by Rene Roy
preparations for injections and preservations in wax casts or organs in jars. These highly
illustrated publications have played an important role in training students, future surgeons
and midwifes.17 In Chapters 9–11, I will describe how atlases of galaxies have fulfilled a
similar role for astronomers.
More broadly, several of the most famous artists of world art history have produced sub-
lime works illustrating nature. Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) and Rembrandt van Rijn
(1606–1669) were among the greatest illustrators of natural scenes. They gave to the art of
scientific drawing its lettres de noblesse. Beyond their artistic value and technical achieve-
ment, sketches and drawings have played a profound epistemological role.
Finally, illustrations are the visual tool to convey the reality of what has been observed.
Images allowed the test of independent verification or reproducibility by other observers. In
earth sciences, drawings and illustrations were a guarantee that the researchers themselves
had been in the field. “A savant had to show that he had indeed seen these features with his
own eyes, that he had been there and studied them for himself, before he could establish any
credibility or authority to pronounce on their scientific explanation.”18 This was particularly
true for the geologists, volcanologists and naturalists of the nineteenth century, such as
Charles Lyell, Louis Agassiz and Charles Darwin (Fig. 2.2).19
Drawing Celestial Objects
Astronomy has its own challenge. The technical set-up and atmospheric conditions under
which astronomical observations are conducted are highly important and affect what is
viewed. The faintness of most celestial objects has always required the use of the finest
instruments with large collecting light power. In spite of using the best instruments, “neb-
ulae” appeared fuzzy, featureless and colourless. The temperamental nature of the atmo-
sphere easily blurred or extinguished the images seen through the eyepiece. If astronomical
16 L. Daston and P. Galison, Objectivity, New York: Zone Books, 2007, pp. 69–82.
17 There is an extensive discussion of atlases of anatomy in L. Daston and P. Galison, The Image of Objectivity, Representations, No. 40, Special Issue: Seeing Science (Autumn, 1992), Berkeley: University of California Press: pp. 81–128.
18 M. J. S. Rudwick, Bursting the Limits of Time: The Reconstruction of Geohistory in the Age of Revolution, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005, p. 42.
19 C. Lyell, Principles of Geology, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1872.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
2. Portraying Cosmic Whirlpools
39
Fig. 2.2 View looking up the Val del Bove, Etna. In November, 1828, Charles Lyell made the draw-
ing on which the engraving is based. From Lyell (1830–1833), Principles of Geology. Courtesy of
Bibliothèque, Université Laval.
sketching followed a rather conservative development, it was considered for a long time far
superior to what early photography could deliver.
In the pre-telescopic age, drawings of celestial objects dealt mainly with bright objects
such as the Moon, comets, meteor showers or various asterisms. On a grand scale of visual
representation, several splendid atlases of the sky with stars superimposed on the mytho-
logical figures of constellations were produced: for example, the superb Uranometria of
the German lawyer and celestial cartographer Johannes Bayer (1572–1625) in 1603. Dan-
ish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546–1601) ran his own press at Uraniborg and he illustrated
his books very well. Brahe’s famous figure of the stella nova depicting the great supernova
of 1572 in the constellation of Cassiopeia continues to be used by modern astronomers.20
In Sidereus Nuncius of 1610, Galileo Galilei presented several drawings of asterisms, or
remarkable groupings of stars. Notable is Galileo’s sketch of stars in the belt and sword of
the Orion constellation, where he distinguished stars visible with the naked eye and those
seen only with the aid of his telescope.
Indeed, with the advent of the telescope, things changed dramatically by allowing views
of a multitude of new objects. Sketching became essential to report and communicate the
“new worlds.” Words and written descriptors were not sufficient. As reproducibility by dif-
ferent observers was an important component of the verification process, drawing became
20 Tycho Brahe, Astronomae Instauratae Progymnasmata, Frankfurt, 1610.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
40
Part I – Images and the Cosmos
an essential tool.21 However, the faintness of many of the objects under study and the tur-
bulent atmosphere remained continuous challenges.
Studied with the telescope, the Moon was an instant favorite for sketching and graphic
reporting. Within months of each other, English astronomer Thomas Harriot and Galileo
made the first known drawings of the Moon as viewed through low-magnification tele-
scopes. Harriot is considered to be the first to have observed the Moon through a telescope
as per his drawings executed on 26 July 1609, around 0900 hrs. As the number of telescopes
and users grew, our natural satellite was mapped in its entirety during the first few decades
of the seventeenth century.
Mapping and drawing of the Moon culminated with the publication of Selenographia,
sive Lunae description, in 1647; this supreme work was the milestone achievement of
Danzig mayor and master brewer Johannes Hevelius (1611–1687). For this formative work,
Hevelius has been called the founder of lunar topography. With telescopes improving over
the next two centuries, drawings of the Moon continued to be valued. Lunar drawings even
became the indicator of the power and quality of any new instrument. A climax was reached
when Scottish astronomer and engineer James Hall Nasmyth (1808–1890) presented his
drawings of the Moon “to educate the eye” at the 1851 Great Exhibition in London where
he received a gold medal.22
In 1659, Dutch astronomer and physicist Christiaan Huygens (1629–1695) published his
highly illustrated book, Systema Saturnium. In this work, Huygens summarized his research
on Saturn, its system of rings and its satellite, Titan, which he had discovered in 1655. The
sketching work was very well presented and emphasized Huygens’ interpretation of the
nature of the rings. The book became the definitive work about the saturnian world, in part
because of the extent and quality of its illustrations.
Drawing the Dazzling Sun
The Sun is bright and, for early observers, its surface showed interesting features such as
sunspots and faculae (see Fig. 0.8). As these features appeared and dissolved with time,
tracking their changes became the driver for daily sketching of the solar surface. Harriot,
Galileo, German Jesuit astronomer Christopher Scheiner (1573–1650), Frisian/German
astronomer Johannes Fabricius (1587–1616) and several observers took turns at mapping
the solar surface and its transient sunspots. Astonishingly, early observers used no eye pro-
tection of any sort. Quickly peeping at the blinding image of the Sun, they got glimpses of
its dazzling surface. Thankfully, the much safer and more reliable technique of projectin
g
the solar image, introduced by Scheiner, was adopted.
The discussion of the nature of sunspots led to an interesting and controversial exchange
between Galileo and Scheiner. Galileo was promoting an explanation that sunspots were
21 S. Schaffer, On Astronomical Drawing, in Picturing Science, Producing Art, C. A. Jones and P. Galison (editors), New York: Routledge, 1998, pp. 441–474.
22 J. North, Cosmos: An Illustrated History of Astronomy and Cosmology, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008, p. 489.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
2. Portraying Cosmic Whirlpools
41
Fig. 2.3 Drawing of the large 1859 sunspot group. The white light flare is indicated as A, B, C and
D, features that evolved over minutes but were caught by astronomer Richard Carrington. From Car-
rington (1859), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
truly part of the surface of the Sun. Scheiner, anonymously hiding under the pseudonym
Apelles, claimed for some time that they were satellites around the Sun. The observations
and sketches of the Sun were the main themes of the first astronomy book on the Sun pub-
lished in Italian and Latin in 1613 (see Fig. 0.8).23 The book presented numerous sketches
of the solar surface; for example, the evolution of the solar surface and its spectacular dis-
play of sunspots can be followed over several weeks of the month of June 1612 (Fig. 0.8).
The features sketched are very familiar to a modern observer of the Sun.24
Some of the historical solar drawings have been used to reconstruct the historical record
of solar activity. Interesting or new solar phenomena were discovered and recorded with
the aid of drawings. German astronomer Wilhelm Tempel (1821–1889) made a drawing of
the solar corona during the eclipse of 18 July 1860. By coincidence, it captured a coronal
mass ejection in progress, a phenomenon that we recognize today as most important for
space weather and solar–terrestrial interactions. On 1 September 1859, British astronomer
Richard Carrington observed an intense solar flare in white light; the rare event lasted only
five minutes, but he made an accurate drawing of it (Fig. 2.3).25 Carrington, “the last serious
23 On Sunspots: Galileo Galilei & Christoph Scheiner, Translated and introduced by E. Reeves and A. van Helden, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
24 H. Bredekamp, Galilei Der Künstler: Der Mond, Die Sonne, Die Hand, Berlin: Walter De Gruyter Inc., 2009.
25 R. Carrington, Description of a Singular Appearance Seen in the Sun on September 1, 1859, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 1859, Vol. 20, pp. 13–15.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
42
Part I – Images and the Cosmos
and most tragic of grand amateur astronomers,” had discovered solar flares.26 He accurately
sketched this particular event; it was so powerful that it appeared as an unusual imprint, a
sharp localized harsh brightening of the solar photosphere. He correctly related the solar
event to the powerful magnetic storm that hit the Earth 16 or 17 hours later. Reporting on
Carrington’s observation, the Royal Astronomical Society commentator cautiously stated:
“While the contemporary occurrence may deserve noting, he [Carrington] would not have it
supposed that he even leans towards hastily connecting them. ‘One swallow does not make
a summer’.” However, Carrington had recorded the right “swallow.” We know that major
geomagnetic storms are triggered by solar flares.
Drawing Sidereal Condensations and “Nebulae”
Until the beginning of the twentieth century, “nebulae” were a mixed bag of objects and no
one made a distinction between local fluorescent gas clouds, objects members of the Milky
Way, and the giant external stellar systems, the “island-universes” known today as galaxies.
Even poorly resolved star clusters were called “nebulae.” Drawing, sketching and portray-
ing of “nebulae” became the vogue. However contrary to the Moon or the Sun, “nebulae”
turned out to be frustratingly difficult objects to draw.
The first known (and preserved) drawing of a nebula is attributed to Giovanni Batista
Hodierna (1597–1660) for his sketch of the Orion Nebula, a nearby gas cloud made fluores-
cent by ultraviolet light from a few very luminous embedded young stars. A self-educated
mason and shoemaker, Hodierna had become a priest and an astronomer. An enthusiastic
supporter of Galileo, he studied nebulous objects, noting differences between comets and
“nebulae.” He surmised that comets were made of terrestrial matter, while “nebulae” were
made up of stars. He listed and described 40 objects that appeared nebulous to the naked
eye but resolved into stars with the aid of the telescope. He used the degree of resolvability
to classify “nebulae.” French astronomer Guillaume Jean-Baptiste Le Gentil (1725–1792)
is also attributed an early sketch of the Orion Nebula.
As we saw in the previous chapter, French astronomer Charles Messier (1730–1817) was
mainly interested in comets. Nevertheless, Messier made several drawings: among his most
famous are those of Messier 31/32/110 (the Andromeda Galaxy and its two companions)
and of Messier 42 (the Orion Nebula). The first trio of objects are now recognized as genuine
galaxies while the latter is the archetype of star-forming regions.
At the end of his 1811 summary paper on the thousands of “nebulae” and star clusters
that he recorded with Caroline, William Herschel showed two plates with engraving of
“nebulae,” illustrating their multiple shapes and degrees of condensation (Fig. 2.4).27 The
illustrated “nebulae” are a mixed bag and are drawn as blurry patches, some with appen-
dices. Our modern eye, trained by photography and a better knowledge of the range of
26 A. Chapman, The Victorian Amateur Astronomers, Independent Astronomical Research Astronomy in Britain 1820–1920, Chichester: Wiley, 1998. pp. 40–41.
27 W. Herschel, Astronomical Observations Relating to the Construction of the Heavens, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1811, Vol. 101, pp. 269–336.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
2. Portraying Cosmic Whirlpools
43
Fig. 2.4 Drawings of several “nebulae” by astronomer William Herschel, one of two plates he pub-
lished in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (1811). Courtesy of Omar
W. Nasim.
13:59:04, subject to the Cambridge Core
.004
44
Part I – Images and the Cosmos
objects, does recognize the different types of “nebulae”: the true nebulae as luminescent
gases of star-forming regions or the planetary nebulae of dying stars, or the more regularly
shaped extragalactic “nebulae,” or galaxies. Herschel proposed an interpretation of the neb-
ular shapes using the conceptual frameworks of Isaac Newton’s law of gravitation and the
Nebular Hypothesis. The gravitational force, he surmised, determines the shape and the
degree of condensation. Herschel even speculated that comets might be the most advanced
stage of nebular condensation.
The advent of several telescopes boosted interest in nebulous objects. “Gradually, neb-
ula hunting was becoming a pursuit of its own right, althoug
h for long it was held in less
esteem than comet hunting.”28 As the nineteenth century moved forward, imaging “neb-
ulae” became an art and a science as waves of astronomers attempted to catch the elu-
sive and diaphanous shapes. These efforts have been discussed and analyzed in depth by
Omar W. Nasim in a superbly illustrated monograph presenting the works of several emi-
nent observers: John Herschel, Samuel Hunter, Ebenezer Mason, William Lassell, Wilhelm
Tempel and those of the Third Earl of Rosse’s team.29 Although astronomers drawing “neb-
ulae” were completely ignorant or incorrectly conceived their nature, they managed to pic-
ture the objects reasonably well most of the time. The reproducibility by drawings of the
same object by different observers remained questionable and some sketches are impossible
to relate to the objects captured by modern photographs. Nevertheless, overall, in answer to
the question of the beginning of this chapter, it can be said that it is possible to draw objects
without a clue of what they are. A most dramatic example is the engraving of the great
nebula in Orion by the Fourth Earl of Rosse.30 When compared to a fine black-and-white
modern photograph, the precision of the details and overall shape seen in the drawings are
stunningly similar.
William Parsons and the Leviathan
The systematic use of drawings as faithful representations of “nebulae” observed through
telescopes enjoyed a significant boost with the work of the Third Earl of Rosse, William
Parsons (Fig. 2.5) and his team of skillful observers at Birr Castle, Ireland.
For a time a member of Parliament, Parsons ran one of the most ambitious and origi-
nal scientific enterprises of the nineteenth century.31 Well endowed through marriage with
family land and fortune, Parsons leveraged these assets to realize and empower his pas-
sion for astronomy. His wife Mary Field, Countess of Rosse (1813–1885), a fine pio-
neer photographer herself, wholeheartedly supported her husband’s astronomical projects.
“Mary was an intellectual young woman, perhaps no great beauty, as she appears thin and
28 J. North, Cosmos: An Illustrated History of Astronomy and Cosmology, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008, p. 443.
29 O. W. Nasim, Observing by Hand: Sketching the Nebulae in the Nineteenth Century, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013.
