Hebrew Version of Secretum Secretorum

The Hebrew Version of the "Secretum Secretorum," a Medival Treatise Ascribed to Aristotle.
Introduction
Author(s): M. Gaster
Source: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Oct., 1908), pp.
1065-1084
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25210670 .
Accessed: 31/03/2014 14:46
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 Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and
Ireland.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 190.247.33.27 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:46:05 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1065
XXVI.
THE HEBREW VERSION OF THE ?'SEC RET UM
SECRETORUM/'
A MEDIAVAL TREATISE ASCRIBED TO ARISTOTLE.
Published
for
the
first
time
from
the MSS.
of
the British
Museum,
Oxford,
and Munich.
With
an
Introduction and an
English
Translation.
INTRODUCTION.
By M. (?ASTER.
1. Great
was
the
reputation
of
Aristotle in the Middle
Ages.
His
sway
was
undisputed,
and
whatever bore his
name was sure to be treated
as
the
expression
of the
highest
wisdom. But that fame rested
mostly
on
Arabic
translations and
interpretations
of his
philosophical
writings. Along
with the
genuine writings,
however,
also
other treatises
were
circulated which were
ascribed to
Aristotle,
with what
justification
has not
yet
been
settled,
but
probably
because
some
of the ideas
put
into his mouth
seem
to have been culled from his
genuine writings
and
others
reflected,
more or
less
accurately,
views and
opinions
contained in his
writings.
Among
such
pseudo-Aristotelian
writings,
none
enjoyed
wider circulation than obtained
by
the treatise which claimed to
represent
the
"
Politeia
"
of
Aristotle. It contributed much
more
to the
reputation
of
Aristotle than
any
other of his
writings,
and
enjoyed
a
far
greater
popularity
than
any
popular
book of the Middle
Ages.
It claimed to be the
quintessence
of
political
wisdom and statecraft
:
the last word
on
the rule of
body
and
mind,
the treasure-house of occult
knowledge,
the
deepest mystery
in the conduct of man.
It was
known
that Alexander the hero of the East had been the
pupil
of
1066 THE SECRETUM
SECRETORUM.
Aristotle. He had been in constant
communication with
his
master,
and letters
purporting
to have
passed
between
master and
pupil
were
circulated from
very
olden times.
The
prowess
of
Alexander,
the
victories he
easily
won,
and the facile manner
in which he
governed
the most
diverse races
deeply impressed
the mind of the
people.
All this
was
attributed to the wise
teaching
and the
prudent
counsel vouchsafed to Alexander
by
his
great
master
Aristotle. The
same
teaching,
it
was
assumed,
if known
and
followed,
would hold
good,
then,
for
any
successor of
Alexander. Thus
a
book has been
compiled
which
purported
to contain that
very
teaching
of Aristotle sent
to his
pupil
as a
great mystery.
If it
were to be of
any
use,
it must needs be
comprehensive
:
he had to be
taught,
or
better,
directed how to
govern
the
people,
how to select
councillors and
advisers,
how to
arrange
his
battles,
how
to
manage
his
finances,
how to select
trusty messengers
to
conduct
safely
and
satisfactorily
all
diplomatic negotiations,
how to choose administrators tit to look after the affairs of
State,
how to
judge
mens
aptitudes
from their outward
appearance.
But this was not all
:
he had to be
taught
also how to conduct
himself,
how to retain and
strengthen
his
physical
health,
how to act in all seasons
of the
year,
how to
keep
measure in
eating, drinking,
and other forms
of
pastime,
and
some
indications had to be
given
of the
secret
properties
of stones and
metals,
which would be
useful to him for his
personal
benefit and for
ruling
the
peoples.
2. A book of this kind
was sure
to be received
favourably
and to be
assiduously
circulated,
if not so
much
by
the
rulers,
at least
by
the ruled. It has at
no
time been
safe,
and still less
so
in olden
times,
to tell the truth to
kings
and
princes
;
but under the
protection
of
Aristotle,
covered
by
his
great reputation
and
justified by
the brilliant
results obtained in the
case of
Alexander,
such
a
venture
could be carried out with
impunity.
Sound and
good
THE SECRETUM SECRETORUM. 1067
advice could thus be
given
to those who held unlimited
sway
over
the
body
and
property
of their
subjects,
in
the
guise
of 'secret statecraft.' What the
"Apologue"
taught
under the form of a
tale
or
fable,
the
"
Regimen
Principum"
taught
in the form of
a
lesson of the
past.
Rules of conduct
were
inculcated
by
the
"
Apologue,"
interspersed
with maxims and followed
by
'
moralisations
'
in books like the
"
Panchatantra,"
the
"Syntipas,"
and
others. Akin to
these,
yet differing
in
form,
are
books
like "Barlaam
Josaphat"
and in
a
higher degree
such
a
book
as
this
one,
ascribed to Aristotle. In order to enhance
its
importance
it is described
as a
deep
Secret,
as
the
mysterious
wisdom of
State,
revealed
only
to Alexander
and
given
to the world
by
a
miraculous chance
through
the intervention of
one
of the Mohammedan Khalifs.
Through
the
investigations
of
Knust, Steinschneider,
F?rster, Suchier, Hertz,
and
Steele,
one can
form
some
estimate of the wide
popularity
of this book and of the
deep
influence it has exercised
upon
the literature of
many
countries. There is
scarcely
any
European language
into which that book has not been
translated,
and
numerous
have been the
poetical renderings
of its contents.
It
appealed
too
strongly
to the instincts of the
peoples
not
to be taken
up
and to be held
up
as
the "Mirror of
Kings."
3. The
bibliography
of the innumerable editions and
MSS. in the various
languages
in the libraries of
Europe
has not
yet
been
completed.
There is no
library
which
does not contain a
number of
copies
of the
"
Secretum."
In the
"
Centralblatt f?r
Bibliothekswesen,"
vol.
vi, 1889,
p.
1
ff.,
F?rster has made
an
attempt
at
cataloguing
the
Latin MSS. and
partly
the translations in other
languages.
He enumerates
no
less than 207 Latin
MSS.,
and W.
Hertz,
in his "Gesammelte
Schriften,"
pp.
156-61,
and
p. 165,
No.
4,
supplies
a
bibliography,
a
brief sketch of the
history
of the
"
Secretum,"
and
a
goodly
list of Arabic
J.R.A.S. 1908. 69
1068
THE SECRETUM SECRETORUM.
MSS. This treatise has also been
versified, and,
to limit
myself
to
English
versions,
we
have the
poem
of
Lydgate,
and his
continuator,
Burgh.
R.
Steele,
in
editing
this
poem (E.E.T.S.,
London,
1894)
has
given
a
succinct and
yet
full and lucid
history
of this text.
One of the books
in Gowers
"
Confessio Amantis
"
is but
a
rhymed
transcript
of
part
of this
"
Secretum."
Roger
Bacon wrote a com
mentary
on it. There
are
besides in
English
a
good
number of ancient translations
more or
less
amplified,
some
from the
French,
and also
a
few from the Latin.
4. Without
attempting
here to
disentangle
the web
of these
numerous
versions,
or
to establish the
literary
filiation and connection between
them,
it suffices for
our
purposes
to establish the fact that there
are
at least
two
recensions,
a
shorter and
a
longer
one,
and that both
go
back to ancient Latin texts not earlier than the
twelfth
century.
5. These Latin texts in their turn rest
on
Arabic
originals.
In the Arabic also at least two recensions
are
known,
a
short and
a
long
one.
As
we
shall
see
later
on,
a
tliird text must have existed in Arabic
differing
from these two. It must have been much
shorter than either of those hitherto
come
to
light.
This book had shared the fate of all
popular
books.
Copyists
took liberties with the contents. There
are
few
MSS.
or even
prints
which
agree
fully
with
one
another.
In
some,
chapters
are
missing;
in
others,
chapters
are
added.
Moreover,
this book
covers a
wide field
;
portions
have been detached and treated
as
separate writings.
The
"
Regimen
Sanitatis,"
i.e. the direction for
preserving
one's
health,
applied
to wider circles. Men in affluent
circumstances
could
carry
out
equally
well
as
kings,
the
medical
prescriptions
contained in that section. And this
portion
has,
in
fact,
been
detached,
and was
translated and
circulated
separately. Similarly,
the
chapter
on
precious
stones and their secret virtues
appealed
to the students
1069
of
Lapidaries
and to
alchemists,
and that section
was
also elaborated and
amplified,
and it led
an
independent
existence.
Again,
the treatise
on
Physiognomy
contained
in
our
book has later
on
been
incorporated
into the works
of Albertus
Magnus,
Duns
Scotus,
and
others,
and is the
primary
source
for the literature of
physiognomies
in the
Middle
Ages.
6. In the
light
of the latter
development
of the
"Secretum,"
and the
separate
existence of
some
of its
chapters,
the
question
may
be asked whether these
chapters
had
always
formed
part
of the
original composition
or
whether
they
had been
incorporated
into it at
a
later
stage, swelling
the contents and
ensuring
for it
a
larger
circulation.
Only
on
that
supposition
an answer can
be
found for
some
of the
problems
connected with the
literary history
of that
book,
and the first
step
towards
arriving
at
any
solution is to
compare
the various texts
and translations extant.
7. Two
names are
mentioned
as
authors of the Latin
translations?one,
Johannes
Hispalensis,
a
converted
Jew,
who flourished
1135-1150,
and
another,
a
certain
Philip
Clericus,
of uncertain
date,
but
according
to
F?rster,
of
the
beginning
of the thirteenth
century
:
this date
may
be taken as
the best
authenticated,
corroborated
by
the
fact that
only
writers of the thirteenth
century
are
acquainted
with that translation. A third Latin translation
may
have also
existed,
the basis for the old
Spanish.
Examining
those first two translations
more
closely,
it will
be found that Johannes
Hispalensis
translated
only
one
treatise of this
book,
the "Rule of Health" and "The
Four Seasons"
(Book
xii),
accompanied by
a
short intro
duction
describing
the
finding
of the book in the
temple
of
the
Sun,
and
stating
that Aristotle had written it at the
request
of Alexander. He does not
seem
to have trans
lated
any
other section of the
book,
and
yet
he calls it
by
the
same
Arabic
name,
"Sir Alasrar"
(corrupted
in the
1070
Latin),
as
the
complete
work. He
evidently
knew
only
so
much of the book.
Philip,
on
the other
hand,
translates
the full
text,
which bears the
same name. It
contains,
in
addition to the
chapters
translated
by
Job.
Hispalensis,
the
rule of
princes,
the
manner of
warfare,
the battle
array,
the choice of
councillors,
the
mysterious properties
of
stones,
some
astrological
sections,
etc. In later times these
two versions have been
blended,
and the work of the
one
mixed
up
with that of the other.
8. In
comparing,
then,
the various Latin translations
among
themselves,
great discrepancy
will be found in the
order and
sequence
of these
very
chapters,
and in the
division of the texts into books and
chapters.
The
"
Rule
of Health
"
will be found either after book ii or
after
book
vii,
and in other
respects
the order of the books
and
chapters
differs in these versions and recensions.
9. The Arabic
original
from which the Latin is the
translation,
although
extant in
many
libraries in
Europe,
has hitherto not been
published.
Steinschneider, however,
has examined some
of the most
interesting,
and he has
compared
the Arabic with the Latin of
Philip
("Ueber
setzungen,"
p.
995,
cf.
p.
245
ff'.,
where
a
full
bibliography
is to be
found).
He has established that in the Arabic
texts
a
similar confusion is found in the division of the
text into ten or
eight
books,
and in the order in which
they
follow
upon
one
another,
agreeing
in
part
with,
but
also
disagreeing
from,
the Latin. The
same
question
arises?Do these Arabic MSS.
represent
a
late
stage
of
development,
when out of
many
independent
treatises
one
single
book had been
evolved,
or
has the
"
Secretum
"
been
preserved
in its
original
form ? Some of
these,
like
the treatise translated
by
Joh.
Hispalensis,
may already
have had the title
"
Secretum,"
and others
may
also have
had the
same
title
or one
approximating
it,
and this
identity
of titles facilitated the
blending
of all of them
into
one
book.
1071
10. In addition to the Latin translations there is
now
a Hebrew version
which,
though
it also rests
on an
Arabic
original, represents,
however,
a
recension other than that
of the MSS. hitherto known. It differs from each of
these
recensions,
and
may
help
us
to reconstruct the
history
of this book. In
point
of time it is at least
con
temporary,
if not older
than,
any
other translation of the
full
text,
and it is
an
open question
whether
Philip
has not made use
of the Hebrew in his Latin translation.
In
one
instance he
distinctly
refers to the Hebrew
name
of
a
bird of which he
gives
also the Arabic
names.
The
reference
may
be
a
later
interpolation,
as
this Latin text
offers
many
examples
of
a
double
translation,
due
no
doubt to
marginal glosses,
which later
copyists
transferred
to the
body
of the text
;
but it
may
just
as
well be due
to
Philip
himself.
11.
Judging
from ancient
quotations
in Hebrew
literature the
"
Secretum
"
was
known
already
at the
beginning
of the thirteenth
century,
and is
quoted
in
the
language
of this
very
translation. The
style
also
points
to that
period
and to
Spain
as
its home. At
that time
a
number of books of
a
similar character
were
translated from Arabic into
Hebrew,
such
as
the
"
Maxims of the
Philosophers,"
the
legendary
"
History
of
Alexander,"
the
philosophical writings
of
Aristotle,
genuine
as
well as
spurious.
Steinschneider in his
great
work
on
the translations from Arabic into Hebrew
(and indirectly
into
Latin)
deals
exhaustively
with this
literature. One
man
stands out
prominently
towards
the end of the twelfth
century
as
author,
poet,
and
skilled
translator,
Judah
Al-Hharizi,
who flourished in
the
beginning
of the thirteenth
century (1190-1218).
12. The translation of the "Secretum" has also been
ascribed to him. Some have doubted this
authorship,
but
no
proof
to the
contrary
has
been
brought
forward.
Hharizi is the author of the
translation of the
1072
"
Maxims of the
Philosophers"
("Mussare
ha-Pilosophim "),
from the Arabic of Honein ibn Ishak
(latest
edition,
A.
Lowenthal, Frankfurt,
1896).
He is also the author
of the
legendary
"
Life of
Alexander,"
the
English
trans
lation of which I
published
in the Journal of the
Royal
Asiatic
Society,
1897. Hharizi
seems to have made his
own
the
cycle
of the Alexander
legends, embracing
the
correspondence
between Alexander and Aristotle. It
is not
a mere
coincidence that in most of the MSS.
the
"
Maxims of
Philosophers,"
the
"
History
of the Death
of
Alexander,"
the
"
Letters of Aristotle to
Alexander,"
and those of
"
Alexander to his mother
Olympias
"
should
be found to follow
immediately
after the
"
Secretum
Secretorum." No doubt these
writings
were
designed
to
form
a
complete cycle
on
the life of Alexander. Also
linguistic parallels
can
be found between the
"
Secretum
"
and the
"
Maxims,"
proving
them to be the work of
one
author.
"
Maxims,"
book
ii,
ch.
4,
"
the letter of
Aristotle,"
is
an
abstract of the
"
Secretum,"
as
shown
by
Lowenthal
(" Sinnspr?che
der
Philosophen,"
Berlin, 1896,
p.
112
ff.)
;
and the Hebrew
text,
ed.
Lowenthal,
p.
27
ff.,
is
strikingly
similar to the Hebrew text of the
"
Secretum."
13.
Hharizi,
the undoubted author of the Hebrew
translation of the
"
Maxims,"
could not have borrowed
verbatim
a
few
passages
from the
"
Secretum
"
to
incorporate
them with his
own
translation of the whole
of the
"
Maxims." It
is,
on
the
contrary,
much easier to
explain
this
similarity by assuming
the author of
one
translation to be the author of the
other,
for he would
use
the
same
language
in both
cases.
Similarity
of
language,
nay,
in
some
instances,
absolute
identity,
runs
through
both books.
They
differ,
on
the other
hand,
very
considerably
from another collection of
"
Maxims
"
translated also from the Arabic under the title
"
Choice
of
Pearls,"
and ascribed to Aben Gabirol. There is
no
valid
reason
why
the translation of the
"
Secretum
"
should
not be the work of Hharizi. Another
argument
may
also
be adduced to make
Hharizi'sauthorship
of the translation
probable.
For
as
it
was
utilised in the thirteenth
century
it could not have been translated into Hebrew later than
towards the end of the twelfth
century,
and
no
quotation
from that book has been traced in Hebrew literature
anterior to the
period
of Hharizi.
14. This Hebrew
version,
preserved
in
a
large
number
of
MSS.,
some
of
which,
of the
beginning
of the fourteenth
century,
is the
same
in all.
Only slight
variations,
due
to the
negligence
of the
copyist,
and minor differences
in the
numbering
of the books and
chapters,
mark the
difference between
one
MS. and the other. In
comparing
this version with the Arabic
we
find
that,
though agreeing
in the main
as
far
as
the order of
chapters
and contents
with the so-called shorter Arabic
recension,
yet
it
differs also
greatly
from it. It has
many
chapters
and
paragraphs
for which no
parallels
in the other versions
have hitherto been discovered. The differences between
the Hebrew and the Latin of
Philip
are
still
greater.
It is not
possible
to enter
upon
a
minute examination of
these differences
so
long
as
the Arabic texts remain
unpublished.
I must limit
myself
here to the
more
important points
in which the Hebrew
agrees
with
or
disagrees
from either of these
versions,
as
the results
obtained
may
have
a
distinct
bearing
on
the
history
of the
"
Secretum."
15. The shorter Arabic recension is divided into
eight
books of
unequal length,
and the
longer
recension into
ten,
also of
unequal length.
The Latin is divided into ten
books and the Hebrew into
eight,
like the shorter Arabic.
But this difference is more
apparent
than real. Certain
sections included in one or
other of these
chapters
in the
shorter Arabic
are
numbered
separately
in the
longer,
and
thus the number of the divisions is increased without
increasing
the contents.
1074 THE SECRETUM SECRETORUM.
16. What
purports
to be
an
exchange
of letters between
Aristotle and
Alexander,
explaining
the
origin
of this
work,
forms
a
kind of Introduction. Then follows the
Prologue
on
the
part
of the first
discoverer,
who
pretended having
found it in a
Temple
of the Sun dedicated to
Asklepios.
He had
gone
in search of it at the
bidding
of the
King
of
the
Faithful,
and
having
found
it,
translated it from the
Greek into
'
Rumi
'
and thence
into Arabic. The author of
this translation is the well-known
Yahya
ibn
Batrik,
i.e. John the
son
of
Patricius,
a
Syrian
freedman under the
Kalif
al-Mamun,
c.
800. The word 'Rumi' cannot be
translated otherwise than
as
meaning
'
Syriac.'
Whether
Yahya
was
the double
translator,
first into
Syriac
and then
into
Arabic,
is
an
open question.
No
one
has
as
yet
even
touched it. If it be true that
Yahya
knew neither Greek
nor
Latin,
then he could
only
translate the work from
Syriac
into
Arabic,
and
we
shall have to assume
that
prior
to his time
some one else had translated the book from the
Greek into
Syriac.
It is not
unlikely,
then,
that
on
the
occasion of the second translation
Yahya
may
have added
to the
originally
shorter
compilation
of the
"
Secretum
"
some other treatises which
may
have existed
independently
and which went
now
to swell the bulk of the book.
17. There is
some
internal evidence for such
a
growth
of the book. I have mentioned above that Johannes
Hispalensis
had translated
only
one or
two of such
treatises which form
now
chapters
in the
"
Secretum,"
notably
the
"
Rule of Health
"
and the
"
Four
Seasons,"
which had
an
Introduction similar to that found
now at
the head of the "Secretum." If we
turn to the
Arabic,
Hebrew,
and Latin texts
we
shall find that the
greatest
difference between these versions is found in the
place
assigned
to these
very
treatises and to that
on
Physiognomy
in the order of
chapters
of the
"
Secretum."
18. The Introduction finishes with
a
table of contents.
If
we
examine it
more
closely
we
shall be struck
by
the
1075
peculiar
fact that those two
large
treatises
on
the
"
Rule
of Health
"
and on
"
Physiognomy
"
are
not mentioned
at all under
separate headings, though they
are
found
included in the
book,
whilst much smaller
chapters figure
there
as
separate
Books. It is a
clear indication that when
the table of contents
was
drawn
up
these treatises had
not
yet
been
incorporated
into the
"Secretum,"
and were
added later
on
at
a new
revision of the text. The table
was
left
as
it
originally
stood,
and each translator
or
copyist
then
arranged
the
interpolated portions
as
best he
chose. Hence those
profound
differences in the
position
of the "Rule of Health." In the
longer
Arabic and in the
Latin and in those
dependent
on
the
Latin,
it is found in
Book
ii,
and the
"Physiognomy"
is
placed
either at the
very
end of the
"
Secretum
"
as
in the
Latin,
or
follows
upon
the
"
Rule of Health
"
as
in the
longer
Arabic. The
saine
holds
good
also for the
chapter
on
the
"
Occult
properties
of
precious
stones and
plants."
In the Latin and in the old
English
translation based
on
it
(ed. Steele)
it is found
immediately
after the
"
Rule of
Health,"
whilst in both the
Arabic texts it forms the
concluding chapter.
19. In the division of the "Secretum" into Books the
Hebrew
agrees
in the main with the Latin
or
longer
Arabic
Some
are
exceedingly
small and consist of
only
one
chapter,
such
as
Books
v
and vi. But
a
close examination of the
Hebrew will show
a
differentiation in the
marking
of the
divisions,
not without
import
for the
history
of the text.
The word
TDK?,
which I have translated
'
Book/
is found
in the MSS. of Oxford and Munich
heading only
certain
chapters
which in accordance with the table of contents
are
the
beginnings
of
new
divisions,
such as
i-iii, iv,
v
(in
the
present
edition marked
vii),
vi
(viii),
vii
(ix),
viii
(xiii).
The other divisions with
one
exception
(x)
are
called with
a
different
title,
"$&,
'Gate/
even
those
very
elaborate
sections
on
Physiognomy
(xi)
and on
the
"
Rule of Health
"
(xii).
Section
x
has
no
heading
at all
;
it is neither
'
chapter
'
nor
'
Book.'
Evidently
the
copyist
was
in
some
doubt how to mark
it,
and he left it without
any
distinctive title. The same
indecision and confusion
between
'
book
'
and
'
chapter
'
are
found in the
longer
Arabic. The shorter does not mark the subdivisions.
20. If
we
deduct those books and
chapters
not found
in the table of
contents,
which
cause
all the confusion
in the MSS. of the
"Secretum,"
we
reduce it to what
must have been the
more
primitive
state. It is freed
from the encumbrance of the
astrological,
medical,
and
physiognomical
sections. Guided
by
the
comparison
between these
recensions,
part
of the alchemistic
portion
will also have to be
eliminated,
and the
chapter
on
the
"
Occult
properties
of
stones,"
the ancient
Lapidarium,
will have to be reduced to
a
much smaller
proportion
than found in the later and
more
elaborate form of the
"
Secretum." Of
Astrology proper looming
so
largely
in
the later
European
recensions the Hebrew has
only
a
faint trace and could not have been more in the Arabic
original
which the translator follows most
faithfully.
In
many
instances he
also,
like the
Latin,
gives
even
the
Arabic technical terms and the Arabic
names
of
scarce
birds and
gems,
sometimes
accompanied by
a
Hebrew
translation,
but
as
often
as
not
only
in
Arabic,
for he
had
evidently
not found
a
proper equivalent
for them
in Hebrew. No doubt in time
an
Arabic text will be
found
corresponding exactly
with the Hebrew.
21. The elimination of those
chapters
not
only
rounds
off the text of the
"Secretum,"
but
helps
also to trace
it back to its
supposed
Greek
sources.
It also modifies
the results to which
previous investigators
had arrived
as to the character of the first
compiler.
So
long
as
the
Physiognomy,
the
Hygiene,
and the
astrological
sections
were
treated
as
essential
portions
of the
original
com
position,
it
was
natural to
suppose
that the author must
have been
a
physician,
who,
according
to the
knowledge
displayed
in those
chapters,
may
have lived in the
eighth
or
ninth
century.
If, however,
those
very
chapters
are
later
interpolations
the real book
may
have been
com
posed
earlier than the ninth
century,
and the author
not in
any way
connected with medical science. It
so
happens
that for those tracts F?rster has shown
that the
Physiognomy
is based
on
the Greek treatise of
Polemon
on
Physiognomy,
and Steele has
pointed
out
the work of another
author,
Diocles Caristes
(B.c. 320),
as
the
source for one
section of the
"
Rule of Health."
The immediate Greek author for the whole of the
Hygiene
or
"
Rule of Health
"
has not
yet
been dis
covered,
but all the libraries have not
yet
been searched.
22.
Having
thus cleared the
way,
we
may
now
proceed
with
our
enquiry
a
few
steps
further,
and endeavour to
trace the
remaining portion
of the book to Greek
sources
or to
parallels
in the Greek
literature,
and to
fix,
if
possible,
the
place
where the
"
Secretum
"
has been
compiled
for the first time.
23. So much has
already
been written that
apparently
little
can
be added. All the scholars
are
unanimous
that the Greek text of this book is no
longer
existent.
Has it
ever
existed ? The recent
discovery
of the
"
Politeia
"
of Aristotle
has,
at
any
rate,
shown that
there is some substratum of truth in the
allegation
that
this book
was a
translation,
though indirectly,
from
a
Greek
original.
But like all such books of
a
popular
character,
it
was more in the nature of
a
compilation
and
paraphrase
than
a
literal translation. It was
to be
a
"Mirror of
Kings,"
and
served,
as
already
remarked,
as a
centre for the
crystallization
of
many
maxims and
teachings
on
the
government
of
kings
and the rule of nations.
24. The
background throughout
the book is Persia and
India. Alexander dreads the Persian nobles. Persian
kings
are
referred to
;
their advice to
princes,
their
maxims of
government,
their customs and habits
are
1078
often mentioned. Greeks
come in for
very
little
mention,
Indian
teaching
and Indian tales
are
much
more
often
referred to. It would be
an
interesting subject
for
scholars of Indian literature to discover the
sources
of
the statements which
are
here
on
many
occasions
put
into the mouth of the Indians. But Persia remains the
land to which the
teachings
of Aristotle
are
sent,
for
Persia is the centre of the
political activity
of Alexander.
It is to that
part
of the world that
we
must trace the
older form of this
book,
and
not,
as some
have
suggested,
to
carry
it
as
far west
as
Egypt.
The allusion to chess
is another
argument
for
seeking
the
origin
of the book
in Persia
or
Western Asia.
Through
Persia this
royal
game
has
come
to
Europe,
and has retained to
a
great
extent the Persian nomenclature. And in the
"
Secretum
"
the
king
with his vizier and
scribes,
with his rich
garments
and
costly array,
is
an
undoubted
copy
of the court of
Persia under the
early
Khalifs. This reference to Persian
and to Indian literature of maxims and
apologues
points
to
a
definite time
when,
and to certain definite
influence under
which,
this
compilation
may originally
have been started. It must be after the time of the
introduction of
"
Syntipas
"
and
"
Panchatantra
"
into
the old Persian
literature,
and after the translation had
been made into Pehlevi
or
into old
Syriac (" Kalilag
Va-Dammag
"),
since when these books became the
literary
property
of the Western nations.
(In
one or
two instances
we
may
trace Gnostic
influences,
and
especially teachings
which
approximate
some
of the views entertained
by
the
Sufis
or
the
pure Brethren.)
25. This
book, then,
is
a
compilation consisting
of divers
smaller
treatises,
of
many
times,
and of different
origins,
all
grouped
round the central
portion,
the
"
Rule of
Kings,"
the Mirror held
up
to the
king by
the wise teacher
Aristotle,
the Guide
by
which he is to rule the nations
subdued
by
him
or
who
owe
him
allegiance
and
fealty.
1079
This is also the true
purport
of those Indian
works, which,
like
"
Syntipas"
and
"
Kalilah,"
spread
so
far and had
so
profound
an
influence
on
the literature of the Middle
Ages.
Similar
"
Guides
"
are
known to have existed in Greek.
There
are
"
Mirrors
"
or
instructions to
kings,
such
as
that
of
Agapetos,
the teacher of the
Emperor
Justinian,
or
that
of
pseudo-Isokrates.
This literature will
help
us
also in
the further elucidation of the
origin
and date of the oldest
form of the
"
Secretum."
26.
Among
the books which
came
from India and were
destined to
play
an
important
r?le in the literature of the
West,
is the famous Buddhist
legend
known
as
the
legend
of
"
Barlaam and
Josaphat,"
or
Joasaph.
Here
we
have
a
book which has
undergone
a
strange
transformation.
Originally
a
Buddhist
"Life,"
it has become
a
collection
of
legends
and
apologues,
with
a
distinct
theological
colour
and
tendency.
It has become
an
apology
of
Christianity
and of asceticism. The immediate source
of the Greek
version has been traced to Persia or
Western Asia. Some
place
it in the Sabbas cloister in Palestine
(Krumbacher,
Byz. Litteraturg.,
2nd
ed.,
p.
886
ff.).
The Greek author
has not been satisfied with
merely changing Buddasaph
into
Joasaph,
but he has woven
into his
romance
the whole
"Apology"
of
Aristides,as
discovered
byArmytage
Robinson,
and has no
doubt laid under contribution also
many
other
writings
not
yet
identified. One of
these, then,
seems
to have been
a
"Mirror of the
King," placed
into the
mouth of
Joasaph (pp.
308 ff. and 331
ff.,
ed.
Boissonade).
This
"
Mirror of the
King
"
agrees
in the main with the
above-mentioned metrical
"
Mirror of
Kings
"
of
Agapetos,
who lived at the
beginning
of the sixth
century.
The
date for the
composition
of
"
Barlaam
"
is assumed
now
to be about the first half of the seventh
century.
It has
also been demonstrated
by
K. Praechter
(Byz.
Zeitschrift,
ii,
pp.
444-460)
that the version in
"
Barlaam
"
is not
directly
borrowed from
Agapetos,
and that both
are
pointing
to
an
older
source common
to them. In some of
the
general
views
expressed
one
may
recognise
in both
these
"
Mirrors
"
the influence of the Fathers of the
Church,
Basilios and
Gregory
of
Nazianz,
who follow more
or
less the
'example*
of
pseudo-Isokrates
and
Agapetos.
But the contents of the
"
Mirror
"
in Barlaam is not
exhausted
by
the reference to these
sources.
27. If
we now
compare
the last-named
"
Mirror
"
with
some
of the
portions
contained in the
"
Secretum,"
we
shall find
a
similarity perhaps
no
less
striking
than the
similarity
between the other Greek Mirrors and the
writings
of the Fathers of the Church. It must not be
forgotten
that the
"
Secretum
"
is known to us
only
through
the Arabic
translation,
which rests
on a
previous
translation made from the Greek into
Syriac.
The Arabic
translator,
however faithful he
may
have
been,
could
scarcely
be
expected
to make his
version,
in fact
a
third
version,
tally
with that in
"
Barlaam,"
with which it
might
have been
originally
identical,
for this had since
become
part
of another
though
a
different
compilation
which has also
undergone,
to
a
certain
extent,
the
manipu
lation of the authors who have embodied it into their
romance. A
"
Mirror
"
passing through Syriac
and Arabic
into Hebrew and Latin could with
difficulty
be
compared
with the
same
"Mirror"
passing through
some
Greek
intermediaries into
Agapetos
and "Barlaam." And
yet
in
spite
of these different translators and
editors,
sufficient
points
of resemblance
can be found between "Barlaam"
(Agapetos)
and the
"
Secretum."
28. This relation between
"
Barlaam,"
Agapetos,
and
"
Secretum
"
should
cause no
surprise,
for the
"
Secretum
"
has
undoubtedly
been
compiled
under similar conditions
which
prevailed
at the
compilation
of
"
Barlaam." Of
these two the
"
Secretum
"
must be the
older,
since
Agapetos
in the sixth
century
had utilised
already
a
similar text for his
"
Mirror of the
Kings."
29. We find further in the
Byzantine
literature also other
"
Mirrors,"
in which
perhaps portions
of the
"
Secretum
"
are
embedded.
They
are
akin to the Western
develop
ment which followed
upon
the
publication
and
propagation
of the Latin
"
Secretum." Steele has
given
a
list of
more or
less elaborate works which start
directly
or
indirectly
from the
"
Secretum
"
and have the
same
object.
They
are
political
"
Vade-mecums
"
for
kings
and
princes.
In Greek
we
have
among
others,
and also
enjoying great
popularity,
the rather elaborate exhortation of the
Emperor
Basil
(867-86),
the founder of the Macedonian
dynasty
on
the throne of
Byzantium.
In
a
series of
chapters
the
Emperor
advises his
son,
Leo
VI,
on his behaviour and
conduct,
on
alms-giving,
on
education,
on
courage,
on
judgment,
on
humility,
and
chastity.
This
writing
reflects
the
teachings
of
pseudo-Isokrates
and
Agapetos, probably
also that of
"
Barlaam." Krumbacher
(I.e., p. 458)
refers
also to other sources
for this
compilation
of the
Emperor
Basil,
such
as
the
anonymous
"De Pol?tica
Sapientia,"
published by
A. Mai
(Script,
vet. Nova
Coll.,
ii),
further
Nikephoros Blemmyde's
treatise
on
the
"
Model of the
King
"
and
on
the duties of the
Princes,
and another
anonymous
letter
"
About the
King," published by
Vitelli.
To these
sources
I
add,
also
possibly
a
Greek version of
the
"
Secretum."
30.
Leaving
out other
writings,
I refer
finally
to
one
of the latest
developments,
the so-called
Teaching
of
Neagoe,
Prince of Wallachia
(sixteenth century),
to his
son. It is
a
very
voluminous
compilation, following
the
same
lines
as
the other
"
Mirrors of the
Kings
"
hitherto
mentioned,
but
interesting
for the fact that the
portion
of
the
"
Mirror of the
King
"
retained in
"
Barlaam,"
together
with the
apologues,
have been introduced into this
larger
book ascribed to
Neagoe.
It has been
preserved
in
a Greek MS. in one
of the cloisters
on
Mount Athos
and in ancient Roumanian and Slavonic versions. The
relation in which
they
stand to one
another and the
sources from which that
teaching
has been evolved have
as
yet
not been examined.
Perhaps portions
could be traced
to the
"
Secretum."
31. The
"
Secretum
"
belonged,
without
doubt,
to
a
larger cycle
of similar
compilations,
and
may
represent
one
of the oldest versions of
"
Mirrors
"
after
pseudo
Isokrates. It is not here the occasion for
entering
upon
a
detailed
cohiparison
between these different recensions
of Eastern and
especially
Greek "Mirrors of the
King."
It must suffice to have drawn attention to
a
series of
writings
of which the connection had hitherto not been
suspected,
and to have contributed to the
possible
dis
covery
of the lost
original
in one of the Greek texts
mentioned.
32. The "War tactics"
(Book ix)
lead us on
the one
hand to the
numerous
writings
on
the art of
war,
composed
after the time of Alexander in the
period
of
the
Diadochs,
not all of which have been
preserved,
and
on
the other to the
no
less rich
mystical
literature,
and
the calculation of the numerical value of the letters and
symbolical
virtue of the names
(vide
Koechly
&
Ruestow,
Griech.
Kriegsschriftsteller, Leipzig,
1853-5,
vol.
ii,
pp.
2,
5
ff.),
or
Sextus Julius
Africanus,
the Church
historian,
who
devotes
a
chapter
to the art of
war
in his
encyclopaedic
work
(vide
W. Christ. Gesch. d.
griech.
Litt,
2nd
ed., Munich,
1890,
p.
724
f.).
33. The medical treatise stands
by
itself,
and
may
have
been the work of the translator from Greek into
Syriac,
who
adapted
the old
writing
to the
knowledge
of the
time. And
last,
but not
least,
some
old Greek texts on
the
philosophers
stone
or
that
pure
substance
by
means
of
which base metals
are
changed
into
gold
and
silver,
have
been
published by
Berthelot in his
"
Collections des anciens
alchimistes
grecs,"
Aristotle
figuring
very
often
(v. Index)
as
author of alchemistical
writings.
Further
investigations
will no doubt throw
more
light
on
the
composite
character
of and the elements that make
up
the
"
Secretum." It
is
a
kind of
encyclopaedia
drawn from the most diverse
sources,
bearing
the
stamp
of the seventh
or
eighth
century, resting
on a
somewhat late and
already
over
worked ancient
tradition,
containing fragments
from
contemporary
literature of
a more
popular
character.
Started under favourable
auspices,
sent out into the
world
as
the last word of
practical
wisdom of
Aristotle,
it has retained its
popularity
for
centuries,
and has
exercised
a
lasting
influence
on
European
civilisation.
34. The Hebrew
text,
published
here for the first
time,
rests
upon
the collation of four
MSS.,
the oldest of which
(A)
dates from the
year
1382
(British
Museum
Or.,
No.
2396);
the others
(O1
and
O2)
are
MSS. Oxford
Nos. 1436 and
2386,
and
finally
Codex Munich
(M)
342.
With the
exception
of Oxford No. 2386 the other MSS.
belong
to the fourteenth
or
fifteenth
century.
I have
retained the divisions into books
as
found in the
MSS.,
but I have subdivided the text into smaller
paragraphs
for
easier
comparison
with other texts. The various
readings
have been added in footnotes
only
when
they proved
to
be of
importance.
Scribes'
errors
have not been noticed
;
omissions in text A have been
supplied
in
square
brackets
from
one or more
of the
MSS.,
noting
whence
they
had
been taken. I have limited
myself
to these four MSS.
because
they
seem
to be the oldest and most accurate.
Other MSS.
may
perhaps
contribute to elucidate here
and there some
of the
proper
names
which I have not
been able to
identify,
or some other minute details of
a
technical
character,
but
as
they
all
substantially
agree
even
in the most obscure and difficult
passages they
undoubtedly represent
the
original
version of Hharizi.
Following closely
the Arabic
original,
he has left
a
few
passages
somewhat obscure. I have tried to
explain
them
as
best I could in the literal translation which I have
J.R.A.S. 1908.
70
1084
added,
by comparison
with the Latin and with other
translations,
notably
the old
English
versions
published by
Steele.
This
publication
claims to be
no more
than
a
small
contribution from
a new
quarter
to
one
of the most
interesting
and
fascinating chapters
in the
literary history
and civilisation of the Middle
Ages.

Hebrew Version of Secretum Secretorum

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Hebrew Version of Secretum Secretorum

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Hebrew Version of the "Secretum Secretorum," a Medival Treatise Ascribed to Aristotle.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen