Skip to main content

Parallelogrammum Prosopographicum

Nexus Network Journal volume 22, pages 735–753 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

This paper investigates the ‘parallelogrammum prosopographicum’ (prosopographical parallelogram), a little-known device for drawing from life using parallel lines. The instrument, described in an article published in 1673 in the Philosophical Transactions, was adapted from Christoph Scheiner’s stereograph and designed as a practical method to bypass the visual effects of perspectival foreshortening. The present paper examines the geometrical and mechanical principles of the parallelogram and the rationale deployed by its inventor. It then locates the implications of the device within a history of orthographic projection through mathematical instruments in late seventeenth-century London. The paper ultimately argues that the programmatic aim of the parallelogram constitutes a relevant case study for a history of early modern architectural representation, a permeable field of research laying on the threshold between projectivity, mathematical practice and instrumentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Notes

  1. In the journal index of the Philosophical Transactions, the title was translated into English: ‘a new way of orthographically delineating by parallel visual rays the posture and actions of an Humane body, exactly preserving the symmetry and proportion of the parts; by Mr. John Saint-Clare’ [sic].

  2. The name of the author as presented in the journal is John St. Clare (Ioanne de Sancto Claro). According to Rupert Hall and Marie Boas Hall however, his name was George (Hall and Hall 1975: 139). George Sinclair may have been the nephew of the mathematician of the same name, author of The Hydrostaticks and party to a controversy with James Gregory (Craik 2018).

  3. In a letter to Gregory from July 1672, Collins mentioned Sinclair’s parallelogram made ‘so as to designe an Object at a distance’. Sinclair had seen a similar instrument designed by instrument maker Hilkiah Bedford ‘after the common mode’, which he apparently did not like. Later that year, Sinclair purchased a similar ‘very good ordinary Parallelogram’ for the bargain price of 40 shillings, which was supposed to be sent to Gregory at St. Andrews University (Turnbull 1939: 239–40).

  4. Partes enim Autographi æquales, transcriptæ sunt in planum prorsus ineæquales. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations from Latin are by the author.

  5. In a later Italian edition of Scheiner’s book, the editor Giulio Troili suggested to use this device to ‘Draw in plane anything that is seen by us from afar, be it Village, Mountain, Sea, Island, Fortress, City, Villa, Square, Hamlet, House, Man, Beast, Stars’ (‘Disegnare in piano ogni cosa da noi veduta da lontano, sia Paese, Monte, Mare, Isola, Fortezza, Città, Villa, Piazza, Borgo, Casa, Huomo, Fiera, Stelle’) (Troili 1653: 18). In order to adapt his device to different positions of the model, Scheiner had equipped his machine with a series of hinges, allowing the projection plane to be rotated at will. This, however, allowed the readjustment of the drawing board but didn’t reduce the effects of foreshortening (Carpo 2011: 142, n.71).

  6. Menimi enim, cum effigiem cuiusdam in horto sedentis, cuius imago per lentem convexam in chartam transmissa fuit, ducerem, crura & depes multum ultra reliqui corporis proportionem, ut pote propriores, crescere.

  7. Expertus sum tamen … nequaquam inter partes Ectypi in planum, eam esse symmetriam, quæ inter partes Prototypi dissiti.

  8. Ex quo luculenter cernere est differentiam, inter rei Apparentiam, ejusque Projectionem.

  9. Apparentia ex duorum duntaxat habitudine pendet, rei nempe objectæ, & intuentis oculi; Projectio vero insuper (quae est rei solidæ in planum transcriptio), planum deposcit, in quod profusi radii varie incidunt.

  10. …quo propieres enim sunt noctu candela, manus aut pedes aut cætera membra eo majorem in parte em oppositum umbram effundunt.

  11. Sicut enim se habet Parallelogrammi planum ad imaginem corporis describendi, sic & paries ad umbram.

  12. ecce tibii aliud imaginis parallelae exemplum in umbris, quæ oriente vel occidente Sole in parietibus radiis solaribus ad angulos rectos oppositis conspiciuntur, quaeque licet tenebrosae, multum tamen lucis in praesenti negotio afferunt, cum Geometrice corporibus, unde fluunt, æquales sint.

  13. Hisce præmissis, fingamus ab omnibus Prototypi punctis radios parallelos prætendi, & ad angulos quam fieri potest rectissimos in planum Pantographicis incidere; qua ratione fiat, ut Index Stereographicus omnia illa puncta saltem præcipua percurrat, nunc inquirendum restat.

  14. …sit oculus in Prosopographia liber & solutus.

  15. …vero mere rationale, sive mathematicum.

  16. Sinclair may have been familiar with this system, as Royal Society member John Evelyn had reproduced it in his De Sculptura (1662: 121–124).

  17. For a more theoretical/general discussion on how mechanisation can clarify the principles of parallel drawing, see (Astengo 2020).

  18. Locke seems to have been referring here to the Stereograph and the Epipedograph, rather than Sinclair’s version.

  19. Sed cum Astronomi decant Sphæram Parallelam, cur non & mihi imaginem Parallelam dicere liceat? A parallel sphere indicates the celestial sphere seen from either the north or the south pole of the earth, where all the celestial bodies seem to move in small circles parallel to the horizon (Blaeu 1668: 40-41).

  20. This resembled a more complex device, designed by Robert Hooke, which included a second eyepiece and a rotating vertical parallelogram to rescale the image. In June 1663 Oldenburg presented the device to Balthazar de Monconys during his journey to London and shipped the machine to him in Paris the following year (Hall, Hall 1966: 285–91; Monconys 1666: 62; Hunter 2015).

References

  • Accolti, Pietro. 1625. Lo Inganno degli Occhi. Florence.

  • Ackerman, James. 1965. On ‘Scientia’. Daedalus 94(1): 14–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberti, Leon Battista. 1541. De L’Architettura di Leon Battista Alberti. Venice.

  • Andersen, Kirsti. 2007. The Geometry of an Art: The History of the Mathematical Theory of Perspective from Alberti to Monge. New York: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Astengo, Gregorio. 2020. Mechanising Parallel Lines. Oase 105: 99-108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, Francis. 1620. Novum Organum. London.

  • Bennett, Jim. 1986. The Mechanics’ Philosophy and the Mechanical Philosophy. History of Science 24: 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, Jim. 2002. The Mathematical Science of Christopher Wren. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Blaeu, Willem. 1668. Institutio Astronomica. Amsterdam: Joannem Blaeu.

  • Bosse, Abraham. 1653. Moyen Universel de Pratiquer la Perspective sur les Tableaux ou Surfaces Irrégulières. Paris.

  • Booker, Peter J. 1963. A History of Engineering Drawing. London: Chatto and Windus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusatin, Manlio. 1982. Arte Pantografica. Osservazioni sugli organi riproduttivi delle forme. Rassegna 9(IV): 39–51.

  • Camerota, Filippo. 2008. The eye of the Sun. Galileo and Pietro Accolti on orthographic projection. In Perspective, Projections and Design. Technologies of Architectural Representation, eds. Mario Carpo and Frédérique Lemerle, 115–126. London: Routledge.

  • Campbell, James. 2008. Wren, Architectural Research and the History of Trades in the Early Royal Society’. In Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century, vol. 6 Architecture, Cultural History, Autobiography, 9–27. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.

  • Carpo, Mario. 2011. The Alphabet and the Algorithm. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpo, Mario and Frédérique Lemerle, eds. 2008. Perspective, Projections and Design. Technologies of Architectural Representation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, Alex D. 2018. The Hydrostatical Works of George Sinclair (c .1630–1696): Their Neglect and Criticism. Notes and Records: The Royal Society Journal of the History of Science, 72(3), 239–73. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2017.0044.

  • D’Aguillon, François. 1613. Opticorum Libri Sex. Antwerp.

  • D’Orgeix, Émilie. 2008 Fortification and Military Architecture in Seventeenth century France. In Perspective, Projections and Design. Technologies of Architectural Representation, eds. Mario Carpo and Frédérique Lemerle, 127–140. London: Routledge.

  • Emmons, Paul. 2006. Architecture before Art: Imagining Architectural Authority in Early Modern England. Architectural Research Quarterly, 10(3–4): 275–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1359135506000388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Robin. 1986. Translations from Drawing to Building. AA Files 12: 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Robin. 1995. The Projective Cast. Architecture and its Three Geometries. Boston: MIT Press.

  • Evelyn, John. 1662. De Sculptura. London.

  • Gerbino, Anthony, and Stephen Johnston. 2009. Compass and Rule: Architecture as Mathematical Practice in England 1500-1750. London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Rupert and Marie Boas Hall. 1966. The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg: 1663-1665. Vol. 2. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Rupert and Marie Boas Hall. 1975. The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg: 1673 – 1674. Vol. 10. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, Matthew C. 2015. “Mr. Hooke’s Reflecting Box”: Modeling the Projected Image in the Early Royal Society. Huntington Library Quarterly 78(2): 301–28. https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2015.0012.

  • Kemp, Martin. 1992. The Science of Art: Optical Themes in Western Art from Brunelleschi to Seurat. London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kepler, Johannes. 1611. Dioptrice. Augusta.

  • Kusukawa, Sachiko. 2019. The Early Royal Society and Visual Culture. Perspectives on Science, 27(3): 350-394. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lencker, Johannes. 1571. Perspectiva. Nuremberg.

  • Lotz, Wolfgang. 1977. The Rendering of the Interior in Architectural Drawings of the Renaissance’, in Studies in Italian Renaissance Architecture. 1–65. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Monconys, Balthazar. 1666. Voyages de Balthazar de Monconys, Seconde Partie. Paris.

  • Oldenburg, Henry. 1669a. Preface to the fifth Year. Philosophical Transactions. 4(45): 893–98.

  • Oldenburg, Henry. 1669b. The Description of an Instrument Invented Divers Years Ago by Dr. Christopher Wren, for Drawing the Out-Lines of Any Object in Perspective. Philosophical Transactions. 4(45): 898–99.

  • Peréz-Goméz, Alberto. 1986. Architecture and the Crisis of Modern Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, Paolo. 2002. I Filosofi e le Macchine 1400-1700. Milano: Feltrinelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sbacchi, Michele. 2009. Projective Architecture. Nexus Network Journal, 11(3), 441–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-009-0011-y .

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiner, Christoph. 1631. Pantographice seu ars delineandi res quaslibet per parallelogrammum lineare seu cavum, mechanicum, mobile. Rome: Ludovici Grignani.

  • Scolari, Massimo. 2015. Oblique Drawing: A History of Anti-Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, George. 1673. Parallelogrammum Prosopographicum. Sive Modus Novus Delineandi per Radios Parallelos ad Aequalitatem Orthographicam, Gestus, Situs, Habitusque Quoscunque Humani Corporis, Servata Symmetria, & Proportione Partium. Philosophical Transactions, 8(96): 6079–6085.

  • Summerson, John. 1990. Wren: Why Architecture?. In The Unromantic Castle, and Other Essays. 63–8. London: Thames and Hudson.

  • Taylor, Eva Germaine Rimington. 1970. The Mathematical Practitioners of Tudor & Stuart England. Cambridge: Institute of Navigation at the University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troili, Giulio. 1653. Prattica del Parallelogrammo. Bologna.

  • Turnbull, Herbert. 1939. James Gregory: Tercentenary Memorial Volume. London: Bell.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wragge-Morley, Alexander. 2010. Restitution, Description and Knowledge in English Architecture and Natural Philosophy, 1650–1750. Architectural Research Quarterly, 14(3), 247–54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1359135510001004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziggelaar, August. 2012. The Impact of the Opticorum Libri Sex. Strabismus, 20(3), 133-138. https://doi.org/10.3109/09273972.2012.709577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ETH, Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5, 8049, Zürich, Switzerland

    Gregorio Astengo

Authors
  1. Gregorio Astengo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gregorio Astengo.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Astengo, G. Parallelogrammum Prosopographicum. Nexus Netw J 22, 735–753 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-020-00497-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-020-00497-x

Keywords

  • Orthographic drawing
  • Prosopographical parallelogram
  • George Sinclair
  • Christoph Scheiner
  • François D’Aguillon
  • Projective geometry