The Origins of al-BirZlnis Method of the Zves in The Theory of Sundials

J. L. BERGGREN*

In his great work on mathematical geography the Central Asian scholar Abu 1-Rayhgn al-Biriini (fl. 1010) described a method for finding the azimuth of one locality relative to another and called it the method of the zijes. Zij is a Persian word that Islamic astronomers applied to astronomical handbooks, and in a previous pape? we portrayed the development of this method in the zijes of Habash al-Hgsib (fl. 850), Abu 1-Waf2 al-BiizjZini (fl. 980) and Jamshid al-Kgshi (fl. 1400) as well as in writings of al-Birijni (fl. ca. 1010) and Abu 1-Wafgs contemporary, Abii Sahl al-Kiihi. The present paper continues our study with an account of the versions of the method found in an anonymous treatise in AS 4830 and the following works: al-Zijal-Shdmil, a work by an unknown astronomer who bases it on a zij of Abii I-Wafs, al-Zij ul-Hdkimi by the 10th Century Egyptian astronomer Ibn Yiinus, and al-Zij ul-Jdmz by Ktishyar ibn LabbBn, a contemporary of Abu 1Waf2 and Ibn Yfmus. This study sheds additional light on the relationships both between the zijes and between their authors, and it contains evidence to suggest that the origin of the method of the zijes lies in the theory of sundials. The problem the method solves, that of finding the azimuth of one place relative to another, is important to the Muslim world when the first place is Mecca and the second is ones own locality, for the azimuth is then the qiblu, which Muslims must face to perform their five daily prayers. During the centuries from Habash al-Hasib to Jamshid al-Kiishi, Muslim astronomers discovered a variety of solutions to the problem, solutions whose study presents the historian of exact sciences with a great diversity of methods, and this paper, with its prede* Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. Canada VSA 1S6.
Centourus 1985: vol. 2 8

pp, 1-16

1 Centaurus XXVIII

1. L.Berggren

Fig. 1

cessor,is an attempt to tell the history of one of these methods over a span of six centuries. (Recent work by D. King has shown that in addition to methods based on scientific principles there are a great number based on folk-astronomy and that the latter were often used in orienting mosque^.^) To make this study as self-contained as possible, we begin with a brief account of the method of the zijes as Al-Kiihi explains it in his treatise. Figure 1 shows the celestial sphere seen from the outside, where ABGD represents the horizon o f our locality and DEB its meridian, passing through the south ( D ) and north (B) points of our horizon as well as through the zenith of our locality (9and the north celestial pole (H). The circle AZG is the celestial equator while N is the zenith of Mecca. In the following account, X Y or X Y Z will always denote the arc of a great circle on the sphere, and Sin X Y denotes the medieval sine function r sin XY, where sin is the modem function and r is the radius of the sphere. Following E. S. Kennedy, we write S h ( x U = WZ)

al-Birmrs "Method of the Zqes"

Fig. 2

to mean "the sine of the arc XY,which arc is also equal to the arc WZ".In addition the reader may find helpful the circle of latitudes shown in figure 2, which portrays the meridian of some locality, in which Z is the zenith of the horizon, P the pole of the equator, 9 the local latitude and = 90" - 9.In general, XYwill denote 90"- XY. We may now identify various arcs in figure 1. HN is the complement of the latitude of Mecca (qM) and TZ is the positive difference between the longitude of our locality and that of Mecca (A). The circle ES, called the altitude circle of Mecca, cuts from our horizon the arc of the inhirdf DS,which measures the angle through which a worshipper fating south must turn to face Mecca. To find DS the methods of the zijes is the following: Let GNOA be a great semicircle passing through the east (A) and west (G) points, so that the angles at 0 are right angles. By the rule of four quantities6applied to the spherical right triangles ONH and ZTH,
@ J

Sin NO =
I'

Sin(NH = eM)Sin( TZ = An) Sin(TH = 90")

J . L.Berggren

and a table of Sines yields a value for NO from that of Sin NO. The same rule, this time applied to the right triangles GOZ, GNT, yields Sin 02 = Sin(NT = rpM) Sin(NG = NO)/Sin(GO = 90)

and from 02 we calculate EO = Q, - 02. The complement of the distance from our zenith to that of Mecca, measured in degrees, is given by

(a,

Sin(NS = 2) =

Sin No. Sin EO Sin(G0 = 90)

(3)

when the rule of four quantities is applied to the right triangles GSN, GDO. Finally the relationship Sin SD = Sin NO Sin(NE = d)/(Sin ES = 90)
(4)

obtained from the triangles DSE and ONE, yields SD, the inhiraf of Mecca. The one drawback to this method is that, since using Sine tables to produce XY from Sin X Y yields only angles between 0 and 90, the method will not, without further instructions, give a correct answer when, e.g., dl > 90. Indeed, in the previous paper one of our concerns was to trace the elaboration of this method up to the work of Jamshid al-KBshi, where one finds the method as the core of a procedure valid for every locality on earth, providing an example of what D. King has called universal solutions in Islamic astronomy. Before turning to the zij literature, where the examples we cite in this work are all from the late-tenth century onwards, we begin with a much earlier treatise outside the corpus of zijes. In a forthcoming paper on early methods for determining the qibla D. King has called attention to a short treatise on the subject found in AS 4830.8The method in the second section of this treatise is of considerable relevance to our study since it calculates, just as (1) above does, Sin NO (which it calls the first quantity), then Sin m ( t h e second quantity), then, just as (2), specifies Sin 02 and, from 02,

al-BirLinis Method of the ZGes

EO = q - 02 (the third quantity). The next step has been garbled by the omission of a line but, as the text is emended in Kings paper, it specifies the use of Sines as lines inside the sphere together with the Pythagorean theorem to calculate Crd EN and then Sin EN = Sin(2 arc Sin $ Crd EN). Finally, after this tortuous bypath, the author returns to the main track and specifies the calculation of what he calls the distance of the qibla from the meridian, i.e. the inhirdJ exactly as in (4). We clearly have here a variation of the method of the zijes, and the awkward and inconsistent way the calculation of O E is handled, together with the terminology first quantity, etc. suggests a treatise independent of the zij of Habash. According to D. King, The style of the Arabic and clumsiness of the mathematical methods identify the treatise as early Abbasid and, in our view, this early date and its evident independence from Habashs treatment support the statement we made in our previous study that it seems unlikely that his [Habashs] zij marks the first appearance of the method .... We now turn to the zijes, beginning with al-Zij al-Shdmil. In his pioneering study of medieval Islamic zijes Kennedy classifies this anonymous work, extant in a 131hcentury copy, as one based on the mean motions established by Abu 1-Wafs and his colleagues, and Sezgin describes this zij as a revision (Bearbeitung) of a zij of Abu 1Waffi. Thus, although the extant work is no mere copy, it is connected with a zij by Abu 1-Waffi, and we shall see evidence supporting the supposition that such a zij is the source of the qibla method in al-Zij al-Shdmil. If this is so we have an alternate treatment of the qibla problem by Abu I-Waffi and one that differs markedly from that of his al-Zij al-Maji-sfi. In this latter work the rule of tangents for spherical triangles is the basic tool for deriving the various arcs, while in al-Zij ul-Shdmil the author follows exactly the steps we have given as (1)-(4); but, instead of referring e.g. to Sin AllSin 90, he speaks of the Sine of what is between the two longitudes depressed (munhuf.tan, i.e. divided by 60) which, since the radius is 60, comes to the same thing and differs only in terminology. Further, in the latter part of al-Zijal-Shdmil it is explained when to measure the inhirdffrom the south point and when to measure it from the north point. If this passage is indeed by Abu 1-Waffi it appears to be the first in which the distinction is made. The following chart summarizes that text, show-

1. L. Berggren

ing the two subcases of each of the two main cases. (Corrected latitude refers to EO.) When the corrected latitude is northerly northerly southerly southerly and the direction of Mecca is the inhiraf lies

east of the meridian west of the meridian east of the meridian west of the meridian

northeast northwest southeast southwest

Here, to say that the corrected latitude is northerly or southerly means that O in figure 1 lies to the north or south of the zenith E, which would appear in the calculations by comparing Q, and 02.The whole procedure is Abu 1-Wafiis substitute for negative numbers. The terminology employed in this section of the zij is at least consistent with the supposition that Abu l-WafZi wrote it, for the descriptions of NO as correction of longitude (fcfddaZ-MZ), of 20 as correction of latitude (fcfdll al-ard) and of EO as corrected latitude (al-ard al-muaddal) are precisely those used in al-Zij &MajisJi.

The assumption that the zij of Abu 1-Wafii on which al-Shdmil is based contains the above description of the qibla method also helps explain al-Bixiinis criticism of Abu 1-Wafii in his Maqdlid where he writes If, on the contrary, his pretentions rest on the determination of the azimuth of the qibla, this does not justify them either because his method offers nothing original not already found in the zij of Habash al-Hiisib. He (only) contents himself with dividing into sections the steps of the calculation and with changing the term corrected longitude (al-tul al-muaddal) to correction of longitude and corrected latitude to correction of latitude. If this judgement on Abu 1-Wafii is taken to apply to the work al-Majis6 which is the only one we know of where all the arcs are calculated by the tangent law, it is hard to understand why al-Biriini would have judged Abu 1-WafZi so severely, for there is surely much there that is quite different from Habashs treatment. On the other hand, al-Bixiinis words apply well to the treatment given in al-Zij al-Shdmil, where the treatment, pre-

al-Bininis Method of the Z$?S

sented in four steps with no proofs, goes beyond that of Yabash only in the concluding discussion summarized in the table, and this alBiriini indeed may have considered no great matter since it is readily apparent from the diagram. The point here is not to vindicate Abu 1Wafii at the expense of al-Bixfini but only to say that of the two texts, al-Zij al-Shdmil and al-MujkK it seems that al-Biriinis criticisms apply more obviously to the former. Al-Biriinis criticism of Abu 1-Wafiifor having introduced the terms correction of longitude and correction of latitude only to make his work appear original makes it plain al-Biriini did not know of Abii Sahls work, which uses precisely the same terminology. Abii Sahl was the director of a group of scholars who made astronomical observations under the Biiyid king Sharal al-Dawla, and one member of this group was Abu 1-Wafii.14Since the method of the zqes, in common with many other solutions of the qiblu problem, involved the celestial sphere it is natural that these two astronomers would have discussed the problem and may have agreed to adopt a common terminology. The two other zijes were composed at about the same time, early in the eleventh century. AZ-Zij aZ-Jdmic of KiishyBr b. LabbBn, written around the year 1010, exists in two similar, but by no means identical, versions, one in Istanbul and the other in Leiden.I5 The first two steps of the Istanbul copy are exactly (1) and (2) and, beyond noting that, like Abu 1-WaW and Abii Sahl, Kiishyiir calls NO the correction of longitude and 02 the correction of latitude these steps need not detain us here. The next step is precisely that of Abu 1-Wafii, i.e. from the comparison of RZ and Z E to form RE - RO = EO, the corrected latitude of the locality, southern, when RE > RO, or ZO - Z E = EO, the corrected latitude of the locality, northern, when Z E < 20. Similarly Kiishyiir states the azimuth is on the east-west line when ZE = EO. Finally the computations of (3) and (4) follow, just as in Abu 1-Wafii and Abii Sahl. In the Leiden version of Kiishyiirs zij however (ff. 19, 20) he calculates first the Sine of an unnamed arc X according to (1) above and, since no arc exceeds 90, X = NO. The text then calls for the addition of @ to X and if the result is

< 90 the sum is the second arc(q,) southerly,

= 90 the azimuth is on the east-west line,

> 90. set the second arc (q2)= 180- (sum), northerly.

1 .L. Berggren

This makes no sense, however, for NO is an arc of a great circle perpendicular to the local meridian and its addition to @, a piece of that meridian, produces nothing useful. A scribe has evidently left out a line that prescribes the formation of Sin 20 from Sin NO, as in (2) above. Since @J = ZD, ZO + @J = OD and, indeed, if this is less than 90 the qiblu is southerly, if it is equal to 90 the qiblu is on the eastwest line, and if it is greater than 90then 0 falls between E and B, and OB, the supplement of OD, is what we want. The next step in KiishyBrs procedure requires the calculation of Cos q, - Sin &Sin W, where q1 has not been previously mentioned but is now referred to as the first arc. I f we take q1 = NO, which is the first arc Kiishyiir calculates, then this expression is exactly (3) and the result of the calculation is, as Kiishyiir says, the Sine of the altitude (d). (In the case when 02 + @ > 90, as in figure 3, so that q2 = OB, we obtain the above expression for Sin d from the rule of four quantities applied to the two spherical right triangles GNS, GOB.) Finally the fourth step is precisely (4), and thus, with the single emendation we have suggested, i.e. inserting the calculation of 02 as in (2) above, and the understanding that the first arc refers to NO, the first arc calculated, the procedure in the Leiden copy of KiishyBrs zij is again the method we are investigating. Consequently, there are two differences between sections of the Leiden and Istanbul versions of Kiishy2rs zij dealing with the qibla. First, the Leiden version reflects a different tradition in its vocabulary with its use of the first arc rather than correction of longitude. Second, the Leiden version handles the case EZ < 02 (the case of a northerly qiblu) by calculating what is called the second arc as 180OD (= OB), where the Istanbul version calculates its complement, OE the corrected latitude, by finding 0 2 - E Z . The differences both in terminology and mathematical minutiae that appear in the two versions of KiishyBrs zij in the sections on the qibla, show that the two versions are to a certain extent independent of each other. To judge by the above criteria the next zij belongs to the tradition of Abu 1-WafB, al-Kiihi and the Istanbul version of KiishyBrs zij. It is alZ jal-fdkimi,written by the Egyptian astronomer Ibn Yiinus in 1009, a few years before his death.16The method in question appears four times in this zij, namely in Chapters 15,20,26and 28, and since three of these appearances are in closely related problems we shall discuss

al-Bininls Method of the Z$es

Fig. 3

them first. In Chapters 15 and 20 steps ( 1 ) ( 4 ) are used to compute the azimuth of the sun or a star given the local latitude, the declination of the body and its hour-angle. (If instead of a celestial body it were the celestial point that is the zenith of Mecca then the latter two of these quantities would be called the latitude of Mecca (qM) and the difference in longitude respectively, so that the input is that of the qiblu problem.) The only difference between the procedures of these two chapters is that in Chapter 15 (see King I, pp. .153-55), as in the Leiden version of Kiishyfirs zij, Ibn Yiinus follows step (2) with a definition of the quantity @ + ZO, which he calls the inclination arc (it being the inclination of the great circle GNA to the horizon), whereas in Chapter 20 at this point (King I, pp. 191-92) he computes ZE - ZO as most other writers do and calls it the corrected latitude. Thus Chapter 15 follows the procedure in the Leiden copy of Kiishyfirs zij, while Chapter 20 follows that of the Istanbul copy and such writers as Abii Sahl al-Kiihi. It does not appear that in these two sections Ibn Yiinus is interested in determining whether the angle of the azimuth should be measured to the north or the south of the prime vertical AEG.

10

J. L.Bergpen

It is in Chapter 28 that Ibn Yiinus applies the method to the problem of finding the qibZa,18and the steps of the method are identical with those of Chapter 15. Also that Ibn Yiinus designates 20 (in Chapter 20 and 28) and EO (in Chapter 20) just as did Al-Kiihi and Abu 1-Wafft, so, contrary to what, al-Biriini said, Abu 1-Waffts terminology is not just an idiosyncracy. Before we discuss the remaining appearance of the method in Ibn Yllnus zij, in Chapter 26, it will be useful to make some general remarks about the method and the mathematical nature of both the problem and the solution it offers. This problem, like most in medieval spherical astronomy, asks for what we should now call a change in spherical coordinates. The equator, with its poles, and the meridian of our locality provide two orthogonal reference circles with respect to which we can measure two coordinates: (1) the height, q ,of a celestial object relative to the equator, and (2) the distance (AA) from the south point of the equator to the foot of the great circle measuring the height. We may call this the equator-meridian system. The problem is to find the analogous coordinates in a horizon-meridian, system, where the horizon circle plays the role of the equator and its zenith plays the role of the north pole. Thus we seek: (1)the height relative to the horizon, i.e. the altitude ( a ) , and (2) the distance from the south point of the horizon to the foot of the great circle measuring the height, i.e. the inbinif (See figure 4). The elegance of the solution consists in introducing an intermediate coordinate system, that of the local meridian and equator, which shares a great circle with both systems, namely the local meridian, with its poles.the E- and W-points. The method shows how to use the data to describe height relative to the meridian (@) and distance relative to the equator (Ax), i.e. in the meridian-equator system. This is why the great circle through the west-point and the zenith of Mecca is introduced, for it is the arc NO of this circle that measures the height relative to the meridian, and it is from the foot of this circle on the meridian, the point 0 (figure l), that the distance 0 2 is measured. This distance immediately supplies us with another, namely OD, which, mathematically, involves changing the second reference circle of the new system from the equator to the local horizon. The elegance of the method lies in the fact that the same rules that transform coordinates from the equator-meridian system to the system me-

al-Birzinis Method of the ZGes

11

Fig. 4

ridian-equator and then to meridian-horizon will effect the change from this latter system to that of horizon-meridian. This is so because the geometric relationship of the first to the second system is the same as that of the second to the third, and this geometric fact is reflected in the formal identity of (1) and (2) with (3) and (4) respectively. Only the names of the variables differ.19The Islamic authors perception of this mathematical relationship is reflected in their use of the terminology of corrected latitude for cj5 (the analog of q ) and corrected longitude for (the analog of An), and to this extent al-Biriini is correct in saying that the phrases correction of latitude and correction of longitude are derivative from the more correct participial constructions. The crucial insight of the solution appears in the literature in another, earlier context as well, namely in the construction of the socalled meridian sundial, whose receiving plane is parallel to that of the local meridian and whose gnomon points eastward (see figure 9, westward, or both. Then the length of the shadow that the gnomon AB casts on a vertical plane EAD depends only on the length of the gnomon and the measure of the arc NG (= NO), the direction of the

12

J. L. Berggren

Fig. 5

shadow depends only on the arc DO (= Thus the transformation of coordinates would have been of great use to the ancient specialists in the design of sundials. In fact, in the Analemma, Ptolemy employs the great circle through the E-W points and the sun, a circle he claims to have introduced into gnomonics. In this work, the arc NO is named the hektEmoros and is one of the six quantities of which any two determine the others. The remaining are: meridianus (OD), decensivus (EN), horizontalis (SG), and two (horarius and verticalis) which do not appear in figure 5 because they involve the prime vertical. Ptolemy explains how, by rotating circles on the sphere into a working plane, a procedure he calls an analemma, the student may determine the six arcs for a given local latitude q, declination 6, and the hour angle t of the sun. P. Luckey gives a translation of Ptolemys procedures into trigonometric terms, from which it transpires that the description of NO is precisely that of (l),though this is not the case with other quantities. According to Sezgin, Ptolemys treatise was not translated into Arabic, but an earlier example of an,analemma, that of Diodoros (first century B.C.), was cited by Ibriihim b. SinBn, the grandson of Thabit b. Qurra, and it is no surprise to see Thiibit b. Qurra, who was well-schooled in Hellenistic mathematics, make use of the hektt3noro.s (which he calls by no special name) in his treatise on ~undials.~ Thiibit

m).

al-Biralnis Method of the ZGes

13

gives the same description of the arcs NO and OR as that found in (1) and ( 2 ) , so it is clear that both basic transformations were familiar to the ninth century writers on gnomonics and that the key idea is found even earlier in Ptolemy. We conjecture, therefore, that the origins of the qibla method that concerns us today lie in the theory of sundials. It may not be coincidental that the writer in whose z i j we first find the method, Habash al-Hiisib, also wrote on sundials, though no copy of his book On Sundials and Gnomons25 is known today. Another piece of evidence for the close connection between this qibla method and the theory of sundials is Chapter 26 of Ibn Yiinus zij, which is devoted to sundials. This Egyptian astronomer gives exactly the same method as does habit for finding the arcs NO and 02 and then finds OD = @ + OZ.He claims the method as his own invention and, evidently ignorant of Thabits work, he may have genuinely believed it was; however, since Ibn Yiinus gives the same qibla method as Abu I-Wafii and others, and he does not claim that as his own invention, the method of the zijes may be an example of a technique for vertical sundials inspiring - during the 9th century - a qibla method which, 150 years later, inspires the original method for sundials. In addition, however ignorant Ibn Yiinus may have been of ThBbits work it is clear that he saw the mathematical core of the method, for he heads Chapter 26 On finding the altitude and azimuth with respect to the meridian, and there can be no doubt that he saw that the three pairs of coordinates involved in the method were in essence all measuring the same pairs of quantities and differed only in the choice of the reference circles. Finally, to conclude our survey, we note an interesting transformation of the mathematical reasoning behind the method in al-Biriinis zij, ul-Qdniin al-M&zidi. Since this source is clearly explained in Kings readily-available survey,26and the steps in the computation of the inbirdfare precisely those of the method of the zijes, we shall not repeat them here; rather we limit ourselves to four noteworthy points in Biriinis treatment. The first is that the horizon of Mecca plays a basic role, and the great circle GNOA of figure 1 is defined as one whose poles are the intersections of the local meridian with the horizon of Mecca. This approach seems to be unique to al-Biriini. Second, the law of sines for spherical triangles is used in addition to the rule of

14

J. L. Berggren

four quantities. Third, al-Biriini explains, using the same test as in the work al-Zij al-Shdmil, how to tell if the qibla is north or south of the prime vertical and east or west of the local meridian. Finally al-Biriini chooses the odd terminology al-bud fil-maddr (the distance on the ma&r) for the arc NO in figure 1. In his K.al-tafhim (p. 56) alBinjni defines al-rnaddrrit al-yaumiyyat as day-circles and maddrat al-ar# as circles parallel to the ecliptic, so the basic meaning of mad& seems to be a small circle parallel to a great circle. Thus it seems to be a strange word to use to designate a great circle. We have, in al-Binjnis treatment, what we would expect in the eleventh century, namely an elaboration of the method to cover a wider variety of cases and the use of spherical trigonometry with the employment of spherical angles. The use of the horizon of Mecca was a variation on what everyone else had done, while the odd name for the arc NO reminds us of a careless slip we have previously observed in the companion treatment of the qibla problem by an analemma in the next section of this zij. We therefore conclude that the roots of the method of the zijes for finding the qibla lie in Ptolemys treatise The Analemma, where the Alexandrian astronomer solves the problem of drawing the hour lines on a vertical dial. In the third century Hijra (9th A.D.), at least by the time of Yiibash al-Hasib, some Islamic writer saw that the sundial transformations, applied twice, would produce a solution to the qibla problem. This solution became extremely popular during the fourth century Hijra (10th A.D.), occumng at least six times either as a solution to the qibla problem or the more general problem of finding the altitude and azimuth of any celestial object given q, the declination and the hour-angle. In the various solutions, the terminology employed reflects two different traditions, and the justifications offered share in the progress of spherical trigonometry from the rule of four quantities to theorems involving the angles of spherical triangles.2s The other characteristic of the fourth-century Hijra treatment of the problem, necessitated by the fact that the medieval sine function assumed only positive values, was an elaboration of the method to deal with a wider variety of cases of the position of Mecca relative to the locality in question. This elaboration reached its culmination by the time of Jamshid al-Kiishi in the latter part of the 9* Hijra century (early 15th century A.D.) who, in his Zij-i-Khdqani, presents an ex-

al-Birrinis Method of the Zces

15

panded version of the method to deal with any location on the earths surface and thus provides a universal solution to the qibfa problem.

Acknowledgements I wish to thank E. S. Kennedy for sending me notes based on microfilm copies of the work af-Zij al-Jdmi by Kiishygr b. Labban and D. A. King and R. Lorch for helpful comments on a preliminary version of this paper. I also thank the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada for its Grant A3486 in support of the research on which this paper is based.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Berggren I: J. L. Berggren, A Comparison of Four Analemmas for Determining the Azimuth of the Qibla, Journal for the History of Arabic Science 4 (1980). pp. 6 W . Berggren 2: J. L. Berggren, On at-Birunis Method o f the Zijes for the Qibla. Proc. of the 16th International Congress of the History of Science (Bucharest, 1981), C. pp. 23745. BirLini: Abu I-Raybin at-Biriini, On the Determination of the Coordinates of Cities (tr. J . Ali), Beirut 1967. Kennedy I : E. S. Kennedy, ,A Survey of Islamic Astronomical Tables, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society N.S.46, Part. 2 (1956). Kennedy 2: E. S. Kennedy, A Commentary Upon Birrinis Kitcib Tabdid al-Amrikin,Beirut 1973. Kennedy 3: E . S. Kennedy, The History of Trigonometry, an Overview, 31sf Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, (Washington, D.C.1%9), pp. 333-59. King I : D. A. King, The Astronomical Works of Ibn Ycinus (Ph.D. diss., Yale Univ., 1972). King2: D. A. King, Art. Kibla, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 4 vols. to date, Leiden 1960present. King 3: D. A. King, Some Early Islamic Approximate Methods for Determining the Qibla, to appear. King 4: D. A. King, The World about the Kkba: A Study of the Sacred Direction in Medieval Islam, to be published by Islamic Art.Publications, S.p.A. Luckey, P., Das Analemma von Ptolemaus, Astronomische Nachrichren 230 (1927) No. 5498, cols. 1 7 4 . Neugebauer: 0. Neugebauer, A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy, Parts 1-3. New York 1975. Sezgin: F. Sezgin, Geschichte des arabirchen Schrifttums, Band V: Mathematik and Band VI: Astronomie, Leiden 1974 and 1978, respectively. Thabit: Thibit ibn Qurra, K. fiilit al-siCit,(ed., trans., and comm. by K. Garbers as Ein Werk a t h . ,As*. Tibit b. QurrL iiber ebene Sonnenuhren), Quellen und Sncdicn zur Cesch. der M und Physik: Abt. A 4 (1936), pp. 1-80.

16

1. L. Berggren

ABBREVIATION
AS Aya Sofia, Istanbul.

NOTES

1 . See Binini, pp. 253-55. 2 . Berggren 2 . 3 . These methods were of several types ranging from exact or approximate mathematical methods to those based on folk astronomy. The former are discussed in King 2 and 3 while those of the latter type are found in King 4 . 4 . This is from the MS Meshhed, Ridn 5412,pp. 43-50. 5. See Kennedy 2, p. xvii. 6 . The rule says that in two spherical right triangles ABC and AB'C' with a common acute angle at A and right angles at C and C', Sin B'C'ISin B'A = Sin BClSin BA. See Kennedy 3 for a discussion of this rule in Islamic mathematics. 7 . in a talk delivered to the 16th International Congress of the History of Science held in Bucharest in 1981. 8 . See King 3 . 9. See King 3. 1 0 . In Berggren 2, p. 241. 1 1 . See Kennedy 1, p. 129. 1 2 . In Sezgin, V p. 324. 1 3 . We are quoting this from the unpublished Ph.D. thesis of Dr. M.-Th. Debarnot who kindly sent us extracts from her thesis relevant to our research. The quotation is from p. 110. 1 4 . See Sezgin V, S.V. al-KOhi. 1 5 . See Sezgin VI, pp. 246-8.Our account of the two versions of this text is based on notes sup plied to us by E. S. Kennedy from microfilms of Leiden, Or. 8 and Istanbul, Fatih 3418. There are several other manuscripts of this zij listed by Sezgin. 1 6 . See Kennedy 1 p. 126. For a detailed study of much of Ibn Yunus' zij see King 1 . 1 7 . King 1, pp. 153-5 and p. 191. 18. King 1, p. 265. 1 9 . The substitutions NT + NO, TR .--* OD produce (3) from (l), and when NS in (3) has been calculated its substitution for NG in ( 2 ) . along with the above substitutions, produces (4) from ( 2 ) . 2 0 . See the discussion in Neugebawr, pp. 848-852. 21. For some remarks on the history of this method see Ntugebauer, pp. 839-56. On the use of analemmas tb determine the qibla see Berggren 1 . 22. In Luckey, col's. 31-32, the results of J. Drecker are reported. 23. See Sezgin, V, p. 170. 24. See Thabir,p. 47. 25. Cited by Sezgin, from the Fihrisr of Ibn al-Nadim, in V, p. 276. 24. See King2. 2 7 . See Berggren 1, p. 74. . 28. For an outline of the history of trigonometry see Kennedy 3