Nicolaus Copernicus, Thoruniensis, Mathematicus celeberrimus.
“This Monument of Copernicus was erected by Melchior Pyrnesius, M. D., who died in 1589.
“On the same altar-piece, or picture, is represented the portrait of John D’Albert, with the following inscription.
Illustris Princeps Dn. Joh. Albertus, Polo. Rex, apoplexiâ hic Thoru. mortuus, Anno 1501, die 17 Maii, ætat. 41; cujus viscera hic sepulta, Corpore Craco translato; Reg. Ann. VIII.
“Upon the whole,” concludes Lord Buchan, “it appears the likeness I send, of Copernicus, is most to be depended on; and, as such, I flatter myself it will be an Heir-loom to infant America! Concerning Napier, it is needless for me to enlarge; the learned Dr. Minto having enabled me to do justice to his memory.”
Although the following particulars respecting Dr. Rittenhouse were not communicated by the writer, Professor Barton, until it was too late to give them a place in the body of the work, the Author nevertheless is glad to have an opportunity of presenting to the public, even at the close of his book, the interesting circumstances this communication contains.
As Optics were one of his favourite studies, so he at one time contemplated a course of public, and I think popular, lectures on this beautiful and important branch of physics. On this subject he mentioned to me his intention in the winter of 1785-1786. The enthusiasm, indeed, with which he developed his design, and I may add the warmth of zeal with which his manner at the time inspired me, I can never forget. And, indeed, I cannot but regret, that our excellent friend never made his appearance in publick, as a LECTURER. As such, he would, unquestionably, have greatly advanced the love and the knowledge of natural philosophy in the United-States. He may, perhaps, have wanted some of the qualifications of a popular teacher. He would not have aspired to finished eloquence of style: to the eloquence of gesture and of manner, he was still more a stranger. But there is an eloquence of physiognomy, which Mr. Rittenhouse most eminently possessed. The modesty and amenity of his manner would have effected much, whether his audience had been a class of philosophers, or an assembly of ladies. Of his own discoveries, and opinions, and theories, he would have always spoken with that sweet and modest reserve, for which he was ever distinguished. He would have dwelt with the most generous and ample enthusiasm upon the great discoveries of Newton; and if, at any time, he could have forgotten that impartial conduct, which it is the duty of the historian of a science to observe, it would have been when he might have had occasion to defend the theories of that great man, against the objections of succeeding and minor philosophers.
In Physics, Newton was his favourite author. Of HIM he ever spoke with a species of respect bordering upon veneration. He considered him as one of those few great leaders in science whose discoveries and services can never be forgotten: whose fame, instead of diminishing, is destined to be augmented, with the progress of time. I had many opportunities of being witness to the exalted opinion which he entertained of the immortal British philosopher. He read Dr. Bancroft’s objections to some parts of Sir Isaac’s theory of colours, with a firm conviction, that the Newtonian principles were still unshaken: and I well remember, that he once referred me to a paper which he had published, in one of our magazines, in answer to some objections which the late Dr. Witherspoon had urged against some of the theories of Newton.
It has been observed by a celebrated writer, that mathematicians in general read but little of each other’s works. This remark, if I mistake not, is very strongly illustrated in Mr. Rittenhouse. However it may have been in his earlier age, I am confident that during the last thirteen years of his life, when my intercourse with him was great, and indeed but little interrupted; I am confident, that at this matured and auspicious era of his life, our friend was not a laborious student. He looked into many books, and he often passed quickly from one kind of reading to another: from philosophy to poetry; from poetry perhaps to philosophy again. His reading may be said to have been desultory. I have little doubt that this rather irregular manner of reading was, in some measure, the result of his extreme delicacy of constitution, which rendered a more unvaried application to any one kind of reading, irksome and oppressive. Often have I seen him lay down his book or pen, to recline upon his sopha, the circumscribed flush upon his cheeks plainly indicating the physical state of his feelings. A short repose would enable him to return to his studies again.