First Western translation of Laozi

Latin Medieval and Neo-Latin
1




The first translation of the Dao De Jing into a Western language was executed in Latin by some of the Roman Catholic missionaries, and a copy of it was brought to England by a Mr. Matthew Raper, F.R.S., and presented by him to the Society at a meeting on the 10th January, 1788,—being the gift to him of P. Jos. de Grammont, ‘Missionarius Apostolicus, ex-Jesuita.’ In this version Dao is taken in the sense of Ratio, or the Supreme Reason of the Divine Being, the Creator and Governor.

P. Jos. de Grammont: Jean-Baptiste-Joseph de Grammont (1736-ca. 1812), French Jesuit missionary to China.

Source: https://www.freedomcircle.com/source/dao-de-jing

Does a scan or text of this translation exist anywhere? The above image was easy to find, but that seems to be all there is of it. Several of de Grammont’s letters exist online. He seems to have played a minor role in French-Anglo-Chinese politics and was attached to the Qing court as a mathematician and musician (Chinese name Liang Dong-cai, 梁棟材).

2

According to this disputatio on Vicipaedia, 道德經 was translated by Jean-François Noëlas in 1721, whose manuscript was recently published in “Uroffenbarung und Daoismus : jesuitische Missionshermeneutik des Daoismus” (Collani, 2008).

In another place we find a reference: “Liber Sinicus Tao Te Kim inscriptus, in Latinum idioma Versus [The Chinese Book Daodejing Written in Idiomatic Latin Verse]. Unpublished Manuscript. The British Library. London, England.”

3

The first partially translation of the Daodejing into a western language dates from 1590 and is credited to Juan Cobo. He translated the Mingxin baojian (明心宝鉴) under the title “Espejo rico del claro corazón o Beng Sim Po Cam” , which is a collection of aphorisms and notable quotations from the Chinese classics, including some passages of the Daodejing.

The first complete translation of the Daodejing into a western language was “Liber sinicus tao te kim” , whose author is believed to be Jean-François Noëlas.

You can find this Latin translation here: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=9798358634534&i=stripbooks&linkCode=qs

4

Yes, from the description, that would appear to be from this manuscript. I see from elsewhere on the internet that you are self publishing this, Borja. Can you give any sample pages?

Also, if you transcribed from the manuscript, can you say anything about this claim?

It also seems the above image (taken from wikimedia) has been doctored: the chinese characters seem to be modern digital fonts superimposed on the mss.

Source: https://twitter.com/edwardW2/status/1324948485993426949

5

We need someone to translate “The Tao of Pooh” and “The Te of Piglet” into Latin.

6

Yes, here are the first and last chapters of this Latin version:

TEXTUS 1us

  1. Ratio quae potest ratiocinando comprendi, non est aeterna Ratio.
  2. Nomen quod potest nominari, non est aeternum nomen.
  3. Non ens appellatur Caeli et Terrae principium.
  4. Ens vocatur omnium rerum mater.
  5. Itaque aeternum non ens concupiscit per contemplationem suarum perfectionem.
  6. Eternum ens concupiscit per consideratione suorum terminorum.
  7. Ista duo (non ens et ens) simul prodeunt sed diversè nominantur.
  8. Eadem (vero iis nominibus) appellatur profunditas profundè penetrate iterum profundior
  9. Omnium mirabilium porta.

TEXTUS 81us ET VLTIMUS

  1. Sermo verus ornatus non est: ornatus sermo sincerus non est.
  2. Qui vere bonus, non contendit: qui contendit, bonus non est.
  3. Vere doctus eruditus non est: eruditus doctus non est.
  4. Sanctus nihil aliundè sibi comparat aut accersit.
  5. Quod homo sit, (non naturae necessitas) sed abundatia pietatis fecit.
  6. Quò plus hominibus dat, eo plus habet.
  7. Caelestis Táo natura ditat omnes, nemini nocet.
  8. Eadem in Sancto natura hominum bono semper laborantem eum facit: et nemini invidentem.


    With regards to that claim, the picture is from the book “Uroffenbarung und Daoismus: Jesuitische Missionshermeneutik des Daoismus (Daodejing-Forschung) Gebundene Ausgabe”. However, it has only the first chapter transcription and German translation as well as comments about it. The Chinese characters are in the original manuscript, thus the Chinese characters are not modern digital fonts superimposed on the manuscript.
7

That strikes me as a lot of fun. I’ve ordered a copy.

8

Thank you! Let me know what you think about it.

I will also share with you the preface updated. Not sure if you will get the version with the updated preface as I changed it a few days ago. I would also appreciate your comments.

PRAEFATIO

Hic liber in Latinum translatus unicus codex Tao Te Kim est, qui in Britannica bibliotheca nunc est. Antequam tres codices erant, sed praeter hunc codicem illi perditi sunt.

Primus codex Tao Te Kim probabiliter inter annos MDCLXXXVII et MDCCII a Jesuita François Noël vertus erat. Jesuita Antoine Gaubil in libri tomo XV, Mémoires concernant l’histoire, les sciences, les arts, les mœurs, les usages, etc. des Chinois, metionem sui translationis facit. Hic liber translatus tamen perditus est.

Secundus codex fortasse non plene translatus sit et in libro, Catalogue Des Livres Imprimes, Des Manuscrits Et Des Ouvrages Chinois, Tartares, Japonais, Etc., Composant La Bibliotheque de Feu M. Klaproth, Jean-François Foucquet interpres esse Tao Te Kim dicitur. Alii viri doctori qualis Louis Pfister Josephque Needham in Bibliotheca Gallica Foucquet translationem esse credunt; sed alii hoc dubitant, verbi gratia, Witek et Von Collani. Witek enim probauit ut ille codex, qui in Bibliotheca Gallica est, translatio non sit, quod hic liber Bibliothecae Gallicae translatio non est sed liber Sinicus Tao Te Kim in Sinicam linguam scriptus est.

Nomen tertii codecis a Pierre-Martial Cibot, Aloys Ko et Etienne Yang translati patet in libri tomo I, Mémoires concernant l’histoire, les sciences, les arts, les mœurs, les usages, etc. des Chinois, sed hoc libellus non inventus est.

Jean-François Noëlas anno MDCCXX hunc codicem Britannicae bibliothecae transferre videtur; namque anno MDCCCIX et in libro de Antonio Montucci, Remarques philologiques sur le voyages en Chine de M. De Guignes, huius codicis indicium est et anno MDCCCICI in libro The Sacred Books of China. Texts of Taoism. Part V: Tao Teh King. James Legge hunc translatiomen exsistere narrat et is ipse hunc librum vidit, autem interpretem libri non agnoscebat. Primum indicium huius translationis libri Sinici Tao Te Kim in Antoine Gaubil epistula est, in qua Gaubil dicit ut Nöelas hunc Sinicum librum explicare conatur, sed Gaubil hoc possibile esse non putat. Haec epistula anno MDCCXXIX in Correspondance de Pékin scripta est. In ultima pagina huius codicis inscriptio est, in qua dicitur, quod Ex-Jesuita Jean-Baptiste Joseph de Grammont hunc librum Tao Te Kim ad Raper et Societati Regia Londinensi offert. Raper anno MDCCLXXXVIII Societati Regia Londinensi hunc codicem dedit.

Noëlas discipulus Foucquet erat, qui Figurismi doctrinam secutus erat. Sectatores Figurismi Tao Te Kim librum sacrum considerabant, quia putabant ut hic liber Sinicus patefactionem incarnationis Christi Iesu ac dogmatem Trinitatis continebat. Ordo enim textorum originalem ordinem non sequitur, quod dispositio textorum ex Figurismi notionibus facta est. Namque undecim textus primi sunt: 1, 14, 4 42, quae dogmatem Trinitatis tractant, et 10, 28, 27, 15, 20, 21, 25, quae patefactionem incarnationis Christi Iesu procurant.

Codex originalis Sinicum textum, translationem Latinam, margines, notas aliquorum versorum habet. Aliqui texti ad textum brevem intellegendum paraphrasem continent, aliqui paraphrasem non habent. Translatio codicis una pars est. Definitiones quoque verborum Sinicorum ex Shuowen jiezi et Zhengzi tong thesauris Sinicis sunt. Praetera interpres huius codicis ad in Latinum vertendum textosque interpretandum multis auctoribus Sinicis et Europaeis utur, exempli gratia, Zhuangzi, Li Yong, Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita, Beatus Augustinus, Antonio Vieira, et. al.

Haec editio Latinam translationem solum habet et, ut supra dictum est, ordo huius codicis textorum originalem Sinicum ordinem non sequitur, sed hic libellus ordinem originalem Sinicum sequitur, quia viris studiosis huius libri sic facilior legere putamus.

Singapura
mense Octobri MMXXII.

BIBLIOGRAPHIA
Cibot, P-M., (1776) ‘Essai sur l’antiquité des Chinois’. In Mémoires concernant l’histoire, les sciences, les arts, les mœurs, les usages, etc. des Chinois: par les Missionnaires de Pékin. Vol 1. Paris: Nyon, p. 54.
Gaubil, A., (1791) ‘Abrégé de l’Histoire chinoise de la grande Dynastie T’ang écrit de 1753’. In Mémoires concernant l’histoire, les sciences, les arts, les mœurs, les usages, etc. des Chinois: par les Missionnaires de Pékin. Vol 15. Paris: Nyon, pp. 1-596.
—, (1970) Correspondance de Pékin 1722-1759. Genève: Droz.
Klaproth, H. J., (1839) Catalogue Des Livres Imprimes, Des Manuscrits Et Des Ouvrages Chinois, Tartares, Japonais, Etc., Composant La Bibliotheque de Feu M. Klaproth. Part 2. Paris: A. Pihan de La Forest.
Legge, J. and Müller, F., (1988) The sacred books of China. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p.xii-xiii.
Montucci, A. (1809) Remarques philologiques sur le voyages en Chine de M. De Guignes. Berlin: Starcke.
Needham, J. and Wang, L., (1956) Science and civilisation in China. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P, p.163.
Pfister, L., (1932) Notices biographiques et bibliographiques sur les Jésuites de l’ancienne Mission de Chine. Chang-Hai: Impr. de la Mission catholique, pp.114-116.
Von Collani, C. (2015) ‘The Manuscript of the Daodejing in the British Library’ in Wong, W. and Führer, B. (ed.) Sinologists as translators in the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries. Hong Kong [China]: Chinese University Press, pp. 39-67.
Witek, J., (1982) Controversial ideas in China and in Europe. Roma: Institutum Historicoum S.I, pp.216-218.