REVIEWS

Samuel N. C. Lieu, Manichaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China: A Historical Survey. Manchester University Press 1985. XIII + 360 pp and 3 maps. £ 35.00.

Samuel Lieu's book on Manichaeism is the result of a long series of detailed studies on Manichaeans and their religion in the Chinese Far East and in the Roman West, and of an unpublished 1981 Oxford dissertation. It has an excellently balanced composition and offers much more than the title announces. The first three chapters deal with Mani's s gnosis, the person of the Apostle of Christ and his mission and church. The next three chapters describe the history of Manichaeism in the West. In particular, that one devoted to Augustine and Manichaeism is outstanding in the way it makes clear the various kinds of appeal which Manichaeism had for the young Augustine. The last three chapters pro- vide the reader with a clear and useful survey of Manichaeism in the Uighur Kingdoms and in China, where its history at least lasted till about 1600 C.E., a much later date than that assumed by Pelliot and Chavannes. The Chinese part of L.'s book is the more important; he is one of the very rare scholars in command of the classical Chinese language-indeed, this part of his book is in fact the first history of Chinese Manichaeism ever written. The book ends with substantial notes, an extensive bibliography of sources and secondary works, and a useful Index and glossary. L. has collected and presented in this book an enormous amount of material on his subject. That makes it very useful for consultation, but does not always add to the clarity of his exposition, since he is so eager to include everything that might be of any importance or interest. The first three chapters are especially relevant to the hotly debated question of origin and nature of Mani's gnosis and elaborate quasi- scientific mythology and doctrine. L. takes a firm and outspoken line: the main elements of Mani's doctrine originate in Syrian and Mesopota- mian Judaeo-Christianity, in particular in Elchasaitism (see now L. Cirillo, Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis. Atti del Simposio Interna- zionale (Rende-Amantea 3-7 settembre 1984) Cosenza 1986), and in the various forms of Syrian Christianity, among which Marcionitism (see 400

Drijvers, Marcionism in Syria. Principles, Problems, Polemics, The Second Century, 1987) and Bardaisan's circle held a paramount posi- tion. Any possible Iranian influence on Mani's thoughtworld is totally denied. In this he is certainly right; all the constituents of Mani's system go back to that Syrian syncretistic milieu, while not excluding the possibility that Iranian dualism had a certain impetus towards the radicalisation of these forms which is so characteristic of Manichaeism. After all, Mani's father Pattik is said to have come from Eastern Iran. On this point a more precise analysis of Mani's system in relation to Marcionism, Bardaisanism, Elchasaitism, Syrian encratite Christianity and to other forms of religious thought current in that period in that particular area would have been extremely useful and would have laid the foundation for the history of Manichaean doctrine which we so urgently need. In such a context the process of adaptation and assimila- tion that Manichaeism underwent in the Roman West as well as in the Chinese East might have illustrated the remarkable preservation of its identity united with an amazing flexibility of mythology and forms (cf. pp. 23-24). In the same context the problem of the possible influence of Greek learning in Mani's system could have been dealt with (see p. 37 and now A. B6hlig, Denkformen hellenistischer Philosophie im Manichaismus, Perspektiven der Philosophie, Neues Jahrbuch 12, 1986, 11-39; W. Fauth, Syzygos und Eikon, Manis himmlischer Dop- pelganger vor dem Hintergrund der platonischen Urbild-Abbild- Theorie, ibidem, 41-68). At the same time it would have become clear that, despite doctrinal differences especially stressed by the Church fathers, all these different groups shared a common culture (see also pp. 107-108 on the dualist Agapius, and my article, Conflict and Alliance in Manichaeism, Struggles of Gods, ed. H. G. Kippenberg, N.Y. 1984, 99-124). That also emphasizes the need for a history of Manichaeism in its Syrian and Mesopotamian homeland until Islamic times, for which Ephrem Syrus and Titus of Bostra will yield valuable material. The Messalians, often considered crypto-Manichaeans (cf. p. 174) will also play a role in such a history (cf. J. Gribomont, Le dossier des origines du Messalianisme, Epektasis. Mélanges Jean Daniélou, Paris 1972, 611- 625 ; A. Guillaumont, art. 'Messaliens', Dict. de Spiritualité 10,2, 1979,1074-1083). Manichaeism was an important factor in cultural and religious life in Roman late Antiquity; it was heavily persecuted by pagan emperors and Christian bishops alike. L.'s chapters IV-VI rightly stress this point. But