The Transmission of the Works of Apollonius of Perge

Apollonius of Perge (or Perga; Apollonius Pergaeus) was an ancient mathematical writer who lived in the Hellenistic era, ca. 200 BC.  His reputation is based upon his Conics (or Conic Sections), one of the great works of ancient mathematics.  The Conic Sections deals with the shapes that are seen when a cone is intersected by a plane, i.e., when it is sliced open. You can get one of four shapes when that happens, including a circle, an ellipse, a parabola, or a hyperbola.

Seven works, including the Conics, are mentioned by Pappus of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 320) in his Collections book 7:[1]

3.  The order of the books of the Domain of Analysis alluded to above is this: Euclid, Data, one book; Apollonius, Cutting off of a Ratio, two; Cutting off of an Area, two; <Determinate Section>, two; Tangencies, two; Euclid, Porisms, three; Apollonius, Neuses, two; by the same, Plane Loci, two; Conics, eight; Aristaeus, Solid Loci, five; Euclid, Loci on Surfaces, two; Eratosthenes, On Means [two]. These make up 32 books. I have set out epitomes of them, as far as the Conics of Apollonius, for you to study, with the number of the dispositions and diorisms and cases in each book, as well as the lemmas that are wanted in them, and there is nothing wanting for the working through of the books, I believe, that have I left out.[2]

Pappus then goes on to summarise the contents of each work.  Listing them:

  1. Conic sections (τομαι τῶν κωνικῶν), in 8 books
  2. Cutting off a ratio (λόγου ἀποτομή), in 2 books
  3. Cutting off an area (χωρίου ἀποτομή), in 2 books
  4. Determinate section (διωρωσμένη τομή), in 2 books
  5. Tangencies (ἐπαφαί), in 2 books
  6. Plane Loci (τόποι ἐπίπεδοι), two books
  7. Neuseis / Inclinations (νεύσεις), two books

Another six works are referenced by other ancient authors, a list of which can be found in the old Encyclopedia Britannica article here.

The Conic Sections

The only material that has reached us in Greek is the first four books of the Conics, although this is not the original text, but as incompetently revised by Eutocius in the 6th century AD. Books 5, 6 and 7 are not preserved in Greek.  The fate of book 8 is unclear, but it does not seem to have existed much later than Pappus in the 3rd century AD, if indeed it existed then.

In the Heiberg edition of 1891[3] the manuscripts are listed as:

  • V – ms. Vatican. gr. 206 (12-13th c.), on fol. 1-160.
  • v – ms. Vatican. gr. 203 (13th c.), contains an extract copied from V on fol. 56-84.
  • c – ms. “Constantinopolitanus palatii veteris” – i.e. in the Topkapi Palace Library – 40 (13-14th c.), fol. 349-516.  Badly damaged by damp.
  • p – ms. Paris BNF gr. 2342 (13th c.).  Heavily (“impudently”) interpolated by someone who knew a lot about Greek mathematics.

Other mss also exist, which the editor dismisses, but without saying why.  28 mss are listed in the Pinakes database, mostly renaissance or later.

The Conics is also preserved in a translation of books 1-7 into Arabic.  This was made in the 9th century as part of the official Translation Movement, undertaken to translate the whole of Greek science into Arabic.  Indeed the Conics was translated into Arabic, not once, but twice.[4]  This consists of the first seven books, and seems to be taken from a copy of Apollonius’ own text, prior to the revisions of Eutocius.[5]

The Arabic translation is preserved in the following manuscripts, listed in Rashed’s edition with a detailed description of their history:[6]

  • A – Istanbul, Sulemaniye library, Aya Sofia no. 2762 (1024 AD).  Written by the mathematician Ibn al-Haytham.
  • B – Oxford, Bodleian Library, Marsh 667 (1070 AD).
  • S – Mashhad, Astan Quds museum library, no. 5619.  Copied from B.  Wrongly catalogued as a commentary on the Conics.
  • M – Tehran, Milli Library no. 3597 (1290 AD).  Does not derive from any other manuscript, but is of the same general family as B, S and D.
  • V – Tehran, Sepahsalar mosque library no. 557.  Copied from M.
  • D – Mashhad, Astan Quds museum library, no. 5391 (1235 AD).  Not descended from any other manuscript, but related to B.
  • T – Tehran, Milli library no. 867 (1860 AD).  A recent copy of D.
  • L – Leiden, Bibliothèque de l’Université, or. 14 (1627).  A partial copy of B.
  • K – Oxford, Bodleian Library, Thurston 1 (1668). Western copy of the last three books of the Conics.

There are also various derivative texts derived more or less directly from Apollonius which may preserve readings.

Rashed gives the following stemma of the manuscripts:

Stemma for the manuscripts of the Arabic translation of Apollonius of Perga’s Conics.

There are two families; A, and M,B,D,S,V.

The Cutting off of a ratio (De rationis sectione)

It was not only the Conics that was translated into Arabic.  The Cutting off of a ratio does exist today in Arabic.  The manuscripts are:

  • I – Istanbul, Suleymaniye library, Ayasofia 4830 (1228 AD), fols. 2v-52v.  Copied in Damascus.
  • B – Oxford, Bodleian Library, Arch. Seld. A. 32 (before 1235-6 AD).  Part of the Selden collection.  Fols. 2v-81r.

A Latin translation was made by Edmund Halley and published in 1706, from B, the Selden manuscript.[7]

The work was edited for the first time, with a French translation, by Roshdi Rashed in 2010.[8]

There is also a rather curious English translation, made without preparing a text: Apollonius of Perga, On cutting off a ratio, An attempt to recover the original argumentation through a critical translation of the two extant medieval Arabic manuscripts, translated by E. M. Macierowski, edited by Robert H. Schmidt, The Golden Hind Press, Fairfield CT (1988).

Other works

Many of the other works by Apollonius are referenced by Arabic writers. Ibn al-Nadim in his Fihrist tells us that the Cutting off of an area, the Determinate Sections, and the Tangent Circles were translated into Arabic.  There are fragments of the Plane Loci and the Neuseis quoted by two 10th century Arabic mathematical writers, which suggests that these works also may have been translated.  No manuscript is currently known of any of these texts.[9]  However Arabic manuscripts remain very understudied, and it is quite possible that these works are extant in a copy in some library, but simply unknown to scholarship.  Let us hope so!

Share
  1. [1]Jan P. Hogendijk, “Arabic Traces of Lost Works of Apollonius”, Archive for History of Exact Sciences 35 (1986) pp.187-253.  JSTOR.
  2. [2]Alexander Jones (tr.), Pappus of Alexandria: Book 7 of the Collection, part 1. Springer: New York (1986), p.84.
  3. [3]I. L. Heiberg, Apollonii Pergaei quae graece exstant cum commentariis antiquis, 2 vols, Leipzig (1891, 1893).  Online. Also contains the ancient commentaries, including Eutocius.
  4. [4]Roshdi Rashed, “Arabic versions and reediting Apollonius’ Conics,” in: Écrits d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences: Volume II Géométries. De Gruyter, Scientia Graeco-Arabica 36.2 (2023), p.351-362.
  5. [5]So Rashed in “Arabic versions and reediting Apollonius’ Conics,” pointing out errors in the Greek proofs of theorems which are not present in the Arabic.
  6. [6]Roshdi Rashed, Apollonius de Perge: Coniques. Tome 1.1, Livre 1.  De Gruyter (2008).
  7. [7]E. Halley, Apollonii Pergæi De sectione rationis libri duo ex Arabico Msto. Latine versi. Accedunt ejusdem De sectione spatii libri duo restituti… Praemittitur Pappi Alexandrini Praefatio ad 7.mum collectionis mathematicae, nunc primum Graece edita: cum lemmatibus ejusdem Pappi ad hos Apollonii libros. Opera & studio Edmundi Halley apud Oxonienses geometriae professoris Saviliani.  Oxford (1706).  Online here.  The first page of the unnumbered praefatio indicates the text, but this is not printed.
  8. [8]Roshdi Rashed (Editor), Hélène Bellosta (Editor), Apollonius de Perge, La section des droites selon des rapports: Commentaire historique et mathématique, édition et traduction du texte arabe (Scientia Graeco-Arabica, 2). De Gruyter (2010)
  9. [9]Hogendijk, “Arabic Traces…”, p.189.

A fake media story about “discovery” of lost works by Apollonius of Perge

Six days ago, the “TürkiyeToday” website published a story revealing that lost works by the ancient mathematician, Apollonius of Perge, had been found in an Arabic manuscript in Leiden by Prof. Jan Pieter Hogendijk.  The story has since reached other outlets, including the Jerusalem Post.

This story would be very exciting, if it was true.  But after some investigation, I find that it’s complete nonsense.  The “lost works” have been known for centuries.

Let’s start with the story as it appears online now:

Lost works of ancient mathematician Apollonius of Anatolia found in rare Arabic manuscript

By Koray Erdogan Feb 5, 2025

Scientists have uncovered two lost books by Apollonius, the renowned mathematician from Anatolia, in an Arabic manuscript housed at the Leiden University Libraries in the Netherlands. This extraordinary find sheds new light on the preservation and transmission of ancient Anatolian knowledge during the Islamic Golden Age.

Apollonius (262 B.C.–190 B.C.) (Apollonius of Perge) is celebrated for his groundbreaking work in geometry, particularly in his book The Conics of Apollonius. This work, which introduces the concepts of hyperbolas, ellipses, and parabolas, was one of the most influential in ancient Anatolian mathematics. However, only four of the original eight books of “The Conics” were available to European scholars during the Renaissance.

The missing books—five and seven—are now found preserved in an 11th-century Arabic manuscript, a translation that had been lost to history.

The manuscripts, which were acquired by Dutch orientalist and mathematician Jacob Golius during his travels to the Middle East in the 17th century, form part of a vast collection of nearly 200 manuscripts that he brought back to Leiden University.

Golius’s acquisition of these texts not only enriched Western scientific scholarship but also played a crucial role in the rediscovery of lost ancient works.

The newly revealed Arabic translation of Apollonius’s lost books is accompanied by detailed illustrations and exquisite Arabic calligraphy. The Dutch mathematician and historian of science, Jan Pieter Hogendijk, emphasized the importance of these manuscripts as symbols of the intellectual achievements of Islamic scientists, noting their precision and artistic quality. “These manuscripts are a testament to the mental discipline and focus of their creators,” Hogendijk stated.

The story the rest of the story is padding, although it refers to a recent volume published in Leiden, “Prophets, Poets and Scholars” as if it was the source.

In fact the news story does not make sense.  Apollonius of Perge did indeed write a textbook on geometry called the “Conics”, in 8 books.  Only the first four books are preserved in Greek.  Books 5 to 7 are indeed preserved only in an Arabic translation.

But this Arabic translation has been known for centuries.  None other than Edmund Halley, of Halley’s Comet, published an edition of the Arabic text of these books with Latin translation.  A modern edition and English translation appeared in 1990 by Gerald Toomer:

Apollonius of Perga; Toomer, Gerald J. (1990). Conics, books V to VII: the Arabic translation of the lost Greek original in the version of the Banū Mūsā. Series: Sources in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences. Vol. 9. New York: Springer (1990). DOI:10.1007/978-1-4613-8985-9. ISBN 978-1-4613-8987-3.

In the preface to the Toomer volume, indeed, on p.viii, we read:

I wish to acknowledge a particular debt of gratitude to my former colleague, J.P. Hogendijk. He read the whole book in draft form, corrected a number of errors, made several suggestions for improvement, and offered some original contributions, which I have gladly incorporated. I need hardly say that all remaining imperfections are solely my responsibility.

Today I have communicated with Prof. Hogendijk.  I learn that he was unaware of the news reports, despite some of them claiming to have an email interview with him.  The Prophets, Poets and Scholars publication from Leiden does indeed exist, and he has a paper in it.  This he lists on his home page here as item 89.  Here’s the bibliographical detail.  But he kindly sent me a copy of the paper, and this makes no such claims.

Jan P. Hogendijk, Jacobus Golius and his Arabic manuscripts on the exact sciences, pp. 114-123 in Arnoud Vrolijk, Kasper van Ommen, Karin Scheper and Tijmen Baarda, eds., Prophets, Poets and Scholars: The Collections of the Middle Eastern Library of Leiden University , Leiden: Leiden University Press, 2024. ISBN 9789087284077 (print); 9789400604520 (ePDF), https://doi.org//10.24415/9789087284077

So… the news story is pure rubbish.  One feels for Prof. Hogendijk, to whom all this nonsense is being attributed.

    *    *    *    *

Ancient Greek mathematical texts are today a field of limited interest, perhaps.  In 17th century Europe, on the other hand, they were of real interest to contemporary mathematicians, trying to solve the same problems.

But reading the preface of the 1990 Toomer book reveals some quite fascinating details of the process whereby the text actually came to light.  Here are some abbreviated extracts from p. xxi onwards.

Since it was known from Apollonius’ introduction to Book I of the Conics that they were originally in eight books, there was considerable interest in 17th-century Europe in recovering the missing Books V-VIII. As we have seen (p. xviii) Books V-VII were extant in Arabic, both in the original translation made by Thabit for the Banu Musa, and in various reworkings. The study of Arabic was beginning to expand in Europe in the later 16th century, and underwent a real flowering in the 17th. Furthermore a manuscript of one of the Arabic versions of the Conics had reached Italy in 1578, and others came to northern Europe from 1629 on. Yet nothing of significance for the later books3 was published until 1661, and no translation of the version closest to Apollonius’ original, that of the Banu Musa, appeared until 1710…..

Among the oriental manuscripts which were given in 1578 by Ignatius Ni’matallah (“Neama”, “Nehama”), Patriarch of Antioch, to Cardinal Ferdinando dei Medici, later Grand-Duke of Tuscany, and founder of the Medicean printing-press in Rome, the first Arabic press, was a compendium of the Conics by Abu’l-Fath Mahmud al-Isfahani. Its importance was recognized by the man in charge of the press, Giambattista Raimondi, who intended to publish an edition, but had still not done so when he died in 1614. At that date there is some talk in the correspondence of Galileo about publishing the work, but then interest lapsed until 1645…

In the meantime two other Arabic manuscripts of the Conics had been brought to Europe. In 1629 Jacobus Golius returned to Leiden from a prolonged visit to the east, bringing back a large number of manuscripts in Arabic, Persian and other languages. Among them was the splendid codex of Apollonius’ Conics, in the version commissioned by the Banu Musa, which is now in the Bodleian Library ..[ms. “O”] .. This was given to him by his countryman David Leleu de Wilhem “for the public good.” Knowledge of the existence of this manuscript (or rather of the apograph which had been made from it of Books V-VII) was rapidly disseminated by the catalogue of the manuscripts deposited by Golius in the Leiden library which the enterprising Gassendi had printed at Paris in 1630. Golius promised to publish the recovered books, and seemed ideally qualified to do so, since he was both an accomplished Arabist and a competent mathematician (shortly after his return from the east he was appointed to the Professorships of Arabic and Mathematics at Leiden).

However, not only did he fail to publish the lost Apollonius himself, but he manreuvred adrOitly and successfully to prevent anyone else doing it for the rest of his life lhe died in 1667), jealously guarding access to his manuscript and the partial copies of it which existed at Leiden, and actively deterring others who were inclined to try their hand, for instance by claiming that he alone could read the difficult script of the manuscript (which is in fact extremely legible). In the years 1644-1646 he was apprehensive that the English mathematician John Pell would anticipate him by publishing Books V-VII from the manuscript of Ravius (on which see below), but seems to have dissuaded him by pretending that he was about to produce his own version. Golius might be excused for not publishing the Apollonius himself on the grounds that he was not idle during these years, being engaged on, amongst other things, his great Lexicon Arabico-Latinum (Leiden, 1653). But his dog-in-the-manger attitude towards the efforts of others to get access to the work, or to publish alternative versions, caused increasing frustration and disgust throughout Europe and among his own countrymen, which can be traced through the decades of the 1630’s and 1640’s in the Mersenne correspondence. …

When Golius died in 1667 his valuable collection of manuscripts, including the Apollonius (see p. xxii) went not to the University of Leiden, but to his personal heirs. Negotiations between them and Cambridge University for the sale of the manuscripts as a lot fell through, and they remained, inaccessible, in the hands of the heirs for nearly 30 years. However, Golius was no longer in a position to restrict access to the partial copies of the Conics which he had handed over to the Leiden library, …

In 1696 Golius’ heirs finally decided to auction his manuscripts. Bernard persuaded Narcissus Marsh (then Archbishop of Dublin), a great patron of scholarship and interested in orientalia, to give him carte blanche to buy at the auction. Although ilt he traveled to Leiden for the sale in October 1696, and bought for Marsh a large number of interesting mss., including the famous Apollonius. But he never recovered from the effects of the winter voyage, dying at Oxford shortly after his return, on Jan. 12, 1697, aged 58, with most of his ambitious plans, including his edition of the Conics, uncompleted. However, the manuscript was now where it would be made available to the man who was to do the most for Apollonius in modern times, Edmond Halley.

Halley’s great edition of Apollonius’ Conics was published at Oxford in 1710. It was the editio princeps of the Greek text, and is until the present publication the only translation of Books V-VII based on the original Arabic version (that supervised by the Banu Musa): all later translations of these books derive from Halley’s Latin version. …

The manuscript of Golius is now in the Bodleian, where it is MS Marsh 667, and is online!  It was written in 1070AD in Azerbaijan, but was in Aleppo by 1627, where it was acquired by Leleu de Wilhelm, for Golius, as indicated by a note in the volume.

While the news story is nonsense, let us hope that it draws attention to the possibilities of real discoveries, waiting to be found in Arabic translation.  Maybe someone will be inspired to work more on these collections!  That would be a nice outcome.

Share

Notes on Ps. Athanasius, “Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem”

An interesting query arrived this morning in the email:

J.P. Migne mentions another Athanasius than Athanasius the Great in the footnotes of John of Damascus’ defense of images. Migne calls him “Athanasius Minor,” and claims that he lived around the 7th or 8th century, and wrote a letter to a man called Antiochus with 109 questions (?) that Athanasius answers.  Do you have any idea where such an Athanasius Minor’s works could be found?

The work in question seems to be CPG 2257, the “Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducum” of pseudo-Athanasius, printed in the PG 28, columns 597-700, but extant in 233 Greek manuscripts and also in translations into every language of the region, including Armenian, Old Slavonic, Arabic and Ethiopic.

Dr Ilse de Vos appears to be the authority on this work, and has an article on the manuscript tradition in a 2015 journal, “The Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem’, in: R. Ceulemans & P. De Leemans (eds), On Good Authority” – The Construction of Authority which is LECTIO volume 3, Brepols (2015), pp. 43-66.  She writes:

… I am preparing a critical edition of the Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem (CPG 2257).1 This erotapocritic text consists of 137 questions and answers that deal with several aspects of Christianity, such as ‘Why do we Christians worship icons and the cross: is that not idolatry?’ (Q 39); ‘Why did God appear to Moses in a thorn bush?’ (Q 59); ‘Does God prefer us to go to church or to give alms to the poor?’ (Q 86) etc. The great  majority of the 233 manuscripts through which this text has come down to us attribute it to Athanasius of Alexandria (see below). We know that this attribution is false but remain in the dark as to the question when precisely the text was written. It has been dated as early as to the first half of the seventh century, between the Persian occupation (614-626/627) and the Arab invasion (638) of Palestine. The presence of numerous QA on icon worship, however, might just as well invite one to date it to the turbulent eighth century. Of no little importance to the question of our text’s dating, is the precise nature of its relationship with the Quaestiones et responsiones (CPG 7746). This text was written in the second half of the seventh century by Anastasius of Sinai and shares quite a number of QA with the text of Ps.-Athanasius.

In the course of its transmission, the Greek text of the Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem was translated into Arabic, Armenian, Georgian, Church Slavonic and Latin….

According to the CPG, the Armenian text has been printed by E. Tayeci, At’anasi Alek’sandrwoy hayrapeti cark’, t’ult’k’ ew enddimasac’ut’iwnk [i.e. S. Athanasii patriarchae Alexandriae homiliae, epistulae et controuersiae,] Venetiis (1899), p.347-477.[1]

The proposed critical edition does not seem to have appeared, however, so Migne is still the latest text.

Share
  1. [1]The Armenian title I transcribe badly from R. Thomson’s Classical Armenian Bibliography, 1995, p. 36, online here.

Life of John Damascene by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem (BHG 884) – Part 6

The story so far.  John Damascene has been working as CFO for the Muslim caliph in Damascus.  In his spare time he has been writing a series of hard-hitting articles in the Constantinople press, attacking the Byzantine president emperor Leo for promoting iconoclasm.  Words like “anti-Christ”  are getting used.  Leo’s PR department responds by doxxing him to the caliph using a fake and treasonous letter.  The caliph falls for it, and initiates cut-backs in John’s department – specifically paring John’s writing hand to the wrist.  Now read on.

    *    *    *    *

18.  John’s Plea to the Mother of God That His Hand Be Restored, in Anacreontic Verses.

As evening fell, and John supposed that the tyrant’s anger had subsided, he sent a representative to him, pleading and speaking thus, “My pain is increasing and has become unbearable. The sharp sting of my suffering will not cease as long as my severed hand remains suspended in the air. Therefore, command that it to be given to me, so that I may bury it in the earth, and the agony may subside.” The tyrant immediately allowed the request, and the hand was given to the righteous man. Having received it, he entered the oratory of his house and, falling prostrate before a certain sacred icon bearing the divine likeness of the Mother of God[1], he placed his severed right hand upon its former joint, and, he prayed from the depths of his heart, crying out with sighs and tears,

O Lady, most holy Mother, You who gave birth to my God,
For the sake of the holy icons, My right hand was cut off.
You are not unaware of the cause For which Leo went mad.
Hasten, then, with all speed And heal my hand.
The right hand of the Most High, Who took flesh from you,
Works many wonders Through your intercession.
Now, through your prayers, Let Him also heal this right hand of mine,
So that the hymns to you which you give me, And to the One incarnate from you,
May be written in harmonious melodies, O Mother of God,
And become an instrument For Orthodox worship.
For you can accomplish whatever you will, Since you are the Mother of God.

While John was saying these words with tears, he fell asleep. In his sleep, he saw the holy icon of the Mother of God looking at him with merciful and joyful eyes, and saying, “Behold, your hand has been made whole.  Delay no longer, but make it the pen of a swift-writing scribe,[2] as you have promised me today.”

19.  John’s Severed Hand Is Healed By the Prayers of Mary.

He awoke, and was healed, and he examined carefully the severed hand, and on seeing it he rejoiced in the spirit in God his Saviour and in His Mother, because the Mighty One had done great things for him. Rising to his feet, he lifted his hands on high and sang a divine hymn most fitting for the occasion.  Throughout the whole night, he with his whole household rejoiced and sang a new song of thanksgiving to God, “Your right hand, O Lord,” he said, “has been glorified in strength; Your right hand has healed my broken right hand, and through it, you will crush the enemies, those who do not honour the venerable icons of Yourself and those of Her who bore You.  By the abundance of your glory, you will crush the enemy icon-breakers through my hand.”  So that night was like day to him, a light and not darkness;[3] and to express the prophetic word with a figure of speech,[4] there was there the pure sound of celebration and the voice of exultation in the tent of the righteous man.[5]

These things did not take place in secret, nor in silence; rather, that marvellous sound and harmonious jubilation was heard by those in the whole surrounding neighbourhood.  Immediately some of the Christ-hating Saracens went to their own leader, saying that John’s right hand had not been cut off at all, but of someone else—perhaps a slave or some other attendant who had, out of loyalty, sacrificed himself in place of his master, and that those ordered to carry out the amputation had taken money instead of inflicting the penalty. “For John remains at home, singing and rejoicing in such a way that you might say that he was celebrating a wedding and composing a bridal song for the marriage hymns. Indeed, his joy seems even greater than that.”

20.  The Barbarian Recognizes the Miracle.

When these things had been reported in this way, John was summoned.  On his arrival, he was ordered to show his severed right hand; and as it was displayed, by the arranging of the Mother of God, a faint line of the cut also was visible, as a most undeniable sign that the severance had indeed taken place.  At this, the barbarian exclaimed: “Who is the physician that has healed you, John?  And what medicines were applied to you?”  Then he [John] in a loud and clear voice proclaimed the miracle.[6] “My Lord,” he declared, “the Almighty Physician, whose power does not fall short of His will.”  The barbarian responded, “Then I infer, O man, that you have suffered for something of which you are innocent.  Forgive us, then, for the rash and thoughtless judgment, because of which we inflicted this punishment upon you.  Go, then, and take charge of your former office; and you will be foremost among our advisors.  From now on, we will undertake nothing without both your advice and guidance.”

21.  He obtains permission to withdraw into a monastery instead, although with difficulty.

Then he [John] fell to the ground and prostrated himself, and, lying face-down for a considerable time, he pleaded to be excused and allowed to take another road, more desirable to journey upon, and to follow Him who says, “I am the Way.”  But the barbarian did not grant permission. And it was like seeing gladiators, as one might say, the barbarian and the righteous man.  The former strove by many ways to hold John fast in the chains of the world, while the other was fiercely trying to break them apart with zeal, and to take flight on angelic wings.  A great stadium then lay open, where Christ was seated as judge of the contest, the audience was the angels.  Indeed one might rightly say that the wicked spirits on the left side emboldened and strengthened the persuasiveness of the barbarian.  Yet with great acclaim my gladiator conquered, and all the adversary’s persuasive efforts were reckoned as [nothing more than] the [feeble] arrows of infants.  The victor departed, his head adorned with a radiant crown, and entered his home with a joyful countenance, though he had left it previously downcast.

    *    *    *    *

The wisdom of John’s decision to get out of the job will be understood by anyone who has worked in an office!

Share
  1. [1]Θεομήτωρ.
  2. [2]Ps.44/45:1-2.
  3. [3]The Latin translation of Lequien expresses this idea twice; presumably the translator’s eye skipped back a phrase, and was not checked later.
  4. [4]ὑπαλλαγή
  5. [5]Here the chapter numbering diverges.  Lequien numbers the next paragraph “20”, and the next two sections are both numbered “21”.  I have followed the numbering of the Patrologia Graeca reprint, which is the Greek text used in the TLG.  This makes Lequien’s “20” the second part of “19”, and then the first “21” as “20.”
  6. [6]lit. “became the herald of the miracle.”

Anacreontics … by ChatGPT!

Chapter 18 of the Jerusalem Life of John Damascene contains a prayer by John to the Virgin Mary, that his severed hand is re-attached to his arm.  The 1712 Lequien edition signals that the prayer is in Anacreontic verse, a form of light verse, curiously.

Rather than try to translate that myself, I asked ChatGPT.

Can you translate this Latin poem into English anacreontic verse with the same number of lines: ”’Domina castissima mater, Deum meum qua peperisti.
Propter imagines sacras, dextra manus mea praecisa est,
Causam haud ignoras furoris, quo Leo saeviit.
Succurre sis ergo quam citissime, et meam manum sana
Illa Excelsi dextera, quae ex te carnem sumsit.
Multas facit virtutes, intercessione tua.
Hanc quoque manum meam, tuas nunc ad preces sanet,
Quo tuas, ut dederis, filiique ex te incarnati laudes
Modulato concentu, O Deipara, conscribat
Et rectae fidei cultui, opitulator adsit
Potes enim quidquid lubet, ut quae sis Dei mater. ”’

And this is what came out:

O Lady chaste, O mother pure,
Who bore my God, divinely sure.

For sacred icons, lo! my hand
Was struck and severed by command.

The tyrant raged, his wrath was blind,
Yet, Mother, thou dost know the mind.

So haste, O help in sorrow’s night,
Restore my hand in mercy’s might.

The hand of Him, the Lord Most High,
Took flesh from thee and reigns on high.

Thy prayers bring wonders, works of grace,
Let now His touch my wound erase.

That I may write, as thou dost give,
Thy praises and His name who lives.

To truth and faith my hand restore,
That I may serve Him evermore.

For all is thine, O Mother dear,
Since God hath made thee Queen and near.

Which I think you will agree is extraordinary.

Just for reference, here is Google Translate for the same lines:

O most chaste mother, you who gave birth to my God.
Because of the sacred images, my right hand was cut off,
You are not ignorant of the cause of the fury with which Leo raged.
Therefore, come to my aid as quickly as possible, and heal my hand
That right hand of the Most High, which took flesh from you.
Many virtues are performed by your intercession.
This hand of mine, too, is now healed by your prayers,
That it may write down your praises, that you may give, and the praises of your son incarnate from you
In a modulated harmony, O Mother of God,
And be present to the worship of the right faith, a helper
For you can do whatever you please, as you are the Mother of God.

Here’s the Greek from the TLG, which is the Lequien text via the PG:

Δέσποινα, πάναγνε μῆτερ, ἡ τὸν Θεόν μου τεκοῦσα,
Διὰ τὰς θείας εἰκόνας, ἡ δεξιά μου ἐκόπη·
Οὐκ ἀγνοεῖς τὴν αἰτίαν δι’ ἣν ἐμάνη ὁ Λέων.
Πρόφθασον τοίνυν ὡς τάχος, καὶ ἴασαί μου τὴν χεῖρα.
Ἡ δεξιὰ τοῦ Ὑψίστου, ἡ ἀπὸ σοῦ σαρκωθεῖσα,
Πολλὰς ποιεῖ τὰς δυνάμεις, διὰ τῆς σῆς μεσιτείας·
Τὴν δεξιάν μου καὶ ταύτην νῦν ἰασάσθω λιταῖς σου,
Ὡς ἂν σοὺς ὕμνους, οὓς δοίης, καὶ τοῦ ἐκ σοῦ σαρκωθέντος,
Εὐρυθμικαῖς ἁρμονίαις συγγράψηται, Θεοτόκε.
Καὶ συνεργὸς χρηματίσῃ τῆς ὀρθοδόξου λατρείας.
Δύνασαι γὰρ ὅσα θέλεις, ὡς τοῦ Θεοῦ μήτηρ οὖσα.

Which turned into:

O Lady pure, O Virgin bright,
Who bore my God in mercy’s light,

For sacred icons, lo! my hand
Was by the tyrant’s wrathless planned.

Thou know’st, O Queen, the cause he gave,
His madness made him fierce and grave.

Then haste, O swiftly grant me grace,
And heal my hand in love’s embrace.

The hand of Him, the Lord Most High,
Took flesh from thee and reigns on high.

Through thee He works His wonders still,
Thy prayers can move His mighty will.

Then let my hand be healed anew,
That I may write thy praises true,

And of thy Son, incarnate King,
With tuneful strains in faith to sing.

To truth and faith my hand restore,
That I may serve Him evermore.

For all is thine, O Mother dear,
Since God hath made thee Queen and near.

Doggerel it may certainly be, but it is certainly extraordinary to see!

Share

Life of John Damascene by John, Patriarch of Jerusalem (BHG 884) – Part 5

Let us continue with the “Jerusalem Life” of John Damascene.  I had not realised that I had completed – but not posted – three more chapters before my hand injury, so only chapter 17 is new.  A quick recap: John is living in Damascus and working as chief financial officer for the muslim caliph.  Now read on!

    *    *    *    *

14.  The madness of Leo the Isaurian against images.

At that time Leo the Isaurian was ruling the Roman Empire.  He, opposing the sacred icons and the orthodox mainstream of the church, [1] was like a lion, seizing  and roaring, burning them[2] with a fire of bestial madness, and seizing and destroying their[3] worshippers, and cruelly tearing them apart with the teeth of tyrannical impiety.  These things came to John’s ears, and he imitated the zeal of Elijah and the rebukes [of wrong-doing] of his namesake [John the Baptist] as if the spirit had anointed him invisibly, and before his consecration,[4] as an opponent of this impiety; and he wielded words as though they were the sword of the Spirit, a sharp weapon to destroy the doctrine of the beast-minded one, as if he were cutting off its head.  So he sent out letters to defend the veneration of the sacred icons to those of the right faith[5] who knew him, powerfully demonstrating in a philosophical way that the veneration of the divine images was necessary.  He also instructed them to say the same things to others, and to show his letters to everyone.  The new athlete of the truth laboured in every way for his letters to pass from hand to hand among the faithful, as if in a circle,[6] to strengthen the true doctrine,[7] and following the example of Paul, he laboured to cover the whole world, although not on foot but through letters proclaiming the truth.

15.  Leo’s strategem against John.

These things were reported to the emperor Leo, and, summoning some of his like-minded associates, since he could not bear the exposure of his impiety, which John’s letters proclaimed clearly, he commanded them to put on a mask of piety and make haste and fabricate a discourse, and to locate a letter written by John in his own hand.  These accomplices of wickedness did not cease pulling on every rope, concealing their intentions and seeking out what they had been ordered to find, until they did find it, and delivered it to the emperor.  He summoned some of his scribes and set before them examples of John’s letters, to imitate the style of the writing, both in thought and phrasing.  Thus he found sufficient people to carry out this task, and he ordered them to write a letter as if from John to himself, the infamous emperor, with the following content.

“Greetings, O emperor!  I also rejoice in your mightiness, because we share the same faith.  I render both gratitude and the appropriate respect to your imperial majesty, for which reason I send these things for your information.  This city of ours happens to have been completely neglected in terms of its defence, and the military force of the Hagarenes here is weak and few in number.  Wherefore in the name of God take pity on this city, and, contrary to all expectation, send a powerful and numerous force which pretends to march elsewhere, and you will  take the city without a fight; for I myself will assist you considerably in this purpose, because both the entire region and the city itself are under my authority.

16.  Leo’s Letter to the Caliph.

After this letter had been written, the impious man wrote another letter in malice to the leader of the Saracens in Damascus, with this intent:

“As I know nothing more blessed than peace, nor more fortunate than friendship, – and keeping treaties of peace is praiseworthy and pleasing to God, –  for these reasons I prefer above all else to preserve unbroken the peaceful friendships which I established with your eminence, although I have often been urged to secretly break these and treacherously violate the treaties, by one of the Christians serving under you through his many letters, who confidently assures me that he would contribute greatly to subdue the city under your control if I should send a large army against it.

For this very reason I have also sent back to you one of the letters which he sent to me, showing that the things which I have written are true, so that you may know what kind of person I am in regard to friendships – truthful, and not inclined to break treaties – and so that you may recognise the ill-will and deceitfulness of the one who dared to write these things to me.

17.  John’s Right Hand is Amputated.

He was lion-named, and serpent-like in deceit, so he sent both these letters through one of his men to the barbarian [ruler].  Upon receiving them, the latter summoned John and showed him that deceitful letter.  John, reading through it, admitted that the pattern[8] of the letters resembled his own, but he added that he did not know the things contained in them at all, nor had such thoughts ever even crossed his mind.  But having read it, he did not fail to recognise the deception, and the plot of the Emperor [against him].  But that ruler, who hated Christ, was like a donkey listening to a lyre—so says the proverb[9]—in his response to what was said  by John. He became deaf to good and truthful speech, and did not remain dumb, when it came to issuing an unjust decree.  Instead he immediately ordered that John’s right hand should be cut off.

When he [John] requested a brief delay in order to defend himself, and to explain the rage of the impious one against him, the barbarian refused, and would not hear of it, being completely beside himself with anger.  And so the right hand was cut off, which had performed great deeds for the Orthodox in God through what it had written; the right hand was cut off which had rebuked those who hated the Lord and, instead of being dipped in ink, as it had once been when writing in defence of the veneration of icons, it was now dipped in its own blood.

So, having cut off that right hand of the Lord, so to speak, they suspended it in the marketplace.

    *    *    *    *

Not one of John’s better days at work, I would guess.

Share
  1. [1]“τῆς Ἐκκλησίας πληρώματος”: this appears to be a standard phrase, lit. “fullness of the church,” the faithful, the assembly.
  2. [2]The icons.
  3. [3]The icons.
  4. [4]“anointing.”
  5. [5]“orthodox.”
  6. [6]“ὡς διὰ κύκλου τινὸς.”  Not translated by Lequien.
  7. [7]“the orthodox faith.”
  8. [8]τύπους
  9. [9]This is one of Aesop’s fables

From my diary

Well that was nice!  I’ve just got back from a short holiday in Iceland, in Akureyri to be specific.  Masses of snow, although no real snowfalls while we were there.  The post-holiday tidy-up is well under way now.

I have ignored a few emails while I was away.  Here’s two.

It looks as if my translation of the Jerusalem “Life” of John Damascene is attracting interest.  I’m keen to get back to that very soon now.  It’s funny how quickly a project fades once you stop working on it.

Also I learn that a college friend of mine has produced a book.  The title is Lost in translation: The Gospels of Mark and John: Fresh insights from the original Greek text, by Tim Hawkins.  It’s available here on Amazon.com and Amazon UK.  He read classics at Oxford, and has been a vicar ever since.  Here’s the blurb:

The New Testament was written not in English but in Ancient Greek, a language far more expressive than our own. This book revisits and comments on a number of short passages in the Gospels of Mark and John, where Greek words reveal an extra force, a double meaning, or a picture linking with other parts of Scripture or the words of Jesus. The Greek is simple and written in simple sentences, because the writers were focused on recording these unique events for posterity rather than with an eye to literary fame. Some words are very unusual, found only in the New Testament, and they give us fascinating insights to enrich our faith.

This book is for anyone interested in studying the Bible; it is not just for academics or preachers. It is not going to overturn traditional Christian theology but to underline it.

I’ve not seen it, but I get the impression that he wanted to bring out some points where the Greek text has a deeper meaning than is possible for any translation to reproduce in English.

Share

From my diary

Just a brief note to say that my hand injury is gradually improving, and that I hope to be able to do some blogging reasonably soon.  My apologies for the silence.

I’ve not been able to do any translating.  In fact I find that I’m starting to miss working on the Life of John Damascene.  But that involves quite a bit of mouse action – which hurts my hand -, so it may have to wait awhile.

However I have continued reading a psalm on Sunday and then the same psalm in the parallel Vulgate Latin and Douai-Reims English.  I really recommend this as a way to improve your Latin.  For each short psalm, the Latin has one less-than-obvious phrasing, which makes you think, and prepares you for the same stuff in medieval Latin.  So expect more posts about incidental matters of this kind.

Apparently Amazon claims that we don’t own the e-Books that we pay them for.  It’s curious to learn that a vendor can make such decisions, and never mind law or justice.  This year I learn that some countries have started to ban access to various illegal book sites, where one may download the same books without payment.  I wonder whether a collection of books downloaded in this way would actually indeed form part of the estate of the downloader!

I’ve read quite a bit of the Letters of A. E. Housman, as selected by Henry Maas – I nearly put Paul Maas! – but most seemed of no real interest today.  He must have been a terror to deal with, though.  His notes to his publisher are words of command, not of entreaty.  A very unhappy man, I suspect.  But then, good as the poetry is, I didn’t much care for A Shropshire Lad.

Share

Orbis terrarum – the world in medieval chant

Last night I was reading psalm 98.  Inevitably I picked up a parallel Latin-English psalter, and read it again in Latin.  In the Vulgate it’s psalm 97, of course.

One thing that I noticed was that “orbis terrarum” was the phrase used to mean “the world.”  Literally this means “the orb/circle/sphere of the earth.”  It’s a common Latin usage, which appears in Augustus, Res Gestae, Pliny the Elder, and indeed in Augustine.

But, because it was in the psalms, every monk from ancient times onwards must have chanted this regularly and memorised it.

Ps 98/97 in the Vulgate and Douai-Reims translation

It’s an interesting thought.

Share

New Website: The Original Douay-Rheims Bible

Here’s something splendid – a website named Original Douay Rheims, created by a student devoted to putting online the original Douay-Rheims translation of the Vulgate bible!  It’s great to see ordinary people doing this on the web.  The link is here:

https://originaldouayrheims.com/home

The site is in progress, but there is already a lot there.

The site owner does not give his name, and asks for people to work with him, who are happy to do so anonymously.  What a wonderful thing to do.

Start of Psalm 97

A few words about the Douai-Reims version (DRV) may be in order.

The DRV is a translation of the Latin Vulgate bible, made around 1600 by exiled Catholics from England at the college in Douai (or Douay, as it was then spelled).  They were all actually based in Reims (Rheims) at the time when they did the New Testament, hence the name.  They used Coverdale’s version as a basis, but revised it to give a very literal translation of the Latin, to the extent of introducing latinate words.

Ownership of the DRV was a criminal offence for a century.  But it still became widely known, thanks to a protestant refutation, that printed the whole thing in a parallel column with the text of the Great Bible, in order to “demonstrate how unreliable it is”!  This was perfectly legal, and inevitably sold very well.  The translators of the King James Bible were certainly aware of it, as they were of other versions, and were influenced by some of its better translation choices.

A century and a half later, between 1749 and 1777, the DRV was revised by a Bishop Challoner, who brought the text more into line with the KJV.  This version is the “Douai Reims” that is most commonly encountered.  This revision is the text that is commonly found online, whereas the Original Douay Rheims site has the pre-Challoner text.

Prior to the internet, few people ever saw any version of the Douai-Reims.  But it is now freely accessible on sites such as Bible Gateway.  Such sites – which, alas, grow more commercial every day – can display the Vulgate and the Douai in parallel columns.

Bible Gateway parallel text

Many people also suppose that the DRV is the only translation of the Vulgate.  But this is not so.  Apparently the Ronald Knox translation is also from the Vulgate?  This Catholic Bible site allows you to have a three column view.

It is curious to notice how the same word is translated differently.  Why is “psallite” not rendered the same in vv4-5?

Anyway, it’s all useful to know about, and one of the blessings of the internet.

Share