What do you think?
Rate this book
Galileo in Rome: The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius
Galileo's trial by the Inquisition is one of the most dramatic incidents in the history of science and religion. Today, we tend to see this event in black and white--Galileo all white, the Church all black. Galileo in Rome presents a much more nuanced account of Galileo's relationship with Rome.
The book offers a fascinating account of the six trips Galileo made to Rome, from his first visit at age 23, as an unemployed mathematician, to his final fateful journey to face the Inquisition. The authors reveal why the theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun, set forth in Galileo's Dialogue , stirred a hornet's nest of theological issues, and they argue that, despite these issues, the Church might have accepted Copernicus if there had been solid proof. More interesting, they show how Galileo dug his own grave. To get the imprimatur, he brought political pressure to bear on the Roman Censor. He disobeyed a Church order not to teach the heliocentric theory. And he had a character named Simplicio (which in Italian sounds like simpleton ) raise the same objections to heliocentrism that the Pope had raised with Galileo. The authors show that throughout the trial, until the final sentence and abjuration, the Church treated Galileo with great deference, and once he was declared
guilty commuted his sentence to house arrest.
Here then is a unique look at the life of Galileo as well as a strikingly different view of an event that has come to epitomize the Church's supposed antagonism toward science.
The book offers a fascinating account of the six trips Galileo made to Rome, from his first visit at age 23, as an unemployed mathematician, to his final fateful journey to face the Inquisition. The authors reveal why the theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun, set forth in Galileo's Dialogue , stirred a hornet's nest of theological issues, and they argue that, despite these issues, the Church might have accepted Copernicus if there had been solid proof. More interesting, they show how Galileo dug his own grave. To get the imprimatur, he brought political pressure to bear on the Roman Censor. He disobeyed a Church order not to teach the heliocentric theory. And he had a character named Simplicio (which in Italian sounds like simpleton ) raise the same objections to heliocentrism that the Pope had raised with Galileo. The authors show that throughout the trial, until the final sentence and abjuration, the Church treated Galileo with great deference, and once he was declared
guilty commuted his sentence to house arrest.
Here then is a unique look at the life of Galileo as well as a strikingly different view of an event that has come to epitomize the Church's supposed antagonism toward science.
226 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
10 people are currently reading
75 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
May 25, 2020
This is a really short and concise history of "The Galileo Controversy" in the early 17th century. I found this story so interesting that I reached out to a Professor of the History of Science at Washington & Lee for recommendations of more detailed works. What makes this subject so interesting? Because nearly everything I ever thought or believed about the entire thing was incorrect.
The general thought is that a scientific mind, Galileo, was persecuted by a a ridiculously dogmatic Church. The First volley in the war between science and the Church. The first challenge I heard to this theory was in a speech by David Berlinski on Socrates in the City. He cited a letter from Galileo to Card. Castelli in 1613 wherein he identified himself as an extremely religious man who insisted the Bible was the unerring word of God. But we who interpret it are fallible, and it took the mathematicians to decipher God's also perfect "book of nature". He also cited a letter from Cardinal Bellamine to Father Paoli Foscari in 1615 noting that should the heliocentric theory be proven true, then theologians would need to reinterpret scripture. Hardly a dogmatic view and quite in line with Galileo's. Bellarmine was the first to quietly "censure" Galileo in a pretty private meeting and advise him to stop teaching Copernican doctrine. Galileo agreed. A document from that meeting was the basis of his actual prosecution in 1633
Remember that the Church was the political and intellectual power in Italy at the time. The Pope was in a bad position with the 30 years war, basically supporting German Protestants against the Catholic Spaniard. He exiled one of Galileo's best friends from the Vatican under suspicion of supporting the Spaniards and the Borgia's (the Pope was a Barberini) Also, the Aristotelian model of the solar system was tight at all the major universities in Europe. Galileo had insulted the Jesuits dearly over several scientific issues and a consensus of 95% of the scientists (all churchmen) was that the sun moved east to west around the earth. (hmm consensus of scientists, think I've heard that before) These political enemies used the church auspices to attack Galileo successfully. Still yet, he was given house arrest at the very advance age of 69 and he wrote another towering treatise on science. Not a harsh prosecution. Recommend to history nerds
The general thought is that a scientific mind, Galileo, was persecuted by a a ridiculously dogmatic Church. The First volley in the war between science and the Church. The first challenge I heard to this theory was in a speech by David Berlinski on Socrates in the City. He cited a letter from Galileo to Card. Castelli in 1613 wherein he identified himself as an extremely religious man who insisted the Bible was the unerring word of God. But we who interpret it are fallible, and it took the mathematicians to decipher God's also perfect "book of nature". He also cited a letter from Cardinal Bellamine to Father Paoli Foscari in 1615 noting that should the heliocentric theory be proven true, then theologians would need to reinterpret scripture. Hardly a dogmatic view and quite in line with Galileo's. Bellarmine was the first to quietly "censure" Galileo in a pretty private meeting and advise him to stop teaching Copernican doctrine. Galileo agreed. A document from that meeting was the basis of his actual prosecution in 1633
Remember that the Church was the political and intellectual power in Italy at the time. The Pope was in a bad position with the 30 years war, basically supporting German Protestants against the Catholic Spaniard. He exiled one of Galileo's best friends from the Vatican under suspicion of supporting the Spaniards and the Borgia's (the Pope was a Barberini) Also, the Aristotelian model of the solar system was tight at all the major universities in Europe. Galileo had insulted the Jesuits dearly over several scientific issues and a consensus of 95% of the scientists (all churchmen) was that the sun moved east to west around the earth. (hmm consensus of scientists, think I've heard that before) These political enemies used the church auspices to attack Galileo successfully. Still yet, he was given house arrest at the very advance age of 69 and he wrote another towering treatise on science. Not a harsh prosecution. Recommend to history nerds
February 15, 2018
Galileo Galilei is considered the father of modern science but this title is not attributed to him until long after his death. Galileo dedicated his entire life to science, invention, and discovery during a time when the Catholic Church is desperately trying to hold on to the power they have left after the Protestant Reformation. His life takes place in the time period where the Church is completely melded and indistinguishable from education. New inventions and discoveries are welcomed with open arms until they go against the status quo. Mariano Artigas’ and William R. Shea’s book Galileo in Rome: The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius displays the trouble Galileo faces when he brings to light the idea that the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around, and atomism. These theories raise the question of the infallibility of Christ, His importance, the Catholic Church’s method of interpretation, and the transubstantiation of the Eucharist.
The authors divvy up Galileo’s life into his six visits to Rome. In this way the reader can fully understand the relationship between papal politics and scientific discovery. When Galileo invents the telescope his theories become a problem for the Vatican, raising many theological debates and worries. Upon his first few visits he receives confirmation for his efforts, but also admonition. Cardinal Bellarmine brings to light the theological issues with his discoveries that will plague Galileo until his dying day. Every idea Galileo holds dear is ripped to shreds by critics and papal authorities, like the Holy Office.
For instance, the mountains on the surface of the moon goes against the popular idea that the heavens are perfect and unchangeable. The four moons of Jupiter demonstrated that not all heavenly bodies revolve around the Earth. The phases of Venus show that at least one body orbits the Sun and the countless numbers of stars alter their perception of the universe. The final straw was atomism.
Galileo’s Assayer, was a masterpiece of Italian Baroque style, widely acclaimed by poets and writers and but not so much by scientists. His atomistic theories within clash with the idea of transubstantiation. Galileo says tastes and other sensory details are subjective, thus making the idea of transubstantiation subjective; bringing back all the controversies of the Protestant Reformation. All of these small issues come down to one large one: the interpretation of Scripture. The bible spoke, and the Church preached specifically, that the Sun rises and sets. Even in the book of Joshua 10:12-13, Joshua says, “Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon. So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped.” Surely if, in reference to the sun, something was not in motion there would be no need to tell it to stop? While this problem could be chalked up to interpretation of ordinary language for ordinary people to understand, it still would mean that the Church had to admit fault in their supposed “superior” interpretation. After the Protestant Reformation and the Council of Trent, this is not an option.
Eventually, after an overabundance of poor decision making and arrogance, Galileo is brought to trial before the Holy Office and they condemn him to house arrest for life, he must recant, and recite seven penitential psalms once a week for the next three years. He dies blind and in pain on the January 8, 1642 without ever knowing his contributions to modern science.
Galileo in Rome: The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius by Shea and Artigas is not the best historical book out there, there are several issues. The pictures provided are horrible quality and completely irrelevant. Maybe two out of the whole assortment make logical sense. Why not provide a photo or drawing of the first telescope, horoscope tables, or paintings of historical figures that were actually talked about? There were no citations within the text. The worst offense being that some of the “factual” information comes across to the reader as opinionated because they gave no evidence. In one instance, they said that Galileo was self-absorbed and thought of himself as being the sole provider of celestial discoveries and treats others’ ideas as inferior to his own. The last part has some evidence presented later but in a book where the actual correspondence between Galileo and colleagues is given quite often, could they not have backed that statement up with some evidence?
With that being said there are no other problems with the book, only praise. Shea and Artigas present themselves in the beginning, ironically, as a scientist/priest duo who hope to not only provide information on the Galileo Affair but also properly assess the relations between science and religion. They do just that in the most flawless way possible! All readers want something different from a historical book. Some want to be spoon fed information for easy comprehension, while others want to be forced to think and process the information for themselves. The authors merge those two forms of writing. The format of the book makes for easy reading and so does the tone. The slight sarcasm at points is endearing and welcomed rather than diminishing to their credibility or their goal. They provide you step by step information, point out relationships, and pinpoint what will later affect Galileo in the presently talked about scenario. They actually refer back, later, to the chapter where the point was made when the subject in broached again. How cool is that? While this would seem like spoon feeding, it is not. For the most part they keep the tone of the book strictly informative and, at times, thought provoking to encourage the reader to make their own assumptions.
Ultimately, Galileo in Rome is well written while achieving its goal stated in the intro and much more. It provided correspondence, quotes, and just enough description as to not be overwhelming. Galileo in Rome could be recommended to anyone interested in the rise of modern science, Galileo’s life, the Roman Inquisition, or the Roman Catholic Church.
The authors divvy up Galileo’s life into his six visits to Rome. In this way the reader can fully understand the relationship between papal politics and scientific discovery. When Galileo invents the telescope his theories become a problem for the Vatican, raising many theological debates and worries. Upon his first few visits he receives confirmation for his efforts, but also admonition. Cardinal Bellarmine brings to light the theological issues with his discoveries that will plague Galileo until his dying day. Every idea Galileo holds dear is ripped to shreds by critics and papal authorities, like the Holy Office.
For instance, the mountains on the surface of the moon goes against the popular idea that the heavens are perfect and unchangeable. The four moons of Jupiter demonstrated that not all heavenly bodies revolve around the Earth. The phases of Venus show that at least one body orbits the Sun and the countless numbers of stars alter their perception of the universe. The final straw was atomism.
Galileo’s Assayer, was a masterpiece of Italian Baroque style, widely acclaimed by poets and writers and but not so much by scientists. His atomistic theories within clash with the idea of transubstantiation. Galileo says tastes and other sensory details are subjective, thus making the idea of transubstantiation subjective; bringing back all the controversies of the Protestant Reformation. All of these small issues come down to one large one: the interpretation of Scripture. The bible spoke, and the Church preached specifically, that the Sun rises and sets. Even in the book of Joshua 10:12-13, Joshua says, “Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon. So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped.” Surely if, in reference to the sun, something was not in motion there would be no need to tell it to stop? While this problem could be chalked up to interpretation of ordinary language for ordinary people to understand, it still would mean that the Church had to admit fault in their supposed “superior” interpretation. After the Protestant Reformation and the Council of Trent, this is not an option.
Eventually, after an overabundance of poor decision making and arrogance, Galileo is brought to trial before the Holy Office and they condemn him to house arrest for life, he must recant, and recite seven penitential psalms once a week for the next three years. He dies blind and in pain on the January 8, 1642 without ever knowing his contributions to modern science.
Galileo in Rome: The Rise and Fall of a Troublesome Genius by Shea and Artigas is not the best historical book out there, there are several issues. The pictures provided are horrible quality and completely irrelevant. Maybe two out of the whole assortment make logical sense. Why not provide a photo or drawing of the first telescope, horoscope tables, or paintings of historical figures that were actually talked about? There were no citations within the text. The worst offense being that some of the “factual” information comes across to the reader as opinionated because they gave no evidence. In one instance, they said that Galileo was self-absorbed and thought of himself as being the sole provider of celestial discoveries and treats others’ ideas as inferior to his own. The last part has some evidence presented later but in a book where the actual correspondence between Galileo and colleagues is given quite often, could they not have backed that statement up with some evidence?
With that being said there are no other problems with the book, only praise. Shea and Artigas present themselves in the beginning, ironically, as a scientist/priest duo who hope to not only provide information on the Galileo Affair but also properly assess the relations between science and religion. They do just that in the most flawless way possible! All readers want something different from a historical book. Some want to be spoon fed information for easy comprehension, while others want to be forced to think and process the information for themselves. The authors merge those two forms of writing. The format of the book makes for easy reading and so does the tone. The slight sarcasm at points is endearing and welcomed rather than diminishing to their credibility or their goal. They provide you step by step information, point out relationships, and pinpoint what will later affect Galileo in the presently talked about scenario. They actually refer back, later, to the chapter where the point was made when the subject in broached again. How cool is that? While this would seem like spoon feeding, it is not. For the most part they keep the tone of the book strictly informative and, at times, thought provoking to encourage the reader to make their own assumptions.
Ultimately, Galileo in Rome is well written while achieving its goal stated in the intro and much more. It provided correspondence, quotes, and just enough description as to not be overwhelming. Galileo in Rome could be recommended to anyone interested in the rise of modern science, Galileo’s life, the Roman Inquisition, or the Roman Catholic Church.
May 31, 2017
If I could only recommend one book on Galileo, it would have to be John Heilbron's biography: Galileo. It is so beautifully written with so many details you won't find in other books. But for someone more interested in the trial alone, I think this might be the book I would recommend. First, I disagree with the reviews here that it was dull and hard to get through. I couldn't put it down. Second, it is written by two men--one a historian who holds the "Galileo Chair" at Padua University--where Galileo himself taught mathematics; and the other a Catholic priest with doctorates in physics and philosophy. Between them, they write a very balanced account of what we now call the "Galileo Affair." This review below from First Things (I know, I know) is an excellent summary of the polemics involved in historical myths and revisionist history. I agree with the review wholeheartedly so will just leave it here.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2...
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2...
March 18, 2019
A very detailed account of the events that led to Galileo's fall. It reads like a cross between a story and a textbook. Lots of names, dates, and locations and constantly thrown around. However, the author always seems to keep you engaged with what is happening and why. Galileo was a famous scientist, possibly the father of science, and he did many recognizable things. His problems with the Catholic church arose when Galileo wrote a book confirming the Copernican view of a heliocentric solar system. This ran against the contemporary interpretations of sacred texts, but Galileo always believed the two could be reconciled.
July 9, 2017
This book is packed full of information and detail on Galileo's life and legacy. However, cramming a bunch of names and dates into a story does not make it a good book. I found this book to be so condensed with names and titles and letters and positions that I felt illiterate when I got to the middle. I really wanted to like this book, and I will admit that my own lack of information to Galileo, Rome, and church leaders greatly hindered my ability to retain the information I read. I would recommend this book to someone already familiar with Galileo and his life.
January 12, 2023
Very interesting perspective. It is fascinating to read first hand accounts of some of the events through the letters of the participants. I would have liked to see the last chapter be a summary of the details outlined in the book as compared to popular modern perception of what happened to Galileo. I don’t think it clearly emphasized how the events contrast what most modern people think happened.
June 2, 2018
3.9 stars. Well-written scholarly bio of Galileo’s relationship with the Church based on the documentary evidence.
Read
December 30, 2019Academic detail. Interesting but not meant for pleasure reading
March 17, 2017
I skim-finished this book. It was great to read before traveling to Italy and visiting the Galileo Museum and the university where he taught in Padua, but it gave me a little more detail than I needed.
February 11, 2015
This was assigned reading for my history of science course. So many names and events and all the little tangents made things hard to follow. I'm usually a fast reader but this took ages! I'm sure it's a great biography and I learned a ton, but ugh!
Overall, good biography and gosh Galileo was sassy, but many of the statements the authors made weren't backed up by fact, were conjecture, or you could really feel the personal bias seeping thorough.
Still not quit sure how I feel about this book. I suppose I'll know when I actually get some sleep.
Word of advice, this book takes WAY LONGER than you'd expect to read so when your professor tells you to start a few weeks before it's due, listen! Don't wait and try to read it 48hours before it's due. Bad idea.
Overall, good biography and gosh Galileo was sassy, but many of the statements the authors made weren't backed up by fact, were conjecture, or you could really feel the personal bias seeping thorough.
Still not quit sure how I feel about this book. I suppose I'll know when I actually get some sleep.
Word of advice, this book takes WAY LONGER than you'd expect to read so when your professor tells you to start a few weeks before it's due, listen! Don't wait and try to read it 48hours before it's due. Bad idea.
October 30, 2016
Well, I know for a fact that I'll want to return to the book in later days since I got lost in it at about the half of it.
Therefore I had trouble understanding it after that. (May also be due to my English, cause the book was written in a very suffisticated language.
Therefore I had trouble understanding it after that. (May also be due to my English, cause the book was written in a very suffisticated language.
January 5, 2010
I love books. I even love (most) textbooks. However, I'm having trouble getting through this book. It's extremely, extremely dry.
Read
July 15, 2012Too technical at times.
November 20, 2014
Read this book in 2 days for an essay, since I was reading it fast I couldn´t really appreciate it but I thought it was interesting. I'll read it again someday.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews