Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 13 November 2021
literature, coptic: update
Paola Buzi Keywords: Coptic literature; Anthony, of Egypt, Saint, ca. 250–355 or 6; Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha texts; Apophthegmata Patrum; Athanasius, Saint, Patriarch of Alexandria, d. 373; Coptic language; Copyists; Council of Chalcedon (451); Gnosticism; Gnostic Literature; Greek language; John Chrysostom, Saint, d. 407; Literature; Nag Hammadi library; Origen; Pachomius, Saint; Severus, of Antioch, ca. 465–538; Shenute, ca. 348–466.
1. Premise 1.1 An Excursus on the Modern Studies of Coptic Literature 2. The Age of Translations (third–fifth centuries) 2.1.Translations of Biblical Works 2.2. Translation of Apocryphal Works 2.3. Translation and (Re-elaboration) of a “Gnostic” Corpus 2.4 The Case of the Dishna Papers 2.5 Translation (and Re-elaboration) of a Manichaean Corpus 2.6 Translations of Patristic and Homiletic Works: From the Early Translations to the Classical Translations 3. From Translations to Original Literature (fourth–sixth centuries) 3.1 Coptic Literature and Early Monasticism 3.2 Pachomius and the Pachomian Milieu 3.3 Shenoute and the Shenoutean Milieu 3.4 The Self-Representation of the Church of Alexandria: The Historiographical Works 3.5 Post- and Anti-Chalcedonian Opposition Literature: Canons, Plerophories, and Other Works of “National Pride”
4. The Golden Age of Coptic Literature (sixth–seventh centuries) 4.1. Hagiographic Cycles 4.2. The Period of Damian and His “Cultural Circle”
5. Toward the Last Literary Production in Coptic (seventh–eighth centuries) 5.1. Literary Production of the Early Islamic Period 5.2 Homilies with the Insertion of Apocryphal Texts 5.3 Formation of the Later (Pseudepigraphic) Hagiographic and Homiletic Cycles and Rearrangement of Homiletic Production 5.4 Poetic Production 6. The So-Called Synaxarial Arrangement and the Last Phase of Coptic Literature © Claremont Graduate University 1 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 1. Premise It is necessary to clarify from the outset that the definition of “Coptic literature” is dealt with here in its strict sense, as the corpus of literary works—almost exclusively religious in nature— written in the Coptic language between the end of the third century CE and the beginning of the twelfth century (with sporadic later artificial relics). These literary works, however, are like the remains of a shipwreck, since they only represent a small part of a much larger production, having survived mainly in codices—often fragmentary and frequently of unknown origin— which, in most cases, were produced much later than the works they contain.
In a broader sense, coptic literature also includes (1) those Greek works that, although written in Egypt, were never translated into Coptic, but were nonetheless adopted and circulated during the period under consideration, being viewed as an integral part of Christian Egypt’s culture, and (2) the so-called copto-arabic literature, which is Coptic in essence but written in Arabic.
In the last two decades, increasing attention has been paid to Egypt’s Greek–Coptic bilingualism in Late Antiquity, which is closely related to the evolution of Coptic literature (Sidarus 2008: 183–202; Fournet 2009: 418–451; Torallas Tovar 2010; Torallas Tovar 2013; Camplani 2015a: 129–153; Papaconstantinou 2014: 15–21; Rutherford 2016: 1–39; Zakrzewska 2017: 115–161; Fournet 2020), as well as to the Coptic–Arabic bilingualism in the Middle Ages (Papaconstantinou 2012: 58–72), and which has shed light on the difficulty of delineating precise boundaries in the uses, competences, and functions of co-existing idioms, while also contributing to the explanation of the integrated use of two languages for the same national literature. If it has been established that, until the beginning of the eighth century, Greek was the high language normally used exclusively for external communication within a local Egyptian community—whether secular, ecclesiastic, or ‘monastic’—several aspects of this linguistic cohabitation still warrant careful analysis.
Numerous provocative and stimulating questions have thus been posed by scholars, among which: At what level of the structure and hierarchy of the Egyptian Church was Coptic used, over time, as an alternative to Greek, at times even supplanting it, as in the case of Bishop Calosiris who, probably due to his inability to properly manage the Greek language, seems to have spoken in Coptic during the Second Council of Ephesus in 449 (Camplani 2018: 101– 144)? Is it a sign of the times that an Egyptian bishop was permitted to speak in his own language during an imperial council, in the presence of imperial authorities, despite the fact that his official letters were written in Greek and were almost certainly translated by interpreters? What was the relationship between the first use of Coptic as a written linguistic medium and the Egyptian language, which was still spoken by the native people (Loprieno and Müller 2012: 102–144)? What was the role of Coptic in education (Bucking 1997: 132–138; Bucking 2021: 225–264)? Is it conceivable that there was a pre-Christian phase in the formation of Coptic, which developed within the milieus that produced magic and Hermetic texts, before being adopted by Christian and Manichean milieus? Was Coptic originally used by uneducated people or was it rather a linguistic medium of local élites fluent in both Greek and Egyptian (Zakrzewska 2014: 79–89)?
How should we evaluate the earliest Coptic literary and documentary texts that were produced from the end of the third century, a period that can quite rightly be considered Coptic’s prehistory? What was the place of Coptic in the (semi)literary production of early monastic communities? And, lastly, what was the real reason for translating from Greek into Coptic (Orlandi 1984: 181–203; Camplani 2022)?
While not all of these questions have an answer at the moment and much remains to be clarified, they highlight the difficulty of defining Coptic literature and its role in a society characterized by a complex interrelationship and stratigraphy of cultures, languages, and literary traditions.
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 2 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 At the same time, recent discoveries of new codices, the identification of previously unknown texts or those presumed lost, and accurate reconsiderations of corpora of texts selected and stored in specific cultural centers—primarily monastic ones from the sixth century onward—have all helped to meaningfully integrate our knowledge.
However, some undeniable obstacles remain, such as the extremely fragmentary consistency of Coptic literature, which came to us via a limited number of ancient libraries and frequently in poor condition, the uncertain date and provenance of the manuscripts, and the extensive use of pseudoepigraphy, which is much more common in the Coptic tradition than in other Christian Oriental literatures (Orlandi 1997: 39–120; Emmel 2007: 83–102; Boud’hors 2012: 224–246; Orlandi 2015). All of these elements make the effort of describing Coptic literature a Sisyphus-like task requiring continuous rethinking and frequent adjustment.
What follows is a schematic description of the main phases in the development of Coptic literature, based on our current knowledge, with the awareness that any schematization, while necessary, is inherently rather artificial (Berno 2020: 295–309). The phenomenon of the so-called Old Coptic, which is only tangentially related to the birth of Coptic literature, as well as the production of magical texts, is not dealt with in this article. Lastly, bibliographical references are kept to a minimum to conserve space, and whenever possible, recent comprehensive publications are preferred.
1.1. An Excursus on the Modern Studies of Coptic Literature It was not until the 1970s that systematic attempts were made to describe the evolution of Coptic literature. Prior to this period, and in some cases even afterward, scholars attempted only sporadically to sketch the development of Coptic literary production methodologically, often with a sense of embarrassment for a literature they perceived to be largely composed of translations and expressed in a coarse language. The opinion of johannes leipoldt, in particular, has affected the perception of the Coptic tradition for a long time. In a nutshell, Leipoldt believed that Coptic literature was created by unskilled translators for the benefit of the uneducated classes. In short, according to him, it was “a literature of immediate wants” (Leipoldt 1907: 31–82).
In general, subsequent studies reflected Leipoldt’s position on the inadequate quality and importance of Coptic literature and were also, in part, just brief lists of works, without a real effort to contextualize them in a cultural and social framework (Morenz 1952: 239–250; Till 1957: 229–258; Müller 1975: 205–208; Coquin 1983: 9–18).
It was in the studies of Tito Orlandi that Coptic literature was analyzed for the first time, not as an ancilla of Greek literature, but as the product of a sophisticated identity operation that reflected the cultural complexity of Late Antique Egypt. One of Orlandi’s main achievements is the proposal for a periodization of Coptic works which, even if not met with full approval, still represents an essential point of reference, a classification of the literary genres and related periods of production and, more importantly, a reflection on the concept of “author” and “work” (Orlandi 1970; Orlandi 1984: 181–203; Orlandi 1989: 457–502; Orlandi 1990b: 93– 104; Orlandi 1995: 127–147; Orlandi 1997: 39–120; Orlandi 2004: 175–195; Orlandi 2007a: 323–334; Orlandi 2015; Orlandi 2020: 51–62). With regard to this last aspect, Orlandi developed an identification system based on a clavis coptica number, used as a univocal coordinate to identify a literary product, in recognition of the fact that the Coptic textual tradition is much more fluid than other Christian oriental traditions and that the titles are frequently untrustworthy, often being much later than the works to which they are ascribed.
More recently, an accurate and well-thought-out description of the evolution of Coptic literature was proposed by Anne Boud’hors, who has also taken into account the most recent textual and codicological discoveries and for putting more emphasis on specific contexts of Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 3 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 production, such as the Theban one (Boud’hors 2012: 224–246). Lastly, Arietta Papaconstantinou briefly retraced the development of Coptic literature—excluding nag hammadi and Manichaean texts—particularly dwelling on the aspects of bilingualism (Papaconstantinou 2021: 571–588).
Also worth mentioning are certain digital resources, which are of great importance for the study of Coptic literature.
The Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari (cmcl) (Institutum Patristicum Austinianum, Rome–Hamburg University) is the pioneer of electronic databases. It contains, inter alia, the abovementioned clavis coptica classification, the reconstruction of several codicological units (above all from the Monastery of Shenoute, more commonly known as the White Monastery) (see dayr anba shinudah (suhaj)), a complete list of authors, and a number of editions and translations (https://www.cmcl.it).
The paths project and its main product, the Archaeological Atlas of Coptic Literature (Sapienza University of Rome), used the cmcl’s experience as a solid foundation to build a new series of databases. It contains a systematic classification of the codicological units pertaining to Coptic literature and their accurate codicological description. Since paths is currently the most complete repertory of Coptic literary manuscripts, a clm (Coptic Literary Manuscript) identifier has been assigned to each codicological unit. When codicological units have already been classified and/or described by other projects (mainly cmcl, but also Trismegistos, ldab, and others), a reference to their identifiers is always provided. The Atlas is searchable using multiple keys (manuscript identifiers, work identifiers, author names, places of production/circulation/storage, etc.) via pre-built forms or by browsing dynamically generated maps. Whenever possible, literary manuscripts are related to their original context of production, storage, circulation, and discovery (https://atlas.paths-erc.eu/).
Coptic Scriptorium (University of Oklahoma–Georgetown University) is another extremely important tool for the study of Coptic literature. It is a collaborative interdisciplinary digital project which, among other features, provides Coptic texts for reading, analysis, and complex searches. The works of Shenoute of Atripe (see shenoute: update) play a large role in the corpora of texts collected by the project (https://copticscriptorium.org/).
Finally, the complete Digital Edition of Coptic Old Testament, a research project by the Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities aims to provide a complete documentation of the Sahidic manuscript evidence, digital editions of all Old Testament manuscripts, critical editions of all Old Testament books, corpus-linguistic analyses, and translations into English, German, and Arabic (https://coptot.manuscriptroom.com/).
2. The Age of Translations (third–fifth centuries) 2.1. Translations of Biblical Works The first use of Coptic, once it established itself as a stable linguistic medium and achieved the status of a literary language, was to translate the Scriptures from Greek, an effort that is now almost universally regarded as an identity operation, rather than a means of making biblical works comprehensible to those who did not have access to Greek (Funk 2012). This action, on the other hand, demonstrates the extent to which the identity of late antique Egypt was bicultural and bilingual, as any form of appropriation implies comprehension.
It is meaningful that the Scriptures were translated in a first phase, more or less concurrently, in different places and into several dialects: sahidic, bohairic, akhmimic, lycopolitan, Oxyrhynchite (see mesokemic), and fayyumic, with Sahidic likely having a slight temporal precedence (third/fourth century).
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 4 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 In fact, the very concept of translation implies fluidity—since translations of the same text may vary from place to place and from period to period—and creativity—since translating is never just a mechanical operation.
Translations of biblical texts are conveyed by some of the earliest extant samples of codices. This is the case with the Hamburger Papyrus Bilinguis (Hamburg, Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg) and the papyrus codex belonging to the bodmer papyri or “Dishna Papers” containing the Gospel of John and Genesis (Cologny, Fondation Martin Bodmer, P. Bodmer iii), representing one of the earliest Bohairic translations (Luisier 2018: 87–89).
In the fifth century, a new phase of Scripture translation into Sahidic was undertaken, producing what can be considered the standard Sahidic Bible.
A similar operation, but in Bohairic, was promoted in the seventh/eighth century by the Monastery of Saint Macarius (see dayr anba maqar). However, unlike previous bibliological products characterized by brief titles, preferably located at the end of the biblical works, these later translations had much longer titles (especially the final ones) and were more faithful to the Greek tradition. We can, therefore, assume that the Bohairic translations of the biblical works undertaken in St. Macarius were made directly from Greek, without the intermediation of Sahidic, and were based on a Vorlage belonging to a different manuscript tradition compared with that used by the Sahidic translations made in the south (Buzi 2017a: 5–22), a fact that sheds light on the role and diverse choices of the scriptoria still active in post-eighth-century Egypt (Takla 2014: 105–121). Even after the biblical translations reached a certain level of stability, it appears clear that different production centers made use of different models.
There are no Coptic manuscripts that contain the complete Bible, not even arranged in a set of series of volumes. Moreover, while we have the entire New Testament (Askeland 2012: 201–230), both in Sahidic and in Bohairic (see new testament, coptic version of the), albeit through the integration of various fragmentary manuscripts, the preservation status of the Old Testament (see old testament, coptic translation of the) is much more incomplete (Takla 2007). Although it is certain that the complete Old Testament was translated, its survival in Sahidic is estimated to be 70%, while in Bohairic it is estimated to be 60% (Takla 2014: 108). Much remains to be done, above all for the Old Testament, but the project “Digital Edition and Translation of the Coptic Sahidic Old Testament” (Behlmer and Feder 2017: 97–107) is expected to make a significant contribution.
2.2. Translation of Apocryphal Works Later, the Coptic language was also used to translate a large number of apocrypha (from the Greek verb apokryptein, meaning “to hide away”)—that is, works outside an accepted canon of Scriptures—at two slightly different periods (fourth century and fifth century). The importance of these witnesses in shedding light on the multiform nature of early Egyptian Christianity does not need to be explained (see apocryphal literature), because they are often not preserved in Greek, as in the case of the Gospel of Judas, or attest to a rather different textual tradition.
If the first translations of apocrypha dealt with what can be considered as texts of a “foundational” character (Acts of Peter, Acts of Pilate, etc.), or with ancient biblical works which eventually did not merge into the Christian canon (Ascension of Isaiah, Apocalypse of Moses, etc.), the later ones also include some examples of the so-called Apostolic memoirs, a literary genre that is well represented in Coptic literature and according to which the narrative was recounted by the Apostles themselves, with the Letter of the Apostles being its most representative example.
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 5 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 Although apparently belonging to the same literary genre, however, the so-called Gospel of the Saviour has been demonstrated by Alin Suciu to be a post-Chalcedonian product, which was affected by the progressive alienation of the Coptic Church from the Byzantine world (Suciu 2017a).
2.3. Translation and (Re-elaboration) of a “Gnostic” Corpus For nascent Coptic literature, the fourth century was a period characterized by a drastic selection of forms and literary genres, with the consequence that some texts—romances, poetry, philosophical treatises, and technical literature—remained largely in Greek. This was coupled with an extreme variety of ideological orientations destined to influence the future production of Coptic literature.
It is in this framework that, along with the translations of the Old and New Testament texts and the apocrypha, a series of writings which are generally, though not exactly, defined as “Gnostic” were translated into Coptic (Brakke 2012) (see gnosticism).
The most famous of them are undoubtedly those conveyed by a group of thirteen codices found in Nag Hammadi (Naǧ‘ Ḥammādī), a village located about 9 km from the Pachomian monastery of Faw Qibli, although they do not exhaust the panorama of the spread of this form of alternative Christianity in Egypt (see nag hammadi library). In fact, the so-called codices Askewianus (Oxford), Berolinensis (Berlin), and Brucianus (London) must be added, for which the Nag Hammadi discovery has aroused new interest (Meyer 2005; Meyer, Pagels, Robinson, Funk, and Poirier 2009).
A closer examination of their content reveals that these texts, normally referred to by a generic and, as stated, incorrect definition, can be divided into at least five distinct groups: Valentinian, Sethian, Iranian, Asian, and Hermetic texts (Mahé 1978; Orlandi 1992; Camplani 1997: 121–175; Camplani 2002). This is not the place to investigate their complex nature, but suffice it to say that their translations into Coptic, which also involved an active process of selection and adaptation, are literary products that can be attributed to intellectual environments that cannot simply be defined as Gnostic—a label used in a certain phase of Coptic studies to define a corpus of texts with no cogent ideological consistency of content—but, rather, are characterized by a mixture of religious tensions, philosophical culture, and personal asceticism, combining philosophy and Christianity. The gospel of truth, the treatise on the resurrection, the tripartite tractate, the hypostasis of the archons, the first and second apocalypse of james, the fragment of thunder, perfect mind, and the sentences of sextus, to name but a few, were all collected in the same ancient library, but they cannot be classified as a consistent corpus of texts, at least originally (Lundhaug 2021b: 117–142). Even from the codicological and manufacturing point of view, there are elements that allow us to subdivide the thirteen codices into sub-groups.
Moreover, it is worth bearing in mind that certain intellectuals, such as zosimus of panopolis, who are difficult to categorize using standard categories, were active in the same area where the Nag Hammadi codices were found. This fact should not be underestimated. The nature of the owners of the Nag Hammadi library, which some scholars believe to be monastic and possibly even attributable to the Pachomian community, although this hypothesis is not unanimously shared (Lundhaug and Jenott 2015; Lewis and Blount 2014: 399–419; Wipszycka and Piwowarczyk 2017: 432–458; Lundhaug 2017: 339–358; Lundhaug and Jenott 2018: 306–325), has yet to be clarified.
Whatever milieu read, copied, adapted, and translated the texts in question—if translation is an operation that happened in Nag Hammadi, which is not certain—thus forming this ancient library, similar work seems to cease after the fifth century. However, some texts—or rather, some elements of them—re-emerge in the later homiletic production.
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 6 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 2.4 The Case of the Dishna Papers The ancient library conventionally known as “bodmer papyri” or “Dishna Papers,” a collection of about thirty manuscripts in Greek, Latin, and Coptic dated between the third and sixth centuries, is a meaningful expression of the religious, cultural, and literary complexity of late antique Egypt described thus far (Agosti, Buzi, and Camplani 2015: 6–172; Nongbri 2018: 157–215).
Discovered in Egypt in 1952, apparently near the village of Dishna, therefore not far from Nag Hammadi, the codices were at the time mostly purchased by the collector Martin Bodmer (1889–1971), but are now preserved in numerous libraries, especially in Europe (Fournet 2015: 8–40). The production consists of a group of manuscripts for which the training environment and precise religious orientation of the owner (or owners) are difficult to identify, since the collection combines biblical and homiletic texts (in Coptic) as well as classical works— including Homeric passages, the Catilinarians by Cicero, some comedies by Menander, and original poems (mainly in Greek, but also in Latin). It should be stressed, however, that in this multiform bibliological production, which includes papyrus and parchment codices, unbound fascicles, and even vertical rolls, all the codices of biblical content are in Coptic. Moreover, one of the Coptic codices (crosby-schøyen Ms 193, preserved in Sweden), which dates to the end of the fourth century, also conveys the translation of the Greek homily On Easter by melito of sardis, consisting of a reflection on Easter themes that is very distant from the position, at that time, of the Church of Alexandria (Goehring 1990).
In short, the Dishna Papers represent an extremely complex picture of inspirations and inclinations that aptly describe the early phase of Coptic literature, when biblical works were copied alongside homiletic and even profane literature, sometimes in the same manuscript.
2.5 Translation (and Re-elaboration) of a Manichaean Corpus At the same time as the circulation of the above “Gnostic” texts, late antique Egypt also welcomed the literary expressions of another religious community: the Manichean one (see
Manichaean texts discovered in Kellis (oasis of Dakhla) in the 1990s, which will be added to a group of manuscripts previously found in Medinet Madi, in the Fayyum region (1920s– 1930s), have revealed letters of Mani, the Gospel of Truth, a book of psalms, numerous logoi, and two volumes of Kephalaia, as well as a series of private letters. This wide and varied documentation clearly highlights that the Manichaean community, unlike the milieus which read the Nag Hammadi texts, must have been an organized and highly hierarchical “church.” Much remains to be clarified, however, including the relationship between this setting and “orthodox” Christianity—whatever the term “orthodox” meant in this period—and the role of the Manichaean community in the use and valorization of the Coptic language. It is conceivable that the production of Manichaean texts in Coptic—which cannot be considered as part of Coptic literature in the strict sense—was motivated by a desire to emulate what was happening in the Christian milieus.
The presence of both Greek and Coptic works in the documentary texts from Kellis is significant, once again demonstrating how the two idioms were intertwined in daily life and literary production.
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 7 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 2.6 Translations of Patristic and Homiletic Works: From the Early Translations to the Classical Translations The patristic genre encompasses a great part of the early translations that contributed to the formation of the first phase of Coptic literature, representing an important witness to the complex relationship and complementarity between Greek and Egyptian literary cultures. Starting from the fourth century, such translating activity, which corresponds to a deliberate selection based on the needs of the Church (and later of the monasteries), continues at least until the sixth century and, above all, initially privileges the production of the Cappadocian Fathers (basil of Caesarea, gregory of nazianzus, and gregory of nyssa), john chrysostom, ephraem syrus, Epiphanius of Salamis, and Melito of Sardis.
On the other hand, the complete absence of the translated works of two outstanding intellectuals who deeply influenced the formation of early Christian Egyptian thought, origen and clement of alexandria, is conspicuous—unless new textual discoveries change this situation in the future.
Early translations of Greek treatises also include texts that are difficult to evaluate, as is the case of the work conveyed by the so-called Berlin Coptic Book (Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung, P. Berol. 20915), whose title, author, and context of production are unknown, but show evident traces of theological and philosophical concepts that are not far from Clement of Alexandria’s thought (Schenke, Schenke, and Plisch 2012; van den Hoek 2003: 75–92). It remains unclear why a first part, devoted to the creation of man and his soul, is combined with a second one of an apocalyptic tome dealing with God’s wrath. It is works like these that reveal the multiform interests of the elite who promoted the translation activity. The Greek homilies translated into Coptic, however, are often divested of their original authorship and re-attributed to different authors (Orlandi 1981b: 333–339; Orlandi 1984: 181– 203; Orlandi 1989, 457–502; Orlandi 1990b, 93–104). This is what happened, for instance, with the work On the Soul and Body by Melito of Sardis which, in the Coptic tradition, is attributed to athanasius of Alexandria by means of a title coined ex novo, in order to promote the latter figure’s status as the founding father of Egyptian Christianity. In general, pseudepigraphic attributions are common practice in Coptic literature (see pseudo-
athanasius, coptic).
However, the case of Melito is also extremely interesting from another perspective: eusebius’ description of his role leaves no doubt about the fact that he was an important and internationally acclaimed author, but his works were subsequently almost neglected, to the point where they were considered lost until the mid-twentieth century. This state of affairs heightens the interest in the discovery in Egypt of his homily On Easter, as attested by two manuscripts in Greek and three in Coptic, dating to between the third and fifth centuries. This popularity is all the more remarkable given that Melito was a typical exponent of the Asiatic school.
Tito Orlandi observed that, in appropriating and translating the works of the early Church Fathers, the Copts made a targeted choice, thus excluding works characterized by a more marked theological and exegetical character, normally extraneous to the interest of the Coptic Church (Orlandi 1995: 127–147), and opting for those with an immediate edifying and pastoral purpose. For instance, among the other works by Athanasius of Alexandria, we have his Life of Antony and the Festal Letters in Coptic, but not his autobiographical, historical, and anti-Arian works. Likewise, cyril of Alexandria’s biblical commentaries and polemical works against the nestorians are missing, while only a selection of the works of John Chrysostom were translated into Coptic (Voicu 2011: 575–610).
If this evaluation still holds, it must be observed, along with Enzo Lucchesi, that we also have examples of sophisticated theological and dogmatic Greek patristic works translated into Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 8 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 Coptic, such as Gregory of Nyssa’s Encomium of Stephen Protomartyr and Cyril of Alexandria’s Scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti (Lucchesi 2006: 11–13; Lucchesi 2011: 376– 388). Moreover, the existence of corpora of works by the same author (Lucchesi and Devos 1981: 75–94; Lucchesi 1981: 95–100; Lucchesi 1998: 107–114), both in Sahidic and in Bohairic, demonstrate that the selection of texts was not carried out randomly. Indeed, a reliable knowledge of the quantity and extent of Greek works translated into Coptic is still a long way off. Lastly, it should not be forgotten that deciding on what was useful to translate and what should be left in its original language was a creative activity in itself. At the same time, the adjustments and the additions of passages that the Coptic version of a Greek work may incorporate are of great importance for the tradition of the text, demonstrating once again that the appropriation of Greek literature was never an automatic process.
One of the aspects related to later translations still to be clarified is the relationship between Sahidic and Bohairic, and in particular, whether the translations into Bohairic descend from Sahidic antigraphs or directly depend on the Greek models.
Despite the undeniable fact that Coptic Egypt produced literature that, with very few exceptions, was Christian, particularly in its early production, there is a sporadic re-emergence of the classical Hellenistic and Greco-Roman tradition, though sometimes unconscious and invariably revisited in the new Christian perspective. This is the case with the above-mentioned Sentences of Sextus and the Sentences of Menander. These collections of sayings, however, were perfectly suited to the role of Christian gnomic literature, and in this respect integrated the collection of sayings par excellence, the apophthegmata patrum, which was also translated in this same period but, as one might expect, had a long tradition (Chaîne 1960; Colceriu 2021).
3. From Translations to Original Literature (fourth–sixth centuries) 3.1 Coptic Literature and Early Monasticism Despite the topos claiming that Egyptian monks only knew Egyptian and often lacked regular educational training, an assertion intended to portray them as having primitive and evangelical genuineness, there is more than one clue to demonstrate that at least some members of this emerging movement had a more elevated culture (Wipszycka 2009). This is certainly the case with antony, whose Letters—transmitted in two versions: a short corpus (seven letters unanimously considered authentic) and a long corpus (21 letters predominantly spurious)—are preserved in Coptic, as well as in other Eastern languages (Garitte 1955). These epistles clearly demonstrate that Antony was aware of the dogmatic issues that were shaking the Church in the fourth century (and, in particular, of the doctrine of Arius), and that he used a language that betrays a philosophical formation, with all due respect to Athanasius who, in his Life of Antony, a true best seller of Late Antiquity, written in Greek but translated at an early stage into Coptic, describes him as a simple person and certainly not as an intellectual (Rubenson 1990; Rubenson 1995: 15–34).
It is possible to hypothesize that, during the fourth century, some of the more or less heterodox groups described in the preceding paragraphs, which were responsible for having initially promoted the use of Coptic, had disappeared, leaving the renewed Egyptian language primarily in the hands of orthodox monks whose education was still marked by an apparently classical paideia, a fact that is more evident in the production of Shenoute (Larsen and Rubenson 2018).
It remains to be clarified, however, whether the literary production of these early monastic circles was written in Greek and soon afterward translated into Coptic, or whether it was produced directly in Coptic.
Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 9 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 The first attempts to develop a real communitarian life are to be attributed to the generation after Antony, as can be testified by the complex settlements of kellia and nitria, to name only two examples. More or less in the same period, a succession of monastic communities, whose anchoritic (or semi-anchoritic) character was still very evident, settled in Middle Egypt, particularly in the area between memphis and shmun. Among the prominent characters of this environment, it is necessary to mention certain monks, who can all be circumscribed within the first half of the fourth century. These monks are the protagonists of a series of works that are completely ignored by the Greek-Latin tradition. Their literary productions, which combine the genres of bioi and historiae monachorum, whose Greek original (if any) is lost, include: the Life of Apollo of Bawit, the Life of Aphou, the Life of Aaron, and the History of Horsiese (Orlandi and Campagnano 1975; Orlandi 1978: 225–230; Orlandi and Campagnano 1984; Orlandi 1990a: 109–126; Goehring 1999, 196–218; Orlandi 2004: 175–195; Suciu 2017b: 141– 171; Dijkstra and van der Vliet 2020).
In this framework, two special cases are represented by paul of tamma, author of at least five works characterized by culturally sophisticated thought (On the Cell, On Humility, etc.), and by agathonicus of tarsus, apparently a fictitious author to whom are attributed a group of works that altogether compose a philosophical corpus aptly reflecting the cultural and religious complexity of this early production (Orlandi 1981a: 269–299; Orlandi 1988; Orlandi 2018b: 177–186). If the Origenist current or the position of the Alexandrian school, with its allegorical interpretation of the Scriptures and strong neo-Platonic roots, emerges from Agathonicus’ production, it is the Christian Asiatic culture, strongly influenced by Stoic philosophy and revealing a rather materialistic culture, with a simultaneously materialistic and typological approach to the Scriptures that is not regulated by a hermeneutic theory, that emerges from the production of Paul of Tamma.
The work that better represents the violence of the Origenist controversy, however, is the Life of Aphou, a peculiar monk, destined to become bishop of Oxyrhynchus, and who is credited with having influenced the decision of theophilus of Alexandria to move the Church from an Origenist position to an opposite one.
The fact that these works have only survived in Coptic does not help us understand whether they were composed directly in this language, although there are now elements that seem to make this hypothesis sustainable, at least in some cases (Suciu 2018, 638–647).
3.2 Pachomius and the Pachomian Milieu While the semi-anchoritic communities of Lower and Middle Egypt flourished, another monastic movement emerged in the Thebaid around the figure of pachomius of Tabennesi, marked by significant specificities. In fact, it is only with Pachomius that the first truly and totally cenobitic community took shape. This community’s life was marked and regulated by Rules, very likely written in Greek initially, but soon translated into Coptic. They are preserved in one of the oldest codices from the White Monastery.
Among the features distinctive to the Pachomian monks is the settlement of communities on the edge of cities or villages, rather than in the middle of the desert. Moreover, they perceived themselves as a unitary group under the command of a single guide. Even after the great expansion of the order, when a dense network of Pachomian monasteries had been founded, from pbow in the south to Canopus on the Mediterranean coast, they all continued to depend on the successor of Pachomius, residing precisely at Pbow.
In addition to the Rules, whose pivotal importance is not necessary to remark on and whose fame extended beyond Egyptian borders, Pachomius left some Letters that make use of cryptographic codes, the meaning of which is still being debated (Joest 2014). Pachomius’ letters, and those of his successors (Goehring 1986), are preserved in Coptic and Greek in Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 10 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 unusual book forms: papyrus and parchment rolls (vertical and horizontal), often obtained from discarded material, a fact that further highlights the Pachomian community’s uniqueness. Louis-Théophile Lefort pointed out that the Rules of Pachomius contain a quotation from the so-called Negative Confession (Book of the Dead, 125). He identified a series of textual relations—sometimes ad textum, more often ad sensum—between ancient Egyptian literature, especially gnomic literature, such as the Teaching of Ani and the Instructions of Amenemope, and the Pachomian work (Lefort 1927: 65–74). However, such a fact, which is merely a pale memory, may be explained by the schooling of the founder of cenobitic monasticism, who, in his Letters, is said to have learned “Egyptian letters,” whatever that means.
The importance of Pachomius is also testified by the spurious works and the various recensions of his Life, written in Coptic but also preserved in Greek, Latin, and Arabic. If the relationship among the different versions of these Lives is complex (Goehring 1986: 3–23; Goehring 2020: 19–33), it is a shared opinion that the early nucleus of the Life has survived in Bohairic and Arabic translations (Veilleux 1980–1982: 1:23–295; Veilleux 1984).
Pachomius’ successors, theodorus of tabennese and horsiesios in primis, mainly produced works that are ascribable to the genres of lives, catecheses, and paralipomena (Lefort 1956; Lefort 1966), and are strictly related to the guidance of the community’s cenobitic life (Joest 2015; Joest 2016).
3.3 Shenoute and the Shenoutean Milieu Between the fourth and fifth centuries, Egypt became ready for a decisive leap: the creation of original literature.
While the original language of the works of Paul of Tamma and those of the Pachomian milieu is still under debate, it is widely agreed—with very few exceptions (Lucchesi 1988: 201–210)—that Shenoute of Atripe, archimandrite of the famous monastic federation guided by the White Monastery located not far from Panopolis (see akhmim) (Timbie 2015: 184– 196), elevated Coptic to the rank of literary language. He used Coptic to compose a variety of works, whose corpus—composed of Logoi or Sermons (eight volumes), Canons (nine volumes), and Letters—was arranged and preserved under his direction, with the apparent prohibition to disseminate them outside the federation (Amélineau 1907–1914; Leipoldt 1906– 1913).
Shenoute’s full adherence to the genres of Greek and Alexandrian literature contrasts with the likely deliberate “anti-literary” choice of Pachomius and his environment (Emmel 2004; Emmel 2018: 9–36). His style was influenced by the Second Sophistic, enriched by the contribution of biblical language and, in particular, of Wisdom books, Gospels, and the Letters of Paul (Camplani 2022).
The Canons are mainly inspired by episodes of daily life in the monasteries, and problems concerning both their internal discipline and their external relations. On other occasions, they are used to announce disciplinary sanctions against persons or groups who deviated from proper conduct. The Logoi, on the other hand, are much more varied in content and are, therefore, particularly useful to define Shenoute’s thought, his deepest Christological, anthropological, and soteriological convictions, and to identify his position in relation to the religious controversies against a number of heterodox currents—Melitianism, Manicheism, persistent forms of traditional religions, and so on—which, in the fifth century, continued to characterize Egyptian Christianity, as the Contra Origenistas attests (Orlandi 1985b; Emmel 2008: 161–201; Cristea 2011; Layton 2014; Schroeder 2007).
Shenoute’s production reveals a high level of education, particularly in rhetoric, and traces of classical paideia, such as in the case of the well-known, albeit unintentional, quotation from The Birds of Aristophanes, which is clearly the product of a residual education acquired in the Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 11 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 Panopolitan milieu by the archimandrite of the White Monastery (Amélineau 1907:
1:386). Similar residual elements of a classical education are traceable in later monastic literary production (Fournet 2011: 19–31).
Lastly, it is necessary to mention that, despite the rigid control exerted by Shenoute on the preservation of his works, there might be some cases of spurious attributions, such as On the Supreme Judgment (Behlmer 1996; Boud’hors 2017a: 121–138).
The outstanding importance of Shenoute, both as an author and as an abbot, determined the development of what can be considered a sub-discipline in its own right, that of Shenoutean studies. These studies encompass several research projects, including the philological project “Editing Shenoute” under the coordination of Stephen Emmel, and a variety of studies on the narrative style (Shisha-Halevy 2010: 451–498), education, the administrative organization of the monastic community (Layton 2002: 385–465), and the relationship with authority and with the Pachomian milieu (Goehring 2007: 47–57), among several other aspects (Boud’hors 2012: 233).
Upon Shenoute’s death, his activities were carried out by his disciples, particularly theodore of tabennese and besa (Kuhn 1956). To the latter is traditionally attributed a Life of the famous archimandrite, which was later proven to be the result of a collage of episodes by various authors (Lubomirski 2007).
As is well known, the White Monastery was equipped with a library that must have been one of the richest of late antique Egypt (Orlandi 2002: 211–231; Takla 2005: 43–51; Emmel and Römer 2008: 5–24; Orlandi and Suciu 2016: 891–918; Orlandi 2019: 17–32). The fragmentary parchment codices that we possess, however, date to a much later period (mainly eighth/ninth–eleventh centuries) than the time in which the library was established. That is the period to which the famous inscriptions/shelf marks found in the so-called “chambrette” located on the first floor of the room to the left of the main church’s apse (Louis 2007: 99–114; Louis 2008: 83–90) and the numerous colophons found in the manuscripts seem to date. However, as with all the other monastic libraries of Late Antique Egypt, we only have very faint clues with regard to its early stages. Shenoute himself often refers to the “papyri” (chartēs) existing in his and his predecessors’ time, but many questions remain unanswered, including: What exactly did the White Monastery library contain in the fifth century? Did it only comprise Christian texts? Or, as in the case of the “Dishna Papers,” did it also include “classical” or “pagan” literature, albeit reinterpreted in a Christian perspective, as the dicta philosophorum, preserved by a much later codex from the White Monastery, seem to testify (Till 1934–1937: 165–175; Buzi 2017b: 131–151)?
Where did Shenoute and his successors obtain the codices used as models for their translation and copying? And what happened to these ancient codices (fifth–seventh centuries)? Did they deteriorate to the point of requiring complete replacement by new (parchment) codices? Did this gradual replacement result in a process of selection of texts that led to the progressive disappearance of possible remnants of “classical” literature, if this was indeed originally present in the library? One of our few certainties is that the library of the White Monastery must have remained active more or less until the fourteenth century. As for modern history, the first leaves of the White Monastery codices arrived in Europe in the second half of the eighteenth century and were acquired by Stefano Borgia for his Museum Borgianum (Buzi 2009: 37–101) and by Jacopo Nani for his collection in Venice (Buzi 2011: 33–57). It is not until the end of the nineteenth century that the library itself was identified and the great bulk of its codices discovered, with the majority of them entering the collection of the Bibliothèque nationale de France (Louis 2007: 99–114) and several other European collections. Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 12 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 3.4 The Self-Representation of the Church of Alexandria: The Historiographical Works Not surprisingly, the Church of Alexandria soon felt the need to write its own official history.
On the one hand, it fixed the sequence of the most meaningful events, which slowly led to the formation of a stable hierarchy and the establishment of the so-called monarchic episcopate, a distinctive feature of the Egyptian Church. On the other, it filled the documentary void of the first two centuries of the Christian era, whose reconstruction is notoriously problematic, to the point that even eusebius of caesarea in his Ecclesiastical History is necessarily very vague, and not only about Egypt (Camplani 2015b: 85–119; Wipszycka 2015).
It is important to stress that, especially in the first phase, Coptic historiographic production was somewhere between translation and original creation, as it was entirely dependent on official patriarchal documents and episcopal dossiers written in Greek, but which were reworked and adapted to the new function.
The first product of this official self-representative effort is a work of seminal importance. Even though it is not preserved in Coptic, with the possible exception of a closely related small fragment (Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung, P. Berol. 11948), the History of the Episcopate of Alexandria (HEpA) is conveyed in fragmentary form, in part in Latin (Verona, Library of the Chapter, Codex Veronensis LX [58], seventh/eighth century, already identified by Scipione Maffei in the eighteenth century), and in part in Gǝʿǝz (a recently discovered manuscript of the so-called Axumite collection, thirteenth century, found in a church in Tigray, Ethiopia). The tradition of this text is very complex, since the two versions in part coincide and in part incorporate different documentary nuclei. The so-called History of Athanasius (or Historia Acephala), which is a historiographic report in itself, consisting of a detailed account of the last twenty years of Athanasius’ episcopate, for instance, is only included in the Latin witness (Camplani 2015b: 85–119; Bausi and Camplani 2016: 249–302; Camplani 2020a: 207–238; Camplani 2020b: 65–94).
Dealing with the Egyptian bishops of the period between the second and the fourth centuries, the main nucleus of the HEpA, which narrates the melitian schism, Athanasius’ episcopate, and the Councils of nicaea and Sardica, was most probably composed in the last quarter of the fourth century during the episcopate of Theophilus (385–412), and certainly before sozomen, who quotes a few passages from it. But later additions can also be identified. The first section of the text, preserved only in the Ethiopian codex, begins with the account of Alexandria’s evangelization, the establishment of the episcopate, and the recording of the rule given by the evangelist mark regulating the choice of the new patriarch (see patriarchal election), elected by twelve presbyters gathered in the presence of the deceased bishop’s corpse. The text claims that this system was in use until the time of peter I (300–311). Then follows the list of alexandrian patriarchs, including their duration in the episcopate, their date of death, their role in the ordination of bishops in Egypt, and other pertinent information (Camplani 2022).
The only historiographic work preserved in Coptic, the History of the Church of Alexandria (Orlandi 1968–1970; Johnson 1976: 7–18; Orlandi 1985a: 363–384; Orlandi 2007b: 3–24; Boud’hors and Morlet 2012: 267–270), in part depends on the HEpA, but has a much larger religious–cultural horizon dealing with the entire Eastern Mediterranean, even if it focuses on Alexandrian events.
The History of the Church of Alexandria is one of the literary products that best reflects the religious and political atmosphere after the theological and political schism of Chalcedon (451), which determined the separation of the Church of Alexandria from the so-called Great Church. Almost certainly written in the last quarter of the fifth century and preserved in two fragmentary Coptic codices, both from the White Monastery, it was made up of two parts. The first, which is poorly preserved and covers the period up to the diocletian persecution, was a Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 13 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 translation and partial reworking of the first seven books of the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, at times integrated and adapted by means of the insertion of passages that were considered representative of the Egyptian Church. The second part, an original creation, recounted the events from Peter I (300–311) up to timothy ii aelurus (457–477), and was probably based primarily on official archival Church documents, although additional sources, such as biographical and hagiographic texts, homilies, and canonical literature, were also used.
As we learn from the paratexts, the History of the Church of Alexandria was composed of twelve books in total and ended with an account of the tormented period of the two rival archbishops, Timothy II Aelurus and timothy salofaciolus, which is roughly where the author of the History of the Patriarchs, composed in Arabic but clearly also based on Coptic documents, becomes more exhaustive (Evetts 1904–1915; Orlandi 1968; den Heijer 1989; Pilette 2013: 419–450). A complementary historiographic source for the Coptic Church’s post-seventh-century history is the Chronicle of john of nikiou, which is also preserved exclusively in Gǝʿǝz (depending, in turn, on a lost Arabic model).
However, between the fourth and sixth centuries, the Coptic Church’s self-representation requirements were met not only through historiography, but also through a variety of literary genres such as hagiography and canonical literature, like the Acts of Mark, the Martyrdom of Peter, and the Life of Athanasius—three founding figures of the Church of Alexandria. Composed beginning in the fifth century and repeatedly revised, these works leave space for the representation of the Christian urban landscape which, due to the construction of new buildings of worship, changed the character of the cities.
3.5 Post- and Anti-Chalcedonian Opposition Literature: Canons, Plerophories, and Other Works of “National Pride”
If the Council of Chalcedon and the failure to subscribe to the so-called tome of Pope leo I determined the official separation of the Church of Alexandria from the position of the other churches, guided by the episcopate of Constantinople, the events following the exile of Theodosius I from Alexandria represented a point of no return, putting an end to any hope of a reconciliation between the episcopal sees. As a consequence, literary production became more and more a tool for narrating the history of the Coptic Church as it was seen by the Copts themselves.
The most official products of this orientation are the collections of acts of the three main ecumenical councils (Nicaea, ephesus I, and Chalcedon), which very likely reached a state of standardization between the late fifth and early sixth centuries, although the beginning of the process may date to the end of the fourth century, at least for the first two councils (Orlandi 2016). These collections are not just translations from the analogous Greek (and Latin) dossiers, but a creative rearrangement of the official documents. The acts of Nicaea, for instance, are conveyed with the title Canons of Hippolytus and include the Faith of the Nicene Creed, a series of gnomai, and other minor texts. They are only preserved by two very incomplete manuscripts from the White Monastery.
The acts of Ephesus, on the other hand, are attributed to a Pachomian monk, victor of tabennese, who does not appear in the Greek and Latin collections. This fact may be explained as an effort by the Coptic Church to “appropriate” this normative work.
The anti-Chalcedonian sentiment and the nationalist spirit of an increasingly consolidated Egyptian Church, however, are also embodied by other literary genres. The Encomium of Macarius of Tkoou, by dioscorus I of Alexandria for instance, narrates the martyrdom of the bishop of Alexandria in the name of his anti-Chalcedonian faith (Fournet 2011, 19–31). It Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 14 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 is, in fact, a compilation of at least three different texts of a historical or autobiographical nature, rearranged for new purposes.
An anonymous Life of Athanasius, based on semi-historical documents, and the Plerophoriae, a series of narratives collected by john of mayuma, or at least attributed to him, also belong to this period and aptly represent the anti-Chalcedonian orientation of this phase of Coptic literature.
Several biographies of Egyptian monks were also produced during this period, including the Life of Matthew the Poor, the Life of Moses of Abydos (see abydos and moses of abydos) and, above all, the Life of Abraham Archimandrite of Farshut (see abraham of farshuṭ), the last Coptic abbot of the Pachomian monastic federation (Goehring 2006: 1– 26; Goehring 2013), all of which attest to a sense of national pride.
4. The Golden Age of Coptic Literature (sixth–seventh centuries) 4.1. Hagiographic Cycles Between the fifth and sixth centuries, in parallel with the production of original literature, the activity of translating homiletic and hagiographic texts from Greek into Coptic continued, with particular attention to those that could have a practical purpose within monastic environments. Therefore, this process of translation reached its peak and determined the formation of what Tito Orlandi defines as “standard” or “classical” translations.
At the same time, having reached its maximum linguistic potential, Coptic was used to produce hagiographic texts. These texts, which were independent or frequently gathered into cycles, inherited the general characteristics of analogous works previously translated from Greek, but now increasingly with Egyptian martyrs as protagonists. This is the case with the Miracles of Colluthus, the Miracles of Gabriel, the Martyrdom of Pamun and Sarmata, and other texts as well.
The material for these martyrdoms, which drew on official documents (such as procedural documents), may have been in circulation for some time but lacked the organization that had been implemented since the sixth century, a process that would persist at least until the eighth century. These hagiographic works have sometimes been classified as “epic passions,” because they are all characterized by certain common traits: an impious emperor (usually Diocletian), a persecution edict, a cruel judge, a lengthy series of tortures inflicted on the martyr, and an equally lengthy series of miracles performed by the latter (Baumeister 1972; Papaconstantinou 2001).
4.2. The Period of Damian and His “Cultural Circle”
damian of alexandria (576(?)–605), who was responsible for the reorganization of the Egyptian Church after the Chalcedonian schism, is a prominent figure in Coptic literature and emblematic of a new age of self-consciousness in the post-Chalcedonian period. The actual cultural circle which gathered around him—whose most representative characters are constantine of asyuṭ (Orlandi 1974), john of shmun, rufus of shotep, and pisentius of Coptos, normally unknown to Greek and Latin sources—produced literature characterized by two main aims: to preserve those Greek patristic works that were not in contradiction with the anti-Chalcedonian choice of Alexandria and to create new works (encomia, hagiographies, and homilies) that would serve the liturgical purposes of a now completely independent Church. The Life of Pisentius attributed to Moses of Coptos, the Martyrdom of Claudius by Constantine of Asyuṭ, and the Commentary of the Gospels by Rufus of Shotep (Sheridan 1998) are some of the most typical examples of this production. Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 15 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 John of Shmun embodies both purposes in the best possible way: without a doubt, strong nationalism is the most distinctive characteristic of his work. In this regard, his homily dedicated to the figure of Antony is particularly significant, since the Egyptian origin of the famous anchorite is once again celebrated as a sign of privileged vocation and ante mortem holiness.
Constantine of Asyuṭ, vicar of Damian for Upper Egypt and active in re-establishing orthodoxy in the region, is credited by the Synaxarium with an intense literary activity, including sermons, and lives of martyrs and saints.
As for Pisentius, who died in 632, on the other hand, there is no doubt that his Life was written by the end of the seventh century, since the most ancient manuscript, recently discovered in Western Thebes, dates to the eighth century (Dekker 2010: 21–31; Dekker 2018: 133–142).
The ongoing debate over what (if anything) was composed directly in Coptic also involves an author from Damian’s period, as some scholars consider the works of Rufus of Shotep to be a translation from Greek produced in the fifth century, in the middle of the Origenist controversy, and later attributed to a fictitious author (Luisier 1998; Lucchesi 2000: 289–301): a fact that clearly illustrates the challenge of writing a reliable and balanced history of Coptic literature.
From a bibliological point of view, in Upper Egypt two main milieus stand out from the constellation of the other cultural centers: the Monastery of Shenoute and the Theban macro-area that, although less homogeneous, has progressively gained a specific and recognizable identity (Boud’hors 2017b: 175–212).
5. Toward the Last Literary Production in Coptic (seventh–eighth centuries) 5.1. Literary Production of the Early Islamic Period Initially, the arab conquest did not seem to affect textual production in the Coptic language, which remained rather active through the literary activity of figures such as agathon of alexandria, isaac of qalamun, Mena of Pshati, Zacharias of Pshou, and benjamin I of Alexandria. The Life of Samuel of Qalamun, by Isaac of Qalamun, which deals with the efforts of the Chalcedonian/Melkite party to forcefully convert the anti-Chalcedonian Egyptian monks, portrayed as the true essence of Coptic Egypt, is one of the most meaningful expressions of this period and can be considered a classic, merging the genres of martyrdom, bios, and historia monachorum (Alcock 1983).
This precarious balance, however, ceased when the new rulers’ control became more and more intransigent (Suermann 2006: 95–109). Among other consequences, this state of affairs caused “pseudo-epigraphic cycles” to flourish, not only being falsely attributed to fictitious authors but, in the impossibility of taking an open position against the new rulers, were even falsely polemical toward anachronistic enemies of orthodoxy, at times exhuming the decidedly defunct pagan opposition. An example of this production is the work falsely attributed to Athanasius, which Tito Orlandi calls De Araborum dominatione, that belongs to the so-called cycle of Athanasius.
It is in this framework that an apparently eccentric work was conceived: the Cambyses Romance (von Lemm 1910: 77–79; Richter 1997–1998: 55–66; Venticinque 2006: 139–158; Doufikar-Aerts 2010). Preserved only in one extremely fragmentary copy, it is clearly inspired by the Alexander Romance (Selden 2011: 133–155; Selden 2012: 17–48; MacCoull 2012: 255– 260) (see romances). Its narrative thread deals with the Persian king Cambyses II (529– 522 bce) and his epistle to the “inhabitants of the East,” a people subject to the Egyptians’ authority, by which he unsuccessfully attempts to incite them against the pharaoh. Supported Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 16 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 by the wise words of Bothros, the “inhabitants of the East” remain faithful to the Egyptians, who, in turn, do not hesitate to express their animosity toward Cambyses, to the point where, significantly, his name turns in the narrative to that of the Assyrian king Nebuchadnezzar II (604–562 BC). Later in the narration, one of the mentors of Cambyses/Nebuchadnezzar suggests sending false messengers to the Egyptians, inviting them to a feast dedicated to the god Apis. The Egyptians, however, perceive the deception and Pharaoh Apries (588–568 BC)—and not Psamtik iii, as it should have been—orders the army to prepare to face the enemy. Unfortunately, the end of the text is lost, and hence we do not know whether the narrative had a happy ending.
It has been correctly observed that, more than Herodotus’ account, the Cambyses Romance, with its deliberate overlapping of Cambyses’ and Nebuchadnezzar’s figures, has several points in common with Josephus’ narration and, above all, with the Book of Judith, the Apocalypse of Elijah, and the Chronicle of John of Nikiu. However, the Demotic literary tradition is also very evident, since Assyrians and Persians are also associated, for instance, in the Oracle of the Potter and in the Prophecy of the Lamb, works that are both generally classified as apocalyptical. The Cambyses Romance is, therefore, the result of multiform inspirations, and does not lack a moral purpose. Despite the apparent novelty and secular character of its narrative thread, this work is rooted in a long Egyptian religious tradition that pits the forces of Chaos against those of Order. Cambyses is humiliated, yet he also represents the necessary instrument for the Egyptians’ redemption. The chronological distance of events from the actual religious–political vicissitudes, be they post-Chalcedonian controversies or the Arab invasion typical of this literary period, placing them in a timeless dimension, endowed the narrative with mythological value.
Another way to react to the new domination, typical of this phase of Coptic literature, was the valorization of sacred places and buildings (Orlandi 2020: 51–62) and the celebration of champions of Coptic orthodoxy. It is in this framework that the fragmentary Encomium of Shenoute by Benjamin I and the Encomium of Benjamin by his successor Agathon, which narrate the consecration of a church dedicated to macarius, as well as the work of john iii dedicated to Saint menas and his popular sanctuary in the mareotis, are to be classified.
5.2 Homilies with the Insertion of Apocryphal Texts As discussed above, apocryphal literature was circulated in Egypt from the earliest Christian centuries. If it seemed to have been marginalized and even banned from the “orthodox” milieus at the end of the fourth century, it turned out to have left a tangible and long-lasting legacy. The period between the sixth and eighth centuries saw the flourishing of a special category of homilies, distinguished by their reliance on, or incorporation of, apocryphal texts, a memory of the past that was used to produce new and intriguing works (Lundhaug 2021a: 212–233). The Investiture of the Archangel Michael, conveyed by three Coptic manuscripts and fragments of Greek and Old Nubian codices from Nubian monasteries, was one of the more popular examples, as is also demonstrated by john of parallos’ scathing attack. In his treatise Against the Heretical Books, he states that this type of text was even read in orthodox milieus (Lundhaug 2019: 59–73). John of Parallos’ polemic includes the Preaching of John, the Laughter of the Apostles, the Teachings of Adam, and the Counsel of the Saviour.
The Investiture of the Archangel Michael, in particular, deals with the circumstances of the creation and fall of Adam and, above all, with the fall of the devil and the role of Michael, a topic that it shares with another meaningful example of this form of literature, the Encomium on Abbaton, the Angel of Death, attributed to timothy I (Suciu and Saweros 2016: 526–545). In accordance with the Investiture of Michael and other apocryphal texts, the Encomium on Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 17 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 Abbaton states that the devil was exiled from heaven because he refused to worship Adam (Lundhaug 2020: 213–227).
The Mysteries of John the Evangelist, the Encomium of the Archangel Raphael, attributed to a certain archelaus of neapolis, and the homily On the Church of the Virgin Mary, falsely ascribed to Basil of Caesarea, are some other examples of this well-represented literary genre.
Due to their engaging narrative thread, these homilies held great appeal to the population. At the same time, they satisfied the purpose of providing material for specific feasts of the liturgical calendar often linked to sanctuaries and shrines of martyrs, which became more and more important for the preservation of the Copts’ identity after the Arab conquest. 5.3 Formation of the Later (Pseudepigraphic) Hagiographic and Homiletic Cycles and Rearrangement of Homiletic Production Martyrdoms and hagiography, in general, represent another literary genre that enjoyed new life in the seventh and eighth centuries. Unlike earlier production, however, the arrangement in cycles is much more systematic, and the pseudepigraphic attribution to false authors is very frequent.
The main purpose of these texts was to reinforce people’s faith and moral behavior, at the same time reaffirming the long orthodox and apostolic tradition of the Coptic Church, in comparison to other churches. Moreover, the complex narrative threads, rich in plot twists and macabre details, also satisfied the need for entertainment.
The Martyrdom of Mercurius (Orlandi 1968; Orlandi and Di Giuseppe Camaioni 1976), the cycle of the Sermons in Lazica attributed to Basil of Caesarea, and the Miracles of Victor attributed to celestinus of rome are only a few examples of this production.
At the same time, earlier homiletic production was rearranged, again attributing the new products to false or anachronistic authors. This is the case of the Encomium on Demetrius and Peter Bishops of Alexandria attributed to Flavianus of Ephesus, very likely a fictitious author. The narrative thread reveals that two originally independent encomia were combined by means of a new lengthy title, a very common expedient in this late period to actualize works. The first nucleus is dedicated to the possibility of a bishop marrying, as the apostle Peter did, while the second is a sort of romance about a woman from Antioch, whose name was Martyria, who wished to reach Alexandria and its archbishop peter I to have her sons baptized. It is possible that the two works were combined in order to enforce a joint commemoration of the two saints in the liturgical calendar. In any case, the two protagonists, both archbishops of Alexandria, perfectly embodied the Coptic identity and satisfied the necessity to reinforce the population’s faith with the exemplary lives of founding characters.
5.4 Poetic Production poetry, strictly defined as a composition characterized by a metrical rhythm and an evident aesthetical linguistic choice, is one of the literary genres which, for some reason, was never fully developed in Coptic. There are, however, a few exceptions, consisting in hymns created for immediate liturgical purposes.
Among these exceptions, often difficult to date, are thirteen acrostic hymns preserved by a manuscript in Sahidic (with some Fayyumic influences) from the Monastery of the Archangel Michael in Hamouli, Fayyum (see dayr al-malak mikha’il (fayyum)) (New York, Morgan Library and Museum, M574). The hymns are composed of 24-line stanzas, using the 24 letters of the Greek alphabet in sequence at the beginning of each stanza, although in one case the letters are arranged in reverse order. It should be stressed that the later Bohairic hymns, Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 18 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 known as Psalis, are also acrostic compositions and probably derive from these types of compositions (Kuhn and Tait 1996).
It is intriguing that the six supplementary letters of the Coptic alphabet are not used to begin stanzas. This absence may suggest that the acrostic was regarded as a Greek type of literary composition, or that the Sahidic manuscript was based on a Greek exemplar (Montserrat 1998: 422–425).
The content includes praise of the Virgin, the apostles, and various saints. Other themes include the Resurrection, the Ascension, and baptism.
It is clear that they were conceived to correspond to related seasons in the ecclesiastical year. Moreover, the composition of this specific form of poetry perfectly fits the political goals of the period’s Coptic production. The fact that some hymns are dedicated to severus of antioch (hymns VI and XI) and Shenoute (hymn xiii), both of whom are the embodiment of the anti-Chalcedonian spirit, demonstrate that, in addition to their liturgical purpose, the hymns also had a political (and maybe even polemical) dimension.
6. The So-Called Synaxarial Arrangement and the Last Phase of Coptic Literature The last phase of Coptic literature is characterized by the arrangement and selection of those texts which, reworked and modified—also by being given new lengthy titles—appeared useful for the preservation and defense of Coptic cultural and religious identity, and also for liturgical use. This is attested to by the recurring presence of a date and reference to a specific commemoration.
These texts were collected in multiple-text parchment codices (or miscellanies), which were often very capacious and could be considered “one-volume libraries.” It is noteworthy that this literary period coincides with an increasingly pervasive use of the Arabic language. Therefore, this late production in Coptic represents, in some way, an extreme and anachronistic resistance in an Egypt which, by then, had become predominantly arabophone.
The most evident and remarkable result of this selection, rearrangement, and adaptation, which can be defined as a systematic revision of previous literary production and a work of literary criticism, is represented by the Alexandrian Synaxarium. This consists of a selection of hundreds of hagiographic and encomiastic texts, abbreviated and arranged according to the needs of the liturgical calendar, and which also served to valorize the places of cult (martyrs’ shrines, basilicas, thaumaturgic sanctuaries, etc.). Despite the fact that the extant redaction of the Synaxarium is in Arabic, there is no doubt that this is based on the above-mentioned critical process and an original Coptic version is highly conceivable. According to Tito Orlandi, this operation of selection and critical re-thinking of past literary production mainly depended on the environment of the Monastery of Macarius’ cultural center (Orlandi 2018a: 58–65) and, therefore, was operated when Bohairic was in the process of replacing Sahidic as Coptic Egypt’s main linguistic tool. The conviction that Bohairic became the literary language par excellence only from the end of the eighth century, however, was recently revised and clarified (Luisier 2018: 95–102).
Nevertheless, the Arabic language rapidly became increasingly intrusive, passing from the role of bureaucratic and legislative idiom to that of the new exclusive language of everyday life and literary Egypt, thus determining the formation of Copto-Arabic literature. From the beginning of the eleventh century until, presumably, the middle of the thirteenth century, a phenomenon akin to that of the dawn of Coptic literature developed: just as biblical and homiletic works were translated from Greek into Coptic from the fourth century, efforts were made to translate Coptic literature into Arabic, or at least that part of it that was still considered interesting. If, in comparison to other regions of the Christian East, the Copts underwent this process later, thereby preserving their own language for a longer period of time, Claremont Coptic Encyclopedia 19 Paola Buzi, Coptic Literature: Update 13 November 2021 the translation process of literary written heritage was faster in Egypt than anywhere else (Rubenson 1996: 4–14).
Roughly between the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, the period that interests us here, liturgical, canonical, apocryphal, and biblical texts were initially translated, largely on private initiative and with rather modest qualitative results (both linguistic and bibliological). In general, it is clear that written Arabic was still mastered with difficulty, as confirmed by the large number of Coptic terms used, while the discovery of numerous documentary texts in the Coptic language leads us to believe that this was, after all, still widely used.
However, in the second half of the tenth century, the first notable Coptic author who wrote in Arabic, Severus of Shmun/Ashmunein (sāwīrus ibn al-muqaffaʿ), was already active, paradoxically lamenting the speed with which Coptic was forgotten by the Christian community, a topos that would then become recurrent. A completely new phase had opened for Coptic literature, but the Coptic language would no longer be its linguistic medium. There is only one exception which, in light of what has just been described, is a very difficult case to evaluate: the rhyming poem known as The Triadon (Sidarus 1978: 125–141; Nagel 1983; MacCoull 1997: 83–148) (see poetry). Written in Sahidic (and Arabic) in the fourteenth century by an unknown author, very likely from the south of Egypt, as the dialect used suggests, it is only preserved by one acephalous paper manuscript of unknown origin, which reached the collection of Cardinal Stefano Borgia (1731–1804) via unknown paths. If the exact use of this poem, structured into stanzas of four verses, which some scholars defined as “didactic” without better clarifying the reason for this definition, is unclear (communitarian recital? silent reading?), it is evident that its author made an enormous effort to select the appropriate Coptic terms for the lexicographic composition, often forcing the language to the point of making it almost unintelligible.
In other words, the last known original literary work in the Coptic language appears to be an artificial product, an erudite creation that drew on a variety of sources—biblical and apocryphal works, non-Chalcedonian hagiography, and monastic and gnomic literature—and was devoid of any natural cultural context.
Lastly, it is worth mentioning the case of a fifteenth/sixteenth-century multilingual manuscript in Sahidic, with some sections in Bohairic, in a very coarse form of Greek, and in Arabic translation, very likely from the White Monastery, that preserves the Feast of the Desert of Apa Shenoute, that is, the description of the rite of a processional liturgy associated with the White Monastery and celebrated on the Monday of the second week of Lent (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, MS Copte 68 + Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, MS Insinger 44). As has been suggested, however, this manuscript would reflect a processional practice with late antique or early medieval origins and therefore the text would be just a late copy—and maybe partial rearrangement—of an older tradition (Davis, Schriever, Farag, and Moawad 2020).