^{page 140 note 1} Badawī, 'Abd al-Raḥmān, Al-Uṣūl al-Yūnānīyah li'n-naẓarīyat as-siyāsīyah fī'l-Islām, Dirāsāt Islāmīyah, xv (Cairo, 1945), Introd. 41Google Scholar .

^{page 140 note 2} Ed. Cairo, a.h. 1348, 340–1.

^{page 140 note 3} Ibid., 381.

^{page 140 note 4} Ibid., 339.

^{page 141 note 1} Ṭabaqāt al-aṭibbā' wa-'l-ḥukamā', ed. Sayyid, Fu'ad, Textes et traductions d'auteurs orientaux, Tome x (Cairo, 1955), 67Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 2} Ed. Lippert (Leipzig, 1903), 379.

^{page 141 note 3} Ed. Müller, i, 205.

^{page 141 note 4} Ibid.

^{page 141 note 5} Πατριρχης on the other hand gave Baṭrak, Baṭriyark. The two words were liable to confusion. Thus the Latin translators sometimes rendered al-Biṭrīq by Patriarcha. See an example below (p. 146 (10)).

^{page 142 note 1} Al-Fakhrī, ed. Derenbourg, H., 304Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 2} Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 244.

^{page 142 note 3} Ibid.

^{page 142 note 4} E.g. the story of the translation by Māsarjawaih of a work on medicine before the time of 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Azīz (Juljul, Ibn, Ṭabaqāt, 61Google Scholar). Cf. also Mas'ūdī, , Tanbīh, ed. Cairo, , 1938, 92–3Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 5} Ed. Lippert, 242.

^{page 142 note 6} Ed. Cairo, 381. If this is to be taken literally, it seems to put the activity of al-Biṭrīq later than is usually supposed.

^{page 142 note 7} Ritter, H. and Walzer, R., “Arabisehe Übersetzungen griechischer Ärzte in Stambuler Bibliotheken,” Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1934, 801–846 (Hippokrates, No. 2)Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 8} i, 32.

^{page 143 note 1} “Die toxicologisehen Schriften dor Araber bis Ende XII. Jahrhunderts,” Virchows Archiv, Band 52 (1871), 366Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 2} Op. cit., 827.

^{page 143 note 3} Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 102.

^{page 143 note 4} Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1871, 365Google Scholar; the same, “Die griechischen Aerzte in arabisehen Üebersetzungen,” Virchows Archiv, Band 124 (1891), 461Google Scholar, where 72 hours are mentioned, not 24.

^{page 143 note 5} Pseudogaleni in Hippocratis de Septimanis Commentarium, Corpus Medicorum Graecorum, xi, 2, 1 (Leipzig and Berlin, 1914Google Scholar).

^{page 143 note 6} Cf. ibid., xv.

^{page 143 note 7} Mentioned without the name of a translator by Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah (i, 102), who cites Hunain to the effect that the work had not survived. If this is so, then the work said to have been translated by Ibn al-Biǭrīq may be the Maqälah fi'lyarqān wa'l-marār (?), attributed to Hippocrates by Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah (i, 34). Cf. Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1891, 460 (No. 95)Google Scholar.

^{page 143 note 8} Loc. cit.

^{page 143 note 9} In the list of translators in the Fihrist (ed. Cairo, , 340)Google Scholar only “Iṣṭifan the Old” (associated with Khālid b. Yazīd) and his father al-Biṭrīq are mentioned before Yaḥyā b. al-Biṭrīq. In another list (Ibn abī Uṣsaibi'ah, i, 188) Asṣāth and Ibn Bakus precede the father, al-Biṣrīq. This can hardly mean that they were earlier in time, since Asṣāth translated for al-Kindī (born about a.d. 800), cf. Fihrist, 352, and Ibn Bakus (Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm b. Bakus, or Bakūs, al-'Ashshārī ?, cf. Fihrist, 349, 351; Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 205) corrected earlier translations and was scarcely among the first of the translators himself. In other lists Ibn al-Biṭrīq is mentioned first (e.g. al-Jāhiẓ, Ḥayawān, ed. Hārūn, 'Abd as-Salām, i, 76Google Scholar).

^{page 144 note 1} Tanbīh, ed. Cairo, , 1938, 138–9Google Scholar.

^{page 144 note 2} Ed. Cairo, 344.

^{page 144 note 3} Ed. Lippert, 18. Al-Qifṭī says that it was corrected by YaḤyā b. 'Adī.

^{page 144 note 4} Ibid.

^{page 144 note 5} Ed. Cairo, 351.

^{page 144 note 6} MS. Add. 7453.

^{page 144 note 7} Ibid.

^{page 144 note 8} MS. Yeni Çami 1179, Walzer, R., “Arabische Aristoteles-Übersetzungen in Istanbul,” Gnomon, 1934, 278Google Scholar.

^{page 144 note 9} Al-Uṣul, 34 (Hebrew MS. 378 of the Vatican Library).

^{page 144 note 10} v, 31, No. 9760.

^{page 144 note 11} MS. Add. 7511.

^{page 144 note 12} Houtsma, , Catalogue of the Leiden University Library, 581 (?)Google Scholar, cited Badawī, , Al-Uṣūl, 35Google Scholar.

^{page 144 note 13} Cf. i, 183–4; ii, 50; vii, 33; vii, 184.

^{page 144 note 14} Cf. Lewin, B. in Oriens, vol. 5 (1952), 355 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 144 note 15} Ed. Cairo, a.h. 1331, iv, 261; iv, 262.

^{page 145 note 1} Ed. Cairo, 352.

^{page 145 note 2} Ed. Lippert, 41.

^{page 145 note 3} The translator is given as a certain Tadhārī, or Theodore (Fihrist, 348). Badawī (Introd. 16 ff.) points out that there is a difficulty in identifying this translator with Theodore Abū Qurrah, since in the Fihrist the translator Theodore is said to have brought it ('araḍahu) to Ḥunain who corrected it, which chronologically is hardly possible. (Abū Qurrah died about a.d. 820, when Ḥunain was still very young.) Steinschneider's suggestion (Die arabischen Uebersetzungen aus dem Griechischen, in Zwölftes Beiheft zum Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, Leipzig, 1893, 41, § 22Google Scholar), Thādarī, Bishop in al-Karkh (Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 206), appears to have been a patron of translators (cf. the heading, ibid., 205) rather than a translator himself. Walzer, following Kraus, P. (RSO., xiv, 1932, 3, n. 3Google Scholar), accepts Theodore Abū Qurrah as translator of the Prior Analytics (“New Light on the Arabic Translations of Aristotle”, Oriens, vol. vi, 1953, 99Google Scholar). But while the reading “Abū Qurrah” in al-Jāḥiẓ, , Ḥayawān, i, 78Google Scholar, is in the MSS., there is some doubt whether Ibn Qurrah, i.e. Thābit b. Qurrah, the well-known translator, is not intended. Cf. the editor's note. This would also presumably apply to the other passage, i, 76, which Kraus had in mind. Theodore Abū Qurrah appears as a distinguished theologian and active controversialist, rather than as a translator, and he appears to be nowhere specifically mentioned as such except in the passages just referred to.

^{page 145 note 4} Manṭiq Aristū, i (Cairo, 1948), 112, n. 5Google Scholar. Cf. Walzer, , Oriens, vi, 1953, 116Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 5} Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah (i, 33) gives K. 'alāmāt al-qaḍāyā and K. fī'l-buthūr as separate titles. Cf. Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1891, 131, § 15 and 134–5, § 24Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 6} Aya Sofya, 3706, 4, and Köprülü, 885, 3. Op. cit., 811 (Hippocrates, No. 14).

^{page 145 note 7} MS. ar. 2946.

^{page 145 note 8} Cf. Campbell, D., Arabian Medicine, i (1926), 19Google Scholar.

^{page 145 note 9} Ed. Cairo, 405.

^{page 145 note 10} Ed. Lippert, 131.

^{page 146 note 1} Bergstraesser, G., Ḥunain b. Isḥaq über die syrischen u. arabischen Galen-Übersetzungen, Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Band XVII (Leipzig, 1925–1928Google Scholar), Arabic text, 39 (transl. 31).

^{page 146 note 2} Aya Sofya, 3590, 3. Op. cit., 811 (Galen, No. 22).

^{page 146 note 3} Ed. Lippert, 55 = Fihrist, ed. Cairo, , 408Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 4} Qaḥṭabah was succeeded by his son al-Ḥasan after his mysterious death at Wäsit (Qutaibah, Ibn, Ma'arif, ed. Wüstenfeld, , 188Google Scholar). Then Shabīb b. Ḥumaid b. Qaḥṭabah was ḥājib to al-Ma'mūn (Mas'ūdī, , Tanbīh, ed. 1938, 305Google Scholar).

^{page 146 note 5} Fihrist, ed. Cairo, , 479Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 6} Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1891, 485, §2Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 7} Ed. Cairo, 440.

^{page 146 note 8} Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, ii, 33.

^{page 146 note 9} Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1871, 367Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 10} Ed. Strauss, B., Quellen u. Studien zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaft, B. IV, ii (Berlin, 1935Google Scholar), 26 (pages 3–4 of the Arabic text). This passage is obviously the source of Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah's information (cf. n. 8).

^{page 146 note 11} Al-Jauharī is mentioned elsewhere as a translator, e.g. in aṣ-Ṣafadī, Al-ghaith al-musajjam fī sharḥ Lāmīyat al-'Ajam (cited by Rosenthal, F., Isis, vol. xxxvi, 253Google Scholar, followed by Walzer, R., Oriens, vol. vi, 1953, 114, n. 1Google Scholar).

^{page 147 note 1} Ed. Cairo, 421. Cf. Steinschneider, , Virchows Archiv, 1871, 349Google Scholar, who would read al-Hind for al-Hindī.

^{page 147 note 2} Cf. p. 140, n. 1.

^{page 147 note 3} Cf. Sayyid, Fu'ād, op. cit., 67–8, nnGoogle Scholar.

^{page 147 note 4} Cf. Steele, R. (Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi, Fasc. v, Oxford, 1920, viiiGoogle Scholar): “The Secretum Secretorum exercised so great an influence on the mental development of Roger Bacon that merely on this ground a study of it would be interesting. From his first work to his last he quotes it as an authority, and there can be no doubt that it fortified, if it did not create, his belief in astrology and natural magic. It came to him and his contemporaries as an unquestioned work of Aristotle.”

^{page 147 note 5} Cf. p. 141, n. 1.

^{page 147 note 6} Ṭahaqāt al-aṭibbā' wa'l-ḥukamā', 67. The other passage where the Sirr al-asrār is cited is 26 ff.

^{page 148 note 1} Bibliothèque des MSS. Paul Sbath, ii (Cairo, 1928), 86, No. 884Google Scholar.

^{page 148 note 2} Ed. Cairo, 340.

^{page 148 note 3} Al-Uṣūl, 33.

^{page 148 note 4} Ibid., 42, 45.

^{page 148 note 5} According to R. Steele (cf. p. 147, n. 4), xiii, the “main body” of the work consists of “discourses” 1–3. But part of it, al-Qaul fī'l-ghālib wa'l-maghlub (see below, pp. 149, 150), certainly seems to have a Greek origin. Tannery, P. (Notices et Extraits des MSS. de la Bibliothèque Nationals, Tome xxxi, ii, 1886, 248–250Google Scholar) reproduces the Greek text of a “Letter of Pythagoras to Telauges”, where a method for determining the victor of two contestants from the numerical value of the letters of their names is described.

^{page 148 note 6} Steinschneider, , Die arabischen Uebersetzungen aus dem Griechischen, 90, § 23Google Scholar, from whom the following details are taken.

^{page 148 note 7} Cf. Suter, H., Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der Araber und ihre Werke. Abhandlungen zur Gesch. der mat.- Wissenschaften, x (Leipzig, 1900), 26, No. 40Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 1} Cf. p. 141.

^{page 149 note 2} Ed. Dieterici (Leiden, 1895), 59–60.

^{page 149 note 3} Al-Uṣūl, Maqālah, 4, 138–9.

^{page 149 note 4} I.e. the same year as the Fihrist, which does not mention the Sirr al-asrār.

^{page 149 note 5} Ṭabaqāt al-umam, ed. Cheikho, (Beyrouth, 1912), 59Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 6} Ed. Cheikho, 45.

^{page 149 note 7} Ḥājjī Khalīfa iii, 591 (No. 7102); Defteri Külübkhāne'i Āya Sofia (Istanbul, 1304), 174Google Scholar.

^{page 149 note 8} Al-Uṣūl, 152–5. See also above, p. 148, n. 5.

^{page 150 note 1} I have examined photostats of the work in the Paris MSS. ar. 666, 59a–65a; 2718, 156a–159a; and 2761, 57b–62a. These vary little. Ibn Khaldūn, always interested in matters of this kind, refers to the Kitāb as-siyāsah al-mansūb li-Arislū (Muqaddimāt, ed. Cairo, , 114 = tr. F. Rosenthal, I, 235Google Scholar) for what he calls hisāb an-nīm . . .; yu'rafu bihi al-ghālib min al-maghlūb. Is the enigmatic nīm a corruption of Gk. πνθμν “root number“ ? On the other hand, Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah mentions (i, 69) a work of Aristotle, Kitāb al-yatīm wa-huwa kitāb al-ghālib wa'l-maghlūb wa'ṭ-ṭlib wa'l-maṭlūb allafahu li'l-Iskandar. It seems that nīm in Ibn Khaldūn may easily come from yatīm.

^{page 150 note 2} Broekelmann, , G.A.L., ed. 2, I, 263Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 3} See e.g. a translation of part of his Kītāb al-jauharatain in Dunlop, D. M., “Sources of Gold and Silver in Islam according to al-Hamdānī,” in Islamica, VIII (1959), 29–49Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 4} Ṭabaqāt al-umam, 59.

^{page 150 note 5} Cf. Steinschneider, , Alfarabi, Mém. Acad. Imp. St.-Pétersbourg, vii^e Série, T. xiii, No. 4 (St. Petersburg, 1869), 142Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 6} Tanbīh, 66–7.

^{page 150 note 7} Cf. al-Ḥasan b. an-Nakad al-Mauṣilī mentioned as the author of alchemical works which he passed off as having been written by Jābir (cf. P. Kraus, Jābir ibn Ḥayyān, Mém. Instit. Égypte, Tome 44, Cairo, 1943, I, lxiii, n. 9).