ABSTRACT
At the close of the third century, the Neoplatonist philosopher Iamblichus was met with an unexpected intellectual challenge in the form of a fictional epistle from his one-time master, Porphyry of Tyre. In the Letter to Anebo (Epistula ad Anebonem), Porphyry had addressed a series of queries to an (imaginary) Egyptian priest with the purpose of drawing attention to what he perceived to be serious religious aporiai. Porphyry was especially concerned with the problem of theurgy, a doctrine that Iamblichus keenly advocated. While similarly voicing his respect for the “perfect” theurgic art (which allows man to receive holy visions of the gods and embark on the path to εὐδαιμονία),1 Porphyry argued that the priest Anebo was misrepresenting theurgy by defending senseless practices such as blood sacrifice and the use of βάρβαρα or ἄσημα ὀνόματα.2 The one issue which proved most irksome for Porphyry was that of the alleged control or subjugation of the divine at the hands of Egyptian theurgists. According to Iamblichus, Porphyry complained: “A thing that very much troubles me is this: how does it come about that we invoke the gods as our superiors, but then give them orders as if they were our inferiors?”3
