# Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia/Chapter 9

CHAPTER IX.
MAFFEO BARBERINI AS URBAN VIII.
Scarcely any Pope has left to posterity so accurate a delineation of his character and aims in his own trenchant utterances as Urban VIII. When shown the marble monuments of his predecessors, he proudly observed that he "would erect iron ones to himself." And the fortress of Castelfranco on the Bolognese frontier (called, in honour of his Holiness, Fort Urbino), the new breastworks of the Castle of St. Angelo, the Vatican Library turned into an arsenal, the new manufactory of arms at Tivoli, and finally the costly harbour of Civita Vecchia, are so many silent testimonies to the cherished desire of this pontiff to transform the eternal city into an inviolable symbol in stone of the temporal power of the Pope, and to accredit himself as a true mediæval vicegerent of Christ with the two-edged sword of the world. His athletic physique and iron energy were ever the vigorous executors of his ideas. In his self-sufficiency he disdained to take counsel with the Sacred College, saying that he "knew better than all the cardinals put together," and boldly set himself above all ancient constitutions, alleging the unheard of reason that "the sentence of a living Pope was worth more than all the decrees of a hundred dead ones." And finally, to leave his flock, the Christian peoples, in no manner of doubt about his pastoral humility, he revoked the resolve of the Romans never again ​to erect a monument to a Pope in his lifetime, saying, "such a resolution could not apply to a Pope like himself."
The desire for unlimited temporal power rises like a column out of the life of Urban VIII. Still it is not destitute of the embellishments of art, poetry, and love of learning. It is no fiction that this imperious pontiff found pleasure in turning passages of the Old and New Testaments into Horatian metre, and the song of Simeon into two sapphic strophes! His numerous and often cordial letters to Galileo bear witness also of his interest in science and its advocates; but if these scientific or poetic tastes clashed for a moment with the papal supremacy, the patron of art and science had to give place at once to the ecclesiastical ruler, who shunned no means, secret or avowed, of making every other interest subservient to his assumption of temporal and spiritual dominion.
It is simply a psychological consequence of these traits of character, that arbitrary caprice, the twin brother of despotic power, often played an intolerable part in his treatment of those who came in contact with him.
This then was the character of the new head of the Catholic Church, on whom Galileo placed great hopes for the progress of science in general, and the toleration of the Copernican system in particular, though they were to result in bitter disappointment. Yet to all appearance he was justified in hailing this election, for not only was Urban VIII. a refreshing contrast to his immediate predecessors, who cared little for art or science, but as Cardinal Maffeo Barberini, he had for years shown the warmest friendship for and interest in Galileo.
Many letters from this dignitary to Galileo which have come down to us bear witness to this. Thus he wrote to him from Bologna on 5th June, 1612: "I have received your treatise on various scientific questions, which have been raised during my stay here, and shall read them with great ​pleasure, both to confirm myself in my opinion, which agrees with yours, and, with the rest of the world, to enjoy the fruits of your rare intellect." The words, "in order to confirm," etc., have led some not very careful writers to conclude that, at all events when cardinal, Urban VIII. was a follower of Copernicus. But this is quite beside the mark. For the work in question was the one on floating bodies, with which, though the Peripatetics got the worst of it, neither Ptolemy or Copernicus had anything to do. A little more attention would have saved Philarete Chasles and others from such erroneous statements.
Another letter to Galileo from the cardinal, 20th April, 1613, after the publication of his work on the solar spots, shows the interest he took in the astronomer and his achievements. He writes:—
"Your printed letters to Welser have reached me, and are very welcome. I shall not fail to read them with pleasure, again and again, which they deserve. This is not a book which will be allowed to stand idly among the rest; it is the only one which can induce me to withdraw for a few hours from my official duties to devote myself to its perusal, and to the observation of the planets of which it treats, if the telescopes we have here are fit for it. Meanwhile I thank you very much for your remembrance of me, and beg you not to forget the high opinion which I entertain for a mind so extraordinarily gifted as yours."
But the cardinal had not confined himself to these assurances of esteem and friendship in his letters, but had proved them by his actions in 1615 and 1616, by honestly assisting to adjust Galileo's personal affairs when brought before the Inquisition. And Maffeo Barberini attributed the success then achieved in no small degree to his own influence, and used even to relate with satisfaction when Pope, that he had at that time assisted Galileo out of his difficulties. But here we must remind those authors who represent Barberini, when cardinal, as a Copernican, in order to paint his subsequent attitude as Pope in darker hues than history warrants, that ​although in 1615 and 1616 he exerted himself for Galileo personally, he in no way sought to avert the condemnation of the system.
In 1620, however, Barberini gave Galileo a really enthusiastic proof of his esteem. He celebrated his discoveries in some elegant and spirited verses, in which astronomy was allied with morality, and he sent them to Galileo, under date of 28th August, with the following letter:—
"The esteem which I always entertain for yourself and your great merits has given occasion to the enclosed verses. If not worthy of you, they will serve at any rate as a proof of my affection, while I purpose to add lustre to my poetry by your renowned name. Without wasting words, then, in further apologies, which I leave to the confidence which I place in you, I beg you to receive with favour this insignificant proof of my great affection."
When this dignitary, who was generally regarded as a friend and protector of science, had ascended the papal chair, the "Accadémia dei Lincei" hastened to dedicate "Il Saggiatore" to his Holiness, in order to spoil the sport of the author's enemies beforehand.
To the annoyance of Galileo's opponents and delight of his friends, by the end of October, 1623, 'Il Saggiatore" appeared, This work is a masterpiece of ingenuity; for the author not only dexterously avoids falling into the snares laid for him by Father Grassi, but prepares signal defeats for him. Galileo takes his attack on him, "The Astronomical and Philosophical Scales," paragraph by paragraph, throws light on each, and disputes or confutes it. And it is done in so sparkling and spirited a style, and the reasoning, pervaded by cutting sarcasm, is so conclusive, that "Il Saggiatore" certainly deserves to be called a model of dialectic skill. ​Our limits preclude going further into its scientific contents. For our purpose it will suffice to say that Galileo took occasion in it to lash many errors in Grassi's work unmercifully, and thereby incurred the eternal hatred of the all powerful Jesuit party. Thus it was to a great extent the purely scientific "Saggiatore" which subsequently conjured up the tragic element in Galileo's fate.
Another interesting point in the work is the way in which Galileo replies to Grassi's interpellations about the system of the universe. Admirable as is the ingenuity with which he performs this ticklish task, one cannot sympathise with the denial of his inmost convictions. He parries the provocations of his adversary by demonstrating that the Ptolemaic and Copernican doctrines had nothing to do with the controversy about comets, and that this question was only raised by "Sarsi" in order to attack him (Galileo). He adds the ambiguous remark: "As to the Copernican hypothesis, I am fully convinced that if we Catholics had not to thank the highest wisdom for having corrected our mistake and enlightened our blindness, we should never have been indebted for such a benefit to the arguments and experiences of Tycho." He then shows that the Copernican system, "which, as a pious Catholic, he considers entirely erroneous and completely denies," perfectly agrees with the telescopic discoveries, which cannot be made to agree at all with the other systems. But since, in spite of all this caution, a defence of the new system might have been detected in these statements, Galileo hastens to the conciliatory conclusion, that since the Copernican theory is condemned by the Church, the Ptolemaic no longer tenable in the face of scientific research, while that of Tycho is inadequate, some other must be sought for.
Notwithstanding all this fencing, however, no one can fail to see in "Il Saggiatore" an underhand defence of the Copernican system, as is evident from the passages quoted. Such ​a vague discussion of it as this, however, did not compromise Galileo according to the decree of 5th March, 1616; but "Il Saggiatore" would have directly contravened the assumed absolute injunction to silence on that system of 26th February, and Galileo would certainly not have ventured to write in this style if the Commissary-General of the Holy Office had, in 1616, solemnly forbidden him to discuss the said doctrine in any way whatever (quovis modo). This is another proof that this famous prohibition was not issued to Galileo in the form in which it occurs in the archives of 26th February.
"Il Saggiatore" was, indeed, denounced to the Inquisition in 1625, by Galileo's opponents, as containing a concealed endorsement of the Copernican system, and a motion was made in the Congregation of the Holy Office to prohibit it, or at any rate to have it corrected; but it was not carried, and the party only prepared a defeat for themselves. In consequence of the denunciation, a cardinal was charged to investigate the matter, and to report upon it. He selected Father Guevara, General of the Theatines, to assist him, who, after careful examination of the work in question, spoke in high praise of it, recommended it most warmly to the cardinal, and even gave him a written statement, in which he explained that the opinion of the earth's motion, even if it had been maintained, would not have appeared to him a reason for condemning it. Even Urban VIIL, who, we must suppose, was perfectly acquainted with the proceedings of 1616, does not appear to have had any scruples about "Il Saggiatore," for he had it read aloud to him at table, immediately after its publication, and, as Galileo was assured, enjoyed it highly.
* ↑ See Ranke: "Die römischen Päpste," etc., vol. ii. p. 531, etc.
* ↑ See Op. viii. pp. 173, 206, 208, 209, 262, 427; ix. p. 31.
* ↑ Op. viii. p. 206.
* ↑ Op. viii. p. 262.
* ↑ Op. viii. p. 451. Pieralisi in his work, "Urban VIII. and Galileo Galilei," Rome, 1875, pp. 22, 27, gives Barberini's ode, which is in Latin, and consists of nineteen strophes, as well as a commentary on it, which has not been printed by Campanella. See also pp. 65, 66, Galileo's reply to Barberini, in which he expresses his warm thanks and his admiration of the poetry. This is not in Albèri's work.
* ↑ Op. iv., "Saggiatore," p. 172.
* ↑ See for these transactions the letter of Mario Guiducci, from Rome, to Galileo, of 18th April, 1625. (Op. ix. pp. 78-80.)
* ↑ Cesarini's letter to Galileo, 28th October, 1623. (Op. ix. pp. 43, 44.)
* ↑ Rinuccini's letters to Galileo, 3rd November and 2nd December, 1623. (Op. Suppl. p. 154; and ix. p. 50.)
Layout 2