Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 15.djvu/511

Rh M A N M A N 487 auditor for nine years, while Faustus was at that time the most esteemed Manichaean teacher in the West. Augustine iu his later writings against the Manichseans deals chiefly with the following problems : (1) the relation between knowledge and faith, and between reason and authority ; (2) the nature of good and evil, and the origin of the latter ; (3) the existence of free will, and its relation to the divine omnipotence ; (4) the relation of the evil in the world to the divine government. The Christian Byzantine and Roman emperors, from Valens onwards, enacted strict laws against the Mani- cheeaus. But at first these bore little fruit. The auditores were difficult to trace out, and besides they really gave little occasion for persecution. In Rome itself between 370 and 440 Manichseism gained a large amount of support, especially among the scholars and public teachers. It also made its way into the life of the people by means of a popular literature in which the apostles were made to play a prominent part (Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles), Manichseism in the West had also some experience of attempts at reformation from the ascetic side, but of these we know little. In Rome Leo the Great was the first who took energetic measures, along with the state authorities, against the system. Valentinian III. decreed banishment against its adherents, Justinian the punish ment of death. In North Africa Manichasism appears to have been extinguished by the persecution of the Vandals. But it still continued to exist elsewhere, both in the Byzantine empire and in the West, and in the earlier part of the Middle Ages it gave an impulse to the formation of new sects, which remained related to it. And, if it has not been quite proved that so early as the 4th century the Priscillianists of Spain were influenced by Manichseism, it is at least undoubted that the Paulicians and Bogomiles as well as the Catharists and the Albigenses are to be traced back to Manicha3ism (and Marcionitism). Thus the system, not indeed of Mani the Persian, but of Manichasism as modified by Christian influences, accompanied the Catholic Church until the 13th century. Sources. (a) Oriental. Among the sources for a history of Mani- chieism, the most important are the Oriental. Of these the Mo hammedan, though of comparatively late date, are distinguished by the excellent manner in which they have been transmitted to us, as well as by their impartiality. They must be named first, because ancient Manichsean writings have been used in their construction, while, with the exception of some small and rather unimportant pieces, we possess no other .original Manichaean works dating from the 3d century. At the head of all stands En-Nedim, Fihrist (circa 980), edited by Fliigel (1871-72); comp. the latter s work Mani, seine Lehre u. seine Schriften, 1862. See also Shahrastani, Kitdb al-milal wan-nuhal (12th cent.), edited by Cureton (1846) and translated into German by Haarbriicker, 1851, and individual notes and excerpts by Tabari (10th cent.), Al-Binini (llth cent.), and other Arabian and Persian historians. Of the Christian Orientals those that afford most information are Ephraem Syrus (ob. 373), in various writings ; the Armenian Esnik (see Zeitsch. f. hist. Theol., 1840, ii. ; Langlois, Collection, ii. 375 sq.), who wrote in the 5th century against Marcion and Mani ; and the Alexandrian patriarch Eutychius (ob. 916), Annales, ed. Pococke, 1628. There are besides scattered pieces of information in Aphraates (4th cent.), Barhebraeus (13th cent.), and others. (b) Greek and Latin. The earliest mention of the Manichseans in the Graco-Roman empire is to be found in an edict of Diocletian (see Hanel, Cod. Grcgor., tit. xv.), which is held by some to be spurious, while others assign it to one or other of the years 287, 290, 296, 308 (so Mason, The Persec. ofDiocl, p. 275 sq.). Eusebius gives a short account of the sect (H. E., vii. 31). It was the Ada Archelai, however, that became the principal source on the subject of Manichreism for Greek and Roman writers. These Ada are not indeed what they give themselves out for, viz., an account of a disputation held between Mani and the bishop Archelans of Cascar in Mesopotamia ; but they nevertheless contain much that is trust worthy, especially regarding the doctrine of Mani, and they also include Manichrcan documents. They consist of various distinct pieces, and originated in the beginning of the 4th century, probably at Edessa. They were translated as early as the first half of the same century from the Syriac (as is maintained by Jerome, De Vir. Illust., 72 ; though this is doubted by modern scholars) into Greek, and soon afterwards into Latin. It is only this secondary Latin version that we possess (edited by Zacagni, 1698; Eouth, Reliq. Sac., vol. v., 1848; translated in Clark s Ante-Niccne Library, vol. xx.); small fragments of the Greek version have been pre served. Regarding the Ada Archelai,^ see Zittwitz in Zeitschr. f. d. liistor. Theol., 1873, and Oblasinski, Ada disp. Arch, ct Manctis, 1874. In the form in which we now possess them, they are a compilation after the pattern of the Clementine Homilies, and have been subjected to manifold redactions. These Ada were used by Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech., 6), Epiphanius (H&r., 66), and a great number of other writers. All the Greek and Latin heresi- ologists have included the Manichseans in their catalogues ; but they seldom adduce any independent information regarding them (see Theodoret, Ha&r. fab., i. 26). Important matter is to be found in the resolutions of the councils from the 4th century onwards (seeMansi, Ada Condi., and Hefele, Concilicnycschichte, vol. i.-iii. ), and also in the controversial writings of Titus of Bostra (6th cent.), Upbs Mavixaiovs (ed. Lagarde, 1859), and of Alexander of Lycopolis, Ao7os irpbs TOSS Mavixaiov 86as (ed. Combefis ; transl. in Ante-Nic. Lib., vol. xiv. Of the Byzantines, the most worthy of mention are John of Damascus (De Hiercs. and Dialog.} and Photius (cod. 179 Bibliotli. ). The struggle with the Paulicians and the Bogomiles, who were often simply identified with the Manichseans, again directed attention to the latter. In the West the works of Augus tine are the great repertory for information on the subject of Manichffiism (Contra epistolam Manich&i, quam vacant funda- incnti ; Contra Faustum Manich&um ; Contra Fortunatutn ; Contra Adimantum ; Contra Secundinum ; De actis cum Felice Manichxo ; De Genesi c. Manichseos ; De natura boni ; De duabus animabus ; De utilitate credendi ; De moribus eccl. cathol. et de moribus Manicheeorum ; De hsercs.). The more complete the picture, however, which may here be obtained of Maniclueism, the moie cautious must we be in making generalizations from it, for it is beyond doubt that Western Manichseism adopted Christian elements which are wanting in the original and in the Oriental Manichreism. Literature. The most important works on Manichseism are Beausobre, Hist, critique de Manichee et du Manichtisme, 2 vols., 1734 sq. (the Christian elements in Manichaism are here strongly, indeed too strongly, emphasized) ; Baur, Das manich. Ecligionssystem, 1831 (in this work Manichsean speculation is exhibited from a speculative standpoint) ; Fliigel, Mani, 1862 (a very careful investigation on the basis of the Fihrist) ; Kessler, Untersuchung zur Genesis dcs manich. Ecligionssystems, 1876 ; and the article &quot; Mani, Manichaer,&quot; by the same writer in Herzog- Plitt s R.E., ix. 223-59. This article is very thorough, and leads to jnost favourable expectations regarding the author s forthcoming work. The accounts of Mosheim, Lardner, Walch, and Schrockh, as well as the monograph by Trechsel, Ucber Kanon, Kritik, und Excgese der Manichaer, 1832, may also be mentioned as still useful. The various researches which have been made regarding Parsisin, the ancient Semitic religions, Gnosticism, &c., are of the greatest importance for the investigation of Manichaism. (A. HA.) MANILA (less correctly MANILLA), the capital of Luzon and the Philippine Islands, and the centre of Spanish commerce in the East, was founded by Legaspi in 1571, and is situated on the eastern shore of a circular bay 120 nautical miles in circumference, 14 36 N. lat. and 120 52 E. long. The country around the bay is more or less flat in character, and in the dry season almost bare of vegetation, so that, excepting the Mafonso and Mateo mountains behind Manila, and the chains of mountains running north and south of the entrance to the bay, there is really nothing attractive about the harbour. It is unsafe in the north-east and south-west monsoons, and vessels over 300 tons have to run for shelter to the naval port of Cavite&quot;, the smaller craft finding a safe anchorage behind a break water facing the mouth of the Pasig. A new breakwater, however, was commenced in 1880 for large vessels. This river Pasig, which is about 14 miles long, is fed by an inland lake called the Laguna de Bayo, and on its way into the harbour it divides Manila into two parts. On its northern bank are large commercial warehouses, a bazaar occupied chiefly by Chinese, known as the Escolta, and trending eastwards an extensive suburb of native dwellings extending some miles up the Pasig. Beyond the Escolta lie Binondo, the business part of Manila, and San Miguel, the fashion able quarter where Spaniards and foreigners have their resi dence, and where since the earthquake of 1880 two palaces