Christianity and Monasticism in Alexandria and the Egyptian Deserts

Gawdat Gabra, Hani N. Takla, Gawdat Gabra, Hani N. Takla

• Publisher: The American University in Cairo Press
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781649030214
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Historia del cristianismo

The legacies of the Coptic Christian presence in Alexandria and the Egyptian Deserts from the fourth century to the present day The great city of Alexandria is undoubtedly the cradle of Egyptian Christianity, where the Catechetical School was established in the second century and became a leading center in the study of biblical exegesis and theology. According to tradition St. Mark the Evangelist brought Christianity to Alexandria in the middle of the first century and was martyred in that city, which was to become the residence of Egypt's Coptic patriarchs for nearly eleven centuries. By the fourth century Egyptian monasticism had begun to flourish in the Egyptian deserts and countryside. The contributors to this volume, international specialists in Coptology from around the world, examine the various aspects of Coptic civilization in Alexandria and its environs and in the Egyptian deserts over the past two millennia. The contributions explore Coptic art, archaeology, architecture, language, and literature. The impact of Alexandrian theology and its cultural heritage as well as the archaeology of its university are highlighted. Christian epigraphy in the Kharga Oasis, the art and architecture of the Bagawat cemetery, and the archaeological site of Kellis (Ismant al-Kharab) with its Manichaean texts are also discussed. Contributors Elizabeth Agaiby, Fr. Anthony, David Brakke, Jan Ciglene?ki, Jean-Daniel Dubois, Bishop Epiphanius, Lois M. Farag, Frank Feder, Cäcilia Fluck, Sherin Sadek El Gendi, Mary Ghattas, Gisèle Hadji-Minaglou, Intisar Hazawi, Karel Innemée, Mary Kupelian, Grzegorz Majcherek, Bishop Martyros, Samuel Moawad, Ashraf Nageh, Adel F. Sadek, Ashraf Alexander Sadek, Ibrahim Saweros, Mark Sheridan, Fr. Bigoul al-Suriany, Hany Takla, Gertrud J.M. van Loon, Jacques van der Vliet, Youhanna Nessim Youssef, Ewa D. Zakrzewska, Nader Alfy Zekry

1 Synopsis of the Arabic Pseudo-Serapionic Life of Antony

Elizabeth Agaiby

THE LIFE OF ANTONY attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria, and existing in various textual traditions and linguistic manifestations, is considered the authoritative history on Antony and his community,¹ and also the reference on ascetic discipline that would be read and emulated across generations, thus testifying to the influence the text has had across both chronological and cultural divides.

Antony has another Life, however, attributed to his disciple, Serapion the bishop of Thmuis.² It appears this version was originally written in Arabic, and circumstantial evidence suggests that it was composed sometime in the thirteenth century, because by the fourteenth century it was incorporated in liturgical texts of the Coptic and Ethiopian churches.³

This chapter will provide a high-level overview of the following:

1.The manuscripts containing a Life of Antony in Arabic

2.A synoptic overview of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life

3.Possible dating and motives behind the composition of the text

The Manuscripts

There are three different vitae of Antony in Arabic: (1) a translation of the Greek Life of Antony attributed to Athanasius (or its Sahidic version);⁴ (2) a redacted version attributed to Serapion of Thmuis (the Pseudo-Serapionic Life);⁵ and (3) an abridged version of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life contained in the Bustan al-ruhban.

The extant manuscripts containing a version of the Life of Antony in Arabic date from the thirteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries, and several copies are preserved in both Egyptian monasteries and libraries outside of Egypt.⁶

To date seventy-nine manuscripts containing a Life of Antony in Arabic have been located:⁷ forty-eight manuscripts inside of Egypt⁸ and thirty-one manuscripts outside of Egypt.⁹ Of all seventy-nine manuscripts, thirteen contain the Life attributed to Athanasius, and sixty-six manuscripts contain a recension of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life.

The following table lists the number of manuscripts containing a Life of Antony in Arabic by location, version, and century.

Table 1. Manuscript of Life of Antony

This table reveals a number of interesting points, the most important being that the Pseudo-Serapionic Life enjoyed more popularity than the Life attributed to Athanasius, not just in the Red Sea monasteries, but throughout Egypt,¹⁰ and the rich manuscript tradition is a clear indicator of a sizable readership. Secondly, the majority of the texts were transcribed between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, a period in which fifteen monks from the Red Sea monasteries were patriarchs of the Coptic Church in unbroken succession.¹¹

Furthermore, information provided in colophons and endowment statements reveals that some of these patriarchs commissioned the copying and endowment of several manuscripts.¹² Thus, one may assume that some Antonian patriarchs chose to propagate the Pseudo-Serapionic Life above that of the Life attributed to Athanasius, and if this was the case, then the text survived as much by public demand as by the important role that ecclesiastical politics and networks played in disseminating the text (Grig 2004: 95). Thirdly, the Pseudo-Serapionic Life began achieving momentum from the fourteenth century, shortly after its composition. And finally, with the exception of one manuscript,¹³ all texts of the Life of Antony in the Wadi al-Natrun monasteries of St. Macarius and the Baramus contain the Life attributed to Athanasius. The Wadi al-Natrun is the only region in Egypt in which the Athanasian prevailed over the Pseudo-Serapionic.

And yet, while the Life attributed to Athanasius is today considered the authentic account in the Coptic Church,¹⁴ the Bustan, which continues to be reprinted¹⁵ and read in monasteries throughout Egypt, still contains many Pseudo-Serapionic elements.

Synoptic Overview

In considering the Pseudo-Serapionic Life, one finds that the text exhibits many of the attributes that are considered typical of a saint’s vita, and of Antony’s in particular:¹⁶ a description of the saint’s origins, parents, and mature childhood; his adoption of ascetic discipline and embracing of the monastic life; his struggle against temptations, often in the form of demonic warfare; his withdrawal to a place of greater solitude; his control over wild animals; and the exorcism of demons, miracles of healing, clairvoyance, and prediction of his death (Talbot 2008: 863). In fact, all of these features are present in both the Pseudo-Serapionic and Athanasian Lives, but the accounts are quite different.

Furthermore, scenes presented as prominent in the Life attributed to Athanasius,¹⁷ such as Antony’s lengthy sermon to his disciples on the ascetical life and demonology, his traveling to Alexandria to support the martyrs, his encounter with Arians and Meletians, and his long, rhetorical debate with philosophers, are all absent from the Pseudo-Serapionic version.

The affirmed purpose of Athanasius’s Life was to present Antony as a model of Christian living worthy of emulation,¹⁸ as a martyr type in his ascetical practice,¹⁹ and as subordinate to the ecclesiastical hierarchy.²⁰ In the Pseudo-Serapionic account, however, the attested purpose of the author is to first

explain [Antony’s] virtues and to tell of a few of [his] miracles [in order] to make the joy of the attendants complete and [so that they may] rejoice over the astounding signs, and victorious wonders.²¹

Secondly, Antony is not like a martyr in his ascetical life, but he is greater than the martyrs because

This saint’s fighting, my beloved, was not like the fighting of the martyrs. For their enemies had bodies like them fighting against them, but this saint fought against spirits and principalities of the pit, for in the words of our teacher Paul [the Apostle]: “For our fighting is not with flesh and blood.”²²

And instead of being subordinate to the church hierarchy, “[Antony is] exalted above . . . all the ranks of the patriarchs in their entirety.”²³

We may consider that the text of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life was based mainly on a primary text—the Life attributed to Athanasius—and was complemented by episodes from secondary sources including Jerome’s Life of Paul the Hermit,²⁴ Palladius’s Lausiac History,²⁵ the Apophthegmata Patrum,²⁶ the History of the Patriarchs,²⁷ and the Coptic Life of St. Macarius the Great attributed to Serapion of Thmuis.²⁸ But a substantial portion of the text contains scenes that are unattested in any historical source.

The following table provides a high-level synopsis of some of the scenes in the Pseudo-Serapionic Life that are both attested in historical sources (indicated with an X) and unattested. Unattested scenes are marked with three asterisks (***). Those also marked with a double asterisk (**) are unattested stories that were incorporated in the Bustan up until the nineteenth century, and unattested stories that are still incorporated in the latest reprint of the Bustan (al-Makary 2014) are marked with one asterisk (*).

Possible Dating and Motives Behind the Composition

As noted earlier, circumstantial evidence indicates that the Pseudo-Serapionic Life was probably composed sometime in the thirteenth century.

Numerous scholars have noted that a major stimulus for the composition of a hagiographical work was to increase the renown of a saint or a religious institution (e.g., Orlandi 1991b: 1450–60; Talbot 1991: 24; Høgel 2002: 30; Papaconstantinou 2007: 364; Armanios 2011: 69; Zakrzewska 2011: 500). But there was a different motivation behind rewriting a hagiographical work, and a key impetus was to mark a consecration or reconsecration of a new or restored monastery or church (Talbot 1991: 17–19).

Table 2. Synopsis of scenes in Pseudo-Serapionic Life of Antony

Seen from this perspective, it is possible that the composition of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life reflected a new phase in the history of St. Antony’s Monastery. If one accepts the assumption that the text was composed sometime in the thirteenth century, the incentive to write a new Life may have been provided by the then recent restoration and expansion of the ancient church (Jones 2002: 21–30) and completion of the decorative program in 1232/1233 (Bolman 2002b: 78). All of these events most likely invigorated Antony’s monastic community.

Internal textual evidence may help to validate this hypothesis. The first evidence relates to the church building. There are quite a few statements in the text (made by both Christ and Antony) relating to church building activities and the rewards that are heaped upon those who contribute, either financially or with their time.

I say to you [Antony] that he who builds a house for you I will build for him in recompense luminous new houses . . . he who has toiled in your house and cared for it and helped in its building, I am the one who will reward him in the next world.³⁰

The second piece of evidence relates to the iconographic program and its significance in perpetuating the memory of Antony. In the text, Antony promises to perform a miracle as long as the supplicant

builds for me a house in which he will make an image of me [emphasis mine] so that my name will not perish.³¹

Furthermore, every new or restored church or decorative program in a Coptic church or monastery must be consecrated by a bishop or patriarch.³² There is an entry in the Copto-Arabic Synaxarium on 4 Misra (10 August) that simply states:

On this day also was the consecration of the Church of the great saint Antony. May his blessing be with us and glory be to God forever, amen.³³

Unfortunately, no further information is provided regarding when the consecration took place. However, given the reference in the Pseudo-Serapionic Life to Christ personally “consecrat[ing Antony’s church] with the great thrones of [His] glory,”³⁴ could it be that the Synaxarium entry refers to a consecration event that occurred sometime following the church’s expansion and completion of the wall paintings?³⁵ In any case, the assumed composition of the redacted account in the thirteenth century, together with the enlargement of the church and its impressive iconographic program, all provide crucial elements for the revival and continued renown of Antony’s monastic community.

Conclusion

Research on narrative psychology suggests that, based on how well the audience responded to stories, storytellers dropped certain stories and refined the plots of others (Polkinghorne 2005: 12). Across the generations, what was not meaningful or no longer relevant in the collective memories was forgone (Kilani 1992: 45, 297), stories that were significant were retained, and accounts of what seemed appropriate at that point in time were inserted.

As early as the eighth century in Egypt,³⁶ hagiographical texts were susceptible to redactions and adjustments,³⁷ and often redacting was done not only to produce a new and improved substitution for the old text (Høgel 2002: 57), but to make it more suitable for the current social, liturgical, linguistic, and political contexts and needs.³⁸

The Pseudo-Serapionic Life is a redaction of the Life of Antony attributed to Athanasius, in which the emphasis and content of the original Athanasian account was transformed to make it more appealing and more familiar to contemporary Egyptians.

The fact that the majority of the texts containing a recension of the Pseudo-Serapionic Life were transcribed between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries—the time during which an unbroken chain of Antonian patriarchs “determined the history of the Coptic Church” (Meina...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Illustrations
• Contributors
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Language and Literature
• Art, Archaeology, and Material Culture
• Preservation
• Abbreviations
• Bibliography