288
monument,” which had to be “an institute of heliophysics having its location in the
native province of Fr. Angelo Secchi” (Statuto 1908, Relazione accompagnatoria,
p. 4). This orientation of the Committee (to establish a local institution, not a “simple” telescope entrusted to the management of astronomers from existing observatories) was one of the relevant barriers to the realization of the project. Tacchini
himself had foreseen this; in 1897, he continued to insist that:
The Committee will not deviate at all from the fundamental concept originally established,
(although) some phrases and proposals suggest that the Committee itself is willing to do
something different from the 1881 project. (…) All this can be very harmful to the project.
(…) On the other hand, long experience has shown me that, even with limited means, you
can start a big project and carry it out in good time.
21
17.6 Two Commissions
During this continuous vacillation between doing and not doing, deciding and not
deciding, the Committee had appointed two other Commissions even before the
establishment of the Commission according to the 1909 Statute (Relazione
(2
a
) 1910).
The first Commission dated back to June 27, 1897, “to study the realization of
the monument.” Its membership included Professor Giacomo Manuelli
22
and the
engineer Pellegrino Spallanzani, joined by the engineer Giovanni Ramusani a year
later. Meeting from year to year, by January 1900 the members of the Committee
were convinced that they were doing well “not to rush” and, indeed, “to have lead
feet.” Thus three more years passed uselessly.
On June 18, 1903, marking the 85th anniversary of Secchi’s birth,
23
Tacchini’s
successor as director of Collegio Romano Observatory, Elia Millosevich
(1848–1919), was invited to Reggio for a conference. On that occasion he asserted
that an astronomical observatory could never be built and, supported by Schiaparelli,
proposed to turn the project into one of “an observatory for meteorology and terrestrial physics” (Relazione (2
a
) 1910: 12–16).
His suggestion was so convincing that, a couple of weeks later, the Committee
dismissed the first Commission and charged Manuelli to contact Ciro Chistoni
(1852–1927), professor of experimental physics at the University of Modena, to
21 P. Tacchini to President of the Committee (U. Levi), Rome Jul 22, 1897. In the same letter,
Tacchini mentions, as an example of the success he achieved by proceeding in small steps, the
Catania Astrophysical Observatory on Mount Etna; the meteorological observatories at Ischia,
Mount Cimone, Sestola, and Pavia; and the one under construction on Mount Rosa. This pragmatic
approach was one of Tacchini’s best organizational qualities (Chinnici 2006).
22 Giacomo Manuelli, professor of chemistry and later of physics at the R. Istituto Tecnico in
Modena, inventor of the “Pila Manuelli,” was the author of a controversial biography of Secchi:
Manuelli 1881; a long and very critical anonymous review is in “La civiltà cattolica,” 11, 7 (749),
1881, pp. 580–589.
23 Actually, the correct date of Secchi’s birth was June 28 (Chinnici 2019: 11–13).
F. Bònoli and A. Mandrino
monument,” which had to be “an institute of heliophysics having its location in the
native province of Fr. Angelo Secchi” (Statuto 1908, Relazione accompagnatoria,
p. 4). This orientation of the Committee (to establish a local institution, not a “simple” telescope entrusted to the management of astronomers from existing observatories) was one of the relevant barriers to the realization of the project. Tacchini
himself had foreseen this; in 1897, he continued to insist that:
The Committee will not deviate at all from the fundamental concept originally established,
(although) some phrases and proposals suggest that the Committee itself is willing to do
something different from the 1881 project. (…) All this can be very harmful to the project.
(…) On the other hand, long experience has shown me that, even with limited means, you
can start a big project and carry it out in good time.
21
17.6 Two Commissions
During this continuous vacillation between doing and not doing, deciding and not
deciding, the Committee had appointed two other Commissions even before the
establishment of the Commission according to the 1909 Statute (Relazione
(2
a
) 1910).
The first Commission dated back to June 27, 1897, “to study the realization of
the monument.” Its membership included Professor Giacomo Manuelli
22
and the
engineer Pellegrino Spallanzani, joined by the engineer Giovanni Ramusani a year
later. Meeting from year to year, by January 1900 the members of the Committee
were convinced that they were doing well “not to rush” and, indeed, “to have lead
feet.” Thus three more years passed uselessly.
On June 18, 1903, marking the 85th anniversary of Secchi’s birth,
23
Tacchini’s
successor as director of Collegio Romano Observatory, Elia Millosevich
(1848–1919), was invited to Reggio for a conference. On that occasion he asserted
that an astronomical observatory could never be built and, supported by Schiaparelli,
proposed to turn the project into one of “an observatory for meteorology and terrestrial physics” (Relazione (2
a
) 1910: 12–16).
His suggestion was so convincing that, a couple of weeks later, the Committee
dismissed the first Commission and charged Manuelli to contact Ciro Chistoni
(1852–1927), professor of experimental physics at the University of Modena, to
21 P. Tacchini to President of the Committee (U. Levi), Rome Jul 22, 1897. In the same letter,
Tacchini mentions, as an example of the success he achieved by proceeding in small steps, the
Catania Astrophysical Observatory on Mount Etna; the meteorological observatories at Ischia,
Mount Cimone, Sestola, and Pavia; and the one under construction on Mount Rosa. This pragmatic
approach was one of Tacchini’s best organizational qualities (Chinnici 2006).
22 Giacomo Manuelli, professor of chemistry and later of physics at the R. Istituto Tecnico in
Modena, inventor of the “Pila Manuelli,” was the author of a controversial biography of Secchi:
Manuelli 1881; a long and very critical anonymous review is in “La civiltà cattolica,” 11, 7 (749),
1881, pp. 580–589.
23 Actually, the correct date of Secchi’s birth was June 28 (Chinnici 2019: 11–13).
F. Bònoli and A. Mandrino