The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci
The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci PREFACE.INTRODUCTION.II.PERSPECTIVE.III.FIRST BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.SECOND BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.THIRD BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.FOURTH BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.FIFTH BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.SIXTH BOOK ON LIGHT AND SHADE.IV.V.WHAT PORTION OF A COLOURED SURFACE OUGHT IN REASON TO BE THE MOST INTENSE.VI.VII.VIII.A DESCRIPTION OF THE ELM.IX.I.II.III.IV.V.VI.VII._X.XI.XII._XIII.I.II.III.IV.V.XIV.I.II.III.XVI.II.III._XVI.I.I.II.III.IV.V.VI.VII.XVII.I.CANAL.II.III.IV.XVIII.XIX.I.II.III.XX.I.II.III.IV.V.XXI.XXII.Copyright
The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci
Leonardo Da Vinci
PREFACE.
A singular fatality has ruled the destiny of nearly all the
most famous of Leonardo da Vinci's works. Two of the three most
important were never completed, obstacles having arisen during his
life-time, which obliged him to leave them unfinished; namely the
Sforza Monument and the Wall-painting of the Battle of Anghiari,
while the third—the picture of the Last Supper at Milan—has
suffered irremediable injury from decay and the repeated
restorations to which it was recklessly subjected during the XVIIth
and XVIIIth centuries. Nevertheless, no other picture of the
Renaissance has become so wellknown and popular through copies of
every description.Vasari says, and rightly, in his Life of Leonardo, "that he
laboured much more by his word than in fact or by deed", and the
biographer evidently had in his mind the numerous works in
Manuscript which have been preserved to this day. To us, now, it
seems almost inexplicable that these valuable and interesting
original texts should have remained so long unpublished, and indeed
forgotten. It is certain that during the XVIth and XVIIth centuries
their exceptional value was highly appreciated. This is proved not
merely by the prices which they commanded, but also by the
exceptional interest which has been attached to the change of
ownership of merely a few pages of Manuscript.That, notwithstanding this eagerness to possess the
Manuscripts, their contents remained a mystery, can only be
accounted for by the many and great difficulties attending the task
of deciphering them. The handwriting is so peculiar that it
requires considerable practice to read even a few detached phrases,
much more to solve with any certainty the numerous difficulties of
alternative readings, and to master the sense as a connected whole.
Vasari observes with reference to Leonardos writing: "he wrote
backwards, in rude characters, and with the left hand, so that any
one who is not practised in reading them, cannot understand them".
The aid of a mirror in reading reversed handwriting appears to me
available only for a first experimental reading. Speaking from my
own experience, the persistent use of it is too fatiguing and
inconvenient to be practically advisable, considering the enormous
mass of Manuscripts to be deciphered. And as, after all, Leonardo's
handwriting runs backwards just as all Oriental character runs
backwards—that is to say from right to left—the difficulty of
reading direct from the writing is not insuperable. This obvious
peculiarity in the writing is not, however, by any means the only
obstacle in the way of mastering the text. Leonardo made use of an
orthography peculiar to himself; he had a fashion of amalgamating
several short words into one long one, or, again, he would quite
arbitrarily divide a long word into two separate halves; added to
this there is no punctuation whatever to regulate the division and
construction of the sentences, nor are there any accents—and the
reader may imagine that such difficulties were almost sufficient to
make the task seem a desperate one to a beginner. It is therefore
not surprising that the good intentions of some of Leonardo s most
reverent admirers should have failed.Leonardos literary labours in various departments both of Art
and of Science were those essentially of an enquirer, hence the
analytical method is that which he employs in arguing out his
investigations and dissertations. The vast structure of his
scientific theories is consequently built up of numerous separate
researches, and it is much to be lamented that he should never have
collated and arranged them. His love for detailed research—as it
seems to me—was the reason that in almost all the Manuscripts, the
different paragraphs appear to us to be in utter confusion; on one
and the same page, observations on the most dissimilar subjects
follow each other without any connection. A page, for instance,
will begin with some principles of astronomy, or the motion of the
earth; then come the laws of sound, and finally some precepts as to
colour. Another page will begin with his investigations on the
structure of the intestines, and end with philosophical remarks as
to the relations of poetry to painting; and so forth.Leonardo himself lamented this confusion, and for that reason
I do not think that the publication of the texts in the order in
which they occur in the originals would at all fulfil his
intentions. No reader could find his way through such a labyrinth;
Leonardo himself could not have done it.Added to this, more than half of the five thousand manuscript
pages which now remain to us, are written on loose leaves, and at
present arranged in a manner which has no justification beyond the
fancy of the collector who first brought them together to make
volumes of more or less extent. Nay, even in the volumes, the pages
of which were numbered by Leonardo himself, their order, so far as
the connection of the texts was concerned, was obviously a matter
of indifference to him. The only point he seems to have kept in
view, when first writing down his notes, was that each observation
should be complete to the end on the page on which it was begun.
The exceptions to this rule are extremely few, and it is certainly
noteworthy that we find in such cases, in bound volumes with his
numbered pages, the written observations: "turn over", "This is the
continuation of the previous page", and the like. Is not this
sufficient to prove that it was only in quite exceptional cases
that the writer intended the consecutive pages to remain connected,
when he should, at last, carry out the often planned arrangement of
his writings?What this final arrangement was to be, Leonardo has in most
cases indicated with considerable completeness. In other cases this
authoritative clue is wanting, but the difficulties arising from
this are not insuperable; for, as the subject of the separate
paragraphs is always distinct and well defined in itself, it is
quite possible to construct a well-planned whole, out of the
scattered materials of his scientific system, and I may venture to
state that I have devoted especial care and thought to the due
execution of this responsible task.The beginning of Leonardo's literary labours dates from about
his thirty-seventh year, and he seems to have carried them on
without any serious interruption till his death. Thus the
Manuscripts that remain represent a period of about thirty years.
Within this space of time his handwriting altered so little that it
is impossible to judge from it of the date of any particular text.
The exact dates, indeed, can only be assigned to certain note-books
in which the year is incidentally indicated, and in which the order
of the leaves has not been altered since Leonardo used them. The
assistance these afford for a chronological arrangement of the
Manuscripts is generally self evident. By this clue I have assigned
to the original Manuscripts now scattered through England, Italy
and France, the order of their production, as in many matters of
detail it is highly important to be able to verify the time and
place at which certain observations were made and registered. For
this purpose the Bibliography of the Manuscripts given at the end
of Vol. II, may be regarded as an Index, not far short of complete,
of all Leonardo s literary works now extant. The consecutive
numbers (from 1 to 1566) at the head of each passage in this work,
indicate their logical sequence with reference to the subjects;
while the letters and figures to the left of each paragraph refer
to the original Manuscript and number of the page, on which that
particular passage is to be found. Thus the reader, by referring to
the List of Manuscripts at the beginning of Volume I, and to the
Bibliography at the end of Volume II, can, in every instance,
easily ascertain, not merely the period to which the passage
belongs, but also exactly where it stood in the original document.
Thus, too, by following the sequence of the numbers in the
Bibliographical index, the reader may reconstruct the original
order of the Manuscripts and recompose the various texts to be
found on the original sheets—so much of it, that is to say, as by
its subject-matter came within the scope of this work. It may,
however, be here observed that Leonardo s Manuscripts contain,
besides the passages here printed, a great number of notes and
dissertations on Mechanics, Physics, and some other subjects, many
of which could only be satisfactorily dealt with by specialists. I
have given as complete a review of these writings as seemed
necessary in the Bibliographical notes.In 1651, Raphael Trichet Dufresne, of Paris, published a
selection from Leonardo's writings on painting, and this treatise
became so popular that it has since been reprinted about
two-and-twenty times, and in six different languages. But none of
these editions were derived from the original texts, which were
supposed to have been lost, but from early copies, in which
Leonardo's text had been more or less mutilated, and which were all
fragmentary. The oldest and on the whole the best copy of
Leonardo's essays and precepts on Painting is in the Vatican
Library; this has been twice printed, first by Manzi, in 1817, and
secondly by Ludwig, in 1882. Still, this ancient copy, and the
published editions of it, contain much for which it would be rash
to hold Leonardo responsible, and some portions—such as the very
important rules for the proportions of the human figure—are wholly
wanting; on the other hand they contain passages which, if they are
genuine, cannot now be verified from any original Manuscript
extant. These copies, at any rate neither give us the original
order of the texts, as written by Leonardo, nor do they afford any
substitute, by connecting them on a rational scheme; indeed, in
their chaotic confusion they are anything rather than satisfactory
reading. The fault, no doubt, rests with the compiler of the
Vatican copy, which would seem to be the source whence all the
published and extensively known texts were derived; for, instead of
arranging the passages himself, he was satisfied with recording a
suggestion for a final arrangement of them into eight distinct
parts, without attempting to carry out his scheme. Under the
mistaken idea that this plan of distribution might be that, not of
the compiler, but of Leonardo himself, the various editors, down to
the present day, have very injudiciously continued to adopt this
order—or rather disorder.I, like other enquirers, had given up the original Manuscript
of the Trattato della Pittura for lost, till, in the beginning of
1880, I was enabled, by the liberality of Lord Ashburnham, to
inspect his Manuscripts, and was so happy as to discover among them
the original text of the best-known portion of the Trattato in his
magnificent library at Ashburnham Place. Though this discovery was
of a fragment only—but a considerable fragment—inciting me to
further search, it gave the key to the mystery which had so long
enveloped the first origin of all the known copies of the Trattato.
The extensive researches I was subsequently enabled to prosecute,
and the results of which are combined in this work, were only
rendered possible by the unrestricted permission granted me to
investigate all the Manuscripts by Leonardo dispersed throughout
Europe, and to reproduce the highly important original sketches
they contain, by the process of "photogravure". Her Majesty the
Queen graciously accorded me special permission to copy for
publication the Manuscripts at the Royal Library at Windsor. The
Commission Centrale Administrative de l'Institut de France, Paris,
gave me, in the most liberal manner, in answer to an application
from Sir Frederic Leighton, P. R. A., Corresponding member of the
Institut, free permission to work for several months in their
private collection at deciphering the Manuscripts preserved there.
The same favour which Lord Ashburnham had already granted me was
extended to me by the Earl of Leicester, the Marchese Trivulsi, and
the Curators of the Ambrosian Library at Milan, by the Conte
Manzoni at Rome and by other private owners of Manuscripts of
Leonardo's; as also by the Directors of the Louvre at Paris; the
Accademia at Venice; the Uffizi at Florence; the Royal Library at
Turin; and the British Museum, and the South Kensington Museum. I
am also greatly indebted to the Librarians of these various
collections for much assistance in my labours; and more
particularly to Monsieur Louis Lalanne, of the Institut de France,
the Abbate Ceriani, of the Ambrosian Library, Mr. Maude Thompson,
Keeper of Manuscripts at the British Museum, Mr. Holmes, the Queens
Librarian at Windsor, the Revd Vere Bayne, Librarian of Christ
Church College at Oxford, and the Revd A. Napier, Librarian to the
Earl of Leicester at Holkham Hall.In correcting the Italian text for the press, I have had the
advantage of valuable advice from the Commendatore Giov. Morelli,
Senatore del Regno, and from Signor Gustavo Frizzoni, of Milan. The
translation, under many difficulties, of the Italian text into
English, is mainly due to Mrs. R. C. Bell; while the rendering of
several of the most puzzling and important passages, particularly
in the second half of Vol. I, I owe to the indefatigable interest
taken in this work by Mr. E. J. Poynter R. A. Finally I must
express my thanks to Mr. Alfred Marks, of Long Ditton, who has most
kindly assisted me throughout in the revision of the proof
sheets.The notes and dissertations on the texts on Architecture in
Vol. III owe to my friend Baron Henri de Geymuller, of
Paris.I may further mention with regard to the illustrations, that
the negatives for the production of the "photo-gravures" by
Monsieur Dujardin of Paris were all taken direct from the
originals.It is scarcely necessary to add that most of the drawings
here reproduced in facsimile have never been published before. As I
am now, on the termination of a work of several years' duration, in
a position to review the general tenour of Leonardos writings, I
may perhaps be permitted to add a word as to my own estimate of the
value of their contents. I have already shown that it is due to
nothing but a fortuitous succession of unfortunate circumstances,
that we should not, long since, have known Leonardo, not merely as
a Painter, but as an Author, a Philosopher, and a Naturalist. There
can be no doubt that in more than one department his principles and
discoveries were infinitely more in accord with the teachings of
modern science, than with the views of his contemporaries. For this
reason his extraordinary gifts and merits are far more likely to be
appreciated in our own time than they could have been during the
preceding centuries. He has been unjustly accused of having
squandered his powers, by beginning a variety of studies and then,
having hardly begun, throwing them aside. The truth is that the
labours of three centuries have hardly sufficed for the elucidation
of some of the problems which occupied his mighty
mind.Alexander von Humboldt has borne witness that "he was the
first to start on the road towards the point where all the
impressions of our senses converge in the idea of the Unity of
Nature" Nay, yet more may be said. The very words which are
inscribed on the monument of Alexander von Humboldt himself, at
Berlin, are perhaps the most appropriate in which we can sum up our
estimate of Leonardo's genius:"Majestati naturae par ingenium."1.How by a certain machine many may stay some time under water.
And how and wherefore I do not describe my method of remaining
under water and how long I can remain without eating. And I do not
publish nor divulge these, by reason of the evil nature of men, who
would use them for assassinations at the bottom of the sea by
destroying ships, and sinking them, together with the men in them.
Nevertheless I will impart others, which are not dangerous because
the mouth of the tube through which you breathe is above the water,
supported on air sacks or cork.[Footnote: The leaf on which this passage is written, is
headed with the wordsCasi39,
and most of these cases begin with the word 'Come', like the two here given, which
are the 26th and 27th. 7.Sughero. In the Codex Antlanticus 377a; 1170a there is a sketch,
drawn with the pen, representing a man with a tube in his mouth,
and at the farther end of the tube a disk. By the tube the word
'Channa' is written, and by
the disk the word 'sughero'.]The preparation of the MSS. for publication.2.When you put together the science of the motions of water,
remember to include under each proposition its application and use,
in order that this science may not be useless.—[Footnote: A comparatively small portion of Leonardo's notes
on water-power was published at Bologna in 1828, under the title:
"Del moto e misura dell'Acqua, di L. da
Vinci".]Admonition to readers.3.Let no man who is not a Mathematician read the elements of my
work.The disorder in the MSS.4.Begun at Florence, in the house of Piero di Braccio Martelli,
on the 22nd day of March 1508. And this is to be a collection
without order, taken from many papers which I have copied here,
hoping to arrange them later each in its place, according to the
subjects of which they may treat. But I believe that before I am at
the end of this [task] I shall have to repeat the same things
several times; for which, O reader! do not blame me, for the
subjects are many and memory cannot retain them [all] and say: 'I
will not write this because I wrote it before.' And if I wished to
avoid falling into this fault, it would be necessary in every case
when I wanted to copy [a passage] that, not to repeat myself, I
should read over all that had gone before; and all the more since
the intervals are long between one time of writing and the
next.[Footnote: 1. In the history of Florence in the early part of
the XVIth centuryPiero di Braccio
Martelliis frequently mentioned asCommissario della Signoria. He was
famous for his learning and at his death left four books on
Mathematics ready for the press; comp. LITTA,Famiglie celebri Italiane,Famiglia Martelli di Firenze.—In the
Official Catalogue of MSS. in the Brit. Mus., New Series Vol. I.,
where this passage is printed,Bartohas been wrongly given for Braccio.2.addi 22 di marzo 1508.
The Christian era was computed in Florence at that time from the
Incarnation (Lady day, March 25th). Hence this should be 1509 by
our reckoning.3.racolto tratto di molte carte le quali io
ho qui copiate. We must suppose that Leonardo
means that he has copied out his own MSS. and not those of others.
The first thirteen leaves of the MS. in the Brit. Mus. are a fair
copy of some notes on physics.]Suggestions for the arrangement of MSS treating of particular
subjects.(5-8).5.Of digging a canal. Put this in the Book of useful inventions
and in proving them bring forward the propositions already proved.
And this is the proper order; since if you wished to show the
usefulness of any plan you would be obliged again to devise new
machines to prove its utility and thus would confuse the order of
the forty Books and also the order of the diagrams; that is to say
you would have to mix up practice with theory, which would produce
a confused and incoherent work.6.I am not to blame for putting forward, in the course of my
work on science, any general rule derived from a previous
conclusion.7.The Book of the science of Mechanics must precede the Book of
useful inventions.—Have your books on anatomy bound! [Footnote: 4.
The numerous notes on anatomy written on loose leaves and now in
the Royal collection at Windsor can best be classified in four
Books, corresponding to the different character and size of the
paper. When Leonardo speaks of 'li tua libri di
notomia', he probably means the MSS. which still
exist; if this hypothesis is correct the present condition of these
leaves might seem to prove that he only carried out his purpose
with one of the Books on anatomy. A borrowed book on Anatomy is
mentioned in F.O.]8.The order of your book must proceed on this plan: first
simple beams, then (those) supported from below, then suspended in
part, then wholly [suspended]. Then beams as supporting other
weights [Footnote: 4. Leonardo's notes on Mechanics are
extraordinarily numerous; but, for the reasons assigned in my
introduction, they have not been included in the present
work.].General introductions to the book on Painting
(9-13).
INTRODUCTION.
Seeing that I can find no subject specially useful or
pleasing—since the men who have come before me have taken for their
own every useful or necessary theme—I must do like one who, being
poor, comes last to the fair, and can find no other way of
providing himself than by taking all the things already seen by
other buyers, and not taken but refused by reason of their lesser
value. I, then, will load my humble pack with this despised and
rejected merchandise, the refuse of so many buyers; and will go
about to distribute it, not indeed in great cities, but in the
poorer towns, taking such a price as the wares I offer may be
worth. [Footnote: It need hardly be pointed out that there is in
this 'Proemio' a covert irony. In the second and third prefaces,
Leonardo characterises his rivals and opponents more closely. His
protest is directed against Neo-latinism as professed by most of
the humanists of his time; its futility is now no longer
questioned.]10.INTRODUCTION.I know that many will call this useless work [Footnote: 3.
questa essere opera inutile. By opera we must here understand libro
di pittura and particularly the treatise on Perspective.]; and they
will be those of whom Demetrius [Footnote: 4. Demetrio. "With
regard to the passage attributed to Demetrius", Dr. H. MÜLLER
STRÜBING writes, "I know not what to make of it. It is certainly
not Demetrius Phalereus that is meant and it can hardly be
Demetrius Poliorcetes. Who then can it be—for the name is a very
common one? It may be a clerical error for Demades and the maxim is
quite in the spirit of his writings I have not however been able to
find any corresponding passage either in the 'Fragments' (C.
MULLER,Orat. Att., II. 441)
nor in the Supplements collected by DIETZ (Rhein.
Mus., vol. 29, p. 108)."The same passage occurs as a simple Memorandum in the MS. Tr.
57, apparently as a note for this 'Proemio' thus affording some data as
to the time where these introductions were written.] declared that
he took no more account of the wind that came out their mouth in
words, than of that they expelled from their lower parts: men who
desire nothing but material riches and are absolutely devoid of
that of wisdom, which is the food and the only true riches of the
mind. For so much more worthy as the soul is than the body, so much
more noble are the possessions of the soul than those of the body.
And often, when I see one of these men take this work in his hand,
I wonder that he does not put it to his nose, like a monkey, or ask
me if it is something good to eat.[Footnote: In the original, the Proemio dě prospettiva cioč
dell'uffitio dell'occhio (see No. 21) stands between this and the
preceding one, No. 9.]INTRODUCTION.I am fully concious that, not being a literary man, certain
presumptuous persons will think that they may reasonably blame me;
alleging that I am not a man of letters. Foolish folks! do they not
know that I might retort as Marius did to the Roman Patricians
[Footnote 21:Come Mario disse ai patriti
Romani. "I am unable to find the words here
attributed by Leonardo to Marius, either in Plutarch's Life of
Marius or in the Apophthegmata (Moralia, p.202). Nor do they occur in
the writings of Valerius Maximus (who frequently mentions Marius)
nor in Velleius Paterculus (II, 11 to 43), Dio Cassius, Aulus
Gellius, or Macrobius. Professor E. MENDELSON of Dorpat, the editor
of Herodian, assures me that no such passage is the found in that
author" (communication from Dr. MULLER STRUBING). Leonardo
evidently meant to allude to some well known incident in Roman
history and the mention of Marius is the result probably of some
confusion. We may perhaps read, for Marius, Menenius Agrippa,
though in that case it is true we must alter Patriti to Plebei. The
change is a serious one. but it would render the passage perfectly
clear.] by saying: That they, who deck themselves out in the
labours of others will not allow me my own. They will say that I,
having no literary skill, cannot properly express that which I
desire to treat of [Footnote 26:le mie cose ….
che d'altra parola. This can hardly be
reconciled with Mons. RAVAISSON'S estimate of L. da Vinci's
learning. "Leonard de Vinci etait un admirateur
et un disciple des anciens, aussi bien dans l'art que dans la
science et il tenait a passer pour tel meme aux yeux de la
posterite." _Gaz. des Beaux arts. Oct. 1877.];
but they do not know that my subjects are to be dealt with by
experience rather than by words [Footnote 28: See Footnote 26]; and
[experience] has been the mistress of those who wrote well. And so,
as mistress, I will cite her in all cases.11.Though I may not, like them, be able to quote other authors,
I shall rely on that which is much greater and more worthy:—on
experience, the mistress of their Masters. They go about puffed up
and pompous, dressed and decorated with [the fruits], not of their
own labours, but of those of others. And they will not allow me my
own. They will scorn me as an inventor; but how much more might
they—who are not inventors but vaunters and declaimers of the works
of others—be blamed.INTRODUCTION.And those men who are inventors and interpreters between
Nature and Man, as compared with boasters and declaimers of the
works of others, must be regarded and not otherwise esteemed than
as the object in front of a mirror, when compared with its image
seen in the mirror. For the first is something in itself, and the
other nothingness.—Folks little indebted to Nature, since it is
only by chance that they wear the human form and without it I might
class them with the herds of beasts.12.Many will think they may reasonably blame me by alleging that
my proofs are opposed to the authority of certain men held in the
highest reverence by their inexperienced judgments; not considering
that my works are the issue of pure and simple experience, who is
the one true mistress. These rules are sufficient to enable you to
know the true from the false—and this aids men to look only for
things that are possible and with due moderation—and not to wrap
yourself in ignorance, a thing which can have no good result, so
that in despair you would give yourself up to
melancholy.13.Among all the studies of natural causes and reasons Light
chiefly delights the beholder; and among the great features of
Mathematics the certainty of its demonstrations is what
preeminently (tends to) elevate the mind of the investigator.
Perspective, therefore, must be preferred to all the discourses and
systems of human learning. In this branch [of science] the beam of
light is explained on those methods of demonstration which form the
glory not so much of Mathematics as of Physics and are graced with
the flowers of both [Footnote: 5. Such of Leonardo's notes on
Optics or on Perspective as bear exclusively on Mathematics or
Physics could not be included in the arrangement of thelibro di pitturawhich is here
presented to the reader. They are however but few.]. But its axioms
being laid down at great length, I shall abridge them to a
conclusive brevity, arranging them on the method both of their
natural order and of mathematical demonstration; sometimes by
deduction of the effects from the causes, and sometimes arguing the
causes from the effects; adding also to my own conclusions some
which, though not included in them, may nevertheless be inferred
from them. Thus, if the Lord—who is the light of all
things—vouchsafe to enlighten me, I will treat of Light; wherefore
I will divide the present work into 3 Parts [Footnote: 10. In the
middle ages—for instance, by ROGER BACON, by VITELLONE, with whose
works Leonardo was certainly familiar, and by all the writers of
the Renaissance Perspective and Optics were not regarded as
distinct sciences. Perspective, indeed, is in its widest
application the science of seeing. Although to Leonardo the two
sciences were clearly separate, it is not so as to their names;
thus we find axioms in Optics under the heading Perspective.
According to this arrangement of the materials for the theoretical
portion of thelibro di pitturapropositions in Perspective and in Optics stand side by side
or occur alternately. Although this particular chapter deals only
with Optics, it is not improbable that the wordspartirň la presente opera in 3 partimay refer to the same division into three sections which is
spoken of in chapters 14 to 17.].The plan of the book on Painting (14—17).14.ON THE THREE BRANCHES OF
PERSPECTIVE.There are three branches of perspective; the first deals with
the reasons of the (apparent) diminution of objects as they recede
from the eye, and is known as Diminishing Perspective.—The second
contains the way in which colours vary as they recede from the eye.
The third and last is concerned with the explanation of how the
objects [in a picture] ought to be less finished in proportion as
they are remote (and the names are as follows):Linear Perspective. The Perspective of Colour. The
Perspective ofDisappearance.[Footnote: 13. From the character of the handwriting I infer
that this passage was written before the year 1490.].15.ON PAINTING AND PERSPECTIVE.The divisions of Perspective are 3, as used in drawing; of
these, the first includes the diminution in size of opaque objects;
the second treats of the diminution and loss of outline in such
opaque objects; the third, of the diminution and loss of colour at
long distances.[Footnote: The division is here the same as in the previous
chapter No. 14, and this is worthy of note when we connect it with
the fact that a space of about 20 years must have intervened
between the writing of the two passages.]16.THE DISCOURSE ON PAINTING.Perspective, as bearing on drawing, is divided into three
principal sections; of which the first treats of the diminution in
the size of bodies at different distances. The second part is that
which treats of the diminution in colour in these objects. The
third [deals with] the diminished distinctness of the forms and
outlines displayed by the objects at various
distances.17.ON THE SECTIONS OF [THE BOOK ON]
PAINTING.The first thing in painting is that the objects it represents
should appear in relief, and that the grounds surrounding them at
different distances shall appear within the vertical plane of the
foreground of the picture by means of the 3 branches of
Perspective, which are: the diminution in the distinctness of the
forms of the objects, the diminution in their magnitude; and the
diminution in their colour. And of these 3 classes of Perspective
the first results from [the structure of] the eye, while the other
two are caused by the atmosphere which intervenes between the eye
and the objects seen by it. The second essential in painting is
appropriate action and a due variety in the figures, so that the
men may not all look like brothers, &c.[Footnote: This and the two foregoing chapters must have been
written in 1513 to 1516. They undoubtedly indicate the scheme which
Leonardo wished to carry out in arranging his researches on
Perspective as applied to Painting. This is important because it is
an evidence against the supposition of H. LUDWIG and others, that
Leonardo had collected his principles of Perspective in one book so
early as before 1500; a Book which, according to the hypothesis,
must have been lost at a very early period, or destroyed possibly,
by the French (!) in 1500 (see H. LUDWIG. L. da Vinci:Das Buch van der Malerei. Vienna 1882
III, 7 and 8).]The use of the book on Painting.18.These rules are of use only in correcting the figures; since
every man makes some mistakes in his first compositions and he who
knows them not, cannot amend them. But you, knowing your errors,
will correct your works and where you find mistakes amend them, and
remember never to fall into them again. But if you try to apply
these rules in composition you will never make an end, and will
produce confusion in your works.These rules will enable you to have a free and sound
judgment; since good judgment is born of clear understanding, and a
clear understanding comes of reasons derived from sound rules, and
sound rules are the issue of sound experience—the common mother of
all the sciences and arts. Hence, bearing in mind the precepts of
my rules, you will be able, merely by your amended judgment, to
criticise and recognise every thing that is out of proportion in a
work, whether in the perspective or in the figures or any thing
else.Necessity of theoretical knowledge (19. 20).19.OF THE MISTAKES MADE BY THOSE WHO PRACTISE WITHOUT
KNOWLEDGE.Those who are in love with practice without knowledge are
like the sailor who gets into a ship without rudder or compass and
who never can be certain whether he is going. Practice must always
be founded on sound theory, and to this Perspective is the guide
and the gateway; and without this nothing can be done well in the
matter of drawing.20.The painter who draws merely by practice and by eye, without
any reason, is like a mirror which copies every thing placed in
front of it without being conscious of their
existence.The function of the eye (21-23).INTRODUCTION TO PERSPECTIVE:—THAT IS OF THE FUNCTION
OF THE EYE.Behold here O reader! a thing concerning which we cannot
trust our forefathers, the ancients, who tried to define what the
Soul and Life are—which are beyond proof, whereas those things,
which can at any time be clearly known and proved by experience,
remained for many ages unknown or falsely understood. The eye,
whose function we so certainly know by experience, has, down to my
own time, been defined by an infinite number of authors as one
thing; but I find, by experience, that it is quite another.
[Footnote 13: Compare the note to No. 70.][Footnote: In section 13 we already find it indicated that
the study of Perspective and of Optics is to be based on that of
the functions of the eye. Leonardo also refers to the science of
the eye, in his astronomical researches, for instance in MS. F 25b
'Ordine del provare la terra essere una stella:
Imprima difinisce l'occhio', &c. Compare
also MS. E 15b and F 60b. The principles of astronomical
perspective.]22.Here [in the eye] forms, here colours, here the character of
every part of the universe are concentrated to a point; and that
point is so marvellous a thing … Oh! marvellous, O stupendous
Necessity—by thy laws thou dost compel every effect to be the
direct result of its cause, by the shortest path. These [indeed]
are miracles;…In so small a space it can be reproduced and rearranged in
its whole expanse. Describe in your anatomy what proportion there
is between the diameters of all the images in the eye and the
distance from them of the crystalline lens.23.OF THE 10 ATTRIBUTES OF THE EYE, ALL CONCERNED IN
PAINTING.Painting is concerned with all the 10 attributes of sight;
which are:—Darkness, Light, Solidity and Colour, Form and Position,
Distance and Propinquity, Motion and Rest. This little work of mine
will be a tissue [of the studies] of these attributes, reminding
the painter of the rules and methods by which he should use his art
to imitate all the works of Nature which adorn the
world.24.ON PAINTING.Variability of the eye.1st. The pupil of the eye contracts, in proportion to the
increase of light which is reflected in it. 2nd. The pupil of the
eye expands in proportion to the diminution in the day light, or
any other light, that is reflected in it. 3rd. [Footnote: 8. The
subject of this third proposition we find fully discussed in MS. G.
44a.]. The eye perceives and recognises the objects of its vision
with greater intensity in proportion as the pupil is more widely
dilated; and this can be proved by the case of nocturnal animals,
such as cats, and certain birds—as the owl and others—in which the
pupil varies in a high degree from large to small, &c., when in
the dark or in the light. 4th. The eye [out of doors] in an
illuminated atmosphere sees darkness behind the windows of houses
which [nevertheless] are light. 5th. All colours when placed in the
shade appear of an equal degree of darkness, among themselves. 6th.
But all colours when placed in a full light, never vary from their
true and essential hue.25.OF THE EYE.Focus of sight.If the eye is required to look at an object placed too near
to it, it cannot judge of it well—as happens to a man who tries to
see the tip of his nose. Hence, as a general rule, Nature teaches
us that an object can never be seen perfectly unless the space
between it and the eye is equal, at least, to the length of the
face.Differences of perception by one eye and by both eyes
(26-29).26.OF THE EYE.When both eyes direct the pyramid of sight to an object, that
object becomes clearly seen and comprehended by the
eyes.27.Objects seen by one and the same eye appear sometimes large,
and sometimes small.28.The motion of a spectator who sees an object at rest often
makes it seem as though the object at rest had acquired the motion
of the moving body, while the moving person appears to be at
rest.ON PAINTING.Objects in relief, when seen from a short distance with one
eye, look like a perfect picture. If you look with the eyea,bat the spotc, this
pointcwill appear to be
atd,f, and if you look at it with the
eyeg,hwill appear to be atm. A picture can never contain in
itself both aspects.29.Let the object in relieftbe seen by both eyes; if you will look at the object with the
right eyem, keeping the left
eyenshut, the object will
appear, or fill up the space, ata; and if you shut the right eye and open the left, the object
(will occupy the) spaceb; and
if you open both eyes, the object will no longer appear ataorb, but ate,r,f. Why will not a picture seen by both eyes produce the effect
of relief, as [real] relief does when seen by both eyes; and why
should a picture seen with one eye give the same effect of relief
as real relief would under the same conditions of light and
shade?[Footnote: In the sketch,mis the left eye andnthe
right, while the text reverses this lettering. We must therefore
suppose that the face in which the eyesmandnare placed is opposite to the spectator.]30.The comparative size of the image depends on the amount of
light (30-39).The eye will hold and retain in itself the image of a
luminous body better than that of a shaded object. The reason is
that the eye is in itself perfectly dark and since two things that
are alike cannot be distinguished, therefore the night, and other
dark objects cannot be seen or recognised by the eye. Light is
totally contrary and gives more distinctness, and counteracts and
differs from the usual darkness of the eye, hence it leaves the
impression of its image.31.Every object we see will appear larger at midnight than at
midday, and larger in the morning than at midday.This happens because the pupil of the eye is much smaller at
midday than at any other time.32.The pupil which is largest will see objects the largest. This
is evident when we look at luminous bodies, and particularly at
those in the sky. When the eye comes out of darkness and suddenly
looks up at these bodies, they at first appear larger and then
diminish; and if you were to look at those bodies through a small
opening, you would see them smaller still, because a smaller part
of the pupil would exercise its function.[Footnote: 9.busoin the
Lomb. dialect is the same asbuco.]33.When the eye, coming out of darkness suddenly sees a luminous
body, it will appear much larger at first sight than after long
looking at it. The illuminated object will look larger and more
brilliant, when seen with two eyes than with only one. A luminous
object will appear smaller in size, when the eye sees it through a
smaller opening. A luminous body of an oval form will appear
rounder in proportion as it is farther from the eye.34.Why when the eye has just seen the light, does the half light
look dark to it, and in the same way if it turns from the darkness
the half light look very bright?35.ON PAINTING.If the eye, when [out of doors] in the luminous atmosphere,
sees a place in shadow, this will look very much darker than it
really is. This happens only because the eye when out in the air
contracts the pupil in proportion as the atmosphere reflected in it
is more luminous. And the more the pupil contracts, the less
luminous do the objects appear that it sees. But as soon as the eye
enters into a shady place the darkness of the shadow suddenly seems
to diminish. This occurs because the greater the darkness into
which the pupil goes the more its size increases, and this increase
makes the darkness seem less.[Footnote 14:La luce entrerŕ.Luceoccurs here in the
sense of pupil of the eye as in no 51: C. A. 84b; 245a; I—5; and in
many other places.]36.ON PERSPECTIVE.The eye which turns from a white object in the light of the
sun and goes into a less fully lighted place will see everything as
dark. And this happens either because the pupils of the eyes which
have rested on this brilliantly lighted white object have
contracted so much that, given at first a certain extent of
surface, they will have lost more than 3/4 of their size; and,
lacking in size, they are also deficient in [seeing] power. Though
you might say to me: A little bird (then) coming down would see
comparatively little, and from the smallness of his pupils the
white might seem black! To this I should reply that here we must
have regard to the proportion of the mass of that portion of the
brain which is given up to the sense of sight and to nothing else.
Or—to return—this pupil in Man dilates and contracts according to
the brightness or darkness of (surrounding) objects; and since it
takes some time to dilate and contract, it cannot see immediately
on going out of the light and into the shade, nor, in the same way,
out of the shade into the light, and this very thing has already
deceived me in painting an eye, and from that I learnt
it.37.Experiment [showing] the dilatation and contraction of the
pupil, from the motion of the sun and other luminaries. In
proportion as the sky is darker the stars appear of larger size,
and if you were to light up the medium these stars would look
smaller; and this difference arises solely from the pupil which
dilates and contracts with the amount of light in the medium which
is interposed between the eye and the luminous body. Let the
experiment be made, by placing a candle above your head at the same
time that you look at a star; then gradually lower the candle till
it is on a level with the ray that comes from the star to the eye,
and then you will see the star diminish so much that you will
almost lose sight of it.[Footnote: No reference is made in the text to the letters on
the accompanying diagram.]38.The pupil of the eye, in the open air, changes in size with
every degree of motion from the sun; and at every degree of its
changes one and the same object seen by it will appear of a
different size; although most frequently the relative scale of
surrounding objects does not allow us to detect these variations in
any single object we may look at.39.The eye—which sees all objects reversed—retains the images
for some time. This conclusion is proved by the results; because,
the eye having gazed at light retains some impression of it. After
looking (at it) there remain in the eye images of intense
brightness, that make any less brilliant spot seem dark until the
eye has lost the last trace of the impression of the stronger
light.
II.
Linear Perspective.We see clearly from the concluding sentence of section 49,
where the author directly addresses the painter, that he must
certainly have intended to include the elements of mathematics in
his Book on the art of Painting. They are therefore here placed at
the beginning. In section 50 the theory of the "Pyramid of Sight"
is distinctly and expressly put forward as the fundamental
principle of linear perspective, and sections 52 to 57 treat of it
fully. This theory of sight can scarcely be traced to any author of
antiquity. Such passages as occur in Euclid for instance, may, it
is true, have proved suggestive to the painters of the Renaissance,
but it would be rash to say any thing decisive on this
point.Leon Battista Alberti treats of the "Pyramid of Sight" at
some length in his first Book of Painting; but his explanation
differs widely from Leonardo's in the details. Leonardo, like
Alberti, may have borrowed the broad lines of his theory from some
views commonly accepted among painters at the time; but he
certainly worked out its application in a perfectly original
manner.The axioms as to the perception of the pyramid of rays are
followed by explanations of its origin, and proofs of its universal
application (58—69). The author recurs to the subject with endless
variations; it is evidently of fundamental importance in his
artistic theory and practice. It is unnecessary to discuss how far
this theory has any scientific value at the present day; so much as
this, at any rate, seems certain: that from the artist's point of
view it may still claim to be of immense practical
utility.According to Leonardo, on one hand, the laws of perspective
are an inalienable condition of the existence of objects in space;
on the other hand, by a natural law, the eye, whatever it sees and
wherever it turns, is subjected to the perception of the pyramid of
rays in the form of a minute target. Thus it sees objects in
perspective independently of the will of the spectator, since the
eye receives the images by means of the pyramid of rays "just as a
magnet attracts iron".In connection with this we have the function of the eye
explained by the Camera obscura, and this is all the more
interesting and important because no writer previous to Leonardo
had treated of this subject_ (70—73).Subsequent
passages, of no less special interest, betray his knowledge of
refraction and of the inversion of the image in the camera and in
the eye(74—82).From the principle of the transmission of the image to
the eye and to the camera obscura he deduces the means of producing
an artificial construction of the pyramid of rays or—which is the
same thing—of the image. The fundamental axioms as to the angle of
sight and the vanishing point are thus presented in a manner which
is as complete as it is simple and intelligible(86—89).Leonardo distinguishes between simple and complex
perspective(90, 91).The last
sections treat of the apparent size of objects at various distances
and of the way to estimate it(92—109).General remarks on perspective (40-41).40.ON PAINTING.Perspective is the best guide to the art of
Painting.[Footnote: 40. Compare 53, 2.]41.The art of perspective is of such a nature as to make what is
flat appear in relief and what is in relief flat.The elements of perspective—Of the Point
(42-46).42.All the problems of perspective are made clear by the five
terms of mathematicians, which are:—the point, the line, the angle,
the superficies and the solid. The point is unique of its kind. And
the point has neither height, breadth, length, nor depth, whence it
is to be regarded as indivisible and as having no dimensions in
space. The line is of three kinds, straight, curved and sinuous and
it has neither breadth, height, nor depth. Hence it is indivisible,
excepting in its length, and its ends are two points. The angle is
the junction of two lines in a point.43.A point is not part of a line.44.OF THE NATURAL POINT.The smallest natural point is larger than all mathematical
points, and this is proved because the natural point has
continuity, and any thing that is continuous is infinitely
divisible; but the mathematical point is indivisible because it has
no size.[Footnote: This definition was inserted by Leonardo on a MS.
copy on parchment of the well-known"Trattato
d'Architettura civile e militare"&c. by
FRANCESCO DI GIORGIO; opposite a passage where the author says:
_'In prima he da sapere che punto č quella parie della quale he
nulla—Linia he luncheza senza ŕpieza; &c.]45.1, The superficies is a limitation of the body. 2, and the
limitation of a body is no part of that body. 4, and the limitation
of one body is that which begins another. 3, that which is not part
of any body is nothing. Nothing is that which fills no
space.If one single point placed in a circle may be the starting
point of an infinite number of lines, and the termination of an
infinite number of lines, there must be an infinite number of
points separable from this point, and these when reunited become
one again; whence it follows that the part may be equal to the
whole.46.The point, being indivisible, occupies no space. That which
occupies no space is nothing. The limiting surface of one thing is
the beginning of another. 2. That which is no part of any body is
called nothing. 1. That which has no limitations, has no form. The
limitations of two conterminous bodies are interchangeably the
surface of each. All the surfaces of a body are not parts of that
body.Of the line (47-48).47.DEFINITION OF THE NATURE OF THE
LINE.The line has in itself neither matter nor substance and may
rather be called an imaginary idea than a real object; and this
being its nature it occupies no space. Therefore an infinite number
of lines may be conceived of as intersecting each other at a point,
which has no dimensions and is only of the thickness (if thickness
it may be called) of one single line.HOW WE MAY CONCLUDE THAT A SUPERFICIES TERMINATES IN
A POINT?An angular surface is reduced to a point where it terminates
in an angle. Or, if the sides of that angle are produced in a
straight line, then—beyond that angle—another surface is generated,
smaller, or equal to, or larger than the first.48.OF DRAWING OUTLINE.Consider with the greatest care the form of the outlines of
every object, and the character of their undulations. And these
undulations must be separately studied, as to whether the curves
are composed of arched convexities or angular
concavities.49.The nature of the outline.The boundaries of bodies are the least of all things. The
proposition is proved to be true, because the boundary of a thing
is a surface, which is not part of the body contained within that
surface; nor is it part of the air surrounding that body, but is
the medium interposted between the air and the body, as is proved
in its place. But the lateral boundaries of these bodies is the
line forming the boundary of the surface, which line is of
invisible thickness. Wherefore O painter! do not surround your
bodies with lines, and above all when representing objects smaller
than nature; for not only will their external outlines become
indistinct, but their parts will be invisible from
distance.50.Definition of Perspective.[Drawing is based upon perspective, which is nothing else
than a thorough knowledge of the function of the eye. And this
function simply consists in receiving in a pyramid the forms and
colours of all the objects placed before it. I say in a pyramid,
because there is no object so small that it will not be larger than
the spot where these pyramids are received into the eye. Therefore,
if you extend the lines from the edges of each body as they
converge you will bring them to a single point, and necessarily the
said lines must form a pyramid.][Perspective is nothing more than a rational demonstration
applied to the consideration of how objects in front of the eye
transmit their image to it, by means of a pyramid of lines.
ThePyramidis the name I apply
to the lines which, starting from the surface and edges of each
object, converge from a distance and meet in a single
point.][Perspective is a rational demonstration, by which we may
practically and clearly understand how objects transmit their own
image, by lines forming a Pyramid (centred) in the
eye.]Perspective is a rational demonstration by which experience
confirms that every object sends its image to the eye by a pyramid
of lines; and bodies of equal size will result in a pyramid of
larger or smaller size, according to the difference in their
distance, one from the other. By a pyramid of lines I mean those
which start from the surface and edges of bodies, and, converging
from a distance meet in a single point. A point is said to be that
which [having no dimensions] cannot be divided, and this point
placed in the eye receives all the points of the cone.[Footnote: 50. 1-5. Compare with this the Proem. No. 21. The
paragraphs placed in brackets: lines 1-9, 10-14, and 17—20, are
evidently mere sketches and, as such, were cancelled by the writer;
but they serve as a commentary on the final paragraph, lines
22-29.]51.IN WHAT WAY THE EYE SEES OBJECTS PLACED IN FRONT OF
IT.The perception of the object depends on the direction of the
eye.Supposing that the ball figured above is the ball of the eye
and let the small portion of the ball which is cut off by the
lines tbe the pupil and all
the objects mirrored on the centre of the face of the eye, by means
of the pupil, pass on at once and enter the pupil, passing through
the crystalline humour, which does not interfere in the pupil with
the things seen by means of the light. And the pupil having
received the objects, by means of the light, immediately refers
them and transmits them to the intellect by the linea b. And you must know that the pupil
transmits nothing perfectly to the intellect or common sense
excepting when the objects presented to it by means of light, reach
it by the linea b;as, for
instance, by the lineb c. For
although the linesm nandf gmay be seen by the
pupil they are not perfectly taken in, because they do not coincide
with the linea b. And the
proof is this: If the eye, shown above, wants to count the letters
placed in front, the eye will be obliged to turn from letter to
letter, because it cannot discern them unless they lie in the
linea b;as, for instance, in
the linea c. All visible
objects reach the eye by the lines of a pyramid, and the point of
the pyramid is the apex and centre of it, in the centre of the
pupil, as figured above.[Footnote: 51. In this problem the eye is conceived of as
fixed and immovable; this is plain from line 11.]Experimental proof of the existence of the pyramid of sight
(52-55).52.Perspective is a rational demonstration, confirmed by
experience, that all objects transmit their image to the eye by a
pyramid of lines.By a pyramid of lines I understand those lines which start
from the edges of the surface of bodies, and converging from a
distance, meet in a single point; and this point, in the present
instance, I will show to be situated in the eye which is the
universal judge of all objects. By a point I mean that which cannot
be divided into parts; therefore this point, which is situated in
the eye, being indivisible, no body is seen by the eye, that is not
larger than this point. This being the case it is inevitable that
the lines which come from the object to the point must form a
pyramid. And if any man seeks to prove that the sense of sight does
not reside in this point, but rather in the black spot which is
visible in the middle of the pupil, I might reply to him that a
small object could never diminish at any distance, as it might be a
grain of millet or of oats or of some similar thing, and that
object, if it were larger than the said [black] spot would never be
seen as a whole; as may be seen in the diagram below. Leta. be the seat of sight,b ethe lines which reach the eye.
Lete dbe the grains of millet
within these lines. You plainly see that these will never diminish
by distance, and that the bodym ncould not be entirely covered by it. Therefore you must
confess that the eye contains within itself one single indivisible
pointa, to which all the
points converge of the pyramid of lines starting from an object, as
is shown below. Leta.b. be the eye; in the centre of it is
the point above mentioned. If the linee
fis to enter as an image into so small an
opening in the eye, you must confess that the smaller object cannot
enter into what is smaller than itself unless it is diminished, and
by diminishing it must take the form of a pyramid.53.PERSPECTIVE.Perspective comes in where judgment fails [as to the
distance] in objects which diminish. The eye can never be a true
judge for determining with exactitude how near one object is to
another which is equal to it [in size], if the top of that other is
on the level of the eye which sees them on that side, excepting by
means of the vertical plane which is the standard and guide of
perspective. Letnbe the
eye,e fthe vertical plane
above mentioned. Leta b c dbe
the three divisions, one below the other; if the linesa nandc
nare of a given length and the eyenis in the centre, thena bwill look as large asb c. c dis lower and farther off
fromn, therefore it will look
smaller. And the same effect will appear in the three divisions of
a face when the eye of the painter who is drawing it is on a level
with the eye of the person he is painting.54.TO PROVE HOW OBJECTS REACH THE
EYE.If you look at the sun or some other luminous body and then
shut your eyes you will see it again inside your eye for a long
time. This is evidence that images enter into the eye.The relations of the distance points to the vanishing point
(55-56).55.ELEMENTS OF PERSPECTIVE.All objects transmit their image to the eye in pyramids, and
the nearer to the eye these pyramids are intersected the smaller
will the image appear of the objects which cause them. Therefore,
you may intersect the pyramid with a vertical plane [Footnote
4:Pariete. Compare the
definitions in 85, 2-5, 6-27. These lines refer exclusively to the
third diagram. For the better understanding of this it should be
observed thatc smust be
regarded as representing the section or profile of a square plane,
placed horizontally (comp. lines 11, 14, 17) for which the
wordpianurais subsequently
employed (20, 22). Lines 6-13 contain certain preliminary
observations to guide the reader in understanding the diagram; the
last three seem to have been added as a supplement. Leonardo's
mistake in writingt denota(line 6) forf denotahas
been rectified.] which reaches the base of the pyramid as is shown
in the planea n.The eyefand the
eyetare one and the same
thing; but the eyefmarks the
distance, that is to say how far you are standing from the object;
and the eyetshows you the
direction of it; that is whether you are opposite, or on one side,
or at an angle to the object you are looking at. And remember that
the eyefand the eyetmust always be kept on the same
level. For example if you raise or lower the eye from the distance
pointfyou must do the same
with the direction pointt. And
if the pointfshows how far the
eye is distant from the square plane but does not show on which
side it is placed—and, if in the same way, the pointtshowsthe direction and not the distance, in order to ascertain
both you must use both points and they will be one and the same
thing. If the eyefcould see a
perfect square of which all the sides were equal to the distance
betweensandc, and if at the nearest end of the
side towards the eye a pole were placed, or some other straight
object, set up by a perpendicular line as shown atr s—then, I say, that if you were to
look at the side of the square that is nearest to you it will
appear at the bottom of the vertical planer
s, and then look at the farther side and it
would appear to you at the height of the pointn