Which is the most accurate translation of the Elements by Euclid? I have found manybtranslations but there seem to be some differences in each version. I would like to know which is the closest to the original.
Asked
Active
Viewed 2,023 times
5
-
1Could you maybe provide some examples of differences you've found? – David H May 21 '14 at 07:39
-
Are we considering only translations into English? – Servaes May 21 '14 at 07:41
-
1Servaes: I can read French and English, but I am a native speaker if Urdu. I'd like a translation in any of these, though I doubt that there's an Urdu version of Euclid. – A Bajaj May 21 '14 at 07:48
-
See also the web-site linked to this post. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 21 '14 at 08:08
-
In fact, that is one of the translations I had in mind in asking this question. – A Bajaj May 21 '14 at 08:15
2 Answers
3
Regarding English, I think that Heath's edition :
Thomas Heath, The Thirteen Books of Euclid's Elements (1908 - Dover reprint)
in three volumes, with huge apparatus of notes and comemnts, it is still "the best one".
Mauro ALLEGRANZA
- 94,169
-
Is there any major difference in this edition and the original first edition in the public domain? – A Bajaj May 21 '14 at 07:50
-
@ABajaj - I do not think so; it seems to me that it is a reprint of the Cambridge ed of 1908. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 21 '14 at 07:53
2
I think that only Sir Thomas Heath's translation :
"The Thirteen Books of The Elements: Volume 1: Books 1 and 2
Paperback: 443 pages
Publisher: Dover Publications Inc.; 2nd edition edition (2 Jan 2000)
ISBN-10: 0486600882 ISBN-13: 978-0486600888 "
really amounts to something, but to say it is accurate, you may say it contains to much comment to be accurate. (Be prepared for 1 page translation followed by many pages comment per proposition)
Ps the ISBN is only of volume 1, There is also a volume 2 and 3
Willemien
- 6,582
-
1The Green Lion edition of this translation removes essentially all of Heath's commentary. It's also extremely well typeset and formatted, and contains all 13 books in a single volume. – Jack M May 21 '14 at 08:06
-
Would I be missing anything if I get this edition which doesn't have the commentary? – A Bajaj May 21 '14 at 08:07
-
@ABajaj - it depends... Are you more interested in the math side (in which case the commentary can be dispendes with) or in the historical side (in which case I think it is very very useful) ? – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 21 '14 at 09:05
-
1@ABajaj - if you are more interested in the math side, this is very very useful "commntary" : Robin Hartshorne, Geometry: Euclid and Beyond (2005). – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 21 '14 at 09:07
-
Mauro ALLEGRANZA: Are there any prerequisites for reading that? I only know some naive set theory, calculus, high school algebra and geometry. – A Bajaj May 21 '14 at 09:10
-
@ABajaj - no; Euclid's Elements is the first complete math textbook in the human history; thus, strictly speaking, it requires no prerequisite at all ... Hartshorne is a good book, with an "mixed" historical-mathematical approach. At the beginning is not difficult; of course, it "moves" towards a certain degree of abstraction. You can browse at the Intro in Amazon, through the link in my comment above. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA May 21 '14 at 09:32
-
@ABajaj I've been reading the version without commentary and I find it to be very readable and comprehensible. – Jack M May 26 '14 at 19:29