Galileo and the Pandemic – WSJ

It will take years to understand the full implications of the demand for scientists around the world to isolate themselves and do science from home. But one of the most famous and misunderstood historical experiments – the Galileo Affair – offers some hints of what the global shutdown might mean for the scientific community. Despite its popular interpretation as a battle between science and religion, Galileo’s condemnation by the Catholic Church was much more complex. It also included a book retraction due to a pandemic.

In the early 17th century, a senior Cardinal Galileo warned that unless there was “true evidence that the Sun,” not the Earth, “is the center of the world,” he would not be able to teach his Copernican ideas publicly. It was at stake that the Bible “seems contrary” to him. But years later, his friend Pope Urban VIII encouraged Galileo to publish his observations and theories in a book that became known as the Dialogue Concerning the Two Principal World Systems.

In 1630 Galileo traveled to Rome to deliver the book to the Vatican for examination due to censorship. The chief censor, a Dominican friar friendly to Galileo, was aware that Copernicus’ ideas were not meant to be taught publicly. Perhaps he also saw that Galileo’s proof was not that strong. (It will take several decades for the observed confirmation of Copernicanism to emerge.) But after asking for another opinion from an aide, the censor approved the book pending some revisions. Happy with this decision, Galileo returned to Florence while the manuscript remained in Rome.

Then an epidemic struck Italy. Political borders were closed and people stayed at home. To make matters worse, the main patron of Galileo’s book in Rome died around this time. Because of these limitations, Galileo decided to publish the book closer to home. After some resistance, the censor in Rome agreed to have the manuscript shipped to Florence. But closings complicated the process, and the book was sent out in parts. When the observers in Florence received the first chapters, they saw that he had already obtained the first approval of Rome. They did not worry much about the reviews, and the book was sent to the press even before the last parts reached Florence. Furthermore, the Roman censor did not read Galileo’s further revisions.

The book was finally released, but the process of its revision was very erratic. For example, as a request for revision, Galileo had to write about the scientific impossibility to confirm the Copernican hypothesis – an idea espoused by Pope Urban. But Galileo decided to write it in such a way that the claim that Copernicanism was unprovable seemed absurd. The Pope felt betrayed upon reading the book. Under immense political and religious pressure from the ongoing Thirty Years’ War – the same conflict that brought the plague to Italy – the Pope decided to respond. The “Dialogue” was taken out of circulation, and Galileo denied his ideas before the Roman Inquisition. He offered to write a final chapter tempering his arguments, but it was too late.

Had Galileo not hurried to publish the book and observers followed normal procedures, the book probably would not have been forbidden, and the novel of a battle between science and religion would not have begun.

Centuries later, when our shutdowns began, shifting scientists’ priorities to writing-oriented tasks seemed like a good solution. Modern communications technology also makes the problems that corrupted Galileo less likely to occur. However, a significant change in work habits under stressful situations – and prolonged physical isolation from collaborators – will always have unforeseen consequences. It would take an uncommon level of vigilance and self-examination, and an understanding of history, to help anticipate and avoid such problems.

Mr. Castel Branco is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin.