Olympiodorus

According to the K. al-Fihrist (p. 251.5 F), a commentary on the De gen. corr. (unknown in Greek) was translated by Ustath, the translator of the Metaphysics.

Another set of translations of philosophical works, different in style and focused on Aristotle and his

Commentators, was produced by Hunayn b. Islraq and his associates. A quasi-contemporary of al-Kindl, Hunayn b. Islraq (d. 873) was a Christian Nestorian, a physician and scientist (see Bergstrasser 1913, 1925; Gabrieli 1924; Meyerhof 1926; Haddad 1974; Strohmaier 1990). Together with his son Islraq b. Hunayn (d. 911) and several translators associated with them in various ways (see Meyerhof 1926:702-713) Hunayn b. Islraq produced a new set of translations. Since his mother tongue was Syriac, some of these translations were into Syriac, and others into Arabic; often a work originally translated into Syriac was retranslated into Arabic, either in this same period - typically, a Syriac translation made by Hunayn was rendered into Arabic by his son Islraq - or even later on, in the second half of the tenth century. As a rule, the Syriac versions mentioned in the bio-bibliographical sources are lost, whereas the Arabic translations made out of them have come down to us. The learned al-Safadl (d. 1363: see Rosenthal in El2, VIII, cols 783-785) contrasts the word for word method of the early translations with the understanding of the sentence as a whole, typical of the translations of Hunayn and his associates (English trans of al-Safadl’s passage by Rosenthal 1975:17). This remark counts as a witness of changing attitudes in the translation technique, that can be viewed partly as an internal evolution - comparable to the change from the verbum de verba pattern of the Latin medieval translations to the Humanist rendering - partly as a reaction, on the part of scientists and scholars involved in the process of the assimilation of Greek learning, to the harsh criticisms against the new literary genre of the philosophical treatise, raised by belletrists like the famous al-Jalrlz (d. 868) or Ibn Qutayba (d. 890). Another element should be added to the picture of a changing landscape, if compared with al-Ma’mun’s times: under al-Mutawakkil (r. 847-861), the Caliphate officially disavowed the Mu'tazilite doctrine and put an end to the mihna, reinstating the doctrine of the increated Qur’an as the official creed of the state (see Madelung 1974).

The translations produced by Hunayn and his associates include other works by Plato and especially Aristotle; Theophrastus; Galen; other works by Alexander of Aphrodisias; Porphyry; perhaps Iamblichus, and Themistius; finally, other works by Proclus, John Philoponus, and Olympiodorus.

Plato (Tim., Leges, Resp. [?], Soph. [?])

As we have seen before, a translation of the Timaeus had been done by Ibn al-Bitrlq, and Ibn al-NadIm affirms that either Hunayn made another translation, or he revised Ibn al-Bitrlq’s one (p. 246.15-246.16 F). Neither has come down to us. Hunayn is credited also with the translation of the Laws (p. 246.5-246.6 F), but this translation is no longer extant: traces of it survive in al-Blrunl’s India (Gabrieli 1947). There is no scholarly consensus about al-Farabl’s acquaintance with it: according to some, his compendium of the Laws (edition: Gabrieli 1952) was made on the basis of this translation, whereas other scholars think that al-Farabl made use of the Arabic version of an epitome, possibly by Galen (see Parens 1995; Gutas 1997; Druart 1998; Harvey 2003). If one has to trust the K. al-Fihrist, Hunayn commented upon the Republic (p. 246.5 F), but no further details are given. A translation of the Republic, be it partial or integral, should have existed, because the Ikhwan al-Safti’ and possibly al-‘jAmirl are acquainted with it; in addition, Averroes commented upon it (see the entry on Plato, Arabic in this volume). Finally, the K. al-Fihrist credits Isljaq with the translation of a dialogue that might be the Sophist (the Arabic skeleton points to that), accompanied by a commentary of an author whose name might be read “al-Imqldurus” (Olympiodorus? Be this as it may, a commentary by Olympiodorus on the Sophist is unknown in Greek).

Aristotle (Cat., De int., An. pr., An. po., Top., Phys., De caelo, Meteor., De gen. corr., De an., Metaph., Eth. Nic.)

The translation of the Categories is attributed to Hunayn in the K. al-Fihrist (p. 248.20 F), but in the Paris MS that contains the Arabic Organon (see Hugonnard-Roche 1993) it is attributed to Isljaq (edition: Badawl 1980; see Elamrani Jamal 1989:510-512). The De interpretatione is an example of the translations into Syriac and Arabic mentioned above: it was translated by Hunayn into Syriac and by Isljaq into Arabic (p. 249.1 F; edition: Badawl 1980; see Hugonnard-Roche 1989:513-515). The Prior Analytics too were translated into Syriac, partly by Hunayn, partly by Isljaq (p. 249.6 F), but what has come down to us in the Paris MS mentioned above is the Arabic version of a certain Tadharl (Theodorus), a scholar of the circle of Hunayn. As for the Posterior Analytics, the K. al-Fihrist (p. 249.11-249.12 F) mentions a translation into Syriac by Hunayn (partial) and Isljaq (complete), adding that this translation - lost to us - was the basis for the Arabic translation by Abu Bishr Matta ibn YUnus (edition: Badawl 1980; for the translations of AbU Bishr Matta, see below). The same is true for the Topics: the Syriac translation by Hunayn, mentioned in the K. al-Fihrist (p. 249.15 F) did not survive, whereas the Arabic version made by two translators of this circle (Abu ‘Uthman al-Dimashql and Ibrahim ibn ‘Abdallah) has come down to us (edition: Badawl 1980). Isljaq translated into Arabic the Physics (edition: Badawl 1984), and Hunayn, according to the testimony of the K. al-Fihrist (p. 250.28-250.29 F), corrected the translation of the De caelo by Yaljya ibn al-Bitrlq. Hunayn also wrote a summary of the Meteorology (edition: Daiber 1975). The De gen. corr., allegedly translated into Arabic in this period (see Rashed 2003), has come down to us only in part, together with Alexander’s commentary (translated by Abu Bishr Matta: see below). As for the De anima, the translation that has come down to us (edition: Badawl 1954) is attributed to Isljaq, but it has convincingly been argued that it is not by him (see the status quaestionis by Elamrani Jamal 2003). Islraq is credited also with a version of the Metaphysics (p. 251.26 F), which might be either a fresh translation, or a revision of Ustath’s (there is no scholarly consensus on this point; see Mattock 1989; Martin 1989; Martini Bonadeo 2002, 2003; Bertolacci 2006). To this period belongs also the Concise Exposition of Aristotle’s Metaphysics by the astronomer, mathematician and philosopher Thabit ibn Qurra, actually focused only on chapters 6-9 of Book Lambda (edition: Reisman and Bertolacci 2009). Finally, the K. al-Fihrist (p. 252.2F) credits Isljaq with the translation of the Nicomachean Ethics (edition: Badawl 1978; Akasoy and Fidora 2005).