Maximilianus Hell (1720-1792) - Munin

was far from flattering. 402 Having ended his period in Leopolis, Zach travelled to Vienna in
1781/82 in search of a position and appears to have visited Hell, to no success. 403 He then
embarked upon a grand tour of Italy, France and England, where he forged personal contacts
with various influential characters of contemporaneous astronomy and became the protégée of
the London ambassador of the important Saxonian town Dresden, Hans Moritz von Brühl.
Upon Brühl’s suggestion, Zach was eventually appointed court astronomer of the Duke of
Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg, Ernst II (1745-1804), in 1786. He then promptly moved from London
to Gotha, where he established an observatory and stayed in touch with his numerous
correspondents in more westerly parts of Europe. By the turn of the century, Zach had become
one of Europe’s leading astronomers, a position he kept until his death in 1832. His bitterness
towards the Jesuits was never weakened, and in his publications he continuously criticised
and accused them of manipulation of data sets and clandestine activities designed to keep
outsiders out of science. 404
The bitterness of Franz Xaver von Zach may have been a special case. Some of his
accusations towards Liesganig and Hell resonate like repetitions of the propaganda of Ignatius
a Born and other freemasons (Zach was, by the way, a freemason himself). It should be
stressed that it was not only the ex-Jesuits who made things difficult for aspiring astronomers
from Central Europe in the final quarter of the eighteenth century. The utilitarian ideology as
promoted by Joseph II was combined with a reluctance to direct too many resources towards
science that was not ‘useful’. Maximilianus Hell sighed over this situation in a letter to Jean
Bernoulli, dated 15 February 1777: 405
402
For various examples, see Brosche & Vargha (eds.) 1984 and Brosche 2009a (with references to numerous
recent contributions).
403
Brosche, in referring to a letter written by Zach from Lyon in the spring of 1783, tells that “die nicht
namentlich genannten kaiserlichen Astronomen ärgern sich, daß ihnen Maskelyne nicht auf ihre Briefe
antwortet” = “the unnamed Imperial Astronomers are irritated because Maskelyne does not answer their letters”
(Brosche 2009a, p. 31). The likely informant would be Father Hell, Imperial Astronomer of Vienna.
404
See Brosche 2009a (with ample references).
405
Hell to Bernoulli in Berlin, dated Vienna 15 February 1777 (UB Basel): “Sed hæc in Astronomiam
[practi]cam per destructionem ordinis mei illata damna, minora Sunt, qua[m] quæ observatoria olim jam à
societate exstructa, Pragense in Bohemia, Græcense in Stÿria, et Viennense in Collegio Academico perpessa
fuissent, nis[i spe?] resuscitandæ Societatis nostræ erectus, viribus omnibus obstitissem; jam e[nim?] Societatis,
et Scientiarum Solidarum inimici, Augustissimæ Jmperatrici per[suadebant?] tria hæc observatoria Sumptibus
societatis nostræ exstructa, instructaque, tanquam Superfluos, inanesque conservationis sumptus exigentia,
tollenda, demoliendaque esse; satis inanium sumptuum, pro sola, ut ajebant, apud exteros conservanda fama,
impendi observatorio Viennensi Cæsareo, et Tyrnaviensi; utque facilius Astronomiam unà cum Jesuitis
eliminarent; observatoria astronomica non esse utilia Princibus ajebant, nisi ijs, qui classem in Mari haberent,
atque navibus mercimonia exercerent, Regna autem Austriæ Subjecta, his carent, ergo Superflua esse
observatoria, Superfluos astronomos, Sumptus inanes, qui in Astronomiam impenderentur, quasi verò
Astronomia alium usum non haberet, nisi nauticum.” (Letters in [brackets] are my conjectures; they are missing
from the copy I have had access to because of their nearness to the binding.)
- 176 -