Edward Wright and his Perspective Glass: a surveying puzzle of the early 17th century

NOTES AND REFERENCES

• I have considered more fully aspects of the history of surveying in a companion paper to this one. It is scheduled for publication in 1999 as N. A. F. Smith, 'Roman Levelling and the New River' in Frontinus' Legacy, ed. Deane R. Blackman and A. Trevor Hodge, (Duckworth, London, 1999). Between the two papers there is some overlap.
   Google Scholar
• N. A. E Smith, 'The Pont du Gard and the aqueduct of Nimes', Transactions, Newcomen Society, vol. 62 (1991), p. 59.
   Google Scholar
• The first was R. C. S. Walters, 'Greek and Roman Engineering Instruments', Transactions, Newcomen Society, vol. 2 ( 1921–1922), pp. 45–60 and then D. Chilton, 'Land Measurement in the Sixteenth Century', Transactions, Newcomen Society, vol. 31( 1957–1958 and 1958–1959), pp. 111–129.
   Google Scholar
• E. R. Kiely, Surveying Instruments. (Columbia University, New York, 1947), p. 185.
   Google Scholar
• Sir H. G. Fordham, Some Notable Surveyors and Map-Makers of the 16th, 17th and 18th Centuries. ( Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1929), p. 4.
   Google Scholar
• There is a general discussion of Roman aqueduct surveying in A. Trevor Hodge, Roman Aqueducts and Water Supply. (Duckworth, London, 1992), Chapter 7.
   Google Scholar
• Such issues are considered in N. A. F. Smith, op.cit., (1).
   Google Scholar
• J.-P. Adam, `Groma et Chorobate; exercices de topographie antique', Mélanges de l'Ecole Francaise de Rome, vol. 94 (1982–3), pp. 1025–1029.
   Google Scholar
• Useful works to begin with are E. R. Kiely, op.cit., ( 4) and A. W. Richeson, English Land Measuring to 1800. (M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1966).
   Google Scholar
• The description is in English in R. C. S. Walters, op.cit., ( 3), pp. 49–50; see also H. Schöne, Herons von Alexandria Vermessungslehre und Dioptra. (Teubner, Leipzig, 1903), pp. 207–13.
   Google Scholar
• Worth consulting are: Donald R. Hill, Islamic Science and Engineering. (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1993), Chapter 10; Charles R. Ortloff, 'Surveying and Hydraulic Engineering of the Pre-Columbian Chim6 State: AD 900-1450', Cambridge Archaeological Journal, vol. 5, no. 1, (1995), pp. 55–74; Joseph Needham, Science and Civilisation in China. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1959), vol. 3, Chapter 22, Section (e), 'Chinese Surveying Methods', pp. 569–79. On p. 577 Needham quotes an ancient canal which had been set to a gradient of 1 in 4750 over a distance of 175 ml. It is interesting that when this canal was relevelled, about the year 1070, greater accuracy was achieved by damming the canal at intervals and simply measuring the difference in level between each section. See below at Note 22.
   Google Scholar
• L. E. Harris, The Two Netherlanders. (Heffer, Cambridge, 1971), pp. 52–64.
   Google Scholar
• For example: J. W. Gough, Sir Hugh Myddelton. (Clarendon, Oxford, 1964), Chapters 2–5; H. W. Dickinson, Water Supply of Greater London. (Newcomen Society, London, 1954), Chapter 3; Sir Jonathan Davidson, 'Presidential Address', Journal of the Institution of Civil Engineers, vol. 31, Nov. 1948, pp. 3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, op.cit., ( 13), P. 12.
   Google Scholar
• That is to say Wright's New River survey suggests that, very approximately, open-sighted levelling could cover 2 to 3 miles per working day.
   Google Scholar
• Moreover, we can speculate that conceivably each return survey followed a different route the better to provide independent checks.
   Google Scholar
• This distinction applies equally to Roman surveying. Most accounts of Roman aqueduct building assume or imply that proving surveys were carried out along the line of the aqueduct as if that was known in advance. My own view, however, is that the line of an aqueduct was dependent upon the proving survey, not the other way round.
   Google Scholar
• In which case the speed and efficiency of Wright 's work would be the more impressive. On balance, however, I believe it more likely that the three surveys were intended to check carefully the relative levels of source and sink.
   Google Scholar
• Details of these works and aspects of construction can be found in Gough, op.cit., ( 13), pp. 51–8 and Dickinson, op.cit., (13), pp. 35–7.
   Google Scholar
• Samuel Smiles, Lives of the Engineers. (Murray, 1874), vol. 1, 'Early Engineering', p. 68.
   Google Scholar
• W. G. Lockett, 'Roman hydraulic engineering: two Vitruvian problems', Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 1, vol. 90, Feb. 1991, p. 139.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, op.cit., (1).
   Google Scholar
• Gough, op.cit., ( 13), p. 51.
   Google Scholar
• Surveying the Nimes aqueduct is considered in Smith, op.cit., ( 2), pp. 59–61 & 70–1. New measure-ments are presented in G. Fabre, J.-L. Fiches and J.-L. Paillet, 'Interdisciplinary research on the aque-duct of Nimes and the Pont du Gard', Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol. 4 (1991), pp. 65–6.
   Google Scholar
• E. G. R. Taylor, 'Cartography, Survey and Navigation, 1400-1750', in A History of Technology, ed. Charles Singer et al., (Clarendon, Oxford, 1957), vol. 3, p. 543.
   Google Scholar
• For a discussion of the distinction to be drawn between the 'telescopic effect' and the telescope as an instrument see A. van Helden, 'The Invention of the Telescope', History of Science, vol. 13 (1975), pp. 256–63.
   Google Scholar
• For the work of Christmann, Generini, Morin and Gascoigne see Robert M. McKeon, 'Les Debuts de l'Astronomie de Precision', Physis, vol. 14 (1972), pp. 222–7.
   Google Scholar
• Picard's instrument is usefully reviewed in Martin Jensen, Civil Engineering around 1700. ( Danish Technical Press, Copenhagen, 1969), pp. 38–40.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, op.cit., ( 28), pp. 40–1. See also Rob H. van Gent and Anne C. van Heiden, Een verrtuftig geleerde; de technische vondsten van Christiaan Huygens. (Boerhaave Museum, Leiden, 1995), p. 30.
   Google Scholar
• Cesare S. Maffoili, Out of Galileo; The Science of Waters, 1628–1718. ( Erasmus, Rotterdam, 1994), p. 135.
   Google Scholar
• Frances Willmoth, Sir Jonas Moore; Practical Mathematics and Restoration Science. (Baydell Press, London, 1993), pp. 148–9.
   Google Scholar
• The canals of Briare and Orléans are described in A. W. Skempton, 'Canals and River Navigations before 1750', in A History of Technology, ed Charles Singer et al., (Clarendon, Oxford, 1957), vol. 3, pp. 463–4. See also Chilton, op.cit., (3), pp. 126–7.
   Google Scholar
• A. Wolf, A History of Science, Technology and Philosophy in the 16th and 17th Centuries. ( Harper, New York, 1959), vol. 1, p. 82. See also McKeon, op.cit., (27), p. 229.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, op.cit., ( 33), p. 79.
   Google Scholar
• E. G. R. Taylor, Mathematical Practitioners of Tudor and Stuart England. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1954), p. 182.
   Google Scholar
• Frances Willmoth, 'The Genius of all Arts and the Use of Instruments: Jonas Moore (1617-1679) as a Mathematician, Surveyor and Astronomer', Annals of Science, vol. 48 (1991), p. 361.
   Google Scholar
• Quoted in J. J. Levallois, Mesurer La Terre: 300 Ans de Giodesie Francaise. (Paris, 1989), p. 115.
   Google Scholar
• Listed in Jensen, op.cit., ( 28), p. 42.
   Google Scholar
• William Leybourn, The Compleat Surveyor. (London, 1653), Ch.59.
   Google Scholar
• Taken from R. S. Kirby and P. G. Laurson, The Early Years of Modern Civil Engineering. (Yale University Press, New Haven, 1932), p. 11.
   Google Scholar