Lost books of Diodorus?
Marian Ionescu
An Internet search for Getae brought me to this website:
http://www.trochos.plus.com/primesauce/earlier.htm#83
I am fascinated to read what Inger Johansson has said about
the lost books of Diodorus Siculus and a rare edition by three
German professors:
http://www.trochos.plus.com/primesauce/earlier.htm#03
My first reaction was: she must mean the translation by Wurm,
published in parts between 1827 and 1840, with the first
collected Abtheilung appearing in 1831.
I therefore searched more in the archive and found that Inger
wrote the following on 5 XI 1998:
"Diodor's historische Bibliothek, Griechische Prosaiter in neuen
Uebersetzungen von Tasel, Ofiander und Schwab, Stuttgart
1831."
Fraktur is difficult to read, because the k is like a t and the s
and f are very similar. After correction of the three mistakes the
right form is:
"Diodor's historische Bibliothek, Griechische Prosaiker in neuen
Uebersetzungen von Tafel, Osiander und Schwab."
The transcription of that page is incorrect, because it makes it
seem as if those three professors TRANSLATED Diodorus. They
did not. They were the general editors of the series but they
did not translate all the works in it.
That page actually reads:
"Griechische Prosaiker in neuen Uebersetzungen herausgegeben
von G.L.F. Tafel, C.N. Osiander und G. Schwab, Professoren zu
Stuttgart"
The next page says:
"Diodor's von Sicilien historische Bibliothek, übersetzt von Julius
Friedrich Wurm"
So the very rare edition which Inger says that she owns is
actually the well-known translation by Wurm, which probably
can be found in all the university libraries of Europe. It is
described as "a serious work" by Oldfather in the Loeb edition.
Other things that she says about her edition of Diodorus can
hardly be correct. It does not contain any of the lost books.
It contains exactly the same books and fragments of books as
every other edition and translation of Diodorus.
It is not based on any rare or unknown manuscripts but on
PRINTED editions of Diodorus. Wurm says in his introduction that
his translation is mainly based on the edition by Wesseling, and
in some places on the edition by Eichstädt. He does not say
that he consulted any manuscripts.
The translation does not contain anything mysterious from a
manuscript on a Greek island. There is a manuscript of Diodorus
called Patmiacus 50, preserved in the library of the Monastery
of Saint John on Patmos:
http://www.libraries.gr/nonmembers/en/libraries_theologou.htm
This manuscript contains only books 11-16 of Diodorus, books
which are also found in other manuscripts. Patmiacus 50 was
first collated by Bergmann in 1866 and used for the first time in
the edition by Vogel-Fischer (1888). See the excellent stemma
by Pierre Bertrac on page cxxi of Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque
historique: Introduction générale (Paris, 1993).
I wonder if Inger can explain why her copy of Wurm's translation
should contain so many things which are not in any other copy?
Marian Ionescu
ie
now you are making a mistake. It's isn't edited same year nor in same German
town as the one you refer to. That I still own. The other I gave away. They
are NOT the same and there are three books in the one I gave away that isn't
in the 'wellknown' edition. The one I gave away I had to have help by a
Greek everytime I wanted to check something. It's edited in Greek. Printed
in 1833 not 1831.
The mixup from your side must have been due to me expressed myself in a
cryptic way. I never given the full information of the one edition I gave
away to anyone here in groups. Ingemar had the information verbally once and
only once long after he wrote his Goterkällan. It was after he had been in
Iceland on the Conference. So the information you refer to is for the one I
still have, not the other one. The other ones I spoken to is a Greek Scholar
of Classic Greek living in Linköping who seen it and checked. The book
doesn't exist at all in any European Library, it seems as if the professor
for that had used Prime Source material from a monestry on the Greek island
where females aren't allowed, or from a monestry on the border of Kurdistan
and Turkey. By help of an Iraqian archaeologist who belongs to the Ortodox
Syrian church I got in contact with one from that monestry who visitied
Sweden in mid 1990's.
From Prof. K in NY I got information that a teacher he had when he started
studying for the last five years has been going thru and copying the
documents in monestries in the region. I take it that it's intended to be
presented one way or an other.
Inger E
"Marian Ionescu" <stud...@unibuc.ro> skrev i meddelandet
news:op.svnantpk3qhjri@xx...
Italo
> Marion,
> now you are making a mistake. It's isn't edited same year nor in same German
> town as the one you refer to. That I still own. The other I gave away. They
> are NOT the same and there are three books in the one I gave away that isn't
> in the 'wellknown' edition. The one I gave away I had to have help by a
> Greek everytime I wanted to check something. It's edited in Greek. Printed
> in 1833 not 1831.
Maybe A.Mai's 'Nova Collectio II'(1833)?
Which is one of the sources for the "Bruchstücke aus Buch
6-10" in Wahrmund's 1866 translation of Diodorus.
ie
"Italo" <ola...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:ddv4cb$u68$1...@news4.zwoll1.ov.home.nl...
> ie wrote:
> > Marion,
> > now you are making a mistake. It's isn't edited same year nor in same
German
> > town as the one you refer to. That I still own. The other I gave away.
They
> > are NOT the same and there are three books in the one I gave away that
isn't
> > in the 'wellknown' edition. The one I gave away I had to have help by a
> > Greek everytime I wanted to check something. It's edited in Greek.
Printed
> > in 1833 not 1831.
>
> Maybe A.Mai's 'Nova Collectio II'(1833)?
> Which is one of the sources for the "Bruchstücke aus Buch
> 6-10" in Wahrmund's 1866 translation of Diodorus.
Is it said to have been edited in Dresden?
Inger E
Italo
> "Italo" <ola...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:ddv4cb$u68$1...@news4.zwoll1.ov.home.nl...
>
>>ie wrote:
>>
>>>Marion,
>>>now you are making a mistake. It's isn't edited same year nor in same
> German
>>>town as the one you refer to. That I still own. The other I gave away.
> They
>>>are NOT the same and there are three books in the one I gave away that
> isn't
>>>in the 'wellknown' edition. The one I gave away I had to have help by a
>>>Greek everytime I wanted to check something. It's edited in Greek.
> Printed
>>>in 1833 not 1831.
>>
>>Maybe A.Mai's 'Nova Collectio II'(1833)?
>>Which is one of the sources for the "Bruchstücke aus Buch
>>6-10" in Wahrmund's 1866 translation of Diodorus.
>
>
> Is it said to have been edited in Dresden?
>
> Inger E
I have no idea. Angelo Mai was cardinal at Rome. But the
relevant part II is from 1827, not 1833, apparantly.
What is the 'unknown' Diodorus text about?
ie
The essential thing is that Diodorus for those years can be used to confirm
some of the later Historians presented 'picture' events and persons, weather
conditions at one for me essential event and so on. There are as you know
more than one who has refered to Diodorus as their source but which we
normally can't confirm Diodorus to be the source for. That is also what can
be gained, according to the Greek scholar who checked the Greek text for me.
My mistake was not to study the Classic languages when in High School. I
have learnt Latin later on but Greek could very well be any of all the
Chinese language when I am trying to read it myself.
Inger E
>
>
>
>
markovic
<elio...@nospamtelia.com> wrote:
> I
> have learnt Latin later on but Greek could very well be any of all the
> Chinese language when I am trying to read it myself.
Which is our impression of your English.
ie
"markovic" <mark...@io.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:markovic-170...@cpe-24-28-65-232.austin.res.rr.com...
Your impression say more about your British English grammar skill than about
mine. Sorry having to say this but due to some stupid non British English
educated English speakers here I more than once had British English scholars
looking in and in 98% of the case my English grammar is correct no matter
that Americans and Aussies don't believe it to be. I sent url:s to the group
showing the hugh difference between British English and the rest, also sent
url:s to homepage of American and Canadian scholars who written about their
own problems when writing academic works in England.
That I do have spelling problems due to dyslexia is no reason for you to
write your abusive lines.
If you can't follow the 'red thread' in my writing,
that's not my problem. There is one no matter if you get it or not and most
never ever have problem finding and following it.
Stop the abusive attack of yours markovic.
Inger E
Marian Ionescu
Inger,
I agree that I am confused here, but because I am interested to
read the lost books of Diodorus I must ask more questions. Let
me see if I have understand that which you say.
You once bought some old books. One of them was an edition of
a Greek work which you gave to a friend who can read Greek.
The other work was a German translation of Diodorus which you
kept.
You now say that the lost books of Diodorus are in the Greek
edition and not in the German translation. But in the past you
have clearly said more then TEN TIMES that the lost books are
also in the German translation which you admit is the one by
Wurm that I have described.
If I am wrong you could correct my mistake if you gave the full
publication details. Can you do that ? Until you do, I can only
use the following clues which you given to news groups.
1. "Diodorus(one of the so called missing books which actually was
translated into German and edited 1833 after the two Prof. who
translated it had read it in the Greek Island for Monks"
2. "In one translation I have in my sleeves, edited 1833, from one
of the books of Diodorus thought to be lost"
3. "Diodorus. It's in one of the presumed missing books. Presumed,
well several of the so called missing books were translated into
German and edited in 1833-1835 by three Professors of History."
4. "there is a lot of information in some of Diodorus Siculus so called
missing books. That I know of because some of them were printed
after being valuated and transcribed by three German Professors of
Greek History and the book was edited 1833"
5. "written sources from 475 BC, in the later case you have to get
hold of a source some think has been gone for long but instead
was preserved in a German translation made by three Professor's
and edited 1833. There problem is that I have one copy in my
hand and that those copies are very rare, no one said to remain
in Central Europe after World War II."
6. "there are notes in a book from 1833,(German Professors
translation of ancient Greek texts) that a MS existed(still
exists?) in Athen and I have an edition of the text."
7. "many old sources, but the best edited ones were found and
translated into German by German Professors of History in the
Greek monestry during the 18th and 19th Century. Many of the
ancient texts were edited in the 1830's. I own some copies
myself. Among them one which I never been able to find an
other example of at all."
8. "a copy of a book edited in less than 200 examplar by three
German Professors. Edited when? 1833."
9. "There exist one source not to be forgotten Diodorus. One
transcription to German exist that contains more than we usually
know remains: "Diodor's historische Bibliothek, Griechische
Prosaiter in neuen Uebersetzungen von Tasel, Ofiander und
Schwab, Stuttgart 1831."
10. "One of the German editions seems to exist only in two copies
of a splendid work made by three German professors in 1830's from
old handwritten B-versions of Diodorus. Some of the chapters is
in later scholars works said to be lost...... well I have one of the
two copies of the book. I bought it cheep. The other example is
said to be in Berliner Stadts Library's collection. I had Linköping's
university looking around Europe via their Inter-borrow system
from other Universities and Librarys. Of 1000 edited examplars
they only found that in Berlin."
11. "there is a lot of information in some of Diodorus Siculus so
called missing books. That I know of because some of them were
printed after being valuated and transcribed by three German
Professors of Greek History and the book was edited 1833. I
have myself one of the few still existing copies of that one
including their comments."
In all this you talk about essential evidence not known to any
one else, from lost books of Diodorus, which you have in a
German translation by three German professors. You name them
as Tasel, Ofiander and Schwab, and you talk about the dates
1830s, 1831 and 1833. All these details agrees with the
translation by Wurm (except that the three professors were
editors of the series, not the translators).
Yet now you are saying that the lost books of Diodorus are not
in the translation but in the Greek edition which you gave away.
Which version is correct ?
You also wrote the following on 7 VII 2004:
"The oldest note of group living in Jutland I have knowledge of
and also have read myself and made validation from is a 1833
edition of Didorus books. That one I seem to be one of the few
to own, we have checked around in Europe and there might be a
copy still existing in Berliner Stadt's Museum, but neither I myself
nor Linköping's University's Library have been able to have that
confirmed. It's a German translation by three Professors and it
seems as if it was a very limited edition. That's the one I have
worked from but I do believe that following in Latin (quick check
done not every book and chapter) is as good as the German
edition:
Diodorus Siculus
Diodori Bibliotheca historica / ex recensione et cum
annotationibus Ludovici Dindorfi
Lipsiae: Teubner, 1866- ; 5 vol.
serie: Bibliotheca scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum
Teubneriana, , ISSN
99-0103885-5"
The strange thing is that you say this Latin translation is not
as good as your German one, yet Dindorf's edition, despite the
Latin title, is an edition of the Greek text ! Your check was
perhaps so quick you did not even notice that the text was
Greek, not Latin ! Please explain how you made this mistake.
Marian I
ie
> " ie " <<I_e> wrote:
>
>
> Inger,
>
> I agree that I am confused here, but because I am interested to
> read the lost books of Diodorus I must ask more questions. Let
> me see if I have understand that which you say.
>
> You once bought some old books. One of them was an edition of
> a Greek work which you gave to a friend who can read Greek.
> The other work was a German translation of Diodorus which you
> kept.
When I studied to become a teacher of History I did my first 5 week practise
at a school where I had an old gentleman as my supervisor/mentor. He had a
good library and we discussed it frequently. A few years later his inheritor
of that library put it up for sale. The later didn't understand the value of
some of the 1800's editions, not to mention a few English 1700's, any how I
managed to get hold of several books at a price each under 1 Euro 50 cent.
Among them were several of the Sophists and also the Diodorus books. I got
the later as cheap as 1 Euro each. One of them was in Greek and one
translated into German. I had one of the other old historians in an 1837
edition, Latin as well. I wondered how it was possible for the Greek book to
be thicker when it had smaller letters. Thus I started to go thru them
comparing them against each other. I had a Greek scholar, had been teaching
Classic Greek before moving to Sweden, who helped me to the texts of those
chapters I never heard of nor could read.
>
> You now say that the lost books of Diodorus are in the Greek
> edition and not in the German translation. But in the past you
> have clearly said more then TEN TIMES that the lost books are
> also in the German translation which you admit is the one by
> Wurm that I have described.
I must have written in a way that you, and maybe others, might be able to
misunderstand.
>
> If I am wrong you could correct my mistake if you gave the full
> publication details. Can you do that ? Until you do, I can only
> use the following clues which you given to news groups.
>
> 1. "Diodorus(one of the so called missing books which actually was
> translated into German and edited 1833 after the two Prof. who
> translated it had read it in the Greek Island for Monks"
Part of the texts in the German translation diverge with the later editions.
That's correct. But there must have been some mixup because there are three
Professors for the edition I am talking about. I don't have the Greek
edition here but if the one refered to by Italy was edited in Dresden, then
he and I probably are refering to same edition.
>
> 2. "In one translation I have in my sleeves, edited 1833, from one
> of the books of Diodorus thought to be lost"
I have copies of the translated Greek text inside the other. At present,
since they started to renovate my apartment in january, I have more than 80%
of my books in boxes. My rooms not finished so I only have the books I am
working with at present up and they are those dealing with Scandinavian
History between 800 AD and 1565 AD. Haven't had time or interest to go thru
the boxes in summertime.
>
> 3. "Diodorus. It's in one of the presumed missing books. Presumed,
> well several of the so called missing books were translated into
> German and edited in 1833-1835 by three Professors of History."
Not your 1831 edition at all.
I have to brake here. Don't have time to write more before Monday. Till then
have a nice weekend. Will be out of town most of the time without access to
a computer with or without net.
Inger E
Alaca
> "Marian Ionescu"skrev
>> You now say that the lost books of Diodorus are in the Greek
>> edition and not in the German translation. But in the past you
>> have clearly said more then TEN TIMES that the lost books are
>> also in the German translation which you admit is the one by
>> Wurm that I have described.
> I must have written in a way that you, and maybe others, might be
> able to misunderstand.
That is certainly not impossible, but I don't know what
you mean. Did Marian and others misunderstand what
you wrote in the 12 quotes Marian gave, or what you
wrote yesterday?
--
¨°º°¨Peter Alaca¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨°º°¨
Rick
Fair Play!
How good is your Swedish?
I have studied four foreign languages and am conversant in only one.
"Conversant" being debatable... or not.
Depending on the language. ;-)
I can ask directions, though!
Although I doubt seriously that I will ever need to use the Mens Room in
Russia.
Well, I probably would if I were there...
And who travels by train these days?
Much less goes to the library.
Now, "Where is the Internet Cafe?" might be more appropriate for the times.
And "How much does it cost" will probably always be needed.
But *none* of the courses I took ever taught the phrase "She never said she
was married!"
<g>
Alaca
> markovic wrote:
>> "ie" wrote:
>>
>>> I have learnt Latin later on but Greek could very well be any
>>> of all the Chinese language when I am trying to read it myself.
>> Which is our impression of your English.
> Fair Play!
> How good is your Swedish?
You are misunderstanding the situation here.
> I have studied four foreign languages and am conversant in only one.
> "Conversant" being debatable... or not.
> Depending on the language. ;-)
>
> I can ask directions, though!
> Although I doubt seriously that I will ever need to use
> the Mens Room in Russia.
Beacuse you are a lady?
> Well, I probably would if I were there...
Because you are a 'lady'?
> And who travels by train these days?
I do, together with millions of other people.
> Much less goes to the library.
I do, together with millions of other people.
> Now, "Where is the Internet Cafe?" might be more
> appropriate for the times.
It certainly is. Go there and look in sci.archaeology,
soc.history.medieval and soc.culture.nordic for mdm
Inger E Johansson.
> [...]
Rick
> Rick wrote: 43049965...@alltel.net,
> > markovic wrote:
> >> "ie" wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have learnt Latin later on but Greek could very well be any
> >>> of all the Chinese language when I am trying to read it myself.
>
> >> Which is our impression of your English.
>
> > Fair Play!
> > How good is your Swedish?
>
> You are misunderstanding the situation here.
No, I'm not.
I've been misunderstanding Ms. Johansson for quite awhile.
But since English is not her native language, I try to make allowances or
would ask for a clarification.
Though that doesn't seem to always work either.
The latter, not the former.
From what I've read, anyway.
No slight intended, Ms. Johansson.
I respect that you are able to attempt to converse in a language other
than your own.
And you are invited to critique my French, Spanish, Russian, Japanese or
Chinese.
In the event that I ever attempt to write in those languages...
I have attempted French on the Internet. In a French newsgroup. They were
very kind.
Surprisingly, since my written French is quite terrible! <g>
>
>
> > I have studied four foreign languages and am conversant in only one.
> > "Conversant" being debatable... or not.
> > Depending on the language. ;-)
> >
> > I can ask directions, though!
> > Although I doubt seriously that I will ever need to use
> > the Mens Room in Russia.
>
> Beacuse you are a lady?
No, because I don't think I will ever *be* in Russia.
>
>
> > Well, I probably would if I were there...
>
> Because you are a 'lady'?
No. But cute.
The statement, not me.
>
>
> > And who travels by train these days?
>
> I do, together with millions of other people.
Never have myself. Here, it's mostly cars and planes.
I thought about qualifying with a location, since I considered that
Europeans might use trains more than we "Left Ponders."
Millions? Hmm. Maybe I should buy stock in Rail Transportation!
Ah~! Make that People transportation by Rails.
Maybe People transportation by a Railroad System?
Just plain Railroads?
Oh to hell with it!
I'll invest in Airplanes.
Although Delta Airlines isn't doing all that well...
So, maybe not.
>
>
> > Much less goes to the library.
>
> I do, together with millions of other people.
Haven't been in one much since my Undergraduate days.
Spent a lot of time in there then, though.
Man, I would love to have had the Internet back in those days!
>
>
> > Now, "Where is the Internet Cafe?" might be more
> > appropriate for the times.
>
> It certainly is. Go there and look in sci.archaeology,
> soc.history.medieval and soc.culture.nordic for mdm
> Inger E Johansson.
Bit of a bother. The nearest one is probably 70 miles away.
Why not just Google using my Internet Provider? <g>