THE EGYPTIAN FOUNDATIONS OF GNOSTIC THOUGHT

appear to delimit a north-south distinction. However, it is clear that Alexander had a
limited understanding of the broader Manichaean system, as indicated by the fact that
he thought he was dealing with a Christian sect.
It is interesting that Alexander nowhere indicates what it is exactly which has
caused some of his fellow-philosophers in Egypt to convert to Manichaeism: is it the
more mythological elements or the pseudo-philosophy? There is indignation and
resentment in his exclamation towards the end of the treatise:
What is told in poetry about the giants is mythological. Those who discourse
about these in allegorical form put forth such things hiding the solemnity of
their tale behind the form of the myth... [they] adorn their poetry in this way in
order to persuade by the marvellousness of their tale. The Manichaeans,
however, understand nothing of this; whenever they are able to come to false
conclusions, they appropriate these as a god-send, whatever their origin, making
every effort, as it were, to vanquish truth by all possible means. 57
The corollary of this very revealing passage is that in spite of flouting Alexander’s
notions about Truth, the Manichaean message worked. One senses that Alexander
would not have objected half as much if these were the workings of a more purely
myth-evolved system. The point to keep in mind is that the Manichaean “myth” did
have a tremendous existential appeal, an allure that was able to traverse an impressive
number of cultural boundaries. It also had a great intellectual fascination as witnessed
by the conversion of Neoplatonic philosophers in Egypt, and by Augustine’s
participation in the faith for some nine years.
Within Egypt the success of Manichaeism took the form of a broad “mythic”
appeal to the Egyptian people. With Alexander we are witness to the success of their
efforts in a radically different forum. For surely, in quite general terms, the cultural
and rhetorical environment of the Graeco-Egyptian intelligentsia of the Delta was
worlds removed from that of the peasants, artisans, and priests of the Achmîm and
Sahid to the south.
In examining other Egyptian Gnostic groups which display affinities with the
Manichaeans, the Pistis Sophia stands out first and foremost as a liturgy used by an
unidentified Gnostic group with pronounced Manichaean “tonalities”. As well, the
text is likely from Upper Egypt and was likely composed in Coptic. The work has
been examined in the previous chapter at some length and a brief listing of similarities
will suffice here.
The taking of hostages and the partial curtailment of archontic power with the
perpetuation of entrapped light in “animal forms” in the Pistis Sophia is a strikingly
Manichaean depiction of events Early in the text, reference is made to the “tyrants
[who] began to wage war against the light”. Their ignorance is stressed: “because they
saw nothing except the greatly surpassing light”(I.25.1-5 58
) The light is subsequently
“swallowed” by the archons: all of these are familiar Manichaean themes.
The function of the Treasury of Light in the Pistis Sophia is an obvious
parallel to the function of the sun and moon in the Manichaean myth, in particular the
depiction of light being processed upwards and downwards. In the Pistis Sophia, there
57
An Alexandrian Platonist, 95.
58
Coptic transcription from NHS, vol. IX, 25.