STUDIES

in Roman and
: | :. : BIRGER A. PEARSON c | o|clark
 STUDIES IN ANTIQUITY AND CHRISTIANITY

Ascetic Behavior in Greco-Roman Antiquity: A Sourcebook

Vincent L. Wimbush, editor

Elijah in Upper Egypt: “The Apocalypse of Elijah”

and Early Egyptian Christianity
David Frankfurter
The Letters of St. Antony: Monasticism and the Making of a Saint
Samuel Rubenson
Women and Goddess Traditions: In Antiquity and Today
Karen L. King, editor

Ascetics, Society, and the Desert:

Studies in Early Egyptian Monasticism
James E. Goehring
The Formation of Q: Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections
John S. Kloppenborg
Reading the Hebrew Bible for a New Millennium:
Volume 1: Theological and Hermeneutical Studies
Volume 2: Exegetical and Theological Studies
Wonil Kim, Deborah Ellens, Michael Floyd,
and Marvin A. Sweeney, editors
Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism
Karen L. King, editor

Mimesis and Intertexuality in Antiquity and Christianity

Dennis R. MacDonald, editor

Wholly Woman, Holy Blood:

A Feminist Critique of Purity and Impurity
Kristin De Troyer, Judith A. Herbert, Judith Ann Johnson,
and Anne-Marie Korte, editors

Gnosticism and Christianity in Roman and Coptic Egypt

Birger A. Pearson
STUDIES IN ANTIQUITY AND CHRISTIANITY

¥
The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity
Claremont Graduate School
Claremont, California

Editorial Board

Dennis R. MacDonald, Director

Kristin De Troyer
Deborah L. Ellens
James D. Hester
Ronald F. Hock
F. Stanley Jones
Rolf P. Knierim
Marvin W. Meyer
Edward N. O’Neil
Birger A. Pearson
Jonathan L. Reed
Gesine S. Robinson
James M. Robinson
Michele R. Salzman
Tammi L. Schneider
Teresa M. Shaw
Marvin A. Sweeney
Karen Torjesen
 G M Elliott Library
Cincinnati Christian Universi
2700 Glenway
PO Box 04320
Cincinnati, OH 45204-3206

Crh

STUDIES IN ANTIQUITY & CHRISTIANITY

GNOSTICISM Anp
CHRISTIANITY
in Roman and Coptic Egypt

BIRGER A. PEARSON

T&T CLARK INTERNATIONAL

+ A Continuum imprint
S NEW YORK * LONDON
 7) “| b ; p O|

Copyright © 2004 by The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission
of the publisher.
T & T Clark International, Madison Square Park, 15 East 26th Street, New York,
NY 10010

T & T Clark International, The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX

T & T Clark International is a Continuum imprint.

Cover art: Baptism scene. Relief (third century C.E.) on a fluted sarcophagus with
rectangular fields. From Lungotevere, Rome. Museo Nazionale Romano delle
Terme, Rome, Italy. Erich Lessing / Art Resource, New York.

Cover design: Laurie Westhafer

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Pearson, Birger Albert.
Gnosticism and Christianity in Roman and Coptic Egypt / Birger A.
Pearson.
p. cm. — (Studies in antiquity and Christianity)
Includes indexes.
ISBN 0-567-02610-8 (pbk.)
1. Egypt-Church history. 2. Church history —Primitive and early
church, ca. 30-600. 3. Gnosticism. I. Title. II. Series.
BR190.P43 2004
276.2'01—dce22
2003022196

Printed in the United States of America

04 05 06 O07 O08 09 10 Foe oe eS aS! 2 od

FOR ANDERS KRISTIAN
 Contents

Preface

Abbreviations

The Coptic Gnostic Library xili

Introduction

Part 1
CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

. Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity

in Egypt 11
. Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 82
. Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 100
. A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter
of Alexandria 114
. Enoch in Egypt eye
. A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 153
Part 2
GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

. Gnosticism as a Religion 201

. Gnostic Ritual and Iamblichus’s Treatise
On the Mysteries of Egypt 224
2: Gnostic Iconography 249
10. The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 268
Summary and Conclusions 283
Index of Ancient Sources 289
Index of Modern Authors 297
 ag beltee qeang gnit ad75] bes.
_@ Se
mt Tall Sie
at wed 1 abotataeal a ‘

= > ct Hohelria ee or eee ot quo f ’

rs , —_ a:
1A
s =yral nl abort=
Tour: Cor 7 Pint = .

a farims)

) VJ { -.)

é i }
 Preface

This book is the seventh in a series of books published as part of

the “Roots of Egyptian Christianity” project based at the Institute
for Antiquity and Christianity of The Claremont Graduate School
in Claremont, California. I became project director in 1981 and in
1983, together with James E. Goehring, then Assistant Director
of the Institute, I presided over an international colloquium on
“The Roots of Egyptian Christianity” held at Claremont and in
Santa Barbara (where I was then a professor). The papers from that
colloquium became the basis for the first book in the Institute’s
new series, “Studies in Antiquity and Christianity”: The Roots of
Egyptian Christianity (edited by Birger A. Pearson and James E.
Goehring, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). The other volumes
in the “Roots of Egyptian Christianity” subseries are:

Tim Vivian, Saint Peter of Alexandria: Bishop and Martyr (Phila-

delphia: Fortress Press, 1988).

Birger A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity

(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1990).

David Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt: The Apocalypse of Eli-

jah and Early Egyptian Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1293).

Samuel Rubenson, The Letters of St. Antony: Monasticism and the

Making of a Saint (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995).

James E. Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert: Studies

in Early Egyptian Monasticism (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press
International, 1999).
x Preface

Nine of the chapters in this book are revised versions of es-

says published earlier. I wish to acknowledge here with thanks
permission to use previously published material: For chapter 2:
Augsburg Fortress Publishers, Minneapolis, and the President and
Fellows of Harvard College; for chapter 3: The Archaeological
Society of Alexandria, Egypt; for chapter 4: Peeters Publish-
ers, Leuven, Belgium; for chapter 5: Trinity Press International,
Harrisburg, Pa.; for chapter 6: the Society of Biblical Literature,
Atlanta; for chapter 7: the Finnish Exegetical Society, Helsinki;
for chapter 8: SUNY Press, Albany, N.Y.; for chapter 9: Upp-
sala University, Sweden; and for chapter 10: Lund University
and Plus Ultra, Sweden. Bibliographical details are given in the
Introduction, below.
I wish to express my gratitude to Dennis R. MacDonald, Direc-
tor of the Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, and my other
colleagues on the Studies in Antiquity and Christianity Editorial
Board for accepting this book into the series. My cordial thanks,
too, are offered to Henry Carrigan, Editorial Director of T & T
Clark International, and Amy Wagner, Senior Managing Editor,
for valuable assistance in seeing this book through the press.
Thanks, too, to David Aiken, who served as the copyeditor, and
John Eagleson, typesetter. They both did a magnificent job.
The indexes were prepared by Lisa Karnan, a doctoral candidate
at The Claremont Graduate University. My thanks to her for an
excellent job, and to the Institute for Antiquity and Christianity
for subsidizing the preparation of the indexes.
I dedicated my edition of Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X,
published in 1981, to my wife, Karen, and to my children, Ingrid,
David, Kristin, Daniel, and Sven. Since then we have been blessed
with another son, Anders Kristian, born in 1986. Anders shares
his dad’s enthusiasm for Egyptian history and culture; so I take
great pleasure in dedicating this book to him, with much love.
 Abbreviations

BCNH Bibliotheque copte de Nag Hammadi

BG Papyrus Berolinensis Gnosticus 8502
CSCO Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium
NewDocs New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity
NHC Nag Hammadi Codex (=Cairensis Gnosticus)
NHL The Nag Hammadi Library in English (3d ed.; ed. J. M.
Robinson and R. Smith; San Francisco: Harper &
Row/ Leiden: Brill, 1988)

NHMS Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies (=NHS)

NHS Nag Hammadi Studies
NTApoc New Testament Apocrypha (ed. W. Schneemelcher;
rev. ed.; English trans. edited by R. M. Wilson;
2 vols. St. Louis: Westminster, 1991-92)
ORNY The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charles-
worth; 2 vols.; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday,
1983-85)

xi
oat ae)

=) 2 t : *
 The Coptic Gnostic Library

[1 Prayer of the Apostle Paul

V2 Apocryphon of James
166) Gospel of Truth
L4 Treatise on the Resurrection

Ip Tripartite Tractate
IL,1 Apocryphon of John
II,2 Gospel of Thomas
IL,3 Gospel of Philip
IL4 Hypostasis of the Archons
jes On the Origin of the World
IL,6 Exegesis on the Soul

Wy Book of Thomas the Contender

IL1 Apocryphon of John
NL2 Gospel of the Egyptians
wits Eugnostos the Blessed
L4 Sophia of Jesus Christ
TIL5 Dialogue of the Savior
IV,1 Apocryphon of John
IV2 Gospel of the Egyptians
VA Eugnostos the Blessed
V2 Apocalypse of Paul

xiii
xiv The Coptic Gnostic Library

V,3 (First) Apocalypse of James

V/A (Second) Apocalypse of James
V,5 Apocalypse of Adam
Vil Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles
VI,2 Thunder: Perfect Mind
VES Authoritative Teaching
VIA Concept of Our Great Power
VL5 Plato, Republic 588a—89b
VL6 Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
VL7 Prayer of Thanksgiving
VL8 Asclepius 21-29
VIL1 Paraphrase of Shem
VIL2 Second Treatise of the Great Seth
VIL3 Apocalypse of Peter
VIL4 Teachings of Silvanus
VIL5 Three Steles of Seth
VIL,1 Zostrianos
Vil,2 Letter of Peter to Philip
IX,1 Melchizedek
IX,2 Thought of Norea
IX,3 Testimony of Truth
X,1 Marsanes
XI,1 Interpretation of Knowledge
X12 A Valentinian Exposition
X1,2a On the Anointing
 The Coptic Gnostic Library XV

X1,2b On Baptism A
XI,2c On Baptism B
XI,2d On the Eucharist A
XI,2e On the Eucharist B
X13 Allogenes
XL4 Hypsiphrone
XIL1 Sentences of Sextus
XZ Gospel of Truth
XIL3 Fragments
XIIL,1 Trimorphic Protennoia
XIIL,2 On the Origin of the World
BG,1 Gospel of Mary
BG,2 Apocryphon of John
BG,3 Sophia of Jesus Christ
BGA Act of Peter
Bruce Codex First Book of Jeu
Bruce Codex Second Book of Jeu
Bruce Codex Untitled Text
Askew Codex Pistis Sophia (four books)
 Introduction

This book contains some results of research on Christianity and

Gnosticism that I have conducted over the past several years. Nine
of the ten chapters are revised versions of essays published else-
where. Only the first chapter, by far the longest, is presented for
the first time here. I have divided the book into two parts. The
first part, “Christianity in Egypt,” consists of the first six chap-
ters. The second part, “Gnosticism in Egypt,” consists of the last
four chapters.
Chapter 1, “Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity
in Egypt,” is divided into two parts. The first part consists of six
mini-essays in which I discuss current scholarly research on the
following topics:
1. current theories of Christian origins in Egypt
2. social groups, early Christian organization, and the growth of
the Egyptian Christian hierarchy
3. Gnosticism and early Manichaeism in Egypt
4. the catechetical school in Alexandria
5. the spread of Christianity from Alexandria into the Egyptian
countryside
6. origins of Egyptian monasticism

In the second part of chapter 1, I attempt to identify the sources

for our knowledge of early Christianity in Egypt through the
third century. These sources consist of documents, mostly pri-
vate letters, and a great number of literary texts. A major issue in
discussing the literary evidence is that of establishing the prove-
nance of any given text. While the Egyptian provenance of some
of the available texts is undisputed, that of others is question-
able or in dispute among scholars. Another factor in arranging

1
2 Introduction

the evidence is the so-called heretical (mainly Gnostic) character

of many of the texts. I discuss the available literary evidence in
six sections:

1. second-century non-Gnostic literature of Egyptian provenance

2. second-century non-Gnostic literature of disputed or question-
able provenance
4
3. second-century Gnostic or other heretical literature of Egyp-
tian provenance
4. second-century Gnostic or other heretical literature of dis-
puted or questionable provenance
5. third-century non-Gnostic literature of Egyptian provenance
6. writings in the Coptic-Gnostic manuscripts:

a. Sethian Gnostic writings

b. Valentinian Gnostic writings
c. Gnostic writings of uncertain affiliation
d. Hermetic writings
e. Non-Gnostic writings

In the course of this survey I offer my own assessment of the

provenance and date of writings that are open to doubt or subject
to scholarly dispute. So far as I am aware, this is the first attempt
at cataloging all of the literary evidence for Egyptian Christianity
from the second and third centuries.
Chapter 2, “Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria,”
is a substantially revised and expanded version of an article pub-
lished in 1986 in a Festschrift dedicated to one of my Harvard
teachers, Krister Stendahl.’ With special attention to works of

1. B. A. Pearson, “Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria,” in Christians

among Jews and Gentiles: Essays in Honor of Krister Stendahl on His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (ed.
G. W. E. Nickelsburg and G. MacRae; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 206-16 (= Harvard
Theological Review 79 [1984, published 1986]), 206-16.
 Introduction 3

Philo Judaeus of Alexandria and two Alexandrian Christian writ-

ings, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Teachings of Silvanus (NHC
VILA), I discuss two varieties of Christianity that probably existed
within the first-century Jewish community of Alexandria.
Chapter 3, “Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark,” is a re-
vised version of an article in a memorial volume published by
the Archeological Society of Alexandria in 1993.* The volume was
intended as a Festschrift dedicated to one of the deans of Alex-
andrian archeology, Daoud Abdu Daoud, whom I was privileged
to meet on research trips to Alexandria. As a result of his un-
timely death in 1990 the volume turned into a memorial. The
article was also published for discussion in a seminar on Philo
of Alexandria held at the annual meeting of the Society of Bibli-
cal Literature in San Francisco in 1997.° In this chapter I discuss
the topography of Alexandria and the locations of early Chris-
tian activity in Alexandria as reflected in the fourth-century Acts
of Mark.
Chapter 4, “A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter
of Alexandria,” is a revised version of a paper presented at the
Eleventh International Conference on Patristic Studies in Oxford
in 1991 and subsequently published in the conference proceed-
ings.* In this chapter I attempt to isolate an original homily
attributable to St. Peter of Alexandria, seventeenth bishop of Al-
exandria (300-311) and martyr, now embedded in a larger Coptic
homily featuring the archangel Michael and published by me
and a former student, Tim Vivian.’ The original Petrine homily
would have been composed in Greek and reflects the influence of
Clement of Alexandria.

2. B. A. Pearson, “The Acts of Mark and the Topography of Ancient Alexandria,” in

Alexandrian Studies in Memoriam Daoud Abdu Daoud (ed. N. Swelim; Société Archéologique
d’Alexandrie, Bulletin 45; Alexandria: Archeological Society of Alexandria, 1994), 239-46.
3. B. A. Pearson, “Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark,” in Society of Biblical Literature
Seminar Papers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 273-84.
4. B. A. Pearson, “A Coptic Homily On Riches attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria,” in
Studia Patristica 26: Papers Presented at the Eleventh International Conference on Patristic Studies
Held in Oxford 1991 (ed. E. A. Livingstone; Louvain: Peeters, 1993), 296-307.
5. B. A. Pearson and T. Vivian, Two Coptic Homilies Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria:
On Riches; On the Epiphany (Corpus dei manoscritti copti letterari; Rome: CIM, 1993), 7-144.
~ Introduction

Chapter 5, “Enoch in Egypt,” is a revised version of an article

contributed to a Festschrift in honor of George W. E. Nickelsburg.°
In this chapter I discuss various pseudonymous books attributed
to the antediluvian patriarch, circulating or composed in Egypt,
and the extent of their influence. I also discuss various traditions
pertaining to the figure of Enoch reflected in Coptic texts and
Coptic archeology. The Bible says that Enoch “walked with God;
and he was not, for God took him” (Gen 5:24). He was a popular
saint in some of the Coptic monasteries until around the ninth or
tenth century.
Chapter 6, “A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon,” also dealing with 7

the figure of Enoch, is a substantial revision of a lengthy article

published in 1976 and including an edition and translation of nine
papyrus fragments housed in the Pierpont Morgan Library in New
York, where I spent a week during the summer of 1975.’ In the
version published here I include a new edition of the fragments,
a slightly revised version of the translation, and a substantially
revised discussion of the fragments and the traditions reflected
in them. The fragmentary text is an apocryphal work probably
composed in Coptic in the fifth or sixth century. It features the
role of Enoch as scribe of righteousness in the judgment.
In chapter 7, “Gnosticism as a Religion,” the first chapter of
part 2, I attempt to define and delineate Gnosticism in terms of
the history and phenomenology of religions. The original version
of this chapter was a paper presented in absentia in a special ses-
sion of the Society of Biblical Literature International Meeting in
Helsinki, Finland, in July 1999, devoted to the topic “Was There a
Gnostic Religion?” That session was sparked in large measure by
a book that has gained a good deal of attention, Rethinking “Gnos-
ticism:” An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category, by Michael

6. B. A. Pearson, “Enoch in Egypt,” in For a Later Generation: The Transformation of

Tradition in Israel, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity (ed. R. Argall et al.; Harrisburg, Pa.:
Trinity, 2000), 216-31.
7. B. A. Pearson, “The Pierpont Morgan Fragments of a Coptic Enoch Apocryphon,”
in Studies on the Testament of Abraham (ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Society of Biblical Literature
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976), 227-83.
 Introduction 5

Williams of the University of Washington.® My Helsinki paper ex-

panded on a plenary paper presented at the Sixteenth Congress of
the International Association for the History of Religions in Rome
in September 1990 and subsequently published in the congress
proceedings,’ with which Williams took issue in his book. In this
chapter I discuss the problem of assessing ancient evidence for
the purpose of delineating historically and morphologically what
I call “the Gnostic religion,” a religion that was especially promi-
nent and persistent in Egypt. I also argue for retaining the term
Gnosticism as a designation for this religion.
Chapter 8, “Gnostic Ritual and Iamblichus’s Treatise On the
Mysteries of Egypt,” is a substantially revised version of a paper pre-
sented to the Sixth International Conference of the International
Society for Neoplatonic Studies at the University of Oklahoma in
1984, a conference specifically devoted to the relationships between
ancient Platonism and ancient Gnosticism, and subsequently pub-
lished in the conference proceedings.'’ In this chapter I discuss
several passages in certain Nag Hammadi tractates that reflect a rit-
ual context and attempt to extrapolate the ritual theories reflected
in them with comparative reference to ritual theories espoused by
Neoplatonist philosopher Iamblichus of Chalcis in his treatise On
the Mysteries of Egypt.
Chapter 9, “Gnostic Iconography,” is a revised version of an
article published in a Festschrift for a Swedish colleague, Jan
Bergman." In this chapter I survey the evidence, which is quite

8. M. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism:” An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious

Category (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996).
9. B. A. Pearson, “Is Gnosticism a Religion?” in The Notion of “Religion” in Comparative
Research: Selected Proceedings of the XVIth Congress of the International Association for the History
of Religions, Rome, 3rd—8th September, 1990 (ed. U. Bianchi; Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider,
1994), 105-14. The Helsinki conference proceedings are forthcoming in a book edited by
Antti Marjanen.
10. B. A. Pearson, “Theurgic Tendencies in Gnosticism and Iamblichus’s Conception
of Theurgy,” in Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (ed. R. T. Wallis and J. Bregman; Studies in
Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern 6; Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992),
253-79.
11. B. A. Pearson, “Gnostic Iconography,” in “Being Religious and Living through the
Eyes:” Studies in Religious Iconography and Iconology: A Celebratory Publication in Honour of
Professor Jan Bergman (ed. P. Schalk; Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Historia Religionum 14;
Uppsala: Uppsala University Press, 1998), 289-301.
6 Introduction

modest, for Gnostic iconography. I treat in some detail the Ophite

Diagram described by Celsus and Origen and used by Gnos-
tic Christians in second-century Egypt, an Egyptian Gnostic
gemstone, a Gnostic amulet of unknown provenance, and the
remarkable ideographs inscribed on numerous pages in the fifth-
century Bruce Codex containing the Coptic text of the Gnostic
Books of Jeu. ey
Chapter 10, “The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature,” is a
substantially revised and expanded version of a paper presented
at an international conference on Manichaeism held at the Uni-
versity of Lund, Sweden, in 1987 and published in the conference
proceedings.'* With special attention to the Greek and Coptic ev-
idence from Egypt, I argue that the third-century prophet Mani
was influenced by Sethian Gnosticism in the formation of his new
religion.
I should here provide some justification for my use of the phrase
Roman and Coptic Egypt in the title of the book. “Roman” can conve-
niently be defined chronologically with reference to imperial rule
extending into the reign of Constantine, the first Christian em-
peror. Scholars usually speak of the Byzantine era as beginning
with the founding of Constantinople at the site of ancient Byzan-
tium in 330, which became capital of the Eastern Roman Empire.
Some scholars use the term Byzantine with reference to Egyptian
history as well, the Byzantine era in Egypt ending with the Arab
conquest in 641. In terms of Egyptian cultural history, one can just
as well refer to Egypt in the period 330-641 as “Coptic Egypt,”
when Coptic literature was developing and flourishing.'? More
than that, one can observe a cultural continuity among Egyptian
Christians that extended into the period after the Arab conquest,
for Coptic literature continued to flourish for several centuries
12. B. A. Pearson, “The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature,” in Manichaean Studies:
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Manichaeism (ed. P. Bryder; Lund Studies
in African and Asian Religions 1; Lund: Plus Ultra, 1988), 147-55.
13. “Coptic” actually means “Egyptian” (Arabic Qubt is derived from Greek Aigyptos).
I use the term here to refer to the language once spoken by native Egyptians and the
vehicle of Egyptian Christian literature until its displacement by Arabic. By extension,
Coptic defines Egyptian Christianity; the Coptic language is still retained in the worship
services of the Coptic church.
 Introduction /

thereafter.’* Indeed, chapter 4 of this book deals with a text that

may have been composed after the Arab conquest.
It is my hope that this book will provide the occasion for further
study by scholars of Egyptian Christianity and Gnosticism. More
importantly, I hope that it will be of interest not only to scholars
but also to educated readers of the general public. I certainly in-
clude in the latter category modern-day Egyptian Christians and
members of the very substantial Coptic Diaspora. After all, it is
their history that I have tried in my small way to illuminate in
this book.

14. On the history of Coptic literature, see T. Orlandi, “Coptic Literature,” in The Roots
of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and
Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 51-81.
 | Pik Mies
re
7 ve .
>4 ’ - - ry) a ¥ _ y -
~~ ae ou %a Pe oe WW Beopkee =: Ear
an b 4 :

= . =— Utes : wel es : eyene “an G ~

7
> batly
=e
tvely
4% tn
oo@
io
Cape —— tial
Ss! iv
\ CRP Ree aR
ie % Yooper

vee
-

— =

-
 Part 1

Christianity
in Egypt
\ - (Soe ete
\ : nn
aemS)
f _ : sf

a
 Current Issues in the Study of
Early Christianity in Egypt

“The history of the introduction and early development of Chris-

tianity in Egypt has not been maligned so much as ignored.” This
is the opening sentence in the introduction to a book on early
Egyptian Christianity by C. Wilfred Griggs. This observation re-
flects the situation as Griggs saw it in 1979, when these words
were first penned.' Things are much different now, largely as a
result of the dissemination and publication of important manu-
script discoveries such as the Nag Hammadi codices.” Indeed, the
series in which this book appears, as well as the book itself, is a
reflection of the renewed interest in early Egyptian Christianity
on the part of scholars in this country and abroad.’
This chapter is divided into two main parts. In the first part I
comment on six areas where ongoing research is shedding new
light on early Egyptian Christianity or where further research
is called for. For the most part, I restrict my discussion to the
second and third centuries. The second part discusses the sources
for our knowledge of Christianity in Egypt up to the end of the
third century. This will entail, in the case of the literary evidence,
establishing what sources can most likely be assigned to Egypt.
In a number of cases, there is considerable scholarly disagreement
1. C. W. Griggs, Early Egyptian Christianity from Its Origins to 451 C.E. (Coptic Studies
2; Leiden: Brill, 1991), 1. Griggs’s book originated as a dissertation submitted to the Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley, in 1979. I assume that he completed the introduction shortly
before he submitted the dissertation.
2. For an account of the history of the publication of the Nag Hammadi codices since
their discovery in 1945, see J. M. Robinson, “Nag Hammadi: The First Fifty Years,” in
The Nag Hammadi Library after Fifty Years: Proceedings of the 1995 Society of Biblical Literature
Commemoration (ed. J. D. Turner and A. McGuire; NHMS 44; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 3-33.
3. The first volume published in the Roots of Egyptian Christianity subseries of Stud-
ies in Antiquity and Christianity was The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson
and J. E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990).
See the preface for the other volumes published in the Roots subseries.

11
12 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

as to whether a particular text should be assigned to Egypt or to

some other area of the Mediterranean—Near Eastern world.

CURRENT ISSUES

CHRISTIAN ORIGINS IN EGYPT

On the origins of Christianity tn Egypt our sources are completely
silent until the early second century, when Alexandrian Christian
literature begins to come into the light of day and the doctrines
of early Christian teachers begin to be reflected in texts and tes-
timonies. The Coptic Orthodox Church credits the Apostle Mark
with the founding of the Alexandrian church,’ but that tradition,
attested only from the fourth century in the writings of Euse-
bius (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.16), can hardly be credited
with historical veracity, even if the presence of Mark in Alexan-
dria at some point cannot be ruled out. The legend that Mark’s
cousin Barnabas was active in Christian mission in Alexandria is
attested in only the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies (1.8.3-15.9) and
is hardly verifiable.” And the New Testament gives the barest hint
of a Christian presence in Alexandria in Acts 18:25, but in only a
probably secondary variant reading, which says that Apollos “had
been instructed in the word in his home country.”° Even if this
reading were accepted, we would still be in the dark as to how the
Christian community in Alexandria got started, although the pos-
sibility is suggested that Apollos, after his association with Paul
in Corinth, returned to his home city and spread the Christian

4. On the Mark legend, see B. A. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some Ob-
servations,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring;
Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 132-56, esp. 137—-45;
idem, “Christianity in Egypt,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N. Freedman et al.;
New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1.954—60, esp. 955-56. See also A. Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina:
Evolution sociale et institutionnelle du christianisme alexandrin (Ile et Ile siécles) (Bern: Lang,
2001), 45-49. On the Acts of Mark, see pp. 100-113 below.
5. Cf. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt,” 136-37. For an argument in favor of its
historicity, see J. C. Paget, The Epistle of Barnabas: Outlook and Background (Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 64; Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1994), 36.
6. Codex Bezae (my translation), representing the Western text of Acts.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 13

message there.’ But that is hardly more than a possibility — and

is certainly not verifiable.
In discussing the origins of Christianity in Egypt, historians
are forced to extrapolate backward from second-century sources
in order to formulate theories as to the origins of the early Chris-
tian mission to Alexandria and the shape of Christianity there.
One still-popular view is that of Walter Bauer in his famous book
Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Bauer begins with
the assumption that solid information about Christian origins
in Egypt must surely have existed, and then he poses the ques-
tion: “What reason could [churchmen] have had for being silent
about the origins of Christianity in such an important center as
Alexandria if there had been something favorable to report?”*
Bauer’s answer implies a kind of damnatio memoriae.’ The earliest
form of Christianity in Egypt was heretical, specifically Gnostic, a
fact that later ecclesiastical leaders repressed. This conclusion has
a certain plausibility in that the earliest Christian teachers active
in second-century Alexandria of whom we have any information
were the archheretics Valentinus, Basilides and his son Isidore,
and Carpocrates and his son Epiphanes (see pp. 53-56 below). The
problem with Bauer’s theory, however, is that he is then forced to
paint with heretical and Gnostic colors the earliest attested Alex-
andrian Christian literature: the Epistle of Barnabas and the extant
fragments of the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews and Gospel of the
Egyptians."°
Much more plausible is the view put forward by papyrologist
Colin Roberts based on his study of the earliest Christian literary
papyri, dating from the second century. These earliest papyri pro-
vide absolutely no support for Bauer’s view that Gnosticism was

7. See G. Dorival, “Les débuts du christianisme a Alexandrie,” in Alexandrie: Une

mégapole cosmopolite: Actes du 9éme colloque de la Villa Kérylos a Beaulieu-sur-Mer les 2 & 3
octobre, 1998 (Paris: Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 1999), 157-74, esp. 160-62.
On Apollos, see pp. 96-99 below.
8. W. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (trans. and ed. R. A. Kraft et
al.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 45.
9. This term is used by Dorival (“Les débuts,” 157) in his discussion of Bauer’s thesis.
10. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 47-53. Bauer mentions the Kerygma Petri (on which see
p. 16 below), but declines to make any judgment as to its relevance (58).
14 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

the earliest and, for a long time, most dominant form of Chris-
tianity in Egypt. Especially important is Roberts’s discussion of
nomina sacra in early Christian manuscripts (abbreviations, with
superlineation, of so-called sacred words such as Jésous, Christos,
kyrios, theos, and others, fifteen in all), a scribal practice that he
traces back to the first-century Jerusalem church."’ I am persuaded
by Roberts’s view that the earliest Christianity in Egypt (i.e., Alex-
andria) was Jewish and that thé earliest Christians (if we can call
them that) in Egypt were an integral part of the Jewish community
of Alexandria (see chapters 2-3 below)."*
Martiniano Roncaglia also argues in support of the Jerusalem
origins of Egyptian Christianity. He specifically ties the evange-
lization of Egypt to James and the Jerusalem church he led.'? While
it is true that James is an important figure in some early Egyp-
tian Christian writings — the Gospel of the Hebrews, for example,
records a postresurrection appearance of Christ to him'* — his
role in the earliest Christian mission to Egypt is hardly verifiable,
though it does remain a possibility.
The problem of the silence of our sources on Christian origins in
Egypt, addressed by Bauer, was not taken up directly by Roberts
in his work, but is addressed by Joseph Modrzejewski in the epi-
logue of his important book The Jews of Egypt. His explanation is
tied directly to the catastrophe that befell the Jews of Egypt as
a result of the rebellion against Trajan: “If primitive Christianity
had not left any marks on Egyptian soil until the end of the sec-
ond century, it was because it had been annihilated along with the

11. C. H. Roberts, Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt (Schweich Lec-
tures 1977; London: Oxford University Press, 1979), 26-48. See also L. W. Hurtado, “The
Origin of the Nomina Sacra: A Proposal,” Journal of Biblical Literature 117 (1998): 655-73.
12. The earliest documented use of the term Christian in Alexandrian sources is found
in Kerygma Petri frag. 2d (Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 6.5.41; cf. NTApoc 2.39).
13. M. Roncaglia, Histoire de l’eglise copte (Beirut: Dar Al-Kalima, 1966-69), 1.53-62.
Cf. also A. M. Ritter, “De Polycarp 4 Clément: Aux origines d’Alexandrie chrétienne,”
in Alexandrina: Hellénisme, judaisme et christianisme a Alexandrie: Mélanges offerts au P. Claude
Mondésert (Paris: Cerf, 1987), 151-72. Ritter argues (163-64) that the mission to Alexandria
was carried out under the auspices of Jewish Christians from Jerusalem, and cites Acts
15:1-12 and Gal 2:7-9.
14. Gospel of the Hebrews frag. 7 in NTApoc 1.178. Compare Paul's list of appearances in
1 Cor 15:5-8.

i
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 15

entire body in which it was immersed — the Jewish community

of Egypt.”*? According to Modrzejewski, the Judeo-Christianity
that came to an end in 117 was replaced by “pagano-Christian
groups” that probably coexisted with the Judeo-Christians before
the revolt and that refused to participate in the revolt. Thus was
launched in Alexandria “the irreversible process of separation of
Christianity from Judaism.””°
While it cannot be denied that the revolt of 115-17 was a cru-
cial event for the Christians in Egypt as well as for the Jews,
I do not find convincing the complete rupture posited by Mod-
rzejewski. On the contrary, the existing second-century evidence
points to continuities between Alexandrian Judaism and post-117
Alexandrian Christianity. In order to shed some light on these
continuities it is necessary to extrapolate backward from second-
century sources. But it is also necessary to take into account
first-century sources for Alexandrian Judaism. In only this way
are the connections seen clearly. Such an exercise is undertaken
in chapter 2 of this book.

SOCIAL GROUPS AND EARLY CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATION IN EGYPT

Much Egyptian Christian literature of the second and third cen-
turies is either anonymous or pseudonymous (see pp. 43-80
below). It is notoriously difficult to extrapolate from such sources
information about the intended audiences of their authors or
the social groups that the texts reflect. The situation gets bet-
ter from the time of Clement on, especially for Alexandria, but
it is still difficult to extrapolate social contexts for third-century
texts. Nevertheless, we must attempt to use the sources at our
disposal in order to obtain a picture, however provisional, of the
socioreligious situations they reflect.
The earliest Christians in Alexandria were part of that city’s
Jewish population. But what about the situation just before or after

15. J. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian (trans.
R. Comman; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 227.
16. Ibid., 230.
16 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

the Jewish revolt under Trajan (115-17)? Attila Jakab argues that it
is among the Jews of education and Hellenistic culture — the spir-
itual heirs of Philo — where the first Christians must be sought.
People of education and means, they probably included proselytes
and God-fearers. They were the inheritors and transmitters of the
works of Philo and of the Septuagint Bible. Their openness to Hel-
lenistic culture also provided an environment in which Christian
Gnosticism could thrive.” *
Jakab rightly underscores in this connection the importance
of the Kerygma Petri, of which only fragments remain (in Clem-
ent’s writings).'® Its attribution to Peter and its reference to “the
Twelve” situates the text in the tradition of the apostles, originally
based in Jerusalem (frag. 3). It certainly reflects a Logos Chris-
tology (frag. 1). At the same time it maintains a credo centered
upon one God, who created the world and can bring an end to
it, a credo that can also be expressed in a “negative theology”
(frag. 2). It finds in the biblical writings prophecies of the coming,
death, and resurrection of Christ (frag. 4). It is the first Alexan-
drian writing to use the term Christian, defining Christians as a
“third race” (frag. 2). The Kerygma Petri clearly represents a vari-
ety of Christianity that lies on a trajectory leading to the mainline
Christianity of Clement, who quotes it. It is the type of Christian-
ity that Irenaeus had in mind, writing later in the same century,
when he claims that the true church has one and the same faith
throughout the world (Against Heresies 1.10.3).'°
But Irenaeus was clearly wrong, especially for Egypt, where
other varieties of Christianity existed from very early on and
persisted through the second century and beyond, such as the
apocalyptically oriented Christianity of the Epistle of Barnabas or
the contemplative wisdom-centered Christianity of the Teachings
of Silvanus.

17. Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina, 54-55.

18. Ibid., 56-57. Bauer ignores this important work, which would have been detrimen-
tal to his theory.
19. See B. A. Pearson, The Emergence of the Christian Religion: Essays on Early Christianity
(Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 1997), 169-85, esp. 174-75.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt AT

And there is more. Rouel van den Broek identifies no fewer

than six distinct groups of Christians in second-century Alex-
andria, all of them attesting to a continuity between them and
Alexandrian Judaism.”° Two of these groups are reflected in the
earliest Alexandrian apocryphal gospels. The Gospel of the Hebrews
was used by Alexandrian Jewish Christians and reflects not only
a special allegiance to James, but also the influence of Alexan-
drian Jewish wisdom theology.”' Judaizing Christians could be
found in Clement’s day, for he wrote a tract against them (see p. 45
below).” The Gospel of the Egyptians was used by a group of Greek-
speaking Egyptian Christians, probably residents of Rhakotis, the
native Egyptian section of Alexandria.” This group, as seen in
its gospel, was oriented to asceticism and may indeed have been
influenced by the Jewish Therapeutae who lived west of Alexan-
dria and whose communal life is described by Philo in On the
Contemplative Life.
Apocalyptically oriented Christianity is reflected not only in
the Epistle of Barnabas but also in Alexandrian Sibylline writings
in Christian dress. Van den Broek calls attention to a prophecy in
the Sibylline Oracles 2.161—64, part of a depiction of the end-time
woes: “O very wretched / dread evildoers of the last genera-
tion, / infantile, who do not understand that when the species
of females / does not give birth, the harvest of articulate men
has come” (trans. Collins in OTP 1.349). Such a prophecy of end-
time woes is attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of the Egyptians, but
there completely transformed into an encratic expression of real-
ized eschatology: “When Salome asked, ‘How long will death
have power?’ the Lord answered, ‘So long as ye women bear
children’” (frag. 1; trans. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.209; see
p. 43 below). A strong strain of apocalypticism was also probably

20. R. van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity (NHMS 39;
Leiden: Brill, 1996), 181-96.
21. Ibid., 184.
22. Dorival, “Les débuts,” 171.
23. Ibid., 184-85; cf. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt,” 150.
24. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 187.
18 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

part of the religious orientation of simple, uneducated Christians

(“simpliciores”) who, of course, left us no writings.”
The two other groups treated by van den Broek are the highly
educated, philosophically oriented Christians for whom a text
such as the Authoritative Teaching (NHC VI,3) would have spe-
cial meaning (see pp. 77-78 below) and the Gnostics.”° But those
groups, too, represent a kind of continuity between them and va-
rieties of Alexandrian Judaism? The tractate Eugnostos the Blessed
(NHC III,3; V,1), for example, reflects the existence in the first
century of a Jewish Gnosticism (see pp. 23 and 70 below).” ‘ Yet
another group can be identified as a probable part of Alexandrian
Christianity: the Marcionites. Gilles Dorival argues that Marcion’s
New Testament arrived in Egypt sometime around 150 or per-
haps a little later (see pp. 56 and 57 below).”** Marcionites were
certainly known to Clement, who polemicizes against them (e.g,.,
Miscellanies 3.3.12).
When we inquire how the various Christian groups in Al-
exandria were organized, we find another continuity between
Christianity and Alexandrian Judaism, namely, the presbyterate.
Each Christian congregation in Alexandria had its own presbyter,
and Jerome informs us (Epistle 146.1.6) that early Alexandrian
bishops were chosen from these presbyters, at least until the end
of the third century. The model for this type of organization was,
of course, the synagogue.” To be sure, the leaders most visible to
us are the prominent Christian teachers in Alexandria, many of
whom we know by name. Thus, a congregation would be organ-
ized under the direction of a presbyter, but could include in its
membership a prominent lay teacher. The same situation is re-
flected in the churches of the Egyptian chéra (country), as seen in

25. Ibid., 188; Dorival, “Les débuts,” 170-71.

26. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 206-34.
27. Ibid., 192.
28. Dorival, “Les débuts,” 171.
29. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 188-91; Ritter, “De
Polycarpe a Clément,” 151-72, esp. 164. Ritter cites Acts 11:30 for a comparable organization
among the churches of Judea. The earliest use of the word npeoBitepoc for a Jewish leader
attested in the papyri is P. Monac. III 49, from second-century B.C.E. Heracleopolis in Egypt.
See S. R. Llewelyn’s discussion in NewDocs 9 (2002): 69-72 no. 24.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 12

Dionysius’s refutation of the chiliast teachings of Bishop Nepos of

Antinoe. Dionysius mentions a visit to Arsinoe, where he “called
together the presbyters and teachers of the brethren in the vil-
lages” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 7.24.6; trans. Lake in Loeb
Classical Library).*°
The presbyterate was important for early Alexandrian Chris-
tian organization. But what about the bishops, and how did they
relate to the presbyters in the period before Demetrius (189-232)?
Unfortunately, the successors of Mark named by Eusebius in his
list of Alexandrian bishops seem to be nothing more than “a mere
echo and a puff of smoke.”
Jakab calls attention to the curious terminology employed in
Eusebius’s account, from Annianus to Agrippinus.”” After Mark,
Annianus “received the charge” (ty Aettoupyiav diadéxetar; 2.24).
Upon Annianus’s death Abilius “succeeded” (d1adéxetar; 3.14)
him. Cerdo “succeeded” (é1ad€xeta1) Abilius and was third “in
charge” (mpoéotn) of the Alexandrian see (napo.xiacg; 3.21). Only
Cerdo, before Demetrius (6.26), is referred to as a bishop. Upon
the death of “the bishop of the diocese of Alexandria” (th¢ €v
‘AdeEavopeta mapoikias...emioKxonoc), referring to Cerdo but here
unnamed, Primus “received the charge” (Aettovpytav KAnpovtat)
from those there (4.1). Primus died in the twelfth year of his
“rule” (npootaciac), and Justus “succeeded” (é1ad€xeta1) him
(4.4). After Justus, Eumenes “succeeded to the government of the
diocese of Alexandria” (tig “Adetavépewv mapoiktas thv mpoota-
otav; 4.5.5). After Eumenes, Markus “was appointed as pastor”
(avadeikvutar mony), and after ten years Celadion “received
the ministry” (mv Aeitovpytav napaAauBavet) of the Alexandrian
church (4.11.6). After Celadion, Agrippinus “took up the suc-
cession” (thy drado0xnv... draAauBaver; 4.20). Julian, Agrippinus’s

30. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 190 n. 31.
31. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 45. The list of bishops may very well have been
constructed artificially by Julius Africanus in his (lost) Chronographies, one of Eusebius’s
sources. See R. M. Grant, Eusebius as Church Historian (Oxford: Clarendon, 1980), 51-52.
32. Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina, 176-77. | am happy to acknowledge my indebtedness
to Jakab’s extensive and valuable discussion of the gradual institutionalization of the
Alexandrian church.
20 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

successor and Demetrius’s predecessor, “was appointed to the

oversight” (éyxeipiCetar thy émoKomiy) of the churches in Alexan-
dria when Agrippinus had completed his “ministry” (Ae.tovpytav)
after twelve years (5.9).
Eusebius’s language underscores the service function of these
Alexandrian leaders, certainly explicit in the use of the term lei-
tourgia. No subordination of other leaders is implied, even if a
position of leadership is implie#, and nothing is said of ordina-
tion or installation. This seems to be in basic agreement with what
Jerome reported later (Epistle 146.1) of the Alexandrian situation:
until the time of Bishops Heraclas and Dionysius, the presbyters
named one of themselves to serve as bishop.** Much later evidence
is supplied by Eutychius who, in his Annals, speaks of twelve
presbyters from whom a new patriarch would be chosen when
the patriarchate fell vacant. Then a new presbyter would be ap-
pointed to the presbytery in place of the newly elected patriarch.
Eutychius also informs us that, until the time of Demetrius, he
was the only bishop in Egypt; Demetrius appointed three bish-
ops and Heraclas, Demetrius’s successor, appointed an additional
twenty.’ We still remain in the dark concerning details about how
the presbyteral college evolved before Demetrius or who the per-
sons named in Eusebius’s list really were —if indeed they really
existed.
In any case, it is clear that Demetrius played a crucial role
in the development of the Egyptian Christian hierarchy; so it is
no wonder that he is referred to as the “second founder of the
church of Alexandria” and the “founder of the church of Egypt”
for his role in the evangelization of areas outside Alexandria.*°
To be sure, it took some time for Demetrius to consolidate his
episcopal authority. The writings of Clement and Origen attest to
this process of evolution “from the Christian community to an

33. Ibid., 177.

34. Patrologia graeca 111.982; cf. E. W. Kemp, “Bishops and Presbyters at Alexandria,”
Journal of Ecclesiastical History 6 (1955): 125-42, esp. 137-38.
35. W. Telfer, “Episcopal Succession in Egypt,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 3 (1952):
1-15; esprZ
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 21

institutional church,”*° and the process begun by Demetrius was

really not completed until the time of Dionysius the Great, the
first “patriarch of Egypt.”””
Before we conclude this section let us consider one other issue,
namely, the social standing of Christians in second- and third-
century Egypt. This, again, is a difficult thing to determine. Jakab
contends that the earliest identifiable Christians were people of
education and means, representing a middle class enjoying a com-
fortable life.** I suspect that this judgment is a little one-sided,
even though it must be admitted that the Christians depicted
in Clement’s Pedagogue were evidently people of means.” The
pagan writer Celsus, probably writing in Alexandria in the 170s,
contemptuously dismissed the Christians known to him as “dis-
honorable and stupid, and only slaves, women, and little children”
(Origen, Against Celsus 3.44).*° And Athenagoras, writing around
the same time as Celsus, acknowledges that among Christians
there are “simple folk, artisans and old women” who, even if
they are not able to express eloquently the benefit they receive
from Christian teachings, nevertheless “show in their deeds the
advantage to others that accrues from their resolution” (Embassy
for the Christians 11).*! Elsewhere, Athenagoras acknowledges that
some Christians are slave owners (35) and therefore people of
means. Thus, it should probably be concluded that the Chris-
tians in second- and third-century Alexandria came from all social
strata.

36. Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina, 175-214. On the testimony of Clement, see 179-88; on
Origen, see 188-214.
B/mlbid yy2lo-Doespr2o2—0).
Som bid Do
39. See Jakab (ibid., 257-92) on the “rich Christians in Alexandria” as discussed by
Clement in his Pedagogue. See also pp. 127-29 below.
40. Translation by H. Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1980).
41. Translation by J. H. Crehan, Athenagoras: Embassy for the Christians; The Resurrection
of the Dead (Ancient Christian Writers 23; Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1956).
42. See L. W. Barnard, Athenagoras: A Study in Second Century Christian Apologetic
(Théologie historique 18; Paris: Beauchesne, 1972), 147-49. On Celsus, see also J. Sirinelli,
“Cosmopolitisme et oecuménisme a Alexandrie,” in Alexandrie: Une mégapole cosmopolite:
Actes du 9eme colloque de la Villa Kérylos a Beaulieu-sur-Mer les 2 & 3 octobre, 1998 (Paris:
Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 1999), 189-202, esp. 193-96.
22 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

The socioeconomic situation of Christians reflected in the writ-

ings of Clement can be extended to the church itself as an
institution, for by the end of the third century the Alexandrian
church had become a banking institution. The evidence for this
comes in a letter from an Egyptian Christian (P. Amherst 3a),
writing from Rome to fellow Christians in the Arsinoite nome
with instructions to make a monetary deposit in Alexandria
with “Maximus the Papas” bysgiving it into the hands of the
bishop’s agent, Theonas (see pp. 128-29 below). Theonas later
became bishop of Alexandria (282-300) and presided over the
construction of a church building in the western part of the city.”

GNOSTICISM AND MANICHAEISM IN EGYPT

In his five-volume work Against Heresies, Irenaeus traces the Gnos-
tic heresy, “gnosis falsely so-called,” back to archheretic Simon of
Samaria (1.23.1—4; cf. Acts 8:9-24). Next in line as “successor” to
Simon is Menander, also a Samaritan (1.23.5), who became active
in Antioch (cf. Justin, 1 Apology 26.4). Then, “arising from these
men,” come Saturninus of Antioch and Basilides, who promul-
gated his system in Alexandria (Against Heresies 1.24.1). Irenaeus
is not clear about where Basilides got his doctrine or where his
original home was (perhaps Antioch or Alexandria). Eusebius (Ec-
clesiastical History 4.7.3—4) interprets Irenaeus’s statements in the
following way: “Thus from Menander, whom we have already
mentioned as the successor of Simon, there proceeded a certain
snake-like power with two mouths and a double head, and estab-
lished the leaders of two heresies, Saturninus, an Antiochian by
race, and Basilides of Alexandria....Basilides, under the pretext
of secret doctrine, stretched fancy infinitely far, fabricating mon-
strous myths for his impious heresy” (trans. Lake). Earlier, in his
Chronicle Eusebius makes the following entry for the sixteenth year
of Hadrian’s reign (132): “Basilides the heresiarch was living in

43. On archeological evidence for this church, see B. Tkaczow, “Archeological Sources
for the Earliest Churches in Alexandria,” in Coptic Studies: Acts of the Third International
Congress of Coptic Studies, Warsaw, 20-25 August 1984 (ed. W. Godlewski; Warsaw: Editions
Scientifiques de Pologne, 1990), 431-35, esp. 432.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 23

Alexandria; from him derive the Gnostics.”“* From this informa-

tion one could conclude (erroneously) that Egyptian Gnosticism
began with Basilides in Alexandria.
Irenaeus makes specific mention of a Gnostic sect whose basic
myth (excerpted in Against Heresies 1.29) is not the same as what he
attributes to Basilides (1.24.3-5), though it does somewhat resem-
ble that of Saturninus (1.24.1-2). Irenaeus reports that Valentinus,
Basilides’ contemporary in Alexandria, “adapted the fundamen-
tal principles of the so-called gnostic school of thought to his own
kind of system” (1.11.1).* Irenaeus’s excerpt of the Gnostic myth
(1.29) corresponds to part of what we now have in the Apocryphon
of John (NHC I1,1; IlL1; IV,1; BG,2). This myth is not originally
Christian but represents a form of Jewish Gnosticism.*° Whether
the myth came from Syria or was developed in Alexandria, it was
at home in Alexandria before Valentinus and Basilides. And, as
we have seen, Eugnostos the Blessed (NHC IIL,3; V,1), a text prob-
ably known in its original Greek form to Valentinus and Basilides,
represents an Alexandrian form of Jewish Gnosticism.
It is, of course, true that Valentinus’s form of Gnosticism was
thoroughly Christian, as was that of Basilides. Indeed, in his study
of the fragments of Valentinus, Christoph Markschies denies that
Valentinus, in contrast to his Valentinian Gnostic followers, can
really be called Gnostic at all,” a position with which I disagree.
In somewhat similar fashion Winfred Lohr, in his important study

44. My translation of Jerome’s Latin from R. Helm (ed.), Die Chronik des Hieronymus,
in Eusebius Werke 7.7 (rev. ed.; Die griechische christliche Schriftsteller der ersten Jahr-
hunderte 47; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1956), 201. See Pearson, Emergence of the Christian
Religion, 147-68, esp. 151, 158.
45. Translation by B. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation with Annotations
and Introductions (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1987), 225.
46. See, e.g., B. A. Pearson, “Pre-Valentinian Gnosticism in Alexandria,” in The Future of
Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester (ed. B. A. Pearson; Minneapolis: Fortress,
1990), 455-66; idem, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 122-46; and pp. 217-18 below.
47. C. Markschies, Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur valentinianischen Gnosis
mit einem Kommentar zu den Fragmenten Valentins (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
Neuen Testament 65; Tiibingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1992).
7
48. See also G. Quispel, “The Original Doctrine of Valentinus the Gnostic,” in From
Poimandres to Jacob Bohme: Gnosis, Hermetism, and the Christian Tradition (ed. R. van den Broek
and C. van Heertum; Amsterdam: Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica, 2000), 233-63.
24 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

of Basilides,*’ stresses the Christian content of Basilides’ teaching

and plays down its Gnostic character.
These two Christian teachers, as well as other heretics such
as Basilides’ son Isidore and Carpocrates and his son Epiphanes,
are the earliest Alexandrian Christian teachers known to us by
name. Their writings, plus many of the anonymous or pseudony-
mous writings preserved in Coptic that we shall survey later in
this chapter, are testimony to the strength and the extraordinary
multiformity of the Gnostic heresy in Egypt and its persistence.
Until the end of the second century there seems to have been
among Alexandrian Christians, and later among Egyptian Chris-
tians of the chdra, a considerable degree of openness to, or at least
tolerance of, novel and exotic teachings. To speak of any sharp dis-
tinction between heresy and orthodoxy in early Christian Egypt
is an anachronism, at least until the end of the second century
and, in some parts of Egypt, much later.
In the third century, a new form of Gnosticism made its entry
into Egypt, Manichaeism, which eventually became a world re-
ligion in its own right.? Disciples of the prophet Mani came to
Egypt from Mesopotamia as missionaries even before the prophet’s
death in 276, probably as early as 270”! or even in the 260s.** They

49. W. A. Lohr, Basilides und seine Schule: Eine Studie zur Theologie- und Kirchengeschichte
des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 83;
Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1996). I take up the case of “Basilides the Gnostic” in a
forthcoming publication.
50. J. BeDuhn calls into question the appropriateness of including Manichaeism in the
general category Gnosticism; see The Manichaean Body: In Discipline and Ritual (Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000). See p. 282 below.
51. Adda and Pateg, two of the Manichaean missionaries, may have come to Egypt
in the company of Zenobia’s army in 270. So M. Tardieu, “Les manichéenes en Egypte,”
Bulletin de la Société Francaise d’Egyptologie 94 (1982): 5-19, esp. 8-10. Cf. G. G. Stroumsa,
“The Manichaean Challenge to Egyptian Christianity,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity
(ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1990), 307-19, esp. 308-10.
52. So I. Gardner, The Kephalaia of the Teacher: The Edited Coptic Manichaean Texts in Trans-
lation with Commentary (NHMS 37; Leiden: Brill, 1995), xv. On Manichaeism and its spread
east and west, see S. N. C. Lieu, Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China
(2d ed.; Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 63; Tiibingen: Mohr-
Siebeck, 1992). For a bibliography on Manichaeism, see G. B. Mikkelsen, Bibliographia
Manichaica: A Comprehensive Bibliography of Manichaeism through 1996 (Corpus Fontium
Manichaeorum Subsidia 1; Turnhout: Brepols, 1997).

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 25

gained a foothold early on in Upper Egypt in the area around Ly-

copolis, from where most of the extant Coptic Manichaean texts
emanated. Missionaries, using well-traveled mercantile routes,
would have reached the Thebaid not only via Alexandria up the
Nile, but also by sea from Mesopotamia to the Red Sea coastal
seaport Berenice and overland to Hypsele, near Lycopolis. Arche-
ological excavations have turned up remains of a Manichaean
community of the early fourth century, providing important ev-
idence of Manichaeism’s spread from Lycopolis to the Dakhleh
Oasis, especially at ancient Kellis (modern Ismant el-Kharab).
Documentary and literary texts found there provide new evidence
of Manichaean life and religion in Egypt, complementing what we
already knew from the sensational discoveries at Medinet Madi
in the 1930s.”
It did not take long for anti-Manichaean literature — both pagan
and Christian — to turn up in Egypt. The two earliest anti-
Manichaean texts date from the late third century, one by Platonist
philosopher Alexander of Lycopolis and (probably) the other by
Bishop Theonas of Alexandria (d. 300).** There is also evidence
of positive Manichaean influences, both on Egyptian Christians,
especially in the monasteries,” and on Gnostics of various stripes.
In the case of Egyptian Gnosticism, one can speak of symbio-
sis between groups of Gnostics and Manichaeans, as seen in their
literature. Alberto Camplani discusses this phenomenon with spe-
cial attention to the Nag Hammadi corpus and sheds new light on
the process of translation from Greek to Coptic manifest in many
of the Nag Hammadi texts as well as other Gnostic texts preserved

53. Gardner (Kephalaia of the Teacher, xvii-xix) provides a brief discussion of the Coptic
texts found at Medinet Madi. Two volumes of texts from ancient Kellis are published thus
far: I. Gardner (ed.), Kellis Literary Texts, vol. 1 (Dakhleh Oasis Project: Monograph 4; Oxford:
Oxbow, 1996); I. Gardner et al. (eds.), Coptic Documentary Texts from Kellis, vol. 1 (Dakhleh
Oasis Project: Monograph 9; Oxford: Oxbow, 1999).
54. For Alexander’s treatise, see P. W. van der Horst and J. Mansfeld (eds.), An Alex-
andrian Platonist against Dualism: Alexander of Lycopolis’ Treatise “Critique of the Doctrines of
Manichaeus” (Leiden: Brill, 1974). On Theonas’s epistle, see p. 61 below.
55. Stroumsa, “Manichaean Challenge.”
26 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

in Coptic.®° Camplani finds evidence of Manichaean influences in

the following tractates:
On the Origin of the World (NHC IL,5; XIII,2)
Book of Thomas the Contender (NHC IL,7)
Gospel of Thomas (NHC II,2)
Paraphrase of Shem (NHC WAII,1)
Apocalypse of Peter (NHC VII3)
Concept of Our Great Power (NHC VI,A)
(First) Apocalypse of James (NHC V,3)
Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC III,2; IV,2)
Untitled text in the Bruce Codex
Pistis Sophia (Askew Codex)
These influences show up as glosses or interpolations and as
evidences of Manichaeizing redaction that could have occurred in
late copies of the texts in Greek or in the process of translation
into Coptic.” Camplani presents equally interesting evidence for
Sethian Gnostic, Valentinian Gnostic, or Hermetic influences on
the Coptic Manichaean texts. Camplani’s work has important
implications for our understanding of how the Coptic Gnostic and
Manichaean texts came into being.

THE CATECHETICAL SCHOOL IN ALEXANDRIA

Teachers played an important role in the life of early Christian
communities in Egypt. The most prominent named Christian
teachers active during the first three-quarters of the second cen-
tury all turn out to be so-called heretics. The first orthodox
Christian teacher known to us by name, Pantaenus, appears in
Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History in connection with events taking
place during the reign of Commodus (180-92):
56. A. Camplani, “Sulla trasmissione di testi gnostici in copto,” in L’Egitto cristiano:
Aspetti e problemi in eta tardo-antica (ed. A. Camplani; Studia ephemeridis Augustinianum
56; Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1997), 121-75.
57. Ibid., 154-58.
58. Ibid., 167-72.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 27

At that time a man very famous for his learning named Pan-
taenus had charge of the life of the faithful in Alexandria,
for from ancient custom a school of sacred learning existed
among them. This school has lasted on to our time, and we
have heard that it is managed by men powerful in their learn-
ing and zeal for divine things, but tradition says that at that
time Pantaenus was especially eminent, and that he had been
influenced by the philosophic system of those called Stoics.
(Ecclesiastical History 5.10.1; trans. Lake)

Eusebius interrupts his discussion of Pantaenus’s activity as a

teacher with an account of a missionary trip that Pantaenus is
reported to have made to “the Indians,” among whom he found
a Hebrew version of the Gospel of Matthew earlier provided to
them by Bartholomew (5.10.2-3). Eusebius then returns to his
discussion of the school and Pantaenus’s role in it (5.10.4): “Pan-
taenus, after many achievements, was at the head of the school
[tov...hyettar SidacKaAetov] in Alexandria until his death, and
orally and in writing expounded the treasures of the divine
doctrine.”
Eusebius mentions the so-called catechetical school in Alex-
andria several times in subsequent chapters of his Ecclesiastical
History. He reports that Clement “was famous in Alexandria for
his study of the Holy Scriptures with Pantaenus” (5.11.1). Later
he writes that “Pantaenus was succeeded by Clement, who di-
rected the instruction [katnynoews] at Alexandria up to such
a date that Origen also was one of his pupils” (6.6.1). Euse-
bius also reports that “Origen was in his eighteenth year when
he came to preside over the catechetical school [tig KkatnynoEews
Tpoeotn SidaoKadretov]” (6.3.3). During the persecution in 202,
other teachers (including Clement) left the city, and “the task of
instruction” (tH¢ TOD KaTHxEtv SiatpLBhc) was entrusted to Origen
alone by Demetrius, “the president of the church” (tod tig ExKAn-
olac mMpoeotmtoc; 6.3.8). Afterward, the task of instruction was
shared by Origen with Heraclas (who later succeeded Demetrius
28 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

as bishop). Heraclas took over the more elementary instruction,

and Origen the more advanced (6.15).
From these and other reports given by Eusebius and from the
unnamed predecessors implied by Eusebius’s expression “from
ancient custom” (5.10) arises the tradition of the catechetical
school in Alexandria with a succession of teachers from Pantaenus
on. A different version of the succession of Christian teachers in
the Didaskaleion at Alexandria is attributed to fifth-century his-
torian Philip of Side in an abridgement of his work extant in a
fourteenth-century manuscript.” In this account the succession of
school heads begins with Athenagoras, followed by Clement, Pan-
taenus, and Origen and ending with Rhodon, who is said to have
moved the school from Alexandria to Side during the reign of
Theodosius the Great (379-95).
Diametrically opposed interpretations of the tradition con-
cerning the Alexandrian catechetical school are put forward by
scholars,°' and in what follows I discuss briefly the interpreta-
tions advanced by Rouel van den Broek and Annewies van den
Hoek.”
Van den Broek undertakes a critical evaluation of the available
evidence, as was earlier done by Gustave Bardy.® Van den Broek
argues that there was no school at all until the time of Demetrius,
only independent teachers: “The whole idea of a Christian school
with a d:.ad0xn of teachers handing down a fixed tradition of learn-
ing to their pupil successors is completely false, at least until the

59. See the important study by B. Pouderon, D’Athénes a Alexandrie: Etudes sur
Athénagore et les origines de la philosophie chrétienne (BCNH Etudes 4; Quebec: Laval University
Press/ Louvain: Peeters, 1997), 1-70, esp. 2 (translation).
60. The complete list of schoolmasters is Athenagoras, Clement, Pantaenus, Origen,
Heraclas, Dionysius, Pierius, Theognostus, Serapion, Peter (the martyr; died 311), Macarius
Politicus, Didymus (the Blind), and Rhodon. Pouderon attributes the obvious chronological
errors in this account not to Philip’s own work, which is lost, but to the traditors of this
abridgment.
61. See the valuable discussion by Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina, 91-115.
62. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 197-205; A. van den
Hoek, “The ‘Catechetical’ School of Early Christian Alexandria and Its Philonic Heritage,”
Harvard Theological Review 90 (1997): 59-87.
63. G. Bardy, “Aux origines de l’école d’Alexandrie,” Recherches de science religieuse 27
(1937): 65-90. This is the approach taken by Jakab as well.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 29

second decade of the third century.” Van den Broek, quite rightly,
rejects the testimony of Philip of Side regarding the role played by
Athenagoras.” The role that teachers played in Alexandria, includ-
ing Clement, was that of a lay teacher. Such lay teachers “played an
eminent role in the church” and “were responsible for all forms of
religious education, from prebaptismal instruction to high theol-
ogy. They were, however, no ecclesiastical officials but laymen.”
Some of them, too, such as Clement, were well schooled in Greek
philosophy and culture. Some of them were scholars involved in
the copying and editing of biblical texts: “Already in the middle
of the second century there existed in Alexandria what has been
called a ‘scriptorium’ which produced biblical texts, established
by the methods of textual criticism which had been developed by
much earlier Alexandrian scholars for the edition of Greek literary
texts.” So it can be assumed that by the second half of the second
century “a circle of biblical scholars” was interested in “integrat-
ing their Christian belief into the Greek culture they also believed
in....But there was no school, in the sense of a Christian academy,
with a regular teaching programme.””
Applying a critical eye to the testimony of Eusebius, van den
Broek discusses the roles of Origen, Heraclas, and Demetrius in
the eventual establishment of a Christian school under ecclesi-
astical auspices. It is only then, “from the second decade of the
third century onward that with a certain right we can speak of a
Christian school at Alexandria.”® The close connection between
church and school that resulted is indicated by some school heads

64. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 199.
65. Ibid., and n. 6. Pouderon rejects the testimony of Philip of Side and argues that
the role posited by Philip for Athenagoras as school head is only a myth. Pouderon does
connect Athenagoras to Alexandria, but only in the role of a private teacher (D’Athénes a
Alexandrie, 69).
66. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 200-201.
67. Ibid., 201-2. For the Alexandrian scriptorium, van den Broek cites the work of
G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum (Schweich Lec-
tures 1946; London: British Academy, 1953), 271-76. The possibility of a “scriptorium for
Christian books” at Oxyrhynchus in the late second or early third century is broached by
Roberts in Manuscript, Society, and Belief, 24.
68. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 202-4, esp. 202.
30 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

becoming bishops. Eventually, from the time of Bishop Theophilus

on (385-412), the school ceased to exist and “only the bishop was
held to be competent in matters of doctrine.””
Van den Hoek takes a different approach to the evidence,
somewhat along the lines of work done earlier on Clement of Al-
exandria by André Mehat.” Based on a survey of the use of the
terms didaskaleion and katéchésis, van den Hoek finds that “Clement
is a pioneer in using the word [Xkatnynotc] to mean specifically ‘in-
struction of those preparing for baptism.’” She goes on to argue
that it is “clear that Clement instructed catechumens and that a
system of instruction that included moral education, biblical in-
terpretation, and a clear anti-heretical element was already in
place.””’ Against the views of those who argue that the school was
independent of the church, she claims that, in Clement’s view, “a
contrast between church and school is nonexistent. His instruction
moved the faithful through baptism and then toward wisdom and
knowledge within the context of the church.” In that connection
she quotes from Clement’s Pedagogue (1.18.4): “We, then, the little
ones, guarding ourselves from the blasts of heresies, which puff
up to swollen vanity, and not entrusting ourselves to fathers who
admonish us wrongly, we then reach perfection, when we are the
church and have received Christ, its head.”””
After concluding that “teaching and scholarship within the
penumbra of the church was a long-established activity in Al-
exandria well before Origen,”” van den Hoek also argues that
Clement combined in himself the role of both teacher and priest
(presbyter), a point of debate among scholars. She cites as ev-
idence a letter by Bishop Alexander of Jerusalem, who refers
to Clement as a presbyter.”* Indeed, Clement’s role as a part

69. Ibid., 205.

70. A. Mehat, Etude sur les “Stromates” de Clément d’Alexandrie (Patristica Sorbonensia 7;
Paris: Seuil, 1966). For a discussion of Mehat’s views, see Jakab, Ecclesia alexandrina, 101-5.
71. Van den Hoek, “ ‘Catechetical’ School,” 69, 71.
72. Ibid., 71-72. The translation of the passage from the Pedagogue is evidently her own.
73. Ibid., 76.
74. Ibid., 77. The letter by Alexander quoted by Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History 6.11.6
is a letter to the Antiochene church delivered‘‘by the hand of Clement the blessed pres-
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 31

of the Alexandrian presbytery could have involved a power

struggle in the church that led to Clement’s departure from the
city.”
The existence of Christian schools in Alexandria also implies
the existence of a Christian library or libraries, and this is clearly
implied in the writings of Clement and Origen, which contain
liberal citations from many authors, including from their Alexan-
drian “predecessor” Philo Judaeus.”° The existence of a Christian
library or libraries in Alexandria also implies the existence of a
scriptorium in which biblical and other Christian works would
be edited and copied.” Van den Hoek concludes that, while it
is important to read Eusebius critically, his claims should not
be completely dismissed, especially when other ancient authors
support them: “Both Clement and Origen speak of a continu-
ous tradition, in which they place themselves. ... When Eusebius
speaks of a succession, he is not so far off because he seems to
reflect the intention that is implicit in the statements of the very
people he describes.””*
Can the views espoused by van den Broek and van den Hoek
be reconciled? The merit of van den Broek’s approach is that he
underscores the important role that teachers played in Alexan-
drian Christian communities, and he also takes sufficiently into
account the changes effected in church life by Bishop Demetrius.
The special merit of van den Hoek’s approach is her close reading
of Clement, from which she can deduce the close relationship that

byter.” For the text, translation, and discussion of the letter, see P. Nautin, Lettres et écrivains
chrétiens des Ile et IIle siécles (Paris: Cerf, 1961), 114-18. Nautin sees in this letter proof that
Clement was a presbyter.
75. Van den Hoek, “ ‘Catechetical’ School,” 79, citing Nautin, Lettres et écrivains chrétiens,
18, 140.
76. Ibid., 79-81. Cf. also A. van den Hoek, “How Alexandrian Was Clement of Al-
exandria? Reflections on Clement and His Alexandrian Background,” Heythrop Journal 31
(1990): 179-94; and idem, Clement of Alexandria and His Use of
Philo in the Stromateis: An Early
Christian Reshaping of a Jewish Model (Vigiliae christianae Supplement 3; Leiden: Brill, 1988).
On the use of Philo by Clement and Origen, see also D. T. Runia, Philo in Early Christian
Literature: A Survey (Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3.3; Assen:
Van Gorcum/ Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 132-83.
77. Van den Hoek, “ ‘Catechetical’ School,” 82, citing Zuntz’s Text of the Epistles.
78. Ibid., 86.
32 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

pertained between school and church in Clement’s own activity

as both teacher and presbyter.
Of course, the full story is not told by either Eusebius or Clem-
ent. Other Christian teachers were in Alexandria in Clement's
time, and they can usefully be compared to the private teachers
who represented the various philosophical and rhetorical tradi-
tions current in the Greco-Roman world. Clement can be seen in
a special light as one who put his Christian instruction in the
service of the Christian communities, which for him constituted
“the church,” and assumed an important leadership role in it. As
for the catechetical school of Alexandrian Christian tradition, van
den Broek is probably right in asserting that it came into being in
only the early third century as a result of the growing authority
of Bishop Demetrius.

EXPANSION OF THE CHURCH INTO THE EGYPTIAN CHORA

Eusebius opens the sixth book of his Ecclesiastical History with the
following statement: “Now when Severus also was stirring up per-
secution against the churches, in every place splendid martyrdoms
of the champions of piety were accomplished, but with especial
frequency at Alexandria. Thither, as to some great arena, were es-
corted from Egypt and the whole Thebais God’s champions, who,
through their most steadfast endurance in divers tortures and
modes of death, were wreathed with the crowns laid up with God”
(6.1; trans. Oulton and Lawlor in Loeb Classical Library). This is
the first mention in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History of the existence
of Christians outside Alexandria. “Egypt and the whole Thebaid”
takes up a lot of territory. “Egypt” presumably refers to the Egyp-
tian Delta, and the “Thebaid” covers a large portion of the Nile
Valley, from Hermopolis up (i.e., going south) to Syene. One can
be excused for casting a skeptical eye on Eusebius’s claims, not
only respecting the role of Severus in the persecution”and its

79. According to an eminent historian of the Severan era, there is no basis for the view
that the emperor initiated the persecution that broke out soon after Severus left Alexandria
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 33

extent (“countless numbers [pvpiov] were being wreathed with the

crowns of martyrdom”; 6.2.3), but also the areas in Egypt whence
these martyrs came.
Nevertheless, it is certainly not the case, as William Telfer ar-
gues, that Christianity in Egypt in 190 (at the time of the Paschal
controversy) was “confined to the city and its environs.”*? In what
follows I shall discuss the evidence we have for Christianity in
Egypt proper, that is, outside Alexandria, in the period indicated
by Eusebius in the passage cited. In the interest of brevity I shall
confine my discussion mainly to the second century, that is, until
the persecution in the Severan era, with recourse to evidence that
turned up since Adolf von Harnack’s magisterial work on the
mission and expansion of Christianity.”
The only specific second-century evidence of Christianity out-
side Alexandria cited by Harnack™ involves the heretics Basilides
and Valentinus, according to reports found in the Against Heresies
(Panarion) of Epiphanius: “Basilides journeyed to Egypt and spent
some time there. Then he went to Prosopitis and Athribitis, and
further, to the environs, or ‘nome’ of Saites and Alexandria. Egyp-
tians call the neighborhood or environs of each city a ‘nome.’ .. .So
this scum spent his entire life in these places” (Against Here-
sies 24.1.1, 2, 4; trans. Williams, with modifications).** All of the
places mentioned are in the Egyptian Delta.” That is probably
where Basilidians could be found in Epiphanius’s day, but there is

in 201. See A. Birley, Septimius Severus: The African Emperor (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode,
1971), 209. The persecution was most likely a local affair, in which the prefect, Laetus, was
probably involved (Ecclesiastical History 6.2.2).
80. Telfer, “Episcopal Succession,” 2. He bases this statement on the Palestinian bish-
ops’ claim that only Alexandria and no other Egyptian church was in agreement with them
on the dating of Easter (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.25).
81. A. von Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahr-
hunderten, vol. 2: Die Verbreitung (4th ed.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1924), 705-29 (on Egypt and
the Thebaid, Libya, and the Pentapolis).
82. Ibid., 708.
83. See F. Williams, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I (Sects 1-46) (NHS 25;
Leiden: Brill, 1987).
84. Griggs (Egyptian Christianity, 82) envisions a journey from Upper Egypt northward
through the Delta, but that is not what the text says. He allows for the historicity of this
account “if Epiphanius had access to accurate information.”
34 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

reason to doubt that Basilides himself did missionary work there.

Epiphanius is hardly a reliable historian.
Epiphanius says: “Valentinus also preached in Egypt. Thus his
seed is still in Egypt, like the remains of a viper’s bones, in
Athribitis, Prosopitis, Arsinoitis, Thebais, and Paralia and Alex-
andria in Lower Egypt. Moreover he went and preached in Rome”
(Against Heresies 31.7.1; trans. Williams). Once again, it must be
said that the historicity of this account is very much in doubt,”
except for the statement that Valentinus moved to Rome. That
Valentinians still existed in Egypt in Epiphanius’s time is, of
course, likely.
Toward the end of the second century Clement made the fol-
lowing claim: “But the word of our Teacher remained not in Judea
alone, as philosophy did in Greece; but was diffused over the
whole world, over every nation, and village, and town, bring-
ing already over to the truth whole houses, and each individual
of those who heard it by him himself, and not a few of the
philosophers themselves” (Miscellanies 6.18.167; trans. Wilson in
Ante-Nicene Fathers 2.520).°° Unfortunately, this statement says
both too much and too little. It says too much in general, and
too little as to specifics, that is, nothing in particular about
Egypt. Such a rhetorical claim is reminiscent of the claim made
by Irenaeus (whose work Clement knew; see Irenaeus, Against
Heresies 1.10.2)” that the true church, spread over the entire
world, maintains a single creed, affirmed alike by churches in
such diverse regions as Germany, Spain, Gaul, “the East,” Egypt,
Libya, and “the central regions of the world.” Of course, Ire-
naeus had no direct knowledge of Christianity in Egypt or Libya,
though he probably did have some knowledge of the situation in
Alexandria.®

85. Griggs (Egyptian Christianity, 83) gives Epiphanius’s account too much credence.
86. Cited by Harnack, Mission und Ausbreitung, 711.
87. On Clement's knowledge of Irenaeus, see van den Hoek, “How Alexandrian Was
Clement of Alexandria?” 186, 190.
88. See Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 174-75.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 35

So, for more reliable evidence of Christianity in Egypt outside

Alexandria in the second century we must turn to the papyri pre-
served by Egypt’s desert sands. For that purpose we turn first to
Joseph van Haelst’s Catalogue des papyrus littéraires juifs et chrétiens
for information on Christian papyri that can be assigned a second-
century date and whose provenance is known. From the Fayum
come fragments of the Old Testament (nos. 174 and 224 and pos-
sibly nos. 52 and 304), possibly the New Testament (no. 462),”°
the Shepherd of Hermas (no. 657), and the Naassene Psalm (1066).
Three fragments from an Old Testament codex come from Qarara
(Innovov moA1c; no. 33). Possibly from Panopolis or nearby come
fragments from the New Testament (John; no. 426) and the Old
Testament (Psalms; no. 118). Antinoopolis is represented by two
Old Testament fragments (no. 179). Of uncertain provenance are
the Egerton gospel fragments (no. 586) and a fragment of the
Sibylline Oracles (no. 581). Oxyrhynchus is well represented, with
fragments from the Old Testament (nos. 13, 40), the New Tes-
tament (no. 372),”' the Gospel of Thomas (no. 593), an unknown
gospel (no. 592), Irenaeus’s Against Heresies, Philo of Alexandria’s
writings (no. 696), and a magical text (no. 1076). This aligns well
with Roberts’s suggestion that a Christian scriptorium probably
existed in Oxyrhynchus by the end of the second century or the
beginning of the third.”
We should also take into account the possibility that some
papyri in the corpus of Jewish papyri are actually Christian, iden-
tified as Jewish only on the basis of the occurrence of biblical
names. For example, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum no. 455, from
Theadeiphia dated to 137, contains the name Isakous (Isaac). An-

89. Nos. 52 and 304 are part of the Chester Beatty collection, for which alternative
provenances are suggested: Aphroditopolis or elsewhere in Upper Egypt. See J. van Haelst,
Catalogue des papyrus littéraires juifs et chrétiens (Paris: La Sorbonne, 1976), 30.
90. P. Rylands 457, which could have come from Oxyrhynchus. See van Haelst, ibid.,
167-68.
91. P. Oxy. 1683, a fragment from a codex containing (at least) the Gospel of Matthew.
To this should be added P. Oxy. 3523, from a codex containing the Gospel of John; see S. R.
Llewelyn’s discussion in NewDocs 7 (1994): 242-48.
92. Roberts, Manuscript, Society, and Belief, 24.
36 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

other, from the Fayum dated to 149, contains the name Somoeilos
(Samuel). The people named in these documents could have been
Christians.”
Mario Naldini’s collection does not include any private let-
ters that are identifiably Christian from as early as the second
century.” But if a letter that is dubbed “the earliest Christian let-
ter on papyrus” can legitimately be identified as such,” we have
evidence of the very early arri¥al of Christianity in Oxyrhynchus.
One caveat is, of course, in order in discussing the papyri:
a certain lag time must be assumed between the composition
or copying of a text on papyrus and its deposit in the place
where the papyrus was found. Also, a text found, for example, at
Oxyrhynchus could very well have been copied elsewhere, most
likely Alexandria. Even so, we can assume from papyrological ev-
idence that Christianity penetrated Upper Egypt and the Fayum
during the second century. It also probably penetrated the Egyp-
tian Delta, though one cannot expect to find papyri from that
area.
The evidence from the third century, both literary and papy-
rological, is much richer.”° It is probable that, during the course
of the third century, all of the nomes of Egypt came to have
their own bishops, ostensibly under the authority of the Alexan-
drian bishop.” It is also during the third century that the Coptic

93. See G. H. R. Horsley’s discussion in NewDocs 4 (1987): 210-13.

94. M. Naldini, I] Cristianesimo in Egitto: Lettere private nei papiri dei secoli II-IV (Florence:
Le Monnier, 1968).
95. The text and translation are reprinted in NewDocs 6 (1989): 169-77 no. 25. See
pp. 41-42 below.
96. The letters of Bishop Dionysius of Alexandria (248-65) are especially important
in this regard (see p. 60 below). On the earliest example of a Christian identified as such
in an official document, a papyrus from early-third-century Arsinoe, see P. van Minnen,
“The Roots of Egyptian Christianity,” Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 40
(1994): 71-85, esp. 74-77. For additional papyrological evidence, see van Haelst’s Catalogue
des papyrus littéraires juifs et chrétiens; Naldini’s Il Cristianesimo in Egitto; and especially E. A.
Judge and S. R. Pickering, “Papyrus Documentation of Church and Community in Egypt
to the Mid-Fourth Century,” Jahrbuch fiir Antike und Christentum 20 (1977): 47-71. For
a general discussion, see G. Tibiletti, “Tra paganesimo e cristianesimo: L’Egitto nel III
secolo,” in Egitto e societa antica: Atti del convegno Torino 8/9 VI-23/24 XI 1984 (ed. S. Curto
and O. Montevecchi; Milan: Vita e pensiero, 1985), 247-69.
97. Harnack, Mission und Ausbreitung, 712.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt oF

language was developed, first of all for the purpose of translating

the Christian Scriptures into the native tongue of the Egyptians.”
To be sure, the Coptic language itself, with its appropriation of
Greek words and phrases into its vocabulary and syntax, reflects
a bilingual environment. It is probably the case that Christianity
spread less rapidly in rural areas than in urban centers, such as
the nome capitals and other towns in the chdra.” Roger Bagnall is
probably right in his estimate that Christians were in the majority
in Egypt by the time of the death of Constantine in 337.'°

ORIGINS OF EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM

Among the beautiful, recently restored, thirteenth-century wall
paintings in the Old Church in the Monastery of St. Antony near
the Red Sea are two paintings occupying prominent places in
the nave of the church, one of St. Antony himself and another
of St. Pachomius.'”’ Accompanying each of the two monks is a
Coptic inscription identifying these two great heroes of Egyptian
monasticism: “Abba Antony, father of the monks,” and “Abba Pa-
chomius, father of the Koinonia.”'* Thus, at his monastery in the
Eastern Desert, St. Antony is identified as the founder of Christian
monasticism, and St. Pachomius as the founder of its coenobitic
variety, that is, monks living in organized communities. These
identifications are, of course, traditional. Antony went out into
the desert as an anchorite, that is to say, he withdrew into the
desert and became a hermit. Others followed him into the desert,
with the result that “the desert has been made a city,” inhabited

98. For a convenient survey with extensive bibliography, see S. Emmel, “Coptic Lan-
guage,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N. Freedman et al.; New York: Doubleday,
1992), 4.180-88.
99. So Llewelyn, in NewDocs 4 (1987): 212.
100. R. S. Bagnall, Egypt in Late Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993),
281. On the persistence of native Egyptian (“pagan”) religious beliefs and practices, see
D. Frankfurter, Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation and Resistance (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1998).
101. E. S. Bolman (ed.), Monastic Visions: Wall Paintings in the Monastery of St. Antony at
the Red Sea (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), xiii, 48.
102. B. A. Pearson, “The Coptic Inscriptions in the Church of St. Antony,” in ibid.,
217-39, 267-70 (notes), 293-96 (indexes), esp. 221, 223.
38 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

by monks who have “registered themselves for citizenship in the

heavens.”"°
Recent research shows how wrong this picture is. The work of
James Goehring is particularly important in this regard.’ There
were certainly ascetic hermits before St. Antony, as we know from
St. Jerome’s Life of Paul of Thebes. Indeed, a painting of Paul is
found right next to that of Antony in St. Antony’s monastery.'°°
And there were monastic communities before the ones founded by
Pachomius. Moreover, monastic communities, for the most part,
were not located in the desert.'”
Especially important in the new picture of Egyptian monasti-
cism is a third category alongside anchorite and coenobitic: village
ascetics living in houses of their own. Especially important in this
regard is the work of E. A. Judge, based on his study of a papyrus
document from Karanis, dated 324 c.£.'°* The document in ques-
tion is a petition addressed by one Isidorus to the local praepositus,
asking for justice in redressing wrongs committed by two per-
sons named Pamonis and Harpalus. Isidorus had been viciously
attacked by them and probably would have died had it not been
for two people who came to his aid: “the deacon Antoninus and
the monk Isaac” (‘Avtovivov SidKovos Kai ‘Ilodk povayod).”
The “monk” Isaac in the document is clearly not a desert ascetic,
nor is he a member of a monastic community. Rather, he lives in
the village and participates actively in civil and church affairs.

103. Athanasius, Life of Antony 14 (Patrologia graeca 16.865), cited by J. E. Goehring,

Ascetics, Society, and the Desert: Studies in Early Egyptian Monasticism (Studies in Antiquity
and Christianity 10; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 1999), 74. Cf. D. J. Chitty, The Desert a City:
An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Palestinian Monasticism in the Christian Empire
(Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Viadimir’s Seminary Press, 1966).
104. Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 13-109.
105. For a convenient translation of the Life of Paul, see C. White, Early Christian Lives
(London: Penguin, 1998), 71-84.
106. Bolman, Monastic Visions, xiii. Above the two figures is portrayed an event in their
famous meeting: a raven bringing a loaf of bread to the two monks (Life of Paul 10).
107. Extensive discussions of these issues are found in Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and
the Desert.
108. E. A. Judge, “The Earliest Use of Monachos for ‘Monk’ (P. Coll. Youtie 77) and
the Origins of Monasticism,” Jahrbuch fiir Antike und Christentum 20 (1977): 72-89. Cf.
Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 20-26, 53-72.
109. Text and translation in Judge, “Earliest Use of Monachos,” 73.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt oe)

Isaac’s situation is illuminated with reference to a denunciation

by Jerome (Epistle 22.34) of a third class of monks in Egypt (i.e., in
addition to the coenobium and the anchorites): the remnuoth. These
monks (“solitaries”) live in small household communities and ex-
ercise too much independence of clerical authority in Jerome’s
view. The remnuoth (obviously a Coptic word: paANOTWT, soli-
tary) denounced by Jerome belong to the same class of ascetics
as the apotaktikai (renouncers; cf. Luke 14:33) referred to in other
sources.'!° And it is this class of monks (ovayot, solitaries) to
which Isaac of Karanis belongs. When Isidorus (who may not have
been a Christian) refers in his petition to a deacon and a monk, he
is referring to categories of local church members well established
by that time (324 C.E.).
Judge concludes from his consideration of the evidence that the
apotactic movement, as later attested, began before the eremitic
monasticism of Antony or the coenobitic monasticism of Pa-
chomius. This movement “represents the point at which the men
at last followed the pattern long set for virgins and widows, and
set up houses of their own in town, in which the life of personal
renunciation and service in the church would be practised.”""!
Judge dates this new development in the third or early fourth
century and suggests that a new name, monachos, was applied to
such people by the general public: “P. Coll. Youtie 77 demonstrates
that by 324 monachos was a recognized public style for the orig-
inal apotactic type of ascetic, ranking alongside the ministers of
the church.”"”
Can we push the development of apotactic monasticism fur-
ther back in time? Ewa Wipszycka refers to the type of asceticism

110. Ibid., 79. This class of ascetics is referred to as “sarabaites” by John Cassian (Con-
ferences 18.4-7). See the important discussion of Egyptian urban monasticism by Ewa
Wipszycka, Etudes sur le christianisme dans l'Egypte de l’antiquité tardive (Studia ephemeridis
Augustinianum 52; Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1996), 281-336, esp. 285.
111. Judge, “Earliest Use of Monachos,” 85. On early Christian groups of women ascetics
in Alexandria, see S. J. Davis, The Cult of Saint Thecla: A Tradition of Women’s Piety in Late
Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 87-89. On female asceticism in Egypt in
late antiquity, see S. Elm, “Virgins of God:” The Making ofAsceticism in Late Antiquity (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1994), 227-372.
112. Judge, “Earliest Use of Monachos,” 88.
40 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

represented by the sarabaitae or remnuoth as “un type archaique

d’ascétisme,” antedating the types represented by Antony and
Pachomius.'!* Based on her observations, Dorival ventures to sug-
gest that one or more groups of “sarabaites” could have existed
in second-century Alexandria.''* Unfortunately, our evidence is
incomplete. But the use of the term monachos to refer to Chris-
tian solitaries may very well go back to a period earlier than that
posited by Judge.
The word povayds (solitary) occurs in the Coptic text of the
Gospel of Thomas in sayings 16, 49, and 75 — sayings that represent
an ascetic stance toward the world. These sayings are not rep-
resented in the Oxyrhynchus fragments of Thomas; so we do not
know if the word povaydc occurred in the original Greek version.
It probably did, and if that is the case the solitaries referred to in
the Gospel of Thomas conceivably refer to a distinct class of Chris-
tian ascetics that could very well have existed in second-century
Alexandria. They may even have created suspicion in the minds
of other Christians in Alexandria, leading to the exhortation in
the Epistle of Barnabas 4.10: “Do not by retiring apart live alone
[Lu] KaO’ Eavtovds Evdvvovtes Lovalete] as if you were already made
righteous, but come together and seek out the common good”
(trans. Lake).

SOURCES
Potential sources for Christianity in Egypt through the third cen-
tury include both nonliterary and literary evidence. The nonliter-
ary sources include archeological evidence based on excavations,
epigraphic evidence, iconographic evidence, and papyrological ev-
idence (documents and letters). For the second and third centuries
the nonliterary evidence is very slim. There is no archeological
evidence apart from a few scattered architectural fragments sup-
posed to come from the earliest attested church in Alexandria, that

113. Wipszycka, Etudes sur le christianisme, 288.

114. Dorival, “Les débuts,” 174.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 41

of Theonas;'" no epigraphic evidence;’”® virtually no iconographic

evidence;'” and the papyrological evidence consists for the most
part of what are taken to be the earliest Christian letters.''* On
the other hand, the literary evidence is massive. While many of
the writings in question are indisputably of Egyptian provenance,
the relevance of some of them for the study of early Christianity
in Egypt needs to be established. That is to say, their Egyptian
provenance is disputed or questionable. Before we discuss the lit-
erary evidence we take up briefly the private Christian letters in
extant papyri from Egypt.
Most Christian letters on papyrus date to the fourth century
and later, and the Christian character of the earlier ones is hard
to establish, for overt expressions of Christian piety are harder to
find the earlier the letters are. Moreover, the evidence for Christian

115. For a complete account of excavations carried out in Alexandria in the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries, see B. Tkaczow, Topography of Ancient Alexandria (An Archeologi-
cal Map) (Travaux du Centre d’Archéologie mediterranéene de l’Académie polonaise des
Sciences 32; Warsaw: PIN, 1993). For the earliest archeological evidence of churches in Al-
exandria, see idem, “Archeological Sources for the Earliest Churches,” 432 (on Theonas’s
church); cf. B. A. Pearson, “Alexandria,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near
East (ed. E. M. Meyers; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1.65—69, esp. 68. The earli-
est identifiably Christian tombs date from the fourth century. Griggs’s claims for first- and
second-century Christian burials at Seila in the Fayum are “fantasy” according to Bagnall.
See C. W. Griggs, “Excavating a Christian Cemetery Near Seila in the Fayum Region of
Egypt,” in Coptic Studies: Acts of the Third International Congress of Coptic Studies, Warsaw,
20-25 August 1984 (ed. W. Godlewski; Warsaw: Editions Scientifiques de Pologne, 1990),
145-50; and Bagnall, Egypt in Late Antiquity, 279 n. 113.
116. No Christian inscriptions are listed in F. Kayser, Recueil des inscriptions grecques
et latines (non funéraires) d’Alexandrie impériale (Ier—IIe s. apr. J.-C.) (Bibliotheque d’étude
108; Cairo: Institut Francais d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1994). Christian sepulchral
inscriptions were published much earlier by G. Lefebvre, Recueil des inscriptions grecques-
chrétiennes d’Egypte (Cairo: Institut Frangais d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1907); three
mid-second-century inscriptions from Alexandria (nos. 34, 35, 54) are probably not Chris-
tian. If they are, they constitute “plus anciens monuments datés de l’/Egypte chrétienne”
(xxiv). On the Greek and Coptic Egyptian Christian inscriptions from the fourth century
on, see S. K. Brown, “Coptic and Greek Inscriptions from Christian Egypt: A Brief Re-
view,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring; Studies in
Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 26-41, with references.
117. Clement of Alexandria (Christ the Educator 3.11) refers to the use of signet rings
by Christian men displaying seals with a dove, fish, sailing ship, musical lyre, or even
an image of the apostles, but no examples have been found. Of course, Clement forbids
any representation of an idol. For the Christian iconographic evidence before Constantine,
mostly from Rome, see G. F. Snyder, Ante Pacem: Archaeological Evidence of Church Life be-
fore Constantine (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1985). On Gnostic iconography, see
chapter 9 below.
118. See Judge and Pickering, “Papyrus Documentation.”
42 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

letters through the third century is rather slim.'” Of the letters

included in Naldini’s II Cristianesimo in Egitto, only seventeen are
earlier than the beginning of the fourth century, and the Christian
identification of some of these is subject to doubt. That is certainly
true of a letter (P. Oxy. 3057), published subsequent to Naldini’s
work, that possibly dates to the end of the first century or the
first part of the second and is identified as “the earliest Christian
letter on papyrus.”'”” Needle$s to say, scholars differ on how to
determine the Christian character of several of the early letters
and what criteria to use.'*' In any case, the earliest Christian let-
ters do provide some information on early Christian letter writing
in Egypt, and, more importantly, their provenance provides im-
portant evidence for the spread of Christianity in the Egyptian
chora.'**
I shall discuss the voluminous literary evidence for early Egyp-
tian Christianity in the period of our focus’ in six sections, with
a separate section devoted to the Nag Hammadi Library and other
Coptic manuscripts.

119. Naldini, I] Cristianesimo in Egitto, supplanting the earlier collection by G. Ghedini,

Lettere cristiane dai papiri greci del III e del IV secolo (Milan: Vita e pensiero, 1923). In an exten-
sive introduction, Naldini discusses the indicators of Christian identification, the letters’
testimony to Christian life, and observations on the language and culture reflected in them.
See also M. Naldini, “Nuove testimonianze cristiane nelle lettere dei papiri greco-egizi
(sec. I]-IV),” in Studi sul cristianesimo antico e moderno (ed. M. Simonetti and P. Siniscalco;
Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1995), 2.831—46 (= Augustinianum 35 [1995]).
Cf. G. Tibiletti, Le lettere private nei papiri greci del III e IV secolo d. C.: Tra paganesimo e cris-
tianesimo (Milan: Vita e pensiero, 1979), which contains a valuable discussion of the letter
formulas and a selection of thirty-four texts.
120. The text and translation are reprinted in NewDocs 6 (1989): 169-77 no. 25, which
includes a valuable analysis by S. R. Llewelyn. Here are his concluding remarks: “We
conclude that the letter gives no indication that the correspondents were Christian. But
equally no evidence stands in the way of its being so accepted” (177).
121. For a valuable discussion by G. H. R. Horsley, with a tabular comparison of the
findings of four scholars (Ghedini, Naldini, Wipszycka [in her review of Naldini’s book in
Journal of Juristic Papyrology 18 (1974): 203-21], and Tibiletti), see NewDocs 4 (1987): 57-63
no. 16.
122. For a discussion of the early Christian letters known to H. I. Bell, see his “Evidence
of Christianity in Egypt during the Roman Period,” Harvard Theological Review 37 (1944):
185-208, esp. 192-99.
123. On the history of Christian literature to the Constantinian era, see C. Moreschini
and E. Norelli, Histoire de la littérature chrétienne antique grecque et latine, vol. 1: De Paul a l'ére
de Constantin (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2000), unfortunately unavailable to me.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 43

SECOND-CENTURY NON-GNOSTIC LITERATURE INDISPUTABLY OR MOST

PROBABLY OF EGYPTIAN PROVENANCE
Gospel of the Hebrews
The apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews is extant in only six frag-
ments consisting of quotations from patristic authors (Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, and Jerome).’** There is some overlapping of
sayings material with the Gospel of Thomas, whose composition is
usually assigned to Syria.’ While some argue that the Gospel of
the Hebrews was composed in Hebrew in Palestine and brought to
Alexandria in only the second century,'*° I accept the usual schol-
arly consensus for its composition in Greek and its origin in early
Alexandrian Jewish Christian circles.

Gospel of the Egyptians

The apocryphal Gospel of the Egyptians is extant only in fragments
consisting of quotations from patristic authors (Clement of Alex-
andria, possibly Hippolytus, and Epiphanius).'” There is some
overlapping of sayings material with the Gospel of Thomas.'** This
gospel may have been in use by early-second-century Gentile
Christians in the Rhakotis district of Alexandria.’”

Secret Gospel of Mark

Two quotations on a page from an incomplete letter attributed to
Clement of Alexandria writing to Theodore are our only source
for information on the Secret Gospel of Mark, claimed by Clement
to have been in use for liturgical purposes by the Alexandrian
church. First published by Morton Smith,'*° the longer quotation
124. NTApoc 1.172-78; R. Cameron, The Other Gospels: Non-Canonical Gospel Texts (Phila-
delphia: Westminster, 1982), 83-86. I exclude from consideration frag. 1, a spurious
quotation from a Coptic homily falsely attributed to St. Cyril of Jerusalem, on which see
van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 142-56.
125. H. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, vol. 2: History and Literature of Early
Christianity (2d ed.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000), 229-30.
126. Dorival, “Les débuts,” 171-72.
127. NTApoc 1.209-15; Cameron, Other Gospels, 49-52.
128. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.235—36.
129. Pearson, “Christianity in Egypt,” 954-68, esp. 956.
130. M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1973).
44 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

consists of a story of the raising from the dead of a young man and
his subsequent initiation, the shorter one of an encounter between
Jesus and three women. There is considerable scholarly debate on
the authenticity of the letter in which it is quoted, its relationship
to the canonical Gospel of Mark, and its date.'*' I see no reason
to doubt the authenticity of Clement’s letter. I tend to agree with
H. Merkel that the Secret Gospel of Mark is dependent on the canoni-
cal gospels and can hardly have been composed before the middle
of the second century.

Kerygma Petri
The apologetic work presented as the “preaching of Peter,” the
Kerygma Petri, is usually assigned to early-second-century Alex-
andria.' Extant only in quotations by Clement of Alexandria, it
is notable for its identification of Christians as a “third race,” not
Jewish and not Gentile (“Greeks”).

Apocalypse of Peter
Consisting of revelations given by Christ on the Mount of Olives
to Peter and the other disciples, the Apocalypse of Peter is extant
only in fragments from Coptic and Ethiopic versions, though it
was originally composed in Greek, probably early in the second
century.'?

Traditions of Matthias

The apocryphal Traditions of Matthias is extant in only three quo-

tations in the writings of Clement of Alexandria. While some
scholars claim that this is a Gnostic writing, nothing in the extant

131. Discussed by H. Merkel in NTApoc 1.106-9; H. Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels:

Their History and Development (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1990), 293-309; Cameron, Other Gospels,
67-71.
132. Introduction and translation by W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 2.34-41. Cf. p- 16
above.
133. Introduction and translation by C. D. G. Miiller in NTApoc 2.620-38. This apoca-
lypse is to be distinguished from the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter that is part of the Nag
Hammadi Library (NHC VII,3).
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 45

quotations indicates that. It was probably composed in Alexandria

in the early second century.”

Jannes and Jambres

The apocryphal Jannes and Jambres, telling of the repentance of the
Egyptian magicians who “opposed Moses” (2 Tim 3:8; cf. Exod
7:11-12), first cited by Origen, apparently circulated rather widely
in ancient Christian circles. Probably composed in second-century
Alexandria, it is extant now only in fragments.’

Sentences of Sextus
The Sentences of Sextus is a collection of Greek wisdom sentences
compiled by an Alexandrian Christian redactor toward the end
of the second century or possibly the beginning of the third.’*°
Preserved in Greek, it is also known from Latin, Syriac, Armenian,
and Georgian versions, and fragments in Coptic are preserved in
the Nag Hammadi Library (NHC XII,1).'°*”

Writings of Clement of Alexandria

The extant writings of Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-214) are Ex-
hortation to the Greeks (Protreptikos), Christ the Educator (Paedagogus),
Miscellanies (Stromateis), a partially preserved letter to Theodore
on the Secret Gospel of Mark, a homily on Mark 10:17-31 entitled
Salvation of the Rich (Quis dives salvetur), Excerpts from Theodotus (Ex-
cerpta ex Theodoto), and Eclogae propheticae. Eusebius (Ecclesiastical
History 6.13) mentions several other works now lost: Hypotyposeis
(Outlines) in eight volumes, On the Pascha, On Fasting, On Slander,
Exhortation to Endurance, To the Recently Baptized, and Against the
Judaizers.'** Clement's writings are extremely important for our

134. See discussion by H.-C. Puech and B. Blatz in NTApoc 1.382-86.

135. Introduction and translation by A. Pietersma and R. T. Lutz in OTP 2.427-42.
136. H. Chadwick, The Sentences of Sextus: A Contribution to the History of Early Christian
Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959).
137. Edition, translation, and introduction by F. Wisse in Nag Hammadi Codices XI, XII,
XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 295-327.
138. On the writings of Clement, with references to editions and studies, see J. Quasten,
Patrology, vol. 2: The Ante-Nicene Literature after Irenaeus (Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1962),
46 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

knowledge of Christian life and praxis in late-second-century Al-

exandria. Some of these writings, including the latest parts of
the Miscellanies, date to the period after 202, when Clement left
Alexandria and moved to Palestine.

SECOND-CENTURY NON-GNOSTIC LITERATURE OF DISPUTED OR

QUESTIONABLE PROVENANCE

The Epistle of Jude

J. J. Gunther makes an interesting case for the Alexandrian prove-
nance of Jude, a late New Testament writing,’ but Syria or
Palestine is more likely.'*°

The Second Epistle of Peter

While an Alexandrian provenance for 2 Peter, another late New
Testament writing, is sometimes argued,'*! Asia Minor is much
more likely.'*

Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

The Old Testament apocryphon Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,

purporting to be the last words of the sons of the patriarch Ja-
cob (whose own testament is recorded in Gen 49), while probably
based on a Jewish original, is certainly Christian in its present
form and composed before the end of the second century. While
an Alexandrian origin is possible, it is more likely to be placed in
Syria.'*

5-36. For more recent bibliography, see A. van den Hoek (ed.), Clément d’Alexandrie: Les
Stromates, Stromate IV (Sources chrétiennes 463; Paris: Cerf, 2001), 44-50.
139. J. J. Gunther, “The Alexandrian Epistle of Jude,” New Testament Studies 30 (1984):
549-62.
140. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.252.
141. For example, H. Paulsen, Der zweite Petrusbief und der Judasbrief (Kritisch-
exegetischer Kommentar tiber das Neue Testament 12.2; G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1992), 95.
142. J. H. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude (Anchor Bible 37C; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 132. Cf.
Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 75-87, esp. 87.
143. Introduction and translation by H. C. Kee in OTP 1.775-828.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 47

Ascension of Isaiah

The Ascension of Isaiah is a Christian expansion of a Jewish account

of the martyrdom of the prophet Isaiah, probably composed in
Greek in the second century, but now extant completely only in
Ethiopic. An Alexandrian provenance is suggested for the work,
but Robert Hall and David Frankfurter argue rather convincingly
for placing it in Asia Minor.”

Sibylline Oracles
Ancient oracular utterances in Greek hexameter verse attributed
to a mythic seeress, “the Sibyl,” are known from the sixth century
B.C.E., but are now lost. Sibylline oracles inspired Jewish writers in
Egypt, from the second century B.C.E. on, to compose prophetic or-
acles in the pagan seeress’s name promoting Jewish monotheism
and repentance in the face of judgment. Christian authors, from
the second century on, took over the same form and composed
new oracles in praise of Christ. An Alexandrian provenance for
some of the Christian Sibylline Oracles is probable, but not certain.
Some of them may date to as early as the second century, but most
of them are later.'*°

Papyrus Egerton 2
Fragments from “an unknown gospel” known as Papyrus Egerton
2 and inscribed on pages from a second-century papyrus codex
were first published in 1935, with a small additional fragment

144. Introduction and translation by C. D. G. Miiller in NTApoc 2.603-20. Cf. Introduc-

tion and translation by M. A. Knibb in OTP 2.142-76. Knibb leaves open the question of
its provenance.
145. R. G. Hall, “The Ascension of Isaiah: Community Situation, Date, and Place in Early
Christianity,” Journal of Biblical Literature 109 (1990): 289-306; D. Frankfurter, “The Legacy of
Jewish Apocalypses in Early Christianity: Regional Trajectories,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic
Heritage in Early Christianity (ed. J. C. VanderKam and W. Adler; Compendia rerum iu-
daicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3.4; Assen: Van Gorcum/ Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996),
129-200, esp. 132-46.
146. The entire collection of the extant Greek oracles in fourteen books (books 9-10 are
lost) is translated and introduced by J. J. Collins in OTP 1.317—472. Christian portions of
books 1-2 and 6-8 are published by U. Treu in NTApoc 2.652-85.
48 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

in 1987.47 What is extant of this gospel consists of parts of

five pericopes sharing traditions associated with all four canon-
ical gospels. An early-second-century date is probable, though
it is dated to as early as the first century.’ An Alexandrian
provenance is possible, but Syria is more likely.

Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 840

\
A fragment of a leaf from Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 840, a miniature
parchment codex, contains the conclusion of a discourse of Jesus to
his disciples in Jerusalem and part of a controversy in the temple
with a pharisaic priest.‘ The date and provenance of the gospel
reflected in this fragment cannot be determined, but a second-
century setting in Syria is possible.'”°

Protevangelium of James

One of several infancy gospels circulating in the early church, the

Protevangelium of James, attributed to Jesus’ brother James, tells the
story of the birth and childhood of Mary and the birth of Jesus.'?!
It is the earliest testimony to Mary’s postpartem virginity and
was probably written in the second half of the second century. An
Alexandrian provenance is possible, but Syria is more likely.

Acts of John

The Acts of John, incomplete in its extant form, is a collection of

episodes from the travels of the Apostle John, culminating in his

147. Introduction and translation by J. Jeremias and W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.96-

99. An improved edition and translation by J. W. Pryor is found in NewDocs 9 (2002): 99-101
no. 28.
148. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.186-87; Cameron, Other Gospels, 72-75.
Both Koester and Cameron assign this gospel to Syria.
149. Introduction and translation by J. Jeremias and W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.94-
92.
150. Cameron (Other Gospels, 53) assigns it to Syria and dates it to the second half of the
first century.
151. Introduction and translation by O. Cullmann in NTApoc 1.421-39; Cameron, Other
Gospels, 107-21.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt Ag

death in Ephesus. It is sometimes assigned to Egypt'” 152 or Syria,’

but an Asian origin is more likely.”

Acts of Andrew
The Acts of Andrew, incomplete in its extant form, is a collection
of episodes from the travels of the Apostle Andrew, culminating
in his martyrdom in Patras. An Alexandrian origin for the book
is suggested,'°’ but Jan Bremmer makes a convincing case for its
provenance in Asia Minor, possibly Pontus.'”°

Epistula Apostolorum
Consisting of revelations given by the risen Christ to his apostles,
with an epistolary preface attacking the heretics Simon and Cerin-
thus, the interesting document known as Epistula Apostolorum
uses a literary form dear to the heretical Gnostics in order to
present christological teachings reflecting the beliefs of the emerg-
ing Catholic church. Originally written in Greek, it is extant in
only Coptic and Ethiopic versions. Carl Schmidt, who first edited
the Coptic version,’” assigns this document to Asia Minor dur-
ing the decade 160-70, but later scholarship tends to assign it an
Egyptian provenance.’ I have long been convinced that Schmidt
was right, and now Charles Hill makes a very convincing case
for assigning the Epistula Apostolorum to Asia Minor, dating it to

152. E. Junod and J.-D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis (Corpus Christianorum: Series Apocrypho-
rum 1-2; Turnhout: Brepols, 1983), 2.692-94, but they assign the Gnostic portion (94-102
and 109) to Syria (631-32).
153. Introduction and translation by K. Schaferdiek in NTApoc 2.152-209.
154. P. J. Lalleman, The Acts of John: A Two-Stage Initiation into Johannine Gnosticism (Lou-
vain: Peeters, 1998), 261-68. Lalleman assigns to it a date “in the second quarter of the
second century” (270), which may be a little too early.
155. Introduction and translation by J.-M. Prieur and W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc
2.101-51, esp. 115-16; D. R. MacDonald, The Acts of Andrew and the Acts of Andrew and
Matthias in the City of the Cannibals (Society of Biblical Literature Texts and Translations:
Christian Apocrypha Series; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 59.
156. J. N. Bremmer, “Man, Magic, and Martyrdom in the Acts of Andrew,” in The
Apocryphal Acts of Andrew (ed. J. N. Bremmer; Louvain: Peeters, 2000), 15-34, esp. 15-20.
157. C. Schmidt and I. Wajnberg, Gesprdche Jesu mit seinen Jiingern nach der Auferstehung:
Ein katholisch-apostolisches Sendschreiben des 2. Jahrhunderts (Texte und Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 43; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1919).
158. Introduction and translation by C. D. G. Miiller in NTApoc 1.249-84; Cameron,
Other Gospels, 131-62; Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.243-45.
50 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

the first half of the second century.'” Its preservation in Coptic

is no indication of an Egyptian origin because Asian Christian
. . . 160
literature was very popular among Christians in Upper Egypt.

Epistle of Barnabas
One of the writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers, the Epistle
of Barnabas has long been considered a product of early-second-
century Alexandrian Christianity.’ I do not find at all convincing
the arguments for a Syro-Palestinian’® or Asian’® origin for it. The
Epistle of Barnabas is, in my judgment, one of the most important
sources we have for early-second-century (or even first-century)
Christianity in Alexandria (see pp. 89-95 below).

Second Epistle of Clement

The writing known as the Second Epistle of Clement is really not an
epistle at all but an early Christian homily. While a Roman prove-
nance is urged for 2 Clement,'** I am inclined to accept Koester’s
arguments for its composition in Egypt around the middle of the
second century.'®

159. C. E. Hill, “The Epistula Apostolorum: An Asian Tract from the Time of Polycarp,”
Journal of Early Christian Studies 7 (1999): 1-53. See also A. Stewart-Sykes, The Lamb’s High
Feast: Melito, Peri Pascha, and the Quartodeciman Paschal Liturgy at Sardis (Vigiliae christianae
Supplement 42; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 25.
160. See Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt,” 149 n. 3. On the circulation of Asian
Christian literature in Upper Egypt and their translation into Coptic, see T. Orlandi, “Cop-
tic Literature,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring;
Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 51-81, esp. 59.
161. See R. A. Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache (The Apostolic Fathers: A New Translation
and Commentary 3; New York: Nelson, 1965). Bauer assumes an Alexandrian provenance
for Barnabas, but regards it as a Gnostic work (Orthodoxy and Heresy, 47-48). L. W. Barnard
uses Barnabas as an important source for reconstructing “Judaism in Egypt A.D. 70-135”;
see Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and Their Background (New York: Shocken, 1966),
41-55. A very convincing case for an Alexandrian provenance for Barnabas is made by
Paget, Epistle of Barnabas, 29-42.
162. See P. Prigent’s introduction in Epitre de Barnabé (Sources chrétiennes 172; Paris:
Cerf, 1971), 22-24.
163. K. Wengst, Tradition und Theologie des Barnabasbriefes (Arbeiten zur Kirchen-
geschichte 42; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1971), 113-18. Wengst assigns it to western Asia Minor,
perhaps Philadelphia, and refers to Ignatius, Philadelphians 8.2.
164. K. P. Donfried, The Setting of Second Clement in Early Christianity (Novum Testamen-
tum Supplement 38; Leiden: Brill, 1974).
165. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.240-—43.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 51

The Writings of Athenagoras

Two writings are attributed to the apologist Athenagoras, who
flourished in the second half of the second century: Embassy for the
Christians and On the Resurrection of the Dead.'® Little is known of
his life, and his works are rarely cited by other Christian writers.
His writings are sometimes assigned to Athens on the grounds
that the title of his Embassy refers to him as “the Athenian, a
Philosopher and a Christian,”’” but I am inclined to accept the
arguments that situate them in Alexandria.’

Epistle to Diognetus
The composite work Epistle to Diognetus consists of an apologetic
treatise (1-10) and a festal homily (11-12). It is assigned to Asia
Minor by some scholars,” but I am inclined to accept the view of
those who argue for an Alexandrian provenance.'””

Agrippa Castor’s refutation of Basilides

Agrippa Castor’s refutation of Basilides, now lost, is known only
from a brief summary by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 4.7). Eu-
sebius (4.7.6) refers to him as “a most famous writer of that time”
(i.e., in the time of Hadrian), but nothing is known of him apart
from Eusebius’s testimony. Winrich Lohr shows that Agrippa was
dependent on Irenaeus for part of his polemic; so he can hardly
have composed his work before the last decade of the second
century.'”’ Eusebius says nothing of the place where Agrippa pro-
duced his work, but Alexandria is plausible because that is where
Basilides had his school.
166. The authenticity of the treatise On the Resurrection is called into question; see W. R.
Schoedel, Athenagoras: Legatio and De resurrectione (Oxford Early Christian Texts; Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1972), xxv—xxviii.
167. C. C. Richardson, Early Christian Fathers (Library of Christian Classics 1; Philadel-
phia: Westminster, 1953; repr. New York: Macmillan, 1970), 290-91.
168. Crehan, Athenagoras, 4-9; Barnard, Athenagoras, 13-18; Pouderon, D’Athénes a
Alexandrie. Pouderon provides a vigorous and convincing defense of the authenticity of
On the Resurrection.
169. Richardson, Early Christian Fathers, 206-10.
170. H. I. Marrou, A Diognéte (Sources chrétiennes 33; Paris: Cerf, 1951), 241-68;
Barnard, Athenagoras, 157 n. 33; cf. Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature, 130.
171. Lohr, Basilides und seine Schule, 5-14 (testimonium 1).

G.M. ELLIOTT LIBRARY .

Cincinnati Christian University
52 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Summary
To summarize our discussion of the writings treated in this
section, I assign to Egypt the following:

some of the Christian Sibyllines

Epistle of Barnabas
2 Clement ‘
the writings of Athenagoras
Epistle to Diognetus
Agrippa Castor’s lost refutation of Basilides

In addition, other writings, including ones not treated here, cer-

tainly circulated in Egypt as early as the second century. Most
important of these were the following apocryphal gospels:

Egerton gospel
Protevangelium of James
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Peter (probably)'”
In addition, first-century canonical writings such as the four gos-
pels and the writings of Paul certainly circulated in Egypt from
early on. The earliest Christian literary papyri, that is, those dated
before 200, attest to the use of the following texts by Egyptian
Christians:

Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,

Psalms

New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Titus, Revelation

Egerton gospel

172. Introduction and translation by C. Maurer and W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.216-

 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 53

Gospel of Thomas
Shepherd of Hermas
Irenaeus, Against Heresies'”*

Thus, the use of non-Egyptian writings by Christians in Egypt

certainly contributes to our knowledge of early Christianity there
and underscores the literary contacts and the flow of traffic that
pertained among Christians in the early empire.

SECOND-CENTURY GNOSTIC OR OTHER HERETICAL LITERATURE

INDISPUTABLY OR MOST PROBABLY OF EGYPTIAN PROVENANCE
The Writings of Basilides and His School
Basilides, who flourished in Alexandria in the time of Hadrian
and Antoninus Pius, was a prolific writer and the first known
commentator on what would become the New Testament Scrip-
tures. His writings and those of his son Isidore and other followers
are all lost, but fragments exist in the writings of Clement of Al-
exandria and Origen and in Hegemonius’s Acta Archelai (a single
questionable citation). These and testimonia concerning Basilides
and his school are collected, edited, translated, and extensively
commented on by Winfred Lohr. Of the nineteen fragments col-
lected by Lohr, ten are attributable to Basilides himself, seven of
them quoted in the writings of Clement of Alexandria, two in
commentaries by Origen, and one in the Acta Archelai.'”* The rest
are from writings of Isidore or, possibly, other unnamed members
of the Basilidian school. In addition, two quite different accounts
of a Gnostic myth are attributed to Basilides, one by Irenaeus
(Against Heresies 1.24.3-7) and the other by Hippolytus (Refutation

173. Roberts, Manuscript, Society, and Belief, 13-14. Second-century papyrus evidence for
John ($%°) and Revelation ($98) has turned up since Roberts’s work. See Novum Testamentum
Graece (27th ed.; ed. B. Aland et al.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993), 689.
174. Lohr, Basilides und seine Schule, frags. 7-8, 10-14, 17-19. Eight of these are presented
in English translation in Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 427-44. Layton does not include frag-
ments from other members of Basilides’ school. Seven fragments of Basilides are presented
in W. Foerster (ed.), Gnosis: A Selection of Gnostic Texts (trans. and ed. R. M. Wilson; Oxford:
Clarendon, 1972-74), 1.74-83, who also includes seven fragments from Isidore or other
Basilidians. Three writings are attributed to Isidore in the extant Basilidian fragments: On
the Grown Soul, Ethics, and Expositions of the Prophet Parchor. See Lohr’s frags. 5, 6, 15.
54 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

of All Heresies 7.20-27).'”° These accounts of Basilides’ myth also

differ from what is taught in the actual fragments of Basilides,
for which Clement of Alexandria is the most reliable informant.'”°
The version in Irenaeus comes closer to Clement's testimony than
the one in Hippolytus and is thus a more reliable testimony to
Basilides’ own mythic system.'”
The Writings of Valentinus ‘
Valentinus was active in Alexandria in the early second century
and was a contemporary of Basilides. Sometime between 136 and
140 he moved to Rome, where he became involved in the church
there and where he opened a school. Valentinus composed homi-
lies, epistles, treatises, and at least one hymn. Most of his writings
are lost, but eight authentic fragments are preserved as quotations
in the writings of Clement of Alexandria and Hippolytus of Rome.
These are edited, translated, and commented on extensively by
Christoph Markschies.'” In addition, an incomplete summary of
a Gnostic myth attributable to Valentinus is given by Irenaeus
(Against Heresies 1.11.1), where it is also reported that Valentinus
adapted to his own purposes the mythic teachings of “the Gnos-
tic school of thought” (presented in Against Heresies 1.29).'” The
Gospel of Truth now known from the Nag Hammadi Library (NHC
1,3; XI1L,2) can confidently be attributed to Valentinus himself.’
[ assume that most, if not all, of what is extant of Valentinus’s
writings can be assigned to his Alexandrian period.

175. Extensive discussion in Lohr, Basilides und seine Schule, 255-323.

176. These differences are stressed by Lohr, who argues that neither account is an
authentic rendition of what Basilides taught (ibid., 271-73, 313-23).
177. So Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 418. Accordingly, Layton includes only the Irenaeus
version of the myth in his anthology (420-25). Both versions are presented in Foerster,
Gnosis, 1.59-74.
178. Markschies (Valentinus Gnosticus?) follows the numbering of the fragments (1-9) as
given in W. Volker, Quellen zur Geschichte der christlichen Gnosis (Sammlung ausgewahlter
Kirchen- und dogmengeschichtlicher Quellenschriften 5; Tiibingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1932),
57-60, but also adds two others, one from Photius and one from Hippolytus, both prob-
ably inauthentic. Markschies also regards frag. 9, from Pseudo-Anthimus, as inauthentic,
a verdict with which I concur. English translations of frags. 1-9 may be found in Foerster,
Gnosis, 1.239-43; and, in a different order, in Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 229-49.
179. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 223-27.
180. So, e.g., Layton, ibid., 250-64. See p. 67 below.

vi
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 55

The Writings of the Valentinian Theodotus

Clement of Alexandria, in his Excerpts from Theodotus, provides
extensive quotations from the writings of Theodotus, a pupil of
Valentinus.'*' While nothing is stated by Clement as to where
Theodotus was active, he likely wrote in Alexandria, which is
also the assumption of Bauer.'**

The Writings of the Valentinian Heracleon

Origen, in his Commentary on the Gospel of John, provides extensive
quotations from a commentary on that gospel written by a mem-
ber of the Valentinian school, Heracleon, who also commented
on the Gospel of Luke (Clement, Miscellanies 4.71.1-73.1).'*° While
Heracleon is usually associated with Ptolemy as representing the
“Italic” branch of the Valentinian school (Hippolytus, Refutation
of All Heresies 6.35; cf. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 2.4.1), his Com-
mentary on John is attested only in Alexandria. So while it is likely
that Heracleon was associated for a time with Valentinus in Rome,
he probably moved back to Alexandria, perhaps when Valentinus
himself moved away from Rome. Heracleon’s commentary clearly
reflects the philological scholarship that was a long-standing part
of Alexandrian culture and was probably composed in Alexandria
sometime between 160 and 180.'™

The Writings of Carpocrates and His Son Epiphanes

Carpocrates flourished in Alexandria in the early second century
and, according to the church fathers, advocated a libertine brand
of Gnostic Christianity. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.25.5) refers

181. The standard edition is that of F-M. Sagnard, Extraits de Théodote (Sources
chrétiennes 23; Paris: Cerf, 1948). Cf. also R. P. Casey, The Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clem-
ent of Alexandria (Studies and Documents 1; London: Christophers, 1934). Material from
Excerpts from Theodotus parallel to Ptolemaeus’s version of the Valentinian myth (Irenaeus,
Against Heresies 1.1.1-8.6) is found in Foerster, Gnosis, 1.147-54.
182. Heresy and Orthodoxy, 49.
183. English translation of the fragments of Heracleon in Foerster, Gnosis, 1.162—83. On
Heracleon and his Johannine exegesis, see A. Wucherpfennig, Heracleon Philologus: Gnostis-
che Johannesexegese im zweiten Jahrhundert (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 142; Tiibingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2002).
184. Wucherpfennig, Heracleon Philologus, 360-71.
56 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

to writings of the Carpocratians, but no specific writing of Car-

pocrates is singled out for mention. Clement of Alexandria, in his
Letter to Theodore, refers to a version of the Secret Gospel of Mark
that had been edited in a libertine direction by Carpocrates. An
excerpt of a book On Righteousness written by Carpocrates’ son
Epiphanes is provided by Clement (Miscellanies 3.5-9).'°

The Writings of Julius Cassianus *

Information on Julius Cassianus, his beliefs, and his writings are
provided by Clement of Alexandria in Book 3 of his Miscella-
nies. Julius Cassianus advocated an extreme form of encratism,
dismissing marriage as nothing but fornication. His writings are
lost, but Clement provides some quotations from a book by Julius
Cassianus entitled Concerning Continence and Celibacy (Miscellanies
3.91-95) and refers to another book called Exegetika (1.101). Clem-
ent does not explicitly say so, but Cassianus was most probably
an Alexandrian. Cassianus was possibly the author of one of the
Nag Hammadi texts, the Testimony of Truth (NHC IX,3), which is
certainly an Alexandrian writing.’

SECOND-CENTURY GNOSTIC OR OTHER HERETICAL LITERATURE OF

DISPUTED OR QUESTIONABLE PROVENANCE
Apelles
Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 5.13) quotes from Rhodo, an anti-
Marcionite author active in Rome, refuting the views of Apelles,
a former Marcionite who founded his own sect. Tertullian (Pre-
scription against Heretics 30) credits Apelles with a writing called
Phaneroseis (Revelations), allegedly based on revelations received
by a woman he supposedly consorted with named Philumene.
This work is lost, as are any other works produced by him. Since

185. English translation of the treatments of the Carpocratians by Irenaeus and Clement
are found in Foerster, Gnosis, 1.36—40. All of the patristic evidence on the Carpocratians is
collected and discussed by Smith in Clement of Alexandria, 295-350 (Greek and Latin texts),
266-78 (discussion).
186. B. A. Pearson (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X (NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981),
118-20. See p. 73 below.
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 57.

Tertullian reports that Apelles had spent some time in Alexan-

dria, it is argued that Apelles was influenced by Alexandrian
theological speculation.'*”

Letter of Paul to the Alexandrians

One lost apocryphal work can be cited here: Letter of Paul to the
Alexandrians, a Marcionite work cited in only the Canon Muratori
and there rejected as having been “forged in Paul’s name for the
sect of Marcion.”'** It cannot be determined whether the title of
this apocryphal letter is an indicator of its Alexandrian origin, but
that appears likely.

THIRD-CENTURY NON-GNOSTIC LITERATURE OF EGYPTIAN

PROVENANCE
Apocalypse of Elijah
The apocryphal Apocalypse of Elijah, extant only in Coptic versions
(Sahidic and Akhmimic), was originally written in Greek (a small
Greek fragment exists).'*’ While it is often argued that the Chris-
tian version we now have is based on a lost Jewish original,'”°
David Frankfurter conclusively demonstrates that it is a Chris-
tian writing from the late third century, which provides important
evidence for Christianity in third-century Upper Egypt.'”"
Gospel of Bartholomew
The apocryphon Gospel of Bartholomew is referred to in several pa-
tristic writings, but is now lost. It is thought to lie behind a later
187. So A. von Harnack in his extensive discussion of Apelles; see Marcion: Das Evan-
gelium vom fremden Gott (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen
Literatur 45; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1924; repr. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,
1960), 177-96.
188. See Schneemelcher’s discussion in NTApoc 2.31. For a translation of the Canon
Muratori, see Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.34-36; see lines 64-65.
189. See A. Pietersma and S. T. Comstock, The Apocalypse of Elijah Based on P. Chester
Beatty 2018 (Society of Biblical Literature Texts and Translations 19: Pseudepigrapha Series
9; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1979), 91-94 (appendix by Pietersma).
190. See introduction and translation by O. S. Wintermute in OTP 1.721-53.
191. D. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt: The Apocalypse of Elijah and Early Egyptian Chris-
tianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 7; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). Frankfurter
provides a synoptic translation of the Sahidic and Akhmimic versions in an appendix
(299-328).
58 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

text called the Questions of Bartholomew, featuring a dialogue be-

tween Christ and Bartholomew.’” The lost Gospel of Bartholomew
is assigned to third-century Egypt (NTApoc 1.540).

Gospel of the Savior

The fragmentary Gospel of the Savior is extant in seven folios from

a Coptic codex housed in Berlin (P. Berol. inv. 22220).""° Its ex-
tant portion consists of a narrative, interspersed with dialogue
between Jesus and his disciples, of events taking place between
the Last Supper and the betrayal. Stephen Emmel shows that this
is the same gospel as the one previously referred to as the Stras-
bourg Coptic Papyrus,’ consisting of fragments of two leaves
from a papyrus codex containing an unknown apocryphal gos-
pel that came to the attention of scholars in 1899.’ The original
editors, who gave it its title, assigned the Greek original of the
Gospel of the Savior to the latter half of the second century,’”° but I
am inclined to assign it to sometime early in the third century.'””
An Egyptian provenance is also highly probable.

192. Introduction and translation by F. Scheidweiler in NTApoc 1.539-53; cf. also J.-D.
Kaestli’s introduction and translation in Ecrits apocryphes chrétiens (Paris: Gallimard, 1997),
1.257-95. This work is to be distinguished from a much later work composed in Coptic, The
Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle, on which see M. Westerhoff,
Auferstehung und Jenseits im koptischen “Buch der Auferstehung Jesus Christi, unseres Herrn”
(Orientalia biblica et christiana 11; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1999).
193. C. W. Hedrick and P. A. Mirecki, Gospel of the Savior: A New Ancient Gospel (Santa
Rosa, Calif.: Polebridge, 1999). Cf. H.-M. Schenke, “Das sogenannte ‘Unbekannte Berliner
Evangelium’ (UBE),” Zeitschrift fiirantikes Christentum 1 (1998): 199-213; S. Emmel, “The Re-
cently Published Gospel of the Savior (‘Unbekanntes Berliner Evangelium’): Righting the
Order of Pages and Events,” Harvard Theological Review 95 (2002): 45-72; idem, “Unbekann-
tes Berliner Evangelium = the Strasbourg Coptic Gospel: Prolegomena to a New Edition
of the Strasbourg Fragments,” in For the Children, Perfect Instruction: Sudies in Honor of Hans-
Martin Schenke on the Occasion of the Berliner Arbeitskreis fiir koptisch-gnostische Schriften’s
Thirtieth Year (ed. H.-G. Bethge et al.; NHMS 54; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 353-74; see also
Hedrick, “Caveats to a ‘Righted Order’ of the Gospel of the Savior,” Harvard Theological Review
96 (2002): 229-38.
194. Emmel, “Unbekanntes Berliner Evangelium.”
195. Introduction and translation by W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.103-5.
196. Hedrick and Mirecki, Gospel of the Savior, 23.
197. So W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 1.103.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 59

Pseudo-Justin: Cohortatio ad Graecos

The apologetic work Cohortatio ad Graecos (Exhortation to the
Greeks), falsely attributed to Justin, uses early Hellenistic Jewish
traditions, including Philo, in exhorting the Greeks to abandon
their errors and be converted to true (Christian) piety.’”* While
other suggestions are made as to its provenance (Greece, Asia
Minor), David Runia makes a persuasive case for assigning it to
early-third-century Alexandria.’”

The Writings of Origen

Origen (185-253), to whom Eusebius devotes much of book 6 of
his Ecclesiastical History, was clearly the most illustrious scholar
and the most important theologian of Christian antiquity. His
voluminous writings, most of which are lost, included works of
textual criticism, exegetical works (scholia, homilies, and com-
mentaries), apologetic works (the most important of which is his
eight-volume work Against Celsus), dogmatic writings (the most
important of which is his treatise On First Principals, completely
extant only in a Latin version), practical and liturgical writings,
and letters. Some of his writings were produced in Caesarea
after he left Alexandria permanently in 233.7 Origen’s works
are of inestimable importance for our knowledge of church life
in early-third-century Alexandria.

The Writings of Ammonius

Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 6.19.10) cites On the Harmony of
Moses and Jesus as one of the works of Ammonius, probably a con-
temporary of Origen. Nothing is preserved of this or any other
writing of Ammonius.””'

198. The latest edition is that of M. Marcovich, Pseudo-Justinus Cohortatio ad Graecos. De

Monarchia Oratio ad Graecos (Patristische Texte und Studien 32; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990).
199. Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature, 184-89.
200. For editions and studies of Origen’s writings, see Quasten, Patrology, 2.37-101. On
Origen’s life and writings, see P. Nautin, Origéne: Sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris: Beauchesne,
1977).
201. Quasten, Patrology, 2.101.
60 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Letters by Alexander of Jerusalem

Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 6.11.3) mentions an Alexandrian
who became cobishop of Jerusalem with Narcissus and later sole
bishop and quotes the concluding greeting of a letter from Alexan-
der to Christians in Antinoopolis in Egypt. Eusebius also quotes
a letter from Alexander to Origen in which he names as his for-
mer teachers Pantaenus and Clement (6.14.8-9). Nothing else is
known of these letters or any other writings of Alexander. I in-
clude Alexander here because he was an Alexandrian, though he
wrote his letters from Jerusalem.

The Writings of Dionysius of Alexandria

Dionysius the Great, to whom Eusebius devotes almost the whole
of book 7 of his Ecclesiastical History, was bishop of Alexandria
from 248 to 265. His voluminous writings include On Nature, On
Promises, Refutation and Apology, and numerous letters, including
festal letters announcing the date of Easter. Unfortunately most
of his writings are lost, and what fragments we do have are
preserved in Eusebius and other patristic writers.*”
The Writings of Theognostus
Theognostus, head of the catechetical school in Alexandria around
265-82, is credited with a work entitled Hypotyposeis (Outlines), in
which he espouses the theology of Origen. Only a small fragment
of this work remains.*”
The Writings of Anatolius
According to Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 7.32), Anatolius was
an illustrious teacher in Alexandria and author of numerous writ-
ings who, after 261, became bishop of Laodicea in Syria. Eusebius
202. The fragments of Dionysius are collected and edited in C. L. Feltoe, AAONYZIOY
AEI'PANA: The Letters and Other Remains of Dionyius of Alexandria (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1904); German translation in W. A. Bienert, Dionysius von Alexandrien:
Das erhaltene Werk (Bibliothek der griechischen Literatur 2; Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1972).
On Dionysius, see also idem, Dionysius von Alexandrien: Zur Frage des Origenismus im dritten
Jahrhundert (Patristische Texte und Studien 21; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978).
203. Quasten, Patrology, 2.109-10. Cf. also L. B. Radford, Three Teachers of Alexandria:
Theognostus, Pierius, and Peter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908), 1-43.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 61

(7.32.14-19) quotes at some length from his Canons on the Pascha, in

which Anatolius expostulates on the correct method of calculating
the date of Easter. In the coursejof his discussion he cites Philo
and other Jewish writers.* Eusebius (7.32.20) also credits Ana-
tolius with a ten-volume Introduction to Arithmetic. Unfortunately
these works are lost. ae

The Writings of Pierius

Pierius, a presbyter and successor to Theognostus as head of the
catechetical school in Alexandria, lived into the fourth century.
A homily On the Prophet Hosea is credited to him, as are works
entitled On the Gospel of Luke, On the Mother of God, and a Life
of St. Pamphilus. All of these writings are lost, except for small
fragments.”

Against the Manichaeans

Two large fragments from a papyrus roll (P. Rylands 469, prove-
nance unknown) contain part of an anonymous letter polemiciz-
ing against the Manichaeans. Its editor, Colin Roberts, assigns it
to the reign of Diocletian and possibly to the chancery of Bishop
Theonas of Alexandria (i.e., 282-300).”°° This is the oldest anti-
Manichaean writing known and attests to the early arrival of the
religion of Mani in Egypt (see p. 25 above).

The Writings of Hieracas of Leontopolis

The only reliable source for information on Hieracas is Epipha-
nius’s Against Heresies 67 (“Against Hieracites”). Hieracas’s public
activity in Leontopolis*” probably began as early as 285, and his
teachings had created considerable attention by around 320. In

204. For a discussion of this work, see Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature, 231-34.
205. Quasten, Patrology, 2.111-13; cf. Radford, Three Teachers of Alexandria, 44-57.
206. C. H. Roberts, Catalogue of the Greek and Latin Papyri in the John Rylands Library
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1938), 3.38-39; van Haelst, Catalogue des papyrus
littéraires juifs et chrétiens, 253 (no. 700). Cf. Stroumsa, “Manichaean Challenge,” 315.
207. K. Heussi, Der Ursprung des Ménchtums (Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1936), 58 n. 2.
Heussi dates the birth of Hieracas to between 245 and 260.
62 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Leontopolis”® he created a strict ascetic community. Epiphanius

reports that Hieracas was an extremely learned man and a cal-
ligrapher who wrote expositions on Scripture in both Greek and
Coptic, as well as psalms and hymns (Against Heresies 67.3.7), pre-
sumably for use in worship services.*” Unfortunately none of his
writings survive.”
%
WRITINGS IN THE COPTIC GNOSTIC MANUSCRIPTS

The Coptic Gnostic manuscripts include the thirteen codices

constituting the Nag Hammadi Library (fourth century), Codex
Berolinensis Gnosticus (early fifth century), Askew Codex (fourth
century), Bruce Codex (fifth century?), and fragments from a
parchment codex found at Deir el Bala’izah in Upper Egypt (fourth
century).”'' These writings fall into the five categories listed
below.’ All of the writings contained in these manuscripts as
we now know them are Coptic translations of Greek originals.

208. Two Egyptian cities have the name Leontopolis, both in the Delta north of Heliopolis:
Tell al-Yahudiya (where a Jewish temple had been built in the second century B.C.E.) and
Tell al-Muqdam.
209. See the important study by Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 110-33.
Goehring shows that the picture drawn in some later sources of Hieracas as a desert ascetic
is false.
210. Frederik Wisse has suggested that Hieracas may have been the author of one of the
anonymous Nag Hammadi writings, the Testimony of Truth (NHC IX,3) but I consider that
unlikely; see F. Wisse, “Gnosticism and Early Monasticism in Egypt,” in Gnosis: Festschrift
fiir Hans Jonas (ed. B. Aland; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), 432-40, esp. 439-
40; and Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X, 120.
211. English translations of all of the writings from the Nag Hammadi codices plus
the closely related Berlin Codex are published in NHL. See also the important German
translation Nag Hammadi Deutsch in two volumes (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2001, 2003). For a
complete bibliography, see D. Scholer, Nag Hammadi Bibliography, 1948-1969 (NHS 1; Leiden:
Brill, 1971); idem, Nag Hammadi Bibliography, 1970-94 (NHMS 32; Leiden: Brill, 1997); with
annual bibliographic updates in Novum Testamentum.
212. On Sethian Gnosticism and Sethian Gnostic writings, see H.-M. Schenke, “The
Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” in The Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut March
28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81),
2.588-616; and J. D. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition (BCNH Etudes 6;
Quebec: Laval University Press /Louvain: Peeters, 2001). This group of writings is referred
to by Layton as “classic Gnostic Scripture”; see Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 5-214. See also
pp. 201-23 below.

Ma
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 63

Sethian Gnostic Writings

Apocryphon of John. The Apocryphon of John (NHC IL1; Il,1; IV,1;
BG,2)" in its present form consists of revelations given by the
risen Christ to his disciple John son of Zebedee and in its orig-
inal Greek version probably dates to the early third century. A
portion of it, but certainly not its frame story, was known to
Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.29). The frame story is probably de-
pendent upon the Acts ofJohn,*"* but the work as we now know it is
made up of earlier sources.’ Its provenance is uncertain (Koester
assigns it to Syria),7'° but I am inclined to place it in Alexandria,
though some of its sources could have come from Syria.
Hypostasis of the Archons. The Hypostasis of the Archons (NHC
IL4)*” is an anonymous treatise that contains a Gnostic exposi-
tion of Genesis 1-6 and other features. The original Greek version
of the tractate as we now know it probably dates to the early third
century, but it certainly contains older sources. Its provenance is
uncertain (Koester assigns it to Syria),”"* but Iam inclined to place
it in Alexandria, though some of its sources could have come from
Syria.
Gospel of the Egyptians. The Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC IL2;
IV,2)*” sets forth a mythic salvation history of the (Gnostic) “race

213. M. Waldstein and F. Wisse (eds.), The Apocryphon of John: Synopsis of Nag Hammadi
Codices II,1; III,1; and IV,1 with BG 8502,2 (NHMS 33; Leiden: Brill, 1995).
214. So Lalleman, Acts of John, 136-37.
215. See pp. 201-23, esp. 217-18 below and Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion,
122-46, esp. 126-34.
216. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.218-19.
217. Edition and translation by B. Layton and introduction by R. Bullard in Nag Ham-
madi Codex II,2—7 together with XIII,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655 (ed.
B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 1.220-59; cf. B. Barc, L’Hypostase des archontes:
Traité gnostique sur l’origine de l'homme, du monde et des archontes (NH II,4) (BCNH Textes 5;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1980.
218. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.217-18. Bullard (in Nag Hammadi Codex
II,2-7, 221) places it in Egypt; Bare (L’Hypostase des archontes, 4-5) places it and its sources
in second-century Alexandria; U. Kaiser (in Nag Hammadi Deutsch 1.218) places it in third-
century Alexandria.
219. A. Bohlig and F. Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2: The Gospel of the Egyptians
(NHS 4; Leiden; Brill, 1975).
64 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

of Seth” and contains interesting ritual features as well. Its orig-

inal Greek version can safely be assigned to third-century Egypt,
probably Alexandria.~°
Apocalypse of Adam. Containing revelations given by Adam on his
deathbed to his son Seth, the tractate Apocalypse of Adam (NHC
V,5)”' contains a salvation history of the “race of Seth.” The only
Nag Hammadi tractate to findsa place in the standard English
edition of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha,™ it is arguably a
product of Jewish Gnosticism, with little or no traces of Christian
influence in it. The tractate as we now know it probably contains
some interpolations. I assign its Greek original to early-second-
century Syria.”
Three Steles of Seth. The tractate Three Steles of Seth (NHC VII,5)*°
contains prayers addressed to the three members of the Sethian-
Gnostic divine triad of Father, Mother, and Son — prayers that are
associated with a ritual of ascent. Its Greek original is most likely
to be assigned to early-third-century Alexandria.
Zostrianos. The tractate Zostrianos (NHC VIIL1),° unfortunately
fragmentary, contains a lengthy account of visionary ascents and
revelations given to a mythic seer, Zostrianos. One of the four
Platonizing treatises of the Sethian corpus,” it was one of the

220. U.-K. Plisch (in Nag Hammadi Deutsch 1.295) expresses some reservations about
assigning it to Egypt.
221. Edition, translation, and introduction by G. MacRae in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5
and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979),
151-95.
222. Introduction and translation by G. MacRae in OTP 1.707-19.
223. Cf. Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 135-44.
224. MacRae (OTP 1.708) tentatively assigns it to Palestine.
225. Edition, translation, and introduction by J. E. Goehring in Nag Hammadi Codex VII
(ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 371-421; cf. P. Claude, Les Trois Stéles de
Seth: Hymne gnostique a la Triade (BCNH Textes 8; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
226. Edition by B. Layton and introduction and translation by J. H. Sieber in Nag Ham-
madi Codex VIII (ed. J. H. Sieber; NHS 31; Leiden: Brill, 1991), 7-225; cf. C. Barry, W.-P. Funk,
P.-H. Poirier, J. D. Turner, Zostrien (NH VIII,1) (BCNH Textes 24; Quebec: Laval University
Press, 2000).
227. The others are the Three Steles of Seth (NHC VII,5), Allogenes (NHC XI,3), and
Marsanes (NHC X,1). On these see Turner, Sethian Gnosticism.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 65

apocalypses read and refuted in Plotinus’s school in Rome in the

third century (Porphyry, Life of Plotinus 16). The provenance of
its Greek original is uncertain, but I am inclined to assign it to
third-century Alexandria.

Melchizedek. The tractate Melchizedek (NHC IX,1)** is a Gnostic

reworking of an apocalypse attributed to the Old Testament priest-
king Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20) wherein Melchizedek is identi-
fied as the future savior, Jesus Christ. I assign its Greek original
to late-second- or early-third-century Egypt, but its presentation
of Melchizedek is clearly based on older Jewish sources.*””
Thought of Norea. The short tractate Thought of Norea (NHC IX,2)*°
in hymnic form, centered upon the salvation of Norea and her spir-
itual progeny, is closely related to the Hypostasis of the Archons, a
text that also features Norea, sister-consort to Seth.”*! Iam inclined
to assign its Greek original to early-third-century Alexandria.

Marsanes. The tractate Marsanes (NHC X,1),** containing reve-

lations and instruction by a Gnostic prophet named Marsanes,
is extremely fragmentary. Its interpretation of the Platonic tradi-
tion and some of its ritual allusions invite comparison with the
teachings of Neoplatonist philosopher Iamblichus of Chalcis (ca.
250-325) (see chapter 8 below). The provenance of its Greek orig-
inal is uncertain, but I am inclined to assign it to third-century
Syria.

228. Edition and translation by S. Giversen and B. A. Pearson and introduction by Pear-
son in Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981),
19-85.
229. See B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity
and Christianity 5; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 108-23.
230. Edition and translation by S. Giversen and B. A. Pearson and introduction by Pear-
son in Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981), 87-99;
cf. Michel Roberge, Noréa (NH IX,2) (BCNH Textes 5; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1980).
231. On Norea, see Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 84-94.
232. Edition, translation, and introduction by B. A. Pearson in Nag Hammadi Codices IX
and X (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981), 229-347; cf. W.-P. Funk, P.-H. Poirier,
and J. D. Turner, Marsanés (NH X) (BCNH Textes 27; Quebec: Laval University Press, 2000).
66 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Allogenes. An apocalypse read in Plotinus’s school in Rome (Por-

phyry, Life of Plotinus 16), Allogenes (NHC X1,3)° is an account
of an ascent and revelations given to Allogenés (probably an eso-
teric name given to Seth).*™ Its Greek original is most likely to be
assigned to early-third-century Egypt, probably Alexandria.
Trimorphic Protennoia. The tractate Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC
XIIL,1)** is a revelatory first-person account of three descents by a
feminine heavenly revealer, Protennoia (First Thought). Interest-
ing comparisons are proposed by scholars between this tractate
and the so-called Logos hymn in the first chapter of the Gos-
pel of John. Its Greek original should probably be assigned to
mid-second-century Alexandria.
Untitled Tractate in the Bruce Codex. The untitled tractate in the
Bruce Codex** is an incomplete work consisting of a revelation
(revealer unnamed) involving an extremely complicated cosmol-
ogy and elaboration of various figures in the heavenly world. It
shows some dependence upon the tractate Marsanes, and at one
point (7) the prophet Marsanes is named and quoted. Turner is
probably correct in assigning it a late date (325-50),?” and I hold
that its Greek original was probably composed in Egypt.

Valentinian Gnostic Writings

Prayer of the Apostle Paul. A short text written on the front flyleaf
of a codex (NHC I,1)** is a prayer ascribed to the Apostle Paul,

233. Edition and translation by J. D. Turner and introduction by A. C. Wire in Nag

Hammadi Codices XI, XII, XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 173-267; cf.
K. L. King, Revelation of the Unknowable God (Santa Rosa, Calif.: Polebridge, 1995).
234. Cf. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 52-83, esp. 65-66.
235. Edition, translation, and introduction by J. D. Turner in Nag Hammadi Codices XI, XII,
XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 371-454; cf. Y. Janssens, La Protennoia
Trimorphe (NH XIII,1) (BCNH Textes 4; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1978); G. Schenke,
Die Dreigestaltige Protennoia (Nag-Hammadi-Codex XIII) (Texte und Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 132; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1984).
236. C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, The Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce
Codex (NHS 13; Leiden: Brill, 1978), xviii-xxi, 214-317.
237. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism, 195.
238. Edition, translation, and introduction by D. Mueller in Nag Hammadi Codex I (The
Jung Codex) (ed. H. W. Attridge; NHS 22-23; Leiden; Brill, 1985), 5-11.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 67

the favorite apostle of the Valentinian school.*” Its Greek origi-

nal can be assigned to the late second or early third century. Its
provenance cannot be determined, but Alexandria is a possibility.

Gospel of Truth. The Gospel of Truth (NHC 1,3; XIL2)** is not a gos-
pel in the traditional sense but rather a homily on the Christian
message (the gospel, the good news). Michel Tardieu argues quite
persuasively that the concluding section (38,6 to the end) of the
Coptic text we now have (the Lycopolitan version in Codex I, not
the Sahidic version extant in fragments in Codex XII) is a sec-
ondary addition datable to the early fourth century.**' The Greek
original of the shorter version should be assigned to Valentinus
himself?” and probably to his Alexandrian period in the early
second century.
Treatise on the Resurrection. The Treatise on the Resurrection (NHC
[4)** is an anonymous didactic epistle addressed to a disciple
named Rheginos expounding the correct (Valentinian Gnostic)
way of interpreting the Christian doctrine of the resurrection. Its
Greek original was probably composed in the late second century.
Its provenance cannot be determined, but Alexandria is a possi-
bility. A Palestinian provenance is also suggested, but that is
unlikely.

239. On the school of Valentinus, see Layton, Guostic Scriptures, 267-353. Of the five
Valentinian writings that Layton includes in his anthology, three are from the Nag Ham-
madi corpus (Prayer of the Apostle Paul, Treatise on the Resurrection, and Gospel of Philip). He
assigns the Gospel of Truth to Valentinus himself (250-64).
240. Edition, translation, and introduction by H. W. Attridge and G. MacRae in Nag
Hammadi Codex I (The Jung Codex) (ed. H. W. Attridge; NHS 22-23; Leiden; Brill, 1985),
55-117 and 119-22 (edition of the Sahidic fragments [NHC XII,2] by F. Wisse).
241. M. Tardieu, “Une diatribe antignostique dans |’interpolation eunomienne des
Recognitiones,” in Alexandrina: Hellénisme, judaisme et christianisme a Alexandrie: Mélanges
offerts au P. Claude Mondeésert (Paris: Cerf, 1987), 325-37, esp. 37.
242. So Tardieu, ibid. Cf. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 251. Of course, that attribution is
not universally accepted. See, e.g., Markschies, Valentinus Gnosticus? 340-47.
243. Edition, translation, and introduction by M. Peel in Nag Hammadi Codex I (The Jung
Codex) (ed. H. W. Attridge; NHS 22-23; Leiden; Brill, 1985), 123-57; cf. J. E. Ménard, Le
Traité sur la Résurrection (NH 1,4) (BCNH Textes 12; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983);
B. Layton, The Gnostic Treatise on Resurrection
from Nag Hammadi (Harvard Dissertations in
Religion 12; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979).
244. H.-M. Schenke in Nag Hammadi Deutsch 1.47.
68 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Tripartite Tractate. The lengthy Tripartite Tractate (NHC 1,5)" may

not be a tractate at all but rather a series of excerpts from a
much longer work.™° Representing a revision of earlier Valen-
tinian teaching, its Greek original was probably composed late
in the third century. Its provenance cannot be determined, but
Alexandria is a possibility.
Gospel of Philip. The Gospel of Philip (NHC II,3)” is a florilegium of
excerpts from Valentinian writings on the sacraments and ethics.
Its original Greek version should probably be assigned to third-
century Syria.
Interpretation of Knowledge. A fragmentary text with homiletic fea-
tures reflecting considerable dependence upon Pauline theology,
the tractate Interpretation of Knowledge (NHC XI,1)** reflects a set-
ting in Christian worship. Its Greek original could have been
composed as early as the second century. Its provenance cannot
be determined, but Alexandria is a possibility.
A Valentinian Exposition. A Valentinian Exposition (NHC X12)” con-
sists of an exposition of Valentinian mythology, supplemented by
five short additions of a liturgical character on the anointing, bap-
tism, and the Eucharist. It was probably used in the context of
initiation into Valentinian gnosis. Its Greek original could have

245. Edition, translation, and introduction by H. W. Attridge and E. Pagels in Nag Ham-
madi Codex I (The Jung Codex) (ed. H. W. Attridge; NHS 22-23; Leiden: Brill, 1985), 159-337;
cf. E. Thomassen and L. Painchaud, Le Traité Tripartite (NH 1,5) (BCNH Textes 19; Quebec:
Laval University Press, 1989).
246. So H.-M. Schenke in Nag Hammadi Deutsch 1.55-56.
247. Edition by B. Layton and introduction and translation by W. Isenberg in Nag
Hammadi Codex II,2-7 together with XIII,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655
(ed. B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill, 1989), vol. 1, 131-217; cf. H.-M. Schenke, Das
Philippus-Evangelium (Nag-Hammadi-Codex II,3) (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte
der altchristlichen Literatur 143; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1997).
248. Edition and translation by J. D. Turner and introduction by E. Pagels in Nag Ham-
madi Codices XI, XII, XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 21-88; cf. U.-K.
Plisch, Die Auslegung der Erkenntnis (Nag-Hammadi-Codex XI,1) (Texte und Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 142; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1996).
249. Edition and translation by J. D. Turner and introduction by E. Pagels in Nag Ham-
madi Codices XI, XII, XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 89-172: cf. J.E
Ménard, L’Exposé valentinienne: Les Fragments sur le baptéme et sur l'eucharistie (BCNH Textes
14; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1985).
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 69

been composed as early as the second century. Its provenance

cannot be determined, but Alexandria is a possibility.

Gnostic Writings of Uncertain Affiliation

Apocryphon of James. The tractate Apocryphon of James (NHC
12)? is in the form of a letter written in the name of James
(brother of Jesus) to a person whose name is mostly lost in a la-
cuna,””' reporting on revelations received by James from the risen
Christ. Its Greek original can safely be assigned to second-century
Alexandria.
On the Origin of the World. The apologetic tract On the Origin of
the World (NHC II,5; XIII,2)** takes the form of a compendium
of Gnostic traditions on various themes. It shares some tradi-
tions with the Hypostasis of the Archons (NHC II4). Its Greek
original should probably be assigned to early-fourth-century
Egypt, but there are indications that it was based on an earlier,
second-century writing.
Exegesis on the Soul. The tractate Exegesis on the Soul (NHC IL6)*™
consists of a narrative, with exhortations to repentance and quo-
tations from biblical writings and Homer’s Odyssey, telling of the
feminine soul’s descent into carnal materiality and her longing

250. Edition, translation, and introduction by F. E. Williams in Nag Hammadi Codex I

(The Jung Codex) (ed. H. W. Attridge; NHS 22-23; Leiden: Brill, 1985), 13-53; cf. D. Rouleau,
L'Epitre apocryphe de Jacques (NH 1,2) (BCNH Textes 18; Quebec: Laval University Press,
1987); D. Kirchner, Epistula Jacobi apocrypha: Die zweite Schrift aus Nag-Hammadi-Codex I (Texte
und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 136; Berlin: Akademie-
Verlag, 1989).
251. Restored as Kerinthos (Cerinthus) by J. Hartenstein and U.-K. Plisch in Nag
Hammadi Deutsch 1.13. On Cerinthus, see Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.26.1.
252. Edition by B. Layton, translation by H.-G. Bethge and Layton, and introduction by
Bethge in Nag Hammadi Codex II,2—7 together with XIIL,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1,
654, 655 (ed. B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 2.12-134; cf. L. Painchaud, L’Ecrit
sur l’origine du monde (NH IL5 et XIII,2 et Brit. Lib. Or. 4926[1]) (BCNH Textes 21; Quebec:
Laval University Press, 1995).
253. So Painchaud, L’Ecrit sur l'origine du monde.
254. Edition by B. Layton and introduction and translation by W. C. Robinson in Nag
Hammadi Codex II,2-7 together with XIII,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655 (ed.
B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 2.136—69; cf. J.-M. Sevrin, L’Exégése de l’ame (NH
II,6) (BCNH Textes 9; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
70 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

to return to her true home. It should probably be assigned to

early-third-century Alexandria.
Eugnostos the Blessed. The tractate Eugnostos the Blessed (NHC III,3;
V,1)° is a revelation discourse concerning the heavenly world
presented in the form of a didactic letter. It was expanded and
Christianized in a larger tractate, Sophia of Jesus Christ (NHC IIL4;
BG,3). Eugnostos is not a Christian work; it is a Jewish Gnostic
work written by a person well versed in Greek philosophy. Its
Greek version was most likely composed in Alexandria, perhaps
as early as the end of the first century. Eugnostos was probably
known to Valentinus”*° and probably to Basilides as well.”
Sophia of Jesus Christ. The tractate Sophia of Jesus Christ (NHC IL4;
BG,3)** expands Eugnostos the Blessed into a dialogue between
Jesus and his disciples and adds considerable mythological ma-
terial besides. Douglas Parrott assigns a first century date to its
Greek original,” but a second century date is more likely. An
Egyptian, probably Alexandrian, provenance is most likely.

Apocalypse of Paul. The tractate Apocalypse of Paul (NHC V,2)?°°

contains an account of the Apostle Paul’s ascent through the heav-
ens up to the tenth (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where he gets as far as the

255. Edition, translation, and introduction by D. Parrott in Nag Hammadi Codices III,3-4
and V,1 with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,3 and Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1081 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS
27; Leiden: Brill, 1991); cf. A. Pasquier, Eugnoste: Lettre sur le dieu transcendant (NH III,3 et
V,1) (BCNH Textes 26; Quebec: Laval University Press, 2000).
256. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 117-30. For a use-
ful Greek retroversion of Eugnostos the Blessed, see D. Trakatellis, The Transcendent God of
Eugnostos (Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1991), 155-95.
257. Pearson, “Basilides the Gnostic” (forthcoming).
258. Edition, translation, and introduction by D. Parrott in Nag Hammadi Codices III,3-4
and V,1 with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,3 and Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1081 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS
27; Leiden: Brill, 1991); cf. C. Barry, La Sagesse de Jésus-Christ (BG,3; NH III,4) (BCNH Textes
20; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1993).
259. Parrott, Nag Hammadi Codices III,3-4 and V,1, 5; Barry (La Sagesse de Jésus-Christ, 36)
favors a third-century date. A third-century Greek fragment exists (P. Oxy 1081).
260. Edition, translation, and introduction by W. Murdock and G. MacRae in Nag Ham-
madi Codices V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS ity
Leiden: Brill, 1979), 47-63.

ve
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 71

third heaven). Its Greek original can be dated to the second cen-
tury. Its provenance cannot be determined, but Alexandria is quite
likely.

(First) Apocalypse of James. The tractate (First) Apocalypse of James

(NHC V,3)**' conveys secret teaching given by Jesus to his
brother James. It shows some possible Valentinian influence, but
there are indications in the text that reflect a Syrian milieu. It
should probably be assigned to late-second- or early-third-century
Syria.

(Second) Apocalypse of James. The tractate (Second) Apocalypse of

James (NHC V,4)** is an apocalypse conveying secret teaching
revealed by Jesus to his brother James and concluding with an in-
teresting account of James’s martyrdom. As in the case of the First
Apocalypse ofJames, a Syrian provenance and a second-century date
are likely.7°
Thunder: Perfect Mind. The revelatory work known as Thunder:
Perfect Mind (NHC VI,2)*™ consists of deliberately paradoxical self-
predications and admonitions attributed to a feminine wisdom
figure possibly to be identified as Eve.*® It reflects an Egyptian,
probably Alexandrian, milieu and is most likely to be dated to the
late second or early third century.

261. Edition, translation, and introduction by W. Schoedel in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2—5
and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979),
65-103; cf. A. Veilleux, La Premiére Apocalypse de Jacques (NH V,3) (BCNH Textes 17; Quebec:
Laval University Press, 1986).
262. Edition, translation, and introduction by C. W. Hedrick in Nag Hammadi Codices
V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill,
1979), 105-49; cf. A. Veilleux, La Seconde Apocalypse de Jacques (NH V,4) (BCNH Textes 17;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1986).
263. So Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.219-20.
264. Edition, translation, and introduction by G. MacRae in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5
and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979),
231-55; cf. P.-H. Poirier, Le Tonnerre, Intellect Parfait (NH VI,2) (BCNH Textes 22; Quebec:
Laval University Press, 1995).
265. Layton includes this text in his collection of classic Gnostic (= Sethian) writings;
Gnostic Scriptures, 77-85.
72 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Concept of Our Great Power. The tractate Concept of Our Great

Power (NHC VI,4)* contains an apocalyptic salvation history ad-
dressed to a community by an anonymous author. It is apparently
a composite work, showing some affinities with Simonian Gnos-
ticism. The Greek original of its final redaction can be assigned
to fourth-century Egypt, but it is based on earlier sources.
Paraphrase of Shem. The lengtky tractate Paraphrase of Shem (NHC
VIL,1)*’ is a Gnostic apocalypse containing revelations given to
Shem by a heavenly revealer named Derdekeas. Its basic sys-
tem and some of its mythic features show strong resemblances
to Manichaeism. Its Greek original should probably be assigned
to late-third-century Syria.
Second Treatise of the Great Seth. The tractate Second Treatise of
the Great Seth (NHC VII,2)°* is a Gnostic homily attributed to
the ascended Christ speaking to his earthly followers. It con-
tains polemics against Catholic Christianity and features a docetic
account of the passion of Christ. Its Greek original should be
assigned to late-second-century Alexandria.
Apocalypse of Peter. The tractate Apocalypse of Peter (NHC VII,3)°
is an apocalypse featuring three visions of the Apostle Peter
with explanations provided by Christ. It contains polemics against
Catholic Christianity and also features a docetic account of the
passion of Christ somewhat resembling that of the Second Trea-
tise of the Great Seth. While it is assigned to early-third-century

266. Edition and translation by F. Wisse and introduction by F. Williams in Nag Hammadi
Codices V,2—5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden:
Brill, 1979), 291-323; cf. the important commentary by F. Williams, Mental Perception: A
Commentary on NHC VI,4: The Concept of Our Great Power (NHMS 51; Leiden: Brill, 2001).
267. Edition, translation, and introduction by F. Wisse in Nag Hammadi Codex VII (ed.
B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 15-127; cf. M. Roberge, La Paraphrase de Sem
(NH VILI,1) (BCNH Textes 25; Quebec: Laval University Press, 2000).
268. Edition, translation, and introduction by G. Riley in Nag Hammadi Codex VII (ed.
B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 129-99; cf. L. Painchaud, Le Deuxidme Traité
du Grand Seth (NH VII,2) (BCNH Textes 6; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1982).
269. Edition and translation by J. Brashler and introduction by M. Desjardins in Nag
Hammadi Codex VII (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 201-47; cf. H. Have-
laar, The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter (Nag-Hammadi-Codex VII,3) (Texte und Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 144; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1999).
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt TS

Syria/” there are indications in the text of an Egyptian milieu.”

I therefore assign it to third-century Egypt, probably Alexandria.
Letter of Peter to Philip. Despite the incipit of the text (“The letter
of Peter which he sent to Philip”), the tractate Letter of Peter to
Philip (NHC VIII,2)*” is more than a letter, for it shows generic
features of the Gnostic dialogue and considerable affinities with
the apostolic acts, including the Petrine part of the canonical Acts.
In the text Peter is clearly the leading figure among the apostles. It
is not possible to determine the provenance of its Greek original,
but early-third-century Alexandria is a possibility.
Testimony of Truth. The Testimony of Truth (NHC IX,3)*” is an
anonymous Christian Gnostic tract with homiletic features con-
taining extensive polemics against other Christians, not only
Catholic Christians but other Gnostics as well.”* It uses a num-
ber of older traditions, including a Jewish Gnostic midrash on the
serpent of Genesis 3.*” On the grounds of its content, especially
its radical encratism, I assign its authorship to Julius Cassianus,
on whom Clement of Alexandria comments extensively (see p. 56
above).

Hypsiphrone. Extant in only six fragments representing four pages

from the codex, Hypsiphrone (NHC X14)” includes a superscript
title: “Hypsiphrone,” the name of a feminine revealer figure in
the extant portion of the text. Turner suggests that this tractate

270. So Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse of Peter.

271. See Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 88-98, esp. 93.
272. Edition and translation by F. Wisse and introduction by M. Meyer in Nag Hammadi
Codex VII (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 227-51; cf. J. E. Ménard, La
Lettre de Pierre a Philippe (BCNH Textes 1; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1977); H.-G.
Bethge, Der Brief des Petrus an Philippus: Ein neutestamentliches Apokryphon aus dem Fund von
Nag Hammadi (NHC VIII,2) (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen
Literatur 141; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1997).
273. Edition and translation by S. Giversen and B. A. Pearson and introduction by Pear-
son in Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981),
101-203; cf. A. Mahé and J.-P. Mahé, Le Témoignage véritable (NH IX,3): Gnose et martyre
(BCNH Textes 23; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1996).
274. See Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 183-93, esp. 188-93.
275. See ibid., 39=51.
276. Edition, translation, and introduction by J. D. Turner in Nag Hammadi Codices XI,
XII, XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 269-79.
74 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

may belong to the corpus of Sethian Gnostic writings,” but not

enough of the text is preserved to come to that conclusion. Nor
can anything be said of its provenance. Third-century Alexandria
is a possibility.
Gospel of Mary. The Gospel of Mary (BG,1),”* unfortunately badly
preserved, consists of dialogue between Jesus and his disciples,
and a special revelation givers to his favorite disciple, Mary Mag-
dalene. The provenance of its Greek original is uncertain, but lam
inclined to assign it to late-second- or early-third-century Egypt.”
Pistis Sophia. Pistis Sophia (Askew Codex), consisting of four
books of Gnostic lore that are clearly compilations of older ma-
terial, contains rambling revelations given by the risen Christ
to his disciples, one of whom is the repentant Sophia (Pistis
Sophia [Faith Wisdom]). I assign its Greek original to early-fourth-
century Egypt.
Books of Jeu. The two Books of Jeu (Bruce Codex),”*' like Pistis
Sophia, which refers to them (Pistis Sophia 2.99), contain rambling
revelations given by the risen Christ to his disciples. In these
books, Jeu is referred to as “the true God” and father of Christ.
His various names are illustrated with various diagrams and seals
accompanying the text (see pp. 261-67 below). I assign the Books
of Jeu in their original Greek to late-third-century Egypt.
Bala’izah Gnostic Fragments. An otherwise unknown Gnostic reve-
lation dialogue is attested in three fragments from a parchment
codex that was probably part of a monastic library at Bala’izah.”*”

277. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism, 62-63.

278. Edition, translation, and introduction by R. M. Wilson and G. MacRae in Nag Ham-
madi Codices V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11;
Leiden: Brill, 1979), 453-71; cf. A. Pasquier, L’Evangile selon Marie (BG 1) (BCNH Textes 10;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
279. A third-century Greek fragment exists (P. Ryl. 463).
280. C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, Pistis Sophia (NHS 9; Leiden: Brill, 1978).
281. Schmidt and MacDermot, Books of Jeu, 38-141.
282. For the text and translation, see P. E. Kahle Jr., Bala’izah: Coptic Texts from Deir el
Bala‘izah in Upper Egypt (London: Oxford University Press, 1954), 1.473-77; cf. introduction
and translation by H.-C. Puech and B. Blatz in NTApoc 1.388-89.

“
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 75

In the extant fragments the Apostle John is reporting on rev-

elations received from the Savior, who is expounding on texts
from the Book of Genesis (Adam and paradise, Cain and Abel,
Noah and the ark, and Melchizedek).*” I assign the original Greek
version to third-century Egypt.

Hermetic Writings
The Hermetic writings are part of a whole corpus of literature
featuring Hermes Trismegistus (Thrice-Greatest Hermes) as a re-
vealer of saving knowledge.*** Nag Hammadi Codex VI preserves
three of these, one of them hitherto unknown.

Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth. The tractate Discourse on the Eighth
and Ninth (NHC VL,6)*» is an initiatory dialogue in which Hermes
instructs his “son” on the way of the soul’s ascent to the ninth
sphere of heaven. It reflects the existence of Hermetic mystery con-
fraternities, and its Greek original should probably be assigned to
late-second- or early-third-century Egypt.
Prayer of Thanksgiving. The Prayer of Thanksgiving (NHC VI,7)** is
a short prayer that reflects the liturgical life of Hermetic commu-
nities. A Greek version exists, embedded in a longer magical text,
the Papyrus Mimaut. It is also found in the concluding section
of the Latin Asclepius (41). Thus, the original Greek version of
the Prayer of Thanksgiving circulated separately and was probably
composed in Egypt in the second century.

283. On the Melchizedek passage, see Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Chris-
tianity, 109-10.
284. The standard edition of the Greek and Latin texts is A. D. Nock and A.-J. Festugieére,
Hermes Trismégiste (4 vols.; Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1954-60). For a convenient translation
of Corpus Hermeticum 1-18 plus Asclepius, see B. P. Copenhaver, Hermetica: The Greek Corpus
Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius in a New English Translation with Notes and Introduction
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
285. Edition and translation by P. Dirkse and J. Brashler and introduction by D. Parrott
in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott;
NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 341-73; cf. J.-P. Mahé, Hermes en Haute-Egypte, vol. 1: Les textes
hermétiques de Nag Hammadi et leurs paralléles grecs et latins (BCNH Textes 3; Quebec: Laval
University Press, 1978), 31-134.
286. Edition, translation, and introduction in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5 and VI with
Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 375-87; cf.
Mahé, Hermeés 1.137-67.
76 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Asclepius 21-29. Part of a text originally composed in Greek

(Greek fragments exist), Asclepius 21-29 (NHC VI1,8)**’ is extant
in complete form only in a Latin translation. Its original Greek
title is 6 Adyog téAevog (the perfect discourse). In form, it is a
dialogue between a Hermetic initiate, here called Asclepius, and
Hermes Trismegistus acting as mystagogue. Its Greek original
should probably be assigned to late-second- or early-third-century
Egypt.

Non-Gnostic Writings
Gospel of Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas (NHC IL,2)** is a collection
of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus, usually introduced with the for-
mula “Jesus said.” These sayings are said to have been “written
down” by Judas Thomas (32,11-12). Of all of the Nag Hammadi
tractates, this one has by far attracted the most scholarly attention,
with no unanimity having been achieved as to its interpretation,
date, relationship to the canonical gospels, and other issues. As to
its provenance, most scholars assign it to eastern Syria. Its Greek
original is dated as early as the first century,’ but a second-
century date is far more likely.” The Gospel of Thomas is often
assumed to be a Gnostic work, but nothing of the typical Gnostic
mythology is reflected in it. Rather, it belongs to a special variety
of early Christianity that Bentley Layton refers to as “the school
of St. Thomas.””””

287. Edition and translation by P. Dirkse and D. Parrott and introduction by Parrott in
Nag Hammadi Codices V,2—5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS
11; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 395-451; cf. J.-P. Mahé, Hermés en Haute-Egypte, vol. 2: Lefragment
du Discours parfait et les Définitions hermétiques arméniennes (NH VI,8.8a) (BCNH Textes 7;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1982), 47-272.
288. Edition by B. Layton, translation by T. Lambdin, introduction by H. Koester, and
edition of Greek fragments by H. W. Attridge in Nag Hammadi Codex II,2-7 together with
XIII,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655 (ed. B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill,
1989), 1.38-128.
289. So Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2.39; cf. idem, Ancient Christian Gospels,
75-128.
290. So J. Schréter and H.-G. Bethge in Nag Hammadi Deutsch 1.153-55.
291. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 359-409. Included in his anthology as writings of this
school are the Gospel of Thomas, the Hymn of the Pearl, and the Book of Thomas the Contender
(NHC IL7).
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt re A

Book of Thomas the Contender. Another tractate stemming from

the “school of Thomas,” the Book of Thomas the Contender (NHC
IL,7)** consists of a revelation dialogue in which the risen Jesus
reveals hidden mysteries to his “twin” brother Judas Thomas. It
is clearly dependent upon the Gospel of Thomas, and its Greek orig-
inal is therefore to be dated somewhat later, probably to the third
century. Its provenance is clearly eastern Syria.
Dialogue of the Savior. The tractate Dialogue of the Savior (NHC
II1,5),7” unfortunately not well preserved, is a dialog between “the
Savior” (he is never called Jesus or Christ) and his disciples, of
whom three are named: Judas, Mary, and Matthew. It is a com-
plex writing, reflecting various early Christian traditions, most
notably collections of dominical sayings. It should probably be
assigned to early-third-century Syria.
Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles. The tractate Acts of Peter and
the Twelve Apostles (NHC VI,1)** belongs to the apocryphal apos-
tolic acts literature and contains narratives featuring Peter and the
Twelve as a group, including an encounter of Peter with a mysteri-
ous man called Lithargoel, who turns out to be the Lord. It should
probably be assigned to late-second- or early-third-century Syria.
Authoritative Teaching. The subscript title of the tractate Authorita-
tive Teaching (NHC VI,3)*” is in Greek: ab0evtiKkdc Adyos. It consists
of a disquisition on the descent and reascent of the soul. Often
taken as a Gnostic work, it is shown by Rouel van den Broek to be a

292. Edition by B. Layton and introduction and translation by J. D. Turner in Nag Ham-
madi Codex II,2-7 together with XIII,2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926 (1), and P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655 (ed.
B. Layton; NHS 20-21; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 2.173-205; cf. R. Kuntzmann, Le Livre de Thomas
(NH II,7) (BCNH Textes 16; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1986).
293. Edition and translation by S. Emmel and introduction by H. Koester and E. Pagels
in Nag Hammadi Codex lI,5: The Dialogue of the Savior (ed. S. Emmel; NHS 26; Leiden: Brill,
1984), 1-17, 37-95.
294. Edition and translation by R. M. Wilson and D. Parrott and introduction by Parrott
in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott;
NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 197-229; cf. H.-M. Schenke’s introduction and translation in
NTApoc 2.412-25.
295. Edition, translation, and introduction by G. MacRae in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5
and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979),
257-89; cf. J. E. Ménard, L’Authentikos Logos (BCNH Textes 2; Quebec: Laval University
Press, 1977).
78 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

product of second-century Alexandrian Christian Platonism.*” Its

Greek original should accordingly be assigned to second-century
Alexandria.
Plato, Republic 588A-89B. A Coptic version of Plato’s Republic
588A-89B (NHC VI,5)*” contains part of Socrates’ parable on the
hybrid character of the human soul. The Coptic translation is so
inept that it was not initially recognized for what it is. The Cop-
tic version may be a translation of a gnosticizing redaction of the
parable that presumably circulated separately in Egypt in the early
third or early fourth century, but that is uncertain.

Act of Peter. The short tractate Act of Peter (BG,4)** consists of a

narrative of healing miracles performed by Peter. It is probably
to be identified as an excerpt from the lost first section of the
apocryphal Acts of Peter, which can be assigned to second-century
Asia Minor.”
Teachings of Silvanus. The tractate Teachings ofSilvanus (NHC VIL4y°
is a lengthy compilation of Alexandrian Christian wisdom and
parenesis formally akin to the biblical Wisdom of Solomon. There
can be no question of its provenance, which is clearly Alexandria.
Although its Greek original could be as late as the early fourth cen-
tury, it clearly incorporates much older traditions and can therefore

296. Van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity, 206-34.
297. Edition, translation, and introduction by J. Brashler in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5
and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott; NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979),
325-39; cf. L. Painchaud, Fragment de la République de Platon (NH VI,5) (BCNH Textes 11;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
298. Edition and translation by J. Brashler and D. Parrott and introduction by Parrott
in Nag Hammadi Codices V,2-5 and VI with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502,1 and 4 (ed. D. Parrott;
NHS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 473-93; cf. L. Roy, L’Acte de Pierre (BG 4) (BCNH Textes 18;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1987).
299. So W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 2.271-86. A. L. Molinari argues, quite unconvine-
ingly, for the integrity of this text and its independence from the Acts of Peter; see “I Never
Knew the Man:” The Coptic Act of Peter (Papyrus Berolinensis 8502.4), Its Independence from the
Apocryphal Acts of Peter, Genre and Legendary Origins (BCNH Etudes 5; Quebec: Laval Uni-
versity Press/Louvain: Peeters, 2000). That the Act of Peter is an excerpt from a larger work
is easily seen in its opening sentence, with its use of the Greek connective particle d¢€.
300. Edition and introduction by M. Peel and translation by Peel and J. Zandee in
Nag Hammadi Codex VII (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 249-369: cf.
Y. Janssens, Les Legons de Silvanos (NH VII,4) (BCNH Textes 13; Quebec: Laval University
Press, 1983). i
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt a2

shed light on the development of Alexandrian Christian theology

from the second, or even the first, century (see pp. 95-99).
Sentences of Sextus. The Sentences of Sextus (NHC XIL1)*” is a frag-
mentary Coptic translation of a work whose Greek original was
discussed above (see p. 45).
Fragments. Two small fragments of Codex XII (NHC XIL3),°
which is the most damaged of all of the Nag Hammadi codices,
are editorially assigned to a single tractate, something not at all
certain. It is assumed that the Coptic fragments represent material
originally written in Greek. Nothing useful can be said regarding
date or provenance.

Summary
To summarize the results of our survey of writings in this sec-
tion, of the fifty-one writings surveyed, twenty-four are Gnostic
writings of the second or third century that can safely or at least
probably be assigned to Egypt:
Apocryphon of John
Hypostasis of the Archons
Gospel of the Egyptians
Three Steles of Seth
Zostrianos
Melchizedek
Thought of Norea
Allogenes
Trimorphic Protennoia
Gospel of Truth

301. Edition, translation, and introduction in Nag Hammadi Codices XI, XII, XIII (ed. C. W.
Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 295-327; cf. P.-H. Poirier, Les Sentences de Sextus (NH
VI5) (BCNH Textes 11; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
302. Edition, translation, and introduction by F. Wisse in Nag Hammadi Codices XI, XII,
XIII (ed. C. W. Hedrick; NHS 28; Leiden: Brill, 1990), 349-55; cf. P.-H. Poirier, Fragments
(NH XII,3) (BCNH Textes 11; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1983).
80 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Apocryphon of James
On the Origin of the World
Exegesis on the Soul
Eugnostos the Blessed (possibly first century)
Sophia of Jesus Christ
Apocalypse of Paul
Thunder: Perfect Mind
one or more of the sources in Concept of Our Great Power
Second Treatise of the Great Seth
Apocalypse of Peter
Testimony of Truth
Gospel of Mary
Books of Jeu
Bala’izah fragments
The three Hermetic writings (Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth,
Prayer of Thanksgiving, Asclepius 21-29) are quintessentially Egyp-
tian. Three of the non-Gnostic writings are also to be assigned
to Egypt: Authoritative Teaching, Teachings of Silvanus, and Sentences
of Sextus. The other writings, of other or uncertain provenances,
clearly circulated in Egypt from as early as the second century on
and were translated there into Coptic.
Considering the literary evidence as a whole, the great variety
exhibited in these writings and their sheer number speak to the
openness of Egyptian Christians to writings of diverse perspec-
tives and testify that clear lines between orthodoxy and heresy
were certainly never established in early Christian Egypt, for all
of the efforts of the Alexandrian bishops from Demetrius on.
In concluding our discussion of the literary sources for our
knowledge of second- and third-century Egyptian Christianity,
we should not forget to mention the most important secondary
sources: the writings of Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, chiefly his
 Current Issues in the Study of Early Christianity in Egypt 81

Ecclesiastical History, Chronicle, and Preparation for the Gospel. In-

deed, some of the writings surveyed above are known to us only
through quotations or testimonies given by Eusebius. And, of
course, Eusebius preserves much early Christian tradition from
Egypt, including his list of Alexandrian bishops. Other histori-
cal works — from a much later date and written in Arabic — also
contain traditions of great antiquity: the Annales of the Melchite
patriarch of Alexandria (tenth century)” and the History of the
Patriarchs written by Bishop Severus (Sawirus ‘ibn al-Mugaffa) of
al-Ashmunein (955-87).°%

303. Latin translation in Patrologia graeca 91.894-1156.

304. B. T. A. Evetts (ed. and trans.), History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of
Alexandria (Patrologia orientalis 1.2: St. Mark to Theonas; Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1948).
 Christians and Jews
in First-Century Alexandria

The title of this chapter posés an important question: To what

extent can one even speak about Christians in first-century Al-
exandria? After all, the Christian community in first-century
Alexandria is, as one of my teachers once put it, something “about
which we know nothing.”’ What follows, therefore, is largely a
matter of inference, at least insofar as it bears upon first-century
Christianity in Alexandria, for we shall have to rely on and ex-
trapolate backward from later Christian sources. There is no such
problem in speaking of Jews in first-century Alexandria, for the
Alexandrian Jewish community of that time is probably the most
well documented of the entire Jewish Diaspora. That giant among
Jewish exegetes and philosophers, Philo Judaeus, is arguably the
most important figure attested in our sources for first-century Al-
exandrian Judaism, and he will play a substantial role in what
follows.

JEWS IN ALEXANDRIA
It need hardly be stated that the first preaching of the gospel of
Messiah Jesus in Alexandria was centered in the Jewish commu-
nity there, the largest and most powerful Jewish settlement in the
entire Greek-speaking world. What sort of reception did the early
Christian missionaries experience there? And how did the exist-
ing Judaism color the development of Christian preaching and
teaching? In raising this issue it is necessary to say something
about Jewish religiosity in Alexandria, especially as to how the
1. K. Stendahl, Paul among Jews and Gentiles and Other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1976), 70. The original version of this chapter was published in a Festschrift in Krister
Stendahl’s honor.

82
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 83

Jews interpreted and lived the Torah, to what extent messianic ex-
pectations might have been part of their beliefs, and how open
they were to Gentiles, including the extent to which they wel-
comed Gentile proselytes into the Jewish politeuma. Such questions
are, of course, ineluctably bound up with political, social, and eco-
nomic factors. While we cannot enter into these questions in detail
here,” it is worth remembering that several events powerfully af-
fected Jewish life in Alexandria during the period of our interest:
the introduction by Caesar Augustus of the laographia (poll tax)
in 24/23 B.C.E.; the pogrom against the Jews under Flaccus in 38
C.E.; the disturbances and massacre of Jews under Philo’s apos-
tate nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, in 66; the destruction of
the Jerusalem temple in 70 and its aftermath; and the Jewish re-
volt under Trajan in 115-17, in which the Jewish community was
virtually wiped out.
Philo claims that “no less than a million Jews” lived in Egypt,
including Alexandria (Against Flaccus 43). It is, of course, hard to
verify that claim,’ but in any case a great number of the Jews
in Egypt would have resided in Alexandria. Philo also claims
that, of the five quarters in Alexandria named after the letters
of the alphabet, two were called Jewish because most of the Jews
resided there, though they were also found in other quarters as
well (Against Flaccus 55). So the Alexandrian Jewish community
was a very large one, whatever the population figures might have
been. And in such a large community of Jews, considerable diver-
sity would be expected among them, both in terms of social status
and in terms of religious beliefs and practices.

2. See, e.g., V. A. Tcherikover, “The Decline of the Jewish Diaspora in Egypt in the
Roman Period,” Journal of Jewish Studies 14 (1963): 1-32; idem, “Prolegomena,” in Corpus
Papyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), 1.1-111; E. M. Small-
wood, The Jews under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 220-55,
364-68, 389-412, 516-19; and articles by M. Stern, S. Safrai, and S. Appelbaum in The Jew-
ish People in the First Century (ed. S. Safrai and M. Stern; Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad
Novum Testamentum 1.1-2; Assen: Van Gorcum/ Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974-76), 117-83,
184-215, 420-503.
3. Josephus (Jewish War 2.385) reports that the entire population of Egypt, including
Alexandria, numbered 7.5 million.
84 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Victor A. Tcherikover characterizes the divisions in the Alexan-

drian Jewish community in sociocultural terms, distinguishing
between the educated, cultured Jews who favored a synthesis
between Hellenism and Judaism and the lower strata of the pop-
ulation whose ideology, more open to influences from Palestine,
was stamped by messianism and a fighting spirit.* Philo obviously
belonged to the first group. And from his writings one can get a
good picture of the religious divisions among the Jews. He charac-
terizes these divisions in terms of the various attitudes toward the
law exhibited by Jews in Alexandria: two groups of “literalist” in-
terpreters, consisting of faithful primitivists on the one hand and
unfaithful scoffers on the other; and two groups of “allegorizers,”
consisting of those who on the one hand, like Philo himself, inter-
preted the Scriptures allegorically but observed the practices of
the law and on the other hand those whose spiritual interpreta-
tion of the law led them to abandon the practices altogether.” We
also know from Philo that some Jews chose the path of complete
apostasy from the Jewish community. We know from him, too,
that a considerable number of Gentiles affiliated with the Jewish
religious community as proselytes.°
In Tcherikover’s discussion of the ideology of the lower-class
messianist Jews he reminds us that there is little or no documen-
tary or literary evidence about them.’ But, as a matter of fact, Philo
himself was not untouched by messianism. Though he never ac-
tually refers to “the Messiah” (he would have said “the Christ”)
in any of his writings, he does, nevertheless, tell us a lot about
Alexandrian Jewish messianic expectations. The key treatise is

4. Tcherikover, “Decline of the Jewish Diaspora,” 22-27.

5. For discussion and references, see P. Borgen, “Philo of Alexandria: A Critical and
Synthetical Survey of Research since World War II,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der rémischen
Welt 2.21.1 (1983): 98-154, esp. 126-28. Migration of Abraham 89-93 is the most important
passage dealing with the last named category. Specific issues addressed include Sabbath
and other festival observance, circumcision, and the sanctity of the temple.
6. For apostates, see On the Virtues 182; On the Life ofMoses 1.30-31; On the Special Laws
3.29. For proselytes, see On the Virtues 182; Questions and Answers on Exodus 2.2. In On the
Virtues 175-86, Philo discusses the process of conversion to Judaism. On this and other
important texts and their relation to the early Christian mission to Gentiles, see P. Borgen,
“The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue,” Studia theologica 37 (1983): 55-78.
7. Tcherikover, “Decline of the Jewish Diaspora,” 24.

*
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 85

On Rewards and Punishments (De praemiis et poenis), which Ferdi-

nand Dexinger analyzes in an important article on post-Herodian
Jewish messianism.* Dexinger delineates the following “messianic
scenario:””
1. Starting point
a. Enmity between man and beast (85, 87)
b. Assault of enemies (94; cf. Ps 2)

2. Messianic occurrences

Exemplary status of Israel (114)

oa”Leadership of a “man” (95, 97; cf. Num 24:7)
Gathering of Israel (165)
2 Passage out of the wilderness (165)
e. Divine manifestations (165)
f. Arrival at cities in ruins (168)

3. Results

a. Peace in nature (89; cf. Isa 11:6)

b. Peace among nations (95, 97)
c. Rebuilding of cities (168)
Item 2b is especially interesting for our purposes. Here is what
Philo says:
For “there shall come forth a man,” says the oracle, and
leading his host to war he will subdue great and populous
nations, because God has sent to his aid the reinforcement
which befits the godly, and that is dauntless courage of soul
and all-powerful strength of body, either of which strikes fear

8. F. Dexinger, “Ein ‘Messianisches Szenarium’ als Gemeingut des Judentums in

nachherodianischer Zeit,” Kairos 17 (1975): 249-78, esp. 250-55. See also R. Barraclough,
“Philo’s Politics,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt 2.21.1 (1983): 417-553, esp.
480-81.
9. Dexinger, “Messianisches Szenarium,” 254—55.
86 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

into the enemy and the two if united are quite irresistible.
Some of the enemy, he says, will be unworthy to be defeated
by men. He promises to marshal against them to their shame
and perdition, swarms of wasps" to fight in the van of the
godly, who will win not only a permanent and bloodless
victory in the war but also a sovereignty which none can
contest, bringing to its subjects the benefit which will ac-
crue from the affection or fear or respect which they feel. For
the conduct of their rulers shows three high qualities which
contribute to make a government secure from subversion,
namely dignity, strictness, benevolence, which produce the
feelings mentioned above. For respect is created by dignity,
fear by strictness, affection by benevolence, and these when
blended harmoniously in the soul render subjects obedient to
their rulers. (On Rewards and Punishments 95-97; trans. Colson
in Loeb Classical Library)
The importance of this messianic scenario in Philo’s treatise
is that it represents contemporary Alexandrian tradition. Philo’s
own religious tendency, likely shared by others in Alexandria, is
to interiorize this vision, interpreting it finally in terms of the
growth of virtue in the human soul (On Rewards and Punishments
172). The “man” of Numbers 24:7 is so interiorized in the pas-
sage quoted, for this reference is most probably to the Logos."
Philo’s treatment of another messianic passage in the Old Tes-
tament, Zechariah 6:12, makes this interpretation very likely, for
avatoAn in the Septuagint (for Hebrew semah, sprout or branch) is
clearly interpreted by him as a reference to the Logos, the “di-
vine image” and “eldest son whom the Father of all raised up
[avétede]” (On the Confusion of Tongues 62-63).'* The Logos, in this
context, is brought into connection with the rising of virtue in the
10. The “swarms of wasps” allude to the “hornets” of Exod 23:28 and Deut 7:20.
11. Num 24:7a Septuagint reads: ‘Efedevoeta1 dvOpwnos Ex tod onéppatoc avdtod, / Kai
Kuplevoet €8vOv toAA@v (there shall come a man from his [Israel’s] seed, / and he shall rule
over many nations [my translation]). Josephus (Jewish War 6.312-13) interprets this passage
as a reference to Vespasian!
12. On these texts, see J. de Savignac, “Le messianisme de Philon d’Alexandrie,” Novum
Testamentum 4 (1959): 319-24, esp. 320.
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 87

human soul (On the Confusion of Tongues 60). Philo was clearly a
proponent of “realized eschatology.”

CHRISTIANS IN ALEXANDRIA
The New Testament provides only tantalizing hints of the Chris-
tian mission to Egypt, mainly because the author of Acts was more
interested in other areas of the Mediterranean world. He does tell
us that Jews from Egypt were present at Peter’s Pentecost speech
(Acts 2:10). The disputants in the controversy with the “Hellenist”
protomartyr Stephen included Jews from Cyrene and Alexandria
(6:9). Indeed it is possible that Stephen himself, or one or more of
the other seven Hellenist leaders, came from there (except Nico-
laus, who was from Antioch; 6:5). It is also likely that some of the
Hellenists hounded out of Jerusalem (8:1) went to Alexandria; in
any case, traffic between Jerusalem and Alexandria was extensive
at that time. “Luke” provides a hint of the existence of a Christian
community in Egypt in the forties of our era in Acts 18:24—25,
where he refers to Apollos as a Jew from Alexandria, eloquent
and powerfully learned in the Scriptures. If the Western reading
at 18:25 is historically correct, we have a clear reference to the
existence of a Christian community in Alexandria at that time,
for according to the variant in Codex Bezae, Apollos “had been
instructed in the word in his home country” (my translation).
Unfortunately we are not told who the original missionaries to
Alexandria were.
According to the Egyptian Christian tradition, Mark the Evan-
gelist was founder and first bishop of the church in Alexandria.
Eusebius is our earliest extant source for this tradition,'* but his

13. Beside the aforementioned passages in On Rewards and Punishments, other of Philo’s
writings contain traces of end-time expectation: On the Virtues 75; On the Life of Moses 2.44,
288; and On the Creation of the World 79-81.
14. The letter fragment from Clement of Alexandria to Theodore, edited by Morton
Smith, refers to Mark’s arrival in Alexandria after Peter’s death in Rome, but nothing is
said of Mark’s role as founder or first bishop; see M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret
Gospel of Mark (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 448 (text), 446 (English trans-
lation). I analyze the Mark legend in B. A. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some
88 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

telling of it can hardly be said to inspire much confidence, par-

ticularly when he goes on to use Philo’s description of the Jewish
Therapeutae as a testimonial to Mark’s Christian converts (Ec-
clesiastical History 2.16-17; cf. Philo, On the Contemplative Life)!
Eusebius’s instinct is correct, however, when he stresses that the
“apostolic men” in Alexandria during Philo’s time were “of He-
brew origin and thus still preserved most of the ancient customs in
a strictly Jewish manner” (Ecélesiastical History 2.17.2; trans. Lake
in Loeb Classical Library). In any case, there can hardly be any
question that the earliest missionaries to Alexandria were Jews
coming from Jerusalem and that the earliest Christian converts
in Alexandria were Jews. Indeed it is doubtful that a clear sep-
aration between church and synagogue was effected there until
the beginning of the second century. Thus, it may very well be an
anachronism to speak of Christians in first-century Alexandria at
all.
What sort of Christianity, if we might call it that, was repre-
sented in the first-century Alexandrian church? Our only recourse
in attempting to answer that question is to engage in historical
inference, for we have no first-century sources at all, at least not
any complete texts. It is possible that the noncanonical Gospel of
the Hebrews and Gospel of the Egyptians, attested by Clement of Al-
exandria and other church fathers, are products of first-century
Alexandrian Christianity." The Gospel of the Hebrews, containing
both narrative and sayings material, has a distinctly Semitic flavor,
though it was written in Greek. As its name suggests, it probably
circulated among Jewish Christians (or Christian Jews) for whom
the symbolic authority of James, brother of Jesus, was an impor-
tant feature. The Gospel of the Egyptians, of which only sayings

Observations,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring;

Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 132-59.
15. See P. Vielhauer and G. Strecker in NTApoc 1.172-78 and W. Schneemelcher in
NTApoc 1.209-15; R. Cameron, The Other Gospels: Non-Canonical Gospel Texts (Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1982), 83-86, 49-52; cf. B. A. Pearson, “Christianity in Egypt,” in The Anchor
Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N. Freedman et al.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1.956. The so-
called frag. 1 of the Gospel of the Hebrews, quoted in a spurious Coptic homily attributed to
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, is certainly not genuine. See R. van den Broek, Studies in Gnosticism
and Alexandrian Christianity (NHMS 39; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 142-56.

“
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 89

material is preserved, shows a strong encratic flavor and contains

tradition that overlaps with the Gospel of Thomas.’® Also written in
Greek, it may have circulated among native Egyptian Christians
living in the Rhakotis district of Alexandria. If that is so, it would
imply mission activity among Gentiles in Alexandria, presumably
carried out by Jesus-believing Jews there.
Still popular is the theory of Walter Bauer, who posits that
the original and most dominant form of Christianity in Alexan-
dria until the time of Bishop Demetrius (189-231) was heretical
and, specifically, Gnostic.” In making this judgment Bauer is
essentially extrapolating backward from the time of Hadrian,
when such Gnostic teachers as Basilides, Valentinus, and Car-
pocrates were active. Such a procedure is dubious, especially since
those men were highly original thinkers. While it is possible that
Christian (and Jewish)'® Gnostics could be found in first-century
Alexandria, it is more likely, prima facie, to suppose that other,
more dominant, varieties of Christianity existed there, more re-
flective of the Jerusalem origins of the Christian mission and of
the dominant varieties of Judaism in Alexandria at that time.”
If one must extrapolate backward from second-century sources
to reconstruct aspects of first-century Alexandrian Christianity,
one should at least use such sources as are clearly bearers of older
tradition and reflect an ongoing school activity. Two such docu-
ments are the Epistle of Barnabas and the Teachings of Silvanus (NHC
VIL4). The Epistle of Barnabas is presumably the oldest complete
writing from Alexandria in existence, probably dating from the

16. H. Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development (Philadelphia:
Trinity, 1990), 75-128.
17. W. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (trans. and ed. R. A. Kraft et
al.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 44-60.
18. See B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity
and Christianity 5; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 10-28.
19. See B. A. Pearson, “Pre-Valentinian Gnosticism in Alexandria,” in The Future of
Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester (ed. B. A. Pearson; Minneapolis: For-
tress, 1990), 455-66. Helmut Koester, in his discussion of the beginnings of Christianity in
Egypt, speaks plausibly of “the simultaneous development of several competing Christian
groups”; see Introduction to the New Testament, vol. 2: History and Literature of Early Christianity
(2d ed.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000), 219.
90 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

beginning of the reign of Hadrian (ca. 117 C.k.).”” The Teachings of

Silvanus is considerably later, certainly no earlier than the end of
the second century,”! but it preserves some very ancient material.

EPISTLE OF BARNABAS
Bauer includes the Epistle of Barnabas in the Gnostic camp, referring
to its “grotesque allegorizatiqn” of the Old Testament and the
emphasis in its text on gnosis.” But, in fact, the exegetical and
halakic gnosis of Barnabas bears no relationship at all to the gnosis
of Gnosticism. Rather, it can be seen as a precursor to the “gnostic”
teaching of Clement of Alexandria and as implicitly anti-Gnostic.”
Silvanus is explicitly so: “My son,...do not allow yourself to be
defiled by strange kinds of knowledge [yv@otc]” (94,29-33; trans.
Peel in NHL 385).”*
The importance of school tradition in early Christianity was
underscored long ago by Wilhelm Bousset in his magisterial book
on Jewish and Christian school activity in Alexandria and Rome.”
Although Bousset concentrates on Philo Judaeus, Clement of Alex-
andria, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus, he devotes a few pages toward
the end of his book to earlier Christian literature, including Barn-
abas. Commenting on its literary genre, Bousset remarks that the

20. See, e.g., L. W. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and Their Background (New
York: Schocken, 1966), 57-72, esp. 63. On the Alexandrian setting of Barnabas, see also
R. A. Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache (The Apostolic Fathers: A New Translation and Com-
mentary 3; New York: Nelson, 1965), 45—48, 54-56; and especially J. C. Paget, The Epistle
of Barnabas: Outlook and Background (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Tes-
tament 64; Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1993), 29-42. Paget (28) dates Barnabas to the time
of Nerva (96-98). The Epistle of Jude cannot be placed in second-century Alexandria; see
p. 46 above.
21. See Y. Janssens, Les Lecons de Silvanos (NH VII, 4) (BCNH Textes 13; Quebec: Laval
University Press, 1983), 23. Since Janssens’s work, there has emerged a tendency in schol-
arship to date the text considerably later. See introduction, transcription, and translation
by M. Peel in Nag Hammadi Codex VII (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996),
249-369, esp. 272-74.
22. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 47-48.
23. On gnosis in Barnabas see, e.g., Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache, 22-27; Paget, Epistle
of Barnabas, 46-49, 244-45.
24. Cf. also Teachings of Silvanus 116,5-9, a polemic against those who regard the creator
of the world as an ignorant deity, a typical Gnostic doctrine.
25. W. Bousset, Jiidisch-christlicher Schulbetrieb in Alexandria und Rom: Literarische Unter-
suchungen zu Philo und Clemens von Alexandria, Justin und Irendius (Géttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1915).

-
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 91

academic tone of the document is hardly that of an epistle. Its au-

thor, presumably speaking in the name of the Cypriot Barnabas
(Acts 4:36; cf. 15:39),”° consistently refers to himself as a “teacher”
(S1:8Go0KaAoc; 1.8; 4.9).The earliest Christian communities included
teachers, together with apostles and prophets, in the leadership of
the church (1 Cor 12:28; cf. Acts 13:1).”” The role of the teacher is
to expound and expand on traditions governing Christian behav-
ior and community life on the one hand (Barnabas 18-21: the “two
ways”) and the proper interpretation of Scripture on the other (1—
17). Robert Kraft points out that Barnabas is clearly the result of
early Christian school activity and an example of early Christian
“evolved literature.”** The Gospel of Matthew is an even earlier
example of such school activity,” but so far as early Alexandrian
Christianity is concerned, Barnabas is our earliest extant example.
Barnabas tells us as much about Jewish exegetical traditions in
Alexandria as about Christian ones. Indeed L. W. Barnard uses
Barnabas as his most important source for discussing “Judaism
in Egypt A.D. 70-135” and argues that the author was “a con-
verted Rabbi who brought into Christianity the exegetical and
homiletical traditions of the Alexandrian synagogue.”*° Among
the traditions he cites, together with rabbinic parallels, are the
ritual of the Day of Atonement (Barnabas 7), the shrub “Rachel”
(7.8), the sacrifice of the red heifer (8.1-2), the gematria on the 318
servants of Abraham (9.8),*' the interpretation of Psalm 1 (10.10),

26. The author does not identify himself in the text, and the subscript title, “Epistle of
Barnabas,” may be secondary. But consonant with the ascription to Barnabas is the (Alex-
andrian?) tradition in Pseudo-Clement Homily 1.9 of Barnabas’s preaching in Alexandria;
see Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt,” 136-37; Paget, Epistle of Barnabas, 36.
27. Bousset, Jiidisch-christlicher Schulbetrieb, 312-16. Barnabas is named first in the list
of “prophets and teachers” of the church in Antioch in Acts 13:1.
28. Kraft discusses in some detail the activity of reproducing and reworking older
materials as reflected in both Barnabas and the Didache. See Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache,
1-22.
29. K. Stendahl, The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament (2d ed.;
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968).
30. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers, 41-55, esp. 47.
31. Barnabas 9.8 is probably the earliest literary attestation of the writing of Jesus’ name
in abbreviated (i.e., suspended) form (In) as a nomen sacrum in early Christian manuscripts.
The four earliest attested nomina sacra (sacred names) from second-century manuscripts
onward are those for Jesus (I¢ or In), Christ (X¢), God (Qc), and Lord (Kg). In adds up to
18, and the numeral for 300 is Greek tau, taken in Barnabas 9.8 as a reference to the cross.
72. CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Moses and Amalek (12), Jacob and Esau (13), the celebration of the
Sabbath (15), and other such details. Barnard also stresses the ex-
egetical methods used in Barnabas: the division of the epistle into
haggadic and halakic sections, rabbinic-style midrash, the use of
allegory, and the use of the pesher method of interpretation (as is
characteristic of the Qumran scrolls). Barnard concludes from his
analysis of Barnabas that “in the crucial period A.D. 70-135 Alexan-
drian Judaism, while having affinities on one side with Philonic
allegorism and other hellenistic modes of thought, was not unaf-
fected by the pattern and requirements of Rabbinism which, no
doubt, had been exerting pressure on Diaspora Judaism.”**
To be sure, all of the Jewish traditions referred to in Barnabas are
used in the interests of sectarian Jewish Christianity and eventu-
ally in the interests of a predominantly Gentile constituency. More
specific for the type of Christianity reflected in Barnabas and its
origins are the connections observed by Barnard between Barn-
abas and the speech of Stephen recorded in Acts 7: the attitude
expressed to the Jerusalem temple and its cultus (Acts 7:42-43,
48-50; Barnabas 16.1-2; 2.4-8), the interpretation of the golden-
calf episode in Israel’s history (Acts 7:38-42a; Barnabas 4.7-8),
and Christology, especially the application of the messianic title
“Righteous One” to Jesus (Acts 7:52; Barnabas 6.7).*? Barnard sit-
uates these items in Barnabas in the second decade of the second
century, that is, in the period of its final redaction, and suggests
that Barnabas used Acts. An alternative explanation for these par-
allels is, however, readily available: This type of Christianity was
introduced to Alexandria soon after the death of Stephen and the

The use of nomtina sacra in manuscripts is a Christian innovation in scribal practice and
probably goes back to the first century. See L. W. Hurtado, “The Origin of the Nomina Sacra:
A Proposal,” Journal of Biblical Literature 117 (1998): 655-73.
32. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers, 51. On Barnabas’s use of allegory and
comparisons to Philo, see D. T. Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature: A Survey (Com-
pendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3.3; Assen: Van Gorcum/Minneapolis,
Fortress, 1993), 90-93.
33. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers, 63-69. As Barnard points out, the term is
taken from Isa 3:10 Septuagint. Cf. also Wisdom of Solomon 2:12, an Alexandrian text. On
the relationship between Barnabas and Acts 7, see also Paget, Epistle of Barnabas, 200-207.

“i
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 93

scattering of the Hellenists from Jerusalem.* The soil was well

prepared for such seeds among at least some Jews in Alexandria,
especially those who tended to ignore the temple and other ritual
observances in favor of a spiritual interpretation of their tradition
(cf. Philo, Migration of Abraham 89-93; see n. 5 above).
A distinctive characteristic of Barnabas is its eschatology and its
consciousness of living in the last, evil stages of “the present age”
before the inbreaking of the “age to come” (Barnabas 2.1; 4.1, 3, 9;
etc.).” The highly charged eschatological atmosphere of Barnabas
may have been characteristic of one branch of Alexandrian Chris-
tianity from the beginning, but in any case, it is clear that the
messianism of Barnabas differed from that of the non-Christian
messianist Jews there in terms of focus, though probably not in
terms of religious intensity. The Christians knew who the coming
Messiah was and expected him to “judge the living and the dead,”
not to restore the land of Israel and the temple (4.12; 5.7; 7.2; 15.5;
cf. 6.8-19; 16.1-10). Such a difference in focus would very likely
contribute to a clash between the two groups of messianists.
By the time of the final redaction of Barnabas, relations between
Christians and Jews had come to the breaking point. This was
largely the result of the aftermath of the destruction of the temple
in 70, the most important feature of which was the consolidation
of Pharisaic (“proto-rabbinic”) Judaism toward the end of the cen-
tury and the dissemination, among Jews of the Diaspora as well
as in Palestine itself, of the so-called Birkat ha-minim (benediction
[really “malediction”] of the heretics), which effectively excom-
municated Christians (nosrim) from the synagogues.” To be sure,
the term Christian does not occur in Barnabas (neither does the term

34. Barnard entertains this as a possibility, suggesting also the possibility of an Alex-
andrian origin for Stephen, but finally prefers to “err on the side of caution” with the other
solution (Studies in the Apostolic Fathers, 71-72). 1 cannot, however, find any trace elsewhere
in Barnabas of the use of Acts.
35. On the eschatology of Barnabas see Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache, 27-29.
36. Barnard, Studies in the Apostolic Fathers, 52-55. This berakhah, introduced as the
twelfth in the Jewish Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions), includes this sentence: “And
may the nosrim and the minim perish quickly; and may they be erased from the Book of
Life and may they not be inscribed with the righteous.” I cannot accept the view of P. van
der Horst that nosrim was not part of the original berakah and added only in the fourth
94 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Jew [‘lovSaioc]), but Christians are nevertheless referred to: They

are “the church” (€xxAnoia; 7.11), and as “the new people of the
covenant” they are set in stark contrast with the people of Israel,
who are now identified as “the former people” (5.7; 7.5; 13.1-6;
etc.). That the “new people” includes Gentiles is also indicated in
13.7, where Abraham is cited as “the father of the Gentiles.”*””
The political situation in Alexandria reached a critical point
when the messianist Jews there sparked the revolt against Rome
under Trajan (115-17) that led to the virtual annihilation of the
Jewish community.* Unfortunately we do not know what role
Christians played in that conflict. Presumably, Christian Jews
would have perished along with the rest of the Jews. There-
after, those Christians who had become alienated from the Jewish
community would represent the mainstream of Christianity in
Alexandria, a “third race,” as the author of the Kerygma Petri puts
ies
To be sure, other Christians lived in Alexandria beside those
represented by Barnabas. Indeed, Barnabas itself probably reflects
some intra-Christian polemic, including an implicit anti-Gnostic
stance, with its repeated reference to halakic and exegetical gno-
sis (see p. 90 above and n. 23).*° Jewish Christians, such as those
reflected in the Gospel of the Hebrews, may be referred to at 4.6,

century; see P. van der Horst, Hellenism-Judaism-Christianity: Essays on Their Interaction (Lou-
vain: Peeters, 1998), 113-24. The evidence of Justin (Dialogue with Trypho 16; 96) seems to
be decisive.
37. Kraft’s translation of the passage is: “The father of the nations which believe in
God while uncircumcised”; Barnabas and the Didache, 124. In Jewish tradition, Abraham is
the prototypical Gentile convert and father of proselytes. See, e.g., G. W. E. Nickelsburg,
“Abraham the Convert: A Jewish Tradition and Its Use by the Apostle Paul,” in Biblical
Figures outside the Bible (ed. M. E. Stone and T. S. Bergren; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 1998),
151-75.
38. On the messianist nature of that revolt, see M. Hengel, “Messianische Hoffnung
und politischer ‘Radikalismus’ in der jiidisch-hellenistischen Diaspora,” in Apocalypticism
in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on
Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979 (ed. D. Hellholm; Tiibingen: Mohr, 1983), 655-86.
39. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 6.5.41; cf. W. Schneemelcher in NTApoc 2.39.
The Kerygma Petri (Preaching of Peter), extant only in fragments quoted by Clement, was
probably composed in Alexandria in the early second century. On the relationship between
Barnabas and the Kerygma Petri, see Paget, Epistle of Barnabas, 235-40, and p. 16 above.
40. On early Alexandrian Gnosticism, B. A. Pearson, “Pre-Valentinian Gnosticism in
Alexandria,” in The Future of Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester (ed. B. A.
Pearson; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 455-66.
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 95

where “Barnabas” warns against “some” who say “that the cove-
nant is both theirs and ours” (trans. Lake).*' Ascetically oriented
Christians, such as those reflected in the Gospel of the Egyptians,
may be referred to when he exhorts his readers “not by retiring
apart [to] live alone [uy Kad’ Eavtots evdvvovtes povalete] as if
you were already made righteous” (4.10)** We might here usefully
compare Philo’s description of the Therapeutae in his treatise On
the Contemplative Life 30: They are said to live a life of study and
contemplation by themselves “in solitude” (uovovuevor) in their
own “cells” (uovaotipia), meeting together only on the Sabbath.

TEACHINGS OF SILVANUS

Much more akin to the religiosity exemplified by Philo is that rep-

resented in the Teachings of Silvanus (NHC VII4). Like Barnabas,
Silvanus is a school product, and there are a number of points
of contact between them. For example, both contain warnings
against the devil and refer to him as “the wicked one” (Silvanus
85,17; Barnabas 2.10; 21.3). The “two ways” tradition prominent
in Barnabas (18-21) is also reflected in Silvanus (103,14-26). Both
texts interiorize the temple (Silvanus 106,9-14; 109,25-30; Barnabas
16.7-10). And both texts compare the impossibility of seeing God
with attempting to look directly at the sun (Silvanus 101,13-17;
Barnabas 5.10).
However, there are some very basic differences between Sil-
vanus and Barnabas. The historical setting is different. There is no
trace of any conflict between Christians and Jews. The only oppo-
nents identifiable in Silvanus are Gnostics (see p. 90 above and n. 24
above). The eschatological fervor of Barnabas is completely absent
from Silvanus. Among other differences that can be pointed out is
the difference in Christology. Whereas there is little or no trace of

41. Barnabas 4.7-8 goes on to argue that the Jews lost the Mosaic covenant irrevocably
when they turned to idols (the golden-calf episode). Cf. 14.1-6.
42. On the possible relevance of this passage to the question of monastic origins,
see p. 40 above. For a discussion of the various groups of Christians in second-century
Alexandria, see pp. 15-18 above.
96 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

a Logos or Sophia Christology in Barnabas,* such Christology is

a major feature of Silvanus.
Despite the late date of Silvanus, it shows some very early traits.
Its genre is that of the Wisdom of Solomon, a logos protreptikos.**
Indeed, very close connections are observed between Silvanus and
Wisdom® and between Silvanus and Philo.** The Christology of
Silvanus is a case in point: “He [Christ] is Wisdom; he is also the
Logos” (Silvanus 106,22-24). A$ with the Logos of Philo, the Logos
of Silvanus is “the Son as the image of the Father” (115,18-19).*”
Like Sophia in Wisdom 7:25-26, Christ is

light from the power of God,

and he is an emanation of the pure glory of the Almighty.
He is the spotless mirror of the working of God,
and he is the image of his goodness.
For he is also the Light of the Eternal Light. (Silvanus
112,37-113,7; trans. Peel in NHL 393)

I comment elsewhere on the relationship between Silvanus and

1 Corinthians 1-4 and suggest that Silvanus retains, as part of its
Alexandrian Christian tradition, a good deal of the speculative
wisdom encountered by Paul in first-century Corinth. One of the
issues involved in the debate between Paul and his Corinthian
congregation in Corinthians 1—4 is that of divine wisdom and the
extent to which human beings have an innate capacity to appropri-
ate it. The following passage from Silvanus sets forth one answer
to that issue:

43. Perhaps a Logos Christology is implicit in the references to Christ's role in creation
(Barnabas 5.5, 10; 6.12).
44. Cf. D. Winston's discussion of the genre of the Wisdom of Solomon in his The
Wisdom of Solomon (Anchor Bible 43; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1979), 18-20.
45. W. R. Schoedel, “Jewish Wisdom and the Formation of the Christian Ascetic,” in
Aspects of Wisdom in Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. R. L. Wilken; Notre Dame: University
of Notre Dame Press, 1975), 169-99. ,
40. ]. Zandee, “ “Les Enseignements de Silvanos’ et Philon d’Alexandrie,” in Mélanges
dhistotre des religions offerts 4 Henri-Charles Puech (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France,
1974), 337-45.
47. Ct, e.g., Philo On the Confusion of Tongues 146-47. Philo can also refer to Sophia as
the “Mother” of the Logos (On Flight and Finding 108-9). This doctrine is muted in Silvanus,
but cf. 91,14-16 and 115,5-8.
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 97

Do not bring grief or trouble to the divine [8etov] [which is]

within you. But when you will care for it, will request of it
that you remain pure, and will become self-controlled in your
soul and body, you will become a throne of wisdom and one
belonging to God’s household. He will give you a great light
through it (wisdom).
But before everything (else), know your birth. Know your-
self, that is, from what substance [ovota] you are, or from
what race, or from what species. Understand that you have
come into being from three races [yévoc]: from the earth, from
the formed [nAdoua], and from the created. The body has
come into being from the earth with an earthly substance,
but the formed, for the sake of the soul [yvyn], has come into
being from the thought of the Divine [6etov]. The created,
however, is the mind, which has come into being in confor-
mity with the image [eik@v] of God. The divine mind has
substance [ovota] from the Divine, but the soul is that which
he (God) has formed [nAdooetv] for their own hearts. (Silvanus
91,34-92,29; trans. Peel in NHL 384)

This passage is essentially an exhortation to self-knowledge, a

prerequisite to living a life of wisdom and virtue. We find here
an interpretation of the Delphic maxim, “Know thyself” (yvo@61
oavtov),“* amplified by exegesis of key texts from the Genesis
account of the creation of humanity (2:7; 1:27). This piece of Hel-
lenistic Jewish wisdom reproduces concepts well known to Philo
and could very well have been derived from him. The exhortation
to self-knowledge here is similar to Philo’s injunction: “Know thy-
self [yv@01 cavtdv], and the parts of which thou dost consist, what
each is, and for what it was made, and how it is meant to work”
(On Flight and Finding 46). For Philo, as for Silvanus, the highest
part in the human is “the Mind that is in thee” (0 €v ool vote;
46; trans. Colson in Loeb Classical Library). The three substances
or genera are read out of Genesis 2:7 (Septuagint): earth (yodv

48. H. D. Betz, “The Delphic Maxim I'v@61 Lavtdv in Hermetic Interpretation,” Harvard
Theological Review 63 (1970): 465-84, esp. 477-82 on Philo.
98 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Gnd tig yic), the formed soul (&tAacev... yoxnv), and the mind
(vodc), which has “substance from the Divine.” Genesis 1:27 is
also brought in, not only with the observation that it is the mind
“which has come into being in conformity with the image [eixov]
[of God],” but also that it is the mind that is created (Kat’ eikova
Sod Exoinoev adtov). Much of this Genesis exegesis in Silvanus
is found in Philo (e.g., Allegorical Interpretation 1.53), including the
distinction between what is formed by God (éniacev; Gen 2:7)
and what is created (énoinoev; 1:27), and probably reflects Philonic
influence.”
This kind of wisdom, however is not shared by the Apostle
Paul, who argues vigorously against it in 1 Corinthians 1-4. As to
who introduced it to Paul’s Corinthian congregation, the answer
is ready at hand: Apollos, that “eloquent man” from Alexandria,
“well-versed in the scriptures” (Acts 18:24). Apollos is the key
figure in Paul’s debate with his Corinthian people in 1 Corinthians
1-4 and probably elsewhere in the epistle (he is singled out for
special mention in 3:5 and 4:6) and was clearly a teacher held
in high regard in both Corinth and Ephesus (cf. 16:12). Indeed,
one might go so far as to posit a “school of Apollos” in Corinth
wherein Hellenistic Jewish wisdom traditions of the Alexandrian
type would have been taught.”
And where did Apollos get the wisdom and knowledge of the
Scriptures that he brought from Alexandria to Corinth? I do not
think that it is at all farfetched to suggest the possibility that
Apollos had been a pupil of Philo’s.°’ Whether Apollos became
a Jesus-believer in Alexandria is still an open question.
Thus, we can gain something of an idea of at least one of the
varieties of (pre-)Christianity in first-century Alexandria from a
comparative reading of 1 Corinthians and Silvanus. It is a religios-
ity that breathes the spirit of the contemplative Philo and, more

49. For additional discussion, with references to other passages in Philo, see Pearson,
Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 165-82, esp. 178-81.
50. B. A. Pearson, “Hellenistic-Jewish Wisdom Speculation and Paul,” in Aspects of
Wisdom in Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. R. L. Wilken; Notre Dame: University of Notre
Dame Press, 1975), 43-66, esp. 59.
51. This is suggested by G. H. R. Horsley in NewDocs 1 (1981): 88 no. 50: “Apollos.”

“
 Christians and Jews in First-Century Alexandria 99

importantly, moves in a trajectory leading to the typically Alex-

andrian Christian theology of such great figures as Clement,”
Origen, and Athanasius.

CONCLUSION
This brief look at Judaism and Christianity in ancient Alexan-
dria shows that variety is a characteristic of both Judaism and
Christianity there during the first century. In the beginning, the
varieties of Christianity in Alexandria were, in fact, varieties
of that great city’s Judaism, for no Christianity was identifi-
able as such. The figure of Philo is a towering presence in that
amalgam. While we do not know what Philo thought of such Jesus-
believing Jews he might have encountered,” he probably engaged
them in open dialogue. Some of them may even have been his
pupils. In any case, it is certainly through the mediation of early
Alexandrian Christians that his writings came to be preserved.
Ironically, Philo played virtually no role at all in the subse-
quent development of Judaism. Philo’s type of Judaism came to
a dead end in the aftermath of the Jewish revolts of the early sec-
ond century. On the other hand, his role, and that of like-minded
Jews of his day, was incalculably important in the development
of Christianity, so much so that Alexandrian Christians came
to look upon him as one of their own predecessors.™ It is the
Philolike Christianity of Silvanus, rather than the primitive apoc-
alypticism of Barnabas or the acosmic radicalism of the Gnostics,
that ultimately carried the day in the development of Alexandrian
Christian theology in the patristic age until the end of the fourth
century.

52. Cf. J. Zandee, “The Teachings of Silvanus” and Clement of Alexandria: A New Document
of Alexandrian Theology (Leiden: Ex Oriente Lux, 1977).
53. Eusebius claims that Philo “not only knew but welcomed, reverenced, and recog-
nized the divine mission of the apostolic men of his day” (Ecclesiastical History 2.17.2; trans.
Lake in Loeb Classical Library).
54. That is certainly the case with Clement of Alexandria and Origen. See A. van den
Hoek, Clement of Alexandria and His Use of Philo in the Stromateis: An Early Christian Reshaping
of a Jewish Model (Vigiliae christianae Supplement 3; Leiden: Brill, 1988); Runia, Philo in
Early Christian Literature, 132-83.
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark

It can be safely assumed that many thousands of travelers vis-

ited the great city of Alexandria during the first century of
the common era.’ It can also be safely assumed that these vis-
itors were greatly impressed by the city’s beautiful setting, its
well-planned streets, and its imposing architectural monuments.”
Among those first-century travelers was, according to Christian
tradition, St. Mark the Evangelist, the first in the traditional line
of patriarchs of the Egyptian church. According to the same
tradition, St. Mark met his death in this city and was buried there.°
One of the chief sources for the Mark tradition is the fourth-
century Acts of Mark, a text that is also of interest for its references
to the topography of ancient Alexandria. The topographical ref-
erences are such that one must attribute the Acts of Mark to an
author who was familiar with the city and its geography and who
can be assumed to have based his account on local Christian tra-
dition. Unfortunately, we do not know who that author was. And,
of course, it must also be admitted that the authenticity of the to-
pographical references in the account is not ipso facto a guarantee

1. [have the good fortune to be numbered among the modern travelers to Alexandria.
My own sojourns in the city were made all the more pleasant and profitable by my visits
with the late professor emeritus Daoud Abdu Daoud, to whom the original version of this
essay was dedicated.
2. One of the more exuberant reactions to the city’s beauty recorded in antiquity is
found at the beginning of book 5 of Achilles Tatius’s novel Clitophon and Leucippe (second
century).
3. The earliest extant source that mentions Mark’s sojourn in Alexandria is a frag-
mentary letter attributed to Clement of Alexandria, published in 1973. According to this
letter, Mark came to Alexandria from Rome after Peter’s martyrdom and expanded his ear-
lier gospel into a “more spiritual gospel” for use in the Alexandrian church. See M. Smith,
Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1973). Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History 2.16 (ca. 311), reports that Mark was the first
missionary to Egypt and the first to establish churches in Alexandria. He later adds (2.24)
that, in the eighth year of the reign of Nero (c.£. 62), Annianus became the first after Mark
to receive charge of the diocese of Alexandria. Neither Clement nor Eusebius says anything
about Mark’s death.

100
vi
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 101

of the historical accuracy of the events narrated. But that is not

our concern here.
The Greek text of the Acts of Mark (Martyrium Marci) was
published in two Greek recensions, represented respectively by
manuscripts in Paris and the Vatican.* It was translated into a
number of other languages and also underwent considerable ex-
pansion.” The narrative can be summarized as follows, using the
Paris recension (Patrologia graeca) as a basis.
When the apostles were sent out to evangelize the world Mark
received as his lot the country of Egypt and the surrounding ter-
ritory (1). After a sojourn in Cyrene of the Pentapolis (now part of
Libya), he received a vision that he should go by sea to Pharos in
Alexandria (2).° Disembarking in Alexandria he came to a place
called Mendion.’ As he was entering the gate of the city, the strap
of his sandal broke and he went to a cobbler to have it repaired.
The cobbler injured his left hand while working on the sandal
and Mark healed it in the name of Jesus Christ. The cobbler,
whose name was Ananias,® invited Mark to his home. As a re-
sult of Mark’s preaching, Ananias was converted, together with
his household and many others (3-4).
Eventually the city’s pagan populace sought to kill Mark. Mark
ordained Ananias as bishop and also ordained some presbyters
and deacons; he then returned to the Pentapolis. He came back to
Alexandria two years later and found the community flourishing,

4. The Paris manuscript is printed in Patrologia graeca 115.164-69; the Vatican

manuscript is printed in Acta Sanctorum (rev. ed.; Paris: Palmé, 1863-1940), 12 (April),
3.xxxvili-xl. There are other manuscripts as well, including one in Leiden, on which see
T. Baarda, “Het martyrium van Marcus,” Benedictijns Tijdschrift 52 (1991): 168-77. Baarda
is preparing a critical edition of the Acts of Mark.
5. For particulars, with references, see B. A. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt:
Some Observations,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E.
Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 132-59,
esp. 140. See also A. de Santos Otero’s discussion in NTApoc 2.461-65.
6. The Leiden manuscript has simply Alexandria (Baarda, “Het martyrium,” 171).
7. So also the Leiden manuscript (Baarda, “Het martyrium,” 171). The other recension
has Bennidion. See pp. 103-4 below.
8. The other recension has Anianus, the more common form of the name. An(n)ianus
is the successor of St. Mark in the traditional list of Alexandrian bishops (cf. n. 3 above).
Anianus is apparently a variant of the name Ananias, which is the Grecized form of the
Hebrew name Hananiah.
102 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

a church having been built in a place called Boukolou near the

seashore (5). But the pagan people were angry at Mark for his
mighty works and the threat that he posed to their idolatry. On the
occasion of a paschal celebration, which coincided with a festival
honoring the god Sarapis, the pagans seized Mark at the service,
dragged him in the streets with a rope around his neck, and threw
him into prison (6-7). During the night he was visited by Christ,
who strengthened him with words of encouragement (8).
The next morning the pagan crowd dragged Mark again in the
same fashion, and Mark died. The mob built a fire in the place
called Angeloi and put Mark’s body on it. But a storm arose and
the pagans fled in terror (9). Pious men came and brought Mark’s
remains to where the Christians were worshiping. They prepared
the body according to custom and placed it in a stone tomb lo-
cated in the eastern part of the city. Mark’s martyrdom took place
on Pharmouthi 30 (= April 25), when Gaius Tiberius Caesar was
emperor (10).”
Our interest in this account is focused on its topographical ref-
erences. The places mentioned are located in the northwestern and
northeastern parts of Alexandria, areas that, in the first century,
were predominantly Jewish in population (see the map below). Is
this a matter of mere chance? One would expect the topographi-
cal references in a fourth-century text to reflect a fourth-century
situation. And so they do, but it is important to point out here
that, by the third century, the center of Alexandrian Christianity,
dominated by the episcopate and the catechetical school, was lo-
cated in the main Greek area of the city, then called Bruchium.”®
In the fourth century the most important churches — the cathe-
dral church Caesarea (built on the site of the Caesareum) and
the church of Alexander dedicated to St. Michael (a converted
temple of Saturn) — were in the same general vicinity, that is,

9. The Latin version of Surianus (Patrologia graeca 115.170) has, more plausibly,
“Claudius Nero Caesar” (= Nero Claudius Caesar, emperor 54-68 C.E.).
10. See C. Andresen, “ ‘Siegreiche Kirche’ in Aufstieg des Christentums: Unter-
suchungen zu Eusebius von Caesarea und Dionysios von Alexandrien,” in Aufstieg und
Niedergang der rémischen Welt 2.23.2 (1979): 387-495, esp. 428-52.
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 103

in Bruchium." This situation is not reflected at all in the Acts of

Mark.
The first place mentioned in the Acts of Mark is Pharos (2), the
site of the famous lighthouse and the first sight of Alexandria that
would greet the eyes of a traveler arriving by sea. In the text,
Mark is said to have had a revelation from the Holy Spirit to go
to Pharos, although he is not reported to have spent any time on
that island. Why Pharos is mentioned at all is not clear, but it is
perhaps not irrelevant that Pharos was the traditional site of the
translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (the Septuagint).
Philo Judaeus, who flourished in the early first century, reports
that the Alexandrian Jews celebrated an annual festival on Pharos
in commemoration of the translators’ achievement (Philo, Life of
Moses 2.35-42).
The next place mentioned in the text is Mendion (Bennidion),
where Mark is said to have met the cobbler Ananias (3). The
place in question was named after a temple, and the variations
in the form of the name reflected in the ancient sources indi-
cate some uncertainty as to whether the deity associated with
this temple was the Thracian goddess Bendis or the Egyptian
god Mendes. The temple is usually referred to in modern dis-
cussions as the Bendideion,’* and during the fourth century it
was converted into a church by St. Athanasius.'’ After the Arab
conquest, this church was rebuilt as the Mosque of the Souq al-
Attarin (demolished in 1830).'* While there is confusion in the

11. On the churches of Alexandria, see H. Leclerq, “Alexandria (Archéologie),” in Dic-

tionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie (ed. F. Cabrol; Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1907),
1.1098-1182, esp. 1107-25; A. Calderini, Dizionario dei nomi geografici e topografici dell’Egitto
greco-romano, vol. 1.1: AAEEANAPEIA (Milan: Cisalpino-Goliardica, 1935); and A. Adriani,
Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-romano; series C (Palermo: Fondazione “Ignazio Mormino”
del Banco di Sicilia, 1966).
12. See Calderini, Dizionario dei nomi, 1.1.101; Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-
romano, 1.220.
13. It is referred to by Epiphanius as the church “of Mendidion” (Against Heresies 69.2).
14. Barbara Tkaczow refers to drawings in the famous Description de l’/Egypte com-
missioned by Napoleon of capitals and other fragments from the church reused in the
mosque; see “Archaeological Sources for the Earliest churches in Alexandria,” in Coptic
Studies: Acts of the Third International Congress of Coptic Studies, Warsaw, 20-25 August 1984
(ed. W. Godlewski; Warsaw: Editions Scientifiques de Pologne, 1990), 431-35.
104 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

sources and disagreement among scholars as to the exact loca-

tion of the ancient Bendideion, I accept the location proposed by
A. Adriani, that is, in the northwestern sector of the city not far
from the Heptastadion (the “seven-stade” mole connecting the is-
land of Pharos with the mainland, long since silted over)."” The
temple was located near the eastern harbor, between the em-
porion and the Heptastadion and thus was near the points of
debarkation for travelers coming to the city by sea.’® The area
in question was near the Delta quarter in the first century (see
p. 110 below).
The Bendideion temple itself would not likely be meant as the
site of Mark’s encounter with the cobbler Ananias; rather, the
text can be construed to indicate that the meeting took place be-
tween the gate of the city (i.e., the gate leading into the city from
the Heptastadion) and the dominant temple in the area, the Ben-
dideion. One would expect such a meeting to take place in or near
a marketplace, an agora. Indeed, an unpublished Coptic text in the
Pierpont Morgan Library in New York recounts Mark’s encounter
with the cobbler Ananias and situates it in the agora.” The agora
in question was the western agora, located near the entrance to
the Heptastadion.'®
The next site mentioned in the Acts of Mark is the most im-
portant of all, the church in Boukolou (4) and the site of Mark’s
memorial (7, 10), that is, the Martyrium of St. Mark, first at-
tested (after the Acts of Mark) in the fifth-century by Palladius.'”
This church was evidently also the church in which, according to

15. Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-romano, 1.210, vs. Calderini, Dizionario dei
nomi, 1.1.101.
16. C. Haas, Alexandria in Late Antiquity: Topography and Social Conflict (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1997), 210.
17. M 606, p. 39 of the manuscript, part of an encomium on St. Peter and St. Paul
attributed to Severianus of Gabala; see L. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the
Pierpont Morgan Library (Corpus of Illuminated Manuscripts 4-5; Louvain: Peeters, 1993),
no. 119. I have consulted the photographic edition of the Morgan manuscripts, Henry
Hyvernat, ed., Bibliothecae Pierpont Morgan codices coptici photographice expressi (56 vols.;
Rome: n.p., 1922), microfilm in the UCSB library. Vol. 52 is M 606.
18. Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-romano, 1.204, 210, 216.
19. Lausiac History 45, reporting a visit to the shrine of Mark in Alexandria by
Philoromus of Galatia. The location of the martyrium is not given.
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 105

Epiphanius, Arius served as a presbyter before he was declared a

heretic. Epiphanius refers to it as “the church of Baukalis,” which
I assume is a corruption or variant of Boukolos.”°
The place is referred to (in the plural) as ta BovKdAov (the
[places] of [the] cowherd; €v toig KkaAovpeévoig BovKdAov) and can
be interpreted as equivalent to ta BovKdAra (the cow pastures).7!
There can be no doubt as to its location, according to the account
in the Acts of Mark: “in the eastern district” (ei¢ 10 GvatoALKOv
uepoc; 10), “beside the sea, beneath the cliffs” (totic napaSadao-
ololc, DTOKGTH KpHLVOV; 5). But since some confusion on this point
was introduced by Jorge Juan Fernandez Sangrador,” it is useful to
take up his arguments in light of the ancient evidence. Fernandez
Sangrador acknowledges that the Martyrium of St. Mark was lo-
cated in the northeastern section of the city, but argues that the
earliest seat of the Alexandrian community, the area of Boukolou,
was located in the Rhakotis district in the southeastern section,
near the ancient Serapeum. He finds support for this in a refer-
ence in Strabo’s Geography (17.1.6) to “herdsmen” (boukolot) living
on the outskirts of the pre-Alexandrian village of Rhakotis. He
also argues that the early Alexandrian Christians had a syncretis-
tic brand of Christianity that took advantage of the proximity
of the Serapeum to spread their religion.* Strabo’s reference to
herdsmen is of no use, however, for Strabo mentions BovKdAot
in connection with other areas of Alexandria and the Delta as

20. Epiphanius, Against Heresies 69.1-2; cf. 68.4. The Greek word BavkaAtc refers to a
vessel used for cooling water or wine (H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, and H. S. Jones, A Greek-English
Lexicon {9th ed.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1968], 311b). The list of Alexandrian churches given
by Epiphanius (69.2) does not specify any related to Mark. Haas distinguishes between
Arius’s “minor church” Baucalis and Mark’s martyrium and says that the church “appears
to have been adjacent to the martyrium of Saint Mark” (Alexandria in Late Antiquity, 269-71).
21. The word Bovkd)o¢ is also used for a religious functionary in the cult of Dionysos.
See Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt,” 153.
22. J. J. Fernandez Sangrador, Los origenes de la communidad cristiana de Alejandria (Plen-
itudo Temporis 1; Salamanca: Universidad Pontificia, 1994). Unfortunately, this work was
unavailable to me. My knowledge of it is solely dependent upon the review by D.J. Bingham
in Journal of Early Christian Studies 4 (1996): 567-68.
23. For this he relies on the spurious letter of Hadrian to the Consul Servianus, on
which see W. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (trans. and ed. R. A. Kraft
et al.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 46-47.
106 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

well.24 And a connection between early Alexandrian Christianity

and Sarapis worship can hardly be made on the basis of any re-
liable evidence, least of all the Acts of Mark! Indeed, our account
quite clearly equates the church in Boukolou with the memorial
to Mark.
One other piece of evidence can be adduced here, namely, the
Martyrdom of St. Peter (Acta o Passio Sancti Petri). There are sev-
eral versions of the martyrddm of the “last martyr” Bishop Peter
of Alexandria (died 311), and various assessments are made of
the story’s historical worth. Of interest here is the connection
between Peter and the Martyrium of St. Mark in the story. The
two published Greek versions” agree in providing the following
details that are relevant to our discussion.
The tribunes take Peter out of his prison to “the place called
Boukolou” (ta tod BovxoAov), where St. Mark had been martyred
(11). With permission of the tribunes, Peter goes down into the
tomb (toy tagov) of Mark and addresses the holy evangelist, ask-
ing for his intercession, that he might enter martyrdom joyously
(12). Rising from the tomb (€x tod uvjuatog) of Mark, Peter offers
up a prayer to Jesus Christ. A holy virgin who had a monas-
tery (Goxntptov) in a suburban house near the resting place
(koiuintpiov) of St. Mark experiences a vision and an audition
from heaven: “Peter [was] the first [apxn] of the apostles; Peter is
the last [téA0¢] of the martyrs” (13). Peter then presents himself to
the tribunes, who station him to the south of the martyr-chapel
(uaptuptov), ina depression by the tombs (uvneta), and there he is
beheaded (14). The people who have been waiting outside Peter’s

24. See, e.g., Strabo 17.1.19, which refers to BovKdAo. active around Pharos who
were also pirates. Cf. the article “Bouxddow” in Paulys Realencyclopiidie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaft (ed. G. Wissowa; Munich: Druckenmiiller, 1980), 3.1.1013-17.
25. For a very useful discussion, see T. Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria: Bishop and Martyr
(Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 3; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 40-50, 64-86.
26. J. Viteau, Passions des Saints Ecaterine et Pierre d’Alexandrie (Paris: Bouillon, 1897)
(= Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca [3d ed.; Brussels: Société des Bollandistes, 1957-1969],
#1502); P. Devos, “Une >passion grecque inédite de s. Pierre d’Alexandrie,” Analecta Bollan-
diana 83 (1965): 157-87 (= Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca #1502a). The latter is essentially
an expanded version of the former. Devos supplies the numbered sections of the text used
here. An English translation of Devos’s edition is given in Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria,
70-78.
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 107

prison realize that he has been taken away and finally arrive at
the place of Peter’s martyrdom (15). Some want to take the body
to the Church of Theonas, but others spirit him away in a ship,
for the place was near the sea (nv yap eyyi¢ n PGAaooa). Sailing
around Pharos, they arrive at the cemetery that Peter himself had
established in a suburban area to the west of the city (ei¢ 10 dv-
TLKOV TIS MOAEWS LEPOS EV TOG MpoaoteEtotc; 16). There he is finally
buried (18).
The topographical references in this account match those of
the Acts of Mark, with additional amplifications. Ta BovKdAov,
where the Martyrium of Mark was located, is specified as a sub-
urban area, but also near the sea. There are also tombs in that
area. The tombs in question are clearly those now known as
the Shatby Necropolis (fourth-third centuries B.C.E.), part of the
eastern necropolis that had been covered over during the city’s
eastward expansion and no longer in use by the first century. The
body of St. Peter is taken by sea around Pharos to a Christian
cemetery that is, no doubt, part of the western necropolis. The
exact location is not known, but it was probably somewhere in
or near what is now the Gabbary district of Alexandria, where
Christian tombs (and also a synagogue inscription) have been
found.”
There can be no doubt as to the location of the area our texts
refer to as ta BovkdAov. By the fourth century, after massive de-
structions suffered by the city in the second and third centuries,
this area was a suburb, located well outside the city. It could very
well have been used for cow pastures (if that is what t4 BovuxdAov
means). The cliffs referred to in the Acts of Mark are probably one
of the hillocks that rose inland from the seacoast east of the city in
the area around Shatby, long since obliterated by the cutting and
filling associated with construction projects in the modern city of
Alexandria, but known from old maps.”
27. See the map on p. 112 below. Cf. also B. A. Pearson, “Alexandria,” in The Anchor
Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N. Freedman et al.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1.152-57.
28. See the maps collected in M. G. Jondet, Atlas historique de la ville et des ports
d’Alexandrie (Cairo: Imprimerie de l'Institut Frangais, 1921), especially a 1686 pictorial map
(vol. 2, plate VII).
108 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

The church associated with the tomb of Mark was probably

abandoned in the fifth century and replaced by another church
dedicated to St. Mark that was closer to the center of the city.” No
trace of the church in Boukolou remains, nor can its exact location
be known, but it was probably located at or near the site of the
present College of St. Mark, built in the 1920s by the Christian
Brothers order of the Roman Catholic Church.
One other site is mentioned in the Acts of Mark, “the so-called
Angeloi” (9), where the mob tried to burn Mark’s body. If there
was such a place, it can be assumed that it was located near
Boukolou.” But the Bollandist editors of the Acts of Mark are likely
correct in their suggestion that the Greek text is corrupted at this
point. The text reads, in both recensions — the corruption thus
goes back to a common source used by both — eig tov¢ Kadoupe-
voug ayyéAovs.*' The reading suggested by the editors is eig tov
aiytaady (to the seashore).* I tentatively suggest, instead, eig tov¢
aiytadovc, the plural form (which means essentially the same) cor-
responding more closely to the plural occurring in the corrupted
text of the Acts of Mark. The corruption in the transmission of
the text would have taken place under the influence of the name
given to a sixth-century church in Alexandria, the Angelion,* and
probably under the influence of the reference in the text to the
worship of the god Sarapis. The mistake would have had to be
made by someone who was ignorant of the geography of fourth-
century Alexandria. The Angelion church, dedicated to St. John the
Baptist, was built on the site of the great Serapeum (sacked by a
mob led by Bishop Theophilus in 391) in the Rhakotis district of
Alexandria, in the southwest part of the city.
The place-name Angeloi having disappeared from our text, we
read instead that the mob ignited a fire “on the beaches” near
29. M. Chaine, “L’eglise de Saint-Marc 4 Alexandrie construite par le patriarche Jean
de Samanoud,” Revue de loriente chrétien 24 (1924): 372-86, esp. 378.
30. See Calderini, Dizionario dei nomi, 1.1.88; Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-
romano, 1.206.
31. The same reading occurs in the Leiden manuscript (Baarda, “Het martyrium,” 17 5)
32. See the commentary in Acta Sanctorum 12.352. :
33. Calderini, Dizionario dei nomi, 1.1.166; Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell'Egitto greco-
romano, 1.216. ¢
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 109

Boukolou and there attempted to burn the martyr’s body. By

coincidence, the same phrase, etc (tovc) aiyiadovc, occurs in an
important passage in Philo’s treatise Against Flaccus, in the context
of a report on a vicious pogrom perpetrated by the Alexandrian
Greeks against the Jews of Alexandria in 37-38 c.£. The passage
in Philo is also of great interest because it incidentally gives us in-
formation on the centers of Jewish population in the city during
the first century:
The city has five quarters named after the first letters of the
alphabet, two of these are called Jewish because most of the
Jews inhabit them, though in the rest also there are not a few
Jews scattered about. So then what did they do? From the
four letters they ejected the Jews and drove them to herd
in a very small part of one. The Jews were so numerous
that they poured out over beaches [eig aiytadAovc], dunghills
and tombs, robbed of their belongings. (Against Flaccus 55-56;
trans. Colson in Loeb Classical Library)

I suggest that the quarter in which the Alexandrian Jews were

gathered was in the eastern part of the city, that is, the main Jew-
ish quarter in antiquity where the Jews first settled during the
Ptolemaic period. This area is described by Josephus as follows:
“By a sea without a harbour, close beside the spot where the waves
break on the beach,” Alexandria’s “finest residential quarter,” lo-
cated “near the palaces” (Josephus, Against Apion 2.33-36; trans.
Thackeray in Loeb Classical Library). The beach in question cor-
responds to the modern Shatby Beach, just east of the promontory
Silsileh (ancient Lochias).
I suggest, further, that the beach(es) referred to by Philo and
by the author of the Acts of Mark are the very same location.
That is to say, the place referred to in the fourth century as
Boukolou, then situated outside the city, was in the first century
the very heart of the most prominent Jewish neighborhood in Al-
exandria, which Josephus describes in such glowing terms. The
topographical reference in the Acts of Mark reflects, in my judg-
ment, a continuity of tradition between the first century and the
110 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

fourth century of Christian activity in that place. Its first-century

location situates the earliest Christians of Alexandria within the
Jewish community of that time and, in effect, corroborates the
intuitive observation of Eusebius regarding the “apostolic men”
of the earliest Christian presence in Alexandria: They “were, it
appears, of Hebrew origin, and thus still preserved most of the
ancient customs in a strictly Jewish manner” (Eusebius, Eccle-
siastical History 2.17.2; trans® Lake; cf. p. 88 above). The earliest
Christians of Alexandria were thus an integral part of the larger
Jewish community there.
Philo, as we saw, refers to the division of the city into five quar-
ters, named after the first five letters of the alphabet. The only
ancient information we have as to which letters corresponded
to the two predominantly Jewish quarters mentioned by Philo is
found in a passage in Josephus, where he reports on actions taken
against the Jews in 66 C.E. by Roman troops let loose by the Pre-
fect Tiberius Alexander (Philo’s apostate nephew!) against rioting
Jews: The soldiers are said to have “rushed to the quarter of the
city called ‘Delta,’ where the Jews were concentrated, and exe-
cuted their orders” (Josephus, Jewish War 2.495; trans. Thackeray).
It is often assumed that this Delta quarter was the residential area
mentioned by Josephus in Against Apion 2, that is, the northeast-
ern quarter of the city.* But the incontrovertible evidence of a
papyrus dated to 13 B.c.z. situates the Kibotos harbor “in Delta
(€v t@ A).”* The Kibotos harbor was an inner harbor located
within the large western harbor, Eunostos.*° The adjacent neighbor-
hood, called Delta, was thus the section referred to by Josephus
in the passage quoted and must also have been one of the two
predominantly Jewish quarters mentioned by Philo.*”
It remains now only to point out that the activities of St. Mark
depicted in the early chapters of the Acts of Mark are situated by

34. So also D. Sly, Philo’s Alexandria (London/New York: Routledge, 1996), 43.
35. Agyptische Urkunden aus den Koni iglichen Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Griechische
Urkunden (Berlin: Weidmann, 1875-1937), #1151.40—41.
36. Strabo makes this clear in the famous description of the city in his Geography
1.10.
“37. So also Adriani, Repertorio d'arte dell’Egitto greco-romano, 1.239.

a
 Ancient Alexandria in the Acts of Mark 4114

the text in or near this northwestern part of the city, which con-
stituted one of the two Jewish neighborhoods. We see, again, a
continuity of tradition between the first century and the fourth
century in terms of the location of Christian activity in the city.
Ongoing Christian activity in this Delta quarter is also reflected in
the location of the very earliest church of which we have recorded
evidence, the church of St. Theonas (bishop of Alexandria, 282—
300), which was located near the western wall and was replaced
by the Mosque of the 1000 Pillars in the ninth century (demolished
at the beginning of the nineteenth century).*
To conclude, whatever we might think about the reliability
of the narrative itself, authentic topographical information on
first-century Alexandrian Christianity is reflected in the fourth-
century Acts of Mark. This information corroborates what could
also be argued on other grounds, namely, that the earliest Chris-
tians in Alexandria constituted a part of the Jewish population of
Alexandria, the most important and sizeable Jewish community
of the Diaspora. It was probably not until after the war of 115-
17,” when the Jewish community was virtually annihilated, that
the Christians assumed a distinct identity of their own.

38. Calderini, Dizionario dei nomi, 1.1.169-70; Adriani, Repertorio d’arte dell’Egitto greco-
romano, 1.217. Numerous architectural fragments ascribed to this church are scattered about
the city. See Tkaczow, “Archaeological Sources,” 432.
39. On this war and its consequences, see V. A. Tcherikover’s discussion in Corpus Pa-
pyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), 1.85-93. One monument
destroyed by the Jews during that revolt was the Nemeseion, built by Julius Caesar for the
head of Pompey (Appian, Civil Wars 2.380), a structure sometimes identified as the famous
Alabaster Tomb located in what is now the Latin Cemetery. See Adriani, Repertorio d’arte
dell’Egitto greco-romano, 1.230. This identification is implausible. Adriani himself identified
the Alabaster Tomb with the Soma (tomb) of Alexander the Great, a view accepted by J.-Y.
Empereur, Alexandria Rediscovered (New York: Braziller, 1998), 145-53.
 LNSIONV VIYONVX31V

a /
J2;1POW

sjjOaueW
 "99 ‘dsa ’69-G9'T ‘(Z661 ‘Sserg AysiaatuQ
P1OJXO :PIOJXO ‘siahay] “W “A ‘P) 7SVY Avan ayy ut ASojoavyosy fo vipadojahouq psof
-XQ ayy, Ul ,/etapuexepy,, apse Aur ut pure ‘zg ,/7d43q ur ApuenstayD Isarpieg,,
ul syreutar Aut aag ‘g9gT ul Aag pnowyey Aq paysrqnd ,,’s31oqney sas ap ja atip
-uexay anbyuy | ap aWeo,, ay} JO sUaNGur ay} UINY Ul ‘s~aTJer YOTYM ‘VW PTOAR}
‘> Satias ‘(996 ‘eI[IDIS Ip OouRg [ep ,,OUTULIO/] OIzeus],, JUOIZePUO :OuLJa]eJ)
OUUUOA-O9AL8 04418] [Jap 2J4v,p O14ojsaday ‘TueLIpy “WY UO paseq SI 3] “6S-ZET “(0661
‘ssaryiog :erydjapeyryg ‘1 AyuenstyD pue Ayinbuuy ut sarpnys ‘Surzya0e5 “gq ‘[
pue uosieag “W “g ‘pe) Apuvysiuyd uviydhSq fo sjooy ay, Ut ,/SUOTFAIaSGC IUIOS
4dA43q ur AyuensiiyD yserpreg,, apoujae Aut ut paystjqnd sem deur styy, :aounos
yomnyD sniseueyly 3S ‘Uolaprpuag ‘9
umeadeias ‘LT eIOBSY UIISAM ‘SC
ITEM 9etV ‘OL ToqieH{ Sovoqry "7
uwmniseuutsyy *6 umntiesae. *¢
yomnyD seuoay 31S 8 nojoynog ur ye “3S Jo uNTIAYEY °Z
quIoy Jajseqr[y °Z asnoyiysryq soreyg ‘[
hay
 A Coptic Homily On Riches
Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria

70
Among the works extant in Coptic attributed to St. Peter of Al-
exandria, seventeenth bishop of that city (300-311) and martyr,’
are two homilies:* an Epiphany homily entitled “On the Baptism
(of Christ)”* and a sermon variously referred to as “Discourse on
Riches”* or “Encomium on the Archangel Michael.”° I will focus
on this latter work in the following discussion.°

1. On the life and writings of Peter, see T. Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria: Bishop and
Martyr (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 3; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988).
2. See B. A. Pearson and T. Vivian, Two Coptic Homilies Attributed to St. Peter of Al-
exandria: On Riches; On the Epiphany (Corpus dei manoscritti copti letterari; Rome: CIM,
1993).
3. A complete Sahidic version of the Epiphany homily is contained in a ninth-century
vellum manuscript in the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York (M 611,1 [folios 1r-18r]);
L. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (Corpus of Illu-
minated Manuscripts 4—5; Louvain: Peeters, 1993), no. 171. Fragments of a Sahidic version
also exist in Paris in the Biliothéque Nationale (P 131,1 [folios 51-58]; P 131,4 [folios 116v—
119]; P 132,1 [folio 62]); see T. Orlandi, “La raccolta copta delle lettere attribuite a Pietro
Alessandrino,” Analecta Bollandiana 93 (1975): 127-32, esp. 129; and E. Lucchesi, Répertoire
des manuscrits coptes (Sahidiques) publiés de la Bibliothéque Nationale de Paris (Geneva: Patrick
Cramer, 1981), 70, 77-78, 86. Lucchesi is preparing an edition of this homily. In anticipation
of that edition, Vivian and I did not provide the Coptic text in our volume, only an Eng-
lish translation, with introduction and notes. Orlandi also published an Italian translation:
Omelie copte (Corona Patrium; Turin: Societa Editrice Internationale, 1981), 27-41.
4. H. Hyvernat, A Check List of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (New
York: privately published, 1919), 9.
5. Orlandi, “La raccolta copta,” 129.
6. The riches /Michael homily is extant in an incomplete Sahidic version and a com-
plete Bohairic version (there is also an Arabic version). The most important Sahidic
manuscript (S1) is a ninth-century vellum codex in the Morgan Library in New York (M
602,1 [folios 2r—14r]); see Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts, no. 116. Unfortunately
an entire quire of eight folios (sixteen pages of text) is missing. The Sahidic version is also
represented by fragments of three manuscripts (S2-4) now in Paris, Vienna, and Naples
and taken from the famous White Monastery of St. Shenoute, identified as such by Or-
landi (in “La raccolta copta”; referred to by him respectively as DB, BL, and U), and by
a seventh-century papyrus fragment (S5) in the Amherst collection now in the Morgan
Library; see Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts, no. 115; and W. E. Crum, Theological
Texts from Coptic Papyri (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series 12; Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1913), 53-57 (theological text no. 10 folio 5: “unidentified sermon”). The Bohairic

114
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 115

One of the more vexing problems in the study of St. Peter’s Cop-
tic dossier is that of attribution or pseudonymity. This observation
applies, of course, to Coptic literature in general.’ Indeed, a Coptic
discourse attributed to any church father might automatically be
regarded as spurious unless very good grounds can be found in
favor of authenticity. Can we find such grounds in the case of the
homily On Riches?® No — at least not for the homily as we now
have it.
The variation in how this work is referred to indicates, in fact,
that this is a composite work that came down to us in Coptic. In-
sofar as our homily is an “Encomium on the Archangel Michael,”
we can safely assume that it cannot be attributed to St. Peter, nor
can it be dated to a period earlier than, say, the seventh century.”
But, only the last part of the homily deals with the archangel
Michael. Up to that point in the text, our homily has more to do
with the topic of wealth and its attendant spiritual dangers (with
some sections bearing upon other topics as well). This variation
in content is reflected in the superscription:
version is contained in a Vatican manuscript (Bl = Codex Vaticanus Copticus 61,3 [fo-
lios 87r-121v]); a Bohairic fragment (B2) also exists in Leipzig (Codex Tischendorfianus
25,15). An edition of the Sahidic and Bohairic versions with composite English translation
is presented in Pearson and Vivian, Two Coptic Homilies. The designations S1-5 and B1-2
for the seven manuscripts were devised by us for our edition. The aforementioned White
Monastery manuscripts are represented by the following folios:
$2 Paris 131,5 (folio 43); Paris 131,3 (folios 81-85)
$3 Paris 131,7 (folio 49); K 9429 in Vienna’s Osterreichisches National Bibliothek; Paris
130,5 (folio 61); Codex Borgianus Bibliothecae Nationalis Neapolitanae IB 14, no. 461
(folios 1-2); Paris 131,5 (folio 38)
S4 Paris 130,5 (folio 102)
7. See T. Orlandi, “Coptic Literature,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A.
Pearson and J. E. Goehring; Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress,
1990), 51-81, esp. 71-81; and idem, “The Future of Studies in Coptic Biblical and Ecclesias-
tical Literature,” in The Future of Coptic Studies (ed. R. M. Wilson; Coptic Studies 1; Leiden:
Brill, 1978), 143-63, esp. 152-54. Orlandi remarks that “some homilies attributed to Peter
of Alexandria and Theophilus of Alexandria may be authentic only in part” (153 n. 46).
8. None can be found, unfortunately, for the Epiphany homily.
9. The content indicates that the Michael material is intended for use on a major
feast day of the archangel Michael, Athor 12 (= Nov. 21 in the Gregorian calendar); see
p- 125 below. The Morgan manuscript (M 602) is itself a synaxary for Athor 12, presumably
inscribed where it was found, that is, in the Monastery of St. Michael at Hamouli, on the
southern edge of the Fayum region of Egypt.
10. See the important survey of the relevant material in C. D. G. Miiller, Die Engellehre
der koptischen Kirche (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1959).
116 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

A homily delivered by the blessed Abba Peter, Archbishop of

Alexandria, concerning those who set their hearts on wealth
and their money and their possessions and their power, de-
priving themselves of what is eternal, setting their hearts
only on what is temporal. And he spoke also about the res-
urrection that will happen to all creation. He also said that
man (can)not teach himself, nor is it possible for king or ruler
to give him instruction. And he spoke also about those who
pervert judgment for the sake of a gift, teaching those great
ones everywhere to love the poor. And he said a few (words)
also at the end of this discourse concerning the archangel
Michael. In (the) peace of God. Amen."
Thus, if we are going to find any material in our text that can
plausibly be identified as an actual homily composed by Peter, we
shall have to subject the text to critical scrutiny, with the aim of
discerning in it the various stages in its composition. By isolating
and removing the accretions, we can identify a core homily that
could plausibly have been composed by Peter.
The text as we now have it’* consists of the following main
elements:"
1. Proemium (1-13)
2. Address to the rich (14-54)
3. Address to the poor (55-69)
4. Application to church leaders (70-74)
5. Judgment and resurrection (75-81; 118-19)

11. Translation of the Sahidic version here and elsewhere is from Pearson and Vivian,
Two Coptic Homilies. The Bohairic is substantially the same, the only notable variant occur-
ring toward the end: “Concerning the honor of the archangel Michael, the commander of the
heavenly forces.” In our translation we identify Bohairic additions to the text with the use
of italic type.
12. There are some notable variations reflected in the manuscripts. Three different
recensions of the Sahidic version can be identified (S1 + $5; S2 + $3; $4); the Bohairic
version derives from the third (S4). See Pearson and Vivian, Two Coptic Homilies, and n. 6
above.
13. The numbered paragraphs refer to the division of the text given in Pearson and
Vivian, Two Coptic Homilies.
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 117

6. Encomium on the archangel Michael (82-117)

7. Peroration and doxology (120-21)
This division identifies the encomium on the archangel Michael
(#6) as an interpolation. But, in fact, our text is more compli-
cated than that, and here we might simply observe that homiletic
material is in general notoriously unstable in its transmission.
Our text’s complications are evident in the extraordinarily long
proemium.

PROEMIUM (1-13)
The proemium begins with a reference to King Solomon, who
preferred wisdom to wealth and power (1 Kings 3:9-11), and con-
tinues with comments on Ecclesiastes 11:6 and other Scriptures
(1-2). But then, suddenly, admonitions are addressed to “teach-
ers” and “watchers over the people” regarding repentance (3-5).
The original theme resumes (6), but the text then reverts again to
concerns and duties of deacons, presbyters, bishops, and teachers
(7-12) and includes in this material the following passage (9): “It
is not with men-pleasing devices or vain ordinances that we teach,
teaching some to be fearful before us, as I heard in the place where
I am hidden on account of the severity of the persecution of the
lawless emperors who have risen against the church, concerning
some leaders in the provinces, that they beat men and women.”*
Here is an “autobiographical” reference to Peter’s flight from
Alexandria during the persecution,” which, however, is better
understood as a hagiographic addition meant to support and make
more explicit the admonition’s (and the entire homily’s) attri-
bution to Peter."® This passage is then followed by an explicit

14. I do not indicate here the lacunas in the damaged manuscript (M 602), which have
been restored with the aid of the Bohairic version (Vat. 61).
15. For details of this period of Peter’s life see Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria, 12-40.
16. A similar “autobiographical” passage occurs in another Coptic text attributed to
Peter, a supposed letter from exile. See C. Schmidt, Fragmente einer Schrift des Martyrbischofs
Petrus von Alexandrien (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Liter-
atur 20; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1901). Schmidt regards this writing as genuine, but H. Delahaye,
in a review of Schmidt’s work (Analecta Bollandiana 20 [1901]: 101-3), proves conclusively
118 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

quotation from the Apostolic Canons warning clergy not to intimi-

date people with force (10).'” The proemium then closes abruptly:
“Let us begin the discourse, and let us first of all teach the rich
and then (afterward) come to the poor” (13).
The material addressed to church leaders cannot be from the
hand of Peter, yet the shape of the text leads to the conclusion
that an original proemium was considerably expanded to produce
what we now have. °

ADDRESS TO THE RICH (14-54)

The first main section of the text begins with a direct address to
a hypothetical rich man, developed in diatribe style: “You [singu-
lar] will say to me....I say to you.” The subject is the proper use
of wealth, which both agree is God’s gift (14). This is followed by
a rebuke of the rich man for his treatment of the poor (15), inter-
rupted by a third-person elaboration of the rich man’s villainy (16;
probably a secondary expansion), and a return to the theme, with
a reference to Solomon and a quotation of Proverbs 22:2 (17). In
what follows, biblical examples of benevolent rich men are cited,
namely, Job and Abraham (18-19). Extensive commentary is then
given on the story of the rich man Nineve and Lazarus in Luke
16:19-31 (20-29). This is followed by yet another example from
the New Testament, the rich man of Luke 12:16—21, whose sudden
death prevented him from enjoying the fruit of his labors (30-31),
and a parenesis based on Ecclesiastes 9:12 (32).
At this point the author addresses his audience (turning now
to the second-person plural) with a story about a selfish wealthy
man “in this city”’* whom he had tried without success to convert
to a more benevolent way of life. This man thought that he would
live to a ripe old age, but died suddenly as a result of a fall from

that it is not. For further discussion and other references, see Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria,
re
17. Canon 19 in the Coptic version. See P. de Lagarde, Aegyptiaca (Géttingen: Hoyer,
1883), 216.
18. The Bohairic version and S3 add “Alexandria.”
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 19

his horse (32-36). This example provides the author with the op-
portunity for further exhortation, with the observation: “It is not
wealth that I was condemning, but I do condemn those who place
their confidence in the things of the earth” (37).
Biblical examples of benevolent rich men follow: Job and Abra-
ham again, David and Solomon (38-39). Solomon’s biblical pro-
nouncement (Eccl 6:2) about the uncertainty of wealth and the
shortness of life (39) provides the opportunity for an application
to the wicked rich living now (40) and a resumption of direct ad-
dress (in the second person singular) of the “pitiless rich man”
(41), whose ultimate fate is prefigured in the case of “Belshazzar
the evil-doing king” (Dan 5). An apocryphal end is given to Bel-
shazzar here, in what appears to be a later gloss: his body was
left unburied and devoured by birds and beasts (42). This direct
address concludes with the assurance to the rich man that he is
not hated or envied; it is his salvation that is desired (43).
At this point in the text, examples from the animal world are
suddenly brought in: Some animals, like the (mythical) “Alloe,”
are very useful and sweet smelling (44-46), providing an example
for the rich to follow (46-48). Others, like the dung beetle, are
putrid and foul smelling, like the rich man who trusts in only his
wealth (49). There can be little doubt, given the structure of the
surrounding text and the nature of this material, that this is an
obvious interpolation, “bestiary” material presumably taken from
an Egyptian version of the Physiologos.'”
The text reverts now to exhortation of the audience (in the sec-
ond person plural), picking up on the theme interrupted by the
bestiary material, that is, salvation in the world to come. The
prerequisite is renunciation of possessions for the love of God
(50). Peter and the other apostles are prime examples of renun-
ciation (Matt 19:27, 29) (51), but this mandate can be fulfilled
with less heroic efforts, such as giving a drink to a thirsty per-
son or buying a book for the church of God (52). The burden of

19. W. E. Crum, “Texts Attributed to Peter of Alexandria,” Journal of Theological Studies

4 (1903): 387-97, esp. 395, commenting on P 130,5 (folio 102) (cf. n. 6 above).
120 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

the emperor’s taxes” are no excuse for failure to seek first God’s
kingdom (Matt 6:33) (53). The wise hearer will escape the judg-
ment that came to Nineve and “will bring his ship to the harbor
of salvation” (54).

ADDRESS TO THE POOR (55-69)

4

The second main section begins with a direct address to the poor
man (in the second person singular) with a warning against envy
of the rich and the observation that an abundance of wealth has its
own disadvantages (55). The poor person is like a ship with light
cargo that sails even shallow seas without difficulty (56), while the
rich person is like a heavily laden ship that can ply only the deep
waters (57).*' Moreover, there are wicked poor as well as wicked
rich; they, too, will be punished (58-59).
At this point in the text the animal world is suddenly invoked
again, this time with reference to the lion and subservient beasts
(60-61). This passage can be identified as an interpolation, for
the text thereafter picks up on the theme of the punishments that
await the wicked poor as well as the wicked rich (62).
The exhortation against envy of the rich then resumes (63), with
further arguments concerning the disadvantages of wealth, such
as ill health caused by excess (64-65). Wealth is good only for
those who will manage it in a godly way; poverty is good for the
one who can bear it and still be thankful (66). The poor should not
take vengeance on the rich and powerful who mistreat the poor,
for God will avenge (67). The “three holy children” (Dan 3:19-23)
were helped by God (68), as was Daniel, whom the beasts could
not harm (Dan 6:19-24) (69).

20. There is no reference to persecution in this passage, such as occurs in the

“autobiographical” material in the Proemium (see p. 117 above).
21. This passage is partially preserved in the papyrus fragment edited by Crum, who
did not identify it as coming from the Peter homily but erroneously placed it with four
unrelated fragments. See n. 6 above.
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 121

APPLICATION TO CHURCH LEADERS (70-74)

Once again the argument is interrupted with extraneous material,
this time, as in the proemium, with special exhortations to those
bearing the title of “teacher,” “bishop,” “presbyter,” or “deacon”
(70). They are to be exemplars of brotherly love (71-74). This pas-
sage closes with a quotation from “Paul” (Heb 7:27), followed by
the saying on the “salt of the earth” (Matt 5:13).

JUDGMENT AND RESURRECTION (75-81; 118-19)

The next section, as it is now constituted, picks up on both the

end of the address to the poor (69) and the exhortation to clergy
(74): “Therefore let us take heed for ourselves. Whether clergyman
or layman, whether rich man or poor man — let them take heed and know
in their heart(s) that there will be a day of requital, and each one
will receive according to the deeds which he did, whether good
or evil. For it is necessary that a day come on which the whole world will
be judged (75).”**
This paragraph continues with reference to the books that will
be opened at the judgment. The next paragraph (76) opens with
the statement that “it is necessary for a resurrection to come,” and
the material that follows includes teaching on the resurrection and
judgment that deals with such issues as the nature of the resurrec-
tion body and the circumstances of the parousia, resurrection, and
judgment, with arguments based on Scripture (76-81). This dis-
cussion is interrupted by the encomium on the archangel Michael,
but within the encomium some of these themes resume (esp. in
87-96) in the context of Michael’s role in the events of the end
time. The basic theme of resurrection and judgment is abruptly
resumed after the encomium at the end of the homily and just as
abruptly concluded (118-19).

22. This section of the text is absent from $1. The lacuna in $1 (M 602) extends from
paragraph 52 to 103, but some of this loss to the Sahidic version is supplied by S5 (56-57)
and S3 (73-78, 83-91, 99-102). Cf. n. 6 above.
(pars CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

The specific resurrection doctrines espoused in these passages

and their relation to Peter’s known teaching on the resurrection
are important issues to which we shall return.

ENCOMIUM ON THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL (82-117)

Reference (in 80-81) to the “voice of the archangel” and the
“trumpet of God” in Paul’s eschatological teaching (1 Thess 4:16;
1 Cor 15:42) provides the occasion for the insertion of the en-
comium, which begins with the rhetorical question, “Who indeed
among the angels is the one whom the Lord will entrust with this fearful
judgment and this great declaration?” (82). The encomium consists of
the following elements:*
1. Michael’s role in the judgment and resurrection in the Day of
the Lord (82-96).
2. Proof from Scripture that Michael is the archangel who will
blow the trumpet (97-99).
3. Polemic against the doctrine that Michael was installed as
chief archangel in place of the fallen Satanael (100-101).
4. A report of Abba Theonas’s teaching on the three postdiluvian
manifestations of Michael recorded in Scripture: to Abraham,
to Joshua, and to Daniel (102-8).
5. Another report of Theonas’s teaching, concerning the destruc-
tion of an idol in Alexandria on Athor 12, which subsequently
became a feast day for Michael (109-17).

The rhetorical question with which the encomium begins is

answered with reference to Scripture: it is the angel whom God
sent to Daniel “and taught him about what would happen to him”
and the one who “became the proclaimer of the first resurrection,
that of the Lord” (82). The author here mistakenly credits Michael
with the role of Gabriel in Daniel 8-12 and identifies the unnamed
23. For a more extensive discussion of the encomium, see Pearson and Vivian, Two
Coptic Homilies, 17-25.
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 123

angel of Matthew 28:2-7 as Michael. It is further affirmed that

Michael will blow his trumpet to inaugurate the resurrection of
the dead and the judgment that is to take place in the “valley of
Jehoshaphat” (Joel 3:1, 12) (83).** This is given further elaboration
in what follows (84-96).
The identity of the angelic trumpeter is discussed in rhetorical
response to a hypothetical skeptical questioner, who asks, “How
does this man know that it is Michael who will blow the trum-
pet at the coming of the Lord?” (97). The Scripture texts cited as
proof are 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Daniel 8:11. The “comman-
der in chief” (apy.otpatnyoc) in the latter passage is identified, in
accordance with Coptic tradition generally, as Michael.”
The encomium next takes up the topic of Michael's installa-
tion in heaven as the intercessor for all humanity before God.
A heretical version of this installation is attacked, according to
which Michael was appointed in place of the devil, Satanael, when
the latter was cast out of heaven (100). The heretical version also
gives the reason for the devil’s banishment: he had refused to
worship the newly created Adam (101). Both of these heretical
traditions are rooted in ancient Jewish apocryphal traditions (e.g.,
Life of Adam and Eve 12-16; 2 Enoch 29 [J]) and are given further
elaboration in a Coptic apocryphon called The Book of the Instal-
lation of the Holy Archangel Michael.*® Our author attributes these

24. On this role of Michael in Coptic tradition, see Miller, Engellehre, 11, and texts
cited.
25. The epithet archistratégos for Michael is common in Coptic tradition (Muller, En-
gellehre, 19) and is based on Jewish tradition (e.g., 2 Enoch 22.6 [J]; cf. Josh 5:14). On the
Jewish traditions, see W. Luecken, Michael: Eine Darstellung und Vergleichung der jiidischen
und der morgenlandisch christlichen Tradition vom Erzengel Michael (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1898), 13-31. See also J. P. Rohland, Der Erzengel Michael, Arzt und Feldherr: Zwei
Aspekte des vor- und friihbyzantinischen Michaelskultes (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fiir Religions-
und Geistesgeschichte 19; Leiden: Brill, 1977), 50-65, 105-37. Rohland (50-54) underscores
the importance of Origen’s interpretation of Josh 5:14 (Selecta in Jesum Nave in Patrolo-
gia graeca 12.821-22) for the development of this idea in subsequent Christian Michael
traditions.
26. See C. D. G. Miller, Die Biicher der Einsetzung der Erzengel Michael und Gabriel (CSCO
225-26: Scriptores Coptici 31-32; Louvain: Secrétariat du Corpus SCO, 1962), 32.iii-iv (dis-
cussion of this passage); also idem, Engellehre, 13-16, 174-75; Crum, “Texts Attributed to
Peter,” 395-97 (on P 131,5 [folio 38]). The revolt of Satanael (= Satan; our text reads erro-
neously “Sanatael”) is mentioned in 2 Enoch 29 [J]; cf. 18.3; the name Satanael also occurs
in 3 Baruch 4 and 9.
124 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

heretical doctrines to an apocryphal “Genesis” composed, accord-

ing to the Sahidic version, by an unknown person called “Enotes”
(100) or “Sietes” (101). The Bohairic version changes these names
to “Isidore,” thus assigning the false teachings to a well-known
heretic from the past: Isidore son of Basilides.”””
The encomium continues with an account of three earthly man-
ifestations of the archangel Michael, information said to have been
supplied by Abba Theonas, “my father who raised me” (102).** Ac-
cording to Theonas’s report, God had prohibited the angels from
descending from heaven after the devil’s fall until, after the flood,
he allowed two angels, Michael and Gabriel, to visit Abraham
under the tree of Mamre (103; Gen 18:1-9), The second appear-
ance of Michael was to Joshua (Josh 5:13-14), whom the angel
helped in his battles (105). The third appearance was to Daniel
(Dan 6:22), when Michael helped him escape harm from the li-
ons. All three manifestations are said to have occurred on Athor
12. The encomiast then exhorts his hearers to come to the church
that bears the name of the archangel Michael (107)” and celebrate
the role of Michael as intercessor for the human race (108).
The encomium concludes with another account credited to
Abba Theonas, an event set in the days of Abba Eumenios “when
he was archbishop in Alexandria” (109).*°° An idol worshiped by
the pagans in Alexandria and in all Egypt was honored with a spe-
cial festival on Athor 12 every year. The idol’s name was Buchis

27. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.20.1; Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies

2.113—-14; 3.1-3; 6.53.
28. Theonas, Peter’s predecessor as bishop (282-300), is here referred to in a phrase
that occurs elsewhere in Petrine pseudepigrapha, e.g., in a letter edited by Crum (“Texts
Attributed to Peter,” 391-92). Not much is known concerning Theonas. The tenth-century
bishop-historian Severus ibn al-Mugaffa (History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of
Alexandria [ed. and trans. B. T. A. Evetts; Patrologia orientalis 1.2; Paris: Firmin-Didot,
1948]) reports only that he built a church in Alexandria and played a prominent role in
the life of the young Peter, his future successor. Theonas had earlier been a steward of his
predecessor Maximus (264-82). See p. 128 below.
29. This indicates that the encomium, either in whole or in part, was composed for
worship services on Athor 12 at a church or chapel dedicated to Michael. Perhaps it was
composed at the Monastery of St. Michael in the Fayum, where the Morgan manuscripts
were found.
30. Eumenios (Eumenes) is seventh in the traditional list of Alexandrian bishops (130-
42). Nothing is known of him, nor could Severus add anything to the bare notations
supplied by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 4.5.11) except his feast day, Babah (Paopi) 10.
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 125

(Coptic 8wwe, sacred bull of Hermonthis).*' As one such festival

was approaching, Eumenios summoned pious monks and clergy
and prayed to God to send the archangel Michael to destroy the
idol (112). On the day of the festival the pagans went into the
temple of Buchis to get the idol for the festival, and they found it
broken in pieces. The temple fell on them and they died (113). The
rest of the pagans became Christians. Eumenios then persuaded
his fellow archbishops to declare Athor 12 a festival in honor of
the archangel Michael (115-17). Athor 13 was added as a festival
in honor of the archangel Gabriel.

PERORATION AND DOXOLOGY (120-21)

The peroration picks up on the theme of judgment, with a final
exhortation followed by a doxology (probably secondary):
Now therefore, O my beloved, let us not persist in being un-
mindful, and let not that day come upon us unaware and we
be seized ...*’ and we be judged together with those to whom
he will say, “Let the sinners be turned away to Amente.”
But let us continue being prepared, expecting the Lord — for
when will he seek us? — in order that at the hour when he
does seek us he might find us prepared, there being nothing
to hinder us from entering the heavenly kingdom. His is the
glory and honor — the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — for ever
and ever. Amen. (120-21)

AUTHORSHIP OF ON RICHES
With this survey of the contents of our Coptic homily complete,
we can return to the problem posed earlier: the identification of a
core homily On Riches that could plausibly have been composed (in
Greek, of course) by Peter in the early fourth century. On the basis

31. See J. Cerny, Coptic Etymological Dictionary (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1976), 29. Cf. also S. Morenz, Egyptian Religion (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press,
1973), 260.
32. M 602 is damaged here; the Bohairic version omits this entire sentence.
126 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

of my earlier comments concerning interpolations and glosses, I

suggest that a well-constructed homily can be isolated from the
material we have, even if only approximately, comprising the
following parts:
Proemium: 1-2 + 6 + 13
Address to the rich: 14-15 + 17-43 + 50-54
X
Address to the poor: 55-59 + 62-69
Eschatological warning: 75 + ?
SeParenetic peroration: 120
Poe
St

Should this literary-critical analysis be found cogent, we still

need to address the historical issues of situation and authorship.
We can pose these as follows: (1) Do the contents of our text reflect
an Alexandrian setting? (2) Do the contents of our text reflect an
economic-social situation such as might be expected for the Alex-
andrian church at the beginning of the fourth century? (3) What
are the grounds for attributing our text to Peter?
The first question can easily be answered positively. In the story
told by the homilist about his dealings with a rich man “in this
city” (33), there was no need to identify the city (as S3 and B1 do:
“Alexandria”); it could hardly be any other city than Alexandria.™*
This is borne out by the nautical metaphors in the text featuring
different kinds of seagoing ships (56-57), something that would be
perfectly natural with a citizen of an important seaport. Indeed,
the famous (eastern) harbor of Alexandria may be the occasion
for the expression “harbor of salvation” at the end of the section
addressed to the rich (54).
The core homily reflects throughout an urban rather than a
rural, village, or monastic setting. The one reference we have in
the text to farming practices is its citation of Ecclesiastes 11:6 in

33. The variations in the Coptic manuscript tradition (cf. n. 6 above), not to mention
the absence of any Greek attestation, prevent us from claiming anything more than an
approximate result.
34. The only other poleis in Egypt in the early fourth century were Naukratis,
Ptolemais, and Antinoopolis. There is no reason to consider any of them in this connection.

v
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 127

the proemium (2, 6): “Sow your seed in the morning hour and
do not cease in the evening hour.” But this text is interpreted
allegorically (in typical Alexandrian fashion)” to refer to Chris-
tian devotion to the church in both youth (“morning hour”) and
old age (“evening hour”). The distractions of a pagan urban en-
vironment are referred to early on in the address to the rich.
Such distractions include consort with prostitutes, obscene men,
and “mocking theater performers” (QENpeyCwkRE NEEMEASKON =
Ovuedrkoi éunoixtar; 14).%°
In order to answer the second question, we should consider what
the actual socioeconomic situation of the Alexandrian church was
at the beginning of the fourth century, that is, before the outbreak
of systematic persecution in 303. Such limited evidence as we have
begins a little more than a century before, with the writings of
Clement of Alexandria. Clement’s detailed exhortations to Chris-
tian people in Alexandria in books 2-3 of his Christ the Educator
present a very vivid picture of affluence in the Christian commu-
nity and the temptations posed by a pagan urban environment. A
detailed discussion is not possible here; the following statements
from book 2 are enough to allow us to see how Clement addresses
the issue of Christian affluence:

We should possess wealth in a becoming manner, sharing it

generously, but not mechanically nor with affectation. ...The
good man, in his prudence and uprightness, “lays up treasure
in heaven.” He who sells his earthly possessions and gives
them to the poor will find an imperishable treasure where
there is neither moth nor robber. . . . It is not he who possesses
and retains his wealth who is wealthy, but he who gives; it is
giving, not receiving that reveals the happy man. Generosity

35. A similar interpretation of Eccl 11:6 is attributed to Origen in the Catena on Ecclesi-
astes of Codex Barber. gr. 388, also attested in Olympiodorus’s commentary on Ecclesiastes.
See S. Leanza, L’esegesi di Origene al libro dell’Ecclesiaste (Reggio Calabria: Edizioni Parallelo
38, 1975), 20, 80-82.
36. Cf. Clement of Alexandria’s condemnation of the theater in Christ the Educator
3.11.76-77 and discussion below.
128 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

is a product of the soul; so, true wealth is in the soul. (Christ

the Educator 2.6.34-35)*””

Clement’s extended homily entitled Salvation of the Rich (Quis

dives salvetur) not only reveals something of Clement’s embarrass-
ment at his own status in life, but tells us a great deal of the
social situation of the people addressed, that is, the Christians
of Alexandria. We shall returrt to that homily presently.
We can assume that the socioeconomic condition of the Alexan-
drian church’s membership did not dramatically decline during
the century following Clement, however difficult the economic
conditions may have been in the empire generally during that pe-
riod. Indeed, we have a precious piece of evidence from the time of
Bishop Maximus (264-82) that indicates that the church itself had
become a banking institution: Papyrus Amherst 3a.” This letter
from an Egyptian Christian, writing from Rome to fellow Chris-
tians in the Arsinoite nome, gives instructions to make a certain
monetary deposit in Alexandria with “Maximus the Papas” (Md&1-
Lov tov nanav; 3.5) by giving it into the hands of the bishop’s agent,
Theonas (3.14).*’ Peter’s predecessor Theonas (282-300) played
a prominent role in the financial affairs of the church (cf. n. 28
above), and the construction of a church building under Theonas’s
episcopacy*’ tells us something of the socioeconomic situation of

37. Translation by S. P. Wood, Clement of Alexandria: Christ the Educator (Fathers of the
Church 23; Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 1954), 227-29.
38. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt (eds.), The Amherst Papyri (London: Oxford University
Press, 1900), 1.28-30.
39. For a full discussion, see A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (rev. ed.; trans.
L. R. M. Strachan; New York: Harper & Row, 1927; repr. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 205-
13. For additional discussion and bibliography, see G. F. Snyder, Ante Pacem: Archaeological
vidence for Church Life before Constantine (Macon, Ga.; Mercer University Press, 1985), 152-
53.
40. On the Church of Theonas, see H. Leclerq, “Alexandrie (Archéologie),” in Dic-
tionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie (ed. F. Cabrol; Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1907),
1:1098-1182, esp. 1110-11; cf. also B. A. Pearson, “Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some
Observations,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring;
Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 132-59, esp. 151-52;
idem, “Alexandria,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N. Freedman et al.; New York:
Doubleday, 1992), 1.152-57; idem, “Alexandria,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology
in the Near East (ed. E. M. Meyers; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 1.65-69; and
pp. 100-113 above.

*
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria 129

the Alexandrian church in the period just prior to Peter’s own

succession to the Alexandrian see.
Does our homily fit this situation? Indeed it does. Our homilist
addresses the issue of wealth in the same manner as Clement be-
fore him and may very well have been acquainted with Clement’s
work. Consider, for example, our homilist’s opening gambit (14):

You will say to me, “God is the one who gave me this wealth.”
Yes, I say to you, God is the one who gives wealth and pov-
erty. But he did not give you wealth in order for you to spend
it wickedly [KAKWC] but benevolently [KaAawc].

And compare Clement:

[Wealth] has been prepared by God for the welfare of men.

You can use it rightly; it ministers to righteousness. But if
one use it wrongly [kax@c], it is found to be a minister of
wrong. We must not therefore put the responsibility on that
which, having in itself neither good nor evil, is not respon-
sible, but on that which has the power of using things either
well [kaA@c] or badly [kaxac] as a result of choice. (Salvation
of the Rich 14; trans. Butterworth in Loeb Classical Library)

Throughout his discourse, our homilist takes great pains to

stress that he does not condemn wealth per se, only the wrong use
of it. He illustrates this point with biblical examples of benevolent
wealthy men, such as Solomon, Job, Abraham, and David (1-2,
18-19, 38-39). He is as uncomfortable with Jesus’ pronouncement
in Matthew 19:29 as Clement is (cf. 51-52 and Salvation of the Rich
21-22).*" He is (almost) as well acquainted with lavish diets as
Clement— and just as disapproving.” The following passage pro-
vides a picturesque example, wherein Abraham reproaches the
tormented Nineve (28): “Remember that you have already sated
your idle soul with the good things of this world: goose, chicken,

41. The “church of God” that needed books for its library (52) (referred to above, p. 119)
may be the one that Theonas built.
42. See Clement’s vivid descriptions of dietary extravagance in Christ the Educator 2.1.
130 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

flesh of pork (and) mutton, every freshwater fish and every fish
of the sea, butter, milk, honey, and every fruit and spiced wine;
and you drank cool, pure and filtered water, until you drank and
were satisfied.” In short, the contents of our homily reflect pre-
cisely what we can know of the socioeconomic situation of the
Alexandrian Christian community at the beginning of the fourth
century. .
Third, what are the grounds for attributing our text to Peter?
This is, of course, more difficult to establish. The most obvious
answer is simply this: The various hagiographic elements that we
identified as later interpolations, including the so-called autobi-
ographic references, were evidently added to a homily that had
been handed down in the Egyptian church as a work of Peter.
These additions served to make explicit the tradition of author-
ship that was only implicit in the received text. To put the question
another way, given the sociohistorical situation of our text, why
not attribute it to the man living in that setting to whom the text
has been traditionally assigned? If not Peter, then who?
How does our homily compare with the genuine works of Peter?
Peter’s oeuvre has not, of course, survived intact. He is best known
for his Canonical Letter, or canons on penance, but we also have
evidence of theological treatises on the nature of Christ and on the
soul, works on the resurrection, paschal and other homilies, and
letters.** Petrine material that especially bears comparison with
our homily are (a) a Greek fragment of a homily™ and (b) various
fragments on the resurrection.”
The homiletic fragment, short as it is, contains exhortations and
warnings of the sort that we find in our homily, including warn-
ings of judgment to come that can be compared to passages in our
text (75 and the peroration): “It is not burdensome for me to speak
concerning the kingdom of heaven and judgment and retribution

43. See Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria, 51-192.

44. J. M. Heer, “Ein neues Fragment der Didaskalie des Martyrbischofs Peter von
Alexandrien,” Oriens christianus 2 (1902): 344-51; Vivian, St. Peter ofAlexandria, 58-59.
45. See Vivian, St. Peter of Alexandria, 132-35 (translations), 100-105 (discussion).

“
 A Coptic Homily On Riches Attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria ia)

in the day of Christ our God, but (it is difficult) for you to receive
the secure oil and unguent of immortality.””°
The Petrine fragments on the resurrection are of two kinds:
fragments preserved in Greek probably giving Peter’s genuine
teaching, and fragments preserved in Syriac that are based on
Peter’s teachings but are, in fact, expansions and corrections of
it. So, whereas Peter interprets Paul’s resurrection doctrines (e.g.,
1 Cor 15) to mean that the dead change their form in the resur-
rection and receive different bodies, the Syriac expansions correct
these interpretations to mean that this body of flesh is the one
that arises in the resurrection.”
Our homily’s extended teaching on the resurrection (76-80,
87-96) contains the same basic doctrine as that espoused in the
deutero-Petrine material found in the Syriac fragments. Thus, the
resurrection material tacked onto the original homily On Riches
consists, in the main, of teachings that derive from the Peter
tradition, that is, as reinterpreted in the course of transmission,
such as we see in the case of the Syriac fragments. The tradition
of Petrine authorship of the core homily provided the occasion
for the addition of this deutero-Petrine resurrection teaching at
the end.
To conclude, there are indeed grounds for attributing our core
homily On Riches to St. Peter of Alexandria. This homily fits very
well the situation in the Alexandrian church during the first three
years of Peter’s episcopacy, that is, 300-303. To be sure, no cer-
tainty can be achieved on this point. But once again: If not Peter,
then who?

46. Ibid., 59 (translation).

47. On these differences, see ibid., 100-105 (discussion).
 Enoch in Egypt

In one of his many articles on Enochic texts and traditions,

George Nickelsburg makes the following comment: “The Chris-
tian preservation and transmission of Enochic texts in Egypt
needs to be studied further.”' This observation provides the oc-
casion for the subject matter of this chapter, which will deal not
only with Enochic texts in Egypt but also with Egyptian Christian
traditions relating to the figure of Enoch. In what follows I want
to take up, first, the various Enochic books that circulated or were
composed in Egypt and the extent of their influence. This will be
followed by some observations on the figure of Enoch represented
in Coptic texts and in Coptic archeology. Some conclusions on the
groups in which the Enochic traditions flourished can then be
drawn.

BOOKS OF ENOCH IN EGYPT

1 ENOCH
First (Ethiopic) Enoch is a composite work made up of five main
sections, usually listed in the chronological order given to them
in contemporary scholarship:*

1. G. W. E. Nickelsburg, “Two Enochic Manuscripts: Unstudied Evidence for Egyptian

Christianity,” in Of Scribes and Scrolls: Studies on the Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism,
and Christian Origins Presented to John Strugnell on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday (ed.
H. W. Attridge et al.; College Theology Society Resources in Religion 5; Lanham, Md.:
University Press of America, 1990), 251-60. The original version of this chapter was an
essay contributed to the Festschrift for George Nickelsburg.
2. See J. C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian
Literature,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity (ed. J. C. VanderKam
and W. Adler; Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3.4; Assen: Van
Gorcum/ Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 33-101; and G. W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, vol. 1:
A Commentary on the Book of Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: For-
tress, 2001), 7-8. Nickelsburg treats as separate sections “The Birth of Noah” (106-7) and
“Another Book of Enoch” (108), which is an appendix to the corpus.

132
“
 Enoch in Egypt 133

1. The Astronomical Book or Book of the Luminaries (72-82;

third century B.C.E.)
The Book of Watchers (1-36; third century B.C.E.)
The Epistle of Enoch (91-108; second century B.C.E.)
The Book of Dreams (83-90; second century B.C.E.)
ol)
Sad The Book of Parables
gente (or Similitudes) (37-71; first century
B.C.E./'C.E.).

What is not known, however, is when and how 1 Enoch achieved

its final shape as reflected in the Ethiopic manuscripts.°
Another question, more directly related to our task here, is this:
Are all five of these sections — and in particular the last section
of the work, the Book of Parables — attested in Egypt? The Book
of Parables was apparently known to the author of the Apocalypse
of Peter, to Origen of Alexandria, and also to the compiler of the
biography of Mani attested in the Cologne Mani Codex (see p. 141
below). And one might expect that the Ethiopic version of 1 Enoch
as a whole was translated from a Greek version obtained from
Egypt.* We have no certain evidence that the Book of Giants, at-
tested at Qumran’ and appropriated by the prophet Mani and his
followers, was known in Egypt.°
There is still another question to which I have found no satis-
factory answer: When and how were the Aramaic Enoch books
translated into Greek? Where this occurred is a matter of sur-
mise: probably in Egypt, presumably in the Jewish community of

3. On the various stages in the literary development of 1 Enoch, see G. W. E. Nickels-

burg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah: A Historical and Literary Introduction
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 150-51; and idem, 1 Enoch, 21-36.
4. On the relationship between the Ethiopic version and the Greek versions, see R. H.
Charles (ed.), The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon,
LOS) R67
5. For the Qumran Aramaic fragments of the Book of Giants, see J. T. Milik, The Books
of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1976), 57-58; 298-339.
The Book of Parables is not attested in the Qumran manuscripts.
6. Milik (ibid., 319) argues that the Book of Giants was known to chronographer
George Syncellus, who presumably got his knowledge of the Enochic writings through
the works of the Alexandrians Panodorus and Annianus (ca. 400 C.E.). The evidence he
cites is ambiguous. The Book of Giants was transmitted eastward rather than westward,
as seen especially in the Middle Persian Manichaean fragments. See Milik, ibid., 298-310.
134 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Alexandria. If 2 Enoch is allowed as evidence (see p. 139 below),

at least some of the material comprising 1 Enoch was extant in
Greek versions in first-century Alexandrian Jewish circles, for, as
Nickelsburg shows,’ 2 Enoch shows clear dependence on 1 Enoch.
Moreover, the parallels cited by Nickelsburg come from four of
the five main sections of 1 Enoch (all except the Parables). The
author of the Wisdom of Solemon, an Alexandrian Jewish work,
may also have known traditions found in the Enoch corpus. In that
case, a Greek version of at least parts of 1 Enoch is attributable to
“a Jewish translator, who worked before the turn of the era.”
The earliest attestation of 1 Enoch in Egypt in Christian sources
is probably in the Epistle of Barnabas, presumably written in Al-
exandria in the early second century or maybe even earlier.’
Barnabas 4.3 refers to the “final scandal,” and this is accompanied
by the phrase “as Enoch says.” While no corresponding passage in
1 Enoch can be identified, the phrase may indicate a general refer-
ence to eschatological sections in 1 Enoch known to the author of
Barnabas.'' Barnabas 16 apparently uses passages from the Epistle
of Enoch, that is, from the Apocalypse of Weeks embedded in that
section, introduced by the phrase “for the Scripture says.””* First
Enoch, or at least parts of it, is counted as Scripture by the author
of Barnabas.
The next attestation of 1 Enoch in Egypt is the Apocalypse of Peter,
for which an Egyptian provenance is highly likely. Its tour of hell
draws on the Book of Watchers, and parallels in Apocalypse of Peter
4 with the Book of Parables suggest a knowledge of 1 Enoch.'®

7. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 185-88.

8. Ibid., 185.
9. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 14, 78-79. Small fragments of the Epistle of Enoch are identi-
fied among the Greek fragments from Qumran Cave 7; see E. Muro, “The Greek Fragments
of Enoch from Qumran Cave 7 (704, 7Q8, & 7Q12 = 7QEn gr = Enoch 103.3-4, 7-8),” Revue
de Qumran 18.70 (1997): 307-12.
10. Second half of the first century according to VanderKam (“1 Enoch,” 36), but
ca. 135-38 according to Nickelsburg (1 Enoch, 87). On the possible relationship between
Barnabas and first-century Judaism in Alexandria, see pp. 90-95 above.
11. See VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 36-38.
12. Ibid., 38-40.
13. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 87.
 Enoch in Egypt 135

Another second-century attestation of 1 Enoch in Alexandria is

Athenagoras’s Embassy for the Christians (176-80), if indeed this
obscure Christian apologist was an Alexandrian."* In Embassy 24
Athenagoras refers to the fallen angels who brought forth the
giants, in language that suggests dependence upon the Book of
Watchers. In the context he discusses the myth as something that
“the prophets have declared.”””
The Book of Watchers is also used by Clement of Alexandria
twice in his Selections from the Prophets (Eklogai), with explicit at-
testation to Enoch, and once in his Miscellanies without attestation.
For Clement, too, Enoch was clearly one of the prophets.'®
First Enoch is used several times by Origen, and with him we
begin to see some evolving changes in the status of the Books of
Enoch. In his early treatise On First Principles he argues for the
noncreated, divine status of the Holy Spirit, and in his discus-
sion he refers to authoritative sources that state that God created
everything; there he cites unspecified statements made “in the
book of Enoch” (1.3.3). Subsequently, in the same treatise, he
quotes 1 Enoch 21.1 and 19.3, introduced respectively by the words
“Enoch speaks thus in his book” and “in the same book, Enoch
himself being the speaker.”’” Later, but presumably still in his
Alexandrian phase, in his Commentary on John, Origen gives the
etymology of Jordan as “going down” (from yrd) and adds that
“Jared was born to Maleleel, as it is written in the Book of Enoch —
if any one cares to accept that book as sacred —in the days when
the sons of God came down to the daughters of men” (6.25; trans.

14. So VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 40. A tenth-century manuscript of the apology reads, “A

Plea Regarding Christians by Athenagoras, the Athenian, a Philosopher and a Christian,”
which leads Cyril Richardson to conclude that Athenagoras was “a Christian philoso-
pher of Athens.” Richardson gives no weight to fourteenth-century Byzantine writer
Nicephorus Callistus’s claim that Athenagoras was the first head of the catechetical
school of Alexandria and teacher of Clement. See C. C. Richardson, Early Christian Fa-
thers (Library of Christian Classics 1; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953; repr. New York:
Macmillan, 1970), 290-91, 297, 300. But see B. Pouderon, D‘Atheénes @ Alexandrie: Etudes sur
Athénagore et les origines de la philosophie chrétienne (BCNH Etudes 4; Quebec: Laval Univer-
sity Press/Louvain: Peeters, 1997), who makes a very good case for Athenagoras’s sojourn
in Alexandria and his role as a teacher there (see p. 51 above).
15. For a good discussion, see VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 40—42, 65-66.
16. For detailed discussion, see ibid., 44—47; Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 90.
17. VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 54-55; Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 90-91.
136 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Allan Menzies in Ante-Nicene Fathers 10.371). Origen’s reference

is to 1 Enoch 37.1, a passage in the Parables. But here Origen is
acknowledging that the canonical status of the Book of Enoch is
questionable. Later, in his Caesarean period, in his twenty-eighth
Homily on Numbers, Origen refers to “booklets called ‘Enoch,’ ”
which “do not appear to be regarded as authoritative among the
Jews.”7® Finally, in his treatise Against Celsus, Origen says that “the
books entitled Enoch are not generally held to be divine by the
churches” (5.54).'° Thus, the final position of Origen on the col-
lection of books of Enoch, which he can also call the book of Enoch,
is that it has no canonical authority in the church.
Anatolius of Alexandria, who became bishop of Laodicea around
168, cites the Book of Enoch as an authority for his calculations
on the correct date of Easter in his lost Paschal Canons, from which
Eusebius provides us witha lengthy quotation (Ecclesiastical History
7.32.14-19).”°
The Apocalypse of Elijah, a Christian writing probably composed
in Upper Egypt in the third century and now extant in two Coptic
versions,”' also attests to the circulation of 1 Enoch in Egypt. The
Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch (85-90) is probably reflected in
Apocalypse of Elijah 5.”
The negative view of 1 Enoch finally adopted by Origen becomes
standard in Alexandrian Catholic Christianity (and elsewhere,
of course) and is stated with presumed finality in Athanasius’s
famous paschal letter of 367. In the context of his discussion
of apocryphal books allegedly used by the heretical Melitians,

18. Quoted in VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 57.

19. Translation by H. Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1965), 306. For discussion see VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 57-59.
20. “The teachings of the Book of Enoch” are cited at the end of the passage (7.32.19).
On Anatolius’s use of 1 Enoch, see Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 92; cf. also the lengthy treatment of
Anatolius in D. T. Runia, Philo in Early Christian Literature: A Survey (Compendia rerum iu-
daicarum ad Novum Testamentum 3.3; Assen: Van Gorcum/ Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993),
231-34.
21. D. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt: The Apocalypse of Elijah and Early Egyptian Chris-
tianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 7; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). Frankfurter
supplies a synoptic translation of the Sahidic and Akhmimic versions (301-28).
22. VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 98. See p. 145 below.

vi
 Enoch in Egypt 137

Athanasius asks rhetorically: “Who has made the simple folk be-
lieve that those books belong to Enoch even though no Scriptures
existed before Moses?”* The so-called finality of the great patri-
arch’s pronouncement was not everywhere recognized, certainly
not by the heretics but also not by the presumably orthodox monks
of Upper Egypt, at least not for a long time.
The myth of the fallen angels (in the Book of Watchers) played a
considerable role in Gnostic and Hermetic traditions in Egypt. The
most notable example is found in Nag Hammadi tractate Apocry-
phon of John (NHC I,1 29,16-30,11), wherein the role of the wicked
Shemihazah and his angels is assumed by the biblical creator and
his archons.™ A similar use of the myth is found in the treatise On
the Origin of the World (NHC IL5 118,17-121,35) and in the Gnos-
tic Pistis Sophia (1.15, 18).” A somewhat different use is made of
it in the Valentinian Exposition (NHC XI,2 38,27-38), wherein the
leading role is played by the devil rather than the demiurge.”°
The Enochic literature played a major role in the development of
Manichaeism. In Egyptian Manichaeism, the myth of the watch-
ers in 1 Enoch is attested in the Kephalaia of the Teacher 38-39: “the
watchers of heaven who came down to the earth” and who “re-
vealed crafts in the world” with destructive results and who were
bound by four angels “with an eternal chain”; their prison “in the
depths of the earth” and their progeny, the giants.”

23. Translation by D. Brakke, Athanasius and the Politics of Asceticism (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1995), 330, quoted and discussed by D. Frankfurter, “The Legacy of Jewish
Apocalypses in Early Christianity: Regional Trajectories,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage
in Early Christianity (ed. J.C. VanderKam and W. Adler; Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad
Novum Testamentum 3.4; Assen: Van Gorcum/ Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 129-200, esp.
170-71.
24. For a detailed discussion, see B. A. Pearson, “1 Enoch in the Apocryphon of John,”
in Texis and Contexts: Biblical Texts in Their Textual and Situational Contexts: Essays in Honor of
Lars Hartman (ed. T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm; Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995),
355-67.
25. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 99.
26. For discussion, see VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 73-76. On the Books of Jeu ascribed in
Pistis Sophia to Enoch, see p. 140 below.
27. See the translation by I. Gardner, The Kephalaia of the Teacher: The Edited Coptic Mani-
chaean Texts in Translation with Commentary (NHMS 37; Leiden: Brill, 1995). On the alleged
Apocalypse of Enoch, see p. 141 below.
138 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Enochic literature may also have been known to some of the

authors of the various treatises that circulated in Egypt under the
name Hermes Trismegistus. Alchemist Zosimus of Panopolis, in
one of his treatises addressed to Theosebeia, mentions the myth
of the fallen angels and attributes this to Hermes; but the ulti-
mate source is probably 1 Enoch.** The Hermetic treatise Asclepius
21-29 refers to angels mingling with humans, which may reflect
knowledge of the same myth*The passage in question is included
in the Coptic fragment preserved in Nag Hammadi Codex VI8
(73,3-12).”
The manuscript evidence of 1 Enoch in Egypt shows that
fragments of two different manuscripts, probably of the fourth
century, were found at Oxyrhynchus (P. Oxy. 2069): three frag-
ments of the Book of Dreams and two of the Astronomical Book
in the Epistle of Enoch.” The manuscripts in question could have
come from elsewhere (Alexandria?). However that may be, they
undoubtedly served the purposes of the Christian community
at Oxyrhynchus, where so many Christian (including biblical)
manuscripts were found.
Two other manuscripts of the Greek version of 1 Enoch found in
Egypt probably reflect a monastic provenience.*' Cairo 10759, part
of a parchment codex (fifth—-sixth century) found a century ago
in a Christian grave at Akhmim (ancient Panopolis), contains a
substantial portion of the Book of Watchers. The burial in which
this manuscript was found was probably that of a monk.” And
P. Chester Beatty 12 (fourth century) contains a substantial portion

28. For discussion, see VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 83-84. For a possible use of 2 Enoch by
Zosimus, see p. 140 below.
29. See J.-P. Mahé, Hermes en Haute-Egypte 2 (BCNH Textes 7; Quebec: Laval Uni-
versity Press, 1982), 83, 88-89, 239. For an English translation of the Hermetica, see
B. P. Copenhaver, Hermetica: The Greek Corpus Hermeticum and the Latin Asclepius in a New
English Translation with Notes and Introduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1992),
82, 242.
_ 30. J. T. Milik, “Fragments grecs du livre d’Hénoch (P. Oxy. XVII 2069),” Chronique
d’Egypte 46 (1971): 321-43; idem, Books of Enoch, 75-76; Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 13. Cf. also
Frankfurter, “Legacy of Jewish Apocalypses,” 189.
31. Nickelsburg, “Two Enochic Manuscripts.”
32. So Frankfurter, “Legacy of Jewish Apocalypses,” 188.

%
 Enoch in Egypt 139

of the Epistle of Enoch. The monastic provenience of the Chester

Beatty codex is probable.*
First Enoch, or at least parts of it, circulated in Upper Egypt in
Coptic, as seen from a fragment discovered in a cemetery near
Antinoopolis. It comes from a parchment codex of the fifth or
sixth century and contains parts of 1 Enoch 93 (i.e., part of the
Apocalypse of Weeks).** How much more of 1 Enoch was preserved
in that manuscript cannot be known,” but we can surmise that the
codex came originally from one of the nearby Coptic monasteries.
Thus we see that 1 Enoch circulated widely in Egypt, first in
Alexandria and then in the chora. After the fourth century its
circulation seems to have been confined largely to the Coptic
monasteries.

2 ENOCH

Second (Slavonic) Enoch was probably composed in Egypt, though

its attestation there is much slighter than that of 1 Enoch. Prob-
ably composed in Greek in the Jewish community of first-century
Alexandria,*° 2 Enoch evidently achieved only a limited circu-
lation among Christians in Egypt. It may have been known to
Origen,” but otherwise its circulation seems to have been lim-
ited mainly to Gnostic and Hermetic circles. Madeleine Scopello
makes a very good case for the use of 2 Enoch by the author of the
Gnostic apocalypse Zostrianos (NHC VIL1). Specifically, she ar-
gues that passages at the beginning (5,15-17) and end (128,15-18)

33. A. Pietersma, “Chester Beatty Papyri,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. D. N.
Freedman et al.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 1.901-3.
34. S. Donadoni, “Un frammento della versione copta del ‘Libro di Enoch,’ Acta
orientalia 25 (1960): 197-202.
35. Donadoni (ibid., 202) surmises that it contained only the Epistle of Enoch and cites
the subscript title of the Beatty papyrus in support: ‘ExiotoAn ‘Evoy.
36. See Slavonic version introduction and translation by F. I. Andersen in OTP 1.91-
213, esp. 94-97. Milik’s view that 2 Enoch was written by a Byzantine monk in the ninth
or tenth century (Books of Enoch, 107-16) has not gained wide acceptance.
37. Influence from 2 Enoch 21-22 is detected in the Homily on Numbers. See Vander-
Kam, “1 Enoch,” 58, who cites H. J. Lawlor, “Early Citations from the Book of Enoch,”
Journal of Philology 25 (1897): 164-225, esp. 203.
140 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

of Zostrianos are dependent respectively upon 2 Enoch 22.10 [J]

and 24.3 [J].°* And I argue elsewhere for the probable influence
of 2 Enoch on the author of the Hermetic Poimandrés (Corpus Her-
meticum 1).°° Finally, Zosimus of Panopolis’s reference to the first
man Adam as constructed of four elements — East (GvatoAn),
West (Svotc), North (dpxtoc), and South (uecnpiBpia) — may be
dependent upon 2 Enoch 30 (].

OTHER ENOCHIC BOOKS

Other books attributed to Enoch in texts and traditions are at

home in Egypt. In the Gnostic Pistis Sophia 2.99, Jesus tells Maria of
“mysteries” that are written “in the two Books of Jeu which Enoch
has written as I spoke with him out of the Tree of Knowledge and
out of the Tree of Life in the paradise of Adam.” A similar refer-
ence to Books of Jeu, written by Enoch in paradise and deposited
on Mount Ararat, occurs in 3.134.*" Books of Jeu do, indeed, exist in
Coptic’ and were probably known to the authors of Pistis Sophia
(Askew Codex), but unfortunately the extant portions of the Books
of Jeu reveal no explicit connection with Enoch.”

38. M. Scopello, “The Apocalypse of Zostrianos (Nag Hammadi VIII,1) and The Book
of the Secrets of Enoch,” Vigiliae christianae 34 (1980): 376-85. See also B. A. Pearson, “From
Jewish Apocalypticism to Gnosis,” in The Nag Hammadi Texts in the History of Religions: Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference at the Royal Academy of Sciences and Letters in Copenhagen,
September 19-24, 1995 (ed. S. Giversen, T. Petersen, and J. P. Sorensen; Historisk-filosofiske
Skrifter 26; Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, 2002), 146-63,
esp. 152-53.
39. B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity
and Christianity 5; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 136-47, esp. 138-39.
40. For the text, see W. Scott, Hermetica: The Ancient Greek and Latin Writings Which
Contain Religious or Philosophic Teachings Ascribed to Hermes Trismegistus, vol. 4: Testimonia
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1936; repr. London: Dawsons of Pall Mall, 1968), 106-7. The same
tradition relating to Adam is found in the Sibylline Oracles 3.26. On the Coptic Enoch
apocryphon, which may reflect influence from 2 Enoch, see pp. 141 and 153-97 below.
41. For the text and translation, see C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, Pistis Sophia (NHS
9; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 247, 349. For discussion, see VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 74-76.
42. See C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, The Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce
Codex (NHS 13; Leiden: Brill, 1978).
43. Could it be that the author of books 1-3 of Pistis Sophia was familiar with a tradition
according to which Enoch was identified as Jeu, the “true God” of the Books of Jeu (1 Jeu 5
and throughout)? Enoch came to be identified as Metatron, “Little Yahweh,” in 3 (Hebrew)
Enoch 3-12. The name Jeu (Coptic feov) is clearly a variant of YHWH.

a
 Enoch in Egypt sel

An Apocalypse of Enoch is referred to in the Cologne Mani

Codex, a late-fourth- or early-fifth-century miniature parchment
codex discovered somewhere in Upper Egypt.” Presumably trans-
lated into Greek in Egypt from an original East Aramaic version
sometime in the mid-fourth century,” it contains alleged quota-
tions from apocalypses attributed to Adam, Sethel, Enosh, Shem,
and Enoch, biblical precursors of the prophet Mani. These apoc-
alypses are thoroughly studied by John Reeves, who considers
them to be Manichaean creations based on available Jewish and
Christian lore associated with the respective patriarchs. The sup-
posed Apocalypse of Enoch clearly demonstrates dependence
upon 1 Enoch (as well as other sources), including the Book of
Parables.*°
There does exist, in fragmentary form, one Enoch apocryphon
that was clearly composed in Egypt, probably in a monastic set-
ting. I have edited, translated, and commented on this apocryphon
(see pp. 153-97 below). The extant material, now preserved in
the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York (C3),” consists of frag-
ments of nine folios from a papyrus codex inscribed in Sahidic
Coptic. The surviving material features revelations received by
Enoch pertaining to his future role as scribe of righteousness
in the judgment of humankind. In one passage, Enoch’s sister
Sibyl* counsels him not to write down people’s sins too hastily
(see p. 161 below). I assign the composition of this apocryphon,
whether written originally in Coptic or in Greek, to the fifth or
sixth century.

44. See the critical edition by L. Koenen and C. Rémer, Der K6lner Mani-Kodex: Uber das
Werden seines Leibes (Papyrologica Coloniensia 14; Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1988).
For an English translation of pp. 1-99, see R. Cameron and A. Dewey, The Cologne Mani
Codex: “Concerning the Origin of His Body” (Society of Biblical Literature Texts and Trans-
lations 15: Early Christian Literature Series 3; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979). The
material after p. 99 (i.e., pp. 100-192) is fragmentary.
45. Koenen and Romer, Der Kélner Mani-Kodex, xv.
46. J.C. Reeves, Heralds of That Good Realm: Syro-Mesopotamian Gnosis and Jewish Traditions
(NHMS 49; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 183-206.
47. See L. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (Corpus
of Illuminated Manuscripts 4—5; Louvain: Peeters, 1993), no. 97.
48. That the (pagan) Sibyl was sister of Enoch is unique to the Coptic tradition. See
pp. 163-64 below. In Jewish tradition Sibyl was a daughter (or daughter-in-law) of Noah.
See J. J. Collins in OTP 1.322.
142 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

In an earlier publication® I refer to fragments from a parchment

codex of another Enoch apocryphon found at Aswan, preserved
in Cairo (manuscript 48085) and edited by Henri Munier.*° These
fragments, together with the Pierpont Morgan fragments, are
briefly discussed by J. T. Milik, and he expresses the view, which I
share, that the two sets of fragments are probably not of the same
work.®! Milik comments that, except for fragment 3 recto, the rest
of the material “seems rather to belong to a homily.” This in-
sight turns out to be correct, for I can now identify the homily
in question. Study of the fragments convinces me that they come
from the Encomium on the Four Bodiless Living Creatures attributed
to St. John Chrysostom™ and extant in Sahidic Coptic in a ninth-
century parchment codex now in the Pierpont Morgan Library
(M 612).°** While there are some divergences between the frag-
ments and the homily, much of the material in the fragments can
be restored on the basis of the text of the homily (i.e., 25-27), and
I have published a new edition reflecting this fact. In this mate-
rial Enoch, scribe of righteousness, is associated with the creature
with the human face (Rev 4:7). Thus, at least two, slightly differ-
ent versions of the Encomium existed: one found in the Monastery
of St. Michael near Hamouli in the Fayum (M 612) and one from
a monastery near Aswan (Cairo 48085).

49. B. A. Pearson, “The Pierpont Morgan Fragments of a Coptic Enoch Apocryphon,”

in Studies on the Testament of Abraham (ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Society of Biblical Literature
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976), 227-83.
50. H. Munier, “Mélanges de littérature copte, III: Manuscrits coptes sa’idiques
d’Assouan” Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Egypte 23 (1923): 210-28, esp. 212-18 (3:
“livre d’Enoch[?]”). Munier (210 n. 1) expresses the view that the fragments in question
came from the Monastery of Saint Simeon near Aswan. No date for the fragments is given.
51. Milik, Books of Enoch, 100-104.
52. Ibid., 104. Milik and I worked independently of each other at approximately the
same time.
53. L. Depuydt (ed.), Homiletica from the Pierpont Morgan Library (CSCO 524: Scriptores
Coptici 43 [Coptic text] and CSCO 525: Scriptores Coptici 44 [English translations]; Lou-
vain: Peeters, 1991), where the Encomium is edited (CSCO 524.27—-46) and translated (CSCO
525.27-47) by C. S. Wansink.
54. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts, 185-87 (no. 96). Part of this manuscript is
now in Berlin.
55. The fragments come from a single codex folio. See B. A. Pearson, “The Munier
Enoch Fragments, Revisited,” in For the Children: Perfect Instruction: Studies in Honor of
Hans-Martin Schenke on the Occasion of the Berliner Arbeitskreis
fiirkoptisch-gnostische Schriften’s
Thirtieth Year (ed. H.-G. Bethge et al.; NHMS 54; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 375-83.
 Enoch in Egypt 143

THE FIGURE OF ENOCH IN COPTIC TRADITION

Of the antediluvian patriarch Enoch, seventh from Adam, the
Scripture says simply: “Enoch walked with God; and he was not,
for God took him” (Gen 5:24). So complete was his disappearance
that Enoch is never again mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, but
he had a fabulous career outside the Bible, as the various books
of Enoch and other traditions inform us. Beginning as a son of
Adam, he eventually became a “second God.”” To be sure, his vir-
tual deification as Metatron is mainly confined to Jewish sources,
notably 3 Enoch (see also the Jerusalem Targum to Gen 5:24). That
this tradition would not appeal to Christians” is understandable
enough, since for Christians it is Jesus who began as a “son of
Adam” and eventually became not only a “second God” but the
second person of the Holy Trinity.”
Some years ago William Adler prepared a short paper for the
Pseudepigrapha Seminar of the Society of Biblical Literature en-
titled “Enoch in Early Christian Literature.” In that paper he
identifies eight functions or characteristics of Enoch found in early
Christian texts:”
1. Enoch’s translation (Heb 11:5; 1 Clement 9; Justin, Dialogue with
Trypho 19; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.5; Ascension of Isaiah 9.9;
Tertullian, Resurrection of the Flesh 58; idem, On the Soul 50;
Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 7.7; Gospel of Nicodemus 9
[25]; Pseudo-Clement, Recognitions 4.12; Augustine, City of God
15,19)

56. See P.S. Alexander, “From Son of Adam to Second God: Transformations of the Bib-
lical Enoch,” in Biblical Figures outside the Bible (ed. M. E. Stone and T. S. Bergren; Harrisburg,
Pa.: Trinity, 1998), 87-122.
57. But see n. 43 above. There may be a hint of this tradition in one of the fragments
of the Pierpont Morgan apocryphon; see pp. 161-62 below.
58. Ido not doubt that early Christian development of Christology, perhaps beginning
with the Apostle Paul (Phil 2:9), took place under the influence of, or at least in tandem
with, Jewish traditions relating to the exaltation of Enoch. Alexander (“From Son of Adam
to Second God,” 114) refers more guardedly to “dialectic between the two traditions.” See
B. A. Pearson, “Enoch and Jesus: Parallel Paths to Heaven,” Bible Review 19 (April 2003):
24-31, 50.
59. W. Adler, “Enoch in Early Christian Literature,” in Society of Biblical Literature Sem-
inar Papers (ed. P. J. Achtemeier; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1978), 1.271-75, esp.
273-75.
144 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

2. Enoch’s repentance (Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 2.15)

3. Enoch’s uncircumcision (Justin, Dialogue with Trypho 19.92;
Aphrahat, Demonstrations Td.)
4. Enoch as priest (Apostolic Constitutions 8.5.3)
5. Enoch as discoverer of astrology (Eusebius, Preparation for the
Gospel 9.18)
6. Enoch as scribe of righteousness (Apocalypse of Paul 20; Gospel of
Bartholomew 17; Pseudo-Titus Epistle 2.153; Testament of Abraham
[short recension] 11.
7. Enoch as opponent of antichrist (Gospel of Nicodemus 9 [25];
Apocalypse of Elijah; Tertullian, On the Soul 50; Apocalypse of Peter
[Ethiopic] 2: Hippolytus, The Antichrist 43; History of Joseph the
Carpenter 31-32.
8. Significance of the name Enoch (“grace of God,” Eusebius,
Preparation for the Gospel 7.8; Enoch = dedicatio, Augustine, City
of God 15.19).

This list shows that Christian interpretations of Enoch varied

widely. Some (nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 8) were dependent upon already-
existing Jewish Enoch literature and traditions; some (nos. 3, 4, 7)
were developed de novo. Two of these (nos. 6, 7) become especially
prominent in Egyptian Christian literature and traditions, and it
is on these that I wish to focus.

ENOCH AS OPPONENT OF ANTICHRIST

The tradition of Enoch as the opponent of the antichrist is de-
veloped on the basis of an interpretation of the two end-time
witnesses in the Book of Revelation 11. While the most plausible
interpretation of Revelation 11 is that the two witnesses are Moses
and Elijah, Enoch soon supplants Moses in early Christian inter-
pretation of this passage.°' The earliest attestation of this tradition
60. For an extensive discussion of this tradition, see R. Bauckham, “The Martyrdom
of Enoch and Elijah: Jewish or Christian?” Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976): 447-58.
Bauckham (447-49) provides a table featuring twenty-four texts that attest to the tradition.
61. See VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 89-92. According to Bauckham (“Martyrdom,” 452)
this happens under the influence of “an independent tradition of the return of Enoch and
 Enoch in Egypt 145

is found in the Apocalypse of Peter, probably composed in Egypt in

the early second century. In the Ethiopic version 2, Christ predicts
the coming of the antichrist, when there will be many martyrs:
“Enoch and Elijah will be sent to instruct them that this is the de-
ceiver who must come into the world and do signs and wonders
in order to deceive. And therefore shall they that are slain by his
hand be martyrs and shall be reckoned among the good and righ-
teous martyrs who have pleased God in their life” (trans. C. D. G.
Miller in NTApoc 2.626, slightly modified). To be sure, it is not
explicitly stated here that Enoch and Elijah will be martyred; that
is made more explicit in a later (“Clementine”) Ethiopic version
of the Apocalypse of Peter.®
The tradition is much elaborated in the Apocalypse of Elijah.’ The
appearance of the antichrist (“the Shameless One”; 3) is followed
by a prophecy concerning a virgin named Tabitha, who will re-
prove the Shameless One, suffer martyrdom at his hands, and then
rise again from the dead (4.1-6).™ This episode is followed by the
return of Elijah and Enoch who, upon reproving the Shameless
One, will be killed by him. They will spend three-and-a-half days
in the marketplace and then rise from the dead to give further
reproof (4.7-15; cf. Rev 11:7-13). After a lengthy treatment of the
martyrdoms that will take place at that time and the rewards that
the martyrs will receive, the text prophesies a time of tribulation,
a final battle, and a judgment. Elijah and Enoch will come down
again to kill the Lawless One (5.32-35), and Christ will descend to
reign on earth for a thousand years (5.36-39). The influence of the
Book of Revelation on the Apocalypse of Elijah is clear; in addition,
there is very probable influence from the Animal Apocalypse of
1 Enoch (85-90, part of the Book of Dreams).°

Elijah in the light of which Revelation 11 was interpreted.” For a possible source, see 1 Enoch
90.31; cf. VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 99. Cf. also 4 Ezra 6.26.
62. Bauckham, “Martyrdom,” 455-56.
63. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt.
64. On Tabitha, see D. Frankfurter, “Tabitha in the Apocalypse of Elijah,” Journal of
Theological Studies 40 (1990): 13-25; and pp. 165-67 below.
65. VanderKam, “1 Enoch,” 98.
t46 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

The Apocalypse of Elijah apparently gained considerable circula-

tion in Egypt, for its influence is seen in a number of later texts.°°
The Coptic versions of the History of Joseph the Carpenter have Christ
prophesy the death of Enoch and Elijah at the hands of the an-
tichrist (81-32). The influence of the Apocalypse of Elijah is clearer
in the Arabic version, where Tabitha is added, together with an-
other woman, Sibyl.” Sibyl, gister of Enoch, is absent from the
Apocalypse of Elijah, but she is featured in the Pierpont Morgan
apocryphon. In one fragment (p. 14 folio 9v) she tells Enoch of
two other people who will be taken up to heaven in their bodies,
Elijah and Tabitha. Reflected here, no doubt, is the antichrist tra-
dition in the Apocalypse of Elijah. While the end-time testimony of
Enoch and Elijah is not found in the extant portions of the Cop-
tic apocryphon, I do not doubt that it was present originally in
material that is now lost.

ENOCH AS SCRIBE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS

In his role as scribe of righteousness, Enoch gains the most cur-

rency in Coptic tradition: in literary sources, in nonliterary texts
(inscriptions), and in monastery wall paintings. Specifically, the
purpose of Enoch’s scribal activity is to record the deeds of
humankind in connection with the judgment and eventually to
serve as a witness before the bar. The origins of this conception of
Enoch’s role as scribe lie in the earliest Jewish Enochic literature:
He is identified as scribe of righteousness in 1 Enoch 12.4. This role
is made more specific in 2 Enoch 53.2 [J], where he is said to be
writing down the deeds of everyone. The specific association of
Enoch with the judgment probably occurred in the original Jewish
version of the Testament of Abraham, recension B.10-11, presumably
composed in Greek in Alexandria in the late first century.®

oo. In addition to those cited here, see the Tiburtine Sibylline Oracle and p. 164 below;
see also the Apouslypse of Psewdo-Shenowte and Bauckham, “Martyrdom,” 456.
67. See F Robinson, Coptic Apocrypha! Gospels (Texts and Studies 4.2; Cambridge:
Cambriige University Press, 1896), 146-47, 229. See p. 164, n. 46 below.
6& See introduction and translation by E. P. Sanders in OTP 1.871-902.
 Enoch in Egypt 147

In the Pierpont Morgan apocryphon (fifth-sixth century), the

Coptic tradition is fully elaborated. Unfortunately this apocry-
phon is far from complete, but various details are seen in the
extant fragments: Enoch records the sins and good deeds of
humankind (p. 15 folio 1r; p. 18 folio 7v). Enoch is urged not
to write down sins too hastily; he can even erase them (p. 17
folio 7r). The judgment involves the use of “balances of righteous-
ness” (p. 16 folio 1v) on which are weighed sins and good deeds
(p. 18 folio 7v).©
The influence of the Coptic Enoch apocryphon, or at least of
the traditions concerning Enoch found in it, are considerable in
later Coptic literature: martyrological,” homiletic,” and magical
(see pp. 168-69 below). One of the most interesting examples
of the elaboration of these traditions is found in the aforemen-
tioned Encomium on the Four Bodiless Living Creatures, attributed
(pseudonymously) to John Chrysostom.” The occasion for the en-
comium is the celebration of the feast day of the Living Creatures,
Athor 8 (still observed in the Coptic church today). On the occa-
sion of a eucharistic celebration, various prominent biblical figures
are asked why they rejoice today. When Enoch is asked he replies:

I rejoice today since God transformed me and gave me the

penholder of salvation and the tomes which were in the hand
of the angel Mefriel, scribe of old. I copied them in six days
and six nights according to the eons of light. After that the
Lord issued a command to a cherub, one of the four creatures.
After he had taken me to the land of my relatives, I gave
orders to my children and my relatives and was taken up

69. Use of a scale in the judgment is also found in Testament of Abraham recension A.13.
It is also reflected in the older Enochic literature; see 1 Enoch 61.8; 2 Enoch 52.15.
70. Martyrdom of Apa Anub, in I. Balestri and H. Hyvernat (eds.), Acta Martyrum (CSCO
43; Paris: Poussielgue, 1907), 236.
71. Encomium of Theodosius on Saint Michael the Archangel, in E. A. W. Budge, Miscellaneous
Coptic Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt (London: British Museum, 1915), 345-46 (text), 909
(translation); cited by Milik, Books of Enoch, 105.
72. Depuydt, Homiletica from the Pierpont Morgan Library (CSCO 524.27-46; 525.27-47).
This homily was composed in Coptic no earlier than the mid-sixth century. See T. Or-
landi, “John Chrysostom, Saint,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia (ed. Aziz S. Atiya; New York:
Macmillan, 1991), 1357-59, esp. 1358.
148 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

to heaven again. God established me before the throne of the

cherub, namely the human-faced one. Because of this I rejoice
today. (Encomium 11; trans. Wansink in CSCO 525.30-31)

This passage represents a revision of older traditions relating to

Enoch as scribe and his ascent to heaven (see, e.g., 1 Enoch 81.5-6;
2 Enoch 22-23; 67.1-2). Lateryon in the text, Christ delivers to his
apostles, gathered on the Mount of Olives, a revelation concerning
the mystery of the four living creatures. At one point the Savior
explains that the four creatures play a role in assuaging the wrath
of God against the sins of humankind (Encomium 25-26):

Because of this my Father has assigned Enoch, the scribe of

righteousness, to the creature with the human face. When-
ever a human being sins..., one of the creatures, the human-
faced one, cries out and urges Enoch the scribe of righteous-
ness, “Do not hurry to write down the sins of the children of
humankind, but be patient a little and I will call the archangel
Michael and he will implore the Father of mercy together
with me. Restrain yourself a little and I will call Gabriel and
he will implore the Father of all good people together with
me....O Enoch, because of this I have been established near
you, since my likeness and yours are one, so that I might re-
mind you. For I am bodiless, but you are of flesh and earth.
Indeed, God who loves humankind, has made plans in this
way. After he removed Mefriel the angel, who was scribe
from the beginning, because he is bodiless, he established
you in his place, having given you the spiritual penholder so
that you might take into account the weakness of people of
flesh and blood.” (27)”

This passage reveals some influence from the Coptic Enoch apoc-
ryphon, particularly in the exhortation to Enoch to be lenient

73. Parts of this passage are found in Cairo manuscript 48085.

 Enoch in Egypt 149

in his work of recording human sins. Enoch’s bodiless predeces-

sor, Mefriel,” is not attested elsewhere in Coptic literature, to my
knowledge.”
In his role as scribe of righteousness, Enoch became a pa-
tron saint of the monks in the Monastery of Apa Jeremias in
Saqqara. The excavations conducted at the site from 1906 to
1910 determined that the monastery was founded toward the
end of the fifth century and was finally destroyed in the ninth
century.’° The excavations turned up three wall paintings rep-
resenting Enoch” and numerous inscriptions invoking him and
other saints.
In a niche in chapel D, Enoch is represented in a painting above
the altar, at far right, with a scroll in his hand. The other figures in
the painting are the Madonna, the two archangels (Michael and
Gabriel), and Apa Jeremias, the monastery’s founder, at the far
left.”* In a niche in cell 1725, Enoch and Apa Jeremias are repre-
sented in the sides, with the Madonna and child as the central
figure. Above the Madonna are the two archangels, and at the top
of the apse the heads of the virtues are represented. In a painting
in the oratory of cell 1727, the same figures appear, with Enoch at
the right. He is carrying a scroll labeled in Coptic “The Book of
Life.””” Enoch’s role as a patron saint, coupled with the monastery’s
founder, Apa Jeremias, is made clear in these pictures.

74. Cf. Vrevoil/Vereveil in 2 Enoch 22.10.

75. His name is not found in the “Katalog der Engelnamen” by J. Michl in Reallexikon
fiir Antike und Christentum (ed. T. Klauser; Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1950-), 5.200-239; nor is
it found in the index of angel names in C. D. G. Miller, Die Engellehre der koptischen Kirche
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1959).
76. J. E. Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara (Cairo: Institut Francais d’Archéologie Orientale
du Caire, 1906-10), vols. 2-4. The final statement on the dates of the monastery appears in
4i.
77. Another painting was found in 1899 at Tebtunis in the Fayum. In this one Enoch
is part of a judgment scene involving the punishment of sinners. He is represented as
seated, with an open scroll in his left hand in which is inscribed in Coptic, “Enoch the
scribe writing down the sins of mankind.” In his right hand he holds a reed pen. See C. C.
Walters, “Christian Paintings from Tebtunis,” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 75 (1989):
191-208, esp. 200-202 and plates 25-29.
78. Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara, 2.67, plate 59.
79. Ibid., 3.23, plates 22, 24.
150 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Numerous Coptic inscriptions found in the monastery, mostly

grave stelae and painted graffiti, testify to the same thing.”
Indeed, one can speak of a Saqqara triad of saints who appear
repeatedly in invocations in the inscriptions: Apa Jeremias, Apa
Enoch, and Ama (Mother) Sibylla (the Sibyl) (see n. 48 above). The
same triad appears less frequently in the Monastery of Apollo at
Bawit, which seems to have been closely related to Apa Jeremias at
Saqqara.*' The invocations of the Saqqara triad typically include
Father, Son, Holy Spirit, St. Mary, St. Michael, St. Gabriel, Apa
Jeremias, Apa Enoch, Ama Sibylla, and other saints; indeed, many
of them begin with Jeremias and Enoch.* These invocations prob-
ably had a liturgical origin as litanies, perhaps used in connection
with services for the dead or other memorial services, for example,
feast days of saints, observed at Saqqara.** The monks at Saqqara
even devised feast days for Enoch himself, as attested in an ink
inscription on the wall of a room at Saqqara: Enoch’s birthday
was observed on Athor 11 (= November 20), and his translation
probably on Epep 20 (= July 27).*
The remarkable status achieved by Enoch at Saqqara is, unfor-
tunately, not attested in literary sources. For example, no liturgical
book includes litanies featuring the Saqqara triad. And evidence
in Coptic sources for the observance of feast days in honor of

80. The inscriptions, some four hundred of them, were edited by Herbert Thompson
and published in Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara, vols. 3-4. The dated ones range from 695
to 849 C.£. (see Thompson's introduction in ibid., 4.47).
81. The Bawit triad, which also occurs in a few inscriptions at Saqqara, features Apollo,
Phip, and Anoup. Cf. Thompson's discussion in Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara, 4.48. In
addition to his appearance at Bawit, Enoch is coupled with Apa Jeremias at Esna and Wadi
Sarga; so C. Wietheger, Das Jeremias-Kloster zu Saqqara unter besonderer Beriicksichtigung der
Inschriften (Arbeiten zum spatantiken und koptischen Agypten 1; Altenberge: Oros, 1992),
213 n. 15, 225, and references cited.
82. See Wietheger’s discussion in Jeremias-Kloster, 210-19.
83. Ibid. Wietheger cites the work of U. Benigni, “Litaniae defunctorum Copticae,”
Bessarione 6 (1899): 106-21; and C. M. Kaufmann, Handbuch der altchristlichen Epigraphik
(Freiburg im Bresgau: Herder, 1917), 149-52.
84. Quibell, Excavations at Saqgara, 3.54—-55 (no. 91). The same inscription provides the
dates of Apa Jeremias’s birth, tonsure, ordination, and death. See Thompson’s discussion in
Quibell, Excavations at Saqgara, 4.47-48. For a convenient exposition of the Coptic calendar,
with dates given in their Julian and Gregorian equivalents, see O. F. A. Meinardus, Christian
Egupt, Ancient and Modern (Cairo: American University in Cairo, 1977), 72-130. Enoch does
not appear in the various editions of the Synaxary cited by Meinardus. See next note.
 Enoch in Egypt 151

Enoch is very meager at best.*° Such honors accorded to our bibli-

cal patriarch ceased with the destruction of the Monastery of Apa
Jeremias in the ninth century.

CONCLUSION
The books associated with Enoch circulated widely in Egypt. First
Enoch may have achieved its current fivefold form in Egypt in a
Greek version and continued to be used in many of Egypt’s mon-
asteries, both in Greek and in Coptic, long after it was proscribed
by St. Athanasius in his famous paschal letter of 367. At least
two books of Enoch (2 Enoch and the Coptic Enoch apocryphon)
were composed in Egypt, the former in the Jewish community
of first-century Alexandria, and the latter in a Coptic monastery
somewhere in Upper Egypt. The eschatological roles of the biblical
patriarch as opponent of the antichrist and as scribe of righteous-
ness in the judgment came to be featured in a number of works
circulating in Coptic in Egypt’s monasteries. And in one impor-
tant monastery, that of Apa Jeremias at Saqqara in the shadow
of Egypt’s oldest pyramid (Djoser’s Step Pyramid), the ancient
patriarch was honored as a patron saint.
Curiously enough, from the ninth or tenth century on, all of
that changes in Egypt. Enoch’s books begin to disappear, and his
memory fades virtually into oblivion in the lives of Egypt’s faith-
ful. In contrast to the situation in the church of Ethiopia, where

85. Thompson (Quibell, Excavations at Saqqara, 4.48) cites calendars printed by J. E.

Selden, De synedriis (Amsterdam: Henricus & Theodorus Boom, 1679), 3.219, 224, for the
feast of Enoch’s translation on Epiphi (Epep) 28 or 25. In the edition of Selden’s work that I
obtained, De synedriis et praefecturis juridicis veterum ebraeorum (London: Jacob Flesher, 1655),
3.407, Abib (= Epep) 25 is given as the day of the ascension of Enoch into heaven. Selden
relied on a Muslim informant, who got his information from an unnamed Christian (347).
Wietheger (Jeremias-Kloster, 225) cites Benigni, “Litaniae defunctorum Copticae,” 119, for
Tobe 27 as the feast day of Enoch. Benigni is relying on Nicolaus Nilles, Kalendarium manuale
utriusque ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis (2d ed.; Oeniponte: Rauch, 1897; repr. Farnborough:
Gregg, 1971), 2.714, where a “commemoration of Henoch the righteous” is included among
those of Tobi 27. The calendar given by Nilles is that of the Copts in union with the Roman
Catholic Church. Enoch’s name is absent from the Egyptian Synaxary, extant in Arabic. See
J. Forget, Synaxarium Alexandrinum (CSCO 47-49, 78, 67, 90; Louvain: Catholic University
Press, 1905-26). On the other editions, see Meinardus, Christian Egypt, 74-75.
152 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

1 Enoch is still virtually part of that church’s Old Testament and

where the patriarch’s feast day is still observed,” there is no trace
of Enoch in Coptic piety.
What happened? It could be that use of the books of Enoch
and cultivation of Enoch as a saint was confined mostly to those
ancient monasteries in Egypt that did not survive into the present,
monasteries such as that of Apa Jeremias at Saqqara and many
others, destroyed in the ninth and tenth centuries. Why Enoch
plays no role at all in monasteries such as those of the Wadi Natrun
or of Antony and Paul in the Eastern Desert near the Red Sea,*®
I do not know. Perhaps, finally, the Bible’s terse comment is true:
“He was no more, because God took him.”

86. On 1 Enoch and the early Ethiopian church, see Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch, 106-8.
87. The day of Enoch’s ascension is Hamle (= Coptic Epep) 24 in the Ethiopic calendar.
See I. Guidi, Le Synaxaire Ethiopien, vol. 2: Mois de Hamlé (Patrologia orientalis 7.3; Paris:
Firmin-Didot, 1911), 403. Cf. Thompson, in Quibell, Excavations at Saqgara, 4.48. In a version
of the Ethiopian Synaxary published by Budge, another date is given: Ter (= Coptic Tobe)
27; see E. A. W. Budge, The Book ofthe Saints of the Ethiopian Church (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1928), 2.555-57. No note of Enoch is taken in the various versions of the
Egyptian Synaxary.
88. For a good treatment of existing monasteries in Egypt, see O. Meinardus, Monks
and Monasteries of the Egyptian Deserts (Cairo: American University at Cairo Press, 1961).

“
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon

THE FRAGMENTS
The fragments of a Coptic Enoch apocryphon presented here in
transcription and translation were first published by W. E. Crum
in 1913." They were part of a collection of papyrus fragments,
written in Sahidic Coptic, acquired sometime in 1905-6 by Lord
Amherst from a dealer in Luxor, who indicated that they had
come from Hou (ancient Diospolis Minor) near the modern city of
Nag Hammadi. They were subsequently purchased by J. Pierpont
Morgan and are now preserved in glass in the Pierpont Morgan Li-
brary in New York.* The fragments published here are catalogued
as “Pierpont Morgan Library. Coptic Theological Texts 3, folios
1-9,” and constitute no. 97 in the published catalogue of Morgan
manuscripts.”
These fragments, consisting of parts of nine leaves from a Cop-
tic codex, comprise the only surviving remnants of an apocryphon
devoted to the biblical Enoch, one that represents only a portion
of what must have been a substantial Egyptian-Christian litera-
ture devoted to the antediluvian patriarch (see pp. 132-42 above).
These fragments received rather scant attention for several decades

1. W. E. Crum, Theological Texts from Coptic Papyri (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic

Series 12; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1913), 3-11 (no. 3).
2. On a visit to the Pierpont Morgan Library, I received from William Voelkle, as-
sociate curator of manuscripts, some additional information. The papyrus collection was
purchased by Morgan through an agent for £8,000 in 1912, one year before Morgan's death.
The papyri were mounted in glass in the British Museum in 1913. In 1925 they were opened
and remounted in glass panes, edged with leather, by Charles T. Lamacroft. They were
stored in the British Museum until 1929, when they were brought to the Pierpont Morgan
Library in New York. In a letter from Lamacroft dated Nov. 15, 1920, it is stated that the
fragments are correctly placed, according to the verification of Crum. Folio 6 of the Enoch
fragments now has a small fragment out of place, and I surmise that this occurred when
Lamacroft remounted the papyri in 1925. See note on folio 6r,ii,1-3 below.
3. L. Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (Corpus of
Illuminated Manuscripts 4—5; Louvain: Peeters, 1993), 188.

153
154 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

after their publication in 1913. T. Lefort reviewed the volume in

which they appear, but said nothing at all of the Enoch fragments,
concentrating rather on the fragments of the Life of Pachomius.*
Montague R. James devoted a paragraph to the Enoch fragments
in his review and called the text “a tantalizing piece of a book
relating to Enoch,”° but his remarks add nothing to what Crum
said about the text. Oskar vot’ Lemm made some valuable sug-
gestions on the text and translation in his Koptische Miscellen in
1914.° Then in 1975-76 I made an extensive study of the frag-
ments, which resulted in a new edition of the fragments as part of
an article published in 1976 and of which this chapter is a revised
version.”
At about the same time J. T. Milik published his book on the
Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch from Qumran and included a chap-
ter entitled “Works Attributed to Enoch in Romano-Byzantine and
Medieval Times.”* In that chapter Milik refers to Crum’s publica-
tion and discusses the Enoch fragments, comparing their contents
with other apocryphal texts dealing with Enoch. He also includes
a literal Latin translation, prepared by G. Garitte, of readable por-
tions of Crum’s edition of the Coptic text.” Four of the Enoch
fragments, on loan from New York, were part of an exhibit of
Coptic art and artifacts at the Rhode Island School of Design in
Providence in 1989. In the exhibit catalog I make a brief entry
on the fragments." Finally, the Enoch fragments are mentioned

4. T. Lefort in Muséon 14 (1913): 323-32.

5. M. R. James in Journal of Theological Studies 16 (1915): 272-73.
6. O. von Lemm in the Bulletin de l'Academie Impériale des Sciences de St. Peters-
bourg 8 (1914): 925-27 = Koptische Miscellen (ed. P. Nagel and K. Kiimmel; Leipzig:
Zentralantiquariat d. Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, 1972), 511-13 (CXLIII).
7. B. A. Pearson, “The Pierpont Morgan Fragments of a Coptic Enoch Apocryphon,”
in Studies on the Testament of Abraham (ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Society of Biblical Literature
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976), 227-83.
8. J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4 (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1976), 89-107.
9. Ibid., 100-106.
10. See F Friedman (ed.), Beyond the Pharaohs: Egypt and the Copts in the 2nd to 7th
Centuries A.D. (Providence: Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, 1989), 219 (no.
132). A photograph of folio 1— and folio 21, as preserved in glass, is also included.

“
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 155

briefly in G. Aranda Perez’s article on apocryphal literature in

the Coptic Encyclopedia.’
The surviving fragments are of very poor quality papyrus (thick
and opaque, with rough surfaces). They range in size from 12.6
cm. (folio 2) to 15.5 cm. (folio 1) high and from 11.8 cm. (folio 2)
to 18.9 cm. (folio 1) wide.
The codex from which the surviving folios came was con-
structed of a number of quires.'* The folios were probably ar-
ranged so that rectos showed alternately horizontal and vertical
fibers. In this way, wherever the book was opened, both verso and
recto showed surface fibers of the same direction, whether vertical
or horizontal.”
Each of our surviving pages is inscribed in two columns, each
column an average of 7.5 cm. wide and each line containing an
average of eight to ten letters. The hand is a somewhat irregular
biblical uncial, typical of the seventh-eighth centuries.’* Rudimen-
tary decorations include the marking of a paragraph with an initial
letter written in the left margin, and decorated above with a coro-
nis: >. The only punctuation mark used is the colon (i.e., a raised
dot that marks phrases), but it is employed somewhat capriciously.
The fragments are very difficult to read, owing to the poor qual-
ity of the papyrus and the fading of the ink. The ink has entirely
disappeared from many letters. Some traces of such letters have
been left, lighter in color than the rest of the papyrus, probably
due to a chemical reaction between the original ink and the pa-
pyrus. Such traces and other very faint traces of ink can be brought
out with the aid of ultraviolet light, a device that I employed with

11. G. Aranda Perez, “Apocryphal Literature,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia (ed. A. S. Atiya;
New York: Macmillan, 1991), 1.161-69, esp. 164.
12. Folio 7r bears the numeral fA (14) on the inside of the top margin, indicating that
there were at least fourteen quires in the codex. See note on folio 7r below.
13. Asis customary in describing a codex (in contrast to a scroll), the recto is the right-
hand page of the opened book, the verso is the left-hand page. The first page of a book is
a recto; the reverse side of the same leaf or folio is a verso.
14. See the examples in M. Cramer, Koptische Paldographie (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,
1964).
156 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

good results when I had an opportunity to study the fragments

in the Pierpont Morgan Library in May 1975.”
The order of the folios is problematic. Crum ordered the folios
in his publication solely on the basis of what he considered to be
a logical order according to content, but stated that the sequence
was “merely tentative.”'® It is curious that he did not attempt to
order the fragments according to their destruction patterns. In-
deed when one combines this physical evidence with a study of
the textual content, the sequence of folios can be determined with
a high degree of probability.
Study of the destruction patterns of the folios shows that they
fall into two groups, in each of which the sequence of folios can
easily be determined, that is, the sequence in which they lay when
they were subjected to many centuries of damage from worms
and rot. One group consists of fragments from the top portions
of three folios (the top margins are preserved), whose sequence
(from the greater to the lesser amount of material preserved) is
folio 91, folio 1—, folio 71.7 The other group consists of frag-
ments probably from the lower portions of six folios (though no
bottom margins are preserved), whose sequence (from the lesser
to the greater amount of material preserved) is folio 2—, folio 31,
folio 5—, folio 81, folio 6—, folio 41.'8
On the basis of textual content, I conclude that folio 2 contains
the opening passage of our apocryphon. In addition, textual con-
tent suggests that folio 9 follows folio 6. A special problem is posed
by folio 4. In all other cases, when the folios are lined up according
to their profiles or destruction patterns, their columns of writing

15. I am grateful to William Voelkle, associate curator of manuscripts, and the staff
of the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York, for allowing me to study and to publish
these fragments, for generously putting their facilities in the library at my disposal, and
for photographs of the fragments.
16. Crum, Theological Texts from Coptic Papyri, 3. He says that “an alternative order
might, for instance, begin with [folios] 2, 6, 8.”
17. I retain the numbering of the folios first proposed by Crum, but reorder them. The
arrows indicate whether horizontal (—) or vertical (1) fibers are showing.
18. Milik proposes a different order (Books of Enoch, 100-102), purely on the basis of
content: 2—, 21, 31,3, 4—, 41, 5t, 5, 8—, 81, 6—, 6t, 9—, 9t,, 7t, 7, 1t, 1.

bo
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 157

also line up, indicating that the folios were in their original po-
sition in the codex when they suffered deterioration. But folio 4,
when arranged according to profile with the other folios in its
group, shows its columns of writing badly askew. This folio was
therefore probably loose in antiquity and could have been shoved
back into the codex anywhere, not necessarily where it originally
belonged. I accordingly place this folio in the sequence of pages
where I thought it fit best according to textual content, for, in fact,
when left in the place assigned to it according to its destruction
pattern, it seems out of place in relation to the other portions of
the text.
I posit the following order of folios (giving fiber directions of
the rectos):’?

a
|31
|5—
7shoes

|81
fis
9—

kl
|71
The language of our fragments is pure Sahidic (i.e., the dialect
of the Sahidic New Testament). The question as to the original
language of the apocryphon cannot be answered with certainty,
though I see nothing to indicate that it is necessarily a translation
from a Greek original. The presence of Greek loanwords, of course,
is no sign that this is a Coptic translation from Greek. (Indeed, the
term loanword is misleading, for Greek words function in Coptic as
Coptic words and are part of the Coptic vocabulary.) The Coptic
syntax, so far as our fragments allow us to determine, is quite
regular, and all Greek words occur in the forms regularly used

19. Contiguous folios are indicated by vertical lines. In contiguous folios the fiber di-
rections alternate in the manner described above, a typical feature of Coptic codices from
the fifth century on.
158 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

in Sahidic Coptic (there being no examples of Greek inflection,

an indicator of translation Coptic).”° Thus, I assume that our text
was composed in the Coptic language, specifically in the Sahidic
dialect of upper Egypt.”

CONTENT
According to the order of the folios adopted here, the apocryphon
begins on folio 2. Somewhat reminiscent of the opening passage
of 2 Enoch, the text tells how the Lord received Enoch son of Jared
into heaven, where he saw “the [mysteries that are hidden] in the
eons of the height, [and] all the minds that are hidden in the eons
of the Light” (2v,i,3-10).” I take this as a summary proem; the
actual ascent of Enoch was presumably narrated later on in the
text (though not in our extant fragments).
We next find Enoch on a mountain, and an angel of God appears
to him. The angel is not named (perhaps Michael or Gabriel), but
is described as “girded about [his] loins with a golden girdle, with
a crown [of] adamant” (31r,ii,8-12).% Enoch is commanded to take
a book from the angel’s hand and reveal the sacred name in it
(3v). He complies and finds “three invisible names” in the book
(5r,ii,9-10): those of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The angel

20. Cf. W. Till, Koptische Grammatik (2d ed.; Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopadie, 1961),
§6 (substantives and adjectives) and §280 (verbs). Some of the Greek words in our text
have a peculiar orthography: ATAMANTINON (Gdapuavttvov; 3r,ii,12), goMOETKH (ar08jKn;
4r,ii,12), TAXH (taxv; 71,i,9). Of course, such spellings also occur in Coptic texts that are
translated from Greek and have undergone a history of transmission in Coptic.
21. Ina review of my 1976 article, “Pierpont Morgan Fragments,” T. Orlandi expresses
his disagreement with my view that the text is an original Coptic composition; “Studi
Copti, n. 1,” Vetera christianorum 15 (1978): 122.
22. The use of the term eons does not necessarily imply any Gnostic element in the
text (cf. Crum, Theological Texts from Coptic Papyri, 4), certainly not a Gnostic intentionality.
For the use of such Gnostic-sounding language in the Christian literature of Coptic Egypt,
see, e.g., C. D. G. Miller, Die Biicher der Einsetzung der Erzengel Michael und Gabriel (CSCO
225-26: Scriptores Coptici 31-32; Louvain: Secrétariat du Corpus SCO, 1962).
23. Michael is regularly presented in Coptic literature with a golden girdle. See C. D. G.
Muller, Die Engellehre der koptischen Kirche (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1959), 18. On the other
hand, Gabriel is the “bringer of good tidings” par excellence in Coptic literature; ibid.,
36-47. In The Book of the Installation of the Archangel Gabriel, Gabriel is frequently called
“the bringer of good tidings of the eons of light”; see Miiller, Biicher der Einsetzung, e.g.,
63 (Coptic text), 76 (German translation). Michael may be considered more likely if we
compare 1 Enoch 71.3; but cf. also Gabriel in 2 Enoch 21.3-5.

*
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon io?

thereupon instructs Enoch in the mysteries of the Holy Trinity.

The three persons of the Trinity “guide the heaven and the earth”
with “a single counsel” (5v,i,2-7).
The final portion of the angel’s instructions to Enoch likely con-
sists of a prophecy of Enoch’s translation to heaven and his future
role in the judgment: “[God will bestow] upon you a [name more]
famous than (that of) any man. You will be taken to heaven in
your body, and you will be placed in the midst [of the] storehouse”
(4r,ii,3-12).*
After a reference to the previous instruction of the angel on the
mountain (4v,i,5-8), it is stated that Enoch found “three seals”
(4v,i,8-10), and (after a lacuna) “writings” are mentioned (4v,i,12).
There is also mention of a “virgin” (4v,ii,6), a probable refer-
ence to the millennium (4v,ii,8-10),~ and (possibly) a mention
of punishment in the “abyss” (4v,ii,12). The context is impos-
sible to reconstruct with certainty, but one is tempted to speculate
that Enoch is here encountering written eschatological prophecies
attributable to the virgin Sibyl.*°
In the next extant section, someone — I take her to be Jared’s
wife, speaking to her husband — says, “Behold, what is my [ ]”” be-
coming, which you have begotten from [me]? Behold three times
she spoke with great words” (8r,ii,5-11). On the next page some-
one, presumably Enoch, is then told that he should go and reveal
something in the midst of his father and mother (8v,i,4-12).

24. See p. 157 above on the problem of the placement of folio 4. The word storehouse is
possibly reminiscent of the “store-chambers of blessing that are in heaven” (my translation)
mentioned in 1 Enoch 11.1, but the Greek word in the latter passage is toeia rather than
aro8nkn. See p. 161, n. 31 below.
25. The thousand-year reign of Christ on earth is a popular theme in Egyptian Chris-
tian literature (cf. Rev 20). See H. G. E. White, The Monasteries of the Wadi ‘N Natrun, vol. 1:
New Coptic Texts from the Monastery of Saint Macarius (Publications of the Metropolitan Mu-
seum of Art, Egyptian Expedition 2; New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1926; repr.
New York: Arno, 1973), 17-18, with reference to fragments from “an apocalyptic gospel”
found in the expedition. The millennial reign is a feature of the Apocalypse of Elijah, with
which our Enoch text has some points of contact. See p. 165 below.
26. Two virgins are mentioned later in the text, Enoch’s sister (Sibyl) and Tabitha. See
p. 160 below.
27. The lacuna has thus far defied restoration, but the reference is clearly to a female
child of Jared and his wife, whom I take to be Enoch’s sister, Sibyl. This interpretation
of the text represents a revision of the one reflected in my earlier study. On Sibyl, see
pp- 163-64 below.
160 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

We then find Enoch outside the bedchamber of his virgin sister.

His mother is with him and says, “Enoch, my son, [let us go]
into the bedchamber, and let us...” (6r,ii,8-12). His sister hears
Enoch’s voice, bids him enter, and they begin to converse (6v).
It is clear from what follows that Enoch’s sister is no ordinary
virgin! She is a prophetess, and there can be little doubt but that
she is none other than the Sibyl. She tells Enoch that God has cho-
sen him because of his righteousness and that he will be taken up
in his body to heaven (9r). Enoch inquires whether others shall
likewise be taken up and is told that Elijah and Tabitha will also be
taken up in their bodies (9v,i). It is possible that, in a lost portion
of the text, reference was made to the coming flood, for the re-
population of the earth is mentioned in what remains of that page
(9v,ii). The text breaks off with the mention of Enoch’s future son,
Methuselah.”*
The last extant portion of the apocryphon deals with the
judgment. The previous context establishes that Enoch is being
instructed on his future role in the judgment by his sister, but
the transition to the next extant passage is difficult to determine.
Someone (perhaps an angel or the Son of God) says (presumably
to God), “If he sees them in all their iniquities which they do,
he will write them immediately, and your entire image will go to
perdition” (1r,i,3-12). This is probably a reference to Enoch’s role
as scribe of righteousness, and the concern is expressed that he
may be too harsh in his scorekeeping! We should understand this
passage to belong either to a dream vision of Enoch himself or to
a report by his sister of a vision that she has had of the heavenly
courtroom.
The same vision continues with the report of an archangel
putting something on “the balances of righteousness” and bring-
ing “other mighty angels” of a “fiery” sort (1v,i,5-12). Mention is
made of “the Son of God seated at the right hand of his Father”
(1v,ii,4-8), and it is probably he who bows down at the Father’s

28. In certain sections of 1 Enoch, Methuselah is the recipient of Enoch’s revelations; see
esp. 1 Enoch 72-91. In the Melchizedek section of 2 Enoch (71-72), Methuselah is established
by God as priest and leader over the people after the translation of Enoch.
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 161

feet, saying, “O my Father, do not...” (the text breaks off here;

1v,ii,8-14).
In the very last extant section, Enoch’s sister is speaking again,
instructing Enoch about his role in the judgment. She counsels
him not to write down people’s sins too hastily (71,1). She also
tells him about the “angel of mercy,” doubtless the angel Michael
(7r,ii). At the weighing of human deeds, if the sins outweigh the
good deeds, Michael tips the scale with his rod (7v).
How much more material came after this passage in the original
apocryphon cannot, of course, be determined. Such material as we
do have, however, is of considerable interest from the standpoint
of the relationship between this text and the apocryphal tradi-
tions about Enoch. These relationships can be established with
reference to the following items.

ENOCH
The special character of Enoch as reflected in our text is based
largely upon the older Jewish apocryphal literature.” As a special
“elect one” (9r,i,4—5),° he is taken bodily into heaven (21,i,9; 2v,i,1-
3; 4r,ii,8-10; 91,ii,1-7)*’ and sees the heavenly mysteries (2v,i,3-
10). Especially intriguing is the pronouncement of the angel to
Enoch concerning a special name: “[God will bestow] upon you
a [name more] famous than (that of) any man” (41,ii,3-7). What
name might this be?
In 1 Enoch 70.2, Enoch ascends to heaven in “chariots of the
spirit,” and we are told that his name vanished among those that
dwell on earth. This may imply, for the Similitudes of Enoch, that
Enoch took over the name of the Messiah/Son of Man, though

29. See P.S. Alexander, “From Son of Adam to Second God: Transformations of the Bib-
lical Enoch,” in Biblical Figures outside the Bible (ed. M. E. Stone and T. S. Bergren; Harrisburg,
Pa.: Trinity, 1998), 87-122. See also pp. 143-44 above.
30. This title is used in the Similitudes of 1 Enoch as an alternative messianic title for
the “Son of Man,” with whom Enoch is identified in 1 Enoch 71.14.
31. Based on Gen 5:24. See, e.g., Sirach 44:16; 49:14; Jubilees 4.23; Josephus, Antiquities
1.85; and esp. 1-3 Enoch. The storehouse mentioned in 4r,ii,12 may be compared not only
to 1 Enoch 11.1, but also to 3 Enoch 10.6; Enoch-Metatron is set over “all the stores of the
palaces of ‘Arabot, and all the treasuries that are in the heavenly heights” (trans. Alexander
in OTP 1.264).
162 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

this is not explicitly stated.’ But 3 Enoch provides the most in-
triguing possibility for the interpretation of our passage: the name
to be given to Enoch is “Metatron,” the Prince of the Presence,
the “Lesser YHWH.”* This accords well with the role assigned to
Enoch in our text as a heavenly scribe, for Metatron is the heavenly
scribe par excellence in Jewish sources.** Thus, our text appears to
reflect ideas concerning the ascension and exaltation of Enoch es-
tablished in the earlier Jewish'literature, especially the Similitudes
of 1 Enoch and 3 Enoch.”
Enoch’s most important role in our text is scribe of righteous-
ness. To be sure, this title does not occur in our text, but Enoch’s
role as such is clearly delineated (11,i,8-9; 7r,i,6-12; 7v,i,4-7).°°
This, of course, is part and parcel of the general designation of
Enoch as a scribe in Jewish apocryphal literature,” and the same
role is given to Enoch in Coptic Christian literature (see pp. 146-51
above). Our text, however, goes beyond the general designation of
Enoch as a scribe in the Jewish apocryphal literature, for it assigns
to Enoch the role of scribe in the judgment, and here we are put into
close contact with the description of the judgment in recension B
of the Greek text of the Testament of Abraham, wherein “the scribe
of righteousness, Enoch,” is appointed by God to “record the
sins and the righteous deeds of each person” (recension B.11.3—4;
trans. Sanders in OTP 1.900).**

32. In 1 Enoch 71.14-17 the identification of Enoch as the Son of Man is clearly made:
“You are that Son of Man who was born for righteousness” (trans. Nickelsburg, private
circulation. That translation will appear in volume 2 of his commentary on 1 Enoch).
33. The identification of Enoch as Metatron is first attested in the Jerusalem Targum
to Gen 5:24.
34. Babylonian Talmud, tractate Hagigah. 15a. On Metatron, see 3 Enoch and Alexan-
der’s discussion in his introduction to 3 Enoch (OTP 1.228-53).
35. This is unusual for a Coptic document, for Coptic literature normally does not as-
sign such an exalted role to Enoch. Of course, it should also be stated that Enoch is not
mentioned at all in the Talmud, and some of the midrashim even deny that he was trans-
lated to heaven. See L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society, 1925), 5.156.
36. For the designation scribe of righteousness, see 1 Enoch 12.4; 15.1. The term also occurs
in Coptic literature. See pp. 146-51 above.
37. The phrase Enoch the scribe occurs in 1 Enoch 12.3; cf. Jubilees 4.17-23; 2 Enoch 23.4-6;
53.2; 64.5.
38. Enoch has the prerogative of erasing sins as well (71,ii,4)! See p. 168 below on the
judgment.

*
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 163

ENOCH’S SISTER, SIBYL

The name of Enoch’s virgin sister is not provided in the extant

portion of our text, but there can be no doubt about her identity:
she is (the) Sibyl. This is borne out not only by the role assigned
to Enoch’s sister in our text, that of a prophetess, but by the Coptic
tradition concerning the Sibyl.”
In a remarkable document called The Book of the Installation of
the Archangel Gabriel, the following words are put into the mouth
of Gabriel: “Moreover I am, O Lord, the one who came to Sibyl
[cia], the virgin sister of Enoch the scribe of righteousness. I
protected her, and rescued her from the hand of the wicked devil
who desired to do evil to her.”“° The episode recorded here is not
elsewhere attested. Stephen Gero suggests that Sibyl, the virgin
sister of Enoch, is here identified with another virgin, Norea, a
spiritual heroine attested in Gnostic sources.*’ In the Hypostasis
of the Archons (NHC IIA), Norea cries out for help when threat-
ened with rape by the evil archons and is rescued by the angel
Eleleth (92,27-93,13). Here Gabriel plays the role of the Gnostic
angel Eleleth.
In another interesting Coptic text, relating the discovery of the
tomb of Christ in Jerusalem by Eudoxia, sister of Constantine,”

39. I know of no Jewish apocryphal text that makes this identification. Other names
do occur for the sisters of Enoch in Jewish literature; cf., e.g., Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiq-
uities 1.14; cf. D. Harrington (ed.), The Hebrew Fragments of Pseudo-Philo Liber Antiquitatum
Biblicarum Preserved in the Chronicles of Jerahmeel (Society of Biblical Literature Texts and
Translations 3: Pseudepigrapha Series 3; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974), 10-11. In
Sibylline Oracles 3.827, undoubtedly composed in Egypt, the Sibyl refers to Noah, survivor
of the deluge. She says, “I was his daughter-in-law and I was of his blood” (trans. Collins
in OTP 1.380). That Sibyl was related to Noah may lie behind the Egyptian Christian tra-
dition of her relationship to Enoch. So S. Gero, “Henoch und die Sibylle,” Zeitschrift fiir die
neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 73 (1982): 148-50, esp. 149. Sibyl is a proper noun in Coptic
tradition.
40. Miller, Biicher der Einsetzung, 73 (Coptic text, my translation).
41. Gero, “Henoch und die Sibylle,” 149-50. On Norea, see B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism,
Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1990), 84-94.
42. Eudoxia is unattested in any historically credible source. She is mentioned together
with Constantine’s mother, Helena, in the Martyrdom of St. George the Diospolite (of Cappado-
cia); I. Balestri and H. Hyvernat (eds.), Acta Martyrum 2.1 (CSCO 86; Paris: Poussielgue,
1924), 261 (Bohairic text); 2.2 (CSCO 125; Paris: Cerf, 1950), 173 (Latin translation).
164 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

an aged man named Jacob says to Eudoxia, “Blessed is the cho-

sen generation about which Sibyl [ciawAAA] the sister of Enoch
the scribe prophesied.”*° There follows a loose quotation from the
Tiburtine Sibyl.*
Sibyl is invoked in close proximity with Enoch in numerous
Coptic sepulchral inscriptions, particularly those of the Mon-
astery of Apa Jeremiasat Saqqara. The usual form is “Father
Enoch [ast& or MENIMWT ENWX], Mother Sibyl [AMA Or TENMAAT
cmeaAaal,” often associated with the founder of the monastery,
Apa Jeremias.*° Thus, one can speak of a distinctive Saqqara triad
of special saints (see p. 150 above). These inscriptions doubtless
reflect the tradition in Coptic Christianity that Sibyl is the sister
of Enoch.
Finally, Sibyl and Enoch are found together with Elijah and
Tabitha in the time of the antichrist, according to the Arabic
version of the History of Joseph the Carpenter.*°

43. Miiller, Biicher der Einsetzung, 74 (Coptic text, my translation). See transcription by
T. Orlandi, introduction and translation by B. A. Pearson, and historical study by H. A.
Drake in Eudoxia and the Holy Sepulchre: A Constantinian Legend in Coptic (Testi e documenti
per lo studio dell “antichita” 67; Milan: Cisalpino-Goliardica, 1980), 67. The Coptic text
was originally published by F. Rossi, “Transcrizione di tre manoscritti copti del Museo
egizio di Torino con traduzione italiana,” Memorie d. Reale Accad. d. Scienze di Torino 37,
ser. 2 (1886), and reprinted in Rossi’s I papiri copti del Museo egizio di Torino, vol. 1 (Turin:
Loescher, 1887).
44. See P. J. Alexander, The Oracle of Baalbek: The Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek Dress (Wash-
ington: Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, 1967), 14 (Greek text), 25 (English
translation).
45. See J. E. Quibell, Excavations at Saqgara (Cairo: Institut Francais d’Archéologie Ori-
entale du Caire, 1909), vol. 3: nos. 1, 5, 12, 23, 26, 29-32, 43, 44, 48, 50, 53, 54, 59, 62, 65,
76, 82, 120, 150. The forms of the name Sibyl vary remarkably: crawaraa and ciaeaa are
commonest, but CBAC, CIBHAAA, C/BAAA, and Cs/BA& also occur. See also J. E. Quibell, Exca-
vations at Saqgara, vol. 4 (Cairo: Institut Francais d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1912). In
two inscriptions from Saqqara, nos. 290 and 304, Sibyl is called “the prophetess.” For addi-
tional references, see von Lemm, Koptische Miscellen, 19-21 (XX); and idem, Kleine Koptische
Studien (ed. P. Nagel; Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat d. Deutschen Demokratischen Republik,
1972), 431, 522.
46. See P. de Lagarde, Aegyptiaca (Gottingen: Hoyer, 1883, repr. Osnabriick: Zeller,
1972), 37 (Bohairic and Arabic texts); and F. Robinson, Coptic Apocryphal Gospels (Texts
and Studies 4.2; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1896), 229, where the Arabic
version of the History of Joseph the Carpenter 32 is translated: “Who are those four, those
of whom thou hast said that the Antichrist shall slay them because of their reproaching?
The Saviour answered, They are Henoch, Elias, Schila, and Tabitha.” (The Coptic ver-
sion has “two men,” meaning Enoch and Elijah.) “Schila” is a corruption for “Sibylla,” as
W. E. Crum acutely observes; see “Schila und Tabitha,” Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft 12 (1911): 352. See p. 165 below.
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 165

ELIJAH AND TABITHA

In our text, Enoch’s sister is represented as telling Enoch that

two others will be taken up in their bodies to heaven: Elijah and
Tabitha (9v,i,5-6). This idea develops out of the antichrist tradi-
tions pertaining to the “two witnesses” of Revelation 11:3-12. In
Revelation 11, two witnesses prophesy during the time of the end,
are finally put to death by the “beast” (= antichrist), but are raised
up and taken to heaven. In the development of this legend in
Christian literature the two witnesses are almost invariably iden-
tified as Enoch and Elijah,” doubtless on the grounds that these
two are singled out in Scripture as those “who have not tasted
death from their birth.”*
Enoch and Elijah appear together as the two witnesses in the
Apocalypse of Elijah.” This apocalypse prophesies that when Eli-
jah and Enoch hear of the appearance of the “Shameless One”
(= the antichrist) they will come down to do battle with him and
testify against him (4.7-12). He will kill them, and they will lie
dead three-and-a-half-days in the marketplace (cf. Rev 11:8), but
on the fourth day they will rise again to pronounce doom upon
the Shameless One (4.13-19).
This episode is immediately preceded by one in which a virgin
named Tabitha is the protagonist. The appearance of the antichrist
is described, and then it is prophesied that the virgin Tabitha will
pursue him to Jerusalem, railing at him all the way. Then the
Shameless One will kill her, but she will rise again and take up her

47. See the valuable treatment by W. Bousset, The Antichrist Legend: A Chapter in
Christian and Jewish Folklore (trans. A.Keane; London: Hutchinson, 1896), 203-11.
48. 4 Ezra 6.26, with probable reference to Enoch and Elijah. The biblical references are
Gen 5:24 (Enoch) and 2 Kings 2:1-11 (Elijah).
49. See translation by O. S. Wintermute in OTP 1.735-53, and the important study
by D. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt: The Apocalypse of Elijah and Early Egyptian Chris-
tianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 7; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). I rely on
Frankfurter’s translation of the Sahidic and Akhmimic versions (299-328). The Sahidic
and Akhmimic versions were first published by G. Steindorff, Die Apokalypse des Elias, eine
unbekannte Apokalypse und Bruchstiicke der Sophonias-Apokalypse (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1899). See
also A. Pietersma, S. Turner Comstock, and H. W. Attridge, The Apocalypse of Elijah (Soci-
ety of Biblical Literature Texts and Translations 10: Pseudepigrapha Series 9; Chico, Calif.:
Scholars Press, 1979), based on P. Chester Beatty 2018.
166 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

testimony (4.1-6). At the end of the Apocalypse of Elijah it is prophe-

sied that Elijah and Enoch (but not Tabitha) will come and pursue
the “son of lawlessness” and kill him (5.32-35). Then Christ the
King will come and bring the thousand-year reign upon the earth
(5.36-39).
It is clear that the Tabitha episode is modeled upon that of the
two witnesses, Enoch and Elijah. In effect she is a third witness
although, indeed, her testimony precedes that of Elijah and Enoch.
Who is this Tabitha? It would appear that this is the Tabitha
of Joppa, also called Dorcas, whom Peter raised from the dead
according to Acts 9:36-41.°° Since her subsequent death is not
recorded in Acts, the Christian author or interpolator of the Apoc-
alypse of Elijah assumes that she, like Enoch and Elijah, was taken
bodily into heaven.*' But other possibilities are also advanced.
Jean-Marc Rosenstiehl proposes that the episode of Tabitha is
based on the ancient Egyptian myth of Tabithet, a scorpion god-
dess and wife of Horus.’ David Frankfurter strengthens this
proposal with the addition of other references and argues for the
continuation of the Tabithet tradition, in connection with Isis, into
the Greco-Roman period and beyond. He also finds her referred
to under the name Tabithia in a Coptic magical spell of the sixth or
seventh century.” In addition, he suggests another possible back-
ground for the Tabitha episode, a Jewish tradition according to
which Bithia, the daughter of Pharaoh who rescued the infant
Moses (Exod 2:5-10; 1 Chr 4:17), was rewarded as a “righteous

50. So Wintermute in OTP 1.746 (in a note to 4.1), following Steindorff, Apokalypse des
Elias, 92-93.
51. According to Steindorff, the Apocalypse of Elijah is based upon a pre-Christian Jewish
apocalypse reworked and interpolated by Christian editors. Frankfurter regards it as the
product of third-century Egyptian Christianity.
52. J.-M. Rosenstiehl, L’Apocalypse d’Elie: Introduction, traduction, et notes (Textes et
Etudes pour servir a I’histoire du Judaisme intertestamentaire 1; Paris: Guethner, 1972),
46-47. Quite unconvincing is his suggestion (69, 99) that Tabitha functions in the text of
the Apocalypse of Elijah as an allegorical reference to the Qumran community.
53. D. Frankfurter, “Tabitha in the Apocalypse of Elijah,” Journal of Theological Studies 40
(1990): 13-25, esp. 13-15. The Coptic spell is P. London Hay 10391, and the name Tabithia is
one of several found in the opening invocation. See also Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt,
316 n. 67. ‘

bo
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 167

Gentile” by being taken alive to paradise.™ The fact remains, how-

ever, that the name Tabitha occurs in only the Acts episode. Her
treatment here, nevertheless, might very well be influenced by the
aforementioned Egyptian and Jewish traditions.
Tabitha and Sibyl are mentioned as witnesses, together with
Enoch and Elijah, against the antichrist in the Arabic version of
the History of Joseph the Carpenter. It is probable that the Coptic
version, in which only Enoch and Elijah are mentioned, is primary
and that the Arabic version was expanded under the influence of
the Apocalypse of Elijah. I also assert that the occurrence of Tabitha
in our Enoch apocryphon is similarly influenced by the Apocalypse
of Elijah.”

THE JUDGMENT

The judgment of humanity is given prominent treatment at the

end of the surviving portion of our apocryphon. First, in a vision
given either to Enoch or to his sister, Enoch’s role as scribe is
mentioned (1r), and the judgment process itself is described (1v).
Finally, Sibyl counsels Enoch not to write men’s sins too quickly
(7r) and describes the work of the “angel of mercy” (7v). Unfor-
tunately both passages are very fragmentary, and therefore no
definitive account of the judgment scenario is possible.
Our document envisions a single ongoing, universal (i.e., for
everyone), postmortem judgment,” rather than the last judgment,

54. Frankfurter, “Tabitha in the Apocalypse of Elijah,” 23-24, referring to Derekh Eretz
Zuta 1.18.
55. Enoch and Elijah do battle with the antichrist in the Tiburtine Sibylline Oracle, but
despite the Tiburtine Sibyl’s probable dependence upon the Apocalypse ofElijah, Tabitha does
not appear. For the Greek version of the (final) antichrist episode, see Alexander, Oracle of
Baalbek, 22 (Greek), 29 (English translation). For the Latin version, see E. Sackur, Sibyllinische
Texte und Forschungen: Pseudomethodius Adso und die tiburtinische Sibylle (Halle: Niemeyer,
1898), 186. Enoch and Elijah are not mentioned by name in the Oriental versions edited
by J. Schleifer, “Die Erzahlung der Sibylle,” Denkschr. d. Kaiserlichen Ak. der Wissenschaften,
Wien, Phil. Hist. Kl. 53 (1910): 1-80, esp. 71-73.
56. This is also a feature of the Testament of Abraham, as well as of a number of other
Jewish apocryphal works. See G. W. E. Nickelsburg, “Eschatology in the Testament of
Abraham: A Study of the Judgment Scene in the Two Recensions,” in Studies on the Testament
of Abraham (ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate
Studies 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976), 23-64, esp. 35.
168 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

which is a more common conception in Christian (including Cop-

tic) literature. The following items are of special import. First,
Enoch is charged with writing down “the sins and the good deeds
of the sons of men” (7v,i). It is feared that all human beings will
perish if he sees all the iniquities they do (11,i). He is thus admon-
ished that, in the course of his duties, he should not write down
sins too hastily (71,i); indeed he is even told to erase the record in
certain cases (7r,ii). Second, the judgment process is described as
a kind of psychostasia, wherein the souls (or rather, their good and
evil deeds) are weighed in the “balances of righteousness” (1v,i).
The scales are in the charge of an archangel (1v,i,5—6), who is also
probably to be identified as the angel of mercy (7v,i,9-11). If this
angel sees the sins of the elect outweighing their good deeds, he
will add the weight of his rod to the balances, presumably on the
side of the good deeds (7v,ii).
The function of Enoch as scribe in the judgment is a fixture
of Egyptian-Christian religion, and the way in which the divine
scribe is presented is paradigmatic of that strange combination
of hope and fear that is so characteristic of Coptic literature. For
example, in a Coptic homily on the four bodiless creatures (Rev
4:6-8) attributed to St. John Chrysostom, Enoch, the scribe of righ-
teousness, is admonished by the human-faced creature, “Do not
hurry to write down the sins of the children of humankind, but
be patient a little and I will call the archangel Michael and he will
implore the Father of mercy together with me” (Encomium on the
Four Bodiless Living Creatures 27).°’
Even in magic the role of Enoch as scribe is feared and ma-
nipulated. One curious magical text inscribed on a wooden tablet
contains a striking parallel to Sibyl’s admonition to her brother
to put his pen down (7r,i,6-12). A wounded deer says to Enoch,
“Enoch the scribe, don’t stick your pen into your ink until Michael
comes from heaven and heals my eye!”
57. Translation by C. S. Wansink in Homiletica from the Pierpont Morgan Library (ed.
Leo Depuydt; CSCO 525: Scriptores Coptici 44; Louvain: Peeters, 1991), 34. On the Coptic
fragments edited by H. Munier and reedited by me, see pp. 142, 147-49 above.
58. See H. R. Hall, Coptic and Greek Texts of the Christian Period from Ostraka, Stelae,
etc. in the British Museum (London: British Museum, 1905), 148-49, as corrected by von
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 169

The fear that people will not be able to avoid perdition if Enoch
sees all their sins (1r,i,3-12) has an interesting parallel in the Tes-
tament of Abraham. In recension A.10 of the Greek version, a voice
from heaven says to Michael during Abraham’s heavenly journey,
“If he [Abraham] sees all those who act in sin, he would destroy
the whole creation!”
In our Enoch apocryphon the fear of the righteous patriarch’s
wrath is (under the influence of Testament of Abraham, but per-
haps correcting it) vested in Enoch, the scribe of righteousness.
This fear is turned to advantage in a magical text, a curse against
several violent persons addressed as a prayer to God: “You must
bring the vengeance of Enoch upon them! As the blood of Abel
called out to Cain his brother, the blood of this miserable man
will call out, until you bring judgment on his behalf against those
who have committed this violence against him. Eloei, Eloei, that
is, Lord Sabaoth, you must bring your wrath upon them.”°° The
“vengeance of Enoch,” of course, is the punishment that follows
the reading of the record that Enoch compiles of a sinner’s evil
deeds.
That Enoch, scribe of righteousness, has the authority to erase
sins from his account is also indicated in our text (71,ii,4). This,
too, we find documented elsewhere in Coptic Christian litera-
ture. In the Martyrdom of Apa Anub, the Savior promises Anub
three crowns and adds this incentive to such as might want to tell
Anub’s story: “For every man who will write of your martyrdom

Lemm, Koptische Studien, 50-57 (LIV), on which my translation is based. See also M. Kropp,
Ausgewahlte koptische Zaubertexte (Brussels: Edition de la Fondation Egyptologique Reine
Elisabeth, 1930-31), 2.66—67 (no. 18f.), for a German translation.
59. See M. E. Stone (trans.), The Testament of Abraham (Society of Biblical Literature
Texts and Translations 2: Pseudepigrapha Series 2; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1972),
24 (text) and 25 (translation). The Greek edition used is that of M. R. James, The Testament
of Abraham (Texts and Studies 2.2; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1892). Other
quotations from the Testament of Abraham in what follows are from Stone’s translation (cf.
translation by E. P. Sanders in OTP 1.887). The wrath of Abraham against sinners is not
mentioned in the Coptic version.
60. Translation by M. Meyer, “Curse against Several Violent People,” in Ancient Christian
Magic: Coptic Texts of Ritual Power (ed. M. Meyer and R. Smith; San Francisco: Har-
per, 1994), 191 (no. 90). The definitive edition of this text is P. Jernstedt, Koptskie Teksty
Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha [Coptic Texts in the State Hermitage] (Moscow/Leningrad:
Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk, SSSR, 1959), 153 (no. 70.17-22).
170 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

and your contest, I shall command Enoch the scribe of righteous-

ness to wipe out of the account book [Xesporpadkon; cf. Col 2:14]
all of his sins, and I shall write his name in the Book of Life.”
One point needs clarification: Enoch, as we have seen, is the
heavenly scribe in the judgment. But the actual writing of the
record is no doubt envisioned as taking place prior to the judg-
ment of the individual, during each person’s lifetime. Thus,
Enoch’s role in the judgment is not exactly analogous to that of
the god Thoth in the Egyptian conception of the judgment scene,
for Thoth records the results of the weighing of the soul.”
Whether Enoch was actually envisioned in our document as
taking part in the judgment scene itself, the weighing of sins and
good deeds, is not clear from the fragments that remain. If he
was, as is probable, then his role was that of a witness in the
judgment, as in the shorter versions of the Testament of Abraham.
In recension B.10 of the Greek version of the Testament of Abraham
and in the parallel section in the Coptic version,” Abraham sees a
soul brought to judgment, and testimony is given before the judge
(Abel according to the Greek version, God according to the Cop-
tic) by a man reading from a book. This man is simply referred

61. My translation is made from I. Balestri and H. Hyvernat (eds.), Acta Martyrum
(CSCO 43; Paris: Poussielgue, 1907), 236 (Bohairic text); (CSCO 44; Paris: Poussielgue, 1908),
144 (Latin translation). There is a possible parallel in manuscript E of the shorter version
(B) of the Testament of Abraham 11. Where the James ed. has, “And the Lord said to Enoch,
‘IT will command you to write down the sins of the soul that makes atonement, and it
shall enter into life’” (trans. Stone), manuscript E has, “And the Lord says to Enoch, ‘I am
making a sign for you, in order that you write the sins of the soul in the book; and if the soul
has received mercy, you will find its sins erased [evpjoeic tac Guaptiac avtic cEnretupévac],
and it will enter into life.’ ” My translation is from the Greek text in F. Schmidt, Le Testament
grec d’Abraham: Introduction, edition critique des deux recensions grecques, traduction (Tiabingen:
Mohr-Siebeck, 1986), 74.
62. Cf. the familiar vignette from the Egyptian Book of the Dead 30, showing the heart
of the deceased weighed in the balance with maat (a feather), with the ibis-headed Thoth
recording the result. On the Egyptian background of the weighing of the soul as found in
the Testament of Abraham and, perhaps, in our Enoch fragments, see p. 172 below.
63. See G. MacRae’s translation, “The Coptic Testament of Abraham,” in Studies on
the Testament of Abraham (ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint
and Cognate Studies 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976), 327-40, conveniently divided
into chapters following the divisions found in James’s edition of recension B. I do not take
account here of the Ethiopic and Arabic versions, which derive from the Coptic.
64. Abel is the judge in recension A as well. In contrast, the Coptic version does not
mention Abel at all and underscores the identity of the judge with the words God the true
judge.
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon A741

to in the Coptic version as “a gray-haired man” who comes be-

fore the judge “with a book in his hand” immediately when the
trial begins. In the Greek version the judge calls for the record
books only after the soul denies a murder the judge accuses her
of having committed: “The judge then instructed him who writes
the records to come, and behold, cherubim bearing two books,
and there was an exceedingly large man with them. He had three
crowns upon his head and one crown was higher than the other
two crowns. The crowns are called the crowns of witness. And
the man held a golden pen in his hand, and the judge said to him,
‘Exhibit the sins of this soul.’”
In B.11 of the Greek version Abraham asks Michael, “Lord, who
is this judge and who is the other one who convicts the sin?” The
Coptic version has Abraham ask, “My lord, who is this great gray-
haired man with this book in his hand, reminding the judge of
these souls?” In both versions® Enoch the scribe of righteousness
is identified as the one who testifies, and it is stated that God has
appointed him to write down all the good and evil deeds that
people do.
The short versions of the Testament of Abraham — and especially
the Coptic version® — provides the key for understanding the role
of Enoch in our apocryphon: He has been appointed by God to
record the good and evil deeds of all people, and each person’s
record will be read when that person comes to judgment before
God, Enoch himself serving as a witness before the bar.°”

65. The Greek version first answers the question about the judge: he is Abel, the first
martyr.
66. Although I do not wish to enter the discussion as to which version of the Testament
of Abraham is closest to the original, I tend to think that at crucial points the Coptic version
provides a more primitive text.
67. In the Coptic Testaments of Isaac and Jacob, which obviously depend upon the Tes-
tament of Abraham, the judgment scene does not occur. Enoch is mentioned in the Testament
of Isaac in a list of patriarchs, and his assumption to heaven is mentioned in the Bohairic
version. He is called “Our father Enoch” (MeneswT ENWX), reminiscent of the grave stelae
mentioned above. See K. H. Kuhn, “The Sahidic Version of the Testament of Isaac,” Journal
of Theological Studies n.s. 8 (1957): 231. Cf. also S. Gaselee’s translation of the Bohairic ver-
sion in G. H. Box, The Testament of Abraham (London: SPCK, 1927), 62-63. For the Bohairic
text, see I. Guidi, “Il Testamento di Isaaco e il Testamento di Giacobbe,” Rendiconti d. Reale
Accademia dei Lincei (Cl di scienze morali, Storiche, e Philologiche 9; Rome: Accademia dei
Lincei, 1900), 230. On the priority of the Sahidic version, see P. Nagel, “Zur sahidischen
Ax CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

In our Enoch fragments the judgment process includes the

weighing of sins and good deeds on a “scale of righteousness.”
The scale is administered by an angel referred to as “the arch-
angel” (1v,i,5—6) or “the angel of mercy.” Both designations belong
to the archangel Michael in Coptic angelology, and I do not
hesitate to identify him accordingly.®
The idea of weighing souls (psychostasia) or human deeds in a
process of judgment occurs jn the Old Testament and other Jewish
literature; and there are analogies in Greek,” Iranian, and other
literatures.”’ In ancient Egyptian literature and iconography, of
course, the idea is central.” Accordingly, we might expect to find
it as a central concept in Coptic Christianity, whose religious lore
is in so many respects derived from that of Pharaonic Egypt. But
this, in fact, is not the case. The psychostasia, and Michael’s role in
it, becomes an important symbol in medieval Christianity in the
West (see p. 176 below).”

Version des Testamentes Isaaks,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Martin-Luther-Universitat

Halle-Wittenberg 12 (1963): 259-63.
68. For Michael as “the archangel,” see Miller, Engellehre, 8; for Michael as “the angel
of mercy,” see ibid., 18. For the Book of the Installation of the Holy Archangel Michael, see Miller,
Biicher der Einsetzung, 26 (Coptic), 33 (German translation). This is consistent with Michael’s
role as advocate and defender of the faithful in Jewish angelology. See, e.g., O. Betz, Der
Paraklet: Fiirsprecher im héretischen Judentum, im Johannes-Evangelium und in neugefundenen
gnostischen Schriften (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Spatjudentums und Urchristentums 2;
Leiden: Brill, 1963), 63-69. I know of no Jewish texts, however, in which Michael takes
part in the weighing of the soul or of the soul’s good and bad deeds in the judgment. In
Coptic Christianity, Michael’s role as mediator between God and humans is so great that
he occupies a place analogous to that of Jesus Christ himself in Western Christianity. Cf.
Miiller, Engellehre, 4.
69. Job 31:6; Ps 62:9; Prov 16:2; 21:2; 24:12; Dan 5:27; Psalms of Solomon 5.6; 1 Enoch
41.1; 61.8; 2 Enoch 49.2; 52.15. The most important parallels to our text are 1 Enoch 61.8 and
2 Enoch 52.15. On the Testament of Abraham and the Apocalypse of Zephaniah, see pp. 173-75
below.
70. G. Macurdy, “Platonic Orphism in the Testament of Abraham,” Journal of Biblical
Literature 61 (1942): 213-26; but the parallels from Greek literature to the judgment scene
in the Testament of Abraham are not real parallels, as G. F. Brandon notes in “The Weighing
of the Soul,” in Myths and Symbols: Studies in Honor of Mircea Eliade (ed. J. Kitagawa and
C. Long; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), 91-110, esp. 99.
71. Brandon, “Weighing of the Soul,” 109-10.
72. Cf. ibid., 91-99; cf. also idem, The Judgment of the Dead: An Historical and Comparative
Study of the Idea of a Post-Mortem Judgment in the Major Religions (London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1967), 37-48.
73. See L. Kretzenbacher, Die Seelenwaage: Zur religiésen Idee vom Jenseitsgericht auf der
Schicksalswaage in Hochreligion, Bildkunst und Volksglaube (Buchreihe des Landesmuseums fiir

ve
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 173

The weighing of good and bad deeds on a scale is mentioned

in the Coptic Apocalypse of Zephaniah.”* This apocalypse, which
depicts the fates of the righteous and the damned, features two an-
gels who write down the good deeds of the righteous in a record
book (xefpotpackon; 3.6)” and an accusing angel (KATHTOpPOC)
who similarly keeps a record book of human sins (3.9). The role of
the accusing angel is to “accuse men in the presence of the Lord”
(6.17). Thus, this angel plays the role of Satan in the Old Testament
(Job 1-2; Zech 3:1-2), and one would expect his archopponent to
be Michael.”° Curiously, Michael is not named in the text. The
weighing of good deeds is mentioned in a passage whose con-
text is disturbed and in which the text is probably corrupt: “Now
therefore, my sons, this is the contest [ACWN] where it is necessary
that the good deeds and the wicked deeds be weighed on a scale”
(8.5).”” This passage is followed by a blast on a golden trumpet by
a great angel,” celebrating the victory over the Accuser: “For you
[singular] have triumphed over the accuser, and you have escaped
the abyss and Hades. You will now cross over the crossing place.
For your name is written in the Book of the Living” (9.12; trans.
Wintermute in OTP 1.514).
We turn again to the Testament of Abraham, but this time to re-
cension A of the Greek version, for the psychostasia scene is absent

Karnten 4; Klagenfurt: Verlag des Landesmuseums fiir Karnten, 1958); cf. also Brandon,
“Weighing of the Soul,” 100-109.
74. See introduction and translation by O. S. Wintermute in OTP 1.497-515. The Cop-
tic fragments were first published by Steindorff in Apokalypse des Elias. The Apocalypse of
Zephaniah was originally composed in Greek by a Jewish writer, probably in Alexandria.
It is quoted once by Clement of Alexandria.
75. The same word is used of Enoch’s record book.
76. Dan 12:1; 3 Baruch 11-15; and many other texts. Cf. Betz, Paraklet, 63-72. In the
New Testament Jude 9 and Rev 12:7-17 reflect the traditional Jewish view of the struggle
between Satan and Michael.
77. Steindorff, Apokalypse des Elias, 56 (my translation, following the suggestion of von
Lemm, Koptische Miscellen, 513 [CXLII]). Steindorff suggests (56n.) that this passage, with
its address to the readers, may be a later gloss. I prefer to see it as an integral part of the
apocalypse, as does Wintermute, who translates the passage, “Now, moreover, my sons,
this is the trial because it is necessary that the good and the evil be weighed in a balance”
(OTP 1.514).
78. Michael is the trumpeter at the judgment in Coptic texts; see Miller, Engellehre, 11,
30. On the encomium on the archangel Michael attributed to St. Peter of Alexandria, see
chapter 4 above.
174 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

from recension B.”’ In A.12 Abraham sees two angels “of fiery ap-
pearance” (nvpivot ti dyn) driving souls “into the wide gate to
destruction.” Between the wide gate leading to destruction and
the narrow gate leading to life sits a “wondrous man, looking like
the sun, like a son of God” on a throne of judgment. Before him
stands a table upon which lies a huge book, flanked by an angel
on either side holding parchment and ink and a pen, recording
the sins and the good deeds. In front of the table is a luminous
angel holding a scale in his hand with which to weigh the souls,”
and on his left sits a fiery angel with a trumpet in his hand in
which is fire “for the testing of the sinners.”
In A.13 Michael identifies the various personages for Abraham:
the judge is Abel;*' the recording angels are left unnamed; the
angel holding the scale is the archangel Dokiel,** “who weighs the
righteous deeds and the sins by the righteousness of God”; and
the angel wielding the fire of testing is Puruel.* Enoch is absent
in recension A; his place is taken by the two unnamed recording
angels, a feature reminiscent of the Apocalypse of Zephaniah.
Another interesting detail in recension A.14 is absent from the
other versions. Abraham asks about the soul whose sins and good
deeds were equal, and Michael replies, “If it could obtain one righ-
teous deed more than its sins, it will go to salvation.” Abraham
thereupon suggests that he and Michael pray to God in this soul’s
behalf. Michael agrees, and the soul is taken to paradise. Here, in
effect, we see Michael functioning in his role as advocate for the

79. A weighing process may be implied in recension B.9, wherein Abraham sees a soul
whose sins were “of equal weight” (icoGuyovoac) with her good works. Cf. also the Coptic
version 9 in MacRae, “Coptic Testament of Abraham.”
80. In A.12 souls are weighed (€Cvyialev tac wuxdc), but in A.13 righteous deeds and
sins are weighed. The weighing of souls is reminiscent of the weighing of the heart in the
Egyptian judgment scenes, and the “righteousness of God” mentioned in A.13 is reminis-
cent of Egyptian maat, the feather against which the heart is weighed. There can hardly be
any doubt as to the influence of Egyptian ideas on the Testament of Abraham.
81. But his judgment is only the first of three. The second judgment occurs “at the
second coming” (of Christ) by the “twelve tribes of Israel”; the final judgment is before
God himself. These three judgments are not mentioned at all in the short recension and
probably do not belong to the original version of the Testament of Abraham.
82. This name does not occur elsewhere. For the etymology (= Sedegiel [righteousness
of God]}), see Nickelsburg, “Eschatology in the Testament of Abraham,” 33.
83. Also a hapax legomenon. The etymology, from Greek rip, is obvious.

“
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon W®)

defense and Abraham sharing in it, but Michael plays no role at

all in the judgment scene, unless the unnamed angel recording
the good deeds is identified as Michael.™
The major parallel between recension A of the Testament of Abra-
ham and our Enoch apocryphon consists of the metaphor of the
weighing of souls (i.e., its good and bad deeds) in a scale. The
discrepancy of detail, however, is such that one cannot argue for
a direct dependence of the Enoch apocryphon upon the Testament
of Abraham, at least in its presentation of the psychostasia. For ex-
ample, Abel as judge, the recording angels, Dokiel and Puruel —
all of these are absent from the Enoch fragments. Of course some
of the details in our text are difficult to interpret. For example,
what does the archangel put upon the balances of righteousness
(1v,i,5—8): the heart of the person under judgment (as in the Egyp-
tian vignette), his rod (cf. 7v,ii,10), or a record of good and/or bad
deeds? Or again: Who are the “other mighty angels,” of a “fiery”
kind, that are brought to the scene (1v,i,9-12): angels of testing,
like Puruel in the Testament of Abraham (recension A.12), or “fiery”
angels of punishment also mentioned there?”
Finally, both the Testament of Abraham and this Enoch apocry-
phon stress intercession for sinners. Abraham (in recension A of
Testament of Abraham) finally joins Michael in praying for a sinner
whose sins and good deeds were equal. In our Enoch fragments
the role of paraclete seems to be divided between the Son of God
(if that is who it is)*° who bows down at the feet of his Father
in fervent prayer (1v,ii) and the angel of mercy (= Michael) who
places his rod on one side of the balances (7V,ii).
The weighting of the scale by the angel of mercy is a remark-
able motif for which no parallel can be found in the Testament
of Abraham or — so far as I am aware — in any other Jewish or
84. Nickelsburg suggests this; “Eschatology in the Testament of Abraham,” 44.
85. In the Testament of Isaac and the Testament of
Jacob, the punishing angels are called
tiw@ptotar. Neither testament, however, contains a description of the judgment; see Box,
Testament of Abraham, 68-69, 82.
86. In Coptic angelology, Michael, rather than Jesus Christ, is usually the advocate for
the faithful before the judgment; see Miller, Engellehre, 11. In a homily by Severianos of
Ngabal, Michael is described as kneeling before the Father and exhorting him to remember
his “image” (eikav); see Miller, Engellehre, 168; and fragments 1r,i,10 and 1v,ii,8-14.
176 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Christian apocryphon. It certainly expresses a genuinely Egyp-

tian spirit,’ and it is therefore surprising that no parallel can be
found in Coptic literature. But it is all the more remarkable that
the idea shows up in medieval Christianity in the West, first, ap-
parently, in Ireland. The famous sculptured cross of Muiredach
at Monasterboice, County Louth, dating from 923, has as one of a
series of sacred episodes caryed on it a large pair of scales, in one
pan of which sits a small human figure. The archangel Michael
holds a staff, the butt of which rests on the head of a recumbent
devil attempting to pull down the other scale pan.” The role of
Michael in this sculptured monument is quite analogous to the
role assigned to him in our Enoch fragments: he comes to the
aid of a poor sinner at the judgment, presiding over the weighing
process and ensuring a favorable balance with his rod. The major
difference is that it is the devil who wants to weight the scale; in
our text it is Michael himself. Otherwise, if we were to inquire
as to a literary source for the sculptured scene on the Muiredach
cross, our Enoch apocryphon would come closer than any extant
document. The Apocalypse of Zephaniah, with its motif of the psy-
chostasia as an agon between the soul and the Kategoros (= Satan),
might be another possible source of influence.
In summary, the Enoch apocryphon represented by the frag-
ments presented here must have been a most interesting and
unusual text. It is clearly influenced by older apocryphal literature
(including Christian apocrypha such as the Apocalypse of Elijah),
but also contains some original features. It is definitely a Christian
product (we have too little of it left to argue for a Jewish Grund-
schrift), as is shown by its express mention of the Holy Trinity. I

87. Cf. the astute remarks on the Egyptian conceptions concerning the judgment of
the dead and the magical use of the so-called negative confession (Book of the Dead 125)
in S. Morenz, Egyptian Religion (trans. A. E. Keep; Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press,
1973), 126-31.
88. Cf. O. Chadwick’s remarks concerning “a vaguely Egyptian ethos about early Irish
monasteries and hermitages,” in John Cassian (2d ed.; London: Cambridge University Press,
1968), 148.
89. See Brandon, “Weighing of the Soul,” 101-2. He cites a number of other examples
and also discusses the Testament of Abraham in this connection. Cf. also idem, Judgment of
the Dead, 121, fig. 6, for a representation of the scene on the cross of Muiredach.
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 17?

assign it to fifth- or sixth-century Egypt, presumably in a monastic

setting.

TELEX |

Some preliminary remarks on the following transcription and

translation are in order. Iemploy Crum’s numbering of the folios,
but place them in the order that I consider to be more probable.
I supply line numbering for convenience of reference (Crum did
not number the lines), but in only folios 9, 1, and 7 do the line
numbers correspond to the lineation of the original pages. In the
cases of the other folios, we do not know how much material has
been lost from the tops of the pages.
In the transcription I use a system of word division different
from that of Crum (following Till’s Koptische Grammatik instead).
For reasons of space I do not render the paragraph incipits ac-
cording to the manuscript (with initial letters written into the left
margin, decorated with the coronis: >), but I indicate where these
occur in my notes to the text. Supralinear strokes are rendered ap-
proximately as they appear in the manuscript, and omitted when
they are lacking there.
In the translation, for reasons of space, I do not indicate the
Greek loanwords in parentheses as is often done in editing Cop-
tic texts. I attempt to make the English translation correspond
line-for-line with the Coptic transcription, but this is not always
possible, either because of the differing syntax or for reasons of
space.
The following sigla are employed:

X A dot under a letter indicates that the letter is visually

uncertain.

A dot on the line outside brackets indicates a letter of which

only ink vestiges survive and which cannot be restored.
[.] A dot inside brackets indicates letter spaces within a lacuna.
178 CHRISTIANITY IN EGYPT

Three dots in the translation indicate scant material that,

though possibly translatable, is ambiguous. Possibilities for
translation are sometimes presented in the notes.
C] Square brackets indicate a lacuna in the manuscript. Where
the text cannot be restored with reasonable probability, the
number of missing letters is indicated with either dots or
numbers, for example, +7. Brackets in the translation indi-
cate lacunas in the manuscript either restored or not restored,
but I do not split English words with brackets, preferring to
put whole words either completely in or completely out of
brackets, depending on the probability of the reading. Un-
translatable material is put in brackets in the translation or
indicated with three dots.
le Angular brackets indicate editorial emendations.

{} Braces indicate editoria! cancellation of erroneous additions

by the scribe.
Parentheses in the translation indicate material thought nec-
essary for the English sense, but not explicit in the Coptic
text.

In the accompanying notes I provide information pertaining

to the manuscript, text, and translation. I do not always present
Crum’s transcription, where only slightly different from mine
(thus departing from the procedure followed in the earlier version
of this essay),”” nor do I indicate where my translation differs from
that of Crum, though the differences are frequently substantial.

90. These minor differences include such details as the placement of brackets or the
use of sublinear dots.
 A Coptic Enoch Apocryphon 179

TEXT AND TRANSLATION

180 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

1. Folio 2— recto
[QINOTA[E] ONT
2 PWAE N[AS] ;
KAJOC ET[E TAT]
[28 Jas 4 Me sapl(erd ayq]p
[+7 ].€ QOTEQHTYA
[+7 Jamoy 6 IINOTTE AE
[47 ].Q& MINOTTE O[N]
[+7 ]Me 8 EpeNneyal[tcre]
[.....-&]Y2sI AOC AE AAO[Y]
[+7 me 10 ETRE TIEY_.[
[+8 JN [A]N tE[Y

2. Folio 21 verso
AT[ANAJAALA]
BANE AAOFY € 2
TNE AYNOTNA
[ATCTH] PION 4 [
EOHITQN NA! €.
WN AITAICE 6 N[
A[T}W NNOTC al
THpoT eeu 8 en
[QIN NAI@ONA pen[
[MJOTOEIN: ATW 10 ay
[.. MANN | K|

2r,i,4 Crum places this and the other lines in this column one line too far down in
relation to column two and reads on line 4: Jn.
2r,i,6 Crum: JAnoy, with amoq suggested in a note as an alternative possibility.
Read either aqjanoy “he begat him” or avjanoy “he was begotten.”
2r,i,9 Crum: ja.
2r,i,11 Crum: [. . .}f& NN[. Milik presupposes [co@]sa and translates sapient]iam (codia)
“wisdjom.”
2r,ii,1 Crum: [.] Nov{. Jon. He suggests in a note: “presumably ‘son of a],’ or some-
thing similar,” referring to Enoch. Milik: . . . [filius] hominis [iu]sti (Sixatoc) . . .
“[son of a right]Jeous man.”

“
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 181

1. Folio 2 recto

Truly, moreover, the

2, righteous man,
that is,
[ 4 Jared
[ feared
[ ] begat him 6 God, for
[ ] under God’s
[ 8 [angels also]
[ ] he received loved him
[ 10 because of his [
[ [and his

2. Folio 2 verso
he was
taken up to 2
heaven. He perceived the
[mysteries] 4 [
[that are hidden] in the [
eons of the height, 6 [
[and] all the minds [
that are hidden 8 [
in the eons of [
the Light, and 10 he [
[the ] of the [ [

2r,ii,7-9 The construction is difficult, but I follow Crum’s translation here.

2r,ii,10 Crum: [e]Taer. .[.
2r itd! Crum has nothing for this line.
2v,i,11 Crum: [. . .Jf& NN[. There must have been a definite article in the first place on
this line.
2v,ii,4 Crum has nothing for this line.
2v,ii,8 Read en[wx “Enoch”?
2v,i1,9 Crum: pe[.
2v,ii,10 Crum: ac[{ “she” (plus perfect verb).
2v,ii,11 Crum: MWt[.
182 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

3. Folio 31 recto
ASU...) €[
2 QO[O}w EYAQEP[a]
TY QIZANTO
4 ow ef<c>ovalc[te
[+8 ]. AOC N[TE] IN[OT]
[27-5 6 TEAYOTWN[Q]
[+7 JOAN N&Y €802 €[Y]
[+6 ]Waze 8 AHP EAN T[EY]
eo JIU[.JO" & TIE NOTA[O]
[+6 JYTA 10 29 NNO®TS [E]
[+7 ]zsJ PEOTKAOM [NA]
[+7 Joc 12 TAMANT[INON]
[.].[

4. Folio 3— verso
Foleed- sew ghuex
Y SEENDX I 2
WHPE NIAped
[2.5 ATE] F220 4 B[
WME QNTAGIA O€s[
[NCW)W NQH 6 TAA[
[T]¥ NCOTWND NOW|
[E]BOA ATIPAN 8 ATE. [
[Tle] 2€ ENWX MEQ[
[NJAY 2E NTA 10 NU[
FAS EI TY[

3r Crum allows the possibility that the top margin is preserved, but although
enough space is left on the fragment for three lines above the first visibly
inscribed line, the surface fibers are virtually all gone. This fragment probably
came from the bottom portion of the page (see p. 156 above).
31,15 Crum has nothing for this line.
3r,i8 Perhaps a verb: “spoke.”
3r,i,9 Crum: ] &-.
3r,ii,4 Manuscript: ef.

v“
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 183

. Folio 3 recto

[
day, while he stood
upon the mountain,
behold an angel
of God
appeared
to him,
] word(s) girded about [his]
loins with a
10 golden girdle, with
a crown [of]
ee
ee
ee
— i adamant
[
4. Folio 3 verso

[ said] to
him, “Enoch,
son of Jared,
[take this] book
in my hand
[and read] in my[
it, and reveal [
the name.” [
Enoch said
[to] him, “Who 10 and you [
[ him (it?) [

31,ii,13 Crum: ? Milik conjectures [super caput eius “upon his head.”
3V On this side, too, the surface fibers are missing on the top part of the fragment.
There was, contrary to Crum, probably no top margin at this point.
3v,i,2 Crum: Ca. ENWX. ¥ appears to be written into the left margin.
3v,i,9 It is presumed to have been written in the margin.
3v,11,6 it is written in the margin with a coronis above it: >.
3v,ii,7 Crum: Naf, but the tail of w is visible.
184 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

5. Folio 5— recto
ee |
2 ME|
[+6 ]MeT AYGNT [Y BET]
[.... ]€QN 4 PAN [AJITEIT
N&ET[OT]AlaB]
[+6 ze 6 TEE ENWX
[+6 ].OK NAY
BE TTR
[+7 ]K 8 OEIC EFC] WO]
bevese }8EROA ANT NPAN
[+7 ]€T 10 NAQOPATON
[+7 ]N AIGNTOT €[T]
[+7 ]. 12 [C]JHQ
QM MAW
[+8 }. WA [€

6. Folio 51 verso
[+6 ]N[
[+6 jow 2 [JL
WOz[Ne] Noe AD|
WT N[E|]TNQH 4 A|
[Tlog N[T]oow ce pw|
Ep QAAME NT 6 eal
TIE AN IUTKAQ TH[
TIPAN ATETW[T ] 8 ME. [
[23] WO NITMEQ WT
WOANT AL 10 CHQ[
[N]NETQIZN [ N[
eave beets! 12 TI
it

5r Crum regards this page as the verso side of the folio (with a question mark).
5r,i,3 Crum: }. Wt..
5r,i,6 Crum: Je.
5r,i,9 Crum: }e8oa.
5ri,12-13 Crum: ?
5r,ii,1 Crum has nothing for this line.
5rii4-5 | The expected supralinear stroke does not appear over the nomen sacrum NNa&
“spirit” (mvedua).
5r,ii,6 itis written in the margin, with a coronis above it: >.
5v Crum regards this page as the recto side of the folio (with a question mark).
5v,i,8 Initial 1 is written in the margin.

*
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 185

5. Folio 5 recto

[
2 [
[ ] the one who he found [it to be the]
iain 4 name [of] the
[ [Holy] Spirit.
[ 6 Enoch said
[ to him, “My
[ 8 lord, behold
lee ee three invisible
[ 10 names
[ I have found
[ i written in the
[ book [

6. Folio 5 verso

[
[ Ja 2 [
single counsel [
which is in 4 [
them. They [
guide the 6 [
heaven and the earth. [
The name of the Father 8 [
[touches] the [
third [ 10 is written [
which is upon [
[ 12 [
[

5v,i9 Crum: [.]wg. He translates “is written” (with a question mark), as though the
word were CHQ.
5v,i,12 Crum has nothing for this line.
5v,ii,2 Crum has nothing for this line.
5v,ii,3 Crum: AH[. He places this and the other lines in this column two lines too
high in relation to column one.
5v,ii,4 Crum: ?
5v,ii,5 Crum: p.[.
5v,1i1,9 Crum: @[
5v,ii,10 Crum: CH[.
186 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

7. Folio 4— recto

(+6 JET.
Perec yl 2 Wa.
(oecad ]T[ WA... INO]
[... NJANOTY 4 TE NA[XAPIZE]
[. JNAWore N&K [NJOTP[AN]
[.... oY EITE 6 NCOEIT E[QOTO
‘Sheer Jecoa % EPWME NIA
[CA..]. CQATCOT 8 CENABITK ET
aoe JAIN TEY TLE QM ITER
[....JE ATTA 10 C[MJM&A
NCE RA
hanes JAAY ET AKIN TMHTE
Bes. j Raa | a7 12 [NO |TMOOT
KH
[48]. [.].
Neon Yel
14 ATIE|
Seal
16 TUN
8. Folio 41 verso
Pear Tce. AM
[+7 IN{ 2 giz
Eas ]. put. NIT N[
in KOC Ne 4 BACTI[OC AZO]
BINTAIAC eIC TS. [
[CJ€EAOC TAMOY 6 MAPeE[NOC
Epooey Qian BE CA
MTOOT dAY 8 NXEIpPlE
GNWOATE WO Np[Oame]
NCHPACT(C) 10 QIBAMTI[KAQ]
ATW ITE WATH |
ONCQAT | 12 NOON .[
Exe te
[+ 7JAC 14

4r It is not certain where folio 4 fits in relation to the other folios, nor is it certain
which is the recto and which the verso (see p. 157 above). Crum regards this
as the recto.
4ri,1 Crum places this line and the others in this column one line too far down in
relation to column two and reads: ]eT{.
4ri4 Crum: JANovw.
4ri5 Crum: Jawwite.
4r,i,8 Crum does not restore the word coaca “comfort.”
4r,i,12 Crum: JIINTY.
4ri,13 Crum: ?
4r,i1,8 C is written in the margin with a coronis above it: ¢:
4r,ii,12 [Ne@}eMoeeTKH with Crum. This is probably a scribal error for NTAMO@HKH,
and the word is translated accordingly. & cannot be read in the manuscript.
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 187

7. Folio 4 recto

[
[ 2 my [
[ [ God]
[ ] good 4 [will bestow]
[ ] will become upon you a [name]
[ ] whether 6 [more] famous
[ ] to comfort than (that of) any man.
[ ] write them 8 You will be taken to
[ ] from his heaven in your
[ 10 body, and you will
[ ] him (it?) which be placed in the midst
[ 12 [of the] storehouse
[ eleerel
14 [
[
16 [

8. Folio 4 verso

[ [
[ 2 upon [
[ [
hal Wea 4 the holy one [of the
since the angel Lord, [
had informed him 6 virgin [
about them on that [
the mountain. He 8 might spend [the]
found three thousand [years]
seals, 10 upon the [earth]
and the [ except [
[ ] the writings 12 abyss [
[
[ 14

4r,ii1,13 Crum: [.JT€ owcie.

4r,ii,14 Crum: JIU.
4rii,15-16 Crum has nothing for these lines.
Av,iA Crum: ]KOC NJ-.
4v,i,12 Crum: [o]v. Ncgav. The visible trace of the first letter looks more like a.
4v,i,13 Crum: JT.
4v,ii,1 Crum: Wal.
Av, ii,3 Crum: [.JTN[.
4y,ii,5 Milik: [misit?] “[sent].”
4Av,ii,7 Crum: 2€C_[.
4v,ii,8-9 Read AmjWo or NT}Wo Np[oame] “the thousand [years],” that is, the millen-
nium. Crum inexplicably translates wo Np[oaste] “hundred [years].”
188 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

9. Folio 8T recto

TE.[
2 AE[.....]..
[+6 ]MO QN .[...] Qs
[.....] AH 4 NT[ET]MAAT
heey eae EIC TAL. JET W[W]
[.... ]OTQN Me NOT NTAK
[+7 ]. ‘ 2MOCc NQH[T]
[.....€]NWX 8 EC WOAMNT N
[+6 ]TAZO COT ACWAZ[E]
[+6 ]PAN 10 QN QENNO[G]
[+7 Je NWAZE .2.[
[+7 Je 12 (.JHONT.J-L

10. Folio 8— verso

.[.. JIT
ZOl....JAE Zz
EPe.[. AME O[
O<v>TE AMOTES 4 ENW[X
AE EPOC ATIOT ANTZ[
EWOTONYC EBOA 6 ENWX JIT[A]
er(€ |MHTEL WHpE .[
[NJCAWK NT 8 A.[
OTONQC EBOA ene.|
QN TAHTE 10 NAT
ATIEKETW(T] NAl[
AN TEKA [AAT] 12 Tal
[.. .J2s[ XI

8r Crum regards this as the verso.

8r,i,5 Crum has nothing for this line.
8r,i,7 Crum has nothing for this line.
8r,ii,1 Crum: €[.
8r,ii,2 Crum: »#e€[.
81,ii,7 Crum: NQH[TC] “from [her].”
8r,ii,11 Crum: kQ .[.
8r,ii,12 Crum: [.JHN. . wf.
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 189

9. Folio 8 recto

[
2 [
[ in [
[ 4 of her.
[ Behold, what is my [ ]
[ Jin 6 becoming, which you
[ have begotten from [me]?
[ ] Enoch 8 Behold three
[ ] judge (verb) times she spoke
[ ] name(s) 10 with great
[ words. [
[ 12 [
10. Folio 8 verso

[
2
[ ] true. [
Neither was it 4 Enoch [
known, nor could it [
be revealed, 6 Enoch, [my]
unless son, [
you [masculine singular] go and 8 [
reveal it [
in the midst 10 et |
[of] your father [
and your [mother] ie [
[ [

8v Crum regards this as the recto.

8v,i,1 Crum: JII[.
8v,i,2 Crum: only ]e.
8v,i,3 Crum: epe[. . . AE.
8v,i,4 Crum: ONTe A[stJOwes, as in the manuscript ONTe is obviously a scribal error
for OWTE.
8v,i1,5 Crum: ?
8v,ii,10 Either “for them” or a form of the verb “to see.”
190 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

11. Folio 6— recto

4 a eM SP
(+8 Jw 2 ETQI[...]..X[E]
[+8 he BOA wages Q
[+7 WN 4 ATTROITO
[.. .JNWA2€ N NTMApoee
[NQEJAAHN A 6 NOC ECNKO
[....]CWTA TRNQHTY
beats ee 8y TIERAC NAY ZI[E]
Ae ] INE ENWX ITA
[+6 ].TA 10 WHPE AAP[ON]
[+6 ]opar EQOTN ENIK[OF]
(+8 Ja 12 TWN NTN.
[+8 J€
12. Folio 61 verso
eee!
BHI... JANE 2
K....NTET On|
N[OW] N[T]ACCH 4 TAT. .AIT[A]
TA €[T]EhW TAIEKIB[EN]
NH NENWX 6 TH TAMALAT]
TIECCON le ANWGO[A]
BAC NAY BE 8 ETPAW|
ENWX TACO NKEI[
[Q]WN EQowN 10 tal
EPO NTGW [WT | N[
[€]BOA AIT [ 12 N[
[

6r,i,1 Crum places this line and the others in this column one line too far up in
relation to column two and reads: JW [.
6r,i,5 Crum disregards the lacuna at the beginning of the line and reads: nwaze n-.
6r,ii,1-3 The material at the end of these lines is on a small fragment now attached to
the wrong position on the other side of the main fragment. Since the smaller
fragment was in the right place when Crum made his transcription, I assume
that the wrong placement occurred when the fragments were remounted in
1925 (see p. 153, n. 2 above). The proper placement of the small fragment can
easily be ascertained by a study of the fibers and by comparison with the
destruction pattern on the contiguous folio 8r.

*
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 191

11. Folio 6 recto

D which is [
outside [
4 the bedchamber
] the words of of the virgin
the] Greeks 6 in which she was
] hear sleeping.
8 She said to him,
“Enoch, my
10 son, [let us go]
— into the bed-
12 chamber, and let us [
=——
eee
ee
SS

12. Folio 6 verso

[
[ 2
[ ] at the moment again [
[when] she heard 4 [ ] I had not yet
[the] voice taken the breast [of]
of Enoch, 6 my [mother].
her brother, she It is not [possible]
said to him, 8 for me to [
“Enoch, my brother, [
[come] in 10 I[
to me and look, [
do not [ 12 [
[

6r,ii,1 Crum: only Jac.

6r,1i,2 Crum: feg[..... nN.
6r,ii,8 Initial mW is written in the margin, with a coronis above it: >
6v,i,1-4 See note to 6r,ii,1-3.
6v,i,1 Crum places this line and the others in this column one line too far down in
relation to column two and reads: [. . .JNC.
6v,i,8 Initial 2 is written in the margin.
6v,ii,4 Crum: faJt. ATI.
6v,ii,13 Crum has nothing for this line.
192 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

13. Folio 9— recto

NNOTTEGW ZBEOTKOTN [E]
WT EQPATEAWK: 2 NE CENAANA
AYNAT EPOK ADAMBANE N[IA]
BENTKOTCH 4 NPWE [ET ]
TIM ATWEKCA TLE QA TILEY [CW]
QH® EBOA EFTE 6 M&A ESMHTL[ES ]
e00T N[IJA: TIE AN[O]K' TEA[AC ]
BAaY BE [..JEIAT & NAY ZET[EN]
ANO[....JNEP. OEIC ..[
Tide Eee 10 TeBeat

14. Folio 91 verso

[(CEJNAABI NIC] Es{E}MHTE<I>N
[Na]@ eEQpal eT 2 TIAACCE NKE
[ME] QA TIET CW pwme NOE
[MA] OTA BE 4 ATTENEIOT
(Q]HATAC AN ABRAM NYG
[KJEOTEI BETA 6 PG EITKAQ
(BIJOAN [..JK& TIE BAC NAY
[. .] ATLAAE 8 BE [MACONA
[.].€NQHTG A& [ITE] <II>KAPITOC
.. TEL 10 ETN [AE] EBOA
NQH[TK

9r The top margin is preserved

9r,i,1 The first-perfect prefix &- undoubtedly occurred on the preceding line.
9r,i8 Initial a is written in the margin.
9r,i,10 Crum: ?
9r,ii,1 Initial 2 is written in the margin. Crum does not provide for another letter
after OTKOTN.
9r,ii,2 Crum: J10. . .N[&-]. Milik: Nonne [Dominus ?]assumet (avadapBaverv) “will [the
Lord?] take up.”
9r,ii,3 The text follows Tito Orlandi, “Studi Copti, n. 1,” Vetera Christianorum 15 (1978):
122. Crum: AdABaAnel.

ve
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 193

13. Folio 9 recto

God looked Well, then,

down upon you, 2 will [any (other)]
and he saw you man be taken
to be an elect 4 up [to]
one, and heaven in his
removed from 6 [body] except
every evil.” He [me?” She] said
Said | 8 to him, [“Our]
[ Lord [
[ 10 [
14. Folio 9 verso
[Two] will be taken except by
up to 2 forming another
[heaven] in their bodies, man like
one 4 our father
Elijah, and Adam, and (that) he
another Tabitha 6 inhabit the earth.”
[ She said to him,
[ ] the place 8 “My brother,
where [ <Methuselah> [is] <the>
[ 10 fruit that [will come]
forth from [you

9r,ii,8 Initial N is written in the margin, with a coronis above it: >. Crum: Na[v] ae.
9r,ii,10 Crum has nothing for this line.
ov The top margin is preserved.
9v,i,1 Crum: [. JNA.
9v,i,10 Crum: JTeT[.
Ov, ii,1 The manuscript has efeHTe, which Crum prints.
Ov, ii,7 Initial 1M is written in the margin.
Ov, ii,8-9 As suggested by Crum in a note, it is assumed that AAeowc was erroneously
omitted from the name AMAAGOTCAAA.
Qv,ii,9 Crum: Aa&[. WKaApioc.
194 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

15. Folio 1— recto

[. jel 2 EYWA[N
CTW[T] EY OTKEY|
WANNAT EPO 4 NOT AN[
OT QN NETANT TE FNAL
WAYTE TH 6 BENTEA[
pov EWHATAAT NGONCN[
YNAC{C}QAICOT $8 TEYGOM |
NTETNOT HN AALAIWE 2.[
TETEKQIK® 10 QAITRO[CAOC]
THPCB(W)KEN ETAAA[T
TAKO' A [AJTAA 12 TOT ENT[HPY
WIN{e N|TOY nat
NcCa&[.... JA 14

16. Folio 1? verso

ae ho [+8 ]K
lucy JA.JCX 2 [+6 ]y-€
[...].00.N{ TE [AT] ME TIpAN
(...).4qnen 4 ATU H Pe A
[....Je AMAP JUNOTTE EY
[XAT ITEAOC AY 6 QMOOC NCA_
[KJAAY EAN MAMA OTNAM ATTY
[AWE NTATKAI 8 EIWT AY
[OC)J7NH AYET MAQTY EAN
(Ne€] NKeEacre 10 ATU[AIT ATTEY
[AO}CNAWwWpE efw[T]Eyaw
[. .IT[..].[ JWag 12 AA[OC] ZEW
TIA[ENWTA
14 Tp[

Ir The top margin is preserved. Crum regards this as the verso.

izs,i Crum: [.Je€[.
1r,i,13 Crum: WIN{e .JTm. He suggests nN] Toy in a note.
1r,i,14 Crum suggests in a note: Ncafowpw)ale] “for a man,” that is, “to mitigate the
severity of the recording angel.” I understand the recording to be done by
Enoch himself (see p. 160 above).
1r,ii,1 Crum: @pf.
11,ii,2 Crum: €9[.
1r,ii,3 It is not possible to read AowK “perish.”
1r,11,6 Crum: Z€nNoO{.
1r,ii,7 Crum: NGONC. [.
11,ii,9 Crum: a{. .Jweg[.
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 195

15. Folio 1 recto

[ [
[ 2 if he [
tremble. If he aaa
sees them 4 A |
in all their he will [
iniquities 6 ste
which they do, violence [
he will write them 8 his power. [
immediately, and balances [
your entire image 10 in that [world]
will go to [
perdition. But 12 them [completely
seek rather [
for [ 14

16. Folio 1 verso

[ [
[ 2 [
[ [that] is, the name
il eesah a of the Son of
[ ] of the arch- God
angel. He put 6 seated at
it upon the the right hand of his
balances of righteousness. 8 Father. He bowed
He brought down at
other mighty 10 the feet of his
angels Father, saying,
[ ] fiery ip KO,
my Father,
14 do not [

1r,ii,10 Crum does not restore KOCAOC.

ibeabith Crum: €[.)MAaA[.
trial. Crum: [. .Jvest{.
1r,ii,13 Crum has nothing for this line.
lv The top margin is preserved. Crum regards this as the recto.
1v,i,1-4 Crum has nothing for these lines.
divil2 Crum: Jo [N]Wag.
1v,ii,10 T is written over part of 4, which the scribe apparently began to write.
1v,ii,14 Crum: JIp[. . . JANY. There is no trace of the last three letters read by Crum
on the fragment now. Perhaps a small piece broke off here subsequent to his
transcription and is now lost.
196 COPTIC TRANSCRIPTION

17. Folio 71 recto

EKQ(E]..[ [.Ju
Was }YPN[o} 2 me[...J.[
BE QN OT ANT es ju eK
KO[T] I NQHT - eq [O]TY €BOA
AN OT ANT NKECOIt
WayqTe N 6 TIE AE ENWX
NEKCEQ NET NAC BZEOTK _
NORE NCWOT 8 {KJOWN [GE] ATTEI
TAXH: AAAlLA] NOOTE A[I] NOT
EKEKW AIT] 10 ACTE[A]OC ON
KAQ QIZ[A] TITE NYRA
TIKAAQA[API] 12 [AY
on |
18. Folio 7— verso
[+8 ]. [..NJNOB[E..]..
PAE Wee 2 IN |44S [NNT
[N] Wwopin OON NY[T]A
[C]QATNNN[O]BE 4 AOOT E[KJECA
AN NATACGON EYWANNAT
NNWHpe N 6 ENNOBE ET
Npwae ce CWK TIAPaA
NAXAPIZE 8 NATAOON
NA[T] ANAT WAYY! ATTEY
[CJEAO[C NT] ANT 10 Q[P]ABAOC ET
AWANEQTHY [QIN TEYST 2
St EL 12 N[OJONAMNY
T[AAO]Y EAN

7r The top margin is preserved, and the numeral fa (14) occurs in the top margin
at the inside, even with the left margin. Since this numeral occurs on the inside
of the page it must be taken to indicate the quire number rather than the page
number. Thus this page is the first of the fourteenth quire. So also Crum, but
he allows for the possibility of taking this page as a verso, with the numeral
therefore in the proper position for a page number.
711,13 Crum: ONG[.
7r,ii,1 Crum has nothing for this line. The tail of wy is visible.
7r,ii,3 Crum:[ €K-].
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION 197

17. Folio 7 recto

you [find [
[ ] he sin(ned) Z [
through [ ] you
cowardice 4 should erase it
and again.”
iniquity, you should 6 Enoch said
not write their to her,
sins against them 8 “Has God, [then],
hastily, but not taken an
you should put [the] 10 angel in
reed on heaven, and [placed]
the penholder 12 [him
[
18. Folio 7 verso

[ [ ] sins [
[ 2 [and] he takes [the good
first [ deeds, and he
write the sins 4 sets them on the other
and the good deeds side. If he sees
of the sons of 6 the sins
men. [They] drawing down (the
will be granted 8 balances) more than the
the angel good deeds, he takes his
[of] 10 rod which is
mercy in his right
[ ie hand, and he
[sets] it upon

71,i1,6 It is written in the margin, with a coronis above it: =

7r,ii,8 Crum: KO@N [. A] JTEIT-.
7r,li,9 Crum: Nowte [¢] Now-. Oskar von Lemm suggests [as] instead of [+]; see
Koptische Miscellen (Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat d. Deutschen Demokratischen
Republik, 1972), 512 (CXLIII). Milik (following Crum): [dedit] “[has given].”
7V The top margin is preserved.
7v,i,1-2 Crum: ?
7V,i,9 Crum: Na&[K] “thou shalt be granted... .”
 at, : chek wae.
ir +2 fee ee Se
~ overhan i o* a!
| ingle wwe ~
ee
7- Ps ;
niviitl 2
> 7
= i be

li a aw
« A
. oe
i =
“a i on, :
~~) ; "er . bigger +! a i) ~
re —€ 0 tied “Se
| >. fg” ro) cars ® . - ie
} Tle ae a as” al ra E ee thes powe oy Ore @
' — = : rsa! - ~@ ws Alle _ vom ot D
“ ; m2 - — — . —_
™ , aap ® = 7
Is . fe + s@ ] a Fa 4 Prikne
a

A VeasAi! o*~ : , ~ - va ment hy

2 na
: : 1
; >@
yee Son ry :

ig one = A ite eth

6 @

= ™ 6 Lap ey ar
1? bagt abe
| a
”
” i

fv
g # m4)
? Aiiees.
a
Ved Thy ihe ra
a
nes 4) 5 @t svrA ® -

Pa . ' , my : 7

® ' @ aaegt
“ < 1 A \togaly
Py - Mi ,¥ x

oe Ae 7 ; 19 pd
.. 3 o 8 1! pet > AS
 Part 2

Gnosticism
in Egypt
 Gnosticism as a Religion

This chapter deals with three interrelated issues: (1) What is a reli-
gion? (2) What is Gnosticism? and (3) Can one legitimately speak
of Gnosticism as a religion? One would think that such questions
would have been settled long ago, at least by historians of re-
ligions. But that is evidently not the case. As for Gnosticism — a
notoriously misused term' — one would at least think that special-
ists in the history of religions might have come to some agreement
on its use in scholarly discourse. That has not happened, and now
we're even being asked to give it up altogether!”
I have dealt with these questions before. At the XVIth Congress
of the International Association for the History of Religions in
Rome in September 1990, I presented an invited paper entitled
“Is Gnosticism a Religion?’”’ In the paper I answered the ques-
tion put in its title in the affirmative and tried to show how and
why it is legitimate to treat Gnosticism as a religion. The congress
had as its main theme “the notion of ‘religion’ in comparative re-
search.” In my paper, I did not deal with religion as a general
human phenomenon, but chose instead to begin with the question
of what constitutes a religion, that is, a discrete religious tradition
or complex of traditions appearing in space and time that is dis-
tinguishable from other religions on the basis of its morphology
in terms of both content and function. I developed my discussion
of Gnosticism as a religion with reference to ideas put forward by

1. See R. Smith, “The Modern Relevance of Gnosticism,” in NHL 532-49.

2. M. A. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism:” An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious
Category (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). For discussion of this important
work, see pp. 208-9, 214 below. See also Karen King, What Is Gnosticism? (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2003), and p. 213.
3. B. A. Pearson, “Is Gnosticism a Religion?” in The Notion of “Religion” in Comparative
Research: Selected Proceedings of the XVIth Congress of the International Association for the History
of Religions, Rome, 3rd—8th September, 1990 (ed. U. Bianchi; Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider,
1994), 105-14.

201
202 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

my Santa Barbara colleague Ninian Smart on what constitutes a

religion. He refers to seven dimensions of a religion: (1) the doctri-
nal/philosophical dimension, (2) the mythic/narrative dimension
(sacred story), (3) the practical/ritual dimension, (4) the experi-
ential/emotional dimension (mysticism, etc.), (5) the ethical /legal
dimension, (6) the social/institutional dimension (organizational
structure), and (7) the material dimension (iconography, etc.).4
Analysis of the shape, content, and function of these dimensions
of a given religion as attested in the available data allows the his-
torian of religions to distinguish one religion from another and to
make relevant comparisons or contrasts.
In treating the various dimensions of Gnosticism I relied on the
primary evidence found in the Coptic texts from Nag Hammadi,
especially the Apocryphon of John (NHC II,1; I1,1; IV,1; BG,2),? and
I want to begin by summarizing that discussion here. For reasons
that will become apparent in what follows, I shall also adduce
some of the Mandaean evidence.
1. Doctrinal dimension. There are no Gnostic manuals of doctrine;
so the doctrinal dimension of Gnosticism must be extrapolated
from the sources at our disposal, which are essentially mythic
in character. Five chief tenets or categories of belief can be
identified:

a. Salvation by gnosis. Gnosis, knowledge revealed from the

transcendent realm, is requisite to salvation. Gnosis is to
Gnosticism what faith is to Christianity, and what obser-
vance of Torah is to Judaism. The revealed knowledge
changes the status of the knower in that the object of
this knowledge is both God and self. In Mandaeism this

4. N. Smart, The World’s Religions: Old Traditions and Modern Transformations (Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 10-21 (these are not listed in Smart’s order).
See also his Dimensions of the Sacred: An Anatomy of the World's Beliefs (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1996). I used Smart’s work in my treatment of Christianity as a reli-
gion; see B. A. Pearson, The Emergence of the Christian Religion: Essays on Early Christianity
(Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity, 1997), 7-22.
5. Quotations from the Apocryphon of John in this chapter are taken from M. Waldstein
and F. Wisse (eds.), The Apocryphon of John: Synopsis of Nag Hammadi Codices II,1; III,1; and
IV,1 with BG 8502,2 (NHMS 33; Leiden: Brill, 1995).
 Gnosticism as a Religion 203

gnosis is personified in the mythic name given to the

redeemer-revealer: Manda dHaiye (Knowledge of Life).°

b. Theology. The Gnostics split the transcendent God of the

Bible into two: a supertranscendent supreme God who
is alien to the world, and a not-so-transcendent creator
(demiurge) who is responsible for creating and govern-
ing the world in which we live. Among the many names
given to the highest deity in Mandaean sources is “King of
Light”; the demiurge is called (among other things) “King
of Darkness.”” In this we see a radical dualism, going
beyond anything we find in the Platonism of antiquity.®
The transcendent God is essentially unknowable, appre-
hended indirectly only through gnosis. This transcendence
is sometimes given expression in a “negative theology,”
such as is found in the Apocryphon of John: “The Monad
[is a unity with nothing] above it. [It is he who exists] as
[God] and Father of the All, [the invisible] One, who is
above [the All]. ... He is [illimitable] ... unsearchable.. .
immeasurable ... invisible... eternal... [ineffable]... un-
nameable . . . for no one can [know him]” (2,26—-3,26).’ Yet,
paradoxically, the creator and his powers are ultimately
derived from the highest God as products of a tragic de-
volution resulting from a split in the deity. The process of
devolution is presented in the basic Gnostic myth.

6. This name is ubiquitous in the Mandaean sources. See W. Foerster (ed.), Gnosis: A
Selection of Gnostic Texts (trans. and ed. R. M. Wilson; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972-74), 2.123-
319 (K. Rudolph’s translation of the Mandaean texts, with extensive introduction).
7. See, e.g., ibid., 2.148-58, 160-69.
8. On the Platonic influences on Gnosticism, see, e.g., B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Ju-
daism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1990), 148-64. See also the essays in J. D. Turner and R. Majercik (eds.), Gnosticism
and Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts (Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Se-
ries 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000); and J. D. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism and
the Platonic Tradition (BCNH Etudes 6; Quebec: Laval University Press/Louvain: Peeters,
2001).
9. 1omit the Greek words supplied in parentheses in the Waldstein and Wisse edition.
The restorations in brackets are usually made on the basis of the parallel versions and are
thus quite certain.
204 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

c. Cosmology. The xdooc, that is, the spatiotemporal universe,

is regarded by the Gnostics as a prison in which the true
human self is shackled. Created and governed by the demi-
urge and his powers, it is the realm of darkness and chaos.
The spiritual rulers (archons) of the world are closely as-
sociated with the seven planets (including sun and moon)
and the twelve zodiacal constellations. Their governance
is referred to as heimarmene (destiny). This cosmology is
based on that of the Hellenistic world in general, which
views the earth as a sphere at the center or bottom of the
universe, surrounded by the seven planets and the fixed
stars.'° Gnostic doctrine views this universe from a radical
dualist perspective.
d. Anthropology. The Gnostic’s self, the essential anthropos, is
as alien to the world as is the transcendent God. The inner
human self is, indeed, an immaterial spark of the divine
now imprisoned in a human body. The body and the lower
emotive soul belong to this world; it is the nous (mind) or
pneuma (spirit), called mana in the Mandaean sources, that
is the higher self, consubstantial with the transcendent de-
ity from which it originated. These doctrines are patently
based on interpretations of key biblical texts, especially
Genesis 1:26-27 and 2:7."!
e. Eschatology. The goal of the Gnostic is to be saved from
the cosmic, bodily prison and restored to the realm of
light. The means of achieving this is gnosis, which in some
Gnostic systems is presented by a savior who is regarded
as having come from the realm of light for the purpose
of awakening slumbering souls to the knowledge of God

10. On the “new cosmology” and its impact on Hellenistic religious beliefs, see M. P.
Nilsson, Greek Piety (Oxford: Clarendon, 1948), 96-103.
11. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 29-38; and idem, The
Pneumatikos-Psychikos Terminology in 1 Corinthians: A Study in the Theology of the Corinthian
Opponents of Paul and Its Relation to Gnosticism (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation
Series 12; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1973), chap. 6.
 Gnosticism as a Religion 205

and the self and enabling them to traverse the various lev-
els of the cosmos in a heavenly journey back to the realm of
light. The liberation of human souls, too, involves the liber-
ation of God, inasmuch as they are “sparks” of God. When
the process of liberation is completed, the entire material
cosmos will either be annihilated or become subject to eter-
nal, unmixed darkness. This eschatology is essentially a
revision of standard biblical and Jewish eschatology.

2. Mythic dimension. Myth and mythopoeia are a very impor-

tant aspect of the Gnostic religion. In giving expression to
their basic beliefs, the Gnostics felt constrained to put into
story form their insights concerning the human predicament
and the process of salvation. Indeed, mythopoeia was an on-
going activity of Gnostic teachers; each would tell the story in
his/her own way, recording these stories in apocalypses and
related literary forms.'’* The basic Gnostic myth, at least in its
origins, is based on Scripture, especially the Book of Gene-
sis. That is to say, the essential elements of the Gnostic myth
consist of reinterpretations of key passages in Scripture and of
certain Jewish traditions of biblical exegesis. The basic myth
as found in the Apocryphon of John consists of the following
elements:

a. Theosophy and theogony. The unknown transcendent de-

ity, in a process of intellection and emanation, brings
forth his First Thought, or “Barbelo.” Further expansion
of the deity takes place, resulting in the production of
eons and other spiritual entities. The basic structure of the
divine world (the Pleroma) includes a divine triad of Fa-
ther (the unknown invisible spirit), Mother (Barbelo), and
Son (Adamas-Autogenes), with subordinate beings: four

12. See B. A. Pearson, “From Jewish Apocalypticism to Gnosis,” in The Nag Hammadi
Texts in the History of Religions: Proceedings of the International Conference at the Royal Academy
of Sciences and Letters in Copenhagen, September 19-24, 1995 (ed. S. Giversen, T. Petersen,
and J. P. Sorensen; Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter 26; Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy
of Sciences and Letters, 2002), 146-63.
206 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

luminaries, a primal Adam, a primal Seth and his pos-

terity, and various eons, the most important of which is
Sophia (Wisdom), a lower version of the First Thought Bar-
belo.!* Somewhat similar in structure is the World of Light
attested in the Mandaean sources."*
b. Cosmogony. The xdopos is the product of a tragic fall within
the Pleroma. Sophia,desiring to bring forth other beings
from herself without the consent of the Father, produces
instead an ugly monster called “Yaldabaoth.”” He creates
various demonic beings (archons) who assist him in creat-
ing the world. He then arrogantly says, “I am a jealous God
and there is no other God beside me” (Apocryphon of John
13,8—9).'® In Mandaean sources, among the names given to
the Gnostic Sophia is Ruha dQudsa (Holy Spirit; cf. Apoc-
ryphon of John 10,17). The demiurge’s arrogant claim is also
attested in Mandaean sources.””
c. Anthropogony and soteriology. Sophia repents of her folly and
is taken up away from her son. Yaldabaoth is rebuked by a
heavenly voice, “Man exists and the Son of Man” (14,14-
15). Yaldabaoth sees an image in the waters and resolves
to create a man according to the heavenly image. He and
his fellow archons create Adam, but the latter remains life-
less until Yaldabaoth exhales into him the remaining spirit
13. On Sophia, see G. W. MacRae, “The Jewish Background of the Gnostic Sophia
Myth,” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970): 82-101, repr. in MacRae’s Studies in the New Testament
and Gnosticism (ed. D. J. Harrington and S. B. Marrow; Wilmington, Del.: Glazer, 1987),
184-202.
14. For relevant texts from the Mandaean Ginza (Right), see Foerster, Gnosis, 2.148-58.
For a detailed discussion, see K. Rudolph, Theogonie, Kosmogonie und Anthropogonie in den
mandaischen Schriften: Eine literarische und traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Forschungen
zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 88; Géttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1965).
15. On Yaldabaoth, see Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 39-51,
esp. 47-48, and literature cited there.
16. On the arrogant boast of the demiurge, a topos in Gnostic literature, see N. A. Dahl,
“The Arrogant Archon and the Lewd Sophia: Jewish Traditions in Gnostic Revolt,” in The
Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New
Haven, Connecticut March 28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions 41;
Leiden: Brill, 1980-81), 2.689-712.
17. The King of Darkness says, “Is there anyone who is greater than I?” See Foerster,
Gnosis, 2.161.
 Gnosticism as a Religion 207

that Yaldabaoth had derived from his mother Sophia. The

result is that Yaldabaoth loses his spiritual power, which
now resides in Adam. Human beings, because their di-
vine spark is entombed in earthly bodies, are in need
of redemption, which comes through gnosis. This basic
Gnostic anthropogony has close parallels in the Mandaean
materials.'®

3. Ritual dimension. While it is not easy to reconstruct the rit-

ual life of the ancient Gnostics, it is nevertheless possible to
extrapolate from the sources at our disposal some basic infor-
mation about two of the rituals they practiced: baptism and a
rite of cultic ascension. The Sethian Gnostic practice of both
rituals is treated by Hans-Martin Schenke and John Turner,
with the baptismal rite also being examined by Jean-Marie
Sevrin.'” Baptism is, of course, a central rite in Mandaeism;””
and the rite of cultic ascension has its Mandaean counterpart
in the masiqta (ascent), the “Office for the Dead.””"

In my Rome paper, I devoted rather little attention to the

other four dimensions of a religion as applied to Gnosticism:
(4) experiential, (5) ethical, (6) social/institutional, and (7) ma-
terial. The ethical dimension poses some problems owing to the
variety of ethical stances attested in our sources. As to the so-
cial/institutional dimension, I made the observation that those

18. K. Rudolph, Gnosis und spatantike Religionsgeschichte: Gesammelte Aufsatze (NHMS 42;
Leiden: Brill, 1996), 123-43. Cf. Pearson, Pneumatikos-Psychikos Terminology, 61-62.
19. H.-M. Schenke, “The Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” in The
Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New
Haven, Connecticut March 28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions
41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81), 2.602-7; J. D. Turner, “Ritual in Gnosticism,” in Gnosticism and
Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts (ed. J. D. Turner and R. Majercik; Society of Biblical
Literature Symposium Series 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), 83-139; J.-M.
Sevrin, Le dossier baptismal séthien: Etudes sur la sacramentaire gnostique (BCNH Etudes 2;
Quebec: Laval University Press, 1986).
20. On Mandaean baptism, see E. Segelberg, Masbuta (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell,
1958).
21. See K. Rudolph, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (San Francisco: Harper
& Row, 1977), 362. For relevant texts, see Foerster, Gnosis, 2.282—88. On Gnostic ritual, see
also chapter 8 below.
208 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

branches of ancient Gnosticism that developed hierarchal struc-

tures, that is, Manichaeism and Mandaeism, had the greatest
staying power (the latter persisting into our own times). And I
subsequently treated elsewhere the material dimension of Gnosti-
cism (see chapter 9 below). In the final part of my Rome paper I put
forward an eighth dimension: the syncretic/parasitic dimension,
manifested in Gnosticism’s,relation to Judaism and to Christian-
ity in its early history.” I argued, as I did in Gnosticism, Judaism,
and Egyptian Christianity, that Gnosticism originated in Judaism
and that it developed in various ways and in various places in
close symbiosis with Christianity. I concluded: “A proper assess-
ment of our extant evidence allows the historian of religions to
conclude that the Gnostic religion arose independently of Chris-
tianity and deserves to be treated as a discrete religion in its own
right, even if its history has often (but not always) been bound up
with that of the Christian religion.””
To be sure, these views have not gone unchallenged. I refer
now to the work of my friend Michael Williams, who proposes in
his book Rethinking “Gnosticism” that scholars should “dismantle”
Gnosticism as a “dubious category.” In mounting his case he also
argues that it is illegitimate to refer to “a Gnostic religion,” as I
(and many others) do.** In the context of an argument that Gnos-
ticism as an “ideal construct” “obscur[es] more than it reveals,”
he takes special issue with my Rome paper, with its description
of the eight dimensions of the Gnostic religion. He says that for
me to come up with those eight dimensions I must “ignore the
true variety in the sources.” He also points out that much of my
argument is “organized around the assumption that Ap[ocryphon

22. L. Painchaud (review of Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity in

Laval théologique et philosophique 47 [1991]: 271-74, esp. 273) criticizes me for using a term
allegedly taken from the natural sciences (“sciences de la nature”) in my discussion of
Gnosticism. But the term “parasite” belongs originally to the social world and is, I contend,
not at all inappropriate to our discussion. Williams (Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 80-85) also
criticizes me for my use of this terminology, but on other grounds.
23. Pearson, “Is Gnosticism a Religion?” 114.
24. See H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of
Christianity (2d ed.; Boston: Beacon, 1963). Rudolph’s monograph Gnosis carries the subtitle,
in its original German version, “Nature and history of a late ancient religion.”
 Gnosticism as a Religion 209

of] John is the most typical example of ‘gnosticism’” and “ ‘the

very best example that we have’ of the ‘basic Gnostic myth’:””

Indeed, Pearson’s entire argument would be more plausi-

ble if he were to confess that his reconstructed “religion” is
not some broad thing called “Gnosticism” but a much more
specific religious tradition or assortment of sources that he
and many other scholars today would call “Sethian.” The
argument based on Pearson’s series of “dimensions” has an-
alytical force only if one can demonstrate that the sources in
the assortment under analysis are characteristically the same
in each dimension. But, as we will see, an examination of
the larger assortment of sources customarily categorized as
“gnostic” today reveals instead significant variety in ethics,
in social structure, in myth and doctrine, and so forth.”°

Touché! I have to admit that there is considerable weight to

these criticisms. I do acknowledge that what I call Gnosticism
or the Gnostic religion is characterized by a bewildering degree
of variety in its historical expressions. But, for that matter, what
I call Christianity or the Christian religion is also characterized
by considerable variety in its historical expressions.” In the case
of Gnosticism, the main challenge in the analysis of our available
sources is delimiting phenomenologically the boundaries of what
we mean by the term” and to what extent we can, by comparison
and contrast, distinguish that type of religiosity from other reli-
gions, especially Christianity and Judaism, even if we also have to
acknowledge the existence of hybrids, such as Christian Gnosti-
cism (or Gnostic Christianity). We do, after all, talk about Jewish

25. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 175 n. 59 (to p. 50).

26. Ibid.
27. See Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 7-22.
28. Cf. H. Jonas, “The Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon — Typological and His-
torical,” in Le origini dello gnosticismo: Colloquio di Messina 13-18 Aprile 1966 (ed. U. Bianchi;
Studies in the History of Religions 12; Leiden: Brill, 1970), 90-108; repr. as “The Gnostic
Syndrome: Typology of Its Thought, Imagination, and Mood,” in Jonas’s Philosophical Es-
says: From Ancient Creed to Technological Man (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974),
263-74.
210 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

Christianity (or Christian Judaism), and in doing so it is not nec-

essary for us to abandon the use of the umbrella terms Christianity
and Judaism.
So I am not yet willing to concede defeat. In what follows I shall
attempt to mount a defense of the continued use of the term Gnos-
ticism by historians of religions and to arrive at greater precision
in delimiting the boundaries of what I will continue to call the
Gnostic religion.
As Bentley Layton points out, the term Gnosticism was first
coined by Henry More (1614-87) in an expository work on the
seven letters of the Book of Revelation.” More used the term
Gnosticisme to describe the heresy in Thyatira (Rev 2:18-29), in
the same sense that his contemporary, Henry Hammond, used
the expression the Gnostick-heresie. The latter expression comes out
of the heresiological literature of early Christianity, especially
Irenaeus of Lyons. The term Gnosticism (= the Gnostic heresy)
was originally used pejoratively, with allegorical application to
seventeenth-century interdenominational polemics. It was coined
simply by adding -ism to the Greek adjective gndstikos.*° Thus,
Gnosticism, as originally used, applies to people referred to by
Irenaeus and other heresiologists with the designation nh Aeyouévn
['vootixn atpeoic (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.11.1). The pejora-
tive designation heresy does not apply here, for the word aipecic
was originally a neutral term used in this context of people “who
call themselves Gnodstikoi” (Against Heresies 1.25.6). Thus the I'va-
OtLKN aipecic simply means “the knowledge-supplying school of
thought.”*! The term Gnosticism in reference to the religious be-
liefs and practices of this group is not necessarily pejorative at all,
even if the term (referring to a heresy) was originally so used in
English. That is a point to which I shall return.

29. B. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” in The Social World
of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne Meeks (ed. L. M. White and O. L. Yarbrough;
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 334-50. Layton’s essay is of fundamental importance to the
current debate on the use of the term Gnosticism.
30. Ibid., 348-49, 335.
31. Ibid., 338.

ve
 Gnosticism as a Religion 24g

The key to a proper understanding and use of the term Gnosti-

cism is the Greek adjective yvwotikdc, used by people in antiquity
as a Self-designation: 01 yvwotikoi (the Gnostics). The adjective
gnostikos was first coined by Plato with reference to a kind of
science (€niotnun; Statesman 258e) and gained currency in philo-
sophical circles. Its application by people to refer to themselves
was a significant innovation, and this usage is duly noted by
Christian (Irenaeus, Clement, et al.) and pagan (Celsus, Porphyry)
writers from the second century on.** Central to this usage, as seen
from the root of the adjective, is the claim to knowledge (yv@otc).
In his polemics against the Gnostics and related heretics, Irenaeus
frequently refers to them under the catchall term gnosis falsely so-
called, borrowing a phrase from the New Testament (1 Tim 6:20)
and using it in the title of his five-volume work Against Heresies:
“Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So-Called.”
Thus, it is essential for historians to know what kind of knowl-
edge it was to which the Gnostics laid claim and what were the
ingredients of this knowledge in terms of myth, ritual, beliefs, and
practices. Irenaeus supplies the starting point with a direct testi-
monium (Against Heresies 1.29) about the “Gnostic haeresis,” which
consists of a lengthy quotation from an actual book used by the
Gnostics. We now know that this excerpt is closely related to part
of the Apocryphon of John. Thus it turns out that the Apocryphon of
John, or one of its sources, has to be regarded as the very center
of the corpus of books produced by the Gnostics,*? which is why I
relied so heavily upon it in my discussion of the eight dimensions
of Gnosticism. The importance of this work is also indicated by its
preservation (more or less) in four versions in Coptic translation
(NEG UAL LIV1 BG 2),
Layton describes a five-step procedure by which the avail-
able data, consisting of testimonia and primary texts such as the
Apocryphon of John and others, can be studied and analyzed for
32. Ibid., 337-40. Clement has his own distinctive use of the term gnostikos to refer to
individual Christians who have attained a higher spiritual wisdom, but he also uses the
term with reference to heretics “who call themselves Gnostics” (e.g., Miscellanies 2.117.5;
3.30.1-2; etc.).
33. Ibid., 343.
212 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

information on the ancient Gnostics. According to him, “only data

identified by these five steps should be assumed to describe the Gnos-
tics. ‘Gnosticism’ thus means an inductive category based on these data
alone.’”** Other uses of the term Gnosticism, from the seventeenth
century to the present, are irrelevant to historical scholarship.”
Following Layton’s line of argument provides justification for
the continued use of the term Gnosticism in scholarly research and
a means by which some clarity can be achieved in its applica-
tion to the relevant ancient sources. But now Williams wants us
to abandon the term altogether on the grounds that it has been
applied, even by scholars, to so many different kinds of things
that it is no longer useful. He buttresses his case by showing how
variegated the evidence is on the one hand and how this evidence
is misconstrued by scholars on the other. Williams provides much
that is useful as a corrective to some previous scholarship, for ex-
ample, on Gnostic ethics.*° But his lack of attention to the one
constant in our relevant evidence is surprising: gnosis as under-
stood and experienced by the people behind the texts. (Had he
paid attention to this aspect, he certainly would not have included
Marcion as one of his four cases of the kinds of things schol-
ars mean by Gnosticism.)” As an alternative to Gnosticism and
Gnostic he suggests a category called “biblical demiurgical” as “a
simple typology for organizing several religious innovations and
new religious movements.”** But this is much more nebulous than
the term Gnostic and completely misses the point of what is the
most essential feature of that which in proper scholarly usage is
called Gnosticism.
Another issue needs to be addressed here with respect to
the term Gnosticism, namely, its supposed pejorative connotation.
Here Williams cites Kurt Rudolph’s observation that the term
““Gnostics’ has proved its worth and is very much to the point;

34. Ibid. (emphasis original). Cf. Smith, “Modern Relevance of Gnosticism.”

35. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 335.
36. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 139-88.
37. Tbid., 23-26.
38. Ibid., 265.
 Gnosticism as a Religion 213

this is less true of ‘Gnosticism’ and we should eliminate it as far

as possible, since it is not only pejorative, but also confusing.”*”
I have no problem using the term Gnosis (with a capital G), as is
common in German scholarship, instead of Gnosticism, more com-
mon in English-speaking scholarship,” but it is certainly not the
case that -ism at the end of the word makes its use pejorative.”
True, the first use of the term in the seventeenth century was so
colored, but its use in neutral scholarship is not. There is noth-
ing pejorative about the terms Judaism and Christianity (i.e., Greek
Christianismos); indeed their first uses were by constituents of the
respective religions in a positive context.”
Another challenge to standard scholarship on Gnosticism has
recently been mounted by Karen King in her book What Is Gnosti-
cism? Her main argument is that “there was and is no such thing
as Gnosticism.”** Her book consists essentially of a critique of
those who have attempted to say something about Gnosticism,
and accuses historians of religions such as myself of skewing their
studies out of an apologetic attempt to define the boundaries of
Christianity. I find no merit in her arguments. My reply to her, and
to Williams, is that there was and is such a thing as Gnosticism. It
it legitimate to talk about “Gnosticism” as “a religion” analogous
to “Judaism” or “Christianity.” The question at issue is this: How
can a religion be delineated in critical historical research?

39. Ibid., 263, quoting K. Rudolph, “ ‘Gnosis’ and ‘Gnosticism’ — The Problems of Their
Definition and Their Relation to the Writings of the New Testament,” in The New Testament
and Gnosis: Essays in Honour of Robert McLachlan Wilson (ed. A. H. B. Logan and A. J. M.
Wedderburn; Edinburgh: Clark, 1983), 21-37 at 28; repr. in Rudolph’s Gnosis und spiitantike
Religionsgeschichte, 34—52 at 45—46.
40. The title of Rudolph’s well-known monograph Die Gnosis: Wesen und Geschichte einer
spitantiken Religion is, in its English version, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism.
41. Cf. W. C. Smith’s objection to the use of “-ism” language in scholarly discourse in
the history of religions; The Meaning and End of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1962; repr.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 60-71.
42. Tovdaicudcs occurs in 2 Maccabees 2:21; 8:1; 14:38; and Xpiotiaviopog in Ignatius,
Magnesians 10.1, 3; Philadelphians 6.1; Romans 3.3.
43. Karen L. King, What Is Gnosticism? (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.) In
an appendix she discusses her methodology and her reliance on the work of theorists such
as Michel Foucault and Pierre Bourdieu. The reader is invited to compare my “personal
observations on scholarly method” in the Epilogue to my book, The Emergence of the Christian
Religion, 214-25. See my remarks on “postmodernism” and “deconstruction,” 224-25.
214 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

Here I cheerfully call upon Williams for assistance. He astutely

observes that “the organization of religious phenomena into cat-
egories of some sort is of course necessary to any intelligible
analysis in the history of religions.” In that context he speaks of
“at least two basic strategies.” The first strategy is “to use self-
definition as the index, by attending to how those whom we are
studying seem to group themselves, how they seem to construct
their own communal or traditional identity.” The second strategy
is “typological (or what some scholars might wish to call phe-
nomenological), entailing the delineation of cross-traditional types
of religious communities or movements.”“* I propose to use both
of these strategies, in the order set forth by Williams, and chal-
lenge his argument that “neither approach should have led us to
the category ‘gnosticism.’”*
The ancient texts attesting to Layton’s discussion of gndstikos
as a self-designation are also treated by Williams, but he doubts
their validity on the grounds that “we apparently do not have
direct evidence of a single so-called gnostic writer using the
self-designation gnostikos”!*® That is to say, this supposed self-
designation is absent from our primary sources, the most impor-
tant of which are the Nag Hammadi tractates. One might have
to concede, at first sight, that the absence of the term gndstikos as
a self-designation in our primary sources is an embarrassment to
scholars who accept the veracity of the testimonia provided by the
heresiologists. As a counterargument, I can do no better than to
quote Layton’s comments:

The question is sometimes raised of why the self-designation

“Gnostic” does not occur in the corpus of Gnostic writings
(as opposed to the testimonia). The answer lies in the fact
that the name Gnostic was the name par excellence of the
members of the hairesis, their most proper name. As such,
its function was not to convey information about what they

44. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 30-31 (emphasis original).

45. Ibid., 31.
46. Ibid., 32.
 Gnosticism as a Religion 215

were like, but rather to express their distinctiveness as a

group; not to say what they were, but who they were. The
claim to supply (or have) gnosis was absolutely banal, but
the use of Gnostikos as a proper name was distinctive. Now,
the works in the Gnostic mythographic corpus are pseud-
epigraphic and mythic in literary character, disguising their
real author, audience, and place, date, and reason of composi-
tion. They do not speak of second- and third-century school
controversies (as do the testimonia of Irenaeus, Porphyry,
or Epiphanius), but rather of primordial, eschatological, and
metaphysical events and relationships. In such compositions,
there is no context in which a second-century school name
such as Gnostikos might naturally occur. Thus, the absence
of the proper name “Gnostikos” in the mythographic corpus
is not a significant absence.”
An analogous situation is the case of the ancient Essenes. The
absence of the term Essene as a self-designation in the Dead Sea
Scrolls leads some scholars to doubt that the sect reflected in
the sectarian literature from Qumran was, in fact, the Essenes
described by Philo, Josephus, Pliny, and other ancient writers.*
What the sectarian literature does provide, however, are “primor-
dial, eschatological, and metaphysical” self-designations such as,
for example, “Children of Light,” a self-designation that was also
used by some Gnostics.””
Thus, we have no reason to doubt that groups of people referred
to themselves as gnostikoi and every reason to believe Irenaeus’s
testimony regarding a specific Gnostic sect or “school of thought”
(Layton’s term). The nature of their beliefs, practices, myths, and
so on can be determined on the basis of evidence available to us,

47. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 344.

48. See J. C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994),
71-92.
49. Cf. 10S 1.9; 2.16; 3.13, 24; 1QM 1.1 and throughout; and Hypostasis of the Archons
IL4 97,13-14; Trimorphic Protennoia X11 41,1, 16; 42,16; 45,33; 49,25. On Gnostic self-
characterizations and their relation to Judaism, see B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and
Egyptian Christianity, 124-35, esp. 130.
216 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

that is, their “mythographic corpus”” as extrapolated from the an-

cient testimonia and augmented by extant primary sources. The
corpus referred to by Layton turns out to be precisely those texts
and testimonia designated by him “classic Gnostic Scripture,” for
which he provides translations in his important anthology The
Gnostic Scriptures.°| The classic Gnostic texts are mostly those la-
beled by other scholars as Sethian Gnostic.” Pride of place among
these texts is the Apocryphon of John, which constitutes “the center
of the Gnostic corpus.”
The question before us now is whether scholars can justifiably
use the category Gnosticism to apply to the aggregate of texts
and testimonia that make up the basic Gnostic corpus. Williams’s
argument is that, even if it be granted that the people behind
these texts referred to themselves as gnostikoi, “the self definition

50. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 344.

51. B. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation with Annotations and Introductions
(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1987), 5-214. The other sections in Layton’s work are titled
“The Writings of Valentinus,” “The School of Valentinus,” “The School of St. Thomas,”
and “Other Early Currents” (containing writings by Basilides and Basilidians; Corpus
Hermeticum 1 [Poimandrés] and 7).
52. See Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism.” Layton’s
“classic Gnostic” texts include the following (using the standard titles instead of those
devised by Layton):
Apocryphon of John (NHC IL,1; L,1; IV,1; BG,2)
Apocalypse of Adam (V,5)
Hypostasis of the Archons (II,4)
Thunder: Perfect Mind (V1,2)
Trimorphic Protennoia (XIII,1)
Gospel of the Egyptians (II1,2; IV,2)
Zostrianos (VIII,1, excerpts)
Allogenes (X1,3)
Three Steles of Seth (VII,5)
Saturninus (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.24.1-2)
the Gnostics (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.29)
other Gnostic teachings (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.30—31)
the Gnostics (Porphyry, Life of Plotinus 16)
the Sethians (Epiphanius, Against Heresies 39)
the Archontics (Epiphanius, Against Heresies 40)
the Gnostics (Epiphanius, Against Heresies 25-26)
Schenke’s list of Sethian texts includes all of Layton’s texts from the Nag Hammadi
corpus except Thunder: Perfect Mind (VI,2) and adds Melchizedek (IX,1), Thought of Norea
(IX,2), Marsanes (X,1), and the untitled treatise in Codex Bruce. These last four were later
added by Layton to his database; see “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,”
342-43. On Sethian Gnosticism, see Turner, Sethian Gnosticism.
53. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 343.
 Gnosticism as a Religion 217

‘gnostic’ would be a subset of ‘Christian,’ much like the label ‘fun-

damentalist’” in the case of certain Christians. To this we can
reply, first of all, that in none of the primary texts or testimo-
nia constituting the basic Gnostic corpus do we find the adjective
Christian as a self-designation. But second, and more important,
the emphasis on gnosis reflected in the self-designation gndstikos
tells us something of great importance regarding the heart and
center of the Gnostics’ religion, for it was gnosis, not faith, that
provided the very basis of their salvation. The content of this gno-
sis is reflected in the basic Gnostic myth, for which our best source
is the Apocryphon of John. Study of this and related texts allows the
scholar to delineate features that, in terms of the phenomenol-
ogy of religion, are clearly distinguishable from anything found
in Christianity, Judaism, or other religions of antiquity. To apply
the category Gnosticism to the aggregate of these features is both
justifiable and appropriate.
To be sure, most (but not all) of our Gnostic texts are related,
somehow, to Christianity and to Judaism as well. In the case of
the Apocryphon of John, in all four versions that we have, Jesus
Christ turns out to be the revealer of gnosis. That seems to allow
the conclusion that it is a Christian text and that the commu-
nity whose doctrines are reflected in it was Christian. That is,
in fact, Williams’s own conclusion,” and some other scholars,
including Layton, share that point of view.°° But the application
of source- and tradition-criticism to the Apocryphon of Join leads
other scholars, including myself,” to the conclusion that the basic
myth reflected in it is not Christian at all; its apparent Christian
features appear in the framework of the text and in interpolations

54. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 30.

Sy Meytel,, es
56. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 23-26; S. Pétrement, A Separate God: The Christian Origins
of Gnosticism (San Francisco: Harper, 1990), 387-419; M. Tardieu, Ecrits gnostiques: Codex de
Berlin (Paris: Cerf, 1984), 26-47; A. H. B. Logan, Gnostic Truth and Christian Heresy: A Study
in the History of Gnosticism (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996).
57. Pearson, Emergence of the Christian Religion, 122-46, esp. 126-34. Cf. also idem, Gnos-
ticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 29-38; idem, “Apocryphon Johannis Revisited,” in
Apocryphon Severini: Presented to Soren Giversen (ed. P. Bilde, H. K. Nielsen, and J. P. Sorensen;
Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1993), 155-65.
218 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

as part of a Christianizing process. In the earlier text the saving

gnosis is provided not by Christ but by a feminine mythologi-
cal revealer. Stripped of the present frame and putative Christian
glosses, the basic Gnostic myth featuring theosophy, cosmogony,
and soteriology is constructed on the basis of reinterpretations
of Scripture, mainly Genesis, and early Jewish traditions. The
Urtext behind the Christiartized text that we now have is tes-
timony to a religiosity that originally had nothing to do with
Christianity. Indeed, even in its present form, Christian features
in the Apocryphon of John are but a thin veneer. The structure and
content of the religiosity in the Apocryphon of John is not only pre-
Christian, that is, in the sense that it originated quite apart from
any Christian connection, but remains essentially distinguishable
from anything that is characteristically Christian. Historians of
religions can legitimately refer in this connection to a Gnostic re-
ligion. The appropriation of Christian motifs, or even the figure of
Jesus Christ as Gnostic revealer, does not change the fundamental
character of that religion.
In order to see this more clearly, we should consider the case
of Mandaeism, one of the varieties of Gnosticism that Williams
chooses not to treat and one that is also ignored by Layton. Re-
garding Mandaeism, Williams argues that “inclusion of this even
wider circle of phenomena would underscore the overall point that
[he was] making. It could strengthen not the argument for the
usefulness of the category ‘gnosticism’ but rather the argument
against it.”°* On the contrary, consideration of the Mandaean case
leads to the very opposite conclusion, which is why I cited some
Mandaean evidence in my discussion above of the dimensions of
Gnosticism.
The Mandaeans, like the ancient Gnostics discussed by Irenaeus
and others, refer to themselves as Mandaye, a term that is equiv-
alent to Greek gndstikoi (those in possession of manda = gnosis).
There are, moreover, remarkable parallels between the Mandaean
beliefs and those reflected in the Gnostic sources. This is shown

58. Williams, Rethinking “Gnosticism,” 6 (emphasis original).

 Gnosticism as a Religion 219

conclusively in the groundbreaking work of Kurt Rudolph.” The

emphasis on saving knowledge is the same, and there are nu-
merous similarities in the use of symbolic language and in the
structure of the basic myth, featuring theogony, cosmogony, an-
thropogony, and eschatology. The parallels in anthropogony are
particularly notable and reflect what must be a common fund
of ancient tradition based on reinterpretations of ancient Jewish
sources and exegetical traditions.” But in the case of the Man-
daeans, their history shows no attempt at Christianization; on the
contrary, Jesus Christ and the Christian religion are consistently
treated very negatively, reflecting only hostile contacts between
the two groups over the course of history.°’ What the Mandaean
case shows, then, is simply this: the religion of the ancient Gnos-
tics and that of the Mandaeans are so similar that one is justified
in concluding that Mandaeism represents a surviving branch of
the ancient Gnostic religion. Mandaeism certainly belongs in the
category ancient Gnosticism.
But how wide is this category? Can one legitimately go be-
yond the texts and testimonia that testify to a specific group
of people who called themselves gnodstikoi and include in the
umbrella category Gnosticism other groups or other traditions?
Layton limits the category: “ ‘Gnosticism’ thus means an inductive cat-
egory based on these data alone. (Other data, and inductive categories
based on different databases, would have to be called by some
other name.).” And Williams is quite right to demand a certain
“degree of commonality” among the data organized phenomeno-
logically among the various dimensions that I argue constitute

59. Rudolph, Theogonie, Kosmogonie und Anthropogonie; idem, Gnosis und spitantike
Religionsgeschichte, 123-43, 433-77; idem, Gnosis, 343-76.
60. Rudolph, Gnosis und spatantike Religionsgeschichte, 123-43. Cf. Pearson, Pneumatikos-
Psychikos Terminology, 61-62.
61. Rudolph, Gnosis und spatantike Religionsgeschichte, 458-77. For excellent treatments of
the Mandaeans of our time, see E. Lupieri, The Mandaeans: The Last Gnostics (trans. C. Hind-
ley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); and J. J. Buckley, The Mandaeans: Ancient Texts and
Modern People (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).
62. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 343-44. Cf. discussion
above.
220 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

the Gnostic religion. There is good reason to expand the cat-

egory Gnosticism to include the Mandaeans. That is warranted
not only because their very name (gndstikoi) implies a claim to
saving gnosis but also because the structure and content of their
religion is so similar to that of the Apocryphon of John. So can
we expand our category even more with the aid of typology or
phenomenology? ‘
Layton himself includes in his own database the testimonium
concerning Saturninus (or Satornilus) of Antioch, historically the
first in Irenaeus’s list of examples of “gnosis falsely so-called” to
incorporate the figure of Christ into his system (Against Heresies
1.24.12). Should we not on phenomenological grounds include
Saturninus’s predecessors, Menander and Simon, in the category
Gnosticism? This would be justifiable on the basis of the shared
mythological features and the typological similarities in the struc-
ture of their respective religions, at least as attested in the relevant
testimonia.” Menander and Simon provide clear examples of a
Gnosticism with no Christian features, for Menander and Simon
claimed for themselves the role of Gnostic savior that Saturninus
assigns to Christ.”
The matter becomes more complicated when we try to ex-
pand the category Gnosticism to include more avowedly Christian
groups such as the Basilidians and the Valentinians or Thoma-
sine Christianity as represented by the Gospel of Thomas,*’ not to
mention non-Christian groups such as the Hermetic conventicles

63. Emphasis original. See Williams’s critique of my work in his paper in the forthcom-
ing conference proceedings from the International Society of Biblical Literature conference
in Helsinki, July 1999: A. Marjanen, ed., Was There a Gnostic Religion?
64. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 159-62; cf. idem, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient
Gnosticism,” 345.
65. See Foerster, Gnosis, 1.27-33.
66. On Simon Magus, see Jonas, Gnostic Religion, 103-11; K. Rudolph, “Simon —
Magus oder Gnosticus?” Theologische Rundschau 42 (1977): 279-359; G. Liidemann, “Die
Apostelgeschichte und die Anfange der simonianischen Gnosis,” in Studien zur Gnosis (ed.
G. Ludemann; Arbeiten zur Religion und Geschichte des Urchristentums 9; Frankfurt:
Lang, 1999), 7-20; Stephen Haar, Simon Magus: The First Gnostic? (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift
fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 119; New York: De Gruyter, 2003).
67. See A. Marjanen, “Is Thomas a Gnostic Gospel?” in Thomas at the Crossroads: Essays
on the Gospel of Thomas (ed. R. Uro; Edinburgh: Clark, 1998), 107-39. :
 Gnosticism as a Religion pape

represented by the Corpus Hermeticum® or other groups often

represented in anthologies of Gnostic texts. The point here is that
the farther removed the relevant sources are, in terms of content,
from the basic Gnostic database, the looser the category Gnosticism
will become and the more room for disagreement as to what should
be included in it. But that is no excuse for abandoning the category
altogether! Instead, a more rigorous application of phenomenology
to the delimitation of Gnosticism is called for.”
Regarding the Valentinians, Layton makes the following perti-
nent remarks:

The structure of the Gnostic type of myth also has strik-

ing parallels in Valentinian mythography, just as Irenaeus
(Adv. Haer. 1.11.1) states that the Valentinian hairesis derived
historically from the Gnostic hairesis. But many aspects of
Valentinian mythography are also significantly different from
Schenke’s [Sethian] Gnostic type of myth, so that Valentinus
and his followers can best be kept apart as a distinct mutation,
or reformed offshoot, of the original Gnostics.””

This indicates that Layton seems to allow for the expansion of

the category Gnosticism to include the Valentinians, even if the
latter are regarded as “a distinct mutation,” and so he includes
them in his anthology of Gnostic Scriptures.”’ The problem is that
we clearly have in this case a mixture or overlapping of categories,
that is, Gnosticism and Christianity, and a reminder that histori-
ans of religions cannot always keep their categories neat and tidy.
In the Valentinian case, we can speak either of a type of Gnostic
Christianity or of Christian Gnosticism. Which is preferable?

68. See R. van den Broek, “Gnosticism and Hermeticism in Antiquity: Two Roads to
Salvation,” in Gnosis and Hermeticism from Antiquity to Modern Times (ed. R. van den Broek
and W. J. Hanegraaff; Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998), 1-20.
69. Jonas’s attempt at this (“Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon”) is still very
useful, but his hesitant inclusion of Marcion is clearly a mistake and contradicts his own
typology in which gnosis is fundamental.
70. Layton, “Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism,” 343.
71. Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, 217-64.
Pipi | GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

One answer to this question is to analyze the Christian and

Gnostic features of the Valentinian system in order to arrive at its
central core: the means of salvation. This central core is expressed
in classic form in the well-known excerpt from the Valentinian
Theodotus: “What liberates is the knowledge [gnosis] of who we
were, what we became; where we were, whereinto we have been
thrown; whereto we speed, wherefrom we are redeemed; what
birth is, and what rebirth” (Clement of Alexandria, Excerpts from
Theodotus 78.2; trans. Jonas, Gnostic Religion, 45). This emphasis
on gnosis as the basis of salvation, in addition to the structural
similarities between the Valentinian myth and the Gnostic myth
of the Apocryphon of John (theogony, cosmogony, anthropogony,
eschatology), allows us to include Valentinianism in the general
category Gnosticism.”
To be sure, the objection might be raised: Does this procedure
not beg the question as to what should be included in the category
Christianity? Didn’t the Valentinians claim to be Christians, even
if they distinguished themselves as “spiritual” Christians from
the ordinary “psychic” Christians with whom they associated? In-
deed, they did, and so the Valentinians have to be included in any
historical treatment of Christianity. This has to be conceded. But
the other side of the argument is equally valid: the Valentinians
also have to be included in any historical treatment of Gnosti-
cism or the Gnostic religion. In the final analysis, scholars will
continue to differ on which category best fits such mixed groups
as the Valentinians, Gnosticism or Christianity. In any case, in
the course of its history the Christian religion developed in such

72. Cf. the Gospel of Truth (NHC 1,3 22,13-18). Jonas’s brilliant treatment of Valen-
anaes is still very valuable; see Gnostic Religion, 174-205, 309-19 (on Gospel of
ruth).
73. T include the Valentinians’ founder in that category as well, contra C. Markschies,
Valentinus Gnosticus? Untersuchungen zur valentinianischen Gnosis mit einem Kommentar zu
den Fragmenten Valentins (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 65;
Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1992). See also G. Quispel, “The Original Doctrine of Valentinus
the Gnostic,” in From Poimandres to Jacob Bohme: Gnosis, Hermetism and the Christian Tra-
dition (ed. R. van den Broek and C. van Heertum; Amsterdam: Bibliotheca Philosophica
Hermetica, 2000), 233-61.

“
 Gnosticism as a Religion 223

a way that the Gnostic groups such as the Valentinians eventu-

ally disappeared, thus rendering moot their inclusion under the
category Christianity.’* The Gnostic religion, on the other hand,
developed in such a way that the Christians among its adherents
disappeared. But the ancient Gnostic religion still persists, as the
exotic Mandaeans remind us.
I conclude this discussion with the observation that most of
our ancient evidence for Gnosticism comes from Egypt, where
various Gnostic groups proliferated from the second century on.
As our available sources amply attest, the Gnostic religion and the
symbiosis between Gnosticism and Christianity persisted longer
there than in any other area of the Mediterranean world.”

74. This issue has meanwhile become actual again in modern times, with the formation
of such neo-Gnostic groups as the Ecclesia Gnostica of Los Angeles. See R. Smith, “The
Revival of Ancient Gnosis,” in The Allure of Gnosticism: The Gnostic Experience in Jungian
Psychology and Contemporary Culture (ed. R. A. Segal; Peru, Ill.: Open Court, 1995), 204-23.
Finally, what people or groups should be included under the category Christianity should
be determined by the adherents themselves. For example, most New England Unitarians
would consider themselves Christians; on the other hand, many California Unitarians
would not.
75. See Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 194-213.
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise
On the Mysteries of Egypt

&

One of the more intriguing problems in the philosophical and

religious history of late antiquity is the relationship between Pla-
tonism and Gnosticism in the early centuries of our era. That
such a relationship exited is, of course, taken as self-evident. Thus,
the great historian of Greco-Roman religions Arthur Darby Nock
could refer to Gnosticism as “Platonism run wild”; and a promi-
nent historian of Greek philosophy, John Dillon, could include
Gnosticism in his discussion of “the Platonic underworld.”’ The
discovery and gradual publication of the Nag Hammadi Library
of Coptic Gnostic texts put the discussion of this issue on far
more solid ground, for the Gnostic primary texts reveal many va-
rieties of Gnosticism and a variety of ways in which Platonism
and Gnosticism relate to one another. Ongoing study of the his-
tory of Platonism also brings new light to this issue. It is therefore
very significant that scholars from both sides — specialists in Pla-
tonism and specialists in the “wild underworld” of Gnosticism—
are coming together for mutual discussion of this issue, with the
result that much new light is shed on the relationships between
Gnosticism and Platonism, including mutual influences.”

1. A. D. Nock, Essays on Religion in the Ancient World (ed. Z. Stewart; Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1972), 2.949; J. Dillon, The Middle Platonists (London: Duck-
worth, 1977), 384-96, including in his discussion the Hermetic Poimandrés and the Chaldean
Oracles.
2. See R. T. Wallis and J. Bregman (eds.), Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (Studies in Neo-
platonism, Ancient and Modern 6; Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992),
containing papers presented at the Sixth International Conference of the International So-
ciety for Neoplatonic Studies held at the University of Oklahoma in March 1984; J. D.
Turner and R. Majercik (eds.), Gnosticism and Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts
(Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Litera-
ture, 2000), containing papers presented at the Gnosticism and Later Platonism Seminar
held from 1993 to 1998 at the annual meetings of the Society of Biblical Literature; and

224
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 220

While much of the discussion focuses on setting up compar-

isons between various Platonic systems of thought and language
and the metaphysical-mythological systems of the Gnostic texts,°
relatively little attention is given in this comparative enterprise to
the problem of religious ritual.* In this chapter, therefore, Iwant to
take up some aspects of ritual in Gnosticism and Neoplatonism.
This is admittedly a difficult task, and I hasten to state at the out-
set that this essay represents an experimental and highly tentative
enterprise. Not least of the difficulties involved in this compara-
tive project is that Platonists and Gnostics alike had various and
sundry attitudes toward ritual. Not all Platonists appreciated re-
ligious ritual (to understate the case), but then neither did all
Gnostics. If Plotinus (Enneads 2.9.14) could criticize the Gnostics
he knew for their ritual activities — he dismissed their recourse
to strange chants and charms and other practices as goéteia (sor-
cery)°— some Gnostics could also adopt a critical attitude toward
ritual of any sort, claiming that gnosis alone is what saves: “One
must not perform the mystery of the ineffable and invisible power
through visible and corruptible things of creation, nor that of the
unthinkable and immaterial beings through sensible and corpo-
real things. Perfect salvation is the cognition itself of the ineffable

J. D. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition (BCNH Etudes 6; Quebec: Laval
University Press /Louvain: Peeters, 2001).
3. For my own modest contributions to this discussion, see B. A. Pearson, “The Trac-
tate Marsanes (NHC X) and the Platonic Tradition,” in Gnosis: Festschrift fiir Hans Jonas
(ed. B. Aland; Géttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978), 373-84; and idem, Gnosticism,
Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Minneapolis:
Fortress, 1990), 148-64.
4. On religious ritual in Gnosticism, see also J. D. Turner, “Ritual in Gnosticism,”
in Gnosticism and Later Platonism: Themes, Figures, and Texts (ed. J. D. Turner and R. Ma-
jercik; Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2000), 83-139. Extensive treatments of ritual are also found in Turner, Sethian
Gnosticism.
5. On the varieties of Gnostic ritual and Gnostic attitudes to religious ritual, see, e.g.,
K. Rudolph, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (San Francisco: Harper & Row,
1977), 218-52.
6. See H. Remus, “Plotinus and Gnostic Thaumaturgy,” Laval théologique et philoso-
phique 39 (1983): 13-20. Plotinus himself has not escaped criticism as a practitioner of
magic. See P. Merlan, “Plotinus and Magic,” Isis 44 (1953): 341-48; and A. H. Armstrong’s
reply, “Was Plotinus a Magician?” Phronesis 1 (1955): 73-79. On the difference between
Plotinus’s and Iamblichus’s attitudes to the Gnostics, see p. 247 below.
226 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

greatness: for since through ‘Ignorance’ came about ‘Defect’ and

‘Passion,’ the whole system springing from Ignorance is dissolved
by knowledge.”
Ritual came to occupy an increasingly important role in Neo-
platonic circles from the time of Porphyry on, especially as a
result of the appropriation and study of the Chaldean Oracles.®
The most extensive and consistent defense of religious ritual by
a Neoplatonist author is Iamblichus’s treatise On the Mysteries of
Egypt (De mysteriis aegyptiorum).’? On the Gnostic side, a number
of primary texts reveal a concern for ritual, containing refer-
ences to baptism and other rites, as well as ineffable names and
nomina barbara that doubtless had ritual significance. One of the
problems in dealing with the ritual aspects of Gnosticism and
Neoplatonism, and especially of considering them together under
a common rubric, is that on the one hand the Gnostic material
lacks a theoretical framework with which to understand the ritual
elements and on the other hand the Neoplatonist material, in-
cluding lamblichus’s famous treatise itself, provides rather scanty
information on the actual ceremonies used by the Platonist theur-
gists. Another obstacle, of course, is the difference in worldview
between the Gnostics and the Platonists, highlighted especially in
Plotinus’s tract Against the Gnostics (Enneads 2.9). However, it must
also be pointed out that some later forms of Gnosticism reflect a
temporizing of the original Gnostic anticosmism. Moreover, a dis-
cernable development in Neoplatonism eventually brings it closer

7. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.21.4, as rendered by H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion: The
Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of Christianity (2d ed.; Boston: Beacon, 1963), 176,
in the context of his discussion of Valentinian Gnosticism. Jonas also refers (311-12) to the
Gospel of Truth and parallel passages (NHC 1,3 18,7-11; 24,28-32). This antisacramentalism
is clearly a minority viewpoint within Valentinian gnosis.
8. See, e.g., R. T. Wallis, Neoplatonism (London: Duckworth, 1962), 105-10. On the
Chaldean Oracles, see H. Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles and Theurgy (ed. M. Tardieu; Paris: Etudes
Augustiniennes, 1978). For an edition of the fragments, with English translation and com-
mentary, see R. Majercik, The Chaldaean Oracles: Text, Translation, Commentary (Studies in
Greek and Roman Religion 5; Leiden: Brill, 1989).
9. The standard edition is E. des Places, Jamblique: Les Mystéres d’Egypte (Paris: Les
Belles Lettres, 1966). Still useful is T. Taylor’s English translation: lamblichus on the Mysteries
of the Egyptians (2d ed.; London: Bertram Dobell, 1895).
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt pi)

to Gnosticism in certain respects." The question can, therefore, be

entertained whether the Gnostic and the Neoplatonic rituals are
in any way comparable and whether they might have had some
theoretical presuppositions in common.
This is what I propose to consider in what follows, knowing full
well that many pitfalls lie in the way. Specifically, what I propose
to do is to apply Iamblichus’s theories concerning ritual to some
Gnostic ritual texts, on the hypothesis that some of our Gnostics
might have shared something of Iamblichus’s theoretical assump-
tions. If, in addition, some of the Gnostics’ ritual activity sheds
some light on actual Neoplatonic practice, so much the better.

IAMBLICHUS’S DEFENSE OF THEURGY

Iamblichus’s defense of religious ritual in his Mysteries of Egypt is,

more specifically, a defense of theurgy, written in reply to some
critical questions on the practice raised by Porphyry in his “Letter
to Anebo.”" Theurgy still has a bad press among scholars of late
antiquity. E. R. Dodds, for example, refers to Iamblichus’s philo-
sophical defense of theurgy as “a manifesto of irrationalism.”””
I do not wish to enter the debate for or against the practice of
theurgy —I am not a practitioner myself — nor do I wish to com-
ment on theurgy as practiced by Julian the Chaldean and his son
Julian the Theurgist, as reflected in the Chaldean Oracles.’* What I
will do is examine Iamblichus’s theories to see whether they are
of use in understanding Gnostic ritual. (In any case, lamblichus’s
theories do not necessarily coincide with those of the two Julians.)

10. See Wallis and Bregman, Neoplatonism and Gnosticism; Turner and Majercik, Gnosti-
cism and Later Platonism; Turner, Sethian Gnosticism; Pearson, “Tractate Marsanes (NHC X)”;
and idem, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 148-64.
11. The text of this letter is edited by A. R. Sodano, Porfirio, Lettera ad Anebo (Naples:
L’arte tipografica, 1958). A translation is included in Taylor, Iamblichus on the Mysteries of
the Egyptians, 1-16.
12. E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1951), 283-311, esp. 287.
13. See Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles and Theurgy; and Majercik, Chaldaean Oracles.
228 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

In doing so, I cheerfully acknowledge the groundbreaking work

on Iamblichus and theurgy by my former student, Gregory Shaw."4
The first and most important point to make is that, at least
for Iamblichus, theurgy does not mean “acting upon” or “cre-
ating” the gods.'> Theurgy involves, rather, the works (erga) of
the gods (theoi); the emphasis is on divine, not human, activity.
This is a central theme in Iamblichus’s Mysteries of Egypt.'® The
work done in theurgic ritual is the work of the gods, even though
it is performed by human beings. Thus, for example, ritual in-
vocations and prayers and chanting of sacred words, ostensibly
directed to the gods, really involves the gods “calling upward”
(avaxadovpevor) the souls of the theurgists (1.12).
The locus classicus for lamblichus’s position on theurgy, indeed
his preference for theurgy (theia erga) over intellectual activity, is
found in Mysteries of Egypt 2: “For it is not thought which joins the
theurgists to the gods, since (if that were the case) what would
prevent those who philosophize theoretically from having theur-
gic union with the gods? . . . For when we are not engaged in
intellection, the synthémata themselves perform by themselves the
proper work, and the ineffable power of the gods, to whom these
[synthemata] belong, knows by itself its own images” (2.11 [96,13-
97,8}).'’ In other words, the divine rituals are effective ex opere
operato (by the work having been performed). A comparison with
medieval Christian sacramentalism naturally suggests itself.'® The

14. See G. Shaw, “Theurgy: Rituals of Unification in the Neoplatonism of Iamblichus,”

Traditio 41 (1985): 1-28; idem, Theurgy and the Soul: The Neoplatonism of Iamblichus (Univer-
sity Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995), a revised version of his dissertation
presented to the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 1987. Shaw was very helpful
to me in the preparation of the original version of this essay, and I gratefully acknowledge
his assistance.
15. Cf. Dodds, Greeks and the Irrational, 283-84; Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles and Theurgy,
461-66.
16. See F. W. Cremer, Die chaldéischen Orakel und lamblich De Mysteriis (Meisenheim:
Hein, 1969), 21-22.
17. English translations of On the Mysteries of Egypt are my own, though Taylor’s
translation is helpful. Since the word cuv@juata can be translated variously as “signs,”
“signatures,” or “symbols,” I use the transliteration synthémata. See Shaw’s discussion in
Theurgy and the Soul, 47-51.
18. Indeed, J. Trouillard thinks that theurgy and Christian sacramentalism are essen-
tially the same; see “Sacrements: La Théurgie paienne,” in Encyclopedia Universalis 15.582;
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt pies)

synthémata that are here considered so powerful can be regarded

as sacramental elements, consisting of such things as voces mysti-
cae and nomina barbara, presumably chanted by the theurgists.”” It
is also important that Iamblichus considers theurgy to be superior
to philosophical contemplation and not a mere concession to the
popular mind.
Iamblichus’s view of theurgy is closely connected with his so-
lution to a basic philosophical problem left unresolved by Plato
himself, that is, the problem of the soul’s embodiment and how
this embodiment is to be understood. As Shaw puts it,

This theme of embodiment, and of the descent of the soul, lies

at the heart of understanding theurgy; depending on one’s
solution to this problem, the world and matter, all one’s em-
bodied existence, could be seen either as a punishment and
burden or as an opportunity to cooperate in manifesting the
divine. Theurgy, 8eoupyia, as its etymology suggests, exem-
plifies the latter solution, for in theurgic rites man became
the instrument and beneficiary of the gods.”°

From what has been said, it is clear that lamblichus’s under-

standing and practice of theurgy was not simply an aberrant
aspect of his life existing alongside his philosophical work, but
an integral part of his Platonic philosophy, based essentially on
his interpretation of Plato’s dialogues. This will be developed fur-
ther in what follows, as we take up for discussion some examples
of Gnostic ritual as reflected in three Coptic Gnostic texts.

and idem, L’Un et l’Ame selon Proclos (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1972), 171-89. For criticism
of this view, see Majercik, Chaldaean Oracles, 23-24. Cf. Shaw’s discussion in “Theurgy:
Rituals of Unification,” 11.
19. Cf. Lewy, Chaldaean Oracles and Theurgy, 437-39.
20. Shaw, “Theurgy: Rituals of Unification,” 12-13. The phrase instrument and benefi-
ciary is derived from Trouillard, “Sacrements,” 582. Shaw goes on to discuss Jamblichus’s
doctrine of the soul in On the Soul, specifically Iamblichus’s rejection of the views of Nu-
menius, Porphyry, and Plotinus that the descending soul leaves a portion of itself in the
divine world. Cf. also J. M. Dillon, Jamblichi Chalcidensis in Platonis dialogos commentariorum
fragmenta (Philosophia antiqua 23; Leiden: Brill, 1973), 41-17, 382-83.
230 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

THREE GNOSTIC TEXTS

The three Gnostic texts I treat here are all found in the Coptic
Gnostic library discovered near the Upper Egyptian town of Nag
Hammadi in 1945: Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC III,2; IV,2), Three
Steles of Seth (NHC VIL5), and Marsanes (NHC X,1).*' These doc-
uments are part of a group.of Gnostic texts that belong to the
Sethian system,” a type of Gnosticism known to Plotinus and
his school in Rome.”* The Gospel of the Egyptians and the Three

21. For a convenient one-volume translation of all of the Nag Hammadi texts (including
also the Berlin Gnostic Codex), see NHL. For bibliography on Gnosticism and the Nag
Hammadi codices, see D. Scholer, Nag Hammadi Bibliography, 1948-1969 (NHS 1; Leiden:
Brill, 1971); idem, Nag Hammadi Bibliography, 1970-94 (NHMS 32; Leiden: Brill, 1997); with
annual bibliographic updates in Novum Testamentum.
22. See H.-M. Schenke, “Das sethianische System nach Nag-Hammadi-Handschriften,”
in Studia Coptica (ed. P. Nagel; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1974), 165-72; idem, “The Phenom-
enon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” in The Rediscovery of Gnosticism: Proceedings
of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut March 28-31, 1978
(ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81), 2.588-616.
The Gnostic texts that belong to the Sethian system according to Schenke are as follows:
Apocryphon of John (NHC I/,1; IIL,1; IV,1; BG,2)
Hypostasis of the Archons (NHC II,4)
Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC III,2; IV,2)
Apocalypse of Adam (NHC V,5)
Three Steles of Seth (NHC VIL5)
Zostrianos (NHC VIII,1)
Melchizedek (NHC IX,1)
Thought of Norea (NHC IX,2)
Marsanes (NHC X,1)
Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC XIIL1)
untitled text in Bruce Codex
For the last-named text, see C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, The Books of Jeu and the Untitled
Text in the Bruce Codex (NHS 13; Leiden: Brill, 1978). See also Turner, Sethian Gnosticism.
23. See C. Schmidt, Plotins Stellung zum Gnosticismus und kirchlichen Christentum (Texte
und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 20; Leipzig: Hinrichs,
1901), 63. Of course, Schmidt did not know the Nag Hammadi texts, though he did know
the Apocryphon of John (BG,2). Porphyry (Life of Plotinus 16) refers to apocalypses used by the
Gnostic opponents of Plotinus and attributed to “Zoroaster and Zostrianos and Nikotheos
and Allogenes and Messos and others.” Zostrianos (VIII,1) and Allogenes (X1,3) are now
known from the Nag Hammadi Library. The name Messos is given in the last-named trac-
tate to the “son” of Allogenés. Allogenés is another name for Seth; see B. A. Pearson,
Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Min-
neapolis: Fortress, 1990), 52-83, esp. 65-66. Nikotheos appears in the Bruce Codex as an
important Gnostic authority, associated in that capacity with another prophet, Marsanes.
We now have a revelation of the latter: Marsanes (X,1). Perhaps Marsanes should be included
in the “others” left unnamed by Porphyry. On Marsanes, see pp. 241-46 below. For an al-
ternative identification of the Gnostic opponents of Plotinus as Valentinians, rather than
Sethians, see F. Garcia Bazan, Plotino y la gnosis (Buenos Aires: Fundacion para la Educacién,
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt Ao

Steles of Seth are of special significance for the study of Sethian

ritual praxis.** Marsanes is the most Platonic of the Nag Hammadi
texts’? and contains some features that appear to reflect a kind of
Platonism very close to that of Iamblichus.”

GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS

The title Gospel of the Egyptians occurs in a secondary colophon
(IIL,2 69,7).”” The document is referred to by its editors as “a typical
work of mythological Gnosticism,”** consisting of the following
sections:

1. The origin of the heavenly world (II,2 40,12-55,16 = IV,2 50,1-

67,1).
2. The origin and salvation-history of the race of Seth (III,2 55,16-
66,8 = IV,2 67,2-78,10).

3. Concluding invocations of a liturgical character (III,2 66,8-

67,26 = IV,2 78,10-80,15).

la Ciencia y la Cultura, 1981); idem, “Plotino y los textos gnosticos de Nag-Hammadi,”

Oriente-Occidente 2 (1981): 185-202; and idem, “The ‘Second God’ in Gnosticism and Ploti-
nus’s Anti-Gnostic Polemic,” in Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (ed. R. T. Wallis and J. Bregman;
Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern 6; Albany: State University of New York
Press, 1992), 55-84.
24. Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” 600-607.
25. See Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 148-64.
26. See my introduction to Marsanes in NHL 461-62. See also J. D. Turner, “Gnosti-
cism and Platonism: The Platonizing Sethian Texts from Nag Hammadi in Their Relation
to Later Platonic Literature,” in Neoplatonism and Gnosticism (ed. R. T. Wallis and J. Breg-
man; Studies in Neoplatonism: Ancient and Modern 6; Albany: State University of New
York Press, 1992), 425-60; idem, introduction in W.-P. Funk, P.-H. Poirier, J. D. Turner,
Marsanés (NHX) (BCNH Textes 27; Québec: Laval University Press, 2000), 1-248. J. F. Fi-
namore, “Iamblichus, the Sethians, and Marsanes,” in Gnosticism and Later Platonism: Themes,
Figures, and Texts (ed. J. D. Turner and R. Majercik; Society of Biblical Literature Symposium
Series 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), 225-57.
27. The standard edition of the two extant versions of this text is A. Bohlig and F. Wisse,
Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2: The Gospel of the Egyptians (NHS 4; Leiden: Brill, 1975).
Their translation in NHL 209-19 presents the version in Codex III, except for missing
sections, where the Codex IV version is used instead. “Of the Egyptians” is restored in
lacunas in the incipit (II2 40,12; IV,2 50,1-2), but Schenke prefers to read the incipit as
“The Book of the H[ol]y [Invocation]” and “[The Ho]ly [Book] of the [Invocation]s” in the
respective versions. This is relevant to the question of the genre of the document (see p. 232
below). Cf. Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” 601. In Nag
Hammadi Deutsch 1.297 the translator, U.-K. Plisch, does not restore the lacunas.
28. Bohlig and Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2, 24.
252 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

4. Conclusions, dealing with the writing and transmission of the

book (III,2 68,1-69,17 = IV,2 80,15-81,2+).7?

The material in this document oriented to ritual is concentrated

in the third section, containing the liturgical invocations. The first
section presents a highly complicated heavenly world, beginning
with the supreme God dwellking in light and silence and featuring
successive emanations from him down to the “seed of the great
Seth.” But Hans-Martin Schenke points out that the Gospel of the
Egyptians is not simply a treatise developing a mythological sys-
tem. Its main subject is not emanation but prayer. As Schenke puts
it, “The writing aims to demonstrate and teach how to invoke
the supercelestial powers correctly and efficaciously, and which
powers to invoke.” The Gospel of the Egyptians is therefore to be
understood as “the mythological justification of a well defined rit-
ual of baptism including the invocations that must be performed
therein.””
Consider the following passage (unfortunately broken by la-
cunas in the manuscripts), dealing with a manifestation of God
called “Domedon Doxomedon:””!
[The] Father of the great light [who came] forth from the
silence, he is [the great] Doxomedon-aeon in which [the
thrice-]male child rests. And the throne of his [glory] was
established [in it, this one] on which his unrevealable name
[is inscribed], on the tablet [. . .] one is the word, the
[Father of the light] of everything, he [who came] forth

29. This outline is basically that of BGhlig and Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and
IV,2, 26.
30. Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” 600.
31. Possible (mixed) etymologies for these names are “Lord of the House” and “Lord of
Glory”; see Bohlig and Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2, 41. The full name, “Dome-
don Doxomedon,” occurs in the preceding context (III,2 43,8-9) of the passage quoted here,
where, however, only “Doxomedon” occurs. There are many examples of the Gnostics’ use
of, and probably chanting of, the seven vowels, which are probably understood as associ-
ated with the seven planetary spheres. See, e.g., E. Poirée, “Le chant gnostico-magique des
sept voyelles grecques,” in Congrés international d'histoire de la musique tenu a Paris @ la bib-
liothéque de Opera du 23 au 29 juillet 1900: Documents, memoires et voux (Solesnes: Saint-Pierre,
1901), 15-38; F. Dornseiff, Das Alphabet in Mystik und Magie (Leipzig /Berlin: Teubner, 1922),
126-13. Iamblichus does not deal specifically with this in his Mysteries of Egypt.
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 235

from the silence, while he rests in the silence, he whose

name [is] in an [invisible] symbol. [A] hidden [invisible]
mystery came forth: TITTTIITITTT
[11] HHHAHHHHHHHHHH-
HHHHHHH [HHO]JOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOO0000 YY[YYY]
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYVYYY EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE AAAA
AAA [AAAA] AAAAAAAAAAA Q9Q0Q00Q/20Q]222L22Q
QQQQ. (IIL,2 43,13-44,9)

The ineffable name given to the Doxomedon eon is made up

of the seven Greek vowels written twenty-two times each (the
number of the letters in the Hebrew/Aramaic alphabet, which
has no vowels). The vowels are not given in alphabetic order. The
order presented here may conceal another divine name: Iyov €
(otiv) A (Kai ) Q (leou is Alpha and Omega). That is, Doxomedon
may be identified as the being called Ieou or Yeou in some other
Gnostic texts, such as the Books of Jeu.”
However one construes the ineffable name hidden in the vowels,
it is most probable that this name was meant to be chanted in a
ritual context, in a language thought to be appropriate to the divine
beings invoked, as revealed to the Gnostics. lamblichus, too, knows
of the use of ineffable names, including “unintelligible” (Gon)
names, and argues that they are not, in fact, without sense to the
gods:

But to us let them be unknowable [Gyvwota], or known only

to some (of us), the interpretations of which we have re-
ceived from the gods. To the gods, indeed, all are significant
(although) not in an effable manner, nor in such a way as
that which is significant and indicative to men through their
imaginations, but either intellectually [voepa@c], according to
the human mind, itself divine, or ineffably [ao0¢éy«twc], both
better and more simply, and according to the mind which is
united with the gods. (Mysteries of Egypt 8.4 [254,17-255,6])

32. Bohlig and Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2, 173. For the Books of Jeu in the
Bruce Codex, see Schmidt and MacDermot, Books of Jeu.
234 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

Iamblichus goes on to discuss the use of barbarian language

in invocations of the gods. With special reference to the sacred
nations of the Egyptians and the Assyrians, he says: “We think
it is necessary to offer our communication to the gods in a lan-
guage related to them.... Those who first learned the names of
the gods, connecting them with their own proper tongue, handed
them down to us, that we might always preserve inviolate, (in a
language) peculiar and proper to these (names), the sacred law of
tradition” (Mysteries of Egypt 7.4 [256,8-15]).
lamblichus’s rationale for the use of unintelligible (Gonua) and
foreign (BapBapa) names would surely strike a responsive chord
with the Gnostics. The Gnostics undoubtedly had similar notions
concerning the appropriateness of certain names or vowel com-
binations to the various heavenly beings invoked in their ritual.
Such ritual included not only chanting but also ritual devices.
The text cited above provides an example of the name inscribed
“on the tablet [mv&oc].” This tablet, as the Greek word used for
it suggests,” was a piece of boxwood on which the name was
inscribed. It is at least possible that the Gnostics would have con-
sidered a boxwood tablet to be an appropriate receptacle for the
divine name, along the theoretical lines set forth by Iamblichus
in his discussion of various “stones, plants, animals, [and] aro-
matics” deemed in some way to be “sacred” and “divine-like”
(Mysteries of Egypt 5.23). lamblichus also refers, in his discussion
of divination, to the use of “sacred inscriptions of characters”
(3.14 [134,5-6]). The ritual chanting of the divine names by the
Gnostics, in any case, can easily be understood, along the lines
suggested by Iamblichus, as vehicles by which human beings are
“called up” to the gods (1.12).
The second section of the Gospel of the Egyptians tells of the
origin and salvation-history of the seed of Seth (the Gnostics).
In this document Seth is the Gnostic savior who passes through
three “advents” (flood, fire, and final judgment) “in order to save

33. Bohlig and Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2, 173; cf. Zostrianos (NHC VIII,1)
130,2.

ve
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 235

(the race) who went astray” (III,2 63,4-9). In his work of salva-
tion Seth undergoes a “baptism through a Logos-begotten body
which the great Seth prepared for himself, secretly through the
virgin in order that the saints may be begotten by the holy Spirit,
through invisible secret symbols [ovuPoaov]” (IIL2 63,10-15). This
section of the text culminates in a reference to the baptism that
the Gnostics are to undergo, a ritual that involves “invocations,”
“renunciations” (of the world and the lower levels of the cosmos),
“five seals” of baptism (presumably in water), and sacred instruc-
tions (III,2 66,2-6). The whole process entails immortalization:
“These will by no means taste death” (III,2 66,7-8).
It is, of course, clear that the kinds of rituals approved by
Iamblichus in his Mysteries of Egypt do not specifically include
baptism,” but his general defense of ritual would surely cover
such a rite. In any case, the invocations associated with bap-
tismal ritual receive prominence in the Gospel of the Egyptians.
Indeed, the climax of the book is a passage that consists en-
tirely of prayer-invocations (III,2 66,8-67,26 = IV,2 78,10-80,15).
In this set of invocations the Gnostic ritually experiences the di-
vine light and feels purified and drawn upward to God, as the
following excerpts surely imply: “I have become light. ...Thou art
my place of rest,...the formless one who exists in the formless
ones, who exists, raising up the man in whom thou wilt purify
me into thy life, according to thine imperishable name” (III,2 67,4,
16-22). This experience could equally well be that described by
Iamblichus, who speaks of invocations of the gods as really involv-
ing the benevolent act of the gods in illuminating the theurgists
and drawing their souls up to themselves (Mysteries of Egypt 1.12).
In this experience the soul,

leaving behind her own life, has exchanged it for the most
blessed energy of the gods. If, therefore, the ascent through
invocations [1 6iG tov KAnoEwV Avodoc] bestows on the priests

34. On Sethian Gnostic baptism, see Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnos-
tic Sethianism,” 602-7; Rudolph, Gnosis, 226-28; Turner, “Ritual in Gnosticism,” 87-97; and
especially J.-M. Sevrin, Le dossier baptismal séthien: Etudes sur la sacramentaire gnostique (BCNH
Etudes 2; Quebec: Laval University Press, 1986).
236 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

purification from passions, deliverance from generation, and

unity with the divine principle, how then could anyone con-
nect it with passions? For such (an invocation) does not draw
the impassible and pure (gods) down to passibility and im-
purity, but, on the contrary, it makes us, who had become
passible through generation, pure and immoveable [ka8apovc¢
Kai Gtpéntovc]. (Mysteries ef Egypt 1.12 [41,16—42,5])

Even more to the point are Iamblichus’s remarks on the power of

prayer (Mysteries of Egypt 5.26).*° Iamblichus discusses three types
of prayer: ovvayoyov (bringing together), leading to contact with
and knowledge (yv@ptotc) of the divine; ovvdetikdv (connective),
eliciting the gifts of the gods even prior to the uttered prayer;
and n dppntocs évwotc, establishing “ineffable union” with the gods
and causing the soul’s perfect repose in the gods. He goes on to
say that “the first pertains to illumination; the second to a com-
mon effectiveness; and the third to the perfect plenitude of the
(divine) fire.” Prayer, for Iamblichus, “offers us habitual contact
with the splendid stream of light, and quickly perfects our inner
being for contact with the gods until it raises us to the very sum-
mit” (5.26 [238,10-12; 239,2—4]). Such observations, indeed, could
arguably be taken as a theoretical commentary on the Gnostic
passage cited.

THREE STELES OF SETH

The incipit of the Three Steles of Seth (NHC VIIL,5)** identifies it as a

“revelation of Dositheos about the three steles of Seth, the Father
of the living and unshakable race” (118,10-13).*” The document

35. Cf. Dillon, Iamblichi Chalcidensis, 407-11.

36. See NHL 397-401. The latest critical edition is by J. M. Robinson and J. E. Goehring
in Nag Hammadi Codex VII (ed. B. A. Pearson; NHMS 30; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 371-421,
with introduction, notes, and bibliography by Goehring. Quotations here are from this
translation.
37. It is debatable whether this Dositheos is to be identified as one or more figures
of the same name mentioned in some traditions related to Samaritanism and Simonian
Gnosticism. See M. Tardieu, “Le trois stéles de Seth: Un écrit gnostique retrouvé a Nag
Hammadi,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 57 (1973): 545-75, esp. 551.
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 237

consists essentially of three sets of prayer-invocations correspond-

ing to three “steles”** of Seth, addressed in ascending order to the
three divine beings of the Sethian Gnostic triad: (Ger-)Adamas
(the Son; 118,24-121,17), Barbelo (the Mother; 121,18-124,15), and
the transcendent Father (124,16-126,31). The concluding section
(126,32-127,21) provides the key to understanding the function
of the three steles, consisting, as it does, of liturgical references
and directions. Despite the similarities with other Sethian Gnos-
tic texts in which the theme of mystic ascent occurs, especially
Allogenes and Zostrianos,” the Three Steles of Seth stands apart as
a liturgical text. Schenke draws special attention to this feature,
referring to the concluding material as liturgical “rubrics” that
direct how the prayer formulas are to be used and what is to be
achieved in the ritual. Schenke concludes that “the Three Steles
of Seth is the etiology of a mystery of ascension of the Sethian
community.”*°
The main thread running through the three sets of invocations
is that of praise or blessing. The first stele begins, “I bless you,
father, Geradama(s)” (118,25-26). The third concludes, “We have
blessed you, for we are able. We have been saved, for you have
willed always that we all do this” (126,29-31). In the course of
these blessings and invocations, the threefold nature of God is
underscored with reference to the Neoplatonic triad of “existence-
life-mind,” and language derived from Middle Platonism is found
throughout. These details are commented on by others*' and need
not occupy us here. What we are especially interested in is the
ritual use made of this text and such light as might be shed on it
with reference to Iamblichus.
38. Cf. the tablet mentioned in the Gospel of the Egyptians IIL,2 43,20 and IV,2 53,17. For
the motif of revelatory steles associated with Seth, see, e.g., Tardieu, “Trois stéles,” 553,
555; cf. also Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 71-76.
39. See, e.g., J. M. Robinson, “The Three Steles of Seth and the Gnostics of Plotinus,”
in Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Gnosticism, Stockholm August 20-25 1973 (ed.
G. Widengren; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1977), 132--42, esp. 133-36. Cf. J. D. Turner,
“The Gnostic Threefold Path to Enlightenment: The Ascent of Mind and the Descent of
Wisdom,” Novum Testamentum 22 (1980): 324-51, esp. 341-51.
40. Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism,” 601-2.
41. Cf. Robinson, “Three Steles of Seth”; Turner, “Gnostic Threefold Path”; idem,
“Gnosticism and Platonism”; Tardieu, “Trois stéles,” 558—67.
238 GNOSTIOS™
IN EGYPT

The Gesre! of the Egyptians is to be understood in relation to

the Gnostic rite of baptism. The Three Steles of Seth deals with
another rite, that of cultic ascension.* The following passage from
the concluding material in the Three Steles of Seth is crucial: “The
one who will remember these and give glory always shall become
perfect among those who are perfect and impassable beyond all
things. For they all bless these individually and together. And
afterward they shall be silent. And just as they were ordained,
they ascend. After the silence, they descend from the third, They
bless the second; after these the first. The way of ascent is the way
of descent” (127,6-21).
From these rubrics one can see that the prayers in Seth’s three
steles are recited in ascending and descending order: 1-2-3-3-
2-1, with an observance of ritual silence between the first and
second recitations of the third stele, the invocation of the primal
Father. The efficacy of these prayers can easily be understood an
the same terms as the invocations in the Gospel of the Egyptians
(see p. 235 above). These prayers can, in fact, be called theurgic
prayers and were probably chanted as hymns.“ In this case, we
have a special ritual of ascent, arguably comparable to the theurgic
ritual of amagdyé reflected in the Chaldean Oracles.“ Though the
rituals of the Sethians and the Chaldeans are not the same, their
meaning and efficacy can presumably be understood on the same
terms.
Ot special interest is this rubric: “The way of ascent is the way
of descent” (127.20). This enigmatic statement, with its allusion to
a famous fragment of Heraclitus,“ has parallels in other Gnostic
and mystical texts. For example, the (Valentinian) Marecosians are

42. See Schenke, “Phenomenon and Significance af Gnostic Sethianion,” 402.

4S. C Colpe uses the term Shouryack iW Teference to the prayers of the Three Stes of
Sth See © Wipe, “Hexinische, idlische, und christliche Ubertieferung in den Schriften aus
Nag Hammadi.” IL Jahrbuch fir Antike und Christentam 16 (197A 106-26, BP LAL See
also Goehring's discussion in Nag Haremadi Cader Vil (ed. Pearson), 380-82.
44. On the Chakiean angnie, see Lewy, Chaldanse Oracles and Thewryy, 177-227) cf. also
Majerctk, Chula Oracies, 30-45.
45. Frag. B @ (Dielsh QXc Go ede nia eal wom. Cr Radolph Grass 172 (but the
reference to 5 90 is a misprint). This fragment is also (partially) quoted Dy Plotinus, Brenads
4.8.1 (QOv Gve cai xara)
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 239

said to have claimed that their redemption mystery “leads them

down into the profundities of Bythos” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies
1.21.2).*° The Jewish Merkabah mystics enigmatically referred to
their mystical journeys as a descent to the Merkabah, that is, the
throne of God.” Perhaps phenomenologically closer to the ritual
use of the invocations in ascending and descending order in the
Three Steles of Seth is Epiphanius’s description of ritual intercourse
practiced by the Phibionites, a libertine Gnostic sect (Against Here-
sies 26.9.6—9). At each act of intercourse the barbarian name of one
of the 365 archons is invoked. After 365 acts of intercourse, the acts
and invocations are repeated in descending order. Completing the
sum total of 730 acts, Epiphanius tells us, the adept boldly says, “I
am the Christ, for Ihave descended downward through the names
of the 365 archons.”*°
The Gnostic understanding of ritual ascent as descent can be
illuminated with reference to Iamblichus’s understanding of the
ascent and descent of the soul and the place of ritual in effecting
the soul’s ascent. Iamblichus asserts that ascents and descents of
souls are essentially two sides of the same coin, as the following
passage in Mysteries of Egypt indicates:

46. Translation by W. Foerster (ed.), Gnosis: A Selection of Gnostic Texts (trans. and ed.
R. M. Wilson; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972-74), 1.218. Cf. A. J. Welburn, “Reconstructing the
Ophite Diagram,” Novum Testamentum 23 (1981): 261-87, esp. 264, where he entertains and
then rejects the suggestion that the reverse order of the Ophite invocations of the plane-
tary archons given by Origen (Against Celsus 6.31) refers to a mystic descent (he cites the
Marcosian and Jewish parallels in n. 12). On the Ophite Diagram, see pp. 252-57 below.
47. See G. G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York: Schocken, 1961),
46-47. Cf. I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des
antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980), 98-123 (on Hekhalot
literature), wherein he describes the theurgic elements in the ascent rituals reflected in
those mystical texts. The use of the verb ydrad (to descend) in an ascent context is reflected
in the Valentinian etymology of the river Jordan in the Valentinian Exposition, On Baptism
A (NHC XI,2a): “The interpretation of that which [is] the Jord[an] is the descent which
is [the upward progression], that [is, our exodus] from the world [into] the Eon” (41,32-
38). G. G. Stroumsa, in his review of Gruenwald’s book (Numen 28 [1981]: 107-9, esp.
108-9), plausibly suggests that the descent language in the Jewish mystical texts reflects
influence from the Hellenistic mystery initiations, in which a symbolic katabasis into Hades
and mystic visions are featured. There may be something of this influence in the Gnostic
examples as well.
48. “Ey eipt 6 Xpiotdc, Enerdyn dvob_ev KateBEBnka 510 TOV OVOUGTwV TOV TEE APYOVTMV;
Against Heresies 26.9.9. Cf. Rudolph, Gnosis, 247-50. Rudolph expresses some skepticism as
to the accuracy of Epiphanius’s descriptions of such libertinist cults. Cf. n. 71 below.
240 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

The works of sacred ritual have been determined from of

old by pure and intellectual laws. Lower (states) are liber-
ated by means of a greater order and power, and when we
change from (the inferior) to a better lot, we abandon the
inferior (states). And this is not effected contrary to the di-
vine law (laid down) from the beginning, as though the gods
were changed according to the sacred rite subsequently per-
formed. But from the first descent God sent souls down here
that they might return again above to him. Therefore there is
no change (in the divine plan)*’ arising from such an ascent,
nor are descents and ascents of souls opposed to each other
[ovite dyovtat ai Kd00501 tov woxX@v Kai Gvodot]. (Mysteries of
Egypt 8.8 [272,2-12])”

Of course, Iamblichus does not mean that ascent and descent

are merely a mechanical process. Ascent can be realized only as
the soul fulfills its responsibilities as a descended soul, specifically
with recourse to the proper ritual, including, perhaps, even ritual
reenactments of the descent.’' For Iamblichus, every divine or de-
monic power” governing the various levels of the cosmos, even
the most base, must be appropriately honored. In this respect, the
Gnostic ritual ascent reflected in the Three Steles of Seth differs
from Iamblichus’s theurgy in that the prayers are addressed not
to lower cosmic beings but to the primal heavenly triad of Father,
Mother, and Son. The power of these prayers are nevertheless to

49. Cf. des Places, Jamblique, 201 n. 3.

50. There may be a possible allusion to Heraclitus’s fragment here (cf. n. 45). Plotinus
quotes Heraclitus frag. B 60, together with frag. 84ab, in his discussion of the descent of
the soul in Enneads 4.8.1. lamblichus quotes from the same fragments in his On the Soul,
apud Stobaeus 1.49 (1.378.21-23; ed. Wachsmuth); cf. A.-J. Festugiére, La révélation d’'Hermes
Trismégiste (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), 3.219.
51. Shaw refers to the “upside-down” state of the embodied soul taught by Plato
(Timaeus 43e) and argues that theurgy, for Ilamblichus, achieves the rectification of the
soul, its “turning around” (periagoge; cf. Republic 521c). See Shaw, “Theurgy: Rituals of
Unification,” 14-15; idem, “Theurgy in Later Platonism,” in Gnosticism and Later Platonism:
Themes, Figures, and Texts (ed. J. D. Turner and R. Majercik; Society of Biblical Literature
Symposium Series 12; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), 57-82, esp. 60-61.
52. Iamblichus treats the various gods, demons, heroes, and souls in Mysteries of
Egypt 1.

v
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 241

be understood, with Iamblichus, in his discussion of prayer and

sacrifice, as “anagogic, effective, and fulfilling.”
Perhaps more clarity can be achieved on what is meant by “as-
cent as descent” in the Three Steles of Seth by turning to the last
text to be taken up in this essay: Marsanes.

MARSANES
The tractate Marsanes (NHC X,1) is unfortunately very badly pre-
served.” It occupies the entirety of the extant material in Codex X,
at least sixty-eight discrete pages, of which many consist of only
small fragments.’ The first ten pages are relatively intact; here
we encounter material relating to a Gnostic ascent experience, in-
cluding discussion of the various levels of reality, symbolically
referred to as seals. The middle portion of the tractate contains
materials on the mystical meaning of the letters of the alphabet
and their relation both to the human soul and to the names of
gods and angels. The rest is hopelessly fragmentary; the bulk of
this tractate, therefore, is totally lost. This is unfortunate, for it
must have been an important text in Gnostic circles, if one can
judge from what is said of the prophet Marsanes in the untitled
tractate from the Bruce Codex: “The powers of all the great aeons
have given homage to the power which is in Marsanes. They said:
‘Who is this who has seen these things before his face, that he has
thus revealed concerning him?’ ”°°
53. “Avaywyov Kal teAeotovupyov Kal aronAnpatikdv; Mysteries of Egypt 5.26 (240,4). Cf.
the previous references to 5.26 on p. 236 above.
54. The first critical edition of this text is B. A. Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X
(NHS 15; Leiden: Brill, 1981), 211-352; cf. NHL 460-71 (with updated translation). A new
edition was published by the French-language project based at the University of Laval:
W.-P. Funk (text, critical apparatus, indices), P.-H. Poirier (translation and commentary),
and J. D. Turner (introduction in English), Marsanés (NH X) (BCNH Textes 27; Quebec:
Laval University Press, 2000). See also my article, “Marsanes Revisited,” forthcoming in
a Festshrift for Wolf-Peter Funk to be published in the BCNH series by the University of
Laval Press.
55. On these problems, see the introduction to Codex X in Pearson, Nag Hammadi
Codices IX and X, 211-50, esp. 211-18. Funk, Poirier, and Turner’s Marsanés lacks a
codicological introduction.
56. Schmidt and MacDermot, Books of Jeu, 235. Marsanes revealed a divine power
“Monogenes” said to be “hidden in the divine Setheus.” This name does not appear in the
extant pages of the tractate Marsanes. Perhaps Monogenes is to be identified as Autogenes,
a prominent divine being in Marsanes.
242 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

This text contains some features that reflect a kind of Platonism

close to that of Iamblichus. One of the bases for this observation
is the statement in Marsanes, very surprising for a Gnostic text,
that “in every respect the sense-perceptible world is [worthy] of
being saved entirely” (5,24-26).°’ Such a statement coheres very
well with Iamblichus’s understanding of the Platonic tradition,
both with respect to his view of matter and his understanding of
the descended soul. For Iamblichus, matter is not evil per se and
the descent of the soul into matter is not regarded as a fall, but as a
demiurgic function. In this, lamblichus is following Plato himself,
particularly Plato’s discussion of the psychogonia in his Timaeus
(41a—42a).* Indeed, such a view can even be brought into confor-
mity with other passages in Plato, including the famous passages
in which the body (o@ua) is referred to as a “tomb” (ofa). In the
Cratylus (400c), for example, it is said that the soul has the body as
a tomb, that is, an “enclosure” (mepiBodog), “in order that it might
be saved [iva o@fntat].”””
In the very next passage in Marsanes, a figure called “the Self-
Begotten One” or Autogenes is referred to. This figure symboli-
cally represents the descending soul in its demiurgic function.”
Unfortunately the text is corrupt and riddled with lacunas, but his
descent progressively (“part by part”) into the world of multiplic-
ity is clearly reflected; the result of this descent is that “he saved a
multitude” (5,27-6,16). Autogenes here plays the same role as the
demiurgic intellect in Iamblichus’s discussion of Egyptian theol-
ogy (Mysteries of Egypt 8.3). Iamblichus describes the progressive
unfolding of the divine from the Ineffable God prior even to the

57. Quotations from Marsanes are taken from my translation in NHL 462-71, slightly
modified where necessary on the basis of Funk’s transcription in Funk, Poirier, and Turner,
Marsanés.
38. Cf. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 148-64 (reference to the
Marsanes passage).
59. See the penetrating study by C. J. de Vogel, “The Soma-Sema Formula: Its Function
in Plato and Plotinus Compared to Christian Writers,” in Neoplatonism and Early Christian
Thought (ed. H. J. Blumenthal and R. A. Markus; London: Variorum, 1981), 79-99.
60. Ct. the Naassene Gnostic system, in which “Autogenes-Adamas” is interchangeable
with “soul.” See Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.6.3-9 (commentary) and 5.10.1
(Naassene psalm).
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 243

First God, down to the demiurgic intellect, and then down to the
world of generation:

And thus the doctrine of the Egyptians concerning first prin-

ciples, from above (down) to the last things, begins from
One and proceeds into multiplicity [ao Evog dpyetat, Kat
TMPOELOLV Eig TANVOc], the many being governed by the One.
And everywhere the indefinite nature is controlled by a cer-
tain definite measure and by the sole supreme Cause of all
things. God produced matter by dividing materiality from
essentiality [a0 thg ovoLOTHTOS DIOGYLGVEtoNs LAOTHTOG]. This
matter, being living, the demiurge took and fashioned from
it the simple and impassable spheres. The last of it (matter)
he ordered into generated and corruptible bodies. (Mysteries
of Egypt 8.3 [264,14—265,10])

For Iamblichus, the soul, in order to ascend, must properly learn

to descend. Ascent to the One is mediated through the Many,°!
specifically with recourse, in ritual, to the various levels of the
cosmos ordained by God. The rituals themselves are appointed in
conformity with sacred law:

(Each ritual) imitates the order of the gods, intelligible and

heavenly. (Each ritual) contains the eternal measures of be-
ings and the wonderful deposits such as are sent down
here from the Demiurge and Father of All. By means of
them, the unutterable things are given expression through
ineffable symbols [ta pev ad8eyKta 51a cvpBOAwV GnopprtoV
éexowvettat]. The formless things are mastered in forms; the
things which are superior to any image are reproduced
through images, and all things are accomplished solely
through a divine cause. (Mysteries of Egypt 1.21 [65,4-12])

In a very important passage in Marsanes (2,12—4,23) dealing

with the various levels of reality, from the material level to

61. See Shaw’s excellent discussion in “Theurgy: Rituals of Unification,” 14-16.

244 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

the level beyond being, each is symbolically related to a “seal”

(sphragis). Thirteen seals are presented in ascending order. The first
three seals are “cosmic” and “material” (2,16-19); the thirteenth
expresses the unknown “silent” God. The writer periodically re-
minds his readers that he previously taught them about these seals
(2,19-21; 3,4-9) and unfortunately does not repeat this instruction
here. The question now arises as to the function of these seals.
Though this passage is not a liturgical text, it is probable that our
Gnostic author is enigmatically referring to a ritual praxis when
he discusses the thirteen seals. Indeed, what may be reflected here
is a theurgic ascent-praxis in which the various seals are to be
understood as equivalent to what Iamblichus calls synthémata.*
The reference to cosmic and material seals, indeed, reminds us of
[amblichus’s use of material synthémata and his recourse to material
objects in theurgic ritual, such as stones, plants, and so on (Mys-
teries of Egypt 5.23). It is in such a context that we can understand
another passage in Marsanes (unfortunately fragmentary), in which
“wax images” and “emerald likenesses” are mentioned (35,1-4).°°
It is also in this general theurgic context that we should under-
stand the extended passage in Marsanes treating the various letters
of the alphabet (19-39). This passage (unfortunately riddled with
lacunas and textual corruptions) is not a model of clarity, to be
sure. But in it is a quasilearned discussion of the nature of the
letters of the alphabet, based, in fact, on the technical discussions
of the grammarians.™ But the discussion clearly has religious pur-

62. Cf. Majercik, Chaldaean Oracles, 44-45, who points out that Synesius (Hymns 1[3]
539.620) uses the terms synthema and sphragis interchangeably in an anagogic context; cf.
her notes to frag. 2 (ibid., 141). Cf. also Pearson, Codices IX and X, 253-61. According to
Turner the use of the term seal here implies a baptismal context; see his introduction in
Funk, Poirier, and Turner, Marsanés, 233.
63. Cf. Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X, 315, where references to magical texts
are also given. See also Poirier’s commentary in Funk, Poirier, and Turner, Marsanés, 453-
54.
64. In Pearson, Codices IX and X, 295-308, I refer to the theories of Dionysius Thrax
and his later commentators. Cf. also the classic monograph on the use of the alphabet
in magic and mysticism: Dornseiff, Das Alphabet in Mystik und Magie. See also Turner's
introduction to Funk, Poirier, and Turner, Marsanés, 453-54, and Poirier’s commentary in
the same volume.

*
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 245

poses and resembles somewhat the speculations of the Valentinian

Gnostic Marcus (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.13-21).° In Marsanes,
however, the entire discussion is tied to the nature of the soul
and its ascent through the spheres. The ascent of the soul pre-
supposes knowledge of the “nomenclature” of the gods and the
angels. The letters of the alphabet and their syllabic combinations
are understood to have their counterparts in the angelic world of
the Zodiac and the planetary spheres. The Gnostic adept, in order
to ascend beyond these spheres, must know their natures and be
able to chant the proper names.
All of this is intelligible in terms of Iamblichus’s theurgic the-
ories. Just as God expressed the ineffable through mysterious
symbols (cf. Mysteries of Egypt 1.21, quoted on p. 243 above), so
must the Gnostic/theurgist give utterance to the sounds conse-
crated to the various gods and angels. Iamblichus specifically
mentions the motive power of music (3.9) and goes on to say:
“Sounds and melodies are consecrated appropriately to each of the
gods, and a kinship with them has been assigned appropriately
according to the proper ranks and powers of each, and (accord-
ing to) the motions in the universe itself and the harmonious
sounds whirring as a result of these motions [tag ano tov KiV-
Yoewv poilovpévac Evappoviovs davdc]” (3.9 [118,16-119,4]).% The
soul must adapt itself to these various sounds and thus be enabled
to ascend, being drawn upward through the spheres to its divine
root (cf. what was said above concerning the efficacy of the divine
names in 7.5).
Before bringing this discussion to a close it is necessary to com-
ment on the following passage in Marsanes, where the use and
efficacy of the various vowel-consonant combinations is stressed:
“And <the> consonants exist with the vowels, and individually
they are commanded, and they submit [cegumotacce]. They

65. On Marcus, see the excellent monograph by N. Forster, Marcus Magus: Kult,
Lehre und Gemeindeleben einer valentinianischen Gnostikergruppe (Wissenschaftliche Unter-
suchungen zum Neuen Testament 114; Tiibingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1999).
66. See des Places, Jamblique, 109 n. 2, on porCopévac.
246 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT ==

constitute the nomenclature [ONOMACIA] [of] the angels. And

[the] consonants are self-existent, [and] as they are changed
<they> submit to [<ce>gvmoTtacce] the hidden gods by means
of beat and pitch and silence and impulse” (30,3-18).
One of the interpretive problems in this passage is how the
Greco-Coptic word gomoTtacce (=bdnotdooetv or brotacoecbat)
should be translated. In terns of Coptic grammar, it could be
rendered either “to subject” (transitive verb) or “to submit.”°
In other words, certain combinations of vowels and consonants,
properly intoned, bring various gods and angels into subjection
(even if the vowels, etc., are “subject to” the gods and angels).
On the face of it, this is more magical than theurgical, given what
was said of theurgy at the beginning of this essay. Yet even this
passage can be understood in Iamblichian terms. At Mysteries of
Egypt 4.1, lamblichus takes up the problem, posed by Porphyry,
how superior beings, when invoked, can be commanded by in-
ferior beings. Iamblichus, of course, cannot grant such a thing,
even though he does stress the ex opere operato character of the
invocations. He solves this problem by arguing that the theurgic
practitioner acts both as a human and as a god. By means of the
synthémata the practitioner is elevated to and conjoined with supe-
rior natures (4.2). The theurgist “invokes, as superior natures, the
powers from the universe, inasmuch as the one invoking is a man,
and again he commands them [€nitdttet avtaic], since somehow,
through the ineffable symbols, he is invested with the hieratic
form of the gods [nepiBaAAetat ... 10 lepatiKov Tov BE@v npdoxnLa]”
(4.2 [184,9-14]).°°
It is in this way that our passage in Marsanes can best be
understood.”

67. See Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X, 304-5. Poirier understands this ter-
minology in terms of grammatical prefixes and suffixes; see Funk, Poirier, and Turner,
Marsanés, 101 (translation), 438-39 (commentary), 65-66 (Turner’s introduction).
68. This question is implicit in Plotinus’s polemic against the Gnostics (Enneads 2.9.14).
69. Iamblichus makes a similar point in Mysteries of Egypt 6.6.
70. See Shaw’s discussion of that passage in Theurgy and the Soul, 186-88.

“
 Gnostic Ritual and lamblichus’s Treatise On the Mysteries of Egypt 247

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The preceding discussion shows that Gnostic ritual can be under-

stood in terms of Iamblichus’s ritual theories. To be sure, I
considered a very limited amount of evidence, both in terms of
the Gnostic material and in terms of Iamblichus’s total presenta-
tion in his treatise Mysteries of Egypt. Indeed, much more can be
done along these lines.”’ But I should clearly state what I have not
done: I have not tried to show that the actual rituals performed
by the Gnostics or by Iamblichus are the same in terms of content,
even though the ascension rituals in both cases are quite compara-
ble. Nor have I tried to show that the mythological background is
the same; on the contrary, the gods, demons, angels, and so on are
different. As for worldview and ontology, Iamblichus’s Platonism
would not allow him to describe the demiurge and the material
world in the terms used by the Gospel of the Egyptians (III,2 56,22-
60,2). It is nevertheless to be noticed that such typically Gnostic
anticosmic expressions are absent from both the Three Steles of
Seth and Marsanes. In fact, the latter document comes closest to
Iamblichus in its view of the world and matter.
Furthermore, while I do not wish to refer to Iamblichus as a
Gnostic, or even a crypto-Gnostic,” Iamblichus’s attitude to the
Gnostics was undoubtedly different from that of Plotinus. This
is indicated in what he says (and does not say) about them. He
refers to the Gnostics once in his On the Soul, in a doxographical
discussion of various beliefs that have been advanced concerning
the activities of the soul, and there he sandwiches them between
Heraclitus and Albinus!” While he would probably take issue
with the views he attributes to the Gnostics concerning the soul’s

71. The ritual activities of the so-called libertine groups, e.g., those Gnostics described
by Epiphanius in his Against Heresies 25-26 (including the Phibionites mentioned above)
should be examined in terms of what Iamblichus says about the ritual use of obscene
objects, gestures, and words (Mysteries of Egypt 1.11).
72. Cf. Plotinus’s criticisms in Enneads 2.9.10-11.
73. On the Soul, apud Stobaeus 1.49 (1.375.9); cf. Festugiére, Révélation, 3.210. I owe this
reference to Michel Tardieu.
248 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

“derangement” (napdavoia) and “deviation” (napéxBaotc),” it is in-

teresting that he even considers them worth mentioning. And, of
course, he could not possibly have joined in Plotinus’s criticisms
of their ritual activity (Enneads 2.9.14, referred to above).
It has been the burden of this essay to show that, despite
the differences that must be assumed between Iamblichus and
the Gnostics, they can be ynderstood in similar terms when
it comes to their use and understanding of religious ritual.
Whether this implies, in the case of Iamblichus, a degeneration of
Neoplatonism, is a question that I must leave to others to decide.

74. While I have not found these specific terms in any Gnostic sources, they might be
applied in general to what is said of the fallen soul in such treatises on the soul as Exegesis
on the Soul (NHC IL,6) and Authoritative Teaching (NHC VI,3). The latter treatise is referred
to, however, as more of a Platonist writing than a Gnostic one. See R. van den Broek, Studies
in Gnosticism and Alexandrian Christianity (NHMS 39; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 206-34. Plotinis
ascribes to the Gnostics a doctrine of the soul’s “declination” (vedoic; Enneads 2.9.11), but
this is a term he himself uses of certain souls (1.6.5).
 Gnostic Iconography

A casual reader of Charles W. King’s learned treatise The Gnos-

tics and Their Remains, originally published in 1864 and reprinted
in 1973,’ might expect that any new discussion of the subject of
Gnostic iconography would necessarily encompass a large mass
of data, enlarged all the more by archeological discoveries made
since King deliberately set out to complement what was known
about “the philosophy of Gnosticism” with “full attention to its
archaeological side.”* I must state at the outset that the following
discussion will be disappointing to those whose appetites have
been whetted by King’s impressive work.
The reason for my more modest approach is that I have a
much narrower definition of Gnosticism than did King, whose
work on “the Gnosis” encompassed large reaches of time and
space from ancient India and Iran to ancient Egypt, from ancient
Greece and Rome and medieval Jewish Kabbala to nineteenth-
century Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism. The best evidence for
the ancient Gnostic religion (see chapter 7 above), whose ori-
gins can be traced to around the turn of the common era, is
constituted by three groups of literary sources and related evi-
dence: (1) the church fathers’ descriptions of Gnostic heresy plus
original Gnostic documents, principally the Coptic Gnostic texts
from Egypt; (2) books preserved by the present-day Mandaeans,
whose religion still exists as a relic of ancient Gnosticism;* and

1. C. W. King, The Gnostics and Their Remains, Ancient and Mediaeval (London: Bell &
Dalby, 1864; 2d ed.: New York: Putnam, 1887; repr. Minneapolis: Wizards Bookshelf, 1973).
2. Ibid., xix. For the philosophy of Gnosticism, King refers the reader to J. Matter,
Histoire critique du gnosticisme et de son influence sur les autres sectes religieuses et philosophiques
pendant les six premiers siécles (3 vols.; 2d ed.; Strasbourg: Levrault, 1843-44).
3. For English translations see W. Foerster (ed.), Gnosis: A Selection of Gnostic Texts
(trans. and ed. R. M. Wilson; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972-74), vol. 1; and NHL.
4. For selections from their writings translated by Kurt Rudolph, with bibliography,
see Foerster, Gnosis, 2.123-319.

249
250 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

(3) ancient testimonies on and original sources produced by and

for Manichaeans.° My discussion of Gnostic iconography will be
limited to the kind of Gnosticism attested by the first group of
sources® and will take up such evidence for Gnostic iconography
as found in art and architecture, talismans or amulets, and illus-
trated manuscripts. The basic question here is this: What evidence
do we actually have for iconography produced by or for the Gnos-
tics known to us from the aforementioned literary sources? And
how is this evidence to be assessed?
Irenaeus of Lyons, in his great work Against Heresies, provides
an extensive discussion (Against Heresies 1.25) of a group founded
by Carpocrates in Alexandria, Egypt, of people who “call them-
selves Gnostics.” He includes in his treatment of a Roman branch
of that group, led by a woman named Marcellina, a statement on
the Carpocratians’ use of art:
They have also images, some painted, some too made of other
material [et imagines quasdam quidem depictas, quasdam autem et
de reliqua materia fabricatas habent], and say they are the form of
Christ [formam Christi] made by Pilate in that time when Jesus
was with men. These they crown, and they set them forth
with the images of the philosophers of the world, Pythago-
ras, Plato, Aristotle, and the rest; and their other observance
concerning them they carry out like the heathen. (Against
Heresies 1.25.6; trans. Foerster, Gnosis, 1.38)’

Irenaeus clearly does not like the Carpocratian heretics and takes
pains to depict their supposedly godless beliefs and practices

5. Unfortunately, the third volume of W. Foerster’s German edition of Gnosis, contain-

ing Manichaean texts, was not translated into English; see A. Béhlig and J. P. Asmussen
(eds.), Die Gnosis, vol. 3: Der Manichdismus (rev. ed.; Zurich: Artemis & Winkler, 1995); but
see H.-J. Klimkeit, Gnosis on the Silk Road: Gnostic Texts from Central Asia (San Francisco: Har-
per, 1993), containing exclusively Manichaean texts. The standard handbook, which treats
all three types of Gnosticism, is K. Rudolph, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism
(San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1977).
6. On iconography of the other two groups see, e.g., K. Rudolph, Mandaeism (Iconogra-
phy of Religions 21; Leiden: Brill, 1978); and H.-J. Klimkeit, Manichaean Art and Calligraphy
(Iconography of Religions 20; Leiden: Brill, 1982).
7. For the Latin text, I use A. Rousseau and L. Doutrelau, Irénée de Lyon: Contre les
hérésies (Sources chrétiennes 264; Paris: Cerf, 1969). ;

“i
 Gnostic Iconography py |

in the worst possible light. His discussion of Carpocratian art

should, therefore, be taken cum grano salis. Nevertheless, there may
be some kernel of truth behind his statements, even if Irenaeus
takes pains to underscore the pagan nature of the Carpocratians’
use of images. Whatever the truth may be, such paintings or
other images that might have existed among the Carpocratians
are irretrievably lost. Consequently, we have nothing from Ire-
naeus’s statement on which to base any discussion of Carpocratian
Gnostic iconography, except that it might have existed.®
Archeological discoveries made during the twentieth century,
especially in Roman tombs, led some scholars to posit a Gnostic
context for some of the wall paintings found in them.’ The paint-
ings found in the tomb of the Aureli in Rome’s Viale Manzoni and
in the “Piazzuola” beneath the church of San Sebastiano on the
Via Appia Antica are probably the most important examples. But
the Gnostic interpretation is wrong, as Paul Corby Finney shows
in his exemplary discussion of the evidence.'® Of course, there
surely were tombs and even church buildings (house churches)
in use among Gnostic heretics, and we even have some meager
inscriptional evidence for them." But such epigraphic evidence as
we have lacks architectural context. Whether the Gnostic heretics

8. For an excellent discussion of the Carpocratian case in the larger context of schol-
arly discussions on the origins of Christian art, see P. C. Finney, “Gnosticism and the
Origins of Early Christian Art,” in Atti del IX Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cris-
tiana, Roma 21-27 Settembre 1975 (Vatican City: Pontificio Istituto di archeologia cristiana,
1978), 1.391—405.
9. See, e.g., C. Cecchelli, Monumenti Cristiano-Eretici di Roma (Vatican City: Pontificio
Istituto di archeologia cristiana, Fratelli Palombi, 1944).
10. P. C. Finney, “Did the Gnostics Make Pictures?” in The Rediscovery of Gnosticism:
Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut March
28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980-81),
1.434—54, esp. 442-50.
11. On the Valentinian tomb inscription to Flavia Sophe, see A. Ferrua, “Questioni
di epigrafia eretica romana,” Rivista di Archeologia Christiana 21 (1945): 165-221, esp. 176-
95; and G. Quispel, “L’inscription de Flavia Sophe,” in Mélanges Joseph de Ghellinck, vol. 1:
Antiquité (Museum Lessianum-Section Historique 13; Gembloux: Ducolot, 1951), 201-14.
On the marble inscription from a Valentinian house church in Rome’s Via Latina, see
P. Lampe, “An Early Christian Inscription in the Musei Capitolini,” in Mighty Minorities?
Minorities in Early Christianity— Positions and Strategies: Essays in Honour of Jacob Jervell on
His 70th Birthday, 21 May 1995 (ed. D. Hellholm et al.; Oslo: Scandinavian University Press,
1995), 79-92, and literature cited there.
252 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

attested in the inscriptions had religious art is a question for which

we have as yet no answer.
The same applies to the alabaster bowl of unknown provenience
and date in the Hirsch collection, whose interior has a sculp-
tured cult scene with naked worshipers surrounding a winged
snakelike deity wound around an omphalos stone. The exterior
has Greek inscriptions from Orphic poems. Hans Leisegang, who
clearly recognized and expostulated the Orphic features of the
bowl, then went beyond the evidence to argue for a Gnostic con-
nection, specifically related to the rituals of an Ophite Gnostic
sect.'? But there is nothing specifically Gnostic about this bowl.’
Some scholars identify as Gnostic limestone stelae and stat-
uettes found at Khirbet Qilqis in Palestine, but such an identifica-
tion is doubtful at best.'* An inscribed stele from Argos in Greece,
containing in a concave niche the bust of a female figure accom-
panied by representations of the seven planets and the Zodiac, is
labeled Gnostic because of an inscription on it.’” The inscription
has nomina barbara, including the names Sabaoth and Iaia (= Iao?).
But the identifiable names are ubiquitous in Greco-Roman magic,'®
and the inscription can hardly be identified as belonging to any
known Gnostic sect.
A more promising approach to Gnostic iconography is provided
by another patristic testimony, this time from Origen. In his trea-
tise Against Celsus, Origen takes up for extensive discussion a
12. H. Leisegang, “The Mystery of the Serpent,” in Pagan and Christian Mysteries:
Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks (ed. J. Campbell; New York: Harper & Row, 1955), 3-
69. Leisegang’s interpretation is based on Epiphanius, Against Heresies 37.5 (quoted by
Leisegang on p. 40).
13. Finney, “Did the Gnostics Make Pictures?” 441. Incantation bowls are found among
the Mandaeans, but these belong to the larger context of Mesopotamian, including Jewish,
magic. These bowls are usually inscribed in Aramaic (or Mandaic, a form of Aramaic). See,
e.g., W. S. McCullough, Jewish and Mandaean Incantation Bowls in the Royal Ontario Museum
(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967); C. D. Isbell, Corpus of the Aramaic Incantation
Bowls (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 17; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press,
1975); and J. Naveh and S. Shaked, Amulets and Magic Bowls: Aramaic Incantations of Late
Antiquity (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1985).
14. See Finney, “Did the Gnostics Make Pictures?” 440-41.
15. A. Delatte, “Etudes sur la magie grecque: Un bas-relief gnostique,” Musée Belge 17
(1913): 321-37.
16. W. Brashear, “A Further Note on an Argive Votive Relief of Selene,” Harvard
Theological Review 83 (1990): 333-40.
 Gnostic Iconography 253

diagram said by Celsus to be in use by “certain Christians.””” The

context in Celsus’s treatise The True Doctrine (lost except for Ori-
gen’s excerpts) is a discussion of the soul’s journey through the
seven heavens, as taught by Plato (Against Celsus 6.21), the elab-
oration of these teachings in the Mithraic mysteries (6.22), and a
comparable “mystery of the Christians” (6.23-24) supposedly bor-
rowed from the Mithraists. This Christian mystery, according to
Celsus, features an elaborate diagram on which its details are in-
scribed. Origen informs us that the diagram in question, which he
himself has seen, is not that of Christians at all but of the “undis-
tinguished sect” of the Ophites, or Ophians (Odgtavot; 6.24). The
extensive description of the diagram that follows in the text is par-
tially that of Celsus and partially that of Origen, who adds details
based on his own examination of it, interspersed with disparag-
ing comments.’® We can extract from Origen’s lengthy discussion
in 6.25-26 the following description of the diagram’s essential
features (in 6.25).
The diagram “contained a drawing of ten circles, which were
separated from one another and held together by a single circle,
which was said to be the soul of the universe and was called
Leviathan.” It also featured another beast (drawn from the Bible)
called Behemoth (misrendered in the Greek as Benudv), said to be
“fixed below the lowest circle.” The diagram “depicted Leviathan
upon the circumference of the circle and at its centre, putting in
the name twice.” Celsus reports that “the diagram was divided
by a thick black line,” and his informants told him that “this was
Gehenna, also called Tartarus.” Leviathan is apparently depicted
on the outer circle as a snake!’ with its tail in its mouth, as can
be inferred from Pistis Sophia 126: “The outer darkness is a great

17. I use the translation by H. Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum (repr. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1980). For the Greek text of the relevant section of Against
Celsus, see B. Witte, Das Ophitendiagramm nach Origenes’ Contra Celsum VI 22-38 (Arbeiten
zum spatantiken und koptischen Agypten 6; Altenberge: Oros, 1993), 42-83 (with German
translation).
18. The diagram described by Celsus was evidently not identical to the one examined
by Origen. See Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum, 33.
19. Leviathan is referred to as an odtc¢ in Isa 27:1.
254 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT
=
=.=.

dragon whose tail is in its mouth, and it is outside the whole

world, and it surrounds the whole world.”
Celsus’s description of the diagram was evidently followed by
a discussion of the uses to which it was put by the sect that owned
it. Celsus mentions a ritual called “the Seal” (ogpayic) and “a dia-
logue in which the one who administers the seal is called Father
and the one who is sealed is‘called young man and Son; and he
answers ‘I have been anointed with white ointment from the tree
of life.” Celsus reports that “those who impart the seal say that
there are seven angels standing on either side of the soul when
the body is dying, the one group being angels of light and the
other of what are called archontic angels.” The archontic angels’
“chief ...is said to be an accursed God,” “the Creator” and “God
of the Jews” (6.27). This god is accursed “because he cursed the
serpent which imparted to the first man knowledge of good and
evil” (6.28).
Origen returns to a description of the diagram at 6.30, here
comparing what Celsus says about it with his own description of
the diagram in his possession. The aforementioned seven archon-
tic angels or daemons were presumably depicted on the diagram.
The first is said to be lion-shaped, and Origen adds that this “angel
of the Creator” is called Michael. The next, a bull, is Suriel. There
follow Raphael (serpentlike), Gabriel (eaglelike), Thauthabaoth
(bearlike), Erathaoth (with the face of a dog), and Thaphabaoth
or Onoel (with the face of [or in the shape of] an ass).
Origen then reports what these sorcerers are “taught to say at
the eternally chained gates of the Archons after passing through
what they call ‘the Barrier of Evil’” (6.31). Starting with the top,
at the eighth level (rather than at the bottom level, as might be ex-
pected), Origen gives the text of the prayers to be directed to each
in order to effect the soul’s passage. After the “Solitary King”
of “the Ogdoad,” prayers are to be offered to the lionlike Iald-
abaoth (associated with the planet Saturn), then to Iao, Sabaoth,

20. C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, Pistis Sophia (NHS 9; Leiden: Brill, 1978), 635.
 Gnostic Iconography 235

Adonai,” Astaphaeus, Ailoaeus (or Eloaeus), and Horaeus (6.31).

Origen tells us that four of these names (Iao, Sabaoth, Adonai,
Eloaeus —all referring to God) are taken from the Scriptures and
three (laldabaoth, Astaphaeus, and Horaeus) “from magic” (6.32).
Origen gives additional details regarding the diagram: “a rect-
angular figure” connected somehow with “the gates of paradise”;
and “the flaming sword” “guarding the trees of knowledge and
of life,” said to be “drawn as the diameter of a circle of fire”
(6.33). Following extensive replies to Celsus’s charges against
Christians, Origen quotes Celsus as saying that the owners of
the diagram “interpret certain words inscribed between the upper
circles above the heavens, and in particular two among others, a
large and a smaller circle, which they interpret as Son and Father.”
Origen adds further information on these circles:
And between the larger circle, within which was the smaller
one, and another which was compounded of two circles, the
outer circle being yellow and the inner blue, we found in-
scribed a barrier shaped like a double axe. Above it there
was a small circle touching the greater of the first two cir-
cles, which had been inscribed with the word “Love”; and
below it next to the circle there was written the word “Life.”
In the second circle, within which were intertwined and en-
closed two other circles and another figure in the shape of a
rhombus, there was inscribed “Providence of Wisdom.” And
inside the sector common to them there was written “Nature
of Wisdom.” Above the sector common to them there was a
circle in which was inscribed the word “Knowledge” [Gno-
sis], and below it another in which was inscribed the word
“Understanding” [Sunesis]. (6.38)

The complicated diagram described by Celsus and Origen is

very difficult to envisage, though a number of attempts have
been made to reconstruct it.” We have no information as to the
21. Adonai is missing from the text here, but is referred to later at 6.32.
22. The most recent attempt is that of Witte (Das Ophitendiagramm, 142-43 [Abbildun-
gen 2-3]). See also Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum, 338-39 (reproducing a reconstruction
256 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

material on which it was drawn, but something as complicated

as this was probably not inscribed on metal or stone. It could
conceivably be inscribed on wood, and we are reminded of the
“unrevealable name” of Doxomedon said to be inscribed on a
wooden tablet (mvE0c) in the Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC HIL,2
43,19-20; IV,2 53,17-19).7> However, the complicated Ophite Di-
agram was more likely inscried on papyrus or vellum. As might
be expected of a Sidypayipma, it had lines and geometrical shapes,
in this case accompanied by text. The zoomorphic archons and
angels were presumably drawn on the diagram, in which case
we have clearly to do with Gnostic iconography, here specifically
Egyptian Gnostic iconography, since the diagram was doubtless
produced in Egypt, probably in Alexandria. Would that a copy
had been preserved from antiquity!
The cosmology reflected in the diagram, including the zoomor-
phic archontic beings inhabiting the seven planetary spheres, is
closely related to that of the Gnostics described by Irenaeus and to
that of the Apocryphon of John and other Nag Hammadi texts. The
names of the seven archons given by Irenaeus in his description
of other Gnostics (Against Heresies 1.30.5)** are the same as those
of the Ophite Diagram (though in slightly different order): Iald-
abaoth, Iao, Sabaoth, Adoneus, Eloeus, Oreus, and Astaphaeus.
In the Apocryphon of John (BG,2 41,16-42,7), “those who are in
command of the seven heavens” are zoomorphic beings, as in the
diagram:”
Yaoth, the lion-faced
Eloaios, the donkey-faced
Astaphaios, the hyena-faced
by T. Hopfner); Rudolph, Gnosis, 68 (reproducing a reconstruction by Leisegang); and A. J.
Welburn, “Reconstructing the Ophite Diagram,” Novum Testamentum 23 (1981): 261-87.
23. See A. Bohlig and F. Wisse, Nag Hammadi Codices III,2 and IV,2: The Gospel of the
Egyptians (NHS 4; Leiden: Brill, 1975), 173, and discussion above, p. 234.
24. The alii in Against Heresies 1.30.1 are identified by Theodoret (History of Heresies
1.14) as “Sethians whom some call Ophians or Ophites.” See Foerster, Gnosis, 1.87-93. I see
nat as other groups of the Gndstikoi whose basic myth is partially quoted by Irenaeus in

25. I use M. Waldstein and F. Wisse (eds.), The Apocryphon of John: Synopsis of Nag
Hammadi Codices II,1; III,1; and IV,1 with BG 8502,2 (NHMS 33; Leiden: Brill, 1995).
 Gnostic Iconography ZOU

Yao, the serpent-faced with seven heads

Adonaios, the serpent-faced
Adoni, the monkey-faced
Sabbataios, the shining flame of fire-faced
It is evident from Origen’s discussion that the diagram and its
content were related somehow to Gnostic rituals intended to assist
the soul in its ascent through the cosmos to the realm of heavenly
life. But exactly what function the diagram had in this connection
is not apparent from Origen’s account. Was it a talisman actually
used somehow in the rituals? If not, what purpose would it serve?
The answer offered by Bernd Witte is persuasive. He argues that
the diagram functioned as a kind of “Gnostic mandala,” an aid to
mystic contemplation and meditation.”
We turn now to another kind of evidence, amulets, mostly gem-
stones that have too loosely been labeled Gnostic. Much of the
evidence discussed by King featured Gnostic amulets inscribed
with the name Abrasax or Abraxas.” The Gnostic connection was
based on the false assumption that the name Abraxas on the
gemstones was the invention of the second-century Alexandrian
Gnostic heresiarch Basilides.** While it is true that the Basilidian
Gnostic system included a cosmic deity called Abrasax, related
to 365 heavens and equated with “the God of the Jews” (so Ire-
naeus, Against Heresies 1.24.7; cf. 1.24.4), it is hardly the case that
Basilides invented this name. Abrasax (Abraxas), a solar deity
whose letter-numerals add up to 365, is ubiquitous in Greco-
Egyptian magic, which is probably where Basilides got the name.
As for the Gnostic amulets, Campbell Bonner, whose important

26. Witte, Das Ophitendiagramm, 30-39.

27. On the Abrasax gems, see M. Le Glay, “Abrasax,” nos. 1-66, in Lexicon iconograph-
icum mythologiae classicae (ed. H. C. Ackerman and J.-R. Gisler; Zurich: Artemis, 1981),
1.1.2-7; 1.2: plates 6-14. On the god Abrasax, see A. Barb, “Abrasax-Studien,” in Hommages a
Waldemar Deonna (Collection Latomus 28; Brussels: Latomus, Revue d’études latines, 1957),
67-86.
28. King, Gnostics and Their Remains, 245.
29. The name also occurs in the very different system ascribed to Basilides by Hip-
polytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.26.6. Abrasax also occurs in three of the Nag Hammadi
tractates: Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC III,2) 52,26; 53,9; 65,1; Apocalypse of Adam (NHC V,5)
75,22; and Zostrianos (NHC VIII,1) 47,13.
258 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

RATINGS
BAVA VIA!
EY FLSJ
Jasper Pendant \ aS
(Courtesy of Blummer Gallery) ‘ 4
%

Figure 1: Egyptian Gnostic amulet

study of them is still a standard in the field, was certainly correct

in stating that they are “not monuments of religious Gnosticism,
but relics of Greco-Egyptian magic.”
A Gnostic connection can be posited for one gemstone in the
corpus studied by Bonner: no. 188 in his corpus, from the private
collection of Joseph Brummer (see fig. 1).°' It is “an oval pendant
of green jasper clouded with red. On the obverse a lion-headed
god, clothed in only the Egyptian apron, stands to left, his right
hand holding a tall staff, his left a situla. At the right edge, read-
ing downward, is the name laAdsaBaw0, at the left Aapmar.”** The
reverse has only an inscription of eight lines: la law LaBam@ Ad-
ovat ErxAwar Qpeog Aotadeoc, the last name written on two lines.
Bonner suggests that Ia might be taken as a mnemonic abbrevia-
tion of the name Ialdabaoth, which appears on the obverse.” This
is a reasonable interpretation, particularly when we then see that
the seven names in question are identical to those of the seven ar-
chons in the Ophite Diagram and the Gnostic system described by

30. C. Bonner, Studies in Magical Amulets, Chiefly Graeco-Egyptian (2 vols.; Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1950), vii.
31. Ibid., 284 (description), 135-38 (discussion), plate IX. On this gemstone, see also
Finney, “Did the Gnostics Make Pictures?” 438-39; H. M. Jackson, The Lion Becomes Man:
The Gnostic Leontomorphic Creator and the Platonic Tradition (Society of Biblical Literature
Dissertation Series 81; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985), 21-22. The (enlarged) representation
given here as figure 1 is taken from an article devoted to the amulet by C. Bonner, “An
Amulet of the Ophite Gnostics,” in Commemorative Studies in Honor of Theodore Leslie Sheer
(Hesperia Supplement 8; Athens: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1949),
43-46 + plate 8.
32. Bonner, Studies in Magical Amulets, 135.
33. Ibid.
 Gnostic Iconography 259

Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.30), with Astaphaeus appearing in the

order given by Irenaeus rather than Origen. The Gnostic origin of
this amulet appears to be unquestionable.
It is clear that laldabaoth occupies the chief place on this gem.
He is “lion-headed,” and accordingly also has the name Ariel
(= Hebrew “lion” plus “God”). This also fits the description
given by Origen: “lionlike,” which in the context of his discus-
sion (Against Celsus 6.30) is probably equivalent to “lion-faced.”™
In the Gnostic tractate On the Origin of the World (NHC IL5), it is
said that the archon Yaldabaoth (= Ialdabaoth) called himself by
that name, “but Ariael is what the perfect call him, for he was
like a lion” (100,23-26). Ialdabaoth is the chief creator-archon of
the Gnostic system found in the Apocryphon of John (NHC 11,1;
III,1; IV,1; BG,2), where he is also given the names Saklas and
Samael (NHC II,1 11,15-18).*° Behind this archon we see the bibli-
cal creator, whose attributes and actions are sometimes described
in the Hebrew Scriptures as lionlike, for example, “roaring like a
lion” (Jer 25:30; Hos 11:10; Joel 3:16 [= Hebrew 4:16]; Amos 1:2;
3:8).°° The amulet itself would serve as a reminder to the wearer
of his/her initiation, which (as in the case of the Ophite Diagram)
would have included the “passwords” enabling the soul to escape
the realm of Ialdabaoth.
Another amulet with a likely Gnostic connection is discussed
at some length by Erwin Goodenough (see fig. 2). In his monu-
mental work Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, Goodenough
describes this stone as “a Jewish amulet,”*” but in a subsequent

34. Bonner (ibid., 137) takes Aeovterdyc (leontine) to mean A€ovtog mpdcMnov Exov
(having the face of a lion).
35. On these three names, see B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Chris-
tianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 39-51, esp.
47-49.
36. For additional discussion of the lionlike nature of Yahweh, see Jackson, Lion Becomes
Man, 13-21.
37. E. G. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period (Bollingen Series 37;
New York: Pantheon, 1953), 2.268; 3: fig. 1145. No provenance is given. Goodenough’s
source is A. de Ridder, Collection De Clercq: Catalogue publié par les soins de l’académie des
Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, vol. 7.2: Les piérres gravées (Paris: Leroux, 1911), plate XXX, #3514
described on 796-97 as “intaille hébraique. — Long., 0™,039. Larg., 0™,0265. Ep., 0™,015.”
The representation given in figure 2 is taken from that work, but considerably enlarged.
 —_

260 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

Figure 2: Jewish Gnostic amulet

article he refers to it as a “Jewish-Gnostic amulet.”*? The amulet

in question is a stone of black steatite (37 x 27 x 14 mm), whose
inscribed Hebrew (square Aramaic) letters indicate a date as early
as the second century.” It is rectangular shaped, but the corners
are cut off so that the stone is actually an uneven octagon.
One of the two main sides of the amulet has a well-cut design of
Adam and Eve on either side of a fruit-laden tree, around which
coils a snake whose open mouth is directed toward Eve’s face as
she is about to pluck a fruit from the tree. Hét (M1) is inscribed
alongside Adam, rés (1) or dalet (1) alongside Eve. Goodenough
could not come up with an explanation for the two letters, but I
suggest that lét stands for hayyim (life), and dalet (not rés) for da‘at
(knowledge).* This confirms the Gnostic interpretation suggested
by Goodenough on the basis of the obvious shamelessness of the
two figures, who do not, as in Christian representations, hide their
genitals.”
The other side of the stone features a circular band with twelve
sections, each with a boss in it. The band, which evidently rep-
resents the Zodiac, encircles an omphalos, around which coils a
snake with open mouth. On either side of the band, at top left

38. E. G. Goodenough, “A Jewish-Gnostic Amulet of the Roman Period,” Greek, Roman,

and Byzantine Studies 1 (1958): 71-80.
39. Ibid.,73.
40. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 47 n. 39.
41. Goodenough, “Jewish-Gnostic Amulet,” 73. ;

-
 Gnostic Iconography 261

and top right respectively, occur a crescent moon accompanied by

hét (for hodes, moon) and a rayed wreath accompanied by sin (W)
(for Semes, sun). Below the sun are seven small bosses, presum-
ably standing for the planets. Seven of the eight narrow faces of
the stone are also inscribed; the top one has holes for a metal ring
or a string to enable the amulet to be worn as a pendant. The in-
scribed faces have figures and Hebrew letters that Goodenough
described but found difficult to interpret; they need not detain us
here.
I agree with Goodenough’s interpretation of this stone as a
Jewish-Gnostic amulet. The scene with Adam and Eve receiving
knowledge and life from the serpent associated with the tree can
easily be interpreted with reference to Gnostic literary texts, such
as the “serpent midrash” embedded in the Testimony of Truth (NHC
IX,3 45,23-49,7) from Nag Hammadi.” Life-giving gnosis, pro-
vided by the serpent-revealer, is what enables the Gnostic soul
to traverse the cosmic realms depicted on the amulet’s other side.
The amulet itself is a sign of its wearer’s initiation into this gnosis.
These two stones are the only ones that can with any degree of
certainty be linked to the ancient Gnostic religion.” The images
inscribed on them are, therefore, examples of Gnostic iconography.
We turn now to the remarkable ideographs found in the Bruce
Codex inscribed on pages containing the Coptic text of the Books of
Jeu.“ The Bruce Codex (fifth century?), bought at Medinet Habu in
Upper Egypt by Scotsman James Bruce in the eighteenth century,
consists of two papyrus codices plus miscellaneous fragments

42. See Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 39-51.

43. A large volume in the Handbuch der Archdaologie series is devoted to ancient gems:
P. Zazoff, Die antiken Gemmen (Munich: Beck, 1983), in which an entire chapter (pp. 349-62,
plates 112-19) is devoted to “ ‘Gnostische’ Gemmen (Magische Amulette).” Not a single one
of the gemstones included there can convincingly be associated with any known Gnostic
sect. Nor am I convinced of the Gnostic character of the stone described and commented
on by R. Kotansky and J. Spier, “The ‘Horned Hunter’ on a Lost Gnostic Gem,” Harvard
Theological Review 88 (1995): 315-37.
44. C. Schmidt’s edition in C. Schmidt and V. MacDermot, The Books of Jeu and the
Untitled Text in the Bruce Codex (NHS 13; Leiden: Brill, 1978), was published earlier: Gnos-
tische Schriften in koptischer Sprache aus dem Codex Brucianus (Texte und Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 8; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1892).
262 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT a
—

bound together. In the Books of Jeu, sixty-nine ideographs are in-

serted into the single columns of Coptic text. These ideographs
cannot really be classified as iconography, for they lack pictorial
images. Some of them can, perhaps, be referred to as examples of
“Gnostic sigillography.”*
The ideographs are clearly related to the Gnostic text that sur-
rounds them; so some brief account of the content of the Books of
Jeu is necessary. The text consists of initiatory discourses given
by “the living Jesus” to his disciples. A preamble (1-4) is fol-
lowed by descriptions of the emanations that his Father caused
Jeu, “the true God,” to bring forth, emanations with which to
fill the “treasuries of the Light” (5-32). These emanations include
different names of Jeu, twenty-eight of them plus others now lost
in missing pages. There follows material featuring instructions
to the disciples as to how to enter the sixty treasuries (33-38).
Only treasuries 55-60 are extant; the preceding ones are lost in
a lacuna. In answer to questions posed by the disciples as to the
reasons for the existence of all these things, Jesus refers to his
own emanation (39) and how the disciples will follow him to the
place of the true God (40-41). This material concludes book 1
and includes a hymn of praise. Book 2 (beginning with 42) deals
chiefly with the rituals and formulas required to effect the ascent
of souls into the Treasury of the Light. One of the more remarkable
sections (45-48) features three baptisms of the disciples by Jesus
(baptisms of water, fire, and Holy Spirit), with ritual offerings of
bread and wine and ritual sealing of the disciples with seals. Jesus
then discusses the “defense” (amoAoyia) seal, and other elements
associated with each level of the ascent (49-51). More specific in-
structions, with which the text breaks off (52; the end is missing),
feature “defenses” at each of fourteen eons.
The ideographs accompanying the text are referred to with the
use of three terms: tog (type), xapaxtip (character), and odpa-
ytg (seal). The first two are concentrated in the first part of the

45. Finney, in his discussion of them (“Did the Gnostics Make Pictures?” 436-37), com-
pares certain linear features of the ideographs called seals with late Roman and Byzantine
seals.

“
 Gnostic Iconography 263

text; the third is concentrated in the material that begins in 33.

Unfortunately, no facsimile edition of this text is available, and I
have not had access to the manuscript. The ideographs are, how-
ever, rendered in Schmidt’s edition as stylized versions of the
originals.*° Thus, the reader can gain some imperfect impression
of these ideographs even though the originals are not rendered
exactly.
The first occurrence of a type deals with the emanation of the
true God Jeu (see fig. 3). It consists of a cryptic name, surrounded
on three sides by lines. The translation of the three-and-one-half
lines consisting of the opening passage (5) is as follows: “He [the
Father] has emanated him, being of this type [ideograph]. This is
the true God. He will set him up in this type as head. He will be
called Jeu” (trans. MacDermot).

aqnpohare seseocyy ehorA ecjo semers

otsfole [eryxgoTTKe |. Mar ne nnorte mTaAH
C1. GNaTagoy epary saemertsfo]c] mame. cena
SLOTTE EPO xRE-1E0T.
Figure 3: Type of the true God

The next occurrence of a type is more elaborate (see fig. 4) and

follows this sentence: “This is the type in which he was before
he was moved to bring forth emanations:” This type consists of
a circle within a square, with cryptograms and text, alongside
which is additional text marked off with lines. The intelligible
text following the cryptogram in the circle is: “Jeu, the true God
[lit., God of truth]. This is his name.” The accompanying text is:
“[mystic name, unintelligible] This is his type. This now is the
form in which [mystic name] <has emanated>. This is his name.
He will be called the true God.”

46. Figures 3-6 are taken from Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften in koptischer Sprache, 47, 48,
Syateley
264 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

LOEIAWOWTIK WLIO)

siesjent Mar me meqyrtemtoc

IWIENOL

Tt Tal Ge Te C€ ENTA=
—

1cor THO[ STE] LOIAWOWTIK WALLIW

NTAAHOIA Tales
Nar Me Meqpamt ces
Tal ne neqpar
NAMLOTTE Epo wAE-
nnorTre wnrTraraAHnera,.

Figure 4: Type of Jeu, the true God

The first occurrence of the term character seems to equate it

with type. (The Greek word yapaxmp is frequently used in magi-
cal texts of the drawings that are found in them of items, mainly
amulets, to be used with the spells.) This character is a rectangle
within which are concentric squares at the top and concentric cir-
cles at the bottom, accompanied by text (see fig. 5): a mystic name
within the inner square with three occurrences of the name Jeu,
plus the phrase he will emanate. Each of the twenty-eight names of
Jeu are accompanied by such characters. The Second Book of Jeu 7,
for example, has mystic names within a rectangle alongside con-
centric squares with “Jeu” plus cryptograms, below which is a
circle divided into six sections, with a small circle in each. This
is accompanied by text: “His character. He caused the power to
move in [mystic name]. It welled up in him. He gave voice as he
emanated. This is the first emanation.”
The seals that begin in the Books of Jeu 33 are quite different
designs. They consist of combinations of lines and various geo-
metric shapes. The one associated with the 58th treasury, in §36,

47. On the charaktéres found in Greek magical papyri and gems, see D. Frankfurter,
“The Magic of Writing and the Writing of Magic: The Power of the Word in Egyptian and
Greek traditions,” Helios 21 (1994): 189-221, esp. 205-10.
 Gnostic Iconography 265

Meqypant Z&
WZZHOZAZHI
O&A. HAMACAZAZ
HZAHOZAZIA
CHZAIAWZR
EIWZAOOWZA
PWZAHZAATO
XWZHOZIZW)
daewZazZws
KPAEWIZAZI0
neyXap aciTpe-
WX WZR7ZR72S
TEOSL KIS QN-WAHW
MAIWZWCHosa
achorhor opar NOHTEY
| ZAZINOTWEZ?
agqy iwtdwi ecipoz
(PTWMNZZAZa
hare ehorA eTe-Tar TE
Mal Me MWOLestT
TWopm mpohodAn.
seprragz.

Figure 5: Character 2 of Jeu

consists of crossed lines, with two concentric circles at the cross-

ing point and eight-pointed rosettes at the end of each of the lines
(see fig. 6). The accompanying text reads as follows: “When you
come to this place, seal yourselves with this seal [referring to the
drawing]. This is its name [mystic name]. Say it only once, while
this cipher 70122(?) is in your hand, and say also this name [mys-
tic name] three times, and the watchers and the ranks and the
veils are drawn back, until you go to the place of their Father and
he gives (you his seal and his name),** and you cross over (the gate
into his treasury). This now is the placing of this treasury and all
those within it.”
48. The material in parentheses is given in cryptograms, but is recoverable on the basis
of earlier versions of the formula.
266 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

eTeTHWanes enerTomoc cthpacize

SL AQOTH 9 N-Terceppacic
NAL ME MECHAM ZAAITZWAZ XK
ABIY NOTcOMm aeeeeate
epe-Hthoc oN-TeTHGIs
20 Spxh avw aai-nempan
\
Pwod Ne Wcom cecereH SK *

ZHWIAAIZE ATW WApe-nes

PrAas aen-nTAgic seM-
MHATATIETACALA WATCOs
25 KOT NAY wanreTHboR K
ENTOMOC samevEwT seY2
YF ntetHa100p erfr. Mar Ge Ne TEINKW eo par
sariet[o] asit-neTIO
HT¢] THPoT.
Figure 6: Seal of the 58th treasury

The reader of the Books of Jeu will certainly wonder what the
accompanying ideographs might mean and what purpose they
might have served. The interpretation advanced above concerning
the Ophite Diagram probably also applies here: These ideograms
are meant to function as Gnostic mandalas, meditational aids that
enhance the mystical meaning of the rituals described in the text.
Some of them, perhaps the seals, may also be intended to depict
graphic symbols actually used in Gnostic ritual. All three of the
terms used for the ideographs also occur in Origen’s description
of the Ophite Diagram and his discussion of the accompanying
rituals (Against Celsus 6.27, 31).
We can now conclude from the evidence provided by the testi-
monies of Celsus and Origen regarding the Ophite Diagram and
from the two gemstones here considered that the ancient Gnos-
tics did have an iconography of sorts. The ideographs in the Bruce
Codex can be considered in the same light as the Ophite Diagram,
49. See Witte, Das Ophitendiagrammt, 34-35.
 Gnostic Iconography 267

even though no actual images are included in them. All four in-
stances are also related in terms of Gnostic religiosity, for they
all deal with the achievement of gnosis as a means of ensuring
the soul’s ascent through the various cosmic levels and eventu-
ally out of the realm of Ialdabaoth altogether and its entry into
the transcosmic divine life.
To be sure, the evidence for Gnostic iconography is very meager,
but, such as it is, it provides illustrations of the religious experi-
ence of adherents of the Gnostic religion in the Roman and Coptic
periods.
10
The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature

In 1977 I published a paper jn which an oft-repeated assertion

was critically tested, namely, that the figure of Seth in Gnostic
literature and religion is somehow related to the Egyptian god
Seth-Typhon.' Upon examination of the essential data, |concluded
that the Egyptian god Seth and the Gnostic Seth are two altogether
different entities. The latter is developed out of the biblical tradi-
tion pertaining to Seth son of Adam; the Egyptian god plays no
role at all in that development, though he does appear under his
Greek name Typhon in some Egyptian Gnostic texts.”
In 1978 I presented a paper to the International Conference
on Gnosticism held at Yale University (published in 1981 in the
conference proceedings)’ in which I set forth a typology of the
figure of Seth in Gnosticism as to his identity and function, using
the following categories: (1) birth of Seth, (2) names and titles of
Seth, (3) Seth as progenitor of the Gnostic race, (4) Seth as recipi-
ent/revealer of gnosis, and (5) Seth as savior. | concluded that the
Gnostic figure of Seth is developed on the basis of a reinterpre-
tation of Scripture (the key passages are Gen 4:25 and 5:1-3) and
Jewish exegetical traditions.
What I want to do in this chapter is to extend the afore-
mentioned typological analysis to Manichaean sources in which

1, B. A. Pearson, “Egyptian Seth and Gnostic Seth,” in Society of Biblical Literature

Seminar Papers (ed. P. J. Achtemeier; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977), 25-43.
2. “Typhon, the great, powerful archon (with the) ass’s <face>"; 2 Jeu frag. C. Schmidt
and V. MacDermot, The Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce Codex (NHS 13; Leiden:
Brill, 1978), 141; cf. Pistis Sophia 4.140.
3. B. A. Pearson, “The Figure of Seth in Gnostic Literature,” in The Rediscovery of Gnos-
ticism: Proceedings of the International Conference on Gnosticism at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut
March 28-31, 1978 (ed. B. Layton; Studies in the History of Religions 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980
81), 2.471-504. A revised version was published in B. A. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and
Egyptian Christianity (Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 5; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990),
52-83.

268
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 269

the figure of Seth occurs,’ with the aim of exploring the extent
to which Mani was influenced by previously existing (Sethian)
Gnostic tradition’ in developing his own mythological system.
Concentration on Manichaean lore relating to Seth might also be
a useful device for gaining new insights into the development of
the Manichaean religion.
Manichaeism’s founder, Mani (or Manichaeus), was born in
southern Mesopotamia in 216 and was brought up in a Jewish
Christian baptist community of Elkasaites, a sect founded by the
prophet Elkasai around 100 c.£. in Syria.” As a result of revela-
tions beginning at age twelve, Mani renounced that community’s
doctrines and was eventually expelled. He founded what was to
become a world religion, one that had spread westward into the
Roman Empire and eastward as far as India by the time of Mani’s
death in 276. The Manichaean religion, suppressed by Christian
emperors in the West, survived into the seventeenth century in
China.’ Primary sources and testimonies related to Manichaeism
exist in many languages: Arabic, Greek, Latin, Coptic, Syriac,
Parthian, Middle Persian, Neo-Persian, Bactrian, Sogdian, Turkic,
Uigur, and Chinese.”
The Egyptian (Coptic and Greek) evidence wil) play a crucial
role in our discussion of the figure of Seth in Manichaeism.’ That

4. Pearson, “Egyptian Seth and Gnostic Seth,” 74-35, 42-43, included sore limited
discussion of the Manichaean and Mandaean sources. See aloo G. G. Hroumsa, Another
Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology (NHS 24; Leiden: Brill, 1984), 145-52. On Mandaean Sitil,
see J. J. Buckley, The Mandaeans: Ancient Texts and Modern People (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2002), 35-39.
5. Ancient Sethian (classic Gnostic) texts and testimonies are listed on p. 216, n. 52
above. On Sethian Gnosticism, see J. D. Turner, Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition
(BCNH Etudes 6; Quebec: Laval University Press/Louvain: Peeters, 2001). See my review
in Biblica 84 (2003): 444-48.
6. On the Elkasaites and the Book of Elkasai, with bibliography, see discussion by
J. Inmscher in NTApoc 2.685-~90.
7. See S. N.C. Lieu, Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China (rev, ed;
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 63; Titbingen: Mohr-Siebeck,
1991). On Chinese Manichaeism, see P. Bryder, The Chinese Transformation ofManichacism: A
Study of Chinese Manichaean Terminology (Lober6d, Sweden: Plus Ultra, 1985).
8. For a bibliography of Manichaeismn, see G. B. Mikkelsen, Bibliographia Manichaica:
A Comprehensive Bibliography of Manichacism through 1996 (Corpus Fontium Manichacorum,
Subsidia 1; Turnhout: Brepols, 1997).
9. Manichaeism came to Egypt very early, probably in 270 or perhaps even earlier.
On Manichaeism in Egypt, see G. G. Strournsa, “The Manichaean Challenge to Egyptian
270 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

evidence consists mainly of Coptic manuscripts found at Medinet

Madi in the 1920s (Kephalaia, Epistles of Mani, Acts, Synaxeis, Psalm
Book, and Homilies) and related texts found more recently in arche-
ological excavations at ancient Kellis (modern Ismant el-Kharab),
in the Dakhleh Oasis.'° Especially important is the Cologne Mani
Codex, a Greek miniature codex (fourth-fifth century) found
somewhere in Upper Egypt. This codex was opened and rendered
readable at the University of Cologne in 1969 and was found to
contain a biography of the prophet Mani.'' One passage from this
text contains a quotation from an apocalypse attributed to Seth
(see p. 277 below).

BIRTH OF SETH

The most extensive account of the birth of Seth is found in a sec-

tion of al-Nadim’s Fihrist entitled “The Beginning of Generation
according to the Doctrine of Mani.”'? According to this account
the first humans, Adam and Eve, were born of two archons, one
male and one female. Isa (Jesus) was sent from above to enlighten
Adam and Eve. The male archon then had incestuous intercourse
with Eve, from whom was born Cain. He in turn had intercourse
with his mother and produced Abel, as well as two girls: “Wise of
the Ages” and “Daughter of Corruption.” Wise of the Ages bore

Christianity,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (ed. B. A. Pearson and J. E. Goehring;

Studies in Antiquity and Christianity 1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1990), 307-19; cf. also p. 24
above.
10. The first volume of the Kellis literary texts is I. Gardner (ed.), Kellis Literary Texts,
vol. 1 (Dakhleh Oasis Project: Monograph 4 (Oxford: Oxbow, 1996).
_ 11. For the critical edition, see L. Koenen and C. Romer (eds.), Der Kélner Mani-Kodex:
Uber das Werden seines Leibes, Kritische Edition (Abhandlung der Rheinisch-Westfalishchen
Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sonderrheia Papyrologica Coloniensia 14; Opladen: West-
deutscher Verlag, 1988). For an English translation of pp. 1-99 of the codex, see R. Cameron
and A. J. Dewey, The Cologne Mani Codex (P. Colon. inv. nr. 4780): “Concerning the Origin of His
Body” (Society of Biblical Literature Texts and Translations 15: Early Christian Literature
Series 3; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979), based on a preliminary edition published
by A. Henrichs and L. Koenen in Zeitschrift fiir Papyrologie und Epigraphik 19 (1975): 1-85;
32 (1978): 87-199. Much of the last part of the codex (pp. 100-191) is very fragmentary.
12. B. Dodge (ed. and trans.), The Fihrist of al-Nadim (New York: Columbia University
Press, 1970), 2.783-86.

“
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 271

two girls to one of the angels, Faryad (Lamentation) and Pur-

Faryad (Laden with Lamentation). Cain, after killing Abel, then
took Wise of the Ages as his wife.
The text continues with the Manichaean version of the story of
the birth of a child easily identifiable as Seth:
Mani said, “Then those two archons and this Sindid and Eve
were distressed because of what they learned about Cain. Al-
Sindid thereupon taught Eve the language of magic, so that
she could enchant Adam. This she proceeded to do, enticing
him with a wreath of blossoms from a tree. When Adam saw
her, he fell upon her in sensual passion, so that she gave birth
to a male child who was beautiful and of a comely counte-
nance. When al-Sindid learned about this, it upset him, so
that he became ill and said to Eve, “This child who has been
born is not one of us, but a stranger.” She therefore desired
his death, but, taking hold of him, Adam said to Eve, “I am
going to nourish him with cow’s milk and the fruit of trees!”
Thus taking him he departed. Al-Sindid, however, caused the
archons to carry off the trees and cows, going far removed
from Adam. When Adam saw this, he took the offspring and
made three circles around him. Over the first [circle] he men-
tioned the name of the King of the Gardens, over the second
the name of Primal Man, and over the third the name of the
Spirit of Life. Then he communed with God, may His name
be glorified, and beseeching Him he said, “Even if I have
committed a crime against Thee, this [child] who has been
born, has not sinned.” Then one of the three hastened with
a wreath (crown) of splendor, which he brought in his hand
to Adam. When al-Sindid and the archons beheld this, they
went their way.”

In the account leading up to the birth of Seth a number of fea-

tures are reminiscent of Gnostic traditions relating to Adam and
Eve and their progeny. The generation of Cain through intercourse

13. Ibid., 785.

DT? GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT
=-
—

between Eve and an archon is, no doubt, dependent upon an earlier

Gnostic tradition according to which Cain is the product of a liai-
son between Eve and the chief archon (Yaldabaoth-Saklas-Samael),
a tradition that developed out of a Jewish haggadah featuring the
generation of Cain from Eve and the devil, Sammael.'* The birth
of Abel through illicit intercourse, here with Cain (a specifi-
cally Manichaean elaboration), is a feature of some Gnostic texts,
though the Gnostic texts in question have Abel, like Cain, born of
archontic parentage (Apocryphon ofJohn [NHC II,1] 24,15-31)."° The
enlightenment of Adam and Eve with gnosis bestowed by Jesus is
reminiscent of those Gnostic traditions according to which Jesus
plays the role of the serpent in paradise (e.g., Apocryphon of John
22,3-9).° The birth of Eve’s daughter, Wise of the Ages, reflects
the influence of earlier Gnostic traditions relating to Norea, the
sister-wife of Seth.'” It is possible that the daughters of Wise of
the Ages in the myth are likewise doublets of the Gnostic Norea,
particularly if the word faryad is actually a Persian word meaning
“help,” rather than “lamentation,” as in Dodges’s translation. In
that case, Faryad and Pur-Faryad are personifications of the help
(BonBera; cf. Gen 2:18) rendered to Gnostic humankind by Norea
(see Hypostasis of the Archons [NHC II,4] 91,34-92,3).’®
In the account of the birth of Seth, al-Sindid plays the role of
the chief archon, Saklas (Asaqlun, Saglon).’” His instruction of Eve
in magic is reminiscent of the role played by the archons in such
Gnostic texts as the Apocryphon of John; the archons (like the sons
of God in earlier Jewish texts elaborating the myth of Gen 6:1-4)
introduce magic and other lore into the world.” The recognition

14. See Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 58-59.

15. Cf. ibid., 60-61.
16. Cf. ibid., 39-51, esp. 43-46, 50.
17. See ibid., 84-94. Cf. also Stroumsa, Another Seed, 151.
: an Cf. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 59-60; Stroumsa, Another
eed, 150.
19. Stroumsa, Another Seed, 149-50.
20. See B. A. Pearson, “Jewish Sources in Gnostic Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the
Second Temple Period (ed. M. E. Stone; Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testa-
mentum 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum/ Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 443-81, esp. 453-55; idem,
“1 Enoch in the Apocryphon of John,” in Texts and Contexts: Biblical Texts in Their Textual and
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 293

of the child born to Eve as a “stranger” reflects Gnostic lore con-

cerning Seth as allogenés (foreigner; i.e., another seed; Gen 4:25).”!
It is clear from the story, elaborated as it is with specifically Mani-
chaean touches, that this child born to Eve holds special honor,
reminiscent of the special role played by Seth in Gnostic traditions.
This is borne out in what follows in al-Nadim’s account. It is
reported that Adam named the boy Shatil. When Adam resorted
to intercourse with Eve he was rebuked by Shatil and brought to
the wisdom of God. Shatil, together with Faryad, Pur-Faryad, and
Wise of the Ages, “accomplished good works, with one idea of
right and one way of life, until the time of their deaths.”
The name here given for Seth, Shatil (Sethel elsewhere in Mani-
chaean texts; Shitil in Mandaean) may reflect a special Hebrew
etymological wordplay (see p. 274 below). The role he plays in
any case is clearly regarded as of central importance in this Mani-
chaean account. Indeed, Shatil functions in a sense as a saved
savior in that he enlightens his father Adam and is a prototype of
the soul that achieves salvation.
Additional accounts of the birth of Seth, now mostly lost,
existed in various languages. One extensive account in Middle
Iranian of the history of the protoplasts, akin to that of al-Nadim,
is reflected in some very corrupt fragments from Turfan. In those
fragments the chief archon is called Saklon; Adam and Eve are
called Gehmurd and Murdyanag; and Seth is called Sytyl.”* Theo-
dore bar Konai evidently had a similar account in Syriac, but his
report breaks off with the enlightenment of Adam, before the story
of the birth of Seth. No Coptic version exists, but there is a ref-
erence to Sethel as “the first born son of Adam” in the Coptic
Situational Contexts: Essays in Honor of Lars Hartman (ed. T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm; Oslo:
Scandinavian University Press, 1995), 355-67.
21. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 65-66.
22. Dodge, Fihrist of al-Nadim, 786.
23. Fragments edited by W. Sundermann, Mittelpersische und parthische kosmogonische
und Parabeltexte der Manichaer (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des alten Orients 8:
Berliner Turfantexte 4; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1973), 70-75 (no. 18), 77 (no. 21: frag. M
1859, with s]ytyl). Cf. Stroumsa, Another Seed, 148-49.
24. Liber Scholiorum (ed. A. Scher; CSCO 69: Scriptores Syri 66; Paris: Typographeum
Republica, 1910 [Syriac text]), 313-18; Liber Scholiorum (R. Hespel and R. Dragnet, trans.,
CSCO 432; Scriptores Syri 188; Lourain: Peeters, 1982 [French translation]), 232-37. Cf.
274 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

Kephalaia 1,” a phrase that presupposes the Gnostic version of the

births of Cain and Abel.

NAMES AND TITLES OF SETH

The most noticeable feature regarding Seth in Manichaean liter-
ature is that his name usually appears as Sethel or Shitil (as in
Mandaean). The theophoric ending -el attached to the name Seth
seems to imply a special divine character for Seth son of Adam.
It is also possible, however, that Mani was aware of a Hebrew
etymological tradition relating to the name Seth. The Hebrew root
in question is Stl (to plant), and the connection between planting
and Seth is found in Jewish (rabbinic) sources. According to one
midrash on Genesis, Adam called Seth by that name “because he
was planted [ntl], because the kingdom of the house of David was
planted [twStlh] from him.”*° In al-Nadim’s account, the section
following the story of Shatil’s birth concerns his name: “He [Mani]
said, ‘Then there appeared to Adam a tree called the Lotus, from
which came forth milk with which he nourished the boy. He [at
first] called him by its name, but later he called him Shatil.’”””
This passage, which connects Seth with a tree, seems to reflect
this planting etymology. That is made all the more likely when
Shitil is called “the perfect plant” in Mandaean sources.** The
same etymology is reflected in a passage from the Nag Hammadi
Gospel of the Egyptians, wherein the Coptic word for plant (TwGe,
both verb and noun) functions as a play on the name Seth: “Some
say that Sodom is the place of pasture of the great Seth, which is

A. V. W. Jackson, Researches in Manichaeism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1932),

221-54.
25. Kephalaia 1 (Manichaische Handschriften der Staatlichen Museen Berlin 1; Stuttgart:
Kohlhammer, 1940), 1210-11. Cf. also, from the Psalmbook: “Sethel also, his [Adam’s]
son,” in C. R. C. Allberry, A Manichaean Psalm-Book (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938), 142.4.
For an English translation of Kephalaia (Headings or Chapters) 1-122, see I. Gardner, The
Kephalaia of the Teacher: The Edited Coptic Manichaean Texts in Translation with Commentary
(NHMS 37; Leiden: Brill, 1995).
26. Cited by Stroumsa, Another Seed, 74.
27. Dodge, Fihrist of al-Nadim, 786.
28. M. Lidzbarski, Das Johannesbuch der Mandder (Giessen: Topelmann, 1915), 244, cited
with other Mandaean references by Stroumsa, Another Seed, 74-75.
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 275

Gomorrah. But others (say) that the great Seth took his plant out of
Gomorrah and planted it in the second place to which he gave the
name Sodom” (Gospel of the Egyptians [NHC IIL,2] 60,12-18; trans.
Boéhlig and Wisse in NHL 215).” Mani was influenced by Gnostic
traditions in which the plant etymology, connected with Seth, was
a feature.
Yet another Gnostic tradition is reflected in the passage from
al-Nadim. Shatil’s appearance as a stranger is connected with
the Gnostic tradition, derived from an interpretation of Genesis
4:25, according to which Seth is given the byname Allogenés (other
race, stranger). This tradition is richly attested both in patristic
accounts and in the Nag Hammadi corpus.”
Finally, a frequent title for Seth in Manichaean literature is sav-
ior: “Sethel our savior.” The salvatory function of Seth the savior
will be taken up later in this chapter (see p. 280 below).

SETH AS PROGENITOR OF THE GNOSTIC RACE

The central feature of the kind of Gnosticism conveniently labeled
Sethian is the idea that Gnostics constitute a special race or seed
of Seth.*! The Manichaean religion, of course, does not place such
emphasis on spiritual genealogy; so one would not expect to find
evidence of this specific Sethian tradition in Manichaean texts.
Yet, there may be a dim reflex of this tradition in at least one
Manichaean text. In the Kephalaia 57, dealing with the generation
of Adam, the following passage occurs: “Now, in the beginning
of the generations the powers who were masters over the years
reigned. Therefore, because of this, the offspring born in their gen-
erations and their lifetime: their years were found to be greater.
They attained a long life span in the generation [genea] of Adam,
and that of Sethel his son, and that of those who came after him”
(Kephalaia 145.23-27; trans. Gardner, slightly modified).

29. Cf. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 67-68; and Stroumsa,
Another Seed, 75.
30. For texts and discussion, see ibid., 65-66.
31. For discussion, see ibid., 68-71; cf. also Stroumsa, Another Seed, 71-134.
276 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

The reference here to a generation (genea) of Seth may reflect in-

fluence from earlier Gnostic traditions in which the genea or genos
of Seth played a key role. To be sure, the specific Sethian doctrine
is no longer evident in this Manichaean text. That is to say, the
Manichaean believers did not seem to have staked any claim to a
genealogical linkage with Seth. The closest one comes to such an
idea reflects, rather, the differentiation of levels within the Mani-
chaean community (the distinction between elect and auditors),
according to which the highest level is symbolically associated
with Seth.
This notion is documented in one of the psalms, in which songs
are sung by “a virgin,” “a continent one,” and “a married one” (the
first reflecting the elect circle). Seth is associated with the highest
spiritual level (Manichaean Psalm-Book 179.20—23; trans. Allberry):
The cry of a Virgin to Sethel
The cry of a Continent one to Adam
The cry of a Married one __ to Eve
In this text it is clear that Sethel occupies a rank superior to
Adam, as we saw in the story of Seth’s birth and as is uniformly
the case of Seth in the Sethian Gnostic material. Accordingly,
those who attain the highest level of spirituality — virginity —
are symbolically related to him, the auditors relating to Adam.
Those completely outside the community (the rest of humanity)
are related to Eve.

SETH AS RECIPIENT /REVEALER OF GNOSIS

A characteristic feature of Manichaeism is the conviction that
Mani was the last of the great prophets, in a line extending back
to the first man, Adam. Several Manichaean texts contain suc-
cession lists of this prophetic line, and while the names are not
always the same, Seth appears in all of them, and sometimes in
first place.* The list in the first chapter of the Kephalaia is a case

32. Stroumsa, Another Seed, 146-47.

*
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 277,

in point: It contains the names Sethel (firstborn son of Adam),

Enosh, Enoch, Shem, Noah, Buddha, Zarathustra, and Jesus Christ
(Kephalaia 12.10-21). Seth is also said to have been the first of the
righteous ones to be snatched up by the angels to heaven, like
Enoch.”
The assumption of Seth into heaven is associated directly with
his revelatory role in an important passage found in the Cologne
Mani Codex. The context there refers to apocalypses attributed
to Adam, Sethel, Enosh, Shem, and Enoch.” The passage dealing
with Seth reads as follows:

Also Sethel his son has similarly written in his apocalypse,

saying that “I opened my eyes and beheld before me an
[ang]el whose [radiance] I am unable to (adequately) rep-
Tesent mee eeie [lig [htninio meee
aa ee to me...[three lines
lost]... [Wh]en [heard these things, my heart rejoiced and my
mind changed and I became like one of the greatest angels.
That angel placed his hand upon my right (hand) and took
me out of the world wherein I was born and brought me to
another place (that was) exceedingly great. Behind me I heard
a loud uproar from those angels whom [I lJeft behind [in] the
world which the[y pos]sessed .. .[at least two lines missing].”
M[any things simil]Jar to these are described in his writ-
ings, and as he was transported by that angel from world to
world, he revealed to him the awesome secrets of (divine)
majesty. (Cologne Mani Codex 50.8-52.7; trans. Reeves)”
Despite its fragmentary character one can see featured in this
passage four essential details: (1) an angelophany given to Seth,
(2) a spiritual transformation of Seth, (3) Seth’s rapture to heaven,
and (4) the response of hostile angels. It is instructive to compare

33. Ibid., 147, citing Augustine’s Contra Faustum 19.3.

34. See J. Reeves, Heralds of That Good Realm: Syrio-Mesopotamian Gnosis and Jewish
Traditions (NHMS 41; Leiden: Brill, 1996).
35. This section of the codex is attributed to “Baraies the teacher,” one of Mani’s dis-
ciples. See Reeves, Heralds of That Good Realm, 15-17. For an extensive commentary on the
Apocalypse of Sethel, see 112-29.
278 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

the report given by Epiphanius concerning a similar account circu-

lating among certain Archontic (Sethian) Gnostics* of a revelatory
——

ascent experienced by Seth:

And then,” they say, the power on high came down with
the ministering angels of the good God and snatched Seth
himself — they also call him “Stranger” [6v Kai ‘AAAoyevn
KaAove1}] — and bore him ‘aloft somewhere, and nurtured
him for some time to prevent his being killed. And long af-
terward it brought him back down to this world and made
him spiritual, and yet physical <in appearance>, so that the
<demiurge>, and the other authorities and principalities of
the god who made the world, would not prevail against him.
And they say he no longer worshiped the creator and demi-
urge, but recognized the power that cannot be named and
the good God on high, <and> that he worshiped him, and
revealed many things about the maker of the world and its
principalities and authorities. And hence they have forged
certain books in the name of Seth himself. (Epiphanius,
Against Heresies 40.7.1-4)*
The similarities between the two texts are quite striking: an-
gelophany, spiritual transformation, rapture, and the response of
hostile angels. In addition, the informants (Baraies, Archontics)
agree in attributing “many revelations” to Seth in his writings.
There are differences, too, but these are minor: the spiritual
transformation takes place in preparation for, or as part of, the
rapture in the Mani Codex; in Epiphanius it is the result of the
rapture. Both sequences are attested in Sethian texts from Nag
Hammadi: In Allogenes (NHC XI,3), Allogenés (= Seth) is “taken
by the eternal Light out of the garment that was upon [him], and
taken up to a holy place whose likeness can not be revealed in

36. On the Archontic Gnostics, see B. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation
with Annotations and Introductions (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1987), 191-201.
37. The previous context features the birth of Seth, Adam’s “own actual son.” See
p- 270 above on the birth of Seth.
38. Translation by F. Williams, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I (NHS 35;
Leiden: Brill, 1987), 267-68.
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 279

the world” (58,27-33; trans. A. C. Wire in NHL 496); in Zostrianos

(NHC VIII,1), Zostrianos is taken up and “received the image
of the glories there. [He] became like one of them” (5,15-17).”
In Epiphanius’s account, essential details of the revelation are
spelled out, such as aspects of Gnostic theology and angelology.
The hostility of the cosmic powers is spelled out in Epiphanius’s
account: a plot to kill Seth. While the hostility of the cosmic angels
is mentioned in the Mani Codex, it contains no mention of a plot
to kill Seth. However, such a plot is attested in later Manichaean
sources.*°
The relationship between the Apocalypse of Sethel quoted in
the Mani Codex and Epiphanius’s account of the Archontic Gnos-
tics indicates that, at least, numerous Sethian traditions were
shared between them.*! Reeves is probably correct in asserting
that the so-called Apocalypse of Sethel and the one attributed
to the other patriarchs in the Mani Codex are not independent
compositions but are “creative adaptations of the traditional lore
which had gathered about these primeval ancestors” intended
to authenticate Manichaean teaching regarding Mani’s prophetic
predecessors.** The Apocalypse of Sethel is a complex of tradition
shared with or derived from Sethian Gnosticism.
In addition to the aforementioned apocalypse, Seth(el) is cred-
ited in Manichaean tradition with at least one written prayer
of revelatory character. Kephalaia 10 has as its heading, “Con-
cerning the Interpretation of the Fourteen [great A]eons about
which Sethel has spoken in [his P]rayer” (Kephalaia 42.25-—26; trans.
Gardner). The attribution of prayers to Seth in the Manichaean
tradition is reminiscent of a similar attribution in Sethian Gnosti-
cism. I refer especially, of course, to the Three Steles of Seth (NHC

39. This passage may be dependent upon 2 Enoch. See M. Scopello, “The Apocalypse of
Zostrianos (Nag Hammadi VIII,1) and the Book of the Secrets of Enoch,” Vigiliae christianae
34 (1980): 376-85. On Zostrianos and other revealers as avatars of Seth, see p. 280 below;
and Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 76-79.
40. For example, in Ibn al-Nadim’s account of Manichaean legends and in some Middle
Iranian sources. On this, see Reeves, Heralds of That Good Realm, 120.
41. Reeves speaks of “an identical complex of traditions”; ibid., 125.
42. Ibid., 210.
280 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

VIL,5), consisting of theurgic prayers addressed to the primal triad

of Sethian Gnosticism.*

SETH AS SAVIOR
In the Gnostic religion generally, the essential role of a savior fig-
ure is that of a revealer of gitosis. Seth’s role in revelation (see
previous section) obviously touches upon his role as a savior. In
Manichaeism, of course, it is ultimately Mani himself who plays
the decisive role as illuminator, paraclete, apostle, savior. He does
so as the last in a line of emissaries from the divine world. In
Sethian Gnosticism, however, Seth is the savior par excellence.
Historical revealer figures are understood to be, in a sense, avatars
of Seth. In Christianized forms of this kind of Gnosticism, Jesus
Christ himself is understood to have “put on” Seth or be in some
way identical to Seth. The Nag Hammadi corpus contains both
Christian and non-Christian texts of a Sethian stamp. In such
non-Christian texts as Zostrianos (NHC VUI,1) and Marsanes (NHC
X,1), the revealers who go by these names are understood to be
incarnations of Seth.
Mani’s religion regards Seth(el) as one of the prophets in the
history of revelation, indeed one of the most important. But one
can go further and see evidence in Manichaean material of an ap-
propriation of a tradition according to which Seth is the savior. The
key text is found in one of the Coptic psalms (Psalmoi Sarakoton).
Unfortunately the Coptic manuscript is damaged at this point, but
the text reads:

Let us sing together to Sethel our savior

...my God —O my savior—
the apostle of the electship —O my (savior) —
the giver of life to souls. Let us sing together to Sethel.
The gods all rejoice in you—O my (savior) — the angels

43. Cf. Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christianity, 74; and pp. 236-41 above.
44. Ibid., 76-79.
 The Figure of Seth in Manichaean Literature 281

bless you, O (my savior) — because of this thing which you

do.
Let us sing together to Sethel. (Manichaean Psalm-Book
144.1-7; trans. Allberry, somewhat modified)

The psalm continues in this vein, with praises of Sethel, and

concludes as follows:

Glory and victory to the paraclete —O my (savior)

our Lord, our Light, Mani—O my (savior)
and all that believe in him—O my (savior)
Victory to the soul of the blessed Mary. Let us
sing together to Sethel, our savior. (Manichaean Psalm-Book
146.9-13; trans. Allberry, somewhat modified)

From this it can be concluded that Mani and his earliest fol-
lowers had appropriated a previously existing Gnostic tradition
according to which Seth is the Gnostic savior par excellence.

CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of this survey of Manichaean texts relating to Seth,
we see that Mani’s teachings regarding Seth were influenced
by previous Gnostic traditions of a Sethian stamp.” The nar-
rative of Seth’s birth contains numerous details reminiscent of
earlier Sethian Gnostic tradition and, in fact, depicts Seth as a
savior figure superior to his father Adam. Manichaean lore re-
lating to Seth’s name (Shatil = stranger) is similarly reflective
of earlier Sethian tradition. While Manichaean religion does not
portray Seth as progenitor of the Gnostic race, even that specifi-
cally Sethian tradition lurks behind some of the Manichaean texts.
Seth’s role as a revealer-savior figure in Manichaean tradition goes
beyond that of a mere link in the chain of tradition. Here, again,
we see indications of a Sethian Gnostic influence on Mani.

45. Other details of Manichaean mythology, such as its myth of the seduction of the
archons, show the same thing. See Stroumsa, Another Seed, 152-67.
282 GNOSTICISM IN EGYPT

How was this influence conveyed to Mani? This important

question is not easy to answer. I suggest that the prophet, highly
educated as he was, had access to Gnostic literature of a Sethian
stamp, perhaps available to him in the Elkasaite community in
which he was raised.*° Influence from Sethian Gnostic traditions
would also have extended to Mani’s earliest disciples, especially
in Egypt, as seen from the Coptic Manichaean texts surveyed
above.
One final comment is in order. It is the assumption of this chap-
ter, and of virtually all previous scholarship on Manichaeism, that
the Manichaean religion is a special instance of the larger reli-
gious phenomenon called Gnosticism or the Gnostic religion.”
This view is challenged in an important book by Jason BeDuhn.
His analysis of Manichaean ritual practices, and especially the di-
etary regimen imposed on the community of elect and auditors,
leads him to conclude that “the Manichaean program of salva-
tion is neither a Christian redemption nor a Gnostic liberation,
but more on the order of a dietetic regimen.”** There is some
merit to BeDuhn’s arguments, which however cannot be taken up
here. However we assess the Gnostic (or Christian) character of
Manichaeism, it is clear from the evidence surveyed in this chap-
ter that the prophet Mani was powerfully influenced by Sethian
Gnosticism and used Sethian Gnostic traditions in developing his
own new religion. That has been made especially clear as a result
of discoveries of primary Manichaean sources in Egypt.

46. Stroumsa (ibid., 161) makes a similar argument regarding the Jewish Enoch
literature that Mani used.
47. See, e.g., H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God and the Begin-
nings of Christianity (2d ed.; Boston: Beacon, 1958), 206-37; K. Rudolph, Gnosis: The Nature
and History of Gnosticism (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1977), 326-42; and the standard
anthologies: A. Bohlig and J. P. Asmussen (eds.), Die Gnosis, vol. 3: Der Manichiismus (rev.
ed.; Zurich: Artemis & Winkler, 1995); H.-J. Klimkeit, (San Francisco: Harper, 1993).
48. J. D. BeDuhn, The Manichaean Body: In Discipline and Ritual (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 2000), 251.

“
 Summary and Conclusions

The history of Christianity and Gnosticism in Egypt is a fasci-

nating one, as the foregoing chapters illustrate. The important
Jewish community of Alexandria initially provided a setting for
the development of both religions in the first century of the com-
mon era. The origins of Gnosticism are obscure, but our available
evidence suggests that it arose in Syria or Palestine, and came
early to Alexandria. The tractate Eugnostos the Blessed (NHC IIL3;
V,1) is probably our earliest evidence (first century) for a Jewish
Gnosticism in Alexandria (chapter 1). During the second cen-
tury Gnosticism and Christianity coalesce. Early second-century
Alexandrian teachers, such as Valentinus and Basilides, adapted
Gnostic mythology in developing their own versions of Christian-
ity (chapters 1 and 7).
The Christian religion began in Jerusalem, but probably came
very early to Alexandria, though we lack any definitive evidence
from the first century. To be sure, it is an anachronism to speak of
“Christianity” as such in first-century Alexandria, for the earliest
Jesus believers there were part of the larger Jewish community.
Very early on, too, various groups of Jesus believers developed,
reflecting the diversity found in the larger Jewish community
of Alexandria. It was not until early in the second century that
“Christians” came to be identified as a group separate from Ju-
daism. Even so, continuities can be traced, in terms of theology
and church organization, from first-century Judaism to second-
century Christianity. The works of Philo Judaeus are particularly
important in that connection (chapters 1-3).
Archeological and documentary evidence for Christianity in
Egypt through the third century is very slim. Some fragments of the
Church of Theonas (end of the third century) have been identified,
not found in situ, and some second-century letters on papyrus have

283
284 Summary and Conclusions

been identified as Christian (chapter 1). But from the second cen-
tury on the literary evidence is massive, with various literary gen-
res exemplified through the third century: gospels, apocalypses,
epistles, midrashic expansions of bible stories, oracles collections,
wisdom books and philosophical literature, apologetic works,
polemical works, exegetical works, homilies, psalms and hymns,
theological tracts, hortatory artd ethical works, and episcopal cir-
culars such as the festal letters inaugurated by Bishop Dionysius.
In addition, first- and second-century literature produced outside
of Egypt, including gospels and epistles which were destined to
become canonical, circulated widely in Egypt (chapter 1).
In terms of church organization, the monarchical episcopate
espoused in Asia Minor by Ignatius of Antioch in the early
second-century came later to the Alexandrian church. While
names of the earliest Alexandrian bishops are given by Eusebius,
the first one clearly to emerge from obscurity is Demetrius (189-
232). While it took some time for Demetrius to consolidate his
authority, he established once and for all the authority of the Alex-
andrian bishop, a process that can be said to have been completed
by Dionysius the Great (248-265) (chapter 1).
Clement of Alexandria provides valuable information on the
socio-economic status of Christians in late second- and early
third-century Alexandria. The church included in its membership
people of affluence and high status, though there is also evidence
that the church included people of lesser means. Papyrus evidence
reveals that the church itself had become a banking institution by
the end of the third century, with the bishop as the chief executive
officer. Until the Great Persecution of 303 the church was thriving
economically, even though there were sporadic persecutions dur-
ing the third century. Relationships among rich and poor were
clearly an issue, as revealed not only by Clement but also later by
Peter of Alexandria (300-311), whose homily On Riches has been
reconstructed as part of a larger homily extant in Coptic (chapters
1 and 4).
Alexandria became the most important cultural and educational
center of the Mediterranean world during the Hellenistic period

bo
 Summary and Conclusions 285

and retained this status in the early Roman period. Thus, it is not
surprising that Christians in Alexandria included in their midst
lay teachers and philosophers of renown. One or more libraries
and scriptoria also existed in the Christian community, which
fostered a high level of scholarship and provided for the copying of
the Scriptures and other works, not only Christian but also Jewish
(especially Philo). A number of private Christian schools existed,
and in some cases (e.g., Clement) teachers were also presbyters of
the church. Eusebius attests to the existence of what he calls the
“Catechetical School” of Alexandria. While the early history of
that school is obscure, it came under the influence of the bishop
from the time of Demetrius on. Later some of the church’s teachers
and headmasters became bishops (chapter 1).
From the second century on the church was taking on a more
Egyptian character, as Christianity expanded into the chora. While
it has been argued that Christianity in Egypt was confined to Al-
exandria until the end of the second century, evidence from the
papyri shows that Christian expansion in Egypt began earlier. By
the end of the third century there were bishops in all the nome
capitals of Egypt. As part of this expansion the Coptic language
was developed during the third century by bilingual Christian
teachers for the purpose of making the Scriptures available to
Egyptians in their own language. By the fourth century Christian
literature was being written in the Coptic language (chapter 1).
One of the chief characteristics of Egyptian Christianity in
its rich history is the prominence of monks and monasteries,
from the fourth century into the present. Indeed, monasticism
as an institution probably plays a greater role in the history of
Egyptian Christianity than in that of any other regional church.
St. Antony is the traditional “father” of eremitic monasticism and
St. Pachomius of the coenobitic variety. We know that Antony
and Pachomius had predecessors, and it is becoming clearer in
current scholarship that a third variety called “apotactic” monas-
ticism existed even earlier. This variety was at home in towns and
villages and consisted of ascetics, both male and female, living
in their own communities. The earliest attestation in the papyri
286 Summary and Conclusions

for the term monachos (“solitary,” from which we get the term
“monk”) is to that form of monasticism. I suggest that this form of
monasticism existed in Alexandria as early as the second century
(chapter 1).
It was chiefly in the monasteries where the works of the Greek
fathers were translated into Coptic, and where indigenous Coptic
literature developed. There is no secular Coptic literature. It is
exclusively religious (Christian), and consists overwhelmingly of
liturgical and homiletic works and encomia on the great saints of
the church, rather than systematic theological treatises. There are
also examples of apocryphal works composed in Coptic. Examples
of such literature are an apocryphon featuring the patriarch Enoch
(chapter 6) and a homily composed for the celebration of a feast
day of St. Michael Archangel (chapter 4). The Enoch apocryphon
exemplifies the important role played by the biblical patriarch in
Egyptian monastic piety until into the ninth century. Thereafter
Enoch disappears from Coptic liturgical life, in contrast to the
important role he plays in the Ethiopian Church (chapter 5).
Gnosticism occupies an important role in the history of Egyp-
tian Christianity. While standard scholarship on Gnosticism has
been challenged in recent books by Michael Williams and Karen
King, who argue for abolishing the term “Gnosticim” in schol-
arship, I maintain that the term is still one that is useful in
delimiting historically and phenomenologically a discrete phe-
nomenon in the history of religions. I argue that Gnosticism
originated independently of Christianity, even though most (but
certainly not all) of the available evidence consists of Christian or
Christianized forms (chapter 7). The ritual dimension of Gnos-
ticism, especially in its non-Christian forms, is exemplified in
elaborate rituals of baptism and cultic ascent. Ritual theories es-
poused by the Neoplatonist philosopher Iamblichus of Chalcis can
shed interesting comparative light on Gnostic ritual texts (chap-
ter 8). Evidence for the material dimension of Gnosticism, on the
other hand, is rather meager: attestations by Celsus and Origen
of an “Ophite diagram,” two Gnostic gemstones, and elaborate
illustrations in a Coptic Gnostic codex (chapter 9).
 Summary and Conclusions 287

Manichaeism, the religion founded by Mani in Mesopotamia,

was brought to Egypt by disciples of Mani even before the
prophet’s death in 276. It became prominent especially in the
region around Lycopolis (Assiut). Manichaean texts produced in
Egypt, both in Greek and in Coptic, attest to the importance of that
religion in Egypt (chapter 1). While Manichaeism, which became a
world religion persisting in China into the seventeenth century, is
usually regarded as an offshoot of ancient Gnosticism, its “Gnos-
tic” character has recently been downplayed. Even so, there can be
no doubt that Manichaeism, especially in Egypt, was influenced
by earlier Gnosticism, especially its “Sethian” variety. Treatment
of the figure of Seth, son of Adam, in Manichaean literature is a
case in point (chapter 10).
What has been offered in this book are windows into the history
of Egyptian Christianity and Gnosticism. I hope that what has
been written here will whet the appetite of the book’s readers for
additional explorations into this fascinating history.
He
 Index of Ancient Sources

BIBLE Luke
passim O20, 118
Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament
including Apocrypha) John
passim 35, 35n. 91752, 53n.
Genesis 173, 55, 66
1-6 63
te27, 97-98 (LXX) Acts
27 97 (LXX), 204 8:9-24 22
4:25 268, 273/275 9:36-41 166
5:1-3 268 11:30 18n. 29
5:24 143, 161n. 31, 165n. 48 15:1-12 14n. 13
6:1-4 272 18:24 98
14:18-20 65 18:25 12
passim 52, 75 passim 13/8/9192

Exodus 1 Corinthians
2:5-10 166 1-4 96, 98
passim o2 12:28 91
15:5-8 14n. 14
1 Chronicles
15:42 122
4:17 166
passim 98
Psalms
2 Corinthians
1 91
12:2=4 70
118 35
passim 52
1 Timothy
Wisdom of Solomon 6:20 211
passim 96, 134
Hebrews
ISIS 143
New Testament
2 Peter
Matthew passim 46
passim 27,02, 001 91, Jt,
Revelation
123, 129
2:18-29 210
Mark ial 144, 165
passim 44,52 11:3-12 165

289
290 Index of Ancient Sources

OLD TESTAMENT NEW TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
Acts of John
Apocalypse of Elijah passim 48-49, 63
passim 57, 136, 144-46,
Acts of Mark
165-67, 176
passim 3, 100-11
Apocalypse of Zephaniah
Apocalypse of Peter
passim 173, 176 2 144, 145
passim 44, 133, 134
Ascension of Isaiah
a3 143 Gospel of Bartholomew
passim 47 ibs 144
passim 57-58
Coptic Enoch Apocryphon
passim 4, 146-48, 151, Gospel of Nicodemus
153-97, 286 9 [25] 143-44
text 180-97
Gospel of the Egyptians
1 Enoch passim 17, 43, 88, 95
passim 132-39, 141, 151-52,
145-48, 158n. 23, Gospel of the Hebrews
160-62, 172n. 69 passim 13, 14, 14n. 14, 17,
43-44, 88, 94
2 Enoch
passim 123n. 25, 134, 139,
Gospel of the Savior
139-40, 146-49, 151, 158,
passim 58
160n. 28, 161n. 31, 162n. 73,
History of Joseph the Carpenter
172n. 69, 279n. 39
passim 144-45, 164, 167

3 Enoch Kerygma Petri

3-12 140n. 43, 143 passim 16, 14n. 12, 16, 44,
10.6 161n. 31 94n. 39
passim 162, 143
Secret Gospel of Mark
Sibylline Oracles passim 43-44, 56, 100n. 3
2.161—64 1735747
passim 47, 163n. 39
DEAD SEA SCROLLS
Testament of Abraham
passim 162, 169, 144-47, 171, Book of Giants
173-75 passim 133

be
 Index of Ancient Sources 291

NAG HAMMADI Apocalypse of Paul (NHC V, 2)

AND GNOSTIC WRITINGS 20 144
passim 70-71, 80
The Coptic Gnostic Library
Apocalypse of Adam (NHC V, 5)
Gospel of Truth hey eH? 257n. 29
(NHC I, 3 and XII, 2)
passim 64, 216n: 52, 230n. 22
passim 5 AY 69h, TS), Pay TEE,
226n. 7 Asclepius 21-29 (NHC VI, 8)
passim 75-76, 80, 138
Apocryphon of John
(NH@IPIe IIA LV Ala BG AL)
Apocalypse of Peter (NHC VII, 3)
2273-9 272
passim 26, 72-73, 80
41, 16-42, 7 256
Ti; 15-18 209,711, 1) Teachings of Silvanus (NHC VII, 4)
24, 15-31 272 (II, 1) passim 3, 16, 78-80, 89-90,
passim 23, 63, 79,137, 202-3, 95-99
205-6, 208-9, 211,
216-18, 220, 222, 230n. 22 Three Steles of Seth (NHC VIL, 5)
passim 64, 79, 216n. 52, 230-31,
Gospel of Thomas (NHC IL, 2)
236-41, 247, 279-80
passim 24, 26, 35, 40, 43,
52-53, 76-77, 89, 220 Zostrianos (NHC VIII, 1)
5, 15-17 1397279
Gospel of Philip (NHC IL, 3)
47, 13 257n. 29
passim 67n. 239, 68
128, 15-18 139
Hypostasis of the Archons passim 64-65, 79, 216n. 52,
(NHC II, 4) 230n. 22, 237, 280
91, 34-92, 3 272
97, 13-14 215n. 49 Marsanes (NHC X, 1)
passim 63, 65, 69, 79, 162, passim 64n. 227, 65, 216n. 52,
216n. 52, 230n. 22 230, 242-44, 246-47, 280

On the Origin of the World Thought of Norea (NHC IX, 2)

(NHC IL, 5 and XIII, 2) passim 65, 79, 216n. 52, 230n. 22
100, 23-26 259
passim 26, 69, 80, 137 Testimony of Truth (NHC IX, 3)
45, 23-49, 7 261
Gospel of the Egyptians passim 56, 62n. 210, 73, 80
(NHC III, 2 and IV, 2)
passim 13, 17, 26, 63-64, 79, A Valentinian Exposition
216n. 52, 230-32, 235, (NHC XI, 2)
237n. 38, 238, 247, 256-57, 41, 32-38 239n. 47
274 passim 68-69, 137
292 Index of Ancient Sources

Allogenes (NHC XI, 3) HELLENISTIC JEWISH WRITERS

58, 27-33 279
passim 64n.227, 66, 79, 216n.52, Josephus
230n. 22, 237, 278 Against Apion
passim 109-10
Trimorphic Protennoia Jewish War
(NHC XIII, 1) 2.495 110
passim 66, 79, 216n. 52,
Philo of Alexandria
215n. 49, 230n. 22
Against Flaccus
Pistis Sophia passim 83, 109
1-3 140n. 43 On the Confusion of Tongues
2.99 74, 137, 140 passim 86—87
4.140 268n. 2 On the Contemplative Life
126 253-54 passim 17, 95
passim 26 On the Life of Moses
2.35-42 103
Other On Flight and Finding
46 97
Bala’izah Gnostic Fragments On Rewards and Punishments
passim 62, 74-75, 80 passim 85-86

Basilides
fragments 53n. 174 RABBINIC LITERATURE

Books of Jeu Eighteen Benedictions

passim 6, 74, 80, 140, 233, (Shemoneh Esreh)
261-67, 286 passim 94n. 36

Untitled Text (Bruce Codex)

PATRISTIC LITERATURE
passim 26, 66, 216n. 52,
230n. 22, 241 Aphrahat
Demonstrations
Cologne Mani Codex
5 BS 144
50.8-52.7 277
passim 133, 141, 270, 278-79 Apostolic Constitutions
8.5.3 144
Kephalaia
passim 25n. 53, 137, 270, Athenagoras
275-77, 279 Embassy for the Christians
passim 21, 51-52, 135
Manichaean Psalm Book
142.2 274n. 25 Augustine
179.20-23 276 City of God
passim 270, 280-81 15:19 143-44
 Index of Ancient Sources 293

Epistle of Barnabas Eusebius

passim oy, Is}, 1G, 240), 0), 32, Chronicle
89-95, 96n. 43, 99, 134 132 22
passim 81
1 Clement
Ecclesiastical History
9 143
ZA1O= L/h 88
Pseudo-Clement 2.16 12, 100n. 3
Homilies AW? 88, 99n. 53, 110
1.8.3-15.9 12 2.24 19, 100n.3
1.9 91 4.5, 11 124n. 30
Recognitions 4.7 sy!
4.12 143 4.7.3-4 Ze
4.7.6 15
Clement of Alexandria
5.13 56
Christ the Educator
6.11.6 30n. 74
1.18.4 30
6.13 45
passim 21, 45, 127-28
eps Eke) 60-61, 136
Excerpts from Theodotus
passim 19-20, 27-28, 32-33,
78.2 222
59-61, 81
passim 45, 55
Preparation for the Gospel
Letter to Theodore
passim 81, 143-44
448 87n. 14, 100n. 3
passim 43-45, 56 Eutychius
Miscellanies Annals
2.113-14 124n. 27 Patrologia graeca
2.117.5-3.30.1-2 2G ITE982 20n. 34
DNS) 144 passim 81
Crone 18
6.5.41 14n. 12, 16, 94n. 39 Hippolytus
passim 34, 45-6, 55-56, On the Antichrist
124n. 27, 135 43 144
Salvation of the Rich Refutation of all Heresies
passim 45, 128-29 5.6.3-9 242n. 60
5.10.1 242n. 60
Epiphanius of Salamis 6.35 55
Panarion Against Heresies 7.20.1 124n. 27
24.1.1, 2, 4 33 7.20-27 53-54
25-26 216n. 52, 247n. 71 7.26.6 257n. 29
SHA 34
39-40 216n. 52 Irenaeus
40.7.1-4 278 Against Heresies
69.2 103n. 13 UIS=21 245
passim 61—62, 105n. 20, P2122 239
DIBA ark) 1.21.4 226n. 7
294 Index of Ancient Sources

Irenaeus, Against Heresies (cont.) Peter 1 of Alexandria

125 250 On Riches
1.25.6 210, 250 passim 114-31, 126-27,
1.26.1 69n. 251 129-31, 173n. 78, 284, 286
1.30-31 216n. 52
Severus
1.30 259 History of the Patriarchs
5.5 143 passim 81
passim 16, 22-23, 34-35, 51,
53-55, 210-11, 220-22, Tertullian
256-57 On the Soul
50 143-44
Jerome On the Resurrection of the Flesh
Epistles 58 143
146.1 20 Prescriptions against Heretics
146.1.6 18 30 56-57
22.34 39

Justin OTHER GREEK AND

Dialogue with Trypho LATIN LITERATURE
passim 93n. 36, 143-44
Iamblichus of Chalcis
On the Mysteries of Egypt
(Pseudo) John Chrysostom
passim 5, 226-29, 233-48, 286
Encomium on the Four Bodiless
On the Soul
Living Creatures
passim 247
passim 142, 147-48, 168
Plato
Martyrdom of St. Peter Cratylus
passim 106-7 400c 242
Statesman
Origen 258e 211
Against Celsus Timaeus
3.44 21 4la—42a 242
5.54 136
Plotinus
6.27, 31 266
Enneads
6.31 239n. 46
635s 248n. 74
passim 59, 252-55
2.9 226
Commentary on John
2.9.10-11 247n.72
6.25 135
2.9.11 248n. 74
On First Principles
2.9.142 225, 246n.
68, 248
1.3.3 135 4.8.1 238n. 45
passim 59 4.8.1 240n. 50

vw
 Index of Ancient Sources 295

Porphyry COPTIC PAPYRI

Life of Plotinus
16 65-66, 216n. 52, 230n. 22 C3 (Pierpont Morgan
Library) 141-42
Strabo
Geography Cairo 48085 142
17.1.6 105 Codex Tischen-
17.1.10 110 dorfianus 25,15 114n.6, 116n.12,
17-1,19 106n. 24 118n. 18, 125n. 32

Codex Vaticanus
EGYPTIAN LITERATURE Copticus 61, 3 114n. 6, 116n. 12,
117n. 14, 118n. 18, 125n. 32
Book of the Dead
30 170n. 62 IB 14 (Codex Borgianus
P45) 176n. 87 Bibliothecae Nationalis
Neapolitanae) 114n. 6, 116n. 12,
118n. 18, 121n. 22
GREEK PAPYRI
K 9429 114n. 6, 118n. 18, 121n. 22
P. Amherst 3a Jap, Ws
M 602,1 114n.6, 115n.9, 117n. 14,
P. Coll. Youtie 77 38n. 10 121n. 22, 125n. 32

P. Egerton 2 35, 47— 48, 52 M 612 141-42

P. Oxyrhynchus Paris 130, 5 114n. 6, 116n. 12,

840 48 118n. 18, 121n. 22
1683 35n. 91 f
3523 35n. 91 Paris 131, 7 114n. 6, 116n. 12,
118n. 18, 121n. 22

INSCRIPTIONS

Monastery of Apa
Jeremias (Saqqara) 146, 149,
164n. 45
¢
 Index of Modern Authors

Adler, W., 143 Brakke, D., 137n. 23

Adriani, A., 103n.11, 104, 108n. 30, Brandon, G. F., 172n.70, 172n.71,
11Ons37lilinessy 113 172n.73, 176n. 89
Alexander, P. S., 143n.56, 161n. 29 Brashler, J., 72n. 269, 75n. 285, 78n. 297,
Allberry, C. R .C., 274n. 25, 276, 281 78n. 298
Andersen, F. I., 139n. 36 Bregman, J., 224n. 2, 227n. 10, 230n. 23
Andresen, C., 102n. 10 Bremmer, J., 49
Appelbaum, S., 83n. 2 Brown, S. K., 41n. 116
Armstrong, A. H., 225n.6 Bryder, P., 269n.7
Asmussen, J .P., 250n.5, 282n. 47 Buckley, J. J., 219n. 61, 269n. 4
Attridge, H .W., 68n. 240, 68n. 245, Budge, E. A. W., 147n. 71, 152n. 87
76n. 288, 165n. 49 Bullard, R., 63n. 217

Baarda, T., 101n. 4, 101n.6, 101n. 7, Calderini, A., 103n.11, 103n. 12,
108n. 31 104n. 15, 108n. 30, 108n. 33, 111n. 38
Bagnall, R., 37, 41n. 115 Cameron, R., 43n.124, 43n. 127,
Balestri, I., 147n. 70, 163n. 42, 170n. 61 44n. 131, 48n. 148, 48n. 150, 48n. 151,
Bardy, G., 28 49n. 158, 88n. 15, 141n. 44, 270n. 11
Barnard, L. W., 21n.42, 50n. 161, Camplani, A., 25-26
51n. 168, 90n. 170, 91, 92, 93n. 34 Casey, R. P., 55n. 181
Barraclough, R., 85n. 8 Chadwick, H., 21n.40, 45n. 136,
Barry, C., 64n. 226, 70n. 258 136n. 19, 253n. 17, 253n. 18, 255n. 22
Bauckham, R., 144n.61, 145n. 62, Chaine, M., 108n. 29
146n. 66 Charles, R. H., 133n. 4
Bauer, W., 13-14, 16n.18, 19n. 31, 55, Chitty, D. J., 38n. 103
89, 90, 105n. 161 Claude, P., 64n. 225
BeDuhn, J., 24n. 50, 282 Collins, J. J., 17, 47n. 146, 141n. 48,
Bell, H. I., 42n. 122 163n. 39
Bethge, H.-G, 69n. 252, 75n. 272, Colpe, C., 238n. 43
76n. 290 Colson, 86, 97, 109
Betz, H.-D., 97n. 48 Comstock, S. T., 57n. 189, 165n. 49
Betz, O., 172n. 68, 173n. 76 Copenhaver, B. P., 75n. 184, 138n. 29
Bey, M., 113 Crehan, J. H., 21n. 41, 51n. 168
Bienert, W. A., 60n. 202 Cremer, F. W., 228n. 16
Birley, A, 32n. 79 Crum, W. E., 114n. 6, 119n. 19, 120n. 21,
Bohlig 7A.) 63n.219, 231527, 232n-31, jan, Gy, ies}, Ist, eye). WES, Ae,
DEQ er, Zein. sis), AO &, Barer, 23), 164n. 46, 177-78
282n. 47 Cullmann, O., 48n. 151
Bolman, E. S., 37n. 101
Bonner, C., 258, 259n. 31, 257-58 Dahl, N. A., 206n. 16
Bousset, W., 90, 91n. 27, 165n. 47 Daoud, D. A., 3,100n. 1

oaeMT
298 index of Modern Authors

Davis, S. |. 39n. 111 Funk, W.-P., 64n. 226, 65n. 232,

de Lagarde, P., 118n_46, 164n.17 23in. 26, 241n.54, 241n. 55, 242n. 57,
de Vogel. C. ], 242n.59 244n. 62, 244n.63
Delahaye, H., 117n. 16
Delatte, A. 252n.15 Garcia Bazan, F., 230n.23
Depuydt, L., 104n. 17, 114n.3, 141n.6, Gardner, I, 24n. 52, 25n. 53, 137n. 27,
142n. 47, 147n. 53, 147n.
S, 148n. 72, 270n. 10, 274n. 25, 275, 279
153n.3, 168n. 57 Garitte, G, 1&4
des Places, E_, 226n. 9, 240n. 49, 245n. 68 Gaselee, S., 171n
Desjardins,
M., 72n. 269 Gero, S., 163
Dewey,A. 141n.44, 270n. 11 Ghedini, G., 42n
Dexinger, F., 85 Ginzberg, L., 162n
Dillon,|.M., 224, 229n. 20, 236n.35 Gisler, J-R., 257n
Dirkse, P., 75n. 285, 76n. 287 Giversen, S., 65n. 228, 65n. 230, 73n
Dodds, E. R., 227, 228&n. 12
Goehring, J. E., ix, 37n. 103, 103n. 104,
Dodge, B., 270n_ 12, 272, 273n.22,
108n. 107, 38, 50n. 160, 62n. 209,
274n.27
Sin. 225, 236n. 36, 270n.43
Donadoni,S.. 139n.34
Grant, R. M,, 19n. 31
Donfried, K. P. S0n. 164
Goodenough, E_, 259-61
Dorival, G., 13n.79, 17n.22, 18, 40,
Grenfell, B. P., 128n. 38
43n. 126
Griggs, C. W,, 11, 33n. 84, 34n. 85,
Dornseiff,F_ 232n.31
41n.115
Doutrelau,
L_, 250n.7
Gunther,] JJ. 46
Dragnet,R., 273n.24
Drake, H. A., 164n. 43
Haar, S., 220n. 66
Elm, S.. 39n. 44
Haas, C., 104n.16
Emmel, S.. 58, 77n.293 Hall, R. G., 47
Evetts, B. T. A. Sin. 304 Hammond, H,. 210
Harrington, D. J., 163n.39
Feltoe, C. L_, 60n. 202 Hartenstein, ]., 69n. 251
Ferrua, A.. 251n.11 Havelaar, H., 72n. 269, 73n. 270
Festugiére, A-]., 75n. 284, 240n. 50, Hedrick, C. W., 71n. 262
247n.73 Helm, R., 23n. 44
Finamore, J. F_, 231n. 26 Hengel, M., 94n.38
Finney, P. C., 251, 252n. 13, 252n. 14, Henrichs, A., 270n. 11
258n. 31, 262n. 45 Hespel, R., 273n. 24
Foerster, W., 53n.174, 54n. 177, Heussi, K., 61n. 207
55n. 183, 56n. 185, 203n. 6, 207n. 21, Hill, C_, 49, 50n. 159
220n. 65, 239n. 46, 249n.3, 250, Horsley, G. H. R., 36n.93, 42n. 121,
256n. 24 ' 98n.51
Hunt, A. S., 128n.38
136n.191, 137n.21, 138n.23, Hurtado, L. W., 14n.31, 92n. 11
145n. 30, 145n.32, 165n. 49, 166, Hyvernat, H., 104n.61, 114n. 42,
167n. 54, 264n. 47 147n.70, 163n.4, 170n. 17
 Index of Modern Authors 299

Irmscher, J., 269n Lawlor, H. J., 32,139n. 37

Isenberg, W., 68n. 247 Layton, B., 23n.45, 53n. 174, 54n. 177,
54n. 178, 54n. 179, 62n. 180, 63n. 212,
Jackson, H. M., 258n.31, 259n. 36, 64n. 226, 67n. 239, 68n. 247, 69n. 252,
274n. 24 69n. 254, 71n. 265, 76, 77n. 288,
Jakab, A., 16, 19, 21, 28n.61, 28n. 63, 77n. 291, 206n. 292, 210-12, 214-18,
30n. 70 219n. 62, 220-21, 278n. 36
James, M .R., 154, 169n.59, 170n. 61, Leclerq, H. , 103n. 11, 128n. 40
170 n.65 Lefebvre, G., 41n. 116
Janssens, Y., 66n. 235, 78n. 300, 90n. 21 Lefort, T., 154
Jeremias, J., 48n. 147 Leisegang, H., 252, 255n. 22
Jernstedt, P., 169n. 60 Lewy, H.; 227n. 13, 228n. 15, 229n.19,
Jonas, H., 208n. 24, 209n. 28, 220n. 66, 238n. 44
221n. 69, 222, 226n.3, 282n. 7, 283 Lieu, S. N. C., 24n. 52, 269n. 7
n.47 Llewelyn, S. R., 18n. 29, 35n. 91, 37n. 99,
Jondet, M. G., 107n. 28 42n. 120
Judge, E. A., 38, 39, 40, 41n. 118 Logan, A. H. B., 217n. 56
Junod, E., 49n. 152
Lohr We 23, 24701) po, bans 175
Lucchesi, E., 114n. 3
Kaestli, J.-D., 49n. 152
Luecken, W., 123n. 25
Kahle, Jr., P. E., 74n. 282
Lupieri, E., 219n. 61
Kaiser, U., 63n. 218
Lutz, R. T., 45n. 135
Kaufmann, C. M., 150n. 83
Kayser, F., 41n. 116
MacDermot, V., 66n. 236, 74n. 280,
Kee, H. C., 46n. 143
140n. 41, 140n. 42, 230n. 22, 241n. 32,
King, C. W., 249, 257n. 257
254n. 56, 261n. 20, 268n. 44
King, K. L., 66n. 233, 201n. 2, 213, 286
MacDonald, D. R., 49n. 155
Klimkeit, H.-J., 250n.5, 250n. 6,
MacRae, G. W., 64n. 221, 64n. 222,
282n. 47
64n. 224, 67n. 240, 70n. 260, 71n. 264,
Knibb, M. A., 47n. 144
74n. 278, 77n. 295, 170n. 63, 174n.79,
Koenen, L., 141n. 44, 270n. 11
206n. 13
Koester, H., 43n.125, 43n.128,,
Macurdy, G., 172n. 70
44n. 131, 46n. 140, 48n. 148, 49n. 158,
Mahé, J.-P., 138n. 29
50, 63, 71n. 263, 76n. 288, 76n. 289,
77n. 293, 89n. 16 Mgjercik, R., 203n. 8, 207n. 19, 224n. 2,
Kotansky, R., 261n. 43 PDE, PEMA NO, PPAR. 1G), HACIA, lke}
Kraft, R. A., 50n.161, 90n. 23, 91, 231n. 26, 238n. 44, 240n.51, 244n. 62
93n. 28, 94n. 35, 105n. 37 Mansfeld, J., 25n. 54
Kretzenbacher, L., 172n. 73 Marcovich, M., 59n. 198
Marjanen, A., 220n. 67
Lake, K., 19, 22, 27, 40, 88, 95, 99n. 53, Markschies, C., 23, 54, 67n. 242
110 Marrou, H. I., 51n. 170
Lalleman, P. J., 49n. 154, 63n. 214 Marrow, S. B., 206n. 13
Lambdin, T., 76n. 288 Matter, J., 249n. 2
Lampe, P., 251n.11 Maurer, C., 52n. 172
300 Index of Modern Authors

Mehat, A., 30 Pearson, B. A., 2n.1, 3n.2, 3n.2, 3n.3,

Menzies, A., 136 3n. 4, 3n.5, 4n.5, 4n.6, 5n.9, 5n. 10,
Merkel, H., 44 5n.11, 6n.12, 16n.5, 17n. 19, 23n. 44,
Merlan, P., 225n.6 34n. 88, 37n. 102, 43n. 129, 50n. 160,
Meyer, M., 73n. 272, 169n. 60 56n. 186, 62n. 210, 63n. 210, 65n. 228,
Milik, J. T., 133n.5, 133n.6, 138n. 30, 65n. 229, 65n. 230, 65n. 231, 65n. 232,
139n. 36, 142, 147n.71, 154, 156n. 18, 70n. 257, 73n. 271, 73n. 273, 73n. 274,
180, 183, 187, 192, 197 75n. 283, 87n.14, 89n. 18, 89n. 19,
\ 91n. 26, 94n. 40, 98n.50, 114n.2,
Mirecki, P. A., 58n. 193
116n. 11, 140n. 39, 142n. 49, 154n.7,
Modrzejewski, J., 14-15
163n. 41, 164n. 43, 201n.3, 204n. 11,
Molinari, A. L., 78n. 299
205n. 12, 206n. 15, 208n. 22, 208n. 23,
Muller, C. D. G., 44n. 133, 47n. 144,
209217ns5 72237 Dele TOF
49n. 158, 115n. 10, 123n. 26, 149n. 75,
230n. 23, 231n. 25, 241n. 54, 260n. 40,
163n. 40, 164n. 43, 172n. 68, 173n. 78,
261n. 42, 268n. 1, 268n. 3, 269n. 4, 269
175n. 86
n.9, 272n. 20, 273n. 21, 279n. 39
Muller, D., 66n. 238
Peel, M., 67n. 243, 78n. 300, 90, 96, 97
Munier, H., 142, 168n. 57
Perez, G. A., 155
Murdock, W., 70n. 260
Pétrement, S., 217n. 56
Muro, E., 134n.9
Pietersma, A., 45n. 135, 57n. 189
Plisch, U.-K., 64n. 220, 231n. 27
Naldini, M., 36 , 42
Poirier, P.-H., 231n.26, 241n. 54,
Nautin, P., 30n. 74, 32n. 75, 59n. 200 241n. 55, 242n. 57
Neyrey, J. H., 46n. 142 Pouderon, B., 28n. 60, 28n. 65, 29n. 65,
Nickelsburg, G. W. E., 4, 94n. 37, 51n. 168
132, 133n.3, 134, 136n. 20, 137n. 25, Prieur, J.-M, 49n. 155
138n. 31, 138n. 31, 152n. 86, 162n. 32, Prigent, P., 50n. 162
174n. 82, 175n. 84 Pryor, J. W., 48n. 147
Nilsson, M. P., 204n. 10 Puech, H.-C., 45n. 134
Nock, A. D., 75n. 284, 224
Quasten, J., 45n. 138, 59n. 200, 59n. 201,
Orlandi, T., 50n. 160, 114n.3, 114n.5, 60n. 203, 61n. 205
114n.6, 115n.7, 147n.72, 158n. 21, Quibell, J. E., 149n. 76, 149n. 78,
164n. 43, 192 164n. 85
Oulton, 32 Quispel, G., 23n. 48, 251n. 11

Pagels, E., 68n. 245, 68n. 248, 68n. 249, Reeves, J., 141, 277, 279n. 40, 279n. 41
77n. 293 Remus, H., 225n.6
Paget, J. C., 12n.5, 50n. 160, 90n. 20, Richardson, C. C., 51n. 167, 51n. 169
90n. 23, 91n. 26, 92n. 33, 94n. 39 Riley, G., 72n. 268
Painchaud, L., 68n.245, 69n. 258, Ritter, A. M., 14n. 13, 18n. 29
72n. 252, 208n. 22 Roberts, C. H., 13-14, 29n. 67, 35,
Parrott, D., 70, 75n.285, 76n. 287, 53n. 173, 61
77n. 294, 77n. 295 Robinson, F., 146n. 67, 164n. 46
Paulsen, H., 46n. 141 Robinson, J. M., xi, 236n. 36

wy
 Index of Modern Authors 301

Robinson, W. C., 69n. 254 Smith, R., 201n. 1, 223n. 223n. 74

Romer, C., 141n. 44, 270n. 11 Sodano, A. R., 227n. 11
Roncaglia, M., 14 Spier, J., 261n. 43
Rosenstiehl, J.-M., 166 Steindorff, G., 165n.49, 166n. 50,
Rossi, F., 164n. 43 166n. 51, 173n. 74, 173n. 77
Rousseau, A., 250n. 7 Stendahl, K., 2, 82, 91n. 29
Rudolph, K., 203n. 6, 207n. 18, 207n. 21, Stern, M., 83n.2
208n. 24, 212, 213n. 39, 219, 220n. 66, Stone, M. E., 169n.59, 272n. 20
Psi sy, Posi By, PLA Dalia.Sy, Strecker, G., 88n.15
250n. 6, 255n. 22, 282n. 47 Stroumsa, G. G., 25n.55, 269n. 4,
Runia, D. T., 59, 61n. 204, 92n. 32, 269n. 9, 272n. 19, 276n. 32, 281n. 45,
99n. 54 282n. 46
Sundermann, W., 273n. 22
Sagnard, F.-M., 55n. 181
Sanders, E. P., 146n. 68, 162 Tardieu, M., 24n.51, 67, 217n. 241,
Sangrador, J. J .F., 105 217n. 242, 226n.56, 237n. 37, 247n. 73
Schaferdiek, K., 49n. 153 Tcherikover, V. A., 84
Scheidweiler, F., 58n. 192 Telfer, W., 20n. 35, 33
Schenke, G., 66n. 235 Thackeray, 109, 110
Schenke, H.-M., 62n. 212, 67n. 244, Thompson, H., 150n. 80, 151n. 85
68ne2467 207s 216no2 2o0ne22, Tl), WAY, HA
DMigy AY, Deiilin, 27, Pv), Pelsiny, ee), Deyy. Tkaczow, B., 22n. 43, 41n. 115, 103n. 14,
238n. 42 111n. 38
Scher, A., 273n. 24 Treu, U., 47n. 146
Schmidt, C., 49, 66n. 236, 74n. 280, Trouillard, J., 228n. 18, 229n. 20
74n. 281, 117n. 16, 140n. 41, 140n. 42, Turner, J. D., 62n.212, 62n. 227,
230n. 22, 230 n. 23, 233n. 32, 241n. 56, 65n. 232, 66, 68n. 248, 68n. 249,
254n. 20, 261n. 44, 263, 268n. 2 73, 74n. 277, 77n. 292, 203n.8, 207,
Schmidt, F., 170n. 61 216n. 54, 224n.2, 225n. 4, 227n. 10,
Schneemelcher , W., 17, 44n. 132, PEAa PDX, Pein, Moy, Pela A%s), Dalila, Sy,
48n. 147, 48n. 149, 49n. 155, 52n.172, 242n. 57, 269n.5
57n. 188, 58n. 195, 58n. 197, 78n. 299,
88n. 15, 94n. 39 van den Broek, R., 17-18, 19n. 30,
Schoedel, W. R., 51n. 166, 71n. 161, 28-29, 31-32, 70n. 256, 77, 78n. 296,
96n. 45 248n. 74
Scopello, M., 139, 140n. 38, 279n. 39 van den Hoek, A., 28, 30-31, 34n. 87,
Scott, W., 140n. 40 45n. 138, 99n. 54
Sevrin, J.-M., 207, 235n. 19 van der Horst, P. W., 25n. 54, 93n. 36
Shaw, G., 228, 229, 240n. 51, 243n. 61, van Haelst, J., 61n. 206
246n. 70 van Minnen, P., 36n. 96
Sieber, P., 64n. 266 VanderKam, J. C., 132n.2, 134n.10,
Sly, D., 110n. 34 1S4nldeelS orale SoneiGmloone2.
Smallwood, E. M., 83n. 2 144n. 61, 145n. 65, 215n. 48
Smart, N., 202 Vielhauer, P., 88n.15
Smith, M., 43, 56n. 185, 87n. 14, 100n.3 Viteau, J., 106n.26
302 Index of Modern Authors

Vivian, T., ix, 3, 114n. 1, 114n. 2, 114n. 3, Williams, F., 33-34, 69n. 250, 72n. 266,
114n.6, 116n.11, 116n.12, 116n. 13, 77n. 266, 278n. 38
117n. 15, 117n. 16, 130n. 43 Williams, M. A., 4-5, 201n.2, 208,
Volker, W., 54n. 178 209n. 25, 212-14, 216-20, 286
von Harnack, A., 33, 34n. 86, 36n. 97, Wilson, R. M., 34, 74n. 278, 77n. 294
57n. 187 Wintermute, O. S., 57n. 190, 165n. 49,
von Lemm, O., 154, 164n. 45, 168n. 58, 166n. 50, 173
173n. 77, 197 Wipszycka, E., 39, 40n. 113
¥ Wire, A. C., 66n. 233
Wachsmuth, 240n. 50 Wisse, F., 45n. 137, 62n. 210, 63n. 213,
Wajnberg, I., 49n. 157 63n. 219, 67n. 240, 72n. 266, 72n. 267,
Waldstein, M., 63n.213, 202n.5, 73n. 272, 79n. 302, 202n.5, 203n.9,
203n. 9, 256n. 25 25in. 27, 201n.28,,232n829).238n. 32,
Wallis, R. T., 224n. 2, 226n. 10 234n. 33, 256n. 23
Wansink, C. S., 148, 168n. 57 Witte, B., 253n. 17-2551 2279257,
Welburn, A. J., 255n. 22 266n. 49
Wengst, K., 50n. 163 Wood, S. P., 128n. 37
White, H. G. E., 159n.25
Wietheger, C., 150n. 81, 150n. 82, Zandee, J., 78n. 300, 96n. 46
150n. 83 Zazoff, P., 261n. 43

a
&-
 ei g

DEMCO
le kt OS
for
NS
et)
—
—o| eo

13829810
|. |, 12
Ns
1
DATE DUE
BIBLICAL STUDIES

“Lucidly written, historically and textually meticulous, with a commanding scope and sense for
broader religious patterns, Pearson’s essays are essential reading for the growth of Christianity in
Egypt and early Christian diversity in general.”
—David Frankfurter, University of New Hampshire, author of Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation
and Resistance

“This welcome publication gathers in a pe collection important essays by an eminent scholar

whose work on texts from ancient Egyptian Christianity and related religious and philosophical
currents has been pioneering. Pearson’s studies provide samplings of the rich variety of religion in
ancient Christian Egypt, with insightful analysis and interpretation informed by a mastery of the
sources and made accessible even to most non-specialists by an admirable clarity of style.”
Michael A. Williams, Chair, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilization, University
of Washington

“A respected scholar brings together in one volume the achievements of a distinguished thirty-year
career in the study of Gnosticism and early Christianity. His first essay catalogs for the first time all
second- and third-century sources for Christian and Gnostic origins in Egypt. The volume will
remain for some time to come a valuable resource and the place where the studyof Egyptian’
Christianity begins.”
Charles W. Hedrick, Department of Religious Studies, Southwest Missouri State University

‘Gnosticism and Christianity in Roman and Coptic Egypt is an absolute delight. Written in an
engaging fashion by Birger Pearson, a scholar well known for his scholarly forays into intriguing
intellectual corners of Egypt, this book is sure to spark interest in the fascinating varieties of religious
expression in Egypt during antiquity and late antiquity.”
Marvin Meyer, Griset Professor of Bible and Christian Studies, Chapman University , + *

“Few subjects in the history of Christianity are as strange and fascinating as the emergence of the
new religion in Egypt, with its curious blend of traditionalist conservatism and speculative
theology. Professor Pearson’s new collection of essays, written with well-balanced judgment on the
basis of decades of detailed research, offers both the general reader and the specialist alike a series of
carefully planned and expertly guided glimpses into the world of early Christianity in Roman and
Coptic Egypt. This is a world that every educated reader should visit at least once.”
—Stephen Emmel, Professor of Coptology, Miinster University

BIRGER A. PEARSON is Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies at the University of California, Santa
Barbara. He is the author of The Emergence of the Christian Religion: Essays on Early Christianity and
co-editor of Nag Hammadi Codex VII.
—
ISBN 0-9670-2610-8
9
T&T CLARK INTERNATIONAL
\ A Continuum imprint
@ www.tandtclark.com

cee
re

9 "780564026101