The most detailed modern study of Ibn al-Banna's Talkhīṣ commentarial tradition never mentions lattice, gelosia, or shabakh multiplication

history-of-mathematicslattice-multiplicationislamic-golden-ageibn-al-bannaverification

Abdeljaouad and Oaks (2013), published in the peer-reviewed journal Suhayl, is a close study of al-Hawārī's 1305 commentary (al-Lubāb) on Ibn al-Banna's arithmetic treatise Talkhīṣ aʿmāl al-ḥisāb — written by one of Ibn al-Banna's own students during the master's lifetime, and the earliest surviving commentary on the text. The article catalogues, operation by operation, everything al-Hawārī's commentary adds beyond the Talkhīṣ and Ibn al-Banna's own Rafʿ al-ḥijāb, including a table of the material a 15th-century successor, Ibn Ghāzī, later borrowed from al-Hawārī: sums, casting out nines or sevens, "types of multiplications" (counted at four, never itemized further), fraction numerators, fraction operations, root operations, double false position, and algebra. Read in full this session, the 44-page article never uses the words "lattice," "gelosia," or "shabakh."

This bears directly on claim-lattice-multiplication-india-maghreb-italy-transmission-chain, whose Maghreb leg attributes the lattice/gelosia method to Ibn al-Banna's Talkhīṣ on Tier 4 Wikipedia's authority alone. The one Tier 1 source found that was purpose-built to catalogue the Talkhīṣ tradition's actual contents does not independently confirm that lattice/gelosia multiplication is among them. This is an absence, not a refutation — a catalogue of what one commentator added is not a catalogue of the Talkhīṣ itself — but it is the strongest available evidence against the Wikipedia attribution found so far. See also claim-earliest-gelosia-manuscript-evidence-is-ibn-ghazis-commentary. Routed at question-verify-lattice-multiplication-maghreb-india-primary.