Ptolemy I set aside his eldest son Ptolemy Ceraunus and instead made his younger son Ptolemy (by Berenice) his successor. Various explanations have been advanced, but none is compelling. In this article, I put forward two hitherto unexplored avenues: first, Ptolemy’s relations with Eurydice and Berenice, and second, Ceraunus’ own ambitions as they pertained to mastery of Greece and Macedonia. The latter especially led Ptolemy, motivated by his own failures in trying to secure Greece and (...) how they compromised the security of his rule, to view Ceraunus as overly ambitious, and so prefer the less military-minded younger Ptolemy. (shrink)

Reports from antiquity — two factual and another based on myth — claim that Ptolemy I was a son of the Macedonian king Philip II. If so, Ptolemy was a half-brother of Alexander the Great. Scholars suppose that this rumour was promoted by Ptolemy I. But this cannot be confirmed. It seems rather that Arsinoë, the mother of Ptolemy I, was a concubine at the court of Philip II and that a rumour existed that Ptolemy (...) I was illegitimately born. This rumour developed in two separate ways. In Macedon, probably in the late 280's BCE, it was claimed that the father of Ptolemy was Philip II. The story may have been inspired by Ptolemy Keraunos in the course of his quest for the Macedonian throne. In Egypt, however, in spite of an apparent reluctance of Ptolemy I to link Lagos with his name, it was officially proclaimed in the reign of his son that Lagos was the father of Ptolemy I. It is possible thereby that Ptolemy II removed the stigma of bastardy from the first Ptolemaic king. (shrink)

The undoubted truth is that there exist for the planetary motions true and constant configurations from which no impossibilities or contradictions follow; they are not the same as the configurations asserted by Ptolemy; and Ptolemy neither grasped them nor did his understanding get to imagine what they truly are.

The model of scientific revolution genesis and structure, extracted from Einstein’s revolution and described in author’s previous publications, is applied to the Copernican one . In the case of Einstein’s revolution I had argued that its cause consisted in the clash between the main classical physics scientific programmes: newtonian mechanics, maxwellian electrodynamics, classical thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Analogously in the present paper it is argued that the Copernican revolution took place due to realization of the dualism between mathematical astronomy and (...) Aristotelian qualitative physics in Ptolemy’s cosmology and the corresponding efforts to eliminate it. The works of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton were all the stages of the mathematics descendance from skies to earth and reciprocal extrapolation of earth physics on divine phenomena. (shrink)

In his Harmonics, Ptolemy constructs a complex set of theoretically ‘correct’ forms of musical scale, represented as sequences of ratios, on the basis of mathematical principles and reasoning. But he insists that their credentials will not have been established until they have been submitted to the judgement of the ear. They cannot be audibly instantiated with the necessary accuracy without the help of specially designed instruments, which Ptolemy describes in detail, discussing the uses to which each can be (...) put and cataloguing its limitations. The best known of these instruments is the monochord, but there are several more complex devices. This paper discusses one such instrument which is known from no other source, ancient or modern, whose design was prompted by the geometrical construction known as the helikôn. It has several remarkable peculiarities. I examine its design, its purposes, and the merits and shortcomings which Ptolemy attributes to it. An appendix describes an instrument I have built to Ptolemy’s specifications, in an attempt to find out how satisfactorily such a bizarre contraption will work; and it explains how various practical problems can be resolved. Keywords: Ptolemy; Greek harmonics; Scientific instruments; Helikôn; Experiment; Mathematics. (shrink)

In this article, I analyze the coincidence of the prediction of the Earth–Sun distance carried out by Ptolemy in his Almagest and the one he carried out, with another method, in the Planetary Hypotheses. In both cases, the values obtained for the Earth–Sun distance are very similar, so that the great majority of historians have suspected that Ptolemy altered or at least selected the data in order to obtain this agreement. In this article, I will provide a reconstruction (...) of some way in which Ptolemy could have altered or selected the data and subsequently will try to argue in favor of its historical plausibility. (shrink)

The purpose of this essay is to show that there was one person, perhaps only one, who developed a rigorously scientific cosmology nearly two thousand years ago. Cosmology is the largest of all subjects, with a long history, and the cosmology considered here is the one that endured for the longest part, nearly three-quarters, of that history. By cosmology I mean a description of the universe as a whole and of the arrangement of its principal parts. But by scientific cosmology, (...) I mean something more. For a cosmology to be considered scientific, three criteria must be met: it must be quantitative, physical, and empirical. Quantitative means that it must assign some scale of distances and sizes to its parts. Physical means that it must rest upon some kind of physical or mechanical principles, causes, for the ordering and motion of its parts. Finally, empirical means that it must either be derived from observation or, if derived theoretically, as from physical or mechanical principles, it must be confirmed by observation. I set out these criteria, which may not be exclusive or exhaustive but are surely within reason, in order to define our subject and exclude mythological or theological cosmologies, which generally meet none of the criteria, and philosophical cosmologies, as those of Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes, which may meet one or two in some way, although not rigorously, but surely do not meet all three. I am not concerned with whether the cosmology or the criteria upon which it is based are correct. Compared to our present understanding, the scale may be off by orders of magnitude, the physics may be entirely mistaken, and the observations may be inaccurate. But if all three are present I would call the cosmology scientific, and if not I would not call the cosmology scientific. (shrink)

: To honor Bernard Goldstein, this article highlights in the "Defense of Theon against George of Trebizond" by Regiomontanus (1436-1476) themes that resonate with leading strands of Goldstein's scholarship. I argue that, in this poorly-known work, Regiomontanus's mastery of Ptolemy's mathematical astronomy, his interest in making astronomy physical, and his homocentric ideals stand in unresolved tension. Each of these themes resonates with Gold- stein's fundamental work on the Almagest, the Planetary Hypotheses, and al-Bitruji's Principles of Astronomy. I flesh out (...) these tensions with an intriguing interpretation of the history of astronomy, in which Regiomontanus contrasts the two-dimensional "eccentric astronomy" attributed to the Almagest and the Arabs with the three-dimensional spheres of the "later" astronomers. A similar contrast reappears when Regiomontanus portrays as a "fictitious art" an astronomy that does not go beyond the accommodation of computations to the appearances. To conclude, I use Regiomontanus's expression to reinstate (pace Goldstein and Barker in this journal, 1998) fictionalism as an actor's category in Osiander and sixteenth-century astronomy. (shrink)

This article explores how mutakallimūn engaged with competing visions of the cosmos—traditionalist and Aristotelian-Ptolemaic—to the beginning of the sixth/ twelfth century. Drawing on works of kalām, Quran commentary, and items from other genres, I demonstrate that rationalist theologians remained divided on such questions as the shape of the earth to the end of this period. These disagreements, moreover, cannot be explained in terms of school affiliation. Based on a comprehensive examination of published sources, I argue that cosmographical opinion among mutakallimūn (...) was a function of exposure to late ancient learning, intellectual formation, and personal inclination more than doctrinal commitment. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.1 (2003) 123-124 [Access article in PDF] Andrew Barker. Scientific Method in Ptolemy's Harmonics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Pp. viii + 281. Cloth, $69.95. Ptolemy's Harmonics is an important source not only for the history of music, but also for the history and philosophy of science. Two recent monographs, by J. Solomon, and A. Barker, now provide a basis (...) for a more widespread discussion of this much neglected work. Barker focuses on the part that is concerned with musical science proper (I, 1-III, 3), and more specifically on the scientific method it displays.Barker uses an analysis of Ptolemy's programmatic statements in I, 1/2, as a key to a reading of Ptolemy's treatise. His exposition has the format of a commentary, with special emphasis on the methodologically relevant passages. For the most part, he follows the order of Ptolemy's text closely, providing historical background information in excursus form. One needs to read a complete text of Ptolemy's treatise along with Barker's exposition in order to understand some of his arguments. It is preferable to also use Düring's [End Page 123] edition of the Greek text. One is rewarded with a detailed and in-depth analysis of the passages that helps one understand Ptolemy's method in harmonics as it unfolds in his treatise. This is so even if one disagrees with Barker's claims concerning Ptolemy's methodology.These claims are outlined in chapter 2, on the basis of I, 1/2 of the Harmonics. The methodological program Barker filters out of the text remains vague in a number of important respects. One misses, for example, a clear exposition on what will count as a sufficient integration of "empirical and theoretical phases," and on what will count as "empirical." This is a serious drawback, since Barker claims that Ptolemy instantiates a complex scientific methodology with a decisive, fully integrated empiricist trait. The drawback is aggravated by the fact that the already vague terms of the postulated methodology have to be watered down considerably in the subsequent chapters to make them fit with Ptolemy's actual procedures. Ptolemy does not seem to deliver even on the vague terms. One may very well remain unconvinced both by Barker's initial arguments concerning Ptolemy's methodology, and by his attempts to show that Ptolemy's procedure in the Harmonics can count as a satisfactory instantiation. Perhaps Ptolemy's intentions are less ambitious. When he states (5.13 ff. Düring, ed.) that "the aim of the student of harmonics must be to preserve the hupotheseis..., as never in any way conflicting with the perceptions that correspond to most people's estimation," he may just mean that he intends to vindicate an essentially Pythagorean (locally modified) account by showing it does not conflict with the phenomena. In my view, he certainly delivers on this less ambitious program. In fact, it seems to me that the understanding of Ptolemy's argumentative path is impeded by Barker's interpretation of Ptolemy's goal of "saving the hupotheseis" as a commitment to the integration of a genuine empiricist trait.Chapters 7 and 8 give an exposition of Ptolemy's tetrachord divisions. For the reader interested in an evaluation of the theoretical aspect of Ptolemy's scientific method, these are the central chapters of Barker's book. Barker provides a detailed analysis, together with an exposition of the historical and technical information needed for a non-specialist to follow both his and Ptolemy's argument. Barker's analysis reveals inter alia that a considerable part of Ptolemy's theory has no counterpart in the realm of phenomena perceived as musical, and that another part, concerning the single most important division of musical practice, is not justified, and not justifiable, by derivation from the principles. It is difficult to see how Ptolemy's account can nevertheless be viewed as a genuine integration of empirical and theoretical aspects. It appears to be an attempt at showing that an essentially Pythagorean theory... (shrink)

Ptolemy wrote the Planetary Hypotheses for both astronomers and instrument-makers. Most studies of this text concentrate on its meaning for the former, but there remain many questions surrounding its meaning for the latter.1 This article investigates the purpose of Ptolemy’s Planetary Hypotheses in light of what he says about instrument-making. It takes up the following questions: what kind of instrument does Ptolemy describe? And, could such an instrument have been constructed? I argue that he did not have (...) one specific design in mind, but instead he offered craftsmen options for the content, design, and operational methods. In addition to exhibiting his astronomical models and estimating planetary positions, the... (shrink)

In his Commentary on Ptolemy’s Harmonics, Porphyry debunks Ptolemy’s quantitative theory of pitches by demonstrating that pitches are qualitative attributes of sound. I argue that Porphyry’s main concern is to save the phenomenological dimension of sound while preserving the possibility of a quantitative analysis of music. I show how he draws on the Aristotelian tradition to develop a theory of pitches as emergent properties that covary with some underlying quantitative features without being reducible to them. Porphyry offers an (...) original and compelling solution to the classic problem of how to provide a quantitative analysis of a qualitative phenomenon. (shrink)

In this article, I demonstrate that, of the two horoscopes transmitted by the Anonymous Commentary on Ptolemy’s ‘Tetrabiblos’, edited by Hieronymous Wolf, Basel, 1559, pp. 98 and 112, the first (H1) corresponds to an actual birth that took place in Lower Egypt on 25 June 448 AD, while the second (H2) is the same horoscope, slightly modified to fit the specific example for which it provides the illustration. The new date proposed here for H1 is important for establishing a (...) more precise chronology of the Anonymous Commentary, since it not only provides a terminus post quem for its composition (from the middle of the fifth century onwards) but also a particular geographical environment in the proximity of Alexandria. Given the large amount of formal and structural similarities which can be readily observed between the Anonymous Commentary and commentaries on Plato and Aristotle composed by Ammonius and his disciples in Alexandria, it becomes impossible not to link the work of the anonymous commentator to the Neoplatonic school of Alexandria of the fifth and sixth centuries, led by the philosopher Ammonius and his brother Heliodorus. (shrink)

In the first part of chapter 2 of book II of the Physics Aristotle addresses the issue of the difference between mathematics and physics. In the course of his discussion he says some things about astronomy and the ‘ ‘ more physical branches of mathematics”. In this paper I discuss historical issues concerning the text, translation, and interpretation of the passage, focusing on two cruxes, the first reference to astronomy at 193b25–26 and the reference to the more physical branches at 194a7–8. In (...) section I, I criticize Ross’s interpretation of the passage and point out that his alteration of has no warrant in the Greek manuscripts. In the next three sections I treat three other interpretations, all of which depart from Ross's: in section II that of Simplicius, which I commend; in section III that of Thomas Aquinas, which is importantly influenced by a mistranslation of, and in section IV that of Ibn Rushd, which is based on an Arabic text corresponding to that printed by Ross. In the concluding section of the paper I describe the modern history of the Greek text of our passage and translations of it from the early twelfth century until the appearance of Ross's text in 1936. (shrink)

► I present an intellectual history of Ptolemy’s accounts of the human soul. ► I assess the accounts for consistency. ► I argue that disparities in the psychological accounts are significant. ► I argue that the disparities demonstrate the maturation of his scientific method.

Bringing the meta-mathematics of Hero of Alexandria and Claudius Ptolemy into conversation for the first time, I argue that they employ identical rhetorical strategies in the introductions to Hero’s Belopoeica, Pneumatica, Metrica and Ptolemy’s Almagest. They each adopt a paradigmatic argument, in which they criticize the discourses of philosophers and declare epistemological supremacy for mathematics by asserting that geometrical demonstration is indisputable. The rarity of this claim—in conjunction with the paradigmatic argument—indicates that Hero and Ptolemy participated in (...) a single meta-mathematical tradition, which made available to them rhetoric designed to introduce, justify, and bolster the value of mathematics. (shrink)

Ever since Auguste Comte articulated his Law of the Three Stages, positivism has maintained a stranglehold on the history and philosophy of science. Despite significant repudiations of this view, there remains a tendency to consider earlier science as an essentially more primitive form of human cognition. Thomas Kuhn’s warnings against this tendency, while widely accepted, have not always been heeded in particular studies. Part of the reason for this might be some dissatisfaction with Kuhn’s account of scientific paradigms in light (...) of what many historians still want to accept as evidence of the cumulative growth of scientific knowledge. Whatever the reason, there still from time to time appear studies which attempt to chronicle the development of science in terms of a developmental anthropology of mental levels. This is often done without a sufficiently critical assessment of the philosophical presuppositions which underlie such an analysis. Further, such analyses ignore the possibility that differing scientific conceptions might result more from differing, but equally sophisticated, ontologies rather than from a transition from a primitive mentality to a more scientific mentality. (shrink)

SUMMARY. The works of Alexander of Aphrodisias were written a few decades after the publication of the most successful -astrology hand- book in antiquity, Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos Syntaxis, which attempts to naturalize astrology, i.e. to make it agree with Aristotelian theory of science. A comparison of the doctrines between the Tetrabiblos and some passages of Alexander'p works on fate demostrates a noteworthy con¬vergere of the two scholars, and probably a dependence of the lasi great greek Aristotle's exegete on the theories (...) of Ptolemaic astrology, at least in reference to three points: theory of fate; justification of de- vining as a technical and naturai conjecture about man's fate; ana¬lysis of the stars' influence on the sublunary world in physical and phi¬losophical terms. (shrink)

Abstract:In his Descriptio urbis Romae, Leon Battista Alberti provides step-by-step instructions for how to draw the outlines of Rome. The image transmitted through Alberti’s text is so accurate that it is justly described as the first “map” of Rome after the Forma Urbis (3rd c. CE). Alberti's idea was sparked by the renewed reading of the works of Claudius Ptolemy: the Geography, but also—as I argue for the first time—the Almagest. I show how this image blends the ways that (...) terrestrial and celestial territories are commonly depicted and gives a fresh interpretation of this cosmologically overdetermined city. (shrink)

: The Hellenistic reception of Babylonian horoscopic astrology gave rise to the question of what the planets really do and whether astrology is a science. This question in turn became one of defining the Greco-Latin science of astronomy, a project that took Aristotle's views as a starting-point. Thus, I concentrate on one aspect of the various definitions of astronomy proposed in Hellenistic times, their demarcation of astronomy and physical theory. I explicate the account offered by Geminus and its subordination of (...) astronomy to arguments made in physical theory about what really is the case. I then show how Ptolemy treats the same topic but maintains that this science is sufficient on its own to determine the realia it studies. In this way, I identify two moments in an obvious process of intellectual change that had profound consequences for the history of astronomy and cosmology over the next 1500 years. My hope is that this will advance our understanding of the reception of horoscopic astrology in Hellenistic times and also serve to locate Ptolemy more fully in his intellectual context. (shrink)

So far am I from rejecting the use of what has been well stated by others, that I would wish that everyone said the same things about the same things and, as Socrates puts it, in the same words, and then there would be no undisputed quarrelling among men about the matters at hand.

So far am I from rejecting the use of what has been well stated by others, that I would wish that everyone said the same things about the same things and, as Socrates puts it, in the same words, and then there would be no undisputed quarrelling among men about the matters at hand.

El objeto de este trabajo consiste en analizar la existencia de la gerousía en la comunidad judía de Alejandría durante el último período de los Ptolomeos y las primeras décadas de Egipto romano, a partir de la relación entre las inscripciones SGE 34. 1532 y SB 1. 2100 de los siglos II-I a.C., traducidos por primera vez al español en el presente estudio, y Contra Flaco 74 de Filón de Alejandría. Con este propósito intentaremos rastrear el término gerousía en los (...) documentos epigráficos antes mencionados y en el pasaje filoniano, y examinar los conceptos técnicos conectados con esta institución y su funcionamiento. The aim of this work is to analyze the existence of the gerousia in the Jewish community of Alexandria during the last period of the Ptolemies and the first decades of Roman Egypt, on the basis of the relation between the inscriptions SGE 34.1532 and SB 1. 2100 from the second and first centuries BC, translated for the first time into Spanish in the present study, and In Flaccum 74 of Philo of Alexandria. For this purpose we shall attempt to trace the term gerousia in the epigraphic documents mentioned above and in the philonian passage, and to examine the technical concepts connected with this institution and its functioning. (shrink)

The article includes a short biography of Hermann of Dalmatia and gives an account of his translations and philosophical and scientific work. In order to have a better understanding of Hermann’s philosophy, a reminder of Greek and Arabic philosophy of nature, on which he relies in his interpretation of the world picture, needs to be presented. Cosmological models by Plato, Aristotle, Eudoxus, Heraclides of Pont, Apollonius of Perga, Hipparchus, Ptolemy, and the Arab scientist Abu Ma’shar, are presented. The main (...) focus of interest is on Hermann’s translations. The immense importance of his translations from Greek and Arabic into Latin is due to the fact that some of the seminal Greek and Arabic works became known in Western Europe in the middle of the twelfth century. Hermann is also important as the author of the original work De essentiis, which presented a blend of Platonian and Aristotelian as well as Western European and Arab traditions. (shrink)

The article includes a short biography of Hermann of Dalmatia and gives an account of his translations and philosophical and scientific work. In order to have a better understanding of Hermann’s philosophy, a reminder of Greek and Arabic philosophy of nature, on which he relies in his interpretation of the world picture, needs to be presented. Cosmological models by Plato, Aristotle, Eudoxus, Heraclides of Pont, Apollonius of Perga, Hipparchus, Ptolemy, and the Arab scientist Abu Ma’shar, are presented. The main (...) focus of interest is on Hermann’s translations. The immense importance of his translations from Greek and Arabic into Latin is due to the fact that some of the seminal Greek and Arabic works became known in Western Europe in the middle of the twelfth century. Hermann is also important as the author of the original work De essentiis, which presented a blend of Platonian and Aristotelian as well as Western European and Arab traditions. (shrink)

This paper is a contribution to our understanding of the technical concept of given in Greek mathematical texts. By working through mathematical arguments by Menaechmus, Euclid, Apollonius, Heron and Ptolemy, I elucidate the meaning of given in various mathematical practices. I next show how the concept of given is related to the terms discussed by Marinus in his philosophical discussion of Euclid’s Data. I will argue that what is given does not simply exist, but can be unproblematically assumed or (...) produced through some effective procedure. Arguments by givens are shown to be general claims about constructibility and computability. The claim that an object is given is related to our concept of an assignment—what is given is available in some uniquely determined, or determinable, way for future mathematical work. (shrink)

In an influential article, A. I. Sabra identified an intellectual trend from twelfth and thirteenth-century Andalusia which he described as the ‘‘Andalusian revolt against Ptolemaic astronomy.” Philosophers such as Ibn Rushd , Ibn Tufayl , and Maimonides objected to Ptolemy’s theories on philosophic grounds, not because of shortcomings in the theories' predictive accuracy. Sabra showed how al-Bitrūjī's Kitāb al-Hay'a attempted to account for observed planetary motions in a way that met the philosophic standards of those philosophers and others. In (...) Nūr al-‘ālam , the subject of this article, Joseph ibn Joseph ibn Nahmias endeavoured to improve upon al-Bitrūjī’s models. Levi Ben Gerson's Hebrew writings on astronomy criticized al-Bitrūjī, but Ibn Nahmias did not mention them. Nūr al-‘ālam deserves attention, too, because it is the first Arabic text on theoretical astronomy by a Jewish author to come to light. In the body of this article, I will describe and analyze Ibn Nahmias’ theory, from Nūr al-‘ālam , for the motion of the sun. (shrink)

It has been common in history for the conqueror or usurper to fortify his position by marrying a daughter of the old line. It was done by Alexander at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, by Herod at the end. There is reason to believe that it was also done both by Ptolemy I. and Seleucus.

Menander's lost comedyThaiswith its famous protagonist, thehetairalover of Ptolemy I Soter and perhaps Alexander himself, was plainly well known at Rome, and is alluded to several times in Latin poetry of the Augustan and later periods, as Ariana Traill has shown. My purpose here is to argue that the literary characterisation of Thais in Menander's play underlies certain aspects of Lesbia as presented in the poetry of Catullus; that Catullus' poetry uses the plays of Menander has been demonstrated by (...) Richard Thomas, arguing that Catullus 8 shows clear traces of Demea's monologue in theSamia(325–56). (shrink)

In a somewhat polemical article on ‘Solstices, Equinoxes, and the Presocratics’ D. R. Dicks has recently challenged the usual view that the Presocratics in general, and the Milesians in particular, made significant contributions to the development of scientific astronomy in Greece. According to Dicks, mathematical astronomy begins with the work of Meton and Euctemon about 430 B.C. What passes for astronomy in the earlier period ‘was still in the pre-scientific stage’ of ‘rough-and-ready observations, unsystematically recorded and imperfectly understood, of practical (...) men’ whose chief concern was to fix the seasons for ploughing, seed-time, sailing voyages and religious festivals. Ionian speculation, says Dicks, took very little note of such observation: ‘some of its wilder flights of fancy might have been avoided, if it had taken more’. In this account of the rise of Greek astronomy, the natural philosophers have no part to play. Their theories represent a speculative enterprise without a scientific future, a philosophic sideline with no impact on the development of observational science from Hesiod to Meton or the development of mathematical astronomy from Meton to Ptolemy.I believe that such a dichotomy between early philosophy and early science in Greece is misguided in principle, and that it seriously distorts our picture of the initial phases of each discipline. It also imposes a considerable strain upon our credulity. Take the case of Anaxagoras who, according to Plato and Theophrastus, had given a causal explanation of eclipses of the moon a generation before Meton. (shrink)

It has been common in history for the conqueror or usurper to fortify his position by marrying a daughter of the old line. It was done by Alexander at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, by Herod at the end. There is reason to believe that it was also done both by Ptolemy I. and Seleucus.

The New Alexandrian Library is to be inaugurated at the end of 1998 on the royal site of the great ancient metropolis, that is, on the site of the Museum founded by Ptolemy I to enclose his mythical collection of books. This ambitious project of a “public research library “ was undertaken on the initiative of the Egyptian government and has, since 1986, received the support of UNESCO.

Summary The main function of Hellenistic queenship is increasingly understood as contributing to the definition of the basileus. The early Ptolemies produced the most peculiar version of the ‘sister queen’, known throughout the Near East as an ideological construct, but taken literally in Egypt from the time of Ptolemy II Philadelphos and Arsinoe II Philadelphos, the ‘Sibling-Lovers’. The most famous example of a ‘virgin queen’ is Berenike, the daughter of Ptolemy III Euergetes and Berenike II, best known from (...) the Kanopos Decree, which regulated her posthumous cult. Often understood as a merely honorary title for some or potentially all princesses in Alexandria, the basilissa title of unmarried girls has found little scholarly attention so far. Altogether, there are surprisingly few royal daughters for whom we have clear evidence: besides the aforesaid Berenike, her sister Arsinoe III and previously Berenike, the daughter of the Philadelphoi. Claims that Arsinoe II or her sister Philotera had enjoyed the same status at the court of Ptolemy I Soter cannot be substantiated, so that their basilissa titles should be explained by marriage with a king. The phenomenon of virgin queenship was thus of limited duration. It is best interpreted as a ramification of an emphatically endogamous royal dynasty: Ptolemy II and Ptolemy III pledged their most distinguished daughter to the future successor even before he had been chosen from among his brothers. (shrink)

The New Alexandrian Library is to be inaugurated at the end of 1998 on the royal site of the great ancient metropolis, that is, on the site of the Museum founded by Ptolemy I to enclose his mythical collection of books. This ambitious project of a “public research library “ was undertaken on the initiative of the Egyptian government and has, since 1986, received the support of UNESCO.

Summary Among the whole burden of the written sources dealing with the urban appearance of Ptolemaic and Roman Alexandria, five or six ancient authors give us precious information which could finally offer a lead to the reconstruction of the monumental center of Alexandria: 1) Strabo, 2) Diodorus, 3) Zenobius, 4) Achilles Tatius, 5) Pseudo-Libanius and 6) Pseudo-Callisthenes. Nowadays, the written testimonia concerning the historical topography of Alexandria are severely withstanding to a hypercritical treatment, to a disapproval instead of a reappraisal.Tkazcow (...) 2013, 687: The reconstruction of the topography of the city in the Ptolemaic and Early Roman Periods was, for a long time, based exclusively on Strabo's description ; the critic is moved against Adriani 1966 and Fraser 1972, 13–34; McKenzie 2007. Yet, there is no other way to solve the puzzle of the monumental center of Ptolemaic Alexandria, but to explain the thinking behind what the ancient authors, principally Strabo, may have seen in Alexandria as eyewitnesses. (shrink)

With mathematical reconstructions and philosophical arguments I show that Toomer's 1973 paper never contained any conclusive evidence for his claims that Hipparchus had a 3438'-based chord table, and that the Indians used that table to compute their sine tables. Recalculating Toomer's reconstructions with a 3600' radius -- i.e. the radius of the chord table in Ptolemy's Almagest, expressed in 'minutes' instead of 'degrees' -- generates Hipparchan-like ratios similar to those produced by a 3438' radius. It is therefore possible that (...) the radius of Hipparchus's chord table was 3600', and that the Indians independently constructed their 3438'-based sine table. (shrink)