Gnosis and Paideia: Education and Heresy in Late Ancient Egypt Stephen J. SHOEMAKER, Durham, NC. The tradition of scholarship on ancient gnosticism reveals, among other trends, a tendency to view the members of these various religious sects as persons of high educational status. Especially when discussing ancient Chris- tian gnosticism, scholars have often assumed, either implicitly or explicitly that the gnostics were educated intellectuals, well versed in the intricacies of ancient philosophy!. Various connections with the language of ancient phi- losophy found in the ancient reports and gnostic texts have led many writers to this conclusion. These scholars posit that this must have been the thought- world in which gnosticism developed and flourished and have proceeded to study it in such light. If it were true, that ancient Christian gnosticism was basically a movement which aimed to make Christianity more resonant with ancient philosophy, then it is unlikely that it would have appealed to or even been understood by the masses of late antiquity. This assumption, on the sur- face at least, has a certain convincing logic to it. But a more careful probing of our evidence from Egypt, a rich source for both ancient social history as well as heresy, shows that the situation may not be so simple. Most of our first hand knowledge of ancient gnosticism comes from several Egyptian texts written in Coptic, and recent discussions of the social status of the Cop- tic language in late ancient Egypt have brought such traditional thinking * Attempts to locate the social status of the ancient gnostics have been few and far between. That is to say, for most scholars, the assumption is a tacit one. Gerd Theisen, himself an advo. cate of ancient gnosticism’s high social position, notes that this is an ‘assumption mentioned most often only in passing’ in ‘Die soriologische Auswertung religibser Uberlieferungen’, Kairos 15 (1975), pp. 284-99. See especially his note 28, p. 296 for a summary of the evidence Which has suggested this view to many scholars. The two most noteworthy examples of explicit arguments for the high educational status of gnostic are Hans Kippenberg, ‘Versuch einer Sozi- Ologischen Verortung des Antiken Gnostizismus', Numen 17 (1970), pp. 211-31 and Peter Munz, “The Problem of “Die Soziologische Verortung des Antiken Gnostizismus”’, Numen 19 (1972), Pp. 41-51. Kurt Rudolph, ‘Das Problem einer Soziologie und “Sozialen Verorung” det Gnosis’, Kairos 19 (1977), pp. 35-44, notes that the view of gnosticism as socially ‘well-placed’ is com- ‘mon among both older and younger scholars of gnosticism and himself takes a different view, suggesting the possibility of iower class gnostics primarily on the basis of reports by Irenaeus and other church fathers that the gnostics were “half-educated’. While he explains that this does not apply to the leaders of the movement, he accepts it as evidence of the ‘uneducated masses within the gnostic fold. Comparison with the constinuency of the ‘great church’ is also invoked as evi- dence (pp. 36-7).536 S.J. SHOEMAKER about gnosticism into question. Roger Bagnall, among others, has recently addressed this problem in his book Egypt in Late Antiquity, and it is primar- ily on his discussion of the social locations of the Greek and Coptic languages that I base my argument?. Although there were attempts in the earlier Roman period to write the Egyptian language using Greek letters, primarily for magical, astronomical, and other ‘popular’ religious texts, Bagnall distinguishes these attempts from Coptic because they ‘reveal a purist streak, ... devoid of borrowings from the Greek"3. Coptic, as Bagnalll defines it, was developed only in the third century with the deliberate purpose of translating the Bible into a form accessible to the masses of Egypt, and it remained largely a language for the transmission of religious literature by missionaries of various stripes’. Its purpose of commu- nicating with the masses of Egypt is particularly evident in its largely phonetic dialects which are believed to correspond to some degree with the locally spo- ken dialects of a given region’. Of course, Greek was a substantial presence in the chora as well. The exten- sive penetration of Greek into the native Egyptian language over the course of the centuries to form Coptic is itself a good indicator of the bilingual nature of rural Egypt. There were, however, very few in the countryside capable of read- ing or writing Greek, a skill limited primarily to the village elite®. Outside this group, there were in the villages perhaps a few others with a very limited skill in the Greek language who could subscribe documents or maybe even write simple documents themselves’. The question of literacy, however, concerns only the ability to read and write Greek, leaving open the possibility that many people, although illiterate, were able to use the Greek language as a means of oral communication. For instance, we know of illiterate liturgists, who could presumably speak Greek, and many upper class women would also fit this cat- egory, as their gender would, according to Bagnall at least, guarantee illiter- acy, yet most of them could probably speak Greek’. The nature of the Coptic language itself suggests that there was at least some level of familiarity with Greek among the illiterate peasants of late ancient Egypt, although there is 2 Rober S, Bagnall, Egypt in Late Antiquity (Princeton, 1993). But sce also Ewa Wipszycka, ‘La christianisation de I'Egypte aux [Ve-Vle sigcles. Aspects sociaux et ethniques’, Aegyptus 68, Pp. 117-65 and ‘Le degré d'alphabétisation en Egypte byzantine’, REAug 30, pp. 279-96. 3 Bagnall, p. 238. * Ibid. 5 Ibid, pp. 238.9. 6 Ibid,, pp. 241-2. 7 Tbid., pp. 242-3. For an earlier period, see Naphtali Lewis, Life in Egypt under Roman Rule (Oxford, 1983), pp. 81-3. * Bagnall, pp. 130, 243-4. This finding is very interesting in light of Eva Wipszycka’s sug- gestion that the Nag Hammadi and other Coptic texts of late ancient Egypt were aimed at a Cop- tic-speaking ‘elite’, ‘La christianisation’, pp. 160-2. Although she notes that many scholars deny the existence of such a group, Bagnall seems to provide evidence for it in his book.Gnosis and Paideia: Education and Heresy in Late Ancient Egypt 537 other evidence to the contrary®. Some of our best evidence on this issue comes from the early Egyptian monastic milieu. One especially revealing text, the Epistle of Ammon, informs us a great deal about the use of language among the monks of Upper Egypt. In recounting his initial arrival to the monastery in 352, the author informs us that the head of the monastery, as well as most of the monks, did not speak Greek, a problem which was solved initially by securing a monk to serve as interpreter for Ammon and the twenty other Greek-speaking monks with whom he shared a house. After a short while, however, a more permanent solution was reached: Ammon became fluent in Coptic!®, This ghettoization of the Greek speakers in the monastery, the provi- sion of an interpreter, and the final solution of teaching them Coptic all sug- gest rather strongly that there was widespread ignorance of Greek among the carly monks of Upper Egypt!!, Yet perhaps the existence of the Coptic translations themselves is the best evidence that the language barrier was a significant one that had to be crossed in order to reach Egypt’s rural population. For whom were the Coptic gnostic texts of late ancient Egypt translated? Certainly it was not for the Greek elite, who would surely have accessed these texts in their original Greek. Instead, the translations must have been aimed at the Coptic speakers of late antiquity. Yet this group would not include those Coptic speakers who could also speak and understand Greek with a fair degree of competence, even if they could not read or write it. Presumably, they too would have no need for a Coptic translation, and could understand the text in Greek. Their illiteracy would not have been a serious obstacle, since, like most people in late antiquity, they were more likely to encounter a religious text, Coptic, Greek, or otherwise, through hearing it read aloud, rather than reading it for themselves. In many cases, however, the actual bilingual abilities of these particular individuals may have been quite limited, serving only to transact whatever business was necessary with the Greek speakers they encountered in the course of daily life. To reach many of these ‘bilingual’ Egyptians, Coptic translations would be useful and perhaps even necessary. Thus, the one thing that we may assume about the audience for which the Nag Hammadi and other texts were translated into Coptic is that they had either no knowledge of or perhaps only a limited, practical knowledge of the Greek language. From this we may also assume that the audience was basi- cally uneducated. That is, they did not have the sort of formal, Greek education which would have provided them with both command of the Greek language and, at the same time, access to the various philosophies of antiquity. ? Bagnall, p. 244. °© Tbid., pp. 244-5. James E. Goehring, The Letter of Ammon and Pachomian Monasticism (Patristische Texte und Studien 27; Berlin, 1986), pp. 161-3, 168, 177-8. 1" Bagnall cites this as evidence for the use of Greek among the Egyptian masses (p. 244-5). find this quite unusual. The only evidence of such that I see is in one person only ~ the inter- preter.538 S.J, SHOEMAKER Of course, so far this is no evidence of the translators’ success in their goal of evangelizing the Egyptian countryside. The attempt may, in fact, have failed miserably, ignorant of the wisdom of later scholars who believe that gnosti- cism would appeal only to an educated elite who could understand the com- plicated use of philosophy in these texts, Yet there is good reason to suppose that the attempt was successful. The existence of several documents in multi- ple copies suggests that these Coptic translations were popular, perhaps in con- trast to their original Greek versions, which have not survived. Also, the geo- graphic diversity evident not only i in the location of the various finds, but also in the differences apparent in the manufacture and dialects of the various codices, bears witness that these translations were not an isolated phenom- enon!?, Moreover, certain ‘orthodox’ Christian writers of late antique Upper Egypt provide a more important confirmation. In descriptions of their hetero- dox Christian ‘neighbors’ they reveal that these evangelistic efforts were not falling on deaf ears!3, Additionally, a group of scholars has been involved for several years now in a new excavation of the earliest Egyptian monastic texts which has unearthed certain indications that many among the first monks of Upper Egypt, a large number of whom were uneducated Coptic speakers, may have held certain ‘gnosticizing’ views and may even have been responsible for our largest collection of gnostic texts to date, found in 1945 near Nag Ham- madi in Egypt'*. While the findings of these scholars have already shaken many earlier preconceptions surrounding the origins of Christian monasticism, they have yet to affect how we think of gnosticism in relation to the social sta- tus of its adherents. Expanding the membership of ancient gnosticism beyond the educated elite has several consequences for how we understand this phenomenon more broadly. First of all, it contradicts an ancient yet still vigorous tendency to view heresies, and especially gnosticism, as a somewhat minor rebellion with limited appeal made by intellectuals against a much more broadly held ‘cathol ” Bentley Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures (Garden City, NY, 1987), p. xxvii. "9 See, e.g.. Herbert Thompson, ‘Dioscorus and Shenoute’, BEHE: Recueil d'Etudes Egyp- tologiques 233 (1922), pp. 367-76; Shenoute, Contra Origenistas. Testo con introduzione e traduzione, ed. tr. Tito Orlandi (Roma, 1985); Tito Orlandi, *A Catechesis against Apocryphal Texts by Shenoute and the Gnostic Text of Nag Hammadi’, HTAR 75 (1982), pp. 85-95. 1 For this reevaluation of the orthodoxy of early Egyptian monasticism, see James B. Goehring, ‘New Frontiers in Pachomian Studies’, in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. ier A. Pearson and James E. Goehring (Philadelphia, 1986), pp. 236-57 and his ‘Pachomius” Vision of Heresy: The Development of a Pachomian Tradition’, Mus 95 (1982), pp. 241-62; Tito Orlandi, ‘A Catechesis against Apocryphal Texts by Shenoute and the Gnostic Text of Nag Ham- madi’, HTAR 75 (1982), pp. 85-95; Samuel Rubenson, The Letters of St. Anthony: Origenist Theology, Monastic Tradition and the Making of a Saint (Lund, 1990); Gedaliahu Stroumsa, ‘Monachisme et Marranisme chez les Manichéens d'Egypte’, Numen 29 (1982), pp. 184-201; Frederik Wisse, ‘Gnosticism and Early Monsticism in Egypt’, in Gnosis: Festschrift fiir Hans Jonas, ed. B. Aland (Gittingen, 1978), pp. 431-440.Gnosis and Paideia: Education and Heresy in Late Ancient Egypt 539 orthodox’ faith. What we are now able to see is that in fact, gnosticism was a Jager and more persistent phenomenon than we had previously thought, and was also able to appeal to all levels of the ancient social ladder. This has fur- ther consequences for the connections we draw between gnosticism and other components of late antique society and culture. In particular, we must recon- sider its relations with ancient philosophy. Admittedly one finds in gnosticism certain strong resonances with ancient philosophy, as there were in the nascent ‘orthodox’ church as well, but this fact should not limit our understanding of ancient gnosticism so that we cannot conceive of how it might have had life outside of this narrow context. Much that passes for gnosticism would indeed have been appealing even if it had fallen on ears unaccustomed to the complex paradigms of ancient philosophy; yet such an assumption involves under- standing gnosticism as a mythologically rich movement, rather than as a pri- marily philosophical one. Although many of the gnostic myths are appropriately considered philo- sophical, in light of certain borrowings, for the most part they are not incom- Prehensible outside of the bounds of philosophy. Generally, they are able to stand on their own as stories explaining various aspects of the believer's exi tence, even without a clear understanding of the philosophical origins of cer- tains elements. This is particularly true in light of a number of important, if tather neglected, links between gnosticism and various ‘magical’ worldviews found in the magical texts of Jate antiquity. In a relation somewhat similar to its links with ancient philosophy, gnosticism borrows certain magical ‘techni- cal terms’ (although they are generally referred to as ‘nonsense syllables’) and names for many important mythic characters from the magical papyri and shares a similar hierarchical structure of ‘being’ and the cosmos!*, Thus we might now turn away from a general view of gnosticism as at its core philo- sophical, and begin to find in late ancient gnosticism what Peter Brown has found: ‘one of the great moments of the recovery of the power of myth in the ancient world. Deeply alien though such mythical narratives might appear to us, the Gnostic myths addressed a pain and expressed an urgency too deep for the stale words of philosophical demonstration’'®. Such a movement surely found broad appeal. 'S Ruth Kithner, ‘Gnostische Aspekte in den koptischen Zaubertexten’. Bulletin de la Société de égyptologie 4 (1980), pp. 61-4, See also A. Ausgewahlte koptische Zaubertexte (3 vols., Edition de Ia Foundation égyptologique Reine Elisabeth; Bruxelles, 1930-1), and Marvin Meyer and Richard Smith, Ancient Christian Magic (San Francisco, 1994), esp. ch. 3. %6 Peter Brown, The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (Princeton, 1988), pp. 107-8.