An astronomical analysis of Hipparchus' Commentaries
Gabriele Vanin

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…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies · Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies · Astronomical Observations and Instrumentation
