The Origins of the Ptolemaic Tradition and its Adoption and Replacement in Colonial America Master Thesis By Ben Baumann 11592583 June 2018 University of Amsterdam Graduate School of Humanities Master’s Program in Classics and Ancient Civilizations: Ancient Studies First Supervisor: Dr. Jan Willem van Henten Second Supervisor: Dr. Fred Spier Baumann 1 I. Introduction The mapping of the universe and the attempt to understand the cosmos through scholarly investigation has been a constant endeavor of the human race since ancient times. This investigation is known as cosmography. In this thesis, I will analyze how early Colonial American scholars made sense of ancient Greek understandings of cosmography. In particular, I will focus on the way these Greek ideas shaped American thinking not only about the cosmos itself, but also about the way cosmographic understanding became intertwined with views about God and theology. When they first arrived in North America, Colonial Americans generally had a cosmography that was based on the Ptolemaic tradition. But, once they became established in the new world, and especially after the founding of Harvard University, a cosmographic revolution taking place in Europe would begin to resonate in the so-called New World. Thus, some Colonial American scholars willingly engaged in contemplation of the new outlook and proved receptive to the ideas of Nicolas Copernicus. Not surprisingly, in a land where scientific and religious thought overlapped so extensively, this caused heated scholarly debate over the topic and even resulted in student protests at Harvard University. The record of these debates can be traced back to the 17th-century writings of Colonial America, such as several astronomical almanacs, that since have been preserved as vitally significant artifacts of intellectual life in the colonies. These almanacs were at the heart of published debate between the Ptolemaic tradition and the ideas of Copernicus. In order to analyze this topic fully, I have created a methodology for my research, breaking it up into four major phases, following my section on historiography. The purpose of these phases is to illuminate the reception of astronomical knowledge and reason of ancient Greece by the Colonial Americans. I will convey this story in the manner of the field of Big Baumann 2 History, which is to structure my analysis into evolutionary phases, which will demonstrate the connections between the Colonial Americans and the past. Along with this, I use the skills I learned from the field of ancient studies, specifically literary analysis to analyze primary and secondary sources to pull the separate threads of this story together. These phases are represented in chapters two through five. In each phase, I focus on three major aspects. In the first phase, which will be highlighted in Chapter II titled “Origins of the Ptolemaic Tradition,” I will analyze the origins of this scientific and philosophical tradition in Alexandria and attempt to reconstruct its development, using a variety of sources. These include primary source material written by the founder of the Ptolemaic tradition himself, Claudius Ptolemy. I will specifically focus on analyzing his most famous works The Almagest and the Planetary Hypotheses, which shed light on his mathematical abilities and his philosophy. In this chapter, I will also include a variety of secondary sources in order to piece this origin story together. Most useful is source commentary by scholars Jacqueline Feke and Elizabeth Hamm, who offer great insight into Ptolemy’s research and philosophy. I will also reference scholar Andrew Barker. In terms of critical analysis, I will engage with the scholars Floris H. Cohen, Andre Vauchez, Olaf Pedersen, and Andrew Erskin in regard to the origins of Alexandria and the Ptolemaic tradition. This analysis will be driven by three major points, which I have identified to be crucial to the development of the Ptolemaic tradition. 1. The Greek tradition of freedom of thought, stemming from Athenian democracy. 2. The objectivity and empirical approach of Claudius Ptolemy, when conducting his research. 3. The mathematics of Ptolemy. To avoid any confusion, when I say the mathematics of Ptolemy I mean what his mathematics represented in terms of the rise of the Ptolemaic tradition, not the specific mathematical calculations he made. Baumann 3 For my next phase, I will examine how Colonial Americans received the Ptolemaic tradition in Chapter III, called “Reception of the Ptolemaic Tradition in Colonial America.” Here, it is important to identify the way the Ptolemaic tradition got started in America and the evidence of its influence on Colonial Americans. To do this, in this chapter I will analyze a mixture of primary and secondary literature, built around these three points: 1. The Ptolemaic tradition in Europe prior to the founding of Colonial America. 2. Colonial American astrology. 3. The Colonial American belief in the Geocentric theory. Based on this contextual discussion, I will place a specific emphasis on the primary source material left by the Colonial American scholar and professor at Harvard Charles Morton, who wrote a Harvard University textbook on Astronomy. To complement this, I will also use a secondary source by scholar Donald K. Yeomans, who writes considerably on 17th century Colonial American astronomy. I will also consider useful contributions from the scholars Jaqueline Feke, Rose Lockwood, Thomas Kuhn, Louis B. Wright, and Elizabeth Patton, and colonial astronomer Increase Mather. In my third phase, I will inspect the Colonial American movement towards the ideas of Nicholas Copernicus, and evaluate the causes of this movement away from the Ptolemaic tradition and why it occurred. This will be based on the following three main points in Chapter IV called “The Shift Towards the Copernican Tradition”: 1. The Puritan use of ancient Greek thought. 2. The Puritan’s religious openness towards new ideas. 3. The scientific support the Puritans received from England. Because this chapter represents the heart of my research, the claims of several important scholars have been integrated to benefit my historical explanation. Most prominent among the primary sources are the writings of Zechariah Brigden, the groundbreaking Colonial American scholar who analyzes the relationship between science and the Copernican tradition, as well as why the Copernican tradition is superior to the Ptolemaic Baumann 4 tradition. I also include Pro-Copernican essays by Colonial Americans Samuel Cheever, Thomas Brattle, and John Foster. On top of this, I evaluate Claudius Ptolemy’s own statements about how science and theology mesh well together. Relevant secondary sources are numerous, but I will focus on those which directly deal with the openness of the Puritan faith towards science, such as Milton Sernett, and Donald K Yeomans, both of whom write about the synergy between science and theology in Colonial America. I will also debate the scholar Milan Zafirovski and his strong criticism of Puritan society’s scientific reception. Next of interest is the work of Jon H. Roberts, who shows how the Puritan belief in God inspired the seeking of knowledge through natural philosophy. Next, we have Samuel Eliot Morison, who wrote thoughtfully about Zechariah Brigden’s interpretation of the Bible. Scholar Rose Lockwood also references the Colonial interpretations of the Bible. Then, there is scholar J. Rixey Ruffin, who describes the Puritan resistance against the rising Copernican tradition. Lastly, I included scholar Rick Kennedy, who wrote about the Puritan philosophy on mathematics and the influence of England. As for phase four, Chapter V, I will place Colonial American cosmography within its historical context. To do this I will compare and contrast, using secondary source material Colonial American cosmography with contemporary European cosmography to create a general overview. This will be based around three main questions. 1. Around what time did each nation or society adopt the Copernican Tradition, if at all during the 17th century? 2. What were the similarities and differences between Colonial Americans and Europeans in the 17th century, when it came to their reception of Copernican cosmography? 3. What was the status of the Copernican tradition in these nations heading into the 18th century? The countries I will be comparing to Colonial America with will be the following: the Netherlands, England, Spain, Baumann 5 France, and the Holy Roman Empire. The reason I chose these five countries is because each of them was influential in Western Europe and featured major figures that influenced 17th century European cosmography, due to their work during or prior to the period. In turn, these nations shaped the cosmographic understandings of the 18th century in Europe as well. The very influential astronomers or astronomical thinkers from these nations that I include in my research are listed as follows: from England: Thomas Digges, John Feild, Thomas Blundeville, and Isaac Newton. From France: Rene Descartes, Pierre Gassendi. Redento Barazano, Gilles Personne de Roberval, and Ismael Boulliau. From the Netherlands: Nicolaus Mulerius, Simon Stevin, Willem Blaeu Rene Descartes, Philippe van Lansberge, and Gisbertus Voetius. Lastly, from the Holy Roman Empire: Galileo Galilei, Robert Bellarmine, Johannes Kepler, Michael Maestlin, and Tycho Brahe. Finally, from Spain, Diego Zuniga and Jeronimo Munoz. I will use these influential scholars to