Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Henrik Lagerlund

Optics, Latin

  • Yael Kedar
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1151-5_557-1

Abstract

Medieval Latin optics had its sources in Greek and Arab thinkers, including Aristotle, Euclid, Ptolemy, Galen, al-Kindi, Avicenna, and Alhacen. Its prominent scholars had been Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon, John Pecham, Witelo, and Theodoric of Freiburg. The medieval Latins discussed light’s ontological status and whether its mode of existence in the medium is spiritual or material. They adopted from Alhacen the model of radiation from individual point-sources and the idea of spherical propagation, thereby opening their account to radial analysis. Grosseteste identified light with the first corporeal form, which inserts dimensions onto matter, and Bacon developed the theory of multiplication of species, of which the activity of light was the observable instance. Light thus became the key to the workings of natural causality. The perspectivists formulated optical laws and applied them in explanations of natural phenomena such as the rainbow, pinhole images, and in their account of sight. They debated about the direction of the visual cone and subjected the eye to geometrical analysis. They explained sight as caused by the perpendicular species, since they are the shortest and therefore the strongest. Upon entering the eye, perpendicular rays pass through the cornea, refract at the rear surface of the crystalline lens, and project through the opening of the optic nerve. Sight perceives light and color directly, and twenty more visual qualities through complex processes of comparison, concept-formation, and reasoning. Attention was given to the various faculties of the brain – such as imagination and memory – and their role in processing visual information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

  1. Albert the Great. (1968). De anima. In Alberti Magni Opera omnia (ed.: Stroick, C., Vol. VII, pars I). Munster: Aschendorff.Google Scholar
  2. Albert the Great. (1978). De sensu et sensato (ed. and trans: Akdogan, K.). Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  3. Albert the Great. (2004). Über den Menschen (De homine) (trans: Anzulewicz, H., and Söder, R. J.). Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Alhacen. (1989). The optics of Ibn al-Haytham, Books I–III, On Direct Vision (ed. and trans: Sabra, A. I.). London: Warburg Institute.Google Scholar
  5. Alhacen. (2001). De Aspectibus, 2 vols (ed. and trans: Smith, A. M.). Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
  6. Bacon, R. (1983). De multiplicatione specierum and De speculis comburentibus (ed. and trans: Lindberg, D. C.). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  7. Bacon, R. (1996). Perspectiva (ed. and trans: Lindberg, D. C.). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  8. Blaise de Parme. (2009). Questiones super perspectiva communi (eds.: Biard, J., et al.). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  9. Blund, I. (1970). Tractatus de Anima (eds.: Callus, D., & Hunt, R. W.). London: Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Grosseteste, R. (1912a). De lineis angulis et figuris (ed.: Baur, L., pp. 59–60). Münster: Aschendorff.Google Scholar
  11. Grosseteste, R. (1912b). De iride (ed.: Baur, L., pp. 72–78). Münster: Aschendorff.Google Scholar
  12. Grosseteste, R. (1982). Hexaemeron (eds.: Dales, R. C. & Gieben, S.). Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi, 6. London: The British Academy.Google Scholar
  13. Grosseteste, R. (2013). De Luce (A critical edition) (ed.: Panti, C.). In J. Flood, et al. (Ed.), Robert Grosseteste and his intellectual milieu (pp. 219–238). Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
  14. Oresme, N. (1974). Questiones super quatuor libros meteororum (ed. and trans: McCluskey, S. C.). Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  15. Oresme, N. (2007). De visione stellarum (On seeing the stars) (ed. and trans: Burton, D.). Leiden/Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
  16. Pecham, J. (1970). Perspectiva communis (ed.: Lindberg, D. C.). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  17. Pecham, J. (1972). Tractatus de perspectiva (ed. and trans: Lindberg, D. C.). St. Bonaventurs: Franciscan Institute Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Pecham, J. (1978). Tractatus de sphera (ed.: MacLaren, B. R.). Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
  19. Theodoric of Freiberg. (1985). Tractatus de iride et de radialibus impressionibus (eds.: Sturlese, L., & Pagnoni-Sturlese, M. R., pp. 95–286). In Corpus Philosophorum Teutonicorum Medii Aevi, II, 4.Google Scholar
  20. Witelo. (1977). Witelonis Perspectivae Liber Primus: Book I of Witelo Perspectiva (ed. and trans: Unguru, S.). Studia Copernicana, Vol. XV. Warsaw: The Polish Academy of Science Press.Google Scholar
  21. Witelo. (1983). Witelonis Perspectivae Liber Quintus: Books V of Witelo’s Perspectiva (ed. and trans: Smith, M. A.). Warsaw: The Polish Academy of Science Press.Google Scholar
  22. Witelo. (1991). Witelonis Perspectivae Libri Duo – Liber Secundus et Liber Tertius: Books II and III of Witelo’s Perspectiva (ed. and trans: Unguru, S.). Studia Copernicana, Vol. XXVII. Warsaw: The Polish Academy of Science Press.Google Scholar
  23. Witelo. (2003). Witelonis Perspectivae Liber Quartus: Book IV of Witelo’s Perspectiva (ed. and trans: Kelso, C. J.). University of Missouri-Columbia.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. Crombie, A. C. (1953). Robert Grossetetste and the origins of experimental science, 1100–1700. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Demange, D. (2016). Olivi et les Perspectivi. Les sources de la théorie olivienne de la vision. Oliviana, 5. http://oliviana.revues.org/850.
  3. Hasse, D. N. (2000). Avicenna’s De anima in the Latin West – The formation of a peripatetic philosophy of the soul, 1160–1300 (Warburg Institute studies and texts, 1). London/Turin: The Warburg Institute – Nino Aragno Editore.Google Scholar
  4. Kedar, Y. & Hon, G. (2017). Roger Bacon (c. 1220–1292) and his system of laws of nature: classification, hierarchy and significance. Perspectives on Science 25(6), 719–745.Google Scholar
  5. Lindberg, D. C. (1966). Roger Bacon’s theory of the rainbow: Progress or regress. Isis, 57, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lindberg, D. C. (1968). The theory of pinhole images from Antiquity to the thirteenth century. Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 5(2), 154–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lindberg, D. C. (1970). The theory of pinhole images in the fourteenth century. Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 6(4), 299–325.Google Scholar
  8. Lindberg, D. C. (1976). Theories of vision from al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Lindberg, D. C. (1978). Medieval Latin theories of the speed of light. Roemer et la vitesse de la lumiere (CNRS, collection d’histoire des sciences, 3, pp. 45–72). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  10. Lindberg, D. C., & Tachau, K. H. (2013). The science of light and color, seeing and knowing. In D. C. Lindberg & M. H. Shank (Eds.), The Cambridge history of science (Medieval science, Vol. 2, pp. 485–511). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. McEvoy, J. (1982). The philosophy of Robert Grosseteste. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Raizman-Kedar, Y. (2006). Plotinus’s conception of unity and multiplicity as the root to the medieval distinction between lux and lumen. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37, 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Raizman-Kedar, Y. (2009). The intellect naturalized: Roger Bacon on the existence of corporeal species within the intellect. Early Science and Medicine, 14, 131–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smith, A. M. (1981). Getting the big picture in perspectivist optics. Isis, 72, 568–589. Reprinted from Shank, M. H. (Ed.). (2000). The scientific enterprise in antiquity and the Middle Ages (pp. 315–336). Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Smith, A. M. (2001). Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
  16. Smith, A. M. (2015). From sight to light – The passage from ancient to modern optics. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Tachau, K. (1988). Vision and certitude in the age of Ockham – Optics, epistemology and the foundations of semantics, 1250–1345. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  18. Ver Eecke, P. (1959). Euclide L’Optique et la catoptrique. Paris: Blanchard.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yael Kedar
    • 1
  1. 1.Multidisciplinary StudiesTel-Hai College and the University of HaifaKiryat ShmonaIsrael