Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-w5hgh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T07:42:35.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Galileo Engineer: Art and Modern Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Wolfgang Lefèvre
Wolfgang Lefèvre
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In spite of Koyré's conclusions, there are sufficient reasons to claim that Galileo, and with him the beginnings of classical mechanics in early modern times, was closely related to practical mechanics. It is, however, not completely clear how, and to what extent, practitioners and engineers could have had a part in shaping the modern sciences. By comparing the beginnings of modern dynamics with the beginnings of statics in Antiquity, and in particular with Archimedes — whose rediscovery in the sixteenth century was of great consequence — I will focus on the question of which devices played a comparable role in dynamics to that of the lever and balance in statics. I will also examine where these devices came from. In this way, I will show that the entire world of mechanics of that time — “high” and “low,” practical and theoretical — was of significance for shaping classical mechanics and that a specific relationship between art and science was and is constitutive for modern sciences.

Information

Type
1. The Context of the Practioners: Mechanics and its New Objects
Information
Science in Context , Volume 13 , Issue 3-4 , Autumn-Winter 2000, pp. 281 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Archimedes, 1543. Opera Archimedis … per Nicolaum Tartaleam … in luce posita. Venice.Google Scholar
Beck, Theodor 1899. Beiträge zur Geschichte des Maschinenbaues. Berlin: Julius Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedini, Silvio A. 1991. The Pulse of Time. Firenze: Leo. S. Olschki.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. A. 1986. “The Mechanics' Philosophy.” History of Science IV/1:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, H. Floris 1994. The Scientific Revolution — A Historiographical Inquiry. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Damerow, , Peter, , Freudenthal, Gideon, McLaughlin, Peter, and Renn, Jürgen 1992. Exploring the Limits of Preclassical Mechanics. A Study of Conceptual Development in Early Modern Science: Free Fall and Compounded Motion in the Work of Descartes, Galileo, and Beeckman. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damerow, Peter and Lefèvre, Wolfgang 1998. “Wissenssysteme im geschichtlichen Wandel.” In Enzyklopädie der Psychologie (Themenbereich C — Serie II — Band 6), edited by Klix, F. and Spada, H., 77–113. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Drake, Stillman and Drabkin, I. E. 1969. Mechanics in Sixteenth-Century Italy. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Drake, Stillman 1978. Galileo at Work: His Scientific Biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Feldhaus, F. M. 1970. Die Technik – Ein Lexikon. Wiesbaden: Heinz Moos.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo. [1890–1909] 1964–66. Le opere di Galileo; nuova ristampa della edizione nazionale, edited by Favaro, Antonio Florence: Barbéra.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo 1960. On Motion and On Mechanics. Translated by Drake, Stillman and Drabkin, I. E.. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo 1974. Two New Sciences. Translated by Drake, Stillman. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Grmek, M. D. 1977. “Santorio Santorio.” Dictionary of Scientific Biography XII:101–103.Google Scholar
Hansen, Peter V. 1992. “Experimental Reconstruction of a Medieval Trébuchet.” Acta Archeologica LXIII: 189–208.Google Scholar
Hill, Donald 1973. “Trebuchets.” Viator IV:99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoykaas, R. 1963. Das Verhältnis von Physik und Mechanik in historischer Hinsicht. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Huuri, Kalervo. 1941. Zur Geschichte des mittelalterlichen Geschützwesens aus orientalischen Quellen. Helsinki.Google Scholar
Klein, Ursula 1994. Verbindung und Affinität. Basel: Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knorr, Wilbur Richard 1982. Ancient Sources of the Medieval Tradition of Mechanics. Firenze: Istituto e Museo di Storia della ScienzaGoogle Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre 1943a. “Galileo and Plato.” Journal of the History of Ideas IV/4:400–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koyré, Alexandre 1943b. “Galileo and the Scientific Revolution of the XVIIth Century.” Philosophical Review LII/4:333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefèvre, Wolfgang 1978a. Naturtheorie und Produktionsweise. Darmstadt and Neuwied: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst 1989. The Science of Mechanics. La Salle: Open Court.Google Scholar
Masotti, Arnaldo 1977. “Ostilio Ricci.” Dictionary of Scientific Biography XI:405 f.Google Scholar
Mitchell, S.Weir 1892. “The Early History of Instrumental Precision in Medicine.” Transactions of the Congress of American Physicians and Surgeons. New Haven: Tuttle, Morehouse and Taylor.Google Scholar
Mittelstra, Jürgen 1970. Neuzeit und Aufklärung. Studien zur Entstehung der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaft und Philosophie. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, Ernest A., and Clagett, Marshall, eds. 1960. The Medieval Science of Weights. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Needham, Joseph 1976. “Chinas trebuchets, manned and counterweighted.” In On Pre-Modern Technology and Science, edited by Hall, B. S. and West, D. C., 107–145. Malibu.Google Scholar
Olschki, Leonardo 1927. Galilei und seine Zeit. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Rose, Paul Lawrence 1975. The Italian Renaissance of Mathematics. Genève: Librairie Droz.Google Scholar
Ruben, Peter 1978. “Wissenschaft als allgemeine Arbeit.” In Ruben, Peter, Dia-lektik und Arbeit der Philosophie, 9–51. Köln: Pahl-Rugenstein.Google Scholar
Schneider, Ivo 1979. Archimedes — Ingenieur, Naturwissenschaftler und Mathematiker. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Settle, Thomas B. 1995. “La rete degli esperimenti Galileiani.” In Bozzi, P., Maccagni, C., Olivieri, C., and Settle, T. B.. Galileo e la scienza sperimentale, edited by M. Baldo Ceolin, 11–62. Padova.Google Scholar
Usher, Abbott P. 1988. A History of Mechanical Inventions. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
White, Lynn Jr. 1962. Medieval Technology and Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
White, Lynn Jr. 1966. “Pumps and Pendula: Galileo and Technology.” In Galileo Reappraised, edited by Golino, Carlo L., 96–110. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar