Main Features of Mark of Toledo's Latin Qurʾān Translation
2013; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 25; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/09503110.2013.845518
ISSN1473-348X
Autores Tópico(s)Language, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
ResumoAbstractThis article sets out to be a concise account of Mark of Toledo's Qurʾān translation. It will be structured as follows: first, it will provide information about when and in what circumstances it was realised. Second, it will present some examples, which will show Mark's way of translating and transferring form and content of the Qurʾān for his Latin-speaking Christian audience. Mark mostly translates words consistently throughout the text, and also tries to translate words derived from the same Arabic root with root-related Latin words. Moreover, he does not usually try to convey the semantic nuances a word may have, seemingly not paying attention to the context, but translating with a standard, basic meaning of the word. (This observation should be taken as a tendency and not as a rule, as the excursus at the end will illustrate.) Nevertheless, Mark does not violate the grammar of the Latin language. Despite his fidelity to the text, Mark's Christian cultural background sometimes influences the translation. In the conclusion, the features of Mark's translation will be set out in relation to the cultural and political activity of its commissioner, the Archbishop of Toledo Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada.Keywords: Islam / literature – proseIberiaTranslation – from ArabicLatin language – and ArabicQurʾān – Latin translationsMarcus of Toledo, translatorJiménez de Rada, Rodrigo, archbishop of ToledoToledo, Spain – translators Notes1The article is an adaptation of a talk given at the International Medieval Congress in Leeds on 11 July 2012. The talk presented some key features of Mark's translations drawn from an analysis of his text and comparison with the Arabic Qurʾān and the Latin translation by Robert of Ketton (1143), which were presented in my doctoral dissertation: Ulisse Cecini, Alcoranus latinus: Eine sprachliche und kulturwissenschaftliche Analyse der Koranübersetzungen von Robert von Ketton und Marcus von Toledo (Berlin/Münster: LIT Verlag, 2012). In order to compensate for the conciseness of the presentation, I have now added an excursus at the end, which should enable the reader to gain an impression of the complexity of the matter. My thanks are due to Prof. Dr Reinhold Glei for his helpful comments and to Nina Tomaszewski for checking my English.The reader can find additional information about my work on Mark of Toledo (including his activity as a translator apart from the Qurʾān translation, a brief account of the manuscript tradition of the Qurʾān translation and a few additional text samples with comparisons with Robert of Ketton) in Ulisse Cecini, “Faithful to the ‘Infidels’' Word: Mark of Toledo's Latin Translation of the Qurʾān (1209-10)”, in Frühe Koranübersetzungen, ed. Reinhold F. Glei (Trier: 2012), pp. 83-98 and in Ulisse Cecini, “Tra latino, arabo e italiano: Osservazioni sulla riduzione in volgare italiano della traduzione latina del Corano di Marco da Toledo (Ms. Ricc. 1910, cc170vb-174rb)”, Filologia Mediolatina 16 (2009): 131-60, where I edit some passages of the translation. An essential bibliography on Mark of Toledo includes: Thomas Burman, “Tafsīr and Translation: Traditional Arabic Qurʾān Exegesis and the Latin Qurʾāns of Robert of Ketton and Mark of Toledo”, Speculum 73 (1998): 703-32; Thomas Burman, Reading the Qur'an in Latin Christendom 1140-1560 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 2007); Marie-Thérèse d'Alverny, “Deux traductions latines du Coran au moyen âge”, Archives d'Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Age, 16 (1948): 69-131, also published in Marie-Thérèse d'Alverny, La connaissance de l'Islam dans l'Occident médiéval, ed. Charles Burnett (Aldershot: Ashgate 1994), I; Marie-Thérèse d'Alverny and Georges Vajda, “Marc de Tolède, traducteur d'Ibn Tumart”, Al-Andalus 16 (1951): 99-140; 259-307; 17 (1952): 93-148, also published in d'Alverny, La connaissance de l'Islam, II; Marie-Thérèse d'Alverny, “Marc de Tolède”, in Estudios sobre Alfonso VI y la reconquista de Toledo 3, Actas del II Congreso Internacional de Estudios Mozárabes, Toledo 20-26 Mayo 1985 [Serie Històrica, volume V] (Toledo: Instituto de Estudios Visigótico Mozárabes, 1989), pp. 49-59, also published in d'Alverny, La connaissance de l'Islam, VII.; José Martínez Gázquez and Nadia Petrus, “Las motivaciones generales de las traducciones latinas del Corán”, Journal of Medieval Latin 18 (2008): 230-46; Reinhold Glei and Stefan Reichmuth, “Religion between Last Judgement, Law, and Faith: Koranic Dīn and Its Rendering in Latin Translations of the Koran”, Religion 42, no. 2 (2012): 247-71.2The explanation for this date is to be found in Cecini, Alcoranus Latinus, 116 n. 477.3On Jiménez de Rada, see Matthias Maser, Die Historia Arabum des Rodrigo Jimenez de Rada: arabische Traditionen und die Identität der Hispania im 13. Jahrhundert: Studie, Übersetzung, Kommentar (Berlin: Lit, 2006); Peter Linehan, Spain 1157-1300: A Partible Inheritance (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008); Wolfram Drews, “‘Sarazenen’ als Spanier? Muslime und kastilisch-neogotische Gemeinschaft bei Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada († 1247)”, in Wissen über Grenzen, ed. A. Speer and L. Wegener (Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 2006), pp. 259-81; Wolfram Drews, “Transkulturelle Perspektiven in der mittelalterlichen Historiographie: Zur Diskussion welt- und globalgeschichtlicher Entwürfe in der aktuellen Geschichtswissenschaft”, Historische Zeitschrift 292 (2011): 31-59; Candida Ferrero Hernández, “Cristianos y Musulmanes en la Historia Arabum de Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada”, Journal of Medieval Latin 18 (2008): 356-73.4Mark of Toledo, Praefatio in Alcoranum. See Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 116.5See Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, ed. A. Potthast (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1957), n° 3680, p. 318.6Mark of Toledo, Praefatio in alcoranum. See Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 115.7See Petrus Venerabilis, Schriften zum Islam, ed. Reinhold Glei (Altenberge: CIS–Verlag, 1985), p. 62: “Aggredior inquam vos, non, ut nostri saepe faciunt, armis sed verbis, non vi sed ratione, non odio sed amore”.8This translation corpus – known after Marie-Thérèse d'Alverny's work as collectio Toletana and re-named by the Barcelona team around José Martínez Gázquez as corpus Islamolatinum – even though it was probably known to Rodrigo and Mark, was never mentioned in the new translations. On this collection, see Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 84 n. 248; Óscar de la Cruz Palma, “Los textos de la llamada Collectio Toletana, fuente de información sobre el Islam”, Journal of Medieval Latin 17 (2007): 413-34.9See Maser, Historia Arabum, p.19-27.10See Maser, Historia Arabum, 2; Drews, Transkulturelle Perspektiven, 31-59, esp. 55.11See Lucy K. Pick, Conflict and Coexistence: Archbischop Rodrigo and the Muslims and Jews of Medieval Spain (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2004).12I follow here defective Qurʾānic spelling; the transliteration takes account of the long vowels.13English translation from Arthur J. Arberry, The Koran Interpreted (London: Oxford University Press 1964), p. 1.14D'Alverny, Deux traductions, 116. Robert of Ketton, who instead appreciated a style characterised by variatio, translated these words as pius and miserator (Sura 1:1: Misericordi pioque Deo, ibidem).15Arberry, Koran, 302.16See Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 199.17Arberry, Koran, 531.18Torino, Biblioteca Nazionale, Codex F.V. 35, (Henceforth as T.), fol. 69vb.19The context to which the verse should be ascribed is explained in Cecini, “Faithful”, 93-4.20See Alessandro Bausani, Il Corano (Milano: RCS Rizzoli Libri S.p.A., 2004), p. 734.21Arberry, Koran, 665.22Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Lat. 14503, fol. 217va,; Paris, Bibliothèque Mazarine 780 (1178): fol. 108rb.23Arberry, Koran, 304.24T: fol. 40vab.25Arberry, Koran, 304.26Sura 19: 25-6.27For the concept of ridiculum in Jerome see his Liber de optimo genere interpretandi, Kommentar G. J. M. Bartelink (Leiden: 1980), 5, 8.28E.W. Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon (London: Williams and Norgate, 1872), pt 1, volume IV, p. 1354.29 Ibid., 1355.30Sura 19: 29. Arberry, Koran, 304.31 Ibid., 305.32 ibid., 303.33T: fol. 40va.34T: fol. 40vb.35From the creed of Costantinople (381). See J. Stevenson, Creeds, Councils and Controversies: Documents Illustrating the History of the Church AD 337-461. New edn revised by W.H.C. Frend (London: SPCK, 1989), p. 114.36T: fol. 72va.37Arberry, Koran, 550.38T: fol. 72va.39T: fol. 79rb.40Arberry, Koran, 583.41Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Lat. 3394, fol. 215v.42Arberry, Koran, 640.43Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 204-13, contains a table with all the Sura titles in the manuscript tradition of Mark's translation.44T: fol. 80ra.45See the preface in Cecini, Alcoranus latinus, 110-16.46See Thomas Burman, “How an Italian Friar Read His Arabic Qur'ān”, Dante Studies with the Anuual Report of the Dante Society 125 (2007): 93-109, pp. 99-100, 104.47See A.A. Ambros and S. Procházka, A Concise Dictionary of Koranic Arabic (Wiesbaden: Reichert 2004), s-b-ḥ, and ḥ-m-d, pp. 127, 78.48For the reference of this translation see above, Sura 110.49The only exception is Sura 2:222, where the word is used in the plural form: Wa-yasʾalūna-ka ʿani l-maḥīḍi qul huwa adhan fa-ʿtazilū l-nisāʾa fī l-maḥīḍi wa-lā taqrabū-hunna ḥattā yaṭhurna fa-idhā taṭahharna faʾtū-hunna min ḥaythu amara-kumu l-lāhu inna l-lāha yuḥibbu t-tawwābīna wa-yuḥibbu l-mutaṭahhirīn(a) (They will question thee concerning the monthly course. Say: “It is hurt; so go apart from women during the monthly course, and do not approach them till they are clean. When they have cleansed themselves, then come unto them as God has commanded you.” Truly, God loves those who repent, and He loves those who cleanse themselves” (Arberry, Koran, 31); Mark, T.: fol. 5rb: Et consulent te pro menstruis. Dic: “Quod langor est”. Contineatis uos a mulieribus in menstruis et non accedatis ad eas donec mundentur. Et cum mundate fuerint accedatis ad eas ex parte qua Deus uobis precepit. Deus enim diligit penitentes et mundos.50Arberry, Koran, 6.51T: F. 1va.52See Ambros and Procházka, Concise Dictionary, t-w-b, 51.53Hartmut Bobzin, Der Koran: Neu Übertragen von Hartmut Bobzin (München: Beck, 2010), p.13.54Arberry, Koran, 7.55T: fol. 1vb.56Ambros and Procházka, Concise Dictionary, 51.57See below, Sura 9:104.58We could not but notice here, too, two different translations of the same word bāriʾ, namely miserator (again!) and liberator, although bāriʾ actually means “creator” (See, Ambros and Procházka, Concise Dictionary, b-r-ʾ, 36). However, we should also note that, in manuscript T, we find above both translations the same note: scilicet redemptorem. Moreover, we should notice that Mark understands the reflexive function of nafs and translates it correctly as vos ipsos: This is another element that shows that the closeness to the original does not do any violence to the Latin language. Regarding the meaning of nafs here, it should be mentioned that there are modern translators, such as Bobzin, who translate it as “soul”, i.e. “desire”. Nevertheless, Bobzin also accepts the more common reflexive/reciprocal solution, which we also find in Arberry. See Bobzin, Koran, 14 (translation) and 616 (comment).59Arberry, Koran, 16.60T:fol. 3rb.61However, for muslim we also find the translation sarracenus, e.g. in Sura 43:69 (T. fol. 67rb).62Arberry, Koran, 20.63T. fol. 3vb.64Arberry, Koran, 20.65Ambros and Procházka, Concise Dictionary, 46.66T: fol. 67ra.67Arberry, Koran, 74.68T: fol. 10vb.69Arberry, Koran, 82.70T: fol. 11vb.71Arberry, Koran, 191.72T: fol. 26va.73See above, Sura 2:54.74Arberry, Koran, 193.75T: fol. 26vb.76Arberry, Koran, 353.77T: fol. 46vb.78T: fol. 4vb.79Arberry, Koran, 537.80T: fol. 70va.81The assumption that Mark did not perceive it as a phrase would tend to support the hypothesis that Mark had a text version of Sura 24:10 with raḥīm (see above).
Referência(s)