by SALVATORE RUZZA
Translated by Nigel Bradley and Stefania Ivaldi
This article first appeared in "La Scrittura", No.50, April-June 1980. Republished by kind permission of the Editor. The original texts are conserved in the Ambrosiana Library in Milan, Italy.
Contrary to what we have learnt to date, Prospero Aldorisio must now be considered as the earliest graphologist. Despite being mentioned by Henze (1862) (1) and Crépieux-Jamin (1888) (2), he has remained unknown. A letter still exists, which is known as: "A letter on the reasoning of a new science called Idengraphy discovered by Prospero Aldorisio", (1610) (3). Aldorisio was then author of Idengraphicus Nuntius (4) and of Gelotoscopia (5), both published in 1611.
We begin with the first document, which is an excellent and complete report on the person and the graphological talent of Prospero Aldorisio, and then pass to Idengraphicus Nuntius which constitutes the first attempt at graphological axiomatics.
The letter was written in 1609 by Giovanni Frigiolo to Giovanni Battista Solari, and published in 1610 by Girolamo Bordoni, who supplied a brief introduction. During a stay in Naples, Frigiolo met Prospero Aldorisio, the eighteen year old son of Giovanni Battista Aldorisio, one of the best Aristotelian philosophers of the time. What he writes in this letter is therefore the result of the discussions he had, along with friends, with Prospero Aldorisio, who was somewhat sparing of words when talking about this new science:
"The inventor (Aldorisio), observing that all writers use varied and different signs in their handwritings, and noticing that it is one of Nature's strong resolutions to make written signs change in accordance with the variety of mankind, came to the conclusion that the diversity of the various handwritings produced by men might imply in them some varieties in principles, qualities or nature.
From each handwriting he first discusses the quality of the body, starting with the form of the whole mixture, and of its parts; the constitution of the elements; which humours are most and least marked, which are dominant, and which are sub-dominant, those which are penultimate, and those in last degree.
He comments on the amount of fire, air, water and earth; and their proportions. From these things he comes to know not only the constitution of the whole body, but also the individual parts: the amount of cartilage, muscles, veins and arteries, giving their quality, and appearance. He accurately describes a person's physiognomy, including the complexion and hair colour; whether he has large ears, a small nose, dark eyes, whether the forehead is large and so on. He draws the outline of the hand and of the forehead; then the natural tendencies, such as the vital, animal and natural. He then distinguishes the four forces; the repulsive, the attractive, the exploitive and the retentive. Then he deduces the gait, stammering, the length and the brevity of life; to what diseases the body is predisposed; and finally, most surprisingly, he can infer any quality of the body and demonstrate it on the basis of written characters.
Accepting these things, and the above mentioned way of knowing them, he then discusses the quality, and inclination of the mind; this had been shown to be possible by Galen (7) when he proved that ''the customs of the mind follow the temperatures of the bodies''. Aldorisio therefore talks about the conditions, the habits, and fortunes of people he has never met, provided that he has a written text to hand, and he could hardly say anything more precise even if he had talked with them for many years.
He knows who is great, who is vile; who is courageous, who is timid; who is cautious; who is foolish; who is disposed to lust, who to modesty; who to gluttony and who to extravagance; or on the contrary who to avarice, and who to sobriety; and thus to other virtues, and to vices, that we call morals. He also predicts fortune by applying different mental aptitudes to the various natural tendencies of different constitutions.
He foresees the honours, dangers, riches, marriages, travels, inheritance, and the people involved. He not only fixes the time of these events, but also the well being of the body and mind. He doesn't predict in years, but in seasons and months. When I stayed in Naples he divided time into four phases, which he named Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter, but then it came to my ears that he was reasoning on the time subdivided into years, months and seasons. He dares to guess these things like an Astrologer, moreover he does so on the basis of reason. He achieved so much that not only by submitting to him a letter, or some other writing, by someone whom he has never met nor seen before, and even of people from far away and foreign lands, just by looking at the written text, as if seeing the image of the writer in the mirror, he would immediately describe the qualities of the writer's mind and body together with his fate, but even, by just looking at a person or having been told of a person's customs and habits, he immediately knows his way of writing or, more specifically, his graphic signs. This could be attributed to a particular aptitude, a peculiar skill, an innate ability to foresee (if we believe Aristotle, that some men naturally foresee events) or to the principles of his marvellous science. Whatever the cause, suffice it to say that none of the many things he predicted has failed to come true, much to the surprise of the people who heard him, including myself, a regular listener.
Furthermore he applied this science not only to men, but also to any animal which might have some instrument suited to moving the pen. However, whatever these principles were, neither I nor anyone else could say more than the Inventor himself, who rarely spoke of them and when he did so, spoke in an obscure way.
As for the name of this new science he talked with me at length, saying that each name, provided that it is suitable, is typical of the thing it has to name and should reveal the difference of that thing, that feature which makes the named thing different from anything else, so that by this it can be known. The Greeks had succeeded admirably in this: in fact, in their language, the names were so descriptive of the things indicated, that each was like a small definition in itself. It is most important when naming new sciences that whoever hears the name can immediately infer what that science is about and the principles that it teaches. Since the main difference in the sciences stems from their object, in order to find the name of this science, one must study its object, which here is simply a study of the writer's qualities from written signs.
Thus we can undoubtedly conclude that the object of that science is the written sign, which is meaningful of the writer's qualities (I purposefully use the word ''quality'' as it can apply equally to the body and mind, as well as chance events); and this being the object, and not the act of writing or the care in writing (as others had thought) and as the name should indicate its peculiar object, it ensues that this should be called science of the ''written'', so to speak. I said ''written'' and not ''writing'' because if I said writing I would not exactly mean the act of writing of which this discipline makes use: and these words in the Greek language meaning.... in order to make up a noun, some letters or syllables must disappear, otherwise it will become speech, this being as Aristotle defined it by saying ''speech is significant utterance, some of whose parts are in themselves significant'', thereby as long as each part of the compound noun were not lacking some syllable, each part would mean something on its own. And this is unbecoming of a compound noun because some part of it must lose some syllables.
Therefore he added that it was not possible to name this science ''Graphirology'' as others suggested: because (apart from missing some syllables which other people did not realize, but that was necessary to make up new nouns), this science not only has written signs as its object, but signs written by means of any tool capable of moving the stylus, be it of feather, or wood. He thought that it was possible to tell men's qualities by written signs, either formed with the left hand, the foot or the mouth: indeed, by making people write with their mouth as well as by left hand, he inferred their qualities, finding no difference at all according to his principles.
This science should be called neither ''Grammilogy'' or ''Grammimancy'', since the name, in order to identify the science, should reveal the meaning not only of the material part but also of the formal part: and as the formal part of the subject of this science is the written sign, as signifier, it follows that in no way is it possible to name this science ''Grammimancy'': in fact this would show that its formal part is not the written sign, as signifier, but as signified. The meaning of the word being such; that is to say, prophecy of the script; which does not correspond to the formal part of the subject i.e. the written sign as signifier of qualities. So this science should be defined as prediction from the script and not of the script. Besides, by naming this science ''-mancy'' (from the Greek word for ''prophecy''), we would restrict its meaning to ''prediction of future events'' only, as this was the meaning in Greek, whereas this science is capable of predicting past, present as well as future events, and in this definition such meanings would not be included.
The author therefore suggested that the science should be called Idengraphy, satisfying the many doubts that his friends raised regarding the fact that the term ''graph-''meant not only ''composition'' (as others would have it) from which in Greek comes the noun composer (=singraphis); he would prove this by demonstrating that the Greeks also used to name paintings as ''Grafi''. Thereby he concluded that in Greek it would not only mean the act of composing, but also the outline one makes in writing. I asked why he did not want to call his science an -ology, as others thought it should be called, and he satisfied my question by replying that as this science is used to make predictions on the writer's qualities from written signs. Otherwise this would mean searching for the causes of signs, which is usually done by a philosopher as he has to look for the first cause - and indeed this is the ultimate goal of philosophy - whereas the ultimate goal of Idengraphy is to tell the qualities and the events that may happen to the writer, which are not causes of writing but effects, which come from the same source of the writing, as if we would say that travelling does not make any difference to writing, but the reason for travelling does. Thus the many effects that the science professes to know do not make any difference to the signs, as their causes, it follows that it should not be called an -ology. It could be added that studying the reasons for the different ways of writing is not identified by the word ''Graphilogy'', meaning by this only difference in writing and not the difference between such and such writings.''
From the passages above it is clear that we find ourselves in the presence of a gifted scholar with specific and exceptional intuition, perhaps even with telepathic capabilities. The resemblance to Moretti is striking in his facility and diagnostic ability to apply graphology constitutionally, physically and psychologically. The physiognomical, and psychological fertile ground is clearly felt in which appears the concept of graphology, or idengraphy as he called the new discipline which had individual writing as its object.
Unfortunately in Idengraphicus Nuntius Aldorisio didn't discuss the meaning of signs, but limited himself to present seventy two graphological principles. The main propositions, which develop a series of graphological themes, have been denoted by appropriate headings.
(a) Individuality of Handwriting
(b) National Influence
(c) Some distinctions of Graphic Signs and their Properties
(d) Technical and Temporal Influences
(e) Reasons for Different Writings
(f) Temporal Variations in the Writing
(g) Typology and its application to Idengraphy
| Element | Appearance | Nature | Effect on Bodies |
| Fire | Harsh/tortuous pyramid-like |
warm or dry | produces angular bodies produces rough bodies |
| Air | Soft pyramidical |
warm or wet | produces smooth bodies produces angular bodies |
| Water | Soft circular |
cold or wet | produces rounded bodies produces smooth bodies |
| Earth | Harsh circular |
cold or dry | produces rounded bodies produces rough bodies |
(h) Aspects of the Temperament which are Discernible From Idengraphy
(i) Scientific Nature of Idengraphy
These are the most interesting propositions left by Aldorisio. Unfortunately, he was unsuccessful in translating his intuitions into a semiotic. It is therefore difficult to say whether his work had a fair sounding or whether, as now seems more likely, it remained neglected.
Baldi, who followed eleven years later, not only failed to make reference to Aldorisio but presented his observations without that character of absolute novelty that distinguishes Idengraphy.
(1) HENZE A, Die Chirogrammatomantie , Leipzig, 1862.
(2) CRÉPIEUX-JAMIN J, L'écriture et le caractère, Alcan, Paris, 1888.
(3) FRIGIOLO G, Lettera nella quale si ragiona intorno alla nuova scienza detta
L'Idengrafia da Prospero Aldorisio ritrovata, Girolamo Bordoni, Milan, 1610.
(4) ALDORISIO P, Idengraphicus Nuntius, Typographia Tarquini, Naples, 1611.
(5) ALDORISIO P, Gelotoscopia, Tarquini Longum, Naples, 1611. This essay deals
with the art of judging character from laughter.
(6) Translations used: (Thanks to Paul Ferguson for translation guidance).
Proprium = personal script. Praeter proprium = super-personalised script. Contra
proprium = counter-personal script.
This article in English was published in Graphology 1995 (Jan) No31 pp35-42. It first appeared in "La Scrittura", No.50, April-June 1980. Republished by kind permission of the Editor. The original texts are conserved in the Ambrosiana Library in Milan, Italy.
Last modified 12 Feb 2002. Please report any corrections to me at this email address bradlen@wmin.ac.uk
hits since 12 February 2002