The editors define "Hellenistic astronomy" as the kind of astronomy, incl astrology, that arose in the wake of Alexander's conquest from the absorption of Babylonian astral science into Greek natural philosophy, was brought to something like perfection by Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD, and dominated the Mediterranean and Near Eastern world until Arab scholars started to make original contributions in the eighth century. One might argue, though the editors do not, that even then nothing fundamental changed until Kepler and Gallileo - even Copernicus' heliocentric system, however radical with respect to Man's place in the universe, was basically Ptolemaic in its mathematical structure.

The book wasn't quite what I expected; basically it was less about the science and more about the contexts than I anticipated. That was something of a disappointment, but I still found it worthwhile enough to read the thing cover-to-cover.

One thing that seemed to be missing was a chapter on rationalistic (as opposed to religious) criticism of astrology; such is repeatedly mentioned, but never addressed directly.