sponsored by psychohistorian.org
RA: 23h 17m 10.5s
Dec: +18° 58′ 1″
Ch: MSA:1209, U2:169, SA:9
Ref: NGC/IC, Corwin (2004)
Type: galaxy, S0
Mag: B=15.1, V=14.1
Size: 1′ x 1′
NGC 7571 may be NGC 7597. Or maybe not. Here is Schultz's entire note on the object (I've expanded his abbreviations).
"A poor stellar group of pretty bright stars follows the above nebulae [N7547, N7549, and N7550] about 1 1/2 minutes; and the whole region following this stellar group seems nebulous: [Schultz italics] a group of small nebulae or a considerably extended nebulosity with several knots? [end italics] As yet the sky was not sufficiently dark, and the nebulosity very faint and indistinct, no decision could be arrived at. This nebulosity independently remarked in the autumns 1867 and 1869, as on the second occasion the elder notice was forgotten. Description and position do not at all agree with III. 181 [N7550]!"
There is no such group of bright star 1.5 minutes following the N7550 galaxy group. The stellar group is instead 1.5 minutes of time following NGC 7578 (coincidentally, RNGC makes N7571=N7578; it probably isn't unless Schultz got his direction wrong and the nebulosity is PRECEDING the stellar group). But Schultz would have had to misidentify N7578 as N7547 or N7550. This, I admit, is a bit of a stretch. But the group of stars is 3.3 minutes following the N7550 group, as well as nearly 20 arcmin to the south. Schultz would have been aware of that considerable difference. Scattered around through the bright stars are several galaxies, four of which (N7588, N7597, N7598, and N7602) Marth ran across about the same time using Lasalle's great telescope in Malta. These are bright enough that Schultz could have pulled them out with his 9.6-inch.
So, I've tentatively put NGC 7571 on the brightest of Marth's galaxies, N7597.
The other possibility is that of RNGC's: N7571 is the same as N7578. N7578 is double and is the brightest in a tight group of galaxies (Hickson 94). This would be in accord with Schultz's description of his object as possibly being a group of nebulae. However, it also requires Schultz to make a mistake in his directions. Also, N7578 is considerably fainter than N7550 or N7597 -- but either of these hypotheses requires that Schultz saw N7578.
I'm leaning slightly toward the N7597 hypothesis, but the other could well be the correct one.
The RNGC (Sulentic and Tifft 1973) notes that this is a nonexistent object. Their coded description reads =7578 S.
The Messier objects
The Bennett objects
The Caldwell list
DOCdb is still in beta-release.
Known issues, feature requests, and updates on bug fixes, are here:
Found a bug? Have a comment or suggestion to improve DOCdb? Please let us know!
DOCdb is a free online resource that exists to promote deep sky observing.
You could help by sharing your observations, writing an article, digitizing and proof-reading historical material, and more.
Everything on DOCdb.net is © 2004-2010 by Auke Slotegraaf, unless stated otherwise or if you can prove you have divine permission to use it. Before using material published here, please consult the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.5 License. Some material on DOCdb is copyright the individual authors. If in doubt, don't reproduce. And that goes for having children, too. Please note that the recommended browser for DOCdb is Firefox 3.x. You may also get good results with K-Meleon. Good luck if you're using IE. A successful experience with other browsers, including Opera and Safari, may vary.