Electrotyped and Printed by The Publishers' Book Composition and Electrotyping Co., 157 & 159 William St., New York.
EDITOR'S PREFACE.
This fourth volume of St. Augustin's Works contains his polemical writings in vindica- tion of the Catholic Church against the heresy of the Manichdeans, and the schism of the Donatists. The former are contained in Tom. II. and VIII., the latter in Tom. IX., of the Benedictine edition.
Like the preceding volumes, this also is more than a reprint of older translations, and contains important additions not previously published.
I. — Seven Writings against the Manich^an Heresy. Four of these were trans- lated by the Rev. Richard Stothert, of Bombay, for Dr. Dods' edition, published by T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1872, and revised by Dr. Albert H. Newman, of Toronto, for the American edition. The other three treatises are translated, I believe for the first time, by Dr. Newman for this edition. (See Contents.)
The Edinburgh translation, especially of the first two treatises, is sufficiently faithful and idiomatic, and needed very little alteration by the American editor, who compared it sentence by sentence with the Latin original, and made changes only where they seemed necessary.
This part of the volume is also enriched by an introductory essay of Dr. Newman, which embodies the literature and the results of the most recent as well as the earlier researches concerning that anti-Christian heresy.
II.— The Writings against the Donatists. These were well translated by the Rev. J. R. King, of Oxford, and are slightly revised by Dr. Hartranft, of Hartford, after a careful comparison with the Latin.
The literary introduction of Dr. Hartranft, in connection with the translator's historical preface, will place the reader in the situation of the controversy between the Catholic Church and the Donatists at the time of St. Augustin.
In both sections the treatises are arranged in chronological order.
The fifth volume will contain the writings of St. Augustin against the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians. It is in the hands of the printer and will be published in October.
PHILIP SCHAFF.
New York, June, 1887.
COMENTS.
I. THE ANTI-MANICH^AN WRITINGS.
Translated by the Rev. Richard Stothert, M.A., Bombay, and Prof, Albert H. Newman, D.D., LL.D., Toronto.
Introductory Essay on the ManichjEan Heresy By Dr. Newman.
On the Morals of the Catholtc Church {De Moi-ibiis Ecclesice Cat/ioiicce), A.D. 388,...Translated by the REV^ Richard Stothert.
On THE Morals OF the Manich^ans {De Aloribus ManichcBoniiii), A.D. 388 Translated by the Rev. R. Stothert.
On Two Souls, against the Manich^ans {^De Dualms Animabus, co/itra Manichceos), A.D. 391 Translated by Dr. Newman.
Acts or Disputation against Fortunatus the Manich^an i^Acta seu Dispiitatio contra Fortunatiivi Manic hceuni), A.D. 392 Translated by Dr. Newman.
Against the Epistle of Manich^us called Fundamental {Contra Epistolam Manic hcBi quam vacant Fundamcnii), A.D 397 Translated by the Rev. R. STo-i'iiKin'.
Reply to Faustus the MANiCHiEAN {Contra Faiistiim ManichcBum, Libri XXXIII.), A.I). 400. 155-345 Translated by the Rev. R. Stothert.
Concerning the Nature of Good, against the Manich/Eans {^De Naima Boiii contra JManichcEos), A.D. 404.. 351-365 Translated by Dr. Newman.
II. THE ANTI-DONATIST WRITINGS.
Translated by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A., Vicar of St. Peter's in the East, Oxford, and late Fellow and Tutor of Merton College, Oxford. The Translation revised, with additional annotations, by the Rev. Chester D.
Hartkanft, D.D., Professor of Biblical and Ecclesiastical History in the Theological Seminary it Hartford, Connecticut.
Introduction to the Anti-Donatist Writings 369-404 By Dr. Hartranft.
On Baptism, against the Donatists {^De Baptismo, contra Donatistas, Libri VII.), Answer to Letters of Petilian, Bishop of Cirta {Contra Litter as Petiliani Donatista Cirtcnsis Episcopi^ Libri III.), A.D. 400.. 519-628 The Correction of the Donatists.
{De Correction Donatistaruin Liber seu Epistola CLXXXV.), Index to the Anti-Manich^an Writings 653-666 Index to the Anti-Donatist Writings 667-675 i WRITI NGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE MANICH^AN CONTROVERSY.
TRANSLATED BY THE REV. RICHARD STOTHERT, M.A., BOMBAY; AND PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY AND COMPARATIVE RELIGION, IN TORONTO BAPTIST ^theological) COLLEGE, TORONTO, CANADA.
i INTRODUCTORY ESSAY ON THE MANICH^EAN HERESY, By Albert H. Newman, D.D., LL.D.
CHAPTER I.— LITERATURE.
I. Sources, The following bibliography of Manichseism is taken from Schaff's History of the Chris- iian Church, vol. II. pp. 498-500 (new edition). Additions are indicated by brackets.
1. Oriental Sources: The most important, though of comparatively late date.
(a) Mohammedan (Arabic): Kitdb al Fihrist. A history of Arabic literature to 987, by an Arab of Bagdad, usually called Ibn Abi Jakub an-Nadim; brought to light by Flugel, and published after his death by Rodiger and Muller, in 2 vols. Leipz. i87i-'72. Book IX. section first, treats of Manichasism. Flugel's translation, see below. Kessler calls the Fihrist 2i ^' FUiidstdtte allerersten Ranges." Next to it comes the relation of the Mohammedan philosopher, Al-Shahrastani (d. 1153), in his History of Religious Parties and Philosophi- cal Sects, Ed. Cureton, Lond. 1842, 2 vols. (I. 188-192); German translation by Haar- briicker, Halle, 1851. On other Mohammedan sources, see Kessler in Herzog,- IX., 225 sq.
(b) Persian Sources: relating to the life of Mani, the Shahnameh {the King's Book) of FiRDAUSi; ed. by Jul. Mohl, Paris, 1866 (V. 472-475). See Kessler, ibid. 225.
[Albiruni's Chronology of Ancient Nations, tr. by E. Sachau, and published by the Oriental Translation Fund, Lond. 1879. Albiruni lived 973-1048, and is said to have pos- sessed vast literary resources no longer available to us. His work seems to be based on early Manichsean sources, and strikingly confirms the narrative preserved by the Fihrist. See also articles by West and Thomas in Journal of the Asiatic Society, 1868, 1870, 187 1.]
(c) Christian Sources: In Arabic, the Alexandrian Patriarch Eutychius (d. 916). Amiales, ed. Pococke, Oxon. 1628; Barhebr^eus (d. 1286), in \\\% Historia Dynastiannn, ed. Pococke. In Syriac: Ephraem Syrus (d. 393), in various writings. Esnig or Esnik, an Armenian bishop of the 5th Century, who wrote against Marcion and Mani (German trans- lation from the Armenian by C. Fr. Neumann, in Illgen's Zeitschrift fiir die Hist. Theologie, 1834, pp. 7 7-78)- 1834, pp. 7 7-78)- 2. Greek Sources: [Alexander of Lycopolis: The Tenets of the Manichcrans (f\r?X^\xh- lished by Combefis, with a Latin version, in the Auctararium No7issininm, Bibl. S. S. Patnnn; again by Gallandi, in his Bibl. Patnnn, vol. IV. p. 73 sq. An English translation by Rev. James B. H. Hawkins, M.A., appeared in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library, Vol. XIV. p. 236 sq.; Am. ed. vol. VI. p. 237 sq. Alexander represents himself as a convert from Pagan- ism to Manichaeism, and from Manichaeism to Orthodoxy. He claims to have learned Man- THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
ichreism from those who were intimately associated with Mani himself, and is, therefore, one of the earliest witnesses.'] Eusebius(Z!'. E. VII. 31, a brief account). Epiphanius [Haer. 66). Cyril of Jerusalem {Catech. VI. 20 sq.). Titus of Bostra {jzpba MwH^aiouG, ed P. de Lagarde, 1859). Photius: Adv. Manichceos {Cod. 179, BibliotJi.). John of Damas- cus: De Haeri's. and Z>/<?/. [Pf.trus SrcuLus, Hist. Manic/iceorii!n.'\ 3. Latin Sources: Archelaus (Bishop of Cascar in Mesopotamia, d. about 278): Acta Dispuiatioiiis cum Manete Hceresiarcha j first written in Syriac, and so far belonging to the Oriental Christian Sources (Comp. Jerome, ^/<' Vir. III. 12), but extant only in a Latin trans- lation, which seems to have been made from the (ireek, edited by Zacagni (Rome, 1698), and RouTH (in Reliquice Saa-(C, vol. V. 3-206); Eng. transl. in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library {yo\. XX. 272-419). [Am. ed. vol. VI. p. 173 sq.]. These Acts purport to con- tain the report of a disputation between Archelaus and Mani before a large assembly, which was in full sympathy with the orthodox bishop, but (as Beausobre first proved), they are in form a fiction from the first quarter of the fourth century (about 320), by a Syrian ecclesiastic (probably of Edessa), yet based upon Manichjean documents, and containing much informa- tion about Manichaean doctrines. They consist of various pieces, and were the chief source of information to the West. Mani is represented (ch. 12), as appearing in a many-colored cloak and trousers, with a sturdy staff of ebony, a Babylonian book under his left arm, and with a mien of an old Persian master. In his defense he quotes freely from the N. T. At the end, he makes his escape to Persia (ch. 55). Comp. H. v. Zittwitz: Die Acta Arclielai et Mauetis untersucht, in Kahnis' Zeitschrift fiir d. Hist. TheoL 1873, No. IV. Oblasin- SKi: Acta Disptct. Arch., etc. Lips. 1874 (inaugural dissert.). Ad. Harnack: Die Acta Archelai iind das Diatessaron latians, in Texte und Untei-sxichuiigen zur Gesch. der alt- chrisil. Lit. vol. I. Heft 3 (1883), p. 137-153. Harnack tries to prove that the Gospel vari- ations of Archelaus are taken from Tatian's Diatessaron.
St. Augustin (d. 430, the chief Latin authority next to the translation of Archelaus). [Besides the treatises published in Clark's series. Contra Fortuiiatuiiiqucndam Manichceoriun Presbyteruni Disput. J. et II., Contra Adimantura Maniclicei discipuluni. Contra Seciindinuin Alanichceum, De Natiira Boni, De duabiis Animabus, De Utilitatc Credendi, De Haeres. XLVI. Of these, De diiabus Animabus, Contra Fortunatiim, and De Natura Boni are added in the present edition, and De Utilitate Credendi has been included among Augustin's shorter theological treatises in vol III. of the present series. \x) l\i^ Confessions z.\\<d the Letters, moreover, the Manichasans figure prominently. The treatises included in the present series may be said to fairly represent Augustin's manner of dealing with Mani- chaeism. The Anti-Manichsean writings are found chiefly in vol. VIII. of the Benedictine edition, and in volumes I. and XL of the Migne reprint. Augustin's personal connection with the sect extending over a period of nine years, and his consummate ability in dealing with this form of error, together with the fact that he quotes largely from Manichtean literature, render his works the highest authority for Manichaeism as it existed in the West at the close of the fifth century.] Comp. also the Acts of Councils against the Manicha^ans from the fourth century onwards, in Mansi and Hefele [and Hardouin].
II. Modern Vvorks.
Isaac de Beausobre (b. 1659 in France, pastor of the French church in Berlin, d. 1738): Histoire Crit. de Maniche'e et du Maniclie'isrtie, Amst. 1634 and '39, 2 vols. 4to. Part of the first volume is historical, the second doctrinal. Very full and scholarly. He intended to write a third volume on the later Manichseans. F. Chr. Baur: Das JSIanichdische Relio-ionso system nach den Quellen neu untersucht und entwickelt, Tiib. 1831 (500 pages). A compre- I Baur discredits tlriis claim on internal grounds {Das Manick. Religionssystem, p. 7).
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.
hensive, philosophical and critical view. He calls the Manich. system a '' gliihend prdchti<res Natur-und lVeltj;ediL/it." [An able critique of Baur's work by Schneckenburger appeared in the "Theol. Siudienu. Kritiken," 1833, p. 875 sq. Schneckenburger strives to make it appear that Baur unduly minifies the Christian element in Manichceism. Later researclies have tended to confirm Baur's main position. The Oriental sources employed by Fliigcl and Kessler have thrown much light upon the character of primitive Manichaeism, and have enabled us to determine more precisely than Beausobre and Baur were able to do the constituent elements of Mani's system. A. v. Wegnern: Manichceonim Iiuiulgentics, Lips. 1827. Wegnern points out the resemblance between the Manichaean system, in accordance with which the " hearers " participate in the merits of the " elect " without subjecting them- selves to the rigorous asceticism practiced by the latter, and the later doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Roman Catholic church ] Trechsel: Ucher Kaiion, Kiitikund Exegese der Manichder, Bern, 1832. D. Chwolson: Die Ssabier tind der Ssabismus, Petersb. 1856, 2 vols. G. Flugel: Ma7ii, seine LeJire uiui seine Sci'iften. A us dem Fihrist des AM Jakicb an-N'adim (987), Leipz. 1862. Text, translation and commentary, 440 pages. [Of the high- est value, the principal document on which the work is based being, probably, the most authentic exposition of primitive Manichtiean doctrine.] K. Kessler: Untersuchungen zur Genesis des Manich. Rel. Systems, Leipz. 1876. By the same: Mdni oder Beitrdge zur Ken7it- niss der Religionsniischung im Semitisnius,'L.€\YL. 1887. See also his thorough article, J/<f/// uud die Manichcer^ in " Herzog," new ed. vol. IX. 223-259 (abridged in Schaff' s " Encyclop." 11. 1396-1398). [Kessler has done more than any other writer to establish the relation between the Manichaeans and the earlier Oriental sects, and between these and the old Babylonian religion. The author of this introduction wishes to express his deep obligation to Kessler. The article on the " Mandder " in " Herzog," by the same author, is valuable in this connection, though his attempt to exclude all historical connection between this Baby- lonian Gnostic sect and Palestine can hardly be pronounced a success. J. B. Mozley: Ruling Ideas in Early Ages; lecture on "The Manichgeans and the Jewish Fathers," with special reference to Augustin's method of dealing with the cavils of the Manichaeans.] G. T. Stokes: Manes 3.x\6. Majiichceatis, in "Smith and Wace," III. 792-801. A. Harnack: Man- ichceism, in 9th ed. of the " Encycl. Britannica," vol. XV. (1883), 481-487. [Also in Ger- man, as a Beigabe to his LehrbucJi d. DogmengescJiicJite, vol. I. p. 681 sq. Harnack follows Kessler in all essential particulars. Of Kessler's article in " Herzog" he says: " This arti- cle contains the best that we possess on Manichaeism." In this we concur. W. Cunning- ham: ^. Austin and Jiis Place in the History of Christian 77?^//^//'/, Hulsean Lectures, 1885, p. 45-72, and passim, Lond. 1886. This treatise is of considerable value, especially as it regards the philosophical attitude of Augustin towards Manichaeism.] The accounts of Mos- henn, Lardner, Schrockh, Walch, Neander, Gieseler [and A\'olf].
CHAPTER II.— PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS, AND ANTECEDENTS OF MANICH/EISM.
"About 500 years before the commencement of the Christian era," writes Professor Monier Williams,' " a great stir seems to have taken plac;p in Indo-Aryan, as in Grecian minds, and indeed in thinking minds everywhere throughout the then civilized world. Thus when Buddha arose in India, Greece had her thinkers in Pythagoras, Persia in Zoroaster, and China in Confucius. Men began to ask themselves earnestly such questions as —What am I? Whence have I come? Whither am I going? How can I explain my consciousness of personal existence' What is the relationship between my material and immaterial nature? What is the world in which I find myself? did a wise, good and all-powerful Being create it out of nothing? or did it evolve out of an eternal germ? or did it come togetlicr by 8 THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
the combination of eternal atoms? If created by a Being of infinite wisdom, how can I ac- count for the inequaUty of condition in it— good and evil, happiness and misery. Has the Creator form or is he formless? Has he any qualities or none?"
It is true that such questions pressed themselves with special importunity upon the thinkers of the age mentioned, but we should be far astray if we should think for a moment that now for the first time they suggested themselves and demanded solution. The fact is that the earliest literary records of the human race bear evidence of high thinking on the fundamental problems of God, man, and the world, and the relations of these to each other. Recent scholars have brought to light facts of the utmost interest with reference to the pre- Baby Ionian (Accadian) religion. A rude nature-worship, with a pantheistic basis, but as- suming a polytheistic form, seems to have prevailed in Mesopotamia from a very early period. "Spirit everywhere dispersed produced all the phenomena of nature, and directed and animated all created beings. They caused evil and good, guided the movements of the celestial bodies, brought back the seasons in their order, made the wind to blow and the rain to fall, and produced by their influence atmospheric phenomena both beneficial and destructive; they also rendered.,the earth fertile, and caused plants to germinate and to bear fruit, presided over the births and preserved the lives of living beings, and yet at the same time sent death and disease. There were spirits of this kind everywhere, in the starry heavens, in the earth, and in the intermediate region of the atmosphere; each element was full of them, earth, air, fire and water; and nothing could exist without them...As evil is everywhere present in nature side by side with good, plagues with favorable influences, death with life, destruction with fruitfulness; an idea of dualism as decided as in the religion of Zoroaster pervaded the conceptions of the supernatural world formed by the Accadian magicians, the evil beings of which they feared more than they valued the powers of good. There were essentially good spirits, and others equally bad. These opposing troops con- stituted a vast dualism, which embraced the whole universe and kept up a perpetual struggle in all parts of the creation." ' This primitive Turanian quasi-dualism (it was not dualism in the strictest sense of the term) was not entirely obliterated by the Cushite and Semitic civilizations and cults that successively overlaid it. So firmly rooted had this early mode of viewing the world become that it materially influenced the religions of the invaders rather than sufi'ered extermination. In the Babylonian religion of the Semitic period the dualistic element was manifest chiefly in the magical rites of the ChaJdean priests'who long continued to use Accadian as their sacred language. " Upon this dualistic conception rested the whole edifice of sacred magic, of magic regarded as a holy and legitimate intercourse established by rites of divine origin, between man and the supernatural beings surrounding him on all sides. Placed unhappily in the midst of this perpetual struggle between the good and bad spirits, man felt himself attacked by them at every moment; his fate depended upon them...He needed then some aid against the attacks of the bad spirits, against the plagues and diseases which they sent upon him. This help he hoped to find in incantations, in mysterious and powerful words, the secret of which was known only to the priests of magic, in their prescribed rites and thejr talismans...The Chaldeans had such a great idea of the power and efficacy of their formulas, rites and amulets, that they came to regard them as required to fortify the good spirits themselves in their combat with the demons, and as able to give them help by providing them with invincible weapons which should ensure success." ' A large number of magical texts have been preserved and deciphered, and among them " the 'favorable Alad,' the ' favorable Z«:?«;;za,' and the 'favorable Uheq,' are very frequently opposed.. to the 'evil Alad,' the 'evil Lamjiia,' the 'evil Uiuqr'^ It would be interesting to give in detail the results of the researches of George Smith, Lenor- INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.
mant, A. H. Sayce, E. Schrader, Friedrich Delitzsch and others, with reference to the elaborate mythological and cosmological systems of the Babylonians. Some of the features thereof will be brought out further on byway of comparison with the Manichjean mythology and cosmology. Suffice it to say that the dualistic element is everywhere manifest, thout>-h not in so consistent and definite a form as in Zoroastrianism, to say nothing of Manichsism. The Medo-Persian invasion brought into Babylonia the Zoroastrian system, already modified, no doubt, by the Elamitic (Cushite) cult. Yet the old Babylonian religion was too firmly rooted to be supplanted, even by the religion of such conquerors as Darius and Cyrus, Modifications, however, it undoubtedly underwent. The duqlism inherent in the system became more definite. The influence of the Jews in Mesopotamia upon the ancient population cannot have been inconsiderable, especially as many of the former, including pro- bably most of the captives of the Northern tribes, were absorbed by the latter. As a result of this blending of old Babylonian, Persian, and Hebrew blood, traditions, and religious ideas, there was developed in Mesopotomia a type of religious thought that furnished a philosophical basis and a mythological and cosmological garnishing for the Manichaean system. Dualism, therefore, arising from efforts of the unaided human mind to account for the natural phenomena that appear beneficent and malignant, partly of old Babylonian origin and partly of Persian, but essentially modified by Hebrew influence more or less pure, furnished to Mani the foundation of his system. We shall attempt at a later stage of the dis- cussion to determine more accurately the relations of Manichaeism to the various systems with which correctly or incorrectly it has been associated. Suffice it to say, at present, that no new problem presented itself to Mani, and that he furnished no essentially new solution of the problems that had occupied the attention of his countrymen for more than 2500 )'ears. Before proceeding to institute a comparison between Manichseism and the various systems of religious thought to which it stands related, it will be advantageous to have before us an exposition of the Manichsean system itself, based upon the most authentic sources.
CHAPTER III.— THE MANICH^AN SYSTEM. Earlier writers on Manichaeism have, for the most part, made the Acta Disp. Archelai et Manetis and the anti-Manichaean writings of Augustin the basis of their representations. For later Manichaeism in the West, Augustin is beyond question the highest authority, and the various polemical treatises which he put forth exhibit the system under almost every imaginable aspect. The "Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus and Manes," while it certainly rests upon a somewhat extensive and accurative knowledge of early Manichaeism, is partially discredited by its generally admitted spuriousness — spuriousness in the sense that it is not a genuine record of a real debate. It is highly probable that debates of this kind occurred between Mani and various Christian leaders in the East, and so Mani may at one time or other have given utterance to most of the statements that are attributed to him in this writing; or these statements may have been derived, for substance, from his numerous treatises, and have been artfully adapted to the purposes of the writer of the "Acts.'' It is certain that most of the representations are correct. But we can no longer rel}' upon it as an authentic first-hand authority. Since Fliigel ])ublished the treatise from the Fihrist entitled " The Doctrines of the Manichaeans, by Muhammad ben Ishak,'' with a German translation and learned annotations, it has been admitted that this treatise must be made the basis for all future representations of Manichaeism. Kessler, while he has had access to many other Oriental documents bearing upon the subject, agrees with Fliigel in giving the first place to this writing. On this exposition of the doctrines of the Manichaeans, there- fore, as expounded by Fliigel and Kessler, we must chiefly rely. The highly poetical mythological form which Mani gave to his speculations renders it exceedingly difficult to lO THE WORKS OF ST. AUGUSTIN.
arrive at assured results with reference to fundamental principles. If we attempt to state in a plain matter-of-fact way just what Mani taught we are in constant danger of misrepre- senting him. In fact one of the favorite methods employed against Mani's doctrines by the writer of the " Acts of the Disputation," etc., as well as by Augustin and others, was to reduce Mani's poetical fancies to plain language and thus to show their absurdity. The considerations which have led experts like Flugel and Kessler to put so high an estimate upon this document, and the discussions as to the original language in which the sources of the document were written, are beyond the scope of this essay. Suffice it to say, that so far as we are able to forpi a judgment on the matter, the reasons for ascribing antiquity and authenticity to the representation of Manichseism contained in the document are decisive.
I. Mani's Life. According to the Fihrist, Mani's father, a Persian by race, resided at Coche on the Tigris, about forty miles north of Babylon. Afterwards he removed into Babylonia and settled at Modein, where he frequented an idol-temple like the rest of the people. He next became associated with a party named Mugtasila (Baptizers), probably identical with or closely related to the Mandseans and Sabeans, both of which parties made much of ceremonial bathings. Mani, who was born after the removal to Babylonia, is re- lated to have been the recipient of angelic visitations at the age of twelve. Even at this time he was forewarned that he must leave the religion of his father at the age of twenty- four. At the appointed time the angel At-Taum appeared again and announced to him his mission. " Hail, Mani, from me and the Lord, who has sent me to thee and chosen thee for his mission. But he commands thee to invite men to thy doctrine and to proclaim the glad tidings of truth that comes from him, and to bestow thereon all thy zeal." Mani entered upon his work, according to Fliigel's careful computation, April i, 238, or, according to calculations based on another statement, in 252. Mani maintained that he was the Paraclete promised by Jesus. He is said, in this document, to have derived his teaching from the Magi and the Christians, and the characters in which he wrote his books, from the Syriac and the Persian. After travelling in many lands for forty years and disseminating his doctrines in India, China, and Turkestan, he succeeded in impressing his views upon Firuz, brother of King Sapor, who had intended to put him to death. Sapor became warmly attached to Mani and granted toleration to his followers. Afterwards, according to some accounts, Mani was imprisoned by Sapor and liberated by his successor Hormizd. He is said to have been crucified by order of King Bahraim I. (276-'7), and his skin stuffed with straw is said to have been suspended at the city gate. Eusebius (H. E. VII. 31) describes Mani as "a barbarian in life, both in speech and conduct, who attempted to form himself into a Christ, and then also proclaimed himself to be the very Paraclete and the Holy Spirit. Then, as if he had been Christ, he selected twelve disciples, the partners of his new religion, and after patching together false and ungodly doctrines collected from a thousand heresies long since extinct, he swept them off like a deadly poison from Persia, upon this part of the world." The account given in the Acta Arcliel. (written probably about 330-40), is far more detailed than that of the Fihrist and differs widely therefrom. It contains much that is highly im- probable. Mani is represented as having for his predecessors one Scythianus, an Egyptian heretic of Aposto'.ic times, and Terebinthus, who went with him to Palestine and after the death of Scythianus removed to Babylonia. The writings of Terebinthus or Scythianus came into the possession of a certain widow, who purchased Mani when seven years of age (then named Cubricus) and made him heir of her property and books. He changed his name to Mani (Manes), and, having become imbued with the teachings of the books, began at about sixty years of age to promulgate their teachings, choosing three disciples, Thomas, Addas and Hermas, to whom he entrusted the writings mentioned above, along with some of his