670 PTOLEMAEUS. the plan we intend to adopt in this article. Pto- lemy stands before us in two distinct points of view : as a mathematician and astronomer ; and as a geographer. There must of course be a separate treatment of these two characters. As an astro- nomer, it must be said that the history of the science, for a long train of centuries, presents nothing but comments on his writings : to treat the history of the latter would be so far to write that of astro- nomy itself. We shall, therefore, confine our- selves to the account of these writings, their prin- cipal contents, and the chief points of their biblio- graphical annals, without reference to commentators, or to the effect of the writings themselves, on the progress of science. And, though obliged to do this by the necessity of selection which our limits impose, we are also of opinion that the plan is otherwise the most advantageous. For, owing to that very close connection of Ptolemy's name with the history of astronomy of which we have spoken, the accessible articles on the subject are so discur- sive, that the reader may lose sight of the distinc- tion between Ptolemy and his followers. The two other great leaders, Aristotle and Euclid, are pre- cisely in the same predicament. Of Ptolemy himself we know absolutely nothing but his date, which an astronomer always leaves in his works. He certainly observed in A. D. 139, at Alexandria ; and Suidas and others call him Alexandrintis. If the canon presently mentioned be genuine (and it is not doubted), he survived Antoninus, and therefore was alive a. d. 161. Old manuscripts of his works call him Pelusiensis and Pheludiensis. But Theodorus, surnamed Melite- uiota (Fabric. Bibl.Graec. vol. x. p. 411), in the thirteenth centurj^ describes him as of Ptolemais in the Thebaid, called Hermeius. Accordingly, our per- sonal knowledge of one of the most illustrious men that ever lived, both in merits and fame, and who lesidedand wrote in what might well be called the sister university to Athens, is limited to two accounts of one circumstance, between the uncertainties of which it is impossible to decide, and which give his birth to opposite sides of the Nile. Weidler {Hist. Astron. p. 177) cites some description of his personal appearance from an Arabic writer, who does not state his source of information. Some writers call him king Ptolemy, probably misled by the name, which is nevertheless known to have been borne by private persons, besides the astro- nomer. On this, and some other gossip not worth citing, because no way Greek, see Halma's preface, p. Ixi. Ptolemy is then, to us, the author of certain works ; and appears in the character of pro- mulgator of his own researches, and deliverer and extender of those of Hipparchus. In this last character there is some difficulty about his writings. It is not easy to distinguish him from his illustrious predecessor. It is on this account that we have deferred specific mention of Hipparchus, as an astronomer, to the present article. The writings of Ptolemy (independently of the work on geography, which will be noted apart) are as follows : — 1. Me7oA7j ^vvra^is Trjs hcrrpovofxias^ as Fa- bricius has it, and as it is very commonly called : but the Greek, both in Grynoeus and Halnia. begins with txaSt]nariKris avvrd^^ws ^i€Kiop irfxaTOV. But the Tetrabiblus presently mentioned, the work on astrology, is also avj/ra^is, in Fabricius fiad-mj-aTtKi^ crvyra^is : and the heading McUhemattca SytUaxis^ PTOLEMAEUS. in several places of Schweiger, Hoffmann*, &c., would rather puzzle a beginner. To distinguish the two, the Arabs probably called the greater work fJLeydXT], and afterwards yueyio-rrj : the title Almagest is a compound of this last adjective and the Arabic article, and must be considered as the European as well as the Arabic vernacular title. To this name we shall adhere ; for though Syntaccis be more Greek, yet, as there are two syntaxes of Ptolemy, and others of other writers, we prefer a well-known and widely-spread word, adopted by all middle Latin writers, and clothed with nume- rous historical associations. It reminds us, too, of those who preserved and communicated the work in question ; and but for whose just appreciation it would have probably been lost. On the manuscripts of the Almagest, see Fa- bricius {Bill. Graec. vol. v. p. 281) and Halma's preface, p. xlv. &c. Doppelrnayer (we copy Halma) says the manuscript used by Grynoeus, the first therefore printed from, was given to the Nuremberg library by Regiomontanus, to whom it was given (probably as a legacy) by Cardinal Bessarion. De Murrcoald not find this manuscript at Nuremberg, but only that of Theon's commentary, given by Regiomontanus, as described : but Montignot tes- tifies to having caused it to be consulted for his version of tjie catalogue. Halma somewhat hastily concludes that there are difficulties in the way of supposing this manuscript to have been used : but public libraries do sometimes lose their manuscripts. This Basle edition may count as one manuscript unknown. Halma corrected its text by various others, in the Royal Library at Paris, principally five, as follows : — First, a Pans manuscript (No. 2389) nearly perfect, cited by some who have used it as of the sixth century, but pretty certainly not later than the eighth. It bears a presentation in- scription to John Lascaris, of the imperial family, who is known to have been sent by Lorenzo di Medicis twice to Constantinople, after its oc- cupation by the Turks, to procure manuscripts. Secondly, a Florence manuscript of the twelfth cen- tury, marked 2390. Thirdly, a Venice manuscript, marked 313, supposed to be of the eleventh century. Fourthly, two Vatican manuscripts, marked 560 and 184, of about the twelfth century. These Florence, Venice, and Vatican manuscripts were probably returned to their original owners at the peace of 1815. The seizures made by the French in Italy have procured us the only two editions of Euclid and Ptolemy which give various readings. The first appearance of the Almagest in print is in the epitome left by Regiomontanus, and edited by Grossch and Roemer, Venice, 1496, folio, headed " Epytoma Joannis de monte regio in al- magestum Ptolomei." The dedication to Cardinal Bessarion calls it the epitome of Purbach, who com- menced it, and his pupil Regiomontanus, who fi- nished it. It is a full epitome, omitting, in parti-
- So far was this appropriation of the word
Syntaxis carried, that it was applied to various as- trolmjical works having nothing to do with Ptolemy. Hoifman has two works in his list which he sup- poses to be English translations of the astrological syntaxis, because they bear as titles " the Compost of Phtolomeus." We have one of them ; which is a common astrological almanack, having just as much relation to Ptolemy as the current number of Moore, namely, a folly in common with him-
