Herodotus and Aristotle on Egyptian Geometry Author(s): C. Macdonald Reviewed work(s): Source: The Classical Review, Vol.

64, No. 1 (Apr., 1950), p. 12 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/702511 . Accessed: 05/03/2012 11:58
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

12

THE CLASSICAL REVIEW

priests who were one of his main sources of information. That this was the origin of geometry is his own opinion. Sesostris (Ramses II), who ruled Egypt for nearly the first three-quarters of the thirteenth century B.C., would be a king likely to be remembered by all Egyptians as one who had raised their country to pre-eminence in the Near East, and the more especially by the priests, in that he had confirmed their privileges and granted them territories in Upper and Lower Egypt to supply revenues.s So, although Herodotus makes no mention of them, for they are not necessary to the point he is making, the priests would have played no small part in land mensuration, and we need AND ARISTOTLE ON HERODOTUS not attach any especial importance to the choice EGYPTIAN GEOMETRY of Sesostris as its originator when considering the at /1 7T7p8 877v7Sov /178' 7rpag T'vayKaltar TY imTraririse of geometry. uciAv EvpErO'aav, Kal rpArov Ev 7ro070rotS But why does Aristotle attribute geometrical 70oiLr7To o7rrep Sto at' aXdOAaaav. repl Aryvmrrov zaO)LzaTltKar7rpWr7ov prowess to the leisure of a priestly class of scholars? 10 Were this in fact the case we should expect to find TrC EKEL aEdOcXOAdEtvwrd Trxvat avvcT7arCTCav t ydp some traces of theory. For leisure and a conlepCEoy OvoS. (Aristotle, Metaphysics A. 981b21.) To~T~ov Ka-avElzat S 'Ti v X p'7vAlyvrr-otat araat tinuity of tradition such as a priestly class would wov 7rv KA^Ppov CKdaaT 7Erpaywvov EAyoV provide are just the requirements for the institu"flaCnA'a, dTS rrpoa6dovS tion of scientific research. The best part of our &tvra, Kat da7rr ToTov rrOtacTOa,, knowledge of at Ed7taardvr7a Evtav-Ov. El irt7TAEELYV Ka-r d7rooop7v Egyptian geometry is gained from av the Rhind Papyrus,6 and most of the problems in TtvoS 70o KA 'pov d rroaELo's 7 L rape'Ao'ro, A8,Obv 0 d vov. 0d 7rpTahd'v EErr TobVs it deal with concrete numbers and but rarely with lrrE iErLaLveTv Kat yEyEV7lVT i7rraKECfroLvOVS. avai/erpov'wras jca EAaTcaaowv abstract. How many bricks, for example, of a certain size would be needed to build a ramp of KaT Ad6yov T77STEraXLapos yyovE, OKWS tot Aoorro Se TEAcEo. aOKEELatE OL OETEV Ev yPLe'vgs certain dimensions, and so on.7 It was no leisure a7rooop77s EdS 7'7v inaveAOELV. yEW/Ierpl7 EtpEOEaOc that prompted the priests to engage in their 'EAAhaa (Herodotus ii. 109.) studies, but a very real need in their everyday life. Both Herodotus and Aristotle undoubtedly knew BOTH Aristotle and Herodotus agree in following the true story of Egyptian geometry; Herodotus the tradition which attributed an early knowledge gives it to us unadorned. Aristotle, however, canof mathematics and geometry to the Egyptians, but the former goes on to attribute it to the leisure not resist an addition of his own. By the fourth century B.C., with the attention given to it by the of the priestly class, while Herodotus notes its Academy, geometry had become part of a liberal origin in the practical necessity of remeasuring the education. For that there could only be one exland flooded by the Nile each year. How can we reconcile and account for the difference between planation-axoA. How highly Aristotle valued it we may learn from other parts of his works. In the their two views ? Nicomachean Ethics 177b5 he says daXoAov'LE0a We should note that Herodotus is followed by and at 1177b17f. he points out ydp vaeaXoAa'dIoev other ancient writers. Proclus' Summary looks that leisure is one of the prerequisites for the very much as if it is under Herodotean influence, activity of the intellect which constitutes complete even though the portion in which we are interested is based directly or indirectly on the History of human happiness. Again, in the Politics 1337b3of. ' ot &d ro C5 pXTS (T v /LovotLK)v) i&aeav Ev 7atlatj Geometry by Eudemus, a pupil of Aristotle. DioaarvT7) ELp77TaLty l7 7rEltvY, OTEp o7TAAaKtS T7)Y aVcLY dorus Siculus (i. 81) drew his material from HeroavvaoaaL dzOvov daXOAELv w&M Kal aXoAad~EY op0Oe dotus and the Egyptian priesthood among others, Se . and it is interesting to note that he tells us (i. 53. 1) KaAws9. ar77yap &pX7rwdvrowv.../laAAov alp-rov al rEAoS... Herodotus, how the priests sing the praises of Sesostris as -d axoAdc -rv cdxoAoasg a true son of the Ionian trading community, needed their benefactor. Strabo, again (xvi. 2. 24), adto make no such gratuitous additions. vances the same reason as Herodotus, and though C. MACDONALD. there may appear to be a discrepancy in their St. Andrew's College, accounts, Lyons' has shown that they only deUniversity of Sydney. scribe two different types of remeasurement of the land which coexisted and are still in operation to-day. Among modern critics, both Ross2 and OBLIQVO RIVO (C.R. lxiii. 7 f.) Heaths note the difference but go no farther, while I QUITEagree with Mr. Kidd that Horace's Burnet4 prefers Herodotus' account. (1) It is most likely that Herodotus would acquire lymphafugax does not pursue a winding course in Odes ii. 3. 11-12, but I am not convinced that his account of the remeasurement of land from the obliquo means simply 'down-hill'. The stream is I J. Eg. Arch. xii (1926), p. 242. 2 In his edition of the s Great Abydos Inscription. Metaphysics, i, p. I18.. 6 c. 1650 B.C. 3 Greek Mathematics, i, p. 121. 7 A. H. Gardiner, Pap. Anastasi, i, p. 31. 4 Early GreekPhilosophy2, p. 19.

descends on Erythrae, six or seven miles farther east. All this is in accord with Thucydides iii. 24, where the men who escaped from Plataea took the road to Thebes till they had passed the shrine of Androcrates, and then turned east 'to the mountain, to Hysiae and Erythrae', i.e. to Grundy's pass. Their pursuers, following the direct route to Athens, used 'the road to Cithaeron and Dryoscephalae': this can only be the pass followed by the modern highway. JOHNL. MYRES. Oxford.