Introduction

The present volume, The Latin Qur’an, 1143–1500: Translation, Transition, Inter­pretation,1 highlights some of the methodological principles aimed at better understanding the process behind the genesis, spread, reading, annotation and interpretation of the Latin Qur’an translations made between 1143 and 1500 by Latin Christian authors. Our goal is to offer an extensive overview of how out of this process emerged the kaleidoscopic European Qur’an, with its multiple angles and perspectives depending on each particular historical moment in premodern Latin Europe.2

In the eastern Mediterranean, geographical proximity and diverse channels of political and cultural exchange between Christian and Islamic communities early on fostered, among Christians living in that region, an in-depth knowledge of the Qur’an and the traditions on the life of the Prophet. By contrast, in the western Mediterranean it is not until the twelfth century that we find the first systematic endeavours to study and disseminate – with polemical intent – the laws and traditions of Islam. Until then, all that was available were an array of legends about the figure of Muhammad, which historians and poets had been circulating since the mid-eleventh century. The Benedictine monk Guibert de Nogent ­(1055–1124), author of the Gesta Dei per Francos (1109), remarked that Latin Christendom lacked the sort of solid information on the law of Muhammad that could make for sound refutations of it, himself indicating that he could only relay the information that had reached his ears.3 This idea expressed by Guibert is absolutely novel if we compare it with the stance voiced by the Mozarabic clergy in thriving ninth-century Córdoba. Despite the city’s abundance of knowledge about Islam, the surviving Christian texts merely paraphrase or reference a handful of ayas, as in the short treatise “Historia de Mohamed Pseudopropheta,” transmitted via the work of Eulogius of Córdoba (ca. 857),4 and in abbreviated form via the work of Paulus Alvarus of Córdoba (ca. 800–860), included in his Indiculus Luminosus,5 “Adnotatio Mammetis Arabum principis,” as well as in the development of the Indiculus itself.6 However, these authors refused to engage with the Qur’an itself, rejecting it outright, refusing even to refer to Muhammad (calling him merely Pseudopropheta) or the Qur’an (Psalmi) by name. Although Eulogius and Alvarus must have known more about Islam than that which appears in their writings, their attitude, in contemporary terms, could be described as one of radical activism, and perhaps, given their monastic isolation, this really was the extent of their knowledge. However, it is highly possible that Mozarabic Christians were perhaps more directly familiar with Eastern Christian texts, as evidenced by the contemporary Latin translation of the Epistula Leonis.7

This method of using an Arabic anti-Muslim polemical source was also ­followed by the Judeo-Converso Petrus Alfonsi,8 whose Dialogi contra Iudaeos (1110) contains the chapter “De Sarracenorum lege destruenda, et sententiarum suarum stultitia confutanda,” based on his reading of the Risālat al-Kindī,9 a work which was subsequently translated into Latin in full as part of a project initiated by the abbot of Cluny, who was to undertake the first systematic approach to the Islamic textual tradition. This foundational event has informed the methodological principle adopted in this book, which proposes an in-depth study of the period spanning from 1143–1500, beginning with the completion of the first ­complete Latin translation of the Qur’an, commissioned by the abbot of Cluny, Peter of Montboissier, better known as Peter the Vene­rable (ca. 1092–1156).

Indeed, as preparations for the Second Crusade (1147–1149) were underway, the abbot travelled to the Iberian Peninsula (1141–1143) in order to inspect various Cluniac monasteries and inquire into their finances.10 During this trip, out of a desire to provide Christian scholars with a corpus of Islamic texts to help them understand and refute Islam,11 the abbot encouraged and financed the first Latin translation of the Qur’an, along with other Islamic texts, which would prove immensely important in shaping and articulating Western refutations of Islam. These texts were the Alkoranus12 (translated by Robert of Ketton); the aforementioned Risālat al-Kindī (translated by Petrus Magister Toletanus, with the help of Muhammad the Moor), which offers a polemical Christian-Muslim dialogue; the Doctrina Mahumet13 (translated by Hermann of Carinthia), an Islamic ‘catechism’ for new converts to Islam; De generatione Mahumeth14 (translated by Hermann of Carinthia), which tells of Muhammad’s family background, birth and progress as a means of legitimising the history of Islam; and the Chronica mendosa et ridicula Sarracenorum15 (translated by Robert of Ketton), which discusses the expansion of Islam. These last three works were brought together under the title Fabulae ­Sarracenorum.16 Therefore, the abbot’s journey proved fruitful, not only for the Order of Cluny’s coffers, but also in terms of the far-reaching intellectual impact it was to have in its own time and after, constituting a decisive event in the intellectual history of Europe, and wherein it is important to highlight the contribution of the expert translators, trained in the finest Latin rhetoric of the twelfth century, and with a wealth of experience in the translation of Arabic scientific texts.

Later on, in 1210 the archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada ­(1170–1247), sponsored and encouraged the anti-Islamic crusade, especially through his support for the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212) and by instructing Mark of Toledo (fl. 1191–1216), canon of the Cathedral of Toledo, to undertake what would be the second Latin translation of the Qur’an.17 Like Robert of Ketton, Mark’s prior experience had been in the translation of scientific texts, but where the former had specialized in astronomy, the latter had focused on medicine. This was to influence how each of them approached the task of translating the Qur’an, relying on linguistic strategies related to each of their respective fields of expertise.18 This is not the only difference between their translations, as they both follow different methods: Robert, steeped in the elegant rhetoric of the twelfth century, employs all its figures and turns of phrase, while Mark’s translation adopts a word-for-word approach.

However, in addition to these full translations of the Qur’an, it is also important to consider cases where authors provide their own translations of specific ayas and suras, as in the Liber denudationis siue ostensionis uel patefaciens,19 the Latin translation of a Arabic original (Būluṣ ibn Rajāʾ, Kitāb al-Wāḍiḥ bi-al-ḥaqq), which paraphrases numerous passages from the Qur’an, and provides transliterations of many sura titles. This seminal work was used profusely by Dominican friar Riccoldo da Monte di Croce in his Contra Legem ­Sarracenorum (1300),20 along with selections from Petrus Alfonsi and from the translation by Mark of Toledo.21 However, Riccoldo was also able to read the Qur’an in Arabic himself, and thus in other instances offers his own translations of certain ­passages.22 Among other sources, Riccoldo also uses23 the Explanatio Symbolum Apostolorum ad institutionem (1256–1257)24 by Dominican friar Ramon Martí25 (after 1280), also the author of Capistrum Iudaeorum, fidelium,26 of Pugio fidei aduersus Mauros et Iudaeos27 and of De Seta Machometi,28 all of which contain passages of Qur’an, and, in the case of De Seta, of Hadith, in his own translation. Another key figure is Ramon Llull, since, although his statements about the Qur’an are dispersed throughout his vast oeuvre, it has been proven that he directly consulted Arabic sources when writing the speech given by the Saracen in Book IV of his Liber de gentili et tribus sapientibus.29 Another relevant work is Dominican friar Alfonso Buenhombre’s (d. 1353) Disputatio Abutalib Sarraceni et Samuelis Iudei (1340), which contains fragments of various ayas.30 Lastly, this overview of fragmentary parts of the Qur’an should also mention Pedro de la Cavallería (ca. 1415–1461), of Aragon, whose treatise Zelus Christi contra Iudaeos, Sarracenos et Infideles (1450)31 recommends reading the Qur’an in order to understand it and, in turn, reject it.

Cardinal Juan de Segovia (1390/5–1458),32 in collaboration with Yça Gidelli, faqīh of Segovia, ʿĪśa ibn Jābir, worked on a trilingual Arabic-Latin-Spanish version of the Qur’an, of...