Latin Translations of the Koran
Introduction
The Koran was one of the best selling books in the Middle Ages and in the early modern period. It was the most important book of the Muslim society and therefore some Christians saw it as a threatening work, which resulted in many European Christians being very interested in the content of this religious work. From the mid-twelfth century until halfway the sixteenth century it was a very popular book. During this period three important translations were made from Arabic into Latin. But why were these translations created? That is the question that will be answered in this research.
In order to answer this question, three translations will be analysed and compared. First the translation of Robert of Ketton(1110-1160) will be analysed. Secondly we will take a closer look at the translation of Mark of Toledo(1193-1216) and lastly at the translation of Flavius Mithridates(1450-1483). The same question will be centralised when looking at all three of the translations, namely what were their specific motives to translate the Arabic Koran into Latin. In addition, I will also take a closer look at the potential use of a Social Network Analysis (SNA).
In order to answer this question, three translations will be analysed and compared. First the translation of Robert of Ketton(1110-1160) will be analysed. Secondly we will take a closer look at the translation of Mark of Toledo(1193-1216) and lastly at the translation of Flavius Mithridates(1450-1483). The same question will be centralised when looking at all three of the translations, namely what were their specific motives to translate the Arabic Koran into Latin. In addition, I will also take a closer look at the potential use of a Social Network Analysis (SNA).
1. Robert of Ketton
Peter the Venerable(1092-1156) was one of the few Christians who stated that the Muslims,
just like all the other heretics, needed the Christian rescue. He said that he had waited for a
very long time for someone to speak up and to refute the Islamic doctrine. However, so far
no one felt the urge to do so. That is why Peter decided to do this himself. He believed that
a lot of Christians did not know about all the wrongs that the Muslims committed. Since they were not aware of this, they could not do anything about it. They could not rise against something of which they did not know it existed. The English translator of scientific Arabic documents, Robert
of Ketton(1110-1160), was asked by Peter to translate the Koran into Latin. Robert of Ketton
decided to accept the offer and to put his normal translation jobs away for a while. He respected Peter a lot and admired all the time and effort that Peter had put into this project. Robert of
Ketton shared the goal of Peter, namely to shed light on the pernicious doctrine of the Islam.
He also thought that the Muslims should be converted to Christendom. The translation of Robert
of Ketton has a lot of polemical features. He added some texts of his own with which he wanted to warn the reader of all the lies that were waiting for him in the rest of the book.
just like all the other heretics, needed the Christian rescue. He said that he had waited for a
very long time for someone to speak up and to refute the Islamic doctrine. However, so far
no one felt the urge to do so. That is why Peter decided to do this himself. He believed that
a lot of Christians did not know about all the wrongs that the Muslims committed. Since they were not aware of this, they could not do anything about it. They could not rise against something of which they did not know it existed. The English translator of scientific Arabic documents, Robert
of Ketton(1110-1160), was asked by Peter to translate the Koran into Latin. Robert of Ketton
decided to accept the offer and to put his normal translation jobs away for a while. He respected Peter a lot and admired all the time and effort that Peter had put into this project. Robert of
Ketton shared the goal of Peter, namely to shed light on the pernicious doctrine of the Islam.
He also thought that the Muslims should be converted to Christendom. The translation of Robert
of Ketton has a lot of polemical features. He added some texts of his own with which he wanted to warn the reader of all the lies that were waiting for him in the rest of the book.
2. Mark of Toledo |
3. Flavius Mithridates |
4. The application of Social Netwerk Analysis
We have seen that there were different reasons for translating the Arabic Koran into Latin. Different people devoted their time to and put a lot of effort in translating this important work of the Muslim society. Sometimes they shared the same goal and interests regarding translating the Koran. The Koran is of course a book, but for the sake of this research it may be better to look at it as a idea or a concept. Would we look at it as an object, the chance would be really small that all these translators and commissioners worked with one and the same Koran. However, when we look at the Koran as a idea or concept, than we can state that there actually was some kind of interaction and exchange between the translations.
|
This relation did not exist in the same time, but over the centuries. It is a diachronic relation. Although the idea of the Koran connects the three translators and commissioners, it probably has not been a conscious choice. Yet, with the information that is now available to us, it can be held that there must have been a certain connection between the three translations and their translators.
To clarify the relationship between the three translations, one can use the Social Network Analysis (SNA). The SNA focuses on the relationships that exist between the individual actors in a network. Between these actors there exists an exchange of knowledge, ideas, goods or objects. With the use of SNA one can get a closer look at the relations and connections between the different actors in a network. Although it is difficult to execute this analysis, it can show us that there must have been some sort of exchange between the three translations. Maybe not a conscious or direct one, but definitely a unconscious and indirect relation. |
Conclusion
On the basis of these findings, the research question as presented in the introduction can be answered: Why is the Koran translated into Latin in the twelfth till halfway the sixteenth century? First there was the goal of converting the Muslims. Both Peter the Venerable and De Rada wanted to convert the Muslims and thought that they needed the translation of the Koran in order to do so. Once they knew their weak places, the Christians could may be convert some Muslims without creating a massacre. Robert of Ketton shared this goal and acknowledged the importance of the project of Peter the Venerable. He was happy to help. Mark of Toledo, however, did not seem to have the exact same purpose and saw no salvation in the use of polemical text in addition to the standard translation. He had deliberately chosen to translate the Koran as literal as possible. The translation of Flavius Mithridates is also very precise and presented very literally. Just like Mark of Toledo he chose not to add hateful messages to his translation. This may have to do with his commissioner, Federigo da Montefeltro, who had another goal for the use of the translation then Peter the Venerable and De Rada. In his case, the translation of the Koran would serve as a utensil with no special polemical features. He wanted it to be some kind of collector item. In short, there were different reasons for translating. Dependent upon ones purpose and goal, the translation was more polemical or more philological.
In this research there was only time and room to analyse three translators and their commissioners. Perhaps an extensive research to other involved people can give us a deeper and better insight in the network that might have existed between the three translations. The readers and the possible publishers also could have played an important part in the creation of the network and the spread of the ideas of the translated Korans. Unfortunately it is not within the capacity of this research to explore their roles. However, it would probably give a more complete overview of the relations and may bring new connections between the translations to light.
H.W.
In this research there was only time and room to analyse three translators and their commissioners. Perhaps an extensive research to other involved people can give us a deeper and better insight in the network that might have existed between the three translations. The readers and the possible publishers also could have played an important part in the creation of the network and the spread of the ideas of the translated Korans. Unfortunately it is not within the capacity of this research to explore their roles. However, it would probably give a more complete overview of the relations and may bring new connections between the translations to light.
H.W.
BibliographyBobzin, Hartmut. “Latin Translations of the Koran: A short Overview.” Islam, Vol. 70, No. 2 (1993): 193-206.
Burman, Thomas E. Reading the Qur’an in Latin Christendom, 1140-1560. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. Burman, Thomas E. “Tafsir and Translation: Traditional Arabic Qur’an Exegesis and the Latin Qur’ans of Robert of Ketton and Mark of Toledo.” Speculum, Vol. 73, No. 3 (juli 1998): 703-732. Burnett, Charles. “The Coherence of the Arabic-Latin Translation Program in Toledo in the Twelfth Century.” Science in Context, Vol. 14, No. 1 (2001): 249-288. Cecini, Ulisse. “Main Features of Mark of Toledo's Latin Qurʾān Translation.” Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean, Vol. 25, No. 3 (2013): 331-344. Clark, Harry. “The Publication of the Koran in Latin a Reformation Dilemma.” The Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1 (lente 1984): 3-12. Daniel, Norman. Islam and the West: the making of an image. Edinburgh: University Press, 1962. Gázques, José Martínez en Andrew Gray. “Translations of the Qur'an and Other Islamic Texts before Dante (Twelfth and ThirteenthCenturies).”Dante Studies, with Annual Report of the Dante Society, No. 125 (2007): 79-92. Jewish Encyclopedia, 1901-1906, (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6177-flavius-raimundus-mithridates, geraadpleegd 27-03-2015). Kritzeck, James. Peter the Venerable and Islam. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964. Nijf, Onno van en Christina Williamson. “Netwerken, panhelleense festivals en de globalisering van de Hellenistische wereld.” Groniek, No. 200 (2014): 253-265. Siddiqui, Mona. “Introduction.” In The Routledge Reader in Christian –Muslim Relations, ed. Mona Siddiqui, 1-17. Londen: Routledge, 2013. |
Sources of imagesFiruge 1. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/vatican/orient.html
Figure 2. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrus_de_Eerbiedwaardige Figure 3. http://www.enciclopedianavarra.com/navarra/rodrigo-jimenez-de-rada/15638/1/ Firgure 4. From Thomas E. Burman, Reading the Qur'an in Latin Christendom, 1140-1560 (Philadelphia: University Press, 2007), 136. Firgure 5. Hannah Wijmenga. Further readingThe information presented on this website also can be found in the following document:
|