I. General description and options for linking up with other projects

Whether medicine, mathematics or botany: a systematic investigation into the connections between knowledge and gardens has yet to be undertaken. Despite numerous individual studies, basic analyses are not even available for individual knowledge formations, for generating and systematising, for transferring and for applying the knowledge to horticulture and garden art. The research project “Landscape Design and the Sciences in the Early Modern Period – Mathematisation and the Scientific Approach in Early Modern Garden Art” is intended to fill in a sensitive gap for the 16th to 18th centuries. It is being jointly organised by the Interdisciplinary Centre for the Research of Science and Technology (IZWT) of the Universität Wuppertal and the Centre of Garden Art and Landscape Architecture of the Leibniz Universität Hannover.

An interdisciplinary workshop involving a new generation of academics is to launch the project and will discuss research issues and research hypotheses and define sub-projects to be worked on as qualification theses. Based on a preliminary assessment, these could be, for example, practical geometry as a key technology in garden art and the connections and interrelations between theoretical aspects of the mathematical sciences and garden theory, but would also include aspects of perspective, optics, acoustics, astronomy/astrology and hydrology. They could be case-studies on individual artists and scientists or also contexts of knowledge in literary genres of the time, which explore and reflect on connections between gardens and sciences on a different level. Finally, a comparative look at the role and function of mathematics/geometry in the garden art of the cultures of the Orient could also be contemplated.

There are options for linking up with other projects in the Royal Garden of Herrenhausen Library project, which has already started, in which the dissertation project entitled “Der Berggarten – seine wissenschaftliche Bedeutung und sein Stellenwert als botanischer Garten im (exemplarischen) Vergleich zu anderen bedeutenden Hofgärten und akademischen Gärten“ (The Berggarten – its scientific importance and significance as a botanical garden in comparison with other important court gardens and academic gardens) promises new results and insights regarding the paradigm of ‘botanical knowledge’. There are also possible points of contact in the direction of Modernism, inasmuch as the conference on “Modernism and Landscape Architecture, 1890-1940”, organised with the National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C. in 2008, investigated for the first time the influence of ecology, including plant ecology, plant geography and plant sociology on the garden architecture of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. An important contribution to the topic of “knowledge transfer” has already been made by Bianca Maria Rinaldi in her dissertation on “Jesuits and Europe’s Knowledge of Chinese Flora and Art of the Garden in the 17th and 18th Centuries”, which was written at the CGL and was supported with a grant from the Klosterkammer Hannover.

In view of the fact that the “Gardening and Knowledge” project can be extended particularly well in the direction of related disciplines, the CGL aims in the medium term to establish a study group. In the “Landscape Design and the Sciences in the Early Modern Period” project, it is planned among other things to join up with the Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel, which organised lectures in October 2006 on the topic of “gardens as epistemological models” together with the Germany Society for 18th Century Studies (Deutschen Gesellschaft zur Erforschung des 18. Jahrhunderts), and to collaborate with the Harvard research institute of Dumbarton Oaks in Washington D. C.

II. Special orientation

The Early Modern garden history continues to attract much interest. In past twenty years, its research has developed quite dramatically and has shown itself open for different methodological and theoretical influences from the humanities and social sciences. Thus a traditional perspective geared to art history, with a tendency to be narrowly focussed, has gradually been replaced by more interdisciplinary approaches to the history of gardens. One of the foremost supporters of these developments and of the systematic broadening of research perspectives to encompass the history of garden culture and garden art was the Harvard research institute of Dumbarton Oaks in Washington D.C. with its Studies in Landscape Architecture Department, today Garden and Landscape Studies.

In the context of this research and of the research conducted by other institutions, mathematics and the natural sciences in general have repeatedly been examined in connection with garden art and garden culture; however they were never the subject of systematic and in-depth efforts that enabled issues to be developed comprehensively and investigated in a larger interdisciplinary research group. With the following outline of research it is intended to initiate a research project that plans to investigate, in an interdisciplinary and international project team and over the course of several years, the questions just touched on, linking garden art with its mathematisation and an increasingly scientific approach in the Early Modern, and to integrate a younger generation of academics in a special way.

III. Current research status

There has been a whole series of investigations and studies in the past two decades that demonstrate how the history of garden art in the Early Modern has opened itself up for methodological and theoretical influences from the humanities and social sciences [i.a. Conan 2002; Hyde 2002; Mukerij 1997; Vérin 1991]. Despite the very densely packed research into the history of garden art [for example Coffin 1991, 1994; Hunt 1992, 1996; Jöchner 2001; Lazzaro 1990; MacDougall 1993; Mosser/Teyssot 1991; O’Malley/Wolschke-Bulmahn 1998; Strong 2000; Woodbridge 1986], the interrelations between garden theory and garden practice on the one hand and the mathematical sciences/early natural sciences on the other hand are an area that has hardly been investigated. Although the geometrical layout of early modern gardens belongs to the standard topoi of garden history literature, only a few articles and monographs pay more than cursory attention to the causes of the geometrisation of gardens and its expressions [Baridon 1998, Cosgrove 1994; Jöcher 2001; Mukerij 1997; Tongiorgi Tomasi 1983, 1989]. This and the numerous further areas of contact between garden theory and garden practice and the mathematical sciences have largely been left untouched both by garden historians and by historians of science, although isolated remarks and observations on the role of special areas of the mathematical sciences do exist, such as in the acoustics [Lauterbach 1996], perspective [Baridon 1998; Hopper 1982; Tongiorgi Tomasi 1983, 1989; Vérin 1991] or astronomy/astrology [Wimmer 1999] [on this cf. above all Stiftung Schloss und Park Benrath and Seminar für Kunstgeschichte der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf (ed.), Wunder und Wissenschaft. Salomon de Caus und die Automatenkunst in Gärten um 1600, Düsseldorf, 2008].

Yet it is worthwhile taking a closer look at these relationships, for on the one hand the mathematical sciences/early natural sciences opened up new options for garden art as to possible courses of action and to how to design gardens, and on the other hand forms of a stronger scientific approach and a trend towards mathematics in the Early Modern can be recognised in this process [Remmert 2004, 2007, 2008]. Thus the project combines interests of garden history with those of the history of science and with the question of how this knowledge is generated, transferred and employed. That the topic ultimately stretches further afield can be seen from the fact that the influence of the natural sciences, in the shape of ecology and plant ecology, plant geography and plant sociology, on garden architecture of the late 19th and early 20th centuries has recently been investigated at the Centre of Garden Art and Landscape Architecture for the first time (conference on “Modernism and Landscape Architecture, 1890–1940”). This line of research is being continued.

As yet no-one has even started to undertake comparative investigations into developments in other cultural regions. This is true of the development in Mogul gardens at the same time and also of the role of Persian garden culture as a ‘predecessor’. Equally neglected are the descriptions of gardens, again of the same period, in the utopias of the Early Modern, although these utopias themselves are subject to the same process of being viewed in a more scientific light [cf. Fischer 1981; Rahmsdorf 1999; Velten 2004].

IV. Sub-projects

The topics of regulating and mastering nature in gardens on the one hand and of gaining control of nature through mathematical sciences on the other hand span the projects comprehensively. This is closely connected with the topic of the deliberate and of the unplanned geometrisation of many areas of life in the Early Modern that Johannes Kunisch has called the “expression of the geometric sense of this epoch” [Kunisch 1999; cf. Eichberg 1977]. A broad analysis of the reasons for this geometrisation, which however is not the main focus of attention here, should have as its departure point primarily the visual penetration by means of geometric forms, which caused unexpected cross-connections between seemingly uncorrelated areas and was especially manifest in gardens of the Early Modern. Thus in her study of the gardens of Versailles, Chandra Mukerij has proved that the geometric forms appear to have sprung from a mathematically structured world, but that their origins are in fact sooner to be found in military technology [Mukerij 1997].

Invoking the very great importance of mathematical sciences (such as geometry, optics, astrology) for garden theory and practice belongs to the standard topoi of garden literature [e.g. Boyceau 1638; Evelyn 2001; Stromer von Reichenbach 1671]. In the opinion of these authors the mathematical sciences were necessary to make garden art into something that was calculable and reliable, so that it itself almost became a kind of nature-science. At the heart of the project is the systematic investigation of the fundamental connections and evident interrelations between the theoretical aspects of mathematical sciences and garden theory and practice. This requires a thorough analysis both of garden literature and of the relevant texts from the whole field of mathematical sciences with special attention being paid to its individual branches (geometry, architecture, astronomy/astrology, acoustics, perspective, optics, hydrology etc.).

1. Case-study I: John Evelyn – garden art as a nature-science

The English scholar, famous as the author of a diary and as a co-founder of the Royal Society, is an ideal crystallisation point for the analysis of the processes briefly outlined above. He devoted almost fifty years of his life to writing down and continually revising a more or less encyclopaedic treatise on gardens, “Elysium Britannicum, or The Royal Gardens” [2001]. Evelyn had set himself the ambitious goal of making garden art into a calculable art that could be conducted along scientific principles. To this end he drew on the entire range of the mathematical sciences in his “Elysium Britannicum”: geometry, optics, astronomy and astrology, perspective, architecture, music, acoustics, hydraulics and gnomonics (theory of sun dials) namely play an important role in his observations. In doing so he explicitly based his writings on the relevant treatises of contemporary mathematicians such as Bernard Lamy and William Oughtred, but above all on the extensive Latin works of Jesuit authors such as Athanasius Kircher, Kaspar Schott or Mario Bettini. For Evelyn, perfecting garden art and perfecting nature-science went hand in hand.

The aim of this sub-project is to analyse the “Elysium Britannicum” with regard to the texts it consulted, how they were processed and the relevance of the observations in practical terms, i.e. on the one hand placing the “Elysium Britannicum” in the context of the cultural history and scientific history of its time and on the other hand examining how the “Elysium” linked in with practical gardening work.

2. Case-study II: Salomon de Caus – the “Hortus Palatinus” as an applied (nature-)science

The very heated public dispute about the reconstruction of the Heidelberg Castle garden [cf. von Buttlar 2008; Fischer 2008] could be the point of departure for another type of ‘reconstruction”: reconstructing the knowledge contexts, on the basis of which the architect, engineer and physicist Salomon de Caus designed and at least partially realised the “Hortus Palatinus” [Hortus Palatinus 1620; Hortus Palatinus 1980]. Existing papers at best offer possible approaches for doing this [Baridon 1998; Patterson 1981/82; Yates 1972], although de Caus can be seen as exemplary for uniting garden art with the mathematical sciences and for the appropriate motivation. The research of art historians has judged the “Hortus” to be “the leading example of a mannerist garden in Germany” [Hansmann 1983], whereas the history of ideas approach has linked it with the Rosicrucian movement [Yates 1972; cf. Brecht 2008]. There is no evaluation from the history of science perspective, in which particular attention would need to be paid first and foremost to music and hydraulics (water automata) and the gnomonics (planned sun dials), transposed into a gardening context, alongside geometry and architecture. In connection with water automata and automata in general, earlier epochs, including above all the Byzantine period, need to be incorporated (cf. e.g. Byzantine Garden Culture 2002). On Salomon de Caus an important contribution was recently delivered in the shape of the catalogue Wunder und Wissenschaft. Salomon de Caus und die Automatenkunst in Gärten um 1600, by the Stiftung Schloss und Park Benrath and the Kunsthistorisches Seminar der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf.

This sub-project aims to reconstruct the forms in which Early Modern nature-science was applied and to explore them in their larger context, based on a real piece of horticultural work, of which admittedly only remnants are preserved, by drawing on pictorial traditions and descriptions as well as further archival materials. Insofar as they are available, the archaeological findings are also to be integrated.

3. Basic topic: Practical geometry as a key technology in garden art

In the 17th century the knowledge of mathematical sciences needed and employed by garden artists and garden theoreticians, above all knowledge in the field of practical geometry, frequently originates from popular introductory works that were written for an audience of young officers or those in the making [e.g. Leclerc 1669]. A whole series of textbooks and manuals from the field of mathematical sciences [as well as Leclerc 1669, e.g. Bettini 1642/1645; Langley 1729; Manesson-Mallet 1702; Schott 1657, 1661] bear witness to the close interweaving – both in terms of content and also visually, by means of the illustrations – of such works and the manifold requirements of garden art and theory. From the end of the 17th century, gardening authors include in their works the elements of geometry that they consider necessary. Mention should be made above all of works such as [Dézallier d’Argenville 1709; Langley 1728; Switzer 1718], in which exact mathematical instructions are given for constructing and laying out gardens.

The aim is to analyse the practical geometry of the 17th century and to recognise its importance with regard to how it was applied and received in garden theory and practice. Particular attention is placed on how the conveyed knowledge was presented and how it was linked with the practice. Subtexts of this project are: a) mathematical sciences as part of the history of increasing professionalism in garden art: b) mathematical practice further afield from contemporary innovations (Descartes, Leibniz, Newton).

3. Context topic: Utopian gardens and the scientific approach of utopias.

The utopias of the Early Modern prove to be a revealing context. From More to Bacon, all classical utopias contain garden descriptions. With the sciences, namely mathematics and natural sciences, becoming increasingly important in utopian constructions, the description and function of gardens in the ideal society – now depicted as an urban community – also change. Alongside More’s “Utopia” and Bacon’s “Nova Atlantis”, there should also be included in the analysis Tommaso Campanella’s “Civitas Solis”, Johann Valentin Andreae’s “Christianopolis” and finally Denis Veira’s “L’Histoire des Sévarambes”. As a rule the utopias are based on more or less sophisticated drafts of ideal cities, so that geometrisation is introduced directly into the shape of the utopia. In addition one can observe in the utopias a successive restructuring of the system of sciences, leading to displacements in the hierarchy of knowledge and a clear tendency towards the empirical, experiment and invention.

This sub-project aims at reconstructing an informative context – one that finds a special form of expression in the newly emerging genre of literary utopias. This involves looking at how nature and science are understood in each work as well as at the resultant description and function of gardens, somewhere between “Architectura Recreationis” [Furttenbach 1640] and genetic optimisation. It should be asked which correspondences can be revealed between garden theory and utopian gardens regarding the increasingly scientific approach.

4. Analogous topic: Mathematics/geometry and garden art in the cultures of the Orient

In relation to Europe the most important developments relevant to the research are to be expected in the Early Modern. In relation to other cultures further questions emerge. For example in the Persian culture, where the formal laying out of gardens emerged more than a millennium ago, one comes across geometry/symmetry in garden design. The Chahar-Bagh motif, the subdivision of gardens or parts of gardens into four squares of equal size, is quoted as an example. The Mogul gardens being contemporary with the Early Modern period, we need to turn to their culture, since the garden sites there are likewise very much characterised by geometric development. We need to ask from which sources in other cultures the corresponding foundations for an increasingly mathematical approach and for the geometrisation of garden art derive. Is it the same kind of mathematics? How are the connections between mathematics/natural science and garden art represented in the other cultures?

In order to be able to answer these questions, the paths of knowledge need to be considered – from the Greeks via the Byzantine Empire and the Arabs, but also via the Nestorian Christians of East Persia and the Arabs into the medieval Occident [Crombie 1965]. And it is worth mentioning just in passing that the knot garden inserted in the “Hortus Palatinus” in a prominent position, composed of four beds at an intersection of paths, adopts an ornament derived from Islamic art that had already put in an appearance in Francesco Colonna’s “Hypnerotomachia Poliphili” (The Strife of Love in a Dream; 1499).

The aim of this project is to explore how garden art in the Orient and in the Occident converges and diverges regarding its geometrisation/mathematisation. A further aim is to uncover the paths of knowledge and interrelations between the two garden cultures, as far as mathematics and natural science are concerned.

V. Programme of work

The research project has a structure that needs to be realised in a process involving a number of stages. Thus a consequence of the initial ideas (I-III) is to hold an international and interdisciplinary workshop before the start of the project investigations, thereby involving young academics in discussing research issues and in the task of arriving at more precise questions. On this basis the sub-projects outlined above could be checked for their suitability as dissertation projects and for other forms of research and if necessary be modified. The research topics and fields could also defined in greater detail, for example in such a way that case-studies are developed on Joseph Furttenbach [1628; 1640; 1640/41] or Johann Sigismund Elßholtz [1666] and other domestic and foreign experts, who have become important for the development of garden art in the process of its becoming more scientific. Equally it could be an attractive and worthwhile task to compare Johann Peschel’s “Garten Ordnung [...] wie man aus rechtem Grund der Geometria einen nützlichen vnd zierlichen Garten macht” [Peschel 1597/2000] with J. Vredemann de Vries’ well-known set of engravings for garden design: “Hortorum viridariorumque elegantes et multiplicis formae” [Vredemann de Vries 1583, 1615].

Following the workshop and as a second step, there should be international notification of two doctoral grants with a duration of two-and-a-half years that are to be awarded for topics taken from the sub-projects. Further topics will be worked on by the project parent institutions in Wuppertal and Hannover. It is intended to have the research work accompanied by a symposium mid-way through the doctoral grants, at which intermediate progress reports will be presented and compared with systematic aspects and broader issues, which can be linked up with the research context by way of talks given by external experts. The close of the doctoral theses and other research work should finally lead to a conference, at which the results and the methodological and theoretical insights should be put up for discussion in order to be able to draw conclusions for a subsequent project with the key issue of “Gardening and Knowledge".

Prof. Dr. Hubertus Fischer
Prof. Dr. Volker Remmert
Prof. Dr. Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn