GrasshoffG., The history of Ptolemy's star catalogue (New York, 1990).
2.
ToomerG. I., Ptolemy's Almagest (London, 1984).
3.
Grasshoff, op. cit. (ref. 1), 21.
4.
Ibid., 24.
5.
DelambreJ. B. J., Histoire du l'astronomie du Moyen Âge (Paris, 1819).
6.
NewtonR. R., The crime of Claudius Ptolemy (Baltimore, 1977).
7.
LaplaceP.-C., Exposition du système du monde (6th edn, Paris, 1935), 391.
8.
EvansJames, “On the origin of the Ptolemaic star catalogue”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xviii (1987), 155–72, 233–78.
9.
Grasshoff, op. cit. (ref. 1).
10.
Ibid., 24.
11.
SwerdlowN. M., “The enigma of Ptolemy's catalogue of stars”, Journal for the history of astronomy, xxiii (1992), 173–83.
12.
EfremovYu. N. and PavlovskayaE. D., “Determinations of the epoch of Almagest stellar catalogue from the proper motions of stars”, History of astronomy investigations (Moscow), xxi (1989), 175–92 (in Russian).
13.
Grasshoff, op. cit. (ref. 1).
14.
The Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, i–xx (European Space Agency, 1997).
15.
HoffleitD. and JaschekC., The bright star catalog (New Haven, 1991).
16.
Grasshoff, op. cit. (ref. 1).
17.
KalashnikovV. V.NosovskyG. V., and FomenkoA. T., Geometric and statistical methods of analysis of star configurations: Dating Ptolemy's Almagest (Boca Raton, Florida, 1993). This book was written to confirm the extraordinary idea that the real history of the Almagest started around the tenth to thirteenth centuries, and all the supposed preceding events are nothing more than phantoms of later ones. In order to get this late dating for Ptolemy's catalogue they rejected the longitudes and precession, and used only the latitude components of proper motions. After fanciful assumptions about the content and techniques used in the Almagest, the authors leave themselves with only eight stars to deal with, because only these stars are considered to have been measured precisely enough. Comparing the latitudes of these stars in Ptolemy's catalogue with the modern latitude values and proper motions, they concluded the epoch of catalogue to be the tenth century a.d. In fact, this dating is based on the large error in the latitude of Arcturus, which these authors interpreted as the result of the proper motion. No explanation is given as to why, whichever of the existing manuscripts of the Almagest catalogue is used, the longitudes always yield an epoch that is close to +60, and many false assertions are given instead. For more detailed criticism of these extraordinary ideas, see EfremovYu. N., “Syndrome of the ‘new chronology’”, Herald of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, i/11 (1998), 37–42.
18.
Kalashnikov, op. cit. (ref. 17), p. 101 of the Russian edition.
19.
PetersC. H. and KnobelE. B., Ptolemy's catalogue of stars: A revision of the Almagest (Washington, 1915).
20.
PeirceC. S., “Photometric research”, Annals of the Astronomical Observatory of Harvard College, v/9 (1878).
21.
EfremovYu. N. and ShevchenkoM. Yu., “What have ground the mathematical millstones?”, History of astronomy investigations (Moscow), xxiv (1994), 164–80 (in Russian).
