334 book reviews

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���4 | doi ��.��6�/�57��7��-���4��7�

Samuel N.C. Lieu, Lance Eccles, Majella Franzmann, Iain Gardner and Ken Parry

Medieval Christian and Manichaean Remains from Quanzhou (Zayton) (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Series Archaeologica et Iconographica 2), Turnhout: Brepols 2012, X + 283 pp., € 125 (hardback).

This new volume in the steadily ongoing CFM-series contains the final reports and a number of related studies by an Australian research team on the Christian (both Church of the East and Catholic) and Manichaean remains, mainly from the Mongol period in Quanzhou and Jinjiang in the Fujian Province of the Republic of China. To a certain extent the book is a continuation of Lieu’s article ‘Nestorians and Manichaeans on the South China Coast’, which was first published in this journal (VC 1980, 71-88), and later republished in a somewhat revised and expanded version in Lieu’s Manichaeism in Central Asia and China (Leiden-Boston-Köln 1998, 177-195). At the centre of this pioneering article were the Manichaean shrine in Quanzhou as well as Marco Polo’s report of his encounter with a Christian sect estimated by him to consist of 700.000 families. Most scholars agree that this was a secretive group of Manichaeans.

Both Polo’s story and the still existing Manichaean temple remain impor-tant subjects in the present book, while it also contains much more. After his brief introductory essay on present-day Quanzhou (Zayton/Zaitun) and early accounts of its Western visitors (the Polo’s, the Arab travel-writer Ibn Battuta, and the Franciscan John of Montecorvino, among others), Lieu continues with a chapter on the Chinese scholar Wu Wenliang (1903-1969) and his pivotal role in the discovery and conservation of Quanzhou’s Christian and Manichaean remains. After that follows Lieu’s contribution ‘The Church of the East in Quanzhou’, a rather extensive chapter on the (still often, but mistakenly) so-called ‘Nestorians’ there, being in actual fact an outline of the history of Church of the East in Sassanian Iran and Central China, its survival in later (mainly medieval) times under the Song and the Mongols, and its eventual demise. In an appendix Lieu once again (but here rather lengthily) discusses Marco Polo’s account on the ‘Christians’ of Fugiu (Fuzhou).

The next chapter, by Iain Gardner, competently and clearly deals with ‘The Franciscan Mission to China and the Catholic Diocese of Zayton’ (53-60). The following exposé, again by Lieu, is entitled ‘Manichaean Remains in Jinjiang’ and focuses on the Manichaean shrine on Huabaio hill in the Jinjiang county.1

1 It is not always clear from the text whether or not the shrine is situated in the prefecture of Quanzhou. On p. 65 it first runs: ‘Almost all Manichaean remains from the Quanzhou region, with the noted exception of a Church of the East inscription from Jintoupu which mentions

335book reviews

Vigiliae Christianae 68 (�0�4) ��9-�46

This shrine in all probability dates back to the year 1148 and contains, carved into the granite back wall, a statue of Mani. Here local worshippers still vener-ate Mani as the Buddha of Light. Some recent sources, however, make mention of other Manichaean shrines in the same Fujian province and one would have read Lieu’s expert opinion also on these locations.2

A major new part of the book starts with chapter 6: ‘Catalogue of Christian and Manichaean Remains from Zayton (Quanzhou, China)’.3 The overview is compiled by Gardner, Lieu and Ken Parry. It consists of two parts (I. Christian Remains; II. Manichaean Remains) and is based upon an earlier Chinese cata-logue of Wu Wenliang (Bejing 1947; revised and expanded by his son Wu Youxiong, Bejing 2005). All descriptions are accompanied by (full colour or b/w) photographs, several of them made by the Australian team. This essential part of the book (pp. 83-128) is followed by two chapters in which the inscrip-tions on the listed artefacts (and some others!) are translated and commented on, i.e. ch. 7 ‘Inscriptions in Latin, Chinese, Uighur and Phagspa’ by Lance Eccles and Lieu (129-149) and ch. 9 ‘Nestorian Inscriptions in Syro-Turkic from Quanzhou: (II) Texts and Translations’ by Majella Franzmann and Lieu (171-214). As indicated in its subtitle, the interposed ch. 8 ‘Inscriptions in Syro-Turkic from Quanzhou: (I) Epigraphical and Historical Background’ by Eccles and Lieu only gives background information.

Ch. 10, ‘The Indian Background: Connections and Comparisons’, is com-posed by Franzmann, Gardner and Parry. It describes the trading relations between South China and South India, but also deals with, for instance, Mani’s links with India and China; the problem of Thomas, the Twin and Mani; the history of early Christianity in India and, in the end, briefly with Christian arte-facts in India and their possible significance for interpreting the Quanzhou

both members of the Church of the East and Manichaeans (v. infra Catalogue B37 = Z44r), come from the County of Jinjiang and not from the prefecture of Quanzhou’. But a few lines later, in a translated quote from a writing of Paul Pelliot, it is said: ‘The Huabiao Hill of the County of Jinjiang prefecture of Quanzhou . . .’. What is clear from the several accounts in this book and elsewhere is that the shrine on Huabiao Hill is ca. 27 km SW from Quanzhou.

2 In a footnote (73 n. 34), Lieu only refers to R. Kauz, ‘Der “Mo-ni-gong”—ein zweiter erhalte-ner manichäischer Tempel in Fujian?’, in: Ronald E. Emmerick a.o. (eds.), Studia Manichaica. IV. Internationaler Kongreß zum Manichäismus, Berlin, 14.-18. Juli 1997, Berlin: Akademie Verlag 2000, 334-341 and B. Stöcker-Parnian, ‘Ein manichäischer Fund an der Südostküste Chinas’, China-Blätter 19 (1991) 211-221. Ralph Kauz (337) makes mention of a number of other Manichaean temples in the region which sparks questions such as ‘Do they still exist? Are they still places of (Buddhist) worship?’

3 I follow the wording as given in the table of Contents. The actual chapter title on p. 83 runs ‘Catalogue to the Christian and Manichaean Remains from Zayton (Quanzhou, China)’.

336 book reviews

Vigiliae Christianae 68 (�0�4) ��9-�46

remains. This last subject is fully discussed by the eminent specialist Parry in the subsequent ch. 11: ‘The Art of the Christian Remains at Quanzhou’. The last chapters are a Bibliography (Lieu et al.) and an (unfortunately far from com-plete) Index (Lieu), respectively.

This pioneering book contains a considerable amount of new material dis-closed by an expert team with an astonishing command of languages. In par-ticular Lieu’s knowledge of a wide range of languages and scripts is impressive, as may be noted of his skills as an historian by training too. At the same time one must say that the book sometimes lacks clear structure and includes sev-eral repetitions. These minor deficiencies will be caused by the fact that the volume results from team work, but might have been avoided by more inten-sive consultation between the authors and, for instance, more cross referenc-ing. Also, a few extra maps would have greatly enhanced its accessibility. This a fortiori goes for an extensive Index (the inclusion, for instance, of much more items from the Catalogue and its subsequent discussions in chs. 7 and 9 would have considerably enhanced its value).

Regarding Lieu’s discussion of Marco Polo’s account in the appendix to ch. 3 (pp. 49-52, not 50-53 as stated in the Index), my main question concerns the passus: ‘nam ipsi [sc. the ‘Christians’ encountered in Fugiu] habebant libros & isti dominj Mapheus & marcus legentes in ipsis inceperunt scripturam inter-pretari & traslatari (sic)4 de uerbo ad uerbum & de lingua in lingua[m] ita quod inuenerunt esse uerba5 psalterij/ tunc interrogauerunt eos unde legem & ordinem illum haberent qui respondentes dixerunt. Ab antecesoribus (sic) nostris habebant’.6 The passage is translated as: ‘For they had books, and these Masters Maffeo and Marco reading in them began to interpret the writing and to translate from word to word and from tongue to tongue, so that they found it to be the words of the Psalter. Then they asked them whence they had that religion and order. And they answered and said: “From our ancestors”.’ My main problem is with the discussion of the word ‘psalterium’ and the phrase ‘ab antecesoribus nostris’. Although Lieu (and rightly so, in my opinion) adheres to the view that the Polo’s stumbled upon a group of Manichaeans, in his commentary he remarks: ‘However, from the description given by Marco Polo and the insistence by the members of this secretive sect that they adhered to teaching “from our ancestors” and that they had the psalms of David, they

4 This is the (defective) MS reading, and not ‘translatari’ as stated by Lieu.5 Not ‘ubera’ as stated by Lieu. 6 Marcus Paulus Venetus de diversis hominum generibus, et de diuersitatibus Regionum

Mundanarum etc., ed. A.C. Moule, in: A.C. Moule & Paul Pelliot, Marco Polo, The Description of the World, II, London: George Routledge & Sons Limited and Carter Lane 1938, liv.

337book reviews

Vigiliae Christianae 68 (�0�4) ��9-�46

could have been Jews. The Manichaeans certainly possessed psalms; but these were mainly to Jesus or to Mani or to other Manichaean deities, and could not easily be misidentified as Davidic’ (52). However, the text nowhere speaks of Psalms of David and taking ‘from our ancestors’ as referring to Jews is an over-interpretion. Moreover, it is by no means necessary to translate ‘psalterium’ with ‘the Psalter’: the reference seems to be to a collection of psalms in which the names of Jesus or Christ struck the visitors and made them decide they stumbled upon a group of ‘Christians’ (or, in the exact words of the Z Manuscript, as followed and quoted by Lieu: ‘quod inuenerunt eos xpistania[m] legem tenere’ and ‘uos estis xpistiani’).7

Another interesting question regarding this episode concerns the identity of the ‘tres apostoli’ spoken of in the text, if indeed Manichaeans are involved. This may, however, be left for another occasion. The above sentences may tes-tify to the fact that we are dealing with an important and intriguing book resulting from a highly interesting research project. Those who wish to become involved in the enterprise may do wise to orient themselves by first reading Lieu’s clearly written and well-composed article previously published in this journal.

Johannes van Oort University of Pretoria

j.van.oort@planet.nl

7 Lieu, 50 and 51; Moule, liv.