An astronomical analysis of Hipparchus' Commentaries

TL;DR

This paper provides a detailed analysis of Hipparchus' Commentaries, challenging traditional views and offering new insights into his contributions and historical reputation in astronomy.

Contribution

It is the first detailed examination of Hipparchus' Commentaries, revealing a different perspective on his work and correcting historiographical misconceptions.

Findings

Reveals new insights into Hipparchus' contributions

Challenges the attribution of the stellar catalogue to Hipparchus

Provides a more accurate assessment of Hipparchus' scientific value

Abstract

Hipparchus is considered the greatest astronomer of antiquity. However, his fame is due, more than to what he has done, or said, or written, to what the scientists of some generation or of a few cen-turies later have written of him: above all Ptolemy. The obvious discrepancy between the declared period and the real one of the stellar catalogue of the Almagest has led to the belief that the cata-logue was in reality made by Hipparchus. This factor has contributed greatly to increase his fame, to the detriment of the one of Ptolemy. However, the only work of Hipparchus that we have re-ceived, Commentaries on Aratus and Eudoxus phenomena, has never been analyzed with the nec-essary accuracy so far. Such an examination, which is carried out here for the first time, reveals a very different scientist from the one represented by orthodox historiography and is intended as an attempt to avoid the continuation of a singular error, that of judging the value of a scholar not by the existing parts of his work, but only by those that are missing.