the formation of a Church within a Church, where a group of persons
claiming for themselves special illumination should rule over the great
body of the faithful, these last being voluntarily set apart from all
communion with their fellows[594]. This was so close a parallel to what
actually occurred in Egypt in the IVth century, when the whole male
population was said with some exaggeration to have embraced the monastic
life[595], and submitted themselves to the rule of an ambitious and
grasping episcopate, as to give us a valuable indication as to the
authorship and date of the book. It may be said at the outset that the
conception of the universe which appears throughout is so thoroughly
Egyptian that it must have been written for Egyptian readers, who alone
could have been expected to understand it without instruction. The idea
of the Supreme Being as an unfathomable abyss was, as has been said in
Chapter II, a very old one in Egypt, where one of the oldest cosmogonies
current made Nu or the sea of waters the origin of both gods and
men[596]. So was the peculiar theory that the lesser gods were the limbs
or members of the Supreme[597]. An Ogdoad[598] or assembly of eight gods
arranged in syzygies or couples was also well known in the time of the
early dynasties, as was the Dodecad of twelve gods which Herodotus knew,
and which M. Maspero refers on good evidence to the time of the
Pyramid-Builders[599]. So was the view that men and other material
things were made from the tears of the celestial powers[600], a notion
well known to Proclus the Neo-Platonist, who attributed it to the
legendary Orpheus[601]. Not less Egyptian—perhaps in its origin
exclusively Egyptian—is the view that the knowledge of the places of the
world after death and their rulers was indispensable to the happiness of
the dead. “Whosoever,” says M. Maspero in commenting upon some funerary
texts of the Ramesside period, “knows the names of these (gods) while
still on earth and is acquainted with their places in Amenti, will
arrive at his own place in the other world and will be in all the places
reserved for those who are justified[602].” The resemblance between the
system of the _Pistis Sophia_ and the doctrines of the Egyptian religion
in the days of the Pharaohs has been pointed out in detail by the
veteran Egyptologist the late Prof. Lieblein and has been approved by M.
Maspero[603]. It extends to particular details as well as to general
ideas, as we see from the ritual inscribed on the tombs at Thebes, where
each “circle” or division of the next world is said to have its own song
and its own “mystery,” an idea often met with in the _Pistis
Sophia_[604]. Even the doctrine in the _Pistis Sophia_ that the dead had
to exhibit a “seal” as well as a “defence” to the guardians of the
heavenly places is explained by the Egyptian theory that no spell was
effective without an amulet, which acted as a kind of material support
to it[605]. The greater part of the allusions in the _Pistis Sophia_ are
in fact unintelligible, save to those with some acquaintance with the
religious beliefs of the Pharaonic Egyptians.
At the same time it is evident that the MS. of the _Pistis Sophia_ that
has come down to us is not the original form of the book. All the
scholars who have studied it are agreed that the Coptic version has been
made from a Greek original by a scribe who had no very profound
acquaintance with the first-named tongue[606]. This appears not only
from the frequent appearance in it of Greek words following Coptic ones
of as nearly as possible the same meaning; but from the fact that the
scribe here and there gives us others declined according to the rules
not of Coptic but of Greek accidence. We must therefore look for an
author who, though an Egyptian and acquainted with the native Egyptian
religion, would naturally have written in Greek; and on the whole there
is no one who fulfils these requirements so well as Valentinus himself.
The fact that the author never quotes from the Gospel according to St
John indicates that it had not come to his knowledge; for the opening
chapter of St John’s Gospel contains many expressions that could easily
on the Gnostic system of interpretation be made to accord with the
Valentinian theology, and is in fact so used by later writers of the
same school as the author of the _Pistis Sophia_[607]. Now the first
direct and acknowledged quotation from St John’s Gospel that we have is
that made by Theophilus, who was made bishop of Antioch in A.D. 170, and
the generally received opinion is that this Gospel, whenever written,
was not widely known long before this date[608]. The only founders of
Gnostic sects of Egyptian birth prior to this were Basilides and
Valentinus, and of these two, Valentinus is the more likely author,
because he, unlike his predecessor, evidently taught for general
edification, and possessed, as the Fathers agree, a numerically large
following. We have, moreover, some reason for thinking that Valentinus
actually did write a book with some such title as the _Sophia_.
Tertullian, in his declamation against the Valentinians, quotes a
sentence from “the Wisdom (Lat. Sophia) not of Valentinus but of
Solomon[609].” It has been suggested that he is here referring to some
saying of the Valentinian aeon Sophia; but no writings would in the
nature of things be attributed to her, and, as M. Amélineau points out,
it is more natural to think that he was here comparing a book with a
book[610]. This figure of rhetoric was a favourite one with Tertullian,
for in his treatise _De Carne Christi_ we find him quoting in like
manner the Psalms—“not the Psalms of Valentinus, the apostate, heretic,
and Platonist, but the Psalms of David[611].” The fact that the story in
the British Museum MS. is called _Pistis Sophia_ instead of _Sophia_
only need not hinder us from identifying this with the work presumably
referred to by Tertullian, because this title is, as has been said, the
work of another scribe than those who transcribed the original; and
Pistis Sophia is sometimes spoken of in the MS. itself as Sophia
only[612]. Moreover, there is some reason for thinking that certain of
the Fathers and even their Pagan adversaries had seen and read the story
of _Pistis Sophia_. The allusion quoted above from Origen to gates
opening of their own accord seems to refer to one of its episodes, and
Tertullian, in the treatise in which he says he is exposing the original
tenets of the sect[613], uses many expressions that he can hardly have
borrowed from any other source. Thus, he speaks of Sophia “breaking away
from her spouse[614]” which is the expression used by Pistis Sophia in
her first Metanoia and is in no way applicable to the Valentinian Sophia
of Irenaeus or Hippolytus. He again speaks of the same Sophia as being
all but swallowed up and dissolved in “the substance” evidently of
Chaos, which is the fate which Pistis Sophia anticipates for herself in
the MS. Tertullian, like the _Pistis Sophia_, also assigns to the
psychic substance the place of honour or right hand in the
_quasi_-material world, while the hylic is relegated in both to the left
hand[615]. The Paradise of Adam is said by him to be fixed by Valentinus
“above the third heaven[616]” as it is in the _Pistis Sophia_, if, as we
may suppose, the soul of the protoplast dwelt in the same place as that
of Elijah. The name of _Ecclesia_ or the Church is given not only to a
particular aeon in the Pleroma, but also to the divine power breathed
into man from a higher world in both Tertullian and the _Pistis
Sophia_[617], and, in the treatise _De Carne Christi_, Tertullian
alludes contemptuously to an heretical doctrine that Christ possessed
“any new kind of flesh miraculously obtained from the stars[618],” which
seems to refer to the taking by Jesus in the opening of the _Pistis
Sophia_ of a body from “Barbelo” the goddess or Triple Power set over
matter and inspiring the benefic planet Venus. For all which reasons it
seems probable that in the _Pistis Sophia_ we have the translation of an
authentic work by Valentinus.
The _Pistis Sophia_, however, is not the only work in the British Museum
MS. The first and second books of it, as they are called by the
annotator, come to an end, rather abrupt but evidently intentional, on
the 252nd page of the MS. There then appears the heading in the hand of
the annotator “Part of the Texts of the Saviour[619],” and on this
follow two pages dealing with the “members” of the Ineffable One, as to
which it is expressly said that only a partial revelation is made[620].
These seem to have slipped out of their proper place, and are followed
by two discontinuous extracts from another treatise, the second of which
is also headed by the annotator “Part of the Texts of the Saviour.” This
second part, which we shall venture to take before the other, is
evidently the introduction to or the commencement of a new treatise, for
it begins with the statement that “After they had crucified Our Lord
Jesus He rose from the dead on the third day,” and that His disciples
gathered round Him, reminding Him that they had left all to follow
Him[621]. Jesus “standing on the shore of the sea Ocean,” then makes
invocation to the “Father of every Fatherhood, boundless light,” in a
prayer composed of Egyptian and Hebrew words jumbled together after the
fashion of the spells in the Magic Papyri[622]. He then shows the
disciples the “disk of the sun” as a great dragon with his tail in his
mouth drawn by four white horses and the disk of the moon like a ship
drawn by two white steers[623]. The two steering oars of this last are
depicted as a male and a female dragon who take away the light from the
rulers of the stars among whom they move. Jesus and His disciples are
then translated to the place called the “Middle Way[624].” He there
describes how the Archons of Adamas rebelled and persisted in
engendering and bringing forth “rulers and archangels and angels and
ministers and decans.” We further hear, for the first time, that the
Twelve Aeons, instead of being, as in the _Pistis Sophia_, all under the
rule of Adamas, are divided into two classes, one Jabraoth ruling over
six of them and Sabaoth Adamas over the other six; that Jabraoth and his
subjects repented and practised “the mysteries of the light,” including,
as we have seen, abstinence from generation[625], whereupon they were
taken up by Jeû to the light of the sun between the “places of the
middle and those of the left.” “Sabaoth Adamas,” on the other hand, with
his subjects to the number of 1800, were bound to the sphere, 360 powers
being set over them, the 360 being controlled by the five planets
Saturn, Mars, Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter. Jesus then describes in great
detail the different tortures in the Middle Way and two other hells
called Chaos and Amenti, wherein the souls of uninitiated men who commit
sins are tormented between their incarnations[626], the final punishment
being in the worst cases annihilation. He then affords His disciples a
vision of “fire and water and wine and blood” which He declares He
brought with Him on His Incarnation, and celebrates a sacrament which He
calls “the baptism of the First Oblation,” but which seems to be a
peculiar form of the Eucharist with invocations in the jargon alluded to
above, and a thaumaturgic conversion of the wine used in it into water
and _vice versâ_[627]. There are several _lacunae_ in this part of the
MS., and the tortures for certain specified sins are differently given
in different places, so that it is probable that with the _Part of the
Texts of the Saviour_ has here been mixed extracts from another document
whose title has been lost[628].
The remaining document of the British Museum MS., being the third in
order of place, was probably taken from the same book as that last
described, and was placed out of its natural order to satisfy the
pedantry of the scribes, the rule in such cases being that the longer
document should always come first. Like its successor, it deals largely
with the “punishments” of the souls who have not received the mysteries
of the light, and introduces a new and still more terrible hell in the
shape of the “Dragon of Outer Darkness” which it declares to be a vast
dragon surrounding the world, having his tail in his mouth, and
containing twelve chambers, wherein the souls of the uninitiated dead
are tortured after their transmigrations are ended until they reach the
annihilation reserved for them at the last judgment[629]. There is also
given here a very curious account of man’s invisible part, which is said
to be made up of the “Power” infused into it by the Virgin of Light
which returns to its giver after death[630], and the Moira or Fate which
it derives from the Sphere of Destiny and has as its sole function to
lead the man it inhabits to the death he is predestined to die[631].
Then there is the Counterfeit of the Spirit, which is in effect a
duplicate of the soul proper and is made out of the matter of the wicked
Archons. This not only incites the soul to sin, but follows it about
after death, denouncing to the powers set over the punishments the sins
it has induced the soul to commit[632]. All these punishments, to
describe which is evidently the purpose of all the extracts from the
_Texts of the Saviour_ here given, are escaped by those who have
received the mysteries.
The _Texts of the Saviour_ therefore clearly belong to a later form of
Gnosticism than the _Pistis Sophia_ properly so called. The author’s
intention is evidently to frighten his readers with the fate reserved
for those who do not accept the teaching of the sect. For this purpose
the division of mankind into pneumatic, psychic, and hylic is
ignored[633], and this is especially plain in certain passages where the
torments after death of those who follow “the doctrines of error” are
set forth. Magic, which has been spoken of with horror in the _Pistis
Sophia_, is here made use of in the celebration of the rites described,
and the miraculous power of healing the sick and raising the dead,
though said to be of archontic, _i.e._ diabolic, origin is here
recommended as a means to be employed under certain safeguards for the
purpose of converting “the whole world[634].” Even the duration of the
punishments and the different bodies into which the souls of the men are
to be cast are made to depend upon the relative positions of the stars
and planets which seem to be interpreted according to the rules of the
astrology of the time,—a so-called science, which is spoken of
scornfully in the _Pistis Sophia_ itself[635]. Yet it is evident that
the author or authors of the _Texts of the Saviour_ are acquainted with
the book which precedes it; for in a description of the powers which
Jeû, who appears in both as the angelic arranger of the Kerasmos,
“binds” in the five planets set to rule over it, we learn that he draws
a power from “Pistis Sophia, the daughter of Barbelo” and binds it in
the planet Venus or Aphrodite[636]. As this is the only reference to
her, and receives no further explanation, it is plain that the writer
assumed his readers to be well acquainted with Pistis Sophia’s history,
and Jeû, Melchisidek, Adamas, and Jaldabaoth, now one of the torturers
in Chaos, appear, as we have seen, in both works. The author of the
_Texts of the Saviour_ also shows himself the avowed opponent of the
Pagan deities still worshipped in the early Christian centuries, as is
evidenced by his making not only the Egyptian Typhon, but Adonis,
Persephone, and Hecate, fiends in hell. Oddly enough, however, he gives
an explanation of the myth of the two springs of memory and oblivion
that we have seen in the Orphic gold plates in the following passage,
which may serve as an example of the style of the book:
“Jesus said: When the time set by the Sphere of Destiny[637] for a
man that is a persistent slanderer to go forth from the body is
fulfilled, there come unto him Abiuth and Charmon, the receivers of
Ariel[638], and lead forth his soul from the body, that they may
take it about with them for three days, showing it the creatures of
the world. Thereafter they drag it into Amenti unto Ariel that he
may torment it in his torments for eleven months and twenty-one
days. Thereafter they lead it into Chaos unto Jaldabaoth and his
forty-nine demons, that each of his demons may set upon it for
eleven months and twenty-one days with whips of smoke. Thereafter
they lead it into rivers of smoke and seas of fire that they may
torment it therein eleven months and twenty-one days. Thereafter
they lead it on high into the Middle Way that each of the Archons of
the Middle Way may torment it with his own torments another eleven
months and twenty-one days. And thereafter they lead it unto the
Virgin of Light who judges the righteous and the sinners, and she
shall judge it. And when the Sphere is turned round, she delivers it
to her receivers that they may cast it forth among the Aeons of the
Sphere. And the servants of the Sphere lead it into the water which
is below the Sphere, that the boiling steam may eat into it, until
it cleanse it thoroughly. Then Jaluha the receiver of Sabaoth
Adamas, bearing the cup of oblivion delivers it to the soul, that it
may drink therein and forget all the places and the things therein
through which it has passed[639]. And it is placed in an afflicted
body wherein it shall spend its appointed time[640].”
The object of the cup of oblivion is obviously that the wicked man may
learn nothing from the torments he has endured. In the case of the
righteous but uninitiated dead, the baleful effect of this cup will be
annulled by “the Little Sabaoth the Good” who will administer to him
another cup “of perception and understanding and wisdom” which will make
the soul seek after the mysteries of light, on finding which it will
inherit light eternal.
It would be easy to see in these features of the _Texts of the Saviour_
the work of Marcus the magician who, as was said in a former chapter,
taught, according to the Fathers, a corrupted form of the doctrine of
Valentinus for his own interested purposes[641]. The distinguishing
feature about his celebration of the Eucharist is the same as that given
in the _Texts of the Saviour_, and as Clement of Alexandria was
acquainted with a sect in his day which substituted water for wine
therein[642], it is probable that Marcosians were to be found during the
latter part of the IInd century in Egypt. It is also to be noted that
the annotator has written upon the blank leaf which separates the first
and second books of the _Pistis Sophia_ a cryptogram concealing,
apparently, the names of the Ineffable One and the other higher powers
worshipped by Valentinus, and this seems to be constructed in much the
same way as the isopsephisms and other word-puzzles attributed by
Irenaeus to Marcus[643]. The mixture of Hebrew names and words with
Egyptian ones in the prayer of Jesus given in the _Texts of the Saviour_
would agree well with what the last-named Father says about Marcus being
a Jew, and a prayer which he represents Marcus as making over the head
of a convert baptized into his sect is couched in a jargon of the same
character[644]. On the other hand, the opening sentence of the book
calls Jesus “our Lord,” which Irenaeus tells us the Valentinians
carefully abstained from doing[645], and the long and detailed
description of the different hells and their tortures is much more
Egyptian than Jewish[646]. The remark attributed to Basilides as to one
in a thousand and two in ten thousand being worthy to take the higher
mysteries is here put into the mouth of Jesus, and perhaps it would be
safer to attribute for the present the _Texts of the Saviour_ not to
Marcus himself, but to some later Gnostic who fused together his
teaching with that of the earlier and more disinterested professors of
Egyptian Gnosticism.
The same remarks apply with but little modification to some other
fragments of Gnostic writings which have come down to us. In the
Bodleian Library at Oxford is to be seen a MS. written on papyrus, which
was brought to this country by the Abyssinian traveller, Bruce. This
also is in the Sahidic dialect of Coptic, and although it has been badly
damaged and the ink is rapidly disappearing in the damp climate of
Oxford, yet a copy taken nearly a century ago by Woide makes its
decipherment possible in most places. The Bruce Papyrus, like the
British Museum parchment MS., contains more than one document.
Unfortunately the arrangement of the leaves is by no means certain, and
the two scholars who have studied it most thoroughly differ almost as
widely as possible as to the order of its contents. M. Amélineau, a
celebrated Egyptologist and Coptic scholar, who published in 1882 a copy
of the text with a French translation in the _Notices et Extraits_ of
the Académie des Inscriptions, considers that the treatises contained in
it are only two in number, the first being called by the author in what
seems to be its heading The _Book of the Knowledge of the Invisible God_
and the second _The Book of the Great Word in Every Mystery_. Dr Carl
Schmidt, of the University of Berlin, on the other hand, who, like M.
Amélineau, has studied the Papyrus at Oxford, thinks that he can
distinguish in the Bruce Papyrus no less than six documents, of which
the first two are according to him the two books of Jeû referred to in
the _Pistis Sophia_, two others, fragments of Gnostic prayers, the fifth
a fragment on the passage of the soul through the Archons of the Middle
Way, and the sixth, an extract from an otherwise unknown Gnostic work
which he does not venture to identify further[647]. To enter into the
controversy raised by this diversity of opinion would take one outside
the limits of the present work; but it may be said that at least one,
and that the most important, of the documents in question must be later
than the _Pistis Sophia_. Not only does this—which M. Amélineau calls
the _Book of the Knowledge of the Invisible God_ and Dr Schmidt
“Unbekanntes Altgnostisches Werk”—quote the opening words of St John’s
Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God without whom nothing was made[648],” which, as has been
said, the author of the _Pistis Sophia_ was unable to do; but it
mentions in briefer form than this last the heavenly origin of the souls
of the Twelve Apostles[649]. There is also in the same document a
description of what appears to be the “emanation of the universe,” in
which the following passage occurs:
“And He [_i.e._ the Ineffable One] heard them [a prayer by the
lesser powers is referred to]. He sent them powers capable of
discernment, and knowing the arrangement of the hidden Eons. He sent
them according to the arrangement of those who are hidden[650]. He
established their Orders according to the orders of the Height, and
according to the hidden arrangement they began from below upward in
order that the building might unite them. He created the aëry earth
as a place of habitation for those who had gone forth, in order that
they might dwell thereon until those which were below them should be
made strong. Then he created the true habitation within it[651], the
Place of Repentance (Metanoia) within it, the Place of Repentance
within it, the antitype of Aerodios[652]. Then [he created] the
Place of Repentance within it, the antitype of Autogenes
(Self-begotten or, perhaps, ‘of his own kind’). In this Place is
purification in the name of Autogenes who is god over them and
powers were set there over the source of the waters which they make
to go forth (?). Here are the names of the powers who are set over
the Water of Life: Michar and Micheu, and they are purified in the
name of Barpharanges[653]. Within these are the Aeons of Sophia.
Within these is the true Truth. And in this Place is found Pistis
Sophia, as also the pre-existent Jesus the Living, Aerodios, and his
Twelve Aeons[654].”
What is intended to be conveyed by this it is difficult to say in the
absence of the context; but the Pistis Sophia mentioned is evidently the
heroine of the book of that name, and the abrupt mention of her name
without explanation shows, as in the _Texts of the Saviour_, that the
author supposed his readers to be acquainted with her story. While this
part of the Papyrus may possibly be an attempt by some later writer to
fulfil the promise to tell His disciples at some future time the
“emanation of the universe” frequently made by Jesus in the _Pistis
Sophia_, it cannot be earlier in date than this last-named document.
Another large fragment in the Bruce Papyrus is also connected with that
which has been called above the _Texts of the Saviour_, and helps to
link up this with the system of the _Pistis Sophia_ proper. In the first
part of the _Texts of the Saviour_ (_i.e._ the fourth document in the
British Museum book), Jesus, as has been mentioned, celebrates with
prodigies a sacrament which He calls the “Baptism of the first
Oblation”; and He tells them at the same time that there is also a
baptism of perfumes, another baptism of the Holy Spirit of Light, and a
Spiritual Chrism, besides which He promises them “the great mystery of
the Treasure-house of Light and the way to call upon it so as to arrive
thither,” a “baptism of those who belong to the Right Hand,” and of
“those who belong to the Middle” and other matters. These promises are
in some sort fulfilled in that part of the Bruce Papyrus which Dr
Schmidt will have it is “the Second Book of Jeû[655],” where Jesus
celebrates with accompanying prodigies three sacraments which He calls
the Baptism of Fire of the Virgin of the Treasure-house of Light, the
Baptism of the Holy Spirit, and a “mystery” which is said to take away
from His disciples “the wickedness of the archons[656].” The details of
these vary but very slightly from the “Baptism of the First Oblation”
celebrated by Jesus in the _Texts of the Saviour_, and seem to have been
written in continuation and as an amplification of it. But the _Texts of
the Saviour_, as we have seen, also mention Pistis Sophia in such a way
as to presuppose an acquaintance with her history; and the presumption
that the author of the Bruce Papyrus had read the book bearing her name
is confirmed by the repetition in it of the names of Jeû, here called
“the Great Man, King of the great aeon of light,” the Great Sabaoth the
Good, the Great Iao the Good, Barbelo[657], the Great Light, and all the
“Amens,” “Twin Saviours,” “Guardians of Veils” and the rest who are
classed together in the _Pistis Sophia_ as the great emanations of
light, and mentioned in a connection which shows them to have the same
functions in all these documents[658]. When we add to these the
repetition of the tradition, formally stated for the first time in the
_Pistis Sophia_, that Jesus spent twelve years with His disciples
between His Resurrection and His Ascension[659], there can be little
doubt that this part of the Papyrus Bruce also is subsequent to the
_Pistis Sophia_. Similar arguments, which are only omitted here for the
sake of greater clearness, apply to all the rest of Dr Schmidt’s
documents, and it follows that none of the contents of the Papyrus can
be considered as any part of the “Books of Jeû” mentioned in the _Pistis
Sophia_[660], which, therefore, remains the parent document on which all
the others are based. As to their absolute date, it seems impossible to
arrive at any useful conclusion. Both M. Amélineau and Dr Schmidt are
agreed that the Coptic Papyrus is a translation from Greek originals;
and M. Amélineau does not put this too far forward when he suggests that
it was made in the IInd and IIIrd century of our era[661]. Dr Schmidt is
probably nearer the mark when he puts the actual transcription of the
Papyrus as dating in the earliest instance from the Vth century. His
earliest date for any of the Greek originals is the first half of the
IIIrd century[662].
If now we put these later documents—the _Texts of the Saviour_ and those
contained in the Bruce Papyrus—side by side, we notice a marked, if
gradual, change of tendency from the comparatively orthodox Christianity
of the _Pistis Sophia_ proper. In the _Texts of the Saviour_ notably,
the fear of hell and its punishments is, as we have seen, present
throughout, and seems to be the sanction on which the author relies to
compel his readers to accept his teaching. In the documents of the Bruce
Papyrus this is also to be found in more sporadic fashion, nearly the
whole of the book being occupied by the means by which men are to escape
the punishment of their sins. These methods of salvation are all of them
what we have earlier called gnostical or magical, and consist simply in
the utterance of “names” given us in some sort of crypto-grammatic form,
and the exhibition of “seals” or rather impressions (χαρακτῆρες) here
portrayed with great attention to detail, which, however, remain utterly
meaningless for us. Thus to quote again from what Dr Schmidt calls the
Second Book of Jeû, Jesus imparts to His disciples the “mystery” of the
Twelve Aeons in these words:
“When you have gone forth from the body and come into the First
Aeon, the Archons of that Aeon will come before you. Then stamp upon
yourselves this seal AA, the name of which is zôzesê. Utter this
once only. Take in your two hands this number, 1119. When you have
stamped upon yourselves this seal and have uttered its name once
only, speak these defences; ‘Back! Protei Persomphôn Chous, O
Archons of the First Aeon, for I invoke Êazazêôzazzôzeôz.’ And when
the Archons of the First Aeon shall hear that name, they will be
filled with great fear, they will flee away to the West, to the Left
Hand, and you will enter in[663]”:
and the same process with different names and seals is to be repeated
with the other eleven aeons. This is, of course, not religion, such as
we have seen in the writings of Valentinus, nor even the transcendental
mysticism of the _Pistis Sophia_, but magic, and magic of a peculiarly
Egyptian form. The ancient Egyptian had always an intense fear of the
world after death, and from the first conceived a most gloomy view of
it. The worshippers of Seker or Socharis, a god so ancient that we know
him only as a component part of the triune or syncretic divinity of late
dynastic times called Ptah-Seker-Osiris, depicted it as a subterranean
place deprived of the light of the sun, hot and thirsty, and more dreary
than even the Greek Hades or the Hebrew Sheol.
“The West is a land of sleep and darkness heavy, a place where those
who settle in it, slumbering in their forms, never wake to see their
brethren; they never look any more on their father and their mother,
their heart leaves hold of their wives and children. The living
water which earth has for every one there, is foul here where I am;
though it runs for every one who is on earth, foul is for me the
water which is with me. I do not know any spot where I would like to
be, since I reached this valley! Give me water which runs towards
me, saying to me, ‘Let thy jug never be without water’; bring to me
the north wind, on the brink of water, that it may fan me, that my
heart may cool from its pain. The god whose name is _Let Complete
Death Come_, when he has summoned anybody to him, they come to him,
their hearts disturbed by the fear of him; for there is nobody dares
look up to him from amongst gods and men, the great are to him as
the small and he spares not [those] who love him, but he tears the
nursling from the mother as he does the old man, and everyone who
meets him is filled with affright[664].”
The priests took care that such a picture did not fade from want of
reproduction and, true to the genius of their nation, elaborated it
until its main features are almost lost to us under the mass of
details[665]. Especially was this the case with the religion of the
Sun-God Ra, who after his fusion with Amon of Thebes at the
establishment of the New Empire came to overshadow all the Egyptian
cults save that of Osiris. The tombs of the kings at Thebes are full of
pictures of the land of this Amenti or the West, in which horror is
piled upon horror, and book after book was written that there should be
no mistake about the fate lying in wait for the souls of men[666]. In
these we see the dead wandering from one chamber to another, breathing a
heavy and smoke-laden air[667], and confronted at every step by
frightful fiends compounded from the human and bestial forms, whose
office is to mutilate, to burn, and to torture the soul. The means of
escape open to the dead was, under the XXth dynasty, neither the
consciousness of a well-spent life nor the fatherly love of the gods,
but the knowledge of passwords and mysterious names[668]. Every chamber
had a guardian who demanded of the dead his own name, without repeating
which the soul was not allowed to enter[669]. Every fiend had to be
repelled by a special exorcism and talisman[670], and every “circle”
through which the dead passed had its own song and “mystery,” which it
behoved the dead to know[671]. Only thus could he hope to win through to
the Land of Osiris, where he might enjoy a relative beatitude and be
free to go about and visit the other heavenly places[672]. For this
purpose, the map, so to speak, of the route was engraved on the walls of
the tombs of those who could afford it, and the necessary words to be
said written down. Those who were not so rich or so lucky were thought
to be parcelled out, like the _fellahin_ of that day, or the _villeins_
of feudal times, in colonies among the different districts of the lower
world, where they flourished or perished according to the number of
talismans or “protections” that they possessed[673]. “If ever,” says M.
Maspero, “there were in Pharaonic Egypt mysteries and initiates, as
there were in Greece and in Egypt under the Greeks, these books later
than the _Book of the Other World_ and the _Book of the Gates_ are books
of mystery and of initiates[674].” Thereafter, he goes on to say, the
ancient popular religion disappeared more and more from Egypt, to give
place to the overmastering sense of the terrors of death[675] and the
magical means by which it was sought to lighten them.
It is to the survival of these ideas that books like the _Texts of the
Saviour_ and those in the Papyrus Bruce must be attributed. The Gnostic
Christianity of Valentinus, direct descendant as it was of the amalgam
of Christianity with pre-Christian faiths which the Ophites had
compounded, no sooner reached the great mass of the Egyptian people than
it found itself under their influence. In this later Gnostic literature
we hear no more of the Supreme Father of Valentinus, “who alone” in his
words, “is good”; no more weight is laid upon the Faith, Hope, and Love
who were the first three members of his Heavenly Man; and the Jesus in
whom were summed up all the perfections of the Godhead becomes
transformed into a mere mystagogue or revealer of secret words and
things. All expectation of the immediate arrival of the Parusia or
Second Coming, when the world is to be caught up and all wickedness to
be destroyed, has passed into the background, as has also the millennium
in which the faithful were, in accordance with a very early belief in
Egypt, to share the felicity of those who had been kings on earth[676].
Instead we have only appeals to the lowest motives of fear and the
selfish desire to obtain higher privileges than ordinary men. Even the
avoidance of crime has no other sanction, and complete withdrawal from
the world is advocated on merely prudential grounds; while rejection of
the mysteries is the unpardonable sin:
“When I have gone unto the light” (says the Jesus of the _Texts of
the Saviour_ to His disciples) “preach unto the whole world, saying:
Renounce the whole world and the matter that is therein, all its
cares, its sins, and in a word all its conversation, that ye may be
worthy of the mysteries of the light, that ye may be saved from all
the torments which are in the judgments. Renounce murmuring, that ye
may be worthy of the mysteries of the light, that ye may escape the
judgment of that dog-faced one.... Renounce wrath, that ye may be
worthy of the mysteries of the light, that ye may be saved from the
fire of the seas of the dragon-faced one.... Renounce adultery, that
ye may be worthy of the mysteries of the kingdom of light, that ye
may be saved from the seas of sulphur and pitch of the lion-faced
one.... Say unto them that abandon the doctrines of truth of the
First Mystery ‘Woe unto you, for your torment shall be worse than
that of all men, for ye shall dwell in the great ice and frost and
hail in the midst of the Dragon of the Outer Darkness, and ye shall
escape no more from the world from that hour unto evermore, but ye
shall be as stones therein, and in the dissolution of the universe
ye shall be annihilated, so that ye exist no more for ever[677]’.”
The priests who engraved the horrors of the next world on the walls of
the royal tombs at Thebes would probably have written no differently.
Gnosticism then, in Egypt soon relapsed into the magic from which it was
originally derived; and we can no longer wonder that the Fathers of the
Church strove as fiercely against it as they did. In the age when books
like the _Texts of the Saviour_ and the fragments in the Papyrus Bruce
could be written, the methods of Clement of Alexandria, who treated
Valentinus and his school as Christians bent on the truth though led
into error by a misunderstanding of the purport of heathen philosophy,
were clearly out of place. “Ravening wolves,” “wild beasts,” “serpents,”
and “lying rogues” are some of the terms the Fathers now bestow upon
them[678], and as soon as the conversion of Constantine put the sword of
the civil power into their hands, they used it to such effect that
Gnosticism perished entirely in some places and in others dragged on a
lingering existence under other forms. The compromise that had served
for some time to reconcile the great mass of the unthinking people to
the religion of Christ thus broke down[679]; and Egypt again showed her
power of resisting and transforming all ideas other than those which
thousands of years had made sacred to her people.
Meanwhile, the bridge between Paganism and Christianity which Gnosticism
afforded had been crossed by many. As the Ophites showed the inhabitants
of Asia Minor how to combine the practice of their ancestral worships
with the Christian revelation, so Valentinus and his successors allowed
the rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven without the difficulties
attendant on the passage of the camel through the needle’s eye. The
authors of the _Texts of the Saviour_ and the Bruce Papyrus went further
and made it possible for the Egyptian _fellah_—then as now hating
change, and most tenacious of his own beliefs—to accept the hope of
salvation offered by the new faith while giving up none of his
traditional lore upon the nature of the next world. In this way,
doubtless, many thousands were converted to Christianity who would
otherwise have kept aloof from it, and thus hastened its triumph over
the State. But the law which seems to compel every religion to borrow
the weapons of its adversaries leads sometimes to strange results, and
this was never more plainly marked than in the case of Egypt. The
history of Egyptian Christianity has yet to be written; but it seems
from the first to have been distinguished in many important particulars
from that which conquered the West, and it is impossible to attribute
these differences to any other source than Gnosticism. The Pharaonic
Egyptian had always been fanatical, submissive like all Africans to
priestly influence, and easily absorbed in concern for his own spiritual
welfare. Given the passion for defining the undefinable and the love of
useless detail which marked everything in the old faith, and in systems
like those of the Coptic texts which form the subject of this chapter he
had the religion to his mind. Nor were other and less abstract
considerations wanting. The life of a scribe or temple servant, as the
race began to lose the vigour which at one time had made them the
conquerors of Asia, had come to be looked upon by the mass of the people
as that which was most desirable on earth[680]; and here was a faith
which called upon the Egyptian to withdraw from the world and devote
himself to the care of his own soul. Hence the appeal of Gnosticism to
those who would escape hell to renounce all earthly cares fell upon good
ground, and Egypt was soon full of ignorant ascetics withdrawn from the
life of labour and spending their days in ecstasy or contemplation until
roused to seditious or turbulent action at the bidding of their crafty
and ambitious leaders. For these monks and hermits the Hellenistic
civilization might as well not have existed; but they preserved their
native superstitions without much modification, and the practices of
magic, alchemy, and divination were rife among them[681]. So, too, was
the constant desire to enquire into the nature and activities of the
Deity which they had brought with them from their old faith, and which
nearly rent Christianity in twain when it found expression in the Arian,
the Monophysite, and the Monothelite controversies. In the meantime, the
Catholic Church had profoundly modified her own methods in the
directions which the experience of the Gnostics had shown to be
profitable. The fear of hell came to occupy a larger and larger part in
her exhortations, and apocalypse after apocalypse was put forth in which
its terrors were set out with abundant detail. Ritual necessarily became
of immense importance under the pressure of converts who believed in the
magical efficacy of prayers and sacraments, in which every word and
every gesture was of mysterious import, and the rites of the Church were
regarded more and more as secrets on which only those fully instructed
might look. The use in them of pictures, flowers, incense, music, and
all the externals of the public worship of heathen times, which
according to Gibbon would have shocked a Tertullian or a Lactantius
could they have returned to earth[682], must be attributed in the first
instance to the influence of Gnostic converts. Renan is doubtless right
when he says that it was over the bridge between Paganism and
Christianity formed by Gnosticism that many Pagan practices poured into
the Church[683].
Apart from these external matters, on the other hand, the outbreak of
Gnosticism possibly rendered a real service to Christianity. To the
simple chiliastic faith of Apostolic times, the Gnostics added the
elements which transformed it into a world-religion, fitted to triumph
over all the older creeds and worships; and their stealthy and in part
secret opposition forced the Church to adopt the organization which has
enabled her to survive in unimpaired strength to the present day. Jewish
Christianity, the religion of the few pious and humble souls who thought
they had nothing to do but to wait in prayer and hope for their Risen
Lord, had proved itself unable to conquer the world, and its adherents
under the name of Ebionites were already looked upon by the Gentile
converts as heretics. Gnosticism, so long as it was unchecked, was a
real danger to the Church, but without it Christendom would probably
have broken up into hundreds of small independent communities, and would
thus have dissipated the strength which she eventually found in unity.
Threatened on the one hand by this danger, and on the other with the
loss of popular favour which the attractions of Gnosticism made
probable, the Church was forced to organize herself, to define her
doctrines, to establish a regular and watchful hierarchy[684], and to
strictly regulate the tendency to mystic speculation and arbitrary
exegesis which she could not wholly suppress. Yet these measures could
not come into operation without producing a reaction, the end of which
we have yet to see.
Footnote 459:
The chapter on Marcion and his doctrines should perhaps in strict
chronological order follow on here, as Marcion’s teaching was either
contemporary with, or at most, but a few years later than, that of
Valentinus. Cf. Salmon in _Dict. Christian Biog._ _s.v._ Marcion,
Valentinus. But the earliest documents in the _Pistis Sophia_ are, as
will be seen, possibly by Valentinus himself, and, as all of them are
closely connected with his doctrine, it seemed a pity to postpone
their consideration.
Footnote 460:
W. E. Crum, _Catalogue of the Coptic MS. in the Brit. Mus._, 1905, p.
173, n. 2, says that it was bought at the sale of Askew’s effects for
£10. 10_s._ 0_d._, and that Askew himself bought it from a bookseller.
Footnote 461:
H. Hyvernat, _Album de Paléographie Copte_, Paris, 1888.
Footnote 462:
Matter, _Hist. du Gnost._ t. II. pp. 39-43, 347-348, and t. III. pp.
368-371.
Footnote 463:
See the present writer’s article “Some Heretic Gospels” in the
_Scottish Review_ for July, 1893, where the MSS. treated of in this
chapter and their divisions are described in detail. Schmidt,
_Koptisch-gnostische Schriften_, Bd I. p. 14, speaks of this “Codex
Askewianus” as “eine Miszellenhandschrift.”
Footnote 464:
Except where otherwise specified, subsequent references here to
_Pistis Sophia_ (in Italics) are to the first 253 pages of the Coptic
MS. only.
Footnote 465:
Cf. the ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος “within the veil” of Heb. vi. 19.
For other instances of its use in this sense see Crum, _Cat. of the
Coptic MSS. in the Brit. Mus._ p. 255, n. 1; and Clem. Alex. _Strom._
Bk V. c. 6. For the _dove_, Mr F. C. Conybeare, in a paper on the
subject read before the Society of Historical Theology in Dec. 1892
(see _Academy_ of 3rd Dec. 1892), said that the dove was “the
recognised symbol of the Holy Spirit or Logos in the allegorizing
theology of the Alexandrine Jews at the beginning of the 1st century
A.D.,” and quoted several passages from Philo in support. Cf. Origen,
_cont. Cels._ Bk I. c. 31. But it was also the emblem, perhaps the
totem-animal, of the great Asiatic goddess who, under the name of
Astarte or Aphrodite, was worshipped as the _Mater viventium_ or
“Mother of all Living,” with whose worship the serpent was also
connected. It was doubtless to this that the text “Be ye wise as
serpents, harmless as doves” refers. Both serpents and doves figure
largely in the Mycenaean and Cretan worship of the goddess. See Ronald
Burrows, _Discoveries in Crete_, 1907, pp. 137, 138, and _Index_ for
references. In later Greek symbolism the dove was sacred to the
infernal Aphrodite or Persephone whose name of Φερρεφάττα or
Φερσεφάττα has been rendered “she who bears the dove.” See de Chanot,
“Statues Iconiques de Chypre” in _Gazette Archéologique_, 1878, p.
109.
Footnote 466:
_Pistis Sophia_, p. 152, Copt. This metaphor is first met with in
Philo, _Quaest. in Genesim_, Bk I. c. 53, who declares that the “coats
of skin” of Gen. iii, 21 are the natural bodies with which the souls
of the protoplasts were clothed. It was a favourite figure of speech
with the Alexandrian Jewish writers. So in the _Ascensio Isaiae_, c.
IV. 16, 17: “But the saints will come with the Lord with their
garments which are now stored up on high in the seventh heaven: with
the Lord will they come, whose spirits are clothed.... And afterwards
they will turn themselves upward in their garments, and their body
will be left in this world.” Cf. Charles, _Ascension of Isaiah_, pp.
34, 35, and _Eschatology_ (Jowett Lectures), pp. 399 _sqq._, where he
says that this was also the teaching of St Paul.
Footnote 467:
The word Σωτήρ, which here as elsewhere in the book appears without
any Coptic equivalent, evidently had a peculiar signification to the
Valentinian Gnostics. Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 1, § 1, p. 12, Harvey, says
that it was the name they gave to Jesus oὐδὲ γὰρ κύριον ὀνομάζειν
αὐτὸν θέλουσι “for they do not choose to call Him Lord.” In the later
part of the book, the document called Mέρoς τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 253,
Copt.) says that “he is saviour and ὰχώρητος (_i.e._ not to be
confined in space), who finds the words of the mysteries and the words
of the Third Receptacle which is within (_i.e._ the inmost of the
three) and excelleth them all.” From which it would appear that the
chief qualification of a saviour in the eyes of the later Valentinians
was that he was not restricted to his special place in the universe,
but could visit at will the worlds below him. We seem therefore to be
already getting near the Manichaean idea of _Burkhans_ (messengers or
Buddhas) who are sent into the world for its salvation. Cf. Chapter
XIII _infra_.
Footnote 468:
So that Judas Iscariot received a super-excellent soul as well as the
other eleven, unless we are to suppose that his successor and
substitute Matthias was one of those chosen from the beginning. It is
curious that neither in this nor in any other Valentinian document is
there any allusion to the treason of Judas. The phrase “Archons of the
aeons” means, as will be seen later, the rulers of the twelve signs of
the Zodiac.
Footnote 469:
The “Sphere,” here as elsewhere in the book, means the sphere of the
visible firmament, which is below that of Heimarmene or Destiny.
Footnote 470:
Τhis παρθένος τοῦ φωτός or Virgin of Light appears here, I think, for
the first time in any Gnostic document, although she may have been
known to the Valentinians. See Irenaeus, Bk II. c. 47, § 2, p. 368,
Harvey. She is, perhaps, a lower analogue of Sophia Without, and is
represented as seated in or near the material sun which is said to
give its light in its “true form” only in her τόπος or place, which is
10,000 times more luminous than that of the Great Propator or
Forefather mentioned later (_Pistis Sophia_, p. 194, Copt.). Her
function seems to be the “judging” of the souls of the dead, which
does not apparently involve any weighing of evidence, but merely the
examination of them to see what “mysteries” they have received in
previous incarnations, which will determine the bodies in which they
are reincarnated or their translation to higher spheres (_ibid._ pp.
239, 292). She also places in the soul a power which returns to her,
according to the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, on the death of its possessor
(_ibid._ p. 284, Copt.), thereby discharging the functions assigned in
the last book of Plato’s _Republic_ to Lachesis. She is also on the
same authority (_i.e._ the Μ. τ. Σ.) one of the rulers of the disk of
the sun and of that of the moon (_ibid._ pp. 340-341, Copt.), and her
place is one of the “places of the Middle” and is opposite to the
kingdom of Adamas, which is called the “head of the aeons” (_ibid._ p.
236, Copt.). She reappears in Manichaeism and it is said in the _Acta
Archelai_ that at the destruction of the world she will pass into “the
ship” of the moon along with Jesus and other powers where she will
remain until the whole earth is burnt up (c. XIII. p. 21 of
_Hegemonius, Acta Archelai_, Beeson’s ed., Leipzig, 1906, p. 21). In
the Turfan texts (F. W. K. Müller, _Handschriften-Reste in Estrangelo
Schrift aus Turfan_, III. Teil, Berlin, 1904, p. 77) appears a
fragment of a prayer in which is invoked _yîšô kanîgrôšanâ_ which Dr
Müller translates Ἰησοῦς παρθένος τοῦ φωτός, “Jesus, Virgin of Light”;
but it is possible that there is some mistake in the reading.
Footnote 471:
Barbelo is a name very frequently met with in the earlier
heresiologists. Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 26, §§ 1, 2, pp. 221-226, Harvey,
declares that there was a sect of Simonians called Barbeliotae “or
Naassenes” who suppose “a certain indestructible (the Latin version
says ‘never-ageing’) Aeon in a living virgin spirit whom they call
Barbelo (masc.),” and gives an account of a string of other aeons
issuing not from, but at the prayer of, this Barbelo, which is far
from clear in the present state of the text. The sect appears, from
what can be made out of his description, to have resembled the
Ophites, of which it may have been a branch. Hippolytus, however, says
nothing of them, and the account of Epiphanius (_Haer._ XXV. and
XXVI., Vol. II, pt 1, pp. 160, 184), Oehler, is untrustworthy,
inasmuch as he assigns the worship of Barbelo to two sects, one of
which he calls Nicolaitans and the other Gnostics simply. To both of
them he attributes after his manner unimaginably filthy rites, and it
is plain from his making Barbelo the mother of Jaldabaoth and giving
her a seat in the eighth heaven that he confuses her wilfully or
otherwise with the Sophia of the Ophites. Her place in the system of
the _Pistis Sophia_ will be described in the text. The name is said by
Harvey to be derived from the Syriac _Barba elo_, the Deity in Four or
God in Tetrad, and the derivation is approved by Hort (_Dict. of
Christian Biog._ _s.h.n._). It appears more likely, however, that it
is to be referred to the Hebrew root בבל “Babel” or confusion, a
derivation which Hort also mentions. In Irenaeus’ Greek text the name
is spelt βαρβηλὼ, in the Latin “Barbelo” with an accusative
“Barbelon,” and in Epiphanius βαρβηλὼ and βαρβήρω. If we might alter
this last into βαρβαριωθ, we might see it in a great: number of magic
spells of the period. Cf. Wessely, _Ephesia Grammata_, Wien, 1886, pp.
26, 28, 33, 34.
Footnote 472:
_Pistis Sophia_, p. 16, Copt. The five words are _zama_, _zama_,
_ôzza_, _rachama_, _ôzai_. Whatever they may mean, we may be quite
sure that they can never contain with their few letters the three
pages or so of text which are given as their interpretation. It is
possible that the letters are used acrostically like the A G L A,
_i.e._ ניבר לעולם אדני (? Ahih ? אהיה) אתה _Ate Gibor Lailam Adonai_,
“The mighty Adonai for ever” (or “thou art the mighty and eternal
Lord”) commonly met with in mediaeval magic. Cf. Peter de Abano,
_Heptameron, seu Elementa Magica_, Paris, 1567, p. 563; or, for other
examples, F. Barrett, _The Magus_, 1801, Bk II. pp. 39, 40. The
notable feature in these mysterious words is the quantity of Zetas or
ζ’s that they contain which points to the use of some sort of table
like that called by Cabalists _ziruph_, or a cryptogram of the
_aaaaa_, _aaaab_, kind. It should be noticed that Coptic scribes were
often afflicted with what has been called Betacism or the avoidance of
the letter Beta or β by every means, which frequently led to the
substitution for it of ζ as in the case of Jaldabaoth = Ιαλδαζαω given
above (Chap. VIII, n. 3, p. 46 _supra_).
Footnote 473:
This idea of certain powers being the members or “limbs” of him from
whom they issue recurs all through the _Pistis Sophia_. Cf. especially
p. 224, Copt., where it is said that the χωρήματα or “receptacles” of
the Ineffable go forth from his last limb. It is probably to be
referred to the conception of the Supreme Being as the Man κατ’
ἐξοχήν, which we have seen current among the Ophites. See Chap. VIII,
n. 2, p. 38 _supra_. That the ancient Egyptians used the same
expression concerning their own gods and especially Ra, see Moret, “Le
Verbe créateur et révélateur,” _R.H.R._, Mai-Juin, 1909, p. 257. Cf.
Amélineau, _Gnosticisme Égyptien_, p. 288. So Naville, _Old Egyptian
Faith_, p. 227.
Footnote 474:
That is to say, their names make up his name as letters do a word. So
in the system of Marcus referred to in Chap. IX _supra_, Irenaeus (Bk
I. c. 8, § 11, p. 146, Harvey) explains that the name of Jesus
(Ἰησοῦς) which might be uttered is composed of six letters, but His
unutterable name of twenty-four, because the names of the first Tetrad
of Ἄρρητος (Bythos), Σιγή, Πατὴρ (Monogenes or Nous) and Ἀλήθεια
contain that number of letters. See also § 5 of same chapter. Those
who wish to understand the system are recommended to read the whole of
the chapter quoted. As Irenaeus has the sense to see, there is no
reason why the construction from one root of names founded on the
principle given should not go on for ever.
Footnote 475:
This is probably either the Horos or Stauros that we have seen brought
into being in the teaching of Valentinus as a guard to the Pleroma,
or, as is more probable, an antitype of the same power in the world
immediately above ours. That there was more than one Horos according
to the later Valentinians appears plain from the words of Irenaeus
above quoted (see Chap. IX, n. 1, p. 105 _supra_). Probably each world
had its Horos, or Limit, who acted as guard to it on its completion.
That in this world, the Cross, personified and made pre-existent,
fulfils this office seems evident from the Gospel of Peter, where it
is described as coming forth from the Sepulchre with Jesus (_Mem.
Miss. Archéol. du Caire_, 1892, t. IX. fasc. 1, v. 10). Cf. too, Clem.
Alex. _Paedagogus_, Bk III. c. 12, and _Strom._ Bk II. c. 20.
Footnote 476:
Ὁ μηνευτος. The word is not known in classical Greek (but cf. μηνυτής
“a revealer”), and appears to have its root in μήν “the moon,” as the
_measure_ of the month. From the Coptic word here translated
“Precept,” we may guess it to be a personification of the Jewish Law
or _Torah_ which, according to the Rabbis, before the creation of the
world existed in the heavens. Later in the book it is said that it is
by command of this power that Jeû places the aeons (p. 26, Copt.);
that the souls of those who receive the mysteries of the light (_i.e._
the psychics) will have precedence in beatitude over those who belong
to the places of the First Precept (p. 196, Copt.); that all the
orders of beings of the Third χὠρημα are below him (p. 203, Copt.);
and that he is “cut into seven mysteries,” which may mean that his
name is spelled with seven letters (p. 219, Copt.).
Footnote 477:
Χάραγμαι. Are these the letters mentioned in last note?
Footnote 478:
Πρεσβευτής, properly, “ambassador” or “agent.” Doubtless a prototype
of our sun. Elsewhere in the book, Jesus tells His disciples that He
brought forth from Himself “at the beginning” power (not _a_ power),
which He cast into the First Precept, “and the First Precept cast part
of it into the Great Light, and the Great Light cast part of that
which he received into the Five Parastatae, the last of whom breathed
part of that which he received into the Kerasmos or Confusion” (p. 14,
Copt.). The Great Light is also called the Χάραγμα of the Light, and
is said to have remained without emanation (p. 219, Copt.).
Footnote 479:
Παραστάται, “Comrades” or “witnesses” or “helpers.” They can here
hardly be anything else but the Five Planets. It is said later that it
was the last Parastates who set Jeû and his five companions in the
“Place of the Right Hand” (p. 193, Copt.). When the world is
destroyed, Jesus is to take the perfect souls into this last
Parastates where they are to reign with him (p. 230, Copt.) for 1000
years of light which are 365,000 of our years (p. 243, Copt.).
Προηγούμενος “Forerunner” does not seem to occur in classical Greek.
Footnote 480:
We hear nothing more definite of these Five Trees, but they appear
again in Manichaeism, and are mentioned in the Chinese treatise from
Tun-huang, for which see Chap. XIII _infra_.
Footnote 481:
This is a most puzzling expression and seems to have baffled the
scribe, as he speaks of them, when he comes to repeat the phrase (p.
216, Copt.), as the “Twin Saviours,” which is a classical epithet of
the Dioscuri. In Pharaonic Egypt, Shu and Tefnut the pair of gods who
were first brought into being by the Creator were sometimes called
“The Twins.” See Naville, _Old Egyptian Faith_, p. 120. Cf. p. 171
_infra_.
Footnote 482:
It is evident from the context that we here begin the enumeration of
the Powers of the Left, who are hylic or material and therefore the
least worthy of the inhabitants of the heavens. According to Irenaeus,
the Valentinians held that all of them were doomed to destruction.
Τριῶν ὠν ὄντων, τὸ μὲν ὑλικὸν, ὃ καὶ ἀριστερὸν καλοῦσι, κατὰ ἀνάγκην
ἀπὸλλυσθαι λέγουσιν, ἅτε μηδεμίαν ἐπιδέξασθαι πνοὴν ἀφθαρσίας
δυνάμενον (Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 1, § 11, p. 51, Harvey). “There being
three forms of existences, they say that the hylic, which they call
the left hand, must be destroyed, inasmuch as it cannot receive any
breath of incorruption.” So in the Bruce Papyrus to be presently
mentioned, the “part of the left” is called the land of Death. At
their head stands “the Great Unseen Propator,” who throughout the
_Pistis Sophia_ proper is called by this title only, and occupies the
same place with regard to the left that Iao does in respect of the
middle, and Jeû of the right. In the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 359,
Copt.) he is called by the name ἀγραμμαχαμαρεχ which frequently
appears in the Magic Papyri. It is there spelt indifferently
ακραμνικαμαρι, ακραμμαχαρι, ακραμμαχαμαρει, ακραμμαχαχαχαρι, and in a
Latin inscription on a gold plate, _acramihamari_ (see Wessely,
_Ephesia Grammata_, p. 22, for references), which last may be taken to
be the more usual pronunciation. One is rather tempted to see in the
name a corruption of ἀγραμματέον in the sense of “which cannot be
written,” but I can find no authority for such a use of the word. As
the ruler of the material Cosmos he might be taken for the Cosmocrator
who, as we have seen, is called by Valentinus Diabolos or the Devil
(but see n. 1, p. 152 _infra_). Yet he cannot be wholly evil like
Beelzebuth for it is said in the text (p. 41, Copt.) that he and his
consort Barbelo sing praises to the Powers of the Light. So in the
Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 378, Copt.) he is represented as begging for
purification and holiness when the Great Name of God is uttered. It is
plain also from the statements in the text (pp. 43, 44, Copt.) that in
the _Pistis Sophia_ he, Barbelo, and the Αὐθάδης or Arrogant Power
make up a triad called the great τριδυναμεῖς or “Triple Powers” from
whom are projected the powers called the “Twenty-four Invisibles.” In
another document of the same MS. (p. 361, Copt.) a power from him is
said to be bound in the planet Saturn.
Footnote 483:
This Εἱμαρμένη or “Destiny” is the sphere immediately above our
firmament. It is evidently so called, because on passing through it
the soul on its way to incarnation receives the Moira or impress of
its own destiny, of which it cannot afterwards rid itself except by
the grace of the mysteries or Valentinian sacraments. Cf. Chap. IX, n.
3, p. 115 _supra_.
Footnote 484:
Ἄρρητος. Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 5, § 1, p. 99, Harvey. _Innominabilis_,
Tertullian, _adv. Valentinianos_, c. 37. So Clem. Alex. _Strom._ Bk V.
c. 10, says that God is ineffable, being incapable of being expressed
even in His own power.
Footnote 485:
Χωρηματα: τόποι.
Footnote 486:
That [_i.e._ the First] mystery knoweth why there emanated all the
places which are in the receptacle of the Ineffable One and also all
which is in them, and why they went forth from the last limb of the
Ineffable One.... These things I will tell you in the emanation of the
universe. _Pist. Soph._ p. 225, Copt.
Footnote 487:
_Ibid._ p. 222, Copt.
Footnote 488:
_Ibid._ p. 127, Copt.
Footnote 489:
See Chap. IX, pp. 121, 122 _supra_.
Footnote 490:
Heb. vi. 19.
Footnote 491:
p. 203, Copt. Why there should be 24, when the dodecad or group of
Aeons in the world above was only 12, it is difficult to say. But
Hippolytus supplies a sort of explanation when he says (_op. cit._ Bk
VI. c. 33, p. 292, Cruice): Ταῦτά ἐστιν ἃ λέγουσιν· ἔτι [δὲ] πρὸς
τούτοις, ἀριθμητικὴν ποιούμενοι τὴν πᾶσαν αὐτῶν διδασκαλίαν, ὡς
προεῖπον [τοὺς] ἐντὸς Πληρώματος Αἰῶνας τριάκοντα πάλιν
ἐπιπροβεβληκέναι αὐτοῖς κατὰ ἀναλογίαν Αἰῶνας ἄλλους, ἵν’ ᾖ τὸ Πλήρωμα
ἐν ἀριθμῷ τελείῳ συνηθροισμένον. Ὡς γὰρ οἱ Πυθαγορικοὶ διεῖλον εἰς
δώδεκα καὶ τριάκοντα καὶ ἑξήκοντα, καὶ λεπτὰ λεπτῶν εἰσὶν ἐκείνοις,
δεδήλωται· οὕτως οὗ τοι τὰ ἐντὸς Πληρώματος ὑποδιαιροῦσιν. “This is
what they say. But besides this, they make their whole teaching
arithmetical, since they say that the thirty Aeons within the Pleroma
again projected by analogy other Aeons, so that thereby the Pleroma
may be gathered together in a perfect number. For the manner in which
the Pythagoreans divide [the cosmos] into 12, 30, and 60 parts, and
each of these into yet more minute ones, has been made plain” [see
_op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 28, p. 279, where Hippolytus tells us how
Pythagoras divided each Sign of the Zodiac into 30 parts “which are
days of the month, these last into 60 λεπτὰ, and so on”]. “In this way
do they [the Valentinians] divide the things within the Pleroma.” Cf.
Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος p. 364, Copt. In another book of the
Philosophumena (Bk IV. c. 7 Περὶ τῆς ἀριθμετικῆς τέχνης) he explains
how the Pythagoreans derived infinity from a single principle by a
succession of odd and even or male and female numbers, in connection
with which he quotes Simon Magus (_op. cit._ p. 132, Cruice). The way
this was applied to names he shows in the chapter Περὶ μαθηματικῶν
(_op. cit._ Βk IV. c. 11, pp. 77 _sqq._, Cruice) which is in fact a
description of what in the Middle Ages was called Arithmomancy, or
divination by numbers.
Footnote 492:
p. 224, Copt. See also p. 241, Copt.—a very curious passage where the
Ineffable One is called “the God of Truth without foot” (cf. Osiris as
a mummy) and is said to live apart from his “members.”
Footnote 493:
In the beginning of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 252, Copt.) it is
said of the Ineffable that “there are many members, but one body.” But
this statement is immediately followed by another that this is only
said “as a pattern (παράδειγμα) and a likeness and a resemblance, but
not in truth of shape” (p. 253, Copt.).
Footnote 494:
What he does say is that the Ineffable One has two χωρήματα or
receptacles and that the second of these is the χώρημα of the First
Mystery. It is, I think, probable that an attempt to describe both
these χωρήματα is made in one of the documents of the Bruce Papyrus.
See pp. 191, 192 _infra_.
Footnote 495:
In addition to the enumeration contained in the so-called
interpretation of the mysterious “Five Words,” there appears in the
2nd part of the _Pistis Sophia_ (pp. 206 _sqq._ Copt.) a long rhapsody
in which it is declared that a certain mystery knows why all the
powers, stars, and heavenly “places” were made. These are here again
set out _seriatim_, and as the order in the main corresponds with that
in the five words translated in the text, it serves as a check upon
this last. The order of the powers in the text was given in the
article in the _Scottish Review_ before referred to, and, although
this was written 20 years ago, I see no occasion to alter it.
Footnote 496:
It is the “last Parastates” who places Jeû and his companion in “the
place of those who belong to the right hand according to the
arrangement (_i.e._ οἰκονομία) of the Assembly of the Light which is
in the Height of the Rulers of the Aeons and in the universes (κοσμοὶ)
and every race which is therein” (p. 193, Copt.). A later revelation
is promised as to these, but in the meantime it is said that Jeû
emanated from the chosen or pure (εἰλικρινής) light of the first of
the Five Trees (_loc. cit._).
Footnote 497:
See nn. 1 and 3, p. 141 _supra_. As has been said, it is difficult not
to see in this “1st Precept” a personification of the Torah or Jewish
Law.
Footnote 498:
See n. 3, p. 146 _supra_.
Footnote 499:
See n. 2, p. 136 _supra_.
Footnote 500:
So Secundus, Valentinus’ follower, taught according to Hippolytus
(_v._ Chap. ΙΧ _supra_) “that there is a right and a left tetrad,
_i.e._ light and darkness.” This may be taken to mean that the
constitution of the light-world was repeated point for point in the
world of darkness. The middle world is of course that where light and
darkness mingle.
Footnote 501:
Jeû is generally called the ἐπίσκοπος or overseer of the Light. He it
is who has placed the Rulers of the Aeons so that they always “behold
the left” (p. 26, Copt.). He is also said to have bound “in the
beginning” the rulers of the Aeons and of Destiny and of the Sphere in
their respective places (p. 34, Copt.), and that each and every of
them will remain in the τάξις or order and walk in the δρόμος or
course in which he placed them. We also hear in the _Pistis Sophia_
proper of two “books of Jeû” “which Enoch wrote when the First Mystery
spoke with him out of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge in
the Paradise of Adam” (p. 246, Copt.). In the first part of the Μέρος
τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, however Jeû is described as “the First Man, the
ἐπίσκοπος of the Light, and the πρεσβευτής or Ambassador of the First
Precept” (p. 322, Copt.); and it is further said in the same book that
“the Book of Jeû (not books) which Enoch wrote in Paradise when I
(Jesus) spoke with him out of the Tree of Life and the Tree of
Knowledge” was placed by His means in “the rock Ararad.” Jesus goes on
to say that He placed “Kalapataurôth the ruler who is over Skemmut in
which is the foot of Jeû, and he surrounds all rulers and destinies—I
placed that ruler to guard the books of Jeû from the Flood and lest
any of the rulers should destroy them out of envy” (p. 354, Copt.).
Footnote 502:
Melchizidek is very seldom mentioned in the _Pistis Sophia_, but when
he is, it is always as the great παραλήμπτωρ or “inheritor” of the
Light (p. 34, Copt.). Jesus describes how he comes among the Rulers of
the Aeons at certain times and takes away their light, which he
purifies (p. 35, Copt.). He is said to have emanated from the light of
the 5th Tree of the Treasure House, as Jeû did from that of the 1st
(p. 193, Copt.). In the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, he is called the great
παραλημπτής or “receiver” of the Light (p. 292, Copt.). In the 2nd
part of the last named document he is called Zorocothora Melchizidek,
an epithet which C. W. King in _The Gnostics and their Remains_
translates “light-gatherer.” It is also said in the same 2nd part that
“he and Jeû are the two great lights,” and that he is the πρεσβευτής
or “Legate” of all the lights which are purified in the Rulers of the
Aeons (p. 365, Copt.). We may perhaps see in him and Jeû the antitypes
of which the Great Light and the First Precept are the paradigms.
Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VII. c. 36, p. 391, Cruice, says that there
was a sect, the followers of one Theodotus, a τραπεζίτης or
money-changer, who said that there was “a greatest power named
Melchizidek who was greater than Christ.” Pseudo-Tertullian repeats
the same story and adds that Melchizidek is “a celestial virtue of
great grace,” who does for heavenly angels and virtues what Christ
does for men, having made himself “their intercessor and advocate.”
See _auct. cit._ (probably Victorinus of Pettau) _Against all
Heresies_, c. XXIV. p. 279, Oehl. He doubtless founded his opinion on
the passage in the Hebrews. The name seems to mean “Holy King” Cf. the
“King of Glory” of the Manichaeans, see Chap. XIII _infra_.
Footnote 503:
p. 35, Copt.
Footnote 504:
He is said to have emanated from the 2nd Tree (p. 193, Copt.) and is
nowhere distinctly named. But one may perhaps guess from the order in
which he occurs in the 2nd part of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος that his
name was Zarazaz, evidently a cryptogram like those mentioned in n. 1,
p. 139 _supra_. It is also said that the Rulers call him “Maskelli
after the name of a strong (_i.e._ male) ruler of their own place (p.
370, Copt.).” This name of Maskelli, sometimes written
Maskelli-maskellô, is frequently met with in the Magic Papyri. Cf.
Wessely, _Ephesia Grammata_, p. 28.
Footnote 505:
They are said to have emanated from the 3rd and 4th Tree respectively
(p. 193, Copt.).
Footnote 506:
p. 193, Copt. He is evidently called _the Good_ because there is a
wicked Sabaoth sometimes called Sabaoth Adamas, and the Great because
there is a Little Sabaoth the Good who seems to act as his messenger.
It is this last who takes the power from the Great Sabaoth the Good
which afterwards becomes the body of Jesus and “casts it into matter
and Barbelo” (p. 127, Copt.). He seems to be set over or in some way
identified with what is called the Gate of Life (p. 215, Copt.) both
in the _Pistis Sophia_ and the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 292, Copt.).
Footnote 507:
p. 12, Copt., where he is oddly enough called the Little Iao the Good,
I think by a clerical error. Later he is said to be “the great leader
of the middle whom the Rulers call the Great Iao after the name of a
great ruler in their own place” (p. 194, Copt.). He is described in
the same way in the second part of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 371,
Copt.).
Footnote 508:
See last note.
Footnote 509:
p. 12, Copt. This “power” is evidently the better part of man’s soul
like the Logoi who dwell therein in the passage quoted above from
Valentinus, see Chap. IX, p. 112 _supra_.
Footnote 510:
p. 194, Copt.
Footnote 511:
See n. 3, p. 137 _supra_.
Footnote 512:
So the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 321, Copt.).
Footnote 513:
The likeness of Mary the Mother and Mary Magdalene to the seven
Virgins appears in the translation of Amélineau (_Pistis Sophia_,
Paris, 1895, p. 60). Schwartze (p. 75, Lat.) puts it rather
differently. See also Schmidt, _K.-G.S._ bd. 1, p. 75. The “receivers”
of the Virgin of Light are mentioned on p. 292, Copt.
Footnote 514:
p. 184, Copt.
Footnote 515:
pp. 340, 341, Copt. As ⲒⲞϨ (ioh) is Coptic for the Moon, it is just
possible that there may be a kind of pun here on this word and the
name Iao. Osiris, whose name was often equated by the Alexandrian Jews
with their own divine name Jaho or Jah, as in the Manethonian story of
Osarsiph = Joseph, was also considered a Moon-god. Cf. the “Hymn of
the Mysteries” given in Chap. VIII, where he is called “the holy
horned moon of heaven.”
Footnote 516:
See note 1, p. 138 _supra_. The Bruce Papyrus (Amélineau, _Notice sur
le Papyrus Gnostique Bruce_, Paris, 1882, p. 220) speaks of the
“Thirteenth Aeon, where are the Great Unseen God and the Great Virgin
of the Spirit (cf. the παρθενική πνεῦμα of Irenaeus) and the
twenty-four emanations of the unseen God.”
Footnote 517:
See n. 2, p. 142 _supra_.
Footnote 518:
See Chapter IX, p. 104 _supra_.
Footnote 519:
p. 116, Copt.
Footnote 520:
I suppose it is in view of this maternal aspect of her nature that she
is alluded to in the latter part of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος as
βαρβηλω βδελλη “Barbelo who gives suck”? Her place, according to the
Bruce Papyrus (Amélineau, p. 218), is said to be in the Twelfth Aeon.
Footnote 521:
There have been many attempts to make this name mean something else
than merely “Faith-Wisdom.” Dulaurier and Renan both tried to read it
“πιστὴ Σοφία” “the faithful Wisdom” or “La fidèle Sagesse.” If we had
more documents of the style of Simon’s _Apophasis_, we should probably
find that this apposition of two or more nouns in a name was not
infrequent, and the case of Ptah-Sokar-Osiris will occur to every
Egyptologist. The fact that the name includes the first and last
female member of the Dodecad of Valentinus (see p. 101 _supra_) is
really its most plausible explanation.
Footnote 522:
This Adamas seems to be an essentially evil power, who wages useless
war against the Light on the entry of Jesus into his realm (p. 25,
Copt.). His seat is plainly the Twelve Aeons or Zodiac (p. 157,
Copt.), and it is said in the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος that his “kingdom”
is in the τοποι κεφαλης αἰωνων or Places of the head of the Aeons and
is opposite the place of the Virgin of Light (p. 336, Copt.). In the
second part of the same document (_i.e._ the μ. τ. σ.) it is said that
the rulers of Adamas rebelled, persisting in the act of copulation
(συνουσία) and begetting “Rulers and Archangels and Angels and
Ministers (λειτουργοί) and Decans” (Δεκανοί), and that thereupon Jeû
went forth from the Place of the Right and “bound them in Heimarmene
and the Sphere.” We further learn that half the Aeons headed by
Jabraoth, who is also once mentioned in the _Pistis Sophia_ proper (p.
128, Copt., and again in the Bruce Papyrus, Amélineau, p. 239), were
consequently transferred to another place, while Adamas, now for the
first time called Sabaoth Adamas, with the unrepentant rulers are
confined in the Sphere to the number of 1800, over whom 360 other
rulers bear sway, over whom again are set the five planets Saturn,
Mars, Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter (pp. 360, 361, Copt.). All this
seems to me to be later than the _Pistis Sophia_ proper, to have been
written at a time when belief in astrology was more rife than in
Hadrian’s reign, and to owe something to Manichaean influence. The
original Adamas, the persecutor of Pistis Sophia herself, seems
identifiable with the Diabolos or Cosmocrator of Valentinus, in which
case we may perhaps see in the “Great Propator” a merely stupid and
ignorant power like the Jaldabaoth of the Ophites and their
successors. See p. 163 _infra_.
Footnote 523:
p. 145, Copt. So Irenaeus in his account of the Valentinian doctrines,
Bk I. c. 1, p. 12 _sqq._ I suppose there is an allusion to this in the
remark of Jesus to Mary that a year is as a day (p. 243, Copt.). But
all the astrology of the time seems to have divided the astronomical
day not into 24, but into 12 hours. It was the same with the
Manichaeans. See Chavannes and Pelliot, “Un Traité manichéen retrouvé
en Chine,” _Journal Asiatique_, série X, t. XVIII. (Nov.-Dec. 1911),
p. 540, n. 4.
Footnote 524:
But curiously enough, not the “souls” of fish. So in the Middle Ages,
the Manichaeans of Languedoc did not allow their “Perfects” to partake
of animal food nor even of eggs, but allowed them fish, because they
said these creatures were not begotten by copulation. See Schmidt,
_Hist. des Cathares_, Paris, 1843. Is this one of the reasons why
Jesus is called Ἰχθύς?
Footnote 525:
This idea of man being made from the tears of the eyes of the heavenly
powers is an old one in Egypt. So Maspero explains the well-known sign
of the _utchat_ or Eye of Horus as that “qui exprime la matière, le
corps du soleil, d’où tous les êtres découlent sous forme de pleurs,”
“Les Hypogées Royaux de Thébes,” _Ét. Égyptol._ II. p. 130. Moret, “Le
verbe créateur et révélateur en Égypte,” _R. H. R._ Mai-Juin, 1909, p.
386, gives many instances from hymns and other ritual documents. It
was known to Proclus who transfers it after his manner to Orpheus and
makes it into hexameters:
Thy tears are the much-enduring race of men,
By thy laugh thou hast raised up the sacred race of gods.
See Abel’s _Orphica_, fr. 236.
Footnote 526:
See n. 1, p. 148 _supra_.
Footnote 527:
This is, perhaps, to be gathered from the _Pistis Sophia_, p. 36,
Copt. Cf. Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, pp. 337-338. In another part of the
last-named document, the Moon-ship is described as steered by a male
and female dragon (the caduceus of Hermes?) who snatch away the light
of the Rulers (p. 360, Copt.).
Footnote 528:
This seems to be the passage referred to later by Origen. See n. 2, p.
159 _infra_.
Footnote 529:
The usual epithet or appellation of Osiris _Neb-er-tcher_ = Lord of
Totality or the Universe. Cf. Budge, _Book of the Dead_, _passim_.
Footnote 530:
So in the _Ascensio Isaiae_, of which Mr Charles says that “we cannot
be sure that it existed earlier than the latter half of the 2nd
century of our Era,” it is said (Chap. IX, v. 15) “And thus His
descent, as you will see, will be hidden even from the heavens, so
that it will not be known who He is.” Charles, _The Ascension of
Isaiah_, p. 62. Cf. _ibid._ pp. 67, 70, 73 and 79.
Footnote 531:
pp. 39, 40, Copt. The reference is apparently to the Book of Enoch, c.
LXXX. (see Charles, _Book of Enoch_, pp. 212, 213, and the _Epistle of
Barnabas_, N.T. extra can., c. IV. p. 9, Hilgenfeld). In the Latin
version of the last-quoted book, it is assigned to Daniel, which shows
perhaps the connection of Enoch with all this quasi-prophetic or
apocalyptic literature.
Footnote 532:
According to the Valentinian system, his name was Θελητὸς or “the
Beloved.” See Chap. IX, p. 101 _supra_.
Footnote 533:
See Chap. VIII _supra_. Here he occupies a far inferior position to
that assigned him by the Ophites. In the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος he sinks
lower still and becomes merely one of the torturers in hell (p. 382,
Copt., κ.τ.λ.). Thus, as is usual in matters of religion, the gods of
one age become the fiends of the next. In the Bruce Papyrus
(Amélineau, p. 212) he appears as one of the chiefs of the Third Aeon.
It is curious, however, to observe how familiar the name must have
been to what Origen calls “a certain secret theology,” so that it was
necessary to give him _some_ place in every system of Gnosticism. His
bipartite appearance may be taken from Ezekiel viii. 2.
Footnote 534:
Probably the latter. See what is said about the Outer Darkness in the
Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, p. 319, Copt. where it is described as “a great
dragon whose tail is in his mouth who is without the whole κόσμος and
surrounds it.”
Footnote 535:
p. 83, Copt. So in the Manichaean legend, the First Man, on being
taken captive by Satan, prays seven times to the Light and is
delivered from the Darkness in which he is imprisoned. See Chap. XIII
_infra_.
Footnote 536:
This demon in the shape of a flying arrow seems to be well known in
Rabbinic lore. Mr Whinfield in _J.R.A.S._, April, 1910, pp. 485, 486,
describes him as having a head like a calf, with one horn rising out
of his forehead like a cruse or pitcher, while to look upon him is
certain death to man or beast. His authority seems to be Rapaport’s
_Tales from the Midrash_.
Footnote 537:
The basilisk with seven heads seems to be Death. See Gaster, “The
Apocalypse of Abraham,” _T.S.B.A._ vol. IX. pt 1, p. 222, where this
is said to be the “true shape” of death. Cf. Kohler, “Pre-Talmudic
Haggadah,” _J.Q.R._, 1895, p. 590. Death, as we have seen in Chap. IX,
p. 107, was in the ideas of Valentinus the creature of the Demiurge.
For the dragon, see Whinfield, _ubi cit._
Footnote 538:
These “three times” are not years. As the _Pistis Sophia_ opens with
the announcement that Jesus spent 12 years on earth after the
Resurrection, we may suppose that He was then—if the author accepted
the traditional view that He suffered at 33—exactly 45 years old, and
the “time” would then be a period of 15 years, as was probably the
indiction. The descent of the “two vestures” upon Jesus is said (p. 4,
Copt.) to have taken place “on the 15th day of the month Tybi” which
is the day Clement of Alexandria (_Strom._ Bk I. c. 21) gives for the
birth of Jesus. He says the followers of Basilides gave the same day
as that of His baptism.
Footnote 539:
Epiphanius, _Haer._ XXVI. t. II. pt 1, p. 181, Oehler.
Footnote 540:
This doctrine of ἑρμηνεία occurs all through the book. The author is
trying to make out that well-known passages of both the Old and New
Testaments were in fact prophetic utterances showing forth in advance
the marvels he narrates. While the Psalms of David quoted by him are
Canonical, the Odes of Solomon are the Apocrypha known under that name
and quoted by Lactantius (_Div. Inst._ Bk IV. c. 12). For some time
the _Pistis Sophia_ was the only authority for their contents, but in
1909 Dr Rendel Harris found nearly the whole collection in a Syriac
MS. of the 16th century. A translation has since been published in
_Cambridge Texts and Studies_, vol. VIII. No. 3, Cambridge, 1912, by
the Bishop of Ossory, who shows, as it seems conclusively, that they
were the hymns sung by the newly-baptized in the Primitive Church.
Footnote 541:
Astrological doctrine first becomes prominent in Gnostic teaching in
the _Excerpta Theodoti_ which we owe to Clement of Alexandria. We may
therefore put their date about the year 200. This would be after the
time of Valentinus himself, but agrees well with what M. Cumont
(_Astrology and Religion_, pp. 96 _sqq._) says as to the great vogue
which astrology attained in Rome under the Severi. Its intrusion into
the Valentinian doctrines is much more marked in the Μέρος τευχῶν
Σωτῆρος than in the _Pistis Sophia_, and more in the Bruce Papyrus
than in either.
Footnote 542:
See Chap. VIII, pp. 73, 74 _supra_.
Footnote 543:
Origen, _cont. Cels._ Bk VI. c. 34.
Footnote 544:
Hippolytus (Chap. IX, p. 92), speaks of the Jesus of Valentinus as the
Joint Fruit of the Pleroma simply. Irenaeus (Bk I. c. 1, p. 23,
Harvey) goes into more detail: Καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐποιΐας ταύτης βουλῇ μιᾷ
καὶ γνώμῃ τὸ πᾶν Πλήρωμα τῶν Αἰώνων, συνευδοκοῦντος τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ
τοῦ Πνεύματος, τοῦ δὲ Πατρὸς αὐτῶν συνεπισφραγιζομένου, ἕνα ἕκαστον
τῶν Αἰώνων, ὅπερ εἶχεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ κάλλιστον καὶ ἀνθηρότατον
συνενεγκαμένους καὶ ἐρανισαμένους, καὶ ταῦτα ἁρμοδίως πλέξαντας, καὶ
ἐμμελῶς ἑνώσαντας, προβαλέσθαι προβλήματα εἰς τιμὴν καὶ δόξαν τοῦ
Βυθοῦ, τελειότατον κάλλος τε καὶ ἄστρον τοῦ Πληρώματος, τέλειον καρπὸν
τὸν Ἰησοῦν ὃν καὶ Σωτῆρα προσαγορευθῆναι, καὶ Χριστὸν, καὶ Λόγον
πατρωνομικῶς καὶ κατὰ [καὶ τὰ] Πάντα, διὰ τὸ ἀπὸ πάντων εἶναι. “Αnd
because of this benefit, with one will and opinion, the whole Pleroma
of the Aeons, with the consent of Christos and the Spirit, and their
Father having set his seal upon the motion, brought together and
combined what each of them had in him which was most beautiful and
brightest, and wreathing these fittingly together and properly uniting
them, they projected a projection to the honour and glory of Bythos,
the most perfect beauty and star of the Pleroma, the perfect Fruit
Jesus, who is also called Saviour and Christ, and after his Father
Logos, and Pan, because He is from all.” Compare with these the words
of Colossians ii. 9: ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος
σωματικῶς. “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead
bodily.”
Footnote 545:
That the Valentinians considered the Dodecad (and _a fortiori_ the
Decad) as having a collective entity, and as it were a corporate
existence, seems plain from what Hippolytus says in narrating the
opinions of Marcus: ταῦτα γὰρ δώδεκα ζώδια φανερώτατα τὴν τοῦ Ἀνθρώπου
καὶ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας θυγατέρα δωδεκάδα ἀποσκιάζειν λέγουσι. “For they say
that these 12 signs of the Zodiac most clearly shadow forth the
Dodecad who is the daughter of Anthropos and Ecclesia” (Hipp. _op.
cit._ Bk VI. c. 54, p. 329, Cruice). And again (_loc. cit._ p. 331,
Cruice): ἔτι μὴν καὶ τὴν γῆν εἰς δώδεκα κλίματα διῃρῆσθαι φάσκοντες,
καὶ καθ’ ἒν ἕκαστον κλίμα, ἀνὰ μίαν δύναμιν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανῶν κατὰ
κάθετον ὑποδεχομένην, καὶ ὁμοούσια τίκτουσαν τέκνα τῇ καταπεμπούσῃ
κατὰ τὴν ἀπόρροιαν δυνάμει, τύπον εἶναι τῆς ἄνω δωδεκάδος. “These are
also they who assert that the earth is divided into twelve climates,
and receives in each climate one special power from the heavens and
produces children resembling the power thus sent down by emanation,
being thus a type of the Dodecad above.” The doctrine of
correspondences or, as it was called in the Middle Ages, of
“signatures” is here most clearly stated. In all this the Valentinian
teaching was doubtless under the influence of the ancient Egyptian
ideas as to the _paut neteru_ or “company of the gods,” as to which
see Maspero’s essay _Sur L’Ennéade_ quoted above.
Footnote 546:
It is said (p. 9, Copt.) that it is by him that the universe was
created and that it is he who causes the sun to rise.
Footnote 547:
As has before been said, this is attempted in one of the documents of
the Bruce Papyrus. See pp. 191, 192 _infra_. In the present state of
the text this attempt is only difficultly intelligible, and is
doubtless both later in date than and the work of an author inferior
to that of the _Pistis Sophia_.
Footnote 548:
p. 16, Copt. Yet the First Mystery is not the creator of Matter which
is evil, because Matter does not really exist. See Bruce Papyrus
(Amélineau, p. 126) and n. 2, p. 190 _infra_.
Footnote 549:
As mentioned in the _Scottish Review_ article referred to in n. 1, p.
135 _supra_, there is no passage but one in the _Pistis Sophia_ which
affords any colour for supposing that the author was acquainted with
St John’s Gospel. All the quotations set forth by Harnack in his
treatise _Über das gnostische Buch Pistis-Sophia_, Leipzig, 1891, p.
27, on which he relies to prove the converse of this proposition, turn
out on analysis to appear also in one or other of the Synoptics, from
which the author may well have taken them. The single exception is
this (_Pistis Sophia_, p. 11, Copt.), “Wherefore I said unto you from
the beginning, Ye are not from the Cosmos; I likewise am not from it”;
John xvii. 14: “(O Father) I have given them thy word; and the world
hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not
of the world.” The parallel does not seem so close as to make it
certain that one document is copying from the other. Both may very
possibly be taken from some collection of Logia now lost, but at one
time current in Alexandrian circles; or from the _Gospel of the
Egyptians_, from which the _Pistis Sophia_ afterwards quotes.
Footnote 550:
See Chap. IX, p. 107 _supra_.
Footnote 551:
See last note. The _Authades_ or Proud God of the _Pistis Sophia_
seems to have all the characteristics with which Valentinus endows his
Demiurge.
Footnote 552:
So Pistis Sophia sings in her second hymn of praise after her
deliverance from Chaos (p. 160, Copt.) “I am become pure light,” which
she certainly was not before that event. Jesus also promises her later
(p. 168, Copt.) that when the three times are fulfilled and the
_Authades_ is again wroth with her and tries to stir up Jaldabaoth and
Adamas against her “I will take away their powers from them and give
them to thee.” That this promise was supposed to be fulfilled seems
evident from the low positions which Jaldabaoth and Adamas occupy in
the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, while Pistis Sophia is said to furnish the
“power” for the planet Venus.
Footnote 553:
See Chap. IX, p. 108 and n. 1 _supra_.
Footnote 554:
All the revelations in the _Pistis Sophia_ are in fact made in
anticipation of the time “when the universe shall be caught up,” and
the disciples be set to reign with Jesus in the Last Parastates. Cf.
especially pp. 193-206 Copt.
Footnote 555:
The idea may not have been peculiar to Valentinus and his followers.
So in the _Ascensio Isaiae_ (x. 8-13) the “Most High the Father of my
Lord” says to “my Lord Christ who will be called Jesus”: “And none of
the angels of that world shall know that thou art Lord with Me of the
seven heavens and of their angels. And they shall not know that Thou
art with Me till with a loud voice I have called to the heavens, and
their angels, and their lights, even unto the sixth heaven, in order
that you may judge and destroy the princes and angels and gods of that
world, and the world that is dominated by them.” Charles, _Ascension
of Isaiah_, pp. 70-71.
Footnote 556:
p. 194, Copt.
Footnote 557:
p. 230, Copt.
Footnote 558:
On the belief in the Millennium in the primitive Church, see
Döllinger, _First Age of Christianity and the Church_, Eng. ed. 1906,
pp. 119, 123 and 268 and Ffoulkes, _s.v._ Chiliasts, in _Dict.
Christian Biog._
Footnote 559:
p. 230, Copt. Cf. Luke xxii. 29, 30.
Footnote 560:
p. 231, Copt. “disciples” not apostles. So the Manichaeans made Manes
to be attended by twelve disciples. See Chap. XIII _infra_.
Footnote 561:
So Jesus says (p. 230, Copt.) of “the man who receives and
accomplishes the Mystery of the Ineffable One”; “he is a man in the
Cosmos, but he will reign with me in my kingdom; he is a man in the
Cosmos, but he is a king in the light; he is a man in the Cosmos, but
he is not of the Cosmos, and verily I say unto you, that man is I, and
I am that man.”
Footnote 562:
p. 246, Copt.
Footnote 563:
See last note and n. 5, p. 147 _supra_.
Footnote 564:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 302 and note.
Footnote 565:
pp. 236, 237, Copt.
Footnote 566:
_Loc. cit._ Or they may cover a kind of allegory, as we might say that
Agape or Love makes Faith, Hope, and Charity. But I believe it to be
more likely that the “12 mysteries” are letters in a word. So in the
Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος it is said of the “Dragon of the Outer Darkness,”
which is in fact the worst of all the hells described in that book:
“And the Dragon of the Outer Darkness hath twelve true (αὐθέντη) names
which are in his gates, a name according to each gate of the
torture-chambers. And these names differ one from the other, but they
belong to each of the twelve, so that he who saith one name, saith all
the names. And these I will tell you in the Emanation of the
Universe”—(p. 323, Copt.). If this be thought too trivial an
explanation, Irenaeus tells us that the 18 Aeons remaining after
deducting the Decad or Dodecad (as the case may be) from the rest of
the Pleroma were, according to the Valentinians, signified by the two
first letters of the name of Jesus: ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τῶν προηγουμένων τοῦ
ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ δύο γραμμάτων, τοῦ τε ἰῶτα καὶ τοῦ ἦτα, τοὺς δεκαοκτὼ
Αἰῶνας εὐσήμως μηνύεσθαι, Irenaeus, Βk I. c. 1, § 5, p. 26, Harvey.
Equally absurd according to modern ideas are the words of the _Epistle
of Barnabas_ (c. X., pp. 23, 24, Hilgenfeld), where after quoting a
verse in Genesis about Abraham circumcising 318 of his slaves (cf.
Gen. xiv. 14), the author says “What then is the knowledge (γνῶσις)
given therein? Learn that the 18 were first, and then after a pause,
he says 300. (In) the 18, I = 10, H = 8, thou hast Jesus (Ἰησοῦν). And
because the Cross was meant to have grace in the T, he says also 300.
He expresses therefore Jesus by two letters and the Cross by one. He
knows who has placed in us the ungrafted gift of teaching. None has
learned from me a more genuine word. But I know that ye are worthy.”
Footnote 567:
“The True Word” or the Word of the Place of Truth. The latter
expression is constantly used in other parts of the book, and seems to
refer to the χώρημα or “receptacle,” that is the heaven, of the Aeon
Ἀλήθεια, that is the Decad. Cf. especially the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος
(pp. 377, 378, Copt.), where it is said that certain baptisms and a
“spiritual chrism” will lead the souls of the disciples “into the
Places of Truth and Goodness, to the Place of the Holy of all Holies,
to the Place in which there is neither female, nor male, nor shape in
that Place, but there is Light, everlasting, ineffable.”
Footnote 568:
These ἀποτάγματα are set out in detail in the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος
(pp. 255 _sqq._ Copt.), where the disciples are ordered to “preach to
the whole world ... renounce (ἀποτασσετε) the whole world and all the
matter which is therein, and all its cares and all its sins, and in a
word all its conversation (ὁμιλιαι) which is therein, that ye may be
worthy of the mysteries of the Light, that ye may be preserved from
all the punishments which are in the judgments” and so on. It should
be noted that these are only required of the psychics or animal men.
Footnote 569:
No doubt in the Greek original the actual seal was here figured. For
examples, see the Bruce Papyrus, _passim_. The idea is typically
Egyptian. As M. Maspero says in his essay on “La Table d’Offrandes,”
_R.H.R._ t. xxxv. No. 3 (1897), p. 325: no spell was in the view of
the ancient Egyptians efficacious unless accompanied by a talisman or
amulet which acted as a material support to it, as the body to the
soul.
Footnote 570:
p. 238, Copt.
Footnote 571:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 296, n. 1, for references.
Footnote 572:
1 Cor. xv. 29. The practice of “baptizing for the dead,” as the A. V.
has it, evidently continued into Tertullian’s time. See Tertull. _de
Resurrectione Carnis_, c. XLVIII. p. 530, Oehler.
Footnote 573:
Döllinger, _First Age_, p. 327.
Footnote 574:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 307. The Emperor Constantine, who was baptized on
his deathbed, was a case in point. The same story was told later about
the Cathars or Manichaeans of Languedoc. The motive seems in all these
cases to have been the same: as baptism washed away all sin, it was as
well to delay it until the recipient could sin no more.
Footnote 575:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 295 and note, for references.
Footnote 576:
p. 236, Copt.
Footnote 577:
See n. 2, p. 166 _supra_.
Footnote 578:
Döllinger, _First Age_, pp. 234, 235.
Footnote 579:
_Ibid._ p. 235. Rom. vi. 4; Gal. iii. 27, 29, are quoted in support.
Footnote 580:
_Ibid._ p. 235. Rom. vii. 22; 1 Cor. vi. 14; Eph. iii. 16 and v. 30
are quoted in support.
Footnote 581:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 342.
Footnote 582:
p. 228, Copt.
Footnote 583:
pp. 230, 231, Copt.
Footnote 584:
The _Pistis Sophia_ proper comes to an end twenty pages later.
Footnote 585:
Döllinger, _First Age_, p. 239. 1 Cor. x. 16 _sqq._; Eph. v. 30,
quoted in support.
Footnote 586:
Justin Martyr was probably born 114, and martyred 165 A.D. For the
passage quoted in text, see his _First Apology_, c. LXVI., where he
mentions among other things that the devils set on the worshippers of
Mithras to imitate the Christian Eucharist by celebrating a ceremony
with bread and a cup of water.
Footnote 587:
Hatch, _op. cit._ p. 308. This visible change of the contents of the
cup of water to the semblance of blood is described in the Μέρος
τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 377, Copt.), and with more detail in the Bruce
Papyrus. Cf. p. 183 _infra_.
Footnote 588:
Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος, p. 354, Copt.
Footnote 589:
Whether the author of the _Pistis Sophia_ really intended to describe
them may be doubted; but it is to be noted that the sacraments which
Jesus is represented as celebrating in the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος can
hardly be they, although Jesus calls them in one place (p. 374,
Copt.), “the mysteries of the light which remit sins, which themselves
are appellations and names of light.” These are administered to the
twelve disciples without distinction, and it is evident that the
author of these books is quite unacquainted with any division into
pneumatic and psychic, and knows nothing of the higher mysteries
called in the _Pistis Sophia_ proper “the mysteries of the Ineffable
One” and “the mysteries of the First Mystery.” We should get over many
difficulties if we supposed the two later books to be Marcosian in
origin, but in any event they are later than the _Pistis Sophia_.
Footnote 590:
p. 246, Copt. So in the Manichaean text described in Chapter XIII,
Jesus is Himself called “the Tree of Knowledge.”
Footnote 591:
So Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 1, § 11, pp. 58, 54, Harvey: Ἐπαιδεύθησαν γὰρ τὰ
ψυχικὰ οἱ ψυχικοὶ ἄνθρωποι, οἱ δι’ ἔργων καὶ πίστεως ψιλῆς
βεβαιούμενοι, καὶ μὴ τὴν τελείαν γνῶσιν ἔχοντες· εἶναι δὲ τούτους ἀπὸ
τῆς Ἐκκλησίας ἡμᾶς λέγουσι· διὸ καὶ ἡμῖν μὲν ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι τὴν
ἀγαθὴν πρᾶξιν ἀποφαίνονται· ἄλλως γὰρ ἀδύνατον σωθῆναι. Αὐτοὺς δὲ μὴ
διὰ πράξεως, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ φύσει πνευματικοὺς εἶναι, πάντῃ τε καὶ πάντως
σωθήσεσθαι δογματίζουσιν. “For the psychic (animal) men are taught
psychic things, they being made safe by works and by mere faith, and
not having perfect knowledge. And they say that we of the Church are
these people. Wherefore they declare that good deeds are necessary for
us: for otherwise we could not be saved. But they decree that they
themselves are entirely and in every thing saved, not by works, but
because they are pneumatic (spiritual) by nature.”
Footnote 592:
p. 249, Copt.
Footnote 593:
p. 250, Copt. It is to be observed that these “cleansing mysteries”
will only admit their recipients to the light of the Kingdom of
Jesus—not to that of the First Mystery or of the Ineffable One.
Footnote 594:
As did perhaps the Manichaeans afterwards. See _J.R.A.S._ for January,
1913, and Chap. XIII _infra_.
Footnote 595:
So Charles Kingsley in _Hypatia_. Gibbon, _Decline and Fall_, vol. IV.
c. 60, n. 15, quotes a statement of Rufinus that there were nearly as
many monks living in the deserts as citizens in the towns.
Footnote 596:
Mallet, _Le Culte de Neit à Saïs_, p. 200, points out that the God Nu
described in the 18th Chapter of the _Book of the Dead_ is “the
infinite abyss, the Βυθός, the πατὴρ ἄγνωστος of the Gnostics.” So
Maspero in _Rev. Critique_, 30 Sept. 1909, p. 13, who declares that
the author of the _Pistis Sophia_ was influenced directly or
indirectly by Osirian beliefs.
Footnote 597:
Moret, _Le verbe créateur et révélateur_, p. 286, for references.
Footnote 598:
Maspero, _Ét. Égyptol._ t. II. p. 187: “L’ogdoade est une conception
hermopolitaine qui s’est répandue plus tard sur toute l’Égypte à côté
de l’ennéade d’Heliopolis. Les théologiens d’Hermopolis avaient adopté
le concept de la neuvaine, seulement ils avaient amoindri les huit
dieux qui formaient le corps du dieu principal. Ils les avaient
reduits à n’être plus que des êtres presque abstraits nommés d’après
la fonction qu’on leur assignait, en agissant en masse sur l’ordre et
d’après l’impulsion du dieu chef. Leur ennéade se composait donc d’un
dieu tout-puissant et d’une ogdoade.”
Footnote 599:
“Son origine (l’ogdoade hermopolitaine subordonné à un corps monade)
est fort ancienne: on trouve quelques-unes des divinités qui la
composent mentionnées déjà dans les textes des Pyramides.” Maspero,
_op. cit._ t. II. p. 383. As he says later the actual number of gods
in the Ennead or Ogdoad was a matter of indifference to the ancient
Egyptian: “les dieux comptaient toujours pour neuf, quand même ils
étaient treize ou quinze,” _ibid._ p. 387. Cf. Amélineau, _Gnost. Ég._
pp. 294, 295.
Footnote 600:
See n. 5, p. 175 _supra_, and Maspero, “Hypogées Royaux,” _Ét.
Égyptol._ II. p. 130, n. 2.
Footnote 601:
See n. 2, p. 153 _supra_.
Footnote 602:
Maspero, “Hypogées Royaux,” t. II. p. 121.
Footnote 603:
Maspero, _Rev. Crit._ 30 Sept. 1909, p. 13.
Footnote 604:
Maspero, “Hypogées Royaux,” t. II. p. 118. Cf. _Pistis Sophia_, p. 84,
Copt. and elsewhere.
Footnote 605:
Maspero, “La Table d’Offrandes,” _R.H.R._ t. XXXV. (1897) p. 325. As
has been said, in the _Ascensio Isaiae_, anyone passing from one
heaven to another has to give a password, but not to exhibit a seal.
Footnote 606:
Amélineau, _Gnost. Ég._ p. 196; Schmidt, _Koptisch-Gnostische
Schriften_, Bd I. p. xiii.
Footnote 607:
It is so used in the _Excerpta Theodoti_, and in the Papyrus Bruce.
See p. 190, _infra_.
Footnote 608:
Jean Reville, _Le Quatrième Évangile_, Paris, 1901, p. 321. Mgr
Duchesne, _Early Christian Church_, pp. 102, 192, says in effect that
St John’s Gospel appeared after the Apostle’s death and was not
accepted without opposition. He thinks Tatian and Irenaeus the first
writers who quoted from it with acknowledgement of its authorship. If
we put the date of Tatian’s birth at 120 (see _Dict. Christian Biog._
_s.h.n._) and allow a sufficient period for the initiation into
heathen mysteries which he mentions, for his conversion and for his
becoming a teacher, we do not get a much earlier date than 170 for his
acceptance of the Fourth Gospel. Irenaeus was, of course, later in
date than Tatian.
Footnote 609:
Tertullian, _Adv. Valentinianos_, c. 2.
Footnote 610:
Amélineau, _Gnost. Ég._ p. 180.
Footnote 611:
Tertullian, _de Carne Christi_, c. 20.
Footnote 612:
_E.g._ p. 47, Copt. Cf. also _ibid._ pp. 147, 170, 176.
Footnote 613:
Tertullian, _adv. Val._ c. v.
Footnote 614:
_Op. cit._ c. 9.
Footnote 615:
_Op. cit._ c. 18.
Footnote 616:
_Op. cit._ c. 20.
Footnote 617:
_Op. cit._ c. 25.
Footnote 618:
Tertullian, _de Carne Christi_, c. 9. Irenaeus, Bk II. c. 7, § 1, p.
270, Harvey, seems to have known both of Barbelo and of the Virgin of
Light, since he speaks of _corpora sursum ... spiritalia et lucida_,
“spiritual and translucent bodies on high” casting a shadow below _in
quam Matrem suam descendisse dicunt_ “into which they allege their
Mother descended.”
Footnote 619:
ⲞⲨ ⲘⲈⲢⲞⲤ ⲎⲦⲈ Ⲏ ⲦⲈⲨⲬⲞⲤ Ⲙ ⲎⲤⲰⲦⲎⲢ, or (in Greek) Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος.
Footnote 620:
“This I say to you in paradigm, and likeness and similitude, but not
in truth of shape, nor have I revealed the word in truth,” p. 253,
Copt. So in the next page (p. 254, Copt.), Jesus says of the perfect
initiate that “He also has found the words of the Mysteries, those
which I have written to you according to similitude—the same are the
members of the Ineffable One.” From His mention of “writing,” one
would imagine that the reference here is to documents such as the
Bruce Papyrus which gives the pictures of “seals” together with
cryptographically written words.
Footnote 621:
p. 357, Copt. This opening sentence could not have been written by one
of the Valentinians of Hadrian’s time, who, as has been said above,
“did not choose to call Jesus, Lord,” Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 1, I. p. 12,
Harvey.
Footnote 622:
In the address of Jesus beginning “O my Father, Father of every
Fatherhood, boundless light” with which this part of the Μ. τ. σ.
opens, we can, with a little good will, identify nearly every word of
the “galimatias” which at first sight seems mere gibberish. Thus, the
whole invocation reads: αεηιουω, ϊαω, αωϊ, οϊαψινωθερ, θερ[ι]νοψ,
νωψιθερ, ζαγουρη, παγουρη, νεθμομαωθ, νεψιομαωθ, μαραχαχθα,
θωβαρραβαυ, θαρναχαχαν, ζοροκοθορα Ιεου Σαβαωθ. The seven vowels to
which many mystical interpretations have been assigned, and which have
even been taken for a primitive system of musical notation (C. E.
Ruelle, “Le Chant des Sept Voyelles Grecques,” _Rev. des Ét.
Grecques_, Paris, 1889, t. II. p. 43, and pp. 393-395), probably
express the sound to Greek ears of the Jewish pronunciation of Yahweh
or Jehovah. The word Iao we have before met with many times both as a
name of Dionysos and otherwise, and is here written anagrammatically
from the difficulty which the Greeks found in dealing with Semitic
languages written the reverse way to their own. The word ψινωθερ which
follows and is also written as an anagram is evidently an attempt to
transcribe in Greek letters the Egyptian words _P_, _Shai_, _neter_
(_P_ = Def. article, _Shai_ = the Egyptian God of Fate whose name
Revillout, _Rev. Égyptol._ Paris, 1892, pp. 29-38, thinks means “The
Highest,” and _neter_ or _nuter_ the determinative for “god”), the
whole reading “Most High God.” The words ζαγουρη παγουρη (better,
πατουρη) are from the Hebrew roots סגר פטר and seem to be the “he that
openeth and no man shutteth; and shutteth and no man openeth” of Rev.
iii. 7. Νεθμομαωθ, which is often found in the Magic Papyri, is
reminiscent of the Egyptian _neb maat_ “Lord of Truth,” the following
νεψιομαωθ being probably a variant by a scribe who was uncertain of
the orthography. Μαραχαχθα I can make nothing of, although as the
phrase νεφθομαωθ μαραχαχθα appears in the Magic Papyrus of Leyden
generally called W (Leemans, _Papyri Graeci_, etc. t. II. p. 154) in a
spell there said to be written by “Thphe the Hierogrammateus” for
“Ochus the king,” it is evidently intended for Egyptian. In the same
spell appear the words θαρνμαχαχ ζοροκοθορα and θωβαρραβαυ which are
evidently the same as those in the Μ. τ. σ., and of which I will only
say that, while Mr King supposes ζοροκοθορα to mean “light-gatherer,”
θωβαρραβαυ is in the leaden _tabula devotionis_ of Carthage (Molinier,
“Imprecation gravée sur plomb,” _Mem. de la Soc. Nat. des Antiquaires
de France_, série VI. t. VIII. Paris, 1897, pp. 212-216) described as
τον θεὸν του τῆς παλινγενεσιας “the god of rebirth.” The concluding
words are of course merely “Yahweh of Hosts.”
Footnote 623:
The description of the moon-chariot drawn by two white oxen is found
in Claudian’s _Proserpine_. According to Cumont (_Textes et Monuments
relatifs aux Mystères de Mithra_, t. I. p. 126 and note) it was not
until Hadrian’s time that this conception, which seems to have been
Persian in origin, became fixed in the West.
Footnote 624:
This “Middle Way” has nothing to do with the τόπος or “place” of the
middle, where are set in the _Pistis Sophia_ proper the powers who
preside over incarnation. It is below the visible sphere (p. 364,
Copt.) and is met with in Rabbinic lore. See Kohler, _op. cit._ p.
587.
Footnote 625:
This division of the Twelve Aeons into two halves seems at first sight
inconsistent with the description in the _Pistis Sophia_ proper which
always speaks of them as Twelve. Yet it is plain that the author of
the _Pistis Sophia_ knew the legend here given, as he makes John the
Divine speak (p. 12, Copt.) of “the rulers who belong to the Aeon of
Jabraoth” and had made peace with the mysteries of the light. These
“rulers who repented” are again mentioned on p. 195, Copt. In the
other part of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος (p. 356, Copt.), it is also
said that the souls of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are to be placed in
“the Place of Jabraoth and of all the rulers who repented” until Jesus
can take them with Him to the light. So the Papyrus Bruce (Amélineau,
p. 239).
Footnote 626:
There are seven pages missing between the descriptions of the tortures
of the Middle Way and those of Amenti and Chaos, the gap occurring at
p. 379, Copt. It is possible that what follows after this is not from
the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος but an extract from yet another document.
Footnote 627:
In the text of the Μ. τ. σ. (p. 377, Copt.), Jesus simply asks His
father for a sign, and “the sign is made which Jesus had said.” In the
Papyrus Bruce where the same ceremony is described in almost identical
words, it is said that the wine of the offering was turned into water
which leaped forth of the vase which contained it so as to serve for
baptism. Cf. Amélineau, _Gnost. Ég._ p. 253. That Marcus the magician
by juggling produced similar prodigies, see Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 7, II.
pp. 116, 117, Harvey.
Footnote 628:
The name of Jaldabaoth, which in the whole of the rest of the MS. is
spelt ⲒⲀⲖⲆⲀⲂⲀⲰⲐ, appears on p. 380 immediately after the _lacuna_ of
seven pages as ⲒⲀⲖⲦⲀⲂⲀⲰⲐ, Ialtabaoth, which supports the theory of
another author.
Footnote 629:
This is also briefly mentioned in the part of the Μέρος τευχῶν Σωτῆρος
just described. See pp. 386, _sqq._, Copt.
Footnote 630:
This appears to contradict the _Pistis Sophia_ proper, where it is
said that the Virgin of Light gives the soul, and the Great Iao the
Good the power.
Footnote 631:
Cf. the speech of the crocodile in the tale of the _Predestined
Prince_: “Ah, moi, je suis ton destin qui te poursuit; quoi que tu
fasses, tu seras ramené sur mon chemin.” Maspero, _Contes Populaires
de l’Égypte Ancienne_, 3rd ed. Paris, n. d. p. 175.
Footnote 632:
Evidently the Egyptian _ka_ or double. Cf. the “Heart Amulet”
described by Erman, _Handbook of Egyptian Religion_, pp. 142, 143,
where the dead says to his heart: “Oh heart that I have from my
mother! Oh heart that belongs to my spirit, do not appear against me
as witness, provide no opposition against me before the judges, do not
contradict me before him who governs the balance, thou art my spirit
that is in my body....” This seems to be a transcription of the 30th
Chapter of the _Book of the Dead_, of which there are several
variants, none of which however directly suggest that the heart is the
accuser to be dreaded. See Budge, _Book of the Dead_, 1909, vol. II.
pp. 146-152.
Footnote 633:
Thus the Μ. τ. σ. says (p. 355, Copt.) “For this I despoiled myself
(_i.e._ laid aside my heavenly nature) to bring the mysteries into the
Cosmos, for all are under [the yoke of] sin, and all lack the gifts of
the mysteries.... Verily, verily I say unto you: until I came into the
Cosmos, no soul entered into the light.” Contrast this with the words
of the _Pistis Sophia_ proper (p. 250, Copt.): “Those who are of the
light have no need of the mysteries, because they are pure light,”
which are made the “interpretation” of the text: “They that are whole
have no need of a physician, but they that are sick.” See also the
_Pistis Sophia_, p. 246, Copt., where it is said of the mysteries
promised by Jesus that “they lead every race of men inwards into the
highest places according to the χωρημα of the inheritance, so that ye
have no need of the rest of the lower mysteries, but you will find
them in the two books of Jeû which Enoch wrote etc.”
Footnote 634:
p. 280, Copt.
Footnote 635:
Μ. τ. σ. p. 388, Copt., where it is said that the soul of the
righteous but uninitiated man is after death taken into Amenti and
afterwards into the Middle Way, being shown the tortures in each
place, “but the breath of the flame of the punishments shall only
afflict him a little.” Afterwards he is taken to the Virgin of Light,
who sets him before the Little Sabaoth the Good until the Sphere be
turned round so that Zeus (♃) and Aphrodite (♀) come into aspect with
the Virgin of Light and Kronos (♄) and Ares (♂) come after them. She
then puts the soul into a righteous body, which she plainly could not
do unless under the favourable influence of the “benefics” ♃ and ♀.
This seems also to be the dominant idea of the _Excerpta Theodoti_,
_q.v._ Compare this, however, with the words of the _Pistis Sophia_
proper (pp. 27, 28, Copt.) where Mary Magdalene explains that the
alteration made by Jesus in the course of the stars was effected in
order to baffle those skilled in the mysteries taught by the angels
“who came down” (as in the Book of Enoch), from predicting the future
by astrology and magic arts learned from the sinning angels.
Footnote 636:
p. 361, Copt.
Footnote 637:
That is the Sphere of Destiny acting through its emissary the Moira or
Fate described above, p. 184 _supra_.
Footnote 638:
It is a curious example of the fossilizing, so to speak, of ancient
names in magic that Shakespeare should preserve for us in the
_Tempest_ and _Macbeth_ the names of Ariel and Hecate which we find in
the Μ. τ. σ. No doubt both were taken by him from mediaeval grimoires
which themselves copied directly from the Graeco-Egyptian Magic Papyri
mentioned in Chap. III _supra_. Cf. the use of Greek “names of God”
like _ischiros_ (sic!) _athanatos_, etc. in Reginald Scot’s _Discovery
of Witchcraft_, _passim_.
Footnote 639:
So that it could not profit by the knowledge of the awful punishments
prepared for sinners. I do not know that this idea occurs elsewhere.
Footnote 640:
p. 380, Copt.
Footnote 641:
The Marcosian authorship of the whole MS. is asserted by Bunsen,
_Hippolytus and his Age_, vol. I. p. 47. Köstlin, _Über das gnostische
System des Buch Pistis Sophia_ in the Theologische Jahrbücher of Baur
and Zeller, Tübingen, 1854, will have none of it, and declares the
_Pistis Sophia_ to be an Ophite work. In this, the first commentator
on the book is followed by Grüber, _Der Ophiten_, Würzburg, 1864, p.
5, §§ 3, 4.
Footnote 642:
Clem. Alex. _Strom._ Bk I. c. 19.
Footnote 643:
Thus, according to Marcus (Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 8, § 11, pp. 145, 146,
Harvey), “that name of the Saviour which may be pronounced, _i.e._
Jesus, is composed of six letters, but His ineffable name of 24.” The
cryptogram in the _Pistis Sophia_ is in these words (p. 125, Copt.):
“These are the names which I will give thee from the Boundless One
downwards. Write them with a sign that the sons of God may show them
forth of this place. This is the name of the Deathless One ααα ωωω,
and this is the name of the word by which the Perfect Man is moved:
ιιι. These are the interpretations of the names of the mysteries. The
first is ααα, the interpretation of which is φφφ. The second which is
μμμ or which is ωωω, its interpretation is ααα. The third is ψψψ, its
interpretation is οοο. The fourth is φφφ, its interpretation is ννν.
The fifth is δδδ, its interpretation is ααα, which above the throne is
ααα. This is the interpretation of the second αααα, αααα, αααα, which
is the interpretation of the whole name.” The line drawn above the
three Alphas and Omegas is used in the body of the text to denote
words in a foreign (_i.e._ non-Egyptian) language such as Hebrew; but
in the Papyrus Bruce about to be described, the same letters without
any line above are given as the name of “the Father of the Pleroma.”
See Amélineau’s text, p. 113. The “moving” of the image (πλάσμα) of
the Perfect Man is referred to in Hippolytus (_op. cit._ p. 144,
Cruice). That the Tetragrammaton was sometimes written by Jewish
magicians with three Jods or _i.i.i._ see Gaster, _The Oldest Version
of Midrash Megillah_, in Kohut’s Semitic Studies, Berlin, 1897, p.
172. So on a magic cup in the Berlin Museum, conjuration is made “in
the name of Jahve the God of Israel who is enthroned upon the cherubim
... and in the name _A A A A_” (Stübe, _Judisch-Babylonische
Zaubertexte_, Halle, 1895, pp. 23-27). For the meaning of the words
“above the throne,” see Franck, _La Kabbale_, p. 45, n. 2.
Footnote 644:
The opening words of the invocation βασεμὰ χαμοσσὴ βαιανορὰ μισταδία
ῥουαδὰ κουστὰ βαβοφὸρ καλαχθεῖ which Irenaeus (Bk I. c. 14, § 2, pp.
183, 184, Harvey) quotes in this connection from Marcus certainly
read, as Renan (_L’Église Chrétienne_, p. 154, n. 3) points out, “In
the name of Achamoth” (_i.e._ Sophia).
Footnote 645:
See n. 3, p. 180, _supra_. In the _Pistis Sophia_ proper Jesus is
never spoken of save as “the Saviour” or as “the First Mystery.”
Footnote 646:
Cf. Maspero, _Hypogées Royaux_, _passim_, esp. pp. 157 and 163.
Footnote 647:
Schmidt’s study of the Bruce Papyrus with a full text and translation
was published in the _Texte und Untersuchungen_ of von Gebhardt and
Harnack under the title _Gnostische Schriften in Koptischer Sprache
aus dem Codex Brucianus_, Leipzig, 1892. He republished the
translation of this together with one of the _Pistis Sophia_ in the
series of early Greek Christian literature undertaken by the Patristic
Committee of the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences under the title
_Koptisch-Gnostische Schriften_, Bd I. Leipzig, 1905. His arrangement
of the papyrus leaves makes much better sense than that of Amélineau,
but it is only arrived at by eliminating all passages which seem to be
inconsequent and attributing them to separate works. The fragments
which he distinguishes as A and B and describes as “gnostischen
Gebetes,” certainly appear to form part of those which he describes as
the two “books of Jeû.”
Footnote 648:
Amélineau, “Notice sur le Papyrus gnostique Bruce,” _Notices et
Extraits des MSS. de la Bibl. Nat._ etc. Paris, 1891, p. 106. This
would seem to make matter the creation of God, but the author gets out
of the dilemma by affirming (_op. cit._ p. 126) that “that which was
not was the evil which is manifested in matter” and that while that
which exists is called αἰώνιος, “everlasting,” that which does not
exist is called ὕλη, “matter.”
Footnote 649:
Amélineau, _op. cit._ p. 231.
Footnote 650:
This word arrangement (οἰκονομία) occurs constantly in the _Pistis
Sophia_, as when we read (p. 193, Copt.) that the last παραστάτης by
the command of the First Mystery placed Jeû, Melchisedek, and four
other powers in the τόπος of those who belong to the right hand πρός
οἰκονομίας of the Assembly of the Light. There, as here, it doubtless
means that they were arranged in the same order as the powers above
them in pursuance of the principle that “that which is above is like
that which is below,” or, in other words, of the doctrine of
correspondences. From the Gnostics the word found its way into
Catholic theology, as when Tertullian (_adv. Praxean_, c. 3) says that
the majority of simple-minded Christians “not understanding that
though God be one, he must yet be believed to exist with his
οἰκονομία, were frightened.” Cf. Hatch, _H.L._ p. 324.
Footnote 651:
Perhaps the House or Place of Ἀλήθεια or Truth many times alluded to
in the Μ. τ. σ.
Footnote 652:
Aerôdios is shortly after spoken of as a person or power, so that
here, as elsewhere, in this literature, the _place_ is called by the
name of its ruler.
Footnote 653:
This word constantly occurs in the Magic Papyri, generally with
another word prefixed, as σεσενγεν βαρφαραγγης (Papyrus Mimaut, l. 12,
Wessely’s _Griechische Zauberpapyri_, p. 116), which C. W. King
(_Gnostics and their Remains_, 2nd ed. p. 289) would translate “they
who stand before the mount of Paradise” or in other words the Angels
of the Presence. Amélineau (_Notices_, etc. p. 144, n. 2) will have
Barpharanges to be “a hybrid word, part Chaldean and part Greek”
meaning “Son of the Abyss”—which is as unlikely as the other
interpretation.
Footnote 654:
p. 143, Amélineau (_Notices_, etc.); p. 361, Schmidt, _K.-G.S._
Footnote 655:
According to Amélineau, _op. cit._, “The Book of the Great Word in
Every Mystery.”
Footnote 656:
pp. 188-199, Amélineau, _op. cit._; Schmidt, _K.-G.S._ pp. 308-314.
Footnote 657:
pp. 219, 220, Amélineau, _op. cit._; Schmidt, _K.-G.S._ p. 226. She
seems to be here called “the Great Virgin of the Spirit.” Cf. the
Ὑπέθεντο γὰρ Αἰῶνα τινὰ ἀνώλεθρον ἐν παρθενικῷ διάγοντι πνεύματι, ὁ
βαρβηλὼθ ὀνομάζουσι, “For [some of them] suppose a certain
indestructible Aeon continuing in a Virgin spirit whom they call
Barbelo” of Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 27, § 1, p. 222, Harvey.
Footnote 658:
The powers named are thus called in both the _Pistis Sophia_ and the
Bruce Papyrus. See _Pistis Sophia_, pp. 248, 252 Copt.; Amélineau,
_op. cit._ p. 177.
Footnote 659:
According to the _Pistis Sophia_ (p. 1, Copt.), 11 years elapsed
between the Crucifixion and the descent of the “Vestures” upon Jesus
on the Mount of Olives. We may imagine another year to have been
consumed by the revelations made in the book.
Footnote 660:
If the “Books of Jeû” were ever written we should expect them to bear
the name of Enoch, who is said to have taken them down in Paradise at
the dictation of Jesus. See p. 147, n. 5, _supra_. Very possibly the
expression really does refer to some of the mass of literature once
passing under the name of Enoch and now lost to us.
Footnote 661:
Amélineau, _op. cit._ p. 72.
Footnote 662:
Schmidt, _K.-G.S._ p. 26.
Footnote 663:
Amélineau, _op. cit._ p. 211; Schmidt, _K.-G.S._ p. 322. The West or
Amenti is the Egyptian name for Hades.
Footnote 664:
Maspero, “Egyptian Souls and their Worlds,” _Ét. Égyptol._ t. I. p.
395.
Footnote 665:
Maspero, “Hypogées Royaux,” _Ét. Égyptol._ t. II. pp. 148, 165.
Footnote 666: