No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2011
None of the Spanish historians who lived before the present century possessed even the slightest knowledge of the Arabic language, and even they stumbled at every step when they had to treat of the Muhammadan dynasties, and their hostile or friendly relations with the Christians. Casiri alone, in his catalogue of the MSS. in the library of the Escurial, edited and translated some extracts from Arab authors; and this was all that had been done down to 1820, when the first volume of Conde's History appeared, and the world imagined that the light of this newly-risen sun was at length, in a great measure, to dissipate the darkness that had for ages enveloped the doings of the Arab and the Berber on the soil of Spain.
page 347 note 1 Hence also it is not surprising that the annotations which profess to explain native terms should be frequently erroneous. Thus in vol. I., p. 15, the name Beni-Alaftas is rendered “sons of Alafta.” The Beni-Alaftas (or rather Banú ?1-Aftas), however, are “the sons of al-Aftas,” 
Another note (vol. I., p. 68) runs as follows: “As the Arabs were in the frequent habit of adding the word Medena (read Madínah), “City,” to the name of each town, so did they prefix the word Guard, “River,” to that of each river. Thence we have Guardalete, Guard-iana, Guard el Quiber, &c, of which the moderns make Guadalquiver, Guadiana, &c ” Not a word of this is correct. The Arabic word for “river” is wádí, valgarly pronounced wád, which the Spaniards write guad. Hence wádí Lekeh, Guadalete; wádí Anah, Guadiana,; al-wádá 'l-kabír or wád al-kahíir, Guadalquivir (not Guadalquiver); wádí Aruh, Guadiaro; wádí Shúṣh, Guadajoz; &c.
page 348 note 1 “If fant avouer,” adds Dozy (Pref. p. viii), “que Conde avait pris ses mesures pour que l'on ne découvrit pas facilement ses impostures. II les a eachésous un caquetage de faux bonhomme. II s'est borné à mentionner les manuscrits dont il s'est servi dans sa préface; encore faut-il avouer que ce qu'il y dit n'est pas exact; il prétend par exemple que, pour l'liistoire des petites dynasties du onziéme siècle, il s'est servi surtout d'lbn-Baschkowál (Eng. tr., vol. I., p. 24). Nous counaiasons ce livre, vous et moi, car il est dans la bibliothèque de la Société Asiatique, et nous Savons que ce Dictionnaire biographique, écrit dans le style d'un régistre de paroisse, contient des renseignements utiles pour l'histoire littéraire, mais que, pour l'histoire politique, il n'est presque d'aucune utilité. II fallait done posséder tous les ouvrages manuscrits dont Conde a pu se servir; heureusement j'ai en tous ceux qui se rapportent aux époques dont je me suis occupé.”
page 348 note 2 Compare Alfayáte = 
, Alfoz = 
, Alfox = 
, Portug. refem = 
page 350 note 1 To his edition of this latter author Dozy has prefixed a vaiuable Introdution, treating of the Arab historians of Spain.
page 352 note 1 P. 264, note 1, I read 
“adopted him as her son,’ for the corrupt 
of the MS.
page 353 note 1 See the Engl. tr. of Conde, vol. II., P. 317 seqq. Mrs. Foster is pleased to add, in a note, that “there is much reason for hoping that the frightful action here attributed to the Cid Campeador has but little foundation in truth.” It is, however, about as well established as any fact in the history of those times.
page 354 note 1 I may be permitted to remark that the word 
(p. 394,1. 24) is an error, perhaps of the press, for 