Leonid Zhmud The Origin of the History of Science in Classical Antiquity

 Phaedo (98a): it is concerned
with the sun, the moon, the rest of the stars (i.e. planets), their relative speed
(tácou~ te péri prò~ Állhla), their revolutions, and their other changes. As-
tronomy is defined in
Gorgias (451c 8–9) in the same way: the revolutions of
stars, the sun, and the moon and their relative speeds. Archytas, finally, attribu-
ting to his predecessors (oî perì maq2mata) a clear knowledge of tã~ tõn
Ástrwn tacutãto~ (47 B 1), suggests that lectures on the periods of heavenly
bodies’ revolutions and their distances from the earth must have been readily
available by Socrates life-time. It is known, at any rate, that astronomy belong-
ed to the four
mathe¯mata taught by Socrates’ contemporaries Hippias and
Theodorus.
132
The question then arises whether the course of astronomy taught
in Athens might possibly be connected with Philolaus, who lived at that time in
Thebes.
A detailed examination of this question would lead us far from Eudemus’
History of Astronomy to the history of early Greek astronomy as such. Our
present task is rather to determine the time in which Eudemus places the Pytha-
goreans who discovered the ‘correct’ order of the heavenly bodies. We have re-
peatedly pointed to the major role he assigned to chronology, trying to place
mathematicians and their discoveries in the most exact temporal succession.
Since chronology was built into the very structure of his historico-scientific
works, the question we have just raised can be reformulated as follows: are
130
In fr. 137, Eudemus emphasizes the antiquity of the discovery (see above, 199). To
the same period belongs the contents of the (future) book IV of the
Elements, which
he attributed to the Pythagoreans (see above, 171). Fr. 142 from the
History of Arith-
metic also refers to the early phase of Pythagorean harmonics (6.1); its more accurate
dating appears hardly possible.
131
Mem. IV,7.4–5, transl. by O. J. Todd. See Burkert. L & S, 315 n. 88.
132
See above, 63f. Meton and Euctemon were active in Athens around 430. In Aristo-
phanes, the study of astronomy goes hand in hand with geometry (
Nub. 194f.).

---

Chapter 7: The history of astronomy
260
these Pythagoreans mentioned before or after Oenopides? To answer this, we
first have to consider Eudemus’ evidence on Oenopides.
5. Oenopides of Chios
Oenopides holds an intermediary position in the
History of Astronomy between
the physicists (Thales, Anaximander, and Anaxagoras), who figure in Theo-
phrastus as well, and the mathematical astronomers that follow him (Meton,
Euctemon, Eudoxus, etc.).
133
Does Oenopides himself belong to one of these
two categories, or is he merely a link between them? At first sight, Oenopides
ought to be numbered among the physicists: he figures, indeed, in the later do-
xography, which attributes to him physical principles. Yet to conclude that he
was mentioned in the
Physiko¯n doxai as well would be premature. In Aëtius,
his name is mentioned three times; in none of these cases does the information
derive with certainty from Theophrastus.
1) The passage of a Stoic origin, from the section “What is god?” (I,7.17):
“Diogenes, Cleanthes, and Oenopides consider god to be the world’s soul”, ob-
viously is a later insertion.
134
2) The assertion that Pythagoras discovered the obliquity of the ecliptic,
whereas Oenopides claimed the discovery as his own, is no less doubtful.
135
133
See above, 238f. In the
History of Geometry, his position is similar: preceded by
Thales, Mamercus, Pythagoras, and Anaxagoras, he is followed by Theodorus, Hip-
pocrates, Leodamas, Archytas, etc. According to the