Between Greek and Arabic: The Sciences in Syriac from

Severus Sebokht to Barhebraeus

TAKAHASHI Hidemi
We have just been hearing today from Prof. Burnett, as we have by now become
so accustomed to expecting, an excellent paper on a subject relating to the
transmission of the sciences from the Arabs to the "West", to the Latin world.
That, as we all know, is one of the later stages in the great clockwise movement
of knowledge around the Mediterranean. The earlier stage of that movement
involved a massive transfer of scientific knowledge from the Greek-speaking
World to the Arabic, or Islamic, world. What is often forgotten in accounts of
that part of the transfer is the role played by another linguistic group in the
transfer, namely those groups of people who used (and to some extent still use)
Syriac as their principal linguistic medium.
Those who know better, including, of course, those of you who are here
today, do know about that. But even those who know better tend not to know
that much about the role of the Syriacs. That is partly because there is rather less
that we can know about the reception of the Greek sciences in Syriac than we
can about the Arabic and the Latin reception, thanks to the loss of a large part of
the scientific literature that once existed in Syriac. That is not to say, however,
that we do not have at least a significant amount of scientific literature surviving
in Syriac. - In this, we are far better off than is the case, for example, with
Middle Persian, where we hardly have any trace today of what can be called
"scientific literature", although it is likely that a certain amount, at least, of such
materials did once exist. - In Syriac, we do have at least enough material for us
to try to assess the achievements of the people who engaged themselves with the
sciences in that language and to consider what characterises their reception of
the 'sciences. We also know that our knowledge of the reception in Syriac is
crucial for our understanding of the reception of the Greek sciences in Arabic
that took place after, and also concurrently, with the reception in Syriac. It is this
reception that I would like to talk about today.
What I would like to do in my paper today is to give a fairly general
account of the reception of the sciences in Syriac. I would like to speak firstly
about the background to the reception. In the second part, I shall give a general
overview of that reception, and I shall then go on to speak about two particular
cases: the cases of Severus Sebokht and Barhebraeus. I shall be talking there not
so much on the details of what they did but on how they viewed the Greek
16
sciences, and shall use this in an attempt to make some observations on what
characterises the reception of the sciences in Syriac.
I. Background to the Reception
a. Syriac as an heir to earlier forms of Aramaic and as an "international
language"
The first point that might be made in talking about the background to the
reception of Greek knowledge among the Syriacs is the fact that Syriac is a form
of Aramaic. What came to be known as Syriac was originally a dialect of
Aramaic spoken around Edessa and, after its emergence as a literary language,
was adopted mainly by those who were already speakers of various dialects of
Aramaic. As such, the speakers, or users, of Syriac could consider themselves to
be heirs to a tradition of writing which was already a millennium old when
Syriac itself emerged as a new literary language. Syriac differs in this from
languages such as Armenian, Georgian and Slavic, where the introduction of
writing is (or has traditionally been) associated with conversion to Christianity,
and even from Coptic in so far as the Syriac alphabet was a product of an
organic development out of older Aramaic alphabets rather than an adaptation of
the Greek. Furthermore, Syriac, as a form of Aramaic, was to inherit, to an
extent, the role played earlier by other forms of Aramaic as the lingua franca of
the peoples in and around the Fertile Crescent, making it an "international"
language used by large numbers of people on either side of the border between
two empires, a border that normally divided the Fertile Crescent into two until
the Arab conquest of the seventh century, with some important consequences on
the way in which Greek learning was received in Syriac and on the role Syriac
would play as an intermediary in the transmission of knowledge.
b. Syriac as a language "without state"
Another point that might be considered is the fact that Syriac was never the
language of a secular power. - "Syrorum gens nec ingenio, nec vi armorum, nec
rebus in historia gestis, admodum claruit" was the unflattering remark made
about the Syriacs by Ernest Renan (Renan [1852] 3). One might take issue here
with the words "ingenium" and "res in historia gestae", but that the Syriacs
never, or at least rarely, distinguished themselves "vi armorum" cannot be
denied. - The people who used Syriac were usually being ruled by others, either
by the Persians or by the Romans. In this part of the world the main language of
the Roman empire was Greek, and in areas of contact between Syriac and Greek,
Greek was the "higher status" language. This is one of the factors that help
17
explain why much literature was translated from Greek into Syriac.
Another consequence this had for the way in which the sciences developed
among the Syriacs lies in the fact that the Syriacs never had their own state and
no state machinery to patronize and finance their scientific activities. In a recent
article on geographical literature in Syriac, the author attributes the relative lack
of interest in geography among the Syriacs to the fact that they did not have a
state to run, the fact, for example, that they had no need to measure the land in
order to levy taxes, or to "describe the vast lands they had conquered, as the
Arabs had" (Witakowski [2007] 221). More importantly, this absence of secular
political institutions among the Syriacs means that in trying to explain the
motives behind the translations into Syriac, we cannot use the kind of
explanation that has been offered for the Arabic translations. In a lecture given
in Tokyo last month, Prof. Keiji Yamamoto discussed some of the new views
being offered about why the translation movement occurred, including the views
of Dimitri Gutas and George Saliba, the former linking the translation movement
to the state ideology of the Abbasids as the successor state of the Persians and
latter linking it to the role of the bureaucrats (cf. Gutas [1998]; Saliba [2007]).
Whether we agree with those views or not, the patronage of the secular rulers
and bureaucrats was an important factor behind the translations from Greek into
Arabic. This, however, could not be the case for the translations into Syriac,
where the important social institutions were almost exclusively ecclesiasticaL
c. Syriac as a Christian language
The third factor I would like to mention is a characteristic which Syriac
shares with some of the other languages into which translations were made from
Greek, such as Armenian, Georgian and Slavonic. In spite of what has been said
about its Aramaic origins, the spread of Syriac and the development of Syriac
literature are closely linked to the spread of Christianity. Although Syriac was
also used to a certain extent by non-Christians, little remains of what they
produced, so that Syriac literature as we know it is essentially a Christian one.
Furthermore, while there are some important exceptions, such as I:Iunain ibn
Isl).aq and other translators from the Abbasid period, the majority of the scholars
who wrote in Syriac, as well as the scribes who copied and handed down their
works to us, were ecclesiastics. This Christian factor was to have an influence
on the choice of materials that were translated from Greek into Syriac, and,
perhaps more importantly, on the selection of the materials that would then be
preserved.
At the same time, it could be argued that it was precisely because they were
Christians that the Syriacs eventually came to translate secular Greek literature
18
into their language. Christianity, though of Aramaic origin, adopted Greek as its
most important linguistic medium at an early stage. The result was that when the
speakers of Syriac and other forms of Aramaic accepted Christianity they soon
had to start translating the Christian books from Greek, beginning with the
Gospels, in the form at first of Tatian's Diatessaron, in the latter part of the
second century. Christianity was at first suspicious of Greek learning, but soon
had to confront and then begin appropriating secular Greek learning in order to
make itself acceptable to the Greek-speaking elite and, having won converts
among the educated classes, began itself to speak the language of Greek
learning. This change in Greek-speaking Christianity was also to be gradually
reflected in Syriac Christianity. Influences of secular Greek learning began to
infiltrate Syriac Christianity with the translation of those Greek Fathers
influenced by Greek learning. It was a little later, perhaps beginning in the fifth
century, but at the latest in the sixth century, that direct translations of Greek
scientific works began to be made in Syriac. The translation process went on
more or less continuously for four centuries, and soon a certain amount of
original scientific literature in Syriac also began to develop around these
translations.
11. Survey of Translators and Materials Translated
:4---
I would like to g o , ~ o the second part of may paper, which is a survey of scientific
literature in Syriac.
A. Earliest period (until ca. 500): translation of "popular" scientific
literature into Syriac
B. Sixth century: translation of more "serious" works on medicine and
philosophy
Sergius of Resh'ayna (ob. 536); Proba; Paul the Persian
C. Seventh-early eighth century: translation activities centred around the
Monastery of Qenneshre
Severus Sebokht (ob. 666/7), Athanasius of Balad (ob. 686), Jacob of
Edessa (ob. 708), George, bishop of the Arab (ob. 724)
D. Eighth century: a lull
Silvanus of Qardu, Isho'bokht (8th c.); Theophilus of Edessa (ob. 785),
David bar Paulus, Abu Nul). al-' AnbarI (ca. 800), Timothy I (727/8-823)
E. After 800: translations into Syriac as a by-product of translations into
Arabic
19
F. Later works influenced by Arabic sciences
Moses bar Kepha (ob. 903), Cause of all causes (10th c.?), Bar Shakko
(ob. 1241), Barhebraeus (1225/6-86) etc.
*See also Appendix
The earliest period of translations, until about the fifth century, involved
translations of more popular materials, what you could call "popular sciences",
or even "pseudo-science". Works such as the Physiologus and Geoponicon, as
well as some of the alchemical materials that have survived in Syriac, may be
have been translated in this period. It is then in the sixth century that we begin to
see translations of more serious works, at least in the fields of medicine and
philosophy. Sergius of Resh'ayna, who translated a large number of works of
Galen into Syriac and also worked with Aristotelian logic, is the most important
figure here. Others such as Proba and Paul the Persian have left us works on
Aristotelian logic, while we also have some anonymous materials relating to
Aristotelian logic from this period. The next stage is the seventh century with
names such as Severus Sebokht, Athanasius of Balad, Jacob of Edessa and
George, Bishop of the Arabs. All these people were associated with a particular
monastery called the Monastery of Qenneshre. The monastery which was
founded just before this time by John bar Aphtonia became a centre of Greek
learning among the Syriacs, and it is by people from that monastery that a
number of scientific works were translated into Syriac in this period. - I shall
have more to say about one of them, Severus Sebokht, later in this paper. - In
the next period, the eighth century, there was something of a lull in scientific
activities in Syriac, although there are some minor works from this period by
authors such as Silvanus of Qardu and Isho'bokht. It is only when we reach the
Abbasid period that we begin to have more activities going on again, and that is
now happening in conjunction with the translations into Arabic. Most of the
translations from this period are by-products of the translations into Arabic.
What usually happened was that the Greek texts were translated into Syriac first,
and then from Syriac into Arabic, but there were also some cases where works
were translated into Arabic first and then into Syriac. Most of the Syriac
translations from this period are lost, and we often only know that translations of
certain works existed from later mentions of those translations. That is the
period I have called E. Then, in the last period, period F, we begin to find Syriac
scientific works which are influenced by Arabic sources, by authors such as
Moses bar Kepha. Then, there is again a revival of learning in Syriac in the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. From that period, we have people such as Bar
20
Shakko and Barhebraeus, who worked with this kind of material. So much then
for a very general overview of what there was in Syriac.
Ill. Severus Sebokht (ob. 66617)
I would like to talk now about two figures in particular, and to have a look at
what they said about the Greek sciences. The first person is Severus Sebokht,
from the seventh century. He was born, probably, in Nisibis, which used to be a
town on the border between the Persian and the Roman empires, a border which
was to disappear in the lifetime of Severus, in the middle of the seventh century.
- It is an interesting fact that it is precisely in this period just after the Arab
conquest of most of the areas inhabited by the Syriacs that we have again this
revival of interest in Greek learning among the Syriacs. - As I have just said,
Severus Sebokht was probably born in Nisibis, and became a monk at the
Monastery of Qenneshre. One historical fact that we know about Severus is that
he took part in a debate with the Maronites in Damascus before the caliph,
Caliph Mu'awiya I. This was recorded in a Maronite chronicle which tells us,
not surprisingly given that it is a Maronite chronicle, that Severus and his
companion were the losers in this debate.
Works
a. Logic: treatise on syllogisms (638), letters to Aitallaha ofNineveh and
Periodeutes Yonan; translation from Middle Persian into Syriac of
Paul the Persian's commentary on De interpretatione (?)
b. Astronomy: On the Astrolabe, On the Constellations, letter to
Periodeutes Basil
Severus' surviving works include those on logic and on astronomy. The latter
include relatively long treatises "On the Astrolabe" and "On the Constellations".
These are the only major astronomical works that we have survived in Syriac
from the first millennium and, as such, are of some importance.
What I would like to do here, however, is to look at the letter he wrote to a
certain Basil, who was living at that time in Cyprus.
From the letter to Periodeutes Basil of Cyprus (see Reich [2000])
Title: "on the precedence of the knowledge [ida'ta] of the Syriacs in the
21
22
teaching of astronomy, and the fact that the knowledge of things that are
[i.e. philosophy] is common property, namely of the Greeks and non-
Greeks [barbaraye], provided they are diligent; and some questions, or
problems, concerning some matters out of those [that are covered] in this
science [i"da'ta, sc. 'of astronomy']"
"Concerning the fact that some of the Greek who are with you, as you
wrote, say that the Syrians can know nothing at all of such things, I mean,
the computation of the stars and the eclipse of the sun and the moon,
believing that all knowledge belongs to the Greeks alone because they
speak Greek, they ought to know, since there are the wise Babylonians,
that the Babylonians were the first inventors of knowledge, and not the
Greeks, as all the writings of the Greeks themselves testify; and after the
Babylonians [came] the Egyptians, and then the Greeks. - And I do not
think anyone will dispute that the Babylonians were Syrians. - Those
who say, therefore, that the Syrians can know nothing at all are in great
error, seeing that the Syrians were the first inventors and teachers of these
things.
Ptolemy, too, testifies that this is so in the Syntaxis [QI.m""v'Q.Q>]. For when
he sets down there the beginning of the computation of the sun and the
moon and the five planets, he does not begin with the years of the Greek
kings, but with those of the Babylonian kings, that is, with King
N ebuchadnezzar. - By N ebuchadnezzar I do not mean the one in whose
time Prophet Daniel was, but the other who was much earlier than him. -
Ptolemy writes in the Syntaxis that the years that passed between this
Nebuchadnezzar, the first of the Babylonian and Persian kings, and Philip
the Madedonian [i.e. Philip Arrhidaeus], who came after Alexander, the
founder of Alexandria, were 424 years, indicating thereby that he found
the beginning and the basis of those computations that he made among
the Babylonians, and not among the Greeks, and so he increased and
enlarged the computations that he made upon this basis that he found
among them ....
Some of them behave arrogantly as if they were the first inventors of the
mathematical science of astronomy [ida'ta hay ma(ama(lqay(a
d-as(ronomiya]. - This is not so. This is not so. - For science [lda'ta]
does not belong to lexis [leksls], or word, but word belongs to science;
and lexis is not the cause of wisdom, but the latter of the former. Those
wise Greeks, too, who wisely defined philosophy did not define it [and
say] that philosophy is nouns and verbs, lexeis or words, and the Greek
language, but that philosophy is the "knowledge of things that are in so
far as they are", "knowledge of the divine and human actions", "art of
arts", "science of sciences", "meditation of death", "becoming similar to
God in so far as is possible for a human being" and "love of wisdom".
But this [sc. philosophy] does not belong to the Greeks alone, but can be
acquired by all who are diligent, be they Greeks or barbaroi [barbaraye].
I shall not talk now about the science of the Indians, who are not even
Syrians, and about their subtle inventions in this teaching of astronomy,
which are more artful than those of the Greeks and of the Babylonians,
and the rational methodoi of their computations, and the reckoning that
goes beyond words, I mean, that with the nine signs. - If those who think
to themselves that they alone have reached the utmost level of wisdom
just because they speak Greek were to take notice of these things, they
might perhaps be persuaded, if only to late, that there are others too who
know something, not the Greeks alone, but also some among the nations
with other languages.
I have said these things not because I despise the wisdom of the Greeks
in such matters as these and other similar matters - for I am not totally
errant [i.e. I am not altogether unfamiliar with it] - but because I want to
show that knowledge is the common property of anyone who wishes to
be diligent, regardless of whether he is Greek or barbaros . ... "
As indicated by its title - which was no doubt given to it by a later scribe rather
than by Severus himself - the first part of the letter deals with this idea that
knowledge does not belong just to the Greeks alone. Severus then goes on to ask
some questions on astronomical matters in the second part of the letter. I have
translated here a significant portion of the first part of the letter. It is, as you can
see, a very interesting attack on the idea that all knowledge comes from the
Greeks.
Towards the end of the part that I have translated we read: "I have said
these things not because I despise the wisdom of the Greek in such matters as
these ... " I am not quite sure what the next part means, but I believe what he
means is: "for I am not totally unfamiliar with the Greek sciences ... " If there
was anyone among the Syriacs who was familiar with the Greek sciences, it was
Severus. He was the best scholar in that field in his day, and yet he says: "I want
to show that knowledge is the common property of anyone who wishes to be
diligent, regardless of whether he is Greek or barbaros." He feels he has to say
this. This is related, of course, to what I said earlier about Syriac being the
"lower status" language, being seen as the inferior language by the Greeks, and
23
it is very interesting to see this attack on that view coming from this scholar of
the Greek sciences just in the period when the Greek-speaking Byzantines lost
control of the area in which the Syriacs lived.
IV. Gregory Barhebraeus (1225/6-86)
The next person that I would like to talk about is Gregory Barhebraeus,
from the thirteenth century, who was the most important representative of the
so-called "Syriac Renaissance" of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
Barhebraeus was born in Melitene (Malatya) in what is now Turkey. He seems
to have studied in Antioch and Tripoli; he may have also studied in Damascus.
He became bishop in 1246 at the age of twenty, and then in 1266, at the age of
forty, he became "Maphrian of the East", whose office is the second highest in
the Syrian Orthodox Church, next to that of the patriarch, with jurisdiction over
what is today Iraq and Iran.
24
Works
a. Exegesis: 'Storehouse of mysteries' roze).
b. Dogmatic theology: 'Candelabrum of the sanctuary' (Mnorat qudse),
'Book of rays' (K. d-zalge), 'Profession of faith'.
c. Moral theology/mysticism: 'Ethicon', 'Book of the dove' (K. d-yaw-
no), 'Childhood of the mind' (Talyut hawno, unfinished), abridge-
ment of/commentary on the 'Book of Hierotheos' (unpublished).
d. Jurisprudence: 'Book of directions' (K. d-hudoye, Nomocanon).
e. Philosophy: 'Cream of wisdom' (lfewat J:!ekmto, only partially pub-
lished), 'Treatise of treatises' (Tegrat tegroto, unpublished), 'Conver-
sation of wisdom' (Swod sufiya), 'Book of the pupils of the eye' (K.
d-boboto, on logic); translation ofIbn SIna's 'Remarks and admoni-
tions' al-ISiiriit wa-al-tanblhiit (Remze wa-m 'ironwoto, unpublished),
translation of Athlr aI-DIn al-AbharI's 'Cream of secrets' (Zubdat al-
asriir, lost); also two Arabic treatises on psychology.
f. Historiography: 'Chronicle' (Maktbonut zabne, in two parts, usually
referred to as 'Chronicon' and 'Chronicon ecclesiasticum'), 'Epitome
of the history of the dynasties' (MukhtCLFar ta'rzkh al-duwal, in Ara-
bic).
g. Belles lettres: 'Book of poems' (MusJ:!oto), 'Laughable stories' (K. d-
tunoye mgaJ:!kone).
h. GrammarlLexicography: 'Book of splendours' (K. 'Book
of grammar in the meter ofMor Ephrem' (also called 'Book ofintro-
duction [to grammar]', in verse), 'On equilitteral words' ('al domyo-
yoto; usually appended to 'Book of grammar'), 'Book of the spark'
(lost).
1. Epistolary work: Letter to Catholicos Denl)a 1.
J. Exact sciences: 'Ascent of the mind' (Suloqo hawnonoyo), 'Astro-
nomical tables (zij) for beginners' (lost).
k. Oneiromancy: 'Book of interpretation of dreams' (lost).
1. Medicine/Pharmacology: 'Book of Dioscorides' (lost), abridgement
of GhafiqI's 'Book of simple drugs' (Muntakhab kitiib jiimi' al-
mufradiit, in Arabic, partially published), commentary on Hippo-
crates' 'Aphorisms' (ms. Syr. Orth. Patr. Libr. 6.17, in Arabic), com-
mentary on Hippocrates' Prognosticon [?] (ms. Syr. Orth. Patr. Libr.
6.17), abridgement of I:Iunayn b. Isl).aq's 'Medical questions' (ms.
Syr. Orth. Patr. Libr. 6.17; ms. Dublin, Chester Beatty Arab. 4925, in
Arabic), 'Book of the uses oflimbs' (probably related to Galen's 'De
usu partium', lost), 'Book of the great Canon of Abii 'AlI' (i.e. a
work on Ibn SIna's 'Canon of medicine', lost), 'Book in which he
gathered the opinions of physicians' (lost), commentary on I:Iunayn's
'Medical questions' (lost).
m. Liturgical works: revision (abridgement) of the Anaphora of St.
James, revision of the rite of baptism, commentary on/revision of the
rite of blessing of water; further sermons and prayers attributed with
varying degrees of certainty to Barhebraeus.
Barhebraeus wrote about all kinds of subjects. He wrote about theology, he
wrote about philosophy. He wrote some well-known works about history,
grammar and also on subjects such as medicine and astronomy. What is
interesting about his works is the kinds of sources that he used. What we very
often find in his works is a mixture of materials taken from earlier Syriac
sources and more recent Arabic works. In the parts, for example, of his Butyrum
Sapientiae (Cream of wisdom) and his Candelabrum of the Sanctuary dealing
with Aristotle's Meteorologica, we find him using such sources as the Syriac
version of the De mundo by Sergius of Resh' aina, as well as Syriac translations
of works by Nicolaus of Damascus and Olympiodorus. At the same time, he
uses later Arabic works such as Ibn SIna's Kitiib al-Shifo', as well as the works
of such authors as Abii al-Barakat al-BaghdadI and Fakhr aI-DIn al-RazI, which
are much closer to his time. That is the kind of mixture of sources that you find
25
j
I!
in his work: early Syriac translations of Greek works and more recent Arabic
works.
I give here some further examples to illustrate this point.
Barhebraeus, Candelabrum of the Sanctuary, Base II (composed ca. 1267):
a\l r6>n.:.. (ktobo d-zugrafiya; cf. Arab. gugrafiyai
Barhebraeus, Book of Rays (composed in 1270's):
......... m.::>>n.:.., ,.1:l;as.4 (G'WGR'PYQWN; ktobeh
d-PRKYRWS;T'PWRBNYi; (TYR'NY; cf. Arab.
Cf. Severus Sebokht, On the Constellations:
.........
(G'WGRWPYQWN; PRWKYRWS;T'PRWBNY)3
In the Candelabrum of the Sanctuary, which is one of his earlier works,
Barhebraeus refers to Ptolemy's Geography as "ktobo d-zugrafiya" which
is clearly a transliteration or transcription of the Arabic "gugrafiya". But in
one of his later works, the Book of Rays, he refers to the same work as the
"G'WGR'PYQWN", which must come from a Syriac source. It is almost
certain that Barhebraeus could not read Greek himself, so there must have
been some Syriac work in which Ptolemy's Geography was mentioned as
"G'WGR'PYQWN". Just a few lines away, Barhebraeus mentions a work called
"PRKYRWS", which must be the "procheiroi kanones", or the Handy Tables,
and also a place called "T'PWRBNY", i.e. Taprobane. - It just so happens that
we find these three proper names mentioned close together also in Severus
Sebokht's On the Constellations. In this case, therefore, we can be fairly certain
that the source Barhebraeus was using was Severus Sebokht. - It may be noted
that in the same Book of Rays, Barhebraeus also mentions a mysterious place
called "TYR'NY", which from the context must mean Ceylon, Sri Lanka. I think
the explanation for this is that he misread an Arabic text where you had the word
"T'PRWBNY". Those of you who know Arabic will see what has happened
here.
1 J. Bakos, Le Candelabre des sanctuaries de Gregoire Aboulfaradj dit Barhebraeus (suite) (PO
24/3), Paris 1933, 103.12.
2 Ed. Istanbul (1997) 16.6f., 17.2, 16.9.
3 F. Nau, (1929/30-31132). "Le traite sur les constellations ecrit, en 661, par Severe Sebokt eveque
de Qennesrin", Revue de ['Orient chretien 27 [3e ser. 7] (1929/30), 327-420; 28 [3e ser. 8]
(1931132),85-100, here vol. 27, 407.
26
Latitudes of the Seven Climes
Ptolemy, Almagest II.6 red. Heiberg] 101-117, tr. Toomer 82-90; BIliinI,
Tajhlm, arab. red. Wright] 138/pers. red. Huma'I] 190; TusI, MU'lnrya
IlLl red. Danishpazhuh] 61-63; Tadhkira IlL 1.[8] red. Ragep] 251-253;
Barhebraeus, Candelabrum Il [ed. Bakos] 95-100; Ascent of the Mind
ILi.8 red. Nau] 141f., tr. 127.
Almagest Tajhlm Mu Tnlya Tadhkira Cand. Ascensus
12;30 12;39 0 12;40 0 12;40
I 16;27 16;39 16;27 16;37,30 - 16;37,30
20;14 20;27 20;127 20;27 20;14 20;27
II 23;51 24;4 (n.1) 23;51 24;5 24;40 (n.2)
27;12 27;28 27;12 27;30 27;12 27;30
III 30;22 30;39 30;22 30;40 30;40
33;18 33;37 33;18 33;37,30 33;16 [sic] 33;37,30
IV 36;00 36;21 36;337 36;22 36;22
38;35 38;54 38;35 38;54 38;35 38;54
V 40;56 41;14 40;56 41;15 41;15
43;1 (n.3) 43;23 43;517 43;22,30 43;15 43;22,30
VI 45;1 45;22 45;457 45;21 45;21
46;51 47;11 46;51 47;12 46;51 47;12
VII 48;32 48;52 48;127 48;52,30 - 50;20 [sic]
50;4 50;25 55;37 50;20 ca. 50
The second example I have given has to do with the latitudes of the Seven
Climes. In his Candelabrum, we find Barhebraeus following the values given by
Ptolemy in the Almagest. In his later work called the Ascent of the Mind, the
values he uses agree with the new values which were given by aI-DIn
al-TusI. - TusI is, of course, very close in time to Barhebraeus. It is, in fact, quite
4 Wright gives the value here as 24; l3
0
in his translation, while his Arabic manuscript appears to
have 24;300 (J Humii'I's Persian text, however, gives the value as 24;4
0
as does Wiede-
mann (1912) 11, who had access to the two Berlin manuscripts of the Arabic version (Petermann 67
& Landberg 63 = 5665 & 5666 Ahlwardt).
5 As explained by Ragep (p. 471), the correct reading in the Tadhkira is apparently the more difficult
minority reading: '\Y''>'" LJJfoJ tu!" (24 + 112 of 116 = 24;5
0
). The value in the Ascensus
here points to an early origin of the less satisfactory majority reading " (24 + 112 +
116 = 24;40
0
), which is also followed later by ShlrazI and JaghminI.
6 The value "43;15" in Cand. follows the value prevalent in the Arabic manuscript tradition of the
Almagest.
27
likely that Barhebraeus knew rUSl personally.
I give here two passages that are of interest in considering how Barhebraeus
viewed the Greek sciences.
a. From the Chronicon
7
There arose among them [sc. the ArabsIMuslims, Tayyilye] philosophers,
mathematicians and physicians who surpassed the ancients in the
subtlety of their intellect. Placing (their buildings) not on another
foundation but on Greek basements, they perfected the buildings of the
sciences, which were great on account of their lucid language [leksls]
and their most studious investigations, so that we, from whom they
received knowledge through the translators - who were all Syriacs - are
now forced to ask them for it.
b. From the Book of Directions (Nomocanon)8
Out of the disciplines of the outsiders, the book of Antony of Tagrit, the
logical [books] of Aristotle - Categoriae, Peri hermeneias, Analytica,
Apodeictica, Topica [in] eight treatises, Refutation of the Sophists, On
the Poets, and On Rhetoric [in] three treatises - and the four
mathematical [books/disciplines] provide beauty for the tongue and
training for the mind.
9
From the Physical Hearing and After-the-Physics,
one is to take only as much as we have taken in our book the
Candelabrum of the Sanctuary and the smaller [Book] of Rays for
refutation and disputation against those who knew God but did not
glorify Him as God (cf. Rom. 1.21). For the great architect of the
Church, too, can be seen to have made use of them in many [places]. He
took the [words] "Sons of Crete are liars" (Tit. 1.12) from a poem on
Maxentius the Cretan;lO "Our race is from God" (Act. 17.28) from
7 Barhebraeus, Chronicon, ed. Bedjan 98.13-18; cf. tr. Budge 92; Teule (2003) 25; id. (2005) 168;
Watt (2004) 15; id. (2005) 16f.; Takahashi (2005) 101.
8 Barhebraeus, Nomocanon, ed. Bedjan 106.3-107.1 = ed. <;iyek 63b 19-64a 22; tr. J. A. Assemanus
55; for a summary of the section where the passage occurs (Nom. VII.9), see Voobus (1970) 518-
520. - The first half of the passage (corresponding to ed. Bedjan 106.3-13) was already quoted at J.
S. Assemanus, BO IIII2, 938f.; cf. Merx (1889) 3; Ruska (1897) 40 n. 4; Watt (1993) 65. - With the
second half, cf. Socrates, Hist. ecc!. III.16.23-26 (ed. Hansen, p. 212; tr. Perichon-Maraval, p. 315-
317); and for the use of Rom. 1.21, ibid. III.16.14.
9 Cf. Socrates, Hist. ecc!. III.16.27: "mum f.1Ev EuyAw'('[((X(; XaQLV Kat YUf.1vaatac; mu YOU,
'wum bE Kat 71QOC; 't:1lV alJ't:wv EKElVWV Ka't:ayvWO'Lv, 71EQt wv x71wcpaAllaav."
10 .... :u.m= r<'borC;o edd. Bedjan/<;iyek; Q:>a..:w.a= r<'borC;o Ms. Bodl. Hunt. 1,
28
Aratus the Chaldean; "Bad company corrupts sweet minds" (I Cor.
15.33) from Euripides;ll "Let us eat and drink; tomorrow we die" (I Cor.
15.32) from the sayings of the Lacedaemonians, when he was rebuking
the Corinthians, who often used this frivolous saying; for Isaiah the
prophet also mentions it.
The first passage is taken from his historical work, the Chronicon.
Barhebraeus is talking here about the scientific achievements of the Arabs. In
doing so, he gives the Arabs due praise for their achievements, and also
acknowledges that the Syriacs like him are now having to learn from the Arabs.
At the same time, we see that he cannot resist making the point that it was
through the Syriacs that the Arabs received the sciences in the first place, that
the Syriacs are the ones who taught these sciences to the Arabs.
The second passage comes from the Book of Directions, which is a book of
canon and civil law, and the context of the passage quoted here is one in which
Barhebraeus is giving a list of books which should be studied in the
ecclesiastical schools. Before the passage quoted here, we have a list of the
books of the Bible and also of the Christian authors whose works are to be read
in the schools. There then follows this list of secular works. The first work
mentioned, "the book of Antony of Tagrit" is a work on rhetoric. This work of
Antony, the books of the Organon and the "four mathematical books", i.e. the
books of the quadrivium, according to Barhebraeus, "provide beauty for the
tongue and training for the mind", that is to say, they are good and useful. He
then goes on to say that "from the Physical Hearing" (i.e. Aristotle's Physics/
Auscultatio physica) and "After-the-Physics" (i.e. the Metaphysics), "we should
only take as much as we have taken in our book the Candelabrum of the
Sanctuary and the smaller Book of Rays for refutation and disputation against
those who knew God but did not glorify Him as God", in other words, that you
have be careful with these books on natural philosophy and metaphysics, but
you can still use them.
Barhebraeus then gives us a justification for the study of these secular
works. - By the "great architect of the Church", he means, of course, St. Paul.
274d 17f. ("ex tractatu Maxentii Cretensis", tr. J. A. Assemanus). The name was probably already
corrupt in the text available to Barhebraeus. He has the correct name, Epimenides, in his biblical
commentary, the Storehouse of Mysteries, ad Tit. 1.12 (ed. <;iyek, 576a 7f., ....
Ms. Bodl. Hunt. 1, 95b ult. .... (1) 'b r6> -..s=').
11 The verse is attributed to Menander in the Storehouse of Mysteries, ad I Cor. 15.33 (ed. <;iyek
556b).
29
The Pauline passages that he uses here are taken from the Historia ecclesiastica
of Socrates of Constantinople (Socrates Scholasticus), as are the words "provide
beauty for the tongue and training for the mind". - What is interesting here is
the fact that Barhebraeus feels that he needs to justify the study of the secular
sciences in this way by referring to none less than St. Paul. This, in a way, shows
the limits of the extent to which these Syriac ecclesiastics, as Christians, could
engage in the study of, and identify themselves with, these secular Greek
SCIences.
v. Concluding Remarks
I have tried in this paper to give an overview of scientific literature in Syriac,
and I have also given some examples to illustrate how two of the most important
representatives of this kind of literature saw the sciences with which they
worked.
I have given on the last page of the handout another quotation from Renan,
a very disparaging evaluation which Renan made about the achievements of the
Syriacs.
"Habes Syros philosophantes: qua in re mehercle eorum merita ut plus
quam decet extollere nolim, ita eorum laudi quidquam detrahere indignum
duco. Fatendum est eos ingenio proprio nihil excogitasse, imo graecae
sapientiae universae amplectendae impares, angulum unum, eumque situ et
aspectu asperrimum ex ill 0 , quo spatiatur Graecia, vastissimo campo
perlustrasse. Logica apud eos una est et tota philosophia, atque pro ilIa
amplissima disciplina, qua veterum ingenia colebantur, hi nisi tricas
dialecticorum, nominum definitiones, categorias inaniaque vocabula
recantant." (Renan [1852] 73)
This passage was, of course, written over a century and a half ago. A
century and half later, we know a little more about scientific literature in Syriac
and the circumstances in which that literature came into being. Renan of course , ,
was well aware of the importance of the role that the Syriacs played in the
transmission of the sciences from the Greeks to the Arabs. -
"Arab as equidem in philosophia nihil vidisse nisi per Syros demonstrare
30
conabor. quis autem negabit philosophiam Arabum rem summi momenti
fuisse, magnamque partem sibi jure vindicare in augenda atque propaganda
philosophiae disciplina?" (Renan [1852] 1)
"Series ergo continua est a schola inde alexandrina usque ad Syros, a Syris
ad Arabas, ab Arabibus ad scholasticos" (ibid., p. 9)
It is a little exaggerated when he says that the Arabs knew nothing of
philosophy except through the Syriacs, but not all that much. It is worth
remembering that even when translations were made directly from Greek into
Arabic, the people making those translations were almost invariably Christians
and usually members of Syriac-rite churches. We should also mention here that
this kind of large-scale translation of scientific literature into Arabic could not
have taken place without the long tradition of translating from Greek into Syriac,
which had taken place before the translations into Arabic. The translations into
Arabic under the Abbasids would not have been possible without the
development of the translation techniques that had been made by the Syriacs
before then.
Another point that I should mention is the interest of the later Syriac
tradition. I have tried to show some aspects of what happened in that later period
with authors like Barhebraeus, where the Syriac tradition became inextricably
intertwined with the Arabic tradition. In order to understand the Syriac scientific
works from that period, we need to refer to the Arabic sources that were used by
these authors. At the same time, the Syriac works from that period often serve as
indirect witnesses for the Arabic tradition. There are cases, for example, where
you can suggest emendations to the text of Ibn SIna's works on the strength of
the paraphrases of them made by Barhebraeus.
One important aspect in which the reception of the sciences in Syriac
differs from that in Arabic is the fact that, whereas the Arabs had their own
empire when they were making their translations, the Syriacs never had an
empire and were always in a politically subservient position, both in relation to
the Greeks and to the Arabs. - That is the background of that passage from
Severus Sebokht that we looked at in which Severus attacks the "chauvinism" of
the Greeks. - In the reception of the sciences by the Syriacs, we have an instance
of the reception of the sciences by a minor, politically weaker, nation.
I have jotted down "parallels with Japan?" on the handout. - You will
understand that it is possible to imagine a Japanese scholar from the Meiji period
saying the same kind of thing as Severus did. That is one of the reasons why I
feel a certain kind of sympathy with the Syriacs. I cannot press parallels too far,
31
but I think there are certain parallels that you can draw between the Syriacs and
the Arabs, on the one hand, and the Japanese and the Chinese, for example, on
the other as recipients of "Western" knowledge. - One interesting feature of
Syriac is that, when you compare Syriac and Arabic, Syriac very often simply
adopted Greek words as loanwords in transcription, whereas the Arabs tended to
translate them and to coin new Arabic terms. That is similar to the situation ,
respectively, in Japanese and in Chinese. - We in Japan started receiving the
"Western" sciences a little earlier than the Chinese, and feel that we are the
"elder brother" in this respect. The likelihood is that in several centuries, if not
in several decades, the main political power in this part of the world will not be
Japan, but China, so that, maybe, there will be some parallels that we, looking
back at the history of this part of the world in several centuries' time, will find in
this regard with the relationship between the Syriacs and the Arabs. That,
however, is very much in the realm of speculation and that kind of speculation is
something which Prof. Yamamoto can do much better than I with his expert
knowledge of astrology. So it is perhaps time for me to stop and hand over the
microphone to him. Thank you very much.
Appendix: Syriac Works Relating to Greek Philosophy and
Natural Sciences
A. Earliest Translations
"Popular" Philosophy: Plutarch (De cohibenda ira, De capienda ex inimicis
utilitate), PS.-Plutarch (De exercitatione), (Ps.)-Isocrates (Ad Demonicum),
Lucian of Samosata (De non facile credendo calumniae), Themistius (De
amicitia, De virtute); sayings attributed to Secundus, Menander,
Pythagoras, Plato, Theano
12
"Popular" Sciences: Physiologus, Geoponicon, alchemical literature
B. Sixth Century
[Astronomical-cosmological treatises (6th c.?) attributed to Dionysius the
Areopagite
13
and Berosus.
14
]
Sergius of Resh'aina (WS, ob. 536): Commentaries on Categoriae addressed
to Theodore and Philotheos; translation ofPs.-Arist. De mundo; Alex. Aphr.
On the Cause of the Universe; "how one finds out the effect of the moon
12 See Brock (2003).
13 Published by Kugener (1907) and Furlani (1917).
14 Published by Levi della Vida (1910).
32
according to the opinion of the astronomers" (appended to comm. on
Galen's De diebus decretoriis)15; also translations of Galen, Ps.-Dionysius.
Proba (WS?, mid..:6th c.?): Commentaries on Isagoge, De interpretatione,
Analytica priora.
Paul the Persian (ES, mid-6th c.): Commentary on De interpretatione;
Introduction to logic.
Anonymous (mainly 6th c.?): Translations of Isagoge; Categoriae (7th c.?);
De interpretatione (Proba?); Analytica priora (to 1.7); commentary on
Isagoge; treatise on the movement of the sun (6th c.?; = excerpt of Paul of
Alexandria, Elementa apotelesmatica).16
C. Seventh-Early Eighth Century
Severus Sebokht (WS, ob. 666/7): On syllogisms; On the Constellations and
On the Astrolabe
l7
; letters, including the letter mentioning the Indian
numerals. 18
Athanasius of Balad (WS, ob. 686): Revised translation of Isagoge;
Introduction to logic (also lost translations of Analytica posteriora, Topica
and Sophistici elenchi?).
Jacob of Edessa (WS, ob. 708): Revised translation of Categoriae;
Encheiridion.
George of the Arabs (WS, ob. 724): Categoriae (revised trans. and comm.);
De interpretaione (revised trans. and comm.); Analytica priora (trans. of
whole work and comm.); letters, including two dealing with astronomical
subjects. 19
D. Eighth Century
Silvanus of Qardu (ES, second half of 8th c.?): Book of Questions and
Answers (dealing with Isagoge, Categoriae and De interpretatione).
Isho'bokht (ES, 8th c.): Treatise on the Ten Categories.
Theophilus of Edessa (Maron., ob. 785): Translation of Sophistici elenchi
15 Edition: Sachau (1870) 101-124; cf. Hugonnard-Roche (2004) 126f.; id. (2005) 485.
16 Edition: Sachau (1870) 125f.; cf. Baumstark (1922) 169 with n. 4; Hugonnard-Roche (2004) 132
with n. 3; for the identification as an excerpt from Paul of Alexandria, see Saliba (1995); cf. id.
(2007) 8.
17 On the Astrolabe, edition: Nau (1899b); On the Constellations, trans. Nau (1929/30-31/32), partial
edition in Sachau (1870) 127-134; cf. Sezgin, GASVI.111f. (also Y.211-213); Hugonnard-Roche
(2001) 36-38; id. (2005) 487-490; McMahon (2007).
18 Edition: Reich (2000); excerpts published earlier by Nau (1910a) 248-252, (1910b) 225-227 and
(1929/30-31/32) 332f.
19 Edition: Ryssel (1893); cf. Sezgin, GAS VI.112-114; Saliba (1995) 444-447; Hugonnard-Roche
(2001)38.
33
(lost).
David bar Paulus (WS, 8th c.): Commentary on Categoriae.
Abil Nill:.I al-' AnbarI (ES, ca. 800): Translation of Topica (lost).
Timothy I (ES, 727/8-823), Book of Stars (1ost; work on astronomy, on
astrology, or against astrology?)20
E. After 800 (?) - Mostly Lost
Translations of Arist., Rhetorica and Poetica (fragments in later authors: Bar
Shakko, Barhebraeus) - Arist., Auscultatio physica, De generatione et
corruptione, Meteorologica (?), De anima, On the Animals (i.e. HA, GA
and PA); commentaries Auscultatio physica, De anima, Meteorologica; also
Theophrastus, Metarsiologica (trans. by Job of Edessa?; fragments
survive); Nicolaus Damascenus, Compendium of Aristotelian Philosophy
(trans. by I:Iunain?; fragments). - Arist., Metaphysica A (by I:Iunain; lost) -
Arist., Ethics (i.e. EN and MM; lost); Ps.-Arist. De virtutibus et vitiis
(abridged version extant).
Translations of Galen etc. by I:Iunain etc.
2
!
Translations of Nicomachus of Gerasa, Arithmetike eisagoge (1ost)22; Archi-
medes, De sphaera et cylindro (1ost)23; Menelaus, Sphaerica etc. (1ost)24;
Euclid, Elements (fragment extant; early or late [13th c.?] translation?).25
Translations of Ptolemy, Almagest (10st)26; Geography (Geographike
20 See Baumstark (1922) 217 n. 9; cf. Ruska (1897) 9; Hugonnard-Roche (200S) 497.
21 See Degen (1981); Macomber (1974).
22 The Arabic version made by J::IabIb ibn BahrIz for Tahir ibn al-Husain (ob. 822)\ and revised by
al-KindI was based on a Syriac version, according to the prologue to the Hebrew version by
Qalonymos ben Qalonymos: see Freudenthal-Levy (2004); cf. Steinschneider (1896) 3S2 (228);
Sezgin, GAS V 164f.; Hugonnard-Roche (200S) 49S; id. (2001) 39.
23 De sphaera et cylindro: note about the omission of difficult passages in the Syriac version quoted in
Ms. Istanbul, Fatih 3414 (dated 1277/8); see Sezgin, GASVI29; cf. Hugonnard-Roche, locc. citt. ~
Book on Triangles (Kitiib ArshlmTms fi al-muthallathiit): corrections made by Sinan b. Thabit b.
Qurra to partial translation from Syriac into Arabic by Yiisuf al-Qass (?); the relevant passage in
QiftI (ed. Lippert 19S.18f.) is not altogether transparent; cf. Steinschneider (1896) 17S (167); Suter
(1900) S2, 224; Sezgin, GAS VI3S; Hugonnard-Roche, locc. citt. (identifying the work, without
explanation, as De mensura circuli).
24 Works (Sphaerica etc.) translated into Syriac and then into Arabic; so Qif1:I, ed. Lippert 321.16f.; cf.
Steinschneider (1896) 196 (188); Sezgin, GASVIS9; Hugonnard-Roche, locc. citt.
25 Edition: Furlani (1924); cf. Sezgin, GAS V88-90; Hugonnard-Roche (2001) 40; id. (200S) 49Sf.;
Takahashi (200S) 8S.
26 Attested in the 12th c., see Kunitzsch (1977); cf. id. (1974) 7-9; Hugonnard-Roche (2001) 40; id.
(200S) 496; also Saliba (1987) 10.
34
hyphegesis, lost) 27; Tetrabibloi
8
; Ps.-Ptolemy, Liber JructuS.
29
Syriac Works of Thabit ibn Qurrah (836-901; lost/o: "(1) book concerning the
laws and canons of the pagans (fJanpe); (2) book concerning the interment
of the dead; (3) book concerning the confirmation of the confession of the
pagans; (4) book on purity and defilement; (5) book on animals which are
fit to be sacrificed; (6) book on times of prayers; (7) book on readings that
are suitable for each of the seven stars in prayers; (8) book on repentance
and supplication; (9) book of music; (10) book of the chronicle of the
ancient Syrian kings, who are Chaldeans; (11) book on the confession of
the $abians; (12) book on the allotment of the days of the week to the seven
stars; (13) book on the renown of his race and his forefathers, from whom
they descend; (14) book of the laws of Hermes and his prayers with which
the pagans pray; (15) book on the fact that two straight lines meet each
other when they are made to go out at less than two right angles; (16)
another book on the same subject"
F. Later Syriac Works on Mathematical Sciences
Severus Jacob bar Shakko (ob. 1241), Book ofDialogues.
3
!
Gregory Abu al-Faraj Bar 'Ebroyo (Barhebraeus, 1225/6-1286), Ascent of the
Min(j2; Astronomical tables (zij) for beginners (1ost)
References
Assemanus, Joseph Aloysius (1838, tr.). "Ecclesiae Antiochenae Syrorum
Nomocanon a Gregorio Abulpharagio Bar-Hebraeo syriace compositus et
a Iosepho Aloysio Assemano in latinam linguam conversus", in A. Maius
(ed.), Scriptorum veterum nova collectio X, Rome, part 2,2-268.
Assemanus, Joseph Simonius, BO = Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-
27 See Ibn al-NadIm, Fihrist, tr. Dodge 640; Qif1:I, ed. Lippert 98.1S (cf. Honigmann [1929] 116, who
thinks the reference may be to the Sketch (Skariphos) of the Habitable World appended to the Syriac
version of Zacharias Rhetor's Ecclesiastical History; on which, see Land [1887], cf. Sezgin, GAS
V213, Witakowski [2007] 233, Dickens [2008] 21).
28 See Nau (1910) 228f.; cf. Hatch (1946) 191, and PI. CXL (for a page out of the text); Sezgin, GAS
VII.42; Saliba (2007) 12.
29 Excerpt preserved in Barhebraeus, Candelabrum of the Sanctuary, see Nau (1931132); cf. id. (19IOa)
246; ed./tr. Bakos (1933) 374 [220].
30 See Barhebraeus, Chronicon [Bedjan] 168.11-23 (cf. QiftI [Lippert] 120). In connection with nos.
IS-16, cf. Sabra (1968).
31 Section on mathematics published by Ruska (1896); cf. Hugonnard-Roche (2001) 41; id. (200S)
497f.
32 Published by Nau (1899a).
35
Vaticana, Rome, 1719-28 (repr. Hildesheim, 1999).
Bakos, Jan (1933). Le Candelabre des sanctuaries de Gregoire Aboulfaradj dit
Barhebraeus (suite) (PO 24/3), Paris.
Baumstark, Anton (1922). Geschichte der syrischen Literatur mit Ausschluj3 der
christlich-palastinensischen Texte, Bonn.
Bedjan, Paul (1890, ed.). Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon syriacum, Paris.
- (1898a, ed.). Nomocanon Gregorii Barhebraei, Paris-Leipzig.
Brock, Sebastian (1982). "From Antagonism to Assimilation: Syriac Attitude to
Greek Learning", in N. Garsoian et al. (ed.), East of Byzantium: Syria and
Armenia in the Formative Period, Washington, 17-34.
- (2003). "Syriac Translations of Greek Popular Philosophy", in P. Bruns (ed.),
Von Athen nach Bagdad. Zur Rezeption griechischer Philosophie von der
Spatantike bis zum Islam, Bonn, 9-28.
<;i<;ek, Yuliyos Yeshu' (1986, ed.). Nomocanon of Bar Hebraeus, Glane/Losser.
- (2003, ed.). Die Scheune der Mysterien. Kommentar zum Alten und Neuen Te-
stament des Gregorios Yohanna Bar Ebroyo (1226-1286), GlanelLosser.
Degen, Rainer (1981). "Galen im Syrischen: Eine Ubersicht iiber die syrische
Uberlieferung der Werke Galens", in V. Nutton (ed.), Galen: Problems
and Prospect, London, 131-166.
Dickens, Mark (2008). "Turkaye: Turkic Peoples in Syriac Literature Prior to the
Se1jiiks", Diss. University of Cambridge.
Freudenthal, Gad, & Tony Levy (2004). "De Gerase it Bagdad: Ibn BahrIz, AI-
KindI, et leur recension arabe de I' Introduction arithmetique de
Nicomaque, d'apres la version hebralque de Qalonymos ben Qalonymos
d' ArIes", in R. Morelon & A. Hasnawi (ed.), De Zenon d'EJee if Poincare.
Recueil d'etudes en hommage if Roshdi Rashed (Les cahiers du MIDEO
1), Louvain, 479-544.
Furlani, Giuseppe (1917). "A CosIl!.ological Tract by Pseudo-Dionysius in the
Syriac Language", JRAS 1917, 245-272.
- (1924). "Bruchstiicke einer syrischen Paraphrase der 'Elemente' des
Eukleides", ZS 3,27-52,212-35.
Hatch, William Henry Paine (1946). An Album of Dated Syriac Manuscripts,
Boston.
Honigmann, Ernst (1929). Die sieben Klimata und die IIOAW; c7r:l(J'lf101. Eine
untersuchung zur Geschichte der Geographie und Astrologie im Altertum
und Mittelalter, Heidelberg.
Hugonnard-Roche, Henri (2001). "La scienza siriaca. IV. Matematica e
astronomia", in S. Petruccioli (ed.), Storia della scienza, IV. Medioevo Ri-
nascimento, Rome, 36-41, 69-70.
36
- (2004). La logique d'Aristote du grec au syriaque. Etudes sur la transmission
des textes de I 'Organon et leur interpretation philosophique (Textes et
traditions 9), Paris.
- (2005). "Textes philosophiques et scientifiques," in Nos sources: arts et
literatures syriaques (Sources syriaques 1), Antelias, 465-509.
- (2007). "Le corpus philosophique syriaque au VIe-VIle siecIes", in C.
D' Ancona (ed.), The Libraries of the Neoplatonists, Leiden, 279-291.
Kugener, Marc Antoine (1907). "Un traite astronomique et meteorologique
syriaque attribue it Denys I' areopagite", Actes du XIVe Congres
international des orientalistes, 2e partie, AIger 1905, Paris, 137-198.
Kunitzsch, Paul (1974). Der Almagest. Die Syntaxis Mathematica des Claudius
Ptolemaus in arabisch-Iateinischer Oberlieferung, Wiesbaden.
- (1977). "Uber einige Spuren der syrischen Almagestiibersetzungen", in Y.
Maeyama & W. G. Saltzer (ed.), IIpwf1ara. Naturwissenschaftliche Studi-
en. Festschriftfur Willy Hartner, Wiesbaden, 203-210.
Land, J. P. N. (1887). "Aardrijkskundige fragmenten uit de syrische literatuur
der zesde en zevende eeuw", Verslagen en Mededeelingen der k. Akad.
van Wetenschappen. Afd. Letterkunde, 3. reeks, 3, 164-193.
Levi della Vida, Giorgio (1910). "Pseudo-Beroso siriaco", RSa 3, 7-43, 611-
612.
McMahon, John M. (2007). "Severus Sebokht", in T. Hockey et al. (ed.), The
Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers, New York, 1044-45.
Macomber, William F. (1974). "The Literary Activity of Hunain b. Ishaq in
Syriac", in Ephram-Hunayn Festival. Baghdad 4-71211974, Baghdad, 570-
545.
Merx, Adalbertus (1889). Historia artis grammaticae apud Syros (AKM 9/2),
Leipzig (repr. Nendeln, 1966).
Nau, Fran<;ois (1899a). Le livre de I 'ascension de I 'esprit sur laforme du ciel et
de la terre. Cours d'astronomie redige en 1279 par Gregoire Aboulfarag,
dit Bar-Hebraeus (BEHE.H 121),2 vols, Paris.
- (1899b). "Le traite sur l'astrolabe plan de Severe Sabokt", JA ge ser. 13, 56-
101,238-303.
- (1910a). "La cosmographie au VIle siecIe chez les syriens", RaC 15 [= 2e ser.
5], 225-254.
- (1910b). "Notes d'Astronomie syrienne", JA lOe ser. 16,219-227.
- (1929/30-31132). "Le traite sur les constellations ecrit, en 661, par Severe
Sebokt eveque de Qennesrin", RaC 27 [3e ser. 7], 327-420; 28 [3e ser. 8],
85-100.
- (1931132). "Un fragment syriaque de l'ouvrage astrologique de Claude
37
Ptolemee intituIe le Livre du Fruit", ROC 28 [3e ser. 8], 197-202.
Reich, Edgar (2000). "Ein Brief des Severus Se.!26k;t", in M. Folkerts & R. Lorch
(ed.), Sic itur ad astra. Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik und
Naturwissenschaften. Festschrift fur den Arabisten Paul Kunitzsch zum
70. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden, 478-489.
Ruska, Julius (1896). Das Quadrivium aus Severus bar Sakku's Buch der
Dialoge, Leipzig.
- (1897). "Studien zu Severus bar Sakkfr's "Buch der Dialoge"", ZA 12, 8-41,
145-161.
Ryssel, Viktor (1893). "Die astronomischen Briefe Georgs des Araberbischofs",
ZA 8, 1-55.
Sabra, A. 1. (1968). 'Thabit ibn Qurra on Euclid's Parallels Postulate', Journal
of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 31, 12-32.
Sachau, Eduard (1870). Inedita syriaca. Eine Sammlung syrischer
Ubersetzungen von Schriften griechischer Profanliteratur, Vienna.
Saliba, George (1987). "The Role of the Almagest Commentaries in Medieval
Arabic Astronomy: A Preliminary Survey of rusT's Redaction of
Ptolemy's Almagest", Archives intemationales d'histoire des sciences 37,
3-20 (repr. in id. A History of Arabic Astronomy. Planetary Theories
during the Golden Age of Islam , New York, 1994,143-160).
- (1995). "Paulus Alexandrinus in Syriac and Arabic", Byzantion 65, 440-454.
- (2004). "Revisiting the Syriac Role in the Transmission of Greek Sciences into
Arabic", Journal of the Canadian yociety for Syriac Studies 4, 27-32.
- (2007). Islamic Science and the Making of European Renaissance, Cambridge,
MA.
Sezgin, Fuat, GAS = Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, Leiden.
Steinschneider, Moritz (1896). "Die arabischen Uebersetzungen aus dem
Griechischen. Zweiter Abschnitt: Mathematik", ZDMG 50, 161-219,337-
417.
Suter, Heinrich (1900). Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der Araber und ihre
Werke, Leipzig.
Takahashi, Hidemi (2005). Barhebraeus: a Bio-Bibliography, Piscataway.
Teule, Herman (2003). "Gregory Barhebraeus and His Time: the Syrian
Renaissance", Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 3, 21-43
- (2005). "The Transmission of Islamic Culture to the World of Syriac
Christianity: Barhebraeus' Translation of Avicenna's Kitiib al-ishiiriit wa
l-tanblhiit. First Soundings", in J. J. van Ginkel et al. (ed.), in Redefining
Christian Identity. Cultural Interaction in the Middle East since the Rise
of Islam (OLA 134), Louvain: Peeters-Departement Oosterse Studies,
38
167-184.
Voobus, Arthur (1970). Syrische Kanonessammlungen. Ein Beitrag zur Quellen-
kunde, 1. Westsyrische Originalurkunden, 2 vols. (CSCO 307, 317, Subs.
35,38), Louvain.
Watt, John W. (1993). "Grammar, Rhetoric, and the Enkyklios Paideia in
Syriac", ZDMG 143,45-71.
- (2004). "Syriac Translators and Greek Philosophy in Early Abbasid Iraq",
Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 4, 15-26.
- (2005). Aristotelian Rhetoric in Syriac. Barhebraeus, Butyrum sapientiae,
Book of Rhetoric (ASL 18), Leiden.
Wiedemann, Eilhard (1912). "Beitrage zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften
XXVII", Sitzungsberichte der Physikalisch-Medizinischen Societat zu
Erlangen 44, 1-40 (= id., AuJsatze zur arabischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte
[Hildesheim 1975], I, 776-815).
Witakowski, Witold (2007). "Geographical Knowledge of the Syrians", in B.
Isaksson et al. (ed.), The Professorship in Semitic Languages at Uppsala
University 400 Years: Jubilee Volume from a Symposium Held at the
University Hall, 21-23 September 2005 (SSU 24), Uppsala, 219-246.
39
Comments
YAMAMOTO Keiji
Takahashi-sensei explained scientific literature in Syriac by dividing it into six
periods (A, B, C, D, E, F). Here, I would like to introduce another division,
including all fields, not [just] scientific literature, according to Sebastian Brock,
a famous Syriac scholar. He has divided the history of literature in all fields into
three periods. It is easy for us to understand the Syriac literature in the three
periods. That is, the first is the Golden Age from the 3rd century until the 7th
century, i.e. before Islam, whose representatives are Sergius of Resh'ayna and
Severus Sebokht, corresponding to A, Band C on Takahashi-sensei's list. And
the second period, the Arab period from 9th century until the 13th century, i.e.
until the Mongol invasion, whose representative is Barhebraeus, corresponding
to D, E and F of the list. As for the third period, it is from the 14th century until
the present day. According to Brock, I quote, "Syriac learning and literature
never died out entirely, and there has been a continuous stream of writers right
up to the present day who have employed classical Syriac as their literary
language."
When I met Takahashi-sensei in Frankfurt for the first time, about eight or
nine years ago, he kindly taught me about Syriac translation of Abl1 Ma' shar,
showing me some catalogs. Then, I was very surprised because I found that the
dates of the manuscripts were the 19th or 20th century. And I realized that Syriac
literature continues into the present day. As far as Syriac translation from Greek
is concerned, there is one significant division from the viewpoint of the
translation movement in the Abbasid dynasty. It is the matter of whether the
Syriac translation was made before the Arabic translation or after it. I am most
interested in the period after 800 C. E., because I am editing the Arabic texts of
the Tetrabiblos by Ptolemy and the Centiloquium, i.e. Liber fructus. The
Centiloquium is astrological aphorisms consisting of 100 phrases, so it is called
Centiloquium in Latin. Its Greek name is 'Karpos', meaning 'fruit'. And the
Tetrabiblos and the Centiloquium, both texts have three versions, that is, Greek,
Syriac, and Arabic. As for the Tetrabiblos, the Greek is original of course, but it
is not certain whether the Syriac translation was made before the Arabic
translation or after it. I can not confirm the date when the Syriac Version was
made. The Arabic version was translated twice, first in the 8th century and then
again in the 9th century. And the unique manuscript containing the Syriac
translation of the Tetrabiblos is no. 346 of the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris.
40
This is a famous manuscript, because it contains various important scientific
texts in Syriac. As for the Centiloquium, it is not certain which version is
original, although the text is attributed to Ptolemy.
Several Arabic manuscripts of the Centiloquium have a common
description in the colophons. I would like to ask Takahashi-sensei and everybody
about it. In the colophon, it reads 'Tamamtu kitiib al-thamar al-musammiit bi-l-
riimiya ANTRWMTA wa-ma 'nii-hu al-mi 'a kalima'. The Book of Fruit is kitiib
al-thamar in Arabic ordinarily, and it is called 'Karpos' in Greek. This colophon
is translated as 'I have completed the book of fruits, called ANTRWMTA in
Greek, whose meaning is one hundred phrases'. I ask everybody what is this.
This mention shows that the Arabic is not original, but a translation from another
version. At least three manuscripts have this title.
Prof. Burnett: But sometimes a distinction is made between rumiya and
yunaniya, and rumiya is the contemporary Byzantine Greek and yunaniya is the
ancient Greek, but...
Prof. Yamamoto: Or middle Greek? According to Takahashi-sensei's appendix,
Liber fructus was preserved by Barhebraeus.
Prof. Takahashi: It is just a short excerpt.
Prof. Yamamoto: It means that the translation is from the time of Barhebraeus?
Prof. Takahashi: It seems it was available to him, yes. Presumably in Syriac.
Prof. Yamamoto: The date of translation of the Liber fructus is in the time of
Barhebraeus?
Prof. Takahashi: It could be much earlier. It just means that he had access to it
in the 13th century.
Prof. Yamamoto: So the Syriac version is later than the Arabic?
Prof. Takahashi: We do not know.
Prof. Yamamoto: It could be later, I see.
Answer [Takahashi]: If I may just mention two things. - Firstly, about the
Tetrabiblos and the Centiloquium, I was a little worried that Prof. Yamamoto
would ask me about them and I meant to do something about it before I came
here today. Prof. Yamamoto kindly forwarded to me a copy of the Syriac
translation of the Tetrabiblos and I was hoping to have the time to look at it, but
I must confess that I have been unable to do so. I am sure that if we look at it,
we should be able to find indications of when the translation was made. I have
listed it with other translations in "Period E" on my handout, but we do not
really know whether the translation dates from this period or not.
The other point is about this late period after the fourteenth century. It is
certainly true that these texts continued to be copied, and we have manuscripts
41
of these scientific texts dating from the nineteenth and even the twentieth
century, although these twentieth-century manuscripts were often made at the
request of Europeans. There were Europeans coming to ask for copies of
manuscripts, and these were copied and sent to European libraries, such as those
in Berlin and Paris. So these twentieth-century manuscripts do not necessarily
show a continued interest in scientific subjects on the part of the Syriac
Christians.
One interesting case that has some relevance for these scientific matters in
the later period is something that I came across this summer. - There was a
Syrian Orthodox patriarch called Ignatius Ni'matallah in the sixteenth century.
He was patriarch from 1557 until 1576, when he abdicated. The story is that he
was forced to convert to Islam by Muslims, so he converted. He then repented,
but had to abdicate as patriarch and went into exile in Italy. He was a very
learned scholar. He took a large number of books with him to Italy. In fact, most
of the Syriac manuscript collection in the Laurenziana in Florence came to
Florence with him. Another thing he did was to take part in Pope Gregory XIII's
commission for the calendar reform. There is an Arabic tract by him in which he
criticises the original reform plan put forward by the commission. The original
Arabic text of the tract is preserved in Florence (Laur. or. 30111 [olim 64 D, and
there is a Latin translation of it in Rome (Vatican Secret Archives, fondo
Bolognetti 315, 2r-58r). - What I came across this summer while I was at Yale is
a copy of a short letter which he wrote in Syriac, presumably from Italy,
addresstid to his faithful back home. In the letter he talks about the role he
played in the commission for the calendar reform and how we should calculate
the date of Easter. There is one work that he quotes there and that is the Ascent
of the Mind, the astronomical work of Barhebraeus. It was interesting for me to
find out that he had read this astronomical work by Barhebraeus and was using
it to support his ideas. In the Syriac piece that I saw Barhebraeus is the only
earlier author that he quotes. I have not seen the Arabic tract, but I have been
told (by Dr. Carl Ehrig-Eggert) that he does quote Barhebraeus in the Arabic
tract too, although he also quotes Arabic authors like Nasir aI-Din al-Tusi there.
- This is just one example of a Syriac scholar from the later period working in
this kind of field. So, yes, the tradition of scientific learning in Syriac did
continue into the later period, and the tradition of Syriac literature did and does
continue to this day, though not so much in the kind of field we are concerned
with here.
42
Discussion
(Q: Question, A: Answer)
Q: When did Syriac cease to be a spoken language?
A: I am not sure if it has ceased. Syriac is still spoken. Of course, classical
Syriac is not spoken any more as an everyday language, but there are still
people who consider themselves to be Syriac and there are still people who
speak forms of Aramaic related to Syriac, people who still speak in Aramaic
and still write in Syriac, so the tradition has not quite ceased yet. But I think
the last stage of Syriac authors who were really quite comfortable writing in
Syriac was from the period of Barhebraeus, about the 13th century, maybe a
little later. After that, even those who did write in Syriac, were more
comfortable writing in Arabic, and they would have been speaking Arabic
normally.
Q: Prof. Takahashi showed us the letter written by Sebokht who died in the 7th
century. In this letter, there is a narrative in which he connects the beginning
of sciences with nations. I know of this kind of narrative in another text, but
what is the origin of this kind of narrative? I think that the 7th century is re-
ally quite early in comparison with other texts.
A: I really cannot answer this, but I am sure that this kind of thing has a long
history, even before this. One example that comes to mind is Herodotus
talking about which was the first language. They isolated a baby and waited
to see which language the baby first spoke. I think it was Lydian. This kind
of precedence has a very long and very old history. I am not sure where
Severus gets it from himself.
Q: The Syrians, I mean the people who were talking in Syriac in the 6th or 7th
century, did they regard themselves as descendants ofBabylonians?
A: I think this is somewhat unusual. I have not really seen other examples of
Syriac speakers associating themselves with Babylonians in particular, but I
suppose one thing which you could argue on this point is that, in this period,
the people around Babylon, Seleucia and the surrounding area would have
been Aramaic speakers. And the Christians in that area would certainly have
been using Syriac in their churches. But I must admit that this is unusual. I
suppose on a larger scale they are all Semitic. You could therefore say that
there is some justification for this assertion.
Q: Prof. Takahashi, could you show me some brief overviews of figures in Syr-
iac science manuscripts? For the history of science, the figures attached to
43
the text are very important, especially in mathematics, astronomy or physics,
because changes of text figures give us a hint of the transmission of manu-
script and how contemporary people used the text.
A: As I said, the manuscripts are rather rare. For Severus Sebokht, it is basically
just one manuscript, Paris 346, and I must admit I have not had the opportu-
nity to see those parts of that manuscript which contain figures. Among Bar-
hebraeus' works, this astronomical work, the Ascent of the Mind, has a large
number of figures, which are actually reproduced in the edition, too. I have
seen some manuscripts which have those figures. Of course by this time,
these figures are taken from the Arabic sources, and the Ascent of the Mind
is influenced mainly by riiSI'S al-Tadhkirafi 'Um ai-hay 'a. I have compared
a couple of these figures, just in the printed editions, but they look similar to
the figures you find in riiSI'S work, and I think that is the way they are
drawn in the manuscripts too.
44
The Theoretical Arguments for Astrology in al-Farabi, al-
Kindi, and Abu Ma'shar
Charles BURNETT
This afternoon I would like to talk briefly about the place of astrology (ahkam
an-nujum-or 'judgements from the stars') in Arabic divisions of knowledge
and the arguments used for the scientific validity of astrology. In medieval texts
one finds astrology either among the mathematical sciences, or as a division of
physics (natural science). To take the latter first.
In a text called 'On the rise of the sciences' which exists in a Latin
translation of an Arabic original that has not yet been identified we find a lively
account of the origins of natural science (following immediately that of the
mathematical sciences) which ends with a description of its eight parts. I quote:
'I say that, because substance sometimes becomes red and at other times
becomes white, sometimes lasts for a long time, at other times for a short
time, sometimes expands, at other times shrinks, sometimes comes into
being, at other times passes away, sometimes is sick, at other times is
healed-because of all this, there had to be a science which would show
all of this, i.e. through which we might arrive at the knowledge of how
this kind of change came about, and what are its occasions and causes,
and how we can remove those that are harmful, when we wish, and how
we can increase them when we wish. This science is the science (or
'knowledge') of natures, which is the science (or knowledge) of action
and passion (the reception of action). When we enquire about its origin,
we will find that it consists of the four elements, which are fire, air, water
and earth, which are the matter of the substances found below the circle of
the Moon. From their four qualities, which are heat, coldness, moisture
and dryness, the accidents happen to substances and action and passion
arrive. From these four roots, together with the first four, which are the
four mathematical sciences, emerged the science (knowledge) of what
occurs under the circle of the moon. The parts of this science, according
to what the first Wise Men said, are eight: namely the science of
astrological judgements, the science of medicine, the science of
nigromancy according to physics, the science of talismans, the science of
agriculture, the science of navigation, the science of alchemy, which is the
science concerning the conversion of one species into another, and the
45
~ ,
Transmission of Sciences Greek, Syriac, Arabic and Latin
List of Contributors:
KOBAYASHIHaruo
NOMOTO Shin
Charles BURNETT
MIURANobuo
TAKAHASHI Hidemi
YAMAMOTO Keiji
Assistants:
KATOMizue
KURASAWA Makoto
YAGUCHI Naohide
Tokyo Gakugei University
The Keio Institute of Culture & Linguistic Studies,
Keio University
The Warburg Institute, University of London
Kobe University
The University of Tokyo
Kyoto Sangyo University
Seikei Senior High School
Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology,
The University of Tokyo
Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology,
The University of Tokyo
Edited by KOBAYASHI Haruo & KATO Mizue
Published by Joint Usage / Research Center for Islamic Area Studies
Organization for Islamic Area Studies, Waseda University (WIAS)
513 Waseda Tsurumaki-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-0041, Japan
TEL:+81-3-3203-4748 FAX:+8l-3-3203-4840
info@islam.waseda.ac.jp
Copyright March 2010 Organization for Islamic Area Studies, Waseda University
All rights reserved.
ISBN 978-4-904039-23-6
This bo?klet is. the report of the workshop "Transmission of Sciences: Greek, Syriac, Arabic
and Latm," whIch was co-organized by Kyoto Sangyo University and Joint Usage /
Research Center for Islamic Area Studies, Organization for Islamic Area Studies Waseda
University (WIAS) on December 9-10, 2009. This publication was funded by t h ~
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (Japan).
l
Foreword and Acknowledgements
The present booklet is the record of the workshop entitled "Transmission of
Sciences: Greek, Syriac, Arabic and Latin" held at the Faculty of Letters,
Waseda University (Tokyo, Japan) on December 9-10,2009.
This workshop was convened and organized as an activity of Solicited
Research Project "Structure and Transformation of Knowledge in Islam: A
History of Ideas Approach" which is affiliated to Organization for Islamic Area
Studies at Waseda University (WIAS). The transmission of knowledge, ideas,
and thoughts in various intellectual trends is a crucial theme for identifying
"the ... characteristics of knowledge within each idea and learning, and the
changes ... ," one of main objectives of this research project. (For the research
objects of our project, see its page on the Web site of WIAS: http://www.kikou.
waseda.ac.jplias/eniresearch/ solicitedresearch.htmL) Thus, this workshop aimed
at deepening our knowledge in this theme with special reference to the
transmission of scientific thought from other cultures and civilizations to
Muslims and from them to Latin Europe.
It is our great honor that we could welcome to this workshop as our speaker
Professor Charles BURNETT (The Warburg Institute, University of London),
one of the most distinguished scholars of our age on the subject of transmission
of Arabic sciences to the West, and invite three leading scholars in Japan in this
field as discussants, Professor MIURA Nobuo (Kobe University), Professor
YAMAMOTO Keiji (Kyoto Sangyo University), and Professor TAKAHASHI
Hidemi (the University of Tokyo). Therefore, our sincere gratitude must be
firstly expressed to Professor Bumett for his presentation of two papers, which
are precious, precursory works in the field of astronomical and astrological
studies, at the workshop and for contribution of their revised versions to this
booklet; and to Prof. Miura, Prof. Yamamoto, and Prof. Takahashi for their
invaluable contribution with their paper, comments, and discussions to the
workshop and this booklet.
Also we would like to express our deep thanks to our audience for their
active participation in the workshop. And our thanks must be extended to the
assistants to our project who are graduate students (mainly from The University
of Tokyo), for their dedicated work to the workshop. Last but not least our deep
gratitude must be expressed to Organization for Islamic Area Studies at Waseda
University (WIAS) and Professor SATO Tsugitaka, the General Director of
Organization of Islamic Area Studies, and the Organization secretariat
(especially Dr. NUKlI Mari) for their kind understanding of and devout support
to our project: without their generous sponsorship this workshop would never
have been held. This project was funded by the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (Japan).
11
Representing the Solicited Research Project group,
KOBAYASHI Hamo (Tokyo Gakugei University)
NOMOTO Shin (Keio University)
March 2010, Tokyo, Japan
1
Contents
The Arabic and Latin Tradition of Ptolemy's Almagest
................................................................................. Charles BURNETT
Comments ............................................................... MIURA Nobuo
1
9
Discussion ....................................................................................................... 14
Between Greek and Arabic: The Sciences in Syriac from Sevems Sebokht
to Barhebraeus ............................................................ TAKAHASHI Hidemi 16
Comments ............................................................... YAMAMOTO Keiji 40
Discussion ....................................................................................................... 43
The Theoretical Arguments for Astrology in al-Farabi,al-Kindi, andAbu Ma'shar
................................................................................. Charles BURNETT 45
Comments ............................................................... YAMAMOTO Keiji 58
Discussion ....................................................................................................... 60