Page:Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia (IA cu31924012301754).pdf/168

This page has been validated.
132
GALILEO GALILEI.

the new system and all discussion of it, bear ample testimony, in our opinion, that the clergy had the interests of science very little at heart, and that their sole desire was to maintain the foundation-stone in its place on which the ingenious structure of the Christian Catholic philosophy was raised; namely, the doctrine that mother earth is the centre of the universe.

In December, 1629, Galileo had completed his ill-fated work on the two systems, except the introduction and a few finishing strokes. He announced this to his friends in sundry letters,[1] and told Prince Cesi in two letters of 24th December, 1629, and 13th January, 1630, that he intended coming to Rome to see to the printing of the "Dialogues."[2] The prince in his reply expressed entire approval of the project, and encouraged Galileo to set out for Rome very soon, "where he would have no further trouble about the proofs than to give such orders as he pleased."[3]

Altogether the position of affairs seemed remarkably favourable for the publication of the "Dialogues." Galileo's devoted adherent, Castelli, had been summoned to Rome in 1624 by Urban VIII., and enjoyed great consideration with the powerful family of Barberini, to whose youngest scion, Taddco, he gave instruction in mathematics. This long-tried friend informed Galileo in a letter of 6th February,[4] that Father Riccardi, who meanwhile had been raised to the office of chief censor of the press (Magister Sacri Palatii) had promised his ready assistance in Galileo's affairs. Castelli also expressed his conviction that, as far as Riccardi was concerned, he would find no difficulty. Another piece of information in the same letter, however, was not quite so satisfactory; the personage second in importance at the papal court, Urban's brother, Cardinal Antonio Barberini, had, when Castelli told him of the completion of the "Dialogues," said nothing particular against the theory itself, so

  1. Op. vi. pp. 333-336.
  2. Ibid. pp. 333 and 336.
  3. Op. ix. p. 167.
  4. Ibid. pp. 173-175.