SpringerLink
Log in

Peculiarities of Presocratic Flat Earth Cosmology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
When the Earth Was Flat

Part of the book series: Historical & Cultural Astronomy ((HCA))

  • 1054 Accesses

Abstract

The issues discussed in this chapter concern peculiarities of the ancient Greek conception of a flat earth. As we will see in Part Two of this book, in the ancient Chinese gai tian system, everything, except the meaning of “falling,” is different. In the present chapter, there is necessarily some overlap with my earlier publications, but this is inevitable to show the differences between the two systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hahn (2001), 169ff and 195–196.

  2. 2.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.7.6 = DK 13A7(6) = LM ANAXIMEN. D3(6) = Gr Axs12 = TP2 As56 = KRS 156.

  3. 3.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.9.4 = DK 60A4(4), = LM ARCH. D2(4), not in Gr and KRS.

  4. 4.

    P 3.10.4–5 (not in S) = DK 68A94 = LM ATOM. D111 = Gr Dmc72, not in KRS.

  5. 5.

    Pseudo-Galen, History of Philosophy 82, not in DK, LM, Gr, and KRS, but see Dox. 633. The suggestion in Panchenko (1999), that Archelaus, Leucippus and Democritus meant that the earth is shaped like a shield, concave at its lower side and convex at its upper side, is ingenious but not very convincing.

  6. 6.

    Epicurus, On Nature ĪĀ [33] Arighetti, from Herculaneum Papyri 1042.8.vi = Gr Axs 20, cf. TP2 243, n.2; not in DK, LM, and KRS.

  7. 7.

    Ibidem.

  8. 8.

    Plato, Timaeus 24E–25A.

  9. 9.

    Plato, Phaedo 109A9–B4.

  10. 10.

    For a discussion of Plato on the shape of the earth, see Couprie (2011), 201–212.

  11. 11.

    Aristotle mentions the argument in De Caelo 294a1–4. 4. I discussed it at length in Couprie (2008) and in Couprie (2011), Chap. 15.

  12. 12.

    Herodotus, Historiae 4.36 = Gr Axr8 = KRS 100; not in DK, LM and TP2.

  13. 13.

    Agathemerus, Geography 1.1.2 = DK 68B15 = Gr Dmc152 = LM ATOM. D112 and D113 (but missing several lines); not in KRS.

  14. 14.

    Cf. Heidel (1937), 12 n. 22: “It is quite certain that the continental mass, not to speak of the οἰκουμένη, was not circular, though the map probably was in the earlier tines.”

  15. 15.

    Heidel (1937), 12. See also Berger (1903), 81 and Pédech (1976), 35. Some scholars divide the surface of the earth on the ancient maps in three parts. For instance, Robinson (1968), 32, and Naddaf (2003), 54, Fig. 1.1. This is, I think, a misunderstanding of another text, in which Herodotus says that the Ionians discerned three parts of the earth: Europe, Asia, and Libya, the river Nile being the border between Asia and Libya. Here, however, Herodotus is not talking about the oldest maps, but about later developments of maps, on which more details of lands were depicted.

  16. 16.

    Heidel (1937), 20 and 54. See also Pédech (1976), 35.

  17. 17.

    Heidel (1937), 17, Fig. 2. See also Pédech (1976), 35–36, and Kominko (2013), 78–79. The data about Ephorus’ map are handed down by Strabo, Geographica.1.2.28 and Cosmas Indicopleustes, Topografia Cristiana 2.79–80. See also Anderson (2013), Plates VIII and IX.

  18. 18.

    See next note.

  19. 19.

    Cf. MR 410–411: “In the standard Platonic-Aristotelian cosmological model both the cosmos and the earth cannot be said to be tilted.” Nevertheless, in order to visualize the inclination of the ecliptic, modern earth globes are usually positioned with a tilt of 23.5°. Mansfeld and Runia also rightly remark: “It needs some imagination to understand the problem raised in this chapter” (MR 410).

  20. 20.

    Cf. Kahn (1970), 102: “the term for this general tilting is always ἔγκλισις, whereas λοξὸς (κύκλος) is the technical expression for the obliquity of the ecliptic.” See also Dicks (1970), 71.

  21. 21.

    Diogenes Laërtius, Vitae Philosophorum 2.9 = DK 59A1(9) = Gr Axg37(9) = GG 340, not in LM and KRS.

  22. 22.

    Cf. Heidel (1933), 122: “the early scientists contended that originally the sun had moved round the edge of the earth-plane.”

  23. 23.

    P 2.12.1 = S 1.23.3 = DK 11A13c = MR 447; not in Gr, the part on the zodiac and the meridian not in LM THAL. R23 and TP1 156. O’Grady (2002) doesn’t even mention this text.

  24. 24.

    Aristotle, Meteorologica 345a3.

  25. 25.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.9.4 = DK 60A4(4) = LM ARCH. D2, not in Gr and KRS.

  26. 26.

    P 2.8.1 (≈1.15.6) = DK 59A67 = LM ANAXAG. D32 = Gr Axg42 = MR 365 = GG 165. KRS does not print this text, but on p. 446 it is stated, completely confusing, “that the earth, which is a circle, presumably a round disc, is tilted toward the south (Aëtius II.8.1, DK 59A67) is ascribed also to Anaxagoras and Leucippus.” According to DK 59A67 not the earth but the cosmos is tilted. The tilt of the earth is nowhere ascribed to Anaxagoras, but to Leucippus and Democritus (see the next section on the alleged tilt of the earth).

  27. 27.

    Dumont (1988), 1430, note 3 at page 648.

  28. 28.

    Dicks (1970), 59.

  29. 29.

    GG 340–341. For more examples, see Couprie (2011), 77.

  30. 30.

    My italics.

  31. 31.

    P 2.8.2 (=S 1.15.6) = DK 31A58 = LM EMP. D 120 = Gr Emp70 = MR 410; not in KRS.

  32. 32.

    Diogenes Laërtius, Vitae Philosophorum 9.33 = DK 67A1(33) = Gr Lcp47(33) = KRS 572; not in LM, but see note 1 at D103.

  33. 33.

    See also, e.g., Dumont (1988), 730 and 1456; Mansfeld (1986), 250–251; McKirahan (2010), 327; Gemelli Marciano (2013), Band 3, 345.

  34. 34.

    Heath (1913), 122, n. 3.

  35. 35.

    KRS, p. 420, n. 4.

  36. 36.

    P 3.12.1 (not in S) = DK 67A27 = LM ATOM. D89(1) = Gr Lcp76; not in KRS, but see note 4 on p. 420.

  37. 37.

    P 3.12.2 (not in S) = DK 68A96 = LM ATOM. D89(2) = Gr Dmc77; not in KRS, but see note 4 on p. 420.

  38. 38.

    Zeller and Nestle (1920)6, 1108 n. 6.

  39. 39.

    Panchenko (1999), 29.

  40. 40.

    Wöhrle (1993), 75. See also KRS, p. 157.

  41. 41.

    Aristotle, De Caelo 294b13–21 = DK 13A20 = LM ANAXIMEN. D19 = Gr Axs13 = TP2 As3 = KRS 150.

  42. 42.

    Ps. Plutarch, Stromata 3 = DK 13A6 = LM ANAXIMEN. D2 = Gr Axs11 = TP2 As83; not in KRS.

  43. 43.

    P 3.15.8 (not in S) = DK 13A20 = Gr Axs15 = LM ANAXIMEN. D20b = TP As46; not in KRS, but see p. 153.

  44. 44.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.7.4 = DK 13A7(4) = LM ANAXIMEN. D3(4) = G Axs12(4) = TP2 As56(4) = KRS 151.

  45. 45.

    Cf. Simplicius, In Aristotelis De Caelo Commentaria 294.33 = DK 68A37 = LM ATOM. D29 = Gr Dmc12; not in KRS.

  46. 46.

    Aristotle, Meteorologica 354a28–32 = DK 13A14 = LM ANAXIMEN. D16 = Gr Axs18 = TP2 As4 = KRS 157. Graham and Laks/Most translate “this region,” but meant is the northern region mentioned just before.

  47. 47.

    KRS, p. 157.

  48. 48.

    Cf. Pédech (1976), 35.

  49. 49.

    The first part of this text was already quoted twice in the previous section; see n. 28 and 32. The qualification “Stoicizing interpretation” in LM, Volume vi, 170; see also MR 412.

  50. 50.

    Diogenes Laërtius, Vitae Philosophorum 9.33 = DK 67A1(33) = Gr Lcp47(33) = KRS 572; not in LM, but see note 1 on D103.

  51. 51.

    P 3.12.1 (not in S) = LM ATOM. D89(1) = Gr Lcp76 = DK 67A27; not in KRS, but see note 4 on p. 420.

  52. 52.

    P 3.12.2 (not in S) = DK 68A96 = LM ATOM. D89(2) = Gr Dmc77; not in KRS, but see note 4 on p. 420.

  53. 53.

    Gemelli Marciano (2013), Band 3, 34. See also Mansfeld (1986), Leukipp 5: “(…) wegen der in den südlichen Teilen anzutreffenden lockeren Beschaffenheit (…), obviously meaning the loose constitution of the southern earth.”

  54. 54.

    Gemelli Marciano translates, inconsequently: “Demokrit [behauptet,] die Erde neige sich, wenn sie wachse, nach dieser Seite hin, weil der südliche Teil der umgebenden Luft schwächer sei.”

  55. 55.

    For Democritus, see Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica 1.39.1–3 = DK 68A99 (partially) = LM ATOM. D120B = Gr Dmc84; not in KRS. Also in Scholium on Apollonius of Rhodes 4.269–271a = DK 68A99 = LM ATOM. D121, not in Gr and KRS. For Herodotus, see Historiae 2.22.1 = DK 59A91 = LM ANAXAG. R3 = Gr Axg55, not in GG and KRS.

  56. 56.

    Cf. Strabo, Geography 2.2.2 = DK28A44a = LM PARM. D38 = Gr Prm43; not in KRS. Also in P 3.11.4 (not in S) = DK28A44a = LM PARM. D39 = Gr Prm44; not in KRS.

  57. 57.

    Rovelli (2009), 55, Fig. 4.

  58. 58.

    In Chap. 8, I will express my doubts as to this rendition of Xenophanes’ ideas.

  59. 59.

    Cf. Aristotle, De Caelo 295b10–20 = DK 12A26 = LM ANAXIMAND. D30 = Gr Axr21 = TP2, Ar6 = KRS 123. As regards Democritus, we must probably distinguish three kinds of motion: the movements of the atoms, which is a random jostling because of collisions, the motion of the heavenly bodies, probably caused by the cosmic whirl, and the motion of heavy things, including the earth, which is downwards unless some other body prevents it. Cf. Furley (1989), 11–12.

  60. 60.

    See, e.g., Diogenes Laërtius, Vitae Philosophorum 2.10 = DK 59A1(10) = Gr Axg1(10) = GG 340 = KRS 503; not in LM.

  61. 61.

    See Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.7.6 = DK 13A7(6) = LM ANAXIMEN. D3(6) = Gr Axs12(6) = TP2 As56 (7.6) = KRS 156. For a discussion of Anaximenes’ cosmology, see Chap. 7.

  62. 62.

    See P 2.13.14 (=S 1.24.1) = DK 21A38 = LM XEN. D36a = Gr Xns60 (abusively referring to DK21A8) = MR 454 (2.13.7); not in KRS. Also in P 2.18.1 (≈S 1.24.1) = DK 21A39 = LM XEN. D38 = Gr Xns73 = MR 505 (abusively numbered P2.17.1); not in KRS, but see p. 174. See also P 2.20.3 (≈S 1.25.1) = DK 21A40 = Gr Xns 61 = MR 514 (P2.20.2) = KRS 177. For a discussion of Xenophanes’ cosmology, see Chap. 8.

  63. 63.

    The first is P’s version (2.31.1), the second that of S (1.26.5), see Dox 362. Both versions in DK 31A61, followed by a kind of reconstruction of the original; LM EMP. D 136 and Gr Emp86 give P’s version, but that of S, in footnotes, without translation; MR give also both versions: 635 (S1.26.5 S1) and 636 (P2.31.1), but in their reconstruction, they follow P; neither version in KRS. According to Mansfeld (2000), 185, the genitive τῆς σελήνης in Stobaeus’ text is an obvious mistake.

  64. 64.

    S 1.26.5 (not in P) = DK 31A50 = LM EMP. D119 = Gr Emp69 = MR 535 (S1.26.5.1 S4); not in KRS. According to the rest of this report, Empedocles concluded that the heavens (the κόσμος) is egg-shaped.

  65. 65.

    See Couprie (2011), 193–200.

  66. 66.

    Graham (2013a), 147.

  67. 67.

    The angular size of the sun was not so easy to measure in those times; two centuries later, Aristarchus calculated with an angular diameter of 2°. With Aristarchus’ number, the size of the sun would have been about 275 km.

  68. 68.

    Aristotle, De Caelo 298a18–21; see also 290b19: ἄστρων τὸ μέγεϑος.

  69. 69.

    For a thorough discussion on Anaximander and infinite worlds, see McKirahan (2001), and more recently Kočandrle (2019).

  70. 70.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.13.2–4 = DK 68A40(2–4) = LM ATOM. D81 = Gr Dmc53(2–4) = KRS 565.

  71. 71.

    Furley (1987), 136. See also Furley (1989), 2.

  72. 72.

    See LSJ on the two different words ἄπειρος; see also Chap. 8, 155–158.

  73. 73.

    Ptolemy, Almagest I.4.

  74. 74.

    Cleomedes in Bowen and Todd (2004), 66. Panchenko (1999), 24 mentions several other ancient authors who used this argument.

  75. 75.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.9.4 = DK 60A4(4) = LM ARCH. D2(4), KRS 515(4); not in Gr.

  76. 76.

    Tannery (1887), 288. See Panchenko (1999), 23 for more scholars on this subject.

  77. 77.

    Hippolytus, Refutatio Omnium Haeresium 1.9.4–5 = DK 60A4(4–5) = LM ARCH. D2(4–5), KRS 515(4–5); not in Gr.

  78. 78.

    Turba Philosophorum, Sermo 5 = LM ARCH. R7b [referring to Plessner (1975), 57, 1–58.9], not in DK, Gr, and KRS; cf. Ruska (1931), 178 [5].

  79. 79.

    Ptolemy, Almagest I.4.

  80. 80.

    Cleomedes in Bowen and Todd (2004), I.5.

  81. 81.

    Herodotus, Historiae 4.25.

  82. 82.

    P 2.24.9 (=S 1.25.3) = DK 21A41a = LM XEN. D35 = MR 563 (reading κλίμα instead of κλίματα) = Gr Xns66 = KRS 179. Untersteiner (2008), 83 (125), n., considers the word ζώναι not authentic, but inserted by the doxographer.

  83. 83.

    Strabo, Geographica 2.2.2 = DK 28A44a = LM PARM. D38 = Gr Prm43; not in KRS.

  84. 84.

    Aristotle, Meteorologica 391a31ff.

  85. 85.

    Aristotle, De Caelo 297b23ff.

  86. 86.

    Ptolemy, Almagest II.6.

  87. 87.

    • P = Aëtius in pseudo-Plutarch, Placita (numbering according to Dox).

    • S = Aëtius in Stobaeus, Anthologium (numbering according to Wachsmuth and Hense).

References

  • P = Aëtius in pseudo-Plutarch, Placita (numbering according to Dox).

  • S = Aëtius in Stobaeus, Anthologium (numbering according to Wachsmuth and Hense).

  • Anderson, J.C., The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indikopleustes. Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, H., Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Erdkunde der Griechen: Abteilung 1. Die Geographie der Ionier. Leipzig: Verlag Von Veit & Comp. 1903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, A.C. and R.B. Todd: Cleomedes’ Lectures on Astronomy. Berkeley: University of California Press 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosmas Indicopleustes, Topografia Cristiana. Greek text of Chapter 6: http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/graeca/Chronologia/S_post06/Cosmas/cos_i060.html.

  • Couprie, D.L., Anaxagoras and Aristotle on the Sun at the Horizon. Hyperboreus 14 (2008), 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • ―, Heaven and Earth in Ancient Greek Cosmology. New York: Springer 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicks, D.R., Early Greek Astronomy to Aristotle. Ithaca N.Y.: Thames and Hudson 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diels, H., Doxographi Graeci. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter 1879 (=Dox).

    Google Scholar 

  • Diels, H. and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Zürich/Hildesheim: Weidmann 19516 (=DK).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumont, J.-P., Les Présocratiques. Paris: Gallimard 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehling, D., Das Problem der Geschichte des griechischen Weltmodells vor Aristoteles. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 128 (1985), 195–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furley, D., The Greek Cosmologists. Volume I: The Formation of the Atomic Theory and Its Earliest Critics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1987.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ―, Cosmic Problems. Essays on Greek and Roman Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gemelli Marciano, M.L., Die Vorsokratiker (3 Bände). Düsseldorf: Artemis & Winkler. 2007–2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershenson, D.E. and D.A. Greenberg, Anaxagoras and the Birth of Physics. New York: Blaisdell Publishing Company 1964 (=GG).

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, D.W., The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge UP 2010 (=Gr).

    Google Scholar 

  • ―, Science Before Socrates. Oxford: University Press 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R., Anaximander and the Architects. Albany: SUNY 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, T., Aristarchus of Samos. The Ancient Copernicus. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1913.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Heidel, W.A., The Heroic Age of Science. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company 1933.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • ―, The Frame of the Ancient Greek Maps. With a Discussion of the Discovery of the Sphericity of the earth. New York: American Geographical Society 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, G.S., J.E. Raven and M. Schofield, The Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2009 (=KRS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, C.H., On Early Greek Astronomy. Journal of Hellenic Studies 90 (1970), 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kočandrle, R., Infinite Worlds in the Thought of Anaximander. The Classical Quarterly (2019, in print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kominko, M., The Science of the Flat Earth: The Cosmography of Cosmas, 67–81 in. J. C. Anderson, The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indikopleustes. Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laks, A. and G.W. Most, Early Greek Philosophy I–IX, Cambridge MA. 2016 (= LM).

    Google Scholar 

  • Liddell, H.G., R. Scott H.S. Jones and R. McKenzie, Greek-English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1996. Also available on the internet, e.g.: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/lsj/#eid=1714&context=search (=LSJ).

  • Mansfeld, J., Die Vorsokratiker II. Stuttgart: Reclam 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • ―, Cosmic Distances. Aëtius 2.31 Diels and Some Related Texts. Phronesis 45.3 (2000), 175–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfeld, J. and D.T. Runia, Aëtiana. The Method and Intellectual Context of a Doxographer, Volume Two, Part Two. Leiden: Brill 2009 (=MR).

    Google Scholar 

  • McKirahan, R.D., Anaximander’s Infinite Worlds, In A. Preus, ed., Before Plato. Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy VI. Albany: State University of New York Press 2001, 40–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • ―, Philosophy Before Socrates. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naddaf, G., Anthropogony and Politogony in Anaximander of Miletus. In: Couprie, D.L., R. Hahn and G. Naddaf, Anaximander in Context New Studies in the Origins of Greek Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press 2003, 7–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Grady, P. Thales of Miletus: The Beginnings of Western Science and Philosophy, Aldershot: Ashgate 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panchenko, D., The Shape of the Earth in Archelaus, Democritus and Leucippus. Hyperboreus 5 (1999), 22–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pédech, P., La géographie des Grecs. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plessner, M., Vorsokratische Philosophie und griechische Alchemie in ararbisch-lateinischer Überlieferung. Studien zu Text und Inhalt der Turba philosophorum. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J.M., Introduction to Early Greek Philosophy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovelli, C., Anaximander’s Legacy. Collapse: Philosophical Research and Development 5 (2009), 50–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruska, J., Turba Philosophorum: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Alchemie. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1931.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tannery, P., Pour l’histoire de science Hellène : de Thalès à Empédocle. Paris : Félix Alcan 1887.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Untersteiner, M., Senofane: Testimonianze e frammenti. Milano: Bompiani 2008 (repr. of Florence: La Nuova Italia 1956).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wöhrle, G., Anaximenes aus Milet. Die Fragmente zu seiner Lehre. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • ―, Traditio Praesocratica. Die Milesier: Anaximander und Anaximenes. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter 2012 (=TP2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeller E. and W. A. Nestle, Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtliche Entwicklung. 1. Teil, 2. Hälfte: Allgemeine Einleitung, Vorsokratische Philosophie Leipzig: 19206.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy and Arts, University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, Czech Republic

    Dirk L. Couprie

  2. Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Dirk L. Couprie

Authors
  1. Dirk L. Couprie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Couprie, D.L. (2018). Peculiarities of Presocratic Flat Earth Cosmology. In: When the Earth Was Flat. Historical & Cultural Astronomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97052-3_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation