With this impressive book, Claudia Leurini has presented the first monograph on the Manichaean church. It contains an introduction, chapters on the bipolar structure of the church, the relations between the church and the Manichaean cosmogony, the hierarchy, the status of women in the church, and on peculiarities of the Central Asian Manichaean church, a bibliography, and indices verborum, nominum (of modern authors), and locorum. The book is the outcome of the author's work on the Middle Iranian Manichaean texts from Turfan during a fellowship at the University of Bologna. Due to the suspension of the activities of the editor of Serie Orientale Roma, this book mainly shows the state of research of 2009.

In the introduction the author defines “new perspectives of analysis and comparison with cultural, social and religious features belonging to societies Mani and his followers had come in touch with” as the aim of her book (p. 1). In the second chapter Leurini draws an analogy between the territorial organisation of the church (twelve provinces under authority of twelve teachers, fourfold structure in relation to the points of the compass), and that of Sasanian Iran (pp. 21f.). She explains the self-designation of the “Church of the East” (MP. dēn ī xwarāsān) as the outgrowing of the territorial unit of the Eastern Manichaean province (MP. xwarāsān pāygōs) after the declaration of independence from the central power in Babylon (pp. 37–40). Furthermore, Leurini discusses terms designating the Elect (MP. wizīdag, Parth. wižīdag; MP. dēndār, Sogd. δynδʾr; MP. dēnawar, Parth. dēnāβar, Sogd. δynβr; MP. dēnāwar, Sogd. δynʾβr; MP./Parth. ardāw; Sogd. rxʾnt) and Hearers (MP. niyōšāg, Parth. niγōšāg, Sogd. nγwšʾk; MP./Parth. huruwān) respectively, the religious conceptions related to them and the function of both groups within the church. Further designations could be added, such as MP./Parth. zādag, frazend, Sogd. zʾtyy, zʾtʾk “child” for the Hearers and MP./Parth. brād, Sogd. βrʾt “brother” for the Elect. For ardāw the author refers to the Zoroastrian eschatological concept of Phl. ahlaw, Av. a auuan OP. artāvan (pp. 50–53).Footnote ¹ Leurini maintains that the knowledge of Manis's canonical writings was restricted to the Elect (pp. 74–85) and attributes the canonical books to the ranks of the hierarchy. But the extant lists of Mani's books do not establish such a link since the terms quoted (pp. 71, 74f.) do not refer to specific books but designate his teachings as a whole.Footnote ² Furthermore, Hearers acted as donors or copyists of books and are depicted with books in miniatures. The Coptic Manichaica have also been ascribed to the library of a layperson.

In the third chapter Leurini argues in favour of a cosmological symbolism of the Manichaean church due to the central importance of the cosmos for the redemption of Light. She gives an analysis of Manichaean depictions of the Light Paradise and the firmaments and sets up a connection between the twelve dominions or kingdoms, twelve gods of the pantheon and twelve virtues. Consequently, she infers from that the existence of twelve firmaments: the ten firmaments of the Manichaean cosmogony plus the realm of Light of god Zurwān plus the realm of the Light Nous, i.e. the church (pp. 106–110). On the basis of complex calculations of astronomical units in Manichaean texts and on various possible models (Biblical, Babylonian, Zoroastrian, Brahmanic, Buddhist, Jain), Leurini links these units with the conception of the “Platonic Year” or “World Year”, i.e. the axial precession of equinoxes (p. 133). Accordingly, she associates the figures of the church hierarchy with this system (p. 141). But the author's assumptions are not fully convincing. Some arguments remain hypothetical and speculative since they cannot be verified by textual evidence. The question remains whether this speculation on astronomical figures goes back to Mani himself or is a later development.

In the fourth chapter Leurini analyses terms designating the ranks of the Elect (MP. hammōzāg “teacher”; ispasag “bishop”; mahistag “elder”, mānsārār, Parth. mānsarδār “head of the house, presbyter”) and puts them in a broader socio-historical context. She emphasises the use of titles and epithets from the royal sphere and draws parallels with those of the highest god in the Avesta and the Old Persian inscriptions, of the Sasanian king, the Manichean pantheon and Mani. Not all text passages quoted by the author can be clearly assigned to the church leader. She explains hammōzāg as “he who together releases, the co-releaser” and links it with the function of the teachers in the redemption of Light (pp. 188f.).Footnote ³ In following H. H. Schaeder, she sees ispasag as continuing OIran. *spasaka- “scout, observer, supervisor”, and compares it with the office of the “Eye of the King” under the Achaemenids, since the bishops were “in charge of watching over the Manichaean communities” (p. 212). In mahistag and the like Leurini sees an equivalent to the social institution of Phl. kadag-xwadāy “head of the house” with a broad variety of meanings (pp. 217–219). She also assumes a connection with the office of the “treasurer”, since the presbyters were the “guardian of the treasure corresponding to the mysteries of religion” (pp. 219f.). Overall, the author maintains that Mani built his church to a great extant according to the model of the Sasanian (and Arsacide) social system. But in contrast, S. F. Jones has clearly pointed to the model presented in the Book of Elchasai.Footnote ⁴

The fifth chapter examines designations of women in the Manichaean community (MP. xwār, Parth. wxār “sister”; MP. wizīdagčān “Electa”; niyōšāgčān, Parth. niγōšāgčān, Sogd. nγwšʾkʾnc “female Hearer”, nγwšʾqpṯʾnc “chief of the community of women-hearer”; MP. duxš “virginal; maiden”; wisduxt “princess”; Sogd. δynʾβrʾnc “Electa”). Leurini points to parallels between the Zoroastrian marriage law and the virgin Electae as the brides of the Light-Nous (pp. 225f., 230–239). But in Zoroastrian marriage virginity did not play a prominent role since women could get married with several men consecutively. The author explains the type of the virgin bride by the hierogamy or “Sacred Marriage” of the priestess with the God in Mesopotamia, later also continued in the cult of Anāhitā, and denies a Christian model for the Electae (pp. 239–252). Nevertheless, the rule of celibacy for male and female clerics can be derived from the Manichaean myth and may have been inspired by Christian narratives like that of Thecla recorded also in Manichaean literature. Buddhist or Jain nunneries could have been further models.

In the last chapter Leurini investigates designations of ranks in the Central Asiatic Manichaean church. The term “head of the Hearers” (MP. niyōšāgbad, Parth. niγōšāgbad, Sogd. nγwšʾqpṯʾnc) reflects the appreciation of laypersons, among them members of the Uyghur royal family and the nobility. For Sogd. *xwštʾnc as female form of Sogd. xwšty “presbyter; master, teacher” and loan word in OTu., the author assumes a borrowing from the title of the abbess customary in the Christian Nestorian community and refers to a possible Elamite forerunner of this rank (p. 264f.). Furthermore, Leurini discusses the etymology of the term fʾmšy/famši/ “head of the church(?)” (pp. 268f.) and examines the function of Manichaean monasteries and the persons related to it (OTu. xroxwan “preacher, teacher(?)”; Chin. ehuanjian saibosai 遏愌健塞波塞 “soul-working deacon, servant of the alms” < Parth. *arwānagān ispasag; MP. hašāgerd, Parth. abǰirwānag “pupil”; Sogd./OTu. zmʾšʾyktw ʾywʾrxʾny/ʾywrxʾny ẓmʾštyk “novice(?)”; various kinds of servants). With reference to the description of the economic activities of the monastery in the OTu. Klostererlaß she draws parallels to the institution of the alms-giving or “soul-work” (ruwānagān) of the Hearers on the one side and the Zoroastrian fire temple and the “foundation for the soul” (ruwān rāy, pad ruwān) on the other. Leurini also points to the economy of temples in ancient Mesopotamia. But Manichaean alms-giving served the redemption of Light during the sacred meal. The Zoroastrian pad-ruwān-foundation however was a legal institution, for which the profit of a certain amount of money was used to perform rituals for the sake of the soul of the donor and his relatives. It is also still uncertain whether the Manichaean monasteries developed into economic entities only in Central Asia.Footnote ⁵ Leurini concludes that Mani “took the Zoroastrian pious foundation as a model and on it he structured his mānistānān”, after Iran had “acquired from the Mesopotamian milieu the system of the temple-economy, of the pious foundations and alms” (p. 312). But in almost all religions gods have been worshipped in temples and goods have been dedicated to them, which required an administration. The most striking feature of Mani's church and monastery system was that women however, were admitted to the clergy, which was not the case in the Zoroastrian church. This points again more to a Buddhist or Jain model. On the last pages of the chapter Leurini discusses the investiture of Manichaean clerics, for which she assumes changes in the responsibilities under the Uyghurs (p. 316). The book has no final conclusion. To the comprehensive bibliography some important publications must be added.Footnote ⁶ The indices are very useful but in the index verborum the Greek, Latin and Coptic terms are missing.

The author underlines a strong influence of Mesopotamian and Iranian elements on the development of the Manichaean church. But one must take into account that Mani conceived his teachings first in Aramaic, so that the terminology of the later texts may use not only Iranian loan words but also translations or calques of Aramaic terms. Leurini also does not consider the visual representation of the church in Manichaean art that in various points is not in accordance with her argumentation.Footnote ⁷ In the discussion of the relevant terms Leurini mostly does not indicate the language of the terms and the sources. It would have been also more comfortable if she had presented the original Chinese characters beside the transcription.Footnote ⁸ Due to space, we cannot go into further details discussed by the author. The overall impression of the book is lessened by a number of typing errors in the text. Within her book, Leurini refers to the dependence of Manichaeism on other religious systems, it is to her credit that she has challenged earlier research and presented new approaches on the basis of a multitude of sources in an interdisciplinary and long-term perspective, reaching from the first century bc up to the tenth century ad but this raises the problem of comparability. Thus, the results of the Leurini's research work need further verification by specialists of relevant fields.