{"title":"关于12世纪马赛表及其非托勒密行星理论的新鉴定论文","authors":"C. Philipp E. Nothaft","doi":"10.1163/15733823-20230090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Two Latin manuscripts in Oxford and Florence preserve diverging recensions of a previously unnoticed astronomical treatise beginning <em>Infra signiferi poli regionem</em> (Oxford recension) or <em>Circulorum alius est sub quo</em> (Florence recension). It can be shown that this anonymous text was originally intended to accompany the Tables of Marseilles in Raymond of Marseilles’s twelfth-century <em>Liber cursuum planetarum</em> (ca. 1141). While the core tables for planetary longitudes in this set were founded on Ptolemy’s kinematic models, as known from the <em>Almagest</em>, this new source frequently deviates from the Ptolemaic norm, for instance by explicitly rejecting an epicyclic explanation of planetary stations and retrogradations. In place of the latter, it argues in favour of a heliodynamic theory inspired by Roman sources such as Pliny, which underwent certain developments in the works of twelfth-century Latin writers such as William of Conches. Rather than being wholly exceptional, these features are indicative of a degree of disconnect between planetary theory and computational practice in twelfth-century Latin astronomy, which is also detectable in other sources from this period.</p>","PeriodicalId":49081,"journal":{"name":"Early Science and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Newly Identified Treatise on the Tables of Marseilles (Twelfth Century) and Its Non-Ptolemaic Planetary Theory\",\"authors\":\"C. Philipp E. Nothaft\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15733823-20230090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Two Latin manuscripts in Oxford and Florence preserve diverging recensions of a previously unnoticed astronomical treatise beginning <em>Infra signiferi poli regionem</em> (Oxford recension) or <em>Circulorum alius est sub quo</em> (Florence recension). It can be shown that this anonymous text was originally intended to accompany the Tables of Marseilles in Raymond of Marseilles’s twelfth-century <em>Liber cursuum planetarum</em> (ca. 1141). While the core tables for planetary longitudes in this set were founded on Ptolemy’s kinematic models, as known from the <em>Almagest</em>, this new source frequently deviates from the Ptolemaic norm, for instance by explicitly rejecting an epicyclic explanation of planetary stations and retrogradations. In place of the latter, it argues in favour of a heliodynamic theory inspired by Roman sources such as Pliny, which underwent certain developments in the works of twelfth-century Latin writers such as William of Conches. Rather than being wholly exceptional, these features are indicative of a degree of disconnect between planetary theory and computational practice in twelfth-century Latin astronomy, which is also detectable in other sources from this period.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Early Science and Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Early Science and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20230090\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20230090","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
牛津和佛罗伦萨的两份拉丁文手稿保存了一篇以前未被注意到的天文学论文的不同版本,开始是《牛津版》(Infra signiferi poli regionem)或《Circulorum alius est sub quo》(佛罗伦萨版)。可以证明,这个匿名文本最初是为了配合马赛雷蒙德12世纪的《马赛表》(约1141年)中的《马赛表》。虽然这组行星经度的核心表是建立在托勒密的运动学模型上的,正如从《大书》中所知的那样,这个新的来源经常偏离托勒密的规范,例如,通过明确地拒绝行星站和退行的本轮解释。取代后者的是,它支持由普林尼等罗马人启发的太阳动力学理论,这种理论在十二世纪拉丁作家如海螺的威廉的作品中得到了一定的发展。这些特征并非完全例外,而是表明了12世纪拉丁天文学中行星理论与计算实践之间存在一定程度的脱节,这在这一时期的其他资料中也可以发现。
A Newly Identified Treatise on the Tables of Marseilles (Twelfth Century) and Its Non-Ptolemaic Planetary Theory
Two Latin manuscripts in Oxford and Florence preserve diverging recensions of a previously unnoticed astronomical treatise beginning Infra signiferi poli regionem (Oxford recension) or Circulorum alius est sub quo (Florence recension). It can be shown that this anonymous text was originally intended to accompany the Tables of Marseilles in Raymond of Marseilles’s twelfth-century Liber cursuum planetarum (ca. 1141). While the core tables for planetary longitudes in this set were founded on Ptolemy’s kinematic models, as known from the Almagest, this new source frequently deviates from the Ptolemaic norm, for instance by explicitly rejecting an epicyclic explanation of planetary stations and retrogradations. In place of the latter, it argues in favour of a heliodynamic theory inspired by Roman sources such as Pliny, which underwent certain developments in the works of twelfth-century Latin writers such as William of Conches. Rather than being wholly exceptional, these features are indicative of a degree of disconnect between planetary theory and computational practice in twelfth-century Latin astronomy, which is also detectable in other sources from this period.
期刊介绍:
Early Science and Medicine (ESM) is a peer-reviewed international journal dedicated to the history of science, medicine and technology from the earliest times through to the end of the eighteenth century. The need to treat in a single journal all aspects of scientific activity and thought to the eighteenth century is due to two factors: to the continued importance of ancient sources throughout the Middle Ages and the early modern period, and to the comparably low degree of specialization and the high degree of disciplinary interdependence characterizing the period before the professionalization of science.