Abbyy Finereader 10 upgrade now out

For many years I have used Abbyy Finereader as my OCR software.  Version 10 is now out, and I have just bought an upgrade.

Mind you, I have retained copies of FR8 and FR9 on my disk, installed and ready to use.  FR9 was quite an improvement in OCR terms on FR8, and has better PDF handling, but the user interface is a lot harder to use.  It fights you.  I’ve never got used to its quirks.  In particular it decided that it wouldn’t allow me to scan images at 400 dpi on my Plustek Opticbook 3600 — which FR8 did — and since I prefer to scan at that resolution, I had to retain FR8.  It’s also better for image cropping. 

So … FR10.  I’ve just installed it, which was painless.  It asks if I want to start some screengrab software every time I start my PC — I uncheck this.  I open it up for the first time, and it wants me to register – that too is painless. 

Then I get a screen with a big red window of “helpful” options — with no way to close it.  I uncheck “display on startup” and it still won’t go.  I’m forced to close the application, and restart.  Not really that good a start.

Next I open an existing FR9 project.  I’d started work on Censorinus, so I use that.  I select the folder; and then it asks me to save it somewhere else.  Yes, OK, we never had to do that in FR5, FR6, FR7, FR8 or FR9.  Why change it?  So I waste some disk space and create folder censorinus_fr10.  I suppose newcomers will find it useful.  And it opens the project OK.  Hmmm. Now what? 

I click on a page, and it doesn’t seem to include any of the OCR’d text.  I select ‘Read’ and it OCR’s it.  But … where is the text I was working on?  A look shows that FR10 has kindly deleted all my recognised text.  It’s kept the blocks on the screen, and that’s it.  B*****ds!!  Now we know why they insisted on keeping the old directory — boy would they be lynched if they hadn’t!  This is bad.  This is really, really bad.  Who wants to restart a whole project?

OK, well I look through a few pages rather hopelessly, and I see one where the image needs editing.  So … what do we have?  Well, we have the FR9 style: “Let’s hide all the tools boys! Hee hee!”  I had to customise mine to get an eraser on it.  How do I do that now?

Well, I can’t say.  If I choose Page|Edit page image, I get a rubbish image editor, with no tools, on which I can crop.  This is the FR9 approach, way inferior to the FR8 one.  It looks as if they still haven’t got rid of that idiot who ruined the interface.  I erase a bit of rubbish on the image … it takes ages.  The pages flashes as I do.  Awful!

OK, I see it.  You choose View|Toolbars|Quick Access bar.  This puts an extra bar at the top, under the file menu.  Then you do View|Toolbars|Customize.    Choose categories “Image”, and you are looking at that toolbar.  Now go down the  icons on the left, and insert them where you want them on that toolbar.  I add erase and a few others, and suddenly I can clean up the image as I want to.  I can zoom the image (although only to 200%, unlike before – another degradation in service), and I can get rid of the image of some long dead student’s pencil on the page.

I’m dispirited, tho.  I’m having to work at this, just to do simple OCR tasks.

OK.  Let’s OCR that page.  Right-click, read and … off it goes.  I get two windows, image and text.  Luckily the “Quick Access Bar” also allows me to minimise the image!  And I click on the text at one point, where it’s duff, and … hang on, where’s the zoom at the bottom?  Ah, it’s still at the bottom; just not displayed by default.  (Why?!)  One click on it, and it appears.

The OCR quality appears about the same, or possibly a little better.  We’ll see.

Overall verdict?  Wish they’d shoot the interface designer. 

UPDATE: another glitch.  While working on Censorinus, I had to do a global replace of “aera” to “era”.  This I did, but they’ve made a subtle change.  After the replace, I used to just hit Esc to get rid of the search/replace dialog box.  Now it doesn’t work.  And why?  Because each time you do a replace, they shift the focus to the document, meaning you have to click the dialog box to get back to where you were. 

This is unbelievably infuriating, and will make for much more work in using the product.  All those extra clicks during a long search/replace…

Share

Daremberg and Saglio’s “Le Dictionnaire des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines”

… is online here.  (The page is the start of stuff on bruma).  This French dictionary looks very useful, and the referencing to ancient sources isn’t bad either.

Thanks to Bill Thayer for pointing me at this one!

Share

Authorities for the Julian year

A search on Google books produced an elderly reference, Wm Ramsay, Ovid: selections for the use of schools (1868) discussing how the Julian year worked (p.333).  But as with so many of these old sources, the referencing to ancient texts is really quite good.

In giving an account of the Roman Calendar, it will be convenient first to explain that portion of the subject concerning which our information is full and complete; and then to pass on to the consideration of those points which are comparatively doubtful and obscure. According to this plan, we shall commence at once with an account of the constitution of the Julian Year [1]. …

[1] The principal authorities are Plutarch, Vit. Caes. 59, Dion Cassius 43. 26, Appian. B.C. II, Ovid Fast. 3. 155, Sueton. Jul. 40, Plin. H.N. 18. 25, Censorinus 20, Macrob. S. I. 14, Ammian. Marcell. 26. 1.

Which gives us something to work with.  It will be interesting to see what Ramsay says…

Share

From my diary

Another chunk of the Selecta in Ezechielem — the remains in Greek of material by Origen on Ezechiel, as printed by Migne — has arrived, leaving only another 11 pages of Migne to go.  I’m told that these chunks of catenas tend to be corrupt and awkward; but sometimes the thought is considerably simpler than it is in Origen.

All this means that Origen on Ezechiel is drawing to an end, and will probably be complete sometime in the new year.  After that, of course, I will have to print it and sell it.  I’m thinking that it might be prudent to hire someone to edit it, design the book, any artwork, etc, rather than try to do it myself.

It’s like websites; anyone can put something together, but to get a professional appearance requires expertise.  I saw an example website that someone was having designed, for a relatively small sum, and it was far better than anything I could do in any reasonable time.  I don’t have any time, anyway; I’ve started a new job, and it means a daily commute which leaves very little time left at the end of the day.  Nor can I do much during the day.  Better to use a professional, perhaps, both from a time and quality point of view.  I wonder where such might be found? 

The translator of the Selecta has indicated willingness to have a go at some of John the Lydian.  I think we’ll do this.  The whole of De mensibus is doubtless interesting, but it’s also long.  I think I’d like to see some return on existing investments of cash in translations before I commission something that costs another $4,000 or so.  It would be prudent, I think. 

So we’ll try doing December from book 4 of De mensibus.  This gives, day by day, a list of what Romans got up to at that time of the month.  It’s only 8 pages, so I’ll just give that away online.

Share

“Killer” Carlson unmasks another fraud

This article came through from CLASSICS-L:

Science Daily 12/15/09:

Ancient Book of Mark Found Not So Ancient After All”

A biblical expert at the University of Chicago, Margaret M. Mitchell, together with experts in micro-chemical analysis and medieval bookmaking, has concluded that one of the University Library’s most enigmatic possessions is a forgery. The book, a copy of the Gospel of Mark, will remain in the collection as a study document for scholars studying the authenticity of ancient books.

Scholars have argued for nearly 70 years over the provenance of what’s called the Archaic Mark, a 44-page miniature book, known as a ‘codex,’ which contains the complete 16-chapter text of the Gospel of Mark in minuscule handwritten text. The manuscript, which also includes 16 colorful illustrations, has long been believed to be either an important witness to the early text of the gospel or a modern forgery, said Mitchell, Professor of New Testament and Early Christian Literature.” …

Mitchell completed the analysis with a study of the textual edition the forger had used. She confirmed and refined Stephen C. Carlson’s proposal that the modern edition from which the forger copied the text was the 1860 edition of the Greek New Testament by Philipp Buttmann. Mitchell identified telltale readings in the Archaic Mark that arose from the original 1856 edition of Buttmann’s critical text, reproducing errors later corrected in the flurry of collations of the famous manuscript Vaticanus between 1857 and 1867.

There was a famous forger of the period, Constantine Simonides, who mingled scraps of genuinely old material with fakes of his own composition.  I wonder if this is another of his creations?

Simonides was unmasked by the famous Tischendorff, who had discovered the Codex Sinaiticus.  Simonides took his revenge by claiming that Simonides himself had written the Sinaiticus, although disclaiming writing any other texts.  There was a lengthy discussion in the Guardian, reprinted in the Journal of Sacred Literature, in which Simonides claims were gradually but relentlessly revealed to be mendacious.

Share

The copyright status of Liddell and Scott

This Spanish post discusses issues around the electronic XML version of Liddell and Scott.

Share

Ancient medicine online

AWOL notes that a French site has a massive collection of ancient medical writers online here.  Not that any of us want recipes for colds from that source, but the incidental information about ancient society is worth looking at.

Share

Origen on Ezekiel; update

Another large chunk of the remains of the Greek text of Origen on Ezekiel has come in, and very welcome it is too!

Share

Roman calendars online

I know that we have Roman calendars incised into monuments.  Does anyone know if we have any online?

Share

A 7th century Syriac mathematician

Before the first world war there was a flourishing of interest in Syriac studies among oriental Christians.  Patriarch Aphram I Barsoum wrote in Arabic a patrology of their works, referenced mainly from manuscripts then existing in Eastern libraries.  This was published but inaccessible by reason of language.  However a few years ago the excellent Matti Moosa translated it into English, and it is available from Gorgias Press under the title of The scattered pearls.  For people interested in Syriac, it is a wonderful resource.  I went and bought a copy, which says something.

It seems that a doctoral student really is going to have a go at some of the works of Severus Sebokht.  This made me look up the entry in Barsoum’s work.  It’s quite impressive, and accessible to few.  This is what Barsoum has to say:

94. Severus Sabukht (d. 667)

Severus was a skillful and famous doctor, a mathematician, a philosopher, nay the first scholar of the church who explored the obscurities of astronomical and natural sciences. He was born at Nisibin in the last quarter of the seventh century, became a monk and was educated in the Monastery of Qenneshrin, where he also acquired that knowledge of Greek and Syriac language and literature and of the Persian language, which made him the goal of seekers of knowledge. He was one of the prominent scholars who was graduated from this famous school, in which he also spent his life teaching philosophy, theology and mathematics, besides the writings of all the Syrian scholars. He was most prominent in astronomy and even excelled the Greeks in this field.1 Many pupils studied under him, the most famous of whom were the Patriarch Athanasius II and Jacob of Edessa. In 638, Severus was consecrated a bishop of the city of Qenneshrin, or, as it was said, of his monastery. He died in 667 at an advanced age. He was assigned the twentieth of July (or according to another calendar the eleventh of September) as the festival day of his commemoration. In the latter calendar, he was called “Severus the Mathematician.”

From the writings of Severus, which cover the fields of theology, philosophy and mathematics, very few have come down to us.

Of his theological writings the following survive:

1.  a treatise on the weeks of Daniel;

2.  an extract on the date of the birth of Our Lord in flesh and in what Greek year he was born;

3.  two letters in seven pages to Sergius, abbot of the Monastery of Khanushia in Sinjar, containing a commentary on the two discourses of Gregory Nazianzen on the Son and the Holy Spirit. In these letters, the name of the author (Severus) was ascribed to his native home Nisibin, which misled Chabot, who thought they belonged to a bishop of Nisibin who was Severus’ namesake.2

His philosophical writings are:

4.  a short treatise on the Analytica Posteriora of Aristotle written in 638 of which only three pages remain;3

5.  extracts in three chapters from his treatise on Hermeneutics,

6.  a letter to his friend Jonas the periodeutes (visiting cleric), explaining some points in the Rhetorica of Aristotle;4

    1 Baumstark, p. 246.
    2 See the three folios in the Brit. Mus. MS. 14547, ninth century.
    3 Brit. Mus. MSS. 17156 and 14460. Also, the Chaldean Library in Mosul MS. 35, sixteenth century, and Cambridge MS. 3287, eighteenth century.
    4 Brit. Mus. MS. 17156, Cambridge MS. 2812, nineteenth century, Dayr al-Sayyida MS. 50. 

7.  a treatise he wrote for some of those who love knowledge, explaining some logical points which had been mentioned in his former letter to Jonas to whom he sent a copy of this treatise;

8.  a letter to the priest Ithalaha, who became a bishop of Nineveh on certain terms in the treatise, De Interpretatione and on arithmetic, surveying, astronomy and music, making the remark that he had written to him a year ago, explaining some canons of the saintly fathers and also praising him because he had sent him copies of the letters of Gregory and Basilius.1

Of his astronomical works we have:

9.  a magnificent treatise on the astrolabe in fifty-two pages, translated into French and published by Nau in 1899;2

10.  a treatise on the signs of the Zodiac, which he wrote in the year 659 or 660, of which only eighteen chapters remain. These chapters were published by Sachau in 1870.3 A few samples of these works exist in a manuscript at the British Museum, such as the habitable and inhabitable portions of the earth, the condition of those living in all its sphere—above and below the measurement of the heaven and the earth and the space between them—and whether the sun moves under or over the earth in the celestial sphere. To this treatise he added in the year 665 from nineteen to twenty-seven answers to astronomical, mathematical and cosmographical questions at the request of the periodeutes Basil of Cyprus.4 This is probably the same treatise which Bar Hebraeus alluded to in his book, Ascent of the Mind;

11.  a letter in eighteen pages addressed to the same Basil on the fourteenth of the lunar month of April 556, about fixing the exact date of Easter;5

    1 Brit. Mus. MS. 14660, ninth-tenth centuries, and Mosul MS. 35.
    2 Paris MS. 346 dated 1309 in the handwriting of the priest Yeshu` Kilo; Berlin MS. 186 in the handwriting of the metropolitan Moses of Tyre dated 1556. For the French translation of Sabukht’s treatise on the astrolabe see F. Nau, “Le traite sur l’astrolabe plan de Severe Sabokt,” Journal Asiatique IX serie, t. XIII, 1899: 56-101 and 238-303. (tr.)
    3 Sachau, Inedita Syriaca, 127-134.
    4 Brit. Mus. MS. 14538, tenth century, and Paris MS. 346.
    5 Berlin MS. 186. [The date 556 should be 665. (tr.)]

12.  three letters, also to Basil, on the science of history, contained in the British Museum manuscript;1

13.  he translated from the Persian into Syriac an abridged exposition of Aristotle’s Interpretatione which had been translated from the original Greek to Persian by Paul the Persian for King Khosrau I,2 to which the monk Severus added the fifth treatise of Aristotle on logic;

14. the translation of Ptolemy’s Tetrapillon on the composition of mathematical speech as is confirmed by an established historical tradition.3

Both Wright and Duval, quoting Assemani, who quoted al-Duwayhi, have erroneously ascribed to him a liturgy in the name of Severus of Qenneshrin, which, in fact, belongs to Severus, bishop of Samosata and abbot of Qenneshrin as has been already mentioned.4

    1 Brit. Mus. MS. 17156.
    2 Dayr al-Sayyida MS. 50.

    3 Paris MS. 346.
    4 Wright, A Short History of Syriac Literature, p. 139, citing Assemani B. O., 2: 463. (tr.)
Share