Part of a collection of 16 pages with astronomical tables and calculations, known as the Uppsala Notes. It contains astronomical observations handwritten by Nicolaus Copernicus. It is bound together with a copy of the Alfonsine Tables from 1492 and Regiomontanus’ tables from 1490. Originally the property of Nicolaus Copernicus, it later belonged to the archives of the Warmian cathedral chapter. Currently, it is part of the collection of the Uppsala University Library
Jagiellonian University monthly magazine
Special edition No. 243/2023
EDITORIAL OFFICE
31-126 Kraków, ul. Michałowskiego 9/3 tel. +48 12 663 23 50
e-mail: almamater@uj.edu.pl www.almamater.uj.edu.pl www.instagram.com/almamateruj
PROGRAMME COUNCIL
Zbigniew Iwański
Antoni Jackowski
Zdzisław Pietrzyk
Aleksander B. Skotnicki Joachim Śliwa
ACADEMIC CONSULTANT
Jacek Popiel
EDITORIAL TEAM
Rita Pagacz-Moczarska – Chief Editor
Zofia Ciećkiewicz – Editor
Alicja Bielecka-Pieczka – Editor
Anna Wojnar – Photojournalist
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Kamil Jodłowiec and Bartosz Zawiślak (except pages 38–45, 78–81 and 96)
PROOFREADING
Kamil Jodłowiec and Bartosz Zawiślak
He stopped the Sun and moved the Earth
Copernicus’ work has its roots in Kraków – An interview with Professor Marcin Karas by Rita Pagacz-Moczarska
PUBLISHER
Jagiellonian University
31-007 Kraków, ul. Gołębia 24
ORIGINAL IDEA AND LAYOUT FOR THE MAGAZINE
Rita Pagacz-Moczarska
PRE-PRESS
Agencja Reklamowa „NOVUM” www.novum.krakow.pl
PRINTED BY Drukarnia Pasaż sp. z o.o. 30-363 Kraków, ul. Rydlówka 24
Cover photographs: Front – Jan Matejko, Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God (fragment), 1873
Back – Statue of Nicolaus Copernicus in front of Collegium Witkowski
Photo by Rita Pagacz-Moczarska
The Editors do not return uncommissioned texts and reserve the right to abridge and edit submitted texts. The Editors are not liable for advertisements and notices.
Sent to print on September 15, 2023.
ISSN 1427-1176
Print run: 1000 copies
True genius. Creator of the heliocentric model of the Universe. Astronomer, mathematician, physician, lawyer, economist, philosopher: one of the most remarkable students of the University of Kraków and at the same time one of the most famous men of science in the world. Nicolaus Copernicus. Why is he so extraordinary? What proof do we have that he was Polish? What did he wait for thirty years before publishing his earth-shattering work, De revolutionibus? What is the most spectacular lie about Copernicus? What can we still learn from him today? The articles published in this special edition of Alma Mater monthly are an attempt at answering these and many more questions about the life and passions of the exceptional Polish scholar. The issue is published to celebrate the 550th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus and the 480th anniversary of his death.
Copernicus was a modest man. He was characterised by his humility in the pursuit of truth, curiosity about the world, consistency in avoiding rash actions and courage in the face of new challenges. His studies in 1491–1495 in Kraków had a profound impact on his scholarly career, and his most famous work, as stressed by Professor Marcin Karas in the issue’s opening interview, has its roots in Kraków. Professor Krzysztof Stopka writes about the thriving liberal arts school at the University of Kraków and the open-mindedness of young Copernicus’ teachers, while Reverend Professor Michał Heller, in a published fragment of his latest book Nicolaus Copernicus’ Theory of Relativity, emphasises that ‘in his work, Copernicus’ pioneering astronomical achievements are intertwined with his contemporary worldview on philosophy and nature’. The issue also features the fascinating story of the subsequent owners of the De revolutionibus manuscript and its way to the Jagiellonian Library told by Professor Zdzisław Pietrzyk. There are noteworthy texts about Copernicus as a physician, about the traces of his reflections in modern economic thought, about exhibitions devoted to the astronomer in the Royal Castle in Warsaw and in the Jagiellonian Library, about numerous Copernicana as well as Jan Matejko’s famous painting Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God owned by the Jagiellonian University.
I encourage you to read on, and I hope that the articles published in this issue of Alma Mater, together with more than 250 unique illustrations sourced mainly from the Jagiellonian Library and Jagiellonian University Museum, are a fitting commemoration of Copernicus’ life and work, presenting interesting insights into his biography and showing him in a new light.
I would also like to believe that the knowledge contained in this issue will intrigue the Readers and become an inspiration for creative endeavours in various fields. Maybe it will even give them an idea for a new research project and entice them to solve some mind-boggling research mysteries? As we have learned from Copernicus, everyone can become a discoverer, provided they have no shortage of passion…
Rita Pagacz-MoczarskaTo mark the 550th anniversary of birth and the 480th anniversary of death of the great astronomer, who in his work De revolutionibus orbium coelestium presented the framework of the heliocentric model of the Universe, thereby shattering the commonly accepted view of the world, the Senate of the Republic of Poland has proclaimed 2023 as the Year of Nicolaus Copernicus.
To celebrate this occasion, the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, and University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, together with the Polish Academy of Sciences Institute for the History of Science have organised the World Copernican Congress in Poland. They aim to present the current state of research on the life and work of the eminent scholar and his influence on the development of science, culture and art. The official opening of this unique event took place on February 19, 2023 in Toruń, on the anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus. International debates attended by historians, culture experts, literary scholars and art historians interested in discussing Nicolaus Copernicus’ place in culture as well as astronomers, historians of astronomy, specialists from the field of medical sciences, economists, philosophers, and historians of these disciplines were held in Toruń, Kraków, Olsztyn and once more in Toruń.
□ Professor, in you book Nowy obraz świata. Poglądy filozoficzne Mikołaja Kopernika [A new image of the world. The philosophical views of Nicolaus Copernicus] published in 2018 by the JU Press, you write that the great scholar is numbered amongst the most famous scientists in our culture. It seems that everyone in the world has heard about the genius of Nicolaus Copernicus. Why is he so extraordinary?
■ To learn about Copernicus, one needs only to look at the introduction to the first book of De revolutionibus. Although it’s a rhetorical text aimed to prepare the reader for reception of the work, reading between the lines it can also be seen as a kind of intellectual autobiography: how the astronomer saw himself, how and in what conditions he carried out his research, and what his conclusions were.
Surprisingly, he kept to himself and did not engage in research in his everyday life. He managed the funds of the Warmian cathedral chapter, he fulfilled the duties of a canon, lawyer, physician and economist; he even dabbled in security and defence. He was a practical man. The astronomical discovery for which he is the most famous and which has earned him his recognition was the result of his spare time activities. He wasn’t a professional astronomer: he hadn’t worked at any university, he hadn’t been part of the academic community, he hadn’t given any lectures; he had contacts with scholars because of his interests. And it was precisely because of this freedom as well as the amateur and solitary nature of his work that he was able to keep his thinking fresh and out of the box. It’s worth to mention that he was also interested in mathematics, physics, history, cartography, philology, astrology and philosophy. So his extraordinariness is to a large extent based on contrast: that such a modest person, largely unknown in the scholarly community and living in Frombork, where there was no academic presence, managed to make such a monumental discovery.
If Copernicus was a professor of our Kraków University, or other prestigious institution such as one of the universities in Paris, Padua, Bologna, Naples or Cologne, it could’ve been reasonably expected that such a discovery would’ve eventually come. What is more, it would’ve been safe to presume that he would’ve created more works describing even more discoveries. As it stands, there was only one book, published after long deliberations, since its author needed to be sure his reasoning was sound and provable.
□ There have been many discussions on Copernicus’ nationality. What do historical sources say? What proof do we have that he was Polish?
■ That’s a very good question. There’s a lot of superficial information on this subject to be found on the Internet. It could be jokingly said that probably every country would in some way like to, directly or indirectly, place Copernicus among its citizens and somehow prove his relationship with it. The Danish would like to see him as the predecessor of astronomer Tycho Brahe, the French – as the successor of Bishop Nicole Oresme, the English – as a precursor to Thomas Digges, who explored the heliocentric theory, the Italians –as a student of Domenico Maria Novara da Ferrara, and the Greeks – as a faithful follower of Bessarion. The Germans started to make claims that Copernicus belonged to their nation in the 19th century, when the Polish state ceased to exist due to partitions. Previously,
they had no doubts he was a Pole. The historical facts that need to be borne in mind unequivocally confirm that Copernicus was Polish.
It is widely known that the concept of ‘nationality’ was understood differently than it is today. That’s why, when carrying out research on Copernicus’ national identity, I first set up a number of criteria related to ethnicity, language as well as social and political issues, and then checked how Copernicus fit into them. As far as ethnicity goes, the Copernicus family came from Silesia. The area where they lived in the 14th and 15th century was dominated by the Polish. Though the name Copernicus (Kopernik) is of German origin, the family was of Polish ancestry from both the father’s and the mother’s side.
Even though Copernicus wasn’t recorded to ever have said ‘I’m Polish’ or ‘I’m German’, research by linguist Professor Stanisław Rospond very clearly shows that Copernicus made mistakes in German texts, while he wrote correctly in Polish (when writing down names). It points to the fact that he was more familiar with Polish than German.
Toruń, where Copernicus’ parents settled down, was a multilingual town, but Poles constituted a large part of its inhabitants. As I mention in my book, in the 15th century there were five churches in the town: in three of them, sermons were delivered in Polish, in the other two – in German. So there was a noticeable majority of Poles there. Besides, when the Polish King Casimir IV Jagiellon –who negotiated what is now known as the Second Peace of Toruń
with the Teutonic Order on October 19th, 1466 in Artus Court – frequented the town, representatives of the town council spoke with him in Polish. So despite what some Germans might be saying, Toruń was not a Hanseatic, Germanic town. The Polish heritage of Copernicus’ parents is also confirmed by the fact that, being very religious, they joined the Third Order of Saint Dominic, but not the one operating at the Toruń convent, which at the time was aligned with the Teutonic Order; instead, they chose the Kraków monastery. Copernicus surely spoke Polish both at home and at school, including his time at Kraków University.
In Warmia, when settling peasants on the lands belonging to the cathedral chapter, he wrote down their names phonetically, with Polish pronunciation and spelling, as no German would’ve done. He always signed his own name in either Polish or Latin, never in German. Additionally, when he treated Georg von Kunheim the Elder, he wrote letters in German to Duke Albrecht Hohenzollern, making simple mistakes that according to Professor Stanisław Rospond were caused by the fact that Copernicus used it as a non-native language.
When it comes to political identity, Copernicus favoured neither the Teutonic Order not the Germans. He never felt close to any German duchy. He never travelled to Germany, though his bust is included in the pantheon of famous Germans at the Walhalla memorial in Donaustauf. Instead,
he always sided with the Polish King Sigismund I the Old, whose reign (1506–1548) came during the times of Copernicus’ professional career. The author of the heliocentric theory was loyal to the Polish king, as he represented his interests in Warmia. When addressing the king on behalf of the Warmian chapter, he called him ‘our monarch’. Poland was Copernicus’ homeland in the broader meaning of the word; in the narrower sense, it was Royal Prussia. He became a Prussian by choice and supported his fellow countrymen, working towards the economic prosperity of Warmia, but always in a close relationship with Poland. There’s also much evidence that in 1504–1530, during regional assemblies in Royal Prussia, he served as a translator for Polish officials who performed their duties at the behest of the Polish king.
So, in every possible way of understanding the concept of nationality, both past and present, Copernicus was Polish.
□ Another proof of his everyday use of the Polish language is the fact that his servant was a Pole named Wojtek Cebulski…
■ It was either Cebulski or Szebulski. Indeed, Copernicus must’ve spoken with him in Polish, since the boy came from a Masovian village and couldn’t have spoken German. Interestingly, in German historiography Cebulski is called Albert in order to cover up his true ethnicity. Copernicus also spoke in Polish with peasants coming to Warmia from Masovia. They also couldn’t have spoken German, and Copernicus had to talk to them in detail about farming issues as well as their rights and responsibilities. In Olsztyn, together with Zbigniew Słupecki, who only spoke Polish, Copernicus organised the defence of the town against the Teutonic Order.
□ Copernicus’ father, also named Nicolaus (about 1420–1483), was a merchant who came to Kraków as a young man. His mother, Barbara (about 1440–after 1495), came from the family Watzenrode. Where exactly did his ancestors come from?
■ The Copernicus family came from the village of Koperniki, located in the powiat (district) of Nysa, near the border with Czechia, close to Opawa Mountains. Even today, in the village there stands a church dedicated to St. Nicholas – though not the original one from the times of Copernicus, but one built later by a German architect in the late 19th century, when the settlement belonged to Germany. When the Copernicus family lived there in the 15th century, the village’s population was ethnically Polish. Based on the names of other places in the area, we can assume that the majority of people were Polish. It was later that German settlers arrived and the region gradually became Germanised. The Copernicus family moved around to various regions in the south of Poland, in particular Nysa, Wrocław, Kraków and Toruń. The astronomer had many Polish relatives, such as his grandmother Katarzyna Modlibożanka and members of the Konopacki, Kostka and Działyński families. Copernicus’ father lived in Kraków, then
became a copper trader and moved to Toruń, which turned into an important trading hub after Poland regained it from the Teutonic Order, as the Vistula River was the main waterway for transporting goods to Gdańsk and further west. In Toruń, he married Barbara Watzenrode, who probably came from Świdnica. The family of Nicolaus’ mother who lived in Toruń was also Polish-speaking.
□ Copernicus had three siblings: two sisters, Barbara and Katarzyna, as well as a brother, Andrzej, with whom he travelled to attend the university in Kraków. What do we know about Nicolaus’ brother and sisters? Did he stay in touch with them?
■ Questions related to Copernicus’ siblings weren’t in the scope of my research. Details on that can be found, among other works, in Jerzy Sikorski’s book Prywante życie Mikołaja Kopernika [The private life of Nicolaus Copernicus]. We know that his brother Andrzej, also a canon of the Warmian cathedral chapter, later fell ill with leprosy, which he’d contracted while in Italy, and soon died as a consequence. Katarzyna married Bartłomiej Gaertner of Kraków and had five children. Barbara joined the Cistercian monastery in Chełmno.
□ After the death of Nicolaus’ father in 1483, the family was looked after by his mother’s brother, the Warmian bishop Łukasz Watzenrode (1447–1517), who had the reputation of a very strict man. It was his idea to send both of Barbara’s sons, Andrzej and Nicolaus, to study at the University of Kraków in 1491. When he arrived in the city, Nicolaus was not yet 19 years old. Which lectures at Kraków University had the greatest impact on his further academic career?
■ I suspect instead of lectures on economics, law and medicine, he was most interested in the philosophy of science as well as astronomy, discoveries and cosmology.
Kraków University was an ideal place for Copernicus, most importantly because he could be schooled not only in observational and theoretical astronomy, but also philosophy. Unfortunately, not many researchers focus on this issue. One of the greatest experts in the Polish philosophy of the late Middle Ages was the medievalist Professor Mieczysław Markowski. I had the honour of him being the reviewer of both my PhD and habilitation theses. That great scholar carefully examined the background of Copernicus’ life by reading manuscripts found at the Jagiellonian Library that had not been previously studied by anyone. This project resulted in a phenomenal book, Burydanizm krakowski w okresie przedkopernikańskim [Cracovian Buridanism in the pre-Copernican period], which contains about six hundred pages. Unfortunately, it was only published in a limited number of about five hundred copies. Maybe now, during the Year of Nicolaus Copernicus, somebody will provide the funding necessary to publish it again, this time in more copies… For me, it was the fundamental reading matter during my research on Copernicus in Kraków. Professor Markowski posited that at Kraków University, philosophy was taught in a very open way, in particular when it came to natural philosophy. There were many schools of thought which complemented each other through discussion. Scholars debated the philosophy of not only John Buridan, but also Thomas Aquinas, Albert of Saxony, John Versor, Giles of Rome and William of Ockham. Other European
universities tended to focus on one of these schools and there were heated debates when it came to choosing the direction for natural philosophy. In Kraków, however, professors came to a very sound conclusion that if scholars in Paris or Oxford are wasting their time discussing trifling issues, it’s better to find a common ground, via communis: a stable, shared platform which would serve to further develop philosophical thought. And Copernicus found it to be a great foundation upon which he could devise his reform of astronomy, since he saw potential in the philosophy of Aristotle. In contrast to the writings of later historians, who had no knowledge of Buridanism, Aristotelianism was not an obstacle for Copernicus. When reading Copernicus’ works in the original, one can clearly see he based his theory on Aristotle, but in the way he was perceived in the Middle Ages in Kraków, influenced by the via communis approach. Aside from Albertism, Thomism, Ockhamism and Buridanism, the astronomer used his own, shall we say, Copernican natural philosophy as a base to create the heliocentric model of the world. It turned out that it wasn’t necessary to replace Aristotle with Plato, as per Popper’s views, but rather correct him, as was previously done by Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham, and others, particularly John Buridan and Albert of Saxony.
To prove that Earth moves, some assumptions needed to be changed. The main problem was that based on classical Aristotelianism, Earth cannot be moved, because it’s heavy and there’s no force trying to do it. Heavenly spheres move because they are formed out of aether, and so they only need a ‘constant mover’ that faces no resistance, metaphysically driving them and giving them purpose. This movement is very simple, because they have no mass,
no weight. Earth, however, as Aristotle saw it, has no mover, and therefore must be in the centre of the Universe.
Copernicus’ saw that his observations imply that the model of the Universe would’ve been better if it had been more rational, more ordered, more elegant. It would explain more and in a simpler way, in terms of quality, not quantity, with more inner cohesion, and would be better suited to the Creator’s expectations. And that is what he decided to show. If the Creator made the world wisely, then there is no chaos, no unnecessary additions. Everything must be structurally harmonious and coherent. Additional changes need to be applied to Aristotelianism: firstly, aether needs to be removed, following Buridan’s example. The whole Universe is built out of the same four elements: earth, water, air and fire. The concept of ‘place’ needs to be altered as well. The centre of the Universe is not the natural place for Earth. Every star and every planet is round and has its own place. Places are no longer absolute, but rather relative. It can be said that Copernicus’ theory was based on a relative concept of natural places. Aristotle’s assumptions excluded the possibility of a moving Earth: it was in the centre because it was natural. And Copernicus said: ‘Every planet is in its own natural place, and since other planets move, Earth must also be doing so. Even the Sun could be moving, though it does not have to, but if there is a centre, something should be in it. And it is the most fitting for the Sun to be at the centre, just as we hang a lamp in the middle of the ceiling’. These are very basic examples, but they are in accordance with the Aristotelian spirit. A healthy dose of empiricism, kept under control by speculative theory. The Sun shines equally on the entire Universe if it’s in the middle. If it was in a more peripheral place, its light wouldn’t be distributed evenly. Planets are brighter when they are close and darker when they are far – a simple observation. Copernicus observed that there must be three types of Earth’s movement: daily motion, yearly motion and precessive motion. All of this works only if one modifies the concept of element, which is what Buridan did, and the concept of place, which is what Copernicus did. One more scholastic comment on Aristotle, if you will.
□ So could one be compelled to say that Copernicus’ work is strictly Cracovian in nature?
■ Even if Copernicus wouldn’t have said that Kraków University is his alma mater in the intellectual sense, such conclusion might be made on the basis of his writing. In all his deliberations on Aristotle, he writes about physics as a foundation for astronomy. The essence of these considerations is Cracovian. It’s as if he discussed this with someone in Kraków. And although Copernicus worked out of Frombork, he based his work on the knowledge he had gained as a student taking notes in Kraków.
□ Still, during the debate Czego nie wiemy jeszcze o Koperniku [What we don’t know about Copernicus], which took place in November 2022 in JU Auditorium Maximum within the
framework of Big Questions in Kraków, when one person asked: ‘Where did Copernicus make his great discovery?’, most panellists were of the opinion that it must’ve been in Italy…
■ I daresay that might not necessarily be the case. Copernicus might’ve thought of the idea when he was still in Kraków. He may have looked for more proof in Italy, but he was already convinced that Kraków shaped him as an astronomer, and I’m sure that when leaving for Italy, he had the basic idea of the heliocentric theory, especially since he described the first model of this theory in his short work Commentariolus (Little Commentary) as early as the first decade of the 16th century, a short while after his studies in Kraków.
□ And what role in Copernicus’ scholarly development was played by Kraków University professor Wojciech of Brudzewo, also known as Albert de Brudzewo or Wojciech Brudzewski, an eminent representative of Kraków school of mathematical and astronomical thought, who had had already stopped teaching astronomy at the University, but instead passionately told students about the philosophy of Aristotle? What influence could he have had on young Copernicus?
■ To my mind, enormous. But to confirm it would require more research into manuscripts found at the Jagiellonian Library. An interesting paper entitled La critique de l’univers de Peurbach développée par Albert de Brudzewo a-t-elle influencé Copernic ? Un nouveau regard sur les réflexions astronomiques au XVe siècle [Did the critique of Peurbach’s universe developed by Albert de Brudzewo influence Copernicus? A new look at astronomical reflections in the 15th century] was published by Italian researcher Michela Malpangotto in Almagest, International Journal for the History of Scientific Ideas in 2013. In that paper, she proved that there’s a direct influence of Brudzewski’s writing on Copernicus, and it’s a positive one. Copernicus has drawn a lot of inspiration from the works of that scholar. This is because Wojciech of Brudzewo asked himself questions that bothered all philosophers of the late medieval period: ‘How to reconcile two different geocentric models of the Universe? How to reconcile Ptolemy with Aristotle?’. And Copernicus did it! To simplify a bit, it can be said that Copernicus’ work is at the same time the last gasp of medieval science and the first cry of Renaissance science. Proponents of Scholasticism demanded a reconciliation between Ptolemy and Aristotle. It’s not good when there are two similar models that differ in some aspects, when the beautiful Universe is described in two ways. Brudzewski wanted to reconcile these two concepts and conceive of a coherent theory. In his 13th century commentary to Aristotle’s view of the heavens, Thomas Aquinas also said there were two models and there might be a third one in the future.
Wojciech of Brudzewo tried to find out who erred – was it Ptolemy or Aristotle? – and correct him. He criticised the concept of equant (equant point) and various issues related to geometry. He asked questions, but couldn’t find the answers. And then all these
questions and arguments gathered by Brudzewski were used by Copernicus, who in that sense was his ‘student’. He didn’t necessarily need to listen to Brudzewski’s lectures. It’s enough that he read his notes, commentaries or books, and talked to people Brudzewski had taught at the University of Kraków. Copernicus knew that Brudzewski set the task of ‘fixing astronomy’, and the pope – of ‘fixing calendar’. And so, he worked on these problems and found the solution.
□ Why did Wojciech of Brudzewo disappear in Copernicus’ shadow?
■ He shared the fate of John Buridan, Nicole Oresme and Nicholas of Cusa. Copernicus’ discovery was so great – one of the greatest in human history – that it overshadowed the achievements of other distinguished scholars. When the Sun shines in the sky, no planet is visible. Though they are all there, one cannot see them, because the Sun is too bright. Copernicus made such a breakthrough in all aspects of life that the others are simply overlooked, even though they directly or indirectly helped him. That’s the way of the world: when someone achieves something truly great, something revolutionary, then the others who came before receive less recognition.
□ Where could have Nicolaus lived during his studies in Kraków?
■ Students from Royal Prussia lived in dormitories, such as the Dormitory of the Poor (Bursa Pauperum), Philosophers’ Dormitory (Bursa Philosophorum), Jerusalem Dormitory (Bursa Hierusalem), Hungarian Dormitory (Bursa Ungarorum) and German Dormitory (Bursa Theutonicorum). Were the brothers Nicolaus and Andrzej
among them? We’ve no idea. According to some researchers, it’s highly probable that the brothers lived in the Jerusalem Dormitory, which used to be located in ul. Gołębia (Gołębia street). Some speculate they might have lived in ul. Kanonicza (Kanonicza street), in the house of nobleman Piotr Wapowski, a friend of their uncle Łukasz Watzenrode. This seems all the more likely because later Nicolaus became a friend of Piotr’s nephew, Bernard Wapowski, with whom he exchanged letters, for instance about the movement of the eighth sphere.
□ During the aforementioned debate (What we don’t know about Copernicus), you stressed how extremely important for learning the details about the life and discoveries of the famous astronomer is the study of source texts, which should be also read between the lines. You emphasised that Copernicus should be discovered through various contexts. So, reading between the lines – since Copernicus didn’t write any footnotes – and taking into account various contexts, is it possible to determine what books he made use of while reinventing the image of the world?
■ He could’ve made use of an entire collection of canonical works available to astronomers and cosmologists, including De sphaera mundi by Johannes de Sacrobosco, synopses of Ptolemy’s Almagest (a treatise in thirteen books containing comprehensive astronomical knowledge of that time period and a mathematical explanation of the geocentric theory) written by Georg von Peurbach and Regiomontanus, and astronomical tables from Spain. Professor Ludwik Antoni Birkenmajer travelled around the world – including, naturally, to Uppsala – to gather records of Copernicus’ collection of books and his research. Copernicus faced a very difficult task, as he concluded that it wouldn’t be possible to reform astronomy after
Feliks Sypniewski, Mikołaj Kopernik wykłada swą naukę wobec uczonych krakowskich w r. 1509 [Nicolaus Copernicus lays out his theory to Kraków scholars in 1509], woodcut, Warsaw, 1870s. Drawing published in Tygodnik Ilustrowany weekly No. 269 from February 22, 1873, devoted to the memory of Nicolaus Copernicus on the 400th anniversary of his birth From the collection of the Jagiellonian LibraryPage form Vitello’s 13th-century work on optics entitled Vitellionis mathematicii doctissimi peri optikis id est de natura, ratione et proiectione radiorum visus, luminum, colorum atque formarum quam vulgo Perspectivam vocant Libri X, Nuremberg 1535. Originally belonging to Nicolaus Copernicus
taking just one look at the sky, because in that case, one only had the knowledge of its current state. Some celestial bodies move very slowly, others have long-period movement that makes it impossible to predict the geometry of their passage during the course of one lifetime. Hence, Copernicus’ had to collect records of all medieval and ancient observations, compare them as best as he could with his own conclusions, and only then perform calculations.
One has to bear in mind that Copernicus had no specialised optical equipment to carry out his research, just simple wooden rulers and a brass astrolabe which he used to measure the angles between bright dots in the sky. He wanted to know how the regularly moving dots had looked like a few thousand years ago. The problem was, as proved by Birkenmajer, that all available literature was devoted to the Egyptian calendar. So even if some information about the Sun, an eclipse or the position of a particular planet had had been recorded somewhere, and Copernicus read it, at first it would have meant nothing to him, because it was based on the Egyptian calendar. He first had to translate it to the Christian calendar. He had to put in an enormous amount of work to, for instance, learn how the Egyptian calendar looked like and how the months were called (and they were called differently in every manuscript), then determine which date an ancient astronomer had had in mind, and only then find the correct date in the Julian calendar, which was the norm in his times. Afterwards, he could calculate how many years,
months, weeks and days passed between the observations, put it all into one model and finally determine the mechanics of a particular movement. When carrying out this partly scientific, partly detective work, he acted like a good historian: he collected all available sources and studies and attempted to find patterns. And then he built his model on the basis of that. Copernicus was not primarily an observer. He chose what to observe, because he already knew what to look for thanks to the records left by his predecessors, and he wanted to know what had changed since their times. It’s a very interesting approach: astronomy based on history rather than observation.
□ So the ground-breaking discovery wasn’t based solely on observations of the sky, but also on reading the works of his ancient and medieval predecessors?
■ Yes. Copernicus said that one needs to look at reality with both eyes, meaning one needs to observe, but make use of knowledge, and experience the world empirically, but based on reason. It’s an Aristotelian proposition. Texts contain theory, but observation is empiricism. Plato, though, would probably not be so inclined to observe things. For him, mathematical speculation was more important. Since the world is made up of shadows, one needs to look at their source – ideas – instead of reality. However, Copernicus stayed true to Aristotle’s postulate that theories are tested with observations, and observations are explained with theories. If one follows this principle, then theories can very closely adhere to reality. This was stressed chiefly by Thomas Aquinas. So it could be said that Copernicus was in some sense a Thomist. Some versions of Aristotelianism became a bit blurry when it came to established concepts, so I think that on the spectrum of all the possibilities, Copernicus was not only a Buridanist, but Thomism was also close to how he viewed reality. This was basically his own philosophy. So in this sense, he’s the precursor of modern science; not of various positivist approaches, but rather those related to metaphysics, which contain a bit of the speculative element.
It’s worth to point out that some books simplistically state that Copernicus read Greek originals because Latin translations were poor. That is not true. To learn about the structure of the Universe, he required only the Latin synopses of Almagest written by German astronomers nearly one hundred years earlier. He based his work on Latin sources and later, when his only student Georg Joachim Rheticus bought him the Greek original as a gift, he compared the two and saw that he was right.
□ What else can we read between the lines when analysing Copernicus’ works?
■ Something that might surprise a lot of readers: respect for tradition. Copernicus is often spoken about as a revolutionary who had to destroy everything and build something new in its place. In truth, no one reading his work will find a single mention of revolution. In his book, Copernicus says he will paint a new, better picture, but he will essentially do it using the old ways and old tools. He draws from tradition, which he respects along with his predecessors, whose works he had read with great care. He doesn’t say they are silly and fool their readers, but instead shows that science is constantly developing, accumulating more and more information, and at a certain point it becomes necessary to rebuild everything, because old information can be interpreted in new ways.
He acted very similarly as an administrator. When he arrived at the Warmian cathedral chapter and saw that fields were not being tended due to war, he didn’t blame his predecessors and accuse them of negligence. He didn’t complain or cry in outrage, but instead invited peasants from Masovia and parcelled out the land. He encountered a problem and set out to find a solution.
Likewise, as Poland regained Royal Prussia from the Teutonic Order after the Second Peace of Toruń, he didn’t complain that participants of regional assemblies were unable to communicate because some of them spoke Polish and some German, but instead travelled to these gatherings and translated from one language to the other.
He had the idea that coins should be minted bearing not only the Polish coat of arms, but the Prussian one as well, so that Prussians would feel connected to both Kraków and King Sigismund I the Old. He promoted local patriotism. He made sure the price of bread was reasonable and that Olsztyn had a sufficient reserves of gunpowder in the face of a Teutonic attack. He negotiated the amount of the gunpowder with a Polish commander. On that occasion, he also learned how to operate a cannon, and later, when writing De revolutionibus, he used expressions such as ‘sudden ejection of a charge by rapidly burning gunpowder’. He saw that during military exercises. He saw what Newton later described as angular momentum. He wanted to show his readers that physics is related to movement.
□ Copernicus was undoubtedly a hard-working, conscientious, consistent, curious and modest scientist. What else can be said about him as a person?
■ Based on what the astronomer himself said, on what his student Georg Joachim Rheticus recorded, and on the opinions of his contemporaries, we can say quite a lot. He was a solitary man when it came to science, he carried out his research by himself, but he was by no means a loner: when he travelled to assemblies, he enjoyed the company of other people. He felt fulfilled as a physician. He didn’t argue with people. He was neither vainglorious nor arrogant, he didn’t make people around him nervous. He had clear, concrete ideas. He was modest, as he never put himself before his research. He made a great discovery, but had the humility to notice the achievements of many great scholars who came before him and from whom he learned so much.
He was very patient and persistent. He put off the publication of his work until he was sure he checked everything, and published it after Rheticus’ arrival in Frombork, when he understood that he could find no more arguments.
Naturally, there is much literary oversimplification. Some people would like to see Copernicus in a more dramatic light, so they portray him as pushed off to the edge of the world, where he still managed to become successful and make his discovery. But he lived in Frombork because of his work. If he lived in Kraków, he probably would’ve reformed astronomy as well. Indeed, he made calculations and wrote his observations on the basis of the Kraków meridian, so Kraków was always a place close to him. Not German universities, but the University of Kraków.
□ He must have been a man of great resolve, strength and bravery, since he defied his domineering uncle and refused to become ordained…
■ Copernicus found a way to get along with him. At first, he did what his uncle told him, but later he came to value his independence.
□ And what about Anna Schilling? Who was she to Copernicus?
■ I didn’t investigate this issue, because I don’t like being sensational.
□ Copernicus’ life got more complicated when Johannes Dantiscus, a schemer and manipulator, became the Bishop of Warmia. Copernicus became the target of denouncing letters, some of which were written by Feliks Reich. The main reason behind them was the issue of Anna Schilling. In a letter to Dantiscus, Copernicus wrote that he hadn’t had send her away since it was difficult to cast aside a person who was not only a good cook, but also a relative… He promised to resolve the matter, but put it off for several years! Why did he ignore Dantiscus’ reprimands for so long and reacted only after the threat of a canonical trial in Frombork?
■ It shows how much freedom he had. Clearly he wasn’t under much pressure, since for many years he was able to tell the bishop: ‘I’ll do it, but not just yet’.
It must be remembered that a canon was a bishop’s associate and the latter didn’t have absolute power over the former. The next
bishop was chosen from a group of canons. So these reprimands should be taken with a grain of salt and seen more as reminders from one colleague to another.
Speaking of the denunciations, there’s one interesting issue which shines a light on another Copernican legend. It’s often said that Copernicus was criticised for his theories and that he was afraid to publish them. Well, he wasn’t afraid, he just wanted to be sure. If his theories had been frowned upon in his time, then aside from the issue of Anna Schilling these denouncing letters would’ve contained accusations that Copernicus was spreading dangerous concepts, which were already known from his Commentariolus from 1507–1510. And yet such accusations weren’t made. So it wasn’t a problem.
□ Why did Copernicus wait thirty years before publishing his ground-breaking work, De revolutionibus? Why did he delay it for such a long time?
■ It took a lot of gruelling work to compare all the tables, make the calculations and compile it all into a uniform system. He needed to make long observations of the Sun. He wanted to spot Mercury, and that was very hard to do, because it is possible either shortly after sunset or shortly before sunrise, very close to the horizon. Frombork was often shrouded in fog, so he had to wait a long time for a good opportunity to gather his observations in one place and make sure his calculations were correct. Some traces of his observations of the Sun remain visible to this day on a wall in Olsztyn. He ordered a special wall to be built, on which he marked the position of the Sun throughout the seasons. He wanted to collect as much information as possible and test his model as much as he could. He didn’t want to be ridiculed for proposing a completely new image of the Universe without proper empirical arguments.
He looked for empirical proof, and yet there was none. The most basic way of confirming his theory would be to mark the movement of Earth in relation to the stars: the annual parallax. Closer stars are in a different position in relation to their background in January than in June. They move, because sometimes Earth is on one side of the Sun, and sometimes on the other. This is called an annual parallax. It was first observed in the mid-19th century, and it’s the easiest method of verifying the heliocentric theory. If one posits that Earth is moving, then it would be good to show it. If one cannot show it, then it would be good to explain why.
It’s because Earth is so far from the stars that the shift is virtually impossible to notice. It’s a rational conclusion, of course, but it leads to a very serious problem, specifically with the drawing Copernicus put in De revolutionibus after the tenth chapter of book one. In the drawing, the Sun is in the centre. Other planets – Mars, Jupiter, Saturn etc. – encircle it. And then, at the edge, the gap between Saturn and the fixed stars is just the same in width as in the case of other planets. And so, the Universe seems beautiful, everything is in order.
However, if one looked closer – and every talented astronomer or cosmologist would’ve been able to follow this reasoning – then it would turn out that if that gap was equal to the others, the annual parallax should be observable. And so if Copernicus claimed it couldn’t be seen because the stars are too far away, then there is a vast amount of space between them and Saturn. I have made my own calculations in line with modern astronomical knowledge: the closest star is 270,000 times further than Saturn. Let us imagine that due to much less precise equipment Copernicus would’ve underestimated this figure tenfold and assumed that the closest star is 27,000 times further than Saturn. If he tried to maintain that scale in a drawing on a piece of paper, he would’ve had to draw the sphere of fixed stars three houses further down the street.
And that would mean the drawing was irrational, because somebody could’ve said: ‘Right, the Universe is beautiful, but something is wrong here. The beautiful part ends at Saturn, then there is a great chasm of emptiness, and the stars are behind it. So this model is worse than then previous ones, because it cannot be represented in a drawing. Why is this great gap here? What’s it for? Why do you maintain that the Universe is rational, even though you say that somebody left here this vast space with nothing in it, which is completely irrational?’.
Copernicus couldn’t have drawn this to scale because it contradicted his assumption that the Universe was soundly, rationally, structurally and geometrically ordered. And such a great gap would violate this order, it’d be chaos, empty space with noting to put in it. Copernicus knew it, so he hesitated to share a theory that had weak spots. He wondered what people would think. I reckon he was concerned about that.
Furthermore, he probably questioned whether he’d be believed, since he wasn’t a university professor, but a canon living in Warmia. Who would’ve trusted a lone, independent scholar that lacked recognition, had no students, was never a rector, had never travelled to universities, never held any debates, and who then suddenly appeared with a finished body of work? His knowledge would’ve seemed suspicious, since he wasn’t an accomplished author.
As Copernicus struggled and hesitated, in 1539 he was visited by a young professor of astronomy and mathematics from the University of Wittenberg, a Protestant man by the name of Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514–1574), full of enthusiasm, who became his only student. He lived with the author of De revolutionibus for two years and finally convinced him by saying that if he died, all his work would be wasted. That proved to be the strongest argument for Copernicus. In 1540, Rheticus printed the introduction to his most famous work in Gdańsk, and published the rest three years later in Nuremberg.
□ How did Rheticus know about Copernicus?
■ Handwritten copies of Commentariolus were read throughout Europe, and this is what piqued the interest of the young
scholar. Rheticus made a long journey to Frombork to meet the mysterious figure behind the theories described in that book. He brought Copernicus new books and breathed fresh air into his studies. He told him that Commentariolus was read in Germany and Italy, that the pope knew about it, and that the calendar needs to be reformed. He also told him that he should find the courage to publish his work, because though he wasn’t well-known, people would read and understand it. At that time, Copernicus was already ailing and embittered, he was tired of it all, and the scheming involving his person wasn’t helping. Rheticus had to persuade him for many months, but in the end he succeeded.
□ In 1542, Copernicus suffered a stroke. He had nothing to lose…
■ Copernicus knew that in science, there are various types of arguments. His own argument was very weak, as it was based on elegance. It also flew in the face of empiricism, distorted Aristotle, and contradicted the Holy Scripture, reason and the senses. Think about it: when we stand, the ground doesn’t move beneath our feet, when we throw a stone in the air, it falls in the same place… Everything seems to disprove Copernicus. One of my students wrote an essay on every argument for and against Copernicus’ theory from the point of view of his contemporary physicists and philosophers. Almost virtually all of them were against. The only one in favour of Copernicus’ theory was that his model was more ordered. But the fact that something is ordered doesn’t automatically mean it’s correct.
Tycho Brahe, who lived later, had much better astronomical equipment and carried out more precise observations, still didn’t believe Copernicus, because when he made his calculations to check the parallax, he got zero.
□ Copernicus was not ordained as a priest, but was inducted into the ranks of the minor orders of the Church as a subdeacon in 1496, probably by his uncle Łukasz Watzenrode when he was the Bishop of Warmia. A year later, he became the canon of the Warmian cathedral chapter. How important was the role of faith and religion in the shaping of Copernicus’ scientific thought?
■ Very important. Copernicus himself said that he will carry out his studies by the grace of God, that God planned the world wisely. Being a canon, he recited psalms, sang in a choir, and was an earnest participant of the holy mass. He was never criticised for not fulfilling his religious duties. He took inspiration from his participation in liturgy. The scripture said that the wise God had designed the order of the world, that it was rational, beautiful and good, and that God had ‘arranged all things by measure and number and weight’, as the Book of Wisdom says. If throughout their lifetime someone constantly hears that the world is ordered and rational, then he doesn’t like the fact that there are two competing astronomical theories that explain it. So it’s better to turn them into one. I once asked Professor Krzysztof Ożóg, one of the most eminent Polish medievalists, about the issue of Copernicus’ membership in the Church and he told me Copernicus probably became just a subdeacon because it was sufficient for him to fulfil the role of a canon without giving him too much duties. He had a priest to celebrate the mass in
his place, he had his own altar. Was he obligated to remain in celibacy? I don’t know.
□ For nearly 40 years, Copernicus was a physician. He treated not only the wealthy such as Johannes Dantiscus and the Bishop of Chełmno Tiedemann Giese, but the poor as well. When he was 68, he travelled to the court of Duke Albrecht Hohenzollern in Königsberg following the Duke’s personal request to treat his advisor and friend Georg von Kunheim the Elder. Copernicus stayed in Königsberg from April 8 to May 3, 1541. But what do we know about his own health, aside from the fact that he suffered a stroke a year before his death?
■ I think he must’ve been in a pretty good shape if he travelled around Warmia and, I think, twice to Königsberg.
In 1541, at the bidding of Duke Albrecht, Copernicus set out from Frombork to Königsberg on a Friday before the Palm Sunday. To travel abroad during the Holy Week, he would’ve had to have a special dispensation from the chapter. He returned to Frombork on May 3. He probably rode on horseback for one or even two days. He seems to have been a vigorous man.
Besides, he probably remained in robust health, since after carrying out his observations on a roof, often on winter nights – the visibility of the sky is the greatest when the night is long and there is no dusk – he never fell ill with pneumonia. And the winters were cold back then. In the summer, nights are never fully dark, the sky is brighter and many things cannot be seen.
□ From your point of view, what is the most spectacular lie about Copernicus?
■ There are several of those. One of them is that he was an extraordinary German scholar who neither spoke nor wrote in Polish. Such information is sometimes presented in German textbooks in no uncertain terms. And Copernicus wrote a lot in Polish: just take the names of the peasants whom he settled in Warmia. Another lie is that he was opposed to Scholasticism; the postulate that Scholasticism was bad and the philosophy of Renaissance was good, and Copernicus firmly stood with Italy and Renaissance thought. And yet his discovery was intellectually grounded in medieval Kraków and not what was taught in Renaissance Italy. During Renaissance, people were more interested in literature, arts and construction, and less in nature.
The case is similar with Aristotelianism and Platonism. There are numerous publications which treat Copernicus as a Platonist who broke off with Aristotle. Personally, I can see no signs of such a breakoff, and to confirm my intuition, during classes I ask my students whether they feel Copernicus’ writing is more Platonist or Aristotelian in spirit. I think I’ve never had a student that saw Platonism in Copernicus. Everyone agrees that Copernicus follows Aristotle’s thought, though in its later form, and Platonism seems more modern because many contemporary cosmologists refer to Plato, judging Aristotle’s philosophy as bad because Thomas Aquinas based his own theories upon him. This is a textbook example of antithesis and this is how Copernicus is inserted into ready-made, stereotypical categories. It’s not true that Copernicus was opposed
to Scholasticism and Aristotelianism. He was a proponent of both of those, he was shaped by them, lived by them. He merely read about them mostly in Latin, not in Greek.
□ Copernicus was interred in 1543 beneath the floor of one of the crypts in the Frombork cathedral, but for several hundred years it wasn’t known exactly where. It was only in 2005, thanks to the archaeological research supervised by Professor Jerzy Gąssowski from the Aleksander Gieysztor Academy of Humanities Institute of Anthropology and Archaeology, that the scholar’s remains were found. Three years later, his identity was confirmed by DNA tests, with samples taken from hairs found in a book belonging to Copernicus now stored in Uppsala. As a result, a second funeral was held for Copernicus in the Frombork cathedral on May 22nd, 2010. Do you think Copernicus’ grave was really found?
■ I hope so. But I can’t be sure, especially since I read the book Mikołaj Kopernik i jego świat [Nicolaus Copernicus and his world] written by Teresa Borawska in collaboration with Henryk Rietz, published by the Toruń Society of Arts and Sciences in 2014, which voices doubt about this claim. Supposedly these hairs could come from a completely random person. Researchers from Toruń fiercely attacked the results of Professor Gąssowski’s study. For me, the results seemed convincing. However, I’m not a specialist in forensic medicine, so it’s difficult for me to judge. I don’t have the tools to investigate the matter.
□ What do you think is still worth researching when it comes to Copernicus? What could one focus on to better understand and showcase his life and work?
■ I think it’s necessary to carefully study the work of Copernicus’ predecessors and the activities of Kraków scholarly community, in particular Wojciech of Brudzewo. I suspect only then it’ll become clear that Copernicus owes to the city of Kraków, Kraków school of astronomy and cosmology, and various strains of Aristotelianism much more than we’ve previously suspected. If we look closely enough, we might very well find that the author of De revolutionibus gathered as much as ninety percent of his work material during his studies in Kraków. Naturally, it wouldn’t in any way diminish his achievements. Wojciech of Brudzewo and other scholars also had access to that knowledge, so maybe they would’ve been able to build a new model of the Universe without observations if they managed collect all the records from antiquity and the Middle
Professor Marcin Karas – philosopher working at the JU Institute of Philosophy Department of Polish Philosophy. He served as the Dean of Faculty of Philosophy’s proxy for the teaching of PhD students. His main area of expertise is the history of cosmology. He is the author of two books on this subject matter published by the JU Press: Natura i struktura wszechświata w kosmologii św. Tomasza z Akwinu [Nature and structure of the Universe in the cosmology of St. Thomas Aquinas] (2007) and Nowy obraz świata. Poglądy filozoficzne Mikołaja Kopernika [A new image of the world. The philosophical view of Nicolaus Copernicus] (2018).
Ages. But they hadn’t – and Copernicus had. They helped him immensely, but the achievement is his. But we need to remember that Copernicus’ work has its roots in Kraków, in our University and in Scholasticism. This, I think, is something we should defend with particular care, so that there are no oversimplified narratives about how a Polish student travelled to Italy and there he achieved enlightenment, discovering that the Sun is in the centre of the Universe. As if he hadn’t learned anything in Kraków, but received all his knowledge from Domenico Maria Novara da Ferrara with whom he collaborated. We need to avoid such oversimplifications.
■ The main problem in Copernican literature is that some authors derive their knowledge from old books instead of looking into sources. They take what was already written and don’t question how someone arrived at their conclusions, thoughtlessly repeating certain opinions. If they looked into sources, they’d see that it’s different: some interpret the work and history of Copernicus for themselves and others just repeat them. There’s a new book about Copernicus in which the author states that if he was a historian or researcher, he would’ve had to make all sorts of footnotes and disclaimers, but since he’s a journalist, he can just write whatever he thinks is right. We need to avoid this kind of thinking, or there’ll be no progress in the studies on Copernicus. There will be expressive and colourful stories, but they’ll be untrue. It’s necessary to scrutinise the source material, preferably in the original, and then look for studies done on the subject; check studies with sources, not sources with studies. From time to time, some famous astronomer specialising in, let’s say, extragalactic astronomy, is asked to write something about Copernicus. But if that person was never involved in researching the history of science, there’s a major risk that they’ll look at certain things through the modern lens, which simply doesn’t fit. Only a historian of science is competent here, someone who can read Latin and knows about certain contexts, about Aristotelianism.
The most common mistake people make when thinking about Copernicus is that he somehow degraded Earth, removed it from the centre of the Universe and put it aside with other planets. But someone who knows the philosophy of Aristotle will realise that in the eyes of Aristotelians Copernicus did exactly the opposite. He took Earth – the worst part of the Universe, where everything lives and dies and there’s nothing constant, nothing immutable – and turned it into a star! This is a promotion, a great honour, contrary to what’s often being written.
And the most basic issue: one can’t read Copernicus from the perspective of Newton, Einstein and Galileo, but instead start from the past: from the perspective of Thomas Aquinas, John Buridan, Albert of Saxony and Wojciech of Brudzewo. Copernicus knew about his predecessors, whereas he can’t have known about those who came after him. Presentism, introducing modern ideas into the past, is the greatest mistake. This is akin to asking what type of car Copernicus had owned. The question is preposterous in and of itself.
□ What can we learn from Copernicus today?
■ Humility. That we need to wait until the very end to present our conclusions. Copernicus must’ve been tempted many times to announce his discovery. The fact that he waited shows his maturi-
ty, that he understood the need to rethink and recheck, to discuss and then to publish something only after making absolutely sure it’s correct. Those who study Copernicus should do the same.
□ Your book Nowy obraz świata. Poglądy filozoficzne Mikołaja Kopernika [A new image of the world. The philosophical views of Nicolaus Copernicus] was published five years ago. Are you planning on writing anything else about Copernicus?
■ I don’t have any such plans, but I think it’d be worth to carefully study manuscripts related to Copernicus stored at the Jagiellonian Library. However, this would be quite a daunting task, as there are over a thousand of them. Not all of them are related to cosmology, but analysing just ten or fifteen of them could take years.
I myself would like to discuss the issue of Earth’s movement in post-Copernican cosmology, in its Aristotelian strain. Learn how scholars dealing with this branch of knowledge argued that the Earth stands still after Copernicus’ discovery. Was their approach to the subject narrow-minded or respectful but flawed? Because these are two completely different things. The standard explanation is that they weren’t mature enough to understand Copernicus. But I’d like to know why they weren’t convinced. Was it because they couldn’t have seen the movement of Earth? Or because Copernicus’ arguments were too refined? Or maybe they had their own arguments to the contrary? I already have some names of authors I’d like to research.
□ Then I wish you many more intriguing discoveries involving Copernicus. Thank you very much for the interview.
Interview by Rita Pagacz-Moczarska
February 19, 1473 – born in Toruń in a merchant family
1491 – completed education at St. John’s Church school in Toruń and arrived in Kraków with his brother Andrzej
1491 – 1495 – studied quadrivium (liberal arts) at the University of Kraków
1496 – received minor orders, probably subdeaconate
1496–1501 – studied canon law at the University of Bologna
1497 – became member of the Warmian cathedral chapter and took the office of Canon of Frombork
1500 – completed legal apprenticeship at the Papal Chancery in Rome
1501–1503 – studied medicine at the University of Padua
May 31, 1503 – received his doctorate in canon law from the University of Ferrara
1504–1510 (or 1512) – served as a secretary and physician to his uncle Łukasz Watzenrode, Bishop of Warmia (based in Lidzbark Warmiński)
1507–1510 – developed and disseminated in manuscript copies the first outline of the heliocentric model, known by the title Commentariolus
1509 – Theophylact Simocatta’s Letters translated by Copernicus from Greek into Latin are published in print in Kraków
1512 – together with the Frombork chapter swore an oath of loyalty to King Sigismund I; took the office of the Frombork Chapter Chancellor and Visitor of the chapter’s estate
1513–1516 – took part in the work on the Julian calendar reform
1514 – purchased a tower in Frombork (part of the city’s defensive walls) and established an astronomical observatory in it
1516 – started to perform economic and administrative duties on the estates of the Warmian cathedral chapter
1520 – organised the defence of Olsztyn during the last war against the Teutonic Order
1523 – became the general administrator of the Diocese of Warmia
1526 – drew up a map of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in collaboration with Bernard Wapowski
1528 – presented a monetary reform programme in the treatise Monetae cudendae ratio
1539 – was visited by Georg Joachim von Lauchen, known as Rheticus, a professor of mathematics from Wittenberg who wanted to learn about Copernicus’ astronomical theory
1542 – the book De lateribus et angulis traingulorum [On the sides and angles of triangles] was published in print in Wittenberg; it would later become part of the first book of De revolutionibus
1543 – the work De revolutionibus orbium coelestium was published in Nuremberg
May 24, 1543 – passed away in Frombork
In the 1490s Kraków, together with neighbouring towns of Kazimierz and Kleparz, had about 20 thousand inhabitants. It was the capital of the Kingdom of Poland, the seat of the ruler of a vast country and of a wealthy bishopric. At that time the Kraków patriciate was ethnically German. The city was governed by the German Town Law, also known as Magdeburg Law. The patriciate of Kraków took great pride in St. Mary’s Church located next to the Main Market Square. In 1489, the woodcarver from Nuremberg Veit Stoss made an altar for the church’s chancel with the Assumption of Mary depicted in the centre. On Sundays and other occasions sermons in German were given there. Conversely, members of the higher clergy – prelates and cathedral or collegiate canons – were Polish and usually came from noble houses. Royal officials, wealthy nobles and chivalry, who were mostly Polish, also had residences in
the city. There was also a certain number of Poles among the common burghers and plebs. Besides the Wawel Cathedral and other urban parishes, Polish sermons were delivered in St. Barbara’s Church, located next to St. Mary’s Church. A new trend developed from the middle 15th century: more Poles than Germans were becoming citizens of Kraków. The total number of 42 people granted this status in 1495 included 28 Poles and 11 Germans. The entire city was also inhabited by Jews, who migrated to Kraków together with the German people. They spoke the dialect of German known as Yiddish. In the second half of the 15th century their religious buildings, mostly synagogues, were located near the current Plac Szczepański (Szczepański square). Only in 1494, King John I Albert, pressured by the city council, ordered Kraków Jews to leave the city and move to the neighbouring town of Kazimierz, which led to the creation of a separate Jewish district. Besides, the migrants to Kraków included Italians from such cities as Genua, Milan, Venice or Florence.
One of them, Filippo Buonaccorsi, called Callimachus, who came from San Gimignano, was the tutor of the sons of King Casimir IV Jagiellon. Kraków was also inhabited by Ruthenians, Hungarians and Lithuanians, as well as several families of Catholic Armenians. It was the most important centre of international trade on the east-west and north-south axes and the Hanseatic city located furthest away from the Baltic Sea. It enjoyed a staple right for goods brought from ‘all parts of the world’, which foreign merchants were additionally obliged to offer for sale.
At the time of Casimir Jagiellon’s rule, the main trade partner of Kraków on the north-south axis was Toruń. After the Second Peace of Toruń (1466), part of the State of the Teutonic order, including Toruń, Gdańsk, Elbląg, and Warmia, became part of the Polish Kingdom known as Royal Prussia. At that time Silesia consisted of numerous duchies, mostly ruled by dukes from the Piast dynasty, which earlier had reigned over entire Poland. From the middle 16th century, it was one of
the lands of the Bohemian Crown, which from 1471 was ruled by King Vladislaus II Jagiellon (died 1516), the son of the Polish king. From 1490 Vladislaus was also the ruler of Hungary and Croatia. The uniting of Poland, Lithuania, Bohemia, Hungary and Croatia under the reign of one dynasty brought all these countries together and fostered intense trade relations between them.
As a result, merchants from Prussia, Silesia, Hungary, and even Greeks, Turks, Tatars and Armenians from the Orient, could be seen in Kraków marketplaces. Hence, in the 1490s the city was an important centre of politics, religion, trade and crafts, of regional, Central European and continental significance.2
The University of Kraków was founded in 1364 by King Casimir the Great, the last ruler of Poland from the Piast dynasty. After his death the University fell into decline, but in 1400 it was re-established by King Vladislaus Jagiełło, the founder of the Jagiellonian dynasty.4 In the middle 15th century, the University of Kraków entered a period of especially rapid growth. Its renown considerably increased, while many European universities were reduced to a regional status. It became an international university, a rival of other major academic centres, especially the University of Leipzig. People from Hungary, Silesia, Prussia, Lusatia, Meissen, South German states, and Switzerland came to study in Kraków. From winter semester 1491/1492 to summer semester 1495 a total of 1,232 scholars were matriculated at the University of Kraków, 516 of whom came from the Polish-Lithuanian state (comprising lands currently belonging to Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine) and 716 – from abroad. Hence, foreigners made up 58.11 percent of the entire student population, even though during that short period the matriculations were hindered by crop failure and an epidemic.5
Kraków was especially famous in Europe for its high level of scholarship in the liberal arts ( artes liberales ). In his description of Europe (In Europam) written around 1458, the renowned Italian humanist Enea Silvio Piccolomini (from 1458 – Pope Pius II) stated that in Kraków ‘a school of liberal arts is thriving’.6
In a chronicle published in Nuremberg in 1493, the German humanist and historian Hartmann Schedel wrote that in Kraków ‘there is a renowned university, visited by many, famous for its outstanding learned men, which teaches the noble arts of rhetoric, poetics, philosophy and philosophy of nature. But the most thriving discipline there is astronomy, and there is no better school in this field throughout Germany’.7 In an epigram entitled Ad Gymnasium Cracoviense, dum orare vellet, the German humanist Conrad Celtes, who spent two years in Kraków (1489–1491), praised the city’s University, whose ‘academic fame reaches the heavens’, for studying liberal arts, exploring the mysteries of nature, the movement of stars, and the celestial map.8 At the same time the Italian humanist Antonio Bonfini, a court historian of Hungarian kings, wrote that ‘Kraków is full
of soothsayers and astrologists’.9 Astrology was then considered the crowning achievement of astronomy – its practical application.10
Liberal arts were traditionally divided into two ’paths’: trivium and quadrivium. The former consisted of grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic, whereas the latter comprised arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music. Grammar was taught from the language textbook Art of Grammar (Ars grammatica or Ars maior) authored by the 4th-century Latin grammarian Aelius Donatus. Another work studied during the course was the second volume of versified Latin grammar textbook Rules for Boys ( Doctrinale Puerorum ) written by the Flemish author Alexander of Villedieu (de Villa Dei, died c. 1240), discussing syntax. Then the students focused on poetics and rhetoric. The former was taught based on such works as Labyrinth (Laborintus) by Eberhard of Béthune (died after 1212) and New Poetics (Poetria Nova) by Geoffrey of Vinsauf (Ganfredus de Vino Salvo).
As this was already the age of humanism, lectures in Roman literature were given in Kraków based on Cicero’s On Duties (De officiis) and On Friendship (De amicitia), Virgil’s Georgics, Bucolics, and Aeneid, Ovid’s Calendar (Fasti), Letters from the Black Sea (Epistulae ex Ponto), and Sorrows (Tristia), Valerius Maximus’ Nine Books of Memorable Deeds and Sayings (Factorum et dictorum memorabilium libri IX) as well as Moral Letters to Lucilius (Epistolae morales ad Lucilium) by Seneca the Younger. On the Consolation of Philosophy (De consolatione philosophiae) by the 6th-century Roman philosopher and Christian theologian Boethius was also studied quite frequently. The lecturers also used epistolography textbooks written in the 15th century: Elegantiolae by Augustin Dati from Sienna and Modus Epistolandi by Franciscus Niger from Venice. While staying in Kraków the already mentioned Conrad Celtes founded the Societas Litteraria Vistulana – an association whose members met in order to read other works of Roman or humanist authors. They also recited their own literary creations, imitating the classical ancient style.
Another liberal art – dialectic – had long been the school of logic and philosophy of nature. The great Greek philosopher Aristotle was considered an unquestionable authority in this area. The basics of Aristotelian logic were discussed in the
13th-century textbook by Peter of Spain entitled Tractatus sex logicos sive parva logicalia. Then, as part of what was called old logic (logica vetus), the Introduction (Isagoga) to Aristotle’s Categories (Praedicamenta), authored by the 3rd-century Neoplatonist Porphyry, was studied along with Categories themselves as well as Hermeneutics, that is, On Interpretations ( De Interpretatione ), also by Aristotle. Then came the new logic (logica nova) based on Boethius’ Latin translations from Greek: Prior and posterior analytics (Libri priorum et posteriorum analeticorum), On sophistical proofs (Liber elenchorum, De sophisticis elenchis) and Topics (Topica). Aristotelian Philosophy was studied based on Metaphysics, whereas the rules of morality, society, and practical life were learnt from Books on ethics, politics and economics (Libri ethicorum, politicorum et oeconomicorum). The philosophy curriculum in 1492–1495 also included the treatise by Thomas Aquinas On being and essence (De ente et essentia), in which the author provided various solutions to different metaphysical problems.11 Aristotle also discussed the philosophy of nature and man in such works as: Physics (Libri phisicorum), On the Soul (De anima), On Generation and Corruption (De generatione et corruptione), Short Treatises on Nature (Parva naturalia)12 , On the Heavens (De caelo et mundo), and Meteorology (Meteora)
Quadrivium was also extensive. Arithmetic and music (mathematical aspects of acoustics) were taught based on textbooks
by the 14th-century mathematicians John of Murs – Arithmetica communis and Musica and John of Linières – Treatise on Fractions (Algorismus minutiarum). The science of perspective (Perspectiva), i.e., optics, was learnt from the work by John Peckham, who lived in the 13th century. Computus chirometralis by an anonymous scholar from Erfurt was used to teach methods of calculating the dates of Easter and other movable feasts. The curriculum included three out of six books of Euclid’s geometry (Elementa). The basic knowledge of trigonometry was acquired from the
Alfonsine Tables, created in 1252 at the behest of King Alfonso X of Castile. The work comprised data needed to compute the position of the Sun, Moon and planets in relation to fixed stars for the Toledo meridian.
Learning about the structure of the universe was also an important part of astronomy curriculum. This issue was discussed in the work by the John of Holywood (de Sacro Bosco), entitled On the Sphere of the World (De sphaera mundi). Written in the second half of 13th century, this astronomy textbook was based on such authoritative sources as Aristotle, Eratosthenes, Euclid, Ptolemy, and Macrobius. It contained information on the spherical nature of the universe and the earth and included definitions of such astronomical concepts as the celestial equator, ecliptic, meridian, tropics, and polar circles. The author discussed, among other issues, the rising and setting of heavenly bodies, as well as their motion, provided basic knowledge on the theory of eclipses, and the length of night and day. Classes on The Theory of Planets (Theorica Planetorum), a purely astronomical work, were based on the text attributed either to Gerard of Cremona (12th century) or Gerard of Sabionetta (13th century).
The lectures on astrology delivered in Kraków were based on works by Claudius Ptolemy from the 2nd century AD. The obligatory readings included his Quadripartitum opus – four books on astrology as well as One Hundred Sayings (Centum verborum or Centiloquium) – a collection of astrological aphorisms also attributed to Ptolemy and actually written in Greek between the 5th and 7th century and translated to Latin in the 12th century, considered one of the most important astrological textbooks in the Middle Ages. The courses on this subject also involved interpreting works by Arab scholars: Albumasar (Abu Ma’shar al-Balkhi, 8th/9th century) – Introduction to Astrology (Introductorium in astrologiam), Abenragel or Albohazen (Abu l-Hasan al-Shaybani, Haly filius Abenragel, 10th/11th century) – Complete Book on the Judgement of the Stars (Praeclarissimus liber completus in iudiciis astrorum) , and Alcabitius (Al-Quabisi, 10th century) – Introduction to Astrology (Epitome astrologiae).13
The books listed above were not specific to Kraków, but belonged to the canon of works read at all European universities.
The actual distinguishing feature of the Kraków academic community was its intellectual pluralism, especially visible in the interpretation of Aristotle’s works. In the late 15th century, the commentaries to the ancient philosopher’s works written in Kraków included interpretations inspired by Averroes, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus. This pluralism paved the way to the critical approach to the entire philosophical thought of Aristotle and made it possible to search for other sources of academic authority among ancient thinkers. One of distinguished Kraków scholars, Jan of Głogów (1445–1507) expressed a view that everyone has the right to defend their opinion if they find it highly likely to be true and using the method of rational reasoning for that purpose is of a far greater scholarly value than invoking authorities.14 In such an atmosphere, Kraków academics were open to embrace new ideas, and even created original works themselves. In the field of mathematics, Marcin Król of Przemyśl, mindful of the difficulties faced by students trying to learn about fractions from manuscripts by foreign authors, created his own textbook entitled Algorismus minutiarum novae compilationis. He also authored a book on geometry (Opus de geometria). They are probably the oldest Polish mathematical textbooks.
Euclid’s geometry was studied with the help of the 13th-century commentary of the
Italian astronomer and mathematician Johannes Campanus of Novara.15 In the field of astronomy, in addition to the Alfonsine Tables, other tables adjusted around 1320 by John of Linières were used, explained with the help of Canones super tabulas Alphonsi authored by his pupil John Danco of Saxony.16 The Alfonsine Tables were also adjusted by the abovementioned Kraków scholar Marcin Król of Przemyśl.
The so-called Astronomical tables (Tabulae resolutae) were an abbreviated version of the Alfonsine Tables . Circa 1428, Tabulae resolutae de mediis et veris motibus planetarum super meridianum Cracoviensem , presenting mathematical data for the Kraków meridian, were created in Kraków.17 Similar tables were compiled in the 1490s by Wojciech of Brudzewo. At the same time, The Theory of Planets ( Theorica planetarum ) was supplemented by The New Theories of
Planets ( Theoricae novae planetarum ), authored by the Austrian mathematician and astronomer Georg von Peurbach. It was a theoretical astronomy textbook, based on Ptolemy’s Almagest (Mathematike syntaxis), presenting the geocentric model of the universe. The work was published in print in Nuremberg by German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Müller of Königsberg (in Franconia), better known as Regiomontanus.18 In Kraków, a commentary to this work was written in 1482 by Wojciech of Brudzewo. (Commentariolum super «Theoricas novas planetarum» Georgii Purbachii). It first circulated in the form of manuscripts and then gained international fame after its publication in print in Milan in 1492. The Calendar (Calendarium, Ephemerides) compiled by Regiomontanus for the years 1475–1531, with new computations of positions of the Sun and Moon and tables of positions and
conjunctions of planets, was also used as a textbook at Kraków University (1492, 1493).19 In 1496 in Basel, the Kraków student Henryk Bebel published his notes from a private lecture by Professor Laurentius Corvinus (Raabe, de Novo Foro, i.e., from Środa Śląska, about 1470–1527), commenting on Ptolemy’s Cosmography ( Cosmographia dans manuductionem in tabulas Ptholomei). Scholarly works in various fields were also published by Jan Schelling of Głogów. His noteworthy astronomical writings include a commentary to Theoricas planetarum, the work entitled Interpretatio «Tabularum resolutarum ad meridianum Cracoviensem», as well as Tractatus de 48 imaginibus caelestibus, discussing the constellations of heavenly bodies from three points of view: astronomical, astrological and mythological. Every year, Jan of Głogów published prognostications and calendars, which were very popular and sold well in both Poland and abroad. In 1492–1494 he worked on a geographical treatise based on Ptolemy’s Cosmography
It is believed that the presence of two endowed chairs at the Faculty of Liberal Arts significantly contributed to the remarkable development of mathematics and astronomy in Kraków. These chairs were founded by Jan, son of Stobner (ca. 1405) and Marcin Król of Przemyśl (before 1458). Scholars who held them could teach the same subject for a longer period of time, doing it in a more thorough manner, while their colleagues had to randomly choose books to comment on every year, which made them unable to specialise in a given field.20
A professor who occupied the Stobner’s chair gave lectures on Computus, and the treatise On the Sphere of the World. He also
specialised in arithmetic, geometry, optics, geography, and astronomy, explaining Euclid’s Elements, Alfonsine Tables or The Theory of Planets. He was also required to forecast the eclipses of the Sun and Moon, while a scholar holding Marcin Król’s chair explained astrological writings and produced annual forecasts (iudicia).21 It was not by coincidence that the first work printed in Kraków was the prognostication for the year 1473, published by Kasper Straube’s printing house. The existence of these two chairs in Kraków was unique on European scale, earning the University international renown. Astronomers and astrologists from Kraków collaborated with scholars from Bologna, Vienna, Prague, Ingolstadt, Heidelberg, and Wittenberg.
qui huius urbis olim hosPitio usus erat22
Nicolaus Copernicus came to study in Kraków together with his brother Andrzej, in compliance with the will of his uncle the Bishop of Warmia Łukasz Watzenrode (1447–1512). The brothers arrived in the capital of Poland in autumn 1491, as the winter semester started on October 19.23 At that time Nicolaus Copernicus had not yet turned 19, whereas Andrzej was even younger.24
The arrival of the two brothers could have been noticed at the royal court, as King Casimir IV Jagiellon and his son Frederic, bishop elect of Kraków, denied their uncle’s claim to the Bishopric of Warmia, which the king intended to secure for his son. Frederic was also the Chancellor of the University, to which he donated a rector’s sceptre made of precious metals, currently kept in the Jagiellonian University Museum. During
their studies the Copernicus brothers witnessed the funeral of the old king (11 July 1492), the coronation of his older son John I Albert (23 September 1492), and the consecration of Frederic as the bishop in the Wawel Cathedral in December 1493. The participants of John Albert’s coronation included Łukasz Watzenrode, who most likely met with his nephews during his visit to Kraków.25
The names of both brothers were entered in the University’s matriculation list in winter semester 1491/1492, which marked Maciej of Kobylin’s ninth term in office as the rector (he was a professor of philosophy and died shortly afterwards). Nicolaus’ name was entered first: ‘Nicolaus Nicolai de Thuronia solvit totum’, that is ‘Nicolaus, son of Nicolaus of Toruń paid the full sum’, whereas Andrzej Copernicus was listed shortly after: ‘Andreas Nicolai de Thorun s[olvi]t 4 gr[ossos]’ – ‘Andrzej, son of Nicolaus of Toruń paid 4 grosze’.26 It remains unclear why Nicolaus’ fee was paid in full and Andrzej’s only partially. They must have both sworn an oath of allegiance to the rector, which was obligatory for newly admitted students. It is also uncertain where and when they underwent the ritual of freshmen’s initiation ceremony – depositio beaniae, organised by older students and considered necessary to become part of the student community.27 Unfortunately, we do not know where they lived either. In 1491, the University adopted a resolution according to which scholars and students were required to live in dormitories or at the premises of Kraków schools, unless they came from Kraków, had relatives in the city, or were of noble birth.28 Students from Toruń, or, broadly speaking, from the Royal Prussia (Polish Prussia) lived
in dormitories, such as Bursa Pauperum (Dormitory of the Poor), Bursa Philosophorum (Philosophers’ Dormitory), Bursa Jerusalem (Jerusalem Dormitory), Bursa Ungarorum (Hungarians’ Dormitory), and Bursa Thetonicorum (Germans’ Dormitory). As far as parish schools are concerned (such as St. Mary’s, St. Anne’s, All Saints’, St. Stephen’s, of the Holy Spirit at the hospital, St. Nicolaus’ outside the city walls, St. Florian’s in Kleparz, Corpus Christi in Kazimierz, and Cathedral School at Wawel), no lists of residents have survived. It is also unknown whether the Copernicus brothers had any relatives in Kraków. This was certainly possible, as their father had moved to Toruń from this very city. As the Bishop of Warmia’s nephews, destined to become clergymen, they were unlikely to be placed in a dormitory or parish school together with other students. Some believe that they stayed at ul. Kanonicza (Kanonicza street) in the house of Piotr Wapowski of Radochońce (1450–1536), a nobleman of Nieczuja coat of arms, doctor of canon law, Dean of the Collegiate Church of Opatów, Canon of Gniezno and Kraków, and an acquaintance of their uncle Watzenrode. Later Nicolaus Copernicus befriended Piotr’s nephew Bernard Wapowski (1475–1535), who would later become a great cartographer, astronomer, and historian. During their student years, these two scholars may have lived in the same house.29 Neither do we know the name of Copernicus’ preceptor, that is, a tutor who assisted the student in arranging the course of study and the choice of professors, and also ensured that he behaved in a proper and morally acceptable way.
Although there are no premises suggesting that Nicolaus Copernicus intended to obtain an academic degree from the Faculty of Liberal Arts, such a possibility cannot be excluded either. He spent four years in Kraków, while the bachelor’s degree was usually obtained after three years of study, and after two more years it was possible to become the Master of Liberal Arts. Yet, there were exceptions to this rule. Undoubtedly, Copernicus came to Kraków well prepared for university studies thanks to the education received in school in Toruń. Yet, his name is absent from the Kraków book of promotions (liber promotionum), so it remains unknown where he obtained the Master of Liberal Arts degree.
One of the few known facts about Copernicus’ studies in Kraków is the
place where he attended the courses. The Liberal Arts students took part in lectures (lectiones), classes (exercitia) and disputes (disputationes) in the Royal College, also known as the Major College (Collegium Maius), located at ul. Św. Anny (St. Anne’s street). In addition to professors’ living quarters, the common room (stuba communis), and the library (libraria), located on the upper floors of the college,30 the building contained lecture rooms ( lectoria ), placed on the ground floor. With the exception of the theologians’ room (lectorium theologorum)31 and the lecture room next to the college gate (prope valvam) from ul. Św. Anny, they were named after ancient philosophers – Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Ptolemy, as well as one ancient Roman poet – Publius Vergilius Maro.32
At the time of Copernicus’ studies, theology was taught in the theologians’ room before noon, whereas philosophy, grammar, and poetics (1491, 1492, 1493) lessons were held in the afternoon. During the last two hours lectures and classes were given by the physician (medicus) and the dean of the Liberal Arts Faculty, who discussed Aristotle’s Physics . Lectures given in Maro’s room were not limited to grammar and poetics, but also concerned philosophy. Grammar, poetics and ancient literature were also taught in Ptolemy’s room (1491, 1492, 1493, 1494, 1495), Plato’s room (1491, 1492, 1494, 1495), room next to the gate (1491, 1493), Aristotle’s room (1492, 1493), and Socrates’ room (1493). The number of professors
based in the Major College varied from twelve to seventeen.33 They were theology and philosophy lecturers. A few of the latter studied theology at the same time, and their living costs were covered by an annual income of 100 grzywny granted to the University in 1400 by King Władysław II Jagiełło. For that reason, they were referred to as ‘royal professors’ (professores regii, magistri regales, lectores regales).34 The members of the Major College had the right to decide who was admitted to the neighbouring Minor College (Collegium Minus), where philosophy lecturers lived, including professors who occupied the chairs in Mathematics and Astrology founded by Jan Stobner and Marcin Król.
During the stay of Copernicus in Kraków, on 29 July 1492, the Major College was damaged by a fire. A resolution to rebuild it ‘in a beautiful form’ (in forma pulchra) was adopted in May of the following year. The work was to be funded by the sum of 40 florins that came from offerings for prayers for the soul of the late King Casimir Jagiellon. On 18 August 1493 a contract for building stairs and gallery of the common room on the first floor in the south wing was signed with a stonemason. At the same time a gallery was also built at the north wing of the building.35 The fire did not destroy all lower parts of the building, as lectures and classes were still held on the ground floor.36 The rebuilding of the College was facilitated by the finding of a treasure hidden in a renovated wall, which happened in 1494, on St. Ladislaus’ day. Although most of the found jewels were taken by the University chancellor, that is, Cardinal Frederick Jagiellon, the remaining part was still enough to provide a considerable support to the University. For that reason, the event was commemorated by recognising St. Ladislaus’ day as a holiday in the University Calendar.37 As the event caused great sensation in Kraków, it may be alleged that it was also witnessed by the students from Toruń.
The Faculty of Liberal Arts was headed by deans, elected every semester. In 1491–1495, when Copernicus studied in Kraków, this office was occupied by such scholars as Jan Sacranus of Oświęcim, bachelor ‘formatus’ of theology (winter semester 1491), Bernard Kapustka of Biskupie, bachelor of medicine (summer semester 1492), Stanisław Biel of Nowe Miasto (winter semester 1492), Paweł of Zakliczewo (summer semester 1493), Maciej
of Kobylin (winter semester 1493), Jakub of Szydłów (summer semester 1494), Jan Sommerfeld (winter semester 1494) and Stanisław Biem of Olkusz (summer semester 1495).38 Copernicus must have known these professors and met them on numerous occasions.
When Copernicus came to Kraków from Toruń, he was already well versed in Latin and the writings of some classical authors. He might have also been educated in logic. Hence, as Kraków University student he could focus on enhancing his philosophical knowledge and start to study the arts of quadrivium, which, as already mentioned, included mathematics and astronomy. He presumably learnt geometry, geography, optics, astronomy and astrology from the lectures of such scholars as Wojciech of Pniewy (On the Sphere of the World), Bartłomiej of Lipnica (Euclid’s Geometry), Szymon of Sierpc (Georg Peurbach’s New Theoricae Novae Planetarum), Bernard Kapustka of Biskupie (Tabulae resolutae and Tabulae eclipsium – tables of eclipses), Marcin Biem of Olkusz (Regiomontanus’ Calendarium
or John Peckham’s Perspectiva), Michał Falkner of Wrocław (Tabulae resolutae), as well as Wojciech Krypa of Szamotuły (In iudiciis astrorum by Albohazen and Centiloquium by Ptolemy) and Jan of Przemyśl ( Computus , John Peckham’s Perspectiva).39
Wojciech of Brudzewo is also counted among Copernicus’ lecturers, even though he did not teach astronomy during the specific time of his studies in Kraków, with the exception of lectures on the treatise on the structure of the universe De caelo et mundo delivered in the summer semester of 1493. It is also believed that Copernicus could have taken part in private lessons given by this professor or met him during courses on Aristotle’s treatises (Parva naturalia in summer semester 1493, classes in Meteorology in 1492, De generatione et corruptione in winter semester 1492). It remains uncertain whether Copernicus listened to private lectures by Laurentius Corvinus (Raabe) on Ptolemy’s Cosmography, which were attended by the aforementioned Henryk Bebel. Corvinus’ contacts with Copernicus are suggested
by the fact that in 1509, after becoming a Toruń municipal officer, he added his poem to Copernicus’ translation of Theophylact Simocatta’s Letters, published by Jan Haller’s printing house in Kraków. A similar lecture on Cosmography was given in 1494 by Jan of Głogów.
During his studies in Kraków Copernicus purchased Elementa geometriae by Euclid (Venice 1482), on whose pages he made various notes showing his in-depth knowledge in this field.40 He also came into possession of Alfonsine Tabulae astronomicae (Venice 1492), where, on the last page, he added the table entitled Tabula diversitatis aspectus ad 51 g[radus]. It enabled prediction of solar eclipses for the Kraków meridian.41 He also bought Tabulae directionum et profectionum by Johannes Regiomontanus (Augsburg 1490).42 The last two books were combined into one volume in Kraków, to which Copernicus also added a notebook containing sixteen pages of handwritten notes (later known as the Uppsala notebook). It has been established that the tables of movement of five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus,
and Mercury) in terms of their changing distance from the ecliptic were adopted by Copernicus from the manuscript copy43 of tables by Giovanni Bianchini, an Italian astronomer who worked in the 15th century at the University of Ferrara. The Kraków version was re-edited, shortened, and slightly modified as compared to the original.44 Besides, Copernicus was certainly interested in astrology, as proved by his purchase of the work In iudiciis astrorum by Albohazen (Venice 1485).45 His notes also include references to the astrological treatise by Ptolemy Quadripartitum opus 46 It is also possible that he attended Jan of Przemyśl’s lecture on Epitomae astrologiae by Alcabitius (winter semester 1491/1492).47
During his stay in Kraków, Copernicus already took part in observations using astronomical instruments: astrolabe, astronomical rings, parallactic triangle, torquetum (allowing measuring the coordinates of heavenly bodies in a horizontal, equatorial and ecliptic systems and conversion between these systems without additional calculations), as well as camera obscura. If, as it is believed, Jacob Köbel of Heidelberg was indeed a fellow student of Copernicus in Kraków, the future author of a treatise on astrolabe could have learnt to use this instrument in this very city.48 Since Copernicus later took active part in observations performed in Bologna by the Italian mathematician and astronomer Domenico Maria Novara and then conducted such observations himself in Rome, it should be assumed that he must have already used astronomical instruments during his Kraków studies. Besides, he had an opportunity to become familiar, at least visually, with several pieces of such equipment brought from Buda to the University in Kraków in accordance with the last will of Marcin Bylica of Olkusz. These instruments, presented on September 10, 1494 to the professors and students and currently kept in the University Museum, included a celestial globe, two astrolabes and a torquetum.49
Unfortunately, we know nothing about Copernicus’ participation in philosophy of nature classes. He surely attended them, as they were indispensable to undertake medical studies, which he later did. The astronomer may have also been interested in lectures in Roman literature, as he is known to have taken interest in humanities (Virgil, Cicero, and others).
The Copernicus brothers left Kraków in summer 1495. It is difficult to assess, without falling into exaggeration, the actual impact of Kraków studies on broadening the mathematical and astronomical horizons of the future scholar. In this context, an important opinion was expressed by Wojciech Koziołek (Caprinus), son of Piotr of Buk, Kraków University student (1540) and bachelor (1541).50 In a dedication letter to the Bishop of Płock Samuel Maciejowski, sent in 1542 (when Copernicus still lived), he wrote that at the University ‘many of those who study and lecture on sciences in Germany have learnt mathematics, amongst whom it is my great honour to list Nicolaus Copernicus, the Canon of Warmia, who used to stay in that city (qui huius urbis olim hospitio usus erat) and has already written many remarkable works in the field of mathematics and is going to publish even more of them. All of this knowledge he had previously gained from our University, which he does not deny, proudly admitting that he owes everything to our Academy’.51
Already in the Middle Ages, European universities took pride in their great alumni: popes, bishops, rulers, and distinguished scholars. They catalogued information about them, wrote their biographies, or added information about their later careers to the matriculation lists.53 As the graduates added to the fame of their universities, their alma maters treated them as vires illustres – eminent men. As it can be seen from the aforementioned quotation, the University of Kraków was already proud of Copernicus during his lifetime. Above his entry in the matriculation list, the gloss ‘Copernicus’ was added, probably as early as the 16th century, which was a clear sign of the University’s identification with the alumnus, already recognised as an eminent man.54 In 1578–1580 a mathematics and astronomy Professor Walenty Fontana explained to students the tables included in the Copernicus’ work De revolutionibus. Paradoxically, the calculations included in this book which were most appreciated at that time were considered significant not so much from the point of view of the heliocentric theory, which could not yet be scientifically proved, but as the basis for horoscopes, without which
it was impossible to embark on a journey, erect a building, let blood from a patient, administer a medication etc.55 Walenty Fontana knew how to capitalise on this, as in 1588 he became employed as a city astrologer in Kraków. His pupil Jan Brożek of Kurzelów, who was a mathematician and an astronomer too and occupied the Marcin Król’s chair in Astrology for more than 15 years (since 1614), embarked on a journey to Prussia in 1618 in the footsteps of Copernicus, visiting places linked to the great astronomer and looking for memorabilia of him. For that purpose, he spent some time in Toruń, Gdańsk, Frombork, Braniewo, Lidzbark, and Reszel. In Toruń he found an epitaph portrait of Copernicus’ father, had it copied by a local painter and brought it to Kraków University, where it can still be found today. In the episcopal library in Lidzbark (Heilsberg), he saw a copy of the first edition of De revolutionibus (1543), while in Frombork he found the rich correspondence of Copernicus and his collaborator Georg Joachim Rheticus from the period 1539–1541, which he brought to Kraków (unfortunately, the letters were later lost). It is believed that Brożek planned to write a biography of Copernicus.56
Although Brożek never fulfilled his alleged plan, the materials he gathered were used by Szymon Starowolski (1588–1656), another Kraków University graduate and a polymath, in his 1625 work published in Frankfurt, containing biographies of one hundred famous Polish writers, entitled Scriptorum Polonicorum Hecatontas seu Centum illustrium Poloniae scriptorum Elogia et Vitae.57 Hence, in the very first Polish biography of Nicolaus Coeprnicus58 he was counted among the most eminent Polish men of learning. After providing genealogical information and stressing the astronomer’s services in the struggle against the Teutonic Order, Starowolski stated that Copernicus studied mathematical sciences (mathematicas artes) in Kraków under Wojciech of Brudzewo, together with Jacob Köbel (Cobilivius), the already mentioned author of a treatise on astrolabe. He also mentioned collaboration with the Bolognese professor Novara and observations conducted in Rome. The author also discussed the circumstances in which Copernicus secured the position of Canon of Warmia with the support of his uncle Łukasz Watzenrode. To achieve this, he had to compete with several rivals
(as reportedly evidenced in the collection of letters obtained by Brożek). According to Starowolski, Copernicus’ scholarly achievements were not limited to the field of mathematics – he had a profound knowledge of physics (nature) and a number of other subjects, which was possible thanks to his proficiency in Latin and Greek. As far as medicine is concerned, he was eulogised as the second Asclepius. When he administered the estate of the Bishopric of Warmia after the death of another bishop (Fabian von Lossainen) and before the appointment of a new one (Maurycy Ferber), Copernicus may have also contributed to regaining the estate unlawfully taken from the Bishopric by the Teutonic Order. Starowolski also referred to the astronomer’s adversaries, including a teacher from Elbląg, who, during a theatrical performance, ‘spitefully ridiculed’ the theory of Earth’s revolution. Other opponents of the ground-breaking discoveries, such as Giulio Scaligero, Jean Bodin, and Cyprian Leowitz, were also mentioned in the work. Starowolski then writes about Copernicus’ pupil, Georg Joachim Rheticus, who had chosen the scholar as his master because of his fame and left the University of Wittenberg for Frombork, where he worked on publishing De revolutionibus . Copernicus, according to Starowolski, earned worldwide fame for his discoveries regarding Earth movement and his new calculations of star trails, surpassing the achievements of Regiomontanus. The author of Scriptorum Polonicorum Hecatontas also provided a number of facts about Copernicus’ life: that he had never seen a printed copy of his work since he died of
haemorrhage, which paralysed the right side of his body, that he liked solitude and had friends among scholars, such as the Bishop of Kulm Tiedemann Giese, the Bishop of Warmia Johannes Dantiscus, the Cantor of Kraków Cathedral Chapter Bernard Wapowski (to whom he wrote a letter on the eighth sphere59), Kraków mathematicians Mikołaj of Szadek and Marcin of Olkusz, who used to study with him60 and with whom he corresponded (again, the evidence was supposed to be found in the documents brought by Brożek). The final part of the biography contains the information on Copernicus’ burial in the Warmia Cathedral, where 38 years later Bishop Marcin Kromer, impressed by the astronomer’s genius, funded a marble plaque with the following inscription: D. O. M. R[everendo] D[omino] Nicolao Copernico Torunensi, artium et medicinae doctori, canonico Varmiensi, praestanti astrologo, et eius disciplinae instauratori. Martinus Cromerus episcopus Varmiensis, honoris et ad posteritatem memoriae causa posuit MDLXXXI (To God, most good, most great. To Reverend Nicolaus Copernicus of Toruń, Doctor of Liberal Arts and Medicine, Canon of Warmia, eminent astrologer and the restorer of this science. Put up in 1581 by Marcin Kromer, Bishop of Warmia, in tribute to him and to the memory of the posterity) Starowolski’s note about Copernicus concludes with the statement that Nicolaus Copernicus died on 24 May 1543.61
Another biography of Copernicus was written by Marcin Radymiński (1602–1664), historiographer of the University of Kraków, but unfortunately, he did not publish the work. After a long break during the first half of the 18th century, when the University was a bastion of the geocentric model, Prof. Jan Śniadecki (1756–1830) delivered a speech praising Copernicus in 1782, inaugurating his own lectures on astronomy. In the St. Anne’s Collegiate Church in Kraków, linked to the University, the world’s oldest Nicolaus Copernicus monument was erected in 1823, funded by the Canon of Kraków Sebastian Sierakowski (1743–1824). On the pedestal, besides the coats of arms of the University and the city of Kraków the following inscription appears: NICOLAUS COPERNICUS PATRIAE URBIS UNIVERSITATIS DECUS HONOR GLORIA (Nicolaus Copernicus, the emblem, pride
and glory of the city’s university). In the Collegium Maius building Sierakowski set up the Jagiellonian room, where a portrait of Copernicus was hung.
In 1873, to mark the 400th anniversary of the astronomer’s birth, Jan Matejko painted another image of Copernicus. The painting showed him during an astronomical observation in Frombork. It was bought from the artist by a group of wealthy citizens and donated to the Jagiellonian University ‘to honour its most renowned alumnus’.62 A Copernicus monument made by Cyprian Godebski, a well-known Parisian sculptor, was unveiled in 1900 in Kraków in the courtyard of Collegium Maius, which then housed the Jagiellonian Library (since 1953 the monument has been located left of the main Jagiellonian University building, Collegium Novum). The inscription on the pedestal reads: Memoriae Nicolai Copernici de Thorunia Qui A. D. 1491 in Studio Cracov[iensi] intitulatus celeberrimus huius scholae existit alumnus (In memory of Nicolaus Copernicus of Toruń, who was matriculated at the University of Kraków in 1491 and became its most famous alumnus).
In 2023 a plaque will be unveiled in Collegium Maius commemorating Copernicus’ studies in this place during the years 1491–1495. As clearly seen from the abovementioned facts, the Jagiellonian University still remembers Nicholaus Copernicus and is continuously proud of him.
1 Kraków, Poland’s most famous city
2 J. Wyrozumski, Dzieje Krakowa, vol. 1, Kraków do schyłku wieków średnich, Kraków 1992, pp. 314–535; M. Starzyński, Krakowska rada miejska w średniowieczu, Kraków 2010, pp. 290–301; P. Mnacakanian, Ormianie w Krakowie do końca XV wieku in Kultura religijna i społeczna Małopolski od XIII do XVI wieku, eds. W. Szymborski, J. Kozioł, Tarnów 2011, pp. 167–178; A. A. Zięba, ‘Ormianie w Krakowie od wieku XIV do schyłku XVIII’, in Kraków międzynarodowy. Materiały z sesji naukowej 7 maja 2016 roku, ed. Z Noga, Kraków 2016, pp. 109–152.
3 A city where a school of liberal arts is thriving.
4 K. Morawski, Historia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Średnie wieki i Odrodzenie, vol. 1–2, Kraków 1900; H. Barycz, Historia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego w epoce humanizmu, Kraków 1935; Dzieje Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, vol. 1, ed. K. Lepszy, Kraków 1964; P. W. Knoll, ‘A Pearl od Powerful Learning’. The University of Cracow in the Fifteenth Century, Leiden –Boston 2016.
5 A. Karbowiak, ‘Studia statystyczne z dziejów Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego 1433/4–1509/10’, Archiwum do Dziejów Literatury i Oświaty w Polsce, vol. 12, Kraków 1910, p. 68; K. Boroda, Studenci Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego w późnym średniowieczu, Kraków 2010, pp. 51–95.
6 Civitas, in qua liberalium artium schola floret. As cited by: R. Ojrzyński, Obraz Polski i Polaków w pismach Eneasza Sylwiusza Piccolominiego (papieża Piusa II), Warsaw 2014, p. 140, fn. 530.
7 Cracovia igitur illustris urbs Sarmaciae quam Poloniam vocant […] Hanc iuxta sacram edem situatum est ingens celebre gymnasium multis clarissimis doctissimisque viris pollens, ubi plurime ingenue artes recitantur. Studium eloquentie, poetices, philozophiae ac phisices. Astronomice tamen studium maxime viget. Nec in tota Germania (ut ex multorum relatione satis mihi cognitum est) illo clarior reperitur. H. Schedel, Liber chronicarum, Nürnberg 1493, after folio CCLXVI.
8 Cum diuturus ero Cracovina forte palaestra, / Cuius fama omni docta sub orbe volat, / Quippe per ingenuas late caput extulit artes, / Ingeniique sui lumina magna dedit. / Scrutata est penitus naturae arcana potentis, / Astrorum cursus consiliumque poli, / Nec tantum astrorum, cunctas est culta per artes, / Quas bonus orator quasque poeta probat. / Nec taceam, sanctis quibus inclyta moribus aucta est, / Ut prope censoris munera cuncta vacent. / Ast ego, cui tenuis consedit pectore Pallas, / Undique et incultus moribus ipse meis / Audeo stridenti resonantia carmina nervo / Promere et ad tantos cruda referre viros. / Parce, precor, rigidis docta senecta lyris. / Si mea nunc tenui texuntur verba Minerva, / Doctior ex vobis post mege grata canam. / Suscipite ergo viri faciles mea verba per aures, / Virtutum vobis quae monumenta ferunt Fünf Bücher Epigramme von Konrad Celtes, hg. von K. Hartfelder, Berlin 1881, pp. 20–21.
9 A coniectoribus et astrologis, quibus referta Cracovia est S. Katona, Historia critica regum Hungariae, vol. 10: Ab Anno Christi MCCCCXC ad Annum Vsqve MCCCCXCV, Buda 1793, p. 258.
10 M. Markowski, Powstanie pełnej szkoły astronomicznej w Krakowie in Historia astronomii w Polsce, vol. 1, ed. E. Rybka, Wrocław 1975, 1975, p. 90; S. Konarska-Zimnicka, Wenus panią roku, Mars towarzyszem [ ] Astrologia w Krakowie XV i początku XVI wieku, Kielce 2018, pp. 22, 31–32.
11 M. Gogacz, ‘Zawartość problemowa traktatu ‘De ente et essentia’’ Tomasza z Akwinu, Opera philosophorum medii aevi. Textus et studia, 1, Warsaw 1976, pp. 9–107.
12 A collection of seven treatises by Aristotle in which he explained biological phenomena: 1. Sense and Sensibilia (De sensu et sensibilibus) 2. On memory (De memoria et reminiscentia), 3. On sleep (De somno et vigilia), 4. On Dreams (De insomniis), 5. On Divination in Sleep (De divinatione per somnum), 6. On Length and Shortness of Life (De longitudine et brevitate vitae), 7. On Youth and Old Age (De juventute et senectute), On Life and Death (De vita et morte), On Respiration (De respiratione).
13 Based on: ’Liber diligentiarum Facultatis Artisticae Universitatis Cracoviensis’ [hereafter: LD], pars 1 (1487–1563), ed. W. Wisłocki Archiwum do Dziejów Literatury i Oświaty w Polsce, vol. 4, Kraków 1886, pp. 18–31 (14911495).
14 M. Markowski, Filozofia przyrody na Uniwersytecie Krakowskim w drugiej połowie XV wieku, Wrocław 1983, series: Dzieje Filozofii Średniowiecznej w Polsce, ed. Z. Kuksewicz, 10), pp. 147–148.
15 M. Markowski, ’Okresy rozwoju astronomii w Polsce w epoce przedkopernikańskiej’, Studia Warmińskie 9, 1972, p. 357.
16 M. Markowski, ’Okresy w rozwoju astronomii‘, p. 360.
17 M. Markowski, ’Nauki ścisłe ma Uniwersytecie Krakowskim w XV wieku’, in: Filozofia polska XV wieku, ed. R. Palacz, Warsaw 1972, pp. 192, 209.
18 M. Markowski, Powstanie pełnej szkoły astronomicznej, p. 97.
19 LD, pp. 22, 26.
20 K. Ożóg, ’Septem artes na Wydziale Sztuk Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego w XV wieku’, in Septem artes w kształtowaniu kultury umysłowej w Polsce średniowiecznej, ed. T. Michałowska, Wrocław 2007, p. 119.
21 A. Birkenmajer, ’Uniwersytet Krakowski jako międzynarodowy ośrodek studiów astronomicznych na przełomie XV i XVI stulecia‘, in: Odrodzenie w Polsce. Historia nauki, part 2, Warsaw 1956, pp. 363–377.
22 Who [Copernicus] used to stay in that city
23 Z. Kozłowska-Budkowa, ’Odnowienie jagiellońskie Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego (1390–1414)’, in: Dzieje Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, p. 79.
24 There were no regulations regarding the age of enrolment at the University of Kraków at that time. Cf. K. Boroda, Studenci Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego, pp. 43–44.
25 F. Papée, Jan Olbracht, Kraków 1936, pp. 30, 37–39.
26 Metryka Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego z lat 1400–1508. Biblioteka Jagiellońska rkp. 258 [hereafter: MUK], published by A. Gąsiorowski, T. Jurek, I. Skierska in collaboration with R. Grzesik, vol. 1, Kraków 2004, p. 498.
27 K. Boroda, Studenci, p. 288.
28 K. Morawski, Historia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Wieki średnie i Odrodzenie, Kraków 1900, pp. 354–355.
29 S. Grzybowski, Mikołaj Kopernik, Warsaw 1973, p. 57; K. Mikulski, Mikołaj Kopernik. Środowisko społeczne, pochodzenie i młodość, Toruń 2015, p. 313.
30 In 1468 a decision was made that the new parts of the college, built in the west wing of the building would have three floors. A. Włodarek, Architektura średniowiecznych kolegiów i burs Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego, Kraków 2000, p. 26.
31 It was initially located in the south wing. The stately theologians’ lecture room on the first floor was created only at the beginning of the 16th century, after the hitherto single floor building was raised in height. Cf. A. Włodarek, Architektura, p. 28, fn. 121.
32 LD, pp. 20–21.
33 Conclusiones antiquae Collegii Maioris Universitatis Cracoviensis 1432–1591, ed. D. Wójcik-Zega, Kraków 2014, p. 51.
34 Statuta nec non liber promotionum philosophorum ordinis in Universitate Studiorum Jagellonica ab anno 1402 ad an. 1849 [hereafter: LP], ed. J. Muczkowski, Cracoviae 1849, p. 444.
35 When it collapsed, it was rebuilt in 1496 thanks to a 100 florin donation from Filippo Callimachus. A. Włodarek, op. cit., pp. 27, 92. This humanist bequeathed a silver bowl and a jug to the College. A. Karbowiak, Dzieje wychowania i szkół w Polsce, vol. III, Lwów – Warsaw –Kraków 1923, p. 174.
36 LD, s. 20 –32. However, some construction works near the lecture rooms took place, since a wall next to the Plato’s room was taken down in 1494. Notae de Universitate studii Cracoviensis, ed. W. Kętrzyński, in: Monumenta Poloniae Historica, vol. V, Lwów 1888, p. 908.
37 M. Zdanek, Uniwersytet Krakowski wobec własnej przeszłości w XV–XVI wieku, Kraków 2017, p. 259.
38 LP, pp. 90–93 ; LD, pp. 18–12, 22–32. Biographical data on people referred to in the article can be found in a digital database created by the JU Archive: https://cac. historia.uj.edu.pl (accessed on 15 Feb 2023).
39 L. A. Birkenmajer, Stromata Copernicana. Studja, poszukiwania i materjały biograficzne, Kraków 1924, pp. 54–78; LD, pp. 18, 20, 26.
40 Reliquiae Copernicane. Nach den Originalen in der Universitäts–Bibliothek zu Upsala hrsg. v. Maximilian Curtze, Leipzig 1875, pp. 5–27.
41 L. A. Birkenmajer, Mikołaj Kopernik, part 1: Studya nad pracami Kopernika oraz materyały biograficzne, Kraków 1900, pp. 56–59; cf. comments on Copernicus’ writings kept in Sweden: J. Dobrzycki, ‘Uwagi o szwedzkich zapiskach M. Kopernika’, Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki, vol. 18, 1973, pp. 488–489.
42 T. Borawska, ‘Księgozbiór Mikołaja Kopernika’, in: ibid., co-authored by Henryk Rietz, Mikołaj Kopernik i jego świat. Środowisko – Przyjaciele – Echa wielkiego odkrycia, Toruń 2014, pp. 329–360; G. Rosińska, ‘Krakowski księgozbiór Mikołaja Kopernika w kodeksach Copernicana 4 i Copernicana 6 Biblioteki Uniwersyteckiej w Uppsali’, Res Historica, vol. 13, 2002, p. 114.
43 Jagiellonian Library, rkps 555.
44 G. Rosińska, ‘Identyfikacja „szkolnych tablic astronomicznych’’ Kopernika’ Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki, vol. 29, 1984, pp. 637–643, 638–642.
45 L. A. Birkenmajer, Mikołaj Kopernik, pp. 192–193. All Copernicus’ notes added to Albohazen’s work were published by J. Wasiutyński (‘Uwagi o niektórych kopernikanach szwedzkich’, Studia i Materiały z Dziejów Nauki Polskiej, series C, vol. 7, 1963, 1963, pp. 67–71); M. Markowski, ‘Wpływ myśli arabskiej na krakowską piętnastowieczną filozofię przyrody i astronomię w świetle rękopisów i inkunabułów Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej’, Biuletyn
Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej, vol. 25, 1975, no. 1/2, pp. 59–68, p. 66, fn. 59.
46 S. Konarska-Zimnicka, Wenus panią roku, pp. 155, 360–361.
47 L. A. Birkenmajer, Mikołaj Kopernik, p. 27; L. A. Birkenmajer, Stromata Copernicana, pp. 337–342; T. Borawska, Księgozbiór Mikołaja Kopernika, pp. 333, 353, 354; G. Rosińska, ‘Krakowski księgozbiór Mikołaja Kopernika w kodeksach Copernicana 4 i Copernicana 6 Biblioteki Uniwersyteckiej w Uppsali’, Res Historica, vol. 13, 2002, pp. 105–123.
48 K. Estreicher, Bibliografia polska, vol. 19, Kraków 1903, p. 352.
49 L. A. Birkenmajer, ‘Marcin Bylica z Olkusza oraz narzędzia astronomiczne, które zapisał Uniwersytetowi Jagiellońskiemu w roku 1493’, Rozprawy Akademii Umiejętności. Wydział Matematyczno-Przyrodniczy, Series 2, vol. 5 (25), 1893, p. 145, fn. 242.
50 MUK, p. 219; Najstarsza księga promocji Wydziału Sztuk Uniwersytetu Krakowskiego z lat 1402–1541, Warsaw 2011, p. 301.
51 Ex hoc enim Gymnasio multi mathemata hauserunt, qui in Germania magna cum laude et emolumento studiosorum eadem profitentur, quorum honoris gratia nomino Nicolaum Copernicum, Canonicum Varmiensem, qui hujus urbis olim hospitio usus errat, et haec, quae scripsit in rebus mathematicis admiranda, plura etiam edenda instituit, ex hac nostra Universitate ceu de fonte primum accepit. Id quod ipse non solum non diffitetur (benignum esse et plenum ingenui pudoris, judicio Pliniano existimans, profiteri per quos profeceris): verum hoc, quidquid est, totum nostrae fert acceptum Academiae. As cited by: Copernicus Nicolaus Torunensis, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium libri sex, [ed. Ioannes Baranowski], Varsaviae 1854, p. 642.
52 An eminent son of Alma Mater, the University of Kraków
53 M. Zdanek, Uniwersytet Krakowski wobec własnej przeszłości, pp. 224–240, esp. 228–229.
54 MUK, v. 1, p. 498, fn. 1629.
55 Cf. apt commentary on that issue in: S. Konarska-Zimnicka, Wenus panią roku, pp. 70–72.
56 A. Pelczar, ‘Jan Brożek (1585–1652). Matematyk, historyk nauki, profesor i dobrodziej Uniwersytetu’ in: Złota Księga Wydziału Matematyki, ed. B. Szafirski, Kraków 2000, pp. 240–269.
57 Second, enhanced edition: Venice 1627, pp. 158–162 (Copernicus’ Biography).
58 H. Barycz, Jan Brożek. Wybór pism, vol. I, Warszawa 1956, pp. 535–537 attributed its authorship to Jan Brożek.
59 The said letter from Copernicus to Bernard Wapowski, written in Frombork on 3 June 1524, included criticism of the work by a Nuremberg mathematician Johannes Werner On the Motion of the Eighth Sphere, published in 1522. Cf. M. Biskup, Regesta Copernicana, Wrocław 1973 (Studia Copernicana, vol. VII) no. 264.
60 Mikołaj of Szadek (1489–1564) could not have studied together with Copernicus. Starowolski probably referred to Jan, son of Prokop of Szadek, a student (1493), bachelor (1495), and master (1499), who then became a physician in Poznań (died 1517). Marcin Biem of Olkusz (ca. 1470–1540) was a student (1486), bachelor (1488), and master (1491), who had taught classes at the Liberal Arts Faculty since 1491. During Copernicus’ studies in Kraków he explained Peckham’s Optics and Regiomontanus’ Calendarium. In 1513 he moved to the Faculty of Theology. He died in 1540.
61 Cf. the Polish translation: Sz. Starowolski, Setnik pisarzów polskich albo pochwaly i żywoty stu najznakomitszych pisarzów polskich, translation and commentary by J. Starnawski, introduction by F. Bielak and J. Starnawski, Kraków 1970, pp. 171–174.
62 In 2021 the painting, normally hanging in Collegium Novum Assembly Hall, was borrowed by the National Gallery in London and presented as part of a special exhibition along with several other items related with Nicolaus Copernicus. Cf. Jan Matejko’s Copernicus Conversations with God, The National Gallery London 25 March – 27 June 2021.
The idea of relativity in physics comes down to the statement that no reference frame is distinguished in any way.1 Because Nicolaus Copernicus demonstrated in practice that tying the origin of the frame of reference to the Sun leads quantitatively to the same results as tying it to Earth (broadly speaking, cf. for example, the phenomenon of ‘fixed star’ parallaxes),
the Toruń-born astronomer is frequently thought of as the first relativist. However, both from historical and substantive perspectives, the issue is much more complex. To investigate it, we will look at Copernicus’ views through the eyes of a modern physicist.
In essence, the entire Copernican revolution is based on abandoning the frame of reference related to Earth (E frame) in favour of the frame of reference related to
the Sun (S frame). These frames are not inertial: a material point moving uniformly with respect to the E system is not doing the same in relation to the S system.
It may therefore be presumed that the relativity of the Copernican revolution reaches much further than the relativity of the special relativity theory (which, as we know, deals only with inertial frames of reference). That is, of course, not true. Copernicus himself could not have mo-
ved past absolutising the phenomenon of movement. In a chapter entitled ‘Why the ancients thought that the earth remained at rest in the middle of the universe as its center’ from the first book of De revolutionibus, Copernicus summarises the viewpoint of his opponents: Therefore, remarks Ptolemy of Alexandria (Syntaxis, 1, 7), if the earth were to move, merely in a daily rotation, the opposite of what was said above would have to occur, since a motion would have to be exceedingly violent and its speed unsurpassable to carry the entire circumference of the earth around in twenty-four hours. But things which undergo an abrupt rotation seem utterly unsuited to gather (bodies to themselves), and seem more likely, if they have been produced by combination, to fly apart unless they are held together by some bond. The earth would long ago have burst asunder, he says, and dropped out of the skies (a quite preposterous notion); and, what is more, living creatures and any other loose weights would by no means remain unshaken. Nor would objects falling in a straight line descend perpendicularly to their appointed place, which would meantime have been withdrawn by so rapid a movement. Moreover, clouds and anything else floating in the air would be seen drifting always westward 2
One noteworthy observation: virtually the same ‘philosophy’ underpinned all 19th-century attempts of detecting Earth’s absolute movement (in relation to the aether). The wind of aether could not have been discovered, and Michelson-Morley’s experiment had to have yielded zero, because there is no such thing as an absolute frame of reference (aether); only relative movements have physical meaning.
The classical principle of relativity postulates the invariance of the laws of mechanics with respect to all inertial frames of reference. Einstein’s special theory of relativity extends the classical principle to all laws of physics (not only mechanics), while the general theory of relativity generalises it even further and applies it to all frames of reference (not only inertial ones).
If (for the sake of clarity) we restrict ourselves solely to inertial frames of reference, we could say that the principle of relativity implies that studying any kind
of phenomena in a chosen inertial frame of reference precludes the possibility of determining whether or not that frame is moving. Since it is a fundamental impossibility, asking about the movement of such a frame of reference (in relation to what?) is an act devoid of any physical meaning. We can find the counterpart (or rather the archetype) of this kind of statement in Copernicus’ writing.
Coming up with a response to the abovementioned Ptolemaic arguments was not an easy task in the times of Copernicus. The Frombork astronomer found a way out by referring to the Aristotelian concept of natural movements. According to Aristotle, heavy things naturally move toward the centre of the Universe (located
in the centre of Earth), while light things (like air and fire) move outward, to the ‘periphery’ of the Universe. These are the natural movements. In order to move something contrary to its nature, a force is needed. These, in turn, are called forced movements. In this conceptual context, Copernicus’ response is understandable: Yet if anyone believes that the earth rotates, surely he will hold that its motion is natural, not violent. But what is in accordance with nature produces effects contrary to those resulting from violence, since things to which force or violence is applied must disintegrate and cannot long endure. On the other hand, that which is brought into existence by nature is well-ordered and preserved in its best state. Ptolemy has
no cause, then, to fear that the earth and everything earthly will be disrupted by a rotation created through natures handiwork, which is quite different from what art or human intelligence can accomplish
Based on this reasoning we can assume that Copernicus would have agreed to formulating the following rule: an observer standing on the surface of a body which moves naturally is unable to determine by any means whether the body moves or not. Compared to what is found in De revolutionibus, this rule is more general in two aspects. Firstly, Copernicus writes only about the movement of Earth, while the above rule (which could, a little excessively, be called the ‘Copernican principle of relativity’) can be applied to any naturally moving body. Secondly, Copernicus speaks about phenomena ‘resulting from violence’, while the rule we are ‘attributing’ to him involves any experiments carried out on the surface of the naturally moving body. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that the convictions expressed in the ‘Copernican principle of relativity’ form the foundation of the response given to the followers of Ptolemy.
If that response is to be treated as a philosophical justification for a new worldview, then we cannot defend Copernicus from the accusation of naivete. What would Copernicus have said if he had known about the effects related to centrifugal and Coriolis force (Foulcault’s pendulum)? However, if we look at his reasoning through a physical lens, we can come to the conclusion that he made a step forward in formulating the principle of relativity. It simply suffices to swap the words ‘naturally moving body’ for ‘inertial frame of reference’ to give the ‘Copernican principle of relativity’ a modern meaning. In the times of Copernicus, physics was not yet ready for this kind of change. Nonetheless, the astronomer’s scientific intuition led him down the right path. He wrote: Every observed change of place is caused by a motion of either the observed object or the observer or, of course, by an unequal displacement of each. For when things move with equal speed in the same direction, the motion is not perceived
This is essentially the principle of relativity of uniform motion. The annual movement of Earth in relation to the Sun may be (grossly) oversimplified as uniform and the abovementioned principle may be applied to it.
De revolutionibus reads: For if this is transformed from a solar to a terrestrial movement, with the sun acknowledged to be at rest, the risings and settings which bring the zodiacal signs and fixed stars into view morning and evening will appear in the same way. The stations of the planets, moreover, as well as their retrogradations and (resumptions of) forward motion will be recognized as being, not movements of the planets, but a motion of the earth, which the planets borrow for their own appearances
But are we not getting too far in ‘modernising’ Copernicus? The concept of relativity was, after all, alien to him. For Copernicus, the difference between moving and unmoving Earth, though it could not have been experimentally proven due to the movement’s nature, was absolute. He thought that the immobility of Earth and mobility of the Sun was apparent, while the mobility of Earth and immobility of the Sun was real. Here, ‘real’ and ‘apparent’ are not synonyms for ‘absolute’ and ‘relative’, but rather their archetypes. The concepts of ‘relative’ and ‘absolute’ gained their modern meaning because of Newton’s work. To quote Copernicus once again: Why should we not admit, with regard to the daily rotation, that the appearance is in the heavens and the reality in the earth? This situation closely resembles what Vergil’s Aeneas says: ‘Forth from the harbor we sail, and the land and the cities slip backward’ (Aeneid, III, 72). For when a ship is floating calmly along, the sailors see its motion mirrored in everything outside, while on the other hand they suppose that they are stationary, together with everything on board. In the same way, the motion of the earth can unquestionably produce the impression that the entire universe is rotating
Even classically ‘relativistic’ quotation of Virgil penned by Copernicus means only the essential impossibility of differentiating real and apparent movement.
When referring to the theory of natural movement in his response to the followers of Ptolemy, Copernicus modified the orthodox teachings of Aristotle. According to the latter, heavy objects move towards the centre of the Universe, while according to the former objects naturally move towards a greater concentration of the
type of matter of which they themselves are composed.
He wrote: For my part I believe that gravity is nothing but a certain natural desire, which the divine providence of the Creator of all things has implanted in parts, to gather as a unity and a whole by combining in the form of a globe. This impulse is present, we may suppose, also in the sun, the moon, and the other brilliant planets, so that through its operation they remain in that spherical shape which they display. Nevertheless, they swing round their circuits in diverse ways
This is not yet the law of universal gravitation, but still an ‘explanation’ in the spirit of Aristotle. And, undoubtedly, a step forward. Within Copernicus’ framework, space is homogenous: it contains no special points such as a centre towards which heavy bodies could move. If some points in space are distinct from others, it is not geometrically, but physically: because they contain a lot of mass.
Why does the universe not exPand?
Let us go back to the Ptolemaic arguments made against Copernicus: Earth cannot rotate around its own axis, because it would be torn apart by centrifugal force. The astronomer dealt with this claim through his concept of natural movements. However, he honestly pointed out the potential for further discussion.
He wrote: But why does he not feel this apprehension even more for the universe, whose motion must be the swifter, the bigger the heavens are than the earth? Or have the heavens become immense because the indescribable violence of their motion drives them away from the center? Would they also fall apart if they came to a halt?.
He then attempted to provide an answer: Were this reasoning sound, surely the size of the heavens would likewise grow to infinity. For the higher they are driven by the power of their motion, the faster that motion will be, since the circumference of which it must make the circuit in the period of twenty-four hours is constantly expanding; and, in turn, as the velocity of the motion mounts, the vastness of the heavens is enlarged. In this way the speed will increase the size, and the size the speed, to infinity. Yet according to the familiar axiom of physics that the infinite cannot be traversed or moved in any way, or moved
in any way, the heavens will therefore necessarily remain stationary
It is worth to remember that in the fourth book of his Physics, Aristotle distinguished between infinity by division (a continuum can be infinitely divided) and infinity by addition (two ends of a straight line are infinitely far from each other). According to Aristotle, there is a mutual and unequivocal proportionality between time and motion. Zeno’s reasoning is not sound: the infinite number of points between Achilles and the tortoise is ‘infinity by division’ and not ‘infinity by addition’. Therefore, it can be traversed in a finite amount of time. Consequently, a distance that is ‘infinite by addition’ cannot be traversed in a finite amount of time.
The argument about ‘untraversable distance’ is speculative in nature and surely had no impact on further development of cosmology. But we can risk a haphazard comparison between Copernicus’ views and the results of modern theoretical deliberations about the Universe. Curiously, in relativistic cosmology, the rotation of the Universe (in relation to what is called the compass of inertia) without any additional assumption excludes the possibility of its expansion (cf. Gödel’s cosmological model). Coincidence or nuggets of ‘prophetic’ intuition in Copernicus’ largely naïve thinking?
Finally, let us compare two passages. The first one, from De revolutionibus, contains one more argument for the mobility of Earth: Moreover since the heavens,
which enclose and provide the setting for everything, constitute the space common to all things, it is not at first blush clear why motion should not be attributed rather to the enclosed than to the enclosing
The second passage comes from a once popular textbook on modern cosmology. It aims to justify Mach’s principle, in accordance with which the inertia of test mass (a local inertial frame) is determined by the average motion of astronomical objects: If one accepts with Mach that the coincidence of the dynamically [e.g. with the use of Foucault’s pendulum] and astronomically [e.g. by measuring the angular velocity of fixed stars] determined frames of reference is in no way a consequence of Newton’s laws (or the theory of relativity), then clearly it becomes necessary to find an explanation of this coincidence, since an accidental agreement of the two frames of reference to the required degree of accuracy is altogether too unlikely. It therefore
Reverend Professor Michał Heller – scholar, cosmologist, philosopher and theologian. Founder of the JU Copernicus Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Kraków. Recipient of numerous awards and honours, including the Templeton Prize. Author of many books, such as God and Geometry, Ultimate Explanations of the Universe and Encountering the Universe
His latest book (Nicolaus Copernicus Theory of Relativity, 2023, in Polish) binds together two Copernican anniversaries. ‘In 1973, the scientific community was celebrating the 500th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus. That event convinced me to take a closer look at his work. Moreover, during that time I was keenly interested in the philosophy of science and I already knew that philosophy of science studied without consideration for the history of science is kind of art for art’s sake. Today, after fifty years, the world celebrates the 550th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus, so it would be difficult for me not to browse through my writings from the past. Truth be told, during this whole time between the anniversaries Copernicus was amongst my interests: philosophy of science, theory of relativity and relativistic cosmology as well as the history of the theory of relativity. I have always believed, and over time the strength of that belief has only grown, that bringing together science and its history is greatly beneficial to both of them. Naturally, the guiding principle that unified it all into a developing structure was the idea of relativity. It is this structure that I now call “Nicolaus Copernicus’ theory of relativity”. To describe it, I only needed to collect my older articles, rethink some issues, correct any mistakes and shortcomings and add anything that might have been missing or that might have come up over time. This is how this book came to be’, Rev. Prof. Michał Heller said.
becomes necessary to postulate a causal connexion between the motion of the stars (and nebulae) and the state of motion of the local inertial frame. In the absence of a third related object the causal connection must be supposed to act between the two phenomena mentioned. An influence of the local inertial frame on the motion of stars is not acceptable and hence it must be assumed that the local inertial frame is determined by some average of the motion of the distant astronomical objects. This statement is known as Mach’s principle.
This time, let us not search for even the humblest beginnings of Mach’s ideas in Copernicus’ works, but one has to admit that the method of argumentation is, in essence, the same. This is even more true when one realises that the sphere of fixed stars (caelum) functions for Copernicus as the ‘absolute’ frame of reference, in relation to which we measure the ‘local’ movement of Earth.
The completely innovative astronomical achievements of Nicolaus Copernicus are in his work intertwined with his contemporary views on philosophy and nature. It seems that it is the fate of all geniuses. Only by standing on the shoulders of his predecessors was he able to see further and clearer than people among whom he lived.
Reverend Professor Michał Heller
Fragment of the latest book by Rev. Prof. Michał Heller, published in May 2023
1 The article was originally published in Kwartalnik Historii Nauki i Techniki, 1972, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 235–242.
2 Nicolaus Copernicus, Complete Works, translated by Edward Rosen, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London 1992. All quotations from De Revolutionibus come from this translation.
In the late Middle Ages and early modern period, the approach to book collections could best be described as utilitarian. Benedykt of Koźmin, as we know from his will and the foundations he set up, rec-
ommended that libraries should keep only those books that were useful and currently required.1 At the end of the Middle Ages, cabinets of curiosities or Kunstkammer started to be established housing both
authentic and fabricated relics. Initially they were managed and displayed by clerics. Collections belonging to churches included objects made of gold, devotional items, sculptures, paintings and valuable books. These cabinets of curiosities over time developed into museums.2
It was not until the beginning of the Renaissance that manuscripts by great writers began to be appreciated. References to ancient authors were drawn from medieval accounts, both those of Byzantine and Western European scribes and those preserved by the Arabs. Actual manuscripts from the ancient period have not survived, however, and there are very few papyrus texts still in existence today.
In the sixteenth century an appreciation also arose for contemporary works, alongside works by the collector’s friends and acquaintances. In the 1540s, for example, students began keeping albums in which their professors, fellow students, travelling companions and even chance acquaintances would write entries.3 People also started collecting examples of writing by well-known individuals, such as in the case of Marcin Ruar, an anti-Trinitarian from Gdańsk, who collected handwritten notes by famous people, including pages from family record books.4
Had Copernicus’ contemporaries been aware that original documents written by the astronomer would one day be considered extremely valuable items for the history of culture and science? Some of them, like Marcin Kromer and Jan Brożek, probably have.5 Copernicus’s theory differed widely from the ideas about the Earth and the universe current at the time, and the importance of his discoveries was underestimated, or even ridiculed. There were even those such as Wilhelm Gnapheus, a teacher at the grammar school in Elbląg, who in 1541 published a comedy entitled Morosophus (‘The Jester-Sage’) containing satirical themes clearly referring to Copernicus and his theory.6
In 1969, in the face of the nearing 500th anniversary of the astronomer’s birth, the Manuscript Section of the Jagiellonian Library began studying the De revolutionibus autograph. The work was carried out by distinguished codicologist Jerzy Zathey, then-head of the Section. As demonstrated in Zathey’s analysis of the paper on which De revolutionibus was written, Copernicus wrote his work in stages.7 By examining the handwriting of Copernicus and the people close to him – including Tiedemann Giese, Bishop of Kulm (Chełmno) – Zathey is able to show that Manuscript 10000 in the Jagiellonian Library in Kraków is indeed an autograph manuscript by Copernicus.8 Zathey identifies the seven leaves of notes as being by Georg Joachim Rheticus. And on leaves 107 (verso) and 109 (recto) there are two words probably written by Jakob Christmann, who owned the manuscript at some point prior to 1613.
Georg Joachim Rheticus became Copernicus’s student and companion in the final years of Copernicus’s life.9 Copernicus visited Bishop Tiedemann Giese in Lubawa in 1539 in the company of Rheticus. Together, Rheticus and Giese persuaded him to publish his thoughts and calculations relating to the heliocentric theory. Copernicus decided to make his work available and allow De revolutionibus to be printed. Rheticus, who took charge of organising the printing, sent the manuscript – probably a final draft or copy – to Nuremberg. The original autograph manuscript in the Jagiellonian Library does not show any of the marks used by printers or traces of ink stains so it is unlikely to have been the manuscript used as the basis for printing.
The printing itself was supervised by Andreas Osiander who, as Jan Kepler has shown, changed the title to De revolutionibus orbium coelestium and added an anonymous introduction.10 His intention in writing the introduction was probably to protect Copernicus from any accusation of violating the biblical view of the position of the Earth in the universe. Osiander also removed Copernicus’s preface addressed to Pope Paul III. The first sheets of De revolutionibus were printed in 1542 and printing was completed by 1543. According to legend Copernicus received a copy on his deathbed.
Very few original manuscripts by leading creative figures from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries – Erasmus, da Vinci, Galileo and so on – still exist today. How, then, did this autograph manuscript of Copernicus’s De revolutionibus come to survive? Who were the various owners of the manuscript?
In the spring of 1543, Bishop Tiedemann Giese attended the wedding of King Sigismund II Augustus and Catherine of Austria in Kraków. On his return to Warmia he familiarised himself with the printed version of Copernicus’s work, subsequently lodging a complaint with the Nuremberg City Council that the printer Johannes Petreius had made unauthorised changes to the text. Giese planned to publish a second edition of De revolutionibus, adding a biography of Copernicus and removing the publisher’s interpolations. He presented his plans in a letter to Rheticus, and may also have asked him to carry out the task.11 After Copernicus’s death, Giese was probably the owner of the autograph manuscript on which the Nuremberg edition is likely to have been based. According to Aleksander Birkenmajer, Copernicus’s papers went to Giese after his death, and on Giese’s death they went to the Chapter of Warmia.12
Tiedemann Giese was born in Gdańsk in 1480.13 From 1492 onwards he lived in Leipzig, studying at the university under the direction of Canon Tomasz Werner of Braniewo, a professor of theology.14 Upon his return to Poland in 1504 he was appointed to the canonry of Warmia, in which he began to play a leading role thanks to the support of the Ferber family. In 1523 he unsuccessfully competed with Mauritius Ferber, to whom he was related, for the position of Bishop of Lidzbark. Giese was a parish priest in Zblewo and also rector of the Church of St. Peter and Paul in Gdańsk. His interest in astronomy brought him close to Copernicus, who he was in contact with from around 1507. Giese was the first person with whom Copernicus shared his observations. During Jan Brożek’s lifetime the correspondence between Giese and Copernicus still existed, but unfortunately its later fate is unknown. Like Copernicus, Giese remained loyal to King Sigismund I the Old in the conflict between the Polish Kingdom and the Teutonic Order, for which Giese was ennobled by the king. In 1523
he became Custodian of the Chapter of Warmia and Official General of the Diocese of Warmia. In 1525, on the advice of Copernicus, he had a polemical anti-Lutheran paper published by the printer Hieronymus Vietor in Kraków. In 1532 he became Coadjutor Bishop to Mauritius Ferber, now Bishop of Warmia. On behalf of the Chapter of Warmia and Bishop Ferber, Copernicus wrote a long letter to the Prussian Senators justifying Giese’s appointment. However, King Sigismund I the Old had different plans, and following Ferber’s death Johannes Dantiscus was made Bishop of Warmia. Giese became Bishop of Chełmno in 1538 and, after the death of Dantiscus, Bishop of Warmia in 1549. He died on October 23, 1550 in Lidzbark Warmiński.15
joachim rheticus (1514–1574)
The next person to own the autograph manuscript of De revolutionibus was Georg Joachim Rheticus.16 Rheticus was born on February 16, 1514 in Feldkirchen. His father was Georg Iserin and his mother Thomasina de Porris, who was of Italian heritage. When Georg Iserin was accused
of witchcraft and executed, the family was stripped of its surname. Georg Joachim then took his mother’s surname de Porris, using its German translation ‘von Lauchen’. He is better known, however, as Georg Joachim Rheticus, from the Roman name for the region that he came from, Rhaetia.
Rheticus was educated in his hometown, then from 1528 to 1531 studied in Zurich. In 1532 he became a student at the University of Wittenberg. He mainly studied mathematics, and after graduating in 1537 began to teach mathematics at the University of Wittenberg.17 In 1538 he discussed Copernicus’s heliocentric theory, which he had heard talk of, with Johannes Schöner and the printer Johannes Petreius
in Nuremberg, and soon decided to travel to Warmia to meet Copernicus himself and study astronomy under him. We know that in the summer of 1539 Rheticus was in Frombork bringing Copernicus a gift of several volumes of the latest literature on mathematical and natural sciences. Three of these books came from the printing house of Johannes Petreius and were intended as an encouragement to have De revolutionibus published by Petreius.
Copernicus went with Rheticus to Lubawa to visit Giese and spent several months there. While in Lubawa, Rheticus worked intensively on the manuscript of De revolutionibus and wrote a summary of Copernicus’s theory. In September 1539 Rheticus
went to Gdańsk to oversee the printing of this summary, entitled Narratio Prima 18 In it, Rheticus describes, in an accessible way, the ongoing debate about the theory of the movement of the planets around the Sun, arguing that the heliocentric system should be accepted as correct. In 1540 he gave a series of lectures on astronomy in Wittenberg, including the heliocentric theory. In 1541 he again visited Copernicus in Frombork, finally obtaining his consent for De revolutionibus to be published. He then took the manuscript to Nuremberg, quickly returning to Warmia and in August 1541 arriving in Königsberg, where he won the support of Albert, Duke of Prussia, for Copernicus’ work. Rheticus also presented his own work on the map of Prussia to Albert and gave him an instrument for measuring the length of the day. He returned to Wittenberg at the end of 1541 and was elected Dean of the Faculty of Liberal Arts. In 1542 he entrusted the printing of De revolutionibus to Petreius, Schöner and Osiander.
In 1542 Rheticus was appointed Professor of Mathematics at the University of Leipzig, a post which he held until 1551. Between 1547 and 1548 he studied medicine in Zurich, as he was seriously ill and wanted to cure himself. However, he had to leave Leipzig as he was accused of homosexuality. After a short stay in Chemnitz and then Prague he settled in Kraków in 1554. In Kraków he lived in the Market Square, in the Kaufman townhouse, supporting himself by working as a doctor and earning additional income by writing horoscopes. He also conducted astronomical observations, building a 14-metre-high obelisk as a simple yet original astronomical observatory, most probably in a garden in the district of Wesoła, close to today’s Copernicus Street. He used an image of the obelisk in his publications, and from 1557 the Kraków printer Łazarz Andrysowicz used the image as his printer’s mark.19 During his time in Kraków, Rheticus also researched the salt mines of Wieliczka, having been recommended to do so by Copernicus while Rheticus was still living in Warmia.20
In 1569, Valentinus Otho (circa 1548 to April 4, 1603) came to Kraków with the aim of studying astronomy and trigonometry under Rheticus.21 Originally from Magdeburg, Otho enrolled at the University of Wittenberg in 1561 and in March 1566
received his Master’s degree in liberal arts. He was a pupil of Johannes Praetorius, who was a professor at the University of Wittenberg and an acquaintance of Rheticus. Under Praetorius, Otho studied the question of the number π. In 1573 he travelled with Rheticus to Košice, where Rheticus had two benefactors, the Voivode of Sieradz Olbracht Łaski and the Hungarian magnate Hans Rueber zu Pixendorf. In November 1574 Otho brought the De revolutionibus manuscript from Kraków to Košice, delivering it to Rheticus on November 28. Rheticus died a few days later on December 4, 1574, and his collection passed to Otho. In 1577 Otho took over the Chair of Mathematics at the University of Wittenberg, but due to a conflict between the Lutherans and the Calvinists he left Wittenberg, which was strictly Lutheran, and moved to Calvinist Heidelberg. In 1596 he published Rheticus’s Opus palatium de triangulis, having himself edited and prepared it for printing.22 According to Bartholomaeus Pitiscus, Otho’s collection was in great disarray, having been stored carelessly, with manuscripts and books by Otho and those he had inherited from Rheticus lying around in heaps, some of them rotting.23
After Otho’s death in April 1603, his collection passed to Jakob Christmann (1554–1613), then Dean of the Faculty of Liberal Arts at Heidelberg University.24 Christmann came from Johannisberg near Mainz and received his primary education at a school in Neuhaus. He became Professor of Oriental Languages at the University of Heidelberg, specialising in Hebrew, and was also an astronomer.25 While the autograph manuscript of De revolutionibus was owned by Otho it had not been bound and it was probably at this time that the title page was lost. It is likely that Christmann gave Copernicus’ work to Simon Petiscus, a professor of mathematics.26
It was possibly Simon Sten (or Stenius, 1540–1619), another Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy at Heidelberg University, that had the manuscript bound.27 The binding is stiffened with pages from the book De inquisitione Hispanica by Reginald Consalvus, published in Heidelberg in 1603, to which Sten wrote the preface. Jerzy Zathey suggests that Sten gave the bookbinder the preface after making corrections. The binding of De revolutionibus is made from
a parchment document issued by the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian II on September 27, 1566.28
The manuscript of De revolutionibus next became the property of John Amos Comenius (1592–1670), one of the greatest pedagogues in history. Comenius was born on March 28, 1592 in Nivnice in Moravia, the son of Martin Komenský, a miller.29 He received his early education at the Unity of the Brethren school in Strážnice, then from 1608 attended the Latin school in Přerov. In
1611 he became a student at the Herborn Academy and on June 19, 1613 enrolled at the University of Heidelberg. On the back of the second protective sheet of the manuscript of De revolutionibus, Comenius wrote that he bought the work for his library, for a good price, from the widow of Jakub Christmann on January 14, 1614 in Heidelberg. Comenius stayed at the University of Heidelberg for less than a year; in 1614 he was already rector of a school in Přerov. After the defeat of the Czech Protestants at the Battle of White Mountain in 1620, he initially went into hiding. In 1625, after discussions with Rafał Leszczyński, he
was involved in bringing a large group of Czech Brethren refugees to Leszno and in 1628 he himself settled in Leszno. He stayed in Leszno from 1628 to1642 and from 1648 to1656, taught at the local grammar school and, as its rector between 1637 and 1641, helped it to flourish. It is thanks to Comenius that a standardised educational system became part of pedagogical practice. The grammar school in Leszno was at the time a popular place of study for young people from Poland and abroad. Comenius’s main work, Janua linguarum reserata, a Latin language course dedicated to the Voivode Bogusław Leszczyński, was written and published in Leszno in 1631. In 1657 he published Orbis sensualium pictus, an example of the idea that textbooks should be illustrated so that their contents can be assimilated more quickly by pupils. Comenius was also interested in astronomy and wrote the now lost textbook Astronomia ad lumen physicum reformanda – probably the reason why he bought Copernicus’ manuscript from Christmann’s widow.
In his philosophical system Comenius adhered to three principles of cognition: sense, reason and divine revelation. Within these three categories, where the main, decisive principle was revelation, there could be no room for Copernicus. Although Comenius owned the manuscript of De revolutionibus he was against the heliocentric theory, as it was incompatible with Scripture.30 In the period 1642 to 1648 Comenius lived in Elbląg, where from 1644 to 1645 he taught philosophy. From 1642 he reported to the Lord High Chancellor of Sweden, Axel Oxenstierna, on the religious and political situation in Poland, hoping in this way to contribute to the collapse of the Catholic and Habsburg governments. He was an ardent supporter of the Swedish and Transylvanian invasions of Poland in 1655 and 1656, and even wrote a panegyric in honour of Charles X Gustav. Leszno became a centre of anti-Polish and anti-royal activitiesand was burned down by Polish troops during a siege in retaliation. Comenius fled the city together with the Swedish army, leaving behind his library and his manuscripts, which were destroyed. He died on November 15, 1670 in Amsterdam.
It is not known under what circumstances the manuscript of De revolutionibus found its way to the Nostitz library in Jawor, Silesia. The third protective sheet of the manuscript bears the signature of Otto von Nostitz (1608–1665), but no date.31 How the autograph found its way to the library is unknown. Otto von Nostitz was born in a Protestant family and received his education during his travels to various European cities before attending the university in Strasbourg. As a well-educated and well-travelled young man, he was appointed to important positions in the Habsburg administration in Silesia. In 1642–1650 he served as the Governor of the Duchy of Breslau, and in 1651–1662 he filled the same position in the Duchy of Jawor-Świdnica. Around 1630, Otto von Nostitz converted to Catholicism. It is possible that before 1630, Nostitz met John Amos Comenius and acquired the De revolutionibus autograph from him. After his conversion, Otto von Nostitz tried to convince the subjects on all his lands to follow suit. He established the library in Jawor in 1651. Was the autograph already a part of its collection? We do not know.
His son Christoph Wenzel von Nostitz (1643–1712), Governor of Legnica in
1662–1685 and Governor of Głogów in 1686–1697, took over the estate of Luboradz in Jawor, including the library and the art collections in the castle. On October 5, 1667, after the death of Otto von Nostitz, an inventory was made of the castle library in Jawor.32 A manuscript of De revolutionibus was in the Nostitz library prior to 1665 but no information about it was published as far as is known. In 1670 the library and Otto von Nostitz curiosity collection was bought by his younger brother Johannes Hartwig and moved to a house in Malá Strana in Prague.33 Indeed it was not until 1788 that Friedrich K. Hirsching, describing the collections of libraries in Prague, made public the fact that the Nostitz library, located in the family’s palace in Prague, included this priceless document.34 It is not known when exactly the manuscript was moved to Prague.35
The call number of De revolutionibus in the Nostitz collection changed several times; one of its call numbers – 156 – appears on the lower part of the spine of the manuscript. On the front endpaper, under the bookplate of the Nostitz family, there is an extensive note dated 1854, written by the then owner of De revolutionibus Erwin Nostitz, giving a detailed description of the manuscript. From the 1840s onwards the manuscript was available to researchers in the library, but due to its popularity it was later moved to the Nostitz archive and access to it was restricted. In the second half of the nineteenth century, research was conducted on the manuscript, including comparing its contents with the first published edition. The manuscript was also made available to the German researcher Maximilian Curtz, who prepared the Toruń edition of the work for the 400th anniversary of Copernicus’ birth.36
In 1896 Ludwik Antoni Birkenmajer was allowed to examine the manuscript in the company of Antoni Czuczyński. Birkenmajer published his findings in his monograph of 1900.37 The first phototype edition of the manuscript appeared in 1944 in Munich, created by Fritz Kubach and Karl Zeller.38
library of the national museum in Prague
Nostitz family for around 300 years. In 1945 the Nostitz collection was nationalised and moved to the Library of the National Museum in Prague, and from there to the University Library. In 1953 the manuscript was loaned to Warsaw for an exhibition on the occasion of the 410th anniversary of Copernicus’s death. A ‘loan certificate’ marked Prague, September 14, 1953, states as follows: ‘The manuscript is lent to the Polish Academy of Arts and Science for inclusion in the exhibition being held in Warsaw on the occasion of the 410th anniversary of the death of Nicolaus Copernicus, for the duration of the exhibition only’. This document was signed, for the Polish side, by Stanisław Lorentz and Alodia Kawecka-Gryczowa.39 The exhibition itself was entitled Odrodzenie w Polsce (‘The Renaissance in Poland’).40 The autograph manuscript was also presented at the Copernicus Session of the Polish Academy of Sciences held on September 15–16, 1956.41
From that time onwards, efforts were made for Poland to acquire the priceless manuscript. As early as 1953, Ambassador Wiktor Grosz started negotiations about exchanging it for certain items of value to Czechoslovakia. In a letter dated December 21, 1953 the Polish Foreign Minister Stanisław Skrzeszewski informed Professor Stefan Żółkiewski of the Polish Academy of Sciences that ‘the government of the Czechoslovak People’s Republic expects that, in return, the government of the People’s Republic of Poland would donate items of historical and cultural value to the Czech nation’.42 The management of the National Library of Poland and the former Director of the Jagiellonian Library, Aleksander Birkenmajer, were involved in this undertaking. Seven objects were selected from the National Library of Poland, the Jagiellonian Library, the Municipal Library in Toruń, the University Library in Wrocław, Father Stanisław Jasiński’s private collection and the Raczyński Library in Poznań. A possible decision about the library of Father Leopold Szersznik, located in Cieszyn, was also considered but the details of this are today unknown. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs was aware of the difficulty of finding a suitable equivalent for the priceless manuscript.43 Ultimately, the Polish side gave Czechoslovakia a parchment manuscript of the Czech Bible from the beginning of the fifteenth century containing 24 figurative
initials and eight decorative initials, with the call number ‘Biblioteka Narodowa –Biblioteka Ordynacji Zamoyskich nr 7 (BN BOZ 7)’.44
jagiellonian university
– jagiellonian library
Under an act of July 5, 1956 the government of Czechoslovakia offered the Polish nation Copernicus’ manuscript as a gift. The Act states as follows: ‘Vláda Československé Republiky [...] daruje vládé Polské lidové republiky rukopis slavného syna polského národa Mikuláše
Kopernika De revolutionibus orbium coelestium ’ (‘The Government of the Czechoslovak Republic [...] presents to the Government of the Polish People’s Republic the manuscript of the famous son of the Polish nation Nicolaus Copernicus De revolutionibus orbium coelestium’). The deed of donation was signed by the Czechoslovak Prime Minister Vilim Široky and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Václav David.45 The ceremonial presentation of the manuscript took place in Warsaw at the Chancellery of the Prime Minister, with the participation of Prime Minister of Poland Józef Cyrankiewicz.46
The negotiations over which institution in Poland should house Copernicus’ manuscript lasted several months. In late July 1956 the Rector of the Jagiellonian University, Teodor Marchlewski, requested that it be given to the Jagiellonian Library. Professor Karol Estreicher made efforts to have the manuscript transferred to the Jagiellonian University Museum, together with the globes then stored in the Jagiellonian Library, as he wanted to create a museum of science devoted to Copernicus in one of its rooms. Finally, on September 25, 1956 the autograph manuscript of De revolutionibus was presented to the Jagiellonian University by Stanisław Lorentz, acting on behalf of the National Museum in Warsaw, where the manuscript had been kept from 1953 to 1956. The gift was accepted on behalf of the Jagiellonian University by the Vice-Chancellor Kazimierz Lepszy and the Deputy Director of the Jagiellonian Library Władysław Pociecha. They were accompanied by the curators of the Jagiellonian Library Irena Barowa and Jerzy Zathey.47 Władysław Pociecha delivered a speech on behalf of the Jagiellonian University.48
Owen Gingerich, a leading researcher of Copernicus’s legacy, who only had access to the propaganda put out by the Communist governments of Central and Eastern Europe, wrote as follows:
After World War II, this treasure was lent by Czechoslovakia to Poland, at which time the Poles simply appropriated it for themselves and deposited in the Jagiellonian Library of Copernicus’ alma mater. It would have been unseemly for one communist society to object too stren-
uously to a bordering brother society, so the precious document has remained in Poland.49
What actually took place was a kind of exchange of cultural goods between countries. In this exchange what mattered above all was the emotional attitude of the parties towards the items being swapped, not their objective value. For the Czechs, the manuscript of De revolutionibus had no emotional value, while for Poland it was vital evidence of how the Polish state had participated in the development of global science and culture. Just how emotional the librarians were about Copernicus’s manuscript can be seen from the telegram sent by Zofia Ameisenova to Aleksander Birkenmajer in Rome on September 25, 1956: ‘WE HAVE THE COPERNICUS MANUSCRIPT’.50 The Jagiellonian Library today considers the manuscript the most valuable item in its collection and has given it the call number ‘10000’.51
In 1969, in connection with the approaching 500th anniversary of Copernicus’ birth, research on the autograph manuscript began at the Manuscripts Division of the Jagiellonian Library, led by the eminent early manuscript specialist Jerzy Zathey, then Head of the Manuscripts Division. Zathey carried out a detailed study of the paper on which the text was written, the handwriting, the way the manuscript was put together and its binding. The back cover was taken apart, allowing Zathey to thoroughly examine the material it was
made of and establish previously unknown details of the manuscript’s binding. 52 A facsimile edition of the autograph manuscript was made, as the first volume in the planned Mikołaj Kopernik Dzieła wszystkie (‘Complete works of Nicolaus Copernicus’). This first volume, entitled Rękopis dzieła Mikołaja Kopernika ‘O obrotach’: facsimile (‘The manuscript of Nicolaus Copernicus’s work ‘‘On the Revolutions’’: facsimile’), with an introduction by Jerzy Zathey entitled Analiza i historia rękopisu ‘De revolutionibus’ (‘Analysis and history of the manuscript ‘‘De revolutionibus’’’) was published in 1972. This volume also appeared in English in 1972 and in Latin, French and Russian in 1973.
The next facsimile edition was published in Hildesheim in 1974. Another facsimile was produced in 1976 in Kraków, using better-quality paper and with more subtle differentiation between the various colours of the paper and ink. This version drew on the experience gained from the publication of the first volume of the complete works. Its overall dimensions are the same as the original manuscript and individual pages are cut to the same size as the originals.
In 1996 Neurosoft published the first electronic reprint of the manuscript of De revolutionibus. This was done by making digital copies of slides of the original. The publication was initially available only on CD-ROM. Later a digital version was made available via the website of the
Jagiellonian Library.53 Currently anyone interested can consult this digital copy.
In 1999 the autograph manuscript of De revolutionibus was inscribed on the UNESCO Memory of the World Register, one of seven Polish items on the list. In 2016 the publisher Tadeusz Serocki in Pelplin produced another facsimile edition of the manuscript.
The autograph manuscript of Copernicus’s De revolutionibus is a document of inestimable value for global cultural heritage. As such, it is treated with the utmost care by the librarians of the Jagiellonian Library.
Zdzisław Pietrzyk
Director of the Jagiellonian Library in the years 2003–2021
1 A. Lewicka-Kamińska, ‘Biblioteka Jagiellońska w latach 1492–1655’, in: Historia Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej, Vol. 1, 1364–1775, ed. I. Zarębski, Kraków 1966, p. 180.
2 K. Pomian, Collectors and curiosities: Paris and Venice, 1500–1800, Cambridge 1990; M. Mencfel, Skarbce natury i sztuki. Prywatne gabinety osobliwości, kolekcje sztuki i naturaliów na Śląsku w wiekach XVII i XVIII, Warsaw 2010; R. Šipek, Die Jauerer Schlossbibliothek Ottos des Jüngeren von Nostitz, Part 1, Frankfurt am Main 2014, pp. 62–69.
3 A. Golik-Prus, Różnorodność formuły ‘non omnis moriar’ w łacińskich wpisach sztambuchowych przełomu XVI i XVII wieku, Katowice 2004.
4 K. Ogier, Dziennik podróży do Polski 1635–1636, edited and with an introduction by M. Pelczar, I. Fabiani-Madeyska, Part 2, Gdańsk 1953, p. 193.
5 In 1581 the Bishop of Warmia, Marcin Kromer, commemorated Copernicus with a marble epitaph plaque in Frombork Cathedral. In the early seventeenth century Jan Brożek, a professor at the University of Kraków, also kept Copernicus’ memory alive – K. Estreicher, Pamiątki kopernikowskie w Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim, Kraków 1973; S. Cynarski, Znajomość nauki Kopernika w Polsce XVII i XVIII wieku, Kraków 1973.
6 K. Ławrynowicz, Albertina. Szkice z dziejów Uniwersytetu Królewieckiego, Pułtusk–Kraków [2010], pp. 59–60.
7 ‘J. Zathey, Analiza i historia rękopisu ‘‘De revolutionibus’’’, in: Rękopis dzieła Mikołaja Kopernika ‘O obrotach’: facsimile, ed. P. Czartoryski, Warsaw–Kraków 1972, p. 27.
8 ‘Wyniki badań porównawczych potwierdzają przeto słuszność sądu, że pismo rękopisu dzieła De revolutionibus jest pismem Mikołaja Kopernika, a zatem że rękopis ten jest autografem’, ibid., p. 27.
9 Georg Joachim Rheticus, Wegbereiter der Neuzeit, publ. Ph. Schöbi, H. Sonderegger, Hohenems 2014.
10 K. Ławrynowicz, Albertina…, pp. 65–66.
11 Ph. Schöbi, Gieses erhellender Brief an Rheticus, in: Georg Joachim Rheticus…, pp. 115–119.
12 A. Birkenmajer, ‘Z dziejów autografu De revolutionibus’, Nauka Polska 1953, No. 3, p. 154; A. Białek, ‘Śladami rękopisu. Próba zarysu dziejów autografu kopernikowskiego “De revolutionibus”’, Sobótka 1974, Issue 1, p. 29
13 W. Pociecha, ‘Giese Tiedeman Bartłomiej (1480–1550)’, in: Polski Słownik Biograficzny, Kraków 1948–1958, Vol. 7, pp. 456–458; H. Zins, W kręgu Mikołaja Kopernika, Lublin 1966, pp. 250–251; T. Borawska, Tiedemann Giese (1480–1580) w życiu wewnętrznym Warmii i Prus Królewskich, Olsztyn 1984.
14 Die Matrikel der Universität Leipzig, publ. G. Erler, Leipzig 1895, Vol. 1, p. 393.
15 T. Borawska, Tiedemann Giese (1480–1550) w życiu wewnętrznym Warmii i Prus Królewskich, Olsztyn 1984 – https://kpbc.umk.pl/publication/36197 [accessed April 26, 2021].
16 L. Hajdukiewicz, ‘Rheticus Georg Joachim (1514–1574)’, in: Polski Słownik Biograficzny, Wrocław 1988–1989, Vol. 31, pp. 255–259; Ph. Schöbi, Rheticus – Wegbereiter der Neuzeit, in: Georg Joachim Rheticus…, pp. 35–92.
17 Album Academiae Vitebergensis ab A.Ch. MDII usque ad A. MDCII, […] Sub auspiciis Bibliothecae Universitatis halensis ex autographo editum […] K. Foerstemann, Leipzig 1841, Vol. 1, p. 146 – Georgius Ioachimus de Porris Feldkirch.
18 J. J. Retyk, Narratio prima. Relacja pierwsza z ksiąg O obrotach Mikołaja Kopernika, trans. I. Lewndowski, introduction and commentary by J. Włodarczyk, Warsaw 2015.
19 H. Sonderegger, ’Rheticus und sein Obelisk in Krakau‘, in: Georg Joachim Rheticus…, pp. 193–198.
20 Ph. Schöbi, ’Rheticus – Wegbereiter der Neuzeit’, in: Georg Joachim Rheticus…, pp. 35–92; H. Sonderegger, ’Rheticus
phie.de/pnd124623425.html#adbcontent [accessed April 26, 2021]; J. Zathey, Analiza i historia…, p. 35.
28 A. Birkenmajer, ’Trygonometria Mikołaja Kopernika w autografie głównego jego dzieła’, Studia Źródłoznawcze 1971, Vol. 15, p. 32.
29 V.-J. Dietrich, Jan Amos Comenius. Mit Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten, Reinbek 2005; V.-J. Dietrich, Johann Amos Comenius. Ein Mann der Sehnsucht 1592–1670. Theologische, pädagogische und politische Aspekte seines Lebens und Werkes, Stuttgart 2003; D. Fauth, Comenius – im Labyrynth seiner Welt, Zell am Main, Würzburg 2009.
30 Q. V e t e r, Sur les destins du manuscrit pragois du Kopernik ‘De Revolutionibus orbium caelestium ( !) libri sex’, Prague 1931, pp. 2–3.
31 Biblioteka Jagiellońska, rkps 10000, karta ochronna c. recto; R. Šipek, Die Jauerer Schlossbibliothek…, pp. 15–40.
32 Ibid., p. 37 – call no. ‘E 343’.
33 R. Šipek, op. cit, Vol I, pp. 82–85.
34 F. K. G. Hirsching, Versuch eines Beschreibung sehenswürdiger Bibliotheken Teuschlands nach alphabetischer ordnung der Oerter, Erlangen 1788, Vol. 3, p. 290; R. Šipek, Die Jauerer Schlossbibliothek…, pp. 175–176.
35 A. Białęk, Śladami rękopisu…, pp. 31–32.
36 N. Copernicus, De revolutionibus, publ. M. Curtze, Thorn 1873.
37 L. A. Birkenmajer, Mikołaj Kopernik. Studya nad pracami Kopernika oraz materyały biograficzne, Kraków 1900.
38 N. Kopernikus, Opus de revolutionibus caelestibus manu propria. Facsimile-Wiedergabe, publ. F. Kubach and K. Zeller, Munich–Oldenburg 1944.
39 BJ, rkps 10000a, k. 1r.
40 Odrodzenie w Polsce. Wystawa w Muzeum Narodowym w Warszawie 1953–1954, Warsaw 1953.
41 A. Birkenmajer, ’Głos w dyskusji‘, in: Sesja Kopernikowska, 15–16 IX 1953, ed. J. Witkowski, Warsaw 1955, p. 453.
42 BJ, rkps przyb. 300/75 – letter from Stanisław Skrzeszewski, Minister of Foreign Affairs, to Professor Stefan Żółkiewski, President of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, December 21, 1953.
43 BN BOZ 7; BJ, rkps 441; Książnica Miejska w Toruniu im. M. Kopernika – rkps KMgz (R.fol.5); Biblioteka Uniwersytecka we Wrocławiu rkps 1452; Manuscript in possession of Rev. Stanisław Jasiński (Kraków, Wawel) 15th-century Latin antiphonary of Bohemian origin; Biblioteka Miejska im. Raczyńskich w Poznaniu druk sygn. IV Kg 23 – hymn book in Czech; ‘Załączając notatkę o Bibliotece im. Leopolda Szersznika w Cieszynie, uprzejmie proszę o rozważenie i tej sprawy…’ – ibid.
44 The manuscript is in Prague: Narodni Knihovna call number XVII.C.56. On the same subject, see also: T. Makowski, Biblioteka Ordynacji Zamojskiej. Od Jana do Jana. Przewodnik po wystawie. Warsaw 2005, p. 297.
45 BJ, rkps 10000b.
und sein Obelisk in Krakau’, in: ibid., pp. 192–198; L. Hajdukiewicz, Rheticus Georg Joachim…, pp. 257–258.
21 C. G. Jöcher, Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexicon, Vol. 3, Leipzig 1751, p. 1,136 – https://digitale.bibliothek.uni-halle. de/vd18/content/pageview/9084413 [26.04.2021]; E. Hilfstein, Was Valentinus Otto a Professor at the University of Heidelberg? ‘Organon’ 1986–1987, Vol. 22–23, pp. 221–223 – https://polona.pl/item/organon-1986-1987-nr-22-23,NzczOTQ3Mw/222/#item [accessed April 26, 2021].
22 D. Roegel, A Reconstruction of the Tables of Rheticus Opus Palatinum (1596), The Loria Collection of Mathematical Tables – http://locomat.loria.fr/rheticus1596/rheticus1596doc.pdf [26.04.2021].
23 J. Zathey, Analiza i historia…, p. 35.
24 G. Drylinger, Christmann Jakob (1554–1613), Heidelberg 2015 – https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/20136/1/christmann.pdf [accessed April 26, 2021].
25 J. Zathey , Analiza i historia…, pp. 35–36.
26 Ibid., p. 35; A. Białek, Śladami rękopisu…, p. 30.
27 R. Hoche, ’Sten, Simon’, Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 1893, Vol. 36, pp. 43–44 – https://www.deutsche-biogra-
46 ‘Dar rządu Czechosłowacji. Przekazanie rękopisu dzieła Kopernika ‘‘De revoliutionibus orbium coelestium’’’, Dziennik Polski 1956, No. 163; BJ, rkps 10000b, leaf 3 – printed invitation to Aleksander Birkenmajer to take part in the ceremony of the presentation of Copernicus manuscript by the Czechoslovak government delegation.
47 BJ, rkps 10000b, leaf 4.
48 BJ, rkps 10000b, leaf 6–8.
49 O. Gingerich, Książka, której nikt nie przeczytał, trans. J. Włodarczyk, Warsaw 2004, p. 47.
50 BJ, rkps przyb. 553/75. Professor Birkenmajer was closely involved in the acquisition of the autograph manuscript of De revolutionibus; his papers, held at the Jagiellonian Library, include several dozen folders relating to research on Copernicus: BJ, rkps przyb. 261–316/75.
51 Inwentarz rękopisów Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej, Nr 9001–10000, Część 3, Nr 9801–10000, ed. J. Grzybowska, Kraków 1986, pp. 717–719.
52 Z. Zathey, Analiza i historia…, pp. 1–39.
53 Jagiellońska Biblioteka Cyfrowa, De revolutionibus libri sex – https://www.jbc.bj.uj.edu.pl/publication/1494 [accessed April 26, 2021].
Thenumerous treasures of culture and national heritage kept in the Jagiellonian Library include items related to one of the greatest scholars, whose discoveries in the field of astronomy revolutionised science: Nicolaus Copernicus. None of his notes or writings survived from the period when he studied at the Jagiellonian University during the years 1491–1495, and the entry in the University’s matriculation list is the only visible trace of his education in Kraków. His academic career then continued at Italian universities. Nevertheless, he certainly left Kraków with a considerable wealth of knowledge, especially in the area of astronomy, as the city was known for the highest standards of scholarship in this particular field. The Kraków University library was able to obtain copies of his writings, including several very precious manuscripts, as early as in the 16th century, and later it came into possession of the autograph of his most important and famous work, De revolutionibus. The collection attracts continual interest from scholars and journalists from all over the world.
Copernicus spent more than 20 years working on De revolutionibus libri sex. He finished the work in 1541, only two years before his death. The book consists of six parts, in printed version also accompanied by a preface addressed to Pope Paul III. What is interesting, is that only one chapter is devoted the description of the ground-breaking heliocentric model of the universe, whereas others include a lot of astronomically significant findings, such as proofs for the spherical shape and movement of the Earth, rules of plane trigonometry, stars, parallels, shadows, changes in day and night length, as well as sunrises and sunsets. Copernicus also developed the theory of the Moon’s rotation earlier proposed by Wojciech of Brudzewo, from whom he might have taken private lessons during his studies in Kraków. Although at that time any conception putting the Sun in the centre of the universe faced sharp criticism from the majority of churchmen and members of the academia, other findings and calculations published in
De revolutionibus were appreciated by Copernicus’ contemporaries. In 1616 the work was placed on Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the index of prohibited books. Heliocentrism became widely accepted in Europe as late as at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries, thanks to new astronomical discoveries. The permission to print De revolutionibus was made as late as 1751
by Pope Benedict XIV, while in 1828 the book was officially removed from the list prohibited works. In tribute to the immense value of Nicolaus Copernicus’ discoveries, in 1999 his autograph was inscribed on the UNESCO Memory of the World Register.
The autograph (catalogue number BJ Rkp. 10000), which was probably the final draft before the fair copy was created,
has the size of 28x19 centimetres and consists of 213 sheets of paper with an early 17th-century cardboard cover, including a parchment document of Emperor Maximilian II, written in German. Copernicus’ handwriting was clear and he arranged the text into one column, leaving out wide margins, where he put 162 geometric diagrams as well as corrections and additions to the text. The entire work includes numerous crossings-out of full sentences, paragraphs, and even entire sections, as well as blots and ink smudges. Some pages feature notes by the great astronomer’s pupil, Georg Joachim Rheticus, thanks to whose efforts it was possible to publish De revolutionibus during his master’s lifetime.
We know a lot about the history of the manuscript. Its details are presented in the article ‘A history of the autograph manuscript of Nicolaus Copernicus’s De revolutionibus’ published on pp. 38–45 of the present issue of the magazine.
At this point, it is worth noting that this invaluable item of cultural heritage became part of the Jagiellonian Library collection in 1956 and is currently one of the greatest treasures kept by the Jagiellonian University.
The Jagiellonian Library, the oldest Polish academic library, possessed copies of the oldest printed editions of Copernicus’ work as early as the 16th century. The extensive and remarkable collection of old printed books includes over a dozen very precious and interesting Copernican memorabilia, such as various copies of three oldest editions of De revolutionibus, as well as historical editions of other works by Nicolaus Copernicus and works devoted to the famous astronomer or directly linked to him.
As far as printed editions of De revolutionibus are concerned, the library possesses as many as seven copies of this book, including two copies of the first edition (Nuremberg: Johann Petreius, 1543), four copies of the second edition (Basel: Heinrich Petri, 1566) and one copy of the third edition (Amsterdam: Wilhelm Jansonius, 1617).
The copies of the first Nuremberg edition, published under the title Nicolai Copernici Torinensis De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, Libri VI, are marked
with catalogue numbers Cim. 8288 and Cim. 8436. Both books are considered extremely valuable historic items: the first of them (Cim. 8288), which belongs to the old Library collection, is closely related to Professor Jan Brożek (1585–1652), an eminent scholar, a polymath and probably the world’s first ‘Copernicologist’. The copy bears signs of intense reading by Brożek, reflected in the presence of his notes, remarks, and very distinct crossings-out. Brożek crossed out the words orbium coelestium from the title, considering them unrightfully added by
the editor, and by crossing out the entire editor’s preface, he wanted to express his objection to the opinion presented there, according to which Copernicus’ views should be considered only one of many plausible theories. It is not precisely known when the Jagiellonian Library came into possession of the volume, but Brożek certainly had access to it in the first half of the 17th century. The second copy of the first edition (catalogue number Cim. 8436) is a splendid bibliophile edition, originating from the book collection of a wealthy merchant Melchior Krupek (or
Krupka), who ordered the books to have covers modelled on volumes from King Sigismund Augustus’ library and bear similar inscriptions. Consequently, the volume has a Renaissance-style brown leather cover, made in 1551, embossed with the words MELCHIORIS CRVPEK MONVMENTVM 1551 on the back cover. Melchior Krupek died between 1580 and 1583, so the copy may have become part of the Jagiellonian Library collection already in the late 16th century.
The second edition of De revoluitonibus was published under the title (here in an abbreviated version) Nicolai Copernici Torinensis De Revolutionibus orbium coelestium, Libri VI. Among the
four ‘Jagiellonian’ copies of this edition one deserves special attention: the volume with catalogue number Cim. 8202 was probably the first to become the possession of the Jagiellonian Library, purchased and covered thanks to the generosity of Kraków University professor Benedykt of Koźmin. It was a permanent fund, established in accordance with the scholar’s last will, intended for the purchase and binding of books for the Jagiellonian Library collection. Works acquired thanks to the fund were fitted with beautiful, richly ornamented covers, with a Jagiellonian Library ownership mark – two crossed rector’s sceptres – on the back cover. The front cover of the above mentioned copy
features an image of the Crucifixion, above which the inscription EX FVNDATIONE D.
A KOZMIN ‘funded by Sir Benedykt of Koźmin’ is embossed, whereas the date of covering the book, 1567, is impressed below the image. The three other copies are no less interesting: Cim. 8506, coming from a Renaissance library of Hieronymus Beck of Leopolsdorf; Cim. 8538, which used to belong, among other owners, to Adam Ostaszewski (1860–1934), interestingly, an opponent of the heliocentric theory; and Cim. 8669, whose cover features empty spaces in which coins were once set, probably as Jan Brożek’s ‘treasury’. More information (in Polish) about specific copies of Nicolaus Copernicus’ work can be found on the Jagiellonian Library blog (www.blog.bj.uj.edu.pl).
The Jagiellonian Library collection includes only one copy of the third edition of De revolutionibus , published in 1617 in Amsterdam, in Wilhelm Jansonius’ printing house under the changed title: Nicolai Copernici Torinensis. Astronomia Instavrata, Libris sex comprehensa, qui De Revolutionibus orbium coelestium inscribuntur . This very interesting volume was owned by Jan Brożek already in 1617. The value of this copy is substantially increased by a set of Brożek’s handwritten notes and poems devoted to Copernicus, bound together with the book. The notes include Brożek’s comment: Terram non esse centrum universi, that is, ‘the Earth is not the centre of the universe’, which testifies to the Kraków Academy professor’s scholarly autonomy and independence displayed in 1617, one year after Copernicus’ work was placed on the Index of Prohibited Books
As far as other works by Copernicus kept in the Jagiellonian Library are concerned, it is worth noting that the collection includes the oldest printed work by the great astronomer, published in 1509 in Kraków in Jan Haller’s printing house. Interestingly, this was not an astronomical book, but Letters of the Byzantine writer and historian Theophylact Simocatta translated by Copernicus from Greek into Latin. According to classical philologists, the work shows the astronomer’s linguistic talent and proficiency in both Latin and
Greek and constitutes the first known translation from Old Greek in Poland.
The second work, chronologically speaking, is Narratio prima – a scholarly abstract of De revolutionibus published by Georg Joachim Rheticus in 1540 in Gdańsk in Franciszek Rhode’s printing house (Jagiellonian Library catalogue number: Cim. 5855), followed by De lateribus et angulis triangulorum, published in 1542 in Wittenberg by Johann Lufft (catalogue number: Cim. 5103). This was the last publication before De revolutionibus.
Other ‘Copernican’ old prints from the Jagiellonian Library collection should rather be considered tributes to the great astronomer or memorabilia of him, even though some of them feature the name of Copernicus as the author. A large proportion of them was published in 1618, partially as a result of Jan Brożek’s journey to Warmia in the footsteps of Copernicus, where he gathered material for the planned, though never written, biography of the astronomer. During this search, Brożek copied the text of Nicolaus Copernicus’ epitaph from his (no longer existing) tombstone in Frombork and had it published in print. The Jagiellonian Library currently possesses the only copy of this single-sheet print, catalogued under the number Cim. 1321 (part of bound-with volume Cim. 1318–1321). Besides the epitaph from the Copernicus’ grave, the same bound-with also includes two lines in a Latin elegiac couplet, allegedly authored by Copernicus himself. The words Me genuit Torunna, Cracovia me arte poliuit || Inter habet primos Varmia clara patres, that is: ’Toruń gave me birth, Kraków trained me in liberal arts, || The famous Warmia numbers me among its finest citizens’, conclude Epistolae ad naturam ordinatarum figurarum plenius intelligendam pertinentes, published by Jan Brożek (Kraków, 1618, catalogue number Cim. 1320). Bearing in mind Brożek’s deep admiration for Copernicus, it can be supposed that the professor actually wrote these verses himself. This is also suggested by two single-sheet prints signed by Jan Brożek, published in 1618, paying tribute to Nicolaus Copernicus. The first of them (catalogue number 14100 III a) extols the glory of Copernicus’ observation tower, earned for being the place where the famous astronomer conducted his research. The second (14100 III b) puts together two eminent cosmographers: Nicolaus Copernicus and Christopher Columbus.
Copernicus began publishing in 1509 by issuing his translation of Greek letters. The last work attributed to the famous astronomer – a collection of poems entitled Septem sidera (Seven stars) – was published posthumously in 1629, after being allegedly found by Jan Brożek searching for lost writings of Copernicus in Warmia and Prussia. Printed at the publishing house of Franciszek Cezary – patriarch of a distinguished family of Kraków printers, the work was dedicated by Jan Brożek to Pope Urban VIII, and its year of publication, encoded in an astronomical riddle is also the year of Brożek’s ordination as a priest. It is widely believed among researchers that it is Brożek himself who had created or compiled the letters, but, for
some reason, attributed them to Copernicus, maybe in order to win him favour with the Pope, enhance the astronomer’s glory or simply conceal his own authorship. Over a dozen ‘Copernican’ early printed books in the Jagiellonian Library collection are works of great historic, bibliophilic, and scholarly value. Along with the autograph of the great astronomer’s book they constitute a unique collection. All the above-mentioned works are available in the digital form on the Jagiellonian Digital Library platform (www.jbc.bj.uj. edu.pl).
Jacek Partyka Wojciech Świeboda Jagiellonian Library
It is not surprising in the slightest that Nicolaus Copernicus has always been an interesting figure for historians of science; indeed, the works on the great astronomer could fill many a bookshelf in a library. Amongst them there are tomes devoted to his medical activities. Copernicus did not only study medicine, but also actively practiced it for many years, monitoring the health of and providing care to sick bishops and members of the Warmian cathedral chapter as well as their families. Notable individuals such as distinguished humanist, poet and diplomat Jan Dantyszek (Johannes Dantiscus) and bishop of Chełmno Tiedeman Giese, Copernicus’ friend, came to seek his medical advice. Nicolaus Copernicus treated important people and, as later accounts would have it, followed the teachings of Hippocrates by caring for the destitute as well.
When Prussian knight Georg von Kunheim fell gravely ill, his close friend prince Albrecht Hohenzollern asked Copernicus for help. It was the year 1541 when the 68-year-old scholar from Toruń set off on a difficult journey to Königsberg. Records show that Copernicus spent over a month there to personally tend to his patient, and kept being involved in the case after returning to Frombork. He even consulted Jan Benedykt Solfa (Johannes Solfa), King Sigismund I the Old’s court physician, about the treatment. As von Kunheim’s condition improved, Copernicus gained the respect and gratitude of prince Albrecht.
This story paints the picture of a physician respected and acclaimed for his skills and knowledge, earning fame among his contemporaries. During his life, Copernicus was known for his expertise in medicine. After his death, he went down in history as a celebrated astronomer. In reality, we know relatively little about his medical education. He might have become acquainted with the medical arts during his time at the University of Kraków, where he studied the Liberal Arts between 1491 and 1495, though there is no proof to back such a claim. However, it is worth to mention that he was familiar with astrology and casting
horoscopes, which were then considered an important part of medicine.
Copernicus began studying medicine during his second stay in Italy, at the University of Padua, in 1501 – and probably finished in 1503. Unfortunately, very little is known about that period. It is not known whether Copernicus earned a doctorate, even though he was sometimes described as medici doctor. However, it is beyond all doubt that he practiced medicine for nearly 40 years of his life.
Copernicus’ studies in medicine took place in the beginning of the 16th century, when the legacy of Hippocrates, Galen and Avicenna were still well-regarded and formed the foundation of medicine. The overarching aim of scholars was to rid the classical texts of errors made by medieval copyists and translators. It was commonly thought that obvious inconsistencies and contradictions arose from incorrect or poor translations. It was necessary, then, to return to the sources. Ancient Latin and Greek became prized languages. It is no coincidence that the following epoch in history became known as the Renaissance. The scholastic model of science became more and more criticised, with scholars all the more boldly and frequently proclaiming the importance of empirical observations of phenomena and stressing the necessity to confront these observations with written records. However, they were still ‘under the spell’ of ancient authors; a sentiment that is evident in the area of medicine.
At the turn of the 15th and 16th century, the perception of human anatomy and physiology was still based on Galen’s views which, though logically consistent, contained a number of serious misconceptions, ultimately leading to erroneous conclusions. Unable to examine actual human corpses, Galen resorted to philosophical speculation supported by the findings of other scholars. He was firmly convinced that observations made during autopsies of animals could be freely applied to the study of the physiology and functioning of the human body. As we now know, this is a false assumption.
Studies on diseases were based on a model derived from the Hippocratic humour theory. In essence, it was predicated upon the equilibrium of four bodily fluids called humours: blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm; there were rules which carefully described the proportions and relationships between the humours. Upsetting the balance resulted in sickness. These inner workings of the organism
were connected to the external, cosmic order. This is why studying maps of the sky was such an important skill for a physician, practically indispensable for making a correct diagnosis and selecting the right treatment. For these same reasons, images of the sky, together with theories on miasma (i.e. noxious air from marshes and decomposing matter), were the foundation of studies on diseases – what we would now call ‘epidemiology’ – in that period.
One of the aspects of health care practices which is still considered important by today’s standards is the examination of the physical properties of urine; this branch of medicine, known back then as uroscopy, was well-respected in the Middle Ages. Similarly, examinations of other bodily secretions and blood had a prominent position in the medical practices in that time. Doctors also appreciated the impact of proper diet (including drinks), lifestyle, personal hygiene and clothing. Medicine was prepared from plant-, animal- and mineral-based substances. Some of the recipes were highly complex and included a number of rare ingredients, such as gold or pearls, or even more exotic ones like the horn of a unicorn. Cleansing treatments were also very important. Purification could help remove from the organism bits of ‘rotting matter’ and accumulation of ‘toxins’ that posed a threat to one’s health or even life, opening the way to the restoration of ‘humour symmetry’. Without a doubt, this view on health problems fostered the custom of bloodletting and performing enemas.
Bloodletting, known even in ancient medicine, was also employed by doctors in the medieval period. Direct cut to a vein, also known as phlebotomy, was the most common form of bloodletting, though not the only one. Leeching was another popular way of getting rid of ‘bad blood’. Enemas served a similar role, particularly if the source of health problems was tied to a digestive tract
disorder. Dating back to ancient Egypt, they remained part of a physician’s armamentarium.
It would be inaccurate to think that during Copernicus’ studies in Italy, scholars had not discussed the nature of medicine itself, seeking new solutions to mounting challenges. Could such disagreements
Preserved medical treatises owned by Copernicus are not in any way exceptional and may well be counted among the literary canon in this discipline at the turn of the 15th and 16th century. The majority of them was most probably purchased during his studies in Italy. The prescriptions written by his hand are in accordance with what he was taught by the professors in Padua. There are no exceptions to the therapeutic rules of his contemporaries.
As a doctor, Copernicus seems to be, first and foremost, a practitioner. Perhaps, as the years went by, he became doubtful of whether he should trust everything he learned in his youth, but nothing seems to indicate that he made any sort of revision of the basics of medical knowledge from that period. Tradition sees him as a careful diagnostician, prudent physician and attentive observer whose reputation far exceeded the borders of the Bishopric of Warmia. It seems reasonable to believe it. Scientific treatises and discoveries are not always the only mark of a great doctor. By writing De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, Copernicus immortalised himself in the pantheon of great scholars. By treating patients with care, dedication and devotion, he was fondly remembered by the posterity.
Chair in History of Medicine, JU MC
S OURCES :
and disputes have been the subject of the great astronomer’s considerations? It is difficult to find proof of that, though there are some indications that Copernicus was favourably disposed towards what would later be called iatromathematics, which stressed the necessity of subjecting medicine to strict mathematical rules. Well-versed in mathematics and driven to find reliable formulas and rules that governed the cosmic mechanism, Copernicus strived to arrive at a possibly clear and objective set of laws that would provide the framework for science and medicine; a goal that seems a natural inclination in his case. However, we cannot be certain.
J. Dobrzycki, L. Hajdukiewicz, Kopernik Mikołaj (1473–1543), PSB 1968–1969, v. 14, pp. 3–16.
S. Flis, ‘Mikołaj Kopernik jako lekarz’, Polski Tygodnik Lekarski 1953, No. 8 (29–31), pp. 1030–1032, 1061–1064, 1094–1096.
Z. Mameła, ‘Studia medyczne i praktyka lekarska Mikołaja Kopernika’, Archiwum Historii i Filozofii Medycyny 1995, v. 58, z. 3, pp. 245–264.
E. Sieńkowski, ‘Mikołaj Kopernik jako lekarz i medycyna jego czasów’, Archiwum Historii Medycyny 1973, v. 36 (4) pp. 249–259.
N.G. Siraisi, Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine: an Introduction to Knowledge and Practice, Chicago–London 1990.
M. Skulimowski, Mikołaj Kopernik. Wybitny przedstawiciel medycyny XVI wieku w Polsce: 1473–1543, Kraków 1973.
D. Wierzbicki, ‘Kopernik jako
Kosmos 1881, No. 6, pp. 273–284.
F. Zampieri, A. Zanatta, Medical History in Italy: the University of Padua Medical School, in: Medical Humanities. Italian Perspectives, eds. L. Caenazzo, L. Mariani, R. Pegoraro, Cleup 2015, pp. 31–38.
Out of Nicolaus Copernicus many talents and scholarly accomplishments, his work on economics is the least widely known. He is recognised as an astronomer and a philosopher, but an economist? That
mendations still apply to the amazingly complex contemporary financial systems? It is worth to take a look and try to answer these questions. The following essay is by no means a comprehensive description
is not so obvious. This holds true for both the general population and economists themselves. Yet a large part of Copernicus’ theoretical framework and public activity was focused on the economy, particularly on the issue of the design of a monetary system. Concepts proposed by Copernicus still resonate in the global economic thought, albeit they are often attributed to other authors. This is hardly surprising, as subjects such as inflation, reasonable monetary policy and economic development of a country are as pressing as ever.
But is Copernicus’ theory on economics as valid today as it was 500 years ago? Do his predictions and political recom-
of Copernican thought; I advise all interested Readers to familiarise themselves with notable works on the history of economic theory cited below. Rather, it is an attempt at reflection on the evolution of Copernicus’ theory since the times of the Renaissance and the development of economics as a branch of science.
The most famous economic works of Nicolaus Copernicus were written between 1517 and 1528. In this interesting transitory period in the European economic history
the medieval, largely dispersed system of small duchies and local administrations gave way to a new order: centralised nation states and imperial rivalries. In his history of monetary systems, renowned anthropologist David Graeber notices that during this period there was also a change in the most dominant form of money. In those days, as kings conquered larger and larger swathes of European lands, they also tried to expand their influence on the issuing of currency. An influx of gold and silver from Latin America facilitated coinage and allowed them to collect taxes in precious metals. Consequently, precious metal money started to supersede previous financial arrangements based on merchant credit and mutual trust between trading partners.
However, evaluating the real value of coins (i.e. estimating how much precious
metal is present in each individual coin) became a real problem. This is because in contrast to paper or digital cash, precious metal money (or, more broadly, commodity money), such as gold or silver coins, has two separate values. Aside from the nominal value, which denotes the purchasing power of a coin (such as a certain number of ducats), they also have an intrinsic value of their own based upon the amount of precious metal that can be smelted. These two values were not always necessarily equal, and kings (as well as owners of mints and influential merchants) faced the temptation to debase the currency, i.e. lower its value by worsening its composition. The presence of many different currencies in circulation and lack of reliable information about them led to inflation, chaos in the markets and, ultimately, to difficulties in everyday economy.
These phenomena were present in Poland as well. The monetary reforms of King Casimir the Great from the mid14th century, which introduced a uniform and well-evaluated currency in the entire country, had not lasted long. The Jagiellons gradually decreased the amount of silver in grosz and denarius, and other currencies and illegally minted coin penetrated into the circulation. Additional
problems were caused by the acquisition of Royal Prussia by Poland in 1466, with its separate and disorganised monetary system. As stated by Professor Mirosław Bochenek: ‘The Prussian monetary system in the times of Copernicus was in a state of decay. For every nine good coins in circulation, there were eight bad ones.
Many of them were not only debased, but even outright counterfeit. Polish kings were helpless to stop the flow of foreign currencies into the kingdom, despite the fact that the Statutes of Casimir the Great demanded that only coins of acceptable weight be used in Poland. Prussian currency was debased several times a year, leading to frequent changes in prices, rent etc.’.
The monetary reform was the subject of heated discussion, both in Prussia and in the court of King Sigismund I the Old. In particular, the idea of unifying the monetary systems of Royal Prussia and Poland was given much consideration, and Copernicus, as the administrator of the Warmia cathedral chapter, was a loud voice in the debates.
In 1517, Warmian bishop Fabian Luzjański (Fabianus Lusianus) convinced Copernicus to draw up a set of guidelines for a monetary reform in Royal Prussia, complete with a theoretical framework. It became the inception of a comprehensive model of precious metal money, which Copernicus contained in five works.1
First and foremost, the model established the difference between the face value and the actual worth of a coin. The face value is nominal, given to coins by the issuer and denoting a certain number of monetary units (which, for instance, was important when it came to taxation). The actual worth of a coin depends on the content of precious metals.
Secondly, Copernicus enumerated the causes of the decreasing value of coins: adding more copper instead of silver, lowering the weight and natural attrition processes. Additionally, injecting too many coins into circulation could also decrease their value through inflation. This observation makes Copernicus a precursor to the later quantity theory of money.
The most famous aspect of Copernicus’ theory is the issue of bad money driving out good. Simultaneous circulation of two currencies differing from one another in terms of precious metal content leads to a gradual withdrawal of the better one, to be hoarded in treasuries, smelted or shipped abroad. Copernicus issued a warning: ‘And if it is wholly inappropri-
ate to introduce a good new coin when there is still a bad old one in circulation, then how much more erroneous was it to introduce new worse coin into circulation with a better older one, not only infecting it, but also, so to speak, driving it out?’.
This phenomenon would lead to dire consequences. The dominance of bad money in circulation means growing inflation, which harms the poorer social classes, the economy of the entire country, and finally kings themselves. According to Józef Zajda, Copernicus thought the debasement of currency was one of four major disasters that cause the collapse of a state, along with discord, mortality and soil infertili ty. A proper monetary reform was to entail, among other things, producing coins in only one mint, banning the use of old money and their gradual replacement in circulation, guaranteeing a constant and limited amount of money in circulation and ensuring the stable value of coins.
Copernicus was one of a few think ers of the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance who formulated similar hypotheses: the issue of money was also discussed by French bishop Nicole Oresme and English mer chant Sir Thomas Gresham. And although Copernicus’ works were the most extensive and clearest, until the modern times the law was tied to Gresham, chief economic advisor to Queen Elizabeth I.2 Professor Bochenek states that Copernicus’ monetary treatises were published as late as in the second half of the 19th century, and they were translated into Polish in the 1920s. It was only then that people started to notice the astrono mer’s original contribution to the economic theory, and his name started popping up in research studies on economics.
This interesting fact is saying a lot about the development of science, where pioneers, often described as ‘giants’, can remain forgotten for centuries due to some historical circumstances. Notwithstanding the name, the ‘law of bad money’ became one of the most frequently discussed and tested laws in the history of economics. To see how important it is, one needs just to take a look at the names of the authors
who wrote about it: Friedrich August von Hayek, Robert Mundell and John Kenneth
currency by the US dollar in everyday life, a phenomenon very well known to Poles from the era of late People’s Republic of Poland, but also present in many countries of the Global South. Similar tendencies are present in international trade and finance, which are dominated by a few strong currencies (US dollar, euro, yuan), while the money of weaker economies is not as trusted by companies and investors. According to George Selgin, the situation is altogether different in highly competitive currency markets, where both strong and weak currencies successfully coexist subject to constant evaluation and re-evaluation in the cycle of buying and selling.
If Copernicus-Gresham’s law is not a universal and objective rule, should it be discarded entirely? Some authors suggested exactly that. In their 1986 paper, Arthur J. Rolnick and Warren Weber attempted to reformulate this law. They claimed that the transactional popularity of money is not determined by the value of precious metals it contains, but rather by adequate revalorisation. The coins in which nominal value is equal to the actual worth will remain in circulation, while those in which it is different will be driven out, no matter whether they contain too much or too little precious metals. The theoretical framework they proposed seemed to better describe the inner workings of the currency market.
Schwartz, Charles Kindleberger, Thomas Sargent, and many others. A true galaxy of Nobel laureates and acclaimed authors!
The works of these authors were mired in controversy. The economic history of the last five centuries has given us numerous and diverse examples that both confirmed and contradicted the ‘law of bad money’. One of these examples is the process of ‘dollarisation’, i.e. supplanting of local
Further research suggested that the centuries-old Copernicus-Gresham’s law may still be useful to accurately describe reality. But the devil is in the details! It turns out that for the ‘law of bad money’ to work, certain conditions need to be met. Following Friedrich August von Hayek, Polish economic methodologists Jarosław Boruszewski and Krzysztof Nowak-Posadzy argue that ‘the fundamental condition is the existence of two types of currency which have the same value for one purpose and different for the other’. For instance, two coins with the same nominal value, but different percentage of precious metals are worth the same for transactional purposes, but differ in value for the purpose of increasing one’s wealth.
How to fulfil this rather complex condition? Certainly, certain strong stimuli
are needed to compel business entities to trade in worse money and stockpile the better one (and not the other way round). What are these stimuli? George Selgin (2020) discerns two imperfections of the currency market. Firstly, it is unreliable information on the content of precious materials in currencies, which makes it difficult for small time players (consumers and employees) to get to know their real worth. This profits various kinds of speculators, minters and traders, who pull good money out of circulation and conduct their business with worse. Secondly, it is the topdown, political compulsion to accept transactions according to their nominal value, regardless of their actual worth. This type of behaviour was enforced in many Renaissance kingdoms, effectively discouraging merchants from trading using good money: in the end, bad was worth the same.
Obverse and reverse of a polymer banknote with a nominal value of 20 zlotys, issued by the National Bank of Poland in 2023. The banknote shows important places and items related to the life of Nicolaus Copernicus. Its most prominent feature is Copernicus’ most famous likeness, known as the Toruń portrait
In such specific circumstances, Copernicus-Gresham’s law was indeed in effect. To quote Selgin: ‘Those writers were addressing, not monetary selection outcomes in competitive and otherwise unhampered markets, but the peculiar selection processes at work in markets characterized by state coinage monopolies, legal tender laws, and such. In those markets, monetary selection favored, not more “efficient” monies but genuinely “bad” ones, meaning ones which, though officially just as valuable as others, were held by the public to be less valuable in fact’.
It is an important lesson for the attempts of scientific description of economic management. It is a historical process, always set in a certain legal and cultural context. Hegemonic institutions, both formal and informal, affect the economic activity of people. Money circulates in a specific way in the computerised systems of global currency markets (such as FOREX), differently in highly-interventionist nation states, and differently still in closely knit local communities bonded by mutual trust. This fundamental, social and cultural layer of economics makes formulating general rules, like those in exact sciences, a very risky proposition.
These caveats can be applied also to the attempts at universalising Coperni-
cus-Gresham’s law according to the statement ‘evil drives out good’. Boruszewski and Nowak-Posadzy show a few examples of such attempts in the economy, politics and culture. Indeed, simple claims such as this one may seem tempting, as they offer an organised – if pessimistic – way to look at reality. But is this really the way the world works? Let us hope not.
Now let us change perspective: from the mundane and fiscal to a much broader one (albeit not yet cosmic). Who was Nicolaus Copernicus as a scholar? Why is he an inspiration to the adepts of almost all branches of science, including economics? What makes him stand out from other famous researchers and theoreticians?
Firstly, he is so distinctive a figure because of his true interdisciplinarity. The criterion we currently use to identify good research was part of his everyday life. We can also note the achievements in the public service of the Warmian canon and the practical applications of his economic work: something that is only now introduced as the ‘third mission of the universities’. But what is truly inspiring is his intellectual courage, readiness to reject old dogma and contradict centuries of orthodoxy. One must remember: espousing a heterodoxic worldview was much more
dangerous during Renaissance than today.
In modern economy, there are still disputes between representatives of different schools of thought. The dominating paradigm remains unchallenged, but the need for change is universally recognised. Climate crisis, the issues of energy transformation, social inequalities, market crashes and high inflation are all phenomena for which mainstream economics has no answer. Divergent schools of thought: ecological, institutional and post-Keynesian economics, however, offer some alternative solutions, and thankfully, their authors are not at risk of being put on the List of Forbidden Books. All of these issues were discussed during the World Copernican Congress, in particular during the panel On fixing money – from Copernican theory of money to contemporary issues in economic policies caused by energy and climate crisis.
JU Institute of Economics, Finance and Management
Bochenek M., ‘Znaczenie traktatu monetarnego „Meditata” Mikołaja Kopernika dla rozwoju myśli ekonomicznej (w 500. rocznicę jego powstania)’, Ekonomista 2017, No 6, pp. 699–718.
Boruszewski J., K. Nowak-Posadzy, ‘Prawo Kopernika-Greshama: rekonstrukcja metodologiczna’, Ekonomista 2018, No 5, pp. 554–577.
Graeber D., Debt. The First 5000 Years, Warszawa 2017. Rolnick A. J. & Weber W. E., ‘Gresham’s Law or Gresham’s Fallacy?’, Journal of Political Economy 1986, Vol. 94, No 1, pp. 185–199.
Selgin G., Gresham’s Law: Handbook of the History of Money and Currency, Springer, Singapore 2020, pp. 199–219. Sparavigna A. C., ‘Some Notes on the Gresham’s Law of Money Circulation’, International Journal of Sciences 2014, Vol. 3, No 2, pp. 80–91.
Zajda J., ‘Kopernikowska teoria pieniądza’, Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 1973, No 35, pp. 17–40.
E NDNOTES
1 Professor Bochenek enumerates them in the following order: Meditata (1517), Modus cudendi monetam (1519–1522), Tractatus de monetis (late 16th century), Monetae cudendae ratio (1526) and Felici Reich. De moneta (1526).
2 Incidentally, a similar fate befell another distinguished Polish economist: Michał Kalecki. His works on business cycles from the 1930s were in many aspects ahead of the famous concepts proposed by John Maynard Keynes and improved upon them. Yet it was Keynes that became a household name and now stands at the foundation of many economic schools of thought. Kalecki is recognised by his peers, but his fame never grew beyond the academia.
Jan Matejko, Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God, oil on canvas, 226 x 316 cm, 1873. From the collection of the Jagiellonian University Museum
Jan Matejko’s painting Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God is indubitably one of the most famous works in the history of Polish art. The painting, completed in 1873, is extremely valuable for two reasons: firstly, it depicts a scholar whose discovery completely upended the perception of humanity’s place in the Universe, and secondly, because it was created by a 19th century master painter that is still considered as one of the most prominent Polish artists.
Jan Matejko loved anniversaries. John III Sobieski at Vienna, Union of Lublin and Constitution of 3 May 1791 are works that he painted to mark special anniversaries of important events. The painting showing Copernicus was not unlike those, as it was created to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the great astronomer’s birth.
The year was 1873. Two years prior, Matejko sat down to draw the first sketch, which turned out to be very similar to the
end result. In the end, the painter managed to fit the figure of Nicolaus Copernicus, part of Frombork architecture, various astronomical instruments and a star-speckled sky on a canvas measuring 225 by 315 centimetres.
The painting took almost three months to make. Matejko had to work fast to make
sure it was ready for the jubilee. He painted it, among other places, in his atelier at ul. Krupnicza 5, where he also lived. Copernicus was born on February 19, 1473, and Matejko’s creation was first shown to Kraków audiences in Spisz House (Pałac Spiski) exactly on February 19, 1873. The painting garnered much attention and was met with critical acclaim. At first, it was meant to be sold to count Jan Działyński, but he was unable to finalise the transaction due to financial troubles. Driven by patriotic sentiments, Matejko refused to sell the painting to the Germans, who wanted to display it at an exhibition in Toruń. It was then that the idea of selling it to the Jagiellonian University was born. The young Nicolaus Copernicus spent several years studying at the Kraków University’s Faculty of Liberal Arts, in those days also including mathematics and astronomy. A work of art presenting the University’s most eminent student would be an excellent addition to its collection.
A fund-raiser, coordinated by count Piotr Moszyński, was announced. Generous donations allowed for the purchase of the painting and gifting it to the Jagiellonian University during a special event held on May 7, 1873. However, it did not stay within the University’s walls for too long, as it was sent off to an international exhibition in Vienna. Fortunately, it was returned to Kraków without any difficulties and was subsequently hung on a wall in the assembly hall of Collegium Maius. Nevertheless, it was the Collegium Novum assembly hall which became the place of its exposition for many years. The building was completed in 1887, and the famous painting found its way to the new heart of the Jagiellonian University.
During World War II, the painting was removed from its frame and hidden in one of the rooms in Collegium Novum belonging to the Institute of Art History. The Nazi Germans transferred it to the Mining Academy, where they stored items taken from the Jagiellonian University. Luckily, ‘Copernicus’ returned to Collegium Novum after the war, where it now hangs on a wall in the assembly hall, surrounded by other works of Matejko, including a few great portraits of University professors. Interestingly, Copernicus can also be found in another painting in the room: The Influence of the University on the Country in the 15th Century, also by Jan Matejko.
The painting Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God shows a terrace of a residential tower in Frombork adjacent to the cathedral (its roof and tower are clearly visible in the background). Truth be told, Matejko never bothered to visit Frombork, but during his work he used pictures made by Karol Beyer, Warsaw’s first professional photographer. Clearly it was important to him to carefully render every architectural detail (one can also recognise the Vistula Lagoon and parts of town). The scene is presented as if time itself has slowed. One can see the face of
a man in deep thought, achieving enlightenment. Matejko could have presented Copernicus poring over his calculations or proudly presenting his findings; instead, he chose a captivating moment: the instant when the astronomer already knows, but still struggles to fathom the consequences of his discovery. It is important to notice that there is no rivalry between rational science and the belief in the divine origin of the world. In Matejko’s eyes, heliocentrism did not diminish the Frombork canon’s faith in God’s order.
Copernicus’ face in the painting was based on surviving records, though it did not make it any less necessary to work
with a model. In this regard, Matejko was assisted by his friend, Polish doctor Henryk Levittoux. Ever since the painting was created, Copernicus’ pose was a subject of criticism. One can clearly see his left leg bent at the knee, as if he was kneeling, but where is his other leg? It takes a closer look to see part of the second shoe underneath the coat-tail. Matejko’s contemporaries accused him of choosing a wrong pose for his model. The right leg is insufficiently highlighted under the coat, making it look unnatural.
One of the most characteristic items shown in the painting is a large instrument on the right. It is a triquetrum, also known as a parallactic ruler, a device known since antiquity and used to measure the altitude of celestial bodies over the horizon. With its aid, Copernicus measured the height of the Moon and stars, trying to calculate their distance from Earth. He described the details of his work in his ground-breaking book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. A full-sized copy of the triquetrum may be found, among other places, in the Jagiellonian University Museum, which also houses replicas of a quadrant and an armillary sphere, made in the 1950s based on Copernicus’ descriptions.
Unsurprisingly, the painting features a heliocentric model of the world, which Matejko placed right behind the astronomer. He based the Copernican version of the planetary system on a model used in the printed version of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium . It needs to be said that Matejko prepared very thoroughly for
painting the scene with the astronomer. He borrowed books on Copernicus from the Jagiellonian Library. He had the privilege of accessing its vast collection not only on its premises, but also at home. Franciszek, the painter’s brother, was a member of the
Library’s staff and brought to him various historical books with drawings. In fact, it was Franciszek who instilled in his younger brother a passion for history.
The artist examined the astronomical devices held in Collegium Maius very carefully. Hence, the painting features a paper measuring tape, an item from the Jagiellonian University’s collection, about ten ells long and stored in a wooden casket. The tip of the tape was cleverly secured with a wooden peg, so it did not fully sheathe. The pair of compasses Copernicus holds in his hand was an object with which many scholars from the early modern period were eager to be portrayed. It was very useful in precise measuring of length. It is not the only pair of compasses visible in the painting: in the lower right corner one can see a sector. It is made of two arms connected by a semi-circular joint. It facilitated mathematical and geometrical calculations, which made it a favourite of architects, cartographers and astronomers. Incidentally, it
was based on a device designed by Galileo. But this brings us to an essential question: are all instruments shown on the painting historically accurate? For instance, how do we explain the telescope? The device is most frequently attributed to Galileo, who improved it and first used it to make observations of the sky. By then, Copernicus was already dead for 66 years! Had the artist skipped some history classes?
Matejko’s painting was not focused on historical accuracy. Instead, his work was more of a commentary or attempt at interpretation of historical processes. His paintings are filled with secret symbolism. His approach is based on philosophy of history, which explains the presence of telescope in the painting of Copernicus. It is rather a subtle allusion to the history of science, pointing to Galileo as the continuator of Copernican thought. Although in the end he was forced to recant, we now know that ‘yet it moves’.
The year 2021 was a milestone for Matejko’s painting. For the first time in history, a work of Polish artist was displayed in the National Gallery in London. This great event in the history of Polish art proved to be a considerable challenge for the Jagiellonian University and its Museum, to whose collection the painting belongs. Initial plans were thwarted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused the exhibition to be postponed several times. The opening of the exhibition, originally planned for 2020, eventually took place on 21 May 2021. Loaning of such a precious object required complex logistical operation and constant heritage conservator’s supervision. Sending Matejko’s work on a 1,400 kilometre journey from Kraków to Trafalgar Square was undoubtedly one of the most prestigious loans in the history of Jagiellonian University Museum. The exhibition was co-organised by the Polish Cultural Institute in London, The Capricorn Foundation and the Office of the ‘Niepodległa’ Programme.
Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God was displayed in London for two months, until August 22, 2021. The director of The National Gallery, Gabriele Finaldi, said he thought Jan Matejko could act as a gateway that introduces a broader audience to the very rich tradition of Polish painting, as his work of art allows the organisers of the exhibition to tell several stories at once: including about Copernicus,
about Matejko, and about what Matejko said about the astronomer. Additionally, it is a very expressive piece of art. Finaldi emphasised his hope that the exhibition will make people remember Matejko’s name, which sounds promising in the context of Polish art. Christopher Riopelle, the exhibition’s curator, stressed that the painting was an obvious choice precisely due to the astronomer’s worldwide recognition. In this way, Copernicus became Matejko’s ticket to contemporary discussion on art, and the coming years will show how the ideas of presenting Polish art to the visitors of The National Gallery develop.
Before the decision on loaning the painting was made, heritage conservators needed to assess its condition. Ever since it was created, the work was exposed to various changing factors, in particular temperature and humidity. Nowadays, they are all regulated by air conditioning, but Matejko’s painting still remembers the time when the assembly hall was heated with tiled stoves, which is unthinkable by today’s standards. Earlier, exactly 106 years after the last stroke of Matejko’s brush, the painting went through comprehensive conservation and restoration. The drying of the stretcher caused it to detach from the painting, which called for proofing and refixing. The fringe strips of canvas were reattached, and the painting was additionally secured with
patches. And how does it look five decades after this treatment? The piece is still in satisfactory condition. In preparation for the exhibition in The National Gallery, the painting was cleaned. Small defects near the edge were filled with plaster and painted with watercolours to match their surroundings, and the edges were additionally secured.
Jan Matejko’s painting is particularly valuable to the Jagiellonian University, and not only because it is one of the most distinguished works of art in the University’s collection. As stated by the Rector of the Jagiellonian University, Professor Jacek Popiel, ‘the piece presents one of the most important figures in the University’s history. Copernicus is a person whose legacy carries a special message to modern times. He proved that science needs an open mind, and a scholar has to be brave, not caring if his discoveries are not recognised or even despised’.
Copernicus’ discovery changed the face of astronomy and gave the world a new perspective, and he himself left the Jagiellonian University a present in the form of a comment featured in De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. Years after leaving the University, he reminisced that everything he achieved in astronomy and mathematics he owes to the Jagiellonian University.
Anna Lohn-Pieróg
Forquite a while now, escape rooms have enjoyed increased popularity with the general public. These rooms are specially designed to entertain puzzle lovers: they are full of riddles, codes and locks that have to be solved and opened in order to be able to leave. These puzzles often require thinking outside the box and overcoming fears. Most of the rooms have a particular theme: they can be dedicated to a particular subject or related to popular books, films or historical events.
However, escaping does not necessarily have to mean opening locks and
unbolting manacles. We can also escape metaphorically, running away from routine or habit. And so, let the Copernicus Treasury from the Jagiellonian University Museum Collegium Maius become an escape room for a while. The Treasury is a room in the Museum devoted in its entirety to Nicolaus Copernicus, his stay at the Jagiellonian University and the flourishing of astronomy that occurred in Kraków during that period. It was furnished and arranged, as was the entire exhibition, by Karol Estreicher the Younger, when he set up the Museum in 1948–1964.
Let us avoid getting stuck in the narrative rut, which one can easily fall into during a quick overview of an issue seemingly so well-known as the life and achievements of Nicolaus Copernicus. Let us closely examine the exhibits like complex puzzles, looking for hidden, obscured or conspicuously absent details. Let us venture off the beaten path to look for things that are not obvious. Let us collect the scattered pages of our past and arrange them into a new story. We will see that Copernicus and his place in the history of the Jagiellonian University has in store many unknown facts about him – and ourselves.
Let us look at the first exhibit and see what kind of puzzle it is. The oldest preserved document that references the great astronomer is a copy of a page from a matriculation book from 1491 (the original is stored at the Jagiellonian Library) mentioning Nicolaus Nicolai de Thuronia – ‘Nicolaus, son of Nicolaus of Toruń’. Additionally, the words solvit totum (‘paid in full’) inform us that he paid his admission fee, which at the time amounted to six grosze, a week’s worth of wages of an unskilled labourer. Aside from Copernicus, we can see the names of students from various countries; back then, nearly half of them came from foreign countries: Hungary, Germany, Switzerland and others. Our task here, however, is to see what is absent: who is missing from the list of students who enrolled at the Jagiellonian University together with Nicolaus Copernicus in 1491?
For instance, there is not a single Jewish name on the list. Why is that? In the Middle Ages, the University was
a religious institution and admitted, formally at least, only Christians. And yet, King Vladislaus Jagiełło chose to locate Collegium Maius in a part of Kraków that was associated with Jews. Many of them lived nearby, they also had their own places of worship there. What is now ul. Św. Anny (St. Anne’s street) was then known as platea Iudeorum, ‘Jewish street’. Some think that choosing this location was no accident, but instead a deliberate policy of ‘de-Jewing the capital’.1 This is because rulers in Prague, Vienna and Heidelberg made similar decisions. The developing University and a student community inimical to Jews could force them to move out of the quarter.
Why mention this in the context of Copernicus? It is often forgotten that as a young student, Copernicus witnessed one of the most dramatic events in the history of the Jewish community in Kraków: in 1494, during the astronomer’s third year at the Jagiellonian University, King John I Albert, ‘meeting the demands of the City Council’, expelled the Jews from Kraków and forced them to relocate to Kazimierz.2
For a long time, valuables left in secret hiding places in the area and Collegium Maius itself were found and used to fill the coffers of the University and its chancellors: Kraków bishops, especially Frederick Jagiellon.3
In the golden age of the Kraków University, the expulsion of Jews feels like an overlooked, hidden flaw. And yet, without it, our memory of that golden age would be incomplete.
The Copernicus Treasury contains items that the great astronomer saw with his own eyes, maybe even used them. They are the astronomical devices of the court astrologer of Hungarian King Matthias Corvinus, Professor Marcin Bylica of Olkusz, who bequeathed them to the Jagiellonian University in his will. They arrived at their destination in 1494; we even know that the then-rector Jan Sacranus declared October 10, 1494 a day off so that professors and students would be able
to admire the magnificent instruments.4 As a third year student, Nicolaus Copernicus must have been among them.
A set of three gilded brass items was made specifically for Marcin Bylica in the 1480s by a Viennese Dominican by the name of Hans Dorn at the request of the king of Hungary. It comprises a large astrolabe, torquetum and globe of the sky. They are the largest and most ornamental European astronomical devices preserved to modern times. The instruments are extremely impressive, but just across the room, in another display case, there is an item even more valuable and rare if somewhat inconspicuous: an Arabic astrolabe from Cordoba dating back to 1054, also gifted by Marcin Bylica. It will provide us with a clue to the mystery of Arabic and Islamic influences in Europe.
In the times when Copernicus studied in Kraków, Europe bore witness to the end of its last Arabic state, the Emirate of Grenada, which succeeded the Emirate of Córdoba. In the 10th and 11th century, it was the richest and most advanced country on the continent, where Islam, Christianity and Judaism coexisted in peace.
With its one million inhabitants, Córdoba was the largest city in Europe. Thanks to universities and libraries, science and art flourished. The city’s scholars were pioneers in mathematics, medicine and, fittingly, astronomy. It was chiefly thanks to Arabic translation that the Latin Europe was able to learn of Ancient Greek think-
ers. This is how Latin astronomers gained knowledge of the ancient astronomical treatise of Claudius Ptolemy, known by its Arabic translation entitled Almagest The Arabs were not merely copying the works of Greeks, but made their own developments: in the 10th century, astronomer ʿAbd al-Rahman al-Sufi revised and corrected Ptolemy’s star list on the basis of his own observations.5 Since the 13th century, when calculating the position of stars in Europe, scholars based their formulas on the Alfonsine Tables – star lists developed by Arabic and Jewish thinkers in Toledo, at the court of Alfonso the Wise, king of Castile and Léon.
When we look at the Arabic astrolabe in the Copernicus Treasury, we can clearly see how advanced science was in the Arabic part of Europe in the 11th century. Although Copernicus himself does not cite Arabic scholars, we know that he was familiar with their achievements. During his studies, he bought an incunabulum published in Venice in 1485 which included the work Praeclarissumus in iudiciis astrorum by Arabic scholar Abu al-Hassan Ali Ibn Ali Ibn Abi al-Rijal (10th/11th century), known under Latinised versions of his
name Haly Albohazen or Haly Abenragel. The book, along with others from Copernicus’ collection, was pillaged by Swedish troops during the Deluge and is currently held in the Uppsala University Library under the signature ‘Copernicana 6’. Haly Albohazen’s work was well-known in the Kraków academic community and duplicated in writing, which is proved by manuscripts preserved in the Jagiellonian Library.6
On one of the walls hangs a photocopy of Copernicus’ diploma of Doctorate in Canon Law, which he obtained in 1503 in Ferrara. What interesting information does it contain? We can see that Copernicus was signed as Nicolaus Copernich de Prussia – ‘from Prussia’. We could simply say that Copernicus was born in Royal Prussia and stop there. But today our role is to uncover what is hidden and confront our fears. So let us ponder about it: was Nicolaus Copernicus a Prussian? The word itself sounds distastefully to Polish ears. And yet, if we overcome this feeling and look at the entirety of Polish-Prussian relations, we will discover a beautiful page in our history that has since been overshadowed by later strife.
The Prussian identity arose in the 15th century in opposition to the Teutonic Order. In 1440, the Prussian Confederation
was formed by nobles, clergy and burghers to unite the estates of the Teutonic Order state in their fight for political representation, appropriated entirely by the Order. In 1454, the Confederation renounced its allegiance to the Order and swore fealty to the Polish king, Casimir IV Jagiellon, asking for the incorporation of Prussia into Poland. It was a remarkable moment in medieval history, when people living in a region decided of their own accord – democratically, we might say – that they wanted to be a part of Poland. The Prussians wanted to become subjects of the Polish king and enjoy the same freedoms and rights that the Poles had. They funded the fight against the Teutonic order during the Thirteen Years’ War and sustained significant casualties in it. Copernicus’ ancestors were also engaged in the events: his maternal grandfather, Łukasz Watzenrode the Elder, Toruń councilman, loaned the city a large sum of 269 florins for military purposes; he personally joined the fight and was wounded in a battle near Łasin. Copernicus’ father, a Kraków merchant also named Nicolaus, settled in Toruń during the war and financially supported the Polish war effort. As a result of the war, after the Second Peace of Toruń in 1466, a large part of Prussia was incorporated into Poland as Royal Prussia, or Polish Prussia. However, the Prussians retained to a degree their own cultural identity.
Georg Joachim Rheticus, Copernicus’ student who convinced the astronomer to
publish De revolutionibus in print, recalled his stay at Copernicus’ house in Warmia in his work Encomium Borussiae, writing: ‘The Prussians are very hospitable ’7 Nicolaus’ uncle, Lucas Watzenrode, canon and later bishop of Warmia, who had a great influence on the astronomer’s education and career, said in 1504: ‘Although this country, Prussia, is a part of the [Polish] Crown, this country, Prussia, is not the same country as Poland, and Prussians are not Poles, and it is a separate country with separate laws’.8 It did not stand in opposition to Watzenrode’s pro-Polish attitude. Copernicus himself did not voice an opinion on this issue, but his life choices, such as his participation in the defence of Olsztyn against the Teutonic Knights, suggest that his views were similar. In the 16th century Poland, Copernicus could identify as Prussian, at the same time being a loyal subject to the Polish king and hoping for a prosperous life in Poland – and we should take pride in that fact. Our collective memory of ‘the Republic of many nations’ is mostly focused on Poles, Lithuanians and Ruthenians, sometimes also Armenians and Jews, but rarely do we remember about the German-speaking Prussians.
fourth Puzzle: facsimiles of De revolutionibus manuscriPt
The Jagiellonian University possesses in its collection a very valuable item: the original manuscript of De revolutionibus
orbium coelestium, where the astronomer personally wrote down the premises of his heliocentric theory, which changed how we see the Universe and started a scientific revolution. The original, however, is not available for public viewing, but is safeguarded in a fireproof vault in the Jagiellonian Library. Instead, the JU Museum exhibits its facsimiles, i.e. faithful copies. What mysteries do they contain?
We know it was written mostly in Frombork, but it is not commonly known that after Copernicus’ death, for twenty years it was in possession of Georg Joachim Rheticus, the very same who encouraged the astronomer to publish it and took the manuscript to Nuremberg, where it was printed in 1543. Rheticus himself settled in Kraków between 1554 and 1555. His stay left an ostensibly durable mark on Kraków, which unfortunately did not last that long. Namely, for the purpose of astronomical observations, he erected an obelisk measuring 45 Roman feet,9 more than thirteen metres. It was impressive enough that the 16th century printing house of Łazarz Andrysowic, later taken over by his son Jan Januszowski, used the obelisk as its symbol. It is purported to have been located either in the area of today’s JU Botanical Garden or Balice near Kraków.10 Regrettably, the obelisk was razed, probably on October 10, 1574 by Kraków students who saw it as the work of a heretic (Rheticus was Protestant). And so, because of religious fanaticism, Kraków lost the unique trace of the activities of Copernicus’ only student.
In 1574, Rheticus left Kraków for Košice, where he died in the same year on December 4. In 1614, Copernicus’ manuscript was acquired by John Comenius, famous Czech philosopher and educator. It is unknown when Comenius lost it – perhaps he witnessed the burning of Leszno by the Polish army during the Deluge in 1656. Eventually, the book found its way to the library of the Nostitz family in Prague, where it was kept for 300 years. In 1945, the library was nationalised by the Czechoslovak government, which gifted it to Poland in 1956.
We are finally nearing the end of our adventure in the escape room. The Copernicus Treasury contains a picture of Earth as seen from space made during the Apollo
From the collection of the Jagiellonian University Museum / Janusz Kozina, Grzegorz Zygier
11 mission and given to the JU Museum by Neil Armstrong during the celebrations of the 500th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus. A beautiful gift from an astronaut to an astronomer who, by changing our view of the Universe, set off a scientific revolution which centuries later put man on the Moon. Let us look at Earth from the cosmic perspective: how peaceful it looks from there! And how small are the political differences, national feuds, religious conflicts and diverging opinions. This is how Copernicus saw the world: although he was often in the centre of disputes, he rose above them and their pettiness. In truth, Copernicus was a giant – and only from this perspective can we truly admire his stature.
Marcin BojdaJagiellonian University Museum
1 S. Waltoś, Na tropach Fausta, Warsaw 2004, p. 159.
2 H. Zaremska, Żydzi w średniowiecznej Polsce. Gmina krakowska, Warsaw 2011, p. 493.
3 K. Estreicher, Collegium Maius. Dzieje gmachu, Kraków 1968, p. 99.
4 Z. Ameisenowa, Globus Marcina Bylicy z Olkusza i mapy nieba na Wschodzie i Zachodzie, Wrocław-Kraków-Warsaw 1959, p. 10.
5 Z. Ameisenowa, Globus Marcina Bylicy z Olkusza…, op. cit., p. 55.
6 Cf. M. Markowski, ‘Wpływ myśli arabskiej na krakowską piętnastowieczną filozofię przyrody i astronomię w świetle rękopisów i inkunabułów Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej’, Biuletyn Biblioteki Jagiellońskiej 1975, Vol. 25, No. 1/2, p. 66. I thank Prof. Krzysztof Stopka for sharing this source with me.
7 J. Dianni, ‘Pobyt Retyka w Krakowie’, Studia i materiały z dziejów nauki polskiej… 1953, No. 1, p. 68.
8 J. Małłek, Dwie części Prus: Studia dziejów Prus Książęcych i Prus Królewskich w XVI i XVII wieku, Olsztyn 1987, pp. 11–15.
9 J. Dianni, Pobyt Retyka…, p. 74.
10 J. Kiliańczyk-Zięba, ‘Obelisk jako sygnet Drukarni Łazarzowej – źródła ikonograficzne i ideowe’, Terminus: półrocznik poświęcony tradycji antycznej w kulturze europejskiej 2007, Vol. 9(1), p. 84.
anniversary of the great scholar’s birth and unveiled in 1873 in the hall of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences building at ul. Sławkowska 17 Copernicus monument in St. Anne’s Collegiate Church, designed and funded in 1822 by Rev. Sebastian Sierakowski and created by Jan Nepomucen Galli. The astronomer’s bust is placed on a column next to the statue of Urania (the muse of astronomy) holding a shield with a constellation named Scutum Sobiescianum (Shield of Sobieski). The sculptures were cast by Antoni Arkusiński. It is the first one of several Copernicus monuments located in Kraków
Tin medal struck in 1873 to commemorate the 400th anniversary of Nicolaus Copernicus’ birth following the efforts of the Poznań Society for the Advancement of Arts and Sciences, based on the design of Wilhelm Below (1822–1895)
Bronze medal featuring the portrait of Nicolaus Copernicus struck in 1948 to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the foundation of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences, based on the design of Franciszek Kalfas (1898–1968)
Nicolaus Copernicus statuette on top of the sceptre of the JU Faculty of Philosophy. The work was commissioned by the JU Senate and made by Franciszek Wyspiański in 1862
Nicolaus Copernicus bust in the lecture room at the former Astronomical Observatory founded by Jan Śniadecki in 1791. The JU Collegium Śniadecki building at ul. Kopernika 27 formerly housed instruments that may have been used by Copernicus and are currently kept in the JU Museum
Nicolaus Copernicus bust donated to the city by Henryk Jordan was placed in Jordan Park at al. 3 Maja in 1889 for educational purposes. During the German occupation (1939–1945) the monument was safeguarded and presented again in the park alley in 1972
1856 sarcophagus containing the remains of Nicolaus Copernicus, formerly kept in the Temple of the Sibyl in Puławy and currently part of the Czartoryski Museum collection at ul. Pijarska 15
Commemorative medal issued to mark the 650th anniversary of the Jagiellonian University foundation, featuring images of Nicolaus Copernicus and Collegium Novum, Kraków, 2014
Stained glass showing Nicolaus Copernicus created by Witold Chomicz, painter and graphic designer associated with the Academy of Fine Arts in Kraków. It is displayed in the hall of the second floor of the JU building at ul. Ingardena 3. The work belongs to a stained glass series originally designed for windows of Collegium Novum assembly hall, also featuring images of Wojciech of Brudzewo, Maciej Miechowita, Mikołaj Rej, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, and Jan Kochanowski
Nicolaus Copernicus, Queen Jadwiga of Poland and Albert Einstein, along with the seven liberal arts – grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music – are the protagonists of the musical-historical spectacle Universa – Open Opera authored by Jan A. P. Kaczmarek, a world-famous composer and winner of the Academy Award for the Best Original Score for Mark Foster’s Finding Neverland. The preview of the show composed to celebrate the 650th Jubilee of the Jagiellonian University in Kraków took place on May 10, 2014 in the Kraków Main Square.
According to its author, the word ‘open’ featured in the title of the opera stresses its unique form, combining the elements of a modern concerto, opera and morality play. Jan A. P. Kaczmarek
rejects the limitations of time and space. The protagonists of his musical piece enter into a dialogue despite coming from different eras and places in Europe. Their solemnity and dignity are entwined with youth and energy, personified by the young choir singers. The orchestra is also an important part of the composition, as it not only provides a background to the events unfolding at the stage, but is also an active partner in the conversation.
The spectacle ends with the motto of the Jagiellonian University: Plus ratio quam vis – Let reason prevail over force!
‘Human thought knows no bounds’, said the composer after the preview showing. ‘I wish the Jagiellonian University to continue improving our species and making our planet a better place in the
next centuries, so that it remains – as it is now – part of the great global community of thinking humans’.
The orchestra was conducted by Monika Wolińska. Queen Jadwiga and Nicolaus Copernicus were portrayed by Iwona Sobotka (soprano) and Małgorzata Walewska (mezzo-soprano), while the role of Albert Einstein was played by Szymon Komasa (baritone). The seven liberal arts were represented by Julia Pietrucha. The soloists were accompanied by Sinfonietta Cracovia, Polish Radio Choir, and the Jagiellonian University Academic Choir Camerata Jagellonica. The libretto included fragments of writing by Martianus Capella as well as texts by Michał Rusinek.
Rita Pagacz-MoczarskaThe story of Nicolaus Copernicus was adapted into a musical! Starting on October 1, 2023, a show entitled Copernicus becomes an integral part of the Kraków Opera’s repertoire. It aims to portray the genius scholar not only as a distinguished astronomer and a great Pole, but also simply a man, open to the world and full of passion for research. ‘We don’t plan on questioning Copernicus’ stature. But we’ll let him put away his astrolabe for a while and speak to us in a way that will reach our hearts and minds’, say the creators. The libretto by writer Ałbena Grabowska recalls the most important events in the astronomer’s life: his studies in Kraków, Padua and Bologna; his return to Frombork; his astronomical research and service as both a canon and a doctor; his participation in the coronation of King Sigismund I the Old and the Prussian Homage; and finally, the publication of his work De revolutionibus . Naturally, the writers also included Copernicus’ intellectual and emotional relationship with Anna Schilling.
The world premiere of the show took place on May 20, 2023 in Frombork, in the courtyard of the Cathedral Hill. There were another two performances in Kraków: one marking the end of the Kraków celebrations of the World Copernican Congress, held on May 26, 2023 in the Kraków Opera, and an additional one in the Italian Renaissance courtyard of the Wawel Castle on June 22, 2023.
The show was directed by Jakub Szydłowski, while Tomasz Szymuś was its music director. The lyrics were written by Daniel Wyszogrodzki, and the music was composed by Tomasz Szymus (conductor – Piotr Sułkowski, choir preparation – Janusz Wierzgacz). The choreography was designed by Jarosław Stanek and Katarzyna Zielonka, the stage design and lighting by Grzegorz Policiński, and costumes by Anna Chadaj. Ed.
During the shows in Frombork and Kraków, the lead role was played expertly by Marcin Franc
One of the final scenes of the musical: the moment just before Nicolaus’ Copernicus book De revolutnionibus is printed, Kraków Opera, May 26, 2023
Main cast of the show at the stage of the Kraków Opera, May 26, 2023
Among the many and varied literary and artistic studies upon which the natural talents of man are nourished, I think that those above all should be embraced and pursued with the most loving care which have to do with things there are very beautiful and very worthy of knowledge. Such studies are those which deal with the godlike circular movements of the world and the course of the stars, their magnitudes, distances, risings and settings, and the causes of other appearances in the heavens; and which finally explicate the whole form. For what could be more beautiful than the heavens which contain all beautiful things?
Nicolaus Copernicus, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, part of introduction to Book One (English translation: Charles Glen Wallis, On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres, Prometheus Books, 1995)
The year 2023 marks the 480 th anniversary of the first issue of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium ( On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres) by Nicolaus Copernicus. For this reason, the special exhibition organised in the Jagiellonian Library between May 11 and June 16, 2023, devoted to the famous astronomer, was focused on this inconspicuous yet historic book. The breakthrough in astronomy, science and philosophy that had happened in the wake of the publication of the manuscript of De revolutionibus and its first three issues (Nuremberg 1543, Basel 1566 and Amsterdam 1617) provided it with an important context. The exhibition primarily showcased the history of Copernicus’ concept of heliocentrism, while the astronomer’s biography, which in itself is a crucial part of the history of astronomy, the Jagiellonian University, Poland and Europe, completed the picture. The first segment of the exhibition focused on pre-Copernican astronomy, along with the precursors and inspirers of the helio-
centric theory, as well as cosmology in the times of Copernicus, by displaying source material such as astronomy textbooks and preserved writings of scholars. Teaching at
the Jagiellonian University in the second half of the 15th century, during the golden age of the University, when education in the area of astronomy was at the highest
level in all of Europe, also provides an important context to Copernicus’ theory. The Jagiellonian Library holds handwritten treatises, commentaries, tables and astronomical drawings of eminent scholars, including lecturers at the Kraków University: Wojciech of Brudzewo, Marcin Król of Żurawica, Marcin Bylica of Olkusz and Jan of Głogów.
The second part of the exhibition, displaying the most precious Copernicana in the collection of the Jagiellonian Library, was built around the astronomer’s 1534 work De revolutionibus orbium coelestium
It is important to note that the autograph of De revolutionibus is very rarely available for viewing to the general audience. The manuscript is a priceless item, but the first
printed issues are also extremely valuable. Several other prints also deserved attention, such as Copernicus’ translation of Theophylact Simocatta’s Ep(isto)le morales, rurales et amatorie interpretatione latina [Moral, bucolic and love letters] from Greek to Latin, published in Kraków in 1509.
The publication of De revolutionibus was preceded by the issue of a synopsis of the work along with some of its fragments and a commentary. Joachim Rheticus announced in print a short summary of the most important propositions of Copernicus’ manuscript and published it as Ad Ioannem Schonerum de libris revolutionum Nicolai Copernici narratio prima (the first account of Copernicus’ De revolutionibus) in a Gdańsk publishing house in 1540.
Parts of De revolutionibus, published as a mathematical treatise covering the basics of trigonometry, were issued in Wittenberg in 1542 under the title De lateribus et angulis triangulorum [On the sides and angles of triangles].
The curators of the exhibition also pointed to the subject of the reception of Copernicus’ heliocentric theory. It was promoted and supported, but also criticised and deliberated on by figures such as Hilary of Wiślica, Tycho Brahe, Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Jan Brożek, Johannes Kepler, Athanasius Kircher, Willem Janszoon Blaeu and others.
The first academic astrological treatise written by Claudius Ptolemy, entitiled Tetrabiblos (four books) or Quadripartitus (four parts), widely used by astronomers to carry out calculations related to the movement of planets. Latin translation from ca 1450
The first publication of the work Epitoma in Almagestum Ptolemaei, that is, a summary of Ptolemy’s Almagest authored by Johannes Regiomontanus and Georg Peurbach; Venice 1496
Wojciech of Brudzewo, Commentary on Georg Peurbach’s New Theories of Planets; manuscript from 1492–1493
Jan of Głogów, Introductorium Astronomie in Ephemerides; Kraków, 1514. Astrology textbook for students of the University of Kraków containing rules of casting horoscopes based on the location and movement of heavenly bodies
The Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe used the Copernicus’ idea and calculations to create his own system combining the geocentric and the heliocentric model. Tycho Brahe, Epistolarvm astronomicarvm libri, Nuremberg, 1601
Marcin Bylica of Olkusz, Treatise on Astrology, manuscript from the late 15th century
Georg Joachim Rheticus, Narratio Prima, Gdańsk, 1540
Philippus Lansbergen, Tabulae motuum coelestium perpetuae, Middelburg, 1632. Astronomical tables of a supporter of the heliocentric theory, which he defended in numerous publications
The works authored by Kraków scholars included numerous horoscopes cast for prominent figures, including rulers. The picture shows photographs of two horoscopes cast for Martin Luther and royal children from the Jagiellonian dynasty, along with a popular computus, used to calculate the dates of movable feasts, authored by Jan of Poland
Two epigrams by Jan Brożek, one of which is dedicated to Copernicus, and the other to Copernicius and Columbus, 1618
Theophylactus Simocatta, ...ep[isto]le morales: rurales et amatorie interpretatione Latina, Kraków, 1509. Letters of the late antique historian and writer translated into Latin by Nicolaus Copernicus
Copernicus’ work on trigonometry, entitled On the sides and angles of triangles, part of De revolutionibus – De Lateribvs Et Angvlis Triangulorum, Wittenberg, 1542
Photos: Rita Pagacz-Moczarska
As an institution brought into being in order to safeguard the heritage of the oldest Polish university, the Jagiellonian University Museum was very thorough in its preparation for the 550th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus, especially since the year 2023 has been declared by the Polish Senate not only
as the Year of Nicolaus Copernicus, but also the Year of Jan Matejko, the creator of the monumental painting Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God What is more, this year we celebrate the 150th anniversary of the making of this great work of art. The grandeur of these anniversaries impelled the JU Museum
to collaborate with the Royal Castle in Warsaw on a jubilee exhibition devoted to the life and work of the versatile Polish scholar and discoverer.
The organisers of the exhibition, the oldest Polish university and the Royal Castle in Warsaw, aimed to create an extraordinary event that would leave a lasting impression on both Polish and foreign audiences. The exhibition Copernicus and His World, hosted by the Royal Castle in Warsaw in the monumental room of the Tin-Roofed Palace that in the past housed the royal library of King Stanisław August Poniatowski, was officially opened on April 24, 2023, after nearly two years of preparations, and remained open to attendees until July 30, 2023.
The organisers of the exhibition aimed to promote the work of Nicolaus Copernicus. They also provided details on various aspects of the Polish scholars’ life.
The exhibition featured two particularly precious items from the collection
of the Jagiellonian University Museum: a large astrolabe and a torquetum. They belonged to Marcin Bylica of Olkusz, distinguished astronomer in the service of Hungarian King Matthias Corvinus who previously taught at the Kraków University. These instruments, called ‘Byliciana’ after their donator, were prominently displayed amongst other astronomical devices brought specifically for this occasion from foreign collections, such as Museo Galileo in Florence, Mathematisch-Physikalischer Salon in Dresden, Germanisches Nationalmuseum in Nuremberg as well as Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The exhibition was supplemented by astronomical early printed books borrowed from the National Library, in particular the exceptionally beautiful copy of Astronomicum Caesareum by Peter Apianus.
Jan Matejko’s painting Astronomer Copernicus, or Conversations with God, on display in Warsaw for the first time, was the centrepiece of the entire exhibition. The painting, one of the most recognisable images of Nicolaus Copernicus in Poland, is part of the collection of the Jagiellonian University, and was a gift of the Kraków community to the University.
Jan Matejko’s importance in the year 2023 was highlighted in the exhibition by his two other paintings, entitled The Influence of the University on the Country in the 15th Century – New currents: Hussitism and Humanism and Sigismund I the Old ennobles professors of the Jagiellonian University, also from the collection of the Jagiellonian University. Matejko’s student Antoni Gramatyka’s painting Nicolaus Copernicus in his atelier, displayed nearby, was a nod to the two abovementioned pieces. Ordinarily, it is presented in the assembly hall of Collegium Maius, the oldest University building dating back to the Middle Ages, where young Nicolaus Copernicus listened to his lecturers.
The exhibition was designed by Wojciech Ciechocki.
The exhibition was accompanied by an extensive catalogue of items, featuring fascinating essays by Jagiellonian University Professors Krzysztof Stopka, Ryszard Gryglewski and Grzegorz Kowalski as well as Professor Michał Kokowski from the Polish Academy of Sciences.
Natalia Bahlawan
Theinitiator, founder and first director of the Copernicus Center, Michał Heller, summarises the Center’s mission in the following way:
‘One of the most radical and profound revolutions in the history of culture and science was the Copernican Revolution. Even the term itself, ‘‘revolution’’, took its origin from the Copernicus’ masterpiece De revolutionibus orbium coelestium – On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres. The Copernicus Center for Interdisciplinary Studies has its headquarters in Kraków –a beautiful city in which Copernicus learned his astronomy. And here in Kraków at the Copernicus Center we try to continue the tradition initiated by the great astronomer.
Our goal at the Center is threefold: research, education and science communication, but we try doing that in a very special way. We do not simply do research, communicate science and provide education. We do that in an interdisciplinary way. We try to look at every problem from different angles. We try to understand how a given problem is a rooted in the scientific background, what was its origin in the history of philosophy and how it could be related to theological or religious views. Our main strategy is absolute honesty in doing research. We try to give absolute priority to the impartiality of reason over sentiments and personal prejudices. We invite you to share with us this unique experience – the common quest for truth and understanding’.
The Copernicus Center was established in 2008. Initially, it operated as a joint venture of the Jagiellonian University and the Pontifical University of John Paul II, and in 2018 it became a unit of the Jagiellonian University. However, the history of the Center – or at least of the community which has laid the foundation for its current activities – is much longer.
From the 1970s, interdisciplinary seminars were being organised in the seat of the bishops of Kraków, first at ul. Franciszkańska 3 (Franciszkańska street),
and subsequently within the cold walls of the monastery at ul. Augustiańska 7 (Augustiańska street). Each of them brought together dozens (and sometimes more than 200) participants – scientists, philosophers, and intellectuals. They came from all
over Poland, and sometimes the seminar hosted scholars from abroad. Usually, two lectures were delivered as a backdrop for a discussion. They pertained to issues at the crossroads of the empirical sciences and philosophy. The seminars lasted until late
evening, and ended, as Michał Heller recalls, ‘when the penultimate participant left’.
In 1978/79, the seminar participants began, to publish a bulletin entitled Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce (‘Philosophical Issues in Science’). Initially, the bulletin was printed in the cellars of the Kraków curia, on a bad quality paper (still a luxury during the communist times), written on a typewriter, copied with the use of mimeograph, and distributed in a number of copies depending on the amount of paper secured. The periodical is still published today, and its 72nd volume has recently been issued.
After the fall of communism, the monthly seminars no longer took place, as many other fully legal alternatives soon appeared. However, a bunch of former participants, together with new students and PhD students, gathered around Michał Heller and Józef Życiński, back then already well known lecturers at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Kraków. They established the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies (Polish: Ośrodek Badań Interdyscyplinarnych, OBI). The OBI was known for several initiatives. Firstly, they continued
publishing ’Philosophical Issues in Science’, in a more professional manner, and it became a recognised scientific journal. Secondly, the OBI launched a monograph series ( Rozprawy OBI , ‘OBI Disserta -
only generated troubles. I therefore thought that it may serve to make OBI formally recognised’.
tions’), where the best Master’s, PhD and habilitation theses were published together with other research monographs. Thirdly, every year, usually in May, it organised a few days-long conferences, later known as the Kraków Methodological Conferences (or May Conferences).
’OBI was an institution which emerged spontaneously, it was not affiliated with any university, it was not registered – and for many years it functioned well. Through volunteer work, with virtually no money‘, Heller recalled. ’When I received the Templeton Prize (in 2008), I wanted to get rid of the money, since I did not need it, and it
In this way, with the cooperation of the Jagiellonian University and the Pontifical University, the Copernicus Center was established. Its official opening took place on October 2, 2008, in the Collegium Maius of the Jagiellonian University. Four key areas of the Center’s activities were introduced: research, science communication, education and publishing. Simultaneously, the Copernicus Center Foundation, with the goal of supporting the Center, was also set up.
Regarding research, the Center aims at discussing the key questions of philosophy, cosmology, mathematics, cognitive sciences, evolutionary biology, history of science and theology in the spirit of recognition and observation of the methodological precepts of particular disciplines, but always in an interdisciplinary dialogue. Throughout the 15 years of the Center’s existence, it brought together several dozens of research groups consisting of the Center’s employees, researchers participating in the research projects carried out at the Center, as well
as scientists who collaborated and became affiliated with the Center.
These research activities resulted in more than 700 works affiliated with the Center, including monographs published in collaboration with the most prestigious publishing houses (Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Routledge and Springer, among others) and research papers published in leading journals (e.g. Synthese, Artificial Intelligence & Law, Psychological Research, Foundations of Science, Scientific Reports, Physical Review, Classical and Quantum Gravity). The quality of research carried out at the Center has been recognised through research grants (Foundation for Polish Science, National Science Centre, Templeton Foundation) and individual awards (e.g. National Science Centre Prize, ‘Mistrz’ subsidy of the Foundation for Polish Science, the ministerial Scholarships for Outstanding Young Sci-
entists, Polityka weekly Science Prize, the ministerial Prize for Outstanding Research Achievements) received by the researchers linked to the Center. The results of research carried out at the Center have been presented at numerous international congresses and conferences or through invited lectures. At the same time, since 2008, the Center itself has organised more than 60 international conferences and seminars.
An important step in the development of the Copernicus Center’s research profile was the creation, of the Mathematical Cognition and Learning Lab (MCLL) in 2022, which received the status of a flagship project within the Excellence Initiative at the Jagiellonian University. The goal of the MCLL is to carry out research and development activities in the sphere of mathematical cognition and mathematical education, as well as provide expertise and develop educational and popular science materials. The MCLL cooperates
with the leading international research centres, including the University of Tübingen, University of California Sand Diego, KU Leuven and University of Bologna.
In addition to research activities, the Copernicus Center is engaged in a number of large-scale undertakings in its socio-economic environment. The three most important of those activities are: Copernicus Festival, a YouTube channel focused on science communication called Copernicus, and the MOOC platform Copernicus College.
The Copernicus Festival has been organised in cooperation with the Tygodnik Powszechny weekly magazine since 2014. It is a unique event on the map of science festivals. Its main goal is to show that science is a key part of culture and that the search for answers to Big Questions requires a constant dialogue between scientists, artists and mass culture. Each edition of the festival is centred around a particular theme. So far, we
have engaged our guests and audience in discussions pertaining to revolutions in science and culture, genius, beauty, emotions, randomness, language, time, imagination and information. After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a special edition of the Festival, ‘The Time of Plague’, was organised. Among the guests of the Festival there were world’s leading scientists, e.g. John Barrow, Julian Barbour, Semir Zeki, Antonio Damasio, Paul Bloom, Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, Joseph LeDoux, Paul Davies, Irv Weissman, and Dan Gilbert. Renowned Polish scientists and artists also participated in the Festival. The Festival’s 10th anniversary edition will take place in May 2023 and will be devoted to the topic of ‘Cosmos’.
The Copernicus YouTube channel was launched in 2009. It is currently one of the biggest Polish YouTube channels devoted to the promotion of science. It hosts lectures and debates featuring leading international and Polish scientists. The channel also benefits from dedicated video shows such as the series Czytamy naturę (‘Reading Nature’), Zacznijmy od zera (’Let’s Start from Scratch’) czy Rozmowy o człowieku (’Conversations on Humans’) So far, the Copernicus channel has accumulated more than 150 thousand subscribers, and each month it features several dozens of new shows, as well as lectures and debates, often transmitted live.
In 2015, the Copernicus Center created the first Polish MOOC platform, the Copernicus College. The platform features more than 50 academic level courses, more than 30 lectures by leading world scientists (e.g. Michael Arbib, Patricia Churchland, John Grey, Roger Penrose, Robin Dunbar and Gregory
Chaitin), as well as e-textbooks and a video glossary of scientific concepts. Copernicus College has more than 60 thousand subscribers, which makes it a significant e-university.
Among other undertakings of the Copernicus Center and Copernicus Center Foundation, one should mention the establishment of the Copernicus Center Press, a publishing house which for 11 years now has been contributing to the Polish book market by publishing popular science books and research monographs. Among its authors are the best Polish and international scholars (e.g. Dennett, Tomasello, Damasio, Dunbar).
For the past 10 years, the Copernicus Center Foundation has operated a café and bookstore called De Revolutionibus located in the Larisch House (Pałac Larischa) at ul. Bracka 12 (Bracka street). in Kraków, where ‘the best coffee meets the best books’. De Revolutionibus became an important space for debates between scientists and artists and became an integral part of the intellectual landscape of Kraków. In 2023, the bookstore changed its address to Rynek Podgórski
(Podgórze Market Square) on the other bank of the Vistula River, while at a new creative space is being developed at ul. Bracka 12, where science will meet other areas of culture in innovative and unexpected ways.
Yet another way of initiating a discussion on the key problems of science which has been introduced by the Copernicus Center in the recent years is the series of meetings with leading scientists entitled Big Questions in Kraków. During those meetings, famous scientists (e.g. Daniel Dennett, John Dylan Haynes and Norman Davies) deliver a lecture and take part in a recorded debate related to a ‘big question’ (key issue), while the background for the discussion is provided by works of leading Kraków’s artists.
The activities of the Copernicus Center do not end here; the list is long and includes hundreds of open lectures and debates, exhibitions, university-level courses, special projects for primary and secondary level school students etc. Simply enumerating these activities may only illustrate the scope of the Center’s activities; it cannot express the spirit of what we do and how we do it. We are driven by the idea that science is an essential part of culture, and our common goal is to better understand the world which we happen to inhabit. Whether – and if so, to what extent – we succeed in this mission can only be judged by the readers of our research articles, the audience of our Festival, the viewers of our science communication shows, and the students at our MOOC platform.
Bartosz Brożek Copernicus Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of the Jagiellonian University Faculty of Law and Administration of the Jagiellonian University
The year 2023 marks more than one important anniversary: one hundred years ago, the independent Polish Post published the first stamp worldwide bearing the picture of Nicolaus Copernicus to celebrate the 450th anniversary of his birth and 150 th anniversary of establishing the Commission of National Education. The stamps were introduced through appropriate circulars and printed in official journals: Journal of Laws
from 1923, No. 5., items 554–555 for the one with nominal value of 1,000 Polish marks and Journal of Laws from 1923, No. 5, items 1030–1031 for the one with nominal value of 5,000 Polish marks. The stamps feature the image of the great astronomer in an oval ornamented with laurels as well as his last name. There are Renaissance-style columns on both sides of the stamps. The lower part of the stamps contains the numbers 1,000 and
5,000, the letter M as well as the Polish coat of arms. In the Catalogue of Polish (and Polish-Related) Postage Stamps [original title: Katalog polskich znaków pocztowych (i z Polską związanych) ] published by Fischer publishing house they are catalogued under the numbers 164 and 166. They were printed in blue and carmine red in the State Printing Plant using the letterpress printing technique from July to December 1923.
Fig. 28 From the private collection of Jerzy DudaThey became invalid on April 30, 1924. Their high nominal value was caused by rampant inflation (Fig. 1, 2).
The stamps were not received favourably by experts, who accused the artists of ‘lack of artistic and technical skills’. All criticism aside, it has to be noted that the stamps published in 1923 became an inspiration for the Polish Post and postal services in other countries to present the image of one of the most famous and distinguished people in the history of the world by issuing stamps on various occasions. Despite them only staying in circulation for a few months, there are many examples of their use (Fig. 3, 4).
The image and statue of Nicolaus Copernicus interested graphic designers even before Poland regained its independence. In 1917, the Warsaw Art Society organised a competition for the design of stamps with an inscription ‘Kingdom of Poland’, the theme of which had to ‘have a decidedly Polish character’ (Fig. 5). The competition had 32 participants, two of whom chose Nicolaus Copernicus as their subject. Afterwards, in Warsaw, 1918, the Society published a catalogue featuring the projects ( Katalog prac konkursowych na marki pocztowe Królestwa Polskiego ). It contained the works of Maksymilian Bystydzieński and Antoni Dzierzbicki, devoted to Copernicus (Fig. 6a, 6b).
From 1923 to the 1980s, the Polish Post issued more than 30 stamps and postcards bearing the image of Nicolaus Copernicus and two most famous statues of him: one from Warsaw, showing the astronomer in a sitting position, funded by Stanisław Staszic and sculpted by Berthel Thorvaldsen, and one from Kraków, sculpted by Cyprian Godebski, which until 1953 stood in the courtyard of Collegium Maius, the previous location of the Jagiellonian Library.
This list also includes stamps showing images of places connected to the life and work of the great astronomer and postal stationery related to this subject matter as well as hundreds of daters, rubber stamps, and other philatelic materials. The statue of Nicolaus Copernicus in the courtyard of Collegium Maius was included in a set of 64 illustrated postcards published by the Polish Post – it featured a printed
stamp with King Casimir Jagiellon and a drawing of ‘Gothic art in Kraków’, showing a part of the courtyard (Fig. 7). The statue in Warsaw was used for a 1956 stamp from the series ‘Statues of Warsaw’, as an engraving by distinguished artist Czesław Słania. Other examples of postal use are also interesting.
Also of note are four series from the period of German occupation in the years 1939–1945. The General Government
Post issued four stamps (Fig. 8) with the depiction of Copernicus (in line with the theory that he was a German) as well as his statue in the courtyard of Collegium Maius (Fig. 9a, 9b). In the same period, there was an extremely valuable publication – stamps and a souvenir sheet commemorating the 400th anniversary of the death of Nicolaus Copernicus, created in 1943 by a group of Polish officers – prisoners of war, who organised the postal service in the II-C Oflag Woldenberg camp (Fig. 10, 11).
After the Second World War, the same motif was used on stamps issued by the Polish Post in 1945 in what is known as the ‘Kraków issue’ (Fig. 12). In 1946, to commemorate the work of the Commission of National Education,
a special edition of stamps was published, which included a stamp showing the image of Copernicus statue in the courtyard (Fig. 13). In May 1951, the Polish Post celebrated the First Congress of Polish Science with a series of stamps. Among them there was one with an image of Nicolaus Copernicus based on a drawing by Jan Matejko (Fig. 14). Philatelic materials showing the postal use of the stamp are becoming harder and harder to obtain.
The year 1953 was declared as the Year of Rebirth and Year of Copernicus to mark the 410 th anniversary of the astronomer’s death. The World Peace Council, of which Poland was a member, called all nations around the globe to celebrate the anniversary. The Year of Copernicus was officially announced on 24 May 1953 in Frombork. Two days earlier, the Polish Post issued two stamps: one depicting Nicolaus Copernicus based on Jan Matejko’s painting and one designed by Jan Marcin Szancer, showing a bust of Nicolaus Copernicus with starlit sky in the background (Fig. 15, 16). Low circulation of these stamps meant that examples of their postal use are very rare (Fig. 17, 18, 19).
In 1953, an exhibition entitled Nicolaus Copernicus was opened in Collegium Maius, during which a manual stamp with a changeable date (calendar), now highly sought after by collectors, was used (Fig. 20). The Polish Post also issued a postcard bearing a fee sign with the inscription ‘housing construction’ and the image of the astronomer. Today, these are very difficult to acquire, particularly the ones from postal circulation (Fig. 21).
The subject of Copernicus in philately was described very thoroughly. Some of the noteworthy publications include Janina Mazurkiewicz’s Tematyka kopernikowska w filatelistyce
[Copernican themes in philately] (Toruń 1970), Roman Puchniarski’s Mikołaj Kopernik w filatelistyce [Nicolaus Copernicus in philately] (Warsaw 1973) and Mieczysław Czernik’s Tematyka kopernikowska w filatelistyce [Copernican themes in philately] (Warsaw 1973). Many articles were published in magazines dedicated to stamp collecting as well as daily and weekly socio-cultural newspapers.
In 1964, the Jagiellonian University celebrated the 600 th anniversary of its foundation, attracting representatives from universities and research institutions from all of Europe. The Polish Post issued stamps with images of famous people related with the Jagiellonian University, including Nicolaus Copernicus.
To mark the event, the Kraków branch of the Polish Philatelic Society organised an exhibition entitled Jagellonica 64 , during which it promoted postal publications, including first day covers (FDCs) and leaflets. Special stamps were also used, including one with the likeness of Copernicus (Fig. 22).
The theories, legacy and image of Nicolaus Copernicus were being promoted by postal authorities of a growing number of countries. The Chinese post was the first and, answering the call of the World Peace Council, issued a stamp showing Nicolaus Copernicus in 1954 to mark the 410th anniversary of his death (Fig. 23). Subsequently, postal services in other countries followed suit: Paraguay in 1965, Yemen in 1969 and Ajman in 1972.
In 1966, the Vatican joined the celebrations of an important event: one thousand years of Christianity in Poland. The Vatican Post Office issued stamps and FDCs which depicted the likeness of Queen Jadwiga (she was formally a king). To the left and right of the cen-
tral figure, there are images of the Gate of Dawn in Vilnius and the courtyard of Collegium Maius with the statue of Nicolaus Copernicus (Fig. 24). The same year, the Astronomical Observatory in Rome, headed by Professor Massimo Cimino and possessing a large Copernican collection, organised an exhibition prepared by Krystyna Chełkowska and Father Tomasz Rostworowski, with a printed invitation in Polish and a richly illustrated catalogue with an introduction, also in Polish (Fig. 25, 26a, 26b, 26c, 26d).
From 1973, in which almost the entire world celebrated the 500th anniversary of Nicolaus Copernicus birth and Poland hosted the International Philatelic Exhibition Poznań ‘73 (August 19–September 2), to 1976, philatelic materials such as series of multiple stamps, single stamps, FDCs, ministerial sheets etc. were issued by 50 countries from almost all continents. To mark the exhibition in Poznań, the United States Postal Service issued a stamp with a portrait of Nicolaus Copernicus and a special card with that stamp as well as two others issued by the Polish Post. Both sides of the card were used by collectors to acquire special postmarks prepared for the event (Fig. 27). The Polish Post issued numerous stamps and two souvenir sheets, which allowed collectors to gather a large number of philatelic materials as well as prepare and send mail, often fancifully franked, to their acquaintances. There are also many foreign publications on this topic, most importantly the Catalogue of postage stamps issued worldwide to commemorate the 500 th anniversary of the birth of Nicolaus Copernicus. Dates of issue 1973–1976 by Wiesław
Zbigniew Józef
Nowicki, published in England in 1978 and translated into Polish.
The number of stamps and other philatelic materials related to Nicolaus Copernicus issued worldwide is staggering and impossible to fully present, let alone describe. However, one should note the postal use of stamps and postcards. In this instance, the inventiveness of mail users and collectors is very interesting. Unique compositions of stamps on envelopes, interesting equipment for franking, ornamenting them, and even using advertising materials to create souvenirs: it is a treat for collectors.
Postal services from various countries issued postage stamps featuring images of the most famous people in art, science, literature, technology, film, astronomy etc. Sometimes they chose selected representatives from different countries, other times they picked the most important one in a certain field. Copernican themes were also featured on stamps in the early third millennium. Stamps and writing pads dedicated to Copernicus were published, for instance, in 2011 in Gabon (Fig. 28) and in 2012 in the Ivory Coast.
The wealth of philatelic material, accessible even to beginner collectors, allows for a very broad use, both in establishing one’s collection and in presenting it to a wider audience in the form of a local display, multimedia presentation, and more official exhibitions, including contests. Such collections could be used, in part or in entirety, in publications related to Copernicus. An example of such a book is Mikołaj Kopernik [Nicolaus Copernicus] from the series Wielcy Polacy [Great Poles], published on the 540th anniversary of birth and 470th anniversary of death of the great astronomer with an introduction by Zdzisław Pietrzyk, who was also the book’s editor. It was published under the patronage of the Jagiellonian Library and Jagiellonian University Museum (Proszówki MMXIII). Pages 187–195 feature a part of the collection of the undersigned, including stamps issued in various countries of the world.
Jerzy Duda
Fig. 27
Copernicana issued by the Polish Post in 2023 and a souvenir sheet issued jointly by the Polish Post and Poste VaticaneFrom the private collection of Jerzy Duda
Mikołaj Kopernik i Uniwersytet Jagielloński na krakowskich pocztówkach oraz na znaczkach pocztowych Polski i całego świata [Nicolaus Copernicus and the Jagiellonian University in Kraków postcards and postage stamps from Poland and around the world] was an exhibition organised to mark the 550th anniversary of the birth of the great Polish astronomer, available for viewing from April to October 2023 in the cellars of Collegium Maius, the oldest Jagiellonian University building.
The exhibition consisted of philatelic materials related to Nicolaus Copernicus from the collection of Professor Aleksander B. Skotnicki, including postcards issued by the Kraków Salon of Polish Painters in the years 1900–1918. It focused on three key dates: 1900, the 500th anniversary of the Jagiellonian University revival; 1943, which marked the 400th anniversary of the death of Copernicus celebrated under Nazi German occupation; and 1973, the 500th anniversary of the scholar’s birth. The featured exhibits come not only from Poland, but also several dozen other countries around the world.
Ed.
Portrait of Nicolaus Copernicus by Artur Szyk, painted in New York for the Kosciusko Foundation in 1943. The miniature was published on the cover of a brochure issued by the Polish government in exile to mark the 400th anniversary of Copernicus’ death. The painting, full of details and hidden meanings characteristic of Szyk’s work, was also prominently featured in the Polish émigré press in the year of the anniversary. Aside from academic and astronomical imagery and coats of arms of cities related to Copernicus, the artist also included numerous examples of Polish symbolism. At the time, it was hugely important, as on the other side of the Atlantic, in Kraków, the Nazi German propagandists issued pamphlets celebrating ‘the 400th anniversary of the birth of German astronomer’. The last part of the aforementioned brochure was devoted to plans of returning cultural greatness to Poland after the war
The unveiling of the statue of Nicolaus Copernicus in the courtyard of Collegium Maius. Some of the participants of the celebrations included JU Rector Professor Stanisław Tarnowski and Professors: Marian Sokołowski, Kazimierz Morwaski, Stanisław Smolka, Henryk Jordan, Karol Estreicher the Elder, Józef Pelczar, Tadeusz Browicz, Napoleon Cybulski, Jerzy Mycielski, Adam Miodoński, and Juliusz Leo as well as President of Kraków Józef Friedlein, Henryk Sienkiewicz, Julian Fałat, Teodor Axentowicz, Leon Wyczółkowski, Jacek Malczewski, Włodzimierz Tetmajer, Stanisław Wyspiański, and Józef Mehoffer, June 8, 1900. From the collection of the Jagiellonian University Archives
Thehistory of the statue of Copernicus begins with a donation of 30,000 zlotys for the purpose of commissioning three oil paintings by Jan Matejko on the basis of his previous sketches from the series Dzieje cywilizacji w Polsce [The history of civilisation in Poland], given by the Austrian government, in particular Emperor Franz Joseph. The Emperor keenly followed the career of the Polish painter, and even visited him in his studio at ul. Floriańska (St. Florian’s Street; today the House of Jan Matejko – a branch of the National Museum) during his stay in Kraków in 1880. The Jagiellonian University was an intermediary in the donation.
Despite declining health, Jan Matejko began working on the first of the three planned paintings: The Influence of the University on the Country in the 15th Century. One of the many important historical figures related to the University shown in the courtyard of Collegium Maius is Nicolaus Copernicus. Sadly, Jan Matejko died on November 1, 1893, leaving behind the unfinished work which now hangs on the wall of Collegium Novum Assembly Hall.
Since the government donation had to be accounted for, the Senate of the Jagiellonian University, following the motion put forward by art history professor Marian Sokołowski (founder of the first Polish chair in art history and the Museum of Jan Matejko), decided to allocate 17,000 zlotys from the aforementioned donation for a statue of Copernicus that was to be put in the Courtyard of Collegium Maius during the celebrations of the 500th anniversary of revival of the Jagiellonian University in 1900.
Professor Sokołowski reached out to a famous Polish sculptor living in Paris, Cyprian Godebski, who accepted the commission and started working on the statue in 1896. He consulted the details of the statue with Jagiellonian University professors, especially Marian Sokołowski.
Two years later, the statue was shipped from Paris to Kraków, and on Friday,
June 8, 1900 at 11.00 a.m., it was officially unveiled in the presence of numerous distinguished guests from Poland and abroad.
A picture of the event stored in the JU Archives shows several hundred dignitaries in fine garments, including Rector Stanisław Tarnowski, Professor Marian Soko
łowski and renowned classicist Professor Kazimierz Morawski. The latter praised Copernicus in an official speech in Latin, crediting him for increasing the recognition of Kraków scholarship in the 15th and 16th century.
. . . On the granite pedestal stands a grey marble block featuring four plaques with inscriptions made of red marble. Four pillars add a touch of lightness and freedom, diversifying the monotonicity of the block’s lines. Four hollows in the base of the statue provide space for small water receptacles. The block emerges from between flowers and green vines climbing toward the inscriptions on the plaques. There are four plaques. . . .
The figure of Copernicus rises from the prettily corniced block. Copernicus, enrobed in the garments of a Jagiellonian University scholar, holds a globe in his hand. In the four corners of the base there are orbs enveloped in golden laurels; additionally, there is a branch of ivy at Copernicus’ feet, symbolising the strong and cordial relationship he had with the Jagiellonian Alma Mater. The statue faces the entrance from the Jagiellonian Library yard. . . .
Natus Thoruniae A.D. 1473, obit Frauenburgi A.D. 1513.
Born in Toruń in the Year of Our Lord 1473, died in Frombork in the Year of Our Lord 1513.
Extra processit longe flamantia moenia mundi, atque omne immensum peregravit mente animoque.
And forward thus he fared afar, beyond / The flaming ramparts of the world, until / He wandered the unmeasurable All (Titus Lucretius Carus, On the Nature of Things, translated by William Ellery Leonard, Project Gutenberg, 2008).
Memoriae Nicolai Copernici de Thorunia, qui ad 1491 in studio Cracoviae institulatus celleberrimus, huius scholae exstitit alumnus.
In the memory of Nicolaus Copernicus of Toruń, who after enrolling in the University of Kraków became its most famous student.
Exempla saecuti maiorum qui nascentis scholae primordia egregie olim fuerunt consules civitatis cracoviensis quingentesimum annum studii a Iagellone reformati pia celebraturi memoria hanc votivam tabulam posuere Anno Domini MDCCCC.
Following the example set by the great people who bore witness to the glorious beginnings of the University, the council of Kraków, wishing to mark the 500 years since the University’s revival by King Jagiełło, plant this consecrated plaque in the Year of Our Lord 1900.
Universitati Iagellonicae centesimum lustrum claudenti professores academiae artium cracoviensis hoc monumentum posuere A. MDCCCC. Statue put up by professors of the Kraków Academy of Arts in the year 1900 for the Jagiellonian University celebrating its 500th anniversary.
collection of Professor Aleksander B. Skotnicki
The Jagiellonian University magazine Alma Mater, which has been coming out since 1996, is intended to present the life of the academic community of Poland’s oldest university. Thanks to the joint efforts of its authors, editors, and co-workers, thanks to the friendly response and feedback from our Readers and the commitment of the University’s authorities, in the 27 years we have managed to create an open forum for the exchange of information and opinion. The magazine has gradually increased its frequency of publication – from a quarterly through a bimonthly, to a monthly now. We are offering membership of the Alma Mater Readers’ Club to all interested in regularly receiving the latest issue of Alma Mater. You can become a member by making a donation (the amount is up to you) for postage and packaging, to the account of the Jagiellonian University. Every member of the Club will receive a free copy of new editions of Alma Mater. The funds collected thanks to our Readers’ generosity will be allocated for the costs of distribution and printing.
If you decide to join, please pay your donation into the University’s bank account: Uniwersytet Jagielloński, PEKAO SA 87124047221111000048544672 fill in the following declaration and send it to our editorial office, or notify us via e-mail (almater@uj.edu.pl).
Name and surname ..........................................................................
Address
Telephone number – e-mail ......................................................................
Are you a Jagiellonian University graduate? Yes No . If you are, please state your faculty, field of study, and year of graduation
I hereby declare that I shall pay a donation in the amount of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . into the bank account of the Jagiellonian University in 2023. Please enrol me in the Alma Mater Readers’ Club and send me a regular copy of the Jagiellonian University’s magazine Alma Mater. I consent / do not consent (delete as appropriate) to the publication of my name, surname, and place of residence in the list of Club members published in Alma Mater.
