(3) In the Odyssey, Calypso directs Odysseus, in accordance with
Phoenician rules for navigating the Mediterranean, to keep the Great
Bear “ever on the left as he traversed the deep” when sailing from the
pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar) to Corfu. Yet such a course taken now
would land the traveller in Africa. Odysseus is said in his voyage in
springtime to have seen the Pleiades and Arcturus setting late, which
seemed to early commentators a proof of Homer’s inaccuracy. Likewise
Homer, both in the _Odyssey_[2] (v. 272-5) and in the _Iliad_ (xviii.
489), asserts that the Great Bear never set in those latitudes. Now it
has been found that the precession of the equinoxes explains all these
puzzles; shows that in springtime on the Mediterranean the Bear was
just above the horizon, near the sea but not touching it, between 750
B.C. and 1000 B.C.; and fixes the date of the poems, thus confirming
other evidence, and establishing Homer’s character for accuracy.[3]
(4) The orientation of Egyptian temples and Druidical stones is such
that possibly they were so placed as to assist in the observation of
the heliacal risings[4] of certain stars. If the star were known, this
would give an approximate date. Up to the present the results of these
investigations are far from being conclusive.
Ptolemy (130 A.D.) wrote the Suntaxis, or Almagest, which includes a
cyclopedia of astronomy, containing a summary of knowledge at that
date. We have no evidence beyond his own statement that he was a
practical observer. He theorised on the planetary motions, and held
that the earth is fixed in the centre of the universe. He adopted the
excentric and equant of Hipparchus to explain the unequal motions of
the sun and moon. He adopted the epicycles and deferents which had been
used by Apollonius and others to explain the retrograde motions of the
planets. We, who know that the earth revolves round the sun once in a
year, can understand that the apparent motion of a planet is only its
motion relative to the earth. If, then, we suppose the earth fixed and
the sun to revolve round it once a year, and the planets each in its
own period, it is only necessary to impose upon each of these an
additional _annual_ motion to enable us to represent truly the apparent
motions. This way of looking at the apparent motions shows why each
planet, when nearest to the earth, seems to move for a time in a
retrograde direction. The attempts of Ptolemy and others of his time to
explain the retrograde motion in this way were only approximate. Let us
suppose each planet to have a bar with one end centred at the earth. If
at the other end of the bar one end of a shorter bar is pivotted,
having the planet at its other end, then the planet is given an annual
motion in the secondary circle (the epicycle), whose centre revolves
round the earth on the primary circle (the _deferent_), at a uniform
rate round the excentric. Ptolemy supposed the centres of the epicycles
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account