Book 1.Indb 243 15/06/16 11:42 244 S

doi: 10.2143/ANES.53.0.3154568 ANES 53 (2016) 243-274 Some Features of Coptic Identity Samuel MOAWAD Abstract In a multi-lingual and multi-religious society such as the Egyptian one, the development of the collective memory is obvious and can be traced in order to identify the events in Christian Egypt that were most influential in shaping Coptic consciousness. Coptic identity can be recognised in every element of the Coptic heritage, such as literature, archaeology and art. The present paper tries to highlight the self- identification of the Copts as it is reflected in their own literary texts produced until the end of the Mam- luk period (1517 CE). Since Coptic identity is variegated, this brief study will be limited to only three features: language, conversion and martyrdom, and apologetics and religious dialogue.* Forming the identity of a nation is a cultural production that consists of various features. Religion, regardless of how important it is or how much influence it has on the other features, is only one component. However, in their attempt to define the features of Coptic identity, Copts have shown a tendency to confuse what is religious with what is cultural. The limitation of the Coptic identity to only the religious aspect, in which other Christians also participate, leads to the distortion of the substance of that identity. Even this “religious” identity is not purely Coptic, but rather Christian. Therefore, I think that the definition of “Coptic identity” in modern times still needs more discussion and clarification. The Arab conquest of Egypt in 641 was, alongside the persecution in 303 and the Chalcedonian schism in 451, the main element in shaping and establishing Coptic collective self-identification. It is quite clear that Egypt remained predominantly Coptic in language and Christian in religion and culture until sometime in the ninth century. However, the Arabicisation process was faster and deeper than Islamisation, so that Coptic culture had apparently become completely Arabi- cised by the 13th century. On the other hand, the last stage of Islamisation began after that, occurring during the Mamluk period (1250–1517). The Coptic Church under Muslim rulers needed to present itself, its history and, most of all, its beliefs in a different way from how it had before. It had to re-explain its dogma in a way that suited the new milieu of Arabic-Islamic culture. This circumstance was the motive for a new Coptic literature in the Arabic language that flourished in the 13th century and was influenced by the surrounding Islamic culture in the Near East in general and Egypt in particular. In this article, I will discuss three important features of Coptic self-identification as reflected in some Coptic and Arabic literary sources to demonstrate how the Copts identified and pre- sented themselves and how their identity developed. * I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Johannes den Heijer for comments, corrections and additional bibliography. Mistakes and errors are my own. Book 1.indb 243 15/06/16 11:42 244 S. MOAWAD The Language Language is a major element in the process through which one obtains knowledge and forms the features of one’s own identity. Choosing to speak or write in a certain language, whether one’s mother tongue or a foreign language, depends on the power the speakers of that language enjoy. The desire of an ethnic minority group to integrate into another community is a primary motive for adopting its language and lifestyle. Conversely, if the minority group has the author- ity, some of the native people may try to learn the language of the conquerors in order to associate with them and thereby achieve benefits or avoid harm. Bilingualism already existed in Egypt in Pharaonic times. In the sixth century BCE there was a Greek community in Memphis; however, by the third century those Greek speakers had lost their Greekness. In 332 BCE Alexander the Great occupied Egypt. Most of his successors, the Ptolemies, did not try to learn the language of their subjects. Queen Cleopatra VII was the exception. Speaking in Greek became a sign of superiority and of being well educated. Egyptian society was divided into ethnic and religious groups with various languages. Some Egyptian natives adopted a double cultural life so that they had two names, an Egyptian one at home and a Greek one in society. However, the situation changed after the Roman occupation in 30 BCE, when the Greeks in Egypt became subjects of the Roman Empire. The Egyptian bilingual society then stood face to face with the new invader and his new language, Latin.1 In the first century CE there were two phenomena that changed Egyptian history; namely, the spreading of Christianity and the evolution of the Egyptian language to reach its final stage, which is known as Coptic. The Coptic language derives from ancient Egyptian, which was still used in Pharaonic temples until the sixth century CE. The adoption of the Greek alphabet to write the Egyptian language saved it from disappearance. Egyptian became more and more difficult to learn as the number of signs increased, eventually reaching 6000. From the end of the second century CE on, Egyptian signs were hardly readable. The hieroglyphic signs became more decorative figures than functional tools for communication.2 Knowledge of Old Egyptian became weak and synonymous with paganism in the eyes of the Christians. However, in the first centuries CE there were still Christians who understood how the Egyptian language functioned. Clement of Alexandria (d. 220), for example, shows a good understanding of the Egyptian script and how it works. In the fourth chapter of the fifth book of his Stromata he writes: Now those instructed among the Egyptians learned first of all that style of the Egyptian letters which is called Epistolographic; and second, the Hieratic, which the sacred scribes practice; and finally, and last of all, the Hieroglyphic, of which one kind which by the first elements is literal (Kyriologic), and the other Symbolic. Of the Symbolic, one kind speaks literally by imitation, and another writes as it were figuratively; and another is quite allegorical, using certain enigmas. Wishing to express Sun in writing, they make a circle; and Moon, a figure like the Moon, like its proper shape. But in using the figurative style, by transposing and transferring, by changing and 1 Torallas Tovar 2010, pp. 19–28. 2 Sternberg-El Hotabi 1994, pp. 221–239. Book 1.indb 244 15/06/16 11:42 SOME FEATURES OF COPTIC IDENTITY 245 by transforming in many ways as suits them, they draw characters. In relating the praises of the kings in theological myths, they write in anaglyphs.3 In contrast with Clement, in the second/third century Shenoute of Atripe (d. 465)4 shows a complete ignorance of the Egyptian script and makes it an object of ridicule: There is nothing else portrayed for them except the likeness of the snakes and scorpions, the dogs and cats, the crocodiles and frogs, the foxes, the other reptiles, the beasts and birds, the cattle, etc.; furthermore, the likeness of the sun and the moon and all the rest, all their things being nonsense and humbug—and where these are, it is the soul-saving scriptures of life that will henceforth come to be therein.5 After the Greek occupation by Alexander the Great, and particularly in the first century BCE, some attempts were made to write Egyptian personal names and short texts using the Greek alphabet; this is called “pre-Old Coptic”. Other more numerous and systematic attempts were made in the first and second century CE to write long texts using the Greek alphabet in addition to signs derived from Demotic; that is, Old Coptic.6 This new writing system opened a wide horizon for the new religion, Christianity, which was preached in Alexandria in the first century by the apostle Mark, according to the ecclesiastical tradition. In the fourth century, Coptic developed into a standard language. We have evidence that various parts or whole books of both the Old and New Testaments were translated from Greek into Coptic in the third century.7 However, the language first took its final form in the fourth century. The monastic movement, which arose at that time under native Egyptians, played a key role in standardising Coptic, especially in the writings of the Archimandrite Shenoute of Atripe, which reached the highest level of Sahidic Coptic. Although Greek was the language of the administration, most Egyptians in Upper and Lower Egypt, and plenty of monks and clerics, could not speak this language. Therefore, it was important to organise an interpreting service in monasteries and hermitic settlements, as attested in monastic literature.8 In Alexandria, the capital of the land, Greek was the most widely spoken and best understood language. The famous narrative of Dioscorus, the patriarch of Alexandria (444–454), and the Coptic bishop Macarius of Tkōou from Upper Egypt illustrates the point well. On the ship to attend the Council of Chalcedon in 451, the patriarch could not commu- nicate with his bishop because he did not speak Coptic but rather Greek, which the bishop did not understand. This fact led Theopistus, the disciple of Dioscorus, to describe the bishop as “mouthless one”.9 From other sources we know that the same Dioscorus sent a letter to the 3 Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, vol. 4, in Stählin 1960, p. 339; English translation, Schaff and Wace 1994, vol. 2, p. 449. 4 The date of the death of Shenoute is debatable, see Luisier 2009. 5 Shenoute of Atripe, Acephalous Work A6 in Young 1981, p.

Load more