1ambition in a man who, to his archbishop's displeasure, went about with his hat
in rags and his pants too short, like a so-called second-rate priest and who had
refused an offer from the university and membership in the Accademia dei
Lincei.
in rags and his pants too short, like a so-called second-rate priest and who had
refused an offer from the university and membership in the Accademia dei
Lincei.
Having dedicated most of his energy and the greater part of his life for
almost thirty years to the study of thousands of Galilean documents, his
profound knowledge of the thought and works of the great master of the
experimental method, his unique familiarity with the surviving instruments
and with the language of Galileo must certainly have led Caverni to feel that
it was at once his right and his duty to sit on that committee. Disappointment
and bitterness are bad counselors and temptation does not spare even the
ministers of the Lord. And thus, even if I do not feel I can agree (in the spirit
of the images and comparisons of Favaro) that Caverni intended to make
poisonous insinuations and basely insult the dead Galileo, there is no doubt
that Favaro is right when he accuses Caverni of having wanted to spite the
living. In modifying his early manuscript (the so-called Venetian manuscript),
in the end he exaggerated and in some places was carried away by the spirit
of criticism at the expense of historic truth and calm judgment. This is the
consequence of a deprecable exasperation, that exasperation which often over
comes candid souls!
almost thirty years to the study of thousands of Galilean documents, his
profound knowledge of the thought and works of the great master of the
experimental method, his unique familiarity with the surviving instruments
and with the language of Galileo must certainly have led Caverni to feel that
it was at once his right and his duty to sit on that committee. Disappointment
and bitterness are bad counselors and temptation does not spare even the
ministers of the Lord. And thus, even if I do not feel I can agree (in the spirit
of the images and comparisons of Favaro) that Caverni intended to make
poisonous insinuations and basely insult the dead Galileo, there is no doubt
that Favaro is right when he accuses Caverni of having wanted to spite the
living. In modifying his early manuscript (the so-called Venetian manuscript),
in the end he exaggerated and in some places was carried away by the spirit
of criticism at the expense of historic truth and calm judgment. This is the
consequence of a deprecable exasperation, that exasperation which often over
comes candid souls!
As for publication, it was only possible thanks to the assistance, which
Giovannozzi characterizes as “munificent,” of commendator Antonio Civelli,
whose firm published the democratic newspaper Il Corriere italiano, owned the
comparable Milanese paper La Lombardia and the Veronese L'Adige, and who
was known, among other things, for having published the Dizionario corografo
dell'Italia (chorographic dictionary of Italy). The first volume appeared in 1891
and the relative scarcity of reviews leads us to think that it was met with
suspicion by both the right and the left. One voice, however, rose clear and
competent to review it at such length that the “Cenno bibliografico” (biblio
graphical note) was in reality the main article of the April 1892 issue of the
magazine Il Pensiero italiano (Italian thought).
That well-balanced and
impartial voice was Giovanni Virginio Schiaparelli's. Director of the Brera
Observatory, he was internationally known as an astronomer and also as a
profound commentator on the writings and documents of ancient astronomy.
In judging Caverni's work he seeks no compromise or halfway measures: the
errors exist, rather serious ones at that, but the merits are such that the rest
seems of secondary importance. He says in the beginning, “... no one in the
history of science and certainly never in the history of practical science was
ever granted the liberty to write without practical knowledge of his subject.”
But “it seems that the gifts of the great scientist and those of the judicious
historian, elegant and erudite, have rarely been reconciled in the same person.”
Giovannozzi characterizes as “munificent,” of commendator Antonio Civelli,
whose firm published the democratic newspaper Il Corriere italiano, owned the
comparable Milanese paper La Lombardia and the Veronese L'Adige, and who
was known, among other things, for having published the Dizionario corografo
dell'Italia (chorographic dictionary of Italy). The first volume appeared in 1891
and the relative scarcity of reviews leads us to think that it was met with
suspicion by both the right and the left. One voice, however, rose clear and
competent to review it at such length that the “Cenno bibliografico” (biblio
graphical note) was in reality the main article of the April 1892 issue of the
magazine Il Pensiero italiano (Italian thought).
That well-balanced and
impartial voice was Giovanni Virginio Schiaparelli's. Director of the Brera
Observatory, he was internationally known as an astronomer and also as a
profound commentator on the writings and documents of ancient astronomy.
In judging Caverni's work he seeks no compromise or halfway measures: the
errors exist, rather serious ones at that, but the merits are such that the rest
seems of secondary importance. He says in the beginning, “... no one in the
history of science and certainly never in the history of practical science was
ever granted the liberty to write without practical knowledge of his subject.”
But “it seems that the gifts of the great scientist and those of the judicious
historian, elegant and erudite, have rarely been reconciled in the same person.”