Talk:Manichaeism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateManichaeism is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 13, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted

Need for revision by expert[edit]

In connection with working on a text where I needed to refer to three basic facts about the spread of Manichaeism to Rome, I checked the corresponding statements in the Wikipedia article against reputable peer-reviewed publications, and all three pieces of information in the section on Manichaeism in the Roman Empire in the Wikipedia article seem to be at least open to serious doubt, and perhaps factually incorrect. Diocletian's edict against the Manichaeans is in scholarly sources dated to 297, not 302 (see, e.g., Robin M. Jensen, "Christianity in Roman Africa", in the Cambridge History to the Ancient World (2013), vol 2, p. 275). The text of the edict is reproduced from an anthology by Gardner & Lieu (2004), but when one checks the reference given in that anthology, De Maleficiis et Manichaeis does not seem to be the title of the edict itself but a slightly garbled version of the title of the chapter in the 4th-century book that (as the article does state correctly) includes the text of the edict. Gardner & Lieu (2004: 117) also write that the identity of the first missionary to bring Manichaeism into the city of Rome is unknown, and that the single source that provides any information is an early 6th-century text that claims that a certain Bundos did so during the reign of Diocletian. I have found no reference in any reputable publication supporting the unsourced statement in the Wikipedia article that a certain Psattiq did so in the year 280. The fact that three out of three pieces of information seem to contradict what one finds in scholarly literature may be a statistical chance occurrence, but it does suggest that the article needs the attention of somebody who is an expert on the topic. Okh123456 (talk) 06:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]