Ibād ī community centred in Basra. As the editors themselves point out, however, “No early manuscripts of any of these texts are extant, and all the manuscripts on which the editors had to rely contain considerable corruption requiring emendation” (p. 1). This deserves note since these texts are assumed to date to the second/eighth century and yet all composite manuscripts from which these texts have been edited date from the late-eleventh/seventeenth century forward. The earliest date cited is 1102/1690 (p. 9) and the latest is 1299/1881 (p. 10). Leaving aside whether the texts themselves indeed date to the second/eighth century (and there is little reason to doubt that they do), this is a remarkable gap in time and it deserves consideration. First of all, it serves as evidence for the long-term preservation of Ibād ī textual traditions and their tremendous value to the study of early Islamic history more generally. For example, the letters attributed to the early (and eponymous) Ibād ī figure named ʿAbd Allāh b. Ibād addressed to the Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān (r.66/685-86/705), previously studied by M. Cook, J. Wilkinson and Madelung himself, have long been recognised as important documents for early Islamic thought. Likewise, other texts in this collection addressing topics such as the Murjiʾa or the assassination of Caliph ʿUthmān are invaluable windows into early Islamic intellectual and political history. Second, however, the fact that both the manuscripts used to edit this collection of texts and the theological texts published by the same authors as Early Ibād ī Theology (Brill, 2014) date from the twelfth/seventeenth century onward suggests that the early-modern period of Ibād ī history was an especially important one and deserves study in its own right. Another important implication of these texts is that they provide evidence for connections between the Ibād ī communities of the east and the nascent Ibād ī communities in northern Africa. For example, the text entitled Kitāb Muslim Abī ʿUbayda wa-H ājib ilā ahl al-Maghrib (“Letter of Muslim Abū ʿUbayda and H ājib to the People of the Maghrib”, pp. 83–94) preserves correspondence between the Ibād ī community in Basra and, according to the authors, the Tripolitania region of what is today Libya as early as the mid-second/eighth century. This, along with another text in the collection, the Risālat Abī ʿUbayda fī al-zakāt (“Epistle of Abū ʿUbayda about the Alms Tax”, pp. 146–211), suggests a regular exchange of letters between the two communities. This is a welcome addition to the library of published Ibadi primary sources and it will be exciting to see what scholars do with these texts as they situate them into the broader context of early Islamic intellectual and political history.

中文翻译：

---

教廷与十字军东征：教皇霍诺留三世与圣地的收复，1216-1227 年

Ibādī 社区以巴斯ra 为中心。然而，正如编辑们自己指出的那样，“这些文本中的任何一个都没有早期手稿存在，而且编辑们不得不依赖的所有手稿都包含相当大的腐败，需要更正”（第 1 页）。这值得一提，因为这些文本被假定可以追溯到二/八世纪，而所有编辑这些文本的复合手稿的日期都可以追溯到十一世纪末/十七世纪。引用的最早日期是 1102/1690（第 9 页），最新的是 1299/1881（第 10 页）。撇开文本本身是否确实可以追溯到二/八世纪（并且没有理由怀疑它们确实存在），这是一个显着的时间间隔，值得考虑。首先，它可以作为长期保存 Ibādī 文本传统及其对更广泛地研究早期伊斯兰历史的巨大价值的证据。例如，归因于早期（和同名）Ibādī 人物 ʿAbd Allāh b 的字母。Ibād 写给倭马亚哈里发 ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān (r.66/685-86/705)，之前由 M. Cook、J. Wilkinson 和 Madelung 本人研究，长期以来一直被认为是早期伊斯兰思想的重要文件. 同样，本集中的其他文本涉及 Murjiʾa 或哈里发 ʿUthmān 遇刺等主题，是了解早期伊斯兰知识和政治历史的宝贵窗口。其次，然而，用于编辑该文本集的手稿和由与早期伊巴德ī神学（Brill，2014 年）同一作者出版的神学文本都可以追溯到 12/17 世纪以后，这一事实表明伊巴德的早期现代时期ī 历史是一部特别重要的历史，它本身就值得研究。这些文本的另一个重要含义是它们为东部的伊巴德ī社区与北非新生的伊巴德ī社区之间的联系提供了证据。例如，题为 Kitāb 穆斯林 Abī ʿUbayda wa-H ājib ilā ahl al-Maghrib（“穆斯林 Abū ʿUbayda 和 H ājib 给马格里布人民的信”，第 83-94 页）保留了 Ibād 之间的通信Basra 的 ī 社区，据作者说，早在 2/8 世纪中叶，今天利比亚的的黎波里塔尼亚地区。这与该系列中的另一篇文本 Risālat Abī ʿUbayda fī al-zakāt（“Abū ʿUbayda 关于施舍税的书信”，第 146-211 页）一起表明两个社区之间经常有书信往来。这是对已出版的 Ibadi 主要来源图书馆的一个受欢迎的补充，当他们将这些文本置于早期伊斯兰思想和政治历史的更广泛背景中时，看到学者们如何处理这些文本将是令人兴奋的。