Seite - 274 - in Maximilian Hell (1720–92) - And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe

Chapter 6274 report “astonishing things” to their superiors, but for the time being they should “quietly keep these to themselves, for propriety requires that they are first brought to the knowledge of the Danish king.”49 Hell’s sincerity about the first right of access as stipulated by the sponsor of the expedition was called into question, as we shall see, by some contemporaries and by astronomers of subsequent generations, and even in some of the more recent literature.50 There is indeed no documentary evidence that such a commitment was ever requested or made. However, this is a kind of instruction that might well have been given orally. The man who was in charge of the Arabia Felix enterprise (in the case of which there was such an explicit obligation), Minister Moltke, was also the host of Hell in Copenhagen in June 1768. The “ban” against private communication of the datasets from Vardø may have been in breach with the ideals and practices of the Republic of Letters, but it was in accordance with Danish procedure under very similar circumstances only a few years earlier. Besides, Hell as a man who must have developed a certain flair for courtly eti- quette over his years of service in Vienna may have perceived restraint in re- gard of publicity as part of his duty even without a “ban,” expressed orally or in writing. Finally, this would have also been in the spirit of the familiar Jesuit strategy of seeking intimate contact with potentates and inner circles at court by means of scientific work when visiting non-Catholic countries.51 Even the sporadic and rudimentary news reports that appeared in the Vien- nese press about Hell’s team during their nearly year-long stay at Vardø were resented in the Danish capital.52 Regarding the transit observation itself, the caution on the part of Hell even included his employer. Thus, when on June 5, 1769 an express letter was sent from Vardø to Baron Thott in Copenhagen, the leader of the expedition revealed nothing except that his observations of both the Venus transit and the solar eclipse had been successful.53 Sajnovics, for his 49 Hell to Höller in Vienna, dated April 6, 1769 (WUS), printed in Pinzger, Hell Miksa, 2:93. 50 “Everyone who had results [i.e., successful observations] to share did so as quickly as pos- sible, everyone except the Jesuit father. Hell knew that he had the trump card in his hand, for observations in the south were of little value if they could not be compared with ob- servations in the north.” Helge Kragemo, “Pater Hells Vardøhusekspedisjon: Belyst ved Pater Sainovič’s dagbok 1768–1769,” in Willoch, Vardøhus Festning 650 år, 92–125, here 120. 51 See, e.g., Florence Hsia, “Jesuits, Jupiter’s Satellites, and the Académie Royale des Scienc- es” and Nicolas Standaert, “Jesuit Corporate Culture as Shaped by the Chinese,” in O’Malley et al., Jesuits, 241–57 and 352–63; and Catherine Pagani, “Clockwork and the Je- suit Mission in China,” in O’Malley et al., Jesuits ii, 658–77. 52 WD, June 25, 1768, 6; May 6, 1769, 9–12; June 7, 1769, 5–7. The resentment evoked by these accounts in Copenhagen was reported by Mercier on June 28, 1769. See Pinzger, Hell Mik- sa, 1:78. 53 Hell to Thott in Copenhagen, dated Vardø, June 5, 1769, in Pinzger, Hell Miksa, 2:102–3.