XXIII 
:ft us a strong sign of his 
a. 
)f Milan 
ts, also on behalf of the 
l and Photogrammetry), 
mnity of people working 
y field for the initiative 
:essful conclusion. 
itext of joint efforts that 
in order to replace the 
RS to the level that our 
ike to remember that the 
:ists who the regretted 
late Giuseppe Inghilleri, 
lost in Italy an ISPRS 
in the Autumn of 1940. 
titute of Physics of the 
:nding the courses of the 
le courses of the studies 
1 assistants at TU Milan, 
desy, Topography and 
of Applied Geophysics, 
the teacher and director 
ifties, some companies 
d manager of artificial 
le SADE company had 
; a technical advice, the 
i time of their dams, 
:onditions and especially 
al basins. The assistants 
lietti and his colleagues 
; deformations object of 
sides of triangulations 
:ntal conditions very 
spear particularly easy, 
ssions on which strategy 
isures, I learned how far 
measures, could be due 
and that this keep into 
tal disturbing causes. 
ience was the execution 
Gravimetric Network, 
Seodesy by the Italian 
following international 
ed out between August 
of the relative gravity in 
correspondence with bench marks of the Militar Geographic 
Institute (which heights were already determined), were 
executed. The network had a density of about one station 
every 100 km 2 , with a precision of some one hundredth of 
milligal, according to the characteristics of the gravimeters 
available in those years. Measures were carried out mainly by 
Cunietti and Inghilleri, with the cooperation of the colleagues 
Mazzon and Marazio especially with respect to computations. 
The absolute values were referred to a pendular measure, 
previously carried out at the Institute of Geodesy of the 
University of Bologna. The measured stations were very 
important later on, since they have been the essential bench 
mark basis for the execution of dense gravimetric surveys in 
all the Italian peninsula. Both works followed scientific 
purposes given by the Italian Geodetic Commission, and 
were useful for mineral researches, in particular for 
hydrocarbon. 
In this period, Cunietti consulted every work that could give 
him information about what already written on “measure” 
and “quantity” concepts. He started from Euclid, going on to 
the philosopher Emanuel Kant, who was also interested in 
this subject, and to the contemporary philosopher and 
mathematician Bertrand Russel. 
All this led to an important result: the decision taken by the 
TU Milan of transforming the course of Topography, for 
industrial engineering students, into a course of “Metrology: 
theory and practice”, given by Cunietti himself. It was, and I 
think still is, an initiative practically absolute in didactic and 
academic field. 
Luigi Alfano 
To testify Mariano Cunietti metrologist, my thought went 
immediately to the beginning of sixties, when I began an 
active cooperation with him in the metrological field. In 1960 
the Faculty of Engineering has been reformed, recognizing 
the importance of the metrological knowledge for the 
engineering studies. 
At the TU Milan was activated the course of “Metrology: 
theory and practice”, entrusted to him until 1996, year of his 
retirement. Afterwards in 1963 was activated the course of 
“Mechanical and Termical Measurements”, entrusted to the 
writer. This situation obviously leads to a strict cooperation 
between Mariano Cunietti and me, in order to coordinate the 
two courses, giving the most complete outlook on the 
measure sciences. 
The cooperation has been manifested particularly in a series 
of meetings, during which we discussed besides of the 
fundamental principles, philosophical too, at the basis of 
measurement operations. In this way, I could know the “man” 
in his completeness. He was an extremely well-balanced and 
very warm and humane person. 
A tireless worker, he never denied someone help, advice or 
opinion, both his interlocutor was a student and a colleague 
or a co-worker. He considered, correctly in my opinion, 
science and technique not separable from classical sciences 
that form their foundations. 
The cooperation continued later-on too, when it seemed 
opportune, rather necessary, to establish and start up the 
group of the "Mechanical Measures”, gathering this group all 
the professors of those disciplines. 
Cunietti’s thought was that not only the human work is a 
fundamental part in measurement operations, but also all the 
techniques and all the technologies are not imaginable 
without man, as part of them. 
This vision led him to develop a strong interest for 
epistemology and classical sciences, in particular philosophy, 
and convinced him about the necessity and utility of meetings 
during which metrologists and philosophers interested in this 
field, could discuss. In such a way, were bom the “Thinkshop 
of Measurements”, held in Como at Villa Olmo, that reached 
by now the XVII edition. 
Cunietti always arranged in order to have the first part of 
these days dedicated to epistemology, seen as a constructive 
criticism to metrological concepts. Philosophers of different 
tendencies were invited to give a talk to us, technicians, in 
order to (start up - begin) discussions that could lead, all of 
us, to deep reflections on measurement foundations. 
Andrea Capello 
For the first time, I met Mariano Cunietti about 52 years ago. 
The war was finished a short time before; Italy was still in the 
phase of a difficult rebuilding, and scientific and academic 
communities were hardly trying to move with the times and 
to make up for lost time. Mariano and I were the same age 
and both young “voluntary” assistants. He was already at the 
Institute of Geodesy, Topography and Photogrammetry of 
TU Milan, I was just arrived at the new little Institute of 
Applied Geophysics. 
Both had in common the Guide, Prof. Luigi Soiaini, whose 
first action, towards me, was to relying me to Cunietti for a 
quick course of gravity differential measures. I was far from 
be blessed with the qualities of patience, accuracy, etc. that 
were, on the contrary, in the nature of Mariano. At the 
beginning, his rigour was in conflict with my carelessness 
and this make him appear as a priest of measure whose the 
only scope in his life was the determination of the 
approximation of investigated quantities. 
However a day of observations in the country and some 
cheerful discussions during breaks were sufficient to reverse 
my first impression. I immediately discovered a spirit open to 
every kind of culture, eager to investigate the most different 
creation of human mind, from music to philosophy and 
history, and his deep faith was not an impediment, but a 
stimulus to better understand and judge. 
After the familiarity of those first juvenile years, life 
circumstances divided our ways, even if they remain parallel 
(in the same year permanent assistants, in the same year 
professors, in the same year retired). Nevertheless we had