Are the Nag Hammadi codices a "library?"

NAG HAMMADI WATCH: The hunt for the Gnostics, Christianity’s bogeyman. For decades, the Gnostic Gospels were widely believed to have been a library of ancient texts hidden away to protect their secrets. But what if the evidence for that is thinner than the papyrus the books were written on? (Candida Moss, National Geographic).

In sum, we do not know where the books were found, by how many people, or in what circumstances. And, because ‘Ali no longer remembered where he had found them, we cannot look for corroborating evidence.

The lack of archaeological context matters. The traditional story is that codices were buried for safekeeping and protection. But if they were found in a grave, then they look more like grave goods owned by a single individual. If they weren’t found together in a single jar or a single grave, then we don’t know how, or if, they are connected to one another. At that point, we can’t really claim they are a library.

In late antiquity, Gnosticism, like Neoplatonism. and Hermeticism, seems often (mostly?) to have been practiced by small groups around a teacher or by independents rather than by some extended "community." It would not be surprising if a collection of their books turned out to be a personal library, perhaps even owned by someone with traditional ecclesiastical or nondescript social connections.

For many posts on the Coptic Gnostic "library" (collection?) from Nag Hammadi, start here and follow the links. Othe relevant posts on Gnostic and similar movements are here, here, and here.

Visit PaleoJudaica daily for the latest news on ancient Judaism and the biblical world.