|
Euclid
of Alexandria is the most prominent mathematician of antiquity best
known
for his treatise on mathematics The Elements. The long lasting nature
of The
Elements must make Euclid the leading mathematics teacher of all time.
However
little is known of Euclid's life except that he taught at Alexandria
in Egypt.
Proclus, the last major Greek philosopher, who lived around 450 AD
wrote (see [1]
or [9] or many other sources):-
Not much younger than these [pupils of Plato] is Euclid, who put
together the
"Elements", arranging in order many of Eudoxus's theorems, perfecting
many of
Theaetetus's, and also bringing to irrefutable demonstration the
things which had
been only loosely proved by his predecessors. This man lived in the
time of the first
Ptolemy; for Archimedes, who followed closely upon the first Ptolemy
makes mention
of Euclid, and further they say that Ptolemy once asked him if there
were a
shorted way to study geometry than the Elements, to which he replied
that there
was no royal road to geometry. He is therefore younger than Plato's
circle, but
older than Eratosthenes and Archimedes; for these were contemporaries,
as
Eratosthenes somewhere says. In his aim he was a Platonist, being in
sympathy
with this philosophy, whence he made the end of the whole "Elements"
the
construction of the so-called Platonic figures.
There is other information about Euclid given by certain authors but
it is not
thought to be reliable. Two different types of this extra information
exists. The
first type of extra information is that given by Arabian authors who
state that
Euclid was the son of Naucrates and that he was born in Tyre. It is
believed by
historians of mathematics that this is entirely fictitious and was
merely invented by
the authors.
The second type of information is that Euclid was born at Megara. This
is due to an
error on the part of the authors who first gave this information. In
fact there was
a Euclid of Megara, who was a philosopher who lived about 100 years
before the
mathematician Euclid of Alexandria. It is not quite the coincidence
that it might
seem that there were two learned men called Euclid. In fact Euclid was
a very
common name around this period and this is one further complication
that makes it
difficult to discover information concerning Euclid of Alexandria
since there are
references to numerous men called Euclid in the literature of this
period.
Returning to the quotation from Proclus given above, the first point
to make is that
there is nothing inconsistent in the dating given. However, although
we do not know
for certain exactly what reference to Euclid in Archimedes' work
Proclus is
referring to, in what has come down to us there is only one reference
to Euclid and
this occurs in On the sphere and the cylinder. The obvious conclusion,
therefore, is
that all is well with the argument of Proclus and this was assumed
until challenged
by Hjelmslev in [48]. He argued that the reference to Euclid was added
to
Archimedes book at a later stage, and indeed it is a rather surprising
reference.
It was not the tradition of the time to give such references, moreover
there are
many other places in Archimedes where it would be appropriate to refer
to Euclid
and there is no such reference. Despite Hjelmslev's claims that the
passage has
been added later, Bulmer-Thomas writes in [1]:-
Although it is no longer possible to rely on this reference, a general
consideration
of Euclid's works ... still shows that he must have written after such
pupils of
Plato as Eudoxus and before Archimedes.
For further discussion on dating Euclid, see for example [8]. This is
far from an end
to the arguments about Euclid the mathematician. The situation is best
summed up
by Itard [11] who gives three possible hypotheses.
(i) Euclid was an historical character who wrote the Elements and the
other works
attributed to him.
(ii) Euclid was the leader of a team of mathematicians working at
Alexandria. They
all contributed to writing the 'complete works of Euclid', even
continuing to write
books under Euclid's name after his death.
(iii) Euclid was not an historical character. The 'complete works of
Euclid' were
written by a team of mathematicians at Alexandria who took the name
Euclid from
the historical character Euclid of Megara who had lived about 100
years earlier.
It is worth remarking that Itard, who accepts Hjelmslev's claims that
the passage
about Euclid was added to Archimedes, favours the second of the three
possibilities
that we listed above. We should, however, make some comments on the
three
possibilities which, it is fair to say, sum up pretty well all
possible current
theories.
There is some strong evidence to accept (i). It was accepted without
question by
everyone for over 2000 years and there is little evidence which is
inconsistent with
this hypothesis. It is true that there are differences in style
between some of the
books of the Elements yet many authors vary their style. Again the
fact that
Euclid undoubtedly based the Elements on previous works means that it
would be
rather remarkable if no trace of the style of the original author
remained.
Even if we accept (i) then there is little doubt that Euclid built up
a vigorous school
of mathematics at Alexandria. He therefore would have had some able
pupils who
may have helped out in writing the books. However hypothesis (ii) goes
much
further than this and would suggest that different books were written
by different
mathematicians. Other than the differences in style referred to above,
there is
little direct evidence of this.
Although on the face of it (iii) might seem the most fanciful of the
three
suggestions, nevertheless the 20th century example of Bourbaki shows
that it is
far from impossible. Henri Cartan, André Weil, Jean Dieudonné, Claude
Chevalley,
and Alexander Grothendieck wrote collectively under the name of
Bourbaki and
Bourbaki's Eléments de mathématique contains more than 30 volumes. Of
course if
(iii) were the correct hypothesis then Apollonius, who studied with
the pupils of
Euclid in Alexandria, must have known there was no person 'Euclid' but
the fact
that he wrote:-
.... Euclid did not work out the syntheses of the locus with respect
to three and
four lines, but only a chance portion of it ...
certainly does not prove that Euclid was an historical character since
there are
many similar references to Bourbaki by mathematicians who knew
perfectly well
that Bourbaki was fictitious. Nevertheless the mathematicians who made
up the
Bourbaki team are all well known in their own right and this may be
the greatest
argument against hypothesis (iii) in that the 'Euclid team' would have
to have
consisted of outstanding mathematicians. So who were they?
We shall assume in this article that hypothesis (i) is true but,
having no knowledge
of Euclid, we must concentrate on his works after making a few
comments on
possible historical events. Euclid must have studied in Plato's
Academy in Athens to
have learnt of the geometry of Eudoxus and Theaetetus of which he was
so
familiar.
None of Euclid's works have a preface, at least none has come down to
us so it is
highly unlikely that any ever existed, so we cannot see any of his
character, as we
can of some other Greek mathematicians, from the nature of their
prefaces.
Pappus writes (see for example [1]) that Euclid was:-
... most fair and well disposed towards all who were able in any
measure to advance
mathematics, careful in no way to give offence, and although an exact
scholar not
vaunting himself.
Some claim these words have been added to Pappus, and certainly the
point of the
passage (in a continuation which we have not quoted) is to speak
harshly (and almost
certainly unfairly) of Apollonius. The picture of Euclid drawn by
Pappus is, however,
certainly in line with the evidence from his mathematical texts.
Another story told
by Stobaeus [9] is the following:-
... someone who had begun to learn geometry with Euclid, when he had
learnt the
first theorem, asked Euclid "What shall I get by learning these
things?" Euclid
called his slave and said "Give him threepence since he must make gain
out of what
he learns".
Euclid's most famous work is his treatise on mathematics The Elements.
The book
was a compilation of knowledge that became the centre of mathematical
teaching
for 2000 years. Probably no results in The Elements were first proved
by Euclid
but the organisation of the material and its exposition are certainly
due to him. In
fact there is ample evidence that Euclid is using earlier textbooks as
he writes the
Elements since he introduces quite a number of definitions which are
never used such
as that of an oblong, a rhombus, and a rhomboid.
The Elements begins with definitions and five postulates. The first
three postulates
are postulates of construction, for example the first postulate states
that it is
possible to draw a straight line between any two points. These
postulates also
implicitly assume the existence of points, lines and circles and then
the existence of
other geometric objects are deduced from the fact that these exist.
There are
other assumptions in the postulates which are not explicit. For
example it is
assumed that there is a unique line joining any two points. Similarly
postulates two
and three, on producing straight lines and drawing circles,
respectively, assume the
uniqueness of the objects the possibility of whose construction is
being postulated.
The fourth and fifth postulates are of a different nature. Postulate
four states
that all right angles are equal. This may seem "obvious" but it
actually assumes
that space in homogeneous - by this we mean that a figure will be
independent of
the position in space in which it is placed. The famous fifth, or
parallel, postulate
states that one and only one line can be drawn through a point
parallel to a given
line. Euclid's decision to make this a postulate led to Euclidean
geometry. It was
not until the 19th century that this postulate was dropped and non-euclidean
geometries were studied.
There are also axioms which Euclid calls 'common notions'. These are
not specific
geometrical properties but rather general assumptions which allow
mathematics to
proceed as a deductive science. For example:-
Things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other.
Zeno of Sidon, about 250 years after Euclid wrote the Elements, seems
to have
been the first to show that Euclid's propositions were not deduced
from the
postulates and axioms alone, and Euclid does make other subtle
assumptions.
The Elements is divided into 13 books. Books one to six deal with
plane geometry.
In particular books one and two set out basic properties of triangles,
parallels,
parallelograms, rectangles and squares. Book three studies properties
of the circle
while book four deals with problems about circles and is thought
largely to set out
work of the followers of Pythagoras. Book five lays out the work of
Eudoxus on
proportion applied to commensurable and incommensurable magnitudes.
Heath says
[9]:-
Greek mathematics can boast no finer discovery than this theory, which
put on a
sound footing so much of geometry as depended on the use of
proportion.
Book six looks at applications of the results of book five to plane
geometry.
Books seven to nine deal with number theory. In particular book seven
is a
self-contained introduction to number theory and contains the
Euclidean algorithm
for finding the greatest common divisor of two numbers. Book eight
looks at
numbers in geometrical progression but van der Waerden writes in [2]
that it
contains:-
... cumbersome enunciations, needless repetitions, and even logical
fallacies.
Apparently Euclid's exposition excelled only in those parts in which
he had excellent
sources at his disposal.
Book ten deals with the theory of irrational numbers and is mainly the
work of
Theaetetus. Euclid changed the proofs of several theorems in this book
so that
they fitted the new definition of proportion given by Eudoxus.
Books eleven to thirteen deal with three-dimensional geometry. In book
thirteen
the basic definitions needed for the three books together are given.
The theorems
then follow a fairly similar pattern to the two-dimensional analogues
previously given
in books one and four. The main results of book twelve are that
circles are to one
another as the squares of their diameters and that spheres are to each
other as
the cubes of their diameters. These results are certainly due to
Eudoxus. Euclid
proves these theorems using the "method of exhaustion" as invented by
Eudoxus.
The Elements ends with book thirteen which discusses the properties of
the five
regular polyhedra and gives a proof that there are precisely five.
This book
appears to be based largely on an earlier treatise by Theaetetus.
Euclid's Elements is remarkable for the clarity with which the
theorems are stated
and proved. The standard of rigour was to become a goal for the
inventors of the
calculus centuries later. As Heath writes in [9]:-
This wonderful book, with all its imperfections, which are indeed
slight enough when
account is taken of the date it appeared, is and will doubtless remain
the greatest
mathematical textbook of all time. ... Even in Greek times the most
accomplished
mathematicians occupied themselves with it: Heron, Pappus, Porphyry,
Proclus and
Simplicius wrote commentaries; Theon of Alexandria re-edited it,
altering the
language here and there, mostly with a view to greater clearness and
consistency...
It is a fascinating story how the Elements has survived from Euclid's
time and this
is told well by Fowler in [7]. He describes the earliest material
relating to the
Elements which has survived:-
Our earliest glimpse of Euclidean material will be the most remarkable
for a
thousand years, six fragmentary ostraca containing text and a figure
... found on
Elephantine Island in 1906/07 and 1907/08... These texts are early,
though still
more than 100 years after the death of Plato (they are dated on
palaeographic
grounds to the third quarter of the third century BC); advanced (they
deal with
the results found in the "Elements" [book thirteen] ... on the
pentagon, hexagon,
decagon, and icosahedron); and they do not follow the text of the
Elements. ... So
they give evidence of someone in the third century BC, located more
than 500 miles
south of Alexandria, working through this difficult material... this
may be an
attempt to understand the mathematics, and not a slavish copying ...
The next fragment that we have dates from 75 - 125 AD and again
appears to be
notes by someone trying to understand the material of the Elements.
More than one thousand editions of The Elements have been published
since it was
first printed in 1482. Heath [9] discusses many of the editions and
describes the
likely changes to the text over the years.
B L van der Waerden assesses the importance of the Elements in [2]:-
Almost from the time of its writing and lasting almost to the present,
the Elements
has exerted a continuous and major influence on human affairs. It was
the primary
source of geometric reasoning, theorems, and methods at least until
the advent of
non-Euclidean geometry in the 19th century. It is sometimes said that,
next to the
Bible, the "Elements" may be the most translated, published, and
studied of all the
books produced in the Western world.
Euclid also wrote the following books which have survived: Data (with
94
propositions), which looks at what properties of figures can be
deduced when other
properties are given; On Divisions which looks at constructions to
divide a figure
into two parts with areas of given ratio; Optics which is the first
Greek work on
perspective; and Phaenomena which is an elementary introduction to
mathematical
astronomy and gives results on the times stars in certain positions
will rise and set.
Euclid's following books have all been lost: Surface Loci (two books),
Porisms (a
three book work with, according to Pappus, 171 theorems and 38
lemmas), Conics
(four books), Book of Fallacies and Elements of Music. The Book of
Fallacies is
described by Proclus [1]:-
Since many things seem to conform with the truth and to follow from
scientific
principles, but lead astray from the principles and deceive the more
superficial,
[Euclid] has handed down methods for the clear-sighted understanding
of these
matters also ... The treatise in which he gave this machinery to us is
entitled
Fallacies, enumerating in order the various kinds, exercising our
intelligence in each
case by theorems of all sorts, setting the true side by side with the
false, and
combining the refutation of the error with practical illustration.
Elements of Music is a work which is attributed to Euclid by Proclus.
We have two
treatises on music which have survived, and have by some authors
attributed to
Euclid, but it is now thought that they are not the work on music
referred to by
Proclus.
Euclid may not have been a first class mathematician but the long
lasting nature of
The Elements must make him the leading mathematics teacher of
antiquity or
perhaps of all time. As a final personal note let me add that my [EFR]
own
introduction to mathematics at school in the 1950s was from an edition
of part of
Euclid's Elements and the work provided a logical basis for
mathematics and the
concept of proof which seem to be lacking in school mathematics today.
TOP
Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
|