Nothing more is known about Manaim. For the name, see de Boor 1889, 170 (and cf. Acts 13.1). *pa/tria II.97 reads *mananah=. Beginning with 'and it was a just measure' (h)=n de\ di/kaion me/tron) the Suda-author simplifies considerably from the patriographical sources—*parasta/seis 12 and *pa/tria II.51, 97 (Preger p. 27-28, 179, 202-203)—which are often obscure and confused in this passage.
Textual notes: oi)/kou] oi)=kos ou(=tos nu=n *(rw[mai=oi] *d[ii/]p[pion] ge/rontos; to\ mure/lion mg. add. A^r; xei=res *)amastria[nw=n] mg. inter. add. M to\ nu=n lego/menon mure/lion. mo/dios xalkou=s mg. exter. add. M; xei=res] qu=res. On the Myrelaion, see omega 177.
[1] 'Scythians' (sigma 703) appear in the Suda's patriographical sources as a generic term for northern barbarians. The attribution of the statue (mentioned in the next sentence) to Manaim/Manane is uncertain, as is the veracity of his putative victory.
[2] These two sentences appear with slight variation in omega 177. See that entry for commentary on the nature and location of the Oreion, Modion, and the house of Crateros; see also mu 1185.
[3] Excavations at the Forum Tauri in the vicinity of the *xalkou=n *tetra/pulon to the north of the Mese uncovered stone hands on two large, bronze columns erected by Valentinian III (425-455)—perhaps replicas of the original bronze hands mentioned here (Janin 1964, 66)). The Book of Ceremonies (1.10 [R83]; 1.17 [R106]); indicates that the original monument stood between the Philadelphion and the Forum Tauri, in the vicinity of the Χαλκοῦν Τετράπυλον to the north of the Mese. The Patria (II.51 53νδ], Preger 179) places it near the Amastrianon. It seems likely that several such monuments appeared in the area around the Capitol; see Janin 1964, pp. 66, 69, 104.
[4] This story is told more fully in *parasta/seis 12 (paraphrased and simplified by *pa/tria II.97), 'one of the shippers (ei(=s e)c a)mfote/rwn tw=n nautw=n) who was selling his corn to the emperor for the corn dole lost his right hand at the foot of the Modion when someone among those present accused him of cheating' (Cameron and Herrin 1984, 75).
[5] This passage probably refers to Valentinian I and, by implication, his brother and co-Augustus Valens. Valens’s Praetorian Prefect Domitius Modestus is attested as having established regulations for weights and measures, including the size of the modius, at Heron Stereometrica 2.54 (cf. Corcoran 1995). This was apparently part of an empire-wide effort introduced in 369/370 under both Valentinian and Valens, as confirmed by Amm. Marc. 27.9.10; Codex Theodosianus 14.4.4; cf. Lenski 2002, 268-69. An actual example of a bronze modius set up as part of this program (datable to 369/370) was discovered in Ponte Puñide (Galicia) with the inscription: “Legal modius according to the imperial order of our lords Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian, unconquerable emperors, on orders from Marius Artemius vir clarissimus acting as Vicar of the Prefect, under the supervision of Potamius and Quentianus, Principal Curials.” (Année Epigraphique 1915, 75 = 1916, 64; cf. Ureña 1915). Janin 1964, 66-67, 104) attributed this passage to Valentinian III (425-55), who is recorded as having fixed the price of African wheat at 40 modioi to the solidus (Novels of Valentinian 13.4; cf. Jones 1964, 445, 1185), but this cannot be correct given that Valentinian never controlled Constantinople, and his regulation is applicable strictly to Africa. The Suda omits an incorrect comment in the patriographical sources that the νόμισμα (i.e. the Constantinian solidus) was originally silver. The patriographical sources for this entire section are textually and factually confused. Cameron and Herrin conjecture that confusion between measurement and price has led the patriographical author(s) to introduce, mistakenly, the contemporary ratio of the solidus to a lesser denomination (1 solidus = 12 miliaresia) in place of information about Valentinian’s price reforms, confirming "the ignorance of [the author of the Παραστάσεις] about the real early history of Constantinople and the inability of the author(s) to explain things clearly in his own words" (Cameron and Herrin 1984, 188).
[6] On the meaning of the difficult exammon, see epsilon 1535.
[7] 'Protector' (pi 2884) refers to an imperial guardsman. The title suggests that the passage refers to an event in the reign of Justinian I (iota 446), placing the removal of the measure in 528/29. See Frank 1969, 84ff.