The Encyclopedia of Ancient Natural Scientists: The Greek tradition and its many heirs

(Ron) #1

CE, provides a terminus post quem for Theomne ̄stos’ work. Theomne ̄stos appears to have
been acquainted with medical theory and also with practice in the field. His is the only
treatise in the Hippiatrika that includes case-studies and detailed instructions for grooming
and early training, and that does not contain magic. Also noteworthy is Theomne ̄stos’
expression of affection for his patients. Theomne ̄stos’ treatise includes quotations from
A, A, N, and “Cassius” (possibly C D).
Echoes of X and S  A are present, but Theomne ̄stos does not
mention these authorities by name, and may have used their work through a compilation
such as that of Cassius Dionusios. An Arabic translation preserved in two MSS indicates
that Theomne ̄stos was a native of Nikopolis, but there were numerous cities with that
name.


CHG vv. 1– 2 passim; Björck (1932) 54–55; Idem,“Griechische Pferdeheilkunde in arabischer Überliefer-
ung,” Le monde oriental 30 (1936) 1–12; RE S.7 (1940) 1353–54, K. Hoppe; Hoyland (2004); NP 12/
1.373, V. Nutton; McCabe (2007) 181–207.
Anne McCabe


Theo ̄n (Astr.) (127 – 132 CE)


P, Syntaxis, records Theo ̄n’s observations of Mercury (9.9) and Venus (10.1–2),
giving an elongation for Mercury of 26 ̊ 15 ’, distinctly larger than the maximum elongation
of 20 ̊ accepted by T   S (3.13, 3.30).


RE 5A.2 (1934) 2067–2068, K. Ziegler.
PTK


Theo ̄n of Alexandria (Stoic) (15 BCE – 15 CE)


The Stoic Theo ̄n, living at the time of A, wrote a commentary on the physics
section of the Introduction to the Doctrines of A  S (Souda Theta-203),
as well as On the Arts of Rhetoric.


GGP 4.2 (1994) 714, P. Steinmetz.
GLIM


Theo ̄n of Alexandria (Astr.) (ca 360 – 385 CE)


Active in Alexandria, according to his record of three astronomical events dated 360,
364 and 377 CE; father of H. Three of his commentaries on P’s works
are almost extant, the most famous being the “Little Commentary” (LC), a practical
guide to the use of the Handy Tables (HT) without theoretical justification. Less famous,
but still influential, was his commentary on the Almagest (IA: only the section on Book 11
is lost). Apparently much less known were the five books of his “Great Commentary” on
HT (GC: only Books 1–3 and part of 4 are extant), in which the correspondence
between the Almagest and HT is examined. These texts contain the most reliable informa-
tion on Theo ̄n.
Despite their different purposes, the three commentaries address a composite audience,
as can be seen from their respective prefaces. Theo ̄n’s foreword to IA states that his auditors
urged him to explain certain difficulties in Ptolemy. Some (if not most) of these students
were mainly interested in making use of Ptolemy’s tables, most probably for astrological


THEO ̄N OF ALEXANDRIA (ASTR.)
Free download pdf