Abstract

I discuss and appraise two conflicting answers to the question of whether there was a crisis in Ptolemaic astronomy prior to the Copernican revolution: Kuhn, who claims that Ptolemaic astronomy was anomaly-ridden at the time of Copernicus, and Gingerich, who claims that the supposed anomalies are fictitious. I conclude that Gingerich's arguments against a technical crisis in Ptolemaic astronomy prior to Copernicus appear to be either arguments against the efficacy of the Copernican system or arguments based on definitions of complexity which are not directly attributable to Kuhn.