Re: [HM] Euclid first edition [was: Archimedes Palimpsest]
Udai Venedem (venedem@wanadoo.fr)
Wed, 14 Jul 1999 06:18:06 +0200
To answer more precisely (and shortly) to Menso Folkerts (july 12th 1999
17:16):
the article by John Murdoch in the DSB is impossible to summarize, but
what I understood can go this way (tell me where I am wrong): if most of
Campanus' version (the one used for the Euclid first edition) is made of
Adelard I and Adelard II, as Adelard I is entirely from Arabic sources,
and a good part of Adelard II is made from Adelard I and other Arabic
sources (but not only, this had indeed to be pointed out), just what do
you mean by "Campanus' text is not at all a translation from the Arabic"?
Can we agree on this (to be short) formula: the text in Latin presented in
Euclid's first edition is largely made after translations from Arabic
sources by Adhelard of Bath?
Udai Venedem
venedem@wanadoo.fr
conceptor of the site (in French)
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/alta.mathematica/
devoted to mathematical bibliophily.