1. Introduction
In my analysis, which is based also on new documents, I examine a specific aspect in the biography of Vito Volterra: not his mathematical thought (in relation to which reference should be made to the bibliography; see, for instance Somigliana Reference Somigliana1954), but the consequences of his opposition to Fascism on his scientific and institutional work. These consequences were significant and led to his gradual and, ultimately, complete ousting from the institutional world of scientific research in Italy: universities, academies, and the National Council of Research (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, hereafter CNR).
The vicissitudes of Volterra's career exemplify several aspects of the Fascist regime's scientific and cultural policy, with purges of dissenting scientists and intellectuals from the cultural and academic institutions – removing them from playing any sort of role abroad, as representatives of Italy (which, in Volterra's case, proved a partial failure), and lastly, excluding scientists of Jewish origin from Italian culture.
However, given Volterra's scientific relevance and his network of international relations, the Fascist government was never able to exclude him entirely from international research institutions and conferences. In this field, moreover, the great mathematician received much support from his scientist colleagues, especially in France. This is noteworthy, and the documents discussed in the article will confirm it.
During the fourth assembly of the International Research Council (hereafter IRC) held in Brussels on 13 July 1928, Volterra was reelected as vice-president thanks to the support of his scientist colleagues (the IRC President was the French mathematician Émile Picard), despite the strong opposition of the Italian delegates.
In May 1931, the Italians (that is, again, the CNR directorate) tried to exclude Volterra from the Patronage committee of the International Conference on Electricity, planned for 1932 in Paris. But, thanks to the support of Paul Janet and Émile Borel, he was included among the French members, as President of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures).
Furthermore, from the French government Volterra received important recognition, in September 1928, when he was appointed Grand Officer of the Legion of Honor.
The Fascist regime's attempts to crush Volterra came up against both the scientist's international notoriety and his prerogatives as a Senator: appointed by the King, in fact, the position was a life tenure. Yet, despite this, the Fascist authorities and Mussolini in person kept Volterra under constant surveillance. In 1930 they tried to intimidate him, but in the end they did not adopt any coercive measures against him, such as preventing him from travelling abroad. His case is similar to that of the philosopher Benedetto Croce in many ways.
Volterra's status as Senator also partially protected him during the sad events towards the end of his life, namely the passing of the anti-Jewish laws. As a Senator, in fact, Volterra was able to benefit from a partial exemption from the persecution, the so-called “discrimination,” which allowed him to keep his personal estate intact.
However, he was not spared the humiliation of being expelled from some of the most prestigious Italian academies on racist grounds.
2. Facing the Facist Regime: An Increasing Pressure
When Mussolini rose to power in October of 1922, Vito Volterra was at the apex of his academic career and at the summit of many prestigious scientific institutions in Italy and abroad (Paoloni Reference Paoloni1990; Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007; Paoloni and Simili Reference Paoloni, Simili, Scazzieri and Simili2008; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012; Simili Reference Simili and Simili2012). With regard to Italy, however, he would not remain there much longer. Even a simple list of the principle positions held by the scientist in these years gives an idea of his manifold duties at the scientific and institutional level.
Professor of Mathematical physics at the University of Rome, senator from 1905, Volterra was president of the Italian Society of Sciences known as of the Forty (Società Italiana delle Scienze detta dei XL) between 1919 and 1920. In 1920 he was elected vice-President of the Accademia dei Lincei. In 1921 Volterra was nominated president of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures), a position he kept until his death, in 1940. Volterra was a member of the executive board of the International Research Council, the institution “founded in 1919 by representatives of the leading scientific academies of the major Allied nations” (Cock Reference Cock1983, 249; Greenaway Reference Greenaway1996; Lehto Reference Lehto1998, 40–41), and later nominated vice president. He also served as advisor for the physics and mathematics sector of the International Education Board (Paoloni Reference Paoloni1990, 149–150; Paoloni Reference Paoloni and Gemelli2000; Siegmund-Schultze Reference Siegmund-Schultze2001, 92; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 113; Paoloni Reference Paoloni and Lacaita2009, 351–354); this prestigious body financed, with the support of the Rockefeller family, a vast program of research and funding for scholarships throughout the 1920s (Siegmund-Schultze Reference Siegmund-Schultze2001). In 1923 he was elected president of the Accademia dei Lincei for a three-year term; in January 1924 he also assumed the presidency of the CNR, whose constitution he had actively promoted (Simili Reference Simili1993; Linguerri and Simili Reference Linguerri, Simili and Casella2000; Simili Reference Simili2001a; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 108–109).
In the beginning of the 1920s, crisis ripened in the political sphere that would culminate in the March on Rome and Mussolini's assumption of power in October of 1922. Volterra watched the unfolding of events with apprehension. Angelo Guerraggio and Giovanni Paoloni observed that
Volterra worried about the political situation, and harboured no sympathy for Mussolini's movement. In a first phase, while he was opposed to the new cabinet, he was resigned to the facts. Faithful to the monarchy, in his institutional duties Volterra decided on a line of general collaboration with the government that the king had wanted, aside from any personal opinion he might hold. (Ibid., 115)
Like other personalities from the liberal ruling class, Volterra initially adapted himself to live with the new administration, which had been legitimated by the King. Anyway, on November 29, 1922, when the Senate gave its vote of confidence to Mussolini, Volterra was absent (Italia. Senato Reference Italia1923, 4331–4332). But his “public reticence” – as Judith Goodstein has defined it (Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007, 188) – was of brief duration.
§2.1 The Opposition to Giovanni Gentile's Reform
The first occasion for dissent was provoked by the reform of the school and university system promoted by the philosopher Giovanni Gentile, nominated minister of Public Education by Mussolini (Charnitzky Reference Charnitzky1996; Di Sieno Reference Di Sieno, Di Sieno, Guerraggio and Nastasi1998; Galfrè Reference Galfrè2000; Giacardi Reference Giacardi2006; Guerraggio and Nastasi Reference Guerraggio and Nastasi2005, 85–90; Turi [Reference Turi1995] Reference Turi2006). The initial measures were taken between November and December 1922. In this phase, Gentile began to reorganize the high ranks of his ministry to strengthen control on the chain of command (Charnitzky Reference Charnitzky1996, 103–114; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 116). During the course of 1923 provisions were issued regarding the various levels of education, starting from middle- and high-school (May 6, 1923); the decrees regarding the elementary school and the university system were enacted on September 30 and October 1, 1923.
Two main purposes of Gentile's reform were to favor humanities studies within the education of the ruling class and to limit access to university studies, creating school programs intended for students from lower social classes. Latin was mandatory, with a few exceptions; the teaching hours devoted to philosophy increased; on the contrary, there was a drastic penalization of scientific culture in the middle and high school levels. Mathematics classes were coupled with physics classes and the teaching hours of both subjects were reduced. To curtail state expenses Italian universities were divided in two main categories: only some institutions were granted full public financial support; 14 universities (among those, the Polytechnics of Turin and Milan) would be entitled to a partial government grant on a sliding scale (Charnitzky Reference Charnitzky1996, 131–132).
As several scholars have pointed out (Paoloni Reference Paoloni1990, 110; Israel Reference Israel1998; Linguerri Reference Linguerri2005, 184–185; Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007, 188–189; Paoloni and Simili Reference Paoloni, Simili, Scazzieri and Simili2008, 140; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 115–122), Volterra opposed Gentile's Reform in every institutional office where he could make himself heard: in the Senate, participating in the meetings of the dissenting senators, and in the Accademia dei Lincei, where he assembled and presided over a Commission that included Guido Castelnuovo as speaker, and which produced a report strongly critical of the Minister's proposals (ANL 1923).
Another feature of the reform was the tribute paid to Catholicism, defined as the “foundation and crowning” of primary education; mandatory Catholic religious instruction was reintroduced in elementary school and the crucifix was put back in the classrooms.Footnote 1 This fell within the “policy of deference and concessions” (De Felice Reference De Felice1966, 498) toward the Vatican carried out by Mussolini in that phase. But it also marked a change of direction. Following the pronouncement of Mussolini on November 16, 1922 (“All religious faiths will be respected, with special regard to the dominant one, which is Catholicism”), Catholicism was recognized as the “dominant” religion of the State: in the words of Michele Sarfatti, “the new Fascist regime thus annulled the spirit of equality that had characterized much of the legislation subsequent to 1848” (Sarfatti [Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2000] Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2006, 43).
This aspect raised uneasiness and alarm in the Jewish milieu, because it was a clear act of discrimination against non-Catholic students as well as teachers (ibid., 44–46). During 1923 a profound concern about the fate of the Jewish teachers was expressed by the socialist philosopher Felice Momigliano, who committed suicide in April 1924 (Cavaglion Reference Cavaglion1988, 199) and by the linguist Benvenuto Terracini (Terracini Reference Terracini1923), both of them Jews. On September 23, the chief rabbi of Rome, Angelo Sacerdoti, predicted: “It is permissible to believe that not too many years from now Jews will be barred from teaching in public schools” (Sacerdoti Reference Sacerdoti1923).Footnote 2 And in his speech in the Senate, February 7, 1925, the Jewish jurist Vittorio Polacco went so far as to compare the loss of civil equality and religious tolerance to a “moral pogrom” (Polacco Reference Polacco1925, 13; Sarfatti [Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2000] Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2006, 46; De Napoli Reference De Napoli2013, 599–601; Pavan Reference Pavan2013, 134–138).Footnote 3
§2.2 After the Matteotti Murder
1924 was the year of the definitive crisis of the liberal state and of the transformation of Fascism into dictatorship; after the kidnapping and murder of the Socialist member of Parliament Giacomo Matteotti on June 10, 1924 (Canali Reference Canali2004 and Canali Reference Canali2009), Volterra was among the 21 senators who gave a vote of no confidence to the government on June 26, 1924 (Italia. Senato Reference Italia1924, 133–134; Zani Reference Zani, Orsini and Nicolosi2008, 30).Footnote 4 Even Benedetto Croce voted in favor, maintaining that with this vote Mussolini would be kept under control and “much that is good” of what Fascism had done could be saved, as he explained July 10 in an interview with the Giornale d'Italia (Dell'Erba Reference Dell'Erba1924; De Felice Reference De Felice1966, 652–654; Zunino [Reference Zunino1991] Reference Zunino2000, 119–120; Zani Reference Zani, Gentile and Lanchester2010, 135). Still in July 1924, although increasingly doubtful, Croce continued to hope that Fascism might be “a bridge toward the restoration of a more severe liberal regime, within a stronger State.”Footnote 5 Besides, in 1923 Croce had made a public defence of Gentile's Reform (Rizi Reference Rizi2003, 52–55).
In his Souvenirs d'apprentissage, remembering the months spent in Rome on a scholarship between 1925 and 1926 and his encounter with Volterra, the French mathematician André Weil wrote: “Arriving in Rome . . . the renowned Vito Volterra extended me a fatherly welcome. Though probably a less universal mathematician than Hadamard, he was an admirable man in all respects. The king had named him Senator for life; he and Croce were the two senators who, until the bitter end, come what may, voted against the Fascists” (Weil Reference Weil and Gage1992, 47).Footnote 6 But with his vote of no confidence in 1924 Volterra preceded Croce on the path of parliamentary opposition to the regime.
On October 31, 1924, Volterra was asked to join the first meeting of the Union of Liberal and Democratic Forces promoted by the antifascist member of Parliament Giovanni Amendola, to be held in Rome on November 8, and to participate in this political initiative. In his telegram of reply addressed to Amendola, Volterra expressed his “profound sympathy” for the new opposition movement, although he regretted that circumstances prevented him joining the meeting.Footnote 7 As a matter of fact, Volterra's name appeared among the signatories of the appeal launched by the Unione Nazionale and published in the daily Il Mondo on November 18, 1924.Footnote 8 In May of 1925, he was also among the signatories of the Manifesto of the Antifascist Intellectuals written by Croce (by then a staunch opponent to Fascism) and published in the daily Il Mondo,Footnote 9 in response to the Manifesto of the Fascist Intellectuals written by Gentile (Papa Reference Papa1958; Rizi Reference Rizi2003, 87–91; Turi [Reference Turi1995] Reference Turi2006, 376–379; Gennaro Reference Gennaro2013).
In June of 1925, at the annual meeting of the Accademia dei Lincei, Volterra made his final public address in Italy (Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007, 194). In that moment, as president of the Lincei and president of the National Council of Research he held the most prestigious scientific positions in the country. Speaking in front of the King and the Queen, the great mathematician rendered homage to the contribution of Italian scientists to the life of the nation and to the victorious outcome of the war; he spoke positively of the foundation of scientific societies “free from any State interference and having a scientifically democratic character”Footnote 10 – with rather eloquent critical reference to the changed political orientation under Fascism. But the regime was no longer inclined to tolerate demonstrations of independence and criticism at the summit of the national scientific institutions.
§2.3 The Accademia d'Italia vs. the Accademia dei Lincei
In January of 1926 Mussolini instituted the Accademia d'Italia, a new national academy conceived as a docile instrument of the cultural politics of the regime (Paoloni and Simili Reference Paoloni and Simili2004; Turi Reference Turi and Zunino2008). The Accademia dei Lincei – which with the election of Volterra as president and the criticism directed at Gentile's reform had made a significant show of independence – was progressively deprived of authority and power in deference to the Accademia d'Italia; finally, in 1939 it was absorbed by the rival institution. Fearing that his presence at the summit of the Accademia dei Lincei might compromise its destiny, Volterra thought seriously about resigning (Paoloni Reference Paoloni1990, 166–169; Paoloni and Simili Reference Paoloni and Simili2004, 159–160; D'Agostino Reference D'Agostino2010, 234; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 126). He retraced his steps, however, after having received letters from various associates and friends, among them that of Carlo Somigliana, who on February 7, 1926, expressed to Volterra solidarity on his part and also in the name of Senator Francesco Ruffini. Nevertheless, Volterra's presidency of the Lincei ended a few months later, at the expiration of his mandate. In these circumstances a reelection of Volterra, an opponent senator and signer of Croce's Manifesto, was inconceivable.
§2.4 Removal from the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
In 1927 the term as president of the CNR also expired. Volterra was replaced by Gugliemo Marconi, who was then also nominated president of the Accademia d'Italia in 1930, and thus assumed control of the two most representative Italian scientific institutions at an international level. The great mathematician, however, had maintained various appointments as delegate to international scientific bodies, a fact that the regime did not intend to tolerate.
In March 1928 the board of directors of the CNR suggested to the Foreign Minister (again, Mussolini himself) that Volterra be removed from his post as member (and President) of the International Commission for the Scientific Exploration of the Mediterranean (Commissione internazionale per l'esplorazione scientifica del mare Mediterraneo),Footnote 11 and in general from all the international commissions for which he served as delegate for Italy, given that “the attitude of senator Volterra had become increasingly harsh towards the National Government, and he makes no secret of it.”Footnote 12 The letter was signed by vice-president Amedeo Giannini (Santoro Reference Santoro1999; Melis Reference Melis2000), a jurist and a diplomat, delegate for the Ministry of Foreign affairs and designated substitute for the presidency in case of absence or incapacity of Marconi. The determination to remove Volterra from his international appointments unfolded in a theatrical manner during the course of the assembly of the International Council of Research that took place in Brussels on July 13, 1928.
The documentation from the CNR archiveFootnote 13 and the transcript of the IRC session (IRC Reference Schuster1928, 8–9) allow for a reconstruction of how it occurred. At the moment of voting for renewal of the appointments of the Executive board (the president was Émile Picard, colleague and friend of Volterra (Mazliak and Tazzioli Reference Mazliak and Tazzioli2009), the Italian delegate, Amedeo Giannini (supported by CNR Secretary General, Magrini) opposed the reelection of the great mathematician to the vice-presidency, claiming that Volterra – no longer being the official representative of Italy – could not even take part in the Executive board. Giannini went so far as to define the possible reelection of Volterra “illegal,” and he announced his own negative vote. After the Italian representative had received assurances that he would be placed on the Commission charged with studying the modifications to the statutes of the Council, the vote proceeded by a show of hands and Volterra was elected member of the Executive board by a large majority. The objections of Giannini were completely ignored. In addition, Volterra was nominated along with him as delegate (for Italy!) to the Commission for the revision of the statutes (IRC Reference Schuster1928, 8–9; St. John Reference St. John1928, 205–206).
Back from Brussels, Giannini himself urged the General Secretary of the IRC to quote verbatim his opposition to Volterra's reelection in the official printed report. While Schuster suggested to play it down, simply reporting that “M. Giannini s'oppose à l’élection de M. Volterra comme Vice-Président pour la raison qu'il a cessé d’être délégué.”Footnote 14 With bitterness, but also with a touch of sarcasm, Volterra gave a synopsis of the events in a letter that he addressed from Brussels to Bonaldo Stringher, governor of the Banca d'Italia and member of the directorate of the CNR, after the IRC assembly:
The International Council of Research renewed all appointments, whether for those who were present, delegates or not, as well as for those who were not even here participating. I am here participating as I told you before my departure in my character as vice president of the International council, a job that does not have any relationship to the national institutions nor to the delegations. Upon my renewal that had been put forward with all the others, the two Italian delegates were opposed as they were also opposed to my participation in a study commission on the regulations. It is something that I don't remember ever having happened before and that caught everyone unexpectedly and that the two delegates were unable to justify or to give me any cautionary warning. The delegates are Giannini and Magrini. It seems to me that the Council of Research ought to send delegates who have a bit of scientific credibility and tact, to a meeting where there were presidents and representatives of the principal academies of Europe and America. The same thing naturally would have happened even if I were not participating, given that all the appointments, as I told you and as has always been the habit were renewed. (Emphasis added)Footnote 15
Shortly after, in September 1928, Volterra was awarded the Great Officer of the Legion of Honour by the French government, in acknowledgment of his work as president of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures.Footnote 16
§2.5 Under Surveillance by the Regime: The Conferences at the Institut Henri Poincaré
Some months later, Volterra was invited to lecture at the newly established Institut Henri Poincaré (hereafter IHP). The Institut was founded in 1928 on the initiative of Émile Borel with the financial support of the Rockefeller's International Education Board and of baron Edmond de Rothschild. During the 1930s the IHP played a role in supporting refugees from Nazi Germany and scientists who experienced political difficulties in their own country as well (Siegmund-Schultze Reference Siegmund-Schultze2001 and Siegmund-Schultze Reference Siegmund-Schultze2009; Catellier and Mazliak Reference Catellier and Mazliak2012).
This invitation through the years became a fixed appointment, to which were added other international duties for the illustrious mathematician. But Volterra's frequent journeys to Paris catalyzed the suspicions of the Fascist authorities against him, to the point where in March of 1930 the chief of police forbade his leaving the country. The prohibition was revoked two months later, thanks to the intervention of the president of the Senate.
Volterra's collaboration with the new French mathematics institute was announced as well by Maurice Fréchet in an article published in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society at the beginning of 1929 (Fréchet Reference Fréchet1929):
The activities of the Institute Henri Poincaré will not be confined, however, to the new courses. It aims to be international in scope. The attendance at these courses is very cosmopolitan indeed. But the Institute will also have an international staff of lecturers. In addition to the permanent courses, single lectures or brief series of lectures will be given by distinguished scientists. Professors Vito Volterra of Rome, and de Donder of Bruxelles, have already promised their cooperation.
In order to go to Paris, however, Volterra first needed authorization for his departure; he reported therefore to the authorities to renew his passport. On December 19, 1928, the police headquarters of Rome informed the Director General of Police of the request, making it known that Volterra “as is noted, is a liberal opponent and, furthermore, he voted against the law on the Grand Council of Fascism.”Footnote 17 Volterra, in fact, had been among the few senators who on November 15, 1928, had voted against the law on the arrangement and attributions of the Grand Council of Fascism (Italia. Senato Reference Italia1929, 11155–11156), best known as the law with which the Grand Council “has become the supreme governing body in the Constitution” (Salvemini Reference Salvemini1929, 299). Before that, on May 12, 1928, with 45 other senators including Croce, Einaudi, Ruffini, and Wollenborg, Volterra had voted against a motion for approving the criteria of an electoral reform that would have favored the Fascists (Italia. Senato Reference Italia1928, 10254–10256; Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 90). On the phonogram of the police headquarters someone added in pencil: “He is among the signers of the Croce Manifesto” and “He is included among the opposition senators.”Footnote 18 The authorization of the passport renewal, in the end, was given by Mussolini himself, who occupied the role of Interior Minister as well: the General Police Administration was under his authority, and he had the last word on these matters, especially regarding a scientist of international renown like Volterra, who was also a well-known antifascist.
According to a ministry circular from April 16, 1927, n. 4919, Volterra had to receive authorization also from the Ministry of National Education in order to depart. On January 19, 1929, therefore, he presented himself to the chancellor of the University of Rome, specifying that he had already obtained clearance from the Foreign Ministry.Footnote 19
It was not, however, just the Italian authorities who concerned themselves with Volterra's departure for Paris. On December 26, 1928, the French embassy in Rome sent a verbal note to the Italian Foreign Ministry, to communicate that the Institut Poincaré had invited the great mathematician to lecture in Paris at the beginning of the following year. The French Ministry of Public Education had charged the Embassy with “insisting” with the Italian government until it should give its authorization and allow Volterra to hold his lectures. On January 16th, by order of the head of the government, the Italian Foreign Ministry responded assuring that Volterra had been authorized to go to France.Footnote 20
The CNR, meanwhile, continued to pay close attention to Volterra's activities and his relations with the international scientific world, paying particular attention to the French milieu, because of his frequent journeys to Paris and also because many antifascist leaders were based in the French capital. Among the confidential hand-written notes of the secretary general, Giovanni Magrini, conserved among the papers of the Marconi Presidency, there are some sheets of great interest dating back to 1929 (Simili Reference Simili2001a, 117; Linguerri Reference Linguerri2005, 222).Footnote 21 Many of these annotations are dripping with anti-Semitism, concerning the zoologist Paolo Enriques (“he is a Jew, and has all the characteristics and the defects of the race”),Footnote 22 the mathematician Guido Castelnuovo (“one of the best known Jewish-Freemason representatives of the international scientific world”),Footnote 23 and Volterra (“he was made a grand master by the International Freemasons, like Einstein”)Footnote 24 : the close connection between Freemasonry and Judaism was a stereotype in Fascist propaganda, before and after the law banning secret societies and Freemasonry, which was enacted in 1925 (Vannoni Reference Vannoni1980; Conti Reference Conti2003; Fedele Reference Fedele2005).
Volterra in particular was rebuked for not having yet resigned “from the post of member of the Executive Board of the International Council of Research, where he continues to carry out his antifascist activity.”Footnote 25 According to these same notes (Magrini based them on what was reported by an ill identified “informer”), Volterra allegedly continued to carry out this activity in Paris, with the support of French colleagues, among whom were Paul Painlevé and Émile Picard.
In the last meeting of the intellectuals, the great Freemason dignitaries, in Paris under the presidency of Painlevé, it was decided that a special demonstration be organized in favor of the noted Italian antifascist Volterra for his militant antifascism. It was established that he be entrusted with the solemn inaugural lesson of the Institut Henri Poincaré, which will be held in the presence of the highest offices of the French State.Footnote 26
According to the information provided by the unidentified Spanish informer (“old friend of Italy, even though a great Freemason dignitary”), during this meeting – on which unfortunately we lack further information – Picard allegedly repeated “it must be sabotaged,” perhaps with reference to some initiatives or candidates sponsored by Fascist government.Footnote 27 Among these papers a newspaper clipping was inserted (without indication of the heading that had published the news) that sent word from Paris that Volterra's inaugural discourse was on the program for February 25, 1929. The notice was from the Messaggero of Rome from February 23 (“All'Istituto ‘Henry Poicaré’ la prolusione del Prof. Vito Volterra”). Tullio Levi-Civita pointed it out to Volterra on February 27, rejoicing in the fact that the leak to press presented the signers in a good light against the intentions of the censors.Footnote 28
At the Institut Poincaré Volterra lectured “on the mathematical theory of biological fluctuations” (Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007, 195).Footnote 29 In 1931 these lectures were published in the volume Leçons sur la théorie mathématique de la lutte pour la vie, edited by Marcel Brelot.Footnote 30
§2.6. Exclusion from the Accademia d'Italia
Mussolini meanwhile was pursuing the fascistization of Italian high culture. In March of 1929 the head of the government chose the first 30 academicians of Italy. At the last minute, the name of Federigo Enriques (who was a Jew, but not an antifascist) was replaced by that of Francesco Severi. Severi had been among the signers of the Croce Manifesto in 1925, but subsequently he had drawn closer to Fascism. On January 31, 1929, shortly before the nomination, he addressed a long letter to Mussolini, in which he declared his adherence to the regime (Capristo Reference Capristo2003; Nastasi and Tazzioli Reference Nastasi and Tazzioli2005 and Reference Turi2006; Guerraggio and Nastasi Reference Guerraggio and Nastasi2005). As a matter of fact, since 1929 the choice of candidates had been based not only on political grounds, but it was also unofficially restricted and barred to Jewish scholars and scientists (Goodstein Reference Goodstein1984; Capristo Reference Capristo2001 and Reference Capristo2003).
On June 1, 1929, from Paris, the bulletin Italia – published by the Italian Anti-Fascist Coalition [Concentrazione antifascista italiana] – commented with apprehension on the situation of the Jews in Italy a few months after the signing of the Concordat between the Catholic Church and the Fascist State and as an example of the developing discrimination, it made reference precisely to the recent nominations to the Accademia d'Italia and to the exclusion of “the two most eminent Italian mathematicians,” Volterra and Levi-Civita, both Jewish: “The two most eminent Italian mathematicians of international renown, Volterra and Tullio Levi-Civita, both Jewish, had been excluded from the Academy of Italy, which had been recently established in the likeness of the French Academy.”Footnote 31
On November 23, 1929, Guido Fubini referred to Levi-Civita's exclusion from the Accademia d'Italia (in his letter he called it “an enormity”) and linked this fact to the “well known bias” against the Jewish candidates.Footnote 32 In the subsequent years Severi supported unsuccessfully Levi-Civita's candidacy to the academy, although Levi-Civita himself was perfectly aware that there were “two objections on my name” (Capristo Reference Capristo2003, 250), i.e. the political (his early antifascist stance) and the “racial” one.
In a letter to the Jewish physiologist Carlo Foà dated March 8, 1932, Severi himself reported that the president of the Accademia d'Italia, Guglielmo Marconi, told the members of the Academy that Jewish candidates “continued” to be ostracized (Capristo Reference Capristo2003, 251; Fabre Reference Fabre2003, 205). At the same time the candidacy of the Jewish archeologist Alessandro Della Seta (also Jewish, but not an antifascist) was rejected by Mussolini, according to the testimony of Ugo Ojetti (Capristo Reference Capristo2001, 9–10).
Evidence of an anti-Jewish prejudice and a veto – undoubtedly Mussolini's – of appointments of Jewish members in the most representative cultural institution of the regime can be also found in several other documents, including the minutes of academy meetings and the personal notes of President Guglielmo Marconi, who marked the names of Jewish candidates with an “E,” the initial letter of the Italian word “ebreo” (“Jew”).Footnote 33
§2.7 Under Surveillance by the Regime: In Paris, 1930–1931
On November 6, 1929, Volterra again requested authorization to go to the French capital in January of 1930 to hold another series of lectures at the Institut Poincaré. His request again was received, and again with the consent of Mussolini, also due to the fact that the information requested from the Italian Embassy showed that during his last stay in Paris “Prof. Vito Volterra. . . did not engage in political activity.”Footnote 34
On March 8, 1930, however, upon his return from France, Volterra was called into the offices of the Director General of Police at the request of commissary chief Guido Leto (future chief of the Political Police), to be interrogated about his presumptive contacts in the antifascist milieu in Paris.Footnote 35 According to what he recounted in his report to the chief of Police Arturo Bocchini, Leto revealed to Volterra that “according to information received by the Ministry, he must have been the instigator or, at least the person who furnished the necessary data for the compilation of the article published in number 9 of La Libertà with the title ‘No: silence is better’.”Footnote 36 In view of the incriminating article, Volterra had
curtly and clearly declared that during his stay in Paris (7-27 of last February) he had absolutely not had contact with the representatives of the Concentrazione and much less had he spoken of political affairs with compatriots. He added that his very well known undeniable patriotic merits would never have suggested to him to mix subjects reflecting the Monarchy with considerations of a political character and he terminated his brief declaration, confirming in a terse fashion that he had by no means seen the ex-deputies Treves, Turati, Modigliani, etc. in Paris.Footnote 37
The article in question, published on the front page of La Libertà March 1, 1930, reported the “Roman impressions” of one of “our friends”; these underlined the meaning of implicit but covert antifascist protest taken on by the honorific tributes in Rome and Turin for the royal princes Marie-José and Umberto of Savoy on the occasion of their wedding, celebrated in January:
In Rome for five days the portraits of the “duce” disappeared as did the garish and shiny insignia, the mercenary fanfare kept quiet. The people having taken charge of directing protocol meant that the police force that was nesting in the streets, hiding in the doorways, in the emptied apartments, on the roofs, in the sewers with the pretext of watching over the safety of the royals in reality protected but one man, Mussolini. In Turin the royal residence was opened for a great reception, given by the Duke of Genoa to the nobility, the clergy, the bureaucrats, the armed forces and the invitation specified: Black shirts are not admitted.Footnote 38
After this “interrogation” – from which Volterra had fruitlessly sought to exempt himself, invoking his senatorial status – the mathematician was released. But this same day the chief of Police communicated to all the prefects that Volterra's extraterritorial departure, regardless of whether he held a valid passport, was nonetheless to be hindered.Footnote 39 And from April 17, 1930, his correspondence was placed under control.Footnote 40 In June, once again departing for Paris to preside over a meeting of the Bureau, Volterra was promptly stopped at the border; he succeeded in unblocking the situation and in departing only by telegraphing to the president of the Senate, Luigi Federzoni.Footnote 41
The surveillance of Volterra during his stays in France continued even in the succeeding years. On August 15, 1931, the information service of the Italian Embassy in Paris reported to the Director General of Police that Volterra
has allegedly had contact here with the directors of the local Antifascist Concentration and he would have demonstrated his opposition to the Fascist Regime. In the session of the International Council of Research he would have had an incident with the official delegate of the Italian Government. He would have in fact, protested the fact that Senator Volterra was invited to sit at the table of the President, affirming that Volterra is an enemy of the National Government. It is requested that you forward Senator Volterra's complete identity profile and that you send, if possible, one of his photographs.Footnote 42
Another representative episode of political boycott by Fascist authorities against Volterra can be traced back to the first half of 1931. In its meeting of May 8, the CNR directorate crossed out his name from the list of possible Italian members to be included in the Patronage Committee (Comité de patronage) of the International Conference on Electricity, scheduled for July 1932 in Paris.Footnote 43 As we know from two letters addressed by Volterra himself to Paul JanetFootnote 44 and Émile BorelFootnote 45 on June 18, 1931, Volterra's candidacy was proposed to the Italian Electrotechnics Committee (Comitato elettrotecnico italiano) by Janet, professor of Electrotechnics at the University of Paris and president of the organizing committee of the conference.Footnote 46 On May 7, 1931, Luigi Lombardi, president of the Italian Electrotechnics Committee (which was under the authority of the CNR) addressed the proposed name list (including the name of Volterra) to the CNR directorate for approval. Volterra was the only candidate to be refused. The reply to the Italian Electrotechnics Committee, dated 19 May 1931, was signed by CNR president Marconi.Footnote 47
Writing to Borel on June 18, 1931,Footnote 48 Volterra was perfectly aware of the fact that the CNR, “which is run by the government” had given its negative advice about his candidacy. However, he also noted that as president of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures he did not need the approval of Italian authorities to be included among the members of the patronage board of the conference, and asked Borel to point this out to Janet. On the same day he also wrote to Janet stressing this point.Footnote 49 In the end, Volterra's name was included among the members of the Comité, and furthermore for that of France!Footnote 50 Clearly, Volterra's French colleagues supported him in bypassing the CNR's veto.
3. Confrontation and Protest: The Refusal of the University Oath of 1931 and the Dismissal from University
In 1931 Mussolini decided to bring the university into line with the Fascist program, imposing on the professors an oath of loyalty not only to the King, to the Constitution and to the laws, but also to the Fascist regime. Yet again, the instigator behind the regimentation of the Italian intellectual sphere was the philosopher Giovanni Gentile (Sasso Reference Sasso1986; Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000; Turi [Reference Turi1995] Reference Turi2006). Royal decree n. 1227 entitled Dispositions on higher education was issued on August 28, 1931, and published in the Gazzetta Ufficiale on October 8. Article 18 prescribed the new form of the oath, containing explicit reference to the regime. A circular from the National Education Ministry then stated that acting instructors and tenured professors should formalize their adherence by November in front of the chancellors of their respective universities and in the presence of two witnesses.
Volterra was among the very few Italian professors – the only one among Italian mathematicians – who refused to take the oath.Footnote 51 All those who defied the decree were then barred from teaching. On November 18, 1931, responding to the convocation letter from the chancellor of the University of Rome, Pietro De Francisci, the great mathematician explained his decision with dry words: “My political ideas are well known, though they appear solely from my parliamentary conduct, which is however unquestionable on the strength of article 51 of the fundamental Statute of the Kingdom. Your Excellency will therefore understand that I cannot in conscience adhere to your invitation expressed in the letter dated the 18th of this month concerning the oath of professors.”Footnote 52 On December 31 Volterra received word of his release from service, “for incompatibility with the general political directives of the government,” beginning January 1, 1932.Footnote 53 Thus ended his teaching career in the Italian university, which had lasted nearly fifty years.
Among those who Volterra told of the loss of his academic post was the eminent mineralogist Alfred Lacroix, permanent secretary of the Académie des Sciences of Paris (Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 93n). In a letter dated December 28, 1931, among other things, Volterra wrote to him about just this:
You probably learned from the press that I have lost my position as professor. It happened just on the occasion of my academic jubilee! I refused to take an oath of loyalty imposed by the Fascist government to the Italian professors, above all because I will not compromise my principles. Such an oath would have moreover limited my political liberty as Senator that was guaranteed to me by the statute of the kingdom.Footnote 54
He wrote similar words to the American mathematician Griffith Evans on January 7, 1932.Footnote 55
§3.1. Demonstrations of Solidarity from France
Many attestations of distress, esteem, and affection were addressed to Volterra by his foreign correspondents, when they learned of the news from the papers. As Marcel Brelot wrote on December 26 from Berlin, the Italian government's decision to deprive him of his post “surprised everyone abroad.”Footnote 56 Among the letters he received from French mathematicians, three will be cited here.
On December 6, 1931 Joseph PérèsFootnote 57 wrote from Marseille:
After reading the news in the press, I guess you are very worried, and I wish to express my great affection for you. If something can relieve your sorrow, it would be the respectful affection of all mathematicians who were your students, who perfectly know that you hold a remarkable position in the current development of mathematics by means of new contributions, those which constitute the most important scientific work existing today; of all people who enjoyed your teaching, your books, your scientific essays, and who have been acquainted with the man, admire him and love him. I apologize for having raised this question at the margin of our habitual mathematical discussions, and I don't want to insist; however, I wanted to express to you all my affection.Footnote 58
On December 26, 1931 Émile Picard wrote from Paris:
I read in the Temps that you and some other renown professors had been threatened with losing your jobs, but I hoped that such a fate would not fall upon you. The regime of emperor Napoleon III had been better inspired, when it exonerated Cauchy from taking the oath. But alas! we live in sad times, and in some respects Bolshevism and Mussolinism are alike. It might be, at least for some time, the form of government to which our civilizations are inclined to. So international morality is going to disappear at all; there will be nothing but the law of the most strong.Footnote 59
On January 21, 1932, Paul LabérenneFootnote 60 wrote from Chartres:
It is with the utmost astonishment and grief that I have learned of your dismissal. I know that Fascist government aimed at imposing an oath of fidelity to university professors; however, I could not believe that a power which defines itself as «italianissimo» might ill-treat one of its most eminent scientists, of whom every country can be proud of. Anyway, let me say that I understand and admire you for your refusal!Footnote 61
Moreover, as Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova had pointed out (Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova Reference Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova1998, 207–208),Footnote 62 Jacques Hadamard tried to help Volterra in obtaining a position abroad. As he reported to Volterra on November 8, 1933, Hadamard suggested to the Egyptian University to call the Italian mathematician. However, this attempt then failed, because the university had already sent an invitation to another professor.Footnote 63
§3.2. Echoes of Volterra's Refusal in the French Press
The news of the refusal and consequent dismissal of Volterra and the others not swearing the oath was spread not only by the Italian press, but also by the principal organs of the foreign press—obviously, from an opposite point of view (Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 205–266). The Italian press sarcastically highlighted the fact that only few professors refused to take the oath, and rejected with animosity the foreign protests against Fascist government. Furthermore, some Fascist newspapers did not miss the opportunity to highlight the fact that among professors who did not swear there were many Jews, including Volterra.Footnote 64 In France this news received ample space in the newspapers of Italian antifascist exiles as well as in national titles of various orientations.
§3.2.1. The Press of the Antifascist Coalition (Concentrazione antifascista)
La Libertà, the newspaper published in Paris by the Antifascist Coalition (Concentrazione antifascista) (Fedele Reference Fedele1976), dedicated the front page on October 15 to the announcement of the oath: “A new embarrassment: The latest strike for the fascistization of the Universities: Oath of fidelity to the Fascist regime imposed on the professors.”Footnote 65 On December 10, the paper returned to the subject, listing – with some errorsFootnote 66 – those not swearing the oath and giving an account of the international petition addressed to the International Institute for International Cooperation in Paris against the Italian government's initiative: “Against the Fascist oath for Italian professors: An international protest by intellectuals”Footnote 67 (Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 220–245; Signori Reference Signori, Angelini and Tesoro2006; Castro Reference Castro and Colombo2011, 118–119). Publication of the names of those who had joined the petition in various European countries (such as Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom) continued on December 17 and 24. In France several professors, writers and politicians joined.Footnote 68 Among them were Victor Basch and Paul Langevin (Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 227). In the United States 180 professors joined the petition (ibid.), among them the mathematicians George David Birkhoff and Marston Morse (Signori Reference Signori, Angelini and Tesoro2006, 577). The petition and the lists of signers were then sent to Geneva to the International Commission for International Cooperation (consulting body of the Society of Nations), which did not follow it up, however, maintaining that the oath was a question of internal politics under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Italian government. For the rest, in November, even an appeal on the part of Nobel Laureate Albert Einstein to the Italian Minister of Justice Alfredo Rocco proved useless (Polverini Reference Polverini1991; Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 21–23; Linguerri and Simili Reference Linguerri and Simili2008, 37–39, 172–173). In his letter to Rocco, Einstein wrote: “The burden of my request is that you should please advise Signor Mussolini to spare the flower of Italy's intellect this humiliation,” that is the oath of fidelity (Einstein [1934] Reference Einstein, Seelig and Bargmann1954).
L’Italia, the bulletin of the “Concentrazione antifascista” directed by Filippo Turati and published in French, announced the oath in the issue from November 1, 1931, with the article “University at the service of Fascism: The oath of fidelity imposed on professors.”Footnote 69 On December 11 the paper published (here, too, with some mistakes) the names of those not swearing, Volterra among them: “The reaction of the most prominent professors against the Fascist oath.”Footnote 70 On January 1, 1932, with the article “International protest of professors against the Fascist oath”Footnote 71 the bulletin illustrated the international initiative.
§3.2.2. The French Press
In L’Ère Nouvelle of Paris, “organ of the leftist cartel,” three front-page articles from October 19, December 8 and 15, by Arturo Labriola – politician and economist who fled Italy to take refuge in France in 1927Footnote 72 – harshly stigmatized the oath and praised those who refused it; among the latter was mentioned “senator Volterra, one of the most renowned European mathematicians.”Footnote 73
On October 30, the journalist and socialist politician Luigi Campolonghi – exile in France since 1923 and president of the Italian League for Human Rights (Lega italiana dei diritti dell'uomo) (Vial Reference Vial1986; Baglio Reference Baglio, Petricioli and Cherubini2007a and Baglio Reference Baglio, Baglio, Fedele and Schirripa2007b) – wrote an editorial for the newspaper L'Oeuvre on the occasion of the ninth anniversary of the March on Rome;Footnote 74 in his article he also referred to the oath of loyalty imposed to the Italian professors and bitterly concluded:
Fascism is not only an Italian disease, it is also . . . an international danger. The whole world knows this. However, once again, what people do to avoid that the Italian disease become a worldwide disease?Footnote 75
On December 20, in the socialist newspaper La Volonté, Victor Basch – professor of aesthetics at the Sorbonne and president of the League for Human Rights (Ligue de Droits de l'Homme) – stigmatized the oath required by “Mussolini's despicable tyranny,” defining it as “an attack against the Spirit,” that would result in “muzzling all mouths, shading all brains.”Footnote 76
In Le Populaire, “daily of the Socialist Party” directed by Léon Blum, Oreste Rosenfeld in the section ‘News from abroad’ dedicated a long article on December 26, 1931, to the oath, entitled “‘Mussolini is always right!’ The oath imposed on scholars and professors.”Footnote 77 Rosenfeld had sympathetic words for the professors who had bent to the dictates of the regime “victims of the Fascist terror, prisoners of Mussolini” and vice versa he paid tribute to those who did not take the oath, to their courage, to the ability to sacrifice themselves for the idea of liberty and for dignity. Rosenfeld returned briefly to the subject on December 29, in a notice entitled “The Fascist oath,” in which he gave an account of the international petition.
In La Dépêche of Toulouse, Célestin Bouglé, professor of political economy at the Sorbonne, also contributed a front page article on December 28, 1931, in the section “Men and Things.”Footnote 78 Bouglé recalled that the oath was an “old story for us. Our fathers experienced similar a situation under the Second Empire.”Footnote 79 The Italian professors had found themselves confronting a serious dilemma. The majority “because of their weakness more than by conviction, raised the arm while bending their head.” A haggard minority, on the other hand, had chosen to resist. So did Vito Volterra, “the outstanding mathematician who lectured last year at the Institute Henri Poincaré,” and represented “the honour of intellectual Italy.”Footnote 80
In conveying the news in Le Temps on December 17, 1931, even the Swiss journalist Paul Gentizon, “not at all hostile to the dictatorship” (Goetz [Reference Goetz and Melissari1993] Reference Goetz and Melissari2000, 250) wrote that “Fascism put an end to that freedom of university education that the most developed countries consider a spiritual achievement, and have inscribed among their fundamental rights. Henceforth, in Italy, professors will be obliged to teach only what is politically agreeable.”Footnote 81 Among those refusing to submit to the moral and intellectual coercion of the regime, Gentizon mentioned “senator V. Volterra, eminent mathematician, who was invited on several occasions to lecture at the Sorbonne.”
§3.3. In Paris, after the Dismissal
In the autumn of 1931, Volterra was again invited to lecture at the Institut Poincaré at the beginning of the following year. Once again (on November 23) the French academic bodies solicited the mediation of the French Ministry of Public Education to intervene on their behalf with the Italian government, to facilitate their invitation of several Italian professors.Footnote 82 On March 9, 1932, the Ministry replied, informing the French academic authorities that the Italians gave their authorization for the acting professors, while Volterra “who was ousted from university on political grounds, left for Paris at the end of last January.”Footnote 83
§3.4. Refusal of the Oath in 1934 and Expulsion from Some Italian Academies
With the Royal Decree of September 21, 1933, n. 1333 (made into law January 12, 1934), a mandatory oath was imposed as well on members of the Italian academies and scientific societies. Again in this context Volterra refused and was consequently expelled from the Accademia dei Lincei, the Italian Society of Sciences known as of the Forty (Società Italiana delle Scienze detta dei XL), and the Academy of Sciences of Turin, among others. Some other institutions, by contrast, continued to number him among their associates even after 1934 (Capristo Reference Capristo2002). On December 24, 1934, in a postcard to his friend, the American astronomer George E. Hale, Volterra wrote: “If you no longer see my name among the members of the Accademia dei Lincei, do not think I am dead!”Footnote 84
On the other hand, in 1936 Pope Pius XI nominated Volterra member of the newly established Pontifical Academy of Sciences (Kleinlerer Reference Kleinlerer1942; Marini-Bettòlo Reference Marini-Bettòlo1987; Paoloni Reference Paoloni1990, Fig. VII.3; Ladous Reference Ladous1994; Nastasi and Tazzioli Reference Nastasi and Tazzioli1999, 421–458; Nastasi and Tazzioli Reference Nastasi and Tazzioli2000, 174–175; Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 149–153).
4. The Last Years: Facing the Anti-Semitic Persecution
After a long and convoluted preparatory phase that included confidential and selective exclusions, violent press campaigns, ambiguous announcements made and subsequently denied (Fabre Reference Fabre2003; Fabre Reference Fabre2005; and Fabre [Reference Fabre, Miller and Zuccotti2004] Reference Fabre, Miller and Zuccotti2006), in July of 1938 the Fascist government officially inaugurated its anti-Jewish politics. In early September the first decrees were issued; in November further provisions followed that outlined a policy of severe persecution by the regime against Italian citizens defined as members of the “Jewish race” (Sarfatti [Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2000] Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2006).
The Royal Decree of September 5, 1938, n. 1390 (Provisions for the defense of the race in the Fascist schools) established in article 4 that “The members of the Jewish race within the Academies, the institutes and Associations of the sciences, arts and letters, will cease to be part of said institutions as of October 16, 1938-XVI.”
On the basis of this law all Jewish members of Italian academies and scientific societies were expelled from the institutions to which they belonged (Capristo Reference Capristo2002 and Capristo Reference Capristo and Zimmerman2005a). Though Volterra had remained on the registers of various academies and scientific societies even after 1934 in spite of his refusal of the oath, in 1938 he was ousted from these, too (Capristo Reference Capristo2002, 360–361).
To be able to remove the associates it was necessary first to single them out. In August, before the law had been issued, the Minister of National Education ordered all academies to carry out a census of its members to ascertain who belonged to the “Jewish race.” Volterra filled out the personal data forms, adding various notations. In response to the question “Do you belong to the Jewish race on your father's side” he wrote: “The Volterra family, which has never moved from Italy and whose ancestors can be traced to earlier than 1400, has always professed the Israelite religion.” For the question “Do you belong to the Jewish race on your mother's side” he wrote: “The Almagià family [Angelica Almagià was Volterra's mother] whose ancestors have resided in Italy for centuries have always professed the Israelite religion and they originate from the Iberian peninsula.” To the question “Do you belong to the Israelite community” he responded yes; to “Do you profess the Jewish religion or other religion”: he responded no. In response to the question “Does your spouse belong to the Jewish race?” Volterra repeated the answer to the question about his matrilineal origins since his wife was his cousin Virginia Almagià.
In 1938 Volterra was expelled from the following institutions: Istituto marchigiano di scienze, lettere e arti di Ancona (where he was an honorary member); Società italiana di Fisica di Bologna; Accademia delle Scienze di Bologna; Unione matematica italiana di Bologna; Accademia di scienze e lettere di Genova; Istituto lombardo di scienze e lettere di Milano; Società astronomica italiana di Milano; Accademia di scienze, lettere e arti di Modena; Circolo matematico di Palermo, Società italiana per il progresso delle scienze di Roma.
Between the second half of 1938 and 1940, Volterra's last scientific contributions could only be published outside of Fascist Italy: in the Comptes Rendus de l'Acadèmie des Sciences, in the Bulletin de la Société Mathématique de France, in the Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society, in Human Biology, and lastly in the Acta Pontificia Academia Scientiarum (Volterra 1954–Reference Volterra1962, 5:538).
This was a clear consequence of the ban imposed on Jewish authors, although Volterra's name did not appear in the lists of banned authors issued by the Fascist authorities (Fabre Reference Fabre1998, 444, 474–481). It must be noticed, however, that the list issued by the Ministry of National Education in September 1938 referred only to textbooks; on the other hand, the list issued by the Ministry of Popular Culture in 1942, after Volterra's death, included the names of his sons, Edoardo (a jurist) and Enrico (an engineer).
§4.1 Demonstrations of Solidarity from France
To the French friends and colleagues with whom he corresponded, Volterra revealed his deep apprehension over his situation and that of his relatives. To Joseph Pérès on October 11, he wrote: “We are living very bad moments at present, and considering also the future.”Footnote 85 To Émile Borel on December 20, he confided: “There are many issues to put in order to salvage something from ruin. The only hope is to obtain the so called “distinction” for me and my family. I have the right to obtain it, because I volunteered in the army during the war and was awarded the cross of honor, but we must wait.”Footnote 86
For propagandistic motives Mussolini had promised on several occasions that certain categories of “Italian citizens of Jewish race” would be completely exempted from persecution. He had done so, for example, in Trieste on September 18, 1938, during an important public speech, which was covered by the international press. He had reaffirmed it on October 6 in the Declaration on Race voted by the Grand Council of Fascism. In reality, the Royal Decree of November 17, 1938, n. 1728 (Provisions for the defense of the Italian race) drastically reduced the margins for exemption, limiting them to certain patrimonial and professional aspects;Footnote 87 the hope of many Italian Jews to escape professional and economic ruin on account of their patriotic “merits” in the end turned into a mockery (Ventura Reference Ventura1997, 136–140).
Nonetheless, in the convulsive months that followed the initial anti-Semitic provisions many people attempted to play the so-called “distinction” card. Volterra himself did so. On October 26, he addressed to the president of the Senate several documents to prove his military merits and services during World War I and to obtain a partial exemption from persecution, for himself and his family. However, on October 29 Federzoni returned the documentation to him, claiming that the matter was out of his jurisdiction.Footnote 88 Therefore, on November 21, 1938, Volterra prepared his application to the Ministry of the Interior, General Administration for Demography and Race.Footnote 89 But, in the end Mussolini decided to extend the “distinction” ex officio to all Jewish Senators (Italia. Senato Reference Italia and Gentile2002, 88). The president of the Senate gave Volterra a formal notice of this concession on January 21, 1939.Footnote 90
However, as Michele Sarfatti has pointed out, “Although the Jewish senators kept their positions for the entire period, they no longer received the acts of the parliamentary proceedings, and the doormen of the Senate were advised to discourage their entry” (Sarfatti [Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2000] Reference Sarfatti, John and Tedeschi2006, 140).Footnote 91 In this circumstance as well, Volterra received many displays of support and affection from his French colleagues.
On November 7, 1938, Volterra thanked Borel for the help he gave to his son Edoardo, who was trying to find some professional opportunity abroad.Footnote 92 On December 20, 1938, the Italian mathematician again thanked Borel for what he had written to his son Edoardo regarding a possible placement for Volterra himself in France:
Certainly, it will be difficult to give him an official appointment here, because a recent law fixes an age limit of 70 for all professors. However, if the grave circumstances do not lead France to a financial catastrophe, it is most likely to grant him a post similar to a faculty position on the budget of the scientific research fund.Footnote 93 Let me say that it would be a great honor for our country to give reception to one of the greatest scholars in the entire world.Footnote 94
I cite here some other letters from Volterra's French correspondents.
Marcel Brelot, Bordeaux, November 26, 1938:
Some days ago Mr. Montel came here before leaving to lecture in Portugal. He spoke to me and to my colleague Milloux about Italian intellectuals, and especially about you. I am better informed about your isolation, about the fate of your sons and that of Mr. D'Ancona. Might these words of respectful sympathy confirm that your international friendships do not change, and that the passing of time, which for so many years blessed your scientific reputation, which Italy can be proud of, and which will ensure that your name becomes a symbol of intellectual dignity.Footnote 95
Émile Picard, Paris, November 30, 1938: “We often spoke about you and your family, and about all worries which had assailed you. We all live in sad times, in which the world has gone crazy and in which, under multiple attacks, much that is good and noble of what our civilization has done risks to die.”Footnote 96
Jean Régnier,Footnote 97 Paris, December 2, 1938:
We live here in great concern for your fate and that of your family. And although we wish to strongly encourage you, we cannot avoid conveying our anxious feelings for you. It is awfully sad for a personality of such calibre as our Master, that your future as well as that of your family are at risk, in a country that you have so honored. It is such an injustice, such a massive incomprehension, that it should leave you completely unmoved. Nobody could pretend that your works and your theories didn't exist; nobody could change the fact that you are, according to all experts, the greatest living mathematician.Footnote 98
Jacques and Louise Hadamard to Vito and Virginia Volterra, [December] 1938: “Dear Friends, we think of you intensely without yet having been able to tell you. We think of you at the threshold of the new year just as we never ceased doing during the present year which finishes full of anguish and pain. It is our deep friendship that I send you.”Footnote 99 Hadamard was a convinced antifascist and a staunch supporter of Jewish causes (Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova Reference Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova1998, 224–227). A Jew himself, Hadamard in 1941 fled France for the United States; in 1944 he moved to England. Hadamard returned to France in 1945 (Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova Reference Maz'ya and Shaposhnikova1998, 229–252).
§4.5 Some Echoes of the Fascist Anti-Semitic Campaign in the French Press
Here I mention some reactions of the French press to the anti-Semitic campaign undertaken by the Fascist regime. For an overview of French political context, characterized by a growing anti-Semitic climate in the late 1930s, I refer to some thorough recent reconstructions of the period (Caron Reference Caron2005; Schor Reference Schor2005; Joly Reference Joly2006, 33–68; Galimi Reference Galimi2006).Footnote 100 Reporting on the news from Italy on September 3 and 4, 1938, Le Temps remarked that foreign observers were surprised and dismayed by the harsh anti-Semitic policy inaugurated by the Fascist government; the French newspaper also pointed out that in Italy the anti-Jewish decrees were accepted without dissent.Footnote 101
The antifascist periodicals published in Paris (Giustizia e Libertà, Il Nuovo Avanti, L'Operaio Italiano, La Voce degli Italiani) clearly expressed their strong condemnation of the Fascist racist policy. “Racist dishonor,” “In full Middle Ages,” “One more shame,” “To the rescue of Italian Jews!” are only some of the many headlines which appeared in these papers after the launch of the anti-Semitic campaign in July 1938 (Chamla Reference Chamla1988). Giuseppe Gaddi, an antifascist exile in Paris and a member of the editorial staff of La Voce degli Italiani, published one of the most relevant pro-Jewish pamphlets written at the time by a Gentile author. His work entitled Racism in Italy appeared in 1939 both in Italian and French, with a preface of Bernard Lecache, president of the International league against racism and anti-Semitism (Gaddi Reference Gaddi and Lecache1939; Sarfatti Reference Sarfatti1988; Casellato Reference Casellato2004).
In its June-September 1938 issue, Races et Racisme (Bulletin du Groupement d’étude et d'information) reported extensively on “Italy and the Jewish question.”Footnote 102 Also the French Jewish periodicals of different orientations (Le Droit de Vivre, “organ of the Ligue international contre l'antisémitisme;” Paix et Droit, “organ of the Alliance israélite universelle”) condemned the “inhuman” and “infamous” Italian anti-Semitic laws. For most of French Jewry the laws against their Italian coreligionists appeared even more “revolting,” given the high rate of assimilation of Italian Jews and their steady manifestations of patriotism (Guedj Reference Guedj2010, 120–122 and Guedj Reference Guedj2011, 316–326). On the other hand, the far-right daily L'Action Française strongly praised the anti-Semitic provisions of Fascist government (Galimi Reference Galimi2006, 287–290).
Volterra died in Rome on October 11, 1940. As it has been noted (Guerraggio and Paoloni [Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2008] Reference Guerraggio, Paoloni and Williams2012, 156), surveillance accompanied him even in death. The police headquarters communicated by phonogram to the Director General of Police that “this morning at 4:30 in his home in Via in Lucina n. 17, Senator Volterra Vito, of Jewish race, died.”Footnote 103 On October 12, in a brief paid death notice published in the newspaper Il Messaggero, his family remembered “Prof. Vito Volterra, Senator, Member of the Pontifical Academy, Volunteer in the World War I.” On the same day, the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano published a quite long obituary of Volterra, introducing it with the words of the President of the Pontifical Academy, who announced “with deep sorrow” the death of the great mathematician.Footnote 104
On October 14, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency announced Volterra's death, mentioning the fact that the scientist “had been at odds with the Fascist regime for several years,” that “although a Senator, Prof. Volterra had not entered the Senate chamber for many years,” and that “he was active in affairs of the Rome Jewish community.”Footnote 105 On October 24, 1940, The Sentinel (the American Jewish Weekly of Chicago) remarked:
No mention of the Senator's passing was made in the Italian press. . . . Even a brief paid notice of his demise was at first refused by the press and was only printed on the second day following his death on October 11 after special pressure was brought on the government by influential friends of the late scientist. A belated three-inch paid advertisement was the sole advice to Italians of the decease of their No. 1 scientist, who served Italy during the World War as director of its scientific procedure, working with Marconi although outranking him in importance.Footnote 106
On October 25, another American Jewish newspaper, The Jewish Advocate, eulogized Volterra as “The Einstein of Italy.”Footnote 107
The French Academy of Sciences commemorated Volterra on October 21, 1940, during the period of Nazi occupation of Paris. Understandably, in his obituary, written by Émile Picard, there is no reference to the persecution Volterra suffered at the hands of the Fascist regime, as an antifascist as well as a Jew (Picard Reference Picard1940).
By contrast, the English mathematician Edmund T. Whittaker noted Volterra's political activism and the racist persecution he and his family suffered. Whittaker published a biographical sketch in the Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society in 1941 (Whittaker Reference Whittaker1941; reprinted in Goodstein Reference Goodstein2007, Appendix A), at the end of which he acknowledged Volterra's son, Enrico, who had fled Fascist Italy in 1939 and had taken refuge in England.Footnote 108 In his obituary for the Cahiers de Physique the director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, Albert Pérard, recalled Volterra's love for France, “which he considered his second homeland” and the “great number of good and enduring friendships in our country” (Pérard Reference Pérard1941, 57) – broad and solid relationships to which his correspondence amply testifies to this day.
Acknowledgments
An earlier version of this contribution was presented and discussed at the Séminaire d'histoire des mathématiques de l'Institut Henri Poincaré “Volterra et la France” (Paris, March 12, 2010), at the “Terzo Convegno Franco-Italiano: Scambi e relazioni tra Francia e Italia: il caso Volterra” [Third French-Italian Conference: Exchanges and Relations between France and Italy: The Volterra Case] organized by Università di Palermo and Université d'Artois (Palermo, May 27–28, 2010), and at the Seminar of the Equipe “Mathématiciens français et italiens, 1920–1940,” organized by the IMéRA-Mediterranean Institute for Advanced Research (Marseille, March 29, 2011).
