The Syriac Origins of Koranic Text October 26, 2019 Category: Religion Download as PDF (Note: This is the second of the two-part piece on the Koran as a Syriac document. As with the previous essay, Mohammed of Mecca is denoted “MoM”; and Classical Arabic is denoted “CA”.) In order to conduct our inquiry, it is necessary to perform a bit of linguistic forensics. This involves assaying the various neo-Aramaic tongues that became prevalent in Late Antiquity: Chaldean / Assyrian, Mandaean, Nabataean, Edessene, Palmyrene, etc.—all of which fell under the over-arching category: Syriac. The next step is to assess how they may have undergone a metamorphosis pursuant to the emergence of the Mohammedan movement. The Semitic languages have a long history, going back to its earliest attested incarnation, Ugaritic (the language of the Amorites, dating to over four millennia ago). At some point around 1100 B.C., Phoenician and Old Aramaic would emerge from these Canaanite (a.k.a. “Sinaitic”) origins. Many–if not all–of the earliest quasi-Abrahamic scriptures derived from Old Aramaic sources. (Such texts used a script that–like the language of the Aramaeans–was based on the Phoenician alphabet.) It is no surprise, then, that the earliest copies of Judaic texts (the books of Enoch, Lamech, Daniel, Ezra, Amram, etc.) were written using Babylonian Aramaic–so named because it is the dialect used by the Babylonian scribes during the Exilic Period (when Judaic scripture was first composed). Only later would those scriptures be rendered in Classical Hebrew (a derivative of Samaritan, which was itself based on Old Aramaic), per the first Deuteronomist sources to which such scripture is attributed. Classical Hebrew (that is: Biblical Hebrew) was a spin-off of Mishnaic Hebrew–a more recent variation of Aramaic script. (Hebrew did not adopt the familiar “square script” until the 1st century A.D.) The Aramaic basis for the earliest Abrahamic scripture continued to be evident into the Middle Ages–as with palpable traces in the Masoretic texts. The Jews of Mesopotamia persisted using variants of Aramaic into Late Antiquity. This is made apparent by documents like the “Book of Elc[h]asai” from the early 2nd century A.D. Hence the go-to language for the various Judaic sects that existed in Late Antiquity (the Essenes, Nazarenes, Ebionites, and Elcesaites) was the neo-Aramaic language known as “Syriac” (alt. Syro- Aramaic). The Judaic “Essenes” preserved such texts in the original language (as well as a Nabataean variation of it), as evidenced by the “Dead Sea scrolls”–parchments found hidden in ancient jars in the caves at Qumran. And so it went: Aramaic eventually morphed into Syriac. This divergence seems to have occurred starting in the late 2nd century B.C.–specifically in the advent of the Kingdom of Urhay (a.k.a. the “Osroene Empire”), named after the Nabataean king: Osroes of Urhay. The capital of this kingdom, the city of Urhay, is what came to be called “Edessa”. This explains why that city would become the epicenter of Syriac literary activity. Starting c. 314 A.D., the kingdom would become a (Syriac) province of the Byzantine Empire–referred to in Greek as the “Heoa Dioikesis” [Diocese of the East]. In the 1st century B.C. through the 2nd century A.D., the (Arab) Emesene Dynasty ruled much of Syria. In the 1st century A.D., the Nabataean King Abgar V of Edessa / Osroene was known as “King of the Arabs” (as attested by the Roman historian, Tacitus). The Abgarid Dynasty’s official language was Syriac; as was the language of most of its subjects. (It ruled until the mid-3rd century.) Through Late Antiquity, Syriac Original essay at: https://www.masonscott.org/the-syriac-origins-of-koranic-text Page 1 of 59 Generated at: 2021-10-01 03:14:52 was inextricably linked with not only other denizens of the Levant, but with those known as Arabs. This makes sense, as the Syriac-speaking region (Nabataea) was referred to as “Arabia Petraea”. {48} The Nabataean region stretched as far north as Harran and Edessa; as far south as Tabuk / Tayma, Hegra, and Dedan; and as far east as Duma (a.k.a. “Dumat al-Jandal”) and Kufa—all of which were located in what had formerly been the land of various Arab peoples (who had used variant scripts, all of which were Southern Semitic dialects). Farther east, the Lakhmids used Syriac—specifically at Hir[t]a (alt. “Al- Hirah”) and Pit-Ardashir, Dilmun (alt. “Al-[a]Hasa”). The farthest south Nabataean linguistic influences may have gone were to the Lihyanites in the Hijaz, who’s capital, Hegra, the Nabateans eventually conquered. Northern Arabs used a potpourri of variant scripts: Dumitic in the vicinity of Duma in the Wadi Sirhan, Dedanic in the vicinity of Dedan, Hismaic in the Hisma region…all the way up to Safaitic in the Al-Safa hills (in the vicinity of Damascus) farther to the north. All were Southern Semitic dialects (sometimes misleadingly referred to as “Old North Arabian”). Illustrative of the genealogy was the preposition that was used for “of” and “the”: the prefix “ha-“ in some inscriptions, and “al-“ in others. This discrepancy illustrates the continuum from older Semitic variants to CA. To call such languages / scripts “proto-Arabic” or “Old Arabic” is to invert causality. It would be like referring to Vulgar Latin as, say, “proto-Portuguese”. Since CA was created as a liturgical language, CA-fetishists are apt to indulge in such casuistry; just as those who fetishize Hebrew are apt to refer to Phoenician and Old Aramaic as “proto- Hebrew”—a retroactive categorization gimmick that is just as absurd. The scope of Nabataean influence may have included north-central Arabia (the “Nafud”, which means the southern edge of Mesopotamia). It included the key port-city of Aqaba and the bustling capital, Petra. It is no coincidence that all the locations in which this family of scripts are found pay tribute to the Nabataean godhead, Dushara. The script of the earliest Korans exhibits grammatical features that clearly derived from the Nabataean region; not from deep within the Arabian peninsula. Note, for example, signature traits like the “i’rab” (an unstressed, short vowel sound), “ta marbuta” (entailing the need to place two dots over the “ha”), and “alif maqsurah” (dotless “ya”): each of them ways to end words. Had CA—an abjad—come from Old South Arabian, these modifications would not have been needed, as that script—an abugida—already contained the vowel sounds required. Syriac would soon overtake its Semitic antecedent, becoming the predominant language from the Levant. This included the various Nabataean peoples, who were all Arabs: the Palmyrenes, Salihids, Tanukhids, and Ghassanids. It would become the lingua franca from Palestine, across Mesopotamia, to the fringes of Sassanian Persia…including northward into central Anatolia and, yes, southward into Arabia. The Lakhmids are the most obvious example of this. When Bar-Sauma of Nisibis wrote his memoirs in the 5th century, it was in Syriac. When the “Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius” was written in the 7th century (about the goings on of the Middle East), it was in Syriac. When MoM was about sixteen years old, an illuminated version of the Gospels was written in Mesopotamia. Even though it was composed at a Byzantine monastery located in Apamea (named “Bet[h] Zagba”), the language used to write it was Syriac. {1} MoM and his fellow Qurayshis–as well as most of the denizens of northwestern Arabia–would have spoken a Hijazi dialect of Syriac; as the Nabataean variant of the tongue was the lingua franca of the region until as late as the 9th century. This explains the myriad inscriptions from that time composed in Nabataean script. {2} Original essay at: https://www.masonscott.org/the-syriac-origins-of-koranic-text Page 2 of 59 Generated at: 2021-10-01 03:14:52 How can we so sure that Hijazis spoke Syriac? The 8th-century historian, Ibn Ishaq wrote that during a renovation of Meccan cube (which purportedly occurred just prior to MoM’s ministry), there was an inscription on a corner of the shrine’s foundation that was COMPOSED IN SYRIAC. Testament to this fact is the conventional tale about MoM’s first revelation at Gar Hira c. 610. Immediately following that first “Night of Destiny” [“Laylat al-Qadar”; a.k.a. the “Night of Destiny / Power”], MoM was highly doubtful that the angel (Gabriel) was really speaking to him. So he came to his wife at the time (the elder Khadijah bint Khuwaylid al-Kubra) to seek council. Khadijah would soon encourage her husband to accept his role as messenger. However, before settling the matter, she urged her spouse to consult her cousin, Waraka ibn Nawfal, whom she esteemed for his prodigious wisdom. MoM obliged. Waraka met with the nascent prophet, and–as the story goes–upon hearing his testimony, validated Kadijah’s endorsement. This account is attested in the most vaunted Hadith: that of Bukhari (1/1/3, 4/55/605, and 9/87/111) as well as of Muslim (vol. 1, no. 301). The anecdote was also included in Ibn Hisham’s recension of Ibn Ishaq’s biography: the “Sirat Rasul Allah”. Here’s the catch: Waraka was an Ebionite / Nestorian preacher of the Quraysh, meaning he would certainly have spoken Syriac (i.e. the language of the Ebionites and Nestorians). However, per Mohammedan lore (in which CA was the lingua franca of the region), Waraka would need to have spoken CA. YET… in broaching the topic of language, Mohammedan lore makes no mention of Waraka speaking any alternate tongues.