Nutaf Min Al-ΗΙYal: a Partial Arabic Version of Pseudo-Aristotle's Problemata Mechanica

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 96-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Abattouy
Keyword(s):  
Twelfth Century ◽  
English Translation ◽  
Critical Edition ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Arabic Text ◽  
Arabic Version ◽  
Mechanical Theory ◽  
Classical Culture ◽  
Muslim Scholars

AbstractThis article investigates the Arabic tradition of the Problemata Mechanica, a Greek text of mechanics ascribed to Aristotle, of which it has often been said that Arabic classical culture had been ignorant of it. Against this prevailed claim, it is shown that the Arabo-Muslim scholars had access to the text at least in the form of an abridged version entitled Nutaf min al-iyal edited by al-Khāzinī (twelfth century) in Kitāb mīzān al-ikma (Book of the Balance of Wisdom). The article includes the critical edition of the Arabic text of the Nutaf on the basis of the two extant manuscripts and its English translation. Finally, the mechanical theory in the Nutaf is characterized briefly.

scholarly journals Textual Commentary on the Ethiopic Text of Ezekiel 1–11

Aethiopica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Knibb
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Critical Edition ◽  
Detailed Comparison ◽  
Hebrew Text ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Arabic Version ◽  
What Is Said ◽  
The Bible

This article provides a textual commentary on the Gǝʿǝz text of Ezekiel 1–11 as edited by Michael Knibb in his recently published edition, The Ethiopic Text of the Book of Ezekiel: a Critical Edition (2015), and complements what is said in the introduction to the edition. It also serves to complement Knibb’s Schweich Lectures, Translating the Bible: the Ethio-pic Version of the Old Testament (1999). The textual notes are primarily concerned to provide a detailed comparison of the Ethiopic version with the underlying Greek text in the light also of the Hebrew text and of the Syriac and Syriac-based Arabic versions; to comment on the vocabulary used in the Ethiopic version of Ezekiel; and to discuss difficulties in the Ethiopic text. The notes demonstrate clearly the dependence of the Ethiopic text of Ezekiel on the Alexandrian text (the A-text), particularly the minuscule pair 106–410 and the minuscule 534, the close ally of 130, which has been regarded as the most closely related of the minuscules to the Ethiopic text of Ezekiel. They also provide evidence of the influence of the Syro-Arabic version on the text.

scholarly journals The invocation of the Archangels Michael and Gabriel attributed to Metrophanes metropolitan of Smyrna (BHG 1292)

2015 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Gielen ◽  
Peter Van Deun
Keyword(s):  
English Translation ◽  
Critical Edition ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
12Th Century

AbstractThis article presents a critical edition and annotated English translation of the Invocation of the holy Archangels Michael and Gabriel by Metrophanes, who was bishop of Smyrna in the second half of the 9th century. The text has only been preserved in the 12th-century manuscript Oxoniensis, Bodleianus, Auctarium E.5.12 (Miscellaneus 77). This new reconstruction of the Greek text replaces the unreliable edition of 1887 by Basileios Georgiadès. In the notes accompanying the translation, references to expressions and Biblical quotes recurrent in the oeuvre of Metrophanes have been added.

PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY: ARISTOTLE'S PHYSICS II.2.193b22–194a12

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
IAN MUELLER
Keyword(s):  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Arabic Text ◽  
Modern History ◽  
Ibn Rushd ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Historical Issues ◽  
Mathematics And Physics

In the first part of chapter 2 of book II of the Physics Aristotle addresses the issue of the difference between mathematics and physics. In the course of his discussion he says some things about astronomy and the ‘ ‘ more physical branches of mathematics”. In this paper I discuss historical issues concerning the text, translation, and interpretation of the passage, focusing on two cruxes, ( I ) the first reference to astronomy at 193b25–26 and ( II ) the reference to the more physical branches at 194a7–8. In section I, I criticize Ross’s interpretation of the passage and point out that his alteration of ( I ) has no warrant in the Greek manuscripts. In the next three sections I treat three other interpretations, all of which depart from Ross's: in section II that of Simplicius, which I commend; in section III that of Thomas Aquinas, which is importantly influenced by a mistranslation of ( II ), and in section IV that of Ibn Rushd, which is based on an Arabic text corresponding to that printed by Ross. In the concluding section of the paper I describe the modern history of the Greek text of our passage and translations of it from the early twelfth century until the appearance of Ross's text in 1936.

A Note on the Status of Origen's De Principiis in English

2007 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronnie Rombs
Keyword(s):  
English Translation ◽  
Critical Edition ◽  
Latin Translation ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Original Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
English Edition ◽  
Critical Editions ◽  
English Translations ◽  
The Status

AbstractThe standard English translation of Origen's De principiis, translated by G.W. Butterworth and published in 1936, is based upon the earlier critical edition of Paul Koetschau. Origen's text survives through the Latin translation of Rufinus, a version that Koetschau fundamentally distrusted: Rufinus had admittedly expurgated Origen's text and could not, accordingly, be trusted. Hence the job of the editor and translator was judged to be the reestablishment—as far as was possible—of Origen's original text. Such suspicion of the text led to, among other problems, the awkward printing of parallel Greek and Latin passages in columns in Butterworth's English edition. Greek fragments and Origenistic material—that is to say, passages that were not direct quotations of De principiis, nor even directly Origen's—were inserted into Koetschau's text based upon presumed doctrinal parallels between those fragments and Origen's 'authentic' thought.We cannot reconstruct the Greek text; what we have inherited for better or worse is Rufinus's Latin translation of Peri archôn, a text that the more recent scholarship of G. Bardy and others have significantly rehabilitated confidence in. With the notable exception of English, translations of De principiis have been made in French, Italian and German, based upon more recent and more balanced critical editions. The author proposes a new English translation of Rufinus's Latin text based upon the critical edition of Henri Crouzel and Manlio Simonetti, published in the Sources Chrétiennes series.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document