Twelfth-Century Latin Translations of Arabic Philosophical Texts on the Iberian Peninsula D.N

D.N. Hasse 1

Twelfth-Century Latin Translations of Arabic Philosophical Texts on the Iberian Peninsula D.N. Hasse, Villa Vigoni, 27 June 2013

Translators count among the most influential producers of texts in ancient and medieval cultures. Their linguistic skills, their learning and diligence, and their open-mindedness towards the foreign, have left enormous traces in intellectual history. For some well-known translators, such as Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq in Baghdad or Gerard of Cremona in Toledo, this is long known to specialists. With his over 70 Latin translations from Arabic, among them Ptolemy’s Almagest and Avicenna’s Canon of Medicine, Gerard of Cremona composed more Latin text than most other authors of medieval Latin prose. Medieval university culture would have looked entirely different without Gerard’s efforts. But in spite of all this, the translators of ancient and medieval times have not yet received the place they deserve in historiography. One way to change this, is to lift the anonymity of translations. We thus come closer to understanding the intellectual profiles, motives and techniques of these great mediators between cultures.

In a paper published in 2010, I have studied the anonymous Latin translations of Averroes of the thirteenth century. Among the 17 Averroes translations, twelve were anonymous. The idea was not to examine the technical vocabulary, but the translator’s usage of particles and short phrases. The statistical analysis of particle usage showed that six anonymous translations, and probably a seventh, were by Michael Scot, three by William of Luna, one by Hermannus Alemannus and one by an unknown fourth translator. In the present paper, I should like to try something similar for the twelfth century: for the great Arabic-Latin translation movement in Spain. Here too we have many anonymous translations. But the textual situation is more complicated: the translation movement in Spain is much larger, and the number of anonymous translations is much higher. Also, there are many Arabic authors involved, not only Averroes. Some anonymous translations, for instance of texts by al-Kindī, are very short. To keep the size manageable and the corpus coherent, I decided to concentrate on philosophical texts, as you can see on the table below – thus excluding other disciplines such as medicine, astrology, or astronomy.

Twelfth-Century Latin Translations of Arabic Philosophical Texts on the Iberian Peninsula anonymous 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn, fragm. ed. C. Martini 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu ed. J. Ruska 03-Turba philosophorum ed. G. Théry 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu ed. A. Nagy 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum ed. G. Bos / C. Burnett D.N. Hasse 2

06-al-Kindī, De radiis ed. M.-T. d’Alverny / F. Hudry 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto ed. E. Gilson 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exercitationis ad viam felicitatis ed. D. Salman 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) ed. M. Cruz Hernandez 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of the 5th Book of Euclid ed. C. Burnett 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum ed. C. Baeumker 12-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, In artem logicae demonstrationis ed. A. Nagy 13-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, Cosmographia ed. P. Gautier-Dalché 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, Liber de quatuor confectionibus ed. A. Sannino 15-Isaac Israeli, De definitionibus ed. J.T. Muckle 16-Avicenna, Isagoge, selections from I and II ed. 1508 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III ed. S. van Riet 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) ed. M.A. Alonso 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid ed. D. Salman

Ġ ā ī John of Seville 20-Ps.-Aristotle, Secretum secretorum ed. H. Suchier 21-Qusṭā ibn Lūqā, De differentia spiritus et animae ed. J. Wilcox 22-Ab Maʿšar, Great Introduction ed. R. Lemay Hugo of Santalla 23-Ps.-Apollonius, De secretis ed. F. Hudry 24-Liberū Aristotilis de 255 Indorum voluminibus ed. C. Burnett / D. Pingree Gerard of Cremona 25-Aristole, Posterior Analytics ed. L. Minio-Paluello 26-Aristotle, Physics mss. 27-Aristotle, De caelo mss. 28-Aristotle, De gen. et corr. mss. 29-Aristotle / Ibn al-Biṭrīq, Meteora I-III ed. P. Schoonheim 30-Ps.-Aristotle, Liber de causis ed. A. Pattin 31-Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Sense ... ed. G. Théry 32-Themistius, Comm. Post. Anal. ed. J.R. O’Donnell 33-al-Kindī, De quinque essentiis ed. A. Nagy 34-al-Kindī, De somno ed. A. Nagy 35-al-Kindī, De ratione ed. A. Nagy 36-al-Fārābī, De scientiis ed. F. Schupp 37-Isaac Israeli, De elementis ed. 1515 38-Isaac Israeli, De definitionibus ed. J.T. Muckle Avendauth and ? 39-Avicenna, prologue / Isagoge ed. A. Birkenmajer Gundisalvi and 40-Avicenna, De anima ed. S. van Riet Avendauth 41-Avicenna, De medicinis cordialibus ed. S. van Riet Gundisalvi and 42-Ibn Gabirol, Fons vitae ed. C. Baeumker Johannes Hispanus 43- al- az l , Summa (Maqāṣid) ed. C. Lohr / ed. J.T. Muckle Gundisalvi 44-Avicenna, Philosophia prima ed. S. van Riet 45- al-FārāĠ ābīī, De scientiis ed. M.A. Alonso, repr. Schneider 46-Avicenna, De convenientia ... scientiarum (from ed. L. Baur Post. Anal. of aš-Šifāʾ) 47-Ps.-Avicenna, Liber celi et mundi ed. O. Gutman Alfred of 48-Nicolaus Damascenus, De plantis ed. H. Drossaart / E. Poortman Shareshill 49-Avicenna, De congelatione ... lapidum ed. E. Holmyard / D. Mandeville

The table lists 19 anonymous translations, plus 30 translations by translators known to us. Number 22 (Abū Maʿšar) is not a philosophical text in the stricter sense; I have added it in order to have enough statistical material for John of Seville, since texts 20 and 21 are rather short. Albumasar’s text leads us to another problem for anyone who studies twelfth-century translations: revision. John of Seville’s version of the Great Introduction was revised, perhaps by Gerard of Cremona, as some have suggested. Other texts, such as al-Fārābī’s Enumeration of the Sciences (De scientiis) was translated twice, by Gerard of D.N. Hasse 3

Cremona and Gundisalvi (texts 36 and 45). There is no consensus on which translation was first; I believe (as Charles Burnett does) that Gundisalvi revised Gerard’s translation. Isaac’s De definitionibus was also translated twice, by an anonymous translator and by Gerard (texts 15 and 37). The same is true of al- Kindī’s On the Intellect (texts 4 and 35). In all three cases, the verbal parallels between the translations make it likely that one translation in fact is a revision of the other. Even if we stay away from these double translations and focus on the others, there remain enough problems for any attempt to identify anonymous translators. The troubling question is whether the stylistic signal of the author (i.e. al-Kindī or al-Fārābī or Avicenna) will be stronger than the translator signal – whether, for instance, Fārābī-translations will group together in Latin, even if they are by different translators. And I have to say there was a moment in April of this year when I almost despaired and I thought that I won’t have anything to present at the Villa Vigoni. I will show you why. Fortunately, the story took a different direction. What is the status quaestionis? As I see it, there were two major steps in research on this issue. First, Manuel Alonso’s analysis of Dominicus Gundisalvi’s translation style in two papers of the 1940s and 1950s, on the basis of which Alonso ascribed several anonymous translations to Gundisalvi (or the tandem Gundisalvi / Johannes Hispanus). Second, Charles Burnett’s research on the translators in Spain. To turn to Alonso’s results first: In a magisterial article of 1955, Alonso compared, on 59 densely written pages, the “coincidencias verbales tipicas” in the works and translations by Gundisalvi, comparing the Arabic and the Latin. This article is full of interesting material. For the present purpose it is most relevant that Alonso bases his ascriptions on 34 typical words and phrases:

multivocum, astrologia / astronomia, parificare, minus commune, credulitas / credere, solet, in sensibilibus, habens, designare / designatus / designatio, concomitari, maneria, fortassis, materiare, enim, caelatura, si ... aut, intellectus, intentio, vicissitudinantur, quadrivialia, dapsilis, aequidistantia, mediante, anitas, diversificare, appendiciae, propalare, numerus surdus, assolare, hylearis, elongatio, transumere / transumptive, imaginatio, et omnino

On this basis, Alonso ascribes nine anonymous translations to Gundisalvi – the other anonymous translations in my list are not discussed by Alonso:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Manuel Alonso Alonso: anonymous translations ascribed to Gundisalvi

Coincidencias verbales típicas en las obras y traducciones de Gundisalvo, in: Al-Andalus 20 (1955), 129-152, 345-379 D.N. Hasse 4

01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn, fragm. 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exercitationis ad viam felicitatis 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of the 5th Book of Euclid 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, In artem logicae demonstrationis 13-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, Cosmographia 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, Liber de quatuor confectionibus 15-Isaac Israeli, De definitionibus 16-Avicenna, Isagoge, selections from I and II 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al-Ġazālī, prologue to Maqāṣid ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The evidence collected by Alonso is impressive. Whether we are convinced by it, depends on the standards we demand from stylistic analysis. One drawback of Alonso’s studies is that he does not compare Gundisalvi’s style with that of any other translator on the Iberian peninsula. Once you start comparing, the result is disillusioning. The rare Latin term parificare, for instance, one of the words picked out by Alonso, is used by Gundisalvi, but also by Gerard of Cremona and Hugo of Santalla, as the following table shows:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– parifica-

''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsAppolDeSecretis:...... 1 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 1 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 1 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 2 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 1 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 0 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 13 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 1 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 0 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

To give further examples: credulitas appears five times in Gerard’s translation of the Posterior Analytics. designare and its cognates is absent in Gerard, but used by John of Seville and Hugo of Santalla. fortassis appears in John, Hugo and Alfred. aequidistare is used by Gerard in his Themistius translation. mediante appears in John, Hugo and Gerard. elongatio is used by Alfred and Gerard. imaginatio is used in various writings by Gerard. et omnino – which is a wonderfully stylistic term, that appears often in Gundisalvi’s writings – unfortunately is used also by John and Gerard. And, a final example: diuersificare is a term which regularly appears in Gerard’s translations.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– diuersifica-

''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsAppolDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 7 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 5 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 7 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 9 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 2 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 2 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 1 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 2 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 24 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 3 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 4 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 1 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

What these tables show, is that Alonso has successfully unearthed terms preferred by Gundisalvi, but not necessarily terms typical of Gundisalvi. Hence, Alonso’s studies were a great advance, because he was able to offer many indications buttressing his hypothesis that Gundisalvi was in fact responsible for a greater set of translations than we knew before. But these indications are of limited validity. Alonso’s evidence for author attribution is not conclusive. From Charles Burnett we have many important studies on the translation movement in Spain: on the various translators, on the coherence of the translation programme, and on the differentiation between the two “Johns” involved: between John of Seville (Iohannes Hispalensis), the translator of at least 14 works mainly of astrology and astronomy in the 1120s and 1130s, and, on the other hand, the collaborator of Gundisalvi on two translations, John of Spain (Iohannes Hispanus, d. 1215), who possibly was the successor of Gundisalvi as archdeacon of Cuéllar. The older research, including Alonso’s, is still full of confusion about these Johns. The starting-point for my inquiry was Burnett’s list of Arabic-Latin philosophical translations, which was published in 2005.1 These are his careful comments on the presumed translators:

1 Charles Burnett, ‘Arabic into Latin: the Reception of Arabic Philosophy into Western Europe’, in P. Adamson, R. Taylor, eds, Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy (Cambridge, 2005) 370-404, here 391-400. D.N. Hasse 7 anonymous translation Burnett’s comments 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn, fragm. perhaps the same translator as 06 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu Gundisalvi (?) 03-Turba philosophorum anonymous 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu Gundisalvi (?) 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum anonymous 06-al-Kindī, De radiis perhaps the same translator as 01 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto Gundisalvi (?) 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exercitationis ad viam felicitatis Gundisalvi (?) 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) anonymous 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of the 5th Book of Euclid Gundisalvi (?) 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum Gundisalvi (?) 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demonstrationis anonymous 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia anonymous 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, Liber de quatuor confectionibus anonymous 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus Gundisalvi (?) 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , selections from I and II unknown, not Gundisalvi 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III unknown, Toledan (?) 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) Alfred of Shareshill (?) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid anonymous

Ġ ā ī Burnett follows Alonso’s suggestions on texts 2,4,7,8,12 and 15, but adds a cautious question mark. Who were the translators of these treatises? Who was responsible for transporting al-Kindī’s, al-Fārābī’s and Avicenna’s work to the Latin West? John of Seville was mainly active in the region of the Limia valley in northern Portugal. Hugo of Santalla, in all likelihood, was a canon of the cathedral of Tarazona. Gerard of Cremona and Dominicus Gundisalvi were canons of the cathedral of Toledo, and Alfred of Shareshill was probably active in Toledo towards the end of the twelfth century. Hence, the importance of Toledo as a centre for Arabic-Latin translations also depends upon whether we can solve the issue of anonymous translations.

I – Computational Stylistics

What I tried to do in the past two years, was to find a solution to the attribution problem by approaching it from two sides: from a philological side and from a computational side. That is, I tried to apply the philological method I had used for the Averroes translations: studying non-technical, non-disciplinary vocabulary, particles and short phrases, everyday words. On the other hand, I tried to study the corpus of translations with the help of the computer. In the fall of 2011, my colleague in digital humanities at Würzburg University, Fotis Jannidis, directed my attention to the most advanced computational stylistics programme available at the moment: the script “Stylo”, which was written with D.N. Hasse 8 the statistics software “R” by two Polish scholars of the University of Krakow: Maciej Eder and Jan Rybicki. The script was published 2011 in a Stanford paper and is since freely available on the net.2 The script written by Eder and Rybicki is designed to make author attributions on the basis of the analysis of the most frequent words of the text. In this analysis of texts of British Fiction, which you can see here, the script has compared the 100 most frequent words of the 27 individual texts, then the 200 most frequent words, then the 300 most frequent words and so forth until 5000. It then performs distance calculations to produce graphs of distances between the texts.

2 Eder, M. and Rybicki, J. (2011). Stylometry with R. Digital Humanities 2011: Conference Abstracts. Stanford University, Stanford, pp. 308-11.

D.N. Hasse 9

As you will see at the end of my paper, the Stylo script is extremely helpful, but at some crucial point, it had to strike the flag. I had to return to the method which I had used for analysing the Averroes translations. The conclusive evidence for the twelfth-century translations, as you will see, will come from the philological judgement about the evidence provided by particles and short phrases. I did not do this alone. I was assisted by Andreas Büttner, a student in philosophy and musicology, whom I had hired for working on the Arabic-Latin Glossary, but who turned out to be gifted programmer as well. Andreas Büttner has worked long on creating a digitalized and fully searchable corpus of these 49 texts. He has invested much effort in standardizing the Latin as far as possible. To extinguish scanning mistakes, he has sent the texts time and again to a server in Berlin, where the texts were checked against the Perseus Latin dictionary (by Gregory Crane), to which he added his own list of non-classical words of the translation literature. In the end, the two dictionaries together recognized a high percentage of the text as correct Latin, as this table shows:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– quality and length of the scanned Latin texts

DATEI LAENGE FEHLER QUAL 01_ANON_01ArisMetAlpha.txt 499 16 97% 02_ANON_02AlexDeIntell.txt 3345 19 99% 03_ANON_03Turba.txt 18682 392 98% 04_ANON_04KindiDeIntell.txt 806 7 99% 05_ANON_05KindiDeMutatTemp.txt 10241 290 97% 06_ANON_06KindiDeRadiis.txt 9150 171 98% 07_ANON_07FarabiDeIntell.txt 4075 65 98% 08_ANON_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis.txt 6567 92 99% 09_ANON_09PsFarabiFlos.txt 822 2 100% 10_ANON_10FarabiEuclid.txt 2277 68 97% 11_ANON_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien.txt 2207 24 99% 12_ANON_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae.txt 6008 42 99% 13_ANON_13IkhwanCosmo.txt 4720 372 92% 14_ANON_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf.txt 1891 112 94% 15_ANON_15IsaacDeDefin.txt 4452 49 99% 16_ANON_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES.txt 966 10 99% 17_ANON_17AvicPhys.txt 59724 339 99% 18_ANON_18AvicDeDiluviis.txt 838 16 98% 19_ANON_19GazaliProlMaqasid.txt 414 12 97% 20_John_20PsArisSecretum.txt 1557 40 97% 21_John_21QustaDeDifferentia.txt 4481 47 99% 22_John_22AlbumasarIntroductorium.txt 109251 1530 99% 23_Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis.txt 47085 693 99% 24_Hugo_24LiberAristotilis.txt 39133 952 98% 25_Gerard_25ArisPostAn.txt 31879 187 99% 29_Gerard_29ArisMeteoraI-III.txt 15955 311 98% 30_Gerard_30PsArisDeCausis.txt 7194 78 99% 31_Gerard_31AlexanderDeMotu.txt 4484 32 99% 32_Gerard_32ThemistiusPostAn.txt 34126 216 99% 33_Gerard_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis.txt 2291 14 99% 34_Gerard_34KindiDeSomno.txt 3081 57 98% 35_Gerard_35KindiDeRatione.txt 733 7 99% 36_Gerard_36FarabiDeScientiis.txt 15106 280 98% D.N. Hasse 10

38_Gerard_38IsaacDeDefin.txt 7124 96 99% 39_Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI.txt 1702 87 95% 40_Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima.txt 65109 468 99% 41_Gundisalvi_41AvicDeMedCord.txt 3467 44 99% 42_Gundisalvi_42GabirolFonsVitae.txt 71182 378 99% 43_Gundisalvi_43GazaliSumma.txt 57578 753 99% 44_Gundisalvi_44AvicMet.txt 109383 494 100% 45_Gundisalvi_45FarabiDeScientiis.txt 6900 54 99% 46_Gundisalvi_46AvicConvenientiaScien.txt 2192 12 99% 47_Gundisalvi_47PsAvicLiberCeli.txt 12317 45 100% 48_Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis.txt 10175 182 98% 49_Alfred_49AvicLapid.txt 1666 61 96% SUMME 802835 9216 99% –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

In a next step, Andreas Büttner created a surface to improve the workflow of analysing the text corpus with Stylo. One of the two authors of Stylo, Jan Rybicki, had tried to identify English-Polish, French-Polish and French-English and English-French translators with the Stylo script.3 But his disappointing conclusion was that translators are condemned to stylometric invisibility. Multivariate analysis of most frequent words cannot tell translator from translator, because the texts usually cluster around the author rather than the translator. When we met Maciej Eder and Jan Rybicki last year at a conference, they were surprised when we showed them the following consensus tree, which contains all texts with known Arabic-Latin translators (with the exception of Avendauth):

3 Rybicki, J. (2012). The great mystery of the (almost) invisible translator: stylometry in translation. In M. Oakley and M. Ji (eds.), Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 231-248

D.N. Hasse 11

In principle, the Stylo script is able to differentiate between Gundisalvi, Gerard, John of Seville, Hugo and Alfred. One problem is al-Fārābī’s De scientiis. But this is explainable, since one of the two translations is a revision of the other. Note that Alfred’s translation of the section On Stones and Minerals of Avicenna’s aš-Šifāʾ does not group together with the many other texts from aš- Šifāʾ translated by Gundisalvi. The author signal in this case is not stronger than the translator signal. A second problem is John of Seville’s translation of the Secretum secretorum. Why does it not group with the other translations by John of Seville but with Hugo of Santalla? I believe this is the case because Hugo of Santalla’s translations, and in particular his translation of Pseudo-Apollonius (Bālīnūs) On the Secrets of Nature, are too close in topic and language to the Secretum secretorum. A third problem is Avendauth’s translation of the prologue to aš-Šifāʾ, which is too short to be relevant for statistical analysis. D.N. Hasse 12

When we leave out Avendauth and the two versions of al-Fārābī’s De scientiis translations, we arrive at the following beautiful consensus tree, which served as our standard for analysis of the anonymous texts:

Standard Consensus Tree

Let me briefly comment on the statistical parameters which produce this tree. At the bottom of the tree, you see the parameters we chose in the end, after trying out many others. The translator attribution rests on an analysis of the most frequent 50 words, then 100 words, 150 and so forth words until 1000 words, and on combining these results. “Culled @ 20-80%” means: The most frequent words considered are only those shared by at least 20% of all texts (again moving upwards until 80% and combining the results) – thus excluding words that appear only in certain disciplines of philosophy. “Eder Delta” is a distance function (metric) used to measure the distance between the most frequent word- lists of the individual texts. “Consensus 0.5” means that the consensus tree D.N. Hasse 13 makes a direct linkage between two texts if that linkage appears in at least 50% of the analyses. We chose this consensus tree as our calibrated standard. Once we had this standard, we could add anonymous translations. For some anonymous translations, the results are clear, for others they are not. I shall begin with an example for a case in which the computer is completely at a loss.

19 Chaotic Consensus Tree: al-Ġazālī, Maqāṣid

This is the Standard Consensus Tree plus one anonymous text: the very brief introduction by al- az l to the Maqāṣid. The Gundisalvi branch remains intact, as do the John, Alfred and Hugo branches, but the Gerard branch has been turned into chaos. ĠWhyā oneī small text has such an effect on the rest of the tree, is difficult to tell. It is a reminder that all results proposed by the Stylo script are in need of philological counter-checking. D.N. Hasse 14

But there are also very convincing results, which I now present to you in numerical sequence. I leave out text number one, which is too short. I proceed to Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu:

02 Consensus tree: Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu

I also pass by consensus trees for the texts 3,4,5 and 6, because here again the position in the tree is ambiguous.

D.N. Hasse 15

07 Consensus tree: al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto

Text 8 creates a chaotic tree. But case 9 is indicative:

D.N. Hasse 16

09 Consensus tree: Ps.-al-Fārābī, ʿUyūn al-masāʾil, Flos / Fontes questionum

D.N. Hasse 17

10 Consensus tree: al-Fārābī, Explanation of the 5th book of Euclid

Text 11 again has an ambiguous position in the tree.

D.N. Hasse 18

12 Consensus tree: al-Fārābī, In artem logicae demonstrationis

Texts 13, 14, 15 again are placed ambiguously between authors.

D.N. Hasse 19

16 Consensus tree: Avicenna, Isagoge of aš-Šifāʾ

D.N. Hasse 20

17 Consensus tree: Avicenna, Physics of aš-Šifāʾ

18 is again ambiguously placed. 19 (al- az l , Maqāṣid) – as we have seen – results in a chaotic tree. Hence, in 7 of the 19 cases, we receiveĠ ā ī an unambiguous result, when analysing the texts with the Stylo script. The results can be summarized as follows:

anonymous translation Alonso Stylo 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 03-Turba philosophorum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu Gundisalvi 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitatis Gundisalvi 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) Gundisalvi Gerard of Cremona D.N. Hasse 21

10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid Gundisalvi 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon. Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, De 4 confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus Gundisalvi 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , I-II Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid

StyloĠ supportsā ī several suggestions by Alonso, with the exception of Pseudo-al- Fārābī’s Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil), which Stylo groups with the translations of Gerard of Cremona, and not with those of Gundisalvi. Moreover, Stylo furnishes evidence that al-Fārābī’s commentary on the fifth book of Euclid (text 10) was a translation by Gundisalvi.

II – Philological Analysis

At this point, it was clear that philological confirmation was needed to arrive at more definite results. As remarked above, Alonso’s philological studies had unearthed terms which were preferred by one translator (Gundisalvi), but not necessarily typical of that translator. Hence, I now began to search for terms or phrases that are not only preferred by, but exclusively used by individual translators. From my reading of the texts, I had noticed that Gundisalvi preferred the phrase quantum ad. Using a search tool written by Andreas Büttner, I then checked my corpus for this phrase. This is the result:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– quantum ad (translating: bi-l-qiyās ilā)

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 0 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_03Turba:...... 0 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 1 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 0 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 2 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 1 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 1 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 1 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 0 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 0 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 40 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 D.N. Hasse 22

''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 1 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 2 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 11 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 1 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 14 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 36 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 52 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 1 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 2 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

You can see immediately that the intuition was correct: Gundisalvi has a liking for the phrase. It appears in a good number of anonymous translations too. But unfortunately it also appears in translations by John of Seville and Hugo of Santalla – even if very rarely. In a next step, I asked Andreas Büttner to write a programme which makes the computer search only in the texts firmly attributed to the six translators and make lists with the terms that only appear in one translator. We then arrived at six lists with words that appear only in Avendauth, Hugo, Alfred, Gerard, John or Gundisalvi respectively. I wanted to know the following: How many such words that appear singularly with one translator are shared by each of the 19 anonymous translations? We prepared a table which gives the number of such exclusive words shared by the anonymous translators. I had hoped that we would now see immediately which translation was produced by which translator – but that was not the case:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –– How many words used only by a single translator are shared by the anonymous translations?

Avendauth Hugo Alfred Gerard John Gundisalvi ANON_01ArisMetAlpha: 0 4 2 17 19 55 ANON_02AlexDeIntell: 0 25 1 58 47 442 ANON_03Turba: 0 115 16 137 148 592 ANON_04KindiDeIntell: 0 6 0 40 22 110 ANON_05KindiDeMutatTemp: 0 87 3 117 364 304 ANON_06KindiDeRadiis: 0 90 7 102 143 546 ANON_07FarabiDeIntell: 0 24 0 62 56 574 ANON_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis: 0 43 7 89 82 389 ANON_09FarabiFlos: 0 9 0 60 22 87 D.N. Hasse 23

ANON_10FarabiEuclid: 0 37 2 51 50 224 ANON_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien: 0 26 4 52 46 255 ANON_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae: 0 36 7 139 94 629 ANON_13IkhwanCosmo: 0 26 3 57 114 158 ANON_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf: 0 12 2 33 59 81 ANON_15IsaacDeDefin: 0 29 4 212 66 380 ANON_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES: 0 15 0 26 21 154 ANON_17AvicPhys: 0 152 31 436 289 4308 ANON_18AvicDeDiluviis: 0 7 1 28 35 89 ANON_19GazaliProlMaqasid: 0 8 0 10 20 35

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Unfortunately, the anonymous translations share exclusive words with almost all translators – safe for Avendauth, whose text is too short to be of any statistical relevance. This table is therefore very disappointing. It does not say anything. The high numbers of Gundisalvi may simply reflect that his translations are rather long compared with others (Avicenna’s Metaphysics, Avicenna’s De anima, Fons vitae etc). At this point, I thought it may turn out that the task is impossible and that it will not be possible to identify the anonymous translators of twelfth-century Spain – in contrast to the translators of Averroes, which formed a corpus much more coherent in length and content. But a few days later I looked again at the lists with characteristic words of single translators. Here is an example of such a list:

––––––––––––––––––––––– Phrases used only by Gundisalvi ullo modo, (178x) sustinet praedicamenta, (177x) substantia composita, (127x) et deinde, (109x) sic ut, (106x) forma intelligentiae, (93x) substantiae simplicis, (88x) facit debere, (86x) debere esse, (81x) uel est, (80x) hoc m, (76x) debet ut, (75x) substantia simplici, (66x) omnes formae, (64x) a forma, (64x) praedictum est, (62x) habeat esse, (60x) essentia substantiae, (60x) factor primus, (54x) quia forma, (53x) inter se, (51x) formae sunt, (51x) omnes formas, (50x) cum forma, (50x) substantia intelligentiae, (49x) m si, (48x) autem dixerit, (48x) D.N. Hasse 24 substantiarum simplicium, (47x) potest autem, (47x) substantiam quae, (46x) forma uniuersalis, (45x) in imaginatione, (44x) d quid, (44x) haec substantia, (44x) formae sensibiles, (43x) materia quae, (42x) quod intelligitur, (41x) alio a, (41x) formae uniuersalis, (41x) materia prima, (41x) ut forma, (41x) sustinentur in, (41x) est m, (40x) suae essentiae, (40x) quod quicquid, (40x) –––––––––––––––––

Some of the words in the list are content words, such as substantia composita, which are typical of a topic or a discipline, but others are stylistic, such as et deinde. The computer cannot differentiate between content words and purely stylistic words. Content words have a tendency to travel from one author to the other, but stylistic words are much more stable. Some of them are highly characteristic of one person writing. I therefore shifted my focus again on small words and phrases that do not contain any content words. Such as et deinde:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– et deinde (translating: ṯumma)

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 0 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 1 ''''_03Turba:...... 0 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 0 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 0 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 5 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 0 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 2 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 10 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 4 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 1 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 6 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 D.N. Hasse 25

''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 25 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 3 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 23 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 54 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 1 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 1 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 2 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

This phrase appears in many Gundisalvi translations (except for the very short De medicinis cordialibus) – regardless, in fact, whether Gundisalvi was translating with another person or not. et deinde never appears in the philosophical translations of John, Hugo, Gerard, Avendauth and Alfred. But et deinde appears in the anonymous translations 2, 7, 12, 13, 15,16, 17. This is a first hint to a large group of anonymous translations deriving from Gundisalvi. There are other stylistic phrases typical of Gundisalvi, which are never used by the other six translators, but shared by a larger group of anonymous translations. One such phrase is postquam autem:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– postquam autem (translating: fa-iḏā)

''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 1 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 4 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 0 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 18 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 41 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 2 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 9 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– postquam autem is shared by the anonymous translations 7, 12, 15, 17.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– inter se (translating: baʿḍ li-baʿḍ)

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 0 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_03Turba:...... 2 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 1 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 2 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 4 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 2 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 0 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 0 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 9 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 1 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 D.N. Hasse 27

''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 8 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 13 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 14 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 10 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 3 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 1 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 2 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– inter se is shared by the anonymous translations 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 17, 19.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– secundum hoc quod (translating: min ḥayṯu or min ǧihā mā or bi-mā)

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 0 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 3 ''''_03Turba:...... 0 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 1 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 0 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09PsFarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 2 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 0 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 0 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 0 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 3 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 25 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 1 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 D.N. Hasse 28

''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 22 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 3 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 12 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 5 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 43 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 1 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 0 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– secundum hoc quod is shared by the anonymous translations 2, 5, 10, 16, 17 – but also once by Gerard. So far I have discussed only two-word- or three-word-phrases, but there is also a particle which is very distinctive of Gundisalvi: idcirco.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– idcirco (translating li-ḏālika)

''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 6 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 9 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 22 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 5 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 3 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 1 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 6 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– idcirco is shared by the anonymous translations 6, 8,10, 11, 15 and 17. From these tables, it is clear that the stylistic phrases et deinde, postquam autem, inter se, secundum hoc quod and idcirco are highly characteristic of Gundisalvi. I now saw the exciting prospect of tracking the whole range of Gundisalvi’s philosophical translations. Instead of showing you more tables for single phrases exclusive of Gundisalvi, I now choose a different way of presenting the evidence. I will give you a conspectus of all stylistic words I have tracked in Gundisalvi, noting which of these words appear in which anonymous translations. This is it:

D.N. Hasse 30

anonymous translation words and phrases shared with Gundisalvi 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu et deinde, uel est, sic ut, opus fuit, est hoc quod, potest autem, et etiam quia, est eo quod, secundum hoc quod, non est autem, in actu, id in quo 03-Turba philosophorum inter se, cur non, habet esse, nullo modo, est eo quod, opus est 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu uel est, non est autem, in actu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum inter se, in tantum quod, secundum hoc quod, in actu 06-al-Kindī, De radiis inter se, idcirco, probatum, sic ut, praedictum est, non est autem 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto et deinde, postquam autem, uel est, opus fuit, id cuius, nullo modo, non est autem 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitates idcirco, probatum 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid idcirco, ullo modo, uel est, tunc esset, praedictum est, secundum hoc quod, in actu 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum inter se, opus fuit, dictio de 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon. et deinde, postquam autem, inter se, idcirco, uel est, hoc est scilicet, sic ut, est hoc quod, non est necesse, ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ ā non est autem, sine dubio, opus est, id in quo 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia et deinde, et etiam quia 14-I w n a - af ʾ, De 4 confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus et deinde, postquam autem, idcirco, in tantum quod, si ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ ā quis autem, habet esse, sine dubio 16-Avicenna, Isagoge, I-II et deinde, secundum hoc quod, non est autem, in actu 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III et deinde, postquam autem, inter se, idcirco, in tantum quod, cur non, ullo modo, hoc est scilicet, probatum, sic ut, opus fuit, tunc esset, est hoc quod, non est necesse, id cuius, potest autem, dictio de, si quis autem, et etiam quia, habet esse, nullo modo, secundum hoc quod, non est autem, sine dubio, in actu, opus est, id in quo 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) in tantum quod, tunc esset, est hoc quod, id cuius 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid inter se, hoc est scilicet, non est autem

Ġ ā ī This is clearly the most indicative table of the entire paper. The words and phrases in recte never appear in any text by the other five translators. The words in italics appear once in another translator – but only once, not even twice. Hence, the words in italics are not as exclusively Gundisalvian as are the words in recte. But together they pile up much evidence – evidence that Dominicus Gundisalvi in fact was responsible for a very large number of Arabic-Latin translations. In two cases, the evidence is scant, namely for texts 8 and 13: al- Fārābī, Liber exercitationis ad viam felicitatis, and I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia. These two texts share only two phrases with Gundisalvi, even though they are not particularly short. But with respect to theḫ otherā texts,ṣ Ṣ theā evidence for Gundisalvi is strong, even in case of the brief texts 4 (al-Kindī’s On the intellect), 18 (Avicenna, De diluviis) and 19 (al-Ġazālī, prologue to the Maqāṣid). D.N. Hasse 31

It is remarkable that three texts do not contain any stylistic words or phrases typical of Gundisalvi: texts 1, 9 and 14. There is an answer to this. Let us turn to the evidence of stylistic words for other translators: Gerard of Cremona, John of Seville, Hugo of Santalla and Alfred of Shareshill. Here comes a phrase typical of Gerard of Cremona:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– secundum semitam

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 0 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_03Turba:...... 0 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 0 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 0 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 2 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 0 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 0 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 0 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 0 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 0 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 31 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 25 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 1 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 0 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 0 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 0 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 0 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 0 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

D.N. Hasse 32

At the beginning, it proved difficult to find small words and phrases that are typical of Gerard’s translations and used only by him, because Gerard’s style is much smoother and less idiosyncratic than Gundisalvi’s. Gerard shares many stylistic words with one or the other fellow translator. But further searching led to the following phrases:

anonymous translation words and phrases shared with GERARD OF CREMONA (propterea quia, praeter quod, secundum semitam, et neque, et propter illud, per sermonem, demonstratio super, et nos quidem, quoniam quando, nisi quoniam, et illud quidem, et scientia quidem, quod est quia, neque est, secundum duos modos) 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellect 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitatis 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) secundum semitam, per sermonem, demonstratio super, et scientia quidem, neque est, secundum duos modos 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon. 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, De 4 confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , I-II 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III praeter quod 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid

Note Ġthatā īthe negative evidence in this table for Gerard’s translations supports the positive evidence of Gundisalvi’s table, which we have seen before. This strongly supports the finding that text 14 (Ps.-al-Fārābī, ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) – which contained none of the words typical of Gundisalvi – was translated by Gerard. Let us turn to John of Seville:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– quoque ac (translating: wa) (in lists)

''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 0 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 0 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 0 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 1 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 0 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 0 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 2 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 46 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 0 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 0 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 0 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 0 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 0 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

As I said at the beginning, Albumasar’s Great Introduction was added to our group of sources, in spite of its mainly astrological content, because we needed to increase the textual basis for John of Seville in our corpus. quoque ac is not used by any other Arabic-Latin translator of philosophical texts in the twelfth century. At this point, it is worth consulting the Online Arabic and Latin Glossary and searching for quoque ac among the quotations cited in this lexicon. Even here, in this much larger group of translators from the eleventh to the thirteenth century, quoque ac always leads us to translations known to derive from John of Seville – which confirms the evidence of the present method. This is the table with words and phrases used exclusively by John of Seville:

anonymous translation words and phrases shared with JOHN OF SEVILLE (quoque ac, cumque fuerint, cumque volueris, D.N. Hasse 34

dicamusque, et patefecimus) 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellect 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitates 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon. 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, De 4 confectionibus quoque ac, cumque fuerint, cumque volueris 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , I-II 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid

Ġ ā ī Among the few stylistic words and phrases which I could isolate for John of Seville, three appear in text number 14, I w n a - af ʾ, De quatuor confectionibus. This is the final letter of The Epistles of the Brethren of Purity, a magical letter on, among other things, how to catchḫ ā animalsṣ Ṣ āwithout hunting. This is a topic which could have interested Hugo of Santalla, who is known as the translator of about seven texts in astrology, astronomy and the divinatory sciences. Hugo would have been a good candidate for the translation of text 14. But the translator, evidently, was John of Seville, not Hugo of Santalla, as the following table underlines:

anonymous translation words and phrases shared with HUGO OF SANTALLA (potissimum, pariter, aut saltem, deinceps quoque, tandemque, denuo, itidem, ut uidelicet, dum uidelicet, hunc quoque, siue potius, plerumque etiam, rursum in, atque huiusmodi, eo item) 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitatis 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid pariter 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon.

ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ ā D.N. Hasse 35

13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia 14-I w n a - af ʾ, De 4 confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , I-II 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III pariter 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid

Ġ ā ī Hugo of Santalla has long been known as an idiosyncratic stylist. This is confirmed by the analysis of stylistic particles and phrases. There are many of them. In fact, Hugo’s list of favourite particles not shared by his fellow translators could even be longer, if I had continued searching. He has many stylistic preferences, which are not shared by any of the anonymous texts discussed here. As a result, we may safely attribute text 14 to the translator John of Seville. Now comes our last translator, Alfred of Shareshill:

anonymous translation words and phrases shared with ALFRED OF SHARESHILL (ut plurimum, huius signum, fietque, ceterum, simulque, aliquotiens, ut multum, per multa) 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum ceterum 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et intellecto 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad viam felicitatis 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al-masāʾil) 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Euclid aliquotiens 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem logicae demon. 13-I w n a - af ʾ, Cosmographia ut plurimum 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, De 4 confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā definitionibus 16-Avicenna,ḫ ā ṣ Ṣ Isagogeā , I-II 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III 18-Avicenna, De diluviis (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Maqāṣid

Ġ ā ī Alfred of Shareshill is a likely candidate for the translation of texts with meteorological, mineralogical or botanical content. But texts 5 and 18 (al-Kindī, De mutatione temporum and Avicenna, De diluviis), which fall into this category, do not contain any stylistic words typical of Alfred. Again, this table underlines the above finding that Dominicus Gundisalvi translated also these treatises. I am quite clueless as to text 1. Here we may have a translator at work whom we do not know. Or, it may be that the text is simply too short for the kind of D.N. Hasse 36 evidence I have been using. The only stylistic feature shared with other translators, as far as I can see at the moment, is causa huius est:

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– causa huius est

ANON_01ArisMetAlpha:...... 2 ''''_02AlexDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_03Turba:...... 0 ''''_04KindiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_05KindiDeMutatTemp:...... 0 ''''_06KindiDeRadiis:...... 0 ''''_07FarabiDeIntell:...... 0 ''''_08FarabiAdViamFelicitatis:...... 0 ''''_09FarabiFlos:...... 0 ''''_10FarabiEuclid:...... 0 ''''_11PsFarabiDeOrtuScien:...... 0 ''''_12IkhwanInArtemLogicae:...... 0 ''''_13IkhwanCosmo:...... 3 ''''_14IkhwanDeQuattuorConf:...... 0 ''''_15IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 ''''_16AvicIsagogeI-II_QUOTES:...... 0 ''''_17AvicPhys:...... 1 ''''_18AvicDeDiluviis:...... 0 ''''_19GazaliProlMaqasid:...... 0 John_20PsArisSecretum:...... 0 ''''_21QustaDeDifferentia:...... 0 ''''_22AlbumasarIntroductorium:...... 0 Hugo_23PsApollDeSecretis:...... 0 ''''_24LiberAristotilis:...... 0 Gerard_25ArisPostAn:...... 1 ''''''_29ArisMeteoraI-III:...... 0 ''''''_30PsArisDeCausis:...... 0 ''''''_31AlexanderDeMotu:...... 0 ''''''_32ThemistiusPostAn:...... 0 ''''''_33KindiDeQuinqueEssentiis:...... 0 ''''''_34KindiDeSomno:...... 0 ''''''_35KindiDeRatione:...... 0 ''''''_36FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''_38IsaacDeDefin:...... 0 Avendauth_39AvicProlIsagogeI:...... 0 Gundisalvi_40AvicDeAnima:...... 1 ''''''''''_41AvicDeMedCord:...... 0 ''''''''''_42GabirolFonsVitae:...... 0 ''''''''''_43GazaliSumma:...... 1 ''''''''''_44AvicMet:...... 2 ''''''''''_45FarabiDeScientiis:...... 0 ''''''''''_46AvicConvenientiaScien:...... 0 ''''''''''_47PsAvicLiberCeli:...... 0 Alfred_48NicolausDePlantis:...... 0 ''''''_49AvicLapid:...... 0 ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Given that we know by now that Gundisalvi was the translator also of texts 13 and 17, the usage of the phrase causa huius est points to Gundisalvi as translator of text 1 as well. This leaves us with the following overall result: D.N. Hasse 37

anonymous translation Alonso Stylo my analysis of particle usage 01-Aristotle, Metaphysics, perhaps Gundisalvi? Alpha Meizôn 02-Alexander of Aphrodisias, Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Gundisalvi De intellectu 03-Turba philosophorum Gundisalvi 04-al-Kindī, De intellectu Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 05-al-Kindī, De mutatione Gundisalvi temporum 06-al-Kindī, De radiis Gundisalvi 07-al-Fārābī, De intellectu et Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Gundisalvi intellect 08-al-Fārābī, Liber exerc. ad Gundisalvi probably viam felicitatis Gundisalvi 09-Ps.-al-Fārābī, Flos (ʿUyūn al- Gundisalvi Gerard of Gerard of Cremona masāʾil) Cremona 10-al-Fārābī, Explanation ... of Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Euclid 11-Ps.-al-Fārābī, De ortu Gundisalvi scientiarum 12-I w n a - af ʾ, In artem Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Gundisalvi logicae demon. 13-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, probably Gundisalvi Cosmographia 14-Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, De 4 John of Seville confectionibus 15-Isaacḫ ā Israeli,ṣ Ṣ Deā Gundisalvi Gundisalvi definitionibus 16-Avicenna, Isagoge, I-II Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 17-Avicenna, Physics, I-III Gundisalvi Gundisalvi Gundisalvi 18-Avicenna, De diluviis Gundisalvi (Meteora II.6) 19-al- az l , prologue to Gundisalvi Maqāṣid Ġ ā ī

Upon the evidence of particle usage, Dominicus Gundisalvi was the translator of 14 anonymous translations, probably of 16. If we add text 1, Gundisalvi was the translator of 17 texts. One translation – that of Pseudo-al-Fārābī’s ʿUyūn al- masāʾil, comes from Gerard of Cremona. One translation – that of the final letter by the Iḫwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ – comes from John of Seville. Note that the computational evidence provided by the Stylo script supports these attributions – even the attribution of text 9 to Gerard. Manuel Alonso’s analysis of Gundisalvi’s vocabulary underlines many findings. But since Alonso did not compare the vocabulary of Gerard of Cremona (or of any other translator), he could not detect Gerard’s hand in text 9.

D.N. Hasse 38

III – Conclusion

Dominicus Gundisalvi emerges from this study as one of the major Arabic-Latin translators of the Middle Ages – alongside the other great names Gerard of Cremona, John of Seville and Michael Scot. Gundisalvi is the key figure for the transport of al-Fārābī and Avicenna into Latin; and he also contributed much to the Latin version of al-Kindī – one half of Alkindus Latinus comes from him, the other half from Gerard of Cremona. We know that, for some translations, Gundisalvi worked together with Arabic-speaking scholars, such as Avendauth and the Mozarab Johannes Hispanus. This may also have been the case for the many anonymous translations that come from him. But in view of the great experience he must have collected over the years and in view of the fact that his Latin style remains recognizable, I would surmise that he did a good number of these translations by himself. Dominicus Gundisalvi signs several charters (Latin and Mozarabic charters) between 1162 and 1190. He is archdeacon of Cuellar north of Segovia, but was resident in Toledo, where he was a canon of the cathedral – where Gerard of Cremona was canon too, in the very same decades. The attribution of 14 (and possibly 17) anonymous translations to Gundisalvi adds to the importance of Toledo, and in particular: of the cathedral of Toledo, in the translation movement. Gerard of Cremona, of course, the translator of at least 70 texts from Arabic, among them great works of Greek and Arabic astronomy and medicine, remains the towering figure. But his fellow canon Gundisalvi also translated almost 30 texts. In contrast to Gerard, Gundisalvi was a philosophical and theological author of his own. He was translator and first recipient at the same time. And in contrast to Gerard, Gundisalvi, when translating, was not interested in Greek authors transmitted in Arabic, but in Arabic philosophy proper. In this particular respect, he was immensely important for the history of philosophy of the Latin West. Without him, I could not have done much of my research – I could not have written my dissertation, for instance. But, of course, that was not Gundisalvi’s concern.