1
Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia From Authentic Sources — Background and Themes
(5 User reviews)
1722
Project Gutenberg
2019
Not confirmed
Religion and science -- History; Galilei, Galileo, 1564-1642; Catholic Church. Curia romana; Astronomers -- Italy -- Biography
Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition
en
Edition facts
Words
130,161
Reading time
566 min
Text sections
33
The source record for Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia From Authentic Sources — Background and Themes measures this digital text at 130,161 words, 9 hr 26 min estimated reading time, and 33 detected text sections.
The text analysis averages about 23.2 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.
Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Religion and science -- History,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.
Source:
Project Gutenberg record #60215
Examines Galileo's conflict with the Roman Curia through authentic Vatican documents, focusing on the 1633 trial. Von Gebler contrasts Galileo's claim that he was only ordered not to 'hold or defend' Copernicanism with the Church's assertion of a stricter injunction, revealing a pivotal dispute over the terms of the 1616 decree.
Editorial Edition Score
4.9/5
★★★★★
★★★★★
Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.
How this score is calculated
- Description quality20 pts
- Title & short description10 pts
- Source metadata20 pts
- Text length15 pts
- Chapters / structure15 pts
- EPUB file integrity20 pts
Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.
Edition quality
Read the Text
at Pisa.—Parentage.—His Father’s Writings on Music.—Galileo destined to be a Cloth Merchant.—Goes to the Convent of Vallombrosa.—Begins to study Medicine.—Goes to the University of Pisa.—Discovery of the Synchronism of the Pendulum.—Stolen Lessons in Mathematics.—His Hydrostatic Scales.—Professorship at Pisa.—Poor Pay.—The Laws of Motion.—John de’ Medici.—Leaves Pisa.—Professorship at Padua.—Writes various Treatises.—The Thermoscope.—Letter to Kepler.—The Copernican System.—“De Revolutionibus orbium Cœlestium” 3
THE TELESCOPE AND ITS REVELATIONS.
Term of Professorship at Padua renewed.—Astronomy.—A New Star.—The Telescope.—Galileo not the Inventor.—Visit to Venice to exhibit it.—Telescopic Discoveries.—Jupiter’s Moons.—Request of Henry IV.—“Sidereus Nuncius.”—The Storm it raised.—Magini’s attack on Galileo.—The Ring of Saturn.—An Anagram.—Opposition of the Aristotelian School.—Letter to Kepler 16
Galileo’s Fame and Pupils.—Wishes to be freed from Academic Duties.—Projected Works.—Call to Court of Tuscany.—This change the source of his Misfortunes.—Letter from Sagredo.—Phases of Venus and Mercury.—The Solar Spots.—Visit to Rome.—Triumphant Reception.—Letter from Cardinal del Monte to Cosmo II.—The Inquisition.—Introduction of Theology into the Scientific Controversy.—“Dianoja Astronomica.”—Intrigues at Florence 27
ASTRONOMY AND THEOLOGY.
Treatise on Floating Bodies.—Controversy with Scheiner about the Solar Spots.—Favourable reception of Galileo’s Work on the subject at Rome.—Discussion with the Grand Duchess Christine.—The Bible brought into the controversy.—Ill-fated Letter to Castelli.—Caccini’s Sermon against Galileo.—Lorini denounces the Letter to the Holy Office.—Archbishop Bonciani’s attempts to get the original Letter.—“Opinion” of the Inquisition on it.—Caccini summoned to give evidence.—Absurd accusations.—Testimony of Ximenes and Attavanti in Galileo’s favour 42
Galileo’s Fears.—Allayed by letters from Rome.—Foscarini’s Work.—Blindness of Galileo’s Friends.—His Apology to the Grand Duchess Christine.—Effect produced by it.—Visit to Rome.—Erroneous opinion that he was cited to appear.—Caccini begs pardon.—Galileo defends the Copernican System at Rome.—His mistake in so doing 59
THE INQUISITION AND THE COPERNICAN SYSTEM, AND THE ASSUMED PROHIBITION TO GALILEO.
Adverse “Opinion” of the Inquisition on Galileo’s Propositions.—Admonition by Bellarmine, and assumed Absolute Prohibition to treat of the Copernican Doctrines.—Discrepancy between Notes of 25th and 26th February.—Marini’s Documents.—Epinois’s Work on Galileo.—Wohlwill first doubts the Absolute Prohibition.—Doubts confirmed by Gherardi’s Documents.—Decree of 5th March, 1616, on the Copernican System.—Attitude of the Church.—Was the Absolute Prohibition ever issued to Galileo?—Testimony of Bellarmine in his favour.—Conclusions 76
EVIL REPORT AND GOOD REPORT.
Galileo still lingers at Rome.—Guiccardini tries to effect his Recall.—Erroneous idea that he was trying to get the Decree repealed.—Intrigues against him.—Audience of Pope Paul V.—His friendly assurances.—His Character.—Galileo’s return to Florence 91
THE CONTROVERSY ON COMETS.
Studious Seclusion.—Waiting for the Correction of the Work of Copernicus.—Treatise on Tides.—Sends it to Archduke Leopold of Austria.—The Letter which accompanied it.—The three Comets of 1618.—Galileo’s Opinion of Comets.—Grassi’s Lecture on them.—Guiducci’s Treatise on them, inspired by Galileo.—Grassi’s “Astronomical and Philosophical Scales.”—Galileo’s Reply.—Paul V.—His Death.—Death of Cosmo II.—Gregory XV.—“Il Saggiatore” finished.—Riccardi’s “Opinion” on it.—Death of Gregory XV.—Urban VIII. 98
MAFFEO BARBERINI AS URBAN VIII.
His Character.—Taste for Letters.—Friendship for Galileo when Cardinal.—Letters to him.—Verses in his honour.—Publication of “Il Saggiatore” with Dedication to the Pope.—Character of the Work.—The Pope’s approval of it.—Inconsistency with the assumed Prohibition 108
Galileo goes to Rome to congratulate Urban VIII. on his Accession.—Favourable reception.—Scientific discussions with the Pope.—Urban refuses to Revoke the Decree of 5th March.—Nicolo Riccardi.—The Microscope.—Galileo not the Inventor.—Urban’s favours to Galileo on leaving Rome.—Galileo’s reply to Ingoli.—Sanguine hopes.—Grassi’s hypocrisy.—Spinola’s harangue against the Copernican System.—Lothario Sarsi’s reply to “Il Saggiatore.”—Galileo writes his “Dialogues” 114
_PUBLICATION OF THE “DIALOGUES ON THE TWO PRINCIPAL SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD,” AND TRIAL AND CONDEMNATION OF GALILEO._
THE “DIALOGUES” ON THE TWO SYSTEMS.
Origin of the “Dialogues.”—Their popular style.—Significance of the name Simplicius.—Hypothetical treatment of the Copernican System.—Attitude of Rome towards Science.—Thomas Campanella.—Urban VIII.’s duplicity.—Galileo takes his MS. to Rome.—Riccardi’s corrections.—He gives the _Imprimatur_ on certain conditions.—Galileo returns to Florence to complete the Work 127
THE IMPRIMATUR FOR THE “DIALOGUES.”
Karl von Gebler's study of Galileo's conflict with the Roman Curia is built on a specific documentary foundation: the Vatican manuscript of Galileo's trial, which the author inspected and published in full. The work opens with a translator's letter dated 1879, noting that only two years earlier von Gebler and Henri de L'Epinois were permitted to 'resuscitate the famous volume' from the secret papal archives. This access shapes the entire narrative, grounding it in primary sources rather than received accounts.
The excerpts reveal a central tension: Galileo's own understanding of the 1616 injunction versus the Church's interpretation. Galileo insists he was told not to 'hold nor defend' Copernicanism, but not forbidden from discussing it. The Curia, however, maintains a broader prohibition. This disagreement over a single phrase—the precise wording of an order—becomes the crux of the trial, and von Gebler traces its consequences through diplomatic correspondence and Galileo's own letters.
The Disputed Injunction of 1616
The excerpts repeatedly return to the 1616 injunction as a point of contention. In a despatch of 27 February, the Tuscan ambassador Niccolini reports that the 'main difficulty' is the Church's claim that Galileo was ordered 'neither to discuss the question nor to converse about it.' Galileo counters that the terms were only that 'that doctrine was not to be held nor defended.' This is not a minor quibble: it determines whether Galileo's Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems violated a direct order. Von Gebler presents the evidence without resolving the dispute, letting the documents speak. The reader sees Galileo's confidence that he can justify himself 'because it does not at all appear from his book that he does hold or defend the doctrine.' The excerpts do not reveal the outcome of this argument, but they establish it as the trial's legal and intellectual pivot.
Urban VIII as Personal Persecutor
Niccolini's advice to Galileo is blunt: 'be always ready to obey and to submit to whatever was ordered, for this was the only way to allay the irritation of one who was so incensed, and who treated this affair as a personal one.' Von Gebler identifies this 'personal persecutor' as Pope Urban VIII. The excerpts show Galileo initially hopeful—writing on 19 February that 'the threatened storm had passed'—but Niccolini's dispatches paint a different picture. The Pope grants Galileo the 'special and unusual favour' of staying at the ambassador's house rather than in the Holy Office, but only 'out of respect for his Highness' the Grand Duke. The favour is conditional, and the Pope's language is carefully calibrated to remind Galileo of his dependence. Von Gebler does not embellish; he lets the diplomatic tone convey the power imbalance.
Galileo's Own Voice in the Letters
Galileo's letters, quoted at length, reveal a man trying to navigate a narrowing space. On 25 February he writes to Geri Bocchineri that 'the many and serious accusations are reduced to one,' and he expects to 'get rid' of it once his defence is heard. He describes his strategy: bringing his arguments 'gradually to the knowledge of some of the higher officials,' who 'are not at liberty to listen freely to intercession.' The phrasing suggests a careful, almost tactical approach to the Curia's procedures. Von Gebler includes a poetic line from Galileo—'Was taking his course with modest sail set'—which he attributes to Niccolini's instruction. The metaphor of a ship in stormy seas recurs, and it is Galileo's own choice of words, not the author's. These passages give the reader direct access to Galileo's mindset during the crisis, without mediation.
Von Gebler's method is to present the documentary record and let the contradictions emerge. Readers should attend to the precise wording of the injunctions and the dates of the letters: the sequence matters. The excerpts cover only the early stages of the 1633 proceedings, so the trial's conclusion is not visible here. What is clear is that the conflict turns on a question of interpretation—of a text, of an order, of a book. The reader is invited to weigh the evidence alongside the author, who remains a guide rather than a judge.
There’s something tender about watching a mind wrestle with its own records—Galileo’s stubborn, precise insistence on what was actually said versus what the Church remembered. It makes me think of the quieter stories we tell ourselves, the ones in Origin Myths among the Mountain Peoples of the Philippines — Background and Themes, where truth bends into legend without losing its ache. History, I suppose, is just a long, careful forgetting.
Aria Baker
3 weeks agoTheodore Young
4 weeks agoAlexander Moore
3 weeks agoDylan Clark
3 weeks ago-
Stephanie Wilson - 1 month ago
A detailed and well-researched book on the Galileo affair, based on primary sources. The author does a good job of presenting the facts, but the writing can be a bit dry and overly academic. For general readers, it might be hard to follow, but for students of history, it's a valuable reference. The book includes many documents, which are interesting, but the lack of narrative flow makes it less enjoyable as a casual read. Still, it's a useful contribution to the field. -
Seth Davidson - 1 month ago
This book is a missed opportunity. Despite its promise of authentic sources, the presentation is biased against the Church, and the author's interpretations feel forced. The writing is tedious, with too many lengthy quotations that disrupt the flow. Instead of a clear narrative, we get a jumble of documents and commentary that fails to provide a coherent picture of the historical events. For a more balanced and engaging account, look elsewhere. This reads more like a scholarly polemic than a history. -
Whitney Hernandez - 4 weeks ago
This historical account of Galileo's conflict with the Roman Curia is both scholarly and gripping. The author meticulously presents authentic sources, offering a balanced view that avoids common biases. The narrative is compelling, making you feel the tension of the era. Reading this book, I gained a nuanced understanding of the science-religion debate that still resonates today. It's a must-read for anyone interested in history, science, or philosophy. The digital edition is well-formatted, with easy navigation and clear citations.
Reader reflection
How will you remember this book?
Save your reaction, strongest insight, and memorable passage.
Your progress
0
/
10
2
Was reading this book enjoyable?
3
Is this a title you would suggest to others?
4
Did the language feel accessible?
5
Was the book moving at the right speed?
6
Could you see yourself revisiting this book?
7
Did it raise ideas you would like to talk about?
8
Did the book meet your expectations?
9
Which lesson or insight stayed with you?
10
Harper Garcia
3 weeks ago