Pp. 475–501. ©2013 by Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery. issn 0018-7895 | e-issn 1544-399x. All rights reserved. For permission to photocopy or reproduce article content, consult the University of California Press Rights and Permissions website, http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintInfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/hlq.2012.75.4.475. huntington library quarterly | vol. 75, no. 4 475  on march 19, 1648/9, colonel anthony weldon cautioned the House of Commons about the imminent publication of a translation of the Koran into Eng- lish. Ostensibly alarmed, the members ordered the serjeant-at-arms, together with an officer of the guards and several soldiers, to accompany Weldon, “make Search for the Press, where the Turkish Alcaron is informed to be now printing,” seize the edition, and arrest the printer. 1 This episode has often been cited, sometimes as a curiosity, sometimes to illustrate the vagaries of censorship, and sometimes as evidence of con- temporary prejudices against Islam. Curiously, however, little attempt has been made An earlier draft of this article was completed in March 2008. I wrote Noel Malcolm to ask whether he would be willing to offer comments, only to discover that he had just completed his own essay on the English translation of the Koran. A lengthy exchange of ideas ensued but, ultimately, we failed to agree on the identity of the translator. And as it proved impossible to publish our respective interpretations together, the following article should be read in conjunction with his essay: “The 1649 English Transla- tion of the Koran: Its Origins and Significance,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 75 (2012): 261–95. 1. Journal of the House of Commons, 56 vols. (London, 1803–13), 6:168. “The Turkish Alcoran”: New Light on the 1649 English Translation of the Koran Mordechai Feingold abstract The first translation of the Koran into English appeared in 1649, the first year of the Commonwealth. The political and religious significance of the publication was then and remains contested. In this essay, Mordechai Feingold traces the history of the translation’s appearance, describing the personages and motivations involved with the publication and its reception. Arguing that Thomas Ross is the likeliest editor, he challenges an alternative identification of those responsible for the translation and paratexts. Feingold surveys the critical recep- tion of the edition, which appears to have been partisan rather than principled, and concludes with a description of rival editions proposed by contemporary Arabists. keywords: seventeenth-century British views of Islam; licensing and censorship of religious works; religious politics of the Interregnum; John Boncle; Alexander Ross; English Arabist scholarship