At the very beginning of the last millennium Ibn al-Haytham greatly contributed to the investigation of the Milky Way. Here, the only three currently known versions of his work on the location of the Milky Way are compared to each other and discussed. A comparison of the texts and an early translation into German by E. Wiedemann in 1906 reveals several differences that triggered a new critical translation of the passed down text. We give detailed comments on the work and check the validity of Ibn al-Haytham's arguments. We also discuss his work in the framework of the ‘Great Debate’ on the Milky Way that took place around 1920, more than a decade after Wiedemann's translation. We find that Ibn al-Haytham's work is certainly at the peak of the unaided-eye era of the Milky Way's discovery. Through his own argumentation and in comparison to Ptolemy's observations Ibn al-Haytham clearly identifies the Galaxy as an extraterrestrial body that is not part of the atmosphere but much further away than the Moon. With some of his statements on the stellar positions passed down by Ptolemy, Ibn al-Haytham also anticipates the concept of stellar proper motions.

Nine manuscripts preserving Avicenna's Kitāb al-Šifāʾ share a set of identical marginal glosses to the section of Logic. One of these manuscripts reports, at the end of each of the glosses, a certificate of transmission ascribing them to the theologian and philosopher Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606H/1210), which provides some material evidence of the existence of a flourishing exegetical activity on the Kitāb al-Šifāʾ during the twelfth-thirteenth century, in spite of the apparent lack of commentaries on the text in that period. The present paper provides an edition of the so far unknown ḥāšiyāt to Avicenna's Kitāb al-Šifāʾ by al-Rāzī, with an attempt at reconstructing their tradition and contextualizing them within al-Rāzī’s exegetical and teaching activity.

One of the epistemological results emerging from this initial study is that the different forms of co-relational inference, known in the Islamic jurisprudence as qiyās, represent an innovative and sophisticated form of reasoning that not only provides new epistemological insights into legal reasoning in general but also furnishes a fine-grained pattern for parallel reasoning which can be deployed in a wide range of problem-solving contexts and does not seem to reduce to the standard forms of analogical argumentation studied in contemporary philosophy of science. However, in the present paper we will only discuss the case of so-called co-relational inferences of the occasioning factor and only in the context of Islamic jurisprudence.

The beginning of the 20th century has witnessed a significant development that has renewed and stimulated the long passionate historical relationship between two great civilisations which are traditionally known as the West and the East. Following their ancestors who cultivated the quest for knowledge tradition, some Arab scholars have come to leading European countries to learn the latest advancement in knowledge. They did not expect they would be confronted with what seems to be the poor showing of their scientific and cultural heritage according to the assessment that was carried out in the previous century by Western scholars and historians. The Western study of the Eastern heritage had such influence that it has generated new Arab intellectual elite which blames the past for the present difficulties. Following the discovery of major scientific Arabic works in the second half of the 20th century, some Arab scholars like Ibrahim Madkour realised that they had in fact just misunderstood their own tradition. What is the source of their misunderstanding? How did they become aware of it? And how can a better understanding of the past change present attitudes and guide future actions? By attempting to provide some answers to such questions, the aim of this paper is to shed light on what seems to be a turning point in modern Arabic intellectual history.

L'ouvrage de Dag Nikolaus Hasse ouvre à nouveau le dossier de la présence et de l'importance de la science et de la philosophie arabes à la Renaissance. Il estime que cette question a trop souvent été traitée de façon partisane, soit pour valoriser a priori l'importance de la pensée arabe dans le développement des sciences en Occident, soit pour valider a posteriori son rejet. Il convient de reprendre le problème sur des bases factuelles, voire quantitatives (éditions, diffusion, etc.).