LATIN AND ARABIC TRANSLATIONS 363 
it was made from the Arabic is clear from the occurrence 
of Arabic words in it; but Atlielhard must also have had 
before him a translation ot‘ (at least) the enunciations of 
Euclid based ultimately upon the Greek text, a translation 
going back to the old Latin version which was the common 
source of the passage in the Gromatici and ‘ Boetius But 
it would appear that even before Athelhard’s time some sort 
of translation, or at least fragments of one, were available 
even in Eifgland if one may judge by the Old English verses: 
‘ The clerk Euclide on this wyse hit fonde 
Thys craft of gemetry yn Egypte londe 
Yn Egypte he tawghte hyt ful wyde, 
In dyvers londe on every syde. 
Mony erys afterwarde y understonde 
Yer that the craft com ynto thys londe. 
Thys craft com into England, as y yow say, 
Yn tyme of good Kyng Adelstone’s day’, 
which would put the introduction of Euclid into England 
as far back as A. d. 924—40. 
Next, Gherard of Cremona (1114—87) is said to have 
translated the ‘15 Books of Euclid’ from the Arabic as he 
undoubtedly translated an-Nairizi’s commentary on Books 
I—X; this translation of the Elements was till recently 
supposed to have been lost, but in 1904 A. A. Bjornbo dis 
covered in manuscripts at Paris, Boulogne-sur-Mer and Bruges 
the whole, and at Rome Books X-XV, of a translation which 
he gives good 'ground for identifying with Gherard’s. This 
translation has certain Greek words such as rombus, romboides, 
where Athelhard keeps the Arabic terms; it was thus clearly 
independent of Athelhard’s, though Gherard appears to have 
had before him, in addition, an old translation of Euclid from 
the Greek which Athelhard also used. Gherard’s translation 
is much clearer than Athelhard’s; it is neither abbreviated 
nor ‘ edited ’ in the same way as Athelhard’s, but it is a word 
for word translation of an Arabic manuscript containing a 
revised and critical edition of Thábit’s version. 
A third translation from the Arabic was that of Johannes 
Campanus, which came some 150 years after that of Athelhard. 
That Campanus’s translation was not independent of Athel 
hard’s is proved by the fact that, in all manuscripts and