Last Years

There is a break in the story of Borghesi and Bertolla for the next five

years. The second clock may have been the last project on which the

priest and the clockmaker worked together, for very good reasons. The

two clocks must have represented a considerable financial investment in

materials and in time, and neither of the men was in sufficiently

affluent circumstances to undertake the luxury of such a hobby without

some form of recompense. The publication of the two little volumes must

have also been done at Father Borghesi's expense. The income of the

parish priest in a small mountain village could not have been equal to

the relatively great costs of the projects that had been completed. It

seems probable that the priest attempted to sell his clocks to a wealthy

patron, perhaps the Baron of Cles, or he may have attempted to obtain

some form of recompense for the continuation of his research. However,

no records can be found of such patronage if it existed. If Borghesi had

received financial assistance while the projects were in progress, he

would certainly have made adequate mention of the patron's name and

assistance in one or the other of the two volumes which he

published.[17]

The next record relating to Borghesi which has been found is the

description of a letter written by an anonymous mathematician late in

1768 or early in 1769. It was 28 pages in length, written in Latin, in

the form of a reply to the writer's brother, on the subject of the clock

invented by Borghesi. It consisted primarily of a criticism launched

against Borghesi's first little volume published in 1763.

The anonymous letter is without date, place, or signature. This writer

claimed that Father Borghesi had made many errors in his book,

presumably in the description of the clock's functions, and in the basic

theories upon which the priest had predicated his research. No complete

copy of the letter's text has been found for study, although it is

described at length in Tovazzi's _Biblioteca Tirolese_. Tovazzi noted

that four copies of the letter existed at that time, and that he

personally had filed one in the Biblioteca di Cles in Trent. However,

every attempt to locate a copy at the present time has been

unsuccessful.

If the anonymous letter was brought to the attention of Father Borghesi,

it must have introduced a disturbing note into his life and cost the

priest many unhappy moments. He was not, however, dissuaded from his

preoccupation with horology. Several years later, in 1773, Father

Borghesi was working on yet another astronomical clock, this time

presumably without the assistance of Bertolla. This third clock was

reported by Tovazzi to have been "of minimum expense but of maximum

ingenuity."

No subsequent information relating to it has come to light, and there is

no record that it was actually completed.

Again there is a period of silence in the life of Father Borghesi which

no amount of research has yet been able to pierce. Whatever the

circumstances may have been, it is reported by several of the sources

noted that both the first and the second clock did, in fact, become the

property of the Empress Maria Theresa in Vienna. The presentation was

made sometime during the period between the completion of the second

clock in 1764 and the year 1780. There is some discrepancy in the

contemporary accounts as to whether Father Borghesi presented one or two

clocks to the Empress, but all the sources with but one exception record

that both clocks were acquired by the Empress.

It is doubtful that Father Borghesi had originally intended to give his

clocks to the Empress at the time that they were made, for he would most

certainly have made some mention of such an intention in the two little

volumes which he published about them. If he saw the letter published by

the anonymous mathematician in late 1768 or 1769, it is possible that he

decided to make the presentation in expiation of his sense of guilt for

the amount of his time which the creation of the timepieces had

consumed. On the other hand, it is just as possible that Father Borghesi

may have forwarded copies of his two little volumes to the Imperial

Court at Vienna, and that the Empress expressed a desire to acquire the

clocks.

Father Tovazzi states that in 1780 "the clock invented by him [Borghesi]

was preserved in Vienna, Austria, at the Imperial Court from which the

inventor was receiving an annual pension of 400 florins." No records in

the Palace archives relating to the clock have yet been found, nor

records of payment of an annuity to Father Borghesi. However, a more

exhaustive investigation of the Furniture Depository of the Imperial

Court may bring forth related records. It was the implication in Father

Tovazzi's account that the second clock had been presented to the

Empress prior to the publication of the anonymous, critical letter in

1768 or 1769. He believed that it was envy of Father Borghesi's

ingenuity, fame and financial benefit that had caused the anonymous

mathematician to publish his letter, for Tovazzi asked "Who would have

encountered opposition to such a marvel? Envy is not yet dead, and has

always reigned."

This last-mentioned theory about the presentation may be the most likely

one. Some evidence may be found in the second clock itself which bears

out this assumption. The multiple chapter ring, with its many

inscriptions, is engraved and silvered in a relatively crude manner,

presumably by Bertolla himself. The main dial plate, however, which is

of gilt brass, is engraved with the utmost skill by one of the great

masters of the art. The inscription below the Imperial Hapsburg eagle

relates to Francis I, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. It is entirely

possible that although Father Borghesi originally had no intention of

giving the clock to the Emperor or the Empress at the time that it was

made, he later changed his mind. Accordingly, he may have commissioned a

master engraver, possibly in Trent or in Vienna itself, to produce a

dial plate which would be of such a quality as to be worthy of the

Emperor himself. If so, this was done shortly after the clock was

completed, for the Emperor died in August of the following year. Perhaps

by the time that the clock was ready, the Emperor had already died, and

Father Borghesi gave the clock instead to Maria Theresa without revising

the inscription.

The acceptance of the clocks by the Empress, and the annuity which was

his reward, would have constituted considerable honor even for one of

the foremost clockmakers of the Empire, but for a humble parish priest

in a little village, such notable Imperial recognition was overwhelming.

Possibly as a result of it, a change was noted in Father Borghesi in the

next few years. His conscience began to bother him, and he began to

question whether he had done right in spending so much of his time and

thought on his horological research. He became more and more confused in

his own mind. Had he spent too much time in mechanical studies to the

neglect of his ecclesiastical duties? If this had been the case, he had

committed the most grievous sin.

Exaggerated though these thoughts may appear, they were undoubtedly of

the most critical importance to the middle-aged priest. His mental

turbulence and confusion increased daily, and it soon became apparent to

others around him. By June 1779, he was completely in the grip of his

obsession, and his parishioners began to whisper amongst themselves that

their pastor was being tortured by the devil. They were unable to help

him, and he became more and more preoccupied with his problem. The years

passed slowly as the pastor became more vague and more tortured by his

conscience.[18]

There probably was continued contact between Father Borghesi and

Bertolla for at least some time after the development of his illness.

Bertolla had retired from active work, but continued to pursue his

interests in his clockshop as much as his health and advanced years

permitted. A clock which he made at the age of 80 survives and is

described and illustrated in the following section on "The Clocks of

Bartolomeo Antonio Bertolla." Finally, on January 15, 1789, Bertolla

passed away and Father Borghesi was left alone, deprived of the

companionship he had enjoyed with the older man for the past two or

three decades. One of Bertolla's nephews continued to work in the master

clockmaker's workshop, but there did not appear to be any association

between the younger man and Father Borghesi.

At last, in 1794, Father Borghesi lost his sanity completely, and he was

forced to relinquish his pastoral duties to a curate. For the remaining

eight years of his life, he continued to live in the rectory of the

little parish church in Mechel where most of his life had been spent,

his needs undoubtedly attended by the parishioners he could no longer

serve. During this period, until his death at the age of 79 on June 12,

1802, Father Borghesi lived on, oblivious of those around him.

Seemingly, he retired to another world; perhaps to that universe which

he had tried to reproduce in his second clock.

Smithsonian Institution - United States National Museum - Bulletin 240 Contributions From the Museum of History and Technology Papers 34-44 on Science and Technology · 第 66 / 318 题