Chapter VI
, vol. I. p. 174, _supra_.
Footnote 356:
Clem. Alex. _Strom._ Bk VII. c. 1.
Footnote 357:
Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 29, p. 281, Cruice.
Footnote 358:
_i.e._ Profound.
Footnote 359:
Not “self-existent,” but maker of his own φύσις or nature.
Footnote 360:
See n. 2, p. 98 _supra_.
Footnote 361:
Harvey reads here αἰώνιος “everlasting,” which makes at least as good sense as the other.
Footnote 362:
Some memory of this seems to have enlivened the disputes between the Nominalists and Realists of the XIIIth century. Cf. the wrangling of the Doctors at the School of Salerno in Longfellow’s _Golden Legend_
I, with the Doctor Seraphic, maintain That the word that’s not spoken, but conceived in the brain, Is the type of Eternal Generation, The spoken word is the Incarnation.
Footnote 363:
They are also probably places or receptacles. In the _Pistis Sophia_ we read repeatedly of the three χωρήματα and of the τόπος ἀληθείας.
Footnote 364:
Amélineau, _Gnost. Égypt._ pp. 200 _sqq._
Footnote 365:
So Hope Moulton, _Early Zoroastrianism_, 1913, p. 114, points out that half of the Persian Amshaspands or archangels bear names expressing “what Mazda is” and the other half “what Mazda gives.” There is much likeness, as has been said, between the Amshaspands and the “Roots” of Simon Magus.
Footnote 366:
It is worth noticing that these are the three “theological” virtues, Faith, Hope, and Charity.
Footnote 367:
Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 23, pp. 269-271, Cruice, wishes to make out that all this is derived from what he calls the “Pythagorean” system of numbers. Anyone wishing to pursue these “silly cabalisms” further is recommended to read Harvey’s Introduction to Valentinus’ system, _op. cit._ pp. cxv-cxvii.
Footnote 368:
Ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δεκαδύο ὁ δωδέκατος καὶ νεώτατος πάντων τῶν εἰκοσιοκτὼ Αἰώνων, θῆλυς ὢν καὶ καλούμενος Σοφία, κατενόησε τὸ πλῆθος καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τῶν γεγεννηκότων Αἰώνων, καὶ ἀνέδραμεν εἰς τὸ βάθος τὸ τοῦ Πατρός. “But the twelfth of the twelve, and the youngest of all the eight and twenty aeons, who is a female and called Sophia, considered the number and power of those aeons who were begotten (?) and went on high to the height of the Father”: Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 30, p. 283, Cruice. The “eight and twenty aeons” shows that Valentinus, according to Hippolytus, did _not_ reckon Bythos and Sige in the first Ogdoad.
Footnote 369:
A further proof that the primitive doctrine of Valentinus did not give a spouse to Bythos.
Footnote 370:
Ἐν μὲν γὰρ τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ, φησίν, ἔστι πάντα ὁμοῦ· (ὁμοῦ seems here to mean “without distinction of time or place.” Cf. the “None is afore or after other” of the Athanasian Creed) ἐν δὲ τοῖς γεννητοῖς, τὸ μὲν θῆλυ ἔστιν οὐσίας προβλητικόν, τὸ δὲ ἄρρεν μορφωτικὸν τῆς ὑπὸ τοῦ θήλεως προβαλλομένης οὐσίας. Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 30, p. 284, Cruice.
Footnote 371:
Καὶ τοῦτο ἐστί, φησίν, ὃ λέγει Μωϋσῆς· “ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος.” “And this, he says, is the saying of Moses. ‘And the earth was _invisible_ and unshapen’”—a curious variant of the A.V., Hippolytus, _loc. cit._ He goes on to say that this is “the good and heavenly Jerusalem,” the land in which the children of Israel are promised milk and honey. It should be noticed, however, that even this unshapen being, like all the Sophias, was identified with the Earth.
Footnote 372:
Hippolytus, _op. cit._ Bk VI. c. 31, pp. 284, 285. Irenaeus, Bk I. cc. 1, 4, p. 21, Harvey, says that Monogenes [Nous] put forth (πρόβαλε) the pair κατὰ προμήθειαν τοῦ Πατρὸς, apparently without the aid of his partner Aletheia. Hippolytus’ account is the simpler, as making all the Pleroma thus descend from a single pair, and is therefore, probably, the earlier.
Footnote 373:
Hippolytus, _loc. cit._, says that this new aeon was called Ὅρος “Horus,” or “The Limit,” because he separates the Pleroma or Fulness from the Hysterema or Deficiency (_i.e._ that which lacks God), which is one of those puns which will be familiar to all Egyptologists (see Erman, _Life in Ancient Egypt_, Eng. ed. p. 396, for other examples). He is also said to have been called Metocheus or the Partaker, because he shares in the Deficiency, doubtless as being partly outside the Pleroma. His name of Horus was probably suggested by that of the old Egyptian god whose figure must have been familiar to every Alexandrian. In the IInd century A.D., this last generally appears with hawk’s head and human body dressed in the cuirass and boots of a Roman gendarme or _stationarius_, which would be appropriate enough for a sentinel or guard.
Footnote 374:
Hippolytus, _loc. cit._ pp. 284, 285, Cruice.
Footnote 375:
Hippolytus, _loc. cit._ pp. 286, 287, Cruice. Christ and the Holy Spirit, having discharged the duty laid upon them, have retired with Sophia “the youngest of the aeons” within the Pleroma and cannot again issue forth.
Footnote 376:
Hippolytus, _op. cit._ c. 32: ἔδοξεν αὐτοῖς μὴ μόνον κατὰ συζυγίαν δεδοξακέναι τὸν υἵον, δοξάσαι [δὲ] καὶ διὰ προσφορᾶς καρπῶν πρεπόντων τῷ Πατρί. “It seemed good to them [the aeons of the Pleroma] not only to magnify the Son by conjunction, but also by an offering of pleasing fruits to the Father.” So in the mysteries of Isis, Osiris is called the fruit of the vine Dionysos. See Athenagoras, _Legatid._ c. XXII. Plainly Bythos and Nous or Monogenes are here represented as Father and Son as in the Ophite myth. The new projection is necessary to accord with the text about the whole Pleroma dwelling together bodily in Jesus. Cf. Colossians i. 19.
Footnote 377:
The expression ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ μέγας is repeated by Clement of Alexandria, _Protrept_. c. XII., possibly with reference to this passage. It may be noticed, however, that Jesus is here also made the Messenger or Ambassador of the Light as with the Ophites. It will be seen later that he occupies the same place with the Manichaeans. Cf.
##