1. The document discusses the importance of history in naval science. It argues that understanding past achievements helps establish consistent definitions of science and technology that can guide design and construction. 2. It provides examples of how historical studies of shipbuilding have uncovered knowledge around static and structural problems as well as material behavior and navigation, enabling technological progress. 3. The document argues that integrating historical knowledge with modern scientific and technical skills allows naval architects and engineers to formulate better design criteria and tools, beyond just imitation, guided by both intuition and rigorous analysis.

1. 1/10
The Entry of History in Naval Science
Massimo Corradi*
*University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy, corradi@arch.unige.it
Abstract
The writings that most closely belong to the discipline of history, and in particular the history of
shipbuilding, are papers containing arguments quite different from each other, or very informative or
very specialized. The scientist is often embarrassed in reading these books because they are written
from a humanistic, and they are not scientific-technical papers, sometimes they are complemented
with mathematical formulas and diagrams written in obsolete languages, designed to discern the paths
of history passed, and adjacent to a discipline that looks to the near future and not in the past, a history
too often forgotten. The Scientia navalis or Naval Science, which Leonhard Euler (1707 - 1783) was a
teacher and somewhat precursor, from time immemorial languishing on the shelves of libraries,
neglected by scholars. This occurred because the discipline has come to self-awareness, especially in
the contemporary age, when, following the example of the Galilean revolution, the community of
surveyors and scholars of mechanics oriented his attention to the problems of shipbuilding and vessel
operations, which at first seemed disciplines entrusted only to the skill of the shipwright, carpenters
and the Masters and Shipmasters on board ships, as well as to the wisdom of tradition. History,
however, is a fascinating and fruitful field of study for some guidance because by understanding what
has been achieved in the past, has been able to establish a more consistent definition of science and
technology to be used in applied in the design and construction. Even for shipbuilding, in fact, the
sedimentation of knowledge of the past passed down orally by the shipwright to their students and
then taught in the schools of Naval Engineering in France scrolls and founded by Jean- Baptiste
Colbert (1619 - 1683) Secretary of the French Navy in the seventeenth century, has been able to point
the way to address and solve static and structural problems, but also those related to material
behaviour and then, thanks to the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, those relating to navigation
and manoeuvring of vessels. Only in this way it was possible to achieve those goals of technical and
technological developments that have allowed the massive shipbuilding industry in the nineteenth
century, following the same “logic” that guided the ancient builders and shipwrights, thus obtaining
accurate and effective design and construction solutions.
Keywords: Naval Science, Fuzzy Sets, Imprecision, Preferences, Aggregation Functions

2. 2/10
1. Historical awareness in the science of shipbuilding
The writings most closely related to the discipline of history, and in particular the History of
shipbuilding, are papers containing arguments quite different from each other, or very informative or
very specialized.
The scientist is often embarrassed in reading these books because they are written from a humanistic,
and they are not scientific or technical papers, sometimes they are complemented with mathematical
formulas and diagrams written in obsolete languages, designed to discern the paths of past history, and
adjacent to a discipline that looks to the near future and not in the past, a history too often forgotten.
The Scientia navalis [Euler, 1749] or Naval Science, which Leonhard Euler (1707 - 1783) was a
teacher and in its own way a precursor, from time immemorial languishing on the bookcases of
libraries, neglected by scholars.
This occurred because the discipline has come to self-awareness, especially in the contemporary age,
when, following the example of the Galilean revolution, the community of mathematicians and
scholars of mechanics oriented his attention to the problems of shipbuilding and vessel operations,
which at first seemed disciplines entrusted only to the skill of the shipwright, carpenters and the
Masters and Shipmasters [Elias, 2010] on board ships, as well as to the wisdom of tradition.
History, however, is a fascinating and fruitful field of study and research for some guidance because
by understanding what has been achieved in the past, has been able to establish a more consistent
definition of science and techniques to be used in the design and applied in the shipyard.
Even for shipbuilding, in fact, the sedimentation of knowledge of the past passed down orally by the
shipwright to their students and then taught in the schools of Naval Engineering in France desired and
founded by Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619 - 1683), Secretary of the French Navy in the seventeenth
century, has been able to point the way to address and solve static and structural problems, but also
those related to material behaviour and then, thanks to the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century,
those relating to navigation and manoeuvring of vessels.
Only in this way it was possible to achieve those goals of technical and technological developments
that have allowed the massive shipbuilding industry in the nineteenth century, following the same
“logic” that guided the ancient builders and shipwrights, thus obtaining accurate and effective design
and construction solutions.
Starting from the Architectura navalis [Furttenbach, 1629] by Joseph Furttenbach (1591-1667),
continuing with L’Architecture Navale [Dassié, 1677] by François Dassie (XVII cent.), to get to the
mature works of Bernard Renau d’Éliçagaray (1652 - 1719) [Renau d’Éliçagaray, Bernard 1690],
Pierre Bouguer (1698 - 1758) [Bouguer, 1746; 1753; 1757], Charles Romme (1745 - 1805) [Romme,
1787], not to mention that some of the most well-known scholars, and finally arrive at the fundamental
work of Henri Louis Duhamel du Monceau (1700 - 1782) on Architecture and construction of naval
vessels [Duhamel, 1752], the treatises of Naval Architecture, construction and manoeuvring of the

3. 3/10
vessels, associated with the early studies of mechanics and hydrodynamics [Bernoulli, 1738], have
traced the basics of the Arts of shipbuilding and seamanship.
Such a wealth of studies has opened the way for the founding of the Naval Science, as well as be
formulated by Jean Bernoulli (1667 - 1748) first and then Euler, where the mathematics associated
with the fundamentals of mechanics, has shown a new way of understanding the naval Architecture
and shipbuilding [Corradi, 2011a]. In fact, Euler was «the first ... to express mathematically the
resistance meeting a ship on its path through the water» e «Leonhard Euler first explained the role of
pressure in fluid flow; formulated basic equations of motion and the so-called Bernoulli theorem;
introduced the concept of cavitation, and the principle of centrifugal machinery» [Rouse and Ince,
1957].
In recent years, historical research has strongly developed in many disciplines of Mathematics,
Physics, in areas such as mechanics of solids and structures in architecture, but little or nothing in
particular in Engineering and Naval engineering disciplines, almost oblivious to the their rich heritage
and sediment. This happened probably because the obsession of ever achieving new results has
effectively forced their scholars to a frenzied run-up to the recent acquisitions of techniques and
technologies, for an exciting race, which does not allow for breaks or critical thoughts turn to the
future, and ‘ignorant’ and forget his past.
Today, however, it is desirable to happen a significant change of course; those who are paid more for
frontier research should perceive that a genuine advancement of physical and mathematical sciences,
as well as structural in the naval field, but perhaps especially in the nautical one, must not only be a
unoriginal exercise das rechnende Denken, as Martin Heidegger cites (1889 - 1976), but require an
intense effort to return to the speculative principles, and thus feel their deep meaning, their
epistemological status, their unspoken or unmentioned values.
In this way the usual search expressed in the further processing of established theories, but still
capable of refining, or the synthesis of more powerful, to better clarify the scope of validity of the
technical solutions generally used, or in the realization of software for the numerical calculation more
and more perfected, should not constitute the necessary routine that supports and reinforces a common
basis of understanding among scholars, but it must be the study and knowledge of the past to guide
future research.
The scientific horizon of discipline extends not only thanks to the discovery of new technologies, or to
the increasing complexity of computing systems which for example the structural engineers are
trained, though perhaps not always fully aware of the complex system of algorithms in that they are
hidden content, as the machine becomes Deus (god / divinity) and not be disregarded by it and by its
results.
The need to formulate plausible interpretations of the mechanical behaviour of structures and
materials, research processes and methods of calculation, of which calls for a simplification of the

4. 4/10
designer’s intuition to bring awareness to calculate, must constitute the essential support that is needed
combine with the historical knowledge in a continuous sedimentation of theoretical findings, technical
developments and technological processes, which, however, is precisely the object of study of
historians.
Suddenly it became clear, therefore, that the Naval Science modelled, since the scientific-educational
‘revolution’ occurred in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, as an aid to the problems of the new
engineering and shipbuilding sectors, should provide appropriate tools and methods to the processes of
design and construction, strong knowledge although remote and often associated with technical notes
now only briefly, was to enable the engineer even more expert in his discipline to formulate design
criteria and calculation tools beyond just one formal ‘analogy’ for ‘imitation’.
Today, the familiar with the laws of mechanics of solids and structures, capacity and care as much as
possible in determining the exact boundary conditions beyond the margins of uncertainty permissible,
the practice of rigorous calculus, should not be the only factors support in the design. The intuition
that forces him to chase elementary concepts whose reasonableness can assure the technician, even in
the absence of clear theoretical explanatory models must enter the fund of knowledge of the designer,
as history has taught us and the Masters have handed down.
As Galileo cites in his Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze [Galileo,
1638] «The constant activity which you Venetians display in your famous arsenal suggests to the
studious mind a large field for investigation, especially that part of the work which involves
mechanics; for in this department all types of instruments and machines are constantly being
constructed by many artisans, among whom there must be some who, partly by inherited experience
and partly by their own observations, have become highly expert and clever in explanation».
The engineer and naval architect and marine experts in science and engineering, must not only
be blind performers of an imitative process, but sharing of meritorious experience, which are very
disquieting, which belongs to the Socratic wisdom: awareness that their scientific knowledge is the
best witness of their real ignorance.
2. A “paradigm shift”
The history of Naval Science, certainly does not replace the knowledge of the Socratic docta
ignorantia (learned ignorance), but rather should serve as a moment of reflection of the knowledge
acquired to facilitate the development of new methods and analytical tools for design and calculus, and
find in this way itself - juxta propria principia (according to its own principles) - the reasons for its
growth.
Starting from the geometry to arrive at static, starting from mathematics to science of resistance, from
the physical and chemical analysis of materials to the mechanics of solids and structures, the history of

5. 5/10
Naval Science can become connotative matrix of a weaving warp and weft, a cloth of empirical
intuitions and scientific knowledge, in order to reveal the hidden reasons that pass through the design
of a boat, vessel or ship, its structural dimensioning, its technologies and materials, to the shipyard that
will lead to its construction.
History does not ignore the fundamental contribution by mathematicians and engineers engaged in
research and study of topics related to the technical competences of the naval architect, but as can be
seen from Mathesis Universalis pursued by the greatest scientists of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, the architecture and the art of building naval vessels, belong to the great mathematicians
who founded a discipline, Naval Science, starting from its roots and its historical knowledge passed
down from father to son, from master to apprentice in the shipyards and in the first naval
establishments then, until the end of the twentieth century.
The acknowledgement of the important role fulfilled by scientists as one of the builders in the
construction of a boat, a vessel, a ship, it is not a granted contribution, and unfortunately it is not
enough to understand the intimate and essential process that led the shipwrights in shipbuilding. It is
not, in fact, only a valuable contribution to certainly firmitas (“art of building”) of naval construction,
although somewhat collateral, even when extrinsic design, but instead of a moment of scientific
awareness of an act of intuitive design that brought to the project by imitation of the ship.
The integration between construction and scientific rationality exceeds the instrumental moment and
aims for the meaning of the work as it was built. In this respect, to recall aspects of the history of
science and construction techniques in the naval field, it properly belongs to the subject of the wealth
of knowledge of the designer. Other views and perspectives overlook and intersect with each other,
forcing even those involved in the project or in shape or design or construction of facilities or to
awaken their attention on the act of the technical build, not intended as an intermediate when
compared to a transcendent purpose, but as a profound dimension of the opening to the knowledge of
man.
The relationship between art and science, between design and construction, becomes a means of
interpretation of a design rationale that, as shown in the Schopenhauer’s text The World as Will and
Representation [Schopenhauer 1819: III, § 43], belongs to the world of aesthetics, as well as the
rational world. The structural aspect of the construction is anything but a side aspect and extrinsic act
of design. Since it is based both the aesthetic essence of the work and science, according to the
German philosopher, it is then the vehicle and message of beauty.
Is perceived as an astonishing historical truth that unites the science revolving around the shipbuilding:
relating the history of Naval Science, caught in its essential moments, reveals issues relevant to the
strength of solids, of Galilean memory, enhanced and transformed, in the search for physical-
mechanical reasons that may explain the phenomenon of resistance, however themes developed in
approximately three centuries of history.

6. 6/10
The static forces and principles of composition and decomposition of forces from Simon Stevin (1548
- 1620), and then especially starting from Gilles Personne de Roberval (1602 - 1675) and Pierre
Varignon (1654 - 1722), proved capable of erect a nouvelle mécanique, basic conceptual tools to
interpret the static behaviour of the vessel at sea.
The structural mechanics and the definition of the laws of equilibrium, which gathers into itself the
objective of structural design, becomes interpretive paradigm of the new Naval Science, because it
leads one to suppose that the active and reactive forces, external actions and internal tensions are
arranged in different parts of the structure in such a way that obey those laws.
«But there’s more: during the eighteenth century undoubtedly under the influence of philosophical
and metaphysical conceptions guided by rational optimism, according to the principles of a
cosmological and anthropological teleonomy, emerged the belief that the same laws “du repos et du
mouvement des corps” were in their turn subject to a finalistic universal design, suitable to express
the beauty and perfection of nature in the “best of all possible worlds”, track worthy of the Supreme
Architect» [Benvenuto, 1988].
The great project of static and mechanical interpretation of the laws in terms of final causes, through
the “method of maxima and minima”, fully developed with the help of the Variational method and
calculus then gave clarity to the mathematical formulation of the theme inherent balance and stability
will be the main topic of Euler’s Scientia navalis.
So, the historical study of Naval Science may be the way to penetrate the inner meaning enclosed in
shipbuilding, because it is the tool to reveal the encounter between the mechanical science and
techniques of construction, because the only observation of the object itself could not open that
otherwise interpretive trails, and do not give explanations on the deep creative processes and design,
but not even a vague foreknowledge of the laws of static and structural insights that underlie the
construction itself.
The “paradigm shift”, according to Thomas Kuhn (1922 - 1996) Scientific Revolutions, that had begun
to emerge in the aristocratic scientific circles, open to innovation of the Galilean science, and then in
the European Academies, up to ebb slowly and not without opposition in the engineering practice at
the end of the Enlightenment, finally explodes with the industrial revolution and it establishes its
triumph.
In the seventeenth century before, and then in the eighteenth century, so we witness a deep and fruitful
interweaving of scholarly and scientific academies, including the civilian and military schools, and
corporations of master builders. Distinguished scholars compile and publish excellent texts on the
subject of shipbuilding [Corradi, 2011b], almost simultaneously with what was happening in the
history of mathematics and the mechanics as applied to the problems of the technique.
It is still a frontier land, not very stimulating for the students of the history of science, and somewhat
difficult for scholars of the history of shipbuilding, but certainly critical to understand the paradigm

7. 7/10
shift that involved the world of technology, not relegated to only the most technical and design note of
the shipyard, which as we have said, has for centuries based its manufacturing capacity in imitation,
but open to education and to teaching, the definition of operational tools such as ‘plans construction’,
with the birth of the Schools of naval engineering.
Fig. 1. Left: image taken from the English manuscript Fragment of Ancient English Shipwrighty by Matthew
Baker (c. 1530-1613), c. 1586; Right: School of Shipbuilding of Brest (1680), illustration of Pierre Ozanne
(1737-1813), professor of drawing.
Here the contribution of the engineer-mathematician, or mathematician- engineer, master of his
discipline, and therefore ready to penetrate between the old maps bristled with calculations and
discouraging geometric constructions has proved invaluable. Exploring the science of “build vessels”
of Galilean memory, as stated in his opening words to Discorsi [Galileo 1638] before, through and
after the “paradigm shift” of which we have mentioned, is no longer a marginal contribution to the
history of shipbuilding, as far as the heart of a crucial event that has changed the face of the “arte del
fabbricare navigli” (“art of build vessels”).
For this reason it is believed that the interest in the history of shipbuilding should be more than a
moment of mere scholarship for scholars enthusiasts but becomes an instrument of basic knowledge
among students of architecture and shipbuilding: the history of both disciplines in itself, and for the
history of shipbuilding itself, especially when you are working with projects of restoration, refitting or
transformation, who is required to make a diagnosis and a prognosis for their best re-use. Maybe not
so much an objective historiography what sustains this interest, but rather the awareness that thorough
knowledge and careful reconsideration of the past are now a necessary condition for real progress of
the research.
3. “A perfect intelligence”
Awareness, as Aristotle wrote [Aristotle, Pol I, 2, 1252 24], that “considering things in their genesis,
you get a perfect intelligence” comes from deep reasons who invest the fundamental principles of the

8. 8/10
disciplines of interest the naval engineer; disciplines ranging from mechanics to hydrostatic and to
hydrodynamic, shipbuilding, science and structural engineering, mechanics of materials, mechanics of
solids and structures, etc.
Is not it wrong to imagine the pre-judgment (in the sense of Gadamer’s thought) according to which,
for example, in only the structural calculation, each shipbuilding - can be regarded as a physical
object completely describable and explicable by the scientist, if - and only if - is known unequivocally
its design configuration, i.e. the geometry of the whole and of each of its parts, the nature of the
external and internal action which is subject, as well as the equations that govern the relationship
between actions and reactions, efforts and stress, strain and deformation in different materials.
The structural analysis belongs by right to the riverbed of the Naturwissenschaften and therefore is
based on data currently ascertained experimentally. It then makes use of the laws that govern the
mechanical behaviour of the bodies, and you do not see what role can exercise the knowledge of the
past history that can govern the design of the present object, if not as useful, but accidental support.
In no way, this implies the introduction of the history of scientific analysis, nor assumes strange
interweaving thinking “nomothetic” characteristic of the natural sciences and the intention
“idiographic” always shielded by the veil of interpretation, which concerns the historical sciences out,
in the Geisteswissenschaften. More simply, it is better to fix instead of the initial data which, together
with the boundary conditions, define the physical-mathematical problem, so as to ensure the existence
and uniqueness of the solution.
Nevertheless, this solid scientific approach, undoubtedly successful in many applications of mechanics
of solids and structures and engineering in general, can be critically revisited and applied even when it
comes to designing the new, in order to connect intimately analysis, purely scientific analysis, of the
physical object, an analysis of another kind, this time to trace the history of structural design that
guided the shipwright and the first engineers of the time.
For example, just behind the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century, which introduced in
shipbuilding the use of iron and the steam within cultural horizons and traditions no longer familiar to
us, but also in the long evolution of shipbuilding in nautical field, where the calculation is arrived late
and the structural design, the construction idea was made by the master for decades.
Among the essential principles of scientific disciplines that are a priori of ship design is in fact a
convincing image “asymptotic” of the structural description and explanation, according to which, any
answer offered by the engineer is valid since he enrolled in the narrow path of achievements
approximate, because that is how you present prolepsis anticipation of a perfect solution whose
existence is ensured by the universal principle of physical determinism.
But the questions that arise are the following: who could say with absolute accuracy to possess all the
necessary data of the problem? Who ever would declare to know the “constitutive equations” of
materials especially those that meet current shipbuilding? And who would know never to play with the

9. 9/10
precision of an intricate calculations congeries, as is required by the strongly non-linear nature of the
complex mathematical problem that must be addressed?
In this sense, it would take ... a demon obliging, or rather one of those angels who, at the time of the
second Scholastics of the seventeenth century, inhabited the Treaties of physical scientists most loyal
to the Aristotelian tradition: because these incorporeal entities could serve as ideal actors to some
daring experiments to break some laws of the peripatetic cosmology, without fear of incurring the
censure of the Inquisition [Giattino, 1653], indicating the existence of a solution, however, is not
known with certainty be excluded at the actual calculation. Still, the idea behind these figures is
paradoxical that we have mentioned converges to the image “asymptotic” of scientific knowledge
mentioned.
Suppose the objective existence of a perfect solution but unattainable within a design process, which
can be more “secularly” define infinite laboratory, able to go from the beginning to the end of a route
can only descriptive-explanatory sight distance and wholesale the solution searched, trying to make
sense and measure the results actually achieved by the limited cognitive instruments of our
knowledge, interpreting them as approximations, more or less accurate, the true solution.
In this way it is found and accepted the convergence of some iterative procedure, with any a priori
assessment of the margin of error associated with each iteration, it is proved analytically that
numerical results obtained by a finite-difference methods (FDM) or finite elements methods (FEM)
are much closer to the correct ones, the more it thickens the solution, according to one or more laws
granted at the discretion of the designer.
4. Conclusions
The question that therefore arises is what is the position of the designer when they are asked to
forecast the structural behaviour of a design idea, but he pretends to be an objective assessment of the
behavioural characteristics of the vessel in its entirety.
The answer perhaps is clear: the indefinable number of factors that are put in place, the
insurmountable difficulty of the experiment, the uncertainty that remains in any theoretical model
designed to represent the inherent non-linearity of the materials, the incidence of aspects may be
captured only by considerations of probability, lead us to think that not even in principle be apparent
via a “ontologically” determined, after which shines forth the true goal of the solution.
In this sense, our case is not much (or only) complicated, but rather complex. The first term is
appropriate for those intricate problems and perhaps unattainable, but for which you can configure, at
least in the abstract, solving paradigms, while the second term is applied to those other problems that
defy any paradigm.

10. 10/10
The solution thus remains contained in the un-decidable act of design, be it aesthetic and engineering,
but the act of design is the history of the time that has been designed and built, and over the years will
be slowly forgotten. But the solutions proposed, designed and implemented should not belong to the
world of the past, but as solutions to problems or comprehensive answers to the questions asked
should be collected and narrated as a key tool for growth and development of the knowledge of the
discipline.
References
Benvenuto, Edoardo (1988). L’ingresso della storia nelle discipline strutturali, Palladio (Nuova Serie), n. 1
(1988), pp. 7-14.
Bernoulli, Daniel (1738). Hydrodynamica. Argentorati (Strasburgo): Johannis Reinholdi Dulseckeri.
Bernoulli, Jean (1714). Essay d’une Nouvelle Theorie de la Manœuvre des vaisseaux, avec quelques Lettres sur
le même Sujet. Basle: Chez Jean George König.
Bouguer, Pierre (17461
). Traité de navire, de sa Construction, et de ses Mouvemens. Paris: Ch. Ant. Jombert.
Bouguer, Pierre (1753). Nouveau Traité de navigation contenant la Théorie et la pratique du pilotage. Paris:
Hippolyte-Louis Guérin & Louis-François Delatour.
Bouguer, Pierre (1757). De la manœuvre des vaisseaux, ou, Traité de méchanique et de dynamique ...
mouvement du navire. Paris: Hippolyte-Louis Guérin & Louis-François Delatour.
Corradi, Massimo (2011a). Lineamenti di Storia della costruzione navale. Vol. 2: L’art du navire e la Scientia
navalis. Edizioni di Storia, Scienza e Tecnica, & / Lulu: Morrisville.
Corradi, Massimo (2011b). Biblioteca di Storia della costruzione navale. Edizioni di Storia, Scienza e Tecnica,
& / Lulu: Morrisville.
Furttenbach, Joseph (1629). Architectura navalis.. Ulm: J. Saur.
Dassié, François (16771
; 16952
). L’Architecture Navale: avec le Routier des Indes Orientales & Occidentales:
Par le Sieur Dassié. Paris: Jean de la Caille.
Duhamel du Monceau, Henri-Louis (1752). Elemens de l’Architecture navale ou Traite pratique de la
construction des vaisseaux. Paris: Charles Antoine Jombert.
Elias, Norbert (2010). Marinaio e gentiluomo. Bologna: il Mulino (trad. It: The Genesis of the Naval
profession, edited by R. Moelker e S. Mennell, Dublin, University College Dublin Presse, 2007).
Euler, Leonhard (1749). Scientia navalis seu tractatus de construendis ac dirigendis navibus ... . Petropoli (St.
Petersburg): Typis Academiae Scientiarum.
Galilei, Galileo (1638). Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze attinenti alla
meccanica e ai moti locali. Leida: appresso gli Elzevirii.
Giattino, Giovan Battista (1653). Physica. Roma: Corbelletti.
Renau d’Éliçagaray, Bernard (1690). Mémoire où est démontré un principe de la méchanique des liqueurs
dont on s’est servi dans la Théorie de la manœuvre des vaisseaux, et qui a été contesté par M. Hughen. [S.l.]:
[s.n.], [ca 1690].
Romme, Nicolas Charles (1787). L’art de la marine ou principes et preceptes généraux de l’art de construire,
d’orner, de manoeuvrer et de conduire des vaisseaux. Paris: Barrois l’Aîné, et fils ; La Rochelle: P.-L. Chauvet.
Rouse, Hunter & Simon Ince (1957). History of Hydraulics. New York: Dover Publications.
Schopenhauer, Arthur (1819). Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung. Leipzig: F. A. Brodhaus.