A history of Greek mathematics Vol.II from Aristarchus to Diophantus by Heath, Thomas Little, Sir, 1921
MACEDONIA is GREECE and will always be GREECE- (if they are desperate to steal a name, Monkeydonkeys suits them just fine) ΚΑΤΩ Η ΣΥΓΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΗ ΤΩΝ ΠΡΟΔΟΤΩΝ!!! ΦΕΚ,ΚΚΕ,ΚΝΕ,ΚΟΜΜΟΥΝΙΣΜΟΣ,ΣΥΡΙΖΑ,ΠΑΣΟΚ,ΝΕΑ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ,ΕΓΚΛΗΜΑΤΑ,ΔΑΠ-ΝΔΦΚ, MACEDONIA,ΣΥΜΜΟΡΙΤΟΠΟΛΕΜΟΣ,ΠΡΟΣΦΟΡΕΣ,ΥΠΟΥΡΓΕΙΟ,ΕΝΟΠΛΕΣ ΔΥΝΑΜΕΙΣ,ΣΤΡΑΤΟΣ, ΑΕΡΟΠΟΡΙΑ,ΑΣΤΥΝΟΜΙΑ,ΔΗΜΑΡΧΕΙΟ,ΝΟΜΑΡΧΙΑ,ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ,ΛΟΓΟΤΕΧΝΙΑ,ΔΗΜΟΣ,LIFO,ΛΑΡΙΣΑ, ΠΕΡΙΦΕΡΕΙΑ,ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ,ΟΝΝΕΔ,ΜΟΝΗ,ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΕΙΟ,ΜΕΣΗ ΕΚΠΑΙΔΕΥΣΗ,ΙΑΤΡΙΚΗ,ΟΛΜΕ,ΑΕΚ,ΠΑΟΚ,ΦΙΛΟΛΟΓΙΚΑ,ΝΟΜΟΘΕΣΙΑ,ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ,ΕΠΙΠΛΟ, ΣΥΜΒΟΛΑΙΟΓΡΑΦΙΚΟΣ,ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ,ΜΑΘΗΜΑΤΙΚΑ,ΝΕΟΛΑΙΑ,ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΚΑ,ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑ,ΙΣΤΟΡΙΚΑ,ΑΥΓΗ,ΤΑ ΝΕΑ,ΕΘΝΟΣ,ΣΟΣΙΑΛΙΣΜΟΣ,LEFT,ΕΦΗΜΕΡΙΔΑ,ΚΟΚΚΙΝΟ,ATHENS VOICE,ΧΡΗΜΑ,ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΑ,ΕΝΕΡΓΕΙΑ, ΡΑΤΣΙΣΜΟΣ,ΠΡΟΣΦΥΓΕΣ,GREECE,ΚΟΣΜΟΣ,ΜΑΓΕΙΡΙΚΗ,ΣΥΝΤΑΓΕΣ,ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΣ,ΕΛΛΑΔΑ, ΕΜΦΥΛΙΟΣ,ΤΗΛΕΟΡΑΣΗ,ΕΓΚΥΚΛΙΟΣ,ΡΑΔΙΟΦΩΝΟ,ΓΥΜΝΑΣΤΙΚΗ,ΑΓΡΟΤΙΚΗ,ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΟΣ, ΜΥΤΙΛΗΝΗ,ΧΙΟΣ,ΣΑΜΟΣ,ΠΑΤΡΙΔΑ,ΒΙΒΛΙΟ,ΕΡΕΥΝΑ,ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΗ,ΚΥΝΗΓΕΤΙΚΑ,ΚΥΝΗΓΙ,ΘΡΙΛΕΡ, ΠΕΡΙΟΔΙΚΟ,ΤΕΥΧΟΣ,ΜΥΘΙΣΤΟΡΗΜΑ,ΑΔΩΝΙΣ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΑΔΗΣ,GEORGIADIS,ΦΑΝΤΑΣΤΙΚΕΣ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΕΣ, ΑΣΤΥΝΟΜΙΚΑ,ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΙΚΗ,ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΙΚΑ,ΙΚΕΑ,ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ,ΑΤΤΙΚΗ,ΘΡΑΚΗ,ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΗ,ΠΑΤΡΑ, ΙΟΝΙΟ,ΚΕΡΚΥΡΑ,ΚΩΣ,ΡΟΔΟΣ,ΚΑΒΑΛΑ,ΜΟΔΑ,ΔΡΑΜΑ,ΣΕΡΡΕΣ,ΕΥΡΥΤΑΝΙΑ,ΠΑΡΓΑ,ΚΕΦΑΛΟΝΙΑ, ΙΩΑΝΝΙΝΑ,ΛΕΥΚΑΔΑ,ΣΠΑΡΤΗ,ΠΑΞΟΙ
MACEDONIA is GREECE and will always be GREECE- (if they are desperate to steal a name, Monkeydonkeys suits them just fine)
ΚΑΤΩ Η ΣΥΓΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΗ ΤΩΝ ΠΡΟΔΟΤΩΝ!!!
ΦΕΚ,ΚΚΕ,ΚΝΕ,ΚΟΜΜΟΥΝΙΣΜΟΣ,ΣΥΡΙΖΑ,ΠΑΣΟΚ,ΝΕΑ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ,ΕΓΚΛΗΜΑΤΑ,ΔΑΠ-ΝΔΦΚ, MACEDONIA,ΣΥΜΜΟΡΙΤΟΠΟΛΕΜΟΣ,ΠΡΟΣΦΟΡΕΣ,ΥΠΟΥΡΓΕΙΟ,ΕΝΟΠΛΕΣ ΔΥΝΑΜΕΙΣ,ΣΤΡΑΤΟΣ, ΑΕΡΟΠΟΡΙΑ,ΑΣΤΥΝΟΜΙΑ,ΔΗΜΑΡΧΕΙΟ,ΝΟΜΑΡΧΙΑ,ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ,ΛΟΓΟΤΕΧΝΙΑ,ΔΗΜΟΣ,LIFO,ΛΑΡΙΣΑ, ΠΕΡΙΦΕΡΕΙΑ,ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ,ΟΝΝΕΔ,ΜΟΝΗ,ΠΑΤΡΙΑΡΧΕΙΟ,ΜΕΣΗ ΕΚΠΑΙΔΕΥΣΗ,ΙΑΤΡΙΚΗ,ΟΛΜΕ,ΑΕΚ,ΠΑΟΚ,ΦΙΛΟΛΟΓΙΚΑ,ΝΟΜΟΘΕΣΙΑ,ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ,ΕΠΙΠΛΟ, ΣΥΜΒΟΛΑΙΟΓΡΑΦΙΚΟΣ,ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ,ΜΑΘΗΜΑΤΙΚΑ,ΝΕΟΛΑΙΑ,ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΚΑ,ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑ,ΙΣΤΟΡΙΚΑ,ΑΥΓΗ,ΤΑ ΝΕΑ,ΕΘΝΟΣ,ΣΟΣΙΑΛΙΣΜΟΣ,LEFT,ΕΦΗΜΕΡΙΔΑ,ΚΟΚΚΙΝΟ,ATHENS VOICE,ΧΡΗΜΑ,ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΑ,ΕΝΕΡΓΕΙΑ, ΡΑΤΣΙΣΜΟΣ,ΠΡΟΣΦΥΓΕΣ,GREECE,ΚΟΣΜΟΣ,ΜΑΓΕΙΡΙΚΗ,ΣΥΝΤΑΓΕΣ,ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΣ,ΕΛΛΑΔΑ, ΕΜΦΥΛΙΟΣ,ΤΗΛΕΟΡΑΣΗ,ΕΓΚΥΚΛΙΟΣ,ΡΑΔΙΟΦΩΝΟ,ΓΥΜΝΑΣΤΙΚΗ,ΑΓΡΟΤΙΚΗ,ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΟΣ, ΜΥΤΙΛΗΝΗ,ΧΙΟΣ,ΣΑΜΟΣ,ΠΑΤΡΙΔΑ,ΒΙΒΛΙΟ,ΕΡΕΥΝΑ,ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΗ,ΚΥΝΗΓΕΤΙΚΑ,ΚΥΝΗΓΙ,ΘΡΙΛΕΡ, ΠΕΡΙΟΔΙΚΟ,ΤΕΥΧΟΣ,ΜΥΘΙΣΤΟΡΗΜΑ,ΑΔΩΝΙΣ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΑΔΗΣ,GEORGIADIS,ΦΑΝΤΑΣΤΙΚΕΣ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΕΣ, ΑΣΤΥΝΟΜΙΚΑ,ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΙΚΗ,ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΙΚΑ,ΙΚΕΑ,ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ,ΑΤΤΙΚΗ,ΘΡΑΚΗ,ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΗ,ΠΑΤΡΑ, ΙΟΝΙΟ,ΚΕΡΚΥΡΑ,ΚΩΣ,ΡΟΔΟΣ,ΚΑΒΑΛΑ,ΜΟΔΑ,ΔΡΑΜΑ,ΣΕΡΡΕΣ,ΕΥΡΥΤΑΝΙΑ,ΠΑΡΓΑ,ΚΕΦΑΛΟΝΙΑ, ΙΩΑΝΝΙΝΑ,ΛΕΥΚΑΔΑ,ΣΠΑΡΤΗ,ΠΑΞΟΙ
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
CONTROVERSIES AS TO HERON'S DATE 301<br />
Philon's date cannot be later than the end <strong>of</strong> the second<br />
century B.C. (If Ctesibius flourished before 247 B.C. the argument<br />
would apparently suggest rather the beginning than the<br />
end <strong>of</strong> the second century.) Next, Heron is supposed <strong>to</strong> have<br />
been a younger contemporary <strong>of</strong> Philon, the grounds being<br />
the following. (1) Heron mentions a ' stationary-au<strong>to</strong>ma<strong>to</strong>n'<br />
representation <strong>by</strong> Philon <strong>of</strong> the Nauplius-s<strong>to</strong>ry, 1 and this is<br />
identified <strong>by</strong> Tittel with a representation <strong>of</strong> the same s<strong>to</strong>ry <strong>by</strong><br />
some contemporary <strong>of</strong> Heron's (ol kocO' f)/xd$ 2 ). But a careful<br />
perusal <strong>of</strong> the whole passage<br />
seems <strong>to</strong> me rather <strong>to</strong> suggest<br />
that the latter representation was not Philon's, and that<br />
Philon was included <strong>by</strong> Heron among the { ancient ' au<strong>to</strong>ma<strong>to</strong>n-makers,<br />
and not among his contemporaries." (2) Another<br />
argument adduced <strong>to</strong> show that Philon was contemporary<br />
lb., p. 412. 13.<br />
1<br />
Heron, Au<strong>to</strong>m., pp. 404. 11-408. 9.<br />
2<br />
3<br />
The relevant remarks <strong>of</strong> Heron are as follows. (1) He says that he<br />
has found no arrangements <strong>of</strong> 'stationary au<strong>to</strong>mata' better or more<br />
instructive than those described <strong>by</strong> Philon <strong>of</strong> Byzantium (p. 404. 11).<br />
As an instance he mentions Philon's setting <strong>of</strong> the Nauplius-s<strong>to</strong>ry, in<br />
which he found everything good except two things (a) the mechanism<br />
for the appearance <strong>of</strong> Athene, which was <strong>to</strong>o difficult (epycodeo-Tepov), and<br />
(b) the absence <strong>of</strong> an incident promised <strong>by</strong> Philon in his description,<br />
namely the falling <strong>of</strong> a thunderbolt on Ajax with a sound <strong>of</strong> thunder<br />
accompanying it (pp. 404. 15-408. 9). This latter incident Heron could<br />
not find anywhere in Philon, though he had consulted a great number<br />
<strong>of</strong> copies <strong>of</strong> his work. He continues (p. 408. 9-13) that we are not <strong>to</strong><br />
suppose that he is running down Philon or charging him with not being<br />
capable <strong>of</strong> carrying out what he promised. On the contrary, the omission<br />
was probably due <strong>to</strong> a slip <strong>of</strong> memory, for it is easy enough <strong>to</strong> make<br />
stage-thunder (he proceeds <strong>to</strong> show how <strong>to</strong> do it). But the rest <strong>of</strong><br />
Philon's arrangements seemed <strong>to</strong> him satisfac<strong>to</strong>ry, and this, he says, is<br />
'<br />
why he has not ignored Philon's work : for I think that my readers will<br />
get the most benefit if they are shown, first what has been well said b}^<br />
the ancients and then, separately <strong>from</strong> this, what the ancients overlooked<br />
or what in their work needed improvement '<br />
(pp. 408. 22-410. 6). (2) The<br />
next chapter (pp. 410. 7-412. 2) explains generally the sort <strong>of</strong> thing the<br />
au<strong>to</strong>ma<strong>to</strong>n-picture has <strong>to</strong> show, and Heron says he will give one example<br />
which»he regards as the best. Then (3), after drawing a contrast between<br />
the simpler pictures made <strong>by</strong> the ancients ' ', which involved three different<br />
movements only, and the contemporary (ol *a0' fjpas) representations <strong>of</strong><br />
interesting s<strong>to</strong>ries <strong>by</strong> means <strong>of</strong> more numerous and varied movements<br />
(p. 412. 3-15), he proceeds <strong>to</strong> describe a setting <strong>of</strong> the Nauplius-s<strong>to</strong>ry.<br />
This is the representation which Tittel identifies with Philon's. But it<br />
is <strong>to</strong> be observed that the description includes that <strong>of</strong> the episode <strong>of</strong> the<br />
thunderbolt striking Ajax (c.30, pp. 448. 1-452. 7) which Heron expressly<br />
says that Philon omitted. Further, the mechanism for the appearance<br />
<strong>of</strong> Athene described in c. 29 is clearly not Philon's 'more difficult'<br />
arrangement, but the simpler device described (pp. 404. 18-408. 5) as<br />
possible and preferable <strong>to</strong> Philon's (cf. Heron, vol. i, ed. Schmidt, pp.<br />
Ixviii-lxix).<br />
302 HERON OF ALEXANDRIA<br />
with Heron is the fact that Philon has some criticisms <strong>of</strong><br />
details <strong>of</strong> construction <strong>of</strong> projectile-throwers which are found<br />
in Heron, whence it is inferred that Philon had Heron's work<br />
specifically in view. But if Heron's BeXoirouKd was based on<br />
the work <strong>of</strong> Ctesibius, it is equally possible that Philon may<br />
be referring <strong>to</strong> Ctesibius.<br />
A difficulty in the way <strong>of</strong> the earlier date is the relation in<br />
which Heron stands <strong>to</strong> Posidonius. In Heron's Mechanics,<br />
i. 24, there is a definition <strong>of</strong> ' centre <strong>of</strong> gravity ' which<br />
is<br />
attributed <strong>by</strong> Heron <strong>to</strong> ' Posidonius a S<strong>to</strong>ic '. But this can<br />
hardly be Posidonius <strong>of</strong> Apamea, Cicero's teacher, because the<br />
next sentence in Heron, stating a distinction drawn <strong>by</strong> Archimedes<br />
in connexion with this definition, seems <strong>to</strong> imply that<br />
the Posidonius referred <strong>to</strong> lived before Archimedes. But the<br />
Definitions <strong>of</strong> Heron do contain definitions <strong>of</strong> geometrical<br />
notions which are put down <strong>by</strong> Proclus <strong>to</strong> Posidonius <strong>of</strong><br />
Apamea or Rhodes, and, in particular, definitions <strong>of</strong> figure<br />
'<br />
and <strong>of</strong> 'parallels'.<br />
Now Posidonius lived <strong>from</strong> 135 <strong>to</strong> 51 B.C.,<br />
and the supporters <strong>of</strong> the earlier date for Heron can only<br />
suggest that either Posidonius was not the first <strong>to</strong> give these<br />
definitions, or alternatively, if he was, and if they were<br />
included in Heron's Definitions <strong>by</strong> Heron himself and not <strong>by</strong><br />
some later edi<strong>to</strong>r, all that this obliges us <strong>to</strong> admit is that<br />
Heron cannot have lived before the first century B. c.<br />
Again, if Heron lived at the beginning <strong>of</strong> the first century<br />
B.C., it is remarkable that he is nowhere mentioned <strong>by</strong><br />
Vitruvius. The De architectural was apparently brought out<br />
in 14 B.C. and in the preface <strong>to</strong> Book V<strong>II</strong> Vitruvius gives<br />
a list <strong>of</strong> authorities on machinationes <strong>from</strong> whom he made<br />
extracts. The list contains twelve names and has every<br />
appearance <strong>of</strong> being scrupulously complete ;<br />
but, while it<br />
includes Archytas (second), Archimedes (third), Ctesibius<br />
(fourth), and Philon <strong>of</strong> Byzantium (sixth), it does not mention<br />
Heron. Nor is it possible <strong>to</strong> establish interdependence<br />
between Heron and Vitruvius ; the differences seem, on the<br />
whole, <strong>to</strong> be more numerous than the resemblances. A few <strong>of</strong><br />
the differences may be mentioned. Vitruvius uses 3 as the<br />
value <strong>of</strong> 7r, whereas Heron always uses the Archimedean value<br />
3f.<br />
Both writers make extracts <strong>from</strong> the Aris<strong>to</strong>telian<br />
Mrj^avLKa 7rp<strong>of</strong>i\rj/Accra, but their selections are different. The