Portraits Leonhard Euler Daniel Bernoulli Johann-Heinrich Lambert Compiled and translated by Oscar Sheynin Berlin, 2010 Copyright Sheynin 2010 www.sheynin.de ISBN 3-938417-01-3 1 Contents Foreword I. Nicolaus Fuss, Eulogy on Leonhard Euler, 1786. Translated from German II. M. J. A. N. Condorcet, Eulogy on Euler, 1786. Translated from French III. Daniel Bernoulli, Autobiography. Translated from Russian; Latin original received in Petersburg in 1776 IV. M. J. A. N. Condorcet, Eulogy on [Daniel] Bernoulli, 1785. In French. Translated by Daniel II Bernoulli in German, 1787. This translation considers both versions V. R. Wolf, Daniel Bernoulli from Basel, 1700 – 1782, 1860. Translated from German VI. Gleb K. Michajlov, The Life and Work of Daniel Bernoullli, 2005. Translated from German VII. Daniel Bernoulli, List of Contributions, 2002 VIII. J. H. S. Formey, Eulogy on Lambert, 1780. Translated from French IX. R. Wolf, Joh. Heinrich Lambert from Mühlhausen, 1728 – 1777, 1860. Translated from German X. J.-H. Lambert, List of Publications, 1970 XI. Oscar Sheynin, Supplement: Daniel Bernoulli’s Instructions for Meteorological Stations 2 Foreword Along with the main eulogies and biographies [i, ii, iv, v, viii, ix], I have included a recent biography of Daniel Bernoulli [vi], his autobiography [iii], for the first time translated from the Russian translation of the Latin original but regrettably incomplete, and lists of published works by Daniel Bernoulli [vii] and Lambert [x]. The first of these lists is readily available, but there are so many references to the works of these scientists in the main texts, that I had no other reasonable alternative. A very short Supplement [xi] provides notice of instructions on geophysical observations compiled by Daniel Bernoulli. The older eulogies and biographies are certainly dated and sometimes contradict each other; in such cases, however, it is easy to discover the truth and in any case they provide valuable information about the life of their heroes and the attitude of the contemporaries to them. I have separated each contribution into sections which at the very least ensures the possibility of referring to their texts more definitely. The references such as [1736/15] show the year of publication and the number of the book or memoir in the lists of publications of Daniel Bernoulli or Lambert. For Euler, the notation is similar, but the number of publication is that given by Eneström (1910/1913) as reprinted in Euler (1962, pp. 352 – 385), see Joint Bibliography to [i] and [ii]. The Notes to each contribution are initialled by the appropriate author or by me. The initial F. R. in the Notes to [i] stand for Ferdinand Rudio, the Editor of the appropriate volume of Euler’s Opera omnia . The references to sources mentioned below in my Foreword are included in the Bibliographies to the appropriate contributions. A year ago I have published a collection of almost the same contributions translated into Russian. Now I see that it contains some mistakes, and the only explanation (not an excuse) seems to be that I have somehow failed to check my first draft. General Comments on Separate Contributions Comments on [i] The original French text of the Eulogy was published separately, then reprinted in the Nova Acta Acad. Scient. Imp. Petropolitana , 1787, pp. 159 – 212. Its German translation by the author himself was subdivided into sections separated by intervals; instead, I numbered them. Professor Gautschi had kindly sent me a draft of his own translation of the German text but avoided further contacts. Consequently, I have only made use of his work for checking here and there my own work and I also inserted his own translation of a Latin passage in § 29. In his Introduction, Fuss mentions von Michel, who allowed “Euler’s life to appear in a native guise by means of his art”. Rudio (p. XL of Euler’s Opera omnia , ser. 1, t. 1) explains that the German translation of the Eulogy was published in Basel at the expense of the 3 state (of Switzerland) and “adorned” by Euler’s portrait copying an engraving by Christian von Mechel (reproduced after the title page in that volume). Nikolai Ivanovich Fuss (1755 – 1826) was Euler’s disciple and became a member of the Petersburg Academy. He is known by his work in geometry, but mainly as Euler’s “small satellite” (Youshkevich 1968, p. 196). For a description of his life and work see Lysenko (1975). Two shortcomings of his Eulogy are, first, that he referred to the memoirs of his teacher not definitely enough; and, second, that he obviously prettified Friedrich II. Here is what Youshkevich (1968, p. 108) had to say about that monarch: Euler and Friedrich II “much disagreed about everything”, mathematics in particular. The monarch “did not appreciate any abstract investigations” and “all the time interfered” in the management of the Berlin Academy. Finally, with the best intentions Fuss invariably called Euler a genius and a great man, but, as far as style goes, he had thus overdone his admiration. Literature about Euler is of course immense. Among the newest sources I mention, Du Pasquier (1927), Spieß (1929), Michajlov (1985), Fellmann (2007) and of course Truesdell (in particular, his appropriate essays in vols. 11 and 12 of Euler’s Opera omnia , ser. 2). Many more worthy publications about Euler are appearing/will yet appear in connection with his jubilee. Comments on [ii] Condorcet provides some interesting details about Euler, but, taken as a whole, his Eloge is simply inadequate and shows disrespect to its readers. Repetitions abound, the description of Euler’s life and work is superficial, in places difficult to understand, sometimes illogical, in other places difficult if at all possible to understand, and ends (§ 38) with an astonishing statement to the effect that Euler’s life was almost cloudless. I have substantiated all this in my Notes which follow Condorcet’s text. Then, a few alleged facts contradict Fuss who undoubtedly knew everything relevant incomparably better. I have translated this Eloge and thus hopefully done away with Condorcet as an authority on Euler but I ought to add that France, one of the most enlightened European nation, as Condorcet reasonably believed, very soon found itself in the turmoil of a bloody revolution and he himself committed suicide while in detention. Comments on [iii] Here is what is known about Daniel Bernoulli’s Autobiography (Smirnov 1959, p. 501): it is A translation [into Russian] of a Latin Autobiography of Daniel Bernoulli kept at the Archive of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. The Petersburg Academy of Sciences received it on 21 July 1776. Its ending is apparently lost . Smirnov did not name the translator, likely Gokhman, who translated the entire Hydrodynamica , and in any case, according to its style the Russian text could not have been written earlier than in the 1920s or 1930s. 4 The translator had inserted in brackets a few Latin words from the original text. Bernoulli had sent his Autobiography to Petersburg and likely therefore somewhat prettified his relations with the Imperial Academy. Comments on [iv] and [v] Daniel Bernoulli (1700 – 1782) was a most prominent scientist mainly known for his pioneer work in mechanics and physics; see Straub (1970) for a modern description of his life and work. The first Eulogy [iv] is superficial (§§ 11 – 13), difficult to understand (§ 5 and description of works in mechanics), partly wrong (Daniel Bernoulli had not been happy and healthy all his life, see Wolf [v]) and includes long passages not directly bearing on his subject whereas his § 17 is as good as incoherent twaddle, cf. Note 19. I have checked his text against its German translation by Daniel II Bernoulli and in many places followed him rather than Condorcet but he obviously did not know as much as Wolf [v] about the life of his uncle. I note that he called D. B. our Daniel and our Bernoulli and manifested excessive respect for Condorcet. I am grateful to Dr. Fritz Nagel Basel) who sent me a photostat copy of that translation. Wolf (1858 – 1862) fulfilled a great work on the history of science in Switzerland and in particular provided much information on the Bernoulli family and on scientists more or less connected with Daniel Bernoulli including many passages from their correspondence with each other and him. Regrettably, he [v] documented his sources quite insufficiently and I was often unable to improve the situation. And he also felt himself at liberty to leave his sentences poorly connected with each other which sometimes hinders understanding (and translation). I left out many passages concerning other scientists. Some of his phrases are italicized or spaced out but it remains unclear whether by Wolf himself or by the authors whom he quotes. Neither Condorcet, nor Wolf (nor Daniel II Bernoulli) were able to describe satisfactorily Daniel Bernoulli’s work in statistics. On this subject see Todhunter (1865), Sheynin (1972) and Hald (1998). Comments on [viii] and [ix] Lambert is known less than Euler or Daniel Bernoulli; his modern biographer is Scriba (1973). Concerning the eulogies on him, I note that Formey [viii] compiled it as a philosopher or historian and Wolf [ix], as an astronomer, but did not notice Lambert’s pioneer work on the theory of errors (Sheynin 1971). In addition, Wolf mentioned hardly known Swiss place-names which I was unable to identify. I 5 Nicolaus Fuss Eulogy on Leonhard Euler Translated from French and extended by various additions by the author himself. Basel, 1786