Pelagius and Hypatia?

Hi, I don't know if this is the right place to put this, but there was no reply on the Ancient Europe and Mediterranean forum:

I don't think Pelagius ever visited Alexandria.

I'm not so sure about that, he went to Palestine before 420ad, and his ideas did gain ground around Carthage, so he could have visited there, of course he probably would have never met Hypatia.

I doubt if they would have liked each other. One was a christian the other a pagan. One a moderate one a fanatic.

I doubt that Hypatia was a 'fanatic'. She had christian as well as pagan students, and she herself was a Neo-Platonist, so that would mean she wouldn't be opposed to the idea of Pelagius' god being the Supreme god. After all Neo-Platonism had a noticable effect on early christianity.

They probably would've gotten along very well in fact, had they by chance met, since Pelagius converted from Manicheanism and it was through Neo-Platonism that Augustine of Hippo converted from Manicheanism to Christianity. So I don't believe their philosophies would be all that disimilar. Of course, Pelagius wouldn't have too much interest in some random tutor who was rumored to be a witch, since even if he visited Alexandria it would just be a stopping point, and Hypatia probably would've been dead by the time he got there anyway.

.............It wasn't Hypatia I was calling the fanatic....

Then you should have said 'one was a christian one was a pagan one was a fanatic and one was a moderate.' So as to avoid confusion.

However I don't see how Pelagius was a fanatic any moreso than Hypatia. Sure he had his own strong personal beliefs, but I wouldn't call him fanatical, or do you base the fact he was a fanatic on him being a Christian?

As I understand it he was a Manichean before he became a christian, and although he was born in the British Isles, his Celtic influences were very minor. For all we know Pelagius could have been an italian immigrant to the Island since he lived during the Roman occupation. I would say that he wasn't an ethnic Briton, because of his leanings towards Greek thought and philosophy, but that's just speculation on my part.

but was his teachings really similar to those of the Manichees?

No not at all, he seems to have become critical of the Manichees and even went so far as to acuse Augustine of being too much like the Manichees. So I would say that he was a Zealot who turned away from the religion he was brought up in.

Okay, Hope I did a little bit more research and have come to the conclusion he was not a Manichee (I thought I read it somewhere but I most have confused him and Augustine).

I have also discovered that he was referred to as a Scot (which back then meant Irish) so I would say that he was of Irish descent. However I believe that any references to Celtic beliefs in his teachings are superficial. He seems to have independently reinvented Stoicism, since he never claimed to be a Stoic, although he was heavily influenced by Greek thought.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11604a.htm

And by Zealot, I mean he was full of Zeal. Which is as you described him. To me a zealot is a positive thing.