Giovanni Battista Riccioli o Getaldićevu djelu Promotus Archimedes ; Giovanni Battista Riccioli on Marin Getaldić’s Promotus Archimedes

U kratkom vremenskom razdoblju od 1651. do 1665. hidrostatička rasprava Promotus Archimedes (1603) Marina Getaldića doživjela je značajne odjeke u djelima trojice isusovačkih polihistora: Giovannija Battiste Ricciolija, Kaspara Schotta iAthanasiusa Kirchera. Prvi je iz spomenutog trolista na Getaldićeva UnaprijeđenogaArhimeda upozorio Giovanni Battista Riccioli u svojoj astronomskoj sintezi Almagestum novum (1651), kad je u petom poglavlju druge knjige »De sphaera elementari et praecipuè de globo terraqueo« zajedno izložioAristotelove filozofeme o gibanju elemenata iArhimedovu hidrostatiku. Već pri prvom spomenu znanstvenik iz Ferrare svrstava Dubrovčanina među trojicu ključnih tumačitelja i nastavljačaArhimedova pionirskoga djela iz hidrostatike – uz Tartagliu i Galileia. On metodologiju određivanja težina različitih kovina i tekućina »s pomoću jednoga jedinoga tijela čiju težinu unaprijed znaš« pripisuje trojici mjeritelja relativnih težina, i to redom Tartagli, Villalpandu i Getaldiću, ali opisuje Getaldićevu metodologiju koja se značajno razlikuje od Tartagline i Villalpandove, štoviše nadmašuje ih po znanstvenoj strogosti. U priloženoj tablici Riccioli izostavlja Tartagline podatke, dok Getaldićeve podatke za relativne težine sedam kovina i pet tekućina uspoređuje s Villalpandovim objavljenim u Apparatus urbis et templi Hierosolymitani (1604). Napokon, Ferarez se oslanja samo na Getaldića kad upućuje na treću i četvrtu tablicu Unaprijeđenoga Arhimeda, u kojima Dubrovčanin predočava odnose između promjera i težine kugle za šest kovina. Uz to nam Riccioli ostavlja dragocjeno svjedočanstvo o najranijoj recepciji Getaldićeve izmjere drevne rimske stope među profesorima matematike Rimskoga kolegija: u svojoj je raspravi Getaldić otisnuo duljinu »polovice drevne rimske stope« (dimidium pedis Romani antiqui); Getaldićeva tiskana izmjera sačuvala se na cedulji u Grienbergerovoj ostavštini, a Kircher je o njoj pismom obavijestio Ricciolija. Tako zahvaljujući Ricciolijevu Novom Almagestu Getaldićeva izmjera drevne rimske stope, iako u sjeni Villalpandovih metrologijskih poglavlja, postaje referentnom točkom u znanstvenoj povijesti te rimske mjere za duljinu. Time je istodobno pronađen kanal znanstvene komunikacije koji vodi od Getaldića preko Grienbergera i Kirchera do Ricciolija. Frankfurtsko pseudoizdanje Ricciolijeva Novoga Almagesta iz 1653. tekstualno se ne razlikuje od bolonjskoga izdanja, ali je doprinijelo da Getaldićeva metodologija i podaci za relativne težine budu dostupniji na frankfurtskom sajmu knjiga, u njemačkim zemljama i na sjeveru Europe. ; In a fairly short period (1651–1665), the hydrostatic treatise Promotus Archimedes (1603) by Marin Getaldić witnessed notable reception in the works of the three Jesuit polymaths: Giovanni Battista Riccioli, Kaspar Schott, and Athanasius Kircher. Giovanni Battista Riccioli was the first of the mentioned three Jesuit scholars to draw attention to Getaldić’s Promotus Archimedes in his astronomic synthesis Almagestum novum (1651), where in the fifth chapter of the second book »De sphaera elementari et praecipue de globo terraqueo« together he expounded Aristotle’s philosophemes on the motion of elements and Archimedes’s hydrostatics. In his very first mention of Getaldić, the scholar from Ferrara included the Ragusan scholar among the three key interpreters and successors of Archimedes’s pioneering work in hydrostatics – alongside Tartaglia and Galileo. The methodology of determining the weights of different metals and liquids »with the aid of a single body whose weight is previously known« Riccioli ascribed to the three measurers of relative weights, to Tartaglia, Villalpando, and Getaldić, yet described Getaldić’s methodology which significantly departed from those of Tartaglia and Villalpando, moreover, it surpasses them in terms of scientific rigour. In the table enclosed, Riccioli omitted Tartaglia’s data, while Getaldić’s data for the relative weights of seven metals and five liquids he compared to Villalpando’s results published in Apparatus urbis et templi Hierosolymitani (1604). Lastly, Riccioli leans on Getaldić only while referring to the third and fourth table in Promotus Archimedes, in which the Ragusan calculated the relationship between the diameter and the weight of a ball for six metals. In addition, Riccioli has left a valuable testimony on the earliest reception of Getaldić’s length of the ancient Roman foot among the professors of mathematics at the Collegium Romanum: in his treatise, Getaldić printed the length of “one half of the ancient Roman foot” (dimidium pedis Romani antiqui); Getaldić’s length was preserved on a scheda in Grienberger’s legacy, of which Kircher informed Riccioli in a letter. Thus owing to Riccioli’s astronomical master-piece, Getaldić’s printed measure of Roman foot, though in the shadow of Villalpando’s metrological chapters, has become a reference point in the scientific history of the Roman linear unit. This at the same time has disclosed a channel of scientific communication leading from Getaldić through Grienberger and Kircher to Riccioli. The Frankfurt pseudo-edition of Riccioli’s Almagestum novum from 1653 does not differ from the 1651 Bologna edition in terms of the text, but it certainly contributed to the accessibility of Getaldić’s methodology of measuring and the data of relative weights at the Frankfurt Book Fair, in the German lands, and in the north of Europe.