Information on the "Fragment quoted in Orosius' Commonitorium"

Before we look at the accusation that Priscillian was a Manichaean, perhaps a brief study of the document known as the "Fragment quoted in Orosius' Commonitorium" (1) would be helpful!

.This is a supposed quote from a lost letter of Priscillian contained in the "Commonitorium de errore Priscillianistarum et Origenistarum" (2)  which was sent by Orosius from Spain, to Augustine in Hippo, in the year 416 A.D.  According to Orosius this clearly shows the heretical doctrine of Priscillian.
Both Chadwick and Conti draw attention to the number of words which are common to both the Fragment and the Tractates and that the style of writing can be regarded as corresponding to that of the earlier tracts.

Chadwick, in his thorough discussion of this document (2) suggests that there are three questions to be asked about the supposed fragment.
" From what source did he (Orosius) derive his information? Is his fragment of Priscillian taken from an authentic letter? and is his picture of Priscillianist doctrine a true representation of the group's beliefs?" (3)

With regard to question one, Chadwick believes that Orosius is drawing on the apologetic work of Ithacius. (4). If this is so then it is to be expected that the text would condemn Priscillian without any regard to proving his sources!

With regard to questions two and three, there are scholars who deny the authenticity of the fragment, and suggest that it is a forgery, written in the years after the death of Priscillian in an attempt blacken the reputation of the "Martyrs of Trier". However, as Chadwick points out, it is possible that it is a fragment of a genuine letter in which Priscillian is warning his readers against Manichaean speculations! There is also the possibility that this is a quote from a pseudographical work written after the master's death in his name, in order to develop a gnostic tendency in the Priscillianist movement. In any of these cases the quoted extract would not necessarily represent either the teaching of Priscillian or his followers.

To summarise - While this "Fragment" may point to a degree of Manichaean belief at the time that it was written (up to 30 years after the death of Priscillian), it cannot be taken with any certainty to condemn Priscillian or the movement as Manichaean or Gnostic.

(1) Conti p. 210
(2) Chadwick pp. 190 - 206
(3) Opp cit. p. 201 - 202
(4) Opp cit. p. 145 (esp. footnote 2)