Confutatio Alcorani
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 14:17, 25 May 2024 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 14:18, 25 May 2024 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {| class="toccolours" style="float: left; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" | {| class="toccolours" style="float: left; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" | ||
| | style="text-align: left;" | | | style="text-align: left;" | | ||
| - | "Readers should be aware (as I was not when I was translating eight years ago) of the existence of a critical edition of [[Contra Legem Saracenorum]] (the original Latin text) by [[J.-M. Mérigoux]], in Mémorie Dominicane 17 (1986), 1-144. The English- speaking scholarly community would perhaps still benefit from a translation directly from this edition. It seems to me, though, that the edition from which I translated, that is, the equivalent of the 1507 Basel edition, must continue to hold some interest for scholars of the work’s reception. In consideration of the work’s influence during the Reformation and Modern Era, it is important to bear in mind the simultaneous existence of the different editions and to be aware of which is being used by whom, should the differences prove significant." | + | "Readers should be aware (as I was not when I was translating eight years ago) of the existence of a critical edition of [[Contra Legem Saracenorum]] (the original Latin text) by [[J.-M. Mérigoux]], in Mémorie Dominicane 17 (1986), 1-144. The English- speaking scholarly community would perhaps still benefit from a translation directly from this edition. It seems to me, though, that the edition from which I translated, that is, the equivalent of the 1507 Basel edition, must continue to hold some interest for scholars of the work’s reception. In consideration of the work’s influence during the Reformation and Modern Era, it is important to bear in mind the simultaneous existence of the different editions and to be aware of which is being used by whom, should the differences prove significant."[https://archive.org/stream/refutationofthekoran/refutationofthekoran_djvu.txt] |
| |} | |} | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
Revision as of 14:18, 25 May 2024
|
"Readers should be aware (as I was not when I was translating eight years ago) of the existence of a critical edition of Contra Legem Saracenorum (the original Latin text) by J.-M. Mérigoux, in Mémorie Dominicane 17 (1986), 1-144. The English- speaking scholarly community would perhaps still benefit from a translation directly from this edition. It seems to me, though, that the edition from which I translated, that is, the equivalent of the 1507 Basel edition, must continue to hold some interest for scholars of the work’s reception. In consideration of the work’s influence during the Reformation and Modern Era, it is important to bear in mind the simultaneous existence of the different editions and to be aware of which is being used by whom, should the differences prove significant."[1] |
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Confutatio Alcorani (1500) is a book by Riccoldo da Monte di Croce
It was also known as Against the Laws of the Saracens and was written in Baghdad.
It was for a very long time very popular among Christians as a polemical source against Islam, and has been often edited (first published in Seville, 1500, under the title Confutatio Alcorani or "Confutation of the Koran").
It was translated into German by Martin Luther in 1542 as Verlegung des Alcoran.
There are translations into English by Thomas C. Pfotenhauer (Islam in the Crucible: Can It Pass the Test?, Lutheran News, Inc., 2002), and Londini Ensis, under the title, "Refutation of the Koran" (Createspace 2010).
Much of this work's contents derive from those sections of the Book of Travels devoted to Muslim beliefs and related topics. One of Riccoldo's major sources, extensively quoted in his own work, is the anonymous Liber Denudationis siue Ostensionis aut Patefaciens. Despite Riccoldo's hostility towards Islam, his work shows specific knowledge of the Qur'an and overcomes one important prejudicial error common to other Medieval criticisms of Islam: the view of Muhammad as an introducer of a Christological heresy.
