i28 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



keenly relished irony and sarcasm. They were now laughing openly 

 at the overthrow of the scholastics. The universities, the Jesuits and 

 many of the clergy, on the other hand, were solidly arrayed against 

 Galileo. The Jesuits were especially inimical. In a juncture like 

 this everything depended upon the Pope. Galileo confidently ex- 

 pected his support, but he had misread the Pope's mind from the very 

 first. The Pope was surrounded by Galileo's enemies. Every point 

 that would tell was made against the book and its author. The 

 dangers that lurked in the Copernican doctrine were exposed ; Galileo's 

 former interpretations of Holy Writ were set forth as monstrous, com- 

 ing, as they did, from the pen of a layman; their obvious weaknesses 

 were pointed out; he was denounced as a rebel to church authority, 

 which had forbidden any one to teach the Copernican doctrine (March 

 5, 1616) ; the Pope was convinced that Galileo had intended to portray 

 him in the character of Simplicius. 



It is absolutely certain that Galileo had no such intention. Under 

 the circumstances it would have been madness for him to alienate his 

 powerful friend and patron. Exactly why he closed his Dialogues with 

 the quotation of the Pope's own words (spoken to Galileo in 1624) it 

 is impossible to say. To us, in the light of events, the quotation seems 

 an inconceivable blunder. But Galileo was very far from a blunderer. 

 He was skilled in fine logic and with his pen. The closing words 

 of the Dialogues (containing the quotation) can be read so as to 

 express a humble submission to authority. It was beyond a doubt, 

 Galileo's intention that they should be so read; it is equally certain 

 that the submission was only perfunctory; the reckless irony of all 

 that preceded them made the quoted words appear as mere foolishness 

 in the mouth of the foolish Simplicius. The very name — Simplicius 

 — was offensive to the Pope. It was not until after July, 1636, that 

 he expressed himself as convinced that Galileo had intended no dis- 

 respect. It was then too late. On July 26, 1636, Galileo writes: " I 

 hear from Eome that his Eminence Cardinal Antonio Barberini and 

 the French ambassador (de Koailles) have seen his Holiness and tried 

 to convince him that I never had the least idea of perpetrating so 

 sacrilegious an act as to make game of his Holiness, as my malicious 

 foes have persuaded him, which has been the prime cause of all my 

 troubles." The prune cause was Urban's conviction that Galileo had 

 brought scandal into the church by teaching a doctrine which was, 

 as yet, unproved. 



The storm was about to break. From now onward the story is 

 fully told in the official documents of the inquisition. The further 

 sale of the Dialogues was prohibited. Galileo's conduct was referred 

 to a special commission of theologians and men versed in science to 

 investigate. That it was not directly sent to the Holy Office was a 



