228 



NATURE 



\7nly 13, 1876 



ludicrous manner in which the Aristotelian philosophers 

 attempted by d, priori logical considerations to disprove 

 the reality of the celestial appearances revealed by the 

 telescope, and " as by magical enchantments to conjure 

 them out of the heavens." So far as the truth of the 

 Copemican theory was concerned, these individual skir- 

 mishes were put an end to by the peremptory decree of 

 the Index Congregation (March 5, 1616), which reduced 

 the revolutionary theory, for all Roman Catholic astro- 

 nomers, to the level of a mere hypothesis, convenient 

 indeed for the representation of phenomena, but not 

 corresponding to actual external facts. This, the un- 

 doubted scope of the decree, which has escaped most 

 previous writers, is carefully stated by von Gebler. The 

 point is one of much interest, since the repressive atti- 

 tude then taken up was not finally abandoned until as late 

 as 1820. Two hundred years of astronomical research 

 were needed to break down the unyielding Papal non 

 possunius. 



The appearance in 1632 of Galileo's Dialogue on the 

 Ptolemaic and Copemican systems was the signal for the 

 final catastrophe. Its high significance is well brought 

 out in the following extract : — 



" The book contains far more than the title promises, 

 for the writer has, in connection with his discussion of 

 the two great systems of the universe, introduced a record 

 of almost every important result obtained by him during 

 nearly fifty years of scientific research and discovery. 

 The author shows himself determined to adopt a style 

 which should appear not exclusively calculated for scholars, 

 but, on the contrary, intelligible and even highly attrac- 

 tive for every really educated man. The essential object 

 of the book was to spread abroad as widely as possible 

 a clear recognition of the constitution of nature in its 

 absolute and final form. That this object was so suc- 

 cessfully achieved is attributable not merely to Galileo's 

 philosophic, but, in the first instance at least, perhaps 

 even more to his literary eminence. The external form of 

 the work was in itself most happily chosen. There is not 

 a trace of the dryness of a systematic treatise in which 

 proof succeeds proof with a wearisome monotony, hardly 

 relieved by a single pause. On the contrary, the facile 

 lively form of dialogue so tolerant of digression, gave the 

 author full opportunity to develop his impetuous elo- 

 quence, his singular power of reasoning, his biting satire 

 — in short, his special and brilliant style." 



Next let us observe the effect of the work on the ene- 

 mies of its author : — 



" Galileo, as one of the most momentously effective of 

 pioneers, was in a high degree obnoxious to the Jesuits, 

 and members of the order had repeatedly been signally 

 worsted in scientific conflicts with the great philosopher, 

 a circumstance by no means fitted to dispose the Fathers 

 of the Society more favourably towards him. As soon 

 as they recognised that in his latest work he had em- 

 ployed an immense array of facts and an overwhelming 

 force of argument for the destruction of the fundamental 

 principles of the old school, in order to build up with an 

 inexorable logic the modern edifice upon its ruins, the 

 Jesuits set all their levers to work to secure the suspen- 

 sion of the revolutionary book, and later, to bring about 

 the ruin of its dangerous author. A prosecution before 

 the Inquisition was their most convenient, indeed pro- 

 bably their only possible weapon." 



The notion, still entertained by some writers, that 

 nothing really serious was meant by the trial, but only 

 the settlement of a point of ecclesiastical etiquette, is 



totally dispelled by the evidence stated in von Gebler's 

 narrative. We see Galileo completely panic-stricken on 

 first receiving the summons of the terrible tribunal, en- 

 deavouring in every possible way to keep out of its grip, 

 and only finally complying when the Court had actually 

 issued its writ to have him brought up to Rome in irons. 

 We see the Grand Duke of Tuscany writing autograph 

 letters to the Cardinals who were members of the Holy 

 Office, begging for a favourable consideration of his 

 servant's case. We see the Pope himself in a fit of un- 

 governable fury against Galileo ; — fury so intense that the 

 Florentine Ambassador, who had provoked it by defend- 

 ing the philosopher, precipitately dropped the subject, 

 " lest he too should be charged with heresy by the Holy 

 Office." During the slow progress of his case in Rome, 

 Galileo was unquestionably treated with quite exceptional 

 favour, in being allowed to reside in the house of the 

 Ambassador except during the days of his actual examin- 

 ation,;and even then lodged in comfortable rooms in the 

 apartments of the Commissary Fiscal, instead of in the 

 ordinary prison. Of what took place during the examin- 

 ation we are not completely informed. That the prisoner 

 was threatened with the torture is certain ; whether it was 

 actually inflicted is still a moot point. Von Gebler very 

 confidently maintains that it was not, and his reasoning 

 at least proves that, if employed at all, it must have been 

 but slightly. 



The closing portion of the narrative presents a dismal 

 picture of years lingered out amid severe physical suffer- 

 ing under the stony-hearted supervision, constant petty 

 interference, and reiterated threats of the Holy Ofifice. 

 And when at last the old man dies, blind and helpless, 

 but surrounded with a glory destined to outlive that of 

 popes and cardinals, the Inquisition is seen nervously 

 bustling about to prevent any memorial being erected to 

 the great astronomer, " lest the good be scandalised," or 

 if that could not be achieved, at least to secure that 

 neither in the inscription nor in the oration pronounced 

 at the grave, " words should occur injurious to.the repu- 

 tation of this tribunal." 



" The feeble Duke of Tuscany did not venture to dis- 

 regard in the smallest degree these unamiable Papal 

 wishes. Even the last directions of Galileo, that he 

 should be laid in the tomb of his ancestors in the church 

 of Santa Croce at Florence, were not respected. The 

 insignificant side chapel of that church, called the capella ' 

 del noviziato, received the mortal remains of the great 

 departed. His body was there buried quietly and with- 

 out public ceremonial in accordance with the will of Urban 

 VIII. No memorial, no inscription marked his last 

 resting-place. But, do what Rome would to wipe out the 

 memory of the famous philosopher, she failed in her 

 attempt to bury in the same grave with his lifeless corpse, 

 the immortal name of Galileo Gahlei." 



Herr von Gebler has performed his task with meri- 

 torious zeal and conscientious labour. He is scrupulously 

 accurate in his use of authorities, and shows a fixed deter- 

 mination — no small merit in a biographer of Galileo— not 

 to exchange the standing-ground of histrry lor the quick- 

 sands of ecclesiastical controversy. His narrative is clear 

 and readable, though not free from a tendency to ditTuse- 

 ness and verbal redundancy which are more sharply 

 criticised in England than in Germany. On one point 

 only does he appear to me open to any serious censure, 



