Pistis Sophia

Pistis Sophia — G. R. S. Mead — Section 24

there may also be another reason, as we shall suggest later on, for the " losing of the thread." Nevertheless the main argument of this learned Coptic scholar is unanswerable. And not only is it evident that we are dealing with a translation into Coptic from Greek, but also that ^ -, ,. . General we are not dealing Avith a single work, but at analysis least with two treatises, fragments of one of which ^^ ^^^' tents. have been in two places inserted in the body of the main treatise, and a larger fragment appended at the end of the MS. The main narrative also is broken by several important lacunre, due in one case to the loss of several leaves of the MS., and generally to the carelessness of the scribe ; the MS. is, moreover, evidently incomplete. A general analysis of the contents reveals the following general outline of contents, the refei'ences being to the pagination of the MS. adopted in Schwartze's text, which is retained between brackets in the present translation. Pistis Sophia, Book 1 1-124 Pistis Sophia, Book 11. ... 126-357 From the Books of the Saviour . . 357-390 There is, however, no title to Book I., nor does there seem to be any reason why the title " The Second Book of Pistis Sophia " should be inserted where it is, right in the middle of the narrative. Book II. ends halfway down page 357, and the whole subject abruptly changes with the heading, " Extnxct from the Books of the Saviour." In addition to these three main divisions of the MS., two pages (253-254), with the same heading, " Extract from the Books of the Saviour," are inserted at haphazard in the middle of Book II. They have no reference to what goes before or what follows; nor are they quite of the same nature as the lengthier Extract at the end of the MS. There is, moreover, a note which occupies the last column of Book I., and which has not the slightest reference to the rest of the nai'rative ; why it is inserted in this place is a XXX INTRODUCTION. mystery. It was probably copied iu by mistake, or the Coptic translator for some reason or other added a note from some other book, most })robably one of the Books of the Saviour.