Skip to main content



(b. Mahãn, Kerman, Persai; fl. Baghdad, ca. 860; d. ca. 880)

mathematics, astronomy.

Our main source of information on al-Māhānī’s life consists of quotations from an unspecified work by al-Māhānī in Ibn Yūnus’ Ḥākimite Tables. Here Ibn Yūnus cites observations of conjunctions and lunar and solar eclipses made by al-Māhānī between 853 and 866. Al-Māhānī remarked, in connection with the lunar eclipses, that he calculated their beginnings with an astrolabe and that the beginnings of three consecutive eclipses were about half an hour later than calculated.

Al-Māhānī main accomplishments lie in mathematics; in the Fihrist he is mentioned only as geometer and arithmetician. Al-Khayyāmī states that al-Māhānī was the first to attempt an algebraic solution of the Archimedean problem of dividing a sphere by a plane into segments the volumes of which are in a given ratio (On the sphere and the Cylinder II, 4). Al-Māhānī expressed this problem in a cubic equation of the form x3 + a = cx2, but he could not proceed further. According to al-Khayyāmī, the problem was thought unsolvable until al-Khāzin succeeded by using conic sections. In Leiden there exists a manuscript copy of a commentary to al-Māhānī’s treatise, probably by al-Qūhī

Al-Māhānī wrote commentaries to books I, V, X and XIII of Euclid’s Elements. Of these, the treatise on the twenty-six propositions of book I that can be proved without a reductio ad absurdum has been lost. Part of a commentary on book X, on irrational ratios; an explanation of obscure passages in book XIII; and three (different?) treatises on ratio (book V) are extant. Since book V, on the theory of proposition, was presented in a synthetic form which did not reveal how the doctrine of proportions had come into being, Arabic mathematicians were dissatisfied with definition 5, the fundamental one. They did not deny its correctness, however, and accepted it as a principle. Gradually they replaced the Euclidean “equimultiple” definition by the pre-Eudoxian “anthyphairetic” definition, which compared magnitudes by comparing their expansion in continued fractions. The “anthyphairetic” conception appears in explicit form in al-Māhānī’s treatise, in which he referred to Thābit ibn Qurra. Al-Māhānī regarded ratio as “the mutual behavior of two magnitudes when compared with one another by means of the Euclidean process of finding the greatest common measure.” Two pairs of magnitudes were for him proportional when “the two series of quotients appearing in that process are identical.” Essentially the same theory was worked out later by as-Nayrīzī. Neither established a connection with Euclid’definition, which was first done by al-Haytham.

At the request of some geometers al-Māhānī wrote an improved edition of the Sphaerica of Menelaus—of book I and part of book II—which has been lost. His improvements consisted of inserting explanatory remarks, modernizing the language (with special consideration given to technical terms), and remodeling or replacing obscure proofs. This edition was revised and finished by Aḥmad ibn Abī Saīd al-Harawī in the tenth century. Al-Ţūsī, who wrote the most widely known Arabic edition, considered al-Māhānī’s and al-Harawī’s improvements valueless and used the edition by Abū Nạr Maṇūr ibn Irāq.


I. Original Works. C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Literatur, supp. I (Leiden, 1937), 383, lists the available MSS of al-Māhānī. Information on al-Māhānī is also given in H. Suter’s translation of the Fihrist in Das Mathematiker-Verzeichniss im Fihrist des Ibn abī Jakuūb al-Nadīm, in Abhandlungen zur Geshichte der Mathematik, VI (Leipzig, 1892), 25, 58. Partial translations and discussions of al-Māhānī’s work are in M. Krause, Die Sphärik von Menelaos aus Alexandrien (Berlin, 1936), 1, 13, 23–26; G. P. Matvievskaya, Uchenie o chisle na srednevekovom Blizhnem i Srednem Vostoke (“Studies on Number in the Medieval Near and Middle East”; Tashkent, 1967), ch. 6, which deals with commentaries on Euclid X; and E. B. Plooij, Euclid’s Conception of Ratio (Rotterdam, 1950), 4, 50, 61.

II. Secondary Literature. On al-Māhāhānī’s observations, see “Ibn Yūnus, Le livre de la grande Table Hak´mite, trans. by J. J. A. Caussin de Perceval in Notices et extraits de la Bibliothèque nationale, 7 (1804), 58, 80, 102–112, 164. Information on al-Māhānī as a mathematician, especially his treatment of the Archimedean problem, is in F. Woepcke, L’algèbre d’Omar Alkhayyāmī (Paris, 1851), 2, 40–44, 96. On the anthyphairetic theory, see O. Becker, “Eudoxos Studien I,” in Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik, Astronomie und Physik, Abt, B. 2 (1933), 311–333.

Yvonne Dold-Samplonius

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"Al-Māh." Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography. . 22 Apr. 2019 <>.

"Al-Māh." Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography. . (April 22, 2019).

"Al-Māh." Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography. . Retrieved April 22, 2019 from

Learn more about citation styles

Citation styles gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA).

Within the “Cite this article” tool, pick a style to see how all available information looks when formatted according to that style. Then, copy and paste the text into your bibliography or works cited list.

Because each style has its own formatting nuances that evolve over time and not all information is available for every reference entry or article, cannot guarantee each citation it generates. Therefore, it’s best to use citations as a starting point before checking the style against your school or publication’s requirements and the most-recent information available at these sites:

Modern Language Association

The Chicago Manual of Style

American Psychological Association

  • Most online reference entries and articles do not have page numbers. Therefore, that information is unavailable for most content. However, the date of retrieval is often important. Refer to each style’s convention regarding the best way to format page numbers and retrieval dates.
  • In addition to the MLA, Chicago, and APA styles, your school, university, publication, or institution may have its own requirements for citations. Therefore, be sure to refer to those guidelines when editing your bibliography or works cited list.