Even though he has left us with a great number of letters to friends and treatises on a unique variety of subjects, much of Synesius’ life is hidden from us. Born around 370 into a prominent family of Cyrene, we do not know if his parents were Christian or not.[i]He was very well educated and his mores were fully in tune with classical civilization. Prominent in his education was his study of Platonic philosophy through his contact with Hypatia.[ii] “He was well versed in Homer, he had obviously read quite a lot of Plato, less of Aristotle, he knew Plotinus and Porphyrius, and Dion Chrysostom was his alleged ideal, both as regards his philosophy and his way of life.”[iii]His philosophical pursuits indicate that he held an interest in many of occult sciences, but this should not be surprising, since it was common for those with a significant amount of education in his day. When it suited him, he would cite the Chaldaean Oracles, and, like many others in his time, he held an interest in astrology (inspired, of course, by Hypatia).[iv] Even though the norms of classical society were disappearing around him in his lifetime, he continued to live them out, resembling many men and women in history who preferred things to the way they were instead of how they were becoming. “Like Xenophon, of whom he reminds us, he was a gentleman-farmer and a man of leisure.”[v]He also was responsible for the upkeep of his family name and its place in the world at large. Where he was from, Cyrene, was in decline; hoping to fix this problem, he went on a prolonged (three-year) diplomatic mission to Constantinople, seeing if he could get imperial funding to help renovate his homeland.[vi]
With such an important background, it is not surprising that Synesius became acquainted with Theophilus of Alexandria. Cyrene, in northern Africa, was within Theophilus’ sphere of influence. We do not know precisely when they first met – perhaps when Synesius was studying in Alexandria under Hypatia, or perhaps later, but we do know that when Synesius got married in 404, Theophilus presided at the ceremony.[vii]This tells us that at least by this time Synesius was either a Christian or a catechumen because it would have been very unlikely that Synesius would have received a Christian marriage if he were not, at least nominally, within the Church, no matter how high his rank was in society.
Sometime later, either around 406 or 411, the bishopric of Ptolemais needed to be filled.[viii]The Christians of Ptolemais, impressed by Synesius’ previous work for Cyrene in Constantinople, as well as by his intellectual capabilities, requested that he was made their bishop. Theophilus, who was on good terms with Synesius, agreed. But Synesius, as he related to his brother, held many reservations which made him pause before accepting the honor.[ix] He wanted to remain married to his wife, with whom he had children;[x] having been well-adjusted to his leisurely lifestyle, he wanted to keep up with it; he wanted to be assured he would be free to live a life, and to do the things he loved, such as going on hunting expeditions. But more importantly, he wanted the freedom to be a philosopher.[xi] He knew that he held beliefs which ran contrary to normal Christian doctrine. He wanted to still be able to follow them. With a fair warning to Theophilus, he stated that, as a philosopher, he would not believe one’s body preceded their soul,[xii] that the world would ever perish,[xiii] and, when it came to the Christian teaching of the resurrection, that it pointed to a holy mystery, but not in the way it was normally taught.[xiv]If Theophilus wanted him to become a bishop, and if he came to agree to taking the position (he was not sure he would, and it would take him six months to decide), he said that he would treat the office as a sacred duty given to him by God. Yet even then, he would not be willing to teach contrary to his own beliefs.[xv]He wanted to make sure Theophilus fully understood what his philosophical views were, so that, if he were to be placed into the bishopric, Theophilus would not feel obligated to cast him at a later date because of them.[xvi]
We have in Synesius’ letter, an honest, personal assessment of where he stood. Through it we see his position. Synesius, educated in Platonic philosophy, is convinced of Platonic truth. Some of the points he raised as possible objections to his elevation to the bishopric seem to indicate that Synesius was familiar with Theophilus’ contention with Origenism; even if he was not, it is clear that he knew of Theophilus’ dealings with St John Chrysostom, and in one letter, he showed embarrassment when he did not know how to deal with a bishop who had once supported Chrysostom.[xvii]It would not be surprising, therefore, that Synesius put these points forward to protect himself from condemnation. For, as we have seen, one of Theophilus’ criticisms of Origen was that he had borrowed from philosophy a wrong understanding of the relationship between soul and body, and this led to an erroneous understanding of the resurrection. In what he wrote, it appears that Synesius believed that each of his points held a possible problem, and indeed, behind them, he believed his reader would pick up Platonic implications he left unstated. For example, by stating he did not believe that the world would have an end, he was also stating that it did not have a beginning. That is, he believed in the eternity of the world, as Bregman points out, “It seems to me, then, much more likely that Synesius maintained the belief, in some form, of the eternity and divinity of the cosmos. When he stated his position succinctly he expected that all its implications would be understood.”[xviii]
What is true of the eternity of the world also appears to be true for the soul. Since it existed before the body, it is also proper to believe that it would exist after death in a similar state; the resurrection, of course, can still be maintained, but only as an allegory of the ascent of the soul. Once again, we can see a similarity between Synesius and Origenism. However there is a difference. Unlike Origen, Synesius grasped the full force of his Hellenistic background, and he embraced it. This should make his views far more suspect than those held by Origen.
We eventually find in Synesius a conflict between Platonic philosophy and Christian theology taking place in his own thoughts. This battle was one that that many in his time and afterwards were to hold.[xix]But the difference is that Synesius recognized the internal discord, and stated, if he was pressed, he would stand with the philosophers over the Christians.
No matter when Synesius was ordained, it is easy to see that he did not live long after his elevation to the bishopric. Dying around the spring of 413, he barely outlived his friend and patron, Theophilus.[xx]As he promised Theophilus, he took his role as bishop seriously. We have fragments of some of his homilies, and they indicate, as can be expected from his background, that he used his philosophical beliefs and allegorical exegetics to interpret Scripture.[xxi]While Theophilus was alive, Synesius would write to him for advice, but also, to write him in praise of his annual paschal letters.[xxii]As bishop, Synesius found the need to exercise his religious authority, and he did what he thought was necessary to help the Church, as can be seen by his involvement with the controversy around Andronicus, a governor with such severe moral failings that Synesius ended up excommunicating him.[xxiii] His time as bishop was also a time of great grief for him. The world surrounding him was falling apart; barbarians were taking control of the land and destroying what he loved most. His personal life was also in shambles. His sons, one after another, had died, and in his letters, we hear no word of his wife, which seems to indicate that she died soon after his elevation to the bishopric.[xxiv] It was in such a sad state of affairs that Synesius’ life comes to an end, although we do not know exactly when.
Footnotes
[i]Traditionally, it has been held that Synesius was born a pagan, and only later converted to the Christian faith. What he reveals to us of his life in his writings, as well as the earliest historical records we have about his life, are vague in regards to his religious background. We do know that he held strong ties with Hellenism and Platonic philosophy, and this is a fact no one has ever questioned. For a thorough discussion on whether or not Synesius was born a Christian, see Alan Cameron, Jacqueline Long, and Lee Sherry, Barbarians And Politics at the Court of Acadius (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993), 19-28.
[ii]He would always keep close ties to Hypatia. Near the end of his life, perhaps even on his deathbed, he sent her a letter in his grief, calling her his, “mother, friend, teacher, and benefactor in all things,” Synesius of Cyrene, Epistle 16 (PG 66:1352B).
[iii]Bengt-Arne Roos, Synesius of Cyrene: A Study in His Personality (SGLL 2; Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press, 1991), 2.
[iv]See Henri Irénée Marrou, “Synesius of Cyrene and Alexandrian Platonism,” in The Conflict Between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century (ed. Arnaldo Momoigliano: Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963), 139 – 140 for a discussion of Synesius’ employment of the Chaldaean Oracles, divination, and creation of an astrolabe.
[v]Jay Alan Bregman, “Synesius of Cyrene: A Case Study in the Conversion of the Greco-Roman Aristocracy” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University Graduate School, 1974), 14.
[vi]Like many other aspects of his life, there is a question as to when he went to Constantinople. The traditional approach says he was in Constantinople between 399 to 402, but some newer studies suggest a slightly earlier date, from 397 to 400. See T.D. Barnes, “Synesius in Constantinople,” Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 27 (1986): 93 – 112 for a discussion of the problem and the explanation for the newer dating.
[vii]Roos, Synesius of Cyrene: A Study in His Personality, 3.
[viii]See T.D. Barnes, “When Did Synesius Become Bishop of Ptolemais?” Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 27 (1986): 325 – 329.
[ix]Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1482C – 1488D).
[x]Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1485A).
[xi]Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1484A).
[xii] “‘Αμέλει την ψυχην ουχ ποτε σώματος `υστερογενη νομιζειν,” Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1485B).
[xiii] “Τον κόσμον ού φήσω και ταλλα μέρη συνδιαφθείρεσθαι.” Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1485B).
[xiv]“Την καθωμιλημένην αναστασιν ‘ιερον τι και απορρητον ‘ήγημαι, και πολλου δέω ταις του πληθους ύποληφεσιν όμολογησαι,” Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1485B).
[xv]Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1488A).
[xvi]Synesius, Epistle 105 (PG 66:1488B).
[xvii]Synesius, Epistle 66 (PG 66:1407C – 1409D).
[xviii]Bregman, “Synesius of Cyrene: A Case Study,” 158.
[xix]Marrou, “Synesius of Cyrene and Alexandrian Platonism,” 147 – 148.
[xx] See Cameron, Long and Sherry, Barbarians, xiii.
[xxi] “Only two fragments of homilies remain to give an idea of Synesius as a preacher. Neoplatonic speculation is a prominent feature in these fragments. Homily I must have been given at the beginning of Easter and consists of an allegorical interpretation of Psalm 2. Homily II is directed to the newly baptized at the Easter Vigil.” Roos, Synesius of Cyrene: A Study in His Personality, 43.
[xxii]Synesius, Epistle 9 (PG 66:1345C – 1318A).
[xxiii]For the letter of excommunication, see Synesius, Epistle 58 (PG 66:1400B – 1404A).
[xxiv]In the aforementioned letter to Hypatia (16), Synesius wrote to her, expressing his despair after all that he had to suffer, and most grievous of all was the death of his children.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In