A consideration of Babylonian astronomy within the historiography of science

Rochberg, Francesca

doi:10.1016/s0039-3681(02)00022-5

Cited by 31 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In deciphering Babylonian cuneiform tablets, they were able to establish, among other things, that Hipparchus's synodic month of 29 days, 31 sixtieths, 50 seconds, 8 thirds, and 20 fourths had its origin in Babylonian astronomy. As Francesca Rochberg and others have pointed out, this hardly made a dent in the standard narrative (Rochberg 2002). But this was not for lack of trying.…”

Section: A Brief (Somewhat Unconventional) Account Of Greek Astronomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematics, the mathematical sciences, and historical contingency: Some thoughts on reading Netz

Ragep

2022

Interdisciplinary Science Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The history of mathematics is replete with multidimensionality and multiculturalism. This essay attempts to use the history of astronomy (one of the mathematical sciences) to emphasize the multiple traditions from various cultural zones that contributed to that history. In doing so, it supplements, but also challenges, the more unidimensional story that Reviel Netz puts forth in his own essay on the importance of the Archimedean tradition. Specifically, the essay uses examples from Babylonian, Greek, Indian, and, especially, Islamic astronomy to show how traditions not tied to Archimedes were of major importance on the often circuitous path to modern science. The notion of contingency is also explored, in particular the idea that without Greek mathematics in general, and Archimedes in particular, early modern and modern science might not have been possible. Counter to this, the essay explores other possible scenarios, whereby different mathematical traditions in other cultural settings could have plausibly led to major breakthroughs associated with the scientific revolution.

show abstract

Section: A Brief (Somewhat Unconventional) Account Of Greek Astronomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematics, the mathematical sciences, and historical contingency: Some thoughts on reading Netz

Ragep

2022

Interdisciplinary Science Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I would contend that in the schematic astronomical tradition we see clear evidence 1 For a detailed analysis of the reception of Babylonian astronomy among the broad history of science community, see Rochberg (2002). Babylonian astronomy has been criticized by some (largely ill-informed) historians of science as not being theoretical and not interested in explanation-some going so far as to characterize it as not quite being science.…”

Section: The Place Of the Rising Times Scheme Within Babylonian Astromentioning

confidence: 99%

Rising Time Schemes in Babylonian Astronomy

Steele¹

2017

SpringerBriefs in History of Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Nevertheless, the general tendency to assume that the Greeks invented science is gradually breaking down, as confirmed with Rochberg's pushing the case of the Babylonians in a contribution confronting the prevailing arguments about the superiority of Greek science. 86 Although Egypt is constantly mentioned in Rochberg's article, Egypt is necessarily excluded from her discussion, which concerns the relative contributions of Greece and Mesopotamia. Yet Rochberg's contribution is typical in that the Assyriologists are gradually-if unintentionallygiving the impression that it was Mesopotamia rather than Egypt that was there before the Greeks.…”

Section: Dating the Emergence Of Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Egypt’s Role in the Origins of Science: An Essay in Aligning Conditions, Evidence and Interpretations

Warburton

2016

Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author argues that the evidence of observation in Egyptian third millennium BCE medicine and astronomy should allow ancient Egypt an important place in the history of science. The argument is primarily based on the absence of evidence of scientific observation in Mesopotamia preceding the Egyptian material, which renders the Egyptian observations of the movements of celestial bodies and trauma the earliest signs of science. While assigning “predictions” and “mathematical astronomy” a more important place, Assyriologists also date what they can document to long after the Egyptian observations and predictions, highlighting the chronological precedence of Egypt. Furthermore, the author stresses a complicated discourse involving the exchange of ideas that was ultimately stymied by the growing importance of religion and magic. Yet the development was not as linear as the usual versions suggest.

show abstract

A consideration of Babylonian astronomy within the historiography of science

Cited by 31 publications

References 11 publications

Mathematics, the mathematical sciences, and historical contingency: Some thoughts on reading Netz

Mathematics, the mathematical sciences, and historical contingency: Some thoughts on reading Netz

Rising Time Schemes in Babylonian Astronomy

Egypt’s Role in the Origins of Science: An Essay in Aligning Conditions, Evidence and Interpretations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About