Steven Runciman's "the Medieval Manichee"

[DanM]

One of the biggest itches in the back of my mind when it comes to the later Roman Empire is the issue of religion and the role it played in Imperial policy. Such a question as religion in the eastern Roman Empire cannot be answered without at least considering the gnostic sects that were so popular in the early years of the Christian church.

 

First, let me explain the title. All gnostics were not Manichee. All gnostics were not dualists either, but most gnostics were branded Manichee by the more traditional forms of the church. As such, the author puts a variety of dualists, monarchists and others under the same umbrella as they were lumped together by the church of the time.

 

While the subject matter may seem a little dry to some, the Runciman has a very enjoyable and engaging writing style. I know I said the same thing about Dalrymple too, but it really is an accurate comment about both authors.

 

To me, the second chapter was the most enjoyable since it covered the gnostic role in the early church and the likely origins of much of its doctrine. While I knew a little about the gnostics, I really had no idea of what they believed or the diversity of beliefs among different agnostic sects. Some of these sects believed the Old Testament God was a different entity from the New Testament God. They thought the Old Testament God was the bad one and the New Testament God was the good one. Many sects believed Jesus and Mary were only angels. Some thought Jesus came out of Mary's ear. Still trying to get my mind around what they meant on that one. There was also some concept of the word of God as a distinct element that could somehow make their sect's church leaders into Christs in their own right. Also, many believed that procreation was bad while others had very liberal views about sex. Trying to keep up with all of the variations of gnostic beliefs is not easy trick.

 

Later chapters talk about the Cathars, Patarenes, Bogomils and Paulicans. What I found most interesting about these chapters was the conditions where these sorts of heretical movements flourished. They were very popular with the poor and with those who felt the Orthodox Church was not responsive to their plight. Specifically the anti-clericalical dynamic is one that I think is meaningful and can give color to several different historical periods.

 

I wish I could express myself better, because I do not really think I gave a fair account of this book. I sort of had the feeling like I was pouring a pitcher of water into a tea cup when I read this book. Hopefully a second or third reading will allow me to hold more of this fascinating information.