administration of the university library at Bonn, and by the eight years of labour which carried to success a work of infinite complexity, the famous Priscae Latinitatis Monumenta Epigraphica (Bonn, 1862). This volume presents in admirable facsimile, with prefatory notices and indexes, the Latin inscriptions from the earliest times to the end of the republic. It forms an introductory volume to the Berlin Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, the excellence of which is largely due to the precept and example of Ritschl, though he had no hand in the later volumes. The results of Ritschl's life are mainly gathered up in a long series of monographs, for the most part of the highest finish, and rich in ideas which have leavened the scholarship of the time.
As a scholar, Ritschl was of the lineage of Bentley, to whom he looked up, like Hermann, with fervent admiration. His best efforts were spent in studying the languages and literatures of Greece and Rome, rather than the life of the Greeks and Romans. He was sometimes, but most unjustly, charged with taking a narrow view of “Philologie.” That he keenly appreciated the importance of ancient institutions and ancient art both his published papers and the records of his lectures amply testify. He devoted himself for the most part to the study of ancient poetry, and in particular of the early Latin drama. This formed the centre from which his investigations radiated. Starting from this he ranged over the whole remains of pre-Ciceronian Latin, and not only analysed but augmented the sources from which our knowledge of it must come. Before Ritschl the acquaintance of scholars with early Latin was so dim and restricted that it would perhaps be hardly an exaggeration to call him its real discoverer.
To the world in general Ritschl was best known as a student of Plautus. He cleared away the accretions of ages, and by efforts of that real genius which goes hand in hand with labour, brought to light many of the true features of the original. It is infinitely to be regretted that Ritschl's results were never combined to form that monumental edition of Plautus of which he dreamed in his earlier life. Ritschl's examination of the Plautine MSS. was both laborious and brilliant, and greatly extended the knowledge of Plautus and of the ancient Latin drama. Of this, two striking examples may be cited. By the aid of the Ambrosian palimpsest he recovered the name T. Maccius Plautus, for the vulgate M. Accius, and proved it correct by strong extraneous arguments. On the margin of the Palatine MSS. the marks C and DV continually recur, and had been variously explained. Ritschl proved that they meant “Canticum” and “Diverbium,” and hence showed that in the Roman comedy only the conversations in iambic senarii were not intended for the singing voice. Thus was brought into strong relief a fact without which there can be no true appreciation of Plautus, viz. that his plays were comic operas rather than comic dramas.
In conjectural criticism Ritschl was inferior not only to his great predecessors but to some of his contemporaries. His imagination was in this field (but in this field only) hampered by erudition, and his judgment was unconsciously warped by the desire to find in his text illustrations of his discoveries. But still a fair proportion of his textual labours has stood the test of time, and he rendered immense service by his study of Plautine metres, a field in which little advance had been made since the time of Bentley. In this matter Ritschl was aided by an accomplishment rare (as he himself lamented) in Germany — the art of writing Latin verse.
In spite of the incompleteness, on many sides, of his work Ritschl must be assigned a place in the history of learning among a very select few. His studies are presented principally in his Opuscula collected partly before and partly since his death. The Trinummus (twice edited) was the only specimen of his contemplated edition of Plautus which he completed. The edition has been continued by some of his pupils — Goetz, Loewe and others.
The facts of Ritschl's life may be best learned from the elaborate biography by Otto Ribbeck (Leipzig, 1879). An interesting and discriminating estimate of Ritschl's work is that by Lucian Mueller (Berlin, 1877).
RITSON, JOSEPH (1752-1803), English antiquary, was
born at Stockton-on-Tees, of a Westmorland yeoman family,
on the 2nd of October 1752. He was educated for the law,
and settled in London as a conveyancer when twenty-two.
He devoted his spare time to literature, and in 1782 published
au attack on Warton's History of English Poetry. The fierce
and insulting tone of his Observations, in which Warton was
treated as a showy pretender, and charged with cheating and
lying to cover his ignorance, made a great sensation in literary
circles. In nearly all the small points with which he dealt
Ritson was in the right, and his corrections have since been
adopted, but the unjustly bitter language of his criticisms roused
great anger at the time, much, it would appear, to Ritson's
delight. In 1783 Johnson and Steevens were assailed in the
same bitter fashion as Warton for their text of Shakespeare.
Bishop Percy was next subjected to a furious onslaught in the
preface to a collection of Ancient Songs (printed 1787, dated
1790, published 1792). The only thing that can be said in
extenuation of Ritson's unmatchable acrimony is that he
spared no pains himself to ensure accuracy in the texts of
old songs, ballads and metrical romances which he edited.
His collection of the Robin Hood ballads is perhaps his greatest
single achievement. Scott, who admired his industry and
accuracy in spite of his temper, was almost the only man who
could get on with him. On one occasion, when he called in
Scott's absence, he spoke so rudely to Mrs Scott that Leyden,
who was present, threatened to “thraw his neck” and throw him out of the window. Spelling was one of his eccentricities, his own name being an example: Ritson is short pronunciation for Richardson. As early as 1796 Ritson showed signs of mental collapse, and on the 10th of September 1803 he became
completely insane, barricaded himself in his chambers at
Gray's Inn, made a bonfire of manuscripts, and was finally
forcibly removed to Hoxton, where he died on the 23rd of the
month.
RITTENHOUSE, DAVID (1732-1796), American astronomer,
was born at Germantown, Pennsylvania, on the 8th of April
1732. First a watchmaker and mechanician he afterwards
became treasurer of Pennsylvania (1777-89), and from 1792 to
1795 director of the U.S. mint (Philadelphia). He was largely
occupied in 1763 and in 1779-86 in settling the boundaries of
several of the states. He was a fellow of the Royal Society of
London, and a member of the American Philosophical Society;
and was elected president of the latter society in 1791. As an
astronomer, Rittenhouse's principal merit is that he introduced
in 1786 the use of spider lines in the focus of a transit instrument.
His priority with regard to this useful invention was acknowledged
by E. Troughton, who brought spider lines into universal
use in astronomical instruments (see von Zach's Monatliche
Correspondenz, vol. ii. p. 215), but Felice Fontana (1730-
1805), professor of physics at the university of Pisa, and
afterwards director of the museum at Florence, had already
anticipated the invention in 1775, though no doubt this fact was
unknown to Rittenhouse. His researches were published in
the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society (1785-1799).
He died at Philadelphia on the 26th of June 1796.
See Memoir (1813) by William Barton.
RITTER, HEINRICH (1791-1869), German philosopher, was born at Zerbst on the 21st of November 1791, and died at Göttingen on the 3rd of February 1869. He studied philosophy and theology at Göttingen and Berlin until 1815. In 1824 he became extraordinary professor of philosophy at Berlin, whence he was transferred to Kiel, where he occupied the chair of philosophy from 1833 to 1837. He then accepted a similar position at the university of Göttingen, where he remained till his death. His chief work was a history of philosophy (Geschichte der Philosophie) published in twelve volumes at Hamburg from 1829 to 1853. This book is the product of a wide and thorough knowledge of the subject aided by an impartial critical faculty, and its value is demonstrated by the
