1As the title of this paper implies, our main objective as authors is to bring up to date the research regarding the written work on agriculture in al-Andalus. In order to do this, in the first place we shall analyze the existing manuscripts which belong to both Arab and Western libraries. Then we shall point out the agronomic treatises which have been edited and translated, with some critical observations on the works which have been carried out in this field up until the present time, and we shall finish with an explanation of the different projects in progress that are related to these Andalusî agricultural treatises.
2Before going on to the different sections of this paper, we would like to make it quite clear that we shall be referring exclusively to the Hispano-Arabic agronomists whose work we have had access to, whether it may be complete or partial. Therefore, authors of whom we have some vague reference but whose work is not known to us will not be mentioned in these pages. Likewise we would like to point out that our work is based on the bibliography in the Escuela de Estudios Árabes (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) which consists of almost four hundred books. All of them have been thoroughly checked through for this study, and we would mention that in the small amount of catalogues from American libraries which have been available to us, we have found no reference to the manuscripts regarding the subject we are dealing with.
3On mentioning each of the Andalusî agronomists we will follow a chronological order, and with regard to the manuscripts which are either theirs or attributed to them, there will be the following arrangement: 1) codices which exist in the libraries of Arab countries, 2) manuscripts from the libraries of European countries. In both cases we follow the alphabetical order of the names of the cities where the libraries are located.
4In the first place, we would point out that in our search hardly any manuscripts were found that had not already been included in previous studies, therefore we shall make reference to those which are mentioned here for the first time. Secondly, we must take into account the fact that the majority of the registered codices are miscellaneous so we shall indicate the exact pages of each of the agricultural manuscripts treatise under consideration.
5ANONYMOUS ANDALUSÎ. There are no known biographical details about this author, although from the references implied from his work titled Kitâb fî Tartîb awqât al-ghirâsa wa-l-maghrûsât, we can deduce that he lived at the end of the 10th Century and beginning of 11th, which means that he is the first of the Andalusî agronomists (Kitâb fî Tartîb, 1990: 17-19).
- 1 This other title given to his agricultural treatise appears in the marginal notes of the manuscript (...)
6Although with certain reservations, we have identified him as Ibn Abî l-Jawâd, mentioned by some later agronomists as the author of a Risâla fî l-filâḥa, of which there are no known manuscripts1. There are two copies of the treatise of this Anonymous Andalusî:
- 2 This comes from the ancient manuscripts in the Zaytûna Library in Tunis, under number nº 5298. Kitâ (...)
7- Bibliothèque Nationale, Tunis, nº 13812, folios 1r – 30r2.
8- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 4764, folios 47r – 64r (Vajda, 1953: 342).
- 3 Ibn Luyûn, Kitâb Ibdâʿ, al-malâḥa wa-inhâʾ, al-rajâḥa fî uṣûl ṣinâʿ,at al-filâḥa, manuscript nº XIV (...)
9IBN WÂFID, Abû l-Muṭarrif ‘Abd al-Raḥmân b. Muḥammad b. ‘Abd al-Kabîr b. Yaḥyà b. Wâfid b. Muḥannad al-Lajmî, an agronomist and physician from Toledo, who died in 1074-5. There is no existing Arab manuscript with the name of this agronomist as the author of this study; there is only a Castilian codex, number 10106 in the Toledo Cathedral Library, which attributes it to a certain «Abel Mutariph Abel Nufit», who according to J. M. Millás Vallicrosa must be identified with Abû l-Muṭarrif Ibn Wâfid (Millás, 1943: 284-293). Although this name is not to be found in any Arabic manuscript, we have two references which claim that this author from Toledo wrote a treatise on agriculture: the first is by the historian Ibn al-Abbâr, who in Takmila leaves it quite clear that Ibn Wâfid wrote Majmûʿ fî l-filâḥa (Summary or Compendium of Agriculture), since he was an expert in agronomy and had been in charge of the planting of the orchard of al-Ma’mûn b. Dhî l-Nûn in Toledo (Ibn al-Abbâr, 1886-1889: VI, 551). The second reference is also from an agronomist, Ibn Luyûn, who in the margin of his agricultural poem claims that Ibn Wâfid wrote Majmûʿ, fî l-filâḥa3.
- 4 For this subject we refer to previous pages and the following studies: Attié, 1969: 241-261; Caraba (...)
10The Arab text which corresponds to the Castilian translation published by Millás, and therefore the work of Ibn Wâfid, can be found in numerous manuscripts, but there are conflicting opinions regarding the authorship of the manuscripts. This is not the appropriate moment to deal in depth with the different opinions which have been considered or how we have reached the conclusion that in fact we have opted for Majmûʿ, fî l-filâḥa by Ibn Wâfid4, so we shall present the sources we believe to be included in his study, adding the different references included, and those which have been dealt with afterwards.
11- Bibliothèque Nationale, Algiers, nº 1550, folios 154v-180r (Fagnan, 1983: 426-427), in the name of Abû l-Qâsim b. ‘Abbâs al-Nahrâwî (explicit on folio 180r), later identified with al-Zahrâwî (Abulcasis latino) from Córdoba.
- 5 This codex, from the Jallâwî collection, does not appear in any of the catalogues of the Rabat Gene (...)
12- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 617 j, pp 414-4785, in the name of Ibn Ḥajjâj (p 414), whose authorship was later defended by the Jordanian publishers of the agronomic document called al-Muqniʿ, fî l-filâḥa.
13- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 157r-194r (Allouche & Regragui, 1958: II, 274), in the name of Ibn Ḥajjâj (folio 216r).
14- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 69, pp 1-74 (al-Khaṭṭâbî, 1982: 233), without any reference in the text, but quoting the name Ibn Ḥajjâj in the catalogue (the author followed by the previously-mentioned Jordanian publishers).
15- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 6342, pp 2-40 (al-Khaṭṭâbî, 1982: 232-233), without any reference in the text, but in the name of Ibn Ḥajjâj in the catalogue.
16- Private manuscript of M. ‘Azîmân, Tetuan, folios 106v-130v (Millás, 1954b: 87-96), with no reference in the text. In the opinion of B. Attié (1982: 321), these folios are the work of al-Nahrâwî.
17- Bibliothèque Générale, Tetuan, nº 889/13, pp 1-51 (Catálogo, 1973: 81), included in the catalogue as unknown author, inside the manuscript to Ibn Ḥajjâj.
18- Bibliothèque Nationale, Tunis, nº 13812, folios 30v-44v (Kitâb fî Tartîb, 1990: 43-44), a codex containing only some fragments of the work of Ibn Wâfid and with no mention of the author on these pages.
19- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 5013, folios 1v-47r (Vajda, 1953: 342). The name of Ibn Ḥajjâj appears on folio 71r, therefore in the catalogue the whole study is under the name of this agronomist (in spite of the fact that on folios 72r to 161v we find the manuscript of Ibn Baṣṣâl) which is maintained by the Jordanian publishers of al-Muqni‘.
20- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 5754, folios 152v-176v (Vajda, 1953: 342), in the name of Abû l-Qâsim b. ‘Abbâs al-Nahrâwî (as we have already mentioned, he is identified as the physician from Córdoba, al-Zahrâwî) in two explicit in the text (folios 176v and 186r). Similarly we can find the title of the work: Kitâb al-Filâḥa. Although folios 176v to 186r are attributed to al-Nahrâwî, this is a summary, or extracts from the same, of the agronomic document by Ibn al-ʿAwwâm (Attié, 1969: 261).
- 6 The contents of all the Arab manuscripts mentioned, except for the two from Tetuan and the codex fr (...)
21-Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 4764, folios 151v-160v, in the catalogue in the name of Abû l-Khayr, as this author appears on folio 64r. Nevertheless, there are several different works in this codex, and in the previously-mentioned folios we can find part of the work of Ibn Wâfid on reared poultry and recommendations against different blights in crops. As happens in previous occasions, these folios are attributed to al-Nahrâwî by Professor Bachir Attié, and to Ibn Ḥajjâj by the Jordanian publishers of al-Muqniʿ 6.
22Apart from the translation in Medieval Castilian referred to, there is another one in Medieval Catalan of Majmûʿ, fî l-filâḥa by Ibn Wâfid on folios 62r to 111r of manuscript nº 93 of the collection of Spanish and Portuguese codices in the National Library in Paris (Morel, 1892: 32-33).The existence of this Catalan version meant that we finally opted for attributing the work it contained to Ibn Wâfid. Although we are dealing with an incomplete manuscript without the name of any specific author, it is well known that this agronomist and physician from Toledo was held in high esteem by the translators of the Crown of Aragon. His translation of Kitâb al-Adwiya al-mufrada (Treatise of simple medicines) (Ibn Wâfid, 1943) is proof of this; it was also translated into several Latin versions.
23IBN ḤAJJÂJ, Abû ‘Umar Aḥmad b. Muḥammad was an agronomist from Sevilla who died at the end of the 11th Century (Carabaza, 1992: 39-55). As we have discovered, there are various manuscripts under the name of Ibn Ḥajjâj although in fact they also contain other works (among them those of Ibn Wâfid). So we shall only list the folios or pages on which we consider that the treatise by this author, al-Muqniʿ, fî l-filâḥa, is included; to date, there has been no controversy about its author.
24- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 617 j, pp 478-510.
25- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 194r-216r.
26- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 69, pp 74-103.
27- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 6342, pp 40-58.
28- Bibliothèque Générale, Tetuan, nº 889/13, pp 51-77.
- 7 All the quoted manuscripts, except for the codex from Tetuan, are described by Carabaza et al., 199 (...)
29- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 5013, folios 47r-71r7.
30IBN BAṢṢÂL, Abû ‘Abd Allâh Muḥammad b. Ibrâhîm al-Ṭulayṭulî, an agronomist born in Toledo, as indicated by his nisba, in the middle of the 11th Century, about whom we have few biographical details. His name is often distorted both by those who copied and transcribed in European countries in Ibn Faṣṣâl, Ibn Faḍḍâl and Ibn Baṭṭâl, although the correct name is Ibn Baṣṣâl. His most well-known agronomic work, Kitâb al-Filâḥa, was dedicated to al-Ma’mûn from Toledo, and soon after it was summarized under the title of Kitâb al-Qaṣd wa-l-bayân. Prior to the transfer of the Toledo Taifa to Christian hands, Ibn Baṣṣâl left for Sevilla, where he died at the beginning of the 12th Century.
31His agronomic treatise is registered in the following manuscripts:
32- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 1v-98r.
- 8 Further information on this manuscript copy and the previous one can be consulted in Carabaza et al (...)
33- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 617 j, pp 270-4138.
34- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 6332.
35- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat nº 6519 (al-Khaṭṭâbî, 1982: 231-232).
- 9 Regarding this and another miscellaneous manuscript belonging to M. ʿAzîmân which have extracts fro (...)
36- Private manuscript belonging to M. ‘Azîmân, Tetuan, folios 49v-105v9.
37- Biblioteca de El Escorial (Collection of Ancient Books), Madrid, nos. 45, 47 and 428. These manuscripts correspond to the original Arabic collection of the library of El Escorial monastery in Madrid. They must have been destroyed in a fire which affected the upper store of the monastery in 1671. Only the first two manuscripts are attributed to the agronomist from Toledo; the third one, quoted among the «Libros de medicina sin autor» («medical books with no author») is said to be an «Imperfect agricultural book in 16 chapters», therefore we imagine that it is an incomplete copy of Kitâb al-Qaṣd wa-l-bayân (Morata, 1934:108, 148,179; Ibn Baṣṣâl, 1995: XXVI).
38- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 5013, folios 72r-161v.
39- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 4764, folio 161v (Carabaza et al., 1991: II, 1120, 1123).
- 10 On this text, which seems to be a summary of the treatise of Ibn Baṣṣâl, and the differences from t (...)
40Another agronomic publication attributed to Ibn Baṣṣâl is the Taqyîd min dîwân al-filâḥa li-Ibn Faḍḍâl, a short treatise on planting, sowing and grafting of some trees and plants10 is included in the following miscellaneous codex:
41- Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, nº XXX of the «Colección Gayangos», folios 100v-141r (E. Terés, 1975: 24).
42Finally, there is a third treatise Taqyîd âjar min ghayr kitâb Ibn Faḍḍâl; due to the ambiguity of the syntax of its title, it is not certain whether it was written by the agronomist from Toledo. There is another copy of it in the previous miscellaneous source:
- 11 This brief fragment has been edited and translated by M. A. Navarro, 1992: 155-169, although the au (...)
43- Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, nº XXX of the «Colección Gayangos», folios 141v-143v11.
44In our opinion, these two treatises may correspond to the missing manuscripts from El Escorial, the aforementioned nos. 45 and 47, respectively.
45The manuscript of Ibn Baṣṣâl was translated into Castilian in the 13th Century, the same as that of the other writer from Toledo, Ibn Wâfid. Although this medieval version has only the first twelve chapters, at times it is more complete than the Arab manuscripts, and therefore we have been able to complete some information missing from the Arabic (Millás, 1948: 347-430).
- 12 This can be seen in greater detail in Abû l-Khayr, 1991: 23-29.
46ABÛ L-KHAYR, the Sevillian agronomist and botanist, known as al-Shajjâr, who died at the end of the 11th Century – beginning of the 12th Century. The following manuscripts are related to this author: nº 13812 of the National Library in Tunis, 2809 of the National Library of Paris and 19 of the Library of the Royal Academy of History in Madrid, although the sources which really have his Kitâb al-Filâḥa are the following (none of them in its complete form)12:
47- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 130v-133v.
- 13 Different references of folios 39v-48v in García, 1987: 340; Millás, 1954a:127-140.
48- Private manuscript belonging to M. ‘Azîmân, folios 23v-48v13.
49- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 4764, folios 64r-151v, the only source which bears the name of the author, Abû l-Khayr al-Shajjâr al-Ishbîlî, and the title of his treatise, Kitâb al-Filâḥa (folio 64r).
50AL-ṬIGHNARÎ, Abû ‘Abd Allâh Muḥammad b. Mâlik al-Murrî al-Ḥâjj al-Gharnâṭî, a writer who was born in a small village near Granada at the time of the last Zirîs and died in the 12th Century, although we do not know the exact date. He dedicated his agronomic treatise, Kitâb Zuhrat al-bustân wa-nuzhat al-adhhân, to the Almoravid governor of Granada Abû l-Ṭâhir Tamîm b. Yûsuf b. Tashufîn (García, 1988: 1-12). There is only one copy of the original text of this article, which originally had twelve maqâlât and three hundred and sixty abwâb, as stated in the notes in the margin of the work by Ibn Luyûn. There are a large number of summaries of it, but all of them are incomplete. The original text is:
51- Bibliothèque Nationale, Algiers, nº 2163. This copy of the original only preserves somewhat less than the complete text, as it includes from the maqâla IV, from the end of bâb 36, to bâb 49 of the maqâla IX (García, 1987-1988: 282).
53- Bibliothèque Nationale, Algiers, nº 2162, although it is registered as anonymous (Carabaza et al., 1991: II, 1132).
- 14 The references to these latter two manuscripts have been included in the article by Ṣâliḥiyya, 1984 (...)
54- Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Humaines, Rabat, nº 23914.
55- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 39 D. This copy of the summary, as others which we shall indicate, is attributed to Ibn Ḥamdûn al-Ishbîlî, and therefore it cannot be al-Ṭighnarî, as some have claimed. Maybe this is the author of the summary, although we cannot provide any biographical data on him, other than the fact that he did not live prior to the 14th Century (García, 1987-88: 284-285).
- 15 According to the copy, the author of the first is Ibn Ḥamdûn al-Ishbîlî, but the second is quoted a (...)
56- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 344 D15.
- 16 Allouche & Regragui, 1958 : II, 273-274. In a note in the margin the author of the first is given a (...)
57- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1260 D16.
58- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1579 D (Allouche & Regragui, 1958 : II, 274).
59- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 105v-130v.
60- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 617 j, pp 1-269.
- 17 Attributed to Ḥamdûn al-Ishbîlî.
61- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1674 K17.
62- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 1534, folios 1r-109v (al-Khaṭṭâbî, 1982: 227).
63- Bibliothèque Générale, Tetuan, nº 545.
64- Bibliothèque Générale, Tetuan, nº 584.
65- Bibliothèque Générale, Tetuan, nº 613 (Catálogo, 1973 : 81).
66- Manuscript belongingnly the
67to M. ʿAzîmân, Tetuan. The passages occupy the first 49 folios and are attributed to Ḥamdûn al-Ishbîlî (Millás, 1954a:131-134).
68- Archivo Municipal, Córdoba, nº IV («Colección», 1959-1960: 108).
- 18 Morata, 1934:105, 145 indicates this as another of the manuscripts which must have disappeared in t (...)
69- Biblioteca de El Escorial (Collection of Ancient Books), Madrid, nº 11, catalogued as «Aben Malich de Taaza» (Ibn Mâlik al-Ṭa‘azî). Volume 1 of the Book of Agriculture, comprising four first books of the twelve written18.
70- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 7023.
71- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 7069 (Sauvan et al., 1987: 17). We have seen that the first of these two copies from Paris is in a deteriorated condition, in fact almost illegible, and is attributed to Ḥamdûn al-Ishbîlî. The second one, ms. nº 7069, claims in a recent note that «malgré l’indication de Colin «Tighnari» sur la couverture, le texte pourrait être l’anonyme ʿUmdat al-ṭabîb », which is a totally erroneous claim (Carabaza et al., 1991: II, 1123).
72IBN AL-ʿAWWÂM, Abû Zakariyâ Yaḥyà b. Muḥammad b. Aḥmad, a Sevillian agronomist from the end of the 12th Century – beginning of 13th Century. The encyclopaedic works of this agronomist, or summaries of them, of various passages from them, are included in several manuscripts (Ibn al-ʿAwwâm, 1988: 39-40):
73- Bibliothèque Nationale, Algiers, nº 1550, folios 180r-193v, in part of the summary of his Kitâb al-Filâḥa.
- 19 Further data on the previous as well as the present one are given in Carabaza et al., 1991: II, 112 (...)
74- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 1410 D, folios 140r-154v19, which only includes different extracts.
75- Manuscript belonging to M. ‘Azîmân, Tetuan, folios 39v-48v (García, 1987: 340; Millás, 1954a:127-140).
76- Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Berlin, nº 6206, giving the whole work, except for the section on zootechny.
77- University of Cambridge Library, Cambridge, nº 1027 (Cod. Or. 608-8) (Brockelmann, 1937-1942: S I, 903), giving a summary of the work.
78- Leyde University Library, nº 1285 (Cod. Or. 346 Warn) (Brockelmann, 1937-1942: I, 651-652; Ullmann, 1972: 447-448; Voorhoeve, 1957: 83), which only has the first part (volume 1 of Banqueri’s translation) of Kitâb al-Filâḥa.
79- British Museum Library, London, nº 998 (Add. 01461) (Brockelmann, 1937-1942: I, 651-652; Ullmann, 1972: 447-448). A copy of the ancient manuscript from El Escorial, which is up until now the most complete work.
80- Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, nº IX of the «Colección Gayangos» (Terés, 1975: 24) from the Escorial collection and the most complete known collection up to the present.
81- Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid, nos. XCIC, CI-3 and CXII-XIII (Ullmann, 1972: 447-448), copy of the previous codex.
82- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 2804 (Vajda, 1953: 342), perhaps the oldest and most correct one, but missing the whole of the second part and some of the first part.
- 20 There is also a manuscript with a translation in Turkish of the treatise by Ibn al-,Awwâm done in 1 (...)
83- Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, nº 5754, folios 176v-186r which only give a summary, or extracts of it, from the work of Ibn al-ʿAwwâm20.
84IBN LUYÛN, Abû Uthmân Sa‘d b. Aḥmad b. Ibrâhîm b. Aḥmad al-Tujîbî, an author who lived and died (1349) in Almería. He was an outstanding lawyer and wrote a work on an agricultural theme, Kitâb Ibdâ’ al-malâḥa wa-inhâ’ al-rajâḥa fî uṣûl sinâ‘at al-filâḥa, also known as Urjûza fî l-filâḥa, since he wrote it in rajaz verse. The following manuscripts are preserved:
85- Bibliothèque Nationale, Nuakchot, nº 65 (Rebstock et al., 1988: 94-95). It is attributed to the name of Abû Uthmân b. Abî Ja‘far b. Laiyûn (sic) al-Tujîbî.
86- Bibliothèque Générale, Rabat, nº 39 (M. al-Manûnî) (Ṣâliḥiyya, 1984: 566).
- 21 This manuscript is not briefed in any of catalogues of the Escuela de Estudios Árabes. Was consulte (...)
87- Bibliothèque Royale, Rabat, nº 1187221.
88- Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Humaines, Rabat, nº 26 (Ṣâliḥiyya, 1984: 566).
89- Biblioteca de la Escuela de Estudios Árabes (C.S.I.C.), Granada, nº XIV (Castillo, 1984: 230-231).
90On revising the catalogue of manuscripts we have found some anonymous codices. In order to check whether these are Andalusî works, we have requested them from the corresponding libraries. While we can verify their origin, we can only offer the following information:
91- Dâr al-Kutub al-Waṭaniyya, Tunis, nº 454. The title is Mukhtaṣar al-filâḥa (‘Umar, 1986:179).
92- Bibliothèque M. le Comte Rochaid, Paris, nº 124 (Bîtâr, 1987: I, 272).
93- Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan, nº CCLXXIII (Löfgren & Traini, 1975-1981: I, 144).
94On analyzing the agronomic Andalusî texts published, the first question which arises is that a considerable number of them came to light quite a few years ago, and some of them, as in the case of Ibn al-‘Awwâm, almost two centuries ago, which meant having new editions, for various reasons. On the one hand, new copies of the manuscripts have been made, which obviously enrich and improve the original texts. On the other hand, over recent years new sources and studies on the subject have been published which help research work on the varied material comprising these texts. Finally, since some years ago multidisciplinary teamwork has begun, which is essential to carry out this study.
- 22 We shall focus on the editions and translations of complete works of the Andalusî agronomists (or t (...)
95Three of these works, Ibn Baṣṣâl, Ibn al-‘Awwâm and Ibn Luyûn, have been re-edited, and the first two accompanied by preliminary studies which check them and bring up to date the bio-bibliographical news on the author and his work, as well as re-interpreting their botanical and agricultural contents. In spite of the obvious need to make a new edition and translation of these works, the lack of time meant making a new edition only, owing to the first ones being out of print and to the increased interest in the subject. We shall, therefore, examine the editions and translations available up until now22.
96ANONYMOUS ANDALUSÎ. We do not consider that this complies with any of the circumstances which would lead to a new publication, i.e. appearance of new manuscript copies or their age, apart from the fact that the edition and translation (Kitâb fî Tartîb, 1990) are correct. The only possibility would be to review some of the botanical identification, which might lead to new interpretation.
97IBN WÂFID and IBN ḤAJJÂJ. We shall refer to these two agronomists at the same time, because we can see from previous pages that their manuscripts appear together in several manuscripts, which has meant a diversity of opinions regarding their author.
98As mentioned previously, there is an edition of the manuscripts of both agronomists published in ‘Ammân in 1982. Their editors, Ṣ Jarrâr and J. Abû Ṣafiyya, maintain that the whole text of the edition, entitled al-Muqniʿ, fî l-filâḥa, corresponds to Ibn Ḥajjâj. In fact the three manuscripts which both editors refer to are in the name of this Sevillian agronomist; nº 617 j from the General Library of Rabat, nº 69 from the Royal Library of Rabat and nº 5013 from the National Library of Paris, but, given the fact that all these codices are of a miscellaneous type, how can the author be decided on just from certain pages on which this agronomist is mentioned? Evidently, if this procedure had been followed in all the cases, the work of different Andalusî agronomists would never have been detected. On the other hand, these Jordanian editors do not consider the fact that in other sources, part of the text which is the subject of their work appears under another author, as in the case of al-Nahrâwî (manuscripts 1550 from the National Library of Algiers and 5754 of the Paris National Library). In spite of everything, both editors put forward a series of arguments (which in our opinion are weak) to support their stance. In later years (Carabaza, 1988: I, 114-175; Carabaza, 1990: 71-81) we have refuted these arguments with what we believe to be well-founded data, to show that pages 5–84 of the edition were part of a separate document, and that the remaining pages 85-124 contained the excerpta which have been preserved from Ibn Ḥajjâj.
99Apart from the data already explained on this subject (differences in content, in agronomic sources…), we must bear in mind the greater number of codices included in the work by Ibn Wâfid in comparison with that of Ibn Ḥajjâj, which influences the independence of one manuscript with regard to the other. Similarly, the medieval translations of the first of the manuscripts in the edition of al-Muqniʿ, confirm our opinion, because if it was a question of just one agricultural manuscript, why should one use, on two occasions, only one specific part of the work?
100The Majmûʿ, of Ibn Wâfid aroused greater interest among the Castilian (Millás Vallicrosa, 1948) and Catalan medieval translators (Ibn Wâfid, 1943), and many centuries later and further a field – in Tunisia - it continued to be of interest. We mention this because the shayj ‘Alî al-Shannûfî (a wise man from the al-Zaytûna Mosque), based on a manuscript whose description he does not reveal, has re-edited the work of Ibn Wâfid, that is, the first part of the Jordanian edition wrongly attributed to Ibn Ḥajjâj. This edition, with the title of Kitâb Mukhtaṣar al-filâḥa al-ifrîqiyya and Kitâb Mukhtaṣar al-filâḥa ‘alà l-kamâl wa-l-tamâm, is a curious example of how the work of Ibn Wâfid has been summarized and adapted to the public it was meant for (Carabaza, 1994 & 1995: I, 309-318 & II, 209-229), and it is further proof of the independence of this treatise with respect to the Sevillian agronomist.
101What is still somewhat inexplicable is that the author’s name should have been lost relatively soon; in fact, Ibn al-‘Awwâm does not even name Ibn Wâfid when he takes extracts from his work. So later copies from the 18th Century (such as the manuscripts of 1550 and 5754 already mentioned) and the edition from Tunisia, do not quote him, but offer other authors. In the case of the former two, if we accept that al-Nahrâwî is an alteration of al-Zahrâwî, the false author could be explained by the relationship that was established between the physician from Córdoba and the physician and agronomist from Toledo since the time of Ibn al-Abbâr (Ibn al-Abbâr, 1886-1889: VI, 551). As regards the authorship of the edition from Tunisia (Abû ‘Abd Allâh Muḥammad Ibn al-Ṣawwâm al-Andalusî), we must bear in mind that this is a summary of previous summaries, making the processing chain much more complex, and therefore more liable to all type of alterations (the name is a mixture of kunya and ism in Ibn Baṣṣâl and al-Ṭighnarî and the nasab altered from Ibn al-‘Awwâm).
102As a result of everything mentioned, it is essential to set up some new editions separating the two treatises, and to use more sources to check the text with greater precision. This will lead to an improvement in the present translation which has several errors, since it was based on the Jordan edition.
103IBN BAṢṢÂL. The edition and translation into Castilian of the work by Ibn Baṣṣâl, published in Tetuan in 1955 by J. M. Millás Vallicrosa and M. ‘Azîmân, meant reinitiating the study into the agronomy of al-Andalus which had been interrupted after the enormous effort made by Banqueri when he published the work by Ibn al-‘Awwâm at the beginning of the 19th Century.
104Millás regrets not having had more than one manuscript available for the edition, which meant there were some doubts and difficulties which can, logically, be noticed in the edited text. Nevertheless, the sound philological training of this illustrious Arabist is evident from the text, although his knowledge of botany is not so sound. Some of his erroneous botanical interpretations have been rectified in the introductory study of the re-edition published a few years ago.
105Since the publication of this work, a total of five new manuscript copies have been discovered, all of the summary and some of them incomplete and late, therefore they do not contribute anything new with regard to the ‘Azîmân miscellany. One of the manuscripts, nº 6519 in the Royal Library in Rabat, in Chapter V on the planting of trees, adds a sectionne of the
- 23 This divided text, XXXVIII, is «de melesinar el çidrial cuando adolesçe el çidrial e fasen sus foja (...)
106«on how to care for melissa when it is diseased and its leaves turn yellow»; this is only found in the medieval Castilian translation23, although this is a scant contribution. Anyway, in the absence of a better manuscript of the original text, we believe that a new critical edition which can incorporate these new copies is essential. We do not know to what extent it would be feasible to achieve another proposal, that is, to reconstruct the text based on quotations on it from later authors.
107ABÛ L-KHAYR. The edition we have of Kitâb al-Filâḥa by this Sevillian agronomist came to light a few years ago, in 1991, as mentioned in a previous note. Since no new manuscript of this work has appeared, it can be considered a definitive edition (with the exception of minor errors in reading which can easily be rectified). Certainly, he did not have the private manuscript of M. ‘Azîmân in front of him at the time of writing, but given its concomitance with an edition published in Fez, as pointed out by Millás Vallicrosa (1954a: 138), we do not believe that there are important differences between this and the 1991 edition. On the other hand, this edition includes in a final appendix what was stated in the Fez edition. Regarding the latter, attributed in its totality to Abû l-Khayr (ed. S. Tuhâmî, 1358 H.), we would mention that some time ago it was shown to be a miscellaneous work in which, together with other agricultural treatises, the work of Abû l-Khayr extends from pages 144 to 174, together with two previous pages, 83 and 84 (Abû l-Khayr, 1991: 27-28; Attié, 1982: 323; García, 1987: 337; García Gómez, 1945: 134-135).
108The translation of Kitâb al-Filâḥa of Abû l-Khayr may also be considered to be definitive, with the exception of some errors based on incorrect reading. It would also be required to introduce certain changes in the botanical identification of plants which appear in this book, since thanks to the combined studies of Botanists and Arabists, known species of plants in al-Andalus, whose identification was obscure, have now been defined.
109AL-ṬIGHNARÎ. Kitâb Zuhrat al-bustân wa-nuzhat al-adhhân was the only unedited Andalusî, but he has recently been edited (al-Ṭighnarî, 2006), and the translation into Castilian is in progress.
110Apart from the fact that this manuscript is one which reflects most directly and specifically the reality of agriculture in al-Andalus, it also entails the greatest difficulties in its critical edition. We have only this copy, which covers a little more than half of the original text, which is to be found in ms. nº 2163 in the General Library of Algiers, as previously mentioned. However, there are nineteen copies of the summary of this text, apart from another missing one, therefore we have had to select the copies to be used in the edition. All of these copies have an introduction that cannot be the work of al-Ṭighnarî for a series of reasons set out in other documents; after the introduction begin the typical subjects that usually head all agricultural manuscripts. So we have edited this first part, which is missing in the original but which appears in all the copies, according to the latter. The most significant problem arises when the summary reaches the beginning of the original text, which from this stage becomes the basic manuscript and is logically much longer than the copies of the summary. We have therefore done two parallel editions, one in the actual body of the edition and the other in the notes to it. These difficulties, among others, account for the delay in the publication of the edition.
- 24 Even the two later translations and their corrections are no improvement on these: the translation (...)
111IBN AL-‘AWWÂM. As already explained, the work of this agronomist from Sevilla was the first of Andalusî agronomy to be published and translated. The brain behind it was José A. Banqueri, and his efforts were recompensed by two thick volumes of the work in 1802. In spite of the enormous difficulties this Franciscan monk (Ibn al-‘Awwâm, 1988: 40-43) had to overcome, among them not having more than the original and one copy of the Escorial manuscript as mentioned, his edition and translation of Kitâb al-Filâḥa by Ibn al-‘Awwâm were excellent if we take into consideration the conditions of time and place in which he accomplished them 24.
112The appearance of new manuscripts, the improvements in methods of editing, the greater present-day knowledge of Andalusî agricultural treatises, and the result of combined works between Botanists and Arabists undoubtedly enable us to establish the original Arabic text with greater precision, and consequently to improve the translations done in this vast task until now.
113IBN LUYÛN. The work by Ibn Luyûn, Kitâb Ibdâ’ al-malâḥa wa-inhâ’ al-rajâḥa fî uṣûl ṣinâ‘at al-filâḥa was the theme of the doctoral thesis of Joaquina Eguaras in 1944, although it was not edited and translated into Spanish until 1975, and re-printed in 1988. This publication was based on manuscript nº XIV in the Escuela de Estudios Árabes, written in 1348, one year before its author’s death, which increased interest in it. Although it was not copied by Ibn Luyûn himself, it points out in the explicit that it was done by a contemporary copyist, which states its originality.
- 25 Some of these notes were translated by Lerchundi & Simonet, 1881.
114The edition could be improved on, since some of its readings are not completely correct. It also omits the useful and abundant marginal notes of the manuscript which contribute interesting philological explanations related to some of the terminology used in the text, as well as other biographical notes on some Andalusî agronomists. We know that these notes were not included by J. Eguaras in her edition, maybe because they were in a rather deteriorated state and therefore difficult to read25.
115We consider that the translation should be thoroughly revised, especially in the field of the botanonomy, where some serious errors in interpretation can be observed, such as the identification of ṣubbâr with cactus or prickly pear (Ficus indica L., Opuntia ficus indica Mill), which are species originating from America, and therefore which cannot be included among the flora from al-Andalus, although this identification is now correct. On the contrary, in the text of Ibn Luyûn, ṣubbâr should be taken as a Mahgreb dialectal term referring to aloe (Aloe vera L.).
116We now know of four more copies, and from these we have made a detailed comparison of manuscript nº 11872 from the Royal Library of Rabat with that in the Escuela de Estudios Árabes, and we have been able to confirm that the first is very similar to the second. Unfortunately this copy from Rabat does not include the marginal notes from the original. In spite of this, however, we consider a new publication of the treatise by Ibn Luyûn is essential, since although a lack of originality is attributed to it, it nevertheless has points of interest, as is shown from the fact that it was used by later authors.
117As we have already pointed out in the previous section, a revision of some editions and translations to date is essential, with a view to establishing the authors of the Andalusî agricultural works clearly, as well as the content of each of them. The relevant projects being carried out in this field are the following:
118- A new edition of the Arab text of Majmûʿ, fî l-filâḥa by Ibn Wâfid, based on a larger number of manuscripts than were used by the Jordanian editors (Ibn Ḥajjâj, 1982). This edition will include the Spanish translation and the Catalan version already mentioned, in order to compare the similarities and differences there are between these two texts written in the Middle Ages. Further to this more complete and carefully compared edition, a final translation will be decided on, and this will improve the existing one, thanks to the thorough comparison between the texts. Dr. Julia M. Carabaza is working on this new edition and translation that scheduled to be published in 2011.
119- A new edition and translation of the excerpta which we have access to of the agricultural treatise called al-Muqniʿ, fî l-filâḥa by Ibn Ḥajjâj. For this edition too, a larger number of manuscripts is being used than was drawn on by the Jordanian editors (Ibn Ḥajjâj, 1982), with the purpose of defining the corresponding text to this Sevillian agronomist as far as possible, and consequently presenting the most faithful translation of the original Arabic. Dr. Julia M. Carabaza is working on this new edition and translation that scheduled to be published in 2010.
120At the beginning of this project we were tempted to «rewrite» the whole works of Ibn Ḥajjâj, based on the multiple passages on him offered by Ibn al-‘Awwâm. Although it may seem an attractive and feasible project, we abandoned the idea because it would have been a type of betrayal to the historical and cultural legacy. If only some extracts of his al-Muqniʿ, are included in the various Arabic manuscripts, it is because these were the ones that in fact were of greatest interest to the public they were aimed at, and his remaining works practically fell into oblivion. Therefore we believe that we must resign ourselves to the numerous quotations stated by his great follower Ibn al-‘Awwâm, who in his eagerness to compile all of the previous agronomic information, «recovers» Ibn Ḥajjâj from the oblivion he was subjected to by the remaining Andalusî agricultural works.
121- A re-edition and new translation of Ibn Baṣṣâl (Ibn Baṣṣâl, 1995), based on the new Arab sources which have appeared, incorporating the Medieval Castilian translation (Millás Vallicrosa, 1948). Dr. Angel López is working on this new edition and translation that scheduled to be published in 2011.
122- Translation of the treatise of al-Ṭighnarî (al-Ṭighnarî, 2006), which Dr. Expiración García is working on and that scheduled to be published in 2010.
123- A new edition and translation of Kitâb al-Filâḥa by Ibn al-‘Awwâm (Ibn al-‘Awwâm, 1988). Although work on this edition is well under way, we must emphasize the need to establish the Andalusî texts prior to Ibn al-‘Awwâm correctly, for this to be a practically final edition, since this Kitâb al-Filâḥa includes a large part of the preceding agricultural information (not only of authors from al-Andalus but also from classical agronomy and eastern Arabic). Doctors C. Álvarez de Morales, J. M. Carabaza and E. García are working on this new edition and translation that scheduled to be published in 2012.
124- Re-edition and new translation of the treatise of Ibn Luyûn. Victor Barraso is working on this new edition and translation that scheduled to be published in 2012.
125Other studies which are being carried out and which are essential to establish the texts and corresponding translations of the Andalusî agricultural works are those related to the agronomical sources quoted by our Andalusî authors. In this sense, for example, we are glad to say that a Spanish translation of the Greek Geoponica of the 10th Century (Geopónica, 1998) has been published a few years ago. The fact that this work is finally available is of invaluable help to clarify certain passages of the Andalusî agricultural works, since it includes a great deal of information from the Greco-Latin classical world, at that time used by our agronomists.
- 26 We have this publication as an example of this work: Carabaza et al., 2004.
126Likewise, we must make further mention of the interdisciplinary work being carried out between Botanists, Agronomists and Arabists. Thanks to them, we are able to achieve a better identification of the plant species named by the Andalusî agronomists, so consequently our view of the Andalusî agricultural landscape is becoming clearer and more defined; therefore the translations in the agricultural-botanical field26 done up until now are improving.
127Finally, we must add the development of a project of Hispano-Arabic cooperation, up to the 18th Century, related to the impact of Andalusî agronomy on the other side of the Strait. Following these same lines of study of the influence of the Andalusî agricultural works, on this occasion within the Christian world, another project has just been finished. It is titled: «Transfer of agricultural and ethno botanic information between the Iberian Islamic and Christian cultures: 10th – 17th Centuries» in which it once more claims the close collaboration between Arabist, Agronomists and Botanists.