Search

Galileo Galilei became blind. Before this happened he revealed that his left eye had always had less than perfect vision. A study of his written works, his handwriting, and the originals of the portraits undertaken during his lifetime indicate that this probably was the case. These portraits suggest that his left eye tended to lose fixation and that, at the age of 60, he suffered from a mucocoele of the right frontal sinus; but these conditions would not have caused blindness. Considering the systemic diseases from which he suffered over his lifetime, he could possibly have had a long standing uveitis with secondary pupillary block glaucoma, common in those with the group of conditions classified as sero-negative arthropathies. Posterior scleritis with secondary glaucoma is less likely. If either of these were the cause, then the disease was probably triggered by a well-documented, severe acute illness as a young adult, the inflammation being localized to the eye as a result of severe recurrent conjunctival infections in his youth. The intermittent nature of the visual loss, the normal appearance of the cornea and pupils in his portraits, the absence of any evidence of inflammatory joint disease, the presence of halos, and the severe nature of the pain-combined with the high level of visual acuity in between attacks and its persistence until the last few weeks of vision means that angle-closure glaucoma must also be considered. These suggestions might be confirmed or refuted by studying his remains. Application has been made for this to be done.

Nicholas Copernicus'De revolutionibus (1543) is a frequent starting point for histories of the Scientific Revolution on account of his dramatic reversal of the cosmic order handed down from antiquity. Nevertheless, Copernicus also mounted a surprisingly sharp attack on one of his contemporaries who tried to correct ancient astronomers. This uneasy balance between respecting and criticizing ancient works was part of broader contemporaneous attempts to grapple with the fragmentary legacies of past generations. Debates over stone ruins as well as manuscript texts shaped the evolution of early printed books, and artists, printers and instrument makers joined natural philosophers in pursuing novelties even while emulating tradition.

The reputations of scientific heroes shift constantly, modified by politicians as well as by historians. Now that the Scientific Revolution has been reappraised, Nicolas Copernicus is portrayed as a friend of the Catholic Church rather than a scientific martyr. As a German-speaking Pole he has been claimed as a figure of national historical importance by both Germany and Poland, and since the early 20th century has been an important symbol of Polish independence.

Francis Baily's publication of the manuscripts of John Flamsteed, the first Astronomer Royal, provoked a furious response. Flamsteed had quarrelled with Isaac Newton, and described him in terms unforgivable to those who claimed him as a paragon of all virtues, both moral and scientific. Baily was condemned for putting Flamsteed's complaints in the public sphere. However, his supporters saw his work as a critique of the excessive hero-worship accorded to Newton. Written when the word 'scientist' had been newly coined, this work and the debates it provoked gives us an insight into contemporary views of the role of the man of science and of the use of science to back political, religious and moral positions.

Astronomy thrived in Europe during the early nineteenth century, but in the United States a utilitarian mind-set opposed it. John Quincy Adams's oratory in support of American astronomical discovery reached its peak during congressional debate over the Smithsonian Institution (1838-1846). During this debate Adams countered proposals to found a university with plans for an observatory. His addresses to congressional and public audiences about observatories and astronomy were intended to foster interest in the science and encourage the growing astronomical community in America. Although the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C., was established before the Smithsonian debate ended, many considered Adams its political father. Adams composed his speeches on astronomy in a systematic manner, following neoclassical principles of rhetoric that he had taught at Harvard University. His speeches both in and outside of Congress show evidence of the rhetorical principles he conscientiously used in the service of astronomy.

In an oil painting from the School of Sustermans, which can be seen in the Palazzo Pitti in Florence, we diagnosed the alterations typical of a keratoacanthoma in the left cheek-bone area of the portrayed Galileo Galilei.