256
12 Coda
an extraordinary professor. Kapteyn has always maintained that he did not
give Hertzsprung any special advantage and as far as we know that he indeed
did not. After all, Hertzsprung was a prominent astronomer already and did
not need any special treatment. His appointment still took some time, but
became effective in 1919, as did the appointment of de Sitter as director. The
astrometry department would then be headed by Antonie Pannekoek. The latter presented a problem because of his strong socialist and communist views.
The prime minister, Pieter Willem Adriaan Cort van der Linden (1846–1935),
leader of the liberal party, who had held this position since 1913, had his doubts
but was not prepared to oppose his appointment. However, after new elections
a new prime minister appeared, Charles Joseph Marie Ruijs de Beerenbrouck
(1873–1936), who was a catholic. He had different views than his predecessor
and personally blocked the appointment of Pannekoek. In the end, Pannekoek
was appointed in Amsterdam; the government in Den Haag had no say in selecting candidates for the municipal university and the Amsterdam city council
did not share the objections.
For the time being, the gap was filled by appointing Kapteyn for one day a
week after his retirement in 1921. However, he was only able to work in Leiden
for a few months before he became fatally ill. The astrometric department did
remain intact. With the Sterrewacht in the hands of Willem de Sitter, Ejnar
Hertzsprung and not much later Jan Hendrik Oort, the future of both Leiden
and Dutch astronomy was in very capable hands.
It is important to mention, however, that there were also developments in
Utrecht, which in addition to those in Leiden, Groningen and Amsterdam
were of great significance. Especially the appointment in 1918 of the Flemish Marcel Gilles Jozef Minnaert (1893–1970) was an enormous stimulus.
Utrecht astronomy flourished until the unfortunate dissolution of the astronomy department in Utrecht in 2012, putting an end to a great tradition of 370
years (see a summary of events by the last chairman of the Utrecht Astronomy
Department, Christoph U. Keller in [111]). The situation around 1920 is described excellently in a letter from de Sitter to Kapteyn dated May 24 of that
year. At that time de Sitter was in Arosa, where he had to stay after being exposed to an overdose of ether during surgery. In his letter he discussed, among
other things, the future of the Bosscha Observatory at Lembang on Java in the
Dutch East-Indies. This Observatory was made possible by rich tea-planter and
amateur astronomer Karel Albert Rudolf Bosscha (1865–1928) from Bandung
and his nephew Rudolf Eduard Kerkhoven (1848–1918). This was formally
opened in 1923, but planning had been started much earlier. Kapteyn felt it
should be managed by a national committee, while de Sitter took the position
that the Sterrewacht director (so himself ) should be responsible for defining
12 Coda
an extraordinary professor. Kapteyn has always maintained that he did not
give Hertzsprung any special advantage and as far as we know that he indeed
did not. After all, Hertzsprung was a prominent astronomer already and did
not need any special treatment. His appointment still took some time, but
became effective in 1919, as did the appointment of de Sitter as director. The
astrometry department would then be headed by Antonie Pannekoek. The latter presented a problem because of his strong socialist and communist views.
The prime minister, Pieter Willem Adriaan Cort van der Linden (1846–1935),
leader of the liberal party, who had held this position since 1913, had his doubts
but was not prepared to oppose his appointment. However, after new elections
a new prime minister appeared, Charles Joseph Marie Ruijs de Beerenbrouck
(1873–1936), who was a catholic. He had different views than his predecessor
and personally blocked the appointment of Pannekoek. In the end, Pannekoek
was appointed in Amsterdam; the government in Den Haag had no say in selecting candidates for the municipal university and the Amsterdam city council
did not share the objections.
For the time being, the gap was filled by appointing Kapteyn for one day a
week after his retirement in 1921. However, he was only able to work in Leiden
for a few months before he became fatally ill. The astrometric department did
remain intact. With the Sterrewacht in the hands of Willem de Sitter, Ejnar
Hertzsprung and not much later Jan Hendrik Oort, the future of both Leiden
and Dutch astronomy was in very capable hands.
It is important to mention, however, that there were also developments in
Utrecht, which in addition to those in Leiden, Groningen and Amsterdam
were of great significance. Especially the appointment in 1918 of the Flemish Marcel Gilles Jozef Minnaert (1893–1970) was an enormous stimulus.
Utrecht astronomy flourished until the unfortunate dissolution of the astronomy department in Utrecht in 2012, putting an end to a great tradition of 370
years (see a summary of events by the last chairman of the Utrecht Astronomy
Department, Christoph U. Keller in [111]). The situation around 1920 is described excellently in a letter from de Sitter to Kapteyn dated May 24 of that
year. At that time de Sitter was in Arosa, where he had to stay after being exposed to an overdose of ether during surgery. In his letter he discussed, among
other things, the future of the Bosscha Observatory at Lembang on Java in the
Dutch East-Indies. This Observatory was made possible by rich tea-planter and
amateur astronomer Karel Albert Rudolf Bosscha (1865–1928) from Bandung
and his nephew Rudolf Eduard Kerkhoven (1848–1918). This was formally
opened in 1923, but planning had been started much earlier. Kapteyn felt it
should be managed by a national committee, while de Sitter took the position
that the Sterrewacht director (so himself ) should be responsible for defining