From Simon Online
Jump to: navigation, search

Sulch arabice est silogo liber de doctrina arabica.


Sulch | Sulth pc
siligo | silligo AC
est om. e
est silligo | siligo ē B
arabica | om. ms. p and adds a section from the next entry Suman: expõitur quod ē coturnix ...


Sulch is Arabic for Latin siligo according to the liber de doctrina arabica.


It is clear that this is a transcription attempt at the Andalusi Arabic word ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/. Sulch is a misreading of Sulth, the result of the very frequent confusion of 't' and 'c' in medieval manuscripts and early prints. Since all witnesses except one show Sulch it is probable that the misreading occurred early on in the transmission chain.

The lemma is well documented in the Spanish sources:

  • Simon's often quoted source, the liber de doctrina arabica, has so far not been identified, but cf. what must be a similar glossary/dictionary - Vocabulista - ed. Schiaparelli (1871: 119): ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/ Siligo [[1]]; (1871: 580): SILIGO ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/, {pl.} ﺍﺳﻼﺕ /aslāt/ [[2]].
  • de Alcalá (1883: 166): centeno {“rye”} miesse concocida {“a well-known cereal”} çúlt [[3]]; and (1883: 273): herren {“fodder”} çult [[4]]
  • Karbstein (2002: 139): “15) Getreide; Roggen {i.e. 'cereal; rye'} (Secale L.)", who equates it with ﺣﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ /ḥanddarūs/:

"ﺣﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ ﻭﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺖ ﻋﺠﻤﻴﺔ ﺴﻨﺘﻨﻪ /ḥanddarūs wa-huwa al-sulti ʕağamīya sintinuh/ - “/ḥanddarūs/ that is /al-sult/ and in Romance it is /sintinuh/" {= cf. Spanish centeno 'fodder'}
N.b. /ḥanddarūs/ according to Siggel (1950: 33) is "ﺧﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ /ḫundurūs/ Triticum romanum (Gram.)"; and he quotes Leclerc according to whom it is: T. spelta, röm. Weizen {i.e. 'Roman wheat'} χόνδρος triticum romanum; ….
Dozy mentions this lemma twice: (1877-81: I.331): "ﺣﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ /ḥandarūs/ seigle" {'rye'} and
(1877-81: I.407): "ﺧﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ /ḫndrws/" without vocalisation "(χόνδρος {/khóndros/}) triticum romanum".

There is considerable variation in the initial consonant of ﺧﻨﺪﺭﻭﺱ /ḫndrws/, i.e. /ḥ/, /ḫ/ and /h/.

See also Candarusium

  • For ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/ cf. also Corriente (1997: 257) s.v. *(SLT)

Botanical identification:

The identification of ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/ is problematic.

Dozy (1877-81: I.671) quoting Vocabulista as his source has: ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/, ﺍﺳﻼﺕ /aslāt signifiait en Espagne seigle {i.e "denoted in Spain seigle, i.e. rye"} (siligo, qui a ce sense dans la basse latinité, voyez Ducange) {i.e. siligo, which at the time of late Antiquity had this meaning (sc. "rye"), see also Ducange [[5]]). The quote in Ducange to which Dozy and Corriente allude is: At postremi aevi auctoribus usurpatur pro Secali, vulgo Segle – "This word {sc. siligo} is used by the authors of later time for Secale {"rye"}, in folk-language Segle". Corriente concurs with Dozy's identification.

However see also Lane (1984: 1401): ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/, "a species of ﺷﻌﻴﺮ {/šaʕīr/} [or barley] …" etc.

Siggel (1950: 42) says: ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/ entspricht Diosk: Τράγος … {i.e. ﺳﻠﺖ /sult/ corresponds to Dioscorides' Τράγος {/Trágos/}, which amongst many other things denotes the cereal spelt according to LSJ. Siggel also quotes Clément-Mullet (1865: 185-226) [[6]]. After some discussion Clément-Mullet (1865: 205) says he has arrived at identifying it with hordeum nudum l'orge nue "hulless or naked barley". See "hulless barley" [[7]], [[8]]

To further the confusion, the siligo of Antiquity is generally identified with "common" or "bread wheat", Triticum aestivum L., syn. Triticum vulgare Vill. [[9]], cf. André (1985: 239) s.v. silīgō.

WilfGunther 18:31, 14 August 2014 (BST)

See also: Siligo

Next entry