Page - 117 - in Maximilian Hell (1720–92) - And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe

117Enlightened and Jesuit Networks, and a New Node of Science farmer and turning-lathe operator from the village of Oberperfuss in Tyrol. In 1751, Anich called on the mathematics professor of the Jesuit college at Inns- bruck, Ignaz Weinhart (1705–87), who, according to Hell’s account, realized his visitor’s talent, and decided to give him lessons on Sundays and holidays. “Thanks to his abilities and diligence,”71 Anich soon became a well-trained, and in his narrow patria also well-recognized, surveyor and mapmaker. Hell corre- sponded with Weinhart, and their letters and their jointly written introduction to the eulogium on Anich (which also appeared separately) leave no doubt about the propagandistic goals of publishing the account.72 The authors recall the similar, also recent story of Johann Ludewig (1715–60) of Cossebaude in Saxony, whose case had been advanced as a proof that “thanks to Martin Lu- ther, in Saxony even simple farmers cultivate philosophy, and publish works on mathematics and other sciences.”73 As presented by the two Jesuit scholars, Anich is a counter-example—almost a refutation: a Catholic peasant (natu- rally, with proper guidance from qualified Jesuits) is at least as capable of achievement and service in the sciences as a Protestant one. After a sketch of the build-up of the Ephemerides as a tool of obtaining inter- national visibility, the story of Anich leads us to a consideration of the specific mechanisms and “vectors” of the operation of the Viennese university observa- tory as a node linking the local, metropolitan, and transnational planes or scales of pursuing astronomical and other kinds of knowledge. Hell brought to the awareness of his international peers relevant work done at a great many lesser “nodes,” and representing these efforts in the Ephemerides alongside the achievements of the famous centers was very much in the spirit of the Enlight- enment notions about the public and “democratic” character of scientific knowledge. This has several aspects, including cross-confessional ones. The praise lavished on Anich was undoubtedly meant to underline the excellence of the Catholic contribution to science, and Hell was—as we shall later see explicitly expressed—no great friend of Protestantism as a religious creed and 71 Hell, Ephemerides 1767 (1766), 8. Cf. the separate edition, Maximilian Hell and Ignaz Wein- hart, Elogium Rustici Tyrolensis Celeberrimi Petri Anich Oberperfussensis Coloni, Tornatoris, Chalcographi, Mechanicarum Artium Magistri, Geodetæ, Geographi, et Astrophili ad Prodigium Excellentis […] (Innsbruck: Trattner, 1768), 7. 72 It might be added that a German summary of the story also appeared in the appendix of the WD, no. 13 (February 14, 1767) and no. 15 (February 21, 1767), unpaginated. In addition, a French resumé was published in the Parisian Journal encyclopédique; see Sommervogel, “Hell, Maximilien,” 254. 73 Hell, Ephemerides 1767 (1766), 4; Hell and Weinhart, Elogium Petri Anich, 3. Cf. Johann Ludewig, Der gelehrte Bauer: Mit Christian Gotthold Hoffmanns Vorbericht nebst Kupffern (Dresden, 1756), critical edition by Holger Böning and Reinhart Siegert (Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1992).