Was the Copernican Revolution truly revolutionary?

Authors Avatar

Was the Copernican Revolution truly revolutionary?


The Copernican revolution refers to the period in cosmic history when Nicolai Copernicus, a Polish astronomer, attempted, and succeeded to a degree, to prove that the earth was part of a heliocentric universe (a universe with the sun as it’s centre, as opposed to geocentric universe, which hypothesizes that the earth is the centre of the cosmos). It directly contradicted the research of Aristotle and Ptolemy, who both believed strongly in the existence of a geocentric cosmos. The work of Ptolemy in particular was widely accepted and approved of by the church when his ideas were publishes in his book ‘Almagest’, which means the great system in Arabic. The fact that Copernicus’ work is referred to as a revolution would suggest that a great deal of change would have had to take place for it to be termed something as substantial as a revolution. That is why it will be analysed whether this period truly was revolutionary. The topic is, however, extremely contentious as both sides can be debated to an extent. It is up to individuals how they view the evidence and decide on whether the Copernican Revolution was indeed revolutionary. The reason that this revolution was named after Nicolai Copernicus is because he was seen as the first person to essentially disagree with the church with reference to cosmology, as those before him had been too afraid to speak out against the then supreme power. The Copernican Revolution occurred during the Renaissance period, which was from the 14th century to the middle of the 16th century. This period, meaning re-birth, saw a great change in man’s attitude towards authority, with the first ideas of liberty and freedom introduced. Therefore the era fits hand in hand with the Copernican Revolution which was all about the changing of trains of thought.

Join now!

Of the reasons which lead us to believe that the Copernican Revolution was truly revolutionary, a central one would have to be the introduction of the heliocentric cosmos. This theory directly contradicted Ptolemy’s research which had stood correct and almost holy to astronomers for hundreds of years, and therefore caused a major uproar, not least because it was condemned by the church as blasphemous. It was especially scorned by the church and churchmen who believed that the earth was the physical centre of the earth and that man was unique and therefore placed on the earth by God for ...

This is a preview of the whole essay