Dante and the early astronomers

by M. A. Orr

Besides his speculations regarding the moon, Thales took pains to note the sun’s movements as accurately as possible, by means of gnomons, with a view to discover the exact length of the solar year, and it was he who advised the Greeks to adopt the Phoenician method of directing their course at sea by the Little Bear instead of the Great Bear, which appears to have been the constellation used in Homeric times.

Thales imagined that Ocean did not merely encircle Earth, but that the whole Earth, which was a thin flat disc, floated upon the Ocean.

This zealous observer must have had something of the absent-mindedness of his great successor, Newton; for it is told of him that while star-gazing he fell into a well!

b.c. 611-545. Anaximander

It is evident that the moon’s passing in front of the sun implies a lesser distance from us, and it must have been this which suggested her place in the scheme of Anaximander. This scheme is rather difficult to understand, from the allusions and quotations of later writers, for we have no original writing by Anaximander; but we can gather enough to show that already in the sixth century b.c. the Greek philosophers were asking themselves what was the explanation of the movements and appearances of the heavenly bodies, how they were supported in the sky, what force moved them, how large and how distant they were, and what they were made of. Anaximander asserted boldly that sun and moon were larger than the whole earth: he thought the sun might be 27 and the moon 19 times as large. How he reached this conclusion it is impossible to say. The Egyptians had already tried to measure the apparent size of the sun as compared with the circumference of the sky, by noting how long it took to set from the moment the lower rim touched the horizon to the moment when the whole disc disappeared: this, divided by the 24 hours taken by the sun to traverse the 360 degrees of the sky, gave the sun’s size in degrees (it is about half a degree), and had they been able to find the actual distance of the sun from the earth, they could have deduced its actual size, but this they had no means of determining.

There are two possible ways of seeing that the moon is smaller than the sun, although they usually appear to us the same size. Anaximander may have seen or heard of an “annular” eclipse, in which the moon is rather more distant from us than at a total eclipse, and therefore her dark body just fails to cover the whole sun, and a bright ring of light surrounds her. More probably he realized what was implied in Thales’ explanation of solar eclipses, and concluded that the moon must be smaller than the sun, because she looks no larger although she is nearer to us.

His scheme is the first of which we have any knowledge in which the movements of the heavenly bodies are explained by supposing them not all in one sky together, but placed in a series of heavens, one above the other: hence it is of peculiar interest to the Dante student, for in it we trace the first attempt towards the theory of the Revolving Spheres. It is true that the Babylonians and Hebrews divided their heaven into three parts, one above the other, but this was only to divide the place of atmospheric phenomena from the dwelling-place of the gods, and sun, moon, planets and stars all moved in the same heaven. Here, in the universe of Anaximander, we find one heaven, the lowest, for air, rain, etc., another for all the stars, a higher heaven for the moon, a yet higher for the sun, and above all the region of fire, the brightest, lightest element, whose nature it was to ascend and which therefore is outside all, as it was the nature of earth to descend and therefore to be at the bottom. Probably either in or above the heaven of celestial fire was the heaven of the gods, for, as Aristotle remarks, all our ancestors, indeed all who believe in gods at all, whether Greek or of any other race, place the dwelling-place of the gods above in high heaven, as the unchanging, unmoving region of eternity.[25]

Unfortunately we do not know what would be of great interest, whether Anaximander also provided separate heavens for the planets, or found a home for them in the heaven of the stars. Perhaps he hardly knew of their existence, or said with Aratus who wrote nearly 800 years later:—

“Of these I dare not speak with certainty, As of the fixed stars’ orbits.”

The successive heavens were in layers, as it were, one above the other, “like the bark enclosing a tree,” but they were transparent and invisible. The heavens themselves were not in motion, carrying the stars, sun, and moon; Anaximander had an ingenious mechanical scheme of wheels or rings to carry them inside their respective heavens, which doubtless was clear to himself, though unfortunately it is not at all clear to us. Some writers have maintained that these heavens were spheres, but for several reasons it is difficult to believe this, and probably the sky was still to Anaximander, as to the Homeric Greeks, a slightly flattened hemisphere,[26] only divided into these layers, and instead of ending at the horizon it continued a little below, to allow of the passage of the heavenly bodies between setting and rising. Perhaps it was for this reason that he gave the earth a greater thickness than the disc of Thales, comparing it to a short thick pillar, three times as broad as high, the top of which only was inhabited. His Cosmos, then, would be something like the diagram, with regard to the disposition (though not the relative sizes) of Earth and the heavenly bodies.