When we study the great conflict in the time of Coppernicus between the
ancient and modern ideas, our sympathies naturally go out towards those
who supported the latter, which are now known to be more accurate,
and we are apt to forget that those who then spoke in the name of
the ancient astronomy and quoted Ptolemy were indeed believers in
the doctrines which they had derived from the Greeks, but that their
methods of thought, their frequent refusal to face facts, and their
appeals to authority, were all entirely foreign to the spirit of the
great men whose disciples they believed themselves to be.
CHAPTER III.
THE MIDDLE AGES.
“The lamp burns low, and through the casement bars
Grey morning glimmers feebly.”
BROWNING’S _Paracelsus_.
55. About fourteen centuries elapsed between the publication of the
_Almagest_ and the death of Coppernicus (1543), a date which is in
astronomy a convenient landmark on the boundary between the Middle Ages
and the modern world. In this period, nearly twice as long as that
which separated Thales from Ptolemy, almost four times as long as that
which has now elapsed since the death of Coppernicus, no astronomical
discovery of first-rate importance was made. There were some important
advances in mathematics, and the art of observation was improved; but
theoretical astronomy made scarcely any progress, and in some respects
even went backward, the current doctrines, if in some points slightly
more correct than those of Ptolemy, being less intelligently held.
In the Western World we have already seen that there was little to
record for nearly five centuries after Ptolemy. After that time ensued
an almost total blank, and several more centuries elapsed before there
was any appreciable revival of the interest once felt in astronomy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account