The most popular recension of the Almagest. With more than 150 known manuscript copies, this work outranks the three extant Arabic versions of the Almagest by far and appears to have entirely replaced the use of the stand-alone translations, especially in the Eastern Islamic world. It relies primarily on the translation by Ishāq b. Ḥunayn revised by Thābit b. Qurra (A.1.2), but also includes a number of references to al-Ḥajjāj’s translation (A.1.1) and to the version by Thābit b. Qurra (A.1.3). According to the authorial colophon, al-Ṭūsī finished this work on 5 Shawwal 644/​13 February 1247, while he resided at the citadel of Alamut. He dedicated the book to an otherwise unknown Ḥusām al-Dīn al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad al-Sīwāsī, who was wrongly assumed to be the author of a commentary on the Taḥrīr by Sezgin (GAS VI).

While no autograph copy of the Taḥrīr appears to have survived, there are numerous manuscripts that claim to be based either on an autograph or on an early copy made by Quṭb al-Dīn al-Shīrāzī. A codex of the Taḥrīr said to be in the handwriting of al‐Ṭūsī himself was in the possession of Shaykh ʿAbd al-Ḥusayn al-Ṭihrānī (d. 1285/1868-9) and apparently later found a new owner in Europe (see Ansari, p. 25, and Dharīʿa). Al-Shīrāzī produced a copy from al‐Ṭūsī’s 644/​1247 autograph before 678/​1279; this copy is lost but was transmitted through students of al-Shīrāzī in MSS Paris, BnF, ar. 2485 and Cairo, Dār al-kutub, K (falak) 3822⁢. Further copies by his students, preserved in MSS Istanbul, Süleymaniye, Ayasofya 2583 and Dublin, Chester Beatty, Ar. 3637, may be based on the same exemplar (on early copies related to the autograph and to al-Shīrāzī, see also LAMT, pp. 311–312). Al-Shīrāzī’s significant role in the transmission of al-Ṭūsī’s Taḥrīr is also evident from a note by his hand dated late Shaʿbān 684/​October 1285 (MS Istanbul, Nuruosmaniye, 2941, f. 1r) in which he mentions having arranged for a copy of the Taḥrīr to be made for the library of a certain Jamāl al-Dīn but expresses regret for lacking the time to thoroughly review and correct it.

In a small number of manuscripts from the seventh/​thirteenth century, the Taḥrīr is transmitted together with al-Ṭūsī’s Mutawassiṭāt (the ‘Middle Books’), his collection of revised treatises to be studied between Euclid’s Elements and Ptolemy’s Almagest, which was likewise repeatedly copied in the Maragha milieu; see MSS Tehran, Sipahsālār, 4727; Mashhad, Āstān-i Quds, 5456⁢, and Tehran, Dānishgāh, F 2885⁢.

Content: The Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī follows the structure of the thirteen books (maqāla) of the Almagest as found in the Isḥāq/Thābit version (A.1.2). As stated in the preface, it contains, overall, 141 sections (faṣl, rather than bāb) as well as 196 figures or propositions (shakl), which are generally numbered with abjad numerals in the margins. Structural differences found in the version by Thābit b. Qurra (A.1.3) are mostly indicated in the margins in the form ḥāshiya wa-fī nuskhat Thābit sabʿa ʿashr bāban. Al-Ṭūsī combines several sections of Book X with those from Book XI dealing with the same topics. Thus he combines sections X.7, XI.1 and XI.5 (on the eccentricities of the superior planets); X.8, XI.2 and XI.6 (on their epicycle radii); X.9, XI.3 and XI.7 (on the correction of their motions); and X.10, XI.4 and XI.8 (on the epoch positions of their mean motions). Although the heading for Book XI precedes the discussion of sections X.7–10, Book X is indicated in its heading to have ten sections (rather than six). In the two Sipahsālār manuscripts from the seventh/​thirteenth century, a sentence immediately preceding section XI.9 clarifies the situation by stating: ‘Here ends Book X, and this is the remainder of 〈Book〉 XI’ (wa-hāhunā tammat al-maqāla al-ʿāshira wa-hādhihi baqiya al-ḥādiyya ʿashra).

In the preface, al-Ṭūsī states that the work is intended for himself as well as his students, and should be considered as a reference work for scholars who come together to discuss its problems. As he formulates it himself, his aim is to simplify difficult passages, to offer solutions for problems (ḥall ashkāl) and to include what the moderns (al-muḥdathūn) invented or what was adopted by later astronomers (al-mutaʾakhkhirūn) in order to make Ptolemy’s theorems more elegant; in doing so he puts an emphasis on brevity and conciseness. He finally advises his readers to correct any mistakes they may find (see Saliba, pp. 5–6, for a translation of parts of the preface).

On the basis of a comparison of the various text versions and commentaries available to him, al-Ṭūsī rephrases, corrects, and updates Ptolemy’s text, sometimes omitting or adding a paragraph, diagram or table. He includes, for example, a sine table and a tangent table in addition to Ptolemy’s table of chords and converts dates from the Almagest to the Yazdigird epoch (see further Saliba, pp. 7–10). Al-Ṭūsī claims to have distinguished in colour the lines and lettering for diagrams which he added, thus emphasising his deviations from Ptolemy. This can still be witnessed in most surviving manuscripts: diagrams copied from the Isḥāq-Thābit translation are presented with red lines and black geometrical points, whereas the diagrams taken from other versions, e.g., Thābit’s, have black lines and red lettering. Another peculiarity of al-Ṭūsī’s Taḥrīr is the tabular form in which parallel computations for the five planets are given as part of the running text (as opposed to tables with a fixed layout) in Books IX to XII.

Appendices: Several copies of the Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī produced in the milieu of the Maragha observatory include one, two or three appendices on different aspects of the planetary models (C.1.18a, C.1.18b, and C.1.18c, mostly in this order). This was first noticed by Parra, who divides the transmission in ‘Type A’, manuscripts without appendix, and ‘Type B’, manuscripts with appendix (see LAMT, pp. 254–255).

​Appendix C.1.18c already appears on its own in MS Tehran, Sipahsālār, 592 (662/​1264, based on the autograph, appendix supplemented by a different hand); in MS Cairo, Dār al-kutub, hayʾa Ṭalʿat 43 (670–673/​1272–1274, copied by Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-ʿUrḍī’s son), as well as in MS Istanbul, Ragıp Paşa, 913 (878/1473, likewise said to be based on the autograph, appendix in the margin). Both MS Sipahsālār 592 and MS Ragıp Paşa 913 give what may be an earlier title of the appendix (Istikhrāj dhālika bi-l-jabr wa-l-muqābala) and attribute it to al-muṣannif, apparently an author of significant authority (ʿazza naṣru-hu in MS Sipahsālār 592), most likely al-Ṭūsī himself. On the other hand, three out of the five known manuscripts deriving from an exemplar produced for the Maragha preacher Maḥmūd al-Khaṭīb in 663/1265 (which in turn was based on the autograph) include C.1.18a and C.1.18b without C.1.18c (the other two copies omit the appendices altogether). All other extant manuscripts directly based on the 644/​1247 autograph contain none of the appendices. The earliest manuscript that features all three appendices as a set in the common order a, b, c is MS Tehran, Sipahsālār, 4727, copied in 671/​1273, with the appendices in the hand of the main scribe. Also several early copies based on an exemplar in Quṭb al-Dīn al-Shīrāzī’s hand (which itself is lost) include the appendices in this order. This outline of the tradition suggests that appendices C.1.18a and C.1.18b on the one hand, and C.1.18c on the other, originated independently in the first half of the 660s/​1260s, the early period of activity of the Maragha observatory, and that they were only combined around 670/​1270, possibly under al-Shīrāzī’s influence.

​We know of only very few manuscripts that contain one or more of the appendices without the Taḥrīr, e.g., C.1.18b and C.1.18c in the very late MS Tehran, Majlis, 1189 S⁢; however, since this manuscript also contains several of al-Ṭūsī’s recensions of the ‘Middle Books’, it probably belongs to the same Maragha tradition. In MS Mashhad, Āstān-i Quds, 12225⁢, C.1.18b is found together with two short treatises by al-Ṭūsī and several works of astronomers associated with the observatory of Ulugh Beg in Samarqand in the first half of the ninth/​fifteenth century. The fact that none of the commentaries on the Taḥrīr, nor the translations mentioned below, include the appendices strengthens the assumption that the set was not perceived as part of the original work.

Glosses: Manuscripts of the Taḥrīr from the Ilkhanid period consistently include a mostly fixed set of marginal annotations, many of which were preserved in manuscripts up to the thirteenth/nineteenth century. They are typically introduced with ‘ḥāshiya’ (in seventh/​thirteenth-century copies often in red ink) and refer to the Almagest versions by al-Ḥajjāj (nuskhat al-Ḥajjāj, A.1.1) and Thābit b. Qurra (nuskhat Thābit, A.1.3) as well as to a Syriac and a Greek copy and to al-Nayrīzī’s lost Almagest commentary. It is unclear whether additional tabular values in section II.6 derived from a manuscript in the hand of Abū Rayḥān al-Bīrūnī should be regarded as part of the main text or belong to the same commentarial layer as the glosses. The glosses are already encountered in copies based on the autograph such as MSS Tehran, Sipahsālār, 592 and Istanbul, Ragıp Paşa, 913, where they are written in the scribes’ hands. In some later copies the notes are additionally marked as minhiyyāt, thus attributing them to the author, i.e., al-Ṭūsī. Qāḍī-Zāda al-Rūmī (C.1.40) and al-Birjandī (C.1.44) both incorporated some of the glosses in their commentaries; in Qāḍī-Zāda’s case this led to the erroneous assumption that he is the author of a note on the three well-known Arabic versions of the Almagest which also appears in numerous copies of the Taḥrīr (cf. Paul Kunitzsch, Der Almagest. Die Syntaxis Mathematica des Claudius Ptolemäus in arabisch-lateinischer Überlieferung, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1974, pp. 26–27, 30–31, 48; Löhr, pp. 235–236).

Translations: A Persian version of the Taḥrīr produced by Khayr Allāh b. Luṭf Allāh, an engineer from Lahore and grandson of the architect of the Taj Mahal, was finished on 24 Muḥarram 1160/5 February 1747. The text was revised shortly before Khayr Allāh’s death by his son Muḥammad ʿAlī l-Riyāḍī and became known under the title Taqrīb Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (Storey). Khayr Allāh’s personal copy of the Arabic version is preserved in MS Rampur, Raza, Arabic 3694. In 1732, an expanded translation of al-Ṭūsī's Taḥrīr into Sanskrit (entitled Samrāṭ Siddhānta or Siddhāntasārakaustubha) was made by Jagannātha Samrāṭ (d. 1744) on the order of Maharaja Jai Singh II. This version is extant in at least 25 manuscripts and has additional notes referring to Ghiyāth al-Dīn Jamshīd al-Kāshī and Ulugh Beg (Pingree). For an edition of the Sanskrit text, see Sharma.

Text: [Istanbul, Nuruosmaniye, 2941]

[preface] (1v–2r) أحمد الله مبدأ كلّ مبدأ وغاية كلّ غاية ومفيض كلّ خير ووليّ كلّ هداية وأرجو حسن توفيقه في كلّ بداية ونهاية. وأصلّي على عباده المخصوصين بالعناية والدراية سيّما محمّدًا وآله الموسومين بالنبوّة والولاية المنقذين من كلّ عماية وغواية، وبعد فقد كنت برهة من الزمان عازمًا على أن أحرّر لنفسي ولسائر طلبة العلم من الإخوان كتاب المجسطي المنسوب إلى بطلميوس القلوذي الذي هو الدستور العظيم لأصحاب صناعة الهيئة والتنجيم تحريرًا لا تفوته مقاصد ذلك الكتاب النظريّة — وأقول الكتاب مشتمل على ثلاث عشرة مقالة ومائة واحد وأربعين فصلًا ومائة وستّة وتسعين شكلًا على ما في النسخة التي نقلها إسحق بن حنين وأصلحها ثابت بن قرّة كما سيجيء مفصّلًا.

[Book I] (2r–13v) المقالة الأولى أربعة عشر فصلًا وستّة عشر شكلًا ا صدر الكتاب استحسن فيه بطلميوس من الفلاسفة أفراد الفلسفة النظريّة عن العمليّة مع كون العمليّة قبل العمل أيضًا — ونحن حسبنا بهذا الوجه لعشرة عشرة من الأجزاء إذ لا يتفاوت فيها دون ذلك بسبب التفاضل شيء بعتدّ به فواجدناها هكذا وسائر الأنواع كهذا الربع تمّت المقالة الأولى.

[Book II] (13v–22v) المقالة الثانية ثلاثة عشر فصلًا وخمسة وعشرون شكلًا ا في جملة المسكون من الأرض عندنا لمّا ذكرنا في المقالة الأولى حال الكلّ على الوجه المجمل — أقول قيل وكأنّا الكتاب الموعود هو جغرافيا تمّت المقالة الثانية.

[Book III] (22v–30v) المقالة الثالثة عشرة فصول وعشرون شكلًا نريد أن نبيّن فيها أحوال الشمس — قال ووسط الشمس لأوّل تأريخ مختصر كما مرّ في الحوت ع مه وموضوعها المقوّم في الحوت ج ح ومطالعها بالمستقيم شله طل فلنستعمل عند الحاجة. تمّت المقالة الثالثة.

[Book IV] (30v–40r) المقالة الرابعة أحد عشر فصلًا وتسعة أشكال ا في تعيين الأرصاد التي منها تعرف رموز القمر الكلّيّة لمّا لم يكن بعد فلك القمر من الأرض بعدًا يكون الأرض عنده كنقطة — فهذا سبب الاختلاف الواقع في حسابه وزاد من ذلك الثقة بأصولنا تمّت المقالة الرابعة بعون الله وحسن توفيقه.

[Book V] (40r–51v) المقالة الخامسة تسعة عشر فصلًا وعشرون شكلًا ا في صنعة آلة يقاس بها الكواكب وهي ذات الخلق لسنا نجد الاختلاف المذكور — وبقي من الأوضاع كون القمر في هذه المواضع عديم العرض وكونه على دائرة عرض إقليم الرؤية ذا عرض أو عديم العرض وقد مرّ به حال الاختلاف فيهما.

[Book VI] (51v–61v) المقالة السادسة عشرة فصول وسبعة أشكال ا في الاجتماعات والاستقبالات النظر في الكسوفات متأخّر عن النظر في الاجتماعات والاستقبالات الحقيقيّة — وإنّما أقامها مقامها في سائر الأوضاع تساهلًا وتفصل على الأمر الجليل وليعتبر في دائرة جرم القمر موضع المحاذاة بحسبها من الأفق.

[Book VII] (61v–67v) المقالة السابعة خمسة فصول ا في أنّ الثوابت حافظة لأوضاعها أبدًا من الصواب تسمية هذه الكواكب بالثابتة — صور نصف منطقة البروج الشماليّة.

[Book VIII] (67v–74v) المقالة الثامنة ستّة فصول وأربعة أشكال ا في جداول النصف الجنوبيّ صور نصف منطقة البروج الجنوبيّ — لأنّ هذا سبب إجماليّ لا يؤثّر تأثير تشكّلات النيّرين الجزئيّة إلى سائر الأسباب تمّت المقالة الثامنة بعون الله وحسن توفيقه.

[Book IX] (74v–86r) المقالة التاسعة أحد عشر فصلًا وعشرة أشكال ا في مراتب أكر السيّارة نبدأ في الكلام في أكرها المتحرّكة بكلّيّاتها على قطبي البروج — فحاصل الخاصّة الأوّل يزدجرد ه كا نج حاصل الأوج و يد يح تمّت المقالة التاسعة حمد لله ومنّه.

[Book X] (86r–89v) المقالة العاشرة عشرة فصول وثمانية عشر شكلًا ا في البعد الأبعد للزهرة لم نجد للقدماء أرصاد الأبعاد العظمى المتساويّة التي في جهة واحدة — تشتمل على بيان مثل تلك الأحوال للمشتري ثمّ لزحل إيثار للاختصار وتجنّبًا من التكرار.

[Book XI] (89v–96v) المقالة الحادية عشرة اثنى عشر فصلًا وأربعة عشرون شكلًا ر من مقالة ي وا ه من مقالة يا في مقدار خروج مراكز العلويّة ومواضع أوجاتها كما استخرجنا مقدار اختلاف القمر وموضع بعده الأبعد من ثلاثة خسوفات — فما حصل فهو بعد موضع الكوكب المقوّم الحقيقيّ من أوجه.

[Book XII] (96v–101r) المقالة الثانية عشر سبعة فصول وثمانية عشر شكلًا ا في المقدّمات التي تحتاج إليها في رجوع الكواكب ممّا يتّبع العلم بالحركات الطوليّة أن تتمّ مقادير الرجوع المختلفة لكلّ كوكب من الأصول المذكورة — فبهذا الوجه حسبنا لسائر البروج ورسمنا جدولًا ذا اثني عشر سطرًا أو خمسة صفوف أوّلها مبادئ الكوكبين وهو هذا.

[Book XIII] (101r–107r) المقالة الثالثة عشر أحد عشر فصلًا وخمسة عشرون شكلًا بقي علينا من أمور الخمسة البحث عن عروضها وعن أبعاد ظهورها واختفائها — يا في خاتمة الكتاب قال وإذا تمّمنا جميع ما يفتقر إلى إرشاده من وجود ما يحتاج إلى وجوده وتصحيح ما يحتاج إلى تصحيحه إلّا الشاذّ بحسب ما وصل إليه علمي ومبلغ رأيي وبقدر ما أعان الزمان عليه ودوّنّا ما هو نافع في هذا العلم من غير أن قصدنا بذلك تكبّرًا أو افتخارًا فلنختم الكتاب أقول وإذ وفّقني الله تعالى أيضًا لإتمام ما قصدته وإنجاز ما وعدته، ولأقطع الكلام حامدًا له على آلائه ومصلّيًا على جميع أوليائه، خصوصًا على خاتم أنبيائه، والبررة من آله وأحبّائه حامدًا لله ومصلّيًا على رسوله وآله الطاهرين.

Bibl.: Ḥājjī Khalīfa, Kashf al-ẓunūn (ed. FlügelGustav Flügel, Kashf al-ẓunūn ʿan asāmī l-kutub wa-l-funūn. Lexicon bibliographicum et encyclopaedicum a Mustafa ben Abdallah Katib Jelebi dicto et nomine Haji Khalifa celebrato compositum, 7 vols, Leipzig: Bentley / London: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1835–1858, vol. V, pp. 385–386; ed. YaltkayaŞerefettin Yaltkaya and Kilisli Rifat Bilge, Kashf al-ẓunūn ʿan asāmī l-kutub wa-l-funūn li-... Ḥājji Khalīfa ..., 2 vols, Istanbul: Maarif Matbaası, 1941–1943, vol. II, col. 1594). — Moritz Steinschneider, ‘Die arabischen Uebersetzungen aus dem Griechischen. Zweiter Abschnitt: Mathematik’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 50 (1896), pp. 161–219 and 337–417, here p. 205; SuterHeinrich Suter, Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der Araber und ihre Werke, Leipzig: Teubner, 1900, pp. 146–153 (no. 368); GALCarl Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, 2 vols, Weimar / Berlin: Felber, 1898–1902, vol. I, p. 511; GALSCarl Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur. Supplementbände, 3 vols, Leiden: Brill, 1937–1942, vol. I, pp. 925 and 930–931; Eilhard Wiedemann, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften. LXXVIII. Naṣîr al Dîn al Ṭûsî. Nach einem vom Verfasser hinterlassenen Manuskript bearbeitet und herausgegeben von Julius Ruska’, Sitzungsberichte der Physikalisch-Medizinischen Sozietät zu Erlangen 60 (1928), pp. 289–316, esp. p. 304; DharīʿaĀqā Buzurg al-Ṭihrānī, al-Dharīʿa ilā taṣānīf al-Shīʿa, 25 vols, Najaf: Maṭbaʿat al-Gharī / Tehran: various publishers, 1936–1978 (1355–1398 A.H.), vol. III, pp. 390–391, no. 1402; Charles A. Storey, Persian Literature. A Bio-Bibliographical Survey, vol. II, part 1: A. Mathematics. B. Weights and Measures. C. Astronomy and Astrology. D. Geography, London: Luzac, 1958, p. 37 (§70.2); Ram Swarup Sharma, Samrād Jagannāth-Viracita. Samrāṭ Siddhānta (Siddhānta-sāra Kaustubha) with Various Readings on the Basis of Different Mss., 3 vols, New Delhi: Indian Institute of Astronomical and Sanskrit Research, 1967–1969; David Pingree, Census of the Exact Sciences in Sanskrit. Series A, 5 vols, Philadelphia, 1970–1994, here vol. III, pp. 57–58; GAS VIFuat Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, vol. VI: Astronomie bis ca. 430 H., Leiden: Brill, 1978, p. 93; Paul Kunitzsch, Claudius Ptolemäus. Der Sternkatalog des Almagest. Die ara­bisch-mittel­alter­liche Tradition, 3 vols, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1986–1991, here vol. III, esp. pp. 8–10; George Saliba, ‘The Role of the Almagest Commentaries in Medieval Arabic Astronomy: A Preliminary Survey of Ṭūsī’s Redaction of Ptolemy’s Almagest’, Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Sciences 37 (1987), pp. 3–20, esp. pp. 7–12; F. Jamil Ragep, Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī’s Memoir on Astronomy (al-Tadhkira fī ʿilm al-hayʾa), 2 vols, New York: Springer, 1993, here vol. I, esp. p. 13; ENWCHelaine Selin (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Western Cultures, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1997 article ‘Almagest. Its Reception and Transmission in the Islamic World’ by Paul Kunitzsch; EI²P. J. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W. P. Heinrichs (eds), The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition, 11 vols plus supplement and index, Leiden: Brill, 1960–2004 article ‘al-Ṭūsī, Naṣīr al-Dīn. 3. As scientist’ by F. Jamil Ragep; MAOSICBoris A. Rosenfeld and Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, Mathematicians, Astronomers, and other Scholars of Islamic Civilization and their Works (7th–19th c.), Istanbul: Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and Culture (IRCICA), 2003, p. 215 (no. 606, A1) and p. 375 (no. 1181, A1); BEAThomas Hockey (ed.), The Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers, 2 vols, Dordrecht: Springer, 2007 articles ‘Jagannātha Samrāṭ’ by Narahari Achar and ‘Ṭūsī’ by F. Jamil Ragep; Salim Aydüz, ‘Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī’s Influence on Ottoman Scientific Literature (Mathematics, Astronomy and Natural Sciences)’, International Journal of Turkish Studies 17 (2011), pp. 21–38, here pp. 30–31 and 37–38; Dirk Grupe, ‘The ‘Thābit-Version’ of Ptolemy’s Almagest in MS Dresden Db.87’, Suhayl 11 (2012), pp. 147–153, here pp. 150–151; Mohammad Sadegh Ansari, Wīrāyish-i intiqādī, tarjama wa sharḥ-i maqāla-yi nuhum-i kitāb-i Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī taʾlīf-i Khwāja Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī, MA thesis, University of Tehran, 2014; LAMTMª José Parra, ‘A List of Arabic Manuscripts of Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī’s Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī’, Suhayl 16–17 (2018–2019), pp. 251–322 = Mª José Parra, ‘A List of Arabic Manuscripts of Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī’s Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī’, Suhayl 16–17 (2018–2019), pp. 251–322; F. Jamil Ragep, ‘The Origins of the Ṭūsī-couple Revisited’, in Alexander Jones and Christián Carman (eds), Instruments – Observations – Theories. Studies in the History of Astronomy in Honor of James Evans, 2020, pp. 229–237; Sajjad Nikfahm-Khubravan, The Reception of Ptolemy’s Latitude Theories in Islamic Astronomy, PhD dissertation, McGill University, 2022, pp. 671–684; Nadine Löhr, ‘Reading Ptolemy’s Almagest in the Ilkhanate. Remarks on Marginalia in Books I and II of Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī’s Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī’, Medieval Worlds. Comparative & Interdisciplinary Studies 22 (2025) [special issue The Mongols’ Baghdad. Knowledge Transmission through Manuscript Cultures before and after the Conquest], pp. 227–254. — María José Parra Pérez and Dirk Grupe, ‘Arabic Commentators on Ptolemy’s Almagest’, Qatar Digital Library: https://www.qdl.qa/en/arabic-commentators-ptolemys-almagest. Islamic Scientific Manuscript Initiative: https://ismi.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/index.php/text/122359. Databases: ISMI.

Ed.: Critical edition (pp. 50–91) and Persian translation (pp. 95–133) of Book IX (including the tables) in Ansari. Critical edition of chapters XIII.1–3 together with a short analysis of the eight early manuscripts used in Nikfahm-Khubravan.

Arabic commentaries

• Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Samarqandī, Sharḥ Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.37)

• Niẓām al-Dīn al-Ḥasan al-Nīsābūrī, Tafsīr Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.38)

• Muddaʿiyyāt ashkāl al-Majisṭī li-Baṭlamyūs al-Qalawdī (C.1.39)

• Qāḍī-Zāda al-Rūmī, 〈Ḥāshiya ʿalā Sharḥ al-Majisṭī〉 (C.1.40)

• al-Birjandī, Sharḥ Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.44)

• Shams al-Dīn al-Khafrī (?), 〈Sharḥ Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī〉 (C.1.45⁢)

• ʿAlī l-Jīlānī, Sharḥ Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.46⁢)

• Muḥammad Hāshim al-Jīlānī, Sharḥ Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.47⁢)

• Ismāʿīl Khātūnābādī (?), Taʿlīq ʿalā Taḥrīr al-Majisṭī (C.1.50⁢)