Search

This paper is part of a larger project of investigating the reception of the Accademia dei Lincei at the Royal Society. Perhaps due to the Lincei's hesitancy to make more use of print, they constituted somewhat of a mystery for the subsequent generations of scientific communities. This is to say that the members of Royal Society were open to or perhaps even actively searching for knowledge related to the Lynxes. In this work, I trace this through a particular case-study in the transmission of knowledge: the arrival at the Royal Society of Federico Cesi and Francesto Stelluti's Trattato del Legno Fossile Minerale Nuovamente Scoperto [ Treatise on the Newly Discovered Mineral Fossil Wood ] (1637) and its accompanying lignum fossile specimen. I aim to show how Robert Hooke, early keeper of the Society's repository, diverged significantly from the initial sense of Cesi and Stelluti: if for the latter the specimen attested for a Renaissance-type continuous chain of being, the former appropriated it in his own theory of geomorphological change and 'petrifaction'. Throughout this article, I also reflect more broadly on other two related issues: 1. The status of the discipline of petrification during the early modern times; 2. The availability of Lincean sources in England and Europe – while pointing out that much more work needs to be done in order to properly chart the dissemination of the Lynxes's works. I conclude by indicating that the Lynxes played a key role in Hooke's genealogical argument on the right use of microscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The correspondence between the mathematician Angelo Genocchi (1817-1889) and Quintino Sella (1827-1884) highlights aspects of Sella’s political thought and cultural organization. In particular, Sella’s aims on Rome “capital of science” and on the fusion of the Società Italiana delle Scienze and the rebuilt Accademia dei Lincei as emblem of national culture created troubles with the elderly members of Italian scientific community. In spite of some incomprehensions, the exchange of ideas persisted the mutual esteem and the shared of ethical and cultural intentions for the progress of the country.

The Accademia dei Lincei functioned through the activities and publications of its appointed members, but also through associated collaborators, who themselves profited from the Lincean network. One of these para-Lynceans was Enrico Corvino, a Roman speziale and botanist of great renown.In this paperI look for the testimonies on Corvino’s active and passive network throughout Italy and part of Europe, which was created during visits from foreign apprentices/specialists to his pharmacopolium(pharmacy) and his hortus (on the Gianicolo), and through a correspondence now largely lost; the networking consisted in the exchange of information, but especially in the sending of seeds (semi; campioni) and plants, all this in close collaboration with his son Francesco, who after his father’s death (1639) pursued his work until he died (1679) and his daughter Maddalena, a gifted miniaturist, who produced designs of the plants, a parallel way of irradiation of the Hortus Corvinus and its plants. This original tracking through contemporary European sources reveals many direct and indirect, and so far unknown, connections with prominent European scholars. It also shows a clearer picture of the Roman speziale’s network, started in collaboration with the Accademia, but largely exceeding it after its end in 1630. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The essay analyses the research carried out by some members of the Accademia dei Lincei on lapides figurati, namely by Fabio Colonna on animal fossils, and by Federico Cesi and Francesco Stelluti on plant fossils; the aim is to show the role played by the Accademia dei Lincei in establishing during the second half of the seventeenth century the opposite poles of the debate on the lapides figurati, on the one hand as chronological indices of a past world and, on the other, as sudden outcome of the vis vegetativa.

L’Accademia dei Lincei fu una delle prime istituzioni scientifiche moderne. Il progetto più ambizioso dell’accademia fu la pubblicazione del Tesoro messicano, un esteso compendio sulla storia naturale del Messico, sul quale i Lincei lavorarono tra il 1611 e il 1651 basandosi sui manoscritti del medico del re di Spagna, Francisco Hernández. La pubblicazione di un trattato scientifico come il Tesoro nel Seicento a Roma richiedeva la mobilizzazione di un ampio network. Questo articolo si concentra sulle quattro principali “pratiche culturali” con le quali i Lincei realizzarono questo libro − pratiche di patronato, scienza, arte e pubblicazione, mostrando in quale misura queste pratiche fossero collegate.I Lincei plasmavano e coltivavano un network di patronato attraverso la donazione a diversi prelati di libri contenenti immagini delle piante descritte nel Tesoro e con un estratto relativo agli animali messicani. Successivamente essi utilizzavano lo stesso network di patronato per verificare le descrizioni dei manoscritti, per entrare in contatto con gli artisti che avrebbero dovuto creare le illustrazioni e per ottenere i privilegi e l’imprematur, necessari per la pubblicazione del Tesoro a Roma. La ricostruzione di queste pratiche dovrà portare a una conoscenza più completa sia del progetto del Tesoro che dei motivi per il ritardo della pubblicazione.

La collana di edizioni critiche di testi greci e latini chiamata Scriptores Graeci et Latini fu fondata negli anni Trenta sotto l’egida della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Fra i membri del comitato scientifico preposto alla direzione dell’im­presa un ruolo chiave fu svolto inizialmente da Giorgio Pasquali. Quest’ultimo non solo progettò di contribuire alla collana con la sua edizione delle Epistole platoniche, ma criticò anche i lavori di altri colleghi coinvolti nell’iniziativa, fra cui soprattutto la pubblicazione delle opere di Virgilio curata da Remigio Sabbadini. Inoltre, Pasquali scrisse anche delle regole editoriali rivolte ai futuri editori (Norme per i collaboratori) al fine di garantire l’uniformità della col­lezione. Dal momento che se ne conservano poche copie, il testo è quasi del tutto sconosciuto, ma esso è nondimeno degno di considerazione. Si tratta infatti del più accurato lavoro che Pasquali abbia mai dedicato alla tecnica dell’edizione critica, accanto alla voce Edizione scritta per l’Enciclopedia Italiana. Basandosi anche su materiale archivistico inedito, si ricostruisce l’attività svolta da Pasquali all’interno del Comitato per l’Edizione Nazionale dei Classici Greci e Latini e si fornisce inoltre una nuova ristampa delle sue Norme per i collaboratori. The Scriptores Graeci et Latini is a collection of critical editions of Greek and Roman texts established in the 1930s under the supervision of the Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Among the members of the scientific committee, a prominent role was initially played by Giorgio Pasquali. Not only did he plan to publish his edition of Plato’s Epistles, but he also criticized the work of his colleagues, in particular that on the poems of Vergil by Remigio Sabbadini. With the homogeneity of the collection on his mind, Pasquali even wrote the Conventions to be respected by future participants in the project (Norme per i collaboratori). This text is almost unknown, since very few copies are still extant today, but it is worthy of consideration nonetheless. It represents the most accurate work by Pasquali concerning the editorial technique of ancient texts, on the same level as the better known entry Edizione that he wrote for the Enciclopedia Italiana. Relying on previously unpublished archival documents, this paper reconstructs all of these aspects of Pasquali’s activity, and the Norme per i collaboratori are newly edited.

Current attempts by historians of science to revise the narrative of the Scientific Revolution by using the concept of the Baroque have important implications for art history. Correspondences between baroque art and baroque science gain new complexity when the rational, epistemologically optimistic image of the New Science is put in doubt. Rather than a method of objective observation, early seventeenth‐century science and art share an acceptance of the constructed nature of reality, of human epistemological limitations and of the role of passions in the observation of the world. While Caravaggio has revolutionised art precisely through his interest in questions of knowledge and sensorial perception and by his subversive transformation of Renaissance epistemological values and ideals, this article concentrates on the work of Jusepe de Ribera, who made the senses and their shortcomings a major theme of his pictorial research. Ribera's epistemology is examined in the context of contemporary Neapolitan philosophy and science. Through the confrontation of some of the Spagnoletto's paintings with the work of figures such as Giovanni Battista della Porta, Federico Cesi and particularly Colantonio Stigliola, it becomes clear that early modern Neapolitan faith in rational knowledge was more ambiguous than is sometimes assumed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The correspondence between the mathematician Luigi Cremona (1830-1903) and Quintino Sella (1827-1884) highlights aspects of Sella’s political thought and cultural activity. In particular his aims on Rome “capital of science” and on the Accademia dei Lincei as emblem of national culture, encountered difficulties. In spite of some incomprehensions in the initial phase of their relationship, the harmony of ethical, political and cultural intentions for the progress of the country and the synergies implemented by the two friends led to important results. Among them we can mention the renewal of academic membership with prestigious names of scientists and intellectuals, the establishment of prizes to encourage scientific research, the publication of memoirs of the two classes and the exchanges of periodicals with academies and scientific institutions all over the world.

The objective of this article is to analyse the origins of modern Technique in the life and work of Pisan scientist Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) in light of two essential ideas. On the one hand, the events of Galileo’s era(16th and 17th centuries) and, on the other, the essential category of «experimentation» as a «physical proof of reality», which appears in Intelligence and Reason (1983) by Xavier Zubiri (1898-1983). From this category of analysis we will be able to see the richness of Galileo’s original technical scientific research and how it has been crucial for the later development of human research throughout History.

The correspondence between Quintino Sella (1827-1884) and Giovanni Virginio Schiaparelli (1835-1910) from 1875 to 1884, when Sella was president of the Accademia dei Lincei and deputy, highlights interesting aspects of the difficulties he encountered in the project on Rome, capital of science and on the Accademia dei Lincei, emblem of national culture. The harmony of ethical, political and cultural intentions for the progress of the country and the synergies implemented by the two friends led to important results: the great equatorial refractor for the Milan observatory, the Accademia dei Lincei palace, the scientific museums, the national library, foreign members, the prizes, the volumes of memoirs of the two classes and the exchange of publications with the academies of foreign nations. In the epistolary dialogues we can see the sharing of the Humboldtian dream of the unification of cultures, the circulation of knowledge and their enlargment to multidisciplinary fields.

Se dan a conocer tres versiones de textos de Lope en dos Cancioneros españoles copiados en Roma a principios del xvii. Son testimonios poco conocidos, ambos guardados en el fondo Corsini de la Accademia dei Lincei de Roma: el Ms. Corsini 625, que es musical (textos 1 y 2), y el Ms. Corsini 970 (texto 3). Los poemas lopescos que nos transmiten son: 1) Esto que me abrasa el pecho (5 estrofas de 9 vv. que constituyen el canto de Olimpio en el Libro III de la Arcadia de 1598); 2) En esta larga ausencia (4 estrofas de 6 vv. que constan en otras fuentes musicales); 3) Aquel sangriento paño descogiendo (3 octavas de endecasílabos pertenecientes a la comedia El bastardo Mudarra, de 1612, que terminan todas con la cita del verso de Garcilaso, Ay dulces prendas por mi mal halladas). Se editan las tres versiones romanas y se estudia el texto que nos transmiten.

The article introduces the special issue including the proceedings of the conference "Albert Hirschman scienziato sociale" held in Rome at the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. The author briefly recalls Hirschman's affiliation with the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, the oldest scientific academy in the world, noting in particular the significant "motivations" for his award of membership in the Academy.

In this address to the Accademia dei Lincei, the author discusses the development of Modigliani's thinking, with special reference to the themes of money, monetary policy and economic policy in general, the main aspects of which were an integral part of the Bank of Italy's first econometric model. Stressing Modigliani's balanced position in the macroeconomic debate, the author shows how, while he refrained from taking sides, he put forward cogent arguments defending the need for counter-cyclical policies. Modigliani's many contributions, both theoretical and empirical, have provided central bankers with a valuable tool; his teaching is still relevant for economists and policymakers, highlighting the role of stabilization policies in a global financial system, their influence on economies' competitiveness and their ability to grow. JEL Codes: B31 Keywords: Accademia dei Lincei, Modigliani

The article explores the attempts of Italian naturalist and scientist Federico Cesi to form a network of institutions around his Lincean Academy and to stimulate his academicians to take part in collective research. Cesi created the statute, the Lynceographum, wherein he discussed the need of "diminishing" geographical distances by way of "peregrination" and the foundation of similar institutions. The extent of the Lyncean network is observed in the publican process of the Mexican Treasury.

Darwin’s Origin of species was positively accepted immediately by the Italian zoologists. The first translation into Italian language, by Canestrini and Salimbeni, appeared in 1864. Overall, the immediacy of the translation of Darwin’s main books clearly states the interest of the Italian naturalists in his work. Darwin was a member of a great number of Italian scientific societies, and in 1875 was elected Foreign Member of the Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Darwinian and evolutionary bents inside the Accademia dei Lincei were constantly retained all through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The first Darwinians, Dalton Hooker, Thomas Huxley, Ernst Haeckel and Anton Dhorn were Lincei academicians, as well as, more recently, the promoters of the Modern Synthesis, George G. Simpson, Theodosius Dobhzansky and Ernst Mayr. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Measuring Lynx. Two Widespread Mistakes in the Galileo Literature The article deals with two widespread mistakes concerning Galileo: A false quotation and a translation error. The quotation reads as follows: “Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so.” Although Galileo is quoted with these words in a large number of publications, the authenticity of the sentence is highly dubious because no one has ever provided a precise bibliographical reference for where to find it in Galileo’s works. Galileo’s alleged rule about measurement can be traced back to the works of two nineteenth century French scholars. This phrase was subsequently picked up by some internationally renowned scientists, who were responsible for its dissemination in German and English books and articles. The two English versions of the measurement quotation published by Hermann Weyl in the late forties of the last century strongly contributed to its worldwide diffusion. The sentence was even re-translated into German and French, and in recent scientific textbooks it is frequently used in order to characterize the methods of modern science. Notwithstanding its increasing popularity, referring to this expression as a quotation from Galileo is a striking example of academic sloppiness. The translation error concerns the name of the Roman Academy of which Galileo was a member. Referring to its emblem, a lynx, Accademia dei lincei is often translated as “Academy of (the) Lynxes”. But the Italian noun for lynx is feminine ( la lince), and the Italian translation of “Academy of the Lynxes” would be Accademia delle linci. The adjective linceo, however, means ”lynx-eyed” in the sense of “sharp-sighted”, and therefore the correct translation of Accademia dei lincei is “Academy of the Lynx-Eyed”. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]