Rebecca Krawiec: Evagrius, Text, and Memory: Writing and Identity in the Egyptian Desert

Evagrius’ monastic writings function as ‘texts’ not merely because they were written but because, particularly in the case of the Praktikos, Evagrius composed the work in order to create the correct conditions for retrieving the message’s communication (Assman, 2006). Yet at the same time, parts of some texts were meant to be stored in memory for the purposes of reflection and meditation. These are the “rituals” that also provide for retrieval. Thus memory and writing combine to create Evagrius’ texts. Further, the relationship between memory and writing provides a context for examining Evagrius’ repeated warnings about demonic use of memory. In these descriptions, particularly in On Thoughts, memory, and its relationship to text, becomes problematic because it defines the monk in relation to the culture he has renounced. Evagrius makes a distinction between what is available to demons (memories) and what is not (the heart), in other words, between the part of the monastic self that attaches to culture and that which he separates from culture. The monk’s progression is a move beyond memory, since memory connects the self to the social structures of culture. Evagrius’ texts guide this progression by employing memory, but they must do so without themselves creating new ‘mental representations.’ That is, monastic texts cannot create monastic memory, even if memory is integral to texts. While biblical examples provide Evagrius with models of writing that do and do not leave ‘imprints,’ Evagrius himself must at times withhold writing to guard against its potential dangers. In short, Evagrius must guard against memory and text as formulators of culture, even as these form the basis of his monastic pedagogy.