Seite - 251 - in Maximilian Hell (1720–92) - And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe

251The Expeditio litteraria ad Polum Arcticum Nothing, therefore, of all this has to do with Father Sajnovics, nor does any of the other research made during the expedition pertain to him; ex- cept that [he] assisted me in some tasks according to my instructions and my ideas; thus, whatever has been revealed, elaborated, discovered, and so on, has to do with me only, and the demonstration of the identity of the Lappish and Hungarian language, as regards the structure of the work, the arguments, its elaboration, and so on has itself been accom- plished according to my ideas and instructions, so that if I had not per- sonally assisted, Hungary today would not be aware of this linguistic identity; out of his own initiative, Sajnovics certainly would not have ac- complished this work, he always opposed my opinion, I had to take this labor in my hand, and he saw how gravely I was affected by his repug- nance toward me and the job.139 Hell explained that the exact particulars of the division of labor between him and Sajnovics were left obscure in the first edition of the Demonstratio because while in Copenhagen he wanted benevolently to promote Sajnovics, to be treated there “not as an assistant or a disciple, but as a good companion of mine, and therefore I arranged his election, after my own, to the academies of Trondheim and Copenhagen, and even he has to acknowledge that he owes this solely to me.” But this was to be over: Hell revealed to Pray that in the forth- coming Expeditio litteraria he had no intention of identifying Sajnovics as an author of the relevant part (to be based on the Demonstratio), and in the mean- time demanded that “everything concerning my Expeditio that is in the plural on the first and second page [of Pray’s epistle], ought to be separated, and ei- ther to be tied exclusively to my person, or deleted.”140 139 Coll. Prayana 18:24. This document was first highlighted by András Vértes at the confer- ence of the Hungarian Society for Linguistics on October 26, 1971, and analyzed in Anna Jászó, “Deux études sur János Sajnovics,” Études Finno­ Ougriennes 16 (1983): 255–61. Cf. Vladár, “Valójában ki a szerzője,” 322. 140 Coll. Prayana 18:24. This reminds one of the changes inserted in the advertisement of the Expeditio litteraria. In an early manuscript draft to the call for subscriptions, Hell points to Sajnovics as the author of a chapter of the first volume: “The treatise of Father Sajno- vics on the identity of the Hungarian and Lappish language.” In all printed versions, how- ever, the name of Sajnovics was erased, and Hell promises only a chapter on “the origin and occasion of this investigation of the Lappish language.” Pray complied with Hell’s re- quests to the extent that in the first pages of the Dissertationes Hell is mentioned as the sole recipient of the invitation, who then took along Sajnovics. As far as the authorship of the Sámi–Hungarian theory is concerned, Pray consistently ascribed it to Sajnovics— quite naturally, as no edition of the Demonstratio was ever published under any other name than his, and Hell’s publication plans on the subject came to nothing.