The Gnostics and Their Remains

by Charles William King

This is a pre-1923 historical reproduction that was curated for quality. Quality assurance was conducted on each of these books in an attempt to remove books with imperfections introduced by the digitization process. Though we have made best efforts - the books may have occasional errors that do not impede the reading experience. We believe this work is culturally important and have elected to bring the book back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide.

Genres: Religion, History, Gnosticism, Reference

540 pages, Paperback

First published February 1, 1942

About the author

Charles William King was a British Victorian writer and collector of gems.

Reviews

[Will Cadle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Charles William King's The Gnostics and Their Remains provides a scholarly albeit laborious peek into the world of the Gnostics by way of glyptic artifacts he'd either collected or were available to him, such as those abiding in the British Museum.

With the discovery, about 80 years after King's book was published, of the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, it's become more clear that the Gnostics were not a coherent sect of Christians whose views varied from today's Church dogma, but that they were a diverse number of sects similar to how the Protestants are comprised of Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, and so forth. However, once the Church sorted through what would and would not be acceptable dogma, the Gnostics were branded heretics (as a side note, many scholars agree that both John and Paul were either Gnostics or supported some of the Gnostic beliefs).

King mostly sifts through the inscriptions on numerous Graeco-Roman artifacts available to him (he sold his own collection which was bequeathed to the Metropolitan Museum) thus providing a close study to the particulars inscribed on them. Many of these gems seem to've been inscribed with talismans to ward off evil spirits or cryptic prayers to protect the wearers, either in Greek or Roman.

So, if you are interested in reading what I consider a captivating overview of religions in general, nonetheless be prepared for a lot of Greek and Latin and without translation. King expected you to be a graduate of a university that provided a Classical Education, I can only assume. Though I've studied Latin (under duress) and have at least learned to read Greek well enough to make out and pronounce the words (out of a desire to read those phrases and words that Jung dribbles onto his writings), I'm not really competent with either (it's been too long since I last had to think about Caesar's Gallic War; and though I have an assemblage of notes on Greek, I found they weren't that much help with King, and I suspect it's because the Greek used at the time of the Gnostics is not the same as what's used today).

When King isn't ponderously detailing the glyptic prayers of some broach or signet ring, he amasses a fund of information on the Jewish-Christian origins of Gnosticism and also how syncretism bled into other religions like multi-colored laundry spattering its hues such that not only did Gnosticism incorporate aspects of other religions, but much of Judaism was affected by Egyptian beliefs (in particular Serapis); King goes on to sort through these religions and their influences as well as Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity in general, and Zoroastrianism.

This, for me, is the highlight of King's book; and, when he spreads out the specifics as to how each religion absorbs traits from its kith and kin, there is a sense of evolution in process (and appropriation). Before reaching his conclusion, King brings matters forward and explicates the purposes and backgrounds of esoteric, secret societies, as well, including Jewish Cabals, the Masons (or Freemasons), the Rosicrucian Order, and even the Illuminati.

Much of King's efforts proved demanding and dry reading, and I confess to being somewhat out of my depth (either from lack of understanding or lack of interest, I'm not sure which) except when he took apart the numerous religions for a closer examination, which I found especially engaging.

It doesn't hurt to be familiar with Gnosticism and, in particular, with the Pistis Sophia, though it is not necessary; but, it's important to keep in mind that King's work was published 80 years before the Nag Hammadi manuscripts were discovered and this latter discovery further informed scholars about the Gnostics to a degree not possible until recently. I daresay King's work still stands up. There's nothing in the Nag Hammadi that I've read that negates any of his academic analyses. It's not an easy read, but it is informative.

[Kenneth C. Rueckert · Rating 4 out of 5]

Worth reading the sections about the sacrament.