Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T19:51:04.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2023

Independent Scholar


This article argues that Moses Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed first became known to a Latin Christian audience in Toledo before 1220, and that the section of it translated as the Liber de parabolis et de mandatis in 1223–24 (Guide III.29–49) is the work of Samuel ibn Tibbon and Michael Scot. Moreover, the introduction to exegesis that prefaces the translation reflects the work of ibn Tibbon. The article considers the impact early contact with the Guide had, first in Toledo, and then in Paris and Provence. The Guide presented a God who worked through the principles of Aristotelian physics, and offered an incentive to translate and study those works of Aristotle and his interpreters that illuminated these questions. Texts translated in Toledo under the inspiration of the Guide became core texts for Paris scholastics. William of Auvergne, the first Parisian scholar to use the translation, would play a key role in the trial of the Talmud. And Cardinal Romanus, to whom the Liber de parabolis et de mandatis was dedicated, is implicated in the controversy of the Guide itself among Jews at Montpellier.

Research Article
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fordham University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


This article itself depends on a textual community. First is Jim Robinson, Samuel to my Michael, without whom this project would not exist. The same is true for Dana Fishkin and Rachel Katz, partners in reading Hebrew and Latin, and for my writing group: Daisy Delogu, Cecily Hilsdale, and Jonathan Lyon. Henrike Lähnemann, Judith Olszowy-Schlanger, and Lesley Smith welcomed me to Oxford, where the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies and St. Edmund Hall gave me a home for a year, where I presented early drafts of this at the Oxford Medieval Studies Lecture, a David Patterson Lecture, and at the Medieval Church and Culture Seminar. I am grateful also to the organizers and members of the Oxford Seminar in Advanced Jewish Studies on “Philosophy in Scripture” who allowed me to sit in on their proceedings. I owe a huge debt to Thomas Burman for long conversations and for inviting me to speak at the University of Notre Dame; to Sam Baudinette, who got this started; to Susan Boynton and Dagmar Riedel for their invitation to speak at the Seminar on Religion and Writing at Columbia University; and to Tobias Hoffmann for the chance to present this at the Sorbonne, mere yards from the manuscript itself. Finally, I am grateful to Josef Stern who read this in draft, saving me from many errors and greatly enriching the presentation of Maimonides found here.


1 Munk, Salomon and Issachar, Joel, Dalālat al-ḥāʾrīn (Jerusalem, 1930–31)Google Scholar. Citations are from The Guide of the Perplexed, trans. Shlomo Pines (Chicago, 1963), by part, chapter, and page number. The edition of the full Latin version, Maimonides, Moses, Dux seu Director dubitantium aut perplexorum, ed. Giustiniani, Agostino (Paris, 1520)Google Scholar, has been replaced in part by a new critical edition and study of part I: Maimonides, Moses, Dux Neutrorum vel Dubiorum, Part I, ed. Di Segni, Diana (Leeuven, 2019)Google Scholar.

2 Stroumsa, Sarah, Maimonides and His World (Princeton, 2009), xii–xivCrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Stroumsa, Sarah, Andalus and Sefarad: On Philosophy and Its History in Islamic Spain (Princeton, 2019), 1118Google Scholar. On “pluralistic circumstances,” see Burman, Thomas E., Religious Polemic and the Intellectual History of the Mozarabs (Leiden, 1994), 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On another Christian stream in this whirlpool, see Burman, Thomas E., “Via Impugnandi in the Age of Alfonso VIII: Iberian-Christian Kalām and a Latin Triad Revisited,” in King Alfonso VIII of Castile: Government, Family, and War, ed. Gómez, Miguel, Kyle C. Lincoln, and Damian J. Smith (New York, 2019), 221–34Google Scholar; and on one “tail” of this process, see Fierro, Maribel, “Alfonso X ‘The Wise’: The Last Almohad Caliph?Medieval Encounters 15 (2009): 175–98Google Scholar.

3 Burman, Thomas E., “The Four Seas of Medieval Mediterranean Intellectual History,” in Interfaith Relationships of the Other in the Medieval Mediterranean, ed. Secord, Sarah Davis, Vicens, Belen, and Vose, Robin (Cham, 2021), 1547Google Scholar, at 18–33.

4 Stock, Brian, The Implications of Literacy (Princeton, 1987), 9092Google Scholar and 522–23.

5 Unlike the imagined textual community envisaged by translators of texts into Old English in Mary Kate Hurley, Translation Effects: Language, Time, and Community in Medieval England (Columbus, 2021), 9.

6 Marie Thérèse d'Alverny, “Les traductions à deux interprètes, d'arabe en langue vernaculaire et de langue vernaculaire en latin,” in Traductions et traducteurs au Moyen Âge, ed. Geneviève Contamine (Paris, 1989), 193–201.

7 James T. Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes: The Book of the Soul of Man (Tübingen, 2007), 8.

8 On ibn Tibbon, see James T. Robinson, “Samuel ibn Tibbon,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available online at (accessed 23 June 2023); Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes, 2–23; and James T. Robinson, “The Ibn Tibbon Family: A Dynasty of Translators in Medieval Provence,” in Be'erot Yitzhak: Studies in Memory of Isadore Twersky, ed. J. Harris (Cambridge, MA, 2005), 199–216.

9 The Liber introductorius is comprised of three sections: the Liber quatuor distinctionum, the Liber particularis, and the Liber physiognomie. See Glenn M. Edwards, “The Liber introductorius of Michael Scot,” (Ph.D. diss., University of Southern California, 1978); Glenn M. Edwards, “The Two Redactions of Michael Scot's Liber introductorius,” Traditio 41 (1985): 329–41; Silke Ackermann, Sternstunden am Kaiserhof: Michael Scotus und sein Buch von den Bildern und Zeichen des Himmelsn (Frankfurt am Main, 2009); Oleg Voskoboynikov, “Le Liber particularis de Michael Scot,” Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge 81 (2014): 249–384; and Eleonora Andriani, “The Elucidarium of Honorius Augustodunensis in the Prohemium of the Liber introductorius of Michael Scot,” Bulletin de philosophie médiévale 59 (2017): 58–77.

10 The best account of what we know, and do not know, about Michael Scot's life and works is Ackermann, Sternstunden am Kaiserhof, 13–57. See also Lucy K. Pick, “Michael Scot in Toledo: Natura Naturans and the Hierarchy of Being,” Traditio 53 (1998): 93–116; Charles Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture from Toledo to Bologna Via the Court of Frederick II Hohenstaufen,” Micrologus 2 (1994): 101–26; Edwards, “Two Redactions”; Lynn Thorndike, Michael Scot (Edinburgh, 1965); and Charles Homer Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science (Cambridge, MA, 1924), 272–77.

11 Óscar de la Cruz Palma and I are currently preparing an edition and translation into English of the full text.

12 Josef Stern, Problems and Parables of Law: Maimonides and Nahmanides on Reasons for the Commandments (Albany, 1998), 2, 15, and 24.

13 Rodrigo Jíménez de Rada, Dialogus libri uite, ed. Juan Antonio Estévez Sola, CCCM 72C (Turnhout, 1999), hereafter Dialogus; and Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada, Breuiarium historie catholice, ed. Juan Fernández Valverde, CCCM 72A (Turnhout, 1992), hereafter Breuiarium.

14 Hereafter Sorbonne 601 followed by folio and section number from our edition in progress.

15 Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France: Université de Paris et universités de départements (Paris, 1918), 150. In addition to the LiberPM and the Averroes translation, the manuscript also contains a fragment of a commentary on Peter Lombard's Sentences and the Latin translation of Maimonides's entire Guide, known as the Dux neutrorum, a fact which has led some to suppose Michael Scot was the translator of this version. The manuscript is not mentioned in A. Lebrun, “Catalogue des manuscrits, tant anciens que modernes, de la bibliothèque de l'Université royale (vers 1826)” = Paris, Bibliothèque interuniversitaire de la Sorbonne, MS 407.

16 Diana Di Segni, “Early Quotations from Maimonides's Guide of the Perplexed in the Latin Middle Ages,” in Interpreting Maimonides, ed. Charles H. Manekin and Daniel Davies (Cambridge, 2018), 190–207, at 193–98 provides a survey and bibliography of Latin scholastic use of and interest in Maimonides on topics including the eternity of the world, the doctrine of negative theology, his prophetology, divine providence, and his treatment of cosmological questions. On the reception of Maimonides's Guide in the Latin west, see Wolfgang Kluxen, “Literargeschichtliches zum lateinischen Moses Maimonides,” Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale 21 (1954): 23–50; Görge K. Hasselhoff, “The Reception of Maimonides in the Latin World: The Evidence of the Latin Translations in the 13th–15th Centuries,” Materia Giudaica 6 (2001): 258–80; and Görge K. Hasselhoff, Dicit Rabbi Moses: Studien zum Bild von Moses Maimonides im lateinischen Westen vom 13. bis zum 15. Jahrhundert (Würtzburg, 2004).

17 Raymond P. Scheindlin, “Al-Harizi's Translation of the Guide of the Perplexed in Its Cultural Moment,” in Maimonides’ “Guide of the Perplexed” in Translation: A History from the Thirteenth Century to the Twentieth, ed. Joseph Stern, James T. Robinson, and Yonatan Shemesh (Chicago, 2020), 55–80, at 60. For bibliography on Thomas Aquinas, see Richard C. Taylor, “Maimonides and Aquinas on Divine Attributes,” in Maimonides’ “Guide of the Perplexed” in Translation, 333, nn. 1 and 2. On Albert the Great, see Caterina Rigo, “Zur Rezeption des Moses Maimonides im Werk des Albertus Magnus,” in Albertus Magnus: Zum Gedenken nach 800 Jahren: Neue Zugänge, Aspekte, und Perspektiven, ed. Walter Senner (Berlin, 2001), 29–66. On Meister Eckhardt, see Yossef Schwartz, “Meister Eckhart and Moses Maimonides: From Judeo-Arabic Rationalism to Christian Mysticism,” in A Companion to Meister Eckhart, ed. Jeremiah Hackett (Leiden, 2012), 389–414.

18 Caterina Rigo, “Dux neutrorum and the Jewish Tradition of the Guide of the Perplexed,” in Maimonides’ “Guide of the Perplexed” in Translation, 81–140, at 82–85, reviews the literature. See also Yossef Schwartz, “Persecution and the Art of Translation: Some New Evidence Concerning the Latin Translation of Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed,” Yod 22 (2019): 60–69; and Peter Ivanecký, “Arqueología de un texto: La transmisión del Dux neutrorum del Maimónides latino,” Scripta Medievalia 12 (2019): 13–30, at 27–29.

19 Kluxen, “Literargeschichtliches zum lateinischen Moses Maimonides,” 42–43.

20 Hasselhoff, “The Reception of Maimonides in the Latin World,” 261; and Görge K. Hasselhoff, “Maimonides in the Latin Middle Ages: An Introductory Survey,” Jewish Studies Quarterly 9 (2002): 1–20, at 7–8. Recent discussions include Maimonides, Dux seu Director (n. 1 above), 15*-16*; and Schwartz, “Persecution and the Art of Translation,” 52–53.

21 For example, in his De scientiis, which cuts, modifies, and reshapes al-Farabi's Kitāb ihsā al-̔ulūm. See Nicola Polloni, “Gundissalinus and Avicenna: Some Remarks on an Intricate Philosophical Connection,” Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 28 (2017): 515–552, at 518–19. Michael Scot knew Gundissalinus's version and used it as the base text for his own division of the sciences: Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture” (n. 10 above), 105. See also Gundissalinus's De anima, which uses Avicenna's De anima and Ibn Gabirol's Fons uite, both translated by him and Abraham ibn Daud, without mentioning either by name; and Beryl Smalley, “William of Auvergne, John of La Rochelle, and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Old Law,” in Studies in Medieval Thought and Learning: From Abelard to Wyclif (London, 1981), 121–82, at 140.

22 On Cardinal Romanus as the recipient of the LiberPM, see Kluxen, “Literargeschichtliches zum lateinischen Moses Maimonides,” 44. Philip Mouskes (d. 1282) identifies him as Frangipani, not Bonaventura, in his Chronique rimée, but perhaps this was to make the rhyme in the poem work. See Richard Kay, Council of Bourges, 1225: A Documentary History (Aldershot, 2002), 39–42.

23 Sorbonne 601, fol. 1ra, §1.

24 See nn. 26, 27, and 28 for examples of both kinds of additions.

25 “Et ego nescio rationem ligni cedri et ysopi et organi et cocci in vacca rubea. Et dixit Auentapun quod in ebreo verbum pro quo nos ponimus ‘ysopum’ significat ‘organum’ et hoc per expositionem illius nominis, et sit pugillus cum quo spergebant sanguinem paschalem. Non possum inuenire rationem quare eligit magis istas species.” Guide III.47, 597; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 15ra, §248. The phrase “per expositionem illius nominis” refers to the fact that the Hebrew word for hyssop can also be read to mean “I will drip.”

26 “Et ille qui non sufficiebat ad emptionem volucrum sacrificabat panem preparatum in modi preparationum illius temporis, sicut panes quos decoquebant <in clibano> et in patellis et in tiganis, ut Leuitici IIo capitulo circa principium [compare Lev. 2:4–7, where “in clibano” is supplied]. Et per totum tangitur fere idem quod clibanus secundum Avemcapun.” Guide III.46, 582; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 12va–vb, §214.

27 Four more citations of ibn Tibbon follow. Discussing Lev. 20:22–23, the text reads: “Custodite leges meas. Et in ebreo est ‘Custodite consuetudines.’ Et dixit post: Nolite ambulare in legittimis nationum et dixit Uanptepun quod in ebreo est, Nolite ambulare in consuetudinibus nationum.” Guide III.37, 549; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 7va, §112. After stating that the priests were not allowed to sit down in the Temple, it adds: “Et vocant ebrei proprie istam domum ‘palacium,’ et dixit hoc Auentapun.” Guide III.45, 579; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 12rb, §195. For the explanation that “sacrifice” refers to animals and “oblation” refers to all other offerings: “Dixit Auentapun quod ‘oblatio’ pertinet ad sacrificia que non sunt bestie, et ‘sacrificia’ ad animalia tantum.” Guide III.46, 583; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 12vb, §221. Contrasting the Hebrew and the Latin of Lev. 7:19: “Et nota secundum Auentapun de versu precedenti quod, licet dicatur in versu precedenti latino: Qui fuerit mundus, uescetur ex ea, et in ebreo est: ‘Qui fuerit mundus vescetur ex carne,’ id est ex carne munda sacrificii.” Guide III.46, 583; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 12vb, §223.

28 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 24–25.

29 For Maimonides, following al-Fārābī, languages are conventional in the sense that God does not literally speak the world into existence and our spoken language emerges from humans, acting rationally and in community, translating thoughts into agreed-upon words in speech. See Guide II.30, 357–58; and Josef Stern, “Maimonides on Language and the Science of Language,” in Maimonides and the Sciences, ed. Robert S. Cohen and Hillel Levine (New York, 2000), 176–94. Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada agrees with Maimonides that there is no divine speech, as such, and that spoken words emerge from human convention: Dialogus, I.x, lines 89–97 (n. 13 above), 198. Compare Stock, Implications of Literacy (n. 4 above), 372–76.

30 “Parabola est sermo unum explicans ex uirtute significationis uerborum in parabola, quam significationem contraxerunt uerba ex impositione uoluntaria humana. Et etiam est parabola sermo innuens aliud ab eo quam significatur per uerba. Et ista innuncio alterius rei aliquando fit per defectum uerborum in prosecutione parabole, et aliquando per uerba posita in parabola.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1rb, §6.

31 “Tacuit ergo de multitudine uallancium et expressit de paucitate unius existencium. Et dico ego quod in eo quod tacuit, partem sermonis, uidelicet multitudinem uallancium, apparuit mihi foramen ut uiderem intellectum spiritualem quem innuit parabola, sicut in defectu parietis fit mina uel foramen per que uidetur aliqua res que prius latuit.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1rb, §9.

32 Guide, I.Introduction, 11–12: “Et qui uidet tunc totum illud simul, pomum auream intus cum exterioribus quasi applumbaturis, non iudicabit a remotis nisi quod totum sit argentum. Et cum accedit prope per foramina sculpturarum siue per circulos perforatos, statim videt aurum quod latet intus. Et quod prius iudicauit argentum in cortice exteriora, dicit postea latere sub eo aurum rotundum.” and Sorbonne 601, fols. 1vb–2ra, §19.

33 Guide, I.Introduction, 12.

34 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 48, 165–66, and 599–603.

35 “Aurifices componunt poma aurea et in circuitu, more applumbature, amplicant rotas argenteas concatenatas adinuicem.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1vb, §19.

36 Sorbonne 601, fol. 1vb, §19; and Guide I.Introduction, 11–12.

37 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 165–66.

38 “Et quia in nobis sunt due uirtutes quarum utraque multipartita est, ut dicetur alias, et vna est terrenalis, secundum quam communicamus cum arboribus et plantis . . . Et alia est bestialis in qua assimilamur animalibus et bestis . . . Hec enim consistit in V sensibus, ymaginacione, et memoria.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1rb, §8.

39 Compare Guide III.22, 490, where the “king” is the evil inclination and the “boy” is the good inclination.

40 “Segor autem que est ciuitas paruula [MS non] est ciuitas intelligencie quam intrat uir contemplationis cum fugit a carne. Cum enim quis sustinet persecucionem principum qui sunt in ciuitate carnis, fugere debet ad ciuitatem intelligencie sue alcioris.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 2rb, §28. The “non” in the manuscript is clearly an error, given the sentence that follows.

41 “Vxor Loth est sensualitas, et due filie sunt uirtus concupiscibilis et irascibilis. Manus Loth apprehenditur, ut extrahatur a carne, a duobus angelis, et manus uxoris et filiarum apprehenduntur ne retineant Loth in excecacione.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 2rb, §27.

42 “Sed nisi Sol, id est illuminacio diuina, oriatur super terram istius, id est super istum qui terrenum habet fundamentum, et habitator est domus lutee, nequamquam ingrediens in Segor.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 2rb, §28. Compare Gen. 19:23.

43 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 137–38, 416–17, 450–52, 508–11, 556–58, 564, 573, and 577.

44 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 44 and 509–10.

45 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 137 and 557–58; and Guide III.22. 490. Compare n. 43, above.

46 For a different take on the connection between the interpretation of parables and commandments, see Stern, Problems and Parables of Law (n. 12 above), 71–76.

47 Sorbonne 601, fols. 3vb–4ra, §55–57.

48 Guide III.27, 510–12; Miriam Galston, “The Purpose of the Law According to Maimonides,” Jewish Quarterly Review 69 (1978): 27–51, at 35–39; and Josef Stern, The Matter and Form of Maimonides’ Guide (Cambridge, MA, 2013), 34–36. See also Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 88–90, 229–30, and 480.

49 “Et duo complementa habemus secundum legem domini ad mandata quod innuitur VI Deuteronomio circa finem in illo versu [Deut. 6:24], Precepit nobis dominus ut faciamus omnia legitima hec, et timeamus dominum deum nostrum. Et in ebraico sermone est postea: ‘Et bene sit nobis cunctis diebus,’ et hec retorquetur ad complementum anime. Et in ebraico sermone, et alia translacione, hec subiungitur predictis ‘uite nostre,’ sed subiungitur sic predictis, [see Deut. 6:25] ‘Et ad iustificandum nos sicut hodie,’ et hec torquetur ad corpus, quia in cunctis diebus ostendit statum perpetuum. Et cum dixit ‘sicut hodie,’ hec retorquetur ad complementum corporale et transitorium, cum non potest perfici nisi cum ordine uirtusque ciuitatis maioris et minoris, de quibus dictum est.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 4ra, §57.

50 Guide II.6, 262–65 (quotations at 264). Maimonides describes prophecy as an overflow from God towards the rational faculty and thence to a perfected imaginative faculty. He cautions that this is not something that every man, even one who attains perfection in the speculative sciences, can obtain: Guide II.36, 369.

51 Peter Heath, Allegory and Philosophy in Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) (Philadelphia, 1992), 61–64. William of Auvergne will come to read it in this way in his own commentary on Ecclesiastes: “Moraliter uero X principes ciuitatis que est unusquisque nostrum X uires quibus omnia nostra adiministrantur accipiendas hic esse quidam philosophantur videlicet V sensus exteriores et V uires interiores scilicet sensum communem imaginationem rationem intellectum memoriam.” Paris, Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal MS 84, fol. 88r.

52 Beryl Smalley, “Gregory IX and the Two Faces of the Soul,” in Studies in Medieval Thought and Learning: From Abelard to Wyclif (London, 1981), 117–20.

53 Lucien Auvray, Les registres de Grégoire IX (Paris, 1896), 1:79 (no. 142); and Jean Louis Alphonse Huillard-Bréholles, Historia diplomatica Frederici II (Paris, 1852), 3:7–9. Note that here imagination is “discreta” not “defecata,” as in the LiberPM, but in abbreviated gothic script, the two words could be easily confused.

54 Nicola Polloni, Domingo Gundisalvo (Madrid, 2013), 29–30.

55 Roland de Vaux, “Guillaume d'Auvergne, témoin d'un avicennisme latin,” in Roland de Vaux, Notes et textes sur l'avicennisme latin (Paris, 1934), 17–43, at 39; and Francesco Santi, “Guglielmo d'Auvergne e l'ordine dei Domenicani tra folosofia naturale e tradizione magica,” in Autour de Guillaume d'Auvergne, ed. Franco Morenzoni and Jean-Yves Tilliette (Turnhout, 2005), 136–54, at 143.

56 Dag Nikolaus Hasse, Avicenna's De anima in the Latin West (London, 2000), 24–30.

57 “Item dicitur intellectus actiuus et intellectus speculatiuus siue contemplatiuus. Actiuus est quo mouemur et ordinamur ad ea que intra nos. Speculatiuus uero quo ordinamur ad superiora per fidem et per spem premiorum. Omnes autem uirtutes superius diuise — siue percipiant interius siue exterius, siue sensibilia siue insensibilia — ordinate sunt ad intellectum et ei seruiunt.” Madrid, El Escorial MS f.III.8, fol. 37vb; Piero Morpurgo, “Fonti di Michele Scoto,” Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei: Rendiconti della classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, series 8 38 (1983): 59–71, at 68–69 and n. 42.

58 On April 28, 1227, Gregory IX wrote to Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, seeking a benefice for Michael. See Auvray, Les registres de Grégoire IX, 1:32 (no. 61); cited in Ackermann, Sternstunden am Kaiserhof (n. 9 above), 28–29 with the full text in n. 56.

59 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 132–34 and 364–66.

60 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 509–10; and Averroes, Compendia librorum Aristotelis qui Parva naturalia vocantur, ed. Emily Shields and Harry Blumberg (Cambridge, MA, 1949), 22.

61 Dag Nikolaus Hasse, Latin Averroes Translations of the First Half of the Thirteenth Century (Hildesheim, 2010), 19; and Averroes, Parva naturalia, ed. Shields and Blumberg, xiii.

62 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 16.

63 ”והשרף <ההוא> ידוע לחכמים, <והוא המלאך הנקרא <אישים>, והוא <האחרון במעלת> הדעות הנפרדות. ומלת הרצפה, נ[ראה] ל[י] שהיא על דרך מלת הובלים בהפוך האותיות מקום צרפה והכוונה מצרף הדעות ומזקקם כי המלאך ההוא משלים שכל האדם ומוציאו מן הכח אל הפועל וזהו צרופו.“ Rebecca Kneller-Rowe, “Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Ma'amar Yikkawu ha-Mayim: A Philosophical and Exegetical Treatise” (Ph.D. diss., Tel Aviv University, 2011), 455, par. 229. Compare James T. Robinson, “On or Above the Ladder? Maimonidean and Anti-Maimonidean Readings of Jacob's Ladder,” in Interpreting Maimonides, ed. Charles H. Manekin and Daniel Davies (Cambridge, 2018), 85–98, at 92.

64 On ibn Tibbon's knowledge of Avicenna, see Gad Freudenthal and Mauro Zonta, “Avicenna Among Medieval Jews: The Reception of Avicenna's Philosophical, Scientific, and Medical Writings in Jewish Cultures, East and West,” Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 22 (2012): 217–87, at 254–57.

65 Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science (n. 10 above), 282, thinks that the ascription is possible. Kluxen, “Literargeschichtliches zum lateinischen Moses Maimonides” (n. 16 above), 46, n. 69; Hasselhoff, “The Reception of Maimonides” (n. 16 above) 261; and Hasselhoff, “Maimonides in the Latin Middle Ages” (n. 16 above), 6, n. 29 are skeptical.

66 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 106–10.

67 The text concludes, “Perfectus est liber Auen Alpetraus, laudetur Ihesus Christus qui uiuit in eternum per tempora, translatus a magistro Michaele Scoto Tholeti in 18o die ueneris augusti hora tertia cum Abuteo leuita, anno incarnationis Ihesu Christi 1217.” ed. Francis Carmody, in Nur ad-Din al-Biṭrūjī, De motibus celorum (Berkeley, 1952), 150. “Abuteo leuita” may represent a garbling of “ibn Tibbon,” and he may have assisted Michael Scot with this translation also.

68 A. I. Sabra, “The Andalusian Revolt Against Ptolomeic Astronomy: Averroes and al-Biṭrūjī,” in Transformation and Tradition in the Sciences: Essays in Honor of I. Bernard Cohen, ed. Everett Mendelsohn (Cambridge, 1984), 133–53, at 133–37.

69 Ibn Tibbon cites it in his Perush ha-Millot ha-Zarot (Glossary of Technical Terms for the Guide of the Perplexed) completed before 1213, in his Commentary on Ecclesiastes, and in his Maʾamar Yikkawu ha-Mayim. See James T. Robinson, “The First References in Hebrew to al-Biṭrūjī's On the Principles of Astronomy,” Aleph 3 (2003): 145–63, at 145–46 and 148.

70 For example, that the movement of the lower spheres is in the same direction as the highest sphere, which is its cause, but at a slower velocity: “Et motus celi est causa motus omnium mocium infra se quoniam ipse solus est motus continuus, sempiternus, et equalis . . . Planete vero 7 moventur motu circullari, et decurrunt per spatia suarum provintiarum que dicuntur orbes sperales. Forma quorum nobis insinuatur per circulos cepe solidi enim vadunt tardius firmamento, et voluuntur in circuitu terre versus celum, id est in altum, et vadunt per transversum orbium suorum circa firmamentum, et incipientes viam suam sigillatim ab oriente elevatione de subterra, super terram, et tendentes per meridiem, finiunt illam visibiliter in occidentem.” Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fol. 21v. Compare Bernard R. Goldstein, ed. and trans., Al-Biṭrūjī: On the Principles of Astronomy (New Haven, 1971), 75; and Robinson, “References to al-Biṭrūjī,” 158 and 160. See also Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 104–105 and 249–50.

71 “Dixit raby moyses magnus phylosophus in quodam libro quod quilibet planetarum 7 habet in spissitudinem viam quingentorum annorum id est tantum spatium quantum posset aliquis homo ire per viam planam et mundam atque congruam ad euntem in quingentis annis non cessando ire omni die debito modo nature quod sumitur numero 40 milliariorum.” Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fol. 54rb; identified first in Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture” (n. 10 above), 118. Compare Guide III.14, 458, alluded to also at II.30, 357; and Pesaḥim 94b. The same comment can be found as a marginal gloss in Edinburgh, University Library, MS 132, fol. 31v. I am grateful to Eleonora Andriani for sharing this information, and the manuscript folio, with me.

72 Guide III.37, 346; and Edwards, “The Liber introductorius of Michael Scot” (n. 9 above), 126.

73 “Planete vero 7 moventur motu circullari, et decurrunt per spatia suarum provintiarum que dicuntur orbes sperales. Forma quorum nobis insinuatur per circulos cepe” Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fol. 21vb; and “Benedictus Deus . . . posuit super 4 elementa quintam essentiam qua indistinxit 7 provincias circa mensura latas in grossum longas et rotundas sua distinctione ad instar circullorum cepe,” fol. 22ra. See Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Sefer haMadda, Yesodei haTorah, III.2. Sela describes this image as a commonplace of Arabic cosmology, but the two sources that he suggests for Maimonides — al-Bīrūnī and the Brethren of Purity — were not available to Michael. See Shlomo Sela, “Maimonides and Māshāʾallāh on the Ninth Orb and Astrology,” Aleph 12 (2012): 101–34, at 105–107 and n. 11.

74 As noted by Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science (n. 10 above), 282. Compare Ackermann, Sternstunden am Kaiserhof (n. 9 above), 13–50.

75 Juan Francisco Rivera Recio, “Personajes hispanos asistentes en 1215 al IV Concilio de Letrán,” Hispania Sacra 4 (1951): 335–58, at 337 and 354–55; Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture” (n. 10 above), 102 and n. 2; and Pick, “Michael Scot in Toledo” (n. 10 above), 96.

76 Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture” (n. 10 above), 104–105; and Pick, “Michael Scot in Toledo” (n. 10 above), 95–96.

77 Regesta Honorii Papae III, ed. Pietro Pressutti (Rome, 1895), 2:194 (no. 4682); 2:227 (no. 4871); 2:254 (no. 5025); 2:258 (no. 5052); and 2:334 (no. 5470); and Auvray, Les registres de Grégoire IX (n. 53 above), 1:32 (no. 61); cited with text in the notes in Ackermann, Sternstunden am Kaiserhof (n. 9 above), 26–29.

78 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 5; and Resianne Fontaine, Otot ha-Shamayim: Samuel ibn Tibbon's Hebrew Version of Aristotle's Meteorology (Leiden, 1995), 4–5.

79 Hasse, Latin Averroes Translations (n. 61 above), 5; Francis J. Carmody, “The Latin Style of Michael Scot in De celo,” in Humaniora: Essays in Literature—Folklore—Bibliography, Honoring Archer Taylor on His Seventieth Birthday, ed. W. D. Hand, G. O. Arlt, and J. J. Augustin (New York, 1960), 208–18, at 216. In the same vein, see Aafke M. I. van Oppenraay, “Michael Scot's Arabic-Latin Translation of Aristotle's Book on Animals: Some Remarks Concerning the Relation Between the Translation and its Arabic and Greek Sources” in Aristotle's Animals in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, ed. Carlos Steel, Guy Guldentops, and Pieter Beullens (Leuven, 1999), 31–43, at 32–34 notes how his translations of Aristotle's and Avicenna's On Animals use different Latin vocabulary to translate the same Arabic terms.

80 Hasse, Latin Averroes Translations (n. 61 above), 22–26.

81 These are Averroes's own De substantia orbis and several commentaries on Aristotle: the Long Commentaries on Physics, De anima, and Metaphysics; the Middle Commentary on De generatione; and possibly De animalibus, as well as the Epitome of Parva Naturalia, in addition to the commentary on De caelo, long securely attributed to Michael on the basis of its colophon. See Hasse, Latin Averroes Translations (n. 61 above), 19–20.

82 Among the phrases that Hasse identifies as characteristic of Michael, I find sed tamen, facere rememorationem, quapropter, and et forte occurring in the LiberPM. Others (cum ita sit, si ita esset, declaratum est, and ex hac sermone) are absent.

83 For example, “Ut dicitur secundo Leuitici circa finem in illa uersu.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1ra, §1.

84 Laura Light, “The Thirteenth Century and the Paris Bible,” in The New Cambridge History of the Bible, Volume 2: From 600 to 1450, ed. Robert Marsden and E. Anne Matter (Cambridge, 2012), 380–91, at 386 indicates that the use of these chapter divisions was common by ca. 1225 and had replaced other systems by ca. 1230.

85 Otto Schmid, Über verschiedene Eintheilungen der Heiligen Schrift insbesondere über die Capitel-Eintheilung Stephan Langton im XIII Jahrhunderte (Graz, 1892), 56–59 and 92–103; Paul Saenger and Laura Bruck, “The Anglo-Hebraic Origins of the Modern Chapter Divisions of the Latin Bible,” in La fractura historiográca: Las investigaciones de edad media y renacimiento desde et tercer milenio, ed. Javier Burguillo, Laura Mier Pérez, and Javier San José (Salamanca, 2008), 177–202; and Paul Saenger, “The Twelfth-Century Reception of Oriental Languages and the Graphic mise en page of Latin Vulgate Bibles Copied in England,” in Form and Function in the Later Medieval Bible, ed. Eyal Poleg and Laura Light (Leiden, 2013), 31–58.

86 The Dominicans began dividing chapters of the Bible into partitions labelled a-g for long chapters and a-d for short ones in the thirteenth century. See Frans van Liere, “The Latin Bible, c. 900 to the Council of Trent, 1546,” in The New Cambridge History of the Bible, 93–109, at 104.

87 “Unde dicit Salomon in libro qui dicitur Ecclesiasticus, tertio capitulo circa principium: ‘Numerum dierum et tempore dedit illi.” Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fol. 5ra; and Edwards, “The Liber introductorius of Michael Scot” (n. 9 above), 58. The actual source of the verse cited is Ecclesiasticus 17:3, not Ecclesiastes 3. It is unlikely that Michael would have ascribed authorship of the former book to Solomon. Thus, I suspect that this is an error for Eccles. 3:3, which also discusses time, likely the product of an intermediate scribe facing a missing lemma. The passage containing this verse is absent from the two manuscripts that transmit the shorter version of the Liber introductorius: Paris, BnF, nouv. acq. lat. 1401; and Madrid, El Escorial, MS f.III.8. In his Liber particularis, Michael refers to a verse in Ecclesiastes again by position, though without a chapter reference: “Verum est quod sapiens Salomon in libro qui dicitur Ecclesiastes circa principium dicit, “Oritur sol et occidit (Eccles. 1:18).” See Voskoboynikov, “Le Liber particularis” (n. 9 above), 310.

88 Jacob names Michael, “החכם הגדול מיכאל שמו הוא אשר התחברתי” (“the great sage, Michael by name, to whom I was connected”)” in the introduction to his Malmad ha-Talmidim, quoted in Gadi Charles Weber, “Studies on R. Yaaqov Anatoli's Malmad Ha-Talmidim” (Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2019), 119, n. 165. On Anatoli's biography, see Robinson, “The Ibn Tibbon Family” (n. 8 above), 216–20.

89 Shlomo Sela, “Al-Farghānī on the 48 Ptolemaic Constellations: A Newly-Discovered Text in Hebrew,” Aleph 16 (2016): 249–365, at 271–72; and Burnett, “Michael Scot and the Transmission of Scientific Culture” (n. 10 above), 108.

90 Sela, “Al-Farghānī on the 48 Ptolemaic Constellations,” 260–62 and n. 45.

91 Colette Sirat, “Les traducteurs juifs à la cour des rois de Sicile et de Naples,” in Traduction et traducteurs au Moyen Âge (n. 6 above), 169–91, esp. 169–75, where Sirat describes the relationship between Anatoli and Michael; and 181–89, where she translates or paraphrases most of the references to Michael in the Malmad ha Talmidim. See also Martin L. Gordon, “The Rationalism of Jacob Anatoli” (Ph.D. diss. Yeshiva University, 1974), 234–43.

92 “והוא מן הזרים בעיני קצת חכמינו כי לא שמו על לב כונת המצות.” Jacob Anatoli, Sefer Malmad ha-Talmidim (Poland, 1866), 177r.

93 ”גם הרחיקו למצא להם כונה עד שהיינו ללעג בין העמים והם משחקים עלינו על התרועה ועל מצות רבות באשר לא נדע להשיב להם ולהודיע בהם טעם וידמו בלבם שעמנו עם סכל ותורתינו לפי המקובל אצלנו סכלות הפך המבוקש בתורתינו ובמחזיקים בה אמר ׳כי היא חכמתכם ובינתכם לעיני העמים׳ ואמר ׳רק עם חכם ובנון הגוי הגדול הזה׳.“ Anatoli, Malmad ha-Talmidim, 177r.

94 ”אלה הפסוקים הורו כי ראויה החקיקה והשאלה על סבת המצות שהיא הטעם ואם נזכר הטעם בתורה נסמך בו ואם לא נחקור עליו … כי קיום המצוה מאין קיום הטעם והכונה הוא מגונם מאד.“. Anatoli, Malmad ha-Talmidim, 177v.

95 ”זהו דעת רז״ל בחקרם טעמי המצות וזה כולו בכלל המצוה אבל בפרטי המצוה אין ראוי לבקש טעם כמו הרב המורה בחלק השלישי.“ Anatoli, Malmad ha-Talmidim, 177v. Cf. Guide III.26.509 and 49.612.

96 ”והחכם שהתחברתי עמו אמר כי זה הענין כולו המשילו החכם על שני מיני המשל שהזכיר הרב המורה ועל המין האחד שבה להמשיל בכללו ענין אחד אמר ׳לא נאוה לנבל שפת יתר׳.“ Anatoli, Malmad ha-Talmidim, 177v.

97 Guide I.Introduction, 12–14.

98 “Et scire debes quia aliter processerunt dicta Salomonis in forma parabole cum loquutus est de melle et aliis rebus, ut post explicabo in capitulo de parabola, et aliter processerunt dicta et sermones in mandatis dei, sicut dicam in capitulis mandatorum.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 1ra, §2. Compare Guide III.46, 582.

99 Sorbonne 601, fol. 1ra–rb, §2–5.

100 As we shall see below, the Latin scholars of Toledo certainly knew parts of the Guide not included in the LiberPM, like II.30. The editor of the Errores philosophorum attributed to Gilles of Rome speaks of “another translation” of Guide II.29. See Gilles of Rome, Errores philosophorum, ed. Josef Koch and trans. John O. Riedl (Milwaukee, 1944), 60–63. Moreover, the Errores philosophorum cites the Guide using the chapter numbering found in ibn Tibbon's Hebrew translation and in the LiberPM, and not that of al-Ḥarizi and the Dux neutrorum. See Isaac Husik, “An Anonymous Mediaeval Christian Critic of Maimonides,” Jewish Quarterly Review 2 (1911): 159–90, at 171–72 and 183. Di Segni demonstrates that the translator of the Dux neutrorum had access to another version of the Guide in addition to al-Ḥarizi, which she supposes is either the Judeo-Arabic original or ibn Tibbon's Hebrew. The Arabic term micha or, better, nucha for the spinal cord (see below) that she finds in the Dux neutrorum is also used in the LiberPM to translate the same passage: Maimonides, Dux seu Director (n. 1 above), 183*–185*; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 5rb, §73.

101 Guide III.26-27, 506–12; and Sorbonne 601, fol. 1ra, §2.

102 Guide III.29, 517 and 521. Compare “Et opera est magna tua ad intelligendum rationes mandatorum in lege, quia tota lex et centrum eius super hoc rotatur. Lex dei est ad destruendum et expellendum et efugandum et abstergendum a cordibus hominum ab huius intencione in esse. Ad hoc facit illud quod dicitur XI Deuteronomio circa medium in illo versu [Deut. 11:16], Cauete ne forte decipiatur cor uestrum. Et propter destructionem essendi ipsa dicit altaria statuas esse destruenda, ut VIIo Deuteronomio circa principio in illo versu [Deut. 7:2], Non inibis cum eis fedus. Et subiungitur prope [Deut. 7:5]: Quin pocius hoc facietis eis aras eorum subvertice, confringite statuas lucosque succidite et sculptilia comburite.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 5a, §70.

103 Guide III.29, 514–17. On Maimonides's Sabians as a phenomenological category rather than a distinct historical group, see Stroumsa, Maimonides (n. 2 above), 84–124.

104 Guide III.29, 518–22.

105 Sirat, “Les traducteurs juifs” (n. 91 above), 188.

106 “Quia multorum uarietas ex incolatu miserie circa intellectum theoricum uariauit a ueritate patrum, doctrinis uariis turbata sinderesi peregrinans in errorum incidit laberintum, adeo quod postposito creatore et ydola fabricaret et eis diuersa numina adaptaret et dampnabili sacerdocio immolaret; et post ydolatriam errores uanos adinuenit, quibus damnatas animas in faciculos colligauit, quas aeterno incendio obligauit, et ab intellectu practico deuiauit, quia semitas plana<s> in uiciorum aspera commutauit.” Dialogus, prol., lines 2–9 (n. 13 above), 175. For the date, see Lucy K. Pick, Conflict and Coexistence: Archbishop Rodrigo and the Muslims and Jews of Medieval Spain (Ann Arbor, 2004), 138 and n. 43.

107 “Sed dei clemencia sui noticiam in Thare progenie conseruauit; deinde secundum promissionis uerbum Abrahae semine propagato, Israel filiis igneam legem dedit in qua tanquam in lagen[e]a testea latuit conpletio promissorum.” Dialogus, prol., lines 10–13 (n. 13 above), 175.

108 “Insania erigitur ydolorum, donec patriarchalis prophecie solers deuocio unum intelligens adoraret.” Breuiarium, prol., lines 14–15 (n. 13 above), 3.

109 For example, Guide I.68, 163. Jacob Anatoli recollects Michael Scot naming God as “Intellect, Intellecting, and Intelligible”: ”והחכם שהתחברתי עמו אמר בו שזה נאמר מפני שהוא השכל המשכיל והמושכל“ Anatoli, Malmad ha-Talmidim (n. 92 above), 47r.

110 Breviarium, prol., line 14 (n. 13 above), 3: “Insania erigitur ydolorum” and Guide III.29, 517. “Et propter extensionem illius stulticie, creuit multum illa rabies in seculo tunc in hoc modo ymaginacionum.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 4vb, §62. Compare Stroumsa, Maimonides (n. 2 above), 138–40.

111 Guide III.29, 518 cites Joshua 24:2: “Your fathers dwelt of old time on the other side of the river, even Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nachor, and they served other gods.”

112 “Et que infelices populi sacrifica demonibus inmolabant, beatus populus et electus legem igneam a Dei dextera assecutus,” Breviarium, prol., lines 18–20 (n. 13 above), 3.

113 “Post quadringentos XXX annos signis et prodigiis a seruitute Egipti in filiis liberata, pronosticis salutaribus in sanguine agni scripte legis remedium est adepta.” Breuiarium, prol., lines 16–18 (n. 13 above), 3; and “Et iam scis lex ostendit in multis locis quod prima intencio legis fuit ut auferretur omne holocaustum nisi solius Dei.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 4va, §64.

114 Guide III.32, 525–26. “Et secundum istam ordinem ingeniatoris benedicti, processerunt multe res in lege domini, quia non proceditur de contrario ad contrarium subito, quia homo non potest exire a consuetudine in qua nutritus est subito.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 5rb, §73. Compare Stern, Problems and Parables of Law (n. 12 above), 34–35.

115 Moses Halbertal, “The Nature and Purpose of Divine Law,” in Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed: A Critical Guide, ed. Daniel Frank and Aaron Segal (Cambridge, 2021), 247–65, at 250–51.

116 Guide III.32, 526–28; and Sorbonne 601, fols. 5rb–6ra, §74–76.

117 On Mark of Toledo, see Pick, Conflict and Coexistence (n. 106 above), 117–21. See also the essays in Mark of Toledo: Intellectual Context and Debates Between Christians and Muslims in Early Thirteenth-Century Iberia, ed. Charles Burnett and Pedro Mantas España (Córdoba, 2022).

118 Marie Thérèse d'Alverny, “Deux traductions latines du Coran au Moyen Âge,” Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 22–23 (1947–48): 113–31; Marie Thérèse d'Alverny and Georges Vajda, “Marc de Tolède, traducteur de Ibn Tūmart,” Al-Andalus 16 (1951): 99–140 and 259–307; and Marie Thérèse d'Alverny, “Marc de Tolède,” in Estudios sobre Alfonso VI y la reconquista de Toledo: Actas del II Congreso Internacional de Estudios Mozárabes (Toledo, 20-26 mayo 1985), 3 vols. (Toledo, 1991), 3:25–59.

119 “Ex collisione ferri et lapidis ignis excutitur, interdum ad illuminandos homines in tenebris degentes, interdum autem ad decoquendum que cruda sunt, interdum ad calefaciendum, interdum ad conflanda uasa ac ceteros usos utiles et exquisitos.” ed. d'Alverny and Vajda, “Marc de Tolède,” 260–61.

120 “Ex coniunctione siquidem duorum parentum utpote lapidis et ferri, ydola ferrea colentium et lapidea, ignis eductus est adurans, quia ex duobus genitoribus tanquam ferro et lapide ydolatrie induratis, ignis exiuit sulphureus, non quippe ut illuminaret homines in tenebris noctis laborantes, sed ut in tenebris ignorantie deperditis, multis retro seculis elapsis potius tenebras accumularet quam luceret.” ed. d'Alverny and Vajda, “Marc de Tolède,” 261. On sources for this passage, see d'Alverny and Vajda, “Marc de Tolède,” 121–22.

121 “Maphometus ex Arabia demonum sordidata culturis extitisset oriundus et ex parentibus ydola colentibus,” ed. d'Alverny and Vajda, “Marc de Tolède,” 261.

122 “Cum secum deliberaret qualiter Arabes et omnes alias nationes ad fidem unius Dei conuerteret, et ydolatriam quoad posset destrueret in illis regionibus, in tanta fuit perplexitate constitutus quod titubauit ad quam istarum legum, an ad nouam Ihesu Christi legem, uel ad ueterem que data est Moisi et populo iudaico, potius eos inuitaret. Sed cum nouisset quod lex euangelica grauior eis existeret, nec eam possent tollerare, utpote lex humilitatis iuxta illud: ‘qui te percussit in maxilla una, prebe ei et alteram,’ et in castitate et ieiunio et ceteris que a Christianis obseruantur, eis esset intollerabilis . . . Legum quoque decalogi uoluit eis predicare, tamen . . . eorum obseruationes prout in Pentateuco continetur extraneas esse decreuit.” ed. d'Alverny and Vajda, “Marc de Tolède,” 262–63.

123 Guide III.32, 525–28; and Pines's discussion of this canniness, which he translates from the Arabic as “wily graciousness” in The Guide of the Perplexed (n. 1 above), lxxii–lxxiv. The LiberPM calls this quality “ingenium divinum.” See Sorbonne 601, fol. 5rb, §73.

124 Guide III.32, 525. On the transmission of this work, see R. K. French, “De juvamentis membrorum and the Reception of Galenic Physiological Anatomy,” Isis 70 (1979): 96–109, at 97.

125 On Mark's translations of medical texts, see d'Alverny, “Marc de Tolède” (n. 118 above), 3:29–41.

126 d'Alverny, “Marc de Tolède” (n. 118 above), 3:39.

127 Known as De motibus liquidis, De motibus obscuris, De motibus manifestis et obscuris, and De motibus dubiis: Galen: On Problematical Movements, ed. Vivian Nutton (Latin) and Gerrit Bos (Arabic) (Cambridge, 2011); Carlos J. Larrain, “Galen, De motibus dubiis: Die lateinische Übersetzung des Niccolò da Reggio,” Traditio 49 (1994): 171–233; and Armelle Debru, “Galen ‘On the Unclear Movements’,” in The Unknown Galen, ed. Vivian Nutton, (London, 2002), 79–85.

128 “Cum igitur volumus aliquem motuum, movet lacertum quem ad hunc plasmavit et creavit. Et declaravi in libro meo de iuvamento membrorum quod creavit nos non solum prudens scire quid oportebat melius agere: immo cum prudentia habuit potentiam qua quidem nihil ei de hoc quod melius et competentius previdit esse defuit agendum, et bonitatem ac largitatem in qua nulla fuit avaritia creandi quod melius est.” Galen, On Problematical Movements, IV.7, ed. Nutton, 195, from Mark's translation. De usu partium was also known as De iuvamento membrorum. See French, “De juvamentis membrorum,” 97.

129 Here, the jaw is discussed in relation to the movement of the tongue. See Galen, On Problematical Movements, V, ed. Nutton, 205–206 (on the jaws and tongue); and IX, ed. Nutton, 229 (on the eyelids). Compare Guide III.32, 525; and “Et illi nerui qui sunt iuuamentum sensus solius uel parui motus cum paruo labore sicut motus palpebrarum aut mandibule, nascebantur de medula.” Sorbonne 601, fol. 5rb, §73.

130 Gerrit Bos, “The Reception of Galen in Maimonides’ Medical Aphorisms,” in The Unknown Galen, ed. Nutton, 139–152, at 143; and Nutton and Bos, On Problematical Movements, 24–25.

131 Galen, On Problematical Movements, I.14–15, ed. Nutton, 183.

132 “In nuca . . . a nuci . . . a nuca,” Sorbonne 601, fol. 5rb, §73. Compare Alfred of Shareshill, De motu cordis VIII.9: “Nervus quidem praecisus et nucha similesque casus partes inferiores reddunt insensibiles.” ed. Clemens Baeumker, Des Alfred von Sareshel (Alfredus Anglicus) Schrift de Motu Cordis (Munster, 1923), 34–35.

133 Guide II.22, 319–20.

134 Édouard Jeauneau, Rethinking the School of Chartres, trans. Claude Paul Desmarais (Toronto, 2009), 66–67; Pick, “Michael Scot in Toledo” (n. 10 above), 93–116; Pick, Conflict and Coexistence (n. 106 above), 79–102; and Teresa Witcombe, “Between Paris and al-Andalus: Bishop Maurice of Burgos and His World, c. 1208–1238” (Ph.D. diss., University of Exeter, 2019). On the history and development of this tradition, its foundations in a doctrine of divine unity, and its eventual attraction to the cosmology and psychology of Avicenna, see Marie Humbert Vicaire, “Les Porrétans et l'Avicennisme avant 1215,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 26 (1937): 449–82.

135 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 106–10.

136 Fontaine, Otot ha-Shamayim (n. 79 above). Fontaine suggests (xxvi–xxviii) that, because his Hebrew version shares so many readings with the Latin translation done by Gerard of Cremona before 1187 in Toledo, which are absent from the extant, late Arabic witness of the text, Samuel must have had access to an Arabic manuscript close to Gerard's model. See Appendix I, lxxv–lxxvi, for more shared readings. But given that one Hebrew manuscript preserves readings shared with the Latin that are in fact errors in reading the Arabic text (xxii–xxiii), and given what we now know about his contacts with Latinists in Toledo, it is worth asking whether Samuel also had recourse to the Latin text itself.

137 Guide II.30, 353; Aviezer Ravitzky, “Aristotle's Meteorology and the Maimonidean Modes of Interpreting the Account of Creation,” Aleph 8 (2008): 361–400; and Fontaine, Otot ha-Shamayim (n. 78 above), xi.

138 Guide I.Introduction.5, 9–10.

139 Guide II.30, 348.

140 Guide II.30, 350–52.

141 D. E. Eichholz, “Aristotle's Theory of the Formation of Metals and Minerals,” The Classical Quarterly 43 (1949): 141–46, at 141; Pieter L. Schoonheim, Aristotle's Meteorology in the Arabico-Latin Tradition, Aristoteles Semitico-Latinus 12 (Leiden, 2000), 12–17; and Resianne Fontaine, “Exhalations and Other Meteorological Themes,” in The Cambridge History of Jewish Philosophy: From Antiquity Through the Seventeenth Century, ed. S Nadler and T. Rudavsky (Cambridge, 2008), 434–50, at 435.

142 Guide II.30, 354. Compare Guide I.72, 186.

143 Compare Guide I.71, 183; I.72, 184–94; III.23, 495–96; and III.49, 605–606.

144 Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fols. 26rb–vb.

145 al-Biṭrūjī, De motibus celorum (n. 67 above), 81–82.

146 Aafke M. I Oppenraay and Eric Kwakkel, Aristotele, De Animalibus: Michael Scot's Arabic-Latin Translation, Volume 1: Books I–III: History of Animals (Leiden, 2020); Aafke M. I. Oppenraay, Aristotele, De Animalibus: Michael Scot's Arabic-Latin Translation, Volume 2: Books XI–XIV: Parts of Animals (Leiden, 1998); Aafke M. I. Oppenraay, Aristoteles De Animalibus, 3: Books XV–XIX: Generation of Animals: Michael Scot's Arabic-Latin Translation (Leiden, 1992); Aafke M. I. van Oppenraay, “Avicenna's Liber de animalibus (‘Abreviatio Avicennae’): Preliminaries and State of Affairs,” Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 28 (2017): 401–16; and Aafke M. I. Oppenraay, “The Critical Edition of Aristotle's De animalibus in the Arabic-Latin Translation of Michael Scot, its Purpose and its Significance for the History of Science,” in The Letter Before the Spirit: The Importance of Text Editions for the Study of the Reception of Aristotle, ed. Aafke M. I. Oppenraay and Resianne Fontaine (Leiden, 2013), 331–44.

147 Aristotle, Meteorologica, ed. Elisa Rubino, Aristoteles Latinus X.1 (Turnhout, 2010), xxxviii–xxxix; James K. Otte, Commentary on the Metheora of Aristotle (Leiden, 1988) must now be supplemented with Henryk Anzulewicz and Philipp Anzulewicz, “Alfred von Sareshel Glossenkommentar zu den ‘Meteorologica’ des Aristoteles,” Przeglad Tomistyczny 27 (2021): 7–60. See also James K. Otte, “The Life and Writings of Alfredus Anglicus,” Viator 3 (1972): 275–91; and James K. Otte, “The Role of Alfred Sareshel (Alfredus Anglicus) and His Commentary,” Viator 7 (1976): 197–209. Alfred's dates remain a matter of speculation. Otte pushed his period of activity prior to 1200 (Otte, Commentary on Metheora, 17–21), but the evidence is weak and depends largely on dating Oxford MS Selden Supra 24, the earliest manuscript of the Meteorology, De mineralibus and the commentary, to no later than about 1200. This section of the manuscript can be reasonably dated between the late twelfth century and ca. 1250 (for the latter date, see Schoonheim, Aristotle's Meteorology, xxxii). If Alfred was among the scholars in Toledo who were influenced by Maimonides, his floruit is likely between 1200 and 1215.

148 Aristotle, Meteorologica, ed. Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem, Aristoteles Latinus X.2 (Turnhout, 2008), 30.

149 As his editor supposes: Otte, Commentary on the Metheora, 25–28.

150 This seems likely, but it would be easier to answer this question in the affirmative if Alfred and ibn Tibbon had drawn on the same passages of Alexander. Alfred quotes Alexander only for Book IV, while ibn Tibbon adds no commentary to his translation of that book. Still, there are commonalities between the two commentaries. Ibn Tibbon cites Avicenna for an argument that the breaking up of a halo around the sun from one side is caused by wind coming from that direction: Fontaine, Otot ha-Shamayim (n. 78 above), 160–61. On the same subject, without citing Avicenna, Alfred remarks that a halo around the sun that is not perfectly round shows that wind has begun: Otte, Commentary on the Metheora, 50. It is absent from the Aristotle: Schoonheim, Aristotle's Meteorology (n. 141 above), 124.

151 Alfred constructed De mineralibus from chapters 1 and 5 of part 5 book I of Avicenna's Kitāb al-Shifā (The Book of Healing). See Samuela Pagani and Elisa Rubino, “Il De mineralibus di Avicenna tradotto da Alfredo di Shareshill,” Bulletin de philosophie médiévale 58 (2016): 23–87; Jean-Marc Mandosio, “Follower or Opponent of Aristotle? The Critical Reception of Avicenna's Meteorology in the Latin World and the Legacy of Alfred the Englishman,” in The Arabic, Hebrew, and Latin Reception of Avicenna's Physics and Cosmology, ed. Dag Nikolaus Haase and Amos Bertolacci (Berlin, 2018), 459–534, at 464 and 472.

152 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 11; Gad Freudenthal, “(Al-)Chemical Foundations for Cosmological Ideas: Ibn Sīnā on the Geology of an Eternal World,” in Physics, Cosmology and Astronomy, 1300–1700 (Amsterdam, 1991), 47–73, at 54–59 and 63–66; and Pagani and Rubino, “Il De mineralibus,” 35–44. Dag Hasse's identification of Michael Scot as the translator of the Avicennan De diluviis (On Floods) is significant in this regard and suggests further connections between the interests of Michael and Samuel that deserve deeper exploration. See Dag Hasse, “Three Philosopher-Translators from Arabic: Abraham Ibn Daud, Dominicus Gundisalvi and Michael Scot,” in Philosophy and Translation in the Islamic World, ed. Ulrich Rudolph and Robert Wisnovsky (Berlin), forthcoming.

153 H. J Drossaart Lulofs and E. L. J. Poortman, Nicolaus Damascenus, De plantis: Five Translations, Aristoteles Semitico-Latinus 4 (Amsterdam, 1989), 465–561; and R. James Long, “Alfred of Sareshel's Commentary on the Pseudo-Aristotelian De plantis: A Critical Edition,” Mediaeval Studies 47 (1985): 125–67.

154 Guide I.72, 186.

155 Pick, Conflict and Coexistence (n. 106 above), 79–102; and Pick, “Michael Scot in Toledo” (n. 10 above), 94–106, 108–109, and 113–15.

156 Thomas Ricklin, “Le coeur, soleil du corps: Une redécouverte symbolique du XIIe siècle,” Micrologus 11 (2003): 123–43, at 142–43.

157 Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 241–45.

158 “Motus quidem celi est sicut uita et celum est in animali sicut cor eiusdem cuius motus si ad horam quiesceret uita corporis finiuntur. Vnde durante motu celi durabit mundus inferior.” Liber introductorius, Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, MS Clm. 10268, fol. 46vb.

159 See n. 2, above.

160 Josef Stern, “Maimonides on Amalek, Self-Corrective Mechanisms and the War Against Idolatry,” in Judaism and Modernity: The Religious Philosophy of David Hartman, ed. Jonathan Malino (Burlington VT, 2004), 359–92, at 376–78.

161 “Et ponitur hec dictio ‘principio’ equiuoce pro Filio et pro principio mundi et temporis, simul enim facta fuerunt, acsi diceret: In principio, id est, in Filio et in principio mundi et temporis, creauit Deus celum et terram.” Breuiarium, I.1, lines 26–29 (n. 13 above), 9.

162 “ ‘Ferebatur’ autem dicitur quia ipse Spiritus est uoluntas Patris et Filii, quia Pater per Filium omnia fecit esse, et ideo dicitur ‘superferri Spiritus’ quia sola benignitas, non externe cause pepulerunt eum fingere opus materie fluitantis; uel etiam de spiritu creato potest intelligi, ut tunc dicatur creatus uentus qui alibi dicitur ‘Spiritus missus in terram’ et quia efficaciter agit undas in aquis, et ideo dicitur ‘supperferri,’ set aliter creatus superfertur et aliter increatus, et ita ponitur hec dictio ‘Spiritus’ equiuoce, sicut hec dictio ‘principio’ cum dicitur ‘In principio’ et cetera.” Breuiarium I.1, lines 43–52 (n. 13 above), 10.

163 Matthew Paris reports that the story that they were lovers was spread by Frederick II. See Kay, Council of Bourges (n. 22 above) 150–51 and n. 7; and Lindy Grant, Blanche of Castile, Queen of France (New Haven, 2016), 103–104 and 249.

164 Grant, Blanche of Castile, 189–90 and 234.

165 Paris Arsenal 84, fol. 88r. Note that these differ somewhat from the ten powers given in the LiberPM (see n. 38 above) and from the varying lists given by Samuel ibn Tibbon: Robinson, Samuel Ibn Tibbon's Commentary on Ecclesiastes (n. 7 above), 509–10. Michael describes the same ten powers as William — five internal and five external senses— in his treatise on the soul: Madrid, El Escorial MS f.III.b, fols. 36rb–37va. His source is Avicenna's De anima: Hasse, Avicenna's De Anima (n. 56 above), 26. Di Segni, “Early Quotations” (n. 16 above), 199–203 presents William's use of the LiberPM as likely.

166 Lesley Smith, “William of Auvergne and the Law of the Jews and the Muslims,” in Scripture and Pluralism: Reading the Bible in the Religiously Plural Worlds of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, ed. Thomas J. Heffernan and Thomas E. Burman (Leiden, 2005), 123–42, at 129–30.

167 Smalley, “William of Auvergne, John of La Rochelle, and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Old Law” (n. 21 above), 141.

168 Smalley, “William of Auvergne, John of La Rochelle, and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Old Law” (n. 21 above), 121–82; and Elsa Marmursztejn, “Olivi on the Hebrew Bible and the Jews: Scholastic Texts from Languedoc in the 1290s,” Speculum 97 (2022): 77–111.

169 Jeremy Cohen, Living Letters of the Law: Ideas of the Jew in Medieval Christianity (Berkeley, 1999), 10–18; Robert A. Markus, “The Jew as a Hermeneutical Device: The Inner Life of a Gregorian Topos,” in Gregory the Great: A Symposium, ed. John C. Cavadini (Notre Dame, 2001), 1–15; and David Nirenberg, “Figures of Thought and Figures of Flesh: ‘Jews’ and ‘Judaism’ in Late-Medieval Spanish Poetry and Politics,” Speculum 81 (2006): 398–426, at 401–402.

170 Alexander of Hales, Glossa in Quattuor Libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi III.37.3 (Florence, 1954), 471–72. Smalley, “William of Auvergne, John of La Rochelle, and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Old Law” (n. 21 above), 135, dates this to 1223–27. Compare Sorbonne 601, fol. 6va–vb, §89-102.

171 Smith, “William of Auvergne and the Law,” 203; de Vaux, “Guillaume d'Auvergne” (n. 55 above), 18–22; and Kevin J. Caster, “William of Auvergne's Adaptation of ibn Gabirol's Doctrine of the Divine Will,” Modern Schoolman 74 (1996): 31–42.

172 de Vaux, “Guillaume d'Auvergne” (n. 55 above), 19; and David Pingree, “Learned Magic in the Time of Frederick II,” in Pathways into the Study of Ancient Sciences, ed. Isabelle Pingree and John Steele (Philadelphia, 2014), 477–94.

173 Grant, Blanche of Castile (n. 163 above), 97–99.

174 Guiseppe Cremascoli, “La Summa di Rolando da Cremona: Il testo del prologo,” Studi medievali, ser. 3, 16 (1975): 825–76, at 827; and Noël Valois, Guillaume d'Auvergne: Évêque de Paris (1228–1249) (Paris, 1880), 48–54.

175 Di Segni, “Early Quotations” (n. 16 above), 203.

176 On knowledge shared by Michael Scot, William of Auvergne, and Roland of Cremona, see Santi, “Guglielmo d'Auvergne” (n. 55 above), 137–53; and Francesco Santi, “Il cielo dentro l'uomo: Anime e corpi negli anni di Federico II,” in Federico II “puer Apulie”: stori, arte, cultura, ed. Hubert Houben and Oronzo Limone (Lecce, 2001), 149–70.

177 Guide III.29, 517–21; A. Dondaine, “Un commentaire scriptuaire de Roland de Crémone ‘Le livre de Job’,” Archivum fratrum praedicatorum 11 (1940–41): 109–37, at 129; and Yehuda Halper, “Does Maimonides's Mishneh Torah Forbid Reading the Guide of the Perplexed? On Platonic Punishments for Freethinkers,” AJS Review 42 (2018): 351–79, at 362–63.

178 Cremascoli, “La Summa di Rolando da Cremona,” 858–60.

179 Shlomo Simonsohn, The Apostolic See and the Jews: Documents, 492–1404 (Toronto, 1988), 171–74 (nos. 162–65).

180 Valois, Guillaume d'Auvergne, 130.

181 John Friedman, Jean Connell Hoff, and Robert Chazan, The Trial of the Talmud Paris, 1240 (Toronto, 2012), 18–22.

182 Di Segni, “Early Quotations” (n. 16 above), 202–203.

183 Friedman, Hoff, and Chazan, Trial of the Talmud, 98.

184 Irven M. Resnick, “Talmud, Talmudisti, and Albert the Great,” Viator 33 (2002): 69–86, at 71–72; Di Segni, “Early Quotations” (n. 16 above), 192, n. 16; and Caterina Rigo, “Zur Rezeption des Maimonides” (n. 17 above), 29–66.

185 Sefer Ginze Nistarot, vol. 4, ed. Joseph Kobak (Bamberg, 1878), 11–12; and Silver, Daniel Jeremy, Maimonidean Criticism and the Maimonidean Controversy (Leiden, 1965), 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

186 Maimonides, Moses, Ḳovets Teshuvot ha-Rambam ve-Igrotav, ed. ben Aryeh Lichtenberg, Abraham (Leipzig 1859)Google Scholar, 4b col. 1; and Talmage, Frank, David Kimhi (Cambridge MA, 1975), 27–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

187 Silver, Maimonidean Criticism, 153; Schwartz, “Persecution and the Art of Translation” (n. 18 above), 55–56 disputes the veracity of Kimḥi's report of the burning of the Guide and Sefer ha-Maddah, arguing that Romanus would have left some record of the event, and that a permanent stigma would have attached itself to Maimonides's name. Cardinal Romanus took the records of his new inquisition with him back to Rome and to my knowledge they have not survived. Perhaps we can draw an analogy between Maimonides's reputation among Christians and that of Aristotle himself, whose natural philosophy was forbidden to be read until it became a part of the Paris school curriculum.

188 Kay, Council of Bourges (n. 22 above), 42.

189 Thus Daniel Silver's skepticism about the charge that Solomon or one of his students was an informer may be fully justified. See Silver, Maimonidean Criticism, 149–56.

190 Sefer 4, ed. Kobak, 12.

191 Maimonides, Ḳovets, 2b col. 2. Josef Stern (personal communication) suggests that this may be a pun on “ba'alei brit ha-millah — members of the covenant of circumcision,” which Maimonides uses to describe a cross-religious intellectual community including Jews and Muslims, who affirm the unity of God, in contrast to Christian Trinitarianism. Compare Stern, Problems and Parables of Law (n. 12 above), 95–97.

192 Sorbonne 601, 4rb, §62; and Rigo, “Dux neutrorum and the Jewish Tradition” (n. 18 above), 103–104.

193 ”הוי היורדים מצרים לעזרה ולגבורה להשיב מלחמה שערה . ההולכים אהרי ההבל ויהבלו ואת פי יי׳ לא שאלו . בעלי ברית המורה . היושב באלוני ממרא. אחי אשכול הכופרים הם היונים היועצים אין על משפחות סופרים. כי מגפן סדום גפנם ומשדמות עמורה. ויכרתו משם זמורה. וכל ליצנותא אסירא. בר מליצנותא דע״ז.למה עברתם את פי יי׳ ותשימו את המורה תורה חדשה. ותאמרו לנו הגאולה ומשפט הירושה. תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה. והיא מתנכרה שלוחה אליכם וקשה.“ Maimonides, Ḳovets, 2b col. 2; and Jacob Adler, “Letters of Judah Alfakhar and David Kimhi,” Studia Spinozana 12(1996): 141–68, at 160.

194 Harvey, Steven, “Maimonides in the Sultan's Palace,” in Perspectives on Maimonides, ed. Kraemer, Joel L. (Oxford, 1991), 4776CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 71–72.