226 



NATURE 



[July 13, 1876 



of great excellence, while in some respects they are 

 altogether unique. In principle they embrace a very 

 complete system of culture, in practice, however, it is 

 found that their system is more especially adapted to the 

 wealthier classes of the community. Judging of a tree 

 by its fruits, we must not forget what a brilliant galaxy of 

 statesmen, divines, philanthropists, and men of the 

 highest general culture, have owed their training to these 

 great Universities. It is when we come to strictly scien- 

 tific professions, such as medicine and chemistry, that the 

 deficiencies of these institutions begin to appear ; neither 

 Oxford nor Cambridge has turned out an appreciable 

 number either of distinguished physicians or distin- 

 guished chemists. Those who are desirous to become 

 proficient in these branches of knowledge almost in- 

 variably go elsewhere. The same may perhaps be said 

 of the science of engineering. 



It has been proved a great misfortune to the country 

 that these two Universities have unwarrantably neglected 

 the scientific training of their graduates. Nor is it un- 

 true to say that in the past generation they have produced 

 statesmen of unquestionable eminence, but yet profoundly 

 ignorant of the scientific requirements of their country. 

 It is only now, after a somewhat prolonged agitation, that 

 the minds of the rulers of this country are becoming awake 

 to the paramount value of science in the development of 

 our resources. 



Let us now briefly consider the four Universities of 

 Scotland. These institutions educate a far larger propor- 

 tion of the people of Scotland than Oxford and Cam- 

 bridge do of the English people. They are the training- 

 schools rather of the middle than of the upper classes of 

 the community. They excel in those branches in which 

 Oxford and Cambridge are deficient, and they are defi- 

 cient in those respects in which Oxford and Cambridge 

 excel. Good medical men and men of good acquirements 

 in various branches of science are produced by these 

 Universities, but the accomplished scholar or mathema- 

 tician is not produced — at least to any great extent. Nor, 

 so far as we are aware, is any attention given to the 

 physical training of the undergraduates. The Scotch 

 Universities are not now connected with the Established 

 Church of Scotland, except in the fact that there is a 

 theological faculty attached to each of them, and that 

 the Church of Scotland looks to that faculty alone for 

 the theological training of its ministers. They are in the 

 habit, however, of giving theological degrees with praise- 

 worthy impartiality to eminent divines in all the some- 

 what numerous divisions of the Presbyterian Church, 

 and occasionally to English Nonconformists. 



The University of London is different from all these, 

 inasmuch as it is entirely unconnected with any religious 

 denomination. It had its origin, if we mistake not, in the 

 wish to give degrees to those who, from adverse circum- 

 stances, had been unable to receive a University education, 

 but who were yet possessed of the requisite information 

 implied in a degree. 



At the present moment a large number take advantage 

 of this institution, and we believe that nearly 700 can- 

 didates presented themselves at the recent matriculation 

 examination. Of these, however, the great majority are 

 not unattached students, but are probably connected with 

 some metropolitan or provincial college that has not the 



power of granting degrees. Thus the University of London 

 is at present the degree-giving body for the alumni of a 

 considerable number of colleges scattered throughout the 

 country, and in virtue of this position it has a very great 

 influence in regulating the studies at those institutions. 



We have thus briefly described the present position of 

 the higher education of this country, and it remains to 

 consider in what respect the present system is deficient 

 and how this deficiency may be remedied, consistently, of 

 course, with those conditions which we have stated, and 

 which no legislation can possibly ignore. This, however, 

 must be reserved for a future occasion. 



GALILEO AND THE ROMAN COURT 



Galileo Galilei und die Romische Curie. Von Karl von 

 Gebler. (Stuttgart, 1876. London : Triibner and Co.) 



'"T^HIS work supplies a continuous and detailed narra- 

 -■- tive of the circumstances under which Galileo in- 

 curred the hostility of the dominant party at Rome at 

 the opening of the seventeenth century, and was by their 

 influence denounced to, and ultimately tried and con- 

 demned by, the supreme tribunal of the Inquisition. An 

 Appendix contains the text of the principal documents 

 referred to in the body of the work. The whole forms a 

 volume of rather more than 400 pages. 



Such an undertaking, though it may, at first sight, 

 appear a mere piece of surplusage to those who know how 

 extensive is the already existing Galileo literature, is 

 yet abundantly justified by recent events. Within the 

 last ten years original documents published in France 

 and Italy, and German critical researches based upon 

 them, have completely overthrown the view hitherto held 

 by the most competent writers on this subject, and com- 

 pelled the adoption of a diametrically opposite conclusion. 

 All previous narratives of the trial of Galileo are thus 

 necessarily superseded, and its history must be entirely 

 re-written. Without attempting to explain the nature of 

 the evidence which has brought about this change of 

 view, a task much beyond my present limits, I propose to 

 state wherein the change itself consists, and to what 

 extent the opinions hitherto held concerning the conduct 

 of the prisoner and of the Court are affected by it. 



The essence of the charge against Galileo was, as we 

 learn from the sentence finally pronounced, that after 

 having been formally prohibited by the Inquisition from 

 defending the Copernican theory, he had, in his Dialogues 

 on the two rival systems of the universe, openly contra- 

 vened this order, and so committed a clear act of contu- 

 macy, or, as we should call it, contempt of Court. On the 

 question whether the accused had actually defended 

 Copernicanism in his Dialogues, modern writers were able 

 to form an independent judgment by the study of his 

 incriminated work ; but the statement about the injunc- 

 tion personally laid upon him by the Inquisition rested 

 solely on the assertion of the Court itself, unsupported 

 by one tittle of corroborative evidence. It is therefore a 

 remarkable circumstance, and no bad illustration of how 

 much may be done by strong asseveration, that the best 

 historians, including some by no means antecedently 

 inclined to repose a child-like confidence in the veracity 

 of the Holy Office, one and all accepted its statement 



