Huck wrote:

Wiki states ...

Gikatilla at times criticizes the Sefer Yeẓirah and the Pirḳe Hekalot. The seven heavens (Ḥag. 12a) are identified by him with the seven planets. He holds Maimonides in great esteem even when he opposes him, and quotes him very often. Other authorities quoted by him are Ibn Gabirol, Samuel ibn Naghrela, and Abraham ibn Ezra. Isaac ben Samuel of Acre in his Me'irat 'Enayyim severely criticizes Gikatilla for too free usage of the Holy Name.

Ptelomy had spheres, but who knew Ptolemy?

The Chaldean order - true - is given with SY.

Well, Abraham ibn Ezra, whom according to the above Gikatilla quotes from, wrote at least 12 books on astrology, which cite Ptolemy extensively. Many of the early commentators on the SY too display extensive knowledge of astrology.

hm ...

In the Middle Ages, before the twelfth century, when his work was being discovered and studied in detail by Islamic scholars, little more than his name was remembered in the Latin West; as early as the Encyclopedia of Isidore of Seville (c.600 AD) he was confused with the dynasty of Ptolemies who had ruled Egypt after Alexander the Great, and from that sprang an iconographic tradition, lasting a thousand years, in which Ptolemy was regularly represented wearing a crown.

http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/starry/ptolemy.html


1377

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_spheres

13th century (Sacrobosco), text written ca. 1230

http://dutarte.perso.neuf.fr/instrument ... obosco.htm

It's difficult to find really old pictures with the sphere model.

Likely one has to assume, that early kabbalists were more conservative. Gikatilla seems to have had a modern orientation. Well, perhaps the first, who risked to use more astrological/astronomical material in "own interpretation".

Ptolemy had more books written than the Almagest. Perhaps these other texts hadn't a focus on the spheres. So Abraham ibn Ezra' texts quoted from other Ptolemy editions.

Huck wrote:
Ptolemy had more books written than the Almagest. Perhaps these other texts hadn't a focus on the spheres. So Abraham ibn Ezra' texts quoted from other Ptolemy editions.

No, he quotes from both the Almagest and the Tetrabiblos extensively. As the SY is not a western European text anyway, I am not sure what the issue is? What educated Europeans knew pre-1250 is irrelevant. Ezra translated many arabic texts in Hebrew c.1150, many of these were later translated into Latin (Ezra's texts were an important influence on the spread of arabic astrology in Europe, not only astrology, but arabic/indian numbers too). Many Jewish scholar weren't dependent on Latin anyway - many had a grasp not only of Hebrew, but Aramaic, Arabic and to a lesser extent Greek -- many texts were introduced into Europe via Jewish translators.

Ezra cites not only Ptolemy, but Indian, Persian & Egyptian authorities too. His method is generally to compare what each has to say on a subject and where there are differences explains which he believes is correct and why.

SteveM wrote: As the SY is not a western European text anyway, I am not sure what the issue is? What educated Europeans knew pre-1250 is irrelevant.

Just my personal interest to know, when Spanish Kabbala took up planet names as attribute for Sephiroth.

Huck wrote:

SteveM wrote: As the SY is not a western European text anyway, I am not sure what the issue is? What educated Europeans knew pre-1250 is irrelevant.

Just my personal interest to know, when Spanish Kabbala took up planet names as attribute for Sephiroth.

Well, such attributions are in the Zohar, so by at least 13th century.

Ezra also uses the order Saturn to Moon, excepting where he is talking about the rulership of the signs, when it is Sun, Moon, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus & Mercury. After explaining why the Sun and Moon rule Leo and Cancer, Saturn being of opposite nature is given rulership of opposite signs Aquarius & Capricorn, then the other planets adjacent signs in the usual (chaldean) order, so each planet has rulership of both a solar sign and a lunar sign. I mention it only because of my observation earlier re: the solar signs appearing on the right side of the tree and and the lunar signs appearing on the left.

The poem 'Keter Malkuth' by the Spanish Jewish neoplatonist Ibn Gabirol (b.1026) follows the Ptoloamaic scheme with the addition of 'intellect' going from earth to the outer spheres :

(God)
10. “Sphere of Intellect” (galgal ha-sêkhel) (cantos 24–25)
9. Encompassing Sphere (canto 23)
8. Zodiac / Fixed Stars (cantos 21–22)
7. Saturn (canto 20)
6. Jupiter (canto 19)
5. Mars (canto 18)
4. Sun (cantos 15–17)
3. Venus (canto 14)
2. Mercury (canto 13)
1. Moon (cantos 11–12)
(Earth)

Ibn Gabirol's works are cited by several early (and later) kabbalists. The poem itself is recited to this day by Sephardic Jews on Yom Kippur.

Jewish astronomers were also employed for the production of astronomical tables in Europe, often based upon Islamic ones but corrected for the latitudes of Europe. For example 12 Jewish astronomers were involved in the production of the Toledo Tables (11th century c.1080) , others were involved with the Alphonsine Tables (13th century). The tables were based upon Ptolomy's geocentric model and methods of calculation (which produced accurate results despite being a false model through the use of epicycles).

Through the influence of hellenism the geocentric cosmology is also found in the Talmud.

In reference to the directions associated with the signs, the Talmud generally associates the first three signs with the east, the next three with the south, the next three with the west and the final three with the north. However there is also another order in the Talmud with the fiery signs northerly, the earthy signs westerly, the airy signs southerly and the water signs easterly.

I am responding to Huck at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1049&start=140#p16126. You started out:

I think, the SY is not a text with very high-ranked astronomy. It's too short for this, at least in its astrological parts. Just my humble opinion.

I don't think the SY used very high-level astronomy. It takes no great knowledge to think of the region of the Fixed Stars as a sphere. All one has to do is look up at night in a place without streetlights and notice how stars that were below the horizon appear over the course of the night. The most difficult part is assuming that the earth is round. Every educated person in ancient times knew the earth was round. Sailors knew about the curvature of the earth; they saw it all the time. I expect that people who roamed the desert knew about it, too, if they had been in places where broad expanses of flat land alternated with high mountains. They also would have known that on the surface of this globe they lived between one of the poles and the equator. That is not very sophisticated knowledge. You can tell by the stars. They may or may not have had a Pole Star (depending on when the earliest SY was written), but they certainly knew about the Little Bear and the changing position of the end of its tail from the horizon as you go north. Wikipedia says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaris):

The Greek navigator Pytheas in ca. 320 BCE described the celestial pole as devoid of stars. However, as one of the brighter stars close to the celestial pole, Polaris was used for navigation at least from late antiquity, and described as ἀεί φανής (aei phanēs) "always visible" by Stobaeus (5th century).

But whatever stars were closest to the celestial pole would have been used by navigators from whenever people sailed beyond view of land.

The rest, about the north/south positions of the zodiacal constellations, I admit is going beyond the astrology of the SY. It is not essential to my interpretation. All the same, I still think that most people then, even shepherds, would have known that the sun's course changed over the year and that its changing path was also that of certain constellations in the night sky. People actually looked at the night sky then, and it wasn't hard to see. For its part, the priestly caste was, during Roman times in the Eastern Mediterranean, debating the heliocentric vs. geocentric model of the motion of the planets, until the Church declared the heliocentric theory to be heresy. I don't know if debates resumed when the Arabs took over or not. (My hypothesis does not depend on heliocentrism.) Astronomers came out of the priestly caste; that skill was needed to calculate when holidays were going to be, if nothing else. But as I say, most of that is not important. The Egyptians had a rather complex knowledge of astronomy even at the time of the pyramids, and the Israelites would have learned from them, as well as from the Babylonians later.

I do think that a section of the priesthood understood basic solid geometry. That is something anybody who built and maintained anything as complex as the Temple of Jerusalem had to know.

In your case for the influence of the I Ching on the Sefer Yetzirah, you assume a basic understanding of solid geometry as well, by which I mean being able to visualize in three dimensions in a way that you can know how a change in one place affects other places in the system, how the various parts relate in a 3-dimensional geometric way.

I do not think the SY depends on anything about cardinal, fixed, etc. signs. That is not mentioned. Also, the geometric division into those in the SY is only approximate, even in the Gra and Long version. I explain that coincidence as related to the verbal associations on which their orderings are built, word association and differentiation to form distinct groups, as opposed to the geometric associations of the short version and Bahir.

Or do you want to argue that the system of cardinal, fixed, and mutable signs somehow derives from the I Ching, too? Maybe so. I'm not saying you're wrong. But using your hypothesis as a basis for rejecting other hypotheses seems to me unjustified. Supposing that the ancient Hebrews had your complex understanding of the I Ching, or somehow duplicated your understanding of it based on sketchy knowledge, seems at least as speculative as what I am doing. It does not seem to me a development that was so obvious as not to need writing down. On the other hand, since I don't understand it, I concede that I'm not in the best position to judge would have been obvious in ancient times.

You write,

We have contradictions with three authentic variants (Bahir, Long-Gra, Short). We've a 4th suggestion on the base of the similarities between SY and I-Ching caused by the binary scheme.

"Binary schemes" can explain many things: cubes and octohedrons, for example. It is how "binary schemes" are used that is crucial, of course. That complex use you attribute to the I Ching is a difficult one to transport from China to the Middle East.

But ou can interpret the SY by means of the I Ching; that's fine. I don't reject what I don't understand. It may be one interpretation out of several equally valid--not a lot, but several. As I say, I find the octohedron and cube interpretations to be equally valid and mutually compatible, each bringing out part of what is there.

When Scholem says the Bahir came from the east, he might have been thinking of the person who brought secret sacred books to Lucca and gave them to the family I talked about at the beginning of this thread. Part of the family went to the Rhineland and part of it to Provence. Kabbalah was in Provence (Narbonne, which these days wouldn't be considered Provence) before it went south of the Pyrenees, and even then it went to Gerona before Castille. At least that's what I've read.

When you speak of "transmission errors", these are usually due to mistaken assumptions on the part of the transcriber. Also, copyists were also redactors, i.e. correctors of what they took to be errors or confusions in the text. I have given reasons for thinking that such "corrections" were introduced in the Bahir and Long Versions, namely, the gradual loss of a geometric understanding of the zodiacal signs in relation to the night sky, replacing it with verbal configurations. The assumption that there was a hidden division into cardinal, fixed, and mutable signs where none existed is another possible reason for error. This feature can work in both directions.

It seems to me that the Bahir is earlier than the Gra or Long Version. If so, it must be based on something earlier, because it only contains a fragment lifted from a longer text. That fragment is more similar to the Short Version than to the others. Is there any historical basis, as opposed to your speulations about the I Ching, for supposing otherwise?

One other issue of mutual interest is the question of when planets got associated with sefirot. It does not seem to be in the SY in any of its versions, or in the associated diagrams (Gra and Luria are the only ones I know for sure, where they are associated, in different ways, with the elemental letters and the diagonals). In Alemanno I only see Saturn mentioned, associated with Binah according to Idel. Pico makes other associations, for which he claims no Jewish authority (all are below Binah; he associates Saturn with Netzach). He knew the Zohar only through Recanati's quotations. But he also knew Gikatilla's "Gates of Justice". As far as I know, the Latin translations of these texts that he paid for are still sitting in Florence untranslated into any modern language, and maybe even still unpublished. There are occasional translations of bits of them in the literature, but nothing about planets that I know of.

Steve: In the Zohar, the only mention of planets that I could find--aside from Tiferet as the Sun and Malkhut as the Moon, which occurs many times--was in the "Chariot" section. They were associated with levels of the "seven supernal palaces"--which I assume correspond to the seven lower sefirot, but maybe included the third--but in a rather obscure way. So your sources in the Zohar for planetary associations to sefirot are of great interest to me.

mikeh wrote: Steve: In the Zohar, the only mention of planets that I could find--aside from Tiferet as the Sun and Malkhut as the Moon, which occurs many times--was in the "Chariot" section. They were associated with levels of the "seven supernal palaces"--which I assume correspond to the seven lower sefirot, but maybe included the third--but in a rather obscure way. So your sources in the Zohar for planetary associations to sefirot are of great interest to me.

It's in Kaplan somewhere - dog/housesitting at the moment so can't give exact reference, but it will be in the double's section, if memory serves me right it will be somewhere between p.180-190. However I believe there are variations in the Zohar, and none of them make any particular sense from an astrological point of view and are based more on linguistic puns and colours. For example if I recall right the moon is variously attributed to chesed, yesod, malkuth based upon considerations such the root of the word for moon is the same as that for stone (malkuth) or white (chesed).

SteveM wrote: However I believe there are variations in the Zohar, and none of them make any particular sense from an astrological point of view and are based more on linguistic puns and colours. For example if I recall right the moon is variously attributed to chesed, yesod, malkuth based upon considerations such the root of the word for moon is the same as that for stone (malkuth) or white (chesed).

For example Levanah (Moon) = stone = malkuth see Zohar Beresheet B 27.

The rest of the planets are mentioned too, 27:69

69....This continues until a planet called Saturn is reached in the second firmanent of the world of Asiyah. All seven planets are located in the world of Asiyah, and they are called Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury and Moon. Through these planets, every change comes to the world. The first planet, Saturn, feeds from the lowest of the seven chambers of the world of Briyah, and the rest of the planets from the other chambers...

Ki Tetze 25 also makes reference to the planets, Jupiter there for example is attributed to Yesod (or at least, the description is taken as Yesod by later commentators, the language and numbering could be interpreted to refer to another sefiroth, IMHO).

See also for example : Ha' Azinu 4 (seven firmanents and seven planets)

Tikuney Zohar 70. (A separate appendix to the Zohar - repairs to the zohar, first printed 1558, is different in style and contains interpolations of later kabbalists).

זהר לבן כלבנה זה גדול'ה. זהר זוהר אדום כמאדים זה גבור'ה.

Glowing (zohar) white as the Moon this is Gedulah. Zohar glowing red as Mars this is Geburah.

mikeh wrote: I do not think the SY depends on anything about cardinal, fixed, etc. signs. That is not mentioned.

It's a basic, that 3x4 = 12. There was a sexagesimalsystem used by the Sumerer. Another basic is, that 12 is good for cycles, cause you can divide it in 1/2, 1/3/ 1/4 and 1/6 and 1/12, which isn't so pleasant with 10. As time depends on cycles, you find there a use of 24 (2x12, hours), 60 (5x12, minutes and seconds) and 360 (30x12, degree and days of the year). The year has the pleasant quality, that it is about 12-13 moons and about roughly 360 days.

It goes too far too assume, that the SY didn't know the astrological 3x4 system of astrology/astronomy.

....

Or do you want to argue that the system of cardinal, fixed, and mutable signs somehow derives from the I Ching, too? Maybe so.

... :-) No, I can imagine, that the people in the west were able to count to 12 by own force.

I'm not saying you're wrong. But using your hypothesis as a basis for rejecting other hypotheses seems to me unjustified. Supposing that the ancient Hebrews had your complex understanding of the I Ching, or somehow duplicated your understanding of it based on sketchy knowledge, seems at least as speculative as what I am doing.

:-) ... There's naturally an abyss between me and them, but there's also an abyss between me and other modern persons, when I start to talk about I-Ching.
Perhaps this second abyss is greater than the first, as modern humanity has lost the sense for the really simple things. Leibniz, who detected the binary code, was totally puzzled, when he detected the binary code use of the Chinese in I-Ching.
In natural math the binary system appears before the decadic use. The decadic use comes to young humans, when Mum or Daddy show the thumb and say "One" and there are 10 long fingers.
The binary system understanding, which depends on the easiests numbers 1-2-3-4 developed, before you could speak any word. It's everybody's mental home, just the ability to differentiate. Light, dark, what's this noise? Sympathy - antipathy, who's "mummy"? In this jungle of the world you build the first concepts. 1, 2, 3, 4 ... and after that it get's too much for the moment. Anybody out there?
Contrasts pleasant - not pleasant, all oppositions = 2. Action - reaction - new situation. Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis = 3. Time cycling: Mummy comes, mummy is there, mummy leaves, mummy is not there. = 4

Even the DNS is organized according I-Ching patterns, better "according binary code".

It does not seem to me a development that was so obvious as not to need writing down. On the other hand, since I don't understand it, I concede that I'm not in the best position to judge would have been obvious in ancient times.

If you still spoke of "fixed etc."... yes, it should been a basic.

You write,

We have contradictions with three authentic variants (Bahir, Long-Gra, Short). We've a 4th suggestion on the base of the similarities between SY and I-Ching caused by the binary scheme.

"Binary schemes" can explain many things: cubes and octohedrons, for example. It is how "binary schemes" are used that is crucial, of course. That complex use you attribute to the I Ching is a difficult one to transport from China to the Middle East.

But ou can interpret the SY by means of the I Ching; that's fine. I don't reject what I don't understand. It may be one interpretation out of several equally valid--not a lot, but several. As I say, I find the octohedron and cube interpretations to be equally valid and mutually compatible, each bringing out part of what is there.

The author of SY spoke of "32" in the manner of specific number groups, 22 (= 3 + 7 + 12) + 10 (1+3+6), which can be identified as belonging to the binary code pattern. An accidental meeting of such a complex number group is not plausible, somehow there should be a context.
The author spoke also about other math qualities (whic have nothig to do with binary code math), and it is not realistic to assume, that he invented all SY content himself. It's more plausible, that he had a natural social context, which had prepared him to do this operation : write the SY.
A Sammelsurium of different traditions, perhaps occasionally an own idea added here and there. It's plausible, that the "32 ways" in their full context weren't made by him, he just had gotten it from somebody. Did he understand the full context? It's not plausible, otherwise we wouldn't discuss these different suggestions for the zodiac signs. And the text has other weaknesses, and possibly also broken traditions after the author of SY.

Special theme

Scholem (Origin ... p. 22) points in matters of an "earlier 32" to Preuschen, Zwei gnostische Hymnen. 1904 (object is a "Brautlied")

http://books.google.de/books?id=GJvhAAA ... olume&q=32

I found a German translation. It appears in the socalled Thomasakten as "Erste Tat des Apostels Judas Thomas",
Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha I, ed. R.A. Lipsius, 1891; II, 1 u. 2, ed M. Bonnet, 1898 (page 109)

I found an English version:
http://gnosis.org/library/actthom.htm

[this is the song]
The damsel is the daughter of light, in whom consisteth and dwelleth the proud brightness of kings, and the sight of her is delightful, she shineth with beauty and cheer. Her garments are like the flowers of spring, and from them a waft of fragrance is borne; and in the crown of her head the king is established which with his immortal food (ambrosia) nourisheth them that are founded upon him; and in her head is set truth, and with her feet she showeth forth joy. And her mouth is opened, and it becometh her well: thirty and two are they that sing praises to her. Her tongue is like the curtain of the door, which waveth to and fro for them that enter in: her neck is set in the fashion of steps which the first maker hath wrought, and her two hands signify and show, proclaiming the dance of the happy ages, and her fingers point out the gates of the city. Her chamber is bright with light and breatheth forth the odour of balsam and all spices, and giveth out a sweet smell of myrrh and Indian leaf, and within are myrtles strown on the floor, and [GARLANDS] of all manner of odorous flowers, and the door-posts(?) are adorned with freedst. And surrounding her her groomsmen keep her, the number of whom is seven, whom she herself hath chosen. And her bridesmaids are seven, and they dance before her. And twelve in number are they that serve before her and are subject unto her, which have their aim and their look toward the bridegroom, that by the sight of him they may be enlightened; and for ever shall they be with her in that eternal joy, and shall be at that marriage whereto the princes are gathered together and shall attend at that banquet whereof the eternal ones are accounted worthy, and shall put on royal raiment and be clad in bright robes; and in joy and exultation shall they both be and shall glorify the Father of all, whose proud light they have received, and are enlightened by the sight of their lord; whose immortal food they have received, that hath no failing (excrementum, Syr.), and have drunk of the wine that giveth then neither thirst nor desire. And they have glorified and praised with the living spirit, the Father of truth and the mother of wisdom.

A 32 is mentioned, twice 7 (female and male) and a 12.

32 = 32 ways
7 = 6+1 inside Sephiroth
7 = 6+1 inside double letters
12 = 12 in zodiac and simple letters
mothers = hidden or missing
3 first sephiroth = hidden or missing

The bride is generally received as "Sophia" (wisdom) by scholars.

Mike H wrote:

When Scholem says the Bahir came from the east, he might have been thinking of the person who brought secret sacred books to Lucca and gave them to the family I talked about at the beginning of this thread. Part of the family went to the Rhineland and part of it to Provence. Kabbalah was in Provence (Narbonne, which these days wouldn't be considered Provence) before it went south of the Pyrenees, and even then it went to Gerona before Castille. At least that's what I've read.

Right, the Kalonymos family. This might be.

When you speak of "transmission errors", these are usually due to mistaken assumptions on the part of the transcriber. Also, copyists were also redactors, i.e. correctors of what they took to be errors or confusions in the text. I have given reasons for thinking that such "corrections" were introduced in the Bahir and Long Versions, namely, the gradual loss of a geometric understanding of the zodiacal signs in relation to the night sky, replacing it with verbal configurations. The assumption that there was a hidden division into cardinal, fixed, and mutable signs where none existed is another possible reason for error. This feature can work in both directions.

There are a lot of trivial reasons for errors. We know this from our own operations. And these earlier persons hadn't a copy+paste function.

It seems to me that the Bahir is earlier than the Gra or Long Version. If so, it must be based on something earlier, because it only contains a fragment lifted from a longer text. That fragment is more similar to the Short Version than to the others. Is there any historical basis, as opposed to your speulations about the I Ching, for supposing otherwise?

Scholem perceives the Bahir as very chaotic (critical reader). Kaplan is much more optimistic ... :-) (believing reader).
In my opinion all three versions to the Zoia problem don''t get the original context.
From the general research experience: First (A) you have to get, that the "32 ways" are element of the binary code. Second (B) to this you have to get the zodiac riddle solved. If you're not really successful with A, you don't get B.
More difficult than B is the Sephiroth group (C), especially 4-9 or 5-10.

Much more difficult than ABC is the riddle about the number "620" ... :-) ... from the technical side. So the persons, who transported the "620" might lead to the real masters, who somehow knew, what they were doing. Naturally, everybody, who just transported the tradition of the 620, might know nothing about the real context.

One other issue of mutual interest is the question of when planets got associated with sefirot. It does not seem to be in the SY in any of its versions, or in the associated diagrams (Gra and Luria are the only ones I know for sure, where they are associated, in different ways, with the elemental letters and the diagonals). In Alemanno I only see Saturn mentioned, associated with Binah according to Idel. Pico makes other associations, for which he claims no Jewish authority (all are below Binah; he associates Saturn with Netzach). He knew the Zohar only through Recanati's quotations. But he also knew Gikatilla's "Gates of Justice". As far as I know, the Latin translations of these texts that he paid for are still sitting in Florence untranslated into any modern language, and maybe even still unpublished. There are occasional translations of bits of them in the literature, but nothing about planets that I know of.

Yes, they develop in chaotic manner, and it's not fun to have to do with so many contradictions. Isaac Luria becomes then interesting, offering qualitative new models. Well, I don't know enough about him.

I made a side-step, following a few links of Gerschom Scholem:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1056&p=16140#p16140

Following this way ...
The next interesting object what I found, was ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism
The Valentianism has a system of 30 Aeons ...



There's a group of 8 (highest, origin), a group of 10 and a group of 12. The quality of these is increasingly degraded, the lower, so more worse. The lowest is the Sophia. This is first not satisfied, and she fights, but an additional figure Horus helps to see the necessity of her situation and she finds a way to get harmony. After these difficulties the things turn to be good and Christ is born. ... so my rough interpretation.

Assuming, that this might be a forerunner or a relationship to the 32 ways of wisdom, I would interpret:

8 ... these are the 8 trigrams (which, as I earlier demonstrated, can be also interpreted as a 10)

10 ... this might be the mix of 3 mothers and 7 planets

12 ... the zodiac.

10 (=8) + 10 + 12 = 32

Valentinianism is a Gnostic Christian movement that was founded by Valentinus in the second century AD. Valentinianism was one of the major Gnostic movements. Its influence was extremely widespread, not just within Rome, but also from Egypt through Asia Minor and Syria in the east, and Northwest Africa.

Egypt - thanks to the calendar with 12x30 days - had a preference for the 30, why it are not 32, but 30.

Wiki has a 19th century picture of it: called Valentinian pleroma



The author of the picture added two figures ... with that it are 32 figures again: Horus and Eon Jesus



****************

Added later:

I wasn't the first with this 32 instead of 30 ...

The Spiritual Seed: The Church of the "Valentinians"
Einar Thomassen (2006)
https://books.google.de/books?id=kIs9Ub ... ns&f=false