Seite - 283 - in Maximilian Hell (1720–92) - And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe

283Observing Venus and Debating the Parallax observations. In that case, he was hardly that lucky, for our observations are surely not the most accurate that exist.75 This comment was made in a private letter and would no doubt have caused a strong reaction if it had reached Hell. It is intriguing to note, however, that Lexell was convinced that the Jesuit in Vardø had made up his observations: Lexell thought there could be no other cause for the late publication than the time needed to manipulate datasets. A man in whom Planman and Lexell both confided, Wargentin in Stock- holm, evidently felt responsible for the situation. Accordingly, he asked the amateur astronomer Hellant in Torneå (now Haparanda, Tornio) to check whether the weather conditions in Vardø really had been as favorable as Hell claimed. When Hellant visited a market in Utsjoki on the borders between the Danish–Norwegian and Swedish(–Finnish) realms, a representative of the lo- cal population of Vardø confirmed that the weather had been beautiful (“smukt”). This testimony appears to have convinced Wargentin, at least.76 The leading university of the German-speaking world during the Enlighten- ment, the Georgia Augusta in Göttingen, had been the workplace of Tobias Mayer, who passed away in 1762. His successor, Abraham Gotthelf Kästner, may not have been an astronomer of Mayer’s eminence, but he made great services to the profession as a prolific reviewer for the Göttingische Anzeigen von gelehr- ten Sachen. Already in the issue for April 7, 1770, Kästner published a very posi- tive, rather long review of Hell’s Vardø report.77 Kästner characterizes the method of determining the pole height as “sagacious” (scharfsinnig), and there is no hint of skepticism concerning any of the practical procedures or theoreti- cal deliberations of Hell. Nor is it mentioned that the report arrived rather late. In sum, the overall assessment is that the Observatio transitus Veneris […] 1769 contains “so much new and important, that this will excuse the length of this summary [i.e., review].”78 Even more lengthy was the review in the Journal des Sçavans, which ap- peared in the issue for September 1770.79 Although the name of the author is suppressed, there can be little doubt about his identity—Lalande. The review is balanced. The boldness of Hell, who took upon himself this strenuous and 75 Lexell to Planman in Åbo, dated St. Petersburg, June 25, 1770 (Kansalliskirjasto, Helsinki, Planman-samlingen no. 61, transcript generously provided by Johan Stén). 76 Cf. Erik Tobé, Anders Hellant: En krönika om sjuttonhundratalets märkligaste Tornedaling. Tornedalica 49. ([Luleå]: Tornedalica, 1991), 147–49. 77 GAgS [18]:1, no. 42 (April 7, 1770): 353–56. 78 GAgS [18]:1, no. 42 (April 7, 1770): 356. 79 JS (September 1770): 619–22.