400 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



wrong. They deprive it of its only palliation, mistaken conscienti- 

 ousness.* 



Nor was this the worst loss to the earth. 



There was then in Europe one of the greatest thinkers ever given 

 to mankind. Mistaken though many of his theories were, they were 

 fruitful in truths. The man was Rene Descartes. The scientific war- 

 riors had stirred new life in him, and he was working over and sum- 

 ming up in his mighty mind all the researches of his time. The re- 

 sult must make an epoch in the history of man. His aim was to com- 

 bine all knowledge and thought into a " Treatise on the World." His 

 earnestness he proved by the eleven years which he gave to the study 

 of anatomy alone. Petty persecution he had met often, but the fate 

 of Galileo robbed him of all hope, of all energy. The battle seemed 

 lost. He gave up his great plan forever.'' 



But champions pressed on. Campanella, full of vagaries as he 

 was, wrote his "Apologia pro Galileo," though for that and other 

 heresies, religious and political, he seven times underwent torture.^ 



And Kepler comes. He leads science on to greater victories. He 

 ^ throws out the minor errors of Kopernik. He thinks and speaks as 



' See Dublin Review, as above. Whewell, vol. i., 393. Citation from Marini : " Gali- 

 leo was punished for trifling with the authorities to which he refused to submit, and was 

 punished for obstinate contumacy, not heresy." The sufficient answer to all this is that 

 the words of the inflexible sentence designating the condemned books are : " Lihri omnes 

 qui affirmant ielluris niotumy See Bertrand, p. 59. It has also been urged that " Gali- 

 leo was punished not for his opinion, but for basing it on Scripture." The answer to this 

 may be found in the Roman Index of 1*704, in which are noted for condemnation '' Libri 

 omnes docenies mobili/atem terree et inmcbilitaicni solis.'" For the way in which, when 

 it was found convenient in argument, Church apologists insisted that it was " the Su- 

 preme Chief of the Church, by a pontifical decree, and not certain cardinals," who con- 

 demned Galileo and his doctrine, see Father Gazree's letter to Gassendi in Flammarion, 

 " Pluralite des Mondes," p. 427. For the way in which, when necessary. Church apolo- 

 gists asserted the very contrary of this, declaring that " it was issued in a doctrinal decree 

 of the Congregation of the Index, and not as the Holy Father's teaching," see Dublin He- 

 view, September, 1865. And for the most astounding attempt of all, to take the blame off 

 the shoulders of both pope and cardinals, and place it upon the Almighty, see the following 

 words of the article above cited: "But it may well be doubted whether the Church did 

 retard the progress of scientific truth. What retarded it was the circumstance that God 

 has thought fit to express many texts of Scripture in words which have every appearance 

 of denying the earth's motion. But it is God who did this, not the Church; and, more- 

 over, since he thought fit so to act as to retard the progress of scientific truth, it would be 

 little to her discredit even if it were true that she had followed his example." Dublin 

 Review, September, 1865, p. 419. For the best summary of the various attempts, and 

 for replies to them in a spirit of judicial fairness, see Th. Martin, " Vie de Galilee." This 

 is probably the best book ever -written on the Galileo question. The bibUography at the 

 close is very valuable. 



* Humboldt, "Cosmos," London, 1851, vol. iii., p. 21. Also Lange, "Geschichte des 

 Materialismus," vol. i., p. 222, where the letters of Descartes are given, showing his de- 

 spair, and the giving up of his best thoughts and works to preserve peace with the Church. 

 Also Jolly, " Hist, du Mouvement Intellectuel au XVP Si^cle," vol. i., p. 390. 



8 Libri, pp. 149, et seq. 



