Physics and Astronomy in 18th Century Painting in the Context of Religious and Mythological Thinking of the Epoch

Agratina Elena Evgen'evna ORCID: 0000-0001-9842-0967 PhD in Art History Postgraduate student; Lomonosov Moscow State University Senior Researcher; Scientific Research Institute of Theory and History of Fine Arts of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Moscow; Russia 21 Prechistenka Street, Moscow, 119034, Russia agratina_elena@mail.ru Other publications by this author

The eighteenth century has opened a new page in the field of interaction between art and science. Representatives of the European art community attached great importance to scientific awareness, followed scientific discoveries and, if possible, used them for the benefit of their work. The postulate of the connection between art and science was the basis of academic education, which presupposed an in-depth acquaintance of young masters with anatomy, geometry and history. For their part, doctors, physicists and mathematicians, and other scientists "tested" art for compliance with scientific standards, provided information about their discoveries to the brush masters, and also consulted the painters on issues of interest to them. There were also well-thought-out attempts to link discoveries in the field of natural sciences with artistic practice.

Although there has not yet been a full-scale study on the interaction of art and science, modern researchers are undoubtedly interested in this topic. M. Baksandall's book "Patterns of Intention: on the Historical Interpretation of Paintings", published back in 1985, is devoted not only to the art of the XVIII century, however, the chapter on Chardin (translated in 2023) demonstrates a subtle understanding of painting of this period in its relationship with actively developing science, in particular, optics ^[1]. In collections and magazines devoted to the problems of painting of the XVIII century, articles regularly appear where science is considered both as a plot and as a force capable of profoundly influencing artistic processes. Thus, W. Boscamp studies the impact of Newton's ideas on painting practice ^[2]. E. Barker, L. Baudo, A. Barn and S. Leach consider the interaction of science and art on the material of English painting ^[3],[4],[5]. In domestic exhibition projects, the works of French artists on the subject of science are exhibited and analyzed in the corresponding catalogs ^[6]. Individual articles began to appear, such as the work of E. Pchelova, devoted to the stated problems and touching on the theme of science in Russian painting ^[7].

Based on the studied literature, as well as authentic sources from the treatises of M.-A. Loge, K.-L. Hagedorn, K.-A. Watle and J.-H. Leblon to the notes in the press of the XVIII century, we would like to consider several examples of how scientific subjects were depicted and interpreted in European painting. For greater clarity, works by Italian, English, French and Russian masters will be presented. This review does not pretend to be complete, but it is intended to highlight an important problem: to show the variety of aspects of reflecting the scientific sphere of the Enlightenment in the mirror of painting, to demonstrate how different sides of the consciousness of that century came to an agreement in art: scientific, religious and mythological. The attracted visual material allows us to see the fascination and even admiration for science as a pan-European trend, to which Russia was also attached.

So, in the 18th century, science became a hobby and entertainment, experiments were conducted at home, friends and acquaintances were invited to conduct them, amateur scientific courses were organized, the most famous and attended of which were the courses of Abbot J.–A. Nollet (1700-1770), which operated since 1734. Publications designed to popularize science are being published. It is enough to mention Voltaire's Elements of Newton's Philosophy (1694-1778), published in 1738, and Count F. Newton's Philosophy for Ladies. Algarotti (1712-1764), who appeared a year earlier. Algarotti's work, which focused on optics, turned out to be a real bestseller and gained European fame. Some enlightened customers wanted to perpetuate their scientific interests by ordering relevant works of art. In this regard, the Portrait of Mademoiselle Ferrand Reflecting on the Works of Newton (1753, Old Pinakothek, Munich) by M.-K. de Latour (1704-1788) is interesting. The lady, who comes from a "rich and educated Parisian family" ^{[8, p.p.]}, is sitting at a book. The model is wearing a simple white silk outfit consisting of a cap and a house dress with a negligee thrown over it. The thick book on the table is actually the only accessory that accompanies the figure. A slight squint of the eyes and a barely noticeable half-smile create an aura of thoughtfulness around the model, some kind of inner intellectual life. Home attire is designed to emphasize that academic studies are not carried out by the model for show, but form an important part of home leisure, morning or evening. It may be recalled that prayer was an integral morning or evening ritual of that time. However, now there are more such rituals: reading scientific books is added to prayer.

It was I. Newton (1643-1727) who turned out to be the figure who attracted the greatest attention of the artistic community. There is an obvious explanation for this. Newton's experiment with a prism and a sunbeam proved to be very significant for the theory and practice of painting. It was discussed and independently repeated in salons and living rooms. The essence of this experiment is described by A.G. Stoletov: "Having made a round hole in the window shutter and darkened the room, Newton passed a ray of the sun onto the prism and received an image on the opposite wall, which he called the solar spectrum—an image of the sun elongated in the transverse (relative to the prism) direction and consisting of longitudinal stripes continuously passing into one another. ... These red, yellow and other rays were part of a white beam: a mixture of them formed what we call white; but when they met a prism that unevenly deflected them from their former path, they parted and gave on the screen a series of separate colored images of the sun. By putting these colored rays back together, we ... will get white light" ^{[9, pp. 543-544]}.

It is known that at the turn of the XVII–XVIII centuries, several important points were identified in the analysis of a painting: drawing, color, composition, expressiveness. Theorists such as Roger de Peel (1635-1709) talk about each of them in a special way. And soon, entire works devoted to each of these aspects of the work, in particular the color, begin to appear. And focusing on the colors, on the color in the picture, the authors of the XVIII century can not help but recall the famous discovery of the English scientist.

Adherents of Newton's theory attached importance not only to the number of colors of the spectrum, which coincided with the number of notes in the musical scale and, accordingly, expressed absolute harmony, but also to their location, starting from red and ending with purple. The rainbow is a scale suggested by nature, a natural assistant to artists in their work. In the book "The Way to correctly judge a work of Painting", the French art theorist M.-A. Lojier (1713-1769) writes: "We see the brightest blue and the most vibrant red occupying different poles of the color scale. From this we can conclude that these two colors are the most complete opposite of each other" ^{[10, p. 149]}. That is, the further away the colors are from each other on the spectral scale, the more difficult they are to combine. The practice of combining colors in a painting is beginning to acquire a pseudoscientific character. There are even some "rules" according to which colors such as orange and blue, as well as red and purple, must necessarily be separated by other colors of the spectrum, for example, yellow and green.

L.-K. von Hagedorn (1712-1780), a German theorist, published in 1762 his work entitled Reflections on Painting. The book was published in French seven years later, in 1775. Hagedorn writes: "The harmony of colors and the ability to achieve the utmost truthfulness of colors constitute the dignity of a colorist and allow him to be called such: just the ability to distribute light and shadow does not make him the creator of the picture. But excellent colors alone do not make an artist a colorist. Nature teaches him to alternate them, and the rules are simple [...]. The rainbow presents us with colors and their combinations" ^{[11, p. 197]}. The solar spectrum for Hagedorn is the main clue of harmonious color combinations, received by the artist from nature.

An enthusiastic admirer of Newton is the artist K.-A. Watle (1718-1789), who composed a poem in verse called "The Art of Painting", where he calls the colors of the solar spectrum "the immortal colors of the sky" ^{[12, p. 23]} and expresses his admiration for Newton's experiment, which managed to "subdue the sunbeam" ^{[12, p. 23]}.

The problem of the impossibility of repeating Newton's experiment in painting practice, that is, to obtain white from a mixture of seven rainbow colors on a palette, confused artists and theorists. It had to be explained in some logical way. Such an attempt was made by the German-born artist J.H. Leblon (1667-1741) in a treatise entitled "Harmony of color in Painting." He calls the colors of the solar spectrum intangible, and those with which the artist has to work are material. Leblon argues that if a mixture of all material colors produces black, then a mixture of transcendent, unearthly colors that make up the solar spectrum will produce "its opposite, that is, white, as proved by the incomparable Mr. Newton in his Optics" ^{[13, p. 6]}. This difference is not due to Newton's mistakes, but to the fact that intangible and material colors belong to different worlds: heavenly and earthly.

Such a resonant discovery, which had an undeniable impact on the theory and practice of art, became the main motive for the creation of the canvas depicting the allegorical tomb of Sir Isaac Newton (Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge) by J. R.R. Tolkien. Valeriani (1689/1690–1762) and D. Valeriani (1688/1689–?) with the participation of J.-B. Pittoni (1687-1767).

The action takes place in a semi-darkened temple. In a niche flanked by four Ionic columns stands a monumental urn with ashes. The tomb is crowned with a pyramid resting on three lions and decorated with drawing tools: a square and a protractor. The pyramid is not a random symbol. Standing firmly on the ground and reaching high into the sky, it was considered a symbol of virtue. Next to the image of the pyramid in the book of emblems and symbols by Daniel de Fey (late XVII – early XVIII) we read: "Virtue elevates me" ^{[14, p. 39]}. Right in front of the tomb is a monument with a sculptural composition of two female figures. One of them, the younger one, has wings growing straight out of her head, and holds a meter in her hand. This is undoubtedly an allegorical representation of science. A description of how Science should be presented is found in Cesare Ripa (1555-1622): "This is a woman with wings on her head, who holds a mirror in her right hand and a sphere topped with a triangle in her left. ... The figure is depicted with wings, because there is no science where the intellect does not rise to the understanding of things" ^{[15, p. 471]}.

The second figure represents Faith, although her appearance is also somewhat different from that described by Cesare Ripa: "This is a woman dressed in white, with a helmet on her head. In her right hand, she holds a heart with a burning candle towering over it, and in the other, the Old Testament tablets along with an open book. ... A heart with a candle in hand means enlightenment of the mind through Faith, which dispels the darkness of unbelief and ignorance" ^{[15, p. 163]}. In the painting by Valeriani and Pittoni, instead of a heart with a candle, a standing Faith holds a flame directly over the head of Science, as if enlightening and blessing it. With her other hand, Vera holds the tablets to herself, and also holds the censer. There is no helmet on her head, it is replaced by a blanket.

Wise men and philosophers gathered at the foot of the monument. They look at some plans, leaf through folios, study the armillary sphere, a device that allows you to determine the coordinates of the heavenly bodies, and most importantly, they observe the experiment. Light is streaming from a small hole in the round window above the urn. It rushes downwards with a thin ray, passes through two prisms and lies like a multicolored rainbow on a dark screen.

Below, at the foot of the stairs, there is another group of characters: Minerva in a helmet, a long tunic and a golden cloak with her retinue. The winged genius points up to where the famous experiment is taking place. Scrolls of paper and books, drawing tools, and a huge globe are scattered around this group. Behind Minerva in the bas-relief, another winged genius crowns Newton himself.

Thus, it was the experiment related to light and color that was considered worthy to be the crowning achievement of Newton's entire life and to decorate the monument that the artists symbolically erected to the English scientist. Studies in science are presented here as in no way contradicting the true faith. On the contrary, Faith and Science are jointly called upon to enlighten humanity. The placement of an allegorical image of the Christian Faith and the ancient Minerva as the personification of Wisdom on the same canvas does not bother the painters either. The proximity of these characters seems quite natural for both artists and customers of the XVIII century.

Another area of science that is of great interest to the educated community in 18th–century Europe is electricity. It is known that the circle of Nicolas-Philippe Ledru (1731-1807), who became famous under the pseudonym Komyu, "who became famous for entertaining physics sessions. Ledru was one of those dual natures, semi-magicians, semi-scientists who know how to amuse and teach..." ^{[16, p. 259]}. He was appointed professor of mathematics at the children of Louis XV, which did not prevent him from keeping an open science salon, where he staged performances using the effects of electricity and magnetism. It featured both fantastic inventions, such as a self-dressing mechanical doll, and quite classic scientific experiments that became the subjects of some paintings.

A painting by S.A.F. was exhibited at the Royal Salon in 1777. Vanloo (1719-1795) "Electric Experiment" (c. 1777, Arkhangelsk State Museum of Fine Arts), recently shown at an exhibition at the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts ^{[6, p. 222]}. The participants in the scene demonstrate the properties of electrical conductors. The electric spark produced by the friction of the glass ball was transmitted through two metal rods through the girl's body. She herself, standing barefoot on a base unable to conduct an electric charge, did not experience the effects of current. It was supposed to be felt by the boy, who had a glass vessel with water in his hands, into which the girl lowered the second of the metal rods. Since such experiments were indeed carried out in the living rooms and salons of Paris, it is not surprising that they appeared in painting as entertaining and in keeping with the spirit of the era subjects. Although this plot has no religious interpretation in this case, the girl, dressed in a light tunic atypical for 1777 and standing on a bench, is perceived as an antique statue on a pedestal. The heroine resembles either Minerva or an allegory of Science, and the semi-dark niche visible behind her should, apparently, evoke the temple interiors.

They were interested in the European cultural community and other properties of the atmosphere. An Englishman, J. R. R. Tolkien, can be considered a master who is particularly committed to a scientific topic. Wright of Derby (1734-1797). His painting "Experiment with a Bird and an Air Pump" (1768, National Gallery, London) highlights an exciting experiment that proves the existence of air and its necessity for the life of all terrestrial inhabitants. This painting, we note, not only documents an experiment conducted at home, but also has the character of a monument to a scientific discovery. The fact is that R. Boyle (1627-1691) and R. Hooke (1635-1703) improved the air pump invented by Otto von Guericke (1602-1686) and began experimenting with it in 1659, more than a hundred years before the appearance of the Wright painting. The information that all living creatures need air, and life in a vacuum space is impossible, was no longer new. Rather, it belonged to the category of well-known facts. Boyle and Cook conducted an experiment with a lark, which they described and confirmed the impossibility of life without air.

Sometimes, in studies devoted to Wright, one can read that the painting depicts a traveling magician-scientist entertaining noble families living on estates with scientific tricks, performing in town halls and provincial clubs ^{[17, p. 337-338]}. However, this is somewhat doubtful, because although such itinerant scientists undoubtedly existed, they did not have the appropriate equipment, using homemade pumps made from improvised materials, such as a bull bladder. Wandering scientists also worked very little with living beings, since it was obvious to everyone that such experiments were clearly inhumane. According to L. Baudo, a researcher of Wright's work, Boyle's pump then became a kind of museum exhibit related to the history of science ^{[4, p. 1-2]}. Its manufacture was complicated and expensive. Boyle built two air pumps at his own expense, one of which he presented to the Royal Society of Science, and the other remained in his personal use. Wright reproduces Boyle's machine very accurately, which, apparently, he could study and sketch in detail, while consulting with John Whitehurst (1713-1788), a scientist and member of the famous Birmingham Lunar Club. Thus, Wright's painting is undoubtedly composed and represents a detailed illustration of the history of science and a picturesque monument to Boyle's discoveries.

Most of the time, the audience's attention is focused on the bird in the glass container, but it can be discovered that the assembled group is simultaneously observing another experiment. On the table there is a large glass container with a yellowish liquid containing something dark. Researchers such as A. Barn and S. Leach identify this object as a chimpanzee skull ^{[5, p. 23]}. The liquid in the vessel is sulfuric acid, capable of dissolving organic materials. By presenting a chemical experiment next to a physical one, Wright was able to depict an empty glass sphere or "bubble", a skull and a burning candle on one canvas. At the same time, the stopwatch in the hand of the man on the left measures the time remaining for the suffocating bird. In fact, we are faced with the allegory of vanitas, which reminds us of the transience of our earthly world, studying the very curious laws of which, we must not forget about the eternal.

Note that the air pump also appears in the work of the Russian master, D.G. Levitsky (1735-1822). In the portrait of E.I. Molchanova (1776, Russian Academy of Fine Arts), the model is represented sitting in front of a table on which an air pump is placed, similar to what we saw in Wright's painting. As you know, Molchanova here is a graduate student of the Smolny Institute, who had a special liking for natural sciences. Therefore, if other girls from this series of portraits are represented, say, on stage or at a musical instrument, then Molchanova is placed in the atmosphere of a scientific office. The Boyle pump was known in Russia because M.V. Lomonosov (1711-1765) wrote about it in the book "Wolfian Experimental Physics" (1746): "This machine was invented by Otton de Guericke, the Magdeburg burgemeister and ambassador of Brandenburg at the state Congress. [...] The Gerickian invention prompted Robert Boyle in England (which he himself admits in the preface to experiments on the elasticity of air in 1659, issued in the Agli language) that he followed the help of Robert Gokk, a very skilled man in natural science and mechanical art" ^{[18, s.p.]} Next, Lomonosov explains in great detail the device of the pump and lists the experiments that can be performed with its help and which he himself has done.

In the second half of the 18th century, the practice of publicly conducting scientific experiments appeared in Russia. As we read in E. Likhacheva, "it was necessary first of all to attract the public to them, and for this purpose university professors usually organized public lectures, to which those who wished were invited, and for the most part "persons of both sexes." In 1772, Professor Rost invited to lectures on physics, except students, all outsiders of every rank and both sexes, lovers and lovers of science, to listen to lectures and watch his physical experiments. Lectures were given in Latin, and students explained them to the public in Russian" ^{[19, pp. 251-252]}.

The Smolny Institute, a very advanced educational institution at that time, placed physics high enough in the educational program. Girls started studying advanced physics at the age of 12-15. This is a very remarkable fact, since we are talking about a women's institute. E. Likhacheva, investigating the problem of women's education, writes: "Apparently, physics was the best of all sciences," noting that the devices had to be ordered from England, since they "cannot be obtained or made here" ^{[19, p. 224]}. The Smolny Institute possessed its own copy of the Boyle air pump ^{[20, p.p.]}, which, apparently, was captured by Levitsky. In Levitsky's painting, science studies appear as not only fascinating, but also befitting an educated Russian woman of that time, that is, they clearly do not contradict moral and religious education.

The European cultural community of the 18th century was interested not only in physics, but also in astronomy. Here it makes sense to turn again to Joseph Wright and his painting "The Philosopher Explaining the Model of the Solar System" (1766, Derby Museum and Art Gallery). The device presented here was designed in 1704 by order of Charles Boyle, 4th Earl of Orrery (1676-1731). It showed the movement of the planets around the Sun, as well as the Moon around the Earth and the moons around Jupiter and Saturn. It can be assumed that Wright could have seen such a device at meetings of the same Birmingham Lunar Club. In addition, James Fergusson (1710-1776), who became a member of the Royal Society of London in 1763, was engaged in the development of astronomical models in the 1760s. This scientist gave popular lectures, which Wright could also attend. In particular, it is known that in 1764, the scientist gave twenty lectures at the County Hall in Derby. These lectures, of course, became a local event and were actively attended by an enlightened public. Two years earlier, another, less well–known scientist, James Arden (1739-1817), gave lectures on astronomy in Derby.

As E. Barker notes, the model of the solar system depicted in the painting did not serve research, as, for example, a telescope could serve, but it was a visual teaching aid, and it had certain disadvantages. Although it was known at that time that the orbits of the planets were elliptical, the model shows them as circles ^{[3, p. 31]}. The same researcher noted that the beauty of the model, the use of expensive materials for its manufacture, such as ivory, rare woods and silver, and the corresponding high cost made this object desirable and popular for furnishing a study among the rich aristocracy ^{[3, p. 31]}. The sun and planets could be made of ivory, but installing a lamp in place of the luminary could help explore such a curious phenomenon as eclipses. Note that the Gazette de France wrote about the eclipse of August 18, 1762, which could be observed in areas as close to England as Normandy and Brittany ^{[21, p. 300]}. Perhaps it is the eclipses that the lecture of the depicted scientist is devoted to, especially since the figure of the boy, in the foreground, appears as a dark silhouette blocking the "sun" from us. An eclipse can also be interpreted in a symbolic, religious sense: physical, material and dark obscures the radiance of divine light for a person.

Interest in astronomy was also characteristic of the Russian society. Scientific pursuits were considered noble and highly befitting of an enlightened public, which was reflected in art, although perhaps not as often as in Europe. Around 1754, a painting by B.V. Sukhodolsky (years of life unknown) "Astronomy" (GTG) was created. By purpose, the work is a desudeport and forms an ensemble with canvases of the same format and purpose: "Walk" (ibid.), "Painting" and "Music" (both by the Russian Academy of Fine Arts). An ensemble was created for the Yekaterinburg Palace in Tsarskoye Selo. The work is made in a rocaille style and depicts an elegant society in the bosom of nature. One of the gentlemen helps the lady to look through the telescope, the other looks into it himself, and the third studies the armillary sphere. A young man sitting at the base of a dilapidated arch is holding a globe in his hands, and a square and ruler are lying on the ground in front of a strolling couple. The artist depicts society at sunset, which is quite natural. The coming night will make it possible to observe celestial bodies with greater efficiency. In the meantime, while waiting for dark, future researchers indulge in pleasant conversations and innocent flirting. The ruins, among which the walk takes place, can be perceived as evidence of the rapid and inexorable passage of earthly time, which heavenly bodies that live by their own laws do not care about, as a symbol of the frailty of earthly existence.

The problem of the interaction of science and art still requires a long and multifaceted study. However, even based on the examples given, it can be stated that interest in science enlivened the European artistic environment, placed the painter in the context of constant searches and led to unexpected discoveries and results. The scientific and artistic communities constantly intersected and had a lot of common topics for reflection and discussion. Many masters of that time were involved in the dialogue between art and science. Understanding scientific issues became a sign of the artist's integration into the European cultural environment, a symptom of his successful socialization. For every major scientific discovery, society expected a reaction not only from scientists, but also from artists, especially if the opportunity to apply it to art was clearly visible. The artists were motivated by the desire to understand the laws of harmony, to build a system of techniques that would allow them to achieve perfection in painting. Science and scientific experiments became the subject of paintings. It required a certain precision, knowledge of the device design and an understanding of the essence of physical processes. The masters of the brush attended scientific demonstrations, listened to lectures by scientists, and consulted with representatives of the scientific community.

One can see how the interpretations used by the artists helped to smooth out possible contradictions between the scientific and religious worldview. These could be quite straightforward indications of the unity of the goals of Faith and Science, as in the "Allegorical Tomb of Newton", where they are presented together as a sculptural group. But often, to discover religious meaning, it was necessary to make efforts, to recall the pictorial tradition of the previous century, for example, still lifes on the theme of vanitas. Ancient mythology elegantly fit into the space between science and religion, reminding us that the tradition of intellectual exploration of the world has a very long history. Of course, the most common image is the goddess of wisdom Minerva. If we talk about portraits, there may be no religious or mythological references, but science turns out to be an occupation befitting the most moral members of society, for example, noble maidens and young ladies, whose morality was supposed to be observed especially strictly. Thus, science was shown not only as a plot worthy of paintings, but also perfectly fitting into the picture of the human world of the XVIII century.