Part 22

When, therefore, all the circumstances here mentioned, respecting Matthias Rittenhouse’s property and condition of life, shall be taken into view, it will be evident that he possessed a decent competency; with an estate quite independent, though not large: for he never enjoyed what is now termed affluence.

Concerning our Astronomer’s early life and condition, even his eloquent eulogist, Dr. Rush, was mistaken in some particulars. His assertion, that Mr. Rittenhouse was descended from parents “distinguished for probity, industry, and simple manners,” is perfectly correct. But, although he was comparatively “humble” in his “origin,” his father held the highly respectable station of an intelligent, independent farmer; and it has been also seen, that his paternal ancestors, for some generations in succession, were proprietors of considerable manufactories of an article important in commerce and the arts, and eminently useful in literature and science as well as in the common affairs of life.

-----

Footnote 83:

“Omnium autem rerum, ex quibus aliquid acquiritur, nihil est agriculturâ melius, nihil uberius, nihil dulcius, nihil homine, nihil libero dignius,” Cic. De Offic. ii. 42.

-----

Dr. Rush has remarked, in regard to Mr. Rittenhouse’s talents first becoming generally known, that “the discovery of his uncommon merit belonged chiefly to his brother-in-law, the Rev. Mr. Barton, Dr. Smith, and the late Mr. John Lukens.” Perhaps it might be said, with greater strictness, that the “discovery” here spoken of, belonged solely to Mr. Barton; by whom it was communicated, very early, to his learned and reverend friend, Dr. Smith,—and through him, to the ingenious astronomical observer, Mr. Lukens, (afterwards surveyer-general,) as well as some other distinguished characters of that time. The writer in the Maryland paper before referred to, after having noticed the prevailing opinion that Mr. Rittenhouse was self-taught, had corrected the full extent of that misconception, in these words: “This is not strictly true; for, while engaged in these acquirements,” (astronomy, &c.) “the Rev. Mr. Barton, a learned episcopal clergyman of Lancaster, married his sister.”——“Mr. Barton, admiring the simplicity of manners and natural genius of his brother-in-law, afforded him every assistance in his power,—not only in mathematics, but in several other branches of literature: Mr. Rittenhouse was worthy of his notice; for he lost no time, and spared no pains, to improve himself in knowledge, as far as his limited education would permit.”

Hence, as well as from the preceding narrative, it will appear that Dr. Rush was led into a further mistake, respecting Mr. Rittenhouse.—In regard to his exalted genius, the learned professor has amply done justice to his memory. He has, in particular, recorded one extraordinary fact, in proof of his genius, well worthy of notice; and which is therefore related in the Professor’s own words.——“It was during the residence of our ingenious philosopher with his father, in the country, that he made himself master of Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, which he read in the English translation of Mr. Motte. It was here, likewise, he became acquainted with the science of Fluxions; of which sublime invention he believed himself, for a while, to be the author: nor did he know for some years afterwards, that a contest had been carried on between Sir Isaac Newton and Leibnitz, for the honour of that great and useful discovery.” Then exclaims the ingenious eulogist, in terms of well-founded admiration, “What a mind was here!”—But, immediately after, he adds—“Without literary friends or society, and with but two or three books, he became, before he had reached his four-and-twentieth year, the rival of two of the greatest mathematicians in Europe!”—The circumstance must, then, have escaped Dr. Rush’s recollection—if indeed he had ever been made acquainted with it,—that five years before Mr. Rittenhouse attained to the age of twenty-four, he found at least one literary friend, in Mr. Barton; whose intimate society he long enjoyed, prior to that period; and that, through his means, he had access to many books.

-----

Footnote 84:

The opinion, that Mr. Rittenhouse was, in his youth and the first years of his manhood, “without literary friends or society, and with but two or three books,” though erroneous in fact, was propagated pretty early; and that opinion has, since, generally prevailed. About twenty-two years before his death, a book was published in Philadelphia, under the title of Caspipina’s Letters; of which the Rev. Mr. Duché, then assistant-minister of Christ-church and St. Peter’s in that city, was the writer. In that pleasant little work, its amiable and worthy author (who has been dead many years) has thus mentioned our philosopher. “After taking a few turns in the garden, we walked back again to the college, where we had appointed to meet the modest and ingenious Mr. Rittenhouse, who, without one single advantage from a private tutor, or public education, by the mere force of genius and industry, may now justly be reckoned the first astronomer and mathematician in the world.”

Under such circumstances as these, it is by no means a matter of surprise, that Dr. Rush should have been led into a similar mistake.

It is, nevertheless, truly astonishing to find an American writer (the late Rev. Mr. Linn,) who, five years after Dr. Rittenhouse’s death, published in Philadelphia, where both resided, a poem entitled, “The Powers of Genius;” but, in which the name of RITTENHOUSE is not once noticed! And yet that gentleman had not omitted to introduce, in one of his notes, an observation which shews, that an European philosopher, also of sublime genius, was present to his mind’s eye!—“From the exhibitions of American talents,” said Mr. Linn, “I indulge the warmest expectations. I behold, in imagination, the NEWTONS, the Miltons, and the Robertsons, of this new world; and I behold the sun of genius” (likewise “in imagination,” it is presumed,) “pouring on our land his meridian beams.”

The writer of these memoirs believes Dr. Linn to have been a very worthy, as well as an ingenious man: as such, he regrets his premature death, and entertains a respect for his memory. But he could not, in justice to the merit of Dr. Rittenhouse’s character, pass unnoticed so unaccountable an omission as the one just mentioned, in Dr. Linn’s Poem.

-----

It is not meant to be insinuated, however, that Mr. Barton ever gave Mr. Rittenhouse any insight into the knowledge of fluxions; or, indeed, much instruction, if any at all, in other of the higher branches of mathematics: because the first named gentleman never did himself pretend to the character of a profound mathematician; and because, likewise, although always esteemed a man of learning, his pursuits in science and literature were chiefly directed to objects of a different nature. That Mr. Rittenhouse derived some instruction and information from his early acquaintance with Mr. Barton, is certain: but, whatever may have been the extent of the literary advantages which the latter was enabled to confer on his young friend and companion, they could not in any degree derogate from the intrinsic excellence and greatness of our Astronomer’s innate genius.

That a mind so formed as that of our young philosopher—situated in life as he was—should have impelled him to assume the business of clock-making, can not be a matter of surprize: this occupation, connected with that of a mathematical instrument maker, is such as may be well supposed to have presented itself to his youthful ingenuity; being in accordance with the philosophical bent of his genius in his early years, while yet untutored in science and unknown to the world.

The great utility of the common clock, in measuring time, is universally known. It possesses numerous and manifest advantages, beyond those of sun-dials, clepsydræ, sand-glasses, and other horological instruments, by reason of its vastly superior accuracy: the sun-dial, indeed, is oftentimes wholly useless in all situations, even in the day-time; and always necessarily so, at night.

But the many improvements which have been made in modern times, in chronometers,—more especially in pendulum-clocks,—have very much advanced a correspondent accuracy in astronomical observations: and these improvements, together with those lately made in telescopes—chiefly by Dr. Herschel, the discoverer of the Georgium Sidus—afford good grounds for hoping, that yet farther and more important additions will continue to be made to the recent discoveries in astronomy.

-----

Footnote 85:

Dr. Herschel, by means of his admirable telescopes, the most powerful that have ever been constructed, discovered on the 13th of March, 1781, a new planet without the orbit of Saturn, called the Georgium Sidus. The newly discovered star was thus named by Dr. Herschel himself, in honour of his patron King George III. by whose bounty he was enabled to construct, and to make incessant and laborious observations with those wonderful telescopes, by which this astronomer has extended our knowledge of the planetary and sidereal system, far beyond its former limits.

Some astronomers on the continent of Europe, and in America likewise, have affected to call this new planet Herschel; while others have endeavoured to give it the name of Uranus. Would it not be well, in order to avoid the perplexity and confusion arising from various names for the same thing, that astronomers of eminence should designate this planet, in future, by the name which the discoverer—who, it may be presumed, was best entitled to give it a denomination—chose to apply to it? It is a strange kind of compliment to Dr. Herschel, if it could have been intended as a mark of respect to him, to refuse an adoption of that name which he had assigned to his own discovery; even by changing it for that of the Doctor himself! He wished this planet, no doubt, to retain the appellation of Georgium Sidus, as a memorial of his grateful respect for his royal benefactor; and in this object of his wish he would be disappointed, by changing it for any other.

The name Uranus is also objectionable, and on another ground. Uranus was a fabulous personage. It is pretended, that in the isle called Panchay, to the east of Africa, is to be seen on a column of gold, a recital of the principal actions of Uranus, together with those of Saturn and Jupiter. It is said that the former was the most ancient king in the world; and that, having been a just and beneficent man, well versed in the knowledge of the stars, he was the first who offered sacrifices to the gods of heaven. We are also told, that in the island just named is a mountain, where Uranus, holding the sceptre of the world, took great pleasure in contemplating the firmament and the stars. Among the sons of this monarch, according to the same fiction, the two most distinguished were Atlas and Saturn, who partitioned between them their father’s kingdom; and Atlas, who in the division acquired the sea-coasts, is said to have excelled in astrology: his reign is placed about sixteen hundred years before the Christian era, and he is therefore ranked as a co-temporary of Moses.

Such is the fabulous history of Uranus! whose name some Christian philosophers seem desirous to perpetuate, with honour, by attaching it to a newly-discovered world! It would be extremely difficult if not impracticable (and, perhaps, even if practicable, the attempt would not be advisable at this time of day,) to abolish such of the names of the heavenly bodies as are derived from the appellations of the false gods of antiquity. But it appears very questionable, whether it be consistent with propriety and a due regard to truth, to connect fable, in any manner, with established and important realities; or whether it be right to dignify the heathen mythology and the preposterous annals of fabulous ages, by unnecessarily associating any thing relating to them, with objects of genuine and useful science.

Baron Bielfeld seems to entertain similar sentiments on this head, when (treating of the mathematics, in his “Elements of Universal Erudition,”) he observes, that “the fables of ancient poets concerning the stars, and,” he adds, “the fancies of some modern Christian astronomers, who have given them names borrowed from the holy scriptures, do not deserve the least attention, when we would treat seriously on this science.” There is much justness in this observation of the learned and ingenious baron: But if the application of names derived from sacred writ, to the stars, be censurable; how much to be condemned among Christians is the practice of giving, even in our day, and in a science which has philosophical truth for its object, the names of heathen deities, and fabulous persons of antiquity, to the celestial bodies! Is it proper, can it, in any way, promote the interests of true science or the attainment of useful knowledge, thus to commemorate any of the absurdities of a false and impious mythology; or any of those traditional personages of the early ages, whose history, as handed down to us in the reveries of the ancient poets and other profane writers, are either enveloped in fable or inexplicable mystery? But to return from this digression:—

Mr. Lalande remarks in his great work on astronomy, which was published in the year 1792, that Louis XIV. gave to astronomers unceasing marks of the interest he took in their labours; and that George III. occupied, with great delight, much of his time in his Observatory at Richmond, as well as in Herschel’s at Slough. In his own, in Richmond Gardens, the king of England has noble and beautiful instruments; among which are a mural arch of 140° and 8 feet radius, made by Sisson, a sector of 12 feet, a transit telescope of 8 feet, made by Adams, and a telescope of 10 feet of Herschel. This grand Observatory was erected in the year 1770, under the direction of Dr. Bevis: it is 140 feet in front, and consists of two stories.

Such princes, then, as Louis XIV. and George III. deserve to be honourably mentioned in the records of astronomical science: and it was meritorious in Dr. Herschel, to dedicate to so munificent a patron and promoter of astronomy as the latter sovereign, in the way he has done, his important discovery of a new planet.