Just to clarify. We are talking specifically about the Platonizing Sethian texts like Zostrianos or Allogenes, not the version found in the Apocryphon of John which is earlier, maybe much earlier. The date of Zostrianos is controversial but is unlikely to be earlier than the pseudo-Chaldean oracles one of which is referenced in the Anonymous Commentary on the Parmenides which has similar philosophic ideas to the Platonizing Sethian texts. Now the pseudo-Chaldean oracles date from the reign of Marcus Aurelius so Zostrianos is later than that i.e around 200 CE at the earliest. Allogenes is probably later than Zostrianos .Well, someone is Wrong on the Internet, and another is wrong in print:The authors of these texts have also borrowed material from other writings of Porphyry and, as a consequence, these texts display a wide range of Porphyrian themes, doctrines, and terminology. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate this Porphyrian influence and to suggest the circumstances in which these texts may have been written.
Rubbish. Abandon all wishful or warped thinking. Pay attention to dates. Be logical.
Egyptian-raised Plotinus (c.250 AD) copied and responded to past generations of Alexandrian writers and established Alexandrian theory: his formation was in 235 AD. Later copyists like Porphyry (c.285 AD) also used much older works (c.100 AD and earlier). Scribes in our Late Antiquity (c.350-500 AD) most probably augmented both their works w/ late ideas, additionally. So it went.
Regarding the intellectual formation of Plotinus in Alexandria, Age 31 in 235 AD, we go back a generation to his conservative teacher Ammonius Saccas (c.175–243 AD). wiki tells us {Edit: adding dates} :According to Porphyry, the parents of Ammonius were Christians {c.145 AD}, but upon learning Greek philosophy {c.200 AD}, Ammonius rejected his parents' religion {c.100-175 AD} for paganism {pre-100 AD}.
We are told that Plotinus' teacher Ammonius abandoned the Christianity of his day: of the Early 2nd C! Implicitly, Ammonius rejected Christian Gnosticism likewise: another dogma of the the Early 2nd C. There is absolutely no reason to suppose Judeo-Gnosticism was called "paganism" by Porphyry; he means 'the old faith of Alexandria.' But here's what's curious: according to Porphyry, contemporary Christianity/Christian Gnosticism was already traditional then (c.150 AD). That means Christianity should have been at least two or three generations old in Alexandria in 200 AD, present since at least 130 AD. Unless his grandparents had converted (c.75 AD!), Christianity should have been a relatively new, radical? cult in Alexandria (c.160 AD). Therefore, Ammonius was repudiating his parents' convert religion: the eternal conservative reaction. By this, he would 'return to' ideologies of previous generations (i.e. pre-100 AD), to learn, then follow & teach that older doctrine: Platonism (c.200 BC-200 AD). Naturally, Alexandrian (retro-)Platonism was also "pagan"...of the old guard Serapis cult? However, this older Alexandrian philosophy (already colored by Judeo-Hermeticism, perhaps) was also influencing both the newer (1st? -) 2nd C. Christianity AND older 1st Gnosticism then circulating and evolving in the Alexandrian milieu of Ammonius' boyhood. So it impacted his own teaching/writings (c.210 AD), those of his preservationist student Plotinus (c.240 AD) AND old Sethian works likewise. There's evident (c.1st C BC) Platonism in Philo's works (c.25 AD) also. No mystery here!
Obviously, Ammonius (c.240 AD) is not 'the source.' Equally sure, the writings of Numenius of Apamea (c.150 AD) are not 'the source.'
Plotinus (c.255 AD) is certainly not 'the source.' At Age 28 (c.232 AD), suffering an intellectual depression in the novelty-driven cosmopolis, he finally found -- or, discovered his affinity for -- another conservative reactionary, Ammonius Saccas. It's blazingly obvious: in his own writings, Plotinus rails against radical sectraians, novelists, philosophical innovators, and new ideas of his day. Rightly considered as a conservative librarian, his ideas look closer to a plagiarism of Platonism, c.100 AD: "Neo-Platonist" follower, indeed.
Porphyry, 'the source'? fuggedaboutit. Porphyry's contemporaries, the (last) scribal copyists of the surviving NHL (c.325 AD) used many-times re-copied older texts (from autographs, c.350-25 BC?). Both Egyptian copyists (of older, known, original Sethian gnostic works circulating in Egypt) in the 2nd C AD and Porphyry in 3rd C AD Rome therefore drew from common Egyptian sources of their own Antiquity. There's your muddle.
Andrew Criddle
Statistics: Posted by andrewcriddle — Sat May 25, 2024 1:14 am