Advertisement

Late Medieval and Renaissance Europe

  • John M. Steele
Part of the Archimedes book series (ARIM, volume 4)

Abstract

After the fall of the Greek and Roman Empires, scientific learning in Europe went into a period of decline. By the latter half of the first millennium, the works of Ptolemy and other Greek astronomers had more or less been lost in Western Europe, fortunately to survive either in the original Greek or in Arabic translation in the Near East. But that is not to say that astronomy had no place in Medieval Europe. Instead, a new form of “practical” astronomy developed whose goals were to assist in solving some of the problems, such as determining the date of Easter and the times of prayers in monasteries, of religious and civil life.1 By the twelfth century AD, however, European interest in science had been rekindled and there began a search to recover ancient scientific texts. This led to the many scientific achievements of the European Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries AD.

Keywords

Solar Eclipse Astronomical Observation EUROPEAN History Lunar Eclipse Eclipse Observation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    McCluskey (1998).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    King (1996).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Samsó (1991).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A wide spectrum of astronomical events are reported in the chronicles including solar and lunar eclipses, meteors, and comets.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    With the exception of some of the eclipse records in the historical chronicles. However, as I have said, these records will not be used in the present study. For details of the eclipse records in the chronicles, see Newton (1972) and Stephenson (1997b).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    For a detailed description of the Toledan Tables, see Toomer (1968).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Note, however, that Alfonso’s patronage was not limited to scientific works; he also sponsored books of historical, legal, and literary studies. For limited biographical details of Alfonso, see Thomas (1970) and the references therein.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Procter (1945).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    However, Poulle (1988) has argued, although not fully convincingly, that the Latin version of the Alfonsine Tables was not a translation of the Castilian original, but a new set of tables compiled in Paris by Jean de Murs in the fourteenth century.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    The canon of Jean de Saxe and the Alfonsine Tables have been translated into French by Poulie (1984). Extracts have also been translated into English by Thoren & Grant (1974).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thorndike (1957) suggests Oxford for some of them, but I do not believe that there is sufficient justification to make this claim.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Levi ben Gerson was almost unique in the Medieval World in mainly using his own observations, rather than those of the ancients, to construct his astronomical models. See Goldstein (1972, 1974).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    These have been edited by Goldstein (1974).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    For a biography of Peurbach, see Hellman & Swerdlow (1978).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dobrzycki & Kremer (1996).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Swerdlow (1990).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Swerdlow (1996).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    An alidade is basically a straight edge used for sighting the reference object and then used as a marker on a graduated scale.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    For a full discussion of the construction and use of an astrolabe, see North (1974).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zinner (1990: 138).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Some of Regiomontanus’ eclipse observations were made jointly with Georg Peurbach.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    See, for example, the many eclipse observations collected by Pingré (1901).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Procter (1945).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cf. Dreyer (1920) who incorrectly remarks that Isaac Israeli only refers to three eclipse observations.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    See Section 4.3 above.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    See Section 4.3 above.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ben Gerson calls this town ‘ir ha-ezov in Hebrew, which is translated into Latin as Aurayca. On the identification of Aurayca with Orange, see Goldstein (1974: 19–20).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    For a detailed biography of ben Gerson, see Samsó (1973).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    For a description of the Jacob’s Staff, see Samsó (1973).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goldstein (1972).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    For detailed biographical accounts of Jean de Murs, see Poulle (1973) and Gushee (1969).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Escorial, MS O.II.10.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gushee (1969).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    See Section 4.4 above.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Poulle (1973).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    For a detailed biography of Regiomontanus, see Zinner (1990) and Rosen (1975).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zinner (1990: 51).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zinner (1990: 141).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zinner (1990: 151).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Shortly after Regiomontanus’ death, rumours spread that he had been the victim of a terrible crime. The sons of Trebizon, whose translation of the Almagest Regiomontanus had criticized, were said to have murdered him. However Zinner (1990: 152) notes that there is little evidence in support of this story, and suggests instead that Regiomontanus was probably the victim of a plague that was epidemic in Rome in that year.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schoener (1544). Regiomantanus’ observations are given in folios 36–43, entitled loannis de Monteregio, Georgii Peurbachii, Bernardi Waltheri, ac aliorum, Eclipsium, Comentarum, Planetarum ac Fixarum observationes. Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Walther is not even given his own entry in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography. For some biographical details, see deB. Beaver (1970). Regarding this article, however, note the cautionary remarks in note 2 of Kremer (1980). For a more recent biographical study, see Eirich (1987).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kremer (1981).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zinner (1990: 146–147).Google Scholar
  45. 44.
    Schoener (1544). Walther’s observations are given in folios 44–60, entitled Observationes factae per doctissimum virum Bernardum Waltherum Norimbergae. Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Newton (1982).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zinner (1990: 122).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    For a detailed discussion of Copernicus and his work, see Swerdlow & Neugebauer (1984).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rheticus, Narratio Prima; trans. Rosen (1959: 111).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Narratio Prima; trans. Rosen (1959: 125).Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    For detailed biographical information, see Hellman (1970), Dreyer (1890), and Thoren (1990).Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hellman (1970).Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Clark & Stephenson (1977: 172–190).Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Thoren (1973).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    This has been translated into English by Raeder, Strömgren, & Strömgren (1946).Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Four volumes of this collection are filled with Tycho’s observations: Dreyer (1923, 1924, 1925, 1926).Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hellman (1970).Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    The choice of these observations is based upon whether Tycho’s sketches seem to relate to the moment of a contact or not, and so is inevitably rather subjective. I have tried to be as cautious as possible, rejecting some observations where it was questionable whether the sketch was of a contact or not.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hellman (1970).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • John M. Steele
    • 1
  1. 1.University of DurhamUK

Personalised recommendations