Month: November 2009

Abu’l Barakat’s catalogue of patristic books is underway!

Posted on by Roger Pearse

This evening I received the first chunk of the English translation that I commissioned of the 13th century list of Christian books by the Arabic Christian writer Abu’l Barakat.  It’s all Greek fathers so far, starting with Clement of Rome and winding down to Cyril of Alexandria. 

The lists are fascinating, and cry out for cross-referencing against Quasten’s Patrology and Graf’s Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, which I think we will do.  This will help everyone work out what exists in Arabic and so is potentially worth investigating for the tradition of the text.

Wonderful news!

Share

An atheist guide to ancient Rome

Posted on by Roger Pearse

While hunting around for material on the Septizodium, I came across a genuine curiosity, here.  The title is “Walking tours of ancient Rome: a secular guidebook to the Eternal City” by a certain Gary M. Devore.  The blurb reads:

This guidebook is designed for tourists and scholars who are interested in exploring first-hand the grandeur and magnificence that was ancient Rome through a Humanist, secular, and freethinking lens. Twelve walking tours are designed around districts of the city. Two appendices also describe day trips that are possible from the city center: the ruins of Rome’s port city of Ostia and the remains of the emperor Hadrian’s splendid villa at Tivoli. (emphasis mine)

I have sometimes thought that atheism is merely a final extreme protestantism.  I’m thinking of the kind of protestantism is that used to demonstrate in hatred of the Pope, whose denials are far more central than anything positive that it affirms.  Atheism is just this kind of protestantism taken one step further still; and echoes the hatred of ‘papists’ by using the same slogans against all Christians.

The section on the Septizonium was actually quite vivid and well written.  I wouldn’t mind doing a walking tour of ancient Rome following this author; except that I might end up laughing.  Such extreme solemnity, such eager care not to speak well of the church, can only be absurd.

There is quite an irony in subtitling an atheist guide as a “guidebook to the eternal city”.  I wish it were cheaper.  I might buy a copy.

Share

Images of the Septizonium from the renaissance

Posted on by Roger Pearse

When I was scanning the Chronography of 354, one part of the book was The fourteen regions of Rome.  This listed all sorts of monuments, and I was reminded today of a mysterious monument named the Septizonium.  It appears on the fragments of the ancient marble map of Rome that I was talking about earlier. 

Renaissance image of the ruins of the Septizodium
Renaissance image of the ruins of the Septizodium

The septizodium stood on a corner of the Palatine hill in Rome, adjacent to the Circus Maximus and overlooking the Via Appia.  It was erected by Septimius Severus, according to the Augustan History.  It was just a facade, rather like the buildings on a classsical stage.  The idea was to put an impressive frontage onto the imperial palace on that side.  It had no architectural purpose other than appearance.

At the renaissance some quite impressive remains still stood.  Pope Sextus V knocked them down for stone, as the humanists of that period tended to do.

The notes on the university website mentioned that images of it existed in renaissance prints; and I wondered if there were any online.  And there are!  Here’s one that I found online via Google images, although I was quite unable to locate the source webpage that it was embedded in.  Thank you, tho, whoever scanned it.

Another excellent image is here, image url here, which gives a real sense of what the ruin must have looked like, complete with its ceilings.

I wish… I wish we could see these buildings today, even as they stood in 1500.

UPDATE: Bill Thayer has a scanned article on the building here.  The Historia Augusta chapter on Severus tells us about the building of it.

UPDATE 2: According to Michael Grant, the remains were demolished by Domenico Fontana in 1588/9.  Archaeology confirms that it consisted of three recesses, with a wing on either end.  Somewhere along it were seven niches, each containing the statue of a planetary deity (which is probably the origin of the name).  A fountain was also involved.  Raffaello Fabretti’s 17th century De aquis refers to “the Septizodium, the remains of which used to be visible in the memory of our fathers between the Caelian and the Palatine”.  Some references to pictures of the monument are here.

I’ve also found references online to “demolition records” extant today which specify what sort of materials it was made of.  These were compiled by Fontana. 

Here is a reconstruction of the plan and appearance of the building.

Reconstruction of the plan and elevation of the Septizodium in Rome
Reconstruction of the plan and elevation of the Septizodium in Rome

UPDATE: Christopher Ecclestone has drawn my attention to a splendid article on the whole subject, with images and bibliography, exists by Susann L. Lusnia, Urban planning and sculptural display in Severan Rome: reconstructing the Septizodium and its role in dynastic politics. American Journal of Archaeology 108 (2004) p.517-544.  This contains all this and more and is highly recommended.

Share

The marble map of Rome

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Does anyone know if there is a picture online of the Severan map of Rome, made of marble and attached to a wall in Rome?  The phrase I have seen is the templum sacrae urbis, but I really know very little about this item and what it depicts.

Share

The administration of Roman libraries

Posted on by Roger Pearse

An interesting post on this subject is here.  It’s a follow-up to a more general article on Roman libraries here, which has a nice bibliography in the footnotes.  Apparently ‘Boyd 1915 “Public Libraries and Literary Culture in Ancient Rome”‘ contains the references to the primary data.  With that publication date, it should be online.  And so it is, here.

Share

The Hypotyposes (Outlines) of Clement of Alexandria

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Clement of Alexandria believed that “Cephas” was different from “Peter”. This information comes to us from Eusebius (Eccles Hist, 1.12.2).Here is the text:

They say that Sosthenes also, who wrote tothe Corinthians with Paul, was one of them. This is the account of Clement in the fifth book of his Hypotyposes, in which he also says that Cephas was one of the seventy disciples, a man who bore the same name as the apostle Peter, and the one concerning whom Paul says, “When Cephas came to Antioch I withstood him to his face.”

The Hypotyposes of Clement of Alexandria is one of his lost works. It still existed in the 9th century, when Photius read it, but probably perished with so much else in the sack of Constantinople by the renegade army originally hired for the Fourth Crusade. Photius’ remarks are here, in the Bibliotheca, codex 109. (Hypotyposes = outlines) He isn’t very complimentary.

Read three volumes of the works of Clement, presbyter of Alexandria, entitled Outlines, The Miscellanies, The Tutor.

The Outlines contain a brief explanation and interpretation of certain passages in the Old and New Testaments. Although in some cases what he says appears orthodox, in others he indulges in impious and legendary fables. For he is of opinion that matter is eternal and that ideas are introduced by certain fixed conditions; he also reduces the Son to something created. He talks prodigious nonsense about the transmigration of souls and the existence of a number of worlds before Adam. He endeavours to show that Eve came from Adam, not as Holy Scripture tells us, but in an impious and shameful manner; he idly imagines that angels have connexion with women and beget children; that the Word was not incarnate, but only appeared so. He is further convicted of monstrous statements about two Words of the Father, the lesser of which appeared to mortals, or rather not even that one, for he writes : “The Son is called the Word, of the same name as” the Word of the Father, but this is not the Word that became flesh, nor even the Word of the Father, but a certain power of God, as it were an efflux from the Word itself, having become mind, pervaded the hearts of men.” All this he attempts to support by passages of Scripture. He talks much other blasphemous nonsense, either he or some one else under his name. These monstrous blasphemies are contained in eight books, in which he frequently discusses the same points and quotes passages from Scripture promiscuously and confusedly, like one possessed. The entire work includes notes on Genesis, Exodus, the Psalms, St. Paul’s epistles, the Catholic epistles, and Ecclesiasticus. Clement was a pupil of Pantaenus, as he himself says. Let this suffice for the Outlines.

Codices 110 and 111 deal with the other two works.

Only fragments now exist of this commentary on the bible, which Eusebius tells us (HE 6.14.1) also included comments on the apocryphal works of Barnabas and the Apocalypse of Peter. Most of the few fragments are in Eusebius. Others are in the commentary of ps.Oecumenius, and John Moschus Pratum Spirituale.  The Greek material can all be found in GCS 17, which is online somewhere, and translated here in the ANF 2.

There is also a Latin translation of a good chunk of it, which passes under the title Adumbrationes Clementi Alexandrini in epistolas canonicas. This was made in the days of Cassiodorus.  It exists in two manuscripts.  The first is in the public library of Laon, no. 96 (L).  This is a parchment quarto which dates from the 8-9th century. The adumbrationes form folios 1-9 of this manuscript, and is followed by a Latin version of the commentary of Didymus the Blind on the letter of James.  Various pages of the manuscript are disordered.

The other manuscript (M) is in Berlin, part of the Sir Thomas Phillips collection from Cheltenham, no. 1665.  This is a parchment codex of 184 pages, of the 13th century. The first 11 pages of the codex contain the adumbrationes, followed by a work of Didymus the Blind, Bede on Acts, Bede’s retraction on Acts, his tract on the canonical letters, and an Epistola ad Accam.  The manuscript has a note that it belonged to a monastery of “St. Mary of the mountain of God”.  It was in Paris in the library of the Jesuits, then passed into the Meerman library, where it was no. 443, and then was bought by Sir Thomas Phillips. 

There  may be passages from the text also in a manuscript in the Laurentian library in Florence, (Pluteu 17.17), a Latin catena on these letters of the bible from Bede, Clement, Didymus and Augustine. 

The text was first published by Margaret de la Bigne in 1575, in her Sacra bibliotheca sanctorum patrum, col. 625-634.  Nothing is said of the manuscript used.  This text was reprinted several times; J. Fell in 1683, Th. Jttig (1700), J. Potter (1715), R. Klotz (vol. 4, 1834), Chr. C. Jos. Bunsen (1854), and L. Dindorf (1869).

A critical edition was published by Zahn in Supplementum Clementinum, Forsuchungen zur Geschichte des Neutestamentlichen Kanons und der altkirchlichen Literatur, III, pp. 64-103, which edits all the fragments; the critical edition of the adumbrationes is on p.79-93.  The editio princeps (P) and the Dindorf edition (D) supplement the two mss (see Zahn, p.10-16).

The comments in the text relate to 1 Peter and 1 John and 2 John.  An English translation of the adumbrationes is in the ANF 2, here.

Share

Some notes on Jupiter Dolichenus

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In the ruined Roman city of Leptis Magna in Libya there is an impressive set of temple steps leading up to what is now merely a foundation.  This was the local temple of a deity little known today, named Jupiter Dolichenus.  Jona Lendering has some notes on this site here, and the following image is at his site.  Despite visiting Leptis twice, I never quite got as far as the temple, as I never walked around the bottom edge of the silted-up port.

Temple of Jupiter Dolichenus at Leptis Magna
Temple of Jupiter Dolichenus at Leptis Magna

But who is Jupiter Dolichenus?

We shall look in vain for literary mentions; Robin Birley here tells us that there are none.  All we have is images with incriptions underneath, and whatever we can deduce from these, from their distribution over the empire, and from the period to which they date.  An altar was recently found at Hadrian’s wall, for instance.

An article by C.S.Sanders in an old issue of the Journal of the American Oriental Society (23), p.85 f. gives more details.  It seems there is a literary reference, in Stephanus of Byzantium (who?) who tells us that Jupiter Dolichenus came from Doliche, a little town in Commagene in what is now Turkey. 

The images are all of the same kind.  The god is depicted holding an axe and a thunderbolt, and stood on a bull or ox.  The inscriptions are largely from the Severan period, and disappear thereafter.

A temporary god, then; one favoured during the period in the 2-3rd centuries when the filth of the Orontes flooded into the Tiber (Juvenal) and which vanished when times changed.

UPDATE: I have finally located online an image of the deity identified clearly by an inscription.  Here it is:

Jupiter Dolichenus (ISDoli 00003)
Jupiter Dolichenus (ISDoli 00003)

The inscription is from Rome itself and reads:

Iovi Optimo Maximo Dolicheno ex iusso ipsius d(onum) d(edit) / L(ucius) Vibius Felix cum Fulvia Tertia coniuge sua / su<b=P> sacerdot{a}e Aquila Barhadados / dedic(ata) Kal(endis) Mart(iis) Imp(eratore) Commodo Aug(usto) IIII et Auf(idio) Victorino II co(n)s(ulibus)

To Jupiter (Jove) Optimus Maximus Dolichenus, by his own order, gives the gift / Lucius Vibius Felix, with Fulvia Tertia his wife / under the priest Aquila Barhadad. / Dedicated on the kalends of March, the emperor Commodus Augustus for the 4th time and Aufidius Victorinus for the 2nd time being consuls.

The fourth consulate of Commodus dates this to 183 AD, on the 1st of March.  The priest Aquila Bar-Hadad has a very biblical name! A Flavius Barhadadi appears in an inscription from Alba Iulia.

Share

Generosity is its own… punishment

Posted on by Roger Pearse

People who write books or place materials online must expect to receive emails of enquiry, and these are normally welcome.  They consist of enquiries about topics already of interest, or can spur further research.

But the generous must be aware that their generosity can be abused.  There are people out there who consider good men as so many easy chairs on which to take their pleasure.

This evening I was reminded of one such episode, some years ago.  I was translating Photius Bibliotheca at the time, and posting chunks of it online.  Someone posted in a public forum a request that I consider translating one particular codex or chapter.  It was a little out of my way, but I did so and a few days later completed the work, and posted it online.  I then replied to the forum post saying that I had done so.

A day or so went by, and I saw other posts by that man, but no reply.  I’d done this work, at his request, and he didn’t even acknowledge it.  This was not very nice; after all, it had taken some hours of my life to do this work.

I eventually emailed him, supposing that somehow he had missed my post.  I got no reply for several days, until finally a sheepish email arrived, saying that he wasn’t sure about various copyright issues and regretted ever asking me to do it.  Thanks there was, in a very muted and unsatisfactory way. 

I felt abused.  In fact I had been abused.  All we have in this life is our time.  We sell it for money, so we can live.  This man had taken some of my life.  He asked me to give him some of my life, and I did so, without thought of any reward save thanks, and this was not forthcoming.  But he got what he wanted, and, hey, that was all he cared about.

There used to be a time when students or schoolchildren would post queries online, which amounted to “will someone do my homework for me”.  This too is selfishness, and any who do so find themselves repaid with silent ingratitude.

Such behaviour can make us smaller, if we let it.  The generous need to consider how they spend their time, and to make sure that they don’t fritter away the only wealth any of us have at the bequest of those who will leave us in the cold once they have no further use for us.  We must do what we do for ourselves.  The abused need to make sure they do not become embittered, for such makes us less.

The happy contributor to the web is one who does only what he feels like doing.  I must admit I’ve been happy in this way for ages!

Share

Petition against Islamic attacks on Copts

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’m not sure whether such things do much good, but Dioscorus Boles has started one in defence of Coptic Christians in middle Egypt currently under Moslem attack.  You can sign the petition here.

It seems to be taken for granted that Copts in Egypt should live in subjection to the Arab majority.  The people who acquiesce in this at the same time get excited about Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland.  The Copts are one group who are denied self-determination and self-identity, and are forced to live under legal disadvantages and discrimination.  This is not good; direct violence against them even less so. 

Share

Ibn al-Tayyib, Commentary on the whole bible

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve had an email this morning asking me if I know of an English translation of a commentary on the four gospels by “ibn al-Tayyib”.  My first reaction is the same as yours — “who?”!

A look in Georg Graf’s Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur vol. 2, p. 160f reveals a Nestorian writer of that name.  Graf gives his name as `Abdullah ibn a-t-Taiyib, but I suspect it is the same man.  He lived and worked in Baghdad in the 11th century, as a physician, monk and priest.  In his day, he was an important man, known to the ruler of the city.  He wrote an introduction to Porphyry’s Isagogue, and did stuff with the works of Hippocrates and Galen.  He died in October 1043, and was buried in the church of Darta.  Sic transit gloria mundi – a great man, whose life is now just a few lines in an obscure handbook.

But he also wrote a commentary on the entire bible.  Graf describes this as the most extensive commentary on scripture in Arabic Christian literature.  It is extant in two manuscripts, Vatican arab. 37 (1291 AD) and Vatican arab. 36 (13/14th century).  A few more manuscripts contain parts of the work.  Graf lists no editions and no translations into any language of this monster text.

Graf wrote 50 years ago, so it is possible that work has been done since.  I’ve posted a note in the NASCAS forum asking if anyone knows of any.  It’s nice to peer into some neglected corners of scholarship like this. 

And I must remember to ask my correspondant how he knows of such a person and his work, and why he wants to know!

UPDATE: Sergey Minov writes to tell us that we’re probably out of luck.  It’s unpublished and untranslated.  But apparently it’s really interesting!

As far as I know no original texts or translations of al-Tayyib’s exegetical works has been published so far. It is a real pity, because, for example, it would contribute to our knowledge of Antiochene exegetical tradition. Thus, there are numerous (?) extracts from Theodore of Mopsuestia and its other representatives in his commentaries.

Here is what I’ve got on modern research on him:

  • Baarda, T., To the Roots of the Syriac Diatessaron Tradition (TA 25:1-3), Novum Testamentum 26 (1986), 1-25.
  • Cacouros, M., La division des biens dans le compendium d’étique par Abû Qurra et Ibn al-Tayyib et ses rapports avec la Grande Morale et le Florilège de Stobée, in: A. Hasnawi, A. Elamrani-Jamal and M. Aouad (eds.), Perspectives arabes et médiévales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophique grecque. Actes du colloque de la SIHSPAI (Société international d’histoire des sciences et de la philosophie arabes et islamiques), Paris, 31 mars – 3 avril 1993 (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 79; Leuven: Peeters / Institut du Monde Arabe: Paris, 1997), 289-314.
  • Caspar, R., Charfi, A., De Epalza, M., Khoury, A.T., Khoury, P., and Samir, S.K., Bibliographie du dialogue islamo-chrétien, Islamochristiana 1 (1975), 125-181; 2 (1976), 187-249; 3 (1977), 257-286.
  • Chahwan, A., Le commentaire de Psaumes 33-60 d’Ibn at-Tayib reflet de l’exegese syriaque orientale (Th.D. dissertation; Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 1997).
  • Faultless, J., The Two Recensions of the Prologue to John in Ibn al-Tayyib’s Commentary on the Gospels, in: D.R. Thomas (ed.), Christians at the Heart of Islamic Rule: Church Life and Scholarship in ‘Abbasid Iraq (The History of Christian-Muslim Relations 1; Leiden / Boston: Brill, 2003), 177-198.
  • Féghali, P., Ibn At-Tayib et son commentaire sur la Genèse, Parole de l’Orient 16 (1990-91), 149-162.
  • Hill, J.H. (tr.), The Earliest Life of Christ Ever Compiled from the Four Gospels, Being the Diatessaron of Tatian (circ. A.D. 160) Literally Translated from the Arabic Version and containing the Four Gospels woven into One Story (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1903).
  • Hoenerbach, W., and Spies, O. (eds.), Ibn at-Taiyib. Fiqh an-Nasrânîya, Das Recht der Christenheit. 4 vols (CSCO 161-162, 167-168, Arab. 16-19; Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1956-1957).
  • Kaufhold, H., Die Rechtssammlung des Gabriel von Basra und ihr Verhältnis zu den anderen juristischen Sammelwerken der Nestorianer (Münchener Universitätsschriften – Juristische Fakultät, Abhandlungen zur rechtswissenschaftlichen Grundlagenforschung 21; Berlin: J. Schweitzer, 1976).
  • Köbert, R., Ibn at-Taiyib’s Erklärung von Psalm 44, Biblica 43 (1962), 338-348.
  • Langermann, Y.T., Abu al-Faraj ibn al-Tayyib on Spirit and Soul, Le Muséon 122:1-2 (2009), 149-158.
  • Macomber, W.F., Newly Discovered Fragments of the Gospel Commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Le Muséon 81 (1968), 441-447.
  • Rosenthal, F., The Symbolism of the Tabula Cebetis according to Abû l-Faraj Ibn at-Tayyib, in: Recherches d’islamologie. Recueil d’articles offert à Georges C. Anawati et Louis Gardet par leurs collègues et amis (Bibliothèque philosophique de Louvain 26; Louvain: Peeters, 1977), 273-283.
  • Samir, S.K., Nécessité de la science: texte de ‘Abdallâh Ibn at-Tayyib (m. 1043), Parole de l’Orient 3 (1972), 241-259.
  • ———. Nécessité de l’exégèse scientifique. Texte de ‘Abdallâh Ibn at-Tayyib, Parole de l’Orient 5 (1974), 243-279.
  • ———. Le repentir et la pénitence chez ‘Abdallâh Ibn at-Tayyib (début du XIe siècle), in: Péché et Réconciliation hier et aujoud’hui (Patrimoine Syriaque, Actes du Colloque IV; Antélias, Liban: Centre d’Études et de Recherches Orientales, 1997), 176-204.
  • ———. Rôle des chrétiens dans la nahda abbasside en Irak et en Syrie (750-1050), Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph 58 (2005), 541-572.
  • ———. La place d’Ibn-at-Tayyib dans la pensée arabe, Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 58:3-4 (2006), 177-193.
  • Sepmeijer, F., Ibn al-Tayyib’s Commentary on Matthew 1-9:32-34, Parole de l’Orient 25 (2000), 557-564.
  • Stern, S.M., Ibn al-Tayyib’s Commentary on the Isagoge, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 19:3 (1957), 419-425.
  • Troupeau, G., Le Traité sur l’Unité et la Trinité de ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-Tayyib, Parole de l’Orient 2 (1971), 71-89.
  • ———. Le rôle des syriaques dans la transmission et l’exploitation du patrimoine philosophique et scientifique grec, Arabica 38:1 (1991), 1-10.
  • Zonta, M., Ibn al-Tayyib Zoologist and Hunayn ibn Ishaq’s Revision of Aristotle’s De Animalibus – New Evidence from the Hebrew Tradition, ARAM 3 (1991 [1993]), 235-247.

There was one final bibliographic item which wasn’t in Roman letters and wouldn’t paste!

UPDATE 2: I’ve written back to my correspondant, telling him this and suggesting he commission a translation and transcription.  At 10c per word of Arabic, it would probably only cost $2-3,000.  That’s nothing for an institution.  I’ve also suggested that, if he does, he put it online as public domain!

If only I had more money!  There is so much I could do.  In the mean time I rely on sales of my CD to help fund it all.

UPDATE 3: I was looking at that bibliography above, and noticed the reference to Hamlyn Hill’s 1903 translation of the Diatessaron from Arabic.   This has to be online, so I went and looked at it.  It turns out that ibn al-Tayyib translated the Diatessaron into Arabic!  His name appears in the colophon:

THE Gospel is concluded, which Tatian compiled out of the four Gospels of the four holy apostles the blessed evangelists, on whom be peace, and which he named Diatessaron, that is, That which is composed of four. The excellent and learned presbyter, Abu-l-Faraj Abdullah Ibn-at-Tayyib, with whom may God be pleased, translated it from Syriac into Arabic, from a copy written by the hand of Gubasi ibn Alt Al-mutayyib, a disciple of Hunain ibn Ishak, on both of whom may God have mercy. Amen.

Hill adds:

Akerblad pointed out that MS. XIV. was evidently a translation from Syriac, as the Arabic of it was full of Syriac idioms. The Borgian MS., on the other hand, is expressly stated, in a notice prefixed to the text, and also in another notice at the conclusion of it, to have been translated from Syriac into Arabic by Abu-1-Faraj Abdullah Ibn-at-Tib. Ciasca, in his Preface, has collected several allusions to this Abdulla Ben-attib, as he is called, from which it appears that he was a celebrated Nestorian monk, born in Assyria, and was the author of several books. He died A.D. 1043, so that  we may conclude that he translated the Diatessaron from Syriac into Arabic early in the eleventh century. The use of the Arabic language was made compulsory in Syria : it is not surprising, therefore, that the two MSS., which now survive, of a Syriac work once used by the Syrian Churches, should both be in Arabic.

[CIASCA, . . Tatiani Evangeliorum Harmoniae,  Arabice, etc., Rome, 1888. ]

UPDATE 3.  Of course I suppose one reason why someone would come to me about this man is that I commissioned and placed online here a translation of one of his works…  I had completely forgotten, I admit; only a google search revealed it.  Ahem.

A book Arabic logic: Ibn al-Tayyib on Porphyry’s “Eisagoge” by Kwame Gyeke (1979) seems to be readily available from online booksellers.  244 pages, and in English.  I wish it was online freely!

It looks as if ibn al-Tayyib commented on Aristotle’s Organon as well.  He was also interested in zoology and botany, according to the snippets I have found.  It is a pity that the articles above are inaccessible to me!

From this link I get this:

Ibn al-Tayyib (Arabic Christian scholar, Baghdad, d. 1043): “The curse of Noah affected the posterity of Canaan who were killed by Joshua son of Nun. At the moment of the curse, Canaan’s body became black and the blackness spread out among them.”

This is referenced:

Joannes C. J. Sanders, Commentaire sur la Genèse, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 274-275, Scriptores Arabici 24-25 (Louvain, 1967), 1:56 (text), 2:52-55 (translation).

I wonder if this is a translation of part of the commentary on Genesis?  It certainly looks like it!  The proper title is “Commentaire sur la Genèse / Ibn aṭ-Ṭaiyib”.  A German version of his commentary on the Categories of Aristotle also seems to exist.  A version of Proclus’ commentary on the Pythagorean Golden Verses does exist in English, translated by J. Linley (1984).

UPDATE: Some more bibliography from Aaron M. Butts in NASCAS, which I had overlooked:

“The following bibliography can be added to that provided by Sergey:

  • T. Baarda, ‘The Author of the Arabic Diatessaron’, in
    Miscellanea Neotestamentica, ed. T. Baarda, A. F. J. Klijn, W.C. van Unnik, vol. 1 (1978), 61-103. (reprinted in T. Baarda, Early Transmission of Words of Jesus [1983], 207-249)
  • C. Ferrari, Die Kategorienkommentar von Abu l-Farag ‘Abdallah ibn at-Tayyib. Text und Untersuchungen (2006).
  • K. Gyekye, Ibn al-Tayyib’sCommentary on Porphyry’s Eisagoge. Arabic text edited with introduction and a glossary of Greek-Arabic logical terms (1975).
  • idem, Arabic Logic. Ibn al-Tayyib’s Commentary on Porphyry’s Eisagoge (1979).
  • M. Kellermann, Ein pseudoaristotelischer Traktat über die Tugend (Ph.D. diss., Friedrich-Alexander-Universität; 1965).
  • ‘Ali Husayn al-Jabiri et al., al-Sharh al-kabir li-maqulat Aristu (2002).
  • Y. Manquriyus, Tafsir al-mashriqi (1908-10).
  • Y. Manquriyus and H. Jirjis, al-Rawd al-nadir fi tafsir al-mazamir (1902).
  • J. C. J. Sanders, Commentaire sur la Genèse (CSCO 274-275; 1967).
  • J. C. J. Sanders, Inleiding op het Genesiskommentaar van de Nestoriaan Ibn at-Taiyib (1963).
  • P. P. Sbath, Vingt traités philosophiques et apologétiques d’auteurs arabes chrétiens du IXe au XIXe siècles (1929), 179-180.
  • G. Troupeau, ‘Le traité sur l’union de ‘Abd Allāh Ibn at-Tayyib’, ParOr 8 (1977-8), 141-150.
  • idem, ‘Le traité sur les hypostases et la substance de ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-Tayyib’, Orientalia Hispanica, ed. J. M. Barral (1974), 640-644.
  • H. Z. Ülken, Ibn Sina Risâleleri (1953), vol. 1, 57-65.
  • J. Vernet, ‘Ibn al-Tayyib’, EI2, vol. 3, 955.

It should be noted that Sanders has provided an edition (with FT) of Ibn al-Tayyib’s commentary on Genesis.”

John Lamoreaux was “currently transcribing the Arabic of the CSCO edition” (of Sanders version of Genesis).

Please also refer to the comments for extensive additional bibliography.

Share