On a Ghost of Historiography past

Author(s): David R. Topper

Source: Leonardo , 1988, Vol. 21, No. 1 (1988), pp. 76-78
Published by: The MIT Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1578420

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Leonardo

This content downloaded from

109.157.117.62 on Mon, 11 Oct 2021 04:53:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 On a Ghost of Historiography Past
David R. Topper

Abstract-Prompted by a recent debate in this journal over Zeitgeist historiography, the author
supports the position of Linda Dalrymple Henderson that only a causal connection between art
and science is a valid methodological position. Drawing on some specific historical case studies,
the author presents several arguments against Zeitgeist historiography.

I. THE GHOST One such principle, which has led to my writing is the recent exchange
many distortions of history, is the Leonardo regarding Linda Dalrymple
No scientist ever walked into a laboratory
nineteenth-century
with a totally blank mind, trusting that concept of a Zeitgeist,Henderson's book The Fourth Dimension
or a 'spirit
'nature' would somehow passively tell its of the times'. Although and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern
secrets. Few experiments have been dominating the historiography of the last Art [5]. I have spoken admiringly of
performed without anticipating the century, the concept of a Zeitgeist still Henderson's work before in this journal;
results (although the results anticipated lingers in the present century, often in particular, I have praised her
are not always achieved). Historiography emerging when links are sought between
investigation of the relationship between
is of a similar nature. Historians do not various elements of culture-such as art art and science in the early years of this
passively peruse documents; they probe and science. Fundamental to the Zeitgeistcentury, for she has exposed the
them, looking for facts-like archaeolo- approach to history is the belief that anotorious myth connecting cubism and
gists digging in predetermined places culture is holistic, each element of that relativity (or Picasso and Einstein) [6].
knowing what they are looking for. Of culture reflecting or expressing its uniqueHenderson replaces the Zeitgeist 'con-
course, anyone may stumble upon an 'spirit'. All aspects of a culture-the nection' between art and science (after
sciences and arts, theology and philo- special relativity was put forward) with a
unexpected discovery. But this is rare; in
general, naive inductivism is a myth. sophy, even history itself-are deemed to causal connection involving a more
be unified by a unique world view, which
Yet even granting the active nature of subtle path through the popularized
human knowing in most endeavors-asomehow apparently penetrates the accounts of four-dimension geometry.
position consistent with a consensus psyches of all humans engaged in these The above-mentioned exchange was
among contemporary epistemologists- enterprises [2]. In his essay In Search of triggered by Arthur Loeb's review of
one is compelled to specify further the Cultural History, E.H. Gombrich makes Henderson's book and involved a defense

limitations entailed in the process. Easily decisive case against this approach.
a by Henderson, a reply by Loeb and
Asserting that the concept as presently
eliminated is the trivial case of purposeful comments by Samuel Edgerton and
deception, fraud or downright lying. used can be traced primarily to Hegel, Arthur C. Danto; at the center of the
There are some celebrated cases of this in Gombrich argues that "this belief in the exchange was the concept of a Zeitgeist.
existence of an independent supra-
science, but fortunately they are few [1].
In this note I do not wish to rehash what

The historiographical analog would beindividual collective spirit" unfortunately transpired in that exchange; rather I want
the distortion of events dictated by has "blocked the emergence of a true to make a few remarks that support
ideological factors; a most egregious cultural history" [3]. Gombrich, never- Henderson's position.
example is the so-called Revisionist theless, admits that One of the key problems accompanying
school which denies the existence of the the Zeitgeist methodology is not only the
belief that cultures are monolithic but-
Holocaust. Of a more subtle type is the obviously there is something in the
Hegelian intuition that nothing in life is and this is a prerequisite for the Zeitgeist
instance of an historian modifying facts ever isolated, that any event and any
to fit a preconceived theory. Of course, all creation of a period is connected by a to operate-that each element of the
historical research involves interpreta- culture
thousand threads with the culture inmust be independently mono-
tion; always an element of fact-fitting is which it is embedded. ... [But] it is one lithic, otherwise the Zeitgeist does not
thing to see the interconnectedness of encompass the culture. This, however, is
involved in the endeavor, a factor
things, another to postulate that all
inherent in the active epistemological aspects of a culture can be traced back patently false. Few periods of art or
process. Nevertheless, there are degrees to one key cause of which they are the science are dominated totally by one style
of interpretation, a less than reasonable manifestations [4]. or theory or viewpoint. There are
case being when the historian disregards virtually always counterviews-Cara-
data (whether consciously or not) which The onus, in other words, is upon the vaggio had Carracci, Newton had
may falsify a preconceived methodo- historian to document the connecting Leibniz. Even in periods seemingly
logical principle. links-if, in fact, any are to be found. dominated by a style, there are counter-
movements; for example, Linda Nochlin,
in an essay on realism in the 1920s and
David R. Topper (educator, art and science II. THE PROBLEM
1930s, points out that despite the
historian), Department of History, University of
Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3B 2E9. In a sense, all that I have said 'vanguard
so far istradition' of non-representa-
by way of preface to some remarks tional art at the time, the realists
I wish
Received 22 July 1986.
constituted
to make on this matter. The catalyst for their own vanguard move-

? 1988 ISAST
Pergamon Journals Ltd.
Printed in Great Britain. LEONARDO, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 76-78, 1988
0024-094X/88 $3.00+0.00

This content downloaded from

109.157.117.62 on Mon, 11 Oct 2021 04:53:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
ment-a fact that makes problematic space' in Renaissance perspective andnature
the of that relationship. Thus, in
"the notion dear to the old-time art Straker's study of Kepler's optics, it is
Euclidean space of the Scientific Revolu-
historian that there is a single style that quite clear that Kepler was transforming
tion. More specifically, the abstract world
'expresses' the world view of a givenof mechanics-the dynamic motionthe of'visualisation' of Diirer from art to
bodies in space-was embodied visually
period" [7]. Nochlin clearly has in mind science; there was no misunderstanding
or distortion.
the 'old-time' Zeitgeist methodology. in various diagrams, with lines, triangles
and curves corresponding to parameters
of motion (namely, distance, velocity and
III. UNCOUPLING ART AND V. A STORY
time). Such diagrams are far removed
SCIENCE
from the drawings of art; in Mahoney's I began by referring to Gombrich's
Even a period as ostensibly holistic words,as "Whatever the mathematician's essay on cultural history as a decisive
the Renaissance may have to be eye is seeing here [in the diagrams], itcritique
has of Zeitgeist historiography. I
reassessed. As an example, I should like should like to end by quoting a story
little to do with new pictorial techniques
to draw the reader's attention to an article for the accurate representation Gombrichof tells of an exchange with
by the historian of science Michael physical S. objects in three-dimensionalanother eminent art historian, Erwin
Mahoney which is directed againstspace. a Panofsky-the discussion taking place
It is the mind's eye that is looking
thesis put forward by Edgerton on here a ..." [11]. Perhaps a link may be about the time that Panofsky was
supposed link between art and science. found between the abstract diagram and working on his well-known essay Gothic
the abstract space of Renaissance
Edgerton's seemingly insightful and Architecture and Scholasticism. To be
methodologically innocent argument was perspective, and hence something may be sure, Panofsky's contribution to icono-
salvaged from Edgerton's thesis. But graphy is beyond dispute; however, the
that the development of linear perspective
in Renaissance art aided in the Scientific meanwhile Mahoney's argument is a rigor underlying his work on symbols was
Revolution by providing a realistic art for strong antidote to the holistic view of relaxed considerably in his analysis of
depicting the many mechanical devices Renaissance art and science [12]. scholastic philosophy and architecture.
crucial to the development of the New More to the point, I would argue that
Science. As Edgerton put it, "what the Panofsky's book is a model of Zeitgeist
IV. COUPLING ART AND SCIENCE
new Renaissance pictorial language historiography. Consider the following
allowed ... was the ability to design Nevertheless, having uncoupled passage:art
machines solely by means of draw- and science on one matter, I would not
ings . .." [8]. The thesis seemed reasonable wish to bridle historians in their search
High Scholastic philosophy ... severely
enough-as if Edgerton had revealed one for legitimate connections in other limited the sanctuary of faith from the
of those obvious (in retrospect) facts matters. For example, in his study of sphere of rational knowledge yet
insisted that the content of this
which all other historians had missed. But Kepler's optics, Stephen Straker has
sanctuary remain clearly discernible.
however convincing the argument may argued convincingly that Diirer's treatise And so did High Gothic architecture
initially seem, it has been seriously on art was the source of Kepler's pinhole delimit interior volume from exterior
questioned by Mahoney. In what seems camera model for the eye and his theory space yet insist that it project itself, as it
to be a searing critique, Mahoney of linear rays of light-both of which were, through the encompassing
structure; so that, for example, the
uncouples the apparent connection initiated the modern theory of optics. cross section of the nave can be read off
between art and science in the Renaissance "[T]here can be no doubt", writes from the facade [16].
by a detailed study of sixteenth- and Straker, that "Diirer's visualisation of
seventeenth-century mechanics and optical problems" was the conceptual
At the least, this is an example of the
mathematics. He makes several points foundation of Kepler's new geometrical
application of the Zeitgeist principle; at
that counter Edgerton's thesis. The optics [13]. This historical connection
most, it may be sophistry. Gombrich, I
engineering draftsmen of the Scientific therefore suggests possible further rela-
tions between art and science in the think, would agree. Here is Gombrich's
Revolution, Mahoney points out, indeed
story:
used the new 'realistic' style, but "neitherScientific Revolution [14].
the things they drew nor the ways they Finally, I should like to underscore the
drew them contributed to revealing thefact that even when historians can I vividly remember a conversation with
working of machines, at least not in the document a connection between art and Erwin Panofsky when I accompanied
him on Cape Cod as he was walking his
sense of a scientific account" [9]. Instead, science, it behooves them to assess the dog in the summer of 1951. He told me
innovation in the science of machines was validity of the relationship. By the latter how puzzled he had been in his student
based upon an abstract approach to the phrase I am referring to the possibility of days by the expression 'Gothic paint-
subject: the "concept of the machine as an an idea, a concept or even a fact being ing'. He could understand the applica-
tion to buildings or decoration, but in
abstract, general system of quantitative distorted as it, so to speak, is transferred
what sense could a painting be Gothic?
parameters linked by mathematic rela- across the interface between art and I summoned my courage and asked
tions ... [was] ever further removed from science. For example, Henderson admits "Do you think that all this really
the physical space the artists had become that most of the artists she studied exists?", to which he replied with an
so adept at depicting" [10]. These adopted four-dimensional geometry uncompromising "yes". Only later I
realized that in his lectures on Gothic
abstract mathematical terms could only merely in a metaphorical manner; Architecture and Scholasticism he had just
be diagrammed, not drawn. Focusing "artists", she writes, "were most often
committed himself to another attempt to
especially on Galileo's development of dealing not with pure science or justify the Hegelian tradition of
mechanics, Mahoney asserts that the so- mathematics but with popular adapta- governing spirits [17].
called new space of Renaissance art had tions (and often misunderstandings)
no relevance to what Galileo accom- thereof' [15]. Historians, therefore, upon If I could add anything to this it would be
plished-contrary to the notion of a
finding relationships between art and that so-called 'Gothic art' itself provides
science,
common origin of the 'rationalization of should probe further into the an excellent example of a contradiction to

Topper, 77
This Ghost of Historiography
content downloaded from Past
109.157.117.62 on Mon, 11 Oct 2021 04:53:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Zeitgeist historiography. I have in mind Edgerton and Arthur C. Danto), watercolor drawings of the moon
those marvelous drolleries found on so Leonardo 19, No. 2, 153-158 (1986). attributed to Galileo reveal that the artist
6. D.R. Topper, "Historical Perspectives relied upon preconceived knowledge of
many Gothic manuscripts. Drawn in a on the Visual Arts, Science and modeling and chiaroscuro in order to
free and spirited hand on the margins of Technology", Leonardo 16, No. 4, 323- 'see' the features of the moon's surface.
manuscripts, drolleries were stylistically 324 (1983). Edgerton assumes the artist to be Galileo
antithetical to the dominant 'Gothic' 7. L. Nochlin, "Return to Order", Art in himself, and thus art aided him in seeing
forms rigidly followed in the centers of America 69, 76 (September 1981). the 'mountains' and 'valleys' on the
8. S.Y. Edgerton, "The Renaissance Artist moon. But recall that Galileo also 'saw'
the pages. Unlike Medieval gargoyles, as Qualifier", in The Perception of lakes and seas; should we blame art for
which in many ways echoed past fears, Pictures, Volume I, M.A. Hagen, ed. this?
drolleries presaged the humanism of the (New York: Academic Press, 1980) pp. 13. S. Straker, "The Eye Made 'Other':
Renaissance. Even Gothic art, so it 179-212. The thesis was repeated (with Diirer, Kepler, and the Mechanization of
modification) in "The Renaissance Light and Vision", in Science, Tech-
seems, was not monolithically 'Gothic'.
Development of the Scientific Illustra- nology, and Culture in Historical Per-
tion", in Science and the Arts in the spective, University of Calgary Studies in
REFERENCES AND NOTES Renaissance, J.W. Shirley and F.D. History, No. 1, L.A. Knafla, M.S. Staum
Hoeniger, eds. (Washington, DC: Folger and T.H.E. Travers, eds. (Calgary:
1. Often cited on this matter is the work of Books, 1985) pp. 168-197. University of Calgary, 1976) pp. 7-25
Gregor Mendel. Frankly, I have never 9. M.S. Mahoney, "Diagrams and Dy- (quotation on p. 8); see also S. Straker,
been comfortable with the assessment namics: Mathematical Perspectives on "Kepler, Tycho, and the 'Optical Part of
that Mendel 'tinkered' with his data. Edgerton's Thesis", in Shirley and Astronomy': The Genesis of Kepler's
Therefore, I am pleased to refer to a Hoeniger [8] pp. 198-220. Theory of Pinhole Images", Archive for
10. Mahoney [9] p. 200.
recent defense of Mendel by Ira Pilgrim, History of Exact Sciences 24, 267-293
"The Too-Good-To-Be-True Paradox 11. Mahoney [9] p. 209. (1981).
and Gregor Mendel", The Journal of
12. Mahoney's critique of Edgerton's thesis 14. Such a relationship is inferred in Svetlana
Heredity 75, 501-502 (1984). does not necessarily imply that Edgerton Alpers's The Art of Describing: Dutch Art
2. I have criticized this approach to supports the Zeitgeist methodology. in the Seventeenth Century (Chicago:
historiography in this journal in my However, some of his remarks in the Univ. of Chicago Press, 1983). In this
column, "Historical Perspectives on the exchange in Leonardo may thus be important book on art and science in the
Visual Arts, Science and Technology", interpreted; for example, Edgerton seventeenth century, she builds upon
Leonardo 15, No. 3, 237 (1982) and 16, speaks of "the current cultural Straker's discovery. Nevertheless, many
No. 4, 323 (1983). 'paradigm' "([5] p. 157). Nevertheless, at of the links she suggests between Kepler's
3. E.H. Gombrich, In Search of Cultural least, Mahoney has uncoupled one facet optics and Dutch art are tenuous at best.
History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969) of an apparent causal link between art15. Henderson [5] p. 153.
p. 36. and science in the Renaissance. Also, 16. E. Panofsky, Gothic Architecture and
4. Gombrich [3] p. 30. mention perhaps should be made of Scholasticism (Cleveland, OH: Meridian
5. Linda Dalrymple Henderson, "On Edgerton's article, "Galileo, Florentine Books, 1957) p. 44.
Artists, Scientists and Historians: A 'Disegno,' and the 'Strange Spottednesse'17. E.H. Gombrich, The Sense of Order: A
Response to Arthur Loeb" (Reply by of the Moon", Art Journal 44, 225-232 Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art
Arthur Loeb, Comments by Samuel (1984), where he argues that a series of (London: Phaidon Press, 1979) p. 199.

78
Topper,This
Ghost of Historiography
content downloaded fromPast
109.157.117.62 on Mon, 11 Oct 2021 04:53:47 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms