Hypsistarii, Sebòmenoi/Phoboùmenoi (tòn Theòn), Theosebeìs, Massaliani,Euphemitai, Caelicolae, Hunafà. ''Adherents of the Prevailing Religion'': let us pay attention to the first term. ''Adherents'' simply means ''Symphatizers'' <ref>Cf above p.15 and ns.70-1 for a subtle theoretical distinction between these terms.</ref>, ''Close to'', ''To get ready for'', it does not mean ''Full Converts'', which is exactly the case of the God-Fearers. Probably al- Bìrùnì should have added to the last words of his definition the attribute ''Monotheistic'', since we always have to do with people who made the fundamental step to turn themselves to the faith in One Most-High God, in One Supreme Deity <ref>As we have said (above p.1 and n.2), that is the sense by which we assume the expression following MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, p.119.</ref> in reference to whom the other lesser deities play often the role of heavenly messengers, of angels, as the Oracle from Oenoanda – that is from the Northern Lycian site where one of the rare ''Hypsistarii''’s cult-places has been found – explicitly states by Apollo’s mouth: ''Born of itself, untaught, without a mother, unshakeable, not contained in a name, known by many names, dwelling in fire, this is God. We, his angels, are a small part of God'' <ref>201The Oracle was firstly published by G.E. BEAN, ''Journey in Northern Lycia 1965-67'', D. Ak. Wien Phil.-Hist. Klasse 104 (1971), pp.20-2 no.37; see the fine commentary by L. ROBERT, “Un Oracle Gravé à Oenoanda”, in ''Opera Minora Selecta'', V, Amsterdam 1972, pp.617-39 (previously published in ''CRAI ''1971); for a discussion about the Oracle here quoted, whose first three lines are also reproduced into the so-called ''Theosophy of Tubingen ''(late V c. C.E.) as well as into LACTANTIUS’ ''Divinae Institutiones ''(1, 7), see MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, p.86 ff., where also the original Greek text and its translation are given. </ref>. But it is true, also, that after the final victory of Christianity God-Fearers’ communities – whose names historically range from ''Hypsistarii'', ''Hypsistariani'', to ''Theosebèis'', ''Sebòmenoi tòn Theòn'', ''Caelicolae ''etc. - but also the lonely individuals seeking after God known by the name ''Hunafà’ ''in the Near Eastern desert regions felt the attraction of Christianity by often achieving their spiritual way through a full Conversion to the Cross, while in previous times they were gravitating around the prevalent Monotheistic groups settled throughout the geographical areas where they lived, which as a rule were Jewish ones.
Al-Bìrùnì’s first-quoted text also turns the reader’s thought to the Jewish context, even if the Persian writer seems to believe that the Jewish presence along the Euphrates and Tigris valley is connected to a religious reality that will come along after several centuries, namely the migration from Palestine into Southern Mesopotamia of some Hemerobaptist sects as Elkesaits and Mandaeans <ref>202The migration of these sects from Palestine has been often put in doubt: see for example E. PETERSON, “Urchristentum und Mandaismus (Nachtrag)”, ''ZNW ''27 (1928), pp.91-98. We wish to recall here that CHWOLSON’s identification (cf. ''Die Ssabier''’s Index, s.vs.) of the religious group called by al- NADIM, ''Fihrist'', ET p.811, the ''Mughtasila ''(“Those who wash themselves”), or ''Sàbat al-batà’ih'', with the Elkesaites and the Mandaeans is valid only for the former group, as the discovery of the so-called ''Mani-Codex ''has demonstrated once for all: ''Der Kolner Mani-Kodex … ''kritische Edition … herausgegeben und ubersetz von Ludwig LOENEN und Cornelia ROMER, ''Papyrologica coloniensia ''14, Opladen 1988. </ref>. But if one interprets the information by means of al-Bìrùnì’s second excerpt, one sees rather the real influence that Zoroastrianism had on Hebraic religion, because it was precisely during the ''Babylonian captivity'' that some typical features of Hebraism such as the juxtaposition Good-Evil and God-Satan or concepts such as the Last Judgement and the Resurrection of the Dead came into being <ref>203On the Jews in Babylonia, also during the Persian period, see the up-to-date bibliography in SCHURER-VERMES-MILLAR-GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, § 31 ns.11 ff. </ref>. To sum up, we have supposed that al-Bìrùnì’s first text was only to be connected with such a historical phenomenon; on the other hand, it had relations with the historical rising of Jewish Proselytism, and reminded for example a well-known textual passage by Josephus mentioning the transfer of the Jews from Babylon to Asia Minor by Antiochus III at the end of the III century B.C.E. <ref>204Antiochus settled two thousand Jewish families in Lydia and Phrygia: granting them the right to follow their own laws and other privileges. JOSEPHUS, ''Ant. Jud''., 12, 149-50, quotes the relevant passages of the letter of the king to his governor Zeuxix: for the authenticity of this document, see the discussion in SCHURER-VERMES-MILLAR-GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.17 n.33; TREBILCO, ''Jewish Communities'', p. 5 ff. </ref>: it was from this original bulk that many well-organized Jewish communities spread throughout Asia Minor and elsewhere, exerting a strong spiritual attraction on the surrounding Gentile milieu, as archaeological findings have proved with certainty. In Afrodisia <ref>205We limit ourselves to quote again TREBILBO’s book, where large space is reserved to the most important Jewish communities in Asia Minor (Sardi, Priene, Acmonia, Apamea), with exaustive bibliography. </ref>, in particular, Gentiles’ involvement in the local synagogue appears to have been really massive, since more than half of the people attending the cult-place were Gentiles whose status range across the entire social spectrum, from the highest civic positions and liberal professions to craftsmen and simple workers <ref>206See REYNOLD-TANNEMBAUM, ''Jews and God-Fearers'', pp.116-23, for a detailed analysis of “the trade designations” in Aphrodisia’s inscription. </ref>: it is worth noting, once again, that such people were not fullconverts, but plain ''theosebeìs'', God-Fearers, whereas only three individuals are recorded in the engraved inscription mentioning the donors’ names of the beneficent institution which they contribute to as ''proselytoi ''<ref>207REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit.: for the mention of ''prosèlytos ''see p.5, face A, ll.13, 17, 22 (“The important fact that 3 persons are explicitly called proselytes … in a period in which Jewish proselytism was forbidden by imperial decree, is a strong testimony of the powerful influence of the Jewish community of Aphrodisia”: P. W. Van der HORST, ''Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity'', p.171 [from the study “Jews and Christians in Aphrodisia in the Light of Their Relations in Other Cities of Asia Minor” contained in the same volume, pp.166-81, and firstly published in ''NedTTs ''43 (1989) pp.106-21]): Commentary pp.43-48, where also the problem of the imperial legislation is treated. </ref>, namely people legally converted to Judaism <ref>208Cf. the previous note, and above p.12 and ns. 90-92. </ref>. Probably the Roman laws prohibiting circumcision and conversion to Judaism since Hadrian’s times played a significant role in such a meagre number of persons claiming explicitly that ''passing of the boundary'' which Juvenal so greatly feared and bitterly mocked: here, in fact, most of the no-Jews prefer to remain in the more neutral religious position of Juvenal’s ''pater metuens sabbata'', worshipping ''nubes et caeli numen ''and abstaining from ''carne suillam ''rather than that of the son who decides to make the last step and thus ''mox et praeputia ponit ''without any reserve <ref>209Cf. above p.14 and n.113. </ref>.
Beyond such vague elements, we know very little about the God-Fearers’ cultic practices. From Oenoanda’s text one learns that sometimes their cult had solar features, because of the Oracle’s prescription to the faithful to pray in direction of the rising sun, namely facing east, gazing up at heaven and offering prayers to the allseeing Aether <ref>210</ref>. A tendency to solar Monotheism comes also out from J. Ustinova’s speculations about the Iranian background of the religious position of the ''thiasoi'', the cultic associations – called ''eispoietoì adelphoì sebòmenoi theòn hypsiston'', but also ''synodos ''of ''thiaseitai ''or ''thiasòtai ''– worshipping ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in Tanais and in several other Greek colonies on the Northern shore of the Black Sea in the first half of the II c. C.E. <ref>211</ref>, though we reject her general conclusions <ref>212</ref>. We should not dwell here on the connection established by E. Schurer more than one century ago between these groups of Monotheistic or quasi-Monotheistic believers and the ''metuentes'' attested by epigraphic and literal evidence in the Latin West <ref>213</ref>, but above all with the ''sebòmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''phoboùmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''Hellenes ''whom Saint Paul regularly meets in the course of his indefatigable mission <ref>214 </ref>in the synagogues of Asia Minor and Greece where he preaches the evangelical message (but in other meetingplaces also, mostly after Paul’s last theological break with the Jews <ref>215</ref>: ''Thus I shall go to Gentiles'') <ref>216</ref>, and who consequently appear to be the original bulk of the emerging Christianity according to Luke’s ''Acts''.Beyond such vague elements, we know very little about the God-Fearers’ cultic practices. From Oenoanda’s text one learns that sometimes their cult had solar features, because of the Oracle’s prescription to the faithful to pray in direction of the rising sun, namely facing east, gazing up at heaven and offering prayers to the allseeing Aether <ref>See the last two lines of the Oracle (refs. above n.201). The adjective ''epòptes'', “all-seeing”, is usually attributed to Helios (cf. S. MITCHELL, ''Anatolia: Land, Men and Gods in Asia Minor'', II, Oxford 1993, p.47), even if it is also applied to ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in a dedicatory formula from an Alexandria’s inscription virtually conflating the Highest god and the Sun god, or in another one from a Pergamum altar completely associating both divinities (dedication to ''Helios Theos Hypsistos''): texts in MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, nos. 284 and 186. </ref>. A tendency to solar Monotheism comes also out from J. Ustinova’s speculations about the Iranian background of the religious position of the ''thiasoi'', the cultic associations – called ''eispoietoì adelphoì sebòmenoi theòn hypsiston'', but also ''synodos ''of ''thiaseitai ''or ''thiasòtai ''– worshipping ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in Tanais and in several other Greek colonies on the Northern shore of the Black Sea in the first half of the II c. C.E. <ref>Being collected within ''Corpus Inscriptionum Regni Bosporani ''(''CIRB''), eds. V.V. STRUVE ''et alii'', Moskow-Leningrad 1965, and firstly published by V.V. LATYSHEV in Russian, these inscriptions – as it is well-known – represent the key-stone of the old and influential study of E. SCHURER, “Die Juden im Bosporanische Reiche und die Genossenschaften der ''sebòmenoi theòn hypsiston ''ebendaselbest”, ''Sitzungberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften'', I, 1897, pp.220-5, but above all of the already quoted “Les Mystères de Sabazius et le Judaisme” of CUMONT, who pointed out to the syncretistic features of these religious communities and whose conclusions had been accepted and discussed by many scholars after him: E.R. GOODENOUGH, “The Bosporus Inscriptions to the Most High God”, ''JQR ''47 (1956-7), pp.1-44; B. LIFSHITZ, “Le Culte du Dieu Très Haut à Gorgippia”, ''RFIC ''92 (1964), pp.157-61; M. TATCHEVA HITOVA “On the Cult of Theòs Hypsistos on the Bosporus” (in Russian), ''VDI ''1 (1978), pp.133-42 (cf. ''SEG ''28 [1978], p.1648); MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, pp.133-5 (nos.83- 104), are only few examples. A good edition and translation of the texts can be found in LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting ''(Appendix 3), pp.226-46. </ref>, though we reject her general conclusions <ref>J. USTINOVA, “The Thiasoi of Theos Hypsistos in Tanais”, ''HR'', 31 (1991), pp.150-80 (cf. ''SEG ''42 [1992], p.726); Eadem, ''The Supreme Gods of the Bosporan Kingdom'', p.183 ff. (“Cult Associations on the Bosporus”). For a widespread tendency to solar Monotheism in Late Antiquity, the classical study of F. CUMONT, ''La Theologie Solaire du Paganisme Romain'', Paris 1909, is still to be considered a reference mark. For the solar character of the Harrànian popular religion, see TUBACH, ''Im Schatten des Sonnengottes'', ''passim''. </ref>. We should not dwell here on the connection established by E. Schurer more than one century ago between these groups of Monotheistic or quasi-Monotheistic believers and the ''metuentes'' attested by epigraphic and literal evidence in the Latin West <ref>''CIJ'', I, 2, nos. 5, 285, 524, 529, 642; (M. STERN, ''GLAJJ ''II, p.105, thought that ''metuens ''could be only an abridgment of the fuller formula ''deum metuens ''and hence was definitely used technically: “It is hard to conceive that either ''metuens ''or ''sebòmenos ''is used in the general sense of ‘religious’ ”). The participles ''metuens ''and ''timens ''can also be found in Christian inscriptions (E. DIEHL, ''ILCV'', Berlin 1961, nos. 3359a, 3416a, 4779, 6 [''metuens''], 1339-41, 1172 [''timens'']): in both cases, however, the formula would actually refer to God.fearers. For a Latin transcription of the Greek ''theosebès ''into Latin letters, cf. J.B. FREY, ''CIJ'', I, 2, Città del Vaticano 1936, no.228 (= D. NOY, ''JIWE'', II, no.207, Rome: Eparchia ''theosebes''; but cf. FELDMAN, “Jewish ‘Sympathizers’ in Classical Literature and Inscriptions”, p.204 n.24: “Frey, who is very eager to find ‘sympathizers’ in his inscriptions, is wrong in not recognizing a possible one here”), and ''CIJ ''I, 2, LIFSHITZ, ''Prolegomenon ''no.619a (= ''JIWE'', I, no.113, Venosa: Marcus ''teuseves''; cf. B. LIFSHITZ, “Les Juifs à Venosa”, ''RFIC'', 90 [N.S. 40] [1962], pp.367-71). For a discussion, besides ROMANIUK, “Die ‘Gottesfurchtigen’ im Neuen Testament”, ''passim'', and LAKE, “Proselytes and God-Fearers”, ''BC'', ''passim'', see LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', pp.68-70. The references to ''metuen(te)s ''are collected by SCHURER-VERMES-MILLAR-GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.168 n.74. For literary evidence, see below n.217. The term ''Theosebés ''is an equivalent of ''Sebòmenos ''(''tòn theòn''): normally in inscriptions the former is preferred because of its shorter form. </ref>, but above all with the ''sebòmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''phoboùmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''Hellenes ''whom Saint Paul regularly meets in the course of his indefatigable mission <ref>God-Fearers in ''Acts. ''Chap. x: description of a model God-Fearer, ''i.e. ''the centurion Cornelius denoted as ''eusebès kaì phoboùmenos tòn theòn ''expressing his piety by means of almsgiving and costant praying (x, 2) and enjoing a good reputation among Jews (x, 22). It is worth noting with PINES, “The Iranian Name for Christians and God-Fearers”, p.147, as “according to the Acts of the Apostles, the first Gentile converted to Christianity was one of the God-fearers”. Cornelius’ episode is the turning point of the book: from here, ''Acts'' is the history of this mission. xiii, 16 (''phoboùmenoi tòn theòn''); 43 (''sebòmenoi prosèlytoi''): the passage has been long discussed, because of its apparent self-contradiction, the words used here by Luke denoting two different classes of believers. Generally two solutions to the problem have been proposed: the first one is that ''prosèlytoi ''is a wrong word, namely an ancient gloss or “a careless expression” (KUHN-STEGEMANN, ''RE'', Suppl. IX, col.1253; KUHN, ''TWNT'', VI [1968], p.743; E. HAENCHEN, ''Die Apostelgeschichte'', in ''KritischeexegetischeKommentar uber das Neue Testament'', III, Gottingen 1959, p.355 n.5 [ET, Oxford 1971, p.413 n.5]; ROMANIUK, loc. cit., p.81; LIFSHITZ, “Du Nouveau sur les Sympathisants”, p.80; H. CONZELMANN, ''Acts of the Apostles'', Philadelphia 1987, p.106); the second coincides with the position of the scholars who reject any technical sense of the word ''sebòmenoi ''(FOAKES-JACKSON, ''BC'', V, p.88; WILCOX, “The ‘God-Fearers’ in Acts: A Reconsideration”, p.181 f.). But particularly worth of interest is a third possibility, namely the suggestion of LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', p.47, who argues “that ''prosèlytos ''is used here in the same manner as in Mattew in a basic ‘verbal’ sense of ‘coming to any-thing new’”: she had in fact checked a semantic value of the term/verb ''prosèlytos''/''prosèrkhetai ''present in some Christian texts such as the ''Homiliae ''of ASTERIUS OF AMASEA, the ''Praescriptio ''of MARIA OF CASSOBELA, and a passage of CLEMENS OF ALEXANDRIA, where “alongside the traditional meaning there began to develop another one, namely ‘a convert to Christianity’ ”, hence the more general “idea of approaching anything new”, by which interpretation obviously all contradictions cease to exist); 50; xvi, 14; xvii, 4, 17; xvii, 17; xviii, 6-7 (''sebòmenoi ''[''tòn theòn''] and ''sebòmenoi Hèllenes'': the abridged formula ''oisebòmenoi ''could also be explained by the commandment of not naming in vain God: cf. J. KLAUSNER, ''Von Jesus zu Paulus'', Jerusalem-Amsterdam 1950, p.55; LIFSHITZ, ''ibidem''). We should add to these items three passages mentioning “Greeks” (xiv, 1, xviii, 4 and xix, 10: ''Ioudaìous kaì Hellenas''), whose identity is certainly not different from the ''sebomènon Hellènon ''previously mentioned in xvii, 4 (cf. REYNOLDSTANNEMBAUM, ''Jews and God-Fearers'', p.51). For other direct or indirect Greek literary references to God-Fearers (Epictetus, Filo, Josephus), see BERTRAM, art. “Theosebès”, ''TWNT ''III, p.123 ff.; COHEN, “Respect for Judaism by Gentiles According to Josephus”, pp.416-9 (who counts as many as five instances in ''AJ'': 3, 217; 3, 318-9; 20, 34; 20, 41; 20, 195; and four in ''BJ'': 2, 454; 2, 463; 2, 560; 7, 45); MARCUS, “The ''Sebòmenoi ''in Josephus”, pp.247-50. Talmudic references to ''yere’i ash-shamayyim ''(“Heaven Fearers”, where “Heaven” is the traditional metonymy for God) are collected and discussed by I. LEVY, “Le Proselytisme Juif”, ''REJ ''50 (1905), pp.1-9; 51 (1906), pp.29-31; and by SIEGERT, “Gottesfurchtiger”, pp.110-27; add REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.48 f. and notes; FELDMAN, “Jewish Sympathizers”, p.207 f.; and the lemma ''jàre’'', ''TWAT'', s.v</ref>in the synagogues of Asia Minor and Greece where he preaches the evangelical message (but in other meetingplaces also, mostly after Paul’s last theological break with the Jews <ref>EPIPHANIUS, ''Panarion'', 80, 1-2, compares Messalians’ places of prayer with extra-mural Jewish sanctuaries, like the cultic place outside the city walls where Paul met the God-fearing Lydia, or another one built by the Samaritans in the shape of an open-air theatre, adding that they also used buildings similar to churches: cf. below p.26.</ref>: ''Thus I shall go to Gentiles'') <ref>''Acts'', xviii, 6.</ref>, and who consequently appear to be the original bulk of the emerging Christianity according to Luke’s ''Acts''.
For the cultic features of the Western ''metuentes'', what we have observed in Juvenal’s satyrical verses <ref>217 Above in the text and n. 209.</ref>is perhaps enough; in reference to God-Fearers’ practices in ''Acts ''one must rather stress the crucial decision of Jerusalem’s Council (51 C.E.) <ref>218For “The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem”, see K. LAKE’s ''Note XVI'', in ''BC'', I, 5, pp.195-212.</ref>, where the duties of such Gentile Converts to Christianity were fixed once and for all: ''Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood'' <ref>219''Acts'', xv, 19-20. </ref>. What is that? It is just the moral-religious code which, according to rabbinical tradition, every man is obliged to follow, and in particular the stranger, the ''resident alien'' (''gertoshàb'', ''ger ash-sha’ar'') in the State of Israel <ref>220For the equivalence ''ger(ei) toshàb – ger(ei) ash-sha’ar – ben(ei) Noah, ''cf. SCHURER-VERMESMILLAR- GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.171; STRACK-BILLERBECK, ''Komm. z.NT'', II, p.722 f.; MOORE, ''Judaism'', I, p.341; REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.48 f. and 58 f. </ref>: the so-called ''Noachite Laws'' <ref>221''Talmud'': ‘''Aboda Zara'', (8, 4) 64b; ''Sanhedrin'', 56a; ''Ger. ''3, 1; cf. the arts. “Laws (Noachian)”, ''JE ''VII, pp.648-50 and “Noachite Laws”, ''EJ ''XII, cols. 1190-1; see also J. BONSIRVEN, ''Le Judaisme Palestinien auTemps de Jesus-Christ'', I, Paris 1934, p.251; KLAUSNER, ''Von Jesus zu Paulus'', p.345. We reproduce the list given by REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.59, and their relative remarks: “What were the seven commandments? On the one hand, we find commandments against 1) idolatry; 2) incest; 3) murder; 4) profanation of the name of God; 5) robbery; 6) a positive commandment on the duty to form instruments of justice; 7) a ban of eating parts cut out of living animals. On the other hand we are told that the tanna’itic school of Manasseh omitted from the Noachite commandments those on the courts and on blasphemy (nos. 6 and 4 above), and substituted prohibitions of emasculation and ‘forbidden mixture’ (of plants, in ploughing, etc.)”.</ref>. There exist various versions of such prescriptions <ref>222Cf. for example ''The Book of Jubilees'', 7, 20 ff., which hands down a quite different list. The set of prescriptions contained in ''Acts'', xv, 19-20 (and repeated in the next passage 28-9), however, is specially worth of attention, since it “is the only one that bears any systematic relationship to the set of religious laws which the Pentateuch makes obligatory upon resident aliens” (“Noachite Laws”, col.1190); cf. also ''Ps.Clementines'', ''PG ''II, col.221. </ref>, but it is interesting to notice now that after this historical decision Christians Converts coming from Gentilism, namely uncircumcised Christians (''Ecclesia ex Gentibus'') <ref>223“The Apostolic decree, a rule agreed at the Apostolic Council where Paul, Peter and others met to discuss the extent to which the gentile converts to Christianity had to follow Jewish Law, is currently agreed by many to be a kind of Christian God-fearers’ rule” (REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.61, with bibliographical references at n.261); cf. SIMON, ''Verus Israel'', p.392: “Le décret apostolique, fixant comme condition à l’admission des Gentils la pratique des precepts dits noachiques, se place dans la mème ligne de la propagande juive”. </ref>, God-Fearers, at least the ''sebòmenoi/phoboùmenoi ''(''tòn theòn'')/''Hellenes ''contacted by Paul and other apostles, ''Hunafà’'', at least the ''Hanìf ''Zayd whose devotional practices are the only ones to be explicitly stated in the ''Sìra ''<ref>224A fundamental correspondence between these different cathegories of people are also suggested by the English translator of the ''Sìrah'', A. GUILLAUME who, when commenting ibn Ishàq’s portrait of Zayd, pointed out that “the influence of the Jewish formula, taken over by early Christianity, is clear” (''The Life ofMuhammad'', p.99 n.2). Cf. however above, p.21 f. and ns. 188-192. </ref>, Sabians, whom many traditions consider as Noah’s heirs and consequently followers of the ''Noachite Laws'' <ref>225See the authors and the works quoted by CHWOLSON, ''Die Ssabier'', II, p.563 (cf. I, p.271 and n.1), and p.592 f. (cf. GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.13); add Khalìl ibn Ahmad who, according to al- Qurtubì, ibn Kathìr and ibn Hayyàn, states that “the Sabians believe that they belong to the religion of the prophet Noah” (quoted by GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p.25).</ref>, and finally Harranians, whose capital city is said to have been founded by Noah or by some of his relatives (a son or a nephew) after the Flood <ref>226For textual references to ibn al-Kalbì, Yàqùt and Bar Hebraeus, see again CHWOLSON, op. cit., II, p.553 and p.549 f. (cf. I, p.311), who, in relation to Bar Hebraeus, mentions Sem’s son Arpakshad, whereas in BUDGE’s translation of the ''Chronicon ''(cit. above n.159), p.7, one finds out the name of Noah’s nephew Shàlàh. AL-TABARI, on the other hand, in his ''History ''claims that ''Sàbì ''is another name of Lamech, the father of Noah (''Ta’rìkh al rasùl wa al-mulùk'', ed. M.J. De GOEJE, repr. Leiden 1964, I, p.178 [ET ''TheHistory of al-Tabarì'', New York 1987]: the great poligraph accepts this derivation of the name ''Sàbi’ùn ''from an eponymous hero together with the other one proposed by him in his ''Tafsìr'': see below p.30 and n.271); cf. AL-ASH’ARI, ''Tashìl al-sabìl'', Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 59 (quoted by CHWOLSON, II, p.563, cf. I, p.271). For the opinion that the Sabians claim to be followers of the religion of Noah, see AL-TUSI, ''al-Tibiyàn fì tafsìral-Qur’àn'', I, ed. Najaf 1376 H./1956, p.282 (Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 62); KASHANI, ''Minhaj al-sàdiqìn fì ilzàmal-mukhàlifìn'', III, ed. Teheran 1346 H.S./1927, p.283 (Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 62): cf. Mc AULIFFE, “Exegetical Identification of the Sàbi’ùn”, p.97 and p.100; add the modern Muslim lexicographers quoted by CHWOLSON, II, p.592 f. , and the authors cited in the previous note. </ref>, appear to share to some extent the same ethicalreligious duties.
But let us go on checking the available textual evidence about God-Fearers’ beliefs and rites. What Gregory of Nazianzus witnesses about the Cappadocian group called by him ''Hypsistarii ''is quite interesting, since he is speaking about his own father, converted to Christianity by some bishops ''en route ''to the Council of Nicaea (325 C.E.), thus handing down a direct and personal experience: ''The Cult was a mixture of two elements, Hellenic error and adherence to the Jewish law … Its followers reject the idols and sacrifices of the former and worship fire and lamplight; they revere the ''sabbath ''and do not touch certain foods, but have nothing to do with circumcision. To the humble they are called Hypsistarians, and the ''Pantokrator ''is the only god they worship'' <ref>227GREGORIUS OF NAZIANZUS, ''Or''., 18, 5 (''PG ''35, 989D ff.). For ''Pantokrator'', see SCHURER, “Die Juden im Bosporanischen Reiche”, p.221; HORSLEY, ''New Documents'', I, p.137 and III, p.118. A cult of ''Zeus Pantokrator ''has been recently identified in Bytinia, ''I. Nicaea ''II, 1, no.1121; 2, no.1512.: the editor of these inscriptions, S. SAHIN, has rightly pointed out the relation of this cult to the worship of ''TheosHypsistos''. It must be remembered that the designation “Hypsistarii”, as well as “Hypsistiani”, was not adopted by the worshippers themselves: it was a label applied by outsiders to them (cf. MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, p.96). </ref>.
There may be little doubt about the relations between this group of devotees of the Highest Divinity and the ''enigmatic'' <ref>228 The adjective is borrowed from TCHERIKOVER, ref. below n.229. </ref>community of worshippers of the god ''Sabbatistés ''mentioned in a Cilician inscription dating back to Augustus’ time and elsewhere called ''etairéa tòn Sambati[stòn ''<ref>229Firstly published by HICKS, ''JHS ''12 (1891), p.236; W. DITTENBERGER ed., ''OGIS'', Leipzig 1903- 1905, p.573. On Sabbatistai, see the art. of GRESSMANN, ''RE'', s.v., and the discussion of TCHERIKOVER, “The Sambathions”, p.46 f. (= ''Scripta Hierosolymitana ''I, p.81 f.); cf also FELDMAN, “Proselyters and ‘Sympathizers’ “, p.278. </ref>. The members of such a cultic association, denoting themselves by the term ''etaìroi'', surely revered the ''Sabbath'', even if they could not be native Jews nor proselytes: as Tcherikover rightly pointed out, in fact, Jews would never refer to their God as ''the God of the ''Sabbath'' <ref>230TCHERIKOVER, op. cit., p.47. The author explains also the real nature of the ''Sambatheìon ''mentioned in a II/III c. C.E. inscription from Tiatira (''IGR ''IV, no.1281; ''CIJ ''II, no.752); cf. SCHURER-VERMESMILLAR- GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.53. </ref>. We are, therefore, dealing with a Gentile environment, namely with observers of the Jewish ''Seventh Day'' of rest whose Hellenistic organization appears to be similar to that of the other groups of pagan believers in a Transcendental Deity.
A passage from Gregory of Nyssa’s ''Contra Eunomium ''is another classical source about ''Hypsistiani'': that is the name, indeed very similar to the previous one recorded by the other Gregory, by which he denotes the members of this Monotheistic group, but without adding any relevant information except for the acknowledgement of attributes such as ''the highest'' and ''Pantokrator ''given to God by them and, at the same time, their rejection of a Christian attribute such as ''Father'' in reference to God <ref>231GREGORIUS OF NYSSA, ''Eun.'', 2 (''PG ''45, 481D – 484A). For funerary epitaphs of two possible Hypsistarians in Phrygia, see MITCHELL, ''Anatolia'', p.50; R.L. FOX, ''Pagans and Christians'', Viking 1986, p.404; LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', p.101f. and n.107. </ref>.
The testimony of Epiphanius about ''Messalians ''(''Those who pray''), even called ''Euphemitai ''(''Those who bless''), happens during the same period (376 C.E.) and is contained in his ''Panarion ''where the subject is discussed at length. The Cyprian bishop distinguishes between a Christian sect by this name and the ''Pagan'' community <ref>232Both groups were known by a number of additional names such as ''Martyriani'', ''Enthusiastae ''etc. About Messalians see ''PS'', Part I, Vol. 3: ''Liber Graduum'', ed. M. KMOSKO, Paris 1926, cxv-cxlix (Discussion), clxx-ccxcii (Ancient Testimonia). The Christian sect was condemned by synods at Side and Costantinople (cf. G.W.H. LAMPE, ''A Patristic Greek Lexicon'', Oxford 1961, p.833, for textual references): close affinities with Christianity result for example from their adoption of a martyr cult. On the other hand, close similarities with Judaism emerge just from the name of their places of worship, because ''proseuche ''occurs almost exclusively in Jewish contexts: a good analysis of the word is given by M. HENGEL, “Proseuche und Synagoge: Judische Gemeinde, Gotteshaus und Gottesdienst in der Diaspora und in Palastina”, in ''Traditionund Glaube: Festgabe fur K.G. Kuhn'', Gottingen 1971, pp.157-83 (= ''The Synagogue, Studies in Origins,Archaeology and Architecture'', ed. J. GUTMANN, New York 1975, pp.110-48); see also L. ROBERT, ''Opera Minora Selecta'', II, Amsterdam 1969, p.1611; SCHURER-VERMES-MILLAR-GOODMAN, ''TheHistory of the Jewish People'', II (1979), p.425 f. n.4 and p.439 f. n.61. The word is used to denote sanctuaries of ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in the Bosporan Kingdom, on Delos, in Galatia, in Hellenistic Egypt (Athribis): references in MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypistos”, nos.85, 88, 109, 202, 285; discussion in HORSLEY, ''New Documents'', III, p.121, IV, p.201. </ref>, for both of which he shows very little sympathy indeed, but we are for the moment only interested to record what the famous heresiologist knows about the latter: ''They are simply pagans who admit the existence of gods but worship none among them; they adore one God only, whom they call Almighty. They also construct for themselves certain houses or spacious areas, like ''fora'', which they call ''proseuchai''. Of old there were certain places of prayer among the Jews which were outside the city, and among the Samaritans, as we find as well in the ''Acts of theApostles'', where Lydia, a seller of purple goods, met those with Paul … Now these earlier Messalians, who derive themselves from pagans and who appeared on the scene before those at present who derive from the Christian religion, have themselves constructed on the one hand certain small places in certain regions which are called ''proseuchai ''or ''eukteria'', while in other locations they have built for themselves something like churches, where they gather at evening and morning with much lighting of lamps and torches and lengthy singing hymns and acclamations to God by the zealous among them, through which hymns and acclamations they fondly think to conciliate God'' <ref>233EPIPHANIUS, ''Pan''., 80, 1-3 (''GCS'', ''Epiphanius'', ed. K. HOLL, III, pp.485-8). </ref>.
One changes geographical area with Cyril of Alexandria, whose information is worthy of attention mostly because of the name of the group that he mentions, for it recurs again under the form of ''Theosebeìs'', which we have already encountered. They live in Phoenicia and Palestina, worship ''Hypsistos Theòs ''but also other deities such as the Sun and the Moon, Earth and Heaven, and the brightest stars: just as was the case for Gregory of Nazianzus’ ''Hypsistarii'', also Cyril claims that ''Theosebeìs''’ beliefs and ritual customs are neither Jewish or Christian, but are a sort of mixture of both <ref>234CYRILLUS OF ALEXANDRIA, ''De Ador. in Sp. et Ver.'', 3, 92 (''PG ''68, 281 BC). </ref>.
In Northern Africa, finally, one finds a group known by the name ''Caelicolae ''in the first years of the V century, because it is mentioned in two constitutions of the ''Theodosian Code ''(408 and 409 C.E.) <ref>235The first law was issued in the names of Honorius, Arcadius and Theodosius II, and the second one in the names of Honorius and Theodosius II: texts and translation in A. LINDER, ''The Jews in Roman ImperialLegislation'', cit. (above n.92), pp.226-36 and pp.256-62. Both were preserved in the Theodosian Code (16, 5, 43; 16, 8, 19), as well as in ''Codex Justinianus ''(1, 9, 12).</ref>: these ''Caelicolae ''- whose ''maior ''seducing many Christians into a sacrilegious second baptism also Saint Augustine is shown to have been in contact with <ref>236 AUGUSTINUS, ''Epist. ''44, 6, 13. The date of the letter may be the year 396, 397 or even 398. The title ''Maior ''refers often to the leaders of the Jewish communities, cf. LINDER, op. cit., p.256. About the ''Caelicolae'', we signalize again the excellent “Un Document du Syncretisme Religieux dans l’Afrique Romaine” of SIMON (cit. above n.72), which represents also one of the rare studies into the matter. Augustine seems to disagree with the usual Christian interpretation of ''tertium genus ''= Christians, since he proposes on the contrary an idea neither distant from our point of view about God-Fearers, nor with Muslim prophetology. About the Biblical episod of the Arch, the Saint in fact writes what follows: ''Jam vero quodNoe homini justo, et sicut de illo Scriptura veridica loquitur, in sua generatione perfecto ''(''Gen., ''6'', ''9)'',imperat Deus, ut arcam faciat, in qua cum suis … liberaretur a diluvii vastitate; procul dubio figura estperegrinantis in hoc saeculo civitatis Dei, hoc est Ecclesiae, quae fit salva per lignum, in quo pependitMediator Dei et hominum homo Christus Jesus ''(''I Tim. ''2, 5) ''... Et caetera quae in ejusdem arcaeconstructione dicuntur, ecclesiasticarum signa sunt rerum … Exempli gratia, velut si quispiam quod hicscriptum est, “inferiora bicamerata et tricamerata facies eam” ''(''Gen. ''6, 16)''; non quod ego in illo opeee dixi'' [''Contr. Faust., ''12, 16]'', velit intelligi; quia ex omnibus gentibus Ecclesia congregatur, bicameratam dictampropter duo genera hominum, circumcisionem scilicet et praeputium, quod Apostolus et alio modo dicit'' Judaeos et Graecos (''Rom. ''3, 9)''; tricameratam vero, eo quod omnes ''gentes de tribus filiis Noe ''post dilviumreparatae sunt: sed aliud dicat aliquid, quod a fidei regula non sit alienum. Nam quoniam non solas ininferioribus mansiones habere arcam voluit, verum etiam in superioribus, et haec dixit bicamerata; et insuperioribus superiorum et haec appellavit tricamerata: ut ab imo sursum versus tertia consurgeret abitatio'' (''De Civ. Dei'', 15, 26; we underline).</ref>- are charged with being a heretical Judaizing sect and are consequently outlawed by the emperors Honorius and Arcadius, even if it is not clear whether such legal measures were ever successful <ref>237It is important to note that in the law issued in 409 C.E. the measures against the ''Caelicolae ''(above p.26 and n.235) were followed by a reiteration of the prohibitions of proselytism: see above p.12 and ns.88-92.</ref>. Yet it is specially important for our purposes that the same name is used twice in ''Beza ''Latin translation of ''Acts'': since the word is used to render the Greek term ''sebòmenoi ''<ref>238''Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis'', ed. F.H. SCRIVENER, Cambridge 1864: ''Acts ''xiii, 50: ''… caelicolasmulieres honestas''; xvii, 4: ''… multi caelicolarum et graecorum multitudo magna'', where the translator introduces a distinction between God-Fearers and the other Greeks which is absent in the original version. In the ''Vulgata ''(beginnings V century), St. JEROME generally translates ''sebòmenoi ''with ''colentes ''and ''phoboùmenoi ''with ''metuentes''. </ref>, in fact, one can assume with Schurer that their beliefs were quite similar to those of the God-Fearers already attested in Asia Minor and elsewhere <ref>239SCHURER, “Die Juden im Bosporanischen Reiche”, p.224 f. A substantial identity between Hypsistarians and Sabians, although within a horizon of research different from ours, had been proposed long ago by G. BOEHMER, ''De Hypsistariis'', Berlin 1824, p.2 ff. and pp.59-85; unfortunately, ''non vidimus'' the study with the same title published little earlier (1823) by C. ULLMANN in Heidelberg. </ref>.
From this brief chronological and geographical survey emerges a real religious frontier, which some authors have also recognized <ref>240“Il n’est pas exclu que nous soyons ici au carrefour, mal délimité, de trois religions”: it was in such terms that SIMON, for example, definied the religious context of the North-African lamp studied by him in the essay cited above (n.236 and n.72), p.515, maintaining at the same time the equation ''Caelicolae''- Hypsistarians (“… les Caelicolae ne sont rien d’autre qu’une varieté proprement africaine de sectateurs du Très Haut”, p.513). Cf. also P. ATHANASSIADI – M. FREDE, ''Introduction ''to ''Pagan Monotheism ''(cit. above n.4), p.17.</ref>. For the rituals, it is not possible to go beyond the evidence, so that one must limit oneself to say that, even when organized communities are concerned, God-Fearers’ religious prescriptions were absolutely not rigid ones and thus can be viewed as a rule within the loose horizon included by the ''Noachite Laws'' <ref>241This point may be taken for granted: see for example the wide coordinates by which LIFSHITZ denoted God-Fearers, namely that they “n’étaient pas convertis au Judaisme et n’observaient que le Sabbat et les ‘commandements de Noe’ ” (“Les Sympathisants”, p.78). </ref>. There was probably sometimes a solar aspect in the cult, the weight of which it is not possible to determine precisely in the different communities, and which might also be totally absent. All this explains why - we believe - several Muslim interpreters of the Middle Ages explicitly claim that the Sabians are ''a religious group which has no cult, scripture and prophet, admitting only the ''tawhìd'', the profession of faith: ‘There is no god but God’ (''Là Allah ill’Allah'')'' <ref>242Some of these traditions are known by AL-TABARI, ''Tafsìr'', I (ref. above, n.41), p.319: Layt following Mujàhid, or, according to another ''isnàd'', al-Kàsim b. Abì al-Bizza following Mujàhid: “the Sabians are not Jews nor Christians, they do not have any cult”; ibn Juràyj following Mujàhid: “the Sabians are a religious group between Jews and Magians, they do not have any cult”; Yùnus b. ‘Abd al-A’là following ibn Wahb [‘Abdallàh b. Wahb] following ibn Zayd [Usàma b. Zayd]: “the Sabians … say: ‘There is no god but God’, but they do not have any cult (''‘amal''), scripture and prophet, only this word: ‘There is no god but God’ ”.We use MARGOLIOUTH’s translation, art. “Harrànians”, p.519. </ref>: a religion which has no cult looks like a paradox, but after what we have learnt about God-Fearers it ceases to appear as such. In the meantime, this evidence – among many other findings - proves that the Mandaean hypothesis about Koranic Sabians is on the wrong road and should consequently be given up.
==The Sabians According to First Islamic Sources==
During the first two centuries of the Islamic Era, Near Eastern authors do not distinguish between ''real'' and ''false'' Sabians: this distinction, in fact, came to the light only in the first half of the III H./IX C.E. c., namely after the Harranians assumed the name ''Sabians'' to define their religious position in relation to the Baghdad Caliphate, during a period when the inter-religious dialogue was quite intense <ref>243GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p. 36 f., argues that there is “nothing to oppose the account of ‘Abù Yùsuf ‘Absha’a [al-Qathì’i] found in ''al-fihrist ''and supported by some Muslim scholars, like al-Khawàrizmì and Hamzah al-‘Isfahànì”: according to the scholar, in fact, “it is well known that during al-Ma’mùn’s reign there was no toleration of views on various subjects which were against the opinion of the central government. In that period there was presumably intolerance about the poll tax by constrast with earlier times, when there was great elasticity”. But such a reconstruction seems us a big distortion of the facts: it corresponds noway to the truth that on the beginnings of the ‘Abbàsid Caliphate, and in particular during al- Ma’mùn’s reign, there was “no toleration of views” in religious matters; on the contrary, just in the course of that period, the debate between different religious minorities and Islam was encouraged and supported by the same Caliph, who not seldom took part in these discussions which he himself liked to organize: in addition to the bibliographical references quoted above n.180, see ''EI2'', VI, s.v. “(al-)Ma’mùn”, but especially IBN AL-BABUYYA, ''Kitàb al-tawhìd'', Teheran 1387 H./1967, p.430 f. , containing the long and interesting controversy between a Sabian master, a certain ‘Imràn , and the famous doctor al-Ridà (the episode is quoted by G. MONNOT, “Sabéens et Idolàtres selon ‘Abd al-Jabbàr”, ''MIDEO'' 12 [1974], p.28). In other words, we think that the adoption of the name “Sabians” by the Harrànians in the first quarter of the III H./IX c. C.E. is a quite natural issue of the need of defining their own doctrinal position in consequence of a change of policy by the Muslim government not in the name of intolerance, but in the name of inter-religious confrontation; likewise, the charge of idolatry, together with the other even more serious one of sacrificing human beings (not excepting children) raised against them belongs – as HJARPE, ''Les Sabéens Harràniens'', pp.96-131, has convincingly demonstrated comparing these calumnies with the similar ones by which Christians were previously charged – to the ''repertoir ''of religious polemics, being one of its most common and favourite arguments (about the unreliability of the ''Fihrist''’s infamous tale, see also GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.120 ff., who furnishes a critical analysis of the historical sources. About the general problem of human sacrifices, the study "Menschenopfer bei den Arabern", ''Anthropos'', 53 (1958), pp.721-805 of J. HENNINGER, should always be taken into account). The idea of Christianity as apostasy is witnessed for example by ORIGEN, ''C. Cels.''; cf. NOCK, ''Conversion'', chap. X and notes to chap. XIII.</ref>. These scholars seem the better source, therefore, for understanding or at least for coming as near as possible to the very nature of the Sabians mentioned by Muhammad in the ''Qur’àn ''<ref>244On the reliability of these earlier sources, see GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p.22 f. and n.48. </ref>: actually one wonders at these interpreters’ honesty of mind, because they generally appear not to fear being too close to the text and adding very poor information to what it literally express. As far as the three Koranic passages recording the ''Sàbi’ùn ''are concerned, the Holy Text shows the following chains of (universal) religions: Believers (Those who believe, Muslims), the Jews, the Christians, the Sabians (''Sura ''II, 62); Believers, the Jews, the Sabians, the Christians (''Sura ''V, 69); Believers, Those who are the Jews, the Sabians, the Christians, the Magians, Unbelievers (Those who set up gods [with God], Pagans of old) (''Sura'' XXII, 17).
Well, with great coherence all these sources state that the Sabians are a religious group ''between ''the Jews and the Christians, or ''between ''the Jews and the Magians, or that they are a Christian sect, or, finally, that they are a separate religion: it is easy to see, therefore, that here the distance from what the text literally says is very limited, or even nonexistent. It is important to remember, besides, the name that defines here the Christians, ''i.e. al-Nasàra'': since it is true that ''al-Nasàra ''is the term usually employed in the Muslim World from the beginnings to name the Christians <ref>245See J.M. FIEY, art. “Nasàra”, ''EI2 ''VII, pp.970-4 . We must remember that the final choice of adopting the Greek (Latin) name “Christians” – firstly used at Antioch in the year 40 according to ''Acts'', xi, 26 - instead of other epithets such as “Nazaraeans” or “Galilaeans” (both pointing at the geographical origin of Jesus, and mostly used by Jews for denoting his followers; the latter, in particular, is still systematically preferred by JULIAN, whose ''Contra Galileos ''is universally known) undercame a heavy historical development, as on the other hand the abundant bibliography about the subject quite evidently proves: F. BLASS, “''KHRESTIANOI-KHRISTIANOI''”, ''Hermes ''30 (1895), pp.465-70; E. PETERSON, “Christianus”, in ''Miscellanea Giovanni Moscati'', I, Citta del Vaticano (Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana) 1946, pp.355-72; E.J. BICKERMAN, “The Name of Christians”, ''HTR ''42 (1949), pp.109-44; J. MOREAU, “Les Nom des Chrétiens”, ''La Nouvelle Clio ''1-2 (1949-50), pp.190-2; C. SPICQ, “Ce que Signifie le Titre de Chrétiens”, ''ST'' 15 (1961), pp.68-78; B. LIFSHITZ, “L’Origine du Nom des Chrétiens”, ''VC ''16.2 (1962), pp.65-70; J. TAYLOR, “Why Were the Disciples First Called Christians at Antioch (Acts xi, 26) ? ”, ''RB ''101.1 (1994), pp.75-94. As far as the name ''masìhìyyùn ''(''i.e. ''the Arabic transcription of the Greek ''Khristianoi'', derived from the name of Christ, ''al-Masìh'') is concerned, it was employed only by Christians for naming themselves still in the VI H./XII century, according to AL-SAM’ANI, ''Al-ansàb'', V, p.300; on the otherd., I, p.239. It is worth noting that this person is one of the sources of al-Tabarì (who mentions him simply as “al-Zayd”), to whom is also due the relevant information that the Sabians lived in ''Jazìrat al-Mawsil ''(''i.e. ''the region around Mosul in Northern Mesopotamia), as MARGOLIOUTH, art. “Harrànians”, p.519, had stressed for demonstrating that just at this early date – namely almost fifty years before the date proposed by the ''Fihrist''’s famous tale - the Harranians were called “Sabians”: the scholar claimed in fact that “the region around Mosul” is an acceptable geographical approximation for Harràn; cf. GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.106 (who dates back Zayd’s death to 770, so that the link between Harràn and the Sabians can be established at least 75 years before al-Ma’mùn’s visit). Indeed, one should perhaps keep in mind that “in the time of the emperor Julian (361-3) the anchorite movement was widely extended and the region of Tùr ‘Abdìn [the large mountainous plateau running just South of Harràn in the direction of Mosul] had already acquired that name which means ‘Mountain of the Servants of God’, because of the number of its ascetics and cenobitic groupings” (SPENCER-TRIMINGHAM, op. cit., p.126). </ref>, but we know that it was not just the only one in use in Muhammad’s times. It is enough to quote the term ''ràhib ''(pl. ''ruhàb''), ''monk'', ''ascetic'' <ref>246</ref>, but also ''philosopher'' <ref>247</ref>, by which Christians were often identified by Arabs and by other people dwelling in Near Eastern desert regions or in the surrounding geographical areas <ref>248</ref>; or to remember a famous religious community such as ''al-Ibàd'', ''The Worshippers'', ''The Servants (of God)'', ''i.e. ''the Nestorian Christians living in al-Hìra <ref>249</ref>, in Southern Mesopotamia.
Regarding the Sabians’ beliefs and rites, the following evidence comes out from these sources: 1) They believe in only One God <ref>250</ref>; 2) They do not have any cult, scripture or prophet <ref>251‘Abd Rahman ibn Zayd, according to the Muslim sources quoted in relation to him in the previous note. </ref>; 3) They state they are followers of the prophet Noah <ref>252Khalìl ibn ‘Ahmad (d. 170 H./786-7), according to AL-QURTUBI, ''Al-jamì’ al-‘ahkàm al-Qur’àn'', ed. Cairo 1387 H./1967, I, p.434; IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; IBN HAYYAN, loc. cit.; cf. CHWOLSON, ''DieSsabier'', I, p.188. </ref>; 4) They pray to the Sun <ref>253Qatàdah (d. 118 H./ 736), according to AL-NAYSABURI, ''Gharàyb al-Qur’àn wa raghàyb al-furqàn'', ed. Cairo 1381 H./1962, I, p.333.. </ref>; 5) They pray in the direction of the ''qiblah ''<ref>254Hasan al-Basrì (d. 110 H./728), according to AL-QURTUBI, loc. cit.; IBN HAYYAN, loc. cit.; Abù al- Zanàd (d. 130 H./747), according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit. (in reality Abù al-Zanàd states that the Sabians pray towards Yaman, ''i.e. ''the South). </ref>; 6) They worship the angels and read the psalms (''zabùr'') <ref>255Qatàdah, according to AL-TABARI, op. cit., I, p.320; AL-QURTUBI, loc. cit.; IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; Khalìl, according to AL-QURTUBI, loc. cit.; IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; IBN HAYYAN, loc. cit.; Hasan al- Basrì, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; ABU AL-FARAJ, loc. cit.; ibn Abì Nujayh (d. 132 H./749), and Suddì (d. 128 H./745), according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; IBN HAYYAN, loc. cit. Other Muslim personalities confirm that Sabians worship the angels (Abù Yusuf [d. 182 H./798], Muhammad ibn Hasan [d. 189 H./804]; cf. ABU LAYTH AL-SAMARQANDI, ''Tafsìr'', Suleymaniye Library, Fatih Bolumu Nu: 227, ed. Istanbul, I, p.19B) and read ''zabùr ''(Abù al-‘Aliyah [d. 90 H./708], Rabì’ ibn ‘Anas al-Basrì [d. 139 H./756], according to AL-BUKHARI, ''Al-jàmi’ al-sahìh'', ed. Istanbul 1981, I, p.90; AL-QURTUBI, loc. cit.; IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; IBN HAYYAN, loc. cit.). </ref>; 7) They believe in the prophets <ref>256Abù al-Zanàd, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; Ziyàd ibn Abìhì, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit. </ref>; 8) They have 5 daily ritual prayers <ref>257Abù al-Zanàd, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; Ziyàd ibn Abìhi, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit.; Qatàdah, according to the same sources quoted in relation to him above n.255. </ref>; 9) They fast 30 days a year <ref>258Abù al-Zanàd, according to IBN KATHIR, loc. cit. It is convenient to recall here – in relation to points 5, 7, 8 and 9 - the quite strange picture of the Sabianism drawn by IBN HAZM, op. cit. (above n.188), p. 34 ff., according to whom it would have had many rites and practices in common with Islàm. According to our sources of information about it (and in particular AL-NADÌM and AL-BÌRÙNÌ’s cultic ''Calendars''), however, we must acknowledge that the religion of the Harrànians fits well with all these elements, excepting the reading of the ''Psalms'': the question of having no cult, scripture or prophet(s), on the other hand, deserves a more detailed analysis which we are going to perform in the next pages. </ref>.
It is clear that there are some contradictions among these statements; it is evident, in other words, that some of these scholars have in mind a certain religious community, a precise one, probably even the Mandaeans or another Baptismal sect, since some of them lived – as they still do nowadays – in the South of Iraq <ref>259It is the case of Ziyàd ibn Abìhì, Hasan al-Basrì, Qatàdah, Abù al-Zanàd, Khalìl ibn Ahmad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Abù Yusuf and Muhammad ibn Hasan. </ref>. But the problem is not to determine whether the Mandaeans may be included among the Sabians and may consequently be part of the ''People of the Book'' <ref>260Taking into account its Monotheistic character, the possession of a Holy Book and the acknowledgment of a Prophet, in fact, their religion, as well as the doctrine of the Elkesaites/''Mughtasila''/''Sàbat al-Batàih'', no doubt is consistent with the features of the “People of the Book” and consequently with those of the group designated as the “Sabians”, mostly because Muhammad himself “may not have fully understood the practices and beliefs of the people he called by that name” (GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.105). Despite the identification Sabians = Mandaeans of which he appears to be convinced, J. THOMAS himself, who consecrated a study to ''Le Mouvement Baptiste en Palestine et en Syrie ''(Gembloux 1935), had to recognize that the latter group – in consequence of its peripherical position and of the small number of its members - could never attract the attention of the Prophet nor let him consider the Mandaean sect in terms of a cult as important as Christianity and Judaism: “Il est clair cependant que la secte sabéenne des auteurs arabes (nos Mandéens) … n’aurait pas, à elle seule, merité un tel traitement de faveur; c’est un mouvement plus vaste qui a du ètre visé … Le Coran aurait-il englobé sous l’appellation de Sabéens les Baptistes de Syrie ? Nous n’oserions ni l’affirmer ni le nier” (p.208 f.). </ref>; the problem is whether these features fit with their religion or not. Now, we think that a statement such as the second one, namely that ''they do not have any cult, scripture or prophet'', or that ''they do not have a certain canonical law'', or even that ''they have no distinctive religion'' is a very singular feature. Actually, with the final summary of the beliefs and the rites of the Sabians made by S. Gunduz, the last and resolute exponent of the ''Mandaean party''<ref>261GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p.25 f.</ref>, one cannot appreciate thoroughly the real weight that the above cited definitions have according to these scholars, while they recur very frequently and are particularly stressed by many of them <ref>We believe that the number of witnesses in agreement about a certain feature could not be judged by itself an undisputable factor for deciding the very weight which it deserves: it needs to take into adequate consideration not only the historical and cultural context of the source in question, but also the role which sometimes the chance may have played for the survival of a certain document: all this may appear ever so trivial, but it seems us closely paralleled by the important methodological discussion about the wrong use of the material in their possession often made by epigraphists, carried on by MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, pp.97 ff. and 111 ff. In any case, it should be noted that nobody – as far as we know – has ever dwelt upon such a definition of Sabianism, despite its exceptional, very astonishing nature. Actually, literally speaking, which could be the meaning of a similar information ? How could one answer to the question ? 262bis) About this point see the convincing argument of R. DUSSAUD, ''Histoire et religion des Nosairìs'', Paris 1900, p.84. </ref>.
But which religion does not have any cult? Well, we believe that such a singular feature can only be applied to a loose group of believers such as the God-Fearers: moreover, their religious position perfectly fits with many other elements of the evidence collected above, and in particular with the statements: 1) because the faith in One (Most-High) God is the most characteristic God-Fearers’ religious feature; 3) because of their links with Noah which we have observed when discussing the ''Noachite Laws''; 4) because of the cult’s solar aspects which we have sometimes noted among God-Fearers’ ritual practices; 5) for the same reason, since the Arabic term ''qiblah ''defines in general the cosmic centre, not - as Gunduz seems to believe – ''the South'', and consequently it may refer to the different positions of the Sun in the sky during the 24 hours cycle (thus including also the North) <ref>262 bis</ref>, in which direction the faithful probably addressed his prayers to; 6) because of the cult of the angels which, again, we have recognized as being particularly present among the God- Fearers (we leave aside for the moment the problem of ''zabùr''). We have no elements that help us to decide whether the final three points of our list are congruent with the God-Fearers’ faith: it is worth noting, anyway, that point 8) may be a natural issue of the cult’s solar aspects already mentioned, whereas point 7) may be seen as a consequence of the Biblical tradition, certainly well-known by many of these communities’ members <ref>263God-Fearers’ acquaintance with the ''Bible'', or at least with some portions of the ''Old Testament ''writings, is generally acknowledged: cf. for example again MITCHELL, op. cit., p.122: “The god-fearers were fully at home with monotheistic beliefs, familiar with religious ideas of the Jews and with Old Testament prophecy, but not wedded to them by uncompromising religious fundamentalism”.</ref>; point 9), finally, is reckoned by just one scholar, ‘Abù al- Zanàd, the same person who records that ''they believe in the prophets'' and that ''they have 5 ritual prayers daily'' with Ziyàd ibn-Abìhì (and, just for the last statement, with Qatàdah).
==The First Latin Translation of the Koran: Sabians = Christians?==
We think it important to recall here the first authoritative Latin version of the Koran made in Spain by Robert of Ketton and Hermann of Carinzia’s staff of translators according to Peter the Venerable’s will, in the year 1143 C.E. <ref>264First printed edition by T. BUCHMANN (BIBLIANDER), Basilea 1543. About this famous translation, see the study of Marie Therèse D’ALVERNY, “Deux Traductions Latines du Coran au Moyen Age”, ''AHDLMA ''16 (1948), pp.69-131. For the other Medieval translation made by MARC OF TOLEDE, dated 1211, but never printed, see below n.248. </ref>. The expressions chosen by those scholars chose to translate the name Sabians in the three Koranic passages in question are in fact very instructive for our purposes. Let us read, then, the Latin text: ''Sciendum autem generaliter, quoniam omnis recte vivens, Iudeus seuChristianus, seu ''lege sua relicta in aliam tendens, ''omnis scilicet Deum adorans,bonique gestor, indubitanter divinum amorem assequetur ''(II, 62) <ref>265BIBLIANDER, p.10.</ref>; ''Credentes atqueIudaei, et ''angelos loco Dei adorantes, qui scilicet legem pro lege variant, ''Christianietiam, omnes hi inquam si in Deum crediderint, et iudici diem expectantesbenefecerint, nihil timeant ''(V, 69) <ref>266BIBLIANDER, p.41 f. </ref>; ''Iam tibi coelitus missa re manifesta, quos vultin viam rectam Deus diriget: qui super omnia potens, illa die credentium etIudaeorum, ac ''leges variantium Christianorum, ''item et gentilium ac incredulorumiudex atque discussor inter erit ''(XXII, 17) <ref>267BIBLIANDER, p.107. Also in MARC OF TOLEDE’s translation (we have used the Ms. Turin B.N. f. V. 35 [XV c.]) the Sabians completely disappear as an authonomous religious group both in ''Sura ''II and XXII (f. 2 r. a, l. 8; f. 44 v. a ll. 11-2): in the first case, the term employed for rendering into Latin the Arabic ''Nasàra ''is ''Christiani ''(''Chani''), whereas in the second one the simple transcription ''Nazarei ''is adopted. In the ''Sura ''V (f. 15 v. b, l. 7) the Latin term selected is ''Sabbahonitae ''(our Ms.’s copyst, or somebody else, by a gloss over the word suggests: ''Samaritani'', evidently having in mind AL-BIRUNI’s passage from ''Chronology'', p.314, or, even more probably, the other one from EPIPHANIUS’ ''Panarion'', ''PG ''41, 234-5; cf. BRANDT, ''Die Judischen Baptismen'', p.113), whereas ''Nasara ''is once again simply transcribed: ''Nazareni'' (''ibidem'', l. 8: a gloss over the word suggests: ''Christiani ''[''Chani'']).</ref>.
We must not forget that we have to do with a learned translation, which should virtually gather the best sources of information about the Koranic text <ref>268Two letters by Peter the Venerable to St. Bernard of the year 1143 stress the competence of the translators: “Je l’ai fait traduire par maìtre Pierre de Tolède, qui connaìt bien le deux langues”; “Les traducteurs sont deux hommes connaissant bien les deux langues” (PETER THE VENERABLE, ''Ep.Lib. IV'', ''XVII'', ''PL ''CVXXXIX, p.339 and p.539, quoted by D’ALVERNY, op. cit., p.72 and p.73). </ref>; besides, one can observe that in XII century Spain Islamic civilisation had been deeply rooted for hundreds of years, and it was therefore the best cultural milieu to carry on such a work. On the other hand, as everybody knows, Spain was the main cultural channel through which most of the old Greek works (but Persian, Indian etc. ones also), lost in the West many centuries earlier, were translated indirectly from a ''second hand'' Arabic version into a Latin one, so that they eventually became available to an European public. Anyway, scholars generally acknowledge that Robert and Hermann have accomplished good work, because the translation <ref>269 MARC OF TOLÈDE translates the text quite literally, observing at the same time the original order of the ''Suras ''and their progressive numeration, whereas Robert of Ketton and Hermann of Carinthia group together some of the first chapters, but this fact does not allow us to evaluate the former version absolutely better than the latter (cf. D’ALVERNY, op. cit., ''passim''). </ref>is quite literal: it is not by chance, for example, that also the first Italian translation of the ''Koran ''(1547) is based upon such an original Latin version <ref>270Andrea ARRIVABENE, Venezia 1547. </ref>.
But let us begin with the ''Sabian'' passage of the ''Sura ''II: it is not difficult to recognize the equation Sabians = God-Fearers, if it is true that the latter are really not full Converts, but just people who have abandoned (at least in part) their previous beliefs and are seeking after (the Latin participial form ''tendens ''is here perfectly fitting) another religion, not without having done in the meantime the fundamental spiritual step of believing in only One Deity, the Most-High God. The background of this information is, likewise, easy to identify: it is one of the most significant semantic values of the Arabic verbs ''saba’a ''and ''sabà ''that al-Tabarì and many other interpreters took in order to explain the name ''Sàbi''. The word means ''someone who takes on a new religion other than his own'', the great Koranic commentator states, adding that the term is an equivalent of the noun ''murtadd'', ''renegate'', ''apostate'' <ref>271AL-TABARI, ''Tafsìr'', I, p.218; cf. above p.8 and n.54; but see also IBN AL-JAWZI, ''Talbìs Iblìs'', ET by D.S. MARGOLIOUTH, ''Islamic Culture ''9 (1935), p.380. </ref>.
In the ''Sabian'' passage of the Sura V it is perhaps possible to recognize two different keys of interpretation: the expression ''qui scilicet lege pro lege variant'', ''who in other words change the Law into (for) another one'', looks like a detail suggesting – just as the reading of the ''zabùr'', the David’s ''Psalms ''which we have met above among the Sabian features <ref>272 “During the patristic period – FELDMAN wrote - the Psalms became the Christian prayer book ''parexcellence''” (“Proselytes and ‘Sympathizers’”, p.293). The relationship ''Psalms ''– Christians is a commonplace, and it is useless therefore to insist upon it here. On the contrary, it seems us worth while remembering that the use of Hebrew ''Elyon ''(= ''Hypsistos'') alone (namely not coupled with ''El'') as a proper name for God becomes very frequent just in the ''Psalms'', till the alternance ''El Elyon ''- ''Elyon ''(or their Greek equivalents) will gain a precise meaning in the last Biblical writings (as for example in the ''Book of Daniel'') and, more in general, in all Jewish-Hellenistic literature including ''Acts'': here, as FOAKES-JACKSON, ''BC'', IV, p.193 note, rightly stressed, Luke employs in fact the latter or the former expression according to whether the presence of a “Jewish background” can be checked or cannot: cf. SIMON, “Theos Hypsistos”, p.372 f. About ''Elyon ''see also below n.335 (end).</ref>– a Christian milieu rather than a Sabian one; but we shall soon see that such a distinction probably was not always made by external observers, so that one could often exchange one for the other. On the other hand, the sentence ''angelos loco Dei adorantes ''is quite strange here, because it seems to be evident that the group in question belongs to the wider category of the Believers, the Monotheists: so what reason is there to suspect the act of ''worshipping angels instead of God''? We have noticed that angels’ worship is an important feature in the cult of ''Theos Hypsistos ''by the God-Fearers, mostly in Asia Minor where a lot of inscriptions mentioning angels have been found <ref>273See C.P. JONES, ''Phoenix ''36 (1982), pp.264-71; HORSLEY, ''New Docs''., V (1989), p.72 f.; M. RICL, “Hosios kaì Dikaios”, ''Epigraphica Anatolica ''19 (1992), pp.99-101 (with special reference to ''Hosios kaiDikaios'', the Phrigian god of justice, who must be regarded as an angel); G. PETZL, “Die Beichtinschriften Westkleinasiens”, ''Epigraphica Anatolica ''22 (1994), p.5; MITCHELL, “Theos Hypsistos”, p.103 ff., who records beside ''Theòs ''(''Zeus'') ''Hypsistos ''the presence of a lesser divinity variously designated as (''to'') ''theion'', ''theion basilikon'', or ''theios angelos'': the role of heavenly messanger of the supreme divinity (see the adjective ''epoùranios ''on an inscription from Galatia quoted ''ibidem ''no. 202, whereas angels and other gods are simply ''ourànios'') may also be accomplished by the traditional pagan gods like Apollo, as the above cited (p.23 and n.201) Oenoanda Oracle demonstrates. Many classical references to the subject are collected by M.P. NILSSON, “The High God and the Mediator”, ''HTR ''56 (1963), pp.101-120; see also Idem, “Zwei Altare aus Pergamon”, in ''Opuscula Selecta ''III, Lund 1960, p.297 ff.; F. SOKOLOWSKI, “Sur le Culte d’Angelos dans le Paganisme Grec et Romain”, ''HTR ''53 (1960), pp.225-9. </ref>. Angels play an important role in Jewish religious culture <ref>274See A.R.R. SHEPPARD, “Pagan Cults of Angels in Roman Asia Minor”, ''Talanta ''12/13 (1980-81), p.77-101, for the relative geographical area; and the older studies of F. CUMONT and M. SIMON respectively published in ''RHR ''36 (1915), pp.159-82 and in ''CRAI ''1971, pp.120-32. For the important role played by the Jewish names of God and angels, see E.R. GOODENOUGH, ''Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period'', II, New York 1953, p.153 ff.; SIMON, ''Verus Israel'', p.394. </ref>, but at least in this region they appear to be a common feature of Jews, Christians and God-Fearers: Saint Paul in fact reproached the Colossians for their custom of worshipping angels, but we must acknowledge that similar admonitions were made in vain, if Theodoret’s commentary on that text does not fail to show that their cult was still alive in Phrigia and Pisidia four centuries later <ref>275''Col''., II, 16. THEODORET, ''PG ''82, p.614 and p.619; cf. ORIGEN, ''Contra Celsum'', 5, 4-5, condemning such a cultual practice. Angel worship is a clear symptom of Monotheistic belief: see again MITCHELL, loc. cit. p.103 f. </ref>. Then, do we have to do with God-Fearers or with (heterodox) Christians here?
The ''Sabian'' passage in the ''Sura ''XXII is the most puzzling one: here, in fact, the lack of a comma between ''leges variantium ''and ''Christianorum ''obliges the reader to understand the expression as a whole <ref>276No doubt about this point: a comma between the two expressions is lacking also in Ms. versions, where moreover sometimes a gloss suggests: “''Cristianos leges variantes ''appellat” (Ms. Vat. Lat. 4071, dated 1462, f.82v ll.8-11); ''Christianos legum variatores ''appellat volens dicere illos evangelium corrupisse et ad suum libitum commutasse (Ms. Turin B.N. H ii 33, XVI c. f.112v ll. 2-5); cf. ARRIVABENE’s Italian version: “… il Dio sarà giudice dei Giudei, ''e de Christiani che variano la loro legge, ''e d’ogni altra setta” (f. 65v). We have to do with a quite curious situation, indeed, for which the following explanation may be advanced: European translators wished to divide sharply Christianity from Islam, so that the former could keep itself pure by any contamination with the latter, and a good means for pursuing such a result surely was to let only a definition valid for heretics (and certainly not for orthodox Christians) appear as included into Muhammad’s horizon of mind. In any case, even the presence of comma should not be a sufficient means for distinguishing one group from another, because all the other religious communities mentioned here (Muslims, Jews, Magians and Unbelievers) are introduced by a conjunction such as ''et ''(''item et'') or ''ac''. </ref>; actually, it seems reasonable to look at the Christians in terms of the historical ''people'' who really changed the (Old Testament) Law <ref>277See, for a general discussion, SIMON, ''Verus Israel'', ''passim''. </ref>, even if at this point the group of the Sabians/God-Fearers ceases completely to appear. Perhaps it is not useless, therefore, to insist upon the historical role played by the God-Fearers during the crucial period of the rising of Christianity, at least according to the ''Acts''’ version of the facts and to Luke’s witness about the sympathy that the ''phoboùmenoi/sebòmenoi ''(''tòn theòn'') felt while listening to the evangelical message, often converting themselves to Christianity <ref>278Cf. above p.25 and ns. 214-216. </ref>.
The historical closeness between the two religious groups also emerges with particular relevance from the evidence collected in S. Pines’ 1968 important article ''The Iranian Name for Christians and God-Fearers''. Given the special interest of the subject for our area of research, we quote it at length: ''In Pahlavi, Sogdian and New Persian, the meaning of one of the most common designations for Christians is ‘fearers’ (''tarsàkàn''), whereas in Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Syriac, similar words, with identical meaning (often, but not always, coupled with God’s name), denote the ‘God-Fearers’ (or ''Yir’è shamayim''), viz., Gentiles who, in the period before or immediately after the beginning of the Christian Era, believed in the God of the Jews and observed some of their precepts … In all probability, the designation ''tarsàk ''is … a vestige that testify to the fact that, in countries in which Aramaic or an Iranian language was spoken, on the borders of the Persian Empire or within it, the Christians, during a certain historical period, were identified with the ‘God-Fearers’, in the technical sense of the term … The designation of the Christians by the name ''tarsakàn ''is, consequently, further proof of the strong connections which existed in the Iranian regions (and in the eastern border-lands of the Roman Empire) between primitive Christianity and the circles of the ''sebòmenoi'' <ref>279''PIASH ''2 (1968), p.152. The same point of view is shared in the clear and self-critical “Comunication” on Pines’ article by J. De MENASCE, “Les ‘Craignants Dieu’ et l’Appellation Iranienne des Chrétiens”, ''HTR ''171.2 (1967) (Section: Cronique), p.257 f: “Bref, à une certaine époque, il est très possible que, pour des populations parlant araméen, ‘craignant Dieu’ ait aussi designé des Chrétiens. On objectera que nulle part dans la litterature syriaque, entièrement chrétienne, l’expression n’est employée pour désigner les Chrétiens: à quoi M. Pines répond avec pertinence que l’appellation a pu toutefois ètre courante parmi les non-Chrétiens pour désigner ceux qui l’étaient. Dès lors, il est legitime conclure que cette désignation, courante dans le monde araméophone des limes iranien, ait passé dans la langue iranienne au moment où elle ne désignait plus que les Chrétiens et soit devenue leur appellation normale. Evidémment à l’époque de l’inscription de Kartìr [about which see below and n.281] le nom ''tarsakàn ''n’était encore generalisé et officialisé” (p.258). Previously, in fact, in the study ''Skand-Gumanik Vicar'', Fribourg 1945, the author seemed convinced (with other scholars as for example Noldeke) that the Iranian word was simply a translation of the Arabic ''rahib ''(originary “monk”, and then used for denoting generally Christians, cf. above ns.189, 248 and 260), but then he changed his mind arriving to the conclusion that the Arabic sense depended from the Iranian one and not the reverse. </ref>.
Pines’ study is especially important for two reasons: in fact it corroborates our hypothesis about the presence of God-Fearers along the borders of the Arabian peninsula or in the neighbouring regions in the historical period which we are dealing with, and it also supposes – as we do – that a confusion between God-Fearers and Christians could sometimes have appeared. Such a confusion was probably due to some similarities in cult practices between both religious groups, as we have already observed, so that in certain geographical areas and during a certain historical period both communities were perhaps called with an identical name by external observers <ref>280The historical and semantic continuity between God-Ferarers and Christians is stressed by LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', p.116: “… at least some of these groups [Hypsistarii, ''Caelicolae'', ''Theosebeis'', Massalians] were at one stage or another connected with Christianity. The Coelicolae were condemned as Christian apostates and obliged by law to rejoin the Church. The Massalians were the forerunners of the Christian sect with the same name. The father of Gregory of Nazianzus, a member of Hypsistarii, was readily converted by bishops on their way to the Council of Nicaea in 325 … Finally, if we compare the spread of Christianity among the population of the Bosporan Kingdom with that of the nearby Chersonese, a striking dissimilarity comes to light, which can be explained by the presence of numerous God-fearers who prepared the way for Christianity in the former”. </ref>. If such is the case, passages in the ''Koran ''about the ''Sàbi’ùn ''could be interesting historical testimonies of bilingualism, such as that one showed by the famous Middle- Persian Inscription from ''Kartìr'': here, the simultaneous quotation, among other religious groups, of ''nàcarày ''and ''kristiyàn'', is explained by M.L. Chaumont, who published and translated the document, in the following way: ''Les mots ''nàcarày ''et ''kristiyàn ''se rapporteraient l’une l’autre aux chrétiens orthodoxes sans aucune acception d’hérésie. Leur jusxtaposition serait l’effet d’un bilinguisme qui s’était instauré depuis peu au sein de la chrétienté perse … Il est très frappant que dans les ''Acta ''de Siméon bar Sabba’è les termes ''kristiyanà ''et ''nasorayè ''sont employés comme synonymes. Avec l’inscription de Kartìr, nous sommes peut-être à l’origine de ce double emploi. Le rédacteur du document, s’il connaissait l’un et l’autre vocable, ne savait sans doute pas qu’ils pouvaient s’appliquer à la même religion'' <ref>281''La Christianisation de l’Empire Iranien'', ''CSCO ''499, Subs. 80, Louvain 1988, p.117; cf. G. WIESSNER, I, ''Untersuchungen zur syrischen Literaturgeschichte'', p.66 and p.317 ns.249, 251, 252 and 254, where one will find out all the references about the two terms as synonymous in the ''Acta''; II, ''ZurMartyreruberlieferung aus der Christenverfolgung Schapurs II'', ''AAWG'', Phil.-Hist. Kl. III.67, Gottingen 1967, p.70 f. and notes (“in the ‘B’ Life of Simeon bar Sabba’e the term ''nasraya ''is only found in the mouth of Persians”); PAYNE-SMITH, ''Thesaurus'', col.1821, s.v. “Kristiàna”, and col.2444, s.v. “Nasràya”; J.B. FIEY, ''Jalons pour une Histoire de l’Eglise en Iraq'', ''CSCO ''330, Subs. 36, Louvain 1970, p.54 n.44 (on Kartìr’s Inscription and the two names for Christians). Text and discussion of the document by Marie Louise CHAUMONT, “L’Inscription de Kartìr à la Ka’bah de Zoroastre”, ''JA ''248 (1960), pp.339-80 (the words in question are at l.10 of the Persian text). For the alleged Judaeo-Christian background of the term ''nàcarày'' (and its connection with the Aramaean term ''nàsràyà ''= from Nazareth) see H.H. SCHAEDER, art. “Nazarenòs, Nazoraìos”, ''TWNT ''IV [1941], p.879 f.; M. RONCAGLIA, “Eléments Ebionites et Elkésaites dans le Coran”, ''POC ''21 (1971), pp.101-26. For the alleged identity with a heretical group such as the Marcionites see J. De MENASCE, ''Skand-Gumanik Vicar'', p.206 f. (but see also the objections of J.M. FIEY, “Les Marcionites dans les Textes Historiques de l’Eglise de Perse”, ''Le Museon ''83 [1970], pp.183-8); cf. A. VOOBUS, “Celibacy, a Requirement for Admission to Baptism in the Early Syrian Church”, ''ETSE ''1 (1951), p.14 f. (who remarks that in the ''Acts ''of Mar Abà [VI c.] [''Jabalaha'', 2nd ed., p.213] the Marcionites are called Christians); for the equation Nazaraeans – Mandaeans (who really call themselves in such a way, see M. LIDZBARSKI, “Nazoraios”, ''ZS ''1 [1922], pp.230-3), cf. M. SPRENGLING, ''Third Century Iran'', Chicago 1953, p.58. Finally, S. BROCK, “Some Aspects of Greek Words in Syriac”, in A. DIETRICH ed., ''Syncretismus im Syrisch-Persichen Kulturgebiet'', Symposium of Gottingen 4th-8th October 1971, Gottingen 1974, pp.91-5 (with further bibliography), remarks that ''nàcarày ''and ''kristyàn ''denote “two groups of different geographical origin and of different cultural allegiance” (p.92), ''nàcarày ''being the normal term used at that time by the Persian authorities (and more in general by outsiders) for denoting Christians, whereas ''kristìyàn'' was a term introduced into the Persian area only in the mid III century for denoting the Christians of Western origin, namely those who had been settled in the Sassanid empire in consequence of Shapur I’s deportations: as far as the name used by Christians for denoting themselves is concerned, the author tentatively suggests the Semitic term ''msihaya'', because “with the growing influence of Antiochene Christianity in the Sassanid empire in the late fourth, and especially early fifth, century, the term ''kristyana ''came to be used for all Christians, irrespective of their origin, thus displacing ''msihaya''. At the same time, ''nàsrayà ''evidently gained, in Christian eyes, distinctly pejorative overtones that had originally not been present in the word” (p.94 f.). Cf. FIEY, ''Communautés Syriaques en Iran et Iraq'', p.181 f., who records in Iran, namely at Rew Ardashìr, “au moins deux églises, l’une des ‘Romains’ et l’autre des ‘Karmàniens’. Les premiers sont probablement de ces prisonniers que Sapor Ier (241-2) distribua dans toutes les villes de son empire et gràce auxquels il restaura Rew Ardashìr. Les seconds sont de vrais persans christianisés; ceux-ci, déportés de l’interieur [n.33: “je ne sais pas sur quoi se base M.lle Chaumont pour attribuer cette église aux ‘Syriens’ (p.178), ce qu’elle interprète (p.179) par de gens ‘originaires des campagnes de l’Antiochène … parlant syriaque”], célébraient leurs offices en syriaque, alors que les premiers priaient en grec”. It is not at all improbable that Muhammad used ''Nasàra ''and ''Sàbi’ùn ''as synonimes, even if the words had a different origin and possibly did not have a strictly identical meaning: our opinion is that the latter word – though referring like the former generally to Christians without any further implication – kept a close semantical link with the idea of Christians as ''tertium genus hominum ''(cf. above pp.18-22 and n.277) which played an important role also for the Muslim prophetology. [“In the Province of Arabia the baptized … were called ‘initiated’ (''oi memnemènoi'') or ‘enlightened’ (''oi pephotismènoi''), while the catechumens ranked as the uninitiated”, SPENCERTRIMINGHAM, op. cit., p.217; cf. p.103. For the problem of the catechumenate, see in particular above n.198]. </ref>.
A third testimony which we wish to discuss here comes from one of the ''Hadìth'' texts concerning the Arabic root ''SB’'', with the meaning ''changing one’s religion for another'', ''to apostatize'', which we already know as a whole. The excerpt comes from to chapter LVIII of al-Bukhàrì’s ''Sahìh'', consecrated to ''al-jiziya wa al-mwàda’ama’a àhl al-dhimma wa al-harb'', namely to the rules which Muslims had to keep when coming in contact with other populations <ref>282AL-BUKHARI, ''Al-jàmi’ al-sahìh'', ed. L. KREHL - T.W. JUYNBOLL (1862-1908), II, lviii (''al-jiziyya''), chap. 11, p.296; FT by O.HOUDAS - W.MARCAIS (1903-1914), Titre lviii (''La Capitation''), chap.11 “Du cas où les ennemis vaincus disent: ‘Nous nous faisont Sabiens’, et n’ont su dire correctement: ‘Nous nous faisons Musulmans’ “), p.414. </ref>: in these cases, the problem was whether to consider these persons as being part of ''the People of the Book'', the Monotheistic communities enjoying the right of tolerance (Jews, Christians, Magians and Sabians), in exchange for the payment of a special tax, the ''jiziya'', foreseen in these cases by Islamic law. The title of the paragraph which we are dealing with is ''About the case when the enemies, after having been won, say: ‘We (want to) become Sabians (''sabà’na'', ''sabà’na'')’, without having been able to say correctly ‘We (want to) become Muslims (''aslamna'', ''aslamna'')’'' <ref>283The same episode is narrated again by AL-BUKHARI, op. cit., III, lxiv (''al-maghàzi''), chap.58; FT Titre lxiv (''Des Expéditions Militaires''), chap.58 (“De l’envoi fait par le Prophète de Khàlid-ben-el-Oualìd chez les Benou-Djodzima”), p.200; and IV, xciii, chapt. 35 (''ahkàm''); FT Titre xciii (''Sentences''), chap. 35 (''Lorsque lemagistrat rend une sentence inique ou en contradiction avec l’opinion des juriconsultes, ce jugement doitètre repoussé''), p.515; the author, however, does not repeat in these last chapters the information referring to the Persian expression previously given in Book lviii, chapt.11. </ref>, and it narrates a quite strange story, indeed. While Khàlid in such a situation did not hesitate to slaughter everybody, being criticized afterwards by the Prophet who kept a distance from his fierce behaviour, ‘Umar on his side claimed that, when some enemy cried out the (Persian) word ''Matras''! <ref>284 In KREHL’s edition the Persian word is vocalized ''mataras''; ''matras ''is the vocalization of the FT where, at the relative note (n.2), the translation: “Ne crains pas !” can also be found. </ref>(''Do not fear!''), he had to be saved.
What is the meaning of this episode? Actually it is not easy to interpret. As often happens when one tries to deepen the meaning of the textual evidence about the Sabians <ref>See, for example, the puzzling story handed down in the so called ''al-qasìdah al-himyarìyah ''(by an anonymous author, cit. in C. ANSALDI, ''Il Yemen'', Roma 1933, pp.57-59), narrating the legendary history of Yemenite kings, about the faboulous meeting between the parents of the Queen of Sheba (Balkìs): the father, in fact, al-Hadhàd bin Sarh (the first King of Yemen), felt in love with her mother (the Queen of ''Jins ''and she herself a ''jinnìyah'') in the course of a hunt, after having followed a wolf (ar.: ''dhi’b'') running after a gazelle (ar.: ''zhab’i''). The relation Sabians – Sabaeans has apparently to be rejected – as it is well known – for the plain ethimological reason that these nouns derive from two different roots (as just the initial difference ''sad'' – ''sin ''is sufficient to prove), and in fact just one scholar suggested an explanatory key for the phenomenon of Sabianism in the Monotheistic communities settled in Southern Arabia since centuries in Muhammad’s times (BELL, The ''Origin of Islam'', p.60 and 148: the author was “personally inclined” to think that ''Nasàra ''in the ''Qur’àn ''denoted the Christians of the Northern Arabia, and to take ''Sàbi’ùn ''as a reference to South Arabian Christians). Nevertheless, similar suggestions – together with the common feature of gravitating around a theme as important as Conversion shared by the Sabians (according to our theory about them, of course) and by the Sabaeans (the Biblical episode of Queen of Sheba’s Conversion does not need to be remebered) – let one understand how difficult is to find a solid ground in such matters. Let us reproduce the words of R. GUENON, ''Le Roi du Monde'', Paris 1958, p.21: “… dans le course du Moyen Age … celle qui se pourrait designer ‘la couverture exterieure’ du [cosmic] Centre en question était constituée en bonne partie par les Nestoriens et les Sabéens”. 285bis) See the already quoted lemma ''jàre’ jiràh moràh'', ''TWAT ''s.v., cols.869-93, in particular the v paragraph (“Furchte dich nicht !”). </ref>, the sense of the document is not completely clear in this case either. At first sight it would seem that the word ''matras ''is a sort of password, providing the external boundaries of the concrete religious goal which the people here at stake are pointing to. After what we have learnt about the Persian name for Christians – ''Tarsakàn ''- from Pines’ study, in fact, we can be reasonably sure that the individuals in question by pronouncing such a word would roughly intend to embrace the idea of ''religious fear''.
But the imperative form of the verb remains still quite problematic: how is it possible for a person vanquished by another to say (to him): ''Do not fear!'' ? Has there ever been a mistake in the transcription of the verb’s tense ? Everything becomes very much clearer, though, when one takes into account the well-known Old Testament formula ''‘al-tirà ''(''do not fear!''), recurring in many different literary and social contexts, among which one in particular deserves our attention being exactly paralleled by the story handed down by al-Bukhàrì: the (Holy) War. The general encourages his soldiers to fight precisely by means of the expression ''do not fear!'', which on the other hand belongs to the ''stereotyped phraseology'' of holy war also beyond the borders of the Jewish culture <ref>285 bis)</ref>.
==Harranians’ Cult of the Most-High God==
The last problem which we must discuss is the Harranian religious position. As we have said more than once, the version contained in al-Nadìm’s ''Fihrist ''of the reasons why Harranians chose to assume the name ''Sabians'' during the first half of the III H./IX C.E. century, seems to us at least partially unbelievable, and we think with Hjarpe that it can be sufficiently explained through the needs of religious controversy <ref>286HJARPE, ''Les Sabéens Harràniens'', ''passim''.</ref>: the historical source from which al-Nadìm takes this information is in fact the Christian Abù Yusùf al-Qathii, namely the author of the ''Talking Head'', the horrible story recorded later by the same ''Fihrist ''<ref>287IBN AL-NADIM, ''Fihrist'', ET p.753 f. Different versions of the same story are transmitted by PSEUDO-MAJRITI, ''Ghàyat al-hakìm ''(ref. below n.296) p.60 f., p.139 f. and p.228; GT (ref. below n.296), p.62 f., p.146 f. and p.240 f.; LT (''Picatrix'') (ref. below n.297), p.34, and p.137. Cf. HJARPE, op. cit., pp.105- 126, who reproduces a comparative pattern of the Talking Head legend, recording also the long ''Chronicle ''of DIONYSIUS (Bishop of Tell Mahre in the VIII c.) published by J.-B. CHABOT, ''Chronicon pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum'', ''CSCO ''91, Paris 1928. </ref>: no doubt, therefore, about this person’s wish of denigrate the Harranian people and their ritual practices, by shedding on them all the most unfavourable light <ref>288As GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.120, opportunely notes, Abù Yusuf Isha’ al-Qatiy’i’s “animosity toward … the pagans of Harran … is quite evident”. </ref>.
Well, let us look more seriously at the picture. It is not possible that Harranians could have continued to follow their ancient traditions in the open air for centuries if their religious position was not able to be included within a Monotheistic pattern, and if it had been, consequently, in striking contradiction with the surrounding Islamic milieu <ref>289Some texts suggest that early on the Muslim government could not ignore the real nature of the Harranian religion and, consequently, they also prove Abù Yusuf al-Qatì’i’s unworthiness. The Muslim conqueror of the city, ‘Iyad ibn Ghanam, transformed for example one of the Harrànians’ temples into the “Friday Mosque”, “but allotted them another locality in Harran where they built another temple which remained in their hands until its destruction by Yahya Ibn Shatir who was governor of Harran on behalf of Sharaf al-Dawlah [1081 C.E.]”: the information is contained in the pages of the ''A’làq ''of IBN SHADDAD (who visited the city in 1242 C.E., just before the Mongolian conquest and the consequent deportation of the inhabitants which marked the final as well as inglorious end of its millenary history) translated by C. CAHEN, "La 'Djazìra' au milieu du treizième siècle", ''REI'', VIII (1934), p.109 ff., and partially reproduced by RICE, “Medieval Harran”, p.38; cf. AL-BALADHURI, ''Futùh al-buldàn'', ed. Beirut 1398 H./1978, p.178 f., ET by P..K. HITTY, ''The Origins of the Islamic State'', New York 1916 (other references about the inclusion, since the very beginnings of the Muslim rule, of the Harrànians among ''ahl al-dhimma'', ''i.e. ''the “subject people”, in GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p.36 n.150). On the other hand, BAR HEBRAEUS tells in his ''Chronicon ''(ET cit. above n.159), p.139, that just few years before al-Ma’mùn’s halt in Harràn, Caliph’s uncle Ibrahìm who was at that time governor of the city “permitted the pagans of Harran to perform their mysteries openly, and at length they arrived at such a pitch of boldness that they decked out an ox in costly apparel, and gave him a crown of flowers, and they hung little bells on his horns, and they walked him around the bazaars whilst men sang songs and (played) pipes; and in this manner they offered him up as a sacrifice to their gods”. There is no reason, however, to judge these elements by themselves as a clear sign of Paganism following the opinion of CHWOLSON, op. cit., I, p.468 ff., of HJARPE, op. cit., p.100, of GREEN, op. cit., p.121, etc.: it does not need but to think for example to some Italian coloured processions in honour of Mary or of the local Saints, which to a Protestant eye till recent times could not represent anything else than pagan survivals. A third document in constrast with ''al-Fihrist''’s version of the facts is the famous “Edict of Toleration” obtained by the Sabian poet and scholar Ibrahìm ibn Hilàl (living in Baghdad and dying there in 994 C.E.) by the amir ‘Adud al-Dawlah on behalf of his coreligionists “in Harràn, Raqqah and Diyar-Mudhar”, allowing the Sabians to practice their religious precepts in the traditional way: from the ''Rasà’il ''of ABÙ-IS’HÀQ IBRAHÌM IBN HILÀL HARRÀNI, quoted by CHWOLSON, op. cit., II, p.537, cf. I, p.660. In addition to Hjarpe and Green’s studies, further contributes to discussion about the real relations Muslims - Harrànian Sabians come from SEGAL, “The Sabian Mysteries”, ''passim'', and by TARDIEU, “Sàbiens Coraniques et ‘Sàbiens’ de Harràn”, p.5 ff. </ref>. But we believe, however, that it was absolutely not an affair of corruption, and that it certainly was not just by means of a lot of naive lies and shameful bribes – as the ''Fihrist ''and other textual sources of the Middle Ages would have the reader believe <ref>290 See above p.2 and n.17.</ref>- that Harràn (a centre which for some years was the Ummayad Caliphate’s capital city! <ref>Though the circumstamce is sistematically reckoned by the authors dealing with the history of the city, none of the avaible studies deepens particularly this period. The famous episode witnessing the scientific importance of the city much before the historical phase of the “Sabian Renaissance”, namely the School of Medicine’s transfert from Alexandria to Harràn by the Caliph ‘Umar II in 717 C.E., is discussed in detail by TARDIEU, op. cit., p.291ff., who rejects the traditional reconstruction of the event. </ref>) could keep its ancient beliefs and rites alive without undergoing any repression by the dominant Muslim government: on the contrary, as everybody knows, many Harranians enjoyed the Caliphs’ confidence and were held in high esteem because of their philosophical and scientific worth, mostly in the field of astronomy and mathematics’ <ref>292The bibliographical references to Thàbit ibn Qurrà are listed above n.176; for the other Sabian personalities of Harrànian origin see CHWOLSON, op. cit., I, p.542 ff; De LACY O’ LEARY, ''ArabicThought and its Place in the History'', pp.43, 54 f. and 105 ff.; and more in general the bibliography given by F.C. De BLOIS, art. “Sàbi’”, ''EI2 ''VIII, pp.692-4. </ref>, and it was surely not because of a simple ''varnish'' of Monotheism such as the one which the Harranian Sabians would have boasted according to M.J. De Goeje’s old opinion <ref>293DOZY-De GOEJE, “Nouveaux Documents pour l’étude de la Religion des Harràniens”, p. 292, quoting a letter of Noldeke. The original material reproduced by these scholars - especially the astral prayers originating from a Harrànian milieu and contained within the ''Ghàyat al-hakìm ''(see below and n.296) - was not available by Chwolson. </ref>.
To demonstrate that the highly sophisticated theology adopted by the Harranian people corresponds to a Monotheistic point of view is an automatic action: the Neoplatonic system which dominates their conception of the ''kosmos ''<ref>294As it is well known, TARDIEU, op. cit., ''passim'', is the first scholar who particularly insisted on the pure Neoplatonic origin of the Harrànian theology: see above n.178 and below n.318. </ref>, with the spiritual Beings living in it and acting as Mediators between Man and God, who dwells beyond all heavenly heights and therefore cannot directly communicate with him, is evident proof of that by itself <ref>About the Harrànian system, the most relevant Islamic sources are AL-NADIM, ''Fihrist'', ET pp.746-50 (the original source is al-Kindì, cf. F. ROSENTHAL, ''Ahmad bin at-Tayyib as-Sarahsì'', New Haven 1943, pp.41-51); IKHWAN AL-SAFA’, ''Rasà’il'', ed. Beirut 1957, IV, p.295ff., FT of the relative section by MARQUET, “Sabéens et Ikhwàn al-Safà’”, ''SI ''24 (1966), expecially p.62 ff.; AL-MAQDISI, ''Le Livre de laCréation et de l’Histoire, ''I, pp.132, 159, 173, 185 (= SCOTT, ''Hermetica ''IV, p.252 f.); ALSHAHRASTANI, ''Milal'', GT p.1 ff. Among the Western studies dedicated to the subject, one cannot but signalize the excellent essay of CORBIN, “Rituel Sabéen et Exegèse Ismaélienne du Rituel” (ref. above n.134), ''passim''. </ref>. It is important to stress the expressions by which such a transcendental Deity was named by Harranians, because it makes clear that their religious horizon was perfectly in keeping with the theology of ''TheòsHypsistos ''which we have recognized as the most characteristic feature of the God- Fearers’ cult. The document which proves beyond any doubt that both contexts share the same faith in One Most-High God is the famous manual of Magic, the ''Gayàt al-Hakìm ''(''The Aim of the Sage'') <ref>296PSEUDO- MAJRITI, ''Das Ziel des Weisens'', ed. H. RITTER, Leipzig-Berlin 1933; GT by H. RITTER - M. PLESSNER, ''“Picatrix”. Das Ziel des Weisens von Pseudo-Majrìtì'', London 1962. </ref>, better known in its Latin form ''Picatrix ''<ref>297 ''Picatrix. The Latin Version of the Ghàyat Al-Hakìm'', ed. D. PINGREE, London 1986. Both works, the Latin and the Arabic one followed by a GT have been edited by the Warburg Institute. It is convenient to keep in mind that the ''Picatrix ''is a quite free translation of the original Arabic text.</ref>under which it was widespread in Europe during the Middle Ages, and which represents moreover one of the best existing sources of information about the Harranian Sabians. Well, in the introductory section of the ''Gayà ''to the ''planetary prayers'', where the general prescriptions to be observed before the beginning of the rite are listed, the author urges the faithful to: ''First of all fill yourself with fear of God'': it is worth noting here that not only one finds out just the ''pass-word'' which we are expecting, the ''Most-High'' <ref>298 ''Ghàya'', III, 7. The original version tells in fact: ''idha àradat àn tanàja kawkaban aw tas’alùhu hàjatun'' fa’istash’ar awalan taqwa Allàh ta’àla (p.195); whereas the German one tells: “Wenn du zu einem Planeten beten oder ihn um etwas bitten willst, ''so fasse vor allem Gottvertrauen''” (p.206). The LT omits the reference to the Fear of God: ''Cum volueris cum aliquo planetarum loqui vel ab eo aliquid tibi necessarium petere,primo et principaliter voluntatem et credenciam tuam erga Deum mundifica, et omino caveas ne in aliquoalio credas''”.</ref>(God), but also the reference to the spiritual ''fear'' which we have learnt to be a God-Fearers’ typical attitude of mind. The fact that such expressions are not here by chance is demonstrated later on, throughout what we can call the ''Monotheistic series'' <ref>299 In his study “Al-Tabarì on the Prayers to the Planets”, ''BEO ''46 (1992), pp.105-117, which is an important integration of his previous “Some of the Sources of the ''Ghàyat Al-Hakìm''”, ''JWCI ''43 (1980), pp.1- 15, D. PINGREE recognizes several sources of the Book III chapter 7 consecrated to the prayers to the seven planets (plus Ursa Maior), each one being characterized by a ritual of its own, including generally a dress of a certain colour, a ring and an incense vessel of a certain metal or stone, an incense, an animal to sacrifice (of course, colours, materials, fumigations and animals being those traditionally put in correspondence to the planetary Beings), and finally a prayer: there exists therefore more than one prayer for each planet (even four, for example, for Juppiter), except for Mercury and Moon, which the author links to different sources and which, consequently, can be ordered in a certain number (three or four) of different series. The source called by Pingree “Sabian” – and the relative series including the 1st prayer to Saturn, the 2nd to Juppiter, the 2nd to Mars, the 1st to Venus, the 1s to the Sun, the only available ones to Mercury and Moon - is specially interesting for us, because every prayer contains the particular formula which we quote just below in our text referring explicitly to the Most-High God.</ref>of these astral invocations, because the repetition of a particular formula is required every time that the worshipper addresses himself to a planetary deity to fulfil his own desires: the formula in fact begins with the words: ''For the sake of the Lord of the High Building'' <ref>300This expression recurs for Saturn, Juppiter, Mars, Venus and Mercury: ''Ghàya'', III, 7, GT p.215 (Saturn: “Beim Herrn des hochsten Gebaudes”), cf. AV p.204 (l.9: ''bi-l-haqq al-baniyyat al-‘uliya''); GT p.217 (Juppiter: “Bei dem < Herrn des > hochsten Gebaude<s>”), cf. AV p.206; GT p.224 (Mars: “Bei dem Herrn des hochsten Gebaudes”), cf. AV p.212; p.227; GT p.231 (Venus: “Bei dem Herrn des Hochsten Gebaudes”), cf. AV p.219; GT p.234 (Mercury: “Beim Herrn des hochsten Gebaudes”), cf. AV p.222. For the Moon there is a clear reference to God and His Majesty: see GT p.236 (“Ich bitte dich … mogest du … gehorchen mit dem Gehorsam zu Gott und seiner Herrschaft”, ll.14-7), cf. AV p.224, l.8. For the Sun, we have to do indeed with a contradiction, because by one side its Power appears subordinate to a higher Rule: see GT p.228 (“… du von Ewigkeit her heilig und mit unendlicher Herrschaft geheiligt bist”, ll.3-4), cf. AT p.216, ll.10-11; but, on the other side, it is called “Primary Cause of the Primary Causes” (GT p.228, “Ursache des Ursachen”, cf. AT p.216), and “the highest of the Degrees” (GT p.228, “… du die hochste der Rangstufen einnimmst”, cf. AT p.216, l.16). It is also noteworthy the invocation used for Ursa Maior in addition to the words “For the Lord of the High Building” employed for the other planets, namely “For the God of the gods” (GT p.227, “Bei dem Gott der Gotter, dem Herrn des hochsten Gebaudes”; cf. AV p.215): this expression, in fact, makes part of the ''repertoir ''of liturgic formulas traditionally recited in honour of the Moon-God ''Sìn ''in Harràn and in the neighbouring region since the Babylonian period till to the Muslim Middle Ages (see below p.34 and n.303).</ref>, where the hint to God’s Exceeding Highness is explicitly made once again in order to obtain the divine intercession before undertaking any ritual action.
What nobody has ever proved until now – as far as we know – is that also the ''popular'' religion of Harràn could correspond to a Monotheistic pattern, that is the crucial move allowing us to set Abù Yusuf al-Qathii’s calumnies aside definitively. >From this point of view one can adduce in fact Sumatar Harabesi’s evidence, where many Syriac inscriptions dating back to 165 C.E. have been found invoking ''Sìn'', the God'', or ''Sìn Marilahé'', or, finally, simply ''Marilahé ''(''The Lord of the Gods'') <ref>301</ref>. The open-air shrine of Sumatar Harabesi lies a few kilometres North-East of Harràn, and there can be no doubt about the close religious relations existing between both places: despite Segal’s speculations about the identity of ''Marilaha ''(that was his reading of the divine name, ''The Lord God'') with ''Baal Shamin'', the ''Lord of the Heavens'' of the Semitic pantheon, the equation ''Marilahé ''= Moon-God ''Sìn ''has been demonstrated with certainty <ref>302</ref>: in Neo-Babylonian times (half of the VI B.C.E. c.), the Moon Deity was addressed in identical terms, ''Sìn ''Lord of the gods'' (''Sìn bèl shà ilani'') according to the famous Nabonide’s inscription discovered in Harràn <ref>303</ref>, as it happened still in IV H./X C.E. c. according to an Harranian cultic calendar (''Rabbu ‘làlihati'') handed down once again by al-Nadìm <ref>304</ref>.
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42 Changes - Wikinoah English
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:103) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
