HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE
176
ridiculed in some parts of the dialogue. And so entirewas the subjection under which all men were held bytheir spiritual tyrants, that, powerful as were the friendsof Galileo, they were overawed, and could attempt nomore than to obtain some slight indulgences in the man.ner of conducting the proceedings against him. Thepope had the courtesy to send a private intimation of thepainful necessity he was under of subjecting the Dia-logues to the Inquisition : while the friendly ecclesiastics,and even the grand duke, could find no better way ofemploying their influence than in prevailing upon Ga-lileo, as the safest course, to make all possible submission.Meanwhile, particular care was taken to exclude fromthe tribunal all who were in the least degree acquaintedwith the subject of the book, or the opinions of theculprit on which the charge of heresy was raised.
Galileo, invited to Rome , was received with everyattention in the palace of Nicolini, the grand duke’sambassador, but was recommended to keep within doors.And when taken to the most holy office for the purposeof examination, he was not consigned to a dungeon, butlodged in the apartments of one of its officers. Thesecrets of the examination have never transpired; thoughhints have been thrown out of, at least, the threat oftorture having been used. The result, however, wasachieved of extracting from the prisoner the admissionof being the author of the Dialogues, and a free andunbiassed declaration of willingness to submit andrecant.
After a time he was brought up to receive his sen-tence, and make his abjuration (June 21. 1633). Thetribunal solemnly delivered its condemnation of hisworks and opinions: extending to him, however, itsmerciful pardon, upon his abjuring his impious and he-retical errors, and submitting himself, generally, to theauthority of the church, and, in particular, to the sa-lutary penance of imprisonment and certain penitentialexercises.