tical system, which was known by the name of Gnosticismb.

answer.

The question has often been asked, why the Evangelists do not represent our Saviour as taking any notice of the sect of the Essenes: but the words of Philo will, I think, furnish us with a sufficient He divides the Essenes into the practical and the contemplative: the former were those who lived in Syria and Palestine; the latter were those who were dispersed in other countries. The practical Essenes appear to have been few: Philo and Josephus compute them at only four thousand; a small number for the whole of Syria and Palestine: and since we read that they lived in villages, avoiding the large towns, it is not extraordinary that we do not hear of them in the discourses of our Saviour, who was generally in Jerusalem when he addressed the Pharisees and Sadducees. The fact seems to have been, that the Essenes were originally Pharisees: but adopting more rigid habits, and living in retired places, they preserved the austerity of the Pharisees without their hypocrisy; and as to matters of religion, they did not much depart from the manners of their forefathers. But the contemplative Essenes, or Therapeutæ, were a very different race of men. According to Philo, they were to be found in several parts of the world, but abounded particularly

b We have the most valuable and authentic materials for the history of the Essenes in the two works of Philo, Quod liber sit quisquis, &c. vol. II. p. 457. and de Vita Contemplativa, p. 471: and in Josephus, Antiq. XIII. 5.9: XVIII.

1. 5. de Bello Jud. II. 8. 2. Eusebius has also preserved an account, which was given of them by Porphyry, de Abstinentia, IV. p. 332. (Præp.Evang. IX. 3.) but it is evidently taken from Josephus.

in Egypt and in the neighbourhood of Alexandria. Egypt, it may be observed, has at all periods been distinguished for men leading solitary lives: monachism took its rise in Egypt: and the contemplative Essenes might not unfitly be described as Jewish, or rather Platonic monks. In religion, they were so far Jews, that they worshipped one God: but Josephus expressly says, that they did not partake in the public sacrifices; and when Philo speaks of their books, he does not mean merely the scriptures, but writings of the founders of their sect, which were filled, as he says, with dark and obscure sayings. Their life, as their name implies, was a life of contemplation. Temperate and abstemious in their habits, and shunning the abodes of men, they passed their days in retirement, giving themselves up to an unceasing and mystical devotion32. Persons in this frame of mind were well suited to prepare the way for Gnosticism: and the same state of things, which led to the eclectic philosophy and the schools of the later Platonists, would also produce the doctrines of the Gnostics.

The Pseudo-Dionysius appears to have considered depaTEVTai and μovaxoi as synonymous. (Eccles. Hierarch. VI. 3. p. 386. ed. 1634.) But the term poraxos was not used till long after the apostolic age; and monachism probably owed its rise to the severity of persecution, as Sozomen observes, I. 12. and Niceph. Call. VIII. 39. ̓Ασκήτης was a term in much earlier use with the Christians, and was taken from heathen writers. (See Casaub. Exerc. II. ad Baron. §. 13. Suicer. voc. ἀσκήτης et μοναχός. Valesius in Eus. II. 17.) So

crates says, that dokηrýpia had probably existed a long time in Egypt, but that the system was carried much further by Ammon, who lived A.D. 330. (IV. 23.) Sozomen observes, that there were no monastic establishments in Europe about the year 340; and that they were introduced into Palestine by Hilarion, who lived at the same period. (III. 14. p. 116.) Athanasius mentions dσκηrai at Rome in the year 355. (Hist. Arian. ad Monachos, 38. p. 366.) See Bingham, Antiquities, VII. 1, 4. Mosheim, de Rebus ante Const. Cent. II. 35. Not. m.

The eclectic philosophy, of which Potamon has been looked upon as the founder, was an attempt, not in itself irrational, to unite different systems. The supporters of it read the Jewish and Christian scriptures: and their ambition was to prove that both of them were borrowed from Plato. It was in this school that some of the Christian Fathers studied and the names of Ammonius, Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus, and others, though connected with some of the most formidable attacks which were made upon Christianity, were sufficient to entitle the later Platonists to a great and merited celebrity 33.

Gnosticism in the mean time had proceeded from the same source, but had run on in a much more tortuous and devious course. I have perhaps said enough to shew, that the Platonic school of Alexandria was the real cause of Gnosticism d. We may suppose, that discussions would be frequent among the learned men of different sects, who frequented that city and it appears, that leaving the more useful branches of ethical, political, or physical philosophy, many or most of them perplexed themselves with the eternal question, Unde malum, et quare? What is the source and the cause of evile? This diffi

d Strabo, who flourished while our Saviour was upon earth, says of the Alexandrians, "they receive many foreign"ers, and have sent out not a "few of their own people: and "there are schools there of all "sorts of science and litera"ture." XIV. p. 463. ed. 1587.

e The minute discussions of the Alexandrian philosophers afforded much amusement in

ancient times, and Timon Phlia-
sius wrote this epigram upon
their endless contentions;

πολλοὶ μὲν βόσκονται ἐν Αἰγύ
πτῳ πολυφύλῳ
βιβλιακοὶ χαρακεῖται, ἀπείριτα
δηριοῶντες,

Μουσέων ἐν ταλάρῳ.
Athen. Deipnos. I. 22. (p. 84.
ed. Schw.)

Philetas of Cos, who was received by Ptolemy Soter, wast

culty has been thought by some to have led to all the false religions which have appeared in the world and the Gnostics, in order to solve the question, built up a monstrous and extravagant system by the union of many creeds. It was with this view, that they placed Matter beyond the limits of the Pleroma, which was the abode of the supreme God. For this also they invented their numerous succession of Eons, by one of whom, without the command or the will of God, the world was created. This was the scheme and framework of the Gnostic theology. Whatever militated against it, was allegorized and tortured into agreement. To study this system, was not the means, but the end. They boasted that they alone could have the knowledge of God and to become perfect in this knowledge, was the only true object of human existence. The disputes of different sects in Alexandria, and the adtional excitement, which was given by the Jewish scriptures, led gradually to this mystical philosophy; and if we are right in supposing that the Jews after the captivity borrowed many opinions from Persia, we may add the eastern doctrine of two Principles as another and important element in Gnosticism f. This view of the subject may reconcile all hypotheses: and we may conclude, that those who have deduced Gnosticism from the doctrines of the Magi,

ed away and died, because he could not solve the fallacy called evoóμevos (Suidas in v.) and Diodorus of Iasus about the same period died of grief, because he could not answer Stilpo of Megara (Diog. Laërt. 1. II. Vit. Euclid.)

Clement of Alexandria in

forms us, that the followers of Prodicus (who were Gnostics) boasted of having some mysterious books of Zoroaster. (Strom. I. 15. p. 357) The same is said of the Gnostics by Porphyry in his life of Ploti

nus.

of Plato, or of the Cabbala, are all in one sense right; and that from these three sources, with the addition of Christianity as soon as it appeared, the different schemes of Gnosticism were formed.

It is not so important, nor indeed would it be possible, to mark the time when Gnosticism began. The seeds of it were sown, when rival schools first disputed upon the origin of evil; when the Jews first took to allegorize their scriptures; and when the Platonic Essenes made religion consist in contemplation. The name of Gnostic was of much later application; probably not till some time after the appearance of Christianity. We meet with it first in Irenæus, who uses it as a generic term to describe all the heretics, who engrafted Christianity upon heathen philosophy: and he tells us, that the persons, against whom he was writing, assumed the title to themselves 8. We may conclude therefore, that the term Gnostic was in common use before the time when the work of Irenæus was composed: and some writers have imagined it to be introduced about the middle of the second century b.

It is demonstrable, however, that long before this time, and in the early days of Grecian philosophy,

g I. 25, 6. p. 104, 105. The term yvσis is used in the Epistle of Barnabas for the mystical interpretation of scripture. (§. 6. p. 18. §. 9. p. 29. §. 10. p. 35.) But though it may be proved that this Epistle was in existence in the middle of the second century, there is no positive evidence that it was written before the end of the first century. (See Ittigius de

Haresiarchis, II. 9. 22. p. 181. Thomasius, Schediasm. Hist. §. 32. p. 20.) Justin Martyr seems to allude to the Gnostics, when he says, "He that thinks "to know any thing without "true knowledge, knows no"thing: he is deceived by the "serpent." Epist. ad Diognet. 12. p. 240.

See Colbergius, de Orig. et Prog. Hæres. II. 2. p. 50.