Historical Paintings and Repeat Photography

Being very familiar with the value of historical photographs and the sort of information we can garner from them, one of our weekly PCU discussion groups addressed whether or not we are able to obtain similar ecologically-relevant data from historical landscape paintings and illustrations. Rock art, illustrations and paintings far precede the invention of photography. Hundreds of thousands of historical records of many forms exist in the archives of human history detailing how landscapes used to look and how humans interacted with nature. While the Arts embrace and often encourage creativity and artistic liberty, this does not preclude artistic records as scientifically valuable evidence, particularly in long-term ecological studies, of what landscapes looked like in the past.

The discussion touched on the artistic influences and ideas of Jacob Hackert (1737 - 1805), Johann von Goethe (1749 - 1832), and Alexander von Humboldt (1769 - 1859), to name a few. The common thread between all of the aforementioned was that they appreciated the individual characteristics of the landscapes they encountered, and understood that there was value in distinguishing one plant type from another, from an artistic perspective. Furthermore, they agreed that landscape paintings should be representative of reality and not romanticised, as was the trend of the time. This is a very important theme to keep in mind when trying to draw ecological parallels between a painting and the real landscape.

According to Hackert, who was a landscape painter, studying individual tree types attentively would guarantee a richer representation of the vegetation in the landscape in the final product.  The concept of vegetation types/units (a concept that is employed globally in the biological sciences) at this time had not yet been conceived. Hackert proposed that vegetation in a landscape could be divided into three “prototype groups”, according to how their branches and leaves looked. Later, Humboldt adopted and expanded this idea to suggest further subdivision into sixteen “plant forms” – a primitive concept based purely on morphology, parallel to what we now understand as vegetation types and plant functional types. Another interesting point to note is that the place of humans in nature was an important idea during this time, and so human elements were visible in many landscape paintings of the time.

‘The knowledge of the natural character of each different region of the world is intimately tied to human history and culture.’ – Alexander von Humboldt

When considering the place of humans in nature, the discussion also touched on the influence of the Arts on conservation efforts. While peer-reviewed scientific articles may appeal to academics, they necessarily lack emotion – something that is often crucial to spur people into action. It was concluded that artists and scientists can and should work together to create awareness about conservation issues.

Relevant readings:

1. Erickson, Raymond, and Brian Schwartz. “Landscape Painting: Between Art and Science.” In Alexander von Humboldt: From the Americas to the Cosmos, edited by Raymond Erickson, Mauricio A. Font, and Brian Schwartz. New York: Bildner Center for Western Hemisphere Studies.
2. Jacobson, Susan K., Mallory D. McDuff, and Martha C. Monroe. 2007. “Promoting Conservation through the Arts: Outreach for Hearts and Minds.” Conservation Biology 21 (1): 7–10.
3. "The Cape Mountains". Trailrider - Adventures and Ride Reports. 2010. Available at: http://trailriderreports.blogspot.co.za/2010/05/cape-mountains.html. Last accessed 7 July 2016.