Neoplatonic Demons and Angels Edited by PDF
February 13, 2023 | Author: Anonymous | Category: N/A
Short Description
Download Neoplatonic Demons and Angels Edited by PDF...
Description
Neoplatonic Demons and Angels
Stu tudi dies es in Pl Plat aton onis ism, m, Neo eopl plaatonis onism m, an and d th thee Pl Plat aton onic ic Tradition Edited by Robert M. Berchman ( Dowling ( Dowling College College and Bard College) College) John Finamore (University (University of Iowa) Iowa) Editorial Board John Dillon (Trinity (Trinity College, Dublin) ( Boston College Dublin) – Gary Gurtler ( Boston College) Jean-Marc Narbonne ( Laval Laval University University,, Canada Canada))
The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/spnp at brill.com/spnp
Neo eopl plat aton onic ic Demon emonss an and d An Anggel elss Edited by
Luc Brisson Seamus O’Neill Andrei Timotin
|
The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov at http://catalog.loc.gov record av available ailable at http://lccn.loc.gov/2018023165 at http://lccn.loc.gov/2018023165
Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: download: brill.com/brill‑typeface brill.com/brill‑typeface.. - - ---- (hardback) ---- (e-book) Copyright 2018 by Koninklijke Koninklijke Brill , Leiden, The Netherlands Netherlands.. Koninklijke BrillHotei incorporates Brill Sense and Publishing. the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhof, Brill Rodopi, All rights reserved. reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduce reproduced, d, translated, translated, stored stored in a retrieval retrieval system, system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recor recording ding or otherwise, without prior written permission permission from the publisher publisher. Authorization to photocopy photocopy items items for internal or personal use use is granted granted by Koninklijke Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, Danvers, 01923, . . Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.
Contents List of Contribu Contributors tors Introduction 1 The Daimon an and d the the Choi Choice ce of Li Life fe in Pl Plot otin inus us’’ Thou Though ghtt 7
Thomas Tho mas Vid Vidart art Thee Ang Th Angel elss in Anci Ancien entt Gn Gnos osis is:: So Some me Case Casess 19
Madeleine Scopello Demo De mons ns and and Ang Angel elss in the the Chalda Chaldaean ean Oracles Oracles 46
Helmut Seng Seng What is a Daimon for Porph Porphyry? yry? 86
Luc Brisson Brisson Porph orphyr yryy of Tyr Tyree on the the Daimon, Birt Birth h and and the the Star Starss 102
Dorian Gieseler Gieseler Greenbaum Greenbaum Daimones in Porphyry’s orphyry’s On th thee Ca Cave ve of th thee Ny Nymp mphs hs 140
Nilufer Akcay Akcay Evil vil Demo Demons ns in the the De Mys Myster teriis iis Assessing the Iamblichean Critique of Porphyry’ Porphyry’ss Demonology 160
Seamus O’Neill Procl Pr oclus’ us’ Critiq Critique ue of Plotin Plotinus’ us’ Demono Demonolog logy y 190
Andrei Timotin Thee Ange Th Angels ls in Proc Proclu lus: s: Mess Messen enge gers rs of the the Gods Gods 209
Luc Brisson Brisson Ontology,, Henadology Ontology Henadology,, Angelolog Angelology y The Ne Neopl oplato atonic nic Ro Roots ots of Ang Angeli elicc Hierar Hierarchy chy 231
Ghislain Casas
Dionysiu Diony siuss the Ar Areop eopagi agite te on Angels Angels Self-Co Sel f-Consti nstitut tution ion versus versus Constit Constituti uting ng Gif Gifts ts 269
Marilena Vlad Index 291
Listt of Cont Lis Contrib ribut utors ors Nilufer Akcay Akcay Hold Ho ldss a Ph.D Ph.D.. in Clas Classic sicss from from theUn the Univ iver ersit sityy of Du Dubl blin in,, Trinity rinityCo Colllleg egee (N (Nov ovemember 2016). Her dissertation is the analysis of Porphyry’s On Porphyry’s On the Cave of the Nymphs against the backdrop of his wider philosophical oeuvre. She was edu Nymphs against cated at Istanbul University where she translated Ovid’s Heroides Ovid’s Heroides into into Turkish during her . . . degree. Her Her aim is to continue to work in the eld of Neoplatonism and ancient allegorical interpretation. Luc Brisson Brisson Directeur de Recherche (1 classe) at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientique, Paris, a member of the Centre Jean Pépin ( 76 du ). His works include How include How Philosophers Saved Myths (Chicago, 2004); Plato the Myth Myths (Chicago, 2004); Plato (Chicago, 1999); Inventing 1999); Inventing the Universe, Maker (Chicago, Universe, with W. Meyerstein (New York, 1995); Sexual 1995); Sexual Ambivalence: Androgyny and Hermaphroditism in Graeco-Roman Antiquity (Ber (Berke keley ley,, 200 2002), 2), amon amongg others, others, and numero numerous us tra transl nslatio ations ns and comcommentaries on the Sophists, Plato, Plotinus, Proclus, and Iamblichus, including (with A.Ph. Segonds) Jamblique, Vie de Pythagore (Paris, 1996). Pythagore (Paris, Ghislain Casas Curr Cu rren entl tlyy le lectu cture rerr in ph phililos osoph ophyy at the the Sorbo Sorbonn nne, e, Pari aris. s. He compl complet eted ed hisPh his Ph.D .D.. at the École Pratiqu Pratiquee des Hautes Hautes Études and the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Paris on medieval angelology. He has published papers on neoplatonic and medieval philosophy, including “Le néoplatonisme sans platonisme du ps.-Denys l’Aréopagite,” in in Les chréti chrétiens ens et l’l’hellén hellénisme. isme. Identi Identités tés religieuses et culture grecque grecque dans l’ Antiquité tardiv tardivee, ed. Arnaud Perrot (Paris, 2012); “Les statues vivent aussi. Théorie néoplatonicienne de l’objet rituel”, Revue de l’histoire l’ histoire des rreligions eligions,, 231/4 (2014); “Language without voice: locutio angelica as a political issue,” in Voice in Voice and Voicelessness in Medieval Europe, Europe, ed. I.R. Kleiman (Houndmills, 2015). Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum Tutor at the University of Wales Trinity St David. Her Ph.D. from the Warburg Institute Institute formed the basis of her book, The book, The Daimon in Hellenistic Astrology: Origins and Inluence (Brill, Inluence (Brill, 2016). She has written articles for Blackwell’s Encyclopedia of Ancient History History and and Springer’s Springer’s Handbo Handbook ok of Arc Archaeoas haeoastro tronomy nomy volume, Kepler’s Astrology and Ethnoastronomy, Ethnoastronomy, and edited/co-translated the volume, Kepler’s (Lampet (Lam peter er,, 2010). 2010). Rec Recent ent public publicatio ations ns includ includee (wit (withh co-edit co-editor or Charles Charles Burn Burnett ett))
From Māshāʾaallāh llāh to Kepler: Theory and Practice in Medieval and Renaissance (Lampeter,, 2015); and “Eternity in the Astrology of Vettius Valens, alens,”” in Astrology (Lampeter Astrology Melamed amed (Oxfor (Oxford, d, 2016). Eternity: A History History,, ed. Yitzhak Mel Seamus O’Neill Associate Professor of Philosophy at a t The Memorial University of Newfoundland. He completed his Ph.D. in Classics at Dalhousie University on St. Augustine’ tin e’ss Pla Platon tonism. ism. Rec Recent ent public publicatio ations ns includ include: e: “ Aequales Demon on- ‘Aequales angelis sunt ’’:: Dem ol olog ogyy, Ange Angelo lolo logy gy,, an andd the the Resu Resurr rrec ectio tionn of the Bo Body dy in Augu Augusti stine ne an andd Anse Anselm lm,,” The Saint Anselm Journal , 12/1 (2016); “‘How does the body depart?: A Neoplatonic Readin Readingg of Dante Dante’s ’s Suicide Suicides, s,”” Dante Studies, 1322 (2 (201 014) 4);; an andd “T “The he De Demo moni nicc Studies, 13 Body: Demonic Ontology and the Domicile of the Demons in Apuleius and Augustine,”” in Philosophical Augustine, in Philosophical Approaches to Demonology, Demonology, ed. R. Arp and B. McCraw Cr aw (Rout (Routle ledg dge, e, 20 2017 17). ). He is curr curren entl tlyy com compl plet etin ingg a mo mono nogr graph aph on St. St. Au Augu gusstine’s demonology, demonology, the culmination of a research project entitled Reconstructentitled Reconstructfunded ed by the the So Soci cial al Scie Scienc nces es an andd Huma Humanningthe ing the Dem Demono onology logyof of SSt.t. Au Augus gustin tinee, fund ities Research Council of Canada. Madeleine Scopello Scopello of the Institut de France (Académie des Inscriptions et BellesCorrespondant of Lettres), Corresponding Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities (), Directeur de recherche (1st class) at Centre National de la Recherche Scientique, Paris ( 8167), Paris, Directeur d’études at the École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris (chair of “Gnosis and Manichaeism”). Her works include L’Exégèse clude L’Exégèse de l’âme (Nag Hammadi , 6): introduction, traduction, com (Leiden, 1985); Les 1985); Les Gnostiques (Paris, mentaire (Leiden, mentaire Gnostiques (Paris, 1991, translated in Italian, Japanese and Corean); L’Allogène Corean); L’Allogène (Nag Hammadi X, 3), wi th W.-P W.-P.. Fun Funk, k, P.-H. Poi3), with rier, J.D. Turner (Québec-Louvain, 2004); Femme, 2004); Femme, Gnose et Manichéisme. De l’espace mythique au territoire du réel (Leiden, (Leiden, 2005); Saint 2005); Saint Augustin, Sur la Genè Ge nèse se co cont ntre re le less Ma Mani nich chée éens ns.. Su Surr la Ge Genè nèse se au sens sens litté littéra ral,l, Livr Livree inac inache hevé vé , with A.-I. Bouton, M. Dulaey, P. P. Monat (Paris, 2005); and and Les Les Évangiles apocryphes (Paris, 2007 and 2016). Helmut Seng Seng Associate Professor at the Universities of Konstanz and Frankfurt am Main. In 2010, he was also directeur also directeur d’études invité at at the École Pratique des Hautes Études (Paris). He is also series editor of the Bibliotheca the Bibliotheca Chaldaica. Chaldaica. His works include Untersuchungen include Untersuchungen zum Vokabular und zur Metrik in den Hymnen des (Frankfurt am Main, 1996); Ver 1996); Vergils Synesios (Frankfurt Synesios gils Eklogenbuch. Aubau, Chronologie ΑΓ ΟΙ , ΑΖ ΑΖΩ Ω ΝΟΙ ΝΟ Ι , ΖΩ ΖΩΝΑ ΝΑΙΟ ΙΟΙ Ι .Drei und Zahlenver Zahlenverhältni hältnisse sse (Hilde (Hildesheim, sheim, 1999); ΚΟ ΑΓΟΙ . Drei
berg, 2009); 2009); Unlivre Begrife chaldaeischer Kosmologie und ihr Fortleben(Heidel Fortleben (Heidelberg, Oracle cless Chaldaï Chaldaïque quess (Br (Brepol epols, s, 201 2016, 6, Médaill Médaillee Le sacrédel’Antiquitétardive:LesOra sacrédel’Antiquitétardive:Les Fèvreèvre-De Deum umier ierde de Pon onss 2018 2018 of the theAc Acadé adémi miee desIn des Insc scrip riptio tions ns et Be Belllles es Le Lett ttre res) s);; as well ell as nume numero rous us arti articl cles es,, ma main inly ly on lat late an anti tiqu quee topi topics cs,, in pa part rtic icul ular ar on the the Chaldaean Oracles. Oracles. Andrei Timotin SeniorresearcherattheRomanianAcademy(),AssociateProfessoratthe Univer Uni versity sity of Bucha Buchares rest,t, Ph.D Ph.D. in Hi Histo story ry (École (École des des Hautes Hautes Étu Études des en Sci Scienc ences es Sociales,Paris),Ph.D.inAncientPhilosophy(ÉcolePratiquedesHautesÉtudes, Paris). His publications on the Platonic tradition include La include La démonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimōn de daimōn de de Platon aux derniers néoplatoni (Brill, 2012, Reinach Prize of the Association Asso ciation des Études Grecques, Paris); ciens (Brill, ciens Platonic Theories of Pray Prayer er , with John Dillon (Brill, 2016); and La and La prière dans la tradition platonicienne, de Platon à Proclus (Brepols, Proclus (Brepols, 2017). Thomas Tho mas Vid Vidart art Teacher of Philosophy in Classes Préparatoires aux Grandes Écoles (Khâgne) at the Lycée Champollion (Grenoble, France). He currently also teaches at the University of Grenoble. He has translated Plotinus’ treatise, On treatise, On Well-Being ell-Being:: J.-F. Pradeau (eds.), Plotin, (eds.), Plotin, Tr (Paris, Plotin, Tr Traité aité 46 , in L. Brisson et J.-F. Traités aités 45–50 45–50 (Paris, 2009). Marilena Vlad Holds a Ph.D. in sciences in sciences religieuses from religieuses from École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris (2011). She coordinates a research project at the Institute for Philosophy “Al. Dragomir” (Bucharest), is assistant professor at the University of Bucharest, and member of the editorial board of Chôra. Chôra. Revue d’études anciennes et médiévales. médiévales. She translated into Romanian the rst part of Damascius’ Plotinus’ Enneads.. Recent publications De principiis principiis,, and several treatises of Plotinus’ Enneads include: Damascius include: Damascius et l’aporétique de l’inefable l’inefable (Paris, forthcoming); “Steppingg into pin into theV the Void: oid: Procl Proclus us and and Dam Damasc asciu iuss on Ap Appr proac oachi hing ng the the Fir First st Pri Princ ncipl iple, e,”” International Journal of the Platonic Tradition Tradition 11 11.1.1 (201 (2017) 7);; “D “Den enys ys l’Aréo l’Aréopag pagit itee et l’l’image image divine: symbole, empreinte, empreinte, statue, statue,”” in in L’ L’icône icône dans la pensé penséee et dans l’art , ed. by K. Mitalaité and A. Vasiliu (Brepols, 2017); and “Damascius and Dionysius on prayer and silence, silence,”” in in Platonic Platonic Theories of Praye Prayer r , ed. by J. Dillon and A. Timotin (Brill, (Brill, 20 2016). 16).
Introduction According to Sallustius, a Roman statesman and Neoplatonic philosopher, who compo com posed sed a summa summary ry of Ne Neop opla lato tonic nic th thou ough ghtt in the the fou fourth rth ce cent ntur uryy, “the “the wid wider er thegapisbetweenournatureandtherstGod,themorepowersmustbethere between us and Him.” Henri Dominique Safrey has emphasised that there are two sides to this propensity in Late Neoplatonism: “First of all, the tendency to monotheism, which generates a supreme and rst God, but connes it as far away as possible from the grasp of intelligence and human knowledge; this is the unknown god. Correlatively, between this inaccessible God and us, the intermediaries (secondary gods, angels, demons and heroes) multiply, but these these ar aree the the agen agents ts of an ascen ascensi sion on towa toward rdss the the rst rst God God..” Th Thee in inte term rmedi ediari aries es aretheoreticallynecessarywithintheNeoplatonictheologicalsystemandtheir raison d’être directly d’être directly ensues from the absolute transcendence of the rst principle cip le.. A thor thorou ough gh un unde derst rstan andin dingg of their their na natu ture re an andd fu func nctio tionn is, is, ther theref efor ore, e, on onee of the major imperatives for the study of Neoplatonic theology. theology. This book, This book, which which origi origina nate tess from from a panel panel on De Demon monol olog ogyy an andd Theu Theurg rgyy orgaorganizedattheannualmeetinginLisboninJune2014,aimstostudytheplace of angels and demons in Neoplatonic thought. The topic was chosen not only because their theological signicance is undeniable, but also because these beings are mutually dependent within the various Neoplatonic metaphysical sy syst stem ems. s.Th This is boo bookk br brin ings gs toge togeth ther er elev eleven en st stud udies ies wh whic ichh ex exami amine ne in chro chrono nolo loggical order the place reserved for angels and demons not only by the main Neoplatonic philosophers (Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus, and Proclus), but also in Gn Gnost ostici icism, sm, the Chalda —an esse essentia ntial,l, though though stil stilll und unders erstudi tudied ed Chaldaean ean Orac Oracles les—an ingredient in Neoplatonic thought—, Christian Neoplatonism, and especially by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, as well as by other important precursors to Neoplatonic and Christian angelology such as Philo of Alexandria. Sallus Sallustiu tius, s, On the Gods and the Universe 26. Tr Trans. ans. Nock Nock (1926). (1926). Safrey Safrey (198 (1981), 1), 168 [= (1990), (1990), 48]: “d’abord la tendance tendance au monoth monothéisme éisme,, qui forge un dieu suprêmeetpremier,maisenlerecoulantleplusloinpossible,horsdelaprisedel’intelligence et de la connaissance humaines, c’est c’ est le dieu inconnu. Corrélativement, entre ce dieu inaccessible et nous, on multiplie les intermédiaires, dieux secondaires secondaires,, anges, démons et héros, maisceux-làsontlesagentsd’uneascensionverslepremier.”SeeTrouillard(1957),forProclus as “théoricien des médiations.” We leave leave aside the Neoplatonic Neoplatonic heroes and se secondary condary gods, bu butt we maintain that they cercertainlydeser tainlydeserve vemor moree sch schola olarlyatte rlyattenti ntion ontha thann they they ha have vere recei ceive vedd sofar so far.. Seehoweve Seehoweverr thesecond thesecond contri con tribut bution ion of Luc Briss Brisson on and the con contri tribut bution ionss of Helmu Helmutt Seng Seng and Sea Seamus mus O’Neil O’Neilll in this this volume.
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
An important reason for studying the notions of “angel” and “demon “demon”” together is that they belong both to religious and philosophical vocabularies, although demons admittedly have enjoyed a more prominent philosophical career than have the angels. As a general characterization, one could say that “demon” (δαίμων) designates, in the Greek religion, a kind of o f divinity divinity,, without speciccultandmythology,distinctfromthegodsandtheheroes,although δαίμων ma mayy be ofte oftenn unde unders rsto tood od as an eq equi uivval alen entt term term for for θεός.Itcanrefertofate (μοῖρα), to revenging spirits (Erinyes), or to the souls of the dead. The seman-
tic uidity of the term is one of the reasons why the notion of the “demon” became an important factor for the philosophic philosophical al rationalisation rationalisation of religi religion, on, especially in Plato’s dialogues, but already in Pre-Socratic philosophy, and in the Pythagorean and Stoic traditions. Plato dened the “demon” as an essentially good middle-being between gods and humans (Symposium ( Symposium 202d–203a), 202d–203a), as a personal tutelary being ( Republic ( Republic 617d–e, 617d–e, 620d–e, Phaedo 620d–e, Phaedo 107d), 107d), or as an equivalent to the divine part of human soul, the νοῦς (Timaeus (Timaeus 90a–c). 90a–c). Plato’s authority and inuence were enormous in Middle- and Neoplatonism to such an extent that the philosophical demonologies of Late Antiquity can be anal ysed as an exegesis exegesis of his texts concerning ““demons. demons.” ” In Neoplatonism, with which this volume deals specically, this attempt to interpret and explain Plato’s writings about demons is observed rst in Plotin Plo tinus—a us—ass shown shown by the study study of Tho Thomas mas Vida Vidart— rt—,, who tries tries to harm harmonis onise, e, notabl not ablyy in Ennead in Ennead 4 [15] [15],, a se seri ries es of Plat Platon onic ic re refe fere renc nces es to the the de demo mons ns (esp (espeecially Republic 617d–e Republic 617d–e and Timaeus and Timaeus 90a–c) 90a–c) with the principles of his own philosophy. Plotinus’ demonology is intertwined with his theory of the soul, but Vidart shows the limits of Plotinus’ interest in demons, an attitude signicantly diferent than that of the Later Neoplatonists. Porphyry seems to have been the rst Neoplatonic philosopher to assign demons a specic place within a complex theological system. Luc Brisson accurately accur ately denes this place by recons reconstructin tructingg the Porp Porphyr hyrian ian theolog theologyy and by highlighting its debt to Plotinus and, of course, to Plato. Porphyry does not hesitate to use the demons to criticize popular religion, but he tried to
See Hild (1881); Gernet Gernet (1917), (1917), 316–321 and and 328–329; Wilamowitz-Moellendorf Wilamowitz-Moellendorf (1931), , 362– 370; Nilsson (1941), 201–206 and (1950), 199–207; François (1957); Rexine (1985); Suáre Suárezz de la Torre (2000); (2000); Timotin (2012), 13–36. See especially especially François François (195 (1957), 7), 64 n. 2 and 336 n. 3, for statistical lists. On Plato’s Plato’s views on demons, demons, see Robin (1908 (1908)) [1964] [1964];; Motte (1989), Timotin (2012), 37–84. This This is one oneof of thecon the conclu clusio sions ns of the themos mostt re recen centt synthe synthesis sis of Platon Platonic ic de demon monolo ology; gy; seeTimotin (2012).
make demon make demonol olog ogyy com compat patibl ible, e, at le least astin in pa part, rt, wit withh phil philoso osoph phic ical al re reliligi gion. on.PPor or-phyry’s mythological exegesis, like that developed in De in De Antro Nympharum, Nympharum, poses nevertheless, specic problems regarding the relationship between the demons and human souls or the gods, and this aspect of Porp Porphyr hyry’s y’s thought is explored by Nilufer Ackay. From a diferent perspective, Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum highlights the importance of astrology (underestimated so far) in Porphyry’s thought. Greenbaum shows how Porphyry’s astrological concerns have informed a signicant part of his approach to diferent topics like the personal demon, the incarnation of the soul, and its choice of the way of life. Thepol The polemic emical al fun functio ctionn of demo demonol nology ogyin in Neo Neopla platon tonism ism is particu particular larly ly notenote worthy in Iamblichus and Proclus, as shown by Seamus O’Neill and Andrei Timotin, who focus on the criticism respectively of Porphyrian demonology by Iamblichus and of Plotinian demonology by Proclus. In Late Neoplatonism, demonology demonology is no longer though thoughtt of only in relation to the soul, and the place of demons in the kosmos the kosmos is is dened according to a diferent theological basis bas is.. Iamb Iamblilich chus us’’ views views on de demon monss are are not, not, howe howeve verr, dev devoid oid of ambigu ambiguiti ities es,, as O’Neill shows, especially concerning the respective descriptions of good and evil demons in the De the De mysteriis, mysteriis, and given that Iamblichus denies some of the ontological and psychological grounds to which his predecessors appealed to account for how and why demons can be evil. By analysing Proclus’ criticism of Plotinian demonology, Timotin explains why Proclus does not refer in this context to the doctrine doctr ine of the undescended soul, on which Plotinus’ theory relies, and which Proclus refuted on various occasions. Timotin shows that Proclus’ strategy is related to the fundamental change in the reading order of Plato’s dialogues introduced by Iamblichus, which, in turn, increased the importance of Symposium’s Symposium’s demonological passage and, correspondingly, correspondingly, decreased the signica signicance nce of Timaeus’ Timaeus’ locus locus equat equating daimon ing daimon with with νοῦς. The new functions that the demons perform in Late Neoplatonism are not unrelated to the inuence of the Chaldaean the Chaldaean Oracles, Oracles, the “pagan Bible” (the appellation belongs to H.D. Safrey) of Late Antiquity. Helmut Seng assumes the arduous task of studying the place of ddemons emons in this challenging work. He shows that in the Chaldaean the Chaldaean Oracles, Oracles, demons appear as evil beings (related to Hecatee or to the Moon), which are understood Hecat understood to disturb the theurgical rituals and to keep human beings close to material life. Seng also highlights the mediating function of συνοχεῖς the Symposium,, and raises the συνοχεῖς, borrowed from the Symposium question of whether these middle-beings are to be regarded as demons. In Ancient Greece, the word “angel” (ἄελος, which means “messenger”) designates either a specic function of gods (especially Hermes) and humans,
or a specic type of divine being, like, for instance, the psychopomps. The notion had no philosophical career prior to the postpost-Hellen Hellenistic istic period. This new usage begins only when the angels in Jewish thought are equated with Platonic daimones Platonic daimones.. Philo of Alexandria is probably the rst to assimilate the twoo te tw term rms, s, and and th thus us,, he pl plaays an es esse sent ntia iall role role in ac accl clim imat atiz izin ingg the the no noti tion on,, bo borrrowed from the Semitic heritage, into Hellenic culture. The Semitic heritage (especially esoteric Judaism) also inspires the various Gnostic angelologies of Late Antiquity, and to a lesser extent was inuenced by Middle- and Neoplatonism, as Madeleine Scopello convincingly shows. In Late Antiquity, Antiquity, angels become a religious reality in their own right in the Greco-Roman world. They are distinct from their Jewish and Christian paralle lels ls,, thoug thoughh perha perhaps ps not not alwa always ys uncon unconne nect cted ed to them. them. Durin Duringg the same same tim time, e, the philosophical life of the notion continued in the works of authors such as Cornelius Labeo, Nicomachus of Gerasa, Calcidius, and in the Chaldaean the Chaldaean Orathe Chaldaean Oracles is cles.. The presence of angels in the Chaldaean cles Oracles is studied by Seng, who analyses their function and their analogical relationship relating to the gure of the theurgist and also questions their relation to the Platonic (good) daimones.. mones Starting with Iamblichus, the angels have a permanent presence in Late Neoplatonic theology. Luc Brisson denes their place in Proclus’ theological system and their oce on the earth through rituals performed by priests who play the role of messengers, making the gods appear to human beings, and transmitting the prayers of human beings to the gods. Ghislain Casas examines Christian Christian Neoplatonic Neoplatonic angelology angelology, studying studying the Neopl Neoplatonic atonic heritage in Pseudo-Dionysius’angelologyandhighlightingthediferencesbetweenthelatter and the angelology angelology of Philo of Alexan Alexandria. dria. A comprehens comprehensive ive study of the place of angels in Pseudo-Dionysius’ theology is ofered by Marilena Vlad. This book aims to encompass and address a wide spectrum of problems raised by the place of angels and demons in the various Neoplatonic theological systems and in related works, such as the Gnostic texts and the Chaldaean the Chaldaean Oracles.. Without pretending to have exhausted such a wide and complex subOracles
See See Mi Micchl (196 (1962) 2).. On Philo Philo’s ’s angelolo angelology gy,, see see Dillo Dillonn ((198 1983), 3), 187– 187–206; 206; Calabi Calabi ((2004 2004); ); Timotin Timotin (2012) (2012),, 1100–1 00–112, 12, and Ghislain Casas’ article in this volume. On angels angels in Late Late Antique Antique paga pagann milieus, milieus, see Cumon Cumontt (1915); (1915); Guarducc Guarduccii (1939); (1939); Pippidi Pippidi (1949); Michl (1962), 53–60; Sokolowski (1960); Sheppard (1980/1981); Belayche (2010); Cline (2011). Th Thee clas classi sica call stud studyy of Cumo Cumont nt (191 (1915) 5) stil stilll rema remain inss th thee main main re refe fere renc ncee fo forr th thee ph phil ilos osop ophi hica call angelology of Late Antiquity.
ject, we hope that tha t signicant progress has been made towards understanding this essential aspect of Neoplatonic Neoplatonic metaphy metaphysical sical and relig religious ious thought. W Wee would like to extend our thanks to the General Editors, Robert Berchman and John Finamore, for accepting this vvolume olume into the series. We would also like to thank the anonymous referee for his or her insightful and helpful comments, which served to improve improve scholarly quality of the volume. The Editors
Bibliography
Angeloi in Belayche, Nicole (2010), “ Angeloi in Religious Practices of the Imperial Roman East”, Henoch 32 [= Ancient Judaism and Christianity in Their Graeco-Roman Context: French Perspectives Perspectives], 44–65 Calabi, Francesca (2004), “Ruoli e gure di mediazione in Filone di Alessandria”, Adamantius 10, 89–99. l’ histoire des religions 36,159– Cumont,, Fr Cumont Franz anz(19 (1915) 15),, “Les “Les anges anges du pagani paganisme sme””, Revue de l’histoire 182 Cline, Robert (2011), Ancient Angels. Conceptualizing Angeloi in the Roman Empire, Leiden—Boston. Dillon, John (1983), “Philo’s Doctrine of Angels”, dans D. Winston, J. Dillon, Two treatises of Philo of Alexandria. A Commentary on the De gigantibus and Quod Quod Deus sit immutabilis, Chico (Calif.), 197–206 François,Gilbert(1957), Le polythéisme et l’emploi l’ emploi au singulier des mots θεός , δαίμων dans la littérature littérature grecque d’ d’ Homère jusqu jusqu’’ à Platon, Paris. Rech cher erch ches es sur sur le dé déve velo lopp ppem emen entt de la pe pens nsée ée juri juridi diqu quee et mora morale le en Gernet Ger net,, Louis Louis (1917 (1917), ), Re Grèce. Étude sémantique, Paris.
Guarducci , M. (1939), Guarducci, (1939) , “Angelos” “Angelos”,, Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni 15, 15, 78–88 Hild, Joseph-Antoine (1881), Étude sur les démons dans la littérature et la religion des Grecs, Paris. Geschi chicht chtee der griech griechisc ischen hen Re Religi ligion on, . Bis zur zur grie griech chisisNilsson, Martin P. (1941), (1950), Ges chen Weltherrschaf eltherrschaft t , . Die hellenistische und römische Zeit , München. Michl, J. (1962), “Engel (heidnisch, jüdisch, christlich)”, in Reallexicon für Antike und Christentum, ed. Theodor Klauser Klauser,, Bd. , Stuttgart, 53–200 Motte Mot te,, André André (1989) (1989),, “La catégo catégorie rie platon platonici icienn ennee du dém démoni onique que””, in J. Ries Ries (ed.), (ed.), Anges et démons. Actes du colloque de Liège et de Louvain-la-Neuve (25–26 novembre 1987), Louvain, 205–221. Nock, Arthur D. (1926), Sallustius, Concerning the Gods and the Universe. Edited and translated by, Cambridge.
Pippidi,i, Dio Pippid Dionis nisie ie M. (1949) (1949),, “Sur “Sur un ange ange gardie gardienn”, Re Revue vue des études études ancien anciennes nes 51, 68–82 68–82.. Rexine, John E. (1985), “ Daimon Daimon in Classical Greek Literature”, Platôn 37, 29–52. Robin, Léon (1908), La théorie platonicienne de l’ amour , Paris. [1964]. Safrey, Henri Dominique (1981), “La théurgie comme pénétration d’éléments extrarationnels dans la philosophie grecque tardive”, in Wissenschaftliche und außerwissenschaftlic sensch aftliche he Rationalität Rationalität.. Referat Referatee und undTTexte des 4. Inte Internatio rnationalen nalen Human Humanistisch istischen en Symposiums 1978, Athens, 153–169 (reprint in H.D. Safrey, Recherches sur le néoplatonisme après Plotin, Paris, 1990, 33–49). Sheppard, A.R.R. (1980/1981), “Pagan Cult of Angels in Roman Asia Minor”, Talanta 12– 13, 77–101. Sokolowski,F.(1960),“Surleculted’ angelos danslepaganismegrecetromain”, Harvard Harvard Theological Review 53, 225–229. Suárez de la Torre, E. (2000), “La nocíon de daimon en la literatura de la Grecia arcaica et clásica”, clásica”, in A. Pérez Jiménez, G. Cruz Andreotti (ed.), Seres intermedios. Ángeles, demonios y genios en el mundo mediterráneo, Madrid—Málaga, 47–87. Timotin, Andrei (2012), La démonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimōn de Platon aux derniers néoplatoniciens (Philosophia Antiqua 128), Leiden—Boston. Revuee phil philoso osophiq phique ue de Trouillard, Jean (1957), “Le sens des médiations proclusiennes”, Revu Louvain 55, 331–342. Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Wilamowitz-M oellendorf, Ulrich von von (1931), (1931), Der Glaube der Hellenen, 2 vols, Berlin.
The Daimon and the Choic oice of Li Liffe in Plot lotinus’ Thought Thomas Tho mas Vid Vidart art * A whole treatise is devoted by Plotinus to the t he nature of the daimon the daimon:: it is the fteenth treatise in the chronological order, entitled, On entitled, On our Allotted Daimon. Daimon. This treatise has to do with a very particular demonology which is developed out of exegetical concerns: Plotinus aims to account for the diferent passages that deal with the daimon the daimon in in Plato’s work. In particular, according to the myth of Er, the soul has to choose before incarnation a daimon a daimon which which will guide it during its exist existence: ence: it does not change its demon during its incarn incarnate ate life. This would imply, if we follow Plotinus’ understanding of the nature of the daimon,, that one has to let the same power prevail in one’s soul throughout daimon one’s entire existence. How could one keep one’s daimon one’s daimon during during one’s entire life life if this this me mean anss that that one one is depriv deprived ed of the the pos possi sibil bility ity of mor moral al impro improve veme ment nt?? The aim of this paper is to show that Plato’s statement cannot be accepted by Pl Ploti otinu nuss bec becau ause se of its cons conseq eque uenc nces es.. For insta instanc nce, e, on onee cou could ld not not be beco come me wis wisee because becoming wise means making the intellect be dominant in the soul, thereby ther eby cha changi nging ng one one’’s daimon .Thus,wehavetoinquireintohowitispossible daimon.Thus,wehavetoinquireintohowitispossible that the soul makes a choice in the course of life itself.
Thee Na Th Natu ture re of the the daimon acc accord ording ing to Plotin Plotinus us
We rst have to explain what the daimon We the daimon is is in Plotinus’ thought. In a general manner, the daimones the daimones are are charac characteriz terized ed by their inter intermediary mediary situation between the place where men are and the realm of gods. This way of describing the daimones the daimones is is in particular inherited from the Symposium the Symposium (202d–203a), (202d–203a), in which Plato maintains that Eros and the other demons are intermediaries intermediaries between human beings and gods. When he evokes the inuence of magical incantations in the Treatise On Treatise On Diculties about the Soul , Plotinus explains thatthe daimones arewonttopayattentiontoprayersmadebypeoplelivingin
* I would like to to thank very much Seamus O’Neill who accepted to read over this study study and to correct its English.
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
the sensible world. It is tempting to establish a link between this thesis and the event that Porphyry narrates in his On his On the Life of Plotinus and the Order of illust stra rate tess that that Ol Olym ympi pius us of A Ale lexan xandri driaa was was jea jealo lous us of PPlo lotin tinus us in His Books Books.. He illu an anecdote dealing with the latter’s latter ’s own own daimon daimon:: to explain why the diferent hostile hos tilepra practi ctices ces of Ol Olymp ympius ius of Alexan Alexandria dria failed, failed, Porph Porphyry yry und underl erline iness the fact that Plotinus’ soul was outstandingly powerful. In this way, he relates that an Egyptian priest invited Plotinus to come to the Iseion, a temple devoted to Isis in Rome, and succeeded in making Plotinus’ daimon Plotinus’ daimon appear. appear. The latter was in fact a god: When the daimon the daimon was was summoned to appear a god came and not a being of the daimon the daimon order, order, and the Egyptian said, ‘Blessed are you, who have a god for your daimon your daimon and and not a companion of the subordinate order. order.’’ This anecdote suggests that the power of one’s soul is the result of the rank of one’s daimon Accord rdin ingg to Porp orphy hyry ry,, this this ev even entt is imp import ortan antt sin since ce it hi high ghliligh ghts ts daimon.. Acco the reason why Plotinus was interested in the question of the daimones the daimones and and more precisely in the hierarchy between them. He explains that the fact that Plotinus’ soul was directed towards his own daimon own daimon,, which was actually a god, may account account for his writing the Tr Treatise eatise On Daimon: On our Allotted Daimon: So the companion of Plotinus was a daimon a daimon of of the more god-like kind, and he continually kept the divine eye of his soul xed on this companion. It was a reason of this kind that led hi him m to write the treatise ‘On Our Allotted Daimon Allotted whichh he se sets ts out out to ex expl plai ainn the the di dif fer eren ence cess be betw twee eenn Daimon,,’ in whic -companions. daimon-companions. daimon Theree is a co Ther cont ntra rast st be betw twee eenn th this is an anec ecdo dote te and and the the id idea eass that that Pl Plot otin inus us de devvelop elopss in the treatise On treatise On our Allotted Deamon. Deamon. We thus have have to be cautious when we See Plotinus Plotinus , 4 [28], [28], 43, 112–16 2–16.. Porphy Porphyry ry,, On the Life of Plotinus and the Order of His Books, 10, 21–25. I use here, as for Plotinus’’ treati nus treatises ses,, A.H. A.H. Armstr Armstrong ong’s ’s tra transl nslati ation, on, but I re rende nderr the word word δαίμων as “daimon”inorder to harmonize the study (the title of Treatise 15, which is On our Allotted Guardian Spirit in in Allott otted ed Daim A.H. Armstrong’s translation, thus becomes On our All Daimon) on).. We can nd nd OntheLife of Plotinus and the Order of His Books written by Porphyry in the rst volume. Ibid. Ibid. 10, 28– 28–33. 33. See on this point Guyot Guyot (2003), 335: “Outre “Outre que, pour pour des raisons chronologiques, chronologiques, Porphyre Porphyre n’ a pu as assi sist ster er à ce cett ttee séan séance ce,, il s’avèr s’avèree di di c cil ilee d’accor d’accorde derr be beau auco coup up de cr créd édit it à ce ré réci cit, t, dans dans la mesure où l’anecdote proposée pour rendre compte du traité 15 est contredite, dans sa
’
study the way in which Plotinus considers the manifestation manifestatio n of daimones: daimones: that he is interested interested in the efects of magical incan incantations tations does not thereby mean that according to him demons manifest outside the soul as a result of spells. sp ells. Plotinus does not discuss daimones discuss daimones from from the perspective of theurgy, that is to say, the ritual practices that reveal the presence of deities in the world in which human beings live and enable the latter to unite with those deities. He puts the emphasis on the fact that the daimon the daimon is is to be found within the soul itself. More precisely, precisely, the the daimon is dened in chapter chapter 3 of the Tr Treatise eatise On daimon is On our Allotted Daimon Daimon as the part of the soul that is above the one that is active in the human soul: Who, then, becomes a daimon ?Hewhowasoneheretoo.Andwhoagod? daimon?Hewhowasoneheretoo.Andwhoagod? Certainlyhewhowasonehere.Forwhatworkedinamanleadshim[after death], since it was his ruler and guide here too. Is this, then, ‘the dai‘the daiwhom om he wa wass allo allott tted ed wh whililee he li livved’? ed’? No, No, but but that that wh whic ichh is befo before re mon to wh the working principle; for this presides inactive over the man, but that which comes after it acts. If the working principle is that by which we have ha ve sense-p sense-perc ercepti eption, on, the the daimon daimon is is the rrati ation onal al pr prin incip ciple le;; but but if we lilive ve by the ra ratio tiona nall pri princ ncipl iple, e, the the daimon is wh what at is ab abov ovee this this,, pr pres esid idin ingg in inac ac-ti tivve an andd gi givi ving ngit itss cons consen entt to toth thee pr prin inci cipl plee whic whichh wo work rks. s.So Soit it is ri righ ghtl tlyy said said that ‘we shall choose.’ choose.’ For we choose the principle which stands above us according to our choice of life. We have to notice a shift in this text: tthe We he rst question concerns the kind of being bei ngss who who can be beco come me daimones thr throu ough gh re rein inca carn rnati ation on,, and and when when he de den nes es the demon that is mentioned in the Phaedo the Phaedo (107d6–7), (107d6–7), Plotinus refers to the one that each human being has. The daimon The daimon is is not a particular power of the soul: its identity depends on the power of the soul that is the most active.
possibilité même, par les thèses de ce traité”. He shows in particular that the daimon is considered to be a part of the soul, which means that it cannot appear, and that the daimon of the wise man, which is the t he One itself, cannot be seen in a sensible way at all. See Brisson (1993) and (2009). We ha have ve in th this is way way to un unde derl rline ine th thee di dif fer eren ence ce betw betwee eenn Plot Plotin inus us and and Iamb Iamblilich chus us (s (see ee th thee De mysteriis). Plotinus Plotinus , , 4 [15], 3, 1–10. Timotin Timotin (2012), 295 und underlin erlines es this point: “Dans “Dans cette per perspect spective, ive, la notion notion de δαίμων ne désigne plus une réalité spécique, mais un rapport de subordination, elle est une notion relative, sans contenu préétabli”.
According to Plotinus, a hierarchy between the diferent kinds of life corresponds to the hierarchy between the diferent parts of the soul. Indeed, the kind of life that one has depends on the part of the soul that dominates and therefore on the position of the daimon the daimon in in the soul. The daimon The daimon thus thus appears as a psychological function: it is described as a power of the soul which stands just above the active power in the soul. It is not itself active, but it is dominating the power that is active. There is indeed a hierarchy between the diferent powers of the soul: the rational principle is, for inst instanc ance, e, above above se sens nse-p e-per ercep ceptio tion. n. Wh What at is the the ro role le of the the daimon daimon,, if iitt is not active? It is the guide of our existence: it agrees with the power that we have chosen, but it also shows the t he way that has to be followed. Indeed, it leads us to adopt the kind of life that is just above the kind of life adopted at the present time. In the following lines of chapter 3, Plotinus opposes the wicked man to the onee who on who is goo ood. d.TThe latt atter is able able to co coin inci cide de wi with th the the lif ifee of the the daimon which daimon which is located above the active part of his soul: But if a ma But mann is abl able to fol follow the daimon daimon which which is above him, he comes to be himsel himselff abov above, e, liv living ing tha thatt daimon daimon’slife,andgivingthepre-eminenceto ’slife,andgivingthepre-eminenceto that that be bett tter er part part of hhim imse self lf to wh whic ichh he is bein beingg led; led; and and afte afterr that that daimon he rises to another anot her,, until he reaches the heights. The goo oodd man man th thus us does does no nott kee eepp the the sa same me daimon daimon:: he ha hass in fact fact su succ cces essi sivvel ely y several ones. Plotinus insists that the soul’s many diferent powers account for the diferent ways of life that people adopt. To make a choice means that the soul pays attention either to the sensible world or to the intelligible one, since the the huma humann bein beingg hold holdss a po posit sition ion in inte terme rmedia diate te betwe between en them. them. In thi thiss wa wayy, the the daimon is daimon is not allotted allotted to the soul from the outside: its allotment allotment depends on th thee wor orld ld whic whichh is ch chos osen en by each each so soul ul.. Th This is co conc ncep epti tion on ho hold ldss huma humann be bein ings gs liable for the choices that they make.
Plot Plotinu inuss , 4 [15] [15],, 3, 18–2 18–20. 0. We haveto haveto poin pointt out out the the cont contra rast st be betw twee eenn the the ti titl tlee of Tre reat atis isee 15 (On our ourAll Allott otted ed Daimon: Plotinus uses a similar expression in chapter 3, 3–4), which comes from a way of speaking that we nd in the Phaedo (107d6–7), and the idea of a choice made by the soul: it appears that the attribution of a daimon is not imposed, since the soul itself chooses its daimon.
’
Thee Re Th Resp spon onsi sibi bili lity ty of Each Each So Soul ul fo forr Its Its Choi Choice ce of Life Life
The choice of a kind of life implies the responsibility of the one who chooses. According to the myth of Er, Er, which can be found in book of the Republic the Republic,, the diferent souls choose before their reincarnation the new kind of life they are going to experience. The The myth sets out what Er has observ observed ed concerning the the path path foll follow owed ed by soul soulss se sepa para ratted from from the the bodi bodies es afte afterr de deat ath. h. As he hi hims msel elf f died in the battle, Er could accompany the souls of the dead, but he has been allowed to come back to life. What interests us in this m myth yth deals with the step that that pr prec ecede edess th thee re rein inca carn rnati ation on of the theso soul ul:: Plat Platoo un under dersc scor ores es the the fac factt that that ea each ch soul has to choose a daimon a daimon which which will accompany it during its new life until its next reincarnation, one thousand and one hundred years later. There are, more precisely, two diferent stages: rst, each soul receives a lot which gives it a rank to make the choice, and next, the soul has to make the choice itself. Plato thus stresses that each soul chooses its kind of existence and therefore is responsible for the life it will have, as we can see when we read the speech of the one who is presented as a kind of interpreter of the Fates: The word of the maiden Lachesis, daughter of Necessity. Souls of a day, this is the beginning of another round of mortal kind that ends in death. No daimon No will select you by lot, but you will be the one to choose a daia dai daimon will mon.. Let the one who draws the rst lot be the rst to choose a life to mon which he will adhere of necessity necessity.. But virtue has no master; by honoring or di dish shon onor orin ingg it it,, ea each ch will will ha have ve a gr grea eate terr or less lesser er sh shar aree of it. it.Th Thee re resp spon on-sibility is the chooser’s; chooser ’s; god is not to be blamed. The daimon is The daimon is chosen, and its assignment assignment is not the result of fate. fate. It is even the case for the soul that chooses last: it has the opportunity to make a choice which will be advantageous for f or it since there are more samples of lives than tha n souls sou ls.. Amo Among ng the the di difer feren entt sa sampl mples es of live lives, s, on onee can n ndd lilive vess of hu human man be being ingss
Plato, Republic, , 617d6–e5. I render δαίμων as “daimon” instead of “divine spirit”. Th This is co conc ncep epti tion on of th thee daimon contrasts with the previous representation of it. See on this subject the study of Aubry (2008) who maintains that the idea of an inner daimon is to be found before Plotinus’ treatises t reatises and highlights how it evolved. She underlines the change that occurs with the myth of Er: “Platon, ici, inverse la signication cosmologique du démon. Car celui-ci est choisi et, le texte est insistant, ‘la responsabilité revient à qui choisit; le dieu, lui, n’ est pas responsable responsable’’ (617e5) (617e5).. Le démon démon dès lors n’est n’ est plus en l’individu la part subie, le lot hérité, l’intériorité comme contrainte, mais au contraire l’objet du choix” (262).
and li and livves of an anim imal als. s. Af Afte terr th thee ch choi oice ce of a ki kind nd of lif life, e, ea each ch soul soul is al allo lott tted ed a dai,whichwillguideitduringthenewlife.Asaresult,whenonechoosesalife, mon,whichwillguideitduringthenewlife.Asaresult,whenonechoosesalife, mon one chooses a daimon a daimon.. When the souls choose their future life, they are super super- vised by the Fates and especially by Lachesis. But the latter does not impose the diferent daimones diferent daimones on on the souls that are present. She only grants to each soul the daimon the that it has chosen: daimon that So when all the souls had chosen their lives, according to the draw they approachedLachesisinorderandshegaveeachthe daimon theyhadchosen to escort them as protector through their lives and as fulller of their t heir choices. The daimon ap appe pear arss in this this way as a gui uide de an andd asso associ ciat atee of a so soul ul.. The ch choi oice ce that each soul makes is in tune with the kind of life that has been experienced en ceddur durin ingg thepr the prev eviou iouss ex exist isten ence ce.. Bu Butt accor accordin dingg toth to thee my myth th of Er Er,, the the ch choic oicee is made only once, and it determines the whole life. We have to notice that the choice made by the soul can lead it to become more virtuous or less so: its moral characteristics depend on the sample of life that has been chosen. More Mo reov over er,, th thee one one wh whoo succ succee eeds ds in be bein ingg vi virt rtuo uous us is ha happ ppyy. In ag agre reem emen entt wi with th Plato’s description of the conditions of reincarnation in book of the Repubthe Repub (617d–e), Plotinus underlines that the soul chooses its daimon its daimon,, and thus lic lic (617d–e), its kind of life. Moreover, he agrees with the idea that virtue has no master. When he discusses the change cha nge of daimon that daimon that occurs when one dies, he also se seem emss to co cons nsid ider er th that at th thee sa same me demo demonn ac acco comp mpan anie iess the the so soul ul du duri ring ng its its en enti tire re life: It is not possible for the principle which led the man in life to lead [after death], but only before, when the man lived; when he ceases to live the principle must hand over its activity to another, since he has died in the life which corresponded to that daimon that daimon’s’s activity. But in order to be more or less virtuous, one has to change one’s daimon one’s daimon:: the moral change implies the possibility of changing one’s one’s demon. In this respect,
Plato, Republic, , 620d6–e1. I use the word “ daimon” instead of “spirit”. The view view th that at tthe he go godd has has allot allotte tedd to to eeve very ryone one a daimon is defended by Plato in the Timaeus (90a). Plotinu Plotinuss quo quote tess the sta state temen mentt of the Republic (, 617e3) in , 4 [28], 39, 2, , , 8 [39], 5, 31, and , 3 [52], 9, 17. Plotinu Plotinuss , 4 [15], [15], 3, 10– 10–13. 13.
’
there seems to be a conict between Plotinus’ conception and the myth of Er: accordingtothemyth,thechoicemadebythesouldeterminestheentirefuture existence. Plotinus understands Plato’s thought in this way since he maintains mai ntains in ch chap apte terr 5 of th thee tr trea eati tise se,, On our our Allot Allotte ted d Dai Daimon mon,, that that acc accor ordin dingg to Pl Plat atoo the the soul keeps the same daimon same daimon:: But if the soul’s purpose is decisive, and that part of it dominates which lies ready to hand as the result of its previous lives, the body is no longer responsible for any evil which may afect the man. For if the soul’s character exists before the body, and has what it chose, and, Plato says, does not change its daimon its daimon,, then the good man does not come into existence here below, below, and neither does the worthless one. The thesis that the daimon the daimon does does not change during life, which is defended by Plato, makes moral change impossible according to Plotinus. Ploti nus.
The Ch The Chan ange ge of the Indi Indivi vidu dual al Daimon Appears to be Moral Necessity
The choice that the soul makes has two diferent aspects which are strongly connected connec ted with each other: we choose at the same time our daimon our daimon and and our life, or rather, we choose our daimon our daimon because because we choose our life. It has to be noticed that the platonic idea of a choice made by the soul is deeply modi ed ed.. Ther Theree is in inde deed ed a ch choi oice ce,, but but th this is choi choice ce is not not ma made de by the the so soul ul be befo forre it itss reincarnation: it is made in our life itself when w hen we let one of the powers of our soull be activ sou active. e. For inst instan ance, ce, if we make make the the ratio rationa nall pri princ ncipl iplee activ active, e, we choos choosee ourr li ou life fe,, whic whichh is the the rati ration onal al on one, e, and and th ther eref efor oree we choo choose se the the daimon daimon,sinceit ,sinceit stands above the active power. But this is a choice that comes second and not rst, in so far as we choose what power is active in the soul and not the one which stands above. Plotinus’ interpretation of the myth of Er puts the emphasisonthepreliminarychoice(προαίρεσις): in ch chap apte terr 5 of Tre reat atis isee 15, 15, the the ch choi oice ce (αἵρεσις) evok evoked ed in th thee myt ythh of Er is de de ne nedd by Pl Plot otin inus us as a pr prel elim imin inar aryy choi choice ce (προαίρεσις). We have perhaps to understand that this choice is made before
Plot Plotin inus us , 4 [15] [15],, 5, 4–9. 4–9. See Plotin Plotinus us , 4 [15 [15], ], 5, 2–4: 2–4: Ἢ καὶ ἡ αἵρεσις ἐκεῖ ἡ λεγομένη τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς προαίρεσιν καὶ διάθεσιν διάθεσ ιν καθόλ καθόλου ου καὶ παντ πανταχοῦ αχοῦαἰνίττ αἰνίττεται εται.A.H.Armstrongtranslatesthispassageinthisway: “The choice in the other world which Plato speaks of is really a riddling representation of
theotherones,butmostimportantly,thiswordreferstoamoraltradition.Plotinusborrowstheterm προαίρεσις fromAristotleandfromtheStoics.According to the latt latter er,, the preli prelimin minary ary cho choice ice is th thee ten tendenc dencyy that pprec recedes edes the dif difere erent nt acti ac tion onss an andd give givess th them em th thei eirr mora morall si sign gni ic cat atio ion. n. In or orde derr to ha havve mo mora rall sign signi ication, our actions thus have to be explained by a preliminary choice, and not byalotthatisimposed.Thingsdependingonchancedonothaveanyinuence on pr prel elim imin inar aryy ch choi oice ce.. If on onee is to be resp respon onsi sibl blee for for on onee’s li life fe,, one one ha hass to ma makke a preliminary choice of one’s life. One must therefore have the opportunity to follow one daimon one daimon and and then another one in order to get wiser wi ser.. One has indeed to change one’s one’s life, as explained in the treat treatise ise On On Virtue Virtuess: Perhaps the possessor of the virtues will know them, and how much he can get from them, and will act according to some of them as circumstanc sta nces es re requ quir ire. e. Bu Butt wh when en he re reac ache hess hi high gher er pri princ ncipl iples es an andd difer diferen entt me meaasures he will act according to these. For instance, he will not make selfcontrol consist in that former observance of measure and limit, but will altogether separate himself, as far as possible, from his lower nature and will not live the life of the good man which civic vir virtue tue requires. He will le leaave th that at behi behind nd,, an andd ch choo oose se an anot othe herr, the the li life feof of the the god ods: s: for for it is toth to them em,, nottogoodmen,thatwearetobemadelike.Likenesstogoodmenisthe
the soul’s universal and permanent purpose and disposition.” As Plotinus seems to evoke the soul in a general manner and not only the soul of the world, I consider καθόλου and πανταχοῦ tobeadverbswhichapplytotheverb αἰνίττεται.ThatiswhyIproposethefollowing tra transl nslati ation: on:“Ot “Othe herwi rwise se what what is called calledthe thecho choice icemad madee there there re refer ferss in riddle riddles, s, gener generall ally y and absolutely, absolutely, to the preliminary choice and to the disposition of the soul.” We We have to
notice ,that it(“there”), which we can nd in intelligible the question and in answer answer, doesthe notword refer, refer ἐκεῖ , as (“there”), often does in Plotinus’ work,both to the world, butthe to the place where the diferent souls choose their lot according to the myth of Er. This notio notionn plays plays a very impor important tant role in the Nicomachean Ethics (book ) of Aristotle: hedistinguishesinparticularthepreliminarychoice(προαίρεσις προαίρεσις)thatconcernsthemeans and the wish (βούλησις) which is directed at the aim (see chapter 4). Epictetus also often refe refers rs to th thee prel prelim imin inar aryy ch choi oice ce in th thee Discourses: fo forr insta instanc nce, e, he gr grou ound ndss fr free eedo dom m in th thee preliminary choice (see Discourses , 12, 9–10). On the meaning of the preliminary choice in the works of the Neoplatonists and also in those of Aristotle and the Stoics (especially Epicte Epi ctetus tus), ), see Ris Ristt (197 (1975). 5).The The di difer ferenc encee betwe between en Aristo Aristotle tle’s ’s concep conceptio tionn and Epi Epict ctetu etus’ s’ is pres presen ente tedd in th this is way: way: “I “Inn Ar Aris isto totl tlee a prohaire prohairesis sis is an act act of ch choo oosi sing ng,, whil whilee in Epic Epicte tetu tuss it isthestateof havingchoseninthemoralarea,thatis,of havingbecomemoralorimmoral” (106). On Plotinus’ understanding of the preliminary choice with regard to Aristotle and to the Stoics, see in particular 107–109.
’
likeness of two pictures of the same subject to each other; but likeness ttoo th thee gods ods is lik likenes enesss to toth thee mode model,l, a be bein ingg of a di dif fer eren entt ki kind nd toou to ours rsel elvves. es. Plotinus highlights in this text the way the wise man ( σπουδαῖος) lives. Even if those who have the civic virtues become similar to gods, the latter are themse selv lves es bey beyon ondd th thes esee civi civicc virt virtue ues. s.Th Thee wise wise man man has has ther theref efor oree to re reac achh a ki kind nd of lifethatishigher.Hedoesnotonlyhavetoimprovehislife:hehastochangehis life,thatistosay,toleavethelifethathehasandtoadoptanewone,thelifeof gods go ds thems themsel elve ves, s, wh which ich is abo above ve th thee life life co corr rres espon pondin dingg to the the ci civic vic virtu virtues es.. Th This is impl im plie iess that that th thee soul soul ha hass to ad adop optt a new new life life,, th thee li life fe of the the Inte Intellllec ect. t. In this this wa wayy, Plotinus appropriates the precept presented by Plato in the Theaetetus the Theaetetus (176a– (176a– b) according to which one has to escape and to be similar si milar to the god. There must be a mobility in existence that enables the human being to favo fa vour ur a spec speci ic c part part of hhis is so soul ul an andd th ther eref efor oree a part partic icul ular ar ki kind nd of lif life. e. The The so soul ul hastobeabletomakeachoiceinthecourseof lifeitself.Plotinusseemstoprese serv rvee th thee powe powerr of th thee so soul ul to ch choo oose se it itss ki kind nd of li life fe an andd ther theref efor oree to ch chan ange ge it itss whic ichh is un unde derl rlin ined ed in chap chapte terr 7 of the the trea treati tise se OnLove .Wecanndin daimon,, wh daimon OnLove.Wecanndin this this ch chap apte terr an andd the the follo followin wingg ones ones Plot Plotinu inus’ s’ss readi reading ng of the my myth th de deal aling ing with with the birth of Eros that can be found in the Symposium the Symposium (203a–204c). (203a–204c). When he studies the link between Eros and the other daimones other daimones,, Plotinus underlines the factt that fac that the the char charac acte teris ristic ticss of Eros Eros,, an andd es espec pecial ially ly the the in insat satiab iable le desir desire, e, enab enable le us to conceive the identity of the demons: But one must consider that the whole race of daimones of daimones is is like this and comes from parents of this t his kind; for every daimon is daimon is able to provide himself with that to which he is ordered, and impelled by desire for it, and akin ak in to Lo Lovve in this this way too, oo, an andd is like ike hi him, m, too oo,, in not not be bein ingg sati satis se edd bu butt impe im pelllled ed by desi desire re for for on onee of the the pa part rtia iall thin things gs wh whic ichh he re reggar ards ds as go good ods. s. For this reason we must consider, too, that the love which good men in this world have is a love for that which is simply simp ly and really good, not just anykindof love;butthatthosewhoareorderedunderother daimones are ordered under diferent ones at diferent times, leaving their love of the simply good inoperative, but acting under the control of other daimones other daimones,, whom they chose according to the corresponding part of that which is active in them, the soul.
Plotin Plotinus us , 2 [19 [19], ], 7, 19–30. 19–30. Plotin Plotinus us , 5 [50], [50], 7, 26–36. 26–36.
Plenty and Poverty are the parents of Love and the other daimones other daimones.. This parentage accounts for the fact that the daimones the daimones are, are, as is Eros himself, at the same time ingenious and decient. We can nd in this text an opposition between betwe en good men who love the good itself and people who follow one daione daimon and mon and then another one: good men act in agreement with Eros whereas the t he ot othe hers rs do no nott foll follow ow on only ly one one de demo mon. n. Th They ey ch choo oose se thei theirr daimon :wecannd daimon:wecannd here the idea of choice, which comes from the myth of Er, but Plotinus appropriates this idea since the choice depends on the part of the soul that is active. How can we explain that good men only follow one daimon one daimon?? It is implicit that chan ch ange geis is no nott nece necess ssary arysin since ce on onee has hasre reach ached ed one one of th thee hi high ghest estle leve vels ls.. Ac Acco cord rd-ing to Plotinus, love and true things are indeed linked since the object of love is the intelligible realm: “hence our love is of simple realities, for so are our thoughts.” The other people follow one daimon one daimon and and then another because they only desire particular things. Good men do not have to be guided by various daimones ious because the change has been made before: they have indeed daimones because chosen to live the life of the Intellect. The soul’s choice of one life rather than another is not only, according to Plotinus, the stage that precedes its reincarnation, but it is also the condition that enables it to become moral. In particular, this choice is necessary for the one who wants to reach happiness, since Plotinus maintains in the treatise On treatise On that the latter consists in adopting the life of the Intellect, which is Well-Being that Well-Being characterized by its perfection: If then then man man can can have have the the perfec perfectt lilife, fe, the man man wh whoo has this this lilife fe is well well of. of. If not, one would have ttoo attribute well-being to the gods, if among them alon alonee this this ki kinnd of llif ifee is to be foun found. d. Bu Butt si sinnce we ma main inta tain in that that this this wel elllbeing is to be found among men we must consider how it is so. What I mean is this; it is obvious from what has been said elsewhere that man hass perf ha perfec ectt life life by ha havi ving ng no nott on only ly se sens nsee-li life fe bu butt re reas ason onin ingg and and true true in inte tellligence.
We do no nott have have to to do wi with th people people who who ha have ve eevil vil desire desiress since they are are discuss discussed ed in the the following lines: “But those who are impelled by desire for evil things have fettered all the lovesinthemwiththeevilpassionsthathavegrownupintheirsouls,justastheyhavefettere teredd th thei eirr ri righ ghtt reas reason on,, whic whichh is in inbo born rn in th them em,, with with th thee ev evil il op opini inion onss whic whichh have have gr grow ownn upon them” (lines 36–39). Plotinu Plotinuss , 5 [50], [50], 7, 55– 55–56. 56. Plotinu Plotinuss , 4 [46], [46], 4, 1–8 1–8..
’
Plotinus explains that a hierarchy has to be found between the diferent ki kind ndss of li life fe,, an andd th thee perf perfec ectt life life is de desc scri ribe bedd as a li life fe ch char arac acte teri rize zedd by its its br brig ight ht-ness ne ss.. One One ad adop opts ts the the perf perfec ectt life life,, wh whic ichh is th thee li life fe of the the Inte Intellllec ect, t, or ra rath ther er,, on onee becomes this life itself, in so far as one’s own intellect is not separate from the Intellect as principle. Such a thesis implies that one’s life does not coincide at once with the perfect life of the Intellect, and therefore that the daimon the daimon is is not from the beginning of existence situated above the Intellect. Only the soul of the wise man possesses this conguration. Indeed, he is characterized by his ability a bility to make the intellect dominate his enti en tire re soul soul.. In the the last last ch chap apte terr of the the Treat reatis isee On our our Al Allot lotte ted d Daim Daimon, on, Plotin Plotinus us underlines the fact that in order to be wise, one has to make the best part of one’s soul, that is to say the intellect, be active. If the intellect is active, the the dai dai necessarily is to be found at the level of the One. But how can the daimon the daimon mon necessarily mon stand at the level level of the rst principl principle, e, which is ssimple imple in an ab absolut solutee manner manner?? The answer consists in maintaining that the daimon the daimon is is not diferent from the One, the intellect, the rational principle and so on … In other words, the daithe dai is not located at the level of the power that is above the active power in mon is mon the soul, rather, it is it is the the power that is above the active power in the soul. This leads us to conclude that Plotinus does not seem to give great importance to the existence of the daimon the daimon:: he only tries to harmonize his own doctrine with the myth of Er and other passages of Plato’s work dealing with the demons.Buthehasthentofaceaproblem:if the daimon ischosenoncebefore inca in carn rnat atio ion, n, mora morall im impr prov ovem emen entt is no nott po poss ssib ible le sinc sincee the the de demo monn is is,, in hi hiss docdoctrine, the power of the soul that is above the one which is active. The daimon The daimon is only a psychological function. As a result, it cannot move from a power to another one, and the soul has to change the daimon the daimon it it follows. The thesis that the daimon the changes during life is deeply called into question by Proclus. In his daimon changes Commentary on the First Alcibiades (75–76), Alcibiades (75–76), he criticizes the identication of the daimon the daimon with with the principle that directs in the soul or with the aspect of the soul that dominates the active power in the soul. In this last option we recognize the thesis defended by Plotinus. According to Proclus, this idea has to be dismissed because its consequences are absurd: a change in the soul would imply a change change of the the daimon daimon itself. itself. Proclus does not accept that the activity of a new faculty in the soul could lead a new daimon to daimon to take the place of the present one. He maintains indeed that only one daimon one daimon is is allotted to a person during his entire existence.
See Andrei Andrei Timoti Timotin’ n’ss contr contributio ibutionn in this volu volume. me.
Bibliography Primary Sources
Armstrong, A.H. (trans.) (1966–1988), Plotinus, Enneads, 7 volumes, Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge (Mass.). Emlyn-Jones, C. and Preddy, W. (eds. and trans.) (2013), Plato, Republic, Vol. 2: Books 6–10, Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge (Mass.). Guyot, M. (trans.) (2003), Plotin, Traité 15 , in L. Brisson and J.-F J.-F.. Pradeau (eds.), Plotin, Traités 7–21, Paris. Secondary Seco ndary Liter Literatur aturee
Aubry, G. (2008), Aubry, (2008), “Démon et intériorité intériorité d’Homère d’ Homère à Plotin: esquisse d’une d’ une histoire” histoire”,, in G. Aubry and F. Ildefonse (eds.), Le moi et l’ intériorité , Paris, 255–268. Brisson,L.(1992),“Plotinetlamagie,”inL.Brissonetal.(eds.), Porphyre, Porphyre, La vie de Plotin, , Paris, 465–47 465–475. 5. Brisson, L. (2009), “The Philosopher and the Magician (Porphyry (Porphyry,, Vita Plotini 10.1–13). 10.1–13). Mythen. Medien, TransTransMagic and Sympathy”, Sympathy”, in C. Walde and U. Dill (eds.), Antike Mythen. formationen und Konstruktionen, Berlin—New-York, 189–202. Rist, J.M. (1975), “Preliminary choice: Proclus, Plotinus et alii ,”,” in H. Dörrie (ed.), De Jamblique à Proclus, Fond ondati ation on Hardt, Hardt,Ent Entret retien ienss surl’ sur l’ant antiqu iquité itécla classi ssique que,, tome tome , Vandœuvres—Genève, Vandœuvres—Genève, 103–122. Timotin, A. (2012), La démonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimōn de Platon aux derniers néoplatoniciens (Philosophia antiqua 128), Leiden—Boston.
The Angels in Ancient Gnos osiis: Som omee Cases Madeleine Scopello Ancient Gnosis has given much attention to angels, as evidenced by both b oth the excer ex cerpts pts tra transm nsmitt itted ed by the heresio heresiolog logists ists and the rs rstt-han handd sour sources ces pre preser served ved in Coptic. In my opinion, Gnostic angelology constitutes a sort of canvas on which metaphysical, cosmological, and anthropogonic themes have havebeen been grafted.. The ed The re re ec ecti tion on on the the an anggels els is clos closel elyy in inte tert rtwi wine nedd wi with th the the foun foundi ding ng them themee of Gnosis, which dissociates an inferior creator and enemy of mankind from a perfec per fectl tlyy good good an andd trans transce cend nden entt god, god, wh whoo is the the sou sourc rcee of kn know owle ledg dge. e. Bot Bothh ar aree accompanied by angels: a ngels: evil angels surround the creator creator,, and good angels, a ngels, the transcendent God. The creator, the demiurge, identied in several systems with the god of the Bible, shapes the cosmos in order to imprison man and make him his slave, depriving him of the spark of knowledge which the transcendent God had provided him. In his creative act, this ignorant and incapable god is assisted by entities often qualied in the texts by the term “angel.” In several Gnostic systems, creation is also attributed to angels acting collectively. These angels, who are co co-responsible, -responsible, or even responsible for creation, can also a lso be characterized by the term “demon” (δαίμων), or by the more technical Gnostic term “archon” (Greek ἄρχων, Latin princeps Latin princeps,, Coptic ⲁⲣⲭⲱⲛ). These (bad) (bad) ange angels ls also produce the body of man, likened to a dark jail wherein the spark of light that he possesses is stied and extinguished. Other functions are exercised by the associatee angels of the demiurge: they gov associat govern ern the cosmos and are the mercile less ss guar guardi dian anss of tthe he sp sphe here ress who who st stri rive ve to bloc blockk the the Gn Gnos osti ticc on the the ro road ad to hi hiss heavenly abode. As for the transcendent God, the Unknowable, towards whom those who have revived in themselves the cognitive spark try to return, he is also surrounded by angels. They form his heavenly court and honour him with a perpetual worship. But the angels can also act as intermediaries to lead the man who aspires to knowledge to the One; they instruct and support him in mystical experiences, most often throughout his journey to heaven: they are the agents of revelation. In addition, the enunciation and invocation of angelic names foster mystical experience and help to attain the celestial mysteries. Within the limits of this article I will provide an overview of Gnostic angelology,, using both the heresi ogy heresiologica ologicall source sourcess and the rst-hand documentation preserved in Coptic. We shall rst examine the function of the angels in their
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
relation to a defective demiurgy and, in a second seco nd stage, the various roles of the angels in the wake of the transcendent God. God . Let us remind that the texts preserved in the codices found in Egypt—the code co dexx As Askkew ew,, the code codexx Br Bruc uce, e, the the Be Berl rlin in co code dex, x, the the Na Nagg Hamm Hammadi adi codic codices es, , and the codex Tchacos—were Tchacos—were translated from Greek into Coptic towards the middle of the 4th century century.. The lost Greek texts had been composed compose d by anonymous mo us Gnos Gnosti ticc au auth thor orss be betw twee eenn th thee midd middle le of the 2n 2ndd and and the the be begi ginn nnin ingg of the the 3r 3rdd cent centur uryy, wh whic ichh si situ tuat ates es them them at ab abou outt the the same same pe peri riod od as the the re refu futa tati tion onss of the the Fathers athers of the the Ch Chur urch ch.. The The only only treat treatise isess tha thatt we were re pr proba obabl blyy wri writt tten en la late terr in Gree Gr eekk at th thee end end of th thee 3rd 3rd or ev even en the the be begi ginn nnin ingg of the the 4th 4th ce cent ntur uryy, an andd whic whichh are therefore closer in time to their Coptic transl translation, ation, are those transmitte transmittedd by the codex Bruce and a nd the codex Askew.
This codex, codex, on parchment, parchment, was bought bought by Antoninus Antoninus Askew in London, from from an antique dealer in 1750. It is preserved in the British Museum (British Library Additional 5114). It contains a treatise of 178 leaves (356 pages) usually designated by the (modern) title of Pistis Sophia. See Schmidt—MacDermot 1978a. This This co code dex, x, on papy papyru russ (in (in tota totall 78 leav leaves es = 156 156 page pages) s),, was was pu purc rcha hase sedd by th thee Scot Scottis tishh tra trave vellller er James Bruce in 1773 near Thebes. It is kept at the Bodleian Library (Bruce Mss. 96). It contains two esoteric treatises: the two Books of Jeu, which form a single set, and a treatise commonly called the Untitled Text . See Amélineau 1882; Schmidt—MacDermot 1978b; new edition by Crégheur 2018. See also Evans 2015. Purchased in 1896 in Ahmim from from an antique dealer dealer by the German philol philologist ogist Carl ReinReinhar hardt, dt, andbysub subseq sequen uently tlyMuseum ide identi ntied edas Gnostic Gnosticby by(Ber theolinensis copto coptolog logist ist Carl CarItl Schmid Sch midt,t, this thi s cod codex ex was was acquired the Berlin of as Egyptology (Berolinensis 8502). contains four treatises: the Gospel of Mary ( Magdalene), the Apocryphon of John, The Sophia of Jesus Christ , and the Act of Peter Peter . See Tardieu Tardieu 1984. 1984. A complete complete translation translation of the rst-hand rst-hand Gnostic Gnostic Coptic texts texts discover discovered ed in 1945 in Upper Upper Egypt at Nag Hammadi was established by Robinson—Smith 1988. See also Robinson 2000 and the new translation by Meyer 2007. In French, we refer to the work of the FrenchCanadian team working on the texts of Nag Hammadi (Université Lava Laval): l): Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi , Section “Textes”, Québec (36 volumes published in the series Textes between 1977 and 2017; 8 volumes published in the series Études and 7 in the series Concordances); Mahé—Poirier 2007 (2012), with the contribution of the members of the team Bibliothèque copte copte de Nag Ha Hammadi mmadi . In German, see Schenke, Bethge Bethge,, Kaiser 2001, 2003. This This co code dex, x, foun foundd in 1980 1980 in th thee regi region on of al-M al-Min inya ya,, was was ma made de avail vailab able le to sp spec ecia ialilist stss in 20 2006 06.. See Kasser et al. 2007.
:
Thee An Th Ange gels ls in the the Sphe Sphere re of Demi Demiur urgy gy
To illustrate this fundamental theme of the Gnostic doctrine, I will present, by way of example, the theories of some teachers and Gnostic groups mentioned by the heresiologist Irenæus of Lyons, and by the primary documentation, notably the Nag Hammadi texts. Thee An Th Ange gels ls in the Gnosti Gnosticc Sy Syst stem emss Kn Know own n by Heres Heresio iolo logy gy
The theme of the activity of the angels in demiurgy is well illustrated by three teach teachers erswho whom m Iren Irenae aeus us of Ly Lyon onss cons conside iders rs tobe to bethe ther rst st repr represe esent ntati ative vess of the the Gnostic doctrine in his work Against Heresies Heresies:: Detection and Refutation of the So-Called Gnosis, Gnosis, composed about 180. These teachers are Simon of Samaria, Menander,, also a Samaritan, and Saturnine of Antioch. Menander Before considering their systems, it is worth recalling how Irenaeus constructed his work. The Bishop of Lyons rst gives a general overview of the most well-known Gnostic teachers, taking as his point of departure those who were his hi s contemporaries—notably the Valentinians—and then goes back to the origins of the doctrine. He thereby sets up a kind of heresiological genealogy,, albeit an articial one, in order to emphasize, on the one hand, the lack ogy of originality originality of thinkers thinkers who are only deemed to repeat the theori theories es of their predecessors by making some “innovations,” and on the other hand, to put this heretical path in oppositio oppositionn to the apostolic success succession, ion, the sole depository of truth: one Creator God, Incarnate Son, Holy Spirit. Simon, Menander, and Saturnine are all of Jewish origin, and have in common an extremely polemical exegetical reading of the Bible and in particular of the Genesis narrative.
Letus mentionfor mentionfor therecord therecordtheothermain theothermain he here resio siolog logica icall wo works rks:: the Elenchos of thepseudothepseudoHippolytus (beginning of the 3rd century); the Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis (315–403); (315–403); various treatises of Tertullian of Carthage Carthage (160?–220),concerning (160?–220), concerning especially the Valentinians; Valentinians; the numerous excerpts of Gnostic teachers refute refutedd by Clement of Alexandria (150–216); the refutation by Origen (185–254) (185–254) of a part of the commentary of the Gnostic Heracleon on the Gospel of John. Rousseau Rousseau—Dou —Doutrel treleau eau 1979 1979 (book –); 1965 (book ); ); 1969 (book ). Cf. Rouss Rousseau eau 1984; 1984; Irenæus of Lyons 2010. I use the abbreviation AdvHaer ( Adversus Haereses). This is what Irenaeus Irenaeus calls calls the “Rul “Rulee of truth, truth,” which the Gnos Gnostics tics do not respect: respect: “F “For or us, we keep the rule of truth, according to which there exists one Almighty God who created everything by his Word, Word, has organized everything and has made all things so that they are” (AdvHaer , 22, 1). Cf. ibid., , 9, 4.
In the section dedicated to Simon of Samaria, the so-called Magician, who lived in the time of the Apostles, Irenaeus relates that Simon identied himself withthesupremePower.HavingrescuedinTyros,inPhoenicia,aprostitute named Helen, he claimed that she was his rst Thought ( Ennoia ( Ennoia),), the mother of all things, from whom he originally got the idea to make the angels and archangels (angelos (angelos et archangelos). archangelos). Now Ennoia had descended to the lower placesandhadgivenbirthtotheangelsandpowers( ang angelos eloset et pot potest estate atess)who latercreatedtheworld.Buttheseentitieswerejealousof theirmotherandsub jected her to all kinds of outrages so that she would not go back to her Father Father.. They also enclosed her in a female body and subdued her to the cycle of transmigr mi grati ation ons. s. Si Simon mon then then inte interv rven ened ed to de delilive verr her her and and to pr prov ovide ide hu human manss wi with th know kn owle ledg dgee of himse himself lf.. His His purpo purpose se was was to corr correc ectt thi thing ngs: s: the the an ange gels ls we were re bad badly ly governing the world, for each of them wanted full command over it. Here we nd nd a tr trace ace of the the Je Jewis wishh co conc ncep eptio tionn of the the an ange gels ls of the the Na Natio tions ns:: God had kept kept Israelforhimself,andgaveanationtoeachangel.ManlioSimonettiunderlined the Jewish origin of this t his theme (cf. for instance, Daniel instance, Daniel 10:13ss, Jubilees 10:13ss, Jubilees 15, 15, 31ss, and 1Enoch 89 89,, 51 51ss ss)) whic whichh Gn Gnos osti ticc th thin inkker erss resu resume me by ch char argi ging ng it with with a mo more re negative tonality. The theme of the angels of the Nations is also to be found in Ba Basi sili lide des. s. Simo Simonn furt furthe herr asse assert rtss th that at th thes esee ang angels els wh whoo cr crea eate tedd the the wo worl rldd had had also also insp inspir ired ed th thee Pr Prop ophe hets ts.. Th Thee huma humans ns were were ma made de sla slaves by the the ob obse serv rvan ance ce of the precepts established by the angels. In the few lines that Irenaeus dedicates to Menander (c. 80), presented as Simon’s successor, the emphasis is also on the role played by angels in creation.Beingamagicianlikehisteacher,Menanderpositstheexistenceof arst Power (Virtus (Virtus)) unknown to all and presents presents himself as the Sav Saviour iour sent from the invisible invisible places for the salvation of humans. humans. The angels, he says, created the world after being emanated by Thought (ab (ab Ennoia emissos). emissos). Through the magic he practiced, Menander asserted that he communicated a knowledge capable of defeating the demiurgical angels. Irenaeus then presents Saturnine and puts him in the wake of Simon and Menander. Originally from Antioch, Saturnine founded a school of thought
Iren Irenae aeus us,, AdvH AdvHae aerr , 23 23,, 1–3. 1–3. Cf. Acts of the Apostles 8. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 23, 2. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 23, 3. Simonetti Simonetti 1970, 1970, p. 7, note 8. See also Daniélou Daniélou 1951. Ibid. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 23, 5. Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 1– 1–2. 2.
:
in the rst half of the 2nd century. century. The place of angel angelss in creation creation is the leitmotiv of his doctrine. According According to Saturni Saturnine, ne, the unkno unknowable wable Father Father made angels, archangels, virtues, and powers (angelos (angelos,, archangelos archangelos,, virtutes virtutes,, potestates).). The world and all that it contains were made by seven of these angels, tates and man is also factura angelorum. angelorum. Saturnine develops an exegesis of Gene Gene 1:26, which highlights the incapability of the angels: a resplendent image sis 1:26, sis of the supreme Power appeared to them, but they could not hold it back, for this image had immediately ascended to the heights. The angels exhorted one another, saying, “Let us make a man according to the image and to the likeness!” (Genesis (Genesis 1:26). 1:26). But, because of their incapability (imbecillitas ( imbecillitas), ), the work they had shaped ( plasma plasma)) could not stand up, but it squirmed like a worm. Moved by pity, pity, the Power from above sent a spark of life that raised man and made it alive. After death, this spark of life ascends alone to that to which it is akin, while the rest from which man was made dissolves. This polemical explanation of the Genesis narrative is a leitmotiv of Gnostic thought, and appears in several sources under much amplied and elaborated forms. Saturnine also maintains that the god of the Jews is one of the angels. At this stage of the doctrine, creation is still the collective work of the angels, and the gure of the demiurge, the biblical god, is not clearly distinguishable as the main artisan of creation. It is in the presentation of the doctrine of Basilides that the character of a single creator begins to appear. Moreover, the terms “angel” and “archon” are almost interchangeable. Let us also note that with Basilides, the founder of a school in Alexandria and active between 120 and 150, we leave the territory of the very rst thinkers, anchored in Samaritan Judaism (Simon and Menander) and Antioch (Saturnine), to penetrate into multicultural Egypt, where Gnosis had developed and ourished. Basilides proclaimed that his doctrine do ctrine came from a secret tradition dating back to the apostle Matthias.
Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 1. Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 2. The Gnostics Gnostics could could nd in Ju Judais daism m elemen elements ts about about th thee demiurg demiurgical ical ange angels ls which which they they reint reinterp erpre rete tedd in a polemi polemical calwa wayy. SeeSimonett SeeSimonettii 197 1970, 0, 9, note note 15, 15,quo quoting tingtheartic thearticle le of Gr Grant ant 1967. This infor informatio mationn comes comes from Clem Clement ent of Alexand Alexandria ria (Stromata 106, 4), according to whom Basilides taught in Alexandriain Alexandria in the time of Hadrian(117–138) Hadrian (117–138),, and Antoninus Pius (138–161). Cf Cf.. Hipp Hippol olyt ytus us,, Elenchos , 20, 1–5. 1–5.
If one keeps to the report of Irenaeus, the presence of the angels in the sy syst stem em of Bas Basililide idess is of for foremo emost st imp import ortan ance ce.. Vir Virtu tues es,, ar arch chon ons, s, an andd ange angels ls ( virare bo born rn of th thee un unio ionn betw betwee eenn Pow ower eran andd Wi Wisd sdom oman andd tutes,, principes tutes principes,, angelos angelos)) are arecalled“therstones”becausetheymadetherstheaven.Fromthese,other angels came into existence by way of emanation, who made a second heaven similar to the rst, and so on, down to the constitution—through a process of degradation (ab (ab derivatione)—of derivatione)—of successive series of archons and angels and 365 heavens. heavens. At the end of the section devoted to Basilides, Irenaeus mentions that “the Basilidians determine the position of the heavens in the same way as the aastrologers: strologers: by borrowing their principles, they adapt them to the proper character of their doctrine.” Here we nd a recurring motif in Irenaeus and, more generally, among heresiologists who accuse the Gnostics of taking up,, in vario up various us eld elds—f s—fro rom m the the Bib Bible le to ph phililos osoph ophyy or astro astrolo logy gy—a —alr lrea eady dy exist exist-ingg th in theo eori ries es whic whichh th they ey sham shamel eles essl slyy ad adap aptt to thei theirr ne need eds. s. Ir Iren enae aeus us,, in this this pa passsa sage ge,, adds adds th that at “the “the ch chie ieff of hea heaven is Ab Abra rasa sax, x, an andd that that is wh whyy he po poss sses esse sess the the number 365.” 365.” The name Abrasax (or Abraxas), whose secret numerical value is the the nu numb mber er 36 365, 5, also also ap appe pear arss in so some me trea treati tise sess of Na Nagg Hamm Hammad adi i and and in the the magical literature. Basilides also asserts that “the angels who occupy the lower heaven, which we see, have done all that is in the world, and have have divided between them the earth and the nations that are in it.” It is at this point in the mythical narration that the presence of a chief of the angels is mentioned: “Their leader is he who passes for being the god of the Jews.” As he had wished to subdue the other nations to his own people (the Jews), the other nations and other archons stood up and waged war against him. Faced with this situation and seeing the perversity of the archons, the unbegotten Father sent the Intellect, his rst-born Son, Christ, to release those who believed in him from the power of the creators of the world. Basilides further maintains that the prophecies of the Old Testament originate from the world’s archons, but that it is from their leader that the Law comes. According to the testimony of Irenaeus, the
Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 24, 3–7. 3–7. Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 3. Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 7. Ibid. See the Index (by E. Crégheur Crégheur)) at “Abrasax”, Abrasax”, in Mahé—Poirier Mahé—Poirier 2007 (2012). Barb 1957. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 24, 4. Ibid. Ib Ibid id.. , 24 24,, 5.
:
disciples of Basilides perpetuate their teacher’s interest in angels. In fact, they invent names which they claim to be those of the angels, by classifying them heavenbyheaven:“theyendeavourtopresentthenamesof thearchons,angels, and virtues of their so-called 365 heavens.” According to them, the knowledge of the angels and their primary causes would enable those who possess this Gnosis to make themselves invisible and elusive before angels and powers. Ir Iren enaeu aeuss late laterr exam examine iness th thee theor theories ies of Ca Carpo rpocr crat ates es who taugh taughtt in Al Alex exan an-dria during the rst half of the 2nd century. His teaching reached Rome, carried there by his disciple Marcellina, Marcellina, at the time of Anicet (about 154). TThe he starting point of the doctrine of Carpocrates Carpocrates is also constituted by the demiurgical activity of the angels; largely inferior to the ungenerated Father, they created creat ed the world and what it contains. These κοσμοποιοί, who are also dened by the term ‘archon’, hinder the rise of Jesus to the Father as well as that of souls. But souls can redeem themselves if they despise these entities. The Carpocratians claim that they can already dominate the archons and the creators of the world by magic techniques. As for the devil, the Adversary, he is one of the angels in the world. He was created to lead the souls of the dying towards the Archon, who is the rst author of the world. This archon delivers the souls to another angel, who is the guardian of the sky, sky, that he may shut sh ut th them em up in ot othe herr bodi bodies es,, for for, ac acco cord rdin ingg to the the Ca Carp rpoc ocra rati tian ans, s, the the bo body dy is a prison. While nothing is said about angels or archons archons in the passages that Irenaeus devotes to Cerinthus, the Ebionites, the Nicolaites, Cerdon, and Marcion, such is not the case for the sectae the sectae which which Irenaeus examines later. The Barbeloites arm that the First archon, author of the universe, having carried a part of the powe powerr of his mother Wisdom, an andd having mo moved ved to infer inferior ior places,
Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. , 25, 1–6, 1–6, and also also Hippol Hippolytu ytus, s, Elenchos , 32, a faithful reprise of the text of Irenaeus in its Greek original form. AdvHaer , 1–2 presents the theories of Carpocrates, Carpocrates, the next part concerns his followers. On Mar Marcell cellina, ina, cf. Scopello Scopello 2015, 218–221. 218–221. Ir Irena enaeus eus,, Ad AdvHa vHaer er , 25, 1–2. 1–2. Ib Ibid id.. , 25, 25, 3. Ib Ibid id.. , 25, 25, 4. Ib Ibid id.. , 26–2 26–27. 7. Ibid. , 29, 1–4. In this syst system em ther theree are also angels angels in bonam partem. The acts and gest gestures ures of the Protarc Protarchon hon are desc described ribed in AdvHa AdvHaer er 29, 29, 44..
made the made the r rmam mamen entt in wh which ich he live lives. s. Be Bein ingg hi himse mself lf Ignor Ignoran ance ce,, he mad madee po powwers and angels, as well as rmaments and earthly things, and in joining with Presump Pre sumption tion (A (Auth uthadia adia), ), he als alsoo pro produc duced ed neg negativ ativee entities entities:: Wic Wicke kedne dness, ss, JealJealousy, Envy, Discord, and Desire (Zelum, Phthonum, Erin, and Epithymian). When his mother nally departed from him, saddened by his son’ son’ss actions, the First Archon saw himself as the only God, which is why he said: “I am a jealous God,andapartfrommeitisnotGod”( Exodus Exodus 20:5, 20:5, Isaiah Isaiah 45: 45:5–6 5–6,, 46: 46:9). 9). Thi Thiss expression has often been interpreted in Gnostic milieus, in contexts characterised acter ised by a very negat negative ive image of the creator creator,, identied with the biblical God. As for the Ophites, to whom Irenaeus devotes a long section, the terms of ‘angel,’ ‘heaven,’ ‘power,’ and ‘creator’ are allotted to the seven sons of the Mother. The rst of them is called Yaldabaoth. This name also appears in the primary sources so urces in which the character enjoyed some popularity. TThe he etymology of Yaldabaoth is uncertain: the meanings, “begetter of powers” (Heb. yāld + (s)abaʾ (s)abaʾoth) and “son of shame” (Heb. Behūthā) have have been proposed. Yaldabaoth Yaldabaoth is i s surrounded by a hebdomade that governs the things of heaven and earth. Likewise, angels, archangels, virtues, powers, and dominions were madebyYaldabaoth.Butassoonastheseentitiescameintoexistence,theyrose againsttheircreatorclaimingtherstplace.Themythcontinueswithaseries of episodes. episodes. Let us mention the episode based on on Exodus 20:5, where Yald Exodus 20:5, abaoth proclaims his authority and encourages the powers collectively to createtheFirstMan:“Come,letusmakeamanaccordingtotheimage”(cf. Genesis 1:26). Thus, six powers convened and shaped a man of prodigious length and breadth,who,however,wriggleslikeaworm( scarizanteautemeotantum ).Only scarizanteautemeotantum).Only an in inte terv rven enti tion on from from abov abovee ca cann st stra raig ight hten en it out. out. Th This is la last st them themee was al alre read ady y pr pres esen entt in Sat Satur urni nine ne.. In this this passag passagee one one cou could ldn ndd theec the echo ho of thesp the specu ecula latio tions ns
The theme theme of the the blasp blasphem hemyy of of the archon archon was deal dealtt wi with th by by Johnst Johnston on 2010. 2010. Fo Forr theatt the attest estati ations onsof of the these se quotat quotation ionss in thete the texts xtsof of NagHam Nag Hammad madi,i, seeEvans— seeEvans—W Webb ebb— — Wiebe 1993. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 30, 1–14. 1–14. Ib Ibid id.. , 30, 30, 4. Ib Ibid id.. , 30, 30, 5. Cf. Cf. Sc Scho hole lem m 197 1974. Black Black 1983. 1983. On these etymologie etymologies, s, see Poi Poirier rier 2006, 257–259. 257–259. Irenae Irenaeus us,, AdvHa AdvHaer er , 30, 5. Ib Ibid id.. , 30, 30, 6. Ibid.
:
of myst mystic ical al Ju Juda dais ism m on th thee co cosm smic ic size size of the the Fi Firs rstt Ma Man, n, whic whichh ar aree gr graf afte tedd on those thoseof of the the inco incomme mmens nsur urabl ablee dim dimen ensi sion onss of God( God (ShiurʾQomah ,“themeasure ShiurʾQomah,“themeasure of stature”). Angels and Demiurge in Nag Hammadi Texts
The theme of the role of angels in angels in malam partem in partem in demiurgy is also widely discussed discuss ed in the writings of Nag Hammadi, wher wheree a number of myth mythic ic largescale frescoes depicting creation creati on have been preserved: the the Apocryphon Apocryphon of John ( , 1; , 1; , 1; 2), the Hypostasis the Hypostasis of the Archons ( Archons ( , 4), and the treatise On treatise On the Origins of the World (, ( , 5). 5). Wee will take as aann example tthe W he case of the Apocryphon the Apocryphon of John. John. Let us rst mention that the term “angel” is present about 150 times in the collection of Nag Hammadi, and that it appears in 23 treatises (the collection contains 53). ItisrenderedwithoutexceptionbytheGreek ἄελος,transcribedinCoptic.As in the Gnostic excerpts preserved by heresiologists, the term “angel” is applied either to the evil entities associated with the act of creation or to the positive entit en titie iess of th thee high higher er worl world. d. In the narra narrativ tives es of cr creat eation ion,, the the terms terms “an ange gel” l” an andd “archon”” aare “archon re interchangeable. The Apocryphon of John The Apocryphon The Apocryphon The Apocryphon of John John is one of the treatises of the Nag Hammadi collection in which the work of revision and interpretation by the Gnostic exegetes of th thee Scrip Scriptur tures es is parti particu cula larl rlyy pe perc rcept eptibl ible. e. Or Orig igin inal ally ly compo compose sedd in Gr Gree eekk in thesecondhalf of the2ndcentury,ithasbeenpreservedinfourcopies:threein NagHammadiandoneintheBerlincodex.Therearetwoversions:twoarelong (NagHammadicodex,1and,1)andtwoareshort(NagHammadicodex, 1 and and Berl Berlin in Code Codexx [ 2]). 2]).Th Thee shor shortt ve vers rsio ions ns ar aree ol olde derr. Ir Iren enae aeus us of Lyons ons mo most st probablyy used probabl used a Greek version version of the sh short ort text, text, which he ssummariz ummarizes es in or order der to construct his account of the Barbeloites. Barb eloites.
On this theme, see Stroumsa 1992, especially 75; Mopsik 1989, 208–211. See also Barc 1975. Seee La Se Layt yton on 19 1989 89,, 20 2000 00.. See Tardieu ardieu 197 1974. 4. See also Layt Layton on 1989 1989,, 2000; Paincha Painchaud ud 1995. 1995. “When the seven archons were thrown down from their skies on the earth, they made for them angels in great number, number, that is demons for their service” (, 5 124, 1–8). See Giv Giverse ersenn 1963; 1963; Tard Tardieu ieu 1984; 1984; Walds Waldstein tein—W —Wisse isse 19 1995 95 (2000); (2000); Mahé—P Mahé—Poirie oirierr 2007 (2012), 217–295 ( Livre des secr secrets ets de Jean by B. Barc). Lu Lutt ttik ikhu huiz izen en 20 2006 06.. The Iren Irenae aeus us,, AdvH AdvHae aerr , 29 29,, 1– 1–4. 4. Ir Iren enae aeus us summ summar ariz izes es he here re th thee co cont nten entt of th thee rs rstt part part of The
The Apocryphon The Apocr is a discourse of revelation delivered to John by the yphon of John John is risen Jesus, whose starting point is the account of Genesis of Genesis which which the anonymous author of this text reinterprets in the light of the Gnostic myth in order to answer the questions about the origin of evil and human destiny. This very rich and complex presentation has been called the “Gnostic Bible” by Michel Tardieu since it deals with the history of origins “until now,” according to the words of its author. The central character of the treatise is the evil creator, the archon Yaldabaoth, the bestial abortion born of Sophia. Following Following the version of Nag Hammadi Codex , , we will conside considerr the episodes in which YYaldabaot aldabaothh builds his angelic court, then, with its help, shapes the rst man. Yaldabaoth, the rst archon (ἄρχων), having retained a part of the power of his mother Sophia, rst creates his own aeon and, copulating with Ignorance, generates Authorities (ἐξουσίαι), whose names are indicated ( 10, 22–11, 4). He also established seven kings for the seven heavens and ve kings of chaos to reign there ( 11, 4–7). Yaldabaoth actually has three names: Yaldabaoth, Saklas, and Samael. He is arrogant and impious, and claims to be the only god ( 11, 7–22). Seven δύναμις) co powe po wers rs (ϭⲟⲙ, th thee Co Copt ptic ic eq equi uiva vale lent nt of δύναμις cons nstit titut utee the the heb hebdom domad. ad. Each Each possessesaname,andtogethertheycreate365angels(,11,23–35).Havingproclaimed himself god, Yaldabaoth unites to the powers ( ϭⲟⲙ), which are with him, 7 authorities (ἐξουσίαι), by giving a name to each of them ( 12, 10–13, 5). Seeing the creation that surrounds him and the crowd of angels (ἄελοι) stemmingfromhim,Yaldabaotharmsthatheisajealousgodandthatthereis no ot othe herr god ap apar artt from from hi him m ( 13, 13, 5– 5–13 13). ). Co Cont ntem empl plat atin ingg the the gu gure re of the the pr priimord mo rdial ial man re re ect ected ed in the the wa wate terr, Yaldab aldabaot aothh ur urge gess his ac acol olyt ytes es to repr reprodu oduce ce it it:: “Come Come on on!! Le Lett us mak make a man man in th thee imag imagee of Go Godd an andd in our our li likkenes enesss, so that that his image becomes for us light!” (cf. Genesis (cf. Genesis 1:26). 1:26). It is rst of all the psychic body of Adam, which is shaped by the seven powers ( δύναμις) ( 15, 13–29 13–29). ). Thisbodyismadeupof abone-soul,asinew-soul,aesh-soul,amarrow-soul,a blood-soul, a skin-soul, and a hair-soul. Then the authorities (ἐξουσίαι), whose names are provided, undertake the task of creating the diferent parts of his body,, from the head to the toenails ( body ( 15, 29–17, 32).
Secret Book of John, but it is not possible to detect any precise parallels with any of the preserved versions. Cf. Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 5:9 . . See Johnst Johnston on 2010. Ap ApJo John hn , 15, 15, 1–6. 1–6. See See Van de denn Br Broe oekk 1996 1996..
:
The nomina barbara attributed The nomina barbara attributed to the entities mentioned in these sections were mainly studied by Sören Giversen and Michel Tardieu. Interpreting these names is often extremely dicult. As Michel Tardieu says, “Quant à la fabrication de noms barbares, ils sont composés la plupart du temps par jeux demétathèsessurdesracinessémitiquesousurdesnomsgrecsdéformés,désignant les fonctions attribuées aux démons par le folklore.” The names of the 5 governors of the sensitive soul ( 17, 32–18, 2), of the demons (δαίμονες) that govern the body ( 18, 2–14), as well as those of the leaders of the passions ( 18, 15–19, 1) are also mentioned in the next part of the Apocryphon the Apocryphon of John. John. The angelic account concludes with an indication of the number of angels ( 19, 2–10), totalizi totalizing ng 365. The author refers here to the “Book of Zoroaster” for further information. This book, according to Michel Tardieu, could be part of the “opuscules astrologico-apocalyptiques des ‘nou veaux Chaldéens’ de langue grecque. grecque.” ” The purpose of this construction, both detailed and complex, is to enclose Adam in a material body which will be his tomb ( 21, 10–14): “This is the tomb (σπήλαιον) of the body (σῶμα) with which the robbers (λῃσταί) have clothed the man, the fetter of forgetfulness. And he became a mortal mo rtal man.” The rest of the narrative narrative indicates that the psychic body of Adam, creat created ed by angels and demons, remains inactive and motionless for a long time ( 19, 11–14). Through a trick, Sophia leads Yaldabaoth to blow on Adam’s face: the archon loses some of the power that he possessed, which penetrates through the the br brea eath th in into to the the ps psyychic chic bo body dy of Ad Adam am.. Ad Adam am is vi vivi vi ed ed,, begi begins ns to mo move ve and and becomeslumino becomes luminous us and intel intelligen ligent.t. Afterw Afterwards, ards,YYaldabaoth aldabaoth’s ’sacolyt acolytes, es, devou devoured red by envy envy,, de deli livver Adam Adam in into to ma matt tter er an andd shap shapee hi him m a body body fr from om eart earth, h, wa wate terr, re re,, and breath in order to deprive him of his superiority.
Thee An Th Ange gels ls of the the Sp Sphe here ress
In addition to their cosmogonic role, the angels who accompany the demiurge also have other functions, including guarding the spheres. They try to prevent the return of souls to their heavenly homeland; they question them and demand answers or passwords to let them cross the heaven over which
Giv Giverse ersenn 196 1963. Tardi ardieu eu 1984 1984.. Ib Ibid id.,., 31 3100. Ib Ibid id.,., 300– 300–30 301. 1. Transla Translation tion by Waldstein aldstein—W —Wisse isse 1995 (200 (2000), 0), 123.
theypreside.Inthe First theypreside.Inthe F , pres preser ervved in two two ve very ry cl clos osee ve verrirst Apoca Apocalypse lypse of James James, sions at Nag Hammadi (codex , 3) and in the codex Tchacos (treatise 2), Jesus reveals to James the answers that he must pronounce to escape the guardians of the spheres when he faces them. These guardians are called “toll collectors” (τελῶναι). The content of James’ answers represents “redemption”: “The Lord [said] to [him]: [James,] behold, I shall reveal to you your redemption. When [you] are seized, and you undergo these suferings, a multitude will arm themselves against you, that they may seize you. And, in particular, three of them will seize you—they who sit as toll-collectors. Not only do tthey hey dema demand nd toll, but they they al also so tak takee away away souls souls bbyy theft. When you come in into to their power power, one of them who is their guard will say to you: ‘Who are you or where are you from?’ You You are to say to him: ‘I am a son, and I am from the FFather’ ather’.. He will say to to you: ‘What sort of son are you, and to what father do you belong?’ You are to say to him: ‘I am from the Pre-[existent] Father and a son in the Preexistent One’” ( 32 32,, 28–3 28–33, 3, 24 24). ). An Andd fu furt rthe her: r: “[Wh “[Whyy ha havve you co come me?] ?]”” (33, (33, 25 25). ). An Andd na nallllyy, later in the text: “ ‘Where will you go?’ you are to say to him: ‘T ‘Too the place from which I have come, there sha shallll I return’. And if you say these things, you will escape their attacks atta cks ( 34, 16–20).” In this passage we can recognize the echo of the existential interrogations expressed in the Excerpt the Excerptaa ex Theodoto (78, 2), transmitted by Clement of AlexTheodoto (78, andria: “Who were we? What have we become? Where were we? Whither have we we been cast? Whither do we hasten? From what have have we been set free?” This striking striking formula, formula, which the the Gnostic Gnosticss proba probably bly pronou pronounced, nced, appears, appears, with variations and additions, in several writings. As in the case of the First the First Apocthis is form formul ulaa is ofte oftenn in inse sert rted ed in a di dial alog ogue ue,, ar arti ticu cula late tedd in qu ques es-alypse of Jame Jamess, th tions and answers, between the toll collectors and the soul at the end of its life. In the First the First Apocalypse of James, James, the answers that James must provide reveal the privileged relationship between James, who symbolizes every soul, and the pre-existing Father, as well as his connection to the supra-celestial world outside of the grasp of the archons. This same dialogue occurs in the
Schoedel 1979 (2000); Veilleux 1986. See the commentary of Veilleux 1986, 85–92. Text tran translat slated ed by Scho Schoede edell 2000, 87–89. 87–89. James of codex TchaThis reco reconstru nstruction ction has been made possible possible thanks thanks ttoo the the lines of James cos,, whi cos which ch arein are in a better bettercon condit dition ion,, and andhas hasbee beenn adopt adopted ed in Mahé—P Mahé—Poir oirier ier 2007 2007 (2012 (2012), ), 752. Sagnar Sagnardd 1970, 1970, 201–20 201–203. 3. See See De DeCo Coni nick ck19 1996 96,, 48, 48, note14; note14; ac acco cord rdin ingg toDeCon toDeConic ick, k,th thee orig origin inof of th thes esee ex exis iste tent ntia iall qu ques es-tions may come from Iran, following Widengren 1952, 103–104. An Egyptian background is also possible.
:
writing entitled entitled James from Code Codexx Tch chac acos os ( 20 20,, 2–22 2–22,, 3), 3), whic whichh is very very cl clos osee James from to the Hammadi text. This passage from the Apocalypse the Apocalypse of James has James has parallels in Ir Iren enae aeus us’’ se sect ctio ionn on th thee Ma Marc rcos osia ians ns,, in wh whic ichh ar aree ci cite tedd the the ri ritu tual al word wordss they they pronounce when they are going to die. The motif of the guardian entities of the spheres also appears in the Apocathe Apoca (Nag Hammadi , 2). During his journey through the skies, Paul lypse of Paul (Nag sees the punishment of a soul at the door of the fourth heaven: angels whip the soul and a toll collector interrogates it, before it is rushed to earth into a body (20, 5–21, 20). In the fth fth heaven, Paul sees “a great angel holding an iron rod in his hands and three other angels with a whip in their hands, rivalling each other: they are goading the souls on to the judgment” (21, 26–22, 12). At the the sixt sixthh he heaaven en,, Pau aull dire direct ctly ly co conf nfro ront ntss a to tollll co collllec ecto torr an andd tell tellss hi him: m: “O “Ope penn to me and the [holy] spirit who is before me!” The toll collector obeys, and Paul with his companion ascends to the seventh seventh heaven heaven (22, 119–24). 9–24). Paul converses here with a character called the Ancient, a version of the gure of the Ancient of Days, Days, familiar in apocaly apocalyptic ptic Judaism. W Wee nd in this passag passagee the Gnostic questioning concerning the origin and the end. To the question “Where are you going, Paul?”, Paul?”, Paul answers: “I am going to the place from which I came. came.”” The identication between the place of origin and the place of destiny deserves to be under underliline ned. d. This This know knowle ledg dgee con consti stitu tute tess th thee cent centra rall poi point nt of bo both th the the Apoca Apoca and the Apocal the Apocalypse lypse lyp se of James James and ypse of Paul Paul , and of many other Gnostic writings. I shall not deal here with the angelic categories mentioned in the Nag Hammadi collection, collection, having already done so elsewh elsewhere. ere. These categ categories ories come from the Bible, but also from the Old Testament pseudepigrapha, an important stream of Second Temple Temple Jewish literature. Some of these angelic classes,
The qu questio estions ns what ar aree the follo following: wing: “Who are ar e you you and wher here e are from?” you from from?” ?” 19–20); ( 20, 20, 10–11); 10– 11); “What son and father?” (20, 14–15), “Where havew yo you u come (20, “Why have you come?” (20, 22); “And where will you go now?” (21, 16). AdvH AdvHaer aer , 21, 5. See the commentar commentaryy of of V Veill eilleux eux 1986, 1986, 86–88. 86–88. Murdoc Murdock— k—Mac MacRae Rae 200 2000, 0, 47–63 47–63 (I quote quote the their ir transl translati ation) on);; Ro Rosen sensti stiehl ehl—Ka —Kaler ler 2005 2005 (see (see especially 62–66 for a commentary on this passage). A passag passagee fr from omPue Puech ch197 1978, 8,96, 96,ill illumi uminat nates esthi thiss tensi tension onbet betwe ween enbeg beginni inning ng andend:“R andend: “Rév évéélant à l’homme qui il est, pourquoi il est venu en ce monde et comment il lui est donné d’ d’en en sortir, la connaissance est instrument de salut, ou plutôt, sauve par elle-même. Elle dévoile les ‘mystères’, livre le secret des énigmes, rend accessibles et transparentes les réalités les plus cachées, les plus insaisissables. Elle est découverte du ‘Royaume’, c’està-dire du Plérôme, de l’ Être—et de notre être—en sa plénitude”. plénitude”. Do Dogn gnie iez— z—Sc Scop opel ello2006(C. lo2006(C.Do Dogn gnie iez, z,“L “Les esem empl ploi oiss d’aggelos dansla”,179–195;M.Scopello, “La bibliothèque de Nag Hammadi et ses anges”, 196–225).
which intervene in the world of the demiurge as well as in that of the transcendent God, have a clear Gnostic origin. The negative angelology developed in these texts is part of a program of critical interpretation of the Bible, carried out by Gnostic authors, who had a deep knowle knowledge dge of the Scriptu Scriptures res and skil skilful fully ly used used all allego egorica ricall exege exegesis sis.. Nev Never er-thel theles ess, s, in se seve vera rall writin writings gs,, ther theree is also also a pos positi itive ve re repu purpo rposin singg of an ange gelilicc matemateri rial al fr from om Ju Juda dais ism. m. In my opin opinio ion, n, Gn Gnos osti ticc au auth thor orss dr drew ew seve severa rall moti motifs fs fr from om the the rich angelic heritage of Jewish pseudepigrapha to elaborate a reexion about theang the angels elsof of the thetran transce scenden ndentt God.The God. These se borrowi borrowings ngsare arenev neverth erthele eless ss adap adapted ted to Gn Gnost ostic ic thou though ghtt and and to its fundam fundamen ental tal opp opposi ositio tionn be betw tween een the the cr creat eator or an andd the superior god. Thee Tra Th rans nsce cend nden entt God God an and d His An Ange gels ls
The Angelus Paedagogus The gure of an angel having the function of an instructor appears in Gnostic narratives relating the journey of a seer to heaven during which the secrets of thehigherworldsandtheirentitiesarerevealedtohim.TheGnosticsborrowed thethemeof thejourneytoheavenfromaformof marginalJudaismexhibiting mystical and apocalyptic tendencies. This esoteric literature paid close attention to the celestial adventures of Enoch ( and Enoch ), who during his Enoch), journey receives revelations from an angel and experiences experi ences ecstatic visions. Nevertheless, the heroes of these heavenly journeys also include other important characters such as Abraham ( Apocalypse ( Apocalypse of Abraham), Abraham), Baruch (Syriac (Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch; Baruch; Greek Apocalypse of Baruch), Baruch), Ezra ( Apocalypse ( Apocalypse of Ezra), Ezra), and Jacob (The (The Ladder of Jacob). Jacob). Several Gnostic texts have taken up the theme of the journey to heaven, and among them, are some treatises having a strong philosophical content, inspiredbyMiddle-Platonismand,insomecases,byNeoplatonism.Thesewritings ings com combin binee in an ori origi gina nall wa wayy a phil philoso osoph phica icall pe persp rspec ectiv tivee wit withh the the tradi traditio tions ns of esoteric Judaism. In several of my works, I have highlighted this aspect, which had been neglected in the research which had mo mostly stly emphasized the contribution contrib ution of philosophy philosophy to these Gno Gnostic stic treatises. treatises. Let us not notee that, in comparison with the Jewish texts, in three treatises from Nag Hammadi—namely
Dognie Dogniez—S z—Scop copell elloo 200 2006. 6. The theme theme of the he heav avenly enly journ journey ey in Judaism Judaism has has given given rise rise to an abundant abundant literatur literature. e. Wee mention here only Collins 1979; Yarbro W Yarbro Collins 1986; Himmelfarb 1993. Comparisons with Gnostic sources sources have have very very rare rarely ly been addressed in these works. works. I mention them hereafter hereafter,, in rrelation elation to the texts I am examining in this article.
:
(,1), Marsanes (,1),and Allogenes 3)—thi hiss asce ascent nt ge gets ts in intete Zostrianos (,1), Marsanes (,1),and Allogenes (, 3)—t riorised and becomes an ascent through the levels of the intellect to the One. These esoteric Jewish traditions—some traditions—some of which include specula speculations tions on the divine throne and chariot (the Merkabah)—have Mer kabah)—have been skilfully revisited in light of Gnostic doctrine. The elements that, in the Jewish texts, illustrated the glory (kavod (kavod ) of a unique god are now applied to the ἄγνοστος, opposed to the lower demiurge. As in the Jewish esoteric texts, the Gnostic Gnostic angelus angelus paedagogus suggests paedagogus suggests to the seer how to behave before the mystery, strengthens him in the dicult moments during his rise, supports him in ecstasy, and reveals to him the hidden meaning of what he hears or sees. Indeed, this journey is also dangerous; becau bec ause se the the se seer er coul couldd be lost lost in the thein inn nity ityof of the the in inte tellllig igib ible le,, the the ange angell teac teache hess hi him m the the be best st atti attitu tude de to adop adopt: t: to st stan andd st stilill,l, to wi with thdr draaw, to pron pronou ounc ncee a hym ymnn or an invocation in silence, for example. Thee patt Th patter ernn of the the ange was already partially sketched in the angelus lus paedagogus paedagogus was Bible. In Ezekiel In Ezekiel 40:3, 40:3, a man whose appearance was like bronze (who is not identi ide ntie edd as asan an an ange gel) l)in instr struc ucts ts the the pr prop ophe hett about aboutthe there rebu builildin dingg of the the Temp emple le;; in Zechariah in Zechariah 1:9.19 1:9.19 (cf. 4:1–6, 6:4–5) an angel explains the visions the prophet had re rece ceiv ived ed;; in Daniel in Daniel 8: 8:15 15–1 –177 “a vis vision ion of man man,,” that that is, is, an an ange gel,l, in inte terpr rprets ets the the meaningof avisiontoDaniel,andin9:2theangelGabrielgiveshiminstruction concerning the future. Butt the Bu the Gnos Gnostic ticss drew drew their theirin insp spir irati ation on mai mainl nlyy fr from om Jewis Jewishh ap apoca ocaly lypti pticc writwritings having strong mystical features. The numerous literary relations between the treatises of Nag Hammadi and these Jewish texts suggest that some Gnostic tic au auth thor orss ha hadd a rs rstt-h -han andd kn know owle ledg dgee of th this is li lite tera ratu ture re and and used used it to fu fuel el thei theirr narrative. The Case Case of the Treatise Treatise Allogenes Allogenes (Nag (Nag Hammadi , 3) As a case study study,, I choose the Nag Hammadi treatise entitled entitled Allogenes Allogenes. . This treatise, strongly coloured by Middle-Platonic elements, also contains Neoplatonic concepts. This suggests that Allogenes that Allogenes,, in its lost Greek versi version, on, is to be
Thebib The biblio liogr graph aphyy onthe on theMer Merkab kabah ah is immens immense, e, sin since ce theind the indisp ispens ensabl ablee works worksof of Gersho Gershom m Scholem. Let us refer to the article by Pierluigi Piovanelli, which presents the essential points of the history of research (Pio (Piovanelli vanelli 2016). Th Thes esee refe refere renc nces es co come me from from th thee stud studyy of Céci Cécile le Dogn Dognie iezz in Dogn Dognie iez— z—Sc Scop opel ello lo 20 2006 06,, 192– 192– 193. Funk Funk—P —Poirie oirier—Sc r—Scopel opello— lo—Tur Turner ner 2004 2004 (p (perso ersonal nal co contribu ntribution: tion: Frenc Frenchh translat translation ion of the Coptic text, 189–239). I quote in this article my own translation. See also Madeleine Scopello, L’Allogène, in Mahé—Poirier 2007 (2012), 1544–1546 (“Allogène (“Allogène et la tradition
placed at a date later than most of Nag Hammadi writings, probably in the second half of the 3rd century. The Coptic translation of this treatise dates, how ho wever ever,, fr from om th thee midd middle le of the the 4th 4th cent centur uryy. In it itss Gr Gree eekk or orig igin inal al,, this this text text ha hadd a certa certain in difu difusio sion, n, as the phil philos osoph opher er Porp orphy hyry ry test testi ies es. . Th Thee studi studies es on on Allo Allo genes rightly genes rightly emphasize its philosophical content, but it seems to me that other traditions had played an important part in its composition. This treatise is an account of a journey to heaven that a seer, who bears the symbolic name of Allog Allogenes, enes, the Strang Stranger er,, gives to his disciple and spiritual son, Messos, after he returns to earth. In fact, Allogenes makes this trip both inside himself and in the celestial spheres, to the threshold of the One. During this journey, Allogenes receives ve secret teachings delivered by an angelic entity bearing the name of Youel “she-of-all-the-Glories.” Of the seven instructions that Allogenes receives during his itinerary, ve are actually transmitted by this angel, while the last two are communicated to him by entities called the Luminaries of Barbelo: Salamex, Semen, and Armê. The rst revelation of Youel deals with the aeon of Barbelo and the Triple Powered One (, 3 45, 6–49, 38). The content of this revelation arouses in Allogenes a feeling of terror to such an extent that he is tempted to turn to the “crowd,” that is, to the world of matter. The second part of Youel’s teaching concerns Barbelo again (51, 1–38). The angel states that this is a revelation that “nobody can hear hear,, exce except pt the great Pow Powers” ers” (50, 22–24 22–24). ). Youel Youel also recalls that the power that inhabits Allogenes allows him to escape, going up to his origins (50, 33–34)—the theme of the return to the heavenly homeland is frequent in Gnostic literature. The third revelation of Youel is preceded by Allogenes’ mystical experience: he sufers a loss of consciousness and falls into an ecstasy during which he becomes god (52, 7–13). Youel puts an end to this
juive”) and the translation translation of this treatise (1551–1574). (1551–1574). Cf. also Clark W Wire ire (Introduction), (Introduction), Turner and Wintermute (Transcription and Translation; notes by Turner) 1990 (2000), 173–267;; King 1995. 173–267 Por orpphyry, ry, Life of Plotinus 16. Cf. Brisson et al. 1992 (especially Michel Tardieu, Tardieu, “Les gnostiques dans la Vie de Plotin. Analyse du chapitre 16”, 503–563); Tardieu—Hadot 1996; Poirier—Schmidt Poirier —Schmidt 2010. In th thee co comm mmen enta tary ry to Allogenes that I prepared for the Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi , I also took into account the contribution of the Platonic tradition. The name name Messos Messos,, always always quoted quoted as as “my “my son Messos, Messos,”” is mentione mentionedd in Allog Allog 49,39– 49,39–40; 40; 50,18; 68,28; 68,35–69, 1.14–16. It is probably a symbolic name, like that of his master Allogenes, the Stranger. These teachings teachings begin in A Allog llog 1 45, 45, 6 aand nd end in 57, 57, 23. Cf. Allog 59,8–60, 59,8–60, 12 and 61,24 61,24–67 –67,, 38. These names names are pro provided vided in Allog 56,24–25 56,24–25..
:
ecstatic state by touching Allogenes and bringing him back to consciousness (52, 14–15). Now Allogenes can listen to Youel’s third teaching on the Triple Powered One. The angel instructs the seer to keep this teaching secret and in silence because only those who are worthy can hear it (52, 16–28). Then Y Youel ouel invok invokes es angelic powers, probably of a higher degree than his own (54, 6–37 6– 37). ). Ha Havi ving ng list listen ened ed to the the na name mess of th thes esee ange angels ls,, Al Allo loge gene ness ha hass a vi visi sion on (55, (55, 11–16) that introduces the fourth part of Youel’s teaching, on the Triple Powered One (55, 17–30). The fth and nal part of the revelation concerns the Triple Male. Youel announces to Allogenes that after a hundred years of meditation, a teaching will be provided by the Luminaries of Barbelo (55, 33–57, 23). Then Youel leaves the scene and departs. At the end of the treatise, Allogenesstatesthathehasbeenorderedtorecordinabookthesecretshereceived from Youel and the Luminaries. He also instructs his spiritual son Messos to communicate the contents of this book to those who will be worthy to hear them. The name of Youel had aroused my curiosity. It was indeed astonishingly close to the name of the angel Yaoel, which appears in some Jewish mystical texts. The Hebraic name of Yaoel, because of the lack of vocalization, could have become Youel in the Greek and Coptic transcriptions. But the presence of a similar name was not enough to support a comparison. It had also to be determined determined whether the angel angel YYaoel aoel from Judaism had a role analogous to that of the angel Youel from Nag Hammadi. I found an interesting track to explore in the Apocalypse the Apocalypse of Abraham. Abraham. This apocalypse, preserved in Slavonic, consists of two parts: the rst one (–) relates the callllin ca ingg of Ab Abra raha ham m an andd th thee dest destru ruct ctio ionn of th thee id idol olss made made by Terah erah;; the the seco second nd (–) narrates Abraham’s sacrice, but especially his journey to heaven under the guidance of the angel Yaoel, and the ecstatic vision he experiences. This second part, as rst noted by George H. Box, bears the mark of Chariot
On th this is gest gestur ure, e, cf cf.. Daniel 10:10–11 10:10–11 where, during the vision, the Angel’s hand touches Daniel and puts him on his knees and palms. One of the LLumina uminaries ries of Barbelo Barbelo says to A Allog llogenes enes (68, 16–23): 16–23): “Writ[e “Writ[e]] [wh]at [wh]at I shall shall [te]ll you and that I shall remind you for those who will be worthy after you; and you will place pla ce this this book book upo uponn a mounta mountain in andyo and youu will will in invo voke ke thegua the guard rdian ian:: ‘C ‘Come ome,, dr drea eadfu dfull One!’ One!’.” Al Allo logg 69,1 69,15– 5–16 16.. Sc Scop opel ello lo 1981 1981;; 20 2008 08a. a. This This ttex extt was was transl translat ated ed by Box Box 1918 1918.. See See aalso lso The Apocalypse of Abraham, translated by R. Rubinkiewicz, revised with notes by H.G. Lunt, in Charlesworth 1983, 687–705; B. Philonenko-Sayar and M. Philonenko, L’Apocalypse d’Abraham, in Dupont-Sommer— Dupont-Sommer— Philonenko 1987, 1697–1730 (translation, presentation, and notes).
mysticism, the Merkabah. The two texts could therefore be compared, for the angel Yaoel Yaoel of the Apocalypse the Apocalypse of Abraham has Abraham has the same function of accompanyingtheheavenlytravellerandrevealingsecretstohimthatwendintheNag Hammadi tractate Allogenes tractate Allogenes.. Inthe Apocalypse Inthe Apocalypseof of Abrah Abraham am,Yaoelisanangelof ,Yaoelisanangelof inefablebeautyandbears royal attributes: purple and sceptre (). For forty days and forty nights, Yaoel and Abraham travel together to the mountain of Horeb. The angel instructs Abraham on the sacrice that God has commanded him to perform (), ( ), and tells him how to escape from the unclean unclean angel, angel, Azazel ( (– –). ). Then Yaoel Yaoel and Abraham ascend to heaven, the angel oonn the left wing of a turtledove, and Abraham on the right wing of a pigeon (). Abraham has a vision that makes him feel completely lost (: “and the place of highness on which we were standing now stopped on high, now rolled down low”). The angel advisesAbrahamtoreciteahymnwithhim(),andthentheinefablevision of the heavenly throne, the Merkabah, opens to Abraham and to his guide (). LetusrstsayawordaboutthenameofYaoel,whosemeaningisgiveninthe Apocalypse of Abraham Abraham:: Yaoel is the angel of the Tetragrammaton. The name Yaoel Yaoel is formed out of two letters drawn from the Tetragrammaton to which are added two letters of the name Elohim (or of “El”, which represents its abbre viation). Exodus viation). 23, 20–21 is the point of departure of this theme: “See, I am Exodus 23, se send ndin ingg an an anggel befo before re you, ou, to kee eepp you on you ourr way an andd to be you ourr guid guidee in intto the place which I have made ready for you. Give attention to him and give ear to hi hiss voice oice;; do no nott go ag agai ains nstt hi him, m, for for you ourr wr wron onggdo doin ingg will will not not be ov over erlo look oked ed by him, because him, because my Name is in him. him.” Wee read in the Apocalypse W the Apocalypse of Abraham (, Abraham (, 4): (words of God) “Go, Yaoel, you who bears My name name,, through My inef inefable able name …”; aand nd in , 8: (words of Yaoel) “I am Yaoel, and I was called so by Him who causes those with me on th thee se sevventh enth ex expa pans nse, e, on th thee rm rmam amen ent, t, to sh shak ake, e, a powe powerr thro throug ughh the the me medi dium um of his inefable name in me.” Finally, we read in , 13–14, in the hymn that Abraham sings with Yaoel Yaoel before having the vision of the throne: “Eli, eternal, mighty one, holy Sabaoth, most glorious El, El, El, El, Yaoel.” The angel Yaoel is also associated with the Tetragrammaton in 3Enoch in 3Enoch,, where he is identie identiedd with Metatron.
I quote, quote, for this this pa passag ssagee and the follo following wing oones, nes, the transla translation tion ooff R. Rubinkiew Rubinkiewicz icz in Charlesworth 1983, 696–697. 3Enoch 48: “Metatron has seventy names. The rst of his names is Yaoel Yah Yaoel.” See Mopsik 1989, followed by the study of Moché Idel, “Hénoch c’est Métatron” (ibid., 381– 406). See also Odeberg 1973; Ph. Alexander, Alexander, 3 (Hebrew Apocalypse of ) Enoch, in Charles-
:
The treatise Allogenes treatise Allogenes does does not bear any indicatio indicationn of the identicati identication on of the name of Youel with the Tetragrammaton. This identication is nevertheless present in another Nag Hammadi text, the the Boo Bookk of the Gr Great eat Inv Invisi isible ble Spirit Spirit (c (cod odex ex , 2), 2), wher wherei einn it is st stat ated ed th that at Yoel oel is the the “an ange gell who who pres presid ides es ov over er the the Name of him (…), the incorruptible incorrupt ible one” (65, 23–26). 23–26). But we could go further in this comparis comparison. on. In In Allogenes 52, 7–15, the pro Allogenes 52, tagonist’s fright and weakening at the threshold of ecstasy are described in termsveryclosetowhatonendsinthe Apocalyps termsveryclosetowhatonendsinthe , 1–5. We read Apocalypsee of Abr Abraham aham , in Allogenes in Allogenes 52, 52, 7–15: “[My s]oul [became] weak and [I] esca[ped, I was] very [distur]bed [and I] turned to my-se[lf]. I saw the light [that] was[ar]ound me and the good that was in me. I became god. Then Youel, she of all the Glories, touchedmeandgavemestrengthback.”Wereadinthe Apocalypse touchedmeandgavemestrengthback.”Wereadinthe Apocalypseof of Abra Abraham ham , 1–5: I he hear ardd the the voice oicettelli elling ngsu such chwo word rdss to tome mean andd I look looked edhe here rean andd ther there. e.An Andd behold there was no human breath, and my spirit was lled with terror. My soul escaped from me. And I became like a stone, and fell face down upon the earth, for there was no longer strength in me to stand upon the earth. And while I was still face f ace down on the ground, I heard the voice of the Saint speaking: speaki ng: ‘Go Yaoel, Yaoel, who bears my name, through my inefable name,puthismanonhisfeetandstrengthenhim,dispellinghisfear.’And the angel who he had sent to me came to me in the likeness of a man: he took me by my right hand and put me on my feet. Let us note that the expression “my soul escaped from me” in the Apocalypse in Allogenes:: “[My s]oul of Abraham , Abraham , 3 is very similar to the phrase used in Allogenes [became] weak and [I] esca[ped” (52, 8). Let us also observe the link established by the author of this apocalypse between the moment when the soul escapes—when Abraham leaves his psychic state—and the moment when he
worth 1983, , 223–315. Regarding the rst name of Metatron, Yaoel, Yaoel, the point of view of Gershom Scholem (Scholem 1960, 41) should be recalled recalled.. According to this scholar scholar,, Yaoel is the equivalent of Metatron in an earlier stage of the speculations on the rst angel; the reference to Yaoel provides, therefore, an explanation for the sentence from the Talmud that claims that Metatron possesses a name which is like that of his Master (Sanhedrin 38b). Scholem notes that the name of Metatron would hav havee been created to replace the name of Yaoel as a vox mystica, and that it would gradually gradually take its place: Scholem 1994, 83. I have dealt more specically specically with Youel in Scopello 2007. The for form m “Yoel “Yoel”” is given given her here. e. I follow here the translation of Belkis Belkis Sayar-Philonenko Sayar-Philonenko and Marc Philonenko. Philonenko.
falls with his face to the ground: this indicates the state of the mystical torpor (tardema (tardema).). This self-abandonment is temporary, and the angel Yaoel puts an end to it by seizing Abraham by the hand and putting him back on his feet ( Apocalypse of Abraham Abraham , , 5). The same is true for for Allogenes Allogenes,wherebytheangel ,wherebytheangel Youel, Youel, with wit h a gesture, puts an end to the visionary experience of the initiate, giving him his strength back (52, 15). But all borrowing involves modications. In Allogenes In Allogenes,, Youel Youel is a femini feminized zed angel.l. The same is true in Zostrianos ange in Zostrianos and and in the Holy the Holy Book of the Great Invisible Invisible Spirit ,, which reinforce the feminine character of Youel by calling her “Male Virgin.”” The author of Allogenes thus Virgin. Allogenes thus elaborated, or adopted a Gnostic tradition that feminized the angel Yaoel. A trace of this tradition also appears in some so me Mani Manich chae aean an te text xtss me ment ntio ioni ning ng an an ange gell call called ed Ioel Ioel,, wh whoo is al also so de de ne nedd as “Male Virgin” Virgin” and “Virgin of light.” ” Thee comp Th comple lette name name of You ouel el in Allogenes is “Y “Youe ouel,l, she-of-a she-of-allll-thetheGlor Gl ories ies”” (ⲧⲁⲛ ). Th Thee “glo “glorie ries” s” ha have ve not not attr attract acted ed the the atte attennⲧⲁⲛⲓⲉⲟ ⲓⲉⲟⲟⲩ ⲟⲩ ⲧⲏⲣ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲟⲩ ⲓⲟⲩ ⲓⲟⲩⲏⲗ ⲏⲗ). tion of scholars either. The Coptic word ⲉⲟⲟⲩ used in Allogenes in Allogenes translates translates the Greek δόξα which in turn renders the Hebrew kavod Hebrew kavod and and its synon synonyms yms,, tifearah tifearah,, tehillah,, hod , yadah tehillah yadah. . These are the founding terms of a mysticism of Glory based on the book of Ezekiel and its mysticism of the throne. In Allogenes In Allogenes,, however, the term “glory” is used in the plural, which seems to refer to a category of angelic entities. I thought of the angels of Glory, or the Glorious Ones, who stand around the throne of Glory. The starting point of this tradition is Exodus is Exodus 15:11 15:11 where, in the interpretative translation of the , the the δόξαι of God are quasi-personied entities. The Glories also appear in the Testament the Testament of Judah , Judah , 2 (the Powers of Glories) and especially in charge, e, night and day day,, of the liturgi 2Enoch 2 Enoch,, where the Glorious Ones are in charg cal service service of the Lord (, ( , 1); Gabr Gabriel iel is one of them ( (,, 5). 5). The Glorious Glorious Ones also grant Enoch permission to ascend into the heavens. At the summit of his mystical quest, Enoch, after having received the attributes of a celestial high priest, will become become like them, without without diference of aspect ( (, , 7). The
Bö Böhl hlig ig— —Wiss Wissee 197 1975. Haereticarum um Fabularum Compendium , 26 ( 83, 380). This Cf. Theodo Theodore rett of Cyrrh Cyrrhus us,, Haereticar angel intervenes in the creation of Eve. Cf. Allog Allog 50 50,, 19– 19–20; 20; 552, 2, 13–14; 13–14; 55, 55, 34; 57, 25. In In 55, 18 sh shee is called “[she of the great] Glories Youel” Y ouel”.. Cf. Jarl E. Fossum, “Glory “Glory,,” in Van der Toorn—Becking— oorn—Becking—V Van der Horst 1999, 348–352. I follow follow the translati translation on of André V Vailla aillant nt and Mar Marcc Philonenk Philonenko, o, Hénoch, in DupontSommer—Philonenko 1987, 1185.
:
Glorious, or the Glories, would therefore be a particularly high category of angels, angel s, as is conrmed by 3Enoch 226, 3Enoch 226, where “600,000 myriads of angels of Glory, carved in aming re, stand facing the throne of Glory.” The angels of Glory, with the Ophanim and Cherubim, pronounce the Qedousha. The Glories are mentioned in the New Testament, and also appear in the Greek magical papyri, where they are characterized by the uninterrupted service ofered to the Lord, an element that was already highlighted in 2Enoch in 2Enoch.. In the chapter 13, myriads of Glories ( ⲉⲟⲟⲩ) are given to the Forefather Untitled Text chapter with the aeons. This one is called “self-gloried” (αὐτοδοξαστός), because he reveals himself with the Glories he possesses. In chapter 14, the Glories are membersof alistof categorieswhichalsoincludesangels,archangels,andministers. provides an additional clue that makes it possible to consider the Allogenes provides Allogenes Glor Gl orie iess as an an anggelic elic ca cate teggory ory. In 49 49,, 21 21–2 –255 it is stat stated ed that that thos thosee wh whoo tr trul ulyy exis existt “ha “have br brou ough ghtt noth nothin ingg bey beyon ondd th thems emsel elve ves, s, ne neith ither er Pow ower er,, nor nor Ran Rank, k, nor nor Gl Glory ory,, nor Aeon, because they are eternal beings.” The four terms in this list refer, in my opi opini nion on,, to the the cate catego gorie riess of an ange gels ls formin formingg the the ce cele lesti stial al co cour urtt of the the Tri ripl plee Power owered ed On One, e, an andd this this inte interpr rpret etati ation on mak makes es sense sense in liligh ghtt of co compa mparis rison onss wit withh Jewish angelology. angelology.
∵ Further examples could be provided. In the course of my research I ha have ve been able to trace the traditions of esoteric Judaism in several Nag Hammadi writings in gs.. I pr prov ovid idee a fe few w exam exampl ples es here here.. The The tr trea eati tise se Zostrianos incl clud udes es,, in Zostrianos (, 1) in the the na narr rrati ative ve of the the as asce cent nt of the se seer er,, tw twoo quas quasi-l i-lit iter eral al qu quot otes es fr from om the the Bo Book ok of Th These esepa passa ssage gess dea deall wit withh the the ide ident nti ica catio tionn of the the vis vision ion-theSec the Secre rets ts of Enoch Enoch.. ary patriarch with the angels of Glory ( 2 ( 2Enoch Enoch 7 == Zost Zost 5, 5, 15–17) and also the privilege of knowing secrets that even angels do not know (( 2 2Enoch Enoch 3 = Zost 128, 128, 14–18). In addition, the language of Zostrianos is Zostrianos is entirely woven out of terms characteristic of Jewish mysticism. OtherNagHammaditreatisesinfusedwithmotifsfrommysticalJudaismare worthy of further study study,, as it is the case with with Eugnostos Eugnostos(Codex,3and,1), (Codex,3and,1),
So ibid., 1185, footn footnote ote to 1. 3Enoch 35, 36, 37. 2Peter 2:10; 2:10; Jude 8:10. 199 and 1051. 1051. Scopel Scopello lo 198 1980. 0. Marvin Meyer Meyer and Madeleine Madeleine Scopello, Scopello, “Eugnostos the Blessed, Blessed,”” in Meyer Meyer 2007, 271–274. 271–274.
which ofers a highly structured angelological system. The same is true for the (Codex , 2 and , 2), which describes Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spir Spirit it (Codex the sumptuous hall of the throne of Glory and emphasises the ritual and liturgical functions of angels. If we turn to codex Tchacos, the Gospel the Gospel of Judas contains Judas contains very interesting angelological elements. For example, Judas’ vision of “the house in the heights” of immeasurable dimensions, surrounded by “great men”—“man” men”—“man” is a technical term for angels in esoteric Judaism—is a motif that appears both in the books of Enoch and, later later,, in the literat literature ure on the divine palaces (Hekhaloth). But research on angels should also be extended, on the one hand, to the Gnostic excerpts preserved in the refutations of the Church Fathers and, on the other, to the Bruce Codex, rich in mystical, theurgical, and ritual rit ual elements, without forgetting the codex Askew Askew.. This research could be pursued in order to obtain an accurate overview of the impact of margina marginall Judaism, not only on the theme of angel angelss but also on other esoteric issues. Such an enquiry should also permit us to trace contacts between mystical Judaism and Gnosis that went beyond a literary level and reached the social fabric of mystical groups.
Bibliography Primary Sources
Box, George H., Apocalypse of Abraham and Ascension of Isaiah, London, 1918. Böhlig, Alexander, Wisse, Frederik (eds.), Nag Hammadi Codices , 2 and , 2, The Gospel of the Egyptians (The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit) (Nag Hammadi Coptic tic Gno Gnosti sticc Lib Librar raryy. A Com Comple plete te Editio Editionn Studie Stu diess ), Leiden Leiden,, 1975 1975 (repri (reprint nted ed in The Cop of the Nag Hammadi Texts, vol. 2). Brisson, Luc et al. (ed.), Porphyre, La Vie de Plotin, vol. 2 (Histoire des doctrines de l’l’Antiquité Antiquité classique 16), Paris, Paris, 1992. Apocalyptic ic Liter Literatur aturee and Charlesworth,C.H.(ed.), TheOldTestamentPseudepigrapha. Apocalypt Testaments, vol. , New York, 1983. Clark Wire, Antoinette, Turner, John D., Wintermute, Orval S., , 3. Allogenes, in Charles W. Hedrick (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codices X, X, X (Nag (Nag Hammadi
Scopel Scopello lo 200 2009; 9; 2011. 2011. Gospel of Judas 45, 3–10. Scopel Scopello lo 200 2008b 8b..
:
Studies Studies ), ), Leide Leiden, n, 1990 (repri (reprinted nted in The Coptic Gnostic Library. A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices, vol. 5, Leiden, 2000, 173–267). Livres es de Iéou» ( Bruce 96). Les Livres Livres du grand disco discours urs Crégheur,, Eric, Les «deux Livr Crégheur mystérique—Le Livre Livre des connaissances du Dieu invisible—Fragment sur le passage del’âme. Tex extes tes établi établis, s, tradui traduits ts et pré présen sentés tés (Bi (Biblio bliothè thèque que copte copte de Nag Nag Ham Hammad madi,i, section Textes), Louvain, 2018. Dupont-Sommer, André, Philonenko, Marc (ed.), La Bible. Écrits intertestamentaires (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), Paris, 1987. Funk,W Funk, Wolf-Peter olf-Peter,, Poirier Poirier,, Pau Paul-Hub l-Hubert, ert, Scope Scopello llo,, Made Madeleine leine,, Turner Turner,, John John D. D.,, L’Allogène ( X, 3) (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi, section Textes, 30), Québec— Louvain, 2004. Apocryphon hon Johannis Johannis. Th Giversen Give rsen,, Søren, Søren, Apocryp Thee Copt Coptic ic Tex extt of the Apoc Apocry ryph phon on Jo Joha hann nnis is in the Nag Hammadi Codex with Tran Translation, slation, Introduction and Commentary Commentary (Acta Theologica Danica 5), Copenhagen, 1963. 1963. Irenaeus of Lyons Rousseau, Adelin, Doutreleau, Louis, Irénée, Adversus Haereses – (Sources (Sources ChréAdver versus susHae Haere reses ses ,2vols(SourcesChrétiennes100), tiennes tienn es 263 263–264 –264), ), Paris, Paris, 1979; 1979; Ad ,2vols(SourcesChrétiennes100), Paris, 1965; Adversus Haereses (Sources Chrétienne Chrétienness 152–153), Paris, 1969. Irenæus of Lyons, Against Heresies. The Complete English Translation from the First Volume Volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, now Presented in a New Edition with Introduction and Notes revised, South Bend, Indiana, 2010. Kasser,, Rodolphe, Marvin Meyer, Gregor Wurs Kasser Wurst,t, François Gaudard, The Gospel of Judas Together with the Letter of Peter to Philip, James, and a Book of Allogenes from Codex Tchacos. Critical Edition, Washington, . .., ., 2007. King, Karen L., Revelation of the Unknowable God, with Text, TTranslation ranslation and Notes to X, 3 Allogenes (California Classical Library), Santa Rosa , 1995. Layton, Bentley (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codex , 2–7, together with X, 2*, Brit. Lib. Or. 4926(1), and .X. .X . 1, 654, 655 , 2 vols (Nag Hammadi Studies –), Leiden, 1989 (reprinted in The Coptic Gnostic Library. A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices, vol. 2, Leiden, 2000). Mahé, Jean-Pierre, Poirier, Paul-Hubert (dir.), Écrits gnostiques, La Bibliothèque de Nag Hammadi (Bibliothèque (Bibliothèque de la Pléiade), Paris, 2007 (2nd edition, 2012). Meyer Mey er,, Marvi Marvinn (ed.), (ed.), The Intern Internati ationa onall Edition Edition.. The Nag Ham Hammad madii Scr Script iptur ures es, San San Franrancisco, 2007. Mopsik, Charles, Le Livre hébreu d’ d’ Hénoch, Paris, 1989. Murdock, William R., MacRae, George W W.,., The Apocalypse of Paul , in Douglas M. Parrot (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codices , 2–5 and with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502, 1 and 4 (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies ), ), Leiden, 1979 (reprinted in The Coptic Gnostic Library, A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices, vol. 3, Leiden, 2000, 47–63).
Odeberg, Hugo, 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Boo Bookk of Enoch, 2nd edition, New York, 1973. Painchaud,Louis, L’Écrit sans titre (Bi (Biblio bliothè thèque quecop copte tede deNa Nagg Hammad Hammadi,i, sectio sectionn Textes 21), Québec—Louvain—Paris, 1995. Poirier,, Paul-Hubert, La Pensée Première à la triple forme (,1).TexteétablietpréPoirier senté (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi, section Textes 32), Québec—Louvain, Québec—Louvain, 2006. Library, A Complete Complete Edition of the Nag Robinson, James M. (ed.), The Coptic Gnostic Library, Hammadi Codices. Edited with English Translation, Introductions and Notes published under the Auspices of The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 5 vols, Leiden, 2000. Robinson, James M., Smith, Robert (eds.), The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Third Completely Revised Edition, San Francisco, 1988. L’ Apocalypse lypse de Pau Paull ( ( , 2) (Bibliothèque Rosenstiehl, Jean-Marc, Kaler, Michael, L’Apoca copte de Nag Hammadi, section Textes, 31), Québec—Louvain, 2005. Sagnard, Sagn ard, F., Clé Clémen mentt d’Alex d’Alexand andrie rie.. Extra Extraits its de Théodo Théodote te (Sou (Sources rces Chré Chrétienn tiennes es 23), Paris, Paris, 1970. Schenke, Schenk e, Hans-Martin, Bethge, Hans-Gebhard, Kaiser, Ursula U. (eds.), Nag Hammadi Deutsch, vol. . ,1–, ,1–,11; vol. . , 2-X 2-X,, Bg 1 und 4, Berlin—New York, 2001, 2003. Schmidt, Carl (text edited by), MacDermot, Violet (translation and notes), The Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce Codex (Nag Hammadi Studies ), Leiden, 1978. Schmi Schmidt, dt, Carl Carl (text (text edi edited ted by), by), MacDe MacDermo rmot,t, Violet Violet (trans (translati lation on and notes notes), ), Pistis Sophia (Nag Hammadi Studies ), ), Leiden, 1978. Schoedel, William R., The (First) Apocalypse of James, in Douglas M. Parrot (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codices , 2–5 and with Papyrus Berolinensis 8502, 1 and 4 (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies ), Leiden, 1979 (reprinted in The Coptic Gnostic Library,, A Complete Edition of the Nag Hammadi Codices, vol. 3, Leiden, 2000, 65– Library 103). Simonetti, Manlio, Testi gnostici cristiani , Bari, 1970. Tardieu, Michel, Codex de Berlin (Sources gnostiques et manichéennes 1), Paris, 1984. Veilleux, Veilleux, A., La première Apocalypse de Jacques ( , 3). La seconde Apocalypse de Jacques ( ( , 4). Texte établi et présenté (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi, section Textes, 17), Québec, 1986. Waldstein, W aldstein, Michael, Wisse, Frederik, The TheApo Apocry crypho phonn of John. John. Synops Synopsis is of Nag Hammad Hammadi i Codices , 1, , 1 and , 1 with 8502 , 2 (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean StudCoptic tic Gno Gnosti sticc Library Library,, A Comple Complete te Editio Editionn ie iess ), ), Leid Leiden en,, 1995 1995 (r (rep epri rint nted ed in The Cop of the Nag Hammadi Codices, vol. 2, Leiden, 2000).
:
Secondary Seco ndary Liter Literatur aturee
Amélineau, Émile Émile (1882), “Le papyrus gnostique de Bruce”, Bruce”, Comptes rendus rendus de l’Acadél’ Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres Belles -Lettres 26/3, 220–227. Barb, A.A. (1957), “Abrasaxstudien”, in Hommages à Waldemar Deonna (Latomus 28), Bruxelles, 67–86. Barc, Bernard (1975), “La taille cosmique d’Adam dans la littérature juive rabbinique des trois premiers siècles après J.-C.”, Revue des Sciences religieuses 49, 173–185. Black, Bla ck, Mat Matthe thew w (19 (1983 83), ), “An Ara Aramai maicc Etymol Etymology ogy for Jal Jaldab dabaot aoth?” h?”,, in Alista Alistair ir H.B H.B.. Logan, Logan, Alexander J.M. J.M. Wedderburn Wedderburn (eds.), The New Testament Testament and Gnosis. Essays in Honor of Robert McL. Wilson, Edinburgh, 69–72. Collins, John J. (ed.) (1979), Apocalypse: The Morphology Morphology of a Genre (= Semeia 14). Dani Da niél élou ou,, Jean Jean (195 (1951) 1),, “Les “Les so sour urce cess ju juiv ives es de la doct doctri rine ne des des AngesdesNations che chezz OriOrigène”, Recherches de science religieuse 38, 132–137. DeConick, April (1996), Seek to See Him. Ascent and Vision Mysticism in the Gospel of Thomas, Leiden. Dogniez, Cécile, Scopello, Madeleine (2006), “Autour des anges: traditions juives et relecture rele cturess gnostiques gnostiques””, in LouisPai Louis Painchau nchaud, d, Paul-Hube Paul-Hubert rt Poirier Poirier(eds (eds.), .), Coptica-Gnostica-Manichaica. Mélanges Wolf-Peter Funk (Bibliothèque (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi, section Études, 7), Québec—Louvain, 179–225. Evans, Erin (2015), The Books of Jeu and the Pistis Sophia as Handbooks to Eternity (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies ), Leiden. Evans, Craig A., Robert L. Webb, Richard A. Wiebe (eds.) (1993), Nag Hammadi Texts and the Bible. A Synopsis & Index (New Testament Tools and Studies), Leiden. Leiden. Grant,t, Robert Gran Robert M. (1967), (1967), “Les êtres êtres interméd intermédiaire iairess dans le judaïsme judaïsme tardif” tardif”,, in Le origin origini i dello gnosticismo. Colloquio di Messina, 13–18 aprile 1966, Leiden, 141–154. Ascent nt to Heav Heaven en in Jewi Jewish sh and Ch Chri rist stian ianApo Apoca caly lypse psess,New Himmelfarb Himme lfarb,, Martha Martha (1993), (1993), Asce York—Oxford York—Oxford.. Johnston,, Steve(2010), Johnston Steve (2010), “Le mythe gnostique du blasphème de l’l’Archonte Archonte””, in J.-P. J.-P. Mahé, P.-H. .-H. Po Poiri irier er andM. and M. Sc Scope opello llo (eds. (eds.), ), Les textes de Nag Hammadi. Histoire des religions et approches contemporaines (Actes du Colloque international tenu à l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 11–12 décembre 2008), Paris, 177–201. Early Jesus TraTraLuttikhuizen, Gerard P. (2006), Gnostic Revisions of Genesis Stories and Early ditions (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Manichaean Studies ), ), Leiden. Piovanelli, Pierluigi (2016), “Pratiques rituelles ou exégèse scripturaire? Origines et nature de la mystique de la Merkav Merkava” a”,, in Simon Mimouni and Madeleine Scopello (eds.), La mystique théorétique et théurgique dans l’Antiquité gréco-romaine. Judaïsmes et christianismes, Turnho Turnhout, ut, 281–302. Poirier,, Paul-Hubert, Schmidt, Thomas S. (2010), “Chrétiens, hérétiques et gnostiques Poirier chez Porphyre. Quelques précisions sur la Vie de Plotin 16,1–9”, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie l’ Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 154/2, 913–942.
Puech, Henri-Charles (1978), En quête de la gnose, t. . Sur l’Éva l’ Évangile ngile selon Thoma Thomass, Paris. Rousseau, Adelin (1984), Irénée de Lyon, Contre les hérésies. Dénonciation et réfutation de la gnose au nom menteur , Paris. Scholem, Gerschom G. (1960), Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah and Talmudic Tradition, New York. Scholem, Gerschom G. (1974), “Jaldabaoth Reconsidered”, in A. Guillaumont, E.-M. La Mélangesd’ d’histoire histoiredes des religionsoferts religions ofertsàà Henri-Charles Puech,Paris, perrousaz(eds.), Mélanges 405–421. Scholem, Gerschom G. (1994), Les grandes courants de la mystique juive, Paris. Scopello, Madeleine (1980), “The Apocalypse of Zostrianos and the Book of the Secrets of Enoch”, Vigiliae Christianae 34/4, 376–385. Allogène ( Scopello, Madeleine Madeleine (1981), ““YYouel et Barbélo dans le traité de l’ Allogène ( , 3)”, 3)”, in Bernard Barc (ed.), Colloque international sur les textes de Nag Hammadi (Québec 22–29 août 1978) 1978) (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi, section Études 1), Leuven, 374–382 (reprinted in Scopello 2005, 49–78). Femme,Gnose Gnose et Manichéisme. De l’espace l’ espace mythique au terScopello Scop ello,, Madeleine Madeleine(200 (2005), 5), Femme, ritoire du réel (Nag (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies ), ), Leiden. Scopello, Madeleine (2007), “Portraits d’anges à Nag Hammadi”, in Nathalie Bosson and Ann Annee Boud’h Boud’hors ors (eds. (eds.), ), Act Actes es du huitiè huitième me Con Congr grès ès int intern ernatio ational nal d’Étud d’Études es Coptes Coptes (Paris, (Par is, 28 juin–3 juillet 2004) (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 163), vol. 2, Louvain, 879–892. Scopello,Madeleine(2008a),“L’âmeenfuite:letraitédel’ Allogène etlamystiquejuive”, in Jean-Marc Narbonne and Paul-Hubert Poirier (eds.), Gnose et philosophie. Études en hommage à Pierre Hadot , Québec—Paris, 97–119. ÉvanScope Scopello llo,, Madele Madeleine ine(20 (2008b 08b), ), “Trad “Traditi itions ons angélo angélolog logiqu iques es et mysti mystique quejui juive ve dans dans l’ Évan gile de Judas”, in Madeleine Scopello (ed.), The Gospel of Judas in Context . Proceedings of the First Conference on the Gospel of Judas held in Paris Sorbonne, 27th– 28th October 2006 (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Manichaean Studies ), ), Leiden, 123–134. Scopello,Madeleine(2009),“Lesangesdansl’ Évangile Évangilede de Judas:aperçupréliminaire”,in grecque et sagesse Mohammad-Amir MohammadAmir Moezzi and Jean-Daniel Dubois (eds.), Pensée grecque d’ d’Orient. Orient. Hommage Hommage à Michel Tardieu, Turnhou Turnhout,t, 589–598. 589–598. Scopello, Madeleine Madeleine (2011), “Les anges de l’ Évangile Évangile de Judas”, in Jacob Albert van den Berg, Annemaré Kotzé, Tobias Tobias Nicklas and Madeleine Scopello (eds.), ‘In Search of Truth’:’: Augustine, Manichaeism and Other Gnosticism. Studies for Johannes van Oort Truth at Sixty (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Manichaean Studies ), ), Leiden, 593–610. Stroumsa, Gedaliahu Guy (1992), “Métatron et le Christ”, in Id., Savoir et salut , Paris, 65–84. Tardieu,Michel(1974), Troismythesgnostiques.Adam,Érosetlesanimauxd’Égyptedans un écrit de Nag Hammadi (, 5), Paris.
:
Tardieu, Michel, Hadot, Pierre (1996), Recherches sur la formation de l’Apocalypse de Zostrien et les sour sources ces de Marius Victorinus (Res Orientales 9), Bures-sur-Yvette. Van Van den Broek, Roelof (1996), (1996), “The Creation of Adam’s Adam’s PsychicBody Psychic Body in the Apocryphon of John” John”,, in Id., Studies in Gnosticism and Alexandrinian Christianity (Nag Hammadi and Manichaean Studies ), Leiden, 67–85. Van Van der Toorn, Karel, Becking, Bob, Van der Horst, Pieter W. (1999), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd Edition Extensively Revised, Leiden. Widengren, G. (1952), “Der iranische Hintergrund Hintergrund der Gnosis” Gnosis”,, Zeitschrift für Religionsund Geistesgeschichte 4, 97–114. Yarbro Yarbro Collins, Collins, Adela Adela (ed.) (1986), Ear Early ly Christ Christian ian Apocal Apocalypt ypticis icism: m: Genre Genre and Social Social Set Set-ting (= Semeia 36).
Demon onss and Angels in the Chald Chaldaean aean Ora Oracles cles Helmut Seng Seng The word δαίμων covers a broad range range of meaning meanings. s. Whil Whilee it has referred to th thee gods ods si sinc ncee Ho Home merr an andd Hesi Hesiod od, , it late laterr ca came me to de desi sign gnat atee thos thosee be bein ings gs wh whoo occupy a middle position between gods and men, and to whom Plato allots a mediatingfunction.Later,certainevilbeingsarealsocalleddemons.InChristian lit litera eratur ture, e, the word word δαίμων canalsorefertothedevil. Ἄ Ἄελος ελοςserves,rst of all, to name a function, and thus, can be applied to men, but also to gods. From the Jewish or general Semitic tradition comes the idea of beings who are nott divin no divine, e, but butar aree mes messe seng ngers ersof of God Godoc occu cupy pyin ingg a separ separat atee statu statuss bet betwe ween en hi him m andd men. an men. They They can, can, th ther eref efor ore, e, be equa equate tedd wi with th the the de demo mons ns,, or be co conc ncei eivved as a separate class of beings, existing beside or above them; occasionally ἄελοι ἄελοι appear as gods of a lower rank. Furthermore, ἄελοι can also refer to beings who are subordinate to to the devil.
Cf Cf.Tim .Timootin tin (20 2012 12)), 13– 3–36 36.. In Reallexik Reallexikon on für Antike und Christentum thedemonsaretreated under the heading “Geister”. Cf. ter ter Vr Vrugt ugt-Le -Lentz ntz (197 (1976), 6), 600 600–60 –602; 2; Timoti Timotinn (2012) (2012),, 15–19. 15–19. Cf Cf.. Zint Zintzzen (197 (1976) 6).. Se Seee belo below w, pp. pp. 62– 2–69 69.. Cf. Cf. ter ter Vrugt rugt-L -Len entz tz (197 (1976) 6),, 600– 600–60 604, 4,wh whoo sees sees su such chte tend nden enci cies es alre alread adyy in th thee Odyssey;Timotin (2012), 26–31, on daimon as “esprit vengeur”; Böcher (1981), on the New Testament. Cf. Origen, Contr Contraa Celsu Celsum m 31; 42, 44 and 45; Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 21, 2; also Kallis (1976), 701. Cf. in gener general al Mic Michl hl (197 (1976) 6) and Klause Klauserr (197 (1976). 6). Cf. Cf. fo forr inst instan ance ce Proc Proclu lus, s, In Remp. ,, p. 255.18–23 Kroll: οἱ γὰρ ἄελοι τίνες εἰσὶν ἢ οἱ ἄων λόγους λόγ ους ἐκφ ἐκφαίν αίνοντ οντες; ες;τίν τίνες ες δὲ καὶ οἱ θεῶ θεῶνν μὲν ὑπη ὑπηρέτ ρέται αι, δαιμ δαιμόνω όνωνν δὲ ἐπί ἐπίστ στατα αταιι πλὴ πλὴνν τῶν τῶν ἀέ ἀέλων λων;; καὶ οὐ ξενι ξενικὸ κὸνν τὸ ὄνομ ὄνομαα κα καὶὶ βαρβ βαρβάρ άρου ου θε θεοσ οσοφ οφία ίαςς μό μόνη νηςς, ἀ ἀὰὰ κα καὶὶ Πλ Πλάτ άτων ων ἐν Κρατύ Κρατύλῳ λῳ τὸν τὸν Ἑρ Ἑρμῆ μῆνν καὶ τὴν Ἶριν ἀέλους εἶναί φησιν, with reference to Plato, Cratylos 407e6 and 408b5 (καὶ ἥ γε Ἶρις ἀπὸ τοῦ εἴρειν ἔοικεν κεκλημένη , ὅτι ἄελος ἦν in Duke-Hicken-Nicoll-Robinson— Duke-Hicken-Nicoll-Robinson— Strachan only in the t he apparatus). Cumo Cumont nt (191 (1915) 5);; von von Rad Rad (193 (1933) 3);; Ki Kitt ttel el (193 (1933) 3);; Mi Mich chll (1 (196 962) 2),, 60 60–9 –97; 7; Se Seeb ebaß aß (1 (198 982) 2);; Gr Gröz özin inge gerr (1982); Böcher (1982); Sheppard (1980/1981); Belayche (2001), 96–104. Cf. for instance Cumont (1915); Michl (1962), 58–59; Belay Belayche che (2010); Cline (2011), 47–76; Tissi (2013), 51–57 (with rich bibliography); case studies in Cline (2011). A much discussed Theosophi α textis 13, 93–1 93–108 08 Erbs Erbsee = 2, 14–2 14–299 Be Beat atri rice ce;; th thee last last th thre reee ve vers rses es of th thee Orac Oracle le run as follows: § 13,
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
In the Chaldaean the Chaldaean Oracles [= Oracles [= ], four groups of beings are to be distinguished, which in a narrower or wider sense can be understood as demons or angels, even though the term ‘demons’ is applied only to group 1 in the fragments of the , , the term ‘angels’ only to group group 4: . . . .
Evil vil de demo monns (δαίμονες), also known as dogs ( κύνες), appear mainly as disruptive forces in ritual. Na Natu ture resp spir irit itss can can be conc concei eivved as demo demons ns,, bu butt they they ar aree no nott ex expl plic icit itly ly desdesignated as such. Beings that mediate betwe between en men and god or gods, gods, thus full fullling ling at least the function allotted to the demons in the Platonic tradition. tradit ion. Angels Angels who perform the same task in a difere diferent nt way way..
The relevant fragments are a re discussed below below. .
Evil vil Demo Demons ns or “Dog “Dogs” s”
Thebasiccharacteristicof thedemonsintheistheirconnectionwithmatter.. ter 88 states:
αὐτοφυής, ἀδίδακτος, ἀμήτωρ, ἀστυφέλικτος, οὔνομα μηδὲ λόγῳ χωρούμενος, ἐν πυρὶ ναίων,
τοῦτο θεός· μικρὰ δὲ θεοῦ μερὶς ἄελοι ἡμεῖς . They are slightly diferent in the oracle of Oinoanda, v. 1–3—cf. Robert (1971) = (1989)— andin and in Lactan Lactantiu tius, s, Institutiones 1,7,1.Cf.Seng(2016b),160–163(withbibliography).Cf.also the ἄελοι in the magical papyri; on this Grundmann (1933) 73–74. Michl (1962), (1962), 112; Böch Böcher er (1982), (1982), 598. One m must ust rrefer efer to th thee com commenta mentaries ries of des PPlace lacess and Majecik, Majecik, as well well as to the the re respec spec-tive disc discussio ussions ns in the monogr monographs aphs by Kroll Kroll (1894), (1894), Lewy Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011, especi especially ally 259–309: 259–309: “Chaldæan demonology”), and Seng (2016a); cf. further Zintzen (1976), 647–652; Moreschini (1995), 90–110 (especially 90–96); Cremer (1969), 63–86; Geudtner (1971), 56–64 (with numerous references to Synesius). Regarding Regarding th thee following section cf. also Seng (2016a), 109–110, as well as Seng (2015), 287– 289.
Unmetrical (and unfounded) is the proposal πείθει πιστεύειν ἁγνούς. to v. 1 in Lewy (1956 = 2011), 263 n. 14: ἡ φύσις [εἶναι ] τοὺς δαίμονας
Nature persuades us to believe that the demons dem ons are pure, and that the ofspring of evil matter are good and useful. In the , matter is an ambivalent entity. It is true that, like everything, it ultimately comes from the divine. Matter is derived from the demiurgical Intellect, who is the ποιητὴς καὶ πατήρ or δημιουργὸς πατήρ τε, and is thereby called πατρογενής. As the substrate underlying the cosmos, which is formed through divine action by means of Ideas, matter can appear in neutral formulations. In most cases, however, matter is negatively characterized by such expressions expre ssions as κακός ( 88, 2) or πικρός ( 129), or even by the formulation ὕλης σκύβαλον ( 158, 1), insofar as it represents the opposite pole to the intelligible and diverts man from it. In 88, this evaluation is transferred to the demons, who are the ofspring of matter. But the deceptive inuence of φύσις φύσις—also seen in the as a negative power—creates the opposite impression. Deception thus belongs to the characteristics associated with
Opusc. c. phi phil l . 38, p. 136.15–16 O’Meara: Psellos, Opus O’Meara: ἡ φύσις / πείθει πιστεύειν εἶναι τοὺς δαίμονας ἁγνούς,/ καὶ τὰ κακῆ κακῆςς ὕλη ὕληςς βλα βλαστή στήματ ματαα χρη χρηστὰ στὰκαὶ καὶ ἐσθ ἐσθλά λά. Thetra The transl nslati ations ons of the , includ includ-ing the re respe specti ctive ve con conte texts xts,, ar aree tho those se of Majer Majercik cik (somet (sometime imess modi modied) ed),, unless unless otherw otherwise ise stated. Cf. Seng Seng (2016a (2016a), ), 91– 91–93 93 and (20 (2015) 15).. 7, 1: πάντα γὰρ ἐξετέλεσσε πατήρ …; 10: εἰσὶν πάντα ἑνὸς πυρὸς ἐκγεγαῶτα. Cf. Seng (2016a), 41–42 and (2015), 293–300. As in Pl Plat atoo, Timaeus 28c2–3 and 41a7. Cf Cf.. Psell sellos os,, Scripta minora , p. 130.1–3 Kurtz: Πατρογενῆ δὲ τὴν ὕλην ὀνομάζει τὰ λόγια, ὡς ἐκ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ πατρὸς ὑποστᾶσαν ἄνευ τινὸς μέσης ἀπογεννήσεως (“The oracles describe
matter matt er as born born of th thee fath father er beca becaus usee it co come mess in into to be bein ingg fr from om th thee de demi miur urge ge as fath father er with with-out a process of intermediate liation”); liation”); John Lydus, De mensibus 11, p. 32.3 Wuensch; 159,p.175.9Wuensch;Psellos,Opusc.phil .40,p.151.9O’Meara;JohnItalus, . 40,p.151.9O’Meara;JohnItalus,Quaestiones Quodlibetales 71, p. 122.1 122.17–1 7–188 Jo Joann annu; u; cf. Sen Sengg (2015) (2015),, 294–29 294–2988 (also (also on John John Ly Lydus dus,, De me mennsibus 11, p. 32.3 Wuensch Wuensch = 173). However However,, it cannot be completely ruled out that this epith epithet et,, whic whichh is atte attest sted ed to in th thee fr frag agme ment ntss of the only only fo forr Heca Hecate te,, was was tran transf sfer erre redd to matter by the Oracles’ exegetes; cf. Seng (2015), 301–302. 5, 1; 34, 1. Cf. Cf. also also th thee di difer ferentia entiations tions in 216 (see below below pp. pp. 58–59 58–59 with n. 83). 83). Indi Indire rect ctly ly 134, 134, 1: Μηδ’ ἐπὶ μισοφαῆ κόσμον σπεύδειν λάβρον ὕλης (“Do not hasten to the lig light ht-ha -hating ting world world,, boi boiste stero rous us of mat matte ter”) r”),, fr from om which which also also 180: 180: τῆς τῆς ὕλ ὕλης ης τὸ λάβρ λάβρον ον (“the turbulence of matter”), cf. Seng (2016), 38. Cf. further Seng (2015), 282–28 282–283. 3. In return, retu matter matt is107. certainly cert demonize nized. d. Seng Seng (201 (2rn, 016a 6a), ), 106– 10er6–10 7. ainly demo
the demons. According to Psellos, the Oracle refers to demonic apparitions in the theurgical ritual preceding the epiphany of φύσις φύσις itself. The role of φύσις φύσις is som somew ewhat hatfor forci cibl blyy re restr stric icte tedd by Psel Psello loss to pr prov ovidi iding ng,, when when in invo voke ked, d, the the oc occa ca-sionn for the sio the on onsl slaug aught htss of dem demon onss from from all all elem elemen ental tal sp sphe here res. s. Th These ese dem demon onss appear in various material forms, which are often pleasant pleasant and charming. The corresponding idea that demons appear during d uring ritual so that they might enjoy the worship and sacrice ofered to the gods is widespread. More dynamic than the image invoked in the term βλαστήματα in 88 is the origin of the demons in 90: … from the hollows of the t he earth leap chthonian dogs, who never show a true sign to a mortal. Here demons are depicted as dogs that spring from the earth, an idea that comes close to their designation as the ofspring of matter, by transfering the vegetal metaphor to the animal. The designation of demons as do dogs gs is also
Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 136.17–22 O’Meara. Generalizing Generalizing interpretation in Lewy (1956 = 2011), 263–264. See also also below below pp. pp. 60–61. 60–61. Cf. for instan instance ce Porph Porphyry yry,, De abstinentia 2, 2–3; Ad Anebonem, fr. 62; 65; 65b; 65e; 65j; 65o; 69 Safrey—Segonds; further Ta Tanaseanu-Döbler naseanu-Döbler (2013), 70. Psellos, Opusc.phil .38,p.138.26–28O’Meara:… . 38,p.138.26–28O’Meara:… ἐκ δ’ ἄρα κόλ κόλπων πων/ γαίης θρῴσκουσιν χθόνιοι κύνες οὔποτ’ ἀληθὲς/ σῆμα βροτῷ δεικνύντες. Cf.alsoHe f.alsoHeccate ate’s χθόνιοι κύνες in Apolloniu Apolloniuss Rhodius, Rhodius, Argonautica 1217, 1217, which, which,ho howe weve verr, are not characterized as demons. Thus, it is aassumed ssumed that the habitual abode of the demons is subterranean. subterranean. Howev However er,, the interpretation of 170 given by Lewy (1956 = 2011), 259 n. 2 remains doubtful. Proclus, In Tim. , p. 121.21–24 Kroll reads: τί δέ, εἰ τὰ ὄρη συμπέσοι, πνεύματος αὐτὰ ῥήξαντος ἀπὸ τῶν ὑπογείων τόπων, ὑφ’ οἵου τὰ λόγια καὶ αὐτάνδρους πόλεις ἀπόυσθαί φησιν, ἐν οἷς ἡ τῶν νεφῶν σύστασις; (“What if the mountains against which the clouds gather were to collapse, with that wind, by which the Oracle says cities too are destroyed men and all, ripping them from their ground-level locations?”): the subterranean subterranean winds that trigger earthquakes (as Naturale aturaless quaestiones 6, 24 often oft en assume assumedd in ancien ancientt times times,, cf. for instan instance ce Seneca Seneca,, N 24–2 –26, 6, as well as Williams (2012), 230–251 or Proclus, InTim. , p. 188.1– 188.1–12 12 Kroll) Kroll),, ambigu ambiguous ously ly called called πνεῦμα, for Lewy would be evil demons (likewise Majercik (1989), 206). Cf.alsoPr f.alsoProoclus clus,, Scholiaad Operaetdies82(adv.152–155):τὸ θηρ θηροφα οφανὲς νὲς τῶ τῶνν δαιμόνω δαιμόνωνν γένος γένος, οὓς κύνας 134 n. 1. εἴωθε τὰ λόγια καλεῖν ; In Remp. , p. 337.17–19 Kroll, on which Johnston (1990),
at atte test sted ed to outs outside ide the the . . Again Again,, dec decep eptio tionn is ment mention ioned, ed, so it seem seemss reaso reasonnable to suppose that 88 and 90 refer to the same context. The false signs indicate a demonic apparition, occurring in the context of the theurgical ritual, in which the apparitions of the gods and their questioningg pl in plaay an im impo port rtan antt role role. . Th Thee demo demons ns try try to di dist stur urbb the the cu cult lt of mo mort rtal alss an andd attempt to deceive them. Correspondingly Correspondi ngly,, 149 recommends: When you perceive a demon near the earth approaching, ofer the mnouziris the mnouziris stone stone and say … According to Psellos, the sacrice of the stone serves to summon an immaterial demon, more powerful than the one near the earth: e arth: This st This ston onee has has th thee po pow wer to ev evok okee an anot othe herr, gr grea eate terr de demo mon, n, wh whoo will will in invi vissiblyapproachthematerialdemonandproclaimthetruthaboutthequestions asked, answering the interrogator. And he utters the evocative
Cf. Scholz (1937), 28–29; Loth (1993), 788 and 822–823; 822–823; Johnston (1990), 140; Seng (1996), 154–155 (with further details). Cf. 72, 142 and and 146–148; 146–148; cf. cf. als alsoo Saf Safrey rey (1999 (1999 = 2000), 2000), especiall especiallyy 30–31 30–31;; TTanas anaseanueanuDöbler (2013), 34–38. On the theurgical ritual including the constraint of gods (which is not found in the themselves), cf. also 223 (δαίμονας in v. 5), attributed to the by Terzaghi (1904) 189 = (1963) 610 who refers to Nicephore Gregoras, not withstanding that the author explicitly states the opposite, and taken by des Places as dubium; cf. Seng (2016b), 147. Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 144.28–29 O’Meara: ἡνίκα δ’ ἐρχόμενον δαίμονα πρόσγειον ἀθρήσῃς,/ θῦε λίθον μνούζιριν ἐπαυδῶν … Cf. Kroll (1894), 58; Lewy (1956 = 2011), 289; Seng (2016a), 114. Tardieu Tardieu (2010) explains the name of the stone (μνούζιριν in the older Psellos manuscripts, which contain the fragment, μνίζουριν in the younger) by the port town of Μούζιρις (now Kodungallur) in Southwestern Southwestern India and identies the stone as the Indian agate, which according to Pliny ( 37, 142) was used for fumigating (crushed in a combustible mixture?). What kind of material is involved in the diferent “agates” of Pliny, Naturales Natural es historia, 37, 139–142 is not always clear, cf. Saint-Denis 168. However, Lewyy (1956 Lew (1956== 2011), 2011), 289–29 289–2900 thinks thinks of a consec consecra ratio tion. n. Cf. furthe furtherr Tanasea anaseanunu-Döb Döble lerr (2013) (2013),, 26–28. Th Thee ri ritu tual al use use of ston stones es (bes (besid ides es he herb rbss and and incan incanta tatio tions ns)) fo forr th thee pu puri ri ca catio tionn of th thee soul soul is also attested to in Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 132.12–13 O’Meara. The The fo form rmul ulat atio ionn λέγει … μετὰ τῆς τοῦ λίθου θυσίας transfers the imperative θῦε λίθον … ἐπαυδῶν(as into int o th theedes indic indPlaces), icat ativ ivee mode mo . The Thetoad adve verb rbia iall ph phra rase seofcann cathe nnot ot be re rela late tedd to th thee Orac Oracle le as subject does butde.only the performer ritual.
name at the same time as the sacrice of the stone. stone. The Chald Chaldean ean distinguishes between good and bad demons; but our pious doctrine denes that all are evil. For such a demonic hierarchy (and rivalry), however, there is no indication in the . Rather, the appearing gods’ superiority to the demons is to be understood, as in Iamblichus, who refers to Χαλδαῖοι προφῆται, saying: When these shine forth, fort h, that which is evil and demonic disappears and makkes way for ma for supe superi rior or be bein ings gs,, just just as da dark rkne ness ss be befo fore re li ligh ght, t, an andd does does no nott trouble the theurgists t heurgists even occasionally occasio nally. . The them The themsel selve vess are are also alsore rega gard rded ed as asut utte tere renc nces esof of the the go gods ds,, ne neve verr of demon demons. s. It is therefore probable that in Psellos, Opusc. Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 145.4–9 O’Meara, the ideas of the Oracles’ exegetes exegetes are reected. reected. The additional explanation that the Chalda Chaldaean ean distinguish distinguished ed good and evil demons is evidently evidently not due to the Neoplatonic tradition, but is intended for a Christian reader, whose natural assumptions this explanation contradicts. contradicts. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that such a distinction is made in the themselves. The invocation of a “greater” demon seems to be an interpretation of the expression ἐπαυδῶν in the sense of “calling, invoking.” But the meaning “to say in addition” is also possible. The missing hexameter closure apparently contained the
Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 145.4–9 O’Meara: ὁ δὲ λίθος οὗτος δύναμιν ἔχει προκλητικὴν ἑτέρου μείζ μείζονος ονος δαίμον δαίμονος ος, ὃς δὴ ἀφα ἀφανῶς νῶς τῷ ὑλικῷ ὑλικῷ δαίμ δαίμονι ονιπρο προσιὼ σιὼνν προφων προφωνήσ ήσει ει τὴν τὴντῶν τῶνἐρω ἐρωτω τωμένω μένωνν ἀλήθειαν, ἣν ἐκεῖνος ἀποκρινεῖται τῷ ἐρωτῶντι. λέγει δὲ καὶ ὄνομα προκλητικὸν μετὰ τῆς τοῦ λίθου θυσίας. καὶ ὁ μὲν Χαλδαῖός τινας μὲν τῶν δαιμόνων ἀγαθούς , τινὰς δὲ κακοὺς τίθεται· ὁ δὲ ἡμέτερος εὐσεβὴς λόγος πάντας κακοὺς ὁρίζεται .
Iam Iambl blic ichhus, us, De mysteriis 31, pp. 176.3–177.6 Parthey Parthey = p. 132.3–26 Safrey—Segonds— Safrey—Segonds— Lecer Lec erf.f. Cf.also Lew Lewyy (1956= (1956= 2011), 2011),27 273–2 3–275 75;; Crem Cremer er (1 (1969 969), ),150 150–15 –151;1;Tim Timoti otinn (2012) (2012),, 225–2 225–228 28 (with bibliography). bibliography). Iam Iambl blic ichhus, us, De mysteriis 31, p. 176.7–9 Parthey = p. 132.7–10 Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf Τούτων ων δὲ ἐπιλαμπόντων ἀφανὲς τὸ κακὸν καὶ δαιμόνιον (trans. Clarke—Dillon—Hershbell): Τούτ ἐξίσταται τοῖς κρείττοσιν, ὥσπερ φωτὶ σκότος, καὶ οὐδὲ τὸ τυχὸν παρενοχλεῖ τοῖς θεουργοῖς. Cf. LLewy ewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 289 nn.. 116 116:: “Psell “Psellos’ os’ interp interpreta retation tion of of this fragme fragment nt is not based based on Chaldæan tradition.” Krol Krolll (1894), (1894), 45 and Theiler Theiler (1942) (1942),, 36 = (1966 (1966), ), 296 attribute attributedd the distinction distinction to the the themselves. ἐπαυδῶν in ἐπᾴδων pro Cf. s.v. ἐπαυδάω.Thechangeof ἐπαυδῶν propos posed ed in Kr Kroll oll (1894) (1894),, 58 is super super-uous.
formula for repelling a demon, possibly an ὄνομα βάρβαρον. There is no need to interpret it as an ὄνομα προκλητικὸν as does Psellos (which makes the second demon necessary); much better in this context, it can be understood as apotropaic. As further safeguards against demons, Psellos identies the diamond, the coral, the thunderstone, and the sword with which a man has been killed (to be put down on the altar). To what extent the practices to which Psellos refers reect ideas already present in the remains unclear. A warning, which recommends rites of purication with an apotropaic efect, can be found in the testimonies concerning 135. First, Proclus, p. 40.2–7 Creuzer/ Creuzer/ Westerink: In Alc., Alc., p.
Cf. Thille Thillett in des des Places Places (1971 (1971), ), 184 184 n. 3. Cf. 150: ὀνόματα βάρβαρα μήποτ’ ἀάξῃς; see also below below n. . . The The a arm rmat atio ionn inPs in Psel ello los, s, Opusc.phil .,3,138Dufy—cf.Lewy(1956=2011),288—thatthe . ,3,138Dufy—cf.Lewy(1956=2011),288—thatthe Chaldeaensveneratedsubterraneandeitiesmightbebasedonsuchconjurations.RemarkAnebon bonem em, fr myst st . 9, ably similar similar is Porph Porphyry yry,, Ad Ane fr.. 10 Safre Safrey— y—Seg Segond ondss (= Iambli Iamblichu chus, s, De my p. 29.17–30.1 Parthey = p. 22.17–21 Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf). Psellos, Opusc. phil . 19, 167–171 Dufy. Cf. Seng (2016a), 114–115. Lewy (1956 = 2011), 291 and n. 124 thinks of “brass instruments”, referring to the declaration by Proclus ( In Crat . 71, p. 35.2–5 Pasquali = 210) that the Chaldaeans, having learned fro from m the gods, designated the bird, which is called κύμινδις by the humans, as χαλκίς “of course” (according to Iliad 291), and that this name is to be attributed to its bronze-like bronze-like voice. But this statementt do men does es not allow allow this this con conclu clusio sion; n; moreo moreove verr, Proclu Procluss is being being somewh somewhat at ironic ironic her here, e, cf. Seng (2018). To what context the amulets mentioned in Suda ι 433, , , p. 640.33–34 Adler belong bel ong is not clear clear.. The human human g guri urines nes (Psel (Psellos los,, Opu Opusc. sc. phil phil . 3, 150– 150–15 1522 Duf Dufy) y) di disc scus usse sedd by Lewy (1956 = 2011), 291–292 serve to ward of diseases, the statue of Hecate—cf. also Tanaseanu-Döbler Tanaseanu-Döbler (2016), 186–190—does not belong to a Chaldaean contex context.t. Since the ddiver iversion sion from from the the spiritua spirituall (th (that at is is,, in th thee ritual ritual conte context xt of the , from the sacred) is caused precisely by the body (cf. Plato, Phaedo 64e8–67b6, especially 66b1), a specia spe ciall prote protecti ction on is re requi quire redd ag again ainst st thede the demon monss andthe and thepas passio sions ns cau caused(or sed(or person personi ied ed)) by them (cf. Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 133.15 O’Meara: θελκτηρίοις … πάθεσιν), which are physical or physically mediated. Cf. Kroll Kroll (1894), (1894), 55; 55; Lew Lewyy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 227 n. 1 and and 264 264 n. 15; 15; Safrey Safrey (1969), (1969), 67–68 67–68;; Seng Seng (1996), 154–156; Seng (2016a), 109–110. Proc Proclu luss quot quotes es tw twoo pi piec eces es,, whic whichh ar aree not not di dire rect ctly ly co conn nnec ecte ted, d, se sepa para ratin tingg th them em by a pare parennthesis; there is no evidence that the rst verse in Proclus forms a continous text with the two verses of the Scholion, as printed by des Places, which is questionable methodology methodology,, as is th theeseparating ins inser ertio tionn itoffrom the the rs rstt vers ve rsee of th thee Sc Scho holilion on in into to th thee Proc Pr luss te text xt (b (bef efor oree th thee pare parennthesis, the immediately following verse) asoclu does Majercik.
Therefore, even the gods exhort us not to gaze at these (demons) beforehand, until we have been strengthened by the powers from the initiation i nitiation rites: For you must not gaze at them until you have your body initiated. And for this reason, the Oracles add: They enchant souls, forever turning them awa awayy from the rites. Second, there is a Scholion in Codex in Codex Parisinus Graecus 1853, Graecus 1853, fol. 68: Another (oracle) about malecent demons Being terrestrial, these ill-tempered dogs are shameless and they enchant souls, forever fo rever turning them away from the rites. Again, the demons show themselves as forces that disturb the ritual by distractingg me in menn from from it it. . Th Thee old old to topo poss asso associ ciat atin ingg do dogs gs wi with th sh sham amel eles essn snes ess, s, as in the the case of the associations in Iliad in Iliad 158–159 and 372–373, 372–373, is apparent here as well. Psellos’ explanations are similar: … th thee demo demons ns.. In this this clas classs, a ty type pe ha hass a bon bonif ifor orm m pow power: er: it hel elps ps the the hi hier er-atic atic asce ascent ntss agai agains nstt th thei eirr oppo oppone nent nts; s; the the othe otherr dr draaws do down wn the the so soul uls; s; it is
Proclus, In Alc., p. 40.2–7 Creuzer/Westerink: διὸ καὶ οἱ θεοὶ παρακελεύονται μὴ πρότερον εἰς ἐκείνους (sc. δαίμονας) βλέπειν πρὶν ταῖς ἀπὸ τῶν τελετῶν φραχθῶμεν δυνάμεσιν· οὐ γὰρ χρὴ κείνους σε βλέπειν πρὶν σῶμα τελεσθῇς. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τὰ λόγια προστίθησιν, ὅτι τὰς ψυχὰς θέλ γοντες ἀεὶ [τῶν] τελετῶν ἀπάγουσιν. Saf Sa fre reyy (1 (196 969) 9),, 67 67:: ἄο περὶ κακοποιῶν δαιμόνων/ ὄντες γὰρ χθόνιοι χαλεποὶ κύνες εἰσὶν ἀναιδεῖς/ καὶ ψυχὰς θέλγοντες ἀεὶ τελετῶν ἀπάγουσιν.
Too ge gene nera rall Le Lewy wy (195 (19566 = 20 2011 11), ), 26 264: 4: “The “The mort mortal al who who do does es not not co cons nsta tant ntly ly pe perf rfor orm m th thee pr preescribed scrib ed lustrations lustrationscanno cannott kee keepp himself himself freefrom free fromthe the delusions delusionsthat thatshe she”—th ”—thee personie personiedd nature (see above p. 49 with n. 25)—“provokes” (similarly 275–276); this does not t well with the idea of an initiation that removes the threat of demons; see Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 266. Overall, Lewy attaches to the demons an importance which is hardly reected in the fragments of the . . An example of cathartic consecration is provided by 133: Αὐτὸς δ’ ἐν πρώτοις ἱερεὺς πυρὸς ἔργα κυβερνῶν / κύματι ῥαινέσθω παγερῷ βαρυηχέος ἅλμης (“Above all, let the priest himself who governs the works of re, be sprinkled with the coagulated
billow of (1970), the deep-roaring sea” ). 823 and the references Cf. Faust (1970) , 26–27; Lothsea”). (1993), references in Seng Seng (1996), 155–156.
called the “bestial and shameless” type; turned towards nature and serving the gifts of destiny, it “charms the souls” or chastises those who have been left devoid of divine d ivine light … It is uncertain whether 89: “… bestial and shameless …” (… θηροπόλον καὶ ἀναιδές …)canbederivedfromthis.Itseemsmoreappropriatetoseeintheformula mu lati tion onss of Pse sellllos os,, on the the on onee ha hand nd,, a tes esti timo moni nium umto to 135, 135,2– 2–33 (ἀναιδὲς and the hapax legomenon θέλγον θέλγ ον τὰς ψυχάς) and, on the other hand, to isolate only the hapax additional expression expression of the . . It is attractiv attractivee to presume θηροπόλον as an additional that the word belongs to a preceding verse. Remarkable here is the distinction between two opposing types of demons. It would be the only evidence for good demons in the , who stimulate the ascent of the soul, thus counteracting the evil demons who want to prevent it. In this way, they are attributed a function which is usually assigned to the angels. In this respect, it seems reasonable to attribute these good demons not to the themselves but to their exegesis. The treachery of the evil demons entails a positive evaluation of the material, which implies a detachment not only from the ritual, but also from the
Psellos, Opusc. phil . 40, p. 150.26–31 O’Meara: … τὸ δαιμόνιον. οὗ τὸ μὲν δύναμιν ἀγαθοειδῆ κέκτηται συαμβάνον ταῖς ἱερατικαῖς ἀνόδοις ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐναντίους ταύταις· τὸ δὲ καθέλκει τὰς ψυχάς, ὃ καὶ θηροπόλον καὶ ἀναιδὲς καλεῖται , τὴν φύσιν ἐπιστρεφόμενον καὶ ταῖς μοιραίαις δόσεσιν ὑπηρετοῦν καὶ θέλγον τὰς ψυχὰς ἢ κολάζον τὰς ἐρήμας ἀπολειφθείσας τοῦ θείου φωτός
… The exac exactt form of the the wor wordd does remain remain uncle unclear; ar; also ἀναιδὲς and θέλγον τὰς ψυχάς are tted into the context; θηροφανές in Proclus, Scholia ad Opera Opera et dies 82 (ad v. 152–155) may be a variation (see above n. 30). The animals in 157 (Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 138.8 O’Meara: σὸν ἀεῖον θῆρες χθονὸς οἰκήσουσιν) do not appear to be demons—as claimed by Lewy (1956 = 2011), 265 n. 19; Cremer (1969), 79 n. 335 and 85 n. 414; Geudtner (1971), 59—but rather, rather, worms feeding on corpses; cf. Kroll (1894), 61 and Tardieu (1987), 160. On Psell sellos os,, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 145.8–9 O’Meara (καὶ ὁ μὲν Χαλδαῖό Χαλδαῖόςς τινας μὲν τῶν δαιμόνων ἀγ ἀγαθο αθούς ύς, τι τινὰ νὰςς δὲ κα κακο κοὺς ὺς τί τίθε θετα ται·ι· ὁ δὲ ἡμέ ἡμέτε τερο ροςς εὐσε εὐσεβὴ βὴςς λόγο λόγοςς πάντ πάντας ας κα κακο κοὺς ὺς ὁρ ὁρίζ ίζετ εται αι)see above pp. 50–51 with n. 36. Questi Questiona onable ble,, ho howe weve verr, is theident theidenti icat cation ionof of angel angelss as good good de demon mons, s, forinstance forinstance in Kr Kroll oll (1894), 45; Lewy (1956 = 2011), 260–262; Geudtner (1971), 57 n. 238; or Majercik (1989), 175; cf. also Cremer (1969), 68–69 and Zintzen (1976), 648. The factual identication of the good demons here and in Iamblichus with the Iynges (unattest (unattested ed to in the fragments of the )—for )—for which, see Cremer (1969), 69–77; Geudtner Geudtner (1971), 57 n. 238; Zintzen (1976), 649–650 and Moreschini (1995), 93–94—is unfounded; what the Neoplatonic exegesis exegesis of the attributes belongs only to later interpretations—cf. Seng (2016d), 295– 301—and does nottotthem Psellos’ description.
spiritual.Correspondingly,thedemonsareassociatedwiththe πάθη (passions), by which man is endangered in his earthly life. This is the case in Psellos: Chaldaean Oracle: Avengers, Avengers, stranglers of men. Explanation: The angels of ascension bring souls towards them by drawing them from becoming. But the avengers, that is to say the vindictive natures of demons and slanderers of human souls, chain these into the passions of matter and, it would be said, strangle them. Such Ποιναί are are also also atte attest sted ed to in Syne Synesi sius us and and in Proc Proclu lus’ s’ hym ymns ns. . Th This is ev eviidence, denc e, too, too, indi indicat cates es their their asso associat ciation ion with mat matter ter. .The The exp expres ression sion ἄγκτειρα is speci sp ecic cal ally ly Chald Chaldean ean. . Deriv Derived ed from from this this is the the corr corres espon pondin dingg use use of the mas mas-culine ἀγκτήρinProclus.Itisnotclearwhetherthereisaprecisedistinction between generally evil and specically punitive demons in the ; and also
Similarly in Iamblichus; Iamblichus; cf. Shaw (1988), 48: “In a theurgical context, Iamblichus personied the impediments of particular souls as demons, invisible entities that draw souls down into the material world and hold them there.” On the demons in Iamblichus and parallels in the , , cf. also Cremer (1969), 78–85. 78–85. Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 139.18–22 O’Meara [ 161]: Χαλδαϊκὸν λόγιον. ποιναὶ μερόπων ἄγκτειραι. Ἐξήγησις. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἀναγωγοὶ ἄελοι ἀνάγουσι τὰς ψυχὰς ἐφ’ ἑαυτοὺς ἐκ τῆς γενέσεως ἐφελκόμενοι ἐφελκόμενοι, αἱ δὲ ποιναί, ἤτοι αἱ τιμωρητικαὶ τῶν δαιμόνων φύσεις καὶ βάσκανοι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ψυχῶν, ἐνδεσμοῦσι ταύτας τοῖς ὑλικοῖς πάθεσι καὶ οἷον ἀπάγχουσι. Deinsomn insomniis iis 8, p. 160.13 providen videntia tia 3, Synesiu iuss, Ep. 43, 43, p. 77 77.1.18; 8; 80.3 80.3 Ga Garz rzya ya;; De 160.13TTer erzag zaghi; hi; De pro p. 121.1 121.144 Terzaghi; erzaghi; Catastasis 6, p. 29 293. 3.33 Terza erzagh ghii (p (pos ossib sibly ly to be unde unders rsto tood od as pe pers rson oni ication in some cases). Proclus, Hymns 1, 37; 7, 41; singular in 4, 12; cf. also van den Berg (2001), 180–181, as w well ell as ποιναῖοι δαίμονες in Proclus, In Remp. , p. 168.13–14; p. 180.8; p. 295.28–296.2 Kroll. Lewy Lewy (195 (19566 = 20 2011 11), ), 29 2988 an andd n. 25 2511 susp suspec ects ts that that they they are are de demo mons ns tort tortur urin ingg “si sinn nner ers” s” in th thee underworld; this is clearly proven wrong by Proclus, Hymns 4, 10–12: μὴ κρυερῆς γενέθλης underworld; ἐνὶ κύμασ κύμασιι πεπτ πεπτωκυῖαν ωκυῖαν / ψυχ ψυχὴν ὴν οὐκ ἐθέ ἐθέλου λουσα σανν ἐμὴ ἐμὴνν ἐπὶ δηρ δηρὸν ὸν ἀλᾶ ἀλᾶσθα σθαιι / Ποι Ποινή νή τις κρυ κρυόεσ όεσσα σα βίου δεσμοῖσι πεδήσῃ [emphasis mine]. Att Atteste estedd to to only only in the quota quotations tions of 161 in Psellos Psellos and and Pletho Pletho,, as well well as in his commentary (p. 3.3; 14.12–13 Tambrun-Krask Tambrun-Krasker). er). The change proposed by Lewy (1956 = 2011), 298 n. 151 in ἄγκτηραι does not improve the text; ἄγκτειρα relates to ἀγκτήρ as ἐλάτειρα to ἐλατήρ or σώτειρα to σωτήρ etc. Othe Otherwise rwise in the the sense sense of “instrume “instrument nt for for closing closing wounds wounds”” etc., etc., cf. ss.. vv.. ἀγκτήρ. Cf. Proc Proclu luss, In Remp. ,, p. 150.24–25 Kroll: τῶν ὑλικῶν καὶ τῶν ποιναίων ἀγκτήρων τῶν εἰς τὸ σκότος σκότ ος ἀγόν ἀγόντων των; (ho (howev wever er without without personic personication) ation),, and InEuc In Eucl l ..,, p. 20.24– 20.24–25 25 Fr Fried iedlei lein: n: τῶν ἐν τούτ τούτῳ ῳ γενε γενεσι σιου ουργ ργῶν ῶν δε δεσμ σμῶν ῶν κα καὶὶ τῶ τῶνν ἀγκτή ἀγκτήρω ρωνν τῆς τῆς ὕλ ὕλης ης (on the cave cave in Plato Plato’s ’s par parabl able) e);; In τῶνoned ἀγκτήρων τῆςcf. ὕλης Alc ., p. 42.1 . Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 139.1– In addi addition tionCreuzer/Westerink: to the evidence evidence mentioned menti in nn.. 60, also Psellos, Opusc.
whether the Ποιναί can be regarded as female demons alongside the “dogs” as male demons. demons. All the more obvious is their common connect connection ion to matte matterr and the passions with which they corrupt souls. Proclus correspondingly writes of materially oriented people: For they do not difer in great measure from dogs without w ithout reason, says the oracle of those who lead a wicked life. Demons are, however, however, not only presented as generally material or chthonic, or as earthly beings. There are also air and water spirits, as in Damascius: Starting from the spirits of the air, irrational demons begin to come into existence. Therefore, the oracle says: says: Mistress driving dogs of the air, earth, and water water. . The designation as dogs may characterize them as demonic in the negative sense. The identity of the ἐλάτειρα κυνῶν remains problematic. Traditionally, this expression would suggest Hecate, as could be substantiated by the following text of Porphyry, who lists exactly the three elements mentioned above:
3 O’Meara (commentary to 90, quoted above p. 49): περὶ δαιμόνων ἐνύλων ὁ λόγος· καὶ κύνας μὲν τούτους καλεῖ ὡς τιμωροὺς τῶν ψυχῶν, χθονίους δὲ ὡς ἐξ οὐρανοῦ πεπτηκότας καὶ καλινδουμένους περὶ τὴν γῆν. The tripartition into good, punishing, and evil demons in Iamblichus, De mysteriis—cf. Cremer (1969), 68–86—does not likely go back to the ;
see above n. 56. Cf. the distinction distinction into male and female female demons demons in Psellos Psellos,, Opusc. phil . 40, p. 150.31–32 O’Meara; sceptical in this respect Kroll (1894), 45. It is questionable whether the passage could refer to nature spirits like the nymphs mentioned in 216, 1. Proclus, In Remp. , p. 309.10–11 Kroll [ 156]: Οἵδε γὰρ οὐκ ἀπέχουσι κυνῶν ἀλόγων πολὺ μέτρον,/ οἱ ζῶντες πονηρὰν ζωήν, φησὶ τὸ λόγιον. Damas amasci cius us,, In Phaedonem 96, 3–5 Westerink [ 91]: ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ἀερίων ἄρχονται συνυφίστασθαι οἱ ἄλογοι δαίμονες· διὸ καὶ τὸ λόγιόν φησιν· / ἠερίων ἐλάτειρα κυνῶν χθονίων τε καὶ ὑγρῶν. Cf. Cf. fo forr inst instan ance ce her her in invo voca cati tion on as σκυλακάγεια in2719–2720=13,7Heitsch.For the association of Hecate and dogs cf. Scholz (1937), 40–42 and Johnston (1990), 134–142, especially 135–136; ample archeological and (only partially relevant) textual evidence in W Werth erth (2006) ,ayed 173–184, 17ed 3–184, especially 173–17 1rld 73–175. 5. See alsoben. regar 28garded above. abov Sarapis, Sara pis,(2006), pportr ortray as an anespecially underwo underworld god, god, could could re dede.aass an equiva equivalent lent to to Had Hades, es,
PerhapsitisoverthesethatSarapisrules,andtheirsymbolisthedogwith threeheads,thatis,theevildemoninthethreeelements,water,earth,and air. The god who has them under his hand will bring them to rest. Hecat Hecatee also rules over them, since she holds the sphere of the three elements together. In ligh lightt of this this ev evide idenc nce, e, the the se seman mantic ticss of ἐλάτειρα might ht be eluc elucida idate ted: d: Heca Hecate te ἐλάτειρα mig is here a helpful power whose control over the demons includes her ability to re reje ject ct them them. . Howe Howeve verr, the the ide ideaa of a mis mistr tres esss of the dem demon onss doe doess no nott t rig right htly ly with what the otherwise say about Hecate. Where she is mentioned, she appears as a metaphysical gure, which can be understood as an intelligible world or reservoir ooff (general) Ideas. In this thi s respect, respect , it seems more reas reasononable to think of another entity. Psellos connects φύσις and its epiphany with φυσικῶν δαιμονίων … πληθύν and πολύς … δαιμόνων χορός (referring to 101 and 88). Hecate is intimately connected to φύσις insofar as she is its origin ( 54). Another possibility would be the moon, to which refers the composition of the demons mentioned here ἀπὸ πάντων δὲ τῶν μερῶν τοῦ σεληναίου
whom Lewy (1956 = 2011), 279–293 279–293 regard regardss as the head of thedemons, the demons, which is not obvious from his evidence; cf. especially 279–282 on Psellos, Opusc. phil . 39, p. 148.3–7 O’Meara. O’Meara. Por orph phyr yryy, De philo philosophia sophia ex ora oraculis culis, p. 150 Wolf [= fr. 327 3–7 Smith]: Μήποτε οὗτοί εἰσιν ὧν ἄρχει ὁ Σάραπις καὶ τούτων σύμβολον ὁ τρίκρανος κύων, τουτέστιν ὁ ἐν τοῖς τρισὶ στοιχείοις , ὕδατι, γῇ, ἀέρι, πονηρὸς δαίμων; οὓς καταπαύσει ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἔχων ὑπὸ χεῖρα. ἄρχει δ’ αὐτῶν καὶ ἡ Ἑκάτη, ὡς συνέχουσα τὸ τρίστοιχον. Cf Cf.. Theo Theocr crit itus us,, id . 12: τᾷ χθονίᾳ Ἑκάτᾳ, τὰν καὶ σκύλακες τρομέοντι and the lexicographic lexicographic entries ἐλάτειραν· ἀπελαστικήν (Photius, Lexicon ε 557; Suda ε 749 , p. 239.18 Adler; Ps.Zonaras, ε p. 686 Tittmann) or ἐλάτειραν· ἀπελατικήν (Συναγωγὴ λέξεων χρησίμων, versio antiqua ε 274), 274), probably (as the entry in the accusative singular suggests) with referenc referencee Dee caelesti hierarchia, p. 28.1 Heil: πάσης ἀλαμποῦς σκοτοto Ps.-Dionysius the Areopagite, D ποιίας ἐλάτειραν. Seng Se ng (201 (2016a 6a), ), 52 52–5 –55. 5. Cf. Cf. also also John Johnst ston on (199 (1990) 0),, 135, 135, wh whos osee ch char arac acte teri riza zati tion on of Heca Hecate te in th thee is, nevertheless, diferent in many respects. This is the sugge suggestion stion of Johnston Johnston (1990) (1990),, 136–141. 136–141. Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 269–2 269–273 73 cona conates tes Hecate and φύσις. Opusc. sc. phi phil l . 38, Psellos, Opu 38, p. 136. 136.13 13 and and 18 O’ O’Me Mear ara. a. The The fo form rmul ulat atio ionn τὴν φύσιν ἐπιστ ἐπιστρεφόμ ρεφόμεενον (ref (referrin erringg to δαιμόνιον, ὃ καὶ θηροπ θηροπόλ όλον ον καὶ ἀναιδὲς ἀναιδὲς καλεῖτ καλεῖται αι) in Psel Psello los, s, Opu Opusc. sc. phil phil .40, . 40, p. 150.29 O’Meara, referred to by Johnston (1990), 139 n. 23, may perhaps be understood by analogy to a pack of hounds surrounding a hunter (cf. , , s.v. s.v. 2), but the context is probably too16a), abstract. Cf. Seng Seng (2016a (20 ), 81–83 81–83..
κόσμου, and which Proclus seems to identify as the φύσεως αὔτοπτον ἄγαλμα
mentioned in 102. Furthermore, Hecate’s association with the moon is found in connection with demons. There are two other arguments in favor of this hypothesis. On the one hand, the infrequently used word ἐλάτειρα i iss attestedtoinNonnusintheformulaichexameterclosure βοῶν ἐλάτ ἐλάτειρα ειρα Σελ Σελήνη ήνη, which can be understood to be a variegated bo borrowing. rrowing. On the other hand, the material world, and thus the area of air, water and earth, begins just below the moon. This aspect will be examined in the following section.
Nature Natu re Spirits Spirits
Nature spirits are mentioned in 216 (dubium ( dubium). ). John Lydus, who transmits the fragment, places them directly under the moon: moo n: The moon is immediately mounted on the universe of generation and all the beings in this t his world are manifestly manifest ly governed by it, as the Oracles say, Nymphs of the springs and all water spirits; hollows of earth, air and beneath beneat h the rays of the t he moon; who mount and ride all matter, heavenly, stellar and fathomless.
Psellos, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 136.20 O’Meara. Remp. ,, p. 133.15–18 Cf. the somewhat somewhat tortuous tortuous formulati formulation on in Proclus, Proclus, In Remp 133.15–18 Kroll: Kroll: εἰ δὲ (the τόπος δαιμόνιος in Plato, Republic 614c1, equated by Proclus with τρίοδος and λειμών in Gorgias 524a2) καὶ προσεχῶς εἰς τὴν σεληνιακὴν ἀνήρτηται σφαῖραν, ἐν ᾗ τῆς γενέσεως αἰτίαι
πάσης πάσ ης καί, ὥς φη φησί σίνν τι τιςς ἱε ἱερὸ ρὸςς λόγο λόγοςς, τὸ αὔτ αὔτοπτ οπτον ον ἄγα ἄγαλμα λμα τῆς φύσ φύσεως εως προ προσλ σλάμπ άμπει ει; cf. Johnst Johnston on (1990), 137 n. 14. Cf. Cf. ibi ibid. d.,, 29 29–3 –38. 8. Nonnus, Dionysiaca 331; 72; 247; 186; 5; 309; 668; cf. also Vian (1976), 141 and Chuvin (1992), 164. The model for the syntagm βοῶν ἐλάτειρα seems to be Colluthus, 110: ποιμενίη δ’ ἀπέκειτο, βοῶν ἐλάτειρα, καλαῦροψ (the only previous evidence for ἐλάτειρα seems to be Pindar, fr. 89a: Τί κάιον ἀρχομένοισ (ιν?) ἢ καταπαυομένοισιν / ἢ βαθύζωνόν τε Λατώ / καὶ θοᾶν ἵππων ἐλάτειραν ἀεῖσαι;). A parallel can be found in the adaptation of ἀμφιφαής ἀμφιφαής (from 1, 4) which in the Chaldaean tradition is applied to Hecate andtothemooninNonnus, Dionysiaca 28 281; 1; 34 349; 9; cf cf.. Seng Seng (2 (201 010) 0),, 23 235– 5–24 2444 and and 25 252– 2– 253. Cf Cf.. Pro Proclus clus,, In Remp. , p. 133.11–15 Kroll. Kroll.
Cf. the detailed deta iled discu discussion Seng Seng2.4((2016c 2016c), ), with further furth er referenc references. es. ἐπιβέβηκε τῷ mensibus ἡ σελήνη προσεχῶς John Lymore dus, us, De ssion 8, p. p. in 41.5–4 41.5–42.4 Wuensch: Wuensch : Ὅτι
Whether the fragment is of Chaldaean or Orphic origin cannot be ultimately determined. Even if specic uncertainties remain, the following analysis appears to be the most probable: rst, cosmic (sublunary) regions (κόλποι) are diferentiated(v.1–3a)inawaythatcorrespondstothefourelements,including the spirits contained therein (explicitly only νύμφαι νύμφαι and πνεύματα). The secon sec ondd part part (v. (v. 3b–4) 3b–4) re reach aches es bey beyon ondd and and incor incorpor porat ates es the the sp sphe here ress of the xe xedd stars and planets, while the sublunary world is summarily designated as ἄβυσσοι. These areas, as well as those mentioned above in v. 1–3a, include divine beings ἐπιβήτορες ἠδ’ ἐπιβῆται, which perform the function of cosmic administration. It remains unclear whether it is a list in the nominative sense, or a series of vocatives to be understood as a hymn or incantation. It is noticeablee that abl that inst instead ead of e ery ry demon demons, s, ὕπα mention tioned. ed. This conrm conrmss ὕπαυγ υγοι οι μηνα μηναῖοι ῖοι are men once again the relation between demons and the moon, as suggested in the previous section. On the other hand, this specic position of the ery beings, which are characterized characterized by their particular proximity to to the moon, would be compatible with the classication of the ἄλογοι δαίμονες among the lower elements. γεννητῷ παντὶ καὶ πάντα κυβερνᾶται τὰ τῇδε ἐναργῶς ὑπ’ αὐτῆς, ὡς τὰ λόγιά φασι·/ Νύμφαι πηγαῖαι καὶ ἐνύδρια πνεύματα πάντα/ καὶ χθόνιοι κόλποι ⟨τε⟩ καὶ ἠέριοι καὶ ὕπαυγοι/ μηναῖοι πάσης ἐπιβήτορες ἠδ’ ἐπιβῆται/ ὕλης οὐρανίας τε καὶ κα ὶ ἀστερίας καὶ ἀβύσσων.
It Itis is a Chal Chalda daea eann frag fragme ment ntac acco cord rdin ingg toJo to John hnLy Lydu dus, s, De De mensibus 8,p.41.10–13Wuensch; cf. also 11, p. 32.1–4 Wuensch (evidence for v. 4); however, Olympiodorus, In Alc., p. 19.7 Creuzer/Westerink quotes v. 4 as Orphic. Intuitively, Intuitively, it seems plausible to assume that the pause of sense coincides with the end of the verse after ὕπαυγοι. In this case, μηναῖοι would refer to ἐπιβήτορες ἠδ’ ἐπιβῆται. These are, however however,, placed above the matter of the sky of the planets and xed stars, which is above abo ve the moon. moon. Thu Thus, s, the ide identi ntic cati ation on of μηναῖοι μηναῖοι with ἐπιβή ἐπιβήτορε τορεςς ἠδ’ ἐπιβῆται is unlikely. unlikely. Ho Howe weve verr, sinc sincee wate waterr is name namedd rs rst, t, th thee elem elemen ents ts are are not not lilist sted ed in th thee us usua uall orde orderr, star startin tingg from the bottom with earth, then water, air, and re. Or th thee si sing ngul ular ar ἄβυσσος in Olympiodorus. The verb ἐπιβαίνω designates the superior rank and efectiveness of one entity over anothe ano therr cosmol cosmologi ogical cally ly and ontolo ontologic gicall ally; y; cf. for instan instance ce ἡ σε σελήν λήνηη προ προσεχ σεχῶς ῶς ἐπιβέβ ἐπιβέβηκε ηκε τῷ γεννητῷ παντί in John Lydus ( De mensibus 8, p. 41.7 Wuensch), in the introduction of In Tim m. , p. 59 the quoted quoted fragment fragment;; Proclus, Proclus, InTi 59.3 .31;1; 165. 165.10 10;; 19 195. 5.22 22 and and 31; 31; 199. 199.18 18 Krol Kroll;l; Psel Psello los, s, Opusc. phil . 40, p. 149.18–19 O’Meara etc. Lewy (1956 = 2011), 266–267 suspects it is “the beginning of a conjuring hymn” hymn”. Cf. Cf. al also so th thee idea idea,, whic whichh go goes es ba back ck to Aris Aristo totl tle, e, th that at th thee inh inhab abit itan ants ts of th thee er eryy zone zone,, wh whic ichh is direct directly ly adjace adjacent nt to the moo moon, n, ar aree the demon demons; s; cf. also also Lam Lameer eeree (1 (1949 949); ); Détie Détienne nne (1963 (1963), ), 146–154; Timotin (2012), 103–105. The location of the demons near the moon is already attested to in Xenoc Xenocrates; rates; Brenk (1986), 2088– 2088–2090 2090 and Timotin (2012), 93–99. Fire is also associat asso ciated ed withcf.the divine. divine .
92, quoted by Proclus, belongs to the same context: Furthermore, in the case of things that are divine, the word aquatic indicates the inseparable superintendence over water, which is the reason why the Oracles Oracles call these ggods ods ‘those who walk on water’. . Here Proclus speaks of gods. Howev However er,, he does not only explain that the terms gods and demons can include all the levels of the κρείττω γένη (gods, angels, demons, and heroes), but also that identical expressions, as in the case of πτη πτηνός and ἀεροπόρος, can refer both to gods in the narrow sense and to gods and demons generally. The exact status of the beings designated as ὑδροβατῆρες in th thee th them emse selv lves es and and thei theirr relat elatio ionn to the the water ater sp spir irit itss in 21 2166 ar aree im impo posssible to identify from this expression alone. In a work attributed to Psellos on the activity of demons, the expression τὰ τῶν δαιμόνων πολυχεύμονα φῦλα immediately precedes a diferentiation of their (deceptive) nature according to the elements. It is unclear whether the last last tw twoo word words, s, which which co coul uldd for form m a hexam hexamet eter er clos closur ure, e, origi origina nate te fr from om the . . Inan In anyy ca case, se,th they ey are are no nott quot quoted ed as Ch Chal alda daean eanin in Pseu Pseudodo-Ps Psel ello los. s.Th Thee ex expr pres essio sionn rst st appear appearss in an ef efus usiv ivee le lett tter er of Bas Basilil of Ca Caesa esare reaa to Lib Liban anius ius,, in πολυχεύμων r thesyntagm πηγῆς πολ πολυχεύμονος υχεύμονος.Whetheritisan adhoc imageorrepresents the adoption of an earlier formulation is dicult to say. The phrase is picked up and variegated by certain Byzantine authors; mainly in the 12th and 13th
Proclus, In Tim.,p.110.3–7Kroll: ἔτ ἔτιι τὸ ἔνυ ἔνυδρ δρον ον ἐπὶ ἐπὶ μὲ μὲνν τῶν τῶν θείω θείωνν τὴν τὴν ἀχ ἀχώρ ώρισ ιστο τονν ἐπισ ἐπιστα τασί σίαν αν ἐνδείκνυται τοῦ ὕδατος, διὸ καὶ τὸ λόγιον ὑδροβατῆρας καλεῖ τοὺς θεοὺς τούτους. Ibid. Ibid. , p. 109.1– 109.1–110 110.12 .12 Kr Kroll oll..
While Festugière Festugière (1954), (1954), , 143 n. 44,, th thinks inks of demons, Baltzly 197 n. 463 463 opts for gods. operationee daemonum daemonum (Boissonade) and De daemo daemonibus nibus (Gautier). On the question of De operation authorship, cf. Gautier (1980), 128–131. Ps.Ps.-Ps Psel ello los, s, De operatione daemonum, p. 30.7–8 Boissonade = line 537 Gautier. Boisso Boissonad nadee (18 (1838) 38),, 2262 62 n. 5 note notess the the varian variantt πολυχλεύμονα, which is not mentioned by Gautier.. This word is not otherwise attested, Gautier attested, and would be a lectio dicilior ; the meaning “making a lot of fun” (cf. χλεύη, χλευάζω etc.) would describe well the deceptive demons. Ps.Ps.-Ps Psel ello los, s, De operatione daemonum, p. 30.8–19 Boissonade = lines 537–545 Gautier (be yond the series of elements is named τὸ μισοφαὲς … γένος). Cf. Cf. Krol Krolll (189 (1894) 4),, 46n. 1:“H 1: “Hau audd sc scio ioan an…” …”;; mo moreres reresol olut utee Le Lewy(195 wy(19566 = 20 2011 11),260 ),260 and and n. n.44 with with referen refe rence ce to μισοφαής (Ps.-Psellos, De operatione operationedaemonum daemonum,p.30.12Boissonade=line540 Gautier). Neither des Places—there 93—nor Majercik characte characterize rize the expression as dubium Basil Basil the. Gr Great eat,, Ep. 353.
centuries, πολυχεύμων is a fashionable expression, but is mostly related to water metaphores. The πολυχεύμονα φῦλα do not appear to belong to this context. This suggests that Pseudo-Psellos draws it from another source, possibly from the (which Basil might already have used). At least the Chaldaean expression μισοφαής, as well as the more common αὐχμηρός, are present in the same section of Pseudo-Psellos. Both words are used in 134. The metaphors of pouring and owing for the process of formation are familiar in the the , , so th that at th thee “mul “multi ti ow owin ingg tr trib ibes es”” of de demo mons ns do no nott ha have ve to be asso associ ci-ated with water water.. In this respect, there is another indication that is particularly important. In hiscom his commen mentar taryy on 88, 88, Psel Psello loss des descr cribe ibess the the assau assault lt of the the dem demon onss pr prece eceededing the apparition of Physis in the following way: A whole chorus of demons ows in, and various demonic apparitions rush fort forth, h, arou arouse sedd from from all all the the elem elemen ents ts,, form formed ed an andd di divi vide dedd fr from om al alll the the secsections of the lunar world. This corresponds, approximately, to the more detailed account of PseudoPsellos; in particular, the formulation πολὺς ἐπιρρεῖ δαιμόνων χορός seems to paraphrase the expression πολυχεύμονα φῦλα. A more similar formula referring to the apparition of evil demons is to be found in Iamblichus: ἐπιρρέον τὸ Cf. Cf. alre alread adyy Le Leoo th thee Deac Deacon on (10t (10thh c. c.), ), Historia,p.51.21Hase: ἐξ αὐτ αὐτῶν ῶν τῶ τῶνν πη πηγῶ γῶνν πολυ πολυχεύ χεύμων μων τις; Ἀνέκδοτ πολυχεύμω υχεύμωνν.Amongthe Ἀνέκδοτον ον ἐγκώμιον εἰς Βασίλειον τον ᾿,p.428.33 Συκουτρής: πηγὴ πολ authors who display a knowledge of Chaldaean vocabulary are Michael Italikos (cf. espe Ep. 28), here Ep. 14, p. 142.21 Gautier; Ep. ad Nicephorum Bryennium 1, p. 371.20 Gaucially Ep Sebastocratorem orem Constantinum Angelum, p. 400.11 tier; Gregorios Antiochos (cf. Oratio in Sebastocrat Bachmann-Dölger; cf. Seng (2009), 67), here Epitaphion 5, p. 87.21; 8, p. 156.19 Sideras; fur Ep.. ad Barlaa Barlaam m 14 ther Greg ther Gregori orios os Pa Palam lamas as (cf. (cf. Sen Sengg (2009) (2009),, 28; (2010) (2010),, 251), 251), he here re Ep 14,, p. 23 232. 2.14 14 Meyendorf; Contra Nic. 5, p. 324.11 Χρήστου. Ps.-P Ps.-Psel sellos los,, De operatione daemonum, p. 30.12 Boissonade = line 540 Gautier. The expression comes from 134, 1 for which Proclus, In Tim. , p. 325.32–326.1 Kroll [ 181] provides testimony; In. In. Remp.,p.158.1KrollofersanotherattestationinadditiontoPsellos, Opu Opusc. sc. phi phil l . 3, 130 130 Du Duf fyy and and 38, 38, p. 146. 146.11 11 O’Me O’Mear ara. a. Af Afte terw rwar ards ds,, the the word word is us used ed as a sophisticated expression expression in Michael Choniates 3, p. 87.18 Lampros (about Lucifer); Nicetas Choniates, Historia, p. 264.22 van Dieten; Ephraem Aenii Historia Chronica, v. 5087 and 5540; Gregorios Palamas, Contra Nic. 10, p. 239.16 Χρήστου (μισοφαεῖ δαίμονι). 37, 15; 56, 3; 51, 2; 218, 2 (dubium). Psel Psello los, s, Opusc. phil . 38, p. 136.18–21 O’Meara: πολὺς ἐπιρρεῖ δαιμόνων χορός, καὶ πολυειδεῖς προφέρονται μορφαὶ δαιμονιώδεις, ἀπὸ πάντων μὲν τῶν στοιχείων ἀνεγειρόμεναι , ἀπὸ πάντων δὲ τῶν μερῶν τοῦ σεληναίου κόσμου συγκείμεναί τε καὶ μεριζόμεναι. See also above pp. 48–49
with n. 24.
κακοποιὸν φῦλον. This does not yet prove whether, in its original meaning, πολυχεύμονα φῦλα aims to diferentiate the demons according to the elements
(the par (the paraph aphra rase se doe doess no nott ment mention ion th them) em) or wh wheth ether er thi thiss un under dersta stand ndin ingg of the the phra ph rase se is at attri tribu butab table le to the the Ne Neopl oplat aton onic ic ex exeg eges esis is.. Bu Butt the the assu assumpt mption ion that that the the formulation is a fragment of the increases in probability. probability. The contingent evidence and ambiguity of the sources allow for only a very cautious conclusion: the probably know natural or elementary spirits, which can be interpreted as demons. On the one hand, we must think of cosm co smol olog ogic ical ally ly ac acti tivve bein beings gs ( 21 216, 6, if Ch Chal alda daea ean; n; pe perh rhap apss 92), 92), and and on the the other hand, of evil evi l powers ( 93 in context).
Intermedi Int ermediate ate and Conn Connectin ectingg
The id The idea ea of dem demon onss wh whoo medi mediat atee be betw twee eenn go gods ds and and men men is form formul ulat ated ed pr prom omiinently nen tly in Plato’ Plato’ss Symposium in whic whichh So Socr crat ates es re repor ports ts Dio Diotim tima’ a’s doc doctri trine ne on Symposium,, Eros: A great great daimon daimon,, Socrates. For all that is ‘daimonic’ is between god and mortal. But what power does it have? Its task task is to int interpr erpret et and and con convey huma humann thin thinggs to the the god odss an andd di divi vinne things to humans—prayers and sacrices, religious ordinances and rituals, and the exchange of favors. Being in the middle, the daimonic can supp su pple leme ment nt each each,, so th that at the the to tota tali lity ty is bo boun undd toge togeth ther er by it it.. Thro Throug ughh the the daimonic comes all mantic and the art of the priests who oversee oversee sacrice, religious religious rituals, incantation incantations, s, and the whole mantic art, as well as De mysteriis 7,p.190.10–11Parthey=p.142.20–21Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf. Iambli Iamblich chus, us, De Cf. τὸ δαιμόνιον φῦλον and especially τὸ τὸ τῶν πονηρῶν δαιμόνων φῦλον, ibid. 6 and 13, p. 19.11 and 198.3–4 Parthey = p. 14.18 and 148.8–9 Safrey—Segonds—Le Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf. cerf. Iamblichus never quotes the literally, but refers paraphrastically to them. Cf. ibid. 28, p. 168.6 Parthey = p.126.10 p. 126.10Safr Safrey—S ey—Segon egonds—Le ds—Lecerf; cerf; 7, p. p.84. 84.7–9 7–9 Parthey Parthey = p. 63.14–1 63.14–177 Safrey— Safrey— Segonds—Lecerf;f; 18, p. 223.15–17 Parthey == p. 166.24–27 Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf Segonds—Lecer Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf (cf. Cr Crem emer er (196 (1969) 9),, 79 n. 346) 346);; 4, p. 75. 5.10 10–1 –144 Par arth they ey = p. 56.23–27 Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf (cf. Tardieu (2010), 104–105); 7, p. 84.6–9 Parthey = p. 63.13–17 Safrey—Segonds— Lecerf (andn.5);7,p.84.14–17Parthey = p. 63.23–25 63.23–25Saf Safrey rey—Seg —Segonds— onds—Lece Lecerf rf (cf. Seng (2016a), 99 n. 14). As for ἐπιρρέον, Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf (p. 142 n. 4) suspect a possible allusion to Plato, Phaedrus 229d7; the context could also be a model of the Oracle’s
formulation. Cf. also also Timoti Timotinn (2012) (2012),, 36–52. 36–52.
sorcery. God does not mix with men, but through the daimonic all association and converse comes between gods and men, whether sleeping or awake. The person wise in these matters is the daimonic man. A person wise in other matters, matters, such as arts and crafts is rreally eally a vulgar vulgar type. These daimones are daimones are in fact very numerous and diferent, and one of them is Eros. Fr From om this this pa pass ssag age, e, two two aspec aspects ts have have emerg emerged ed withi withinn the Pl Plat aton onic ic tradi traditio tionn that that describe the nature and activity of demons: maintaining the cohesion cohesion of the cosmos and mediating (ritual) communication between humans and gods. Both aspects are taken up in the . On th thee on onee hand hand,, th thee ex exis iste tenc ncee of en enti titi ties es,, whos whosee co cohe hesi sivve e efe fect ct on the the co cossmos is indicated by their designation as συνοχεῖς, is well-attested. It is not always clear whether the term denotes a pure function or serves as a namelike designation of specic beings. The latter case is at any rate attested to in Proc Pr oclu luss ( In Parm 647.6– 6–88 Cous Cousin in), ), wh wher eree the the ex expr pres essi sion on is attr attrib ibut uted ed to the the Parm.,., p. 647. Assyrians (equivalent to the Chaldaeans) ( 188): […] such as the Zones and the Independent of Zones, the Sources, the Implacables and the Connectors, celebrated by the Assyrians.
δα ιμόνιον μεταξύ Plat Platoo, Symposium 202d3–203a8: Δαίμων μέγας, ὦ Σώκρατες· καὶ γὰρ πᾶν τὸ δαιμόνιον ἐστι ἐστι θεοῦ θεοῦ τε καὶ καὶ θν θνητ ητοῦ οῦ. Τίνα, ἦν δ’ ἐγώ, δύνα δύναμιν μιν ἔχο ἔχονν; Ἑρμηνεῦον καὶ διαπορθμεῦον θεοῖς τὰ παρ’ ἀνθρώπων καὶ ἀνθρώποις τὰ παρὰ θεῶν, τῶν μὲν τὰς δεήσεις καὶ θυσίας, τῶν δὲ τὰς ἐπιτάξεις τε καὶ ἀμοιβὰς τῶν θυσιῶν, ἐν μέσῳ δὲ ὂν ἀμφοτέρων συμπληροῖ , ὥστε τὸ πᾶν αὐτὸ αὑτῷ συνδεδέσθαι. διὰ τούτου καὶ ἡ μαντικὴ πᾶσα χωρεῖ καὶ ἡ τῶν ἱερέων τέχνη τῶν τε περὶ τὰς θυσίας καὶ τελετὰς καὶ τὰς ἐπῳδὰς καὶ τὴν μαντείαν πᾶσαν καὶ γοητείαν . θεὸς δὲ ἀνθρώπῳ οὐ μείγνυται , ἀὰ διὰ τούτου πᾶσά ἐστιν ἡ ὁμιλία καὶ ἡ διάλεκτος θεοῖς πρὸς ἀνθρώπους, καὶ ἐγρηγορόσι ἐγρηγορόσι καὶ κα καθε θεύδο ύδουσ υσι·ι· καὶ καὶ ὁ μὲ μὲνν πε περὶ ρὶ τὰ τοιαῦ τοιαῦτα τα σο σοφὸ φὸςς δαι δαιμό μόνι νιος ος ἀν ἀνήρ ήρ, ὁ δὲ ἄο τι σοφὸς οφὸς ὢν ἢ περ ερὶὶ τέχ έχνα ναςς ἢ χειρουργίας τινὰς βάναυσος. οὗτοι δὴ οἱ δαίμονες ποοὶ καὶ παντοδαποί εἰσιν , εἷς δὲ τούτων ἐστὶ καὶ ὁ Ἔρως. Translation borro borrowed wed from Brenk (1986), 2086.
Cf. Timotin Timotin (2012 (2012), ), 37–46, 37–46, 85–161, 85–161, and 163– 163–241. 241. Cf. Seng (2016d), (2016d), 307–313. 307–313. In Crat .107,p.59.1–3Pasquali[152;207]andinDam This This is perh perhap apss th thee ca case se in inPr Proc oclu lus, s, In . 107,p.59.1–3Pasquali[152;207]andinDamascius, In Parmenidem , p. 95.1–6 [ 81; 80]; , p. 31.17–19 Westerink—Combès— Segonds. Cf. Po Porph rphyry yry,, De philosophia ex oraculis, p. 141 Wolf [= fr. 324 8–9 Smith]. Proc Proclu lus, s, In Parmenidem, p. 647.6–8 Cousin: οἷα τὰ τοῖς Ἀσσυρίοις ὑμνημένα, Ζῶναι καὶ Ἄζωνοι καὶ Πηγαὶ καὶ Ἀμείλικτοι καὶ Συνοχεῖς. Cf. also Damascius, In Parmenidem , p. 67.19–20 [, 83]; , , p. 97.1–98 97.1–98.4 .4 [ 82]; , , p. 31.20–23 Westerink—Combès—Segonds. esterink—Combès—Segonds.
Moreover, there is a passage by Damascius from which the exact wording of Moreover, 177 is dicult to extract: […] or the Masters Masters of Consecration Consecration are, accord according ing to the Oracl Oracle, e, bound together with the Connectors. Proclus, In Tim. Proclus, In Tim. , p. 420.11–16 Kroll can also be mentioned in this respect ( 32): Living-Thing-itself, then, is the third intelligible triad. Of [this triad] the too say that it is ‘a worker’, that it is ‘the bestower of life-bearing Oracles too Oracles re’, that it ‘lls the life-producing womb of Hecate’ and pours into the Connectors the life-giving might of most puissant re. The absolute use of συνοχεῦσιν points to the fact that not only a functional description is given are here. By receivingasthe efectiveentities. power of the ensure life-giving re, re, the συνοχεῖς characterized mediating They the cohe co hesio sionn of th thee co cosm smos os by commu communic nicati ating ng lilife fe and and in inte tellllig igibl iblee forms forms,, i.i.e. e. Ideas Ideas,, into the material world. In this respect the two demonic functions specied by Plato are held together, but have been applied to cosmology. In their connecting function, the συνοχεῖς act particularly to fulll the same task as does Eros, as a power acting universally; in this respect, they are to be regarded as its particular manifestations, as ἔρωτες. This structuring seems to
μὲ ν τελετάρχαι συνείλην Dama Damasc sciu ius, s, De Principiis ,, p. 117.9–10 Westerink—Combès: esterink—Combès: ἢ οἱ μὲν ται τοῖς συνοχεῦσι, κατὰ τὸ λόγιον. Des Places’ text reads οἱ μὲν τελετάρχαι / τοῖς συνοχεῦσι συνείληνται; cf. Seng (2016d), 302–304. Cf. also Seng Seng (2016a), (2016a), 52–54, 52–54, as well well as (2016d), (2016d), 309 309–310. –310. The establish establishment ment of two rst verses by des Places is rather experimental, but unconvincing; 32, 1–2: Ἐργάτις, ἐκδότις ἐστὶ πυρὸς ζωηφόρου ⟨αὕτη⟩, καὶ τὸν ζῳογ ζῳογόνον όνον πληροῦσ ’ Ἑκάτης ⏑ ⏑ κόλπον. Proc Proclu lus, s, In Tim. , p. 420.11–16 Kroll: Ἡ τρίτη τοίνυν τριὰς ἡ νοητὴ τὸ αὐτοζῷον , περὶ ἧς καὶ τὰ λόγιά φησιν, ὅτι ἐργάτις, ὅτι ἐκδότις ἐστὶ πυρὸς ζωηφόρου, ὅτι καὶ τὸν ζῳογόνον πληροῖ τῆς Ἑκάτης κόλπον καὶ / ἐπιρρεῖ τοῖς συνοχεῦσιν / ἀλκὴν ζειδώροιο πυρὸς μέγα δυναμένοιο. In the last verse the manuscripts read ζείδωρον. On life, cf. also Proclus, Proclus, Theologia Platonica 20, p. 59.1–6 Safrey—Westerink. Cf. also also 32; 82 82,, 2. δεσμὸν πυριβριθῆ ἔρωτος; 42, 1: δεσμῷ Ἔρωτος ἀγητοῦ; 46, 2–3: ἁγνὸν Ἔρωτα, / συν 39, 39, 2:πάντων δετικὸν ἐπιβήτορα σεμνόν.
have its origins in the presentation of Eros as a δαίμων μέγας in Plato. Pla to. However, there is no indication that the συνοχεῖς are considered to be or designated as demons. Nor can can th thei eirr re rela lati tion on to th thee na natu ture re sp spir irit itss di disc scus usse sedd ab abov ovee (sec (secon ondd sect sectio ion) n) be de dete termi rmine ned. d. Damasc Damasciu iuss wri write tess ( In Parm Parm.. , p. 95. 95.1–6 1–6 Westerin esterink—C k—Combè ombès— s— Segonds, 81 and 80): And the Connectors are not three, but each one is multiple; concerning the Empyric is said: All things yield to the intellectual lightning-bolts of the intellectual re. And concerning the Material: But also, all those things which serve material connectors. One observes here, the Chaldaean three-world schema, which distinguishes between( ,and ὑλαῖοςκόσμος .Therelationaldetermination ἐμ)πύριος αἰθέριος by the adjective raises the question as to whether the συνοχεῖς here represent a separate class of beings, or rather, independent entities, which act on matter, an idea applicable to elemental demons, dem ons, but also to other beings. Apart from f rom the function ooff connecting, the adopt from Plato the aactivctivity of medi mediatin atingg be betwe tween en hum humans ans and gods, gods, and provide provide a speci specic c aadjec djectiv tivee in accordance with διαπορθμεῦον in in Symposium Symposium 202e3: 202e3: διαπόρθμιος. The oracle is quoted by Damascius:
Dama Damasc sciu ius, s, In Parmenidem , p. 95.1–6 Westerink—Combès—Segonds: καὶ οἱ συνοχεῖς οὐ τρεῖς, ἀὰ ποοὶ ἕκαστος· περὶ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ ἐμπυρίου λέγεται· τοῖς δὲ πυρὸς νοεροῦ νοεροῖς πρηστῆρσιν ἅπαντα/ εἴκαθε δουλεύοντα./ Περὶ δὲ τοῦ ὑλαίου·/ ἀὰ καὶ ὑλαίοις ὅσα δουλεύει συνοχεῦσι. Cf. for instan instance ce Seng Seng (2009) (2009),, 75 75–7 –799 and (20 (2016a 16a), ), 84 84–8 –87. 7. In Procl Proclus us,, Damasc Damascius ius,, and Psell Psellos os,, this diferentiation is related not only to the συνοχεῖς, but also to the νοητοὶ ἅμα καὶ νοεροί collectively (see below p. 68). Ac Acco cord rdin ingg to toPs Psel ello loss (Opusc.phil . 46, 46, 43–5 43–511 Du Duf fy) y),, Ju Julilian anth thee Ch Chal alda daea eann asks asks th thee συνοχεὺς τοῦ παντὸς for the soul of an archangel for his son (see below p. 75). At least, the word word is found exclusively exclusively in Chaldaean Chaldaean ccontexts, ontexts, which are discussed below below.. The corresponding verb can be applied to angels; cf. Proclus, In Tim. , p. 314.16–17; , p. 165.24 Kroll.
Henceforth, one could also understand this name [assimilator] from the tr trut uthh of th thee ma magi gica call art, art, bo both th th that at wh whic ichh co come mess fr from om the the Oracles an andd that that which comes co mes from Persia. For the fathers who preside over magic bbring ring forward everything into visibility and, conversely, they make everything go back into the invisible, as, in order to speak like the Oracle the Oracle,, they are “e “estab stablis lished hed as transmit transmitter terss of mess message ages” s” betw between een the Fa Father ther and matt matter er,, for of the the vis visibl iblee thin things gs they they make make copie copiess of the the in invis visibl iblee and and they they en engr graave the invisible in the visible production of the world. The actual Oracle actual Oracle text text should be: διαπόρθμιοι ἑστηῶτες; at least this could be the second part of a hexameter from the penthemimer onwa onward, rd, with bucolic dihaeresis. Unli Un likke in Plat Platoo, th thee ex expr pres essi sion on is no nott re rela latted to de demo mons ns,, but but to οἱ ἐπ ἐπὶὶ μαγε μαγειῶ ιῶνν πατέρες. The identity and origin of these entities exclusively attested to in Damascius in Chaldaean contexts and in Psellos ( Ψε Ψεοῦ οῦ ὑποτύπωσις κεφαλαιώδης τῶν παρὰ Χαλδαίοις ἀρχαίων δογμάτων) are uncertain. They may not be Chaldaean, Persian, theother formulation Damascius refers, on the one hand, tobut Persia, and,since on the hand, to in Chaldaean tradition (ἀπὸ τῶν λογίων). The latter is represented by the quoted λόγιον; for the former, only the expression οἱ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πατέρες is suitabl suitable, e, corresp corresponding onding to
Dama Damasc sciu ius, s, In Parmenidem , , p. 124.3–10 Westerink—Combè Westerink—Combès—Segonds: s—Segonds: Ἤδη δὲ τοῦτο λάβοι τις ἂν καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς μαγικῆς ἀληθείας, τῆς τε ἀπὸ τῶν λογίων καὶ τῆς Περσικῆς. Οἱ γὰρ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πατέρες εἴς τε τὸ ἐμφανὲς πάντα προάγουσιν, καὶ πάλιν εἰς τὸ ἀφανὲς περιάγουσιν, ὡς ἂν “διαπόρθμιοι ἑστῶτες”, κατὰ λόγιον φάναι, τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῇ ὕλῃ, καὶ τά τε ἐμφανῆ μιμήματα τῶν ἀφανῶν ἐργαζόμενοι καὶ τὰ ἀφανῆ εἰς τὴν ἐμφανῆ κοσμοποιΐαν ἐράφοντες. Krol Krolll emen emends ds κατὰ ⟨τὸ⟩ λόγιον; but perhaps the article is intentionally left out, because the fragment is
not originally related to οἱ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πατέρες and only the expression is picked up. Cf. ἑστηῶτ’ in 146, 146, 8. Ho Howe weve verr, th thee quot quotat atio ions ns fr from om th thee are are also also gr gram amma matic tical ally ly tt tted ed into their context, so that methodical doubts concerning the exact expression persist. See below below n. 130. 130. Psel Psello los, s, Opusc. phil . 40, p. 150.9–10 O’Meara: καὶ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν δὲ τρεῖς πατέρες ἀρχικὴν ἔχουσι τάξιν. Cf. further Opusc. phil . 39 (Τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔκθεσις κεφαλαιώδης καὶ σύντομος τῶν παρὰ Χαλδαίοις δογμάτων), p. 148.11–12 (= Opusc. theol . , 23 , 56–57 Gautier): τοὺς δὲ περὶ μαγειῶ μαγ ειῶνν λόγο λόγους υς συν συνιστ ιστῶσι ῶσινν ἀπό ἀπότε τε ἀκρ ἀκροτά οτάτων των (μακροτάτων Opusc.theol .,23AGautier) . ,23AGautier) τινῶν δυνάμεων ἀπό τε περιγείων ὑλῶν. See below below nn. 128–1 128–130. 30. In Dama Damascius scius ( In Parmenidem Parmenidem ,, p. 129.4 Westerink—Combès— esterink—Combès— Segonds) Julian’s Ὑ Ὑφηγητικά φηγητικά are men mentio tioned ned in dir direc ectt connec connection tion with with τοῖς τοῖς μαγ μαγικο ικοῖς ῖς πατ πατράράσιν,butinanewsentence;Kroll(1894),39concludesthattheybelongtothiswriting.Lewy ἀρχικοὶ οὶ πατέ πατέρες ρες,butalso,def(1 (195 9566 =wrongly, 2011 2011), ), 138– 138–13 1399 not no only only equa equate th them em(2009), with with th the37–74. e ἀρχαί or ἀρχικ initely with thet κοσμαγοί ; tes cf.s Seng
the Persian μάγοι. The on ontolog tological ical leve levell whic whichh Damascius Damascius at attribut tributes es to them is described by the alternative expressions ἀρχικός, ἡγεμονικός, ὑπερκόσμιος, and ἀφομοιωτικός. Their place is directly under the Demiurge, whose uniform activity they continue at a particular level, and thus clearly above the demons. διαπόρθμιος The further attestations ofrent the expression be Pro-e cl clus us, , who whoat attri tribut butes es it todi to dife fere nten entit tities ies,, all all of wh which ichar aree can abstr abstract act.found . On the thin e sam same level of the hierar hierarchy chy of Being as οἱ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πατέρες in Damascius are the forc fo rces es th that at are are assi assign gned ed to the the ἀφομ whichh work work demiur demiurgi gical cally ly ἀφομοιωτι οιωτικὰ κὰ γένη γένη and whic downward:
The li The libe bera rate tedd lead leader ers, s, ther theref efor ore, e, bein beingg su such ch as we hav have sh show ownn them them to be be,, let us survey the multiform orders of them adapted to this order. order. Some of them, therefore, therefore, we call transporters call transporters,, and these are such as unfold to secondary natures, the progressions of the assimilative genera.
Evidence, however however,, is missing, as as already already stated. The refer reference ence to the Persian Persian tradition might point to the cult of Mithras, high ranking practicioners of which are repeatedly sacrorum orum (cf. Scholia lia veter veteraa in The The-called pater sacr (cf. th thee indices in Verma ermase sere renn 35 3522 and and 42 426; 6; Scho ocritum on id . 2, 10a: ἐκ θυέων: ἐκ τῶν θυσιῶν, μαγειῶν· θύος γὰρ τὸ θῦμα) and once πατὴρ νόμιμος τῶν τελετῶν ( 76, p. 74 Vermaseren). Dama Damasc sciu ius, s, In Par Parmenide menidem m ,, p. 123.7–20 123.7–20 Westerink esterink—Comb —Combès—Seg ès—Segonds onds,, an instru instructive ctive example of the Neoplatonic synopsis of the traditions; cf. Safrey (1992 = 2000): ἀρχικός according to (θεία παράδοσις, 8; 19–20 quotation of 40), ἡγεμονικός according to Iambli Iam blichu chuss (9–10, (9–10, with with refer referenc encee 11–12 11–12 back back to Plato Plato,, Phaedrus 246e4–247a3), ὑπερκόσμιος (οἱ δέ, 12), ἀφομοιωτικός according to the Orphic tradition (14–17, testimonium to Orph. fr . 192 Kern = 286 () Bernabé; but cf. also Westerink—Combès—Segonds esterink—Combès—Segonds (200 (2002), 2), , , 123 n. 6); cf. also ibid. , 270–2 270–271. 71. Cf. Da Damas masciu cius, s, In Parmenidem , p. 123.7–130.10 Westerink—Combès—Segonds, with the other other eviden evidence ce of the expr express ession ion,, fro from m which which it als alsoo bec become omess clear clear that that they they are are three, three, as in Psellos (ibid. , p. 129.8–12 Westerink—Combès—Segonds), as well as the variant μαγικοὶ πατέρες (ibid. , p. 127.24–128.1; p. 129.1–3 Westerink—Combès—Segonds); further ἡ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πηγή with similar characterisation in Damascius, De principiis , p. 31.9–10 and p. 38.8–10 Westerink Westerink—Combès, —Combès, as well as Westerink—Combès Westerink—Combès (1991), , , 185–18 185 –1866 and Lec Lecerf erf—Sa —Saud udell ellii (2016) (2016),, 70–7 0–74. 4. It is espec especial ially ly import important ant to not notee that that DamasDamascius reads into the and Julian’s Ὑφηγητικά propositions about the entities ἐπὶ μαγειῶν using formulations that reveal reveal his approach. This reinforces the doubts doubts about their original aliation with the Chaldaean tradition, although a reference reference to Persia in the Ὑφηγητικά cannot be excluded; cf. also Lecerf—Saudelli (2016), 75–77. Τοιο οιούτω ύτωνν τοί τοίνυν νυν τῶν ἀπο ἀπο-Theologia ogia Platonica Platonica 17, λύτων Proc Proclu lus, s, Theol p. 82.16–20 Safrey—W Safrey—Westerink: esterink: ὄντων ἡγεμόνων νοήσωμεν αὐτῶν τὰς πολυειδεῖς δυνάμεις τῇ τάξει ταύτῃ προσηκούσας·
The reference to an oracle is missing; the formulation διαπορθμίους καλέσωμεν seems almost imperatively to imply that there is no Chaldaean evidence. In In In In Re 92.28– 8–29 29 Krol Kroll,l, Pr Proc oclu luss us uses es διαπόρθμιος (without refere reference nce Remp mp.. , p. 92.2 to th thee ) to de desi sign gnat atee forc forces es su subo bord rdin inat atee to the the di divi vini niti ties es that that di dire rect ct the the he heaavens. The entities with which the expression διαπόρθμιος is otherwise asso τελετάρχαι ciated in the Proclus are much higher.s as These are ἴυες , whose, function philosopher describe describes demiurgic and and cosmological. cosmologica l. Obviously Obviously, the expression can be related, by the exegetes of the Oracles the Oracles,, to diferent entities with a certain freedom, but this does not allow conclusions to be drawn conc co ncer erni ning ng the the thems themsel elve ves. s. In the the Neopl Neoplat aton onic ic syst systems emsof of Pr Procl oclus us an andd DamDamascius, ἴυες, συνοχεῖς, and τελετάρχαι form the Ennead of the νοητοὶ ἅμα καὶ both inte intellllig igibl iblee an andd int intel elle lect ctual ual div divin initi ities es,, which which col colle lecti ctive vely ly have have a νοεροί, the both conn co nnec ectin tingg and and media mediatin tingg posit position ion bet betwe ween en the the su supe perio riorr Enne Ennead ad of the the in inte telllliigibl giblee entit entitie iess an andd the the subor subordin dinat atee Hebdo Hebdoma madd of the the in inte tellllec ectua tuall entit entities ies.. HowHowever,, this metaph ever metaphysical ysical syst system em belongs not to the themselves but to their exegesis. Both the ἴυες as a magic wheel, and the τελετάρχαι as (human, ἐπὶ demonic or divine) of thebelong theurgical ritual,tobut Damascius, originally theprobably sphere ofalso the οἱcult. μαγειῶν πατέρ πατέρες ες inleaders In thi thiss re resp spec ect,t, the expr expres essio sionn διαπόρθμιος al alig igns ns perfec perfectl tlyy wit withh its Pl Plat aton onic ic oriorigin. Howe Ho weve verr, Proc Proclu luss ob obvi vious ously ly avoid avoidss app apply lyin ingg the the term term to thes thesee en entit titie iess themthemselves. Instead, he speaks of δυνάμεις ( In Parm., Parm., p. 1199.36 Cousin) or ὄνομα δυνάμεις ( In ( In Alc Alc.,., p. 150.12 150.12 Creuze Creuzer/W r/West esterin erink; k; In In Cr Crat at . 71, 71, p. 33 33.1 .144 Pasqu asqual ali) i).. This This co coul uldd be anindicationthat78originallydidnotrefertothe ἴυε ἴυεςςandthe τελετάρprecisely, not in a context that allows them χαι mentioned by Proclus, or more precisely, to be interpreted as metaphysical entities. On the other hand, ὄνομα may also have ha ve a ritua rituall con conno notat tation ion;; ὀνόματα with cultic signicance are the ὀνό ὀνόματ ματαα βάρ βάρ-βαρα, which were used as ritual calls for mediation between gods and humans καὶ τὰς μὲν διαπορθμίους καλέσωμεν, ὅσαι τὰς τῶν ἀφομοιωτικῶν γενῶν προόδους ἐκφαίνουσι τοῖς δευτέροις· (trans (trans.. T. Taylor). aylor).
Perha erhapsthe psthe Moirai accordingtoPlato, Republic 617b7–d1; cf. Festugièr Festugièree (1953), ,, 33 n. 2. Cf. Seng (2016d), (2016d), 302–313. 302–313. These are are regarded regarded as demons in Zintzen (1976), (1976), 649–650, but without sspecic pecic reasons; reasons; for the series “angels, Iynges, evil demons” he does not ofer (648) any evidence. Cf. Lewy (1956 = 20 2011), 11), 1139 39 aand nd see see above above n. 128. 128. Likew Likewis isee in Proc Proclu lus, s, Theol Theologia ogia Platonica Platonica 17, p. 82.17 Safrey—W Safrey—Westerink and In Remp Remp., p. 92.29 Kroll. Which Whic h is impossible impos sible rst of all for grammatic grammatical al rea reasons sons,, cf. the masculine masculine ἑστ⟨η⟩ῶτες (but see above n. 124).
in theu theurgy rgy. . If, how howev ever er,, the expres expression sion διαπόρθμιος doesbelongtothecontext of the cult, then the τελετάρχαι are the grammatically appropriate reference of 78 as well well as οἱ ἐπὶ μαγειῶν πατέρες in Damascius, whose Chaldaean origin, however, however, has been shown to be questionable. An addit additional ional argument for this hypothesis would be their close association with the συνοχεῖς according to 177, which corresponds to in thethe complementary functions of the demons according to Plato. However, as case of the συνοχεῖς , it must remain an open question whether the τελετάρχαι or other entities, which 78 originallllyy re na refer ferre redd to to,, woul wouldd ha have ve to be class classi ied ed as de demon monss acc accor ordin dingg to Ch Chal aldae daean an understanding. Proclus more clearly refers to the demons in In in In Alc., Alc., p. 69.15–70.3 Creuzer/ Westerink: W esterink: Diotima has assigned them this rank that binds together divine and mortal, transmits the channels from above, elevates all secondary beings to the gods, and completes the whole by the continuity of the medium. As a specic deviation from Plato, Plato,it it is remarkable that διαπόρθμιος hereagain denotes an action from the top downwards, while the complementary direction from the bottom upwards is designated by ἀναγωγός ἀναγωγός. Since Proclus refers exp xpllic icit itly ly to Pl Plat atoo and and not not to th thee , once once more more,, a cl clue ue to the the or orig igin inal al refer eferen ence ce of 78 is wanting. To sum up: although the are aware of the idea of beings conceived of as διαπόρθμιοι ἑστ⟨η⟩ῶτες ( 78) and συνοχεῖς ( 188) in accordance with the functionsattributedtothedemonsbyPlato,thereisnoevidencethattheywere designated or thought of as demons.
According to 150 (quoted above n. 43); cf. Zago (2010), aass well as Seng (2016a), 115–116 and (2017), 53–59, each with further references. references. But see abo above ve p. 68. See above above p. 64. 64. Sinc Sincee th thee τελετάρχαι ar aree sub subor ordin dinat ated ed to the συνοχεῖς, th they ey co coul uldd well well be pr prie iest stss who who co commmunicate with them in the ritual. In Alc., p. 69.15–7 Διοτίμαα ταύ ταύτην τηναὐτ αὐτοῖς οῖς ἀπο ἀποδέδ δέδωκε ωκε τὴντάξ τὴν τάξιν ιν, Proc Proclu lus, s, In 69.15–70.3 0.3 Creuzer/Westerink: Creuzer/Westerink: Διοτίμ τὴν συνδετικὴν τῶν θείων καὶ τῶν θνητῶν, τὴν διαπόρθμιον τῶν ἄνωθεν ὀχετῶν, τὴν ἀναγωγὸν τῶν δευτέρων ἁπάντων εἰς τοὺς θεούς , τὴν συμπληρωτικὴν τῶν ὅλων κατὰ τὴν τῆς μεσότητος συνοχήν. (Trans. Westerink modied). Thecon The conce cept pt of channe channels ls as a means means of com commun munica icatin tingg theInt the Intell elligib igible le andLif and Life, e, andof and of the soul’s also typically Chaldaean; cf. Seng (2016a), 82 and n. 41. In the background seemsreturn, to be, ofis course, Plato, Timaeus , 43d1.
Angels
The conjectures on the nature and activities of the angels in the depend to a ver eryy gre reat at ext xten entt on the the co conc nclu lusi sion onss fr from om the the Oracles Oracles’’ ex exege egetica ticall traditi tradition. on. As we have have seen, they ar aree anagogic, and thus they are opposed to the demons, who, byin their material bindby human souls to matter. matter . Theirbound function theown ascent of the orientation, soul is described Proclus in the Excerpta the Excerpta as follows: Chaldaica as Chaldaica How does the order of angels cause the soul to ascend? By shining round aboutthesoul,hesays.Thatisilluminatingthesoulonallsidesandlling it with pure re, which gives it an unswerving order and power through which it does not rush into material disorder but makes contact with the light of the divine beings, and holds it fast in its own place, and causes a separation from matter by lightening it with warm breath and causing a rising up through the anagogic life. life . For the warm breath is the sharing of life. Thee te Th text xt pr pres esen ents ts some some pr probl oblem ems, s, es espe pecia ciallllyy in the the for formu mula latio tionn φέουσα, φησί, Thee te text xt tran transmi smitt tted ed re read ads, s, in abbr abbrev eviat iated ed for form, m, φέρουσα …, bu butt περὶ πε ρὶ τὴ τὴνν ψυ ψυχή χήνν. Th a mediopassive would be expect expected ed as in the closel closelyy related text from Psell Psellos os (Opu 17.1.199 O’Me O’Mear ara) a).. As a co conj njec ectu ture re,, Ja Jahn hn prop propos oses es φαίνουσα, Opusc. sc. phi phil l .,. , 9, p. 17 while Kroll proposes φέουσα as well as πυρί for περί. For the following paraphrase, φέω ts perfectly. But since it can be used not only transitively, but also intransitively, the second change does not seem necessary. Des Places’ Cf. Cremer Cremer (1969), (1969), 63–68. 63–68. See above above pp. 54–55. 54–55. In Iamblich Iamblichus, us, the angels angels liberat liberatee the souls from from the material; material; cf. cf. Cremer (1969), 66 and Finamore (2002), 428. ExcerptaChaldaica Chaldaica,p.206.6–15desPlaces[=p.1.3–10Jahn]:ἡδὲτῶνἀέλωνμερὶς Proc Proclu lus, s, Excerpta πῶς ἀνάγει ψυχήν; φέουσα, φησί, περὶ τὴν ψυχήν, τουτέστι περιλάμπουσα αὐτὴν πανταχόθεν, καὶ πλήρη ποιοῦσα τοῦ ἀχράντου πυρὸς, ὃ ἐνδίδωσιν αὐτῇ τάξιν ἄκλιτον καὶ δύναμιν , δι’ ἣν οὐκ ἐκροιζεῖται εἰς τὴν ὑλικὴν ἀταξίαν , ἀὰ συνάπτεται τῷ φωτὶ τῶν θείων· καὶ συνέχει δὲ αὐτὴν ἐν οἰκείῳ τόπῳ, καὶ ἀμιγῆ ποιεῖ πρὸς τὴν ὕλην , τῷ θερμῷ πνεύματι κουφίζουσα καὶ ποιοῦσα μετέωρον διὰ τῆς ἀναγωγοῦ ζωῆς· τὸ γὰρ πνεῦμα τὸ θερμὸν ζωῆς ἐστι μετάδοσις . The text is given according to des Places, but without the conjecture πυρί for the transmitted περί p. 206.7 des Places (p. 1.4 Jahn); see below for the discussion on the text. While des Places Places uses Psel Psellos’ los’ Opusc. phil . 9 as further text evidence, O’Meara (2013) shows that Psellos probably worked here and in Opusc. phil . 38 with a longer version of Excerpta. the. . Cf Cf. .
attempt to extract from this text an Oracles an Oracles fragment fragment ( 122: τὴν ψυχήν φέγ γουσαα πυρί) is highly doubtful, especially given that no oracle seems to be the γουσ subject of φησί Psellos, Opusc. phil ..,, φησί, but rather, Proclus is the subject, as in Psellos, Opusc. 9, p. 17.18–19 17.18–19 O’Meara. Less improbable improbable is to see marks of a Chaldaean formulation in the phrase τῷ θερμῷ πνεύματι κουφίζουσα, but the version πνεύματι θερμῷ /of κουφίζουσα (should ( 123) propos proposed ed by des Places uncerta uncertain. in. TheDivinesignisignicance light and re be highlighted, whichisare ciphers for the Intelligib Inte lligible le in the , as well as the close connection connection of the angels to light and re apparitions in Iamblichus, De Iamblichus, De mysteriis. mysteriis. A partly similar description (without explicit reference to the ) can already be found in Iamblichus:
By means of the gods’ good will and the illumination bestowed by their light, it often goes higher and is elevated to a greater greater rank, even to that of the angelic order. order. When it no longer abides in the connes of the soul, this totality is perfected in an angelic soul and an a n immaculate life. What is particularly noticeable here is the transformation of the ascended soul into an angelic soul, a transformation which consistently performs the transposition into the rank of angels. In Proclus, the emphasis is shifted to stress the the plac place. e. For th this is,, th ther eree is ev even en a Ch Chal alda daea eann ex expr pres essi sion on ( 138) 138),, as ap appe pear arss from Olympiodorus, who ascribed already to Plato the following f ollowing doctrine:
As des Places translates: translates: “dit l’l’ oracle oracle””, correspondingly correspondingly Majercik Majercik 95 and Lanzi 97. García García Baźan 153 translates without an explicit subject “se reere también al nombre que con voca””. voca By mainta maintaining ining the word word sequence sequence,, θερμῷ / πνεύματι κουφίζουσα would also be possible. Evidence Evidence in des Places’ Places’ and Majercik’ Majercik’s indices under πῦρ and compounds, φῶς (φάος) and πρηστήρ; cf. also Geudtner (1971), 66 and n. 277. Cf. Cf. Cr Crem emer er (1 (196 969) 9),, 65 65–6 –66; 6; more moreov over er,, 67 on th thee spec specia iall be beau auty ty of th thee ange angels ls,, fo forr whic whichh th ther eree is no direct evidence in the Oracles’ fragments. Iamb Iamblilich chus us,, De myst mysterii eriiss 2, p. 69.8– 69.8–13 13 Parth Parthey ey = p. 51. 51.25– 25–52. 52.66 Safre Safrey— y—Seg Segond onds—L s—Lece ecerf. rf. Cf. Cremer (1969), 64–65 and Finamore (2002), 429–430. mysterii eriiss 2, p. 69.8– Iamb Iamblilich chus us,, De myst 69.8–13 13 Parth Parthey ey = p. 51. 51.25– 25–52. 52.66 Safre Safrey— y—Seg Segond onds—L s—Lece ecerf: rf: … διὰ δὲ τὴν τῶν θεῶν βούλησιν ἀγαθὴν καὶ τὴν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ἐνδιδομένην φωτὸς ἔαμψιν ποάκις καὶ ἀνω ἀνωτέρ τέρω ω χωροῦ χωροῦσα σα, ἐπὶ μείζο μείζονά νά τε τάξιν τάξιν τὴν ἀ ἀελι ελικὴν κὴν ἀναγ ἀναγομέ ομένη νη. Ὅτε δὴ οὐκέτι τοῖς τῆς ψυχῆς ὅροις ἀναμένει, τὸ δ’ ὅλον τοῦτο εἰς ἀελικὴν ψυχὴν καὶ ἄχραντον τελειοῦται ζωήν. Cf. also ibid., ibid., p. 83.1–3 83.1–3 PParth arthey ey = p. 62.14–15 62.14–15 Safre Safrey—S y—Segon egonds—Le ds—Lecerf: cerf: ἥ γε τῶν ψυχῶν θέα τῶν μὲν ἀχράντων καὶ ἐν ἀέλων τάξει ἱδρυμένων ἀναγωγός ἐστι (τῶν ψυχῶν is Genitivus
obiectivus).
On thee ot Onth othe herr ha hand nd,, he heho hold ldss th that atev even enth thee so soul ulss of theu theurg rgis ists tsdo dono nott al alwa ways ys remain on the intelligible plane, but that they too descend into genesis, those of whom the Oracle says ‘In the abode of the angels’.. According to Proclus and Olympiodorus, this area is opposed to tthe he sphere of γένεσις γένεσ ις, thebelongs sublunartoworld of becoming and passing the place the angels the supralunar, celestial sphere.away. This Thus, is conrmed byof a
fragmentfromPorphyry( De regr fragmentfromPorphyry( De ,fr.2931–6Smith),whereinthe regressu essu animae animae,fr.2931–6Smith),whereinthe ange an gels ls ar aree assig assigne nedd the the re regio gionn of eth ether er.. This This shou should ld al also so corr corres espon pondd to a sep sep-arate ara te rank rank in the Chalda Chaldaean ean hier hierarc archy hy of bein beings gs.. In the Cha Chaldae ldaeanan-Neo Neopla platon tonic ic systems, as summarized by Psellos, the sequence is (gods—)angels—demons—heroes. The angels are integrated into the older series: gods—demons—heroes. Possibly, this extension is due to the inuence of the , without the series itself having to be Chaldaean. However However,, angels are also present in the magical papyri (wherein their Jewish origin is obvious), and appear as subordinate gods in some pagan sources. Olympi Olympiod odoru orus, s, In Phae Phaedonem donem 10, 14, 8–10 8–10 Westeri esterink: nk: ἀ ἀὰὰ μὴ μὴνν οὐδ οὐδὲὲ τὰς τὰς τῶν τῶν θεου θεουργ ργῶν ῶν ψυ ψυχὰ χὰςς βούλ βούλετ εται αι μέ μένε νειν ιν ἀε ἀεὶὶ ἐν τῷ νοητ νοητῷ ῷ, ἀ ἀὰὰ κα καὶὶ κατ κατιέ ιένα ναιι εἰς εἰς γένε γένεσι σιν· ν· περὶ περὶ ὧν φησι φησινν τὸ λόγι λόγιον ον ‘ἀελικῷ ἐνὶ χώρῳ’. (Trans (Trans.. Westerink). Augu August stin ine, e, De civitate dei 9, p. 416.9–14 Dombart—Kalb; cf. Kroll (1894), 45. The formulation (loca) aetheria vel empyria may be deliberately imprecise. This corr correspo esponds nds to the τόπος ἀμφιφάων in 158, 2; cf. Seng (2005), 854–860 and (2010), 244–252. Lewy (1956 = 2011), 219 equates the angels themselves with the individual parts of the place (which he identies with the Paradise mentioned in 107, 10; his further interpretation 220–222 remains doubtful). On 107, cf. Tardieu (2014) and Fernández Fernández (2014). Psel Psello los, s, Opusc. phil . 40, p. 150.20–23 O’Meara; cf.—without explicit mention of the
Alc Alc., p. Parthey god gods— s— p. 152 152.2– .2–33 O’Mear O’Meara a and alr alread eady Olymp ympiod iodoru 22.2–3 22.2–3 Creuzer Cre /Wesesterink, or41, more profusely Iamblichus, Dey Ol mysteriis orus, 5, s,p. In16.6–16 = uzer/W p. 12.3–14 Safrey—Segonds—Lecerf, and Proclus, In Tim. , p. 165.3–167.31 Kroll. Cf. also Lewy (1956 = 2011), 161–162 n. 365 and 261–262 n. 8; Timotin (2012), 153–158. Origin Originall allyy Chalda Chaldaea eann ac accor cordin dingg to Creme Cremerr (1969) (1969),, 39; cautio cautiousl uslyy agreei agreeing, ng, Timoti Timotinn (2012) (2012),, 154–155. Acco Accord rdingto ingto Plat Plato, o, Cratylus 397c8–e1; Republic 392a3–6; Laws 717b2–4;cf.Lewy(1956 = 2011), 511 n. 9; Cremer (1969), 38 as well as Cumont (1915), 170 and n. 5. Cf. Theiler (1942), 29 [= (1966), 287]; Festugière Festugière (1953), ,, 253; Cremer (1969), 39; Timotin Contraa Celsum Celsum 37and68, (2012) (20 12),, 154 154–15 –155. 5. Howe Howeve verr, it is alread alreadyy attest attested ed in Orige Origenes nes,, Contr although with slight modications (ἀγαθοὶ δαίμονες and ἄοι δαίμονες). The angels angels are are rega regarde rdedd in this way way as the equivalent equivalent of good demons demons whom whom the evil demons always always oppose in the ; see above n. 56. Exemple Exempless are are 1930–195 1930–19500 and and 2695–27 2695–2704. 04. See above above n. 10.
A complementary function of the angels, beside that of supporting the ascension of souls, is that of messengers of divine revelations, as in PPorphyry: orphyry: He even said, in fact, that there are angels of two kinds, those who come down to earth to make divine pronouncements to theurgists, and those who live on earth to declare the truth of the Father Father,, his height and depth. The reference to the theurgists appears to be based on Chaldaean doctrine or practice; the angels who are active on earth seem to be the theurgists themthem selves in accordance with Olympiodorus. In a more specic context, Proclus quotes 137. It is a commentary on Plato’s Republic Plato’s 614d1–3. 614d1–3. There the Pamp Pamphyl hylian ian Er, who has returned from Republic the Other World, tells of his instruction: When he himself stepped forward, fo rward, they said they wanted him to act as a messenger mankind, tell them which what was whappened as going oninthere. They urged him to heartoand observetoeverything that place. This activity as a messenger or angel is compared by Proclus to the content of the theurgical ritual:
Po Porph rphyry yry,, De regressu animae, fr. 285 4–7 Smith [= Augustine, De civitate dei 26, angelo eloss qui quippe ppe ali alios os esse esse dixit ,, qui deorsum descendentes p. 442. 442.14–1 14–177 Dombart Dombart—Kal —Kalb]: b]: Et ang hominibus theurgicis divina pronuntient; alios autem, qui in terra ea, quae patris sunt, et altitudinem eius profunditatemque declarent (Translation (Translation by Wiesen). Invoking this passage, Zintzen (1976), 648, refers 18 (οἱ τὸν ὑπέρκοσμον πατρικὸν βυθὸν ἴστε νοοῦντες ) to the theurgists. However, However, according to the Neoplatonic evidence, the νοεροὶ θεοί are concerned;cf.Proclus, In Crat .107,p.57.22–26Pasquali;Damascius, .107,p.57.22–26Pasquali;Damascius, In Parmenidem ,p.20.1–2 Westerink W esterink—Combès—Segonds; —Combès—Segonds; De princ principiis ipiis , p. 119.3–6 Westerink—Combès. esterink—Combès. Cremer Cremer (1 (1969 969), ),65 65 thi thinks nkstha thatt thesec the second ondgr group oupcom compri prisesthe sesthe archa archange ngels ls alo alone,but ne,but thedistincti thedistinction on between deorsum descendentes and in terra needs to be explained. The The reve revela lato tory ry func functio tionn of th thee ange angels ls do does es not not seem seem to su sugg gges estt any any appa appari ritio tionn in th thee wak wake of gods, as mentioned by Iamblichus; cf. Cremer (1969), (1969), 66. Plat Platoo, Republic 614d1–3: Ἑαυτοῦ δὲ προσελθόντος εἰπεῖν, ὅτι δέοι αὐτὸν ἄελον ἀνθρώποις γενέσθαι τῶν ἐκεῖ καὶ διακελεύοιντό οἱ ἀκούειν καὶ θεᾶσθαι πάντα τὰ ἐν τῷ τόπῳ. (T (Tra rans ns.. T. GrifGrifth). The Er story story described described in the entire entire se section ction of In In Remp. ,, p. 153.5–155.18 Kroll, is replete with theurgical imagery imagery. Cf. Broze—V Broze—Van Lieferinge (2007), especially especially 329–333; for referreferences to the in the context, also Toulouse (2001), 182–191. 182–191.
In this particular case, therefore, the Universe, on the one hand, initiated initi ated at the proper times the soul of this Er, such a blessed perfection being rightly due to this soul; on the other hand, as being initiated into this view by the Universe, his soul was raised to an angelic rank. In fact fact,, it is to such a class that the telestic experts of this world belong. Whoever is truly hieratic, “shines angel in power,” says the Oracle. thus becomes, on the like one an hand, theliving epoptes of invisible invisible things and, He on the other, the messenger for the visible vis ible beings. This description conforms to an interpretation of the ascent and descent of souls, as described in Proclus and Olympiodorus, as events of the theurgical ritual. However, the theurgist himself appears here as ἄελος, with emphasis not only on the ἀελικὴ τάξις, but also on the functional aspect. aspe ct. However, the evidence in Olympiodorus on the descent of the souls of the theurgists theurg ists from the place of the angels can also be understood diferently: diferently: as a claim that these souls possess the status of an angel before they descend into the sublunary world, status which toThe some extent persists, is not completely annihilated byathe descent. theurgists are not and subject to Heimarmene (destiny), Heimarmene (destiny), which operates below the moon, as 153 makes clear:
Proc Proclu lus, s, In Remp Remp. , p. 154. 154.12 12–2 –200 Krol Krolll (w (with ith 137) 137):: καὶδὴ ⟨κα καὶὶ τὴν τὴν⟩ τοῦ τοῦ Ἠρ Ἠρὸς ὸς τούτ τούτου ου ψυ ψυχὴ χὴνν ἐν τοῖς καθήκουσι χρόνοις ἐτέλει μὲν τὸ πᾶν, κατὰ δίκην ὀφειλομένης αὐτῇ τῆς τοιαύτης εὐδαίμονος τελειότητος, ὡς δὲ πρὸς ἐκείνην τὴν ⟨θέαν⟩ ὑπὸ τοῦ παντὸς τελουμένη[ν] εἰς ἀελικὴν ἀνήγετο τάξιν. καὶ γὰρ οἱ τῇδε τελεστικοὶ τάξεώς εἰσι τοιαύτης· θέει ἄελος ἐν δυνάμει ζῶν , φησὶν φησ ὶν τὸ λόγ λόγιον ιον, ὅστι ὅστιςς ἐσ ἐστὶν τὶν ὡς ἀληθ ἀληθῶς ῶς ἱε ἱερα ρατικ τικός ός·· γίνε γίνετα ταιι οὖν ἐπόπ ἐπόπτη τηςς μὲ μὲνν τῶν τῶν ἀφαν ἀφανῶν ῶν, ἄελος δὲ τοῖς ἐμφανέσιν ὁ αὐτός. ⟨καὶ τὴν⟩ Kroll; ⟨θέαν⟩ and τελουμένη[ν] Festugière (1953), , 99 n. 2. Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 219–220 219–220 thinks thinks of the soul of a dead theurgist theurgist (“dise (“disembodi mbodied” ed” in Finam Fin amor oree (2 (200 002) 2),, 426) 426) in he heaaven ven (w (whi hich ch do does es not not tt ri righ ghtl tlyy with with Proc Proclu lus) s),, bu butt po post stmo mort rtal al events and rituals correspond. correspond. It is th ther eref efor oree un uncl clea earr in th thee co cont ntex extt whet whethe herr th this is ange angell is ru runn nnin ingg (L (Lew ewyy (1 (195 9566 = 20 2011 11), ), 22 223, 3, n. 194 194)) or shinin shiningg (Fest (Festugi ugièr ère, e, desPla des Place ces, s, Majer Majercik cik,, García García Bazán) Bazán);; θέει canmeanboth.The Excerpta rptaChalda Chaldaica ica, p. 20 lat latte terr corre correspo sponds nds to the des descri cripti ption on in Exce 206. 6.7– 7–99 de dess Plac Places es (p (p.. 1.1.4– 4–66 Jahn), and the luminous app appearances earances of the ange angels ls in Iamblichus (see above above n. 152), however it cannot be excluded that the ambiguity is intentional. Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 223–224 223–224 n. n. 194 identie identiess the souls souls of the theurgists theurgists with with the heroes heroes (which are missing in the fragments of the ); the evidence quoted (Proclus, In. Crat . 117, p. 68.25–26 Pasquali; Psellos, Opusc. phil . , p. 150.25–26 O’Meara), however, is hardly convincing. Cf. Seng (2016a); 111 n. 39 with the bibliography quoted there.
For the theurgists do not fall into the herd which is subject to destiny destiny. . Psellos reports the outstanding case of Julian the Theurgist, the presumed author of the : […] theyounger, Julians under Marcus Onethere was older the other. As for the if I can afordAurelius. an excursus, is an than anecdote, namely that his father, when he was about to beget him, asked the Connector of the the Univ Univer erse se foran for an arch archan ange gelic licso soul ul toco to cons nstit titut utee the thesu subs bstan tance ce of his son, son, andd th an that at,, afte afterr th thee bi birt rthh of th thee latt latter er,, he br brou ough ghtt hi him m in intto co cont ntac actt wi with th al alll the gods and with the soul of Plato Plato,, who was in the company company of Apollo and Hermes; and enjoying epopteia enjoying epopteia by by the means of hieratic art, he questioned this soul of Plato about what he wanted. Here the soul of an angel descends from the heavenly place into the human body of a theurgist, that is, the soul of an archangel into the theurgist κατ’ ἐξοχήν. Preevents correspond to those of the ritual. This anecdote doesand not postmortal need to be regarded as historically reliable evidence in 15 153: 3: οὐ γὰρ ὑφ’ εἱμαρτὴν ἀγέλην πίπτουσι θεουργοί. Psel Psello los, s, Opusc. phil . , 46, 43–51 Dufy: […] οἱ ἐπὶ τοῦ Μάρκου Ἰουλιανοί· ὁ μὲν γάρ τις αὐτῶν πρεσβύτερος ἦν, ὁ δὲ νεώτερος. περὶ δὲ τοῦ νεωτέρου, ἵνα τι μικρὸν ἐκκόψω τὸν λόγον , καὶ τοιοῦτον ἐπιθρυεῖται φλυάρημα, ὡς ὁ πατήρ, ἐπεὶ γεννῆσαι τοῦτον ἔμεεν, ἀρχαελικὴν ᾔτησε ψυχὴντὸνσυνοχέατοῦπαντὸςπρὸςτὴντούτουὑπόστασιν, καὶὅτιγεννηθέντατοῖςθεοῖςπᾶσισυνέστησε καὶ τῇ Πλάτωνος ψυχῇ Ἀπόω Ἀπόωνι νι συνδιαγούσῃ καὶ τῷ Ἑρμῇ, καὶ ὅτι ταύτην ἐποπτεύων ἔκ τινος τέχνης ἱερατικῆς ἐπυνθάνετο περὶ ὧν ἐβούλετο. However However,, one cannot conc conclude lude from from this that in the themselves themselves there there is a distinction betwe bet ween en angels angels and ar archa change ngels ls (aimin (aimingg at the difer diferent entiat iation ion betwe between en difer diferent ent classe classess of being or less specically), as advocated by Majercik (1989), 13. Cf. Cremer (1969), 64. Rather Rather, it has to be seen within the the narro narrower wer conte context xt of the legenda legendary ry trad tradition ition on the Iulianoi, as rst documented by the church historian Sozomen ( Historia Ecclesiastica 18, 6–7)—c 6–7 )—cf.f. Sen Sengg (2009) (2009),, 142 142–15 –1500 and Athan Athanass assiad iadii (2010) (2010),, 203–20 203–208— 8—,, and wit within hinthe the wider wider context of the anecdotal tradition on the theurgical activity of Proclus in Marinus or of other philosophers in Eunapios. In this respect there is no reason to see a late invention in Psellos, Opusc. phil . , 46, 43–51 Dufy. Dufy. Remarkable is the role of Plato in the text; normally, it is the gods who are said to reveal the oracles; cf. Hadot (1987), 27–29 = 44–46, as well as Seng (2017), 68–69. This point might have have been ccontrovers ontroversial ial among the exegetes exegetes of the t he in antiquity; but perhaps the soul of Plato, who dwells dwells with the gods, could be understood to be their mouthpiece vis-à-vis the human questioner. In any case, the reference to Plato has not been introduced by Psellos himself, since he states that there is Opusc. atheol decided between and Chaldaean teaching; cf. Psellos, Orat. for . 1, 287–295 . , 23,contrast 46–52 Gautier andGraeco-Platonic Dennis (almost identical), on which cf. Seng (2009), 134–135.
order to appreciate its importance as an illustration of the idea of the angelic theurgist. In summary, summary, the sources provide a close link between the angels and theurt heurgists. In the theurgical ritual, the angels lead the soul of the theurgist up to the supralunar sphere where, free from every inclination towards the material ofcent becoming, hehimse the truth which after aft erworld his des desce nt.. Thus Thus,, he hicontemplates mself lf bec become omes s andivine , a me mess ssen engghe er, er,proclaims that that is is,, an ἄελος angel. Similarly, Similarly, the soul of an angel can descend from iits ts place and live and operate through a human body as a theurgist.
Conclusion
The following picture emerges from the fragments of the which have come down to us together with the interpretations of their Neoplatonic exegetes. The demons appear in the as evil beings, who disturb the theurgical ritual and bind human beings to material life. They are specially related to the earthandarecalleddogs.Thisexpressionisalsoappliedtowaterandairspirits, which therefore also seem to be evil and are regarded as ἄλογοι.Theystandina (tra (t radit dition ional ally ly gi give ven) n) re rela latio tions nship hip to He Heca cate te or to the Mo Moon on,, wh which ich occ occup upie iess the the
The role role of the younger younger Julian in these interrogations interrogations of the gods has been interpreted interpreted to be that of a spiritual medium by Safrey (1981 = 1990), 218–220 following Dodds (1947), 56 and 65–69 [= (1957), 284 and 295–299] and (1965), 56–57; similarly similarly,, Athanassiadi (1999), 151–152 and (2006), 48–54. The production of the could have been been staged or imagined as such a collaboration between father and son. Cf. Lewy (1956 (1956 = 2011), 2011), 260–262. 260–262. Gallavotti Gallavotti (1977), (1977), 101 ggoes oes certainly certainly ttoo oo fa farr by supposing that that the ἄελοι in the oracle of Institutiones Oinoandav.3(also Theosophi α §13,108Erbse=2,29BeatriceandLactantius, Institutiones 7, 1, v. 3) are to be understood as Chalda Chaldaean ean theurgists. The speaker belongs to the group of the lower gods, who are a subordinate part of God: μικρὰ δὲ θεοῦ μερὶς ἄελοι ἡμεῖς; cf also Pricoco (1987), 21–23. The text is not Chaldaean anywa anyway; y; cf. Seng (2016b), 160–163, with further bibliography. bibliography. Whether Whether the the theurgic urgical al souls souls are to be assigned assigned the “status “status”” or “subs “substance tance”” of an angel angel (or whether such a distinction exists in the ) ) cannot be decided from the existing fragments; cf. Finamore (2002), 427 and 432. 215 (dubium) mentions two classes of demons, which are attributed to man in pairs and dispense good and evil to him; in this, they can be inuenced by human action. This idea has nothing in common with the evidence that has been analysed. Wher Whereas eas formal aspects do not suggest a Chaldaean origin, the quotation as χρησμός and not as λόγιον speaks strongly against it. Cf. Seng (2016e).
cosmolo cosmo logic gical al ra rank nk abo above ve them them.. Wh Whet ethe herr, in add additi ition on,, ther theree ar aree go good od eleme element ntal al or na natu ture resp spir irit its, s,ca cann nnot ot be deci decide ded; d; at be best st this this co coul uldd be appl applie iedd toth to thee ὕπαυγοι, dire di rect ctly ly belo belong ngin ingg to th thee moon moon,, wh whic ichh ma mayy be asso associ ciat ated ed wi with th re re.. Th That at the the should call such beings demons is, however however,, improbable, given that the meaning ing of th thee expr express ession ion is alwa always ys nega negativ tivee in the the testi testimo moni nies es.. Th Thee idea idea of dem demon onss as mediating beings according to Plato, Symposium Plato, as Symposium 202d13–203a8 is taken up, by the cosmologically efective συνοχεῖς well as by 202d13–203a8 the adjective adject ive διαπόρθμιος whose reference, however, however, remains unclear. Whether these middle-beings middle -beings are demons,accordingtoChaldaeanunderstandingandparlance,isdiculttosay, but once again unlikely. unlikely. Angels are closely connected to the t he ascent of souls, as well as to theurgists, who accomplish it ritually ritually.. Whether they can be reckoned to be good demons or are explicitly not to be counted as a group of demons must remain an open question.
Bibliography Primary Sources
Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica recognovit bevique adnotatione critica instruxit H. Fränkel, Oxford, 1961. Sancti Aurelii Augustini episcopi De civitate dei libri XX , recognoverunt B. Dombart et A. Kalb, Leipzig, 1929. 1929. (repr. (repr. Darmstadt 1981). Thee city city of God God ag again ainst st th thee paga pagans ns in inse seve venn vo volu lume mess.Books–with SaintAugustine, Th an English translation by D.S. Wiesen, London—Cambridge London—Cambridge (Mass.), 1968. Saint Basile, Lettres, texte établi et traduit par Y. Courtonne, Courtonne, , , Paris, 11966. 966. Collouthos, L’enlèvement d’Hélène, texte établi et traduit par P. Orsini, Paris, 2002. Trait aités és des pr premi emiers ers pri princi ncipes pes, texte établi par L.G. Westerink et traduit par Damascius, Tr
J. Combès, –, – , Paris, Paris, 1986–1991. 1986– 1991. Damascius, Commentaire du Parménide de Platon, t. , texte établi par L.G. Westerink (†), introduit, traduit et annoté par J. Combès, Paris, 1997; t. , texte établi par L. L.G. G. Weste esteri rink nk (†), (†), intr introd odui uit,t, trad tradui uitt et anno annoté té pa parr J. Co Comb mbès ès,, Paris aris,, 1997 1997;; t. , te text xtee établi par L.G. Westerink, introduit, traduit et annoté par J. Combès avec la collaborati bor ation on de A.-P A.-P. Se Segon gonds ds,, Paris Paris,, 200 2002; 2; t. , texte texteéta établi bli par L.G. L.G. Westeri esterink, nk,int introd roduit uit,, trad tradui uitt et anno annoté té pa parr J. Co Comb mbès ès av avec ec la co collllab abor orat atio ionn de A. A.-P -P.. Se Sego gond ndss et de C. Luna Luna,, Paris, 2003. The Greek Commentaries on Plato’s Phaedo, vol. Damascius, L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam—Oxford—New dam—Oxford—N ew York, 1977 (., ( ., Nieuwe Reeks 93). 93). Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita, De coelesti hierarchia. De ecclesiastica hierarchia. De Translated Translated into English from the German original by Andrei Timotin.
mystica theologia. Epistulae, herausgegeben von G. Heil † und A.M. Ritter, Berlin— New York, 1991 (Patristische (Patristische Texte und Studien 36). Ephraem Aenii Historia Historia Chronica Chronica, recensuit O. Lampsides, Athens, 1990. – , texte grec, traduction et annoEusèbe de Césarée, Histoire ecclésiastique. Livres – tation par G. Bardy, Paris, 1955 ( 41). unedierte byzantinische Grabreden, herausgegeben von A. SiGregorios Antiochos, 251990. deras, Thessaloniki, Gregorios Palamas, Συράμματα, vol. Λόγοι ἀποδεικτικοί , Ἀντεπιγραφαί , Ἐπιστολαὶ πρὸς Βαρλάαμ, ἐκδίδουν B. Bobrinsky, Π. Παπαευαέλου, J. Meyendorf, Π. Χρήστου, Thes Δογματικαὶ πραγματεῖαι καὶ ἐπιστολαὶ ἐπιστολαὶ γραφεῖσαι κατὰ τὰ ἔτη 1348– saloniki, 1988; vol. Δογματικαὶ 1358, προλογίζει Π.Κ . Χρήστου, ἐκδίδουν Π.Κ . Χρήστου, Β.Δ. Φανουργάκης, Β.Σ. Ψευτογκάς, Thessalon Thessaloniki, iki, 1988. Die griechischen Dichterfragmente der römischen Kaiserzeit , gesammelt und herausgegeben von von E. Heitsch, Bd. , Göttingen, Göttingen, 1963 1963 ( ( 49). Homeri Ilias, edidit T.W. .W. Allen, , , Oxford 1931. 1931. Jamblique, Réponse à Porphyre (De mysteriis), texte établi et traduit par H.D. Safrey et
A.-P.. Segonds A.-P Segond † aavec vec la collaboration A. Lecerf, Paris, 2013. Onsthe Mysteries Iamblichus, , Translateddewith Introduction and Notes by E.C. Clarke, J.M.Dillon, J.M. Dillon, and J.P. J.P. Hershbell, Atlanta 2003 (Writingsfrom (Writings from the Graeco-RomanW Graeco-Roman World 4). JoannesItalos, Joannes Italos, Quaestionesquodlibetales(ἀπορίαικαὶλύσεις ),editioprincepsvonP.Joannou, Ettal, 1956 (Studia patristica et Byzantina 4). Ioannis Lydi Lydi Liber de mensibus, edidit R. Wuensch, Wuensch, Leipzig, 1898 (repr. (repr. Stuttgart 1967). Lactantius, Divinarum institutionum libri septem. Fasciculus 1: Libri et , ediderunt E. Heck et A. Wlosok, Berlin—New York, 2005. 2005. Leonis Diaconi Caloënsis Historiae libri decem et liber de velitatione bellica Nicephori Augusti e e recensione C.B. Hasii addita eiusdem versione atque annotationibus ab ipso recgnitis, Bonn, 1828. Συκουτρής Ἀνέκ νέκδοτ δοτον ον ἐγκ ἐγκώμι ώμιον ον εἰς Βασ Βασίλε ίλειον ιον το τονν ᾿,” Ἐπετ Ἐπετηρὶς ηρὶς Ἑταιρεία Ἑταιρείαςς ΒυζαντιΒυζαντι, Ι.(1933),“ νῶν Σπουδῶν, 10, 426–430. ἐκδιδό δόμε μενα να νῦν νῦν τὸ πρ πρῶτ ῶτον ον κα κατὰ τὰ τοὺς τοὺς Μιχαὴλ Ἀκομινάτου τοῦ Χωνιάτου τὰ σωζόμενα σωζόμενα τὰ πλεῖστα ἐκδι ἐν Φλωρεντίᾳ Ὀξωνίῳ Παρισίοις καὶ Βιέννῃ κώδικας ὑπὸ Σ.Π. Λαμπροῦ, Athens, 1879. Michel Italikos, Michel Italikos, Let Lettr tres es et discou discours rs, édit édités és par par P. Gaut Gautie ierr, Paris aris,, 197 1972 (Arc (Archi hive vess de l’orien l’orientt chrétien 14). Nicéphore Bryennios, Bryennios, Histoire, introduction, texte, traduction et notes par P. Gautier, Bruxelles, 1975. Nicetae Choniatae Choniatae Histor Historia ia, recensuit I.A. van Dieten, –, Berlin—New York, 1975. Nonni Panopolitani Panopolitani Dionysiaca Dionysiaca, recognovit A. Keydell, –, Berlin, 1959. Thesterdam—Oxfor Greek Commentarys on Plato’s Plato’ Phaedo , vol. Olympiodorus, L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam—Oxford—New d—New York,s1976 ( (., .,,Nieuwe Reeks 92).
Olympiodorus, Commentary on the First Alcibiades of Plato, critical text and indices by L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1956. Oracles Chaldaïques avec un choix de commentaires anciens, texte établi et traduit par É. des Places, troisième tirage revue et corrigé par A.-P. Segonds, Paris, 1996 (1971). The Chaldean Oracles, text, translation and commentary by R. Majercik, Leiden, 1989 (Caldeos ( 5) 5).. Oráculos con una selección de testimonios de Proclo, Pselo y M. Italico. Numenio de Apamea, introducciones, traducciones y notas de F. García Bazán, Madrid, 1991. Origenes, Contra Celsum Celsum libr librii , edidit M. Marcovich, Leiden—Boston—Köln, Leiden—Boston—Köln, 2001 (VChr Suppl. 54). Orphicorum fragmenta, collegit O. Kern, Berlin, 1922 (1963). Poetae epici Graeci, testimonia et fragmenta, pars . Orphicorum et Orphicis similium testimonia et fragmenta, fasciculus 1, edidit A. Bernabé, München—Leipz München—Leipzig, ig, 2004. Papyri Graecae Magic Magicae. ae. Die griechischen Zauberpapyri , herausgegeben und übersetzt von K. Preisendanz, zweite, verbesserte Auage mit Ergänzungen Ergänzungen von K. Preisendanz, durchgesehen und herausgegeben von A. Henrichs, Stuttgart, 1973. Photii Patriarchae Le Lexicon xicon , edidit.Pars C. Theodoridis, , ork, 19 1998. 98. PindariPatriarchae Carmina cum fragmentis Fr Fragment agmenta. a. Berlin—New Indices Indices, edidit ediditYH. Maehle Mae hlerr, Leipz Leipzig, ig, 1989. Plato, Opera , recognoverunt brevique adnotatione critica instruxerunt E.A. Duke— W.F. W .F. Hicken— Hicken—W W.S.M. Nicoll—D.B Nicoll—D.B.. Robinson—J.C Robinson—J.C.G. .G. Strachan, Strachan, Oxford, Oxford, 199 1995. 5. Plato, Opera, recognovit brevique adnotatione critica instruxit I. Burnet, –, Oxford, 1899–1907 (repr. 1967). Plato, The Republic, edited by G.R.F. G.R.F. Ferrari, translated by T. Grith, Cambridge, 2000. Pline l’Ancien, Histoire naturelle. Livre XXX , texte établi, traduit et commenté par E. de Saint-Denis, Paris, 1972. Porphyry, De l’abstinence, t. . Introduction par J. Boufartigue et M. Patillon, Livre ,
texte établi par J. Boufartigue, et traduit paretJ.traduit Boufartigue et M. Patillon,Paris, Paris,1977; 1979.t. Livres et , texte établi Porphyrii philosophi fragmenta, edidit A. Smith, fragmenta Arabica D. Wasserstein interpretante, interpretant e, Stuttgart—Leipzig, Stuttgart—Leipzig, 1993. Lett ttre re à An Anéb ébon on l’Égypti l’Égyptien en, texte Porphyry, Le texte établi, tradu traduit it et comme commenté nté par H.D H.D.. Safrey Safrey et A.-P. Segonds, Paris, 2012. Eclogae e Proclo de philosophia Chaldaica Chaldai ca sive de doctrina oraculorum Chaldaicorum, nunc primum edidit et commentatus est A. Iahnius, Halle, 1891. Philosophia Chaldaica. Extraitsdu Extraits du commentaire commentairede de Proclus Proclussur sur la philosophie chaldaïque, Oracle acless Chalda Chaldaïqu ïques es ave avecc un choix choix de com commen mentai taire ress anc anciens iens, te in Or text xtee ét établ ablii et trad tradui uitt par É. des Places, 206–212. Procli hymni hymni , edidit E. Vogt, Wiesbaden Wiesbaden,Commentary , 1957. Proclus’ Hymns , Essays, Translations, by R.M. van den Berg, Leiden— Boston—Köln, 2001 (PhA 90).
Proclus, Su Surr le pr prem emie ierr Alcib Alcibiad iadee de Pl Plat aton on, text textee ét étab ablili et trad tradui uitt pa parr A. A.-P -P.. Se Sego gond nds, s, – –, , Paris, 1985–1986. ProcliDiadochi Procli Diadochi in Platonis Cratylumcommentaria Cratylum commentaria,ediditG.Pasquali,Leipzig,1908(repr. Stuttgart—Leipzig, Stuttgart—Le ipzig, 1994). Procli in Platonis PParmenidem armenidem Comme Commentaria ntaria, edidit C. Steel, –, – , Oxford, 2007–2009. 2007–2009. Procli Diadochi in Platonis Rem1965). Publicam commentarii , edidit G. Kroll, –, Leipzig, 1899–1901 (repr. Amsterdam Procli Diadochi in Platonis Timaeum comment commentaria aria, edidit E. Diehl, –, Leipzig, 1903– 1906 (repr. Amsterdam 1965). Proclus, Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, Volume , Book 4: Proclus on Time and the Stars, translated with an introduction and notes by D. Baltzly, Cambridge, 2013. Proclus, Théologie Platonicienne, texte établi et traduit par H.D. Safrey et L.G. Westerink, –, Paris, 1968–1997. 1968–1997. The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor successor,, on the theology of Plato, translated from the Greek by T. Taylor, Taylor, London, 1816 (repr.: Proclus, The theology of Plato, translated by T. Taylor, aylor, Frome, Frome, 1999). 1999). DerErläuterung Kommentar desFragmente, Proklos zu Hesiods „Werken Patrizia Marzillo,und Übersetzung Erläuterun g der Tübingen, Tübingen, 2010. und Tagen“ , Edition, Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora, , edidit J.M. Dufy, Stuttgart—Leipzig, 1992; , edidit D.J. O’Meara, Leipzig, 1989. Michaelis Pselli scripta minora magnam partem adhuc inedita, edidit recognovitque E. Kurtz, ex schedis eius relictis in lucem emisit F. Drexl, Drexl, , , Milano, 1941. Michaelis Pselli theologica, , edidit P. Gautier, Leipzig, 1989. Michaelis Pselli Orationes fforenses orenses et acta, edidit G.T. Dennis, Stuttgart—Leipzig, 1994. Michele Mich ele Psel Psello, lo, OracolicaldaiciconappendicisuProcloeMicheleItalo ,acuradiS.Lanzi, Milano, 2001. Michael Psellus, De operatione daemonum cum notis Gaulmini curante curante J.F. Boissonade,
accedunt inedita Pselli, Nürnberg, 1838. Gautier, P. (1980), “Leopuscula De daemonibus du Pseudo-Psellos,” Revue des études byzantines byzantines, 38, 105–194. Scholia in Theocritum vetera, recensuit C. Wendel, Leipzig, 1914. 1914. L. Annaei Senecae naturalium quaestionum libros recognovit H.M. Hine, Stuttgart— Leipzig, 1996. Sozomenus, Kirchengeschichte, hera heraus usge gege gebe benn vo vonn J. Bide Bidezz († (†), ), ei eing ngel elei eite tet,t, zum zum Dr Druc uck k besorg bes orgtt und mit Re Regis gister ternn verse versehen hen von von G.C. G.C. Hansen Hansen,, zweit zweite, e, durchg durchgese esehen henee Aua Aua-ge, Berlin, 1995 ( 4). Suidae Lexicon, edidit A. Adler, –, Leipzig, 1928–1938 (Lexicographi Graeci 1). Συναγωγὴ Συναγω γὴ λέξεων χρησίμων, texts of the original version and of . . , edited by I.C. Cunningham, Berlin—New Synesii Cyrenensis OpusculaY,ork, N. T2003. erzaghi recensuit, Roma, Roma, 1944.
Synesii Cyrenensis Epistolae, A. Garzya recensuit, Roma, 1979. Theocritus, edited with a translation and commentary by A.S.F. A.S.F. Gow, Gow, – –,, Cambridge, 1962. Theosophorum Graecorum fragmenta, iterum recensuit H. Erbse, Stuttgart—Leipzig, 1995. Anonymi Monophysitae Theosophia Attempt P. Beatrice, Leiden—Boston—Köln, 2001 (VChr, an Suppl. 56). at Reconstruction by P. Iohannis Zonarae lexicon ex tribus codicibus manuscriptis nunc primum edidit obser vationibus illustravit et indicibus instruxit J.A.H. J.A.H. Tittmann, –, –, Leipzig, 1808 (repr (repr.. Amsterdam 1967). Secondary Seco ndary Liter Literatur aturee
Athanassiadi, P. P. (1999), “The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy, Theurgy,” in Athanassiadi, P., Frede, M. (ed.), Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity, Oxford, 149–183. Athanassiadi, P. (2006), La lutte pour l’ othodoxie dans le platonisme tardif. tardif.De De Numénius à Damascius, Paris. Athanassiadi, . (2010), “JulianOrakel: the Theurgist: Man or Myth?,” Myth?,” inezeption Seng, ,H., Tardieu, Orakel:Kontext Kontext—Interpretation—R —Interpretation—Rezeption M. (ed.), (ed.), DiePChaldaeischen Heidelberg Heide lberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 2), 193–208. Belayche Bela yche,, N. (2001), (2001), Iudaea—Palaestina. Iudaea—Palaestina.The The pagan cults in Roman Palastine,Tübingen. Belay Bel ayche che,, N. (2010) (2010),, “ Angeloi Angeloi in Relig Religiou iouss Practi Practices ces of the Imp Imperi erial al Roman RomanEas East,t,”” Henoch 32, 44–65. Böcherr, O. (1981), Böche (1981), “Dämonen “Dämonen . Neues Neues Testament, estament,” Theologische Realenzyklopädie , 279–286. Böcher,, O. (1982), “Engel . Böcher . Neues Testament, estament,”” Theologische Realenzyklopädie , 596– 599. Brenk Bre nk,, F.E. (1986) (1986),, “In the Light Light of the Moon: Moon: Demono Demonolog logyy in the Early Early Imperi Imperial al Pe Perio riod” d”,, Aufstieg und Lieferige, Nieder Niedergang gangC.der Römischen elt 16.3, 1 6.3, 2068–2145. Broze, M., Van (2007), “Er leWPamphylien, ange et messager. De l’âme angélique chez Jamblique et Proclus,” Revue des Sciences philosophiques et théolo giques 91, 323–334. d’ Apollon. Pratiques et tr traditions aditions oraculaires dans l’l’Antiquité Antiquité Busine, A. (2005), Paroles d’Apollon. tardive (– (– siècles), Leiden—Boston ( 156). Cline,R.(2011), AncientAngels. ConceptualizingAngeloiintheRomanEmpire,Leiden— Boston ( 172). Cremer, F.W. (1969), Die chaldäischen Orakel und Jamblich De Mysteriis, Meisenheim (BzKPh 26). Cumont,F.(1915),“Lesangesdupaganisme,” Revue Revue de l’Histoire l’ Histoiredes des Religions 72,159–182. De la pensée religieuse Détienne, M. le(1963), mon dans pythagorisme ancien , Paris. à la pensée philosophique. La notion de dai-
Dodds, E.R. (1947), “Theurgy and its Relationship to Neoplatonism,” 37, 55–69 [= Dodds, E.R., The Greeks and the irrational , Berkeley 1951, 284–299]. Dodds, E.R. (1965), Pagan and Christian in an age of anxiety. Some aspects of religious experience from Marcus Aurelius to Constantine, Cambridge. Faust, M. (1970), “Die künstlerische Verwendung von κύων ‘Hund’ in den homerischen Epen,” Glotta 48, 8–31.A. (2014), “En búsqueda del paraíso caldaico,” Ilu. ’Ilu. Revista de Fernández Fernández, Ciencias de las Religiones 18, 57–94. Festugière, A.J. (1953), La révélation d’Hermès d’ Hermès Trismégiste, , Paris. Festugière, A.J. (1954), La révélation d’Hermès d’ Hermès Trismégiste Trismégiste, , Paris. Finamore, J.F. J.F. (2002), “ ‘In angelic space’: Chaldaean Oracles fr. 138 and Iamblichus,” in Barbanti, M., Giardina, G., Manganaro, P. (ed.), Ἕνωσις καὶ φιλία. Unione e amicizia. Omaggio a Francesco Romano, Catania, 425–432. Gallavotti, C., (1977), “Un’epigrafe teosoca ad Enoanda nel quadro della teurgia caldaica,” Philologus 21, 95–105. Geudtner, O. (1971), Die Seelenlehre der chaldäischen Orakel , Meisenheim (BzKPh 35). Grözinger, 596. K.E. (1982), “Engel . Judentum,” Theologische Realenzyklopädie , 586– Grundmann, W. (1933), “ἄελος . ἄελος im Griechentum und Hellenismus,” Theolo gisches Wörter Wörterbuch buch zum Neuen Testament , , 72–75. Hadot, P. (1987), “Théologie, exégèse, révélation, écriture dans la philosophie grecque,” in M. Tardieu (ed.), Les règles de l’interprétation, Paris, 13–34 [= Hadot, P.: Études de philosophie ancienne, Paris 1998, 27–58]. Johnston, Johnst on, S.I. (1990), Hekate Soteira. A study of Hekate’s roles in the Chaldean Oracles and related literature, Atlanta (American Classical Studies 21), 134–142. Antike und Christentum , Kallis, A. (1976), “Geister . , ,”” Reallexikon für Antike , col. 700–715. Kittel, G. (1933), “ἄελος . Die Engellehre des Judentums. . ἄελος im , ,”” Theologisches TWö Wörter rterbuch buch zum,” Neuen Neue n Testam estament ent , Antike , 79–86. Klauser, . (1962), “Engel Reallexikon für Antik e und Christentum , col. 258–322. Kroll, W. (1894), De oraculis Chaldaicis, Breslau (BphA 1) (repr. with addendum Hildesheim 1962). Lameer Lam eere, e, W. (1949) (1949),, “Autem Au temps ps où Fr Franz anzCum Cumont ont s’interrog s’interrogeai eaitt surAri sur Arist stot ote, e,”” L’Antiquité classique 18, 279–324. Lecerf, A., Saudelli, L. (2016), “‘Sources’ “ ‘Sources’ et ‘principes’: univers universalité alité et particularité dans les Orac Oracles les Chaldaïques Chaldaïques,” in Se Seng ng,, H., H., Sf Sfam amen enii Gasp Gaspar arro ro,, G. (e (ed. d.), ), Theo Theologisc logische he Orakel Orakel in der Spätantike, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 5), 47–88. theurgy. Mysticism Magic and Platonism in the Lewy, H. (1956), Chaldaean Oracles and theurgy. Later Roman Empire,LeCaire(TroisièmeéditionparM.Tardieuavecunsupplément
«Les Oracles 1891–2011», Loth, H.-J. (1993),chaldaïques “Hund,” Reallexikon für Paris, Antike Antike2011). und Christentum ,, col. 773 773–828. –828.
Michl, J. (1962), “Engel –,” Reallexikon für Antike Antike und Christentum , col. 53–258. Moresc Mor eschin hini,i, C. (1995 (1995), ), “Il demone demone nella nella cultur culturaa pagana pagana dell’ dell’età età imperi imperiale ale,,” in Pricoc Pricoco, o, S. (ed.), Il demonio e i suoi complici , Soveria Mannelli, 90–110. O’Meara, D.J. (2013), “Psellos’ Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles and Proclus’ lost Comme Co mmenta ntary ry,,” in Seng, Seng, H. (ed.), (ed.), Platonismus und Esoterik in byzantinischem Mittelalter ter undS.italie ita lienisc nischer heroracolo Renaiss Renaissanc ance e, Heidel Heidelber g (Bi (Bibli blioth otheca Cha Chalda ldaica ica 3), 2013, 2013,religiosa 45–56. 45–56. Rivista dieca storia e letteratura Pricoco, (1987), “Un di Apollo suberg dio,” 23, 3–36. Theologisc logisches hes Wörter Wörterbuch buch zum Neuen Neuen TestaRad, Ra d, G. von (193 (1933) 3),, “ἄελος . מim ,” Theo ment , , 75–79. Robert, L. (1971), “Un oracle gravé à Oinoanda,” Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 597–619 [= Robert, L., Opera minora selecta, , Amsterdam 1989, 617–639.] Safr Sa frey ey,, H.D. H.D. (1969) (1969),, “Nouv “Nouveau eauxx Oracl Oracles es chalda chaldaïqu ïques es dans dans les scholi scholies es du Paris. Gr . 1853, 1853,”” Revue de philologie 43, 59–72. Safrey, H.D. (1981), “Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques,” Revue des Études Augustiniennes 27,63–79]. 209–225 [= Safrey, H.D., Recherches sur le néoplatonisme après Plotin, Paris 1990, Safrey,, H.D. (1992), “Accor Safrey “Accorder der entre elles les traditions theologiques: une charactéristique du néoplatonisme athénien,” in Bos, E.P., Meijer, P.A. (ed.), On Proclus and his inluence in medieval philosophy, Leiden—New York—Köln, 35–50 [= Safrey, H.D., Le néoplatonisme néoplatonisme après Plotin, Paris 2000, 143–158]. Safrey, H.D. (1999), “Σημεῖον/signum dans la littérature néoplatonicienne et la théurgie,” in Signum, X X Colloquio Internazionale [del lessico intellettuale europeo], Roma, 8–10 gennaio 1998, a cura di M.L. Bianchi, 23–38 [= Safrey, Safrey, H.D., Le néoplatonisme après Plotin, Paris, 2000, 127–141]. Scholz, H. (1937), Der Hund in der griechisch-römischen Magie und Religion, Berlin.
Seebaß, . Altes Testament,” Theologische Realenzyklopädie , , 583– 586. H. (1982), “Engel . Seng,H.(1996), UntersuchungenzumVokabularundzurMetrikindenHymnendesSynesios, Frankfurt a.M. (Patrologia 4). Seng, H. (2005), “Der Körper des Theurgen,” in Pagani e cristiani alla ricerca della salvezza, XXX Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana, Roma, 5–7 maggio 2005, Roma, 849–860. Seng, H. (2009), ΚΟΑΓΟΙ , ΑΖΩΝΟΙ , ΖΩΝΑΙΟΙ . Drei Begrife chaldaeischer Kosmologie und ihr Fortleben, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 1). Seng,H.(2010),“Ἀμφιφαής: Face acett tten en einer einer cha chalda ldaeis eische chenn Vokabel okabel,,” in Seng, Seng, H.,T H., Tardieu ardieu,, M. (ed.), (ed.), Die Chaldaeischen Orakel: Orakel:Kontext Kontext—Interpretation—R —Interpretation—Rezeption ezeption, Heidelberg Heidelberg (Bibliotheca 2), 235–254. Υ. Au sujet du dualisme dans les Oracles ChalSeng, H. (2015),Chaldaica “Ρ
daïques, daïque s,”” in Jo Jour urdan dan,, F., Vasiliu asiliu,, A. (ed (ed.), .), Duali Dualismes. smes. Doctrines Doctrines reli religieuse gieusess et traditions traditions philosophiques, Paris [= Chôra. Revue d’ d’ études anciennes et médiévales, Hors-série / 2015], 279–304 Seng,H.(2016a), Unlivresacrédel’Antiquitétardive:Les Orac Oracles les Chaldaïqu Chaldaïques, es,Tu Turnhou rnhoutt (Bibliothèque de l’École l’ École des Hautes Études 170). 170). Seng, H. (2016b), “Theologische Orakel zwischen Metaphysik und Ritual,” inlberg Seng,(BiH., Orakel in der Spätantike Sfameni Gasparro, G. (ed.), Theologische , Heidelberg Heide bliotheca Chaldaica 5), 145–170. 145–170. Seng, H. (2016c), “ 216 (dubium) des Places—fr. Orph. 353 Kern. Probleme und Interpretationen,” in Soares Santoprete, L.G., Van den Kerchove, A. (ed.), Des oasis d’Égypte à la Route de la Soie. Hommage à Jean-Daniel Dubois, Turnhout (Bibliothèque de l’École l’ École des Hautes Études 176), 176), 811–826. Ἴυεςς, συνοχεῖς, τελετάρχαι in den Chaldaeischen Orakeln,” in Seng, Seng, H. (2016d), “ Ἴυε H., Soares Santoprete, L.G., Tommasi, C.O. (ed.), Formen und Nebenformen des Platonismus in der Spätantike, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 6), 293–316. Seng, H. (2016e), “Ein Orakelzitat bei Johannes Lydos, De mensibus 4, 101 p. 141, 1–11 ΚΟΙΝ ΚΟ ΙΝΩΝ ΩΝΙΑ ΙΑ Wuensch Wuen ( “Langage 215 dubium desdieux Places),” 89–106.dans les Oracles ChalSeng, H. sch (2017), des et langage des 40, hommes daïques,” in Soares Santoprete, L.G., Hofmann, P. (ed.), Langage des dieux, langage des démons, langage des hommes dans l’Antiquité , Turnhout (Recherches sur les rhétoriques religieuses 26), 53–78. Ilias 14, 291 und die Chaldaeischen Orakel ,” in Seng, H., Soares SantoSeng, H. (2018), “ Ilias prete, L.G., Tommasi, C.O. (ed.), Hierarchie und Ritual. Zur philosophischen Spiritualität der Spätantike, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 7), 251–257. Shaw Sh aw,, G. (19 (1988) 88),, “Theurg “Theurgyy as Demiur Demiurgy: gy: Iam Iambli blichu chus’ s’ Sol Soluti ution on to the Proble Problem m of EmbodEmbodiment,” Dionysius 12, 37–53. Shepp Sh eppard ard,, A.R.R. A.R.R. (1980/ (1980/19 1981) 81),, “Paga “Pagann cult cult of angels angels in Roman Roman Asi Asiaa minor minor,,” Talanta 12/13,
77–101. Tanaseanu-Döbler, I. (2013), Theurgy in Late Antiquity. Antiquity. The Invention of a Ritual Tradition, Göttingen (Beiträge zur Europäischen Religionsgeschichte Religionsgeschichte 1). Tanaseanu-Döbler, anaseanu-Döbler, I. (2016), “ ‘Denn auf der Erde können sie sich nicht aualten, sondernn nurauf der nur auf heilig heiliger er Erde’ Erde’:: Bemerk Bemerkung ungen en zumVerhäl zumVerhältni tniss derGöt der Götte terr zurMat zur Materi eriali alität tät in Porphyrios’ Philosophia ex oraculis haurienda,” in Seng, H., Sfameni Gasparro, G. (ed.), Theologische Orakel in der Spätantike, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 5), 171–204. Tardieu, M. (1987), “Pléthon lecteur des Oracles,” Mêtis 2, 141–164. Tardieu, M. (2010), “L’oracle de la pierre mnouziris,” in Seng, H., Tardieu, M. (ed.), Die Chaldaeischen Orakel: Orakel: Kontext—Interpr Kontext—Interpretation—Rezeption etation—Rezeption, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica Tardieu, M. (2014), 2), “Le93–108. paradis chaldaïque,” in Lecerf, A., Saudelli, L., Seng, H. (ed.),
Oracles chaldaïques Oracles chaldaïques,, fragments fragmentset et philosophie philosophie, Heidel Heidelber bergg (Bibli (Biblioth otheca eca Cha Chalda ldaica ica 4), 15–29. ΕΝΥΝΙΩΝ di Terzaghi, erzaghi, N. N. (1904), (1904), “Sul comme commento nto di Nic Nicefor eforoo Gregora Gregora al ΕΡΙ ΕΝΥΝΙΩΝ di Sinesio,” Si nesio,” Studi italiani di lologia classica 12, 181–217 [= Terzaghi, N., Studia Graeca et Latina, –, Torino, 1963, 1963, 602–638]. 602–638]. Die chaldäischenzum Orakelund Orakel und die Hymnen des Synesios Theiler Theiler, . (1942),W., ,Halle(18, Forschungen Neuplatonismus 1) [=, W Theiler, , Berlin, 1966 (QSGPh 10), 252– 301]. Timotin, A. (2012), La démonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimōn de Platon aux derniers néoplatoniciens, Leiden—Boston (Philosophia Antiqua 128). Tissi, L.M. (2013), (2013), “Un oracolo tratto da Porrio Porrio nella Teosoa di Tubing Tubinga. a. (§27 (§ 27 Erbse = 24 Beatrice),” in Gigli Piccardi, D., Magnelli, E. (ed.), Studi di poesia greca tardoantica, Firenze, 37–64. Toulouse, S. (2001), “Que le vrai sacrice est celui d’un cœur pur. À propos d’un oracle ‘porphyrien’ dans le liber XX sententiarum édité parmi les œuvres d’Augustin,” Recherches Augustiniennes 32, 169–223. Corpus inscriptionum et monumentorum religionis Mithraicae, –, Vermaseren, Vermaseren, The Hague,M.J., 1956–1960. terVrugt-Lentz,J.(1976),“Geister,” Reallexikon Reallexikonfür für Antike und Christentum ,col.598– 615. Werth, W erth, N. (2006), Hekate. Untersuchungen zur dreigestaltigen Göttin, Hamburg (Antiquitates 37). Theco cosmic smicvie viewpo wpoint int.. A Study Studyof of Senec Seneca’ a’s Natur Williams, G. (2012), The Natural al Ques Questions tions,, Oxford. Oxford. Zago, M. (2010), “«Non cambiare mai i nomi barbari» ( Oracoli Caldaici , fr. 150 des Places),”” in Seng, H., Tardieu, M. (ed.), Die Chaldaeischen Places), Chaldaeischen Orakel: Orakel: Kont Kontext ext—Inte —Interpre rpre-tation—Rezeption, Heidelberg (Bibliotheca Chaldaica 2), 109–143. Christentum um , col. 647– Zintzen, C. (1976), “Geister ..c, . .c,”” Reallexikon für Antike und Christent
652.
What is a Daimon for Porphy orphyry? ry? Luc Brisson Brisson**
Pknown orphy orphyry ry see ms to”have ha ve been beean complete the the rst rst etotheological situa situate te the pa parti rticu cula larl rlyytakes compl complex ex entit en tity y asseems “demon “demon” within complet system. He his inspiration from Plotinus, who was himself strongly inspired by the Stoics, while remaining faithful to Plato.
Beforee Porphy Befor Porphyry ry
In ep epic ic poem poemss, in the the Ho Homer meric ic Hymns, Hymns, in tr trag aged edyy, and and in the the Orph Orphic ic poem poems, s, the the term δαίμων freq freque uent ntly ly ap appea pears rs as a sy syno nony nym m of θεός this conn connec ectio tionn bet betwe ween en θεός; this the two terms is i s also obvious in Porphyry Porphyry.. In epic poems, δαίμων can designate an indeterminate divine power that unleashes the wind the sea, that inspires reckless thoughts, a divinity linked to chance andonfate. f ate. In theortragedians dia ns,, one one nds nds a repr repres esen entat tation ion of the the δαίμων as a ve veng ngef eful ul spi spirit rit. . Fi Fina nallllyy, the the term δαίμων could be considered as the posthumous title of some exceptional men. In Plato, the term designates an entity intermediary between the gods and theworldwhosetaskitistoadministerit,asinthemythtoldintheStatesman theworldwhosetaskitistoadministerit,asinthemythtoldinthe Statesman, , or in the Symposium the Symposium, , between the gods and human beings. Particularly by mean me anss of ora oracl cles es,, the the dem demon on tr tran ansmi smits ts the the gods’ gods’ ins instr truc uctio tions ns to hu human man be bein ings gs;; they also convey the prayers prayers of human beings up to the gods. We We can therefore understand why Eros appears as the ideal intermediary, between the gods andd hu an human man bein beings gs,, betw betwee eenn hu human manbe being ingss in the the co cont ntex extt of amo amoro rous us rela relatio tions ns,, * I would like to to thank M Michael ichael Chase Chase for translating translating this article into English. For systematic references, references, see Timotin ((2012). 2012). This book was was very useful to me. Odyssey 201; 169. Iliad 600. Odyssey 256; 129. Euripid Euripides es,, Orestes 1545. Aesch Aeschylu ylus, s, Persians 619–621 in particular. In the the myth of the races, Hesiod (Works and days 121–126) grants the men of the Golden Age the title of δαίμονες δαίμονες. See Plato’s adaptation of this myth in Republic iii 415a–c. Plat Platoo, Statesman, 271c–27 271 c–274d. 4d. Plat Platoo, Symposium, 203a–e.
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
??
and nally within the human being, between the body and the soul. To this process of mediation one may connect the assimilation, in the human soul, of the intellect to a δαίμων, for the intellect is the activity that makes possible the establ est ablish ishme ment nt of a link linkbet betwe ween en thediv the divin inee an andd the the hu huma mann bein being, g, assimi assimila late tedd to a cele celest stia iall plan plant, t, whos whosee root rootss are are in th thee he head ad.. Al Also so asso associ ciat ated ed wi with th this this δαίμων εὐδαιμονία is the notion of happiness, in ancient Greek,sign, literally (the intellect) is in i n acalled good shape.” Finally Finally, , the demonic that“whose divine δαίμων voice that prevents Socrates from acting in certain circumstances, is connected with this intermediary. intermediary. In the Epinomis the Epinomis, , a treatise attributed to Plato P lato but which is not by him, one o ne nds the rst attempt to establish a hierarchy among divine beings in which the δαίμονες nd their place. The general thesis defended by the author of the is the following: philosophy is identied with astronomy, which is Epinomis is Epinomis de de ne nedd as th thee scie scienc ncee of the the he heaaven enly ly bodi bodies es,, co cons nsid ider ered ed as the the hi high ghes estt di divi vine ne beings,towhich,moreover,acultmustberendered.Inthiscontext,demonsare si situ tuat ated ed be betw twee eenn the the visi visibl blee gods gods,, that that is the the star stars, s, and and huma humann be bein ings gs.. Th They ey ar aree
made mad e ofadeithe eitofher r et ethe her r or air air. . Ifmy, webe we belie lieve vePl Plut arch ch, ,smoreo mor eove ver r,rmedia Xenocr endiary ocrat ates es, sec sec-son ond d head he the olde ol der r Acade Ac ademy , cons co nside idere red dutar demon dem ons to be in inte terme ry being be, ings in the manner of the Symposium the Symposium,, but associated them with the isosceles triangle, in reference to the Timaeus . Timaeus. With the renewal of Platonism at the beginning on the Roman Empire, which can be dened as a s a rejection of the aristotelianised and stoicised iinternterpretation of Plato promoted by the New Academy, demonology assumes considerab side rable le importan importance. ce. For Phi Philo lo of Ale Alexan xandria dria, , the ent entire ire univer universe se is pro provide videdd with souls, and the souls in the air are precisely the angels ooff which which Genesis Genesis
Plato, Timaeus 90a: 90a: “Now “Now we ough oughtt to th thin inkk of th thee most most sove sovere reig ignn pa part rt of ou ourr soul soul as god’ god’ss gift gift to us, us, give givenn to be our our guid guidin ingg spir spirit it.. This This,, of cour course se,, is th thee ty type pe of soul soul th that at,, as we main main-tain, resides in the top part of our bodies. It raises us up away from the earth and toward what is akin to us in heaven, heaven, as though we are are plants grown not from from the earth but from heave hea ven. n. In sa sayin yingg this, this, we speak speak abs absolu olutel telyy corre correctl ctlyy. For it is from from heave heaven, n, thepla the place ce which which our souls were originally born, that the divine part suspends our head, i.e., our root, and so keeps our whole body erect” (trans. D.J. Zeyl). Seee Br Se Bris isso sonn (2 (200 005a 5a). ). Ps..-Pl Plat atoo, Epinomis 984d–985b. Ps..-Pl Plat atoo, Epinomis 984e–985a. Plutarch, De facie in orbe lunae 943e–944a. Plato, Timaeus 31b–32b. The gods are represented by the equilateral triangle, the δαίμονες by the isosceles triangle, and human beings by the scalene triangle (see Plutarch, De defectu oraculorum 416c4–d4). Philo, De gigantibus 6–18; De somniis 134–143; De plantatione 12–13.
6:3, speaks, which are to be identied with the demons mentioned by the Greek philosophers. philosophers. Such demons are the instrum instruments ents of divine providen providence, ce, which excludes the existence of evil demons. For his part, Apuleius establishes a twofold hierarchy among living beings, physical and theological. One has four parts: re, air, earth, and water; while the other has three, comprising the supreme god, the star-gods, and the of providence correspond to this hierarchy. Thedemons. approachDiferent is similardegrees in Maximus of Tyr yre. e. In cont contra rast, st, Alcin Alcinoos oos,, in his his hand handboo bookk in inte tend nded ed for teach teachin ingg Pl Plat ato’ o’ss doc doc-trines, trin es, the the Didaskalikos Didaskalikos,, do does es no nott se seem em to ha have ve show shownn any any pa part rtic icul ular ar in inte tere rest st in demonology.. He does not establish a twofold hierarchy demonology hierarchy,, physical and theological,amonglivingbeings,anddoesnotconnectthedoctrineof thedemonswith that of providence.
In Porph Porphyry yry
Porphyry’s Porphyry’ s theological system takes its inspiration from that of o f Plotinus, but is much more systematic. Thee Fi Th Firs rstt Go God d
According to Porphyry’s treatise On treatise On Abstinence from Killing Animals, Animals, at the summit of the hierarchy is the rst god: “The rst god, being incorporeal, unmoved and indivisible, neither contained in anything nor bound by himse self lf, , ne needs edsnot nothi hing ng ex exte tern rnal al,, as ha hass been been said. said. ” ” In Porphy orphyry ry,, this this go godd seems seems to ha havve be been en le less ss se sepa para ratte from from th thee In Inte tellllec ect, t, an andd henc hencee fr from om the the So Soul ul,, than than the the
Apuleius ius, De dogm. Platon 11; De deo Socratis , 116; –, 121–124. Ma Maxi ximu muss of Ty Tyre re,, Discourse and . Alcinoos, Didaskalikos 171.15–20. Described in the De Abstin Abstinentia entia; this this sy syst stem em se seem emss to be the the one one de defe fend nded ed in th thee Lett Letter er to Anebo the Egyptian (ed. Safrey-Segonds, Première partie: Les êtres supérieurs, fragments 2–32). 2–3 2). On this this sub subjec ject,t, seePo see Porph rphyr yre, e, De l’abstinence l’ abstinence, ed.Bou ed. Boufa farti rtigue gue-P -Pati atillo llon, n, vo vol.l. , xxix xxix–– xliv.. xliv Por orpphyry, ry, On Abstinence from Killing Animals, trans. G. Clark. We also use Porphyre, De l’abstinence, éd. Boufartigue-Pa Boufartigue-Patillon. tillon. The De Abstinentia is here abreviated and the English translation is G. Clark’s sometimes modied. These are the predicat predicates es of the incorpore incorporeal; al; see Porph Porphyry yry,, Sentences 1–3. The incorporeal is everywhere everywhere and nowhere; see Porphyry Porphyry,, Sentence 31.
57, 3. Naturally Naturally,, the rst god is self-sucient. 37, 1.
??
One-Good of Plotinus. The typical formula that qualies him is ὁ ἐπὶ πᾶσι (“he who is above all things”). The priest of this supreme god is the philosopher. pher . The appropriate cult for this god is, quite naturally naturally,, silence: “To “To the god who rules over all, as a wise man said, we shall ofer nothing perceived by the senses,eitherbyburningorinwords.Forthereisnothingmaterial,whichisnot impu im pure re tonor the theyet im imma mate teri rial al. logos when . So ev even en logos expr ex press essed edcontaminated in speec speechh is no not appro priat iatee for him, internal internal logos when it has been byt app the ropr passion of the soul. But we shall worship him in pure silence and with wit h pure thoughts about him.” This very ne text may be compared to this other passage: “So, inasmuch as the father of all is simpler and purer and more self-sucient, beingestablishedfarfromthematerialreection,theonewhoapproacheshim shou sh ould ld be pure pure an andd holy holy in all all resp respec ects ts,, begi beginn nnin ingg with with the the bo body dy an andd culm culmin inat at-ing in the inner man, assigning to each of his parts, or altogether to what is hi his, s, the the ho holi line ness ss th that at is na natu tura rall to ea each ch..” ” Th Thes esee li line ness ev evok oke, e, it seem seems, s, the the so soul ul’’s unio un ionn with with the the su supr prem emee god. god. It shou should ld be no note ted, d, mo more reov over er,, that that the the us usee of the the term term “f “fat athe her” r” asso associ ciat ated ed wi with th th thee rs rstt god god ma mayy we wellll re refe ferr to the the Chalda Chaldaean ean Oracles, cles , where rst goddescribes is called as Father, and isimage at the of opposite extreme from matter, whichthe Plotinus a “ghostly a bulk.” The soul’s approachh to this father and its union with him demands the practi approac practice ce of all the the virtue virtues. s. This This supr supreme eme god god cor corre resp spon onds ds to the the On One-Go e-Good od of Pl Ploti otinu nus, s, wit withh which, in the Life the Life of Plotinus, orphyr yryy, who who was was sev seven enty ty yea ears rs ol oldd at the the ti time me,, Plotinus, Porph says says he wa wass unit united ed on only ly once once,, wher whereas eas Ploti Plotinu nuss ha hadd had had this this ex expe perie rienc ncee seve severa rall times in his life.
On Porph Porphyry’s yry’s doctr doctrine, ine, see Hado Hadott (196 (1966). 6). See 57, 2; 34, 2; and 5, 4; Life of Porphyry 23, 26; Eusebius, Preparatio Evangelica 5, 1. 49, 1. Perhap Perhapss Apol Apolloniu loniuss of Ty Tyana; ana; cf. Euse Eusebius, bius, Preparatio Evangelica 10, 7. A St Stoi oicc di dist stin inct ctio ion. n. 34, 2. For silent worship, see also Corpus Hermeticum , 31; , , 17–21. 57, 3. The words ὑλικῆς ἐμφάσεως means the body, that is a reection on the matter described as a mirror; see Plotinus, 6 [26], 7, 25. The “inner man” refers refers to Republic , 598a7. Plotin Plotinus, us, , 7 [38 [38], ], 34, 28–31. 28–31. Chaldaean Oracles, fr. 1 Des Places. Plot Plotin inus us,, 6 [2 [26] 6],, 7, 13: 13: εἴδωλον καί φάντασμα ὄγκου, trans. A.H. Armstrong. Seee Br Se Bris isso sonn (2 (200 005b 5b). ).
Seee Por Se orph phyr yryy, Sentence 32, and Brisson (2006). Por orph phyr yryy, Life of Plotinus, chap. 23.
Thee Ot Th Othe herr Gods Gods
The other gods are described as “particular (μερικοί)”. )”. This qualicat qualication ion indicates that the other gods are multiple. They belong to very diferent groups, who are distributed between the level of the Intellect and that of the Soul. Int Intell elligi igible ble God Godss Sinc Sincee the theThe Inte Intell llect ect fol follo lows ws immed immediat iatel elyy upon upon the the On One, e, the the in inte tellllig igibl iblee gods gods,, o offspring of the supreme god, come rst. Their priest is also the philosopher, who must add to pure silence the singing of hymns: “For “Forsacrice sacrice is an ofering to each god from what he has given, with which he sustains us and maintains our essence in being.” The intelligible is the food of the soul; this is why Porphy orphyry ry es estab tablilish shes es a para parallllel el bet betwe ween en thi thiss ac actt an andd that that of a pe peasa asant nt o ofer ferin ingg a part pa rt of his harv harvest est as an act of thank thanks. s. Th Thee Pl Plat aton onic ic maxim maxim that that see seeks ks “assim assimililaati tion on to go god” d” must must be unde unders rsto tood od as assi assimi mila lati tion on to the the Int Intel elle lect ct,, thro throug ughh wh whic ichh the soul can unite with the One. Plotinus also recommends the singing of hymns, and Porphyry Porphyry mentions the PPythagorean ythagorean practice in this context: “The
Pythagoreans, who are committed students of numbers and lines, made their mainoferingtothegodsfromthese.TheycallonenumberAthena[7],another Artemis [2], and likewise another Apollo [1]; and again they call one Justice [4] and another Temperance [9], and similarly for geometrical gures.” In a Platonic context, the goal is by no means to relate the intelligible forms to specic traditional divinities, but simply to contemplate the intelligible forms as such. The critical remark about those philosophers who busy themselves with statues could well be directed against Amelius, Porphyry’s fellow-disciple at Plotinus’s school, who used to make the rounds at the temples. A bit further on, we nd a mention of the sacrices that should be ofered by philosophers: “Holiness, both internal and external, belongs to a godly man, who strives to fast fast from from th thee pass passio ions ns of th thee so soul ul just just as he fast fastss fr from om thos thosee food foodss wh whic ichh ar arou ouse se 57, 2. 34, 4. The term “ofspring” (ἔκγονος) is, as it were, called for by the qualier “father” applied to the supreme god. See Perno Pernott (1993 (1993). ). See also also Pr Procl oclus us,, Hymnes et prières, trad. Safrey; Proclus’ Hymns, Van den Berg (2001). 34, 4. This This met metaph aphor or comes comes fr from om Phaedrus 248a–c. Plot Plotinu inus, s, 9 [3 [33] 3],, 9, 33. 33. Hymns to numbers were attributed to the Orphics: fr fr.. 309–317 309–317 Kern = 695–705 695–705 Bernabé. See See St Stee eell (2 (200 007) 7).. 36, 1–2. 35, 1. Por orpphyry, ry, Life of Plotinus, 10.
??
passio pass ions ns,, who who feed feedss on wi wisd sdom om abou aboutt the the gods gods and and beco become mess li likke them them by ri righ ghtt thinking about the divine; a man sanctied by intellectual sacrice ( ἱερωμένου ),wh whoo appr approa oach ches esth thee god god in whit whitee cl clot othi hing ng,, and and with with a tr trul ulyy pure pure τῇνοερᾷθυσίᾳ), dispassion in the soul, with a body which is light and not weighed down with the alien juices of other creatures or with the passions of the soul.” In this paragraph, a more precise must renderwe to nd the intelligible gods. mention of the cult that the philosopher Thee Go Th Gods ds Asso Associ ciat ated ed wi with th th thee Soul Soul
Then com Then comes es the the domain domain of the the So Soul ul,, up upon on wh whic ichh we nd nd lilitt ttle le in inte tere resti sting ng in infor for-mations in the the .. First and foremost, one nds the world soul, for the world is a living being, and is therefore made up of a body and a soul; then the souls of the visible gods that are the heavenly bodies, the souls of the invisible gods thatarethedemons,andeventhesoulsof humanbeingsandanimals.Allthese soul so ulss are are li link nked ed to a body body,, whic whichh in th thee ca case se of the the in invi visi sibl blee god odss is the the pneuma pneuma,, whereas for mankind this t his body body,, which initially is also a pneuma pneuma,, is, at the end of its descent to earth, an organism containing the four elements. The Worl orld d Sou Soul l
What one nds on the world soul corresponds to what Plato and Plotinus say about it: “Nor does the soul of the world, which by nature has threedimensionality and self-movement; its nature is to choose beautiful and well-ordered movement, and to move the body of the world in accordance with the best reasons (logoi ). ). It has recei receive vedd the the bod bodyy in into to its itsel elff an andd enve envelo lops ps it, it, an andd yet is in inco corp rpor orea eall and and has has no sh shar aree in an anyy pa pass ssio ion. n. ” ” Th Thee al allu lusi sion on to reasons gives a clear indication that we are in a Plotinian context. 45, 4. Perhaps Perhaps an an allusion allusion to the denition of the soul by Xenocrates, Xenocrates, according to Aristotle in the De anima 2, 404b16–30. See See Plat lato, Phaedrus 247a–b. The intelligible is food for for the intellect. The soul soul is dde ened ned as the the pprin rincip ciple le of of spontan spontaneou eouss motio motionn ( Phaedrus Phaedrus 245c–d). These motion mot ionss ar aree beauti beautiful ful and andord orderl erlyy, for they they ar aree cir circul cular ar and obe obeyy a ma mathe themat matica icall harmo harmony ny (Timaeus 36c–d). The logoi are are the Forms that are present in the Soul in the mode of succession, and no longer of simultaneity as are the Forms in the Intellect. See Plato, Timaeus 34b, 34b, 36e. 36e. Th Thee soul soul is ever everyw ywhe here re in th thee body body of th thee worl world, d, bu butt nowh nowher eree because it is incorporeal. Since the ssoul oul is incor incorpore poreal, al, it cannot cannot be su subject bject to afecti afections, ons, accordin accordingg to PPorph orphyry’s yry’s Sentence 37, 21. 2. See See Br Bris isso sonn (199 (1999) 9)..
Thee Visi Th Visibl blee Go Gods ds,, That That is is,, the Heav Heaven enly ly Bo Bodi dies es
Next comes the world itself, that is, the xed stars and the wandering stars, in particular the sun and the moon, since they are made up of a soul and a body: “To the other gods, the world and the xed stars—visible gods composed of soulandbody—weshouldreturnthanksashasbeendescribed,bysacricesof inanimatethings.”Inamorepositivesense,onemustproceedasfollows:“But fo forr th thee god odss wi with thin in th thee he heaaven en,, th thee wa wand nder erin ingg and and the the xe xedd (the (the su sunn sh shou ould ld be taken as leader of them t hem all and the moon second) we should kindle re which is already kin to them, and we shall do what the theologian says. He says not a single animate creature should be sacriced, but oferings should not go beyond barley-grain and honey and the fruits of the earth, including owers. ‘Let not the re burn on a bloodstained bloodstained alter’ and the rest of that he says, for what need is there to copy out the words?” Sacrices of plants pertained perta ined to the rst men, who burned these plants to honor the heavenly heavenly bodies. Hence this remark by Porphyry on a practice of his time: “It is for them that we preserveanunderlyingreinthetemples,thisbeingthethingmostlikethem.”In the Timaeus, , re is the element associated the dwellingthe of stars the gods. FFor or the Timaeus philosopher, however, the mere fact ofwith contemplating is already a form of cult. cult. Here, Porphyry Porphyry coin coincides cides with the position of the the Epinomis Epinomis,, where philosophy was fused with astronomy astronomy.. Thee In Th Invi visi sibl blee Gods Gods,, That That is, is, th thee Demo Demons ns
Finally, we come to the invisible gods, identied with the demons: “So there remains the multitude of invisible gods, whom Plato called daimones called daimones without without distin dis tincti ction on..” ” This This rema remark rk refer referss to this this fam famous ous pas passag sagee of the the Timaeus which, h, Timaeus,, whic after evoking the celestial gods, moves on to the traditional gods: Tand o describe the dancingand movements thesecircular gods, their juxtapositions the back-circlings advances of of their courses on themselves, to tell which of the gods come into line wit withh one another, at their
37, 3. This coul couldd well well be Orph Orpheus, eus, but it is is a Pythagor Pythagoreaniz eanized ed Orpheus. Orpheus. 36, 3–4. 5, 2. See the Timaeus 39e–40a. 35, 1.
37, 4. The full grading: god, archangel, archangel, angel, demon, archon, soul ( Letter to Anebo, fr. 28a Safrey-Segonds) is not taken into account here.
??
conjun conj unct ctio ions ns and and ho how w man many of th them em are are in oppo opposi siti tion on,, an andd in what what or orde derr and at which times they pass in front of or behind one another another,, so that some are occluded from our view to reappear once again, thereby bringing terrors and portents of things to come to those who cannot reason— to tell all this without the use of visible models would the labor spent in We willofdothe with this account, and and so letgenerated this be the conclusion to ourvain. discussion nature of the visible gods. As for the other gods it is beyond our task to know and to speak of how they came to be (Περὶ δὲ τῶν ἄων δαιμόνων εἰπεῖν καὶ γνῶναι τὴν γένεσιν). We should accept on faith the assertion of those gures of the past who claim clai m to be the t he ofspring of spring of gods. They must surely have been well informed about their own ancestors. So we cannot avoid believing the chilildr ch dren en of go gods ds,, ev even en th thoug oughh their their accou account ntss la lack ck pl plau ausib sible le or com compel pelliling ng proo pr oofs fs.. Ra Rath ther er,, we shou should ld foll follow ow cu cust stom om an andd beli believ evee them them,, on the the gr grou ound nd that what they claim to be reporting are matters of their own concern. Accordingly,, let us accept their account of how these gods came to be and Accordingly stategave whatbirth it is. Earth and Heaven gave ve birth Ocean and Tethys, who in turn to Phorcys, Cronusga and Rhea to and all the gods in that gener erat atio ion. n. Cron Cronus us and and Rhea Rhea gave birt birthh to Ze Zeus us an andd Her Hera, as well ell as al alll thos thosee siblings who are called by names we know. These in turn gave birth to yet another anot her generation. In any case, when all the gods had come to bbe, e, both the ones who make their rounds conspicuously conspicuously and the ones who present themselves only to the extent that they are willing, the demiurge of the t he universe spoke ttoo them. This passage is highly interesting, because it considers the terms δαίμων and θεός assynonyms,andespeciallybecauseitremindsusthatagod,sinceheconsi sist s of a so soul ul an and body body,of , isthe not notdemiurge, im immo mort rtal al who by na natu ture re:fashioned : hi hiss im immo mort rtal alit ity depe pend ndsalso s on a sts decision on thed part has him. Ity de should be noted that Plato is very clear on the subject: the traditional gods are placed on the same level as the heavenly bodies. Porphyry continues by pointing out that some of these traditional gods have have received a name, while others have not. no t. Thos Thosee who who have have been been gi give venn a na name me rece receiv ivee ho hono nors rs li likke the the othe otherr gods, ods, an andd gran gr ante tedd a cu cult lt;; th thos osee who who hav have no nott rece receiv ived ed a na name me al also so re rece ceiv ivee ho hono nors rs and and ar aree the object of a cult, albeit an obscure one. Whereas popular rel religion igion considers
An armi armillllar aryy sphe sphere re.. Plato, Timaeus 40c–41a.
that all demons can become angry if they are neglected, Porphyry makes a very clear distinction between the good demons, who do only good, and the bad ones, who are malecent. All demons are thus made up of a soul and body. body. This body, body, however, however, is not a te terr rrest estria riall body body, but but a vehi vehicl clee mad madee of pneuma.Yetinwhatdoesthis pneuma.Yetinwhatdoesthis pneuma pneuma,, to of the demons areof associated, consist? may,considered of course, be which a case the of asouls Platonic recuperation a Stoic notion. TheThis Stoics the world to be a divine, living unit, organized according to rational laws and governed in its slightest details by a providence from which all transcendence is ex excl clude uded. d. At th thee basis basis of their their co cosm smol olog ogyy, they they pl place acedd the the fol follo lowi wing ng tw twoo pri prinncipl ciples es.. One One ca cann on only ly be afe afect cted ed:: it is mat matter (ὕλη) la lacki cking ng al alll deter determin minati ation on,, al alll motion, and all initiative, while the other has the ability to act, and brings to matt ma tter er fo form, rm, qual quality ity,, and and mot motion ion.. Th This is secon secondd pr prin incip ciple le is “r “rea eason son” ” (λόγος).In this context, the λόγος can also receive the name of “god”, for its action makes it, as it were, the artisan of the universe, but an artisan whose art resides in all the the pr produ oduct ction ionss of natu nature re.. By tak taking ing the deman demandd for the in indet deter ermin minac acyy of mat mat-ter to its limit, Stoicism was forced to recognizethose in theof λόγος alone the cause of the most elementary physical characteristics, the four elements (re, air, water, and earth) and those of the result of the combination of these four elements in sensible things. This is why we may speak of Stoic “corporealism” or even “materialism”: the action of the λόγος on matter and bodies remains a material, corporeal activity activity.. In addition, the active principle, which the Stoics call λόγος, also has physical name, “re”. This is not concrete re, but a re that unites within itself all the powers of concrete re. It is an energy, and the three other elements (air, water,, earth) correspond to the three states water sta tes in which it can also be found: f ound: gas, li liqu quid id,, so soli lid. d. This This re re that that is th thee λόγος ide ident nti ied ed wit withh go godd can al also so be co conc nceiv eived ed πνεῦμα n al as an igne igneou s breat br eath, h, the th e omnipr omn iprese esent nt alll the thise pa part rtssisofassociated th the wor orlld pe pennetrated byous the and informed by it, re,. Iwhich hot, with πνεῦμα expan ex pansio sion, n, wh whililee air, air, wh which ich is cold, cold, is ch char aract acteri erize zedd by cont contra racti ction on.. Th This is osc oscililla la-tion, which animates all bodies and ensures their cohesion, is called “tension” (τόνος), a tension that is diversied according to the regions of the universe. It assumes the name of “tenor” or “maintenance” (ἕξις) in inanimate solids, of “constitution” (φύσις) in plants, and of “soul” (ψυχή) in living beings. In all 37, 5. On the pneuma in Porphyry, see Kissling (1922); Proclus, The Elements of Theology, ed. Dodds, 318–319; Deuse (1983), 218–227. As one one will will soon soon realiz realize, e, this this tterm erm should should nnot ot be taken taken in its usual usual sense. sense. , , 1013 [= Sextus Empiric Empiricus, us, Adv. math. 78].
??
these cases, the function of this corporeal principle is to maintain cohesion in all bodies, including, and above all, the body of the world. Neoplatonists such as Plotinus and Porphyry criticize this notion of pneuma because pneuma because it remains corporeal and does not enable a distinction between body and soul. Yet Plotinus nu s an andd Por orph phyr yryy mak make it th thee body body of th thee in invi visi sibl blee go gods ds,, and and this this pa para rado doxi xica call function explains why pneuma is pneuma is not here, for it has by no the equivalent in a modern language. In general, thistranslated body is not perceptible senses; someti som etimes mes,, ho howe weve verr, ev evilil dem demon onss can can,, as we shal shalll see see,, ma make ke thems themsel elve vess vis visib ible le by projecting images on their pneuma their pneuma. . Quite naturally, the pneuma the pneuma,, which is subject to afections, is liable to be destroyed: “The pneuma “The pneuma,, insofar as it is corporeal, is passible and corruptible. Though it is so bound by souls that the form endures for a long time, it is not etern eternal al;; for it is re reaso asona nabl blee to supp suppose ose that that som someth ethin ingg co cont ntinu inuou ousl slyy ow owss fr from om them and that they are fed. In the good daimones good daimones,, this is in balance as in the bodies of those that are visible, but in the malevolent it is out of balance; they allot more to their passible element, and there is no evil that they do not attempt to dobody to the regions around the demons earth.” to It isbethus the relationfrom of their soul to their that allows the good distinguished the bad ones. Demonscanbegoodorbad,accordingtowhethertheirsouldominatestheir vehicle or their their pneuma afe ctions: pneuma,, which, because it is corporeal, is subject to afections: “All the souls which, having issued from the universal soul, administer large parts of the regions below below the moon resting on their pneuma their pneuma but but controlling it by reason, should be regarded as good daimones good daimones …” …” It is hard to determine whether the formula ὅσαιμὲνψυχαὶτῆςὅληςἐκπεφυκυῖαι impliesthatthesesouls come co me fr from om th thee hyp ypos osta tasi siss So Soul ul or from from th thee worl worldd soul soul. . It is al also so qu quit itee di di c cul ultt to understand this other formula: ἐπερειδόμεναι μὲν πνεύματι. One thinks right away aw ay of tthe he myth myth of tthe he Phaedrus Phaedrus,inwhichalllivingbeings,includinggodsand ,inwhichalllivingbeings,includinggodsand
We nd nd th this is doctrine doctrine of the breath breath assimil assimilate atedd to a body body in Plotinus Plotinus , 6 [2 [26], 6], 5. 22–29: 22–29: “But the purication of the part subject to afections is the waking up from inappropriate images and not seeing them, and its separation is efected by not inclining much down wards and not having a mental picture of the things below. But separating it could also mean me an ta taki king ng away way th thee th thing ingss fr from om whic whichh it is sepa separa rate tedd when when it is not not stan standi ding ng ov over er a vi vita tall breath ( pneuma) turbid from gluttony and sated with impure meats but that in which it resi reside dess is so ne ne,, th that at it can can ride ride on it in peac peace. e.” (T (Tra rans nsla lati tion on by A. A.H. H. Arms Armstr tron ongg modi modi ed ed). ). Se Seee Por orph phyr yryy, Ad Gaurum 6 (1), 6–11 and maybe Synesius of Cyrene, De insomniis 19, 2. Se Seee Por orph phyr yryy, Sentence 29. 39, 2. 38, 2. The aambigu mbiguity ity is alre already ady prese present nt in Plotin Plotinus us 3 [27], [27], wher wheree the express expression ion design designates ates--
demons,areprovidedwithasoulandavehicle,the pneuma,thesoulconsisting demons,areprovidedwithasoulandavehicle,the pneuma ,thesoulconsisting of a driver who is reason, mounted on a chariot that is his vehicle, and of two hors ho rses es,, one one good, good, co corr rresp espon ondin dingg to ardor ardor,, an andd anoth another er one one bad bad,, corr corres espon pondin dingg to de desi sire re.. In Plat Platoo, no sp spec eci ic cat atio ionn is ma made de of tthe he na natu ture re of th this is vehi vehicl cle, e, and and al alll the gods and demons are good. Thee Go Th Good od De Demo mons ns
Porphyry takes up a tradition that goes back to Plato, according to which the good demons, intermediary between the gods and the world, ensure the government of the sublunary world: these demons care for animals, harvests, and atmospheric phenomena, particularly rain and wind. These demons are are also the intermediaries between gods and men: “Among them must be numbered the ‘transmitters’,, as Plato calls tthem, hem, who report ‘‘what what comes from people to the gods and what comes from to gods to people’, carrying up our prayers to the gods as if to judges judges,, and carrying back to us their advice and warning warningss through oracles.” oracles.” In additio addition, n, they preside over liberal arts and techniques. In short, demons administer the sublunary world. This a theme that backtothe De backtothe De mundo mundo, , a trea treatis tise e at attri tribu bute tedd to Ari Arist stotl otle, e, but butiswh which ich co cont ntain ainssgoes sevseveral Stoic elements. Moreover, as is the case for Socrates’ divine sign, the good demo de mons nsw warn arn us, us, in so far far as ispo is poss ssib ible le,, of the the da dang nger erss towh to whic ichh the the ba badd de demo mons ns expose us. Thee Ev Th Evil il De Demo mons ns
By accepting the existence of evil demons, Porphyry departs from most of the Platonictraditionwhichacknowledgesonlygooddemons:“Butthesoulswhich donotcontrolthe pneuma donotcontrolthe pneuma adjacenttothem,butaremostlycontrolledbyit,are forthatveryreasontoomuchcarriedaway,thentheangersandappetitesof the
the hypostasis Soul in chapter 1, 32–33 and tthe he world soul in chapter 2, 34–35. For parallels pointing toward the world soul, see Corpus Hermeticum 7; Macrobius, In Somnium Scipionis 6, 20. 38, 2. πορθμεύοντας τας. Τοὺς πορθμεύον Plato, Symposium 202e3–4: Ἑρμηνεῦον καὶ διαπορθμεῦον θεοῖς τὰ παρ ’ ἀνθρώπων καὶ ἀνθρώποις τὰ παρὰ θεῶν. 38, 3. One nds this represe representation, ntation, which comes from the Symposium (202d–203a) in Max Maximu imuss of Ty Tyre re,, Discou Discourse rse ; ; Apulei Apuleius us,, De do dogm gm.. Plat Platon on.12,204; De deo Socra Socratis tis 6. 132–133; Plutarch, De Iside 26 and De defectu 471a–b. 38, 2. 41, 3.
??
,butmayreasonablybecalled pneuma aresetof.Thesesoulsarealso daimones daimones,butmayreasonablybecalled malecent.” These harmful demons are located in the region closest to the earth ear th and and ar aree su subje bject ct to afec afectio tions ns.. Th Thee exist existen ence ce of eevi vill demon demonss al allo lows ws on onee to accou acc ount nt for evil evil in this wo worl rld, d, an andd for devian deviantt relig religiou iouss pr pract actice ices. s. Inde Indeed, ed, the these se demon dem onss “… ar aree th them emsel selve vess re resp spon onsib sible le for th thee sufe suferin rings gs that that oc occu curr ar arou ound nd the the earth: crop failures, earthquakand earthquakes, es, droughts the themselves like like …” They also stir upplagues, disturbances among mankind in society:and “They rejoice in everything that is likewise inconsistent and incompatible; slipping on, as it were, the masks of the other gods, they prot ffrom rom our lack of sense, winning over the masses because they iname i name people’s appetites with lust and longing for wealth and power and pleasure, and also with empty ambition from which arises civil conicts and wars and kindred events.” Finally, they give rise to reprehensible religious practices: “Then they prompt us to supplications and sacrices, sacric es, as if the benecent gods were angry angry.. They do such things because they want to dislodge us from a correct concept of the gods and convert us to themselves.” They inspire human sacrices, rejoice in bloody sacrices, and promote of sorcery sorcery. .a reconciliation between philosophical reliIn fact,the thepractice evil demons allow gion and critique of popular religion. It is the evil demons that give rise to the practices condemned by philosophy. If the evil demons come to wear the masks of the gods, it is because of their description by the poets, and of certainn posit tai position ionss of the the ph phililoso osoph pher erss who who borro borrowe wedd he heav avililyy fr from om tradi traditio tion, n, who whose se authority was thereby reinforced. Unli Un likke the the go good od de demo mons ns,, the the evil evil de demo mons ns beco become me vi visi sibl blee fr from om ti time me to ti time me.. Various forms can come to be imprinted on their invisible pneuma invisible pneuma:: “All these, and those that have the opposite power, power, are unseen and absolutely abso lutely imperceptible to human senses. For they are not clad in a solid body, nor do they all havvmped ha e on one sh shap ape, bu but t pneuma th they ey tak takeare ma ny form foetimes rms. s. man The The shap sh apes whic ichhetimes im impr prin intin t and an d ar are sta stampe de up upon one,the their ir pneuma arman e som someti mes manife ifest st es an andwh d someti som mes invi visib sible le,e,
38, 4; see 58, 2. The wor wordd ὁρμή refers to an important notion in stoicism, the impulse to action. Chaldaean aean Oracles Oracles, fr. 39, 39, 3. In In ue uenc ncee by th thee Chald fr. 14 1499 de dess Plac Places es.. See See H. Seng Seng in this this bo book ok.. 40, 1. 40, 3. 40, 2. 42, 1–3. See Graf (1994).
This This is alread alreadyy the case case in Epinomis 984e. See Sentence 29.
and the worse demons sometimes change their shape.” We nd a detailed description of this process in the Ad the Ad Gaurum: t he Gaurum: “For instance, to begin with the last lastpoi point nt,, if we wecou could ldimp imprin rintt on our ourbod bodyy what what we were repr pres esen ent— t—lilike keth thee de demon monss who, as the story goes, manifest the forms of their representations on the airy br brea eath th th that at is asso associ ciat ated ed wi with th th them em or co conn nnec ecte tedd wi with th them them,, no nott by co colo lori ring ng it it,, butthe manifesting reections ofr—on their inefable way, way on thbye su surr rrou ound ndin ingg the air air,, as in a mir mirro ror— oneeimagination, co coul uldd in infe ferr …” …”insome Th These eseevi evill dem demon ons, s,, who are closer to the earth, masquerade as gods, and lead mortals astray by their change of forms. We nd this conception of the demons in a Christian author such as Calcidius, who identies angels with the good demons, and evil demons with the henchmen of Satan (chap. 133). It is practically impossibl blee to es estab tablilish sh a direc directt hist histori orical cal link link be betw tween een Cal Calcid cidius ius and and Porph orphyry yry, bu butt on onee may imagine that if Calcidius did not know Porphyry, both may depend on a common source. In his critique of popular religion, Porphyry coincides with his adversaries, the Christians. Yet whereas popular pagan religion was ercely denounced by the the Gn Gnos osti tics cs an andd by Ch Chri rist stia iann the Chaldean ap apol olog ogis ists ts,, it wa was s on only ly, part paGnostics, rtia iallllyy deno denoun unce ced d by Porphyry. Hermetic literature, the Chaldean Oracles Oracles, and Christians considered that the world in which we live is subject to the malevolent powerr of demons. powe demons. Porphyry Porphyry sought a concil conciliatory iatory position that did not hesitate to criticize popular religion, but tried to make it partially compatible compat ible with philosophical philos ophical religion religion.. The main stumbling block was blood sacrice, the most important act of the religion of the city, which implied putting animals to death and eating their esh. An entire theology and demonology were attached to sacrice (34–50). Different sacrices must be ofered to gods that difer in rank (37). To the highest god,onecannotofercorporealsacrices(34),forasacricemustbeadaptedto thenatureof thegodtowhomitisofered(35).Onemustfollowtheexampleof the Pythagoreans, who ofered numbers to the gods (36). Sacrices attract the
See See Ca Calc lcid idiu iuss (§135 (§135). ). 39, 1. Por orpphyry, ry, Ad Gaurum 6 (1), 6–11, trans. M. Chase. Calc Calcid idiu iuss, Commentaire au Timée de Platon, ed. Bakhouche, §127–136. On demons, see Den Boeft (1977); (1977); Timotin (2012), 132–141. 132–141. See Timoti Timotinn (2012) (2012),, 131–13 131–1322 and 209 209–21 –215. 5. Corpus Hermeticum 5; 13–15; Asclepius 25–26. Chaldaean Oracles, fr. 89–90 des Places. On these evil demons, see H. Seng in this book. Paul, Ephes. 6:12; Cor 2:6–8. 2:6–8. Cf. Detienne Detienne (197 (1979). 9).
??
evil demons who, unlike the good ones, feed on blood and burned esh (38– 43). In fact, it is the consumption consumption of animal esh that constitu constitutes tes a source of impurity for mankind (44–45). Flesh attracts evil demons (46). Contact with an inferior soul sullies the human huma n soul (47–49). Finally, we understand why the consumption of animal esh is contrary to the supremedoes goalnot of philosophy, which is to tend union god (50). Divination require animal sacrices, for toward there are goodwith demons who indicate to the good person, by means of dreams, signs, and voices, what he or shee mu sh must st do (5 (51– 1–53 53). ). Al Alth thou ough gh,, in some some case cases, s, one one mu must st al allo low w an anim imal al sacr sacri ic ce, e, nothi no thing ng for force cess us to con consu sume me the the esh esh of th thee vic victim tims. s. Indee Indeed, d, even even if we accep acceptt that there were human sacrices in the past, nothing authorizes us to eat our fellow-humans (53–57). Although it is not clear that Porphyry always accepted the the doc doctr trin inee of me mete tens nsoma omato tosis sis,, ac accor cordin dingg to wh which ichthe thesou soull co coul uldd pass pass fr from om one human or animal body to another as a function of the quality of its previous existence, one can assume that for a Platonist like him, putting an animal to death, and especially eating it, could not fail to be considered as homicide and an act of cannibalism. Thee Hu Th Huma man n So Soul ul
It isin Itis in this thisco cont ntex extt that thatth thee hu huma mann bein beingg must mustbe besi situ tuat ated ed:: the the be bein ingg whos whosee so soul ul has fallen into an earthly body, and whose goal is to rise back up and a nd return to the principle principle that is his origin. It should be noted that on the occasion of the huma hu mann soul soul’’s desc descen entt from from th thee st star ar wher wheree it was was lo loca cate ted, d, to co come me an andd esta establ blis ishh itself inabodytowhichitbecomesattachedatbirth,thesoulbecomesladen with pneuma with way, human soul is a kind of demon inhabiting a body. body. pneuma.. In a way,
Bibliography Primary Sources
Calcidius, Commentaire au Timée de Platon, édition critique, traduction française et notes par Béatrice Bakhouche avec la collaboration de Luc Brisson pour la traduction, Paris, 2011. Oracles Orac les chaldaïques chaldaïques avec vec un choi choixx de co comm mmen enta tair ires es an anci cien ens. s.TTex exte te ét étab ablili et trad tradui uitt pa parr
See Deuse Deuse (1983); (1983); Smith (1984). (1984). See Po Porph rphyry yry in the Ad Gaurum. See See Br Bris isso sonn (2 (201 018) 8).. Th Thee is issu suee of th thee pers person onal al de demo monn in Porph orphyr yryy is de deal altt with with in th this is book book by Dorian D. Greenbaum Greenbaum and by Nilufer Akcay Akcay,, and in Plotinus by Thomas Vidart.
É. Des Places, troisième tirage revu et corrigé par A.Ph. Segonds, Paris, 1996 [rst edition 1971]. abstinence,texteétabliettraduitparJ.BoufartigueetM.Patillon,3vols., Porphyre, De l’l’abstinence Paris, 1977–1995. Porphyre, On Abstinence from Killing Animals, translated by Gillian Clark, London, 2000. Porphyre, Lettre à Anébon, texte établi, traduit et commenté par H.D. Safrey et A.Ph. Segonds, Paris, 2012. Proclus, The Eleme Elements nts of Theol Theology ogy, ed edit itio ionn and and tran transl slati ation on by E. E.R. R. Dodd Dodds, s, Oxfo Oxford rd,, 196 1963 3.. Proclus, Hymnes et prières, traduction par Henri Dominique Safrey, Paris, 1994. Proclus, Proclus’ Hymns. essays, translation, commentary by Robbert Van den Berg, Leiden-Boston,, 2001. Leiden-Boston Secondary Seco ndary Liter Literatur aturee
Brisson, Luc (1999), “ Logos Logos et logoi chez chez Plotin. Leur nature et leur rôle”, Les Cahiers Philosophiques de Strasbourg 8 [special issue on Plotinus], 87–108 (reprinted in Ontologie et Dialogue. Hommage à Pierre Aubenque, sous la direction de Nestor L. Cordero, Paris, 2000, 47–68). Brisson, Luc (2005a), “Socrates and the divine signal according to Plato’s testimony: philosophical practice as rooted in religious tradition” tradition”, Apeiron 38, 2 [special issue: Socrates and divine sign, ed. by P. Destrée and N.D. Smith], 1–12. Brisson, Luc (2005b), “Peut-on parler d’union mystique chez Plotin?”, in A. Dierkens, l’ Un, de l’l’Antiquité Antiquité à nos jours, BruxB. Beyer de Ryke (eds.), Mystique: la passion de l’Un, elles, 61–72. Brisson, Luc (2006), “The Doctrine of the Degrees of Virtues in the Neoplatonism: An Analysis of Porphyry’s Sentence 32, its Antecedents, and its Heritage”, in H. Tarrant, Dirk Baltzly (eds.), Reading Plato in Antiquity. London, 89–106.
Brisson, Brisso n, Luc (2018) (2018),, “Le “Less pérégr pérégrina inatio tions ns de l’l’âme âme humain humainee suiva suivant nt Porph Porphyre yre.. Une analanal yse de la Sentence 29”, Mélanges Paul-Hubert Poirier , Québec, forthcoming. Den Boeft, J. (1977), Calcidius on Demons (ch. 127–136), Leiden. Detienne, Marcel (1979), La cuisine du sacrice, Paris. Deuse, W. (1983), Untersuchungen zur mittelplatonischen und neuplatonischen Seelenlehre, Abhan Abhandlun dlungen gen der geistesgeistes- und soz sozialwis ialwissens senschaft chaftliche lichenn Klasse, Klasse, Einzel-v Einzel-veröf eröf-fentlichung 3, Wiesbaden. Graf, Fritz (1994), La magie dans l’ antiquité gréco-romaine: gréco-romaine: idéologie et pratique, Paris. Hadot, Pierre (1966), “La métaphysique de Porphyre”, in Porphyre, Fondation Hardt. Entretiens sur l’Antiquité l’ Antiquité Classique 12, 125–163 (reprint in Pierre Hadot, Plotin, Por phyre. Études Néoplatoniciennes, Paris, 1999). Kissling, R.C. (1922), “The okhema-pneuma of the Neo-platonists and the De insomniis of Synesius of Cyrene”, American Journal of Philology 43, 318–330.
??
Kroll, Wilhelm (1894), De Oraculis Chaldaicis, Breslauer Philologische Abhandlungen, traduction par Henri Dominique Safrey, Safrey, Paris, Vrin, 2016. Pernot, Laurent (1993), La rhétorique de l’éloge dans le monde gréco-romain, 2 vols., Paris. Smith, A. (1984), “Did Porphyry reject the Transmigration of human Souls into Animals?”, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 127, 276–284. Steel, Carlos (2007), “Divine gures. An essay in Platonic-Pythagorean Theo Theology” logy”,, in A Platonic Pythagoras. Platonism and Pythagoreanism Pythagoreanism in the Imperial Age, ed. M. Bonazzi, C. Lévy, Lévy, and C. Steel, Turnhout, Turnhout, 215–242. Timotin, Andrei (2012), La démonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimōn de Platon aux derniers néoplatoniciens, Leiden-Boston Leiden-Boston..
Por orph phyr yryy of Tyr yree on th thee Daimon, Birth and the Stars Dorian Gieseler Gieseler Greenbaum Greenbaum**
Introduction
The works works of Po Porph rphyry yry of Ty Tyre— re—poly polymath math,, philos philosophe opherr and astrolo astrologer ger—h —hav avee enjoyed an upsurge in scholarly interest particularly in the last twenty years. This attention has forced a reassessment of earlier verdicts on Porphyry’s thought. From formerly having been accused of being ‘gâté par trop de souplesse’ and ‘no consistent or creative thinker’, his reputation has been rehabilitated: ‘a very erudite intellectual with an amazing knowledge of the history of philosophy, an interest in religion, rhetoric, and the culture of his time’; ‘It is not inappropriate inappropria te to compare Porphyry with Plutarch, who shared many of the same interests …’. Recent works featuring Porphyry have concentratedidentity on religious issues (in some anddivination. the topic sal vation), and ethnography; andcases ritual,Christian, oracles and divinati on.ofSome have touched on the topic of Porphyry’s interest in astrology (mostly tangentially) as well as his conception of the daimōn the daimōn. . However, However, aside from my own
*
I tthank hank Crystal Crystal Addey Addey for her insightful insightful and useful useful comments comments on an earlier earlier draft draft of of this essay.. I also thank James Wilberding for helpful suggestions on Porphyry essay Porphyry and the Myth of Er. Er. Finally, I thank the anonymous reviewer for pointing out areas needing clarication, and Akindynos Kaniamos for general comments. Needless to say, say, any errors remaining in in spite of their advice are my own. Fo Forr eviden evidence ce suppo supporting rting this designation designation,, see my recent recent book, Greenbau Greenbaum m (2016) (2016),, 236, 251,, 266–2 251 266–273 73;; also also Addey Addey(20 (2014a 14a), ), 104 104–10 –106, 6, 117 117–12 –124; 4; also also bel below ow,, ‘Porp ‘Porphy hyry ry on Astro Astrolog logy’ y’, esp. esp. n. 22. Bid Bidez (1913) 913),, 132. 132. Dodd Doddss (195 (1951) 1),, 28 286– 6–28 287. 7. Karama Karamanol nolis is and Sheppa Sheppard rd (2007) (2007),, 4. Sm Smit ithh (20 2007 07)), 12 12.. Simm Simmon onss (2 (201 015) 5);; Proc Procto torr (2 (201 014) 4).. Johnson (2013). Addey (2014a). E.g., E.g., Johnso Johnsonn ((2013) 2013);; astrol astrology ogy is more more centr central al to his topic in Johnso Johnsonn ((2015) 2015),, 186–201. 186–201. Timotin (2012), (2012), 208–215; Alt (2005), 79–80; 79–80; Nance (2002): however however, Nance’s point of view is somewh somewhat at blink blinker ered ed as to Porph Porphyry’ yry’s other other wide-r wide-rang anging ing int inter erest estss and how how these these might might a afe fect ct ho how w he wr writ ites es ab abou outt daimones. Se Seee also also Lu Lucc Br Bris isso sonn’s and and Niluf Nilufer er Acka Ackay’ y’ss artic article less in this volume.
© , , | : ./ ./_ _
,
work, no one has, as yet, considered how astrology has been integrated iinto nto Porphy orphyry’ ry’ss ideas ideas abo about ut bir birth th and and the the daimōn say no noth thin ingg of the rela relatio tions nshi hipp daimōn,, to say of the soul’s attachment to the body at birth. This article aims to remedy that lack. The focus of my investigation will be the way in which Porphyry combines the the in fu func nctio tions ns and andparticularly int inter erac actio tions nsthe of the daimōn,, huma daimōn hu mans ns an and so ulss wi with th hi his s in inte terrest astrology, astrological moment ofd soul birth. The primary texts I shall be looking at are On are On What is Up to Us, Us, To Gaurus on How Embryos are Ensou Ensouled led and par parts ts of Po Porph rphyry’ yry’ss underst understudie udiedd astrolo astrologic gical al treatis treatise, e, Intro Introduction to the Tetr Tetrabiblos abiblos, , which integrates with the other two texts. A close reading of these texts in regard to the daimōn the daimōn,, astrology and when the soul comes into the body will demonstrate a coherent philosophical and astrological line followed by Porphyry in these treatises. In looking at Porphyry’s astrological knowledge, this essay will also discuss astrological terms that relate etymologically to terms used by Porphyry in philosophical contexts, even if Porphyry does not make a specic connection betw be twee een th them em. Th The po inthyry t ofrygi givi ving ngted, thes thd,ese e ex exam ampl es isitly no not tonnec pr prov oveted, e bey be ond a re reaa-s son sonabl able endou doubt bt.that th ate Ppoin orphy orp equa eq uate or ev even en ples ex expl plic icitl ytconn co ecte d, ysuch suon chd term te rms and doctrines. It is to show, in demonstrating the astrological knowledge base that would have been available to Porphyry as an astrologer, underlying similarities between the use of terms in astrological and philosophical contexts.
Porphy orphyry ry on Daimones, Astr Astrol olog ogyy and and the the Myth Myth of Er Porphyry on Daimones
Porphyry’sabidinginterestindaimones Porphyry’sabidinginterestin is revvea eale ledd in inaa numb number er of hi hiss wo work rks: s:On daimones isre On Abstinence from Killing Animals, Animals, Philosophy from Oracles, Oracles, Life of Plotinus, Plotinus, Letter to Anebo, Anebo, On the Cave of the Nymphs in the Odyssey Odyssey,, Commentary on Plato’ Plato’ss
Gre Greenbau enbaum m (2016), (2016), 247–255, 247–255, 266–275 266–275.. The ascription of this text to Porph Porphyry yry has mostly been agreed upon by scholarship, scholarship, pace Barnes (2011), 109 n. 22, who calls it, in relation to Porphyry’s authorship, ‘doubtful’. But to my mind James Wilberding’s argument for authenticity, expanding on Kalbeisch’s, is persuasive: Wilberding (2011), 7–10, esp. esp. 9–10. For the argument for Porphyry’s Porphyry’s authorship of this treatise (which has been accepted by most scholarship on the topic), see Greenbaum (2016), 266–270 266–270.. This ddiscus iscussion sion follo follows ws a hholist olistic ic app approa roach ch in line with with recen recentt scholar scholarship ship ((e.g. e.g. Johnson Johnson [2013], 13–14), in contrast to, e.g. Bidez’s approach (1913), dating Porphyry’s works by their so-called intellectual developme development. nt.
Timaeus, Onn What is Up to Us and To Gaurus Timaeus, O di ferent goal Gaurus.. Each of these has a diferent inmind.In On Abstinence orphyry ry den denes es an andd cl clas assi sies es the the di dife fere rent nt kin kinds ds of Abstinence,, Porphy daimones existingintheworld,bothgoodandevil(especiallyinrelationtoanimals and blood sacrice). The Life The Life of Plotinus recounts Plotinus recounts the famous episode in which Plotinus’s personal daimōn isconjuredbyanEgyptianandisfoundtobe not ,merely a daimōn, a daimōn but a godlike daimōn godlike daimōn (10.14–33). (10.14–33). Inthan Philosophy Orathe mention of daimones, , especially those of lessIn Philosophy sterling from qualities, cles cles, ,daimones allows Eusebius to twist Porphyry’s words words to suit his polemical agenda of conati ating ng gods gods and and daimones an andd th ther erefo efore re condem condemnin ningg the the pag pagan an go gods ds as me mere rely ly evil demons. In the Cave the Cave of the Nymphs Porphyry Nymphs Porphyry mentions the ‘natal daimōn ‘natal daimōn’’ (35), discusses the descent and ascent of the soul through the Gates of Cancer and Capricorn (22–23) and notes that the rising places belong to the gods, but th thee se sett ttin ingg ones ones to daimones (29) (29).. Frag Fragme ment ntss fr from om the the mo mostl stlyy lo lost st Commentary on the Timaeus deal Timaeus deal with various classes of daimones and daimones and how they manifest. The Letter The Letter to Anebo provides Anebo provides a full-edged inquiry into the role of daimones in daimones in divin div inee hie hiera rarc rchi hies es bu butt also also dis discu cusse ssess the the role role of the the pe perso rsona nall daimōn ,intheurgy daimōn,intheurgy pr prope oper r an and d in ast astro gy.. In To Gaurus Gauru ,the daimōn daimōn’ ab abil ityy to di disp spla lay y im imag ages es vi viaa an ‘airy pneuma pneuma’ ’ rolo is logy discussed. In OnsWhat In On is Up to’sUs, Us ,ilit Porphyry’s commentary on the Myth of Er examines the role of the persona personall daimōn daimōn that that attaches to every person upon incarnation and the astrological moment of birth. bir th. are approached from diferent angles in these treatises, and it Daimones are Daimones is important to take account of the context in which Porph Porphyry’s yry’s informat information ion about them occurs. occurs. Sometimes his purpose is denition, classicatio classicationn and diffe fere rent ntiat iation ion,, as in De in Deabsti abstinentia nentia andthe Com Commen mentar taryy on Timaeu Timaeuss.Othertimes his purpose is to provide discussion on the diferences between gods and daiand daithe Letter to Anebo) mones,, as in parts of De mones De mysteriis (quoting mysteriis (quoting the Letter Anebo) or on souls and .,Frag.[Sodano]).Butthe Letter daimones (e.g. Comm.Tim Comm.Tim.,Frag.[Sodano]).Butthe Letterto to Anebo alsotrains much of Por Porphry’s phry’s focus, daimonically daimonically speaking speaking,, on the personal personal daimōn daimōn,, its attr attrib ibut utes es an andd it itss pu purp rpos osee in th thee liv lives of human humans. s. Thus Thus,, it is cl clea earr that that Por orph phyr yry y considers ‘daimones ‘daimones’’ not as a monolithic class, but as varied beings with various functions and characteristics, performing various roles. Though Porphyry is unusual in that his works provide us with a large amount of material on on dai daimones,, what he tells us is quite consistent with the varied cultural views of mones in the Greco-Roman era and Late Antiquity. In this essay, the perdaimones in daimones sonal/natal/guardian daimōn sonal/natal/guardian will be emphasised emphasised not only because this is the daimōn will
Forover orovervi view ewss of th thee daimōn in cultural cultural cont contexts exts,, see Greenbaum Greenbaum(2016 (2016), ), Introduc Introduction tion and Chs 1, 3, 5 and 6. For extensive analysis of the daimōn in a Platonic context as well as literarily,, philosophically and re arily religiously ligiously see Timotin (2012).
,
kind of daimōn featured daimōn featured in the texts under discussion, but also because it repre rese sent ntss on onee of the the pr princ incip ipal al areas areas wh wher eree ast astro rolo logy gy an andd phil philoso osoph phyy int interm ermin ingl gle, e, particularly in Porphyry’s work. Porphyry on Astrology
Astrology another treated by Porphyry in more tthan han onefrom work.Oracles These, include Onisth ,the Letter , Philosophy the e Cave Cave oftopic th thee Nymp Ny mphs hs,the Letter to Anebo Anebo, Oracles, and, obviously, the Introduction the Introduction Life of Plotinus, Plotinus, On On What is Up to Us, To Gaurus Gaurus and, to the Tetr Tetrabiblos abiblos,, a strictly astrological text almost certainly written for students in astrology. As with his works discussing daimones discussing daimones,, his treatments of astrology reect the diferent issues he is addressing, although his views in the diferent treatises are not as a s inconsistent as some have asserted. In the Life the Life of Plotinus Porphyry Plotinus Porphyry mentions Plotinus’s interest in astrology, ‘more precisely the [astrological] outcomes of the natal astrologers’, i.e. not tables or other mathematical tools, but how the astrologers derive astrological efects, efects, which would natural naturally ly be of more interest from a philos philosophical ophical perspectiv perspec tive. e. In In Phi Philos losoph ophyy from from Or Oracle acless, he is co connce cern rned ed wi with th the the pr prop oper er astr astroologicalmomentforbeginninganoracularritualinordertoobtainavalidoracle (this reects the astrological technique of katarchē katarchē , which can include beginning a task or event based on the best astrological circumstances for what the
I thank Akindynos Akindynos Kaniamos Kaniamos for his felicitou felicitouss phra phrasing sing here. here. H.Tarra H.Tarrant, nt,per person sonal al con conve versa rsatio tionn (17 (17 Fe Febb 2015);I 2015);I share sharehis hispos positio ition, n, especi especiall allyy bec becaus ausee PorPorphyry inserts his own commentary into the astrological doctrines he draws chiey from Antiochus of Athens (mostly unacknowled unacknowledged) ged) and Ptolemy Ptolemy.. Manuals of astrology astrology,, aimed at current or would-be practising astrologers, astrologers, are common in the Greco-Roman era and Late Antiquity, and even exist in Demotic Egyptian (Winkler 2016). Whether addressed to readers generally, generally, dedicated to a particular student (such as Ptolemy to Syrus, V Vettius ettius Valens Valens to Marcus, or Paulus Alexandrinus to Cronammon) or written as a series of classes ov over er time time (an exam example ple of suc suchh practi practice ce is Olympi Olympiodo odorus rus’s ’s Commentary on Paulu Pauluss Alexa Alexanndrinus’s Introduction to Astrology, which took place place between between May and July of 564 564 in Alexandria; see Westerink [1971] and Greenbaum [2001], vii), such texts have much in common with Porphyry’s treatise on technical doctrines of astrological practice. Johnson (2013),162–164,isuncertainastowhomthetextwasaddressed,butsurmisesitwasforphilosophy students who might like to know something about astrology (it does not seem to have occurred to him that Porphyry could teach astrology students, even though Johnson compares comp ares the Introduction to the teach teaching ing texts texts of other other astrol astrolog ogers ers [164 [164 and nn. 94–95] 94–95]). ). 15, 15, 23–2 23–24: 4: … τοῖς δὲ τῶν γενε γενεθλια θλιαλόγ λόγων ων ἀποτ ἀποτελεσ ελεσματικοῖ ματικοῖςς ἀκριβέ ἀκριβέστερο στερονν.Seethediscussion of this this pas passag sagee in Adams Adamson on (2008) (2008),, he here re 265–26 265–2666 (but (but he hasmis has missed sedthe thespe speci cic c re refer ferenc encee γενεθλιαλόγων γων], whom he calls, generically, ‘horoscope casters’). to natal astrologers [ γενεθλιαλό
event or task represent). The same criteria apply for the consecration of statues. In On In On the Cave of the Nymphs, Nymphs, he describes a cosmology that is heavily infused with astrological motifs. The Letter The Letter to Anebo inquires Anebo inquires about the identity of one’s one’s personal personal daimōn daimōn vis-à-vis vis-à-vis the astrological astrological techniq technique ue of nding a ‘housemaster’ ‘house master’ (οἰκοδεσπότης),providingonemeansforlearningtoachievehappinessandvirtue.The pinessandvirtue.The Introduction Introductionto to the theT Tetrabiblos etrabiblosdevotesanentirechapter devotesanentirechapter to the discovery of the oikodespotēs the oikodespotēs and and lord of the nativity nativity. . soul, daimōn and and On What is Up to Us and Us and To To Gaurus combine Gaurus combine matters of soul, daimōn incarnation along with astrological content. The astrological viewpoint displayed here by Porphyry is applied in a philosophical context: he seeks to unpack the philosophical meaning behind certain doctrines and examine the
See Addey (2014a), 104–105, 117–124; contrast with Johnson (2013), 78–80, 113–118. See Pérez Pérez Jiménez (2007); also my discussion in Greenbaum (2016), 253–254. See my analy analysis sis in Greenbaum Greenbaum (2016), (2016), 266–275, 266–275, esp. esp. 2273– 73–27 275. 5.
It important emphasise that Porph was not aann dec opponent opponent or denier astrol-s ogyis (even if he to critiques it at here times), asPorphyry someyry scholars have declared: lared: Safrey andofSegonds Segond (2012), 77, comm. Fr. 83: Porphyry ‘mettait en doute la possibilité même de l’astrologie’ (in my view they have conated Porphyry’s Porphyry’s inquiry about nding the astrological ‘housemaster’ with Iamblichus’s own comments about it and astrology generally); Broze and Vann Lieferinge (2011), 68, 77 Va 77;; Tanaseanu-Döbler Tanaseanu-Döbler (20 (2013), 13), 75–79, 75–79, who seems to ha have ve misinterpreted Porphyry’s positions. She claims he ‘satirically questioned’, among other things, ‘astrology and the quest for the personal daimon’ (75); her arguments on both topics are awed, and she seems unaware that Porphyry also wrote an astrological textbook. The mere fact that Porphyry brings astrology into so many of his treatises, and authored an astrological text to boot, should give pause to those who assume his scorn for it. Some remark that Porphyry’s view of astrology was ‘ambivalent’: Johnson (2013), 113; or ‘agnostic’: Wilberding (2013), 99; contra Wilberding (2011), 77 n. 227, when he criticises or questions astrological doctrines, e.g. To Gaurus, 16.6.1: ‘I have mentioned these [the Chalde Cha ldeans ans/as /astro trolog logers ers]] not notbec becaus ausee I agr agree ee with with allthe all their ir doctrin doctrines es …’. But But it is notunc not uncomommon for astrologers to criticise and ofer improvements for astrological practices (see, e.g., Ptolemy and Vettius Vettius Valens); Valens); this does not mean they disavo disavow w it. Furthermore, Furthermore, one should sho uld not assume assume,, as Johns Johnson on (2013) (2013) doe does, s, a unanim unanimous ous agree agreemen mentt for astro astrolog logers ers eit eithe herr on physical causation by the stars or on determinism (‘hard’ determinism, 112, subsequentl que ntlyy cal called led‘a ‘astr strolo ologic gical al determ determini inism sm’’, 115), 115), or ev even en a defaul defaultt fat fatali alism, sm,to to which which Johns Johnson on contrasts Porphyry’s Porphyry’s ‘soft astrology’ (114). Finally Finally,, we should not assume that Porphyry is approa app roachi ching ng astro astrolog logyy from from an etic etic positio positionn (i. (i.e. e.,, only only as a phi philos losoph opher er cri critic tical al of astro astrolog logy y as a knowledge system), as Johnson does, 162–164, esp. 164. Aside from his authorship of anastrologicaltextbook,evidenceforPorphyry’s practice of astro astrolog logyy appea appears rs in Hepha Hephaesestio, Apotelesmatica (, 10. 23–27), who quotes Porphy Porphyry ry as giving an example birthchart showingg ho showin how w to dete determi rmine ne length length of life life in months months (menti (mentioni oning ng a te techn chniqu iquee also also cove covere redd Intr.. Tetr .). in the Intr .). For bibliography on this chart see Heilen (2015), , 281 (Hor. gr. 234..5).
,
parameters of fate (εἱμαρμένη) in astrology. It is clear that Porphyry acknowlparameters edges a role for the stars in the incarnation of humans huma ns (or animals in general). His purpose, especially in On in On What is Up to Us, Us , is to tease out the parameters of heimarmenē heimarmenē in in this role from what is in our power. Furthermore, he wants to make clear that astrology in both practice and philosophy is concerned not only with heimarmenē with and the and about life that are unchangeable unchang eable (over which we heimarmenē have no control), but things with the choices we have within the connes of astrological doctrine. In this he is not unlike other Hellenistic astrologers whose practice p ractice often of ten shows not the rigidity of astrological fatalism f atalism (if such a thing even exists in practice: I argue for its rarity) but the exibility of astrola strology to interpret the choices available to people as they go through life. This is not astrological fatalism, or a ‘hard’ determinism, to use a modern locution, but the use of astrology as a stochastic art, a divinatory tool based moree on met mor metaph aphor or,, an andd sy symb mbol olic ic an andd signi signic cati ating ng la lang ngua uage ge (w (whi hich ch,, after after al all,l, is its conception in Mesopotamian thought), rather than as a causal and rigid protopro to-‘s ‘scien cience ce’’.. Undeni Undeniabl ablyy, vie views ws of astr astrolog ologers ers about about thei theirr cra craft ft ma mayy disp displa lay y
See Gr See Gree eenb nbau aum m (2 (201 016) 6),, passim, but esp. Chs 1, 3 and 8. Her Heree I m mean ean not on only ly as astrol trology’s ogy’s comm common on practic practicee of assigning assigning diferent diferent attributio attributions ns to the same astrological phenomena (planets, zodiac signs, as well as congurations): e.g., Mercury signies education (παιδεία), letters, testing (ἔλεγχος), speech/reason (λόγος), having siblings, interpretation etc. (Valens, Anthology, .1.37); but also interpreting events with similar astrological astrologicalcharacte characteristics ristics in diferentways diferent ways.. See below, below, ‘Astrology Astrology and Choice in the theSou Soul’l’ss Desce Descent’ nt’(pp (pp.. 130 130–13 –131), 1),for foran anex examp ample le of difer diferent entint inter erpre pretat tation ionss forthesame for thesame astrological conguration by Vettius Valens. Some mode modern rn schola scholarship rship on astrol astrology ogy aand nd determ determinism inism has applie appliedd a slight slightly ly difer diferent ent terminology.. Long (1982), 17 terminology 1700 and n. 19 uses ‘hard’ astrology, ‘which claims that heavenly bodies are both signs and causes of human afairs’, and ‘soft’ astrology, astrology, in which they are only signs. Hankinson (1988), here 132–135, prefers ‘strong’ (‘concret (‘concretee predictions for particular individuals’, 132) and ‘weak’ (‘general (‘general tendencies and predispositions’, 134) astrology. Seee Gr Se Gree eenb nbau aum m (2 (201 010) 0).. See, e.g., Oppenheim (1974); (1974); Rochberg (1996); Rochberg (2004). In its mode modern rn sense. sense. Even Even in an antiquity tiquity,, Ptolem Ptolemyy is the the main main proponen proponentt of an astrol astrology ogy solely dependent on physical causation. Most other Hellenistic astrological texts, and I include Porphyry’s Porphyry’s in that category, category, do not emphasise, or even discuss, a physical mechanism by which astrology works (indeed, they concentrate on elucidating the doctrines and techniques used in actual practice; as working astrologers they do not, for the most part, concern themselves with philosophical issues, though some—particularly Vettius Valens—give Valens—give clues about their views in this regard). regard). Fora For a discussion of theissue the issue of causalcausality in astrology, especially in regard to Plotinus’s position, see Dillon (1999), Lawrence (2007).
contradictory or inconsistent notions about the role of fate—the point is that these varied viewpoints do not do not monolithically monolithically endorse a hard determinism or extreme astrological fatalism. Furthermore, the origins of western Hellenistic astrology in Mesopotamia and Egypt mean that, when we think about astrologyy an og andd fat fate, we mu must st be aler alertt for for th thos osee cult cultur ures es’’ id idea eass ab abou outt fat fate an andd the the star starss, andd how an how they they may may infor inform m Hell Hellen enist istic ic ast astro rolo logy gy,, an andd not not mer merel elyy con consid sider er Gree Greek k views. When Porphyry talks about astrology astrology,, as far as a ‘choice-based’ practice is conc co ncer erne ned, d, he is follo followin wingg in th thee st step epss of Doroth Dorotheu euss of Sido Sidon, n, Manil Manilius iusan andd Vetettius Valens Valens. . As far as astrological philosophy is concerned, he is following his te teac ache herr Pl Ploti otinu nus, s,wh whoo look looked ed at he heav aven enly lycon cong gur urati ation onss as a la lang ngua uage geof of si sign gns s rather than embracing Ptolemy’s Ptolemy’s theories and explanations explanations of pure physica physicall causation. Above all he is following Plato in understanding how choice and necessity are a part of every human life, and in discerning what parts of our lives, which begin with particular positions of planets and stars in the heavens, are not are not under under our control, and what parts are dependent on our ability of self-determination, se lf-determination, to choose (or not) virtue and making our lives better. In this this,, ev even en th thee int interp erpre retat tation ionof of the the as astr trol olog ogic ical al chart chartca cann al allo low w for fordi difer feren entt out out-comes co mes bas based ed on ou ourr choic choices es an andd me ment ntal ality ity (see (see mor moree dis discu cuss ssion ion of this this bel below ow). ).
See Gree Greenba nbaum um (2016) (2016),, Chs Chs 2 and 3. The rst rst two two include include katar katarchic chic astrol astrology ogy (which (which includes includes choos choosing ing the the best astrolog astrologiical moment to begin something) in their treatises. Hephaestio (b. 380), also covers katarchic astrology; I mention him here because he follows and enlarges on Dorotheus, whom he quotes extensively extensively.. Valens’ position on heimarmenē in astro astrolog logyy is compli complicat cated ed,, but his assertions of an unalterable fate are tempered by his clear belief in the power of providence and the daimōn for escaping from it: see Komorowska (2004), 294–334; Green Greenbau baum m (2016) (2016),, 36– 36–44; 44; his positio positions ns on fate fate and pro provid videnc encee are are not dis dissim simila ilarr to those those in Ps.-Plutarch’s De fato: see Komorowska (2004), 332–334, contra Komorowska (1995); Greenbaum (2016), 28. He even speaks of astrology as a ‘heavenly theory’ (οὐρανία θεωρία) reve reveal aled ed to hi him m by th thee ai aidd of his his pers person onal al daimōn ( Anthology, , 1.1.7) 7):: se seee Gr Gree eenb nbau aum m (2016), 34 and n. 70. E.g. Enneads , 3 [52], 7.1–13, 8.6–9. On this topic, see Dillon (1999); Lawrence (2007); Adamson (2008); (2008); Addey Addey (2014a), (2014a), 205–208, 205–208, 211. Most Most str strict ictly ly astro astrolog logica icall texts texts—in —inclu cludin dingg Porph Porphyry’ yry’ss—do —do not contai containn muc much, h, if any any, philphilosophical exegesis exegesis of astrology: they are concerned with practical techniques. Manilius, whose Stoic Stoic tendencies tendencies shine through through in his Astronomica; and Vettius ettius Valens, alens, whose philosophy is eclectic but certainly present in his Anthology, are probably the two ancient astro ast rolog logers ers (along (along wit withh Firmic Firmicus us Mater Maternus nus)) mos mostt de devo vote tedd to ex expre pressi ssing ng any any kind kind of philophilosophical view of astrology. astrology. For Ptolemy’s philosophical inclinations, see Ta Taub ub (1993).
,
Porphyry on the Myth of Er
The main treatise in which Porphyry discusses Plato’s Myth of Er in Republic in Republic is the essay transmitted by Johannes Stobaeus under the title Περὶ τοῦ ἐφ’ (OnWhatisUptoUs). ). Fragments designated as a a Commen Commentar taryy on Pla Plato to’s ’s ἡμῖν (OnWhatisUptoUs Republic also Republic also deal with the Myth of Er, Er, and may be part of what was originally one treatise. I shall draw on both sets of fragments in this analysis. In them we nd important material on Porphyry’ Porphyry’ss ideas about incarnation, the daimōn daimōn,, and what choice and self-determination ([τὸ] αὐτεξούσιον) the soul is capable of both before birth and after after.. Porphyry’ss concern is to demonstrate Plato’s ultimate consistency in allowPorphyry’ ing human choice over part of the human lived experience (especially the moral mor al part). part). Here Here his his idea idea of ‘ ‘rst rst’’ an andd ‘s ‘sec econ ond’ d’ lilive vess is an imp import ortan antt par partt of hi hiss argument.t. The souls freel argumen freelyy choose a ‘rst’ life (thoug (thoughh based on a lottery giving theorderinwhichtheychoose).Thischoiceismadeonabiologicalandgender level: to be human or animal and, for those who have chosen to be human, to be ma male le or fe fema male le (2 (268 68, , 48 48–5 –544 Sm Smit ith) h).. On Once ce the the ch choi oice ce is ma made de,, cert certai ainn nece necesssitated consequences follow. The second life has two separate components, one of which results in necessitated consequences and one which is ‘up to us’. The former we may describe as environmental or situational (268.54–67): for example, we may be born into a rst-world or third-world environment, into poverty or riches or something in-between. We may be beautiful or ugly. Each of these yields certain consequences: if we are born male into a patriarchal culture, we immediately have certain advantages that a woman would not;t; being no being bo born rn into into an au auen entt family family pr prov ovide idess mor moree ma mate teria riall advan advantag tages es;; an andd the same with physical appearance. So such a component of our lives, which are the soul’s choice before birth, are no are no longer up up to us after we are born and begin living our lives. These, Porphyry says, are ‘provided by nature or by
Wilbe Wilberdin rdingg (2011 (2011)) translat translates es ‘On What is In In our Powe Power’r’, which also conv conveys eys an accura accurate te sense of the Greek; to use the phrase ‘On Free Will’, as Johnson (2013, 2015) and others have done applies a modern connotation which is not present in the Greek and which can easily mislead a modern reader. For an excellent analysis of the term ἐφ’ ἡμῖν and the dangers of mis-translation, see Eliasson (2008), 14–16. Th Thee two two sets sets of fr frag agme ment ntss are are in Smith Smith(1 (199 993) 3),, 181– 181–18 187 7 and and 26 268– 8–27 271 1.. For di disc scus ussi sion on of th thee one treatise theory, theory, see Wilberding (2011), 123–124. This This is also also Plotin Plotinus’ us’s aim in Ennead , , 4 [15]. [15]. I agre agreee with with th thee para parame mete ters rs of Wilb Wilber erdi ding ng (2 (201 013) 3),, 93–1 93–101 01,, who who di disc scus usse sess th thee ‘two ‘two do doma main ins’ s’ of the second second life, life, one of whi which ch (the (the en envir vironm onment ental) al) is chosen chosen by the soul soul before before incarn incarnaation. I disagree with the assessment of Johnson (2015), 189–191 about (lack of) choice in the environmental and familial aspects of the second life.
chance’. This accords with heimarmenē with heimarmenē —what —what we could call the physical and environmental environmental circumstances circumstances under which someone is born, such as an acorn (to use a popular analogy) necessarily growing into an oak tree, not a maple or an elm (and that acorn falling either on fertile or infertile soil). These circumstances of the second life are tied in with astrology, to be discussed below. What is up to us us,, Porp orphy hyry ry sa says ys,, are are ‘acq acqui uisit sition ion of skill skillss and and pr profe ofess ssion ionss an andd know kn owle ledg dge’ e’, ‘… politi political cal live livess an andd the purs pursuit uit of powe power’r’ which which ‘depen dependd on de delilibberate choice’. These, for him, are another life (268, 55), a ‘kind of second character’ (or: impression, 268, 56, δεύτερον τινα χαρακτῆρα). These lives can be lived in a good or evil evi l way (268, 778–79). 8–79). So, So, the soul chooses a rst rst life and part of a second life that, once chosen, lead to necessary consequences and cannot be changed. But once this choice is made, the unfolding of that life— how we live that life—wisely or unwisely, with virtue or with vice, is up to us: this is the component of character in Porphyry’s Porphyry’s second life. The daimōn who accompanies the soul into life must also be examined here. daimōn who As we know from f rom the Myth of Er, Er, the souls choose their their daimōn daimōn,, who accompanies them into life and raties the life they chose. Plato plainly states states that choosin cho osingg the daimōn is the the soul’ soul’ss pr prer erog ogati ative ve:: ‘Y ‘You ourr daimōn daimōn will will not be allotted to you, but you will choose your daimōn your daimōn’’ (617e1). But Porphyry, perhaps follo lowing wing his master master,, Plo Plotinu tinus, s, does not use use the ve verb rb αἱρέω (c (choos hoose) e) in reg regard ard to the daimōn the in Onn What is Up to Us: ‘… that daimōn,, but instead λαγχάνω, ‘obtain by lot’, in O the daimōn the daimōn that that we obtained by lot is some kind of inescapable inescapable guard for us’ (268, 15–16). Why might this be? An important distinction between these two concepts (choice vs. allotment) allotment) is that the former gives more power and
268 268,65–6 ,65–66 Smit Smithh: διὰ φύσε φύσεως ως ἐπ ἐπορ ορίσ ίσθη θη ἢ τύ τύχη χηςς. SeeWil See Wilber berdin ding’ g’ss argume argument nt (2013) (2013),, 98–101 98–101,, tying tying th this is phra phrase se in wi with th th thee soul soul’’s ch choi oice ce of th this is part part of th thee se seco cond nd lilife fe and and its its astr astrol olog ogic ical al connection (271 , 72–79). On This reference to nature and chance recalls the discussion in Pseudo-Plutarch’ Pseudo-Plutarch’ss essay On Fate (571–572), where heimarmenē is is associated with both nature and tyche. See Hillman Hillman (1996, (1996, repr repr.. 1997 1997). ). 268 268, 67– 7–69 69:: τὰς δὲ γε τῶν τεχνῶν ἀναλήψεις καὶ τὰς τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων ἐπιστημῶν τε καὶ ⟨τὰς⟩ τῶν πολιτικῶν βίων ἀρχῶν τε διώξεις. … 268, 26 8, 74–75: 74–75: … ⟨ ἐκ⟩ τῆς προαιρέσεως. … Note Note that that Plato Plato ass assert erts, s, in Phaedo, 69b–c, that true virtue exists with intentional knowledge [φρόνησις]. Thanks to Crystal Addey Addey for this observation. observation. Plato, Republic, 617e1: οὐχ ὑμᾶς δαίμων λήξεται, ἀ ’ ὑμεῖς δαίμονα αἱρήσεσθε. Cf Cf.. th thee titl titlee of Ennead Ennead , , 4: ‘On our Allotted Daimōn’, Περὶ τοῦ εἰλήχοτος ἡμᾶς δαίμονος (t (tha hank nkss to Cr Crys ysta tall Adde Addeyy for for th this is sugg sugges estio tion) n).. Plot Plotin inus us us uses es the the ve verb rb as em empl ploy oyed ed by Plat Platoo in Phaedo 107d (thanks to the anonymous reviewer for this reminder). 268 268,, 15 15–1 –16: 6: … ὅτι ὃν εἰλήχαμεν δαίμονα ἀναπόδραστός τις ἡμῖν φρουρός.
View more...
Comments
