We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2009
In two conferences, separated by the space of only a few months, in September 1966 and March 1967, Giovanni Polvani—at the time president of the Domus Galilaeana—and the council of the Domus, attempted a series of operations, all ambitious and difficult. The first, and to some extent the simplest, was to gather round the Domus all those who were working in a professional role or as amateurs on the history of science. Also invited were scholars who had become involved in the discipline through the territorial or thematic nature of their particular interests (as was the case with Luigi Firpo, Cesare Vasoli and others), or who had some special relation to the history of science of a more, so to speak, extrinsic kind, people such as archivists, librarians, and so on. Secondly, the organizers wished—and here was where the difficulties began—to start up a discussion (not limited to mere theory) on what people understood the history of science to be, what its relationship was with the history of technology, of philosophy, and with cultural history in general. As hinted above, the discussion was not meant to be on abstract theoretical terms, since it was designed to serve as a premise for an even more complex project, that is to set up a centre for the training of future historians of science. As often happens, in the heat of discussing the concrete problems which were the subject of the first meeting at Pisa (the sources of the history of science, limited to Italy, and only to the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries), there emerged difficulties, various orientations, evaluations and declarations, which were both meaningful and enlightening.
1 Polvani, G., ‘Parole introduttive’, In: Atti del primo convegno internazionale di ricognizione delle fonti per la storia delta scienza italiana: i secoli X1V–XVI, (ed. Maccagni, Carlo), Firenze, 1967, pp. 22–28.Google Scholar
2 Hall, M. Boas, ‘Natural history’Google Scholar, ibid., pp. 212–226 and the relative discussion. A discussion which would be unthinkable today; see the recent International Study Conference on ‘Giovan Battista Delia Porta’ (Vico Equense 29 September–3 10 1986)Google Scholar organized by the ‘Suor Orsola Benincasa Institute’ in Naples.
3 Ibid., pp. 78–80.
4 Agazzi, E., Storia delle scienze dal mondo antico al secolo XVIII. Dal secolo XIX al mondo contemporaneo, vol. 2, Roma, 1984.Google Scholar
5 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 236.
6 Ibid., p. 8.
7 Ibid., p. 10.
8 But for a different and more problematic view, see Roger, J.'s fine essay, ‘Per una storia storica delle scienze’, Gironale critico della filosofia italiana, 1984, 3, pp. 285–314.Google Scholar
9 By Carlo Maccagni, in Agazzi, , Storia, vol. 1, pp. 219 and ff.Google Scholar
10 Then by Agazzi, Evandro himself, Storia, vol. 1, pp. 236Google Scholar and ff. But Galileo is mentioned also in the section by Antonio C. Garibaldi dedicated to physcis (ibid., pp. 286 and ff.)
11 Agazzi, E., ‘La storia della scienza come punto d'incontro fra riflessione filosofica e ricerca scientifica’, In: Atti del convegno sui problemi metodologici di storia delle scienze, Firenze, 1967, p. 49.Google Scholar
12 In connection with this, see the interesting views of Garin, E., ‘Fra '500e '600: Scienze nuove, metodinuovi, nuove accademia’, Nuncius, I, 1986, 1, pp. 3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and now in Convegno celebrativo del IV centenario della nascita di Federico Cesi (Acquasparta, 7–9 ottobre 1985), 1986, Roma, pp. 29–49.Google Scholar
13 Polvani, , op. cit. (1), p. 247.Google Scholar
14 Geymonat, L., Storia del pensiero filosofico e scientifico, Milano, 1970, vol. 1, p. 9.Google Scholar
15 In collaboration with other writers.
16 ‘To embark on such an arduous task I found it useful to base myself on the structure (validated by many favourable opinions) of my school textbook on the history of philosophical thought, and on the small volume I wrote many years ago on scientific thought’ (Storia, 1970, vol. 1; p. 2 in the ‘Avvertenza’).Google Scholar
17 This however had been given a priori.
18 This had also been given a priori.
19 Geymonat, , Storia, 1970, vol. 1, ‘Introduzione’, pp. 5–13.Google Scholar
20 Polvani, , op. cit. (1), pp. 279–296Google Scholar. Then in L'età nuova, Napoli, Morano 1967.Google Scholar
21 Organized by the Centro di Studi Metodologici of Turin.
22 See note (11). But there is no end to conferences; if anything they grow in size. See for example the recent La scienza tra filosofia e storia in Italia net Novecento, by Minazzi, F. and Zanzi, L., Roma, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri 1987Google Scholar, which brings together in 725 pages the contributions to a congress held in Varese in 1985.
23 By Clelia Pighetti. But Mario Vegetti's paper ‘Rapporti fra Filosofia e sapere scientifico in una prospettiva storiografica sul pensiero greco’ was important in its recalling of themes and a historical period which are not usually dealt with by Italian historians of science, who have always resorted to translations such as Sambursky, S.'s Il mondo fisico dei GreciGoogle Scholar (preface by Geymonat, L., Milano, Feltrinelli 1959Google Scholar) or Farrington, B.'s Storia della scienza grecaGoogle Scholar (Milano, , II Saggiatore 1964Google Scholar). The changed historiographic climate at the end of the 1960s is attested to in a fine book by Cambiano, G., Platone e le tecniche, Torino, Einaudi 1971Google Scholar. But Vegetti should also be remembered for his edition of Ippocrate, 's OpereGoogle Scholar in ‘Classici della scienza’, run by Geymonat, (Torino, Utet 1965)Google Scholar, a collection in which appeared, one after the other, Archimede, 's OpereGoogle Scholar and Galen, 's OpereGoogle Scholar, edited, respectively, by Frajese, Attilio (1974)Google Scholar and Garofalo, Ivan and Vegetti, Mario (1978).Google Scholar
24 Rossi, P., ‘Considerazioni conclusive’Google Scholar, ibid., p. 175.
25 Micheli, G., ‘Storia della scienza e storia della filosofia; problemi di metodo’Google Scholar, ibid., p. 35.
26 Ibid., p. 34.
27 Ibid., pp. 174–185.
28 We must also underline Luigi Bulferetti's work done for the ‘Istituto Italiano per la storia della tecnica’. But see Bulferetti, 's autobiographical testimony, ‘La rinascita della storiografia relativa alia scienza-tecnica in Italia nel secondo dopoguerra in una prospettiva positivistica’, op. cit. (22), pp. 279–293.Google Scholar
29 ‘Studi storici’, 1965, 3, pp. 507–546.Google Scholar
30 Ibid., 1961, 3–4, pp. 465–495. And, before that, Carugo, 's essay, ‘Sui rapporti tra progresso tecnico e pensiero scientifico’Google Scholar, ibid., 1960, 4, pp. 835–847.
31 Rossi, P., Storia e filosofia. Saggi sulla storiografia filosofica, Torino, 1969.Google Scholar
32 Ibid., p. 226.
33 The Scientific Renaissance, 1450–1630, which appeared later, in 1973Google Scholar, translated into Italian, in the Feltrinelli series of history of science books.
34 Agassi, J., ‘Towards an Historiography of Science’, History and Theory, 1963, 2.Google Scholar
35 Which was published in 1964.
36 Garin, E., Scienza e vita civile net Rinascimento italiano, Bari, 1965, p. VII.Google Scholar
37 Garin spoke of ‘classificatory historiography’, which ‘tends to hypostatize the various disciplines, founding them on pseudo-categories: on the one hand the arts, on the other philosophy and sciences; here art and morality, there religion and politics’. (Ibid., p. VIII).
38 Ibid., p. IX.
39 Pisa, Nistri Lischi and also composed of a series of essays written between 1968 and 1970.
40 As ‘Da Campanella a Vico’ (in Dal Rinascimento all'Illuminismo, op. cit., pp. 79–117Google Scholar) or ‘Rinascimento e rivoluzione scientifica’ (in Rinascite e rivoluzioni, cit., pp. 297–326Google Scholar) which was, significantly enough, the opening paper of the Congresso Nazionale di Filosofia, history of philosophy section, held at Aquila in the spring of 1973.
41 Koyré, A., Dal mondo del pressappoco all'universo della precisione. Tecnicbe strumenti e filosofia dal mondo classico alla rivoluzione scientficaGoogle Scholar. Introduction and translation by Zambelli, P., Torino, Einaudi 1967.Google Scholar
42 Published, respectively, in 1976 and 1972 by Einaudi, in ‘Biblioteca di cultura filosofica’Google Scholar, while the translation, done in the same years by myself, of the Koyre, 's collection Etudes d'histoire de la pensée scientifiqueGoogle Scholar must have been lost in the publishing programmes of the publisher, almost as if to show the diminished interest in the work of the French—Polish historian after the explosion at the end of the 1960s. In fact, no other work by Koyré has been translated into Italian since then, in parallel with different orientations in Italian historiography.
43 Nor in this framework must we forget the volume by Solinas, Giovanni (he too a teacher of history of philosophy), Il microscopic e le metafisiche. Epigenesi e preesistenza da Cartesio a Kant (Milano, 1967)Google Scholar and the volumes, both published in the Einaudi ‘Biblioteca di cultura filosofica, by Pala, A., Isaac Newton (1969)Google Scholar and by Gargani, AldoHobbes e la scienza, (1971).Google Scholar
44 If we except perhaps Alessandro Paoli, professor of history of philosophy at the University of Pisa, and his works on the Galilean school. But Paoli is still in many ways a ‘special case’. See Malusn, L., La storiografia filosofica italiana nella seconda metà dell'Ottocento. Tra positivismo e neokantismo, Milano, 1977, pp. 529–532.Google Scholar
45 The relationship of historiography and science in the age of positivism has not been the object of research for very long, so the bibliography is scarce. As a first approach, see Bucciantini, M., Bibliografia e storia della scienza in Italia (1868–1920), In: Biblioteche speciali (ed. Guerrini, M.), Milano, 1986, pp. 110–134Google Scholar and the recent Baldini, U., ‘Verso una definizione storica della “filosofia” del galileismo: gli epistolari come strumento interpretative’, Rivista di storia della filosofia, 1987, 2, pp. 213–235.Google Scholar
46 Garin, E., ‘Agonia e morte dell'idealismo italiano’, In: La filosofia italiana dal dopoguerra a oggi, Roma-Bari, 1985, pp. 24–29.Google Scholar
47 Among which the Istituto e Museo di Storia della Scienza in Florence (1942)Google Scholar and later the Domus Galileiana of Pisa, under its president Giovanni Gentile. For the merely propagandistic aspects of Fascism's interest in the history of Italian science, see Galluzzi, P., ‘La storia della scienza nell'E 42’, In: Gregory, T. and Tartaro, A., Utopia e scenario del regime. Ideologia e programma dell'olimpiade delle civiltà, Venezia, 1987, pp. 53–69.Google Scholar
48 Galuzzi, M., ‘Matematica e filosofia contemporanea: la situazione italiana’, In: La matematica nella cultura contemporanea (ed. Brigaglia, Aldo), Caltanisetta-Roma, 1985, pp. 89–101.Google Scholar
49 Even Pompeo Faracovi, who ran the Livorno conference on Enriques (see later), coming back recently to the question of the ‘Marginalizing’ of Enriques even among scientists, finds no better answer than to call upon ‘a role’ palyed by ‘the school reform of 1923, with the coupling on the one hand of mathematics and physics, and the separation and reciprocal isolation of the humanistic—philosophical and scientific disciplines on the other’, with the conclusion that there is still ‘much work’ to be done. Faracovi, O. Pompeo, ‘I Problemi della scienza di Federigo Enriques’, Intersezioni, 1986, 2, p. 375.Google Scholar
50 See Micheli, Gianni's contribution in the volume quoted, La scienza tra filosofia e storia in Italia net Novecento pp. 295–308.Google Scholar
51 See for example Maiocchi, R., ‘Il ruolo delle scienze nello sviluppo industriale italiano’, In: Storia d'ltalia. Annali 3. Scienza e tecnica nella cultura e nella società dal Rinascimento a oggi, Torino, 1982, pp. 927–959Google Scholar; Ciliberto, M., ‘Scienza filosofia e politica: Federigo Enriques e il neoidealismo italiano’, In: Federigo Enriques approssimazione e verità (ed. Faracovi, O. Pompeo), Livorno, 1982, pp. 131–166.Google Scholar
52 Belfagor, 1983, 1, pp. 65–78.Google Scholar
53 De Darwin an darwinisme: Science et idéologic. Congrès international pour le centenaire de la mart de Darwin (ed. Conry, Y.), Paris, 1983, pp. 49–67Google Scholar, where Montalenti's work was also published.
54 But see Barone, F.'s thoughtful pages, ‘Croce e la scienza’, Mondo opcraio, 11 1982, pp. 77–83Google Scholar and more recently Maiocchi, R., ‘Sul concetto di Rinascita della filosofia della scienza in Italia’, op. cit. (22), pp. 507–511.Google Scholar
55 Rossi, P., ‘Federigo Enriques storico della scienza’, op. cit. (51), pp. 65–66.Google Scholar
56 See for example Casini, Paolo in the ‘Prefazione’Google Scholar to the Italian edition of Storia della scienza by Daumas, M. (Bari, 1969, p. xx)Google Scholar for the discussion concerning historiography in the United States. But in many ways Casini's work should be read again and remembered.
57 See Minazzi, F., Giulio Preti: bibliografia, Milano, 1984.Google Scholar
58 Among which, because of the singularity of the series in which it appeared, Le basi della scienza moderna (Milano, 1947)Google Scholar edited by Needham and Pagel (two of the writers mentioned above by Paolo Rossi) which brought together the lessons held at Cambridge and published there in 1938, and which ranged from Greek science to atomic theories.
59 Farrington, B., Lavoro intellettuale e lavoro manuals nell'antica Grecia, Milano, 1953, p. 26.Google Scholar
60 Bacon, F., La nuova Atlantide e altri scritti, Milano, 1954, pp. VII–IXGoogle Scholar. This and the preceding volume by Farrington were, however, published in the ‘red’ series of history and philosophy.
61 1961 was, on the other hand, the year of the Italian translation of Singer, C.'s Breve storia del pensiero scientifico, Torino, Einaudi.Google Scholar
62 As Bulferetti, L.'s work, Le ideologic socialistiche in Italia nell'età del positivismo evoluzionistico (1870–1892), Firenze, 1951Google Scholar, in which positivist ‘scientism’ found place in the reconstruction of political and ideological struggles since the unification of Italy.
63 Negri, V. A., ‘Il problema della storia della filosofia in Italia nel venticinquennio 1945–1970. X. Storia del pensiero filosofico e storia del pensiero scientifico’, Cultura e scuola, XIII (1974), pp. 137–138.Google Scholar
64 Torino, Einaudi 1957. Which nonetheless remains the only attempt on the part of Italian postwar historiography to given an organic presentation of the figure of the Tuscan scientist.
65 Galilei, G., Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze (eds Carugo, A. e Geymonat, L.), Boringhieri 1958Google Scholar, which opened the series ‘Classici della scienza’.
66 Luporini, C., La mente di Leonardo, Firenze, Sansoni 1953Google Scholar. This was the second title of a new series entitled ‘Biblioteca storica del Rinascimento’, run by Eugenio Garin, in which Antonio Corsano's book on Bruno had come out first, and Kristeller's on Ficino was to come out immediately after.
67 Milano, Feltrinelli 1960.
68 Galasso, G., ‘Mito e storia di Galileo nel Mezzogiorno d'ltalia (sec. XV11–XV111)’ In: Novità celesti e crisi del sapereGoogle Scholar. Atti del convegno internazionale di studi galileiani, (ed. Paolo Galluzzi), Supplement to the Annali dell'lstituto e Museo di storia delta Scienza (now Nuncius. Annali di Storia della Scienza), 1983, 2, pp. 431–440Google Scholar and now the essay ‘Scienze, istituzioni e attrezzature scientifiche nella Napoli del Settecento’, in L'età dei lumi. Studi storici sul Settecento europeo in onore di Franco Venturi, Napoli, 1985, 1, pp. 193–228.Google Scholar
69 By the same author see at least Il filosofo e la catastrofe. Un terremoto del Settecento, Torino, 1985.Google Scholar
70 La storiografia delle scienze: metodi e prospettive, Firenze, 1975, but the conference was in 11 1971.Google Scholar
71 Ferrone, V., Scienza natura religione. Mondo newtoniano e cultura italiana nel primo Settecento, Napoli, 1982.Google Scholar
72 Lachterman, D., Vico, Doria e lageometria sintetica, 1980, X, pp. 10–35.Google Scholar
73 Palladino, F., ‘Origine e diffusione del calcolo differenziale in Italia. Con appendice di lettere inedite’, IV (1984), pp. 377–405Google Scholar. On the essay by J. Roger see footnote 8.
74 Casini, P., Newton: gli scolii classici, (1981), I, pp. 7–53.Google Scholar
75 Critica marxista, 1981, 6, pp. 45–78 and pp. 79–120.Google Scholar
76 But see at least Meijer, P. De, ‘Sul Novecento letterario’, in Società e cultura dell'Italia unita (eds Macry, P. and Palermo, A.), Napoli, 1978, pp. 205–216.Google Scholar
77 Op. cit. (51), 3, p. XV.Google Scholar
78 See for example the Bollettino di storia delle scienze matematiche edited by the Unione Matematica kaliana since 1981.Google Scholar
79 Edited by Bucciantini, M. (Vol. 1, 1982, Firenze, Olschki 1985)Google Scholar and by Bucciantini, M. and Citernesi, A.C. (Vol. II, 1983, Vol. III, 1984Google Scholar, idem 1986 and 1987).
