DOCSLIB.ORG

Modeling the Heavens: Sphairopoiia and Ptolemy's Planetary Hypotheses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modeling the Heavens: Sphairopoiia and Ptolemy's Planetary Hypotheses Modeling the Heavens: Sphairopoiia and Ptolemy’s Planetary Hypotheses Elizabeth Hamm Saint Mary’s College of California This article investigates sphairopoiia, the art of making instruments that display the heavens, in Claudius Ptolemy’s Planetary Hypotheses. It takes up two questions: what kind of instrument does Ptolemy describe? And, could such an instrument have been constructed? I argue that Ptolemy did not propose one specific type of instrument, but instead he offered a range of possible designs, with the details to be worked out by the craftsman. Moreover, in addition to exhibiting his astronomical models and having the ability to esti- mate predictions, the instrument he proposed would have also shown the phys- ical workings of the heavens. What emerges is both a clearer idea of what Ptolemy wanted the technician to build, and the purpose of such instruments. 1. Introduction Ptolemy wrote the Planetary Hypotheses for both astronomers and instrument- makers. Most studies of this text concentrate on its meaning for the former, but there remain many questions surrounding its meaning for the latter.1 This article investigates the purpose of Ptolemy’s Planetary Hypotheses in light of what he says about instrument-making. It takes up the following questions: what kind of instrument does Ptolemy describe? And, could such an instru- ment have been constructed? I argue that he did not have one specific design in mind, but instead he offered craftsmen options for the content, design, Research for this article was supported by the Saint Mary’s College Faculty Development Fund. I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers from this journal for their generous comments and constructive feedback. 1. For the astronomical models in the Planetary Hypotheses see Willy Hartner 1964; Bernard R. Goldstein 1967; Otto Neugebauer 1975, pp. 900–26; N. M. Swerdlow 2005; Dennis Duke 2009; and Elizabeth Hamm 2011. Andrea Murschel discusses both the astro- nomical models and the implications for instrument-maker and she offers a detailed account of Book II (Murschel 1995). Perspectives on Science 2016, vol. 24, no. 4 ©2016 by The Massachusetts Institute of Technology doi:10.1162/POSC_a_00214 416 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/POSC_a_00214 by guest on 30 September 2021 Perspectives on Science 417 and operational methods. In addition to exhibiting his astronomical models and estimating planetary positions, the instrument Ptolemy described would have also shown the physical workings of the heavens. 2. BookIofthePlanetary Hypotheses The Planetary Hypotheses was written sometime after Ptolemy’s comprehen- sive and influential astronomical work, the Almagest. It offers an account of celestial motion and dimensions based on models presented in the Almagest. It includes a number of changes to the parameters and models, and it examines the structure of the heavens. The entirety of the text, except for the tables that conclude it, exists in Arabic, translated from the original Greek, and in Hebrew translated from the Arabic.2 Only the first part of Book I has survived in Greek.3 The text commences with a brief statement of what was accomplished in the Almagest, and then promptly turns to the aim of the work: Here we have taken on the task to set out the thing itself briefly, so that it can be more readily comprehended by both ourselves and by those choosing to arrange the models4 in an instrument ( ), either doing this in a more naked ( ) way by restoring each of the motions to its respective epoch by hand, or through a mechanical ( ) approach, combining the models with one another and with the motion of the whole.5 Indeed, this is not the accustomed manner of sphairopoiia ( );6 Ptolemy states that this text was written for two audiences: “both ourselves and those choosing to arrange the models in an instrument.” By “ourselves,” Ptolemy refers to astronomers like himself. The second audience includes craftsmen who wish to arrange the models from the Almagest into an instru- ment ( ) in one of two ways: hand operated or mechanical ( ). This instrument is not the type used to take observations, but instead one that would show his astronomical models. Ptolemy offered 2. The tables at the end of the text are lost. Murschel discusses the tables and recon- structs them (1995, pp. 52–3). For information about the Arabic and Hebrew manuscripts see J. L. Heiberg 1907, pp. ix–x, Goldstein 1967, p. 5; Regis Morelon 1993, pp. 9–10, and Elizabeth Hamm 2011, pp. 10–11. 3. For information about the Greek manuscripts see Heiberg 1907, pp. vi–x and Hamm 2011, pp. 10–11. 4. Taking to refer back to . Following Toomer, I have translated as model. For a discussion of Ptolemy’s use of this word see G. J. Toomer 1998, pp. 23–4. For a list of variations in the manuscript see Heiberg 1907, pp. 70–106. 5. Taking to refer to . Heiberg 1907, pp. 70–72. 6. Heiberg 1907, p. 70. Unless otherwise stated, all translations are my own. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/POSC_a_00214 by guest on 30 September 2021 418 Modeling the Heavens the technician choices in how to display the models, indicating that he did not have one definitive design in mind. With the first option, the manual choice, each celestial body would be moved to its appropriate position for a given date by hand. The second option, the mechanical choice, has the models connected to one another, possibly through a series of gears, so that moving certain parts of the model would drive the movement of other parts. While this initial description is brief, Ptolemy elaborated by contending that he did not want the device built in the accustomed manner of sphairopoiia. This is the only instance in Ptolemy’s extant works where the word sphairopoiia is used. Indeed, this word is used only a handful of times in the existing Greek corpus. It has several different meanings, including: making some- thing into a ball or sphere, a branch of mechanics, or a particular astronomical device. The latter two senses are found in the works of several scientific writers and include the construction of celestial globes, armillary spheres, and other devices that displayed celestial models.7 Ptolemy is forthright about why the device he describes should not be constructed in the accustomed style of sphairopoiia: he thinks that style makes the craftsmanship, rather than the astronomical models, the object of display. After explaining that the instrument should be constructed so that each motion is returned to its starting point either manually or by combining the models to the motion of the whole mechanically, he states: Indeed, this is not the accustomed manner of sphairopoiia ( ); for this [sort of manner], apart from failing to represent the models, presents the phenomenon only, and not the underlying [reality], so that the craftsmanship ( ), and not the models, becomes the exhibit. But rather [the manner] where the different motions under our view are arranged together with the anomalies that are apparent to observers and subject to uniform and circular courses, even if it is not possible to intertwine them all in a way that is worthy of the aforementioned, but [instead] having to exhibit each [model] separately in this way. (Heiberg 1907, pp. 72–4) Ptolemy wanted the device to be built in a style where the planets’ appearances and the structures of the models were exhibited. He claimed that the traditional style of sphairopoiia accomplished the former, but not the latter. The earlier instruments, which only showed the phenomena, managed to combine the models of all of the celestial bodies into one instrument. Ptolemy wanted his instrument to show the underlying mo- tions and the planetary positions. He had a complete mechanical instrument 7. James Evans and J. Lennart Berggren discuss this in more detail (2006, pp. 52–3). Also see Sylvia Berryman 2009, pp. 81–87. Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/POSC_a_00214 by guest on 30 September 2021 Perspectives on Science 419 in mind, but he did not know if such an instrument could be built. Recognizing the challenge of building a comprehensive instrument, he offered the craftsman the option of displaying each model in a separate instrument. Although he did not give specific directions, Ptolemy intended for the text to be a resource for technicians and astronomers as indicated by the opening sentences. He did not provide a detailed design; however, he made some recommendations. He suggested that the astronomical models should be displayed as circles instead of spheres. Concerning the positions and arrangement of the circles causing the anomalies, we will apply the simpler version in respect to the method of instrument-making ( ), even if some small variations will follow ( ), and moreover we fit the motions to the circles themselves, as if they are freed from the spheres that contain them ( ),8 so that we can gaze upon the visual impact of the models bare and unconcealed. (Heiberg 1907, pp. 72–5). The inner workings of each planetary model would be easily viewable, he stated, if the components of the models were displayed as circles instead of spheres. A secondary benefit to using circles instead of spheres is that such a decision would require less material, possibly making the device easier to build, and less expensive. Additionally, his willingness to sacrifice some accuracy, small variations or differences, for the sake of instrument-making shows that he accepted that making such instruments required compromises with complete accuracy. 3. Book I.B. and Book II of the Planetary Hypotheses The second half of Book I (Book I.B) and Book II cover material original to the Planetary Hypotheses, such as descriptions of the sizes and distances of the planets, the theory of nested spheres, and the physical attributes of Ptolemy’s astronomical models.9 While the topics of Book I (parts A and B) and Book II differ, the theme of instrument-making is woven through- out the entirety of the work.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Geography of Ptolemy Elucidated
    The Grography of Ptolemy The geography of Ptolemy elucidated Thomas Glazebrook Rylands 1893 • A brief outline of the rise and progress of geographical inquiry prior to the time of Ptolemy. §1.—Introductory. IN tracing the early progress of Geography it is necessary to remember that, like all other sciences, it arose from “ small beginnings.” When men began to move from place to place they naturally desired to tell the tale of their wanderings, both for their own satisfaction and for the information of others. Such accounts have now perished, but their results remain in the earliest records extant ; hence, it is impossible to begin an investigation into the history of Geography at the true fountain-head, though it is in some instances possible to guess the nature of the source from the character of the resultant stream. A further difficulty lies in the question as to where the science of Geography begins. A Greek would probably have answered when some discoverer first invented a method for map- ping out the distance between certain places, which distance conversely could be ascertained directly from the map. In accordance with modern method, the science of Geography might be said to begin when the subject ceased to be dealt with mythically or dogmatically ; when facts were collected and reduced to laws, while these laws again, or their prior facts, were connected with other laws—in the case of Geography with those of Mathematics and Astro- nomy. Perhaps it would be better to follow the latter principle of division, and consequently the history of Geography may be divided into two main stages—“ Pre-Scientific” and Scientific Geography—though strictly speaking, the name of Geography should be applied to the latter alone.
    [Show full text]
  • The Magic of the Atwood Sphere
    The magic of the Atwood Sphere Exactly a century ago, on June Dr. Jean-Michel Faidit 5, 1913, a “celestial sphere demon- Astronomical Society of France stration” by Professor Wallace W. Montpellier, France Atwood thrilled the populace of [email protected] Chicago. This machine, built to ac- commodate a dozen spectators, took up a concept popular in the eigh- teenth century: that of turning stel- lariums. The impact was consider- able. It sparked the genesis of modern planetariums, leading 10 years lat- er to an invention by Bauersfeld, engineer of the Zeiss Company, the Deutsche Museum in Munich. Since ancient times, mankind has sought to represent the sky and the stars. Two trends emerged. First, stars and constellations were easy, especially drawn on maps or globes. This was the case, for example, in Egypt with the Zodiac of Dendera or in the Greco-Ro- man world with the statue of Atlas support- ing the sky, like that of the Farnese Atlas at the National Archaeological Museum of Na- ples. But things were more complicated when it came to include the sun, moon, planets, and their apparent motions. Ingenious mecha- nisms were developed early as the Antiky- thera mechanism, found at the bottom of the Aegean Sea in 1900 and currently an exhibi- tion until July at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers in Paris. During two millennia, the human mind and ingenuity worked constantly develop- ing and combining these two approaches us- ing a variety of media: astrolabes, quadrants, armillary spheres, astronomical clocks, co- pernican orreries and celestial globes, cul- minating with the famous Coronelli globes offered to Louis XIV.
    [Show full text]
  • Thinking Outside the Sphere Views of the Stars from Aristotle to Herschel Thinking Outside the Sphere
    Thinking Outside the Sphere Views of the Stars from Aristotle to Herschel Thinking Outside the Sphere A Constellation of Rare Books from the History of Science Collection The exhibition was made possible by generous support from Mr. & Mrs. James B. Hebenstreit and Mrs. Lathrop M. Gates. CATALOG OF THE EXHIBITION Linda Hall Library Linda Hall Library of Science, Engineering and Technology Cynthia J. Rogers, Curator 5109 Cherry Street Kansas City MO 64110 1 Thinking Outside the Sphere is held in copyright by the Linda Hall Library, 2010, and any reproduction of text or images requires permission. The Linda Hall Library is an independently funded library devoted to science, engineering and technology which is used extensively by The exhibition opened at the Linda Hall Library April 22 and closed companies, academic institutions and individuals throughout the world. September 18, 2010. The Library was established by the wills of Herbert and Linda Hall and opened in 1946. It is located on a 14 acre arboretum in Kansas City, Missouri, the site of the former home of Herbert and Linda Hall. Sources of images on preliminary pages: Page 1, cover left: Peter Apian. Cosmographia, 1550. We invite you to visit the Library or our website at www.lindahlll.org. Page 1, right: Camille Flammarion. L'atmosphère météorologie populaire, 1888. Page 3, Table of contents: Leonhard Euler. Theoria motuum planetarum et cometarum, 1744. 2 Table of Contents Introduction Section1 The Ancient Universe Section2 The Enduring Earth-Centered System Section3 The Sun Takes
    [Show full text]
  • The Dark Shades of the Antikythera Mechanism
    Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-018-6255-9 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) The dark shades of the Antikythera Mechanism 1 2 3 Aristeidis Voulgaris • Christophoros Mouratidis • Andreas Vossinakis Received: 19 June 2018 Ó Akade´miai Kiado´, Budapest, Hungary 2018 Abstract In this work we analyze the dark shades which are evident on the AMRP X-ray positive Computed Tomographies and Radiographies of the Antikythera Mechanism ancient prototype. During 2000 years under the sea, the Mechanism bronze parts were totally corroded. The decreased X-ray absorption of the corroded bronze, allowed the CTs capture even in the thick large side of Fragment A. During the photometric analysis of the CTs, apart from corroded bronze, at least two other different (corroded) metal materials were detected, which were used by the ancient manufacturer during the construction of the Antikythera Mechanism. From our analysis and correlating with the mechanical evidence resulting by the use of our functional reconstruction models of the Antikythera Mechanism, we conclude that the existing design of the Antikythera Mechanism is probably the first of such a sophisticated design of the ancient manufacturer. Keywords Metals of Antikythera Mechanism Á Bronze corrosion Á Atacamite X-ray absorption Introduction Mechanism via the 2D X-ray and Thulium 170 radiation began by C. Karakalos of National Centre of Scientific The Antikythera Mechanism was found in 1901, in a Research ‘‘Demokritos’’ (Greece), in the 1970s. Karakalos shipwreck at 50 m depth, on a gulf of Antikythera island, took several film radiographies @160 keV [3]. The first Greece, by Symian sponge divers.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Place in the Universe Sun Kwok
    Our Place in the Universe Sun Kwok Our Place in the Universe Understanding Fundamental Astronomy from Ancient Discoveries Second Edition Sun Kwok Faculty of Science The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, China This book is a second edition of the book “Our Place in the Universe” previously published by the author as a Kindle book under amazon.com. ISBN 978-3-319-54171-6 ISBN 978-3-319-54172-3 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-54172-3 Library of Congress Control Number: 2017937904 © Springer International Publishing AG 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • SIS Bulletin Issue 9
    Scientific Instrument Society Bulletin of the Scientific Instrument Society No. 9 1986 Bulletin of the Scientific Instrument Society For Table of Contents, i~e inside back cover. Mailing Address for Editorial Mattent Dr. Jon Darius c/o Science Museum London SW7 2DD United Kingdom Mailing Addrem for Administrative Matters Mr. Howard Dawes Neville House 42/46 Hagley Road Birmingham B16 8PZ United Kingdom Executive Committee Gerard Turner, Chairman Alan Stimson, Vice-Chairman Howard Dawes, Executive Secretary Trevor Waterman, Meetings Secretary Bnan Brass, Treasurer Jeremy Collins Jon Darius John Dennett Alan Miller Carole Stott David Weston Editor of the Bulletin Ion Darius Editorial Auistant Peter Delehar Typesetting and Printing Halpen Design and Print Limited Victoria House Gertrude Street Chelsea London SW10 0JN United Kingdom (01-351 5577) (Price: £6 per issue including back numbers where available) The Scientific Instrument Society is a Registered Charity No. 326733. Editor's Page Collections: Cabinets and Curios relevant one for our purposes, is Greenwich harbours both cabinet and pinpointed by A.V. Simcock in his curio collections - e.g., from the The dispersal of two collections of essay "A Dodo in the Ark" in Robert T. Barberini family in the 17th century scientific instruments in the past few Gunther and the Old Ashmolean (to be •nd from G.H. Gabb in the 20th. months- part of the Frank collection •t reviewed in the next issue of the Sotheby's Bond Street and part of the Bu//etin): "Interest in collecting Historically, then, collections which Zallinger cabinet •t Christie's South antique scientific instruments... have not been dispersed for whatever Kensington - invites comment on the emerged with the rise of • European reason can and do serve as nuclei for some of our greatest museums.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Mathematical Proof?
    Why Mathematical Proof? Dana S. Scott, FBA, FNAS University Professor Emeritus Carnegie Mellon University Visiting Scholar University of California, Berkeley NOTICE! The author has plagiarized text and graphics from innumerable publications and sites, and he has failed to record attributions! But, as this lecture is intended as an entertainment and is not intended for publication, he regards such copying, therefore, as “fair use”. Keep this quiet, and do please forgive him. A Timeline for Geometry Some Greek Geometers Thales of Miletus (ca. 624 – 548 BC). Pythagoras of Samos (ca. 580 – 500 BC). Plato (428 – 347 BC). Archytas (428 – 347 BC). Theaetetus (ca. 417 – 369 BC). Eudoxus of Cnidus (ca. 408 – 347 BC). Aristotle (384 – 322 BC). Euclid (ca. 325 – ca. 265 BC). Archimedes of Syracuse (ca. 287 – ca. 212 BC). Apollonius of Perga (ca. 262 – ca. 190 BC). Claudius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy)(ca. 90 AD – ca. 168 AD). Diophantus of Alexandria (ca. 200 – 298 AD). Pappus of Alexandria (ca. 290 – ca. 350 AD). Proclus Lycaeus (412 – 485 AD). There is no Royal Road to Geometry Euclid of Alexandria ca. 325 — ca. 265 BC Euclid taught at Alexandria in the time of Ptolemy I Soter, who reigned over Egypt from 323 to 285 BC. He authored the most successful textbook ever produced — and put his sources into obscurity! Moreover, he made us struggle with proofs ever since. Why Has Euclidean Geometry Been So Successful? • Our naive feeling for space is Euclidean. • Its methods have been very useful. • Euclid also shows us a mysterious connection between (visual) intuition and proof. The Pythagorean Theorem Euclid's Elements: Proposition 47 of Book 1 The Pythagorean Theorem Generalized If it holds for one Three triple, Similar it holds Figures for all.
    [Show full text]
  • Apollonius of Pergaconics. Books One - Seven
    APOLLONIUS OF PERGACONICS. BOOKS ONE - SEVEN INTRODUCTION A. Apollonius at Perga Apollonius was born at Perga (Περγα) on the Southern coast of Asia Mi- nor, near the modern Turkish city of Bursa. Little is known about his life before he arrived in Alexandria, where he studied. Certain information about Apollonius’ life in Asia Minor can be obtained from his preface to Book 2 of Conics. The name “Apollonius”(Apollonius) means “devoted to Apollo”, similarly to “Artemius” or “Demetrius” meaning “devoted to Artemis or Demeter”. In the mentioned preface Apollonius writes to Eudemus of Pergamum that he sends him one of the books of Conics via his son also named Apollonius. The coincidence shows that this name was traditional in the family, and in all prob- ability Apollonius’ ancestors were priests of Apollo. Asia Minor during many centuries was for Indo-European tribes a bridge to Europe from their pre-fatherland south of the Caspian Sea. The Indo-European nation living in Asia Minor in 2nd and the beginning of the 1st millennia B.C. was usually called Hittites. Hittites are mentioned in the Bible and in Egyptian papyri. A military leader serving under the Biblical king David was the Hittite Uriah. His wife Bath- sheba, after his death, became the wife of king David and the mother of king Solomon. Hittites had a cuneiform writing analogous to the Babylonian one and hi- eroglyphs analogous to Egyptian ones. The Czech historian Bedrich Hrozny (1879-1952) who has deciphered Hittite cuneiform writing had established that the Hittite language belonged to the Western group of Indo-European languages [Hro].
    [Show full text]
  • The Almagest
    Alma College The Alma, MI 48801 Almagest The bi-weekly newsletter of the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science. Your trusted source for news. Volume 9 No. 4 October 24, 2016 Math & C.S. Colloquium pportionment is a mathematical way to round A integers proportionally. Although well known to determine how many seats each state receives in the U.S. House of Representatives, apportionment methods are also used in the U.S. presidential primaries and the general election. In this talk, Dr. Michael Jones will Why Call it “The Almagest?” examine the geometry of two types of paradoxical behavior ctually, the name of our newsletter was that may occur in these A borrowed from an astronomical handbook settings, using real data when published around 150 A.D. The author was appropriate. We’ll also touch on some recent Claudius Ptolemy, an Egyptian astronomer, mathe- proposed laws and how they would affect the matician, and geographer of Greek descent. paradoxical behavior. Dr. Jones is an Associate Almagest came in thirteen volumes and proclaimed Editor at the American Mathe-matical Society's Mathematical Reviews in Ann Arbor, MI. that the universe was geocentric—the Earth was the middle of the universe. That, however, is not “The Mathematics of Apportionment in what most interests a mathematician about U.S. Presidential Primaries and the Almagest. Of more importance to us is the lost mathematical work that it displays. General Election” Presenter: Dr. Michael Jones Hipparchus was a Greek astronomer and mathema- Date: Tuesday, November 1st tician whose work dates to about three centuries Time: 4:00 prior to Ptolemy’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Pappus of Alexandria: Book 4 of the Collection
    Pappus of Alexandria: Book 4 of the Collection For other titles published in this series, go to http://www.springer.com/series/4142 Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences Managing Editor J.Z. Buchwald Associate Editors J.L. Berggren and J. Lützen Advisory Board C. Fraser, T. Sauer, A. Shapiro Pappus of Alexandria: Book 4 of the Collection Edited With Translation and Commentary by Heike Sefrin-Weis Heike Sefrin-Weis Department of Philosophy University of South Carolina Columbia SC USA [email protected] Sources Managing Editor: Jed Z. Buchwald California Institute of Technology Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences MC 101–40 Pasadena, CA 91125 USA Associate Editors: J.L. Berggren Jesper Lützen Simon Fraser University University of Copenhagen Department of Mathematics Institute of Mathematics University Drive 8888 Universitetsparken 5 V5A 1S6 Burnaby, BC 2100 Koebenhaven Canada Denmark ISBN 978-1-84996-004-5 e-ISBN 978-1-84996-005-2 DOI 10.1007/978-1-84996-005-2 Springer London Dordrecht Heidelberg New York British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Control Number: 2009942260 Mathematics Classification Number (2010) 00A05, 00A30, 03A05, 01A05, 01A20, 01A85, 03-03, 51-03 and 97-03 © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010 Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licenses issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Order in the Cosmos
    11/12/2015 Order in the Cosmos: how Babylonians and Greeks Shaped our World 1 11/12/2015 2 11/12/2015 Two distinct periods of flowering: • Old Babylonian astronomy: during and after First Babylonian dynasty (Hammurabi) 1830‐1531 BCE • New Babylonian/Chaldean astronomy: Neo‐Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar) 626‐539 BCE Medo‐Persian 539‐331 BCE Seleucid 335‐141 BCE Parthian 129 BCE‐224 AD timeline Babylonian astronomy Evans 1998 3 11/12/2015 Babylonian Astronomers: ∏ most consistent, systematic and thorough astronomical observers of antiquity ∑ First to recognize periodicity astronomical phenomena (e.g. eclipses !), and apply mathematical techniques for predictions ∑ Systematically observed and recorded the heavens: ‐ Records spanning many centuries (> millennium) ‐ Archives of cuneiform tablets ‐ Famous Examples: Enuma Anu Enlil 68‐70 tablets Kassite period (1650‐1150) tablet 63: Venus tablet of Ammisaduga MUL.APIN 700 BCE oldest copy: 686 BCE • Several types of astronomical texts in Babylonian astronomy. • Four principal types: 1) astronomical diaries 2) goal year texts 3) ephemerides 4) procedure texts • Ephemerides: ‐ listing of positions of planets and their meaning (eg. extreme points retrograde path) ‐ predictive: positions based on calculations (based on scheme) ‐ ephemerides for Moon ‐ ephemerides for planets • Procedure texts: description of procedure(s) to calculate ephemerides 4 11/12/2015 Old text, probably Kassite period (1595‐1157 BCE) • Amajor series of 68 or 70 tablets • dealing with Babylonian astrology. • bulk is a substantial collection of omens, estimated to number between 6500 and 7000, • interpreting a wide variety of celestial and atmospheric phenomena in terms relevant to the king and state 2. If with it a cloudbank lies on the right of the sun: the trade in barley and straw will expand.
    [Show full text]
  • Pos(Antikythera & SKA)018
    Building the Cosmos in the Antikythera Mechanism Tony Freeth1 Antikythera Mechanism Research Project 10 Hereford Road, South Ealing, London W54 4SE, United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] PoS(Antikythera & SKA)018 Abstract Ever since its discovery by Greek sponge divers in 1901, the Antikythera Mechanism has inspired fascination and fierce debate. In the early years no-one knew what it was. As a result of a hundred years of research, particularly by Albert Rehm, Derek de Solla Price, Michael Wright and, most recently, by members of the Antikythera Mechanism Research Project, there has been huge progress in understanding this geared astronomical calculating machine. With its astonishing lunar anomaly mechanism, it emerges as a landmark in the history of technology and one of the true wonders of the ancient world. The latest model includes a mechanical representation of the Cosmos that exactly matches an inscription on the back cover of the instrument. We believe that we are now close to the complete machine. From Antikythera to the Square Kilometre Array: Lessons from the Ancients, Kerastari, Greece 12-15 June 2012 1 Speaker Copyright owned by the author(s) under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike Licence. http://pos.sissa.it Building the Cosmos in the Antikythera Mechanism Tony Freeth 1. Ancient Astronomy Astronomy? Impossible to understand and madness to investigate... Sophocles Since astronomy is so difficult, I will try to keep everything as simple as possible! As all astronomers know well, the stars are fixed! When the ancients looked at the sky, they saw a number of astronomical bodies that moved relative to the stars.
    [Show full text]