me till six months after the publication of my 'Dialogues,' because otherwise I should have had an opportunity of saying much in praise of both, and of giving some consideration to a few particular points, especially to one in Morin and to another in Fromond. I am quite astonished that Morin should attach so great a value to astrology, and that he should pretend to be able, with his conjectures (which seem to me very uncertain) to establish its truth. It will really be a wonderful thing, if, as he promises, he raises astrology by his acuteness to the first rank among human sciences, and I await such a startling novelty with great curiosity. As to Fromond, who proves himself to be a man of much mind, I could have wished not to see him fall into, in my opinion, a grave though wide-spread error; namely, in order to refute the opinions of Copernicus, he first hurls scornful jests at his followers, and then (which seems to me still more unsuitable), fortifies himself by the authority of Holy Scripture, and at length goes so far as to call those views on these grounds nothing less than heretical. That such a proceeding is not praiseworthy seems to me to admit of very easy proof. For if I were to ask Fromond, who made the sun, the moon, the earth, and the stars, and ordained their order and motions, I believe he would answer, they are the creations of God. If asked who inspired Holy Scripture, I know he would answer, the Holy Spirit, which means God likewise. The world is therefore the work and the Scriptures are the word of the same God. If asked further, whether the Holy Spirit never uses words which appear to be contrary to things as they really are, and are only so used to accommodate them to the understandings of rude, uncultivated people, I am convinced that he would reply, in agreement with the holy fathers, that such is the usage of Scripture, which, in a hundred passages, says things for the above reason, that if taken literally, are not only heresies, but blasphemies, since they impute to God, anger, repentance, forgetfulness, etc. But if I were to ask Fromond, whether God, in order to accommodate Himself to the understanding of the multitude, ever alters His creations, or whether nature, which is God's handmaid, and is not changeable at man's desire, has not always observed, and does not still maintain, her usual course in respect to motion, form, and relative positions of the various parts of the universe —I am certain that he would answer, the moon has always been spherical, although for a long period the people thought she was flat; he would say, in fine, that nothing ever changes in nature to accommodate itself to the comprehension or notions of men. But if it be so, why, in our search for knowledge of the various parts of the universe, should we begin rather with the words than with the works of God? Is the work less noble or less excellent than the word? If Fromond, or any one else, had settled

fessoris ordinarii. Ant.-Aristarchus, sive orbis terræ immobilis. Liber unicus, in quo decretum S. Congreg. S. R. E. Cardinalium anno 1616, adversus Pythagorico-Copernicanos editum defenditur. Antverpiæ ex officina Plantiniana 1631, in 40."

that the opinion that the earth moves is a heresy, and if afterwards. demonstration, observation, and necessary concatenation should prove that it does move, into what embarrassment he would have brought himself and the holy Church. But if, on the contrary, the works are indisputably proved to vary from the literal meaning of the words, and we give the Scriptures the second place, no detriment to Scripture results from this. Since, in order to accommodate themselves they often ascribe, even to God Himself, entirely false conditions, why should we suppose that in speaking of the earth or the sun they should keep to such strict laws, as not to attribute conditions to these creations, out of regard for the ignorance of the masses, which are opposed to fact? If it be true that the earth moves and the sun stands still, it is no detriment to Holy Scripture, since it speaks of things as they appear to the people.

6

"Many years ago, when the stir about Copernicus was beginning, I wrote a letter of some length, in which, supported by the authorities of numerous fathers of the Church, I showed what an abuse it was to appeal so much to Holy Scripture in questions of natural science, and I proposed that in future it should not be brought into them. As soon as I am in less trouble, I will send you a copy. I say, in less trouble, because I am just now going to Rome, whither I have been summoned by the Holy Office, which has already prohibited the circulation of my Dialogues.' I hear from well-informed parties that the Jesuit fathers have insinuated in the highest quarters that my book is more execrable and injurious to the Church than the writings of Luther and Calvin. And all this although, in order to obtain the imprimatur, I went in person to Rome, and submitted the manuscript to the Master of the Palace, who looked through it most carefully, altering, adding, and omitting, and even after he had given it the imprimatur, ordered that it should be examined again at Florence. The reviser here, finding nothing else to alter, in order to show that he had gone through it carefully, contented himself with substituting some words for others, as, for instance, in several places, 'Universum' for 'Nature,' 'quality' for 'attribute,' 'sublime spirit' for 'divine spirit,' excusing himself to me for it by saying that he foresaw that I should have to do with fierce foes and bitter persecutors, as has indeed come to pass."2

The letter to the Grand Duchess Christine. 2 Op. vii. pp. 16-20.

CHAPTER VI.

GALILEO'S ARRIVAL AT ROME.

Galileo reaches Rome in February, 1632.- Goes to the Tuscan Embassy. -No Notice at first taken of his Coming.-Visits of Serristori.— Galileo's Hopefulness.-His Letter to Bocchineri.-Niccolini's Audience of the Pope.-Efforts of the Grand Duke and Niccolini on Galileo's behalf.-Notice that he must appear before the Holy Office.-His Dejection at the News.-Niccolini's Advice not to defend himself.

ON 20th January this palsied old man set out, borne in a litter, on his arduous journey to Rome. Near Ponte a Centino, on the frontiers of the States of the Church, in the unhealthy flats of the vale of Paglia, he had to submit to a long quarantine, which, in spite of Niccolini's repeated efforts, had only been shortened two days. He could not resume his journey for twenty days, but arrived at length, on 13th February, at Rome, in good preservation, and alighted at the hotel of the Tuscan Embassy, where he was most kindly received by Niccolini. On the next day Niccolini informed Cioli that "Signor Galilei arrived yesterday evening in good health at this house." He mentioned further that Galileo had already called on Mgr. Boccabella, not as an official personage, as he had resigned his office of assessor to the Holy Office a fortnight ago, but as a friend who showed great interest in his fate, and to take his advice as to the conduct to be observed. Galileo had already introduced himself to the new assessor. Niccolini concluded his despatch by saying that to-morrow, in the course of the forenoon, he

1 The Inquisitor informed the Holy Office, two days later, that Galileo had left Florence on the 20th. (Vat. MS. fol. 411 ro.; and Gherardi's Documents, Doc. xii.)

2 Comp. Niccolini's letter to Galileo of 5th Feb., 1633. (Op. ix. p. 327.)

would introduce Galileo to Cardinal Barberini, and ask him for his kind mediation with his Holiness, and beg him, in consideration of Galileo's age, his reputation, and his ready obedience, to allow him to remain at the hotel of the embassy, and not to be taken to the Holy Office.1

This request was tacitly granted for the time being, and afterwards officially confirmed. To Galileo's great surprise, no notice was taken of his presence at Rome for some time. Cardinal Barberini gave him a friendly hint, not at all ex officio, that he had better keep very retired in the ambassador's house, not receive any one, nor be seen out of doors, as any other conduct might very likely be to his disadvantage. Of course the savant, anxious as he was, scrupulously obeyed the admonition, and awaited the event in quiet retirement, though with great impatience. Not the smallest instruction was issued by the Holy Office; to all appearance it did not in the least concern itself about the arrival of the accused which it had urged so strenuously. But it was appearance only. For only two days after he came, Mgr. Serristori, counsellor to the Holy Office (the same to whom a year before Count Magalotti had, by Galileo's wish, presented one of the eight copies of the "Dialogues" brought to Rome), called several times on Galileo, but always said expressly that his visits were entirely of a private character and originated with himself. But as he always discussed Galileo's cause very particularly, there is good reason to think that he was acting under orders from the Holy Office, who wanted to discover the present sentiments and defensive arguments of the dreaded dialectician, that they might act accordingly at the trial, a measure entirely in accordance with the traditional practice of the Holy Office. Niccolini put this construction on the Monsignore's visits, but not so Galileo. For

1 Niccolini's despatch to Cioli of 14th Feb. (Op. ix. p. 432.)

2 See Niccolini' despatches to Cioli of 16th and 19th Feb. (Op. ix. pp. 432, 433.)

3 See Niccolini's despatch to Cioli of 19th Feb.

although he perceived that in all probability they were “approved or suggested by the Holy Congregation," he was far from thinking any evil, and was delighted that this officer of the Inquisition, his "old friend and patron," should "cleverly give him an opportunity of saying something by way of expressing and confirming his sincere devotedness to the holy Church and her ministers," and that he apparently listened to it all with great approval.1 He thinks this course pursued by the Inquisition "may be taken to indicate the beginning of mild and kindly treatment, very different from the threatened cords, chains, and dungeons;"2 indeed, while he assumes that these conferences are held at the instigation of the authorities, "and for the purpose of gaining some general information," he thankfully acknowledges "that in this case they could not proceed in any way more favourable to him or less likely to make a sensation." However, in the sequel he was to discover soon enough, that they cared nothing whatever about making a sensation at Rome, and that even in this respect they did not spare him in the least.

At this period, as his letters show, Galileo was very hopeful. On 19th February he wrote to Cioli, that to all appearance the threatened storm had passed, so that he did not allow his courage to sink as if shipwreck were inevitable, and there were no hope of reaching the haven; and the more so as, obedient to his instructor, in the midst of stormy billows he

"Was taking his course with modest sail set." 4

This instructor was Niccolini, who strongly advised Galileo "to 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

1 See Galileo's letter to Cioli of 19th Feb. (Op. vii. pp. 20-22.)

2 Ibid.

3 Comp. Galileo's letter to Geri Bocchineri of 25th Feb. (Op. vii. p. 23.) 4 Op. vii. pp. 20-22.