183, l.

Luriaf Theory 69
This "simple" theory of the lunar motion is undoubtedly the largest body of
theoretical astronomy inherited by Ptolemy from his predecessors. Nevertheless,
a careful analysis of the foundations on which this classical theory was built led
him to significant numerical and methodological improvements.
The theory developed so far rests on data obtained from lunar eclipses. In
Book V of the Almagest it is shown that lunar longitudes outside of syzygies are
not represented with sufficient accuracy and that there exists a "second anomaly"
of the lunar motion depending on the moon's elongation from the sun. This
second anomaly is zero at syzygies, so that the simple theory from Book IV
remains valid for the theory of eclipses. The discovery of the second anomaly, in
modern terminology known as "evection," had a far reaching influence on the
techniques of ancient and medieval astronomy through Ptolemy's invention of
movable eccenters by means of which he succeeded in describing correctly the
observed deviations from the simple theory.
As a consequence of these refinements in the theory of the motion of the
moon lunar positions provided the most accurately known data for the determination
of nearby positions of planets and fixed stars. On the other hand the
parameters of the lunar theory are derived from eclipses because only through
the solar theory are ecliptic coordinates known with sufficient accuracy. This
illustrates the decisive importance ofthe theoretical models and their interrelations
in the order sun-moon-planets and fixed stars (which, in turn, influence the determination
of the sidereal as well as of the tropical coordinates), an importance far
greater than the role played by individual observations. This imbalance between
theoretical structures and direct observations became even more accentuated in
the time after Ptolemy and remained characteristic for all pre-telescopic astronomy.
In Chap. 1 of Book IV Ptolemy explains that only lunar eclipses are suitable
for the determination of lunar longitudes because they are independent of parallax.
Chap. 2 gives a short historical summary concerning the determination of the
fundamental period relations of the lunar motion, followed by a critical discussion
of the method to determine the length of the anomalistic period. Chap. 3 derives
the numerical values of the different mean motions which then are tabulated in
Chap.4.
We shall postpone the discussion of Ptolemy's historical remarks to the section
on Hipparchus. 2 We then can quickly dispose of the tables of mean motions and
their computations but we will have to go into more detail in the discussion of
Ptolemy's arguments concerning the correct determination of a period of the lunar
anomaly.
2. Mean Motions
Ptolemy inherited from Hipparchus the following parameters:
mean synodic month: m=29;31,50,8,20d
2 Below I E 5, 1 A.
251 synodic months= 269 anomalistic months
5458 synodic months= 5923 periods of latitude,
(1)
(2)
(3