--- Begin Message ---
Dear Roger and All, 
I'm not really sure that the Romans (or the Greeks and Romans) did not use even 
gnomons inclined. The Archaeological Superintendence of Pompeii I was assured 
that the sundial that I enclose in the original photo has the original gnomon 
inclined. I put an excerpt from my book De Monumentis Gnomonicis apud Graecos 
et Romanos, published in 2005 and a link to see the full PDF. Here you can see 
that also Sharon Gibbs wrote (1980, Greek and Roman Sundials) about this: Gibbs
(p. 79) alludes to this fact considering that comparisons of the relative 
positions of the shadow Sixth Time(noon) on any horizontal clock shows that the 
gnomon was not placed vertically in the holeIt preserved to accommodate him, 
but was inclined towards the North Pole (examples 4001G, 4002G, 4004G, 
4005G).Greeting to all, and the best wishesNicola Severino
Link PDF of my 
bookhttp://www.nicolaseverino.it/LIBRI%20MIEI%20EDIZIONI%20ILMIOLIBRO/De%20Monumentis%20Gnomonicis%20libro%20completo.pdf



Uno gnomone unicoSiccome lo gnomone di questa meridiana, che ha 
dell'incredibile anche per la sua unica forma di piccolo obelisco, èinclinato 
come un assostilo, è facile pensare che sia solo il risultato di un maldestro 
restauro. Ma la base dellognomone che vedremo nel prossimo orologio 
orizzontale, e che è assolutamente originale, fa pensare che anche inquel caso 
lo gnomone fosse si tipo inclinato e parallelo all'asse terrestre. Che i Romani 
utilizzavano lo gnomonepolare per gli orologi orizzontali? Nessuno degli 
esemplari descritti da Gibbs possono aiutarci in questa 
possibileinterpretazione. Nessuno di essi conserva uno gnomone originale, come 
invece in questo caso di Pompei dove lamaggior parte dei reperti si sono 
conservati in modo perfetto. Gli gnomoni originali di questi orologi 
orizzontali,relativamente, piccoli, costituiscono una scoperta eccezionale 
nella gnomonica, ma il fatto che essi potessero esseredel tipo parallelo 
all'asse terrestre va contro ogni possibile teoria matematico-astronomica 
adattabile all'epoca.Eppure la forma triangolare del foro che ospita lo 
gnomone, come quello dell'altro orologio orizzontale che andiamoa descrivere 
tra poco, fa pensare che esso fosse proprio inclinato e non ortogonale. Ora 
devo aggiungere che Gibbs(pag. 79) accenna a questo fatto considerando che le 
comparazioni delle relative posizioni dell'ombra dell'ora Sesta(mezzogiorno) su 
qualche orologio orizzontale mostra che lo gnomone non fu piazzato 
verticalmente nel bucopreservato ad ospitarlo, ma fu inclinato verso il polo 
Nord (esempi 4001G, 4002G, 4004G, 4005G). Lagiustificazione di questo fatto è 
la stessa che abbiamo dato prima, e cioè che sugli orologi greco-romani la 
posizionedel "piede dello gnomone" non era importante perchè solo l'ombra della 
punta dello gnomone indicava l'ora".Un'altro passo del libro ci fa capire che 
Gibbs non ha mai trovato un esemplare che conservi uno gnomone originale:Tracce 
di gnomoni di bronzo o ferro rimangono a coprire la testa dei buchi in cui 
erano impiantati.Le curve di declinazioneAltro fatto eccezionale è la presenza 
di sole 5 curve di declinazione solare: perchè?Gibbs riporta le immagini di 
soli due orologi solari che hanno un'anomalo tracciato delle curve di 
declinazione, manon sono orizzontali. Si tratta del n° di catalogo Gibbs 1004, 
ovvero una meridiana sferica con 6 curve dideclinazione e la n° 3048, quindi 
una meridiana conica, con sole 4 curve di declinazione. Non è facile dare 
unarisposta, soprattutto corretta, e le interpretazioni non possono che 
rimanere nel vago. Per quanto riguarda questaunica meridiana orizzontale con 5 
curve diurne osserviamo che:1) Sono tracciate con buona precisione e tecnica;2) 
Sono state omesse le curve diurne invernali relative ai mesi di Gennaio e 
Febbraio;3) Un confronto con il progetto di una meridiana con ortostilo di 5 cm 
calcolata con un moderno PC, offre untracciato delle 5 curve di declinazione 
pressoché identico a quello di questa meridiana.Da quanto detto, possiamo fare 
le seguenti ipotesi generalizzate, di cui alcune un po' forzate e fantasiose:1) 
In alcuni casi, sporadici, il costruttore disegnava solo le curve di 
declinazione piu' importanti, cosi' come in molticasi si sono descritte solo 
quelle degli Equinozi e Solstizi;2) Che nel periodo compreso tra il II-I secolo 
a.C. e fino all'avvento del calendario Giuliano, qualche costruttore 
dimeridiane si atteneva ancora al vecchio calendario solare romano ereditato da 
Romolo dalla fondazione di Roma cheprevedeva l'anno civile in 304 giorni divisi 
in 10 mesi. Questa potrebbe essere l'unica ipotesi plausibile e reale,16



----Messaggio originale----

Da: [email protected]

Data: 30/07/2015 6.26

A: "Michael Ossipoff"<[email protected]>, "sundial 
list"<[email protected]>

Ogg: Re: Temporal Hours






Hi Michael and all,
 
I don't know the dominance of 
temporal hours or equal hours before mechanical or water clocks were in 
common usage. It is clear they co-existed. It is a significant research 
endeavor 
to determine the dominance and the reasons. Meeting for lunch was no problem. 
Dinner was more chancy; remember the verse of Cattulis, "Cenabis bene, mi 
Fabulle". Once the time and location were set, the 
important question remained "Who is bringing the 
duck".
 
Greek and Roman dials were not horizontal or vertical flat planar 
dials, but hemispheres, scafes or other projections of the sky onto a spherical 
or conical surface.  Planar dials came with the 
Islamic dials. The first planar dial with a polar gnomon was  by Ibn 
al-Shatir in Damascus in 1371. This dial had  temporal hours, equal hours 
based on noon, sunrise and sunset, and Islamic prayer times, including 
reference 
lines to prayer times when the sun was well below the horizon. For me this 
dial is the epitome of sundials. It includes all the time systems in vogue 
at that time and for hundreds of years before and after. They all existed and 
were in common usage suited for different purposes. The question remains "Who 
is 
bringing the duck" for dinner. Time is important. Don't overcook it. 

 
Regards, Roger Bailey
 
 
 Michael Ossipoff 


Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 11:57 AM
To: Roger Bailey ; sundial list 
Subject: Re: Temporal Hours








Roger, thanks for the answer. Ok, I shouldn't say that as a fact without 
having more information than I do. This is what I was implying or saying, 
without really having much support for it:

"In Europe and the 
fertile-crescent region, in ancient, classical and medieval times, before 
mechanical clocks (starting with Folliet-balance clocks) came into wide use, 
Equal Hours were of interest, for the most part, only to astronomers and 
astrologers. For ordinary civil timekeeping, for arranging meetings, keeping 
schedules or other civil/social purposes, Temporary Hours were preferred by 
pretty much everyone."


Were a fair percentage of people making their appointments and 
schedules by Equal Hours in the times and places named in the above 
paragraph?

I'm not being argumentative--I really don't know. 


----------------------------------

Thanks for 
reminding me about Temporary Hours lines on Flat Dials being satisfactorily 
approximated by straight lines. I'd temporarily (no pun intended) forgotten 
that. It was a question that I'd asked, and received an answer to, when I first 
wrote to NASS.

Were Flat-Dials (for Temporary or Equal Hours) in 
use before mechanical clocks were getting popular?  What about _wide_ use? 
How early?


-------------------------------------


Can anyone explain why the early, inaccurate inertia-controlled 
Folliet-Balance clocks replaced the cheaper, more easily-made water-clocks? 
Were 
those earliest, most inaccurate mechanical clocks significantly, or any, more 
accurate than water-clocks?


Michael Ossipoff















On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Roger Bailey <[email protected]> wrote:


  
   Hi Michael  and all,
   
  Temporal or Antique hours co-existed with equal hours 
  from way back, thousands of years. It didn't take a technological device 
  like a clock to cause a change. A more interesting point is the portrayal of 
  temporal hours, 12 unequal hours in the day on a flat sundial. It is easy on 
  Greek/Roman hemispheres but what about flat planar sundials. Is it sufficient 
  to calculate the points for the solstices and draw a straight line between 
  them? This works but is it right mathematically? To answer this 
  question, Fred Sawyer gave an excellent presentation on Antique Hours at 
  the NASS Conference in 2010 in Burlington. Was it really five years ago! Here 
  is a clip of the abstract from the NASS website.
   
  
  "Antique Hour Lines: Fred Sawyer gave another excellent example of his 
  reviews of the history of complex mathematical concepts for sundials. In the 
  case of Antique Hour Lines, the question was “Are they straight lines?” For 
  millennia they were assumed to be, but the assumption was questioned by many 
  mathematicians. Proofs were offered by Ibrahim Ibn Sinan in the 10th century, 
  Christopher Clavius in the 16th, Hellingweth in the 18th and many including 
  Montucla, Delambre and Cadell in the 19th, offering proofs that the lines 
were 
  in fact curved. The various proofs tended to be empirical based on plotting 
  the results of individual calculation. Biot offered an analysis in 1841 and 
  Davies in 1843, but the problem was not fully solved until 1914 when Hugo 
  Michnik studied the curves for the equatorial sundial, providing a method to 
  come up with non-parametric equations for the curve for each hour. Fred then 
  presented the graphs of various hour lines at different latitudes and 
  inclinations. The curves were amazingly complex looking but the specific area 
  of interest, where a shadow would be projected was very close to the straight 
  lines of the traditional method."
   
  This is why I belong to NASS, to read the Compendium and 
  to go to the conferences. Here we see solutions to problems we didn't even 
  know existed.
   
  Regards, Roger Bailey
  
  

  
  From: Michael Ossipoff 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 4:47 PM
  To: Dan Uza 
  Cc: sundial list 
  Subject: Re: Precision: the measure of all 
things
  

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  (I should clarify again that, for clarity, I like to capitalize _kinds_ 
  of whatever sort of thing I'm talking about...such as kinds of sundials or 
  hour-systems, though I realize that that capitalization is probably not 
  officially correct.)


  Another closely-related interesting question is the matter of what _kind_ 
  of hours are used. Of course every book or article on sundials points out 
  that, before mechanical clocks became widespread, civil time was measured in 
  "Temporary Hours", which divided the day, from sunrise to sunset, into 12 
  equal parts, and likewise divided the night, from sunset to sunrise, into 12 
  equal parts.

Those books and articles nearly always imply or say 
  that equal hours was a new invention when it was adopted--that someone 
  invented a new way to designate time, and so it was adopted. Another 
frequent, 
  and related, statement or implication is that the Horizontal Dial was an 
  innovation that was came into use upon its invention because, before that, 
its 
  possibility was there, but just hadn't occurred to anyone.

But I 
  read different. I read that Equal Hours were in use by astronomers and 
  astrologers long before they were adopted for civil time, and so they were 
  hardly a new invention at the time of their adoption for civil 
  time.

In fact, look at a Hemispherium or Hemicyclium. Designed to 
  read in Temporary Hours, its hour-line, for a particular hour, crosses a 
  different Equal-Hours line, according to the declination. Whether those 
  Temporary Hours were drawn by calculation, or by empirical observation, it's 
  plain that it would have been obvious to the dial-maker that he was making 
the 
  3 p.m. hour-line cross different Equal-Hours lines at different solar 
  declinations.

One thing that I'm objecting to is that many of 
  those books imply that Temporary Hours are more primitive, and Equal Hours 
are 
  something more advanced that therefore, when invented, immediately replaced 
  Temporary Hours.

Primitive? Rather, a lot more complicated and 
  laborious to make. For sundials, and likewise for 
  water-clocks.

People should be impressed by the ingenuity and 
  determination of early makers of sundials and water-clocks, who devised 
  Temporary Hours markings and mechanisms for them.

As for the 
  Horizontal Dial, of course it's for Equal Hours. That's what it's convenient 
  for. Sure, Flat Dials, including Horizontal Dials, and Polar Dials, and 
  Equatorial Dials, and others, could have likewise been made for Temporary 
  Hours, but they wouldn't have been easier to mark than a Hemicyclium. So it 
  isn't surprising if the Horizontal Dial came into use around the same time as 
  Equal Hours.

What I read was that, though Equal Hours were well 
  known and used by astronomers and astrologers, no one wanted them for civil 
  timekeeping. Hence the effort and ingenuity used to devise Temporary Hours 
  sundials and water-clocks.

But, when the mechanical clock was 
  invented, and came into relatively wide use (as tower-clocks, and in some 
  homes), it was so much simpler to make clocks for Equal Hours, that, as a 
  result, Equal Hours replaced Temporary Hours, for that reason of pure 
  manufacturing-practicality.

(By the way, were the early 
  mechanical clocks, the Folliet Balance intertially-slowed  clocks, 
  without the fusee compensation, any more accurate than water-clocks, which 
  were much cheaper and easier to build?)

Temporary Hours surely 
  made a lot of sense in agricultural societies, where it must have been very 
  important and practical for farmers to know what percentage of the day 
  remained. I don't advocate a return to Temporary Hours, because, speaking for 
  myself, it seems to me that finding what percentage of the day is over, and 
  how much or how little remains, seems a bit pessimistic, and maybe not a good 
  way to name the time of day.   ...but I realize that it had 
  practical importance in agricultural societies.

Michael 
  Ossipoff

  


  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  

  On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Dan Uza <[email protected]> wrote:

  
    
    Hi everyone,
    
If you haven't already, you might want to check out the first 
    part of the documentary "Precision: the measure of all things". It's about 
    the measurement of time and length, featuring the topic of sundials. 
There's 
    an interesting theory about how the day got split into 12 hours because 
this 
    number is highly divisible (but why not 60?). I just watched it on Da 
    Vinci Learning.  
    

    Dan Uza
    Romania
---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial




  

  

  
---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial


  

  

  

  No virus found in this message.
Checked by 
  AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 
  2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4392/10325 - Release Date: 07/28/15
  

  


No virus found in this 
message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus 
Database: 4392/10332 - Release Date: 07/29/15




<<attachment: polare.JPG>>


--- End Message ---
---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Reply via email to