Pistis Sophia

1. A. C. McGiffert, Prolegomena to Church History of Eusebius in Schaff and Wace. Select Library of Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers. I. p. 179, n. 17.

2. Not Greek, as has been sometimes said. The point is of importance for dating.

3. Where not otherwise mentioned, this pagination is used in all references hereafter.

4. Cf. alternative ending of Mark and Apocal. of Paul. Budge, Misc. Coptic Texts, p. 1084.

5. See my article “Some Heretic Gospels” in Scottish Review for 1893.

6. Archæological Report of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1897-1898, p. 62.

7. Album de Paléographie Copte.

8. F. Granger, in a review in the Journal of Theological Studies, v. v. (1904), pp. 0400 ff., says he sees no reason why Coptic should not have been its original language. I am inclined to agree with him, particularly with regard to the Fourth and Fifth Documents. But the balance of expert opinion is distinctly against this view.

9. In the Preface to the Coptic text of 1851, he states his intention of publishing later a “tractate,” showing the Ophite origin of the work; but this promise, like others affecting it, remains unfulfilled.

10. All this is dealt with in the Introduction to my translation of the Philosophumena, published by the S.P.C.K. in 1921, pp. 5, 6.

11. Theologische Jahrbucher, Bd. XIII., pp. 1-104, 137-196, Edited by Baur and Zeller, Tübingen.

12. Buckle, who was a most omnivorous reader, found Schwartze’s Latin version and summarised it in the Commonplace Book, published after his death.

13. I had the pleasure in 1912 of again uncovering a great part of these tombs under the leadership of my old friend Prof. Edouard Naville. I was astonished both at their extent and the very imperfect account of their first discovery given by M. Amélineau in the volumes published by him long after the excavation, from what were evidently imperfectly taken notes. Lack of funds prevented the Egypt Exploration Fund, for which Prof. Naville and I were working, from continuing our exploration, but I saw enough to convince me that there is still much to be gathered from a fresh exploration of the site.

14. Dr. Preuschen’s criticism was made in the Theologische Litteratur-Zeitung (of Jena) Bd. XIX. (1894), pp. 183-187, and answered by Dr. Schmidt in the Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftliche Theologie of the same year, Bd. XXXVII., pp. 555 ff. Pastor Lichtenhau’s attack was given in the last-named periodical for 1901, Bd. XVIII., pp. 236 ff.

15. Among the earlier writers, I should mention Joh. Nap. Grüber, who, in an inaugural Thesis read before the Faculty of the University of Würzburg in 1864, on the Ophite heresy, dealt at great length with the Pistis Sophia. I have worked through this, however, without deriving from it any new ideas which could be substantiated by later information. Among more recent writers, I may also mention the late Mr. P. D. Scott-Moncrieff’s Paganism and Christianity in Egypt (1913), which contains many useful hints and might, but for the writer’s premature death, have been expanded into a useful text-book.

16. E.g.M. Maspero’s review in the Revue Critique (n. 3, LXVIII., 2nd plie) for 1909, pp. 192, 193 of Lieblein’s article on the Pistis Sophia in the Kristiania Videnskobs-Selskabs Forhandlingen of the same year.

17. The word topos used here and elsewhere in the text seems to be a Greek translation of the Egyptian Ker-t, which as M. Naville, Litanie du Soleil, pp. 15, 16, points out, is the place which serves as a residence for a spirit or a body such as the Sun. He thinks with Champollion that it was also what the Alexandrians sometimes described as a zone or sphere.

18. All this appears in the opening pages of our text with the exception of the place of our earth and of Chaos which is nowhere distinctly stated. Chaos is represented in the episode of Pistis Sophia as being below the twelve Æons or Zodiac; but in her hymn of thanksgiving, she describes what has been done there as taking place “in the world of men.” Does this mean that the earth was made out of the “passions” of Sophia, as Irenæus (I. i., 10, pp. 48, 49 Harvey) says Valentinus affirmed? It is probable; but in any case, the Egyptians seem always to have regarded Chaos or the Darkness as outside rather than below the earth.

19. See pp. 16-20 Copt.

20. The word “Æon,” frequently employed in our text, seems to have in it quite a different meaning from that which the Fathers attributed to it. According to them, the Gnostics used it as equivalent to “Spirit” or “Power,” going so far as to describe the Supreme God of their system as “the Perfect Æon.” In our MS., however, it generally signifies the signs of the Zodiac and their curious adjunct the thirteenth Æon, which are all inhabited at some time or other by rebellious powers. In other passages, especially in the later documents, it resumes its proper etymological meaning of “Age” as when “the Consummation of the Æon” is talked of.

21. Mary Magdalene appears as the chief interlocutor in the dialogues with the Saviour, asking, it is said, thirty-nine questions in all out of a total of forty-six. A Gnostic work is mentioned by Epiphanius in his twenty-sixth Heresy, as being used by a sect which he calls “the Gnostics” only, and bearing the title [the great] “Interrogations of Mary.” Hence Harnack (Über das gnostische Buch Pistis Sophia, pp. 107 ff.) concludes that this may have been the original title of our text or of some part of it, and Schmidt seems to agree with him. But the practices which Epiphanius attributes to his Gnostics are expressly condemned in one of the later Documents of our text, nor do any of the tenets which he assigns to them agree with those here described.

22. The Father is called “the First Mystery looking inward” on p. 126 (Copt) and Jesus “the First Mystery looking outward” on p. 128, while the Veil of the First Mystery who is the Twin Mystery “looking inwards and outwards” is mentioned on p. 222.

23. See pp. 237-240 (Copt).

24. See p. 246 (Copt).

25. See pp. 248-252. The Treasurehouse is therefore part of the Kerasmos.

26. The Ophites actually had such a diagram, and this with their “defences” or “passwords” is described by Origen. Cf. Forerunner, II., pp. 66-74.

27. These three “rhapsodies” are to be found on pp. 206-216, 219-224, and 229-231. Scott-Moncrieff in his Paganism and Christianity in Egypt, pp. 77-80, points out that the early organisation of the Church in Egypt included “prophets” who were accustomed to utter things in ecstasy; and it is quite possible that these rhapsodies may be a specimen of their utterances. Besides being familiar with the Book of the Dead, they may have had an hereditary connection with the prophets of Amen.

28. That He was supposed to have visited the highest realms is shown by the fact that He wore all three robes on his return.

29. To correspond doubtless to the one “Space” of the Ineffable and the three Spaces of the First Mystery; making four in all.

30. See pp. 279-281, Copt.

31. See pp. 281-285; 336-341, Copt.

32. These transmigrations are limited in number (see p. 327, Copt); but the number is not stated. It would be interesting to know if they were five, like those of the Manichæans.

33. See p. 355, Copt.

34. Thus Irenæus (II., 33, 3, p. 331 H.) says He suffered on completing His thirtieth year; yet that He taught until He was forty or fifty years old.

35. This is repeated in the Bruce Papyrus in the same connection.

36. See p. 361, Copt.