The precise designation of the seat of the bishopric of Archelaus has been the subject of considerable diversity of opinion. Socrates [1436] and Epiphanius [1437] record that Archelaus was bishop of Caschar, or Caschara. [1438] Epiphanius, however, does not keep consistently by that scription. [1439] In the opening sentence of the Acts themselves it appears as Carchar. [1440] Now we know that there were at least two towns of the name of Carcha: for the anonymous Ravenna geographer [1441] tells us that there was a place of that name in Arabia Felix; and Ammianus Marcellinus [1442] mentions another beyond the Tigris, within the Persian dominion. The clear statements, however, to the effect that the locality of the bishopric of Archelaus was in Mesopotamia, make it impossible that either of these two towns could have been the seat of his rule. Besides this, in the third chapter of the Acts themselves we find the name Charra occurring; and hence Zacagnius and others have concluded that the place actually intended is the scriptural Charran, or Haran, in Mesopotamia, which is also written Charra in Paulus Diaconus, [1443] and that the form Carchar or Carchara was either a mere error of the transcribers, or the vulgar provincial designation. It must be added, however, that Neander [1444] allows this to be only a very uncertain conjecture, while others hold that Caschar is the most probable scription, and that the town is one altogether different from the ancient Haran.
The date of the Disputation itself admits of tolerably exact settlement. Epiphanius, indeed, [1445] says that Manes fled into Mesopotamia in the ninth year of the reign of Valerianus and Gallienus, and that the discussion with Archelaus took place about the same time. This would carry the date back to about 262 a.d. But this statement, although he is followed in it by Petrus Siculus and Photius, is inconsistent with the specification of times which he makes in dealing with the error of the Manichæans in his book On the Heresies. From the 37th chapter of the Acts, however, we find that the Disputation took place, not when Gallienus, but when Probus held the empire, and that is confirmed by Cyril of Jerusalem. [1446] The exact year becomes also clearer from Eusebius, who [1447] seems to indicate the second year of the reign of Probus as the time when the Manichæan heresy attained general publicity--Secundo anno Probi...insana Manichæorum hæresis in commune humani generis malum exorta; and from Leo Magnus, who in his second Discourse on Pentecost also avers that Manichæus became notorious in the consulship of Probus and Paulinus. And as this consulship embraced part of the first and part of the second years of the empire of Probus, the Disputation itself would thus be fixed as occurring in the end of a.d. 277 or the beginning of 278, or, according to the precise calculation of Zacagnius, between July and December of the year 277.
That the Acts of this Disputation constitute an authentic relic of antiquity, seems well established by a variety of considerations. Epiphanius, for instance, writing about the year a.d. 376, makes certain excerpts from them which correspond satisfactorily with the extant Latin version. Socrates, again, whose Ecclesiastical History dates about 439, mentions these Acts, and acknowledges that he drew the materials for his account of the Manichæan heresy from them. The book itself, too, offers not a few evidences of its own antiquity and authenticity. The enumeration given of the various heretics who had appeared up to the time of Archelaus, the mention of his presence at the siege of the city, [1448] and the allusions to various customs, have all been pressed into that service, as may be seen in detail in the elaborate dissertation prefixed by Zacagnius in his Collectanea Monumentorum Ecclesiæ Græcæ. At the same time, it is very evident that the work has come down to us in a decidedly imperfect form. There are, for example, arguments by Manes and answers by Archelaus recorded in Cyril [1449] which are not contained in our Latin version at all. And there are not a few notes of discrepancy and broken connections in the composition itself, [1450] which show that the manuscripts must have been defective, or that the Latin translator took great liberties with the Greek text, or that the Greek version itself did not faithfully reproduce the original Syriac. On the historical character of the work Neander [1451] expresses himself thus: [1452] "These Acts manifestly contain an ill-connected narrative, savouring in no small degree of the romantic. Although there is some truth at the bottom of it--as, for instance, in the statement of doctrine there is much that wears the appearance of truth, and is confirmed also by its agreement with other representations: still the Greek author seems, from ignorance of Eastern languages and customs, to have introduced a good deal that is untrue, by bringing in and confounding together discordant stories through an uncritical judgment and exaggeration."
[1430] Thus Cyril of Jerusalem, in the sixth book of his Catecheses, §§ 27 and 30, tells us how Manes fled into Mesopotamia, and was met there by that shield of righteousness (hoplon dikaiosunes) Bishop Archelaus, and was refuted by him in the presence of a number of Greek philosophers, who had been brought together as judges of the discussion. Epiphanius, in his Heresies, lxvi., and again in his work De Mensuris et Poderibus, § 20, makes reference to the same occasion, and gives some excerpts from the Acts of the Disputation. And there are also passages of greater or less importance in Jerome (De vir. illustr., ch. 72), Socrates (Hist. Eccles., i. 22), Heraclianus bishop of Chalcedon (as found in Photius, Bibliotheca, Cod. xcv.), Petrus Siculus (Historia Manichæorum, pp. 25, 35, 37), Photius (Adversus Manichæos, book i., edited in the Biblioth. Coislin., Montfaucon, pp. 356, 358), and the anonymous authors of the Libellus Synodicus, ch. 27, and the Historia Hæreseos Manichæorum in the Codex Regius of Turin. [See Cyril's text in Routh, R. S., vol. v. pp. 198-205.]
[1431] As by Zacagnius at Rome, in 1698, in his Collectanea Monumentorum Veterum Ecclesiæ Græcæ ac Latinæ; by Fabricius, in the Spicilegium Sanctorum Patrum Sæculi, iii., in his edition of Hippolytus, etc.
[1432] Biblioth., Cod. lxxxv. [Coleridge thinks "Manes" himself a myth, "a doubtful Ens."]
[1433] See especially ch. 39 and 55. [Note reference to John de Soyres, vol. v. p. 604, this series.]
[1434] De vir. illustr., ch. 72.
[1435] Such as the apparent confusion between aer and aner in ch. 8, and again between loimos and limos in the same chapter, and between pessei and plessei in ch. 9, and the retention of certain Greek words, sometimes absolutely, and at other times with an explanation, as cybi, apocrusis, etc.
[1436] Hist. Eccles., i. 22.
[1437] Hæres., lxvi. ch. 5 and 7, and De Mens. et Pond., ch. 20.
[1438] Kascharon.
[1439] For elsewhere (Hæres., lxvi. 11) he writes Kascharen, or, according to another reading, which is held by Zacagnius to be corrupt Kalcharon.
[1440] And that form is followed by Petrus Siculus (Hist. Manich., p. 37) and Photius (lib. i., Adv. Manich.), who, in epitomizing the statements of Epiphanius, write neither Kascharon nor Kalcharon, but Karcharon.
[1441] Geogr., book. ii. ch. 7.
[1442] Book xviii. 23, and xxv. 20, 21.
[1443] Hist. Misc., xxii. 20.
[1444] Church History, ii. p. 165, ed. Bohn.
[1445] De Mensur. et Pond., ch. 20.
[1446] Cateches., vi. p. 140.
[1447] Chronicon, lib. post., p. 177.
[1448] In ch. 24.
[1449] Catech., vi. p. m. 147.
[1450] As in the 12th, 25th, and 28th chapters.
[1451] [Compare Routh, Reliquiæ Sacræ, vol. v. pp. 4-206, and his everywhere learned notes.]
[1452] Church History, ii. pp. 165, 166, ed. Bohn. [Compare Robertson, vol. i. pp. 136-144.]
The Acts of the Disputation [1453] with the Heresiarch Manes.
------------------------
1. The true Thesaurus; [1454] to wit, the Disputation conducted in Carchar, a city of Mesopotamia, before Manippus [1455] and Ægialeus and Claudius and Cleobolus, who acted as judges. In this city of Mesopotamia there was a certain man, Marcellus by name, who was esteemed as a person worthy of the highest honour for his manner of life, his pursuits, and his lineage, and not less so for his discretion and his nobility of character: he was possessed also of abundant means; and, what is most important of all, he feared God with the deepest piety, and gave ear always with due reverence to the things which were spoken of Christ. In short, there was no good quality lacking in that man, and hence it came to pass that he was held in the greatest regard by the whole city; while, on the other hand, he also made an ample return for the good-will of his city by his munificent and oft-repeated acts of liberality in bestowing on the poor, relieving the afflicted, and giving help to the distressed. But let it suffice us to have said thus much, lest by the weakness of our words we rather take from the man's virtues than adduce what is worthy of their splendour. I shall come, therefore, to the task which forms my subject. On a certain occasion, when a large body of captives were offered to the bishop Archelaus by the soldiers who held the camp in that place, their numbers being some seven thousand seven hundred, he was harassed with the keenest anxiety on account of the large sum of money which was demanded by the soldiers as the price of the prisoners' deliverance. And as he could not conceal his solicitude, all aflame for the religion and the fear of God, he at length hastened to Marcellus, and explained to him the importance and difficulty of the case. And when that pattern of piety, Marcellus, heard his narration, without the least delay he went into his house, and provided the price demanded for the prisoners, according to the value set upon them by those who had led them captive; and unlocking the treasures of his goods, he at once distributed the gifts of piety [1456] among the soldiers, without any severe consideration of number or distinction, [1457] so that they seemed to be presents rather than purchase-moneys. And those soldiers were filled with wonder and admiration at the grandeur of the man's piety and munificence, and were struck with amazement, and felt the force [1458] of this example of pity; so that very many of them were added to the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, and threw off the belt of military service, [1459] while others withdrew to their camp, taking scarcely a fourth part of the ransom, and the rest made their departure without receiving even so much as would defray the expenses of the way.
[1453] Of Archelaus, bishop of Caschar in Mesopotamia.
[1454] Treasury.
[1455] In Epiphanius, Hæres., lxvi. 10, it is Marsipus.
[1456] Pietatis pretia.
[1457] Nec numero aliquo nec discretione ulla distinguit. For distinguit, some propose distribuit.
[1458] Reading commonentur, as in the text. Commoventur is also suggested, ="were deeply moved."
[1459] On the attitude of the Christians of the primitive Church towards warfare, see Tertullian's De Corona Militis, ch. 11, and the twelfth canon of the Nicene Council.
2. Marcellus, as might well be expected, was exceedingly gratified by these incidents; and summoning one of the prisoners, by name Cortynius, he inquired of him the cause of the war, and by what chance it was that they were overcome and bound with the chains of captivity. And the person addressed, on obtaining liberty to speak, began to express himself in these terms: "My lord Marcellus, we believe in the living God alone. And we have a custom of such a nature as I shall now describe, which has descended to us by the tradition of our brethren in the faith, and has been regularly observed by us up to the present day. The practice is, that every year we go out beyond the bounds of the city, in company with our wives and children, and offer up supplications to the only and invisible God, praying Him to send us rains for our fields and crops. [1460] Now, when we were celebrating this observance at the usual time and in the wonted manner, evening surprised us as we lingered there, and were still fasting. Thus we were feeling the pressure of two of the most trying things men have to endure,--namely, fasting and want of sleep. But about midnight sleep enviously and inopportunely crept upon us, and with necks drooping and unstrung, and heads hanging down, it made our faces strike against our knees. [1461] Now this took place because the time was at hand when by the judgment of God we were to pay the penalty proper to our deserts, whether it might be that we were offenders in ignorance, or whether it might be that with the consciousness of wrong we nevertheless had not given up our sin. Accordingly at that hour a multitude of soldiers suddenly surrounded us, supposing us, as I judge, to have lodged ourselves in ambush there, and to be persons with full experience and skill in fighting battles; and without making any exact inquiry into the cause of our gathering there, they threatened us with war, not in word, but at once by the sword. And though we were men who had never learned to do injury to any one, they wounded us pitilessly with their missiles, and thrust us through with their spears, and cut our throats with their swords. Thus they slew, indeed, about one thousand and three hundred men of our number, and wounded other five hundred. And when the day broke clearly, they carried off the survivors amongst us as prisoners here, and that, too, in a way showing their utter want of pity for us. For they drove us before their horses, spurring us on by blows from their spears, and impelling us forward by making the horses' heads press upon us. And those who had sufficient powers of endurance did indeed hold out; but very many fell down before the face of their cruel masters, and breathed out their life there; and mothers, with arms wearied, and utterly powerless with their burdens, and distracted by the threats of those behind them, suffered the little ones that were hanging on their breasts to fall to the ground; while all those on whom old age had come were sinking, one after the other, to the earth, overcome with their toils, and exhausted by want of food. The proud soldiers nevertheless enjoyed this bloody spectacle of men continually perishing, as if it had been a kind of entertainment, while they saw some stretched on the soil in hopeless prostration, and beheld others, worn out by the fierce fires of thirst and with the bands of their tongues utterly parched, lose the power of speech, and beheld others with eyes ever glancing backwards, groaning over the fate of their dying little ones, while these, again, were constantly appealing to their most unhappy mothers with their cries, and the mothers themselves, driven frantic by the severities of the robbers, responded with their lamentations, which indeed was the only thing they could do freely. And those of them whose hearts were most tenderly bound up with their offspring chose voluntarily to meet the same premature fate of death with their children; while those, on the other hand, who had some capacity of endurance were carried off prisoners here with us. Thus, after the lapse of three days, during which time we had never been allowed to take any rest, even in the night, we were conveyed to this place, in which what has now taken place after these occurrences is better known to yourself."