AI Translation of modern Greek once more

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In my last two posts here and here, I looked at AI and other translations of the following passage from Ch. Stergioulis’ modern Greek translation of the “Life of St Nicholas” by Methodius, Archbishop of Constantinople (the “Methodius ad Theodorum”:

3. Καταγόταν ο Νικόλαος από τα Πάταρα, πόλη της επαρχίας των Λυκίων, η οποία εκείνη την εποχή (του αγίου Νικολάου) είχε αρκετούς κατοίκους. Τώρα όμως μοιάζει περισσότερο με κώμη παρά με πόλη14. Κι αυτό παθαίνουν πολυτρόπως οι πόλεις-παρακμάζουν και οι κάτοικοί τους μεταναστεύουν-εξαιτίας των αμέτρητων κριμάτων τους έναντι του θεού. Έτσι λοιπόν κατανοούμε και αυτό που συνηθίζουμε να γράφουμε, ότι δηλαδή οι πόλεις τιμωρούνται για τις αμαρτίες των κατοίκων τους15. Βρίσκεται δηλαδή, εκεί κοντά τόπος πεδινός, σχισμένος στα δύο, σαν ξεσχισμένο ιμάτιο. Κι από το ρήγμα που έχει δημιουργηθεί, φαίνεται να αναδύεται, την ημέρα, καυτός ατμός, ενώ τη νύχτα ξεπηδά σαν από χάλκινο καμίνι φλογώδης καπνός16. Και καίει το χέρι όποιου τολμά να το ακουμπήσει, χωρίς όμως να του το κατατρώγει αλλά και την σάρκα, όπως θα γινόταν στην περίπτωση που κάποιος απλώνει το χέρι του στη φωτιά• είναι όμως απεικόνιση και προοίμιο, με μικρή ομοιότητα, του αιωνίου πυρός. Και ευρισκόμενοι σε απορία με το φαινόμενο οι μεγαλύτεροι σε ηλικία μετέφεραν από γενιά σε γενιά, ο κάθε πατέρας στο παιδί του, (όπως μας διασώζεται ο άγραφος πλην αληθινός τούτος λόγος), ότι εξαιτίας της ακολασίας και της σαρκολαγνείας των κατοίκων της η θεία δίκη κατεδίκασε τούτη τη γη στο φρικτό αυτό θέαμα, για να αποτρέψει την επι-στροφή τους στο μέρος αυτό.

Today I went back to the same sites, to see what came out.  First I asked ChatGPT 3.5, “Can you translate something from modern Greek to English”, and when it said yes, pasted in the above text:

Nicholas originated from Patara, a city in the province of Lycia, which at that time (of Saint Nicholas) had several inhabitants. However, now it resembles more of a village than a city. This is a fate suffered in various ways by cities—they decline, and their inhabitants migrate—due to their countless sins against God. Therefore, we understand what we commonly write, that is, cities are punished for the sins of their residents.

Nearby, there is a flat place, split in two, like a torn garment. From the rift that has been created, hot steam seems to emerge during the day, while at night it rises like fiery smoke from a bronze furnace. And it burns the hand of anyone who dares to touch it, without, however, consuming it as well as the flesh, as would happen if someone were to extend their hand into a fire. It is, however, a representation and prelude, with little resemblance, to the eternal fire.

In awe of this phenomenon, the older ones passed down from generation to generation, each father to his child (as this unwritten but true account has been preserved for us), that due to the immodesty and sensuality of its inhabitants, divine justice condemned this land to this dreadful spectacle to prevent their return to this place.

This is different to the output I got two days ago.  Mostly it is very similar, and certainly impressive.  In a couple of places, it isn’t as good.  In a couple of places it’s a bit better.

Next, I tried using Bing CoPilot “with GPT-4”:

3.  Nikolaos originated from Pataras, a city in the province of Lycia, which at that time (of Saint Nicholas) had many inhabitants. Now, however, it looks more like a village than a city. And this is what happens to cities – they decline and their inhabitants emigrate – because of their countless sins against God. Therefore, we understand what we are used to writing, that is, that cities are punished for the sins of their inhabitants. There is a nearby flat place, split in two like a torn garment. And from the rift that has been created, hot steam appears during the day, while at night fiery smoke emerges like from a copper furnace. And it burns the hand of anyone who dares to touch it, but without consuming it or the flesh, as would happen if someone were to put their hand in fire. It is, however, a depiction and a prelude, with little similarity, of the eternal fire. And the older ones, puzzled by the phenomenon, passed down from generation to generation, each father to his child (as this unwritten but true story is preserved), that because of the debauchery and carnality of its inhabitants, divine justice condemned this land to this terrible spectacle, to prevent their return to this place.

This is almost the same as I got in my first post.  But one good feature of Bing AI is that it indicates the websites that it is using:

I imagine that this is concealed by other sites, in case they had to pay royalties.

It does feel creepy that the same input on different days produces different output from the same site.  I know that Google Translate could be like that.  But even so… it feels flaky.

All the same, there’s no doubt that AI is producing better results than Google Translate or DeepL.  I do think that we then need to look up variable words and establish their meaning ourselves.

Doing so could certainly be easier. Remember that I know no modern Greek at all; all of this is a way to use online tools.

One bit that varies is the “flat place” or “low lying place” or “plain”.  Looking at Google Translate, I see this preserves the footnote numbers, which helps us work out whereabout in the Greek text this is.  It’s just after footnote 15:

inhabitants15. In other words, there is a plain nearby, torn in two, like a torn garment.

This must be “τόπος πεδινός”, “topos pedinos”.  Even I know “topos” must be a “place”, if only thanks to Tales from Topographic Oceans.  So “pedinos” is our word of not-quite certain meaning.

Going to Lexilogos and copying the word, and clicking on WordReference gives us this page.

This does indeed actually explain the problem – plains are flat and are found in the lowlands, hence the various different meanings. I hate that this is an online-only tool – what if the web goes down? – but it’s something.

Likewise I get αρκετούς – “several inhabitants”?, and plug this in.  Taking off letters from the end, it asks if I mean αρκετός – I know enough Greek to agree – and tells me that it means enough, ample, plenty, sufficient.  I.e. “lots”, which is what I would expect.  Likewise “διασώζεται” also works, once you remove a few letters to get the base verb, meaning “save, rescue”, i.e. “preserve”.

So maybe this is how we use these tools to make a translation:

  1. Use Google Translate on the modern Greek to get a general idea of what each sentence means, and a few signposts so I can move around the Greek text.
  2. Bang the Greek into ChatGPT to get a better translation.  Maybe do the same with Bing AI, if it’s working.
  3. Compare the three, and look for oddities.
  4. Find the actual modern Greek word for each oddity, look it up in WordReference.com, and see if this can resolve it.  (Remembering, if using Chrome, to force it NOT to translate the page into Engish).

That has the look of a way to do the translation. It’s cumbersome.  Any clues about Greek will help mightily.  But it really requires very little knowledge, and you can produce a respectable translation, I think.

I will try it out with another chapter of Methodius ad Theodorum.

UPDATE (17 Jan 2024): Much more in the comments below.

Share

Is Google now doomed? Wild thoughts and conspiracy theories below!

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I have just spent an interesting hour on the PC since my last post.  Those who read it will recall that I posted some modern Greek, and then the Google Translate output for it – good, but by no means perfect.  It then occurred to me to try Microsoft’s Bing AI.  The output from that was marvellous, so I added that to the end of the post.

Then I started pasting more of the modern Greek into Bing AI, chapter by chapter.  This went well until chapter 11, when it crashed.  And crashed and crashed.  When it did return, the output was obviously inferior, using different sources!  So I stopped.  The Bing AI interface was frankly a mess anyway.

Then it occurred to me to try Bard AI, the Google product.  This produced… inferior output.  Not really any better than Google Translate.

Then I tried ChatGPT 3.5, the OpenAI product.  And suddenly I was getting good output again, if subtly different.

Google has dominated the web ever since the late 90s.  But it is basically a search engine company.  It rose to power because it was a markedly better search engine than AltaVista, which it destroyed.  But the founders of Google have long since departed, as has its “don’t be evil” ethos.  For many years now the company has concentrated on squeezing dollars out of the web.

But “AI” is basically search-engine technology.  So the rise of OpenAI is really the arrival of a new generation of search engine; and Google is struggling.

What the OpenAI people have realised is that most people do not, actually, want to “search the web”.  They want information.  So they have reimagined the search engine, added a  layer of algorithms on top, with a chat-bot on top of that.  Their search engine produces information, not lists of results.  These engines can be targeted for developers, or translators, or other specialised markets.

It looks very much as if OpenAI have created the next generation search engine.

If so, it must have become obvious to search-engine people about a year ago.  Google executives must have been quaking in their well-funded boots.  This is the end for Google, as Google was the end for AltaVista… unless.  Unless Google can catch up.

It has been telling how little we really know about how “AI” works.  The hype has been tremendous.  The hard facts have been few.  And no wonder, if it’s now a cut-throat commercial race.

Google may have some trouble here.  It isn’t really a tech company any more.  It’s an advertising company.  Products like Google Docs were invented elsewhere and bought in.  Microsoft went down this route, as IBM did before them.  There is still interesting tech going on, but they aren’t the cutting edge.

Microsoft will be the big beneficiary of this new era, because of its far-sighted investment in the OpenAI company.  Bing AI, I think, must basically be a front-end on OpenAI.

If all this is true, then Google may not be able to fight back.  The link to Microsoft means that they cannot just buy OpenAI, which would have been a possible way forward.  So… maybe Google will enter the long decline experienced by other tech companies before.  Once people do not use their search engine, it’s basically over.

For the conspiracy minded, this may also explain some otherwise perplexing events of the last year.  In particular it may explain the boardroom coup at OpenAI, when the directors sacked the company founder, Sam Altman.  Why the heck would you do that?  It didn’t stick – Microsoft intervened. The directors seem to be just corporate drones, of no special talent.  Microsoft wasn’t going to let them wreck the company that was about to take over the world.  But why would you do that at all?  Why get rid of the guy who will make you rich?

If this was a Hollywood movie, who would be the prime beneficiary of those mysterious shenanigens at OpenAI?  If OpenAI had collapsed, if Altman could no longer direct the company, who would benefit?  It’s an interesting thought.  Did someone bribe the renta-board of OpenAI to crash the company?  Some existing vested interest?  Not necessarily Google, of course, but possibly someone with shares in it?

Likewise it is interesting to see all the lawsuits, and claims of copyright on the databases used, the large language models (LLMs).  Not that the claims are bogus.  If I understand correctly, there is little doubt that many of the modern AI databases are indeed based upon masses of copyright material.  We know this thanks to one company making an incautious publication which listed what they were loading into their database!

But say that the copyright claims probably valid.  Whether that is true or not – and when it will be decided – will be a decision for the US courts.  These are notoriously political, so money and power will no doubt decide.  Again, who would benefit from knobbling the new technology?

In truth I have no idea about all of this.  There must be people less connected than myself, but it might be hard to name them!  But perhaps all this really signals that the revolution is here.

Yet this revolution may not benefit us, the ordinary internet users.

For one thing, OpenAI is the first web technology that you have to pay for.  It’s on subscription.  This is a new, and unwelcome change to the free internet.

Likewise searching the web at least gives you a choice of viewpoints.  If you get your news from OpenAI, you get one viewpoint only.  It’s great news for the would-be censors, who seem to grow more numerous every day.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

Share

Methodius ad Theodorum (BHG 1352y) in modern Greek – part 1

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve now obtained access to the modern Greek translation by Ch. Stergioulis of the “Life of St Nicholas” composed by Methodius I, patriarch of Constantinople, around 843 AD, and dedicated to a certain Theodore.  I’ve OCR’d the text using Abbyy Finereader 15, and corrected it – I had to install the Greek language patch into Windows.  I have created a Word document containing the text.  Doing so caused Word to do some funny things, but I got there in the end.

Google Translate is not quite – not quite – good enough; but it gives us quite a lot.  The actual storyline starts in chapter 3, which Stergioulis renders as follows:

3. Καταγόταν ο Νικόλαος από τα Πάταρα, πόλη της επαρχίας των Λυκίων, η οποία εκείνη την εποχή (του αγίου Νικολάου) είχε αρκετούς κατοίκους. Τώρα όμως μοιάζει περισσότερο με κώμη παρά με πόλη14. Κι αυτό παθαίνουν πολυτρόπως οι πόλεις-παρακμάζουν και οι κάτοικοί τους μεταναστεύουν-εξαιτίας των αμέτρητων κριμάτων τους έναντι του θεού. Έτσι λοιπόν κατανοούμε και αυτό που συνηθίζουμε να γράφουμε, ότι δηλαδή οι πόλεις τιμωρούνται για τις αμαρτίες των κατοίκων τους15. Βρίσκεται δηλαδή, εκεί κοντά τόπος πεδινός, σχισμένος στα δύο, σαν ξεσχισμένο ιμάτιο. Κι από το ρήγμα που έχει δημιουργηθεί, φαίνεται να αναδύεται, την ημέρα, καυτός ατμός, ενώ τη νύχτα ξεπηδά σαν από χάλκινο καμίνι φλογώδης καπνός16. Και καίει το χέρι όποιου τολμά να το ακουμπήσει, χωρίς όμως να του το κατατρώγει αλλά και την σάρκα, όπως θα γινόταν στην περίπτωση που κάποιος απλώνει το χέρι του στη φωτιά• είναι όμως απεικόνιση και προοίμιο, με μικρή ομοιότητα, του αιωνίου πυρός. Και ευρισκόμενοι σε απορία με το φαινόμενο οι μεγαλύτεροι σε ηλικία μετέφεραν από γενιά σε γενιά, ο κάθε πατέρας στο παιδί του, (όπως μας διασώζεται ο άγραφος πλην αληθινός τούτος λόγος), ότι εξαιτίας της ακολασίας και της σαρκολαγνείας των κατοίκων της η θεία δίκη κατεδίκασε τούτη τη γη στο φρικτό αυτό θέαμα, για να αποτρέψει την επι-στροφή τους στο μέρος αυτό.

Google Translate:

3. Nicholas came from Patara, a city in the province of Lycia, which at that time (of Saint Nicholas) had several inhabitants. But now it looks more like a county than a city[14]. And this is what cities suffer in many ways – they decline and their inhabitants emigrate – because of their countless crimes against God. This is how we also understand what we usually write, namely that cities are punished for the sins of their inhabitants[15]. In other words, there is a lowland area nearby, torn in half, like a torn garment. And from the rift that has been created, hot steam seems to rise during the day, while at night fiery smoke rises as if from a copper furnace[16]. And it burns the hand of whoever dares to touch it, but without consuming it but also the flesh, as it would be in the case of someone stretching out his hand into the fire; but it is a representation and prelude, with little resemblance, of the eternal fire . And being perplexed by the phenomenon, the elders conveyed from generation to generation, each father to his child, (as this unwritten but true word is preserved to us), that because of the debauchery and carnal lust of its inhabitants the divine judgment condemned this land in this horrible sight, to prevent their return to this place.

Hmm.  I’ve underlined bits that look strange in the English.  Surely the sense is that Patara had “lots” of inhabitants?  Hardly “several”?  But it’s not bad, considering that I know not a word of modern Greek myself.

I did wonder if there were some online Greek dictionaries in which I could look up individual words, and verify the meaning.  Even better if there was something that could cope with inflections, and tell me what case etc it was.  But I must be using the wrong search terms, because all I got was junk sites.

Even so, this is interesting.  It explains why John the Deacon, in his Latin version – clearly a paraphrase – devotes the second half of the same chapter (= 2) to a digression about a field where volcanic fissures had opened, and you could burn your hand but it was not consumed.  It’s because he’s following Methodius, and making rather a hash of it.

The footnotes are also interesting:

14. Η συγκεκριμένη φράση υπαινίσσεται ίσως τη φυσική παρουσία του συγγραφέα στην περιοχή. Το ίδιο προκύπτει κι από την περιγραφή του ηφαιστειώδους εδάφους της περιοχής της Λυκίας που ακολουθεί.

14. This particular phrase perhaps alludes to the author’s physical presence in the area. The same follows from the description of the volcanic terrain of the Lycia region that follows.

15. Γρηγόριος Νύσσης, Εις τόν Εκκλησιαστήν, Όμιλία Α’, σ. 282,11-14: «τάχα δ’ άν ήμιν γνωριμώτερον τό ζητούμενον νόημα γένοιτο, εί την γραφικήν συνήθειαν έπί τών πρός τό κρεϊττον νοουμένων συνεξετάσαιμεν.»

15. Gregory of Nyssa, To the Ecclesiastes, Sermon I, p. 282,11-14: “so if we knew the meaning sought in general, we should consider the scriptural custom of those who understand the creed.”

16. Το έδαφος της Λυκίας είναι ηφαιστειώδες, εξαιτίας της έκρηξης ηφαιστείου κοντά στη Φασήλιδα.

16. The terrain of Lycia is volcanic, due to the eruption of a volcano near Phasilida.

Notes 14 and 16 are clear enough. Note 15 tho, is not.

It would be interesting to put the whole thing into English.  As far as I know there is no English translation of the Methodius ad Theodorum, despite its key importance for the transmission of the legend of St Nicholas.  But I don’t think Google Translate alone will do.  Dictionaries of modern Greek are needed!

UPDATE:  It occurred to me to try Bing Ai, with the Copilot in Microsoft Edge.  The result was impressive:

Nikolaos came from Pataras, a city in the province of Lycia, which at that time (of Saint Nicholas) had many inhabitants. Now, however, it looks more like a village than a city. And this is what happens to cities – they decline and their inhabitants emigrate – because of their countless sins against God. Therefore, we understand what we usually write, that is, that cities are punished for the sins of their inhabitants. There is a nearby plain, split at the 8th degree, like a torn garment. And from the rift that has been created, hot steam appears during the day, while at night fiery smoke emerges like from a copper furnace. And it burns the hand of anyone who dares to touch it, but without corroding it or the flesh, as would happen if someone were to put their hand in the fire. It is, however, a representation and prelude, with little similarity, of the eternal fire. And the elders, perplexed by the phenomenon, passed down from generation to generation, each father to his child (as this unwritten but true story is preserved), that because of the debauchery and carnality of its inhabitants, divine justice condemned this land to this terrible spectacle, to prevent their return to this place.

Better!

Update (14th Jan): I’ve fixed the “8” and removed a spurious dash.  Interestingly Google Translate handled the “8uo” as “duo” correctly.  Thank you Ikokki for pointing that out.  Bing AI isn’t speaking to me tho, so I cannot rerun it.  I’ve tried with the free account at ChatGPT, and asked: “Can you translate something for me from modern Greek to English?”  It replied “Certainly! I’ll do my best to help you with the translation. Please provide the text you’d like me to translate from modern Greek to English.”  I pasted in the text above and got this:

Nicolas originated from Patara, a city in the province of Lycia, which at that time (during the era of Saint Nicholas) had numerous inhabitants. However, now it resembles more of a village than a city. Cities undergo this fate in various ways—they decline, and their residents migrate—due to their countless sins against God. Therefore, we understand what we commonly write, namely that cities are punished for the sins of their residents.

Nearby, there is a low-lying area, split in two, like a torn garment. And from the rift that has formed, hot steam seems to rise during the day, while at night, it emerges like fiery smoke from a bronze furnace. It burns the hand of anyone who dares to touch it, without, however, consuming it or the flesh, as would happen if someone were to place their hand in fire. It is, however, an image and prelude, with little resemblance, of the eternal fire.

Perplexed by this phenomenon, the older ones conveyed from generation to generation, each father to his child (as this unwritten but true account is passed down to us), that because of the licentiousness and carnal desires of its inhabitants, divine justice condemned this land to this terrible spectacle to prevent their return to this place.

Paragraphing by ChatGPT.

Share

A collection of modern Greek translations of St Nicholas legends

Posted on by Roger Pearse

An interesting volume of St Nicholas literature has come to my attention, published in 2017. I learned of it from the wonderful Dumbarton Oaks list of Translations of Byzantine Saints Lives.  It contains modern Greek translations of a number of the early Greek “Lives” of St Nicholas.

You may wonder why most of us care.  Well, Google Translate handles modern Greek rather well.  So this means that even those of us with no knowledge of medieval Greek can read the texts by means of this edition.

But first some details.

The volume is Ch. Stergioulis, Ἅγιος Nικόλαος. Ἐγκωμιαστικοὶ Λόγοι ἐπιφανῶν βυζαντινῶν λογίων, Athens: Zitros, (2017), Series: ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΟΙ ΣΥΓΓΡΑΦΕΙΣ / Byzantine Writers 19.  ISBN 9789604633234.  In English that appears to mean something like “Encomia by eminent Byzantine writers”.  The website of the publisher is here, and if you use Chrome, you can read the site easily using Google Translate.

The book is actually very cheap – only about 17 euros – and I would have bought a copy.  But doing so has proven beyond my abilities, since all the websites offering copies want to be paid by bank transfer rather than credit card.  Many of them won’t ship to me anyway.  Fortunately I was able to find a PDF with sample pages online here, including the table of contents!

Πρόλογος σεβασμιωτάτου μητροπολίτου Λα- Σελ.ρίσης κ. Ιγνατίου……………………………………………. 9
Εισαγωγή Β. Κατσαρός……………………………… 13
Πράξις του εν αγίοις πατρός ημών Νικολάου…. 65
Τευδο-Πρόκλου Εγκώμιον εις τον όσιον Νικόλαον…………………………………………………………….101
Ανδρέου επισκόπου Κρήτης Εγκώμιον εις τον όσιον πατέρα η μών Νικόλαον………………………….. 123
(Μιχαήλ) Βίος και πολιτεία και μερική θαυμάτων εξήγησις του εν αγίοις πατρός ημών Νικολάου 169
Μεθοδίου πρεσβυτέρου και ηγουμένου εις τον βίον καιταλείποντα του οσίου πατρός ημών Νικολάου ……………………………………………………………. 251
Μεθοδίου αρχιεπισκόπου Κωνσταντινουπόλεως εγκώμιον εις τον άγιον Νικόλαον………………… 307
Συμεών του Μεταφράστη Βίος και Πολιτεία…. 419
Νεοφύτου Εγκώμιον εις τον μέγαν Νικόλαον…. 535

From this I  get:

Foreword by a church dignitary
Introduction by B. Katsaros.
Nicholas of Myra, “Praxis de stratelatis” (BHG 1350) p. 65–100.
Nicholas of Myra, encomium by Pseudo-Proclus (BHG 1364c) p. 101–22.
Nicholas of Myra, encomium by Andreas of Crete (BHG 1362)  – p.123-68
Nicholas of Myra, vita by Michael (BHG 1348) pp. 174-243.
Nicholas of Myra, vita by Methodios (BHG 1352y) – p.256–98.
Nicholas of Myra, encomium by Archbishop Methodius of Constantinople (BHG 1352z) pp. 312–405.
Nicholas of Myra, vita by Symeon Metaphrastes (BHG 1349), 424–520.
Nicholas of Myra, encomium by Neophytos the Recluse(BHG 1364), 542–651.

This list does not in any way convey to the reader the value of the contents.  For this, in fact, an academic publication.

First, it contains both the medieval Greek and the modern Greek on facing pages.  Secondly each text is preceded by an introduction.  And each introduction and text has detailed footnotes to the literature, although these are sadly banished to the end.

There is no English translation for many of these texts, other than those which I have placed online over the years, and which I must collect into a single place.  According to the DOAKS list, there are German translations for some of them, by L. Heiser, in Nikolaos von Myra. Heiliger der ungeteilten Christenheit,Trier (1978), which is probably more accessible.

But the great find is a translation of BHG 1352y, the “Methodius ad Theodorum”, which was the source for the legend of St Nicholas throwing gold through windows so that poor girls could have a dowry, and thus of our modern tradition of “Santa” the bringer of gifts.  This was used by John the Deacon for his “Life” in Latin, ca. 880, and is how the story reaches us.

Material in Greek tends to be unknown to western academics, because of the language barrier.  But this need no longer be so, and volumes like this make clear that we are all missing out.

 

Share

So… farewell, Abbyy Finereader, but why did you just commit suicide?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

It must be 20 years ago or more that I first stumbled upon the OCR software, Abbyy Finereader.  I was enthralled, and I bought it, with the option for Cyrillic recognition.  At the time the word was that it had originally been developed for the KGB!  It was much better than anything else.

Since that day I have bought every upgrade.  These appeared every couple of years, and always gave you a  bit better OCR.  The user interface was not really improved tho – they tended to mess with it, when it worked really very well.  And currently I am using Abbyy Finereader 15 Pro.  This is a wonderful OCR engine.  In the last couple of versions, the software developers have gone a bit insane, and started forcing you to produce PDF as your output.  But in fact they don’t do PDFs that well!  Never mind – it is still possible to just do straight OCR.  The addition of the Fraktur module is good also.

But … disaster!  I learn today that the idiots and nincompoops at Abbyy have decided to make it available only on a “subscription” model.  You can’t buy it any more.  Instead they will lease it to you for a year, for the same price as a purchase used to be.  At the end of the year, you have to pay again.  And again.

I have never purchased a subscription for any software, and I never will.  This is predatory pricing, and it should be illegal.

We all know that  Microsoft have their “Office 365” subscription.  A few years back I was horrified to find that a poor girl living on benefits was paying for a subscription.  She had to count every penny; yet Microsoft was bleeding her each month.  I quickly put a stop to that, I should say.

Last month I discovered that my late mother had also been taken in by this scam, and was paying a monthly sum to Microsoft just to do basic word-processing.

This is classic monopoly abuse.  Create a monopoly, then force people to accept predatory prices that benefit only the monopolist.  Instead of bringing in better software each year, so that people want to buy something better, how much easier it is to just force them to pay again for the same thing?

Microsoft can get away with it, because word-processing is essential, and they have donated heavily to the US political establishment.

But I rather doubt that Abbyy has a monopoly.  All they have done is to ensure that I don’t buy any more upgrades.

All the same, it’s a shame.  Abbyy Finereader really was good.  I always recommended it.

Those who don’t feel like being robbed like this may wish to know that Google Docs does OCR for free, and for an even wider range of languages than Abbyy.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Happy New Year, everybody.  We can leave behind all the chores of last year, and plan to do some good things.

Over the Christmas period, I took a long hard look at the St Nicholas project, and decided that it was time to guillotine it and actually release something.  I was just getting deeper and deeper into text critical issues, for which I have no special qualification.  So … it is out there.

Yesterday I was looking at loose ends.  One of these was a pair of publications from the St Nicholas Centre in Bari have been sitting next to my computer for a couple of years now.  This is because one of them contained an Italian translation of the text by John the Deacon.  But the majority of the content was about the “translation of the relics” – i.e. the movement of the bones – of St Nicholas from Myra in Turkey to Bari in Southern Italy.  This took place in 1087.

In fact there are two accounts, written very close to the time, which have got rather mingled together in the medieval copies.  The scribes were mainly concerned with producing something edifying for liturgical use, and were not very bothered about who wrote what.

But what makes this funny is that the two accounts were written by different factions in Bari.  Bari had been the capital of the Byzantine province, until it was seized by the Norman Robert Guiscard a few years earlier.  This bandit had levied a heavy tax, and then moved on to attack somewhere else.  The tax fell mainly on the middle classes, as such things do, and these were looking for a way to restore the economy.  So they decided to steal the bones of St Nicholas.  Once they got them back, actual fighting broke out over who got them.  One side was the Byzantine supporters; the other was those who were sucking up to Guiscard.

There are still two recensions of the text in the manuscripts; the “Vatican” and the “Beneventan”.  But each is a  mixture of the two accounts.  The names come from the manuscript which leads each family of manuscripts of each type.

I’ve made quite a dent in translating the St Nicholas literature in general, and I thought perhaps I should take the Italian translation of one of the accounts – that by “Nicephorus” – and run it through Google Translate.  So I got my old book scanner out – a Plustek Opticbook 3600 – and set to work.  After about 40 pages it stopped, and told me that the scanner needed to warm up (!).  A page later it did it again.  In fact what was happening was that it was overheating.  I turned it all off and left it for an hour, and I was able to do the rest.

Then I ran Abbyy Finereader 15 on it, and got a very decent Word document.  This in turn started to translate very easily.  But then I saw in a footnote that an English translation existed, made by a certain Charles W. Jones. A quick google, and I discovered that this was already online at the St Nicholas website, here.

So… no need to do it myself! I filed away the bits and pieces.  One less thing to do.  It’s an odd feeling to see the “St Nicholas” shortcut vanish from my desktop after five years!

I wondered about replacing the scanner.  It’s a real nuisance to only handle 40-50 pages at a go.  But to buy a new one of the same type looks like real money. They now call it a Plustek Opticbook 3800L, as far as I can see.  I don’t scan much any more.  So maybe I shall live with it!

I’ll have to check over any other loose ends, and then look at what’s next!

Share

John the Deacon, “Life of St Nicholas” – now online in English

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I have finally completed my translation of the “Life of St Nicholas of Myra” by John the Deacon (BHL 6104, 6105, 6106 etc).  Written around 880 AD, it is the foundation text for the entire western tradition of legends about St Nicholas.  There are no critical editions of the Latin, and all of the early modern editions are low quality, or worse, or worse.

I have collated a bunch of the earliest manuscripts accessible to me, and established a reasonably reliable text.  I have included the collation in the footnotes.  I have also collated and translated the variant version of the legend of the Three Generals (a.k.a. “Stratilates”) found in one of the early editions and almost nowhere else.

I have also looked at the Bibliographia Hagiographia Latina (BHL) entries for St Nicholas, and pointed out various errors.

Here are the files:

I also include two working files which might be useful to those poking at the Latin text.  Most people should ignore these.  They are very rough.  If you need them, here they are.

I have uploaded the same files to Archive.org here.

As usual, I make all this material public domain.  Use it for whatever purpose you like, personal, educational or commercial.

I first attempted a translation in 2018, but I started to work seriously on it only in 2019. It’s been four hard years of work.  The project kept growing in size, and all of it was fascinating.  In the end I have decided to stop where I am, and do no more.  So here it is!

Share

“Scriptor Syrus”, the scholiast on Dionysius bar Salibi: oft-quoted, but from where?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Something that comes around every year at this time is a quotation from a certain “Scriptor Syrus,” supposedly about the origins of Christmas.  Often it is supposed to be 4th century. This is the usual wording.

It was a custom of the pagans to celebrate on the same Dec. 25 the birthday of the sun, at which they kindled lights in token of festivity …Accordingly, when the church authorities perceived that the Christians had a leaning to this festival, they took counsel and resolved that the true Nativity should be solemnized on that day.

There is an excellent post at Andrew McGowan’s blog here about this “quote”, and the many errors and falsehoods involved, and a mention by Tom Holland.  It is, in fact, a marginal note by an unknown Syrian writer (= “scriptor syrus”) in a manuscript of the works of Dionysius bar Salibi, a 12th century Syriac author.

There is a somewhat fuller translation by Ramsay MacMullen, Christianity and Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, Yale (1997), p.155:

A twelfth-century Syrian bishop explained,

“The reason, then, why the fathers of the church moved the January 6th celebration [of Epiphany] to December 25th was this, they say: it was the custom of the pagans to celebrate on this same December 25th the birthday of the Sun, and they lit lights then to exalt the day, and invited and admitted the Christians to these rites. When, therefore, the teachers of the church saw that Christians inclined to this custom, figuring out a strategy, they set the celebration of the true Sunrise on this day, and ordered Epiphany to be celebrated on January 6th; and this usage they maintain to the present day along with the lighting of lights.”[8]

p.244, 8.  Dionysius Bar-Salibi, bishop of Amida, whom I quote from the Latin of G. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalis Clementino-Vaticanae 2 (Rome 1721) 164; and compare such other festivals as that of the Natale Petri of February, particularly in Fevrier (1977) 515, who protests against apologetic arguments to insulate the choice of date from any pagan antecedents or competition.

The overt polemical purpose of the modern author needs no discussion. But the reference is a useful entry-point to try to find the actual source.

What work are we talking about?  What manuscript?

Assemani was an Eastern Christian who published a whole series of extracts from eastern authors, in the original language, in his Bibliotheca orientalis Clementino-Vaticanae, with commentary and translation in Latin.  These are now online, and volume 2, page 164 may be found at Google books here.  The text is in two columns.  The original language is given, a text in italics is the translation, and Assemani’s own words are in normal text.

Page 164 from Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticanae, vol. 2 (1721)

Assemani introduces our scholiast thus (Google translate follows):

Hunc tamen Armenorum ritum, quem hic rejicit Bar-Salibaeus, anonymus nescio quis Syrus probare contendit in margine apud eundem Bar-Salibaeum fol. 43. a tergo, his verbis:

However an anonymous Syrian, I don’t know who, tries to prove this Armenian rite, which Bar-Salibaeus here rejects, in the margin in the same Bar-Salibaeus fol. 43. on the back, in these words:

Then follows the Syriac text, and then the Latin translation prepared by Assemani:

Mense Januario natus est Dominus eodem die quo Epiphaniam celebramus, quia veteres uno eodemque die festum Nativitatis & Epiphaniae peragebaret, quoniam eadem die natus & baptizatus est. Quare hodie etiam ab Armenis uno dic ambae festivitates celebrantur. Quibus adstipulantur Doctores, qui de utroque festo simul loquuntur. Causam porro, cur a Patribus praedicta solemnitas a die 6. Januarii ad 25. Decembris translata fuit, hanc fuisse ferunt. Solemne erat ethnicis hac ipsa die 25. Decembris festum ortus solis celebrare; ad augendam porro diei celebritatem, ignes accendere solebant: ad quos ritus populum etiam Christianum invitare & admittere consueverant. Quum ergo animadverterent Doctores ad eum morem Christianos propendere, excogitato consilio eo die festum veri Ortus constituerunt; die vero 6. Januarii Epiphaniam celebrari jussere. Hunc itaque morem ad hodiernum usque diem cum ritu accendendi ignis retinuerunt. Et quoniam sol duodecim gradus ascendit Dominus natus est hac die tertiadecima, & sicut S. Ephram docet, Solis justitiae & duodecim Apostolorum ejus mysteria repraesentat. Numerus, inquit S. Doctor, denarius perfectus est. Die decima Martii uterum intravit. Numerus item senarius perfectus est. Die 6. Januarii utramque partem nativitas ejus reconciliavit.

In the month of January, the Lord was born on the same day on which we celebrate the Epiphany, because in the olden days the festival of Nativity and Epiphany was held on the same day, since he was born and baptized on the same day. Therefore, even today, both festivals are celebrated by the Armenians. The Doctors [of the Church] support this, who speak of both festivals at the same time. Furthermore, the reason why the aforesaid solemnity was transferred by the Fathers from the 6th of January to the 25th of December, they say was this. It was traditional for the pagans to celebrate the birth of the sun on this very day, the 25th of December; to further enhance the celebration of the day, they used to light fires: to which rites they were accustomed to invite and admit even Christian people. When, therefore, the Doctors noticed that the Christians were inclined to that custom, they devised a plan and established on that day the feast of the true Resurrection; but on the 6th of January they ordered that the Epiphany be celebrated. So they have kept this custom to this day with the ritual of lighting fires. And since the sun has risen twelve degrees, the Lord was born on this thirteenth day, and as St. Ephraim teaches, he represents the mysteries of the sun of justice and his twelve apostles. The number, says the Holy Doctor, is a perfect denarius. On the tenth of March he entered the womb. The same number is perfect. On the 6th of January his birth reconciled both parties.

I don’t understand the bit about “denarius”; is it a typo for “senarius,” which seems to mean “a multiple of six”?  But it doesn’t matter for our purposes.  Assemani then continues his work by introducing a different extract from fol. 125 concerning Caiaphas, of no relevance here.

So these words, by the anonymous “syrian writer”, are on folio 43v of the manuscript used by Assemani.

But what is this a manuscript *of*?  What text?

Looking up to page 161, I see that Assemani is quoting material from folio 37v of this manuscript of a work by Dionysius bar Salibi, about the “progenitores” of Christ, from Luke’s gospel:

Quos Lucas refert Christi progenitores, eos ex Africano, Eusebio, Nazianzeno,Sarugensi, Graecisque & Syriacis Codicibus sic enumerat fol.37. a tergo:

He enumerates those whom Luke gives as progenitors of Christ, from Africanus, Eusebius, Nazianzen, [Jacob of] Sarug, from Greek and Syriac manuscripts, on fol. 37v:

He then continues with a passage from folio 161, on the nativity of Christ, before adding the material above from the scholiast.  It’s odd that this jumps about like this.

On pp.157-8, it all becomes clear.  Assemani is giving extracts from the Commentary on the Four Gospels by Dionysius bar Salibi, and he is extracting this material from a Vatican manuscript:

Commentaria in Testamentum Vetus & Novum. Et quidem expositio in quatuor Evangelia exstat in Cod. Syr. Vatic. 11. & in Cod. Syr. Clem. Vat. 16. a fol. 27. usque ad fol. 263. ejusque duo exemplaria in Bibliotheca Colbertina haberi testatur Renaudotius tom. 2. Liturg. Orient. pag. 454.

Commentaries on the Old and New Testaments. And a certain exposition on the four Gospels exists in Cod. Syr. Vatic 11. And in Cod. Syr. Clem. Vat. 16, from fol. 27. up to fol. 263. Renaudius testifies, Liturg. Orient. vol. 2, page 454 that two copies of this are held in the Bibliotheca Colbertina [i.e. now in the French National Library].

So… let’s take it further.  A lot of Vatican manuscripts are online.  But when I use the excellent Wiglaf guide to Vatican mss, and look at Vatican. Syr. 11, and Vaticanus Syr. 16, – I don’t think there is a “Clementine” subdivision of Syriac manuscripts – I find that neither has scholia on fol. 43v.  Someone has messed up the numbering of the manuscripts since!  It turns out that Assemani and his son did so, later in life, in the 1750s.  The marvellous Syri.ac website tells me of a concordance by Hyvernat, “Vatican Syriac Mss Old And New Press Marks” (1903), online here.

But this too is useless.  The old “Vat. Syr. 1” became Vat. Syr. 19, online here, but there is still no marginal note on folio 43v.  Hyvernat does not explain the “Clem.” collection at all.

Thankfully Hyvernat tells us about a catalogue composed by Assemani and son, and Syri.ac gives links to text-searchable PDF’s!

Looking at these, if we do a text search for “Salib”, we find that manuscript 156 contains Dionysius bar Salibi.  But… no scholion on fol. 43v.  In fact the manuscript has been divided into two parts, and part 2 is also online here.

The catalogue for Vat. Syr 156 says the Luke portion begins on fol. 188, which doesn’t sound right.  But at the end it says “see ms 155, fol. 161v”  And when I look at the catalogue entry for Vat. Syr. 155 – it too contains Dionysius bar Salibi!  The text search had missed it.   Are these two, perhaps, the two manuscripts that Assemani used, now placed side by side?  Hyvernat says look at the start of the catalogue entry, there may be the old shelfmark there.  And…

CLV. Codex in fol. bombycinus, foliis constans 294. Syriacis recentioribus literis exaratus, inter Syriacos Codices, a nobis in Vaticanam Bibliothecam inlatos, olim Decimus sextus: quo continentur:

150.  Folio manuscript on cotton-paper, consisting of 294 leaves, written in modern Syriac letters, one of the Syriac manuscripts brought by us into the Vatican Library, once the Sixteenth: which contains:

So this is indeed the one-time manuscript Vat. Syr. 16!   Hyvernat expresses himself bitterly toward the authors of the catalogue – “of no practical use” -, and, after more than two hours working on this, I too am less than chuffed with them.  The manuscript was never simply “Vat. Syr. 16”; prior to the reorganisation it was, in fact, Vat. Syr. Assemani 16; and the other manuscript, 156, was Vat Syr. Assemani 46.  Aaargh!

But … viewing Vat. Syr. 155 on folio 43v – there is a long scholion!  We’re there!  It matches!

Vatican Syr. 155, folio 43v – the scholion on Dionysius bar Salibi, Commentary on Luke, discussing the date of Christmas

One last wrinkle.  The catalogue (part 3, p.297) tells us that Luke is on fol.160v onwards.  That’s is item 23 in this manuscript, which contains various texts.  So what is fol. 43v part of?  Well, item 21 is the commentary on Matthew, starting on folio 32, and continuing to fol. 148v.  Not Luke, as anyone would infer from the original in the Bibliotheca Orientalis, unless they were very careful.

So this passage by “Scriptor Syrus” is, in fact, a scholion by some unknown person, on a passage in the Vatican Syr. 155 copy of Dionysius bar Salibi’s Commentary on Matthew.

It would be most useful to know exactly which passage of Dionysius bar Salibi is so annotated.  But there we must leave this.

Update: 24 Dec. 2023.  A useful comment from Syriacist Grigory Kessel is that Dionysius bar Salibi’s commentary on the gospels was printed in the CSCO series, with a Latin translation; and that the annotation above is against Dionysius’ comments on Matthew 2:1 (“Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, saying,…”), and the relevant passage is here.  I imagine it relates to the paragraph on p.67, l.12 onwards, where 25 December is specified.  Thank you!

Share

Working with Bauer’s 1783 translation of Bar Hebraeus’ “History of the Dynasties”

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Following my last post, I’ve started to look at the PDFs of Bauer’s 1783-5 German translation of Bar Hebraeus’ History of the Dynasties.

It must be said that the Fraktur print is not pleasant to deal with.  But it could be very much worse!  I’ve seen much worse.  Here’s the version from Google Books:

And here is the same page from the MDZ library:

I’ve tried running both through Abbyy Finereader 15 Pro.  Curiously the results are better, on the whole, from the higher resolution MDZ version.  I had expected that the bleed-through from the reverse might cause problems – and it may yet!  Even more oddly, the OCR on the “Plain Text” version of Google Books is better still.

But there is a problem with using Google Books in plain text mode.  There is no way to start part way through the book.  You will always be placed at the very start, and you can only navigate by clicking “Next page” or whatever it is.  This is not good news if you have 100 pages to click through before you get to where you want to be.

The opening portion of these world chronicles is always a version of the biblical narrative about the creation, followed by material from the Old Testament, combined with apocryphal material.  I may be alone here, but I have always found these parts of the narratives unreadable.  When I translated Agapius, I started with the time of Jesus, part way through.  I did the same with Eutychius. I only did the opening chapters at the end, after I had translated all the way from Jesus to the end of the book first.  I recall that it felt like wading through glue. I might have given up, except that I had already invested so much time in the project.

Starting in the time of Jesus immediately introduces us to familiar figures.  On page 88 of volume 1, the “Sixth Dynasty” starts, with Alexander the great.  It ends on page 98 with Cleopatra.  Each section starts with a familiar name, one of the Ptolemies in most cases.

On page 99, dynasty 7 begins, after an introduction, with Augustus.  The dynasty ends on p.139 with Justinian.  Each ruler gets a paragraph, often only a few sentences.

It’s all do-able, clearly.  I’m not sure that I want to get into working on this book seriously, with the St Nicholas project still in mid-air.  But it’s not hard work, which is something!

Share

The “Historia Dynastiarum” or “History of the Dynasties” by Barhebraeus

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The last of the five big Arabic Christian histories is the Historia Dynastiarum (Tarikh Mukhtasar Ad-Duwal) of Bar Hebraeus.  This is a revision, abbreviation, and expansion, of his Syriac world history, the Chronicum Syriacum.  There seems very little evidence in Google that the Historia Dynastiarum has received very much attention.

Here is a Google Translate version of the relevant parts of his entry in Graf’s Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Litteratur, vol. 2.  This is of course very old now.  First the man himself (p.272):

92. Gregorius Abu ‘l-Farag ibn al-`Ibri, almost universally referred to in the Western scholarly world with the Latinization of the nickname Barhebraeus, the most important writer of the Jacobites [=monophysites], is one of the most important of his diverse writings, which cover all areas of profane and theological knowledge extends to Syrian literary history. Only two works that certainly came from his pen were written in Arabic from the start. The days of his life fell during the difficult time of the Mongol invasions.

Barhebraeus was born in Melitene in 1225-6 as the son of a Christian doctor who had been converted from Judaism and was given the baptismal name Johannes. After his parents moved to Antioch, he took lessons in logic and medicine from a Nestorian in Tripoli, Syria. Consecrated bishop under the name Gregorius in 1246, he successively held three bishoprics, most recently Aleppo, and in 1264 became Maphrian of the East, i.e. the Deputy of the Patriarch in the East Syrian-Persian church area with changing residence. He died in Maraga on July 30, 1286, highly revered by Muslims and all Christian parties, and was buried in the Monastery of Matthew (Deir Matta) near Mosul.

Graf states that Barhebraeus only composed two works in Arabic.  The first is a work on the Soul.  The second is the History of the Dynasties.

The crowning achievement of Barhebraeus’s life’s work is his Arabic history entitled the “History of the Dynasties”, which he wrote at the request of Muslim friends and completed shortly before his death. It is a partly abridged, partly expanded adaptation of his secular history (chronography), which he had previously written in Syriac, and which was accompanied by a church history in the same language. The additions to the Arabic abstract include, above all, valuable information about scientific and literary figures, including older Arabic sources. He reports events based on the ruling personalities, which are arranged in groups of 10 “dynasties”, these are the (Old Testament) patriarchs (al-auliya’), the judges, the Israelite and Chaldean kings, the kings of the Magi (Medes ), the. the pagan Greeks (Alexander to Cleopatra), the Franks (in the sense of Westerners: Augustus to Justinian II), the Christian Greeks (Tiberius II to Heraclius), the Muslim Arabs (Muhammed to al-Musta’sim) – by far the most extensive and most detailed part of the entire work – and the kings of the Mongols from Hulägu until the death of Ilkhan Argun in 1285.

Editions: Edvardus Pocockius, Specirnen historiae Arabum etc., Oxonii 1650, excerpts, beginning with the history of the Arabs before Islam, in Latin. Translation and notae. Complete: Historia compendiosa Dynastiarum, authore Gregorio Abul-Pharajio Malatiensi medico . .. Arabice edita, et latine versa, Oxonii 1663. Antun Salhani, Ta’rih muhtasar ad-duwal, Beirut 1890. German translation: Georg Lorenz Bauer, Des Gregorius Abulfaradsch kurze Geschichte der Dynastien, oder Auszug der allgemeinen Weltgeschichte (= Gregorius Abulfaradsch’s short history of the dynasties, or excerpt from general world history), 2 vols., Leipzig 1783 and 1785. Cf. J. H. Hottingeri Promtuarium; Sive, Bibliotheca orientalis, Heidelbergae 1658, pp. 80-82.

Manuscripts: Paris ar. 296 (15th century); 297 (1554 AD); Additions in the margins and on the endpaper: historical, geographical and chronological notes on the city of Amid, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, and lists of the Jacobite Primates up to 1493 and the Nestorian Catholicoi. Par. ar. 298 (1598 AD); 299 (1693 AD); 6501 (1355 AD).  Leiden or. 759; 760.  Vatican Borg. syr. 59 (Karshuni, 1688 AD, written in Rome by Athanasius Safar, Bishop of Mardin). Copenhagen or. 8 (1663/4 AD; see John Erichsen, Udsigt over den gamle Manuscript-Samling i det store Kongelige Bibliothek [= Overview of the old Manuscript Collection in the great Royal Library], Copenhagen 1768, p. 5).   Petersb. Inst. or. 37 (1605/6 AD). Sbath 50 (Kars., 17th century), incomplete; Fihris 61.

The 1663 edition by Pococke is available online in many places.  Here are a few:

Bauer’s 1783-5 German translation – printed in Fraktur -, the Des Gregorius Abulfaradsch kurze Geschichte der Dynastien, is also online:

Because of the awkward Fraktur text, this looks rather intimidating to the English reader, unless you view the copy in Google Books.  There you can click on the “gearwheel” at top right, and select “plain text”.  This will give you the text, already OCR’d into a Roman font.  If you do this in Chrome, your browser will then automatically translate it into some sort of English.  Curiously, if you copy the German plain text into Google Translate, you get a much better English translation!

By this process, we get this for Bauer’s rather charming preface (slightly cleaned up by me):

I do not think that I need to make an apology by daring to present to the public a German translation of an Arab historian, of Gregorius Abulfaradsch’s Brief History of the Dynasties. At a time when everything with healthy hands is eager to give every product of the mind, no matter how poor, a German robe if it is stamped with the name of a Briton or a Frenchman; At a time when translation factories for Greek and Latin classics are being set up everywhere, I thought that the dear public, which always shows a fair amount of patience, should not make a sheepish face and reject me out of hand if I ever do produce an Arab, and ask for his favor and protection for him.

Or does the Arab have less right to do this than the Romans and Greeks? “But Pocock has already appended a Latin translation to the edition of Abulfaradsch?” But there are also Latin translations from old Latin and Greek authors that are just as pleasant to read and clear as the one from my hero, and yet one explains it those German translations are not superfluous; And here it is also the case that Pokock’s work is rare, expensive and certainly in few hands of historians and history lovers.

Or do only the Greeks and Romans deserve to appear in German garb for the sake of the important content? It is true that the Oriental historian does not write as gracefully as a Herodotus or not after. The history of a people whose religion arose after the Christian one and has well over half of the human race among its followers; of a people whose language surpasses most of the world in terms of wealth, culture and spread across vast lands; of a people who had never been subjugated, but who were seized by religious enthusiasm and, as a result, a desire for conquest, subjugated almost the entire world and founded an immense empire that even exceeded the Roman one in size; a people who have done so many harm to the Christian religion, with whom the Christians in Spain, Italy and France, the Greek emperors in their provinces, and later the Western Christians fought so many bloody wars during the Crusades; of a people that embraced the sciences and translated the Greek philosophers, historians and poets into their mother tongue, while Christian Europe was covered in stark darkness by monkery and pfaffery.  Shouldn’t the history of such a people deserve to be known, and shouldn’t the author be important, who can be used as a source in its study?

Anyone would be ashamed not to know anything about the ancient Persians and their kings, about the Greeks and Romans. But in the history of the equally famous empires of the Khalifs and the Mogols, which overthrew them and which are so close to us in time and other circumstances, one did not want to count oneself to be a disgrace? I have often been surprised that the name of the Khalifs and their empire was something completely unknown to many a self-studied and not ignorant man. And if the names of great scholars who are respected by the world can serve to justify my undertaking, I can also refer to the fact that Mr. D. Dache in Leipzig, and my former excellent teacher in oriental languages, Prof. Nagel, too Altorf, honored my project with your approval, and expressed his consideration for me, which I have always enjoyed to the fullest extent, and as a grateful student I boast here with true reverence, that he also supported me from the stock of his library.

This, I thought, should protect me from criticism for publishing a German translation of Abulfaradsch, which mainly provides the history of the Khalifs and Mogols. For those who do not already know him or are familiar with Pocock’s work, I note that he is a native of Malatia, a city on the west side of the Euphrates, where his father, Aharon, was a famous physician, and that he in the XIII. century lived. He himself was very experienced in the science of medicine, which is why he reveals many predilections for doctors in his book and weaves in some nice anecdotes about them. He has written several works, such as: a Syriac grammar and a Chronicon Syriacum, which Asseman published in his Bibliotheca Oriental. Tom. II. p. 308. Wherever one finds more from our author, and among other things the opinion expressed in the preface by Pokock that our Abulfaradsch is the same person as Abulfaradsch Abdallah Ibn Attajeb (a Nestorian monk) is refuted. By religion he was a Christian, and of the Jacobite sect. The accuracy of his reports results from their comparison with other proven historians, such as Abulfeda, Eutychius, Al Makin. He was partly a contemporary and eyewitness to the events under the Mogol government. He continued his story of the creation of the world, according to the custom of Eastern historians, up to the year of Christ 1283. I was surprised that he wasn’t often missing from the oldest story and, despite its brevity, that he included many a pleasant anecdote. His style is simple and completely unadorned, the tone of his narrative is uniform and dull, still more bearable than Eastern pomp. Compare the preface by Mr. Ritter Michaelis to his Arabic grammar.

I also ask that the reader keep in mind when reading the translation that I could not embellish the original. The respect he was held in because of his learning is demonstrated by the titles given to him in the title of the book: He was the greatest scholar, the king among scholars, the model and phoenix of his age, the pride of the wise. How important his reports are is demonstrated by the frequent use which the authors of the General World History, in the 19th and 20th parts, in the history of the Muslim empire, have made of him.**

In my translation I tried to express exactly the meaning of the original, and I flatter myself that, through comparison with other writers, I have mostly hit the mark. Wherever errors have crept in that did not escape my eyes, I have corrected them in the following notes, and I will diligently point these out to the reader. If I had immediately at hand the subsidies of several Arabic writers, as I received them later, I could certainly have given my translation greater perfection, which the second part will certainly contain. As for the explanatory and corrective notes, I was advised by a respected scholar that most of the sheets had already been printed, so they had to be appended at the end. The time I was granted was short, which is why I only briefly touched on the bare essentials. But because I feel that it is more convenient if the notes are always placed under the text, where they belong, I will give them this more appropriate placard for the second part if the audience receives this first attempt with indulgence and care. “Why I didn’t deliver the Abulfaradsch in its entirety right away?” Someone might also ask about the translation of an Arabic book!

– Written in Nuremberg, March 21, 1783.

I would have given the opening of Barhebraeus’ preface also, but there are some OCR errors there which would make this harder work!

Update (19 Dec 2023): In the comments, Diego points out that the mysterious reference to the “General World History” must refer to volumes 19 and 20 of “Allgemeine Weltgeschichte von der Schöpfung an bis auf gegenwärtige Zeit” (Leipzig 1765-1808, 29 vols.). This was a German translation/adaptation of W. Guthrie and ‎J. Gray’s “A General History of the World, from the Creation to the Present Time” (1764-7).  Thank you!

Share