This essaye xamines earlyC hristian literaturea se vidence for at rend in religious movements with an increasinglyl iteraryo ro therwise intellectual profile. Self-proclaimed authorities on Christ clustered in the urban spaces of the empire wheret hey joined and rivaled assorted aspirings pecialists who boasted ar angeo fs kills and, in some cases, derivedw isdom or mysteries from the samewritings. All partook in abroader phenomenon of religious innovation that was propelled by urban resources: the book industry,agrowth in libraries, the heightened status of writings, and awidespread enthusiasm for paideia. Iargue that Christian authorsare prime,ifunexceptional, examples of this more general religious development.Thus situated, their writingshold important clues for theorizing the activities of non-Christian religious actors and groups that are less well attested in this earlyp eriod. 1I ntroduction In the first book of his Against the Heresies (Haer. 1.7. 1-2), Irenaeus denounces Marcus,af ollower of Valentinus, as a "skilled magical imposter" (magicae imposturae peritissimus)who deceivedmanywith his apparent ability to work wonders. The tricks that Irenaeus attributes to Marcus-altering the color of acup of wine to give the impression of an efficacious invocation, for instance-are well known; less so, perhaps,their alleged source, the Paignia of Anaxilaus, af igure known variouslyfrom earlier sources as aphysician, aPythagorean philosopher, amagician, and the author of several writingsabout the "magical" properties of minerals, herbs, and other natural materials.¹ These paignia,I renaeus reports, Marcus combined with the wickedness of those called magi as well as asmattering of Christian texts to achieveh is proprietary heretical brew,o ne that proved especiallyi ntoxicating to wealthyw omen. Irenaeus'st one, equal parts derisive and hyperbolic, has led many at ranslator to render paignia as buffooneries or tricks, with the implication thatMarcus traded in cheap magicians' gimmicks; therec an be little doubt that the heresiologist understood Αnaxilaus and his legacyi ns uch terms.H owever,t his lan