Abstract
In a recent paper [1], Christián Carman advanced a tentative explanation for “overspecification” in medieval mathematical diagrams. Carman argues that the original (“correct”) diagrams were corrupted, presumably through incompetent copyists, while preparing the initial copies—often before the tenth consecutive copy. The diagrams then stabilized in an overspecified form and resisted further changes, sometimes for centuries of copies thereafter. I feel hesitant about this hypothesis for several reasons: (1) it assumes that the first Greek diagrams were essentially identical to modern diagrams; (2) pre-modern overspecification is ubiquitous and is rarely reversed; (3) the hypothesis ignores differing traditions of perspective; (4) the informal tests used to support the hypothesis do not precisely mirror the medieval copyist’s activity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Carman, C.: Accounting for overspecification and indifference to visual accuracy in manuscript diagrams: a tentative explanation based on transmission. Hist. Math. 45, 217–236 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hm.2018.05.001
Sidoli, N.: Research on ancient Greek mathematical sciences, 1998–2012. In: Sidoli, N., Van Brummelen, G. (eds.) From Alexandria, Through Baghdad, pp. 25–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36736-6_3
Netz, R.: The Shaping of Deduction in Greek Mathematics: A Study in Cognitive History. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)
Sidoli, N., Saito, K.: The role of geometrical construction in Theodosius’s Spherics. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 63, 581–609 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-009-0045-2
Asper, M.: Mathematik, Milieu, Text. Sudhoffs Arch. 87, 1–31 (2003)
Saito, K.: Traditions of the diagram, traditions of the text: a case study. Synthese 186, 7–20 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0073-3
Saito, K.: A preliminary study in the critical assessment of diagrams in Greek mathematical works. SCIAMVS 7, 81–144 (2006)
Saito, K., Sidoli, N.: Diagrams and arguments in ancient Greek mathematics: lessons drawn from comparisons of the manuscript diagrams with those in modern critical editions. In: Chemla, K. (ed.) History of Mathematical Proof in Ancient Traditions, pp. 135–162. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)
Netz, R.: The Works of Archimedes, Volume I: The Two Books on the Sphere and the Cylinder. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)
De Young, G.: Editing a collection of diagrams ascibed to al-Ḥajjāj: an initial case study. SCIAMVS 15, 171–238 (2014)
Decorps-Foulquier, M.: Sur les figures du traité des Coniques d’Apollonius de Pergé édité par Eutocius d’Ascalon. Revue d’histoire des mathématiques 5, 61–82 (1998)
Sidoli, N.: What we can learn from a diagram: the case of Aristarchus’s on the sizes and distances of the sun and the moon. Ann. Sci. 63, 581–609 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790701336841
Raynaud, D.: Building the stemma codicum from geometric diagrams. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 68(2), 207–239 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-013-0134-0
De Young, G.: Diagram numbers in medieval manuscripts of Euclid’s elements. Humanistica 7, 27–33 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1400/212774
De Young, G.: Diagrams in the Arabic Euclidean tradition: a preliminary assessment. Hist. Math. 32, 129–179 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hm.2004.04.003
Grant, E.: Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)
Avrin, L.: Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance. American Library Association, Chicago (2010)
Pedersen, J., French, G.: Scribes and books. In: Hillenbrand, R. (ed.) The Arabic Book, pp. 37–53. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1984)
Aghayani-Chavoshi, J. (ed. and trans.): Ketâb al-nejârat (Sur ce qui est indispensable aux artisans dans les constructions géométriques). Institut Français de Recherche en Iran, Tehran (2010)
Sezgin, F., Neubauer, E.: Katalog der Instrumentsammlung des Institutes für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften. Institut für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main (2010)
Hall, B.: The didactic and the elegant: some thoughts on scientific and technological illustrations in the middle ages and Renaissance. In: Baigrie, B. (ed.) Picturing Knowledge: Historical and Philosophical Problems Concerning the Use of Art in Science, pp. 3–39. University of Toronto Press, Toronto (1996)
De Young, G.: Book XVI: a medieval Arabic addendum to Euclid’s elements. SCIAMVS 9, 133–209 (2008)
Busard, H., Folkerts, M.: Robert of Chester’s (?) Redaction of Euclid’s Elements, the so-called Adelard II Version: Volume II. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1992)
Jardine, B., Jardine, N.: Critical editing of early-modern astronomical diagrams. J. Hist. Astron. 41, 393–414 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/002182861004100307
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
De Young, G. (2020). On “Overspecification” in Medieval Mathematical Diagrams. In: Pietarinen, AV., Chapman, P., Bosveld-de Smet, L., Giardino, V., Corter, J., Linker, S. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12169. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54249-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54249-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-54248-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-54249-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)