Girolamo fracastoro and the doctrine of contagious diseases. The significance of J's work

The European Renaissance gave the world amazing minds and names. One of the greatest scientific encyclopedists, significantly ahead of his time, is Girolamo Fracastoro (1478-1553). He was born in Italy, in Verona 540 years ago and was talented in everything: in philosophy, in the art of medicine, as a scientist-researcher in medicine, mathematics, astronomy, geography, he was engaged in literary activities (poetry and prose), which was very diverse . G. Fracastoro graduated from the University of Padua, becoming one of the most educated people of his time. At the university, in his immediate circle there were later outstanding figures of the Renaissance (astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus, writer Navajero, geographer and historian Ramusio, etc.).
After graduating from university (at the age of 20 he was already teaching logic), Fracastoro settled in Padua, lived in Verona, Venice, and later moved to Rome, where he became a court physician-consultant to Pope Paul III. G. Fracastoro's scientific works are devoted to astronomy (he proposed a model of the solar system in accordance with the theory of N. Copernicus, introduced the concept of “Earth's pole”), issues of psychology and philosophy, which he reflected in his “Dialogues” (“On the soul”, “On sympathies” and antipathies”, “On understanding”), medicine and other problems.
In 1530, G. Fracastoro’s poem, which became a classic, “Syphilis or the Gallic Disease,” was published, where he talks about a shepherd whose name was Syphilus. The shepherd incurred the wrath of the Gods for his wrong lifestyle and was punished with a serious illness. Thanks to G. Fracastoro, the “Gallic disease” began to be called “syphilis” - after the name of the shepherd from the poem, which contained not only a description of the disease, the route of infection, but also recommendations for combating it. The poem became an important sanitary guide. At a time when syphilis was very common, she played a major educational and psychological role.
J. Fracastoro created the doctrine of infectious diseases and is considered the founder of epidemiology. In 1546 His work “On contagion, contagious diseases and treatment” was published. G. Fracastoro analyzed and summarized the ideas about the origin and treatment of infectious diseases of his predecessors - Hippocrates, Thucydides, Aristotle, Galen, Pliny the Elder and others.
He developed the doctrine of contagion (in addition to the existing miasmatic theory, he created the contagious theory) - about a living, multiplying principle that can cause disease, described the symptoms of many infectious diseases (smallpox, measles, plague, consumption, rabies, leprosy, typhus, etc.), was convinced of the specificity of contagions, that they are secreted by a sick organism. He introduced the concept of “infection”. He identified three ways of infection: through direct contact, indirectly through objects and at a distance. He devoted one part of his book to treatment methods. J. Fracastoro developed a system of preventive measures. During epidemics, he recommended isolation of the patient, special clothing for caregivers, red crosses on the doors of sick people’s houses, closure of trade and other institutions, etc. The works of G. Fracastoro were read with interest by his contemporaries and people of subsequent generations. G. Fracastoro died in 1553 in Affi. In 1560 His letters, of great scientific and literary interest, were published as a separate volume, and in 1739. poems were published. In Verona, Fracastoro's hometown, a monument was erected to him.

FRACASTORO Girolamo (Fracas-toro Girolamo, 1478-1553) - Italian scientist, doctor, writer, one of the representatives of the Italian Renaissance.

Honey. received his education in Padua. G. Fracastoro's early works are devoted to geology, optics, astronomy, and philosophy.

J. Fracastoro systematized and generalized the position established by his predecessors about the specific ii multiplying infectious principle - “contagion” and gave direction to the further study of infectious diseases. Therefore, the statement that he is the founder of the doctrine of contagion (infection) is incorrect. His first work on syphilis, De morbo gallico (1525), was not completed. The materials of this research were included in the poem “Syphilis, sive morbus gallicus” published in 1530 in Verona, which was translated into Russian in 1956 under the title “On Syphilis”. The largest honey G. Fracastoro's work “On contagion, contagious diseases and treatment” (1546) was reprinted many times. Having summarized the views of his predecessors, from ancient authors to contemporary doctors, as well as his own experience, G. Fracastoro made the first attempt to create a general theory of epidemic diseases and describe a number of individual diseases - smallpox, measles, plague, consumption, rabies, leprosy, etc. The first book is devoted to general theoretical principles, the second to a description of individual infectious diseases, and the third to treatment. According to J. Fracastoro’s definition, “contagium is an identical lesion that passes from one to another; defeat takes place in the smallest particles, inaccessible to our senses, and begins with them.” He distinguished specific “seeds” (i.e., pathogens) of certain diseases and established three types of their spread: by direct contact, through intermediary objects, and at a distance. The teachings of Fracastoro had a significant influence on G. Fallopius, G. Mercuriali, A. Kircher and others.

In the homeland of G. Fracastoro in Verona in 1555, a monument was erected to him.

Op:. Syphilis, sive morbus gallicus, Verona, 1530 (Russian translation, M., 1956); De sympathia et antipathia rerum liber unus. De contagione et contagiosis morbis et curatione libri tres, Venetiis, 1546 (Russian translation, M., 1954).

Bibliography: Immortal B. S. Fracastoro and his role in the history of the doctrine of infection, Zhurn. micro., epid. and im-mu n. , No. 6, p. 82, 1946; 3 a b l u d o v-

with k and y P. E. Development of the doctrine of contagious diseases and Fracastoro’s book, in the book: Fracastoro D. About contagion, contagious diseases and treatment, trans. from Latin, e. 165, M., 1954; Major R. N. Classic

descriptions of disease, p. 37, Springfield, 1955; Singer C. a. Singer D. The scientific position of Girolamo Fraca-storo, Ann. med. Hist., v. 1, p. 1, 1917.

P.E. Lost.

Girolamo Fracastoro

Fracastoro Girolamo (1478, Verona, = 8.8.1553, ibid.), Italian Renaissance scientist = doctor, astronomer, poet. In 1502 he graduated from the University of Padua; professor at the same university. The first scientific works = on geology (history of the Earth), geography, optics (refraction of light), astronomy (observations of the Moon and stars), philosophy and psychology. In 1530, F.’s scientific and didactic poem “Syphilis, or the French Disease” was published.
F.'s main work = "On contagion, contagious diseases and treatment" (1546), which was reprinted many times in many countries, sets out the doctrine of the essence, routes of spread and treatment of infectious diseases. F. described 3 ways of infection: through direct contact, indirectly through objects and at a distance, with the obligatory participation of the smallest invisible “seeds of the disease”; infection, according to F., = material principle (“contagium corporeal”). F. was the first to use the term “infection” in the medical sense. He described smallpox, measles, plague, consumption, rabies, leprosy, typhus, etc. While developing views on the contagiousness of infections, he partially retained (in relation to syphilis) the previous ideas about their transmission through miasmas. F.'s works laid the first foundations for the clinic of infectious diseases and epidemiology.
Works: Opera omnia, Venetiis, 1584; in Russian lane = About contagion, contagious diseases and treatment, book. 1=3, intro. Art. P. E. Zabludovsky, M., 1954; About syphilis, M., 1956.
P. E. Zabludovsky.

Girolamo Fracastoro

(1478...1553)

The existence of formidable infectious diseases that sickened thousands of people at once has been known for centuries. In unknown and mysterious ways, these diseases are transmitted from one person to another, spreading throughout the country, spreading even across the sea. The holy Jewish book, the Bible, mentions the "plagues of Egypt"; ancient papyri written on the banks of the Nile four thousand years BC describe diseases that are easily recognizable as smallpox and leprosy. Hippocrates was called to Athens to fight the epidemic. However, in the ancient world, human settlements were located at a considerable distance from each other, and cities were not overpopulated. Therefore, epidemics in those days did not entail significant devastation. In addition, hygiene, which was generally observed, also had a great influence. In the Middle Ages, in Europe, simple remedies: water and soap were forgotten; in addition, in the cities surrounded by fortress walls, extraordinary crowding reigned. Therefore, it is not surprising that epidemics in these conditions spread horribly. So, the plague epidemic that arose in 1347...1350 resulted in 25 million human victims in Europe, and in 1665 in London alone one hundred thousand people died from the plague. It is believed that in the 18th century, smallpox epidemics killed at least 60 million people in Europe. People noticed quite early on that the centers of the epidemic were mainly the dirty and overcrowded urban slums where the poor lived. Therefore, during the epidemic, the authorities monitored the sweeping of streets and cleaning of gutters. Litter and waste were removed from the city limits, and stray dogs and cats were destroyed. However, no one paid attention to rats, which - as was later established - are carriers of the plague.

Girolamo Fracastoro, an Italian physician, astronomer and poet, born in 1478 and died in 1533, first thought about how infectious diseases spread and how to fight them.

Vetmed biography of Girolamo Fracastoro

As the most effective means against the spread of infection, Fracastoro put forward isolation of patients and disinfection, that is, according to the concepts of that time, thorough cleaning and purification of the place where the patient was. Even now we can recognize these demands as fair, although we know that cleaning and cleaning alone is not enough, disinfection is necessary with anti-epidemic agents, which Fracastoro’s contemporaries did not have at their disposal. On Fracastoro’s advice, they began to paint a cross in red paint on the doors of houses where the sick were; at his request, during the epidemic, shops, institutions, courts and even parliaments were locked, beggars were not allowed into churches and meetings were prohibited. Houses in which people were sick were locked and even burned along with everything that was inside. It happened that cities engulfed by an epidemic were surrounded by troops, cutting off access to them, leaving residents to the mercy of fate who were in danger of starvation. It is curious that Fracastoro is the author of a poem about the “French” disease - syphilis. It was Fracastoro who introduced this name for the disease into medicine.

I like

"Rank of Great Doctors" 371

From this book you will learn about how the greatest doctors of mankind lived and worked: Hippocrates, Avicenna, Morton, Dietl, Ehrlich, Pavlov and others. Author - Grzegorz Fedorovsky (1972)

D. Fracastoro. Biography. Contributions to epidemiology

The holy Jewish book, the Bible, mentions the "plagues of Egypt"; ancient papyri written on the banks of the Nile four thousand years BC describe diseases that are easily recognizable as smallpox and leprosy. Hippocrates was called to Athens to fight the epidemic. However, in the ancient world, human settlements were located at a considerable distance from each other, and cities were not overpopulated. Therefore, epidemics in those days did not entail significant devastation. In addition, hygiene, which was generally observed, also had a great influence. In the Middle Ages, in Europe, simple remedies: water and soap were forgotten; in addition, in the cities surrounded by fortress walls, extraordinary crowding reigned. Therefore, it is not surprising that epidemics in these conditions spread horribly. So, the plague epidemic that arose in 1347...1350 resulted in 25 million human victims in Europe, and in 1665 in London alone one hundred thousand people died from the plague. It is believed that in the 18th century, smallpox epidemics killed at least 60 million people in Europe. People noticed quite early on that the centers of the epidemic were mainly the dirty and overcrowded urban slums where the poor lived. Therefore, during the epidemic, the authorities monitored the sweeping of streets and cleaning of gutters. Litter and waste were removed from the city limits, and stray dogs and cats were destroyed. However, no one paid attention to rats, which - as was later established - are carriers of the plague.

Boccaccio's younger contemporary and compatriot was the physician Girolamo Fracastoro. He lived in the middle of the 16th century, during the era of the late Renaissance, so rich in outstanding discoveries and remarkable scientists.

Girolamo Fracastoro, an Italian physician, astronomer and poet, born in 1478 and died in 1533, first thought about how infectious diseases spread and how to fight them. The scientist owns the terms “infection” and “disinfection.” These terms were readily used by the well-known physician K. Hufeland at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries. The works of G. Fracastoro and other circumstances, measures to combat epidemics contributed to some of their reduction, in any case There were no such large-scale endemic diseases as in the 14th century in Europe, although they constantly threatened the population.

Fracastoro graduated from the University of Padua and settled in Padua. Then he lived for some time in Verona and Venice, and in his old age he moved to Rome, where he took the position of court physician to the Pope. In 1546, he published a three-volume work “On Contagion, Contagious Diseases and Treatment,” the fruit of his many years of observations and research. In this work, Fracastoro points out that diseases are transmitted either through direct contact with the patient, or through his clothing, bedding, and dishes. However, there are also diseases that are carried over a distance, as if through the air, and they are the worst of all, since in this case it is difficult to protect yourself from infection. As the most effective means against the spread of infection, Fracastoro put forward isolation of patients and disinfection, that is, according to the concepts of that time, thorough cleaning and purification of the place where the patient was. Even now we can recognize these demands as fair, although we know that cleaning and cleaning alone is not enough, disinfection is necessary with anti-epidemic agents, which Fracastoro’s contemporaries did not have at their disposal. On Fracastoro’s advice, they began to paint a cross in red paint on the doors of houses where the sick were; at his request, during the epidemic, shops, institutions, courts and even parliaments were locked, beggars were not allowed into churches and meetings were prohibited.

Fracastoro is considered one of the founders of epidemiology. For the first time, he collected all the information accumulated by medicine before him, and gave a coherent theory about the existence of “living contagium” - the living cause of infectious diseases.

The provisions of this theory are briefly reduced to the following theses.

Along with the creatures visible to the naked eye, there are countless living “minuscule particles inaccessible to our senses,” or seeds. These seeds have the ability to generate and spread others like themselves. Invisible particles can settle in rotten water, in dead fish remaining on land after a flood, in carrion, and can penetrate into the human body. When they settle in it, they cause disease.

The routes of their penetration are very diverse. Fracastoro distinguished three types of infection: through contact with the patient, through contact with objects that were used by the patient, and, finally, at a distance - through the air. Moreover, each type of infection corresponded to its own special contagion. Treatment of the disease should be aimed both at alleviating the patient’s suffering and at destroying the multiplying particles of contagion.

Works of Girolamo Fracastoro

It is curious that Fracastoro's theory was better accepted by the people than by his medical colleagues: such was the power of Hippocrates' more than two thousand years of authority!

Fracastoro not only gave a general theory of “living contagion”. He developed a system of protective measures. To prevent the spread of contagion, patients were recommended to be isolated; they were looked after by people in special clothes - long robes and masks with slits for the eyes. Bonfires were lit in the streets and courtyards, often made of wood that produced acrid smoke, such as juniper. Free communication with the epidemic-stricken city was interrupted. Trade was carried out at special outposts; money was dipped in vinegar, goods were fumigated with smoke. Letters were removed from envelopes with tweezers.

All this, especially quarantines, prevented the spread of contagious diseases. To some extent, these measures are still applied today. Who doesn’t know about the disinfection that is carried out in the home of a patient with diphtheria, about the strict regime of infectious diseases hospitals.

Quarantines and anti-epidemic cordons disrupted the normal life of the country. Sometimes spontaneous riots broke out among the population, who did not understand the full importance of the measures being taken (for example, the “plague riot” in Moscow in 1771). In addition, the “boss” sometimes gave such confused and obscure explanations about the purpose of quarantines that people did not understand them. Here is an interesting excerpt from the diary of A. S. Pushkin in 1831 (the year of the great cholera epidemic).

“Several men with clubs were guarding the crossing of a river. I began to question them. Neither they nor I fully understood why they were standing there with clubs and with orders not to let anyone in. I proved to them that there was probably a quarantine established somewhere, that if I didn’t come today, I would attack him tomorrow, and as proof I offered them a silver ruble. The men agreed with me, moved me and wished me many summers.”

The provisions of this theory are briefly reduced to the following theses.

The boldness of Fracastoro's generalizations was very great. The scientist had to fight many prejudices and preconceived opinions; he did not take into account the authority of the father of medicine - Hippocrates, which in itself was unheard of insolence for that time. It is curious that Fracastoro's theory was better accepted by the people than by his medical colleagues: such was the power of Hippocrates' more than two thousand years of authority!

In presenting the life of Nicolaus Copernicus, we could not help but touch on some issues of an astronomical nature. This probably did not cause much difficulty to readers, since the basic ideas of Copernicus have become truisms in our time. However, in order to appreciate the full historical significance of Copernicus's works, we must enter into a more detailed consideration of them, and for this, we, in turn, must acquaint the reader with the state of knowledge about the universe that Copernicus found. We need to show what Copernicus could have taken from his predecessors and what of their inheritance he had to give up.

We have already mentioned more than once that the science of “modern times” began its development with the restoration and study of the heritage of ancient Greek science. We also know that Copernicus himself considered the ancient astronomers to be his teachers. Therefore, we must begin our presentation from an era more than two thousand years distant from us.

The oldest theory of the universe known to us is the “Pythagorean” system, which legend traces back to the semi-legendary Pythagoras. This system, in contrast to previous ideas about the world, put forward the idea of the movement of the Earth. This circumstance was the reason that the teaching of Copernicus at one time received the name “Pythagorean teaching,” although, as we will now see, the similarity here is very superficial.

Already in the 5th century BC, the Pythagorean system received its design, but we know little about its details. Aristotle (IV century BC) reports the following about the cosmology of the Pythagoreans:

“Regarding the position of the Earth, the opinions of philosophers differ among themselves. However, most philosophers who consider the sky to be limited place the Earth in the middle. On the contrary, the Italian philosophers, the Pythagoreans, believe that there is fire in the middle and that the earth revolves around it like a star, through which the changes of day and night occur. They also accept another Earth, opposite to ours and called by them “counter-earth,” since their main goal is not to study phenomena, but to adapt the latter to their own views and theories.” Aristotle also talks about why the Pythagoreans place fire at the center of the world:

“The most important things, in their (the Pythagoreans’) opinion, deserve the most honorable place, and since fire is more important than the Earth, it is placed in the middle.”

Our drawing explains the idea of the Pythagoreans, according to which the Earth rotates in the direction from west to east around the “central fire”, and at the same time around its axis. The Earth completes both rotations in one day. That is why none of the people have seen the divine hearth, where the “central fire” burns and where the deity resides, for the “central fire” illuminates only the antipodes, where it is impossible to penetrate from the inhabited part of the Earth. Antichthon, i.e. “counter-earth,” revolves around the “central fire” (constantly between the Earth and the latter, which is clearly visible in our figure) and completely blocks the rays of the “central fire” from the Earth.

The role of the Sun was only auxiliary: it only concentrated and sent the rays of the “central fire” to the Earth. It is transparent, like glass, and moves throughout the zodiac throughout the year, which is why the length of the day changes and the seasons change.

Already the Pythagorean Philolaus gifted the Earth with movement around the “central fire”. This gave reason to consider him the predecessor of Copernicus. The next step forward was taken by Hicket and Ecphant, also Pythagoreans. Hicket believed that the Earth occupied the center of the universe and that the “central hearth” or “central fire” was located in the center of the globe. He further attributed to the Earth a rotational movement around its axis during the day in the forward direction, that is, from west to east. He apparently completely abandoned the existence of a “counter-earth”.

The famous Roman lawyer, writer and politician Cicero characterizes the cosmological views of Hicket as follows: “The Syracusan Hicket, as Theophrastus claims, believes that the sky, the Sun, the Moon, the stars, in general everything that is above us, is at rest and that nothing in the world moves , with the exception of the Earth." Further, Cicero quite clearly attributes to Hicket the opinion that the Earth rotates only around its axis.

Ekphant's doctrine was approximately the same. The denial of the existence of a “counter-earth” was still a big step forward compared to the doctrine of Philolaus, which was entirely based on the current numerical mysticism of the Pythagoreans. The fact that Ecphant and Hickett spoke clearly about the daily rotation of the Earth deserves to be especially noted, since Copernicus dared to return again to this ingenious and fruitful idea.

Let us now briefly touch upon the views on the structure of the world of two outstanding Greek philosophers - Plato and Aristotle (IV and V centuries BC).

In one of his last works (Timaeus), Plato, in very unclear terms, attributes to the Earth itself some movement around its axis. But, we repeat, this part of the Timaeus is very dark, and opinions differ greatly about the meaning of what Plato wanted to say. According to legend, Plato supposedly set his students the task of explaining the movement of the planets across the sky by combinations of uniform circular motions, because only circular motion, as “perfect,” he considered “worthy” for celestial bodies. It is unlikely that this legend has any basis, but what is important for us is that during the Renaissance, this motivation, strange in our opinion, enjoyed success and was illuminated by the name of Plato.

Aristotle was a strict geocentrist. In his great treatise “On Heaven,” Aristotle places the Earth at the center of the universe and tries to justify by reasoning that the Earth should rest completely motionless in the center of the world. At the same time, he considers the Earth to be spherical and proves this very successfully and well. The Sun, Moon and planets, as well as the sphere of stars, according to Aristotle, revolve around the Earth. Aristotle rejects all the Pythagorean hypotheses about the movement of the Earth or its rotation around its axis as completely absurd and unreliable.

Aristotle divided the entire universe into two parts that were fundamentally different in their properties and structure:

1) the realm of the perfect - the sky, where everything is incorruptible, absolutely pure and perfect, and where the “fifth element” is located - the incorruptible, perfect and eternal ether, a more subtle (subtle) matter than air and fire;

2) the region of earthly elements, where constant changes and transformations of elements occur, where everything is perishable and subject to destruction and death.

In general, heaven is an area of absolute, unchanging laws: everything there is unchanging and eternal. The earth, on the contrary, is a region of the transient, changeable - it is dominated by chance, emergence and destruction. By virtue of what has been said, in heaven, in a perfect region, all movements are perfect, that is, all celestial bodies move in circles, the most “perfect” curves; all movements in the sky, in addition, are only uniform; There cannot be any uneven movements there.

We see that Aristotle, like Plato, also attaches exceptional importance to “perfection” in the universe. That is why he also considers the universe to be spherical.

The elements in Aristotle's cosmology are arranged in proportion to their weight (or density). Because of this, the coarsest and heaviest element - the earth - is concentrated in the center of the universe, the globe of the earth is surrounded by water, as a lighter element; then there is an air shell (the earth's atmosphere), and even higher - a shell of an even lighter element - fire. This shell occupies the entire space from the Earth to the Moon. Above the shell of fire extends a shell of pure ether, of which, according to Aristotle, all celestial bodies are composed. Strictly speaking, the Moon, Sun and planets do not move around the stationary Earth. Only those spheres to which these celestial bodies are “attached” revolve around the Earth.

These concentric spheres (their common center, according to Aristotle, coincides with the center of the Earth) were introduced into astronomy by the famous mathematician Eudoxus (408–355 BC). He was not only a wonderful astronomer, but also an outstanding mathematician. Since Eudoxus was undoubtedly a student of Plato, driven by the desire to implement his teacher’s idea - to explain the strange movements of the planets in the sky by the addition of circular movements, he made an ingenious attempt to obtain the visible movements of the planets (as well as the Sun and Moon) by a combination of uniform rotational circular movements.

The problem posed by Eudoxus was, in general, resolved, and in the era of Aristotle his theory of concentric spheres enjoyed great fame. Aristotle also accepted it and made extensive use of it in his great work “On Heaven” (in four books). Aristotle even increased the total number of spheres of Eudoxus to 56 (Eudoxus himself used only 27 spheres).

To briefly explain to readers in the simplest way why these complex systems of concentric spheres were needed, let us first recall how the Sun, Moon and planets move across the sky. We will need this to understand not only the constructions of Eudoxus - Calippus - Aristotle, but also the ingenious system of the world put forward by Nicolaus Copernicus.

The Moon and the Sun move across the sky from west to east, along the same constellations (zodiac constellations): Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces. All five planets visible to the naked eye move along these same 12 zodiacal constellations.

The movements across the sky of the two “lower” planets - Mercury and Venus - seem less complex than the movements of the “upper” planets (Mars, Jupiter and Saturn). Both of these “lower” planets are always visible in the firmament not far from the Sun, i.e. either in the west, after sunset (in other words, in the evenings), or in the morning, but already in the east, i.e. before sunrise . At the same time, both Mercury and Venus gradually move away from the Sun, then approach it, until, finally, they disappear in its rays.

The movement of the “upper” planets seems much more complex and confusing. Let's look at the attached drawing. It depicts the apparent path of Mars in 1932–1933. Carefully examining this figure, we notice from the numerals of the months (Roman) that at first, from November 1932 to January 1933, Mars moved across the sky from right to left (from west to east), i.e., it moved “straight” across the sky movement, then, from approximately February to April 1933, Mars moved from left to right. This movement of the upper planet - from left to right - is usually called retrograde, or reverse, movement.

Before changing its direct motion to reverse, or retrograde, each upper planet seems to completely stop moving and appears motionless against the background of a given constellation for some time; As they say, the planet is standing still. After the retrograde motion of the planet ends, the planet begins to stand again, then the planet begins to move across the sky again in a straight motion, etc. This means that with their generally smooth movement across the sky, all the upper planets describe, as it were, some “nodes” ", or "loops".

In order to now give readers an idea of the application of the spheres of Eudoxus to the explanation of the movements of the celestial bodies (Sun, Moon and planets), we will try to explain with the help of these spheres the movement of the Moon across the firmament. To do this, let us imagine three concentric spheres (see figure): the first sphere, the “outer” one, making a complete revolution around the axis of the world during the day from east to west; the second sphere “middle”, rotating around an axis perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic for 18 years 230 days; finally, the third sphere - the “inner” one, which should make a full revolution in 27 days around an axis perpendicular to the plane of the lunar orbit. The rotation of the first sphere was “communicated” by the second, then by the third. Eudoxus did not wonder about the reason that brings all these spheres into rotational motion.

The rotational motion of the first sphere should explain the apparent daily movement of the Moon across the firmament; the rotational motion of the second sphere should explain the motion of the nodes of the lunar orbit; the movement of the third is the visible movement of the Moon across the vault of heaven during one lunar month, i.e. for approximately 27 days. If the Moon is placed, say, somewhere on the equator of the third sphere, then the result will actually be the visible path of the Moon in the sky, with all its main “inequalities”. In other words, by combining three uniformly occurring circular movements, it is possible to explain the uneven movement of the Moon across the sky.

As a result of the combination of many circular motions introduced by Eudoxus, the apparent path of the planet in the sky should resemble, in general, the one shown in our other drawing. In this case, the planet describes successively arcs 1–2, 2–3, 3–4, etc., at equal times, moving in the direction indicated by the arrow.

We see that the forward and backward movements of the planets were explained using the spheres of Eudoxus. But Aristotle introduced additional extra spheres, spheres that “return back” in order to “paralyze” the action of the system of spheres of a planet more distant from the Earth on each planet located closer to the Earth. This greatly complicated Eudoxus' system; as a result, in Aristotle’s cosmological system there were 55 spheres. But then Aristotle introduced some simplification, and then the number of spheres was reduced to 47. To explain the rotational movements of all spheres, Aristotle introduces another 56th sphere, which he calls the “first mover.” This outermost sphere, embracing all the others, sets all other spheres of the sky in rotation. In turn, the sphere of the “first mover” is driven into eternal rotation by the deity. Aristotle's deity thus replaced the machine that sets the numerous spheres of the universe in rotation.

With all the influence that Aristotle enjoyed, his opinions did not serve as indisputable for his contemporaries and their closest descendants as they became in the Middle Ages. This is best proven by the fact that less than half a century after the death of Aristotle, Aristarchus of Samos came up with his new system of the world. This system, contrary to Aristotle, asserts that the Earth is not motionless; it moves around the Sun and around its axis. The theory of Aristarchus differed from the constructions of the Pythagoreans not only in that it made the Sun the central body instead of “fire,” but also in that it was based on observations and various mathematical calculations. Aristarchus even determined the ratio of the radius of the earth's orbit to the radius of the moon's. True, the value of this ratio 19:1 obtained by him is approximately 20 times less than the true one, but this error had its source in the poor quality of his goniometer instruments; Aristarchus’ method was impeccable.

Here is what the greatest mathematician of antiquity, Archimedes (287–212 BC), says about Aristarchus: “...According to some astronomers, the world has the form of a ball, the center of which coincides with the center of the Earth, and the radius is equal to the length of the straight line connecting the centers of the Earth and the Sun. But Aristarchus of Samos, in his “Proposals,” rejecting this idea, comes to the conclusion that the world is much larger than just indicated. He believes that the fixed stars and the Sun do not change their place in space, that the Earth moves in a circle around the Sun, which is in the center of its (Earth’s) path, that the center of the ball of the fixed stars coincides with the center of the Sun, and the size of this ball is such that the circle , described, according to his assumption, by the Earth, is to the distance of the fixed stars in the same ratio as the center of the ball is to its surface.”

From the quotation from Archimedes' Psammit, one can see that Aristarchus attributes to the Earth only a revolution around the Sun. According to Plutarch, Aristarchus also allowed for the daily rotation of the Earth around its axis. Thus, in Aristarchus we have a real heliocentric system of the world; he is rightly called the “Copernicus of antiquity.” Copernicus himself, naming a number of Greek authors who taught about the movement of the Earth (Philolaus, Heraclides of Pontus, Ecphantus and Hicetus), does not mention Aristarchus.

A study of Copernicus's manuscripts has recently shown that in the original text of his work Copernicus also spoke of Aristarchus of Samos, but then this mention was excluded. It is possible that the reason for this was the fact that Aristarchus was known as an atheist, and Copernicus wanted to avoid attacks from the church.

Between Aristarchus, the creator of the scientific heliocentric system of the world, and Ptolemy, the great Greek astronomer who long established the geocentric system, lies a huge period of time - about three hundred years. During this time, Greek astronomy made great strides forward both in terms of the accuracy and number of observations made, and in terms of the development of mathematical research tools. We will mention only two predecessors of Ptolemy: Apollonius (famous mathematician of antiquity; 3rd century BC) and Hipparchus (2nd century BC).

Apollonius replaced Eudoxus's theory of concentric spheres with the theory of epicycles, which was so widely used by Ptolemy.

To explain the forward and backward movements of the planets across the sky, Apollonius assumes that every planet moves uniformly along the circumference of a certain circle (the so-called epicycle), the center of which moves along the circumference of another circle (the so-called deferent: circulus deferens, i.e., the referring circle). So, the movement of the planet, according to Apollonius, should always consist of at least two uniform arc movements, since the movement of the center of the epicycle along the deferent was also assumed to be completely uniform. However, in order to explain the complex movements of the planets across the sky, it was also necessary to select in a certain way the sizes of the deferent and the epicycle, as well as to successfully select the values of the speeds of their movement along the deferent and the epicycle. We will return to the theory of epicycles later.

Hipparchus was a first-class observer, but at the same time an excellent theorist, who was able to apply to various issues of astronomy the achievements of ancient Greek mathematics that were made in his era. Having taken a geocentric point of view, he at the same time accepted that the orbits of the Sun, Moon and planets can only be circular, that is, quite exact circles.

At the time of Hipparchus, it was already well known that the Sun makes its (visible) movement unevenly across the celestial sphere. Hipparchus first tried to explain this uneven movement of the Sun by introducing the epicycle, following the idea of Apollonius; but then he accepted the hypothesis that the Sun moves uniformly along its circular path, but that the Earth is not at the center of this circle. Hipparchus called such circles “eccentrics.” Thus, Hipparchus nevertheless moved the Earth from its place of honor “at the center of the world,” where Eudoxus and Aristotle placed it.

Using similar techniques, Hipparchus also studied the movement of the Moon, and then compiled the first tables of solar and lunar movement, from which it was possible to determine the positions of the Sun and Moon on the firmament quite accurately (for that time).

Hipparchus tried, using a selection of “eccentrics,” to explain the apparent motion of the planets. But he failed to do this, and he abandoned the construction of a theory of planets and limited himself only to careful observation of their complex visible movements and left to subsequent generations of astronomers rich observational material that spanned many years.

Hipparchus was very interested in the problem of determining the distances of the Moon and the Sun. Here is a summary of Hipparchus' data on the distances and sizes of the latter (in earth radii):

Hipparchus / According to modern data

The distance of the Sun from the Earth is 1150 23000

Distance of the Moon from the Earth - 59 60

The diameter of the Sun is 5.5 109

The diameter of the Moon is 1.3 1.37

Hipparchus, as we see, obtained fairly good results for the distance and size of the Moon. But to determine the distance of the Sun from the Earth, he was unable to obtain any new results and was forced to use the number of Aristarchus, famous in ancient times, i.e., accept that the Sun is only 19 times farther from the Earth than the Moon, which is just like us noted above - completely wrong.

The observational material made by Hipparchus was used by the famous astronomer Claudius Ptolemy (2nd century AD), whose work had a huge influence on the entire further development of astronomy until the era of Copernicus. We have already mentioned this work, which in the original was called “Great Treatise of Astronomy.” We mean the famous work known under the Latinized title “Almagest” (Almagestum). When translated into Arabic, and then from Arabic into Latin, the title of Ptolemy’s work was distorted, which is why the completely meaningless word came out: “Almagest.” This name remained with the work of Ptolemy.

Of the richest and most interesting material contained in the Almagest, we are interested here only in the Ptolemaic theory of the universe. Ptolemy in his work accepts the point of view of Aristotle - Hipparchus about the complete immobility of the Earth in the center of the world or not far from the latter. All other “moving” celestial bodies revolve around the absolutely motionless Earth in this order: Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. All these seven bodies move in circular orbits, but the center of each circular orbit in turn moves in some other circle. This is the system of the world of Ptolemy.

We see that this system, just like the systems of Apollonius and Hipparchus, returns astronomy “backwards”, from Aristarchus to Aristotle. However, it would be wrong to conclude that Ptolemy insists on the immobility of the Earth because he does not know or ignores the teachings of Aristarchus. On the contrary, Ptolemy examines in great detail the question of whether the Earth is at rest or in motion. He knows that the apparent movements of the stars can be explained if we assume that the Earth moves. But he rejects this explanation because a number of physical considerations, as he believes, exclude such an assumption.

Ptolemy's arguments boil down to the following: if the Earth were not at the center of the world, then we, says Ptolemy, could not always see exactly half of the firmament; further, of two stars diametrically opposite each other in the sky, in this case we would see either both together, or neither. Those,” Ptolemy continues his argument, “who admit that such a heavy body as the Earth can hold freely and not fall anywhere, obviously forget that all falling bodies tend to move perpendicular to the surface of the Earth and fall towards its center, or, which is the same, to the center of the universe. But just as freely falling bodies have, without exception, a tendency towards the center of the world, the Earth itself should also have a similar tendency if it were shifted from this center.

To appreciate the strength of these arguments, we must keep in mind that, according to the ideas that prevailed in antiquity and were not abandoned in the era of Copernicus, all “fixed” stars (that is, all luminaries, with the exception of the Sun, Moon and planets) are located on a spherical surface, so that there is some “center of the world”. The question was whether the Sun or the Earth was placed at this center.

But among the arguments against the movement of the Earth we find in Ptolemy those that are not necessarily connected with one or another idea about the location of the stars. From everyday experience we know that individual objects appear closer and further apart as the observer moves and changes his position in relation to them. This occurs because the magnitude of the angle formed by the directions drawn from the eye to two stationary objects changes when the position of the eye changes.

If the Earth has a translational motion, then its position, and at the same time the position of the observer, changes, and therefore the apparent distances between individual stars should change depending on the position of the Earth in its orbit, that is, depending on the time of year. Meanwhile, the most careful observations did not reveal this change. From this Ptolemy concluded that the Earth does not have translational motion.

Ptolemy's error, as we now know, stems from the fact that the distances of the Earth from the stars are so enormous in comparison with the diameter of the Earth's orbit that the displacement of the Earth in its orbit causes the most insignificant changes in their apparent distance. These changes could not be detected using the instruments used by ancient astronomers. And in the era of Copernicus, observation technology was not at the level necessary for this. Only about a hundred years ago (in 1838) Bessel first discovered the existence of such a “displacement” for one of the stars closest to us (star 61 of the Cygnus constellation), and subsequently these displacements were found for other stars. Below we will see what considerations Copernicus was guided by when he rejected this and other arguments of Ptolemy. Here we note that the considerations with which Ptolemy substantiated the impossibility of forward motion were also very convincing in the era of Copernicus.

As for the rotational motion of the Earth, Ptolemy gives a number of strong arguments against it. Here, for example, is one of them. It is known that during the rotational motion of any body, any object placed on it is thrown outward (the action of centrifugal force). This centrifugal force should, when the Earth rotates, tear away from the Earth and carry into space all objects located on its surface. This, however, is not observed.

We see that Ptolemy does not take into account the forces of gravity, which outweighs the centrifugal force. This mistake may seem very gross if we do not take into account that mechanics in the time of Ptolemy, and even in the time of Copernicus, was in its infancy, and any clear idea of the basic laws of motion did not yet exist.

The same unfamiliarity with the doctrine of the motion of bodies is manifested in other reasonings of Ptolemy; As an example, let us cite one more of them, which, if not explained with the help of the laws of mechanics, can seem irresistible. If the Earth has a rotational movement from west to east, then a body thrown upward, when falling back down, should, says Ptolemy, fall not in its original place, but somewhat to the west, which, however, is not observed. This argument can only be refuted when we turn to the law of inertia, according to which a body, in the absence of external obstacles, must maintain its existing speed. Before being thrown, the body lying on the Earth had the same speed as the point on the Earth where the body was located. Being thrown upward, it does not lose this speed and therefore does not “lag behind” the Earth.

The reader sees that the “simple” mistake made by Ptolemy requires knowledge of the “simple” laws of mechanics to correct it. But these “simple” laws are by no means as obvious as it might seem to a person accustomed to them: their discovery took an entire era in the history of science. Copernicus, as we will see, already anticipated these laws, but they were understood and formulated with complete clarity much later, only in the 17th century.

Based on considerations similar to those described above, Ptolemy built his theory of planetary motion, which is striking in its grandeur. In this system, as in the Hipparchus system, to explain all the features of the movement of the planets, the planets are assumed to move in circles (epicycles), the centers of which, in turn, move in circles (deferents).

Let us now touch upon the Ptolemaic theory of planetary motion. According to this theory, the Earth is located at a certain point, near the center of the deferent planet; the planet moves uniformly around the circumference of the epicycle. Using calculations, you can choose the relative sizes of the deferent (eccentric) and the epicycle, as well as the rotation times so that when observed from the Earth, the planet will appear to be moving in one direction or in the opposite direction, i.e., sometimes from west to east, sometimes from east to west, and it is possible to select the dimensions of the epicycle and eccentric so well that the apparent movement of a planet, for example Mars, across the sky will be well represented.

To take into account all the features of the movement of the planets, Ptolemy needed to select different angles of inclination of their deferents and epicycles to the plane of the Sun’s orbit. All of these details of the theory led to very complex calculations. And yet, Ptolemy managed to produce them, managed to create a harmonious theory that was quite well consistent with the observations of that time. This theory glorified the name of Claudius Ptolemy and became for many centuries the only one with the help of which they tried to explain all the features, all the “inequalities” in the movements of the five planets known at that time.

However, this theory seemed very complicated even to Ptolemy himself. In the XIII book of his Great Treatise, Ptolemy writes with complete frankness: “We should not be frightened by the complexity of the hypothesis or the difficulty of calculation; Our only concern should be to explain natural phenomena as satisfactorily as possible.” In any case, when developing the theory of epicycles just briefly outlined, Ptolemy showed brilliant mathematical talent and great talent as a calculator.

Ptolemy had no method for determining the distances of the planets from the Earth, as a result of which his system suffered from complete uncertainty in this regard. All ancient astronomers and Ptolemy along with them assumed that planets that move quickly across the sky are located closer to the Earth than those that move more slowly across the sky. Therefore, Ptolemy adopted this order of arrangement of his world system (see figure): Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. The name of Ptolemy enjoyed enormous authority among Arab astronomers, who became the heirs of ancient Greek science. But the observations of Arab astronomers in their observatories were more accurate than Ptolemy’s, and therefore very soon “inconsistencies” with Ptolemy’s theory of epicycles were discovered. It turned out that one epicycle was not enough; that in order to preserve the general plan of the Ptolemaic system, along the circumference of the second circle it was necessary to imagine the center of the third circle moving, and along the circumference of the third circle - the center of the fourth circle, etc. On the circumference of the last of all these epicycles a planet should be placed. This, of course, terribly complicated the initially relatively simple theory of Ptolemy.

Thus, the Arab astronomers who revived Ptolemaic geocentric astronomy, despite the excellent astronomical observations that they made in their richly furnished observatories with the help of more advanced astronomical instruments (in Damascus, Baghdad, Meghreb, Cairo, Samarkand), went further than the geocentrism of Aristotle - Ptolemy, they did not go further than the epicycles and spheres of Eudoxus.

During the Crusades, the uncultured Western European knighthood and clergy came into contact with the educated, sophisticated, but already decadent Arab society, with its cultural and scientific achievements. Thanks to the Arabs, European scientists first became acquainted with Aristotle, and then with Ptolemy. The Latin translation of the Almagest from Arabic appeared, however, only in the 12th century.

Since the clergy had a monopoly on intellectual education, all sciences, in particular astronomy, became simple branches of theology. This supreme, categorical dominance of theology in all sciences, in all branches of mental activity was, in the words of Engels, “a necessary consequence of the fact that the church was the highest generalization and sanction of the existing feudal system” (Engels, “The Peasant War in Germany”, Partizdat, 1932 , pp. 32–33).

In the middle of the 13th century, a learned monk, one of the most prominent representatives of scholasticism, Thomas Aquinas, made an attempt to combine Christian theology with the natural science system of Aristotle. He created an entire worldview system, which to this day remains irrefutably authoritative for all church science. He managed to “reconcile” the Aristotelian system of the world with the Christian religion and “link” it with the biblical concept of the universe.

Sanctified by the authority of Thomas Aquinas (canonized by the church), Aristotle's geocentric system reigned supreme throughout Western Europe for almost 300 years. From now on, no one should doubt the immobility of the Earth in the center of the world, for this opinion was sanctified by the church and all its centuries-old authority.

Meanwhile, the economic development of Europe moved forward at a rapid pace. The development of crafts, trade, and monetary transactions gradually undermined the old feudal order. In wealthy European cities, the capital of wealthy merchants became a powerful force. The former markets have become cramped for trading operations; the desire to get new ones drew sailors further and further into the expanses of unexplored oceans, which led to a number of great discoveries.

In 1485, a Portuguese expedition led by Diego Cano reached Cape Cross (21 28" south latitude) on January 18th.

The next expedition of Bartholomew Diaz rounded the southern tip of Africa in 1486. Thanks to the discovery of the compass, sailors could move from careful sailing along the coast to long voyages “across the ocean.” But in this case, practical astronomy provided no less services than the compass, providing new, convenient tables and instruments for the use of navigators. Particularly important was the invention of the so-called cross staff (“cross staff”). This instrument enabled ship captains to determine geographic latitude with some accuracy. As for geographical longitude, the navigators of that time had to be content with only a very approximate definition of it. However, the use of the “Kreuzstab” allowed the brave sailors of that great era to expand their navigation areas. Using this tool and new planetary tables (Regiomontana), navigators began to undertake much more daring and risky voyages, no longer afraid of vast expanses of water. The first who taught Portuguese sailors to use the “Creutzstab” to measure latitude on the high seas was the merchant and astronomer Martin Behaim (1459–1506), originally from Nuremberg. He is also known as the man who made the first earthly globe. In 1492, Beheim presented his hometown with a globe made of expensive material and with great care, which he called “the apple of the Earth.” This globe is still preserved in Nuremberg.

“Let it be known,” Behaim writes on his globe, “that the whole world is measured on this figure of an apple, so that no one doubts how simple the world is, that you can travel everywhere on ships or walk, as depicted here.”

In 1497, Vasco da Gama's expedition was equipped in Portugal, which carried out the first sea voyage to India.

From 1497 to 1507, the Portuguese equipped as many as eleven expeditions to India, developing enormous energy in a short period of time; but, notes one historian, both people and capital are eagerly rushing to the east. The basis of this enthusiasm is, of course, a purely material incentive: the colossal profitability of Indian enterprises in the first time after the discovery of India. At that time, Indian trade generated about 80 percent net profit per year. All of Europe took part in these enterprises with its capital.

In 1492, Christopher Columbus, also trying to solve the problem of opening a sea route to India, embarked on a long journey across the Atlantic Ocean and accidentally discovered a new, hitherto unknown continent - America. Almost simultaneously with Columbus, the Italian Cabot acted, who discovered Labrador in the spring of 1497, and Newfoundland in 1498 and explored the shores of America to Cape Hatteras.

The experience gained by the individual navigators who took part in all these numerous voyages was colossal: in new countries they saw new constellations, unknown to anyone until now; their own, direct observations convinced them of the “convexity,” i.e., sphericity, of the Earth. Ship captains needed new, accurate tables indicating the positions of various luminaries in the sky at different times. They needed new instruments for astronomical observations and new methods for producing the latter.

All these circumstances completely changed the tasks and goals of astronomy. The latter could no longer remain the same dead and dry science, extracted from ancient parchments and interesting only to a few professors. From the above-ground spheres, where the thoughts of medieval astronomers and astrologers hovered, astronomy descended to Earth and very quickly received purely earthly tasks: to come up with ways to determine the latitude and longitude of a ship at sea - this was the most pressing task of that time. The two astronomers were a kind of reformers of medieval astronomy. These were Purbach and Regiomontanus. Both of them turned to observations and raised Renaissance astronomy to the height at which it stood in antiquity, during the time of Hipparchus and Ptolemy.

Georg Purbach (Purbach or Peuerbach, 1423–1461) studied at the University of Vienna with Johann of Glunden, who was then a professor of mathematics and astronomy in Vienna. After completing a full course of science in Vienna, Purbach, a twenty-year-old youth, went to Rome. Around 1450 he returned to Vienna, where he received the chair of mathematics and astronomy.

Purbach set as his main task to give a completely accurate presentation of the theoretical part of the Almagest, mainly the planetary theory of Ptolemy (i.e., the theory of epicycles), and then apply the theoretical principles of the Almagest to the compilation of more accurate tables of the movements of the Sun, Moon and planets. But all the Latin translations of the Almagest at his disposal were of extremely poor quality. In view of this, Purbach intended to study the Almagest in the original, in other words, to thoroughly study the Greek text of the famous work of Ptolemy.

It was precisely at this time, after the fall of Constantinople in 1543, that the Greek text “Almagest” was brought by the Greek Vissarion, who had fled from the city conquered by the Turks. Purbach failed to study the Greek language properly, but nevertheless he studied the Almagest so much that he could compose an “Abridged Exposition of Astronomy” - an essay in which an excellent, although somewhat abbreviated and concise, summary of the contents of Ptolemy’s work was given.

Purbach was quite clear that the urgent task of astronomy should be to improve the existing planetary tables. In fact, comparing his observations with the so-called Alphonse tables (tables compiled in the 13th century by Arab astronomers invited for this purpose by King Alphonse X), Purbach for Mars, for example, received a difference of several degrees!

Early death did not allow Purbach to improve the planetary tables, but still he somewhat improved both the techniques and the accuracy of observations, significantly improved the trigonometric tables of the Almagest and (which is a very important feature of him as a professor) always tried to expound the Ptolemaic system and his theory of epicycles, following exactly the text of the famous author of the Almagest: he rightly attributed many inconsistencies, errors and complications of Ptolemy’s planetary theory to the ignorance and negligence of the scribes. However, the observations of Purbach himself made it possible to become convinced of the imperfection of Ptolemaic theoretical constructions. Purbach's gifted student, Johann Müller from Königsberg (a small town in Lower Franconia), is better known in the history of astronomy under the Latinized surname Regiomontana (1436–1476). After Purbach's death, Regiomontanus was appointed his successor in the department of mathematics and astronomy at the University of Vienna and turned out to be a worthy successor to his teacher.

Early death prevented Purbach from thoroughly studying the Greek language; his successor studied the latter perfectly and read the Almagest in the original. Since 1461, Regiomontanus was in Italy, where he was engaged in copying Greek manuscripts, but did not abandon his studies in astronomy and astronomical observations. In 1471, he returned to Germany and settled in Nuremberg, where he became close with a wealthy burgher, Bernard Walter, who built a special observatory for Regiomontanus, equipped with excellent instruments for that time. These instruments had exceptional precision for that time. Bernard Walter not only created a truly luxurious observatory for his learned friend, but also founded a special printing house to publish his works.

Using his instruments, Regiomontan managed to make many observations by 1475, unprecedented in their accuracy. In 1475, Regiomontan left his scientific studies and observations at the Nuremberg Observatory and, at the call of Pope Sixtus IV, arrived in Rome to work on calendar reform. This reform came to a halt with the death of Regiomontanus in 1476.

In 1474, the printing house founded by Bernard Walter in Nuremberg printed the tables compiled by Regiomontanus; he called them "Ephemeris". It was a collection containing tables of longitudes, the Sun, Moon and planets (from 1474 to 1560), as well as a list of lunar and solar eclipses for the period from 1475 to 1530. These tables, which glorified the name of Regiomontanus more than his other works, did not, however, contain the tables necessary to determine the latitude of a place.

Beginning with a new edition published in 1498, Regiomontanus' Ephemerides also contained tables for calculating latitudes. Regiomontanus' ephemerides were used, among other things, by Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci, Bartholomew Diaz and Vasco da Gama.

The energetic activity of Purbach and Regiomontanus greatly facilitated the transition from the old system of the world to the new heliocentric system created by the genius of Nicolaus Copernicus.

Some historians even believe that Regiomontanus himself was a supporter of the heliocentric picture of the world. But this is just a guess. As far as we know, Purbach and Regiomontanus did not think of overthrowing the centuries-old Ptolemaic system of the world; they only tried to fully master Ptolemy’s techniques and provide observers with new, accurate tables of celestial movements.

But isolated voices against the main provisions of the Ptolemaic system were already beginning to be heard. For example, in the middle of the 14th century, Nicole Oresme, a canon in Rouen (later a bishop), had already come to the conclusion that Aristotle and Ptolemy were mistaken, that the Earth, and not the “sky,” makes a daily rotation. Oresme presented his evidence in a special “Treatise on the Sphere”; in it he even tried to show that the assumption that the Earth rotates around its axis does not at all contradict the Bible.

Oresme died in 1382, and his “Treatise” did not receive any distribution after his death, so his idea about the rotation of the Earth around its axis during the day and his “proofs” of this rotation did not become known to almost any of the astronomers and mathematicians of subsequent times. Copernicus himself, who collected all the statements about the movement of the Earth, knew nothing about Nicholas Oresmus.

Nicholas of Oresme is followed by the famous Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464): philosopher, theologian and astronomer. According to his teaching, the Earth is a star and, like everything in nature, is in motion. “The earth,” says Nikolai Kuzansky, “moves, although we do not notice it, for we perceive movement only when comparing it with something motionless.” This learned cardinal believed that the universe is a sphere and that its center is God, but he did not place the Earth in the center; for this reason, the Earth must move, like all other luminaries. The considerations of Nicholas of Cusa rest mostly on general philosophical considerations, and not on observations and mathematical conclusions.

In his brilliant description of the Renaissance, given in the “Old Introduction to the Dialectics of Nature,” Engels, speaking of the titans “in strength of thought, passion and character, in versatility and learning,” also mentions Leonardo da Vinci, whom he calls “the great mathematician, mechanic and engineer."

But Leonardo was partly an astronomer, an amateur, it is true, but a brilliant amateur, who expressed a number of amazing thoughts regarding the Moon, the Sun and the stars. For example, in his manuscripts, among various fragments of phrases and reasoning, recorded in his mirrored writing, there is the following question:

“The Moon, heavy and dense, what does it support, this Moon?” From this recording, says prof. N.I. Idelson, “breathes with a significant scientific premonition... Leonardo, a man of almost modern thinking, approaches nature with different thoughts: what holds the Moon in the depths of space?” More than two hundred years will pass from the posing of this question by Leonardo to its resolution by Newton. But Leonardo is precisely a man of “almost modern thinking”; in his notes we will find more than one idea that scientists of our time could subscribe to!

In Leonardo we will, indeed, find a completely correct explanation of the ashen light of the Moon and the statement that the Earth is “a star like the Moon,” and wonderful records about the Sun. Leonardo also has the following entry: “The Earth is not in the center of the solar circle and not in the center of the world, but in the center of its elements, close to it and united with it, and whoever stood on the Moon, our Earth with the element of water would seem to be playing the same the same role as the Sun in relation to us.” This entry again contains a “significant scientific premonition” - that the Earth does not rest at the center of the world, as Aristotle, Ptolemy and Leonardo’s contemporaries believed. This means that Leonardo had already “moved” the Earth from its fixed position in the center of the world.

We should mention two more astronomers, contemporaries of Copernicus. One of them is Celio Calcagnoni, a native of the Italian city of Ferrara (1479–1541); He served first in the army of the emperor, then of Pope Julius II, then, leaving military service, he became an official of the papal curia and a professor at the University of Ferrara.

In 1518, he lived in Krakow, where at that time Copernicus had learned friends who already knew about his teaching. Thus, Calcagnini could familiarize himself with Copernicus's proposals and their rationale. Be that as it may, Calcagnoni probably wrote a small pamphlet in Latin around this time entitled: “Why the Heavens Stand and the Earth Moves, or on the Perpetual Motion of the Earth.”

Calcagnini's brochure is only eight pages long. Using various arguments, borrowed mainly from ancient authors (Aristotle and Plato), Calcagno tries, like Nicholas Oresme once did, to convince readers that the Earth should rotate around its axis, making a full revolution in one day. He also points out that, just as flowers and leaves all turn towards the Sun, so the Earth must constantly try to turn various parts of its surface towards the radiant luminary of the day. But the Earth only rotates; she, according to Calcagnoni, still rests in the very center of the universe. Thus, Calcagnini remains partly on the old Ptolemaic point of view, for he does not allow the movement of the Earth around the Sun.

Although Calcagnini's work was not published until 1544, it was known in Italy even earlier. Perhaps the author, according to the custom of that time, himself sent out handwritten copies of his short article to various Italian scientists and his friends. At least Francesco Mavrolico, a famous astronomer and mathematician in his time (1494–1575), in his “Cosmography”, printed in Venice in 1543, i.e. in the year of the death of Nicolaus Copernicus, accepts Calcagnini’s opinion about the rotation of the Earth around its axis and even protects him. It should be noted that the preface to Maurolico’s book is marked February 1540. Consequently, already before 1540 Mavroliko managed to familiarize himself with Calcagnini’s brochure. However, the rest of Mavroliko’s book is written in the old spirit. Maurolico was subsequently an opponent of the Copernican doctrine of the movement of the Earth, although he allowed the rotation of the Earth around its axis.

In 1515, the first printed Latin edition of Ptolemy's Almagest was published in Venice; in 1528 it was published again in Paris and then, in 1551, in Basel. Finally, in the same Basel in 1538, the Greek text of the Almagest was published.

This desire for the Almagest, for the original, where the theory of epicycles was expounded, is very instructive. We have seen that, despite the presence of views that shook the teachings of Ptolemy, this latter remained unsurpassed. It was necessary first to raise astronomy to the height at which it stood in the times of Hipparchus and Ptolemy. This was done by Purbach and Regiomontanus. But their astronomical works still did not go beyond the achievements of the Almagest. The creation of Ptolemy was still the cornerstone for all astronomical work and observations: instruments were improved only gradually - they were undoubtedly made better than in the days of the great Greek astronomers of antiquity - as well as the observation methods themselves.

Another of Copernicus's contemporaries that we should also mention is Girolamo Fracastoro.

Fracastoro was born in 1483 in Verona. He studied in Padua, and then became a professor of logic there; He occupied this place until 1508.

In 1508 Fracastoro returned to Verona and lived there until his death in 1553. As we know, in the fall of 1501 Fracastoro met Nicolaus Copernicus.

Fracastoro's main work, Homocentrics, was published in Venice in 1538. In Padua, Fracastoro became close friends with the three della Toppe brothers, one of whom studied anatomy with Leonardo da Vinci, and the other devoted himself specifically to astronomy. This last one was called Giovanni Battista. Giovanni della Toppe drew up a whole plan for transforming the theory of planets, using exclusively the spheres of Eudoxus, without any epicycles or eccentrics. However, he died young, not having time to complete the great work he had undertaken. He bequeathed the completion of his work and all his ideas regarding the new astronomical theory of planetary motion to his friend Fracastoro, who with his work “Homocentrics” exactly followed the methods of Giovanni della Toppe. Fracastoro's work has a “dedication” (preface) to Pope Paul III. Let us recall that the great work of Nicolaus Copernicus, “On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Circles,” published in 1543, also had the same “dedication.” Fracastoro's writing is dark and difficult to read. The cumbersome world mechanism described by the author is much more complex than the elegant theory of Ptolemy’s epicycles: in total Fracastoro introduces 79 spheres. This means that he extremely complicated the old system of Eudoxus - Aristotle. His complex system is not a step forward, but rather a step back.

So, over a period of just over a hundred years, astronomy in Europe has indeed been revived. Purbach was, as it were, the Hipparchus of modern times, Regiomontanus was, as it were, a new Ptolemy. On the other hand, Fracastoro can be called the Eudoxus of the new period of advanced astronomy. But while Fracastoro was trying to revive the complex theory of Eudoxus, a canon unknown to the world in distant Frauenburg was preparing a complete renewal of astronomy, its complete liberation from old principles.

The problem becomes clearer if we consider the most interesting and detailed of the anti-Ptolemaic systems proposed before Copernicus. In 1538 the book Homocentrics appeared, dedicated, like De Revolutionibus, to Pope Paul III. Its author is Girolamo Fracastoro, an Italian humanist, poet, physician and astronomer, professor of logic in Padua at the time when Copernicus was a student there. Fracastoro did not claim to have identified the central idea in Homocentrics, which was to replace the epicycles and eccentrics of Ptolemy with the concentric (or homocentric) spheres generated by Plato's student Eudoxus (active c. 370 BC) and refined by Aristotle. Fracastoro did destroy the epicycles and eccentrics, but at the cost of a very implausible system, much further removed from physical reality than the Ptolemaic system which it was intended to replace. Fracastoro suggested that any movement in space can be decomposed into three components located at right angles to each other. Thus, the movement of the planets can be represented as the movement of crystalline spheres, the axes of which are located at right angles to each other - three for each movement. He further suggested - quite inappropriately - that if the outer spheres move the inner ones, the movement of the inner spheres does not affect the outer ones.

This allowed him to eliminate many of the Aristotelian spheres - those that served to counteract the friction caused by the two spheres destroying each other. At the same time, daily rotation was allowed primum mobile to explain the rising and setting of planets and fixed stars. Thus, Fracastoro needed only seventy-seven spheres. He very cleverly eliminated the great defect of Aristotle's system, which is that if the planets are located on the equators of the spheres concentric with the Earth, there should be no difference in their brightness. He explained the observed difference in brightness by suggesting that spheres (material bodies) have different transparency due to different densities. This system (with which other scientists also experimented) shows the extent to which Copernicus followed the fashion of the times in reviving ancient systems to replace the Ptolemaic one. It also demonstrates the enormous superiority of the Copernican system. Indeed, despite the detailed description, Fracastoro did not offer a replacement for Ptolemy’s computational methods. He certainly knew and understood the Almagest, but had neither the patience nor the mathematical gift to rewrite it again. He was content to explain how to get rid of epicycles and eccentrics, without bothering to explore the significance of his assumptions regarding the mathematical representation of motion by means of spheres.

Copernicus wrote De Revolutionibus as a careful parallel to the Almagest, revising the computational and mathematical methods for a different concept of planetary motions. Book I is devoted, like Ptolemy's Book I, to a general description of the Universe: the sphericity of the Universe and the Earth, the circular nature of celestial motion, the size of the Universe, the order of the planets, the motion of the Earth, and the basic theorems of trigonometry. But only Ptolemy wrote about a geocentric and geostatic Universe, and Copernicus insisted that the Earth and all other planets revolve around the Sun, rejecting Ptolemy's arguments one after another. He also managed to add something to Ptolemaic trigonometry. Book II deals with spherical trigonometry, the rising and setting of the sun, and the planets (now attributed to the motion of the Earth). Book III contains a mathematical description of the movement of the Earth, and Book IV contains a mathematical description of the movement of the Moon. Book V describes the motion of the planets in longitude, and in Book VI - in latitude, or, as Copernicus himself wrote: “In the first book I will describe the positions of all the spheres, together with those movements of the Earth that I attribute to it; thus, this book will contain, as it were, the general system of the Universe. In other books, I will relate the movements of the remaining luminaries and all orbits to the movement of the Earth, so that we can conclude how the movements and phenomena of the remaining luminaries and spheres can be preserved if they are related to the movement of the Earth.”