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

Tim. 40d)
that without a ‘visual model’ (díoyi~ … tõn mimhmátwn; cf. Leg. 669e, 796b) it is
impossible to grasp the complexity of the planets’ movement. It is not clear whether
he meant a celestial globe or some other three-dimensional model (Heath.
Aris-
tarchus, 155; Taylor A.E., op. cit., 241f.), but his remark undoubtedly belongs to the
pre-Eudoxian period.
182
pólo~ is mentioned in Herodotus (II, 109) and twice in Aristophanes (fr. 169, 227
K.–A.), who directly refers to the polos installed by Meton in Athens. Later it was
often called 1liotrópion (Sch. Ar. Av. 997a). See Rehm, A. Horologium, RE 8
(1913) 2417ff.; idem.
Parapegmastudien, 28f.; Franciosi, op. cit., 112f. On pre-
served sundials, see Gibbs, S. L.
Greek and Roman sundials, New Haven 1976.

---

Chapter 7: The history of astronomy
270
that they discovered in the sun’s movement. A kinematic model used in Plato’s
Republic (617c) to account for the non-uniform movement of the planets
183
implies that pre-Eudoxian astronomy did possess some means to explain the ir-
regularity of the planetary motions.
184
While Meton’s and Euctemon’s
floruit falls in the 430s, Eudoxus was born
about 390, and not a single specialist in mathematical astronomy is known to
have been active in the period between them.
185
This lacuna, particularly
strange considering the flourishing state of mathematics at that time,
186
poses a
number of questions to the historian of science. This ‘lost’ generation includes
Archytas and, a bit younger, Plato, whose astronomical knowledge is quite
solid and corresponds to the level of the science contemporary with him.
187
Did
Plato study astronomy with Meton’s and Euctemon’s contemporaries, such as
Theodorus, or does he owe at least part of his knowledge to Archytas? Eudoxus
is known to have studied geometry with Archytas, but who taught him astron-
omy? Could Archytas have been an intermediary between the scientists of the
last third of the fifth century and Eudoxus’ generation?
188
Was the astronomical
literature of the late fifth century rich enough to ensure the transmission of
knowledge without direct study with specialists in the field?
189
Or was astron-
omy taught by the mathematicians known to us, who, like Archytas, could not
boast any independent achievements in astronomy?
All these questions are relevant to the
History of Astronomy inasmuch as its
fragments mention only names already familiar to us. The
Catalogue of geo-
meters, meanwhile, lists six names that are not attested elsewhere: Mamercus,
Neoclides, Leon, Theudius, Athenaeus, and Hermotimus, five of whom lived in
the late fifth and the fourth century. Two of the four astronomers named at the
beginning of Theophrastus’
On Weather Signs do not figure in other sources
either.
190
Hence, the
History of Astronomy could also have contained names of
scientists unfamiliar to us or information about the astronomical studies of emi-
nent mathematicians. The variety of Eudoxus’ astronomical works and the ma-
183
See Knorr. Plato and Eudoxus, 316 f.
184
I owe this parallel to I. Bodnár.
185
Though Philolaus’ followers Hicetas and Ecphantus suggested the idea of the earth’s
rotation around its axis (50 A 1; 51 A 5), they were physicists, not
mathe¯matikoi.
186
Mentioned in the
Catalogue between Hippocrates and Eudoxus are Leodamas,
Theaetetus, Archytas, Neoclides, and Leon.
187
See Heath.