burns - apocalypse of zostrianos and iolaos

Le Muséon 126 (1-2), 29-43. doi: 10.2143/MUS.126.1.2983533 - Tous droits réservés.© Le Muséon, 2013.

THE APOCALYPSE OF ZOSTRIANOS AND IOLAOS

A Platonic Reminiscenceof the Heracleidae at NHC VIII,1.4*

For Bentley Layton

The Sethian Gnostic1 apocalypse Zostrianos (Nag Hammadi Codex VIII,1) provides a crucial glimpse into Gnostic Platonism of the third century C.E. and beyond2, but not just for its metaphysics; the text’s genre and literary trappings also provide useful information about how some Gnostics pack-aged their more philosophically-inclined works, and, indeed, regarded the Hellenic culture which loomed behind their investigations into the intel-ligible spheres. Research into Zostrianos has focused on its metaphysics and relationship to contemporary “Pagan” thought, leading a vast majority of scholars to regard it as a “Pagan” apocalypse, perhaps even designed to appeal to contemporary Greek philosophers3. Yet an attentive reading

* This article was written under the auspices of a postdoctoral research fellowship from Copenhagen University (the Faculty of Theology), to which I express my gratitude.

1 Important critiques of the category of Gnosticism include WILLIAMS, Rethinking Gnosticism, KING, What is Gnosticism?. Here I generally agree with Layton that “Gnostics” is a useful term for designating a particular group of individuals who called themselves “Gnostics” (“knowers”) and were associated with a particular body of myths centered on the fall of Sophia and the creation of the world by a morally ambivalent or evil demiurgic figure (LAYTON, Prolegomena, p. 366-369; see also, more recently, BRAKKE, Gnostics, p. 29-51). Certainly this myth is referred to in passing in Zost., NHC VIII,1.9-11. More-over, Porphyry (Vit. Plot., ch. 16) entitles the work his master composed against the mem-bers of their seminar who possessed a copy of Zost. “Against the Gnostics (Pròv toùv Gnwstikoúv).” Zost. appears to belong to the “Sethian” school of Gnosticism divined by SCHENKE, Phenomenon, p. 588-616, and in other works; the classic monograph is TURNER, Platonic Tradition; for critique and more recent discussion, see WILLIAMS, Sethianism, p. 32-63; RASIMUS, Paradise.

2 We know that some Greek Vorlage of Zostrianos circulated in the seminar of the great philosopher Plotinus, in the year 263 C.E. (Porph. Vit. Plot., ch. 16; for analysis, see TARDIEU, Gnostiques, p. 503-546). Dating the Greek Vorlagen and tracing the Coptic trans-lations of Zostrianos and the related “Platonizing” Sethian literature from Nag Hammadi (particularly Allogenes [NHC XI,3]) is a controversial and complex undertaking, albeit not germane to the present work. For a pre-Plotinian dating of Zost. and Allogenes, see recently TURNER, Pre-Plotinian Parmenides Commentaries, p. 1131-1172; for a post-Plotinian dating, see most recently MAJERCIK, Porphyry and Gnosticism; for a short summary of scholarship and the issues involved, see BURNS, Apophatic Strategies, p. 177-179.

3 DORESSE, Apocalypses, p. 255-263; FRANKFURTER, Regional Trajectories, p. 151; PEARSON, Gnosticism as Platonism, p. 60; IDEM, From Jewish Apocalypticism, p. 150; IDEM, Ancient Gnosticism, p. 99-100; ABRAMOWSKI, Nicänismus, p. 561; KALER, Flora, p. 146. On Zost. as a “Pagan” apocalypse attempting to appeal to a Hellenically-minded

96268_Museon_2013_1-2_03_Burns.indd 2996268_Museon_2013_1-2_03_Burns.indd 29 1/07/13 13:591/07/13 13:59

30 D.M. BURNS

of its frame narrative and routine investigation of its characters’ back-grounds in Greco-Roman literature leads one to consider instead a milieu for Zostrianos that is deeply colored by contemporary Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature, even rejecting the authority of Hellenic tradition.

The work begins by describing the anxiety which weighs upon the eponymous seer prior to revelation4:

I was in the cosmos for the sake of those of my generation (äot) and those who would come after me, the living elect... I preached forcefully about the entirety to those who had alien parts5. I tried their works (ùbooue) for a little while; thus the necessity of generation brought me into the manifest (world). I was never pleased with them, but always I separated myself from them, since I had come into being through a holy birth. And being mixed, I straightened my soul, empty of evil...6

This Sethian sage is frustrated with others in his community and their “works,” and separated himself from them. He then ponders questions relating to the production of the various strata of being and their rela-tionship to the transcendent first principle7. This leads him to despair:

And as I (was) meditating upon these things, so as to understand them, I brought them up daily, according to the custom (twp) of my race (génov), to the God of my fathers (eiote). I blessed them all. For my forefathers and their descendants who sought, (all) found8. But as for me, I did not cease from asking after a place of repose (Mton) worthy of my spirit, without being bound by the sensible world. Finally, I became terribly upset and felt depressed about the small-mindedness that surrounded me. I dared (tólmein) to do something, and to deliver myself unto the beasts of the desert for a violent death9.

audience, see SIEBER, Introduction, p. 239; other assignments of this rhetorical trajectory to each of the “Platonizing” Sethian apocalypses (including Zost.) include J.D. TURNER in many studies, such as Introduction: Zostrianos, p. 53; IDEM, Platonic Tradition, p. 292ff; FRANKFURTER, Regional Trajectories, p. 160-161; ATTRIDGE, Apocalyptic Traditions, p. 197, 205; MAZUR, Plotinus’ Mysticism, p. 177, 309 n. 61.

4 All translation of Coptic, Greek, and Latin presented below is my own, except as noted. For Zost., I have consulted the editions of LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos, p. 30-225; BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien, p. 236-481; for commentary on the text, see also TURNER, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 483-662. When possible, apocalypses and testaments are cited following the abbreviation, notation, and translations in CHARLESWORTH, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Citations of classical Greek sources correspond to those found in the TLG, abbreviated per the OCD.

5 TURNER, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 486, identifies those with “alien parts” as con-trasting the souls who belong to the heavenly world of forms, i.e. the “wholes.” See also PERKINS, Gnostic Dialogue, p. 80-81.

6 Zost. NHC VIII,1.1.5-31. 7 Ibidem, 2.1-3.13. 8 Cf. Mt 7:7-9/Luke 11:9-10; Gos. Thom. log. 2, 92, 94. For discussion, see ATTRIDGE,

“Seeking” and “Asking”, p. 295-302. 9 Zost. NHC VIII,1.3.13-28.


THE APOCALYPSE OF ZOSTRIANOS AND IOLAOS 31

This passage is deeply coded with Judeo-Christian language. First, while the local ancestral god is never explicitly identified, the title “God of my fathers” is a common Septuagintism for the Jewish deity, as demonstrated by Scopello10. Second, Perkins notes that early Christian sects were com-monly accused by Jews of betraying the “traditions” of “our fathers”11. Third, it is common in Jewish apocalypses for the revelation to arrive when the seer is in a state of emotional turbulence12. One might add that the very site of a desert meditation has a direct parallel in the Apocalypse of Enosh quoted in the Cologne Mani Codex13. Although Zostrianos is alone amongst Jewish seers in asserting that suicide is a viable solution, the interest in beasts devouring men in the desert occurs in the Enochian Similitudes14.

The idiom with which Zostrianos speaks about community’s God and his ancestors is rather biblical, without explicitly identifying the com-munity as Jewish or Christian. Rather, he talks in a way that he expects Jews and Christians to understand. The identity of these ancestors and the content of their customs remain uncertain.

Scopello has argued that the common reference to the Jewish Patriarchs, “our fathers” is re-constellated in this Sethian context to refer to Seth and his lineage. Turner also identifies the “ancestors” as Sethians, speculating that the “works” and “customs” in question are typical Sethian mythologou-mena, such as the names and powers of the intelligible beings or story of the celestial and terrestrial Adams related in the Apocryphon of John15. The problem with this line of reasoning is that the lineage Zostrianos refers to is unquestionably problematized, driving the seer to self-annihilation. The rest of the treatise contains only positive references to Seth and his “seed,” not to mention lengthy elaborations of traditional Sethian doxol-ogy and ethnically-reasoned soteriology. It is hard to imagine that the community he rejects here is a Sethian one.

10 SCOPELLO, Apocalypse of Zostrianos, p. 381, followed (with reservations) by WILLIAMS, Immovable Race, p. 85 n. 29.

11 See Ap. John NHC II,1.13-17; John 7:12, 7:47; Just. Mart. Dia. ch. 69; Sanh. 43a, Acts Phil. 19; cit. PERKINS, Gnostic Dialogue, p. 80-82.

12 TURNER, Commentary:Zostrianos p. 493, recalls 2 En. 1:3; see also 4 Ezra 3:2-11, 4:12; 2 Bar. 5:1-4; Apoc. Ab. 3, 6; CMC 58.8-16.

13 CMC 52.12-16, noted also by ATTRIDGE, Apocalyptic Traditions, p. 201. Cf. Asc. Is. 4.13. Heraclides’ protagonist Empedotimus (Procl. Comm. Remp. 2:119 [Kroll]) also encountered Hades and Persephone in the desert before attending a final judgment (see COULIANO, Psychanodia, p. 40ff).

14 1 En. 61:5-6. 15 SCOPELLO, Apocalypse of Zostrianos, p. 382; TURNER, Platonic Tradition, p. 676;

IDEM, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 493, 495.


32 D.M. BURNS

We are provided with more clues once the scene is rudely interrupted by a visitor:

Then, there stood there before me the angel of knowledge of eternal [light]. And he said to me, “Zostrianos, why have you become so insane that you do not know the great, eternal (ones) who are above? [ ] to you [ ] and [concerning] [ ]...send you to [ ]16 that you are now saved [ ]...truly is in eternal destruction17. Nor [ ]18...to those you know, [so that] you save some others, those who the father of those on high will choose19. [Do you] think, now, that you are the father of [your race] or that Iolaos is your father? [ ]20 an angel of God, who [ ]21 for you through [holy] people22? Come, and pass out from (sine) some [places]23 to which you’ll return, another time, in order to preach to the living race, to save those who are worthy, and to strengthen the chosen ones (niswt[P]); for great is the contest (âgÉn) of this aeon, and short is the time (xrónov) of this land24.

Zostrianos’ chastisement by the angel, another typical apocalyptic motif, provides the necessary clues to determine his ancestry. Much hinges on how one translates the Coptic of lines 8–10 on page 4 of the MS:

[kme]eue on éeNtKpiwt Nte p[ekgenos] ée ïOLAOS pe pekiwt.

Scopello does not address it. Layton, Poirier, and Turner translate it as a question (“do you think that you are the son of Iolaos?”), assuming that Iolaos must be Zostrianos’ father25. The translation is correct, but its interpretation is problematic for several reasons. First, the angel is clearly rebuking Zostrianos for his delusions; stating the obvious, his ostensible paternity, contributes nothing to the speech. Second, Zostrianos’ community, including perhaps his carnal father, is his problem, not his solution. The angel’s puzzling query gives us pause to here to review some outside evidence about both Zostrianos and Iolaos.

16 BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: “Voi [là pourquoi tu [as été] envoyé vers le...” 17 BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: M[pRjw]pe. “Do not be in eternal destruction...” 18 BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: [MpRei]me; LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos:

MpVeime. “Do not/he did not know/pay attention to...” 19 BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: “[ceux que]... choisira.” LAYTON – SIEBER,

Zostrianos: “chosen elect.” 20 LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos: ou[. BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: ouN tak N. 21 BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: ea[véimo]eit, “who guided you.” 22 SCOPELLO’S recollection (Apocalypse of Zostrianos, p. 382) of Qumran literature re:

the title “holy people” is enticing and certainly supports the present analysis, but the sentence is too fragmentary to draw any conclusions.

23 With BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien: ùN n[i ma]. LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos: ùn n[aï].

24 Zost. NHC VIII,1.3.28-4.20. 25 SCOPELLO, Apocalypse of Zostrianos, p. 382; LAYTON, Gnostic Scriptures, p. 125 n. e;

TURNER, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 484; IDEM, Pre-Plotinian Parmenides Commentaries, p. 132; see also WILLIAMS, Sethianism, p. 44. LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos and BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien, agree on the text.



Who is Zostrianos? In a passage discussed separately by Mark Edwards and John Turner, Arnobius says:

Thus the magus Zoroaster would come, if you will, through the fiery region from the inner earth, so that we would agree with the writer Hermippus; Bactrianus, too is in accord with the account of Ctesias that he writes in his Historiarum Primo that he [e.g. Zoroaster] was an Armenian, the grandson of Zostrianos, and a Pamphylian of the line of Cyrus…26

As Edwards argues27, the multiplication of names found in Arnobius results from confusion about Plato’s reference, in Republic book X, to the figure of Er:

It isn’t however a tale of Alcinous that I’ll tell you, but that of a brave man called Er who died in battle, the son of Armenius and in the line of Pamphylos…28

For my part I even know of men who say that Er was an Armenian; such men must be made to explain how it is possible that an Armenian can be of the race of Pamphylos. It makes no difference that men of great authority, like Theodorus of Asine, have held this theory29.

While Theodorus had conflated Pamphylia and Armenia, Clement of Alexandria had conflated Er with Zoroaster:

Zoroaster wrote these things – (Zoroaster), son of Armenios, of the race of Pamphylos: “having died in battle and come into Hades, I learned them from the Gods…”30

The sum of all this evidence is that Zostrianos is the legendary grandfa-ther of Zoroaster31. Arnobius associated him with Armenia as well as the line of Pamphylos, thus likening him to Er, the seer in Plato’s Republic book X, who is also said to be a descendent of Pamphylos.

26 Adv. nat. 1.52 (“age nunc veniat, quaeso, per igneam zonam magus interiore ab orbe Zoroastres, Hermippo ut assentiamur auctori, Bactrianus et ille conveniat cuius Ctesias res gestas historiarum exponit in primo, Armenius, Zostriani nepos, et familiaris Pamphylos Cyri...”). For summary of commentary on the Latin, see EDWARDS, Zoroasters, p. 282-283, whose sense of the passage agrees with the present approach. For commentary see BIDEZ – CUMONT, Mages, I, p. 109-110; SCHMIDT, Plotins Stellung, p. 21-22, 51; PUECH, Plotin et les gnostiques, p. 88-89; ELSAS, Neuplatonische und gnostische Weltablehnung, p. 34; TARDIEU, Gnostiques, p. 530-531.

27 EDWARDS, Zoroasters, p. 287. 28 Plat. Res. X 614b: Âll’ oû méntoi soi, ¥n d’ êgÉ, Âlkínou ge âpólogon êr¬,

âll’ âlkímou mèn ândróv, ˆJròv toÕ Ârmeníou, tò génov Pamfúlou… 29 Procl. Comm. Remp. 2:110.14-18 (Kroll), tr. EDWARDS, Zoroasters, p. 284 (o˝da dè

∂gwgé tinav kaì Ârménion tòn ÈJra légontav, oÃv êrwt¢n de⁄, p¬v tòn Ârménion Pámfulon e˝naí fjsin tò génov· eî kaì ™m⁄n ãndrev aîdo⁄oi toÕto üpélabon, Qeódwron légw tòn Âsina⁄on).

30 Clem. Alex. Strom. 5.14.103.2 (Stählin): aûtòv goÕn ö Hwroástrjv gráfei· táde sunégraca Hwroástrjv ö Ârmeníou, tò génov Pámfulov, ên polémwç teleutßsav ên ÊAidjÇ genómenov êdájn parà qe¬n.

31 Not “great-grandfather,” pace RASIMUS, Porphyry, p. 106.


34 D.M. BURNS

Significantly, Proclus notes that a descendent of Pamphylos cannot also be an Armenian. Why not? In the ancient world, a “Pamphylian” could be a resident of Pamphylia, a region between Cilicia and Lycia (modern-day southern Anatolia). Its name means pan-phyle, i.e. “all-races.” Ancient legends reported by Herodotus, Strabo, and Pausanias say that the region was settled by a motley crew of Achaeans after the Trojan War, who were led westward by the three Achaean seers Calchus, Amphilochus, and Mopsus32. Some late traditions say that the name derived from a Pamphylia, daughter of Mopsus, or an unrelated man by name of Pamphylos, about whom nothing else is known33. In any case, it is easy to imagine that ancient Platonists would associate the visionaries Zostrianos, Zoroaster, and Er with a region settled not by one but three Achaean seers.

However, we must also consider another, more famous, Pamphylos – the legendary founder of the Dorian Greeks closely associated with the descendants of Heracles, the Heracleidae34. Traditions going back to the seventh-century BCE report that after Heracles’ death, his son Hyllus led the other Heraclids about Greece, seeking refuge. They were received at the court of Hercules’ friend Aegimus, in Thessaly. Upon Aegimus’ death, his sons, Pamphylos and Dymas, swore allegiance to Hyllus, fused their lineages, and together with him invaded the Peloponnesus – the so-called “return of the Heracleidae” – and founded the Dorian race35. This Greek ethnic group was split into three fulaí (tribes), descended from its three founders – the Hylleis, the Dymanes, and the Pamphyloi. However, Pamphylos’ Doric Pamphylians were closely associated with Sparta, not Pamphylia36. Pamphylian Greek is full of Doric and Arcadian elements37, and so some scholars have conflated the Doric, Heraclid Pamphylos with the Anatolian region of Pamphylia38. I am tempted to do the same, but I have not found any ancient sources that explicitly connect the aetiological myths of Pamphylia and the Dorians.

32 Herod. Hist. 7.91; Strab. Geogr. 14.668; Paus. Descr. 7.3.4; RUGE, Pamphylia, col. 361-362.

33 RUGE, Pamphylia, col. 361. 34 For Dorians and the Heracleidae in the same breath, see Tyrt. frg. 11; Thucy-

dides 1.12.3; Diod. Sic. Bib. hist. 7.9.1; Paus. Descr. 2.13.1. 35 Tyrt. fr. 19; see also HALL, Ethnic Identity, p. 60-61, to which I am indebted for the

sources discussed here. For a survey of scholarly investigation into the possible origins of the three Dorian phylai, see ibidem, p. 8ff.

36 Pind. Pyth.1.60-63; see also idem, Isthm. 9.3-4. 37 Thus RUGE, Pamphylia, col. 362-363. 38 Ibidem, col. 361.



Who is Zostrianos? He is “of the Pamphylian race,” but whether that means the lineage of Doric Pamphylos or the land of Pamphylia, settled by seers, is not yet clear.

Doubts were raised above concerning the interpretation of the angel’s words to Zostrianos: “do you think that Iolaos is your father?” So, who is Iolaos? Ancient myths have it that Iolaos was the nephew of Hercules39. In antiquity he was known as the first ôlumpiódromov, and strongly associated with athletic competition40. In his old age, he defended the sons of Hercules, the Heracleidae, from his uncle’s nemesis, Eurysthenes. In Euripides’ play The Children of Heracles, the aged Iolaos, a surro-gate-father for the Heracleidae, was restored to youth for one day to meet and slay Eurysthenes at Athens41. Iolaos was also famed for leading Attic colonists to Sardinia, whose inhabitants became known as “Iolaeioi” and “Iolaeis”42. In the Roman Empire, the figure of Iolaos was closely bound up with the cult of Hercules. He was particularly important in Thebes, where he had a témenov and was the chief mythological figure in the initiatory rites for young men. He was associated with the festival of the Herakleia, so much so that it was sometimes called the Iolaeia43. Finally, Iolaos was the genius of Carthage44.

I submit that the story of Iolaos’ relationship with the Heracleidae clears up our question about which Pamphylos it is that Zostrianos, Zoroaster, and Er are related to. Since the “angel of knowledge” refers to the savior of the Heracleidae, we can assume that the “Pamphylian” background of our seers is that of the Doric Greeks of Sparta, who traced

39 Hesiod, [Scut.] l. 74ff; Ps.-Apollod. Biblio. 2.70; Paus. Descr. 8.14.9. The present discussion of Iolaos summarizes the evidence presented in KROLL – CUMONT, Iolaos, col. 1844-1845; GRAF, Iolaos, p. 1072.

40 Eur. Heraclid. 88; for the monuments, see Pind. Ol. 9.98-99; Paus. Descr. 1.19.3; 8.14.9, 45.6; for the olympiad, see ibidem, 5.8.3, 17.11.

41 Eur. Heraclid. 854-858, tr. H. Taylor and R. Brooks, in BURIAN – SHAPIRO, Euripides: Suddenly, two stars, all blazing fire, settle downon the horses’ yokes, hiding the chariotin a kind of cloud or shadow. Men who understand these things said those stars were Hebe and your son, Herakles.Then, out of that darkness in the air came Iolaos – young, his strong shoulders straining on the reins, a man in all the vigor and freshness of his youth.

See also Paus. Descr. 1.44.10; Ovid, Metam. 9.394. For the history of the Dorians’ self-identification with the Heracleidae, see HALL, Ethnic Identity, p. 62ff.

42 Strab. Geogr. 5.225; see also Diod. Sic. Bib. hist. 4.29ff; 5.15, 5.22 (cit. TURNER, Pla-tonic Tradition, p. 294-295 n. 29; IDEM, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 484); Paus. Descr.10.17.5.

43 Plut. Frat. amor. 492c; Diod. Sic. Bib. hist. 4.24.4; schol. Pind. O7 154, O9 143-151. 44 KROLL – CUMONT, Iolaos, col. 1846, on Polyb. Hist. 7.9.2.


36 D.M. BURNS

their lineage back to the Heracleidae. On this reading, the literary frame that opens NHC VIII presents a Zostrianos who is unhappy in a Dorian community. The “God of our fathers” is a Greek god (Zeus?). Zostri-anos gets depressed there, tries to commit suicide, and meets an angel of the lord, who asks him, “do you think that Iolaos is your father?”

It is impossible that Iolaos could be his literal father, for several rea-sons; we’ve already observed that the question doesn’t fit the context, but now we can say more.

For instance, there are no records of Iolaos having a son. Hesiod men-tions a daughter that Iolaos has with Megara, by name of Leipephile – but no sons45. Next, Pamphylos son of Aegimus belongs to a generation of Greeks after Iolaos; if Zostrianos was Iolaos’ son, then he would be of the same generation as Pamphylos, which is improbable, since Arno-bius clearly knows him not as a close relative of Pamphylos, but as belonging to his lineage. Finally, the manuscript of Nag Hammadi’s Zos-trianos mentions Iolaos in the first lines of page 1, but the lacunae around it do not permit a restoration of pjyre anywhere46.

“Father” must here indicate an ancestor or progenitor of a group with distinct ethnic identity, thus “people or lineage of Iolaos, nephew of Heracles”47. So Zostrianos and Iolaos do have some kind of kinship, but the angel wishes to contrast Zostrianos’ line with that of Hercules and the Dorian Greeks. The question of fatherhood is sarcastic. In apocalyp-tic literature, angels occasionally tire of the ignorance of seers and regale them with questions48, and that is the case here, so as to say: “do you really think Iolaos, or any of these Dorians, is your ancestor? Of course not. You’re a member of the Immovable Race!” 49. The angel then takes Zostrianos on his heavenly journey, which culminates in his acquisition

45 Paus. Descr. 9.40.5-6. 46 LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos, and TURNER, Commentary: Zostrianos, note the

mention of Iolaos at the beginning of the tractate, VIII,1.1.4. The line is obliterated: [os .] . . [. . . .] .S .[ . .]I^A mN ïolaos. As Sieber remarks ad loc., the surviving ink traces, bottoms of vertical strokes, do not permit a restoration of pjyre N, “the son of [ ]-ia and Iolaos,” fitting the common genealogy to the beginning of apocalypses (e.g. Sim. En. 1 En. 37:1-2; 4 Ezra 1:1-43; 2 Bar. 1:2).

47 Possibly a survival from Semitic; see BROWN – DRIVER – BRIGGS, Hebrew and English Lexicon, s.v. 4 באb, p. 3b. Several prospective terms for “father” qua “ancestor” in Zost.’s Greek Vorlage could have been translated as eiwt: patßr is used in the singu-lar for “ancestor” in the LXX (Gen 10:21, 17:4-5, 19:37-38, 36:9.43, Dt 26:5, Is 43:27, Ezek 16:3.43), while in Classical Greek, one has genétjv or goneúv (LIDDEL – SCOTT, Greek-English Lexicon, p. 343b, 356b). I thank Dr. Matthew Neujahr for discussing this lexical issue with me.

48 2 Bar. 22:2-8, 55; Apoc. Adam NHC V,5.66.17-21 (“Adam, why are you sighing?”). 49 “Immovable Race” is a common Sethian epithet for the elect (WILLIAMS, Immov-

able Race).



of secrets beyond the ken of even the angels; he obtains visions of the Barbelo, receives a crown, and returns to preach to his seed – not the seed of Iolaos, but the seed of Seth, an ethnic designation that is most intelligible in terms of contemporary Christian language about the faith as a “third race”50. To borrow from Denise Buell’s language, Zostrianos engages in Sethian “ethnic reasoning,” contrasting the material, empty Dorian lineage with the spiritual lineage of Seth51.

One question remains: if the author of Nag Hammadi’s Zostrianos wished to thus subvert the popular lore about Er and Zostrianos’ Pam-phylian heritage to engage in a polemic against the Greeks, why did they focus on the figure of Iolaos? Why doesn’t the angel ask, “Zostrianos, do you think you are the son of Pamphilos?” or “Heracles,” or some such?

One possibility is that the author of Zostrianos wished to invoke Iolaos’ association with athletic competition. The angel of knowledge describes the present world as an âgÉn, “struggle,” but also “competition”; the sage in heaven talks about crowns, and gets one himself52. It is not impos-sible that Zostrianos refers to contemporary Christian martyrological lan-guage about receiving crowns after one’s âgÉn53. Perhaps this martyro-logical discourse is intensified by a jab at Greek athletics, of which Iolaos was a patron saint.

I prefer another possibility, which is that the author(s) of Zostrianos refers to Iolaos in order to refer to one of their favorite authors, Plato. Iolaos was best known as Hercules’ sidekick; during battle with the Hydra, the hero is attacked by a giant crab. Against any single opponent Hercules is invincible, but two monsters at once are too much. Iolaos evens the odds by fighting off the crab54.

50 On Christians as a “third-race,” see Aristid. Ath. Apol. 2.1 (Greek); Pre. Pet. ap. Clem. Al. Strom. 6.5.41.4-7, 42.2, 13.106.4-107.1; Ter. Scorp. 10.10; Nat. 1.8. The source of inspiration is likely 1 Cor 10:32. On these passages, see LIEU, Race, p. 489; BUELL, Rethinking the Relevance of Race, p. 461ff; EADEM, Why This New Race?, p. 66ff. See also Gos. Phil. NHC II,3.75.31ff. In still other texts, Christians are a “fourth race,” see Aristid. Ath. Apol. 2.1 (Syriac); Clem. Al. Exc. 28, p. 118-120 (Sagnard) and commentary ad loc.

51 BUELL, Rethinking the Relevance of Race, p. 461; EADEM, Why This New Race?, p. 9.

52 Zost. 129.15-19. 53 Many examples could be given, but see, for instance, 1 Pet 5:4; cf. 2 Cor 3:18;

Ter. Cor. 15. A probable inspiration is the celestial reward of the righteous in heaven, postmortem transformation into a luminary body (Dan 12:3; 1 En. 104:2-3). Instances from the various late antique acta of the martyrs can be found in MUSURILLO, Acts of the Christian Martyrs, p. 72.28-33, 184.7-9, 194.13-14, etc.

54 See Hes. Theog. 323; Ps.-Apoll. Bibl. 2.5.2, 2.6.1; Diod. Sic. Bib. hist. 4.31; Plut. Amat. 761d.


38 D.M. BURNS

Significantly, Plato recalls this episode in his Euthydemus. Here, poor Socrates is “double-teamed” by the eponymous sophist and his brother, Dionysodorus. Pressed to explain his inability to respond to their argu-ments, he exclaims:

“I am weaker than either of you, so that I do not hesitate to run away from you both together. I am much more worthless than Heracles, who was unable to fight it out with both the Hydra, a kind of lady-sophist who was so clever that if anyone cut off one of her heads of argument, she put forth many more in its place, and with another sort of sophist, a crab arrived on shore from the sea – rather recently, I think. And when Heracles was in distress because this creature was chattering and biting on his left, he called for his nephew Iolaos to come and help him, which Iolaos successfully did. But if my Iolaos should come, he would do more harm than good.”“And when you have finished this song and story,” said Dionysodorus, “will you tell me whether Iolaos is any more Heracles’ nephew than yours?”55

Jackson rightly defends giving the role of Iolaos to Socrates’ companion in the dialogue, Ctesippus56; Ctesippus’ aid is of dubious worth, given his lack of self-control and his own fondness for eristic57. The aid of Iolaos, which here connotes a detour into verbal playfulness that detracts from philosophical inquiry, is best rejected. Similarly, Zostrianos’ education doesn’t help him any more in his interaction with his community than Ctesippus’ eristic is able to help Socrates; rather, he finds himself walk-ing in circles around impossible metaphysical questions and driven to despair58. While Zostrianos knows that he is different from those in his society, he does not know how or why, because he does not have knowl-edge of himself or his origins.

Whether or not one finds the Euthydemus a plausible backdrop for Zostrianos’ frame narrative, the story is clearly about the impossibility of obtaining true knowledge without external (i.e. divine) aid59. Moreover, as is common in apocalypses60, the source of authority is not incidental,

55 Euthyd. 297b7-d2, tr. Sprague; see also Phaedo 89c, where Socrates volunteers to be the “Iolaos” of Phaedo, who finds the turnabout quite silly.

56 JACKSON, Socrates’ Iolaos, p. 381. 57 Ibidem, p. 382ff recalls 283e1, 294d7, 294d4, 300d3, but esp. 299c-e, 300d; Lys. 211b-c. 58 It is following on his questions about the categories of intelligible beings and the

production of Substance from that which is insubstantial (Zost. NHC VIII,1.2.14-3.17) that Zostrianos becomes exasperated. In the context of Iolaos and the hydra myth, it is worth recalling Plat. Soph. 240c: the mixture of being and not-being is “ãtopov,” and “by this exchange of words the many-headed sophist (polukéfalov sofistßv) has once more against our will compelled us to confess that non-being somehow exists (tò m® ∫n...e˝nai).”

59 TURNER, Commentary:Zostrianos, p. 487, 493. 60 Thus COLLINS, Apocalyptic Imagination, p. 41-42; also the essays collected in YARBRO

COLLINS, Early Christian Apocalypticism, esp. AUNE, Apocalypse of John, p. 87-91.



but central to the pericope. It is unclear what “local custom” Zostrianos uses to “put forth questions to the god” – the diverse media of Greek oracles come to mind61, or he could simply mean prayer – but his dis-satisfaction with what are most likely Greek authorities draws a contrast with Sethian thought. The text uses genre, idiom, and language that, in recognizably Judeo-Christian terms, describes the unhappy, pre-revelatory polytheistic life of a would-be patriarch, a Pamphylian in the lineage of Iolaos62. It is thus unlikely that Zostrianos – and the other so-called “Platonizing” Sethian apocalypses63 – is a product of “Pagan” culture, for its frame narrative is designed to appeal to those familiar with the authority and traditions of Jewish apocalyptic literature. It unfavorably invokes a particular Hellenic ethnic group in order to disparage adherents of the Hellenic philosophy, and demand the attention of its readers to the authoritative, Sethian lore that awaits them.

Bibliographical abbreviations

ABRAMOWSKI, Nicänismus = L. ABRAMOWSKI, Nicänismus und Gnosis im Rom des Bischofs Liberius: Der Fall des Marius Victorinus, in Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, 8 (2005), p. 513-566.

ATHANASSIADI, Philosophers and Oracles = P. ATHANASSIADI, Philosophers and Oracles: Shifts of Authority in Late Platonism, in Byzantion, 62 (1992), p. 45-62.

ATTRIDGE, Apocalyptic Traditions = H.W. ATTRIDGE, Valentinian and Sethian Apocalyptic Traditions, in The Journal of Early Christian Studies, 8.2 (2000), p. 173-211.

ATTRIDGE, “Seeking” and “Asking” = H.W. ATTRIDGE, “Seeking” and “Asking” in Q, Thomas, and John, in J. ASGEIRSSON – K. DE TROYER – M. MEYER (ed.), From Quest to Q: Festschrift James M. Robinson, Leuven, 2000, p. 295-302.

AUNE, Apocalypse of John = D. AUNE, The Apocalypse of John and the Problem of Genre, in YARBRO COLLINS, Early Christian Apocalypticism, p. 65-96.

BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien = C. BARRY – W.P. FUNK – P.-H. POIRIER – J.D. TURNER, Zostrien (NH VIII,1), (Bibliothèque Copte de Nag Hammadi, «Textes», 24), Québec – Louvain, 2000.

BIDEZ – CUMONT, Mages = J. BIDEZ – F. CUMONT, Les mages hellénisés. Zoroastre, Ostanès et Hystaspe, d’après la tradition grecque, Paris, 1938 (repr. 1973), vol. I, p. 107-127.

61 Surveyed in JOHNSTON, Ancient Greek Divination; still useful is PARKE, Greek Ora-cles. Certainly an attack on the oracles would have provoked a Platonist of the second or third-century CE, for such practices were undergoing a revival in and cross-fertilization with Platonic thought – see ATHANASSIADI, Philosophers and Oracles, p. 45-62.

62 A similar narrative template can be observed in the Apocalypse of Abraham. 63 In strong agreement re: Zost.’s sister treatise Marsanes, per BRANKAER, Marsanes,

p. 21-41.


40 D.M. BURNS

BRAKKE, Gnostics = D. BRAKKE, The Gnostics, Cambridge, 2010.BRANKAER, Marsanes = J. BRANKAER, Marsanes: un texte Séthien platonisant?,

in Le Muséon, 18 (2005), p. 21-41.BROWN – DRIVER – BRIGGS, Hebrew and English Lexicon = F. BROWN –

S.R. DRIVER – C.A. BRIGGS (ed.), A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Cambridge, 1906.

BUELL, Rethinking the Relevance of Race = D. BUELL, Rethinking the Relevance of Race for Early Christian Self-Definition, in Harvard Theological Review, 94.4 (2001), p. 449-476.

BUELL, Why This New Race? = D. BUELL, Why This New Race? Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity, New York, 2005.

BURIAN – SHAPIRO, Euripides = P. BURIAN – A. SHAPIRO (ed.), The Complete Euripides, Oxford, 2009.

BURNS, Apophatic Strategies = D. BURNS, Apophatic Strategies in Allogenes, in Harvard Theological Review, 103.2 (2010), p. 161-179.

CHARLESWORTH, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha = J. CHARLESWORTH (ed.), Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Anchor Bible Reference Library), New York, 1983.

CMC = L. KOENEN – C. RÖMER (ed.), Der Kölner Mani-Kodex. Abbildungen und Diplomatischer Text (Papyrologische Texte und Abhandlungen, 35), Bonn, 1985.

COLLINS, Apocalyptic Imagination = J.J. COLLINS, The Apocalyptic Imagination, Grand Rapids (MI) – Cambridge, 1998.

COULIANO, Psychanodia = I.P. COULIANO, Psychanodia: A Survey of the Evidence Concerning the Ascension of the Soul and its Relevance (Études prélimi-naires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain, 1), Leiden, 1984.

DORESSE, Apocalypses = J. DORESSE, Les apocalypses de Zoroastre de Zostrien, de Nicothée, in Coptic Studies in Honor of Walter Ewing Crum (The Bulletin of the Byzantine Institute, 2), Boston, 1950, p. 255-263.

EDWARDS, Zoroasters = M.J. EDWARDS, How Many Zoroasters? Arnobius, ‘Adversus Gentes’ I 52, in Vigiliae Christianae, 42.3 (1988), p. 282-289.

ELSAS, Neuplatonische und gnostische Weltablehnung = C. ELSAS, Neuplatonische und gnostische Weltablehnung in der Schule Plotins (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten, 34), Berlin, 1975.

FRANKFURTER, Regional Trajectories = D. FRANKFURTER, The Legacy of Jewish Apocalypses in Early Christianity: Regional Trajectories, in J.C. VAN-DERKAM – W. ADLER (ed.), The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, Minneapolis, 1996, p. 129-200.

GRAF, Iolaos = F. GRAF, Iolaos, in H. CANCIK et al. (ed.), Der neue Pauly, Bd. V, Stuttgard, 1998, p. 1072.

HALL, Ethnic Identity = J.M. HALL, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity, Cam-bridge, 2000.

JACKSON, Socrates’ Iolaos = R. JACKSON, Socrates’ Iolaos: Myth and Eristic in Plato’s Euthydemus, in Classical Quarterly, 40.2 (1990), p. 378-395.

JOHNSTON, Ancient Greek Divination = S.A. JOHNSTON, Ancient Greek Divination, Malden (MA) – Oxford, 2008.

KALER, Flora = M. KALER, Flora Tells a Story. The Apocalypse of Paul and Its Contexts (Studies in Christianity and Judaism, 19), Wilfrid, 2008.

KING, What is Gnosticism? = K. KING, What is Gnosticism?, Cambridge, 2003.



KROLL – CUMONT, Iolaos = W. KROLL – F. CUMONT, art. Iolaos, in Paulys Real-encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Bd. IX.2, Stuttgart – München, 1916, col. 1844-1845.

LAYTON, Gnostic Scriptures = B. LAYTON, The Gnostic Scriptures (Anchor Bible Reference Library), New York, 1987.

LAYTON, Prolegomena = B. LAYTON, Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism, in L.M. WHITE and L.O. YARBROUGH (ed.), The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne Meeks, Minneapolis, 1995, p. 334-350.

LAYTON – SIEBER, Zostrianos = B. LAYTON – J. SIEBER, NHC VIII,1, Zostrianos, in J. SIEBER (ed.), Nag Hammadi Codex VIII (Nag Hammadi Studies, 31), Leiden, 1991, p. 30-225.

LIDDEL – SCOTT, Greek-English Lexicon = H.G. LIDDEL – R. SCOTT (ed.), rev. H.S. JONES, A Greek-English Lexicon. With a Revised Supplement, Oxford, 1996.

LIEU, Race = J.M. LIEU, The Race of God-Fearers, in Journal of Theological Studies, 46 (1995), p. 483-501.

MAJERCIK, Porphyry and Gnosticism = R. MAJERCIK, Porphyry and Gnosticism, in Classical Quarterly, 55 (2005), p. 277-292.

MAZUR, Plotinus’ Mysticism = Z. MAZUR, The Platonizing Sethian Gnostic Back-ground of Plotinus’ Mysticism (Ph.D. Diss., The University of Chicago), Chicago, 2010.

MUSURILLO, Acts of the Christian Martyrs = H.A. MUSURILLO (ed.), The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (Early Christian Texts), Oxford, 1972.

PARKE, Greek Oracles = H.W. PARKE, Greek Oracles, London, 1967.PEARSON, Ancient Gnosticism = B. PEARSON, Ancient Gnosticism: Traditions

and Literature, Minneapolis, 2007.PEARSON, From Jewish Apocalypticism = B. PEARSON, From Jewish Apocalypticism

to Gnosis, in S. GIVERSEN, T. PETERSEN, and J.P. SØRENSEN (ed.), The Nag Hammadi Texts in the History of Religions, Proceedings of the Interna-tional Conference at the Royal Academy of Science and Letters in Copen-hagen, September 19-24, 1995. On the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Nag Hammadi Discovery (Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter, 26), Køben-havn, 2002, p. 146-164.

PEARSON, Gnosticism as Platonism = B. PEARSON, Gnosticism as Platonism: With Special Reference to Marsanes (NHC 10,1), in Harvard Theological Review, 77.1 (1984), p. 55-72.

PERKINS, Gnostic Dialogue = P. PERKINS, The Gnostic Dialogue: the Early Church and the Crisis of Gnosticism (Theological Inquiries), New York – Ramsey – Toronto, 1980.

PUECH, Plotin et les gnostiques = C. PUECH, Plotin et les gnostiques, in IDEM, En quête de la Gnose, vol. I. La Gnose et le temps, et autres essais, Paris, 1978, p. 85-116.

RASIMUS, Paradise = T. RASIMUS, Paradise Reconsidered in Gnostic Mythmak-ing. Rethinking Sethianism in Light of the Ophite Evidence (Nag Hammadi and Manichaeism Studies, 68), Leiden, 2009.

RASIMUS, Porphyry = T. RASIMUS, Porphyry and the Gnostics: reassessing Pierre Hadot’s Thesis in Light of the Second- and Third-Century Sethian Treatises, in TURNER – CORRIGAN, Plato’s Parmenides, vol. II, p. 81-110.


42 D.M. BURNS

SCHENKE, Phenomenon = H.-M. SCHENKE (tr. B. LAYTON), The Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism, in B. LAYTON (ed.), The Rediscovery of Gnosticism (Numen Book Series), 1981, p. 588-616.

SCHMIDT, Plotins Stellung = C. SCHMIDT, Plotins Stellung zum Gnosticismus und kirchlichen Christentum, Leipzig, 1901.

SCOPELLO, Apocalypse of Zostrianos = M. SCOPELLO, The Apocalypse of Zostri-anos (Nag Hammadi VIII.1) and the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, in Vigiliae Christianae, 34 (1980), p. 376-385.

RUGE, Pamphylia = W. RUGE, art. Pamphylia, in G. WISSOWA, et al. (ed.), Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Bd. XVIII.3, Stutt-gart – München, 1949, col. 354-407.

SIEBER, Introduction = J. SIEBER, An Introduction to the Tractate Zostrianus from Nag Hammadi, in Novum Testamentum, 15 (1973), p. 233-240.

TARDIEU, Gnostiques = M. TARDIEU, Les gnostiques dans La vie de Plotin, in L. BRISSON [ed.], La vie de Plotin, Paris, 1982-1992, p. 503-546.

TURNER, Commentary: Zostrianos = J.D. TURNER, Commentary: Zostrianos, in BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien, p. 483-662.

TURNER, Introduction: Zostrianos = J.D. TURNER, Introduction: Zostrianos, in BARRY – FUNK – POIRIER, Zostrien, p. 1-224.

TURNER, Platonic Tradition = J.D. TURNER, Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition (Bibliothèque copte de Nag Hammadi. «Études», 6), Louvain – Paris, 2001.

TURNER, Pre-Plotinian Parmenides Commentaries = J.D. TURNER, The Platoniz-ing Sethian Treatises, Marius Victorinus’s Philosophical Sources, and Pre-Plotinian Parmenides Commentaries, in TURNER – CORRIGAN, Plato’s Parme-nides, p. 1131-1172.

TURNER – CORRIGAN, Plato’s Parmenides = J.D. TURNER – K. CORRIGAN (ed.), Plato’s Parmenides and its Heritage (Writings from the Greco-Roman World Supplement Series), Atlanta, 2010.

WILLIAMS, Immovable Race = M.A. WILLIAMS, The Immovable Race. A Gnostic Designation and the Theme of Stability in Late Antiquity (Nag Hammadi Studies, 29), Leiden, 1985.

WILLIAMS, Rethinking Gnosticism = M.A. WILLIAMS, Rethinking Gnosticism: Arguments for Dismantling a Dubious Category, Princeton, 1995.

WILLIAMS, Sethianism = M.A. WILLIAMS, Sethianism, in A. MARJANEN – P. LUOMANEN (ed.), A Companion to Second-Century Christian “Heretics” (Vigiliae Christianae Supplements, 76), Leiden, 2005, p. 32-63.

YARBRO COLLINS, Early Christian Apocalypticism = A. YARBRO COLLINS (ed.), Early Christian Apocalypticism: Genre and Social Setting (Semeia, 36), Decatur, 1996.

Zost. = Zostrianos

Centre for Naturalism and Christian Semantics Dylan Michael BURNS

Department for Biblical ExegesisKøbmagergade 44-46DK-1150 Copenhagen K, [email protected]



Abstract — Pages one and four of Nag Hammadi Codex VIII puzzlingly refer to a certain “Iolaos.” Why would the nephew of Hercules appear in the frame narrative of a “Platonizing” Sethian apocalypse? A close reading of this pericope, recollection of parallel themes in contemporary apocalypses, and review of evi-dence about the figures of Zostrianos and Iolaos show that the text wishes to contrast the Heracleidae with the seer’s true spiritual genos – the seed of Seth. While Zostrianos’ revelations deal with Neoplatonic metaphysics, the text also rejects Hellenic authority. Why, then, the choice of Iolaos as the target of the text’s polemic? It is worth recalling a reference to him in Plato’s Euthydemus, speculat-ing that the Gnostic author considers philosophy sans revelatory aid nothing more than sophistry. In any case, pace prior scholarly consensus, Zostrianos was not composed by or for a “Pagan” audience or as an “ecumenical” text, but is writ-ten for an audience that rejected Hellenic authority, and was instead beholden to Judeo-Christian apocalyptic traditions.


burns - apocalypse of zostrianos and iolaos

Documents