¹ The Ultimate Quest regarding the Rectification of [Astronomical] Principles. A critical edition of this text using all the extant manuscripts is now completed by the present author. There exists an English translation based on one manuscript, completed by Victor Roberts more than twenty years ago but never published. A new comprehensive translation of the critically edited text and a commentary on the whole work are now in preparation by the present author.

² Neugebauer, O., Exact Sciences in Antiquity (Providence, RI, 1957), Appendix, pp. 197, 203–204.Google Scholar Neugebauer was already working on the Maragha results from a French translation of a text by Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (d. 1274) describing the “Ṭsī Device” and Ṭūsī lunar model. It was Baron Carra De Vaux who first made that text available in French as Appendix VI to Tannery's, P.Recherche sur l'histoire de l'astronomie ancienne (Paris, 1893), pp. 337–361.Google Scholar

³ Neugebauer, O., Exact Sciences, note 2.Google Scholar

⁴ All these articles are now gathered together in Kennedy, E.S. et al. , Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences (American University of Beirut, Beirut, 1983), Pp. 50–107.Google Scholar

⁵ The important chapter in Ṭūsī's work, where the description of his lunar model is to be found, was already published in translation by Carra De Vaux, see note 2 above.

⁶ See for example, Saliba, G., “The Original Source of Quṭb al-Dīn al-Shīrāzī's Planetary Model,” Journal for the History of Arabic Science (1979) 3: 3–18.Google Scholar

⁷ Urḍī's text, Kitāb al-Hay'a, was first used by Swerdlow, Noel in his unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, “Ptolemy's Theory of the Distances and Sizes of the Planets: A Study of the Scientific Foundation of Medieval Cosmology” (Yale, 1968),Google Scholar and identified simply as the “Anonymous Astronomical Treatise in Bodleian Arabic Ms March 621.” Later, the same manuscript was used by Goldstein, B. and Swerdlow, N. in “Planetary Distances and Sizes in an Anonymous Arabic Treatise Preserved in Bodleian Ms March 621,” Centaurus (1970–1971) 15: 135–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The present author finally identified this Bodleian MS as being the work of 'Urḍī, in The First non-Ptolemaic Astronomy at the Maragha School,” ISIS (1979) 70: 571–576.Google Scholar

⁸ In reality it was Carra De Vaux who first published Ṭūsī's lunar model, see note 2 above.

⁹ See note 6.

¹⁰ Saliba, G., “A Medieval Arabic Reform of the Ptolemaic Lunar Model,” Journal for the History of Astronomy (1989) 20: 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹ Parts of the Tadhkira were edited, translated into English, and supplied with a commentary by Ragep, F. Jamil as a Ph.D. dissertation at Harvard University, 1982. Since then, I understand that the same author has undertaken to edit the whole work and to translate it into English and comment upon it.Google Scholar

¹² See al-Haytham, Ibn, Al-Shukūk 'ala Baṭlamyūs, edited by Sabra, A. and Shehaby, N. (Dubitationes in Ptolemæum) (Cairo, 1971).Google Scholar

¹³ The present author is aware of the facsimile edition produced by Goldstein, B., “The Arabic Version of Ptolemy's Planetary Hypothesis,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society (1967) 57, and of an on-going project, conducted by Régis Morelon, the aim of which is to produce a critical edition of the Planetary Hypothesis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴ Goldstein, B., Al-Biṭrūjī: On the Principles of Astronomy (New Haven and London, 1971).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Koyré's statement, in Taton, R., Histoire générale des sciences, vol. 2, p. 64,Google Scholar was also quoted in Neugebauer, O., “On the Planetary Theory of Copernicus,” Vistas in Astronomy (1968) vol. 10, p. 89,CrossRefGoogle Scholar reprinted in Neugebauer, O., Astronomy and History: Selected Essays (New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, Tokyo, 1983), pp. 491–505. See also infra.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶ Swerdlow, N. and Neugebauer, O., Mathematical Astronomy in Copernicus's De Revolutionibus (New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, Tokyo, 1984), p. 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Neugebauer, O., “On the Planetary Theory of Copernicus,” p. 90, note 15.Google Scholar

¹⁸ See, for example, Hartner, W., “Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī's Lunar Theory,” Physis (1969) 11: 287–304;Google Scholar“La science dans le monde de l'Islam après la chute du califat,” Studia Islamica (1970) 31: 135–151;Google Scholar“Copernicus, the Man, the Work, and its History,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1973) 117: 413–422;Google Scholar“The Islamic Astronomical Background to Nicholas Copernicus,” Ossolineum 1975, Colloquia Copernica III, Nadbitka, 7–16 [all now reprinted in W. Hartner, Oriens-Occidens II (1984)];Google ScholarSwerdlow, N., “The Derivation and First Draft of Copernicus's Planetary Theory: A Translation of the Commentariolus with Commentary,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1973) 117: 423–512.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See, Hartner, W., “Copernicus, the Man,” note 18.Google Scholar

²⁰ Hartner, continued to explore this connection between Copernicus and the Maragha astronomers till the last years of his life. Just before he died, he published, for example, “Ptolemaische Astronomie im Islam und zur Zeit des Regiomontanus,” Regiomontanus-Studien, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungberichte, 364. Band (1980), Heraugegeben von Günther Hamann, 109–124.Google Scholar

²¹ Swerdlow, N., “Derivation,” note 18.Google Scholar

²² For a detailed analysis of the use of 'Urḍī's Lemma by the Maragha astronomers and its eventual use by Copernicus, see Saliba, G. “Arabic Astronomy and Copernicus,” Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften (1984) 1: 73–87, esp. pp. 78–79.Google Scholar

²³ See A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy (New York, Heidelberg, Berlin, 1975), p. 1456 for plate IX of Vat. Gracec. 211, fol. 116r.Google Scholar

²² Swerdlow, Noel and Neugebauer, Otto, note 16, figs. 5 and 6.Google Scholar

²⁴ See for example, Saliba, G., “The Role of the Almagest Commentaries in Medieval Arabic Astronomy,” Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Sciences (1987) 37: 3–20.Google Scholar

²⁵ Most of these interpretations are now grouped together for the reader's convenience in one article by Gingerich, Owen, “Islamic Astronomy,” Scientific American (1986) 254: 74–83. This article was later translated into Arabic with many gross mistakes in the Arabic and published in the Arabic version of the Scientific American Majallat al-'Ulūm, 1.1: 8–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ Saliba, G., “Theory and Observation in Islamic Astronomy: The Work of Ibn al-Shāṭir of Damascus (d. 1375),” Journal for the History of Astronomy (1987) 18: 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁷ Saliba, , “The Role of the Almagest Commentaries,” note 25.Google Scholar

²⁸ See Roberts, note 4.

²⁹ See note 10.

³⁰ Roberts, Victor, note 4, p. 430.Google Scholar

³¹ For a more detailed treatment of the problem of periodization in Arabic astronomy, see Saliba, G., “The Role of Maragha in the Development of Islamic Astronomy: A Scientific Revolution Before the Renaissance,” Revue de Synthèse (1987) 3.4: 361–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

³² For a short survey of Tāj al-Sharī^cas models, see G. Saliba, “Islamic Planetary Theories After the Eleventh Century,” to appear in a book devoted to the history of Arabic science edited by R. Rashed. See also the edition, translation, and commentary on Tāj al-Sharī^ca's works in the Ph.D. dissertation of Ahmad al-Dallāl, Department of Middle East Languages and Cultures, Columbia University (1990).Google Scholar

³⁴ The only reference we have to this book comes from an elementary treatise called Kitāb al-Hay'a (A Book on Astronomy), by the same anonymous Spanish author, now preserved at the Osmania University Library, Hyderabad, MS N° 520RH.

³⁵ Cf. Arabic manuscript Ahmad III 3338, fol. 4v, in the Topkapi Library, Istanbul.

³⁶ The latest of these studies is Sabra, A.I., “The Andalusian Revolt against Ptolemaic Astronomy,” in Transformation and Tradition in the Sciences, edited by Everett, Mendelsohn (Cambridge, 1984).Google Scholar

³⁷ The last study of Swerdlow, N., “Jābir Ibn Aflah's Interesting Method for Finding Eccentricities and Direction of the Apsidal Line of a Superior Planet,” in From Deferent to Equant, edited by King, D. and Saliba, G., Annals, New York Academy of Sciences (1987) 500: 501–512, explains the methodological sophistication of Jābir, but does not touch directly upon the issues raised here.Google Scholar

³⁸ I have noted the importance of these texts and their interrelationship in the preliminary survey of the Tahrĭr. See Saliba, G., “The Role of the Almagest Commentaries,” note 25.Google Scholar

³⁹ Cf. Shīrāzī's text, Majlis Shūra-i Milli MS 3944, Teheran, fol. 7r.

⁴⁰ Se ISIS (1983) 74: 388–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Centaurus (1986) 29: 249–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ This treatise was mentioned by the biographer Zādeh, Taşköprü (d. 1561), al-Shaqā 'iq al-Nu'mānīya fi al-Dawla al-'Uthmānīya, edited by Ahmad, S. Furāt, Istanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Yayinlari N°: 3353 (Istanbul 1985), p. 159.Google Scholar

⁴² The existence of this treatise was first brought to my attention, in 1981, by A.I. Sabra, of Harvard University, who has kindly sent me a copy of his own handwritten selections from it. I gladly acknowledge his kind gesture.

⁴³ See Suter, H., Die Mathematiker und Astronomen Der Araber und Ihre Werke (Leipzig, 1900), p. 188.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See Sédillot, L.P.E.A., Prolégomènes des Tables Astronomiques d'Ouloug-Beg (Paris, 1853).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Süleymaniye, Hüsrev Paşa MS 246.

⁴⁶ Ibid., fol. 46v.

⁴⁷ Ibid., fol. 50v.

⁴⁸ See, for example, Suter, , Die Mathematiker und Astronomen, p. 189,Google Scholar note 43 and Brockelman, C., Geschichte der Arabischen Literatur (Berlin, 1902), II, p. 414.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ MS Arabic Revan 1996.

⁵⁰ Ibid., fol. 90r.

⁵¹ Ibid.

⁵² Ibid., fol. 92v.

⁵³ lstanbul University MS Arabçe 2466.

⁵⁴ See, Suter, Die Mathematiker und Astronomen, p. 190, note 43, where he gives a variant of the name as Chalīl b. Ahmed el-Naqīb, Gars ed-dīn Ḥalebī, but does not mention the work discussed here.

⁵⁵ MS Arabçe Yeni Cami 1181.

⁵⁶ Ibid., fol. 174v.

⁵⁷ More on this author in Suter, Die Mathematiker und Astronomen, p. 194, note 43.

⁵⁸ Süleymaniye Library, Istanbul, Laleli Arabic MS 2126, fols. 64r-116v.

⁵⁹ lstanbul University, MS Arabçe 2466.

⁶⁰ Ibid., fol. 6v.

⁶¹ See, Saliba, G., “Ibn Sīna and Abū 'Ubayd al-Jūzjāni: The Problem of the Ptolemaic Equant“ Journal for the History of Arabic Science (1980) 4: 376–403.Google Scholar

⁶² lstanbul University, MS Arabçe 2466, fol. 6v.

⁶³ Ibid., fol. 7r.

⁶⁴ In this context I am thinking of the work of the Ḥanbalite theologian Ibn Taymīya al-Harrānī (d. 1328) who did make such statements in his Dar' al-Ta'āruḍ Bayn al-'Aql wa-l-Naql, but this is the subject of another article.