The Mandaeans and the Question of Their Origin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARAM, 16 (2004) 47-60 C. MÜLLER-KESSLER 47 THE MANDAEANS AND THE QUESTION OF THEIR ORIGIN CHRISTA MÜLLER-KESSLER1 (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena) In memory of my teacher in Semitics Rudolf Macuch Browsing the Internet for the Mandaeans one comes across the website “Mandaean World”, where one can read under the logo of the Uroboros snake, the gnostic serpent encircling the world: “The origins of both the peo- ple, and of the religion are one of the continuing mysteries of Mandaean re- search.” This quotation describes exactly the difficulty by which a hundred and fifty years of scholarly discussion was led mostly within Europe concern- ing the “Mandäerfrage”. A scholarly dispute more at home in theological cir- cles or in research groups whose main interest is the study of the world reli- gions than among linguists. I have a feeling that time has come to re-open the issue of this unsolved mystery. Where would it be more appropriate than within this elected circle, whose interest is the culture, the religion, the literature, and the language of a very fascinating religious-ethnic group, the Mandaeans, a small community who has survived nearly two thousand years, fighting persecution and other calamities. Like the Jews they have stuck to their ancient rites and religious books, helping them through several waves of near extinction. Their literary works have been handed down in a surprising close tradition and might be the reason for their opportunity to overcome all kinds of external difficulties. Only our much-praised achievements of the modern world made such an ancient re- ligious sect partially leave their former homeland. Its exile might lead to an end of a two thousand years history of the last remaining gnostics. The recent so-called liberation of Iraq came too late for the Mandaeans, since most of them were already driven out from one of their homesteads with other marsh inhabitants after the first Gulf war in 1990.2 1 This paper was originally presented in a modified version in the Habilitation-Colloquium at the Philolosophische Fakultät, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena, and was read again at the Sec- ond International Aram conference on the Mandaeans, Oxford 10th, July 2002. 2 A figure of 30 000 Mandaeans living around Nasariye (Ur) given in the English Newspaper The Independent on Easter Sunday 21st of April 2003 is doubtful. 48 THE MANDAEANS AND THE QUESTION OF THEIR ORIGIN SOURCES OF THE MANDAEANS The issue from where the Mandaeans originate and how the elements of their religious doctrine can be geographically localised, can be followed up in plenty of scholarly disputes. Some of them have been forgotten in the mean- time. The basis for most discussions were the translations of the Mandaeans’ literary corpus by the semitist and eminent epigrapher M. Lidzbarski, edited between 1915 to 1926. It was then continued from the thirties till the sixties by Lady E. S. Drower who contributed her exact observations of modern Man- daean cultural practise in Iraq and Iran which she laid down in her famous book The Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran, their cults, customs, magic, legends and folklore,3 and published other Mandaic text genres, among them The Ca- nonical Prayerbook of the Mandaean,4 astronomical ominas,5 and incantation series6. This stands in contrast to the 19th cent. scholars like W. Brandt and K. Kessler who had only the hand written copy of the Mandaean Ginza by H. Petermann at hand7, but at least a precise and so far valid grammatical treat- ment of the Mandaic language. When the only existing scholarly Mandaic dic- tionary was published in 1963 by Lady E. S. Drower and R. Macuch,8 the ma- jor text editions had been edited. THE STATE OF RESEARCH CONCERNING THE “MANDÄERFRAGE” The divergent scholarly works on the question of the Mandaeans cannot be summed up in a short paper. The reason for this are the diverse sources of their literature. Some parts of their literary major works were composed and redacted only after the Islamic conquest, e.g. the major part of the Ginza, some of them already during the final period of the Parthian rulership.9 One of their religious books, the Book of John which carries already an Arabic title drasa ∂-yahya, foreshadows an intensive dispute with the Christian religion which cannot be assumed for the older Mandaic literary stage. With the compilation of the Ginza or also called Sidra rabba, the most important religious work, presumably finalised shortly after the defeat of the Sasanians by the Arabs 3 Op. cit., (Oxford, 1937). 4 Op. cit., (Leiden, 1959). 5 Drower, E. S., The Book of the Zodiac, (London, 1949). 6 The most relevant articles are: “+afta ∂ Pi,ra ∂ Ainia”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Soci- ety, 1937, pp. 589-611; 1938, pp. 1-20 and “A phylactery for rue”, Orientalia Nova Series, 15 (1946), pp. 324-346, since they give more hints to the Mandaean legacy than the so-called “high literature”. 7 Petermann, H., Thesaurus sive Liber Magnus vulgo “Liber Adami” appellatus, opus Man- daeorum summi ponderis, (Leipzig, 1867). 8 A Mandaic dictionary, (Oxford, 1963). 9 That certain religious concepts were already fixed can be followed up in the earliest text material, the Mandaic incantations on lead sheets and in the later text corpus, the magic bowls. The supposed first ever published Mandaic lead roll gives some good examples and was chosen on purpose from the Pir Nukraya archive by M. Lidzbarski, see n. 10. C. MÜLLER-KESSLER 49 near al-Qadisiya in 637 – when the Mandaeans were granted the status of a book religion – and helped them to obtain religious freedom under the Islamic dominance. However, one has to discriminate in the chronology of Man- daeans’ major literary works between different layers. Already M. Lidzbarski, the brilliant translator of the Ginza, had to admit that there is lack of distinc- tive indications to distinguish between older and younger textual layers. Lidzbarski considered a Mandaic incantation text on a lead strip which he pub- lished in 1909 as the oldest textual evidence, and dated it to the 4th cent. AD.10 It is more than conceivable that the oldest sections in the Mandaean literary works were composed several centuries before their actual final redaction. This fact induced wild assumptions and speculations concerning the first ap- pearance of the Mandaeans, and opinions ranged from some centuries BC up to the 6th cent. AD. All this came to a standstill with the energetic and con- tinuous publication activity of the well known “Religionshistoriker” K. Ru- dolph. According to his publications, the question of the Mandaeans seemed to be solved.11 From that time on the “Mandäerfrage” attracted hardly any atten- tion. In principle the results and opinions of K. Rudolph go back to the reflec- tions of M. Lidzbarski who as an unparalleled translator and with his unques- tionable exemplary competence in Semitic languages, took in general an idi- osyncratic attitude towards any form of criticism. Lidzbarski favoured a West- ern origin, meaning Palestine and denied a Babylonian background. Following Lidzbarski, K. Rudolph is of the opinion that such Mandaic central terms as manda and naÒorayye (by which the Mandaeans describe themselves), and the two religious terms kus†a12 and gupna13 support enough evidence for a Chris- 10 Lidzbarski, M., “Ein mandäisches Amulett”, in Florilegium ou recueil de travaux d’éru- dition dédies à Monsieur le Marquis Melchior de Vogüé, (Paris, 1909), pp. 349-73, esp. 349. 11 Rudolph, K., Die Mandäer I. Das Mandäerproblem, (Göttingen, 1960); –, Die Mandäer II. Der Kult, (Göttingen, 1961); –, Theogonie, Kosmogonie, and Anthropogonie in den mandäischen Schriften, (Göttingen, 1965); –, “Die Religion der Mandäer”, in Gese, H., Höfner, M. and Rudolph, K. (eds.), Die Religionen Altsyriens, Altarabiens und der Mandäer, (Stuttgart, 1970), pp. 403-469; –, “Die Mandäer”, in Widengren, G. (ed.), Der Mandäismus, (Darmstadt, 1982), pp. 468-471; and many other contributions in reference works. 12 The dissimilation of two emphatics in one root in Aramaic occurs only under the influence of Akkadian, which is the case in the earliest Aramaic inscriptions (Zincirli, Sfire, Tell Fekheriye, Neirab), and in the imported administrative language from Mesopotamia to Egypt, known as Of- ficial Aramaic or Imperial Aramaic. Therefore kws†ˆ could only develop in an Akkadian phonetic environment. There are other cases where /q/ is not dissimilated to /g/, but to /k/ in Mandaic, e.g. in the Akkadian loanword k}rÒ}, kyrÒˆ < qrÒ ‘slander’, see Drower and Macuch, p. 216, and Baby- ˆ†kamÒa/ < /qamÒa/ ‘locust’. The Greek transliteration of kws/ כמצא lonian Jewish Aramaic kousta, koustijl given in Lidzbarski, M., Das Johannesbuch, (Giessen, 1916), p. XVIII, are based on the expected transliteration of Semitic languages into Greek q = k and † = t, and are no arguments for a Western origin. 13 The word gwpnˆ is attested with the same spelling in the Babylonian Talmud as well, see Sokoloff, M., A dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic periods, (Ramat-Gan, 2002), p. 271, and does not need to be imported from Palestine. A magic bowl with Mandaean religious concepts is BM 91709, published as 082M in Segal, J. B., Catalogue of the Aramaic and Mandaic incantation bowls in the British Museum with a contribution by E. C. D. Hunter, (London, 2000), pp. 108-10. 50 THE MANDAEANS AND THE QUESTION OF THEIR ORIGIN tian Jewish sect in the Jordan valley.14 A splinter group broke away and immi- grated to the East, meaning Mesopotamia. Western elements of the Mandaean doctrine were created in a very vaguely described geographical environment in Palestine or Syria. For example, the Mandaean ritual baptism, the so-called maÒbuta15 was imported from there.