceive of the Gnostics of %le&andria looking upon a ne( !hristian orthodo&y in Rome, one to e ever more firmly (edded to the po(er of the Roman 3tate, (ith any affinity or fondness. 6ehind the theological clash there lies the sociological, that of Egypt occupied y a foreign po(er, one actively disposed to repress its (ay of life, even the functioning of its priesthoods. 0ithout attempting to reconstruct the social and political realities of the time, it is far too easy for scholars to deal (ith an array of te&tual fragments as if they e&ist in a vacuum, devoid of socio2political$$more essentially rhetorical$$purposes. % desire to reconte&tualiDe this tractate (ith these purposes in mind is the primary purpose ehind this present translation. #he curtain of censure (hich (as to later descend, eginning (ith @iocletian:s edict against the Manichaeans on the 4+st of March, 2,7, reached its culmination a century later (ith the decree of #heodosius and the urning of the li raries in %le&andria. #he urial of documents surely represents a last desperate e&pedient on the part of late paganism and Gnostic schools to preserve their (orks <or else it (as simply the efforts of those stal(art anti/uarians of any stripe (ho o ;ected to the destruction of ooks as a matter of principle>, yet prior to this there is likely to have een an e&ploration of rhetorical alternatives of (hich the Tripartite Tractate may e an e&ample. "ur historical thesis is that Egyptian religiosity (as the catalyst for developing %le&andrian Gnosis, e&tending the su stance of =Egyptian (isdom= into the architectonics of Greek systematic thought, and dra(ing in a (ide array of disparate religious elements, including the evolving =!hrist$myth.= 0hile the fires of this pagan (isdom (ere eventually to e put out y the influ& of orthodo& !hristian dogmas, the em ers continued to glo( for some time in the la yrinthine permutations of Gnostic thought and eyond <argua ly arising from its deep centuries$long ground fire in this century>. Gnostic thought in %le&andria, under such inspired teachers as Jalentinus and 6asileides, engaged upon a dialectic (ith orthodo&y, one that (as ultimately doomed to fail in the face of effective heresiological opposition. #he Tripartite Tractate can e seen to e a product of this last phase of interaction efore the all$out persecutions egan. Iltimately, the alien /uality of Egyptian thought could e toned do(n y the %le&andrian Gnostics, /uite possi ly for political or rhetorical reasons, ut it could not e hidden entirely. In this te&t (e are (itness to an ancient tradition that has een profoundly revolutioniDed y the Greek influences it had em raced. Many in our essentially !hristian mythos (ill no dou t e&perience this sense of alienness in Gnostic (ritings <if not in the (ork then perhaps in themselves>. #here is a mythological2philosophical rift here1 eyond the pale that orthodo&y then dre( a out its sym olic (orld, there e&isted the dualisms of Soroaster, Mani, the Essenes, of 'lato and the Middle 'latonists, the relativism of Greek 3ophist and 3keptical thought, as (ell as the pervasive archetypes of Egyptian myth. #here (as much to e e&cluded, and perhaps the greatest challenge lay in the eradication of =Egyptian 0isdom.= #he

&&i&
Roman heresiologist Hippolytus (rote the Refutatio <#he Refutation of %ll Heresies> in the late second or early third centuries. Having descri ed the system of 6asileides of %le&andria at length <and taking every opportunity to malign and ridicule>, Hippolytus saves his most potent slander for the last sentence) =#hese are the myths that 6asileides tells from his schooling in Egyptian (isdom, and having learnt such (isdom from them he ears this sort of fruit.=<!h.7.27> !learly the attle$lines et(een Rome and %le&andria had een dra(n at an early date. It is important to realiDe, ho(ever, that this convenient model of =monists and dualists= has its acute limitations, especially in the case of %le&andria (here the pagan$Gnostic core of Hermeticism and !hristian Gnosticism fused oth (orld$ vie(s on different levels. #he dualistic level (as the lo(er of the t(o, the level of episteme <philosophy and science>1 (hereas the higher level (as that of gnosis <direct kno(ledge of the @ivine> (herein the oneness of God (as realiDed, al eit through the mystery of his =depths.= It (as precisely ecause the higher level of Gnosis (as esoteric that the dualistic aspects of Gnostic thought loomed large in orthodo& minds. 6y the third and fourth centuries "rthodo& !hurch councils (ere allo(ing for very little middle ground et(een their e&clusivistic dogmas and all that (as vie(ed as heretical or pagan. Given the surfeit of pagan2Egyptian detail to e found in the #ripartite #ractate and the limitations of the !hristian gloss, this makes the possi ility of orthodo&, or even =proto$orthodo&= authorship, e&tremely remote. %s is the case (ith the even larger tractate of the 'istis 3ophia, the Tripartite Tractate has een scanted y so$called =Gnostic 3tudies= <actually, as it stands, rather a su set of !hristian "rigins 3tudies) it is, finally, not a useful candidate for the advancement of theories a out so$called !hristian Gnosticism ut can more properly e seen as pagan Gnostic thought, centred in %le&andria, appropriating the !hrist myth for its o(n ends. #he #ripartite #ractate operates on a num er of different levels, the deepest eing inelucta ly Gnostic, and one either feels the need to NsanitiDe: this presence or one does not$$this (riter does not <and I (ould note in passing, and certainly (ithout rancour, that most =Gnostic scholars= are in fact *e( #estament scholars pursuing Gnostic studies =on the side= to some large e&tent$$much of (hat has een (ritten a out the Gnostics has een predicta ly ske(ed and even the most sympathetic disposition here reflects a narro(er focus>. In a sense oth (orks are (ritten in code. "ur most important rhetorical concern here lies in ascertaining the su tlety of an e&oteric appeal commensurate (ith the transmission of a deeper esoteric su stratum) does the te&t in fact demonstrate the superior literary skills re/uired to convey e&plicit and hidden levels that complement one anotherA I have taken this /uestion to the te&t and I find that there is a undant proof for this hypothesis. 0ith this translation of the Tripartite Tractate I am presuming to at least partially ring the more hidden recesses of this Gnostic terrain to light. "f the t(o rhetorical models set out here, the less attractive is that these te&ts (ere (ritten in this manner as a purely defensive measure <as opposed to a skilful attempt at proselytiDation>, this eing done to deflect the censoriousness of those !hurch officials (hose onerous task it (as to scan such te&ts as they managed to get hold of, seeking for clear heretical references <female figures in the Godhead for

&&&
instance, or any suggestion of prurience> (hich (ould then consign the (ork to the flames$$or if the (ork (as more fortunate, to some rather severe editorialiDing. It (as this very descending age of darkness, as it finally reached the furthest outposts of civiliDation at that time, (hich drove some unkno(n person<s> to ury the (ork in a large earthen ;ar in the sands of southern Egypt, thus preserving it for posterity. %fter lying hidden for some +K55 years, the Tripartite Tractate is eing read again) (e must e&tend our appreciation to those unkno(n guardians of Gnosis and ensure (e are among those =(ho have eyes to see.=

#he #ranslation Reference is made to e&tant translations of this te&t y Harold 0. %ttridge and Elaine H. 'agels. My o(n interpretation of the te&t differs (idely from their o(n, and my aim here has een to ring the larger philosophical$$Jalentinian2Egyptian$$sense of the (ork to ear upon the translation of critical passages. I detail hidden$$or half$ hidden as the case may e$$references and allusions to the teachings of Jalentinus in addition to (hat is e&plicit, in particular similarities (ith that (hich has come do(n to us from his disciple 'tolemaeus through that =grand= (ork of Irenaeus of ?yon, "gainst "ll Heresies. 0ords in s/uare rackets indicate reconstructions from lacunae ased upon fragmentary evidence in the te&t1 all (ords presented y myself (ith no asis <other than the larger sense of the passage> are footnoted. B...C indicates a lacuna that is not possi le to reconstruct. 0ords in round rackets are added in the interests of grammatical continuity and are usually pronouns or con;unctives. #he asis I use in translating this te&t) +> #he (ork is e&cerpted from an earlier Jalentinian Jorlage as evidenced y the citation particles < > (hich commence each ne( paragraph. I have offset these paragraphs in verse form to indicate this, and also to enhance the prose$poetry style of the te&t in general <I have also used my o(n sense of poetic appreciation in structuring the te&t in verse form at various ;unctures>. #he parenthetical num ering of these e&cerpts is done purely for reference purposes and does not indicate an effort to structure the te&t on my part. In dra(ing from another more e&plicit te&t, the author has demonstrated a certain artistry in coming up (ith a finished (ork that is cohesive, clearly follo(ing a larger design. 2> % ma;or focus of the (ork is upon the aeons, their free (ill, and their function as independent hypostases of the 8ather. I (ould maintain that this is the only e&tant Jalentinian (ork to e&plore the actual significance of the names given to various aeons. #hese names are not at all gratuitous <as many scholars seem to assume$$remarka ly little has een done in this regard>, and their functions, if not e&actly clearly defined in this tractate, are at least adum rated. 0hereas %ttridge and 'agels consistently avoid this possi ility and translate the Greek terms as nouns, treating the aeons as =attri utes= of the 8ather <they are that of course, ut far more>, I have capitaliDed the references (hile giving the actual Greek name of the

&&&i
aeon in parentheses. 0here the actual Greek name of the aeon is given in the te&t this procedure has een reversed in order to emphasiDe the fact that (e are dealing (ith Jalentinian aeons. "f the 44 Jalentinian aeons in the 'tolemaic system for e&ample, no less than 45 are alluded to here and there are some 2-. aeonial allusions in the entire te&t. Many of these allusions are rather faint, the ma;ority are /uite strong, and some are completely e&plicit. It should e stressed ho(ever that to any Jalentinian of the time, all these (ould have een o vious. 8or the orthodo& mind these (ould have een e&tremely difficult to ascertain and modern translators have in effect =taken the ait= in this regard, rendering up a te&t less inoffensive to their o(n sensi ilities. It is critical to realiDe that it is not an either2or proposition (ith respect to aeonial hypostasis2semantic attri ute of the 8ather. #he dou le entendre (as intended y Gnostic (riters, and the aeons are seen as archetypes e&erting their influence into our o(n realm. #he aeons themselves are the cosmic personalities of emanationism, handed do(n directly from the Egyptian Memphite and Heliopolitan cosmologies. 4> It is my contention that the (ork (as e&cerpted and masked to some large e&tent, and (as pro a ly directed to(ards the Hellenised and non$Hellenised Egyptian orthodo& audience$$the latter version is (hat has come do(n to us in native !optic. #he literary density of the te&t, and the fact that the =hylic= human segment are clearly seen to e soteriologically doomed, indicates that it (as aimed at the semi$ orthodo& intelligentsia, or elite$$these are in fact the very people (ho pro a ly uried the entire *ag Hammadi li rary. Eet even (ith its =protective colouration= the Tripartite Tractate e&hi its far more philosophical and theosophical affinities (ith the system of 6asileides, various Hermetic discourses, and other Egyptian =pagan= sources. -> I have, of course, resisted the urge to go eyond a =mere= literal translation of a te&t from one language to another, to =render= a te&t inspired y my o(n appreciation of the Gnostic spirit. "n the other hand, I have approached the te&t (ith the a(areness that the (ords arose out of a sym olic (orld entirely different from our o(n. !entral to the entire Jalentinian cosmology is the figure of 3ophia. I re;ect entirely the notion that this (riter, so consistent in numerous other regards (ith respect to Jalentinian thought, (ould e a ma;or revisionist here. #he figure of 3ophia is masked, assuredly, ut not so completely as to suggest at all her re;ection. I render her presence ehind the ?ogos in rackets1 e.g. =He <she> saidT= Even more compelling is the presence of almost all the other Jalentinian aeons throughout the (ork. It seems to me that %ttridge and 'agels: case must rise or fall on this point) (hy (ould a revisionist not entirely remove her presence, especially (hen it (as repellent to orthodo& sensi ilitiesA %s the te&t makes clear, =0isdom=$$3ophia in the given Greek loan$(ord$$appears at many critical ;unctures and this is more than coincidence surely, especially since the !optic (ord for (isdom is used on occasion) (hy not consistently use M*#!%6E, rather than 3ophia to avoid all reference to the Gnostic goddessA 0hy use the (ord in such provocative conte&tsA 0hy refer to the =3ophia$nature= of the ?ogos for instanceA #he ans(er to these /uestions is that 3ophia, like 'ortia in her courtroom appearance in The 1erchants of 5enice, assumes a male persona to play her part upon this stage.

&&&ii

#HE EGE'#I%* 8"I*@%#I"*3 "8 G*"3#I! #H"IGH#

by

Daniel Richard McBride

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate Department of The Centre for the tudy of Religion !ni"ersity of Toronto

# Copyright by Daniel Richard McBride $%&&'(

&&&iii
ABBR)*+AT+,A. / American Journal of Semitic Languages BD Boo0 of the Dead B) Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar of New York B+1A, Bulletin de linstitut darchologie orientale B 1) Bulletin de la socit fran aise d!gyptologie Cd) "hroni#ue d!gypte CR "hristian $eligion CT Coffin Te2ts )nch3 Enchoria )* E%angelium &eritatis 1)-4C 'acsimile Edition of the Nag (ammadi "odices GM )*ttinger +is,ellen 4TR (ar%ard -heological $e%ue .ARC) Journal of the American $esearch "entre Egypt .)A Journal of Egyptian Archeology .-) Journal of Near Eastern Studies .R Journal of $oman Studies . )A -he Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Anti#uities .T Journal of -heological Studies 5eph3 .ephalia MB +/nchener Beitrage MD6+5 +itteilungen des deutschen 0nstituts f/r 1gyptische Altertumskunde M4 +anich1ische (andschriften M+1A, +emoires de linstitut fran ais darcholgie orientale -4C -ag 4ammadi Code2 -4 Nag (ammadi Studies -T No%um -estamentum -T New -estament Studies ,MR, 2udheidkundige +ededelingen het $i3ksmuseum %an 2udheden te Leiden ,r3 2rientalia PB 4apyrus Berolinensis 5678 PDM 4apyri 9emoticae +agicae PGM 4apyri )raecae +agicae PT Pyramid Te2ts Rd7 $e%ue d!gyptologie RT $ecueils et -ra%au: *C &igiliae "hristianae 86 ;eitschrift f/r 1gyptische Sprache 8DMG ;eitschrift der deutschen morgenl1ndischen )esellschaft

4-

These are the myths that Basileides tells from his schooling in )gyptian wisdom9 and ha"ing learnt such wisdom from them he bears this sort of fruit3 4ippolytus9 $efutatio :3;:

4. 'art I $ 'ro lems of Interpretation Chapter One Introduction and Hermeneutic Prospectus

(e thinks he is in Ale:andria on the 4anium< an artificial mountain coiled round =y a staircase< rising in the centre of the town> 0n front of him stretches Lake +areotis< to the right the sea< to the left open country ? and 3ust =eneath his eyes a confusion of flat roofs< cut through from north to south and from east to west =y two intersecting roads which display down their entire length a series of porticoes rich in corinthian capitals> -he houses o%erhanging this dou=le colonnade ha%e coloured glass in their windows> A few of them are fitted e:ternally with enormous cages of wood where the outside air rushes in> +onuments #uite %arious in their architecture crowd close together> Egyptian pylons loom a=o%e )reek temples> 2=elisks emerge like lances =etween red =rick =attlements 0n the middle of s#uares appear the pointed ears of a (ermes or a dog@headed Anu=is> Antony can see mosaics in the courtyards< and carpets hanging from =eams in the ceilings> + then decided to study under good old Didymus3 Blind though he was9 no one could master his 0nowledge of the criptures3 <hen the lesson was o"er he would request my arm to lean on3 + would wal0 him to where9 from the Panium9 one can see the Pharos and the high sea3 <e would come bac0 by way of the harbour9 elbowing men of e"ery race9 from Cimmerians wrapped in bears0ins to Gymnosophists of the Ganges rubbed o"er with cow=dung3 But there was always a fight going on in the streets9 on account of .ews refusing to pay ta29 or of seditious parties who wanted to e2pel the Romans3 The town is in fact full of heretics9 the followers of Mani9 of *alentine9 of Basilides9 of Arius > all of them accosting you to argue and con"ince Their tal0 now and again crosses my mind3 Try as one will to pay no attention9 it?s unner"ing3 Gusta"e 1laubert%

The @orientalisingA glosses and historical liberties in 1laubert?s description of )gypt and the deniBens of Ale2andria during this time period are ob"ious;C yet apart from the e2cesses9 perhaps9 of surrealism and lyricism which enli"en this wor09 there is something quite fresh and authentic about the scene that he describes3 Both in the stro0es with which he effects the temptations of Anthony9 and in the honest e2pressions of his own inner ambiguity9 1laubert?s @sa"age sensualityA is well read9 obsessed with history9 and therefore mythopoeically entitled3 /ac0ing e"en a fraction of the resources possessed by modern Gnostic tudies9 1laubert approaches the @hereticalA Sit, with a 0eener sense of )gypt and the ,rient9 one uncompromised by modern rhetorics of inclusion which would ameliorate these figures9 bringing them into the fold as o"erly imaginati"e early Church theologians9 ser"ing them up as opaque obDects of study beneath the rubric of @influencesA3 1or 1laubert these "oices tantalise because they ha"e been
%

Gusta"e 1laubert9 -he -emptation of St> Antony9 trans3 5itty Mroso"s0y $/ondonE Penguin Boo0s9 %&FG(9 ::9 HG3 @-er"al and 1laubert continually elaborated their ,riental material and absorbed it "ariously into the special structures of their personal aesthetic proDects3 This is not to say9 howe"er9 that the ,rient is incidental to their wor0333 their ,rient was not so much grasped9 appropriated9 reduced9 or codified as li"ed in9 e2ploited aesthetically and imaginati"ely as a roomy place full of possibility3 <hat mattered to them was the structure of their wor0 as an independent9 aesthetic9 and personal fact9 and not the ways by which9 if one wanted to9 one could effecti"ely dominate or set down the ,rient graphically3A )dward aid< 2rientalism $%&:FC reprint9 -ew Ior0E *intage Boo0s9 %&:&(9 %F%3

4K
gi"en bac0 their time and placeC they are historically enabled persons not at all lac0ing in either flair or mundanity9 or dedication to strange > dare we say9 ,riental > causes and systems of thought3 1laubert persuades us that with genuine socio=historical apperception a certain romantic e2cess and lac0 of accuracy can be easily forgi"enC no amount of accurate detail9 howe"er9 can mas0 an insufficiency of connection or @feelA for the historical period in question3G ,ne of the main effects of this study is to dilate the notion of @4ellenistic syncretismA in order to show that Gnostic emanationist mythologies9 e2pressly dualist9 drew much of their essence from ancient )gyptian emanationist theologies9 themsel"es implicitly dualistic in nature3' Although traditional )gyptian cosmologies were much mitigated by e2posure to di"erse influences in the 4ellenistic and Roman era9 a basic insight about theogony obtained great systematic clarity9 as well as fantastic obscurity9 in a broad array of sects9 many of which sur"i"ed until the conquest of )gypt by +slam3 The scholastic dichotomy so often encountered in Comparati"e Religious tudies9 at least until quite recently9 is that of oriental syncretism e2isting as the antithesis to occidental system> This supposedly @main characteristic feature of 4ellenistic religionAJ9result of Ale2ander?s conquest9 is now being appreciated by some scholars more for the undergirding cohesi"e structures9 for their synergism or fusion9 as opposed to mere conglomeration or sedimentation3H <ith respect to an entire array of emanationist thought in )gypt9 4ellenistic cosmogonic structures must be "iewed as a continuation of ancient )gyptian models3: )gypt in the Graeco=Roman era shared in the broader apprehension of 4eimarmene9 and the proto=Gnostic re"olution in thin0ing now saw )gypt ruled by underworld demonic forces3 A fragmentary magical papyrus "ery succinctly illustrates the o"erriding concerns about a world encircled by !roboros the time=sna0e3 A two=column list of the baneful effects appears following a magical appeal that has not been preser"edE
death dar0ness mental illness grief
G

rudeness e"il the e"il eye debauchery

As chopenhauer was to put itE @People who pass their li"es in reading9 and ha"e acquired their wisdom from boo0s are li0e those who learn about a country from tra"el descriptionsE they can impart information about a great number of things9 but at bottom they possess no connected9 clear9 thorough 0nowledge of what the country is li0e3 ,n the other hand9 people who pass their li"es in thin0ing are li0e those who ha"e "isited the country themsel"esE they alone are really familiar with it9 possess connected 0nowledge of it and are truly at home in it3A 4arerga and 4aralipomena9 "ol3;9 trans3 R3.3 4ollingdale $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:'(9 K;H;3 <e are spea0ing here of ontological and ethical dualismsC that is9 of a "iew of reality that posits two different orders of beings9 in terms of their @beingnessA and split embodiment of Good and )"il3 1rederic0 C3 Grant9 (ellenistic $eligionsA -he Age of Syncretism $+ndianapolisE Bobbs=Merrill9 %&JG(9 2iii3 /uther 43 Martin9 (ellenistic $eligions $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:(9 %LE @+t is not useful to understand any coherently identifiable cultural form as grounded in superficial borrowings occasioned by circumstantial contact3A /3 5M0osy is one of the few )gyptologists directly concerned with this problemE @)"erything points out that a new e2amination of )gyptian influences upon Gnosis be established on the grounds of the historical circumstances and the e"olution of )gyptian religion in the later period3A +n Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uium of +essina< BC@B5 April< BDEE9 ed3 !go Bianchi $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:L(9 ;'L3

'

47
fear illness po"erty disturbance sla"ery indecency lamentation troublesomeness emptiness malignancy bitterness arrogance $PGM CNN+3%=%'(F

Amongst numerous other e2amples that might be gi"en9 this represents a comprehensi"e compendium of underworld e2perience9 a litany of 4ellenistic an2iety that prompted a turning to new cosmogonies9 new di"ine models that could be fitted into the old religious architectonics3 All of this9 it is posited here9 began to occur within a segment of the )gyptian priesthood and their ancillary classes3 The "ery @magiciansA who felt the need to propitiate the ancient )gyptian gods near Thebes9 e"idenced in the magical papyri9 had access to the still thri"ing and popular )gyptian temples of the day3 This depicts an outward=loo0ing=in dynamic on the part of a new religious sensibility in Ptolemaic )gypt3 <ithin the inner core the great wor0 of restoring the )gyptian te2tual tradition upon the walls of the new temples being built operated within a bubble3 <hile )gypt swirled with insurrection and re"olt9 as well as agricultural reform and scientific ad"ances9 one pictures this stolid cadre of hereditary priests single=mindedly focused upon restoring the central architectural touchstones of their faith9 undoubtedly belie"ing that true autochthonic pharaonic rule would one day again pre"ail3 +n this wor0 these priests were ironically sustained by the Ptolemaic decrees which supplied the funds9 labour9 and political protection needed for so "ast an underta0ing3 4owe"er9 on the front lines of popular religion the distress about a new )gypt ruled by pernicious 1ate grew3 These new religious de"elopments ineluctably drew from the ancient wells of )gyptian theology3 A signal indicator here is the wide=spread appeal of Manichaean thought in the southern heartland of )gypt3 )"en with the )gyptian mythological glosses that we shall e2amine9 the lure of this radical dualist creed to all social stratas in )gypt powerfully demonstrates the shift in religious temperament in )gypt to one acutely concerned with the problem of e"il3 1rom this broad and fertile soil the Manichaeans in the third century C3)3 drew many of their adherents3 4ere was a creed espousing the new dualist mood9 and at once rigidly hierarchic and didactic in its religious practice3 ,ne imagines many spiritually and economically disenfranchised )gyptian priests and their sub=classes drawn to this teaching9 undoubtedly entrenching the )gyptian elements that the creed of Mani manifested in )gypt3 The implicit dualism of )gyptian religion e"ol"ed into new forms3 The wor0ing sociological hypothesis with which the present study was commenced was that the )gyptian priest stands behind the )gyptian Gnostic3 +f the te2tual o"erlaps and influences could be charted9 + felt that a socio=historical case might be made for their superimposition3 ,f interest in studying Gnostic thought in a religious=theological light9 is the e"er= present gra"itational pull of )gyptian motifs9 mythological elements9 and theogonic substructures3 <hat shall be defined as Archaic Gnosis manifests as much of a radical change in mood as does 4ellenistic Gnosis9 its more sophisticated spiritual sisterC howe"er9 this priestly= deri"ed outloo0 was one unwilling to let go of the ancient social structures of )gyptian religious e2perience3 The underlying cosmogony and methodology of the Gnostic 4istis Sophia9 or the Books of Jeu9 strongly suggests the authority and hegemony of an inner elite with access to the new sacred te2ts9 their traditional role being a proper furthering of ritual and rote understanding3
F

4ans Dieter BetB9 ed39 -he )reek +agical 4apyri in -ranslation< "ol3 %9 -e:ts $ChicagoE the !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&FH(9 G%H3

4P
The static9 inner component of )gyptian religiosity attempted to remain true to the letter of the ancient word9 handed down in the hieratic continuum3 !nderlying this thesis is the assumption that a re"olutionary change occurred within literate classes beyond these sacred precincts9 an offshoot of speculati"e thought intent upon dynamically engaging the percei"ed limitations of the conser"ati"e priestly tradition3 1or these groups Ma?at was patently not manifest in the now empty shell of pharaonic ruleE for them one might say the emperor had no clothes9 or rather9 in this case9 the clothes had no emperor9 as a distant /agid ensconced in Ale2andria could hardly be seen to completely fulfil the deeper mandates of the )gyptian theogony3 Cleopatra *++ could be said to ha"e attempted to wear the double crown of )gypt9 ac0nowledging and mastering the critical prerequisites of language3 Beyond this short=li"ed mirage of total Gree0 and )gyptian synthesis howe"er9 the palpable e2perience of e"il in )gypt under the Romans following the death of Cleopatra and the murder of her son required9 for some9 the restructuring of the ancient mythos so as to pull the traditional components of )gyptian thought into a new synthesis3 The enabling ideal of pharaonic Ma?at was now seen to be e"erywhere elided by the oppressi"e realities of Roman rule3 +f some priests were barely able to accept the religious legitimacy of a Ptolemaic 0ing in Ale2andria9 far fewer could ha"e belie"ed in the Roman praefectus Aegypti acting on behalf of an absent liege=lord of )gypt3 This mood9 surfacing within the religious=minded literati9 found e2pression in both the underworld= obsessed magical papyrus and later Gnostic tractate3 There was also a more philosophical mode of Gnosis e2hibiting the same pronounced tendency to draw upon )gyptian theogonic models3 4ellenistic Gnosis9 as we shall call it9 mo"ed far from the )gyptian temple precinct9 entering into open debate in the agora where it displayed the heterodo2y of its ma0e=up in its openness to engage and incorporate other religious models9 and in its disdain for religious authoritarianism3 +t is in the area of 4ellenistic Gnosis that the )gyptian foundations of Gnostic thought attained their greatest synthesis with the di"erse strata of metaphysical thought in 4ellenistic and Roman times3 4ere we ha"e the beguiling and obscure phenomenon of literate .ews who were no longer .ews in any real sense of the term9 Gree0s who were no longer Gree0s in their religious affiliations and bloodlines9 )gyptians who were no longer @pureA )gyptians9 and proto=Gnostic magicians and priests in the period from %LL B3C3)3 to %LL C3)39 all of who contributed to the e"olution of Gnostic thought3 Abo"e all9 there remains the essential enigma of the literate and bilingual9 if not multi=lingual9 @Graeco=)gyptianA3 +n a sense9 this group represents both and neither of the scholastic categories of @Gree0A and @)gyptianA9 so remo"ed were they from traditional modes of thought and e"en clear ethnic di"isions3 Gnosis9 in its most ad"anced 4ellenistic fruition9 was quintessentially re"olutionary3 +renaeus set the tone for 4eresiology in focusing upon the su=%ersi%e in Gnostic thought&9 and the attitudes that continue to circle about the Gnostic phenomenon are directed by essentially theological interests9 seconded by a traditional Classicist?s disdain for a @syncretisticA group of philosophical poseurs3 Patristic censure and "ehement polemic9 while not at all clear on Gnostic origins or theological moti"ations9 were quite correct in apprehending the sub"ersi"e qualities of Gnostic thought3 <edded to 4ellenistic indi"idualism9 itself corrosi"ely antinomian as de"eloped in the secular=humanist atheism of )uhemerus and ophistO 0eptic intransigence with respect to Truth=claims9 there now appeared a host of seminal thin0ers well="ersed in Gree0 philosophy and rhetoric9 who drew upon arcane oriental thought to ad"ance "arious metaphysics which in total effected an end=run around e"ol"ing Christian orthodo2y3 Time and space9 history itself9 was the enemy of Gnostic soteriology9 and thus social order9 military occupation9 political
&

ee GPrard *allPe9 A Study in Anti@)nostic 4olemicsE 0renaeus< (ippolytus< and Epiphanius3 tudies in Christianity and .udaism9 no3% $<aterlooE <ilfred /aurier Press9 %&F%(9 ;&=GG3

4,
hierarchy9 and ecclesial authority all had their claims to the Good deconstructed9 and the stripped=down paradigm of their shared historical functions was seen to be @demiurgicA or @archonticA3 As .onas puts itE Gnosticism has been the most radical embodiment of dualism e"er to ha"e appeared on the stage of history333 +t is a split between the self and world9 men?s alienation from nature9 the metaphysical de"aluation of nature9 the cosmic solitude of the spirit and the nihilism of mundane normsC and in its general e2tremist style is shows what radicalism really is3%L +n this study + do not intend to simply posit )gyptian historical antecedence for foundational dualistOemanationist "iews and lea"e it at thatC rather9 + am proposing that a large amount of direct historical connectedness in the lineage of this mode of )gyptian philosophicalOtheological thought is in fact the case3 As such9 + am ad"ancing a socio=historical model for the appearance of the )gyptian Gnostics9 and for the incorporation of )gyptian religiousOphilosophical motifs in Gnostic thought in Graeco=Roman )gypt3 A philosophical hermeneutic does not usually rise or fall upon the specific dating and genealogy of "arious documents9 nor upon "iable social models9 as it is enough to 0now that these speculations occurred9 and in that sense the te2tual analyses presented herein can stand on their own3 4owe"er9 + am concerned with establishing the historical e"olution of an essential aspect of )gyptian religious thought9 from earliest dynastic times to the final phases of )gyptian religious independence9 and it is clear that we must go beyond an e2clusi"ely te2tual appreciation in order to effecti"ely conte2tualise part of the Gnostic phenomenon as a manifestation and continuation of )gyptian religious thought in )gypt at a particular phase of her history3 +t is my contention that the )gyptian Gnostics9 e"ol"ing as they did out of the )gyptian priesthood and associated religious=minded classes9 supplied the most essential theogonic framewor0 for the mythopoeic e2plorations of Gnostic thought3 The e2istence of dualist groups in )gypt ca> %LL B3C3)3 = 'LL C3)3 is well established3 The Gnostics9 4ermeticists9 Middle=Platonists9 Manichaeans9 and those who shared in the demonised Le=enswelt of the Gree09 Coptic9 and Demotic magical papyri ha"e all recei"ed serious study from "arious academic quarters3 + want9 howe"er9 to de"elop a historical and philosophical pan=optic with which to appreciate the common political and religious factors that unite these groups in )gypt3 This study therefore proceeds firstly as a @history of philosophyA to detail the genealogy of dualistOemanationist thought in )gypt from the ,ld 5ingdom to the Graeco=Roman era9 condensing a "ast period of early )gyptian history in an attempt to thread out the emanationist traDectory and then de"elop its final manifestations in the period %LL B3C3)3 to 'LL C3)33 + also attempt to de"elop a socio=historical picture at "arious Dunctures with which to underscore certain 0ey aspects of emanationistOdualist thought3 Part ++ presents a diachronic study of dualism in )gyptC that is9 a basic following of emanationist and dualist thought in chronological order although it is essentially philosophical in its interpretati"e focus3 This is seen to be a necessary preparation with which to then del"e into the internal patterns9 the structure9 of what shall be loosely defined as )gyptian Gnostic thought as opposed to the e"er= augmenting scholarly construct of a Gnostic=ism< at present only "aguely connected with )gypt3 The focus of Part +++ is essentially synchronic in analysing Gnostic thought through "arious thematic filters9 all of them pertaining to traditional )gyptian thought9 while again drawing in "arious socio=historical considerations where appropriate3 The Gnostics are centre=stream in the de"elopment of 4ellenistic Gnosis and can be seen to merge their boundaries into a di"erse
%L

4ans .onas9 @A Retrospecti"e *iew9A in 4roceedings of the 0nternational "ollo#ium on )nosticism< Stockholm August 87@86< BDFC $ toc0holm9 %&::(9 %'3

-5
array of associated 0indred speculations at the timeC li0ewise9 the essential )gyptian religiousOphilosophical outloo09 detailed in Part ++9 permeates beyond its geographicalOcultural boundaries and is as readily discernible in the writings of the Gree0 philosophers Plutarch and Plotinus9 as it is in the )gyptian Gnostics Basileides and *alentinus3 4owe"er9 Plotinus was born and raised in )gypt9 Plutarch "ery sympathetically disposed thereto9 and *alentinus and Basileides9 both )gyptians9 had the benefits of Gree0 educations3 A critical hermeneutic problem9 and one that must be addressed in its full historical breadth9 is the issue of what @Gree0A and @)gyptianA means in the conte2t of Graeco=Roman )gypt3 Gi"en the perforated cultural boundaries of 4ellenistic Ale2andria it would be foolish to argue an e2clusi"e cultural rootedness in any specific direction9 but we can at the outset surely suspect a "ery strong )gyptian presence in Gnostic thought for social9 linguistic9 philosophical9 and ob"ious geographical reasons3 This thesis sets out to demonstrate the )gyptian foundations of Gnostic thought within all the abo"e scholarly parameters3 +t must be said that my initial e2plorations within the Gnostic labyrinth were almost entirely philosophical and literary=critical3 + belie"ed that the whole problem of @Gnostic originsA was largely a creation of the scholarly hermeneutics brought to bear upon the phenomenon of Gnostic thought9 and that the issue9 for lac0 of te2tual9 sociological9 and archaeological e"idence9 was in any e"ent unresol"able3%% +n its turn9 the theory of a largely Gree09 Persian9 .ewish9 and purely Christian genealogy for the appearance of so=called Gnosticism9 usually placed in the second century C3)39 has attained some le"el of consensus among scholars since the last century although it must be said that many of these hypotheses appear to proceed9 a priori9 from the bac0ground of those scholars who turned their sights upon the phenomenon of @GnosticismA3 This attempt to define a discrete intellectualOhistorical traDectory9 one that would also Dustify suffi2ing an @ismA onto Gnostic thought at large in this period has allowed "arious hypotheses to coe2ist3 <e are9 afterall9 dealing with a @syncretismA9 and the @4istory of ReligionsA approach to this phenomenon in particular has rather condescendingly generated a loose conceptual model within which the elusi"e Gnostic remains essentially unidentifiable in any clear historical light3 4owe"er9 the nagging perception stayed with meE much of the locus of this phenomenon9 many of its greatest teachers9 the "ery language of the e2tant te2ts themsel"es9 are )gyptian3 An uneasy feeling about the whole business 0ept resurfacing as + noted certain distinct affinities with ancient )gyptian religious thought9 and it was clearly possible that this might well represent the tip of the iceberg3 All this 0ept refocusing my interest upon )gypt3%; +t seemed less and less Dustifiable to accept the orientalising assumptions of @Christian ,riginsA studies > although it is far more inclusi"ist than was the case
%%

ee Geo3 <idengren9 @/es origines du gnosticisme et l?histoire des religions9A in Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA"ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile< BDEE< ;F=HL3 + was struc0 early on by a remar0 made by Ale2ander BQhlig9 in the peroration of his chapter @Gnostische Probleme in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadi9A in +ysterion und GahrheitA )esammelte Beitr1ge ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HF(9 %GGE @But abo"e all one should not forget9 that these representations of the Gnostics in )gypt are quite refined and de"eloped9 and therefore question whether )gyptian theological thought was not also able to ma0e a contribution3 + wanted these questions answered3A ,r an e"en more e"ocati"e "iew presented by .an 8andee9 @Der Androgyne Gott in 6gypten ein )rscheinungsbild des <eltschQpfers9A in $eligion im Er=e HgyptensA Beitrage ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte ,u Ehren %on Ale:ander B*hlig9 ed3 Manfred GQrg $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FF(9 ;:FE @The ancient )gyptian temple=cults strongly maintained themsel"es into the time=period that Gnosticism in )gypt spread333 +t is possible that former priests of the )gyptian gods had themsel"es Doined the Gnostic Mo"ement9 bringing with them the representations of their belief3A

%;

-+
e"en twenty years ago > in its strongly felt need to groom the unin"ited guest now again at the tableC nor was it appropriate to deal with this te2tual array in a purely structuralist fashion9 or to ta0e to heart Thoreau?s adage9 that @thought greets thought o"er the widest gulfs of time with unerring freemasonryA9as a hermeneutic dogma3%G The @dramatistic conte2tA to adopt the o"erarching "iew of the modern literary=critical theorist 5enneth Bur0e9 the o"erheated political matri2 which generated the terministic screens employed by the Gnostics as they pursued their "ery particular te2tual strategies > this can in large measure to be located in Ale2andria9 and in )gypt9 e"en if this is sometimes more a state of mind than a specific geographical location3 A historical enabling process in my methodology had to enfranchise my philosophical understanding of these te2ts > the Gnostics had to be adumbrated9 and finally defined9 as actual socio=historical beings in )gypt3 A study of those Gnostics who li"ed9 literally and figurati"ely9 beyond the sway of )gyptian theology9 and the pull of Ale2andria?s assimilating "orte29 is beyond the scope of the present wor03 + spea0 of endemic scholarly constructs that tend to impede our understanding of Gnostic thought for two main reasons3 1irst9 there has not been enough emphasis upon understanding more deeply the philosophical essence of Gnostic thought > this in itself might largely define the historicalOsocial boundaries of the mo"ement3%' The hermeneutic hindrances here arise out of the abo"e=mentioned @4istory of ReligionsA agenda with their traditional "alorisation of Religion o"er mythology9 ,rthodo2y o"er heresy9 ystem o"er syncretism9 cience o"er magic9 and the Philosophical o"er the pre=philosophical9 all of which manifest implicitly occidental agenda that tend to be more scholastic than insightful3 The 0ernel and pith of Gnostic philosophy9 its @misprisionA and @hermeneutics of suspicionA as applied to the sacred cows of the time9 has not been adequately lin0ed to irre"erent and anarchic Ale2andria $at least in the Roman "iew at the time(9 to the )clectic Potamon9 the 0eptics Arius Didymus and Arcesilaus acti"e there9 to the e"er=widening anti=religious polemical bow=wa"e of )uhemerus9 or to the earlier ophistic assault on aletheia for e2ample3 There are also a number of ob"ious temperamental and conceptual o"erlaps between Gnostic dualism and Gree0 Philosophy that ha"e yet to be considered within a socio=historical pan=opticC in particular9 an entire range of dualist9 so=called @Middle PlatonicA philosophers from )mpedocles to -umenius demand attention3 econdly9 and for myself this resulted from a deeper philosophical understanding of the mo"ement along the abo"e lines9 there has been no serious attempt to situate the mo"ement in )gyptC that is9 not Dust geographically connected with )gypt9 but spiritually lin0ed with her millennia of religious thought and e2pression3 This is by far the most surprising omission gi"en the te2tual and historical conspicuousness of Ale2andria9 and the fact that the tremendous 4ellenistic ferment of the time in"ol"ed an acute Graeco=)gyptian religiousOphilosophical fusion Dust prior to and concurrent with the rise of the Gnostic sects in )gypt3 <ith )gypt in particular9 ca3 J;J B3C3)3 = GLL C3)39 we might e2pect that centuries of foreign subDugation and re"olt had a rather profound watershed effect upon the )gyptian psyche9 in large measure
%G

A rather glaring flaw that e2ists in the seminal wor0 of +oan P3 Couliano9 -he -ree of )nosis< trans3 43 3 <iesner and +oan P3 Coulinao $%&&LC reprint9 an 1ranciscoE 4arper Collins9 %&&;(3 +ronically9 and tragically prescient9 Couliano inad"ertently endorsed my own socio=historical focus here with an opening statementE @this boo0 cannot dwell on "ague9 romantic hypotheses meant to show some interaction between dualism and society9A$2"i( that is contradicted only two pages later when he admitted that his own attraction to Gnosticism was deri"ed from the twenty=two years he had spent within a totalitarian regime3 An astute point made by Gio"anni 1iloramo9 A (istory of )nosticism< trans3 Anthony Alcoc0 $,2fordE Basil Blac0well9 %&&L(9 %''3 ,ne only wishes that he might ha"e ta0en his own ad"ice with respect to treating )gyptian thought9 e"en cursorily9 in this otherwise important study3

%'

-2
e2plaining the rise of dualist temperament and speculation3 1ar from ac0nowledging this manifest premise9 the field has disenfranchised the "ery )gyptian language through which Gnostic te2ts come down to us9 claiming uncon"incingly that all the -ag 4ammadi te2ts are redactions from Gree0 originals for which9 incidentally9 not one manuscript sur"i"es3 This might be the case9 but the socio=historical picture points towards bilinguality9 if not multi=linguality9 not a hermetic Gree0 world9 and the larger inference that only )reek@speakers were in"ol"ed in the rise of the Gnostic mo"ement is a socio=historical thesis that is as bold as it is unsubstantiated3 All those who ha"e seriously studied Graeco=Roman Ale2andria 0now how problematic it is to spea0 of pure @Gree0sA beyond the immediate coterie of the /agid dynasty > by Roman times this ethnic distinction was more acutely blurred9 the o"ercompensating pretensions of the metropolites under Roman rule in )gypt notwithstanding3%J To assume an ethnic=based te2tual e2clusi"ity for the -ag 4ammadi te2ts composed in )gypt is to put the Gnostic mo"ement in )gypt in a con"enient glass bottle9 for it denies a connection between the rise of Gnosis there and the e"ol"ing Geltanschauung of a significant segment of non Gree0= spea0ing )gyptians3 The larger issue is that the Gnostics9 indeed all the dualistic groups in )gypt at this time9 manifest a profound dualist @world="iewA metamorphosis which had occurred within the )gyptian psyche9 not Dust the Gree0=4ellenistic3 This fact is central3 A hermeneutic which insists upon "iewing this de"elopment as a rogue species of Gree0 thought9 a parasitical syncretism9 or an eccentric Christian mutation or influence9 is a hermeneutic without socio=historical foundations3 ,ur thesis will lead us to the consideration that Coptic was li0ely a parallel9 if not primary9 language of composition for an )gyptian mythopoeic genre which was as un=Gree0 as it was non=Christian in much of its output in the first centuries of our era3 Ale2andrian Gnosis in particular affirms this )gyptian assimilation of di"erse cultural elements9 including the Gree09 which in itself supplied the means for the initial pre=Christian de"elopment of the Coptic script3 There is a decided lac0 of co=ordination and co=operation amongst the disciplines + must draw together in this wor03 The tendency to downplay9 if not entirely omit9 the role of )gypt in Gnostic thought has had a totalising effect upon the "ehicle and tenor of @Gnostic tudiesA as it now stands3 +n its general treatment of Gnostic te2ts the field by far and large operates within an unconscionable socio=historical "oid3 An e2amination of Gnostic thought as an )gyptian phenomenon would appear to be an ob"ious e2ploration to ma0e yet9 by far and large9 it remains an open frontier3 <ith the e2ception of a small number of )gyptologists who ha"e written articles on some important

%J

That an endogamous core of Gree0s attempted to maintain their own cultural integrity amongst a sea of )gyptians is hardly a surprise3 4owe"er9 gi"en the e"idence for intermarriage and the fact there was at this time a "ery strong political moti"e for distancing oneself from the status of @)gyptianA9 we may surmise that the number and influence of these groups was limited3 ee -aphtali /ewis9 Life in Egypt Inder $oman $ule $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&F'(9 'G3

-4
connections9 and a handful of limited forays by those wor0ing in Gnostic tudies9 there has been few attempts to e2plore the literary relationships between late=phase )gyptian religious thought and Gnostic=Coptic e2pression for e2ample9 or to attempt to tac0le the e2tremely complicated issue of Gnostic thought appearing against a particular socio=political bac0drop in )gypt3 This lac0 appears at times to be a wilful deficiency9 often simple neglect with respect to a host of methodologies whose boundaries happen to coincide here9 and + ha"e been unable to simply discuss @Gnostic connectionsA in "arious areas without directly raising the larger impediments that e2ist in the modern scholarly appreciation of dualist speculation as a whole3 And yet it must be said that this general situation is much mitigated by the e2cellent wor0 of a host of e2ceptional scholars who ha"e wor0ed on specific elements that support my caseC indeed9 this thesis rests upon their wor0 at critical Dunctures and would not ha"e been possible without it3 )"en soE while not out to be o"erly captious9 indeed cynical9 in the de"elopment of an antidotal hermeneutic9 howe"er @Gnostic tudiesA9the study of )gyptian Gnostic thought in particular9 is a field still shaped by strong antipathies3 +t often e2ists as a stal0ing=horse for narrow theological and philosophical concerns9 a "eritable Potemp0in te2tual "illage directly comparable to the Roman orientalist apprehension of Ale2andria which e2isted ad Aegyptum9 but not in Aegyptos3 +t will therefore simplify the tas0 at hand to dispense with the whole Christian ,rigins issue as the root emanationist structures we are concerned with in )gypt predate by millennia the widespread acceptance of Christianity in )gypt in the 'th century C3)33 Middle Platonic9 4ermetic9 and )gyptian magical cosmologies9 all of which subtend Gnosis in )gypt9 are completely de"oid of Christian influences9 and Manichaeism in )gypt is9 in addition9 polemically and formidably arrayed against e"ol"ing orthodo2y3 Te2tual analyses of e2tant
%H %: %H

A3A3 Barb9 @Mystery9 Myth9 and Magic9A in -he Legacy of Egypt9 ed3 .3R3 4arris $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:%(9 %H%9 demonstrates the ease with which )gyptology is able to "iew this issueE @After all9 considering the basic )gyptian mentality9 it was no mere coincidence that )gypt became the country where Gnosticism flourished and proliferated more than anywhere else3A ee also C3.3 Blee0er9 @The )gyptian Bac0ground of Gnosticism9A in Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile< ;;&=G:C Ale2ander BQhlig9 in the chapters @Gnostische Probleme in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadiA9 and @!rBeit und )ndBeit in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadi9A in +ysterion und GahrheitA )esammelte Beitr1ge ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HF(C /3 5M0osy9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion9A in Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile BDEE9 ;GF=':C Pahor /abib9 @)gyptian ur"i"als in the -ag 4ammadi /ibrary9A in Nag (ammadi and )nosisA 4apers read at the 'irst 0nternational "ongress of "optology< ed3 R3 Mc/3<ilson $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 %'&=J%C 1rantise0 /e2a9 @/a /Pgende Gnostique sur Pistis ophia et le Mythe ancien 7gyptien sur l?oeil de RP9A in Egyptian $eligion9 "ol3%9 no3%=G $April %&GG(C Michel Malaise9 @+sisme et Gnosticisme9A in )nosticisme et monde hellnisti#ue9 Actes du "ollo#ue de Lou%aine@la@Neu%e JBB@BK mars BD57L9 ed3 .ulien Ries $/ou"ain=la=-eu"eE +nstitut ,rientaliste9 %&F;(9 ':C Torgny R"e= Qderbergh9 @The Pagan )lements in )arly Christianity and Gnosticism9A in "ollo#ue 0nternationale sur les -e:tes de Nag (ammadi $/a"alE /es Presses de l?!ni"ersitPe /a"al9 %&F%(9 :%=FJC Rachad Mounir houcri9 @1rom the 4ieroglyphs to the Cross9 )gyptian Philosophy and Christian Gnosis9A $Paper presented at the Grd +nternational Congress of )gyptology9 Toronto9 %&F;(C .an 8andee9 @Der Androgyne Gott in 6gypten ein )rscheinungsbild des <eltschQpfers9A in $eligion im Er=e Hgyptens> .an 4elderman9 @+sis as Plane in the Gospel of TruthSA in )nosis and )nosticism< ed3 Martin 5rause $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 ;H='HC R3 Mc/3<ilson @Gnostic ,rigins an )gyptian ConnectionSA in $eligion im Er=e HgyptenC Douglas M3 Parrott @)ugnostos and TAll the Philosophers?9A in $eligion im Er=e Hgyptens< and @Gnosticism and )gyptian Religion9A N- NN+N9% $%&F:(C Benno PrBybyls0i9 @The Role of Calendrical Data in Gnostic 9A &" G' $%&FL(E JH=:LC Albert Torhoudt9 Een 2n=ekend )nostisch Systeem in 4lutarchus 9e 0side et 2siride $/o"aniiE tudia 4ellenistica9 %&';(3

%:

-patristic sources and Gnostic wor0s outside of a limited number of @canonicalA Gnostic tractates that Christian ,rigins is wrestling with9 clearly indicates that the Christian influence upon the dualist systems of the first centuries of our era9 with the possible e2ception of the so= called Gnostic @ chool of ThomasA located in yria9 was in many ways limited9 and often marginal9 literally worlds remo"ed from the later synoptic Christ Myth3 ,ne must bear in mind9 too9 that the role of a sa"iour in Gnostic thought quite clearly e2ists apart from all de"eloped christologies where it appears at all3 The inclusion of Christ is usually effected as a supporting player amongst players on the Gnostic stage9 and his role is more often supererogated by a female sal"ific figure9 or at least distinctly shared with her3 That this manifest dynamic is scarcely recognised by the field is a hermeneutic issue3%F +n short9 the mere inclusion of .esus in a Gnostic metaphysic does not a full=blown "hristian=Gnostic te2t ma0e9 any more than a sprin0ling of .ewish magical names ma0e a tractate Jewish=Gnostic3 omehow this ob"ious point has been lost in the interminable debate o"er the historical precedence of Gnostic or Christian @belie"erA9which in any case is not currently concerned with the maDority of Gnostic manuscripts3 The most essential Gnostic te2ts can be laid out as follows according to Christian influenceE

%3 Gnostic -on=ChristianE ,n the ,rigin of the <orld )ugnostos The Paraphrase of hem The G teles of eth 8ostrianos Thought of -orea Marsanes )2egesis on the oul Apocalypse of Adam Allogenes ;3 Gnostic wO Marginal Christian GlossesE Boo0s of .eu Pistis ophia !ntitled te2t 4ypostasis of the Archons Tripartite Tractate Gospel of the )gyptians ;nd Treatise of Great eth *alentinian )2position Trimorphic Protennoia G3 Gnostic with )nhanced Christian )lementsE
%F

Pheme Per0ins9 @ ophia as Goddess in the -ag 4ammadi Codices9A in 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 ed3 5aren /3 5ing $PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF(9 %L;E @Both the christianiBation of the gnostic myths and the fact that most scholars who study them ha"e interioriBed the religious symbolics of a .ewish or a Christian @patriarchal orthodo2yA frequently occlude the feminine side of the gnostic sa"iour9A from Pheme Per0ins9 @ ophia as Goddess in the -ag 4ammadi Codices9A in 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 ed3 5aren /3 5ing $PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF(9 %L;3

-. Gospel of Truth Apocryphon of .ohn ophia of .esus Christ MelchiBide0 '3 Gnostic ChristocentricE Gospel of Thomas Gospel of Philip Boo0 of Thomas the Contender Dialogue of the a"iour Apocryphon of .ames %stO;nd Apocalypse of .ames Apocalypse of Peter Gospel of Mary
The other Gnostic te2ts that we ha"e are heterodo29 or simply unclassifiable in their ma0eup9 neither emanationist9 nor con"incingly Christian9 and are in any case embody a small minority of e2tant manuscript as held up against the abo"e3 The point to be made here is that Gnostic tudies is four times more li0ely to draw upon the @ChristianA tractates $groups G and ' abo"e( as opposed to the @non=ChristianA te2ts $categories % U ;(3 +n addition9 a small core group of the abo"e te2ts generates a preponderance of the discussion while the rest recei"e drastically less attention3 Appendi2 A presents a full demonstration of this dynamic3 To the e2tant Gnostic te2ts we can add the Patristic e"idence on "arious teachers and groups9 in particular *alentinus and Basileides in Ale2andria3 The -ag 4ammadi corpus was buried towards the end of the fourth century and is thus a late=phase collection of "arious te2ts9 containing elements that are far older9 and with only one=quarter or so con"incingly christocentric in their conception9 numerous others demonstrate what has to be seen as no more than Christian glosses3 This is in accord with patristic sourcesE in detailing the ,phite Gnostics $as described by +renaeus(9 <erner 1oerster ends by noting9 @is .esus Christ not here superfluousSA%&3 The ,phite system is rather typical in its depiction of .esusE @As Christ descended into this world9 he first put on his sister ophia9 and they both reDoiced as they refreshed each other3 That is what they designate as bridegroom and brideA3;L 5aren /3 5ing;% concludes that Christ @is superfluousA in the Apocryphon of .ohn $-4C ++9% and +*9%( following 3 Arai3;;9 and 4ans=Martin chen0e;G3 eth @put onA .esus in -he )ospel of the Egyptians $-4C +++ H'3%=G(;'C in -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia the chief female aeon in the wor0 proclaims9 @+ put on .esus3 + brought him forth from the cursed cross and + established him in the dwelling places
%&

<erner 1oerster9 )nosisAA Selection of )nostic te:ts< "ol3 %9 -he 4atristic E%idence $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:;(9 FH3 +renaeus9 Ad%> (aer> + 9 GL3%;3 Trans3 <erner 1oerster9 )nosisAA Selection of )nostic te:ts< "ol3 %9 &;3 5aren /3 5ing9 @ ophia and Christ in the Apocryphon of John9Ain 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 %HF> asagu Arai9 @8ur Christologie des Apo0ryphons des .ohannes9A N-S %J $%&HF=H&(E GL;=%F3 4ans=Martin chen0e9 @The Phenomenon and ignificance of Gnostic ethianism9Ain -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism9 "ol3;9 Sethian )nosticism9 ed3 Bentley /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 JFF=H%H3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +*A Nag (ammadi "odices 000<8 and 0&<89 ed3 Ale2ander BQhlig and 1rederic0 <isse $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J(9 %'H3

;L ;%

;; ;G

;'

-K
of his ParentA $-4C N+++9% J3%;( C Christ as /ogos in the -ripartite -ractate $-4C +9J( is an ob"ious fusion with the traditional *alentinian ophia9 and the function of the /ogos throughout this large te2t is seen to operate on the grand super=cosmic le"el in 0eeping with its philosophical originations;HC finally9 the 4istis Sophia presents a characterisation of .esus that is less de"eloped than Mary9 his most priBed disciple3 More important than this upstaging of roles howe"er9a main feature of the middle groups with Christian glosses is in fact an emphasis upon the cosmogonic with a sparse super=addition of .esus into the pre=e2isting framewor03 The pre= Christian Gnostic wor0 Eugnostos and its redaction into -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist points up the main rhetorical relationship between group one and two in this sense3 The conclusion ad"anced herein is that the Christian influence upon Gnostic thought was at best one of many > on par9 by the time the -ag 4ammadi find was buried9 with the influences of Persian and .ewish thought in many e2amples3 +n the centuries leading up to this terminus ad #uem< the Christian message is more ob"iously contained within a diffracted constellation of apocalyptic .esus sects set amongst a host of deeply arcane and ancient systems currently flourishing in Ale2andria from the first century B3C3)3 to the fourth century C3)33 A far stronger case9 te2tually and socio=historically9 can be made for the religious importance of .esus in )gypt being carried within a Gnostic milieu in these centuries than holds true in re"erse3 )manationist systems were e2pounded and refined for millennia before the first appearance of .esus sects in )gypt9 and there is little or no e"idence that Christian thought was a pre"alent force in )gypt prior to the third and fourth centuriesC indeed9 the "ery notion of @ChristianityA in this era is an ob"ious polemical proposition9 as are the usual facile discussions about @GnosticismA3;: Christianity simply cannot be called a system at all in the first two centuries $there was no orthos do:a which is precisely why the Gnostic temperament readily assimilated certain aspects of it(9 but was li0ely a succession of charismatics arri"ing from the north9 in the usual manner of teachers Dourneying to )gypt to teach and be taught9 many of whom were rather dualistically inclined themsel"es if Paul and .ohn are any indication3 +t is the legitimate tas0 of Christian ,rigins to come to terms with Gnostic influence upon Christian thought9 and theirs is a "alid contribution to Gnostic tudiesC howe"er9 these concerns ha"e been allowed to dominate the field and the result has been a biased "iew of the Gnostic phenomenon9 an optic that
;J ;J

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++E Nag (ammadi "odices M0< M00< M0009 ed3 Charles <3 4edric0 $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&L(9 'G;3 The wit of Celsus9 often dri"en to e2cess9 satirises the Christian conception of Christ as /ogos in this regardE @The Christians put forth this .esus not only as the son of God but as the "ery /ogos > not the pure and holy /ogos 0nown to the philosophers9 mind you9 but a new 0ind of /ogosE a man who managed to get himself arrested and e2ecuted in the most humiliating of circumstancesA9 R3 .oseph 4offmann9 trans39 "elsus< 2n the -rue 9octrineA A 9iscourse Against the "hristians $,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:(9 H'3 The proper question to raise for this time period is the far more per"asi"e influence of a loosely=defined @GnosticA thought upon the self=professed @Christian3A Clement of Ale2andria is particularly instructi"e in his manifestation of Middle Platonic and Gnostic affinities3 ee 3R3C3 /illa9 "lement of Ale:andriaA A Study in "hristian 4latonism and )nosticism $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:%(3 Also <alter Bauer9 2rthodo:y and (eresy in Earliest "hristianity $PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&:%(9 JGE @Thus in )gypt at the beginning of the second century==how long before that we cannot say==there were gentile Christians alongside .ewish Christians9 with both mo"ements resting on syncretistic=gnostic foundations333 <e first catch sight of something li0e Tecclesiastical? Christianity in Demetrius9 the bishop of Ale2andria from %F& to ;G%3 Certainly there had already been orthodo2 belie"ers there prior to that time9 and their community possessed a leader3 But we can see how small their number must ha"e been from the fact that when Demetrius assumed his office he was the only )gyptian Tbishop?3A

;H

;:

-7
peripheralises most of the socio=historical and philosophical=te2tual concerns that the present study shall raise9 and which bases its conclusions by far and large upon a limited @canonA of Gnostic tractates3;F + am not out to define the origins of Gnosticism9 nor shall the term be used herein9 for the simple reason that in my "iew @GnosticismA did not e2ist in the broad sense of the term3;& There are numerous other fabulous creatures in the 4ellenistic thic0et that upon closer inspection change shape9 or e"en cease to e2istC howe"er9 the ism on the Gnostic must ran0 as one of the most misleading3 The o%erall heterodo2y of Gnostic thought is not bounded by any such doctrinal regulation9 proselytising=moti"ated self=definition or other rhetorical agenda resulting from political common coin9 as to ma0e this modern scholarly fi2ation at all useful3 The penchant for orthos do:a< with its concomitant phenomena of canonicity9 ecclesial authority9 and sought=after rapprochement with societal pra:is9 is implicitly repellent to 4ellenistic Gnosis9 a high profile feature of Gnostic thought which embodied a spirit of indi"idual re"olt against traditional "alues>GL The appearance of Gnostic thought in )gypt is to be held up against a historical tapestry of political uphea"als9 more particularly a "isceral resentment against pernicious 1ate and harsh Roman rule3 Abo"e all9 there is a despairing reassessment of Ma?at in the conte2t of )gypt as being no longer embodied in traditional pharaonic rule o"er the Two /ands3 There is a strong foreshadowing from this remo"e of the -ietBschean re"aluation of all "alues with its elitist focus upon a "eritable pneumatic N=ermensch9 if the term can be stripped
;F

Gnostic tudies has been drawn into the essentially theological "orte2 of Christian ,rigins3 /iterally hundreds of scholars are wor0ing on the synthetic @VA model follows in the footsteps of the early orthodo2 propagandist )usebius in attempting to posit a coherent orthodo2y9 an authoritati"e te2tual= historical continuum that can be traced bac0 to the direct teachings of .esus3 The "ast percentage of articles and boo0s on @GnosticismA which ha"e been spawned in this crypto=theological en"ironment9 most of which were found to be of no use at all in the present wor09 seem simply unable to impartially deal with the historical picture which emerges for the first two centuries of our era3 This picture is one of utter ferment and confusion with respect to religious boundaries3 +n appropriating Gnostic te2ts for the abo"e cause9 it is equally unpalatable for these scholars to contemplate Christian thought9 at least in )gypt9 as a subset of a generalised @GnosticA Geltanschauung3 Paul .ohnson?s A (istory of "hristianity $/ondonE Penguin Boo0s9 %&:H( presents a refreshing departure from the narrow tedium of normati"e histories for this time period3 + cannot hope to e2press the situation better than Morton mith9 @The 4istory of the Term Gnosti0os9A in -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism< "ol3 ;9 ethian )nosticism9 :&FA @By our academic prerogati"e9 without considering ancient usage9 we recogniBe certain schools as @gnosticAC hence the ideas held by those schools become @typically gnosticAC hence @gnosticismA will be definedC and the resultant definition of @gnosticismA will pro"e the @gnosticA character of these schools3 ince Plato said @the most perfect of formsA was that most completely circular $-imaeus9 GGb(9 we may describe the research program as Platonically perfectA3 The question of Gnostic thought has been ably treated by quite a number of scholars9 and there is a general consensus that a dualist world="iew forms the core of what + prefer to call the Gnostic temperament3 + intend by this to highlight the larger question of mood which prompts and shapes dualist thought in general9 as much present in the contemporary @gnosticA philosopher )mil Cioran?s wor0 'all into -ime $ChicagoE Vuadrangle Boo0s9 %&:L(< as it is in -he (ypostasis of the Archons3 The consideration of this root temperament leads one to directly e2amine the historical factors that go into shaping it3 +t is my far from no"el premise that the social history which generated the dualist mood in )gypt is an integral facet of )gyptian history and must be treated as such3 +t would be hard to imagine attempting a study of9 say9 Middle 5ingdom theological e2pression9 or eighth century east )uropean /atin te2ts9 with an almost complete a"oidance of socio=historical analysis9 yet in Gnostic tudies this is e2actly the case3

;&

GL

-P
of its -aBi misappropriations3 The 4ellenistic Gnostic stands as the supreme literary re"olutionary who sought not to substitute one form of historical Dustification with another9 but rather endea"oured to o"erthrow the thralls of historical process entirely9 this as a result of an Entweltlichungstenden,9 an estrangement from the world that is to be historically and socially situated3G% <ithin Ale2andria there de"eloped a pluralism of religious speculation rarely seen concentrated upon the world stage in one time and place9 a hothouse of e2otic incubation that owed its allegiance to an e2traordinary heterodo2y forced upon it by historical circumstance +ronically9 much of the resulting dualist mood9 in particular the Gnostic temperament at the core of it9 was anti=historical3 The Romans were undoubtedly sapient from a political point of "iew in attempting to "itiate Ale2andria?s influence through denial of city=council status for centuries on end3 Roman rule9 for dualist thought across the board in the -ear )ast9 was synonymous with the @archonticA > Roman satrapies and prefects were the debased and @hylicA e2ecutors of a demonic 4istorical Rule3 +t was precisely time and place that the Gnostic temperament indicted9 and the ism tagged onto Gnostic thought is therefore a misnomer insofar as the antihistoricism of this genre of mythopoeicOmystical thought precluded any attempt on their part to define themsel"es as a historical mo"ement9 although there are some subsets of Gnostic thought at large that e2ist as e2ceptions as we shall see3 +n light of this it can be said that while some nuances of Gnostic thought were self=consciously sectarian9 the o"erall mo"ement can be more effecti"ely treated as a literary phenomena3G; Apart from the pressing need to establish the socio=historical foundations of Gnostic thought in )gypt9 my tas0 is also to supply the te2tual substructure in earlier phases of )gyptian religious history for the rise of Gnosis in late antiquity3 +n the final analysis howe"er $as it appears in the conclusion(9 + am not intent upon merely engaging in a search for "arious religious motifs that might be superficially matched upC + wish to apply certain modalities of modern literary=critical theory in my approach to the array of ancient te2ts before me once the historical and philosophical analyses are concluded3 The deconstruction of "arious orientalist assumptions which subtend the boundaries of the ,ccident $)dward aid(9 the ficti"e or distorted @author=functionA that a scholarly discourse tends to inflict upon a gi"en te2t $Michel 1oucault(9 the symbolic and metaphorical polarity in language e2isting here as the equi"alent of Gnostic pleromic and demiurgic ontologies $Paul de Man(9 the @non=philosophyA of the )gyptians and the Gnostics operating in an antithetical fashion as a @poetic metaphysicsA $4arold Bloom(9 the Gnostic de"aluation of any stated @realA obDecti"ised historical Sit, as anticipating modern phenomenology $)dmund 4usserl(9 a concern with a social hegemony at wor0 in discourse that bids us 0eep the politicalOse2ual @heatA of the historical moti%e ali"e in te2tual e2egesis $Antonio Gramsci(9 the possibility of translation from one te2tual=setting to another $George teiner(9 and finally /iterature?s larger concern with radical e"il $Georges Bataille(9 all of these @modernA concerns can and should be ta0en to Gnostic te2ts3 +ndeed9 the e2istence of the 0eptical schools in Ale2andria at the time9 and the implicitly Gnostic @deconstructionistA approach to the <ord9 fairly compel us to not only return full=circle with respect to our own modern hermeneutic agenda9 but to more fully ac0nowledge the te2ts from
G%

4ans .onas sees this as the main feature of Gnostic thought3 ee +oan P3 Couliano9 from his inter"iew with .onas9 in )nosticismo e pensiero modernoA (ans Jonas $RomeE /Prma di Bretschneider9 %&FJ(9 %'H3 A point made by 1rederic0 <isse9 @The !se of )arly Christian /iterature as )"idence for +nner Di"ersity and Conflict9A in Nag (ammadi< )nosticism< and Early "hristianity9 ed3 Charles <3 4endric0 and Robert 4odgson .r $MassachusettsE 4endric0son Publishers +nc39 %&FH(9 %FF3 <isse also notes the spuriousness of orthodo2 and heretical di"isions prior to ;LL C3)33

G;

-,
the time period and place in which @hermeneuticsA first surfaced3 This literary=critical optic forms the natural end=point of this study although + am of necessity unable to gi"e this "ast underta0ing anywhere near its full due3 +ndeed9 the o"erall scope + ha"e set for myself might be considered e2cessi"ely broad were it not for the fact that the system of mo"ements before us all e2tend out from a central historical and mythological a2is3 The @historicalA + spea0 of here is more specifically e2istential and arises9 quite simply9 from the human e2perience of e"il in historical processesC the mythological refers to all te2ts that detail an emanationist structure underlying their di"ine pantheon or philosophical metaphysic3 +n this discussion + am enfranchising the much=maligned notion of the @mythologicalA to connote ideas of philosophical and theological consequence and merit3 +n dealing with the Gnostics and the Manichaeans in )gypt + am mainly concerned with the presence of an autochthonic )gyptian te2tuality9 as well as a social history to support itC the bac0drop of the Gnostic and Manichaean mo"ement at large will only be peripherally e2amined3 /i0ewise9 Middle Platonic and 4ermetic thought are culled for )gyptian and specifically dualist content3 The Gnostic mo"ement is the main focus here and it is within the boundaries of their emanationist theogonies that + propose to establish )gyptian precursors3 1inally9 the 2riental bac0drop against which an identifiably Gree0 mode of ratiocination operated must be e2amined9 for amongst an array of ancient ci"ilisations9 the Babylonian9 Persian9 yrian9 .ewish9 and )gyptian9 all is pertinent9 but pride of place must go to )gypt3 The )gyptian influence upon Gree0 thought9 commenced with the importation of Gree0 mercenaries by Psammetichus + $HH'=%L B3C3)3( who allowed Gree0 settlements and set up a scribal school9GG reaching its high point in Ptolemaic Ale2andria in the last centuries before our era when the )gyptianisation of the Gree0 settlers was proceeding apaceG' As well9 we are able to trace the clear precursors of Gnostic and Middle Platonic thought in this locus as in no other3 Gree09 Coptic9 and Demotic magical papyri all e2hibit a wide=spread shift in mood towards dualistic cosmologies Dust prior to and during the earliest stages of Roman rule in )gypt3 Towards the beginning of this period $;LL B3C3)3 to 'LL C3)3( Coptic was de"eloped in the rough9 li0ely for business documentation as well as the translation of religious te2ts by a bilingual Graeco= )gyptian literati3 The philosophical and historical thesis + ad"ance is that the root emanationist metaphysic found in a large number of 4ellenistic e2plorations of Gnosis can be traced far bac0 to the )gyptian Memphite9 4ermopolitan9 and 4eliopolitan theologies which supply the earliest e2amples of this particular world"iew3 The emanationist "iew in turn finds its e2pression between two poles > the dualist and the monist3 This di"ision9 of course9 is not always a neat one as + shall demonstrate3 4owe"er we may note at the outset that the monist idealism of toicism places it far to the right of this spectrum9 whereas the radically dualist Manichaean system is about as far @leftA as one can go > off the scale in fact3 )gyptian Gnostic thought9 representing "arious shades of mitigated dualisms is more towards the centre between the two e2tremesC 4ermeticism and the Chaldean system9 along with the thought of Philo of Ale2andria and the Platonists9 peusippus9 Nenocrates9 4arpocration9 Atticus9 Plutarch9 Ammonius9 and -umenius for that matter9 are all left of centre > that is9 distinctly dualistic > whereas other modes "erge to the right9 ne"er more strongly than when -eoplatonism finally attempted to define itself as being anti=Gnostic under Plotinus3 A note on the terminologies used in this study3 @CosmologyA is not used here in the modern philosophical sense to designate a branch of metaphysics9 but rather that of a descripti"e
GG G'

.ohn Boardman9 -he )reeks 2%erseas $4armondsworth9 )nglandE Penguin Boo0s(9 %G%3

ee -aphtali /ewis9 )reeks in 4tolemaic Egypt "ase Studies in the Social (istory of the (ellenistic Gorld $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&FH(3

.5
model of the uni"erse3 @GnosticA shall be capitalised to indicate a formal quality or affiliation with 0nown Gnostic sectsC @gnosticA indicates a general tendency considered apart from the historical phenomena of Gnostic thoughtC @GnosisA indicates the doctrinal $for the more religionistic sects( and historical attributes of this special 0nowledgeC @gnosisO refers to the specific idealised synchronic e2perience9 or to a specific te2tual reference in Coptic or Gree03 1inally9 @philosophyA is used on par with mythology in the conte2t of this time period3 The more formalised and self=conscious occidental modalities of Philosophy9 proper9 shall be referred to as Gree0 Philosophy9 Modern Philosophy9 or simply Philosophy3 + begin this study9 then9 by discussing that which holds all emanationist systems in common9 and in drawing out and defining the implicitly dualist thrust of all such speculations3

.+
art !! , Historical 1anifestations of Emanationist and 'ualist Thought in Egypt )hapter Two* Emanationist Theologies and roto,dualism in Egypt

)gyptology has gone through many changes in the last one=hundred years or so in its appreciation of )gyptian conceptions of the di"ine3 The modern definitions of monotheism9 henotheism9 pantheism and polytheism9 ha"e shaped long debates as to the essential nature of )gyptian religion3 ,f course the same hermeneutic is at wor0 in defining 4induism9 for e2ample9 where the abstract and remote monotheistic nature of Brahman is appreciated by ans0rit scholars and 4indu theologians rather more than it is for the layperson practising an ostensible @polytheismA3 <e may li0ewise presume that abstruse theological issues9 as we percei"e them in )gyptian thought9 were more the concern of a temple elite than the layperson9 or at the "ery least that this elite comprised the main formulators of )gyptian cosmology3GJ Certainly the number of people who were literate at any gi"en phase in )gypt?s history was relati"ely small3GH +n treating the written records of this elite we ha"e a most essential problem in defining ntr as @godA which9 for the )gyptians9 simply meant @whiche"er god you wishA3G: A neo=monotheist interpretation might be deri"ed from the fact that this @god=nessA is used by the )gyptians as a common denominator upon which "arious di"ine entities subsist9 howe"er the o"er=riding )gyptian emphasis upon the genealogy of their gods simply cannot allow for )gyptian religion to be interpreted as monotheistic in the modern occidental sense3GF There is9 then9 the fundamental question of a theogony9 or genealogy of the gods9 which can be traced bac0 through e"er diminishing numbers of di"ine personages to a ource that is itself only ambiguously singular3 At the outset we can note in passing that the )gyptian Gnostic of ;LL C3)39 li0ewise a member of a literate elite9 was both @neo=monotheisticA and @neo=polytheisticA9 when pressed9 as much as was an )gyptian priest of Amun some ;LLL years earlier3 1or both9 the conception of a Primal ource9 in itself necessary and good9 still required a principle of Disorder or per"ersity in its "ery depths9 and both de"eloped an acute emphasis upon a plurality of di"ine personages which functioned between a temporal and spatial ource9 and the created world3 Both are in fact proponents of the same emanationist framewor09 although in entirely different circumstances3G&
GJ

Gertie )nglund9 @God as a 1rame of Reference9A in -he $eligion of the Ancient EgyptiansA "ogniti%e Structures and 4opular E:presssions< ed3 Gertie )nglund $!ppsalaE Acta !ni"ersitatis !psaliensis9 %&F&(9 FE @The thoughts that emanated from the temples and the temple schools were all=embracing and e2plicating3 They constituted a systematic thin0ing and this system of thought was normati"e3 Those thoughts represented the )gyptian way of thin0ing3 Actually it represented the thin0ing of the elite and it is still an open question to what e2tent it permeated the entire society3A ee .ohn Baines and C3.3)yre9 @1our notes on literacy9A )+ H% $%&FG(E HJ=&H3 The authors estimate that %W of the population at any gi"en time was able to read and that the nature of this literacy was multi=le"eled3 )ri0 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od in Ancient EgyptA -he 2ne and the +any9 trans3 .ohn Baines $%&:%C reprint9 +thaca9 -IE Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&F;(9 J&3 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od in Ancient Egypt9 JGE @,ne must note that )gyptian religion9 which retained its plurality of gods to the end9 ne"er became a monotheistic faith9 e"en in its most Tphilosophically? tinged utterances3A Three Gnostic tractates name the highest diety in their theogony as @The 4idden ,neA9 and so the identification with Amun is li0ely9 although Atum shared in apophatic epithets as well3 ee -he -hree

GH

G:

GF

G&

.2
Besides the philosophical architectonics of emanationism which can be drawn from both groups of theological thin0ers9 there is the underlying social esotericism of these quintessentially literate endea"ours3'L + define emanationism as follows3 +t is essentially based upon one insightE although there is a complete Monad9 ource9 Parent9 Primal <aters9 or ,ne at the centre of all reality9 and although it is ine2pressibly perfect in e"ery sense9 still there arose the need for differentiation3 This streaming forth9 @e2tensionA9 hypostasising9 procreation9 or emanation through the sheer power of Thought9 <ord9 Generation9 or +ntellect9 in the ource9 resulted in the appearance of "arious lesser entities9 natures9 or le"els of metaphysical reality culminating in the natural world3 These are referred to as specific natures in the more philosophical systems $e3g3 nous< logos< dynamis etc3( and their numbers are limited by the ancient )gyptian emphasis upon ogdoads and enneads9 and later Pythagorean number=systems as a ruleC as more personalised entities they appear in the so=called @mythologicalA systems $e3g3 Atum9 Ma?at9 +sis9 ophia9 Barbelo9 eth9 Anthropos etc3( wherein the @aeonsA or @syBygiesA are more numerous9 their dramatis persona ta0ing on a se2ualised role3 The emphasis then is upon the need for theogonic process9 for differentiation arising out of the !ndifferentiated3 This need9 put simply9 is one of distancing3 The idealism of the Perfect ,ne is percei"ed to be at a certain remo"e from this world which in some sense must be lower or inferior than the perfect tate of Being represented in the Primal ource3 '% 1urther9 the dysteliological phenomena in human life > war9 famine9 plague9 disease etc3 > these bid the emanationist e"entually consider the reality of e"il and incorporate some theory for its e2istence into the distancing process of the theogony3 4uman0ind9 then9 is afflicted by e"il because it is at a certain remo"e from the ource9 either spatially or spiritually $a @1allA theory(9 to which it must ultimately return if it is to regain its pristine spiritual state of being3 +n "arious measures9 life in the flesh is regarded as a lower le"el of incarnation which must be ele"ated onto the higher le"el of spiritual being3 ,f course the )gyptians belie"ed that the physical body could attain this9 as well as the soulC it was only in the final phases of )gypt?s autochthonic e2pression that this was changed9 and it was felt that the body must be cast off on the road to sal"ation3 )manationist thought is imbued with two seemingly incompatible tensions9 the dualist and the monist3 The monist is in a difficult position here9 for all the @slings and arrows of outrageous fortuneA must be reconciled with a Perfect <ill which9 while somewhat diminished in this lower realm9 is still ine2plicably all=powerful and is @as it should beA3 +n the ancient )gyptian "iew9 the goddess Ma?at manifests this principle of correct order in the cosmos and pharaonic rule was seen to be the e2ecutor of Ma?at3 The inconsistency of a perfect ource and imperfect world9 of @othernessA9 to adopt Rudolf ,tto?s e2pression9 and the natural world9 was ne"er reconciled in the thought of Plotinus9 a most "igorous and systematic proponent of this "iew3 This is certainly an indication > for he was a most able philosopher and thin0er in his time
Steles of Seth $-4C *++9J(9 ;ostrianos $-4C *+++9%(9 and Allogenes $-4C N+9G(3
'L

+n this sense9 we may see the Gnostic "iew of the @hylicA lumpenmensch as being of a piece with the traditional e2clusi"ism of the )gyptian priesthood3 A3A3 Barb @Mystery9 Myth9 and Magic9A%J;E @)gyptian cult and ritual as a whole was fundamentally esoteric9 the pri"ilege of a hereditary priesthood which was only too an2ious to a"oid profanation by the uneducated and illiterate masses3A 4ans .onas9 @Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon9A in Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA"ollo#uio di +essina< &GE @<hate"er the beginning9 whether one9 two9 or three Troots?9 the crisis history of original being issues into a di"ided state of things3 <ith the Tcosmos?9 reality is clearly polariBedC the towering9 many=storied structure of the spheres and aeons images the width of the rift between the poles9 its "ery multiplicity ser"es to e2press the separati"e power of the antidi"ine and thus9 for the earthbound "iew9 the remoteness from God3A

'%

.4
> that emanationism implicitly "erges on dualism3 Plotinus9 himself a Graeco=)gyptian protPgP of the Persian dualist=influenced philosopher Ammonius accas in his earlier days in )gypt9 and who had many Gnostics appearing in his classes9 represents the classic )gyptian struggle with this ancient problemC his was an attempt to re=establish an idealised )gyptian emanationism9 one free from the dar0ness that occluded it in the centuries of subDugation in the /ate Period3 Plutarch9 -umenius9 *alentinus9 Basileides9 Carpocrates9 Plotinus9 and the 4ermeticists9 all on a direct philosophical traDectory traceable to the earliest 4eliopolitan priesthoods9 were essentially wor0ing on the same theological problems9 and approaching them with the emanationist theogony and "arious dualisms9 e2plicit or implicit9 as @gi"ensA3'G 1or the dualist9 the patent impracticality of monist idealism requires a definition of a more radicalised e"il that accords it an autonomous life of its own9 possible precisely because of the established distance from the ource3 This distance often mo"es this realm into the "icinity of Chaos9 Dis=,rder9 the Depths9 or the Abyss9 a common feature in all systems which li0ewise deri"e from the ancient )gyptian concept of the Prime"al Creator effecting his own creation out of the undifferentiated waters of -un with which Creation remains fore"er bounded3 The creator=god Atum can be seen as the creati"e power of -un9'' howe"er this generates a duality in -un for he is fore"er to be associated with chaos and disorder as well as being the @father of all the godsA9 the hypostasiser of Atum for e2ample3 The distance in the theogonic process9 as it has now become9 in"ol"es the new question of /imit9 another implicit )gyptian concept > that which is beyond redemption by "irtue of the fact that e"il operates at too great a "itality to be assimilated and which must be thus delimited and cast out3 The daily struggle with the serpent Apep9 the autonomous force of e"il in -un9 depicts the need for this limit3 +n the /ate Period the struggle with eth more acutely depicts the need to maintain this boundary against e"ilC @Boo0s and pells against the God ethA describes eth as ha"ing @de"ised e"il before he came forth from the womb9 he who caused strife before he came into beingA3'J 1rom the earliest times9 eth was associated with the desert9 a "ast Bone of death beyond the limits of the @blac0 landA3 +n the /ate Period eth?s final e2pulsion is into Asia from whence he returns to brea0 into )gypt wrea0ing ha"oc9 illustrates the culmination of this trend in )gyptian religious thought9 one immediately prior to the rise of dualist thought in )gypt3 The ethian threat underlay the need for @The Ritual for the ,"erthrow of eth and his ConfederatesA9 a te2t dated to the reign of
'; ';

<ith regards to the two Plotinian concepts of the soul?s descent into an @inferiorA world9 and the rather toic praise gi"en to the e2cellence of the cosmos9 .3M3 Rist ma0es the following obser"ationE @The two positions may be incompatible9 the result of conflicting pressures which Plotinus was ne"er able to resol"e9A 4lotinusA-he $oad to $eality $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&H:(9 %%;3 3 3 .ensen9 9ualism and 9emonologyA the 'unction of 9emonology in 4ythagorean and 4latonic -hought $CopenhagenE Mun0sgaard9 %&HH(9 %G9 gi"es a pedantic discussion of dualism in Gree0 thought9 replete with such o"er=rationalised conceptions as @pure reasonA9 @purely intellectual moti"esA9 @the psychological bac0ground of the mechanism of predispositionA9 and whose "iew of the ancient world apparently drops off entirely before JLL BC)9 as the first=line in his boo0 indicatesE @The doctrine of demons as mediators between God and man seems to originate about JLL B3C3 in the Pythagorean school3A ,ne must suppose that he has not heard of the Boo0 of the Dead9 or the Coffin Te2tsE e"en if one is to argue their status as formal @mediatorsA9 there is no escaping the intermediary realm of demons in the )gyptian afterlife9 or their functions which are seen to be critical in the soul?s attempts to reach the di"ine3 ee Dimitri Mee0s9 @GPnies9 Anges9 DPmons en 7gypte9A in )nies< Anges et 9mons9 ources ,rientales *+++ $ParisE 7ditions du euil9 %&:%(3 Brigitte AltenmXller9 Syncretismus in den Sargte:ten $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&:J(9 F&3 iegfried chott9 B/cher und Spr/che gegen den )ott Seth> Irkunden des aegyptischen Alterums> Irkunden +ythologischen 0nhalts 0< 4eft + $/eipBig9 %&;&(9 &3

'G

'' 'J

.-ectanebo +9 a rite which was performed daily in the ,siris temple at Abydos3 4owe"er9 all emanationist systems agree upon the necessity for the theogony3 <hether or not the resulting world is to be regarded as e"il in itself9 or simply fore"er threatened by e"il9 the soteriological tas0 is the sameE to affirm the /ight of the ource in this realm9 and to go about returning to it after death9 possibly redeeming the world9 or part of it9 in the process3 +n contradistinction to this9 Manichaeism as such is an emanationist system of a radically different order9 for it posits two eternal pre=e2istent realms of Good and )"il that do not intersect3 )manation proceeds out of these two geographical and spiritual antitheses9 and there is no necessity for an intersection3 )"il has no possible genesis within the Good which is effecti"ely the central emanationist position3 This last point clearly defines the difference between a radical and a mitigated dualist system3 <hereas one might say that the guiding Manichaean ma2im is @ne?re the twain shall meetA9 the focus in )gyptian emanationist thought is upon the theogony9 upon the dialectical process of differentiation3': <e are of necessity e2amining mythological conceptions of philosophical consequence and it is no longer appropriate to regard )gyptian @mythA as lac0ing in philosophical merit9 or of historiographical "alue for that matter9 although the te2ts we are to e2amine were of course not generated with either of these formal aims in mind3 The battle to ha"e )gyptian thought appreciated philosophically has been fought and won within )gyptology proper9 but it still bears re=emphasising3 @Myth became Tmyth? only when philosophy had arri"edA as .3 Mansfeld puts it'F9 and the philosophical consequences of myth are fore"er being pulled out in hindsight9 as with the famous philosophical redisco"ery of Gnostic thought by 4ans .onas9 following the religionsgeschichtliche Schule of the great nineteenth century German philologists9 although chopenhauer?s redisco"ery of +ndian philosophy is perhaps the best precedent to note3 This process is currently in mid=stride within )gyptology3'& )ri0 4ornung draws upon the %&th
'H 'H

Donald B3 Redford9 4haraonic .ing@Lists< Annals and 9ay@Books $MississaugaE Benben Publications9 %&FH(9 ;:&3 .an Assmann9 ;eit und Ewigket im alten Hgypten $4eidelbergE Carl <inter !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&:J(9 G%E @ ome dualist thought appears to establish its other=worldliness as a category of Chaos9 )"il and -on=being9 an unreconcilable opposite of Being9 while in more monistically deri"ed conceptions they appear as the transcendent Irgrund of Being9 as a constituent world=principle9 one that the principle of plurality is dialectically attached to>A The o"erall tendency as Assmann maintains9 and as + maintain here9 is towards the latter3 This is not to concede that )gyptian thought is @monisticAC rather9 what bears emphasising is that it is not radically dualistic9 a de"elopment consonant with later )gyptian Gnostic thought3 .3 Mansfield3 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeE A TGnostic? Motif from Parmenides and )mpedocles to /ucretius and Philo9A in Studies in )nosticisn and (ellenistic $eligions< ed3 R3 "an den Broe0 and M3.3 *ermaseren $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 ;H;3 <riting two decades ago9 .3 Gwyn Griffiths illustrates the tendency to compare the two in terms of results9 in this case the li0elihood that the Presocratic Thales based his philosophy upon the ancient )gyptian mythological figure of -un9 @deri"ing it from mythology9 he applied it in a sense which pioneered a philosophical9 as opposed to a mythological point of "iew9A from 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride $CardiffE !ni"ersity of <ales Press9 %&:L(< ';F3 This said9 the assumption that real philosophy is essentially about modes of argumentation is simply wrong9 e"en if this is in fact standard fare in Philosophy departments these days > Philosophy is about insight3 As a recent study on chopenhauer obser"esE @+t cannot be the case that what is most important about what a philosopher has to con"ey to us is introduced by his arguments9 unless his problems are primarily technical ones of logicE it must already lie in the insights9 Dudgements9 perceptions9 points of "iew9 choices9 formulations and so on that stoc0 his premisses3A Bryan Magee9 -he 4hilosophy of Schopenhauer $%&FGC reprint9 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:(9 G&3 That Philosophy and Mythology often proceed and concern themsel"es

':

'F

'&

..
century German philosopher 13<3 chelling at the beginning of his wor09 "onceptions of )od in Ancient EgyptA -he 2ne and the +any3JL 1rom chelling?s 0ntroduction to the 4hilosophy of +yth9 4ornung quotes the following passageE @they Ythe )gyptian godsZ cannot be dismissed with a simple pronouncement of distasteC detestable or not9 they e2ist9 and since they e2ist they must be e2plainedA3J% The ob"ious significance of this passage quite simply is that chelling9 as a philosopher9 too0 )gyptian thought quite seriously9 and 4ornung uses this as an o"erture to his study3J; iegfried MorenB establishes an essential point with respect to )gyptian philosophyE /et us note the remar0able lin0 between two relati"e adDecti"esE @that which is YandZ that which is not $intt wtt(A3 This means @e"erythingA and ta0es account formally of what does not e2ist in a way which would do credit to Gree0 philosophy3 But the )gyptians did more than supply the linguistic prerequisites for philosophical thin0ingC we also encounter genuine philosophical modes of reasoning and posing problems3JG This is one of the stronger statements to be found among )gyptologists concerning the philosophical status of )gyptian thought and is an apposite point with which to mention a number of inherent dualisms in )gyptian thought3J' The separation of 4orus and eth9 delimiting hea"en and earth $and foreshadowing the Gnostic function of 4orus > /imit > and demiurgic "icissitudes beyond the Pleroma as we shall later seeJJ(9 earth and underworld9 and most stri0ingly in the blac0 and the red9 the essential dualism of the long=standing )gyptian world="iewE /oo0ing across the -ile9 for most of its length they Ythe ancient )gyptiansZ could see the boundaries of their world in the rich red=brown mud that was deposited each year3 Beyond this narrow fertile belt was tawny desert9 mostly sterile9 inhospitable and dangerous3 The di"ision between culti"ation and wilderness9 fecundity and barrenness9 life and death9
with the same insights need hardly be argued3
JL J%

4ornung9 "onceptions of )od in Ancient EgyptA -he 2ne and the +any< %H=%:3

13<3.3 chelling9 Einleitung in die 4hilosophie der +ythology< 8weite Abtheilung + $%FJHC reprint9 Darmstadt %&J:(9 ;'3 chelling was reacting to a line of Goethe?s in which he spo0e of @e2tolling dog= headed godsA3 4ornung?s mention of chelling is not at all surprising for his later philosophy drew upon the writings of .a0ob Boehme whose mystical writings were an ob"ious influence upon chelling3 ee 13<3 chelling9 4hilosophical En#uiries into the Nature of (uman 'reedom9 trans3 .ames Gutman $%FL&C reprint9 /a alle9 +/E Columbia !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH(3 +t is also interesting to consider that Boehme was ad"ancing a quintessentially gnostic concern with the genesis of e"il9 and that his thought is highly reminiscent of Basileides of Ale2andria $ca3 %G; C)( who9 in turn9 espoused a system which shows numerous deri"ations from the Memphite theology as we shall later e2amine3 iegfried MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion9 trans3 Ann )3 5eep $%&HLC reprint9 /ondonE Methuen U Co /td9 %&:G(9 %L3 ee also )ri0 +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine $CopenhagenE Museum Tusculanum Press9 %&F'(9 %: and passim3 A point anticipated by .3Gwyn Griffiths9 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride< HLE @it is the elder 4orus that is originally implicated in the struggle against eth=Typhon3333 The elder 4orus as the picture and "ision of the world to come $J'9 G:Gc( is perhaps a Gnostic feature3A

J;

JG

J'

JJ

.K
good and e"il9 was therefore clear and complete9 and ga"e the )gyptian his characteristic awareness of the essential duality of his uni"erse3JH )gyptian thought9 which was much preoccupied with death and the soul?s Dourney thereafter9 focused upon hea"en and the realm of the dead9 the latter being a sort of archetypal @twilight BoneA lin0ed with chthonian deities9 geographically associated with the necropolises located along the edge of the western desertJ:9 but also with the prime"al ocean -un which e2tends under the dis0 of the earth3JF The Middle 5ingdom Coffin Te2ts at times amount to a guide for the dead in the netherworld9 delimiting paths and supplying passwords for the inimical forces that are to be encountered3 This9 too9 was a later Gnostic and Chaldean preoccupation3 +n the -ew 5ingdom the @/i"resA depict a subterranean realm of the dead in which the sun tra"erses twel"e di"isions from west to east $representing the hours of the night( abo"e an underworld ri"er3 +n both Middle and -ew 5ingdom te2ts there are gates guarded by serpents ,ld 5ingdom te2ts demonstrate the )gyptian desire to free themsel"es after death from the gods of the earth $Ckr>wL9 Geb9 and e"en the word tC $lit3 @earthA or @groundA( is used as the inhibitor of supernal flight3 The hostile actions of demons are to be found in all descriptions of the )gyptian underworld and it is this feature that supplies us a clear lead in de"eloping the precursors of Gnostic thought in ancient )gyptian cosmologies3 As such we shall return to the subDect of )gyptian demonology at the end of this chapter3 Another important feature9 later reflected in Gnostic thought9 is total destruction through fire of the dead whose crimes are Dudged to be beyond redemption3 The Am Duat depicts the enemies of Chepri being burned by nine serpents3 The )gyptian concern was with total elimination of unredeemable elements9 precisely the same soteriological end=game de"eloped in Manichaeism3 The immortal powers of e"il9 in the )gyptian "iew9 are confined to the e2treme cosmogonic depths where they fulfil their function of bounding and re"i"ifying ,rder3J& A distinction between physical death and spiritual death in Gnostic thought can also be seen to ha"e its )gyptian roots3 Papyrus mith9 a %:th century BC) medical te2t9 its original conception perhaps dating bac0 to the early ,ld 5ingdom9 shows that physical affliction and death was not simply "iewed as resulting from bodily decay9 but was attributable to demoniac or pneumatic influence3 As for Tsomething entering from the outside9? it means the breath of an outside god or death9 and not the introduction of something which his $own( flesh has produced3HL 1or all Gnostics9 radical or mitigated9 the world represents a tyrannical power=system9 a "irtual prison within which the pneuma or spirit of Anthropos has been incarcerated3 et against
JH J: JF

Cyril Aldred9 -he Egyptians9 re"3 ed3 $/ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&F'(9 :%3 MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion9 ;L:3

.an 8andee9 9eath As An EnemyE According to Ancient Egyptian "onceptions $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HL(9 &'3 )ri0 4ornung9 @The Disco"ery of the !nconscious in Ancient )gypt9A in SpringA an Annual of Archetypal 4sychology and Jungian -hought9 %H=;: $Dallas9 TNE pring Publications9 %&FH(9 ;'E @They Ythe powers of e"ilZ ha"e a place in the underworldC and this ma0es sense because confrontation with the powers of destruction and disintegration9 with the disorganiBed chaos before creation9 and with the threat of total destruction belongs with regeneration3A 4apyrus Edwin Smith9 trans3 .ohn A3 <ilson9 -he "ulture of Ancient Egypt $ChicagoE Chicago !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&J%(9 J:=JF3

J&

HL

.7
this much polarised /ate=Period struggle of good "s3 e"il9 the )gyptian=Gnostic attitude towards death can be seen to embody the traditional )gyptian "iew of death as an e2istential tripwire beyond which hostile powers lur0ed3 The sharp di"ision between fertilised land and desert had cosmogonic repercussions in the )gyptian psyche one might say9 and the )gyptian ideal of ,rder always had edgy undertones as a result of this fear of immanent Disorder3H% The implicit monism of the )gyptian pharaonicOCreator ideal was ne"er able to o"ercome this essential dualism in outloo09 one which resulted from the )gyptian "iew of death as the enemy of life3H; The anti=Gnostic early Church polemicist +renaeus $floruit %FJ C)( informs us that certain Gnostic groups attempted to redeem people at the point of death through a christening= process accompanied by the recital of in"ocations which included lists of sacred names3 The dying person is also instructed with certain passwords which will enable him or her to ascend past the barriers of the archons3HG These details are of course quintessentially )gyptian9 as found towards the end of the aite period in particular9 when the Boo0 of the Dead $literally the Boo0 of Going 1orth By Day( was regularised9 and an increasing number of magical incantations used against di"ine Dudgement appear3 PGM +*9 the @Mithras /iturgyA9 a magical te2t with pronounced )gyptian influences9 depicts the ascent into hea"en by the see0er of Gnosis9 this accomplished through the use of proper passwords9 %oces magicae9 and appeals to "arious di"inities3 All of this is quite traditional in an )gyptian conte2t9 howe"er the ecstatic condition depicted in association with this Dourney through the hea"ens was earlier foreign to )gyptian religionH'9 as was the Gnostic "iew of casting off the body9 li0e a chrysalis9 to let the entrapped pneuma ascend to its rightful place in the airy regions3 The ancient )gyptian theologian had a far more positi"e "iew of life in the flesh in cosmogonic terms9 hence the desire to preser"e one?s physical form in the afterlife3 These more practical "iews of Gnosis are to be contrasted with more sophisticated forms in which gnosis is seen to be an inner attainment9 in itself assuring one?s place in the Pleroma after death3 This 0nowledge9 according to "arious Gnostic tractates9 imparts an immediate "ision and certainty regarding the holistic necessity for life and death on earth9 and no sacraments or passwords are required3 4owe"er9 this too has its roots in )gyptian soteriology9 for )gyptian theology differentiates between @the man of 0nowledgeA $rhw( and the ignorant $ihmw(C as well9 the Memphite Theology depicts the creator dispensing @life to the righteous and death to the transgressorA in spiritual terms as opposed to the merely physical3 <e are witness to a split which later shows up in Gnostic thought between Archaic and 4ellenistic Gnosis $discussed in Chapter F(3 The archaic )gyptian soteriology places its emphasis upon reference to sacred te2t9 to procedure9 and e2ternal propitiation3 !nder the sway of a host of theologians with Gree0 philosophical educations9 a more sophisticated form of Gnosis saw sal"ation dependent upon inner resources9 upon 0nowing9 and upon being recognised as pneumatic3 Both theological propensities are inherently elitist and this essential characteristic is at the heart of the socio= historic model which shall be de"eloped herein3
H%

ee GXnther Roeder9 @5osmogonische *orstellungen in 6gypten > Die 5osmogonie "on 4ermopolis9A Egyptian $eligion % $%&GG(9 ;3 8andee9 9eath as an Enemy9 %E @<ithout death no "ictory o"er death3 Death becomes the foundation of eternal life9 life in its potential form 333 this monistic conception stands in contrast with a dualistic one9 in which death is considered the enemy of life3 This dualistic "iew is the primary one9 sprung from the natural fear of death in man0ind3A +renaeus9 Ad%> (aer +9 ;%3J3 5M0osy9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion9A ;'G3

H;

HG H'

.P
The outer sweep of the )gyptian ostensibly polytheistic mlange belays a relati"ely stable contemplati"e centre based in large measure upon the socio=historic phenomena of "arious classes of priests unremittingly associated with the political power=centres of )gypt3 These strata were to sustain themsel"es for millennia9 from ,ld 5ingdom into Roman times3 Ta0en in its entirety9 these @formulators of the CreedA e"inced a distinctly philosophical attitude e"en while largely neglecting to attain a certain rigour and consistency in their e2pression as Dudged by our own analytic predilections3HJ The process by which )gyptian creation=models were originally concei"ed9 maintained9 and altered9 fuses both philosophical and theological endea"ours against an historical bac0dropC one might say that this s0yward=reaching architectonic of the mind roots itself in the social9 religious9 political9 geographical9 and essentially rhetorical9 soil of the times3 Abo"e all9 the constant threat of disorder to the )gyptian world bounded and subtended their profound appreciation of Ma?at3 +n the reign of enwosret ++ $c> %&LH=%FF: B3C3)3( for e2ample9 5he0heperre=sonbu wrote about his own profound sense of the moral unworthiness of human society9 of afflictions and calamities3 + am meditating on the things that ha"e happened9 the e"ents that ha"e occurred in the land3 Transformations go on9 it is not li0e last year9 one year is more burdensome than the ne2t3333 Righteousness is cast out9 iniquity is in the midst of the council=hall3 The plans of the gods are "iolated9 their dispositions are disregarded3333 Calamities come in today9 tomorrow afflictions are not past3 All men are silent concerning it9 although the whole land is in great disturbance3 -obody is free from e"il3HH The brea0=up of the 1irst +ntermediate Period in"ol"ed a recognition amongst the )gyptians of its internal causes9 most particularly of the reality of e"il within human beings themsel"es3H: This process of drawing out the implicitly dualistic in )gyptian thought can be seen to progress from this traumatic period3 By the -ew 5ingdom we are witness to a split between human0ind and the di"ine as can be seen in the myth of the Celestial Cow3 +n this myth9 the power of the ageing Re is waning and human0ind re"oltsC the result is the destruction of much of human0ind and the god?s retreat to a higher realm3HF The Memphite Theology demonstrates that the )gyptians did not ha"e a strictly materialistic "iew of the cosmos9 but rather saw a split between the psychic and intellectualOspiritual on the one hand9 and the physical on the other3 Ptah brings the gods into e2istence9 then he brings forth the towns9 temples9 and sanctuaries9 whereupon the gods descend into inanimate nature9 @ta0ing bodyA in all trees9 stones9 claysE thus they came into e2istence 3H& As well9 +amblichus confirms this positioning of intelligence9 a priori9 abo"e
HJ

.3P3 Allen9 )enesis in EgyptA -he 4hilosophy of Ancient Egyptian "reation Accounts $-ew 4a"enE Iale !ni"ersity9 %&FF(9 i2E @<e ha"e di"orced philosophy9 as a discipline9 from religion3 +n the former we appreciate reality o=3ecti%ely9 as something capable of studyC in the latter we understand it su=3ecti%ely9 as something that can only be e2perienced3 This dichotomy did not go"ern -ear )astern thought3A BM JH'J9 trans3 by .ames 43 Breasted9 9e%elopment of $eligion and -hought in Ancient Egypt $%&%;C reprint9 PhiladelphiaE !ni"ersity of Pennsyl"ania Press9 %&:;(9 ;LL=;L%3 4ornung9 @The Disco"ery of the !nconscious in Ancient )gypt9A %:E @This new insight into the negati"e traits of human character which can no longer be suppressd is frightening3A ee )rich 4ornung9 9er Hgyptische +ythos %on der (immelskuh $1reibergE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&F;(3 4ieroglyphic transcription from .ames 4enry Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest9A ;HS G& $%&L;(E plate ++9 column J&3

HH

H:

HF H&

.,
nature3 This forms a compelling lin0 between )gyptian thought and the 4ermetic doctrine of the celestial inspiration of matter3:% This split between the two realms is emphasised in the special nature of human0ind?s relationship to the gods9 e2pressed in the 0nstruction to +erikare<
:L

Pro"ide for men9 the cattle of God for he made hea"en and earth at their desire 4e suppressed the greed of the waters he ga"e the breath of life to their noses for they are li0enesses of 4im which issued from 4is flesh3 4e shines in the s0y for the benefit of their heartsC 4e has made herbs9 cattle9 and fish to nourish them3 $lines lGL=G'(:; <hile the physical body belongs to sensible creation9 the spiritual elements originate from on high9 from the intelligible sphere of cosmic intelligence3 <hen released from the physical9 the Ba and A0h $generally9 the psyche and pneuma( return to their spiritual originator3 A point to be made here is that this special nature of human0ind does not come from the demiurge9 but from the highest theogonic le"els of the Creator3:G The special nature of human0ind is thus a 0ey element in the rise of later Gnostic sects9 for in itself it anticipates the contradiction of higher and lower originations3 ,ne has to agree with +"erson in his assessment of this split in terms of its later impact upon philosophyE The fundamental dualism responsible for the distinction made between intelligible and sensible9 spiritual and physical e2istence is of eminent importance9 not merely for the understanding of the )gyptian approach to cosmological problems and phenomena9 but also9 historically seen9 as an anticipation of the philosophical theory of ideas3:' The @dysteliologicalA as we might term it9 within the )gyptian uni"erse9 arose from two gi"ens in their cosmology > one was essentially e2ternal9 the other threat arose from within3 +n the first case9 the )gyptian sphere of life floated as a @bubbleA surrounded by the limitless dar0 waters of the inert -un3:J This all=inclusi"e realm9 while gi"ing rise to the cosmogony9 fore"er maintained the threat of disorder in its chaotic inert presence3 +t is the supreme Mystery in )gyptian speculationE 4ow the upper side of this s0y e2ists is in uniform dar0ness9 the southern9 northern9 western and eastern limits of which are un0nown9
:L

2n the +ysteriesA 9e mysteriis Aegyptiorum9 trans3 T3 Taylor U A3 <ilder $Chthonios Boo0s(9E @The )gyptians9 li0ewise9 do not say that all things are physical3 1or they separate the life of the soul and the intellectual life from nature9 not only in the uni"erse9 but also in us3 And admitting intellect and reason to subsist by themsel"es9 they say that generated essences were thus fabricated3A *+++9 '3;H:3 +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine< %%3 Translated by R3,3 1aul0ner in -he Literature of Ancient Egypt9 ed3 <illiam 5elly impson $-ew 4a"en9 CTE Iale !ni"ersity Press9 %&:G(9 %&%> +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine< %H3 +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9%H3 Allen9 )enesis in Egypt9 :3

:% :;

:G :' :J

K5
these ha"ing been fi2ed in the <aters9 in innertness3 there is no light of the Ram thereE he does no appear there > $a place( whose south9 north9 west and east land is un0nown by the gods or akhs9 there being no brightness there3 And as for e"ery place "oid of s0y and "oid of land9 that is the entire Duat3:H The initial triumph of light o"er dar0ness9 procreati"e energy o"er innertness9 is not a decisi"e one3 This is what pre"ents )gyptian thought from being monistic9 for the threat from dar0ness and disorder is fore"er maintained3:: The second internal factor arises within the theogony itself in the form of eth9 the disrupter9 destroyer9 and god of confusion3 <e shall return to this once the basic theogonic structure has been described3 The 4eliopolitan system9 li0ely the historical root system for all others9 details the initial act of creation by Atum9 in se2ual terms9 but without a partner3 This onanistic act initiates a procreati"e principle which is thereafter enacted amongst male and female pairs of hypostases9 commencing with hu and Tefnut3 The act itself ta0es place against a bac0drop of the disorderly abyss9 a pre=temporal condition9 a substance=less state of potential which awaited a catalyst in order to bring forth natural forces through creationE + was born in the Abyss before the s0y e2isted9 before the earth e2isted9 before that which was to be made firm e2isted9 before turmoil e2isted $PT !tt3 'FH9 K%L'L(3:F ,ut of the watery wastes of -un9 the pre=creation state of undifferentiation9 a creati"e principle initiates a theogonic process9 thereby establishing a realm of order3:& Atum9 in the 4eliopolitan "ersion9 is the positi"e principle of completion parado2ically at wor0 within the nothingness of a pre=e2isting chaotic state3 Atum also actualises the latent polarity of maleOfemale by being essentially androgynous3FL

:H ::

1rom the cenotaph of eti +9 in .3P3 Allen9 )enesis in Egypt9 %3

4elmer Ringgren9 @/ight and Dar0ness in Ancient )gyptian Religion9A in Li=er AmicorumA Studies in (onour of 4rofessor 9r> ">J> Bleeker $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&H&(9 %''3 R3,3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&H&(9 %:G3 This is strongly suggesti"e of Plotinus? concern with emanation and necessity arising within the ,ne3 Rist sets out to demonstrate that9 @if emanation follows from the ,ne?s nature and the ,ne?s nature is caused by the ,ne?s will9 then emanation will be an act of a 0ind of a free will and Plotinus will be freed from the shac0les of a deterministic uni"erse9A 4lotinusA the $oad to $eality< :H3 Rist?s analysis demonstrates "ery con"incingly that this was li0ely the intent of Plotinus3 +t seems to me that Plotinus9 who was of course born and educated in )gypt albeit within a Gree0 social milieu9 ad"anced an embellishment upon the perennial )gyptian depiction of the free=will of Atum $the first appearance of a @will to differentiateA within -un(9 the result of which was a non=deterministic uni"erse for the )gyptians $or "ice "ersa(9 and a distinct lac0 of fatalism in their outloo03 There is a similar ambiguity in "arious Gnostic te2ts which de"elop a 4eliopolitan=style Pleroma of se2ually generated pairs of aeons3 The Primal ource9 or @ParentA is presumably androgynous9 yet there are hints that he has a consort at "arious Dunctures3 +n some *alentinian "ersions9 this consort is named Sige $ ilence( which perhaps mirrors the role of an undifferentiated -un $i3e3 "oiceless( as a de facto consort3 Atum is on par with the Gnostic figure of Autogenes in *alentinian thought9 who li0ewise is @self=begettingA3

:F :&

FL

K+
Perhaps the most important feature of this system is the emphasis upon the androgyny of the primal creati"e power9 and a balancing of masculine and feminine energies in each subsequent creati"e act which occurs as followsE

-un [
AT!M $androgynous(

4! > > > T)1-!T G)B > > > =-!T

, +R+ > > =+ + )T4 > =-)P4T4I
F%

The group of gods engendered by Atum form an ennead9 and it must be understood that while the first moment of differentiation is contained as potential in the androgyny of -un and Atum9 and attains plural form in the birth of hu and Tefnut9 the formation of the ennead establishes the cosmogonic grounds for an enhanced plurality3F; This impression is reinforced by the fact that not only are the specific gods changeable9 in particular -ephthys and eth9 but that the @enneadsA depicted in "arious cosmologies often do not number nine and are not9 strictly spea0ing9 defined by the nonary psd>t3 The great ennead of 5arna09 for e2ample9 numbered fifteen gods3FG +t is compelling to consider the idea early put forward by 43 Brugsch that this @nine=nessA is in fact a squared pluralE G;3 <ith this we must agree9 for the critical moment of differentiation and generation occurs with Atum as androgynous Parent9 gi"ing birth to hu and Tefnut > squaring this threeness effecti"ely emphasises the idea of plurality $in hieroglyphs three equals the pluralF'(3 Another 4eliopolitan "ariant depicts Atum forming a triad with the two goddesses9 4athor=-ebet=4etepet and aosis9 and their names can indicate the male and female se2ual organsE htpt @blissA etc39 and iw>s@cC>s @she comes while she grows largeA3 /i0ewise the word for Atum?s mouth9 from which hu and Tefnut emerge9 denotes the "ul"a in erotic literature3 This emphasis upon the original latent duo9 the theogonic e2tension into three9 and then "arious enneads9 ogdoads9 hebdomads etc3 is at the "ery heart of a large number of Gnostic cosmologies3 ,f equal importance in establishing )gyptian mythological precursors of Gnostic thought is the equi"ocal figure of eth3 +t is not necessary to go into the mur0y origins of this god e2cept to say that a distinct lac0 of assimilation may ha"e resulted from his origination with the original inhabitants of )gypt near ,mbos3 1rom ,ld 5ingdom to Graeco=Roman times he remained a deity apart to the e2tent that he was finally identified as the Gree0 Typhon as a
F%

A coffin te2t from the Bubastite period9 gi"es a first=person account of this processE @+ am one YAtumZ who became two Y hu=TefnutZ3 + am two who became four Y hu=Tefnut=Geb=-utZ3 + am four who became eight Y hu=Tefnut=Geb=-ut=,siris=+sis= eth=-ephythysZ9A 1rom the coffin of a priest of Amun in the ;;nd DynastyE 4ermann 5ees9 9er )*tterglau=e im alten Hgypten $%&'%C reprint9 Berlin9 %&JH(9 %:%3 <infried Barta9 Intersuchungen ,um )*tterkreis der Neunheit $MXnchenE Deutscher 5unst"erlag9 %&:G(9 ;'E @)inem T-eungQtter0reis? stand damit ein T*ielgQtter0reis? gegenXber3A Barta 9 Intersuchungen ,um )*tterkreis der Neunheit< lists F' 0nown enneads in )gyptian thought3 More specifically9 it reifies adDecti"es and denotes abstraction3

F;

FG F'

K2
personification of e"il3 1rom the earliest times eth is the enemy of ,siris and 4orus and was well 0nown for his negati"e qualities3FH The eth=animal determinati"e is used for words @indicating concepts di"ergent from the normal orderAF: and o"erall9 the impression of eth?s rhetorical presence is that of a disturber of the peace3 +n philosophical terms he embodies the principle of the dysteliological > plague9 illness9 abortion9 catastrophe9 storm etc3 +n theological terms he embodies the spirit of non ser%iam9 a lawless presence associated with his desert abode9 literally beyond the pale of social order and Dustice3 +n )gyptian te2ts he is often associated with the power of dar0ness fore"er threatening the sun and the moon3FF eth?s most important theogonic function is as the manifestation of disDunction among the gods3 +t will be recalled that eth and his consort -ephthys appear alongside ,siris and +sis and this in itself disturbs the harmony of the hypostases9 for two pairs are produced by Geb and -ut as opposed to the pre"ious pattern of only one9 and eth is born prematurely by stri0ing a blow to brea0 through -ut?s side $9e 0side GJJ)F&(3 +n anticipation of this +sis li"es in fear of eth in -ut?s womb and eth becomes associated with abortion3&L 1urthermore9 eth and -ephthys do not form a di"ine syBygy or pair and9 according to Plutarch $9e 0side GJFB&%(9 eth is abandoned by his concubine Thoeris3 The homose2ual episode with 4orus is yet another disrupti"e act which has maDor theogonic consequences3 As we shall detail more closely in Chapter %L9 all of the main components of the high=profile *alentinian Gnostic myth are established hereE pairs of syBygies emanate forth from the Primal Parent until a disDunction occurs in the theogonic process9 this centred about an hypostasis who e2ists apart from the established order without a partner9 and who causes an abortion to occur following an illicit se2ual act3 The murder of ,siris by eth is of course the theogonic act of disDunction par e2cellence3 ,sirianism was based upon the worldly passions of fidelity and treason9 lo"e and enmity9 attainment and emulousnessC this core myth9 undoubtedly the most powerful one in almost any phase of )gypt?s history9 especially on a popular le"el9 enacted a soteriology of nothing less than the e"entual triumph of Good o"er )"il3 A further 0ey conflict is anticipated here in the struggle between 4orus and eth following eth?s murder of ,siris3 4orus himself is brought forth in solitude by +sis without a consort9 and mother and child e2ist in close pro2imity to the Abyss as symbolised by the 5hemmis marshes3 <e need not go into the details of this battle3 eth is dri"en out of )gypt and castrated9 symbolising the setting up of a boundary between chaos and the cosmos3 This critical cosmogonic e"ent establishes the essential polarity in the )gyptian world"iew9 for the spirit of 4orus and eth permeate all reality and are fore"er in contention3 Again9 this anticipates a central *alentinian mythological e"ent in the @fallA of ophia after her @formless abortionA and subsequent demiurgic creation of the world3 The Pleroma9 greatly disturbed9 sets about
FJ FJ

<3B3 )mery9 Archaic Egypt $%&H%C reprint9 4ammondsworthE Penguin Boo0s /td39 %&F:(9 %;LC Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< ;J&E @the reasons for the identification of eth and Typhon are not far to see03 Both were protagonists in war against the established order among the gods9 Typhon opposing 8eus9 and eth 4orus3A .an 8andee9 @ eth als turmgott9A ;HS &L $%&HG(E %JJ3 te *elde9 Seth< the )od of "onfusion $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&::(9 ;'3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< 'F:3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride9 %GH=G:3 te *elde9 Seth< the )od of "onfusion9 ;&3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride9 %'H=':3

FH F: FF F& &L &%

K4
separating itself from this dysteliological locus9 and the aeon 4orus is dispatched in order to establish the boundary3 The fact that the Gree0 horus means boundary rather fortuitously facilitated this te2tual fusion with ob"ious e2pedience3 A /ate=Period magical papyrus depicts a petitioner as0ing the assistance of 4orus to unbar the door to allow his escape from TyphonE Be opened9 be opened9 , bar9 for + am 4orus the great one9 Archephrenepsou Phirin29 the son of ,siris and +sis3 And + wish to escape from the godless Typhon quic0ly9 quic0ly9 at once9 at once3&; <hile 4orus and eth are e"entually reconciled9 we note the transition to a more Gnostic "iew in the later periods of )gyptian history9 when the tendency was to assign eth as the permanent abode of e"il3&G 4owe"er9 the necessity for eth in the daily functioning of the )gyptian cosmos is clearly demonstrated in eth?s rendering decisi"e assistance to Re in his solar barque against the incessant attac0s from the serpent Apophis9 quintessential being of chaos3 Apophis is always thwarted but ne"er 0illedC he and chaos are indestructible3&' +t has been postulated that eth9 as the @chosen of ReA in this conte2t9 is to be seen as a "iolent aspect of Re3 )"en so9 he remains a n=d< an e"il being9 and it is in his fight against Apophis that he is 0nown as an @instigator of confusionA $sd hnnw(3&J The creati"e principle as enacted in the 4eliopolitan ennead is depicted in profoundly se2ual terms9 indeed incestuous in that all se2ual pairings occur @within the familyA as it were3&H The first le"el of this process can be "iewed as the essential de"elopment of differentiation as principles9 the male and female primal pair of hu and Tefnut3 The second le"el of this theogony in"ol"es the primordial laying out of physis9 earth and s0y9 as embodied in Geb and -ut3 The third le"el depicts the establishment of nomos9 the political=historical embodied in ,siris9 +sis9 eth and -ephthys3&: This last le"el underlies the establishment of the )gyptian state and it is here that we loo0 to ascertain the purpose of the entire process3 The power of the )gyptian state9 which was quintessentially theocratic9 required its own Dustification within the larger theogonic process3&F +ndeed9 one could say that9 at least in the ,ld 5ingdom oligarchies9 a fourth le"el e2isted beneath the third9 peopled by the @royalsA who enacted their own powers as e2tensions from the archetypal le"el abo"e in terms of the royal
&; &G &' &J

Griffiths9 "onflict of (orus P Seth9 %%F1rom 4apyri 2sloenses $,slo9 %&;J(9 +9 G%Hff3 te *elde9 Seth< the )od of "onfusion9 H:3 )ri0 4ornung9 @Chaotische Bereiche in der geordneten <elt9A 86 F% $%&JH(E ;F3

+edinet (a=u +9 pl3G;9JC 'H9G%3 + am indebted to te *elde for this referenceE Seth< )od of "onfusion< %L%3 This need not be "iewed as the @grossly sensualA onanism as MorenB would ha"e it9 Egyptian $eligion9 %HG3 MorenB attempts to ameliorate this image by showing that the "erb msi may mean @to bring forthA in "arious applicationsC howe"er the 4eliopolitan "iew of creation clearly emphasises the se2ual pairing of male and female powers abo"e all else3 ee Tobin9 -heological 4rinciples9 HJ9 for a more con"incing discussion on the employment of the "erb msi @to begetA or @to bearA in )gyptian thought3 <ith the e2ception of the Gree0 terms employed9 + am following Tobin?s discussion here9 -heological 4rinciples9 HG=H'3 1or a more modern "ersion of this + would mention Thomas 4obbes $%JFF=%H:&(9 whose main wor0 Le%iathan sets out to Dustify so"ereigntyC this he does by positing di"ine will at wor0 in the "ery manifestation of so"ereign rule which9 good or bad in "arious instances9 is always preferable to anarchy and disorder3

&H

&:

&F

Kpair mirroring the procreati"e functions of their hea"enly counterparts3 Abo"e all9 the di"ine theogony was to be located in the se2ual polarities of their specific physical beings3 This was a recipe for a "igorous nepotism in the power=politics of the time3&& There can be little doubt that the 4eliopolitan system arose out of the )gyptian e2perience of the natural order3 The "ery birth of the sun god each day was depicted in these terms9 and the dramatic contrast of the -ile with its sheath of @blac0 landA as set against the @red landA of the desert9 would ha"e amplified the )gyptian e2perience of the procreati"e as a cosmogonic principle underlying its appearance within a "irtual wasteland3 4ere9 too9 we might e2pect an e2periential ground for )gyptian "iews on the Abyss3 +n both theologies9 creation too0 place @at the first timeA $sp tpy( which9 according to MorenB9 does not Dust mean the beginning333 it only means the beginning of an e"entA3%LL This distinction is important9 again following MorenB9 for if the beginning arises out of an e"ent9 there is an e"entless e2istence prior to the beginning of what is essentially a theogony9 the genealogy of the godsE @Chaos is therefore to be thought of not only as confused but also monotonousA3%L% The )gyptian e2perience of the desert9 which embodies the almost complete lac0 of a procreati"e principle9 is the bac0drop against which the di"ine generation of political power along the -ile is set3 eth9 the TGod of Confusion? is situated in the desert itself9 and his abode becomes the "ery boundary between the transitory and the e"erlasting3 +t is this same boundary9 as 4ornung points out9 that e2ists between order and chaos9 the e2istent and non=e2istent3%L; ,ne need not argue that these metaphysical speculations necessarily preceded their incorporation into a political framewor09 nor need one insist that they necessarily arose therefromC rather we assume that the two occurred more or less simultaneously3 The absolute dependence of a procreati"e order upon the -ile9 as set about by a "ast Bone of death which in turn isolated the )gyptians from other world="iews9 these factors profoundly shaped the )gyptian "iew of a natural world=order and9 most importantly9 the feeling of certainty that their political will to power was the end result of a theogonic process3 The 4ermopolitan theology is also e2tremely important in pre"iewing certain 0ey Gnostic mythological elements The formation of an ,gdoad9 formed from the four pairs of so= called (eh9 or Chaos gods9 is the main distinguishing feature3%LG A Coffin Te2t depicts the creation of the eight gods @in chaos9 in the Abyss9 in dar0ness and in gloomA3%L' +n this system9
&&

+ncest was widespread amongst the royals9 although not necessarily de rigueur9 it is difficult to ascertain if it was a distinct effort to ritually enact the larger theogonic process3 ,n the subDect of di"ine 0ingship in the ,ld 5ingdom9 a recent and important wor0 in the area draws the following conclusionsE Barry .3 5emp9 @,ld 5ingdom9 Middle 5ingdom and econd +ntermediate Period9A in Ancient EgyptA A Social (istory9 ed3 B3G3 Trigger9 B3.3 5emp9 D3 ,?Connor9 A3B3 /loyd $%&FGC reprint9 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH(9 :GE @Any functional e2planation must begin with the ,siris=4orus= eth motif which9 as it were9 underpinned 0ingship and one of whose main themes was to relate the person of the li"ing 0ing in the closest possible way to his country?s royal ancestors9 and thus to ensure that the historical process of royal succession remained always embraced within a central and authoritati"e body of myth3A3 MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion< %HH3 MorenB< Egyptian $eligion<%HH> 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od9 %JF3

%LL %L% %L; %LG

There is no word for @chaosA as such in )gyptianC heh means @millionA or @manyA9 and their qualities indicate that this numerical surfeit was one of formlessness3 CT ++ pell HJC R3,3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts< "ol3 %9 Spells B@C6K $<arminsterE Aris U Phillips /td39 %&:F(9 :F3

%L'

K.
Atum is li0ewise engendered out of -un9 and he also brings forth hu and Tefnut3 4owe"er9 the theologians were ob"iously much concerned with e2plicating the nature of -un and in positing a female presence coterminous with -un3 -un thus had his consort -unet who9 in contradistinction to -un?s prime"al ocean9 was the counter=hea"en beneath3 -un and -unet $or -aunet as the Gree0s called her( become the primordial couple of the ,gdoad which ta0es on three other couples whose nature is li0ewise intended to define the nature of the prime"al substance out of which the main theogony was to proceedE

-unO-aunet
$watery abyss(

4uhO4auhet

5u0O5au0et

AmunOAmaunet
$hiddenness(

$formlessness( $dar0ness(

There is an interpenetration of ideas that e2ist in the 4eh=godsC for e2ample9 -un was seen to embody an inert or indolent quality9 while 4uh9 with his e2panding qualities of formlessness9 beto0ens mo"ement3%LJ +t shall later be demonstrated that this fundamental "iew of eight Chaos= di"inities at wor0 in the creation of things is directly carried on into Gnostic thought9%LH as is also for e2ample9 the 4ermopolitan positing of the origin of life from an egg which later shows up in the thought of the Gnostic Basileides of Ale2andria3 <e turn now to e2amine the Memphite Theology3 Thus the )nnead was born9 so that the eyes could see9 the ears hear9 the nose breath air9 $and( so they could all ascend to the heart3 4e is the one who causes all full 0nowledge to be attained3 +t is the tongue which enunciates that which the heart thin0s9 and thus all of the gods were born and his )nnead was fulfilled3%L: The abo"e passage from the haba00a stone9 what has come to be 0nown as the @Memphite TheologyA is at the core of a re"olution in )gyptian emanationism3 The te2t goes on to state that it is this process @that gi"es "alue to e"erythingA3 ,ne senses in )gyptology distinct gratification in the appearance of this te2t9 for it ob"iates the need to e2clusi"ely focus upon Atum?s graphic and unsophisticated generation of the 4eliopolitan ennead3 Besides prefiguring the @<ordA in .ohn?s gospel $and of a piece with the generation of all sorts of erroneous debate about )gyptian @monotheismA in conDunction with A0henaten(9 the cerebral Memphite Ptah subsumes the onanistic Atum9 and the concept of power e2isting in words as opposed to the loins9 can be seen to indicate a transition from the static power dynamics of a per"asi"e nepotism in the )gyptian state9 to a more dynamic rhetorical en"ironment within which those of pro"en ability9 e"en without the usual family connections9 might e2ercise the power of the word3%LF +n this sense the
%LJ

<infried Barta9 @Die Bedeutung der Personifi0ation 4uh im !ntersheid Bu den Personifi0ation 4ah und -un9A)+ %;: $%&&;(E :=%;3 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld $-4C ++9 ;=:( for e2ample3 4ieroglyphic transcription from Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest9A plate ++9 column JH3

%LH %L: %LF

.ohn Baines9 @Restricted 5nowledge9 4ierarchy9 and DecorumE Modern Perceptions and Ancient +nstitutions9A JA$"E NN*++ $%&&L(9 H=:E @A good point for departure for placing e"idence for restricted 0nowledge in a rudimentary model of the )gyptian elite is the general one that 0nowledge is an instrument of power3333 +t would be surprising if there were not some homology between access to religious centers and to religious 0nowledge3333 Much display of 0nowledge will not be in written form9 although it will often relate to written materials3 <hen it is written9 what is shown must not re"eal what is 0nown3 <hat has not been identified in )gypt and seems implausible is a formal restriction on who might acquire the basic 0nowledge of literacy9 which would be a prerequisite to access to the more

KK
historical conclusion to be drawn is that the 4eliopolitan system is quintessentially ,ld 5ingdom in its emanationist endorsement of family rule and nepotistic hegemony3 Throughout the entire 1ourth Dynasty9 for e2ample9 @is a line of "iBiers9 most of them also in charge of the 0ing?s building proDects9 who are 0ing?s sonsA3%L& This trend waned in the following three centuries9 and by the Middle 5ingdom the significance of princes in the administration was @e"en more inconspicuousA3%%L <e suspect9 then9 that the de"elopment of the Memphite system may ha"e been intimately bound up with the dissolution of that state3 Certainly )gypt?s capital throughout the ,ld 5ingdom remained at Memphis but by the 1ourth Dynasty9 this highly centralised state began to disintegrate when @pro"incial go"ernorships and other offices came to be regarded as hereditary appointmentsA%%% +t is tempting9 then9 to "iew this as an ine"itable de"elopment for a social structure which emulated a cosmology that was itself nepotistic9 indeed incestuous3 The appearance of parallel power=centres9 in the form of the nobility eroding the power of the 0ing9 surely indicates that the hereditary succession of rulership failed to produce the le"el of competency required to rule a "ast 0ingdom from the centre3%%; As well9 we ha"e strong indications that this de"elopment manifested a growing freedom of thought and e2pression in "arious social classes beyond the immediate circle of the 5ing3 The autobiography by An0htifi9 the nomarch of 4ieraconopolis9 embodies this transition to the Middle 5ingdomE + am the "anguard of men and the rearguard of men3 ,ne who finds the solution where it is lac0ing3 A leader of the land through acti"e conduct3 trong in speech9 collected in thought9 on the day of Doining the three nomes3 1or + am a champion without peer9 who spo0e out when the people were silent9 on the day of fear when !pper )gypt was silent3%%G +n the approach to the 1irst +ntermediate Period other critical changes are apparent3 +n the ,ld 5ingdom the 0ing attained his afterlife in a celestial hea"en9 whereas all others were destined for earth3 This interpretation may be o"erstated9 and we may be dealing with a tendency as opposed to an absolute3 Be that as it may9 following the decline of the ,ld 5ingdom it seems as though the doctrine of the =a $@soulA( came to be applied to e"eryone9 and the absolute theocratic power of the 0ing was now shared by powerful priesthoods3 ,ur o"erall question in this regardE does the subsequent rise of Memphite theology from the ,ld 5ingdom 4eliopolitan system represent a reaction to the political failures inherent in an autocratic9 nepotistic ruleS Does the power of the word itself now enable a larger class of people to find sal"ation9 politically and spiritually9 beyond the primordial blood boundaries of
recondite material + discuss333A
%L& %%L %%% %%;

Cyril Aldred9 Egypt to the End of the 2ld .ingdom $/ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&HJ(9 ::3 +bid39 :F3 +bid39 %GL3

+bid39 %GL=G%E @The pro"incial go"ernors9 now fast becoming feudal potentates9 no longer sought burial near the tomb of their o"erlord9 but made their own cemeteries in the district capital9 and clearly regarded themsel"es as little inferior to so many minor 0ings333 the central authority had become too wea0 to hold bac0 the rising tide of anarchy9 and the ci"ilisation of the ,ld 5ingdom collapsed with the political system that had created it3A An0htifi created an alliance of the three southernmost nomes against the nome of )dfu3 1rom Miriam /ichtheim9 Ancient Egyptian Literature9 "ol %9 -he 2ld and +iddle .ingdoms $Ber0eleyE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:J(9 FH3

%%G

K7
the 0ingly clanS Certainly An0htifi?s emphasis upon his speech seems to bear this out3 A later treatise on 0ingship from the &th=%Lth Dynasty9 -he 0nstruction Addressed to .ing +erikare9 probably a pseudepigraphic wor0 according to Miriam /ichtheim9 for which @a fully sustained compositional coherence as found in comparable wor0s of the Twelfth Dynasty has not been achie"edA%%' e2hibits precisely the interest in the spo0en word we would e2pect with an underlying ascendant Memphite cosmology in placeE +f you are s0illed in speech9 you will win9 The tongue is a 0ing?s swordC pea0ing is stronger than all fighting9 The s0illful is not o"ercome333 The wise is a school to the nobles3 Those who 0now what he 0nows will not attac0 him9 -o crime occurs when he is nearC .ustice comes to him distilled9 haped in the sayings of the ancestors3 Copy your fathers9 your ancestors9 ee9 their words endure in boo0s9 ,pen9 read them9 copy their 0nowledge9 4e who is taught becomes s0illed3%%J This passage is from near the beginning of the te2t3 The following is from the "ery end of the documentE 1or god 0nows e"ery name3 Do not neglect my speech9 <hich lays down all the laws of 0ingship9 <hich instructs you9 that you may rule the land9 And may you reach me with none to accuse you\%%H 4ere indeed is a direct depiction of di"ine power operating through the 0ing through the medium of language as opposed to an unembellished genealogy3%%: The Memphite theology is instructi"e in preser"ing the power of the 0ing and9 indeed9 the entire )nnead from which he is descended9 yet it prepares the theological grounds for social re"olution9 a priori or posteriori as the case may ha"e been3 <hat it underta0es is a sort of cosmogonic surgical operation in which a procreati"e initiati"e has been subsumed by a principle of intellection3 Politically9 of course9 this would ha"e set up a more effecti"e consensus=ma0ing body with which to affect policy
%%' %%J %%H %%:

+bid39 &F3 +bid39 &&3 +bid39 %LH=:3

Compare the abo"e9 then9 with an ,ld 5ingdom pyramid te2t which displays the 4eliopolitan emphasis upon the 0ing?s cosmic genealogyE @The 5ing?s mother was pregnant with him9 e"en he who was in the /ower 0y9 the 5ing was fashioned by his father Atum before the s0y e2isted9 before the earth e2isted Yetc3Z333 for the 5ing is an +mperishable tar9 son of the star=goddess who dwells in the mansion of el0et333 4e who is in his ser"ice has commended this 5ing to 4im who is in his litter that they may ser"e the 5ing9 for the 5ing is a star9A $PT !tt3 J:%(3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts9 ;;H=;:3

KP
decisions9 military and economic9 as well as spiritual3 The growing power of the priesthoods and the dawning Great Age of the Middle 5ingdom is the sort of result one would e2pect3 + am wor0ing from the hypothesis that the Memphite theology was part philosophical treatise9 part political manifesto3 +n the latter instance we detect an effort being made to remo"e the theogonic Dustification for absolute power manifesting itself in the 0ing and his family3 A principle of accounta=ility was established in a transference of power made manifest in the wordC the custodians of the word thus made themsel"es an intermediary9 a rhetorical arena within which 0ingly power and its di"ine genealogy were to be conte2tualised or shared3 +n effect the 0ing became partially accountable to the priesthood in a way that the American president is accountable9 at least in theory9 to the Congress3 The dynamics of accountability here are purely rhetorical9 theological consensus being the necessary social aperture to encompass the e"olution of creati"e human thought3 The e"olution of the Memphite theology9 or something similar9 was perhaps ine"itable in the de"elopment of religious thought in )gypt3 1ollowing the demise of the ,ld 5ingdom autocracy9 the new power=groups would ha"e seen the ad"antages of a cosmogony that diluted the nepotistic droit de seigneur of the 0ing?s family3%%F +f the earlier 4eliopolitan system can be said to ha"e had its roots in the literal soil of )gypt9 in its geography and cult of 0ingship9 the Memphite Theology symbolises a subsequent partial emancipation of the )gyptian mind itself from the stasis of absolute pharaonic rule3 /i0ewise9 the paralysing inertia of A0henaten?s @atheismA required the reinstatement of such a priestly intelligentsia3%%& The much=discussed @democratisation of the afterlifeA which arose following the collapse of the ,ld 5ingdom== although this is li0ely not a neat di"ision==literally found its "oice in this nuance of )gyptian theological e2pression9 for it empowered the literate who had access to the special 0nowledge contained in the te2ts3 The roots of Gnostic thought are to be found here9 and their claim of absolute access to the di"ine9 and afterlife return to the Pleroma through gnosis9 represents the supreme apotheosis of )gyptian aspirations in this conte2t3 <e turn now to e2amine the "ery foundation out of which all di"inity is seen to appear9 the primordial waters of -un within whose depths the so=called chaos gods appear3 -un is to be seen as the "ery upholder of consciousness and light as manifest in the daily periploi of Re in his barque9 but he also contains the writhing presence of disorder and e"il in his depths > the serpent Apep3 The concept of the prime"al waters is common to all )gyptian creation=models3%;L
%%F

.ohn Baines9 @Restricted 5nowledge9 4ierarchy9 and DecorumE Modern Perceptions and Ancient +nstitutionsA9 notes the pri"ileges of the Ptah priesthood in the 1ifth and i2th DynastiesE @By claiming Tpriesthoods?of rare separable aspects of Ptah9 these men asserted special religious pri"ileges3 o far as the e"idence goes9 they were the only people who had those pri"ileges $apart from the 0ing9 who would probably ha"e had them as of right(9A F3 Iet we must as0E how much respect9 ultimately9 would these high=priests ha"e had for 0ings who possessed the right without possessing the actual 0nowledgeS Donald B3 Redford9 AkhenatenA the (eretic .ing $PrincetonE Princeton !ni"ersity Press9 %&F'(9 ;G'E @ uch documents as the Memphite Theology and the -ew 5ingdom hymns to Ptah and Amun are philosophical treatises of the highest achie"ement3 <hat did A0henaten substitute for them9 once he had declared them anathemaS -othing\ +f mythology $in the broadest application of the term( is the only means of di"ine re"elation9 apart from the "ision of the mystic9 then what A0henaten championed was in the truest sense of the word9 atheism3A ,ne notes then with interest the first Milesian philosophers in Greece9 among whom Thales $ca3 JFJ BC)(9 according to Aristotle9 speculated that @the first principle and basic nature of all things is water9A and @the earth rests upon water3A Diogenes /aertius reports that Thales @went to )gypt and spent some time with the priests there9A trans3 R3D3 4ic0s $9iogenes Laertius< "ol3 %C /oeb Classical /ibrary3 CambridgeE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&:;(9 ;&C Proclus $2n Euclid( claims that @Thales was the first

%%&

%;L

K,
+t is interesting and significant that a recent wor0 by Robert <ild9 Gater in the "ultic Gorship of 0sis and Sarapis<%;% contains "irtually no references to the primordial Ir=God -un9 or to his consort -aunet3 +t is an e2ample9 by no means rare9 of the peculiar position -un occupies in the modern )gyptological assessment of )gyptian religious thoughtE there9 but not completely there9 one might say3%;; <ild is by no means alone in this3 iegfried MorenB?s critical wor0 Egyptian $eligion does not mention him as a maDor god in his appendi2 listing out the characteristics of the gods9 although of course -un appears throughout the wor09 such appearances being otherwise noted in the inde23 The presence of -un is so ubiquitous in all periods of )gyptian history that it is ta0en for granted and perhaps this in part accounts for a certain lac0 of emphasis placed upon this figure3 -un?s presence was primordial and therefore required less articulation9 yet when the )gyptians dug down for water it was in search of -un9 when the 0ing sets sail into the realm of the afterlife it is to -un that he appealsE this presence was acti"ely sought in temple and field as the basis for life9 religious and mundane3 At the outset + wish to Dustify my "iew that -un is one of the more important philosophical insights contributed by )gypt to the ,ccident3 +t is surely no o"erstatement to say that the Presocratic Thales of Miletus was rather deri"ati"e in claiming that the ontological ground of being was water9 and it cannot be considered a coincidence that this insight forms the "eritable starting point for Gree0 philosophy as has been taught in the <est for centuries3 +t was Plotinus of )gypt who first wrestled with what were essentially the philosophical contradictions of -un in de"eloping a set=piece theodicy of a ,ne that contains all within itE goodness and light9 as well as the somewhat less than perfect3 The essential insight about -un9 as de"eloped by the )gyptians o"er millennia can be traced through to .a0ob BQhme?s @!ngroundA and further to 13<3 chelling?s @will of the depthsA %;GE an initial state of chaotic formlessness contained the latent seed of a theogony within it9 one which was itself spar0ed by the unruly impulse of freedom in these depths3 The godhead9 the "ery theogony of the gods9 is enacted against this donn and all must be referred bac0 to it as it operates as an ontological foundation along the "ery boundaries of non=e2istence3 -un9 as a principle of formlessness mysteriously merging towards form9 is the progenitor of all differentiation9 di"ine and earthly9 and the image of water9 manifesting both form and formlessness simultaneously9 perfectly contains this idea in itself9 most especially as it can be lin0ed with the "ery @greeningA of life3 <e shall more closely e2amine -un in chapter %L9 especially as it appears in Gnostic te2ts9 but for now we must probe the concept as the starting point for a host of )gyptian emanation theogonies3 An equally abstruse line of thought9 and one which li0ewise flows into Gnostic speculation9 pertains to the ancient )gyptian "iew of eternity9 for which the )gyptians had two conceptions3 Nhh eternity pertains to the cyclic nature of earthly e2istence9 of the phenomenological9 of the realm of actual beings3 +n contradistinction to this dt denotes the stasis of the non=e2istent9 of nonbeing3 4owe"er9 we ha"e noted9 as does 4ornung9 that the non=
to go into )gypt and bring bac0 scientific 0nowledge into Greece9A trans3 Philip <heelwright -he 4resocratics< $+ndianapolisE Bobbs=Merrill9 %&HL(9 '&3
%;% %;;

Robert A3 <ild9 Gater in the "ultic Gorship of 0sis and Sarapis $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(3

-o better illustrated than in te *elde?s remar0 that @-un is sometimes called the father of the gods9 but there is no question of a relation between -un and Atum9 for -un is not real9A @Relations and Conflicts between )gyptian Gods9 particularly in the Di"ine )nnead of 4eliopolis9A in Struggles of )ods> 4apers of the )roningen Gork )roup for the Study of the (istory of $eligions9 ed3 43G3 5ippenberg $-ew Ior0E Mouton Publishers9 %&F'(9 ;':3 chelling influenced the early )gyptologists "on trauss and Torney9 with respect to a @mythological monotheismA with -!- at the head3

%;G

75
e2istent permeates all that is9 and we therefore e2pect nhh and dt to be intertwined3 A se2ual gloss to this is not inappropriate gi"en the widespread appeal and duration of the 4eliopolitan theology3 Nhh is in many ways a masculine demiurgic temporal quality9 whereas dt is a feminine archetype that is rather more static and passi"e in its ma0eup3 ,ne has to be careful in ma0ing broad generalisations based upon gender howe"erE while Re is quintessentially nhh< Geb is ostensibly a passi"e dt figure beneath the o"erarching dynamic nhh -ut3 +t is entirely in 0eeping9 then9 that in the Memphite theology we find $Ptah(=-un and $Ptah(=-aunet depicted as the parents of Atum3 1rom the ,ld through Middle 5ingdom we can see -un now represented as an @inertA dt figure9 then as a dynamic nhh demiurge3%;' +t is worth mentioning at this point that -un?s function was later ta0en up in Gnostic cosmologies wherein such primordial figures as 1irst=thought9 elf=created9 1irst=father9 /ogos9 -ous9 and the female ige $silence( are to be found as the first discrete entity adDacent to the Primal ource3 The upshot of this is that a sort of translucent entity is "isualised9 e2isting simultaneously in form and formlessness9 being and nonbeing3 1or -un9 as in numerous later emanationist systems9 the first mo"e into differentiation9 from one to two9 is primarily se2ual9 and all of creation is imbued with the twoness of se2ual differentiation thereafter3 +n the Middle 5ingdom Coffin te2ts9 as well as the Boo0 of Two <ays9 and "arious magical spells9 the recognition of -un?s unique role was continued3 +t is hard for us not to thin0 that only the ubiquitous and sensuous intuition of -un all about them 0ept the )gyptians interested in such a difficult principle3 But then the principle is also a personality9 and the personality is regularly manifest in the seasonal inundation for e2ample9 and in the appearance of Re e"ery morning from the depths3 ,ne can seen this poeticOsensuous appreciation in a te2t from the time of Amenhotep +++ near /u2orE 4ow beautiful is -un in his pool at e"ery seasonC more is it wine than water9 li0e a full -ile9 born of the /ord of )ternity3%;J +t is an ob"ious conclusion to ma0e that such architectural features as the sacred la0e at 5arna09 to name but one9 was in fact a "irtual shrine for -un from which "arious re=enactments of theogonic progressions might begin and end3 +n the -ew 5ingdom The Boo0 of the Di"ine Cow has Re spea0ing to @the )ldest ,neA as0ing his ad"ice about how to deal with e"il men9 specifically indicating that he wishes to hear what -un has to say before he dispatches them3 -un?s reply is interesting9 for in effect he graciously chides Re as being greater and older than he who created him3%;H 1rom this we might assume that -un?s realm was "iewed as being essentially metaphysical9 from whence all life= gi"ing @moisturesA and empowerment of deities were effected3 4owe"er -un is not demiurgic in the created realm in any direct way hence his reminder to Re9 solar architect=deity supreme3 +n turning to the Boo0 of the Dead9 it comes as no surprise to find -un well=represented throughout3 pell %: from the time of eti + is quite e2plicit about the status of -unE

%;'

+n a late te2t these were interestingly combined in the story of -un lusting after a goddess bathing in the ri"er3 4e de"ises a strategem to seduce her which fails and one wonders if his innate @innertnessA might ha"e been the problem3 .313 Borghouts @Magical Te2ts9A in -e:tes et langages de l!gypte pharoni#ueA cent cin#uante annes de recherches< B588@BDF JCairoE +nstitut 1ran]ais d?archPologie orientale9 %&:'(9 &3 )rich 4ornung9 9er Hgyptische +ythos %on der (immelskuh9 GF9 lines ;&='F3

%;J

%;H

7+
The Great God9 the self=created9 is water9 he is -un9 father of the gods3$BD pell %:(
%;:

,ne=thousand years later the same "iew pre"ails9 as this inscription from the Ptolemaic temple at 5om ,mbo testifiesE Great -un9 father of the gods9 the creator of the earth9 who created the others%;F +ndeed9 as the modern "isitor enters this temple9 it is the name of -un that appears largest9 set upon the archway of the main temple entrance9 larger e"en than the cartouches of the Ptolemaic 0ings who financed the rebuilding of the temple3 The theologicalO3philosophical functioning of -un is an important one to de"elop in some detail9 for this Irstoff9 out of which the theogony proceeds9 is essential in many Gnostic ystems9 as ubiquitous as enneads9 ogdoads and the li0e3 This e2cursus on nhh and dt is effected with a "iew towards illustrating the recondite nature of the )gyptian apprehension of this= worldliness and other=worldliness9 a 0ey Gnostic feature already mentioned9 one which owed its de"elopment in part to the enhancement of )gyptian demonology in the /ate=Period3 <e turn then to briefly e2amine )gyptian demonology3 The )gyptian netherworld is filled with a myriad number of inimical beings $demons or e"il spirits( with names li0e @e"il=doersA $isfty>w(9 @slaughterersA $Qdty>w(9 @torturersA $iCy>w(9 @lords of the netherworldA $n=>w dC>t(9 @rebelsA $snt>w(9 @enemiesA $tsty>w(9 and @e"il oneA $n=d( to name but a few3 ,siris and eth9 along with numerous other maDor gods9 ha"e demoniacal minions wor0ing in this realm to obstruct and torment the dead souls3 -umerous funerary te2ts detail the names of demons and the passwords required to disarm them as the situation for the dead person was seen to be perilous indeed3 The @enemiesA in this realm9 are both masculine and feminine demons $hfty and hft>t(9 whose eternal tas0 it would seem is to waylay and snare the kC $spirit9 soul( of the dead person3%;& <hile life is imbued with maat9 death is closely associated with inDustice in the )gyptian mind3%GL The e"il actions of men and gods9 are seen to reach their culmination and resolution in the afterlife3 This resolution in"ol"es the dispensation of punishment and a di"ision of all into that which is redeemed9 and that which is to be held in chec09 sometimes destroyed9 as unredeemable3 Apart from the specifics of the o"erarching emanationist systems already loo0ed at9 this strong feeling in the )gyptian "iew pertaining to the status quo of a cosmology eternally battling on the cusp of light and dar0ness9 good and e"il9 has to be seen as the 0ernel of later )gyptian Gnostic e2pression3%G% <hile not predisposed towards passi"e meditation9 the ancient )gyptian e"inced at once a scepticism and faith which proceeded from strong feelings about death and the afterlife3%G; +n line with this9 )gyptian art9 architecture9 and the inscriptions thereupon9 can be seen in a "ery ob"ious way as an attempt to o"ercome time9 and therefore death3 +n the 4eliopolitan theology the ascent to hea"en is enacted against the panorama of an underworld filled with spirits and ruled o"er by ,siris3 The sun9 in passing
%;:

Raymond ,3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian Book of the 9ead $%&:;C reprint9 Austin9 TNE !ni"ersity of Te2as Press9 %&&L(9 ''3 Adolphe Gutbub9 -e:tes fondamentau: de la thologie de .om 2m=o $+nstitut fran]ais d?ArchPologie orientale du Caire9 "ol3 % U ;9 %&:G(9 ':L3 8andee9 9eath as an Enemy< ;%F=%&3 MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion< %F&3 ee Ringgren9 @/ight and Dar0ness in Ancient )gyptian Religion3A MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion< %&H3

%;F

%;& %GL %G% %G;

72
beneath the earth e"ery day into night9 was seen to pass through this realm9 and e"en the sacred barque of Re was attac0ed and threatened nightly on its underworld tra"erse3 As Re rose anew each morning with his powers intact9 so the indi"idual was e2pected to be preser"ed #ua indi"idual9 with "arious @substances of the soulA $Ch< =C< and sw>t for e2ampleE the spirit9 soul9 and shadow( able to function in the afterworld3 The ascent from nhh eternity to the dt eternal9 from this world to the other9 begins with death9 and it is at the moment of death that the life of the spirit must be affirmed anew as it surmounts the enneadE + am the son of Atum9 the companion of Ma^etC + ha"e come that + may climb up9 + go forth upon the "erte2 of the )nnead3%GG The primary dualism at wor0 in )gyptian thought considers death to be an enemy insofar as its effects > motionlessness9 termination of consciousness9 decay of the body9 are seen to be permanent nhh manifestations9 without recourse to a higher supernal dt realm3 The possibility of this afterlife is attained through close identification on the part of the deceased with one or more of the gods9 through passwords and an ability to identify demons and netherworld passages9 and through the demonstration of "irtue9 often effected in the form of @negati"e confessionsA made by the deceased in the hereafter before Dudgement $ @+ did not 0ill9 + did not fornicateA etc3(3 The question of eternal life for the soul is the same for men and gods9%G' and in this we presage the Gnostic di"ine figure of Anthropos9 celestial imago of human0ind whose fate is of course ine2plicably bound up with the soteriological telos of human0ind below3 As well9 whether human0ind is created from the tears of a god9 or a potter?s wheel9 both are found in the Gnostic concepts of the basic su=stance of creation as hypostasised di"ine substances and qualities9 and in these substances being formed through the artifices of "arious demiurges3 +n )gyptian thought the history and worth of human0ind mirrors the theogony and purpose of the godsE The ennead is combined in your bodyE your image is e"ery god9 Doined in your person3%GJ
%GG %G' %GJ

CT ++ pell %;%3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts< %%%3 8andee9 9eath as an Enemy< :3 Papyrus /eiden + GJL9 Chapter &L3 Allen9 )enesis in Egypt9 J%3

74 )hapter Three* 'ualism in pre,"le/andrine latonic Thought

The entire issue of )gyptian influence upon early Gree0 philosophical thought lies beyond the focus of this study and + shall do no more than trace the general dualistic elements in early Gree0 philosophy3%GH <ith some of the specific ingredients of /ate Period )gyptian religious e2pression9 we are witness to an original )gyptian conception of things that li0ely found its way into Gree0 thought in the 4ellenic era9 later to return to )gypt in the 4ellenistic3%G: This process is far too complicated and obscure to be del"ed into although the ground=brea0ing and e2tremely important wor0 of B343 tric0er who earlier ad"ocated a strong 4ermetic dependence upon )gyptian thought and a direct )gyptian influence upon Gree0 philosophy and religion must be ac0nowledged3%GF <hat is of importance to note is the formulation of dualist

%GH

+ consider a strong )gyptian influence a gi"en9 following9 for e2ample9 the conclusions of )ri0 +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 JGE @of the doctrines in"ol"ed we ha"e not merely seen the great maDority recorded in )gyptian te2ts ages before their appearance in other sourcesC but we ha"e also seen se"eral of them quoted by classical authors9 and defined as typical of )gyptian philosophical reasoning3 The general agreement of these sources in their definition of identical concepts tends to "ouch for their relati"e correctness9 and is of particular significance from our particular point of "iew because it indicates that a direct e2change of ideas did in fact ta0e place between )gyptian and Gree0 scholars3A To cite but one a"enue of possibility the figure of )udo2us of Cnidos9 astrologer and mathematician9 stands out first and foremost in the fourth century B3C3)3 )udo2us is mentioned by Plutarch in 9e 0side et 2siride more than any other ancient source9 and si2 of these se"en citations are concerned with )gyptian religion3 According to Diogenes /aertius $Li%es of Eminent 4hilosophers9 F3F:(9 )udo2us @proceeded to )gypt with Chrysippus the physician9 bearing with him letters of introduction from Agesilaus to -ectanabis9 who recommended him to the priests3 There he remained one year and four months with his beard and eyebrows sha"ed9A trans3 R3D3 4ic0s9 9iogenes Laertius< "ol3 ; $/oeb Classical /ibrary3 Cambridge9 Mass3E 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&JF(9 'L%9 'LG3 ee -he "orpus (ermeticum9 Mnemosyne9 ser3 +*9 "ol3 ++9 %&'&C also @De Brief "an Aristeas9A *erhandelingen d3 -ederl3 A0ad39 Afd3 /etter0inde9 -3 3 H;9 no3 '9 %&JH3 There has been a strong scholarly disinclination to accept an )gyptian bac0drop in Gree0 philosophical thought9 or e"en the 4ermetica for that matter9 in spite of the wor0 of a number of scholarsE see 1linders Petrie9 -ransactions of -hird 0nternational "ongress of the (istory of $eligions9 %&LF9 and 4ersonal $eligion in Egypt Before "hristianity9 %&L&C 1ranB Cumont9 L!gypte des Astrologues< Bru2elles9 %&G:C Philippe

%G:

%GF

7cosmologies in Gree0 thought during a period in which Gree0 interaction with )gypt was increasing3 The )gyptian 0ing Psammetichus + $HH'=%L B3C3)3( employed Gree0 mercenaries in his army and allowed for the settlement of the first Gree0 communities in )gypt by rewarding these soldiers with two pieces of land for their ser"ices3 According to Diodorus9 Psammetichus encouraged trade with Greece9 and @was so great an admirer of the 4ellenes that he ga"e his sons a Gree0 educationA9%G& 4erodotus records that the Gree0s were well=treated and respected by the 0ing9 who also founded a school of interpreters3%'L <hether or not the influence of dualist Gree0 philosophy arri"ed in this period cannot be pro"en on the basis of e2tant te2ts3 +n any case it is a moot point9 for the conquest of )gypt by Ale2ander in GG% B3C3)3 irre"ocably brought the entire array of Gree0 religious and philosophical thought to )gypt where it was to increasingly interact with the )gyptian world"iew3 +n this section + shall be focusing upon the following philosophersE

PresocraticsE
Parmenides $c3 JLL='JL B3C3)3( )mpedocles $c3 'F'=';' B3C3)3( 4eads of the Athenian AcademyE peusippus $c3 GH: B3C3)3( in Athens Nenocrates $c3 GJH B3C3)3( in Athens <e turn to the fifth century B3C3)3 for the first clear e2amples of a philosophical e2ploration of dualist cosmologies in"ol"ing demiurgic acti"ities3 <ith Parmenides one is immediately struc0 by the role of a goddess figure in the formation of the cosmos9 one who notes that the opinions of men are affected by @the decei"ing structure of my wordsA3%'% This goddess9 according to implicius? account of Parmenides9 created the other gods and has power o"er @the souls of men9 which she sends now from the "isible towards the in"isible and then the other way roundA%'; and she is directly responsible for @gruesome birthA3%'G There is9 as Mansfeld points out9 a suggestion that we might be dealing with a different goddess9 possibly Anan0e $-ecessity( who could be associated with Di0e $.ustice(3 This goddess guards the @Gates of -ight and DayA through which the soul9 called the poet9 must ascend3 The goddess must be persuaded to let the poet by and Mansfeld is quite
Derchain9 @/?AuthenticitP de l?+nspiration Pgyptienne dans le TCorpus 4ermeticum?9A in $e%ue de l(istoire des $ligions %H% $%&H;(E %:J=&FC and 1ran]ois Daumas9 @/e 1onds Pgyptienne de l?hermPtisme9A in )nosticisme et +onde (ellenisti#ue9 G=;J9 all of whom adduce positi"e e"idence in support of the )gyptian underpinnings of 4ermetic thought3 )ri0 +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 details the strong )gyptian presence in "arious 4ermetic te2ts9 in particular the 4oimandres9 the most Gnostic e2pression in the 4ermetic corpus3 Garth 1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermesAA (istorical Approach to the Late 4agan +ind $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH( de"elops a "ery strong case indeed for the )gyptian foundations of 4ermetic thought3
%G& %'L %'%

Diodorus iculus +3 H:3&< trans3 C343 ,ldfather $%&GGC reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F&(9 ;GJ3 Boardman9 -he )reeks 2%erseas< %G%3

1r3;FBF9 JGfC .3 Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeE A TGnostic? Motif from Parmenides and )mpedocles to /ucretius and Philo9A in Studies in )nosticism and (ellenistic $eligions9 eds3 R3 "an den Broe0 and M3.3 *ermaseren $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 ;HJ3 0n 4hys>G&9 ;LfC Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and Demiurge9A ;HH=H:3 1r3 ;FB%L9'C Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and Demiurge9A ;HF3

%'; %'G

7.
correct is associating this with )gyptian religious "iews on the ascent of the soul3 lists out a number of other antecedents to Gnostic thought in ParmenidesE
%''

Mansfeld

%( The physical realm is inferior to the perfection of Being3 ;( @ omething happenedA which brought this about9 and di"ine powers are responsible for the elaboration of the original error3 G( A plurality of di"inities is in"ol"ed in the theogonic e2tension $my phrase(3 '( The goddess who plays a direct role in the construction of the world is situated in the lower realm3 J( The goddess @commandsA to which + would add that a soteriological medium of @higher languageA is also focused upon3 + would also point out another important motif which occurs in ParmenidesE firstly9 the poet is @a man who 0nowsA $1r3 ;FB%9G( and9 as Mansfeld puts it9 @he is called Tinitiated? before he has been initiatedA%'J and this surely anticipates the Gnostic pneumatic3 Parmenides9 and presumably his fellow @poetsA ha"e direct access to this transition9 whereas others must loo0 to the language these poets lea"e behind3 Ta0en in conDunction with this foreshadowing of @Gnostic elitismA the cosmogonic emphasis upon the goddess and the word is especially stri0ing3 The ambiguous dual=aspect of the Parmenidean goddess is drawn out by )mpedocles into an e2plicitly lower entity9 4ate9 who is seen to embody e"il3 <hile /o"e and 4ate are subordinate to a higher di"inity in Parmenides9 they themsel"es are the dualistic framewor0 of )mpedocles? cosmos3 1or )mpedocles9 the two powers of trife and /o"e appear out of the @single ,neA and fragment ;; suggests the )gyptian emphasis upon ,rder bounded by DisorderE @As things came together in harmony9 trife withdrew to the outermost regionA3%'H This dualism is further de"eloped in fragment ;&E <hen trife had fallen to the lowest depth of the "orte2 and /o"e had reached its "ery center9 then all things came together so as to be a single whole3 This unity was attained not all at once9 but according to the wishes of the things that were uniting9 as they came some from one direction9 some from another3 Iet along with the things that became mi2ed there were many things that remained unmi2ed > all9 in fact9 of which trife retained possessionC for trife had not yet retreated entirely from them to the outermost limit of the circle9 but he had departed from some things while in others he remained3%':

%''

Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeA9 ;:'=:JE @<e are not told what it is that they $the poets( say9 but the implication is clearE they 0now what they ha"e to say3 This is a remar0able incident9 which9 to the best of my 0nowledge9 has not been the study of scholarly inquiry333 perhaps he had some information about )gyptian lore3 This must remain speculation3 The parallel with what is found in Gnostic thought is not less surprising for this reason9 e"en if > as is9 on the whole9 the most probable e2planation > the Gnostics too0 o"er their plurality of gates from )gyptian religion9 transposing them from the -ether <orld to the 4ea"ens3A +bid39 ;:H3 Trans3 <heelwright9 -he 4resocratics9 %G%3 +bid39 %G;3

%'J %'H %':

7K
As with the identical )gyptian "iew on Disorder e2isting as a theogonic entity< there is no sense in )mpedocles that trife can be finally "anquished9 indeed its interpenetration of the All is seen to be necessary3 +t is also worth emphasising that pre= ocratic thought9 here as elsewhere9 lea"es one with an ambiguous sense of what @goddessesA or @powersA are to meanC that is9 are they to be ta0en mythologically or philosophicallyS +t is clear that Gree0 philosophy?s earliest formulations are not to be easily separated in this regard3 The souls of men are daimones and9 in conDunction with the baleful tra"ails of 4ate9 together pre"ent or delay a larger cosmic reconciliation3%'F +n fragment &L )mpedocles gi"es a curiously gnostic=sounding lamentE @1rom what high place of honour and bliss ha"e + fallen9 so that now + go about among mortals here on earthSA%'& )arth is referred to as @this low=roofed ca"ernA in fragment &G%JL and in fragment &' we get the clearest glimpse of dualist sentimentE @ uch a man am +9 alas9 a fugiti"e from the gods and a wanderer at the mercy of frenBied trifeA3%J% An important feature which powerfully anticipates Gnostic thought is the positing of an e"il demiurge9 one intimately bound up with a dual=aspected creati"e goddess3 The power is referred to as neikos9 or oulomenon9 which can be translated as trife9 or Banefulness $in Cicero referred to as 9iscordia(3 This power is responsible for human0ind?s fall9 e2ile9 and continued indenture to 1ate3 This entity engages in endless struggle with the power of /o"e $erosL for the souls of men and daimones3 <hile Mansfeld?s o"erall analysis is most penetrating9 in one regard it fails to appreciate the main thrust of Gnostic mitigated dualist systems9 by far the most numerous9 which are to be associated with )gypt3 Mansfeld brea0s down Gree0 demiurgic speculation as followsE + ++ Good worldE = good Demiurge $Plato9 toics( = no Demiurge $Aristotle( )"il worldE = e"il Demiurge $no Gree0 representation( = no Demiurge $)picureans(%J;

This appreciation of an @e"il worldOe"il DemiurgeA as not being represented in any Gree0 school of thought is quite ine2plicable on two counts 1irstly9 Mansfeld has already detailed the @e"il DemiurgeA of )mpedocles9%JG to which must be added a host of Middle Platonists9 specifically9 Nenocrates9 Ammonius $not acchus(9 Plutarch9 -umenius9 and Atticus9 whom we shall e2amine in Chapter H3%J' econdly9 Mansfeld equates the notion of @e"il DemiurgeA with the Gnostics which is far too simplistic3 There are numerous e2amples9 especially in the mitigated *alentinian system9 where the Demiurge is not at all e"il per se9 rather he is seen to be ignorant9
%'F %'& %JL %J% %J; %JG

Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeA9 ;F'9 ;FH3 Trans3 <heelwright9 -he 4resocratics9 %'%3 +bid39 %'%3 +bid39 %';3 +bid>< G%G3

<hat has not9 to the best of my 0nowledge9 been emphasiBed sufficiently before is that this fall9 this e2ile9 and the continued fate of man9 ha"e been caused and continue to be caused by 4ate9 i3e3 by )mpedocles? e%il 9emiurge9A $original emphasis(3 Mansfeld9 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeA9 ;FH3 And so9 if Dillon?s -he +iddle 4latonists $+thaca9 -IE Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&::( is guilty of ignoring the Presocratic dualist precursors of Plato $Parmenides and )mpedocles are not cited in his inde2(9 Mansfeld is guilty of not noting the Middle Platonic successors to these two pi"otal philosopher=poets3

%J'

77
attempting to do the best that he can with limited resources9 or guilty of simple hubris3 ,ther similar Gnostic demiurgic depictions abound3 +n the following e2position of "arious Platonic thin0ers we must 0eep in mind that the primary influence among the Gree0 philosophers of the time was the Timaeus3%JJ peusippus $c3'L:=GG& B3C3)3( accepted the e2istence of two opposite principles9 emphasising their functions as @seedsA or @potenciesA of all differentiation from the Primal ource%JH The +ndefinite Dyad accomplishes all theogonic manifestations9 and peusippus? concept of the ,ne is reminiscent of Parmenides in the sense that the ,ne remains a @blan0A as it were9 beyond all "alues3 By means of @a certain persuasi"e necessityA%J: multiplicity is effected amidst matter9 a material principle which is e"il9 and which responds to the Good3 ,n the lower le"els9 his fourth and fifth realms of oul and the physical world respecti"ely9 this problem arises as a by=product3%JF An important point here is that peusippus places the ,ne abo"e +ntellect9 and is thus @at "ariance not only with Aristotle9 but with all official Platonism up to PlotinusA3%J& +t need only be added that he is in agreement with numerous Gnostic cosmologies on this point3 Nenocrates headed the Athenian Academy as the direct successor of peusippus in GG& B3C3)3 <ithout doubt9 he is the most profound philosophical precursor of Gnostic thought on the Gree0 side of the di"ide3%HL Many of the details of his thought can be seen to be in accord with the Chaldean system and with the Gnostic -rimorphic 4rotennoia $-4C N+++9%(3 1or Nenocrates9 a Monad is at the centre of all reality9 quite possibly not transcendent but within the cosmological realm9 an ambiguity also found in the Chaldean system3 Below this is the Dyad9 a female principle who is @the Mother of the GodsA3%H% This female world soul is enfranchised by the Monad operating within9 or against9 the +ndefinite Dyad which is an e"il and disorderly principle9 a sublunary 4ades rife with demonic powers3 This9 and @a preoccupation with triadic distinctionsA%H; also affords compelling e"idence to lin0 Nenocrates with the @ChaldeansA and with the Gnostics > the -ripartite -ractate9 and the -rimorphic 4rotennoia in particular3 )"en
%JJ

Dillion< -he +iddle 4latonists< FE @The -imaeus remained the most important single dialogue during the Middle Platonic period9 supported by chosen te2ts from the $epu=lic< 4haedrus< -haetetus< 4haedo< 4hile=us< and Laws3A +bid3< %;3 +bid3< %'3 +bid3< %:E @an ine"itable failure to master completely the substratum3A

%JH %J: %JF %J&

+bid39 %F3 4ace imone PPtrement9 A Separate )odA the "hristian 2rigins of )nosticism9 trans3 Carol 4arrison $%&F'C reprint9 -ew Ior0E 4arperCollins9 %&&L(9 G;9 who claims that @the fact remains9 howe"er9 that the e2pression @un0nown GodA is not found in Plato or in the Platonists up to -umenius3A This e2act e2pression may not be e2tant in our sources9 but the philosophical position it implies certainly is3 PPtrement completely misconstrues the sense of this concept which can be traced bac0 to Parmenides3 +t is patently not a question of temporal progression9 of denoting god $the @true godA as her hegemonic hermeneutic insists( as being @hitherto un0nownA9 but is a depiction of an ineffable source9 beyond the phenomenological9 beyond the ability of language to e2press it3 This goes bac0 to ancient )gyptian concepts of Atum9 Amun9 and PtahC it is found in Parmenides9 peusippus9 and )udorus of Ale2andria $ca> HL B3C3)(9 the "haldean 2racles9 and numerous Gnostic te2ts3 .ensen9 9ualism and 9emonology< %LG9 sees Nenocrates as an absolute dualist as held up against the relati"e dualism of Plato3 Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< ;J3 +bid3< GL3

%HL

%H% %H;

7P
more compelling is a differentiation made by Nenocrates between @0nowledgeA $epist_me( and sense=perception $aisth_sis(9%HG which finds its e2act parallel in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia $-4C N+++9%3GH3;(%H'E @+ am the determination $aisth_sis( and the 5nowledgeA3 @5nowledgeA is from the Coptic C,,I- which is used as a synonym for Gnosis throughout the te2t3 The thought of the Protennoia e2ists as a sound in perception $aisth_sis( and as a word @hidden in the ilence of the +neffableA $G:3;G U ;&(%HJ9 for e2ample3 The sense in both speculations is that there is a form of lower 0nowledge based upon a phenomenology of the sublunary realm9 and there is a higher 0nowledge re"ealed by the feminine principle9 a special 0nowledge pertaining to the upper unseen realms3 An interesting resonance is also obtained in Nenocrates? ma2im @that true sophia is a form of 0nowledge not attainable by humansA3%HH ,ther specific terms such as pronnoia9 nous9 logos9 archai9 and telos9 are also notable for their similar applications3 1inally9 the e"il disorderly principle against which the higher god draws forth creation is highly reminiscent of )gyptian 4eliopolitan conceptions3 Plutarch?s report on the myth of +sis and ,siris was clearly influenced by Nenocrates9%H: and an )gyptian deri"ation for this "iew here is thus further enhanced3 These two philosophers9 direct successors of Plato?s Academy9 are not part of the Middle Platonist mo"ement proper9%HF but are important in the ob"ious influence they e2erted upon the continuation of Platonic dualisms3 <hile Gree0 intellectual intercourse with the potent Persian empire to the east was a factor prior to Ale2ander9 the conquest of the east in cultural9 and more specifically linguistic terms9 ob"iously generated a new watershed period of interaction3 A great intellectual cross=fertilisation between Gree0 and non=Gree09 one that was later to de"ol"e upon Ale2andria and other 0ey cities of the eastern Mediterranean following the brea0=up of this far= flung enterprise9 was initially a broadly self=conscious act of synthesis and assimilationE 4ellenism9 thus willingly perforated by di"erse influences9 became the 4ellenistic3 +n the eighth year of Nenocrates? tenure as head of the Athens Academy9 Ale2ander founded Ale2andria in GG% B3C3)39 and it cannot be doubted that his dualist "iews were aired amongst the literati of the fledgling Ptolemaic state3 At this time many of the sacred boo0s of the ,rient were finding their way into 0oine Gree09 the lingua franca of the new empire3 The state of flu2 within the Academy can bee seen by the shift from Nenocratian dualism to a more implicitly toic thrust under his successor Polemon who headed the Academy following the death of Nenocrates in G%' B3C3)3E one of Polemon?s pupils was the toic 8eno3 Arcesilaus and9 later9 Carneades9 instituted the pre=eminence of s0eptical method in the -ew Academy in the ;nd century B3C3)39 and so we ha"e all maDor philosophical contenders "ying for control of this academic throne in a relati"ely short period of time3%H& +t is at this Duncture that Ale2andria begins to loom large in the de"eloping picture of dualist thought3 <ith the fragmentation of Ale2ander?s empire9 the eastern lin0s with the
%HG %H' %HJ %HH %H: %HF %H&

+bid3<GL Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'L'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'LH3 Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< G:3 +bid3< ;H3 Defined by Dillon as e2tending from c> FL B3C3)3 to c> ;;L C3)39 -he +iddle 4latonists< %3

This s0eptic influence is much reduced in Dillon?s wor0 and mars his o"erall appreciation of the period3 ,ne must as0 why @the s0eptical tradition has no place in Middle Platonism9A $-he +iddle 4latonists< 'G > Dillon himself does not answer this question( when Gnostic thought9 4ermeticism9 the Chaldean ,racles9 e"en the @Persian influence9A attain some measure of attention9 be it e"er so cursory3

7,
sources of Gree0 culture became far more tenuous by the beginning of the second century B3C3)3 Ale2andria9 ideally suited to become the ancient world?s intellectual and economic clearing house par e2cellence9 was beginning to manifest the fruits of a particularly successful result of Ale2ander?s push for synthesis with foreign elements The Ptolemaic penchant for research resulted in the establishment of the famous libraries9 and the intellectual research underta0en there also included a syncretistic assimilation of di"erse religious elements9 from the Persian Ahura MaBda9 to e"en a consideration of Buddhist metaphysical claims from the far off realm of Asho0a3%:L )hapter $our* Graeco,Egyptian (ynthesis in "le/andria

<hen Ale2ander "isited the place and saw the ad"antages of the site9 he resol"ed to fortify the city on the harbour3 <riters record9 as a sign of the good fortune that has since attended the city9 an incident which occurred at the time of tracing the lines of the foundation3 <hen the architects were mar0ing the lines of the enclosure with chal09 the supply of chal0 ga"e outC and when the 0ing arri"ed9 his stewards furnished a part of the barley=meal which had been prepared for the wor0men9 and by means of this the streets also9 to a larger number than before9 were laid out3 This occurrence9 then9 they are said to ha"e interpreted as a good omen3%:% Thus begins trabo?s description of Ale2andria at its founding in GG% B3C3)3 +ndeed9 although we shall be focusing in this section upon the intellectual de"elopments among the literati of Ale2andria and Memphis9 we should not lose sight of the economic foundations for prosperity which made such achie"ements possible3 )"en before the Roman conquest9 the corn trade from the interior made its way up the canal for transhipment from Ale2andria to feed the citiBens of Rome3%:; The port went on to become the greatest trading centre in the ancient world and9 according to Diodorus9 was the largest city in the world by the end of the Ptolemaic period3%:G Ptolemaic )gypt was the most potent mercantile economic power the world had yet seen as a result of early Gree0 scientific and economic reforms in )gypt and Ale2andriaC as the hub of the new empire it became a clearing=house for goods and ideas9 including a multi= national population3 A substantial .ewish community established itself in the eastern part of the city%:' and the Persians were also e"ident in the city as military colonists3
%:L

+t seems certain that Buddhist emissaries from the +ndian 0ing Asho0a arri"ed in Ale2andria around ;LL B3C3)39 a period of mounting religious e2citement in )gypt3 ee amuel 53 )ddy9 -he .ing is 9eadA Studies in the Near Eastern $esistance to (ellenism CCK@CB B>"> $/incoln9 -)E !ni"ersity of -ebras0a Press9 %&H%(9 ;:F3 -he )eography of Stra=o &0009 trans3 43/3 .ones $%&G;C reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&H:(9 %: %3H3 This harbour was called @)unostus9A which probably refers to a corn deity3 P3M3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria9 "ol3 % $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity PressE %&:;(9 ;H3 1ollowing the Roman conquest9 )gypt supplied one=third of the empire?s grain requirements According to Diodorus iculus9 Ale2andria had GLL9LLL free people $probably around JLL9LLL total( in the time of Augustus3 The population of )gypt was : million > %LL years later it was :3J million9 not including Ale2andria3 ee also 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria9 &%9 /ewis9 )reeks in 4tolemaic Egypt9 ;H3 *ictor Tcheri0o"er9 (ellenistic "i%ilisation and the Jews $-ew Ior0E Atheneum9 %&:L(9 ma0es the point that .ewish emigration from Palestine to )gypt cannot be historically connected with Ale2ander

%:% %:;

%:G

%:'

P5
The laws concerning foreigners settling in Ale2andria were apparently lenient and although it is li0ely that in the first century of Ptolemaic rule a great gulf e2isted between the Gree0s and )gyptians9%:J it is as probable that the Ptolemaic immigrants were intermarrying with )gyptian women in particular from earliest times%:HC certainly by the second century of /agid rule this was a widespread social phenomenon3 )gyptian culture can be said to ha"e almost literally seduced the Gree0 from the outset3%:: This @seductionA9 as we shall see9 pertains to far more than the phenomenon of intermarriageC e"en so9 it is the mingling of blood=lines which creates the real possibility for a more complete cultural fusion3 This was a sociological dynamic that Ale2ander attempted to apply as the bonding agent for his far=flung empire3 +t is ironic that in )gypt at least9 it sowed the seeds for e"entual Ptolemaic dissolution3 +n this chapter it is our critical tas0 to understand this many=nuanced process of )gyptianisation9 both for purposes of historically and socially conte2tualising the preconditions for the rise of Gnostic sects in )gypt9 but also to understand the characteristic )gypto=4ellenistic interte2tuality of many Gnostic te2ts as ha"ing their roots in the Ptolemaic period3 The sporadic Gree0 contempt for )gypt had always been tempered by a sense of awe for the antiquity of this neighbouring cultureC while trabo thought the )gyptians were hot= tempered and hostile to foreigners9 Polybius was impressed by the ci"ility of the Ale2andrians3 The )gyptians for their part despised all foreigners9 most notably the Persians who had subDugated the country $not without tremendous resistance at times( from J;J to GG; B3C3)3 +t should be emphasised here that the Gree0 influence was already manifest long before Ale2ander?s arri"al in )gyptC the Ptolemaic era was to intensify this cultural interaction greatly3%:F This general antipathy towards foreigners howe"er9 was always mitigated amongst an e"er=widening group of )gyptians who interacted with the Gree0s9 and especially those who learned the Gree0 language3 Abo"e all9 the arri"al of Ale2ander set in motion a more ambi"alent attitude among the )gyptians9 for their earlier resistance to foreign domination had been
himselfC rather9 it seems it occurred under Ptolemy + $G;G=;FG(3
%:J

<ith regard to the first point9 it is 1raser?s conDecture that the Ptolemies encouraged the influ2 of Gree0s with talentC 4tolemaic Egypt< J;3 The second point is part of 1raser?s model which insists upon the 4ellenic purity of the opening phases of Ptolemaic rule3 Certainly the city was thoroughly Gree0 in its earliest phases3 <hile a gulf li0ely e2isted between the ruling Macedonians and the )gyptian man on the street9 the question is whether this split e2isted from top to bottom in the social hierarchy3 1raser?s argument is based upon the silence of the sources in the first instance$4tolemaic Egypt9 :L(9 and upon an implicitly orientalist "iew of the )gyptians in Ale2andria3 )ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead< G%G9 points out that intermarriage was initially banned in the Gree0 cities $Ale2andria9 -au0ratis9 and Ptolemais(9 but that the trend de"eloped from the middle of the third century onward $an interesting de"elopment considering Ale2ander?s own insistence that intermarriage ta0e place(3 Tcheri0o"er9 (ellenistic "i%ilisation and the Jews9 ;L9 ma0es the point that although Gree0 settlement in early Ptolemaic times was significant9 it didn?t really ha"e a chance against the se"en million indigenous )gyptiansC that9 mainly through intermarriage9 the process of )gyptianiBation proceeded unchec0edE @for the soldiers married women of the local population9 and with the women )gyptian names9 language9 religion and customs entered into their family life3 The children of such mi2ed families normally followed the mother3A +t is also to be noted that Gree0 women had absolutely no say in the choice of husband $at least where hereditary rights were concerned( and that9 therefore9 the phenomenon of intermarriage between Gree0 women and nati"e )gyptian men must ha"e been rare3 )gyptian women9 for their part9 had the choice3 ee Alan B /loyd9 @The /ate Period9Ain Ancient EgyptAA Social (istory9 G%%=%'3 MorenB9 Egyptian $eligion<3;''3

%:H

%::

%:F

P+
essentially religious and their e2treme hatred for the Persians facilitated Ale2ander?s "ictory3 Ale2ander?s retinue included the )gyptian matutefna0ht who9 we can surmise9 guided Ale2ander in his subsequent efforts to placate the religious sentiments of the )gyptians by ma0ing peace with the priesthoods and by consulting the oracle of Amun in the western desert3 The 0eystone for the subsequent fusion of Gree0 and )gyptian culture9 howe"er9 was the establishment of Ale2andria3 Beyond the suffering caused by the uprooting of local )gyptian populations drawn in to supply the muscle for the new administrati"e centre9 and sur"i"ing the brutal corruption of the first Gree0 satrapies9 the prosperity of the city began to alter and dominate the social and economic life of all )gypt3 +n the earliest stages9 the city must ha"e e2hibited the wildness inherent in all frontier towns as thousands of Gree0 immigrants arri"ed9 lured by the promise of a more prosperous e2istence3 Polybius and trabo had condemnatory things to say about the immorality and irresponsibility of the Gree0s in Ale2andria3%:& By the beginning of the second century B3C3)3 the lin0 between Ale2andria and the sources of Gree0 culture had been bro0en following the fragmentation of Ale2ander?s empire3 This9 along with the e"er=increasing social effects of Gree0=)gyptian intermarriage9 delimits the transition in Ale2andria from cultural mosaic to more of a melting pot9 from frontier 4ellenistic pro"incial capital9 to an independent city in )gypt9 but ne"er quite of )gypt9%FL although the threat of foreign in"asion created a common front for the )gyptians and their Gree0 administrators3%F% +t is presumed at this point $from the second century B3C3)3 onwards( that the administrators were still @pureA in the tracing of their Macedonian descent9 whereas the lower Gree0 strata were becoming increasingly )gyptianised through intermarriage in the rural areas3%F; )gyptianisation was also proceeding apace on the religious le"el3%FG The )gyptians continued to belie"e in the superiority of their culture in the face of percei"ed Gree0 barbarisms9%F' and they reDected the Graeco=)gyptian god arapis9 who was essentially a Ptolemaic court deity9 created through the grafting of Gree0 and )gyptian religious ideas as an attempt towards creating the religious foundations for imperial unity3 This9 in part9 was the result of an early affiliation between the )gyptian priest Manetho and the Gree0 priest Timotheus3 Manetho is of great interest here as he was writing boo0s on )gyptian antiquity in Gree0 in the third century B3C3)39 thus supplying the unilingual Gree0 intelligentsia with direct

%:&

Polybius9 trans3 13<3 <alban0 $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:;(9 222i"3%'9 %=JC traboE 2"ii3%3%:3 As the Romans were later to call it9 Ale:andrea ad Aegyptum > Ale2andria =y )gypt9 not in it3 Philopater $;;%=;L' B3C3)3( defended the )gyptian 0ingdom against the eleucid 0ing Antiochus9 winning a decisi"e "ictory at Raphia in ;%:3 Twenty=thousand )gyptians were instrumental in this battle and they returned with a new military confidence in themsel"es3 <ithin si2 months a great re"olt was started in the Delta which spread throughout )gypt9 lasting some thirty years as a sort of low=0ey guerilla campaign without any decisi"e engagements )ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead< G%G3 Garth 1owden writes of the durability of )gypt following the conquest of Ale2anderE @+n the centres of power9 4ellenism was triumphantC but in cultural terms )gyptianism9 instead of being submerged by 4ellenism9 e2ercised so strong a gra"itational and assimilati"e pull on it that the product of their interaction was at least as much )gyptian as Gree03 -owhere was this truer than in matters of religion3A -he Egyptian (ermes< %'3 There were mutual antipathiesC while the Gree0s were disgusted by )gyptian burial practices and animal worship9 the )gyptians were in turn horrified at the Gree0 practice of infanticide3

%FL %F%

%F; %FG

%F'

P2
insights into )gyptian thought written by an )gyptian rather than an outsider3 Manetho and Timotheus9 as priestly ad"isers to the /agid 0ing9 in effect anticipated and facilitated the later cultural fusion of Gree0 and )gyptian religious thought3 Certainly Manetho9 as a bilingual high= priest in 4eliopolis9 was in the perfect position to encourage the cultural @)gyptianisationA of the Gree0s3%FH The failure of arapis to ta0e hold among the )gyptians9 undoubtedly anticipated by Manetho9 was paralleled by a strong reception of this Graeco=)gyptian god by the Gree0s9 and by a declining interest on their part in the Gree0 gods3%F: An increasing number of Gree0s in fact were turning to the )gyptian gods9 and +sis figures prominently although she was half=4ellenised in the process3%FF Iet e"en before Ale2ander )gyptian merchantmen were promoting acceptance of +sis abroad on her own terms and not as a Gree0 goddess equi"alent3%F& +n particular9 +sis was attracti"e to women9 effecti"ely ele"ating their stature in the 4ellenistic world3%&L The emancipatory effect of +sis upon the status of women is perfectly e2pressed in a long hymn to +sis dating from the second century C3)39 found at ,2yrhynchus9 which proclaims that9 @she made the power of women equal to that of menA3%&% The emancipation of Gree0 women9 as part of the larger growing concern for the indi"idual9 was part of a remar0able social de"elopment in the 4ellenistic age3 1rom the fourth century onwards an increasing number of women were recei"ing a formal education at all le"els3 1or the first time in Gree0 history9 they were ta0ing part in ci"ic matters $performing as magistrates for e2ample( and recei"ing ci"ic honours3 This was also paralleled by their impact upon the arts3 <ithin the Ale2andrian milieu the female poets )rrina $@the girl geniusA%&;(9 -ossis of /ocri9 and Anyte of Tegea in particular are notable3 <e might speculate that the focus upon the feminine in Gnosticism finds its precursor in the appearance of the female poets of
%FJ %FJ

Manetho?s wor0s were sponsored by Ptolemy `ter $the first 0ing of the Ptolemaic dynasty9 GLJ=;FG( and the underlying rhetorical purpose is mirrored in the writings of Berossos9 priest of Mardu0 at Babylon9 who wrote for Antiochus + $;F%=;H%(3 @The wor0s of Manetho and Berossos may be interpreted as an e2pression of the ri"alry of the two 0ings9 Ptolemy and Antiochus9 each see0ing to proclaim the great antiquity of his land3A Manetho9 Aegyptiaca9 trans3 <3G3 <addell $%&'LC reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&FL(9 23 <hile there is a fair amount of uncertainty about the details of Manetho?s life9 his role in the establishment of erapis seems beyond doubt3 A marble bust was found with his name inscribed upon the base9 in the ruins of the temple of erapis at Carthage3 +anetho< 2iii3 + suggest that no )gyptian priest in 4eliopolis $iwnw in )gyptian te2ts( would ha"e deliberately aimed the mass of )gyptian belie"ers towards a synthesis with Gree0 religious sentimentC rather9 it is more li0ely that Manetho was in effect attempting to create an antechamber for foreigners9 perhaps to facilitate their e"entual entry into the great hall of )gyptian religion @ he could become Aphrodite and *enus9 goddess of beauty and lo"e3 he could assume the queenly office of 4era consort of 8eus $himself then identified with arapis( ruling as mistress of all three dominions > hea"en9 earth and hell333 he could be worshipped as the Great Mother of all -ature3 he could be the personification of <isdom $ ophia( and Philosophy3A R3)3 <itt9 0sis in the )raeco@$oman Gorld $/ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&:%(9 ;L3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria9 ;HL3 arah B3 Pomeroy9 )oddesses< Ghores< Gi%es< and Sla%esAGomen in "lassical Anti#uity $-ew Ior0E choc0en Boo0s9 %&:J(9 ;%&3 4>2:yrhynchus %%3%GFL3 ;%'=%H9 trans3 Pomeroy9 )oddesses< Ghores< Gi%es< and Sla%es9 ;%&3 1raser9 4tolemiac Ale:andria< JHH3

%FH

%F:

%FF

%F& %&L

%&% %&;

P4
Ale2andria in the third century B3C3)3 The literary use of a first=person female narrator is e2tremely rare in ancient te2ts and the appearance of this de"ice in Ptolemaic and Gnostic Ale2andria strongly suggests historical connectedness3%&' <ithin the boundaries of the Gnostic mo"ement there appeared a substantial number of religious leaders who were in fact Gree0= educated women3 A maDor factor in the growing influence of women in Ptolemaic Ale2andria e2tended down from abo"e9 as it were9 from the powerful and rather ruthless Ptolemaic queens and in their relationships to +sis and "arious other deities3%&J )2tending upwards was the influence of )gyptian women through intermarriageC )gyptian women had traditionally been more emancipated than their Gree0 counterparts in social terms3%&H The abo"e=mentioned growing concern for the indi"idual in"ol"ed the @disco"eryA of women as indi"iduals in power=politics and in religion3%&: The e2pression of this sentiment perhaps found its apotheosis in the wor0s of the epigramist Meleager of Gadara $.ordan9 c> %LL B3C3)3(9 most of whose poems are about lo"e3 +n the "ariegated forms his epigrams ta0e $one hundred ha"e sur"i"ed(9 his lo"e for womanhood attains almost the le"el of a religious panegyric3 4ellenistic art re"ealed a new interest in the eroticism of women3 +n conDunction with the influence of Ptolemaic royal women9 the courtesan class of sophisticated women also influenced perceptions of women and female se2uality3 <hile a certain fran0 libertinism in Ptolemaic times manifested in the Dionysian
%&G %&G

ee 5ing9 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism which discusses the positi"e9 and negati"e9 aspects of the feminine in Gnostic thought3 By @focus upon the feminineA we are concerned here with the sociological role of women in the mo"ement as anticipated by 4ellenistic emancipation9 as well as the prominent appearance of female di"inities3 1or the importance of Memphis in the de"elopment of +sis aretologies9 see .an Bergman9 0ch Bin 0sisA Studien ,um memphitischen (intergrund der griechischen 0sisaretalogien $!ppsalaE Acta !ni"ersitatis !psaliensis9 %&HF(3 +n particular9 Cleopatra represented herself as @the new +sis9A <itt9 0sis in the )raeco@$oman Gorld9 %':3 Apart from the fact that )gyptian female children were not subDect to infanticide9 )gyptian women were not marrying as early as Gree0 women $late as opposed to early teens for the Gree0s(9 they were not subDected to a kurios $guardian( beyond age twel"e9 they could choose husbands9 initiate di"orces9 own and sell land9 and conduct legal suits3 This is attested as far bac0 as ,ld and Middle 5ingdom literary sources9 Gay Robbins9 Gomen in Ancient Egypt $Cambridge9 MAE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&&G(3 A "ery narrow "iew of women?s roles is espoused by Antoinette <ire who marginalises the )gyptian situation as followsE @Although a broader public status accrued to a woman through the males with whom she was so lin0ed9 this status was due to the effecti"e functioning of these roles and was e2ercised largely through them3 The occasional indi"idual e2ception of a Cleopatra or the regional e2ception of land=owning women in )gypt only highlight what was e"erywhere else the rule3A ee Antoinette Clar0 <ire9 @The ocial 1unctions of <omen?s Asceticism in the Roman )ast9A in 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 GLF3 This surprisingly pre"alent "iew in Gnostic tudies does not "ery well understand or see0 to establish the )gyptian setting as perhaps the most critical Sit, im Le=en for @images of the feminineA in Gnosticism3 The emancipation of women was a 4ellenistic phenomenon in Ale2andria9 the superior status of )gyptian women was a widespread historical reality in )gyptE both factors found their later e2pression in the Gnostic mo"ement3 Michael Grant9 'rom Ale:ander to "leopatraA -he (ellenistic Gorld $-ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&F;(9 ;L'E @The cultural bac0ground for this shifting of attitudes was a tremendous new disco"ery9 strongly reflected both in literature and art9 that women were actually interesting9 not merely as remote figures in tragedies9 but as real and attracti"e personsE and preoccupation with their loo0s9 and with feminine standards of beauty9 increased out of all recognition3A

%&'

%&J

%&H

%&:

Pfesti"als at )leusis near Ale2andria perhaps finds its parallel in the rise of the later libertine Gnostic sects9%&F a more important connection is found simply in a focus upon the indi"idual which included male and female se2uality3 Many Gnostic sects too0 the crucible of male=female se2uality as the most critical component for spiritual sal"ation3 Madeline copello details the similarities between heroines in the Gnostic no"el and the 4ellenistic no"el9 noting that @in the gnostic no"els9 there is a tension between prostitution and "irginity which is un0nown to 4ellenistic no"elsA3%&& A strong connection is made in this regard with .ewish wisdom literature and her o"erall conclusion is that Gnosticism in"ol"ed culti"ated women in its circles9 in particular the courtesan class3 1or all this9 Ale2andria reflected the general widespread decline of Gree0 culture in the late 4ellenistic ageC at least such is the picture drawn by some Classicists3;LL Putting aside such 4ellenocentric optics which sees this Graeco=)gyptian cultural fusion as a @declineA we now focus upon the )gyptian side of the cultural equation3 1ollowing the strong showing by the )gyptian contingent at the battle of Raphia in ;%: B3C3)39 and faced with the determination of the long )gyptian re"olt which followed9 Gree0 respect for the )gyptian grew3 +n the face of continuous re"olts throughout almost the entire Ptolemaic period9 the dynasty became more and more )gyptianised in an effort to appease )gyptian intractability in this regard3;L% The temples became the centre of )gyptian cultural lifeC they alone were e2empt from ta2es and could produce oil3 The regular priestly synods were mo"ed from Ale2andria to Memphis in %&: B3C3)3 signalling a shift in the balance of power3;L; By the time the half=Gree09 half=)gyptian named Dionysus=Petosarapis began his re"olt among the Gree0s in %H& B3C3)3 $his name itself manifesting the diminishing fault=line between the two cultures(9 a re"olt which quic0ly spread among the )gyptians9;LG the currency of the regime was
%&F

The heresiologist )piphanius? testimony o"erall is rather dubious in its specific details9 but there is no reason to doubt that he had some sort of encounter with @liberalA )gyptian Gnostic women $Panarion NN* ;9:(3 Madeline copello9 @.ewish and Gree0 4eroines in the -ag 4ammadi /ibrary9A in 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 F%3 The thesis of 1raser9 in 4tolemaic Ale:andria< is that the @golden ageA of Ale2andrian creati"ity was a product of the Gree0 immigrs in the Grd century B3C3)3 1ollowing this9 @the immigr was being replaced by an inferior9 locally=bred intellectual class9A $:%:(3 Iet9 it should be noted9 1raser is largely arguing e silentio $that no great wor0s of Ale2andrian poetry sur"i"e from the first and second centuries B3C3)3 ergo there were none9 for e2ample YHL:Z(3 The @re"i"alA $as 1raser phrases it( of certain philosophical schools in the mid=%st century B3C3)3 in Ale2andria indicates an ob"ious continued creati"ity associated with a library that remained intact e"en following the Roman conquest3 1or a complete refutation of the traditional "iew that Caesar inad"ertently burned a substantial portion of the library in Ale2andria9 see /uciano Canfora9 -he &anished Li=rary $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&F:(9 F%=F;> A graphic e2ample of this is to be found in the comparison of two decrees written by )gyptian priests in honour of the Ptolemaic 0ings3 The first was written in ;GF in honour of Ptolemy +++9 and the second in honour of Ptolemy *9 was written in %&H B3C3)3 The second letter details the increasing efforts of the Ptolemies to placate a powerful nati"e priesthood3 M3M3 Austin9 -he (ellenistic Gorld from Ale:ander to the $oman "on#uestA A Selection of Ancient Sources in -ranslation $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&F%(9 GHH9 G:'3 Dorothy .3 Crawford9 @Ptolemy9 Ptah and Apis in 4ellenistic MemphisA9 in Studies on 4tolemaic +emphis< tudia 4ellenistica ;'9 ed3 <illy Peremans $/ou"anni9 %&FL(9 %&3 According to Diodorus $NN+3+Ja( Dionysus incited the masses to re"olt and we can assume he was bilingual9 as his name suggests3

%&&

;LL

;L%

;L;

;LG

P.
appearing with symbols of )gyptian gods9 reflecting the shift in the currency of culture as it were3 )gyptian priestly propaganda was in part responsible for the anti=4ellenist attitude amongst the people at large3;L' The core of )gyptian intransigence was the belief in maat> ,ne might say that the sheer immo"ability of the culture in this regard9 so strongly suggested by her massi"e monuments and temples9 powerfully contributed to induce the turning of Gree0s to )gyptian gods3 <hile intermarriage supplied the primary social underpinnings for this de"elopment9 it is important too that by the second century an increasing number of @Gree0sA were in fact born and raised upon )gyptian soil and naturally identified with )gypt as their homeland3 @)gyptianisationA created different results on different le"els3 +n fact much of the social struggles of these times suggest a class war9 thus in"ol"ing the two races on the same sides at times3 )gyptianisation on the le"el of the lower classes in"ol"ed the partial transculturaliBation of Gree0s who embraced )gyptian religious beliefsC the great mass of lower=class )gyptians for their part9 howe"er9 thoroughly resisted 4ellenisation3 ,n the administrati"e le"el a half=caste group of Graeco=)gyptians was created alongside the Gree09 and )gypto=Gree0 alongside the )gyptian9 each side mo"ing towards the centre as it were3 Ptolemaic appeasement of )gyptian religious sentiment in"ol"ed pri"ileges being e2tended to the )gyptian priesthood and the clergy in Memphis became pro=Ptolemaic to a large e2tent once it became clear that the regime was committed to supporting the hereditary transition of religious power in Memphis9 and once this power was seen to grow as the centuries passed3 The high priest in Memphis became a sort of ethnarch9 or shadow=0ing9 a political reality not li0ely to ha"e been lost upon the Ptolemies3;LJ 1rom %H' B3C3)3 these priesthoods began to include Gree0s3;LH At first glance one would assume that these @Gree0sA were allowed only to become stolists $a sort of temple custodian= class of priest(9 or understudies of some sort9 and not immediately allowed into the specialist class of scholars and intellectuals3 4owe"er9 @Gree0A is a misnomer9 as we are dealing largely with Graeco=)gyptians9 that is9 those born and raised in a bilingual household and neighbourhoods and not pure Gree0s who had later learned the language3 There is no reason to assume that such persons were not granted access to the innermost sanctuaries of the 4ouse of /ife as true aspirantsC indeed9 the highest priestly office in the land in this period was occupied by Petubastis $%;L=:J B3C3)3(9 son of the high=priest Psenptaas9 and the Gree0 princess Berenice9 daughter of )uergetes ++9 and so was himself an e2emplar of this phenomenon3;L: Both he and his father9 as 4igh Priests in Memphis9 consolidated the prestige and legitimacy of the
;L'

)ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead< ;:'=;:JE @The )gyptians e"en claimed that all man0ind had learned law and human culture from )gyptian colonies sent all o"er the world3333 Athens was said to ha"e been founded by the )gyptians from ais3333 Y,Zne thing "arious )gyptians did agree upon was that all human culture came from )gyptian gods and )gyptian 0ings9 and that these e2cellent institutions had been changed for the worse by the Ma0edonian YsicZ9 the conquerors and destroyers of ci"iliBation3A Dorothy .3 Crawford9 @Ptolemy9 Ptah9 and Apis in 4ellenistic Memphis9A G%E @Memphis now stands apart from other )gyptian temples with a special relationship between 0ing and high priestA3 ee also )3A3)3 Reymond and .3<3B3 Barns9 @Ale2andria and MemphisE some 4istorical ,bser"ations9A 2r> 'H $%&::(E %=GG9 as well as )3A3)3 Reymond< 'rom the $ecords of a 4riestly 'amily from +emphis< "ol3% $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&F%(3 )ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead9 G%& There is some contro"ersy connected with the ordinals to be gi"en to Psentaas9 father of Petubastis9 Petubastis himself9 and his son9 also named Psentaas3 As my discussion is not concerned with the larger genealogy of the entire priesthood in Memphis + ha"e opted to lea"e these off3

;LJ

;LH ;L:

PK
Ptolemies in a time of political wea0ness for the dynasty3 Petubastis was brought into the temple in %LJ=%L' at the age of %H and probably became high=priest at age G' when his father Psenptaas died in F: or FH B3C3)3;L& Petubastis issued @decrees and ordinances on behalf of the 0ingAC as well9 he @emerges from the political chaos created by the acti"ities of the "arious factions in Ale2andria as the real master of )gyptA3;%L As a "eritable second 0ing in Memphis9 this son=in=law to the Gree0 0ing must ha"e reported to )uergetes on the progress of the state= funded wor0 going on at 5om ,mbo and )dfu in the 0ing?s name3 4e undoubtedly engaged in the wor0 of restoring the ancient )gyptian te2ts as had his nine predecessors under the Ptolemies3 +t is scarcely concei"able that he could ha"e attained such high office were he not e2tremely capable with hieratic and hieroglyphic9 as well as demotic3 )qually9 one imagines a 0een interest on the part of this spiritual potentate in furthering the word of )gyptian religious thought9 into Gree09 if not at least for the Gree0 priests under his direct care9 then to all those with serious purpose and interest3 The demotic stela for Petubastis is unfortunately fragmentary9 howe"er a stela dedicated to his son Psenptaas pointedly underlines the lengths the Gree0 0ings went to in"ol"e themsel"es in )gyptian religious practice and9 equally9 the rapport that the high priests of Memphis had with the Gree0 0ing in Ale2andriaE + went to the residence of the Gree0 0ings on the shore of the sea west of Aqa whose name is Ra0otis YAle2andriaZ3 The 5ing of !pper and /ower )gypt9 /ord of the Two /ands9 the god Philopater Philadelphus -eos=Dionysus9 coming forth from his palace ali"e and well9 arri"ed at the temple of +sis9 mistress of the +at=,udDat3 4e made many and great offerings to her3 /ea"ing the temple of +sis upon his chariot9 the 0ing himself stopped his chariot3 4e put on my head a beautiful crown of gold with all sorts of genuine and precious stones with $S( a heart of the 0ing in the midst of it3 + was named his prophet3 4e issued a royal edict to the towns and nomes sayingE @+ ha"e made the great Chief of wor0ers Psenptaas9 true of "oice9 my prophetA$BM FFH Y%L;HZ(3;%%
;LF

+t is here that an important precondition for the rise of Gnostic thought was created9 for the group in the "anguard of Petubastis was fluent in Gree09 literally @the language of powerA of the time9 as well as )gyptian3 The e"olution of spoken Coptic9 with its liberal use of Gree0 loan= words9 is the natural result one would e2pect3 The de"elopment of this "erbal phenomenon into a written medium employing the Gree0 alphabet was a natural consequence9 one that shall be e2amined more closely in Chapter H3 Complete bilingualism pro"ided the basis for a subsequent fusion of Gree0 and )gyptian philosophical and religious thought among a group that was already predisposed to ta0e up these matters3;%;

;LF ;L&

Reymond and Barns9 @Ale2andria and Memphis9A%H=%&

Charles Maystre9 Les grands prRtres de 4tah de +emphis $1reiburg9 witBerlandE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&&;(9 %&;=&G3 Reymond and Barns9 @Ale2andria and Memphis9A ;%3 Charles Maystre9 Les grands prRtres de 4tah de +emphis9 '%;3

;%L ;%% ;%;

ee 1ran]ois Dunand9 @/es yncrPtismes dans la Religion de l?7gypte RomaineA9 in Les syncrtismes dans les religions de lanti#uit< ed3 1ran]ois Dunand and P3 /P"_que $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J(9 %J;= FJ9 where the earlier Ptolemaic dynamics are also discussed3

P7
<e 0now "ery little about )gyptian religious life in Ale2andria in this period9 but we may surmise that it was acti"e as the )gyptians also had their own law courts3;%' 1or the Gree0s9 apart from the abo"e=mentioned cult of arapis9 there was a dynastic cult centred upon the body of Ale2ander3;%J A syncretism of Dionysus=!nderworld=,siris was made9 and Bast was associated with Artemis by the Gree0s3 There is e"idence that the Persian religion of Ahura= MaBda gained some footing in third century B3C3)3 Ale2andria9;%H and a possible 8er"anite influence upon the festi"al of 5ore=Aion held in Ale2andria can be detected3;%: The "illage of )leusis east of the city was named after the site of the famous )leusinian mysteries in Greece9 and a rather e2uberant yearly festi"al was held there3;%F +sis is perhaps the best attested deity in Ptolemaic Ale2andria9 and there may ha"e been an earlier cult of +sis with its own temple on the hill of Ra0otis before the foundation of Ale2andria3 .udaism of course was strongly present in the eastern part of the city9 but e"idence for non=)gyptianOGree0 deities is sparse9 limited at present to Cybele9 the Phrygian goddess of fertility9 referred to in Ale2andria as @The Mother of the Gods and the a"iour who hears our prayersA and @The Mother of the Gods9 the Accessible ,neA3;%& 1inally9 it seems certain that Buddhist emissaries from the +ndian 0ing Asho0a arri"ed in Ale2andria around ;LL B3C3)39 a period of mounting religious e2citement in )gypt3;;L An important factor has to be the e2istence of mystery=cults in Ale2andria9 and the cult of +sis must ran0 as the most important3 The 4ellenisation of this )gyptian goddess resulted in her acceptance in the remotest corners of the Gree0 and Roman worlds3 +n her most potent form
;%G ;%G

1raser9 predictably9 concludes that there was therefore @a lac0 of religious acti"ity9A $4tolemaic Ale:andria< %F&(9 this because the site was not associated with a particular god3 There is9 howe"er9 some e"idence that a fort was established on the site by Ramses +++ around %JLL B3C3)39 and there may ha"e been a shrine to +sis upon Ra0otis hill before the arri"al of Ale2anderC in any e"ent9 there is no e"idence to suggest that the site was "iewed by )gyptians as being on foreign soil9 much as they detested Ale2andria at times3 Vuite apart from this9 it is unli0ely in the e2treme that with all the e"idence we ha"e of )gyptian cultural tenacity9 that the )gyptian population e2isted in Ale2andria as deculturaliBed drones as 1raser would suggest3 +bid39 J'3 The body of Ale2ander was @0idnappedA by Ptolemy on route from Babylonia to Macedonia9 and brought to @hisA city3 This was a shrewd mo"e intended to legitimate the city in )gyptian eyes as the pharaonic centre of power in )gypt3 +n the e"ent9 this was only minimally successful3 According to DioscoridesE 1raser9 ;:&3 Also9 @the statement that 4ermippus9 the pupil of Callimachus9 wrote a commentary on the writings of 8oroaster9 if true9 suggests that translations of Persian te2ts were also a"ailable for study at the library3A1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria< GGL3 8er"anism was an offshoot of 8oroastrianism which focused upon a higher unity of Time within which the dar0 and light principles $Ahura MaBda and Ahriman( were contained9 hence the percei"ed connection with the Gree0 5ore9 and the )gyptian Aion3 According to atyrus3 trabo condemns the @immoralitiesA practiced there by men and women39 and <alter Bur0ert9 while admitting that the e"idence is inconclusi"e9 draws the following conclusionE @it seems that the Ale2andrian festi"al too0 place in a temple9 without pre"ious initiationC it was not a mystery celebration but rather belonged to an )gyptian setting3A ee <alter Bur0ert9 Ancient +ystery "ults $Cambridge9 MAE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:(9 GF3 The question of course that is not answered here is whether or not there was participation by )gyptians3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria< ;::3 There is a suggestion of influence here with the later Gnostic myth of one of the primordial female aeons9 sometimes called )00lesia9 or Barbelo9 referred to as @The Mother of the Aeons3A )ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead< ;:F3

;%' ;%J

;%H

;%:

;%F

;%&

;;L

PP
here she manifests fate3 4er declaration9 @+ conquer 4eimarmene3 4eimarmene obeys meA powerfully anticipates the first person address of the female spea0er in the Gnostic -he -hunderA 4erfect +indE @+ am the one who is called Tthe Truth9? and T+niquity3?A $;L3:=F;;%( Both female figures in effect refute the widespread belief in astrological determinism3 The self= professed o2ymoronic qualities of the female spea0er in the Gnostic te2t suggests the shift into a dualistic conception of the goddess consistent with the ophia myth3;;; And so while the higher ophia does rise abo"e the 4eimarmene $1ate(9 her lower aspect continues to be held in thrall3 This may well represent the e"olution of the +sis tradition within an epoch which began to subscribe to the conception of a demonised cosmos3;;G +n any e"ent9 +sis must be considered as an important influence upon the e"olution of the Gnostic ophiaOBarbelo figure as we shall more closely e2amine in Chapter %%3;;' <ithin )gypt9 the +sis cult was most strongly de"eloped in Ale2andria and Memphis3 Rather than dealing with other specific sects at length it is more important to note the common features of mystery cults as opposed to religions3 +n the first instance the "oluntarism in"ol"ed in Doining such a group was of critical importE;;J the cults operated in seclusion and were not at all interested in propagating a faith3;;H There is a primary concern with @0nowingA among an inner elite group of adepts9 pertaining directly to the transmission of the deeper significance of some core myth3;;: Another important characteristic is the complete absence of any concept of heresy9 or e2communication3;;F All of the abo"e factors represent 0ey characteristics of the Gnostic sects and are therefore to be counted among the precursors of Gnostic thought in Ale2andria3 ,ne "ery important difference does e2ist9 howe"er9 and this is manifest in the "ague soteriologies presented by the mystery cults in generalC unli0e the

;;%

Coptic transcription from -he "optic )nostic Li=rary< "ol3 N+A Nag (ammadi "odices &< 8@6 P &09 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:&(9 ;JL3 A compelling presentation of the close affinity between "arious passages in this te2t and the sayings of +sis is presented by Rose 4orman Arthur in her boo0 -he Gisdom )oddessA 'eminine +otifs in Eight Nag (ammadi 9ocuments $/anham9 MarylandE !ni"ersity Press of America9 %&F'(3 Mar"in <3 Meyer9 -he Ancient +ysteries $ an 1ranciscoE 4arper U Row9 %&F:(9 %:L=:%E @+sis is9 in fact9 the female principle of -ature9 and is recepti"e of e"ery form of generation9 in accord with which she is called by Plato the gentle nurse and the all=recepti"e9 and by most people has been called by countless names9 since9 because of the force of Reason9 she turns herself to this thing or that3333 Y Zhe has an innate lo"e for the first and most dominant of all things9 which is identical with the good9 and this she yearns for and pursuesC but the portion which comes from e"il she tries to a"oid and to reDect9 for she ser"es them both as place and means of growth3A +sis9 li0e the later ophia9 embodies the power of eros and thanatos3 This9 in turn9 may ha"e resulted in a schism within this goddess tradition as is suggested in the female spea0er?s address to the Gree0s and in her identification with )gypt in the -hunderA 4erfect +ind3 According to 4ippolytus $(er3 J9%'9H=:(9 a Gnostic group called the Peratae worshipped +sis as the right=hand power of god and as the twel"e hours of the day3 ee also .ean Doresse9 -he Secret Books of the Egyptian )nostics $%&JFC reprint9 Rochester9*TE +nner Traditions +nt39 /td39 %&FH(9 ;:G=:'3 @Mystery initiations were an optional acti"ity within polytheistic religion9 comparable to9 say9 a pilgrimage to antiago di Compostela within the Christian system9A Bur0ert9 Ancient +ystery "ults9 %L3 +bid39 'J3 +bid39 :H3 +bid39 'F3

;;;

;;G

;;'

;;J

;;H ;;: ;;F

P,
Gnostics9 who made this the "ery heart of their myths9 the mystery cults had only a "ery faint concern for the sal"ation of the soul3;;& Amidst this mosaic of belie"ers9 there were philosophical traditions which originated in Greece and which were present in Ale2andria3 The topos here must focus upon the library of Ale2andria9;GL and upon its associated Mouseion which was9 by etymology9 a cult=centre for the worship of the Muses3 <hile the sources don?t permit us directly to "iew what wor0 was done here9 we can say with some confidence that this must ha"e in"ol"ed cataloguing and copying as a basis for more ad"anced wor0 in philology and science9 certainly in"ol"ing teaching and the gi"ing of lectures3 An important point for our purposes is that ancient )gyptian te2ts were li0ely translated there3;G% +n the first instance9 the Ptolemies appear to ha"e had a high regard for ancient )gyptian customs and traditions9 and the high=priest in Memphis apparently operated as a *iceroy of the Ptolemies3;G; +n this connection we note that the abo"e=mentioned 4igh Priest Psenptaas was li0ely gi"en the hand of the Gree0 princess in return for the assistance he had rendered )uergetes ++3 A fundamental split e2isted among the philosophical groups of the 4ellenistic world3 +n the fourth century B3C3)3 the epicentre of Gree0 philosophical thought was still Athens9 and this continued on until it was sac0ed by Mithradates in FF B3C3)39 following which the Academy shifted to Ale2andria $ca> :H B3C3)3(3 *arious philosophical traditions were well=represented in Ale2andria in the form of contending sects9 and the fundamental split we are dealing with is that which e2isted between the toics and 0eptics3 +t is 0epticism we shall be focusing upon as the primary philosophical progenitor of Gnostic thought in Ale2andria3 0epticism was deeply hostile to the toic notion of con"entional 0nowledge as the essential foundation of e2cellence $aret;GG(9 and strongly emanated from the Academy in Greece in the third century B3C3)39 the prestige of which had recently been re=established by the 0eptic Arcesilaus3;G' An epistemological theory of uncertainty which allowed room for probability9 but not for absolute certainty9 was espoused by Antiochus of Ascalon and his intellectual heirs of the late Ptolemaic period9 Potamon and Arius Didymus9 both of Ale2andria3 Potamon was the founder of the )clectic chool9;GJ and Arius was the @spiritual ad"isorA of Augustus during his triumphant entry into Ale2andria3;GH The old 0eptical school of Pyrrho was re"i"ed in Ale2andria by
;;& ;GL

+bid39 F:3

TBetBes and )piphanius agree that there were two libraries3 According to TBetBes the @Palace libraryA contained 'LL9LLL symmigeis scrolls containing more than one title9 and &L9LLL amigeis with only one wor09 while the @e2ternal libraryA contained ';9FLL wor0s3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria< G;&3 ee /uciano Canfora9 -he &anished Li=rary9 %FG=F&3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria9 GGL3 Reymond and Barns9 @Ale2andria and MemphisA9 %J

;G% ;G; ;GG

1or etymological reasons we shall insist that aret be translated as @e2cellenceA rather than the modern inflation of @"irtueA as it is often rendered3 A3A3 /ong9 (ellenistic 4hilosophyA Stoics< Epicureans< Sceptics9 ;nd ed3 $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&FH(9 &'3 A mo"ement @which selected from the doctrines of each school9A 1raser9 '&L3 1raser notes that the influence of the eclecticism of Antiochus e2tended into the Roman period9 in particular the influence it had on Cicero through whose teachings it has come down to us as the familiar creed of western humanism3 ,ne of whose accomplishments was the pardoning by Augustus of Cleopatra?s court ophist Philostratus3 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria< '&L3

;G'

;GJ

;GH

,5
Anesidemus of Cnossus in JL='L B3C3)3E his first boo09 4yrrhoneian Arguments9 was an attac0 upon toic philosophical and physical doctrines3;G: -eo= cepticism remained essentially an Ale2andrian philosophy long after the fall of the Ptolemies3 +t is important to postulate here that the toic= 0eptic split must ha"e e2tended down to ground le"el9 as it wereC that it was not Dust a series of abstruse arguments limited to a small group of thin0ers wor0ing in association with the library9 but also represented a @gut=le"elA response to the layperson?s role in the cosmos9 as witnessed by the widespread 4ellenistic de"elopment of anti=determinism3 The rise of the great religious mo"ements in the Roman period affords us a clear picture of this split in world"iews9 rather facilely summed up in modern scholarly discourse as @monistA and @dualistA world="iews3 ,n the one hand there was the toic notion of Di"ine Reason operati"e in the e2emplar of kosmos > @all is as it should beA e2presses the sentiment9 and there is no radical di"ine=lower world splitE for the toic @it was a one=storey systemA3;GF The 0eptic deconstructs this attitude9 and it must be remembered that the formal 0eptics of this period always operated in the shadow of their ophistic forerunners9 with their own emphasis upon subDecti"ity9 the indi"idual9 and rhetoric3 +t is a short leap from a disparagement of toic idealism to demonise the cosmos and ma0e the problem of radical e"il a primary concern3 The orthodo2=Gnostic split9 manifesting a later de"elopment of this schism9 became an acute monistOdualist confrontation in the phenomenal rise of Manichaeism for which the toic ideal of Di"ine Reason in the kosmos was brought down to its most debased antithesis9 that of a pernicious tyrannical power=system3 The spontaneous appeal of Manichaeism indicates the widespread support this world"iew possessed at the grassroots le"el and9 as shall be demonstrated in Chapter &9 )gypt too was fertile ground for the growth of a radical dualism in its most e2treme form of Manichaeism 3 ,n a philosophical le"el9 this di"ision manifests itself as one between deterministic and "oluntaristic conceptions of the indi"idual9 actualised within a symbolic world that is consequently pro or anti=cosmist3 The philosophy of )picurus9 for e2ample9 was anti=cosmist in the sense that it reDected astrological determinism as did the cult of +sis3 A passage from the -ripartite -ractate $an e2tended Gnostic wor0 probably written in Ale2andria9 and certainly )gyptian( draws out this di"ision "ery wellE They ha"e introduced other types $of e2planation(9 some saying that those who e2ist ha"e their being in accordance with pro"idence These are the people who obser"e the orderly mo"ement and foundation of creation3 ,thers say that it is something alien3 These are the people who obser"e the di"ersity and lawlessness and the powers of e"il3 $%L&3J=%J(;G& Plutarch9 writing around %%F C3)39 obDects to toic monism9 and demonstrates the stance of a host of Platonist philosophers with rather Gnostic leaningsE <e must neither place the origins of the uni"erse in inanimate bodies9 as Democritus and )picurus do9 nor yet postulate one reason and one pro"idence9 dominating and ruling e"erything9 as the creator of characterless matter9 as the toics doC for it is impossible9
;G:

1raser maintains that Pyrrhonism @died outA in the mid=third century arguing9 again9 from negati"e e"idence There is no direct proof for this and it seems far more li0ely that the philosophy was ali"e and well throughout the entire Ptolemaic period3 )3R3 Dodds9 4agan and "hristian in an Age of An:iety $/ondonE <3<3 -orton U Company9 %&HJ(9 %G3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++E Nag (ammadi "odice 0 J0A6LA -he -ripartite -ractate9 "ol3 %9 ed3 4arold <3 Attridge U )laine 43 Pagels $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FJ(9 ;&L3

;GF ;G&

,+
where God is responsible for e"erything9 for anything e"il to come into being9 or for anything good to come where God is responsible for nothing3$9e 0side GHFB(;'L ,ne feature that is prominent on the 0eptical side of the di"ide is an implicit focus upon the indi"idual9 male or female3 Pyrrhonian 0epticism e2hibited a close lin0 with the ophistic enlightenment9 and with the thought of Protagoras in particular3;'% To return for a moment to our earlier discussion about the emancipation of women in 4ellenistic times9 we can assume that the "arious modes of 0eptical thought in Ale2andria would ha"e supported women rather than e2cluding their participation9 in"ol"ed9 as they were9 in the repudiation of traditional "aluesE the connection with the earlier ophistic Aufkl1rung has already been noted9 and it was the ophists who first raised the issue of women?s rights3;'; The reDection by )picurus of toic doctrines also included the admission of women into the sect as equals3 o9 too9 the female philosopher 4ipparchis li"ed according to Cynic principles3 The toics9 for their part9 did not posit equality between the se2es and refused to accept women as rational beings3 +n opposition to the 0eptics who were undermining the "alues of the Classical period9 the toics9 following their founder 8eno $GGJ=;HG B3C3)3(9 were intent upon reinforcing those "alues9 and in particular9 in reasserting the traditional role of motherhood and marriage for women3;'G toicism9 on the whole9 was a philosophy of social conser"atism3 The radical subDecti"ism of the ophists proclaimed the relati"ity of truth9;'' and under the auspices of Pericles in Athens9 created a distinct internationalism of outloo0 as pur"eyed by the tra"elling sophistes3 This feature was to become the hallmar0 of the later 4ellenistic age as it bro0e out across the ,rient under Ale2anderC indeed9 the young 0eptic Pyrrho tra"elled with Ale2ander on his campaigns in the east3 The demurral by Protagoras concerning the e2istence of the gods finds its more e2treme de"elopment in the appearance of agnosticism in Ale2andria in the Cyreanean philosophy of Theodorus9;'J as well as in the atheism of )uhemerus $died ;&F B3C3)3( which was to ha"e far=reaching effects in its literary assault upon traditional religious beliefs3;'H A connection also e2isted here between the subsequent rise of )uhemerism and the ophistic mo"ement3;': +n conDunction with the abo"e undermining of traditionalism9 Diogenes9
;'L ;'% ;';

Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride9 %FF=F&3 /ong9 (ellenistic 4hilosophy9 :&3

G3B3 5erferd9 -he Sophistic +o%ement $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&F%(9 %J&E @+t is not surprising that the new thin0ing of the ophistic mo"ement should lead to the posing of questions concerning the rights and position of women in Gree0 societies9A3 <e would also note in passing that the first implicit condemnation of sla"ery in Gree0 te2ts $found nowhere in Plato and Aristotle( appears to be that of Alcidamas9 a disciple of the ophist Gorgias3 Regarding their concern about falling birth=rates in Gree0 cities9 see Pomeroy9 )oddesses< Ghores< Gi%es< and Sla%es9 %G;3 ee Protagoras? famous dictumE @Man is the measure of all thingsE of things that are9 that they areC of things that are not9 that they are notA $trans3 <heelwright9 -he 4resocratics9 ;G&(3 @As for the gods9 + ha"e no way of 0nowing either that they e2ist or that they do not e2istC nor9 if they e2ist9 of what form they are3 1or the obstacles to that sort of 0nowledge are many9 including the obscurity of the matter and the bre"ity of human lifeA $trans3 <heelwright -he 4resocratics9 ;'L(3 This statement by Protagoras9 much misunderstood9 clearly a"ows a moderate agnostic position as opposed to the atheistic3 @+t is difficult to belie"e that )uhemerus did not realiBe that his theology would be used as o"ert propaganda against traditional beliefs9A 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria< ;&'3

;'G

;''

;'J

;'H

,2
the founder of the Cynical mo"ement9 saw benefit to the indi"idual in confounding societal law9;'F and the )picureans reDected political systems9 urging their followers not to ha"e anything to do with political leaders3;'& +n loo0ing for e"idence of this antinomianism later in a specifically Ale2andrian Gnostic figure9 we note Carpocrates and his son )piphanesE But the laws9 he $)piphanes( says9 since they could not restrain men?s incapacity to learn9 taught them to transgress3 1or the pri"ate property of the laws cut up and nibbled away the fellowship of the di"ine law3333 4e says that Tmine? and Tthine? were introduced through the laws9 and that $people( would no longer enDoy in community the fruits either of the earth or of possessions9 or e"en of marriage3 Clement of Ale2andria9 Strom>+++9;3:3;;JL Abo"e all9 the corrosi"eness of ophist relati"ism 0noc0ed down the traditional world= "iew espoused by world=affirming theologies and philosophies and established a relati"ist outloo0 that was more mar0edly secular humanist in focus3;J% This was accomplished at ground le"el9 by an assault upon the "ery preconditions for phenomenological certainty3 This tradition9 clearly manifest and maintained in Ale2andria9 found its way into the "ery pith of 4ellenistic Gnosis which was as contemptuous of the toic world="iew as were the earlier 0eptics in Ale2andria3;J; Again9 for proof of this we turn to a patristic account of Carpocrates of Ale2andriaE

;': ;'F

+bid39 ;&'3

<hen as0ed where he is from9 his famous reply9 @+ am a citiBen of the uni"erseA "i"idly e2presses the sort of internationalist outloo0 associated with these @liberalA groups of the time $Diogenes /aertius9 H9 HGC /oeb "ol3 ;9 HJ(3 Grant9 'rom Ale:ander to "leopatra9 ;'G=''3 +t should be noted here that the )picureans9 while on the @liberalA side of the equation socially and politically9 were in fact on the toic side of the philosophical di"ide in a number of critical regards9 most particularly in their world=affirming empiricism3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts< "ol3 %< G&3 +n particular9 the focus upon rhetoric was instrumental in undermining truth=claims by sidestepping9 as it effecti"ely did9 the "ery notion of a purportedly pure philosophy at wor09 dealing instead with the question of psychological moti"es and the dynamics of discourse3 George 5ennedy9 in -he Art of 4ersuasion in )reece $Princeton !ni"ersity Press9 %&HG(9 ma0es the analogous pointE @Rhetoric was at times a greater liberaliBing force in ancient intellectual life than was philosophy3 +t demonstrated that there were two sides to many if not all questions9A ;G3 Both mo"ements were to suffer persecution for their stand3 The persecution of the Gnostics is well= 0nownC by the fourth century their wor0s were being burned in )gypt9 mere possession made a criminal offense under Roman law3 There is a strong similarity here in the earlier Gree0 resistance to the ophistic mo"ement3 5erferd9 -he Sophistic +o%ement< %H'=HJE @This tradition Y ophistic atheismZ was coupled with another according to which a whole series of prosecutions for impiety $ase=eia( were brought against the e2ponents of such "iews > Protagoras9 ocrates9 Phidias9 Ana2agoras9 )uripides and Theodorus are all mentioned9 and in a number of cases prosecution was said to ha"e resulted in e2ile or e"en death3 +n the case of Protagoras tradition declared that the boo0 in which he wrote concerning the gods was ordered to be burnt in public3 +t is probable that there is some e2aggeration and e"en some degree of fiction in all this3 But the e"idence can hardly be dismissed as a whole3A

;'&

;JL ;J%

;J;

,4
They $Carpocrates and his followers( say that conduct is good and e"il only in the opinion of men333 through faith and lo"e are $men( sa"ed3 All other things are indifferent9 being accounted now good9 now e"il9 according to the opinion of men3 +renaeus9 Ad%> (aer> +9;J3'=J;JG A little further9 +renaeus affirms the philosophical lin0 we are positingE They call themsel"es gnostics3 They ha"e also images9 some painted9 some too made of other material9 and say they are the form of Christ made by Pilate in that time when .esus was with men3 These they crown9 and they set them forth with the images of the philosophers of the world9 Pythagoras9 Plato9 Aristotle9 and the rest3 +renaeus9 Ad%> (aer> +9;J3H;J' +t was not my intent to burden the te2t with an e2tended discussion of this affinity9 howe"er the relati"ism of Carpocrates is highly reminiscent of the ophists Gorgias and Protagoras as .onas has remar0ed3;JJ The implicit relati"ity of both de"elopments on this traDectory is acute9 with the difference being that the Gnostic philosopher has de"eloped a metaphysic to e2plain this relati"ity3 <hether this philosophical aspect of Gnostic thought owes its inception entirely to the earlier ad"ent of the Gree0 ophistic enlightenment9 or whether it is simply a case of @sympathetic resonanceA is impossible to say with certainty gi"en the e"idence a"ailable3 At the "ery least the conditions for li0ely historical connectedness are there3 Alongside these philosophical de"elopments is the dualism endemic to so=called Middle= Platonic thought9 whose origins we ha"e e2amined in the pre"ious chapter3 The shared sympathetic resonance of a number of Platonic philosophers with the rise of dualism in )gypt is e2tremely important and will be de"eloped in Chapter :3 Cleopatra?s attempt to fuse Gree0 and )gyptian culture on the tate le"el failed in the face of Roman e2pansionism3 This is not to say that the fusion she sought was not in fact present9 perhaps e"en widespread amongst the literate classes3 The changes for )gyptian peasants following the Roman conquest in GL B3C3)3 were ne"ertheless disastrousC in fact9 the laws enacted by Augustus and maintained for two hundred years were designed to impede social mobility3;JH The population of )gypt was singled out for particularly harsh treatment and Ale2andria bore the brunt of this on numerous occasions3 @The notoriously outspo0en and irre"erent populace of Ale2andriaA were noted for their percei"ed fic0leness9 "olatility9 destructi"eness9 and lac0 of respect for Roman authority3;J: This hostility to Rome continued until well into the second century9 perhaps until eptimius e"erus? granting of a Council to the city in %&&=;LL3;JF A "i"id e2pression of this sentiment is found in -he Acts of the 4agan
;JG ;J' ;JJ

1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts9 "ol3%9 G:=GF3 +bid39 GF3

4ans .onas9 -he )nostic $eligion $%&JFC reprint9 BostonE Beacon Press9 %&HG(9 ;:;9 on the abo"e passage from CarpocratesE @<hile this reminds one of nothing more than the reasoning of certain classical ophists9 a deeper Gnostic reflection upon the source of such @human opinionsA transforms the argument from a s0eptical to a metaphysical one9 and turns indifference into oppositionE the ultimate source is found to be not human but demiurgical9 and thus common with that of the order of nature3A To @0eep the se"eral population strata as discrete and immutable as possibleE di%ide et impera9A /ewis9 Life in Egypt Inder $oman $ule< G;3 +bid39 %&:3

;JH

;J:

,+artyrs 9 which purports to be a "erbatim record of hearings between an indi"idual or small group and the )mperor in which insolent defiance is e2pressed3 <e may conclude that this li0ely represents the tip of an e2tensi"e underground literary mo"ement of the time $whose wor0s ha"e been lost(9 undoubtedly centred in Ale2andria9 one which e2presses ci"ic pride and anti=Roman sentimentC as such it would also ha"e been an e2pression of larger )gyptian nationalism3 Many public demonstrations occurred in the streets of Ale2andria during this time and support was in"ariably gi"en to pretenders to the throne in Rome which ine"itably caused reprisals9 the bloodiest wrea0ed by Caracalla in ;%J C3)3;HL The important feature in these de"elopments is the shared alliance of Graeco=)gyptian and )gypto=Gree0 against Roman rule3 ,utside of Ale2andria itself )gyptian resistance increased9 the most serious re"olt occurring in the Bou0olia marshes in %:; C3)3 led9 significantly9 by an )gyptian priest3 This insurrection actually defeated Roman units and almost captured Ale2andria before the yrian garrison inter"ened3 This incident illustrates an important phenomenon in )gypt3 The )gyptians had a priestly class9 unli0e the Gree0s3 As the upper classes had been dissol"ed under Ptolemaic rule and were not allowed to reappear under the Roman9 it was this class of priests who naturally became the repository of )gyptian cultural and national aspirations9 although the power of the priests was curtailed in a number of ways by the Romans3 A substantial segment of this class centred in the Gree0 cities owing to their partial assimilation by the Ptolemies9 and the bilingualism which resulted undoubtedly played a maDor role in the uprisings in Ale2andria3 +n %%J C3)3 a .ewish re"olt had bro0en out in Cyrene and subsequently spread to Ale2andria where whole sections of the city were de"astated3 +t is to be stressed that a number of maDor Gnostic teachers appeared in Ale2andria in the midst of this period of unrest $*alentinus c> %'L for e2ample(3
;J&

+t is at this point9 ha"ing set the stage for the appearance of the Gnostics9 that things become the most difficult and tenuous9 owing to a lac0 of te2tual e"idence But let us attempt to de"ise a model for this critical time period from GL B3C3)3 to the end of the second century9 one which is in accord with all of the e"idence we ha"e thus far marshalled3 +n the first instance the bilingual )gyptian priestly class in Ale2andria9 since its earliest inception9 was undoubtedly in contact with other di"erse intellectual mo"ements9 some of which we ha"e discussed3 The distance9 psychological and physical9 of Ale2andria from the -ile "alley itself would ha"e facilitated the @mutationA of this group in "arious directions fed9 as it were9 by the richness of cultural di"ersity in the city3 This would ha"e reflected the changes which were being wrought in the predominantly )gyptian populace of the capital9 although it must be stressed again that at this point the terms @Gree0A and @)gyptianA had become increasingly blurred3 The dualisms of Persian and )ssene thought may ha"e supplied a critical influence9;H%
;JF

The partial treatment e2tended by Augustus to the Ale2andrian .ews embittered relations between the .ews and Ale2andrians3 Philo wrote about the great pogrom in GF C3)39 others are 0nown to us only from the patriotic and propagandist Ale2andrian literature9 fragments of which ha"e sur"i"ed on papyri9 0nown by scholars as Acta Ale:andrinorum3 A great deal of the unrest in the city was caused by this friction although it should be stressed that this wasn?t anti= emitism per seC rather9it reflected the citiBenry e2pressing their disapprobation of Roman rule through the .ews as percei"ed Roman protPgPs3 4erbert A Musurillo9 ed3 -he Acts of the 4agan +artyrs $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&J'(3 /ewis9 Life in Egypt Inder $oman $ule9 ;L%3

;J& ;HL ;H%

+n particular the anti=Roman theology of the )ssenes3 The dualistic tenor of )ssene thought is well established and need not be detailed here although it must be said that the integrity of this group9 as deri"ed from the Dead ea crolls9 as with many 4ellenistic traDectories9 is now being called into

,.
and the deconstruction of the toic world"iew among a substantial social group would ha"e required its replacement with a more "ital theologising< a new religious consciousness based upon the old9 but more directly concerned with the problem of e"il3 This last issue is one that is most important9 and while the attainments of the leading thin0ers of the time were undoubtedly critical in their ability to act as a catalyst9 this is only possible gi"en the ground swell of public opinionE this reciprocity is what creates mo"ements <e therefore note that the grassroots dualistic sentiment which one century later so ob"iously supplied the foundations for the rise of Manichaeism9 was present in )gypt during this time as is manifest in the magical papyri and the one Gnostic tractate in our possession9 Eugnostos the Blessed $-4C +++9G U *9%(9 which can be dated to the first century B3C3)3;H; The most interesting changes9 from our perspecti"e9 would ha"e occurred among the bilingualised descendants of the priestly class who were made up in part of educated Gree0s who had crossed the cultural di"ide3 <e note in particular 4ecataeus $c> GLL B3C3)3(9 a pupil of the 0eptic Pyrrhon who9 at a "ery early stage in Ptolemaic rule9 pro"ided a powerful rhetorical impetus in aiding this transculturalisation although he could hardly be called bilingualised3 According to Diodorus9 his wor0 2n the Egyptians was di"ided into four sectionsE nati"e cosmology and theologyC geography of )gyptC nati"e rulersC and customs3 +n all this his main interest was in demonstrating the antiquity and superiority of )gyptian culture and social institutions although the accuracy of the details he passes along lea"e much to be desired3 )"en so9 together with Manetho9 4ecataeus was instrumental in early Ptolemaic times in disseminating )gyptian thought to the Gree0 world9 and in abetting the worldly and comparati"ist spirit of the Ale2andrian age3;HG This group9 e2isting in close pro2imity to the library in Ale2andria9;H' would then ha"e facilitated the de"elopment of the @internationalistA perspecti"e imbuing the Gnostic temperament3 The later anti=Roman sentiments of the city would ha"e enhanced their own anti=worldliness9 and their anarchic temperament9 fundamentally )gyptian at this point with respect to foreign laws9;HJ would ha"e been in perfect accord with the most anarchic ancient city of learning 0nown in antiquity3 Gnostic libertinism9 as well as asceticism9 both arose from the bed of anarchist temperament3;HH <e shall ha"e occasion to e2amine the growing lin0 between
question3 +t is to be speculated that the interaction of .ew and Persian during the former?s e2ile in Babylon created a conduit for 8oroastrian dualisms to enter into .ewish thought3 Abo"e all9 there are .ewish glosses in many Gnostic te2ts9 and the role of the .ewish community in Ale2andria needs to be e2amined9 as do the Theraputae li"ing along the shores of /a0e Mareotis south of the city3 The presence of Persians in Ale2andria has already been noted9 along with the li0ely translation of their religious te2ts in the library3
;H; ;HG ;H'

This point is detailed in Chapter :3 @Manetho testifies to the growth of an international spirit in the Ale2andrine age3A +anetho9 "ii3

-ot necessarily in the city although one assumes that this would ha"e naturally formed the focus here3 There is te2tual e"idence to show that antiquarians in other Gree0 cities on the -ile built up their libraries through buying9 borrowing9 and copying as one would e2pect3 There is one te2t which illustrates a boo0seller?s list of boo0s needed from Ale2andria3 Requests here included the complete wor0s of "arious philosophers9 and one interesting treatise9 regrettably lost9 entitled 2n the Ises of 4arents /ewis9 Life in Egypt Inder $oman $ule9 H%3 This anarchism was not confined simply to the large cities9 but e2tended into the rural areas where peasants were dri"en to flee their homes by Roman ta2es and liturgies3 The large scale refusal to wor0 was also a common feature of the times3 +bid39 ;LG=;L'3 5urt Rudolf9 )nosis9 trans3 Robert Mc/achlan <ilson $ReprintC%&::9 an 1ranciscoE 4arper U Row9 %&FG(9 ;JJE @)"idently libertine and ascetic deductions were drawn from the beginning9 and more or

;HJ

;HH

,K
Ale2andria and Memphis9 in particular the hereditary high=priests there whose lineage continued unbro0en throughout the entire Ptolemaic era9 and whose power was e"er=increasing3 )gyptian in their cultural heritage and ways of thin0ing9 this group would ha"e been profoundly radicalised by their e2posure to the di"erse intellectual de"elopments in Ale2andria9 in particular Gree0 philosophical thought3 The parallel Gnostic interaction of Graeco=)gyptian elements resulted in a synergism9 a fusion9 far more than a mere accumulation of disparate ideas3 ,n the strength of a dualist te2tuality manifest in the magical papyri9 a widespread shift to dualistic world="iews in the ancient world supplied the @heatA for this transformation3 The numerous Gnostic o"erlaps with this genre9 and with the 4ermetica as well9 shall be e2amined in the ne2t chapter3 <ithin the Roman colonial net two great cultures struggled to sur"i"e9 and both found their common cause in Ale2andria3 The rise of orthodo2 Christianity9 and its deliberate fusion with the Roman state9 was to result in the complete destruction of the autochthonous religious sentiments of )gyptC the Gree0 world was to resist Romanisation and in fact outlast it3 4owe"er9 this earlier Graeco=)gyptian synthesis allowed for the passing on of ideas from both cultures into the RomanC as well9 it allowed for the rise of philosophies which were a product of a fusion of Gree0 and )gyptian thought9 notably the 4ermeticists9 -eoplatonists9 and the Gnostics $Manichaeism might be included here(9 all of whom were to ha"e a great influence in the Roman world3;H: Many of the maDor Gnostic teachers that we 0now of9 certainly the 0ey figures with whom the patristic writers were grie"ously affronted9 were )gyptian3 The Roman heresiologist 4ippolytus of Rome wrote the $efutatio $The Refutation of All 4eresies( in the late second or early third century3 4a"ing described the system of Basileides of Ale2andria at length9 4ippolytus sa"es his most telling indictment for the last sentenceE @These are the myths that Basileides tells from his schooling in )gyptian wisdom9 and ha"ing learnt such wisdom from them he bears this sort of fruitA3;HF To this we can add Plotinus? indictment of the Gnostics $also written in Rome( some fifty years before 4ippolytus3 Clearly the battle lines between Rome and Ale2andria were being e2tended on theological and philosophical grounds by these times3;H& Prior to this period9 and e2tending well into it9 the magical papyri embody an )gypto= Gree0 fusion of thought preoccupied with underworld powers and the inimical nature of the 4eimarmene $1ate(3 As Ale2andria represents the stri"ings of an intellectual elite to assimilate
less simultaneously9 from the common @anarchisticA deposit9 and were practised with different degrees of intensity3A
;H:

The dissemination of 4ermetic and -eoplatonic thought in the Roman world is well=attested3 Manichaeism e2tended itself across -orth Africa into pain and +taly9 and across the ,rient to the south of China3 *alentinianism9 to choose one dominant Gnostic sect9 had churches in southern Gaul and on the )uphrates at the time +renaeus wrote his monumental wor09 Against All (eresies $c3 %FL=%&; C3)3(3 *+9 ;:3 Trans3 Catherine ,sborne9 $ethinking Early )reek 4hilosophyA (ippolytus of $ome and the 4resocratics $+thaca9 -ew Ior0E Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:(9 GL&3 There is only the tradition of Mar0 to suggest any sort of @orthodo2A Christian traDectory in )gypt in the first century9 a tradition which can be discounted gi"en the complete lac0 of mention in Clement and ,rigen3 Bell F%9 argues for @a not inconsiderable Christian elementA in Middle )gypt from the middle of the second century onwards which is possible9 although one must affirm the dominance of Gnostic thought in )gypt at this time9 and in fact its influence is to be found in the writings of Clement and ,rigen quite apart from the mainstream Gnostic authors of the time > these @ChristiansA were li0ely Gnostic=Christians3 4ippolytus?s statement re"eals a Roman=Ale2andrian polarisation resulting from the orthodo2 condemnation of the Ale2andrian hairesis3 The Gnostics were free to Tchoose? until the persecutions began in the fourth century and onwards3

;HF

;H&

,7
di"erse religious and philosophical elements into a new system9 one emboldened by the new= found internal focus upon the indi"idual9 so the magical papyri manifest the ancient methodologies of the )gyptian priesthood9 an e2ternal focus upon te2t9 religious practice9 and proper procedure3 +t is to the magical papyri that we now turn3

,P
)hapter $ive* The 1agical apyri

+n setting out to analyse the magical papyri we must first of all emphasise the socio= historical conte2t within which these documents appeared9 for there is a connection to be made with the so=called -ag 4ammadi find as well as the 4ermetica9 associations that scholars by far and large ha"e neglected to date3;:L The )gyptian magical papyri9 written in Gree09 but also containing a substantial number of Demotic te2ts and containing numerous Coptic glosses9 were preser"ed in Thebes9 some %%G 0m upri"er from the Gnostic collection buried in the .ebel al Tarif $some HL 0m if one heads directly o"erland across the large bow of the ri"er(9 and both caches were hidden towards the end of the fourth century C3)33 +n -he 2gdoad $e%eals the Ennead $-4C *+9H(9 a hermetic te2t buried in the .ebel al Tarif9 4ermes directs Tat $bThoth(E @, my son9 it is proper to write this boo0 on steles of turquoise9 in hieroglyphic characters333A $-4C *+9H3H%3%F(;:%3 PGM N++3%;% refers to a certain 8minis of Tentyra $Dendera( and this close geographical pro2imity of te2tual references reinforces the compelling thematic o"erlaps that we shall e2amine in this chapter3 +t is important to stress the geographical and historical pro2imity of the magical papyri to the -ag 4ammadi find9 for this li0ely e2plains in part the 0indred heterogeneity of their composition3 The compilers of both collections ob"iously had an abiding interest in philosophy9 theurgy9 and traditional )gyptian mythological modes of thought3 A concomitant of this is the bilinguality of both groups3 This last aspect is important for the tas0 at hand9 for we do not wish to simply demonstrate Gnostic affinities9 but to show that many of these conceptions can also be traced bac0 further to ancient )gyptian thought3;:; +n this section + propose to establish a number of thematic elements in the magical papyri as a conduit or bac0drop for Gnostic thought3 The terminus ad #uem for both libraries > for such they appear to be > allows for a much earlier date of original composition3;:G The lin0s between the magical papyri and 4ermetic thought are strong9 and 1owden ma0es the important point that both the Thebes cache and the -ag 4ammadi corpus9 @illustrate that interloc0ing of the technical and philosophical approachesA that he traces in the 4ermetica3;:'
;:L

1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermes9 %:L9is a notable e2ception3 @The neglect that has been la"ished on the Thebes cache is all the more surprising when one considers the dominant position that it occupies in the study of late antique magic and early alchemy9 and its similarities with the -ag 4ammadi library9 now e2posed to the opposite form of abuse3A Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+9 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott9 GHH=H:3 Also 1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermes9 %:L9 who belie"es that the whole -ag 4ammadi collection belonged to a person or group from this area based upon this reference and linguistic considerations3 <ilfried Gute0unst9 @<ie @magischeA ist die @MagieA im alten 6gyptenS )inige theoretische Bemer0ungen Bur Magie > Problemati09Ain La +agia in Egitto al -epi dei 'araoni9 eds3 Alessandro Roccati and Alberto iliotti $Rassegna +nternaBionale di Cinematografia Archeologica Arte e -atura /ibri9 %&F:(9 ::=&F9 follows <3 <estendorf9 43 te *elde9 and )3 Drioton9 in demonstrating that @magicA in )gyptian thought was but a refracted colour in the larger )gyptian religious spectrum9 one that pertained to practical theology3 The Gnostic te2t Eugnostos the Blessed $-4C +++9G( for one9 has been dated with some certainty to the first century B3C3)3 $@)ugnostos and TAll the Philosophers?@ from $eligion im Er=e Hgyptens(9 while the magical te2ts presented by BetB @are mainly from the second century B3C3 to the fifth century A3D3A -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 2li3 1owden< Egyptian (ermes< %:;3

;:%

;:;

;:G

;:'

,,
The magical papyri demonstrate the rise of a new religious world"iew in )gypt9 one in which the underworld has gained in direful importance3 ,ne ma0es a fundamental mista0e in assuming that these documents only illustrate a debased lowbrow mlange of ill=fitting pieces3 Magical te2ts are no longer "iewed as being a sort of religious underworld in and of themsel"esC recent wor0 in anthropology and sociology "iews the phenomenon of magic as a modality of religious thought9 one which is to be situated on the continuous spectrum of religious e2perience;:J <hile there is not yet a consensus on how magic is to be defined9 A3 egal?s article @4ellenistic MagicA ably details the hermeneutic pitfalls in the modern hierarchic approach to the religious phenomenon of @magicA3;:H The magical papyri at once offer us a direct glimpse into the transformational process that a segment of traditional )gyptian theology was undergoing9 in particular an enhancement of its own theurgic propensities in a mar0ed dualist world"iew3 The result of this9 as + shall argue9 is the foundation of a religious impetus coterminous with Gnostic thought in )gypt3 4ans Dieter BetB9 in the introduction to his translation of the Gree0 magical te2ts describes their contents as followsE ince the material comes from Graeco=Roman )gypt9 it reflects an amaBingly broad religious and cultural pluralism3 -ot surprising is the strong influence of )gyptian religion throughout the Gree0 magical papyri9 although here the te2ts show a great "ariety3 )2pressed in Gree09 Demotic9 or Coptic9 some te2ts represent simply )gyptian religion3 +n others the )gyptian element has been transformed by 4ellenistic religious concepts3 Most of the te2ts are mi2tures of se"eral religions > )gyptian9 Gree09 .ewish9 to name the most important3333 <e should ma0e it clear9 howe"er9 that this syncretism is more than a hodgepodge of heterogeneous items3 +n effect9 it is a new religion altogether9 displaying unified religious attitudes and beliefs3 As an e2ample9 we may mention the enormously important role of the gods and goddesses of the underworld3 The role of these underworld deities was not new to )gyptian religion or9 to some e2tent9 to ancient Gree0 religionC but it is characteristic of the 4ellenistic syncretism of the Gree0 magical papyri that the netherworld and its deities had become one of its most important concerns333 The people whose religion is reflected in the papyri agree that humanity is inescapably at the whim of the forces of the uni"erse3;:: .anet .ohnson9 in her accompanying introduction to the Demotic magical papyri9 notes the o"erwhelmingly )gyptian content and methodology of the demotic te2ts9 while also stressing the similar )gyptian attributes of the Gree0 papyri3;:F Abo"e all9 the bilingualism of the scribes in"ol"ed in the production of the te2ts is apparent9 and .ohnson?s conclusion that9 @one must9 at any rate9 be leery of o"erstating the Gree0 case and attributing too much to Gree0 influenceA might equally be applied to the -ag 4ammadi corpus3 This )gyptian sensibility is one that is engaged in syncretistic acti"ities3 Alongside such )gyptian figures as Amun9 5hepri9 the 4eh=gods9 -ephthys9 +sis9 Thoth and Re9 to name a few9 are "arious gods from the Gree0 pantheon and9 most importantly9 a per"asi"e superficial .ewish influence which resulted from
;:J

ee Christopher3A3 1araone and Dir0 ,bbin09 +agika (iera $-ew Ior0E ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&%(9 "i3 Alan egal9 @4ellenistic Magic9A in Studies in )nosticism and (ellenistic $eligions9 ed3 R3 "an den Broe0 and M3.3 *ermaseren $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 G'&='%%3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 2l"9 2l"i9 2l"ii3 +bid39 l"3

;:H

;:: ;:F

+55
the high esteem accorded to .ewish magicians at this time3 PGM N++9 ;L%=H& ends by calling upon the )gyptians9 the .ews9 the Gree0s9 the high=priests9 and Parthians3;FL <hile this might be seen to be mere rhetorical flourish9 the actual thematic contents of the collection argue otherwise3 <hile more @syncretisticA in their ma0eup9 it is important to note that there is no great gulf between the religious aspirations of the Graeco=)gyptian magician and the continuing traditional modes of thought3 -he 'irst -ale of .hamuas which dates to the middle of the first century C3)3 is9 according to 13 /l3Griffith9 @one of the finest wor0s of imagination that )gypt has bequeathed to usA;F% The story depicts etne 5hamuas diligently see0ing after a sacred te2t said to be written by the hand of Thoth3 *arious tales concerning 5hamuas detail the powers of this boo09 and it is Dust possible that in not at all depicting 5hamuas $ etne( in a heroic light9 that this traditional story was used as a cautionary against the new appropriation of sacred te2ts which were being put to magical uses beyond the temple precinct3 +n any e"ent9 the te2t shows some Gree0 influences3 +n analysing the magical papyri thematically we shall concern oursel"es mostly with those autochthonic )gyptian elements that ha"e at least some bearing upon Gnostic thought as the o"erall )gyptian presence is ubiquitous and need not be e2hausti"ely detailed3;F;
;:&

-un
The figure of -un is found throughout the collection9 as in PGM +++ wherein Re is addressed and his appearance from the primordial abyss is clearly maintainedE , god of gods9 lord of the world9 who ha"e di"ided by your own di"ine spirit the uni"erseC first from the firstborn you appeared9 created carefully from water that?s turbulent;FG @The great god in the abyssA is a typical epithet and we find this further on in PGM +++3HGG=H&L9 a passage which focuses upon Re and other figures on the sun=barque3 This te2t is written in Coptic and is to be tentati"ely dated to the first century C3)33;F' +n PGM +*9 %J&H=%:%J9 the %; passengers of Re?s sun=barque are identified as the %;=hours of the nights passage9 each in turn depicted as a specific animal and )gyptian god3 R3 Mer0elbach and M3 Totti see this as li0ely coming from an astrological=mystical boo0 dating to the ;nd or %st century B3C3)3;FJ The motif of the attac0 by Apophis upon the sun=barque also shows up in Coptic magical te2ts3;FH
;:& ;FL ;F%

<illiam M3 Brashear9 +agica &aria $Bru2ellesE 1ondation 7gyptologique Reine 7lisabeth9 %&&%(9 ;;3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %HG3

13 /l Griffith9 Stories of the (igh 4riests of +emphis $%&LLC reprint9 ,snabrXc0E ,tto 8eller *erlag9 %&FJ(9 %'3 1or an in depth loo0 at the )gyptian theological presence in one papyri in particular9 see .an Bergman9 @Ancient )gyptian Theogony in a Gree0 Magical magical Papyrus $PGM *++9 ll3 J%H=J;%(A9 in Studies in Egyptian $eligion9 M3 4eerma "an *oss et>al> ed3 $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F;(9 ;F=G:3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 G;=GG3 Christine 4arrauer9 +eliouchosA Studien ,ur Entwicklung religi*ser &ortsellungen in griechischen synkretistischen ;au=erte:ten $<einE *erlag der csterreichische A0ademie der <issenschaften9 %&F:(9 :%3 Reinhold Mer0elbach and Maria Totti9 A=rasa:A Ausgew1hlte 4apyri $eligi*sen und +agischen 0nhalts9 Band %9 )e=ete $,pladenE <estdeutscher *erlag Gmb49 %&&L(9 %LJ3 <illiam 43 <orrell9 @A Coptic <iBard?s 4oard9A AJSL 'H $%&GL(E ;H%3

;F;

;FG ;F'

;FJ

;FH

+5+
The figure of Mas0elli is to be identified as -un9 and this di"ine figure appears in the Gnostic 4istis Sophia where he is also identified as 8araBaB $Boo0 +*9 GHJ3;(;FF3 *arious di"ine figures come forth from -un and in fact )gyptian @+ am he who came forth from -unA is written as a sacred incantationE P4+R+M-,!- YAZ-,N3;F& The function of -un as the abyss which generates di"inity is found in Gnostic thought9 as in this passage from 2n -he 2rigin of the GorldA
;F:

-ow the Aeon of Truth possesses no shadow within $and( it did not wea0en9 for the immeasurable /ight is e"erywhere within it3 But its e2terior is shadow which is called Dar0ness9 from which there appeared a Power presiding o"er the Dar0ness3 The Powers which thereafter came to be called the shadow @the Chaos which has no beginningA3 1rom it9 each YgenusZ of the gods blossomed upwards Y3333333Z together with the entire world Yso thatZ the shadow follows upon the first <or03 +t was manifest YasZ the Deep $Coptic -,I-( from within the Pistis9 about which we ha"e spo0en3 $-4C ++9J &F3;J=&&3;(;&L <e note that the idea of the theogony as being bounded by -un is e2pressed as the e2terior shadow3 The association of Pistis with -un is also e2pressed in PGM N++3;;&E @+ am the faith YPistisZ found in men9 and am he who declares the holy names9 who YisZ always ali0e9 who came forth from the abyssA3;&% The appearance of -un in the magical papyri and Gnostic thought will be further e2amined in Chapter %L and it need only be mentioned here that the figure of the *alentinian Bythos figures largely in that discussion3;&; The 4ermopolitan ,gdoad PGM NN+3 %=;& affords an e2ample wherein -un is depicted with his female counterpart -aunet along with the other three couples of the 4ermopolitan ,gdoadE 4eh and 4ehet9 5u0 and 5au0et9 Amun and Amaunet9 together referred to as @the eight guardsA3;&G +n Gnostic te2ts the Chaos gods9 often numbered as eight or twel"e9 are found in "arious te2ts9 to be e2amined in Chapter %%3 A di"ine figure of particular interest in this connection is that of BA+-C4,,C4 which is a rendering of the )gyptian = n kkw $@soul of dar0nessA(9 the 4emopolitan god 5u03;&' The
;F: ;FF

4arrauer< +eliouchos9 ;; n3%F3

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3+NE 4istis Sophia9 ed3 R3 Mc/3 <ilson $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 :GL3 PGM NN+3;JC BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 ;J&3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3NN+E Nag (ammadi "ode: 00<8@F9 ed3 Bentley /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F&(9 GL3 Ale2ander BQhlig9 @!rBeit und )ndBeit in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadiA in +ysterion und Gahrheit $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HF(9 %GJ='F9 who otherwise notes the connections with )gypt in this te2t9 but does not draw any connection with -un3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri< %H;3 Also noted in Mer0elbach9 A=rasa:9 %:;3 The connection of -un with the *alentinian Bythos in PGM N++3;;& is noted in Mer0elbach< A=rasa:9 %:;3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 ;J&3 The ogdoad is also detailed in similar fashion in PGM N+++3:&%3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri 9%FC Mer0elbach9 A=rasa:9 &HC 4arrauer < +eliouchos<:&9 Terrence DuVuesne9 A "optic 0nitiatory 0n%ocation9 ,2fordshire Communications in )gyptology ++3 Thame

;F& ;&L

;&% ;&;

;&G ;&'

+52
figure of BA+-C4,,C4 appears in the Gnostic 4istis Sophia $Boo0 +* GJH3;; and GF%3;J=GF;3J(9 where it is described as a god which comes for the soul of the deceased9 accompanying it down to Amentiy3 PGM *3%& refers to BA+-C4,,C4 as @him who appeared before fire and snow333 who introduced light and snowA;&J and a similar connection is maintained in the 4istis Sophia where the soul is ta0en to @the places of frost and snowA $Boo0 +* G:H3;L U GFL3J(;&H3 The soul is later ta0en to @the outer dar0ness until the day when the great dragon=faced archon who circles the dar0ness will be DudgedA $+*3GFL3%L=%G(;&:9 a depiction of e"ents highly reminiscent of the )gyptian night Dourney of the dead through the realm of -un and Apophis3 A similar figure appears in PGM N+++3FL&E BA+-P4-,!-9 = n pC Nwn $soul of -unA(9 which is to be identified as Re9 based upon -he Book of the "elestial "ow $"erse ;F%(E @the ba of -un is ReA3;&F +t is worth mentioning that the 4ermopolitan ,gdoad was still of considerable theological importance well into Roman times3 The temple of ,pet in 5arna09 for e2ample9 indicates precisely the sort of storehouse of theological information one would anticipate as a bac0drop for both the magical papyri and Gnostic te2ts3 As one enters the temple today9 the largest wall of reliefs before the inner temple depicts the 4ermopolitan ogdoad3 The eight gods are laid out on a number of '=foot high panels dominating the entire wall of reliefs9 and they ta0e their prominent position down either side of the main entrance to the inner temple3 The ,pet temple was apparently "ery popular in Roman times for pregnant women and it is not hard to imagine the connection made by the )gyptians between the @watery abyss from which e"ery di"inity comes forthA and pregnancy and birth3 Again9 the Gnostic 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld also depicts this associationE Then the bile that had come to be from shadow was cast into a part of Chaos3 ince that day the watery condition is manifest9 and what san0 within it flowed forth manifest in Chaos9 Dust as with she who gi"es birth to a child $when( her entire afterbirth flows forthC Dust so9 matter came to be out of hadow and was cast aside3 $-4C ++9J &&3%%=;L(;&& The temple was restored and rebuilt under Ptolemy N++ $FL=J% B3C3)3( and some rebuilding was also effected under Augustus3 Apart from this9 the ancient city of Chmunu $hmnw(9 literally @The City of the )ight GodsA at modern=day Tel el=Ashmunein in Middle )gypt9 must ha"e been 0nown by all Graeco=)gyptians with any interest in religious matters as the @ogdoad=cityA and the Ptolemies built a temple to Ptah within the precincts of the old city3GLL

,2onE Darengo9 %&&%(9 %&3

;&J ;&H

BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %L%3

Coptic transcription from N(S< %ol>0M9 :J;9 :HL3 4arrauer9 +eliouchos9 FL9 identifies the functions of Bainchooch with eth9 god of inclement weather9 an association deri"ed from the primordial Chaos god 5u0 $Dar0ness(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< %ol>0M9 :HL3 43.3 Thissen9 @6gyptische BeitrRge Bu den griechischen magischen Papyri9Ain $eligion und 4hilosophie im Alten Hgypten9 eds3 !rsula *erhoe"en and )rhart Graefe $/eu"enE !itge"eriD Peeters(9 ;&G=GL;3 Coptic transcription from N(S< %ol> MM09 G;3 GXnther Roeder9 @5osmogonische *orstellungen in 6gypten > Die 5osmogonie "on 4ermopolis9A Egyptian $eligion % $%&GG(E %;3

;&: ;&F

;&& GLL

+54
)manationist *ariations PGM N+++ is of especial interest in laying out "arious @MosaicA "ersions of an emanationist system clearly deri"ed from the )gyptian3GL% The compiler of this te2t composed @The 5ey of MosesA and ma0es reference to @A acred Boo0 called T!nique? or )ighth Boo0 of MosesA9 the @secret moon prayerA of Moses9 @the Tenth 4idden $Boo0S( of MosesA9 @The 4idden Boo0 of Moses concerning the Great -ameAand @The Archangelic $Boo0S( of MosesA3GL; The last te2t is referred to in the Gnostic tractate 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld $-4C ++9J U N+++9;( which is li0ewise concerned with the nature of chaos and lists the se"en forces of chaos3 The se"en emanations in PGM N+++ appear diachronically as a result of utterances by an unidentified creator godE %3 Phos=Auge $/ight=RadianceE Rehera0hty( ;3 <atery Abyss $-un( G3 -ous=Phrenes $Mind=<itsE Thoth( '3 Genna= pora $Generati"e Power=ProcreationE Amun( J3 4ermes=Moira $.ustice=1ateE Ma?at( H3 5airos $TimeE nhhSdt(GLG :3 Psyche $ oulE =CSkC( +A, $Demiurge( The )gyptian correspondences are listed and the assimilation of the 4eliopolitan system to the Memphite is suggested3 +t will be recalled that the memphite Ptah created through utterance and that all the functionaries of the progenerati"e 4eliopolitan system were left intact below this new creation dynamic manifest in the so"ereignty of Ptah3 The demiurge appears separately from the rest and is put in charge of the earth3 The abo"e appear as male=female pairs9 as in other Mosaic te2ts9 although here there are omissions3 The appearance of a sequence of se"en utterances which produce "arious gods is to be found at the temple of )sna not far from where the present te2t surfaced3GL' Again9 the Gnostic 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld reflects the closest lin09 quite apart from citing the same @MosaicA source The se"en hea"ens and their female counterparts are listed and their creation is effected through @the principle of "erbal e2pressionA $%LL3%J(GLJ3 ,ne is not surprised to find the typical Gnostic de"elopment of demiurgic hubris in this te2t as Ialdabaoth $+A,( boasts that @+t is + who am God9 and there is no other one that e2ists apart from meA $%LG3%%(GLH3 +t is of considerable import

GL%

ee Morton mith9 @The )ighth Boo0 of Moses and 4ow it Grew $P3 /eid3 . G&J(9A in Atti del M&00 "ongresso interna,ionale di papirologia $-apoliE centro +nternaBionale per lo studio di papiri ercolanesi9 %&F'(9 HFG=&G3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %:; n3;3 The female syBygy @the VueenA $the moon( has been omitted here3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %:F n3J%3 ee erge auneron9 Esna &A Les 'Rtes religieuses dEsna $CairoE +mprimerie de l?+nstitut fran]ais d?archPologie orientale9 %&H;(9 ;HF=H&3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+9 G'3 +bid39 'L3

GL; GLG

GL'

GLJ GLH

+5to note that this shows up in PGM N+++ where +A,9 terrified at the prospect of a god abo"e him9 says @+ am stronger than this fellowA3GL: +n PGM +++3%'J The magician identifies himself as @Adam the forefatherA and goes on to address the god as followsE Come to me9 hear0en Yto meZ9 most Dust one of all9 steward of truth9 establisher of DusticeC + am he whom you met and granted 0nowledge and holy utterance of your greatest name9 by which you control the whole inhabited worldC perform for me the -- deed3GLF This is a most interesting passage on two counts 1irstly9 it appears to be drawing on the +sis myth in which she poisons the sun god in order to learn his most secret name3 This myth will be e2amined more closely in Chapter %; as it forms a 0ey feature of the *alentinian myth3 econdly9 the inferiority of the demiurge to Adam is a feature common to the so=called ethian group of Gnostic tractates9 as in -he Apocalypse of Adam where Adam tells his son eth that9 @we resembled the great eternal angels9 for we were e2alted abo"e than the god who created us and the powers with himA $-4C *9J H'3%'(GL&3 Christine 4arrauer in her wor0 +eliouchos9 remar0s that this passage @appears here to underlie a completely certain direction of the Gnostic anthropos myth9 in which primal man stands higher than the begettor=godA3G%L PGM +*3%HGJ=%:%J is a hymn to -unORe @the shining 4elios333 the great erpent9 leader of all the gods9 who control the beginning of )gypt and the end of the whole inhabited world9 who mate in the ocean9 P ,+ P4-,!T4+ -+-T4)RAG%% The te2t presents the %; hours of the un=god Re as passengers upon the sun=barque9 associated with "arious di"inities $"ia their animals(E

%st hour ;nd hour Grd hour 'th hour Jth hour Hth hour :th hour Fth hour
GL: GLF GL&

cat O Re dog O Anubis serpent O ThothG%; scarab O 5hepri don0ey O eth=Typhon lion O un=god at noon goat O soul of ,siris bull O soul of ,sirisG%G

glory and grace strength and honour honour strength strength and courage success9 glorious "ictory se2ual charm e"erything $to be accomplished(

BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %:F3 +bid39 ;;3

Coptic te2t from N(S< "ol3N+E Nag (ammadi "odices &< 8@6 P &0 with 4apyrus Berolinensis 5678 B P K9 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:&(9 %J'3 4arrauer < +eliouchos< 'J3 + am indebted to Dr3 4arrauer for this connection3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 HF3 The epithet is the equi"alent of @the Agathodaimon9 the god $of( the godsA9 a "ariation occuring in PGM +++3%''='JE P ,)+ , P ,)+ , P-,!T) -)-T)RT)R,!9 the equi"alent of pC Ty QC pC Ty QC pC ntr nC ntr>w tr>w< @Good Daimon9 Good Daimon9 , god of all the gods\A9 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 ;;3 -un9 as @the father of all the godsA is clearly identifiable in these passages3 This identification is rather more circuitous3 ee Mer0elbach9 A=rasa:9 %%F3 @The goat from Mendes9 as with the Memphite Apis=bull9 is an incarnation of the soul of ,siris3A Mer0elbach< A=rasa:9 %%&3

G%L G%%

G%; G%G

+5. &th hour %Lth hour %%th hour %;th hour falcon O 4orus baboon O Thoth ibis O 4ermes=Thoth crocodile O obe0 success and luc0

+ list out the skills or #ualities associated with these emanations9 for it seems to me that they mirror the type of aeons that appear in *alentinian thought $see Appendi2 B(3 The primal ogdoad in *alentinian thought dispenses with mythological figures in its interest in de"eloping hypostatic qualities of the godheadE

Bythius $The Deep( ige $ ilence( -ous $Mind( Aletheia $Truth( /ogos $<ord( 8oe $/ife( Anthropos $Primal Man( )00lesia $Church(
,f interest here is the aeon @ igeA which appears to be a tripartite goddess whose other components are )nnoea $+dea( and Charis $Grace(3G%' Charis appears as a quality of the first hour in PGM +* and while the coincidence is li0ely Dust that9 it nonetheless points up the genesis of Gnostic thought as it mo"es from the purely mythological to a deeper concern with those natures of the godhead that are re"ealed diachronically in the aeons3 This mo"ement from )gyptian god to an attribute e2pressed in the Gree0 language is manifest in both systems3 acred ounds Perhaps the most characteristic feature of the magical papyri is the constant recourse to sacred sounds9 usually "owels that often form palindroms9 cryptic di"ine names and the li0e3 A late 4ellenistic or early Roman treatise 9e elocutione< written by a certain TDemetrius? who probably li"ed in the first century B3C3)3 or C3)3 9 states the followingE @in )gypt the priests9 when singing hymns in praise of the gods9 employ the se"en "owels9 which they utter in due successionC and the sound of these letters is so euphonious that men listen to it in place of flute and lyreA3G%J Plato had earlier identified the origination of reciprocity between sacred sound and structural attributes of the cosmos to ThothE 333some god or god=inspired man disco"ered that "ocal sound is unlimited9 as tradition in )gypt claims for a certain deity called Theuth3 4e was the first to disco"er that the "owels in that unlimited "ariety are not one but se"eral9 and again that there are others that are not
G%' G%J

The Primal ,gdoad $group of F(

These are referred to as if they are separate aeons throughout -he -ripartite -ractate $-4C +9J(3

Demetrius9 9e elocutione< in <3R3 Roberts9 9emetrius on Style $CambridgeE At the !ni"ersity Press9 %&L;(9 %LJ3

+5K
"oiced9 but ma0e some 0ind of noise9 and that they9 too9 ha"e a number3 $ 4hile=us %F b9c3(G%H /i0ewise Plotinus9 in describing the @real=nessA of thoughts and images as appercei"ed by the intellects of the ages9 statesE The wise men of )gypt9 + thin09 also understood this9 either by scientific or innate 0nowledge9 and when they wished to signify something wisely9 did not use the forms of letters which follow the order of words and propositions and imitate sounds and the enunciations of philosophical statements9 but by drawing images and inscribing in their temples one particular thing9 they manifested the non=discursi"eness of the intelligible world9 that is9 that e"ery image is a 0ind of 0nowledge and wisdom and is a subDect of statements9 all together in one9 and not discourse or deli"eration3 $Ennead *3F9 H=&(3G%: Apuleius9 in chapter N*+++ of -he -ransformations of Lucius Apuleius of +adaura< described the initiation of /ucius into the cult of +sis in Rome3 An elder priest proscribes the rites from hieroglyphic scrolls9 during which the initiate is led to the feet of the goddess and is gi"en specific secret instructions that surpass the spo0en word3G%F The creati"e power of the word in all such reliable and fabulist manifestations is to be traced bac0 to the Memphite theology in its most potent e2pression and9 alongside the depiction of "arious underworld enneads and ogdoads9 the theurgic attempt to manipulate di"ine powers through sound forms a central feature of the religious e2perience e2pressed in the magical papyri3 -o spell contained herein is complete without recourse to sacred sounds and di"ine names3 +n turning briefly to the e2tant Gnostic te2ts we note the 4istis Sophia< Books of Jeu< and -he Intitled -e:t along with se"en of the -ag 4ammadi tractates employ sacred sounds3G%& <hile -he -hunder 4erfect +ind doesn?t directly employ a succession of "owel sounds9 the focus upon language in a theogonic conte2t perfectly mirrors the Memphite Ptah describing his act of creation through the wordE + am the sound of the manifold "oice9 and the word of many aspects3333 + am the hearing that is attainable to e"erything9 + am the speech which cannot be grasped3 + am the name of the sound and the sound of the name3 + am the sign of the letter and the manifestation of the di"ision3 $%'3%; U ;L3;F=GJ(G;L /i0ewise9 -he )ospel of -ruth describes the quintessential )gyptian concern here This is the 0nowledge of the li"ing boo0 which he re"ealed to the aeons9 at the end9 as Yhis lettersZ9 re"ealing how they are not "owels nor are they consonants9 so that one might read
G%H G%: G%F

Trans3 Dorothea 1rede9 Plato9 4hile=us $+ndinapolisE 4ac0ett Publishing Co39 %&&G(9 %%3 4lotinus &A Enneads &> B@D< trans3 A343 Armstrong $/oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F'(9 ;J:3

/ucius Apuleius9 -he )olden Ass9 trans3 Robert Gra"es $%&JLC Reprint3 4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s /td39 %&FH(9 ;G%=';3 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld $++9J(9 -he )ospel of the Egyptians $+++9;(9 -he 9iscourse on the Eigth and Ninth $*+9H(9 -he 4araphrase of Shem $*++9%(9 ;ostrianos $*+++9%(9 +arsanes$N9%(9 -rimorphic 4rotennoia $N+++9%(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+9 ;GH9 ;JL9 ;J;3

G%&

G;L

+57
them and thin0 of "ain things9 rather they are the letters of the truth which they alone spea0 who 0now them3 )ach letter is a complete dthoughte li0e a complete boo09 since they are letters written by the !nity3 $-4C +9G ;;3GF=;G3%J(G;% which can be contrasted with a -ew 5ingdom )gyptian religious piece which describes the functions of the sacred boo0s in the templeE ,ne ma0es the boo0 @)nd of the <or0A on this day3 +t is a secret boo09 which wrec0s charms9 which binds the conspiracies9 which halts the conspiracies9 which intimidate the whole uni"erse3 +t contains life9 it contains death3333 The boo0s which are inside9 they are the @emanations of ReA in order that this god may li"e than0s to those and in order to o"ercome his enemies3G;; +arsanes presents an e2tended discourse upon the nature and functioning of sacred sounds and a brief e2cerpt will ser"e to illustrate thisE The sounds of Ythe semi"owelsZ are superior to the "oiceless $consonants(3 And those that are double are superior to the semi"owels which do not change3 But the aspirates are better than the inaspirates $of( the "oiceless $consonants(3 And those that are intermediate will YacceptZ their combination in which they areC they are ignorant YofZ the things that are good333 Y1ormZ by YformZ they9 dthey constitutee the nomenclature of the YgodsZ and the angels9 YnotZ because they are mi2ed with each other according to e"ery form9 but only $because( they ha"e a good function $-4C N ;H3;F=;:3%F(G;G A similar connection can be made between the Demotic magical papyri and the Gnostic Books of Jeu3 A ceaseless reference to sacred formulae in both cases ma0es use of words and the names of personages that are quite similar at times9 often in"ol"ing a string of di"ine functionaries whose names begin with the same consonant3 1or e2ample9 in the /eiden Demotic magical papyrus we find the following names e"o0edE Ba0hu0hsi0hu0h9 Babel9 Baoth9 Bumai9 Bouel9 Bolboel9 Boel9 Bibiou9 Basaethori9 Bla0mo9 Bra09 Bampre9 Brias9 Balbo09 etc3C in the Gnostic Books of Jeu we ha"e a similar run of namesE Beoio9 BeoBaB9 BorathoB9 BaochaBaio9 BoreBaBai9 BasaBaB9 BaothoioBa9 BaoBaeeBe9 BeBaBou9 BerBaesa9 BoBaBapoB9 BaoBaBBaB9 Barcha9 etc3G;' The use of magical diagrams can also be lin0ed between the Gnostic Books of Jeu and the Magical papyri as the following e2amples illustrateE

G;%

Coptic transcription from E%angelium &eritatis9 eds39 Michel Malinine9 4enri=Charles Puech9 and Gilles Vuispel> $8XrichE Rascher *erlag9 %&JH(9 %'9 %H3 Philippe Derchain9 Le 4apyrus Salt 586A rituel pour la conser%ation de la %ie en !gypte $Bru2ellesE Palais des AcadPmies9 %&HJ(9 J:=H;C :J=:FC FG=FJ3 The te2t dates to the -ew 5ingdom9 c> %GLL3 B3C3)3 Coptic transcription from Nag (ammadi Studies< "ol3 N*< ;&H9 ;&F3 13/l3 Griffith and 4erbert Thompson9 ed39 -he 9emotic +agical 4apyrus of London and Leiden9 $&L'C reprint9 -ew Ior0E Do"er Publications +nc39 %&:'(9 passimC *iolet McDermot9 ed39 N(S %ol> M000A -he Books of Jeu and the Intitled -e:t in the Bruce "ode: $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 passim3

G;;

G;G G;'

+5P

1igure %G;J 1igure ;G;H The Gnostic Books of Jeu contain a total of HG magical diagrams alongside the te2t9 as well as innumerable magical symbols used in the te2t itself3 +t is to be noted that figurae magicae can be traced bac0 to the illustrated rolls of the )gyptian temples3G;: The use of cryptic di"ine names9 sometimes a string of )gyptian words as we ha"e seen9 or the "ery conception of @,gdoadA which becomes a di"inity $reference(9 and palindroms9 form a standardised mode of theurgic address to higher powers3 PGM +*3:%' con"eys a typical entreatyE 4ail9 , /ord9 , Master of the water\ 4ail9 , 1ounder of the earth\ 4ail9 , Ruler of the wind\ , Bright /ightener9 PR,PR,P4)GG) )M)T4+R+ ART)-T)P+ T4)T4 M+M), I)-AR, P4IRC4)C4, P )R+ DAR+, P4R) P4R)/BA\ 1i"e re"elation9 , lord9 concerning the -- matter3G;F To this can be contrasted the Gnostic .esus as spiritual teacher standing beside the ocean with his disciples in the 4istis SophiaA 4ear me9 my 1ather9 thou father of all fatherhoods9 thou infinite /ightE aeiouo9 iao9 aoi9 oia9 psinother9 thernops9 nopsiter9 Bagoure9 pagoure9 nethmomaoth9 nepsiomaoth9 marachachtha9 thobarrabau9 tharnachachan9 chopochothora9 ieou9 sabaoth $Boo0 +* GJG3F= %;(G;& The appeal9 the formula9 magical word plays9 and figure of abaoth lin0 the 4istis Sophia to the same religious milieu3 <e are gi"en insight into the wor0ings of the magical= oriented mind in its appropriation of )gyptian and Gree0 concepts and gods as with9 for e2ample9 the cryptic di"inity @PsinotherA called upon after +A, by the Gnostic .esus3 Psinother also appears in PGM +*3F;F at the "ery end of the spell cited abo"e9 along with -opsither and
G;J G;H G;:

BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %'&3 N(S %ol> M000< JL3

amson )itrem9 in +/nchener Beitr>%& $%&G'(E;'F='&E -icholas 4orsfall9 @The ,rigins of the +llustrated Boo0 of the Dead9A Aegyptus HG $%&FG(E ;L;3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 J;3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3+N9 :LH3

G;F G;&

+5,
Thernopsi9 also mentioned in the 4istis Sophia3 PGM +*9 as noted abo"e9 details the correspondence of "arious )gyptian di"inities with the twel"e hours e2pressed in the form of animalsC so9 too9 the 4istis Sophia lists the twel"e dungeons each with a ruler whose face changes e"ery hour from one animal to another $+*3G%:3%H=G%&3%L(3GGL )qually interesting is the appropriation of the Gree0 psi9 @greatestA9 hence Psinother as @greatest godA which is also )gyptian for @the sons of godA3GG% As well9 the psi=sound to the )gyptian ear registered as @nineA $Coptic C+(9 a number e2pressing the quintessence of plurality to )gyptian sensibilities3GG; As with the appropriation of the Gree0 horus $boundary( to the )gyptian 4orus9 the bilingual mentality behind this cultural fusion attempted to create an entirely new middle groundE the aeon 4orus in *alentinian thought was not an opaque dynamic of god9 neither was he the full= blown figure of )gyptian myth3 o too9 this bilingual religiosity naturally fused the Gree0 psi as greatness with the Coptic C+ bespea0ing @nine=nessA9 attaining a synthesis of and the )gyptian pCTC> The hidden linguistic attributes of such names as BA+-C4,,C49 Psinother9 or TeilouteilouGGG9 confirm this referring=bac0 to )gyptian religious sensibilities in magical thought3

Gnosis
The means of recei"ing special 0nowledge of the di"ine in the Magical te2ts has a number of important connections with Gnostic thought3 The ascent to the pleroma and return of the spiritual master to teach is found in PGM +*3'F;9 the so=called @Mithras /iturgyA3 The author writes of the mysteries which the great god 4elios Mithras ordered to be re"ealed to me by his archangel9 so that + alone may ascend into hea"en as an inquirer and behold the uni"erse3GG' +n the Gnostic ;ostrianos9 an angel of @eternal lightA addresses 8ostrianos Come and pass through9 within each $the great eternal aeons abo"e(3 Iou will return to them another YtimeZ in order to preach to a li"ing Yrace33Z and to preser"e those who are worthy9 and to gi"e strength to the elect9 for the struggle of the aeon is great but time in this world is shortA $-4C *+++9%3'3%G=;L(GGJ /i0ewise9 the Gnostic 4araphrase of Shem depicts the ascent of a solitary adept9 aided by a di"ine figure in attaining gnosis3 The tractate begins with the following descriptionE

GGL GG% GG;

ee also DuVuesne9 A "optic 0nitiatory 0n%ocation9 ;% BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 J'3

ee 4arrauer< +eliouchos< F% n3FF3 The 4istis Sophia $+3%;H3H=%L( lists out a number of sacred sounds that are to be ta0en as @interpretations of the names of these mysteriesA3 The third one listed is 3 ee .an Vuaegebeur9 @A propos de Teilouteilou9 nom magique9 et de T_rout_rou9 nom de femme9A Ench ' $%&:'(E %&=;&3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 'F3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3NNN+A Nag (ammadi "odices &0009 ed3 .ohn 43 ieber $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%(9 GH9 GF3

GGG

GG' GGJ

++5
That which Derde0ea re"ealed to me9 hem9 according to the will of the MaDesty3 My thought which was in my body too0 me away from my race +t lead me on high to the foundation of the world close to the /ight which shone upon the entire earthly realm in that place3 + saw no earthly resemblance9 but there was light3 And my thought separated from the body of dar0ness as though in sleep3 $-4C *++3%3G=%H(GGH An emphasis upon a pure life and abstinence for the Gnostic adept in these two e2amples is also to be seen in PGM +*3:G; which directs the aspirant to remain pure for se"en days @and abstain from meat and the bathA3 The Gnostic treatise -he -estimony of -ruth is an interesting te2t on a number of counts The pro"enance of the te2t has been strongly located in Ale2andria in the ;nd centuryGG:9 and the te2t is anti=orthodo29 indeed antinomian in general9 while at the same time also indicting a number of other Gnostic sects3 ,ne passage in particular "ery clearly lays out an ascetic course for the aspirant of gnosisE And he pondered the Power which flowed upon the entire place9 and which possessed him3 And he is a disciple of his Nous which is male3 4e began to 0eep silent within himself until the day when he should become worthy to be recei"ed abo"e3 4e reDects for himself superfluity of words and wordsome quarrels and abides the entire place And he bears up under them9 and endures all of the e"il things3 And he is patient with e"eryone ma0ing himself equal to all9 also separating himself from them3 And that which anyone desires he brings to him so that he might become complete and holy3 $-4C +N9G 'G3;&= ''3%&(GGF The testimony of Chaeremon9 a first=century )gyptian priest9 is an important one to consider alongside Gnostic and magical aspirations3 The strong presence of )gyptian mythological elements in the magical papyri9 in particular the identification of gods and sacred animals9 the setting of standards for initiates9 and interpretations of dreams or "isions9 are all acti"ities which can hardly be considered far=remo"ed from Chaeremon?s priestly milieu3GG& A case for a fair degree of o"erlap can certainly be made and9 e"en ac0nowledging Chaeremon?s undoubted desire to idealise the )gyptian priesthood9 we cannot but doubt that main gist of his testimony concerning priestly ascetic practices reflect the actual @pureA life of the priesthood of the time3G'L At the end of a long and "ery detailed description of the ascetic obser"ances of )gyptian priests as described by Chaeremon9 Porphyry ma0es the following interesting commentE @But the rest > the crowd of priests9 shrine $S( bearers9 temple wardens9 and assistants > practice the same rites of purification for the gods9 yet not with such great accuracy and self=
GGH

Coptic transcription from 'EN("9 $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:;(9 :3 This feature also appears in -he Apocryphon of John $-4C ++9%9 +++9%9 +*9% U BG FJL;9;(9 Asclepius $ -4C *+9F(9 -he 9iscourse on the Eighth and Ninth $-4C *+9H(9 Allogenes $-4C N+9G(9 and the 4istis Sophia $As0ew Code2(> Pearson9 N(S< "ol3 N*9 %;L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N*3< %J;9 %J'3

GG: GGF GG&

A fine e2ample of )gyptian priestly piety is to be found upon the walls of the tomb of Petosiris9 a sage of 4ermopolis who li"ed around GJL=GGL B3C3)3 The inscriptions testifies that9 @)"ery night the spirit of god was in my soul9 and at dawn + did as he willed3 + practiced Dustice YMa?atZ9 + detested e"il3A erge auneron9 -he 4riests of Ancient Egypt $/ondonE )"ergreen9 %&HL(9 %G3 Porphyrius $;GG=GL' C3)3(9 writing on the )gyptian priests in 2n A=stinence< described how @they practice simplicity in li"ing and in dress9 temperence9 austerity9 Dustice9 and non=attachment333A $+*9 H=F(3 @-othing impunes the essential authenticity of what sur"i"es3A 1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermes< J'3

G'L

+++
controlA3 This is precisely the sub=class of the )gyptian priestly hierarchy where we would e2pect a number of bilingual )gyptians with some sort of Gree0 bac0ground to stand as @re"isionistsAC indeed9 it is clear that Chaeremon wants it understood that this class is less pure than the inner priestly circle3G'; PGM +++3JFG=H%LG'G contains a rather eloquent entreaty to god for gnosis and is to be found in the 4ermetic Asclepius in its entirety9 also surfacing in the -ag 4ammadi corpus as @The Prayer of Than0sgi"ingA $-4C *+9:( alongside the other two 4ermetic tractates Asclepius $ -4C *+9F( and -he 9iscourse on the Eighth and Ninth $-4C *+9H(3G'' The rather odd notion of eating gnosis is to be found in both PGM N+++3&%L where the se"en "owels are lic0ed off a gold lamella9 and in Gnostic practice where9 according to 4ippolytus where some Gnostics @dran0A their gnosis3G'J There are numerous )gyptian antecedents9 as in the rubric from this Coffin Te2tE
G'%

This spell should be spo0en o"er the se"en sacred eyes in writingE to be washed in beer and natron and to be drun0 by the man3$CT ++ pell G'%(G'H An e2ample9 concurrent with the appearance of the magical papyri and Gnosis in )gypt is to be found in -he 'irst -ale of .hamuas3 +n this Graeco=Roman demotic literary epic9 the )gyptian prince -enefer0aptah obtains a magical boo0 of great power3 4is younger brother at one point describes the actions of -enefer0aptahE 4e caused to be brought unto him a piece of new papyrusC he wrote $thereon( e"ery word that was before him on the roll9 all3 4a"ing caused it to be soa0ed with beer9 he dissol"ed it in water9 he made certain that it was dissol"ed9 he dran0 it9 he 0new according to that which in which it was3G': Di"ine Personages The figure of +A,9 abaoth9 Adonai9 and Abrasa2 in the magical papyri form an ob"ious lin0 with Gnostic cosmologies3 PGM +++3%'H offers a typical sampling of in"o0ed demiurgic deitiesE

G'% G';

"haeremon< 1ragment %L9 %:3

<ith respect to the authors of the magical papyri9 A3A3 Barb ma0es e2actly this point about re"isionary priestly acti"ities in a bilingual conte2tE @The demotic te2ts can hardly ha"e been written by anybody but an )gyptian priest or scribe9 the Coptic ones were probably a lucrati"e sideline of unscrupulous mon0s3A @Mystery9 Myth9 and Magic9A%HL3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 GG=G'3 ee 1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermes9 FG3

G'G G'' G'J

)lenchos * ;G9G $p3%;J9 ;' <(3 The testimony of )piphanius about certain libertine Gnostic se2ual practices might also qualify for inclusion here3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts< ;:H3 Griffith9 Stories of the (igh 4riests of +emphis9 ;J=;H3

G'H G':

++2
+ conDure you by the god +A,9 by the god Abaoth9 by the god Michael9 by the god ouriel9 by the god Gabriel9 by the god Raphael9 by the god Abrasa2 Ablathanalba A0rammachari9 by the lord god +aoil9 by the lord god Chabra$ch(G'&
G'F

The first three of these gods are Gnostic planet aeons9 the following four are .ewish archangels3GJL +t is clear from other lists in the magical papyri $PGM N3'J for e2ample( that the group of se"en is probably being emphasised here in the usual planetaryO"owel sound arrangement9 with Abrasa2 standing apart3 +t is clear that the prestige that .ewish magical practises had translated into an array of .ewish di"ine personages9 as in the abo"e9 or in the .ewishising of specific deities through the alteration of name=endings3GJ% The .ewish element9 as such9 deri"es from 4ellenistic syncretistic .udaism > specifically Ale2andrian in all li0elihoodGJ; > and not from .ewish religion at the time of the ,ld Testament3GJG The phenomenon of an anti= .ahweh cosmology filled with .ewish=sounding di"ine personages9 but not e2clusi"ely so9 is shared in part by both the Magical papyri and Gnostic thought9 in particular so=called ethian Gnosticism3 The figure of Abrasa29 ubiquitous in the magical papyri9 and the cosmic egg $PGM +++3%'J for e2ample( are both to be found in the thought of the Gnostic Basileides of Ale2andria $see Appendi2 B(3 The reports of +renaeus $ad%> haer> + %&9% U '(9 4ippolytus $$efut> : ;H9H(9 )piphanius $4anar> ;'3:H(9 and Pseudo=Tertullian $ad%>omn>haer> +3'(9 while not at all agreeing on the nature of Basileides? thought9 agree that Abrasa2 was not a creation of Basileides9 but was pic0ed up for numerological reasons among others3 The Gree0 section of Papyrus Carlsberg J; mentions the three @chastising archons of the Abyss9 Chla9 Achla9 and AchlamouA3GJ' which recalls the punishing archons of Chaos in the 4istis SophiaE @-ow it happened that when the emanations of the Authades realised that the Pistis ophia was not raised up from the Chaos9 they immediately turned again and tormented her greatlyA $+3': FJ3%'=%:(GJJ3 The Coptic part of Papyrus Carlsberg depicts a lion=faced di"inity9 Petbe9 god of retribution and re"enge li"ing in -un $Pshai9 the /ate=Period god of 1ate9 is also presented as li"ing in -un in a demotic magical papyrusGJH(3 The name of the chaos=god Authades in the 4istis Sophia $@self=willedA( describes a principle of arrogant wilfulness3 This power is described as lion=faced9 @whose one half was fire and whose other half was dar0ness9

G'F G'& GJL GJ%

4arrauer translates the lacuna here as Y abaZoth< +eliouchos< 'J3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 ;;3 4arrauer< +eliouchos9 'H3

Brashear9 +agica &aria9 ;; n3JE @Gree0 and Coptic magicians ga"e their te2ts a semitic flair by strewing them with almost any root9 word or name and adding the endings @el< @ath or @oth3A 4arrauer identifies the passage in PGM +++3'Gff as @definitely333 from Ale2andriaA3 The syncretistic elements allow for this conclusion9 especially the Babylonian underworld goddess that 4arrauer identifies3 +eliouchos< J'3 BetB9 @Magic and Mystery in the Gree0 Magical Papyri9A in +agika (iera9 ed3 Christopher A3 1araone and Dir0 ,bbin0 $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&%(9 ;'&3 Brashear9 +agica &aria< 'L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +NA 4istis Sophia9 ed3 Carl chmidt $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 %:L3

GJ;

GJG

GJ' GJJ GJH

PDM 2i"3GLC BetB9 )reek +agical 4apyri9 %&:3 ee also 43.3 Thissen9 @6gyptische BeitrRge Bu den griechischen magischen PapyriA9 GLL3

++4
namely IaldabaothA $+3G; 'H3%'=%:( 3 Arioth9 a god of the depths in Papyrus Carlsberg J;GJF9 also shows up in -he 4istis Sophia $+*3%'L3GH;( as the female archon Ariuth3 1inally9 it might be mentioned that the 4istis Sophia describes -he 2uter 9arkness as a great dragon encircling the earth with its tail in its mouth9 and the common motif of the !roboros is found pictorially presented in PGM *++3J&L3
GJ:

+ncubation
The phenomenon of direct access to the numinous through dreams shows up throughout the magical papyri $e3g3 PGM +3% U G:C +*3G;LJC *++3;G;9 'L: U :;:=G&C N++3%;%='G( and is counted upon as one of the potent s0ills of the magician3 This function is also a critical feature of )gyptian priestly life as it is well=attested in the /ate Period3 The Gnostics Carpocrates9 and imon9 were attac0ed by +renaeus and 4ippolytus for their percei"ed practice of the magical arts9 including gnosis through dreams3GJ& Carpocrates9 an )gyptian Gnostic acti"e in Ale2andria with his son )piphanes around %GL C3)39 is denounced because he would @practice magic9 and use images and incantationsC philters9 also9 and lo"e potionsC and Yha"ingZ recourse to familiar spirits9 dream=sending demons333 declaring that Yhe possessesZ power to rule o"er9 e"en now9 the princes and formers of this worldA9 as is Basileides along the same lines3GHL +n short9 two of the most influential Gnostic teachers that we 0now of in Ale2andria9 are accused of practising all of the normal practices of the )gyptian dualist magician3 Gi"en the te2tual affinities that we ha"e thus=far e2amined9 in conDunction with the sympathetic mood shared by Gnostic and magician9 the main thrust of the testimony of +renaeus must be gi"en credence This sur"ey does not pretend to be e2hausti"e but is sufficient to the tas0 at hand in establishing a firm Gnostic resonance in the magical papyri and "ice "ersa3 +n particular9 we ha"e noted those Dunctures where magic is subsumed by gnosis> This gnosis @includes almost e"erything of interest to the magician9 from fore0nowledge of the di"ine plans for the future to the range of things we would regard as scientificA3GH% ,ne particular magical spell $also cited by BetB in this regard( stands out hereE + am Thouth9 disco"erer and founder of drugs and letters3 Come to me9 you under the earthC arouse YyourselfZ for me9 great daimon9 he of -oun Y-unZ9 the subterranean333 + will not let god or goddess gi"e oracles until +9 --9 0now through and through what is in the minds of all men9 )gyptians9 yrians9 Gree0s9 )thiopians9 of e"ery race and people9 those who question me and come into my sight9 whether they spea0 or are silent9 so that + can tell them whate"er has happened and is happening and is going to happen to them9 and + 0now their s0ills and their li"es and their practices and their wor0s and their names and

GJ: GJF GJ& GHL

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +N< &; Brashear9 +agica &aria9 'L3 +renaeus +3NN+++ U +3NN*C 4ippolytus 4aer3H3;H

Ad>(aer> +3NN+*3J and %3NN*3G9 trans3 A3 Roberts and .3 Donaldson9 Ante@Nicene 'athers9 "ol3 % $-ew Ior0E cribner?s ons9 %&%G(9 GJLC also Clement9 Strom> +++3;bKJ3;=&3G U K%L3% 4ans Dieter BetB9 @The 1ormulation of Authoritati"e Tradition in the Gree0 Magical Papyri9A in Self@ 9efinition in the )reco@$oman Gorld9 "ol3 G9 Jewish and "hristian Self@9efinition< ed3 Ben 13 Meyer and )3P3 anders $PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&F;(9 %H'=HJ3

GH%

++those of their dead9 and of e"erybody9 and + can read a sealed letter and tell them e"erything $in it( truly3GH; The reference to 0nowledge of past9 present9 and future9 in a gnosis=conte2t is highly reminiscent of the famous *alentinian formulaE <hat liberates is the 0nowledge of who we were9 what we becameC where we were9 whereinto we ha"e been thrownC whereto we speed9 wherefrom we are redeemedC what birth is9 and what rebirth3GHG <hile the o"erlaps with Gnostic thought are numerous9GH' it is fair to conclude that they are not so numerous as to suggest Gnostic antecedenceGHJ This cannot be pro"en on te2tual grounds9 and so we must ad"ance a sociological hypothesis for the interpenetration of Gnostic and magical thought3 + would begin by echoing 1owden?s obser"ation that we are dealing with an intellectual elite in Gnostic9 4ermetic9 and magical thought3GHH Gree0 magical thought perhaps began to influence its )gyptian counterpart > a "enerable aspect of traditional priestly functions > as early as the Hth century B3C3)3GH: /ater on9 there was also the increasing influence of Gree0 philosophyGHFC as well9 we must mention the de"elopment of alchemy9 which also saw close collaboration between )gyptian and Gree0 thought3GH& Abo"e all9 it seems to me9 it is the phenomenon of bilingualism that supererogates the modern scholarly fi2ation with the syncretistic3 yncretism9 per se9 need not be seen as a capricious endea"our underta0en by a particular social group generally assumed to be culturally confusedC it is more often a natural result of a deeply established bilingual social life3 A person who grows up with two acti"e day to day languages often does not ha"e the option to participate in either of the respecti"e cultures in"ol"ed at the complete e2pense of the other > he or she is compelled to synthesise the two3 ,n the basic le"el of the simpliciores this in"ol"es finding a norm for customs and religious obser"ancesC on the le"el of the elite we are dealing with here9 it necessitates e2ploring each "ast mythologicalOtheological architectonic for Duncture=points that can form the foundations for
GH; GHG GH'

PGM *3 ;':=GLGC BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %LH3 E:c>-heod> :F3;9 translation 4ans .onas9 -he )nostic $eligion9 'J3

4ace Brashear who claims that9 @,n the whole9 Gnostic elements in the magical papyri are relati"ely few and far between9A $+agica &aria9 ;G( which of course begs the question as to what @GnosticA means in his statement3 ,n a "ery general le"el the magical papyri are strongly Gnostic in their depiction of underworld powers9 and their quest for a 0nowledge that will guide them past these inimical obstacles > this quite apart from specificsE how Gnostic is Gnostic in this senseS A point made by Brashear in conDunction with the abo"e o"erstatement of his case3 The two traDectories of Gnostic and magical thought are not mutually e2clusi"e9 and Brashear pushes the distinction too far3 +agica &aria9 ;G3 1owden9 -he Egyptian (ermes< %&%3 BetB9 @Magic and Mystery in the Gree0 Magical PapyriA9 ;'&3 BetB9 @The 1ormulation of Authoritati"e Tradition in the Gree0 Magical PapyriA9 %HG3

GHJ

GHH GH: GHF GH&

1ran]ois Daumas9 @/?alchimie a=t=elle une origine PgyptienneS9A in 9as $*misch@By,antinische Hgypten $MainB am RheinE Phillip "on 8abern9 %&FG(9 %%HE @the milieu in which alchemy was born was Graeco=)gyptian and333 the literature and national sciences were easily accessible to writers who were part of it3A

++.
a new world"iew3 The strengths and wea0ness of this synthesis can only be partially appreciated from this remo"e3 ,ne of the main problems in basing one?s understanding upon such and such a particular group in the 4ellenistic era9 is that the definitions are always somewhat synthetic9 as well they might gi"en the "olatile shifting of social and mythological boundaries during these times3 The te2ts9 or embedded te2ts as they often appear9 are always @contaminatedA by influences that obfuscate the modern penchant for clear=cut traDectories a posteriori3 @ yncretismA more often signals modern scholarly frustration with this phenomenon than it effecti"ely elucidates3 The most critical subset of bilingualism as the true dynamic underlying so=called syncretism9 is redaction> The intellectual elite wrestling with multicultural religiousOphilosophical issues in this period > themsel"es a smaller group within an already small percentage of people who were at all literate in )gypt > were opening new mythological frontiers which incorporated traditional thought patterns as a matter of course3 The new=found focus upon the 4ellenistic indi"idual "ouchsafed his or her right to mythopoeic synthesis3 By the same to0en9 an earlier te2t by such a @syncretistA could be ta0en up by a later redactor and rewor0ed with no pangs of conscience9 witness the transformation of Eugnostos the Blessed $-4C +++9G(9 a @paganA Gnostic te2t9 into -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist $-4C +++9'( through sheer addition to the core te2tE the fact that both te2ts were preser"ed alongside one another in the .ebel al Tarif surely indicates that the redaction process itself was being appreciated by the ancient antiquarians who buried the te2ts to protect them3 +t is therefore of the essence to place a significant segment of the Gnostics in )gypt in close association with the phenomenon of Graeco=)gyptian intermarriage and bilingualism as we ha"e seen in Chapter '3 The writers of the magical papyri in part came from the same milieu3 And so it is that the appearance of Coptic in the magical te2ts is a signal de"elopment on the linguistic side of this fusion and the whole question of the de"elopment of Coptic in association with this intellectual elite must now be raised3

++K
)hapter (i/* The 'evelopment of )optic

,ne of the main te2tboo0s currently being used to introduce students to Coptic9 and certainly the most recent publication of its type9 is T3,3 /ambdin?s 0ntroduction to Sahidic "opticG:L which9 while otherwise an e2cellent piece of wor09 presents a rather equi"ocal "iew of the actual social origins of the language that it sets out to teach3 )arlier on in his career /ambdin9 following the wor0 of <313 )dgerton9G:% focused upon problems in the "ocalisation of )gyptian and applied the term @Proto=CopticA to designate the period of de"elopment between )dgerton?s @Paleo=CopticA phase and the actual rise of Coptic as a written script3 /ambdin a"oided the problem of dealing with actual historical time=periods in the de"elopment of this synthetic linguistic model3G:; 4owe"er9 in his 0ntroduction to Sahidic "optic9 written twenty= fi"e years later9 /ambdin states that the Coptic script was employed by the early Christian proselytisers in Ale2andria in the second century C3)3 as a way of presenting the Bible to the )gyptian masses3 )2actly what is meant by @employedA here is ambiguousE does it indicate that the use of the Gree0 alphabet for the )gyptian language was initiated by Christian proselytisersS or did they capitalise upon the fact that Coptic was already an established scriptSG:G The a"ailable e"idence e2amined in Chapter J surely affirms the latter3 +n the first instance9 we ha"e Coptic magical te2ts which date bac0 to at least the first century of our era3G:'
G:L G:%

Thomas ,3 /ambdin9 0ntroduction to Sahidic "optic JMacon9 GAE Mercer !ni"ersity Press9 %&FG(3

<illiam 13 )dgerton9 @ tress9 *owel Vuality9 and yllable Di"ision in )gyptian9A JNES H $%&':(E %= %:3 Thomas ,3 /ambdin9 @The Bi"alence of Coptic E-A and Related Problems in the *ocaliBation of )gyptian9A JNES %: $%&JF(E %F%9 n3;G+E @+ use the word Tsubsequent? in a relati"e sense only9 since + obDect to )dgerton?s assigning Paleo=Coptic forms to any specific period of the history of the )gyptian language3 As + ha"e stated9 the Paleo=Coptic forms represent a synthetic relationship between the Coptic and )gyptian writings of a word9 and we are not in a position to determine their reality as speech forms in a gi"en period9 much less to demonstrate the simultaneity of changes required if this were true3A3 @The hieroglyphic script333 together with its cursi"e deri"ati"es9 hieratic and demotic9 remained the sole medium for writing the Egyptian language until the end of the second century A>93 At that time9 the missionaries of the Church9 then centred in Ale2andria9 undertoo0 the translation of the Bible from Gree0 into )gyptian in order to facilitate their tas0 of ChristianiBing the country3 They abandoned the three=thousand=year=old hieroglyphic writing system9 probably as much because of its comple2ity and imperfections as for its @heathenA associations9 and chose instead to employ a modified form of the Gree0 alphabet3A /ambdin9 0ntroduction to Sahidic "optic9 "iiC emphasis added3 /ambdin is e"idently contending that Coptic arose entirely as a Christian phenomenon9 assigning this de"elopment to a time= period which pro"ides no te2tual proof for a widespread Christian presence in )gypt3 /ambdin is perhaps to be forgi"en for putting forward the traditional story $and for studiously a"oiding the inclusion of e"en one @hereticalA te2t in the Coptic passages in his e2ercises( as his o"erall aims are linguisticC not so9 Alan 53 Bowman in Egypt After the 4haraohs $<arwic0shire9 )nglandE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&FH(9 %J:=JF9 who ad"ances this same "iew3 ee Paul )3 5ahle9 Balai,ahA "optic -e:ts from 9eir el@Balai,ah in Ipper Egypt $/ondonE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&J'(9 ;J;9 which dates these te2ts @towards the end of the first century A3D3AC also <erner *ycichl9 9ictionaire !tymologi#ue de la Langue "opte $/eu"enE 7dition Peeters9 %&FG( which dates some te2ts between &J=%GL C3)39 others around %LL C3)3C Tito ,rlandi in @Coptic /iterature9A in -he $oots of Egyptian "hristianity9 ed3 Birger A3 Pearson $PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FH(9 J;9 dates

G:;

G:G

G:'

++7
As well9 we ha"e a siBeable selection of Gree0 and Demotic magical te2ts from the first three centuries C3)3 which ma0es frequent use of Coptic words and glosses3G:J <hile it is li0ely that there were some Gree0=spea0ing Christian communities in )gypt in the later first9 and second centuries9 we do not ha"e e"idence for any considerable Christian presence until the middle of the third century C3)39 the great con"ersion of the )gyptian masses not occurring until well into the fourth3G:H 1ollowing the conclusions of such scholars as A3 4arnac09 C3 chmidt9 .3 Maspero9 43+3 Bell9 and G3 Bardy9 P3)3 5ahle concludes that @there is practically no e"idence at all for Christianity in )gypt before the time of Demitrius $patriarch A3D3 %FFO&=;G%(9 and Clement of Ale2andria $died A3D3 ;%:(A3G:: Gi"en this9 we may therefore draw the ob"ious conclusion that Coptic9 not Dust the stage of the language but the employment of the script9 e2isted before its wide=spread use by Christian proselytisers in )gypt3G:F + wish9 then9 to de"elop a practical hypothesis for the e2istence of Coptic as a @paganA phenomenon before its further de"elopment in Christianised )gypt9 to assign to it a pro"isional time period and location9 and to draw out some implications for the study of )gyptian Gnostic te2ts in particularC as heirs to a long tradition of independent )gyptian religious thought9 they might be e2pected to ha"e been composed by literate )gyptians in the language of )gypt and not e2clusi"ely in Gree03 The linguistic relationship between Coptic and Demotic9 the nati"e )gyptian script which was in declining use during the first three centuries of our era9 is an e2tremely difficult area and will not be e2plored here in any great depthC rather a number of fundamental linguistic conclusions ad"anced by Demotists and Coptologists will be used to support a "iable socio=historical model within which these scripts might be conte2tualised3G:& +n terms of accessible te2tual e"idence9 our initial consideration must be the aforementioned Coptic magical papyri3 5ahle concludes that9 @the so=called ,ld Coptic te2ts being written with Gree0 letters e"idently met an urgent desire9 particularly in the case of spells9
these te2ts from the first to the fourth or fifth century C3)3C 4elmut atBinger9 @,n the ,rigin of the ahidic Dialect9A in Acts of the 8nd 0nternational "ongress of "optic Studies9 eds3 Tito ,rlandi and 1rederic0 <isse $RomeE C3+3M39 %&FJ(9 G%%E @+t is generally accepted that Y ahidicZ did not owe its role of an enchoric 0oine in !pper )gypt to Christianity9 but rather had assumed that function at a considerably earlier timeAC C3<3 Goodwin9 @,n an )gyptian te2t in Gree0 characters9A ;HS H $%FHF(E %F=;'9 details an )gyptian horoscope written in the Gree0 alphabet with the addition of si2 letters ta0en from the Demotic3 Based upon planetary positions gi"en the te2t can be dated with some certainty to %J' C3)3
G:J

ee BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri3 A number of these te2ts are identified as ha"ing originated from ,ld Coptic "ersions3 Also 13 /l3 Griffith @The ,ld Coptic 4oroscope of the tobart Collection9A ;HS9 "3GF9 %&LL9 :%=&G9 and @The Date of the ,ld Coptic Te2ts and their Relation to Christian Coptic9A ;HS G&< %&L%9 :F=F;3 5ahle9 Balai,ah9 ;J:C see in particular 43+3 Bell9 @)"idence for Christianity in )gypt during the Roman period9A (-$ NNN*++ $%&''(E %FJff39 and Gusta"e Bardy Les premiers temps du christianisme de langue copte en !gypte in +morial Lagrange $Paris9 %&'L(9 ;%LE @+f it can be determined that at the beginning of the fourth century the Coptic element was represented in the churches of )gypt9 it seems li0ely that it remained as a feeble minority9 and9 that9 in the main9 Christianity in )gypt e2isted closely attached to 4ellenism3A 5ahle9 Balai,ah9 ;J:=JF3 +t should be remembered that until the Council of Chalcedon in 'J% C3)39 Gree0 was used for official purposes and was in fact the principle language of the Church of )gypt3 ee 5ahle9 Balai,ah< ;H'3 + am9 in the main9 following the original conclusions of 5urt ethe9 @Das *erhRltnis Bwischen Demotisch und 5optisch und seine /ehren fXr die Geschichte der Rgyptische prache9A ;9+) :& $%&;J(E ;&L=G%H3 ee also atBinger @,n the ,rigin of the ahidic DialectA3

G:H

G:: G:F

G:&

++P
to lay down e2actly the pronunciation of words or to clarify obscure passages in DemoticA3GFL The system of transcription itself in this regard is9 according to 5ahle9 sufficiently de"eloped to rule out isolated attempts made upon a purely indi"idual basis3GF% + would note9 howe"er9 that this need to e2actly "ocalise words only ma0es sense in a Graeco=)gyptian milieu9 for "owelless scripts ob"iously cause no confusion amongst nati"e spea0ers3 <e are faced with the socio=historical model of Gree0 sensibilities requiring a window into the language9 and of )gyptian sensibilities desirous of pro"iding it3 There is e"idence which demonstrates rudimentary attempts at transcribing )gyptian into the Gree0 alphabet in the form of graffiti found at Adydos9 which dates to the second century B3C3)3

1igure GGF;

This e2ample9 dated by PerdriBetO/efeb"re ca> ;LL=%LL B3C3)39 commences with a false startE line one misses the G and therefore starts a fresh line in a firmer hand3 A Gree0 date / @in year JA is added and we ha"e @year J of pharaohA with the name @!rgonaphorA appearing at the end of that line3 Based upon + would date the te2t to the year ;L; B3C3)39 the fifth year of pharaoh 4arma0his9 also 0nown as 4aronnophris and 4urgonaphor9GFG who led a successful re"olt in the Thebaid3 Pierre /acau9 the first )gyptologist to see this graffito9 rendered lines G and ' in Coptic9 @+ saw +sis with ,siris9 + saw Amun=Re9 5ing of the Gods9 the Great GodA9 and with this we must basically agree3 @-,MA is an in"erted M-9 the @/A in Amon=Ra is a common feature from the -ew 5ingdom onwards9 ,-T4)R a Gree0 rendering of @5ing of the GodsA from nisw ntrw9 and the at the end is a suffi2 meaning @greatA3 4owe"er9 the "erbal=form is still troubling3 +t is ob"iously a qualitati"e and would seem to be from the "erb 9 @to lo"eA3 This does not wor0 rhetorically in an )gyptian conte2t as it was not the normal e2pression used to describe a connection between the 0ing and the godsE @belo"ed ofA is the ob"ious choice
GFL

5ahle9 Balai,ah9 ;J;=JG3 This dynamic can be seen in action in the Demotic magical papyri3 .anet 43 .ohnson in her introduction to -he )reek +agical 4apyri ma0es the analogous point in noting that the occurrences of the older )gyptian hieratic script are far more common than Gree0 passages in these te2ts9 @and glosses into ,ld Coptic most frequently for the writing of magical names and presumably to indicate proper pronounciation $which would ha"e been "ery difficult to do gi"en the abbre"iated nature and great age of the traditional )gyptian scripts(9A +n BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri< l"i3 5ahle9 Balai,ah9 ;JG3 5ahle notes that this estimate is based upon unpublished material3 Paul PerdriBet and Gusta"e /efeb"re9 Les )raffites )recs du +emnonion dA=ydos< +nscriptiones Graecae Aegypti9 "ol3 +++ no3:' $%&%&C reprint9 ChicagoE Arles Publishers +nc39 %&:F(9 %G3 Bowman9 Egypt After the 4haraohs9 GL3

GF% GF;

GFG

++,
which would entail another "erb3 /acau has ob"iously opted to ta0e the M as an - for Dust this reason9 and thus we ha"e the qualitati"e of the "erb -AI9 to see3 This confirmation of Gree0=)gyptian linguistic interaction suggests that a true Gree0= )gyptian culturalOeconomic interaction in Egypt generated the need for the )gyptian language to be transcribed into the Gree0 alphabet for a "ariety of reasons9 possibly e"en as early as :JL=HJH B3C3)3 during the reign of Psammetichus +3GF' + propose then to de"elop a social model based upon Gree0=)gyptian interaction from HJL B3C3)3 to GF' C3)39 that is9 the era of the early Gree0 settlements in )gypt9 e2tending through Ptolemaic and Roman times until Demotic was e"entually replaced by Coptic as the written )gyptian script3GFJ This phase + shall call @)arly CopticA9 and as a wor0ing hypothesis we should loo0 to Ptolemaic times9 especially the later period of Ptolemaic rule when a significant number of Gree0s were becoming )gyptianised to a quite remar0able degree9 for the sort of deep Graeco=)gyptian cultural fusion which would ha"e generated the impetus to create a systematic script for spo0en )gyptian employing the Gree0 alphabet3 The )arly Coptic period9 as + am defining it9 is contemporaneous with the rise and fall of Demotic which for %LLL years was the written language of )gypt $ca> HJL B3C3)3 = 'JL C3)3(3GFH During the main de"elopment of Coptic9 Demotic was the script in use among )gyptians3 This cursi"e script9 descended from 4ieratic9 continued on in use until the final phases of )arly Coptic $%LL B3C3)3 = GF' C3)3( and so we ha"e the interesting phenomenon of two radically

GF'

The )gyptian 0ing Psammetichus + employed Gree0 mercenaries in his army and allowed for the settlement of the first Gree0 communities in )gypt by rewarding these soldiers with two pieces of land for their ser"ices3 According to Diodorus9 Psammetichus encouraged trade with Greece9 and @was so great an admirer of the 4ellenes that he ga"e his sons a Gree0 education9A 9iodorus Siculus 0< +3H:3&3 4erodotus records that the Gree0s were well=treated and respected by the 0ing9 who also founded a school of interpreters3 ee Boardman9 -he )reeks 2%erseas9 Chapter '3 +t is9 + belie"e9 reasonable to assume that apart from translating Gree0 into )gyptian9 this school might ha"e attempted at least the transliteration of spo0en )gyptian into the Gree0 alphabet3 The earliest written e"idence for actual linguistic influence may e2ist in the form of a 5ushite inscription found at Abydos3 ee .ill 5amil?s wor09 "optic EgyptA (istory and )uide $CairoE The American !ni"ersity in Cairo Press9 %&F:(9 ;;9 in which she reports that @the earliest attempt to write the )gyptian language alphabetically in Gree09 feeble but important9 has sur"i"ed in an inscription dating to the 5ushite dynasty333 at Abydos3A -o note or further description is gi"en for this inscription and + am yet unable to trac0 it down3 The date HJL B3C3)3 puts us well into the reign of the aforementioned Psammetichus + $HH'=%L( who restored free rule to )gypt from the Assyrians9 and it is in this period that we first hear of numbers of Gree0s in )gypt3 This9 in conDunction with the possibly useful 5ushite inscription9 mar0s the beginning of the social possibilities for early Coptic3 Boardman9 -he )reeks 2%erseas9 %;&f3 The date of GF' C3)3 mar0s the closing down of the temples of )gypt by the decree of Theodosius9 which signalled the end of )gyptian @paganism3A ee /ewis9 Life in Egypt under $oman $ule9 F;E @Demotic333 began to fade in the second century9 though "estiges are at hand for some two hundred years after that3A ee also <3)343 Coc0le?s article9 @ tate Archi"es in Graeco=Roman )gypt from GL BC to the Reign of eptimius e"erus9A JEA :L $%&F'(E %LH=%;;9 in which archi"al records in Gree0 and Demotic are e2amined3 Also9 .anet 43 .ohnson9 -he 9emotic &er=al System $ChicagoE The !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&:H(9 %9 dates the rise of Demotic to the reign of Psammetichus + $ca> HH'=H%L(3 ince the last e2tant cohesi"e Demotic te2t is dated to the third century + am using this as well to define the end of the )arly Coptic period9 in conDunction with Theodosius? decree9 for it is at this point that Coptic begins o"erta0e Demotic as the written language of the "ulgate3

GFJ

GFH

+25
different scripts for the same language e2isting side by side during late Ptolemaic and Roman times3GF: A study of Demotic material from the Ptolemaic Period9 much of it as yet unpublished9 shows that the )gyptian language attained "igorous e2pression in this written form9 both in the quantity of the te2ts which ha"e come down to us9 and in the broad array of its te2tual applications3GFF <hat interests us is the o"erlap of Gree0 and Demotic in a bilingualised Ptolemaic social stratum9 and + would cite but one e2ample from many3GF& Dionysios9 son of 5ephalas9 li"ed in the last decades of the second century B3C3)3 The )gyptian element in his family had been prominent from much earlier and he had been gi"en the benefit of a bilingual upbringing3 As a result he wrote Gree0 and Demotic as well as any scribe of the time9 and his family too0 great pride in 0eeping their Gree0 names9 although they used their )gyptian names and spo0e the )gyptian language inter familia3 Dionysios ser"ed in the military of the Ptolemaic state $as did his father9 hence his possessing that pri"ilege(9 yet also held a priestly office in the cult of the local ibis=god3 This e2ample illustrates a quite remar0able degree of Graeco=)gyptian cultural interpenetration9 one endemic to the latter half of the Ptolemaic era3 1rom this point on9 with some certainty9 we can loo0 to bilingualised strata made up of literate Graeco=)gyptians and bilingual )gyptians9 primarily in Ale2andria and Memphis9 for the wherewithal and essentially religious moti"es to de"elop a systematic Coptic script3G&L The fact that Dionysios held an )gyptian priestly office is significant3 !nli0e the )gyptians9 at least in Ptolemaic times9 the Gree0s had ne"er de"eloped a priestly class3 <e recall 5ahle?s hypothesis that the formulation of Coptic arose out of an @urgent needA to clarify passages in Coptic9 especially to effect an accurate transliteration of sacred sounds > a quintessentially )gyptian religious concern now manifested in a bilingual en"ironment3 Dionysios? case9 and other similar ones that we possess9 is significant not Dust in demonstrating the complete le"el of bilingualisation attained by )gyptians of Gree0 descent in this time periodE
GF:

There were9 of course9 e"en more "ariants in limited use during this period9 specifically Ptolemaic9 a "ibrant renaissance in temple hieroglyphic9 and some forms of hieratic as noted by ClementE @Those instructed among the )gyptians learn first of all the genre of )gyptian letters which is called Tepistolographic?C secondly9 the Thieratic? genre which is used by the sacred scribesC finally and in the last place9 the Thieroglyphic? genre9 which partly e2presses things literally by means of primary letters and which is partly symbolical3 +n the symbolical method9 one 0ind spea0s Tliterally? by imitation9 a second 0ind writes as it were metaphorically9 and a third one is outright allegorical by means of certain enigmas3A Stromata * '9 ;L3GC fragment ;LD9 from Pieter <illem "an der 4orst9 "haeremonA Egyptian 4riest and Stoic 4hilosopher $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F'(9 GJ3 Diodorus iculus writing in the first century B3C3)39 mentions the fact that )gyptian priests were9 at this time9 still teaching their sons the hieroglyphic or hieratic script $referred to as @sacredA9 along with Demotic(C 9iodorus Siculus +9 F%3%=H3 Besides a large array of prosaic $largely legal and economic( te2ts9 we ha"e the genre of )gyptian wisdom literature in its final phase9 written in Demotic3 ee Miriam /ichtheim9 Late Egyptian Gisdom Literature in the 0nternational "onte:t $1reiburg9 witBerlandE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&FG(3 + am drawing primarily from /ewis9 )reeks in 4tolemaic Egypt< %;'=G&3 4ace 1raser9 4tolemaic Ale:andria3 1raser concludes that among the )gyptians in Ale2andria there was @a lac0 of religious acti"ityA $%F&( in this period because the site was not associated with a particular god3 There is9 howe"er9 some e"idence that a fort was established on the site by Ramses +++ around %JLL B3C3)39 and there may ha"e been a shrine to +sis upon Ra0otis hill before the arri"al of Ale2anderC in any e"ent9 there is no e"idence to suggest that the site was "iewed by )gyptians as being on foreign soil9 much as they detested Ale2andria at times3 Vuite apart from this9 it is unli0ely in the e2treme that9 with all the e"idence we ha"e of )gyptian culturalOreligious tenacity9 the )gyptian population of Ale2andria e2isted as deculturalised drones as 1raser seems to suggest3

GFF

GF& G&L

+2+
most significantly9 it "i"idly confirms what we 0now from other sources > that a significant number of Gree0 descendants were T)gyptianised? through their )gyptian wi"es and through a genuine and acti"e participation in )gyptian religion3 1ollowing 5ahle + would postulate that Coptic arose to some e2tent out of the esoteric needs of a relati"ely small Graeco=)gyptian social class which was more concerned with religious than mundane matters9 a class perhaps more scholarly and esoteric in their interests than that represented by Dionysios9 and one which is to be associated with /ower )gypt9 particularly in Ale2andria and Memphis3G&% Alongside this de"elopment there is the more widespread need in the ci"il ser"ice of the times to translate )gyptian into Gree0 characters for administrati"e purposes3 +t is clear that at its inception Coptic would ha"e been de"eloped by bilingual )gyptians who wrote in both Gree0 and Demotic scripts and whose minds were open to Gree0 culture3G&; <e must constantly bear in mind9 howe"er9 that the term @)gyptianA in the Ale2andria of the first century B3C3)3 )gypt9 has many nuances3 The bilingualised strata we refer to were largely comprised of Gree0 and )gyptian descendants whose family lines went bac0 across one side of the di"ide or the other9 though some had li0ely come to embody a hybrid Graeco=)gyptian social class3G&G <e ha"e noted the pri"ileges that were e2tended to the )gyptian priesthood in the second century B3C3)3 following the battle of Rafia3 1rom around %H' B3C3)3 a significant portion of this clergy became pro=Ptolemaic9 although we might assume this to ha"e been more the case in /ower )gypt3 1rom this time membership in these priesthoods began to include Gree0s9 and this must surely ha"e mar0ed the inception of a decisi"e phase for the de"elopment of Coptic3G&' This group9 as can be seen in the case of Dionysios9 was fluent in Gree09 literally
G&%

ee 5M0osy9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion9A in which the association of Gnosis with Ale2andria is seen to e2tend bac0 into the earliest period of Gnostic studies3 @+n this time Ale2andria is not only the stronghold of Gree0 culture and 0nowledge9 it is especially an international centre9 in which oriental religions also played an important role9A ;GF3 Philippe Derchain9 @MiettesE 4omfre g )dfou9A $d! ;H $%&:'(E KG9 %J=%&9 who notes the allusions to the 0lliad made in a myth of 4orus by a hierogrammate in late Ptolemaic times9 remar0s that9 @The fact is capital for me9 if we admit the well=foundness of what precedes9 it is that we suddenly find9 in this )gyptian sacerdotal world which seems to us so enclosed9 an opening towards the Gree0 world9 an interest for a culture with which9 we ha"e rather been accustomed to belie"e9 it was li"ing in conflict3A )ddy9 -he .ing is 9ead< G%G9 points out that intermarriage was initially banned in the Gree0 cities $Ale2andria9 -au0ratis9 and Ptolemais(9 but that the trend de"eloped from the middle of the third century onward3 ee also *ictor Tcheri0o"er9 (ellenistic "i%ilisation and the Jews $-ew Ior0E Atheneum9 %&:L( in which he ma0es the point that although Gree0 settlement in early Ptolemaic times was significant9 it didn?t really ha"e a chance against the se"en million indigenous )gyptians3 The process of )gyptianisation9 mainly through intermarriage9 proceeded unchec0ed9 @for the soldiers married women of the local population9 and with the women )gyptian names9 language9 religion and customs entered into their family life3 The children of such mi2ed families normally followed the mother9A ;L3 1or a detailed discussion of the problems in"ol"ed in attempting to define ethnic boundaries9 see 5oen Goudriaan9 Ethnicity in 4tolemaic Egypt $AmsterdamE .3C3Gieben9 %&FF(3 +n following 5ahle and atBinger in their positing of a ruling=class ahidic dialect in /ower )gypt9 we should note also that this literary a2is established between 0ing and shadow=0ing or ethnarch created the requisite rhetorical en"ironment we would e2pect for the de"elopment of Coptic3 1or this a2is was not created between strict ethnic polarities9 rather it bespea0s a cultural fusion occurring among the educated classes9 perfectly symbolised by the inclusion of Gree0s among the )gyptian priesthood3 1or e2ample9 in the reign of Ptolemy *+ $%FL=%'J(9 4erodes9 nati"e of Pergamon9 held the priestly station of Prophet of 5hnum3 1or the special nature of Memphis in Ptolemaic times see Crawford et al39 Studies on 4tolemaic +emphisC Reymond and Barns9 @Ale2andria and MemphisE some 4istorical

G&;

G&G

G&'

+22
the language of power of the time9 as well as )gyptian3 The e"olution of a spo0en )gyptian which made liberal use of Gree0 loan=words was the natural result9 and this spo0en phenomenon must ha"e immediately preceded the appearance of a more or less systematic Coptic script3 More than this9 a complete bilinguality on the part of an educated class pro"ided the basis for a subsequent fusion of Gree0 and )gyptian philosophical and religious thought within a group that was already predisposed to ta0e up these matters as we ha"e seen3 The important wor0 of .3 Ioyotte9 for e2ample9 attests to @a collaboration between Gree0 Tmen of culture? and the hierogrammates of )dfuA3G&J A tangible result of this de"elopment9 albeit one refracted down onto lower social le"els as it were9 is to be found in the magical te2ts which first appear in Coptic9 Demotic9 and Gree0 shortly after this period in the first century C3)33G&H The early partial yet systematic transcription of a spo0en )gyptian dialect into Gree0 characters9 which is clearly demonstrated by the graffiti at Abydos from the second and first centuries B3C3)39 would ha"e gained great impetus from these social conditions9 for the moti"ation and wherewithal is now present for the transcription of )gyptian thought into a more uni"ersal form9 precisely the modus operandi then in effect in the Ptolemaic libraries in Ale2andria3 + would therefore target a specific Ptolemaic period which was especially conduci"e9 politically9 for the systematic de"elopment of Coptic from %H' B3C3)3 onwards9 the appro2imate time when Gree0s were first Doining the )gyptian priesthood in significant numbers3 The le"el of )gyptianisation among the Gree0s reached new heights in the first century B3C3)39 and we are drawn to the reign of )gypt?s last Gree0 ruler9 Cleopatra *++9 for the requisite decisi"eness of character to be found amongst the litany of wea0 rulers who immediately preceded her3 he alone9 of all the /agids9 attempted to manifest a Graeco=)gyptian fusion beyond mere political e2pediency9 and she alone of all the Ptolemaic rulers learned the )gyptian language $an incredible achie"ement\( and in this she perfectly symbolises the seduction of the Gree0 mind by )gyptian religiosity3 +ndeed9 Cleopatra presented herself as @the new +sisA3G&: <e can speculate that her own study of )gyptian was effected through the employment of Gree0 characters3 +f this be the case she would ha"e li0ely been Bealous to ha"e all upper echelons in
,bser"ationsA9 and Reymond< 'rom the $ecords of a 4riestly 'amily from +emphisA %ol>B>
G&J

.ean Ioyotte9 @Ba0hthis3 Religion Pgyptienne et culture grecque g )dfou9A in $eligions en !gypte hellnisti#ue et romaine $ParisE E Presses uni"ersitaires de 1rances9 %&H&(9 %;:='%3 @The dossier of -a0hthis ma0es 0nown the e2istence9 in the )dfu of the last two centuries before our era9 of an acti"e intercommunication between a Gree0 cultural milieu and the e2clusi"e group which practised the sciences and magic sacred to the nati"e )gyptians9A $%G&='L(3 This cross=fertilisation occurred9 we can assume9 as a result of the tolerant relations that e2isted at the top between Ptolemaic 0ing and )gyptian ethnarch3 ee Crawford9 @Ptolemy9 Ptah and Apis in 4ellenistic MemphisA9 'LE @The relationship between Ale2andria and Memphis9 between monarch and high priest appears to be one of equal respect3A The discussion here centres upon the first century B3C3)33 <e must constantly bear in mind9 as + will note at "arious points in this discussion9 the acute problem of negati"e e"idenceE not one original te2t has been bequeathed to us from the greater Gnostic teachers of Ale2andria in the early first and second centuries9 ergo we cannot say with certainty in what proportion they wrote in Coptic9 Gree09 and Demotic3 /i0ewise9 the wholesale destruction of @paganA te2ts in the Christian era also does not allow us to place too great an emphasis upon the magical te2ts as being sole manifestations of the e"olution of Coptic in the first century3 <itt9 0sis in the )raeco@$oman Gorld< %':3 This is not to idealise Cleopatra?s moti"es9 for certainly the political e2pediency of appearing decisi"ely )gyptian looms large in the Ptolemaic claim to chthonic legitimacy at this time3 4owe"er9 her ability to learn the language is quite stri0ing and + see no reason to doubt a sincere commitment on her part towards )gyptian religion and cultural identity3

G&H

G&:

+24
the state learn )gyptian and the Coptic script would ha"e greatly facilitated this tas03 The lin0 between Ale2andria and Memphis was at its strongest at this time9 and we recall that the son of the bilingual high=priest Petubastis was in office during Cleopatra?s reign3 This hypothesis howe"er cannot be pro"ed3 +t is enough to note that the required de"elopment time for the degree of systematisation apparent in the Coptic magical te2ts of the first century C3)3 encompasses her ;%=year reign $J%=GL B3C3)3(3 + turn now to e2amine "ery briefly the linguistic arguments put forward by P3)3 5ahle that ahidic Coptic e2isted as a pre=Christian dialect of Ale2andria3 5ahle?s concludes that ahidic is a neutral dialect that does not fit into the scheme of other sub=dialects $i3e3 Achmimic9 Middle )gyptian9 1ayyumic9 and Bohairic(3 G&F The frequent use of Gree0 words and particles9 and in particular Gree0 "erbs9 in ahidic9 must be ta0en to indicate that ahidic had been in contact with Gree0 more closely than any other dialect3 ahidic is therefore to be associated with Ale2andria as9 @the principle9 if not the sole9 written and spo0en dialect of the more educated pagan )gyptianA3 +t is important to 0eep in mind the social turmoil of this period9 described in the preceding chapter9 when attempting to account for the de"elopment of Coptic in the first and second century C3)33 The people responsible for the transcription of "arious @religiousA te2ts into Gree09 Coptic9 and Demotic9 prominently included in their number indi"iduals who represented a fairly widespread shift in )gypt to dualistic cosmologies3 The magical te2ts ser"ed to sustain )gyptian religious and philosophical thought9 albeit in rather 4ellenised form in many e2amples9 and the need for proper pronunciation in part prompted a turning to the efficacy of the Gree0 alphabet by a bilingual class3 The magical te2ts depict a melding of world"iews whose de"elopment can be traced from an incipiently dualistic )gyptian religious tradition on to the demonised cosmos of the Gnostics3 The interpenetration of Gree09 .ewish9 )gyptian9 and Persian religious concepts and figures found within this mo"ement9 all points toward the multilingual9 essentially literate9 en"ironment of Ale2andria and other nominally Gree0 cities of the Delta in late=Ptolemaic and early=Roman times although this was not e2clusi"ely the case as is attested by the Graeco=)gyptian interaction at )dfu under Ptolemaic rule3G&& As well9 we note that Plutarch9 writing 9e 0side et 2siride in Delphi ca> %%F C3)39 e2hibits a strong interest in the )gyptian language9 affording some thirty linguistic references to )gyptian in this wor0 alone3'LL This is not to suggest9 howe"er9 that the de"elopment of Coptic9 or proto=Coptic as the case may be9 need only ha"e occurred within an essentially Gnostic $i3e3 dualistic( milieu3 The toic )gyptian priest Chaeremon9 to my mind9 represents precisely the sort of rearguard reaction against the dualist radicalisation of traditional )gyptian religious thought that we would e2pect from part of the )gyptian priesthood3'L% ,ften described as a @ toic philosopherA9 Chaeremon9
G&F

5ahle< Balai,ah9 ;JJ3 The distillation of the main points of 5ahle?s argument ha"e been ta0en from ;GG=;J:3 ee also atBinger @,n the ,rigin of the ahidic Dialect9A in which this /ower )gyptian spo0en dialect is traced to an earlier Memphite phase of the language in Persian times9 as a language of the ruling class3 ,ne wonders if this dialect can be traced further bac0 to the 0nown @Delta dialectA of /ate )gyptian in Rammeside times3 Ioyotte9 @Ba0hthis3 Religion Pgyptienne et culture grecque g )dfou3A Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< %LG3

G&& 'LL 'L%

+ am equating Chaeremon?s toic sensibilities with the longstanding tradition of maat > an acute appreciation of right order in the physical uni%erse> Dualist cosmologies are intent upon remo"ing maat9 or the Pleroma9 the principle of perfection9 completion itself9 from the demonstrably imperfect material realm3 Philosophically9 Ale2andria can be "iewed in terms of a toic= 0eptic split9 the latter

+2anti= emite and idealiser of the )gyptian priestly way of life wrote9 among a number of lost wor0s9 the (ieroglyphica which was quite influential in late antiquity3'L; Chaeremon is important in that he consciously facilitated the Graeco=)gyptian fusion we are concerned with9 this from within a more conser"ati"e scholarly class of priests3 Against such literary initiati"es must be set the aforementioned Acts of the 4agan +artyrs9 the de"elopment of Gnostic thought9 and "arious other rhetorical "ehicles which ga"e outlet to )gyptian nationalism and anti=Roman sentiment3 The hypothesis + ad"ance is that this genuine cultural interaction ine"itably generated the appearance of the spoken )gyptian dialect of the time in Gree0 characters9 in Ale2andria and Memphis in particular'LG9 especially one already richly embedded with Gree0 loan=words3 The Gree0 mind9 e"en @)gyptianisedA to the e2tent of ostensibly casting off the Gree0 mythos and embracing the )gyptian9 would ha"e insisted upon this at some point for reasons of e2pediency9 and the more liberal Graeco=)gyptian magician and priest would ha"e appreciated the facility with which actual "owel sounds could be recorded9 as a result readily mo"ing away from the archaic pronouncements9 figurati"ely and literally9 of Demotic3 +n analysing the relationship between Demotic and Coptic9 5urt ethe concluded that9 as with e"ery phase of the )gyptian language9 Demotic was e"entually left behind by the actual spo0en language of the people9 and perpetuated within itself archaic forms3 The seeds for the germination of Coptic ha"e to do9 in part9 with this lag between an older written script9 and the newer spo0en language3'L' Through e2tensi"e linguistic analyses ethe9 e"en in his day9 was able to conclude that Demotic is not to be considered a @di"iderA between /ate )gyptian and CopticC li0ewise9 Coptic cannot be depicted simply as a continuation of Demotic3 There was a comple2 inter=relationship between the three and Coptic should be "iewed as a parallel de"elopment to Demotic rather than as a clear successor3'LJ A pi"otal point is made by ethe at the beginning of his articleE +n Coptic we ha"e the spo0en language $"ulgar or colloquial speech( noticeable at the same time people used Demotic as a written form $literature and an official document
attitude underpinning9 in the form of "arious )clectic and 0eptic philosophical schools9 the liberal and antinomian tenor of the times in late Ptolemaic=early Roman Ale2andria3 The toic temperament naturally melded with ci"il authority3 The -ripartite -ractate9 a later Gnostic te2t9 clearly delimits this splitE @They ha"e introduced other types $of e2planation(9 some saying that those who e2ist ha"e their being in accordance with pro"idence These are the people who obser"e the orderly mo"ement and foundation of creation3 ,thers say that it is something alien3 These are the people who obser"e the di"ersity and lawlessness and the powers of e"il3A Coptic transcription from N(S< %ol> MM&0009 ;&L3
'L; 'LG

"an der 4orst9 "haeremon< from the introduction>

An indirect affirmation of the prominence of Memphis in the Gree0 mind is perhaps to be found in the etymology of the Gree0 s9 which came from an )gyptian name for Memphis (wt@kC@ 4th9 @ oul=Mansion of Ptah3A ee Ricardo A3 Caminos9 Late@Egyptian +iscellanies $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&J'(9 GF9 n3%9G3 ee ethe9 @Das *erhRltnis Bwischen Demotisch und 5optisch und seine /ehren fXr die Geschichte der Rgyptische prache9A GLL3 ethe?s main point is that this dynamic is far more intense in a society which is mostly illiterate9 wherein the perpetuation of the script is effected by a relati"ely small group9 predisposed for religious and political reasons to entrench archaic forms3 +bid39 GL%E @YCopticZ at its inception did not succeed Demotic but was a language which independently arose from the same root Y/ate )gyptianZ9 and was used simultaneously with the Demotic language9 being its sister not its daughter3A

'L'

'LJ

+2.
script(333 The speech9 which we come up against as @CopticA in the literature of Christian )gypt9 must ha"e been 0nown as the spo0en language of the people at least from the first century AD9 Tthe Age of the Roman )mperors9? for we 0now this to be the last period of acti"ity for a national ancient )gyptian culture3'LH The wor0ing sociological hypothesis + ad"ance is that the co=e2istence of the Demotic and Coptic script in large measure connotes the simultaneous e2istence of an @,ldA and @-ewA )gypt9 a way of spea0ing and thin0ing that bespea0s two cultural generations9 that of older and younger linguistic sisters to adopt ethe?s conceit3 +n the core JLL=year period with which we are dealing $ca3 ;LL B3C3)3 = GLL C3)3('L: this distinction became more and more acute3'LF +n contrasting Demotic with Coptic it has been argued that there was a sharp brea0 between the two3'L& .anet 43 .ohnson9 at the conclusion of -he 9emotic &er=al System argues9 following ethe9 that these were simply oral inno"ations which gradually de"elopedE There was certainly a lag between their de"elopment in the spo0en language and their appearance in the written language9 in Demotic as throughout )gyptian history3 Thus by the Roman period much Demotic was probably archaic3 But some of the inno"ations did ma0e their way into the written language3 <ith the adoption of a radical new script for Coptic9 there was no need to preser"e archaic forms9 and there certainly was a brea03'%L Coptic in its inception was ne"er a transliteration of Demotic which remained the script of arch= conser"atism and bureaucracy in )gypt3 Abo"e all we sense a fundamentally pragmatic concern
'LH 'L:

+bid39 GL%C emphasis added3

The Demotic magical papyri of /ondon and /eiden $originally one manuscript(9 according to .anet .ohnson9 @was written in the third century of our era and constitutes the latest long9 connected Demotic te2t which has been preser"ed3A .ohnson9 -he 9emotic &er=al System9 ;3 This te2t shows considerable Coptic influence in a large number of words employing Coptic transcriptions9 and so this te2t can be used to demonstrate the decline of Demotic as the script in current use3 The last Demotic e2ample we ha"e is a grafitto from the middle of the fifth century3 The period from the third to fifth centuries mar0s the e2pansion period of Coptic under the growing hegemonic influence of orthodo2 Christianity in )gypt3 ee Griffith and Thompson9 -he 9emotic +agical 4apyrus of London and Leiden3 This te2t9 initially called the @/eiden GnosticA $a term reDected by the editors of this edition(9 actually displays numerous thematic o"erlaps with the Gnostic Books of Jeu as mentioned abo"e3 +n attempting to 0eep in mind the rhetorical dynamics here9 it should be remembered that there was a profound split within the )gyptian priesthood following the o"erthrow of the rebel 0ing An0hma0his in %FJ B3C3)3 As always9 the geographical location of !pper )gypt ensured a less liberal9 more conser"ati"e9 reactionary stance when faced with a foreign presence9 and we can assume that the clergy which remained loyal to Ale2andria following the rebellion > and who were subsequently rewarded > came primarily from the cities of the north9 Memphis in particular9 where cultural fusion was proceeding apace This socio=political split li0ely forms the basis for the subsequent linguistic split between Demotic and Coptic in Gree0 and Roman times3 +t should also be remembered that in the Ptolemaic era there was a turning inward by the "arious temples in the de"elopment of "arious scripts9 unli0e the earlier Dynasties when temple inscriptions appeared throughout )gypt in more or less standardised forms3 The combination of this @turning inwardA with a pro=Ptolemaic stance by the priesthood in Memphis pro"ides fertile possibilities for the de"elopment of Coptic there3 5urt ethe9 @Das *erhRltnis Bwischen Demotisch und 5optisch9A and B343 tric0er9 @De +ndeeling der )gyptische Taalgeschiedenis9A 2+$2 ;J $%&'J(E %;=J%3 .ohnson< -he 9emotic &er=al System9 GL%3

'LF

'L&

'%L

+2K
with writing )gyptian as it currently sounded which was always a problem9 a corollary that was no longer practicable within the consonantal ambiguities of Demotic3'%% 1ollowing ethe and .ohnson9 + conclude that there was a difference in the phonetic basis for both scripts3 The sociological factors which created the need for Coptic ensured that it would de"elop as its own dialectical entity to a large e2tentC as the communities in"ol"ed $Graeco=)gyptian and the more purely )gyptian( thought differently about things9 their written language ineluctably reflected these differences3 Throughout the critical period of the )arly Coptic phase< ca> ;LL B3C3)3 onwards9 the de"elopment of Coptic would ha"e been prompted for reasons of e2pediency3 1or one9 the employment of )gyptian with the Gree0 alphabet allowed the nati"e language to be effecti"ely taught to Gree0=spea0ing peoples3 Complete familiarity with an alphabet creates an immediate window into a language9 and if the modern mind finds Demotic difficult it is for reasons similar to those faced by the Ptolemaic Gree0sE the Demotic script is entirely foreign3 This moti"e would ha"e been shared by both Gree0s and )gyptians who were desirous of ha"ing specific modes of )gyptian religious thought disseminated3 Philological and linguistic wor0 is to be associated with Ale2andria9 in particular her libraries9 there as in no other city in )gypt3'%; +f this @oldA and @newA split is to ha"e any "alidity9 the rise of Coptic must be associated with /ower )gypt where Gree0 literary influence was at its strongest9 specifically the heterodo2 en"ironment of Ale2andria9 and her spiritual sister=city9 Memphis3 As noted9 the linguistic studies of 5ahle and atBinger suggest this3'%G Demotic on the other hand9 + surmise to ha"e become a literary bastion of the conser"ati"e south3 !pper )gypt did not initially need Gree0 to deal with the outer world as did /ower )gyptC rather9 the abo"e=mentioned Gree0=)gyptian fusion was far more restricted and the nati"e script was retained by priests and scribes3 This must ha"e been percei"ed to be the @naturalA9 e"en culturally sacrosanct9 method of recording information9 arcane and prosaic9 and the continued employment of Demotic li0ely resulted in part from a strong desire to resist the
'%%

.ohnson9 -he 9emotic &er=al System9 %J3 +n analysing the /eiden Demotic magical Papyrus9 .ohnson notes the mar0ed changes in transformational rules > the appearance of a new rule9 the deletion of an old one9 changes in order9 @generalisationA of old rules9 etc3 > achie"ed by @rela2ing the en"ironmental restrictions for its application3A This @rela2ationA9 + would suggest9 amounted to a cultural openness to the e2tent of allowing Gree0 to pro"ide for a more utilitarian linguistic "ehicle > i3e39 its alphabet > while ensuring that its incorporation would not radically alter the tenor of spo0en )gyptian beyond the writing of it3 +n fact the library was in close pro2imity to the great temple in Ale2andria9 thus creating the ideal conditions for religious9 philosophical9 and scientific cross=fertilisation3 @-e2t door to the Ale2andrian arapeum was the great !ni"ersityE the cult of arapis and the establishment of the /ibrary and the Museum were ali0e due to Ptolemy +3 The /ibrary was to o"erflow into the Temple and the lin0s were to remain inseparable until the final onslaught by the Christians3A <itt9 0sis in the )raeco@$oman< %&L3 + would also note that this dynamic parallels an earlier situation according to atBinger3 @At a gi"en time at the beginning of the Persian domination or later9 the need was felt in the Thebaid to acquire 0nowledge of the idiom that was spo0en by the ruling class of the north3 The idiom of the capital = Memphis = was ta0en o"er by e"eryone who sought to succeed in the realms of administration and politics3 <hat was first perhaps thought to be a need may later ha"e become a fashion3A 1rom @,n the ,rigin of the ahidic Dialect9A G%L3 atBinger?s conclusion9 that @we should ta0e into consideration the historical aspects of the pre=Coptic de"elopment9 more than has been the caseA $G%%(9 ably targets the underlying problems addressed hereE abo"e=all the need to define the rhetorical en%ironment in socio= historical terms9 and the psychological moti%ations that brought "arious strata of Gree0 and )gyptian literati together in genuine synthesis3

'%;

'%G

+27
encroachment of the Gree09 and later Coptic9 scripts3 This was one aspect of )gyptian @intransigenceA in the face of a supposed Gree0 political hegemony3'%' + am not attempting to paint a too simplistic north=south polarity9 howe"er it seems to me that this is supported by the ancient geographical=sociological differences which e2isted between an insulated !pper )gypt and a /ower )gypt that was obliged to ta0e on foreign influences3 )"en so9 as time went on from the de"elopment of Coptic in the late Ptolemaic=early Roman era9 we would e2pect to see Coptic and Demotic used according to different rhetorical agenda throughout all of )gypt9 especially during Roman times when the Gnostics were acti"e in the first9 second9 and third centuries3 1or if Coptic embodies cultural synthesis it follows that it would ha"e had9 in part9 an array of specific applications associated with more heterodo2 communities3 Con"ersely9 if Demotic were a script that habitualises itself in business documentation9 along with archaisms and ritual in religious te2ts9 we would e2pect an array of applications that were more strictly free from heterodo2 influences3 )2tant te2ts in Coptic and Demotic appear to bear out this distinction3'%J This is not to say that there was not a large area of o"erlap between the two scripts during Roman times9 undoubtedly created by a commonality of applicationsE what it does suggest9 though9 is that the essential reasons for the appearance of either script at a gi"en time and place resulted from comple2 social factors which conform to the larger pattern of heterodo2y "s3 archaicism3 Gi"en the lac0 of te2tual e"idence this cannot be ascertained beyond the general obser"ations herein ad"anced3 +f it is accepted that Coptic was initially a /ower )gypt phenomenon resulting from the interaction of Gree0 and )gyptian thought9 it is clear that the Gree0 impact upon the )gyptian language itself was surprisingly restrictedE the loan words are mostly synonyms9 some specific Gree0 philosophical terms without )gyptian counterparts9 and limited employment of prepositions9 particles9 "erbs and the li0e3 The grammatical e2actitudes of Gree0 had no dramatic impact upon the infrastructure of Coptic whatsoe"er and this is significant9 for it supplies linguistic support for the larger cultural picture de"eloped hereE the Gree0s9 their insulated royalty and immediate coterie e2cepted perhaps9 underwent a profound metamorphosis in )gypt following the brea0=up of Ale2ander?s empire3 +n short9 their mythos was largely o"erpowered by the )gyptian3 <hile this process was in some ways subliminal during the first century of Ptolemaic rule9 the so=called @golden periodA9 the stunning performance of )gyptian arms at the battle of Raphia in ;%: B3C3)3 powerfully re0indled the )gyptian political will to power3 <hile the re"olts that followed were e"entually suppressed9 the impression of )gyptian cultural "irility is sustained through the pri"ileges being increasing accorded to the priesthood9 and by the fact that this priesthood began to include Gree0s after %H' as noted abo"e3 The linguistic fusion we are concerned with must be set against this picture3 Moreo"er9 the hybridisation of 4ellenistic thought had a profound influence upon the )gyptian psyche9 one result of which was the rise of dualistic religious "iews which are to be found in an array of

'%'

The temple of Philae9 for e2ample9 during the reigns of Philopator and )piphanes $;%H=%F'(9 engra"ed a decree only in 4ieroglyphic and Demotic script9 although the te2t declares itself to be trilingual3 ee <illy Pereman 9A ur le bilinguisme dans l?7gypte des /agides9A in 2rientalia Lo%aniensa Analecta BCA Studia 4aulo Naster 2=lata BB $/eu"enE Peeters9 %&F;(9 %':3 <e can easily appreciate why Gree0 was omitted9 for a widespread re"olt against Ptolemaic rule occurred during this periodE An0hma0his became 5ing of )gypt in the Thebaid around ;LL B3C3)3 and this independent reign was not crushed until %FJ B3C3)3 3 Many of the Coptic te2ts a"ailable from the Gnostic era in )gypt are later redacted "ersions from primarily the third and fourth centuries for which it is impossible to ascribe their original form3 The 4istis Sophia9 howe"er9 was li0ely composed in Coptic as has been noted elsewhere3

'%J

+2P
)gyptian manifestations3 +n terms of the actual language9 e"en though the impact of Gree0 upon )gyptian was limited9 it nonetheless ensured that Coptic9 as a spoken language9 would ha"e sounded rather different than Demotic from the outset9 perhaps9 at the time of Basileides $ca> %GL C3)3(9 manifesting specific differences in application and pronunciation comparable to the modern phenomenon of Cambridge )nglish in use alongside ,ld )nglish in certain arcane scholarly circles3'%: That the de"elopment of Coptic was li0ely a localised and esoteric phenomenon would account for the limited e"idence9 both in quantity and te2tual applications9 which supports this thesis3 +n assigning the de"elopment of the script to Ale2andria or at least to the Delta this e2planation gains credence from the fact that %(9 documents do not sur"i"e as well in the moist soil of the Delta9 as compared with the arid south9 ;(9 @PaganA documents faced wide=spread destruction in the Christian era9 and G(9 the urbanisation and population density of the modern city of Ale2andria does not allow for e2tensi"e e2ca"ation3 1or these reasons an argument based upon negati"e e"idence has creditable force and we must be "ery careful in attempting to de"elop a definiti"e picture based only upon e2tant te2tual e"idence The linguistic and socio=historical e"idence herein e2amined suggests that the de"elopment of Coptic occurred in Ptolemaic )gypt and early Roman )gypt as a script produced through Graeco=)gyptian religious interaction3 As to why the Christians e"entually chose Coptic as their proselytising medium the answer is quite clearE the script had prestige and efficacy to the orthodo2 mind $which initially used Gree0 in )gypt(9 whereas Demotic was a difficult script to master and its use of determinati"es was to be associated with9 among other things9 the @paganA )gyptian gods3 This choice9 along with the Christianisation of the Roman tate9 ensured that Coptic pre"ailed o"er Demotic as the spo0en and written language of )gypt9 in itself symbolising the final eradication of the ancient )gyptian world"iew by a non= autochthonous creed3 Coptic li0ely arose out of a true cultural fusion amongst a limited literati9 a script which carried within itself the impetus to flower into a distinct language of its own9 as a "ehicle for heterodo2y in /ower )gypt centred at Ale2andria9 and perhaps to a lesser e2tent at Memphis and other communities3 Certainly Gree0 was at the centre of the GLL years of mar"ellous research carried out in Ale2andria under the Ptolemies3 Bilinguality9 and the subsequent de"elopment of Coptic9 howe"er9 allowed this synthesis to mo"e into the )gyptian psyche > it allowed entire Gree0 strata to meld themsel"es to9 and to transform9 )gyptian religious consciousness9 and on a "ery large scale3 The rise of the Gnostic mo"ement was one maDor result of this3 +t is therefore significant that we ha"e te2ts such as the (ermetica in Coptic9 the "ery quintessence of a Gree0=)gyptian fusion9 fragments of Plato?s $epu=lic< a huge Manichaean corpus which surfaced this century9 a similarly e2tensi"e Gnostic library found in the .ebel al Tarif near -ag 4ammadi9 as well as other "ery large Gnostic sources9 and )gyptian magical te2ts9 all in Coptic3 The critical feature here9 and one which initially prompted me to in"estigate this problem9 is that outside of the category of magical te2ts9 not one word of this array of heterodo2 literature has yet to be found in DemoticE there are no Gnostic9 Manichaean9 4ermetic9 or attempted transliterations of foreign te2ts in the autochthonic )gyptian script still in widespread use at the time > they e2ist only in Coptic9 and to a far lesser e2tent in Gree03'%F
'%H '%H '%:

pecifically9 Gnosticism9 4ermeticism9 Middle Platonism9 and Manichaeism3

ee B343 tric0er9 @De +ndeeling der )gyptische Taalgeschiedenis9A who concludes that Coptic was the real spo0en language9 while Demotic was an archaic literary form of )gyptian $':(3 4owe"er9 tric0er9 whose wor0 pre=dates 5ahle?s and other subsequent studies of the magical te2ts9 dates the rise of Coptic to the end of the third century C3)33

+2,
The reasons for this9 as + ha"e suggested9 are socio=historical9 resulting from the di"ergence of a new )gypt from the old9 the 4ellenistic from the Archaic3

'%F

The (ermetica e2cepted3 ,nce again it should be stressed that the e2tant Gnostic Coptic te2ts appear to date from the third and fourth centuries but are certainly redacted "ersions of earlier te2ts which therefore puts their composition in a period during which the widespread use of the Demotic script was still current3

+45 Chapter Seven: Hellenistic Egypt: Theurgy, Theology, Philosophy, and Gnosis

<e may9 howe"er9 remar0 that the immobility that our dynamic predilections are inclined to derogate as petrifaction could also be regarded as a mar0 of the perfection which a system of life has attained > this consideration may well apply in the case of )gypt3'%&

,"erall9 )gyptian theological te2ts inscribed in Ptolemaic and Roman times demonstrate a religious e2pressi"eness that is far from formulaic3 The priesthoods of the "arious temples were gi"en a carte =lanche by the Ptolemies to effect a renaissance period in the de"elopment of hieroglyphics3 <ith the dismal memory of centuries of Persian rule still "ery fresh in their minds9 the priests now had a tendency to inscribe as much as they could upon the new walls9 in effect to immortalise in stone their hieratic libraries of sacred te2ts concerning cosmogonies9 ritual9 and practice3 +t is remar0able that the Ptolemies required only the inscription of their names as 0ings of !pper and /ower )gypt9 yet e"en this affirmation of their resident monarchy was effected in hieroglyphicE an absolutely minimal acquiescence to Gree0 culture9 in terms of language or architecture9 is to be found in the great Ptolemaic temples3 And of course it must be re=emphasised that the e2pense to build these temples > in many cases reno"ate or add to > was enormous3 A fundamental question must be raised here9 and it pertains to the outloo0 of the @Gree0A literati in9 say9 the second century B3C3)3 and onwards3 ,ne imagines them obser"ing this perennial e2penditure of resources on the temples of )gypt9 witnessing the painsta0ing inscriptional wor0 ceaselessly carried out9 and abo"e all their susceptibility to the still potent priesthoods who radiated their auras of religious prestige from within these ancient precinctsE is it e"en plausible that there would not ha"e been > for the @Gree0sA9 ne"er mind the bilingual strata we are more directly concerned with > an o"erpowering urge to understand hieroglyphicsS';L The temples and pyramids dominated the )gyptian s0yline9 much as church spires focused the eye abo"e the countryside in )ngland in centuries past9 and the perdurable architecture and mysterious te2ts of )gypt must ha"e obsessed the inquiring Gree0 mind3';% The ob"ious sociological hypothesis here is that Cleopatra?s mastery of )gyptian represents the tail= end of a religious participation which began among the lower classes9 e"entually e2tending e"en into the inner circle of the /agid rulers3
'%& ';L

.onas9 -he )nostic $eligion9 %'3

,ne can hardly accept the conclusions of R3 3 Bagnall9 concerning @the Gree0 lac0 of esteem for the )gyptian present > the failure of the reality of )gypt to ha"e any serious impact on the Gree0 world9A in @)gypt9 the Ptolemies9 and the Gree0 <orld9ABES G $%&F%(E;%3 )"en in the Gree0 world distant from )gypt9 the +sis cults and general prestige of @)gyptian <isdomA militate against this conclusion3 But in )gypt itself9 what @Gree0sA are we spea0ing of hereS 4ure Gree0s9 free from the historical trends of intermarriage and bilingualismS The reality of the Graeco=)gyptian in )gypt does not accord with this rather standard Classicist derogation3 Many Gree0s were themsel"es in"ol"ed in building these )gyptian temples and9 although there are references to Gree0 temples9 none ha"e thus far surfaced3

';%

+4+
+t should also be remembered that in the Ptolemaic era there was a turning inward by the "arious temples in the de"elopment of "arious scripts9 unli0e the earlier Dynasties when temple inscriptions appeared throughout )gypt in more or less standardised forms3 The combination of this @turning inwardA with a pro=Ptolemaic stance by the priesthood in Memphis pro"ides fertile possibilities for the de"elopment of Coptic there3 A number of thematic lin0s with Gnostic thought shall be discussed in Part +++C for now we shall ma0e a number of general obser"ations3 +n the first instance9 the theurgic applications of the magical papyri9 also found in the "haldean 2racles for e2ample9 manifests the archaic9 hierarchic9 te2t=bound and e2ternally acti"e aspects of Gnosis3 4ans /ewy9 in treating the "haldean 2racles< essentially defines the theurgic essence of Archaic GnosisE The basic principle of the system333 represents the entities that accomplish the theurgical operation as identical with those that rule the !ni"erseC the selfsame power is drawn upon in the practice of magic and in the organisation of the Cosmos3 Belie"ing this9 the Chaldeans could not but regard a full understanding of the forces of the !ni"erse as a necessary preliminary to theurgy9 which aims at dominating those forces3 Accordingly9 their e2position of the system of the Cosmos has a preeminently practical obDect9 manifested in the choice of the "arious themes and in the way in which these are dealt with3';; The true @underworld of PlatonismA e2ists in the "haldean 2racles9 as opposed to Gnostic thought in general9 both for the later intense appropriation of the 2racles made by Platonic philosophers9 and for their less sophisticated9 more mechanistic "iew of the cosmos3 The point to be made here is that there is no difference at all9 either in o"erall thrust9 or in the cosmological details $the names are different but they amount to the same world"iew(9 between the Chaldean "iew and Archaic Gnostic which shall be detailed further in the ne2t chapter3 The theurgic represents the bottom=end9 practical approach to di"ine 0nowledge9 where the effort is not made for a detached lo"e of the arcane9 of secret 0nowledge itself9 but for sensible results3 Gnosis and Philosophy manifest themsel"es as the occupations of the elite3 Philosophy is curiously and uneasily wedded to Gnosis in )gyptian Gnostic thought9 for the two endea"ours often ha"e entirely antithetical aims depending upon who is at the helm3 ,n the other hand9 there is a simpatico in mood and method that goes quite deep9 and one is witness to an interpenetration of thought that bespea0s a large social interaction of )gyptian and Gree0 intelligentsias for which we ha"e little direct e"idence3 +n Chapter G we noted a differentiation made by Nenocrates between @0nowledgeA $epist_me( and sense=perception $aisth_sis(C in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia we also ha"e this distinctionE @+ am the perception $aisth_sis( and the 5nowledgeA $-4C N+++9%3GH3%;(';G $Coptic C,,I-E gnosis(3 The thought of the Protennoia e2ists as a sound in perception $aisth_sis( and as a tripartite word @hidden in the ilence of the +neffableA $G:3;G U ;&(';'3 <e shall e2amine -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia at greater length9 but we note the sophisticated philosophical "ocabulary employed in this te2t3 Culling those terms that are not prosaic or used as ob"ious synonyms for )gyptian words in both tractates9 we are left with a "ery sophisticated philosophical "ocabulary indeed3 +t is clear that this array of terms
';;

4ans /ewy9 "haldaean 2racles and -heurgyA +ysticism< +agic and 4latonism in the Later $oman Empire $%&JHC reprint9 ParisE 7tudes Augustiniennes9 %&:F(9 %J:3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'L'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'LH3

';G ';'

+42
does not appear in the te2t as a sort of haphaBard free=associati"ity on the part of the most recent scribe or redactor9 rather it is to be supposed that their employment was an integral part of the original composition3 And yet this philosophical tendentiousness does not disrupt the essentially mystic9 re"elatory tone of the te2t3 ,ne might say that as the Gree0 language had an e2tremely limited impact upon the formulation of Coptic9 so Gree0 Philosophy supplied some of the precision tools and procedures9 perhaps e"en the dry=doc0 in Ale2andria9 yet the shipwrights and ships being built were )gyptianOoriental3 This carefully circumscribed employment of Gree0 loan=words9 besides suggesting the elite bilingualised stratas we ha"e come upon earlier9 also suggests the "ery language and thought=processes of these Graeco=)gyptians9 or )gypto=Gree0s3 Gnosis was held to be on a much higher le"el than was Philosophy9 for if it cast a cold light upon the demiurgic "icissitudes of carnal e2istence9 it did so in order to highlight one?s true spiritual nature9 and thus it espoused the typically )gyptian obsession with a good afterlife > all of these are e2pressed in the famous ma2im by *alentinus9 to the effect that @we 0now where we are from9 where we are9 and where we are goingA3 +n Coptic=gnostic te2ts9 the word is as li0ely to be drawn from the actual Gree0 loan=word $gnosisL as it is from Coptic equi"alents $"AYNE or ++E(3 +n either case the word meant simply @to 0nowA9 in itself embodying the dual sense of the 1rench sa%oir and connaUtre< or the German wissen and kennenC equally9 it was as apt to be used with reference to the arcane as it was to the prosaic and this meaning e2tends bac0 into the etymology of the Coptic word from the ancient )gyptian3';J ,ne might say9 in light of the abo"e e2amination of -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia9 that Gnosis9 while essentially different9 perhaps e"en alien to Philosophy proper9 cannot e2ist apart from it3 As with the methodology of 5ant9 this 0nowledge see0s to posit the preconditions of intelligibility9 to present an understanding of the aeons and the theogony for e2ample9 yet since the sensuous data of consciousness is recei"ed from a lower @demiurgicA le"el of being9 gnosis must ultimately transcend this and go higher if it is to be of any sal"ific consequence3';H At this Duncture we turn to e2amine dualist Gree0 philosophy prior to9 and concurrent9 with the rise of Gnosis in )gypt3 +t is an interesting feature of Middle Platonic thought that it has been "iewed as an @eclecticA period of Gree0 philosophy9 a period of formulation preparatory to a greater philosophical de"elopment commencing with Plotinus3 This period9 from the first century B3C3)3 to the fourth C3)39 is often "iewed as a speculati"e "oid3';: As a consequence it has been
';J

ee .3 Cernh?s "optic Etymological 9ictionary $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&:H(9 %HF9 where the Demotic and late )gyptian antecedents are gi"en3 ,ne notes in passing9 the startling fau: pas in /ayton?s interpretation of Gnostic thought whereby gnosis is translated as @acquaintance9A )nostic Scripture $-ew Ior0E Doubleday9 %&F:(3 @AcquaintanceA of course loads the term on the side of personal 0nowledge9 especially passing acquaintance with another person3 +n the ancient world the se2ual connotations of this side of the term were fully realiBed of course9 and @to 0nowA someone had this interpretati"e ambiguity built into itC yet the more superficial connotations of @acquaintanceA opted for by /ayton are Darring to say the least3 By insisting upon this incommensurate term in such a critical philological locus9 /ayton displays an alarming lac0 of sensiti"ity to the philosophical dimensions of Gnostic thought3 )nosis also pertained to specific 0nowledge of transmundane realms and powers9 to the entire ontological equation of being and the indi"idual?s responsibility therein3 )nosis on this le"el was not construed to be simply 0nowledge a=out GodC more to the point9 it was seen to in"ol"e direct e2perience of a larger theogonic process e2perienced in the indi"idual3 ,ften referred to as @the underworld of PlatonismA by Dillon3 A3A3 /ong?s wor0 (ellenistic 4hilosophy $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&FH( is notable for completely ignoring the mo"ement3 The only figure who attains some mention9 Plutarch9 is drawn in purely for his critical "iews on toicism and )picureanism3 /i0ewise /ong?s later collaboration with D3-3 edley9

';H

';:

+44
a period of thought generally percei"ed as being of marginal interest in the history of philosophy and religion3 +n the study of 4ellenistic emanationist thought9 the area is of course critically important3 .ohn M3 Dillon?s wor09 -he +iddle 4latonists9 is a determined9 and in large measure successful9 attempt to rectify the s0etchiness that surrounds the output of these philosophers3 +t is somewhat ironic that the boo09 while beginning upon this reformist note and in proceeding to lay out a prodigious array of te2t and commentary9 ends by derogating the entire field in the traditional manner3 The peroration is of interestE The claim9 then9 that + ma0e for these men is a modest one3 /i0e those humble sea= creatures whose concerted action slowly builds a coral reef9 the philosophers of this period each contributed some detail to the formation of what was to become perhaps the greatest philosophical edifice of all time9 that Platonism which9 gathering to itself much of Aristotelianism and toicism9 was to dominate the /ate Antique world and the Middle Ages9 and continue as a "ital force through the Renaissance to the present day3';F This is low praise indeed9 especially for such a di"erse array of thin0ers for whom the te2tual e"idence is so s0etchy9 but whose prolific influence cannot be doubted3';& +t is a worthwhile e2ercise to note the times and places of appearance of these Middle Platonists9 and to colour them in according to their general philosophical stance Admittedly9 we are dealing with a mlange here9 and things are not neat and tidy so diffused were these inter= penetrating strands of thought3 But Dillon?s rather typical Classical tudies emphasis of @Aristotelianism and toicismA does not do Dustice to the larger picture he has presented3 By a rough measure9 + would note that o"er GO' of these philosophers can be situated upon the @dualist and s0epticA traDectory9 while the rest display @monistOstoicA propensities3 These philosophical colourations are fairly e"enly distributed throughout the eastern Mediterranean3 @AristotelianismA is present in "arying doses9 as is toic method9 often without world= affirmation in the usual toic manner3 0epticism and Dualism are ob"iously not held in high regard in Dillon?s rather 4egelian "ision of high=Philosophy ta0ing root from this @lowlyA Middle Platonic soil3'GL Apart from this9 there are almost no connections made in this wor0 between the philosophical di"ergencies under discussion and the socio=political bac0drop that ga"e rise to them3 The sac0ing of Athens in FF B3C3)39 the rise of Roman hegemony in the eastern Mediterranean and its effects upon philosophicalOmythological speculation9 the acute Graeco=)gyptian fusion underway in Ale2andria9 the widespread turning to dualist cosmologies
-he (ellenistic 4hilosophers< $CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:( maintains the same focus with the addition here of -umenius although the e2cerpts gi"e no sense of his dualist procli"ities3 &;W of the boo0 is on )picureanism and toicism9 and FW or less on the 0eptic mo"ement3 Apart from this remar0able bias9 it is interesting that a Dustification of this optic is not offered9 indicating the pre"ailing attitude of many Classicists towards Middle Platonism and 0epticism in general3
';F ';&

Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< '%J3

Many of these philosophers were wide=ranging authors for which we possess not one e2tant wor0C instead we are se"erely handicapped by an array of embedded te2ts which are often presented for inimicable reasons3 +n any e"ent9 that such "ibrant conceptualists as Nenocrates9 Plutarch and -umenius in particular be li0ened to @humble sea creaturesA slogging together a coral reef is really quite astounding3 And Dillon?s omission of 0eptical thought here is the more ine2plicable gi"en the praise he accords their methods at a few Dunctures in his wor0C eg39 @ cepticism333 which had produced so much e2cellent philosophiBing $by modern standards( under Arcesilaus and Carneades in the -ew Academy9A -he +iddle 4latonists< %LJ3

'GL

+4in this time period9 of which Middle Platonism is but one e2emplar > to say these factors are marginalised in this boo0 is to be guilty of understatement oneself3 +n opposition to the implicitly orientalist tenor of this stance $the ,rient is responsible for dualism and a general muddying of the water( with its accompanying pro= toicOAristotelianism occidental bias $the best of what is modern and western came from this purer traDectory(9 + would note that the potent tradition of 0eptical thought was instrumental in @deconstructingA "arious religious and philosophical dogmas of the time9 and in facilitating a more @pluralistA approach to @TruthA and @5nowledgeA in the Gree0 cities of the eastern Mediterranean9 especially Ale2andria3 ,f course all of this would require a spirited defence of s0eptical and sophistic de"elopments > that their philosophical influence was indeed profound > and this cannot be underta0en here3 The antipathy between what might be called obDecti"ism "s3 subDecti"ism or perspecti"ism9 is imbued in Plato?s reactionary obsession with the ophists in his dialogues3 Dualist thought in this philosophical mode goes straight bac0 to Plato as well9 in particular the -imaeus3 +t is distinctly present in Presocratic thought as well9 in the speculations of )mpedocles and Parmenides in particular as we ha"e seen3 This traDectory9 loosely defined as such for its distinct dualist propensities9 must be studied in association with all other dualist systems which e2isted at this time3 <e shall be briefly e2amining the following philosophersE Thrasyllus $c> %'=G: C3)3( from )gypt $Ale2andria(9 he became court philosopher of Tiberius in Rome3 Ammonius $c>'L C3)3( from )gypt Plutarch $c> FJ C3)3( from Chaeroneia -umenius $c> %JL C3)3( of Apamea $ yria( Albinus $c> %JG C3)3( of myrna Atticus $c> %:H C3)3( in Athens 4arpocration $c> %FL C3)3( of Argos Ammonius accas $c> ;%L C3)3( of )gypt $Ale2andria(3 All of these philosophers are contemporaneous with the rise of Gnostic thought9 and all e2hibit pronounced dualistic tendencies in their speculations with the e2ception of Ammonius accas whom we must conDecture to ha"e been an important late figure3 This issue will be raised in its turn3 Those few discussions which seriously raise the issue of the influence of Platonic thought upon Gnosticism9 and which go beyond the positing of a general influence9 centre upon the figure of -umenius in the ;nd3 c3 C3)33 +t is necessary to situate the rise of Middle Platonism proper in this era9 for at its "ery inception the Academy was forced to flee Athens after the city was sac0ed by Mithradates in FF B3C3)3 <ith the rise of Ale2andria detailed in Chapter ' it comes as no great surprise to see that there followed a general drift towards Ale2andria from :H B3C3)3 onwards9 although it is argued by some that the physical institution collapsed and was not re"i"ed until the fourth century C3)33'G% This "iew is surely erroneous gi"en the e"idence we ha"e for philosophical acti"ity in )gypt in this periodE the rise of philosophical )clecticism occurred there9 as did the re"i"al of Pyrrhonist 0epticism in Ale2andria by Aenesidemus $c> JL='L(C Thrasyllus of Ale2andria9 a philosopher with dualist tendencies9 became the court philosopher of Tiberius in Rome $c> %'=G: C3)3(9 and Theomnestus of -aucratis in )gypt became a head of the school of Antiochus around '' B3C3)3 in Athens3 All this suggests a potent
'G%

ee Dillon?s sources on this "iew9 -he +iddle 4latonists< HL3 4is own "iew is that9 @the centre of Platonic philosophy seems now to mo"e to Ale2andria9A $H%(3

+4.
philosophical presence in )gypt3 Antiochus9 from Ascalon9 Palestine9 was earlier in his life a 0eptic philosopher who later became a toic in RomeC his pupils9 Ariston and Dion9 were also acti"e in Ale2andria3 At the close of this period9 the Ptolemaic synthesis with )gyptian culture is at its highest9 and the Gree0 state is about to fall to Roman rule3 +t is surely a critical factor that toicism was a far more acceptable philosophy to Roman sensibilitiesC as Dillon puts it To be at all acceptable to the Roman aristocracy9 after all9 toicism had to find a place for loyalty to the nation state and for the duty of public ser"ice3'G; +t is for these general reasons that the )gyptian toic priest Chaeremon was in"ited to Rome to become the teacher of -ero in the following century3'GG +n contradistinction to this9 @the notoriously outspo0en and irre"erent populace of Ale2andriaA'G' were noted for their hostility to Rome which continued until well into the second century9 well beyond eptimius e"erus? grant of a Council to the city in %&&=;LL if Caracalla?s ruthless massacre of Ale2andrians in ;%J is any indication3 +t is against the pronounced anarchic tenor of the times that the inter=action of Gnostic and Middle Platonic thought in )gypt must be set3'GJ +t was a period of re"olt9 pogroms9 and bloody reprisals9 the most serious re"olt occurring in the Bou0olia marshes in %:; C3)39 which was led by an )gyptian priest3 +nsofar as Gnostic and Middle Platonic thought in )gypt too0 place under these conditions9 we can e2pect that the e2perience of a lac0 of freedom > economic9 intellectual9 and cultural > influenced their speculations9 and this includes all Gree0 cities in the eastern Mediterranean where Gnostic thought and Middle Platonism were acti"e3'GH This undoubtedly pro"ides one of the 0ey socio=political underpinnings for the phenomenon of @4ellenistic religionsA3'G: The )gyptian philosopher Ammonius $floruit> 'L C3)3(9 teacher of Plutarch9 is a figure of interest3 +n his thought we see an enhanced dualist perspecti"e upon the cosmos that has
'G; 'GG

-he +iddle 4latonists9 :F3

1or this he must ha"e been "iewed as a theocratic quisling by some of his fellow priests in )gypt9 especially in the south3 /ewis9 Life in Egypt under $oman $ule9 %&:3 This anarchism was not confined simply to the large cities9 but e2tended into the rural areas where peasants were dri"en to flee their homes by Roman ta2es and liturgies3 The large=scale refusal to wor0 was also a common feature of the times3 ee /ewis9 ibid39 ;LG=;L'3 Robin /ane 1o29 4agans and "hristians in the +editerranean Gorld from the Second "entury A9 to the "on%ersion of "onstantine $4armondsworth9 )nglandE Penguin Boo0s9 %&FH(9 '&9 ma0es an analogous pointE @+n a stri0ing scene9 the .ew Philo $c3'L A3D3( tells how a theatre audience9 probably in Roman Ale2andria9 had cheered boisterously at a line in a Gree0 play referring to Tfreedom3? Ale2andrians were perhaps e2ceptionally conscious of their loss of it9 but the scene can be generaliBed3 Gree0 cities were aware of a great9 free past9 and in relati"e terms9 we must allow for their sense of a loss of ci"il and political liberty3 +t underlay the culture of this period9 and we can Dustly diagnose it9 e"en when contemporaries do not emphasiBe it3A A perspecti"e all the more remar0able for its omission in /uther 43 Martin?s otherwise useful wor09 (ellenistic $eligions3 Certainly9 Martin is correct in noting that9 @by late antiquity9 the centrifugal force of 4ellenistic e2pansion e2tended the locus of deficiency to the outer bounds of the cosmos itself3 The necessary conclusion to this cosmic re"aluation was that the totality of the finite cosmos9 together with its predominantly feminine attributes9 was considered to be deficient9A $%H%(3 <hat is lac0ing in this assessment is an appreciation of the underlying mood of despair to be found in )gypt in particular3

'G' 'GJ

'GH

'G:

+4K
similarities with Nenocrates3 +n this "iew9 the sublunary realm is ruled o"er by an entity who is distinct from the upreme Deity as a ruler of 4ades9 thus e2hibiting similarities to the Persian Ahriman3'GF Ammonius is 0ey in demonstrating the presence of a de"eloped philosophical dualism in )gypt in the first century9 and it is li0ely that he incorporated )gyptian thought in his wor03'G& -ot much is otherwise 0nown about Ammonius9 but in e2amining the teachings of the maDor figure of Plutarch9 we may presume that many elements of Plutarch?s )gyptian sympathies came from his teacher3 Plutarch9 whose floruit was around FJ C3)39 is an e2tremely important figure9 both for his pronounced dualist thought and contemporaneous with the Gnostics9 and also for the e2tensi"e writings of his that ha"e come down to us3 1or Plutarch9 the Monad9 or ,ne9 is abo"e the +ndefinite Dyad9 it @being the element underlying all formlessness and disorderA3''L The ,ne operates through this9 limiting9 shaping9 and ma0ing it recepti"e to the higher will3 +t is highly significant that Plutarch describes this acti"ity using )gyptian mythological figures3 The ,ne relates to the world through the Logos whose two aspects are seen as the soul and body of ,siris3 <hile the soul is indestructible9 the body is torn asunder by the ruler of the !nderworld $ eth=Typhon( to be reassembled by the female di"inity +sis3 Contrast the sense of the following passage from 2n 0sis and 2sirisE 1or what YtrulyZ e2ists and is intelligible and is good pre"ails o"er destruction and changeC but the images $eikonesL which is perceptible and corporeal fashions from it9 and the logoi9 forms and li0enesses which it assumes9 are li0e figures stamped on wa: in that they do not endure for e"er3 They are seiBed by the element of disorder and confusion which is dri"en here from the regions abo"e and fights against 4orus9 whom +sis brings forth as a image of the intelligible9 he being the perceptible world3 $9e 0side G:GA(''% with a passage from the Gnostic -rimorphic 4rotennoiaA The Archigenetor of +gnorance who ruled o"er Chaos and the !nderworld produced a person in my $the 4rotennoia( 1orm3 But he did not 0now that this one would become a sentence of dissolution for him9 nor did he understand the Power which is in it3 But now + ha"e descended and ha"e reached down into Chaos9 and + was YnearZ those of mine who are in that place + am hidden among them9 + gi"e them Power9 + gi"e them 1orm333 $'L3;G= G'(''; +sis and the female Protennoia share the same function9 which might almost be described as one permitting +mmanuel 5ant?s numenon to surface through the a priori categories3 As is usually the case in Gnostic thought9 what might ha"e been an absolute emphasis upon the masculine <ord is conte2tualised by the feminine power operati"e within it3 This feminine dynamic is seen to be an e2ecutor of a Primal ource which is itself beyond words9 yet she herself employs

'GF 'G&

Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists9 %&%3

<ith what we 0now about the comple2 class of Graeco=)gyptians in )gypt at this time9 it is possible that Ammonius is the Gree0 "ersion of Amon3 Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists< %&&3 Griffiths9 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride9 ;L'=;LJ Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< '%;3

''L ''% '';

+47
the dynamis of logoi in the struggle against Chaos9 Disorder9 the Abyss9 +gnorance9 and Malign Powers3 The Chaldean focus upon 4e0ate and the +ynges is also strongly suggested here3 +n Plutarch?s dualism9 based upon a late passage from Plato9''G the unruly disorder is defined as an acti"e force9 a @Maleficent oulA which is in a state of re"olt against the manifest world3''' Plutarch9 besides drawing upon )gyptian thought9 doubtlessly passed on from Ammonius9 is also incorporating Persian elements into his thought9 or is at least intent upon showing such parallels9 considering 8oroastrian theology to be the @opinion of the maDority of the wisest menA3 +n the same passage is found a depiction of a star0 dualism that is indeed a0in to the PersianE /ife and the cosmos9 on the contrary3333 are compounded of two opposite principles $archai( and of two antithetical powers $dynameis(9 one of which leads by a straight path and to the right9 while the other re"erses and bends bac03 1or if nothing comes into being without a cause9 and if good could not pro"ide the cause of e"il9 then -ature must contain in itself the creation and origin of e"il as well as good3 $9e 0s> GH&C(''J Plutarch occupies a position midway between a radical and mitigated dualism3 4e does not posit the e2istence of a pre=e2isting )"il realm of equal force to the good9 one which subsequently attac0s the good realm as is the case with ManichaeismC rather he suggests that the Maleficent oul created a proto=cosmos before the real one was made9 a world of @wraith and phantasmA9 which shares the abo"e depiction in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia of the Archigenitor of +gnorance attempting to model a form of the higher 4rotennoia3 The shared picture is further strengthened in the clear portrayal of this first proto=cosmos nonetheless being bound up with the higher feminine principle3 1or Plutarch it is the desire for order in +sis which brings this about9 and in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia it is the @innocent sophiaA o"er whom the lower powers attained a temporary "ictory9 @the one who descended so that + $the 4rotennoiaL would dissol"e their endsA $'L3%J=%:(''H3 Plutarch?s depiction of +sis draws upon the "ery heart of the +sis=worship of his timeE Thus +sis is the female principle in nature and that which recei"es all procreation9 and so she is called by Plato the -urse and the All=recei"ing3333 +mbued in her she has a lo"e of the first and most so"ereign principle of all9 which is the same as the Good9 and this she longs for and pursues3 The lot which lies with e"il she shuns and reDectsC she is9 indeed9 a sphere of acti"ity and subDect matter for both of them9 but she inclines always of herself to what is better9 offering herself to it for reproduction9 and for the sowing in herself of efflu2es and li0enesses3 +n these she reDoices and she is glad when she is pregnant with them and teems with procreations3 1or procreation in Matter is an image of Being and an imitation of That which +s3 $9e 0side G:;)('':
''G

Boo0 Ten of the Laws $F&HDff(9 in which an antagonist @of the opposite capacityA is set against the beneficent @<orld oul3A Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< ;L;3 Griffiths9 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride9 %&L=%&%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< '%;3

''' ''J ''H '':

Griffiths9 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride9 ;L;='3 ee also Mar"in <3 Meyer9 -he Ancient +ysteries $ an 1ranciscoE 4arper U Row9 %&F:E @+sis is9 in fact9 the female principle of -ature9 and is recepti"e of e"ery form of generation9 in accord with which she is called by Plato the gentle nurse and the all= recepti"e9 and by most people has been called by countless names9 since9 because of the force of

+4P
The picture here is in accord with many Gnostic systems9 in particular the -rimorphic 4rotennoia which abounds with feminine procreati"e imagery3 <e are in essence dealing with the Gnostic ophia who9 through her own fecundity9 yearns towards the higher godhead3 +n the Gnostic model9 the irrational <orld oul is dragged down in bodily form into @sleepA and @forgetfulnessA9 a quintessentially Gnostic depiction3 Dillon is quite correct in noting that this entity @is completely interwo"en with the Rational oul9 maintaining a constant cosmic tensionA3''F Plutarch details another 0ey feature of the *alentinian system which describes the e2tension of ophia into the lower realms beyond (orus which9 for Plutarch is the sensible cosmos3 Plutarch attempted to correct pre"ious conceptions here in recognising the pre= e2istence of the chaotic or irrational oul9 =efore the demiurgic creation3''& 1or the *alentinians this refers precisely to ophia?s @formless abortionA which must be hypostasised by the demiurge9 subsequent to the establishment of the 4orus=boundary9 into the equi"alent of the Platonic 1orms9 and thence into the creation of the lower realm3 This @abortionA cannot be supposed to ha"e come about @e2 nihiloAC rather the whole theogony is a @pleromaA of se2ual energy and tension > ophia?s desire to @0nowA the 1ather must be seen with this double entendre in mind as we shall see in Chapter %;3 4is compensating desire to 0now his @depthsA can also be ta0en in this light9 and the surfacing of these depths uses ophia as an e2tension or facilitator of further theogonic de"elopments9 precisely the role of the +sis figure in Plutarch and the Protennoia of the -rimorphic 4rotennoia Another 0ey feature of Plutarch?s thought is the di"ision of humanity into three classes9 a concept at the heart of the *alentinian system9 and found in "arious Gnostic te2ts3'JL Plutarch?s demonology reflects a similar world to that of the Chaldeans9 a sublunary realm dominated by 4ecate9 and Dillon is close to the heart of things in noting that9 @both God?s pronoia and his transcendence must be preser"ed9 and the uni"erse can tolerate no sharp di"isions or sudden transitionsA'J%3 Gnostic thought embellishes things further by stipulating that e"en as an unperturbed Perfection the Primal ource9 replete in its ineffable perfections9 still @desiredA to 0now its depths9 to commence differentiation9 aeonial e2tension9 a stream of hypostases9 a direct descent into the apogee of matter3 This is implicit in Middle Platonism and the Chaldean system in any case and9 as we shall see9 it is e2plicit in -umenius3 The pre=e2istent aspect of this pneumatic=hylic disorderly polarity is to be found in the ancient )gyptian concept of -un9 or rather -aunet9 a watery @feminineA chaotic realm which girds the creation itself3 And so it is we see Atum?s original onanistic act of creation mirrored e2actly in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia9
Reason9 she turns herself to this thing or that3333 Y Zhe has an innate lo"e for the first and most dominant of all things9 which is identical with the good9 and this she yearns for and pursuesC but the portion which comes from e"il she tries to a"oid and to reDect9 for she ser"es them both as place and means of growth9A$%:L=:%(3
''F ''& 'JL

Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists9 ;LH3 +bid39 ;L:3

+bid39 ;%'E @<e seem to ha"e here three classes of person9 one without any higher element in their souls at all9 another with a higher element to which they are obedient9 and a third with a higher element with which they struggle9 but by which they are finally subdued3A This third group should actually be situated between the two other poles as it is in *alentinian thought where they are called hylics9 psychics9 and pneumatics respecti"ely3 +bid39 ;%:3

'J%

+4,
+ am androgynous3 + Yam MotherZ9 + am 1ather since + YcohabitZ with myself alone9 and + YcopulateZ with myself alone $'J3;(3'J; Atum does not create e: nihilo9 but creates from out of the -un3 Plutarch?s +sis embraces the abyss before the cosmos itself is created and this9 too9 is from the ancient 4eliopolitan theology9 as e2pressed here in a Pyramid Te2tE + was born in the Abyss before the s0y e2isted9 before the earth e2isted9 before that which was to be made firm e2isted9 before turmoil e2isted $PT !tt3 'FH9 K%L'L(3'JG <hile the spea0er is ostensibly the masculine Atum9 the most important feature of this system is the emphasis upon the androgyny of the primal creati"e power9 and a balancing of masculine and feminine energies in each subsequent creati"e act3 The Memphite Theology reconte2tualised the abo"e by establishing the creati"e logos of Ptah abo"e the procreati"e Atum3 Atum ta0es on distinctly demiurgic characteristics in the Memphite "iew3'J' 1inally9 Plutarch?s soteriology depicts the soul?s struggle with the demonic forces of the lower world and it is here that we recei"e the most plangent re"erberation of the Gnostic mood in describing that moment when the soul attempts to ascendE <hilst we are immersed in worldly affairs9 and are changing bodies9 as fit "ehicles for our con"eyance9 he lets us alone to try our strength9 patiently to stem the tide and get into the ha"en by oursel"esC but if a soul hath gone through the trials of a thousand generations9 and now9 when her course is almost finished9 stri"es bra"ely9 and with a great deal of labour to ascend9 the Deity permits her proper Genius to aid her9 and e"en gi"es lea"e to any other that is willing to assist3 The Daemon9 thus permitted9 presently sets about the wor0C and upon his approach9 if the soul obeys and hear0ens to his directions9 she is sa"edC if not9 the Daemon lea"es her9 and she lies in a miserable condition3 $9e genio Socratis9 ;''JJ( This "ision of the sophia figure desperately attempting to return to the heights is at the heart of a myriad number of Gnostic representations9 as it is in the -rimorphic 4rotennoiaE <hen the )pinoia of /ight understood $this( she entreated the other Creation in humiliation3 he said9 Y@Gi"e unto me another e2istenceZ so that + will come to the gi"en Power9 lest + e2ist in an Ye"ilZ ,rder3A YAnd theZ entire YassembledZ 4ouse of Glory agreed with her word3 They brought a blessing upon her and the e2alted ,rder e2pelled it $the lower ,rder( from her3 $G&3G;='L3'('JH

'J; 'JG 'J'

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< ';;3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts< %:G3

@This identification of Ptah with cosmic intelligence also puts Atum?s demiurgic qualities and functions into relief3A +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine< %;3 Trans3 <illiam <3 Goodwin9 4lutarchs +orals9 "ol3 ; $BostonE /ittle9 Brown and Co39 %F:'(9 '%'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< '%L9 '%;3

'JJ 'JH

+-5
+t is also powerfully present in the repetitious @lamentsA of ophia in the 4istis Sophia9 and all of *alentinian thought9 including the -ripartite -ractateA And through that one $the Logos(9 begets him$self( along with that which he is9 and is himself renewed along with the one $Sophia( who came upon him9 through his brother $the Logos( who sees him and entreats him about the matter9 namely the one$Sophia( who desired to ascend to him3 $-4C +9J :J3'=&('J: To conclude9 it must be emphasised that Dust prior to the appearance of the maDor Gnostic teachers of Ale2andria9 Plutarch?s system can be seen to be philosophically contiguous in breadth and detail9 displaying all of the @syncretismA and @elitismA commonly associated with Gnostic thought3 Plutarch?s indebtedness to his )gyptian mentor Ammonius cannot be doubted9 and it is safe to say that many of the concepts e2amined here must ha"e been rife in Ale2andria in the first century C3)33 +t is now an appropriate Duncture at which to introduce -umenius whose floruit was c>%JL C3)33 -umenius was an e2act contemporary of numerous Gnostic teachers in )gypt as well as the purported authors of the "haldean 2racles3 Although we can?t conclusi"ely demonstrate this gi"en the incomplete corpus we ha"e for -umenius9 it is nonetheless a stri0ing fact that the thought of -umenius ta0es the rhetorical form of a 4ermetic dialogue more than the Platonic3'JF -umenius9 also9 demonstrates that he is a pluralist par e:cellence9 drawing from .ewish9 Brahman9 Magian9 and )gyptian thought3 -umenius manifests the aforementioned toic= 0eptic split in launching a blistering attac0 on Antiochus for going o"er to the toic side9 as well as heaping comic ridicule upon the 0eptic /acydes who is seen to dogmatically will epochR $suspension of belief( in the face of clear e"idence of household theft by his ser"ants'J& -umenius is notable9 then9 for he clearly delimits his independent philosophical traDectory from toicism and 0epticism3 The dualism of -umenius is as acute as Plutarch?s9 citing Plato for the e2istence of two <orld ouls9 the one beneficent9 the other male"olentE @)"erywhere does the nature of e"il mingle with Pro"idence9 as some flawA3'HL A tripartite cosmology is present here9 as with the other systems so far e2aminedE the first is the @1atherA9 the second @CreatorA9 and the third @CreatureA3 The first @occupies himself therewith $creation( only from a distanceA3'H% Creation is depicted as birth9 and @wetnessA with the souls ho"ering o"er the di"ine waters in a depiction reminiscent of Atum and -un3 The third is a lower aspect of the second and is similar to Plutarch?s soul and body of ,siris9 although the e"il <orld oul ta0es on a more independent status than a mere description of a @down=sideA of +sis in Plutarch?s "iew3 The demiurge is depicted in strictly neutral terms in that he is good only as a conduit for the higher Good3'H; The
'J: 'JF 'J&

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;GL3 Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< GHG3

ee -he Neoplatonic Gritings of Numenius9 trans3 5enneth Guthrie $%&%:C reprint9 /awrence9 5ansasE elene Boo0s9 %&F:(9 K *++3G9 @The Comic )2perience of /a0ydes3A This is an interesting precursor of a host of similar misconcei"ed criticisms of 0eptical thought9 all of which fail to understand the fact that a 0eptic would not deign to push epochR on the le"el of the eulogon9 or common=sense3 +bid39 %H3 +bid>< GL3

'HL 'H% 'H;

A much misunderstood aspect of Gnostic thought where it is assumed that the Gnostic uni"erse must depict the demiurge as being e"il3 +n fact a mitigated dualist system must9 by "irtue of an inner

+-+
1irst God acts out of @desireA for the econd9 and the econd for the ThirdC the econd only acts in demiurgic fashion in conDunction with the Third3 As with Plutarch9 this theogonic e2tension9 as it were9 plunges into the watery Abyss of fluid Matter9 which is seen to be a positi"e9 e"il force3'HG -umenius?s <orld oul9 howe"er9 is not seen to be in complete re"olt against this process9 but rather submits9 @albeit with certain irreducible recalcitranceA9 as Dillon elegantly puts it3'H' +n any e"ent9 the descent of the soul represents a tragic inducement of a higher entity into the hylic accretion of bodily form3 +n descending into the cosmos9 -umenius depicts the soul as struggling with demons of the west9 @inasmuch as9 according to the belief of the )gyptians9 the <est is the abode of harmful demonsA3'HJ This is not the place to attempt a study of the affinities between -umenius and the Chaldean ,racles9 howe"er9 ta0en together9 they suggest a common dualist bac0drop to Gnostic thought that was far more widespread than is generally appreciated3 ,ne 0ey o"erlap is in a shared negati"e "iew of the body3 1or the Chaldeans the body is @the root of all e"ilA'HHC -umenius sees a perpetual struggle between opposed souls in human0ind which allows for no reconciliationE the soul e2ists in the body as in a prison9 also a battlefield between warring factions $rational Good "s3 irrational )"il(3 Albinus of myrna $c> %JG(9 a contemporary of -umenius9 is difficult to isolate amongst a welter of Middle Platonic sources9 and it is perhaps best to assume that9 as Dillon puts it9 @we are in fact gi"ing more an account of Middle Platonic doctrine in generalA'H: to which + would add that he is clearly influenced by toic doctrine and hence does not indicate the same pronounced degree of dualist tendencies in common with the other philosophers here e2amined3 + should say that what Chaeremon accomplishes in his idealisation of the )gyptian priesthood9 Albinus attempts in his "alorisation of the Philosophical /ife3 A wor0 attributed to Albinus9 the 9idaskalikos $)uide to the 9octrines of 4lato(9 begins with the definition that Philosophy is @a stri"ing after wisdom or a release and a redirecting of the soul from the bodyA'HF9 this based upon the intelligible world3 )lsewhere9 a distinction of a type of 0nowledge independent of sense= perception is de"eloped3 Another Middle Platonic de"elopment held in common with Gnostic thought is a focus upon the need for theogony in the peerless and motionless ,ne3 ,ne sees this contradictory depiction in the thought of AlbinusE ince Mind is better than oul9 and Mind in acti"ity intelligising all things simultaneously and eternally9 is better than mind in potentiality9 and nobler than this is the cause of this and whate"er might e2ist superior to these9 this would be the Primal God9 which is the cause of the eternal acti"ity of the mind of the whole hea"en $i3e3 of the cosmos(3 The former9 being motionless itself9 directs its acti"ity towards the latter9 e"en as the sun
theogonic consistency9 posit the demiurge as being ignorant9 a hapless tool9 or else simply doing the best that he is able to do with limited resources3 This is consistent in all *alentinian tractates3
'HG 'H' 'HJ 'HH 'H: 'HF

Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists< G:G3 +bid>< G:J3 Guthrie< Neoplatonic Gritings< JL3 /ewy9 "haldaean 2racles and -heurgy9 ;::3 Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists9 ;:;3

.eremiah Reedy9 trans39 -he 4latonic 9octrines of Al=inus $Grand Rapids9 M+E Phanes Press9 %&&%(9 ;%3

+-2
towards "ision9 when someone loo0s at it9 and as an obDect of desire sets desire in motion9 while remaining itself motionlessC e"en thus will this Mind mo"e the mind of the whole hea"en3'H& This can be profitably compared with the Gnostic Basileides of Ale2andria9 a contemporary of Albinus who9 according to 4ippolytus9 targets the same issueE ince therefore there was nothing9 no matter9 no substance9 nothing insubstantial9 nothing simple9 nothing composite9 nothing non=composite9 nothing imperceptible $non subDecti"e(9 no man9 no angel9 no god9 nothing at all that can be named or can be apprehended by sense perception9 nothing of the mental things and thus $also nothing of all that which( can be simply described in e"en more subtle ways9 the non=e2istent god333 without intelligence9 without perception9 without will9 without resol"e9 without impulse9 without desire9 wished to ma0e a world3 + say The wished?9 he says9 for want of a word9 wish9 intelligence9 and perception being e2cluded3 By Tworld? $+ mean( not the flat9 di"isible world which later di"ided itself9 but a world=seed3':L As does Plotinus a few centuries later9 e"idenced in this description of his thoughtE Nous proceeded from the ,ne $and oul from Nous( without in any way affecting its ource There is no acti"ity on the part of the ,ne9 still less any willing or planning or choice333 There is simply a gi"ing=out which lea"es the ource unchanged and undiminished3 But though this gi"ing=out is necessary9 in the sense that it cannot be concei"ed as not happening or as happening otherwise9 it is also entirely spontaneousE there is no room for any sort of binding or constraint9 internal or e2ternal9 in Plotinus? thought about the ,ne3':% + ha"e drawn upon these e2tensi"e quotations to ma0e a number of important points 1irst off9 Gnostic and Platonic interests coincide in all three passages3 econdly9 and Dust as important9 the e2pressions used are quite similarC there is in fact no great conceptual abyss between supposed philosophical and mythological discourses3 This passage from Basileides is in fact remar0able for its "igour and clarity9 and his concept of the @world=seedA is directly analogous to the realm of the Platonic 1orms3 The last point9 and one which shall be returned to in our e2amination of Ammonius accas9 is that there is no great difference between Plotinus9 "ehement anti=Gnostic9 and Basileides on this issue3':; -or is this some minor abstruse point but is in fact at the "ery heart of all emanationist doctrinesE how and why does a Perfect ,ne9 residing in tranquil motionlessness9 commence an emanation process which e"entually produces a lesser9 distant9 or inferior9 realmS':G The <orld= oul of Albinus is an entity which requires awa0ening and ordering':'C this9 too9 is a critical act in the Basileidean theogonyE @Then the Gospel had to come to the phere of
'H& ':L ':% ':;

Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists< ;F;3 4ippolytus9 $efutatio *++ ;%3%3 1oerster9 )nosisAA Selection of )nostic te:ts< "ol %9 H'3 A343 Armstrong9 4lotinusA A &olume of Selections $/ondonE !nwin U Allen9 %&JG(9 GG3

4owe"er9 it should be noted that9 according to 4ippolytus9 Basileides was against emanationism per se $describing God in such a scheme as a spider at the centre of its web(9 preferring instead to detail a Memphite conception of immediate creation by the <ordE @the seed of the world9 says he9 came from the non=e2istent9 the word which was spo0en3 1oerster9 )nosisAA Selection of )nostic -e:ts< "ol3 %9 HJ3

+-4
the e"en9 so that the Ruler of the 4ebdomad might also be taught and ha"e the Gospel brought to himA3':J A meta@language of gnosis is also the dynamic by which the Archgenitor of the -rimorphic 4rotennoia comes to realise his essential state of +gnoranceE 1or behold9 he himself9 the Archgenitor of our birth in whom we too0 pride9 e"en he is ignorant about this !tteranceA $''3;:(':H As with Plutarch9 the <orld= oul of Albinus pre=e2isted in a dormant fashion9 @a sort of tranceli0e sleepA':: which is made to loo0 upon @the obDects of intellectionA of the 1ather9 thereby recei"ing the 1orms and shapes3 This stri"ing towards the thoughts of God9 the Platonic +deas9 is depicted as a process of recollection $anamnRsis( furthered by @small spar0sA $aithygmata( which9 in the nature of d3a %us9 prompt the soul to recall its pre"ious e2istences and stri"e upwards3':F /i0ewise9 the soul comes to realise its state of forgetfulness in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia and the catalyst of gnosis is much the sameE + went beneath their language and told the Mysteries to my own9 a 4idden Mystery $through which( the fetters and sleep of )ternity were dissol"ed3 $'%3;H(':& ,ne cannot differentiate between Philosophy and Gnosis as there do not appear to be critical differences between the nature of the @small spar0sA of philosophical insight described by Albinus9 and the Gnosis which operates @beneath languageA in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia> This is a pi"otal test case to deal with9 for in both systems the reception of this particular mode of 0nowledge is of the highest soteriological significance <hat is missing in the system of Albinus is an enhanced female sal"ific figure seen to e2ist in intimate collusion with the word9 or iynges in the Chaldean system3 Albinus depicts a counter=mo"ement in the soul9 a @wantonnessA or @wilfulnessA bound up in its irrational nature9 a downward mo"ing erring autonomy a0in to the Gnostic depiction of hylic lust that is a pre=e2istent gi"en9 as e2pressed in the -rimorphic 4rotennoiaE

':G

ee .an 8andee?s important wor09 -he -erminology of 4lotinus and of Some )nostic Gritings< +ainly the 'ourth -reatise of the Jung "ode: $/eidenE -ederlands 4istorisch=Archaeologisch +nstituut in 4et -abiDe ,osten9 %&H%(3 -umerous te2tual parallels are drawn out between the thought of Plotinus and that e2pressed in the Gnostic -ripartite -ractate> 8andee?s conclusion that9 @Plotinus only gradually departed from gnostic dualism and became a more monistic thin0er9A$G( is conte2tualised as a reaction of the older Plotinus9 and his larger conclusion that @Plotinus as well as the Gnostics draw from the common well of Middle Platonism9A $'L( is clearly the case3 <ith respect to the core concept of emanationism $pro=ole(9 8andee?s depiction of Plotinian and Gnostic necessity can also be applied to Middle Platonism as a whole9 as well as the Chaldean systemE @Creation has not been intended consciously3 +t is not based on a determined plan of the creator9 nor on a constraint put upon him from the outsideC but it is founded upon an inner necessity9 Dust as fire must radiate warmth9A$G%(3 Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists< ;F'3 1rom 4ippolytus9 $efutatio *++ ;H3'C 1oerster9 A Selection of )nostic -e:ts9 "ol3 %9 :%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 ';L3 Dillon< -he +iddle 4latonists< ;F:3 +bid>< ;&%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%'3

':' ':J ':H ':: ':F ':&

+-1or as for our tree from which we grew9 a fruit of +gnorance is what it possesses9 and death also e2ists in its lea"es9 and Dar0ness e2ists beneath the shade of its boughs9 $from( which we pluc0ed with guile and lust9 this $tree( of the Chaos of +gnorance which became for us a dwelling=place $''3;L('FL Atticus was another influential philosopher in this time period $his floruit was about %:H C3)3(9 who was a leader of Platonism in Athens following Taurus $a 0eptic(9 possibly head of the Athenian Academy there9 assuming it e2isted at all3'F% God9 for Atticus9 is transcendent9 and the /ogos is his instrument9 not simply an aspect of the di"ine countenance Again9 unordered matter is pre=e2istent9 along with @the Maleficent oulA $kakergetis psychR(3 The syllogistic thrust of Atticus? speculation is as followsE motion comes from the soul and this motion is disorderly9 therefore there is a disorderly soul3 This soul is adulterated by the higher 1orms pressing down9 and the result is a lower <orld oul a0in to Plutarch?s +sis3'F; 4arpocration of Argos $c> %FL C3)3( is noted by Proclus as being a pupil of Atticus3 The members of the ,lympian pantheon are referred to as @ArchonsA and the demiurge is @head ArchonA9 a0in to Basileides? depiction of @the great ArchonA $4ippolytus9 $efutatio9 N9%'3H(3 The "ery nature of the body and matter is quintessentially e"il for 4arpocration9 and incarnation into such a state is seen to be an unmitigated disaster3 ,ne can hardly see0 a more @gnosticA "ersion of Platonic thought in the few telling essentials we ha"e from 4arpocration3 A socio= historical hermeneutic here must as0 how influential these philosophers were > did they brea0 ground on their own9 or were they reflecti"e of a larger ground=swell of public opinionS Again9 the larger focus upon 4ellenistic religions must affirm the latter3 The last philosophical figure to be ta0en up here is the mysterious personage of Ammonius accas of Ale2andria $c> ;%L C3)3(3 +t is unfortunate indeed that we ha"e no direct insights a"ailable into the teachings of the mentor of ,rigen and Plotinus3 A strong case can be made9 + belie"e9 to lin0 accas within the dualist philosophical traDectory we ha"e thus far delimited3 +n the first instance9 Porphyry notes that Plotinus9 after e2periencing disappointment with "arious Ale2andrian teachers9 became quite enthused with accas after being directed to this teacher by a friend3 Porphyry notes that9 The friend9 understanding the desire of his $Plotinus?( heart9 sent him to Ammonius9 whom he had not so far tried3 4e went and heard him and said to his friend9 @This is the man + was loo0ing for3A 1rom that day he stayed with Ammonius and acquired so complete a training in philospohy that he became eager to ma0e acquaintance with the Persian philosophical discipline and that pre"ailing among the +ndians $Life G3%%=%:(3'FG Dillon is surely correct in assuming from this that accas is highly reminiscent of -umenius in his incorporation of Persian and +ndian elements into his philosophical outloo03 Porphyry in fact mentions that the commentaries of -umenius and Atticus were read in the school of Plotinus3 ,f

'FL 'F% 'F; 'FG

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 ';L3 Dillon9 -he +iddle 4latonists< ;':='F3 +bid>< ;J'3

4lotinus 0A 4orphyry on the Life of 4lotinus and the 2rder of (is BooksV Enneads 0> B@D< trans3 A343 Armstrong $%&HHC reprint9 /oeb Classical9 %&F&(9 &3

+-.
special import in this passage as it continues9 is the hermeneutical emphasis gi"en to Plotinus? reading of these te2tsE But he did not Dust spea0 straight out of these boo0s but too0 a distincti"e personal line in his consideration9 and brought the mind $nous( of Ammonius to bear on the in"estigations in hand3 4e quic0ly absorbed what was read9 and would gi"e the sense of some profound subDect of study in a few words and pass on $Life %'3%G=%F(3'F' This is an intriguing reference9 although it is oblique9 for the sense is of a particularly personal insight applied to language9 a teachable approach to language that aims for intuiti"e insight9 and a method that Plotinus acquired from Ammonius accas9 his teacher in )gypt3 Plotinus elsewhere commends the )gyptians for their appreciation of sacred sounds as we ha"e noted3 +t seems clear that the ostensible anti=Gnostic stance of Plotinus is essentially reactionaryC he had Gnostics in his school and he must ha"e been e2posed to Gnostic doctrines in )gypt3 The fact that he left )gypt for Rome may indicate a desire to physically remo"e himself from the heartland of an e2plicitly dualist tendency in philosophy which aggra"ated the implicitly dualist in his own3'FJ 4e was ne"er able to reconcile this dualism in his speculations9'FH and the fact that he ne"er cites Ammonius in support of his case9 along with the positi"e picture of Ammonius gi"en by Porphyry abo"e9 strengthens the impression that Plotinus continued to hold his mentor in high esteem throughout his life9 although he fundamentally disagreed with the more enhanced @PersianA dualism in his teachings3 <e ha"e noted the o"erlap of philosophical interest in Plotinus and Basileides on one maDor issueC in fact the whole tenor of Plotinian speculation is Gnostic in many ways9 and *alentinus and Plotinus are intimate allies as contrasted with the cosmology of Mani whose teachers were debating with philosophers in Ale2andria in the second year of Plotinus? understudy with Ammonius accas $;'' C3)3(3 And so the following famous passage from Boo0 1our of -he Enneads could ha"e been written by any )gyptian GnosticE ,ften + ha"e wo0en up out of the body to my self and ha"e entered into myself9 going out from all other thingsC + ha"e seen a beauty wonderfully great and felt assurance that then most of all + belonged to the better partC and set firm in it + ha"e come to that supreme actuality9 setting myself abo"e all else in the realm of +ntellect3 Then after that rest in the di"ine9 when + ha"e come down from +ntellect to discursi"e reasoning9 + am puBBled how + e"er came down9 and how my soul has come to be in the body9 when it is what it has shown itself to be by itself9 e"en when it is in the body3 $Ennead +*3F9 %=%%('F:
'F' 'FJ

4lotinus 0< '%3

+n this we may ha"e another clue as to the philosophy of Ammonius acchus3 +t is a psychological dynamic of o"ercompensation that one tends to be most passionately opposed to that which one once belie"ed in3 The whole process of con"ersion dictates this beha"iour9 which we see in aul of Tarsus for e2ample9 or in Augustine?s efforts to discredit Manichaeism after spending nine years as a fellow auditor3 <ith regards to the two Plotinian concepts of the soul?s descent into an @inferiorA world9 and the rather toic praise gi"en to the e2cellence of the cosmos9 .3M3 Rist ma0es the following obser"ationE @The two positions may be incompatible9 the result of conflicting pressures which Plotinus was ne"er able to resol"e9A 4lotinusA-he $oad to $eality< %%;3 4lotinus 0&A Enneads 0&> B@D9 trans3 A343 Armstrong $/oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F'(9 G&:3

'FH

'F:

+-K
The final point to be made with respect to Ammonius accas is that this passage reinforces Porphyry?s depiction of a special form of philosophical insight which e2ists abo"e @discursi"e reasoningA3 This can be lin0ed with the poetic discourse of Parmenides9 the @true ophiaA of Nenocrates9 the @small spar0sA of Albinus9 the eagerness of -umenius for Mysteries9'FF and the @dynamis of logoiA in Plutarch3 Alongside this traDectory we ha"e the per"asi"e donn of gnosis in the Gnostic mo"ement3 +t is at this point of synthesis that + end my e2position of Gree0 dualist philosophical thought and set about detailing the differences > more to the point the underlying affinities > that e2ist between theurgy9 philosophy9 and gnosis3 This point is emphasised here to suggest that the logical end=point of Middle Platonism is not at all a refutation of Gnostic thought as is commonly belie"edC rather9 the dualism is per"asi"e throughout9 and Plotinus is no e2ception3 Moreo"er9 we must go further here and posit definite intellectual collaboration between dualist Middle Platonist and Gnostic thought3 As we ha"e e"idence of congress between Plotinus and his Gnostic students so9 too9 Ale2ander of /ycopolis reports that his fellow philosophers were being con"erted following debates with Manichaean missionaries in )gypt3'F& The boundary between *alentinus9 Carpocrates9 and Basileides in Ale2andria9 and Plutarch9 -umenius9 Cronius9 and Albinus can hardly ha"e been a rancorous or contentious one3'&L +n fact the Persian propensities of -umenius9 Plutarch9 and Ammonius accas allow us to conclude that the con"erts Ale2ander spea0s of when he wrote his treatise at the end of the third century C3)3 were li0ely part of this school3 As we ha"e e"idence on both sides of inclusi"istic tendencies and an openness to dialectic9 we can assume that Gnostics and Platonists were commonly in"ol"ed in discussion and debate3 The dualist school of Middle Platonism must certainly ha"e "iewed many Gnostic teachers as colleagues9 as with modern Philosophy professors whose credentials are quite in order9 yet who de"elop a somewhat tarnished reputation > or enhanced depending upon the milieu >for @mystical pursuitsA on the side3 + ha"e attempted to show that the )gyptian priest stands behind the Gnostic of Graeco=Roman times9 that the religious "iews of )gypt were thus con"eyed and transformed through these literate social classesC howe"er9 Ale2andria9 in its de"elopment of a more philosophical 4ellenistic Gnosis9 was acti"ely sought out by some of the finest philosophical minds of the times and their contribution generated a "ery different sort of gnosis from the Archaic3 The so=called @Middle PlatonicA philosophers9 along with the e"er theogony= obsessi"e )gyptian philosopher=priests9 de"eloped the first early Gnostic treatises in )gypt at an early date as Eugnostos the Blessed bears out3 +n turning to e2amine gnosis within the conte2t of 4ellenistic )gypt9 that is9 predating the rise of the maDor Gnostic groups that we 0now of in Roman )gypt9 there are three main Gnostic te2ts that stand out abo"e the restE -he 4istis Sophia< -he Books of Jeu< and Eugnostos $-4C +++9G U *9%(3 The first two wor0s shall be e2amined in the following Chapter under the rubric of Archaic GnosisC Eugnostos e2ists apart in e"idencing an early e2ample of )gyptian
'FF 'F&

Guthrie< Neoplatonic Gritings9 ';3

ee Pieter <illem "an der 4orst and .3 Mansfeld9 eds and trans39 An Ale:andrian 4latonist Against 9ualism $/eidenE )3.3 Brill %&:'(9 JFE @+9 for one9 do not wish to deny that these doctrines are capable of influencing the minds of those who uncritically accept this theory9 especially since deceitful e2positions of this 0ind were successful in ma0ing con"erts out of certain fellow=philosophers of mine3A 1or e2ample9 Marcellina9 a disciple of Carpocrates9 came to Rome to disseminate her Gnostic faith3 According to +renaeus9 this group used a painted image of .esus9 setting it forth9 @with the images of the philosophers of the world9A $Ad%> (aer> +9 ;J3H(9 trans3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts< "ol3 %9 GF3

'&L

+-7
Gnostic thought and it is to be dated to the first century B3C3)3 Eugnostos begins with a refutation of three different philosophical positions9 referring to those men who ha"e inquired about GodE
'&%

The wisest among them ha"e speculated about the truth from the ordering of the world3 And the speculation has not reached the truth3 1or the ordering is spo0en of in three opinions by all the philosophers9 hence they do not agree3 1or some of them say about the world that it was directed by itself3 ,thers9 that it is pro"idence9 others that it is fate3 But it is none of these3 $-4C +++9 :L3F=;;('&; Parrott identifies the three positions with the )picureans9 toics and Babylonian astrologers respecti"ely and his general point about a lac0 of reference to Platonism is sound9 although a Daundiced "iew towards 1ate in the 4ellenistic world was a 0eynote feature of the time9 one deri"ed from a number of directions and with many nuances3'&G <ith respect to the first point the te2t indicts the @self=madeA as an @empty lifeA $-4C +++ :%3%('&'9 and yet throughout the following te2t there are references to the @self=made 1atherA $e3g3 -4C +++ :J3H('&J9 and + understand this to mean that a self=made di"inity within a theogonic process $that our author describes in great detail( is the true understanding9 whereas self=made in a rigid and all=inclusi"e monistic sense is notE Parrott ma0es the point that this is in essence the ethic of hedonism in )picureanism3'&H <ith this we must agree9 and in fact we ha"e a passage from )picurus not cited by Parrott that is remar0ably cognate with the abo"eE Destiny9 which some introduce as so"ereign o"er all things9 he Ythe hedonistZ laughs to scorn9 affirming rather that some things happen of necessity9 others by chance9 others through our own agency3 $Diogenes /aertius %L3%GG('&: Eugnostos was apparently a "ery popular tractate among later Gnostics and one can detect a number of themes that show up in other tractates9 specifically9 an anti=philosophical
'&%

Parrott9 @)ugnostos and TAll the Philosophers?A9 %J'9 dates it here on the basis of a reference to @all the philosophersA $+++3:L3%J( which e2cludes mention of the PlatonistsC3 Parrott?s citation is worth repeating hereE @During these centuries $ending with G% B3C3)3( it is neither Platonism nor the peripatetic tradition established by Aristotle which occupies the central place in ancient philosophy9 but toicism9 cepticism9 and )picureanism333A /ong9 (ellenistic 4hilosophy9 %3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++A Nag (ammadi "odices 000< C@K and &<B9 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%(9 ''3 Martin9 (ellenistic $eligions< %J:=JFE @Already by the end of the nineteenth century9 in which the 4ellenistic age was first defined9 it had been proposed that the gnostic teachings of late antiquity were directed against a deterministic rule of fate9 that is9 the uncontested so"ereignty of astrological heimarmene3 But concern with the rule of fate in the 4ellenistic world was not limited to the anticosmic protest of late antiquity9 nor was the notion of fate limited to the "iew of an oppressi"e heimarmene3 The 4ellenistic structure of fate itself was in transformation along with the transitory world it articulated3A Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 'H3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 :;3 Parrott9 @)ugnostos and ill the Philosophers?9A %J&3 /oeb9 "ol3;9 HJ&3

'&;

'&G

'&' '&J '&H '&:

+-P
stance9 an apophatic description of the Primal Parent9 and a strong de"elopment of an )gyptian emanationist theogony3 <e shall return to the first point at the end of this chapter3 The epithets concerning the Parent are typical of a number of Gnostic te2tsE immortal9 unnameable9 imperishable9 incomprehensible9 immeasurable9 un0nowable9 etc39 these are important features of -he )ospel of -ruth $-4C +9G(9 -he -ripartite -ractate $-4C +9J(9 -he Apocryphon of John $-4C ++9%9 +++9% +*9 % U BG FJL;9;(9 -he )ospel of the Egyptians $-4C +++9; U +*9;(9 -he Second-reatise of the )reat Seth $-4C *++9;(9 Allogenes $-4C N+9G(9 -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia $-4C N+++9%(9 -he Intitled -e:t $Bruce M &H(9 and -he 4istis Sophia $As0ew Code2(9 to name only the more prominent e2amples where the apophatic descriptions usually occur at the beginning of the wor03 The te2t describes an emanationist system that is quintessentially 4eliopolitan and it can be laid out as followsE
1ather of the !ni"erse j1orefatherj 1ather j elf=Begettorj Begotten Perfect Mind Y 4!Z k Y-!-Z YAT!MZ

All=<ise Begettress ophia YT)1-!TZ

elf=Perfected Begettor YG)BZ k Great ophia Y-!TZ 1irst=Begotten on of God Y, +R+ Z k 1irst=Begotten ophia Y+ + Z bTime

a"iour Begettor of All Things Y )T4Z k Pistis ophia Y-)P4T4I Z bIear !nbegotten elf=Begotten Begettor 1irst=Begettor All=Begettor Arch=Begettor k k k k k k All=<ise ophia All=Mother ophia All=Begettress ophia 1irst=Begettress ophia /o"e ophia Pistis ophia

b%; Months

:; Powers $%; 2 H( GHL Powers $:; 2 J( b Days +nfinite Powers b 4ours U Moments 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 The 4ea"ens of Chaos $mirroring the higher theogony(

Parrot errs in identifying this with the Amun theology of Thebes for the simple reason that he does not recognise the emphasis upon the ennead 3 Parrott counts only fi"e le"els abo"e the second group of %; deities9 and notes that the te2t claims that @they are the type of those who

+-,
proceeded themA3 $-4C +++3F;3%L( 9 concluding that the si2th pair in the second group is missing in the first group3 This is in fact not the case9 for the classic 4eliopolitan relationship between -un and Atum is e"ident9 wherein Atum is depicted as lying inert in -un3 +t is a testament to the te2tual faithfulness to this close relationship in )gyptian thought9 that Parrot misses it3 The te2t describes this entity as followsE
'&F

4e sees himself within himself9 li0e a mirror9 ha"ing appeared in his li0eness as elf= 1ather9 that is9 elf=Begettor9 and as Confrontor9 since he is confronted !nbegotten 1irst )2istent3 4e is indeed of equal age with the one who is before him9 but he is not equal to him in power3 $-4C +++ :J3G=%;('&& +n the 4eliopolitan "iew9 Atum?s role merges with the Ir@Sit, of -unE tm means @e"erythingA or @completeAJLLC parado2ically9 it can also mean @to become non=e2istentAJL% Atum?s self= generation ta0es place within the conte2t of -un3 The Coffin te2ts describe this relationshipE Atum came into being in chaos $CT ++ pell :H9 line '(JL; 4uman0ind who come forth from my eye9 $they( whom + sent out while + was alone with -ut in innertness $CT ++ pell FL9 line G(JLG Parrott identifies the highest deity here with Amun on the basis of his hiddenness9 but this is one of a number of qualities and is not unduly emphasised in the te2t3 Atum for that matter9 displays the same qualitiesE + am 4e $Atum( whose name is secret9 more holy of throne than the Chaos=gods $BD pell :(JL' The te2t identifies the aeons as @the ons of the !nbegotten 1atherA which suggests -un?s title of @father of the godsA as has been noted9 and Atum?s act of self=generation need hardly be emphasised at this point e2cept to say that it is in complete accord with the second theogonic entity described as @ elf=BegettorA3 This common feature of Gnostic thought can be traced bac0 to the ancient )gyptian epithet for the creator god9 hpr ds>f9 literally @came into being by himselfA3 Below Atum we ha"e the eight other members of the 4eliopolitan ennead3 Another indicator of this is the figure of eth e2actly where he should appear $the @ a"iour > Begettor of All ThingsA is identified as eth in the te2t( and this is another e2ample of )gypto=Gree0 heuristic in fusing the )gyptian god with the .ewish ,ld Testament figure3 The lowest entity in
'&F '&& JLL

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 %%H3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 :;9 :'3

Raymond ,3 1aul0ner9 A "oncise 9ictionary of +iddle Egyptian $%&H;C reprint9 ,2fordE !ni"ersity Press9 %&&%(9 ;&F3 Rudolph Anthes9 @)gyptian Theology in the Grd millenium B3C39A JNES %F $%&J&(E %::3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts9 :F3

JL% JL; JLG

Author?s translationC 4ieroglyphic transcription from Adriaan de Buc09 -he Egyptian "offin -e:ts $ChicagoE The !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&GF(9 GG3 1aul0ner9 Book of the 9ead9 GH3

JL'

+.5
the hierarchy is the demiurge @Arch=BegettorA $correctly identified as Ialdabaoth in the Christian redaction( seen here as the consort of Pistis ophia who is also located in typical Gnostic fashion Dust before the lower realms3 Parrott neglects to ta0e into consideration that the @hea"ens of chaosA are a reflection of the aeonic realities abo"e9 another )gyptian and Gnostic donne3 This realm is described as followsE @here below error9 which e2ists with truth9 contests itA $-4C +++ ::3H=&(JLJ and the upshot of the theogonic process is summed up as followsE @and in this way the defect of femaleness appearedA $-4C +++ FJ3H=F(JLH9 both9 again9 quintessentially Gnostic descriptions3 And so @the defect of femalenessA statement is not a later gnosticising addition9 as Parrot would ha"e it9 but is contiguous with the entire thrust of the piece3 /i0ewise @+mmortal Androgynous ManA anticipates numerous Gnostic references to the androgynous Primal man3 ,ne concurs that the tractate is perhaps proto=gnostic in a number of regards9 but it is not at all @un=gnostic as Parrott9 with qualifications9 maintains3JL: As a "ery early Gnostic te2t9 this wor0 illustrates a number of 0ey elements9 not the least of which is the presence of the )gyptian theogonic paradigm3 This model9 howe"er9 has had its constituti"e mythological figures transformed into hypostases whose functions9 arranged hierarchically9 are intended to gi"e insight into the higher realm of which the lower is but a reflection3 The function of the 4eliopolitan ennead is here reflected downwards twofold in order to create theogonic distance between the source and Chaos3 The Christianised Sophia of Jesus "hrist e2plicates the Gnostic "iew that is implicit in our te2tC namely9 that the third duplication of the ennead occurs in chaos and that the final male aeon9 the @Arch=BegettorA is the arrogant demiurge Ialdabaoth3 The interesting perspecti"e on time in the tractate also owes its conception to the )gyptian distinction between nhh and dt< here defined in terms of the perishable and imperishableE -ow a difference e2isted among the imperishable aeons3 /et us9 then9 consider it this way3 )"erything that came from the perishable will perish9 since it came from the perishable3 <hate"er came from imperishableness will not perish but will become imperishable9 since it came from imperishableness3 o9 many men went astray because they had not 0nown this differenceC that is9 they died3 $-4C +++ :G3%:=:'3:(JLF .an Assmann sees nhh=time as bound up with life on this side $9iesseits(9 pertaining to the 0ing9 the state9 the forces of nature9 @the perpetuity of discontinuity9 the unities of countable aspects of timeA3JL& Time and life in this "iew cannot be di"ided3 9t represents an underlying9 or o"erarching9 archetype on the other side $Jenseits(9 one which eternally endures in a state of static unchangableness9 complete and immutable9 generating what Assmann describes as @the
JLJ JLH JL:

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 FH3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 %'L3

WEugnostos is not gnostic9 in any classic sense3 <ith the e2ception of one brief passage9 which appears to be an editorial addition Ythe female defect passageZ9 the attitude toward the "isible world is more positi"e than one finds in later gnostic writingsA9 Parrott9 @)ugnostos and TAll the Philosophers?9A%J'= JJ3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 H'9 HH3 .an Assman9 ;eit und Ewigkeit im Alten HgyptenA Ein Beitrag ,ur )eschichte der Ewigkeit $4eidelbergE Carl <inter !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&:J(9 %;3

JLF JL&

+.+
unlimited nature of the continuous aspects of timeA The critical line in the abo"e quotation is the reference to a difference e2isting among the imperishable aeonsE if the difference is perishability "s3 imperishability9 and the aeons are all imperishable9 how does the difference e2ist among themS 1or the answer to this we note their association with the elements of time that are listed on the right column of the diagram abo"e3 @TimeA begins on the fifth le"el of the first ennead and is seen to itself emanate into its lowest le"el9 that of @hours and momentsA3 Perishableness9 among the imperishable aeons9 is associated with the passage of nhh= time3 At first glance this time would appear to start with the fifth le"el of the first ennead9 at least in archetypal fashion9 but is more probably to be associated with @the hea"ens of chaosA3 <ith its firm )gyptian Sit, and theological presence9 its reference to a @0nowledge principleA and complete lac0 of magical elements9 Eugnostos is perhaps our earliest e2ample of 4ellenistic Gnosis3 +t is our one te2t that can with fair certainty be placed in )gypt before Roman rule3 An important indication of the time and date here is the calendrical e"idence to lin0 this te2t with the )gyptian ci"il calendar9 also the case in the 4istis Sophia3 The cosmological numbers H9 &9 %;9 :;9 and GHL are emphasised9 while the calendrical figures of %; and GHL are notable3 +t is therefore of decisi"e interest that the Christianised redaction of this te2t into -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist drops all numeric allusions9 retaining only the number %;3 As Benno PrBybyls0i rightly obser"es9 @the author of -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist in turn found e"en the rewor0ed calendrical system of Eugnostos the Blessed to be a cause of embarrassment3 -ot wanting to be in conflict with the official calendar of the Roman )mpire he dropped the reference to the number GHL and only retained the number %;A3J%% %; was a safe number to retain as it was common to all calendrical systems3 The transition here is from )gyptianOpaganOPtolemaic=period Gnostic te2t9 to )gyptianOGree0=Christian Roman=Period Gnostic3 There is no dissimilarity in the dualist mood that subtends the speculations of all of the abo"eE emanationism itself is the primal source9 the system from whence these conceptual hypostases stream forth9 be they theurgic9 philosophic9 or Gnostic3 1or lac0 of con"incing e"idence our other te2ts are to be dated later than Eugnostos and it is to these that we now turn in order to discuss 4ellenistic Gnosis more fully9 along with its spiritual sister Archaic Gnosis3
J%L

J%L J%%

+bid39 %;3

Benno PrBybyls0i9 @The Role of Calendrical Data in Gnostic /iterature9A&igiliae "hristianae G' $%&FL(E HH3

+.2 )hapter Eight* -oman, agan Egypt* "rchaic Gnosis vs. Hellenistic Gnosis

A central hermeneutic problem9 one that arises in attempting to differentiate the @philosophicalA from the @mythologicalA in retrospect9 results from fact that the modern tradition of @PhilosophyA9 in the polarised occidental pseudo=scientific sense9 introDects itself within an @orientalA milieu9 a speculati"e soil wherein the roots of philosophy itself are historically intertwined with the mythological3 <hile the split can be traced between PlatonistOAristotelian antipathies towards their less analytical counterparts9 and "ice "ersa9 the Middle Platonic era as coincident with the Gnostics does not demonstrate any great schism3 The pronounced dualisms of Plutarch and -umenius9 their openness to Persian and +ndian thought9 their affinity with the )gyptian9 and their physical and temporal pro2imity to the Gnostics9 these do not allow them to be e2clusi"ely situated upon the philosophical side of the di"ideC nor do the 0indred metaphysical speculations of the Gree0=educated Gnostic teachers of Ale2andria allow them to be slotted onto the mythological side of a rift between two supposedly distinct geo=cultural or methodological plates3 Disclaimers from both sides notwithstanding9 the Middle Platonic philosophers were wor0ing on quintessentially Gnostic cosmological concernsC the Gnostics for their part were able to use Gree0 philosophical terms and methods3 Perhaps the greatest failure of the orientalist approach to this array has to do with the fragmenting indirections of a hermeneutic prepossessed with notions of the @syncretisticA9 a marginalising strategy which etiolates this @daBBling tangle of metaphysical thoughtA beneath the broader traDectories with which the Traditions in"ol"ed would prefer to ally themsel"es3J%; Classical tudies and Christian ,rigins are disinclined to spea0 of synthesis in this wide=spread dualist 4ellenistic Geltanschauung< preferring instead to temporise about incompatible points of origin9 hopeless deri"ations9 and parasitical relationships9 as though a wild chaotic sea of mental disorder e2isted about an archipelago of firm philological landfalls9 affording such safe harbours as Plato and the Academy9 Aristotle9 Paul9 .ohn and the ynoptics9 Plotinus9 Clement9 the Patristic polemicists9 and of course almost all /atin authors3 The sun0en reefs of the Chaldeans9 Middle Platonists9 ophists and 0eptics9 4ermeticists9 the late=period )gyptian priesthood9 the Manichaeans and Gnostics9 are seen to be fore"er slipping bac0 into the watery syncretistic abyss from whence they came3J%G ,ne is often dealing with a @gut le"elA reaction to these mo"ementsE either one is sympathetic in large measure9 or one is not3 An orientalist approach has e"erything to do with a lac0 of sympathy3 This negati"e "iew9 itself a long=li"ed historical tradition9 arises from the perception of these mo"ements as ha"ing unattracti"e9 or simply unuseful attributes3 There is more at sta0e here9 howe"er9 for the abo"e perception of oriental inferiority is often coupled with a direct apprehension of the sub"ersi"e embodied in these religious "iews3 The notion of the @hereticalA of course arises from a sense of indignation at percei"ed illegitimate appropriations of traditional traDectories3 The hyperbole of a metaphorical depiction of @safe
J%;

Martin9 (ellenistic $eligions9 %L9 points out the mista0en etymology of syncretism which is often ta0en from synkerannumi9 to mi2 or Doin togetherE sugkretismos9 the correct etymological root9 denotes the combining of two parties against a third3 And so we note the irony in"ol"ed here of Classical tudies and Christian ,rigins9 in laying the charge of synkerannumi< are themsel"es acting out the etymologically correct meaning of sugkretismos3 <ith the ophists and 0eptics of course we might more accurately spea0 of a sea of relati"ism9 equally abhorrent to Classical=Christian sensibilities3

J%G

+.4
harboursA and @sun0en reefsA is therefore appropriateE gut=reactions are hyperbolic9 and the western academic appreciation of ,riental religions is coloured by the historical threats these traditions ha"e maintained3 The rise of +slam9 sans dualism9 became the new target for orientalist antipathies with the fall of Toledo to the aracens in the Fth century9 and the dramatic capitulation of Constantinople in %'JG3J%' <e must bear this general dynamic in mind as we turn to e2amine the phenomenon of Gnosis more closely9 for it is to be noted that modern inclusi"ising tendencies within so=called @Gnostic tudiesA ha"e created a "irtual canon of Gnostic te2ts which are subDect to incessant inquisition9 while others languish in "irtual anonymity as has been demonstrated in Appendi2 A3J%J ,n its highest le"el 4ellenistic Gnosis pertains to a fusion between the "ery roots of ,ccidental thought and the ,rient9 between the ideal of philosophical discipline and the immediate inner transformation of mystical e2perience > this can be called synchronic gnosis3 The Gnostics were unable to dispense with a preparatory phase to the gnosis e2perienceC hence while many te2ts adopt a sophisticated deconstructionist approach to language as a "itiated @fallenA medium bound up with noetic refractions $the mendacious indirections of the phenomenological underworld(9 the Gnostic rhetors were still compelled to ma0e use of it3 These Gnostic te2ts do not contain a recipe for gnosis itself9 rather they delimit a preparatory phase9 a mode of cosmic=critical awareness $we note in passing that the usual @anti=cosmicA tag is far too simplistic( that will prepare the soul for the direct ascent9 often written in a @codeA for the initiated3 The cosmic=critical stance of the Gnostic mo"ement arises from an acute sense of entrapment9 of numbness9 sleep9 and into2ication in the flesh9 a drun0enness of the world induced by @the wine of ignoranceA3 +gnorance is a historical condition9 one which is itself a hypostatic result of the larger theogonic process3 As .onas puts itE The metaphor Y@wine of ignoranceAZ ma0es it clear that ignorance is not a neutral state9 the mere absence of 0nowledge9 but is itself a positi"e counter=condition to that of 0nowledge9 acti"ely induced and maintained to pre"ent it3 The ignorance of drun0enness is the soul?s ignorance of itself9 its origin9 and its situation in the alien worldE it is precisely the awareness of alienness which the into2ication is made to suppressC man drawn into the whirlpool and made obli"ious of his true being is to be made one of the children of this world3J%H
J%'

+ am9 in the main9 raising the critical concerns addressed by )dward aid in his pro"ocati"e wor0s 2rientalism< and "ulture and 0mperialism $-ew Ior0E Alfred A3 5nopf9 %&&G(9 and + am focusing upon what he defines as the starting point of @,rientalismA per se9 that being the early Gree0 and later Roman attitudes towards the Persians and )gyptians3 ,rientalism9 according to aid9 is a form of te2tual appropriation underta0en by the <estern mind in its efforts to assimilate the )astC more fundamentally9 it represents a scholarly effort that is often made in concert with the e2tension of actual political control3 1rom the historical root of large scale Gree0 and Roman hegemony established o"er the )ast9 accomplished under Ale2ander and Augustus9 the entire colonial tree has grown9 flourishing in the %Fth and %&th centuries9 but still "ery much with us now9 to the e2tent that one can agree with aid?s perspecti"e upon @the worldwide hegemony of ,rientalism9A and that @the principle dogmas of ,rientalism e2ist in their purest form today in studies of the Arabs and +slamA3 2rientalism< G;F9 GLL3 The most frequent to appear are as followsE -he )ospel of -homas $-4C ++9;(9 -he )ospel of -ruth $+9G U N++9;(9 -he Apocryphon of John $-4C ++9%9 +++9%9 +*9% U BGFJL;9;(9 -he )ospel of 4hilip $-4C ++9G(9 -he 'irstSSecond Apocalypse of James $*9G U '(3 All of these te2ts can be described as Gnostic christocentric in some measure3

J%J

+.+t follows that Philosophy9 proper9 is indicted insofar as it is content to reside on the ratiocinati"e le"el9 the phenomenological or historical9 without realising its malign ma0eup9 and without therefore aiming most of its endea"ours towards the ultimate e2istential omega=point of gnosis< the otherness of the non=historical spiritual source +n recalling the anti=philosophical stance e2pressed at the beginning of Eugnostos we note that this was retained into the Christian redaction of -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist $-4C +++9' U BG FJL;9G(3 The passage from EugnostosE 1or the ordering is spo0en of in three opinions by all the philosophers9 hence they do not agree3 1or some of them say about the world that it was directed by itself3 ,thers9 that it is pro"idence9 others that it is fate3 But it is none of these3 $-4C +++ :L3%;=;;(3J%: has a mar0ed similarity to a passage from -he -ripartite -ractate already citedE They ha"e introduced other types $of e2planation(9 some saying that those who e2ist ha"e their being in accordance with pro"idence These are the people who obser"e the orderly mo"ement and foundation of creation3 ,thers say that it is something alien3 These are the people who obser"e the di"ersity and lawlessness and the powers of e"il3 $-4C +9J %L&3J= %J(J%F and the te2t goes on to further indicts the philosophers as followsE The things which they thought of as wisdom was the similitude decei"ing themE they thought that they had attained the truth when they had $only( attained error3 $%L&3GJ= %%L3%(J%& -he Apocryphon of James specifically indicts reason as being part of the lower spiritOsoul dualismE That you be full of the pirit9 be in want of the deliberation9 for reason is of the soul3 $+9;3'3%&=;;(J;L ,ther e2amples followE Then when she $the soul( becomes young again she will ascend9 praising the Parent and her brother9 by whom she was sa"ed3 +n this way the soul will be sa"ed by being born again3 And this is due not to rote sayings or to professional s0ills or to boo0 learning3 The )2egesis on the oul $++9H3%G'3;J=G%(J;%
J%H J%: J%F J%& J;L J;%

.onas9 -he )nostic $eligion9 :%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*++9 ';9 ''3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;&L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;&L3 Coptic transcription from 'EN("< code: 0< F3

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN+< %HL3 ee also9 /uther 43 Martin9 @The Anti=Philosophical Polemic and Gnostic oteriology in TThe Treatise on the Resurrection? $CG +9G(9A Numen ;L $%&:G(E ;L=G:3

+..
The powers of the luminaries said to me9 @Cease hindering the inacti"ity that e2ists in you by see0ing incomprehensible mattersC rather hear about him in so far as it is possible by means of a primary re"elation and a re"elationA3 Allogenes $N+9G H%3;'=G%(J;; The philosopher who is in an outer body9 he is not the one to whom it is proper to pay respect9 rather $it is the( philosopher according to the inner man3 -he Sentences of Se:tus $N++9%3G'3%:(J;G 1rom the abo"e9 along with the e"idence of 4ippolytus9 for e2ample9 who claims nothing but plagiarism from Gree0 philosophy on the part of the *alentinians9 we can be sure that the Gnostics were aware of the philosophies which came before them9 and which e2isted in their own times3 MaDor figures such as *alentinus and Basileides can be e2pected to ha"e had a full Gree0 education along the lines of Plotinus3 Plotinus in fact probably manifests a normati"e biography for the )gypto=Gree0 4ellenistic theological thin0er > elite9 pri"ileged9 afforded a good education9 and ine"itably ending up in Ale2andria see0ing a suitable mentor3 At its most basic le"el of definition9 gnosis is 0nowledge9 patently a catalyst for transcendence ,ne sees9 again and again in Coptic=Gnostic te2ts9 this slipping from the normal sense of @0nowledgeA to gnosis9 whether the latter term be the Gree0 or the Coptic "22YN9 which often ta0es on its higher numinous cast solely through literary conte2t3 4owe"er9 ha"ing said this9 there is a concomitant to this notion of @higher 0nowledgeA and that is the "iew of a lower world9 a dualist cosmology which attempts to answer why illumination is necessary for the reascent to the Pleroma3 Gnosis is a particular 4ellenistic soteriology which sees the archetype of humanity > Anthropos > as mirroring the larger cosmogonic rift3 /iterate and Philosophy=critical 4ellenistic Gnosis9 embellishing upon the Memphite "iew9 often places its emphasis upon the word @wordingA reality9 upon human subDecti"ity?s true relationship with historical process or cosmogonic hierarchy9 an awareness attained through synchronic epiphany9 one to be associated with a certain amount of intellection3J;' Archaic Gnosis might be said to place its own emphasis upon the Memphitic <ord9 but one that does not see the numinous power originating in the pneumatic Anthropos9 but rather in the di"ine hierarchy that can be made to ser"e human0ind through correct procedure9 the semantic ornamentation of the diachronic rite3 The upper end displays a 0een sense of the ironic with respect to language > the earlier Memphitic word by 4ellenistic times ta0es on a double entendre9 or hypostatic stature9 and this bright blade of Tnuminous discourse? is wielded by a sophianic figure3J;J At the other
J;; J;G

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 ;;'3

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol 3 NN*+++9 G;L3 +n a te2t that is otherwise rather un=Gnostic $it is attributed in a number of other non=Gnostic9 non=Christian sources(9 this saying fits in well with Gnostic thought which may e2plain its inclusion in the -ag 4ammadi corpus3 .313 Borghouts9 @Ch>w $a0hu( and hkC>w $he0au(3 Two Basic -otions of Ancient )gyptian Magic9 and the Conception of the Di"ine Created <ordA9 in La +agia in Egitto al -epi dei 'araoni9 G&E @Ch>w or hkC>w is best translated as ^magical utterance?333 the Tcreati"e emanation? sometimes ta0es the form of a stream of thought9 and one gets the impression that especially in the /ate Period such creati"e power is chiefly "ested with Tintellectual capacity?3A This impression of the female di"inity wielding discourse with irony is nowhere more e"ident in the Gnostic corpus than in the -hunderA 4erfect +ind3 1or + am the first and the lastE

J;'

J;J

+.K
e2treme words e2ist upon a theurgic palette9 or doctrinal liturgy9 often applied with a mar0ed penchant for mind=numbing literalism and cant3 Two respecti"e e2amples can be gi"en hereE There was a time9 says he9 when there was nothingE not e"en that nothing was there9 but simply9 clearly9 and without any sophistry there was nothing at all3 <hen + say Tthere was?9 he says9 + do not indicate a Being9 but in order to signify what + want to e2press + say9 says he9 that there was nothing at all3 1or that9 says he9 is not simply something ineffable which is named $indicated(C we call it ineffable9 but it is not e"en ineffable3 1or what is not $e"en( ine2pressible is called Tnot e"en ine2pressible?9 but is abo"e e"ery name that is named3 1or the names do not e"en suffice9 he says9 for the world9 so multiform is it9 but fall short3 And + do not ha"e it in me to find correct names for e"erythingC rather it is proper to comprehend ineffably9 without using names9 the characteristics of the things which are to be named3 1or $the e2istence of( the same designation$s for different things( has caused the hearers confusion and error about the things3333 ince therefore there was nothing9 no matter9 no substance9 nothing insubstantial9 nothing simple9 nothing composite9 nothing non=composite9 nothing imperceptible $non subDecti"e(9 no man9 no angel9 no god9 nothing at all that can be named or can be apprehended by sense perception9 nothing of the mental things and thus $also nothing of all that which( can be simply described in e"en more subtle ways9 the non=e2istent god333 without intelligence9 without perception9 without will9 without resol"e9 without impulse9 without desire9 wished to ma0e a world3 + say The wished?9 he says9 for want of a word9 wish9 intelligence9 and perception being e2cluded3 By Tworld? $+ mean( not the flat9 di"isible world which later di"ided itself9 but a world=seed3 Basileides $according to 4ippolytus(J;H

Again when you reach the ran0 of the three amens9 the three amens will gi"e you their seal and their mystery3 And again they will gi"e you the great name9 and you will pass through to their interior3 <hen you go to the ran0 of the child of the child9 they will gi"e to you their mystery and their seal and the great name3 Again you will go to their interior3 <hen you reach the ran0 of the twin sa"iours9 they will gi"e to you their mystery and their seal and the great name3 Again you will go to its interior to the ran0 of the great abaoth9 he of the Treasury of the /ight3 <hen you reach his ran09 he will seal you with his seal and he will gi"e to you his mystery and his great name3 Again you will go in to its interior to the ran0 of the great .ao the Good9 he of the Treasury of the /ight3 4e will gi"e to you his mystery and his seal and the great name3

+ am the one who is honoured and the one who is scorned3 + am the whore and the holy one333 + am the sound of the manifold "oice9 and the word of many aspects3 + am the storyE $+ am( my name333 + am the hearing that is attainable to e"erything9 + am the speech which cannot be grasped3 + am the name of the sound and the sound of the name3 $%G3%H=;FC %'3%;=%JC ;L3;F=GGE Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;G'9 ;GH9 ;JL U ;J;(3
J;H

4ippolytus9 $efutatio *++ ;L3;3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts< "ol3 %9 H'3

+.7
Again you will go in to its interior to the ran0 of the se"en amens3 Again they will gi"e you their mystery and their seal and the great name3 -he Second Book of Jeu $%%&3%=;%(J;: The abo"e te2t continues with twenty=one more passages beginning with @AgainA and well illustrates the point in its emphasis upon seals9 names9 and e2ternal procedure3 The passage by Basileides is one of the most important secondary sources we ha"e with which to appreciate the nature of Gnostic thought in Ale2andria3 -o e2tant Gnostic tractate e2hibits this refle2i"e sophistication with language outside of the more poetically=concei"ed -hunder< 4erfect +ind3 + would briefly digress so as to draw out the subtlety of the Basileidean theogony3 The te2t can be philosophically paraphrased as followsE the words @"acuumA and @spaceA are intended to refer to something9 no less so than @planetA9 @sunA9 or @asteroidA3 Consider for a moment that this something is defined as nothing9 with no substance9 indeed no spatial or temporal referents in itself > it e2ists only in relation to that which is not "oid3 +f all that is supposedly @materialA in the uni"erse were to be remo"ed $planets9 suns9 asteroids etc3( there would be a @pureA "oid9 a state that can be philosophically postulated9 yet must be immediately negated insofar as language cannot contain it3 1or "oid e2ists in this situation inasmuch as it @e2istsA as a concomitant of all physical elements in the cosmos3 @Pure *oidA9 as + would call it9 is free from this commitment and must therefore e2clude language which is itself based referentially upon the cosmos3 ,ne might be tempted to thin0 that it is possible to concei"e of the "oid without physical referents9 yet this is only theoretically possible9 for by insisting that pure %oid can =e concei%ed $by human intelligence( the obDector has in fact placed himself within the "oid9 philosophically spea0ing9 and so it is no longer a @pure "oidA but one contaminated by a percei"ing referent3 Pure "oid9 according to Basileides9 precludes all substance9 all perspecti"e9 all subsequent being9 and therefore e2cludes e"erything in its "ery nature9 including +ntelligibility as we 0now itE it is therefore ineffable3 Iet out of this depth9 this "oid9 there arose a <ill which surfaced9 gradually creating intelligibility and differentiation from an inchoate and latent state3 Basileides? "ery careful description of the almost blind and unconsciously directed attributes of this Creator god9 curiously anticipates chopenhauer?s GillE Absence of all aim9 of all limits9 belongs to the essential nature of the will in itself9 which is an endless stri"ing3J;F )qually9 the image comes directly from the ancient )gyptian "iew of the Prime"al *oid9 the inert depths of -un wherein the osmotic Atum finally manages to o"ercome his lassitude and create the ennead9 "ery well described in Coffin Te2t FLE <hile + was alone with -ut in innertness + could not find a place to stand or sit before 4eliopolis had been founded in which + could e2ist before my throne was formed upon which + might sit before + made -ut that she might dwell abo"e me
J;: J;F

Coptic transcription from the N(S< "ol3 N+++9 %HH3

Arthur chopenhauer9 -he Gorld as Gill and $epresentation< "ol3 +9 trans3)313.3 Payne $-ew Ior0E Do"er Publications9 %&HH(9 %H'3

+.P
that she might marry Geb before the first had been born before the )nnead had come into e2istence that they might dwell with me Atum said to -unE @+ am upon the flood=waters and becoming "ery tired and my patricans are inert3333AJ;& +n Basileides we are witness to all the intellectual refinement we would e2pect from an Ale2andrian schooled in Gree0 thought9 one who employs rhetorical schemes and tropes in his writings if we are to ta0e 4ippolytus? transcription at face "alue3JGL The conceptualisations and language employed are "ery much philosophical9 and one senses a sophisticated caution in the handling of words with which to con"ey a rather abstruse line of thoughtE what is stri0ing in this passage is the deconstruction of naa"e "erbal realism and a focus upon the limitations of language3JG% -ot so the author of -he Books of Jeu9 whose mind re"els in the repetition of formulae9 in the twists and turns of a ritualised passage through the underworld maBe where diabolical forces are to be confronted with magical names and passwords3 The difference in form and substance between the two passages9 + would suggest9 is on par with any passage from 5ant?s "riti#ue of 4ure $eason and the ruleboo0 to 9ungeons P 9ragons< the modern gothic role=playing game3JG; /est the image seem o"erstated9 it should be mentioned that the )gyptians in fact had a board game named @passageA in which the player had to find a path through GL inimical realms to attain the sustenance and Dustification of a god3JGG The question of whether
J;& JGL

4ieroglyphic transcription from Adriaan de Buc09 -he Egyptian "offin -e:ts9 GG=G'3

There is surely no reason not to gi"en that the addition of the rhetorical scheme of anaphora $which adds mar0ed emphasis through repetition of opening phrases( for e2ample9 would hardly ha"e been added by 4ippolytus who sought to denigrate3 The e2tended use of the o2ymoron > the @master=trope of mysticismA > in -he -hunderA 4erfect +ind demonstrates comparable sophistication to Basileides? use of anaphora to cite two e2amples out of many3 A study of Gnostic rhetoric is acutely required in this field3 Gnostic te2ts were undoubtedly esoteric9 intended to offer a way beyond the incipient mendaciousness of human 0nowledge and therefore words > these factors suggest a rhetorical intent on the part of gnostic writers which could be said to be deconstructi"e3 <e say this in the loose sense of a shared attitude toward meaning $as conte2t=bound(9 which is reDected as ultimate3 Iet Gnostic philosophy does not @celebrate the abyssA or crumple its own epistemological=discursi"e underpinnings into nihilistic @"ain agitationAC rather9 reference is made to otherness9 an e2traperspecti"al omega point for the historical self3 There is no attendant deconstructi"ist mystical drought > conte2t $time and space itself(9 for the Gnostic9 is essentially pernicious9 and the indeterminacies inherent in our use of language reflect our 1allE @!topia does not require rhetoric3A .an Assmann9 @Death and +nitiation in the 1unerary Religion of Ancient )gypt9Ain Yale Egyptological Studies CA $eligion and 4hilosophy in Ancient Egypt9 ed3 <illiam 5elly impson $-ew 4a"en9 CTE Iale !ni"ersity9 %&F&(9 %'G=''E @The topography of the hereafter Ythe Coffin Te2tsZ described in these spells is so full of dangers because of the demonic creatures inhabiting it3 The netherworld appears therein first and foremost as a social sphere9 in which the deceased must mo"e and9 e"entually9 integrate himself by means of the spo0en wordE by appealing9 conDuring9 intimidating9 beseeching9 threatening9 answering9 etc333 The accumulation of such an enormous body of 0nowledge based on pure speculation and meant to insure indi"idual sal"ation $i3e3 in the sense of o"ercoming death( reminds one of the Gnosis and must surely represent one of its roots3A Assmann9 @Death and +nitiation9A %'F3

JG%

JG;

JGG

+.,
*alentinian Gnostic thought with its thirty aeons was itself directly descended from an )gyptian board game must be left open gi"en the lac0 of hard e"idence3 The @archaicA approach to di"ine 0nowledge has its roots in the )gyptian religious tradition of elite priesthoods who alone possessed the ability to read sacred te2ts and utter the requisite formulae9 incantations9 and sacred sounds used to appease or simply affirm the gods9 more critically a distinct hortatory "iew towards cosmogonic manipulation which can be traced bac0 to the ,ld 5ingdom Pyramid te2ts3 +n the following the 0ing addresses -unE , -u9 let these $gates( be opened for me9 for behold + ha"e come9 a god=li0e soul $PT !tt3 GHL9 KHLG(3JG' The mere possession and use of this @di"ine discourseA was a mode of political power in itself9 as e"idenced by the priesthood?s immense influence throughout )gypt?s long history9 and we are dealing more with class distinctions as opposed to the more indi"idualistic attainment of insight9 a hallmar0 of 4ellenistic Gnosis3 The tendency in this mode of religiosity is to form a hierarchy of %( Principle Teacher or re"elation ;( +nner elite G( Auditors or imple belie"ers3 +n conDunction with this9 there is a general preoccupation with the notion of @sacred spaceA $who?s allowed where9 at what time9 and under what conditions9 and so on(3 And so we see a more conser"ati"e9 class=conscious9 and utilitarian conception of Gnosis herein3 To mention a few e2amplesE the 4istis Sophia9 -he Books of Jeu< +arsanes< Manichaeism in )gypt9 4ermeticism9 and the Chaldean system are all e2amples of diachronic or archaic gnosis3 +t is not necessary to del"e into these and other te2ts separately9 instead we shall focus purely upon the 4istis Sophia9 a non=-ag 4ammadi Gnostic te2t3 The 4istis Sophia is a critical te2t to consider and it is interesting to note that this "oluminous tractate has been scanted by Gnostic tudies9 or more to the point9 Christian ,rigins scholarship3 The reason for this9 it seems clear9 is the strong magical elements in the wor0 that ha"e already been detailed in Chapter J3 Along with this the Christian framewor0 of the te2t9 undoubtedly a later redaction9 has been rather une"enly stitched upon an immense and complicated pagan cosmology whose inscrutability patently supersedes the teacher?s best efforts to carry it3 +t is not a good candidate for @Christian GnosisA3 At "arious Dunctures throughout the entire four boo0s of the 4istis Sophia9 the largest Gnostic te2t to surface thus far9JGJ the literary ceiling opens up as it were9 re"ealing a dense and intricate cosmology3 To supply a philosophical Dustification for this many=tiered metaphysical hierarchy is clearly not the purpose of this massi"e wor09 and a detailed picture must be painsta0ingly put together by the patient reader3 A fundamental e2egetical question must as0 whether the writer$s( did indeed presuppose this fantastic bac0drop as a required liturgy in the minds of the congregation9 or whether it was intended as a pedantic course of esoteric instruction for new auditors3 +n any e"ent9 the rhetorical purpose of the 4istis Sophia9 if it can be ascertained9 is a touchstone to an understanding acutely required in this Gnostic te2t > perhaps more so here than in any other3JGH
JG' JGJ

1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts9 %%:3

This te2t9 which may ha"e been unco"ered originally in %:H& by the cottish e2plorer Bruce9 is entitled the As0ew Code2 after its first owner9 a /ondon doctor who bought the code2 in %::;3 +t totals some G'H pages of original manuscript3 This te2t and the Bruce Code29 were made a"ailable to scholars o"er a century ago9 and up until the surfacing of the -ag 4ammadi find $an ongoing process now9 o"er 'L years after the actual disco"ery of some J; gnostic tractates in upper )gypt( these represented the only primary source materials for

JGH

+K5
,ur hypothesis presupposes a Christian frame to ha"e been superimposed upon a deeper mythological substratum3 The consistency of the cosmology throughout the 4istis Sophia9 as held up against the inconsistencies of the self=consciously liturgical formulations of the foreground te2t9 argues that the @gi"enA in the minds of the worshippers was li0ely a cosmological &orlage from an earlier pre=Christian system of thought9 certainly )gyptian3 The infiltration of the @Christ=mythA into these )gyptian systems of thought has been graphically attested within the -ag 4ammadi find3JG: <e li0ely ha"e e"idence here of an early phase following this transformation where the cosmological bac0drop still powerfully intrudes upon the tendentiously Christian setting of the main te2t3 +n effect9 the wor0 attempts to mo"e off in two non=complimentary directionsC as a result9 the biblical scenario of Christ instructing his disciples is flattened by the ideational weight of the pre=Christian cosmological @fugueA of the emanationist system pressing down from abo"e3 +n particular the presence of ophia contends with Christ as a cosmic=player > a typical result of this fusion of Christ=myth with BarbeloO ophia systems > and the disciples are predictably wooden9 or stoc0 characters3 +nterestingly enough9 while ophia is not allowed to directly address the congregation9 her archetype can be seen to be at wor0 in the epicentre of disciplic action9 symbolised by the consummate dominance of Mary Magdalene o"er all the other disciples in the wor09 indeed in a characterisation of her that is more G=dimensional than that of .esus himself3 +t is not possible to appreciate what is going on in the cosmic drama presented in the 4istis Sophia unless one has an appreciation of the larger setting3 The te2t mo"es about this "ast cosmic stage with a flashlight9 illuminating "arious parts of the whole without attempting to bac0light the entire mise en scXne > most curious3 + would attempt then to re"erse a process that is forced upon the unwary reader and proceed from the whole to the parts3 +n this the themes of light and dar0ness are ubiquitous in the te2t9 and the entire effect of this dualism is to present the upper reaches of 8one % as being blindingly brilliant9 whereas the lowest reaches of 8one & are of unredeemable blac0ness3 Between the four Bones which ma0e up the realms of light and dar0ness respecti"ely9 is The Treasury of /ight $8n3 '(9 a transition Bone where particles of light are processed downwards and upwards3 +t is interesting to note that there is no primary theogonic process de"eloped with respect to this elaborate set=upE it simply is3 +t is the starting point for a drama that ta0es place in a localised setting in the %Gth aeon of 8one :3 4ere9 Pistis ophia suffers a 1all down into 8one & which acti"ates an e"entual response in 8one ;3 This directs the a"iour in 8one G to descend to her aid3 The te2t goes to great lengths to ma0e it clear that the entire series of e2istential le"els are peopled with innumerable spirits3 The historical .esus9 located in 8one F along with all of human0ind9 is thus one player upon a "ast multi=dimensional stage9 situated here within the dimension of kosmos3 /i0e the chorus in a ha0espearean drama or Gree0 tragedy9 he leads the discipleOreader into "arious @scenesA3 4is ascent into @hea"enA $as humans concei"e it( is9 on the scale of things in the 4istis Sophia9 a relati"ely localised mo"ement from 8one F to 8one :3 4is return and subsequent teachings form the historical premise of the entire wor03 .esus attempts to teach the disciples about the entire system we ha"e briefly s0etched3 This is the essential plot of the 4istis Sophia > it is also the literary function of the piece9 insofar as the readerOlistener is e2pected to identify with the disciples3 This will be ta0en up again further on3
@Gnostic studiesA3 Iet the difficulty in ascertaining a Sit, for this te2t9 + would argue9 coupled with its off=putting lac0 of o"erall stylistic merit9 ha"e consigned this wor0 for the time being to an obscure fate3
JG:

Eugnostos the Blessed with -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist is the most definiti"e e2ample of this9 howe"er it is present in a number of other tractates which shall be treated further on3

+K+
At this point the nature of each Bone might be described to some e2tent by drawing from "arious descriptions that are found throughout the entire te2t3JGF A schematic and description of the Bones is as followsE

> > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

8one % ,ne 1ather Realm of /ightE %J great mysteries of the 1ather9 mediating the powers of redemption3 Mystery of the e"en *oices > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8one ; Primary Mystery Realm of /ightE %J great mysteries of the 1ather9 mediating the powers of redemption3 Mystery of the e"en *oices > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8one G Twenty=four Mysteries > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8one ' Treasury of /ight %; gathering points of light $each with %; guardians set o"er a further %; organisers( : spirits J trees of light G gemini guardians %; other guardians > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8one J The Right .eu $Bishop of /ight( MelchiBede0 The Great abaoth $1ather of the soul of .esus( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sone K #he Middle
8araBaB

> > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

JGF

There are some minor inconsistencies throughout the te2t which + ha"e @editorialiBedA in the interests of pursuing a managable discussion3 +n particular9 Boo0 1our of the 4istis Sophia stands apart from the others in form and substance to some e2tent9 offering a somewhat simpler cosmology3 These amount more to omissions than anything else9 and no radical changes in the system ha"e been noticed by myself3

+K2 +A, the Good The little abaoth the Good The /ight=Maiden $.udge of souls( : /ight=maidens with %J helpers un and Moon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sone 7 #he ?eft YThe %Gth AeonZ The in"isible god and his great power the Barbelo G spirits including Authades %; syBygies $pairs of aeons( The last female aeon Pistis ophia H aeons ruled by .abraoth $who has been redeemed( YRealm of "isible CosmosZ H aeons ruled by abaoth Adamas $unredeemed( with %; Bodiac spirits J great ArchontesE 5ronos9 Ares9 4ermes9 Aphrodite9 8eus YRealm of AirZ J great ArchontesE Paraplech9 Aethiopica9 4e0ate9 Paredron Tupson9 +a0sthanabas9 ruling o"er GHL Archontes of Adamas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sone P 6eneath #he Middle The firmament $with innumerable spirits( The )arth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >= Sone , #he Inder(orld) 2rcus ruled o"er by Ariel "haos ruled o"er by the lion=headed +aldabaoth $along with Persephone and Adonis( -he 2uter 9arkness $a great dragon encircling the earth with its tail in its mouth( %; chambers of punishment

+K4
The &orlage was written in Coptic C in this case the ahidic dialect points towards a southern religious community although9 as a later redaction9 it is hardly conclusi"e3 Towards the end of the wor0 a "ehement disclaimer is put forward to the effect that the group condemns the Gnostic libertines3 Thomas as0s about those who mi2 semen and female menstrual blood with lentils to eatC .esus respondsE @Truly + say that this sin surpasses e"ery sin and e"ery iniquityA etc3J'L This might be in response to the charges raised by )piphanius against the Gnostic libertines of )gypt in his 4anarion9 written about G:J3 The appearance of the Coptic BA+-C4,,C4 and numerous other magical connections detailed in Chapter J9 place the composition of the Irte:t anywhere bac0 to the first century B3C3)3 4owe"er9 the Sit, is )gyptian as is made clear by a number of o"erlaps with the magical papyri and )gyptian theology3 <ith respect to the latter9 there is the "ision of uroboros and the outer dar0ness9 the )gyptian symbol of unending time set against chaos9 present especially in the -ew 5ingdomC the sun and moon ships9 descriptions of the water -un and Amente in the 4istis Sophia are also deri"ed from )gyptian thoughtCJ'% finally9 the creation of human0ind from the tears of god9 the original homophonic connection drawn from the )gyptian rmt b man9 and rm3t b tears9 as in the following Coffin Te2tE
JG&

+t is with my sweat that + created the gods3 Man0ind is from the weeping of my eye $CT %%GL(J'; Boo0 +* GGG3%'=%: of the 4istis Sophia continues this motifE +f9 on the other hand9 it is a new soul $which( they ta0e from the sweat of the archons9 and from the tears of their eyes3333J'G The )gyptian legend of the eye of Re is to be strongly connected in other ways with the 4istis Sophia3J'' +n Boo0 %9 chapters ;L9 G%9 G;9 GJ9 JF9 and F%9 ophia is described as being attracted to this great lightC this9 in turn9 aroused the emulous hatred of the archons below her le"el3 The head archon here emanated his own great light and ophia mista0enly descends towards this without her partner3 At this point the great lion=faced archon .aldabaoth and all his minions surround her9 oppressing her and attempting to steal her light3 ophia cries out for help in the form of a number of @repentance?sA3 The light=power she originally saw abo"e is e"entually despatched to her aid9 and she is brought up from Chaos3 The /eyden demotic
JG&

@,ur boo09 as it stands9 has an )gyptian9 non=Gree0 origin9A in 13C3 Bur0itt9 @Pistis ophia9A J-S ;G $%&;%O;;(E ;:'C and @Pistis ophia and the Coptic /anguage9AJ-S ;: $%&;JO;H(E %'F in which the author reDects the linguistic analysis of Carl chmidt that Coptic9 not Gree09 was the language of composition3 Carl chmidt9 4istis Sophia< em gnostisches 2riginalwerke $/eipBig9 %&;J(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +N9 :H;3 Philippe Derchain9 @Mythes et Dieu2 lunaires en 7gypte9Ain Sources 2rientales *E La lune< mythes< et rites9 %:=HF3 ParisE 7ditions du euil9 %&H;3 /eonard 43 /es0o9 -he Ancient Egyptian Book of -wo Gays $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:;(9 %GL3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +N9 HHH3 ee also 5M0osy9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion3A 1rantise0 /e2a9 @/a lPgende gnostique sur Pistis ophia et le mythe ancien 7gyptien sur l?oeil de RP9AEgyptian $eligion +9 no3 %=G9 $April %&GG(3 + am indebted to /e2a for this connection3 + lin0 up this myth with the broader *alentinian myth in Chapter %;3

J'L J'%

J';

J'G J''

+Kpapyrus + GF' $not the /eiden=/ondon magical papyri(9 dated to the ;nd century C3)39 describes the departure of Tefnut9 daughter of Re9 to )thiopia following her reDection of her partner3 Re sends Thoth in order to bring Tefnut bac09 for her absence has caused a disruption in )gypt3 Thoth finds her in the desert where she has been attac0ed by an )thiopian cat which subsequently changes into a lion3 +n the form of a baboon Thoth persuades her to return to )gypt3 This myth9 which e2ists in fragmentary form in the /eiden papyrus9 is a deri"ation of the earlier story of the eye of Re9 found in the tombs of eti + and Ramses +++9 in which the eye of Re is despatched in order to end human0ind?s re"olt against himself3 J'J The eye of Re accomplishes this in the form of 4athor who descends to earth3 ,nce on earth9 4athor ta0es the form of a lioness $ e0hmet(9 unleashing a terrible slaughter upon human0indE That is how the Powerful ,ne $ e0hmet( came into being9 the Confused ,ne in the night9 to wade in their blood as far as 4eracleopolis3J'H The decisi"e similarity here with the 4istis Sophia9 besides the ob"ious lion=figure9 is the depiction of it operating as an independent force of e"il9 for Re becomes alarmed at her e2cessi"e will in this regard3 Re is forced to send emissaries and de"ise a ruse whereby 4athorO e0hmet would desist in her sanguine acti"itiesE the point is that she was no longer an e2tension of his will9 but was effecti"ely saying @non ser%iamA3 As with the later ophia myths9 this terrible lower aspect of the goddess 4athorO e0hmet is later redeemed by Re as she assumes the higher form of his )ye once again3 The eye of Re in this capacity9 is also to be found in the Boo0 of the Dead3 This is one of two critical )gyptian myths that form the main ophia myth in *alentinian thought9 for e2ample9 and the same deri"ation in the 4istis Sophia is quite apparent3 The calendar used in the 4istis Sophia is based upon the )gyptian ci"il calendar in widespread use until ;G& B3C3)3 )"en after the Ptolemaic decree9 in which the GHL day kJ calendar was to be replaced by a GHJ3;J day calendar9 it is argued that the traditional )gyptian calendar continued to be used in )gypt3 ,ther specific calendrical references in the 4istis Sophia show that the calendar is indisputably the )gyptian ci"il calendar3J': Apart from these compelling factors9 there is the emphasis at "arious Dunctures upon the sacred sound of the nameC there are the passwords gi"en the ascending soul9 that it may pass beyond the lower regions into eternal lifeC there is the ascent of the master to hea"en and his return to teachC finally9 the whole collection could easily be entitled a @Boo0 of the DeadA gi"en the emphasis placed upon the soteriology of the indi"idual soul > this in"ol"es understanding a specific cosmological system9 a scheme of things rather alien to orthodo2 Christianity3 The nine Bones of course suggests the traditional )gyptian emphasis upon the ennead9 and the primacy of the initial three reinforces this3 The syncretism with "arious Gree0 mythical figures9 as with the connection made with Bubastis @who is called Aphrodite in the cosmosA $Boo0 +*3%'L(9 suggests an Ale2andrian conte2tC as well9 the hea"y reliance upon the psalms > which for rhetorical effect are li0ely to ha"e been presumed as a donn in the readerOlistener > may indicate a strong .ewish influence3J'F Ale2andria9 again9 had its influential .ewish community9 a community that was headed towards
J'J

)rich 4ornung9 9er Hgyptische +ythos %on der (immelskuh3 Also 5urt ethe9 @8ur altRgyptischen age "om onnenauge das in fer 1erne war9A in Intersuchungen ,ur )eschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens9 "ol3 J $reprintC %&%;9 4ildesheimE Georg ,lms *erlagsbuchhandlung9 %&H'(9 %%&=JH3 -he Book of the 9i%ine "ow in Ale2andre Pian0off9 -he Shrines of -ut@Ankh@Amon9 Bollingen eries N/3; $-ew Ior0E Panthen Boo0s9%&JJ(9 ;F3 PrBybyls0i9 @The Role of Calendrical Data in Gnostic /iterature9AJ:3

J'H

J':

+K.
complete assimilation and this ob"iously represents some interim phase upon that traDectory3J'& ,ne thin0s of the period following the decimation of the .ewish community in )gypt and the stripping of their pri"ileges following the failure of their re"olt in C3)3 %%J=%:3 A turning to the Gnostic concern with )"il in the world9 a radicalising reassessment of .ahweh as a result of their own suffering and despair9 this might be e2pected on the part of a number of .ewish speculati"e thin0ers at this historical Duncture in particular3JJL This acme of .ewish disheartenment in Ale2andria occurred only a few years before the appearance of *alentinus and Basileides there3 Then again9 the o"ert dualism of the piece could point strongly towards an )ssene group3JJ% 4owe"er9 all these considerations are to be tied to the later redaction3 The earlier pagan cosmology and attribute of archaic Gnosis lin0 it with the south3 +n this regard the most important point to ma0e here is one made by 1rancis /egge some :L years ago9 that the world"iew e2pressed in the 4istis Sophia is @so thoroughly )gyptian that it must ha"e been written for )gyptian readersA3JJ; There is also a pronounced Manichaean influence at wor0 throughout the 4istis Sophia3JJG Apart from further specific instances which will be noted in the ne2t chapter9 there is a Manichaean @feelA about the whole wor0E the obsessi"e detailing of the cosmology and attempt to present sal"ation as being almost a system of physicsC the whole cosmic dualism in both systems which simply is9 without genesisC as well9 both depict a spiritual apogee9 a point of fallenness for the soul from which there is no return3 1inally9 the doctrinal and syncretistic nature of the wor0 suggests the Manichaean approach3 All of this is not to say howe"er9 that these factors must follow the rise of Manichaeism $Mani li"ed from C3)3 ;%H=;::(C Ta0en by themsel"es they could as easily be current or prior to the teachings of Mani3 My conclusion9 based largely upon connections with the magical papyri and )gyptian religion9 is that they pre= date Mani > li0ely a part of a per"asi"e world="iew which Mani was to subsequently appropriate3

J'F

4owe"er9 these attributes are limited to Boo0s +* and ++ respecti"ely and cannot be generalised for the entire te2t3 At least one assumes this to be the caseC perhaps it would be safer to simply say that the community became more and more 4ellenised as time went on3 The term @.ewA is as nuanced as any other in this time and place3 There were numerous nominal .ews in )gypt who were neither .ewish by race9 circumcised9 or e2pected to strictly follow .ewish religious laws3 ee Paul .ohnson9 A (istory of "hristianity $4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s9 %&:H(9 %;3 This is strongly suggested at %;'3;' cont3E @+t is this which baptised and forga"e the race of man0ind and made them to be at peace with the ons of the /ightA $Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +N9 ;'F(3 The final battle between @the ons of Dar0nessA and @the ons of /ightA is of course a central motif in the )ssene cosmology3 1rancis /egge9 'orerunners and $i%als of "hristianityA 'rom CC7 B>"> to CC7 A>9>< "ol3 % $%&;;C reprint9 -ew Ior0E !ni"ersity Boo0s9 %&H'(9 %:J3 + would briefly list a number of compelling similarities that occur in the te2t3 Reference is made to the @tyrants YwhoZ began to wage war against the light3A Their ignorance is stressed9 @because they saw nothing e2cept the greatly surpassing light9A $;J(3 The sun and moon are depicted as processors of light particles9 and the light is @swallowedA by the archonsE both are familiar Manichaean motifs $GJ=GH(3 The tragedy of the mi:ture $light and dar0ness( is at the heart of Manichaean thought and this 0ey concept is e2pressed in the 4istis SophiaE @And when the perfect number is completed so that the mi2ture is dissol"ed333A $::(3 The Manichaean idea of processing the particles of light in one?s food is e2actly mirrored here $;F;(3

J'&

JJL

JJ%

JJ;

JJG

+KK
Archaic Gnosis is not a later @degenerateA form of Gnostic thought3 This seems to me too easy a way out of a comple2 situationE it also has the suspicious ad"antage of Dustifying the decision to ignore some rather long and difficult wor0s9 a course adopted by most in the field to this day3JJ' The 0ey here is the cosmological system we ha"e detailed3 +f one strips away all of the artifice in this myth9 one is left with a rather embellished form of pre=Christian )gyptian= Gnostic thought which parallels > perhaps e"en anticipates > the teachings of *alentinus in particular3 Granted9 the descripti"e style of this system is one dri"en to e2cess9 but this was the accepted norm in an )gyptian milieu3 The @rewriteA of the original Coptic te2t would then ha"e occurred in an Ale2andrian milieu towards the end of the fourth century3 The te2tual e"idence we ha"e before us suggests the Sit, im Le=en of an early group of )gyptian=Gnostic religionists9 li0ely li"ing far to the south of cosmopolitan Ale2andria3 <ith respect to 4ellenistic Gnosis there are a number of te2ts that e"idence the sort of sophistication we would e2pectC howe"er9 it must be said that the maDority of te2ts in our possession do not accord all that well with the depiction of Basileidean rigour in 4ippolytus9 or the renown of *alentinus3 )nough has been written about )ospel of -ruth as a candidate for authorship by *alentinus that it not be entered into here3 Certainly the te2t espouses an emanationist system of thought a0in to what we 0now of *alentinus through the patristics3 Rather9 + shall treat the -ripartite -ractate briefly9 for it is of comparable length to the 4istis Sophia9 equally neglected outside of a handful of scholars9 and is perhaps the most philosophical of wor0s found in the Gebel al Tarif3 .udged stylistically9 the wor0 is almost certainly the wor0 of one author3 The o"er=riding )gyptian emanationist framewor09 the numerous parallels with the system of Basileides among other )gyptian Gnostic sects9 and 4ermetic thought9 indicates that this wor0 was li0ely part of the Ale2andrian milieu of Gree0=educated poets9 mystics9 and theosophers9 many of whom were undoubtedly Graeco=)gyptians or )gypto=Gree03 The analogy of a poetic genre $perhaps less of an analogy than we are inclined to thin0( might e2plain the mar0ed lac0 of cohesion e2hibited by the -ag 4ammadi corpus as a whole3 According to what we 0now about "arious Gnostic sects9 none of the wor0s contained therein can be considered e2emplars for any particular school9 although we can ascertain strong tendencies in some3 This certainly holds true for the -ripartite -ractate9 easily among the most dense9 difficult9 often florid9 and beguiling poeticOphilosophical metaphysic in the entire collection9 yet it powerfully displays 0ey features of the *alentinian myth3 The wor0 is not easily approached analytically and is comparable in style and theme with the later mystical writings of .a0ob BQhme9 or Meister )c0hardt3 ,"erall the wor0 describes the entire theogonic de"olution of the Godhead into its own depths9 the creation of e"il9 the mission of the onO/ogos9 and an e2tended elucidation upon determinism and free=will as e2emplified by the aeons9 most particularly in the last aeon to be begotten > ophia3 Part + deals with the determinism of the 1ather and the free=will of the
JJ'

Consider Bentley /ayton?s recent wor09 -he )nostic Scriptures9 in which there is no mention whatsoe"er of this te2t3 )"en 4ans .onas9 one of the more profound philosophical thin0ers in the field9 Dudged the wor0 to be @laterA and @degenerate9A etc3 By contrast he is clearly impressed with the sophistication of the *alentinian myth $)nostic $eligion9 %:'=;LJ(3 + would argue that the cosmogonic difference between the *alentinian system and that of the 4istis Sophia more li0ely results from a @glossA achie"ed by the rhetorical genius of *alentinus which is in accord with the model we ha"e de"eloped that of 4ellenistic Gnosis appearing after the Archaic3 ,f course this in itself reflects the larger situation in Ale2andria > that of nati"e )gyptians being educated into the architechtonics of Gree0s systematic thin0ing $the literary result of which would undoubtedly be much more appealing to a 4eideggerian(3 Amongst modern post=-ag 4ammadi scholars9 .ean Doresse is one of the few to ha"e accorded the 4istis Sophia a prominent place in his discussion of Gnostic te2tsC -he Secret Books of the Egyptian )nostics9 H:=:%3

+K7
hypostatised aeonsC Part ++ describes the creation of humanity9 e"il9 and the fall of AnthroposC Part +++ deals with the "ariety of theologies9 the tripartition of humanity9 the actions of the a"iour and ascent of the sa"ed into !nity3 As with all *alentinian Gnostic systems that ha"e come down to us9 the concern is with theodicy > the Dustification of God in the face of de facto radical e"il3 More essentially the reciprocity between Creator and created finds its flash= point in gnosis> <hether the created are hypostatic aeons or human beings9 the entire ontological equation of being is affected by the mo"ement of each independent entity towards sal"ation or perdition3 The emanationist focus of the te2t9 as with so many Gnostic wor0s in this regard9 commences at the beginning of the tractateE 4e9 the incomprehensible9 ineffable9 illimitable9 unchangeableE he is sustenance9 he is 1elicity$+acariotes(9 he is Aletheia$Truth(9 he is reDoicing9 he is reposeC that which he contemplates is that which he sees9 that which he utters9 that which he has as thought3 By him9 all of Sophia$<isdom( is raised up and is abo"e Nous$Mind(9 and is abo"e all honour and beauty9 and all sweetness and greatness9 and is abo"e Bythius$Depth( and e"ery e2altation3 +f this one who is un0nowable in his nature9 to whom all power which + mentioned pertains9 if out of his e2ceeding sweetness he wishes to bestow Gnosis that he be 0nown9 he has the ability to do so3 4e has his power9 which is his will3 -ow9 howe"er9 he holds bac0 in ilence$Sige(9JJJ he who is the great cause9 begetting the eternal e2istence of the All3 +t is in the so"ereign sense that he begets himself ineffablyC he alone is self= begottenC he realiBes himself and 0nows himself in the way that he is3 <hat is worthy of admiration and glory honour and esteem9 he brings forth because of the boundlessness of his greatness9 the unsearchability of his Sophia$<isdom(9 the immeasurability of his power9 and his untasteable sweetness3 4e is the one who manifests himself in conception9 ha"ing glory and honour9 mar"elous and lo"ely9 the one who glorifies himself9 the one who wonders9 honours9 and also lo"esC 4e is the one who has a on $and( who subsists in him9 who is ilence$Sige( to him9 who is the ineffable one in the ineffable one9 the in"isible one9 the incomprehensible one9 the inconcei"able one in the inconcei"able one3 +t is in this manner that he e2istsE the 1ather9 as we said earlier9 in his underi"ati"e state9 0nows himself and begot him $the on( by ha"ing a thought9 which is the thought of him9 that is9 the perception of him which is Ythe hypostasisZJJH of his constitution fore"er3 That is9 then9 the so"ereign sense gi"en in ilence$Sige(9 Sophia$<isdom(9 and "haris$Grace(9 named properly in this way3 $JJ3%G=J:3F(JJ: + ha"e put the #ualities of the Godhead in italics for they manifest a distinct rhetorical presence in the te2t3 These are in fact all *alentinian aeons9 hypostases of the Primal Parent
JJJ

The term ige9 denoting the female aeon9 is not used here and yet the unusual feminine suffi2 on 0apwc is clearly intended to allude to the feminine hypostasis ilence without being e2plicit3 This then is a standard *alentinian feature $as found in *alentinus9 Ptolemaeus9 and others( although this author 0eeps it on an esoteric le"el in the te2t3 ee the system of Ptolemy in +renaeus9 Against (eresies $%3;3%(E @And it $Mind or +ntellect( thought to communicate the siBe and e2tent of the parent?s magnitude to the other aeons9 and the fact that it was beginningless9 uncontained9 and not capable of being seen3 But by the will of the parent9 silence restrained it because it wanted to ele"ate all of them into thought and into longing for a search for the aforementioned ancestor of theirs3A The lacuna here does not allow for any certain translation3 This term9 howe"er9 ma0es perfect sense philosophically in the de"elopment of the te2t and is suggested here3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 %&F9 ;LL3

JJH

JJ:

+KP
which form the ennead9 ogdoad9 and hebdomad of pleromic e2tension3 The subterfuge here also e2tends to the ambiguous @/ogosA figure in the te2t who is essentially ophia in disguise3 The only possible reason for this is to play down the ostensible @polytheismA9 along with the potent female figure of ophia who usually manages to occlude all other male aeons or @sa"ioursA in her immediate "icinityC all this seems to be accomplished with a "iew towards ma0ing the te2t acceptable to orthodo2 sensibilities3 The redaction we are presented with here is therefore to be dated in the mid to late third century C3)39 not too long before it was buried to sa"e it from the effects of persecution3 An important rhetorical concern here lies in ascertaining the subtlety of an e2oteric appeal commensurate with the transmission of a deeper esoteric substratumE does the te2t in fact demonstrate the superior literary s0ills required to con"ey e2plicit and hidden le"els that complement one anotherS As with -he )ospel of -ruth9 another TroDan horse for orthodo2 sensibilities9 -he -ripartite -ractate is often eloquent9 ostensibly a"oiding the repetition of arcane rites9 passwords9 and magical spells9 nor does it lay out labyrinthine underworld maps3 +nstead9 both emphasise the glory of the Primal Parent which creates the sense of a monotheist temperament3 4owe"er9 neither te2t is monotheistic in the classic occidental sense9 and in fact this is precisely because the emanationist depiction of e"ents is true to the ancient pattern3 The theogonicOcosmogonic process is the primary concern in -he -ripartite -ractate as it follows the theogonic story from beginning to end9 attempting to e2plain the purpose of the one and the manyE At the time they e2isted in the +dea$EnnoeaL of the 1ather9 that is9 in the hidden Bythius$Depth(9 Bythius 0new them9 but they were powerless to 0now the Depth in which they e2istedC nor could they 0now themsel"es9 nor could they 0now anything else3 They e2isted together with the 1atherC they did not e2ist by themsel"es3 Rather9 they were only able to become li0e a seed9JJF so that it has been disco"ered that they e2isted li0e a fetus3 +n the same manner as the Logos$the <ord(9 he begot them9 $they( subsisting spermatically along with those who had not yet been brought into e2istence by him3 The 1ather9 therefore9 initially thin0ing of them > not only that they might e2ist for him9 but that they might e2ist for themsel"es as well9 that they might then e2ist in his thought in the

JJF

This is the first reference to the metaphor of the @seedA which is also used e2tensi"ely in Basileides as a way of conceptualiBing that which doesn?t yet e2ist9 but which nonetheless e2ists in potential3 +n other Ale2andrian systems this metaphor is used primarily by way of e2plaining the creation of the material world3 Contrast this with Basileides as reported by 4ippolytus $$ef> :3;%(E @The seed of the world had e"erything within itself333 thus the non=e2istent god made a non=e2istent world of non=e2istent things9 setting down and hypostasising a single seed that has within itself the all=seed of the cosmos in its entiretyA9 trans3 Catherine ,sborne9 $ethinking Early )reek 4hilosophy9 ;F:C also /ibellus +N from the (ermeticaE @The 5osmos is an instrument of God?s willC and it was made by him to this end9 that9 ha"ing recei"ed from God the seeds of all things that belong to it9 and 0eeping these seeds within itself9 it might bring all things into actual e2istence9A trans3 <3 cott9 (ermetica $BostonE hambala Publications9 %&FJ(9 %FG3 Many of the concepts used in the -ripartite-ractate9 the thought of Basileides9 and the 4ermetica9 display a close affinity with the so called Barbelognostics who were pre= Christian and whose system was built about the concept of a female aspect of the 1ather $Barbelo9 or ophia(3 Cf3 also with MelchiBede0 $-4C +N9 %9 &EJ=%L(E @They were engendered9 the gods and the angels and the men9 out of the seed9 all of the natures9 those in the hea"ens and those upon the earth and those under the earthA $Coptic transcription from N(S< *ol3 N*9 JH9 JF(3 There is an interesting possibility that the word @BarbeloA is deri"ed from the Coptic word for seed9 @B/B+/)3A The seed9 apart from the abo"e metaphorical e2pression of potentiality9 also represents the Gnostic ideal of bise2uality > the pre=1all state of androgynous purity3

+K,
substance of +dea$Ennoea( and that they might e2ist for themsel"es too > sows +dea$Ennoea( li0e a seed of Y0nowledgeZso that they might concei"e of what e2ists for them3 $HL3%H=H%3%%(JHL
JJ&

<e note the presence of -un here as Bythos $the Depths(9 and its traditional relationship to the generation of the "arious di"inities3JH% As well9 the Memphite emphasis upon Ptah creating gods and the world through utterance and thought is also present3 A maDor focus of the wor0 is upon the aeons9 their free=will9 and their function as independent hypostases of the 1ather3 These names are not at all gratuitous $as many scholars seem to assume > remar0ably little has been done in this regard(9 and their functions9 if not e2actly clearly defined in this tractate9 are at least adumbratedE )ach one of the aeons has a name9 each of which is a quality and power of the 1ather9 since he e2ists in many names9 which are intermingled and harmonious with one another3 $:G3F=%;(JH;

+arsanes also demonstrates the emanationist focus upon the nature and relationship of the "arious aeonsE
And in what way did the unbegotten ones come to be since they are unbegottenS And what are the differences among the aeonsS And as for those who are unbegotten > how many are they and how are they different from one anotherS $-4C N9% H3;G=;&(JHG ,f the GG *alentinian aeons in the system of Ptolemy for e2ample9 disciple of *alentinus9 no less than GL are alluded to in the -ripartite -ractate3 There are some ;'J aeonial allusions in the entire te2t3 Many of these allusions are rather faint9 the maDority are quite strong9 and some are completely e2plicit3 +t should be stressed howe"er that these would ha"e been ob"ious to any *alentinian of the time3JH' 1or the orthodo2 mind this recondite emanationism would ha"e been e2tremely difficult to ascertain and modern translators ha"e in effect followed in this regard3 +t is important to realise that it is not an eitherOor proposition with respect to aeonial hypostasisOsemantic attribute of the Parent3 The double entendre was intended by Gnostic writers as the aeons are seen as archetypes e2erting their influence into our own realm3 -he -ripartite -ractate qualifies as an e2ample of 4ellenistic Gnosis in its philosophicalOtheosophical synthesis of di"erse ideas3 The architectonic is essentially )gyptian

JJ&

The point made here is that the aeons ha"e been gi"en free will e"en though they subsist in the thought of the 1ather3 They are independent hypostases3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;LH9 ;LF3 +n section ;J9 Bythos is referred to as @depth of depth9 elder of eldersA9 a description highly reminiscent of @the father of the godsA epithet of -un3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;;F3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N*9 ;HF3

JHL JH%

JH; JHG JH'

This in fact represents a maDor interpretational difficulty with all of the -ag 4ammadi te2tsE the familiarity of the reader $or listener( with the gnostic myth is often presupposed3

+75
emanationist with the usual de"elopment of enneads and ogdoads in male=female pairs3 1urther thematic attributes will be de"eloped in Part +++3 + ha"e noted elsewhere the main problem of redaction here as we ha"e "ery few clues outside of the late=phase Christianising tendency as to the stages of redaction in"ol"ed3 +t is for this reason9 among others9 that a socio=historical model is required in order to obtain a more direct "iew of Gnostic thought %LL B3C3)3=GLL C3)33 +t is ironic indeed that we must turn to the Patristics for e"idence of this thought3 The e"idence on *alentinus is of critical importance here for he was9 by all accounts9 a prolific and seminal thin0er for whom not one wor0 sur"i"es3 /i0ewise Basileides9 and both of these Gnostic teachers draw upon traditional )gyptian theology in the mythopoeic formulation of their systems as we shall e2amine in Part +++3 To summarise9 in the Roman era in )gypt we are presented with these different manifestations of Gnosis in )gypt3 Both show up as mythopoeic @syncretisticA endea"ours underta0en by select literate classes9 one undoubtedly to be closely associated with Ale2andria and her libraries9 .ewish community9 and mystery cults9 along with the Gree0 cities in /ower )gypt and 1ayyumC the other descended from the priesthoods from Behbeit el 4agar in the Delta to Philae in -ubia3 The first9 which we are calling 4ellenistic or synchronic Gnosis9 displays a more sophisticated concern with the qualities of the "arious le"els of emanationist theogonies9 ad"ancing an architectonic that is at once Gree0 and )gyptian9 and which focuses upon the immediate inner transformation through )nosis of the indi%idual soul3 The other9 which we are terming Archaic or diachronic Gnosis9 manifests a grassroots disenchantment with the cosmos and a turning to a religiosity that relies upon incantation and spell for safe passage through or abo"e a demonised underworld thought to so closely subtend the apparent worldC this Gnosis is more conser"ati"e and doctrinal in nature9 relying upon an understanding of multi= tiered cosmologies9 passwords9 "arious forms of hortatory address and the li0e9 strenuously focused upon the e:ternals of historical religious practice to %ouchsafe )nosis3 +n terms of the )gyptian priestly tradition from which it e"ol"ed9 the emphasis is upon te:tual traditions and a good e2ample of this methodology is an inscription upon a stela upon the isle of eheil3 The inscription reports that the -ile had not flooded in se"en years and as a result a great famine gripped the land3 As auneron notes9 @what was to be done at this pointS Re"ise the system of interior distribution or import wheatS +mpro"e the irrigation systemS -ot at all3AJHH The inscription details the correct procedureE
JHJ

Then9 says the 0ing9 + resol"ed to turn to the past and + as0ed a priest $333( about +mhotep333E T<here does the -ile riseS <hat town of the winding ri"er is thereS <hat god rests there to assist meS? 4e risesE T+ am going to the city of Thoth9 + will enter the room of the archi"es9 + will unroll the holy boo0s9 and + will ta0e guidance from them?333 4e re"ealed to me mar"elous and mysterious things3JH: And this from a period when the patent impro"ements of Gree0 irrigation techniques were there for all to see3 The referring bac0 to ancient tradition9 to the te2ts for proper procedure9 is of course quintessentially )gyptian9 and Archaic Gnosis displays all the hallmar0s of a tradition= bound religious "iew in this sense3 4ellenistic Gnosis is9 by comparison9 anarchic in throwing
JHJ

@The androgynous Creator god is to be found in se"eral Coptic=Gnostic te2ts which originated in )gypt9 and was already 0nown in pharaonic times3A .an 8andee9 @Der androgyne Gott in 6gyptenA9 ;'%3 auneron9 -he 4riests of Ancient Egypt9 %%&3 +bid39 %;L=;%3

JHH JH:

+7+
off the whole cultural incubus of a formalised religiosity9 proclaiming the ability and right of the indi"idual with true gnosis to attain complete spiritual truth9 in essence forgoing the Archaic need to stand firmly within a religious Tradition3 Archaic Gnosis9 by definition9 precedes the 4ellenistic by an indeterminate period of time9 and is to be associated with an increased theological concern with the problem of e"il in )gypt9 as manifest in the magical papyri3 As we shall see in Chapter &9 this sociological split in dualist adherent also shows up a few centuries later on in the e"idence of Manichaean success in the agora of /ower )gypt9 including the con"ersion of Gree0 -eoplatonic philosophers9 as well as a widespread appeal to the peasants9 priests9 and artisans of the ahid and Thebaid to the south3 This points up a capacity in Archaic Gnosis to encompass a radical dualism9 whereas 4ellenistic Gnosis is concerned more with theodicy9 with the descensus of a part of the godhead9 and is in that sense a mitigated dualism3 +t is my thesis that Gree0 magic interacted with the )gyptian "ia a bilingual class of philosopher=priests9 and that the whole e"olution of a more star0ly dualistic Geltanschauung9 powerfully manifest in the magical papyri9 was due to the @re"isionistA acti"ities of this group3 4ere we must include the Mysteries9 especially since this particular Graeco=)gyptian fusion bro0e down the traditional barriers between priesthood and laity in cultic obser"ances3JHF The Gnostic phase followed upon the magical9 and continued on in parallel fashion9 influencing9 and being influenced by9 the grass=roots le"el practice of autochthonic magic associated with the conser"ati"e )gyptian priesthood and their @renegadeA magical practitioners3 1urther remo"ed from this was the phenomenon of 4ellenistic Gnosis with its Gree0 philosophical o"ertones and emphasis upon the indi"idual3 This synthetic model can be laid out as followsE Traditional Priesthood Magical Papyri jRe"isionistsj Archaic Gnosis 4ellenistic Gnosis
ca> 67 B"E
ca> 67 "E

ca> 877 B"E

The first offshoot from )gyptian tradition manifests itself as an enhanced concern with the underworld and the incorporation of di"erse Gree0 and .ewish elements among othersE the emphasis here is upon day to day effects and thus displays the hallmar0 of popular religion3 The de"elopment of Archaic Gnosis from this emphasises traditional )gyptian emanationist thought= structures in a cosmogonic setting where the focus is upon religious practice and soteriology3 )gyptian religion had always been acutely aware of the fact that the earth @was perpetually threatened by the re"olt of per"erse forces9 bad spirits9 adulterated souls of the dead9 obscure and male"olent powersAJH&9 and so the focus remained traditional9 e"en while the methods branched out beyond the sanctions of the temple precinct3 ,ne would suspect the dependence here upon a literacy connected with the temples themsel"es3J:L 4ellenistic Gnosis manifests a
JHF

@An important influence was brought to bear in the shaping of the Mysteries3 The conception of initiation9 formerly restricted to priests9 was now e2tended to all participants3A Griffiths9 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride9 H:3 auneron9 -he 4riests of Ancient Egypt9 %HH3 As Griffiths notes9 @ancient )gyptian schools were often attached to temples333 and in these schools the priests were probably the teachers9A 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride< G%J3 Donald B3 Redford9 4haraonic .ing@Lists< Annals and 9ay@Books9 ;%J=;;'9 gi"es a comprehensi"e o"er"iew of the li0ely contents of

JH& J:L

+72
more sophisticated analysis of emanationist theogonies with a "iew towards the internal transformation of the indi"idual and is ostensibly more Gree0 in tone than the Archaic9 wedding philosophy to mysticism against the bac0drop of "arious )gyptian theologies3 The Ale2andrian "iew of Gnosis is inescapably antinomian and anti=ecclesial in the first instance9 and the acute need for an e2ternal redeemer9 to dramatise the Passion of Christ for e2ample9 was entirely against their philosophical grain3 A3D3 -oc09 in writing about the Gnostic milieu9 noted that9 @for these men there was not a redeemer9 in the past or in the futureC but man had in himself > or some men had in themsel"es > that di"ine element which was potentially both redeemable and redeemerA3J:% -oc0 also ma0es a point that is at the heart of the present section > that the poor had little time for deep reflection upon religious matters9 that introspection requires free=time9 otium9 and that this was only a"ailable to those members of the educated classes who were not themsel"es absorbed by public and pri"ate business9 or political life3J:; Clearly9 we are essentially dealing with the class of philosopherOpriest and scribe in )gypt9 and for the rapid and dramatic transitional de"elopment of some strata of )gyptian religious thought into the Gnostic in this period we are in large measure obliged to focus upon the e2istence of the Graeco=)gyptian9 or )gypto=Gree09 intelligentsia3 +t follows that if these groups felt no great need for an e2ternal redeemer9 and we are spea0ing here of 4ellenistic Gnosis as opposed to Archaic9 neither would they feel obliged in see0ing sal"ation for themsel"es to closely follow cult ritual3 An e"ocati"e piece of e"idence comes to us from +renaeus who writes about Basileides in this regardE 4e attaches no importance to the question regarding meats offered in sacrifice to idols9 thin0s them of no consequence9 and ma0es use of them without any hesitationC he holds also the use of other things9 and the practice of e"ery 0ind of lust9 a matter of perfect indifference These men9 moreo"er9 practice magic9 and use images9 incantations9 in"ocations9 and e"ery other 0ind of curious art3J:G 1rom the abo"e we detect an almost full=blown s0eptical agenda with respect to religious cultic acti"ity9 for it is not "iewed as being worthless9 rather it is regarded with an attitude of indifference <e ha"e noted earlier the antinomianism of Carpocrates9 also indicted by +renaeus9 who proclaimed that good and e"il are simply in "irtue of human opinion9 a relati"ism that Protagoras9 the great ophist philosopher9 would ha"e heartily endorsed3J:' This sophistication9 from our remo"e9 delimits the rather se"ere fault=line between 4ellenistic and Archaic Gnosis in terms of =elief in e2ternal procedure or nomos> The ancient oriental religious attitude9 if we can describe it thus9 will ta0e the question of cultic obser"ance and pra2is e2tremely seriously3 +n contrast with this9 the new corrosi"e Gnosis born of heterodo2y will hedge its bets on that score9 intuiting9 as did the earlier ophists and 0eptics9 that the real dynamic for Truth9 be it mundane
a temple library in )gypt during the fi"e centuries leading up to our era3
J:% J:; J:G

Arthur Darby -oc09 Essays on $eligion and the Ancient Gorld $,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:;(9 '':3 +bid39 'JL=J%3

Ad%>(aer>< trans3 A Roberts9 .3 Donaldson9 Ante@Nicene 'athers $-ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&%G(9 GJL3 ome ele"en statues in a half=circle of wall were unco"ered in %&JL facing the so=called phin2 alley leading to the erapeum at Memphis in )gypt3 Among the philosophers on one side9 facing the poets on the other9 is Protagoras $also Plato9 4eraclitus9 and Thales(3 The statues certainly date to the Ptolemaic period9 and the inclusion of Protagoras establishes his philosophical influence in )gypt3 ee 5erferd9 -he Sophistic +o%ement 9 'G=''3

J:'

+74
or celestial9 lies within the indi"idual9 or at least along a "ariety of a"enues3 1or this indifference is not the closed=off dogmatism of someone who has ceased to see0 along the traditional a"enues > indeed9 in the same breath +renaeus reports that the Ale2andrian Gnostics @practise magic and use imagesA and there would appear to be a rather sharp contradiction in one who does this while professing @perfect indifferenceA to their efficacy3 The answer lies in the continuing effort to see09 that this indifference implies an openness to "arious options9 and is in fact a0in to 0eptical atara:ia9 the freedom from dogmatic bondage to either contending "iewpoints3 The social and literary realities underlying the rise of )nosis in )gypt thus far e2amined arise9 in part9 from the split within the priesthood in )gypt that occurred in Ptolemaic times following the battle of Raphia in ;%: B3C3)3 The old tensions of !pper and /ower )gypt9 between the stronghold of Amun at Thebes and Ptah at Memphis9 continue on in this era3J:J The Memphite priesthood was accorded substantial rewards for their pro=Ptolemaic stance and the marriage of the high priest of Ptah9 Psenptaas9 to Berenice9 daughter of )uergetes ++ aptly reflected this union of church and state3 Berenice was the mother of high priest Petubastis $%;L= :J B3C3)3( and it is clear that the assumption of theological power by a completely bilingual high=priest with an )gyptian theologian for a father9 and direct filial lin0s to the crown9 furthered the already growing bonds between Ale2andria and Memphis3 +t seems to me that the change of "enue for the regular priestly synods from Ale2andria to Memphis in %&: B3C3)3J:H was a signal de"elopment occurring in a time of complete secession by the Thebaad during the successful re"olt of An0hma0is3 The Ptolemies sought chthonic legitimacy through the political power of Memphis at a time of great internal wea0ness3 +n the year following the relocation of the synod to Memphis one can?t help concluding that those bodies of priests who did not Doin the secessionists in the south were able9 as a consequence9 to dictate terms to the thirteen year= old )piphanes3J:: There is also the possibility that An0hma0is? father9 4arma0his9 was the same figure as the 4igh Priest 4arma0his of Memphis9 which underlines the fact that the struggle for chthonic legitimacy by the Ptolemies required appeasing Memphis at all costs3J:F That any 4igh Priest could head off and set up a separatist 0ingdom must ha"e been the greatest fear of all Ptolemaic 0ings and queens3 +n this sense it is perhaps incorrect to thin0 of Psenptaas marrying into the royal family > at least an equally important dynamic at wor0 was that of the royal family marrying into Memphis3 The e2tensi"e Ptolemaic temples9 built or restored from the Delta to the south at large e2pense9 e2tend in high relief through the !pper )gyptian heartland and are a testament to Ptolemaic attempts at appeasement in the face of this proud intransigence <ith the e2ception of Memphis9 there is e"ery suggestion that this appeasement more or less failed9 and that the temples became centres of cultural resistanceJ:& +n lin0ing this feeling to the south particularly9
J:J J:H J::

Crawford9 @Ptolemy9 Ptah and Apis in 4ellenistic Memphis9A F3 +bid39 %&3

Crawford does not state this as stronglyE @it seems unli0ely that the thirteen year=old )piphanes was able to dictate a policy to the priests3A Crawford also notes that this decree was li0ely composed initially in )gyptian $+bid39 GG(3 Reymond de"elops this intriguing hypothesis in @Ale2andria and Memphis9A &3 4arma0his became the fifth 4igh Priest of Memphis in ;%: B3C3)39 the year of )gypt?s glorious performance at the battle of Raphia3 +t is a curious coincidence in the e2treme that the earliest e2pression in proto=Coptic we ha"e bears the epithet of this secessionist 0ing as we ha"e seen in Chapter H3 43<3 1airman9 -he -riumph of (orus $/ondonE B3T3 Batsford /td39 %&:'(9 GGE @There is abundant e"idence that the nati"e temples were in reality centres of nationalism and that one of the main tas0s of

J:F

J:&

+7we note the rebellions9 the nationalism e2pressed in the temple of )dfu9 the 2racle of the 4otter9 and the 9emotic "hronicle3JFL 1rom the second century B3C3)3 the traditional )gyptian priesthood began to attract Gree0s9 or perhaps more e2actly those of Gree0 descent9 and this continued on into Roman times3 A papyrus contemporaneous with the main Gnostic teachers in Ale2andria presents a "ery interesting picture of this continued foundation of Archaic Gnosis9 one opening itself to Gree0= spea0ers3JF% The te2t is to be dated to the middle of the second century C3)3 and was translated into Gree0 from )gyptian by a bilingual author or redactor3 Although the te2t is fragmentary9 it is clear that it was concerned with laying out priestly regulations and oaths for initiates as the following passage indicatesE + will not eat and + will not drin0 the things which are not lawful nor all those things which ha"e been written in the boo0s nor will + attach my fingers to themC + will not measure a measure on a threshing floorC + will not lift a balance in my handC + will not measure landC + will not go into a clean placeC + will not touch sheep?s hairC + will not hold the machaira until the day of my deathA3 All these things are written down together Yin a boo0Z3 Ta0ing it up he reads it aloud as testimony333JF; Two classes of priests are mentioned and the te2t is ob"iously intended for Gree0=spea0ers entering the )gyptian priesthood3 The date of composition for this te2t may ha"e been much earlierC in any e"ent it both demonstrates the continued traditional strictness of the )gyptian priesthood9 as well as the participation of bilingual )gyptians in its inner rites3 Current at the height of Gnosis in )gypt9 it demonstrates the direct window into the )gyptian faith that Gnostic teachers had at their disposal9 either through their own participation9 or through the participation of their teachers9 students or followers3 The onset of Roman rule in )gypt manifested itself as a direct assault upon these priestly classes9 upon the prestige and economic power that was theirs e"en up until Ptolemaic times3 !nder the Romans the numbers of the priesthood steadily diminished and a focus upon practical spiritual affairs began to manifest itself outside of the temples3JFG This socio=economic disenfranchising of large numbers of priests9 the rise of @magicalA procedure and indi"idual e2perience beyond the temple walls9 along with a mar0edly increased hostility to the oppressi"eness of historical process9 all define the socio=historical rise of Gnostic thought in )gypt3 Moreo"er9 one can thin0 of no more suitable image of Gnostic forlornness in )gypt9 of a sense of being alien9 a stranger in a strange land9 than the widespread phenomenon of insol"ent )gyptians turned fugiti"e under the pitiless scourge of Roman o"er=ta2ation3 1or these people9 abandoning their traditional lin0 with temple and hearth9 the teachings espoused by Gnostic

the priesthood was to preser"e and to fan the spirit of national pride9 of nationalism9 until the day came when once more the true 4orus would sit on the throne3A
JFL

ee .3Gwyn Griffiths9 @)gyptian -ationalism in the )dfu Temple Te2tsA in )limpses of Ancient EgyptA Studies in (onour of (>G> 'airman9 eds3 .ohn Ruffle9 G3A3 Gaballa and 5enneth A3 5itchen $<arminsterE Aris U Philips /td39 %&:&(9 %:F3 These are three e2amples from a fairly long list of similar e2amples3 ee Donald B3 Redford9 4haraonic .ing@Lists< Annals and 9ay@Books9 ;:H=&H3 Papyri <ash3 !3 +n"3 %GF3 *erne B3 chuman9 @A econd=Century Treatise on )gyptian Priests and Temples9A (-$ /+++ $%&HL(E %J&=:L3 +bid39 %:L3 /ewis Life in Egypt Inder $oman $ule9 &F3

JF%

JF; JFG

+7.
theologians to the effect that the physical realm was itself inimicable could hardly ha"e sounded radical3 +ndeed9 there is a strong sense of the e2istential e:perience of despair9 especially among the recalcitrant )gyptians9 responsible for this re"olt against the (eimarmene3 ,"er HLL years of foreign occupation had9 at the commencement of the Roman period9 brought the )gyptian populace to its lowest depths in its e2perience of an alien economic and cultural tyranny3 Roman soldiers garrisoning the conquered pro"ince were the tangible and unmas0ed face of Roman rule in )gypt9 and a @"eritable ancient apartheidA resulted from the Roman orientalising disdain for )gypt3JF' This notching up of oppression and misery in )gypt quite ob"iously fuelled dualist speculationE here was a palpable force of e"il set loose in the Two /ands3 ,f critical importance at this Duncture was the o"erthrow of the high priests of Memphis who had maintained and greatly increased their hereditary hold on theological power throughout the entire Ptolemaic period3JFJ )2pressed in the language of the )gyptian priesthoods of the time9 one might say that the perennial )gyptian e2perience of +aat had fled upwards to become a feminine power untainted by a desacralised )gypt and its demonic o"erlords3 A lower feminine deficiency9 left behind9 became the wandering lamenting +sis9 equated with the cosmos itself9 with 1ate9 e2pressed by the feminine noun (eimarmene3JFH The 4ermetic te2t Asclepius9 a "ersion of which was found in the .ebel al Tarif9 goes on at great length describing an apocalyptic "ision of a desecrated )gypt within which the Gnostics appearedE ,r are you ignorant Asclepius9 that )gypt e2ists as the image of hea"enS +f it is fitting that we spea0 the Truth9 our land is the temple of the cosmos3 +t is proper that you not be ignorant that a time will come about $when( )gyptians will appear to ha"e ser"ed the Godhead in "ain9 and all their practice in their 1aith will be despised3 1or all 1aith shall lea"e )gypt and flee upwards to hea"en3 And )gypt will be widowed9 abandoned by the gods9 for foreigners will enter )gypt and shall become masters of itE , )gypt\ $:L3G=;G( Di"ine )gypt will suffer e"ils greater than these3 )gypt9 lo"er of God9 and the residence of the gods9 school of di"ine teachings9 will become an image of impiousness3333 $:%3G%=GJ( Dar0ness will be preferred to light and death will be preferred to life3 -one shall wondrously cast their eyes up to hea"en3 And the pious man will be counted as insane9 and the impious man will be honored as wise333 $:;3%:=;G( The wic0ed angels will remain among men9 e2isting among them9 leading them rec0lessly into wic0ed thingsE atheism9 war9 and brigandage9 accomplished by teaching them things contrary to nature333 $:G3J=%;(JF:

JF' JFJ

+bid39 %&9 G'3

.an Vuaegebeur9 @The Genealogy of the Memphite 4igh Priest 1amily in the 4ellenistic Period9Ain Studies on 4tolemaic +emphis9 tudia 4ellenistica ;'9 ed3 <illy Peremans $/ou"anii %&FL(9 :'3 Martin9 (ellenistic $eligions9 %H%E @By late antiquity9 the centrifugal force of 4ellenistic e2pansion e2tended the locus of deficiency to the outer bounds of the cosmos itself3 The necessary conclusion to this cosmic re"aluation was that the totality of the finite cosmos9 together with its predominantly feminine attributes9 was considered to be deficient3A 5M0osy attributes this de"elopment in )gyptian thought to Pythagorean influences9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion9A;';3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+A Nag (ammadi "odices &<8@6 and &09 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott < '%F=';F3

JFH

JF:

+7K
)hapter #ine*Egyptian 1anichaeism

According to Persian sources9 the first Manichaean proselytisers probably arri"ed in )gypt between ;'' and ;:L C3)39 some ;L=JL years after Mani had recei"ed his first re"elation in Mesopotamia3JFF Three missionaries were sent westwards in this period and an important Manichaean missionary to arri"e in )gypt was one Addas9 0nown in )gypt as Pappos3 There it is recorded that he set up numerous monasteries and established a Manichaean community based upon an order of elects and their supporting auditors3 4e is also said to ha"e used the writings of Mani9 as well as his own9 to great effect in !pper )gypt before ma0ing his way to Ale2andria3 +n the Acta Archelai and in )piphanius a certain 0ythanios9 an apostle of Manichaeism9 is mentioned as ha"ing made his first disciples at 4ypsele south of Assyut3JF& 1inally9 there is the e"idence of a maDor Manichaean te2tual find made in the 1ayyum in %&GL which indirectly supports an !pper )gyptian pro"enance since the dialect used in this e2tensi"e literature is not the 1ayyumic Coptic of the area as one would e2pect9 but is rather a type of Achmlmic which places its composition much further to the south in the Assyut area north of Thebes3J&L This9 then9 confirms the presence of a maDor Manichaean community in !pper )gypt which may ha"e resulted from early missionising efforts there3 Although some scholars ha"e argued that the Red ea trade route with its o"erland passage to Thebes from the Gulf of Aqaba through the <adi 4ammamat would ha"e facilitated such a de"elopment9J&% this cannot be firmly ascertained and one might equally argue that the Manichaeans9 with their penchant for public disputation9 would ha"e aimed initially for Ale2andria9 intellectual and economic nucleus of )gypt at this time3 At the "ery end of this period9 from ;''=;:L C3)39 there is indeed direct e"idence of a maDor Manichaean influence e2tending into Ale2andria as Manichaean missionisers arri"ed in the train of the successful Palmyrian in"asion of )gypt in ;:L3J&; +n assessing the transmission of Manichaeism into )gypt one is faced with two complementary de"elopmentsE firstly9 the spread of a popular Manichaeism which apparently enDoyed great success in !pper )gyptC secondly9 the arri"al of Manichaean thought in the cities9
JFF

ee te2t M; in 13C3 Andreas and <3B3 4enning< Sit,ungs=erichte der preuss> Akadamie der Gissenschaften $%&GG(9 GL%=;C also <erner undermann9 +itteliranische manich1ische -e:te kirchengeschichtlichen 0nhalts< B-- %%9 no3G3G $BerlinE A0ademie=*erlag9 %&F%(9 'JL=J%3 )piphanius depended upon the latter in his polemical wor03 ee Acta Archelai9 ed3 and trans39 C343 Beeson $/eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs9 %&LH(9 &L=&%9 and )piphanius9 4anarion H&9 ed3 and trans3 53 4oll $/eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs9 %&;;(3 This information9 howe"er9 is unreliable3 ee .oseph *ergote9 @Der ManichRismus in 6gypten9A in 9er +anich1ismus< ed3 Geo <idengren $DarmstadtE <issenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft9 %&::(9 ;%'=;'3 *ergote ta0es this to indicate that as the te2ts are not original )gyptian wor0s9 they must ha"e come directly from yria9 thus indicating a historical transmission "ia the southern route3 <hile this is certainly possible9 it is still inconclusi"e insofar as we cannot say that Manichaean te2ts written in 1ayyumic $or any other northern dialect( did not e2ist3 The e2istence of these would suggest a northern route3 ee <3 eston9 @/?7gypte ManichPenne9A"dE %' $%&G&(E GH;=:;3 + am here following the analysis of Michel Tardieu9 @/es ManichPens en 7gypte9A BS'E J $.une %&F;(E J=%:3 Direct e"idence for the con"ersion to Manichaeism of a close family member of queen 8enobia prior to her in"asion of )gypt is gi"en in an e2tant ogdian fragmentC reference is also made here to the Manichaean Electus Adda arri"ing @Dust as far as Ale2andriaA3

JF&

J&L

J&% J&;

+77
most particularly Ale2andria3 ,ne is perhaps best ad"ised to assume that both e"ents occurred more or less simultaneously9 for alongside the e2tensi"e literary e"idence of the Medinet Madi find in the 1ayyum9 there are indications of maDor Manichaean successes in the "arious agora of )gyptian cities3 +n this regard9 the completely preser"ed polemic of Ale2ander of /ycopolis is an e2tremely important source for Manichaeism in )gypt3 Ale2ander9 a non= Christian -eoplatonic philosopher9 was concerned that many of his fellow philosophers were being swayed by Manichaean arguments9 e"en to the e2tent of Doining their ran0s3J&G +n response to this9 Ale2ander attempts a full philosophical refutation of their system3 The curtain of censure which was to later descend9 beginning with Diocletian?s edict against the Manichaeans on the G%st of March9 ;&:9 reached its culmination a century later with the decree of Theodosius and the burning of the libraries in Ale2andria3 +t was to be the fate of the Manichaeans9 as with the broader array of Gnostic groups in )gypt9 to ha"e their teachers and writings dri"en underground by an ascendant RomanOChristian hegemony9 and their contribution to religious thought e"entually edited=out for posterity3 Iet two fortunate circumstances9 both occurring within almost one decade of each other in the present century9 ha"e opened up new possibilities for the understanding of dualist thought in specifically )gyptian modes3 The e2tensi"e Manichaean find at Medinet Madi has its e2act counterpart9 in terms of its quality and bul09 in the Gnostic collection found in the Gebel el Tarif9 both written in Coptic3 Both collections were hidden around 'LL C3)39 undoubtedly to protect them from the effects of persecution3 As it is the purpose of this thesis to demonstrate the )gyptian presence in Gnostic thought9 Manichaeism must also be included beneath the rubric of Gnosis in )gypt3 +t shall be demonstrated in this chapter that a distinctly )gyptian "ariant is e"ident e"en in the supposedly foreign mythological flora and fauna of Manichaeism3 )gyptian Gnosis here9 as well as with the other groups e2amined in this thesis9 is also a legitimate )gyptological concern3J&' There has also been a strong tendency in the broader field of Manichaean tudies to regard all te2tual e"idence for Manichaeism as a bounded e2tension from the central comple2 of ideas which originated with Mani himself3 4owe"er9 Mani was not directly in"ol"ed in proselytising in )gypt and it is clear that the e2tensi"e Manichaean Coptic te2ts which incorporate central )gyptian religious motifs were not part of the Manichaean canon3 This then points towards the e2istence of a distinctly )gyptian Manichaean sect3 +n the first instance + shall be concerned with establishing some aspects of Manichaean thought which appear to be )gyptian3 + shall also deal with Manichaeism as philosophy and myth9 the interaction of Manichaean thought with Ale2andrian -eoplatonism being of primary interest3 1inally9 + shall consider its affinities with other 0nown Gnostic groups in )gypt9 in particular the group which used the 4istis Sophia as part of their liturgy3 ,ne must as0 what attraction the foreign creed of Manichaeism possessed in Roman times for the )gyptian peasant9 priest9 and philosopher3 Arising from the fact that Manichaeism apparently obtained large initial successes in !pper )gypt > surely a conser"ati"e bac0water as held up against liberal Ale2andria > we must assume that a radically new and e2otic message9
J&G

@+9 for one9 do not wish to deny that these doctrines are capable of influencing the minds of those who uncritically accept this theory9 especially since deceitful e2positions of this 0ind were successful in ma0ing con"erts out of certain fellow=philosophers of mine3A "an der 4orst and Mansfeld< An Ale:andrian 4latonist Against 9ualism<JF3 Tardieu9 @/es ManichPens en 7gypte9A %JE @As a religious concern9 Manichaeism belongs to the history of )gypt9 as a linguistic concern it brings to Coptology an ensemble of material of great coherence and richness not yet e2plored9 as a codicological concern it is one of the most beautiful chapters in the history of the boo03 )gyptology9 li0ewise9 cannot not be conscious of it3A

J&'

+7P
particularly as it was to be associated with Persia9 would ha"e had little chance of acceptance in )gyptC rather9 such an appeal would ha"e to contain much in the way of traditional form and substance for any chance at dissemination9 most especially in )gypt3 This feature goes right to the heart of Mani?s well=0nown proselytising methods and accounts for the e2traordinary geographical and cultural breadth that his religion achie"ed9 from the Atlantic to the Pacific3 Mani clearly tailored his message for the ears of its recipients9 blending specific indigenous elements upon his syncretistic palette9 thus offering a way @inA for the local no"itiate3 As time went on following Mani?s death9 his missionisers would ha"e felt e"en further unencumbered in de"eloping these local "ariants into a more localised Manichaean e2pression9 one which still9 howe"er9 attempted to complement the canonical doctrines of Mani3 + propose to consider three specific )gyptian "ariantsE negati"e confessions9 apocalypticism9 and heliocentrism3 An important )gyptian aspect of Manichaean thought was the employment of the so= called @negati"e confessionA3 These statements are neither confessions9 nor negati"e in the sense of admitting guiltC rather they are a declaration of innocence and in )gyptian tradition this is customarily manifested in the conte2t of the deceased standing before Dudgement in the hereafter3 The Manichaean Psalms depict the righteous )lect declaring their pure state of being prior to the ascent of the soul3 The Manichaean?s e2tensi"e use of this literary form is quite clearly deri"ed from the )gyptian as it is not found anywhere else in the Manichaean canon3 The Manichaean Psalms to .esus depict the righteous )lect declaring their pure state of being prior to the ascent of the soul3 *arious e2amples follow with the Manichaean te2t gi"en first9 followed by earlier )gyptian e2amples in italicsE + did not allow my enemies to put out my lamps $4salms CCN/+++ JL3:(J&J + ha"e not ser"ed the )rror333$CC/N*++ F'3;;(J&H + ha"e ne"er been a sla"e of baseness that wor0s outrages $CC/NNN++ %LG3GG(J&: 0 was not ro==ed< 0 was not spat in the eyes< owing to the worth of my speech< the competence of my counsel< and the =ending of my arm>>> Ne%er did 0 hand a person o%er to a potentate< so that my name might =e good with all men> 0 ne%er lied against any person @ an a=omination to Anu=is> 'irst 0ntermediate 4eriod @ Stela of the Butler +erer of EdfuJ&F Ne%er was 0 =eaten in the presence of any official since my =irthV ne%er did 0 take any property of any man =y %iolence 2ld .ingdom @ +ortuary 0nscription of Ne,emi=J&&

J&J

Coptic transcription from C3R3C3 Allberry9 ed3 and trans39 A +anichaean 4salm=ook< 4art 00E +anichaean +anuscripts in the "hester Beatty "ollection $ tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&GF(9 JL3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 F'3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 %LG3 /ichtheim9 Ancient Egyptian Literature< "ol3%9 F:3

J&H J&: J&F J&&

.ames 4enry Breasted9 Ancient $ecords of Egypt9 "ol3 %9 -he 'irst to the Se%enteenth 9ynasties $%&LHC reprint9 /ondonE The 4istories U Mysteries of Man /td39 %&FF(9 K;:'3

+7,
+ ha"e gi"en my soul YarmourZC + ha"e not gi"en it instead to the YfoulZ pleasures333 $4salms CCN/+* J%3H( Iour yo0e which you intended for me9 + did not refuse it my /ord333 $J%3%F=%& Iour lamps of /ight9 + ha"e not allowed my enemies to e2tinguish them333 $J%3;%=;;( + was not shamed in any respect in my deeds that + ha"e performed333 $J%3;&=J;3%(HLL 0 ha%e repelled falsehood for you> 0 ha%e not done falsehood against men>>> 0 ha%e done no e%il>>> 0 ha%e not taken away the food of the spirits< 0 ha%e not copulated>>> $ pell BD %;J(HL% 0 do not that which his ma3esty hates>>> my %oice was not Ylifted upZ in the kings house< nor was my step too =road in the palace 0 took not the reward of lying< nor e:pelled the truth for the %iolent> Amarna JAkhenatenL 4eriod @ -om= of -utuHL; + ha"e not bound my mind to the cares333 $4salms CC/N*+++ FH3%L( + ha"e not mingled with the sects of )rror333 $FH3%'( + ha"e not defiled my tongue with blasphemy333 $FH3%J=%H( + ha"e not mingled with the intercourse of the flesh333 $FH3G%(HLG 0 ha%e not =een deaf to the words of truth>>> 0 ha%e not transgressed my nature< 0 ha%e not washed out Jthe picture ofL a god>>> 0 ha%e not made con3uration against the king>>> 0 ha%e neither misconducted myself nor copulated with a =oy>>> $ pell BD %;J(HL' There is a strong9 though indirect9 lin0 between )gyptian and Manichaean apocalypticism3 This lin0 has been well=established in many instances3 1or our purposes this influence can be considered a priori as contrasted with possible a posteriori influences effected upon Manichaeism following its inception3 Apocalyptic )gyptian influences9 alongside 8oroastrian for instance9 were a part of the cultural warp and woof of the area of Mesopotamia in which Mani grew up3 ,ne particular point can be mentioned here howe"er3 The eschatological depiction of the cosmic conflagration which burns for %9'HF years e2ists in Manichaean and )gyptian Gnostic te2ts3 +n the Middle Persian Sha=uhragan the length of the conflagration is %'HF years9 essentially an )gyptian othis period of %'HL years3HLJ This
HLL HL% HL;

Coptic transcription from +>4>9 J%=J;3 1aul0ner< -he Ancient Egyptian Book of the 9ead9 ;&=GL3

.ames 4enry Breasted9 Ancient $ecords of Egypt < "ol3 ;9 -he Eighteenth 9ynasty $%&LHC reprint9 /ondonE the 4istories U Mysteries of Man /td39 %&FF(9 K%L%G3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 FH3 1aul0ner9 -he Book of the 9ead9 G%=G;3

HLG HL' HLJ

ee /3 5oenen9 @Manichaean Apocalypticism at the Crossroads of +ranian9 )gyptian9 .ewish and Christian Thought9Ain "ode: +anichaicus "oloniensisAAttit del Simposio 0nterna,ionale< $ende@ Amantea C@F settem=re BD5K9 eds3 A3 Roselli and /3 Cirillo $CosenBaE Marra )ditore9 %&FH(9 ;FJ=GG;3

+P5
calendrical figure of %9'HL also finds its e2pression in other )gyptian Gnostic eschatologies as we shall see3 The eschatological import here is that of a fulfilled cycle of time9 one which was based upon astrological obser"ation3 This essential )gyptian conception became part of the personal teachings of Mani before Manichaean missionaries arri"ed in )gypt and it sur"i"ed for half a millennium in China9 long after Manichaeism disappeared in )gypt ca3 %LLL C3)3 The distinction between a priori and a posteriori )gyptian influences upon Mani and Manichaeism can only be tentati"ely s0etched out3 Certainly9 the abo"e=mentioned apocalyptic influences had found their way into Mani?s milieu prior to his formulation of the Manichaean creed3 pecific )gyptian heliolatrous sentiments9 on the other hand9 were more li0ely to ha"e been grafted onto the Manichaean heliocentric cosmology following its transmission into Parthia and )gypt9 homelands of Mithras and Re3 Mani was the self=proclaimed @Apostle of /ightA and the imagery of light in his teachings is pronounced3 The sun9 for ob"ious reasons9 was the most powerful symbol of his realm of /ight in the worldC as well9 it was a "ehicle for "arious di"ine functionaries who descended from the realm of /ight9 and it was a transporter of sa"ed souls bac0 to this realm3 As his message spread out from Mesopotamia9 east and west9 it naturally fused with the heliolotrous sentiments of traditions with ancient and "enerable histories3 The Persian Mithras and the )gyptian Re stand dominant at this time as manifestations of heliocentrist religiosity3 The )gyptian Durisdiction o"er the eastern Mediterranean at "arious points in history9 and the subsequent Persian subDugation of )gypt in the late pre=Ptolemaic phase9 allowed ample opportunity for cross=fertilisation3 Religious conceptions re"ol"ing around light and dar0ness e2pressed a sentiment that united the Persians and )gyptians9 in spite of numerous other differences3 <e might e2pect that the Manichaeans would employ heliolatrous imagery in their scriptures used in )gypt3 Mary Boyce has identified some of the parallels which e2ist between Parthian te2ts and the )gyptian .ephalia3HLH +t is her conclusion that the core teachings of Mani did not regard the sun as a personal god9 but that Manichaeism was drawn this way in its interaction with the Parthian Mithras3 As for the @Coptic con"ertsA $sic(9 howe"er9 her conclusion is that they had @no predisposition to worship a personal sun=god9 YandZ 0ept more strictly to Mani?s original teachingsA3HL: + shall e2amine more closely the te2tual e"idence for this supposition and demonstrate that it is without foundation3 Chapter HJ of the Manichaean .ephalia9 @Concerning the unAHLF and written in Achmlmic Coptic9 is one of the longest chapters of the entire te2t3 This wor0 is found only in its )gyptian e2pression and was non=canonical for the Manichaeans3HL& 4omiletic fragments e2ist in Parthian parallels which were dedicated to the Third Messenger stationed within the rising sun in the east9 and which was seen to be an e2ecutor of the higher /i"ing pirit in its battle against e"il3 There is9 howe"er9 no other e2tant Manichaean te2t which presents such an e2tended discourse upon the sun and one is powerfully struc0 by its imagery and tone in the
HLH

Mary Boyce9 @,n Mithra in the Manichaean Pantheon9A in A Locusts LegA Studies in (onour of S>(> -a#i,adeh< ed3 <3B343 4enning $/ondonE /und9 4umphries9 %&H;(9 ''=J'3 Coptic transcriptions for the .ephalia from Ale2ander BQhlig9 +anich1ische (andschriften der Staatlichen +useen Berlin> Band +9 .ephalaia< 8> (1lfte $ tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&HG(3 Boyce9 @,n Mithra in the Manichaean Pantheon9A J%3 +(9 %JF=H'3

HL: HLF HL&

The se"en canonical wor0s are as followsE -he Li%ing Jor )reatL )ospelV -he -reasure of LifeV 4ragmateia< i>e> W-reatise< EssayOV -he Book of +ysteriesV -he Book of the )iantsV -he LettersV and possibly Sah=uhragan which has been omitted from Coptic and Chinese lists3

+P+
Coptic .ephalia3 +n this scheme the sun is more than a mere symbol and transit=Bone for sa"ed soulsC the writer has constructed a telescopic cosmology in which the un is the intermediary between Mani and the realm of /ight3 As the 1ather is e2alted abo"e all in his realm9 so @the un is greatly e2alted abo"e the all333 it e2ists for the 1ather of GreatnessA $%HG3%= '(H%L The sun is the great @enlightenerA and @illuminatorA in the physical world3 Mani9 in turn9 is described in similar fashion9 and his disciples are depicted as being his rays $%HH3;='(3H%% )gyptian heliolatry reached its apotheosis in the person of A0henaten $ca3 %GJF B3C3)3(C the Atenists9 in worshipping the physical dis0 of the sun9 simply enhanced what had already been present in )gyptian thought since at least the Twelfth Dynasty $ca3 ;LLL B3C3)3(9 and of course sun=worship as a state religion dates bac0 at least as far as the 1ifth Dynasty $ca3 ;'HJ@ ;G;G B3C3)3(3 The heresy of A0henaten9 as it came to be "iewed following his death9 resulted more from the fact that he had suppressed other di"inities $and consequently9 their priesthoods( than that he had acti"ely promulgated a monotheistic conception of a supreme solar di"inity per se3 1rom the 1ifth Dynasty onwards $ca3 ;'HJ B3C3)3( the name of Re became a regular feature of the royal titulary3 The sun=worship of A0henaten differed from the "arious Re=cults in placing more emphasis upon the Aten9 or "isible manifestation of godhead9 than upon Re9 the hidden power which moti"ated it3 This strongly parallels the Manichaean distinction between the Third )n"oy positioned within the sun9 and the sun itself3 The "ery name A0henaten9 which translates something li0e @Glorified pirit of the un=Dis0AH%; of course idealises the fusion of the 0ing with the "isible sun3 Chapter H: of the .ephalia9 entitled @Concerning the +lluminatorA9 contains the following pronouncement by ManiE As with the un9 the great +lluminator @ if it comes in its rising9 $at( the time in which it shines upon the world9 it e2tends out its rays upon all the earthC if9 again9 it is concei"ed of as setting $then( its rays YdisappearZ and sin03 There is not one single ray left upon the earthE in this way9 howe"er9 this is also li0e the image of the flesh into which + ha"e been cast $and( was manifested in the world3 All my sons9 howe"er9 the )lect9 the righteous who e2ist in the houses of e"ery country9 are li0e the rays of the un3$%HJ3;F=%HH3'(H%G Consider9 then9 the -ew 5ingdom te2t9 already cited elsewhere9 which is concerned with the )gyptian priestly elect9 pur"eyors of Re?s beneficence to the world at largeE +t Ythe boo0Z must be "ery9 "ery secret9 mysterious9 in"isible3 There is only the solar disc which sees into its mystery3 The men who enter into it are the personnel of ReE these are the scribes of the house of life3 The boo0s which are inside9 they are the @emanations of ReA in order that this god may li"e than0s to those and in order to o"ercome his enemies3H%' <ith A0henaten9 or the Litanies of $e for that matter9 and the Manichaean teachings in )gypt9 we are dealing with heliocentric cosmologies which had a long history in the entire
H%L H%% H%; H%G H%'

Coptic Transcription from +(9 %HG3 +bid39 %HH3 Donald B3 Redford9 Akhenaten9 %'%3 +bid39 %HJ9 %HH3 Philippe Derchain9 Le 4apyrus Salt 586< J:=H;C :J=:FC FG=FJ3

+P2
ancient -ear )ast3 This @heliocentrismA represents an intellectual9 philosophical e2pression9 as opposed to @heliolatryA which is less systematic9 more of a sentiment3 The rather fuBBy notion of @sun=worshipA incorporates these two tendencies and is to be found in the .ephalia and other earlier )gyptian religious te2ts3 This point can thus be made by drawing upon specific te2tual parallels which e2ist between )gyptian Manichaean and -ew 5ingdom te2ts3 ome e2amples of the heliocentric outloo0 follow9 with the Manichaean te2t gi"en first9 and earlier )gyptian counterparts gi"en in italicsE A3 The un as gi"er of life 333he manifests and re"eals the world in the sign of the radiance of the Aeon of /ight from which he comes9 whose sign is here in this world illuminating all of creation3 333he nourishes9 gi"es power9 the taste and fragrance of the trees and fruit and "egetables and all herbs and flowers and fertile plains upon all the earth3 $.eph> %HL3%9 %L(H%J -hou createdst the earth when thou wert afar< namely men< cattle< all flocks< and e%erything on earth which mo%es with legs< or which is up a=o%e flying with wings> -he foreign countries of Syria and .ush< and the land of Egypt< thou placest e%ery man in his place< and makest their food>>> 0nfinite life is in thee to #uicken them< and the =reath of life for JtheirL nostrils> -hy =eams appear< and all nourishing plants grow in the soil< caused to grow =y thy rays[ $TGreat 4ymn?9 Tomb of Ay9 A0henaten(H%H B3 The un as gi"er of perception The first good act which he performs for them is his /ight which he shines forth upon them9 opening the eyes of all human beings as they see by reason of it and are born in him3 $.eph3 HJ %J&3%F=;L(H%: (omage to thee< $e< supreme power< who makes the earth %isi=le< who gi%es light to those in the Gest< he whose forms are his =eing< when he transforms JhimselfL into his )reat 9isk[ $-he )reat Litany< '(H%F C3 The withdrawal of the un and the commencement of the )"il time The first e"il accomplished in the world by the night is the dar0ness of which all the world is full since when the un turns away from the world and draws in its rays9 immediately from there the night spreads its shade upon all the world3 The eyes of human beings become full of dar0ness3
H%J H%H H%: H%F

Coptic Transcription from +(9 %HL3 Redford9 Akhenaten the (eretic .ing9 %::3 Coptic Transcription from +(9 %J&3 Ale2andre Pian0off9 -he Litany of $e $-ew Ior0E Bollingen 1oundation9 %&H'(9 ;;3

+P4
$.eph3 HJ %HL3;G(
H%&

333immediately thence the e"il human beings come out and perform wic0ed deeds9 the adulterers9 the plunderers and the poisoners9 the e"il beasts come out with all the sna0es from their holes9 filled with e"il deeds9 wandering in the night3 $.eph3 HJ %H%3%;(H;L 333it shows all creations in their chaotic stateC they seethe in their hearts9 committing e"il and perdition3 The fourthE the hea"iness of sleep lies upon $one( stri0ing one down with sleep9 and one lies9 sleeping9 resting li0e a corpse in the night3 $.eph3 HJ %H%3%(H;% Ghen thou settest in the Gestern hori,on< the earth is in darkness after the manner of death> +en spend the night indoors with the head co%ered< the eye not seeing its fellow> -heir possessions might =e stolen< e%en when under their heads< and they would =e unaware of it> E%ery lion comes forth from its lair and all snakes =ite> 9arkness lurks< and the earth is silent when their "reator rests in his ha=itation> $Q)reat (ymn< tom= of Ay< Akhenaten(H;; D3 The o"erthrow of the forces of Dar0ness The li"ing pirit will come suddenly333 he will succour the /ight3 But the wor0 of Death and the Dar0ness he will shut up in the dwelling that was established for it333 $ 4salms CCNN+++ %%3%G=%H(H;G Glory and "ictory to our /ord Mani9 the pirit of Truth9 that cometh from the 1ather3 $%%3;&=GL(H;' Then he too0 the dar0ness in the middle of his /ight and swept it out3 Again9 in this way he dispersed the fear within his peace 333when he shines upon all the world the wic0ed sna0e and sharp=toothed beast who are full of baseness run to hide in their ca"es3 $.eph3 HJ %J&3 ;J U %HL3'(H;J +ay you =e keen< may your soul =e glorious< may you annihilate the enemies of $e[ -he Joined -ogether makes you =reathe< and you shineV your darkness is dispelled while you call the 2ne in (is 9isk and the 2ne in (is 9isk calls you>>> Ghen he sees his JownL =odies and makes his transformations in the region with mysterious #ualities< when he places the rays into the darkness of those who hide the
H%& H;L H;% H;; H;G H;' H;J

Coptic Transcription from +(9 %HL3 +bid39 %H%3 +bid39 %H%3 Cyril Aldred9 AkhenatenA .ing of Egypt $/ondon and -ew Ior0E Thames U 4udson9 %&FF(9 ;'%3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 %%3 +bid39 %%3 Coptic Transcription from +(9 %J&9 %HL3

+Pnaked =odies< he inherits the +ysterious ca%erns< he gi%es eyes to the gods @ they see< and their souls are glorious> -he gates of the Netherworld are open< the earth discloses its "a%erns> Lo< the mace of $e in the hands of .ing N smites his enemies< his staff annihilates the e%il ones> (is e:tent is the e:tent of the 2ne of the (ori,on< his seats are the seats of $e> $-he )reat Litany(H;H )3 The un as the transporter of the sa"ed soul 1erry me across to the sun and the moon9 o ferryboat of tranquil /ight9 abo"e these three lands3 , first=born + ha"e become a holy bride in the bridal=chambers of tranquil /ight3 + ha"e recei"ed the gifts of the "ictory3 $4salms CC/N+* F%3%L=%'(H;: -hose who 3u=ilate at $e< those who adore the Soul of the 2ne of the (ori,on< 3u=ilate at the soul of $e> +ay ye adore his soul< the 2ne of the Netherworld[ Ghen (e in his disk calls you< your soul rises to your "reator> $The Great /itany(H;F 13 Praise for the un=god?s prophet upon earth ing with the Angels and bless the Mind of the shining /ight of the 1ather9 the sun333 $4salms9 CCNNN*++ G:3;;=;G(H;& /et us sing together unto Mani9 the man of God333 $G:3;H(HGL /ight your lamps and333 0eep watch on the day of the Bema for the Bridegroom of Doy and recei"e the holy rays of /ight of the good 1ather3 $G:3GL=GF3%(HG% ayE 4ail new un9 that has come forth with his /ightE 4ail 4oly pirit9 that you ha"e come today to sa"e usE ,ur /ord Mani who forgi"es us our sins3 Blessing to thy 1ather9 peace to the 0ingdom on high3 $4salms9 CCN/+ ';3:=%G(HG; 2 Li%ing Aten>>> -hy rays em=race the lands to the full e:tent that thou hast made< for thou are $e and thou attainest their limits and su=duest them for thy =elo%ed son YAkhenatenZ> -hou art remote yet thy rays are upon the earth> $TGreat 4ymn?9 Tomb of Ay9 A0henaten(HGG
H;H H;: H;F H;& HGL HG% HG; HGG

Pian0off9 -he Litany of $e9 G%=G;9 G:3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 F%3 Pian0off9 -he Litany of $e9 G:3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 G:3 +bid39 G:3 +bid9 G:=GF3 +bid39 ';3 Aldred9 AkhenatenA.ing of Egypt9 %3

+P.
(o all li%ing upon the earth< and those who shall =e young men someday[ 0 shall tell you the way of life>>>> 2ffer praises to the li%ing 9isk and you shall ha%e a prosperous lifeV say to him Q)rant the ruler health e:ceedingly[ and then he shall dou=le fa%ours for you>>>> Adore the king YAkhenatenZ who is uni#ue like the 9isk< for there is none other =eside him[ $Amarna inscriptionE A0henaten(HG' A number of important features e2pressed here contain specific dualistic sentiments and philosophical ideas3 The sun is the abettor of life on earth9 the foe of dar0ness9 at once a symbol and direct manifestation di"ine energies whose source is distant3 This essential dualism finds its basis in the long=standing )gyptian world="iew and the e2pression of it gi"en here often aspires to the le"el of poetry3 The many parallels which e2ist between )gyptian Manichaean te2ts and -ew 5ingdom inscriptions clearly demonstrate surface similarities between the heliocentrism of A0henaten and Mani as he is depicted in the Coptic .ephalia3 Both saw themsel"es in a three=tiered cosmology in which they were in a position of direct authority for human0ind $for A0henaten9 the Aten priesthood and his chosen people the )gyptians9 for Mani his )lect and all humanity( beneath the "isible presence of god in the worldE the sun=dis03 Both saw themsel"es as the prophet of the sole god who created himself daily in the form of the sun3 The sun9 for both9 is the most concentrated locus of di"inity in the physical uni"erseE to e2perience the sun?s rays upon oneself was literally to feel the hand of God3 Iet a differentiation is made between the physical presence of the un and the realm of the 1ather which is quite distant and in"isible for humans3 The 1ather gi"es to the un9 and the un to the Great )nlightener upon earthE A0henatenOMani9 both of whom become the tangible focus of the faith3 <hen the higher di"inity goes to rest9 in both systems9 the world becomes a dar0 and hostile place9 sleeping in the manner of death until the life=gi"ing rays of the sun appear again on the eastern horiBon3 A0henaten and Mani ta0e on the role of spiritual suns in the physical dar0ness during this time9 and the dawn defines the prophet?s role upon earth as the e2ecutor of the o"erthrow of dar0ness3 +t is no o"erstatement to stress these aspects of the two systems9 although it must be added that this core=theology can be somewhat obscured in Manichaeism gi"en the intricate con"olutions of Mani?s entire pseudo= scientific system of thought3 These similarities9 while interesting9 do not argue any necessary historical connectednessC what they do suggest9 it seems to me9 is the heliocentric donne drawn upon in similar fashion by two distinct groups of religionists in )gypt3 The fact that the Manichaeans accomplished this some %JLL years after the Atenists9 in the last phases of )gyptian autochthonic thought9 bespea0s the powerful longe"ity of heliocentrism in the )gyptian religious e2perience Throughout Ptolemaic and Roman times the )gyptian priesthood had become a repository for nationalist sentiment9 their "arious leaders often e2isting as ethnarchs among the populace At the time when the Manichaeans arri"ed in )gypt these priests could still read the ancient te2ts and it is to be e2pected that the general mythological "iew of the masses still drew upon their own "enerable traditions "ia this learned class3 This in fact is borne out in the te2tual e"idence that we ha"e3HGJ The imagery surrounding the figure of Re was commonplace as was9
HG' HGJ

Redford9 Akhenaten the (eretic .ing9 %F%3

ee in particular )berhard ,tto9 )ott und +enschA nach den 1gyptischen -empelinschriften der griechisch@r*mischen ;eit $4eidelbergE Carl <inter !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&H'(C also Maria=Theresa Derchaine=!rtel9 4riester in -empelA 9ie $e,eption der theologie der -emple %on Edfu und 9endara in den 4ri%atdokumenten aus ptolem1ischer ;eit $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&F&(3

+PK
for instance9 the continued association of eth with the hostile deserts3 +n the temple of +sis at Philae9 Ptolemy ++ Philadelphus is entitled @ on of Re9 /ord of the Crowns9 Ptolemy9 gi"en life li0e ReA3HGH Tiberius9 some three centuries later9 was accorded similar titles3HG: ,"erall9 theological te2ts inscribed in Ptolemaic and Roman times demonstrate a "ibrant renaissance in hieroglyphics9 and all temples built in this era pro"ided facilities for a rooftop celebration of the rite of the !nion with the Dis03HGF The Coptic "erb in the Manichaean te2ts is used in close association with as in the abo"e=mentioned passage from the 4salmsA $@ ayE Thail new un that has come forth with his /ight9?A 4salms CCN/+ ';3: ( and the "erb comes from the
HG& H'L hieroglyphic pr\ 9 also in"ariably used to describe the sun god?s coming forth3 +t is difficult to see then how Boyce arri"es at the "iew that the @Coptic con"ertsA had @no predisposition to worship a personal sun=god9 YandZ 0ept more strictly to Mani?s original teachings3A All historical e"idence points to the contrary and9 indeed9 the Manichaean te2ts 0nown from )gypt display the heliocentric emphases9 and e"en )gyptian etymologies in the te2ts themsel"es9 which one would e2pect3 The point then is that there was a split between the original teachings of Mani and what was being disseminated in !pper )gypt9 and probably elsewhere in the ancient world3 Papyrus Rylands 'H&9 an official church anti=Manichaean document of some sort9 e2plicitly condemns sun worship in )gyptE

+f there be found man or woman in one of the cities which the /ord thy God gi"eth thee that has wrought wic0edness in the sight of the /ord thy God and hath worshipped the sun or any of the host of hea"en9 it is an abomination unto the /ord thy God3H'% +t is also no coincidence that the -eoplatonic philosopher Ale2ander of /ycopolis concluded his anti=Manichaean polemic with an e2tended attac0 upon the apparent absurdities inherent in Manichaean heliocentrism3 The Manichaeans were clearly emphasising this integral part of their teachings9 not Dust for the )gyptian masses9 but for the intellectual Plite in Ale2andria and other cities of the Delta3 There are two main polemical sources for Manichaeism in )gypt3 ,f these9 Ad%ersus +anichaeos by erapion of Thmuis $an early orthodo2 churchman writing in the mid 'th
HGH

1rom 4ymn * in /ouis *3 8ab0ar< (ymns to 0sis in (er -emple at 4hilae $4ano"erE Brandeis !ni"ersity Press9 %&FF(9 J&3 ee9 for instance9 4ermann .un0er and )rich <inter9 9as )e=urtshaus des -empels de 0sis in 4hil1 $<ienE Der csterreichischen A0ademie der <issenschaften in <ien9 %&HJ(9 GL&3 At "arious important Dunctures the di"ine statue left its sanctuary and was carried to the rooftop to be e2posed to the first rays of the rising sun3 ee .ean=Claude Goyon9 @Ptolemaic )gyptE Priests and the Traditional Religion9A in "leopatras EgyptA Age of the 4tolemies9 ed3 Robert 3 Bianchi $-ew Ior0E The Broo0lyn Museum in association with *erlag Phillip "on 8abern9 MainB9 %&FF(9 G:=G&3 Coptic transcription from +>4>9 ';3 Cernh9 "optic Etymological 9ictionary9 %;:3

HG:

HGF

HG& H'L H'%

)mphasis added3 This is a free adaptation of Deuteronomy %:E;=H wherein those who worship the sun and moon are sentenced to death by stoning3 1rom C343 Roberts< ed3< "atalogue of the )reek and Latin 4apyri in the John $ylands Li=rary< "ol3 G9 -heological and Literary -e:ts $ManchesterE !ni"ersity Press9 %&GF(9 'G3

+P7
century in /ower )gypt( is for the most part propagandistic and has only marginal utility in detailing Manichaean philosophy3H'; Those few passages in the wor0 with any e2pository "alue are in accordance with the writings of Ale2ander of /ycopolis who wrote his main wor0 roughly a half century earlier3 Ale2ander?s treatise is of course equally polemicalC the difference is that Ale2ander was a philosopher who saw fit to describe the system he disagreed with in order to more effecti"ely refute it3 The information it contains is therefore of great use in assessing Manichaean thought in )gypt3 An e"en greater ser"ice9 howe"er9 is pro"ided by this wor0E Ale2ander conclusi"ely demonstrates that Manichaean philosophy was ta0en seriously by the philosophers of his time9 and that it was acti"ely engaged in disputation within the -eoplatonic schools3 Ale2ander?s own philosophical stance shades off into the positions of Plotinus and PorphyryC he must9 therefore9 be considered a part of the larger Ale2andrian school3 + shall neither attempt to e2amine the full breadth of the Manichaean positions con"eyed to us by Ale2ander nor detail his refutation of these pointsC rather9 + shall continue our e2amination of heliocentrism through an analysis of Ale2ander?s refutation of it3 At a rough count9 %J=;L percent of Ale2ander?s treatise effecti"ely deals with the issue of heliocentrism9 indicating the importance he placed upon it3 +n isolating those passages in Ale2ander?s polemic which deal with the sun and moon9 one is quic0ly struc0 by the complete absence of heliolatrous sentiment in Ale2ander?s e2position of Manichaean thought3 ,ne might suspect that he was more concerned with the heliocentric infrastructure of their thought were it not for a categorical statement he ma0es at the "ery beginning of his presentationE @ un and moon they honour most of all9 not as gods9 but as the means by which it is possible to attain to GodA3H'G This statement9 in conDunction with the rest of his discussion9 accords with a more original form of Manichaean thought9 that is9 with the direct word of Mani himself which saw the importance of the sun and moon in terms of their critical sal"ific functions3 The difference between the heliocentrism in Ale2ander?s depiction of Manichaeism in )gypt and that of the o"ert heliolatry in the .ephalia9 it would seem9 graphically illustrates the )gyptianisation of the sect3 This would also appear to delimit a north= south distinction3 4owe"er9 it is clear that Ale2ander had a limited understanding of the broader Manichaean system9 as indicated by the fact that he thought he was dealing with a Christian sect3 +t is interesting that Ale2ander nowhere indicates what it is e:actly which has caused some of his fellow=philosophers in )gypt to con"ert to ManichaeismE is it the more mythological elements or the pseudo=philosophyS There is indignation and resentment in his e2clamation towards the end of the treatiseE <hat is told in poetry about the giants is mythological3 Those who discourse about these in allegorical form put forth such things hiding the solemnity of their tale behind the form of the myth333 YtheyZ adorn their poetry in this way in order to persuade by the mar"ellousness of their tale3 The Manichaeans9 howe"er9 understand nothing of thisC whene"er they are able to come to false conclusions9 they appropriate these as a god=send9 whate"er their origin9 ma0ing e"ery effort9 as it were9 to "anquish truth by all possible means3H''

H';

Robert Pierce Casey9 ed39 Serapion of -hmuis Against the +anichees $CambridgeE 4ar"ard Theological tudies9 %&G%(9 %:3 "an der 4orst and Mansfeld < An Ale:andrian 4latonist Against 9ualism9 J:3 An Ale:andrian 4latonist9 &J3

H'G H''

+PP
The corollary of this "ery re"ealing passage is that in spite of flouting Ale2ander?s notions about Truth9 the Manichaean message worked3 ,ne senses that Ale2ander would not ha"e obDected half as much if these were the wor0ings of a more purely myth=e"ol"ed system3 The point to 0eep in mind is that the Manichaean @mythA did ha"e a tremendous e2istential appeal9 an allure that was able to tra"erse an impressi"e number of cultural boundaries3 +t also had a great intellectual fascination as witnessed by the con"ersion of -eoplatonic philosophers in )gypt9 and by Augustine?s participation in the faith for some nine years3 <ithin )gypt the success of Manichaeism too0 the form of a broad @mythicA appeal to the )gyptian people3 <ith Ale2ander we are witness to the success of their efforts in a radically different forum3 1or surely9 in quite general terms9 the cultural and rhetorical en"ironment of the Graeco=)gyptian intelligentsia of the Delta was worlds remo"ed from that of the peasants9 artisans9 and priests of the Achmlm and ahid to the south3 +n e2amining other )gyptian Gnostic groups which display affinities with the Manichaeans9 the 4istis Sophia stands out first and foremost as a liturgy used by an unidentified Gnostic group with pronounced Manichaean @tonalitiesA3 As well9 the te2t is li0ely from !pper )gypt and was li0ely composed in Coptic3 The wor0 has been e2amined in the pre"ious chapter at some length and a brief listing of similarities will suffice here3 The ta0ing of hostages and the partial curtailment of archontic power with the perpetuation of entrapped light in @animal formsA in the 4istis Sophia is a stri0ingly Manichaean depiction of e"ents )arly in the te2t9 reference is made to the @tyrants YwhoZ began to wage war against the lightA3 Their ignorance is stressedE @because they saw nothing e2cept the greatly surpassing lightA$+3;J3%=JH'J( The light is subsequently @swallowedA by the archonsE all of these are familiar Manichaean themes3 The function of the Treasury of /ight in the 4istis Sophia is an ob"ious parallel to the function of the sun and moon in the Manichaean myth9 in particular the depiction of light being processed upwards and downwards3 +n the 4istis Sophia9 there is a le"el beneath the Treasury of /ight which is organised around twel"e gathering=points of light3H'H *arious functionaries are arranged about these principles and ser"e to conduct the energies of light into the lower Bones3 The function of this realm is to mi2 and separate pure and impure energies3 Below this is @the MiddleA9 containing "arious functionaries who are specifically empowered with the guardianship of human souls3 The /ight Maiden?s function9 for e2ample9 is the Dudgement of souls9 while the sun and the moon transmit light down into the lower Bones9 ensuring that e"ery soul has a spar0 of light energy intermingled with it3 The 4istis Sophia uses a more elaborate system of le"els to account for the process described in the Manichaean myth3 <hile the sun and moon function as transmitters9 they are not quite as e2alted as in the Manichaean system although they9 too9 operate in conDunction with di"ine functionaries3 Moreo"er9 the critical difference is that the Manichaean transmitters only send light upwardsE in the 4istis Sophia the light tra"els both ways3 There are philosophical reasons for this and + shall return to this point3 +t follows that the soteriology for the indi"idual soul in both systems is similar3 +n the 4istis Sophia the disciple who is able to recei"e @the one word of that MysteryA is enabled to ascend past the archons to the Treasury of the /ightE @1or it becomes a great beam of light and flies to the height9 and no power is able to restrain itA$++3;;F3' U ;;&3&=%%(3H': Manichaean te2ts are redolent with imagery such as this3H'F Abo"e all9 the 4istis Sophia stresses the critical Manichaean concept of mi:tureE
H'J H'H H':

Coptic transcription from N(S9 "ol> +N9 ;J3 *arious descriptions are found throughout Boo0 +9 in particular Chapters ;H and ;:3 Coptic transcription from N(S9 "ol> +N9 'JH9 'JF>

+P,
And when the perfect number is completed so that the mi2ture is dissol"ed9 + will command that all the tyrant gods who did not gi"e $up( what is purified of their light be brought3 + will command the fire of wisdom9 which the perfect ones transmit9 to consume those tyrants until they gi"e $up( the last of what is purified of their light3 $+3::3%&=;J(H'& The o"erall impression in placing the two systems side by side is that of two meticulous and tendentious cosmological catalogues which e2tensi"ely chart the hierarchical details of immense metaphysical systems3 Iet a great philosophical disparity e2ists between the two modes of dualistic thought3 +n Manichaeism there can be no acceptance of necessity for the tragedy of life on earth3 The mi2ture of light and dar0ness9 good and e"il9 simply put9 is a tragic error which must be ruthlessly rectified3 +n the 4istis Sophia9 ophia herself ma0es an enlightening assertionE And + alone among the in"isible ones9 in whose place + e2isted9 transgressed9 and + came down to the Chaos3 + transgressed before you so that your ordinance should =e fulfilled3 $+3%%%3%L=%G(HJL +n suggesting a higher determinism at wor0 in the 1all9 this system dramatically de"elops the story of a theogonic process of internal rift and reunion3 This last di"ision forms the essential fault=line between @radicalA and @mitigatedA dualistic religious e2pressions > in this we must endorse .onas? original distinction between @+ranianA and @)gyptianA modes of Gnostic thought3HJ% +ranian dualism re3ects the possibility of synthesis between the two realms of /ight and Dar0nessC )gyptian dualism reconciles3 +t is for this reason that /ight is processed upwards and downwards in the mitigated systemC in Manichaeism the /ight must only attempt its escape upwards3 Another issue pro"ides a sociological bridge across this philosophical chasm3 +n the 4istis Sophia the presence of ophia competes with Christ as the main sal"ific agent while the disciples function as wooden or stoc0 characters3 As mentioned in the preceding chapter9 the @ ophia archetypeA is manifest in the emphasis gi"en to Mary Magdalene3 ,f the %LF appearances of "arious disciples9 Mary has JF = more than all of the other disciples combined3 The quality of her appearances is e"en more stri0ingE in all sections9 she is clearly described as the superior disciple9 and in line with this she ta0es certain liberties that the other disciples do not3 This is the most stri0ing redactional tendency in the wor03 The emphasis placed on Mary finds a curious parallel in the Manichaean Psalms3 The "eneration gi"en to the )gyptian Manichaean )lect in their Psalms is in sharp contrast to the mythopoeic philosophising of the .ephalia3 The )lect referred to are listed and prioritised according to the number of referencesE Mary $%%L(C Theona $G&(C .mnoute $%:(C Pshai $%H(C

H'F

1or e2ample9 see the Manichaean 4ymn Cycles from the Parthian as presented in .es P3 Asmussen< +anichaean Literature $Delmar9 -ew Ior0E cholar?s 1acsimiles U Reprints9 %&:J(3 @Iou shall put on a radiant garment9 and gird on /ightC and + shall set on your head the diadem of so"ereigntyA$FH(C @1or through that will go out the chosen and all the benificent9 and all who 0new the mystery and understood the beliefA$F:(C @Truly you shall pass their border9 and shall not be held at their watch=posts9A$F:(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< %ol> +N9 %J'3 +bid39 ;;;9 emphasis added3 .onas9 -he )nostic $eligion< passim>

H'& HJL HJ%

+,5
Plousiane $%L(C Apa Panai $:(C isinnios $;(C @MartyrsA $;(C Cleopatra9 )ustephios9 +nnaios9 Gabriah9 almaios9 Pappos9 Addas9 ,Beos9 ethel9 Apa Polydo2us9 Apa Pshai $% each(3 +t is important to note of course that a number of the names $Panai and Pshai for e2ample( are definitely )gyptian3HJ; ,f e"en greater interest is the preponderance of references made to the female Manichaean )lect3 The first fi"e figures are repeatedly raised together as obDects of praise9 presented in the form of do2ologies which conclude almost e"ery psalm in the collection3HJG Although the gender of .mnoute9 Pshai9 and Plousiane is not quite certain9 it is li0ely that they9 along with Mary and Theona9 are female Manichaean )lect3 <hen one considers that the references to Mary and Theona are more than double those of all of the other members of the Manichaean church9 one may conclude that these women occupied a position of great importance in the Manichaean church in )gypt3 The word @martyrsA is used twice in association with the Manichaeans Mary and Theona9 which leads one to the conclusion that they may ha"e been e2ecuted as a result of Diocletian?s edict of ;&: C3)3 A critical piece of historical information is pro"ided in Papyrus Rylands 'H& which specifically attac0s the Manichaean missionaries who9 with deceitful and lying words steal into our houses9 and particularly against those women whom they call the Telect? and whom they hold in honour9 manifestly because they require their menstrual blood for the abominations of their madness3HJ' The concluding ad hominem need not be ta0en seriously9 and it is clear that the female Manichaean missionaries had a rather high profile and were effecti"e in their endea"ours9 thus becoming targets for orthodo2 in"ecti"e3 This stands in mar0ed contrast with Manichaeism outside of )gypt which9 while certainly affording women the roles of )lect teachers and missionisers9 did not go so far as to "enerate historical women in their liturgy3 The emancipation of women in 4ellenistic times found its ideal locus in Ale2andria9 especially as the city became more and more )gyptianised3 The Gree0s intermarried primarily with )gyptian women who had always enDoyed more social and political freedoms than their Gree0 counterparts3 This ele"ation of the social functions of women naturally found its e2pression in the Gnostic sects of the Roman period which thus prepared the way for the Manichaeans3 The first Manichaean missionaries headed towards )gypt along the trade routes to Ale2andria and o"erland from the Red ea to Thebes3 They did this perhaps 0nowing that they were heading towards a 0indred community of fellow Gnostics3 )gypt9 along with Rome and Parthia9 would ha"e been high upon the list of targets for the Manichaean mission3 The story of 0ythanios9 whether or not it is based upon historical fact9 points towards the li0elihood that the )gyptian Gnostics may ha"e sought out the teachings of Mani abroad and brought them bac0 with them3 The fact that Manichaean and )gyptian Gnostic te2ts both appear almost entirely in the dialects of !pper )gypt suggests that the southern route was an important lin0 for the transmission of Manichaean teachings into )gypt3 The presence of the Christ myth in these
HJ;

These names appear in their earlier forms9 pC@n@C and pC@TCi in 4ermann Ran0e9 9ie Hgyptischen 4ersonennamen< Band %9 &er,eichnis der Namen $GlXc0stadtE *erlag "on .3.3 Augustin9 %&GJ(9 %LJ3;G and %%:3;G9 respecti"ely3 1or e2ample9 the end of psalm CC/NN++E @Glory and "ictory to our /ord Mani9 the pirit of Truth9 who cometh from the 1ather9 and his holy perfect )lect9 and the soul of the blessed Mary9 Theona9 Pshai9 .mnoute3A Roberts9 "atalogue of the )reek and Latin 4apyri9 'G3

HJG

HJ'

+,+
dualist groups along with such Manichaean mythological figures as a0las and -ebrod9 and a radically anti=world eschatology9 clearly pro"ided the Manichaean proselytisers with a sympathetic and recepti"e audience +t is important to consider the fact that there were Gnostic groups in )gypt who fell on the Manichaean side of the philosophical radicalOmitigated di"ide3 At least si2 of the Gnostic te2ts found in the .ebel el Tarif show a mar0ed affinity with a more Manichaean type of radical dualism3HJJ +n this regard the distinction between radical and mitigated is not an abstruse theological point9 but a grassroots issue that must ha"e been e2ceedingly contentious3 Many )gyptian Gnostic te2ts equal or e2ceed the Manichaean predilection for e2tended cosmological systematisationC howe"er9 there is little e"idence to suggest that this was accompanied by a politicalOsocial agenda3 +ndeed this is not to be e2pected from a tapestry of thought whose o"erall wea"e displays an eclectic indi"idualismE antinomians are not li0ely to miss the contradiction in"ol"ed in substituting one brand of nomos for another3HJH +t is probable that the radicalOmitigated dualist split which e2isted among "arious Gnostic groups in )gypt was polarised e"en further by the arri"al of the Manichaeans9 for social as well as philosophical reasons3 The Manichaeans9 in effect9 were saying that Gnosis as a form of indi"idual insight was not enough3 A rigorous adherence to a mode of doing9 i3e3 concerted religious affiliation9 was of soteriological consequence +n proselytising among the Gnostic groups of )gypt9 the nati"e priesthood9 and the Graeco=)gyptian philosophers9 the Manichaeans offered a plan of action which was in direct response to human0ind?s carnal predicament9 and this too0 the form of an e2treme asceticism for the )lect3 +f we are to ta0e seriously the e"idence of the %st century )gyptian @ toicA priest Chaeremon9 the Manichaeans would ha"e felt an especial sympathy for the ascetic acti"ities of this class3 1urther9 in allowing for a whole sub= class of supporters beyond the actual monastery walls9 the mo"ement ensured three thingsE it e2panded the boundaries of belief to included those who could not li"e by the strict code of the )lectC it fitted into the )gyptian religious "iew of professional and semi=professional priesthoods functioning within a @sacred spaceA9 this far better than the adherents of 4ellenistic GnosisC and9 it insulated the )lect from the e2igencies of physical e2istence9 allowing them to lead @pureA li"es which would ser"e as an e2ample for all3 +n short9 in not being anti=ecclesial in their outloo09 the Manichaeans were far better able than most )gyptian Gnostic sects to draw upon )gyptian religious tradition in the concrete9 as opposed to the subtler philosophical issues the Ale2andrian Gnostics de"oted themsel"es to3HJ: + would conclude by suggesting that a difference in sociological foundations for the Manichaeans and Gnostics in )gypt li0ely lies at the root of the @radical=mitigatedA dualist split3 The teachings of the great Gnostic teachers9 *alentinus9 Carpocrates9 )piphanes9 and Basileides9 are to be associated with Ale2andria and other Gree0 cities in /ower )gypt9 although their
HJJ

;ostrianos $*+++9 %9 %3%L and J3%%(9 Apocalypse of 4eter $*++9 G9 ::3;%(9 -he Second -reatise of the )reat Seth $*++9 ;9 HF3GL(9 -he 4araphrase of Shem $*++9 %9 %3;%(9 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld $++9 J9 &:3GL(9 -he Apocryphon of John $++9 %(3 Rudolf9 )nosis9 ;HJE @<hilst 4ellenistic political theory understands earthly so"ereignty as a system controlled by di"ine reason $nous< logos(9 and so pro"ides a Dustification for it9 Gnosis disputes alleged conformity to reason of the whole world9 since this world had its origin in a blunder and a Tsenseless act?3A Peter Brown9 @The Diffusion of Manichaeism in the Roman )mpire9A J$S J& $%&H&(E &;=%LG9 perhaps o"erstates the difference in approach hereE @The eclecticism9 e"en the confusion9 of Gnostic literary remains at -ag 4ammadi contrasts "i"idly with the organiBed dogmatism of the Manichaean scriptures3 Manichaeism was a religion organiBed for sur"i"al in a harsher age than that which saw the spread of a salonf1hig Gnosticism9A $&&9 n3&:(3

HJH

HJ:

+,2
incorporation of specific 4eliopolitan9 4ermopolitan9 and Memphite theologies strongly suggests a participation in the full=breadth of )gyptian religious thought3 +t is surely no coincidence that a more heterodo2 and liberal form of Gnosis was espoused there in conDunction with sophisticated mitigated=dualist systems3 The distinctly archaic9 @orthodo2A "ersions of Gnosis in the 4istis Sophia and the Manichaean religion9 as e2pressions of radical dualist cosmologies9 would ha"e appealed more to a deeply entrenched )gyptian conser"atism in religious matters3 +f so9 the bul0 of the Manichaean auditors would ha"e been drawn from this group9 and a larger percentage of the elect from among the redoubtable priesthoods in the south3 This di"ision is supported by the traditional split between !pper and /ower )gypt attested from the earliest phases of )gyptian historyE conser"atism was manifestly a feature of the south9 a more @worldlyA stance was una"oidably assumed in the Delta3HJF This traditional split was further enhanced in Ptolemaic times by the Pro2imity of Memphis to Ale2andria9 and by the secessionist acti"ities of the south3HJ& ,n the le"el of popular religion there is strong e"idence to suggest the de"elopment of an )gyptian Manichaean sect with distinct characteristics of its ownE the negati"e confessions9 apocalypticism9 and in particular a pronounced heliocentrism inDected with heliolatrous sentiments9 all are quintessentially )gyptian3 This again suggests !pper )gypt as the primary milieu within which )gyptian Manichaeism e"ol"ed3 The great Ptolemaic temples of the south all demonstrate the perpetuation of "ital )gyptian theological concerns far remo"ed from the e2traneous languages of power of Gree0 and later Roman rulers3 4ere9 too9 we might suppose that a significant number of )gyptians9 most especially priests9 were disposed to see0 out a new e"olution of their religious e2perience9 one that might e2plain the failure of maat in )gypt3 <hile preser"ing the supra=national characteristics of their theology9 Manichaeism li0ely became increasingly )gyptianised during the time following the death of Mani in ;:' C3)33 +n this they duplicated the fate of pre"ious foreign religious mo"ements in )gypt9 the last being the )gyptianisation of the Ptolemaic stateE only the Romans9 with their centralised bureaucracy and )mperor=by=pro2y9 were able to withstand in large measure the powerful pull of )gyptian culture3 Amongst the )gyptians the Manichaeans were e2tremely high=profile and effecti"e in their frequent debates9 leading li"es of impressi"e self=discipline3 o effecti"e was this last factor that one might say that the Christian desert fathers were obliged to assume the same role in their bid to con"ert )gypt to orthodo2y3 1or the precursors of early Christian monasticism we loo0 to the strict didacticism of the nati"e priesthoods and the Manichaean missionaries in )gypt9 both armed with their "enerable te2ts scrolled in compelling calligraphics9 and especially the e2treme asceticism of the Manichaeans3 Diocletian?s edict dro"e Manichaeism in )gypt underground to some e2tent although it was able to function in a reduced capacity for centuries3 ,ne important result of this must ha"e been the eradication of Manichaean monasteries in the cities and towns9 thus creating an opening for an orthodo2 Christian substitution3 The Annales of )utychius gi"es strong e"idence for the e2istence of the Manichaean )lect and their /isteners in )gypt at this time3HHL The patriarch of Ale2andria also mentions that in the late 'th century the maDority of the metropolites and bishops of )gypt were Manichaean3HH% The Manichaean church was undoubtedly repressed and maintained a tenuous

HJF

Again9 the fact that the Coptic dialects used in the 4istis Sophia and the Manichaean .ephalia are both from the south9 while not conclusi"e9 in itself reinforces this impression3 Crawford9 @Ptolemy9 Ptah and Apis in 4ellenistic Memphis9A F3 This te2t was used by 7m3 de toop9 @)ssai sur la diffusion du manichPisme dans l?)mpire Romain9A $e- GF $%&L&(E :'=:J3

HJ& HHL

+,4
e2istence in these later centuries before it9 along with Christianity9 was engulfed by the tide of +slam3HH; <hile the new Christian message bro0e from its .ewish roots permeating the Roman state9 Manichaean syncretism was9 in a way9 correctly identified by Diocletian as a foreign doctrine whose message could properly be associated with the Persians9 the hereditary enemies of the Romans3 The rise of Manichaeism resulted initially from the acti"e support gi"en to Mani by the Persian state3 +n effect9 the suppleness of the Manichaean teachings allowed it to mo"e through the mythological water=tables beneath national boundaries3 +t was e"entually thwarted in the <est due to the efforts of its great ri"al which effecti"ely foiled any attempt by the Manichaeans to enlist the support of the Roman state3 Christian orthodo2y used precisely the same methods as the Manichaeans and was in a far better position to do so insofar as it was not percei"ed to be an alien creed during the later phases of its de"elopment3 )gyptian Manichaeism was left li0e a tidal pool once the high=water mar0 of Manichaeism in the <est receded3 Putting aside the hac0neyed heresiologies and the too=often narrow polemics of modern scholarship in order to "iew Manichaean te2ts upon their own merits9 we disco"er a mo"ement that was at once efficiently organised9 ultra=literate9 and e2tra"agantly poetic3 Manichaeism in )gypt9 apart from demonstrating the openness of the Manichaean missionaries to )gyptian religiosity9 also indirectly affirms the strong e2istence of )gyptian religious thought at the end of a "ast era of religio=philosophical self=determination3 The mythopoeicising lan of the Manichaeans in this regard bespea0s a sensiti"ity to a humanist uni"ersality not yet seen upon such a grand trans=cultural stage3 This last factor undoubtedly e2plains their sur"i"al in )gypt for some se"en centuries in increasingly hostile circumstances3 By the fourth century )gyptian Manichaeism had undoubtedly become more than the )gyptian sect of the religionist ManiC by the tenth century it was surely the last repository of many ancient autochthonic religious conceptions9 indeed the last manifestation of Gnosis in )gypt3

HH%

+n noting certain apparent doctrinal differences mentioned in )utychius? testimony9 .acques .arry9 @/e ManichPisme en 7gypte byBantine9A B0'A2 HH $%&HF(E %;%=G:9 comes to the unli0ely conclusion that @the maDority of the Christian clergy at the time of Timothy were Marcionite and not Manichaean9A $%G%(3 As well9 there is a Coptic sermon9 attributed to Cyril of Ale2ander9 from the ninth or tenth century9 which clearly mentions the Manichaeans in )gypt in the same period3 This @ ermon sur la PPnitence9A is edited and translated by M3 Chalne9 in the +langes de la 'acult 2rientale de lIni%ersit Saint Joseph H $%&%G(E '&G=J%&3 + am indebted to G3 troumsa?s article9 @Monachisme et Marranisme cheB les Manicheens d?7gypte9A Numen ; $%&F;(E %F'=;L%9 for this source and for the Annales of )utychius referred to abo"e3 +t is interesting that this date ma0es the Manichaeans in )gypt contemporaneous with Priscilianism in northern pain $and + note the legendary tradition attributed to Priscillian9 of a Manichaean master from )gypt9 Marc of Memphis(3 The sur"i"al of the Manichaeans beyond the fourth and fifth centuries in )gypt was undoubtedly due in part to their ability to pose as Christians9 meeting in secret to affirm the radical di"ergencies of their faith3

HH;

+,-

art !!! 6 The Egyptian $oundations of Gnostic Thought

)hapter Ten* The rimacy of #un and the Emanationist hierarchy of 1onad, 'yad, and Triad

+ propose to begin by re"iewing the direct e"idence for -un a"ailable to us in te2ts ranging from ,ld 5ingdom to Graeco=Roman times3 +t will be of particular interest to see if an e"olution or pattern can be drawn out from this immense period of time $ca3 ;JLL B3C3)3 = 'LL C3)3(3 The earliest body of te2ts we ha"e concerning -un comes to us from the Pyramid te2ts3 +t is notable that 1aul0ner9 in relying upon ethe?s transcriptions9 translates the group of signs for -un9 "ariations on 9 as either the capitalised @AbyssA or as a personified god -iu9 according to his reading of the conte2t3HHG @The 5ing?s meal is in the AbyssAC the 0ing departs to the flood9 a"oiding the @wrathful onesA9 and -iu and -enet $-un and -aunet( protect him3 -un is also mentioned as being at the head of his @Chaos=godsA3 -ow9 apart from the hermeneutic problem in"ol"ed in deciding when -un is @AbyssA and when he is himself as it were9 we also ha"e the problem created by 1aul0ner in calling the 4eh gods the "haos gods9 as there is no specific word for chaos in )gyptian per se3HH' + shall later suggest that as the creation of these eight gods is a diachronic de"elopment in the theogonic process9 they only transmit the original Ir@prin,ip through themsel"es9 that as hypostases they were not regarded as being completely synonymous with that original state3 +n fact precisely the same ambiloquoy e2ists between -un and the Abyss as e2ists between the 4eh gods and Chaos gods3 +t is seen by some )gyptologists that it is our own interpretati"e insistence upon a sharp di"ision between personification and principle which li0ely creates this interpretati"e problemE undoubtedly the )gyptians had no such difficulty > -un was both a principle of prime"al water9 and a personal god3 That said9 there is in fact an ambiguity in -un and the 4eh gods which goes bac0 through the earliest te2ts3 Their shared equi"ocal stature has to do with their close pro2imity to disorder and the inimical forces that are to be found in )gyptian thought3 -un and the 4eh gods are "alorised to the e2tent that they are seen to hold this tendency towards dissolution in chec09 pro"iding the most fundamental ontological frame for the initiation of the theogony9 graphically depicted as a mound rising up out of the watery abyssC as well9 the determinati"e employed in writing 4eh depicts the figure of a god with arms upraised in order to support the s0yE 3HHJ +n this light they are @-unA and @4eh godAC their dar0er side in the theogonic process9 howe"er9 sees them functioning as @AbyssA and @ChaosA3 -un is concei"ed in his inchoate state as "erging upon differentiation > in the dynamic commencement of this process the latent becomes manifest9 usually in the form of the first hypostasis Atum > @the hidden oneA > and as a concomitant to this deity9 a feminine creati"e
HHG

-he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid Te2ts9 %:G3 The phrase that 1aul0ner renders as @born in the Abyss9A $PT !tt3 'FH(9 /ichtheim translates as @born in -unA9 Ancient Egyptian Literature9 "ol3 %9 ':3 o ingrained is the Gree0 word in our own collecti"e psyche that e"en 4ornung slips into using it routinely in "onceptions of )od> Barta9 @Die Bedeutung der Personifi0ation 4uh im !ntersheid Bu den Personifi0ation 4ah und -un9A :3

HH'

HHJ

+,.
principle inasmuch as he is seen to be androgynous3 -un is concei"ed as the abyss abo"e the s0y9 while -aunet is the watery abyss below the earth3HH: This feminine counterpart of -un sometimes occurs alongside Atum9 but is more usually depicted as a conflation of Atum=-un creating hu and TefnutOMa?at3 The theogony is thus concei"ed of as monad > dyad > triad9 which mar0s the hypostatic moment of plurality for the )gyptian theologian3 This primal plural9 three9 attains its apotheosis in being squared9 and the ennead of nine members results3 The emphasis upon the formation of this primal three with -un as the ordering principle is found in the Gnostic tractate ;ostrianosE
HHH

+t is the water of )2istence which is possessed by Di"inity9 that is9 the 5alyptos333 $%J3%L= %;( The first perfect water of the tripartite power of the Autogenes $is( the perfect soul?s life9 for it is a word of the perfect god while coming into being333 for the +n"isible pirit is a fountain of them all333 $%:3H=%G( Then Yhe saidZ T4ow then can he contain an eternal modelS The general intellect shares when the self=generated water becomes perfect3 +f one understands it and all these9 one is the water which belongs to 5alyptos9 whose image is still in the aeons3 $;;3%=%'(HHF 5alyptos $from the Gree0 ms for @co"eredA( also appears in Allogenes as the head of a triad of aeons and is ob"iously to be identified with AtumE directly beneath him in both tractates is Protophanes $first="isible(9 followed by Autogenes $self=generated(3 The triad itself in the two Gnostic systems9 synergistically creates a female hypostasis Barbelo= ophia whose nature and actions are depicted in an ethical light9 and so is reminiscent of Ma?at3 As one might e2pect in the ,ld 5ingdom9 -un is portrayed in the Pyramid te2ts as a bestower of recognition and fa"our upon the departed 0ing3 -un is a critical deity to beseech in this regard9 as he is seen to allow the passage of the 0ing across the watery waste in the solar barqueC in this he sa"es the 0ing from @inimical godsA as in !tterances ;:; U HL: in the Pyramid Te2ts where the 0ing says9 , 4eight which is not sharpened9 Portal of the Abyss9 + ha"e come to youC let this be opened to me333 + am at the head of the followers of Re?9 + am not at the head of the gods who ma0e disturbance $PT !tt3 ;:;9 KG&;(3HH& The 5ing was fashioned by -u at his left hand when he was a child who had no wisdomC he has sa"ed the 5ing from inimical gods9 and he will not gi"e the 5ing o"er to inimical gods $PT !tt 3HL:9 K%:L%(3H:L

HHH HH: HHF

ee 8andee9 @Der Androgyne Gott in 6gypten3A Allen9 )enesis in Egypt< '3

Coptic transcriptions from N(S< "ol3NNN+A Nag (ammadi "ode: &0009 ed3 .ohn 43 ieber $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%(9 JF9 HL9 HF9 :L3 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts9 :& +bid39 ;J%3

HH& H:L

+,K
@DisturbanceA and @inimicalA are ta0en from the "erb thth which means to @ma0e H:% disturbanceA or @disorderA3 The "erb carried on into Coptic as and it is interesting to note its employment in the -ripartite -ractate for e2ample where @the beings of the similitudeA9 the equi"alent of the ancient )gyptian inimical gods9 through deceit and arrogance initially mislead those see0ing sal"ation9 with things which are written by the hylics who spea0 in the fashion of the Gree0s9 the powers of those who thin0 about all of them9 attributing them to the right9 the powers which mo"e them all to thin0 of words together with a representation which is theirs and $which( they apprehended so as to attain the truth using the confused powers which act in them3 Afterwards they attained to the order of the unconfused ones9 the one which is established9 the one9 only9 who is preser"ed as a representation of the representation of the Parent3 4e is not in"isible in his nature9 but <isdom en"elopes him9 so that he might sustain the form of the truly in"isible one3 $%%L=;'=%%%3'(H:; The use of the same word for @confused $or mi:ed( powersA and @inimical godsA in a remar0ably similar soteriological and theogonic setting illustrates the continued presence of specifically )gyptian theogonic elements9 e"en to the e2tent of employing the same language3H:G Ma?at9 as that which gathers together the ordered whole from disorder9 imbues the entire )gyptian world"iew9 and in tracing her genealogy bac0 to its starting point9 we note that ,rder is implicit in the whole possibility of theogonic e2tension from the Primal ource The 4eh gods9 for instance9 are to be listed on the side of ,rder9 whereas theA inimical godsA and Apep are not3 ,rder is fore"er bounded by the disorderly and it is interesting that there is no sense in )gyptian myth that Disorder can be finally "anquished3 4ornung ma0es the important point that as a result )gyptian religion did not de"elop eschatologies as this would point up the lac0 of order now3H:' ignificantly it is only in Graeco=Roman times that we first get eschatological te2ts3 There is a profound realism at wor0 in the )gyptian "iew which depicts an ambiguity in the relationship between these two principles3 This blurring of functions9 + maintain9 is quite acute in the role of -un9 as it is in eth9 so much so that they were both e"entually to succumb to their dar0er sides in Graeco=Roman times3 <e might say that -un is the theogonic principle which arises out of the inimical and disorderly qualities of his milieuC as such he is to be appealed to in the first instance in any attempt to renew a state of equipoise with respect to these forces3 +n the ,ld 5ingdom the death of the 0ing is the singular e"ent in the preser"ation of ,rder for it represents a cyclic passage to new 0ingship and the continuing afterlife of the departed 0ing3 The death of the 0ing represents a moment of acute crisis for ,rder as the 0ing must now "enture into the "icinity of the @AbyssA and must be preser"ed by the Depth?s redeemer9 -un3 This moment is the most threatening as it occupies9 diachronically and synchronically $historically and mystically(9 the omega=point of creationE that which
H:% H:; H:G

Cernh9 "optic Etymological 9ictionary9 ;LH3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;&;3 )mphasis added3

A close study of Coptic words whose etymological antecedents show up in "ery similar religious conte2ts in earlier periods of )gyptian history is an important area that remains as yet completely unresearched3 As well9 the o"erall redactional patterns in Ptolemaic=period autochthonic )gyptian religious e2pression need to be further ascertained3 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od 0n Ancient Egypt9 %H;=HG3

H:'

+,7
parado2ically arises out of the "oid3 To fail to attain one?s place in ,rder after death9 to attain a proper afterlife9 is to return to the "oid3 There is an urgency in ancient )gyptian religious thought9 carried on into the Gnostic9 centred precisely upon this threat to the indi"idual3 +n turning to the Middle 5ingdom we 0eep in mind the well understood notion of a @democratisationA of )gyptian soteriology3 The Coffin te2ts indicate that -un continued to be an important figure for )gyptian religion3 +n reading through the Coffin te2ts one is repeatedly struc0 by this problem of timing in the theogony3 -un is still depicted as the @,ld ,neA9 as one of the prime"al @chaos godsAC howe"er9 at other Dunctures it is clear that the 4eh=gods were created by hu who of course normally appears further down the familial chain as a son of Atum3 Atum?s role also merges with the Ir@Sit, of -un as his own his self=generation ta0es place within the conte2t of -un3 +n fact the theogonic roles of these personages and principles blur into each other and we ha"e what amounts to a deification of specific theogonic functions which e2tend this way and that according to "arious @rhetoricalA considerations3 This moment of differentiation9 0ey to e"ery )gyptian emanationist religious "iew9 is here shared at "arious Dunctures by -un9 Atum9 hu9 and the 4eh=gods3 +n one way this emanation is seen as being chronologicalE -un precedes Atum who precedes hu3 +t is clear9 howe"er9 that the )gyptians were also able to "iew the entire situation in a synchronic light in which all things occur more or less simultaneously3 <e are not surprised therefore to see that hu is depicted in the Coffin te2ts as ha"ing created the chaos=gods3 1rom the Middle 5ingdom onwards -un is described as @the 1ather of the GodsA3 That the Gree0s deri"ed this idea from the )gyptians can hardly be doubted9 as with 4omer who describes9 @,cean9 the forbear of the godsA3H:J + would suggest that it is this pro2imity to the disorderly pre=e2istent that empowers -un in this way3 )ri0 4ornung notes that the )gyptians used the n sdmt>f @not yetA form to spea0 of time before creation3 +n a theological conte2t this was a "ery careful way of spea0ing about a state that was atemporal and non=spatial3 +f we can for a moment put it in modern philosophical terms we are dealing with that moment before 5ant?s a priori categories are actually engaged3 trictly spea0ing9 this may be concei"ed of as the non=e2istent9 howe"er the )gyptians9 as 4ornung also points out9 had a distinct perspecti"e upon the idea of the non= e2istent3 This is an e2tremely difficult issue to deal with9 both in terms of how the )gyptians actually handled it9 but also in terms of the philosophical repercussions that are still with us3 )ssentially9 being and nothingness are identical in this state3 To be non=e2istent is ob"iously to preclude e2istence9 but it does not preclude the possibility of becoming e2istent3 +n essence9 the whole issue of latency9 or potential9 is at the heart of this "iew of the godheadE that which comes to be through the collecti"e efforts of the chaos=gods and their female partners already @wasA in a dormant state3 This precise moment is also clearly delimited by the )gyptians as a shift from this primal inchoate Monad into two3 This is the basis for an essential dualism that is to be found throughout )gyptian thoughtE light and dar0ness9 s0y and earth9 the two lands9 dynamic and static9 male and female9 and finally e"en time is di"ided into two aspectsE nhh and dt3 <e can also draw in an interesting connection with the practice of incubation3 This access to the di"ine through dreams actually occurred before the Ptolemaic period and there is a strong sense here of @accessingA -un in this regard3 A3 de Buc0 has written a pro"ocati"e interpretation of this phenomenon9 wherein he maintains that sleep itself was regarded as a

H:J

Boo0 N+* of -he 0liad9 trans3 )3 *3 Rieu $4armondsworth9 )nglandE Penguin Boo0s /td39 %&FG(9 ;H;3

+,P
descent into -un9 hence the feeling of renewal that results from it E -un is9 afterall9 source of all life3H:: The sun and the dead 0ing themsel"es ma0e the same Dourney through his depths3 +t is in the /ate Period that a profound transformation of religious "iews occurs9 e"en if these results are more dramatically apparent beyond the temple precincts3 1oreign subDugation under the Persians9 Gree0s9 and finally Romans9 created a need for redrawn boundaries9 definitions of e"il9 and eschatology3 +n this process 0ey di"inities such as eth and -un can be seen to reflect the mythos=shift more than other deities for the simple reason that their own natures had always been depicted in pro2imity to the forces of dar0ness and chaos now set loose upon the land3 Certainly -un was still depicted on the walls of all the Ptolemaic temples in his usual form and is well represented in the larger Ptolemaic temples of the south9 often presented in fusion with Ptah $5alabscha9 Philae9 )dfu(9 obe0 $5om ,mbo(9 4apy $,pet temple9 5arna0(9 4orus $,pet temple9 Dendara(9 and 5hnum=Amun $)sna(3 )"en in poorly preser"ed temples one finds depictions of -un on the few standing walls left $e3g3 Tod9 Medamud9 Mut temple at 5arna09 Behbeit el 4agar(3 -un9 along with the entire 4ermopolitan ,gdoad forms the large front=court relief at the ,pet temple3 This temple was quite popular in Roman times in association with childbirth and it is surely no coincidence to find inscriptional "ariations here that ma0e use of the child determinati"e in -unE
H:H

+n )sna we ha"e a number of depictions of the Ptolemaic 0ings offering incense to the 4ermopolitan ,gdoad9 and in one case9 specifically to -un and his female consort -aunet3 1rom these and other e2amples too numerous to cite here9 we draw the ob"ious conclusion that -un was well represented in all the great temples of )gypt well into Roman times3 <e can be sure that this inclusion was not simply rote or formulaicC Ptolemaic inscriptional e"idence shows that his role was being acti"ely de"eloped in theological terms9 and that his mysterious traditional pre=eminence was maintained within the temple precincts3 The ,pet temple is important for it shows -un?s role in a more popular mode of religious obser"ance9 as opposed to being confined to the more abstruse cosmogonic issues we ha"e e2amined3 This is accomplished in close association with the traditional "iews on the birth of Re e"ery morning9 from the water abyss @between the thighs of -utA as e2pressed in the mythological papyrus of 5honsu=Mes dated to the ;%st DynastyE 4e ta0es a seat in the Morning Barge and shines between the thighs of -ut3 The name of the gate of this city is )2altation of the Gods3 The name of this city is ,utcome$S( of Dar0ness9 Appearance of Birth3 The name of the 4our of the night in which this Great God ta0es a rest in this ca"ern at the end of utter dar0ness3 <hen this Great God is being born in his forms of 5hepri at this ca"ern9 -un and -unet9 4eh and 4ehet appear at this ca"ern at the birth of this Great God when he comes out of the -etherworld3 Ydepiction of -un holding up the solar barge3 Below his left handZE They proceed in the following of this god3 YAbo"e the head of -unZE These arms come out of the water9 they lift this god3 -un3 YTe2t to leftZE
H:H

Adriaan de Buc0< 9e )odsdienstige 2p%atting %an den Slaap 0n,onderheid in het 2ude Egypte $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&G&(3 Ale2andre Pian0off9 The hrines of Tut=An0h=Amon9 ;'E @333the outflow of the prime"al ocean9 the <atery Abyss9 -un9 in which before the Creation reposed the germs of all li"ing things3A

H::

+,,
, hail9 tow him9 let $him( pass by the ca"ern of -un333
H:F

<e surmise that this change in religious "iews towards a more acutely dualistic cosmology too0 place more or less outside the main templesC in this regard9 the 5honsu Cosmology is of special interest for it displays a syncretism with respect to the generation of -un and the primal ogdoadE Amun in that name of his called Ptah created the egg that came forth from -un333 as Ptah of the 4eh gods and the -enu goddesses who created hea"en and earth3 4e eDaculated and made YitZ at this place in the la0e9 which was created in TDenene Ya Memphite sanctuary of PtahZ9 it flowed out from under him9 li0e that which happens9 in its name of @grain of seedA3 4e fertiliBed the egg and the eight came into e2istence from it in the district around the ,gdoad3 4e languished there in -un9 in the Great 1lood3 4e 0new themC his nec0 recei"ed them3 4e tra"eled $hns( to Thebes in his form of 5honsu3 4e cleared his throat from the water in the flood3 Thus came into e2istence his name of 5honsu the Great in Thebes9 the august being in the seed3 4e turned his face to this seed3 +t was his Ma?at9 that great one who raised herself as a power from the ground9 a nec0lace on his breast fashioned to the li0eness thereof9 brought from the333 high land in -un3 Thus came into e2istence Thebes in her name of *alley3 Thus came into e2istence 4athor the Great9 in the midst of the @grain of seedA in that name of hers of -unet3 Then he put his body upon her9 and he opened $pth( her as Ptah9 the father of the gods3 Thus came into e2istence the ,gdoad333 consisting of its four males9 and a wife for each one3H:& The appearance of the female creati"e principle in the primal waters is most stri0ingly echoed in 2n the 2rigin of the GorldE Abo"e all9 the water was purified by means of the image of the Pistis ophia who had appeared to the Primal Parent in the waters3 .ustly9 then9 it has been said9 @by means of the watersA3 the holy water9 since it brings life to the All9 purifies it3 $-4C ++9J%LF3GL= %L&3%(HFL The depiction of Ma?atO4athorO-unet as the female progenitor of the chaos=gods anticipates this critical concern in Gnostic te2ts with the appearance of a female consort alongside the Primal Parent as in -he Apocryphon of JohnE The source of the pirit flowed out of the li"ing water of light and it supplied all the aeons and uni"erses in e"ery manner3 +t realiBed +ts own image9 seeing it in the luminous waters of light which surround +t3 And +ts )nnoia performed a deed9 standing in +ts presence in the lustrous /ight9 that which is the power before the All9 which re"ealed herself > this is the perfect Pronoia if the All9 the /ight9 the li0eness of the /ight9 the image of the in"isible3 he is the perfect power9 the Barbelo9 the perfect aeon of glory3

H:F H:&

Pian0off9 +ythological 4apyriA -e:ts9 ;%L3

1rom room J of 5honsu temple at 5arna03 Richard A3 Par0er and /eonard 43 /es0o9 @The 5honsu Cosmology9A in 4yramid Studies and 2ther Essays 4resented to 0>E>S> Edwards< ed3 .ohn Baines9 T3G343 .ames9 Anthony /eary and A313 hore $/ondonE )gypt )2ploration ociety9 %&FF(9 %HF=:J3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+< J;3

HFL

255
$BG9 ;HE%&=;:E%J(
HF%

Also e2pressed in its -ag 4ammadi "ariantE 4e is the Yfirst of e"erythingZ for he is head of all the aeons333 1or it is he Yalone who loo0s at himself in hisZ light which surrounds him9 Ynamely the spring ofZ the water of life3 And Yit is he who gi"es to all the aeonsZ in e"ery form9 and who Yrealises his imageZ which he sees Yin the source of the piritZ3 +t is he who puts his desire in his Y/ight=water whichZ is in the spring of the water Yof purity whichZ surrounds him3 And Yhis thought performedZ a deed and she was un"eiled9 namely Yshe who had appeared before himZ in the glow of his light333 This is the first thought in his imageC she became the womb of the All $-4C ++9% '3%;=J3J(HF; Along with other shared similarities with 4athor9 the Gnostic @womb of e"erythingA in the theogony suggests the traditional "iew of 4athor as a lo"e9 se2uality9 and fertility goddess3HFG The te2t goes on to describe how a lower female hypostasis9 ophia9 creates the chaos gods and lower world3 The creation of the chaos gods in association with a female aspect of the Godhead can also be found in 2n the 2rigin of the GorldE These are the Yse"enZ powers of the se"en hea"ens of YChaosZ3 They came to e2ist androgynous9 consistent with the immortal archetype that e2isted before them9 according to the desire of Pistis so that the image of that which e2isted since the beginning might obtain until the end $-4C ++9J %L;3%(HF' 1or proof of this de"elopment outside of the temples we loo0 to the magical papyri as a transitional te2tual medium paralleling the rise of Gnostic thought3 The identification of the deceased with -un is ta0en o"er by the magician in a number of magical papyri9 as in PDM N+*3;JG wherein the magician claims @+ am the serpent who came forth from -unAHFJC PGM NN+3%: includes the entire ,gdoadE And you9 lord of life9 ruling the upper and lower regions9 whose Dustice is not shut off9 whose glorious name the Muses praise9 you whom the eight guards )9 ,9 C4,9 C4,!C49 -,!-9 -A!-+9 AM,!- and +, attend9 you who possess the inerrant truthC many mo"ing bodies will not o"erpower meC no spirit9 no "isitation9 no daimon9 no e"il being will oppose me9 for + will ha"e your name as a single phylactery in my heart9 P4+R+M-,!- A-,C43HFH

HF%

Coptic transcription from <alter C3 Till and 4ans=Martin chen0e9 eds3 and trans3 9ie )nostischen Schriften des .optischen 4apyrus Berolinensis 5678 $BerlinE A0ademie *erlag9 %&:;(9 &;9 &'3 Coptic transcription from Martin 5rause and Pahor /abib9 9ie 9rei &ersionen des Apokryphon des Johannes $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&H;(9 %%F=%;%3 Robbins9 Gomen in Ancient Egypt< %H%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+9 GH3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 ;%L3

HF;

HFG HF' HFJ HFH

@+ am he who came forth from -unA 9 written out as a sacred incantation9 is essentially a Coptic transcription of the usual hieroglyphic pronouncement3 +bid39 ;J&3

25+
These can be contrasted with any number of traditional )gyptian antecedents9 as in The Book of -wo GaysE YThe deceased identifies himself with -un in order to pass by a gateZ The gate of the flaming=front9 hidden bac09 in which there is a man who is bound3 +t is in the firmament with the sun for a duration3 + am -un9 lord of Dar0ness3 + ha"e come that + may ha"e power o"er the way3333$CT %%G;(HF: or a spell from -he Book of 9ead dating to the period Dust prior or current to the magical papyri in )gyptE + am he who donned the white and bright fringed cloa0 of -un which is on his breast9 which gi"es light in dar0ness9 which unites the two companion=goddesses who are in my body by means of the great magic which is on my mouth3 $BD pell FL(HFF The use of "erbal spells with which to bring light to a dar0ness associated with -un is also to be found in the -rimorphic 4rotennoia9 where the /ogos descends into the depthsE @4e Ythe /ogosZ re"ealed himself to those who li"e in Dar0ness $5A5)( and informed those who li"e in the Abyss $-,I-(A9 $-4C N+++ G:3%J(HF&3 Typhon9 although usually associated with eth9 at "arious points appears to ta0e on -un?s characteristicsE @boiler of the wa"es9 disturber of the sea?s great depthA3 acred names that are appealed to as great powers at times are clearly deri"ed from -unE e3g3 -+-,!-,9 -,!-+9 -,!-A+T49 -+,!9 -A!-+-9 -,!-C li0ewise a spell to cause separation9 strife and war9 in"o0es the sacred name AP,P 9 ob"iously the Apophis sna0e3 +n a sacred boo0 entitled @The )ighth Boo0 of MosesA an emanation hierarchy is depicted as followsE

%3 ;3 G3 '3 J3 H3 :3 F3

/ight <atery Abyss Mind $-ous( Generation $Procreation( 1ate Time oul $4syche( +A, $Demiurge(H&L

The second le"el is described as a god in charge of the watery abyssE @without him water neither increases nor decreasesA3 The eight le"els depicted in this remar0able te2t suggest the 4ermopolitan ,gdoad and this is rendered quite e2plicit in another spell wherein @the eight guardsA are mentioned9 including the pairs of -,!-O-A!-+ and AM,!-OAMA!-+3H&%
HF: HFF HF& H&L H&%

/es0o9 -he Ancient Egyptian Book of -wo Gays< ;J> 1aul0ner9 -he Book of the 9ead9 :F3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'LH3 1rom PGM N+++3%H;3 BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri9 %:H=:F3

The name BA+-P4-,!- is also mentioned and is a good e2ample with which to illustrate a point3 Most of these names continue to be "iewed by many scholars as nonsensical9 howe"er it is clear that BA+-P4-,!-9 ta0ing the Bohairic direct article before -,!- here9 and BA+- as BA - @soul of9A is

252
)lsewhere there are specific references to -un and to the @serpent who came forth from -unA and "arious references to the prime"al waters3 <hat is interesting is of course the entire worldly conte2t that these spells presuppose3 Gone is the abiding faith in Ma?at as bound up in legitimate nati"e rule3 +nstead we ha"e the 4ellenistic antipathy towards the dar0 forces of 1ate and the concern with appeasing these powers through submission9 bribery9 or wor0ing of efficacious spells3 -un is to be equated with these dar0er forces although there is a lingering numinous afterglow which continues to surround his figure3 +n ending the traditional traDectory of -un our last te2tual e2ample can be cited9 that of the /eyden Magical papyrus which was composed in Demotic some time in the early third century C3)33 +n this te2t the following inDunction appearsE @,pen to me Ar0hah before e"ery god and e"ery man333 1or + am the serpent that came forth from -unA3H&; The 4ermetic 4oimandres< the most Gnostic of all 4ermetic te2ts9 is also directly inspired by the )gyptian "iew of chaos9 from which creation proceeds3 The te2t describes a @dar0ness9 tending downwardsA9 appearing as a sna0e and changing into @something moistA3H&G <e are now well into the Coptic era $%LL B3C3)3 onwards( and it is worth noting at the outset that the translation of -,I- gi"en by Crum is @abyss of hell3 Depth of earth9 seaA3H&' Crum?s translation9 howe"er9 is based more upon later Christian=Coptic writings3 +n )gyptian Gnostic te2ts -,I- may be an abyss9 but it is one that generates e"ery sort of di"inity in this te2t9 which is -un?s traditional role3 The -ag 4ammadi Gnostic te2t 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld< which dates somewhere in %LL='LL C3)3< does not describe a completely demonised -unE -ow the eternal realm $aeon( of truth has no shadow outside it9 for the limitless light is e"erywhere within it3 But its e2terior is shadow9 which has been called by the name @Dar0nessA 1rom it there appeared a force presiding o"er the dar0ness3 And the forces that came into being subsequent to them called the shadow @the /imitless ChaosA3 1rom it9 e"ery 0ind of di"inity sprouted up YtogetherZ with the entire place9 Yso thatZ also9 YshadowZ is posterior to the first product3 +t was in the Abyss Y-,I-Z that YitZ $shadow( appeared9 out of Pistis3 $&F3;G=&&3G(H&J And you Ythe ignorant demiurge amaelZ will descend to your mother the Abyss Y-,I-Z along with those that belong to you3 $%LG3;;(H&H Then when abaoth Yson of the demiurgeZ was illumined9 he recei"ed great authority against all the forces of Chaos3 ince that day he has been called @/ord of the 1orcesA3 $%L'3'(H&:

BA - P) -,I-9 the @ pirit of the AbyssA9 -!-3

H&; H&G

13/l3Griffiths and 4erbet Thompson9 -he Leiden 4apyrus9 H&9 :%3

ee 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts< "ol3 %9 ;&C also +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 GL "optic 9ictionary $%&G&C reprint9 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:&(9 ;;Hb3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+9 GL3 +bid39 'L3 +bid39 ';3

H&' H&J H&H H&:

254
4e hated his father9 the Dar0ness Y5A5)Z9 and his mother the Abyss Y-,I-Z9 and loathed his sister9 the thought of the prime parent9 which mo"ed to and fro upon the waters3 $%L'3%L=%G(H&F 333they will fall into the Abyss Y-,I-Z9 and the Abyss will be o"erturned3 $%;H3GG( And the deficiency will be pluc0ed out by the root Y-,I-)Z $and thrown( down into the dar0ness Y5A5)Z3 And the light will withdraw up to its root Y-,I-)Z3 $%;:3'(H&& ;ostrianos depicts the four aeons of 5alyptosO-un9 describing them9 in terms of the 4eh gods9 as e2isting in a synchronic array9 as opposed to being diachronically prioritisedE But 5alyptos is a single aeonC he has four different aeons3 +n accord with each of the aeons they ha"e powers9 not li0e first and second powers9 for all these are eternities333 all of them e2ist in one9 dwelling together and perfected indi"idually in fellowship and filled with the aeon which really e2ists $%3%%J3%'=%%H3H(:LL +t is the description of these four as @eternitiesA that denotes the 4eh=god function9 along with the o2ymoronic description of their natures that occurs a little further on in the te2tE The 0nowledge of the 0nowledge is there together with a setting up of ignorance Chaos is there and a perfect place for all of them9 and they are strange3 True light $is there(9 also enlightened dar0ness along with he who does not really e2istE it does not really e2ist3 $%%:3'=%G(:L% The traditional o2ymoronic depiction of -un?s innertness which still has this mo"ing to and fro of latency within it is to be found in the other @5alyptosA tractate AllogenesE ince it is impossible for the Yindi"idualsZ to comprehend the !ni"ersal ,ne Ysituated in theZ place that is higher than perfect9 they apprehend by means of a 1irst YThoughtZ > $it is( not as Being $alone(9 YbutZ it is along with the latency of )2istence that he confers Being3 4e Ypro"idesZ e"erything for YhimselfZ since it is he who shall come to be when he recognises himself3 And he is Y,neZ who subsists as a YcauseZ and source Yof BeingZ and YanZ immaterial Ymaterial and anZ innumerable Ynumber and a formlessZ form and a YshapelessZ shape and a powerlessness and a power and an insubstantial substance and a motionless motion and an inacti"e acti"ity3 YIet he is aZ pro"ider of Ypro"isions andZ a di"inity YofZ di"inity333 And that ,ne mo"ed motionlessly in that which go"erns9 lest he sin0 into the boundless by means of another acti"ity of Mentality3 $'F3&=G; U JG3%L=%'(:L; A most compelling depiction of -un and the Chaos $4eh( gods is to be found at the "ery beginning of -he Intitled -e:tE

H&F H&& :LL :L% :L;

+bid39 ';3 +bid39 &L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3NNN+9 %&F9 ;LL3 +bid39 ;L;3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 %&F9 ;LF3

25This is the 1irst Parent of the )ntireties3 This is the first )ternity3 This is the 5ing of the !n"anquishable3 This is he in whom the )ntireties mo"e to and fro3 :LG This is he who ga"e form to them within himself3 This is the self=originated and self=generated place This is the Depth $=ythosL of the )ntireties3 +n truth this is the great -un $N2YN(333 $%3H= %%( This is he whose members are a multitude $@myriad=myriadA( of powers in each of them3 $%3%H=%:(:L' The te2t goes on to describe @the !noriginated Parent who is 1ather and Mother9 alone unto himself9 whose Pleroma encompasses the twel"e Depths3 $Chap3;3 ;;F3;(:LJ The twelfth is described as @the Truth from whom all Truth comes forthA $'3F(3 and the Gree0 alethia is used with the Coptic M)3 This @image of the ParentA is described as @the Mother of the aeonsA $'3& U %L(9 and one is reminded of the ubiquitous presence of the Goddess Ma?at in her role in the "arious )gyptian theogonies3 The system can be laid out as followsE

:LG

Charlotte A3 Baynes9 A "optic )nostic -reatise $CambridgeE !ni"ersity of Cambridge Press9 %&GG(9 '%9 claims the Coptic C<PM comes from the hieroglyphic inscriptions associated with the waters of the innundation3 + ha"e been unable to completely detail this3 Adolf )rman and 4ermann Grapow9 G*rter=uch der Aegyptisch Sprache< Band ' $/eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs?sche Buchhandlung9 %&GL(9 %&F9 list the associations with the waters9 @to weepA9 also @a characteristic of Apophis3A *ycichl9 9ictionaire !tymologi#ue de la Langue "opte9 %&H9 lists only the demotic antecedent9 @to errA9 or @to loseA9 while also suggesting a possible association with C,PM9 @a type of beer3A +t seems that9 by Coptic times9 the associations with losing one?s way9 weeping9 and inebriation9 caused the word to be used in Gnostic te2ts when spea0ing of error and ignorance3 The Gnostic "iew on the @drun0ennessA of ignorance has been elsewhere remar0ed3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+++A -he Books of Jeu and the Intitled -e:t in the Bruce "ode:9 ed3 R3 Mc/3 <ilson $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 ;%'3 Coptic te2t ta0en from -he =ooks of Jeu and the Intitled -e:t in the Bruce "ode:9 trans3 and commentary9 *iolet MacDermot $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 ;%H9 ;%F3

:L'

:LJ

ParentbDeepb-!DemiurgeOParentO/ogosO-ousOAnthropos Gnosis )nneadE /ife Rest Resurrection Rebirth 4ope /o"e Pistis eal Pleroma surrounding %; DeepsE %( all=source ;( all=wise G( all=mystery '( all=gnosis J( all=chaste H( e"ery silence :( insubstantial doorbsubstance F( forefather of forefathers &( all=fatherOself=father %L( all=powerful %%( in"isible one %;( TruthE Mother of the Aeons

25.

DemiurgeO1orethoughtE ' Monads U ' Gates9 each withE H helpersO;' myriad powersO& enneadsO%L decadsO%; dodecadsOJ pentads % ,"erseer wO three aspectsE %( unbegotten ;( true G( unutterable Aphr_don k %; beneficent ones 1orefather Adam of the /ight Perfect Mind D))P G ParenthoodsE %( Co"ered ,neO4idden God ;( J TreesO,nly=begotten /ogos G( ilenceO ource +MM)A !RAB/) D))P G GreatnessesE %( till ,ne ;( !n0nowable ,ne k GHJ Parenthoods b year G( +nfinite ,ne k onshipOChristO*erifier D))P ,1 )T4)! wO %; ParenthoodsE %( indi"isible ;( incomprehensible G( un0nowable '( silence J( still H( all=father :( all=mystery F( rest U resurrection &( co"ered %L( thrice=male %%( triple=powered %;( truth eparation of )2istent from -on=)2istent $)2istent b )ternalC -on=)2istent b Matter( /ord of Glory eparates Matter into Two /andsE /and of Death and Dar0ness /and of /ife and /ight

+t is important to lay out a schematic9 e"en in the face of such a surfeit of apparent erroneous elaboration9 for it is only in this way that larger patterns can be drawn out3 +n this case

25K
there are a number of apparent similarities with Eugnostos $see Appendi2 B(3 The role of -un and his enneads is replicated here9 as is the emphasis upon the number %;3 /i0ewise the ophia figure9 TruthOMa?at9 is the final figure in a series Dust before the creation of the lower realms3 The generation of a specific number of powers is equated with the di"isions of time9 in this case the GHJ days of the year9 and the emphasis upon radical e"il is li0ewise minimalised in both tractates3 The figure of eth is ambiguous in both tractatesC certainly to be lin0ed with the entire ethianO,ld Testament model9 but also suggesting the )gyptian3 At one point in our te2t an only=begotten one hidden in eth is referred to as @the Dar0ness of /ightA and the one @through whom etheus is 5ingA $%;3;JU;:(3 eth rules o"er his own Deep9 but there is also a suggestion of the traditional myth of 4orus and eth towards the end of the te2t wherein the end of the theogony is reached in the di"ision of matter into two lands3 Apart from these considerations the tractate leans more towards Archaic Gnosis in its descriptions on innumerable realms and hierarchies3 The entire te2t is theogonic9 along the lines of the -ripartite -ractate to be sure9 but displays a more hac0neyed obsession with its "ast hierarchy in the same spirit as the 4istis Sophia3 4owe"er9 Charlotte Baynes9 in the introduction to her translation of this te2t9 is quite Dustified to remar0 that it is @a treatise which must ran0 among the best products of philosophical Gnosticism of the early centuries A3DA3:LH The specific terminologies employed9 in terms of the Gree0 loan=words9 are much a0in to the -rimorphic 4rotennoia> +n the *alentinian system of Ptolemeus as deri"ed from +renaeus $Against (eresies9 Boo0 %(9 the first aeon of the primal ogdoad is Bythos with his female consort ilence $Sige(9 and Bythos9 the Deep3 Bythos is a constant feature of *alentinian thought9 his role being the Irstoff out of which the theogony proceeds3 +n -he )ospel of -ruth9 for e2ample9 Bythos is ob"iously -un in the following descriptionE Because of the Depth they recei"ed the )rror9 $the Depth( of the one who encircles all spaces9 there being none that encircle him3 +t was a great wonder that they were in the Parent9 not 0nowing him9 $or( that they were able to come forth by themsel"es9 since they were unable to understand or 0now the one in whom they were3 $-4C +9G ;;3;'=G'(:L: and we ha"e a "ery similar passage from -he -ripartite -ractateE But since he is YasZ he is9 Yhe isZ a spring9 which is not diminished by the water which abundantly flows from it3 At the time they e2isted in the +dea$EnnoeaL of the 1ather9 that is9 in the hidden Bythius$Depth(9 Bythius 0new them9 but they were powerless to 0now the Depth in which they e2istedC nor could they 0now themsel"es9 nor could they 0now anything else $HL3%%=;H(:LF Tertullian reacted to the peculiar nature of the head aeon in *alentinian Gnostic thought as followsE uch stories of the hea"ens you would imagine to be detached tenements in some happy isle of the blessed9 + 0now not where3 There the god e"en of the *alentinians has his
:LH :L: :LF

Baynes< A "optic )nostic -reatise9 "ii3 Coptic transcription from )*9 %'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;LH3

257
dwelling place in the attics3 They call him indeed9 as to his essence9 4erfect Aeon9 but in respect of his personality9 Before the Beginning< and sometimes Bythos $Depth(9 a name which is most unfit for one who dwells in the heights abo"e\ They describe him as unbegotten9 immense9 infinite9 in"isible9 and eternal3:L& <ith the 4ermopolitan theology9 we ha"e noted their emphasis upon the primordial ogdoad9 the so=called Chaos gods3 +n this system -un has been dilated into eight apophatic qualities and has therefore had his 4eliopolitan pre=eminence somewhat diluted3 Tertullian appears to be detailing e2actly this phenomenon with respect to di"erging opinions among the *alentiniansE There are some who do not claim the first place for Bythus9 but only a lower one3 They put their ,gdoad in the foremost ran03:%L The names of the primal ogdoad in this "ariant lea"e no doubt as to their deri"ation from the apophatic 4ermopolitan eightE @+nconcei"ableA9 @+ndescribableA9 @+n"isibleA9 @-amelessA9 @!nbegottenA9 etc3 The final fall of -un occurred in the Christian era in )gypt9 from 'LL C3)3 onwards9 although it was facilitated in this by the ambiguity of the word as it was used in Gnostic and magical te2ts3 More than this9 the association of the word with a @paganA deity was undoubtedly recognised and so -un?s fate was sealed3 -un9 although "enerated for the longest of ages throughout )gyptian history e"entually suffered from his pro2imity to Chaos and Disorder9 forces which were conceptually9 as well as politically9 set loose upon occupied )gypt in the /ate Period and which beto0ened the flight of Ma?at to a higher supernal realm3 The 4ermopolitan chaos=gods were found guilty by association and the dar0ness in -un e"entually o"ercame his august properties as later Coptic te2ts demonstrate3 4owe"er9 this dysteliological element of per"ersity9 always symbolised by the need to slay Apophis who li"ed in the Abyss9 fulfilled an essential theogonic role in both )gyptian and Gnostic cosmologies3 imply put9 this need pertains to the whole question of the original necessity for aeonial e2tension9 god and goddess hypostasisation etc3 The parent wished to @find his rootA as one Gnostic tractate puts itC li0ewise great pains were ta0en by the )gyptian theologians to ensure that the orderly masculine nhh aspect9 and the feminine9 chaotic9 dt side of -un remained e"er=presentE -un upholds the solar bar09 he also contains the deadly and destructi"e Apep in the entrails of his dar0nessE this is a perfect image for the duality of the )gyptian "iew of creation9 and of the Gnostic Parent and his or her @DepthsA3 Thousands of years later9 .a0ob BQhme was to put into words the "ery conundrum addressed by the earliest )gyptian theologians9 that of a will to emanate appearing in a boundless pregnant "oidE <e are able then to recogniBe that the eternal !nground out of -ature is a will9 li0e an eye wherein -ature is hiddenC li0e a hidden fire that burns not9 which e2ists and also e2ists not333

:L&

9e 4raes> (aer> +*3*++9 9 trans3 P3 4olmes9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 +++ $-ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&LF(9 JLH=: 9e 4raes> (aer> +*3NNN*9 9 trans3 P3 4olmes9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< %ol> 000 $-ew Ior0E cribner?s ons9 %&LF(9 J%&

:%L

25P
1or all is comprised in the will9 and is an essence9 which9 in the eternal !nground9 eternally ta0es its rise in itself9 enters into itself9 grasps itself in itself9 and ma0es the centre in itself333:%%

BQhme elsewhere refers to the first principle as @the Abyss9 the -othing9 and the AllA9 out of which proceeds @the <ill of the Abyss333 the 1ather of all BeingsA3:%; chelling9 too9 is no pantheist in seeing the essence of freedom as a dar0 principle in the Godhead3 /i0e BQhme9 passages in his writings ha"e been labeled @gnosticA for their depiction of an umbral and irrational di"ine abyss that precedes being3 ,ne cannot escape the connection9 howe"er we can see that Gnostic thought is but a conduit in this regard9 one through which the ancient )gyptian "iew of -un is drawnE
1ollowing the eternal act of self=re"elation9 the world as we now behold it9 is all rule9 order and formC but the unruly lies e"er in the depths as though it might again brea0 through9 and order and form nowhere appear to ha"e been original9 but it seems as though what had initially been unruly had been brought to order333 <ithout this preceding gloom9 creation would ha"e no realityC dar0ness is its necessary heritage333 This primal longing mo"es in anticipation li0e a surging9 billowing sea3333:%G

:%% :%;

Si: -heosophic 4oints $Ann ArborE !ni"ersity of Michigan Press9 %&JF(9 H9 F3

@1our Tables of Di"ine Re"elation9A in Jaco= Boehme Essential $eadings< ed3 Robin <aterfield $<ellingboroughE The Aquarian Press9 %&F&(9 ;%J3 13<3 chelling9 4hilosophical En#uiries into the Nature of (uman 'reedom< G'=GJ3

:%G

25, Chapter Eleven: The Heliopolitan Theology of eonial E!tension

.an 8andee ma0es a critical obser"ation with respect to the Gnostic deri"ation of the androgynous Creator and )nnead from ancient )gyptian thoughtE The outcome of the comparison of the Gnostic and ancient )gyptian primordial creator= god is that there is at the "ery least an agreement in phenomenological terms3 +n both forms of religions it is a question of the androgyny of the creator god9 containing masculine and feminine fecundity within itself333 As well9 there first came forth9 before the de"elopment of the phenomenological world9 a transcendent number of gods9 the )nnead of 4eliopolis9 the Pleroma of the Gnostic te2ts3:%' 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld9 besides adumbrating the 4eh=gods9 also describes this adherence to the androgynous archetype that permeates )gyptian and Gnostic thoughtE These are the Yse"enZ powers of the se"en hea"ens of YChaosZ3 They came to e2ist androgynous9 consistent with the immortal archetype that e2isted before them9 according to the desire of Pistis so that the image of that which e2isted since the beginning might obtain until the end $%L;3%(:%J The @!ntitled Te2tA presents as clear a 4eliopolitan=deri"ed description of the androgynous Atum creating his ennead as one could hope to find in Gnostic thoughtE +t is this Ythe MonadZ which stirred e"erything with its radiance And they recei"ed Gnosis9 and /ife9 and 4ope9 and Repose9 and /o"e9 and Awa0ening9 and 1aith9 and Rebirth9 and eal3 This is the )nnead which came forth from the !noriginated Parent who is 1ather and Mother9 alone unto himself9 whose Pleroma encompasses the twel"e Depths3 $;;:3;;=;;F3G(:%H +n addition to this9 we are presented with a graphic e2ample of Atum?s procreati"e act in +elchi,edekE all the archons and angels along with the sperm YwhichZ lept Yforth from the 1atherZ of the )ntirety3333 YThey beingZ engendered9 the Ygods and angelsZ along with human beings from out of the spermE all of Ythe naturesZ9 those in Yhea"en andZ those upon the earth9 and YthoseZ under the earth3333 $&3%:%:(

:%' :%J :%H :%:

.an 8andee9 @Der androgyne Gott in 6gyptenA9 ;::3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+9 GH3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+++< ;%H9 ;%F3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N*9 JH9 JF3

2+5
+ note in passing that Atum?s name connotes @e"erythingA or @entiretyA from the )gyptian tm9 and thus underwrites the ubiquitous Gnostic ideal of the pleroma3 This act depicts the beginning of the theogonic process9 the point at which the Abyss differentiates itself into "arious hypostases3 Although )piphanius is historically short=sighted in assigning the deri"ations of *alentinian thought to 4esiod9 he is close to the mar0 in seeing the "ery architectonic of Gnostic thought in 4esiod?s -heogony9 where Chaos generates all the gods and goddessesE 1or he Y*alentinusZ too wants to introduce thirty gods and aeons and hea"ens9 of which the first is Depth9 as he says with his lac0 of sense9 Dust as 4esiod9 the one responsible for his ideas9 certainly saidE @Chaos is the "ery first of godsA3:%F -ow who does not realiBe that @ChaosA and @DepthA mean the same thingS:%& +t has been possible in this study to bring out the emanationist foundations of )gyptian Gnostic thought at almost e"ery turn through analysis of "arious e2tant te2ts3 + propose to continue with this heuristic in this chapter9 howe"er9 Patristic e"idence will be more closely drawn upon in order to show what re"erberations there e2isted9 abroad from )gypt9 in the minds of those who recognised a definite alien and pseudo philosophical quality that imbued the writings of the Gnostics in )gypt3 +t is my contention that this alienness was in its way correctly apprehended by 4ippolytus9 +renaeus9 et al>9 and that modern inclusi"istic tendencies in Christian ,rigins to ameliorate this strangeness in fa"our of a more sanitised @Christian GnosticismA patently ignores the ancient oriental precepts of )gyptian emanationist thought3 <hile the logos=oriented Memphite Theology is to be found in the teachings of Basileides among a number of other e2amples9 by far the largest proportion of Gnostic emanationist systems display their 4eliopolitan pedigree in remaining true to the central procreati"e pattern of the di"ine family tree made up of pairs of gods and goddessesE this was most obscure and unpalatable to the early Church polemicists3 Patristic writings of course must be ta0en cum grano salis< yet we ha"e no great need to doubt their larger obser"ations as they targeted the phenomenon of Gnostic aeons and the patterns they appeared within3 Theirs was not a great tas0 in terms of refutation9 for the systems they reported on displayed as much of an off=putting disregard for clearly defined system in their day as they continue to do in ours3 <e ha"e seen the primal ogdoad show up in "arious Gnostic systems of thought9 the 4eh=god @myriadA and chaotic nature of this ogdoad often ob"ious3 Tertullian9 writing around ;LL C3)39 ga"e "ent to his frustration in dealing with the Gnostic fi2ation in this regard9 and inad"ertently confirms the function of the 4ermopolitan ,gdoad in *alentinian thoughtE Thus you ha"e an ,gdoad9 a double Tetra9 out of the conDunctions of males and females > the cells $so to spea0( of the primordial Aeons9 the fraternal nuptials of the *alentinian gods9 the simple originals of heretical sanctity and maDesty9 a rabble > shall + say9 of criminals or of deitiesS > at any rate9 the fountain of all ulterior fecundity3:;L

:%F :%&

4esiod9 -heogony9 %%H3

)piphanius9 4anarion G%3;3J9 in -he 4anarion of St> Epiphanius< Bishop of Salamis< ed3 and trans3 Philip R3 Amidon $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&L(9 %L&3 9e 4raes> (aer> +*9 Chap3*++3 Peter 4olmes9 Ante@Nicene 'ather "ol +++ $-ew Ior0E cribner?s ons9 %&LF(9 JL:3

:;L

2++
That these four male=female pairs of aeons are seen as primordial9 @the fountainA of all subsequent creations9 can lea"e no doubt as to the 4ermopolitan theogony that informs this system3 -or are we surprised to learn9 as has been noted elsewhere9 that the first original aeon from which all else springs is 0nown as Bythus9 the DepthsE -un and the primordial ogdoad together form the well=springs of the *alentinian theogony both in the te2ts and the patristic sources at our disposal3 +t might ha"e been possible for early orthodo2y9 or proto=orthodo2y as the case may be9 to safely ignore this "eritable mythopoeic gushing up from the unconscious had the Gnostics simply e2isted as an apolitical and powerless collection of fringe groups3 The Patristic response connotes that the imaginati"e fire of Gnostic thought caught on enough to gi"e them at first pause9 and then consternation9 as Christian thought itself was percei"ed to be drawn into9 perhaps e"en deri"ed from the Gnostic warp and woof3 .erome noted the acute intelligence of *alentinus:;%9 +renaeus reacted to the considerable presence of *alentinians in the "icinity of /yon9 and others indict the specifically )gyptian mythological bac0drop drawn upon by Gnostic authors at "arious Dunctures3 Tertullian9 writing around ;LL C3)39 saw all heresies instigated by philosophy9 the central Gnostic notion of the Aeon as a philosophical figment3:;; +n general9 the patristic authors are hard=pressed to understand the mystifying phenomenon of reams and reams of hypostasising aeons that appear in the Gnostic te2ts before them li0e a cacophony of sounds9 a haphaBard confusion of firewor0s lighting the dar0ness of the Ale2andrian imagination3 This conDectural impetus is curiously wedded to the methods and terminology of philosophical in"estigation9 enough so to con"ince most heresiologists that pagan philosophy was the true culprit9 as with TertullianE <hat indeed has Athens to do with .erusalemS <hat concord is there between the Academy and the ChurchS what between heretics and ChristiansS333 Away with all attempts to produce a mottled Christianity of toic9 Platonic9 and dialectic composition\:;G This assumption has carried on current appraisals of Gnostic thought by far and large9 and the assumption seems to ha"e been that there is a haphaBard9 gratuitous9 and e2tra"agant imaginati"e quality to Gnostic e2pression9 one that flies in the face of a more reasoned spirituality based upon true faith3 As Tertullian was to e2claim in the midst of the e2asperating tedium of setting down the *alentinian system9 + prefer to be ignorant of than to be informed3 1or what can be right in a system which is propounded with such absurd particularsS:;' +t might ultimately be as fruitless to attempt a definition of the 1our 8oas of Bla0e as it would be to characterise or philosophically Dustify each indi"idual member of the *alentinian ,gdoad9 although a whole arsenal of methodologies might be brought to bear here9 from structuralism to .ungian analysisC howe"er9 as one mo"es from the conte2t of )gyptian theogony to mythological particulars9 one begins to see that @the medium is the messageA if it can be put that way3 1or while the indi"idual goddessOaeon is important9 as with Portia in -he +erchants of
:;%

@-o one can bring heresy into being unless he is possessed9 by nature9 of an outstanding intellect and has gifts pro"ided by God3 uch a person was *alentinus9A 0n (os> %%9 %L> 9e 4raes> (aer> +*3*++9 JL:3 9e 4raes> (aer> +3*++9 ;'H3 9e 4raes> (aer> +*3NNN*9 J%&

:;; :;G :;'

2+2
&enice9 this importance is mythopoeically layered9 te2t9 or in this case9 theogony=bound9 as there is a larger role to be played3 The o"erarching pattern of the ennead in )gyptian thought9 for e2ample9 is of far greater theological magnitude than the indi"idual members9 hence we ha"e no less than F' 0nown "ariations on the theme of @enneadAC this adherence to the ancient pattern in Gnostic thought li0ewise e2plains the proliferation of "ariations beneath the @constantA rubrics of enneads9 ogdoads9 hebdomads and the li0e3 4ippolytus9 at the beginning of his anti=Gnostic polemic written around ;;; C3)39 significantly offers a lengthy primer in Gree0 philosophy by way of demonstrating his own philosophical credentials before attempting to detail Gnostic deri"ation and absurdity3 Iet 4ippolytus came to belie"e that there was something else going on in this biBarre constellation of teachings3 !nli0e his heresiological predecessors9 +renaeus and Tertullian9 4ippolytus recognised Basileides as a proponent of ancient )gyptian theologyE @These are the myths that Basileides tells from his schooling in )gyptian wisdom9 and ha"ing learnt such wisdom from them he bears this sort of fruitA3:;J This is no idle hearsay or slander from 4ippolytus9 for he is quite able to describe in some depth the )gyptian insight about their emanationist theologyE Do not the )gyptians9 howe"er9 who suppose themsel"es more ancient than all9 spea0 of the power of the DeityS 333they asserted that the Deity is an in"isible monad9 both itself generating itself9 and that out of this were formed all things3 1or this9 say they9 being unbegotten produces the succeeding numbersC for instance9 the monad superadded into itself9 generates the duadC and in li0e manner9 when superadded $into duad9 triad9 and so forth(9 produces the triad and tetrad9 right up to the decade9 which is the beginning and end of numbers333 and the elements themsel"es9 when computed and resol"ed by subtraction of enneads9 terminate properly9 some of them in the masculine number9 and others of them in the feminine3 And9 again9 the ennead is subtracted for this cause9 because the three hundred and si2ty parts of the entire $circle( consist of enneads3:;H +t is re"ealing9 to say the least9 that this influential early Christian figure has had to wait se"enteen centuries to ha"e his "iew more fully brought to light3:;: +n e2amining the 4ippolytan "ersion of Basileides $see Appendi2 B3%L where this "ersion and the +renaean Basileides are both detailed(9 one is struc0 once again by the usual theogonic progression of entities from the @-on=)2istent GodA in his *oid9 to the )gyptian model of the egg $with which they "ery effecti"ely conceptualised the idea of latency(9 to the appearance of @threenessA e2actly where it should appear9 in the usual Atum > hu > Tefnut configuration3 1ollowing this is the normati"e de"elopment of numerical aeonial patterns9 in this case an ogdoad $whether or not it is 4ermopolitan=deri"ed is impossible to say from the te2t(9 and a hebdomad3 The system described by +renaeus $see Appendi2 B( has enough in common to be sure that it comes from the same constellation of @Basileidean thoughtA > whether it is a younger or older Basileides9 a contemporary disciple9 or later follower9 does not matter3 The emphasis upon a Memphite Ptah

:;J :;H

$efutatio :3;:C Catherine ,sborne9 trans39 $ethinking Early )reek 4hilosophy< GL&3 $efutatio +*3N/+++9 trans3 .343 MacMahon9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< %ol> & $-ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&%%(9 'L

:;:

+ do not wish to ignore the wor0 of those early scholars9 mentioned elsewhere in this wor09 who turned their sights upon this possibility3 4owe"er9 AmPlineau and others9 ob"iously lac0ed the philological foundations9 not to say e2tant Gnostic te2ts9 to pursue this thesis adequatelyC nor do + wish to enter into the debate as to whether 4ippolytus actually e2isted3 ee *allPe9 A Study in Anti@)nostic 4olemics< '%3

2+4
<ord=generated cosmos9 the naming of Abrasa2 as ruler of the GHJ hea"ens in both te2ts9 lea"e little room for doubt3 4ippolytus also reports on the -aasenes9 their name deri"ed from the 4ebrew word nahash for serpent3 Their system9 e2pressed in a gospel which has not sur"i"ed entitled According to the Egyptians9 describes the tripartite di"ision of Man whose archetype is bise2ual3:;F The )gyptians9 in the "iew of this group9 @are of greater antiquity than all man0indA3:;& <hether or not this was a group of )gyptian Gnostics is impossible to sayC howe"er9 their dependence upon )gyptian mythology is quite stri0ing according to 4ippolytus E And this is the great and secret and un0nown mystery of the uni"erse9 concealed and re"ealed among the )gyptians3 1or ,siris $the -aasene( says9 is in temples in front of +sisC and his pudendum stands e2posed9 loo0ing downwards9 and crowned with all its own fruits of things that are made333 And the Gree0s9 deri"ing this mystical $e2pression( from the )gyptians9 preser"e it until this day3:GL Cerinthus9 a Gnostic acti"e outside of )gypt in the first or second century9 is reported by +renaeus to be @a man who was educated in the wisdom of the )gyptiansA3 Cerinthus postulated the demiurge remo"ed from the Primal ource9 one ignorant of the realms abo"e him3:G% +renaeus treats the ,phites in a progression of descripti"e passages that li0ely maintains the order of the teachings he had access to3 +n this he describes a typical )gyptian emanationist system9 proceeding from the pre=e2istent -un > @water9 dar0ness9 Abyssus9 ChaosA3 The descriptions of *alentinian thought passed on by +renaeus are particularly useful in understanding their own brand of emanationist thought3 +renaeus goes to great lengths to engage the e2igencies of Gnostic theology here9 in an attempt to demonstrate the inherent absurdities of their system3 +t is not an easy tas0 to define @*alentinianismA historically or sociologically3 *alentinus was born in )gypt9 tentati"ely identified by )piphanius as @a Phrebonite9 YbornZ on the coast of )gypt:G;9 and recei"ed a Gree0 education in Ale2andria3 During his formati"e years there he was also e2posed to many di"erse dualistic teachings9 including those from the )gyptian Thoth $Gree0 4ermes( tradition9 Platonism9 and li0ely 8oroastrian and )ssene influences3 As a teacher in Ale2andria he was a contemporary of BasileidesC he is also reported by )piphanius around G:J C3)3 to ha"e taught in Athribus9 Prosopites9 Arsinoe9 the Thebaid9 the @lower region of the seacoastA and Ale2andriaA3:GG The only writings we ha"e from *alentinus are fragments embedded in heresiological wor0s9 although -he )ospel of -ruth may be his own3:G' *alentinus
:;F :;& :GL :G%

$ef> *3++3 $efutatio +*3N/+++9 trans3 .343 MacMahon9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 *9 '&3 +bid39 JL3 +bid39 JL3

Ad%>(aer> +3NN*+3%3 trans3 A3 Roberts and .3 Donaldson9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 +9 GJ%=J;C also reported in 4ippolytus to be @disciplined in the teaching of the )gyptiansA9 $efutatio *++3NN+9 trans3 .343 MacMahon9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 *9 %%'3 4anarion G%3;3%3 trans3 Philip R3 Amidon9 -he 4anarion of St> Epiphanius< Bishop of Salamis<%LF3 4anarion G%3:3%C ibid39 %%G3 This based upon the continued e2istence of *alentinian communities there in )piphanius? day3 Bentley /ayton claims this to be the case $)nostic Scriptures9 introduction(9 yet there is no proof for this other than the fact that this tractate contains a fair number of @*alentinianA features9 as well as demonstrating some of the rhetorical sophistication one would would e2pect from a figure such as

:G; :GG

:G'

2+Dourneyed to Rome around %'L C3)3 and almost became bishop there according to Tertullian3 4is subsequent e2ile to Cyprus and his death are shrouded in mystery3 The school established by this strongly philosophical poet=theosopher was wide=spread and prolific9 lasting many hundreds of years before finally succumbing to persecution3 +t appears as though a western and eastern branch of *alentinianism e"entually e"ol"ed although this did not result from any maDor or radical theological schism3 The *alentinian system is best "iewed as a theogonic cycle9 an e"olutionary circle within the Godhead3 /i0e the later poeticOmystical writings of .a0ob BQhme9 the concern here is with the necessary generation of real and actual radical e"il from out of the @depthsA of God3 The de"elopment of aeonial #ualities itself creates deficiency $as deri"ati"e but independent entities9 they remain ignorant of the Godhead(9 but an undergirding necessity continues the e"olution of the aeons who e2ist in se2ual pairs3 The *alentinian Gnostic perspecti"e upon the fundamental e2istence of archetypal male=female syBygies $in the Pleroma( and their theogonic generation of offspring is closely allied to the 4eliopolitan model3:GJ This emphasis is perfectly e2pressed in A &alentinian E:positionE @1or this is the desire of the parent9 that nothing occur in the Pleroma without a syBygyA $N+ ;3GH3;F=G%(3:GH *alentinian te2ts emphasise the formation of human syBygies9 or @hea"enly conDunctionsA in order to mirror the di"ine realm and effect personal sal"ation3 +mplicit in both )gyptian and Gnostic theogonies9 is the e2istence of an androgynous ideal which stands at the "ery font of the emanation process3 To ascend to this le"el9 to be sa"ed9 is to regain this androgynous state3 ,ne must agree with M3 copello in her assessment of this as an eradication or fusion of oppositesE @Androgyny9 in the Gnostic spirit9 coincidentia oppositorum9 is the annihilation of all se2ualityA3:G: +n the )gyptian Gnostic conte2t the pairing finally bro0en by ophia is an ob"ious disruption of Ma?at9 embodying a @ ethianA element of disturber3 +n a suggesti"ely ambiguous setting9 ophia plunges into the depths by refusing her partnerC yet this is a result of her desire to @0nowA the 1ather9 and she therefore confronts the issue of aeonial ignorance with respect to the 1ather3 The Pleroma is agitated by her @fallAC e"en so9 one imagines their disturbance to result from the sudden awareness of their own ignorance The result is a @formless abortionA which e2ists as a negati"e manifestation of the inchoate side of the original 1ather from which the aeons proceeded3 Thus the qualities contained in this lower formlessness must be actualised and9 although the redempti"e intercession of 4oros and Monogenes is successful9 the continued presence of the lower realm bespea0s a loss of innocence and an ac0nowledgement of the "itality of )"il3 The deri"ation of the Gnostic @fallenA goddess motif from a number of )gyptian antecedents shall be ta0en up in the ne2t chapter in detail3 ophia is redeemed by the di"ine emissary and returns to the Pleroma although she lea"es a shadow image of herself behind > the ophia Achamoth3 This lower ophia is an equi"ocal female principle responsible for the creation of the ignorant Demiurge and e"il archons9 as well as the creation of the physical world and man0ind through the Demiurge3 The Demiurge is seen as the .ewish creator=god .ahweh who proclaims @there is no god but myself\A <hile other Gnostic systems display a strong @cosmic anti= emitismA in this regard9 *alentinian thought9 as well as the system of Basileides9 "iew the demiurge as an ignorant tool who is sooner or later informed as to the true state of affairs3
*alentinus3
:GJ :GH :G:

ee 8andee9 @Der Androgyne Gott in 6gypten3A Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN*+++9 %G'3

M3 copello9 LE:gXse de lAmeA 0ntroduction< traduction< commentaire9 -4 ;J $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FJ(9 %;%3

2+.
Man0ind is di"ided into three groupsE the hylics $fleshly types(C the psychics $those with free will(C and the pneumatics $the redeemed ones who also operate as redeemers9 li0e Christ(3 The question as to whether one is born into one of these groups9 or whether one acquires merits or demerits in the course of a lifetime resulting in a final assignation has no clear answer3 The pneumatics are sa"ed by natureE these are the Gnostics9 hence the charge here of @Gnostic elitismA3 The psychics must choose between sal"ation and perdition9 although in the -ripartite -ractate9 an e2tensi"e *alentinian te2t9 e"en the fallen psychics appear to be sa"ed in the end9 and the orthodo2 Church falls in this group3 The hylics are soteriologically doomed by nature3 There is a foreshadowing of Gnostic elitism in )gyptian thought in the 0nstruction of Amenemope dating to the Ramesside period although e2tant copies appear much later3 This te2t emphasises an ideal contemplati"e man9 silent and mindful of a high religiosity3 4is ad"ersary9 @the heated manA is impetuous9 filled with falsehood9 with a @faulty heartA $N++%:(E 4e who does e"il9 the shore reDects him $+*3%;( Iou heated man9 how are you nowS 4e cries out9 his "oice reaches hea"en3 +t is the Moon YThothZ who declares his crime3 $+*3%:=%&( A storm that bursts li0e fire in straw9 uch is the heated man in his hour3 <ithdraw from him9 lea"e him alone $*3%'=%H( Do not befriend the heated man9 -or approach him for con"ersation3 $N+3%G=%'(:GF <hat suggests the Gnostic "iew in this di"ision of humanity9 is the aura of perdition in the lower group that threatens to carry all along with it9 @headed for the abyssA $N*+++3;;(3 Apart from this9 the )gyptian underworld was concei"ed as tripartite9 prefiguring the @sa"edA and @damnedA *alentinian categories of the pneumatic and hylic at either end9 as well as denoting a @transitionA Bone in=between which corresponds to the *alentinian psychic3:G& The figure of Christ is apparent in *alentinian theology although here9 as with most Gnostic=Christian systems9 the focus is upon the larger theogonic pictureE the descent of the on to assist ophia9 his appearance in the world wor0ing in conDunction with the pneumatics9 the final ascent to the bridal chamber preparatory to the higher androgynous ascent into the Pleroma9 and the destruction of all that cannot be redeemed in the lower world3 *alentinian thought represents a far more sophisticated e2ploration of the problem of e"il than the rigid dualism of Manichaeism for e2ample3 Pushed to its deepest speculations9 the mythology of *alentinus is surprisingly monistic in waysC yet this is but a "ehicle for a world= "iew that is stri0ingly dualistic3 The tenor of *alentinian writings is quintessentially Gnostic9 by which one might spea0 of the o"er=riding Gnostic sentiment of alienation in the tyrannical power=system of kosmos9 and of yearning to return to a world of /ight while yet realising that e"ery indi"idual confrontation with the forces of dar0ness furthers the entire redemption of ophia9 and hence the Godhead itself3 There is an inbuilt necessity in this mitigated emanationist system3 +renaeus thought the *alentinians deri"ed the main feature of their thought from the pagan Gree0 philosophers3 +n particular9 Thales? conception of water as the generati"e originator

:GF :G&

/ichtheim9 Ancient Egyptian Literature< "ol3 ++9 %'H=%HG3 Assmann9 @Death and +nitiation9A%'F3

2+K
of all thingsE @now it is Dust the same thing whether we say water or BythusA3 The *alentinian conceptions of shade and "acuity are seen to come from Democritus and )picurus9 and +renaeus also mentions the philosophical distinction made between that which is and that which is not9 the first principle of all things > the ,ne > and its production of Dyad9 Tetrad9 and Pentad3 <ith reference to the *alentinian ,gdoad9 Decad9 and Duodecad9 +renaeus as0sE @why has it been made into three parts and not four9 or fi"e9 or si2SA:'% +n fact9 all of the abo"e features illustrate the *alentinian dependence upon )gyptian theological systems9 Bythos in particular as we ha"e seen in the preceding chapter3 The @threenessA which appeared so arbitrary to +renaeus is also one of the 0ey numerological characteristics of )gyptian religion3 +renaeus is correct in ascribing these ideas to pagan thought9 and in noting the Gree0 resonances in this e2emplar of 4ellenistic Gnosis9 howe"er the deepest mythological and theological attributes of so=called *alentinian thought are 4eliopolitan and 4ermopolitan3 <e note in particular that ophia was the thirtieth aeon and that the number thirty had great significance in )gyptian thought3 Besides the GL=year edfest period9 there is the compelling image of a board game9 already mentioned9 in which players had to negotiate a passage through GL inimical realms to attain spiritual succour3:'; A good te2tual e2ample to put forward here is the 0nstruction of Amenemope mentioned abo"e3 This wor0 is organised into GL sections and the closing chapter presents a curiously clear anticipation of the Gnostic sense of completion and @fullnessA as achie"ed in the banishment of ignorance9 notions which would seem to inform the *alentinian Gnostic "iewE
:'L

/oo0 to these thirty chapters9 They inform9 they educateC They are the foremost of all boo0s9 They ma0e the ignorant wise3 +f they are read to the ignorant9 4e is cleansed through them3 Be filled with them9 put them into your heart9 and become a man who e2pounds them9 ,ne who e2pounds as a teacher3:'G This te2t9 as /ichtheim notes9 stresses @contemplation and enduranceA and an @o"erall regrouping of "alues and a redefinition of the ideal manA o"er worldly success3 The worth of the te2t9 for /ichtheim9 lies @in its quality of inwardnessA:''9 all of which anticipate the essentials of Gnosis3 +n the end9 in detailing the aeonial deri"ations9 the theogonic architectonic9 the "ery foundations of *alentinian thought can be seen to be essentially )gyptian9 enough so to "indicate AmPlineau who wrote o"er a century ago9 that @*alentinus333 had only to cast his eyes upon the monuments which surrounded him in )gypt9 to listen to the di"ine legends9 and he found the largest part of his theologyA3:'J There is9 howe"er9 an equally important precursor of

:'L :'% :'; :'G :''

Ad%>(aer> ++3N+*3;3 trans3 A3 Roberts and .3 Donaldson9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 +9 G:H3 +bid39 G:&3 Assmann9 @Death and +nitiation9A%'F3 /ichtheim9 Ancient Egyptian Literature< "ol3 ++>9 %H;3 +bid39 %'H3

2+7
Gnostic thought to be found in the )gyptian goddesses who combine to become the *alentinian ophia3

:'J

M3)3 AmPlineau9 Essai sur le gnosticisme gyptien< ses d%eloppements et son origine gyptienne< Annales du musPe Guimet9 "ol3%' $ParisE Ministfre de l?instruction publique9 %FF:(9 ;&G33

2+P
)hapter Twelve* The Gnostic !sis, Tefnut, and Hathor

,f all the )gyptian mythological precursors who appear against an emanationist bac0drop9 none finds such full e2pression in Gnostic thought as the motif of the youngest and wisest goddess who e2perienced a passion to 0now the Parent9 the goddess who fled con"ention9 or the goddess who fell to earth archetype3 This special intimacy between goddess and father= god9 at times suggesti"ely se2ual9 as well as pertaining to @0nowingA hidden aspects of the Primal ource9 forms the core motif of *alentinian thought9 this and the standard theme of a goddess transgressing > with or without the appro"al of the Parent > and subsequently generating a lower realm3 To briefly re"iew this we shall e2amine the system of Ptolemeus9 a disciple of *alentinus ca> %FJ C3)3 $see Appendi2 B(3 +n this emanationist theogony a primal ogdoad appears from the ource with Bythos appearing as the first aeon9 ob"iously functioning as -un3 This original group of eight both suggest the 4eh=gods and the 4eliopolitan )nnead when considered along with the Primal Parent3 +n the latter case a correspondence would be as followsE

Bythius $The Deep( ige $ ilence( -ous $Mind( Aletheia $Truth( /ogos $<ord( 8oe $/ife( Anthropos $Primal Man( )00lesia $Church(

hu Tefnut Geb -ut ,siris +sis eth -ephthys

A Decad follows the first ,gdoad and a Duodecad follows on this3 The last goddess to appear is ophia9 thirtieth and youngest aeon3 ophia embodies the eth principle $as discussed in the ne2t chapter(in refusing to procreate with her partner Theletos9 instead wishing to @0nowA the Parent3 +renaeus described the passion of ophia as followsE @YitZ consisted in a desire to search into the nature of the 1atherC for she wished9 according to them9 to comprehend his greatnessA3:'H The result is a formless abortion $another eth motif( and the generation of great agitation in the Pleroma3 )"entually 4orus establishes a boundary between the aborti"e realm and the upper realmsE ophia is redeemed and returns to the congregation while her lower self9 remains with the Demiurge as ophia Achamoth3 There are two )gyptian myths from which the abo"e sequence of e"ents is deri"ed3 The first is the myth of Re and +sis which e2ists in many "ersions3 The manuscripts we shall be e2amining date to the %&th Dynasty $%G%'=%;LL B3C3)3(3:': +sis is herein described as a cle"er
:'H :':

Boo0 +3;3;3 Anti@Nicene 'athers9 "ol3%9 G%:3 All citations are from Pian0off9 -he Litany of $e>

2+,
woman9 whose @heart was craftier than a million men333 more discerning than a million godsA and9 @she thought in her heart to learn the name of the august godA3:'F +sis too0 some of the god?s @spittleA and shaped it into a sna0e which bit him9 upon which @the fire of life came out of himselfA3:'& The god?s ennead became greatly disturbed as the god informed them A painful thing has bit me3 My heart does not 0now it9 my eyes do not see it9 + do not recognise in it anything that + ha"e created3 + ha"e not felt a pain li0e itC There is nothing more painful than this3:JL This is an e2emplary Gnostic precursor of what it means for the Primal Parent to confront his @depthsA3 The depths in"ol"e an unintended per"ersity9 e"il3 +n the )gyptian and Gnostic "iew this centres upon the figure of a goddess with e2ceptional qualities3 +sis appears before the god and promises to relie"e his pain if he will tell her his name9 to which he e"entually agrees9 sayingE Gi"e me thy ears9 my daughter +sis9 o that my name may come from my body into thy body3:J% +t is surely not o"erstating things to note the se2ual tension in this descriptionE +sis wishes to 0now the 1ather and he ends up @bittenA9 suffering a burning fe"er not relie"ed until his @nameA passes from his body into hers3 Apart from this we ha"e the same theogonic infrastructure as with later Gnostic systems9 in that an amorphous and inchoate aspect of the godhead is transformed by the youngest daughter of the ParentC this transformation causes se"ere agitation amongst the higher powers9 a disruption that requires e2treme measures in dealing with it3 The upshot of this is an emphasising of the special theogonic relationship between 1ather god and youngest goddess3 The daughter generates the dysteliological within the all=perfect PleromaC the role of +sis in this myth9 as with eth in many others9 points up the )gyptian appreciation of this3 +sis9 as with the later Gnostic ophia9 was a power that was acti"ely in"ol"ed with the reality of pain and suffering within the "isible world9 and the mysteries of se2uality3 +sis went on from her depiction in the abo"e spell as @+sis the Great9 Mistress of the Gods9 who 0nows Re by his own nameA to proclaim in Graeco=Roman timesE + am the wife and sister of 5ing ,siris333 + compelled women to be lo"ed by men3 + caused the Dust to be stronger than gold or sil"er3 + ordained that the true be considered beautiful3 + in"ented marriage contracts3
:'F

Pian0off < Litany of $e9 JH3 ee also another "ersion found in A343 Gardiner9 ed> (ieratic papyri in the British +useum< "ol3 %9 -e:t> Third eries $/ondonE British Museum9 %&GJ(3 @+sis was a woman wise in speech9 her heart more cunning than that of millions of menC her utterance was more e2cellent than that of millions of godsC she was more percepti"e than millions of glorified spirits3 he was not ignorant of anything in hea"en or earth9 li0e Re who holds the earth in his possession9A%%H3 Pian0off < Litany of $e9 J:3 +bid39 J:3 +bid39 J&3

:'& :JL :J%

225
/anguages + assigned to Gree0s and barbarians3 + caused the honorable and the shameful to be distinguished by -ature333 The island from the depths + brought up into the light3 + conquer 1ate3 1ate heeds me3 4ail )gypt who reared me3:J; The 0ey feature here is her in"ol"ement with the @shamefulA9 her role in @surfacingA creation from the depths9 and her dominion o"er 1ate3 The Gnostic -hunder 4erfect mind comes directly out of the +sis tradition as a few e2cerpts demonstratesE + am the bride and the bridegroom333 + am the mother of my father9 and the sister of my man and he is my offspring333 + am the sound of the manifold "oice9 and the word of many aspects3 $%G3;:=G; U %'3%;=%'( + am the Dudgment of the Gree0s and of the barbarians3 + am the one whose image is great in )gypt $%H3J=:( ,ut of shame accept me unto yoursel"es shamelesslyC and out of shamelessness and shame9 indict the parts of my being in yoursel"es $%:3%J=;;( + am the one who is called @the TruthA and @+niquityA $;L3:=F( :JG The lin0 in both systems9 besides the ob"ious recourse to aretologies9:J' is the feminine power o"er beneficence and iniquity9 as well as her archetypal presence as se2uality incarnate3 The reference to @-atureA is an identification of +sis with Ma?at who subsumes both @honourableA and the @shamefulA:JJC the corresponding identification with @TruthA in the Gnostic te2t is also lin0ed to @+niquityA9 and so the dual=aspected goddess present in the lower world is a motif shared by )gyptian and Gnostic thought3 The depiction in the -hunder of the goddess as wife and mother of her husband firmly lin0s this te2t to the )gyptian +sis tradition9 where +sis is wife of ,siris and mother of 4orus9 his reincarnation3 As well9 +sis assimilated within herself all of the ancient gods9 and so it is with the Gnostic goddess @whose image is great in )gyptA and who claims that @+ am the one whose God is manyA$-he -hunderA 4erfect Mind9 -4C *+9; H3;'(3:JH The second main )gyptian myth to inform the Gnostic "iew of the di"ergent goddess9 and on par with the +sis and Re story9 is the myth of Tefnut in -ubia3 The /eyden demotic papyrus + GF'9 already cited9 dated to the ;nd century C3)39 describes the departure of Tefnut9 daughter of Re9 who reDects her partner and has fled to )thiopia in the form of a lioness3 Re sends Thoth and hu in order to bring Tefnut bac09 for her e2ile has caused disturbances in
:J;

tanley M3 Burstein9 ed3 and trans39 -he (ellenistic Age from the =attle of 0psos to the death of .leopatra &00 $Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FJ3 Coptic transcriptions from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;GH9 ;'L9 ;''9 ;JL3 ee Pheme Per0ins9 @ ophia as Goddess in the -ag 4ammadi Codices9A%JF=%:H3 ee also Arthur9 -he Gisdom )oddess< %H%=H;3 Burstein9 -he (ellenistic Age< %':9 n3 F3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;'L3

:JG :J'

:JJ :JH

22+
)gypt3 Thoth $and hu in the )gyptian original( finds her in the desert and e"entually persuades her to return to )gypt3 This myth9 which e2ists in fragmentary form in the /eiden papyrus9 is a deri"ation of the earlier story of the eye of Re9 found in the tombs of eti + and Ramses +++9:JF in which the eye of Re is despatched in order to end human0ind?s re"olt against himself3 As noted in Chapter F9 4athorO e0met wrea0s a terrible "engeance upon human0ind9 acting as an independent force of e"il on par with the lion=faced Authades3 1ollowing this main mythological story9 the 4istis Sophia< along with all of *alentinian myth< depict emissaries being sent from on high to deal with the disruption centred about a 0ey goddess figure3 e0met was worshipped on the desert?s edge as a mistress of war and strife9 and was apparently associated with -ubia in later times as lions were more numerous there3 4er main sanctuary was at MemphisC howe"er9 the temple of Mut south of 5arna0 in its prime under the auspices of Amenhotep +++ had some si2 hundred ;=metre high statues of e0met set up within its precincts3 As with -un9 the 4eh=gods9 4orus9 eth and +sis9 e0hmet too0 on a dar0er role in Graeco= Roman times as she was incorporated into the Gnostic myth3 +n conflating the +sis and Tefnut stories9 we are presented with the 0ey function of the *alentinian theogonic myth reduced to its essentialsE the daughter of the Creator god reDects her consort and wishes to 0now the ParentC as a result of this she ends up in a terrifying "oid > literally an antithetical @emptinessA to pleromic @fullnessA3 <hile initially manifesting an acute spirit of non ser%iam9 she is redeemed9 and order is restored to the di"ine congregation3 This is accomplished through the dispatch of certain di"ine functionaries who succeed in bringing the goddess bac03 ophia9 in Gnostic thought9 is a conflation of +sis9 4athor9 and e0hmet3 The appeal by Thoth to Tefnut is highly reminiscent of the Gnostic @callAE the soul9 far afield from its spiritual source9 is reminded by Thoth of her heritage and urged to return3
:J:

+ also remain here until the retribution upon myself is fulfilled3 Iou lo"e your land9 as do + myself following my yearnings3 May you callE come with me to )gypt\:J& The Gnostic 4istis Sophia embodies the banished goddess archetype par e2cellence3 ophia in Chaos performs an elaborate series of @repentancesA9 the end result of which is the call of ophia for help and the dispatch of two di"ine emissaries to sa"e herE T, /ight9 you who has assisted me9 may your light descend upon me3 1or you are my shelter and + come to you /ight9 belie"ing in you9 the /ight333? And + commanded Gabriel and Michael that they should bear the Pistis ophia upon their hands that her feet do not touch the lower Dar0ness3 And + again commanded them that they guide her in the places of Chaos from whence they would bring her out3 $++9 %G&3%=' U %;=%H(:HL

:J:

The Gree0 te2t "aries from the )gyptian demotic original in minor details3 ee tephanie <est9 @The Gree0 *ersion of the /egend of Tefnut9A JEA JJ $%&H&(E %H%C <ilhem piegelberg 9er 1gyptische +ythus %om Sonnenauge $ trassburgE trassburger Druc0erei und "erlagsanstalt9 %&%:(C also 4ans .un0er9 @Der AusBug der 4athor=Tefnut aus -ubienA $A=h> d> .gl> 4reuss> Ak9 %&%%(3 5urt ethe9 @8ur altRgyptischen age "om onnenauge das in fer 1erne war9Ain Intersuchungen ,ur )eschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens9 "ol3 G $%&%;C reprint9 4ildesheimE Georg ,lms *erlagsbuchhandlung9 %&H'(3 piegelberg9 9er 1gyptische +ythus %om Sonnenauge< N++9 %=;L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +N9 ;:F3

:JF

:J& :HL

222
-he -hought of Norea is a short -ag 4ammadi Gnostic te2t which also e2presses the motif of the goddess who finds herself in the @lower regionsA and calls out for help3 1our helpers intercede in this scenario9 @that she be reconciled to all the imperishable onesA $-4C +N 9; ;F3%L(3 Besides suggesting the motif of Tefnut in -ubia9 this te2t also manifests the focus of the Re and +sis myth in its description of the goddess attaining the inner thought and 0nowledge of the 1ather3 The abo"e=cited passage is embedded in the larger conte2t of this motifE Y heZ has inherited the /i"ing <ord $/ogos( that she be reconciled to all of the +mperishable ,nes9 and Yspea0Z with the Mind of the 1ather3 And Yshe beganZ to spea0 with words of YlifeZ and $she( remained in the presence of the e2alted ,ne YpossessingZ that which she had learned before the world came to be3 $;F3F=%:( :H% +arsanes $-4C N9%( also suggests the Tefnut motif of the goddess attaining gnosis in withdrawing from the Godhead9 and is also approached by two powersE Gnosis stood beyond him because it belongs to him9 and she who e2ists9 she who sought9 possesses it in the same manner as the Triple=Powered ,ne possesses3 he withdrew from them9 these two Powers9 since she e2ists outside of the Great ,ne3 $&3G=%;(:H; The Tefnut motif bespea0s the dual aspects of the goddess9 as does the +sis and Re story in which +sis debilitates the god and disrupts the unfolding unity and harmony of the theogony3 +n the *alentinian model it is 4orus who establishes the boundary following ophia?s transgressionsC ophia is redeemed and ascends to the Pleroma9 not without lea"ing her dar0er double behind as a sort of shadow goddess ambiguously functioning in the 4eimarmene through the demiurge3 This moment appears to be ta0en from another +sis myth in which 4orus chops off the head of +sis in a rage at her une2pected 0indness towards ethE @he cut off the head of his mother +sis and he too0 it under his arm and climbed up the mountainA3:HG There is no sense in the )gyptian Re and +sis myth9 the Tefnut in -ubia myth9 or in the plethora of Gnostic affiliated ophia myths9 that these female di"ine figures 0nowingly commit e"il3 This is the essential feature for both mythologies3 Theirs is not a @1allA as such9 although it is clear that they transgress the accepted order in see0ing out their own self=fulfilment3:H' +t is curious indeed that both myth=systems hint at a se2ual lin0 and this points us to the consideration that the goddess was seen to be fulfilling the larger theogonic necessity3 +f the Gnostic Parent @wished to 0now his depthsA9 the earlier )gyptian Re also @came outA to see what he had made9 meeting up with an e2perience of e"il that was quite une2pected3:HJ +n both theogonies9 a young female goddess empowers herself at the e2pense of the entire di"ine courtE her punishments for this action range from the "ery mild to fairly se"ere9 as in the case of the 4istis Sophia who ends up tormented and abused at great length by lower powers until her repentances are heard3 The o"erall )gyptian=Gnostic theme is that this goddess acts as a critical catalyst in the assimilation of the lower realms3 The *alentinian establishment of the aeon

:H% :H; :HG :H' :HJ

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N*9 &H3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N*9 ;:'3 -he "ontendings &9F ff39 trans3 Griffiths from 9e 0side et 2siride< GJL> 4ace a whole host of scholars9 too numerous to list here9 who define this as a @fallA3 Pian0off9 Litany of $e9 J:3

224
4orus occurs in response to the call of the goddess9 and we find this e2act turn of e"ents in the earlier )gyptian mythE +sis called out9 and $sent( her "oice to hea"en9 that the souls of the gods in the firmament might hear it9 and gi"e Dudicial commands for 4orus9 the son of +sis3:HH +n see0ing out a catalysing agent closer to the genesis of actual e"il9 the function of the demiurge must be considered3 As we ha"e seen in the pre"ious chapter9 this figure is often simply ignorant9 or e"en well=meaning albeit with limited resources and flawed results3 4owe"er9 there are other @archonsA that fulfil the role of male"olent agents and the essential dramatic element9 present in a host of Gnostic myths9 is their attempt to ensnare and torment ophia3 This dichotomy can also be traced bac0 to )gyptian myth in the antagonism that e2isted between +sis and eth3 eth 0ills her husband and brother ,siris9 and also attac0s the offspring of the goddess who is born in hiding in an inhospitable place3 The ethian principle of wilful per"ersity shall be dealt with in the following chapter3 +n Gnostic te2ts the role of ophia9 often following her repentance and redemption9 is one of a dispenser of Dustice a0in to the role of +sisOMa?at3 The figure of Christ is slotted into a pre=e2isting Memphite theology of the <ordC the result is a close association between this goddess and a /ogos=figure3 Both are theogonically engaged in a descent to the lower realms in order to confront and transform e"il3 All of this is present in the +sis=myth as relayed to us by PlutarchE 1or this reason the longing for truth9 particularly for truth about the gods9 is a yearning after di"inity9 since it in"ol"es in its training and intellectual pursuit an acquirement of sacred lore which constitutes a holier tas0 than all ceremonial purification and temple ser"ice9 a tas0 which is supremely welcome to this goddess whom you worship as one who is e2ceptionally wise and de"oted to wisdom3 4er name certainly seems to imply that to her more than anyone else belong 0nowledge and understanding3 1or +sis is a Gree0 nameC so is Typhon9 who is hostile to the goddess and demented by ignorance and deceitC he scatters and destroys the sacred <ord which the goddess collects and puts together and deli"ers to those undergoing initiation3:H: Do we not detect an indictment of traditional religious practice here9 in fa"our of an elitist quest for <isdomS The te2t goes on to recommend ascetic practices as a preparation for @0nowledge of the 1irst and the /ordA $GJ;3%L(3 These basic motifs could be demonstrated at length9 from any number of Gnostic tractatesC howe"er9 a sampling from -he -ripartite -ractate will sufficeE Those of whom he first thought that they should attain Gnosis and the good things which are in it9 Sophia of the 1ather caused them to ponder9 so that they would e2perience the e"il things and might train themsel"es in them9 as a Y333Z for a time9 Yso that they mightZ recei"e the enDoyment Yof good thingsZ for eternity3 $%;H3;F=G:( he had the Logos of the on and his essence and his power and his form9 who is the one whom he lo"ed and in whom he was pleased9 who was entreated in a lo"ing manner3 he
:HH

.un0er3 9er )rosse 4ylon9 %:9 %%=%GC also9 as Griffiths notes in 9e 0side et 2siride9 @+sis uttered a great shrie0 and the world was disturbed9AGGL3 GJ%3%:=GJ;3J9 trans3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride9 %%&=;%

:H:

22was light and a desire to be established she was instructed and she was an eye of "ision9 these aspects of the e2alted she possessed and she is Sophia that his thought oppose those things beneath the organiBationC it was a <ord for the utterance and the completion of things in this manner3 $&G3G'=&'3%L( The powers were good and greater than those of the similitude3 1or those belonging to the similitude also belong to a nature of YdeceitZ3 1rom a phantasm of similarity and a thought of arrogance has Ycome aboutZ that which they becameC howe"er9 they originate from the thought which first 0new them3 $F;3%J=;'( The beings of the similitude9 howe"er9 were e2ceedingly afraid9 since they were not able to hear about him Ythe <ordZ in the beginning9 that there is $can be( a "ision of this 0ind3 Therefore they fell into the pit of ignorance which is called @the ,uter Dar0nessA9 and @ChaosA and @4adesA and @the AbyssA $F&3;L=;F(3:HF There does not yet e2ist in )nglish a translation and commentary of all four "ersions of the Apocryphon $@ ecret Boo0A( of John9:H& nor has there been any "iable theory put forward as to the e2istence of an Irte:t from which these four "ersions ha"e come down to us3::L This9 in large part9 results from the usual paucity of sociological e"idence we ha"e about specific Gnostic sects in general3 The lac0 of a firm date and place of composition9 and anonymity of the author9 only adds to the difficulty in assessing the rhetorical intent of the wor0 and in what sort of conte2ts it was actually used3 At the "ery least it is clear that the wor0 attained widespread appeal in "arious recensions3 Certainly if -he Apocryphon of John made it to the wilds of /yon where +renaeus reacted to it9::% as well as to Ale2andria and southern )gypt9::; it was as li0ely to ha"e been used in yria and the cities of Asia Minor3 The depiction of aeonial generation follows the description of primal unity of the ource3 +n the Apocryphon of John3 this ource creates @its own imageA9 a first entity separate from itself which is a female @forethoughtA9 called Barbelo9 referred to as @the womb of e"erythingA $-4C
:HF :H&

Coptic transcriptions $in sequence gi"en( from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 G;L9 ;H;9 ;';9 ;J'3

There are in fact fi"e "ersions if +renaeus?s rather abbre"iated account $Ad%>(aer> + ;&9%='( is included3 The Coptic tractates contained in -ag 4ammadi codices ++ and +* are rather similar and ha"e been ta0en together $by B3 /ayton among others( to pro"ide a long "ersion with a minimal number of lacunaeC the tractate contained in -ag 4ammadi codice +++ and the Berolinensis manuscript FJL;9 now in Berlin $hereafter TBG?(9 differ in more specific details and are the @shortA "ersions referred to in this study3 ee Martin 5rause and Pahor /abib9 9ie 9rei &ersionen des Apokryphon des Johannes $<iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&H;(9 in which the three -ag 4ammadi te2ts now in the Cairo museum are translatedC <alter C3 Till and 4ans=Martin chen0e9 eds3 and trans3 9ie )nostischen Schriften des .optischen 4apyrus Berolinensis 5678 $BerlinE A0ademie *erlag9 %&:;(C also Michel Tardieu9 !crits )nosti#uesA "ode: de Berlin $ParisE /es 7ditions du cerf9 %&F'(3 Referring to @their liesA> and depicting them as a sect descended from the imonians9 +renaeus describes them as @a multitude of Barbelognostics9 appearing li0e mushrooms out of the ground $Ad%>(aer> + ;&9%(3 The -4C ++ @longA "ersion is written in ahidic Coptic but with a ahidic with dialectical elements which place it at the northern edge of the ahidic area3 nren Gi"ersen9 in the introduction to his Apocryphon Johannis $CopenhagenE Prostant Apud Mun0sgaard9 %&HG(9 concludes that9 @we must admit that the linguistic peculiarities only testify in fa"our of the te2t ha"ing actually been written in the area around that place at -ag 4ammadi which is stated to be the finding place9 though the area slightly north thereof would fit9A$''(3

::L

::%

::;

22.
++9 JEJ(3 Through Barbelo9 "arious aeons are created forming a Pentad made up of male= female pairs3 +t is at this point that the Gnostic "ersion of the "irgin birth is detailed as Barbelo is impregnated by the 1ather9 gi"ing birth to Autogenes9 the Gnostic cosmic Christ=figure3 All four "ersions followE
::G

-4C ++9% H3;=;;::' This is the pentad of the aeons of the 1ather which is the first man9 the image of the in"isible spiritE it is Pronoia $forethought( who is Barbelo9 together with the Mind9 and 1ore0nowledge9 and the +ndestructibility9 and the )ternal /ife9 and the Truth > this is the androgynous pentad of the aeons which is the decad of the aeons9 which is the 1ather3 And he gaBed at Barbelo in the clear light which surrounds the in"isible spirit $and( with his spar0 she concei"ed3 And he begot a spar0 of light resembling blessedness9 but it does not equal his greatness3 This was an only child of the Mother= 1ather which was manifested out $from the 1ather(C namely9 the sole offspring9 the only child of the 1ather of pure /ight3 And the in"isible "irginal spirit reDoiced o"er the /ight which came to be9 that which was first manifested in the first power of his Pronoia who is Barbelo3

-4C +*9% &3F=;F::J This is the Pentad of androgynous aeons which is the Decad of aeonsE this is the 1ather3 And he saw in Barbelo a pure /ight en"eloped by the in"isible spirit9 $and( with his spar0 she concei"ed a child for him3 4e begot a spar0 of light in a blessed /ight9 but it does not equal his greatness3 This was an only child of the Mother=1ather which was manifested out $from the 1ather(C namely9 his sole offspring9 the only child of the 1ather of pure /ight3 4owe"er9 the in"isible "irgin pirit reDoiced o"er the /ight which came to be9 that which was first manifested out of the first power of his Pronoia who Yis BarbeloZ3

::G

This raises the "ery important issue $for more orthodo2 Christian scholars in any case(9 of whether the Gnostic concept of the Primal ource $@the !nityA9 @GodA9 @1ather of the AllA9 @the +n"isibleA in our te2t( was dyadic or strictly monist3 The inclusion of the feminine principle at the "ery beginning of the theogony accords well with many other gnostic te2ts in creating a certain ambiguity3 @The tradition that *alentinus taught an ultimate dyad must be "iewed in the light of the e2treme ambiguity of the term Tdyad?3 +n philosophical usage it could mean $a( plurality as such9 the Tindefinite dyad?9 $b( duality9 $c( the number two $two may be added to two9 but not twoness to twoness(9 $d( the second cosmic principle9 and $e( the first pair of principles3 +n theology it could indicate a pair of antagonistic first principlesC or again9 a God with two complimentary aspects3A G3C3 tead9 @The *alentinian Myth of ophia9A J-S9 -3 3 NN9 Pt3% $April %&H&(E FF3 Coptic transcription from DD* %;G=;J3 Coptic transcription from DD* ;L:=F3

::' ::J

22K
-4C +++9% &3G=;G::H These are the fi"e aeons of the 1ather which is primordial Man9 the image of the in"isibleE these are Barbelon9 together with )nnoia $Thought(9 the 1irst Gnosis9 and +ncorruptibility9 and )ternal life3 These are the fi"e androgynes9 the ten aeons of the 1ather3 And Barbelon gaBed intensely into the pure light and was en"eloped by it3 he begot a spar0 of light resembling the blessed light9 but not equal in greatnessE this is the only=begotten9 made manifest out of the 1ather > the di"ine Autogenes9 first=born of all the offspring of the 1ather9 the pure /ight3 The great in"isible spirit reDoiced o"er the /ight9 that which he re"ealed in the primordial power which is his Pronoia the Barbelon3 BG9 ;&EF=GL3%'::: This is the fifth of the aeons of the 1ather9 $he( who is Primal Man9 the image of the in"isible who is the Barbelo9 together with )nnoia9 and the 1irst Gnosis9 and +ncorruptibility9 and )ternal /ife3 This is the fifth androgyne::F9 namely9 the tenth aeon3 4e is the 1ather of the !ncreated 1ather3 The Barbelo gaBed intensely at him9 into his pure /ight3 he was en"eloped by it and she begot a blessed spar0 of lightE it was not howe"er9 equal in greatness3 This is the only=begotten re"ealed by the 1ather9 the di"ine Autogenes9 the first=born child of all the spirits of pure /ight3 The in"isible pirit reDoiced o"er the /ight which came to be9 that which was first manifested out of the primordial power which is his Pronoia9 the Barbelo3

The core myth is not substantially altered here in any te2t9 howe"er the differences that do e2ist are not simply syntacticalC rather9 certain aspects of this process are stressed in different ways3 1or e2ample9 only -4C ++ lists -ruth as one of the aeons9 this being a 0ey female *alentinian aeon $Aletheia( located in the primal ogdoad3 +n -4C ++ and +* it is the 1ather who loo0s at Barbelo9 whereas in -4C +++ and BG it is Barbelo who gaBes at the 1ather3 +n this amorous situation9 the question of who seduces whom is rather acute9 suggesting the incestuousness that e2ists between ophia and the 1ather in the *alentinian system3 There is9 howe"er9 a more fundamental issue as the 0ey feature of all Gnostic @goddessA te2ts9 springing from their )gyptian deri"ation9 is the willful self=empowerment of the female goddess or aeon3 As +sis or Tefnut disrupt the godhead through their independent actions9 so Gnostic emanationist systems follow this lead in emphasising the independent nature of ophia9 Barbelo9 and other female aeons3 +t is clear then that -4C +++ and BG FJL;9; are part of this picture9 whereas -4C ++ and +* abo"e are more monistic in their desire to portray the omnipotent will of the 1ather3::& 1urther down in the theogonic process ophia is created as followsE

::H ::: ::F

Coptic transcription from DD* HL=H%3 Coptic transcription from PB &F9 %LL3

Clearly what is being referred to here is the final syBygy > each pair made up of a male and female aeon > the female aeon here being the tenth3 The lacunae of the shorter recensions aside9 we note that it is only the longer "ersions that made it into )nglish translation in the so=called @third9 and completely re"isedA Nag (ammadi Li=rary in English< ed3 .ames M3 Robinson $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FF(3

::&

227
-4C ++9% &E;J=%LE%:FL The ophia of the )pinoia9 being an aeon9 contemplated within a thought of herself with the conception of the in"isible spirit and fore0nowledge $prognosis(3 he desired to bring forth a li0eness from herself9 without the consent of the spirit > he had not appro"ed > and without her consort9 and without his intention3 And though the person of her maleness had not appro"ed and she had not found her chance9 and she had deliberated without the consent of the pirit9 $yet with( the Gnosis of her initiati"e she brought forth because of the in"incible power which is in her3 -4C +++9% %'E&=%JEG:F; ,ur friend and sister ophia9 who is an aeon9 contemplated a thought of herself through the conception of the pirit and the first 0nowledge3 he desired to bring forth her li0eness from herself Y3333Z:FG although the pirit did not appro"e9 nor gi"e his assent9 nor did her consort appro"e9 the male "irginal pirit3 he did not then find her consort $nor( assent without the appro"al of the pirit and the Gnosis of her own harmony which she brought forth because of the amorous inclination which is in her3 -4C +*9% %JE%=J:F% T333of herself with the contemplation of the in"isible pirit and the fore0nowledge $prognosis(3 he desired to bring forth a li0eness from herself without the consent of the pirit > he had not appro"ed3333

BG GHE%H=G:E%%:F' -ow our friend and sister ophia9 who is an aeon9 thought a thought of herself9 and through the thought of the pirit together with the first 0nowledge9 she desired to re"eal the li0eness out of herself9 although the spirit had not consented or granted it9 nor yet had her consort appro"ed9 the male "irgin spirit3 he did not find one in harmony with her as she was about to concede it without the consent of the pirit and with the Gnosis of her harmony9 emitting forth because of the passion which is in her3

The reference to ophia as sister occurs in +++ and BG9 while in ++ it is to Sophia of the Epinoia> ophia see0s a union with the in%isi=le spirit and foreknowledge in ++ and +*9 spirit and first knowledge in +++ and BG3 4er erstwhile consort is referred to in ++ as @the person of her malenessA9 @male "irginal spiritA in +++ and BG3:FJ Most importantly9 ophia begets because of an in%inci=le power in her in ++9 and amorous inclination and passion in +++ and BGC although +*
:FL :F% :F; :FG

Coptic transcription from DD* %G'=GJ3 Coptic transcription from DD* ;%;3 Coptic transcription from DD* HF=H&3

There is at this point an error made by the scribe who inserts %JE '=& mista0enly3 This segment is omitted in the translation here3 Coptic transcription from PB %%;9 %%'3 As in the -ripartite -ractate for e2ample9 this male aeon $-heletos in the *alentinian system( is not named3 There is also a similar e2pression used by Mary in the 4istis Sophia $Boo0 %9 GGE%'(E @And Mary also came forward and said9 TMy /ord9 my $inner( man of light has ears9 and $therefore( + hear with my power of light3?A This "ery stri0ingly portrays the inner syBygy necessary for true spiritual "ision from a female perspecti"e3

:F' :FJ

22P
is missing here $large sections of this tractate ha"e been lost( it seems li0ely that its "ersion was in%inci=le power as well3 The se2uality of +++ and BG are in accord with the parallel in the pre"ious section in +++ and BG in which Barbelo is seen as the seducer3 The following section appears to deri"e from the )gyptian myth of the eye of Re and 4athorE
-4C ++9% ;L3%'=;F:FH And he sent9 by means of his beneficent pirit and his immense compassion9 a helper to Adam9 luminous )pinoia from within him9 she who is called @/ife3A And she assists the whole creation9 suffering with him and restoring him to his pleroma $fullness(9 and by instructing him about the descent of his seed and by teaching him of the upward path9 the way which he came down3 And the luminous )pinoia was hidden in Adam so that the archons would not 0now $her(9 but that the )pinoia might be a correction of the defect of the Mother3 -4C +++9% ;J3H=;G:FF 4e sent his beneficent pirit out and his immense compassion as a helper for the first who had come down9 who was called @Adam of the luminous )pinoiaA9 she whom he called @8oeA $/ife(3 But it is she who wor0s at the whole creation9 suffering with him9 establishing him in his pleroma $fullness(9 and e2plaining to him the descent of the deficiency9 and she instructed him about the reascent3 -ow the luminous )pinoia was hidden in him so that the archons would not 0now $her(9 but that our syBygaic sister Y333Z ophia is about to rectify her deficiency by means of the luminous )pinoia3 -4C +*9% G%3;G=;H:F: 333of the upward path9 the way which he came down3 And the luminous )pinoia was hidden in Adam so that333

BG JGE'=J'E':F& 4e sent out the beneficent pirit and his immense compassion as a helper for the first who had come down9 who was called @Adam of the luminous )pinoiaA9 she whom he called @8oeA $/ife(3 But it is she who wor0s at the whole creation9 suffering with him9 establishing it as his completed temple for he himself9 and e2plaining to him the descent of his deficiency and instructing him about the reascent3 And the luminous )pinoia was hidden in him so that the archons would not 0now $her(3 But our sister ophia who resembles oursel"es9 is about to rectify her deficiency by means of the luminous )pinoia3

<e are presented in this section of the cosmogonic tale with the second part of the )gyptian core myth9 the descent of Tefnut to -ubia and the despatch of di"ine emissaries to redeem her to )gyptC as well9 there is the motif of the eye of Re and 4athor sent to quell the re"olt of human0ind against the hea"ens3 Also suggesti"e is the depiction in -he Litany of $e of a long in"ocation which as0s that the 0ing be made li0e Re himself in order to deli"er him from the

:FH :F: :FF :F&

Coptic transcription from DD* %HG=H'3 Coptic transcription from DD* ;GL=G%3 Coptic transcription from DD* F%=F;3 Coptic transcription from PB %'H9 %'F3

22,
tormenting demons of the netherworld3 )lsewhere9 it is proclaimed of the 0ing that @thou art the bodies of +sisA3:&% ,f all the )gyptian goddesses Ma?at ran0s with -un as a comple2 ubiquitous archetype9 a figure whose presence resonates throughout the entire theogony3 +n the created world of order9 a manifestation of her own puissance9 Ma?at is depicted on innumerable reliefs as the recipient of 0ingly offerings and prayer3 <hen the 0ing dies and sets out upon his underworld Dourney9 it is to -un that he prays3 -un is an ordering principle > one which contains disorder within itself > therefore otherworldly9 whereas Re9 solar architect supreme9 is at the "ery centre of life in this world9 his role indubitably bound up with the created world born anew each morning3 4owe"er9 Ma?at represents not Dust a demiurgic dynamic bound up in the maintenance of the world9 of society9 and royalty9:&; but a benign demiurgic principle manifest at the "ery onset of the theogonic process9 as in Coffin te2t FL9 already cited9 in which Atum identifies his daughter Tefnut as Ma?at3 /i0ewise9 when +sis is identified with Ma?at9 it is due to her fusion with 4athor3:&G This dynamic of blending functions9 personalities9 and theogonic roles in )gyptian thought finds its later distinct manifestation in Gnostic myth3 The so=called *alentinian myth in my "iew9 is not original in the sense of its forming a discrete and no"el traDectory amongst the welter of Gnostic ideas surfacing in the first centuries of this era3 Certainly patristic e"idence has highlighted a number of features that can create this impression3 4owe"er9 the 0ey theogonic figure in the *alentinian myth is ophia9 not Christ9 nor any earthly player3 +t is in the self=contained "olition of this female figure that we can see the myth as a reflection and refraction of a host of )gyptian goddess motifs9 and we note that the 4istis Sophia< or -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia< to cite two important e2amples that are not @*alentinianA are equally theogonically centred upon the goddess who falls to earth3 The 0ey feature in the Gnostic e2tension of the )gyptian myth9 and one that is faithfully maintained and elaborated upon into a "eritable fugue of "ariations9 is the self=willed aspect of the goddessE ophia wished to @0nowA the 1ather9 as did +sis9 and she alone of all the aeons procreated from herself alone3 And so a critical aspect of the *alentinian myth centres upon the antinomian se2uality of the female aeon in her refusal to accept her ordained partner9 instead choosing to procreate by herself alone3 This decisi"e self=empowerment is also a 0ey characteristic of +sis as Plutarch recordsE
:&L

1or they often gi"e +sis the name Athena9 which has some such meaning as thisE 0 came from myself9 which indicates self=impelled mo"ement3:&' This characteristic is also to be found in connection with +sis in a /ate )gyptian te2t first noted by <3 piegelberg wherein +sis proclaims her ha"ing gi"en birth to a son without male in"ol"ementE @+ ha"e played the part of a man though + am a womanA3:&J +n this +sis is again demonstrating her special affinity with the creator=god9 in this case the androgynous Atum3:&H Iet e"en her more commonly portrayed union with ,siris suggests the Gnostic theogonic
:&L :&% :&;

Pian0off9 -he Litany of $e9 G;=GG3 +bid>< ;G3

Aristide ThPodoridfs9 @De l?assimilation g la di"initP dans la agesse de l?ancienne 7gypte9A in )nosticisme et monde hellnisti#ue9 ;H=G:3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< ;H'3 4eri 0sidos9 G:H3%%9 trans3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< ;%:3 <ilhelm piegelberg9 @*ariaE )ine neuelegende Xber die Geburt des 4orus9A ;HS JG $%&%:(E &'=&:3

:&G :&' :&J

245
apotheosis9 for this follows his death9 and the birth of their son 4arpocrates is premature resulting in a deformity in his lower limbs9 a turn of e"ents in e"ery sense symbolically @ ethianA3:&: Plutarch?s "iew of matter9 from the )gyptian mythology at his disposal9 is in complete accord with the *alentinian "iewE The images which the perceptible and corporeal nature fashions from it9 and the ideas9 forms and li0enesses which this nature assumes9 are li0e figures stamped on wa2 in that they do not endure for e"er3 They are seiBed by the element of disorder and confusion which is dri"en here from the region abo"e and fights against 4orus9 whom +sis brings forth as an image of what is spiritually intelligible9 since he is the perceptible world333 made spurious by matter3 333matter9 being shown by its nature to be incapable of itself brought forth the first creation3 1or this reason they declare that god to ha"e been born maimed in the dar0ness3333:&F The *alentinian myth9 as we ha"e seen in Chapter %%9 embodies one of the clearest and strongest ophia myths in its "ariants The intriguing issue of imperfection in both +sis and ophia is at the heart of their theogonic functions9 and is a 0ey to their broad appeal3 This issue9 initially in"estigated by Albert Torhoudt in Een 2n=ekend )nostisch Systeem in 4lutarchus 9e 0side et 2siride:&&9 is shown by Torhoudt to e2hibit a close connection between the *alentinian system recorded by 4ippolytus9 and chapters J'ff in Plutarch?s 9e 0side et 2siride3FLL +t is interesting to consider the li0elihood that it was Plutarch?s own dualistic propensities which lead him to note this connection3 The )ospel of -ruth ta0es the negati"e attributes of +sis further9 depicting the goddess as the demonised 4lane9 the hypostasised )rror in the theogonic process3 1ollowing Torhoudt9 .an 4elderman notes the enabling myth of ,siris as creati"e /ogos9 +sis as the recepti"e material element9 and their offspring 4orus as the created world3FL% This myth is seen to be deri"ed in the /ate Period from @an Ale2andrian milieu lying behind this gnosticising sourceA9 from which Plutarch also drew3FL; Gnostic re"ersal which redeems eth as we shall see in the ne2t chapter9 here turns +sis into the personification of ignorance and e"ilE +gnorance of the Parent brought about Terror and 1ear3 The Terror became dense in the manner of mist so that no one could see3 Because of this )rror found strength $and( she made her own matter "ainly9 without 0nowing Truth3 $-4C +3G %:3&=%:(FLG
:&H

CT pell ++9 %GH9 @+ am Atum who created the great ones9 + am he who fashioned hu9 + am these Two9 male and female3A 1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts< %%H3 Torhoudt sees the maimed 4arpocrates as emblematic of the material element of the worldC indeed9 the word used by the *alentinians for the material @abortionA9 e0trwma9 in Torhoudt?s "iew recalls the premature nature of 4arpocrates? birth3 Een 2n=ekend )nostisch Systeem< GHf9 and %%&3 G:G3%G9 trans3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< ;LJ /o"aniiE tudia 4ellenistica9 %&';3 een to be @con"incingA by Griffiths for oneC 9e 0side et 2siride9 '&3 .an 4elderman9 @+sis as Plane in the Gospel of TruthSA9 GG3 +bid39 GF3 Coptic transcription from E&9 '3

:&:

:&F :&& FLL FL% FL; FLG

24+
@,bli"ionA comes into being from )rror $%:3GH(9 and we recall the establishment of 4orus in the *alentinian scheme9 a boundary to separate the disrupti"e abortion of ophia from the pleroma3 4orus is born of +sis in this sense9 and although Plane is an unredeemable e"il in this tractate there is9 as always9 a theogonic necessity in this turn of e"entsE ,bli"ion9 which did not come into e2istence close to the Parent9 came into e2istence because of him3 $%F3%=G(FL' Apart from this nadir in the fortunes of +sis9 this goddess o"erall embodies human attributes in the sense that she shares in the tra"ails of the lower realm that we inhabit3 he is a pur"eyor of gnosis in the +saic tradition9FLJ seen to be a more efficacious alternati"e to many forms of traditional religious obser"ance as the abo"e citation from Plutarch demonstrates9 and is able to o"ercome pernicious 1ate3 This famous declaration @+ o"ercome 1ate\A finds its theogonic e2tension in "arious Gnostic myths where ophia is seen to descend to the le"el of the 4eimarmene and e"entually o"ercome it through "arious dynamics3 +t is the melancholic search for the scattered ,siris9FLH the ignorance9 wandering9 and lamentation in a lower world that form the archetypal appeal of this )gyptianOGnostic female sal"ific figure3 The reDection of astrological determinism underlies the percei"ed numinosity of both goddesses3 +n the conflated mythological person of ophia9 the )gyptian goddesses 4athor9 Tefnut9 and +sis continue to lead the downward theogonic e2tension into dar0ness9 one that parado2ically leads to e"entual pleromic completion3

FL' FLJ

Coptic transcription from E&9 H3

@At the same time9 +sis is to him YPlutarchZ a goddess of wisdom9 and her mysteries lead to gnosis of the highest being9 that is9 ,siris9AGriffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride< J%3 Plutarch9 4eri 0sidos< J&3%3

FLH

242
)hapter Thirteen* The (eth rinciple* 'emiurgic Bac.lash to leromic 7imits

+n the field of Gnostic tudies the figure of eth stands at the centre of ethianism9 @properly or improperly so calledA3 The ca"eat is proposed by 1rederic0 <isse who li0ens the enterprise9 in Boological terms9 to past attempts to establish the historicity of the unicorn3FL: The tractates that appear to indicate the ethian presence rarely contain all si2 themes laid out by chen0eC e"en then9 the same themes appear in different forms and in different conte2ts and are often obscure and muddled in their focus and "ariations3 <isse then goes on to ma0e an important hermeneutic critique of chen0e and all those in Gnostic tudies who ha"e followed his lead3 These e2egetists insist upon "iewing Gnostic authors as @sect theologiansA9 and all contradiction and confusion apparent in the array of te2ts before us must therefore9 in this "iew9 result from inept translation and copying or redaction processes that refract the system far from its systemic inception3 <isse then turns to e2amine the nature of Gnostic composition9 one that is at the heart of the present study and which9 when properly understood9 must remo"e the @ismA from Gnostic thought3 <isse?s conclusions are worth citing in partE %( The gnostic tractates in question must not be seen as the teaching of a sect or sects9 but as the inspired creations of indi"iduals who did not feel bound by the opinions of the religious community3 ;( Recurring themes such as those chen0e isolated were not part of a particular gnostic system but @free=floatingA theologumena and mythologumena which one could use as one saw fit3 As 5liDn and others ha"e shown9 quite a number of these can be traced bac0 to esoteric circles9 and they can be shown to ha"e been a"ailable to persons of di"erse religious bac0grounds3 )"en if a definite meaning was attached to these theologumena the gnostic author felt free to change the meaning and original conte2t3 G( This group of writings should be e"aluated and interpreted differently from theological treatises in the orthodo2 tradition3 They do not adhere to the e2pected pattern of systematic thin0ing and argumentation3 Conflicting thoughts do not appear to offend the author3333FLF o far so good9 howe"er <isse goes on to recommend that a penetrating analysis of the structure of such writings would be improper9 and that they were intended primarily for meditation3 Iet the two aims are not mutually e2clusi"eE <isse?s analysis is correct in de"aluing the attribute of a self@conscious cultic cohesi%eness upon the Gnostic mo"ement as a wholeC howe"er9 this must not obscure the host of mythological substructures9 in terms of the emanationist systems employed9 that surface in a large segment of Gnostic theology3 As with the well=understood literary and musical @"ariations on a themeA9 one does not imagine these wor0s as an attempt to dogmatically con"ey the original te2t or score9 rather they ta0e the earlier wor0
FL:

1rederic0 <isse9 @ tal0ing Those )lusi"e ethians9Ain -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism< "ol3 ;< Sethian )nosticism9 ed3 Bentley /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%(9 JHG=:H3 <isse "ery effecti"ely details the problems with the thematic filter established by 4ans=Martin chen0e9 @Das sethianische ysten nach -ag=4ammadi=4andschriften9A in Studia "optica< ed3 Peter -agel $BerlinE Academie *erlag9 %&:'(9 %HJ=:G3 <isse9 @ tal0ing Those )lusi"e ethians9A J:J=:H3

FLF

244
as inspirational and use it as a starting point for "ariations and new e2plorations3 The new wor0 is e2pected to display the inspirational genius of the artist9 and to indict the wor0 as deri"ati"e9 or con"ersely to claim that it isn?t true enough to the original9 is to entirely miss the point of the @mythopoeicA enterprise3 And all of this of course is not to deny the underling literary and musical con"entions that all such "ariations must adhere to3 <e ha"e a similar problem with the scholarly construct of *alentinianism9 properly or improperly so called3 <e essentially ha"e little idea about the cultic acti"ities of such a group9 nor can we say that there was a proselytising group of missionaries who promulgated a system in the manner of the Manichaeans9 or the orthodo2 church for that matter3 <hat we can say9 in light of the abo"e obser"ations9 is that a number of Gnostics created a constellation of @*ariations on a Theme by *alentinusA in the 0ey of )gyptian emanationist theologies as we ha"e seen in Chapter %;3 +t is the clear adherence to emanationist con"ention that demonstrates the ultimate deri"ation of so=called *alentinianism and ethian Gnostic thought3 + adopt a middle ground between <isse and chen0e9 for the ethian motif is apparent and does point towards the @esoteric .ewishA component in Gnostic thought3 +t is the "ery eclectic esotericism in this genre which precludes the need for strict theological clarity in occidental terms3 ,ur tas0 at hand is to e2amine the role of the )gyptian eth in Gnostic thought3 +n doing so we do not posit eth?s continued role within )gyptian myth9 but rather note his demonisation9 his fusion with the Gree0 Typhon9 and most importantly his suggesti"e archetype subtending Gnostic demiurgic functions3 +t is my contention that as the disruption of nati"e pharaonic rule continued from Persian times onwards9 the )gyptian sense of maat was se"erely sha0en3 +f order in the "isible world9 and therefore the in"isible as well for the theogony results in the creation of )gypt9 wherefrom does the new disruption and e"il in the land originateS -un and the so=called Chaos gods are ob"ious candidates as e"idenced in the magical papyri and Gnostic te2ts3 4owe"er9 this le"el of di"inity is not directly bound up with the created world and is to be associated with the Primal ource of a hypostatic stream of ,rder9 fore"er bounded by Disorder3 The seasonal flood and withdrawal of the -ile to its orderly ban0s9 lea"ing behind the possibility for organisation and beneficence in the newly fecundated fields > this was but a re"erberation of -un?s more central role in bounding Disorder as an ontological predicate3 The significance of eth for Gnostic thought ran0s alongside that of the +sisOTefnut myths we ha"e already e2amined3 eth is a self=directed agent who re"olts against established order9 e"en before birth in brea0ing through -ut?s side3 As a result of his contro"ersial beha"iour9 eth is often replaced in the ennead by 4orus or Thoth for e2ample3FL& 4e is the principle of the dysteliological within the bounded theogonic order9 whereas -un and the 4eh= gods are on the macrocosmic frontier3 ,ne sees a desire in )gyptian theology to situate eth upon this edge as eth is finally cast out into Asia in the /ate Period from whence he returns to wrea0 ha"oc in )gypt3 The )gyptian word khenenu @confusionA9 is written in hieroglyphs using the eth animal determinati"e and represents the opposite of maat3F%L As is the case at other Duncture points between Gnostic and )gyptian thought9 the significance of "arious roles is e2plored by the Gnostics with certain "ariations and blurring of identities apparent3 The @ eth=principleA9 if we can call it that9 is shared by the Gnostic ophia in a large number of mythological e2amples3 /i0ewise a late=appearing member of an ennead9 hebdomad or whate"er9 she disrupts the cosmic order in se2ual terms by brea0ing with established order9 and in unleashing chaotic and destructi"e forces in the lower world as her
FL&

te *elde9 @Relations and Conflicts between )gyptian Gods9 particularly in the Di"ine )nnead of 4eliopolis9A ;';3 43 te *elde9 @The )gyptian God eth as Tric0ster9A JA$"E *++ $%&HF(E G:3

F%L

24negati"e passions or abortion are hypostatised3 At this point > and we are "ery much drawing on the @*alentinianA myth > the demiurge creates the world out of these elements and rules o"er it in conDunction with a ophia=figure abo"e him3 4e is often arrogant and boastful9 yet ne"er a completely e"il personage3 4is role is absolutely necessary in the entire scheme of things9 and it is here that we note an equi"alent role in eth3 eth helps slay the Apophis sna0e daily for Re and this e2tremely positi"e function is to be held up against all the disrupti"e iniquities that occur within the other pro"enances of eth?s power3 eth is at the heart of the )gyptian e2perience of duality9 his @origin and e2istence is an accident9 not in agreement with maatA3F%% +n contrast with this9 of course 4orus establishes his mansion9 e2tending his principle of orderly rulership to the rightful 0ing of )gypt3 This theme is to be found in the Ptolemaic temple of )dfu9 wherein 4orus sets his limit by casting eth outE The coward $ eth( is repulsed from the mansion of 4orus of the 4orus gods9 , ser"ant of 4orus9 Iour hCyt@chamber is Doyful $+*3;G'9F=&(F%; The Gnostic appropriation of this concept9 in the same literary fashion as the fortuitous alliterati"e glosses employed by the Ptolemaic priests in the abo"e inscription9 disco"ered the function of 4orus amplified in the definition of the Gree0 horus9 meaning boundary3 The -ripartite -ractate illustrates this transformationE All his$her( prayer and remembering were numerous powers according to (orus$/imit( who was established3 1or there is nothing barren in his$her( thought3 The powers were good and greater than those of the similitude3 1or those belonging to the similitude also belong to a nature of YdeceitZ3 1rom a phantasm of similarity and a thought of arrogance has Ycome aboutZ that which they becameC howe"er9 they originate from the thought which first 0new them3 $F;3%L=;'(F%G ,f course the qualities of deceit and arrogance well accord with eth?s @tric0sterA characteristic3 +n the *alentinian myth9 following the @e2tensionA of ophia3 The aeon finds herself cut off from the pleroma9 surrounded by her formless abortion3 The androgynous aeon 4orus establishes a limit9 so as to establish a wall against the threat of disorder9 afterwhich ophia repents and is redeemed3 +n the main 4eliopolitan )gyptian myth9 +sis raises 4orus in solitude in the inhospitable marshes of 5hemmis3 4orus9 unli0e the gods before him9 is destined not to ha"e a female consortC in the *alentinian myth this is also the case3 <e ha"e elsewhere in so=called *alentinian thought9 the scenario of a di"ine figure declining her partner9 resulting in infecundity or abortion3 The Gnostic -orea9 also 0nown as -uraita and -huraita9 is presented as the wife=sister of ethF%'9 and this would appear to deri"e
F%% F%;

+bid39 ;F3

hmty hms>ti r hwt (r (rw hm (r hCyt<k m hwt E ta0en from an inscription cited by Barbara <atterson9 @The !se of Alliteration in Ptolemaic9A in )limpses of Ancient EgyptA Studies in (onour of (>G> 'airman< ed3 .ohn Ruffle et al>$<arminster9 )nglandE Aris and Phillips9 %&:&(9 %H:3 )lsewhere in this temple there are numerous descriptions of @ ethian sacrificesA and rites directed against ethian animalsE @Their tone is "igorously hostile3 To describe them as Tthreatening? would be an understatement9A .3G3 Griffiths9 9e 0side et 2siride9 JJ%3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;';3 ee Birger A3 Pearson9 @Re"isiting -orea9A in 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism< ;HJ9 for a useful study of this figure9 although the )gyptian connection is entirely o"erloo0ed3

F%G F%'

24.
in part from the )gyptian goddess9 -ephthys9 or sometimes -eith9 wife=sister of eth3 <hile in the )gyptian myth -ephthys is distanced from the disrupti"e acti"ities of eth and their sy,ygy is ne"er holistically incorporated into the ennead9 Gnostic in"ersion redeems -orea and eth9 and they can be seen to function together as pur"eyors of gnosis3 Be that as it may9 all of the disrupti"e features that operate in the Gnostic theogony can be traced bac0 to the fundamental principles contained in eth9 one of infecundity9 incompletion9 prematurity9 and aborti"eness3F%J A further se2ual parallel is to be found in eth?s homose2ual act9 one which @threatens to change the cosmos into chaosA3F%H ophia?s se2ual de"iance manifests eth?s dynamic as @an enemy of boundariesAF%:C 4orus establishes the boundary and she comes to realise this @ ethian e2cessA in herself3 4er clash with the pleroma is the archetypal conflict between 4orus and eth3 The Gnostic )ospel of the Egyptians $-4C +++9; and +*9;( depicts an equi"ocal eth figure who represents a fusion between the )gyptian eth and the son of Adam3F%F The te2t is a hash of redacti"e layers that are difficult to delimitC certainly the Christian elements are a later addition and the pre=Christian elements of the te2t are cautiously "iewed by 13 <isse and A3 BQhlig as being @considerably olderA than their pro"isional ;nd or Grd century compilation date3F%& At a number of Dunctures the tractate re"eals a solid 4eliopolitan emphasis upon AtumOAutogenes and a female power generating a stream of ogdoads which can be laid out as followsE AutogenesO1emale Power Y%st ,gdoadO8nd 2gdoadZ

4armoBel )amaliel ,roiael )a=riel Da"ithe Samlo )leleth

Grace +emory Perception Lo%e !nderstanding 4eace Prudence

A=rasa: Eternal Life > ChaosE hylic ophia9 a0la and -ebruel9 %; rulers of 4adesOChaos The te2t notes that another three ogdoads are formed9 for a total of forty aeons9 although the names of the other members are not gi"en3 The female power responsible for generating the first ogdoad also generates eth who stands outside the hypostasising order of the ogdoads3 The bac0ground theogony9 and a "ery intricate and abstruse one it is9 is on par with the 4istis Sophia9 although in this system eth has a pi"otal theogonic importance ascribed to his person3 The main function of eth is as a conduit for the di"ine light from abo"e to appear in his seed which
F%J

!go Bianchi9 @ eth9 ,siris9 et l?ethnographie9A Selected Essays on )nosticism< 9ualism< and +ysteriosophy $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F(9 %;:3 te *elde< Seth< )od of "onfusion9 'G3 +bid39 JH3

F%H F%: F%F

A point made by 1rederic0 <isse and Ale2ander BQhlig9 in Nag (ammadi "odices 000< 8 and 0&< 8A -he )ospel of the Egyptians $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J(9 GJ3 The possible )gyptian pro"enence of the piece is also noted $GH( 3 N(S< "ol3 +*9 GF3

F%&

24K
generates the @race of ethA3 The aeons all gi"e praise to the upper echelons that this might happenC @then e"erything shoo0A $J'3%%(F;L as a series of emanations come forth9 culminating in the appearance of a female power9 @the mother of the lightsA appearing through eth $JH3:(F;%3 All of this is a Gnostic in"ersion of the main )gyptian myth of 4orus and eth9 whereby the seed of eth is depicted as a parody of true generati"e powers3 The focus upon the @seed of ethA in both "iews9 has to do with a critical mode of se2uality that furthers or hinders the theogony3 The )gyptian Gnostics drawing upon the figure of eth and his consort were out to completely redeem their role in the )gyptian myth3 A common feature of )gyptian=Gnostic thought occurs at this point as the underworld is created from out of the last aeon in the main group9 in this case )leleth3 The @hylic ophiaA corresponds with the *alentinian ophia Achamoth9 she who is left in the lower world following the repentance of the higher ophia3 The two demons9 a0la and -ebruel9 appear in a number of Gnostic te2ts as well as being central figures in the Manichaean system $ a0las and -ebrod(3 a0la is the demiurge and is identified as the .ewish .ahwehE @+ am a Dealous god and apart from me nothing has come into being3333A $JF3;'=;H(F;;3 eth functions as the bringer of pneumatic seed into this lower world9 for the formation of @a great incorruptible raceA $HL3;J(F;G3 Gnostic in"ersion identifies eth with odom and GomorrahC as well9 flood9 conflagration9 famine9 and plague appear because of the race of eth3 eth appeals to the higher powers for protection for his race on earth and di"ine inter"ention occurs on their behalf3 There are simply too many echoes of the )gyptian god eth for the eth figure in this tractate to be identified solely with the .ewish son of Adam9 a point originally made by <isse and BQhlig3F;' eth e2ists somewhat apart from the normal order although he plays an acti"e roleC he is associated with odom and Gomorrah which alludes to eth?s homose2ual act with 4orusF;JC the main theogonic function of eth in -he )ospel of the Egyptians is se2ual9 specifically concerned with generationC the result of this acti"ity is the appearance of a race of eth in a lower realm setting off a host of @dysteliologicalA phenomena3 The boo0 of eth9 as the te2t refers to itself as9 was placed @in high mountains on which the sun YReZ has not risen9 nor is it possibleA $HF3G=J(F;H9 and the association of eth with the underworld and desert is here maintained3 Apart from these specific points9 eth?s equi"ocal role is e"erywhere apparent9 as disturber and protector of the theogony3 ophia desires to @0now the fatherA in @*alentinianA myth9 and her incest li0ewise disrupts the se2ualOtheogonic process3 The result is an aborti"e chaos that the aeon 4orus must delimit from the agitated Pleroma3 The ethian Gnostics9 as reported by 4ippolytus9 li0ewise posited se2ual dysfunction within the theogony as the precondition for the creation of man0ind and the lower worldE After9 then9 the light and the spirit had been recei"ed9 he says9 into the polluted and baneful $and( disordered womb9 the serpent > the wind of the dar0ness9 the first=begotten
F;L F;% F;; F;G F;' F;J F;H

+bid39 %%L3 +bid39 %%H3 +bid39 %;H3 +bid39 %G'3 +bid39 GJ +bid39 GJ +bid39 %H;3

247
of the waters > enters within and produces man9 and the impure womb neither lo"es nor recognises any other form3F;: The critical feature of a water=sna0e performing a theogonic function in the disorderly waters is clearly deri"ed from the serpent Apep in -un9 although the new twist of Apep as the progenitor of human0ind is nowhere to be found in )gyptian thought3 @The Paraphrase of ethA9 referred to in 4ippolytus9 presumably the source he is wor0ing from9 displays a number of conceptual o"erlaps with the -ag 4ammadi tractate @The Paraphrase of hemA $-4C *++3%(9 although a close identification between the two has been ruled out by some3F;F The depiction of the dar0 waters as the womb9 the @great dar0 water333 wrapped in "ile ignoranceA in 4ara> Shem $;3;;(9 and @the dar09 and formidable9 and bitter9 and defiled waterA in 4ippolytus9 both seen to be womb from which human0ind are produced ob"iously suggests a shared theology3F;& The @ eth=principleA also pertains to the duration of destinyFGL9 hence his fusion with the Gree0 Typhon in the late phase3 A study by .an Assmann?s depicts nhh@eternity pertaining to the 0ing9 the state9 the forces of nature9 @the perpetuity of discontinuity9 the unities of countable aspects of timeA on this side $9iesseits(3FG% Nhh@eternity9 as we shall e2amine in Chapter %J9 is essentially demiurgic and denotes a realm that has become threatened from within by its own theogonic process9 embodied in eth3 1or eth also limits the undisturbed functioning of 4orus and the entire theogonic process e2tending down from abo"eE eth also limits the e2istence of 4orus and his mother3 The child 4orus is brought forth by +sis in solitude3 +n the difficulties and dangers mother and child ha"e to endure9 not in ordered society9 but in the inhospitable marshes of 5hemmis9 the glorious9 original di"ine life is almost lost3 -ot only is the cosmos surrounded by prime"al chaos9 the cosmos itself pro"es to be fissured at eth?s first stirring3FG; +n Gnostic myth9 especially the @*alentinianA9 +sisO ophia and 4orus maintain themsel"es in the higher supernal realm with 4orus establishing a limitC below this the ethODemiurge is left to rule o"er the aborti"e underworld3 The limiting of eth in )gyptian and Gnostic myth is the 0ey dramatic de"elopment in both9 for eth and the Gnostic demiurgic realm are not to be crushed or o"erthrown9 rather they are destined to fulfil their destiny in terms of nhh=time3FGG The critical nature of eth and the Gnostic demiurge is equi"ocal9 embodying boastful arrogance and capriciousness9 but not quintessentially e"ilC eth aids Re daily against Apophis9 and the Gnostic demiurge in many
F;: F;F F;&

$efutatio *3N+*9 trans3 .343 MacMahon9 Ante@Nicene 'athers< "ol3 *9 HH3 M3 Roberge9 -he Nag (ammadi Li=rary in English9 G'%3

Also shared to some e2tent by the -icolaitans $ca3 &L C)( of Pergamum and )phesus attac0ed by .ohn3 )piphanius mentions their belief that the spirit separated dar0ness9 depth9 and water from which came the womb9 which produced four aeons etc39 all of which depicts the usual )gyptian 4eh=god characteristics3 Bianchi9 @ eth9 ,siris9 et l?ethnographie9A %GJ3 Assman9 ;eit und Ewigkeit im Alten Hgypten< B8> te *elde9 Seth< )od of "onfusion>< G;3

FGL FG% FG; FGG

Anthes notes this distincti"e feature of )gyptian theologyE @)gyptian religion is9 + thin09 completely free of those logics which eliminate one of two contradictory concepts and press religious ideas into a system of dogmas3A @)gyptian Theology in the Grd millenium B3C39A %:L3

24P
systems is enlightened by ophia and attempts to do the best he can3 Both figures fulfil their role in the theogonic process and their eradication because of their percei"ed negati"e qualities is not at issue3 At the beginning of this study we defined emanationist thought as placing its emphasis upon the need for theogonic process9 for differentiation arising out of the !ndifferentiated3 This need9 we maintained9 is one of distancing3 Thus the eth principle represents a polarity9 a remo"e9 an apogee from the ource that9 parado2ically9 ta0es one into its deepest mysteries3 eth for the ancient )gyptian theologians9 and the DemiurgeO ophia for the Gnostics9 was an acti"e principle embodying all the dysteliological phenomena in human life > war9 famine9 plague9 disease9 abortion9 flood9 and earthqua0e > all that which is allowed to occur9 in the larger mystery of things9 upon the outermost rims of Dustice9 fullness9 and order3

24,
)hapter $ourteen* The 1emphite Theology of the 0ord* Gnosis as the 1eta, -hetorical -esponse

There is little scholarly debate o"er the Memphite system e2isting as an antecedent to the 4eliopolitan3FG' 5ees9 for e2ample9 dates the Memphite to the period between the Third and 1ifth Dynasties9FGJ while MorenB dates the latter to the transition from the 1ifth to i2th Dynasty3FGH The uncertainty of an ,ld 5ingdom dating for the @Memphite TheologyA does not change the relationship for purposes of rhetorical analysis3FG: +n the first instance the te2t refers to the )nnead of Atum9 commenting as followsE 4is YPtahZ )nnead is before him as teeth and lipsE they are the semen and hands of Atum $and( the )nnead of Atum came into being as his semen by means of his fingers3 But now the )nnead $of Ptah( is the teeth and lips in this mouth9 which proclaims the name of e"erything from which hu and Tefnut came forth3FGF 1rom this it is clear that the Memphite concern was not at all in o"erthrowing the 4eliopolitan "iew and substituting something radically different9 rather the )nnead is affirmed and it is only the creati"e process that is under re"ision here3FG& <e might say that the Memphite "ersion of creation is a clarification of the 4eliopolitan system9 one which see0s to usurp Atum with Ptah9 for while Atum is granted his continued status as creator god9 his creati"e power is reconte2tualised as that of Ptah9 as are other 0ey players in the theogonyE There came into being through the heart9 there came into being through the tongue9 the form of AtumE for supreme is Ptah who gi"es YlifeZ to Yall the godsZ and their kas9 through

FG'

This is9 howe"er9 a comple2 issue3 <hen + spea0 of the Memphite system + am referring to the te2t that comes from the haba0a stone whose Ir@te:t is dated anywhere from ,ld 5ingdom to -ew by )gyptologists9 the latter "iew seeing it as an antique forgery as such3 There is clear e"idence9 howe"er9 for the establishment of Ptah9 the Memphite creator=god9 in conDunction with the new capital built some %L miles south and across the ri"er from 4eliopolis by Menes following his unification of !pper and /ower )gypt in the 1irst Dynasty3 5ees< )*tterglau=e9 ;'F3 MorenB< Egyptian $eligion9 %J'3

FGJ FGH FG:

ee 1rederic0 .unge9 @8ur 1ehldatierung des sog3 Den0mals memphitischer Theologie9A +9H0. ;& $%&:G(E %&J=;L'9 in which a date in the Ramesside period or later is proposed3 4ieroglyphic transcription from Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest9A plate ++9 column JJ3 /3 5M0osy9 @A Memphite Triad9A JEA HH $%&FL(E JG9 @<hile the primiti"e form of the myth of engendering by onanism ne"er disappeared9 the concept of creation in 4eliopolis tended to de"elop along more subtle lines3 ince there is no proof that this process was induced by Memphite influence9 one would rather thin0 that the transmission of ideas too0 place in a 4eliopolis=to=Memphis direction3 That would entail that the Memphite creation myth was formed of9 or enriched by9 elements adopted from anstract 4eliopolitan doctrines3A

FGF FG&

2-5
this heart9 through this tongue9 in which 4orus came into being9 in which Thoth came into being9 as Ptah3F'L @4eartA refers to mind in this depiction9 and @tongueA refers to speech3 This is quite stri0ing9 for it indicates that )gyptian philosophical thought was crossing a profound threshold in proposing that its own thought=processes be e2amined as a microcosm for di"inity itselfC while they did not reDect the pre"ious body=oriented model $which focused upon the procreati"e functions(9 they sought to establish a more e2alted9 indeed philosophical9 theogonic process based upon the powers of thought and utterance9 and it must be remembered that the earlier 4eliopolitan system9 had posited the hypostatic e2istence of Sia $@!tteranceA(9 and (u $@PerceptionA(9 two gods created by Atum in any case3 +n an essentially rhetorical and political conte2t9 the 0ey thing to 0eep in mind is e2actly who @theyA were3 peculati"e thought resided within the priesthood9 and there is therefore a distinct message of self=empowerment in a theogony based upon the sacred and creati"e word9 as opposed to blood=ties3 There is a significance to this te2t that goes beyond seeming to prefigure creation by the <ord in .ohn?s GospelE the te2t9 as it goes on to demonstrate presents Creation as a paradigm of human subDecti"ityE Thus the )nnead was born9 so that the eyes could see9 the ears hear9 the nose breath air9 $and( so they could all ascend to the heart3 4e is the one who causes all full 0nowledge to be attained3 +t is the tongue which enunciates that which the heart thin0s9 and thus all of the gods were born and his )nnead was fulfilled3F'% +t is this process @that gi"es "alue to e"erythingA as the te2t states some thirteen lines further on3F'; The critical point here is that creation9 although it e2ists in some sort of primordial state9 is not actually effected until the concept attains the reality of speech3F'G The god @wordingA reality was not seen as ha"ing effected creation e: nihilo9 instead9 as MorenB describes it9 @the creator seiBes the powers latent in the prime"al material and incorporates them into his own beingA3F'' 4igher 0nowledge in the )gyptian Memphite "iew pertains to an appreciation of the logos=oriented creation of the theogony by the Primal ource The Memphite Theology demonstrates this focusE
F'L

4ieroglyphic transcription from Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest9A plate ++9 columns JG=J'3
F'%

4ieroglyphic transcription from .ames 4enry Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite PriestA9 plate ++9 column JH3 Compare with Allen9 )enesis in Egypt9 'GE

@The eyes? seeing9 the ears? hearing9 the nose?s breathing of air send up to the heart9 and it is what causes e"ery conclusion to emergeC it is the tongue that repeats what the heart plans3 o were all the gods born9 Atum and his )nnead as well333A
F'; F'G

Allen9 )enesis in Egypt< @which facilitates e"erything9A 'G3

An )gyptian concept that is also clarified in 4ermetic thought3 ee +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 G%C also the 4ermetic tractate +*9 ;3 &:9 J=HE @when concei"ed by the intellect9 intellection is pronounced by the word3A MorenB< Egyptian $eligion9 %:;3

F''

2-+
+t is through what the heart thin0s and the tongue commands that e"ery di"ine decree came into being3 Thus were the male kas made and the female kas set in place9 and they who made all pro"isions and offerings through this word3F'J The Gnostic -ripartite -ractate demonstrates precisely the same "iew of the original generation of the male and female aeonsE +n the same manner as the Logos9 he begot them9 $they( subsisting spermatically along with those who had not yet been brought into e2istence by him3 The 1ather9 therefore9 initially thin0ing of them > not only that they might e2ist for him9 but that they might e2ist for themsel"es as well9 that they might then e2ist in his thought in the substance of +dea$Ennoea( and that they might e2ist for themsel"es too > sows +dea$Ennoea( li0e a seed of Y0nowledgeZ so that they might concei"e of what e2ists for them3 $HL3G'=H%3&(F'H ,ne is gi"en a some insight into )gyptian Gnostic theologising in the tractate 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld where the Memphite Theology9 in conDunction with the 4ermopolitan9 is rationalised to e2plain the creation of the lower demiurgic realmE After this9 the archon thought within his nature and created by means of the word an androgyne3 $%L%3&=%%(F': e"en appeared out of the Chaos as androgynous beings3 $%L%3;'(F'F The Primal Creator +aldabaoth9 since he possessed great authorities9 created hea"ens for each of his offspring by means of "erbal e2pression9 beautiful9 as dwelling places9 $and( for each hea"en great glories se"en times e2cellent3 Thrones and mansions and temples9 and also chariots and "irgin spirits $e2tending( up to an in"isible one > together with their glories9 each one possesses these in his hea"en9 as in an army9 the power of the gods9 lords9 angels and archangels in countless thousands $created( that they may ser"e3 An inquiry into these matters can be found9 clearly $defined(9 in -he 'irst Logos of 2raias> $%L;3%%=;J(F'& This te2t is important9 both for its demonstration of )gyptian theological antecedents9 as well as its affirmation of Gnostic inter=te2tuality3 -o less than eight citations of other wor0s are made in the larger wor09 and a number of them can be conclusi"ely connected with the magical papyri as has been demonstrated in Chapter J3 The same principle of "erbal creation and se"en Chaos=gods appear and one is therefore not surprised to find a number of laudatory references to )gypt in this tractate9 including @the water hydri in )gyptA9 the Phoeni29 and Apis bulls3 This passage concludesE @+t was only in )gypt that these great signs appeared > nowhere else > as an indication that it is li0e God?s ParadiseA $%;;3%H=%;G3%(FJLE The consideration of what prompted
F'J

4ieroglyphic transcription from .ames 4enry Breasted9 @The Philosophy of a Memphite PriestA9 plate ++9 column JH=J:3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN++9 ;LH9 ;LF3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol NN+9 GH3 +bid39 GH3 +bid39 GF3 +bid39 FL3 ee BQhlig9 +ysterion und Gahrheit9 %'J='F3

F'H F': F'F F'& FJL

2-2
the )gyptian concern with noetic reciprocity as + would term it9 and this medium9 effected between god and creation9 is clarified by the presence of maat> The sense of cosmic and political order9 of morality9 and e"en etiquette9 it has been suggested9FJ% prefigures the Gree0 concept of 3FJ; +n the same sense that maat is portrayed as a creati"e principle begotten by Atum9 she nonetheless delimits9 and in some ways precedes9 the "ery possibilities for Atum?s act of creation3FJG +aat as a personal goddess and principle is therefore somewhat of an anomaly in the entire 4eliopolitan pantheon9 for as a creati"e principle she also operates as a synecdoche for the entire cosmologyC that is9 she herself is both the Dustification and principle of completion9 therefore the "ery basis of Being underlying all hypostatic enactments9 including the appearance of Atum himself3 +aat< who was eternal and indestructible9 was @the embodiment of )gyptian optimismA3FJ' This cosmological reciprocity arose out of socio=historical conditions9 including the relationship between the 0ing and his subDects as e"idenced by the decline of the ,ld 5ingdom bifurcated afterlife as a 0ingly prerogati"e9 but more particularly the political relationship between the 5ing and the priesthoods3 + ha"e stressed the apparent intent of the Memphite system to mitigate but not radically alter the 4eliopolitan3 +n this sense9 the 0ing?s royal pedigree would ha"e remained critically important but not9 in itself9 decisi"e3 1or the procreati"e power of Atum has attained a "erbal stature in Ptah9 and the pharaoh9 as e2emplar and e2ecutor of the di"ine will on earth9 must in this conte2t spea0 first9 procreate after as it were3 +n effect9 the legitimacy of the 0ing is "ouchsafed by his speech9 and the prerogati"es of thought and speech are shared by all3FJJ +t is my contention that the emanationist "iew of creation through %er=al e:pression is quintessentially )gyptian in origin9 although it was undoubtedly affected by di"erse ancient
FJ% FJ;

Tobin9 -heological 4rinciples9 ::3

+ would note in passing that maat as goddess in this regard9 finds her later parallel in the metaphoric concept of Parmenides who has the Goddess of Truth proclaim that9 @.ustice does not loosen her fetters to let Being be born or destroyed9 but holds them fast9A <heelwright9 -he 4resocratics9 &:3 +t is interesting that the monism of Parmenides proceeds out of a concern with a central eternal state of Being comparable to the )gyptian -un9 and that his @Goddess of TruthA appears as his own hypostatic deri"ation therefrom9 a0in to the )gyptian conceptOgoddess of maat3 Tobin9 -heological 4rinciples< :FE @+n order to e2press anything of the fullness which was contained in the )gyptian Ma?at9 the Gree0 language had to ha"e recourse to terms such as $@rightA9 @orderA(9 $@fateA9 @portion9A(9 $@discretionA9 @self=restraintA9 @moderationA(9 and $@"irtueA9 @nobility9A( Ywhich + prefer to translate as @prowess9A or @e2cellenceAE @"irtueA was a later sense of the wordZ3 The @fullnessA of which Tobin spea0s found its way in Gnostic thought into their concept of the 4leroma> This embodied the same sense of necessity as in maat9 howe"er this engendered good and e"il in the world3 Tobin9 -heological 4rinciples9 FL3 Admittedly we are on tenuous grounds9 yet it is a consistent conclusion to be drawn from a system which was surely ta0en this seriously3 <e are touching upon the subDect of pharaonic literacy9 that royalty in this system would ha"e been schooled by the priests in the cosmogonic @language of power9A in a sort of dialectical pro"ing=ground for all who would rule by the word3 The essential point is that in the Memphite "iew9 utterance9 as well as perhaps family birthright9 would ha"e been the true test of 0ingly suBerainty o"er the priesthood3 +t is the "ery principle of intellection present in the Memphite system which must needs confer this thin0ing independence upon such a sophisticated group of priests3 Ptah9 the @Di"ine ArtificerA is9 in this sense9 a metaphor for the demiurgic endea"ours of these religious philosophers9 an imago of their own speculati"e genius3

FJG

FJ' FJJ

2-4
influences by Roman times3 The teachings of Basileides in Ale2andria points us in this directionE <hence9 says he9 came the lightS 1rom nothing3 1or9 says he9 it is not written where $it came( from9 but only $that it came( from the "oice of him that spo0e3FJH 4ippolytus of Rome?s attac0 on Basileides9 along with +renaeus9 indicates that this Gnostic teacher ad"anced a Memphite=theology based theogony3 This can be historically connected with e2tant )gyptian religious te2ts at the time of Basileides9 in the form of a Demotic te2t from the uchos temples in the 1ayyum which dates to the second century C3)3E To him belongs the Power of <ord from di"ine word$s( to ma0e great Y Z3FJ: As well9 from the cartonnage of a mummy in the time of Augustus we ha"e an e2ample of the Memphite theology in demotic $Pap3 Berlin %GHLG(3FJF The appercepti"e thrust of the Memphite theogony suggests a modern philosophical concern with subDecti"ism in a few critical regards3FJ& 1or our purposes of course it attains a distinct resonance with all of the emanationist systems we ha"e loo0ed at3 The establishment of the )gyptian Memphite theology as the precursor for aspects of 4ellenistic emanationist thought is critical9 for it supplies the historical grounds necessary to understand common emphases e"ident in theurgic9 philosophical9 and Gnostic applications3 The )gyptians did not consider e"erything to be physical in natureC as this te2t ma0es clear9 they distinguished between sensible and intelligible e2istence9 and between physical and spiritual natures3FHL +n particular the watery abyss of -un in )gyptian thought is intimately bound up in the creati"e process9 and one is Dustified in spea0ing of Tefnut and -ut as @wateryA feminine hypostases in the lower order3 The principle of Chaos is at the heart of all )gyptian cosmologies and it finds its way into Platonic and Gnostic e2pression3FH%
FJH FJ:

4ippolytus9 $ef> *++ ;L9 ;;3G3 Trans3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts9 "ol3 %9 HJ>

DPD HH%'3H from )3A3)3 Reymond9 ed39 'rom the "ontents of the Li=raries of the Suchos -emples in the 'ayyum< part ++< Ancient Egyptian (ermetic Gritings $<ienE *erlag BrXder 4olline09 %&::(9 %'J3 <3 )richsen= 3 chott9 'ragmente memphitischer -heologie in demotischer Schrift $Abb3 Des Geistes u3 oBialwiss3 5/3 Der A0ad in MainB $%&J'(9 no3 :3 *ia the Gree0 ophistic mo"ement + might add9 in particular the famous a2iom of Protagoras9 @Man is the measure of all that is9 that it is9 and all that is not9 that it is not3A The )gyptians distinguished between being and not=being9 between $ntt( that which is9 and $iwtt(9 that which is not3 ee +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 %;E @That the )gyptians did in fact identify this power of the heart with what we should call cosmic intelligence is once more confirmed by .amblichus9 stating that when the nous re"ealed itself as Tthe power which with care and s0illfully brought all things to perfect completion9 then its )gyptian name was in fact Ptah9? Y9e +ysteriis :=;H'9 '9 *+++9G9 %&H=%&:Z3 .amblichus? statement is confirmed by Proclus9 who on the authority of Porphyrius relates that the )gyptian 4ephaistos9 i3e3 Ptah9 was considered the manifestation of technikos nous< ob"iously a direct reference to his )gyptian epithet T/ord of craftsmanship3?@ .ohn Dillon9 @The Descent of the oul in Middle Platonic and Gnostic Theory9A in -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism9 "ol3 %9 -he School of *alentinus9 ed3 Bentley /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FL(9 GJ:=H'9 does not note the )gyptian antecedents9 but ably describes the negati"e feminine roleE @The solution resorted to in Platonism9 and generally in Gnosticism as well9 is the postulation of a female principle9 either generated by or somehow arising beside the primal entity $which is in"ariably male(3 this is a principle of negati"ity9 boundlessness and lac09 and pro"o0es the generation of the multiplicity of

FJF

FJ&

FHL

FH%

2-+t is also of interest that the 4eliopolitan pro=creati"e theogony was subsumed by the Memphite9 but not reDected3 <e can see the same theogonic tension between a se:ual and a %er=al mode of emanation in almost all forms of 4ellenistic Gnosis3 +n some Gnostic systems9 the -rimorphic 4rotennoia9 -he -hought of Norea9 and -he -hunderA 4erfect +ind for e2ample9 the emphasis is upon utterance although there is a distinctly se2ual feel to these wor0s9 quite apart from the fact that all employ first=person female personas3 +n most *alentinian wor0s the emphasis is upon aeonial se2ual pairing although the role of the @/ogosA is also powerfully featured3 +n contrast with *alentinus9 Basileides fa"oured creation by the <ord as we ha"e seen9 and so the split is quite apparent between these two Gnostic teachers3 The fact that they were contemporaries in Ale2andria indicates that this was a current issue3 This can be traced bac0 further to the pre"ious century to imon Magus whose concept of the Primal ource is "ery much a0in to the Chaldean and Middle Platonic3 The imonian @Boundless PowerA draws forth Thought from itself and she $Thought( e2ists in hermaphroditic fashion as she li0ewise contains Power within herself3 FH; The Memphite focus upon utterance releasing the creati"e thought is apparent here9 and of course the se2ual aspects of the gnosis of imon Magus need hardly be emphasised3 +n pursuing these considerations it is apparent that the Chaldean system and Middle Platonism both side with the Memphite cosmology3 Apart from a distinct disinclination to detail hosts of descending aeons in male=female pairs9 howe"er9 their systems find many stri0ing similarities with Gnostic thought in general9 and of course with respect to those Gnostic systems which are more Memphitic9 the tas0 is really to draw out substantial differences> +t remains a safe generalisation to say that9 systemic similarities aside9 the Middle Platonists were not all that interested in theurgy per se3FHG 4owe"er9 Chaldean and Gnostic applications are coterminous in their cataloguing of sacred formulae with which to manipulate higher powers3 + shall offer only one e2ample of a Gnostic te2t which clearly shows theurgic applications3 +arsanes $-4C N9% ;:3%;=%F( engages in a lengthy description of the di"ine power of "owel and consonant soundsE @1orm by form9 they constitute the nomenclature of the gods and the angels9 not because they are mi2ed with each other according to e"ery form9 but only because they ha"e a good functionA3FH' These9 @are commanded to submit333 and as they are changed they submit to the hidden gods by means of beat and pitch and silence and impulseA3FHJ The author of this tractate wishes to impart 0nowledge about @the generation of the namesA$GJ3H(9 and @the word of the hypostasisA$GH3;%(3 The cosmos is headed by the @!nbegotten ,neA beneath which operates the female Barbelo in the same manner as the Chaldean 4e0ate3 As well9 the @sense=perceptible worldA is held in contradistinction to a higher 0nowledge possessed by Barbelo3 +t is the clear emphasis upon using sacred sounds to manipulate higher powers which puts this Gnostic te2t in complete accord with the Chaldean3 +n
creation9A $GJ:(3 The same ambiguity about -un?s relationship with the creator Atum is to be found in *alentinian e2pressionsC as the @formlessA -un seems to be the consort of Atum9 so the @"oicelessA Sige $silence( is the somewhat clandestine syBygaic partner of the *alentinian Progenitor3
FH;

4ippolytus9 $efutatio H3%FE @1or it is from this power that the unique thought came forth and became two3 And he also was oneC for ha"ing her within him he was alone9 but not9 howe"er9 first despite pre= e2isting9 but appearing to himself from himself he became second3A Trans3 Catherine ,sborne9 $ethinking )reek 4hilosophy9 ;J%3 4owe"er one can assume that they felt a distinct sympathy for this mode of speculation gi"en the e2tensi"e e"idence we possess3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N*9 ;&H9 ;&F3 +bid39 ;&3;L U GL3%%3

FHG

FH' FHJ

2-.
conclusion it should be noted that there is also a less enhanced Gnostic theurgy at wor0 within the Gnostic mo"ement as a whole9 and this pertains to the simple possession of passwords that will allow the soul to ascend past the archons following physical death3FHH These details are of course quintessentially )gyptian9 as found towards the end of the aite period in particular9 when the Boo0 of the Dead was regularised as has been mentioned3 +n the /ate Period an increasing number of magical incantations are used against inimical di"initiesC this is e2ceptional in terms of the number and intensity9 howe"er it but perpetuates ancient )gyptian "iews and is not in itself a new de"elopment3 +n discussing the Boo0 of the Dead9 in this case a partial Demotic "ersion dating to the time of -ero in HG C3)39FH: 5M0osy ma0es this pointE @+n general it can be ascertained9 that the first centuries of Roman rule brought no essential "ariations in other=worldly beliefs in )gypt333 in the )gyptian literature on death9 the Dourney through the otherworld is no simple hea"enly "oyageE the te2ts concern themsel"es with the arri"al of the soul in the !nderworldA3FHF Alongside this magical continuum there is a more sophisticated perspecti"e on Gnosis de"eloping in these times9 certainly less mechanistic9 one which "iews this e:perience as one of inner transformation3 ,nce transformed9 the soul of the aspirant ine2orably mo"es upwards and there is no need for the deployment of arcane formulae or passwords3 +t therefore follows that the abo"e Gnostic philosophical terminus is a natural progression from the reconte2tualisation of 4eliopolitan nepotisticOse2ual theogonic power= dynamics9 into a truer paradigm of human subDecti"ity3 1or the subsequent de"elopment of the Memphite @wordA theogony is in accord with the traditional )gyptian soteriological emphasis upon the @magicalAE sacred passwords and the li0e3 4uman consciousness9 in mirroring the di"ine dynamic9 is able to empower its own spiritual destiny by understanding this creati"e relationship between inner and outer3 This suggests the modern philosophical concern with subDecti"ism in a few critical regards3 Consider the following definition of )2istential PhilosophyE Y+tZ determines the worth of 0nowledge not in relation to truth but according to its biological "alue contained in the pure data of consciousness when unaffected by the emotions9 "olitions9 and social preDudices3 Both the source and the elements of 0nowledge are sensations as they @e2istA in our consciousness3 There is no difference between the e2ternal and internal world9 as there is no natural phenomenon which could not be e2amined psychologicallyC it all has its @e2istenceA in states of the mind3FH& ,ne is reminded in particular of 4eidegger?s notion of the @,penA wherein things are in a state of continuously arri"ing to be met by our proDections3 The result is @realityA3F:L -eedless to say9 the )gyptians were not concerned with systematising their insight9 although we can once again loo0 to the Gree0 philosophers for the intermediary stages of the
FHH

ee +renaeus9 Ad%ersus (aereses9 ; "ols39 trans3 and ed3 <3<3 4ar"ey $Ridgewood9 -ew .ersey9 %&HJ(9 Boo0 +9 Chap3 NN+3J3 1rantise0 /e2a9 9as demotische -oten=uch der 4ariser National=i=liothek $/eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs9 %&%L(3 5M0osy9 @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion9A;';3 Dagobert3 D3 Runes9 ed39 9ictionary of 4hilosophy $-ew .erseyE /ittlefield Adams U Co39 %&H;(9 %L;= %LG3 ee G3-3 -icholson9 Seeing and $eading $-ew .erseyE 4umanities Press9 %&F'(3

FH:

FHF FH&

F:L

2-K
de"elopment of this insight3 The )gyptians were raising the perceptual issue of reciprocity between subDect and obDect9 ostensibly within the mind of a god9 and can well be called the @philosophical harbingers of the Pre= ocratics3AF:; The Gnostic -rimorphic 4rotennoia manifests a word=empowered cosmology which demonstrates this focus upon the inner and outerE
F:%

<e alone Yare separateZ from the manifest world since we are Ysa"ed by theZ hidden YwisdomZ Yin ourZ hearts Yby means ofZ the ineffable and immeasurable Y*oiceZ3 And the one who is hidden within us pays the tribute of his fruit to the <ater of /ife3 Then the on who is complete in all respects9 that is9 the <ord which originated through this *oice which preceded it in the heights9 $and( who possesses within himself the name which is a /ight9 he re"ealed the imperishable things and all of the un0nown things were made 0nown3 And those things that are difficult to interpret and secret9 he re"ealed3333 $GH3GG= G:3%%(F:G The Gree0 loan word hermeneia9 which means @interpretationA or @power of speechA9 from which hermeneutic deri"es9 ties in well with the sense of the @power of wordsA to @gi"e utteranceA9 etc3 consonant with the Memphite theology e2pressed in this wor03 Archaic Gnosis9 as we ha"e defined it9 is more traditionally )gyptian in its recourse to the written word9 the sacred te2ts that must be at hand in order to effect sal"ation3 The alt Papyrus9 already cited9 is thus on par with the inter=te2tuality of 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld> A premier e2ample of Archaic Gnosis9 alongside the 4istis Sophia9 is -he Books of Jeu3 The Gnostic aspirant here emulates the di"ine "oice which gi"es rise to the emanation processE But + ha"e called upon the name of my 1ather9 to ensure that he should mo"e the true god so that he will emanate333 This is the first "oice which he ga"e $"oice to(E he stirred his emanations until they emanated3 $JL3%G=%F U J;3&=%L(F:' 4uman identification with di"ine entities including "arious transformations is a hallmar0 of )gyptian religious e2perience Coffin Te2t GGJ commences with the identification of the deceased with Atum9 the un=god9 -un9 and ,sirisE There comes into being a speech by me9 Atum3 + was $once( aloneC + was Re at his first appearings9 when he arose from the horiBon9 + am the Great ,ne9 the self=created3 Gho is the )reat 2ne< the self@created] (e is the water of the A=yss3 <ho created his names9 /ord of the )nnead9 who will not be repelled from the gods3 Gho is he] (e is Atum who is in his sun3 333The super"isor of what e2ists3 Gho is he] (e is 2siris> 333 + ha"e got rid of my wrongdoing9 + ha"e dispelled my e"il9 + ha"e remo"ed the falseness which was on me3
F:%

The later thought of Nenophanes of Colophon9 a teacher of the monist Parmenides9 pro"ides a clear parallel to the earlier Memphite "iewE @+t is the whole of God that sees9 the whole that thin0s9 the whole that hears3 <ithout effort he sets e"erything in motion by the thought of his mind3A Trans3 <heelwright9 -he 4resocratics9 G;3 Redford9 AkhenatenA -he (eretic .ing9 %JF3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++< 'L'9 'LH3 )mphasis added3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+++9 ;H9 GL3

F:; F:G F:'

2-7
333 + restored the )ye after it had been inDured3 $CT pell +* GGJ9 lines %F'=;G%3(
F:J

The sense here is of a conflation of gods that focus down upon the soul of a man9 imbuing him with their numinous powers9 and aiding him in the struggle against e"il3 -he )ospel of the Egyptians presents a "ery similar pictureE 1or this Adamas is a /ight which shone from the /ight9 for he is the )ye of the /ight3 1or he is the 1irst ManE because of him all things are9 to him all things are9 and without him they are as nothing9 Yhe beingZ the Parent who came forth9 inaccessible and un0nowable3 4e came down from abo"e for the eradication of the Defect3 Then the great di"ine self=begotten <ord and the incorruptible man Adamas became a mi2ture which is man3 And man came into being through a word3 $-4C +*9 H%3F=;;(F:H +n both te2ts9 human0ind is identified with the di"ine power of speech9 and with a fusion of "arious di"ine figures that shall aid in the struggle with e"il3 Both te2ts go on to entreat numerous other di"ine figures to perform soteriological functions in the theogony3 +n pell GGJ9 the sal"ation of the soul after death through its mirroring of the theogonic processC in -he )ospel of the Egyptians9 the furthering of the theogonic process as mirrored in the 1irst Man3 The di"ine power of speech in this process9 the )ye of Re9 and the fusion of human and di"ine in both te2ts9 "ouchsafe the quintessentially )gyptian pedigree of -he )ospel of the Egyptians3 As well9 in both "ersions of -he )ospel of the Egyptians9 the "erb shope appears at "arious Dunctures9 as in $-4C +*9; H%3;L(F::9 and the idea of transformation can be etymologically lin0ed in these two te2ts9 for shope comes from hprF:F9 used in the opening lines of pell GGJE hpr mdw nnk tm wnn>i w kwi>F:& 4ellenistic Gnosis tends towards the more radically subDecti"istic9 as undoubtedly influenced by ophistic9 0eptical9 and )uhemerisian relati"isms to be found in Ale2andria3 The word in this conte2t is more purely indi"iduati"e9 free from nomos=oriented religiosity and te2tual hierarchy3 !nto the Gnostic alone9 literally @the one who 0nowsA is the true power of transforming gnosis free from the encumbrances of world=generated episteme3 +n this sense -he -hunder 4erfect +ind represents the supreme literary attempt to generate this subDecti"ist stance3 The -hunderA 4erfect +ind is a difficult wor0 to place historically3 Among the collection of Gnostic tractates found at -ag 4ammadi9 )gypt9 in %&'J9 this wor0 is unique in a number of regards3 <hile the wor0 is certainly Gnostic in many ways9 its distinct allusi"eness does not allow it to be lin0ed with any particular Gnostic systemC rather it seems to embody a wider appeal which stems from its basis in the +sisO ophia traditions pre"alent in )gypt from GLL B3C3)3 to GLL C3)3 The use of a female first=person narrati"e is rare enough in ancient te2ts9 the fact that this tradition e2isted in Ptolemaic Ale2andria three=hundred years prior to the rise of )gyptian Gnostic sects9 presents us with a strong case for historical connectedness3 The te2t abo"e all alludes to the Gnostic ophia myth9 and draws out the parado2ical unity of ophia9
F:J F:H F:: F:F F:&

1aul0ner9 -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts< ;H;=HG3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +*9 &G9 &J3 +bid39 &G3 Cernh< "optic Etymological 9ictionary9 ;'&3

<alter 1edern9 @The TTransformations? in the Coffin Te2ts > A -ew Approach9A JNES %& $%&HL(E ;'%= J:3

2-P
manifested in her two aspects after her descent into the lower material realm3 The higher ophia embodies the return to the Pleroma9 while the lower ophia represents the carnal passage in life towards the reascent in Gnostic terms3 +n effect the paradigm of good and e"il e2isting in ophia9 "ery powerfully con"eyed by the use of o2ymorons $@the master=trope of mysticismA(9 parado29 and parallelisms9 is held up as an e2istential mirror for the human conditionE @+ am merciful9 and + am cruelA $-4C *+ %J3%J=%H(3FFL + propose to offer the following analysis of the te2t based upon 5enneth Bur0e?s wor0 on meta=rhetoric3 This is a complicated issue9 and not one fully e2plicated by Bur0e himself3 Bur0e sees pure persuasion as an a priori presence in human0ind moti"ating all discourse9 an archetype that endlessly disclosesE Apparently the farthest one can go9 in matters of rhetoric9 is to the question of @pure persuasionA3 But since that would bring us to the borders of metaphysics9 or perhaps better @meta=rhetoricA9 we should try as much as possible to 0eep particular e2amples in mind3FF% Meta=rhetoric9 + maintain9 is more properly the focus within human sentience9 and is to be differentiated from pure persuasion in that the latter is common to all life=forms9 perhaps best characterised as chopenhauer?s <ill in terms of its blind9 battling9 fecundity3 +f rhetoric is the @art of persuasionA9 then meta=rhetoric must refle2i"ely persuade an inner "iew of its own persuasi"enessE in this sense it is specifically limited to human acti"ities3 Meta=rhetoric9 as the ultimate humanist rhetoric of indi"idualism9 is a synthesis of poetic9 philosophical9 and psycho= analytical modes of discourse9 manifestly a @rhetoric of confessionA as it must deri"e from indi"idual refle2ion9 a philosophy of rhetoric as it must subsume all discourse3 This fusion of poetic9 philosophical9 and psycho=analytical endea"ours9 operating within the essentially anarchic9 and antinomian realm of the radical subDect9 must attempt to e2tend +ntelligibility into the realm of the non=rationalE Pure persuasion should be much more intensi"ely purposi"e333 it would be a @pureA purpose9 a 0ind of purpose which9 as Dudged by the rhetoric of ad"antage9 is no purpose at all9 or which might often loo0 li0e sheer frustration of purpose3 1or its purpose is li0e that of sol"ing a puBBle9 where the puBBle=sol"er deliberately ta0es on a burden in order to throw it off9 but if he succeeds9 so far as the tests of material profit are concerned he is no further ahead than before he began9 since he has ad"anced not relati"ely9 but @in the absoluteA333 Iet9 though what we mean by pure persuasion in the absolute sense e2ists nowhere9 it can be present as a moti"ational ingredient in any rhetoric9 no matter how intensely ad"antage=see0ing such rhetoric may be3FF; + maintain that the entire -hunderA 4erfect +ind presents a radical theology of the <ord9 one that is meta=rhetorical in its purposes in the sense that it attempts to persuade a "ision of its own persuasi"eness3 +n this wor0 a female spea0er addresses an un0nown group of people9 possibly Gree0s and )gyptians9 or barbarians $i3e3 non=Gree0 spea0ing peoples(9 as the te2t suggests3 The confessional rhetoric of this address is powerfully amplified through the continuous use of the anaphoric @+ am333A which is possibly meant to mirror9 or e"en satirise9 the
FFL FF%

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;'L3

5enneth Bur0e9 A $hetoric of +oti%es $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&H&(9 ;H:3 +bid39 ;H&9 ;:L3

FF;

2-,
@ego eimeA $@+ amA( pronouncements in .ohn?s gospel9 although this is uncertain3 <hat is of great interest is that these confessional @+ am333A formulas usually result in parado2ical rather than definiti"e statements3 The parado2es are not only intellectual but also ta0e the form of emotional states9 quite often focusing their tension upon language itself3 The wor0 is clearly philosophical and mystical9 using language as a poetic "ehicle for these ends3 The use of anaphora9 parallelism9 and metaphor9 establishes the wor0 as poetic9 while the use of parado29 o2ymoron9 and specific philosophical terms gi"es the wor0 a contemplati"e9 philosophical bent3 These two modes of discourse are fused throughoutC three e2amples will illustrate thisE 1or + am the first and the lastE + am the one who is honoured and the one who is scorned $%G3%H=%:(FFG 1or + am the Gnosis and the ignorance + am reticence and loquaciousness $%'3;H=;F(FF' 1or + am the ophia of the Gree0s and the Gnosis of barbarians3 + am the Dudgement of the Gree0s and of the barbarians $%H3G=H(FFJ The following perple2ing statement9 it seems to me9 indicates a philosophical focus upon two critical termsE @Those who e2ist together in my being are ignorant of meC and those who e2ist in my substance are the ones who 0now meA3 Being and su=stance must be seen to represent two antithetical natures within the spea0er herself9 and this is confirmed in the earlier statement9 @+ am the Gnosis and the +gnoranceA These terms9 which are Gree0 loan=words in the Coptic te2t9 reinforces a strong allusion to philosophical issues3FFH <e can identify a number of passages that are clearly focused upon rhetorical concerns9 upon the issue of a refle2i"e use of language and meaning3 These are as followsE + am the silence that cannot be apprehended and the idea that is often remembered3 + am the sound of the manifold "oice9 and the word of many aspects3 + am the storyE $+ am( my name $%'3&=%J(FF: Those who deny me9 confess me9 and those who confess me deny me3 Those who spea0 truth of me9 lie about me9 and those who lied about me9 tell the truth about me3 Those who understand me9 be ignorant of me3 And those who do not 0now me9 let them 0now me3
FFG FF' FFJ FFH

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;G'3 +bid39 ;GF3 +bid39 ;'L3

Although this is not necessarily true for all Gree0 loan words in Coptic3 4owe"er9 it is clear in this case that =eing and su=stance ha"e to be considered part of a quintessential philosophical "ernacular3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;G'3

FF:

2.5
1or + am the Gnosis and the ignorance + am reticence and loquaciousness $%'3%F=;F(FFF + am333 the security in insecurity $%J3;J=;:(FF& + am the Gnosis of my quest333 the power of the powers in my Gnosis9 with the angels9333 333they who ha"e been sent by my word $%F3%%=%H(F&L + am the utterance attainable to e"eryone and the speech which cannot be grasped3 + am a mute who does not spea09 and great is my multitude of words3 4ear me in wea0ness9 and be instructed by me in strength3 + am she who cries out and + am cast forth upon the face of the earth3 +t is + who prepares the bread and my mind inside3 + am the Gnosis of my name3 + am the one who cries out9 and it is + who listens $%&3;L=G'(F&% 4ear me you auditors9 and learn from my words those who 0now me3 + am the hearing that is attainable to e"erything9 + am the speech which cannot be grasped3 + am the name of the sound and the sound of the name3 + am the sign of the letter and the manifestation of the di"ision $;L3;H=GJ(F&; There is a play between silence and speech9 between @mutenessA and a @multitude of wordsA which is resol"ed towards the end of the te2t as the utterer and listener > the one who is silent and the one who spea0s > are proclaimed as the spea0er herselfE @+ am the one who cries out9 and it is + who listensA3 As well9 a tension between sound and name is generatedE the sound is @the utterance attainable to e"eryoneA9 whereas the name is @the speech which cannot be graspedA3 This name is the spea0er herself as manifest in all languageE @+ am the sign of the letter and the manifestation of the di"isionAC and she proclaims herself as e2isting beyond the parado2ical circularity of languageE @+ am333 the speech which cannot be grasped333 + am the Gnosis of my nameA3 )nosis has a different function in "arious passages which need not be detailed3 The critical line9 @+ am the Gnosis of my questA signifies that the spea0er is not an end but a means that she herself is engaged in pursuing3 +n connection with the "ery e"ocati"e emphasis upon

FFF FF& F&L F&% F&;

+bid39 ;GF3 +bid39 ;'L3 +bid39 ;'H3 +bid39 ;'F9 ;JL3 +bid39 ;JL9 ;J;3

2.+
language and parado2 found throughout the te2t9 this suggests the refle2i"eness of persuasi"eness see0ing to e2plicate its own nature3 The spea0er refers to her role in a number of parado2ical statementsE @whoreA9 @wifeA9 @"irginA9 @brideA9 @motherA9 @barren womanA > the social roles of indi"idual women who necessarily manifest the spea0er?s archetype3 This she confirms with her reference to @the spirit of women e2isting within meA3 The following passages are redolent with se2ual double=entendreE ,ut of shame accept me unto yoursel"es shamelesslyC and out of shamelessness and shame9 indict the parts of my being in yoursel"es9 and come into myself9 those who $thus( 0now me9 and those who 0now the parts of my being9 and establish the great with the small first creatures $%:3%J=;'(F&G + am she who is wea0 and am made whole in a "oluptuous place $%J3;:=;&(F&' 4owe"er9 she also states that9 along with the @whore=holy oneA dichotomy9 @+ am lust in outward appearance and abstinence e2ists within meA $%&3%F=;L(F&J3 As the wor0 mo"es to transcend all dichotomy we can see that a higher se2uality is being depicted in the two passages gi"en abo"e3 The concept of non ser%iam is presented as part of the spea0er?s nature9 hence her statement that9 @+ am sinless and the root of sin comes from within meA $%&3%J=%:(F&H9 in line with the abo"e can be rephrased as9 @+ am the sin in sinlessnessA3 This is made clearer in the peroration of the te2t wherein the spea0er awaits those who go through so=called @libertinisms and condemned passionsA $;%3;G=;'(F&:3 The @delightful forms which e2ist in numerous sinsA $;%3;%=;;(F&F9 deconstructs the whole notion of @sinA3 The qualities of antinomianism9 which + ha"e posited as e2isting in meta=rhetoric9 are also e"ident in the @negati"eA side of a number of o2ymorons used to illustrate the parado2ical nature of the spea0erC for e2ample9 @shameless9 @anarchyA9 @godlessA9 @foreignerA9 @unrestraintA9 @sinA9 and @lustA are proclaimed by her as being part of her disposition3 +t might be said here that there is an ethical realm of se2uality9 but that there is also a higher amoral equi"alent3 This wor0 clearly demonstrates its concern with parado2 and language3 +t is also e"ident that the wor0 self=consciously stri"es to transcend all dichotomy9 and this is accomplished not by loo0ing at dichotomy as an e2ternal reality9 but in "iewing it as e2isting within the duplicities of language9 and therefore within the spea0er herself who presents herself9 in effect9 as Rhetoric incarnate3 The relentless insertion of parado2ical statements is ob"iously designed to ma0e something @une2pectedA happen in the reader3 F&& This something might be said to be the
F&G F&' F&J F&H F&: F&F F&&

+bid39 ;''3 +bid39 ;'L3 +bid39 ;'F3 +bid39 ;'F3 +bid39 ;J;3 +bid39 ;J;3

A number of o2ymoronic pairs of qualities can be listed3 These are used in the te2t following @+ am333AE firstOlast whoreOholy one GnosisO+gnorance reticenceOloquaciousness

2.2
elicitation of an uncanny identification with the spea0er who is @the word of many aspectsA3 Behind the ironic awareness of her own persuasi"eness9 behind the blandishments of rhetorical seduction with its wilfully alembicated welter of parado2ical terms9 lies the enigma of a rhetorical personality&LL > this alone "aults +ntelligibility onto the meta=rhetorical le"elC as such9 the purpose underlying the antimonies of these "erbal posturings uses the archetype of pure persuasion as a means9 not as an end or obsession in itself > an ethical tautness in this confession sa"es it from such a fall3 +n the Bur0ean sense the wor0 is not theological9 but logological9 in its focusE +f we defined @theologyA as @words about godA9 then by @logologyA we should mean @words about wordsA3&L% Bur0e commences his wor0 on religious rhetoric with this obser"ation and it seems to me that -he -hunderA 4erfect +ind attempts to transcend theology in this manner3 The emphasis upon the di"ine word emanating and creating reality finds its paradigm within human conscious articulation9 indeed the ancient Memphite "iew is most aptly e2pressed $un0nowingly one suspects( by Bur0e in his insistence upon the centrality of rhetoric9 and the logological role of the word in religionE +nstead of loo0ing upon @GodA as the title of titles in which all is summed up9 one could loo0 at all subclasses as materially @emanatingA or @radiatingA from this @spiritual sourceA3 And thus9 Dust as religion could be "iewed as central9 with all specialiBed fields such as law9 politics9 ethics9 poetry9 art9 etc3 @Brea0ing offA from it and gradually becoming @autonomousA disciplines9 so there is a technical sense in which all specialiBation can be treated as radiating from a /ogological center3&L; The realm of the @logologicalA9 of @meta=rhetoricA9 drawing upon 5enneth Bur0e?s thought9 seems to me to represent the end=point of )gyptian Memphite Theology as transformed within 4ellenistic Gnosis3 +n this sense9 the sacred word mo"ed beyond the temple precincts to
shamelessOmodest assuranceOfear warOpeace po"ertyOwealth mercifulOcruel foolishOwise hatedOlo"ed /ifeODeath /awOAnarchy scatteredOcollected godlessOgod $@fearingA( praisedOdespised foreignerOcitiBen substanceOwithout substance restraintOunrestraint harmonyOdissolution sinOsinless lustOabstinence the one who cries outOthe one who listens
&LL

Patricia Co2 Miller9 @+n Praise of -onsense9A in "lassic +editerranean Spirituality9 ed39 A343 Armstrong $/ondonE Routledge U 5egan Paul /td9 %&FH(9 'F;E @/i0e Plotinus9 Perfect Mind 0nows that her thundering riddles are the echoes of her reality in words9 and it is those words that gi"e her mystery a place in which to dwell in human consciousness333 he identifies herself not only with the parado2ical images of language but with language itself3 Perhaps the ultimate re"elation is that this goddess is the "ery process of spea0ing that she uses to characterise herself3 5enneth Bur0e9 -he $hetoric of $eligion $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&H%(9 %3 +bid39 ;H3

&L%

&L;

2.4
re"isionist magicians9 to Gree0 philosophers9 to e"entually become desacralised in ironic word=plays and gnomic parado23&LG <hat was an original insight which saw human mental processes mirroring the di"ine theogonic e"entually found its acute e2pression in the Gnostic indi"idual3 This indi"idual9 as the -hunder 4erfect +ind demonstrates9 del"ed into the di"ine @wordingA paradigm within9 with the e2pectation that this would offer a direct glimpse and path to the fullness of the di"ine realm abo"e3 This process9 + maintain9 commenced with the usurpation of the traditional nepotistic=based religious politics9 to a more acutely te2t= empowered religiosity > as a reflection of the <ord=generated theogony abo"e3 <hat was once perhaps more the prerogati"e of the 0ing and upper royalty alone now e2tended down through the priesthoods in their possession of sacred te2ts3 The end result of this was the literal absconding of @magicalA te2ts in the /ate Period9 where priestly entrepreneurs found a ready mar0et for their palliati"e persuasi"e power3 Archaic Gnosis was to spring from these roots9 manifesting its own "ersion of @meta=rhetoricA9 one tendentiously mysterious in its focus upon the numinous power of sacred sounds3 @RhetoricA is used in this discussion in the sense that in )gyptian thought there was always percei"ed to be a need to persuade on the part of the indi"idual soul following death3 <hether it be @negati"e confessionsA appeals to -un9 or passwords9 influencing a passage through inimical realms through the use of language remains a shared )gyptian and Gnostic attribute9 one as ubiquitous as the emanationist substructure of their thought itself3 Metarhetoric stands as the final phase of the indi"idual?s need to persuade sal"ation beyond death3 Archaic Gnosis followed embodies the traditional nuances of this dynamic in being unable and unwilling to forgo the ancient social patterns of hierarchic religiosity "ouchsafing the safe passage of the soul3 This gnosis replaced old sacred te2t with new9 forging a lin0 with the past through magical papyri9 temple inscriptions and temple libraries3 The <ord as the pra:is of Archaic Gnosis placed its adherents upon the right=wing of the political spectrum9 where their aspirations would ha"e been characterised as supremely religionist9 sectarian9 and nationalist3 The magical papyri9 for e2ample9 at times e"idence a claim to 4eliopolitan legitimacyC while these need not be ta0en literally of course9 such pronouncements indicate the continued importance of 4eliopolis to this religious sensibilityE An e2cerpt of the enchantments from the holy boo0 called 4ermes9 found in 4eliopolis in the innermost shrine of the temple9 written in )gyptian letters and translated into Gree03&L' The 4ermetica is itself an e2emplar of Archaic GnosisC -he 9iscourse on the Eighth and Ninth9 found at -ag 4ammadi9 e2hibits the )gyptian conser"ati"e recourse to archaic te2tuality9 to the proper employment of the word3 The te2t ends with the following instructions from spiritual master to acolyteE , my son9 write this boo0 at the temple of Diospolis in hieroglyphic characters333

&LG

+ ha"e not had occasion to refer to -he )ospel of -homas $-4C ++9;( in this dissertationC the tractate is christocentric=gnostic9 more li0ely a peripheral recipient of )gyptian Gnosis9 and has been so e2egetically mistreated9 that + ha"e found it to be of marginal utility3 4owe"er9 we note the o"erlap of parado2 between -he -hunder and -he )ospel of -homas9 as in the instructions of .esus to his pneumatic electE @<hen you ma0e the two one and the interior as the outside and the outside as the interior and the abo"e as the below9 and when you shall ma0e the male and the female a single one9 so that the male is not male $nor( the female female333 you shall go to hea"en3A $/ogion ;;(3 Coptic te2t from N(S< "ol3NNA Nag (ammadi "ode: 00< 8@F9 ed3 B3 /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F&(9 H;3 PGM CNN++3%C BetB9 -he )reek +agical 4apyri< G%H3

&L'

2., my son9 it is proper to write this boo0 on steles of turquoise9 in hieroglyphic characters3333 $-4C *+9H3H%3%F(&LJ +n contradistinction to this9 4ellenistic Gnosis9 prompted by the myriad strands of metaphysical thought gathered in places li0e Ale2andria9 finally came to consider the indi"idual alone as possessing the di"ine spar0 of 0nowledge which would allow an ascent to the Pleroma3 This gnosis is synchronic9 as opposed to the historic or diachronic dispositions of con"entional religion9 for its effort at persuasi"eness relies only upon its own inner resources9 its own inner archetype of light returning to /ight3 ,ne would suppose that a @pureA form of this "iew of Gnosis would forsa0e the written word entirelyC if so9 it must therefore remain a synthetic model for the simple reason that these adherents would ha"e been disinclined to lea"e us any written e"idence3 4owe"er9 the -hunder 4erfect +ind< as well as the thought of Basileides for e2ample9 demonstrate that at least some of these Gnostics attempted to apply a "ery sophisticated9 e"en @deconstructionistA approach to language in an effort to get around its "ery diachronic limitations3 )dward aid noted @an unmista0able aura of power about the philologistA&LH and to the e2tent that there were prominent Gnostic groups in Ale2andria and Memphis in )gypt9 or further afield in such similar cross= roads cities as Antioch9 )dessa9 and the ri"al library in Pergamum9 there can be no doubt that their discourse operated in the Bur0ean @dramatistic conte2tA that a politicalOreligious realm of practical effects was mo"ed in the wa0e of such comparati"ist acti"ities3 As @philologyA in its inception connoted a final reDection of the di"ine origins of language9 we can see an early forerunner of this literary criticism in the literary acti"ities of the Museon in Ale2andria9 in its multilingistic collation of ancient religious Truths9 and in the uni"ersalism of the preceding Ptolemaic epoch which fostered this pluralism3 The de=historicising <ord of 4ellenistic Gnosis was seen to be a numinous pearl of insight9 one prompted by the original irritant @dirtA of historical process9 and thereby formed by language=borne contending Truth claims9 but ultimately transcendent in its left=wing utopian aspirations of a @return to fullness3A To pic0 up the desacralised word and use it in this cause was undoubtedly the greatest challenge faced by these early deconstructionists3 +n ostensibly forsa0ing the political possibilities of sectarianism one might say they too0 up the last option open to them and became a literary genre3 -he -hunder 4erfect +ind is9 in my "iew9 the one e2tant Gnostic wor0 which can be placed alongside the patristic accounts of Basileides by way of demonstrating a "ery high le"el of rhetorical sophistication3 +n these few passages we see a cosmic=critical perception brought into the political arena9 one which self=consciously dri"es the discourse itselfE + am the one whose image is great in )gypt and the one who has no image among the barbarians3 + am the one who has been hated and lo"ed in e"ery place + am the one called /ife whom you called Death3 + am the one called /aw whom you called Anarchy3 $%H3:= %J(&L: + am peace and war comes to be because of me3 And + am a foreigner and a citiBen3 $%F3;G=;H(&LF

&LJ &LH &L: &LF

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3N+9 GHH U GH: aid9 2rientalism< %G; Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 ;'L9 ;';3 +bid39 ;'H3

2..
4ear me you auditors9 and learn from my words those who 0now me3 + am the hearing that is attainable to e"erything9 + am the speech which cannot be grasped3 + am the name of the sound and the sound of the name3 + am the sign of the letter and the manifestation of the di"ision3 $;L3;H=GJ(&L&

&L&

+bid39 ;JL9 ;J;3

2.K
)hapter $ifteen* The return to dt,supernal time from nhh,earthly time in the Egyptian Gnostic "fterlife

At this point + attempt to answer a question was raised earlier9 one concerning the uni"ersalisation of )gyptian gods and goddesses into 4ellenistic hypostases3 <hile we can see -un9 the 4eh=gods9 4athor9 Tefnut9 and +sis9 a demiurgic Re9 a redeemed and recalcitrant eth for e2ample9 present in Gnostic thought9 it is significant that this continuation of central )gyptian di"ine figures strips them of their traditional identificationE whyS +n answering this we must once again loo0 to the socio=historical conte2t that ga"e rise to these religious de"elopments9 in particular the sense of religious crisis that lay upon )gypt in Graeco=Roman times3 +f @Ma?at has fled to a higher supernal realmA9 if the physical world has been desacralised9 then this dualism of fallen world and 4igher spiritual source would require a soteriology of e"entual ascent3 Douglas Parrott9 one of the few scholars in Gnostic tudies to loo0 at this problem9 has e2pressed this "ery wellE Another de"elopment is the transformation of a theology rooted in )gyptian historical myth into one of uni"ersal9 transcendent realities3 The names of the deities9 which mar0ed them as )gyptian9 are gone9 replaced by those of a more uni"ersal character3 There is no reference to the sna0e 5ematef or his son3 -o reference to Thebes9 the -ile Dourney9 the cities "isited on the way9 or the return to Thebes and burial at Medinet 4abu3 +t is as though the realm of history itself > that is9 the realm of particular e"ents9 times and places > has lost its interest9 and attention has turned to e"ents beyond time3&%L +n this chapter + hope to show that it is not that the Gnostics in )gypt turned to e"ents @beyond timeA in the strict sense9 rather they focused upon a higher archetype of Time and uni"ersalised9 or hypostasised9 the traditional identities of their di"inities in the process3 1or @e"ents beyond timeA is an o2ymoron9 as there can only be one e"ent beyond time9 that of a beginningless9 endless stasis3 This state was seen to generate its own latent impulse towards differentiation9 well=appreciated by )gyptian theologians as the dt eternal9 the boundless and inert qualities of -un3 Theogonic e2tension and finally historical e"ent arose from this latent eternal state3 The failure9 indeed the demonisation9 of the nhh in )gyptian theological terms9 the literal o"erthrow of the di"ine power of Re made manifest in historical rule through the pharaoh9 underlies the entire rise of Gnosis in )gypt3 The di"ision into nhh=time and dt =time is accepted by enough )gyptologists for us to no longer doubt that it was often intended3 8ab0ar?s point that the terms are often used interchangeably is well=ta0en&%% > the words9 afterall9 were used in close pro2imity and so there ine"itably arose an inclination to use them as synonymsC howe"er the fact remains that there are two original conceptions for eternity and are used in different ways9 e"en if it is not a consistent and general distinction3 A schema will demonstrate the positions of "arious )gyptologists on this issueE

nhh
&%L &%%

dt

Douglas M3 Parrott9 @Gnosticism and )gyptian Religion9A N- ;& $%&F:(E F&=&L3

/ouis *3 8ab0ar< @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead9A JNES ;' $%&HJ(E ::3

2.7
.3P3 Allen&%; eternal recurrence eternal sameness &%G /3*3 8ab0ar something completed $to be( attained A3 Ba0ir&%' infinity before world temporal world ends &%J )3 Drioton infinity before world temporal world ends /3 5M0osy&%H infinity ahead static eternity past &%: A3 Gardiner eternity in future eternity in the past )3 ,tto&%F future in years future e"erlastingness &%& G3 Thausing eternity $life=time( eternity $death=space( )3 4ornung&;L eternity $Being( eternity $-onbeing( 53 ethe&;% eternally sought $nhy( eternally attained $S( .3 Assmann&;; orderOrecurrence chaosOduration The general consensus is that time as nhh has an end as it is bound up with the cyclic phenomenology of this worldC time as dt on the other hand denotes the stasis of -onbeing9 the changeless and formless primordial state > though @pregnantA > which is the bac0drop for the dynamic nhh3 +t would seem that eternity was considered to be -un in its most archetypal manifestation9 using such suggesti"e qualifiers as @inertA or @hiddenA to imply the impending theogonic de"elopment of the ennead3 +n addition to the abo"e we ha"e <3 <estendorf?s theory that nhh and dt should be "iewed as categorising notionsE&;G

nhh
masculine

dt
feminine

$fatherOsonOhusband( phallic
&%; &%G &%'

$motherOdaughterOwife uterine

Allen< )enesis in Egypt< for CT pell FL9 ;%3 @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead9A ::=FG3

Abd=el=Mohsen Ba0ir9 @Nhh and dt reconsidered9AJEA G& $%&JG(E %%L=%%C see howe"er his re=appraisal in @A further re=appraisal of the termsE Nhh and 9t9A JEA HL $%&:'(E ;J;=J'9 in which he clarifies nhh and dt as being representati"e of a dynamic life associated with an e"erlasting rotation of Tdays? and Tnights?E nhh with its sun dis0 as determinati"e represents daylight and the creation of the world9 whereas dt with its land determinati"e is associated with dar0ness9 the netherworld9 and the physical and corporeal span3 1rom 8ab0ar9 @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead3A ::3 /3 5M0osy< @8u einer )tymologie "on PhilRE die T+nsel der 8eit?9A Acta Anti#ua %H $%&HF(E ':3 Alan 43 Gardiner9 @4ymns to Amon from a /eiden Papyrus9A ;HS '; $%&LJ(E %;=';3 @AltRgyptische 8eit"orstellungen und 8eit begriffe9A in 9ie Gelt als )eschicte %' $%&J'(E %GJ='F3 Gertrude Thausing9 @Die AusdrXc0e fXr T)wig? im ogyptischen9A +0'A2 HH $%&G'(E GF3 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od< %:%3 4yramiden@-e:te9 ++9 ;'%3 Assman< ;eit und Ewigkeit im alten Hgypten< 'J3

&%J &%H &%: &%F &%& &;L &;% &;; &;G

<olfhart <estendorf< @8weitheit9 Dreiheit9 und )inheit in der altRgyptichen Theologie9A ;HS %LL $%&:'(E %GH='%>

2.P dynamic dayOsunlight order conscious

ReO4orusOli"ing 0ing =a=soul

static nightOdar0ness chaos unconscious

,sirisO0ing?s mummy corpse

.an Assmann?s study&;' offers a particularly effecti"e philosophical appreciation of the )gyptian distinction here3 The )gyptian word for time Qhw pertains to the idea of a lifetime as the e2istential yardstic0 by which it is measured > the period of time between birth and death3 The opposite idea to Qhw9 as Assmann points out9 is that of immortality on this side $9iesseits(9 as nhh9 pertaining to the 0ing9 the state9 the forces of nature9 @the perpetuity of discontinuity9 the unities of countable aspects of timeA3 Time and life in this "iew cannot be di"ided3 9t represents an underlying9 or o"erarching9 archetype on the other side $Jenseits(9 one which eternally endures in a state of static unchangableness9 complete and immutable9 generating what Assmann describes as @the unlimited nature of the continuous aspects of timeA3 The modern literary= critical theorist Paul de Man has noted the difference between symbol and allegory as essentially one of diachronicity "s3 the synchronic3 The allegory relies upon the @"oid of temporal differenceA wherein the story is historically unfolded9 whereas the symbol is synecdochic $embodying all within itself(9 and aims at e"o0ing immediate sympathies or affinities3&;J ,ne might say that the nhh=eternal9 at wor0 in the endless play of allegorical signification9 aims at representing the story in human e2istential terms9 whereas the dt=eternal is the "ery archetype of time9 immutable and ineffable9 attainable perhaps through insight or gnosis spar0ed on the symbolical le"el of representation3 +t has been obser"ed that9 @prime"al time may be described as the time before duality had arisen in the landA3&;H Atum9 whose name is imbued with the notion of @e"erythingA and @nothingA from the word tm9 begins the process of differentiation with the creation of hu and Tefnut3 The result is the appearance of duality9 including eternity split into dt and nhh3 G3 )nglund notes that the 4eliopolitan system is essentially nhh in its desire @first and foremost to show the dynamics of the transforming process and how the process leads to a dynamic state of energy9 ReA3&;: +n all phases9 howe"er9 the dynamic nhh and passi"e dt must be present3 +n particular9 )nglund notes that the )nnead as a whole functions as a dt=element for the final outcome9 Re9 the representati"e of nhh3 +n all of this the nhh side is stressed through the se2ualOphallic creation myth3 +n the Memphite system the stress is upon the dt aspectE @Bandaged and with bound limbs Ptah is a typical representati"e of the passi"e and stationary dt=sideA&;F and is depicted as being pregnant with creation3 +n this larger sense the two theologies are complementary9 in part perhaps e2plaining why the Memphite= habba0a te2t did not reDect the 4eliopolitan system but presented it in balance with the new understanding3 Nhh and dt appear in /ate Period te2ts where the distinction continues3 ome e2amplesE
&;' &;J

Assman9 ;eit und Ewigkeit im Alten Hgypten9 %%=%'3

Paul de Man9 @The Rhetoric of Temporality9A in "ritical -heory Since BDE69 eds3 4aBard Adams and /eory earle $Tallahassee9 1/E 1lorida tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH(9 ;L&=%L3 te *elde9 Seth< )od of "onfusion9 ;: )nglund9 @Gods as a 1rame of Reference9A %J3 +bid39 %J3

&;H &;: &;F

2.,
%( The /eyden Magical Papyrus $Demotic9 dated ca> ;;J C3)3( 4o\ spea0 to me Thes9 Tenor9 the father of eternity $nhh(&;& 4ail to him\ ,siris9 5ing of the !nderworld333 he who is under the nu=s tree in Meror9 who is on the mountain of Poranos9 who is on my house to eternity $nhh(&GL Pomo who is called the mighty bull9 the great god that is in the I,at9 that came forth from the four YboundariesSZ of eternity $dt(&G% Thy Yserpent is a serpentSZ of eternity $dt(&G; ;( 4ymns to +sis in 4er Temple at Philae Iou $+sis( are the di"ine mother of 4orus9 The Mighty Bull who protects )gypt9 /ord of the -ome9 fore"er $dt(&GG The /ord and ruler of )ternity $dt(&G' May he $Ptolemy( gloriously appear as the 5!/) upon the throne of 4orus9 eternally $ dt( li0e Re&GJ 1ore"er for your 5a9 e"erlastingly $dt(&GH 4is MaDesty is 4orus upon the throne of the Child9 fore"er $nhh( and e"er $dt(3 Protect the son of Re9 Ptolemy9 fore"er $dt(&G: Gnostic Te2ts9 and Coptic te2ts in general in"ariably use sha enech or some Gree0 loan word as dt seems to ha"e disappeared3&GF 4owe"er9 the distinction remained9 and the Gnostics were anti nhh=time as it was "iewed to be a false demiurgic @eternityA as opposed to the dt female aeon ophia3 Consider the following description by +renaeus of the *alentinian "iew of demiurgic timeE <hen the Demiurge further wanted to imitate also the boundless9 eternal9 infinite and timeless nature of the upper ,gdoad $the original eight Aeons in the Pleroma(9 but could not e2press their immutable eternity9 being as he was the fruit of defect9 he embodied their eternity in time9 epochs9 and great numbers of years9 under the delusion that by the
&;&

13 /l3 Griffith and 4erbert Thompson eds39 -he Leyden 4apyrus9 $%&L'C -ew Ior0E Do"er Publications9 %&:'(9 H%3 +bid39 %GJ3 +bid39 H:3

&GL &G% &G;

+bid39 H&3 +t seems to me that the first two citations concern themsel"es with demiurgic figures9 hence their nhh association9 whereas the final two e2amples are clearly identified with -!- and so the dt chaoticOarchetypal qualifier is perhaps chosen3 8ab0ar9 (ymns to 0sis in (er -emple at 4hilae9 ;%=;;3 +bid39 GL3 +bid39 JF=J&3 +bid39 FL3 +bid39 FL=F%3

&GG &G' &GJ &GH &G: &GF

+ ha"e been unable to trace its de"elopment in the G*rter=uch< in Cernh9 "optic Etymological 9ictionary9 or Crum9 "optic 9ictionary>

2K5
quantity of times he could represent their infinity3 Thus truth escaped him and followed the lie3 Therefore his world shall pass away when the times are fulfilled3 $Ad%> (aer> +3%:3;(&G& 4ere we ha"e a clear distinction drawn between a false nhh eternity > one usually bound up with demiurgic hubris in not admitting to the higher powers of eternity9 and associated in 4ellenistic times with the "icissitudes of 1ate > and a distilled dt eternity commonly associated with female <isdom figures in Gnostic thought3 These are deri"ed from "arious +sis9 Tefnut9 4athor and Maat religious appreciations9 in this case more specifically deri"ed from the 4eh=gods3 ,ne is at first puBBled by this9 for the 4eh=gods literally contain nhh=eternity in their names as a comparison between 4eh and nhh illustrateC howe"er9 the 4eh=gods are seen to combine the eternities of both dt and nhh9 occupying a realm midway between hea"en and earth3&'L The abo"e passage by +renaeus suggests a "iew of time put forward by Plato in the -imaeusC howe"er9 the nhhSdt bipolar "iew of time predates Plato by thousands of years9 and Plato can be seen to ha"e appropriated a concept that was "ery widespread among )gyptian priestly circles in his early "isits to )gypt3&'% The nhhSdt split shows up in 4ermetic te2ts9 as in the 4oimandres9 the most Gnostic of all9 wherein the teacher imparts the traditional "iew of nhh and dt9 of mortal time and immortal timeE That is why man9 unli0e all the li"ing things on earth9 is twofoldE mortal because of the body9 immortal because of the essential Man3 1or he who is immortal and has authority o"er all things e2periences mortality9 being subDect to fate3 4e who is up abo"e the 4armony $of the spheres( has become a sla"e inside the 4armony3&'; The 4ermetic Asclepius9 one "ersion of which surfaced in the -ag 4ammadi corpus9 also demonstrates this di"ision and need not be del"ed into here3&'G <e ha"e e2amined the role of 4orus in )gyptian myth9 and his heuristic appropriation within Gnostic systems as the limit or boundary between the Pleroma and the lower world3 An inscription at Dendara describes his position in terms of fusing the higher dt realm with the
&G& &'L

Anti@Nicene 'athers9 "ol3%9 G';='G3

Barta9 @Die Bedeutung der Personifi0ation 4uh im !ntersheid Bu den Personifi0ation 4ah und -un9A :3 .an Assmann9 in Stein und ;eitA +ensch und )esellshaft im alten Hgypten $MXnchenE <ilhelm 1in0 *erlag9 %&&%( describes this theology of timeE @That is the sun=theology in )gypt9 grounded in the temple in 4eliopolis9 the same temple from which the tradition followed Plato9 himself initiated there into )gyptian wisdom3 <ith no other ancient )gyptian theology are we as well=informed as with these9 which are found in their thousands of deposits9 abo"e all hymns9 but also tractates9 cosmographical writings of the sun?s passage9 hea"en and underworld boo0s9 dead and magical te2ts3 <hen we base our research on these rich materials9 they afford us in e"ery instance a concei"able and solid basisC as well9 in confronting these te2ts we must 0eep in mind that they do not originate with the 0nowledge of the )gyptian @man on the streetA9 but with the 0nowledge of the T<elt=ild@Spe,ialisten9 the priestsA$':(3 "orp> (erm> +3%J9 trans3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts9 "ol3 %9 GG%3 ee +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 G' in which the Asclepius is discussed in terms of the nhh@dt di"ision3

&'%

&'; &'G

2K+
lower nhh in the epithet9 @he who unites together nhh=eternity and dt=eternityA3 /i0ewise9 an inscription from )dfu depicts the same fusionE @nhh=eternity is in his right eye9 dt=eternity is in his left eyeA3&'J The Gnostic embodiment of nhh is to be found in their conception of aeons $the modern /atin spelling from the Gree0 aion( which manifest discrete periods of Pleromic or theogonic epochs3 The Pleroma itself is dt=eternal and is therefore @all things at onceA9 often referred to as @the aeon of aeonsA in "arious tractates9 as in -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia for e2ampleE @and the Aeon of Aeons loo0ed upon the Aeons he ga"e birth toA $GF3;H=;:(3&'H -he )ospel of the Egyptians depicts a typical Atum=figure at the head of the gods who generates a triad from out of himself3 The Coptic is included here as my translation differs substantially from the /eiden9 Brill edition from whence the Coptic te2t is ta0enE&':
&''

The /ight which he first made which comes forth as $the( )ternity of the )ternities of the ineffable9 unbounded9 unproclaimable Parent9 the Aeon of the Aeons who begets himself9 who shines forth from himself aloneE the 1oreigner9 the uninterpretable power of the ineffable Parent3 Three powers come forth from him3333 $-4C +*9; JL3%%=;'(&'F +n this important passage a parallelism e2ists between the )ternity of )ternities and Aeon of Aeons that must be seen in terms of the dt and nhh distinction3 The dt realm is 3enseits< synecdochic and synchronic9 immutable and ineffable > more to the point relying upon a rhetoric of the apophatic to con"ey the abo"e un=qualities3 As we ha"e noted elsewhere9 the self= generating figure of Atum depicted abo"e9 "erges towards the dt in -un in displaying all these apophatic qualities9 and his "ery name means @fullnessA9 pleroma being perhaps the most common concept in Gnostic thought after gnosis3 Atum is also intimately in"ol"ed in the ensuing di"ine family tree and can be seen to be the creati"e power of -un and is thus nhh= demiurgic3 The Coptic "erb 9 @shiningA is quite suggesti"e of Re appearing out of the watery abyss9 and @eternitiesA9 plural9 depicts the durati"e nature of the Gnostic aeons3

&'' &'J &'H &':

,tto9 )ott und +ensch9 &; $/D Te2t ++ ;%%(3 +bid39 &G $*'F(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 'LF3

Nag (ammadi "odices 000< 8 and 0&< 8E -he )ospel of the Egyptians< trans3 BQhlig and <isse9 JG9 JJ3 Their translationE @333the eternal light of the eternities9 which has come forth9 of the ineffable and unmar0ed and unproclaimable 1ather9 the aeon of the aeons9 he who begets himself9 and he who comes forth from himself9 and the alien one9 the uninterpretable power of the ineffable 1ather3 Three powers come forth from him3333A does not appear to be cogniBant of the relati"e present 3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +*9 JG9 JJ3

&'F

2K2
The symbol of the uroboros found in Gnostic thought goes bac0 at least to Coffin Te2ts9 specifically that of Merenptah3&'& This emblem is bound up with concrete cyclical processesE day and night9 coming and going9 east and west9 yesterday and tomorrow9 all perpetually cycling in life?s e2perience +n this sense time and life cannot be separated3&JL )gyptian hypostatic representations of nhh@time are to be seen in days as the one > two > and twel"e formulations of the un=cultsC as the month in the moon cultsC and for the year9 the goddess othis3 Beyond this is the ;J=year Apis period9 the GL=year edfest period9 and the %'HL=year othis=period3 These are all essentially nhh cycles of order and recurrence and they re"eal in the later periods of )gyptian thought their implicit tendency towards eschatology3 The othis=period of %'HL years a central feature in Manichaean thought as we ha"e seen in Chapter &3 Perhaps the most "i"id Gnostic eschatology to incorporate this feature is to be found in -he "oncept of 2ur )reat 4owerE Then their time which was gi"en to them to possess power9 $that( which was calculated for them9 $is( fourteen hundred and si2ty eight years3 +f the fire has $then( consumed them all9 and if it does not find anything else to burn9 then it shall destroy itself Y33333333Z Then the firmaments Yshall slideZ down to the Depth $-,I-(3 $-4C *+9 ' 'H3;J=':3H(&J% The word for @timeA abo"e9 is from the Gree0 m s and it is to be noted that Chronos was an underworld deity worshipped in Ale2andria in association with Aion3 The notion of the aeon ha"ing its powers num=ered suggests this connection3 The -rimorphic 4rotennoia contains an interesting passage in which the female spea0er defines the temporal nature of the lower aeon that human0ind finds itself withinE And + shall tell them of the coming end of the Aeon9 and + shall edify them $concerning( the beginning of the Aeon to come9 the one which does not possess change $but( which will alter our countenance through itself9 that we become pure3 <ithin these Aeons9 from which + re"ealed myself in the Thought of the resemblance of my$f( maleness9 + preser"e those who are worthy within the Thought of my unchanging Aeon3 1or + shall tell you a Mystery of this Aeon in particular9 and + shall inform you of the )nergies within it3 The Birth calls Yto the BirthEZ hour begets hour9 Yday createsZ day9 month creates month9 Time turns9 following Time3 This particular Aeon was accomplished in this manner9 and it was numbered9 $being found( small9 for it was a finger that omitted a finger9 and a $chain( lin0 which is added to by means of a lin03 <hen the Great Powers understood that the time of fulfillment was manifest as in the labour pains of the pregnant woman $which( brought $her to( the entrance of the door9 in this way the Destruction approached3 All together the )lements trembled and the foundations of the !nderworld and the ceilings of Chaos shoo0 and a great fire glowed in their midst and the roc0s and the earth shoo0 li0e reeds blown in the wind3 $';3%F='G3%;(&J; The god Aion of Ale2andria 9 ostensibly born of the @*irginA 5ore9 manifested the birth of 4orusO4arpocrates from +sis9 or Re from -eith3 The central figure of +sis is more clearly seen
&'& &JL &J% &J;

.an Assmann9 +9H0.> ;F3% $%&:;(9 ':=:G3 Assman< ;eit und Ewigket im alten Hgypten9 G'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 G%F9 G;L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%H9 '%F3

2K4
here $than0s to Plutarch and Apuleius( as @firstborn of the agesA and @queen of timeA3 Chronos and Aion were apparently worshipped separately in Ale2andria and elsewhere9 and the demiurgic attributes of Chronos are apparent in his syncretistic association with the underworld3&J' Aion9 on the other hand9 has been connected with the (eh=gods&JJ and certainly9 the following inscription from a pedestal in )leusis9 depicts a strong sense of dt=eternityE
&JG

4e who by his di"ine nature remains e"er the same in the same things333 he who is and was and shall be9 without beginning9 middle9 or end9 free from change9 uni"ersal craftsman of the eternal di"ine nature&JH The depiction of a +sis=type goddess in -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia creating her temporal aeons @in the Thought of the resemblance of my $f( malenessA $';3;'=;J(&J: closely matches the e"idence we ha"e for the )gyptian goddess gi"ing birth to Chronos and Aion on December ;J and .anuary H respecti"ely3 +t has been suggested that these dates represent the two original )gyptian festi"als of the winter solstice3&JF +n this conte2t we mention again the completely consistent description of +sis as dt in her temple at Philae3 Nhh is portrayed in )gyptian thought as essentially male9 often as a pseudonym for the sun=god9 and manifesting cyclical time3 The critical feature which unites ancient )gyptian and Gnostic thought is the depiction of nhh=time as mirroring the higher dt@ realmE while the two realms interpenetrate9 this temporal bipolarity is hierarchalised in this manner3 @)ternity is to time333 as the li"es of the gods are to those of mortalsA&J&9 it might be said9 once the theogony is set in motion for whate"er mysterious purposes9 for there is a reciprocity between di"ine and mortal life3 The cyclic nature of our own lower eternity9 the )gyptian nhh9 fulfils the larger di"ine eternity abo"e3 Ptolemy +++ $)uergetes +E ;'H=;;; B3C3)3( built a southern gate to the 5arna0 temple comple2 now 0nown as the Bab el=Amara3 The gate is remar0ably well preser"ed and is a most impressi"e achie"ement both in terms of the quality of the inscriptions and iconography9 o"erall architecture9 and the amount of theological content contained in its inscriptions3 As with the ,pet temple9 some ;LL yards further into the comple29 the 4eh gods are prominent9 as is -un?s role of theogonic facilitator3 The @inert onesA $Amun9 Amaunet9 -un9 -aunet9 4eh9 4ehet9 5e0 and 5e0et( are fashioned by -unC they in turn fashion hu @who ma0es peace in their Two /ands in Medinet 4abu9 life for eternity< coursing to eternityA3 The italicised section appears to gi"e some insight into the relationship between nhh and dtE

&JG

Raffaele PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A in Essays on the (istory of $eligion9 ed3 43.3 Rose $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&H:(9 %:'3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A%:&3 This association occured through identification of Anubis with Cerberus with Chronos $through the triceps of arapis(3 4enri Brugsch9 $eligion und +ythologie der alten Hgypter $%F&%C reprint9 /eipBigE /eipBig 8entralantiquariat der Deutschen Demo0ratischen Republi09 %&H&(9 %G;='LC also Richard ReitBenstein in )*tt> Nachr> %&L'9 G%:3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos(Chronos in )gypt9A%:J3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%H3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A %:;=G3

&J'

&JJ

&JH &J: &JF &J&

Peter Manchester9 @The Religious )2perience of Time and )ternity9A in "lassic +editerranean Spirituality9 ed39 A343 Armstrong $/ondonE Routledge U 5egan Paul /td39 %&FH(9 G&G3

2KQnh r nhh hp r dt&HL ,f interest is the employment of the "erb hp> ,ne would e2pect the formulaic @fore"er and e"erA nhh hn dt as is found at Philae for e2ample&H%9 where a "erb of motion completed by the preposition r @toA or @untilA is not necessary3 The sense here is of the cyclic coursing of nhh completed in dt3 +n my "iew these split eternities9 seen to be interpenetrating9 form the "ery grist of Plotinus? philosophical e2plorations of time and eternity3 The following passage from the Enneads is imbued with the ancient )gyptian "iew of nhh and dtE <e must ta0e oursel"es bac0 to the disposition which we said e2isted in eternity9 to that quiet life9 all a single whole9 still unbounded9 altogether without declination9 resting in and directed towards eternity3 Time did not yet e2ist9 not at any rate for the beings of that worldC we shall produce time by means of the form and nature of what comes after $Ennead +++3%%9 %=:(3&H; But since there was a restlessly acti"e nature which wanted to control itself and be on its own9 and chose to see0 for more than its present state9 this mo"ed9 and time mo"ed with itC and so9 always mo"ing on to the @ne2tA and the @afterA9 and what is not the same9 but one thing after another9 we made a long stretch of our Dourney and constructed time as an image of eternity $Ennead +++3%%9 %'=%&(3&HG Plotinus? description of the higher eternity9 with its @unboundedA nature9 @without declinationA fits well with the Gnostic "iew of the PleromaC li0ewise9 the lower nhh realm is quintessentially demiurgic9 with a will that is @restlessA9 desiring @to control itself and be on its ownA3 This "ery particular "iew of time and eternity espoused by Plotinus and the )gyptian Gnostics is not9 therefore9 to be traced bac0 to Plato3 -or is Plato drawing e2clusi"ely from earlier Gree0 philosophers9 Ana2imander for e2ample&H'C rather9 the source is the ancient )gyptian "iew of nhh and dt3 By the /ate Period9 under the influence of dualist and apocalyptic undercurrents9 the traditional9 cyclic9 @coursing to eternityA of )gyptian thought had been transformed within Gnostic thought into a soteriological imperati"e9 possible only through gnosis3

&HL

4ieroglyphic transcription from 5urt ethe9 -he=anische -empelinschriften aus )riechisch@$*mischer ;eit $BerlinE Academie *erlag9 %&J:(9 FL9 section &Jc3 8ab0ar9 (ymns to 0sis in her -emple at Philae9 FL3 4lotinus 000A Enneads 000> B@D9 trans3 A343 Armstrong $%&H:C reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&FL(9 GG:3 4lotinus 0009 GG&3 Peter Manchester9 @The Religious )2perience of Time and )ternity9A 'L%3

&H% &H;

&HG &H'

2K.
)hapter $ifteen* The return to dt,supernal time from nhh,earthly time in the Egyptian Gnostic "fterlife

At this point + attempt to answer a question was raised earlier9 one concerning the uni"ersalisation of )gyptian gods and goddesses into 4ellenistic hypostases3 <hile we can see -un9 the 4eh=gods9 4athor9 Tefnut9 and +sis9 a demiurgic Re9 a redeemed and recalcitrant eth for e2ample9 present in Gnostic thought9 it is significant that this continuation of central )gyptian di"ine figures strips them of their traditional identificationE whyS +n answering this we must once again loo0 to the socio=historical conte2t that ga"e rise to these religious de"elopments9 in particular the sense of religious crisis that lay upon )gypt in Graeco=Roman times3 +f @Ma?at has fled to a higher supernal realmA9 if the physical world has been desacralised9 then this dualism of fallen world and 4igher spiritual source would require a soteriology of e"entual ascent3 Douglas Parrott9 one of the few scholars in Gnostic tudies to loo0 at this problem9 has e2pressed this "ery wellE Another de"elopment is the transformation of a theology rooted in )gyptian historical myth into one of uni"ersal9 transcendent realities3 The names of the deities9 which mar0ed them as )gyptian9 are gone9 replaced by those of a more uni"ersal character3 There is no reference to the sna0e 5ematef or his son3 -o reference to Thebes9 the -ile Dourney9 the cities "isited on the way9 or the return to Thebes and burial at Medinet 4abu3 +t is as though the realm of history itself > that is9 the realm of particular e"ents9 times and places > has lost its interest9 and attention has turned to e"ents beyond time3&HJ +n this chapter + hope to show that it is not that the Gnostics in )gypt turned to e"ents @beyond timeA in the strict sense9 rather they focused upon a higher archetype of Time and uni"ersalised9 or hypostasised9 the traditional identities of their di"inities in the process3 1or @e"ents beyond timeA is an o2ymoron9 as there can only be one e"ent beyond time9 that of a beginningless9 endless stasis3 This state was seen to generate its own latent impulse towards differentiation9 well=appreciated by )gyptian theologians as the dt eternal9 the boundless and inert qualities of -un3 Theogonic e2tension and finally historical e"ent arose from this latent eternal state3 The failure9 indeed the demonisation9 of the nhh in )gyptian theological terms9 the literal o"erthrow of the di"ine power of Re made manifest in historical rule through the pharaoh9 underlies the entire rise of Gnosis in )gypt3 The di"ision into nhh=time and dt =time is accepted by enough )gyptologists for us to no longer doubt that it was often intended3 8ab0ar?s point that the terms are often used interchangeably is well=ta0en&HH > the words9 afterall9 were used in close pro2imity and so there ine"itably arose an inclination to use them as synonymsC howe"er the fact remains that there are two original conceptions for eternity and are used in different ways9 e"en if it is not a consistent and general distinction3 A schema will demonstrate the positions of "arious )gyptologists on this issueE

nhh
&HJ &HH

dt

Douglas M3 Parrott9 @Gnosticism and )gyptian Religion9A N- ;& $%&F:(E F&=&L3

/ouis *3 8ab0ar< @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead9A JNES ;' $%&HJ(E ::3

2KK
.3P3 Allen&H: eternal recurrence eternal sameness &HF /3*3 8ab0ar something completed $to be( attained A3 Ba0ir&H& infinity before world temporal world ends &:L )3 Drioton infinity before world temporal world ends /3 5M0osy&:% infinity ahead static eternity past &:; A3 Gardiner eternity in future eternity in the past )3 ,tto&:G future in years future e"erlastingness &:' G3 Thausing eternity $life=time( eternity $death=space( )3 4ornung&:J eternity $Being( eternity $-onbeing( 53 ethe&:H eternally sought $nhy( eternally attained $S( .3 Assmann&:: orderOrecurrence chaosOduration The general consensus is that time as nhh has an end as it is bound up with the cyclic phenomenology of this worldC time as dt on the other hand denotes the stasis of -onbeing9 the changeless and formless primordial state > though @pregnantA > which is the bac0drop for the dynamic nhh3 +t would seem that eternity was considered to be -un in its most archetypal manifestation9 using such suggesti"e qualifiers as @inertA or @hiddenA to imply the impending theogonic de"elopment of the ennead3 +n addition to the abo"e we ha"e <3 <estendorf?s theory that nhh and dt should be "iewed as categorising notionsE&:F

nhh
masculine

dt
feminine

$fatherOsonOhusband( phallic
&H: &HF &H&

$motherOdaughterOwife uterine

Allen< )enesis in Egypt< for CT pell FL9 ;%3 @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead9A ::=FG3

Abd=el=Mohsen Ba0ir9 @Nhh and dt reconsidered9AJEA G& $%&JG(E %%L=%%C see howe"er his re=appraisal in @A further re=appraisal of the termsE Nhh and 9t9A JEA HL $%&:'(E ;J;=J'9 in which he clarifies nhh and dt as being representati"e of a dynamic life associated with an e"erlasting rotation of Tdays? and Tnights?E nhh with its sun dis0 as determinati"e represents daylight and the creation of the world9 whereas dt with its land determinati"e is associated with dar0ness9 the netherworld9 and the physical and corporeal span3 1rom 8ab0ar9 @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead3A ::3 /3 5M0osy< @8u einer )tymologie "on PhilRE die T+nsel der 8eit?9A Acta Anti#ua %H $%&HF(E ':3 Alan 43 Gardiner9 @4ymns to Amon from a /eiden Papyrus9A ;HS '; $%&LJ(E %;=';3 @AltRgyptische 8eit"orstellungen und 8eit begriffe9A in 9ie Gelt als )eschicte %' $%&J'(E %GJ='F3 Gertrude Thausing9 @Die AusdrXc0e fXr T)wig? im ogyptischen9A +0'A2 HH $%&G'(E GF3 4ornung9 "onceptions of )od< %:%3 4yramiden@-e:te9 ++9 ;'%3 Assman< ;eit und Ewigkeit im alten Hgypten< 'J3

&:L &:% &:; &:G &:' &:J &:H &:: &:F

<olfhart <estendorf< @8weitheit9 Dreiheit9 und )inheit in der altRgyptichen Theologie9A ;HS %LL $%&:'(E %GH='%>

2K7 dynamic dayOsunlight order conscious

ReO4orusOli"ing 0ing =a=soul

static nightOdar0ness chaos unconscious

,sirisO0ing?s mummy corpse

.an Assmann?s study&:& offers a particularly effecti"e philosophical appreciation of the )gyptian distinction here3 The )gyptian word for time Qhw pertains to the idea of a lifetime as the e2istential yardstic0 by which it is measured > the period of time between birth and death3 The opposite idea to Qhw9 as Assmann points out9 is that of immortality on this side $9iesseits(9 as nhh9 pertaining to the 0ing9 the state9 the forces of nature9 @the perpetuity of discontinuity9 the unities of countable aspects of timeA3 Time and life in this "iew cannot be di"ided3 9t represents an underlying9 or o"erarching9 archetype on the other side $Jenseits(9 one which eternally endures in a state of static unchangableness9 complete and immutable9 generating what Assmann describes as @the unlimited nature of the continuous aspects of timeA3 The modern literary= critical theorist Paul de Man has noted the difference between symbol and allegory as essentially one of diachronicity "s3 the synchronic3 The allegory relies upon the @"oid of temporal differenceA wherein the story is historically unfolded9 whereas the symbol is synecdochic $embodying all within itself(9 and aims at e"o0ing immediate sympathies or affinities3&FL ,ne might say that the nhh=eternal9 at wor0 in the endless play of allegorical signification9 aims at representing the story in human e2istential terms9 whereas the dt=eternal is the "ery archetype of time9 immutable and ineffable9 attainable perhaps through insight or gnosis spar0ed on the symbolical le"el of representation3 +t has been obser"ed that9 @prime"al time may be described as the time before duality had arisen in the landA3&F% Atum9 whose name is imbued with the notion of @e"erythingA and @nothingA from the word tm9 begins the process of differentiation with the creation of hu and Tefnut3 The result is the appearance of duality9 including eternity split into dt and nhh3 G3 )nglund notes that the 4eliopolitan system is essentially nhh in its desire @first and foremost to show the dynamics of the transforming process and how the process leads to a dynamic state of energy9 ReA3&F; +n all phases9 howe"er9 the dynamic nhh and passi"e dt must be present3 +n particular9 )nglund notes that the )nnead as a whole functions as a dt=element for the final outcome9 Re9 the representati"e of nhh3 +n all of this the nhh side is stressed through the se2ualOphallic creation myth3 +n the Memphite system the stress is upon the dt aspectE @Bandaged and with bound limbs Ptah is a typical representati"e of the passi"e and stationary dt=sideA&FG and is depicted as being pregnant with creation3 +n this larger sense the two theologies are complementary9 in part perhaps e2plaining why the Memphite= habba0a te2t did not reDect the 4eliopolitan system but presented it in balance with the new understanding3 Nhh and dt appear in /ate Period te2ts where the distinction continues3 ome e2amplesE
&:& &FL

Assman9 ;eit und Ewigkeit im Alten Hgypten9 %%=%'3

Paul de Man9 @The Rhetoric of Temporality9A in "ritical -heory Since BDE69 eds3 4aBard Adams and /eory earle $Tallahassee9 1/E 1lorida tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH(9 ;L&=%L3 te *elde9 Seth< )od of "onfusion9 ;: )nglund9 @Gods as a 1rame of Reference9A %J3 +bid39 %J3

&F% &F; &FG

2KP
%( The /eyden Magical Papyrus $Demotic9 dated ca> ;;J C3)3( 4o\ spea0 to me Thes9 Tenor9 the father of eternity $nhh(&F' 4ail to him\ ,siris9 5ing of the !nderworld333 he who is under the nu=s tree in Meror9 who is on the mountain of Poranos9 who is on my house to eternity $nhh(&FJ Pomo who is called the mighty bull9 the great god that is in the I,at9 that came forth from the four YboundariesSZ of eternity $dt(&FH Thy Yserpent is a serpentSZ of eternity $dt(&F: ;( 4ymns to +sis in 4er Temple at Philae Iou $+sis( are the di"ine mother of 4orus9 The Mighty Bull who protects )gypt9 /ord of the -ome9 fore"er $dt(&FF The /ord and ruler of )ternity $dt(&F& May he $Ptolemy( gloriously appear as the 5!/) upon the throne of 4orus9 eternally $ dt( li0e Re&&L 1ore"er for your 5a9 e"erlastingly $dt(&&% 4is MaDesty is 4orus upon the throne of the Child9 fore"er $nhh( and e"er $dt(3 Protect the son of Re9 Ptolemy9 fore"er $dt(&&; Gnostic Te2ts9 and Coptic te2ts in general in"ariably use sha enech or some Gree0 loan word as dt seems to ha"e disappeared3&&G 4owe"er9 the distinction remained9 and the Gnostics were anti nhh=time as it was "iewed to be a false demiurgic @eternityA as opposed to the dt female aeon ophia3 Consider the following description by +renaeus of the *alentinian "iew of demiurgic timeE <hen the Demiurge further wanted to imitate also the boundless9 eternal9 infinite and timeless nature of the upper ,gdoad $the original eight Aeons in the Pleroma(9 but could not e2press their immutable eternity9 being as he was the fruit of defect9 he embodied their eternity in time9 epochs9 and great numbers of years9 under the delusion that by the
&F'

13 /l3 Griffith and 4erbert Thompson eds39 -he Leyden 4apyrus9 $%&L'C -ew Ior0E Do"er Publications9 %&:'(9 H%3 +bid39 %GJ3 +bid39 H:3

&FJ &FH &F:

+bid39 H&3 +t seems to me that the first two citations concern themsel"es with demiurgic figures9 hence their nhh association9 whereas the final two e2amples are clearly identified with -!- and so the dt chaoticOarchetypal qualifier is perhaps chosen3 8ab0ar9 (ymns to 0sis in (er -emple at 4hilae9 ;%=;;3 +bid39 GL3 +bid39 JF=J&3 +bid39 FL3 +bid39 FL=F%3

&FF &F& &&L &&% &&; &&G

+ ha"e been unable to trace its de"elopment in the G*rter=uch< in Cernh9 "optic Etymological 9ictionary9 or Crum9 "optic 9ictionary>

2K,
quantity of times he could represent their infinity3 Thus truth escaped him and followed the lie3 Therefore his world shall pass away when the times are fulfilled3 $Ad%> (aer> +3%:3;(&&' 4ere we ha"e a clear distinction drawn between a false nhh eternity > one usually bound up with demiurgic hubris in not admitting to the higher powers of eternity9 and associated in 4ellenistic times with the "icissitudes of 1ate > and a distilled dt eternity commonly associated with female <isdom figures in Gnostic thought3 These are deri"ed from "arious +sis9 Tefnut9 4athor and Maat religious appreciations9 in this case more specifically deri"ed from the 4eh=gods3 ,ne is at first puBBled by this9 for the 4eh=gods literally contain nhh=eternity in their names as a comparison between 4eh and nhh illustrateC howe"er9 the 4eh=gods are seen to combine the eternities of both dt and nhh9 occupying a realm midway between hea"en and earth3&&J The abo"e passage by +renaeus suggests a "iew of time put forward by Plato in the -imaeusC howe"er9 the nhhSdt bipolar "iew of time predates Plato by thousands of years9 and Plato can be seen to ha"e appropriated a concept that was "ery widespread among )gyptian priestly circles in his early "isits to )gypt3&&H The nhhSdt split shows up in 4ermetic te2ts9 as in the 4oimandres9 the most Gnostic of all9 wherein the teacher imparts the traditional "iew of nhh and dt9 of mortal time and immortal timeE That is why man9 unli0e all the li"ing things on earth9 is twofoldE mortal because of the body9 immortal because of the essential Man3 1or he who is immortal and has authority o"er all things e2periences mortality9 being subDect to fate3 4e who is up abo"e the 4armony $of the spheres( has become a sla"e inside the 4armony3&&: The 4ermetic Asclepius9 one "ersion of which surfaced in the -ag 4ammadi corpus9 also demonstrates this di"ision and need not be del"ed into here3&&F <e ha"e e2amined the role of 4orus in )gyptian myth9 and his heuristic appropriation within Gnostic systems as the limit or boundary between the Pleroma and the lower world3 An inscription at Dendara describes his position in terms of fusing the higher dt realm with the
&&' &&J

Anti@Nicene 'athers9 "ol3%9 G';='G3

Barta9 @Die Bedeutung der Personifi0ation 4uh im !ntersheid Bu den Personifi0ation 4ah und -un9A :3 .an Assmann9 in Stein und ;eitA +ensch und )esellshaft im alten Hgypten $MXnchenE <ilhelm 1in0 *erlag9 %&&%( describes this theology of timeE @That is the sun=theology in )gypt9 grounded in the temple in 4eliopolis9 the same temple from which the tradition followed Plato9 himself initiated there into )gyptian wisdom3 <ith no other ancient )gyptian theology are we as well=informed as with these9 which are found in their thousands of deposits9 abo"e all hymns9 but also tractates9 cosmographical writings of the sun?s passage9 hea"en and underworld boo0s9 dead and magical te2ts3 <hen we base our research on these rich materials9 they afford us in e"ery instance a concei"able and solid basisC as well9 in confronting these te2ts we must 0eep in mind that they do not originate with the 0nowledge of the )gyptian @man on the streetA9 but with the 0nowledge of the T<elt=ild@Spe,ialisten9 the priestsA$':(3 "orp> (erm> +3%J9 trans3 1oerster9 )nosisA A Selection of )nostic -e:ts9 "ol3 %9 GG%3 ee +"erson9 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine9 G' in which the Asclepius is discussed in terms of the nhh@dt di"ision3

&&H

&&: &&F

275
lower nhh in the epithet9 @he who unites together nhh=eternity and dt=eternityA3 /i0ewise9 an inscription from )dfu depicts the same fusionE @nhh=eternity is in his right eye9 dt=eternity is in his left eyeA3%LLL The Gnostic embodiment of nhh is to be found in their conception of aeons $the modern /atin spelling from the Gree0 aion( which manifest discrete periods of Pleromic or theogonic epochs3 The Pleroma itself is dt=eternal and is therefore @all things at onceA9 often referred to as @the aeon of aeonsA in "arious tractates9 as in -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia for e2ampleE @and the Aeon of Aeons loo0ed upon the Aeons he ga"e birth toA $GF3;H=;:(3%LL% -he )ospel of the Egyptians depicts a typical Atum=figure at the head of the gods who generates a triad from out of himself3 The Coptic is included here as my translation differs substantially from the /eiden9 Brill edition from whence the Coptic te2t is ta0enE%LL;
&&&

The /ight which he first made which comes forth as $the( )ternity of the )ternities of the ineffable9 unbounded9 unproclaimable Parent9 the Aeon of the Aeons who begets himself9 who shines forth from himself aloneE the 1oreigner9 the uninterpretable power of the ineffable Parent3 Three powers come forth from him3333 $-4C +*9; JL3%%=;'(%LLG +n this important passage a parallelism e2ists between the )ternity of )ternities and Aeon of Aeons that must be seen in terms of the dt and nhh distinction3 The dt realm is 3enseits< synecdochic and synchronic9 immutable and ineffable > more to the point relying upon a rhetoric of the apophatic to con"ey the abo"e un=qualities3 As we ha"e noted elsewhere9 the self= generating figure of Atum depicted abo"e9 "erges towards the dt in -un in displaying all these apophatic qualities9 and his "ery name means @fullnessA9 pleroma being perhaps the most common concept in Gnostic thought after gnosis3 Atum is also intimately in"ol"ed in the ensuing di"ine family tree and can be seen to be the creati"e power of -un and is thus nhh= demiurgic3 The Coptic "erb 9 @shiningA is quite suggesti"e of Re appearing out of the watery abyss9 and @eternitiesA9 plural9 depicts the durati"e nature of the Gnostic aeons3

&&&

,tto9 )ott und +ensch9 &; $/D Te2t ++ ;%%(3 +bid39 &G $*'F(3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 'LF3

%LLL %LL% %LL;

Nag (ammadi "odices 000< 8 and 0&< 8E -he )ospel of the Egyptians< trans3 BQhlig and <isse9 JG9 JJ3 Their translationE @333the eternal light of the eternities9 which has come forth9 of the ineffable and unmar0ed and unproclaimable 1ather9 the aeon of the aeons9 he who begets himself9 and he who comes forth from himself9 and the alien one9 the uninterpretable power of the ineffable 1ather3 Three powers come forth from him3333A does not appear to be cogniBant of the relati"e present 3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 +*9 JG9 JJ3

%LLG

27+
The symbol of the uroboros found in Gnostic thought goes bac0 at least to Coffin Te2ts9 specifically that of Merenptah3%LL' This emblem is bound up with concrete cyclical processesE day and night9 coming and going9 east and west9 yesterday and tomorrow9 all perpetually cycling in life?s e2perience +n this sense time and life cannot be separated3%LLJ )gyptian hypostatic representations of nhh@time are to be seen in days as the one > two > and twel"e formulations of the un=cultsC as the month in the moon cultsC and for the year9 the goddess othis3 Beyond this is the ;J=year Apis period9 the GL=year edfest period9 and the %'HL=year othis=period3 These are all essentially nhh cycles of order and recurrence and they re"eal in the later periods of )gyptian thought their implicit tendency towards eschatology3 The othis=period of %'HL years a central feature in Manichaean thought as we ha"e seen in Chapter &3 Perhaps the most "i"id Gnostic eschatology to incorporate this feature is to be found in -he "oncept of 2ur )reat 4owerE Then their time which was gi"en to them to possess power9 $that( which was calculated for them9 $is( fourteen hundred and si2ty eight years3 +f the fire has $then( consumed them all9 and if it does not find anything else to burn9 then it shall destroy itself Y33333333Z Then the firmaments Yshall slideZ down to the Depth $-,I-(3 $-4C *+9 ' 'H3;J=':3H(%LLH The word for @timeA abo"e9 is from the Gree0 m s and it is to be noted that Chronos was an underworld deity worshipped in Ale2andria in association with Aion3 The notion of the aeon ha"ing its powers num=ered suggests this connection3 The -rimorphic 4rotennoia contains an interesting passage in which the female spea0er defines the temporal nature of the lower aeon that human0ind finds itself withinE And + shall tell them of the coming end of the Aeon9 and + shall edify them $concerning( the beginning of the Aeon to come9 the one which does not possess change $but( which will alter our countenance through itself9 that we become pure3 <ithin these Aeons9 from which + re"ealed myself in the Thought of the resemblance of my$f( maleness9 + preser"e those who are worthy within the Thought of my unchanging Aeon3 1or + shall tell you a Mystery of this Aeon in particular9 and + shall inform you of the )nergies within it3 The Birth calls Yto the BirthEZ hour begets hour9 Yday createsZ day9 month creates month9 Time turns9 following Time3 This particular Aeon was accomplished in this manner9 and it was numbered9 $being found( small9 for it was a finger that omitted a finger9 and a $chain( lin0 which is added to by means of a lin03 <hen the Great Powers understood that the time of fulfillment was manifest as in the labour pains of the pregnant woman $which( brought $her to( the entrance of the door9 in this way the Destruction approached3 All together the )lements trembled and the foundations of the !nderworld and the ceilings of Chaos shoo0 and a great fire glowed in their midst and the roc0s and the earth shoo0 li0e reeds blown in the wind3 $';3%F='G3%;(%LL: The god Aion of Ale2andria 9 ostensibly born of the @*irginA 5ore9 manifested the birth of 4orusO4arpocrates from +sis9 or Re from -eith3 The central figure of +sis is more clearly seen
%LL' %LLJ %LLH %LL:

.an Assmann9 +9H0.> ;F3% $%&:;(9 ':=:G3 Assman< ;eit und Ewigket im alten Hgypten9 G'3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 N+9 G%F9 G;L3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%H9 '%F3

272
here $than0s to Plutarch and Apuleius( as @firstborn of the agesA and @queen of timeA3 Chronos and Aion were apparently worshipped separately in Ale2andria and elsewhere9 and the demiurgic attributes of Chronos are apparent in his syncretistic association with the underworld3%LL& Aion9 on the other hand9 has been connected with the (eh=gods%L%L and certainly9 the following inscription from a pedestal in )leusis9 depicts a strong sense of dt=eternityE
%LLF

4e who by his di"ine nature remains e"er the same in the same things333 he who is and was and shall be9 without beginning9 middle9 or end9 free from change9 uni"ersal craftsman of the eternal di"ine nature%L%% The depiction of a +sis=type goddess in -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia creating her temporal aeons @in the Thought of the resemblance of my $f( malenessA $';3;'=;J(%L%; closely matches the e"idence we ha"e for the )gyptian goddess gi"ing birth to Chronos and Aion on December ;J and .anuary H respecti"ely3 +t has been suggested that these dates represent the two original )gyptian festi"als of the winter solstice3%L%G +n this conte2t we mention again the completely consistent description of +sis as dt in her temple at Philae3 Nhh is portrayed in )gyptian thought as essentially male9 often as a pseudonym for the sun=god9 and manifesting cyclical time3 The critical feature which unites ancient )gyptian and Gnostic thought is the depiction of nhh=time as mirroring the higher dt@ realmE while the two realms interpenetrate9 this temporal bipolarity is hierarchalised in this manner3 @)ternity is to time333 as the li"es of the gods are to those of mortalsA%L%'9 it might be said9 once the theogony is set in motion for whate"er mysterious purposes9 for there is a reciprocity between di"ine and mortal life3 The cyclic nature of our own lower eternity9 the )gyptian nhh9 fulfils the larger di"ine eternity abo"e3 Ptolemy +++ $)uergetes +E ;'H=;;; B3C3)3( built a southern gate to the 5arna0 temple comple2 now 0nown as the Bab el=Amara3 The gate is remar0ably well preser"ed and is a most impressi"e achie"ement both in terms of the quality of the inscriptions and iconography9 o"erall architecture9 and the amount of theological content contained in its inscriptions3 As with the ,pet temple9 some ;LL yards further into the comple29 the 4eh gods are prominent9 as is -un?s role of theogonic facilitator3 The @inert onesA $Amun9 Amaunet9 -un9 -aunet9 4eh9 4ehet9 5e0 and 5e0et( are fashioned by -unC they in turn fashion hu @who ma0es peace in their Two /ands in Medinet 4abu9 life for eternity< coursing to eternityA3 The italicised section appears to gi"e some insight into the relationship between nhh and dtE

%LLF

Raffaele PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A in Essays on the (istory of $eligion9 ed3 43.3 Rose $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&H:(9 %:'3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A%:&3 This association occured through identification of Anubis with Cerberus with Chronos $through the triceps of arapis(3 4enri Brugsch9 $eligion und +ythologie der alten Hgypter $%F&%C reprint9 /eipBigE /eipBig 8entralantiquariat der Deutschen Demo0ratischen Republi09 %&H&(9 %G;='LC also Richard ReitBenstein in )*tt> Nachr> %&L'9 G%:3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos(Chronos in )gypt9A%:J3 Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%H3 PettaBBoni9 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt9A %:;=G3

%LL&

%L%L

%L%% %L%; %L%G %L%'

Peter Manchester9 @The Religious )2perience of Time and )ternity9A in "lassic +editerranean Spirituality9 ed39 A343 Armstrong $/ondonE Routledge U 5egan Paul /td39 %&FH(9 G&G3

274
Qnh r nhh hp r dt%L%J ,f interest is the employment of the "erb hp> ,ne would e2pect the formulaic @fore"er and e"erA nhh hn dt as is found at Philae for e2ample%L%H9 where a "erb of motion completed by the preposition r @toA or @untilA is not necessary3 The sense here is of the cyclic coursing of nhh completed in dt3 +n my "iew these split eternities9 seen to be interpenetrating9 form the "ery grist of Plotinus? philosophical e2plorations of time and eternity3 The following passage from the Enneads is imbued with the ancient )gyptian "iew of nhh and dtE <e must ta0e oursel"es bac0 to the disposition which we said e2isted in eternity9 to that quiet life9 all a single whole9 still unbounded9 altogether without declination9 resting in and directed towards eternity3 Time did not yet e2ist9 not at any rate for the beings of that worldC we shall produce time by means of the form and nature of what comes after $Ennead +++3%%9 %=:(3%L%: But since there was a restlessly acti"e nature which wanted to control itself and be on its own9 and chose to see0 for more than its present state9 this mo"ed9 and time mo"ed with itC and so9 always mo"ing on to the @ne2tA and the @afterA9 and what is not the same9 but one thing after another9 we made a long stretch of our Dourney and constructed time as an image of eternity $Ennead +++3%%9 %'=%&(3%L%F Plotinus? description of the higher eternity9 with its @unboundedA nature9 @without declinationA fits well with the Gnostic "iew of the PleromaC li0ewise9 the lower nhh realm is quintessentially demiurgic9 with a will that is @restlessA9 desiring @to control itself and be on its ownA3 This "ery particular "iew of time and eternity espoused by Plotinus and the )gyptian Gnostics is not9 therefore9 to be traced bac0 to Plato3 -or is Plato drawing e2clusi"ely from earlier Gree0 philosophers9 Ana2imander for e2ample%L%&C rather9 the source is the ancient )gyptian "iew of nhh and dt3 By the /ate Period9 under the influence of dualist and apocalyptic undercurrents9 the traditional9 cyclic9 @coursing to eternityA of )gyptian thought had been transformed within Gnostic thought into a soteriological imperati"e9 possible only through gnosis3

%L%J

4ieroglyphic transcription from 5urt ethe9 -he=anische -empelinschriften aus )riechisch@ $*mischer ;eit $BerlinE Academie *erlag9 %&J:(9 FL9 section &Jc3 8ab0ar9 (ymns to 0sis in her -emple at Philae9 FL3 4lotinus 000A Enneads 000> B@D9 trans3 A343 Armstrong $%&H:C reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&FL(9 GG:3 4lotinus 0009 GG&3 Peter Manchester9 @The Religious )2perience of Time and )ternity9A 'L%3

%L%H %L%:

%L%F %L%&

27)onclusion
The socio=historical model ad"anced in this study is more than a adDunct to te2tual e2egesisC it is a necessary component of any attempt to e2plain the deep=seated )gyptian presence in Gnostic thought3 1or it is the ancient emanationist tree which bears the aeonial fruit9 and the widespread popular appeal of the +sis and ,siris story9 unbro0en from ,ld 5ingdom until well into Roman times9 manifests this same mythological resource that 4ellenistic religious thought was to draw from3 <ith its emphasis upon the apophatic source9 its self= generation of male and female polarities9 its primal triad9 and subsequent hypostases forming ogdoads9 enneads and the li0e9 the )gyptian theogonic family predates Gree0 thought by millennia9 and is not in itself Persian9 .ewish9 or remotely Christian3 Arising from this foundation is an entire range of compelling e"idence for specific )gyptian mythological features carried on into Gnostic thoughtE the youngest and wisest goddess wishing to @0nowA the Parent for e2ample9 the flight of the goddess to a desolate realm9 the 4eliopolitan ogdoad showing up almost "erbatim9 the unfolding e2plorations of the Memphite word9 or -un appearing where he should upon the edge of theogonic order3 Iet e"en if we lac0ed these specific supports9 the mind=set or attitude< would demarcate the per"asi"e )gyptian rubric3 + ha"e therefore tried to answer the questionE by what type of person9 and by what means9 were these themes carried through into Gnostic thoughtS Gnostic te2tuality in )gypt rests upon the foundations of )gyptian religious thought3 + ha"e shown that Coptic cannot be considered to be a Christian phenomenon in its conception9 and that the reality of spo0en )gyptian in Ale2andria9 with its liberal use of Gree0 loan words9 arises out of the comple2 social reality of bilingual Graeco=)gyptians and )gypto=Gree0s %LL B3C3)3=GLL C3)33 @BilingualA does not Dust suggest the model of two races with a select group of literati9 on either side of the di"ide9 who e"entually learn the other?s languageC rather9 it pertains9 in Ptolemaic and Roman Ale2andria and Memphis in particular9 to a host of social classes that were born and raised within the mythological shadow of two cultures3 +t bespea0s the synthesis that a child with a Gree0 father and )gyptian mother must achie"e as one of his or her earliest cultural accomplishments3 This result is apparent in the first century B3C3)3 among classes that9 while literate9 could hardly be considered the literatiC how much more so must be the influence among those who became the philosophers and priests in this turbulent ageS Theirs was the daunting tas0 of assimilating Gree0 and )gyptian thought9 .ewish9 Persian9 and Christian9 in a world in a state of dramatic flu23 The )gypto=Gree0s in Ale2andria and Memphis certainly considered themsel"es to be )gyptian9 and it requires no great imaginati"e leap to posit9 again e"en without the early te2tual e2amples for pre=Christian Coptic that we possess9 the formulation of a written mode of the current )gyptian "ernacular using the Gree0 alphabet3 + ha"e not decisi"ely pro"en this to be the case for the ob"ious reason that we do not possess a cache of Coptic documents that can be definitely dated to this early period3 +t is e2tremely difficult to pursue any particular theme in this period because of a massi"e loss of documentation3 4owe"er9 the larger point about bilinguality is central and well=established3 The potent effect here is that it opens the process of Gnostic theologising to the deep well=springs of )gyptian religious thought which surrounded the philosopher=priest in )gypt at e"ery turnC con"ersely9 it opened )gyptian sensibilities to Gree0 ratiocination and heterodo2y with respect to a "aried and "ast array of sacred te2ts now a"ailable in Gree03 This said9 howe"er9 )gypto= Gree0 syncretistic endea"ours in )gypt remained "ery much grounded in ancient )gyptian theological precepts and this is an indirect result of the large=scale editorialising efforts of priests in the Ptolemaic temples3 <ithout the inscriptural renaissance of Ptolemaic9 made

27.
possible by the building proDects of the Ptolemies9 )gyptology would be "astly impo"erished in its understanding of )gyptian thoughtC li0ewise9 the impact of a still="ibrant )gyptian theology upon the new dualist creeds would ha"e been far less pronounced without the continued acti"ities of these priesthoods3 +t is beyond the scope of this study to attempt to delimit redactional patterns in Ptolemaic inscriptional e"idence by way of demonstrating a specific and re"isionary Ptolemaic religious "iew3%L;L 4owe"er9 e"en a cursory sur"ey of Ptolemaic shows its re"olutionary aspects in terms of form and content3%L;% <ithin the temples this picture of a simple reinscribing of the sacred te2ts in brushed=up Middle )gyptian must be seen to be far more complicated than thatC we must also emphasise that the Ptolemies were not intending to simply appease @)gyptiansA with this > they were responding to the seminal influence of the )gypto=Gree0OGraeco=)gyptian literati and politicos in Ale2andria and Memphis3 1rom these religious foundations9 directly and indirectly9 Gnosis arose in )gypt3 Iet another foundation for Gnostic thought in )gypt pertains to the widespread rise of dualist thought in the ancient -ear )ast and here9 as with the abo"e concern about Gnostic te2tuality9 the magical papyri are critical3 These te2ts bear witness to )gyptian sensibilities undergoing a radical transformation in mood9 one that amounts to a reconte2tualisation of the deep=seated )gyptian understanding of Ma?at3 The 0ing was always seen as the symbolic and literal e2ecutor of Ma?at in )gyptian history9 a benign demiurgic sustainer of )gypt?s di"ine role in the larger cosmogonic setting3 <ith the eradication of this rule through foreign subDugation some )gyptian theologians were forced to de"elop theodicies9 the "ery wellspring of )gyptian Gnostic moti"ation3 +n this9 they turned to the ancient understanding of disorder9 of the @inimical godsA fore"er threatening their land and the afterlife of the soul3 +t is well established that e2tensi"e libraries of )gyptian religious te2ts were a"ailable for study in this time period9 some quite possibly translated and 0ept in the Ptolemaic libraries in Ale2andria9 the maDority carefully guarded in the indi"idual temple comple2es where they ser"ed as the hieratic font for the ongoing transcription into hieroglyphic9 and a reference for proper temple obser"ances3%L;; The assumption of power by the ethnarch Petubastis $%;L=:J B3C3)3(9 4igh=Priest in Memphis9 at a time when Gree0s were entering the )gyptian priesthood9 surely mar0s the pi"otal point for the de"elopment of proto=Gnostic thought in )gypt3 At a time Dust prior9 or during9 the period to which we can ascribe with some certainty the formation of an )gyptian Gnostic te2t9 Eugnostos the Blessed9 the phenomenon of bilingual )gyptian priests is perfectly emblematised in this e2tremely important spiritual leader for the nation9 son=in=law of
%L;L

4ei0e ternberg9 +ythische +oti%e und +ythen=ildung in den Hgyptischen -empeln und 4apyri der )riechisch@$*mischen ;eit< GQttinger ,rientforschungen9 +*3ReiheE Hgypten $<eisbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FJ(9 gi"es an e2cellent o"er"iew of the employment of mythological elements in )dfu9 )sna9 and 5om ,mbo3 ee /3 5M0osy9 @Temples and 1unerary Beliefs in the Graeco=Roman )pochA9 in L!gyptologie en BDFD $ParisE 7ditions du Centre -ational de la Recherche cientifique9 %&F;(9 %%:=;:3 +n discussing ci"il or sacerdotal custodianship of the sort of material that Manetho used in the writing of his Aegyptiaca9 Redford $4haraonic .ing@Lists< ;%'( opts for the temple librariesE @Clearly it could not9 in times when Gree0s ruled )gypt9 ha"e been the former9 since according to the reliable tradition it was the ci"il authority itself that Tcommissioned? Manetho to write his wor03A <hile one can certainly agree that Ptolemaic ci"il libraries in Manetho?s day must ha"e had a minimal amount of )gyptian religious te2ts at their disposal9 + thin0 this situation changed radically in the centuries that followed3 Gi"en the legendary acquisiti"eness of the /agids with respect to their library in Ale2andria9 Manetho can be considered to be a forerunner of their later efforts to channel and preser"e the flow of arcane writings into synthesis and translation in Ale2andria9 including an indeterminate amount of te2ts from their nati"e land3

%L;%

%L;;

27K
)uergetes ++3 <hat policies and e2amples did this remar0able figure set for the philosophers and priests of his dayS Alas9 this must remain speculati"e9 but at the "ery least we can be sure he was sympathetic to the )gypto=Gree0 priests in his care9 to their need to synthesise theological elements from the two cultures9 for such was his own una"oidable mandate and interest3 To Gree0 and )gyptian ali0e9 Petubastis9 on the one hand9 represented the Gree0 mind and heart at one in the Great 4all of )gyptian religionC on the other9 his was an image of )gyptian religiosity offering up Ma?at with the full weight and authority of 4ellenistic political power3 This man stands as an important figure in any discussion about Graeco=)gyptian religious @syncretismsA9 for he himself fused both races9 both religious "iews9 as well as Church and tate3 <e are not surprised to note the *ienna stela recording his funeral as a state occasionE @in his train there marched the du0es of )gypt9 members of the )gyptian priesthood9 and "arious bodies representing the nationA $F;3%3%%(3%L;G Eugnostos the Blessed e"idences a distinct 4eliopolitan=deri"ed emanationist systemC this9 along with its lac0 of archaic attributes suggests a lower )gyptian pro"enance9 and it need hardly be stressed that 4eliopolis was a "ery short distance across the -ile and downstream from Memphis3 This te2t demonstrates precisely the sort of synthesis we would e2pect as a result of Graeco )gyptian interaction following upon the heels of Petubastis? tenure3 <e must be acutely aware of the limitations of our sources3 Most of the magical and Gnostic te2ts that we ha"e form a discrete window into this world9 located in the late fourth century C3)39 and confined to the Thebaid hinterland3 <ith Gnostic thought in particular9 one is struc0 by the disparity between the -ag 4ammadi corpus and patristic accounts of the Ale2andrian teachers and their disciples3 +t is compelling in this regard to see that these late= period Gnostic te2ts in the main support the o"erall thesis herein ad"anced3 To be sure9 some of these te2ts can be dated much earlier than their time of burial9 and others can be assigned pro"isional locations in )gyptC howe"er9 a number of interpretati"e problems pre"ent us from really understanding who collected these te2ts and why9 and most importantly what redacti"e processes went into their final formulation3 The salient problem here is that9 with a few notable e2ceptions9 the tractates buried in the Gebel al Tarif in general do not manifest the high le"el of 4ellenistic Gnosis which pea0ed in Ale2andria o"er two centuries earlier3 <e ha"e no reason to doubt the general e"idence of Patristic e"idence in this regard which could not help but admire the rhetorical s0ills of *alentinus while attempting to refute him9 or the seminal influence and sophistication of Basileides as found in the polemics of 4ippolytus and +renaeus3 Iet we do not ha"e one tractate which can be conclusi"ely lin0ed to any of the maDor Gnostic figures that we 0now of in that city3 +t is ironic indeed that we owe much to the patristic writers for ha"ing any glimpses at all of te2tual Ale2andria in the first few centuries3 And so the first tas0 underta0en was an attempt to establish the social milieu of Gnosis in )gypt3 A second essential labour demonstrated the te2tual foundations in earlier phases of )gyptian religious history for the rise of Gnosis in late antiquity3 +t remains to be as0ed how modern literary=critical theory can aid us in our understanding of the literary output of the )gyptian Gnostics3 A main concern + ha"e de"eloped herein de"ol"es from )dward aid?s "iews on @orientalismA and + am targeting the impact this discursi"e dynamic has had in the fields of Christian ,rigins and Classical tudies in particular9 two disciplines which e2ert a decisi"e influence upon the rather anaemic field of @Gnostic tudiesA3 These two subsets of the orientalist approach9 insofar as they can be seen to e2ist in these fields9 are identified by their discursi"e consistencies9 and many of aid?s larger indictments ring true3 The orient9 for the orientalist9 displays a disdain for mental discipline9 philosophical concepts9 and rational interpretation3 +ts "ery language is seen to be inferior9 and its literary output is not to be ta0en all
%L;G

Reymond9 @Ale2andria and Memphis9A %;3

277
that seriously3 The orient needs to be rescued $by the orientalist( from its alienating otherness9 its strangeness< stagnation9 and obscurity3%L;' The full significance of oriental @syncretismsA is discarded in a series of reductions and transformations which entrench the pre= eminence of occidental religious and philosophical modes of thought o"er orientalE @history9 in such a unionA9 as aid notes9 @is radically attenuated if not banishedA3%L;J <hat ta0es o"er is a rhetorical momentum generated within the discourse itself9 a self=referentiality that deflects non= orientalist9 or simply unorthodo2 perspecti"es as a matter of course3 <hat poses as science is in fact a discourse and9 as aid obser"es9 this system of 0nowledge is @less a place than a toposA9 a te2tual set of references9 characteristics9 that originate in a quotation9 a citation from someone?s wor0 on the orient9 etc3%L;H My identification of Christian ,rigins and Classical tudies as the main obfuscators in this regard9 gi"es rise to a literary=critical concern raised by 1oucaultE @the author functionA3 All of the hegemonic concerns of orientalist bias are at play here9 for 1oucault turns the optic around and notes that the author is simply @not thereA but is a function of the characteristics of our discourse9 of necessity operating within the play of signs with which we empower it3%L;: The more general concerns of orientalism can thus be focused onto one sharp literary=critical point and the wedge can be effecti"ely dri"en in hereE if the whole notion of authorship is in large measure spurious9 or is at least a construct internally generated by scholarly opinion without effecti"e recourse to social history9 what is left with respect to the @Gnostic phenomenonAS + do not wish to push 1oucault?s criticism beyond a certain point9 for while the agenda of orientalism often operate against a bac0drop of authorial ficti"eness $and + would maintain that allowing an author to remain a cipher itself powerfully contributes to authorial ficti"eness(9 + ha"e attempted to create a psychological and political profile of the Gnostic author9 especially with respect to the Gnostic deconstructi"e approach to language9 but also in terms of a didactic conser"atism lin0ed with the )gyptian priestly classes9 as we ha"e seen3 +n short9 + refer rhetoric bac0 to its practical effects9 in particular the en"ironment within which it was originally generated3 The social and political reality of the Gnostic rhetor must be ascertained if we are to understand Gnostic rhetoric3 As George teiner puts itE An informed9 a"id awareness of the history of the rele"ant language9 of the transforming energies of feeling which ma0e of synta2 a record of social being9 is indispensable3 ,ne must master the temporal and local setting of one?s te2t9 the moorings which attach e"en
%L;' %L;J %L;H

aid9 2rientalism< %;%3 +bid39 ;'H3

+bid>9 %::3 + would note in passing the recent and surprisingly lengthy wor09 Nag (ammadi -e:ts and the Bi=leA A Synopsis and 0nde:9 ed3 Craig A )"ans9 Robert /3 <ebb9 and Richard A <iebe $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&G( which generates an impression of strong biblical connections throughout the Gnostic corpus3 4owe"er9 upon closer e2amination one notices that the methodology employed is self= admittedly loose3 +n terms of influence between scripture and specific passages from the -ag 4ammadi corpus9 the authors spea0 of a two=tiered form of appraisal based upon @reasonable probability9A or @possibilityAE @The forms of influence between the te2ts may be quite di"erse3 <hen citing a particular scriptural te2t we are not necessarily indicating that a -ag 4ammadi author or redactor was ma0ing deliberate allusion to it3 1or e2ample9 the influence on the mind of the writer may ha"e been only subconsciousA $2i2(3 <hile the editors admit the possibility of mediation through other traditions or te2t9 redactors9 or translators9 + would point out an ob"ious problem with an approach that is not concerned with the possibility of re"erse influence9 that Biblical scripture itself might be drawn from earlier Gnostic te2ts3 Michel 1oucault9 @<hat is an Author9A in Language< "ounter@+emory< 4ractice9 trans3 D313 Bouchard and 3 imon $+thaca9 -ew Ior0E Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&::(3

%L;:

27P
the most idiosyncratic of poetic e2pressions to the surrounding idiom3 1amiliarity with an author9 the 0ind of resti"e intimacy which demands 0nowledge of all his wor09 of the best and the botched9 of 3u%enilia and opus posthumum9 will facilitate understanding at any gi"en point3%L;F + spea0 of @a psychological and political profileA of the Gnostic author as we ha"e no clear lin0s between te2t and author in the Gnostic array9 with the e2ception of Mani9 although in the conte2t of )gypt this9 too9 is problematic3 ,f necessity we must settle for a generalised bipolar Gnostic imago9 one that perpetuates )gyptian religiosity in the contrary modes of Archaic and 4ellenistic Gnosis3 <e ha"e situated the Gnostics in terms of the social history of the country they li"ed and died in3 <e must concur with 1oucault and note that the fire that dri"es rhetoric is essentially se:ual and political or9 to echo 5enneth Bur0eE @rhetoric is what things will do to us and for usA3%L;& <hether one is writing a no"el or @spinning outA the idea for a bomb9 there is no difference in principleE @each is but trac0ing down and carrying out the resources of his terminologyA3%LGL + would therefore as0 what the Gnostic author trying to do with language in a political light3 1or Antonio Gramsci9 hors de com=at following incarceration at the hands of fascism9 pragmatism equals the political9 and the political will stri"es towards consensus and hegemony9 either through liberating leadership9 or repressi"e coercion3 The te2t is political9 embedded in the larger array of political te2ts9 and it either tantalises the indi"idual?s will to be free9 or it signals the first tentacles of the new ideology within which sOhe is condemned to be subDugated3 +t is all political9 e"en allowing for the most "igorous emphasis upon indi"iduality9 for the indi"idual qua indi"idual e2ists only in relation to othersE That ethical @impro"ementA is purely indi"idual is an illusion and an errorE the synthesis of the elements constituting indi"iduality is @indi"idualA9 but it cannot be realised and de"eloped without an acti"ity directed outward9 modifying e2ternal relations both with nature and9 in "arying degrees9 with other men333 1or this reason one can say that man is essentially @politicalA since it is through the acti"ity of transforming and consciously directing other men that man realises his @humanityA9 his @human natureA3%LG% An Ale2andrian Gnostic9 at least following Diocletian?s edict against the Manichaeans in ;&: C3)39 and a century later with the decree of Theodosius against anything autochthonic9 would ha"e appreciated the Gramscian perspecti"e on hegemony9 and the abo"e stance on indi"idualism is tacitly contained in the Gnostic myth of Anthropos3 The @hegemonicA and political will ob"ious in Archaic Gnosis is to be also found in the refle2i"e indirections of 4ellenistic Gnosis3 Reduced to the most basic rhetorical le"el9 both e2hibit a need to persuade9 and one might say that those Gnostic tractates that manifest a spirit of re"olt against traditional forms of religious 0nowledge were written by a disinherited class of intellectuals in an occupied country3 + draw in Gramsci to illustrate a similarity in their respecti"e historical conditions9 more essentially to underline a consequent perspecti"e upon 0nowledge that both employ3 Theirs is
%L;F

George teiner9 After Ba=elA Aspects of Language and -ranslation $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:J(9 ;J3 5enneth Bur0e< 4ermanence and "hangeA An Anatomy of 4urpose $Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&F'(9 ;;3 5enneth Bur0e9 @Pragmatism9Ain "ommunicationA "oncepts and 4erspecti%es9 ed3 /ee Thayler $<ashington9 D3C3E partan Boo0s9 %&H:(9 GG%3 Vuintin 4oare and Geoffrey -owell mith9 eds39 Selections from the 4rison Note=ooks of Antonio )ramsci3 $/ondonE /awrence and <ishart9 %&:%(9 GHL3

%L;&

%LGL

%LG%

27,
not specifically a re"olt against traditional 0nowledge per se9 rather it is an implacable critique of the authority9 or hegemony9 that presumes to empower 0nowledge in particular ways3 +t is this realisation that prompts re"aluationE The realisation of a hegemonic apparatus9 in so far as it creates a new ideological terrain9 determines a reform of consciousness and of methods of 0nowledgeE it is a fact of 0nowledge9 a philosophical fact3%LG; + ha"e raised the problems that are to be associated with this pragmatic @referring bac0A of discourse to its historical situatedness9 for while the moti"ations of the heresiological polemicist are clear enough gi"en the sort of te2tual red flags the Gnostics were wa"ing9 not enough has been said about Gnostic polemical intent in a political and social conte2t3 Bur0e?s essentially deconstructi"e approach to the actual meaning of words is tempered by his focus upon what language does9 and this constant re"ersion to the pragmatic realm falls in line with the concerns of aid and 1oucault about the se2ual and political heat of history9 endlessly generating te2ts3 As early as the second century C3)3 this was the percei"ed distinction between orthodo2y and heresy9 a clash of attitudes "ery particular to this time and place3 Archaic Gnosis manifests a larger )gyptian @intransigenceA sto0ed by a repressi"e foreign regimeC 4ellenistic Gnosis9 in addition9 suggests an Ale2andrian poetic disdain for the authoritarian discourse of Church and tateE it is the clash of a fluidly mythopoeic and intuiti"e Graeco=)gyptian hybrid religiosity9 with @the stern9 masculine9 laconic tenor of Roman cultureA3%LGG <e can gi"e these "oices bac0 to the author through enucleation of the hermetic Gree0 world of Gnosis that scholarship has erected9 and thus understand the plethora of )gyptian influences that are shot through the phenomenon of Gnosis3 This mo"es us yet closer to apprehending what sort of person the )gyptian Gnostic actually was3 This architectonic9 most especially as it de"ol"es upon this construct of what 1oucault termed the @author functionA in the dynamics of discourse9 is a critical issue to address3 <hile aid?s critique is effecti"e9 especially as it targets the more grotesque abuses of te2tual $mis(appropriation9 one cannot pretend that a pure discourse completely free from orientalising assumptions is possible3 This is too much the hysterically pluralist agenda now current9 where all criticism and debate o"er the worth of differences is effecti"ely stifled by the -ewspea0 of politically correct inclusi"ism3 As Bloom puts itE @+nterpretation is implicitly hierarchical9 and cannot proceed without a usurpation of authorityA3%LG' <e are at least aware9 therefore9 of our own limitations3 + see the Gnostic phenomenon in )gypt as being essentially oriental9 as pagan9 specifically )gyptian with respect to many of its deepest precepts3 + see it both as an a"ant=garde literary genre fostered by the oriental yearning to be free from historical bondageC yet also ad"ancing tendentious orthodo2ies in the purest sense of the word3 +t is no coincidence that this side of the Gnostic equation was the most successful in ad"ancing its phantasmagorical cosmologiesE Manichaeism carried the
%LG; %LGG

+bid39 GHJ=HH3

teiner9 After Ba=el9 F'3 <alter Bauer9 2rthodo:y and (eresy in Earliest "hristianity9 re"3 ed39 trans3 and eds39 Robert A3 5raft and Gerhard 5rodel $%&GGC reprint9 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&:%(9 ;GL9 who himself powerfully critiques the scholastic orthodo2=heresy split assigned to this time period9 cannot resist presenting the Rome=Ale2andria split in traditional orientalist garbE @Rome possessed the most tightly=0nit9 perhaps the only more or less reliable anti=heretical maDority9 because it was furthest remo"ed from the oriental danger Bone and in addition was by nature and custom least inclined or able to yield to seemingly fantastic oriental ways of thin0ing and oriental emotions that becloud clear thought3 The sober sense of the Roman was not the proper seed=bed for yrian or )gyptian syncretism3A 4arold Bloom3 AgonA -owards a -heory of $e%isionism $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F;(9 'G3

%LG'

2P5
,riental banner of Gnosis forward in open conflict across the entire Mediterranean basin and was successful far beyond the means or desires of its more refle2i"e Gnostic cousins3 @,rientalA is not an e2clusi"e term9 no more so than is the appellati"e @4ellenisticA in this time=period3 The discrete pictures of occidental Gree0 and Roman9 and oriental )gyptian9 yrian9 and Persian9 ha"e traditionally formed the outer panels of a te2tual triptych9 one which can be seen to be fore"er tending inwards9 and bac0 outwards9 from the larger syncretistic collage in the centre3 The te2tual infrastructures mirror the social as + ha"e tried to show9 themsel"es offering up a picture of blurred distinctions3 To insist upon sharpening up the lines here and there is to miss the point of the entire can"as9 drifting instead to the more familiar polarities3 The basis of Christian orthodo2y in the second century following the passing of a non=fulfilled apocalypticism embody precisely this reactionary and re"erse mo"ement to the polarised occident from the central religious heterodo2 spirit of the times3 The writings of Celsus $ca> %:F C3)3(9 one of the "ery few anti=Christian @paganA philosophical sources to ha"e sur"i"ed the boo0 burnings of early Roman Christianity $this due to the fact that his writings were embedded in ,rigen(9 e2coriates9 lampoons9 and ultimately logically refutes Christian thought in his masterwor0 2n the -rue 9octrine> Celsus spea0s for the entire heterodo2y of the pagan world in his reaction to Christian ideologyE <hy should we not worship godsS + mean9 if it is accepted that all of nature > e"erything in the world > operates according to the will of God and that nothing wor0s contrary to his purposes9 then it must also be accepted that the angels9 the demons9 heroes > e"erything in the uni"erse > are subDect to the will of the great God who rules o"er all 333 The notion that one cannot ser"e many masters is the sort of thing one would e2pect of the race of Christians > an eccentric position9 but one perhaps predictable of a people who ha"e cut themsel"es off from the rest of ci"ilisation3%LGJ +t need hardly be stressed that without the e2istence of an e2clusi"ist orthodo2y there can be no heresy3 ome ;LLL pages of @GnosticA manuscript ha"e come down to us thus far3 More interesting than the obsessi"e wor0 done on a small group of selected te2ts by a small group of specialists in a few fields9 is the e2clusion of the maDority and indifference to a Sit, that has been left a "irtual "oid3 aid?s larger point is that we allow oursel"es to be silent about the actual historical and social world $of the ,riental( that we ha"e appropriated3 Te2tuality has been surgically remo"ed from the circumstances that engendered it in the first instance9 and so we ha"e a 1oucaultian @structure of punishmentA erected about those authors that ha"e been made to inhabit the orientalist panopticon3 They are obser"ed and transformed9 disciplined and reorganised9 by the applied scholarly dynamic of consensus3 +nsofar as their )gyptian "oice is not being allowed to spea0 to us9 we are presented with an alarmingly ficti"e author function in Gnostic thought9 one that is self=disciplining to follow 1oucault?s model3 This is interesting9 because the implicit 4ellenistic Gnostic deconstructionist stance towards language was itself arrayed against hierarchy9 canonicity9 the notion of complete te2tual authority placed upon the unimpeachable word > precisely the @politicalA contentiousness apparent in modern literary=critical theory9 especially among the poststructuralists3 4ow many traditionalist )nglish professors now don the hat of +renaeus and damn the young Gnostic @deconstructionistsA in their midstS This has e"erything to do with a percei"ed tearing up of the hallowed and respectful approach to te2ts9 in fa"our of a pneumatic artistic integrity wherein Tradition and his Rules > the perennial @shh\A librarian > is 0ic0ed out the door and the te2ts mythopoeically reappropriated3 ,f all the religious groups to ha"e had their true characteristics blanched by the orientalising author=function9 the Gnostics are the most unli0ely to remain
%LGJ

4offman< "elsus< 2n the -rue 9octrine< %J3

2P+
quiescent3 They appear to ha"e understood e2ceedingly well the profound ethical and practical moti"ations that shape mythopoeic and ideological enterprises3 @ReappropriationA on the Gnostic side of the equation can be seen to be a euphemism for a radical and antithetical in"ersion3 Bloom?s notion of @misprisionA denotes an apparent contempt and failure to appreciate the "alue of somethingC in legal terms it is the spirit of wilful felony or treason3%LGH As this spirit can be seen to imbue a religious or philosophical stance9 we note that it has its roots in s0eptical thought3 +f proposition A is put forward9 it is necessary that its antithesis9 B9 also be put forward to allow for a suspension of Dudgement9 to allow one to remain a true seeker< which is the correct etymological root of skepsis3 +f 4egel is currently @inA and chopenhauer @outA9 then Gnostic misprision will demand that the re"erse become the case in the Gnostic @shadowA department3 +f (ow )reen was my &alley is on the literature curriculum and de ade?s 2ne (undred 9ays of Sodom is off $not Dust off9 but ruled to be off(9 then it must be brought in3%LG: Gnostic re"ersal required that proposition B be fully and mythopoeically e2plored9 and so if the sna0e is e"il in the orthodo2 "iew then the Gnostic myth will ha"e the sna0e as a sal"ific figureC if .ahweh is the upreme Deity in the ,ld Testament9 then in the Gnostic "iew he is but an arrogant9 boastful9 and capricious Demiurge3 As .onas puts itE +nstead of ta0ing o"er the "alue=system of the traditional myth9 it YGnostic thoughtZ pro"es the deeper @0nowledgeA by re"ersing the roles of good and e"il9 sublime and base9 blest and accursed9 found in the original3 +t tries9 not to demonstrate agreement9 but to shoc0 by blatantly sub"erting the meaning of the most firmly established9 and preferably also the most re"ered9 elements of tradition3 The rebellious tone of this type of allegory cannot be missed9 and it therefore is one of the e2pressions of the re"olutionary position which Gnosticism occupies in late classical culture3%LGF The re"olutionaryOpolitical attributes of 4ellenistic Gnosis indicate a willing in"ol"ement in historical process9 albeit indirectly9 from a certain lofty remo"e9 for Gnostic misprision can be seen to be a polemical throwing down of the glo"e9 the act of a literary pro%ocateur3 +n this it was much more e2asperating to their opponents to engage in a guerrilla= war replete with underco"er @Christian=GnosticsA and te2tual TroDan=horses3 As opposed to setting up a counter=dogma9 a clear drawing of battle=lines and battle plans in the grandiose Manichaean manner9 the Gnostics enfiladed9 raided te2tual @supply dumpsA and formed a fifth column within the midst of orthodo2y3 The Gnostics refused the role of @early Church theologiansAC witness the departure from Rome of *alentinus who perhaps belatedly came to realise9 only after Dourneying to the heart of orthodo2y9 the perspicacity of his opponents in recognising the underlying oriental alienness of his theogony and9 as a consequence9 the full implications of political hierarchy3 The Gnostics also refused the well=respected authority of philosophical discourse and thus maintained a boundary between themsel"es and occidental thought3 This mythopoeic rim remains difficult to penetrate9 for the root cause of this last e"olution of )gyptian traditional thought9 burning its brightest against the dar0ness of a Roman night9 lies in their utter disenchantment with historical process itself3 The theogonic foundations of their theologies9 )gyptian both in breadth and depth as + ha"e tried to show9 also display a
%LGH

4arold Bloom9 @/ying Against TimeE Gnosis9 Poetry9 Criticism9A in -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism9 "ol %9 ed3 Bentley /ayton $/eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FL(9 J:=:;3 A "iew espoused by Camille Paglia9 Se:ual 4ersonae $-ew Ior0E *intage Boo0s9 %&&%(9 a misprisionism perhaps not unconnected to the ac0nowledged influences of 4arold Bloom3 .onas9 -he )nostic $eligion9 &;3

%LG:

%LGF

2P2
certain 0inship with their conser"ati"e te2tual forbears that goes beyond all such theological specifics and is to be seen in terms of their te2t=obsessi"eness3 The )gyptian glyphs on the great Ptolemaic temples of the time display all of the didactic authoritarianism one might e2pect with respect to a world="iew quintessentially @hegemonicA3 +n contrast to this the 4ellenistic Gnostics were rogue intellectuals9 "irtual Ba0unins of the time whose socialist utopia was the ideal of idealsE a pleroma located supernally3 And yet e"en the most radical mythopoeic thin0er9 wedded to the heterodo2 renaissance of Ale2andrian pluralism9 was still obliged to operate within the mythos9 within the practical realm3 <e ma0e a gra"e mista0e oursel"es in idealising the so=called anti=historicism of 4ellenistic Gnosis9 for these tractates operated politically9 in spite of all disclaimers9 and a sympathetic "iew of their message had distinct9 doubtless anticipated9 political consequences3 ,ne could hardly see0 to find a more suitable bac0drop for this mo"ement than the troublesome and anarchic intellectual centre of Ale2andria under Roman rule3 )"en so9 the Gnostic dilemma with respect to language and time is e2cruciating9 for language is mendaciously @archonticA and the irony is that e"en a re"olution to deconstruct the hegemonic must use hegemonic means9 e"en presupposing that the goal will be that last historical=moment when the political process finally enters the pleroma of hegemony=free e2istence9 presumably the non=historical > the dt eternal attained through the tra"ails of nhh e2istence3 <ith Gnostic thought we are presented with the fusion of incompatibles > a metaphysical idealism whose hands are ine"itably dirtied with the indi"idual will to power in earthly terms3 )2plicit to the Gnostic temperament was the "iew of history as tyranny9 yet in contradistinction to the radical Manichaean message9 the unfolding of the lower realm9 and hence the Gnostic role therein9 was seen to be theogonically necessary3 This9 too9 is quintessentially )gyptian9 in effect requiring a repositioning of 4orusE the transposed and hypostasised )gyptian 0ingship becomes the great supernal boundary of Gnostic thought3 Beneath this )gypt now endured the dar0 flood of historical oppression9 mirroring the e"en deeper abyss of -,I- below3 chopenhauer saw the Gill9 a curious -un=li0e ground of all being9 as the originator of e"erything that is9 also noting that this amoral impulse9 this @endless blind stri"ingA was only self=consciously aware in human0ind3 And so it is here that Gramsci?s distinction comes to the foreE it is all hegemonic9 but there was seen to be a liberating upward dri"e of indi"idualistic humanism9 fore"er the accomplishment of the few with @antithetical 0nowledgeA $Gramsci?s intellectuals were the Gnostic pneumatics(9 for the rest the downward fall of ideology dar0ened by deep ethical failures9 mired in the entropic grasp of history9 the emulous (eimarmene3 The oppressi"e te2tual weight of the downward Gramscian dri"e is symbolised in the time of the Gnostics by the edicts issued against them by the Roman state9 and the subsequent burning of the libraries in Ale2andria by Christian mobs led by the infamous archbishop Theophilus ca> 'LL C3)3 The burning of these untold thousands of priceless documents at this time represents a disaster of the first order for the human mind9 the repercussions of which are doubtless still with us3 The Ale2andrine renaissance began and ended with the librariesC in this the )gyptian preoccupation with the <ord9 theogonically melded to the heterodo2 nature of 4ellenistic Gnosis at large9 ended at the e2act time the temples were shut down3 Moreo"er9 beyond the phenomena of 4ellenistic Gnosis in )gypt there e2isted the supporting medium of Graeco=Roman heterodo2y now entering its own te2tual )*tterd1mmerung3 This @pluralism of the mindA9 li0e an electrical current9 coursed between the posts of "arious libraries charged with an assemblage of documents numbering hundreds of thousands of wor0s3 The "ast maDority of these priceless scrolls went up in flames by the end of the fourth centuryE !n"erified assertions that this or that library was consumed by fire often refer to successi"e conflagrations at a single site3 This is true of both Ale2andria and Antioch>

2P4
where the Museum9 we are told9 went up in flames under Tiberius and again under .o"ian3 Traditions of this 0ind were confirmed by the melancholic e2periences of war waged by Christianity against the old culture and its sanctuariesE which meant9 against the libraries333 ur"eying this series of foundations9 refoundations and disasters9 we follow a thread that lin0s together the "arious9 and mostly "ain9 efforts of the 4ellenistic=Roman world to preser"e its boo0s3 Ale2andria is the starting point and the prototypeC its fate mar0s the ad"ent of catastrophe9 and is echoed in Pergamum9 Antioch9 Rome9 Athens3%LG& Gnostic thought in )gypt appeared at the "ery end of an incredibly "ast period of independent religious e2pression3 +n no other ci"ilisation is this concern with the word quite so apparent as in the ancient )gyptian3 The destruction of temple and library9 more effecti"ely the criminalising of those who would wor0 within those precincts9 demarcates an abrupt end to a period of fusion begun some se"en=hundred years earlier by the Ptolemies3 + now reach the point where + might ta0e my hermeneutic concerns to the tas0 at handE how does one read these inscriptions that confront one e"erywhere in )gypt9 on almost e"ery clear surface of an )gyptian temple9 forming the most compelling fusion of a linguistic and structural architectonic e"er attained by the human mindS surely any hermeneutic de"eloped here can be applied to )gyptian Gnostic te2tsS The )gyptian Gnostics appeared within a medium that was obsessed with the literary9 e"en before the formation of the philological crucible of Ale2andria3 There are two responses to these questions and it raises the issue of linguistic theory9 specifically whether translation between different languages is possible3 ,ne pole would deem this enterprise to be futile9 at least in terms of accomplishing a real te2tual cognisance that bears upon the intended and achie"ed rhetorical results peculiar to the time and place of the te2tE @what passes for translation is a con"ention of appro2imate analogies9 a rough= cast similitude9 Dust tolerable when the two rele"ant cultures are cognate9 but altogether spurious when remote tongues and far=remo"ed sensibilities are in questionA3%L'L The other posits the underlying uni"ersality of human speech9 attainable in spite of surface differencesE @translation is realisable precisely because those deep=seated uni"ersals9 genetic9 historical9 social9 from which all grammars deri"e can be located and recognised as operati"e in e"ery human idiom9 howe"er singular or biBarre its superficial formsA3%L'% + ha"e ob"iously tended more towards the latterC howe"er9 it must be said that the limitations on our situating specific authors and te2ts and the social=history that generated them9 the appalling lac0 of e"idence out of Ale2andria9 must ine"itably lea"e us in an interpretati"e gray Bone3 ,ne can widen the optic indefinitely9 incorporating a "ast socio=historical and te2tual basis for one?s hermeneutic so as to attain "arious contrasts9 but at some point closure is requiredC in this case it is the o"erall thesis that the proponents of Graeco=Roman Gnosis were heirs to the te2t=obsessed epiphany of )gyptian religiosity3 4owe"er9 this epiphany9 in the sense of a moment resonant with higher human meaning9 also turned upon its own basis for te2tual authority3 <e again raise the importance and difficulty in"ol"ed in de"eloping a hermeneutic for a group of writers who were often ironically disposed towards language itself3 +t is clear that the Gnostics appreciated the linguistic reflection of the cosmos into a lower demiurgic realm of false stories and a higher realm of true insight3 These were drawn out directly from the ancient )gyptian understanding of the split nature of eternity9 as we ha"e seen3 <e shall ne"er directly hear from those Gnostics who felt that the linguistic medium was entirely mendacious for
%LG& %L'L %L'%

Canfora9 -he &anished Li=rary9 %&%=&;9 %&H3 teiner9 After Ba=el9 :'3 +bid39 :G3

2Pob"ious reasons3 4owe"er9 the large amount of te2tual e"idence that we possess demonstrates that the Gnostics were prepared to use the medium of the word in spite of the problems associated with it3 There is no mista0ing the irony in -he -hunderA 4erfect +ind when the female spea0er launches into an e2tended first=person barrage of o2ymoronic deconstructi"ismsC e3g3 @+ am the goddess and the whore333 + am merciful and cruel333 it is + who spea0s and + who listensA9 etc3 <e are entering here into an area of @literatureA that embodies a fusion of philosophical and poetic modes of thought9 what 4arold Bloom calls @poetic metaphysicsA3 Bloom?s definition of the @strong poetA fi2es itself upon the Gnostic as e2emplar of @one who will not tolerate words that inter"ene between himself and the <ordA3%L'; @<ordsA9 small w9 are incipiently mendacious9 bound up as they are in the phenomenological flu2 of demiurgic time3 +f the Gnostic rhetor was obliged to pic0 up the demiurgic pen sOhe would deconstruct and in"ert te2tual authority by way of compensation9 and would attempt9 as Bataille puts it9 to e2press a @so"ereign "alueA9 e"en one compromised by words9 in the understanding of e"il3E /iterature is either the essential or nothing3 + belie"e that the )"il==an acute form of )"il== which it e2presses9 has a so"ereign "alue for us3 But this concept does not e2clude moralityE on the contrary9 it demands a Thypermorality?3 /iterature is communication3 Communication requires loyalty3 A rigorous morality results from complicity in the 0nowledge of )"il9 which is the basis of intense communication3 /iterature is not innocent3 +t is guilty and should admit itself so3%L'G There are many philosophical consequences and nuances to be drawn out from Gnostic thought9 not the least of which is their indirect outlining of phenomenological concerns3 The @act of e2perienceA in which the historical is apprehended gi"es the Gnostic pause9 clearly anticipating 4usserl?s attempt to reach @a really pure self=e2perience and purely psychical dataA3%L'' 1or the Gnostic9 the phenomenal world was an admi2ture of demiurgic a priori intentionality9 and percei"ing Anthropos3 Against all philosophies of obDecti"ity9 the Gnostic9 along with 4usserl9 holds up the possibility of an antithetical self that cannot be contained by historical process3 The antithetical spirit is to be found in Phenomenology?s abiding focus upon a hidden transcendent subDecti"ityE The transcendent subDecti"ity9 which for want of language we can only call again9 @+ myselfA9 @we oursel"esA cannot be found under the attitude of psychological or natural science9 being no part at all of the obDecti"e world9 but that subDecti"e conscious life itself9 wherein the world and all its content is made for @usA9 for @meA3 <e that are9 indeed9 men9 spiritually and bodily9 e2isting in the world9 are9 therefore9 @appearancesA unto oursel"es9 parcel of what @weA ha"e constituted9 pieces of the significance @weA ha"e made3 The @+A and @weA which we apprehend9 presuppose a hidden @+A and @weA to whom they are @presentA3%L'J Gnostic phenomenology arose from their critique of a demonised historical process9 whereas 4usserl?s concerns are with the conundrum of a transcendent subDecti"e intentionality
%L';

4arold Bloom9 @Poetry9 Repression9 Re"isionism9A in "ritical -heory Since BDE69 eds3 4aBard Adams and /eory earle $TallahasseeE 1lorida tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH(9 GGJ3 Georges Bataille9 Literature and E%il9 trans3 Alastair 4amilton $%&J:C reprint9 -ew Ior0E !riBen Boo0s9 %&:G(9 from the preface3 )dmund 4usserl9 @Phenomenology9A in "ritical -heory Since BDE69 HJ&3 +bid39 HH;3

%L'G

%L'' %L'J

2P.
underwriting @realityA3 These differences9 howe"er9 frame a methodology that is startlingly contiguous3 Both "iews9 whether @religiouslyA or @philosophicallyA inspired9 implicitly attac0 the equanimity with which we accept what is supposedly obDecti"e beyond oursel"es3 That said9 Phenomenology is bede"illed by its attempts to define a science based upon an enhanced subDecti"ism that would seem to mur0ily de"our its own presuppositions3 1or 4ellenistic Gnosis9 ha"ing attained a state of super=absorption with respect to ancient )gyptian theogonic models9 Gree0 Philosophy and Rhetoric9 its gnosis must transcend all such pedagogical plateau23 Their conundrum arose from the una"oidable establishment of their own te2tual authority9 e"en with an a"owed aim of o"erthrowing all such hegemonies3 That the language9 the sacred sounds of gnosis< can accomplish this in the midst of archontic hegemony9 is ultimately an ahistorical9 non=te2tual mystery9 spo0en here by the female Gnostic godhead in the -rimorphic 4rotennoiaE + spo0e==+==with the Archons and Authorities9 for + went beneath their language and told the Mysteries to my own9 a 4idden Mystery $through which( the fetters and sleep of )ternity were dissol"ed3 $-4C N+++9 % '%3;'=;&(%L'H This is a new le"el of rhetoric far remo"ed from the $hetorica ad Ale:andrum9 supposedly written by Ana2imenes in the fourth or third century B3C3)3%L':9 for it affects disdain for the sort of utilitarian sophistic of traditional argumentation9 presuming to rise abo"e the amoral dri"es of pure persuasion to the hyper=morality of gnosis> Gnosis is the radical and mystical shattering of an all=encompassing te2tuality3 Derrida was therefore rather @anti=GnosticA9 perhaps disingenuously per"erse9 with il ny a pas de hors@te:te9 as was the ophist Gorgias in the sense that the moti"e and aim of these thin0ers was to @deconstructA Philosophy itself9 not to philosophise3 Perhaps9 more pragmatically9 one can reduce it to a no"el attempt to attain stature through rebellion as opposed to con"entional procedure3 4ellenistic Gnosis9 as a literary phenomenon9 is to be chronologically situated between the two literary enfants terri=le%L'F9 and such li0ewise contrary players in the Gnostic mo"ement in )gypt would ha"e sub"erted the orthodo2y of Archaic Gnosis as readily as they did Rome=sponsored Christianity3 Iet deconstruction is essentially reconstruction9 as the possibility of a rigorous nihilism in epistemic terms cannot be ta0en seriously as an end in itself3 Gnostic sub"ersion was a means to an end9 and it defines their percei"ed alienness in this sense9 as well9 perhaps9 as a need on their part to be seen as alien3 Their obscurity9 mythopoeic e2tra"agance9 and historical affronts to Roman rule9 both political and ecclesial9 were deliberate9 the "ery message9 at least in part9 of the same rhetorical medium which generated -he Acts of the 4agan +artyrs9 or the 4ermetic Asclepius 3 Behind such re"olutionary posturings9 howe"er9 are the traditional )gyptian aspirations for the sal"ation of the soul9 and we cannot but belie"e that the Gnostic perpetuation and re"i"ification of the ancient oriental emanationist theogonies were genuinely held to3 The Gnostics in )gypt were9 afterall9 heirs to a millennia of religious thought focused9 li0e no other before or since9 upon a word=empowered afterlife3 )gyptian Gnostic thought could not help but build upon and embellish the te2tual foundations of this antiquityE schooled in )gyptian wisdom and ha"ing learnt such wisdom from them9 they bore this sort of fruit3

%L'H %L': %L'F

Coptic transcription from N(S< "ol3 NN*+++9 '%'3 <3R3 Roberts9 9emetrius on Style $CambridgeE At the !ni"ersity Press9 %&L;(9 %%3 And Derrida certainly ac0nowledged his debt to the ophistic mo"ement3

2PK
"ppendi/ " " (urvey of Gnostic rimary (ources, non,)hristian and )hristian, as cited by Gnostic (tudies
G(%L'& )G%LJL !$%LJG %G%LJ'

"(G .%LJ%

#H G%LJ;

+. Gnostic *on$!hristian) ,n the ,rigin of the <orld YGLZ )ugnostos Y;LZ The Para3 of hem Y'&Z The G teles of eth Y&Z 8ostrianos Y%G; $=(Z Thought of -orea YGZ Marsanes YHFZ )2egesis on the oul Y%LZ Apocalypse of Adam Y;%Z Allogenes Y;'Z 2. Gnostic (2 Marginal !hristian Glosses) Boo0s of .eu Y&'Z Pistis ophia YGJHZ !ntitled te2t YH;Z 4ypostasis of the Archons Y%%Z Tripartite Tractate YF:Z Gospel of the )gyptians Y;&Z ;nd Treatise of Great eth Y;%Z *alentinian )2p3 Y;:Z Trimorphic Protennoia Y%JZ 4. Gnostic (ith Enhanced !hristian Elements) Gospel of Truth Y;:Z Apocryphon of .ohn YG;Z ophia of .esus Christ Y;&Z MelchiBide0 Y;:Z -. Gnostic !hristocentric) Gospel of Thomas Y%&Z Gospel of Philip YGJZ
%L'&

L L L & %& L L L %; :

% ' J L L L L % %J L

%: : F %L %: : G G & &

%' F ; & %J % H %L G: %%

J % ; ; %L J % ;% ; L

GG %; & G J % ; : ;; G

L L L %% L %& & L %' L

L L L % L L L L J L

G %% L %: ;& ;& ' % F L

H G G FG : ;% % % JH L

L G L J& %& F G G F L

G %; L ;L : & ; ' J L

%' ;F L L ;G ;F

L G G L : L

;G :F %' ' J %'

%%; :J %' J JH G

; JG J % %L J'

%G '% & ; G; %F

/ayton< -he )nostic Scriptures3 +ndicators are number of pages de"oted to wor09 either in commentary or actual translation3 )dwin M3 Iamauchi 9 4re@"hristian )nosticismA A Sur%ey of the 4roposed E%idence9 ;nd ed3 $Grand RapidsE Ba0er Boo0 4ouse9 %&FG(3 +ndicators are number of pages de"oted to wor09 either in commentary or actual translation3 PPtrement< A Separate )od> +ndicators are number of pages de"oted to wor03 Nag (ammadi< )nosticism< P Early "hristianity9 eds3 C3<3 4edric0 and Robert 4odgson9 .r3 $Peabody9 MAE 4endric0son Publishers9 %&FH(3 +ndicators are number of lines per te2t listing in the inde23 5ing9 ed9> 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism> +ndicators are number of citations in wor03 Bianchi9 Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile< BDEE3 +ndicators are number of page citations3

%LJL

%LJ% %LJ;

%LJG %LJ'

2P7
G( )G "(G. #HG !$ %G

Boo0 of Thom3 the Contender Y:Z Dialogue of the a"iour Y;: $=(Z Apocryphon of .ames Y%HZ %stO;nd Apoc3 of .ames YG&Z Apoc3 of Peter Y%'Z Gospel of Mary Y%;Z

& L L L L L

L L L L L L

; L & H % %

J & %F G & '

% : % G L F

; G ; & ; J

This chart is intended to generally indicate hermeneutic patterns with respect to the way in which Gnostic te2ts are called upon in e2egesis3 The abo"e demonstrates the weight of emphasis here or there in terms of numbers9 but has nothing to say about the quality of those references3 Category % contains those te2ts that are clearly non=Christian9 while Category ; contains te2ts that9 at best9 display marginal Christian glosses3 Ta0en together9 these two categories present us with the main te2tual e"idence that we ha"e for non=Christian Gnostic thought3 Category G lists te2ts with a more pronounced Christian frame=story although it should be noted that a wor0?s earliest manifestation can still be considered by many scholars to ha"e been non= Christian9 as with the Apocryphon of John or -he Sophia of Jesus "hrist for e2ample3 Category '9 in contradistinction to all of the abo"e9 shows no emanationist content9 but rather focuses upon the figure of .esus and the Christian content appears to ha"e been part of the original composition3 The number of pages for each tractate is listed in square brac0ets after the title3 A minus sign indicates a fair number of lacunae in the te2t3 The si2 titles are all recent representati"e maDor wor0s within Gnostic tudies9 and all approach the phenomenon of Gnostic thought in an @o"er"iewA fashionC i3e3 ad"ancing broad theories as to the nature and appearance of Gnostic thought in generalC as such9 reference to the full breadth of Gnostic te2ts is de 3ure3 <hile the first three wor0s are single=authored9 the remaining three in"ol"e multiple submissions for a total of %LL separate contributions used in this sur"ey o"erall3 The numbers differ in e2act meaning from column to column but may be generally ta0en to indicate the number of main references to a specific tractate within a gi"en wor03 The e2act numbers are therefore not to be compared from column to column for any sort of meaningful resultC rather9 the ratio within each column is combined with the others to obtain the followingE Total number of references to Categories % U ; &;& Categories G U ' FJH The two groups are thus on parC howe"er9 there is a disparity in the pages of original manuscript represented by the two groups3 Total number of pages of original manuscript in Categories % U ; %LHF Categories G U ' ;F'

2PP
The o"erall propensity to refer to Categories G U ' in defining Gnostic thought > i3e3 the @Gnostic=Christian te2tsA > is therefore adDusted to ' to % with the number of original pages of Gnostic manuscripts ta0en into consideration3 +n addition to this9 fi"e tractates are drawn upon inordinately in relation to all others shown3 Prioritised according to their popularity9 with numbers of references gi"en in square brac0ets9 they are as followsE

%3 ;3 G3 '3 J3

The Apocryphon of .ohn Y;:FZ The 4ypostasis of the Archons Y%&%Z The Gospel of Truth Y%H'Z The Gospel of Thomas Y%GGZ The Gospel of Philip Y%%:Z

All other tractates on the chart abo"e ha"e a @scoreA $number of references( of less than %LL3%LJJ Total references to the top J b FFG Total references to the remaining ;H tractates on chart b &%' There is also a disparity in the number of pages of original manuscript that generate the abo"e resultsE Total number of pages of original manuscript in @top JA b %;' Total number of pages of original manuscript in remaining ;H b %;;F 1actoring in both ratios the o"erall conclusion can be e2pressed as followsE on a page by page basis9 the @top JA Gnostic te2ts are &3' times more li0ely to be used in te2tual e2egesis than the remaining ;H tractates herein e2amined3%LJH +n being presented with a case for Gnostic thought in general9 the first statistical result abo"e also suggests that in your a"erage @o"er"iewA Gnostic tudies wor0 on @GnosticismA9 the Gnostic=Christian te2tual citations will outnumber the non= or slightly Gnostic=Christian $according to the distinctions de"eloped here( ' to %3 + am not aware of a hermeneutic study that has yet drawn attention to this phenomenon of @canonicityA and Christian ,rigins=directed interpretati"e bias at play in Gnostic tudies3 The lac0 of interest in Group % is especially instructi"e9 as are the paucity of references to the Intitled -e:t $the fact that no concerted attempt to gi"e the te2t a descripti"e name is itself an indication of its marginalised status(> This wor09 and the -ripartite -ractate9 itself recei"ing scant co"erage9 together number ;LL pages of well=preser"ed original manuscript9 and of a philosophical quality head and shoulders abo"e all other e2tant Gnostic te2ts3 <ith the Books of Jeu and the 4istis Sophia added we ha"e a total of o"er :;; pages in four te2ts that
%LJJ

The ne2t fi"e are as followsE -he Apocalypse of Adam Y&:ZC -he -rimorphic 4rotennoia Y&HZC -he )ospel of the Egyptians Y:&ZC 2n the 2rigin of the Gorld Y:LZC ;ostrianos YHHZ My own e2perience bears this out3 +n the first years that + studied Coptic + wor0ed with a Gnostic tudies scholar3 The Gnostic te2ts we wor0ed on were -he )ospel of -homas< -he )ospel of -ruth< and -he )ospel of 4hilip>

%LJH

2P,
/ayton and Iamauchi for e2ample do not mention9 e"en in passing3 +n the present study + ha"e found all of the abo"e to be of critical import3 /ayton?s boo0 -he )nostic Scriptures turns an astonishing blind eye to this arrayC indeed9 for a boo0 broadly entitled @The Gnostic cripturesA9 this study is remar0able for its lac0 of heterodo2y in the selection of Gnostic te2ts3 1rom the outset /ayton does not adequately e2plain the reasoning behind his selection process with respect to the "arious Gnostic wor0s which might be considered *alentinian for one $this itself understood to be a maDor interpretati"e problem by most scholars in the field( or9 on the other hand9 those Gnostic writings which are decidedly non=Christian $a much easier tas0(3 1ar from elucidating why such te2ts ha"e been selected or omitted9 the non=specialist reader is not ad"ised that such e2cluded te2ts e"en e2ist3 +n the preface /ayton mentions that9 @a number of wor0s sometimes labelled Tgnostic9? though only in a "ague and looser sense9 ha"e been deliberately omittedA%LJ:9 and he e2plains the selection of *alentinian te2ts as followsE @+t is not feasible in a boo0 such as this to ma0e a complete sur"ey of the *alentinian school in its )astern and <estern branches9 since much of the e"idence consists of fragments or e2cerpts whose significance is best con"eyed by a detailed discussion of the original Gree0A3%LJF 4owe"er9 the e2clusion and lac0 of mention of the -ripartite -ractate9 for instance9 is most peculiar as it e2ists in Coptic not Gree09 and is neither a fragment $it is the longest tractate in the -ag 4ammadi corpus(9 nor can it concei"ably be called @"aguelyA or @looselyA gnostic3 A basic point to 0eep in mind with /ayton?s model is that his theories are based upon only four out of twel"e possible *alentinian tractates%LJ&C his larger conclusions about Gnostic thought in general are based upon only %G out of G% of the main te2ts e2amined here > in any other field this sort of methodology would be suspect3 /ayton is closely associated with the wor0 done on -he Nag (ammadi Li=rary in English and has made maDor contributions therein3

%LJ: %LJF %LJ&

-he )nostic Scriptures9 :i3 -he )nostic Scriptures< :%3

The following eight tractates display the strongest *alentinian presence9 while the final four are somewhat less defensible3 The Roman numeral references are to the code2 number in the -ag 4ammadi library and the asteris0ed citations are those used by /aytonE -he 4rayer of the Apostle 4aul $+9%(p -he )ospel of -ruth $$+9GON+++9;(p -he -reatise of the $esurrection $+9'(p -he -ripartite -ractate $+9J( -he )ospel of 4hilip $++9G(p -he 0nterpretation of .nowledge $N+9%( A &alentinian E:position $N+9;( -he Intitled -e:t $Bruce Code2( -he 'irst and Second Apocalypse of James $*9G='( -he Letter of 4eter to 4hilip $*+++9;( -he -estimony of -ruth $+N9G(

2,5
Iamauchi manifests an e"en narrower te2tual approach to an e2ceedingly comple2 te2tual and socio=historical issue3 +n going after @pre=Christian GnosticismA one might e2pect at least a treatment of all the te2ts in Category %C instead we ha"e a contro"ersial thesis deri"ed from an amaBingly sparse selection of a"ailable te2ts3 The socio=historical picture which one would e2pect to be de"eloped in a discussion as to whether this group precedes that9 is non= e2istent3 PPtrement?s wor09 li0e Iamauchi9 is concerned with dispro"ing the scholarly consensus that Gnostic thought preceded Christian9 although she does not settle for his rather "ague picture of simultaneity for the two religious de"elopments9 instead opting for the unli0ely thesis of complete Christian precedence +n pursuing this ide fi:e PPtrement displays a more generous distribution of references than /ayton or Iamauchi9 not9 howe"er9 departing from the o"erall pattern of a propensity to use Christian=Gnostic sources and a complete lac0 of interest in )gypt3 The three remaining wor0s on Gnosticism and early Christianity9 Gnostic origins9 and the study of the 1eminine in Gnostic thought are far better than the first three enterprises== undoubtedly a result of their multi=authorship==howe"er all still reinforce the tendency to use te2ts in Categories G and ' o"er % and ;9 and in highlighting a percei"ed @Christian=GnosticA canon o"er the bul0 of Gnostic manuscripts3 The Messina conference is to be commended for presenting a more balanced array of source material than is usually the case to this day9 almost thirty years later9 and in supplying a detailed inde2 of te2t citations9 a rarity in the field3 As well9 this wor0 at least ac0nowledged the @problemA of )gypt in defining Gnostic thought9 de"oting ; articles9 out of a total of J'9 to the issue of )gyptian Gnosticism3 The other fi"e representati"e wor0s are entirely de"oid of any analysis of an )gyptian presence in Gnostic thought9 nor do they ad"ance a "iable socio=historical model of any 0ind for that matter3

2,+ ppendi! " Genealogy of Egyptian Emanationist Thought

%3 The 4eliopolitan )nnead $ ca> ;:FL B3C3)3(

Y-unZ Atum
YAtum generates through masturbationZ hu = Tefnut Geb = -ut ,siris = +sis eth = -ephthys

$Disrupti"e )"ent(
;3 The 4ermopolitan ,gdoad $ ca> ;;JL B3C3)3(

-un=-aunet
$watery abyss(

4uh=4auhet

5u0=5au0et

Amun=Amaunet
$hiddenness(

$formlessness( $dar0ness(

G3 The Memphite Theology $ca> ;L'L = :JL B3C3)3( Ptah=-un $1ather( = Ptah=-aunet $Mother( YPtah generates through Thought and !tteranceZ

Atum
hu = Tefnut Geb = -ut ,siris = +sis eth = -ephthys

2,2
'3 Parmenides $ ca> Hth c3 B3C3)3(

,-) Goddess
YGoddess creates other godsZ

@disrupti"e theogonic e"entA Goddess $possibly lower Anan0e = -ecessity( ascends Physical Realm the result of )rror PoetO oul @a man who 0nowsA

J3 )mpedocles $ ca> Hth c3 B3C3)3( Goddess /o"e Goddess 4ate $-ei0os( e"il Demiurge souls of men are daimones

2,4
H3 peusippus $ ca> 'L:=GG& B3C3)3( ,-) $without ethical qualities( +ndefinite Dyad $seeds or potencies(

-umbers

Principles Magnitudes ,-)

Y+ndefinite Dyad

oul

-umber
Geometricals $Magnitudes(

oul
)"il as a by=product

Matter
:3 Nenocrates $G&H = G%' B3C3)3C Ammonius ca> 'L C3)3 is similar(

M,-AD
DIAD female @Mother of the GodsA @e"il principle of DisorderA +D)A

,!/
4igher 8eus /ower 8eus <,R/D ,!/ $female = moon( superlunary sublunary

4ades
Di"inities $planets9 stars etc3(

F3 )ugnostos $ ca> JL B3C3)3(

1ather of the !ni"erse j1orefatherj 1ather j elf=Begettorj Begotten Perfect Mind Y 4!Z k

Y-!-Z YAT!MZ

2,-

All=<ise Begettress ophia YT)1-!TZ

elf=Perfected Begettor YG)BZ k Great ophia Y-!TZ 1irst=Begotten on of God Y, +R+ Z k 1irst=Begotten ophia Y+ + Z bTime

a"iour Begettor of All Things Y )T4Z k Pistis ophia Y-)P4T4I Z bIear !nbegotten elf=Begotten Begettor 1irst=Begettor All=Begettor Arch=Begettor k k k k k k All=<ise ophia All=Mother ophia All=Begettress ophia 1irst=Begettress ophia /o"e ophia Pistis ophia

b%; Months

:; Powers $%; 2 H( GHL Powers $:; 2 J( b Days +nfinite Powers b 4ours U Moments 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 The 4ea"ens of Chaos $mirroring the higher theogony(

2,. &3 Plutarch $ ca> FJ C3)3( M,-AD

+-D)1+-+T) DIAD $e"il9 formlessness9 disorder principle(

+ + /,G,
$soul b ,siris( MA/)1+C)-T ,!/ $,siris k eth=Typhon( +MMA-)-T /,G, $body of ,siris( <,R/D ,!/OMATT)R

$+sis( 4,R!
$sensible cosmos(

2,K
%L3 Basileides according to 4ippolytus $ ca> %GL C3)3( @-on=)2istent GodA in Pure *oid $ChaosE -un( <orld eedO)gg differentiation( $AtumO-unE latent %%3 Basileides According to +renaeus and )piphanius $ ca> %GL C3)3( !nborn Parent +ntellect <ord Prudence Tripartite onship $AtumO huOTefnutE plurality9 2G( hypercosmos cosmos Great Archon of the ,gdoad $ogdoad is ineffable( on $Christ( Archon of the 4ebdomad $ignorant .ahwehE hebdomad is spea0able( on of Archon $.esus( 4abrasa2 and GHJ hea"ens Powers Principalities > in each of the GHJ Angels 4ea"ens .ahweh $Ruler of the GHJth 4ea"en( Docetic Christ $lower manifestation of Di"ine +ntellect( Power = ophia

Abrasa2 $Ruler of the GHJ 4ea"ens(

2,7

%;3 The *alentinian Theogony According to +renaeus and Tertullian $ca> %GL C3)3( Depth $Bythus(O1irst BeginningOPerfect Aeon ilenceOGraceO+dea Mind Truth The Primal ,gdoad $group of F( <ord /ife Primal Man Church qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq Profundity +ntercourse !naging !nion elf=)2istent *oluptuousness Motionless Blending ,nly=Begotten Blessed qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq Ad"ocate 1aith Paternal 4ope Temperate /o"e )"er=1lowing +ntelligence )cclesiastical 1elicity <ished=1or ophia Duodecad Begotten by Anthropos and )00lesia Decad Begotten by /ogos and 8oe

2,P
%3 ophia?s @1allA @1ormless creationA G3 ophia?s return to Pleroma 4orus $no consort( 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 ;3The Boundary or /imit established after ophia?s @e2tensionA ophia Achamoth $'3 Creation of the lower material realmE 4ebdomad(

%G3 The !ntitled te2t

2,,
ParentbDeepb-!DemiurgeOParentO/ogosO-ousOAnthropos Gnosis )nneadE /ife Rest Resurrection Rebirth 4ope /o"e Pistis eal Pleroma surrounding %; DeepsE %( all=source ;( all=wise G( all=mystery '( all=gnosis J( all=chaste H( e"ery silence :( insubstantial doorbsubstance F( forefather of forefathers &( all=fatherOself=father %L( all=powerful %%( in"isible one %;( TruthE Mother of the Aeons

DemiurgeO1orethoughtE ' Monads U ' Gates9 each withE H helpersO;' myriad powersO& enneadsO%L decadsO%; dodecadsOJ pentads % ,"erseer wO three aspectsE %( unbegotten ;( true G( unutterable Aphr_don k %; beneficent ones 1orefather Adam of the /ight Perfect Mind D))P G ParenthoodsE %( Co"ered ,neO4idden God ;( J TreesO,nly=begotten /ogos G( ilenceO ource +MM)A !RAB/) D))P G GreatnessesE %( till ,ne ;( !n0nowable ,ne k GHJ Parenthoods b year G( +nfinite ,ne k onshipOChristO*erifier D))P ,1 )T4)! wO %; ParenthoodsE %( indi"isible ;( incomprehensible G( un0nowable '( silence J( still H( all=father :( all=mystery F( rest U resurrection &( co"ered %L( thrice=male %%( triple=powered %;( truth eparation of )2istent from -on=)2istent $)2istent b )ternalC -on=)2istent b Matter( /ord of Glory eparates Matter into Two /andsE /and of Death and Dar0ness /and of /ife and /ight

455

6i liography of !optic 3ources

1)-4C9 Code2 +3 The 1acsimile )dition of the -ag 4ammadi CodicesE Code2 +3 1arid9 hafi09 ed39 et al3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&::3 1)-4C9 Code2 *++3 The 1acsimile )dition of the -ag 4ammadi CodicesE Code2 *++3 1arid9 hafi09 ed39 et al3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:;3 -4 9 "ol3 +*E -ag 4ammadi Codices +++9; and +*9;9 ed3 Ale2ander BQhlig and 1rederic0 <isse3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J3 -4 9 "ol3 +NE Pistis ophia9 ed3 Carl chmidt3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 -4 9 "ol3 N+E -ag 4ammadi Codices *9 ;=J U *+9 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:&3 -4 9 "ol3 N+++E The Boo0s of .eu and the !ntitled Te2t in the Bruce Code29 ed3 *iolet McDermot3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 -4 9 "ol3 N*9 Codices +N and N9 ed3 Birger A3 Pearson3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 -4 9 "ol3 NNE -ag 4ammadi Code2 ++9 ;=:9 ed3 B3 /ayton3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F&3 -4 9 "ol3 NN++E -ag 4ammadi Codice + $+EJ(E The Tripartite Tractate9 "ol3 %9 ed3 4arold <3 Attridge U )laine 43 Pagels3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FJ3 -4 9 "ol3 NN*++E -ag 4ammadi Codices +++9 G=' and *9%9 ed3 Douglas M3 Parrott3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%3

45+ -4 9 "ol3 NN*+++E -ag 4ammadi Codices N+9 N++9 N+++9 ed3 Charles <3 4edric03 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&L3 -4 9 "ol3NNN+E -ag 4ammadi Codices *+++9 ed3 .ohn 43 ieber3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%3 )"angelium *eritatis9 Michel Malinine9 ed39 et al3 8XrichE Rascher *erlag9 %&JH3 5rause9 Martin9 and Pahor /abib3 Die Drei *ersionen des Apo0ryphon des .ohannes im 5optischen Museum Bu alt=5airo3 <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&H;3 Till9 <alter C3 and 4ans=Martin chen0e3 Die Gnostischen chriften des 5optischen Papyrus Berolinensis FJL;3 BerlinE A0ademie *erlag9 %&:;3 5ephalia9 from Ale2ander BQhlig9 ManichRische 4andschriften der taatlichen Museen BerlinE Band +9 5ephalaia9 ;3 4Rlfte3 tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&HG3 CRC3 Allberry9 ed3 and trans39 A Manichaean Psalmboo09 Part ++E Manichaean Manuscripts in the Chester Beatty Collection3 tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&GF3

452

6i liography
Aldred9 Cyril3 Egypt to the End of the 2ld .ingdom3 /ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&HJ3 qqqqqqqqqq Akhenaten> /ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&:L3 ^^^^^^^^^^ -he Egyptians3 /ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&F'3 Allberry9 C3R3C39 ed3 and trans3 A +anichaean 4salm=ook> Part ++> +anichaean +anuscripts in the "hester Beatty "ollection> tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&GF3 Allen9 .3P3 )enesis in EgyptA -he 4hilosophy of Ancient Egyptian "reation Accounts3 Iale )gyptological tudies ;3 -ew 4a"enE Iale !ni"ersity9 %&FF3 AltenmXller9 Brigitte3 Syncretismus in den Sargte:ten> <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&:J3 AmPlineau9 M3)3 Essai sur le gnosticisme gyptienA ses d%eloppements et son origine gyptienne> Annales du musPe Guimet9 "ol3%'3 ParisE Ministfre de l?instruction publique9 %FF:3 Amidon9 Philip R3< ed3 and trans3 -he 4anarion of St> Epiphanius< Bishop of Salamis3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&L3 Anthes9 Rudolf3 @)gyptian Theology in the Third Millenium B3C33AJNES %F $%&J&(E %H&=;%;3 Apuleius9 /ucius3 -he )olden Ass9 translated by Robert Gra"es3%&JL3 Reprint3 4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s /td39 %&FH3 Arai9 asagu3 @8ur Christologie des Apo0ryphons des .ohannes3A NS- %J $%&HF= H&(E GL;=%F3

454

Armstrong9 A3439 trans3 4lotinusA A &olume of Selections3 /ondonE Allen U !nwin9 %&JG3 Arthur9 Rose 4orman3 -he Gisdom )oddessA 'eminine +otifs in Eight Nag (ammadi 9ocuments3 /anham9 MDE !ni"ersity Press of America9 %&F'3 Asmussen9 .es P3 +anichaean LiteratureA $epresentati%e -e:ts "hiefly from +iddle 4ersian and 4arthian Gritings> Reprint3 Delmar9 -3I3E cholars? 1acimilies and Reprints9 %&:J3 Assman9 .an3 @Die +nschrift auf dem Rurern ar0ophagdec0el des Merneptah3A +9A0. ;F $%&:;(E ':=:G3 qqqqqqqqqq ;eit und Ewigkeit im Alten HgyptenA Ein Beitrag ,ur )eschichte der Ewigkeit> 4eidelbergE Carl <inter !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&:J3 qqqqqqqqqq @Death and +nitiation in the 1unerary Religion of Ancient )gypt3A +n Yale Egyptological Studies CA $eligion and 4hilosophy in Ancient Egypt3 -ew 4a"en9 CTE Iale !ni"ersity9 %&F&3 qqqqqqqqqq Stein und ;eitA +ensch und )esellshaft im alten Hgypten3 MXnchenE <ilhelm 1in0 *erlag9 %&&%3 Attridge9 4arold <3 and )laine Pagels9 eds3 and trans3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary3 *ols3 NN++ U NN+++< Nag (ammadi "odice 0 J0A6LA -he -ripartite -ractate3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FJ3 Austin9 M3M3 -he (ellenistic Gorld from Ale:ander to the $oman con#uestA A selection of ancient sources in translation3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&F%3 Bagnall9 R3 3 @)gypt9 The Ptolemies9 and the Gree0 <orld3A BES C $%&F%(E J=;%3 Baines9 .ohn and C3.3)yre3 @1our notes on literacy3A )+ H% $%&FG(E HJ=&H3 Baines9 .ohn3 @Restricted 5nowledge9 4ierarchy9 and DecorumE Modern Perceptions and Ancient +nstitutions3A JA$"E NN*++ $%&&L(E %=;G3

45-

Ba0ir9 Abd=el=Mohsen3 @Nhh and dt reconsidered9A JEA G& $%&JG(E %%L=%%3 qqqqqqqqqq @A further re=appraisal of the termsE Nhh and 9t>A JEA HL $%&:'(E ;J;=J'3 Barb9 A3A3 @Mystery9 Myth9 and Magic3A +n -he Legacy of Egypt< edited by .3R3 4arris9 %GF=H&3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:%3 Bardy9 Gusta"e3 Les premiers temps du christianisme de langue copte en !gypte in +morial Lagrange3 ParisE Gabalda9 %&'L3 Barta9 <infried3 Intersuchen ,um )*tterkreis der Neunheit> MunichE Deutscher 5unst"erlag Gmb49 %&:G3 qqqqqqqqqq @Die Bedeutung der Personifi0ation 4uh im !ntersheid Bu den Personifi0ation 4ah und -un3A )+ %;: $%&&;(E :=%;3 Bataille9 Georges3 Literature and E%il3 %&J:3 Reprint3 -ew Ior0E !riBen Boo0s9 %&:G3 Bauer9 <alter3 2rthodo:y and (eresy in Earliest "hristianity3 )dited and translated by Robert A3 5raft and Gerhard 5rodel3 %&GG3 Reprint3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&:%3 Baynes9 Charlotte A3 A "optic )nostic -reatise> CambridgeE !ni"ersity of Cambridge Press9 %&GG3 Beeson9 C3439 ed3 and trans3 Acta Archelai3 /eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs9 %&LH3 Bell9 ir 4arold3 @)"idence for Christianity in )gypt during the Roman period3A (-$ NNN*++ $%&''(E %FJ=;LF3 qqqqqqqqqq @Popular Religion in Graeco=Roman )gypt +E The Pagan Period3A JEA C' $%&'F(E F;=&:3

45. Bergman9 .an3 0ch Bin 0sisA Studien ,um memphitischen (intergrund der griechischen 0sisaretalogien> !ppsalaE Acta !ni"ersitatis !psaliensis9 %&HF3 qqqqqqqqqq @Ancient )gyptian Theogony in a Gree0 Magical magical Papyrus $PGM *++9 ll3 J%H=J;%(3A +n Studies in Egyptian $elgion9 edited by M3 4eerma "an *oss9 et al39 ;F=G:> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F;3 BetB9 4ans Dieter3 @The 1ormulation of Authoritati"e Tradition in the Gree0 Magical Papyri3A +n Self@9efinition in the )reco@$oman Gorld3 *ol3 G9 Jewish and "hristian Self@9efinition< edited by Ben 13 Meyer and )3P3 anders3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&F;3 qqqqqqqqqq -he )reek +agical 4apyri in -ranslation< 0ncluding the 9emotic Spells3 *ol3 %9 -e:ts> ChicagoE The !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&FH3 qqqqqqqqqq Magic and Mystery in the Gree0 Magical Papyri3A+n +agika (ieraA Ancient )reek +agic and $eligion9 edited by Christopher A3 1araone and Dir0 ,bbin03 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&%3 Bianchi9 !go3 @ eth9 ,siris9 et l?ethnographie3A +n Selected Essays on )nosticism< 9ualism< and +ysteriosophy> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 Blee0er9 C3.3 @The )gyptian Bac0ground of Gnosticism3A +n Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile< BDEE9 edited by !go Bianchi9 ;;&=G:3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:L3 Bloom9 4arold3 @/ying Against TimeE Gnosis9 Poetry9 Criticism3A +n -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism3 *ol3 %9 edited by Bentley /ayton9 J:=:;3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&FL3 qqqqqqqqqq AgonA -owards a -heory of $e%isionism> ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F;3 qqqqqqqqqq @Poetry9 Repression9 Re"isionism3A +n "ritical -heory Since BDE6< edited by 4aBard Adams and /eory earle9 GG%=''3 Tallahassee9 1/E tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH3 Boardman9 .ohn3 -he )reeks 2%erseas3 4amondsworth9 )nglandE Penguin Boo0s9 %&H'3

45K BQhlig9 Ale2ander and 1rederi0 <isse3 -he )ospel of the Egyptians> +n Nag (ammadi Studies3 *ol3 +*9 edited by .ames M3 Robinson3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J3 BQhlig9 Ale2ander3 +anich1ische (andschriften der Staatlichen +useen Berlin> Band +< .E4(ALA0A< 8> (1lfte3 tuttgartE <3 5ohlhammer *erlag9 %&HH3 ^^^^^^^^^^ @Gnostische Probleme in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadi3A +n +ysterion und GahrheitE )esammelte Beitr1ge ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HF3 qqqqqqqqqq @!rBeit und )ndBeit in der Titellosen chrift des Code2 ++ "on -ag 4ammadi3A +n +ysterion und GahrheitE )esammelte Beitr1ge ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HF3 ^^^^^^^^^^ ;um (ellenismus in den Schriften %on Nag (ammadi3 <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&:J3 BQhme9 .a0ob3 Si: -heosophic 4oints3 Ann ArborE !ni"ersity of Michigan Press9 %&JF3 Borghouts9 .313 @Magical Te2ts3A +n -e:tes et langages de l!gypte pharoni#ueA cent cin#uante annes de recherches< B588@BDF8< :=%&3 CairoE +nstitut 1ran]ais d?archPologie orientale9 %&:'3 ^^^^^^^^^^ @Ch>w $a0hu( and hkC>w $he0au(3 Two Basic -otions of Ancient )gyptian Magic9 and the Conception of the Di"ine Created <ord3A+n La +agia in Egitto al -epi dei 1araoni9 edited by Alessandro Roccati and Alberto iliotti3 RassegnaE +nternaBionale di Cinematografia Archeologica Arte e -atura /ibri9 %&F:3 Bowman9 Alan 53 Egypt After the 4haraohs> <arwic0shire9 )nglandA !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&FH3 Boyce9 Mary3 @,n Mithra in the Manichaean Pantheon3A +n A Locusts LegA Studies in (onour of S>(> -a#i,adeh< edited by <3B343 4enning< ''=J'3 /ondonE /und9 4umphries9 %&H;3 Brashear9 <illiam M3 +agica &aria3 Bru2ellesE 1ondation 7gyptologique Reine 7lisabeth9 %&&%3

457

Breasted9 .ames 4enry3 @The Philosophy of a Memphite Priest3A ;HS G& $%&L%(E G&=J'3 qqqqqqqqqqq 9e%elopment of $eligion and -hought in Ancient Egypt3 %&%;3 Reprint3 PhiladelphiaE !ni"ersity of Pennsyl"ania Press9 %&:;3 qqqqqqqqqqq Ancient $ecords of Egypt3 *ol3 %< -he 'irst to the Se%enteenth 9ynasties> %&LH3 Reprint3 /ondonE The 4istories U Mysteries of Man /td39 %&FF3 qqqqqqqqqqq Ancient $ecords of Egypt3 *ol3 ;9 -he Eighteenth 9ynasty3 %&LH3 Reprint3 /ondonE the 4istories U Mysteries of Man /td39 %&FF3 Brown9 Peter3 @The Diffusion of Manichaeism in the Roman )mpire3A J$S J& $%&H&(E &;=%LG3 Brugsch9 4enri3 $eligion und +ythologie der alten Hgypter3 %F&%3 Reprint3 /eipBigE 8entralantiquariat der Deutschen Demo0ratischen Republi09 %&H&3 qqqqqqqqqq )rammaire 9moti#ueA "ontenant les principes gnrau: de la langue et de lcriture populaires des anciens !gyptiens> %FJJ3 Reprint3 BonnE DXmmlers *erlag9 %&:%3 Bur0e9 5enneth3 -he $hetoric of $eligionA Studies in Logology3 Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&H%3 qqqqqqqqqq @Pragmatism3A +n "ommunicationA "oncepts and 4erspecti%es9 edited by /ee Thayler3 <ashington9 D3C3E partan Boo0s9 %&H:3 qqqqqqqqqq A $hetoric of +oti%es3 Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&H&3 qqqqqqqqqq 4ermanence and "hangeA An Anatomy of 4urpose> Ber0eley9 /os Angeles9 and /ondonE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&F'3 Bur0ert9 <alter3 Ancient +ystery "ults3 Cambridge9 MAE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:3 Bur0itt< 13C3 @Pistis ophia3A J-S ;G $%&;%O;;(E ;:%=FL3 qqqqqqqqqq @Pistis ophia and the Coptic /anguage3A J-S ;& $%&;JO;H(E %'F=J:3

45P Burstein9 tanley M3 -he (ellenistic Age 'rom the Battle of 0ppsos to the 9eath of .leopatra &00> CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FJ3 Caminos9 Ricardo A3 Late@Egyptian +iscellanies $,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&J'3 Canfora9 /uciano3 -he &anished Li=rary> Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&F:3 Casey9 Robert Pierce3 Serapion of -hmius Against -he +anichees3 4ar"ard Theological tudies N*3 CambridgeE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&G%3 Cernh9 .arosla"3 "optic Etymological 9ictionary3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&:H3 Chalne9 M3 @ ermon sur la PPnitence3A +n +langes de la 'acult 2rientale de lIni%ersit Saint Joseph H $%&%G(E '&G=J%&3 Cioran9 )3M3 -he 'all 0nto -ime9 translated by Richard 4oward3 ChicagoE Vuadrangle Boo0s9 %&:L3 Coc0le9 <3)343 @ tate Archi"es in Graeco=Roman )gypt from GL BC to the Reign of eptimus e"erus3A JEA :L $%&F'(E %LH=%;;3 Couliano9 +oan9 P3 )nosticismo e pensiero modernoA (ans Jonas> RomeE /Prma di Bretschneider9 %&FJ3 ^^^^^^^^^^ -he -ree of )nosis9 translated by 43 3 <iesner and +oan P3 Couliano3 %&&L3 Reprint3 an 1ranciscoE 4arperCollins9 %&&;3 Crawford9 Dorothy .3 @Ptolemy9 Ptah and Apis in 4ellenistic Memphis3A +n Studies on 4tolemaic +emphis9 edited by <illy Peremans9 %=';3 /o"aniiE tudia 4ellenistica ;'9 %&FL3

45, Crum9 <3)3 "optic 9ictionary> %&G&3 Reprint3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:&3 Daumas9 1ran]ois3 @/e fonds Pgyptienne de l?hermPtisme3A +n )nosticisme et monde hllenisti#ue3 Actes du "ollo#ue de Lou%aine@la@Neu%e JBB@BK mars BD57L9 edited by .ulien Ries9 G=;J3 /ou"ain=la=-eu"eE +nstitut ,rientaliste9 %&F;3 qqqqqqqqqq @/?alchimie a=t=elle une origine PgyptienneSA +n 9as $*misch@ By,antinische Hgypten9 %L&=%F3 MainB am RheinE Phillip "on 8abern9 %&FG3 de Buc09 Adriaan and Alan 43 Gardiner9 ed3 -he Egyptian "offin -e:ts> ++9 -e:ts of Spells FE@BEC> ChicagoE The !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&GF3 de Buc09 Adriaan9 9e )odsdienstige 2p%atting %an den Slaap 0n,onderheid in het 2ude Egypte3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&G&3 de Man9 Paul3 @The Rhetoric of Temporality3A +n "ritical -heory Since BDE69 edited by 4aBard Adams and /eory earle3 Tallahassee9 1/E 1lorida tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH9 %&&=;;;3 Derchain9 Philippe3 @/?AuthenticitP de l?+nspiration Pgyptienne dans le TCorpus 4ermeticum?3A $e%ue de l(istoire des $ligions %H% $%&H;(E %:J=&F3 qqqqqqqqqq @Mythes et Dieu2 lunaires en 7gypte3A +n Sources 2rientales *9 La lune< mythes< et rites< %:=HF3 ParisE 7ditions du euil9 %&H;3 qqqqqqqqqq Le papyrus Salt 586JB> +> B776B< rituel pour la conser%ation de la %ie en !gypte3 Bru2ellesE Palais des AcadPmies9 %&HJ3 ^^^^^^^^^^ WMiettesE 4omfre g )dfou3A $d! ;H $%&:'(E K'9 %J=%&3 Derchaine=!rtel9 Maria=Theresa3 4riester in -empelA 9ie $e,eption der theologie der -emple %on Edfu und 9endara in den 4ri%atdokumenten aus ptolem1ischer ;eit> <isbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&F&3 de toop9 7m3 @)ssai sur la Diffusion du ManichPisme dans l?empire Romain3A $e- GF $%&L&(3

4+5

Dillon9 .ohn3 -he +iddle 4latonistsA 57 B>"> to A>9> 887> +thaca9 -IE Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&::3 qqqqqqqqqqqq @The Descent of the oul in Middle Platonic and Gnostic Theory3A +n -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism3 *ol %9 -he School of &alentinus< edited by Bentley /ayton9 GJ:=GH'3 /eidenE%&FL3 Diodorus iculus> Books B and 00< B@CK3 translated by C343 ,ldfather3 %&GG3 Reprint9 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F&3 Diogenes /aertius3 Li%es of Eminent 4hilosophers3 *ol3 %9 edited by R3D3 4ic0s3 %&;J3 Reprint3 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&&%3 qqqqqqqqqq Li%es of Eminent 4hilosophers> *ol3 ;9 edited by R3D3 4ic0s3 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&;J3 Dodds9 )3R3 @Theurgy and +ts Relationship to -eoplatonism3A Journal of $oman Studies G:9 %&':9 JJ=H&3 qqqqqqqqqq @-ew /ight on the TChaldean ,racles3A -he (ar%ard -heological $e%iew J' $%&H%(E ;H;=;:G3 qqqqqqqqqq4agan and "hristian in an Age of An:iety3 /ondonE <3<3 -orton U Company9 %&HJ33 Doresse9 .ean3 -he Secret Books of the Egyptian )nostics3 %&JF3 Reprint3 Rochester9 *TE +nner Traditions +nt39 /td39 %&FH3 DuVuesne9 Terence3 A "optic 0nitiatory 0n%ocation> ,2fordshire Communications in )gyptology ++3 Thame ,2onE Darengo9 %&&%3 Dunand9 1ran]ois3 @/es syncretisme dans la religion de l?7gypte romaine3A +n Les Syncrtismes dans les religions de lanti#uit< edited by 1ran]ois Dunand and P3 /P"_sque9 %J;=FJ3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:J3 )ddy9 amuel 53 -he .ing is 9eadA Studies in the Near Eastern $esistance to (ellenism CCK@CB B>"> /incoln9 -)E !ni"ersity of -ebras0a Press9 %&H%3

4++ )dgerton9 <illiam 13 @ tress9 *owel Vuantity9 and yllable Di"ision in )gyptian3A JNES H $%&':(E %=%:3 )itrem9 amson3 @Dreams and Di"ination in Magical Ritual3A +n +agika (ieraA Ancient )reek +agic and $eligion9 edited by Christopher A3 1araone and Dir0 ,bbin03 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&&%3 )mery9 <3B3 Archaic Egypt> %&H%3 Reprint> Penguin Boo0s /td39 4ammondsworthE %&F:3 )nglund9 Gertie3 @God as a 1rame of Reference3A +n -he $eligion of the Ancient Egyptians "ogniti%e Structures and 4opular E:pressions9 edited by Gertie )nglund9 :=;F3 !ppsalaE Acta !ni"ersitatis9 %&F:3 )rman9 Adolf9 and 4ermann Grapow9 G*rter=uch der Aegyptisch Sprache> Band '3 /eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs?sche Buchhandlung9 %&GL3 )"ans9 Craig A39 Robert /3 <ebb9 and Richard A <iebe9 eds3 Nag (ammadi -e:ts and the Bi=leA A Synopsis and 0nde:3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&G3 1airman9 43<3 -he -riumph of (orus3 /ondonE B3T3 Batsford /td39%&:'3 1aul0ner9 R3,3 -he Ancient Egyptian 4yramid -e:ts3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&H&3 ^^^^^^^^^^ -he Ancient Egyptian "offin -e:ts> *ol3 %< Spells B@C6K3 <arminsterE Aris U Phillips9 %&:G3 ^^^^^^^^^^ @The +nstruction to Meri0are3A +n -he Literature of Ancient Egypt9 edited by <illiam 5elly impson< %FL=&;3 -ew 4a"en9 CTE Iale !ni"ersity Press9 %&:G3 qqqqqqqqqq -he Ancient Egyptian Book of the 9ead> %&:;3 Reprint3 Austin9 TNE !ni"ersity of Te2as Press9 %&&L3 qqqqqqqqqq A "oncise 9ictionary of +iddle Egyptian3 %&H%3 Reprint3 ,2fordE Griffith +nstitute Ashmolean Museum9 %&&%3

4+2 1edern9 <alter3 @The TTransformations? in the Coffin Te2ts > A -ew Approach3A JNES %& $%&HL(E ;'%=J:3 1iloramo9 Gio"anni3 A (istory of )nosticism> Translated by Anthony Alcoc03 ,2fordE Basil Blac0well9 %&&L3 1oerster9 <erner3 )nosisA A selection of )nostic -e:ts3 *ol3 %9 4atristic E%idence ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:;3 1laubert9 Gusta"e3 -he -emptation of St> Antony9 translated by 5itty Mroso"s0y3 4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s9 %&FG3 1oucault9 Michel3 @<hat is an Author3A +n Language< "ounter@+emory< 4ractice9 trans3 D313 Bouchard U 3 imon3 +thaca9 -IE Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&::3 1owden9 Garth3 -he Egyptian (ermesA A (istorical Approach to the Late 4agan +ind3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH3 1o29 Robin /ane3 4agans and "hristians in the +editerranean Gorld from the Second "entury A9 to the "on%ersion of "onstantine> 4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s9 %&FH3 1raser9 P3M3 4tolemaic Ale:andria3 G "ols3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:;3 Gardiner9 Alan 43 @4ymns to Amon from a /eiden Papyrus3A ;HS '; $%&LJ(E %;= ';3 qqqqqqqqqq ed> (ieratic papyri in the British +useum> *ol3 %9 -e:t> Third eries3 /ondonE British Museum9 %&GJ3 Gi"ersen9 nren3 Apocryphon JohannisA -he "optic te:t of the Apocryphon Johannis in the Nag (ammadi "ode: 00 with -ranslation< 0ntroduction and "ommentary3 CopenhagenE Prostant Apud Mun0sgaard9 %&HG3

4+4 Goodwin9 C3<3 @,n an )gyptian te2t in Gree0 characters3A ;HS H $%FHF(E %F=;'3 Goudriaan9 5oen3 Ethnicity in 4tolemaic Egypt> AmsterdamE Gieben9 %&FF3 Goyon9 .ean=Claude3 @Ptolemaic )gyptE Priests and the Traditional Religion3A +n "leopatras EgyptA Age of the 4tolemies9 edited by Robert 3 Bianchi9 ;&= G&3 MainBE *erlag Phillip "on 8abern in association with The Broo0lyn Museum9 %&FF3 Grant9 Michael3 'rom Ale:ander to "leopatraA -he (ellenistic Gorld3 -ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&F;3 Grant9 1rederic0 C3 (ellenistic $eligionsA the Age of Syncretism> -ew Ior0E The /iberal Arts Press9 %&JG3 Griffith9 13 /l3 @The ,ld Coptic 4oroscope of the tobart Collection3A ;HS GF $%&LL(E :%=&G3 ^^^^^^^^^^ @The Date of the ,ld Coptic Te2ts and their Relation to Christian Coptic3A ;HS G& $%&L%(E :F=F;3 qqqqqqqqqq Stories of the (igh 4riests of +emphis3%&LL3 Reprint3 ,snabrXc0E ,tto 8eller *erlag9 %&FJ3 Griffith9 13 /l and 4erbert Thompson9 eds39 -he 9emotic +agical 4apyrus of London and Leiden3%&L'3 Reprint3 -ew Ior0E Do"er Publications +nc39 %&:'3 Griffiths9 .3 Gwyn3 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride> CardiffE !ni"ersity of <ales Press9 %&:L3 qqqqqqqqqq @)gyptian -ationalism in the )dfu Temple Te2ts3A +n )limpses of Ancient EgyptA Studies in (onour of (>G> 'airman< edited by .ohn Ruffle9 G3A3 Gaballa and 5enneth A3 5itchen9 %:'=:&3 <arminsterE Aris U Philips /td39 %&:&3 Gutbub9 Adolphe3 -e:tes fondamentau: de la thologie de .om 2m=o> ; "ols3 +nstitut fran]ais d?ArchPologie orientale du Caire9 %&:G3

4+-

Gute0unst9 <ilfried3 @<ie Tmagische? ist die TMagie? im alten 6gyptenS )inige theoretische Bemer0ungen Bur Magie > Problemati03A +n La +agia in Egitto al -epi dei 'araoni9 edited by Alessandro Roccati and Alberto iliotti3 RassegnaE +nternaBionale di Cinematografia Archeologica Arte e -atura /ibri9 %&F:3 Guthrie9 5enneth3 -he Neoplatonic Gritings of Numenius3 %&%:3 Reprint3 /awrence9 5 E elene Boo0s9 %&F:3 4arrauer9 Christine3 +eliouchosA Studien ,ur Entwicklung religi*ser &orstellungen in griechischen synkretistischen ;au=erte:ten> <ienE *erlag der csterreichische A0ademie der <issenschaften9 %&F:3 4edric09 Charles <3 and Robert 4odgson9 .r39 eds3 Nag (ammadi< )nosticism< P Early "hristianity3 Peabody9 MAE 4endric0son Publishers9 %&FH3 4edric09 Charles <39 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3 NN*+++< Nag (ammadi "odices M0< M00< M0003 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&L3 4elderman9 .an3 @+sis as Plane in the Gospel of TruthSA +n )nosis and )nosticism< edited by Martin 5rause9 ;H='H3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 4oare9 Vuintin and Geoffrey -owell mith9 eds39 Selections from the 4rison Note=ooks of Antonio )ramsci3 /ondonE /awrence and <ishart9 %&:%3 4offmann9 R3 .oseph9 trans39 "elsus< 2n the -rue 9octrineA A 9iscourse Against the "hristians3 ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:3 4ornung9 )ri03 @Chaotische Bereiche in der geordneten <elt3A ;HS F% $%&JH(E ;F= G;3 qqqqqqqqqq 9er Hgyptische +ythos %on der (immelskuh> 1reibergE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&F;3

4+. ^^^^^^^^^^ "onceptions of )od in Ancient EgyptA -he 2ne and the +any9 translated by .ohn Baines3 %&:%3 Reprint3 +thaca9 -IE Cornell !ni"ersity9 %&F;3 qqqqqqqqqq @The Disco"ery of the !nconscious in Ancient )gypt3A +n An Annual of Archetypal 4sychology and Jungian -hought< %H=;:> Dallas9 TNE pring Publications9 %&FH> 4orsfall9 -icholas3 @The ,rigins of the +llustrated Boo0 of the Dead3A Aegyptus HG $%&FG(E %&&=;%H3 4orst9 Pieter <illem "an der and .3 Mansfeld9 eds3 and trans3 An Ale:andrian 4latonist Against 9ualismA Ale:ander of Lycopolis -reatise Q"riti#ue of the 9octrines of +anichaeus> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:'3 4usserl9 )dmund3 @Phenomenology3A +n "ritical -heory Since BDE6< edited by 4aBard Adams and /eroy earle9 HJF=H'3 Tallahassee9 1/E 1lorida tate !ni"ersity Press< %&FH3 +renaeus> Ad%ersus (aereses3 +n Anti@Nicene 'athers> *ol3 %39 translated by A3 Roberts and .3 Donaldson3 -ew Ior0E Charles cribner?s ons9 %&%G3 +"erson9 )ri03 Egyptian and (ermetic 9octrine3 CopenhagenE Museum Tusculanum Press9 %&F'3 .arry9 .acques3 @/e ManichPisme en 7gypte byBantine3A B0'A2 HH $%&HF(E %;%= G:3 .ensen9 oren 3 9ualism and 9emonologyA -he 'unction of 9emonology in 4ythagorean and 4latonic -hought> CopenhagenE Mun0sgaard9 %&HH3 .ohnson9 .anet 43 -he 9emotic &er=al System3 ChicagoE The !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&:H3 .ohnson9 Paul3 A (istory of "hristianity3 4armondsworthE Penguin Boo0s9 %&:H3

4+K .onas9 4ans> -he )nostic $eligion> %&JF3 Reprint> BostonE Beacon Press9 %&HG3 qqqqqqqqqq @Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon3A +n Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uium di +essina< BC@B5 Aprile< BDEE9 edited by !go Bianchi9 &L=%L'3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:L3 qqqqqqqqqq @A Retrospecti"e *iew3A +n 4roceedings of the 0nternational "ollo#uium on )nosticism< Stockholm< August 87@86< BDFC> toc0holmE %&::3 .unge9 1rederic03 @8ur 1ehldatierung des sog3 Den0mals memphitischer Theologie3A +9H0. ;& $%&:G(E%&J=;L'3 .un0er9 4ermann and )rich <inter3 9as )e=urtshaus des -empels der 0sis in 4hil1> <ienE Der csterreichischen A0ademie der <issenschaften9 %&HJ3 5ahle9 P3)3 Balai,ah3 ; "ols3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&J'3 5M0osy9 /3 @8u einer )tymologie "on PhilRE die T+nsel der 8eir?3AActa Anti#ua %H $%&HF(E G&='F3 qqqqqqqqqq @Gnosis und 6gyptische Religion3A +n Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismoA "ollo#uium of +essina< BC@B5 April< BDEE< edited by Bianchi9 !go9 ;GF=':3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:L3 qqqqqqqqqq @A Memphite Triad3A JEA HH $%&FL(E 'F=JG3 qqqqqqqqqq @Temples and 1unerary Beliefs in the Graeco=Roman )poch3A+n L!gyptologie en BDFD< %%:=;:3 ParisE 7ditions du Centre -ational de la Recherche cientifique9 %&F;3 5amil9 .ill3 "optic EgyptA (istory and )uide3 CairoE The American !ni"ersity in Cairo Press9 %&F:3 5emp9 Barry .3 @,ld 5ingdom9 Middle 5ingdom and econd +ntermediate Period3A +n Ancient EgyptA A Social (istory< edited by B3G3 Trigger9 B3.3 5emp9 D3 ,?Connor9 A3B3 /loyd9 :%= %F;3 %&FG3 Reprint3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH3

4+7 5ennedy9 George3 -he Art of 4ersuasion in )reece3 PrincetonE Princeton !ni"ersity Press9 %&HG3 5erferd9 G3B3 -he Sophistic +o%ement> CambridgeA Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&F%3 5ing9 5aren /3 @ ophia and Christ in the Apocryphon of John>A +n 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 edited by 5aren /3 5ing9 %JF=%:H3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF3 5oenen9 /udwig3 @Manichaean Apocalypticism at the Crossroads of +ranian9 )gyptian9 .ewish and Christian Thought3A +n "ode: +anichaicus "oloniensisA Attit del Simposio 0nterna,ionale< $ende@Amantea C@F settem=re BD5K< edited by A3 Roselli and /3 Cirillo9 ;FJ=GG;> CosenBaE Marra )ditore9 %&FH3 5rause9 Martin and Pahor /abib9 9ie 9rei &ersionen des Apokryphon des Johannes> <iesbadenE,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&H;3 /abib9 Pahor3 @)gyptian ur"i"als in the -ag 4ammadi /ibrary3A +n Nag (ammadi and )nosisA 4apers $ead at the 'irst 0nternational "ongress of "optology< edited by3 R3 Mc/3<ilson9 %'&=J%3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 /ambdin9 Thomas ,3 @The Bi"alence of Coptic E-A and Related Problems in the *ocaliBation of )gyptian3A JNES %: $%&JF(E %::=&G3 ^^^^^^^^^ 0ntroduction to Sahidic "optic> Macon9 GAE Mercer !ni"ersity Press9 %&FG3 /ayton9 Bentley9 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> ; "ols3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F& ^^^^^^^^^ -he )nostic Scriptures3 -ew Ior0E Doubleday9 %&F:3 /egge9 1rancis3 'orerunners and $i%als of "hristianityA 'rom CC7 B>"> to CC7 A>9>> ; "ols3 %&;;3 Reprint3 -ew Ior0E !ni"ersity Boo0s9 %&H'3

4+P /es0o9 /eonard 43 -he Ancient Egyptian Book of -wo Gays> Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:;3 /ewis9 -aphtali3 Life in Egypt under $oman $ule3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&F'3 ^^^^^^^^^ )reeks in 4tolemaic EgyptA "ase Studies in the Social (istory of the (ellenistic Gorld3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&FH3 /ewy9 4ans3 "haldaean 2racles and -heurgyA +ysticism +agic and 4latonism in the Later $oman Empire3 %&JH9 Reprint3 ParisE 7tudes Augustiniennes9 %&:F3 /e2a9 1rantise03 9as demotische -oten=uch der 4ariser National=i=liothek3 /eipBigE .3C3 4inrichs9 %&%L3 qqqqqqqqqq @/a /Pgende Gnostique sur Pistis ophia et le Mythe ancien 7gyptien sur l?oeil de RP3A +n Egyptian $eligion3 *ol3%9 no3%=G3 April9 %&GG3 /ichtheim< Miriam> Ancient Egyptian /iterature3 G *ols3 Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:J9 %&:H9 %&FL3 ^^^^^^^^^^ Late Egyptian Gisdom Literature in the 0nternational "onte:t> 1ribourg9 witBerlandE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&FG3 /illa9 al"atore R3C3 "lement of Ale:andriaA A Study in "hristian 4latonism and )nosticism> ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:%3 /loyd9 Alan B3 @The /ate Period9 HH'=G;G BC3A +n Ancient EgyptA A Social (istory< edited by B3G3 Trigger9 B3.3 5emp9 D3 ,?Connor9 A3B3 /loyd9 ;:&=G'F3 %&FG3 Reprint3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH3 /ong9 A3A3 (ellenistic 4hilosophyA Stoics< Epicureans< Sceptics3 ;nd ed3 Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&FH3 MacDermott9 *iolet9 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3 N+++9 -he Books of Jeu and the Intitled te:t in the Bruce "ode:> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 ^^^^^^^^^^ ed3 4istis Sophia3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3

4+,

Magee9 Bryan3 -he 4hilosophy of Schopenhauer3 %&FG3 Reprint3 ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:3 Malaise9 Michel3 @+sisme et Gnosticisme3A +n )nosticisme et monde hellnisti#ue9 Actes du "ollo#ue de Lou%aine@la@Neu%e JBB@BK mars BD57L9 edited by .ulien Ries3 /ou"ain=la=-eu"eE +nstitut ,rientaliste9 %&F;3 Manchester9 Peter3 @The Religious )2perience of Time and )ternity3A +n "lassic +editerranean Spirituality9 edited by A343 Armstrong9 GF'='L:3 /ondonE Routledge U 5egan Paul /td9 %&FH3 Manetho3 Aegyptiaca9 translated by <3G3 <addell3 %&'L3 Reprint3 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&FL3 Mansfield9 .3 @Bad <orld and DemiurgeE A TGnostic? Motif from Parmenides and )mpedocles to /ucretius and Philo3A +n Studies in )nosticism and (ellenistic $eligions9 edited by R3 "an den Broe0 and M3.3 *ermaseren9 ;H%=G%'3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 Martin9 /uther9 43 .r3 @The Anti=Philosophical Polemic and Gnostic oteriology in TThe Treatise on the Resurrection? $CG +9G(3A Numen ;L $%&:G(E ;L=G:3 qqqqqqqqqq (ellenistic $eligions3,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:3 Maystre9 Charles3 Les grands prRtres de 4tah de +emphis> 1reiburg9 witBerlandE !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&&;3 Mee0s9 Dimitri3 @GPnies9 Anges9 DPmons en 7gypte3A +n Sources 2rientales *+++9 )nies< Anges et 9mons> ParisE 7ditions du euil9 %&:%3 Mer0elbach9 Reinhold9 and Maria Totti3 A=rasa:A Ausgew1hlte 4apyri $eligi*sen und +agischen 0nhalts> Band %9 )e=ete3 ,pladenE <estdeutscher *erlag Gmb49 %&&L3

425 Meyer9 Mar"in <3 -he Ancient +ysteries< A Source=ookA Sacred -e:ts of the +ystery religions of the Ancient +editerranean Gorld> an 1ranciscoE 4arper U Row9 %&F:3 Miller9 Patricia Co23 @+n Praise of -onsense3A +n "lassic +editerranean Spirituality9 edited by A343 Armstrong9 'F%=JLJ3 /ondonE Routledge U 5egan Paul /td9 %&FH3 MorenB9 iegfried3 Egyptian $eligion9 translated by Ann )3 5eep3 %&HL3 Reprint3 /ondonE Methuen U Co /td39 %&:G3 Murray9 Gilbert3 'i%e Stages of )reek $eligion> /ondonE <atts U Co39 %&GJ3 Musurillo9 4erbert A39 ed3 -he Acts of the 4agan +artyrs3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&J'3 -icholson9 Graeme3 Seeing and $eading> -ew .erseyE 4umanities Press9 %&F'3 -oc09 Arthur Darby3 Essays on $eligion and the Ancient Gorld3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:;3 ,rlandi9 Tito3 @Coptic /iterature3A +n -he $oots of Egyptian "hristianity9 edited by Birger A3 Pearson3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FH3 ,sborne9 Catherine3 $ethinking Early )reek 4hilosophyA (ippolytus of $ome and the 4resocratics3 +thaca9 -ew Ior0E Cornell !ni"ersity Press9 %&F:3 ,tto9 )berhard3 9ie Biographischen 0nschriften der 1gyptischen Sp1t,eit> /eidenE )3.3 Brill3 ^^^^^^^^^^ )ott und +enschA nach den 1gyptischen -empelinschriften der griechisch@r*mischen ;eit> 4eidelbergE Carl <inter !ni"ersitRts"erlag9 %&H'3 Paglia9 Camille3 Se:ual 4ersonae> -ew Ior0E *intage Boo0s9 %&&%3

42+

Par0er Richard A3 and /eonard 43 /es0o3 @The 5honsu Cosmology3A +n 4yramid Studies and 2ther Essays 4resented to 0>E>S> Edwards< edited by .ohn Baines9 T3G343 .ames9 Anthony /eary and A313 hore9 %HF=:J3 /ondonE )gypt )2ploration ociety9 %&FF3 Parrott9 Douglas M39 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary3 *ol3 N+9 Nag (ammadi "odices &< 8@6 P &0 with 4apyrus Berolinensis 5678 B P K3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:& qqqqqqqqqq@Gnosticism and )gyptian Religion3AN- NN+N9 %9 %&F:3 qqqqqqqqqq @)ugnostos and TAll the Philosophers?3A +n $eligion im Er=e HgyptensA Beitrage ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte ,u Ehren %on Ale:ander B*hlig9 edited by Manfred GQrg3 <iesbadenE,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FF3 qqqqqqqqqq ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3 NN*++< Nag (ammadi "odices 000< C@K and &<B3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&%3 Pearson9 Birger A3 ed3 Nag (ammadi Studies> *ol3 N*< "odices 0M and M3 /eidenE )3.3Brill9 %&F%3 qqqqqqqqqq @The Problem of T.ewish Gnostic? /iterature3A +n Nag (ammadi )nosticism< and Early "hristianity9 edited by Charles <3 4edric0 and Robert 4odgson .r3 Peabody9 MA3E 4endric0son Publications9 %&FH3 qqqqqqqqqq @Re"isiting -orea3A +n 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism< edited by 5aren /3 5ing9 ;HJ=:J3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF3 PerdriBet9 Paul and Gusta"e /efeb"re3 Les )raffites )recs du +emnonion dA=ydos> +nscriptiones Graecae Aegypti3 *ol3 +++3 %&%&3 Reprint3 ChicagoE Arles Publishers +nc39 %&:F3 Per0ins9 Pheme3 @ ophia as Goddess in the -ag 4ammadi Codices3A +n 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism9 edited by 5aren /3 5ing9 %JF=:H3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF3 PPtrement9 imone3 A Separate )odA -he "hristian 2rigins of )nosticism3 %&F'3 Reprint3 -ew Ior0E 4arperCollins9 %&&L3

422 PettaBBoni9 Raffaele3 @Aion > $5ronos( Chronos in )gypt3A +n Essays on the (istory of $eligions9 edited by 43.3 Rose9 %:%=:&3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&H:3 Pian0off9 Ale2ander3 -he Shrines of -ut@Ankh@Amon3 Bollingen eries N/3;> -ew Ior0E Pantheon Boo0s9 %&JJ3 qqqqqqqqqq +ythological 4apyriA -e:ts3 Bollingen eries N/3G3 -ew Ior0E Bollingen 1oundation +nc39 Pantheon Boo0s9 %&J:3 qqqqqqqqqq -he Litany of $e3 Bollingen eries N/3'3 -ew Ior0E Bollingen 1oundation +nc39 Pantheon Boo0s9 %&H'3 Plato3 4hile=us< edited by Dorothea 1rede3 +ndianapolisE 4ac0ett Publishing Co39 %&&G3 Plotinus3 4orphyry on the Life of 4lotinus and the 2rder of (is BooksV Enneads B> B@D>< translated by A3 43 Armstrong> %&HH3 Reprint> /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F&3 qqqqqqqqqq Enneads 000> B@&39 translated by A3 43 Armstrong> %&H:3 Reprint3 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&FL3 qqqqqqqqqq Enneads 0&> B@D>< translated by A3 43 Armstrong> /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F'3 qqqqqqqqqq Enneads &> B@D39 translated by A3 43 Armstrong> /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&F'3 Plutarch3 +orals3 *ol3 ;39 translated by <illiam <3 Goodwin3 BostonE /ittle9 Brown and Company9 %F:'3 qqqqqqqqqq 9e 0side et 2siride< translated by .3Gwyn Griffiths in 4lutarchs 9e 0side et 2siride> CardiffE !ni"ersity of <ales Press9 %&:L3 Polybius9 translated by 13<3 <alban03 Ber0eley and /os AngelesE !ni"ersity of California Press9 %&:;3 Pomeroy9 arah B3 )oddesses< Ghores< Gi%es< and Sla%esA Gomen in "lassical Anti#uity3 -ew Ior0E choc0en Boo0s9 %&:J3

424 PrBybyls0i9 Benno3 @The Role of Calendrical Data in Gnostic /iterature3A &igiliae "hristianae G' $%&FL(E JH=:L3 Vuaegebeur9 .an3 @A propos de Teilouteilou9 nom magique9 et de T_rout_rou9 nom de femme3A Ench ' $%&:'(E %&=;&3 qqqqqqqqqq @The Genealogy of the Memphite 4igh Priest 1amily in the 4ellenistic Period3A +n Studies on 4tolemaic +emphis9 edited by <illy Peremans9 'G=F;3 /o"aniiE tudia 4ellenistica ;'9 %&FL3 Ran0e9 4ermann3 9ie Hgyptischen 4ersonennamen> Band %3 &er,eichnis der Namen> GlXc0stadtE *erlag "on .3.3 Augustin9 %&GJ3 Redford9 Donald9 B3 AkhenatenA -he (eretic .ing3 PrincetonE Princeton !ni"ersity Press9 %&F'3 ^^^^^^^^^^ 4haraonic .ing@Lists< Annals< and 9ay Books3 MississaugaE Benben Publications9 %&FH3 Reedy9 .eremiah3 -he 4latonic 9octrines of Al=inus> Grand Rapids9 M+E Phanes Press9 %&&%3 Reymond9 )3A3)3 'rom the "ontents of the Li=raries of the Suchos -emples in the 'ayyum> Part ++9 Ancient Egyptian (ermetic Gritings3 <ienE *erlag BrXder 4olline09 %&::3 ^^^^^^^^^^ 'rom the $ecords of a 4riestly 'amily from +emphis3 *ol3 %3 <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&F%3 )3A3)3 Reymond and .3<3B3 Barns3 @Ale2andria and MemphisE ome 4istorical ,bser"ations3A 2r 'H $%&::(E %=GG3 Ringgren9 4elmer3 @/ight and Dar0ness in Ancient )gyptian Religion3A +n Li=er AmicorumA Studies in (onour of 4rofessor 9r> ">J> Bleeker> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&H&E %'L=JL3 Rist9 .3M3 4lotinusA -he $oad to $eality3 CambridgeE Cambridge !ni"ersity Press9 %&H:3

42-

Robbins9 Gay3 Gomen in Ancient Egypt> Cambridge MAE 4ar"ard !ni"ersity Press9 %&&G3 Roberts9 C3439 ed3 "atalogue of the )reek and Latin 4apyri in the John $ylands Li=rary +anchester> *ol3 G< -heological and Literary -e:ts> ManchesterE !ni"ersity Press9 %&GF3 Roberts9 <3R3 9emetrius on Style> CambridgeE At the !ni"ersity Press9 %&L;3 Robinson9 .ames M39 ed3 -he Nag (ammadi Li=rary in English3 Grd ed3 /eidenE Brill9 %&FF3 qqqqqqqqqq @*ery Goddess and *ery ManE .esus? Better elf3A +n 0mages of the 'eminine in )nosticism< edited by 5aren /3 5ing9 %%G=;:3 PhiladelphiaE 1ortress Press9 %&FF9 %%G=%;:3 Roeder9 GXnther3 @Die 5osmogonie "on 4ermopolis3A Egyptian $eligion % $%&GG(E %=;:3 Rudolf9 5urt. )nosis translated and edited by Robert Mc/achlan <ilson3 %&::3 Reprint an 1ranciscoE 4arper U Row Publishers9 %&FG3 Runes9 Dagobert3 D3 ed39 9ictionary of 4hilosophy3 -ew .erseyE /ittlefield Adams U Co39 %&H;3 aid9 )dward3 2rientalism3 %&:F3 Reprint3 -ew Ior0E *intage Boo0s9 %&:&3 qqqqqqqqqq "ulture and 0mperialism3 -ew Ior0E Alfred A3 5nopf9 %&&G3 atBinger9 4elmut3 @,n the ,rigin of the ahidic Dialect3A +n Acts of the 8nd 0nternational "ongress of "optic Studies< edited by Tito ,rlandi and 1rederic0 <isse3 RomeE C3+3M39 %&FJ3 auneron9 erge3 -he 4riests of Ancient Egypt3 /ondonE )"ergreen Boo0s9 %&HL3

42. ^^^^^^^^^^ Esna &A Les 'Rtes religieuses dEsna au: derniers siXcles du 4aganisme> CairoE +nstitut fran]ais d?ArchPologie orientale du Caire9 %&H;3 R"e= Qderbergh9 Torgny3 @The Pagan )lements in )arly Christianity and Gnosticism3A +n "ollo#ue 0nternationale sur les -e:tes de Nag 4ammadi9 :%=FJ3 /a"alE /es Presses de l?!ni"ersitPe /a"al9 %&F%3 chelling9 13<3.33 Einleitung in die 4hilosophie der +ythology> 8weite Abtheilung +3 %FJH3 Reprint> Darmstadt9 %&J:3 ^^^^^^^^^^ 4hilosophical En#uiries into the Nature of (uman 'reedom< translated by .ames Gutman3 %FL&3 Reprint3 /a alle9 +/E Columbia !ni"ersity Press9 %&FH3 chen0e9 4ans=Martin3 @Das sethianische ysten nach -ag=4ammadi= 4andschriften3A +n Studia "optica< edited by Peter -agel9 %HJ=:G3 BerlinE Academie *erlag9 %&:'3 qqqqqqqqqq @The Phenomenon and ignificance of Gnostic ethianism9A +n -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism> *ol3 ;9 Sethian )nosticism9 edited by Bentley /ayton9 JFF=H%H3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 chmidt9 Carl3 4istis Sophia< em gnostisches 2riginalwerke> /eipBig9 %&;J3 chopenhauer9 Arthur3 -he Gorld as Gill and $epresentation3 ; "ols39 translated by )313.3 Payne3 -ew Ior0E Do"er Publications9 %&HH3 qqqqqqqqqq 4arerga and 4aralipomena3 ; "ols39 translated by )313.3 Payne3 ,2fordE Clarendon Press9 %&:'3 chott9 iegfried and <olDa )richsen3 'ragmente memphitischer -heologie in demotischer Schrift3 Abb3 Des Geistes u3 oBialwiss3 5/3 Der A0ad3 in MainB %&J'3 qqqqqqqqqq B/cher und Spr/che gegen den )ott Seth> Irkunden des aegyptischen Alterums> Irkunden +ythologischen 0nhalts< 4eft +3 /eipBig9 %&;&3 houcri9 Rachad Mounir3 @1rom the 4ieroglyphs to the Cross9 )gyptian Philosophy and Christian Gnosis3APaper presented at the Grd +nternational Congress of )gyptology9 Toronto9 %&F;3

42K

chuman9 *erne B3 @A econd=Century Treatise on )gyptian Priests and Temples3A (-$ /+++ $%&HL(E %J&=:L3 cott< <alter9 ed3 and trans39 (ermetica3 ' "ols3 BostonE hambhala Publications9 %&FJ3 egal9 Alan3 @4ellenistic Magic3A +n Studies in )nosticism and (ellenistic $eligions9 edited by R3 *an den Broe0 and M3.3 *ermaseren9 G'&='%%3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 eston9 <3 @/?7gypte ManichPenne3A "d! %' $%&G&(E GH;=:;3 ethe9 5urt3 @Das *erhRltnis Bwischen Demotisch und 5optisch und seine /ehren fXr die Geschichte der Rgyptische prache3A ;9+) :& $%&;J(E ;&L=G%H3 qqqqqqqqqq -he=anische -empelinschriften aus )riechisch@$*mischer ;eit< in BerlinE Academie *erlag9 %&J:3 qqqqqqqqqq@8ur altRgyptischen age "om onnenauge das in fer 1erne war3A+n Intersuchungen ,ur )eschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens> *ol3 J3 %&%;3 Reprint3 4ildesheimE Georg ,lms *erlagsbuchhandlung9 %&H'3 ieber9 .ohn 439 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3 NNN+< Nag (ammadi "odices &0003 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&&% mith9 Morton3 @The 4istory of the Term Gnosti0os3A+n -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism> *ol3 ;9 Sethian )nosticism9 edited by Bentley /ayton9 :&H= FLF3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 qqqqqqqqqq @The )ighth Boo0 of Moses and 4ow it Grew $P/eid3 . G&J(3A +n Atti del M&00 "ongresso interna,ionale di papirologia< HFG=&G> -apoliE Centro +nternaBionale per lo studio di papiri ercolanesi9 %&F'3 piegelberg9 <ilhelm3 9er 1gyptische +ythus %om Sonnenauge3 trassburgE trassburger Druc0erei und "erlagsanstalt9 %&%:3 qqqqqqqqqq @*ariaE )ine neuelegende Xber die Geburt des 4orus3A;HS JG $%&%:(9 &'=&:3

427

tead, G3C3 @The *alentinian Myth of ophia3A Journal of -heological Studies9 -3 39 *ol NN9 Pt3% $April9 %&H&(E :J=%L;3 teiner9 George3 After Ba=elA Aspects of Language and -ranslation> ,2fordE ,2ford !ni"ersity Press9 %&:J3 ternberg9 4ei0e3 +ythische +oti%e und +ythen=ildung in den Hgyptischen -empeln und 4apyri der )riechisch@$*mischen ;eit> GQttinger ,rientforschungen9 +*3 ReiheE Hgypten3 <eisbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FJ3 trabo3 -he )eography< translated by 43/3 .ones3 %&G;3 Reprint3 /oeb Classical /ibrary9 %&H:3 tric0er9 B343 @De +ndeeling der )gyptische Taalgeschiedenis3A 2+$2 J $%&'J(E %;=J%3 ^^^^^^^^^^ -he "orpus (ermeticum9 Mnemosyne3 er3 +*9 *ol3 ++3 %&'&3 qqqqqqqqqq @De Brief "an Aristeas3A *erhandelingen d3 -ederl3 A0ad39 Afd3 /etter0inde9 -3 3 H;9 no3 ' $%&JH(3 troumsa9 Gedaliahu G3 @Monachisme et Marrianisme cheB les ManichPens d?)gypte3A Numen ; $%&F;(E %F'=;L%3 undermann9 <erner3 +itteliranische manich1ische -e:te kirchengeschichtlichen 0nhalts< B-- BB9 no3 G3G BerlinE A0ademie *erlag9 %&F%3 Tardieu9 Michel3 @/es ManichPens en )gypte3ABS'E &' $%&F;(E J=%&3 ^^^^^^^^^^ Ecrits gnosti#uesA "ode: de Berlin3 ParisE /es 7ditions du cerf9 %&F'3 Tcheri0o"er9 *ictor3 (ellenistic "i%ilisation and the Jews3 -ew Ior0E Athenaeum9 %&:L3 te *elde9 433 @The )gyptian God eth as Tric0ster3A JA$"E *++ $%&HF(E G:='L3

42P qqqqqqqqq Seth< )od of "onfusion> /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&::3 qqqqqqqqq @Relations and Conflicts between )gyptian Gods9 particularly in the Di"ine )nnead of 4eliopolis3A +n Struggles of )ods> 4apers of the )roningen Gork )roup for the Study of the (istory of $eligions9 edited by 43G3 5ippenberg3 -ew Ior0E Mouton Publishers9 %&F'3 Thausig9 Gertrude3 @Die AusdrXc0e fXr T)wig? im ogyptischen3A+0'A2 HH $%&G'(E GF=';3 ThPodoridfs9 Aristide3 @De l?assimilation g la Di"initP dans la agesse de l?ancienne 7gypte3A +n )nosticisme et monde hllenisti#ue3 Actes du "ollo#ue de Lou%aine@la@Neu%e JBB@BK mars BD57L9 edited by .ulien Ries3 /ou"ain=la=-eu"eE+nstitut ,rientaliste9 %&F;3 Thissen9 43.3 @6gyptische BeitrRge Bu den griechischen magischen Papyri3A +n $eligion und 4hilosophie im Alten Hgypten9 edited by !rsula *erhoe"en and )rhart Graefe9 ;&G=GL;3 /eu"enE !itge"eriD Peeters3 Till9 <alter C3 and 4ans=Martin chen0e3 9ie )nostischen Schriften des .optischen 4apyrus Berolinensis 56783 BerlinE A0ademie *erlag9 %&:;3 Tobin9 *incent Arieh> -heological 4rinciples of Egyptian $eligion3 -ew Ior0E Peter /ang9 %&F&3 Torhoudt9 Albert3 Een 2n=ekend )nostisch Systeem in 4lutarchus 9e 0side et 2siride3 /o"aniiE tudia 4ellenistica9 %&';3 *allPe9 GPrard3 A Study in Anti@)nostic 4olemicsA 0renaeus< (ippolytus< and Epiphanius3 tudies in Christianity and .udaism9 no3 %3 <aterlooE <ilfred /aurier !ni"ersity Press9 %&F%3 "an Den Broe09 R3 and M3.3 *ermaseren3 ed3 Studies in )nosticism and (ellenistic $eligions Jpresented to )> _uispel on the occasion of his E6th Birthday3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3

42, "an der 4orst< Pieter <illem9 and .3 Mansfeld3 An Ale:andrian 4latonist Against 9ualism3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill %&:'3 "an der 4orst< Pieter <illem9 "haeremonA Egyptian 4riest and Stoic 4hilosopher3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F:3 *ergote9 .oseph9 @Der ManichRismus in 6gypten3A +n 9er +anich1ismus< edited by Geo <idengren< ;%'=;'3 DarmstadtE <issenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft9 %&::3 *ycichl9 <erner3 9ictionaire !tymologi#ue de la Langue "opte3 /eu"enE 7dition Peeters9 %&FG3 <aterfield9 Robin9 ed3 Jaco= Boehme Essential $eadings> <ellingboroughE The Aquarian Press9 %&F&3 <atterson9 Barbara3 @The !se of Alliteration in Ptolemaic3A +n )limpses of Ancient EgyptA Studies in (onour of (>G> 'airman< edited by .ohn Ruffle9 G3A3 Gaballa and 5enneth A3 5itchen9 %H:=H&3 <arminster9 )nglandE Aris and Phillips9 %&:&3 <est9 tephanie3 @The Gree0 *ersion of the /egend of Tefnut3A JEA JJ $%&H&(E %H%=FG3 <estendorf9 <olfhart3 @8weitheit9 Dreiheit9 und )inheit in der altRgyptichen Theologie3A ;AS %LL $%&:'(E %GH='%3 <heelwright9 Philip3 -he 4resocratics> +ndianapolisE Bobbs=Merrill9 %&FG3 <idengren9 Geo3 @/es origines du gnosticisme et l?histoire des religions3A +n Le 2rigini 9ello )nosticismo9 "ollo#uio di +essina< BC@B5 April< %&HH9 ;F= HL3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:L3 <ilson9 .ohn A3 -he "ulture of Ancient Egypt> ChicagoE Chicago !ni"ersity of Chicago Press9 %&J%3

445

<ilson9 R3 Mc/39 ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3N+++< -he Books of Jeu and the Intitled -e:t in the Bruce "ode:3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 qqqqqqqqqq ed3 -he "optic )nostic Li=rary> *ol3 +N9 4istis Sophia3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&:F3 qqqqqqqqqq @Gnostic ,rigins an )gyptian ConnectionSA +n $eligion im Er=e HgyptensA Beitrage ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte ,u Ehren %on Ale:ander B*hlig3 <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FF3 <isse9 1rederi03 @ tal0ing Those )lusi"e ethians3A +n -he $edisco%ery of )nosticism3 *ol3 ;9 Sethian )nosticism9 edited by Bentley /ayton9 JHG=:H3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&F%3 qqqqqqqqqq @The !se of )arly Christian /iterature as )"idence for +nner Di"ersity and Conflict3A +n Nag (ammadi< )nosticism< and Early "hristianity9 edited by Charles <3 4endric0 and Robert 4odgson .r39 %::= &L3 MAE 4endric0son Publishers +nc39 %&FH3 <itt9 R3)3 0sis in the )raeco@$oman Gorld3 /ondonE Thames and 4udson9 %&:%3 <orrell9 <illiam 43 @A Coptic <iBard?s 4oard3AAJSL 'H $%&GL(E ;G&=H;3 Iamauchi9 )dwin M3 4re@"hristian )nosticismA A sur%ey of the 4roposed E%idences $;nd ed3(3 Grand Rapids9 M+E Ba0er Boo0 4ouse9 %&FG3 Ioyotte9 .ean3 @Ba0hthis3 Religion Pgyptienne et culture grecque g )dfou3A +n $eligions en !gypte hellnisti#ue et romaine9 %;:='%3 ParisE Presses uni"ersitaires de 1rances9 %&H&3 8ab0ar9 /ouis *3 (ymns to 0sis in (er -emple at 4hilae3 4ano"erE Brandeis !ni"ersity Press9 %&FF3 qqqqqqqqqq @ ome ,bser"ations on T3G3 Allen?s )dition of The Boo0 of the Dead3A JNES ;' $%&HJ(E :J=F:3 8andee9 .an3 9eath as an EnemyA According to Ancient Egyptian "onceptions3 /eidenE )3.3 Brill9 %&HL3

44+ qqqqqqqqqq-he -erminology of 4lotinus and of some )nostic Gritings< +ainly the 'ourth treatise of the Jung "ode:3 /eidenE -ederlands 4istorisch= Archaeologisch +nstituut in het -abiDe ,osten9 %&H%3 qqqqqqqqqq @ eth als turmgottA9 ;HS &L $%&HG(E %''=JH3 qqqqqqqqqq @Der Androgyne Gott in 6gypten ein )rscheinungsbild des <eltschQpfers3A +n $eligion im Er=e HgyptensA Beitrage ,ur sp1tantiken $eligiongeschichte ,u Ehren %on Ale:ander B*hlig3 <iesbadenE ,tto 4arrassowitB9 %&FF3

442

444

If not for a fragrance in this vacant room $for Chris( +f not for a fragrance in this "acant room where mottled memory should sin in rich forgetfulness + would shade dimly in your "aulted tomb3 /o"e of self fasts now upon the barrens9 Tmidst the gloom The dus0=daunted hush U cry of twilight would bless if not for a fragrance in this "acant room3 Abo"e wild cries9 the grief=stric0en groom +n satiating quiet9 remorse ransoms words unsaid9 lest + would shade dimly in your "aulted tomb3 <ould not fondness fail in its unending tra"ails9 e2hume the bitter=sweet curse of anamnesis9 "oid a fearful tenderness if not for a fragrance in this "acant roomS <ithout occult words drawn out upon a poet?s loom wea"ing e"ergreen the failed and lo"ely9 this airy caress + would shade dimly in your "aulted tomb3 Dar0ened souls alight9 gather fire in the mantling brume e"en 0issed by power ethereal9 it is e"er you9 + confess== +f not for a fragrance in this "acant room + would shade dimly in your "aulted tomb3

44-

I:ve studied the scenario and secretly (ished to follo( some dark (oman as did he through the s(eating arcades, and further do(n as hero or anti$hero of the aDaars, a more modest !hrist$figure, son of Man chronicling the carefully choreographed fall and mapping the flames (eaving along the ody:s hot horiDons. #o e&perience that pain reversing itself and a fallen (oman ecome goddess. 3ages in to(ers look do(n into shado( filled (ith thoughts (orse than any deed. I:ve studied the scenario and might e a le to (ear the (hore:s kiss like a enediction) UI (ill perfect you in all mysteries of the ?ight and all GnosisV $ 'istis 3ophia to feel distant 0isdom mine at last red like a storm at sunset eyond this spectral to(n, her smile stretched et(een heaven and earth a crimson slash upon my cheek.