Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, by Mario Biagioli. A Book Review by Harsh Sanghavi
Biagioli’s Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, speaks about a time when practitioners of science had to walk a fine line between searching for the truth and staying wary of the Church’s all watching eyes. Galileo spent many years of his life working as a mathematician and philosophers at the Medici court. Biagioli argues that Galileo’s role in the court was integral to his work, a fact that was not given that much importance until Biagioli pointed this out.
The court helped push the status of Galileo’s work by providing social legitimization of his work and the scientific discipline as a whole. Biagioli even goes as far as to suggest that patronage was key to understanding both the cognitive attitudes and career strategies of scientists of the time. Biagioli argues that Galileo was a master of the cultural codes that constituted strategic courtship. Galileo’s career began first, as a member of a specific socio-professional culture of mathematicians, later as a courter where he refashioned himself as an unusual type of philosopher. Biagioli states that “In a sense, Galilio reinvented himself around 1610 by becoming the grand duke’s philosopher and mathematician.”
Biagioli follows Galileo’s career differently than a biography. He does not provide a chronological order of all the things he did, nor does he include everything that Galileo was involved in. Rather Biagioli looked at Galileo’s life from the perspective of how he conducted his work and studies. Biagioli looks at, in detail, Galileo's texts, scientific reviews and other documents to help micro-analyze the structures of his daily activities.
As mentioned previously, patronage is an important theme of Biagioli’s book. Patronage, Biagioli argued, was not just a resource that could be used by shrewd, machiavellian operators, rather it was an integral part of how all courtiers fashioned themselves. He discusses courtiers like Galileo sending various gifts to patrons such as telescopes and truffles, even naming “stars” after his patrons, almost as if he were giving them credit for his work.
Later on, Biagioli discusses Galileo’s career trajectory after having improved the telescope and having proved his skills as a philosopher at the Medici court. Galileo’s time in Rome comes into focus. The legitimization of Copernicus' heliostatic cosmos became more important to Galileo’s career, with parts of the church even going as far as ordering Galileo to not treat the Copernican doctrine as truth. Further on, Biagioli discusses Galileo’s use of his courtier skills to present and legitimize his views on comets.
Towards the end of the book, Biagioli proposed a reinterpretation of Galileo’s trial. Describing the events as much as a result of a clash between the dynamics and tensions of baroque court society and culture and not only a clash between Cosmology and Theology.
Biagioli posits that the same system that helped legitimize and push Galileo’s work to the limelight was also responsible for his downfall. Patrons of the science and philosophies were no longer allies as the social distance that they kept between themselves and people like Galileo. No one could contest the church without facing consequences, the same being true for Galileo’s patrons. Biagioli even went as far as saying the controversies were “good sport” to the patrons, with the patrons being spectators to the events.
This book gives us an interesting insight into the life and times of seventeenth-century courtiers, particularly Galileo. The book gave the reviewer a fresh perspective into the growth and legitimization of the science of the times, showing the importance of being able to present your ideas and thoughts to the right people along with the ability to navigate the politics of seventeenth-century Europe.