Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T23:20:21.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Narmouthis (Medinet Madi) to Kellis (Ismant El-Kharab): Manichaean Documents from Roman Egypt*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2012

I. M. F. Gardner  and
S. N. C. Lieu
I. M. F. Gardner
Affiliation:
Edith Cowan University, Australia
S. N. C. Lieu
Affiliation:
Macquarie University, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1968, Peter Brown read at the Society's Annual General Meeting a paper entitled ‘The Diffusion of Manichaeism in the Roman Empire’. Delivered at a time when little research was being carried out by British scholars either on Manichaeism or on the cultural and religious relationship between the Roman and the Sassanian Empires, it was for many a complete revelation. With consummate skill and vast erudition Brown placed the history of the diffusion of the sect against a background of vigorous and dynamic interchange between the Roman and the Persian Empires. He also mounted a successful challenge on a number of popularly held views on the history of the religion in the Roman Empire. Manichaeism was not to be seen as part of the mirage orientale which fascinated the intellectuals of the High Empire. It was not an Iranian religion which appealed through its foreigness or quaintness. Rather, it was a highly organized and aggressively missionary religion founded by a prophet from South Babylonia who styled himself an ‘Apostle of Jesus Christ’. Brown reminded the audience that ‘the history of Manichaeism is to a large extent a history of the Syriac-speaking belt, that stretched along the Fertile Crescent without interruption from Antioch to Ctesiphon’. Its manner of diffusion bore little or no resemblance to that of Mithraism. It did not rely on a particular profession, as Mithraism did on the army, for its spread throughout the Empire. Instead it developed in the common Syriac culture astride the Romano-Persian frontier which was becoming increasingly Christianized consequent to the regular deportation of whole communities from cities of the Roman East like Antioch to Mesopotamia and adjacent Iran. Manichaeism which originally flourished in this Semitic milieu was not in the strict sense an Iranian religion in the way that Zoroastrianism was at the root of the culture and religion of pre-Islamic Iran. The Judaeo-Christian roots of the religion enabled it to be proclaimed as a new and decisive Christian revelation.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 86 , November 1996 , pp. 146 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © I. M. F. Gardner and S. N. C. Lieu 1996. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 JRS 59 (1969), 92–103Google Scholar (reprinted in idem, Religion and Society in the Age of Augustine (1972), 94–118).

2 See esp. ibid., 93–7 (95–105).

3 ibid., 93 (97).

4 On the impact of the newly discovered Central Asian material on German scholarship of the interwar years see esp. Widengren, G., ‘Der Manichäismus — Kurzgefaßte Geschichte der Problemforschung’, in Aland, B. (ed.), Gnosis. Festschrift für Hans Jonas (1978), 286–99.Google Scholar

5 Published as The Religion of the Manichees (1925). See esp. 37–43 and 92–3.

6 ibid., 88–9. Cf. Lieu, Manichaeism 2, 78–80.

7 Burkitt, op. cit. (n. 5), 111–19.

8 Burkitt, op. cit. (n. 5), 71–86.

9 Schaeder, H. H., ‘Urform und Fortbildungen des Manichäischen Systems’, Vorträge der Bibliothek Warburg 1924–5 (1927), 65–157Google Scholar, esp. 106–27. For a useful summary of the controversy on the ‘Ursprung’ of Mani's teaching see Widengren, op. cit. (n. 4), 290–302.

10 cf. Mani-Fund, 8–9 and H. Ibscher, ap. Ps.-Bk. II pp. VII–IX. The most detailed statement on the fate of the codices is Robinson, J. M., ‘The Fate of the Manichaean Codices 1929–1989’, in Wießner, G. and Klimkeit, H.-J. (eds), Studia Manichaica, II. Internationaler Kongreß zum Manichäismus, Studies in Oriental Religions 23 (1992), 19–62Google Scholar. The same author has written a full-length monograph on the subject entitled The Manichaean Codices of Medinet Madi (updated version, May–June 1991), which is in limited circulation.

11 However the possibility exists that the still unseparated book-block which is part of the Synaxeis codex may contain the text of the Living Gospel as well as the commentary to it.

12 Polotsky's linguistic contributions ranged from Byzantine Greek to Aramaic and Arabic and included all periods of the Egyptian language. He also contributed a fine summary of Mani's system based on the newly discovered texts as well as the better known patristic sources to Pauly (Suppl. VI (1935), 241–72). See the fine appreciation of Polotsky's achievements by Ullendorf, E., ‘H. J. Polotsky (1905–1991): linguistic genius’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1994), 3–13.Google Scholar

13 Manichäische Homilien, ed. and trans. H. J. Polotsky (1934).

14 See esp. pp. 1–19 and 42–70.

15 cf. Putt, S. Gorley, ‘Charles Allberry and Roy Calvert’, Encounter 69 (1987), 70–6Google Scholar. In the novels Snow substituted Manichaean Coptic with Manichaean Sogdian — the least well known of the three Middle Iranian dialects used by Manichaeans in Central Asia. Though once the predominant language of the Silk Road with a flourishing literature of Manichaean, Buddhist, and Christian writings, the manner of the rediscovery and decipherment of Sogdian has made it a much cited example of academic eccentricity and irrelevance.

16 See esp. the appreciation by a fellow Coptologist: T. Säve-Söderbergh, Studies in the Coptic Manichaean Psalm-Book (1949).

17 Most notably in Brown's acclaimed Augustine of Hippo — A Biography (1967), 49, 51, 58. See also Bonner, G., St Augustine of Hippo — Life and Controversies (1963), 59Google Scholar.

18 Kephalaia, ed. and trans. Polotsky, H. J. and Böhlig, A. (1940 ff.). Polotsky was responsible for the first two fascicles (pp. 1–102)Google Scholar and Böhlig the rest (pp. 103–244).

19 Ps.-Bk. II, 56, 31–57, 13, trans. Allberry.

20 cf. Robinson, op. cit. (n. 10), 51–7. The leaves of the Acts codex now in Dublin are published in facsimile in MCPCBL II, pls 99–100.

21 All that emerged in print of his work on the Chester Beatty texts is the brief abstract of his paper ‘Wiederaufnahme und neuester Stand der Konservierung der Manichäischen Papyruscodices’, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Congress of Orientalists, Cambridge 21st–28th August, 1954 (1956), 359–60, and a discussion of the method of conservation he employed: ‘Wandlungen in der Methodik und Praxis der Papyruskonservierung’, in Actes du Xe Congrès International de Papyrologues, Varsovie-Cracovie, 3–9 septembre 1961 (1964), 253. Some of his unpublished reports are cited in Robinson, op. cit. (n. 10), 26–31.

22 Kephalaia, Zweite Hälfte, ed. A. Böhlig (1966).

23 ‘Ja und Amen in manichäischer Deutung’, ZPE 58 (1985), 59–70Google Scholar. Reproduced in idem, Gnosis und Synkretismus. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur spätantiken Religionsgeschichte, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament XLVIII (1989), II, 638–53.

24 cf. Gardner, I. M. F., Coptic Theological Papyri II, Edition, Commentary, Translation, with an Appendix: The Docetic Jesus, (2 vols) Mitteilungen aus der Papyrus-sammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek XXI (1988), Textband 53–5.Google Scholar

25 The (Berlin) Kephalaia is being completed by W.-P. Funk, the Synaxeis-codex by P. Mirecki, and the twenty-five or so remaining leaves of the Letters by Funk and Gardner.

26 ‘Egyptian Manichaeism’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Egyptian Antiquities 18 (1988), 80–98Google Scholar. See also the perceptive remarks in Lim, R., ‘Unity and diversity among the western Manichaeans: a reconsideration of Mani's sancta ecclesia’, Revue des Études Augustiniennes 35 (1989), 231–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 246ff.

27 ‘Iranische Kephalaiatexte?’, in Wießner and Klimkeit (eds), op. cit. (n. 10), 305–18.

28 ‘Studien zur kirchengeschichtlichen Literatur der iranischen Manichäer II’, Altorientalische Forschungen 13/2 (1986), 253–62Google Scholar.

29 cf. Ps.-Bk. II Index of Persons, 45*.

30 cf. Millar, F. G. B., The Roman Near East 31 BCAD 337 (1992), 160–73Google Scholar; see also sources in Dodgeon, M. H. and Lieu, S. N. C., The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars (226–363) (1991), 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 Mani-Fund, 28.

32 So, 18223 (= T.M. 389c) + 18222 ( = T.M. 389c) MMTKGI (441–515) 3.3, pp. 41–5. Eng. trans. Lieu, S. N. C., Manichaeism in Mesopotamia and the Roman East (1994), 28–9.Google Scholar On Addā see also Lieu, op. cit., 108 and 263–4 and idem, Manichaeism 2, 102–3.

33 cf. Cantineau, J., Inventaire des inscriptions de Palmyre, fasc. 3, La Grand Colonnade (1930), No. 19, p. 25, 4–5Google Scholar. Cf. Millar, op. cit. (n. 30), 170.

34 MCPCBL II, viii–ix.

35 MCPCBL II, pl. 99, ll. 21–34, ed. and trans. Tardieu, M., ‘L'arrivée des manichéens à al-Ḥīra’, in Canivet, P. and Rey-Coquais, J.-P. (eds), La Syrie de Byzance à l'Islam VIIe -VIIIe siècles, Actes du Colloque international Lyon-Maison de l'Orient Méditerranéen, Paris - Institut du Monde Arabe 11–15 Sept. 1990 (1992, pub. 1994), 16–17.Google Scholar

36 Mani and Jesus were each depicted in Manichaean texts as a healer. On this see esp. the material from both Manichaean historical and hymnological sources collected in W. Oerter, ‘Mani als Arzt? Zur Bedeutung eines manichäischen Bildes’, in Vl. Vavřínek (ed.), From Late Antiquity to Early Byzantium. Proceedings of the Byzantinological Symposium in the 16th Eirene Conference (1985), 219–23.

37 cf. Mani-Fund, 49–50.

38 MCPCBL II, pl. 100, ll. 1–12, trans. Giversen in idem, ‘The Manichaean texts from the Chester Beatty Collection’, in P. Bryder (ed.), Manichaean Studies Proceedings of the First International Conference on Manichaeism, Lund Studies in African and Asian Religions 1 (1988), 269.

39 cf. Mani-Fund, 3.

40 ‘Ein griechischer Mani-Codex (P. Colon, inv. nr 4780)’, ZPE 5/2 (1970), 97–216Google Scholar.

41 In Mt. hom. 83, PG 58.669.

42 cf. Koenen, L. and Römer, C., Mani. Auf der Spu einer verschollenen Religion (1993), 39–42.Google Scholar

43 cf. Koenen, L., ‘Zur Herkunft des Kölner Mani-Codex’, ZPE II (1973), 240–1Google Scholar.

44 ‘The Cologne Mani Codex reconsidered’, HSCP 83 (1979), 339–67Google Scholar.

45 ibid., 342–9.

46 So far 192 pages have been successfully conserved. See the facsimile edition: Koenen, L. and Römer, C., Der Kölner Mani-Kodex, Abbildungen und diplomatischer Text, Papyrologische Texte und Abhandlungen 35 (1985).Google Scholar

47 The editio maior remains Henrichs, A. and Koenen, L., ‘Der Kölner Mani-Kodex (P. Colon, inv. nr. 4780) ΠΕΡΙ ΤΗΣ ΓΕΝΝΗΣ ΤΟΥ ΣΩΜΑΤΟΣ ΑΥΤΟΥ’, ZPE 19 (1975), 1–85Google Scholar; 32 (1978), 87–199; 44 (1981), 201–318; and 48 (1982), 1–59. The commentary on the last part of the text by C. Römer is eagerly anticipated. All citations, however, are from the editio minor: Der Kölner Mani-Kodex (Über das Werden seines Leibes), kritische Edition aufgrund der von A. Henrichs und L. Koenen besorgten Erstedition, herausgegeben und übersetzt von L. Koenen und Cornelia Römer, Abhandlungen der Rheinisch-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Sonderreihe, Papyrologica Coloniensia XIV (1988).

48 CMC 94.10–97.17, ed. Koenen and Römer, pp. 66–8 (cf. ZPE 32 (1978), 115–17Google Scholar).

49 The Fihrist of al-Nadim, trans. B. Dodge (1970), 811. Cf. Chwolsohn, D., Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus I (1856), 543–4Google Scholar.

50 On the Manichaean Simeon see Fihrist, trans. Dodge, p. 755, and CMC 106, 19 (?) [Συμεὼ]ν.

51 Rudolph, K., Die Mandäer, I, Prolegomena: Das Mandäerproblem (1960), 36–43.Google Scholar

52 The earliest incontrovertible evidence for the existence of the Mandaeans in Iraq comes from the well-known Nestorian heresiologist, Theodor bar Kōnī of Kaškar (fl. eighth century) who cites, in his chapter, on the Kanteans phrases from an important Mandaean work known as the Left Ginza. Cf. Rudolph, op. cit. (n. 51), 1, 255–9, esp. 256, n. 4.

53 On the other hand, the Mandaean Right Ginza castigated as ‘zandiqia’ (i.e. heretics = Arab, zndyq, heretic, esp. dualist) the followers of Mar Mani (undoubtedly the eponymous founder of the Manichaeans) who belong to the ‘gate’ (i.e. religion) of the Messiah. See e.g. Right Ginza IX, I, ed. H. Petermann, Thesaurus s. Liber magnus vulgo “Liber Adami” appellatus opus Mandaeorum summi ponderis (1867), 228, 9–18, trans. M. Lidzbarski, Ginza, Der Schatz oder das große Buch der Mandäer, Quellen der Religionsgeschichte (1925), 229, 17–27. For another example of Mandaean anti-Manichaean polemic see The Canonical Prayerbook of the Mandaeans, 357, 10, ed. and trans. E. Drower, text p. 379, trans, p. 251.

54 Hipp., ref. omn. haer. IX. 13.1–2, p. 357, ed. Marcovich: . On the place of Elchasaios in Jewish Christianity see esp. L. Cirillo, Elchasai e gli Elchasaiti. Un contribute alia storia della communità giudeo-cristiane, Studi e ricerche I, Università degli Studi della Calabria, Centro interdipartimentale di scienze religiose (1984) and idem, ‘Elchasaiti e Battisti di Mani: i limiti di un confronto delle fonti’, in L. Cirillo and A. Roselli (eds), Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis, Atti del Simposio Internationale (Rende-Amantea 3–7 settembre, 1984) (1986), 97–139.

55 With the exception perhaps of the description of a vision of two celestial figures of gigantic proportions which finds a Jewish-Christian parallel in the Ascensio Jesajae IX, 27–40, ed. Tisserant.

56 ap. Eusebius, hist. eccl. VI.38, p. 592, 16–22. A dominant feature of the ‘baptists’ of the CMC for whom to have read Paul was to have ‘gone over to the enemies’ and ‘eaten Greek bread’. Cf. CMC 87.19–21, p. 60: .

57 Epiph., haer. XIX.1.4–5, p. 218, 4–10.

58 ibid. XIX.1.10, p. 219, 5–10.

59 ibid. XIX.1.12, p. 219, 13–16.

60 The Revelation of Elchasai, Investigations into the Evidence of a Mesopotamian Jewish Apocalypse of the Second Century and its Reception by a Judaeo-Christian Propagandist, Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 8 (1985), 210–20Google Scholar and 225–6. See also idem, ‘The Book of Elchasai: a Jewish apocalypse’, Aula Orientalis 5 (1987), 104–6.

61 Luttikhuizen, op. cit. (n. 60), 222.

62 The text is very fragmentary but the autobiographical nature is clear due to the word ymg ‘Twin’ on the previous line. M1344 + M5910, Sundermann, W., Mitteliranische manichäische Texte kirchengeschichtlichen Inhalts, Berliner Turfantexte XI (Berlin, 1981)Google Scholar 2.2, 25–7, p. 19: ](.)rynd 'w' s tw y(mg) | […. ….](.) 00 'lxs'(..hr) (..)[..] | [ ](.)mn'n (p)[ ].

63 cf. Gignac, F. T., A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the Roman and Byzantine Periods 1 (1976), 235Google Scholar and 242–9.

64 As well demonstrated by R. Merkelbach, ‘Die Täufer, bei denen Mani aufwuchs’, in Bryder, op. cit. (n. 38), 105–33.

65 See esp. the palaeographical remarks in Turner, E. and Parsons, P., Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, BICS Suppl. 46 (1987), 129Google Scholar.

66 Fonkič, B. L. and Poljakov, F. B., ‘Paläographische Grundlagen der Datierung des Kölner Mani-Kodex’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 83/1 (1990), 22–30Google Scholar.

67 ibid., 25–6.

68 Homilia CXXIII, ed. Brière, M., Les Homiliae Cathédrales de Severe d'Antioche, PO XXIX (1961), pp. 124–88Google Scholar (trans, of Jacob of Edessa); ed. A. Rahmani, Tractatus de Haeresibus, ed. I. Rahmani, Studia Syriaca IV, Documenta de antiquis haeresibus (Beirut, 1909), pp. 48–89 (Syriac Text) (trans, of Paul of Callinicum).

69 See e.g. Baraies and Salmaios. On these see Lieu, S. N. C., ‘An early Byzantine formula for the renunciation of Manichaeism, the Capita VII contra Manichaeos of ‹Zacharias of Mytilene›’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 26 (1983), 196Google Scholar (repr. idem, Manichaeism in Mesopotamia and the Roman East (1994), 266).

70 Reports of progress on the excavation are published in Journal for the Scientific Study of Egyptian Antiquities; with briefer but more rapidly published accounts of each season's work appearing also in the Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology.

71 Wagner, G., Les Oasis d'Egypte (1987).Google Scholar

72 An expanded although earlier version of this material can be found in Gardner, I. M. F., ‘The Manichaean community at Kellis progress report’, Acta Orientalia Belgica 1993 (1994), 79–87Google Scholar.

73 All the Kellis texts are being edited for publication in a series of Dakhleh Oasis Project monographs, to be published by Oxbow Press (Oxford).

74 The numbering here is that of the excavation inventory, and is provisional to the assigning of ‘P. Kell.’ numbers to be used for the critical editions.

75 Published by Gardner, I. M. F., ‘A Manichaean liturgical codex found at Kellis’, Orientalia 62/2 (1993), 30–69Google Scholar.

76 Intense work is currently being undertaken on the prosopographical and other data provided by the archive, with the first volume of Coptic documentary texts projected for 1996.

77 On the limits of Manichaean mission see Fowden, G., Empire to Commonwealth, Consequences of Monotheism in Late Antiquity (1993), 75–6.Google Scholar